Infamy

(Lat. in, not, and fama, fame.)

Infamy is loss of a good name. When this has been brought about by regular legal process, terminating in a conviction in a court of justice, no injury is done to the criminal by publishing the fact. The same thing can be said when the scandalous repute in which a person is held is matter of common knowledge. The canon law seems to require a pre-existing public opinion against an individual before the investigation in a judicial inquiry can be narrowed to any particular person. Infamy in the canonical sense is defined as the privation or lessening of one's good name as the result of the bad rating which he has, even among prudent men. It constitutes an irregularity, i.e. a canonical impediment which prevents one being ordained or exercising such orders as he may have already received.

It is twofold in species, infamy of law (infamia juris) and infamy of fact (infamia facti).

Infamy of law is contracted in one of three ways. Either the law itself attaches this juridical ineligibility and incapacity to the commission of certain crimes, or makes it contingent upon the decision of a judge, or finally connects it with the penalty imposed by him. This kind of infamy is incurred chiefly by those guilty of duelling (whether as principals or seconds), rape (as likewise those who co-operate in it), attempt to marry during the lifetime of the actual consort, heresy, real simony, etc. Infamy of law may be removed either by canonical purging or by application to the Holy See.

Infamy of fact is the result of a widespread opinion, by which the community attributes some unusually serious delinquency, such as adultery or the like, to a person. This is more of an unfitness than an irregularity properly so called, unless sentence in court has been pronounced. It ceases therefore when one has shown by a change of life extending over a period of two or probably three years that his repentance is sincere.

TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906); SLATER, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); GASPARRI, De Sacra Ordinatione (Paris, 1893); WERNZ, Jus Decretalium (Rome, 1904).

JOSEPH F. DELANY.

Infanticide

Child-murder; the killing of an infant before or after birth. According to the French Criminal Code the word is limited to the murder of the new-born infant. In English it has been used for the deprivation of life from the moment of conception up to the age of two or three years. Except under Hebrew and Christian law, the killing of very young children by their parents has almost invariably been either legally permitted or at least practised with impunity. Economic reasons more than any others had led to the killing of infants before or after birth and have continued to exert an unfortunate influence even down to our own day. In Oriental countries certain poetic and religious traditions were appealed to in justification of the custom of killing infants, but as a rule the economic basis for it is clear. In many countries it was the custom to get rid of many of the female infants because they were unproductive, and generally expensive, members of the family. Sometimes usage required large dowries to be given with them. In India infanticide continued to be practised until far into the nineteenth century, notwithstanding the efforts of the British Government to put an end to it. In Greece and Rome, even at the height of their culture, the custom of exposing infants obtained, and in China and Japan delicate or deformed children were abandoned, or even healthy females, where there were male children in the family. Missionaries have done much to break up the custom and many children have been saved by them in the last few generations to be reared in the light of Christianity. Christianity first opposed a formal and effectual barrier to infanticide. Immediately after the Emperor Constantine's conversion he enacted two laws (about A. D. 320) directed against child-murder which are still found in the Theodosian Code (lib. XI, tit. xxvii). The first, to remove temptation, provided funds out of the imperial treasury for parents over-burdened with children; the second accorded all the rights of property of exposed infants to those who had had the charity to save and nurture them.

In modern times even in Christian countries two causes have led to post-natal infanticide: one, the disgrace attendant upon illegitimacy; the other, an economic reason. Illegitimate children were sacrificed partly for the concealment of shame, but often to escape the burden of the child's support. The crime occurs most frequently where illegitimacy is most frequent and, according to statistics, is least common in Ireland. In countries where children are readily received without question into institutions, infanticide is rare. In France the law forbids inquiry into paternity, and arrangements are made for the state care of the children. In Russia even more liberal provision is made for the state care of any child whose parents cannot or will not care for it. The question of child-murder by mothers has always been a difficult legal problem. Under a statute of James I of England, the mother had to account for the death of her infant or be held responsible for it. In 1803 trials for infanticide were placed under the ordinary rules of evidence. The presumption now is that every new-born child found dead was born dead unless the contrary is proved. This rule of English law holds in the United States. Infanticide has been quite common in European countries during the nineteenth century for two sordid reasons: one was the neglect of infants in the process of what was known as baby-farming, the other was the desire to obtain insurance money. This abuse has been regulated in various ways, but baby-farming and child-insurance still seriously increase the death-rate among infants.

PRE-NATAL INFANTICIDE

The murder of an infant before birth. This is more properly called foeticide. Among the ancient philosophers and medieval theologians there was considerable discussion as to when the human embryo could be said to possess human life. This is no longer a question among modern biologists. At the very moment of conception a human being comes into existence. At any time after this the deprivation of life in this living matter, if done deliberately, is murder. The laws of most States in the Union are so framed that conditions may not be deliberately created which would put the life of the foetus in danger, or which would bring about an abortion before the foetus is viable, unless it has been decided in a consultation of physicians that the lives of both mother and child are in danger and only one of them can be saved. The comparative safety of the Cæsarean section has also worked in the direction of safeguarding the life of the unborn child. The killing of a viable child because it is impossible to deliver it by the natural birth passages is now condemned by physicians all over the world. Craniotomy, that is, the crushing of the skull of a living child in order to facilitate its delivery, where great difficulty was encountered, was a common teaching in medical schools a generation ago, but the stand taken by the Church has had its effect in gradually bringing about a change of teaching and a recognition of the right of the child to life. Craniotomy on the living child is now never considered justifiable. When it is definitely known that the foetus is dead, crushing methods may be employed to extract it piecemeal, but this procedure is much more dangerous for the mother than Cæsarean section.

Many drugs are purchased by women with the idea that they will produce abortion without endangering the mother's life. No such drugs are known to modern medical science. There are drugs in the pharmacop ia which produce abortions, but only by affecting the mother very seriously. Abortion sometimes occurs after the taking of certain drugs supposed to produce it; but the premature birth is not due to the drug, it is caused by other influences. Twenty percent of all pregnancies end in premature births. The unfortunate woman who has had recourse to the drug then imagines that she has committed infanticide, and in intention she has; but the actual event has not been the result of the drug, unless that drug was one of the poisonous kind known as "abortifacients" and abortion took place in the convulsion which followed. It is absolutely certain that no known drug will produce abortion without producing very serious effects upon the mother, and even gravely endangering her life.

(For the teaching of the Church on pre-natal infanticide, see ABORTION.)

BROUARDEL, L'Infanticide (Paris, 1907); TARDIEU, L'Infanticide (Paris, 1868); RYAN, Infanticide, its Prevalence, Prevention and History (Fothergill Gold Medal S. A.), (London, 1862); BOURDON, L'Infanticide dans les législations anciennes et modernes (Douai, 1896). -- All the standard works on medical jurisprudence have chapters on this subject.

JAMES J. WALSH.

Stefano Infessura

Born at Rome about 1435; died about 1500. He devoted himself to the study of law, took the degree of Doctor of Laws, and acquired a solid legal knowledge. He was for a while judge in Orte, whence he came to the Roman University as professor of Roman law. Under Sixtus IV (1471-84) his office was affected by the financial measures of that pope, who frequently withheld the income of the Roman University, applied it to other uses, and reduced the salaries of the professors. Infessura was also for a long time secretary of the Roman Senate. He was entangled in the conspiracy of Stefano Porcaro against Nicholas V (1453), which aimed at overturning the papal Government and making Rome a republic (Pastor, Gesch. der Päpste, 4th ed., I, 550 sq.) Infessura also belonged to the antipapal faction, formed among the paganizing Humanists of the Roman Academy under Pomponio Leto (op. cit., II, 322 sqq.) He is particularly well known as the author of a work, partly Latin and partly Italian, the Diarium urbis Romae (Diario della Città di Roma), a chronicle of the city from 1294 to 1494. The historical information is not of special value until the time of Martin V and Eugene IV, or rather until the pontificates of Paul II (1484-1492), Sixtus IV (1471-84), Innnocent VIII (1484-1492), and the first part of the reign of Alexander VI. The antipapal and republican temper of the author, also his partisan devotion to the Colonna, and his personal animosity, led him to indulge in very severe charges and violent acusations of the popes, especially Sixtus IV. He put down in his chronicle every fragment of the most preposterous and malevent gossip current in Roman society; even obvious falsehoods attributed to him. He is therefore not considered a reliable chronicler. It is only with the greatest caution and after very careful criticism that his work can be used for the papal history of his time. The Diarium was first edited by Eccard (Corpus historicum medii aevi, II, 1863-2016); afterwards, with omission of the most scandalous parts by Muratori (Scriptores rerum Italicarum, III, ii, 1111-1252); a critical edition of the text is owing to Tommasini, Diario della Città di Roma di Stefano Infessura scribasenato (Fonti per la storia d'Italia, VI, Rome, 1890).

TOMMASINI, Il diario do Stefano Infessuar in Archivia della Societa romana di storia patria, XI (Rome, 1888), 481-640; IDEM, Nuovi documenti illustrativi del Diario di Stef. Infessura, XII (Rome, 1889), 5-36; PASTOR, Geschichte der papste, 4th ed., II, passim, especially 646-649.

J.P. KIRSCH

Infidels

(Latin in, privative, and fidelis.)

As in ecclesiastical language those who by baptism have received faith in Jesus Christ and have pledged Him their fidelity and called the faithful, so the name infidel is given to those who have not been baptized. The term applies not only to all who are ignorant of the true God, such as pagans of various kinds, but also to those who adore Him but do not recognize Jesus Christ, as Jews, Mohammedans; strictly speaking it may be used of catechumens also, though in early ages they were called Christians; for it is only through baptism that one can enter into the ranks of the faithful. Those however who have been baptized but do not belong to the Catholic Church, heretics and schismatics of divers confessions are not called infidels but non-Catholics. The relation in which all these classes stand to the Catholic Church is not the same; in principle, those who have been baptized are subjects of the Church and her children even though they be rebellious children; they are under her laws or, at least, are exempt from them only so far as pleases the Church. Infidels, on the contrary, are not members of the ecclesiastical society, according to the words of St. Paul: Quid mihi de his qui fortis sunt, judicare? (I Cor., v, 12); they are entirely exempt from the canon law; they need to be enlightened and converted, not punished. Needless to say, infidels do not belong to the supernatural state; if they receive supernatural graces from God, it is not through the channels established by Jesus Christ for Christians, but by a direct personal inspiration, for instance, the grace of conversion. But their condition is not morally bad; negative infidelity, says St. Thomas (II-II, q. x, a. 1), does not partake of the nature of sin, but rather of punishment, in the sense that ignorance of the Faith is a consequence of original sin. That is why the condemnation by the Church of proposition lxviii of Baius: Infidelits pure negativa, in his quibus Christus non et praedicatus, peccatum est (purely negative infidelity in those to whom Christ has not been preached is a sin), was fully justified. But it is different with regard to positive infidelity, which is a sin against faith, the most grievous of all sins, apostasy. Being endowed with reason, and subject to natural law, infidels are not excluded from the moral order; they can perform acts of natural virtue; and so the ecclesiastical authorities had to condemn proposition xxv of Baius which declared that: Omnia infidelium opera peccata sunt, et philosophorum virtutes vitia (all works of infidels are sinful, and all the virtues of the philosophers are vices; cf. St. Thomas, loc. cit., a. 4; Hurter, Theol. dogm., III, thes. cxxvi and cxxvii). Daily experience moreover proves incontestably that there are infidels who really religious, charitable, just, true to their word, upright in their business, and faithful to their family duties. One can say of them, as the Scriptures say of Cornelius the centurion, that their prayers and their alms are acceptable to God (Acts, x, 4). It was especially among such well-meaning infidels that the Church of Jesus grew up, and it is from their ranks that she gains her recruits at the present day in missionary lands.

The Church, mindful of the order of the Saviour: Go, teach all nations (Matt., xxviii, 12), has always considered the preaching of the Gospel among the infidels and their conversion by her apostolic missionaries to be one of her principal duties. This is not the place to recall the history of the missions, from the labours of St. Paul, the greatest of missionaries, and those who gave the light of faith to the Greek and Roman world, and those who converted the barbarian peoples, down through the ages when the phalanxes of religious men rushed to the conquest of the Orient, the Far East, and America, to the present-day pioneers of the religion of Jesus Christ; the multitude of heroes and martyrs and the harvest of souls that have been won to the true Faith. Doubtless, we still are far from having but one fold and one shepherd; nevertheless, there is not to-day a province or race of men so remote, but has not heard the name of Him by whom all men must be saved and has given children to the Church. The work of the missions is placed, as is well known, under the care and direction of the congregation of cardinals that bears the admirable name Da Propaganda Fide (for the propagation of the Faith), instituted by Gregory XV in 1622. Ever encouraged and developed by the popes, it is the directing body on whom the evangelical labourers in infidel lands depend. It sends them forth and grants them their powers, it established the prefectures Apostolic and the vicariates, and it is the tribunal to whose decision the missionaries submit their controversies, difficulties, and doubts.

Thought there is a general obligation on the Church to toil for the conversion of infidels, yet it is not incumbent on any particular persons, unless on those priests charged with the care of souls who have infidels within their territory. For the distant fields of labour missionaries, priests, members of religious orders, both men and women, who voluntarily offer themselves for the apostolic work, are recruited in Catholic countries. Native Christians are not excluded from the ranks of the clergy, and it is a duty of the missionaries to provide themselves prudently with auxiliary workers in their missions. To draw the infidels to the Faith, the missionaries ought, like St. Paul, to make themselves all things to all men, adopt the customs of the country, acquire the native language, establish schools and charitable institutions, preach especially by their example, and show in their lives how the religion they have come to teach is to be practiced (cf. Instr. of the Prop. to the Vicars Apostolic of China, in the Collectanea S. C. de Prop. Fide, n. 328). They and their catechists are to instruct with zeal and patience to those who are anxious to know the true religion, admitting them to baptism after longer or shorter period of probation, as was done in the case of the catechumens in ancient times. But the conversion of infidels must be free and without compulsion, otherwise it will not be genuine and lasting (cap. 9, tit. vi, lib. V, de Judaeis). It cannot be denied that at various epochs, notably under Charlemagne and later in Spain, there were forced conversions, which may be explained, though not excused, by the custom of the age; but the Church was not responsible for them, as it has constantly taught that all conversions should be free. On several occasions it expressly forbade the baptism of Jews and infidels against their will, and even the baptism of children without their parents consent, unless they were in imminent danger of death (cf. Collect. cit., De subjecto baptismi). In the rite of administering baptism the Church still asks the questions: Quid petis ab Ecclesia Dei? Vis baptizari?

Though ecclesiastical law does not affect the acts of infidels as such, yet the Church has to pass judgment on the validity of these acts and their juridical consequences when infidels come within the fold by baptism. No act of an infidel can have any value from the point of view of the spiritual society to which he does not belong; he is incapable by Divine law of receiving the sacraments, notably Holy orders (evidently we are not speaking here of a purely material reception); nor can he receive or exercise any ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The acts of infidels are to be considered in the light of natural law, to which they, like all men, are subject, and in accordance with the Divine law, in so far as it determines the secondary natural law. This applies principally to the case of matrimony. The marriage of infidels is valid as a contract under natural law, not as a sacrament, though at times this word has been applied to it (cf. Encycl. Arcanum); it is subject only to the impediments of natural law and, at times, to those of the civil law also, but it is not affected by the impediments of canon law. However the Church does not recognize polygamy as lawful among infidels; as to divorce strictly so called, it admits it only under the form of the Casus Apostoli, also known as the privilege of the Faith or the Pauline privilege; this consists in a convert being permitted to abandon his partner, who remains an infidel, if the latter refuse to continue the common life without endangering the faith of the convert (cf. DIVORCE, I, B, 1); under such circumstances the convert may marry a Catholic. As to acts which are prohibited or void in virtue of canon law alone, they are valid when performed by infidels; thus, the impediment of the remoter degrees of consanguinity and affinity, etc., does not affect the marriages of infidels. But the juridical consequences of the acts, performed by them when infidels, begin to exist at the moment of and in virtue of their baptism; consequently, a converted widower may not marry a relative of his late wife without dispensation; and again, a man who has had two wives before his conversion is a bigamist and therefore irregular.

Most of the laws passed by the Church refer to the relations between its subjects and infidels in not only religious but also civil affairs. Speaking generally, the faithful are forbidden to take part in any religious rites, considered as such, of pagans, Mohammedans, or Jews, and all the more to practice them through a kind of survival of their primitive superstitions. If this prohibition is inspired not so much by a fear of the danger of perversion as by the law forbidding the faithful to communicate in sacris with non-Catholics, aversion to false religions and especially from idol worship justifies the rigor of the law. To mention but the principal acts, the faithful are forbidden to venerate idols, not only in their temples, but also in private houses, to contribute to the building or repairing of pagan temples or of mosques, to carve idols, to join in pagan sacrifices, to assist at Jewish circumcisions, to wear idolatrous images or objects having an acknowledged religious significance, so that the fact of wearing them is looked upon as an act of pagan worship, and finally to make use of superstitious and especially idolatrous practices in the acts of civil or domestic life. Some very delicate questions may arise in connection with the last prohibition; for instance, we may recall the celebrated controversy concerning the Chinese rites (see CHINA). On the other hand, it is not forbidden to enter temples and mosques out of mere curiosity if no act of religion be performed, or to eat food that has been offered to false gods, provided that this be not done in a temple or as a sacred repast, and that it be done without scandal; or to observe customs or perform acts which are not in themselves religious, even though pagans join superstitious practices to them. Not only is it not forbidden, but it is permissible and one might say obligatory to pray even publicly for infidel princes, in order that God may grant their subjects peace and prosperity; nothing is more conformable to the tradition of the Church; thus Catholics of the different rites in the Ottoman Empire pray for the sultan.

In this place mention may be made of the ecclesiastical law forbidding the faithful to marry infidels, a prohibition which is now a diriment impediment, rendering a marriage null and void unless a dispensation has been obtained (see DISPARITY OF WORSHIP). It is easy to see that there is a real danger to the faith and religious life of the Catholic party in the intimacy of married life and in the difficulties in the way of a Christian education of the children; and, if that party be the wife, in the excessive authority of the husband and the inferior condition of the wife in infidel countries; consequently, this dispensation is granted only with difficulty and when the precautions dictated by prudence have been taken. The laws regulating the dealings between Catholics and infidels in civil life were inspired also by religious motives, the danger of perversion, and the high idea entertained in the ages of faith of the superiority of Christians to infidels. These regulations, of course, did not refer to all acts of civil life; moreover, they were not directed against all infidels indifferently, but only against Jews; at the present day they have fallen almost completely into desuetude. In the early Middle Ages, Jews were forbidden to have Christian slaves; the laws of the decretals forbade Christians to enter the service of Jews, or Christian women to act as their nurses or midwives; moreover, Christians when ill were not to have recourse to Jewish physicians. These measures may be useful in certain countries to-day and we find them renewed, at least as recommendations, by recent councils (Council of Gran, in 1858; Prague, in 1860; and Utrecht, in 1865). As for the Jews, they were ordinarily restricted to certain definite quarters of the towns into which they were admitted, and had to wear a dress by which they might be recognized. Modern legislation has given the Jews the same rights as other citizens and the intercourse between them and Catholics in civil life is no longer governed by ecclesiastical law. (See JEWS AND JUDAISM; MOHAMMED AND MOHAMMEDANISM.)

A. BOUDINHON

Infinity

(Lat. infinitas; in, not, finis, the end, the boundary).

Infinity is a concept of the utmost importance in Christian philosophy and theology.

DEFINITION

The infinite, as the word indicates, is that which has no end, no limit, no boundary, and therefore cannot be measured by a finite standard, however often applied; it is that which cannot be attained by successive addition, not exhausted by successive subtraction of finite quantities. Though in itself a negative term, infinity has a very positive meaning. Since it denies all bounds -- which are themselves negations -- it is a double negation, hence an affirmation, and expresses positively the highest unsurpassable reality. Like the concepts of quantity, limit, boundary, the term infinity applies primarily to space and time, but not exclusively, as Schopenhauer maintains. In a derived meaning it may be applied to every kind of perfection: wisdom, beauty, power, the fullness of being itself.

The concept of infinity must be carefully distinguished from the concept of "all-being". Infinity implies that an infinite being cannot lack any reality in the line in which it is infinite, and that it cannot be surpassed by anything else in that particular perfection; but this does not necessarily mean that no other being can have perfections. "All-being", however, implies that there is no reality outside of itself, that beyond it there is nothing good, pure, and beautiful. The infinite is equivalent to all other things put together; it is the greatest and most beautiful; but besides it, other things both beautiful and good may exist (for further explanation, see below). It is objected that, if there were an infinite body, no other body could exist besides it; for the infinite body would occupy all space. But the fact that no other body could exist besides the infinite body would be the result of its impenetrability, not of its infinity. Spinoza defines: "Finite in its kind is that which can be limited by a thing of the same kind." (Ethics, I def. ii). If he intended only to say: "Finite is that from which another thing of the same kind, by its very existence, takes away perfection", no fault could be found with him. But what he means to say is this: "Finite is that, besides which something else can exist; infinite therefore is that only which includes all things in itself." This definition is false.

Many confound the infinite with the indeterminate. Determination (determinatio) is negation, limitation (negatio, limitatio), says Spinoza. Generally speaking, this is false. Determination is limitation in those cases only where it excludes any further possible perfection, as for example, the determination of a surface by a geometrical figure; but it is no limitation, if it adds further reality, and does not exclude, but rather requires a new perfection, as for example, the determination of substance by rationality. The mere abstract being, so well known to metaphysicians, is the most indeterminate of all ideas, and nevertheless the poorest in content; the infinite, however, is in every way the most determinate idea, in which all possibilities are realized, and which is therefore the richest in content. According to Hobbs, we call a thing infinite if we cannot assign limits to it. This definition is also insufficient: infinite is not that whose limits we cannot perceive, but that which has no limit.

DIVISION

The different kinds of infinity must be carefully distinguished. The two principal divisions are: (1) the infinite in only one respect (secundum quid) or the partially infinite, and the infinite in every respect (simpliciter) or the absolutely infinite; (2) the actually infinite, and the potentially infinite, which is capable of an indefinite increase. Infinite in only one respect (viz. extension) is ideal space; infinite in only one respect (viz. duration) is the immortal soul; infinite in every respect is that being alone, which contains in itself all possible perfections and which is above every species and genus and order. Potentially infinite is (e.g.) the path of a body which moves in free space; potentially infinite is also the duration of matter and energy, according to the law of their conservation. For this motion and this duration will never cease, and in this sense will be without end; nevertheless, the path and the duration up to this instant can be measured at any given point and are therefore in this sense finite. Hence they are infinite not according to what they actually are at a given moment, but according to what they are not yet and never actually can be; they are infinite in this, that they are ever and forever progressing without bounds, that there is always the "and so forth". The actually infinite, however, is now and at every moment complete, absolute, entirely determined. The immeasurable omnipresent spirit does not advance from point to point without end, but is constantly everywhere, fills every "beyond" of every assignable point. Hegel calls potential infinity the improper (schlechte), actual infinity the true infinity.

THE INFINITY OF GOD

The actual infinity of God in every respect is Catholic dogma. In accordance with the Holy Bible (III Kings, viii, 27; Ps. cxliv, 3; cxlvi, 5; Ecclus., xliii, 29 sqq., Luke, i, 37, etc.) and unanimous tradition, the Vatican Council at its Third Session (cap. i) declared God to be almighty, eternal, immense, incomprehensible, infinite in intellect and will and every perfection, really and essentially distinct from the world, infinitely blessed in Himself and through Himself, and inexpressibly above all things that can exist and be thought of besides Him. The infinity of God can also be proved from philosophy. God is the self-existing, uncreated Being whose entire explanation must be in Himself, in Whom there can be no trace of chance; but it would be mere chance if God possessed only a finite degree of perfection, for however high that degree might be, everything in the uncreated Being -- His perfections, His individuality, His personality -- admit the possibility of His possessing a still higher degree of entirety. From outside Himself, God cannot be limited, because, being uncreated, He is absolutely independent of external causes and conditions. Limitation would be chance; the more so because we can maintain not only that any given finite degree of perfection may be surpassed, but also, in a positive way, that an infinite being is possible. Moreover, if God were finite, the existence of other gods, His equals or even His superiors in perfection would be possible, and it would be mere chance if the y did not exist. Of such gods, no trace can be found, while on the other hand, God's infinity is suggested by various data of experience, and in particular by our unbounded longing after knowledge and happiness. The more man a man is, and the more he follows his best thoughts and impulses, the less he is satisfied with merely finite cognitions and pleasures. That the essential cravings of our nature are not deceptive, is demonstrated at once by experience and speculation.

From the infinity of God it is easy to deduce all His perfections: His unity, simplicity, immutability, etc., though these may be proved also by other means. Many of God's attributes are nothing else than His infinity in a particular respect, e.g. His omnipotence is but the infinity of His power; His omniscience, the infinity of His knowledge. Whatever is known to be a pure unalloyed perfection, must be an attribute of God on account of His infinity. We say a pure unalloyed perfection; for God, just because He is infinite does not possess all perfections in the same way. Only pure perfections -- i.e. those which include in their concept no trace of imperfection whatsoever -- are contained in Him formally. We must therefore ascribe to Him the attributes wise, powerful, amiable, etc., without any restriction, because these are all pure perfections. Of the so-called mixed perfections, which include besides the positive reality also some imperfections, as e.g., extension, contrition, courage, sound reasoning, and clear judgment, He possesses only the perfection without the connected imperfection. His is, for example, the all-pervading presence, without composition; love for the good without having committed sin; power without having to overcome fear; knowledge without formal reasoning or formal judgment. He possesses, therefore, the mixed perfections in a higher form -- eminently, i.e. in the only form which is worthy of the infinite. But even the pure perfections are contained in Him in a higher form than in the creature, in which they are dependent, derived, finite. God's perfection and that of the creature are the same analogically only, not univocally. The error of Anthropomorphism consists just in this, that it ascribes to God human perfections, without first refining them; whereas Agnosticism errs in its contention that, of all the pure and good qualities which are found in creatures, none can be ascribed to God. Those modern writers too are mistaken, who hold the best form of religious sentiment to be that which comprises the largest number of elements, and if needs be, of contradictions. According to them, we should call God both finite and infinite; finite to escape Agnosticism, infinite to escape Anthropomorphism. But it is evident that the highest and absolute truth cannot be a compound of contradictions.

The dogma of God's infinity is not only of the greatest import for theology in the strictest sense of the term (i.e. the treatise on God), but it throws new light upon the malice of sin, which, on the account of Him Who is offended, becomes objectively infinite; upon the infinite majesty of the Incarnate Word and the boundless value of His merits and satisfaction; upon the necessity of the Incarnation, if God's justice required an adequate satisfaction for sin.

INFINITY AND MONISM

How imperatively thought demands that infinity be ascribed to the self-existent Being is best shown by the fact, that all those who have at any time identified, and especially those who nowadays identify God and the world -- in short, all Monists -- almost universally speak if the infinity of their God. But this is an error. One has but to open one's eyes to see that the world in imperfect, and therefore finite. It avails nothing for the Monists to assume that the world is infinite in extension; all that could be inferred from this supposition would be an infinitely extended imperfection and finiteness. Nor do they gain anything by staking their hopes on evolution, and predicting infinity for the future of the world; uncreated existence involves infinity at every moment, at this present instant as well as at any future time, and not only potential but real, actual infinity. Others therefore maintain that the world is not their God, but an emanation from God; they must consequently grant that God has parts -- else nothing could emanate from Him -- and that these parts are subject to imperfections, decay, and evil -- in short that their God is not infinite. Hence others assert that the things of this world are not parts of the Absolute, but its manifestations, representations, forms, qualities, activities, accidents, attributes, affections, phenomena, modifications. But if these are not mere words, if the things of this world are really modifications etc. of the Absolute, it follows again that, as much as it is in finite things, the Absolute is subject to limitation, evil and sin, and is therefore not infinite. This leads many to take the last step by asserting that the things of this world are nothing in them selves, but simply thoughts and conations of the Absolute. But why has not the Absolute grander and purer conceptions and volitions? Why has it contented itself for thousands of years with these realistic self-represent ations, and not even yet attained with certainty an idealistic conception of reality? Turn as one may, in spite of all efforts to evade the consequence, the god of Monism is not an infinite being.

The Monists object that God as conceived by Theists is a finite thing, since He is not in Himself all reality, but has outside Himself, the reality of the world. However, it has been stated above that infinity and totality are two entirely different ideas, and that infinity does not, in every supposition, exclude the existence of other things besides itself. We say, not "in every supposition", for it may be that the infinite could not be infinite if certain beings existed. A being uncreated or independent of God, or a Manichfan principle of evil, cannot exist beside the infinite God, because it would limit His absolute perfections. This is the time-honored proof for the unity of God, the grand thought of Tertullian (Adv. Marcion., I, iii), "if God is not one, He is not at all." But that besides God there are creatures of His, reflections from His light, illuminated only by Him and in no way diminishing His light, does not limit God Himself. God, on the contrary, would be finite, if His creatures were identical with Him. For creatures are essentially of mixed perfection, because essentially dependent; infinite is only that which is pure perfection without any admixture of imperfection. If, therefore, one wants to form the equation: infinite = all, it must be interpreted: infinite = everything uncreated; or better still: infinite = all pure perfections in the highest and truest sense. Taken in the monistic view, viz. that there can be no reality besides the infinite, this equation is wrong. The identification, how ever, of "infinite" and "all" is very old, and served as a basis of Eleatic philosophy.

Another very common objection of Monists against the theistic conception of God is, that being personal, He cannot be infinite. For personality, whether conceived as individuality or as self-consciousness or as subsistent being, cannot exist without something else as its opposite; but wherever there is something else, there is no infinity. Both premises of this argument are false. To assert that infinity is destroyed wherever something else exists, is but the repetition of the already rejected statement that infinity means totality. Equally unwarranted is the assertion that personality requires the existence of something else. Individuality means not hing more than that a thing is this one thing and not another thing, and it is just as much this one thing, whether anything else exists or not. The same is true of self-consciousness. I am aware of myself as Ego, even though nothing else exist, and I have no thought of any other being; for the Ego is something absolute, not relative. Only if I desire to know myself as not being the non-Ego, to use the expression of Fichte -- I necessarily must think of that non-Ego, i.e. of something as not-myself. The subsistence of intellectual beings, i.e. personality in the strictest sense of the term, implies only that I am a being in and for myself, separate from everything else and in no way part of anything else. This would be true, even though nothing else existed; in fact, it would then be truer than ever. Far from excluding personality God is personal in the deepest and truest meaning, because He is the most independent being, by Himself and in Himself in the most absolute sense (see PERSON).

HISTORY

Concerning the philosophers before Aristotle, Suarez pertinently remarks that they "scented" the infinity of God (subodorati sunt). In many of them we meet the infinity of God or of the First Cause, though in many cases it be only infinity in extension. Plato and Aristotle assert in substance the infinity of the Highest Being in a more adequate sense, though blended with errors and obscurities. The Stoics had various ideas that would have led them to admit the infinity of God, had not their Pantheism stood in the way. The conceptions of Philo's Jewish-Alexandrian philosophy were much purer; the same may be said to a certain degree of the neo-Platonism of Plotinus, who was largely influenced by Philo. Plotinus originated the terse and trenchant argument: God is not limited; for what should limit Him? ("Enn. V", lib. V, in "Opera omnia", Oxford, 1885, p. 979). Against Plotinus, however, it may be objected that true infinity is as little consistent with his doctrine of emanations as with the more or less pantheistic tendencies of the Indian philosophy.

The Christian writers took their concepts of the infinity of God from the Bible; the speculative development of these ideas, however, needed time. St. Augustine, being well acquainted with Platonic philosophy, recognized that whatever could be greater, could not be the First Being. Candidus, a contemporary of Charlemagne, perceived that the limitations of all finite beings point towards a Creator, Who determines the degrees of their perfection. Abelard seems to teach that God, being superior to everything else in the reason of His existence, must also be greater in His perfections. A book, which is sometimes ascribed to Albert the Great, derives God's infinity from His pure actuality. All these reasons were collected, developed, and deepened by the Scholastics of the best period; and since then the speculative proof for the infinity of God has, in spite of some few objectors, been considered as secure. Even Moses Mendelssohn writes: "That the necessary Being contains every perfection which it has, in the highest possible degree and without any limitations, is developed in numberless text-books, and so far nobody has brought a serious objection against it" ("Gesammelte Schriften", II, Leipzig, 1893, p. 355). Kant's attempt to stigmatize the deduction of infinity from self-existence as a return to the ontological argument, was a failure; for our deduction starts from the actually existing God, not from mere ideas, as the ontological argument does. Among Christians, the dogma itself has rarely been denied, but the freer tendencies of modern Protestantism in the direction of Pantheism, and the views of some champions of Modernism in the Catholic Church, are in fact, although not always in expression, opposed to the infinity of God.

INFINITY OF CREATURES

The knowledge we have about the infinity of creatures leaves much to be desired. It is certain that no creature is infinite in every regard. However great it may be, it lacks the most essential perfection: self-existence, and whatever else is necessarily connected with it. Moreover, philosophers and theologians are practically unanimous in declaring that no creature can be infinite in an essential predicate. As to the questions whether an accident (e.g. quantity) is capable of infinity, whether the creation could be infinite in extension. Whether there can be an infinite number of actual beings, or whether an infinite number is at all possible -- as to these questions they are less in harmony, though the majority lean towards the negative answer, and in our time this number seems to have increased. At any rate the infinite world, of which the old Greek philosophers dreamt and the modern Materialists and Monists talk so much, lacks every proof, and, as to the infinite duration of the world, it is contradicted by the dogma of its temporal beginning.

The mathematicians too occupy themselves with the infinite, both with the infinitely small and the infinitely large, in the treatises on infinite series, and infinitesimal calculus, and generally in all limit operations. The infinitely small is represented by the sign 0, the infinitely large by a character that looks like the number "8" turned on its side. Their relation is expressed by the ratio 1/0 = (infitely large) All mathematiians agree as to the method of operating with the two quantities; but there is much division amongst philosophers and philosophizing mathematicians as to their real meaning. The least subject to difficulties are perhaps the following two views. The infinite in mathematics may be take n as the potentially infinite, i.e. that which can be increased or diminished without end; in this view it is a real quantity, capable of existence. Or one may take it as the actually infinite, viz. that which by actual successive addition or division can never be reached. In this view it is something which can never exist in reality, or from the possibility of whose existence we at best abstract. It is a limit which exists only as a fiction of the mind (ens rationis). Or if the infinitely small is considered as an absolute zero, but connoting different values, it is really a limit, but as far as it connotes other values, only a logical being. Thus at times Leibniz calls both the infinitely small and the infinitely large fictions of the mind (mentis fictiones) and compares them to imaginary quantities. Carnot calls the differential an être de raison; Gauss speaks of a façon de parler.

OTTO ZIMMERMAN

Infralapsarians

(Lat., infra lapsum, after the fall).

The name given to a party of Dutch Calvinists in the seventeenth century, who sought to mitigate the rigour of Calvin's doctrine concerning absolute predestination. As already explained (see CALVINISM), the system evolved by Calvin is essentially supralapsarian. The fundamental principle once admitted, that all events in this world proceed from the eternal decrees of God, it seems impossible to avoid the conclusion that the fall of man was not merely foreseen and permitted, as the Catholic doctrine teaches, but postivitely decreed, as a necessary means to the Divine end in creating Man, the manifestation of God's power in condemning, as well as of His mercy in saving, souls. It was this corollary of Calvinism, viz., that God created some men for the express purpose of showing His power through their eternal damnation, that brought on the troubles associated with the name of Arminius (see ARMINIANISM). In their controversies with opponents, within and without the pale of Calvinism, the Infralapsarians had the advantage of being able to use, or abuse, for the purpose of argument, the texts of Scripture and the Fathers which establish the dogma of original sin. But since, to remain Calvinists at all, they were obliged to retain, even if they did not insist upon, the principle that God's decrees can in no wise be influenced or conditioned by anything outside of Himself, the difference between them and the more outspoken Supralapsarians seem to have consisted simply in a divergent phrasing of the same mystery. To the sould which is foreordained to eternal misery without any prevision of its personal demerits, it matters little whether the decree of condemnation date from all eternity or --

JAMES F. LOUGHLIN

Giovanni Inghirami

Italian astronomer, b. at Volterra, Tuscany, 16 April, 1779; d. at Florence, 15 August, 1851. He was of a noble family which produced two other distinguished scholars, Tommaso (1470-1516), humanist, and Francesco (1772-1846), archaeologist, brother of Giovanni. His education was received in is native cit at the College of Saint Michael, conducted by the Piarists, popularly called the "Scolopi". This order he joined at the age of seventeen, and later became professor of mathematics and philosophy at Volterra, where one of his pupils was the future Pius IX. In 1805 he travelled int he north of italy, and was engaged for some months in scientifice work at Milan. He was called to Florence to fill the twofold office of professor of mathematics and astronomy at the College of the Scolopi, known from the adjacent church as the College of San Giovannino, and of director of the college observatory established by the Jesuit, Leonard Ximenes. His first publications were articles on hydraulcis, statics, and astronomy, astronomical tables, and elementary text-books on mathematics and mathematical geography. In 1830 after observations extending over fourteen years, he published, with the patronage of the Grand Duke Ferdinand III, a "Carta topografica e geometica della Toscana" on the scale of 1:200,000 -- a work of high merit. When the Berlin Academy of Sciences undertook the construction of an exhaustive astronomical atlas, he was assigned a section. His performance of this task won great praise. he became successively provincial and general of his order, but is failing heath and his love for scientific work caused him to resign the latter office, which had required his taking up residence in Rome, and to accept the position of vicar-general. He returned to Florence and, although almost blind for some years, continued his teaching until afw months before his death. Simplicity and piety were dominant traits of his character. The scientific works of Inghirami include: numerous articles published in the "Astronomische Nachrichen", in Zach's "Monatliche Correspondenz zur Beförderung der Erd-u. Himmelskunde" and in his own "collezione di opusculi e notizie di Scienze" (4 vols., Florence, 1820-30); "Tavole Astronomiche universali portatili" (ibid., 1811), and "Effemeridi di Venere e Giove ad uso di naviganti pel meridiano di Parigi" (ibid., 1821-24).

ANTONELLI, Sulla vita e sulle opere di Giov. Inghirami (Florence, 1854); VON REUMONT, Beitrage sur italienischen Geschichle, VI) Berlin, 1857), 472 sq.

PAUL H. LINEHAN

Venerable Francis Ingleby

English martyr, born about 1551; suffered at York on Friday, 3 June, 1586 (old style). According to an early but inaccurate calendar he suffered 1 June (Cath. Rec.Soc. V, 192). Fourth son of Sir William Ingleby, knight, of Ripley, Yorkshire, by Anne, daughter of Sir William Malory, knight, of Studley, he was probably a scholar of Brasenose College, Oxford, in and before 1565, and was a student of the Inner Temple in 1576. On 18 August, 1582 he arrived at the English College, Reims, where he lived at his own expense. He was ordained subdeacon at Loan on Saturday, 28 May, deacon at Reims, Saturday, 24 September, and priest at Loan, Saturday 24 December, 1583 and left for England Thursday, 5 April 1584. (These four dates are all new style). He laboured with great zeal in the neighbourhood of York, where he was arrested in the spring of 1586, and lodged in the castle. He was the one of the priests for harbouring whom the Venerable Margaret Clitherow (q. v.) was arraigned. At the prison door, while fetters were being fastened on his legs he smilingly said, "I fear me I shall be overproud of my boots." He was condemned under 27 Eliz. c. 2 for being a priest. When sentence was pronounced he exclaimed, "Credo videre bona Domini in terra viventium". Fr. Warford says he was short but well-made, fair-complexioned, with a chestnut beard, and a slight cast in his eyes.

JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT

University of Ingolstadt

The University of Ingolstadt (1472-1800), was founded by Louis the Rich, Duke of Bavaria. The privileges of a studium generale with all four faculties had been granted by Pope Pius II, 7 April, 1458, but ovwing to the unsettled condition of the times, could not be put into effect. Ingolstadt, modelled on the University of Vienna, had as one of its principal aims the furtherance and spread of Christian belief. For its material equipment, an unusually large endowment was provided out of the holdings of the clergy and the religious orders. The Bishop of Eichstatt, to whom diocese Ingolstadt belongs, was appointed chancellor. The formal inauguration of the university took place on 26 June, 1472, and within the first semester 489 students matriculated. As in other universites prior to the sixteenth century, the faculty of philosophy comprised two sections, the Realists and the Nominalists, each under its own dean. In 1496 Duke George the Rich, son of Louis, established the Collegium Georgianum for poor students in the faculty of arts, and other foundations for similar purposes were subsequently made. Popes Adrian VI and Clement VII bestowed on the universit additional revenues from ecclesiastical property. At the height of the humanistic movement, Ingolstadt counted among its teachers a series of remarkable savatns and writers; Conrad Celtes, the first poet crowned by the German Emperor; his disciple Jacob Locher, surnamed Philomusos; Johann Turmair, known as Aventinus from his birthplace, Abensber, editor of the "Annales Boiorum" and of the Bavarian "Chronica", father of Bavarian history and founder (1507) of the"Sodalitas litteraria Angilostadensis". Johanees Reuchlin, restorer of the Hebrew language and literature, was also for a time at the university.

Although Duke William IV (1508-50) and his chancellor, Leonhard von Eck, did their utmost during thirty years to keep Lutheranism out of Ingolstadt, and though the adherents of the new doctrine were obliged to retract or resign, some of the professors joined the Lutheran movement. Their influence, however, wa counteracted by the tireless and successful endeavours of the foremost opponent of the Reformation, Dr. Johann Maier, better known as Eck, from the name of his birth-place, Egg, on the Gunz. He taught and laboured (1510-43) to such good purpose that Ingolstadt, during the Counter-Reformation, did more than any other university for the defence of the Catholic Faith, and was for the church in Southern Germany what Wittenberg was for Protestantism in the north. In 1549, with the approval of Paul III, peter Canisus, Salmeron, Claude Lejay, and other Jesuits were appointed to professorships in theology and philosophy. About the same time a college and a boarding school for boys were established, though they were not actually opened until 1556, when the statutes of the university were revised. In 1568 the profession of faith in accordance with the Council of Trent was required of the rector and professors. In 1688 the teaching in the faculty of philosophy passed entirely in the hands of the Jesuits.

Though the university after this change, in spite of vexations and conflicts regarding exemption from taxes and juridical autonomy, enjoyed a high degree of prosperity, its existence was frequently imperilled during the troubles of the Thirty Years War. But its fame as a home of earning was enhanced by men such as the theologian, Gregory of Valentia; the controversialist, Jacob Gretser (1558-1610); the moralist, Laymann (1603-1609); the mathematician and cartographer, Philip Apian; the astronomer, Christopher Scheiner (1610-1616), who, with the helioscope invented by him, discovered the sun spots and calculated the ime of the sun's rotation; and the poet, Jacob Balde, from Ensisheim in Alsacc, professor of rhetoric. Prominent among the jurists in the seventeenth century were Kaspar Manz and Christopher Berold. During the latter half of that century, and especially in the eighteenth, the courses of instruction were improved and adapted to the requirements of the age. After the founding of the Bavarian Academy of Science at Munich in 1759, an anti-ecclesiastical tendency sprang up at Ingolstadt and found an ardent supporter in Joseph Adam, Baron of Ickstatt, whom the elector had placed at the head of the university. Plans, moreover, were set on foot to have the university of the third centenary the Society of Jesus was suppressed, but some of the ex-Jesuits retained their professorships for a while longer. A movement was inaugurated in 1772 by Adam Weishaupt, professor of canon law, with a view to securing the triumph of the rationalistic "enlightment" in Church and State by means of the secret society of "Illuminati" (q.v.), which he founded. But this organization was suppressed in 1786 by the Elector Carl theodore, and Weishaupt was dismissed. On 25 November, 1799, the elector Maximilian IV, later King Maximilian I, decreed that the university, which was involved in financial difficulties, should be transferred to Landshut; and this was done in the following May. Among its leading professors towards the close were Winter the church historian, Schrank the naturalist, and Johann Michael Sailer, writer on moral philosophy and pedagogy, who later became Bishop of Ratisbon.

ERMAN-HORN, Bibliographie d. deutschen Universitaten, II (Leipzig, 1904); ROTMAR, Annales Ingolstad. Academiae (Ingolstadt, 1580); MEDERER, Annales, Ingolstadienses Academiae (Ingolstadt, 1782); PRANTL, Geschichte der Ludwigs-Maximilians Universitat in Ingolstadt, Landshut, Munchen (Munich, 1872); ROMSTOCK, Die Jesuitennullen Prantls (Eichstatt, 1898) (a reply to Prantl's charges against the Jesuits); VERDIERE, Historie de l'universite d'Inglostadt (Paris, 1887); RASHDALL, Universities etc., II (Oxford, 1895), pt. 1; BAUCH, Die Anfange des Humanismus in Ingolstadt (1901).

KARL HOEBER

Venerable John Ingram

English martyr, born at Stoke Edith, Herefordshire, in 1565; executed at Newcastle-on-Tyne, 26 July, 1594. He was probably the son of Anthony Ingram of Wolford, Warwickshire, by Dorothy, daughter of Sir John Hungerford. He was educated first in Worcestershire, then at the English College, Reims, at the Jesuit College, Pont-a-Mousson, and at the English College, Rome. Ordained at Rome in 1589, he went to Scotland early in 1592, and there frequented the company of Lords Huntly, Angus, and Erroll, the Abbot of Dumbries, and Sir Walter Lindsay of Balgavies. Captured on the Tyne, 25 November, 1593, he was imprisoned successively at Berwick, Durgam, York, and in the Tower of London, in which place he suffered the severest tortures with great constancy, and wrote twenty Latin epigrams which have survived. Sent north again, he was imprisoned at York, Newcastle, and Durgam, where he was tried in the company of John Bostle (q. v.) and George Swalwell, a converted minister. He was convicted under 27 Eliz. c. 2 (which made the mere presence in England of a priest ordained abroad high treason), though there was no evidence that he had ever exercised any priestly function in England. It appears that some one in Scotland in vain offered the English Government a thousand crowns for his life.

JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT

Jean-Auguste Dominique Ingres

A French painter, b. at Montauban, 29 August, 1780; d. at Paris, 14 January, 1867. His father sent him to study at Toulouse. At the age of sixteen he entered into the famous studio of David, in Paris. Steeped in the theories of Mengs and Wincklemann, he had broken away from the conceits and libertinism of the eighteenth century and led art back to nature and the antique. In Davids view the antiques was but the highest expression of life, freed from all that is merely transitory, and removed from the caprices from whim and fashion. Ingres accepted his master's programme in its entirety. But what in David's case made up a homogenous system, answering the twin faculties of his vast and powerful organism, meant quite another matter for the pupil. The young artist was gifted with a wondrous sensitiveness for reality. No one has ever experienced such sharp, penetrating, clear cut impressions with an equal aptitude for transferring them in their entirety to paper or canvas. But these exceptional gifts were handicpped by an extreme lack of inventiveness and originality. Unfortunatley David's teaching filled him with the belief that high art consisted in imitating the antique, and that the dignity of a painter constrained him to paint historical subjects. Throughout his life Ingres did violence to himself to paint scenes of the order of his master's "Sabines", as he suceeded in doing in his "Achilles receiving the messengers of Agamemnon" (Pais, Ecole des Beaux-Arts), which in 1801 won the "Prix de Rome". but instead of being a living historical or poetical scene, this painting is but a collection of studies, stitched together with effort, and without any real unity of result.

Thus it was that there was always in Ingres a curious contradiction between his temperament and his education, between his ability and his theories. And this secret struggle between his realistic longings and his idealistic convictions explains the discords of his work. In the beginning, however, his youth was the main factor. Perhaps, too, his obscurity, the dearth of important orders, and the necessity of earning his living were all in his favour. Never was he greater or more himself than during this period of his career (1800-1820). His absoulte realism and his intransigeance caused him to be looked on in David's school as an eccentric and revolutionary individual. Ingres had been friendly with a Florentine sculptor named Bartolini, and was strongly atracted by the works of the early Renaissance period, and by that art throbbing with life, and almost feverish in its manner of depicting nature, such as we find examples of in the works of Donatello and Filippo Lippi. He grew enthusiastic over archaic schools, over the weird poems of Ossian, over medieval costumes, in a word, over everything which by being unconventional seemed to him to draw nearer to reality, or at least gave him new thrills and sensations. He was put down as "Gotic", as an imitatior of Jean de Bruges (Jan van Eyck) and all the works he produced at this time bear the mark of oddity. This is especially true of his prtraits. Those of "Madame Rivière" (Louvre, 1804), "Granet" (Aix-en-Provence, 1806), "Madame Aymon "La Belle Zélie)" (Rouen, 1806), "Madame Devançay" (Chantilly, 1807), and of "Madame Se Senones" (Nantes, 1810) are unrivalled in all the world, and take a place next to the immortal creations of Titian and Raphael. Never was there completer absence of "manner", forgetfulenss of set purpose, of systematic or poetical effort, never did a painter give himself up more fully torealism, or submit more absoultely to his model, to the object before him. No work brings home to us more clearly the expression of something definite unless it be those little portrait sketches drawn by this same artist in the days of his poverty and sold at twenty francs each, and which are now famous as the "Ingres crayons". The finest are to be seen at the Louvre and in the Bonnat Collection at Paris and Bayonne.

In 1806 Ingres set out for Rome, and in the Vatican he saw the frescoes of the greatest of the decorators, the master of the "Parnassus" and the "School of Athens". He at once persuaded himself that this was absolute beauty, and that these paintings held within them formulæ and concepts revealing a full definition of art and of its immutable laws. And it is to this mistake of his that we owe not a few of his finest works; for had he not wrongly thought himself a classicist, he would not have felt himself bound to adopt the essential constituent of the clasical language, namely, the nude figure. The nude, in modern realism, hints at the unusual, suggests something furtive and secret, and takes a place in the programme of the realists only as something exceptional. Whereas with Ingres, thanks to the classical idealism of his doctrine, the nude was always a most important and sacred object of study. And to this study he applied, as in all his undertakings, a delicacy and freshness of feeling, an accuracy of observation toned down by a slightly sensual touch of charm, which place these paintings among his most precious works. Never was the joy of drawing and painting a beautiful body, of reproducing it in all the glory and grace of tis youth, mastered by a Frenchman to such an extent, nor in a way so akin to the art of the great painters. "OEdipus" and the "Girl Bathing" (1808), the "Odalisque" (1814), the "Source" (1818) -- all these canvases are in the Louvre -- are among the most beautiful poems consecrated to setting forht the noblest meaning of the human figure. And yet they remain but incomparable "studies". The painter is all the whhile incapable of blending his sensations, of harmonizing them with one another so as to form a tableau.

This same taste for what is quaint led Ingres at this period to produce a host of minor anecdotal or historical works such as "Raphael and the Fornarina", "Francesca da rimini" (1819, in the Angers Museum), etc., works that at times display the wit, the romance, and the caprice of a quattrocento miniature. here the style becomes a part of the reality, and the archaism of the one only serves to bring out more clearly the originality of the other. In work of this order nothing the artist has left us is more complete than his "Sixtine Chapel" (Louvre, 1814). This magnificent effort, small in size though it is, is perhaps the most complete, the best balanced, the soundest piece of work the master ever wrought. At this time David, exiled by the Restoration, left the French school without a head, while the Romantic school, with the "Medusa" of Gericault (1818) and the "Dante" of Delacroix (1822), was clamouring for recognition. Ingres, hitherto but little known in his solitude in Italy, resolved to return to France and strike a daring blow. As early as 1820 he sent to the Salon his "Christ conferring the keys on Peter" (Louvre), a cold and restrained work which won immense success among the classicists. The "Vow of Louis XIII" (Montauban, 1824), a homage to Raphael, appeared opportunely as a contrast to Delacrois's "Massacre of Scio". Henceforward Ingres was looked up to as the leader of the traditional School, and he proves his claim to the title by producing the famous "Apotheosis of Homer" (Louvre, 1827).

This marks the beginning of a new period, in which Ingres, absorbed in decorative works, is nothing more than the upholder of the classical teaching. Over and over again he did himself violence in composing huge mechanical works like the "St. Symphorin" (Autun, 1835), "The Golden Age" (Dampierre, 1843-49), the "Apotheosis of Napoleon", "Jesus in the midst of the Doctors" (Montauban, 1862), works that entailed most persevering labour, and which after all are but groups of "Studies", mosaics carefully inset and lifeless. Some of Ingres most beautiful portraits, those of Armand Bertin (Louvre, 1831), of Cherubini (Louvre, 1842), and of Madame d'Haussonville (1845) belong to this period. But gradually he gave up portrait- painting, and wished only to be the painter of the ideal. yet he was less so now than ever before. In his latest works his deficiency of composition becomes more and more evident. His life was uneventful. In 1820 he left Rome for Florence, and in 1824 he settled in Paris, which he never left save for six years (1836-1842) which he spent in Rome as director of the Villa Medici. He died at the age of 87, having continued to work up to his last day. perhaps his prestige and his high authority counted for something in the renaissance of decorative painting that took place in the middle of the nineteenth century. But his undoubted legacy was a principle of quaintness or oddity and eccentricity, which was copied by artists like Signol and Jeanniot. Ingres was a naturalist who persisted in practising the most idealistic style of art which was ever attempted in the French School. Like his great rival delacrois, he may be said to have been a lonely phenomenon in the art of the nineteenth century.

GAUTIER, Les Beaux-Arts en Europe (Paris, 1855); DELECLUZE, Louis David, son ecole et son temps (Paris, 1855); DELABORDE, Ingres, sa vie, sa doctrine (Paris, 1870); BLANCE, Ingres (Paris, 1870); DUVAL, L'Atelier d'Ingres (Paris, 1878); LAPAUZE, Les dessins d'Ingres (Paris, 1901): 7 vols.in folio. and 1 vol. of printed matter); DE WYZEWA, L'aervre peint de J.D. Ingres (Paris, 1907): D'AGEN, Ingres, d'apres une correspondance inedite (Paris, 1909).

LOUIS GILLET

Ingulf

Abbot of Croyland, Lincolnshire; d. there 17 December 1109. he is first heard of as secretary to William the Conqueror, in which capacity he visited England in 1051. After making a pilgrimage to Jerusalem he entered the Norman monastery of Fontenelle, or Saint-Wandrille, under Abbot Gerbert, who appointed him prior. The English Abbey of Croyland falling vacant, owing to the deposition by Lanfranc of Abbot Ulfeytel, Ingulf was nominated to the office in 1087 at the special instance of King William. he was not only an able but a kindly man, as was shown by his successful efforts to obtain his predecessor's release from Glastonbury, where he was confined, and his return to Peterborough (the house of his profession), where he died. Ingulf governed Croyland for twenty-four years, and with success, though in the face of many difficulties, not the least being his own bad health, for he suffered greatly from gout. Another of his troubles was the partial destruction by fire of the abbey church, with the sacristies, vestments, and books. An event of his abbacy was the interment in Croyland church of the Saxon Earl Walthe of Northumbria, who was executed by William's orders, and was a martyr as well as a national hero in the popular estimation.

ORDERCIUS, VITALIS, Historia Ecclesiastica, pars II, lib. IV (ed. MIGNE, Paris, 1855), 364 [ORDERICUS is the onlly extant authority for the few fact known about Ingulf's life. the chronicle known as his Historia Anglicana, containing many autobiographical details, is a fourteenth-or fifteenth-century forgery]: see also FREEMAN, Conquest of England, IV (Oxford, 1871), 600, 601, 690.

D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR

Richard of Ingworth

(INGEWRTHE, INDEWURDE).

A Franciscan preacher who flourished about 1225. he first appears among the friars who accompanied Agnellus to England in 1224, and is supposed to have been the first of the Franciscans to preach north of the Alps. He was already a priest and well on in years at the time of his arrival, and was responsible for the establishment of the first Franciscan house in London. The first convents at Oxford and Northampton were likewise indebted to his efforts, and he served for a time as custodian at Cambridge. In 1230 he acted as vicar of the English Province during the absence of Agnellus at a general chapter at Assisi, and was subsequently appointed provincial minister of Ireland by John Parens. In 1239, during the generalship of Albert of Pisa, he relinquished this position and set out as a missionary for the Holy Land, during which pilgrimage he died.

ECCLESTON, De Adventu fratrum Minorum in Anglican; BREWER, ed., Mon. Franciscana, I, in Rolls Series; LITTLE in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.; Eng. Hist. Rev., Oct., 1890.

STANLEY J. QUINN

Injustice

(Lat. in, privative, and jus, right).

Injustice, in the large sense, is a contradiction in any way of the virtue of justice. Here, however, it is taken to mean the violation of another's strict right against his reasonable will, and the value of the word right is determined to be the moral power of having or doing or exacting something in support or furtherance of one's own advantage. The goods whose acquisition or preservation is contemplated as the object of right belong to different categories. There are those which are bound up with the person, whether there is question of body or soul, such as life and limb, liberty, etc., as likewise that which is the product of one's deserts, such as good name; and there are those things which are extrinsic to the individual, such as property of whatever sort. The injury perpetrated by a trespass on a man's right in the first instance is said to be personal, in the second real. All injury, like every kind of moral delinquency, is either formal or material according as it is culpable or not. It is customary also to distinguish between that species of injurious action or attitude which involves loss to the one whose right is outraged, such as theft, and another which carries with it no such damage, such as an insult which has had no witnesses. The important thing is that in every kind of injury such as we are considering, the offense is against commutative justice. That is, it is against the virtue which, taking for granted the clear distinction of rights as between man and man, demands that those rights be conserved and respected even to the point of arithmetical equality. Consequently, whenever the equilibrium has been wrongfully upset, it is not enough to atone for the misdeed by repentance or interior change of heart. There is an unabatable claim of justice that the wronged one be put back in possession of his own. Otherwise the injury, despite all protestations of sorrow on the part of the offender, continues. Hence, for example, there must be apology for contumely, retraction for calumny, compensation for hurt to life and limb, restitution for theft, etc. No one therefore can receive absolution for the sin of injustice except in so far as he has a serious resolution to rehabilitate as soon as he can and in such measure as is possible the one whose right he has contemned.

It is an axiom among moralists that "scienti et volenti non fit injuria", i.e., no injury is offered to one who knowing what is done consents to it. In other words, there are rights which a man may forego, and when he does so, he cannot complain that he has been deprived of them. Some limitations, however, are necessary to prevent the abuse of a principle which is sufficiently obvious. First of all a man must really know, that is, he must not be the victim of a purely subjective persuasion, which is in fact false and which is the reason of his renunciation. Secondly, the consent which he gives must not be forced such as might be yielded at the point of a pistol, or such as might be elicited under pressure of extreme necessity taken advantage of by another. Lastly, the right must be such as can be given up. There are some rights which as a result of either the natural or the positive law cannot be surrendered. Thus a husband cannot by his antecedent willingness legitimize the adultery of his wife. His right is inalienable. So also one could not accede to the request of a person who would not only agree to be killed, but would plead for death as a means of release from suffering. The right which a man has to life cannot be renounced, particularly if it be remembered that he has no direct dominion over it. This ownership resides with God alone. Hence the infliction of death by a private person, even in response to the entreaties of a sufferer to be put out of misery, would always be murder.

JOSEPH F. DELANEY

Pope Innocent I

Date of birth unknown; died 12 March, 417. Before his elevation to the Chair of Peter, very little is known concerning the life of this energetic pope, so zealous for the welfare of the whole Church. According to the "Liber Pontificalis" he was a native of Albano; his father was called Innocentius. He grew up among the Roman clergy and in the service of the Roman Church. After the death of Anastasius (Dec., 401) he was unanimously chosen Bishop of Rome by the clergy and people. Not much has come down to us concerning his ecclesiastical activities in Rome. Nevertheless one or two instances of his zeal for the purity of the Catholic Faith and for church discipline are well attested. He took several churches in Rome from the Novatians (Socrates, Hist. Eccl., VII, ii) and caused the Photinian Marcus to be banished from the city. A drastic decree, which the Emperor Honorius issued from Rome (22 Feb., 407) against the Manicheans, the Montanists, and the Priscillianists (Codex Theodosianus, XVI, 5, 40), was very probably not issued without his concurrence. Through the munificence of Vestina, a rich Roman matron, Innocent was enabled to build and richly endow a church dedicated to Sts. Gervasius and Protasius; this was the old Titulus Vestinæ which still stands under the name of San Vitale. The siege and capture of Rome by the Goths under Alaric (408-10) occurred in his pontificate. When, at the time of the first siege, the barbarian leader had declared that he would withdraw only on condition that the Romans should arrange a peace favourable to him, an embassy of the Romans went to Honorius, at Ravenna, to try, if possible, to make peace between him and the Goths. Pope Innocent also joined this embassy. But all his endeavours to bring about peace failed. The Goths then recommenced the siege of Rome, so that the pope and the envoys were not able to return to the city, which was taken and sacked in 410. From the beginning of his pontificate, Innocent often acted as head of the whole Church, both East and West.

In his letter to Archbishop Anysius of Thessalonica, in which he informed the latter of his own election to the See of Rome, he also confirmed the privileges which had been bestowed upon the archbishop by previous popes. When Eastern Illyria fell to the Eastern Empire (379) Pope Damasus had asserted and preserved the ancient rights of the papacy in those parts, and his successor Siricius had bestowed on the Archbishop of Thessalonica the privilege of confirming and consecrating the bishops of Eastern Illyria. These prerogatives were renewed by Innocent (Ep. i), and by a later letter (Ep. xiii, 17 June, 412) the pope entrusted the supreme administration of the dioceses of Eastern Illyria to Archbishop Rufus of Thessalonica, as representative of the Holy See. By this means the papal vicariate of Illyria was put on a sound basis, and the archbishops of Thessalonica became vicars of the popes. On 15 Feb., 404, Innocent sent an important decretal to Bishop Victricius of Rouen (Ep. ii), who had laid before the pope a list of disciplinary matters for decision. The points at issue concerned the consecration of bishops, admissions into the ranks of the clergy, the disputes of clerics, whereby important matters (causæ majores) were to be brought from the episcopal tribunal to the Apostolic See, also the ordinations of the clergy, celibacy, the reception of converted Novatians or Donatists into the Church, monks, and nuns. In general, the pope indicated the discipline of the Roman Church as being the norm for the other bishops to follow. Innocent directed a similar decretal to the Spanish bishops (Ep. iii) among whom difficulties had arisen, especially regarding the Priscillianist bishops. The pope regulated this matter and at the same time settled other questions of ecclesiastical discipline.

Similar letters, disciplinary in content, or decisions of important cases, were sent to Bishop Exuperius of Toulouse (Ep. vi), to the bishops of Macedonia (Ep. xvii), to Decentius, Bishop of Gubbio (Ep. xxv), to Felix, Bishop of Nocera (Ep. xxxviii). Innocent also addressed shorter letters to several other bishops, among them a letter to two British bishops, Maximus and Severus, in which he decided that those priests who, while priests, had begotten children should be dismissed from their sacred office (Ep. xxxix). Envoys were sent by the Synod of Carthage (404) to the Bishop of Rome, or the bishop of the city where the emperor was staying, in order to provide for severer treatment of the Montanists. The envoys came to Rome, and Pope Innocent obtained from the Emperor Honorius a strong decree against those African sectaries, by which many adherents of Montanism were induced to be reconciled with the Church. The Christian East also claimed a share of the pope's energy. St. John Chrysostom, Bishop of Constantinople, who was persecuted by the Empress Eudoxia and the Alexandrian patriarch Theophilus, threw himself on the protection of Innocent. Theophilus had already informed the latter of the deposition of John, following on the illegal Synod of the Oak (ad quercum). But the pope did not recognize the sentence of the synod, summoned Theophilus to a new synod at Rome, consoled the exiled Patriarch of Byzantium, and wrote a letter to the clergy and people of Constantinople in which he animadverted severely on their conduct towards their bishop (John), and announced his intention of calling a general synod, at which the matter would be sifted and decided. Thessalonica was suggested as the place of assembly. The pope informed Honorius, Emperor of the West, of these proceedings, whereupon the latter wrote three letters to his brother, the Eastern Emperor Arcadius, and besought Arcadius to summon the Eastern bishops to a synod at Thessalonica, before which the Patriarch Theophilus was to appear. The messengers who brought these three letters were ill received, Arcadius being quite favourable to Theophilus. In spite of the efforts of the pope and the Western emperor, the synod never took place. Innocent remained in correspondence with the exiled John; when, from his place of banishment the latter thanked him for his kind solicitude, the pope answered with another comforting letter, which the exiled bishop received only a short time before his death (407) (Epp. xi, xii). The pope did not recognize Arsacius and Atticus, who had been raised to the See of Constantinople instead of the unlawfully deposed John.

After John's death, Innocent desired that the name of the deceased patriarch should be restored to the diptychs, but it was not until after Theophilus was dead (412) that Atticus yielded. The pope obtained from many other Eastern bishops a similar recognition of the wrong done to St. John Chrysostom. The schism at Antioch, dating from the Arian conflicts, was finally settled in Innocent's time. Alexander, Patriarch of Antioch, succeeded, about 413-15, in gaining over to his cause the adherents of the former Bishop Eustathius; he also received into the ranks of his clergy the followers of Paulinus, who had fled to Italy and had been ordained there. Innocent informed Alexander of these proceedings, and as Alexander restored the name of John Chrysostom to the diptychs, the pope entered into communion with the Antiochene patriarch, and wrote him two letters, one in the name of a Roman synod of twenty Italian bishops, and one in his own name (Epp. xix and xx). Acacius, Bishop of Beræa, one of the most zealous opponents of Chrysostom, had sought to obtain re-admittance to communion with the Roman Church through the aforesaid Alexander of Antioch. The pope informed him, though Alexander, of the conditions under which he would resume communion with him (Ep. xxi). In a later letter Innocent decided several questions of church discipline (Ep. xxiv).

The pope also informed the Macedonian bishop Maximian and the priest Bonifatius, who had interceded with him for the recognition of Atticus, Patriarch of Constantinople, of the conditions, which were similar to those required of the above-mentioned Patriarch of Antioch (Epp. xxii and xxiii). In the Origenist and Pelagian controversies, also, the pope's authority was invoked from several quarters. St. Jerome and the nuns of Bethlehem were attacked in their convents by brutal followers of Pelagius, a deacon was killed, and a part of the buildings was set on fire. John, Bishop of Jerusalem, who was on bad terms with Jerome, owing to the Origenist controversy, did nothing to prevent these outrages. Through Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage, Innocent sent St. Jerome a letter of condolence, in which he informed him that he would employ the influence of the Holy See to repress such crimes; and if Jerome would give the names of the guilty ones, he would proceed further in the matter. The pope at once wrote an earnest letter of exhortation to the Bishop of Jerusalem, and reproached him with negligence of his pastoral duty. The pope was also compelled to take part in the Pelagian controversy. In 415, on the proposal of Orosius, the Synod of Jerusalem brought the matter of the orthodoxy of Pelagius before the Holy See. The synod of Eastern bishops held at Diospolis (Dec., 415), which had been deceived by Pelagitis with regard to his actual teaching and had acquitted him, approached Innocent on behalf of the heretic. On the report of Orosius concerning the proceedings at Diospolis, the African bishops assembled in synod at Carthage, in 416, and confirmed the condemnation which had been pronounced in 411 against Cælestius, who shared the views of Pelagius. The bishops of Numidia did likewise in the same year in the Synod of Mileve. Both synods reported their transactions to the pope and asked him to confirm their decisions. Soon after this, five African bishops, among them St. Augustine, wrote a personal letter to Innocent regarding their own position in the matter of Pelagianism. Innocent in his reply praised the African bishops, because, mindful of the authority of the Apostolic See, they had appealed to the Chair of Peter; he rejected the teachings of Pelagius and confirmed the decisions drawn up by the African Synods (Epp. xxvii-xxxiii). The decisions of the Synod of Diospolis were rejected by the pope. Pelagius now sent a confession of faith to Innocent, which, however, was only delivered to his successor, for Innocent died before the document reached the Holy See. He was buried in a basilica above the catacomb of Pontianus, and was venerated as a saint. He was a very energetic and active man, and a highly gifted ruler, who fulfilled admirably the duties of his office.

Epistolæ Pontificum Romanorum, ed. COUSTANT, I (Paris, 1721); JAFFÉ, Regesta Rom. Pont., I (2nd ed.), 44-49; Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I, 220-224; LANGEN, Geschichte der römischen Kirche, I, 665-741; GRISAR, Geschichte Roms und der Päpste im Mittelalter, I, 59 sqq., 284 Sqq.; WITTIG, Studien zur Geschichte des Papstes Innocenz I. und der Papstwahlen des V. Jahrh. in Tübinger Theol. Quartalschrift (1902), 388-439; GEBHARDT, Die Bedeutung Innocenz I. für die Entwicklung der päpstlichen Gewalt (Leipzig, 1901).

J.P. KIRSCH

Pope Innocent II

(Gregorio Papereschi)

Elected 14 Feb., 1130; died 24 Sept., 1143. He was a native of Rome and belonged to the ancient family of the Guidoni. His father's name is given as John.

The youthful Gregory became canon of the Lateran and later Abbot of Sts. Nicholas and Primitivus. He was made Cardinal-Deacon of the Title of S. Angelo by Paschal II, and as such shared the exile of Gelasius II in France, together with his later rival, the Cardinal-Deacon Pierleone. Under Callistus II Gregory was sent to Germany (1119) with the legate Lambert, Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia. Both were engaged in drawing up the Concordat of Worms in 1122. In the following year he was sent to France.

On 14 Feb., 1130, the morning following the death of Honorius II, the cardinal-bishops held an election and Gregory was chosen as his successor, taking the name of Innocent II; three hours later Pietro Pierleone was elected by the other cardinals and took the name of Anacletus II. Both received episcopal consecration 23 Feb.; Innocent at Santa Maria Nuova and Anacletus at St. Peter's. Finding the influential family of the Frangipani had deserted his cause, Innocent at first retired into the stronghold belonging to his family in Trastevere, then went to France by way of Pisa and Genoa. There he secured the support of Louis VI, and in a synod at Etampes the assembled bishops, influenced by the eloquence of Suger of St-Denis, acknowledged his authority. This was also done by other bishops gathered at Puy-en-Velay through St. Hugh of Grenoble. The pope went to the Abbey of Cluny, then attended another meeting of bishops, November, 1130, at Clermont; they also promised obedience and enacted a number of disciplinary canons.

Through the activity of St. Norbert of Magdeburg, Conrad of Salzburg, and the papal legates, the election of Innocent was ratified at a synod assembled at Würzburg at the request of the German king, and here the king and his princes promised allegiance. A personal meeting of pope and king took place 22 March, 1131, at Liège, where a week later Innocent solemnly crowned King Lothair and Queen Richenza in the church of St. Lambert. He celebrated Easter, 1131, at St-Denis in Paris, and 18 October opened the great synod at Reims, and crowned the young prince of France, later Louis VII. At this synod England, Castile, and Aragon were represented; St. Bernard and St. Norbert attended and several salutary canons were enacted. Pentecost, 1132, the pope held a synod at Piacenza. The following year he again entered Rome, and on 4 June crowned Lothair emperor at the Lateran. In 1134 the pope, at the request of the emperor, ordered that Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and the island of Greenland should remain under the jurisdiction of Hamburg (Weiss, "Weltgeschichte", V, 21). On the departure of the emperor, innocent also left and went to Pisa, since the antipope still held sway in Rome. At Pisa a great synod was held in 1135 (Hefele, "Conciliengeschichte", V, 425) at which were present bishops of Spain, England, France, Germany, Hungary, etc. In the spring of 1137 Emperor Lothair, in answer to the repeated entreaties of the pope, began his march to Rome. The papal and imperial troops met at Bari, 30 May, 1137, and the pope was again conducted into Rome. Anacletus still held a part of the city, but died 25 Jan., 1138. Another antipope was chosen, who called himself Victor IV, but he, urged especially by the prayers of St. Bernard, soon submitted, and Innocent found himself in undisturbed possession of the city and of the papacy.

To remove the remnants and evil consequences of the schism, Innocent II called the Tenth Ecumenical Council, the Second of the Lateran. It began its sessions on 4 April, 1139 (not 8 April, as Hefele writes, V, 438). One thousand bishops and other prelates are said to have been present. The official acts of Anacletus II were declared null and void, the bishops and priests ordained by him were with few exceptions deposed, the heretical tenets of Pierre de Bruys were condemned. Thirty canons were made against simony, incontinence, extravagance in dress among the clergy, etc. Sentence of excommunication was pronounced upon Roger, who styled himself King of Sicily, and who after the departure of the emperor had invaded the lands granted to Rainulph. In 1139 St. Malachy, Archbishop of Armagh, left Ireland to visit the shrine of the Apostles. Innocent received him with great honours and made him papal legate for all Ireland, but would not grant him permission to resign his see in order to join the community of St. Bernard at Clairvaux (Bellesheim, "Ireland", I, 356). In the East, Innocent II curbed the pretension to independence on the part of William, Patriarch of Jerusalem and of Raoul, Patriarch of Antioch (Hergenröther, II, 410).

After the death of Alberic, Archbishop of Bourges, in 1141, Louis VII of France wanted to secure the nomination of a man of his own choice whom the chapter did not consider the fit person, and they chose Pierre de La Châtre, whereupon Louis refused to ratify the election. The bishop-elect in person brought the matter to Rome, and Innocent, finding after due examination that the election had been made according to the requirements of ecclesiastical law, Confirmed it and himself gave the episcopal consecration. When Pierre returned to France, Louis would not allow him to enter his diocese. After useless negotiations Innocent placed France under interdict. Only during the reign of the next pope was the interdict removed and peace restored.

In the trouble between Alfonso of Spain and Alfonso Henríquez who was making Portugal an independent monarchy and had placed his kingdom under the protection of the Holy See, Innocent acted as mediator (Aschbach, "Gesch. Span. u. Port.", 1833, 304, 458). Ramiro II, a monk, had been elected King of Aragon. Innocent II is said to have given him dispensation from his vows, though others claim that this is a calumny spread by the enemies of the pope (Damberger, "Weltgeschichte ", VIII, 202).

Several minor synods were held during the last few years of the life of Innocent, one at Sens in 1140, at Vienne in 1141 and in the same year at Vienne and Reims; in 1142 at Lagny, in which Ralph, the Duke of Vermandois is said to have been excommunicated by the legate Yvo of Chartres for having repudiated his lawful wife and married another (Hefele, V, 488). A synod was held under the presidency of the papal legate 7 April, 1141, at Winchester; and 7 Dec., 1141, at Westminster. During his pontificate Innocent II enrolled among the Canonized saints of the Church: at Reims in 1133, St. Godehard, Archbishop of Reims; at Pisa in 1134, St. Hugo, Bishop of Grenoble, who had died in 1132, and had been a zealous defender of the rights of Innocent; at the Lateran in 1139, St. Sturmius, Abbot of Fulda (Ann. Pont. Cath., 1903, 412). To St. Norbert, the founder of the Premonstratensians, he granted in 1131 a document authorizing him to introduce his rule at the cathedral of Magdeburg (Heimbucher, "Die Orden u. Congr.", II, Paderborn, 1907, 55); to St. Bernard he in 1140 gave the church of Sts. Vincent and Anastasius near Rome (ibid., 1, 428); he also granted many privileges to others. His letters and privileges are given in Migne (P. L., CLXXIX). According to the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, II, 379) he ordained eighteen deacons, twenty priests, and seventy bishops.

He was buried in St. John Lateran, but seven years later was transferred to Santa Maria in Trastevere. Innocent II is praised by all, especially by St. Bernard, as a man of irreproachable character. His motto was: "Adjuva nos, Deus salutaris noster". The policy of Innocent is characterized in one of his letters: "If the sacred authority of the popes and the imperial power are imbued with mutual love, we must thank God in all humility, since then only can peace and harmony exist among Christian peoples. For there is nothing so sublime as the papacy nor so exalted as the imperial throne" (Weiss, V, 25).

BRISCHAR in Kirchenlex., s. v.; DENZINGER, Enchiridion (10th ed., Freiburg, 1907), 167. See also under ANACLETUS II.

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

Pope Innocent III

(Lotario de' Conti)

One of the greatest popes of the Middle Ages, son of Count Trasimund of Segni and nephew of Clement III, born 1160 or 1161 at Anagni, and died 16 June, 1216, at Perugia.

He received his early education at Rome, studied theology at Paris, jurisprudence at Bologna, and became a learned theologian and one of the greatest jurists of his time. Shortly after the death of Alexander III (30 Aug., 1181) Lotario returned to Rome and held various ecclesiastical offices during the short reigns of Lucius III, Urban III, Gregory VIII, and Clement III. Pope Gregory VIII ordained him subdeacon, and Clement III created him Cardinal-Deacon of St. George in Velabro and Sts. Sergius and Bacchus, in 1190. Later he became Cardinal-Priest of St. Pudentiana. During the pontificate of Celestine III (1191-1198), a member of the House of the Orsini, enemies of the counts of Segni, he lived in retirement, probably at Anagni, devoting himself chiefly to meditation and literary pursuits. Celestine III died 8 January, 1198. Previous to his death he had urged the College of Cardinals to elect Giovanni di Colonna as his successor; but Lotario de' Conti was elected pope, at Rome, on the very day on which Celestine III died. He accepted the tiara with reluctance and took the name of Innocent III. At the time of his accession to the papacy he was only thirty-seven years of age. The imperial throne had become vacant by the death of Henry VI in 1197, and no successor had as yet been elected. The tactful and energetic pope made good use of the opportunity offered him by this vacancy for the restoration of the papal power in Rome and in the States of the Church. The Prefect of Rome, who reigned over the city as the emperor's representative, and the senator who stood for the communal rights and privileges of Rome, swore allegiance to Innocent. When he had thus re-established the papal authority in Rome, he availed himself of every opportunity to put in practice his grand concept of the papacy. Italy was tired of being ruled by a host of German adventurers, and the pope experienced little difficulty in extending his political power over the peninsula. First he sent two cardinal legates to Markwuld to demand the restoration of the Romagna and the March of Ancona to the Church. Upon his evasive answer he was excommunicated by the legates and driven away by the papal troops. In like manner the Duchy of Spoleto and the Districts of Assisi and Sora were wrested from the German knight, Conrad von Uerslingen. The league which had been formed among the cities of Tuscany was ratified by the pope after it acknowledged him as suzerain.

The death of the Emperor Henry VI left his four-year old child, Frederick II, King of Sicily. The emperor's widow Constance, who ruled over Sicily for her little son, was unable to cope singly against the Norman barons of the Sicilian Kingdom, who resented the German rule and refused to acknowledge the child-king. She appealed to Innocent III to save the Sicilian throne for her child. The pope made use of this opportunity to reassert papal suzerainty over Sicily, and acknowledged Frederick II as king only after Constance had surrendered certain privileges contained in the so-called Four Chapters, which William I had previously extorted from Adrian IV. The pope then solemnly invested Frederick II as King of Sicily in a Bull issued about the middle of November, 1198. Before the Bull reached Sicily Constance had died, but before her death she had appointed Innocent as guardian of the orphan-king. With the greatest fidelity the pope watched over the welfare of his ward during the nine years of his minority. Even the enemies of the papacy admit that Innocent was an unselfish guardian of the young king and that no one else could have ruled for him more ably and conscientiously. To protect the inexperienced king against his enemies, he induced him in 1209 to marry Constance, the widow of King Emeric of Hungary.

Conditions in Germany were extremely favourable for the application of Innocent's idea concerning the relation between the papacy and the empire. After the death of Henry VI a double election had ensued. The Ghibellines had elected Philip of Swabia on 6 March, 1198, while the Guelfs had elected Otto IV, son of Henry the Lion and nephew of King Richard of England, in April of the same year. The former was crowned at Mainz on 8 September, 1198, the latter at Aachen on 12 July, 1198. Immediately upon his accession to the papal throne Innocent had sent the Bishop of Sutri and the Abbot of Sant' Anastasio as legates to Germany, with instructions to free Philip of Swabia from the ban which he had incurred under Celestine III, on condition that he would bring about the liberation of the imprisoned Queen Sibyl of Sicily and restore the territory which he had taken from the Church when he was Duke of Tuscany. When the legates arrived in Germany, Philip had already been elected king. Yielding to the wishes of Philip, the Bishop of Sutri secretly freed him from the ban upon his mere promise to fulfil the proposed conditions. After the coronation Philip sent the legates back to Rome with letters requesting the pope's ratification of his election; but Innocent was dissatisfied with the action of the Bishop of Sutri and refused to ratify the election. Otto IV also sent legates to the pope after his coronation at Aachen, but before the pope took any action, the two claimants of the German throne began to assert their claims by force of arms. Though the pope did not openly side with either of them, it was apparent that his sympathy was with Otto IV. Offended at what they considered an unjust interference on the part of the pope, the adherents of Philip sent a letter to him in which they protested against his interference in the imperial affairs of Germany. In his answer Innocent stated that he had no intention of encroaching upon the rights of the princes, but insisted upon the rights of the Church in this matter. He emphasized especially that the conferring of the imperial crown belonged to the pope alone. In 1201 the pope openly espoused the side of Otto IV. On 3 July, 1201, the papal legate, Cardinal-Bishop Guido of Palestrina, announced to the people, in the cathedral of Cologne, that Otto IV had been approved by the pope as Roman king and threatened with excommunication all those who refused to acknowledge him. Innocent III made clear to the German princes by the Decree "Venerabilem" which he addressed to the Duke of Zähringen in May, 1202, in what relation he considered the empire to stand to the papacy. This decretal, which has become famous, was afterwards embodied in the "Corpus Juris Canonici". It is found in Baluze, "Registrum Innocentii III super negotio Romani Imperii", no. lxii, and is reprinted in P. L., CCXVI, 1065-7. The following are the chief points of the decretal:

• The German princes have the right to elect the king, who is afterwards to become emperor.
• This right was given them by the Apostolic See when it transferred the imperial dignity from the Greeks to the Germans in the person of Charlemagne.
• The right to investigate and decide whether a king thus elected is worthy of the imperial dignity belongs to the pope, whose office it is to anoint, consecrate, and crown him; otherwise it might happen that the pope would be obliged to anoint, consecrate, and Crown a king who was excommunicated, a heretic, or a pagan.
• If the pope finds that the king who has been elected by the princes is unworthy of the imperial dignity, the princes must elect a new king or, if they refuse, the pope will confer the imperial dignity upon another king; for the Church stands in need of a patron and defender.
• In case of a double election the pope must exhort the princes to come to an agreement. If after a due interval they have not reached an agreement they must ask the pope to arbitrate, failing which, he must of his own accord and by virtue of his office decide in favour of one of the claimants. The pope's decision need not be based on the greater or less legality of either election, but on the qualifications of the claimants.

Innocent's exposition of his theory concerning the relation between the papacy and the empire was accepted by many princes, as is apparent from the sudden increase of Otto's adherents subsequent to the issue of the decretal. If after 1203 the majority of the princes began again to side with Philip, it was the fault of Otto himself, who was very irritable and often offended his best friends. Innocent, reversing his decision, declared in favour of Philip in 1207, and sent the Cardinals Ugolino of Ostia and Leo of Santa Croce to Germany with instructions to endeavour to induce Otto to renounce his claims to the throne and with powers to free Philip from the ban. The murder of King Philip by Otto of Wittelsbach, 21 June, 1208, entirely changed conditions in Germany. At the Diet of Frankfort, 11 November, 1208, Otto was acknowledged as king by all the princes, and the pope invited him to Rome to receive the imperial crown. He was crowned emperor in the Basilica of St. Peter at Rome, 4 October, 1209. Before his coronation he had solemnly promised to leave the Church in the peaceful possession of Spoleto, Ancona, and the gift of Countess Matilda; to assist the pope in the exercise of his suzerainty over Sicily; to grant freedom of ecclesiastical elections; unlimited right of appeal to the pope and the exclusive competency of the hierarchy in spiritual matters; he had, moreover renounced the "regalia" and the jus spolii, i. e., the right to the revenues of vacant sees and the seizure of the estates of intestate ecclesiastics. He also promised to assist the hierarchy in the extirpation of heresy. But scarcely had he been crowned emperor when he seized Ancons, Spoleto, the bequest of Matilda, and other property of the Church, giving it in vassalage to some of his friends. He also united with the enemies of Frederick II and invaded the Kingdom of Sicily with the purpose of wresting it from the youthful king and from the suzerainty of the pope. When Otto did not listen to the remonstrances of Innocent, the latter excommunicated him, 18 November, 1210, and solemnly proclaimed his excommunication at a Roman synod held on 31 March, 1211. The pope now began to treat with King Philip Augustus of France and with the German princes, with the result that most princes renounced the excommunicated emperor and elected in his place the youthful Frederick II of Sicily, at the Diet of Nuremberg in September, 1211. The election was repeated in presence of a representative of the pope and of Philip Augustus of France at the Diet of Frankfort, 2 December, 1212. After making practically the same promises to the pope which Otto IV had made previously, and, in addition, taking the solemn oath never to unite Sicily with the empire, his election was ratified by Innocent and he was crowned at Aachen on 12 July, 1215. The deposed emperor Otto IV hastened to Germany immediately upon the election of Frederick II, but received little support from the princes. In alliance with John of England he made war upon Philip of France, but was defeated in the battle of Bouvines, 27 July, 1214. Then he lost all influence in Germany and died on 19 May, 1218, leaving the pope's creature, Frederick II, the undisputed emperor. When Innocent ascended the papal throne a cruel war was being waged between Philip Augustus of France and Richard of England. The pope considered it his duty, as the supreme ruler of the Christian world, to put an end to all hostilities among Christian princes. Shortly after his accession he sent Cardinal Peter of Capua to France with instructions to threaten both kings with interdict if they would not within two months conclude peace or at least agree upon a truce of five years. In January, 1198, the two kings met between Vernon and Andely and a truce of five years was agreed upon. The same legate was instructed by the pope to threaten Philip Augustus with interdict over the whole of France if within a month he would not be reconciled with his lawful wife, Ingeburga of Denmark, whom he had rejected and in whose stead he had taken Agnes, daughter of the Duke of Meran. When Philip took no heed of the pope's warning Innocent carried out his threat and on 12 December, 1199, laid the whole of France under interdict. For nine months the king remained stubborn, but when the barons and the people began to rise in rebellion against him he finally discarded his concubine and the interdict was lifted on 7 September, 1200. It was not, however, until 1213 that the pope succeeded in bringing about a final reconciliation between the king and his lawful wife Ingeburga.

Innocent also had an opportunity to assert the papal rights in England. After the death of Archbishop Hubert of Canterbury, in 1205, a number of the younger monks of Christ Church assembled secretly at night and elected their sub-prior, Reginald, as archbishop. This election was made without the concurrence of the bishop and without the authority of the king. Reginald was asked not to divulge his election until he had received the papal approbation. But on his way to Rome the vain monk assumed the title of archbishop-elect, and thus the episcopal body of the province of Canterbury was apprised of the secret election. The bishops at once sent Peter of Anglesham as their representative to Pope Innocent to protest against the uncanonical proceedings of the monks of Christ Church. The monks also were highly incensed at Reginald because, contrary to his promise, he had divulged his election. They proceeded to a second election, and on 11 December, 1205, cast their votes for the royal favourite, John de Grey, whom the king had recommended to their suffrages. The controversy between the monks of Christ Church and the bishops concerning the right of electing the Archbishop of Canterbury, Innocent decided in favour of the monks, but in the present case he pronounced both elections invalid; that of Reginald because it had been made uncanonically and clandestinely, that of John de Grey because it had occurred before the invalidity of the former was proclaimed by the pope. Not even King John, who offered Innocent 3000 marks if he would decide in favour of de Grey, could alter the pope's decision. Innocent summoned those monks of Canterbury who were in Rome to proceed to a new election and recommended to their choice Stephen Langton, an Englishman, whom the pope had called to Rome from the rectorship of the University of Paris, in order to create him cardinal. He was duly elected by the monks and the pope himself consecrated him archbishop at Viterbo on 17 June, 1207. Innocent informed King John of the election of Langton and asked him to accept the new archbishop. The king, however, had set his mind on his favourite, John de Grey, and flatly refused to allow Langton to come to England in the capacity of Archbishop of Canterbury. He, moreover, wreaked his vengeance on the monks of Christ Church by driving them from their monastery and taking possession of their property. Innocent now placed the entire kingdom under interdict which was proclaimed on 24 March, 1208. When this proved of no avail and the king committed acts of cruelty against the clergy, the pope declared him excommunicated in 1209, and formally deposed him in 1212. He entrusted King Philip of France with the execution of the sentence. When Philip threatened to invade England and the feudal lords and the clergy began to forsake King John, the latter made his submission to Pandulph, whom Innocent had sent as legate to England. He promised to acknowledge Langton as Archbishop of Canterbury, to allow the exiled bishops and priests to return to England and to make compensation for the losses which the clergy had sustained. He went still further, and on 13 May, 1213, probably of his own initiative, surrendered the English kingdom through Pandulph into the hands of the pope to be returned to him as a fief. The document of the surrender states that henceforth the kings of England were to rule as vassals of the pope and to pay an annual tribute of 1000 marks to the See of Rome. On 20 July, 1213, the king was solemnly freed from the ban at Winchester and after the clergy had been reimbursed for its losses the interdict was lifted from England on 29 June, 1214. It appears that many of the barons were not pleased with the surrender of England into the hands of the pope. They also resented the king's continuous trespasses upon their liberties and his many acts of injustice in the government of the people. They finally had recourse to violence and forced him to yield to their demands by affixing his seal to the Magna Charta. Innocent could not as suzerain of England allow a contract which imposed such serious obligations upon his vassal to be made without his consent. His legate Pandulph had repeatedly praised King John to the pope as a wise ruler and loyal vassal of the Holy See. The pope, therefore, declared the Great Charter null and void, not because it gave too many liberties to the barons and the people, but because it had been obtained by violence.

There was scarcely a country in Europe over which Innocent III did not in some way or other assert the supremacy which he claimed for the papacy. He excommunicated Alfonso IX of Leon, for marrying a near relative, Berengaria, a daughter of Alfonso VIII, contrary to the laws of the Church, and effected their separation in 1204. For similar reasons he annulled, in 1208, the marriage of the crown-prince, Alfonso of Portugal, with Urraca, daughter of Alfonso of Castile. From Pedro II of Aragon he received that kingdom in vassalage and crowned him king at Rome in 1204. He prepared a crusade against the Moors and lived to see their power broken in Spain at the battle of Navas de Tolosa, in 1212. He protected the people of Norway against their tyrannical king, Sverri, and after the king's death arbitrated between the two claimants to the Norwegian throne. He mediated between King Emeric of Hungary and his rebellious brother Andrew, sent royal crown and sceptre to King Johannitius of Bulgaria and had his legate crown him king at Tirnovo, in 1204; he restored ecclesiastical discipline in Poland; arbitrated between the two claimants to the royal crown of Sweden; made partly successful attempts to reunite the Greek with the Latin Church and extended his beneficent influence practically over the whole Christian world. Like many preceding popes, Innocent had at heart the recovery of the Holy Land, and for this end undertook the Fourth Crusade. The Venetians had pledged themselves to transport the entire Christian army and to furnish the fleet with provisions for nine months, for 85,000 marks. When the crusaders were unable to pay the sum, the Venetians proposed to bear the financial expenses themselves on condition that the crusaders would first assist them in the conquest of the city of Zara. The crusaders yielded to their demands and the fleet started down the Adriatic on 8 October, 1202. Zara had scarcely been reduced when Alexius Comnenus arrived at the camp of the crusaders and pleaded for their help to replace his father, Isaac Angelus, on the throne of Constantinople from which he had been deposed by his cruel brother Alexius. In return he promised to reunite the Greek with the Latin Church, to add 10,000 soldiers to the ranks of the crusaders, and to contribute money and provisions to the crusade. The Venetians, who saw their own commercial advantage in the taking of Constantinople, induced the crusaders to yield to the prayers of Alexius, and Constantinople was taken by them in 1204. Isaac Angelus was restored to his throne but soon replaced by a usurper. The crusaders took Constantinople a second time on 12 April, 1204, and after a horrible pillage, Baldwin, Count of Flanders, was proclaimed emperor and the Greek Church was united with the Latin. The reunion, as well as the Latin empire in the East, did not last longer than two generations. When Pope Innocent learned that the Venetians had diverted the crusaders from their purpose of conquering the Holy Land he expressed his great dissatisfaction first at their conquest of Zara, and when they proceeded towards Constantinople he solemnly protested and finally excommunicated the Venetians who had caused the digression of the crusaders from their original purpose. Since, however, he could not undo what had been accomplished he did his utmost to destroy the Greek schism and latinize the Eastern Empire.

Innocent was also a zealous protector of the true Faith and a strenuous opponent of heresy. His chief activity was turned against the Albigenses who had become so numerous and aggressive that they were no longer satisfied with being adherents of heretical doctrines but even endeavoured to spread their heresy by force. They were especially numerous in a few cities of Northern an in Southern France. During the first year of his pontificate Innocent sent the two Cistercian monks Rainer and Guido to the Albigenses in France to preach to them the true Faith and dispute with them on controverted topics of religion. The two Cistercian missionaries were soon followed by Diego, Bishop of Osma, then by St. Dominic and the two papal legates. Peter of Castelnau and Raoul. When, however, these peaceful missionaries were ridiculed and despised by the Albigenses, and the papal legate Castelnau was assassinated in 1208, Innocent resorted to force. He ordered the bishops of Southern France to put under interdict the participants in the murder and all the towns that gave shelter to them. He was especially incensed against Count Raymond of Toulouse who had previously been excommunicated by the murdered legate and whom, for good reasons, the pope suspected as the instigator of the murder. The count protested his innocence and submitted to the pope, probably out of cowardice, but the pope placed no further trust in him. He called upon France to raise an army for the suppression of the Albigenses. Under the leadership of Simon of Montfort a cruel campaign ensued against the Albigenses which, despite the protest of Innocent, soon turned into a war of conquest (see ALBIGENSES). The culminating point in the glorious reign of Innocent was his convocation of the Fourth Lateran Council, which he solemnly opened on 15 November, 1215. It was by far the most important council of the Middle Ages. Besides deciding on a general crusade to the Holy Land, it issued seventy reformatory decrees, the first of which was a creed (Firmiter credimus), against the Albigenses and Waldenses, in which the term "transubstantiation" received its first ecclesiastical sanction.

The labours of Innocent in the inner government of the Church appear to be of a very subordinate character when they are put beside his great politico-ecclesiastical achievements which brought the papacy to the zenith of its power. Still they are worthy of memory and have contributed their share to the glory of his pontificate. During his reign the two great founders of the mendicant orders, St. Dominic and St. Francis, laid before him their scheme of reforming the world. Innocent was not blind to the vices of luxury and indolence which had infected many of the clergy and part of the laity. In Dominic and Francis he recognized two mighty adversaries of these vices and he sanctioned their projects with words of encouragement. The lesser religious orders which he approved are the Hospitallers of the Holy Ghost on 23 April, 1198, the Trinitarians on 17 December, 1198, and the Humiliati, in June, 1201. In 1209 he commissioned the Cistercian monk, Christian, afterwards bishop, with the conversion of the heathen Prussians. At Rome he built the famous hospital Santo Spirito in Sassia, which became the model of all future city hospitals and exists to the present time (see Walsh, "The Popes and Science", New York, 1908, p. 249-258; and the article HOSPITALS). The following saints were canonized by Innocent: Homobonus, a merchant of Cremona, on 12 January, 1199; the Empress Cunegond, on 3 March, 1200; William, Duke of Aquitaine in 1202; Wulstan, Bishop of York, on 14 May, 1203; Procopius, abbot at Prague, on 2 June, 1204; and Guibert, the founder of the monastery at Gembloux, in 1211. Innocent died at Perugia, while travelling through Italy in the interests of the crusade which had been decided upon at the Lateran Council. He was buried in the cathedral of Perugia where his body remained until Leo XIII, a great admirer of Innocent, had it transferred to the Lateran in December, 1891. Innocent is also the author of various literary works reprinted in P. L., CCXIV-CCXVIII, where may also be found his numerous extant epistles and decretals, and the historically important "Registrum Innocentii III super negotio imperii". His first work, "De contemptu mundi, sive de miseria conditionis humanæ libri III" (P. L., CCXVII, 701-746) was written while he lived in retirement during the pontificate of Celestine III. It is an ascetical treatise and gives evidence of Innocent's deep piety and knowledge of men. Concerning it see Reinlein "Papst Innocenz der dritte und seine Schrift 'De contemptu mundi" (Erlangen, 1871). His treatise "De sacro altaris mysterio libri VI" (P. L., CCXVII, 773-916) is of great liturgical value, because it represents the Roman Mass as it was at the time of Innocent. See Franz, "Die Messe im deutschen Mittelalter" (Freiburg, 1902), 453-457. It was printed repeatedly, and translated into German by Hurter (Schaffhausen, 1845). He also wrote "De quadripartita specie nuptiarum" (P. L., CCXVII, 923-968), an exposition of the fourfold marriage bond, namely,

1. between man and wife,
2. between Christ and the Church,
3. between God and the just soul,
4. between the Word and human nature

and is entirely based on passages from Holy Scripture.

"Commentarius in septem psalmos pœnitentiales" (P. L., CCXVII, 967-1130) is of doubtful authorship. Among his seventy-nine sermons (ibidem, 314-691) is the famous one on the text "Desiderio desideravi" (Luke, xxii, 15), which he delivered at the Fourth Lateran Council.

Gesta Innocentii, written by an unknown contemporary, edited with valuable critical notes by BALUZE (Paris, 1686). The Gesta were also edited by MURATORI in Rerum ltalicarum Scriptores ab anna 500 ad 1500, III (Milan, 1723-51), i, 480 sq., and reprinted in P. L., CCXIV, cviii-ccxxxviii. Concerning their historical value see ELKAN, Die "Gesta Innocentii III." im Verhältniss zu den Regesten desselben Papstes (Heidelberg, 1876). The principal modern sources are: HURTER, Geschichte des Papstes Innocenz III. und seiner Zeitgenossen (4 vols., Hainburg, 1841-4); the following six studies by LUCHAIRE, all published at Paris: Innocent III, Rome et l'Italie (1904); Innocent III, la croisade des Albigeois (1905); Innocent III, to papauté et l'empire (1906); Innocent III, la question d'Orient (1907): Innocent III, les royautés vassales du Saint-Siège (1908); Innocent III, le concile de Latran et la réforme de l'église (1908); BARRY, The Papal Monarchy (New York, 1903), 282-332; JORRY, Histoire du Pape Innocent III (Paris, 1853); DELISLE, Mémoire sur les actes d'Innocent III, suivi de l'itinéraire de ce pontife (Paris, 1857); DEUTSCH, Papst Innocenz III. und sein Einfluss auf die Kirche (Breslau, 1876); GASPARLIN, Innocent III, le siège apostolique, Constantin (Paris, 1875); SCHWEMER, Innocenz III. und die deutsche Kirche während des Thronstreites von 1198-1208 (Strasburg, 1882); LINDEMANN, Kritische Darstellung der Verhandlungen Innocenz III. mit den deutschen Gegenkönigen (Magdeburg, 1885); ENGELMANN, Philipp von Schwaben und Innocenz III. während des deutschen Thronstreites (Berlin, 1896); WINKELMANN, Philipp von Schwaben und Otto IV. (2 vols., Leipzig, 1873-8); MOLITOR, Die Decretale "Per venerabilem" von Innocenz III. und ihre Stellung im öffentlichen Rechte der Kirche (Münster, 1876); GÜTSCHOW, Innocenz III. und England (Munich, 1904); NORGATE, John Lackland (New York, 1902); GASQUET, Henry the Third and the Church (London, 1905), 1-26; LINGARD, History of England, II (Edinburgh, 1902), 312-376; PIRIE-GORDON, Innocent the Great (London, 1907), somewhat fantastic; NORDEN, Papsttum und Byzanz (Berlin, 1903), 133-238; HILL, A History of European Diplomacy, I (New York, 1905), 313-331; MULLANY, Innocent III in American Catholic Quarterly Review, XXXII (Philadelphia, 1907), 25-48; FEIERFEIL, Innocenz III. und seine Beziehungen zu Böhmen (Teplitz, 1905); BÖHMER, Regesta imperii, V.; Die Regesten des Kaiserreiches unter Philipp, Otto IV., Friedrich II., Heinrich (VII.), Konrad IV., Heinrich Raspe, Wilhelm und Richard, 1198-1272, newly edited by FICKER and WINKELMANN (Innsbruck, 1881-1901).

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Innocent IV

(Sinibaldo de' Fieschi)

Count of Lavagna, born at Genoa, date unknown; died at Naples, 7 December, 1254. He was educated at Parma and Bologna. For some time he taught canon law at Bologna, then he became canon at Parma and in 1226 is mentioned as auditor of the Roman Curia. On 23 September,1227, he was created Cardinal-Priest of San Lorenzo in Lucina; on 28 July, 1228, vice-chancellor of Rome; and in 1235 Bishop of Albenga and legate in Northern Italy. When Celestine IV died after a short reign of sixteen days, the excommunicated emperor, Frederick II, was in possession of the States of the Church around Rome and attempted to intimidate the cardinals into electing a pope to his own liking. The cardinals fled to Anagni and cast their votes for Sinibaldo de Fiesehi, who ascended the papal throne as Innocent IV on 25 June, 1243, after an interregnum of 1 year, 7 months, and 15 days. Innocent IV had previously been a friend of Frederick II. Immediately after the election the emperor sent messengers with congratulations and overtures of peace. The pope was desirous of peace, but he knew from the experience of Gregory IX how little trust could be put in the emperor's promises. He refused to receive the latter's messengers, because, like the emperor himself, they were under the ban of the Church. But two months later he sent Peter, Archbishop of Rouen, William of Modena, who had resigned his episcopal office, and Abbot William of St. Facundus as legates to the emperor at Melfi with instructions to ask him to release the prelates whom he had captured while on their way to the council which Gregory IX had intended to hold at Rome. The legates were furthermore instructed to find out what satisfaction the emperor was willing to make for the injuries which he had inflicted upon the Church and which caused Gregory IX to put him under the ban. Should the emperor deny that he had done any wrong to the Church, or even assert that the injustice had been done on the side of the Church, the legates were to propose that the decision should be left to a council of kings, prelates, and temporal princes. Frederick entered into an agreement with Innocent on 31 March, 1244. He promised to yield to the demands of the Curia in all essential points, viz., to restore the States of the Church, to release the prelates, and to grant amnesty to the allies of the pope. His insincerity became apparent when he secretly incited various tumults in Rome and refused to release the imprisoned prelates. Feeling himself hindered in his freedom of action on account of the emperor's military preponderance, and fearing for his personal safety, the pope decided to leave Italy. At his request the Genoese sent him a fleet which arrived at Civitavecchia while the pope was in Sutri. As soon as he was notified of its arrival, he left Sutri in disguise during the night of 27-28 June and hastened over the mountains to Civitavecchia, whence the fleet brought him to Genoa. In October he went to Burgundy, and in December to Lyons, where he took up his abode during the following six years. He at once made preparations for a general council, which on 3 January, 1245, he proclaimed for 24 June of the same year. Innocent had nothing to fear in France and proceeded with great severity against the emperor.

At the Council of Lyons the emperor was represented by Thaddeus of Suessa, who offered new concessions if his master were freed from the ban; but Innocent rejected them, and having brought new accusations against the emperor during the second session, on 5 July, solemnly deposed him at the third session, on 17 July. He now ordered the princes of Germany to proceed to the election of a new king, and sent Philip of Ferrara as legate to Germany to bring about the election of Henry Raspe, Landgrave of Thuringia. The pope's candidate was elected on 22 May, 1246, at Veitshochheim on the Main. Most of the princes, however, had abstained from voting and he never found general recognition. The same may be said of the incapable William of Holland, whom the papal party elected after Henry Raspe died on 17 February, 1247. But Innocent IV was determined upon the destruction of Frederick II and repeatedly asserted that no Hohenstaufen would ever again be emperor. All attempts of St. Louis IX of France to bring about peace were of no avail. In 1249 the pope ordered a crusade to be preached against Frederick II, and after the emperor's death (13 December, 1250), he continued the struggle against Conrad IV and Manfred with unrelenting severity. On 19 April, 1251, Innocent IV set out for Italy and entered Rome in October, 1253. The crown of Sicily devolved upon the Holy See at the deposition of Frederick II. Innocent had previously offered it to Richard of Cornwall, brother of Henry III of England. Upon his refusal, he tried Charles of Anjou and Edmund, son of Henry III of England. But after some negotiation they also refused owing to the difficulty of dislodging Conrad IV and Manfred who held Sicily by force of arms. After the death of Conrad IV, 20 May, 1264, the pope finally recognized the hereditary claims of Conrad's two-year-old son Conradin. Manfred also submitted, and Innocent made his solemn entry into Naples, 27 October, 1254, but Manfred soon revolted and defeated the papal troops at Foggia (2 Dec., 1254).

In England, Innocent IV made his power felt by protecting Henry III against the lay as well as the ecclesiastical nobility. But here and in other countries many just complaints arose against him on account of the excessive taxes which he imposed upon the people. In Austria, he confirmed Ottocar, the son of King Wenzel, as duke, in 1252, and mediated between him and King Béla of Hungary in 1254. In Portugal, he appointed Alfonso III administrator of the kingdom, because the people were disgusted at the immorality and the tyranny of his father, Sancho III. He favoured the missions in Prussia, Russia, Armenia, and Mongolia, but owing to his continual warfare with Frederick II and his successors he neglected the internal affairs of the Church and allowed many abuses, provided they served to strengthen his position against the Hohenstaufen. He approved the rule of the Sylvestrines on 27 June, 1247, and that of the Poor Clares on 9 August, 1253. The following saints were canonized by him: Edmund Rich, Archbishop of Canterbury, on 16 December, 1246; William, Bishop of St-Brieuc, in 1247; Peter of Verona; Dominican inquisitor and martyr, in 1253; Stanislaus, Bishop of Cracow, in the same year. He is the author of "Apparatus in quinque libros decretalium", which was first published at Strasburg in 1477, and afterwards reprinted; it is considered the best commentary on the Decretals of Gregory IX. The registers of Innocent IV were edited by Elie Berger in four volumes (Paris, 1881-98) and his letters, 762 in number, by Rodenberg in "Mon. Germ. Epp. sæculi XIII", II (1887), 1-568.

A Short biography of Innocent IV was written by his physician, NICOLAS DE CORBIA. It was published by MURATORI, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, III (Milan, 1723-51), 1, 589-593. The modern sources are: DESLANDRES, Innocent IV et la chute des Hohenstaufen (Paris, 1908); WEBER, Der Kampf zwischen Papst Innocenz IV. und Kaiser Friedrich II. bis zur Flucht des Papstes nach Lyon (Berlin, 1900); FOLZ, Kaiser Friedrich II. und Papst Innocenz IV., ihr Kampf in den Jahren 1243-1245 (Leipzig, 1886); RODENBERG, Innocenz IV. und das Königreich Sicilien (Halle, 1892); MAUBACH, Die Kardinäle und ihre Politik um die Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts (Bonn, 1902); ALDINGER, Die Neubesetzung der deutschen Bistümer unter Papst Innocenz IV. (Leipzig, 1900); HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, IV (Leipzig, 1903), 808-851; BERGER, S. Louis et Innocent IV; étude sur les rapports de la France et du saint-siège (Paris, 1893); MASETTI, I pontefici Onorio III, Gregorio IX, ed Innocente IV a fronte dell' Imperatore Federico II (Rome, 1884); MICHAEL, Papst Innocenz IV. und Oesterreich in Zeitschrift für kath. Theologie, XIV (Innsbruck, 1890), 300-323; IDEM, Innocenz IV. und Konrad IV., ibidem, XVIII (1894), 457-472; GASQUET, Henry the Third and the Church (London, 1905), 205-353.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Bl. Innocent V

(PETRUS A TARENTASIA)

Born in Tarentaise, towards 1225; elected at Arezzo, 21 January, 1276; died at Rome, 22 June, 1276. Tarentaise on the upper Isère in south-eastern France was certainly his native province, and the town of Champagny was in all probability his birthplace. At the age of sixteen he joined the Dominican Order. After completing his education, at the University of Paris, where he graduated as master in sacred theology in 1259, he won distinction as a professor in that institution, and is known as "the most famous doctor", "Doctor famosissimus" For some time provincial of his order in France, he became Archbishop of Lyons in 1272 and Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia in 1273. He played a prominent part at the Second =8Ccumenical Council of Lyons (1274), in which he delivered two discourses to the assembled fathers and also pronounced the funeral oration on St. Bonaventure. Elected as successor to Gregory X, whose intimate adviser he was, he assumed the name of Innocent V and was the first Dominican pope. His policy was peaceable. He sought to reconcile Guelphs and Ghibellines in Italy, restored peace between Pisa and Lucca, and mediated between Rudolph of Hapsburg and Charles of Anjou. He likewise endeavoured to consolidate the union of the Greeks with Rome concluded at the Council of Lyons. He is the author of several works dealing with philosophy, theology and canon law, some of which are still unpublished. The principal among them is his "Commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard" (Toulouse, 1652). Four philosophical treatises: "De unitate formæ", "De materia cæli", "De æternitate mundi", "De intellectu et voluntate", are also due to his pen. A commentary on the Pauline Epistles frequently published under the name of Nicholas of Gorran (Cologne, 1478) is claimed for him by some critics.

Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II (Paris, 1892), 457; CIACONIUS-OLDOINUS, Vitæ et res gestæ Pontif. Rom., II (Rome, 1677), 203-206; MOTHON, Vie du bienheureux Innocent V (Rome, 1896); BOURGEOIS, Le Bienheureux Innocent V (Paris, 1899); TURINAZ, Un pape savoisien (Nancy, 1901); SCHULZ in the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, V (New York, 1909), 504.

N.A. WEBER

Pope Innocent VI

(ETIENNE AUBERT)

Born at Mont in the Diocese of Limoges (France); elected at Avignon, 18 December 1352; died there, 12 September, 1362. He began his career as professor of civil law at Toulouse where he subsequently rose to the highest judicial position. Having entered the ecclesiastical state he became successively Bishop of Noyon (1338), of Clermont (1340), cardinal-priest (1342), Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia, and Grand Penitentiary (1352). The conclave which elected him to the papacy is remarkable for the fact that the first certain election capitulation was framed by the cardinals present, each of whom bound himself to divide, in case of election, his power and revenues with the College of Cardinals. Aubert took this engagement but with the restriction; "in so far as it was not contrary to church law". When the choice fell on him, one of his first pontifical acts declared the pact illegal and null, because it contained a limitation of the Divinely conferred papal power. The new pope also gave immediate proofs of the thoroughly ecclesiastical spirit which was to animate his policy. Shortly after his coronation the numerous ecclesiastics who had flocked to Avignon in search of preferment received a peremptory order to repair, under penalty of excommunication, to their respective places of residence. Some appointments to benefices made by his predecessor were repealed, numerous reservations abolished, and pluralities disapproved. Luxury was banished from the papal court and the obligation of following this example set by the pope imposed upon the cardinals. To the auditors of the Rota, whose services were gratuitous, a fixed income was assigned in the interest of a more impartial administration of justice. As the territory of the Papal States had been usurped by petty princes, Innocent VI sent Cardinal Gil de Albornoz (q. v.) to Italy with unlimited power. Success on the battle-field and diplomatic skill enabled this legate to restore papal authority in the States of the Church.

Pope Innocent viewed favourably the imperial coronation of the German king, Charles IV, at Rome, but at the same time exacted from him a solemn pledge that be would leave Rome the very day on which the ceremony would take place. Charles was crowned on Easter Sunday, 1355, by the Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia and faithfully observed his promise. The following year he issued the celebrated "Golden Bull", against which the pope protested because it silently passed over the papal claims to confirm the German kings and to administer the empire during a vacancy. Objection was also made in 1359 to the emperor's resolution to undertake a reform of the German clergy independently of the pope; Charles's reformatory plans, however, subsequently received ecclesiastical approbation. The mutual peaceful dispositions prevented any conflict of a serious character. Innocent VI sought to terminate the war between France and England, and finally through his intervention the Peace of Brétigny was concluded in 1360. To protect the papal residence against the bands of freebooters that were then devastating France, Innocent increased the fortifications of Avignon; but before these were completed he was attacked and constrained to buy off his assailants by an enormous ransom. He used with but little success the severest ecclesiastical penalties against Peter I of Castile (1350-69), who had repudiated and poisoned his wife and is deservedly known as "the Cruel". His efforts to restore peace between Castile and Aragon were fruitless, so also his plans for a crusade and for the reunion of the Eastern Church with Rome. At the request of Emperor Charles IV he instituted (1354) for Germany and Bohemia the feast of the Holy Lance and Nails (Lanceæ et Clavorum). He renewed the previous privileges of the mendicant orders, then in conflict with Richard Fitzralph, Archbishop of Armagh. Although tainted with nepotism he ranks among the best of the Avignon popes. His patronage of arts and his moral integrity are generally recognized.

For his Bulls consult Bullarium Rom., ed. COCQUELINES, III. pt. II (Rome, 1741), 314-324; BALUZIUS, Vitæ pap. Avenion., I (Paris, 1693), 321-62, 918-74, 1433-36; Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II (Paris, 1892), 487, 491-93; MARTÈNE, Thesaurus novus anecdotarum, II (Paris, 1717), 843-1072. BÖHMER, Regesta imperii, VIII (Innsbruck, 1889), 782-93; DEPREZ, Innocent VI, lettres closes, patentes et curiales se rapportant à la France (Paris, 1909); BERLIÈRE, Suppliques d'Innocent VI in Anal. Vatic. belg., V (Namur, 1910); CERRI, Innocenzo papa VI (Turin, 1873); WERUNSKY, Italienische Politik Papst Innocenz VI. und König Karl IV. (Vienna, 1878); DAUMET, Innocent VI et Blanche de Bourbon (Paris, 1899); MOLLAT, Innocent VI et les tentatives de paix entre la France et l'Angleterre (1353-55) in Rev. d'hist. ecclés., XI (1909), 729-43; PASTOR, Geschichte der Päpste, tr. ANTROBUS, I (London, 1891), 93-95; CREIGHTON, History of the Papacy, I (New York, 1901), 54-55; CHEVALIER, Bio-bibliog.

N.A. WEBER

Pope Innocent VII

(Cosimo de' Migliorati)

Born of humble parents at Sulmona, in the Abruzzi, about 1336; died 6 November, 1406. He studied at Perugia, Padua, and finally at Bologna, where he graduated under the famous jurist Lignano. After teaching jurisprudence at Perugia and Padua for some time, he accompanied his former professor, Lignano, to Rome, where he was received into the Curia by Urban VI (1378-89). Shortly after his arrival in Rome, Urban sent him as papal collector to England, where he remained about ten years. Upon his return to Rome he became Bishop of Bologna in 1386, and on 5 December, 1387, Archbishop of Ravenna. The latter see he held until 15 September, 1400. In 1389, Boniface IX created him Cardinal-Priest of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, and sent him as legate to Lombardy and Tuscany in 1390. He was universally esteemed for his piety and learning, and was an able manager of financial affairs. On 17 October, 1404, he was elected and took the name of Innocent VII. His reign fell in the time of the Western Schism; the rival pope was Benedict XIII (1394-1423). Previous to his election, Innocent VII, like the other cardinals, had taken the oath to leave nothing undone, if needs be even to lay down the tiara, in order to terminate the schism. Shortly after his accession he took steps to keep his oath by proclaiming a council, but the disturbances which occurred in Rome brought the pope's good intentions to naught. The revolutionary element among the Romans rose up against the temporal authority of the pope, and King Ladislaus of Naples hastened to Rome to assist the pope in suppressing the insurrection. For his services the king extorted various concessions from Innocent, among them the promise that he would not make any agreement with the rival pope without stipulating that the king's rights over Naples should remain intact. Not content with these concessions, which Innocent made for the sake of peace, Ladislaus desired to extend his rule over Rome and the ecclesiastical territory. To attain his end he aided the Ghibelline faction in Rome in their revolutionary attempts in 1405. Innocent had made the great mistake of elevating his unworthy nephew, Ludovico Migliorati, to the cardinalate. This act of nepotism is the one blemish in the short reign of the otherwise virtuous pope. But it cost him dear. The cardinal, angered because the Romans rebelled against his uncle, waylaid a few of the most influential among them on their return from a conference with the pope, and had them brought to his house in order to murder them. The people were highly incensed at this cruel deed, and the pope had to flee for his life, although he was in no way responsible for his nephew's crime. He took up his abode in Viterbo until the Romans requested him to return in 1406. They again acknowledged his authority, but a squad of troops which King Ladislaus of Naples had sent to the aid of Colonna was still occupying the Castle of Sant' Angelo and made frequent sorties upon Rome and the neighbouring territory. Only after Ladislaus was excommunicated did he yield to the demands of the pope and withdraw his troops. In the midst of these political disturbances Innocent neglected what was then most essential for the well-being of the Church, the suppression of the schism. His rival, Benedict XIII, made it appear that the only obstacle to the termination of the schism was the unwillingness of Innocent VII. The reasons why Innocent did practically nothing for the suppression of the schism were: the troubled state of affairs in Rome, his mistrust in the sincerity of Benedict XIII, and the hostile attitude of King Ladislaus of Naples. Shortly before his death he planned the restoration of the Roman University, but his death brought the movement to a standstill.

Vita Innocentii VII in Liber Pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, II (Paris, 1892), 508-10, 531-3, 552-4; and in MURATORI, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores ab anno 500 ad 1500, III (Milan, 1723-51), ii, 832 sq.; BRAND, Innocenzo VII ed il delitto di suo nipote Ludovico Migliorati in Studi e Documenti di Storia e Diritto, XXI (Rome, 1900); BLIEMETZRIEDER, Das Generalkonzil im grossen abendlandischen Schisma (Paderborn, 1904); IDEM, Die Konzilsidee unter Innocenz VII. und König Ruprecht von der Pfalz in Studien und Mitteilungen aus dem Benediktiner und dem Cistercienser Orden, XXVII (Brünn, 1906), 355-68; VERNET, Le Pape Innocent VII et les Juifs in L'Université Catholique, XV (Lyons. 1894), 399-408; KNEER, Zur Vorgeschichte Papst Innocenz VII. in Historisches Jahrbuch, XII (Munich, 1891), 347-351.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Innocent VIII

(Giovanni Battista Cibò)

Born at Genoa, 1432; elected 29 August, 1484; died at Rome, 25 July, 1492. He was the son of the Roman senator, Aran Cibò, and Teodorina de' Mari. After a licentious youth, during which he had two illegitimate children, Franceschetto and Teodorina, he took orders and entered the service of Cardinal Calandrini. He was made Bishop of Savona in 1467, but exchanged this see in 1472 for that of Molfetta in south-eastern Italy and was raised to the cardinalate the following year. At the conclave of 1484, he signed, like all the other cardinals present, the election capitulation which was to bind the future pope. Its primary object was to safeguard the personal interests of the electors. The choice fell on Cibò himself who, in honour of his countryman, Innocent IV, assumed the name of Innocent VIII. His success in the conclave, as well as his promotion to the cardinalate, was largely due to Giuliano della Rovere. The chief concern of the new pope, whose kindliness is universally praised, was the promotion of peace among Christian princes, though he himself became involved in difficulties with King Ferrante of Naples. The protracted conflict with Naples was the principal obstacle to a crusade against the Turks; Innocent VIII earnestly endeavoured to unite Christendom against the common enemy. The circumstances appeared particularly favourable, as Prince Djem, the Sultan's brother and pretender to the Turkish throne, was held prisoner at Rome and promised co-operation in war and withdrawal of the Turks from Europe in case of success. A congress of Christian princes met in 1490 at Rome, but led to no result. On the other hand, the pope had the satisfaction of witnessing the fall of Granada (1491) which crowned the reconquest of Spain from the Moors and earned for the King of Spain the title of "Catholic Majesty". In England he proclaimed the right of King Henry VII and his descendants to the English throne and also agreed to some modifications affecting the privilege of "sanctuary". The only canonization which he proclaimed was that of Margrave Leopold of Austria (6 Jan., 1485). He issued an appeal for a crusade against the Waldenses, actively opposed the Hussite heresy in Bohemia, and forbade (Dec., 1486) under penalty of excommunication the reading of the nine hundred theses which Pico della Mirandola had publicly posted in Rome. On 5 Dec., 1484, he issued his much-abused Bull against witchcraft, and 31 May, 1492, he solemnly received at Rome the Holy Lance which the Sultan surrendered to the Christians. Constantly confronted with a depleted treasury, he resorted to the objectionable expedient of creating new offices and granting them to the highest bidders. Insecurity reigned at Rome during his rule owing to insufficient punishment of crime. However, he dealt mercilessly with a band of unscrupulous officials who forged and sold papal Bulls; capital punishment was meted out to two of the culprits in 1489. Among these forgeries must be relegated the alleged permission granted the Norwegians to celebrate Mass without wine. See "Bullarium Romanum", III, iii (Rome, 1743), 190-225.

BURCHARD, Diarium, ed. THUASNE, I (Paris, 1883); INFESSURA, Diario della Città di Roma, ed. TOMMASINI in Fonti per la Storia d'Italia, V (Rome, 1890); CIACONIUS-OLDOINUS, Vitæ et Res gestæ Pontif. Rom., III (Rome, 1677), 89-146; SERDONATI, Vita d' Innocenzo VIII (Milan, 1829); PASTOR, Geschichte der Päpste (4tb ed., Freiburg, 1899), 175-285: bibliog. XXXVII-LXIX; tr. ANTROBUS, (2nd ed., St. Louis, 1901), V, 229-372; CREIGHTON, A History of the Papacy, new ed., IV (London and New York, 1903), 135-182; GARNETT in The Renaissance Cambridge Modern History, I (New York, 1903), 221-225; ROSCOE, Lorenzo de' Medici (London, 1865), 214-229, 362; KRÜGER, The Papacy (tr., New York, 1909), 146, 151-153.

N.A. WEBER

Pope Innocent IX

(Giovanni Antonio Facchinetti)

Born at Bologna, 22 July, 1519; elected, 29 October, 1591; died at Rome, 30 December, 1591. After successful studies in jurisprudence in his native city he was graduated as doctor of law in 1544, and proceeded to Rome, where Cardinal Nicolò Ardinghelli chose him as his secretary. Later he entered the service of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, who appointed him his ecclesiastical representative at the head of the Archdiocese of Avignon and subsequently called him to the management of his affairs at Parma. In 1560 he was named Bishop of Nicastro in Calabria, and in 1562 was present at the Council of Trent. Sent as papal nuncio to Venice by Pius V in 1566, he greatly furthered the conclusion of that alliance (Pope, Venice, Spain) against the Turks which ultimately resulted in the victory of Lepanto (1571). In 1572 he returned to his diocese, but resigning his see he removed to Rome. In 1575 he was named Patriarch of Jerusalem, and on 12 December, 1583, created Cardinal-Priest of the Title of the Four Crowned Martyrs — whence the frequent designation "Cardinal of Santiquattro". During the reign of the sickly Gregory XIV the burden of the papal administration rested on his shoulders, and on this pontiff's death the Spanish party raised Facchinetti to the papal chair. Mindful of the origin of his success, he supported, during his two months' pontificate, the cause of Philip II of Spain and the League against Henry IV of France. He prohibited the alienation of church property, and in a consistory held on 3 November, 1591, informed the cardinals of his intention of constituting a reserve fund to meet extraordinary expenses. Death, however, did not permit the realization of his vast schemes. He left numerous, though still unpublished, writings on theological and philosophical subjects: "Moralia quædam theologica", "Adversus Machiavellem", "De recta gubernandi ratione", etc. His bulls are printed in the "Bullarium Romanum", ed. Cocquelines, V, pt. I (Rome, 1751), 324-32.

CIACONIUS-OLDOINUS, Vitæ et res gesta Pontif. Rom., IV (Rome, 1677), 235-48; MOTTA, Otto Pontificati del Cinquecento (1555-1591) in Arch. stor. Lombard., 3rd series, XIX (1903), 372-373; RANKE, Die römischen Päpste, II (9th ed., Leipzig, 1889), 150, tr. FOWLER, II (London, 1901), 157; BRISCHAR in Kirchenlexikon, s. v.

N.A. WEBER

Pope Innocent X

(Giambattista Pamfili)

Born at Rome, 6 May, 1574; died there, 7 January, 1655. His parents were Camillo Pamfili and Flaminia de Bubalis. The Pamfili resided originally at Gubbio, in Umbria, but came to Rome during the pontificate of Innocent VIII. The young man studied jurisprudence at the Collegio Romano and graduated as bachelor of laws at the age of twenty. Soon afterwards Clement VIII appointed him consistorial advocate and auditor of the Rota. Gregory XV made him nuncio at Naples. Urban VIII sent him as datary with the cardinal legate, Francesco Barberini, to France and Spain, then appointed him titular Latin Patriarch of Antioch, and nuncio at Madrid. He was created Cardinal-Priest of Sant' Eusebio on 30 August, 1626, though he did not assume the purple until 19 November, 1629. He was a member of the congregations of the Council of Trent, the Inquisition, and Jurisdiction and Immunity. On 9 August, 1644, a conclave was held at Rome for the election of a successor to Urban VIII. The conclave was a stormy one. The French faction had agreed to give their vote to no candidate who was friendly towards Spain. Cardinal Firenzola, the Spanish candidate was, therefore, rejected, being a known enemy of Cardinal Mazarin, prime minister of France. Fearing the election of an avowed enemy of France, the French party finally agreed with the Spanish party upon Pamfili, although his sympathy for Spain was well known. On 15 September he was elected, and ascended the papal throne as Innocent X.

Soon after his accession, Innocent found it necessary to take legal action against the Barberini for misappropriation of public moneys. To escape punishment Antonio and Francesco Barberini fled to Paris, where they found a powerful protector in Mazarin. Innocent confiscated their property, and on 19 February, 1646, issued a Bull ordaining that all cardinals who had left or should leave the Ecclesiastical States without papal permission and should not return within six months, should be deprived of their ecclesiastical benefices and eventually of the cardinalate itself. The French Parliament declared the papal ordinances null and void, but the pope did not yield until Mazarin prepared to send troops to Italy to invade the Ecclesiastical States. Henceforth the papal policy towards France became more friendly, and somewhat later the Barberini were rehabilitated. But when in 1652 Cardinal Retz was arrested by Mazarin, Innocent solemnly protested against this act of violence committed against a cardinal, and protected Retz after his escape in 1654. In Italy Innocent had occasion to assert his authority as suzerain over Duke Ranuccio II of Parma who refused to redeem the bonds (monti) of the Farnesi from the Roman creditors, as had been stipulated in the Treaty of Venice on 31 March, 1644. The duke, moreover, refused to recognize Cristoforo Guarda, whom the pope had appointed Bishop of Castro. When, therefore, the new bishop was murdered while on his way to take possession of his see, Innocent held Ranuccio responsible for the crime. The pope took possession of Castro, razed it to the ground and transferred the episcopal see to Acquapendente. The duke was forced to resign the administration of his district to the pope, who undertook to satisfy the creditors. The papal relations with Venice, which had been highly strained during the pontificate of Urban VIII, became very friendly during Innocent's reign. Innocent aided the Venetians financially against the Turks in the struggle for Candia, while the Venetians on their part allowed Innocent free scope in filling the vacant episcopal sees in their territory, a right which they had previously claimed for themselves. In Portugal the popular insurrection of 1640 had led to the secession of that country from Spain, and to the election of Juan IV of Braganza as King of Portugal. Both Urban VIII and Innocent X, in deference to Spain, refused to acknowledge the new king and withheld their approbation from the bishops nominated by him. Thus it happened that towards the end of Innocent's pontificate there was only one bishop in the whole of Portugal. On 26 November, 1648, Innocent issued the famous Bull "Zelo domus Dei", in which he declares as null and void those articles of the Peace of Westphalia which were detrimental to the Catholic religion. In his Bull "Cum occasione", issued on 31 May, 1653. he condemned five propositions taken from the "Augustinus" of Jansenius, thus giving the impulse to the great Jansenist controversy in France.

Innocent X was a lover of justice and his life was blameless; he was, however, often irresolute and suspicious. The great blemish in his pontificate was his dependence on Donna Olimpia Maidalchini, the wife of his deceased brother. For a short time her influence had to yield to that of the youthful Camillo Astalli, a distant relative of the pope, whom Innocent raised to the cardinalate. But the pope seemed to be unable to get along without her, and at her instance Astalli was deprived of the purple and removed from the Vatican. The accusation, made by Gualdus (Leti) in his "Vita di Donna Olimpia Maidalchini" (1666), that Innocent's relation to her was immoral, has been rejected as slanderous by all reputable historians.

CIAMPI, Innocenzo X Pamfili e la sua corte (Imola, 1878); FRIEDENSBURG, Regesten zur deutschen Geschichte aus der Zeit des Pontifikats Innocenz X in Quellen und Forschungen, edited by the Prussian Historical Institute in Rome, V (1902), VI (1903); RANKE, Die römischen Päpste, tr. FOSTER, II (London, 1906), 321-9; BAROZZI E BERCHET, Relazioni degli stati Europei lette al senato dagli Ambasciatori Veneti nel secolo decimosettimo, Serie III: Italia, Relazioni di Roma, II (Venice, 1878), 43-161; PALATIUS, Gesta Pontificum Romanorum, IV (Venice. 1688), 571-94.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Innocent XI

(Benedetto Odescalchi)

Born at Como, 16 May, 1611; died at Rome, 11 August, 1689. He was educated by the Jesuits at Como, and studied jurisprudence at Rome and Naples. Urban VIII appointed him successively prothonotary, president of the Apostolic Camera, commissary at Ancona, administrator of Macerata, and Governor of Picena. Innocent X made him Cardinal-Deacon of Santi Cosma e Damiano on 6 March, 1645, and, somewhat later, Cardinal-Priest of Sant' Onofrio. As cardinal he was beloved by all on account of his deep piety, charity, and unselfish devotion to duty. When he was sent as legate to Ferrara in order to assist the people stricken with a severe famine, the pope introduced him to the people of Ferrara as the "father of the poor", "Mittimus patrem pauperum". In 1650 he became Bishop of Novara, in which capacity he spent all the revenues of his see to relieve the poor and sick in his diocese. With the permission of the pope he resigned as Bishop of Novara in favour of his brother Giulio in 1656 and went to Rome, where he took a prominent part in the consultations of the various congregations of which he was a member.

He was a strong candidate for the papacy after the death of Clement IX on 9 December, 1669, but the French Government rejected him. After the death of Clement X, King Louis XIV of France again intended to use his royal influence against the election of Odescalchi, but, seeing that the cardinals as well as the Roman people were of one mind in their desire to have Odescalchi as their pope, he reluctantly instructed the cardinals of the French party to acquiesce in his candidacy. After an interregnum of two months, Odescalchi was unanimously elected pope on 21 September, 1676, and took the name of Innocent XI. Immediately upon his accession he turned all his efforts towards reducing the expenses of the Curia. He passed strict ordinances against nepotism among the cardinals. He lived very parsimoniously and exhorted the cardinals to do the same. In this manner he not only squared the annual deficit which at his accession had reached the sum of 170,000 scudi, but within a few years the papal income was even in excess of the expenditures.

The whole pontificate of Innocent XI is marked by a continuous struggle with the absolutism of King Louis XIV of France. As early as 1673 the king had by his own power extended the right of the régale over the provinces of Languedoc, Guyenne, Provence, and Dauphiné, where it had previously not been exercised, although the Council of Lyons in 1274 had forbidden under pain of excommunication to extend the régale beyond those districts where it was then in force. Bishops Pavillon of Alet and Caulet of Pamiers protested against this royal encroachment and in consequence they were persecuted by the king. All the efforts of Innocent XI to induce King Louis to respect the rights of the Church were useless. In 1682, Louis XIV convoked an Assembly of the French Clergy which, on 19 March, adopted the four famous articles, known as "Déclaration du clergé français" (see GALLICANISM). Innocent annulled the four articles in his rescript of 11 April, 1682, and refused his approbation to all future episcopal candidates who had taken part in the assembly. To appease the pope, Louis XIV began to pose as a zealot of Catholicism. In 1685 he revoked the Edict of Nantes and inaugurated a cruel persecution of the Protestants. Innocent XI expressed his displeasure at these drastic measures and continued to withhold his approbation from the episcopal candidates as he had done heretofore. He irritated the king still more by abolishing the much abused "right of asylum" in a decree dated 7 May, 1685. By force of this right the foreign ambassadors at Rome had been able to harbour in their palaces and the immediate neighbourhood any criminal that was wanted by the papal court of justice. Innocent XI notified the new French ambassador, Marquis de Lavardin, that he would not be recognized as ambassador in Rome unless he renounced this right. But Louis XIV would not give it up. At the head of an armed force of about 800 men Lavardin entered Rome in November, 1687, and took forcible possession of his palace. Innocent XI treated him as excommunicated and placed under interdict the church of St. Louis at Rome where he attended services on 24 December, 1687.

The tension between the pope and the king was still increased by the pope's procedure in filling the vacant archiepiscopal See of Cologne. The two candidates for the see were Cardinal Wilhelm Fürstenberg, then Bishop of Strasburg, and Joseph Clement, a brother of Max Emanuel, Elector of Bavaria. The former was a willing tool in the hands of Louis XIV, and his appointment as Archbishop and Elector of Cologne would have implied French preponderance in north-western Germany. Joseph Clement was not only the candidate of Emperor Leopold I of Austria but of all European rulers, with the exception of the King of France and his servile supporter, King James II of England. At the election, which took place on 19 July, 1688, neither of the candidates received the required number of votes. The decision, therefore, fell to the pope, who designated Joseph Clement as Archbishop and Elector of Cologne. Louis XIV retaliated by taking possession of the papal territory of Avignon, imprisoning the papal nuncio and appealing to a general council. Nor did he conceal his intention to separate the French Church entirely from Rome. But the pope remained firm. The subsequent fall of James II of England destroyed French preponderance in Europe and soon after Innocent's death the struggle between Louis XIV and the papacy was settled in favour of the Church. Innocent XI did not approve the imprudent manner in which James II attempted to restore Catholicism in England. He also repeatedly expressed his displeasure at the support which James II gave to the autocratic King Louis XIV in his measures hostile to the Church. It is, therefore, not surprising that Innocent XI had little sympathy for the Catholic King of England, and that he did not assist him in his hour of trial. There is, however, no ground for the accusation that Innocent XI was informed of the designs which William of Orange had upon England, much less that he supported him in the overthrow of James II. It was due to Innocent's earnest and incessant exhortations that the German Estates and King John Sobieski of Poland in 1683 hastened to the relief of Vienna which was being besieged by the Turks. After the siege was raised, Innocent again spared no efforts to induce the Christian princes to lend a helping hand for the expulsion of the Turks from Hungary. He contributed millions of scudi to the Turkish war fund in Austria and Hungary and had the satisfaction of surviving the capture of Belgrade, 6 Sept., 1688.

Innocent XI was no less intent on preserving the purity of faith and morals among the clergy and the faithful. He insisted on a thorough education and an exemplary life of the clergy, reformed the monasteries of Rome, passed strict ordinances concerning the modesty of dress among Roman ladies, put an end to the ever increasing passion for gambling by suppressing the gambling houses at Rome and by a decree of 12 February, 1679, encouraged frequent and even daily Communion. In his Bull "Sanctissimnus Dominus", issued on 2 March, 1679, he condemned sixty-five propositions which favoured laxism in moral theology, and in a decree, dated 26 June, 1680, he defended the Probabiliorism of Thyrsus González, S.J. This decree (see authentic text in "Etudes religieuses", XCI, Paris, 1902, 847 sq.) gave rise to the controversy, whether Innocent XI intended it as a condemnation of Probabilism. The Redemptorist Francis Ter Haar, in his work: "Ben. Innocentii PP. XI de probabilismo decreti historia" (Tournai, 1904), holds that the decree is opposed to Probabilism, while August Lehmkuhl, S.J., in his treatise: "Probabilismus vindicatus" (Freiburg, 1906), 78-111, defends the opposite opinion. In a decree of 28 August, 1687, and in the Constitution "Cœlestis Pastor" of 19 November, 1687, Innocent XI condemned sixty-eight Quietistic propositions (see QUIETISM) of Miguel de Molinos. Towards the Jansenists Innocent XI was lenient, though he by no means espoused their doctrines. The process of his beatification was introduced by Benedict XIV and continued by Clement XI and Clement XII, but French influence and the accusation of Jansenism caused it to be dropped. His "Epistolæ ad Principes" were published by Berthier (2 vols., Rome, 1891-5), and his "Epistolæ ad Pontifices", by Bonamico (Rome, 1891).

IMMICH, Papst Innocenz XI. (Berlin, 1900); MICHAUD, Louis XIV et Innocent XI (4 vols., Paris, 1882 —) written from Gallican standpoint; GÉRIN, Le Pape Innocent XI et la révolution anglaise de 1688 in Revue des questions historiques, XX (Paris, 1876); IDEM, Le Pape Innocent XI et la Révocation de l'Edit de Nantes, ibidem, XXIV (1878); IDEM, Le pape Innocent XI et l'Election de Cologne en 1688, ibidem, XXXIII (1883); IDEM, Le Pape Innocent XI et le siège de Vienne en 1683, ibidem, XXXIX (1886); FRAKNOI, Papst Innocenz XI. und Ungarns Befreiung von der Türkenherrschaft, translated into German from the Hungarian by JEKEL (Freiburg im Br., 1902); GIUSSANI, Il conclave di Innocenzo XI (Como, 1901). A contemporary biography by LIPPI was newly edited by BERTHIER (Rome, 1889). Sea also HORVARTH in Catholic University Bulletin, XV (Washington, 1909), 42-64; cf. ibid., IX 1903, 281.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Innocent XII

(ANTONIO PIGNATELLI)

Born at Spinazzolo near Naples, 13 March, 1615; died at Rome, 27 September, 1700. Re entered the Roman Curia at the age of twenty and was successively made vice-legate at Urbino, inquisitor in Malta, and Governor of Perugia. Under Innocent X he became nuncio in Tuscany, and Alexander VII sent him as nuncio to Poland, where he regulated the disturbed ecclesiastical affairs and united the Armenians with Rome. In 1668 he became nuncio at Vienna. Innocent XI created him Cardinal-Priest of San Pancrazio fuori le mura and Bishop of Faenza on 1 September, 1682, then Archbishop of Naples in 1687. After the death of Alexander VIII the cardinals entered the conclave at Rome on 11 February, 1691, but neither the French nor the Spanish-Hapsburg faction among the cardinals could carry its candidate. A compromise resulted in the election of Cardinal Pignatelli on 12 July, 1691. In his Bull "Romanum decet Pontificem" (22 June, 1692), which was subscribed and sworn to by the cardinals, he decreed that in the future no pope should be permitted to bestow the cardinalate on more than one of his kinsmen. Towards the poor, whom he called his nephews, he was extremely charitable; he turned part of the Lateran into a hospital for the needy, erected numerous charitable and educational institutions, and completed the large court-house "Curia Innocenziana", which now serves as the Italian House of Commons (Camera dei Deputati). In 1693 he induced King Louis XIV of France to repeal the "Declaration of the French Clergy", which had been adopted in 1682. The bishops who had taken part in the "Declaration" sent a written recantation to Rome, whereupon the pope sent his Bull of confirmation to those bishops from whom it had been withheld. In 1696 he repeated his predecessor's condemnation of Jansenism and in his Brief "Cum alias" (12 March, 1699) he condemned twenty-three semi-Quietistic propositions contained in Fénelon's "Maximes". Towards the end of his pontificate his relations with Emperor Leopold I became somewhat strained, owing especially to Count Martinitz, the imperial ambassador at Rome, who still insisted on the "right of asylum", which had been abolished by Innocent XI. It was greatly due to the arrogance of Martinitz that Innocent XII advised King Charles II of Spain to make a Frenchman, the Duke of Anjou, his testamentary successor, an act which led to the "War of the Spanish Succession".

Bullarium Innocentii XII (Rome, 1697); RANKE, Die römischen Päpste, tr. FOSTER, History of the Popes, II (London, 1906), 425-7; KLOPP, Hat der Papst Innocenz XII im Jahre 1700 dem Könige Karl II von Spanien gerathen, durch ein Testament den Herzog von Anjou zum Erben der spanischen Monarchie zu ernennen in Historisch-Politische Blätter, LXXXIII (Munich, 1879), 25-46 and 125-150; BRISCHAR in Kirchenlex., s. v.

MICHAEL OTT

Pope Innocent XIII

(Michelangelo Dei Conti)

Born at Rome, 13 May, 1655; died at the same place, 7 March, 1724. He was the son of Carlo II, Duke of Poli. After studying at the Roman College he was introduced into the Curia by Alexander VIII, who in 1690 commissioned him to bear the blessed hat (berettone) and sword (stocco) to Doge Morosini of Venice. In 1695 he was made Titular Archbishop of Tarsus and nuncio at Lucerne, and in 1697, nuncio at Lisbon. Clement XI created him Cardinal-Priest of Santi Quirico e Giulitta on 17 May, 1706, conferred on him the Diocese of Osimo in 1709, and that of Viterbo in 1712. Sickness compelled him to resign his see in 1719. After the death of Clement XI he was elected pope in a stormy conclave on 8 May, 1721. In memory of Innocent III, to whose lineage he belonged, he chose the name of Innocent XIII. Soon after his succession he invested Emperor Charles VI with the Kingdom of Sicily and received his oath of allegiance in 1722. When, a year later, the emperor invested the Spanish prince Don Carlos, with Parma and Piacenza, the pope protested on the ground that these two duchies were under papal suzerainty. His protests, however, remained unheeded. Like his predecessor, be gave an annual pension to the English Pretender, James III, the son of the dethroned Catholic King, James II, and even promised to aid him with 100,000 ducats, in case an opportunity should offer itself to regain the English Crown by force of arms. He also assisted the Venetians and especially the Island of Malta in their struggle against the Turks. In the dispute of the Jesuits with the Dominicans and others, concerning the retention of various Chinese Rites among the Catholic converts of China, Innocent XIII sided with the opponents of the Jesuits. When in 1721 seven French bishops sent a document to Rome containing a petition to suppress the Constitution "Unigenitus" in which Clement XI had condemned the errors of Quesnel, Innocent XIII not only condemned the writing of the bishops, but also demanded unconditional submission to the Constitution. He was, however, weak enough to yield to French pressure and raise the unworthy Prime Minister Dubois to the cardinalate. He, indeed, exhorted the minister to change his wicked life, but his exhortations remained useless. (For a milder view of Dubois see Bliard, "Dubois, cardinal et premier ministre", Paris, 1901.) In a Bull of March, 1723, he regulated numerous abuses in Spain and was assisted in the execution of this Bull by King Philip V of Spain. The fears which were raised in the beginning of his pontificate that he would yield to nepotism were entirely groundless. He elevated his brother to the cardinalate, but did not allow his revenues to exceed 12,000 scudi as had been stipulated by Pope Innocent XII.

MAYER, Papstwahl Innocenz' XIII (Vienna. 1874); Leben Papst Innocentii XIII (Cologne. 1724); MICHAUD, La fin de Clément XI et le commencement du pontificat d'Innocent XIII in Internationale theologische Zeitschrift, V, 42-60, 304-331.

MICHAEL OTT

Innsbruck University

Innsbruck University, officially the ROYAL IMPERIAL LEOPOLD FRANCIS UNIVERSITY IN INNSBRUCK, originated in the college opened at Innsbruck in 1562 by Blessed Peter Canisius, at the request and on the foundation of the Emperor Ferdinand I of Austria, who in this way made effective his long-cherished plans for an institute of higher learning for the people of Tyrol. The imperial edict of foundation was read from every pulpit in Tyrol on 12 May, 1562, and the school opened under the direction of the Fathers of the newly founded Society of Jesus on 24 June of the same year as a gymnasium with four classes, in which elements, grammar, and syntax were taught. A fifth and lowest class of elements was added in 1566. In 1599 Ferdinand expressed the wish that the programme of studies be widened so as to include a studium universale. This was done, however, only in 1606, when a new building for the gymnasium was completed, whereupon courses in philosophy (dialectics) and theology (casuistry and controversies) were begun, the other subjects being rhetoric, humanities, syntax, and upper and lower grammar. Logic was added in 1619. Until 1670 the erecting of the gymnasium into a university had been repeatedly discussed and planned, but without result. In 1670-71 the course in philosophy was extended to three years; in 1671-72 two chairs of scholastic theology were founded, as well as one of law (institutiones) and in the following year two of jurisprudence and one of canon law. In 1672 also the gymnasium was raised to the rank of an academy, and in 1673 this academy received the name and rank of a university, although lectures in medicine did not begin until 1674.

The Emperor Leopold I of Austria promulgated the imperial decree of foundation in 1677, and it was in the same year that Pope Innocent XI granted the new university the customary rights and privileges. The faculty then consisted of fifteen professors: five for theology, four each for philosophy and law, and two for medicine. Of these, three of the professors of theology, all of those of philosophy and the professor of canon law in the law faculty were Jesuits; two members of the secular clergy lectured in the first-named faculty, and the rest were laymen. The complete organization of these four faculties followed ten years later. The chancellor of the university was the Prince-Bishop of Brixen, in the Tyrol, who was usually represented in Innsbruck by a vice-chancellor. Until 1730 the university remained essentially unchanged. The number of professors rose to eighteen. The eighteen years following, however, witnessed a widening of the study plan; the Government of Maria Theresa began to interfere more directly in the inner work of the university. During the next period, from 1748 to 1773, this state domination increased, reaching a maximum under Joseph II. In 1773 when, upon the suppression of the Society of Jesus, the Jesuits, who up to this had made up one-half of the professors and under whom the theological faculty became the most eminent of the four, ceased to lecture, the university numbered 911 students, distributed as follows: 325 in theology, 116 in law, 43 in medicine and 437 in philosophy.

Joseph II published an order for the suppression of the university on 29 November, 1781, but on 14 September, 1782 issued a decree allowing it to he continued as a lyceum with two university faculties, philosophy and theology, and facilities for the study of law and medicine. In 1783 the Government established at Innsbruck a general theological seminary for the whole of Tyrol, only to close it again in 1790. The university was recalled to life by Joseph's successor, Leopold II, to be again suppressed by the Bavarian Government in 1810, leaving a lyceum with merely philosophical and theological courses. This condition of affairs lasted until 1817, when courses in law and medicine were added. From the departure of the Jesuits in 1773 until 1822, when it was completely suppressed, the theological faculty, in which the principles of Josephinism and Gallicanism reigned almost supreme, ad been in continual conflict with the Bishop of Brixen, who had no right of supervision, not even over purity of doctrine, which suffered grievously in the interval. At one time even the "Imitation of Christ" was a forbidden book. In 1826 the university was again restored, this time by the Emperor Francis II of Austria. It consisted at first of only two full faculties, philosophy and law. In 1857, mainly through the efforts of Vincent Gasser, Prince-Bishop of Brixen, the theological faculty was added and entrusted once more to the Jesuits, who have since, with two exceptions, been the sole professors. The complete organization of the restored university was reached when the medical faculty was reconstituted in 1869.

The most illustrious teachers of the university have been and are mainly in the theological faculty. Since the restoration of the latter in 1857 the best known of these have been: in dogmatic theology, Cardinal Steinhuber (died 1907), Stentrup (died 1898), Kern (died 1907), and Hurter, the latter still lecturing since 1858; in moral theology, Noldin (retired 1909); in sacred eloquence, Jungmann (died 1885), the author of a well-known work on æsthetics; in moral theology and sociology, Biederlack; in canon law and ecclesiastical history, Nilles (died 1907); in Scripture, Fonck (called to Rome, 1908); in ecclesiastical history, Grisar (professor honorarius since 1898). Dr. Ludwig von Pastor, author of the well-known "History of the Popes", is professor of history in the faculty of philosophy, in which the eminent Austrian meteorologist Pernter (died 1909) was at one time professor. To this faculty belongs also the cartographer von Wieser. The theological faculty has frequently suffered the attacks of "liberal" professors, who form the large majority in the faculties of the profane sciences in the Austrian universities. These professors have several times endeavoured to have the theological faculty suppressed, but it has ever found a faithful protector in the Emperor Francis Joseph I. This faculty also took the leading part in the controversy following upon the blasphemous attack on the Church in 1908 by Dr. Ludwig Wahrmund, professor of canon law in the law faculty.

Intimately connected with the theological faculty, though no official part of it, is the seminary (Theologisches Konvikt), where the majority of the students of theology reside. This institution, called the "Nikolaihaus", was first opened for poor students in 1569, closed in 1783, and reopened for the theologians in 1858. It is almost exclusively through the theological faculty and the "Nikolaihaus" that Innsbruck is known outside of Austria-Hungary, especially among Catholics. In the fifty years since the restoration of the faculty, 5898 students, from nearly every civilized country, have frequented the lectures in theology, of whom 2983 are alumni of the "Nikolaihaus". Of these students, 4209 belonged to the secular and 1689 to the regular clergy; they represeated 202 dioceses and Apostolic vicariates, and 73 provinces, cloisters, etc., of the regulars. North America has contributed 443 students, with few exceptions all from the United States; England is represented among the alumni by 10, and Ireland by 15 students. The "Nikolaihaus" is governed by a regens who is a member of the Society of Jesus. A Jesuit father also is always university preacher, and the university sodality is under the direction of another Jesuit. Innsbruck is the theologate of the Austrian and Hungarian provinces of the Society of Jesus. The influence of the university since its restoration, as in its earlier periods, has been important. Naturally this influence has been felt most of all in the Tyrol, which to a large extent owes to the university its culture, especially among the clergy and in the medical and legal professions. In particular, the presence of theological students from all parts of the world has made the influence of the faculty of theology of great weight in the education of the clergy, and in the development of theological science during the last fifty years, an influence which has been spread and augmented by the faculty organ, the "Zeitschrift für Katholische Theologie", a quarterly now in its thirty-third year. Innsbruck is one of the eight Austrian state universities. The university buildings number about 40 (including institutes clinics etc.). There is also a university church in charge of the Jesuits. This church was erected during the years 1620-40 by Archduke Leopold V of Austria and his wife Claudia de' Medici. The buildings for the medical, chemical, and physical sciences are new and well equipped. The library contains over 225,000 volumes, including many valuable manuscripts. The number of students averages about 1000, that of the professors and privat dozenten over 90. In 1908-09 the number of students registered in the winter semester was 1154, thus distributed: theology, 355; law, 293; medicine, 213; philosophy, 293. In the summer semester (1909) the total was 1062. In this same year there were 105 professors and privat dozenten.

PROBST, Geschichte der Universität in Innsbruck seit ihrer Entstehung bis zum Jahre 1860 (Innsbruck, 1869); PROBST, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Gymnasien in Tirol (Innsbruck, 1858); HOFMANN, Das Nikolaihaus zu Innsbruck einst und jetzt (Innsbruck, 1908); AHERN in The Messenger (December, 1908).

M.J. AHERN

In Partibus Infidelium

(Often shortened to in partibus, or abbreviated as i.p.i.).

A term meaning "in the lands of the unbelievers," words added to the name of the see conferred on non-residential or titular Latin bishops, for example: "John Doe, Bishop of Tyre in partibus infidelium. Formerly, when bishops were forced to flee before the invading infidel hordes, they were welcomed by other Churches, while preserving their titles and their rights to their own dioceses. They were even entrusted with the administration of vacant sees. Thus we find St. Gregory appointing John, Bishop of Alessio, who had been expelled by his enemies, to the See of Squilace (cap. "Pastoralis," xliii, caus. vii, q. 1). In later days it was deemed fitting to preserve the memory of ancient Christian Churches that had fallen into the hands of the unbelievers; this was done by giving their names to auxiliary bishops or bishops in missionary countries.

Fagnani (in cap. "Episcopalia," i, "De privilegiis") says that the regular appointment of titular bishops dates back only to the time of the Twelfth Lateran Council under Leo X (Session IX); cardinals alone were authorized to ask for them for the dioceses. St. Pius V extended the privilege to the sees in which it was customary to have auxiliary bishops. Since then the practice became more widespread. The Sacred Congregation of the Propaganda, by its circular letter of 3 March, 1882, abolished the expression in partibus infidelium; the present custom is to join to the name of the see that of the district to which it formerly belonged, e.g. "John Doe, Archiepiscopus Corinthius in Achaiâ," or else merely to say "titular bishop".

A. BOUDINHON

In Petto

An Italian translation of the Latin in pectore, "in the breast", i.e. in the secret of the heart. It happens, at times, that the pope, after creating some cardinals in consistory, adds that he has appointed one or more additional cardinals, whom he reserves in petto, and whom he will make known later: "alios autem [v.g. duos] in pectore reservamus, arbitrio nostro quandoque declarandos." Until they have been publicly announced these cardinals acquire no rights, and if the pope dies before having declared their names they do not become members of the Sacred College; but when he has proclaimed their elevation at a subsequent consistory, they take rank from the date of their first nomination and receive from that date all the emoluments accruing to their office. This is a method that the popes have sometimes adopted to ensure poor ecclesiastics a competency to meet all the expenses incident to their promotion. At the consistory of 15 March, 1875, Pius IX announced that he was creating and reserving in petto five cardinals, whose names would be found, in case of his death, in a letter annexed to his will. But the canonists having raised serious doubts as to the validity of such a posthumous publication, Pius IX published their names in the consistory of the following 17 September (See CARDINAL.).

Santi-Leitner, Praellections juris canonici, I, tit xxxi, n. 23.

A. BOUDINHON

Inquisition

(Lat. inquirere, to look to).

By this term is usually meant a special ecclesiastical institutional for combating or suppressing heresy. Its characteristic mark seems to be the bestowal on special judges of judicial powers in matters of faith, and this by supreme ecclesiastical authority, not temporal or for individual cases, but as a universal and permanent office. Moderns experience difficulty in understanding this institution, because they have, to no small extent, lost sight of two facts.

On the one hand they have ceased to grasp religious belief as something objective, as the gift of God, and therefore outside the realm of free private judgment; on the other they no longer see in the Church a society perfect and sovereign, based substantially on a pure and authentic Revelation, whose first most important duty must naturally be to retain unsullied this original deposit of faith. Before the religious revolution of the sixteenth century these views were still common to all Christians; that orthodoxy should be maintained at any cost seemed self-evident.

However, while the positive suppression of heresy by ecclesiastical and civil authority in Christian society is as old as the Church, the Inquisition as a distinct ecclesiastical tribunal is of much later origin. Historically it is a phase in the growth of ecclesiastical legislation, whose distinctive traits can be fully understood only by a careful study of the conditions amid which it grew up. Our subject may, therefore, be conveniently treated as follows:

I. THE SUPPRESSION OF HERESY DURING THE FIRST TWELVE CENTURIES

(1) Though the Apostles were deeply imbued with the conviction that they must transmit the deposit of the Faith to posterity undefiled, and that any teaching at variance with their own, even if proclaimed by an angel of Heaven, would be a culpable offense, yet St. Paul did not, in the case of the heretics Alexander and Hymeneus, go back to the Old Covenant penalties of death or scourging (Deut., xiii, 6 sqq.; xvii, 1 sqq.), but deemed exclusion from the communion of the Church sufficient (1 Tim., i, 20; Tit., iii, 10). In fact to the Christians of the first three centuries it could scarcely have occurred to assume any other attitude towards those who erred in matters of faith. Tertullian (Ad. Scapulam, c. ii) lays down the rule:

Humani iuris et naturalis potestatis, unicuique quod putaverit colere, nec alii obest aut prodest alterius religio. Sed nec religionis est religionem colere, quae sponte suscipi debeat, non vi.

In other words, he tells us that the natural law authorized man to follow only the voice of individual conscience in the practice of religion, since the acceptance of religion was a matter of free will, not of compulsion. Replying to the accusation of Celsus, based on the Old Testament, that the Christians persecuted dissidents with death, burning, and torture, Origen (C. Cels., VII, 26) is satisfied with explaining that one must distinguish between the law which the Jews received from Moses and that given to the Christians by Jesus; the former was binding on the Jews, the latter on the Christians. Jewish Christians, if sincere, could no longer conform to all of the Mosaic law; hence they were no longer at liberty to kill their enemies or to burn and stone violators of the Christian Law.

St. Cyprian of Carthage, surrounded as he was by countless schismatics and undutiful Christians, also put aside the material sanction of the Old Testament, which punished with death rebellion against priesthood and the Judges. "Nunc autem, quia circumcisio spiritalis esse apud fideles servos Dei coepit, spiritali gladio superbi et contumaces necantur, dum de Ecclesia ejiciuntur" (Ep. lxxii, ad Pompon., n. 4) religion being now spiritual, its sanctions take on the same character, and excommunication replaces the death of the body. Lactantius was yet smarting under the scourge of bloody persecutions, when he wrote this Divine Institutes in A.D. 308. Naturally, therefore, he stood for the most absolute freedom of religion. He writes:

Religion being a matter of the will, it cannot be forced on anyone; in this matter it is better to employ words than blows [verbis melius quam verberibus res agenda est]. Of what use is cruelty? What has the rack to do with piety? Surely there is no connection between truth and violence, between justice and cruelty . . . . It is true that nothing is so important as religion, and one must defend it at any cost [summâ vi] . . . It is true that it must be protected, but by dying for it, not by killing others; by long-suffering, not by violence; by faith, not by crime. If you attempt to defend religion with bloodshed and torture, what you do is not defense, but desecration and insult. For nothing is so intrinsically a matter of free will as religion. (Divine Institutes V:20)

The Christian teachers of the first three centuries insisted, as was natural for them, on complete religious liberty; furthermore, they not only urged the principle that religion could not be forced on others -- a principle always adhered to by the Church in her dealings with the unbaptised -- but, when comparing the Mosaic Law and the Christian religion, they taught that the latter was content with a, spiritual punishment of heretics (i.e. with excommunication), while Judaism necessarily proceeded against its dissidents with torture and death.

(2) However, the imperial successors of Constantine soon began to see in themselves Divinely appointed "bishops of the exterior", i.e. masters of the temporal and material conditions of the Church. At the same time they retained the traditional authority of "Pontifex Maximus", and in this way the civil authority inclined, frequently in league with prelates of Arian tendencies, to persecute the orthodox bishops by imprisonment and exile. But the latter, particularly St. Hilary of Poltiers (Liber contra Auxentium, c. iv), protested vigorously against any use of force in the province of religion, whether for the spread of Christianity or for preservation of the Faith. They repeatedly urged that in this respect the severe decrees of the Old Testament were abrogated by the mild and gentle laws of Christ. However, the successors of Constantine were ever persuaded that the first concern of imperial authority (Theodosius II, "Novellae", tit. III, A.D. 438) was the protection of religion and so, with terrible regularity, issued many penal edicts against heretics. In the space of fifty seven years sixty-eight enactments were thus promulgated. All manner of heretics were affected by this legislation, and in various ways, by exile, confiscation of property, or death. A law of 407, aimed at the traitorous Donatists, asserts for the first time that these heretics ought to be put on the same plane as transgressors against the sacred majesty of the emperor, a concept to which was reserved in later times a very momentous role. The death penalty however, was only imposed for certain kinds of heresy; in their persecution of heretics the Christian emperors fell far short of the severity of Diocletian, who in 287 sentenced to the stake the leaders of the Manichaeans, and inflicted on their followers partly the death penalty by beheading, and partly forced labor in the government mines.

So far we have been dealing with the legislation of the Christianized State. In the attitude of the representatives of the Church towards this legislation some uncertainty is already noticeable. At the close of the forth century, and during the fifth, Manichaeism, Donatism, and Priscillianism were the heresies most in view. Expelled from Rome and Milan, the Manichaeism sought refuge in Africa. Though they were found guilty of abominable teachings and misdeeds (St. Augustine, De haeresibus", no. 46), the Church refused to invoke the civil power against them; indeed, the great Bishop of Hippo explicitly rejected the use force. He sought their return only through public and private acts of submission, and his efforts seem to have met with success. Indeed, we learn from him that the Donatists themselves were the first to appeal to the civil power for protection against the Church. However, they fared like Daniels accusers: the lions turned upon them. State intervention not answering to their wishes, and the violent excesses of the Circumcellions being condignly punished, the Donatists complained bitterly of administrative cruelty. St. Optatus of Mileve defended the civil authority (De Schismate Donntistarum, III, cc. 6-7) as follows:

. . . as though it were not permitted to come forward as avengers of God, and to pronounce sentence of death! . . . But, say you, the State cannot punish in the name of God. Yet was it not in the name of God that Moses and Phineas consigned to death the worshippers of the Golden calf and those who despised the true religion?

This was the first time that a Catholic bishop championed a decisive cooperation of the State in religious questions, and its right to inflict death on heretics. For the first time, also, the Old Testament was appealed to, though such appeals had been previously rejected by Christian teachers.

St. Augustine, on the contrary, was still opposed to the use of force, and tried to lead back the erring by means of instruction; at most he admitted the imposition of a moderate fine for refractory persons. Finally, however, he changed his views, whether moved thereto by the incredible excesses of the Circumcellions or by the good results achieved by the use of force, or favoring force through the persuasions of other bishops. Apropos of his apparent inconsistency it is well to note carefully whom he is addressing. He appears to speak in one way to government officials, who wanted the existing laws carried out to their fullest extent, and in another to the Donntists, who denied to the State any right of punishing dissenters. In his correspondence with state officials he dwells on Christian charity and toleration, and represents the heretics as straying lambs, to be sought out and perhaps, if recalcitrant chastised with rods and frightened with threats of severer but not to be driven back to the fold by means of rack and sword . On the other hand, in his writings against the Donatists he upholds the rights of the State: sometimes, he says, a salutary severity would be to the interest of the erring ones themselves and likewise protective of true believers and the community at large (Vacandard, 1. c., pp. 17-26)

As to Priscillianism, not a few points remain yet obscure, despite recent valuable researches. It seems certain, however, that Priscillian, Bishop of Avilia in Spain, was accused of heresy and sorcery, and found guilty by several councils. St. Ambrose at Milanand St. Damascus at Rome seem to have refused him a hearing. At length he appealed to Emperor Maximus at Trier, but to his detriment, for he was there condemned to death. Priscillian himself, no doubt in full consciousness of his own innocence, had formerly called for repression of the Manichaeans by the sword. But the foremost Christian teachers did not share these sentiments, and his own execution gave them occasion for a solemn protest against the cruel treatment meted out to him by the imperial government. St. Martin of Tours, then at Trier, exerted himself to obtain from the ecclesiastical authority the abandonment of the accusation, and induced the emperor to promise that on no account would he shed the blood of Priscillian, since ecclesiastical deposition by the bishops would be punishment enough, and bloodshed would be opposed to the Divine Law (Sulp. Serverus "Chron.", II, in P.L., XX, 155 sqq.; and ibid., "Dialogi", III, col.217). After the execution he strongly blamed both the accusers and the emperor, and for a long time refused to hold communion with such bishops as had been in any way responsible for Priscillians death. The great Bishop of Milan, St. Ambrose, described that execution as a crime.

Priscillianism, however, did not disappear with the death of its originator; on the contrary, it spread with extraordinary rapidly, and, through its open adoption of Manichaeism, became more of a public menace than ever. In this way the severe judgments of St. Augustine and St. Jerome against Priscillianism become intelligible. In 447 Leo the Great had to reproach the Priscillianists with loosening the holy bonds of marriage, treading all decency under foot, and deriding all law, human and Divine. It seemed to him natural that temporal rulers should punish such sacrilegious madness, and should put to death the founder of the sect and some of his followers. He goes on to say that this redounded to the advantage of the Church: "quae etsi sacerdotali contenta iudicio, cruentas refugit ultiones, severis tamen christianorum principum constitutionibus adiuratur, dum ad spiritale recurrunt remedium, qui timent corporale supplicium" -though the Church was content with a spiritual sentence on the part of its bishops and was averse to the shedding of blood, nevertheless it was aided by the imperial severity, inasmuch as the fear of corporal punishment drove the guilty to seek a spiritual remedy (Ep. xv ad Turribium; P. L., LIV, 679 sq.).

The ecclesiastical ideas of the first five centuries may be summarized as follows:

• the Church should for no cause shed blood (St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Leo I, and others);
• other teachers, however, like Optatus of Mileve and Priscillian, believed that the State could pronounce the death penalty on heretics in case the public welfare demanded it;
• the majority held that the death penalty for heresy, when not civilly criminal, was irreconcilable with the spirit of Christianity.

St. Augustine (Ep. c, n. 1), almost in the name of the western Church, says: "Corrigi eos volumus, non necari, nec disciplinam circa eos negligi volumus, nec suppliciis quibus digni sunt exerceri" -- we wish them corrected, not put to death; we desire the triumph of (ecclesiastical) discipline, not the death penalties that they deserve. St. John Chrysostom says substantially the same in the name of the Eastern Church (Hom., XLVI, c. i): "To consign a heretic to death is to commit an offence beyond atonement"; and in the next chapter he says that God forbids their execution, even as He forbids us to uproot cockle, but He does not forbid us to repel them, to deprive them of free speech, or to prohibit their assemblies. The help of the "secular arm" was therefore not entirely rejected; on the contrary, as often as the Christian welfare, general or domestic, required it, Christian rulers sought to stem the evil by appropriate measures. As late the seventh century St. Isidore of Seville expresses similar sentiments (Sententiarum, III, iv, nn. 4-6).

How little we are to trust the vaunted impartiality of Henry Charles Lea, the American historian of the Inquisition, we may here illustrate by an example. In his "History of the Inquisition in the Middle Ages" (New York, 1888, I, 215), He closes this period with these words:

It was only sixty-two years after the slaughter of Priscillian and his followers had excited so much horror, that Leo I, when the heresy seemed to be reviving in 447, not only justified the act, but declared that, if the followers of a heresy so damnable were allowed to live, there would be an end to human and Divine law. The final step had been taken and the church was definitely pledged to the suppression of heresy at any cost. It is impossible not to attribute to ecclesiastical influence the successive edicts by which, from the time of Theodosius the Great, persistence in heresy was punished with death.

In these lines Lee has transferred to the pope words employed by the emperor. Moreover, it is simply the exact opposite of historical truth to assert that the imperial edicts punishing heresy with death were due to ecclesiastical influence, since we have shown that in this period the more influential ecclesiastical authorities declared that the death penalty was contrary to the spirit of the Gospel, and themselves opposed its execution. For centuries this was the ecclesiastical attitude both in theory and in practice. Thus, in keeping with the civil law, some Manichaeans were executed at Ravenna in 556. On the other hand. Elipandus of Toledo and Felix of Urgel, the chiefs of Adoptionism anti Predestinationism, were condemned by and councils, but were otherwise left unmolested. We may note, however, that the monk Gothescalch, after the condemnation of his false doctrine that Christ had not died for all mankind, was by the Synods of Mainz in 848 and Quiercy in 849 sentenced to flogging and imprisonment, punishments then common in monasteries for various infractions of the rule.

(3) About the year 1000 Manichaeans from Bulgaria, under various names, spread over Western Europe. They were numerous in Italy, Spain, Gaul and Germany. Christian popular sentiment soon showed itself adverse to these dangerous sectaries, and resulted in occasional local persecutions, naturally in forms expressive of the spirit of the age. In 1122 King Robert the Pious (regis iussu et universae plebis consensu), "because he feared for the safety of the kingdom and the salvation of souls" had thirteen distinguished citizens, ecclesiastic and lay, burnt alive at Orléans. Elsewhere similar acts were due to popular outbursts. A few years later the Bishop of Chalons observed that the sect was spreading in his diocese, and asked of Wazo, Bishop of Liège, advice as to the use of force: "An terrenae potestatis gladio in eos sit animadvertendum necne" ("Vita Wasonis", cc. xxv, xxvi, in P. L., CXLII, 752; "Wazo ad Roger. II, episc. Catalaunens", and "Anselmi Gesta episc. Leod." in "Mon. Germ. SS.", VII, 227 sq.). Wazo replied that this was contrary to the spirit of the Church and the words of its Founder, Who ordained that the tares should be allowed to grow with the wheat until the day of the harvest, lest the wheat be uprooted with the tares; those who today were tares might to-morrow be converted, and turn into wheat; let them therefore live, and let mere excommunication suffice St. Chrysostom, as we have seen, had taught similar doctrine. This principle could not be always followed. Thus at Goslar, in the Christmas season of 1051, and in 1052, several heretics were hanged because Emperor Henry III wanted to prevent the further spread of "the heretical leprosy." A few years later, In 1076 or 1077, a Catharist was condemned to the stake by the Bishop of Cambrai and his chapter. Other Catharists, in spite of the archbishops intervention, were given their choice by the magistrates of Milan between doing homage to the Cross and mounting the pyre. By far the greater number chose the latter. In 1114 the Bishop of Soissons kept sundry heretics in durance in his episcopal city. But while he was gone to Beauvais, to ask advice of the bishops assembled there for a synod the "believing folk, fearing the habitual soft-heartedness of ecclesiatics (clericalem verens mollitiem), stormed the prison took the accused outside of town, and burned them.

The people disliked what to them was the extreme dilatoriness of the clergy in pursuing heretics. In 1144 Adalerbo II of Liège hoped to bring some imprisoned Catharists to better knowledge through the grace of God, but the people, less indulgent, assailed the unhappy creatures and only with the greatest trouble did the bishop succeed in rescuing some of them from death by fire. A like drama was enacted about the same time at Cologne. while the archbishop and the priests earnestly sought to lead the misguided back into the Church, the latter. were violently taken by the mob (a populis nimio zelo abreptis) from the custody of the clergy and burned at the stake. The best-known heresiarchs of that time, Peter of Bruys and Arnold of Brescia, met a similar fate -- the first on the pyre as a victim of popular fury, and the latter under the henchmans axe as a victim of his political enemies. In short, no blame attaches to the Church for her behavior towards heresy in those rude days. Among all the bishops of the period, so far as can be ascertained, Theodwin of Liège, successor of the aforesaid Wazo and predecessor of Adalbero II, alone appealed to the civil power for the punishment of heretics, and even he did not call for the death penalty, which was rejected by all. who were more highly respected in the twelfth century than Peter Canter, the most learned man of his time, and St. Bernard of Clairvaux? The former says ("Verbum abbreviatum", c. lxxviii, in P.L., CCV, 231):

Whether they be convicted of error, or freely confess their guilt, Catharists are not to be put to death, at least not when they refrain from armed assaults upon the Church. For although the Apostle said, A man that is a heretic after the third admonition, avoid, he certainly did not say, Kill him. Throw them into prison, if you will, but do not put them to death (cf. Geroch von Reichersberg, "De investigatione Antichristi III", 42).

So far was St. Bernard from agreeing with the methods of the people of Cologne, that he laid down the axiom: Fides suadenda, non imponenda (By persuasion, not by violence, are men to be won to the Faith). And if he censures the carelessness of the princes, who were to blame because little foxes devastated the vineyard, yet he adds that the latter must not be captured by force but by arguments (capiantur non armis, sed argumentis); the obstinate were to be excommunicated, and if necessary kept in confinement for the safety of others (aut corrigendi sunt ne pereant, aut, ne perimant, coercendi). (See Vacandard, 1. c., 53 sqq.) The synods of the period employ substantially the same terms, e.g. the synod at Reims in 1049 under Leo IX, that at Toulouse in 1119, at which Callistus II presided, and finally the Lateran Council of 1139.

Hence, the occasional executions of heretics during this period must be ascribed partly to the arbitrary action of individual rulers, partly to the fanatic outbreaks of the overzealous populace, and in no wise to ecclesiastical law or the ecclesiastical authorities. There were already, it is true, canonists who conceded to the Church the right to pronounce sentence of death on heretics; but the question was treated as a purely academic one, and the theory exercised virtually no influence on real life. Excommunication, proscription, imprisonment, etc., were indeed inflicted, being intended rather as forms of atonement than of real punishment, but never the capital sentence. The maxim of Peter Cantor was still adhered to: "Catharists, even though divinely convicted in an ordeal, must not be punished by death." In the second half of the twelfth century, however, heresy in the form of Catharism spread in truly alarming fashion, and not only menaced the Churchs existence, but undermined the very foundations of Christian society. In opposition to this propaganda there grew up a kind of prescriptive law -- at least throughout Germany, France, and Spain -- which visited heresy with death by the flames. England on the whole remained untainted by heresy. When, in 1166, about thirty sectaries made their way thither, Henry II ordered that they be burnt on their foreheads with red-hot iron, be beaten with rods in the public square, and then driven off. Moreover, he forbade anyone to give them shelter or otherwise assist them, so that they died partly from hunger and partly from the cold of winter. Duke Philip of Flanders, aided by William of the White Hand, Archbishop of Reims, was particularly severe towards heretics. They caused many citizens in their domains, nobles and commoners, clerics, knights, peasants, spinsters, widows, anti married women, to be burnt alive, confiscated their property, and divided it between them. This happened in 1183. Between 1183 and 1206 Bishop Hugo of Auxerre acted similarly towards the neo-Mainchaeans. Some he despoiled; the others he either exiled or sent to the stake. King Philip Augustus of France had eight Catharists burnt at Troyes in 1200 one at Nevers in 1201, several at Braisne-sur-Vesle in 1204, and many at Paris -- "priests, clerics, laymen, and women belonging to the sect". Raymund V of Toulouse (1148-94) promulgated a law which punished with death the followers of the sect and their favourers. Simon de Montfort's men-at-arms believed in 1211 that they were carrying out this law when they boasted how they had burned alive many, and would continue to do so (unde multos combussimus et adhuc cum invenimus idem facere non cessamus). In 1197 Peter II, King of Aragon and Count of Barcelona, issued an edict in obedience to which the Waldensians and all other schismatics were expelled from the land; whoever of this sect was still found in his kingdom or his county after Palm Sunday of the next year was to suffer death by fire, also confiscation of goods.

Ecclesiastical legislation was far from this severity. Alexander III at the Lateran Council of 1179 renewed the decisions already made as to schismatics in Southern France, and requested secular sovereigns to silence those disturbers of public order if necessary by force, to achieve which object they were at liberty to imprison the guilty (servituti subicere, subdere) and to appropriate their possessions, According to the agreement made by Lucius III and Emperor Frederick Barbarossa at Verona (1148), the heretics of every community were to be sought out, brought before the episcopal court, excommunicated, and given up to the civil power to he suitably punished (debita animadversione puniendus). The suitable punishment (debita animadversio, ultio) did not, however, as yet mean capital punishment, hut the proscriptive ban, though even this, it is true, entailed exile, expropriation, destruction of the culprits dwelling, infamy, debarment from public office, and the like. The "Continuatio Zwellensis altera, ad ann. 1184" (Mon. Germ. Hist.: SS., IX, 542) accurately describes the condition of heretics at this time when it says that the pope excommunicated them, and the emperor put them under the civil ban, while he confiscated their goods (papa eos excomunicavit imperator vero tam res quam personas ipsorum imperiali banno subiecit). Under Innocent III nothing was done to intensify or add to the extant statutes against heresy, though this pope gave them a wider range by the action of his legates and through the Forth Lateran Council (1215). But this act was indeed a relative service to the heretics, for the regular canonical procedure thus introduced did much to abrogate the arbitrariness, passion, and injustice of the Civil courts in Spain, France and Germany. In so far as, and so long as, his prescriptions remained in force, no summary condemnations or executions en masse occurred, neither stake nor rack were set up; and, if, on one occasion during the first year of his pontificate, to justify confiscation, he appealed to the Roman Law and its penalties for crimes against the sovereign power, yet he did not draw the extreme conclusion that heretics deserved to be burnt. His reign affords many examples showing how much of the vigour he took away in practice from the existing penal code.

II. THE SUPPRESSION OF HERESY BY THE INSTITUTION KNOWN AS THE INQUISITION

A. The Inquisition of The Middle Ages

(1) Origin

During the first three decades of the thirteenth century the Inquisition, as the institution, did not exist. But eventually Christian Europe was so endangered by heresy, and penal legislation concerning Catharism had gone so far, that the Inquisition seemed to be a political necessity. That these sects were a menace to Christian society had been long recognized by the Byzantine rulers. As early as the tenth century Empress Theodora had put to death a multitude of Paulicians, and in 1118 Emperor Alexius Comnenus treated the Bogomili with equal severity, but this did not prevent them from pouring over all Western Europe. Moreover these sects were in the highest degree aggressive, hostile to Christianity itself, to the Mass, the sacraments, the ecclesiastical hierarchy and organization; hostile also to feudal government by their attitude towards oaths, which they declared under no circumstances allowable. Nor were their views less fatal to the continuance of human society, for on the one hand they forbade marriage and the propagation of the human race. and on the other hand they made a duty of suicide through the institution of the Endura (see CATHARI). It has been said that more perished through the Endura (the Catharist suicide code) than through the Inquisition. It was, therefore, natural enough for the custodians of the existing order in Europe, especially of the Christian religion, to adopt repressive measures against such revolutionary teachings.

In France Louis VIII decreed in 1226 that persons excommunicated by the diocesan bishop, or his delegate, should receive "meet punishment" (debita animadversio). In 1249 Louis IX ordered barons to deal with heretics according to the dictates of duty (de ipsis faciant quod debebant). A decree of the Council of Toulouse (1229) makes it appear probable that in France death at the stake was already comprehended as in keeping with the aforesaid debita animadversio. To seek to trace in these measures the influence of imperial or papal ordinances is vain, since the burning of heretics had already come to be regarded as prescriptive. It is said in the "Etablissements de St. Louis et coutumes de Beauvaisis", ch. cxiii (Ordonnances des Roys de France, I, 211): "Quand le juge [ecclésiastique] laurait examiné [le suspect] se il trouvait, quil feust bougres, si le devrait faire envoier à la justice laie, et la justice laie le dolt fere ardoir. "The "Coutumes de Beauvaisis" correspond to the German "Sachsenspiegel", or "Mirror of Saxon Laws", compiled about 1235, which also embodies as a law sanctioned by custom the execution of unbelievers at the stake (sal man uf der hurt burnen). In Italy Emperor Frederick II, as early as 22 November, 1220 (Mon. Germ., II, 243), issued a rescript against heretics, conceived, however quite in the spirit of Innocent III, and Honorius III commissioned his legates to see to the enforcement in Italian cities of both the canonical decrees of 1215 and the imperial legislation of 1220. From the foregoing it cannot be doubted that up to 1224 there was no imperial law ordering, or presupposing as legal, the burning of heretics. The rescript for Lombardy of 1224 (Mon. Germ., II, 252; cf. ibid., 288) is accordingly the first law in which death by fire is contemplated (cf. Ficker, op. cit., 196). That Honorius III was in any way concerned in the drafting of this ordinance cannot be maintained; indeed the emperor was all the less in need of papal inspiration as the burning of heretics in Germany was then no longer rare; his legists, moreover, would certainly have directed the emperors attention to the ancient Roman Law that punished high treason with death, and Manichaeism in particular with the stake. The imperial rescripts of 1220 and 1224 were adopted into ecclesiastical criminal law in 1231, and were soon applied at Rome. It was then that the Inquisition of the Middle Ages came into being.

What was the immediate provocation? Contemporary sources afford no positive answer. Bishop Douais, who perhaps commands the original contemporary material better than anyone, has attempted in his latest work (LInquisition. Ses Origines. Sa Procedure, Paris, 1906) to explain its appearance by a supposed anxiety of Gregory IX to forestall the encroachments of Frederick II in the strictly ecclesiastical province of doctrine. For this purpose it would seem necessary for the pope to establish a distinct and specifically ecclesiastical court. From this point of view, though the hypothesis cannot be fully proved, much is intelligible that otherwise remains obscure. There was doubtless reason to fear such imperial encroachments in an age yet filled with the angry contentions of the Imperium and the Sacerdotium. We need only recall the trickery of the emperor and his Pretended eagerness for the purity of the Faith, his Increasingly rigorous legislation against heretics, the numerous executions of his personal rivals on the pretext of heresy, the hereditary passion of the Hohenstaufen for supreme control over Church and State, their claim of God-given authority over both, of responsibility in both domains to God and God only etc. What was more natural than that the Church should strictly reserve to herself her own sphere, while at the same time endeavouring to avoid giving offence to the emperor? A purely spiritual or papal religious tribunal would secure ecclesiastical liberty and authority for this court could be confided to men of expert knowledge and blameless reputation, and above all to independent men in whose hands the Church could safely trust the decision as to the orthodoxy or heterodoxy of a given teaching. On the other hand, to meet the emperors wishes as far as allowable, the penal code of the empire could be taken over as it stood (cf. Audray, "Regist. de Grégoire IX", n. 535).

(2) The New Tribunal

(a) Its essential characteristic

The pope did not establish the Inquisition as a distinct and separate tribunal; what he did was to appoint special but permanent judges, who executed their doctrinal functions In the name of the pope. Where they sat, there was the Inquisition. It must he carefully noted that the characteristic feature of the Inquisition was not its peculiar procedure, nor the secret examination of witnesses and consequent official indictment: this procedure was common to all courts from the time of Innocent III. Nor was it the pursuit of heretics in all places: this had been the rule since the Imperial Synod of Verona under Lucius III and Frederick Barbarossa. Nor again was it the torture, which was not prescribed or even allowed for decades after the beginning of the Inquisition, nor, finally, the various sanctions, imprisonment, confiscation, the stake, etc., all of which punishments were usual long before the Inquisition. The Inquisitor, strictly speaking, was a special but permanent judge, acting in the name of the pope and clothed by him with the right and the duty to deal legally with offences against the Faith; he had, however, to adhere to the established rules of canonical procedure and pronounce the customary penalties.

Many regarded it, as providential that just at this time sprang up two new orders, the Dominicans and the Franciscans, whose members, by their superior theological training and other characteristics, seemed eminently fitted to perform the inquisitorial task with entire success. It was safe to assume that they were not merely endowed with the requisite knowledge, but that they would also, quite unselfishly and uninfluenced by worldly motives, do solely what seemed their duty for the Good of the Church. In addition, there was reason to hope that, because of their great popularity, they would not encounter too much opposition. It seems, therefore, not unnatural that the inquisitors should have been chosen by the popes prevailingly from these orders, especially from that of the Dominicans. It is to he noted, however, that the inquisitors were not chosen exclusively from the mendicant orders, though the Senator of Rome no doubt meant such when in his oath of office (1231) he spoke of inquisitores datos ab ecclesia. In his decree of 1232 Frederick II calls them inquisitores ab apostolica sede datos. The Dominican Alberic, in November of 1232, went through Lombardy as inquisitor haereticae pravitatis. The prior and sub-prior of the Dominicans at Friesbach were given a similar commission as early as 27 November, 1231; on 2 December, 1232, the convent of Strasburg, and a little later the convents of Würzburg, Ratisbon, and Bremen, also received the commission. In 1233 a rescript of Gregory IX, touching these matters, was sent simultaneously to the bishops of Southern France and to the priors of the Dominican Order. We know that Dominicans were sent as inquisitors in 1232 to Germany along the Rhine, to the Diocese of Tarragona in Spain and to Lombardy; in 1233 to France, to the territory of Auxerre, the ecclesiastical provinces of Bourges, Bordeaux, Narbonne, and Auch, and to Burgundy; in 1235 to the ecclesiastical province of Sens. In fine, about 1255 we find the Inquisition in full activity in all the countries of Central and Western Europe in the county of Toulouse, in Sicily, Aragon, Lombardy, France, Burgundy, Brabant, and Germany (cf. Douais, op. cit., p. 36, and Fredericq, "Corpus documentorum inquisitionis haereticae pravitatis Neerlandicae, 1025-1520", 2 vols., Ghent, 1884-96).

That Gregory IX, through his appointment of Dominicans and Franciscans as inquisitors, withdrew the suppression of heresy from the proper courts (i.e. from the bishops), is a reproach that in so general a form cannot be sustained. So little did he think of displacing episcopal authority that, on the contrary he provided explicitly that no inquisitional tribunal was to work anywhere without the diocesan bishops co-operation. And if, on the strength of their papal jurisdiction, inquisitors occasionally manifested too great an inclination to act independently of episcopal authority it was precisely the popes who kept them within right bounds. As early as 1254 Innocent IV prohibited anew perpetual imprisonment or death at the stake without the episcopal consent. Similar orders were issued by Urban IV in 1262, Clement IV in 1265, and Gregory X in 1273, until at last Boniface VIII and Clement V solemnly declared null and void all judgments issued in trials concerning faith, unless delivered with the approval anti co-operation of the bishops. The popes always upheld with earnestness the episcopal authority, and sought to free the inquisitional tribunals from every kind of arbitrariness and caprice.

It was a heavy burden of responsibility -- almost too heavy for a common mortal -- which fell upon the shoulders of an inquisitor, who was obliged, at least indirectly, to decide between life and death. The Church was bound to insist that he should possess, in a pre-eminant degree, the qualities of a good judge; that he should be animated with a glowing zeal for the Faith, the salvation of souls, and the extirpation of heresy; that amid all difficulties and dangers he should never yield to anger or passion; that he should meet hostility fearlessly, but should not court it; that he should yield to no inducement or threat, and yet not be heartless; that, when circumstances permitted, he should observe mercy in allotting penalties; that he should listen to the counsel of others, and not trust too much to his own opinion or to appearances, since often the probable is untrue, and the truth improbable. Somewhat thus did Bernard Gui (or Guldonis) and Eymeric, both of them inquisitors for years, describe the ideal inquisitor. Of such an inquisitor also was Gregory IX doubtlessly thinking when he urged Conrad of Marburg: "ut puniatur sic temeritas perversorum quod innocentiae puritas non laedatur" -- i.e., "not to punish the wicked so as to hurt the innocent". History shows us how far the inquisitors answered to this ideal. Far from being inhuman, they were, as a rule, men of spotless character and sometimes of truly admirable sanctity, and not a few of them have been canonized by the Church. There is absolutely no reason to look on the medieval ecclesiastical judge as intellectually and morally inferior to the modern judge. No one would deny that the judges of today, despite occasional harsh decisions and the errors of a, few, pursue a highly honourable profession. Similarly, the medieval inquisitors should be judged as a whole Moreover, history does not justify the hypothesis that the medieval heretics were prodigies of virtue, deserving our sympathy in advance.

(b) Procedure

This regularly began with a months "term of grace", proclaimed by the inquisitor whenever he came to a heresy-ridden district. The inhabitants mere summoned to appear before the inquisitor. On those who confessed of their own accord a suitable penance (e.g. a pilgrimage) was imposed, but never a severe punishment like incarceration or surrender to the civil power. However, these relations with the residents of a, place often furnished important indications, pointed out the proper quarter for investigation, and sometimes much evidence was thus obtained against individuals. These mere then cited before the judges -- usually by the parish priest, although occasionally by the secular authorities -- and the trial began. If the accused at once made full and free confession, the affair was soon concluded, and not to the disadvantage of the accused. But in most instances the accused entered denial even after swearing on the Four Gospels, and this denial was stubborn in the measure that the testimony was incriminating. David of Augsburg (cf. Preger, "Der Traktat des David von Augshurg uber die Waldenser", Munich, 1878 pp. 43 sqq.) pointed out to the inquisitor four methods of extracting open acknowledgment:

• fear of death, i.e. by giving the accused to understand that the stake awaited him if he would not confess;
• more or less close confinement, possibly emphasized by curtailment of food;
• visits of tried men, who would attempt to induce free confession through friendly persuasion;
• torture, which will be discussed below.

(c) The Witnesses

When no voluntary admission was made, evidence was adduced. Legally, there had to be at least two witnesses, although conscientious judges rarely contended themselves with that number. The principle had hitherto been held by the Church that the testimony of a heretic, an excommunicated person, a perjurer, in short, of an "infamous", was worthless before the courts. But in its destination of unbelief the Church took the further step of abolishing this long established practice, and of accepting a heretics evidence at nearly full value in trials concerning faith. This appears as early as the twelfth century in the "Decretum Gratiani". While Frederick II readily assented to this new departure, the inquisitors seemed at first uncertain as to the value of the evidence of an "infamous" person. It was only in 1261, after Alexander IV had silenced their scruples, that the new principle was generally adopted both in theory and in practice. This grave modification seems to have been defended on the ground that the heretical conventicles took place secretly, and were shrouded in great obscurity, so that reliable information could be obtained from none but themselves. Even prior to the establishment of the Inquisition the names of the witnesses were sometimes withheld from the accused person, and this usage was legalized by Gregory IX, Innocent IV, and Alexander IV. Boniface VIII, however, set it aside by his Bull "Ut commissi vobis officii" (Sext. Decret., 1. V, tit. ii); and commanded that at all trials, even inquisitorial, the witnesses must be named to the accused. There was no personal confrontation of witnesses, neither was there any cross-examination. Witnesses for the defence hardly ever appeared, as they would almost infallibly be suspected of being heretics or favourable to heresy. For the same reason those impeached rarely secured legal advisers, and mere therefore obliged to make personal response to the main points of a charge. This, however, was also no innovation, for in 1205 Innocent III, by the Bull "Si adversus vos" forbade any legal help for heretics: "We strictly prohibit you, lawyers and notaries, from assisting in any way, by council or support, all heretics and such as believe In them, adhere to them, render them any assistance or defend them in any way. But this severity soon relaxed, and even in Eymerics day it seems to have been the universal custom to grant heretics a legal adviser, who, however, had to be in every way beyond suspicion, "upright, of undoubted loyalty, skilled in civil and canon law, and zealous for the faith."

Meanwhile, even in those hard times, such legal severities were felt to be excessive, and attempts were made to mitigate them in various ways, so as to protect the natural rights of the accused. First he could make known to the judge the names of his enemies: should the charge originate with them, they would be quashed without further ado. Furthermore, it was undoubtedly to the advantage of the accused that false witnesses were punished without mercy. The aforesaid inquisitor, Bernard Gui, relates an instance of a father falsely accusing his son of heresy. The sons innocence quickly coming to light, the false accuser was apprehended, and sentenced to prison for life (solam vitam ei ex misericordia relinquentes). In addition he was pilloried for five consecutive Sundays before the church during service, with bare head and bound hands. Perjury in those days was accounted an enormous offence, particularly when committed by a false witness. Moreover, the accused had a considerable advantage in the fact that the inquisitor had to conduct the trial in co-operation with the diocesan bishop or his representatives, to whom all documents relating to the trial had to he remitted. Both together, inquisitor and bishop, were also made to summon and consult a number of upright and experienced men (boni viri), and to decide in agreement with their decision (vota). Innocent IV (11 July. 1254), Alexander IV (15 April, 1255, and 27 April, 1260), and Urban IV (2 August, 1264) strictly prescribed this institution of the boni viri -- i.e. the consultation in difficult cases of experienced men, well versed in theology and canon law, and in every way irreproachable. The documents of the trial were either in their entirety handed to them, or a least an abstract drawn up by a public notary was furnished; they were also made acquainted with the witnesses names, and their first duty was to decide whether or not the witnesses were credible.

The boni viri were very frequently called on. Thirty, fifty, eighty, or more persons -- laymen and priests; secular and regular -- would be summoned, all highly respected and independent men, and singly sworn to give verdict upon the cases before them accordingly to the best of their knowledge and belief. Substantially they were always called upon to decide two questions: whether and what guilt lay at hand, and what punishment was to be inflicted. That they might be influenced by no personal considerations, the case would be submitted to them somewhat in the abstract, i.e., the name of the person inculpated was not given. Although, strictly speaking, the boni viri were entitled only to an advisory vote, the final ruling was usually in accordance with their views, and, whether their decision was revised, it was always in the direction of clemency, the mitigation of the findings being indeed of frequent occurrence. The judges were also assisted by a consilium permanens, or standing council, composed of other sworn judges. In these dispositions surely lay the most valuable guarantees for all objective, impartial, and just operation of the inquisition courts. Apart from the conduct of his own defence the accused disposed of other legal means for safeguarding his rights: he could reject a judge who had shown prejudice, and at any stage of the trial could appeal to Rome. Eymeric leads one to infer that in Aragon appeals to the Holy See were not rare. He himself as inquisitor had on one occasion to go to Rome to defend in person his own position, but he advises other inquisitors against that step, as it simply meant the loss of much time and money; it were wiser, he says, to try a case in such a manner that no fault could be found. In the event of an appeal the documents of the case were to be sent to Rome under seal, and Rome not only scrutinized them, but itself gave the final verdict. Seemingly, appeals to Rome were in great favour; a milder sentence, it was hoped, would be forthcoming, or at least some time would be gained.

(d) Punishments

The present writer can find nothing to suggest that the accused were imprisoned during the period of inquiry. It was certainly customary to grant the accused person his freedom until the sermo generalis, were he ever so strongly inculpated through witnesses or confession; he was not yet supposed guilty, though he was compelled to promise under oath always to be ready to come before the inquisitor, and in the end to accept with good grace his sentence, whatever its tenor. The oath was assuredly a terrible weapon in the hands of the medieval judge. If the accused person kept it, the judge was favourably inclined; on the other hand, if the accused violated it, his credit grew worse. Many sects, it was known, repudiated oaths on principle; hence the violation of an oath caused the guilty party easily to incur suspicion of heresy. Besides the oath, the inquisitor might secure himself by demanding a sum of money as bail, or reliable bondsmen who would stand surety for the accused. It happened, too, that bondsmen undertook upon oath to deliver the accused "dead or alive" It was perhaps unpleasant to live under the burden of such an obligation, but, at any rate, it was more endurable than to await a final verdict in rigid confinement for months or longer.

Curiously enough torture was not regarded as a mode of punishment, but purely as a means of eliciting the truth. It was not of ecclesiastical origin, and was long prohibited in the ecclesiastical courts. Nor was it originally an important factor in the inquisitional procedure, being unauthorized until twenty years after the Inquisition had begun. It was first authorized by Innocent IV in his Bull "Ad exstirpanda" of 15 May, 1252, which was confirmed by Alexander IV on 30 November, 1259, and by Clement IV on 3 November, 1265. The limit placed upon torture was citra membri diminutionem et mortis periculum -- i.e, it was not to cause the loss of life or limb or imperil life. Torture was to applied only once, and not then unless the accused were uncertain in his statements, and seemed already virtually convicted by manifold and weighty proofs. In general, this violent testimony (quaestio) was to be deferred as long as possible, and recourse to it was permitted in only when all other expedients were exhausted. Conscientiousness and sensible judges quite properly attached no great importance to confessions extracted by torture. After long experience Eymeric declared: Quaestiones sunt fallaces et inefficaces -- i.e the torture is deceptive and ineffectual.

Had this papal legislation been adhered to in practice, the historian of the Inquisition would have fewer difficulties to satisfy. In the beginning, torture was held to be so odious that clerics were forbidden to be present under pain of irregularity. Sometimes it had to be interrupted so as to enable the inquisitor to continue his examination, which, of course, was attended by numerous inconveniences. Therefore on 27 April, 1260, Alexander IV authorized inquisitors to absolve one another of this irregularity. Urban IV on 2 August, 1262, renewed the permission, and this was soon interpreted as formal licence to continue the examination in the torture chamber itself. The inquisitors manuals faithfully noted and approved this usage. The general rule ran that torture was to be resorted to only once. But this was sometimes circumvented -- first, by assuming that with every new piece of evidence the rack could be utilized afresh, and secondly, by imposing fresh torments on the poor victim (often on different days), not by way of repetition, but as a continuation (non ad modum iterationis sed continuationis), as defended by Eymeric; "quia, iterari non debent [tormenta], nisi novis supervenitibus indiciis, continuari non prohibentur." But what was to be done when the accused, released from the rack, denied what he had just confessed? Some held with Eymeric that the accused should be set at liberty; others, however, like the author of the "Sacro Arsenale" held that the torture should be continued. because the accused had too seriously incriminated himself by his previous confession. When Clement V formulated his regulations for the employment of torture, he never imagined that eventually even witnesses would be put on the rack, although not their guilt, but that of the accused, was in question. From the popes silence it was concluded that a witness might be put upon the rack at the discretion of the inquisitor. Moreover, if the accused was convicted through witnesses, or had pleaded guilty, the torture might still he used to compel him to testify against his friends and fellow-culprits. It would be opposed to all Divine and human equity -- so one reads in the "SacroArsenale, ovvero Pratica dell Officio della Santa Inquisizione" (Bologna, 1665) -- to inflict torture unless the judge were personally persuaded of the guilt of the accused.

But one of the difficulties of the procedure is why torture was used as a means of learning the truth. On the one hand, the torture was continued until the accused confessed or intimated that he was willing to confess, On the other hand, it was not desired, as in fact it was not possible, to regard as freely made a confession wrung by torture.

It is at once apparent how little reliance may be placed upon the assertion so often repeated in the minutes of trials, "confessionem esse veram, non factam vi tormentorum" (the confession was true and free), even though one had not occasionally read in the preceding pages that, after being taken down from the rack (postquam depositus fuit de tormento), he freely confessed this or that. However, it is not of greater importance to say that torture is seldom mentioned in the records of inquisition trials -- but once, for example in 636 condemnations between 1309 and 1323; this does not prove that torture was rarely applied. Since torture was originally inflicted outside the court room by lay officials, and since only the voluntary confession was valid before the judges, there was no occasion to mention in the records the fact of torture. On the other hand it, is historically true that the popes not only always held that torture must not imperil life or but also tried to abolish particularly grievous abuses, when such became known to them. Thus Clement V ordained that inquisitors should not apply the torture without the consent of the diocesan bishop. From the middle of the thirteenth century, they did not disavow the principle itself, and, as their restrictions to its use were not always heeded, its severity, though of tell exaggerated, was in many cases extreme.

The consuls of Carcassonne in 1286 complained to the pope, the King of France, and the vicars of the local bishop against the inquisitor Jean Garland, whom they charged with inflicting torture in an absolutely inhuman manner, and this charge was no isolated one. The case of Savonarola has never been altogether cleared up in this respect. The official report says he had to suffer three and a half tratti da fune (a sort of strappado). When Alexander VI showed discontent with the delays of the trial, the Florentine government excused itself by urging that Savonarola was a man of extraordinary sturdiness and endurance, and that he had been vigorously tortured on many days (assidua quaestione multis diebus, the papal prothonotary, Burchard, says seven times) but with little effect. It is to be noted that torture was most cruelly used, where the inquisitors were most exposed to the pressure of civil authority. Frederick II, though always boasting of his zeal for the purity of the Faith, abused both rack and Inquisition to put out of the way his personal enemies. The tragical ruin of the Templars is ascribed to the abuse of torture by Philip the Fair and his henchmen. At Paris, for instance, thirty-six, and at Sens twenty-five, Templars died as the result of torture. Blessed Joan of Are could not have been sent to the stake as a heretic and a recalcitrant, if her judges had not been tools of English policy. And the excesses of the Spanish Inquisition are largely due to the fact that in its administration civil purposes overshadowed the ecclesiastical. Every reader of the "Cautio criminalis" of the Jesuit Father Friedrich Spee knows to whose account chiefly must be set down the horrors of the witchcraft trials. Most of the punishments that were properly speaking inquisitional were not inhuman, either by their nature or by the manner of their infliction. Most frequently certain good works were ordered, e.g. the building of a church, the visitation of a church, a pilgrimage more or less distant, the offering of a candle or a chalice, participation in a crusade, and the like. Other works partook more of the character of real and to some extent degrading punishments, e.g. fines, whose proceeds were devoted to such public purposes as church-building, road-making, and the like; whipping with rods during religious service; the pillory; the wearing of coloured crosses, and so on.

The hardest penalties were imprisonment in its various degrees exclusion from the communion of the Church, and the usually consequent surrender to the civil power. "Cum ecclesia" ran the regular expression, "ultra non habeat quod faciat pro suis demeritis contra ipsum, idcirco, eundum reliquimus brachio et iudicio saeculari" -- i.e. since the Church can no farther punish his misdeeds, she leaves him to the civil authority. Naturally enough, punishment as a legal sanction is always a hard and painful thing, whether decreed by civil of ecclesiastical justice. There is, however, always an essential distinction between civil and ecclesiastical punishment. While chastisement inflicted by secular authority aims chiefly at punishment violation of the law, the Church seeks primarily the correction of the delinquent; indeed his spiritual welfare frequently so much in view that the element of punishment is almost entirely lost sight of. Commands to hear Holy Mass on Sundays and holidays, to frequent religious services, to abstain from manual labour, to receive Communion at the chief festivals of the year, to forbear from soothsaying and usury, etc., can efficacious as helps toward the fulfillment of Christian duties. It being furthermore incumbent on the inquisitor to consider not merely the external sanction, but also the inner change of heart, his sentence lost the quasi-mechanical stiffness so often characteristic of civil condemnation. Moreover, the penalties incurred were on numberless occasions remitted, mitigated, or commuted. In the records of the Inquisition we very frequently read that because of old age, sickness, or poverty in the family, the in the family, the due punishment was materially reduced owing to the inquisitor sheer pity, or the petition of a good Catholic. Imprisonment for life was altered to a fine, and this to an alms; participation in a crusade was commuted into a pilgrimage, while a distant and costly pilgrimage became a visit to a neighboring shrine or church, and so on. If the inquisitors leniency were abused, he was authorized to revive in full the original punishment. On the whole, the Inquisition was humanely conducted. Thus we read that a son obtained his fathers release by merely asking for it, without putting forward any special reasons. Licence to leave risen for three weeks, three months, or an unlimited period-say until the recovery or decease of sick parents was not infrequent. Rome itself censured inquisitioners or deposed them because they were too harsh, but never because they mere too merciful.

Imprisonment was not always accounted punishment in the proper sense: it was rather looked on as an opportunity for repentance, a preventive against backsliding or the infection of others. It was known as immuration (from the Latin murus, a wall), or incarceration, and was inflicted for a definite time or for life. Immuration for life was the lot of those who had failed to profit by the aforesaid term of grace, or had perhaps recanted only from fear of death, or had once before abjured heresy. The murus strictus seu arctus, or carcer strictissimus, implied close and solitary confinement, occasionally aggravated by fasting or chains. In practice, however, these regulations were not always enforced literally. We read of immured persons receiving visits rather freely, playing games, or dining with their jailors. On the other hand, solitary confinement was at times deemed insufficient, and then the immured were put in irons or chained to the prison wall. Members of a religious order, when condemned for life, were immured in their own convent nor ever allowed to speak with any of their fraternity. The dungeon or cell was euphemistically called "In Pace" it was, indeed, the tomb of a man buried alive. It was looked upon as a remarkable favour when, in 1330, through the good offices of the Archbishop of Toulouse, the French king permitted a dignitary of a certain order to visit the "In Pace" twice a month and comfort his imprisoned brethren, against which favour the Dominicans lodged with Clement VI a fruitless protest. Though the prison cells were directed to be kept in such a way as to endanger neither the life nor the health of occupants, their true condition was sometimes deplorable, as we see from a document published by J. B. Vidal (Annales de St-Louis des Francais, 1905 P. 362):

In some cells the unfortunates were bound in stocks or chains, unable to move about, and forced to sleep on the ground . . . . There was little regard for cleanliness. In some cases there was no light or ventilation, and the food was meagre and very poor.

Occasionally the popes had to put an end through their legates to similarly atrocious conditions. After inspecting the Carcassonne and Albi prisons in 1306, the legates Pierre de la Chapelle and Béranger de Frédol dismissed the warden, removed the chains from the captives, and rescued some from their underground dungeons. The local bishop was expected to provide food from the confiscated property of the prisoner. For those doomed to close confinement, it was meagre enough, scarcely more than bread and water. It was, not long, however, before prisoners were allowed other victuals, wine and money also from outside, and this was soon generally tolerated.

Officially it was not the Church that sentenced unrepenting heretics to death, more particularly to the stake. As legate of the Roman Church even Gregory IV never went further than the penal ordinances of Innocent III required, nor ever inflicted a punishment more severe than excommunication. Not until four years after the commencement of his pontificate did he admit the opinion, then prevalent among legists, that heresy should be punished with death, seeing that it was confessedly no less serious an offence than high treason. Nevertheless he continued to insist on the exclusive right of the Church to decide in authentic manner in matters of heresy; at the same time it was not her office to pronounce sentence of death. The Church, thenceforth, expelled from her bosom the impenitent heretic, whereupon the state took over the duty of his temporal punishment. Frederick II was of the same opinion; in his Constitution of 1224 he says that heretics convicted by an ecclesiastical court shall, on imperial authority, suffer death by fire (auctoritate nostra ignis iudicio concremandos), and similarly in 1233 "praesentis nostrae legis edicto damnatos mortem pati decernimus." In this way Gregory IX may be regarded as having had no share either directly or indirectly in the death of condemned heretics. Not so the succeeding popes. In the Bull "Ad exstirpanda" (1252) Innocent IV says:

When those adjudged guilty of heresy have been given up to the civil power by the bishop or his representative, or the Inquisition, the podestà or chief magistrate of the city shall take them at once, and shall, within five days at the most, execute the laws made against them.

Moreover, he directs that this Bull and the corresponding regulations of Frederick II be entered in every city among the municipal statutes under pain of excommunication, which was also visited on those who failed to execute both the papal and the imperial decrees. Nor could any doubt remain as to what civil regulations were meant, for the passages which ordered the burning of impenitent heretics were inserted in the papal decretals from the imperial constitutions "Commissis nobis" and "Inconsutibilem tunicam". The aforesaid Bull "Ad exstirpanda" remained thenceforth a fundamental document of the Inquisition, renewed or reinforced by several popes, Alexander IV (1254-61), Clement IV (1265-68), Nicholas IV (1288-02), Boniface VIII (1294-1303), and others. The civil authorities, therefore, were enjoined by the popes, under pain of excommunication to execute the legal sentences that condemned impenitent heretics to the stake. It is to he noted that excommunication itself was no trifle, for, if the person excommunicated did not free himself from excommunication within a year, he was held by the legislation of that period to be a heretic, and incurred all the penalties that affected heresy.

The Number of Victims.

How many victims were handed over to the civil power cannot be stated with even approximate accuracy. We have nevertheless some valuable information about a few of the Inquisition tribunals, and their statistics are not without interest. At Pamiers, from 1318 to 1324, out of twenty-four persons convicted but five were delivered to the civil power, and at Toulouse from 1308 to 1323, only forty-two out of nine hundred and thirty bear the ominous note "relictus culiae saeculari". Thus, at Pamiers one in thirteen, and at Toulouse one in forty-two seem to have been burnt for heresy although these places were hotbeds of heresy and therefore principal centres of the Inquisition. We may add, also, that this was the most active period of the institution. These data and others of the same nature bear out the assertion that the Inquisition marks a substantial advance in the contemporary administration of justice, and therefore in the general civilization of mankind. A more terrible fate awaited the heretic when judged by a secular court. In 1249 Count Raylmund VII of Toulouse caused eighty confessed heretics to be burned in his presence without permitting them to recant. It is impossible to imagine any such trials before the Inquisition courts. The large numbers of burnings detailed in various histories are completely unauthenticated, and are either the deliberate invention of pamphleteers, or are based on materials that pertain to the Spanish Inquisition of later times or the German witchcraft trials (Vacandard, op. cit., 237 sqq.).

Once the Roman Law touching the crimen laesae majestatis had been made to cover the case of heresy, it was only natural that the royal or imperial treasury should imitate the Roman fiscus, and lay claim to the property of persons condemned. was fortunate, though inconsistent and certainly not strict justice, that this penalty did not affect every condemned person, but only those sentenced to perpetual confinement or the stake. Even so, this circumstance added not a little to the penalty, especially as in this respect innocent people, the culprits wife and children, were the chief sufferers. Confiscation was also decreed against persons deceased, and there is a relatively high number of such judgments. Of the six hundred and thirty-six cases that came before the inquisitor Bernard Gui, eighty-eight pertained to dead people.

(e) The Final Verdict

The ultimate decision was usually pronounced with solemn ceremonial at the sermo generalis -- or auto-da-fé (act of faith), as it was later called. One or two days prior to this sermo everyone concerned had the charges read to him again briefly, and in the vernacular; the evening before he was told where and when to appear to hear the verdict. The sermo, a short discourse or exhortation, began very early in the morning; then followed the swearing in of the secular officials, who were made to vow obedience to the inquisitor in all things pertaining to the suppression of heresy. Then regularly followed the so-called "decrees of mercy" (i.e. commutations, mitigations, and remission of previously imposed penalties), and finally due punishments were assigned to the guilty, after their offences had been again enumerated. This announcement began with the minor punishments, and went on to the most severe, i.e., perpetual imprisonment or death. Thereupon the guilty were turned over to the civil power, and with this act the sermo generalis closed, and the inquisitional proceedings were at an end.

(3) The chief scene of the Inquisitions activity was Central and Southern Europe. The Scandinavian countries were spared altogether. It appears in England only on the occasion of the trial of the Templars, nor was it known in Castile and Portugal until the accession of Ferdinand and Isabella. It was introduced into the Netherlands with the Spanish domination, while in Northern France it was relatively little known. On the other hand, the Inquisition, whether because of the particularly perilous sectarianism there prevalent or of the greater severity of ecclesiastical and civil rulers, weighed heavily on Italy (especially Lombardy), on Southern France (in particular the country of Toulouse and on Languedoc) and finally on the Kingdom of Aragon and on Germany. Honorius IV (1285-87) introduced it into Sardinia, and in the fifteenth century it displayed excessive zeal in Flanders and Bohemia. The inquisitors were, as a rule, irreproachable, not merely in personal conduct, but in the administration of their office. Some, however, like Robert le Bougre, a Bulgarian (Catharist) convert to Christianity and subsequently a Dominican, seem to have yielded to a blind fanaticism and deliberately to have provoked executions en masse. On 29 May, 1239, at Montwimer in Champagne, Robert consigned to the flames at one time about a hundred and eighty persons, whose trial had begun and ended within one week. Later, when Rome found that the complaints against him were justified, he was first deposed and then incarcerated for life.

(4) How are we to explain the Inquisition in the light of its own period? For the true office of the historian is not to defend facts and conditions, but to study and understand them in their natural course and connection. It is indisputable that in the past scarcely any community or nation vouchsafed perfect toleration to those who set up a creed different from that of the generality. A kind of iron law would seem to dispose mankind to religious intolerance. Even long before the Roman State tried to check with violence the rapid encroachments of Christianity, Plate had declared it one of the supreme duties of the governmental authority in his ideal state to show no toleration towards the "godless" -- that is, towards those who denied the state religion -- even though they were content to live quietly and without proselytizing; their very example, he said would be dangerous. They were to be kept in custody; "in a place where one grew wise" (sophronisterion), as the place of incarceration was euphemistically called; they should be relegated thither for five years, and during this time listen to religious instruction every day. The more active and proselytizing opponents of the state religion were to be imprisoned for life in dreadful dungeons, and after death to be deprived of burial. It is thus evident what little justification there is for regarding intolerance as a product of the Middle Ages. Everywhere and always in the past men believed that nothing disturbed the common weal and public peace so much as religious dissensions and conflicts, and that, on the other hand, a uniform public faith was the surest guarantee for the States stability and prosperity. The more thoroughly religion had become part of the national life, and the stronger the general conviction of its inviolability and Divine origin, the more disposed would men be to consider every attack on it as an intolerable crime against the Deity and a highly criminal menace to the public peace. The first Christian emperors believed that one of the chief duties of an imperial ruler was to place his sword at the service of the Church and orthodoxy, especially as their titles of "Pontifex Maximus" and "Bishop of the Exterior" seemed to argue in them Divinely appointed agents of Heaven.

Nevertheless the principal teachers of the Church held back for centuries from accepting in these matters the practice of the civil rulers; they shrank particularly from such stern measures against heresy as punishment, both of which they deemed inconsistent with the spirit of Christianity. But, in the Middle Ages, the Catholic Faith became alone dominant, and the welfare of the Commonwealth came to be closely bound up with the cause of religious unity. King Peter of Aragon, therefore, but voiced the universal conviction when he said: "The enemies of the Cross of Christ and violators of the Christian law are likewise our enemies and the enemies of our kingdom, and ought therefore to be dealt with as such." Emperor Frederick II emphasized this view more vigorously than any other prince, and enforced it in his Draconian enactments against heretics. The representative of the Church were also children of their own time, and in their conflict with heresy accepted the help that their age freely offered them, and indeed often forced upon them. Theologians and canonists, the highest and the saintliest, stood by the code of their day, and sought to explain and to justify it. The learned and holy Raymund of Pennafort, highly esteemed by Gregory IX, was content with the penalties that dated from Innocent III, viz.. the ban of the empire, confiscation of property-, confinement in prison, etc. But before the end of the century, St. Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theol., II-II:11:3 and II-II:11:4>) already advocated capital punishment for heresy though it cannot be said that his arguments altogether compel conviction. The Angelic Doctor, however speaks only in a general way of punishment by death, and does not specify more nearly the manner of its infliction. This the jurists did in a positive way that was truly terrible. The celebrated Henry of Segusia (Susa), named Hostiensis after his episcopal See of Ostia (d. 1271), and the no less eminent Joannes Andreae (d. 1345), when interpreting the Decree "Ad abolendam" of Lucius III, take debita animadversio (due punishment) as synonymous with ignis crematio (death by fire), a meaning which certainly did not attach to the original expression of 1184. Theologians and jurists based their attitude to some extent on the similarity between heresy and high treason (crimen laesae maiestatis), a suggestion that they owed to the Law of Ancient Rome. They argued, moreover, that if the death penalty could be rightly inflicted on thieves and forgers, who rob us only of worldly goods, how much more righteously on those who cheat us out of supernatural goods -- out of faith, the sacraments, the life of the soul. In the severe legislation of the Old Testament (Deut., xiii, 6-9; xvii, 1-6) they found another argument. And lest some should urge that those ordinances were abrogated by Christianity, the words of Christ were recalled: "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill" (Matt., v. 17); also His other saying (John, xv 6): "If any one abide not in me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up, and cast him into the fire, and he burneth" (in ignem mittent, et ardet).

It is well known that belief in the justice of punishing heresy with death was so common among the sixteenth century reformers -- Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, and their adherents -- that we may say their toleration began where their power ended. The Reformed theologian, Hieronymus Zanchi, declared in a lecture delivered at the University of Heidlelberg:

We do not now ask if the authorities may pronounce sentence of death upon heretics; of that there can be no doubt, and all learned and right-minded men acknowledge it. The only question is whether the authorities are bound to perform this duty.

And Zanchi answers this second question in the affirmative, especially on the authority of "all pious and learned men who have written on the subject in our day" [Historisch-politische Blatter, CXL, (1907), p. 364]. It may be that in modern times men judge more leniency the views of others, but does this forthwith make their opinions objectively more correct than those of their predecessors? Is there no longer any inclination to persecution? As late as 1871 Professor Friedberg wrote in Holtzendorffs "Jahrbuch fur Gesetzebung": "If a new religious society were to be established today with such principles as those which, according to the Vatican Council, the Catholic Church declares a matter of faith, we would undoubtedly consider it a duty of the state to suppress, destroy, and uproot it by force" (Kölnische Volkszeitung, no. 782, 15 Sept., 1909). Do these sentiments indicate an ability to appraise justly the institutions and opinions of former centuries, not according to modern feelings, but to the standards of their age?

In forming an estimate of the Inquisition, it is necessary to distinguish clearly between principles and historical fact on the one hand, and on the other those exaggerations or rhetorical descriptions which reveal bins and an obvious determination to injure Catholicism, rather than to encourage the spirit of tolerance and further its exercise. It is also essential to note that the Inquisition, in its establishment and procedure, pertained not to the sphere of belief, but to that of discipline. The dogmatic teaching of the Church is in no way affected by the question as to whether the Inquisition was justified in its scope, or wise in its methods, or extreme in its practice. The Church established by Christ, as a perfect society, is empowered to make laws and inflict penalties for their violation. Heresy not only violates her law but strikes at her very life, unity of belief; and from the beginning the heretic had incurred all the penalties of the ecclesiastical courts. When Christianity became the religion of the Empire, and still more when the peoples of Northern Europe became Christian nations, the close alliance of Church and State made unity of faith essential not only to the ecclesiastical organization, but also to civil society. Heresy, in consequence, was & crime which secular rulers were bound in duty to punish. It was regarded as worse than any other crime, even that of high treason; it was for society in those times what we call anarchy. Hence the severity with which heretics were treated by the secular power long before the Inquisition was established.

As regards the character of these punishments, it should be considered that they were the natural expression not only of the legislative power, but also of the popular hatred for heresy in an age that dealt both vigorously and roughly with criminals of every type. The heretic, in a word, was simply an outlaw whose offence, in the popular mind, deserved and sometimes received a punishment as summary as that which is often dealt out in our own day by an infuriated populace to the authors of justly detested crimes. That such intolerance was not peculiar to Catholicism, but was the natural accompaniment of deep religious conviction in those, also, who abandoned the Church, is evident from the measures taken by some of the Reformers against those who differed from them in matters of belief. As the learned Dr. Schaff declares in his "History of the Christian Church" (vol. V, New York, 1907, p. 524),

To the great humiliation of the Protestant churches, religious intolerance and even persecution unto death were continued long alter the Reformation. In Geneva the pernicious theory was put into practice by state and church, even to the use of torture and the admission of the testimony of children against their parents, and with the sanction of Calvin. Bullinger, in the second Helvetic Confession, announced the principle that heresy could be punished like murder or treason.

Moreover, the whole history of the Penal Laws against Catholics in England and Ireland, and the spirit of intolerance prevalent in many of the American colonies during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries may be cited in proof thereof. It would obviously be absurd to make the Protestant religion as such responsible for these practices. But having set up the principle of private judgment, which, logically applied, made heresy impossible, the early Reformers proceeded to treat dissidents as the medieval heretics had been treated. To suggest that this was inconsistent is trivial in view of the deeper insight it affords into the meaning of a tolerance which is often only theoretical and the source of that intolerance which men rightly show towards error, and which they naturally though not rightly, transfer to the erring.

B. The Inquisition in Spain

(1) Historical Facts

Religious conditions similar to those in Southern France occasioned the establishment of the Inquisition in the neighboring Kingdom of Aragon. As early as 1226 King James I had forbidden the Catharists his kingdom, and in 1228 had outlawed both them and their friends. A little later, on the advice of his confessor, Raymond of Pennafort, he asked Gregory IX to establish the Inquisition in Aragon. By the Bull "Declinante jam mundi" of 26 May, 1232, Archbishop Esparrago and his suffragans were instructed to search, either personally or by enlisting the services of the Dominicans or other suitable agents, and condignly punish the heretics in their dioceses. At the Council of Lérida in 1237 the Inquisition was formally confided to the Dominicans and the Franciscans. At the Synod of Tarragona in 1242, Raymund of Pennafort defined the terms haereticus, receptor, fautor, defensor, etc., and outlined the penalties to be inflicted. Although the ordinances of Innocent IV, Urban IV, and Clement VI were also adopted and executed with strictness by the Dominican Order, no striking success resulted. The Inquisitor Fray Pence de Planes was poisoned, and Bernardo Travasser earned the crown of martyrdom at the hands of the heretics. Aragons best-known inquisitor is the Dominican Nicolas Eymeric (Quétif-Echard, "Scriptores Ord. Pr.", I, 709 sqq.). His "Directorium Inquisitionis" (written in Aragon 1376; printed at Rome 1587, Venice 1595 and 1607), based on forty-four years experience, is an original source and a document of the highest historical value.

The Spanish Inquisition, however, properly begins with the reign of Ferdinand the Catholic and Isabella. The Catholic faith was then endangered by pseudo converts from Judaism (Marranos) and Mohammedanism (Moriscos). On 1 November, 1478, Sixtus IV empowered the Catholic sovereigns to set up the Inquisition. The judges were to be at least forty years old, of unimpeachable reputation, distinguished for virtue and wisdom, masters of theology, or doctors or licentiates of canon law, and they must follow the usual ecclesiastical rules and regulations. On 17 September, 1480, Their Catholic Majesties appointed, at first for Seville, the two Dominicans Miguel de Morillo and Juan de San Martin as inquisitors, with two of the secular clergy assistants. Before long complaints of grievous abuses reached Rome, and were only too well founded. In a Brief of Sixtus IV of 29 January 1482, they were blamed for having, upon the alleged authority of papal Briefs, unjustly imprisoned many people, subjected them to cruel tortures, declared them false believers, and sequestrated the property of the executed. They were at first admonished to act only in conjunction with, the bishops, and finally were threatened with deposition, and would indeed have been deposed had not Their Majesties interceded for them. Fray Tomás Torquemada (b. at Valladolid In 1420, d. at Avila, 16 September, 1498) was the true organizer of the Spanish Inquisition. At the solicitation of their Spanish Majesties (Paramo, II, tit. ii, c, iii, n. 9) Sixtus IV bestowed on Torquemada the office of grand inquisitor, the institution of which indicates a decided advance in the development of the Spanish Inquisition. Innocent VIII approved the act of his predecessor, and under date of 11 February, 1486, and 6 February, 1487, Torquemada was given dignity of grand inquisitor for the kingdoms of Castile, Leon, Aragon, Valencia, etc. The institution speedily ramified from Seville to Cordova, Jaen, Villareal, and Toledo, About 1538 there were nineteen courts, to which three were afterwards added in Spanish America (Mexico, Lima, and Cartagena). Attempts at introducing it into Italy failed, and the efforts to establish it in the Netherlands entailed disastrous consequences for the mother country. In Spain, however, it remained operative into the nineteenth century. Originally called into being against secret Judaism and secret Islam, it served to repel Protestantism in the sixteenth century, but was unable to expel French Rationalism and immorality of the eighteenth. King Joseph Bonaparte abrogated it in 1808, but it was reintroduced by Ferdinand VII in 1814 and approved by Pius VII on certain conditions, among others the abolition of torture. It was definitely abolished by the Revolution of 1820.

(2) Organization

At the head of the Inquisition, known as the Holy Office, stood the grand inquisitor, nominated by the king and confirmed by the pope. By virtue of his papal credentials he enjoyed authority to delegate his powers to other suitable persons, and to receive appeals from all Spanish courts. He was aided by a High Council (Consejo Supremo) consisting of five members -- the so-called Apostolic inquisitors, two secretaries, two relatores, one advocatus fiscalis -- and several consulters and qualificators. The officials of the supreme tribunal were appointed by the grand inquisitor after consultation with the king. The former could also freely appoint, transfer, remove from office, visit, and inspect or call to account all inquisitors and officials of the lower courts. Philip III, on 16 December, 1618, gave the Dominicans the privilege of having one of their order permanently a member of the Consejo Supremo. All power was really concentrated in this supreme tribunal. It decided important or disputed questions, and heard appeals; without its approval no priest, knight, or noble could be imprisoned, and no auto-da-fé held; an annual report was made to it concerning the entire Inquisition, and once a month a financial report. Everyone was subject to it, not excepting priests, bishops, or even the sovereign. The Spanish Inquisition is distinguished from the medieval its monarchical constitution and and a greater consequent centralization, as also by the constant and legally provided-for influence of the crown on all official appointments and the progress of trials.

(3) Procedure

The procedure, on the other hand, was substantially the same as that already described. Here, too, a "term of grace" of thirty to forty days was invariably granted, and was often prolonged. Imprisonment resulted only when unanimity had been arrived at, or the offence had been proved. Examination of the accused could take place only in the presence of two disinterested priests, whose obligation it was to restrain any arbitrary act in their presence the protocol had to be read out twice to the accused. The defence lay always in the hands of a lawyer. The witnesses although unknown to the accused, were sworn, and very severe punishment, even death, awaited false witnesses, (cf. Brief of Leo X of 14 December, 1518). Torture was applied only too frequently and to cruelly, but certainly not more cruelly than under Charles V's system of judicial torture in Germany.

(4) Historical Analysis

The Spanish Inquisition deserves neither the exaggerated praise nor the equally exaggerated vilification often bestowed on it. The number of victims cannot be calculated with even approximate accuracy; the much maligned autos-da-fé were in reality but a religious ceremony (actus fidei); the San Benito has its counterpart in similar garbs elsewhere; the cruelty of St. Peter Arbues, to whom not a single sentence of death can be traced with certainty, belongs to the realms of fable. However, the predominant ecclesiastical nature of the institution can hardly be doubted. The Holy See sanctioned the institution, accorded to the grand inquisitor canonical installation and therewith judicial authority concerning matters of faith, while from the grand inquisitor jurisdiction passed down to the subsidiary tribunals under his control. Joseph de Maistre introduced the thesis that the Spanish Inquisition was mostly a civil tribunal; formerly, however, theologians never questioned its ecclesiastical nature. Only thus, indeed, can one explain how the Popes always admitted appeals from it to the Holy See, called to themselves entire trials and that at any stage of the proceedings, exempted whole classes of believers from its jurisdiction, intervened in the legislation, deposed grand inquisitors, and so on. (See TOMÁS DE TORQUEMADA.)

C. The Holy Office at Rome

The great apostasy of the sixteenth century, the filtration of heresy into Catholic lands, and the progress of heterodox teachings everywhere, prompted Paul III to establish the "Sacra Congregatio Romanae et universalis Inquisitionis seu sancti officii" by the Constitution "Licet ab initio" of 21 July, 1542. This inquisitional tribunal, composed of six cardinals, was to be at once the final court of appeal for trials concerning faith, and the court of first instance for cases reserved to the pope. The succeeding popes -- especially Pius IV (by the Constitutions "Pastoralis Oficii " of 14 October, 1562, "Romanus Pontifex" of 7 April, 1563, "Cum nos per" of 1564, "Cum inter crimina" of 27 August, 1562) and Pius V (by a Decree of 1566, the Constitution "Inter multiplices" of 21 December, 1566, and "Cum felicis record." of 1566) -- made further provision for the procedure and competency of this court. By his Constitution "Immensa aeterni" of 23 January, 1587, Sixtus V became the real organizer, or rather reorganizer of this congregation.

The Holy Office is first among the Roman congregations. Its personnel includes judges, officials, consulters, and qualificators. The real judges are cardinals nominated by the pope, whose original number of six was raised by Pius IV to eight and by Sixtus V to thirteen. Their actual number depends on the reigning pope (Benedict XIV, Const. "Sollicita et Provida", 1733). This congregation differs from the others, inasmuch as it has no cardinal-prefect: the pope always presides in person when momentous decisions are to be announced (coram Sanctissimo). The solemn plenary session on Thursdays is always preceded by a session of the cardinals on Wednesdays, at the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, and a meeting of the consultors on Mondays at the palace of the Holy Office. The highest official is the commissarius sancti oficii, a Dominican of the Lombard province, to whom two coadjutors are given from the same order. He acts as the proper judge throughout the whole case until the plenary session exclusive, thus conducting it up to the verdict. The assessor sancti officii, always one of the secular clergy, presides at the plenary sessions. The promotor fiscalis is at once prosecutor and fiscal representative, while the advocatus reorum undertakes the defence of the accused. The duty of the consultors is to afford the cardinals expert advice. They may come from the secular clergy or the religious orders, but the General of the Dominicans, the magister sacri palatii, and a third member of the same order are always ex-officio consultors (consultores nati). The qualificators are appointed for life, but give their opinions only when called upon. The Holy Office has jurisdiction over all Christians and, according to Pius IV, even over cardinals. In practice, however, the latter are held exempt. For its authority, see the aforesaid Constitution of Sixtus V "Immensa aeterni" (see ROMAN CONGREGATIONS).

JOSEPH BLÖTZER

Canonical Inquisition

Canonical Inquisition is either extra-judicial or judicial: the former might be likened to a coroner's inquest in our civil law; while the latter is similar to an investigation by the grand jury. An extra-judicial inquiry, which is recommended in civil cases, is absolutely necessary in criminal matters, except the case be notorious. A bishop may not even admonish canonically a cleric supposedly delinquent without having first instituted a summary inquest — "summaria facti cognitio"; "informatio pro informatione curiæ" — into the truth of the rumours, denunciations, or accusations against said cleric. This examination is conducted by the bishop personally, or by another ecclesiastic, prudent, trustworthy, and impartial, deputed by the bishop, as secretly and discreetly as possible, without judicial form. This, however, does not preclude the examination of witnesses or experts, for example, to discover irregularities in the records or accounts of the Church. Great caution is to be observed in this preliminary inquiry, lest the reputation of the cleric in question suffer unnecessarily, in which case the bishop might be sued for damages. The acts with the result of the inquisition, if any evidence has been found, should be preserved in the archives; if evidence is wanting or is only slight, the acts should be destroyed.

The outcome of the preliminary investigation will be to leave matters as they are; or to proceed to extra-judicial corrective measures; or to begin a public action, when the evil cannot be otherwise remedied. The bishop's judgment in this matter is paramount; for, even when a crime may he satisfactorily proven, it may be more beneficial to religion and the interests at stake not to prosecute. In matters of correction proper, in which medicinal penalties are employed, judicial action is barred by limitation in five years. The second inquisition is for the information of the auditor or judge, a judicial inquiry, being the beginning of the strictly judicial procedure — "processus informativus"; "inquisitio pro informando judice". If sufficient warrant for a judicial trial exist, the bishop will order his public prosecutor (procurator fiscalis) to draw up and present the charge. Having received the charge, the bishop will appoint an auditor to conduct the informative procedure, in which all the evidence bearing on the case, for the defence as well as for the prosecution, is to be obtained. This inquest consequently comprises offensive and defensive proceedings, for the auditor is to arrive at the truth, and not conduct the inquiry on the supposition that the defendant is guilty.

When the auditor, assisted by the diocesan prosecutor, has procured all the evidence available for the prosecution, he will open the defensive proceedings with the citation (q. v.) of the accused. The accused must appear in person (see CONTUMACY) for examination by the auditor: the fiscal prosecutor may be present. He is not put under oath, and is granted perfect freedom in defending himself, proving his innocence, justifying his conduct, alleging mitigating or extenuating circumstances. All declarations, allegations, exceptions, pleas etc., of the defendant are recorded by the clerk in the acts. They are read to the defendant and corrected, if necessary, or additions made. Finally, the accused, if willing, the auditor, and the secretary should sign the acts. A stay must be granted the accused if he demand it, to present a defence in writing. This inquiry may open up new features, to investigate which stays may be necessary. The accused must be heard in his own defence after this new inquiry. When satisfied that the investigation is complete, the auditor will declare the inquest closed, and make out an abstract of the results of same. This abstract together with all the acts in the case are given to the diocesan prosecutor. Thus ends the judicial inquisition.

Instructio S. C. EE. RR., 1880; Instructio S. C. de Prop. Fide pro Statibus Fœderatis Americœ Septentrionalis, 1884; MEEHAN, Compendium juris canonici (Rochester, 1899), p. 241 sqq.; DROSTE-MESSMER, Canonical Procedure in Disciplinary and Criminal Cases of Clerics (New York, 1886).

ANDREW B. MEEHAN.

Asylums and Care for the Insane

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries hospital care of the sick of all kinds and nursing fell to the lowest ebb in history (see HOSPITALS). Institutions and care for the insane, not only shared in this decadence, but were its worst feature. Because of this, many writers have declared that proper care for the insane and suitable institutions developed only in recent generations. As the Church had much to do with humanitarian efforts of all kinds in the past, it has been made a subject of reproach to her. As a matter of fact the Church, from the earliest times, arranged for the care of the insane, and some of the arrangements anticipated some of the most important advances in modern times. It was after the religious revolt in Germany, whose influence was felt in other countries, that the Church's charitable institutions suffered in many ways, and hospitals and asylums of all kinds deteriorated.

Insanity has been known for as long as our record of human history runs. Pinel, the great French psychiatrist, in his "Nosographie philosophique", II (Paris, 1798), 28, gives the details of the treatment of the insane by the priests of Saturn, the god of medicine in Egypt, in special parts of the temples. According to this, those suffering from melancholia were treated by suggestion, by diversion of mind, and recreations of all kinds, by a careful regimen, by hydropathy, by pilgrimages to the holy places. In Greece we know of the existence of insanity from its occurrence in the various myths. Ulysses counterfeited insanity in order to escape going on the Trojan expedition, and ploughed up the seashore, sowing salt in the furrows. When Nestor, however, placed his infant son in front of the plough, Ulysses moved the boy aside, and Nestor said there was too much method in his madness. Evidently at this time (1200 B.C.) the Greeks were quite familiar with insanity, since they could even detect malingering. The stories of Ajax killing a flock of sheep which by illusion he thought a crowd of his enemies, of Orestes and the Furies, of the Bacchæ, all show familiarity with insanity. As in Egypt, the insane in Greece were cared for in certain portions of the temple of the god of medicine, Æsculapius. In the famous temple at Epidaurus, part shrine and part hospital, there was a well-known spring, and hydro-pathy was the main portion of the treatment, though every form of favourable suggestion was employed. Interesting diversions were planned for patients, and they had the distinct advantage of the journey necessary to reach Epidaurus. Insanity was looked upon as a disease and treated as such. The delirium of acute disease had not yet been differentiated from mania, and melancholy was considered an exaggeration of the depression so often associated with digestive disturbance. The first hospital for insane patients of which there is mention was the Piræus.

Among the Romans we have abundant evidence, in their laws, of care for the insane, but we know little of their medical treatment until about the beginning of the Christian Era. In the Twelve Tables curators are assigned the insane even after their majority. They could transact no business legally, but during lucid intervals could make binding contracts. When parents were insane, children could marry without their consent, but this had to be explicitly stated. The insane could make no wills, nor be witnesses of wills except during lucid intervals, but the lucidity had to be proved. With all these careful legal provisions it seems incredible that medical care should not have been given, but all records of it are wanting. At Rome, a series of writers on insanity made excellent studies in the subject, which could only have been made under circumstances that allowed of such careful study of the insane as we have opportunities for in modern times (Celcus, first century: Cælius Aurelianus, about A.D. 200, mostly a translation of Soranus; Alexander Trallianus, 560). Among the Greek writers, Hippocrates (about 400 B.C.), Asclepiades, who wrote shortly before Christ, as well as Aretæus of Cappadocia, Soranus, and Galen, who wrote in the first century after Christ, show a considerable knowledge of insanity. The great Roman student of the subject, however, was Paulus Ægineta (630), whose writings show such a thorough familiarity with certain phases of insanity as could only have been obtained by actual observation, not of a few patients, but of many.

With the beginning of Christianity more definite information as to asylums for the insane is available. Ducange, in his "Commentary on Byzantine History", states that among the thirty-five charitable institutions in Constantinople at the beginning of the fourth century there was a morotrophium, or home for lunatics. This seems to have been connected with the general hospital of the city. In the next century we have the records of a hospital for the insane at Jerusalem, and it is probable that they existed in other cities throughout the East. Nimesius, a Christian bishop of the fourth century, collected much of what had been written by older authors with regard to the insane, adding some observations of his own, and showing that Christianity was caring for these unfortunates. With the foundation of the monasteries the insane were cared for in connection with these. The Rule of St.Jerome enjoined the duty of making careful provision for the proper treatment of the sick, and Burdett, in his "Hospitals and Asylums of the World", considers that this applied also to those suffering from mental disease. He adds: "It is beyond question that in earlier times, commencing with provision for the sick, including those mentally ill, by the early bishops in their own houses, the Church gradually developed an organization which provided for the insane, first in morotrophia (i.e., places for lunatics) and then in the monasteries. Evidence of the existence of this system is to be met with in France, Italy, Russia, Spain, Germany, and in some of the northern countries of Europe" (op. cit., I). With the foundation of the monasteries of the Benedictines and the Irish monks, hospitals were opened in connection with them (see HOSPITALS). The insane were cared for with other patients in these institutions, and we have any prescriptions from the olden times that are supposed to be cures of lunacy. The cleric author of "Leechdom, Wortcunning and Star Craft of Early England", a collection of herbal prescriptions made about A.D. 900, gives remedies for melancholia, hallucinations, mental vacancy, dementia, and folly.

There are records of many institutions for the insane. Desmaisons declared that "the origin of the first establishment devoted for the insane in Europe dates back only to A.D. 1409; it was founded in Valencia in Spain under Mohammedan influence" (Des Asiles d'Aliénés en Espagene, Paris, 1859). This statement has been often quoted, but is entirely erroneous. We know for instance that there was an asylum exclusively for sufferers from mental diseases at Mets in 1100 and another at Elbing near Danzig in 1320. According to Sir William Dugdale (Monasticon Anglicanum, London, 1655-73), there was an ancient English asylum known as Berking Church Hospital, situated near the Tower of London, for which Robert Denton, chaplain, obtained a licence from King Edward III in 1371. Denton paid forty shillings for this licence to found a hospital in a house of his own in the parish of Berking Church, London, "for the poor priests and for the men and women in the sad city who suddenly fall into a frenzy and lose their memory, who were to reside there until cured; with an oratory to the said hospital to the invocation of the Blessed Virgin Mary". About this same time there is a tradition of the existence of a pazzarella, or place for mad people, in Rome, the conditions of entrance being rather interesting.

Lunatics were cared for, moreover, in special departments of general hospitals. At Bedlam, the London hospital founded in the thirteenth century, this was true. (see BEDLAM). Evidently the same thing was true at many other places. At first glance this might seem open to many objections. Psychopaths in modern times, however, have been trying to arrange to have wards for acute mental cases in connection with general hospitals, for patients thus come under observation sooner; they are more willing to go to such hospitals and their friends are more ready to send them. Serious developments are often thus prevented. In this system of psychopathic wards in general hospitals of the Middle Ages anticipated our modern views. In another phase of the care of the insane there is a similar anticipation. At Gheel in Belgium the harmless insane are cared for by the people of the village and the neighbouring country who provide them with board, and treat them as members of the family. This system has attracted much attention in recent years, and articles on Gheel have appeared in every language. It has its defects, but these are probably not so great as those that are likely to occur in the institutional care of such patients. This method of caring for the insane has been practised at Gheel for over a thousand years. Originally the patients were brought to the shrine of St. Dympna, where, according to tradition, they were often healed. The custom of leaving chronic sufferers near the shrine, under the care of the villagers, gradually arose and has continued ever since. Nearly ever country in Europe had such shrines where the insane were cured; we have records of them in Ireland, Scotland, England, and Germany, and it is evident that this must be considered an important portion of the provision for these patients. In France the shrines of Sts. Menou, or Menulphe, and Dizier were visited from very early times by the insane in search of relief. The shrine of St. Menou at Mailly-sur-Rose was especially well-known and a house was erected for the accommodation of the mentally diseased. At St. Dizier a state of affairs very like that at Gheel developed, and the patients were cared for by the families of the neighbourhood. All of this interesting and valuable provision for the care of the insane, as well as the monastic establishments in which they were received, disappeared with the Reformation.

Spain, though not the first country to organize special institutions for the insane, did more for them than perhaps any other country. The asylum at Valencia already mentioned was founded in 1409 by a monk named Joffre, out of pity for the lunatics whom he founded hooted by the crowds. The movement thus begun spread throughout Spain, and asylums were founded at Saragossa in 1425, at Seville in 1435, at Valladolid in 1436, and at Toledo before the end of the century. This movement was not due, as has been claimed, to Mohammedanism, for Mohammedans in other parts of the world took no special care of the insane. Lecky, in his "History of European Morals", has rejected the assertion of Desmaisons in this matter, which is entirely without proof. Spain continued to be the country in which lunatics were best cared for in Europe down to the beginning of the nineteenth century. Pinel, the great French psychiatrist, who took the manacles from the insane of France, declared Spain to be the country in which lunatics were treated with most wisdom and most humanity. He has described an asylum at Saragossa "open to the diseased in mind of all nations, governments, and religions, with this simple inscription: Urbis et Orbis (Traité Méd.-philos. sur l'aliénation mentale, Paris, 1809). He gives some details of the treatment, which show a very modern recognition of the need to be gentle and careful with the insane rather than harsh and forceful.

The pazzarella at Rome already mentioned was founded during the sixteenth century by Ferrantez Ruiz and the Bruni, father and son, all three Navarrese. This hospital for insane "received crazed persons of whatever nation they be, and care is taken to restore them to their right mind; but if the madness prove incurable, they are kept during life, have food and raiment necessary to the condition they are in. A Venetian lady was moved to such great pity of these poor creatures upon sight of them that on her death she left them heirs to her whole estate." This enabled the management, with the approbation of Pope Pius IV, to open a new house in 1561, in the Via Lata. In France and Italy the custom continued during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries of placing lunatics, particularly those of the better class - though also of the other classes when they had patrons who asked the privilege - in male or female monasteries according to their sex. This practice also prevailed in Russia. In 1641 the Charenton Asylum was founded in one of the suburbs of Paris, near the Park of Vincennes, and was placed under monastic rule. After the foundation of the Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul, the charge of this institution was given to them. During this century the French established a system of colonies by which the insane were transferred to country places for work during intermissions in their condition, and were returned to the central asylum whenever they were restless.

During the eighteenth century there was an awakening of humanitarian purpose with regard to the insane in nearly every country in Europe. St. Peter's Hospital at Bristol, England, was opened in 1696; the Manchester Royal Lunatic Hospital in 1706; Bethel Hospital at Norwich in 1713; Dean Swift's Dublin Hospital in 1745; while the Pennsylvania Hospital of Philadelphia (1751) and the New York Hospital (1771) each contained wards for lunatics. In 1773 the first asylum exclusively for the care of the insane in the United States was opened at Williamsburg, VA. After this, asylums for the insane multiplied, though the system under which the inmates were cared for involved many abuses. Burdett's third chapter is entitled "The Period of Brutal Suppression in Treatment and Cruelty: 1750 to 1850".

In 1792 what has been called the humane period in the treatment of the insane began, when Pinel, against the advice of all those in authority and with the disapprobation of his medical colleagues, removed the chains and manacles and other severer forms of restraint at the great asylum of Bicêtre, near Paris, and gave the inmates all the liberty compatible with reasonable safety for themselves and others. At the same time William Tuke was engaged in establishing the retreat near York, which came into full operation in 1795. In this institution very enlightened principles of treatment were carried into effect. Early in the nineteenth century, Dr. Charles Worth and Mr. Gardner Hill, in the Lincoln Asylum, did away with all forms of mechanical restraint. The non-restraint system was fully developed by Dr. John Conolly in the Middlesex County Asylum at Hanwell. In the mean time, at the second institution solely for the insane in the United States, the Friends' Asylum at Frankfort, Pennsylvania (1817), the principles of gentle, intelligent care for the insane were being thoroughly applied and developed. The treatment of the insane was first systematized by Dr. S.B. Woodward, at Worcester, Massachusetts. Dr. Kirkbride of Philadelphia did much to remove the evils of restraint. Miss Dix must bear an honoured name for the successful philanthropy in doing away with many abuses in England and her native America. In recent years the care of the insane has to a great extent come entirely under the control of the State. This was apparently rendered necessary by the abuses that crept into private institutions for the insane. Even in the State institutions, however, until the last twenty-five years, there was many customs to be deprecated. Mechanical restraints of all kinds were used very commonly in America; within a generation patients were fastened to chairs, or to their beds, or secured by means of chains. The "open door" is, however, now becoming the policy of most institutions. Modes of restraint are very limited and used only with proper safeguard.

Most American institutions are overcrowded, because it seems impossible to increase accommodations in proportion to the increasing numbers of the insane. There are two reasons for this increase. One is an actual increase in the proportion of the insane to the total population because of the strenuous life. Another is that in our busy modern life there is less inclination to keep even the mildly insane at home. Apart from the State institutions, there is a reaction to the old monastic system of care for the insane, and there are many large and well-known insane asylums in America under the charge of religious. The tradition established by Madame Gras at the foundation of the Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul has borne fruit. In America they have large asylums for the insane in Baltimore, New Orleans, Madison, N.J., and New York.

BURDETT, Hospitals and Asylums of the World (London, 1891); TUKE, History of the Insane in the British Isles (London, 1882); CLARK, Memoir of Dr. Conolly with Sketch of the Treatment of the Insane in Europe and America (London, 1869); KIRCHOFF, Grundriss einer Geschichte der deutschen Irrenpflege (Berlin, 1890); bigoted; ESQUIROL, Mémoire historique sur Charenton (Paris, 1835).

JAMES J. WALSH

Insanity

All writers on this subject confess their inability to frame a strictly logical or a completely satisfactory definition. The dividing line between sanity and insanity, like the line that distinguishes a man of average height from a tall man, can be described only in terms of a moral estimate. There is a borderland between the two states which is not easily identified as belonging certainly to either. Hence a definition that aims at rigorous comprehensiveness is liable to include such non-insane conditions as hysteria, febrile delirium, or perverted passions. The definition given by the "Century Dictionary" is probably as satisfactory as any: "A seriously impaired condition of the mental functions, involving the intellect, emotions, and will, or one or more of these faculties, exclusive of temporary states produced by and accompanying intoxications or acute febrile diseases."

Not less difficult is the problem of classification. No classification based on a single principle is entirely satisfactory. Anatomical changes are an inadequate basis because they are absent from many forms of insanity; the causes are so numerous and so frequently combined in a single case that it is impossible to say which is predominant; and the symptoms are so manifold that the accidental cannot always be distinguished from the essential. Indeed, the nervous system and the mental functions are so complex and so inadequately known that any attempt at an accurate classification of their abnormal states must of necessity be a failure. In this article only the most important forms will be enumerated, namely, those which are most prevalent and those which are clearly distinguished from one another.

One of the oldest divisions of mental disorders is into melancholia and mania. In the former the dominant mood is depression; in the latter, exaltation. The former differs from sane melancholy only in degree, and its chief characteristics are mental anguish and impulses to suicide. It includes probably one-half of all the cases of insanity, and is more frequently cured than any other form. In mania the morbidly elated mood may vary from excessive cheerfulness to violent rage. Monomania, which may exhibit characteristics of both melancholia and mania, is a perversion of the intellective rather than the affective faculties. Its chief manifestation is delusions, very frequently delusions of persecution. Monomania corresponds roughly to the later and more precise term paranoia. In this form the delusions are systematized and persistent, while the general intellectual processes may remain substantially unimpaired. When the attacks of melancholia or mania occur at regular intervals they are frequently named periodical insanity. The term partial insanity comprises chiefly those varieties known as impulsive, emotional, and moral. These are characterized by a loss of self-control, on account of which the patient performs acts that are at variance with his prevailing disposition, ideas, and desires—for example, murder and suicide. Somewhat akin to these forms are those associated with such general diseases of the nervous system as epilepsy, hysteria, and neurasthenia. When insanity takes the form of a general enfeeblement of the mental faculties as a consequence of disease, it is called dementia. It is usually permanent. Its principal varieties are senile, paralytic, and syphilitic. Paresis is one kind of paralytic dementia. All the above-mentioned forms of insanity are acquired, in the sense that they occur in normally developed brains. Congenital insanity, or feeble-mindedness, is divided chiefly, according to its degrees, into imbecility, idiocy, and cretinism.

That insanity is on the increase, seems to be the general verdict of authorities, although the absence of reliable and comprehensive statistics makes any satisfactory estimate impossible. Whatever be its extent, the increase is undoubtedly due in some measure to our more complex civilization, especially as seen in city life. In general, the causes of insanity may be reduced to two: predisposing causes and exciting causes. The most important of the former are insane, neurotic, epileptic, drunken, or consumptive ancestors; great stress and strain, and a neuropathic constitution. Among the exciting causes must be mentioned shock, intense emotion, worry, intellectual overwork, diseases of the nervous system, exhausting diseases, alcoholic and sexual excesses, paralysis, sunstroke, and accidental injuries. It has been estimated that the physical causes, whether predisposing or exciting, stand to the moral causes, such as affliction and losses, in the ratio of four to one. Of 2476 cases due to physical causes which were admitted to the asylums of New York during the twelve months preceding 30 September 1900, alcoholic and sexual excesses and diseases had brought on 684. The majority of cases of insanity, however, are traceable to more than one cause.

Inasmuch as insanity almost always involves some perversion of the will, either direct or indirect, it raises interesting and important questions concerning moral responsibility. Every impairment of mental function must impede the freedom of the will, either by restricting its scope, or by diminishing or destroying it outright. Ignorance, error, blinding passion, and paralysing fear all render a person morally irresponsible for those actions which take place under their influence. This is true even of the sane; obviously it happens much more frequently among the insane, owing to delirium, delusions, loss of memory, and many other mental disorders. Is it, however, only in this general way, that is, through defective action of the intellect, that freedom and responsibility are lessened or destroyed in persons who are of unsound mind? May not the disease act directly upon the will, compelling the patient to do things that his intellect assures him are wrong? The English courts and almost all the courts of the United States answer this question in the negative. Their practice is to regard a defendant in a criminal case as responsible and punishable if at the time of the crime he knew the difference between right and wrong, or at least knew that his act was contrary to the civil or moral law. For example, a man who, labouring under the insane delusion that another has injured his reputation, kills the latter is presumed to be morally accountable if he realized that the killing was immoral or illegal. In a word, the rule of the courts is that knowledge of wrong implies freedom to avoid it. Medical authorities on insanity are practically unanimous in rejecting this judicial test. Experience, they maintain, shows that many insane persons who can think and reason correctly on every topic except that which forms the subject of their delusion are unable to determine their wills and direct their actions accordingly. In an unsound mind normal intellection is not always accompanied by normal volition. We should expect to find this true from the very nature of the case. For if a diseased brain can interfere with normal thinking it can undoubtedly interfere likewise with normal willing. And there is in the nature of the situation no reason why this deranged condition of the will may not manifest itself in connexion with normal, as well as with abnormal, intellectual action. To assume that the victim of an insane delusion has perfect control over those actions that are apparently not affected by the delusion—actions that he clearly perceives to be wrong, for example—is to assume that the operations of intellect and will are as perfectly harmonized in an unsound as in a sound mind. As a matter of fact, the presumption would seem to lead the other way, that is, to the conclusion that the action of the will as well as that of the intellect will be abnormal.

Insanity experts do not, indeed, contend that all the consciously immoral acts of a partially insane person are unfree. They merely insist that these acts cannot be presumed to be free on the simple ground that the patient is aware of their immorality. In their view, the question of freedom and responsibility can be answered only through an examination of all the circumstances of the particular case. The laws of one American state, and of some foreign countries, are in substantial harmony with this doctrine. According to the laws of New York, "No act done by a person in a state of insanity can be punished as an offence." The French law is slightly more specific: "There can be no crime nor offence if the accused was in a state of madness at the time of the act." More specific still is the law of Germany, yet it does not introduce knowledge or advertence as a criterion of responsibility: "An act is not punishable when the person at the time of doing it was in a state of unconsciousness or disease of mind by which a free determination of the will was excluded".In passing it may be observed that the laws of all countries assume that freedom of the will and moral responsibility are realities, and declare that punishment is to be inflicted only when the will has acted freely.

The discussion in the last two paragraphs refers especially to delusive insanity, or to what is sometimes called partial intellectual insanity. There is another variety which is even more important as regards the question of moral responsibility. Inasmuch as it involves the will and the emotions rather than the intellect, it is called affective insanity, and it is subdivided into impulsive and moral. According to medical authorities, impulsive insanity may occur without delusions or any other apparent derangement of the intelligence. Those suffering from it are sometimes driven irresistibly to commit actions which they know to be wrong, actions which are contrary to their character, dispositions, and desires. Many suicides and homicides have in consequence of such uncontrollable impulses been committed by persons who were apparently sane in all other respects. Obviously, they were not morally responsible for these crimes. Although this theory runs counter not only to English and American legal procedure, but also to the opinions of the average man, it seems to be established by the history of numerous carefully observed cases, and to provide an explanation for many suicides and murders that are otherwise inexplicable. Moreover, it is inherently probable. Since insanity is a disease of the brain which may affect any of the mental faculties, there seems to be no good reason to deny that it can affect the emotions and the will almost exclusively, leaving the intellectual processes apparently unimpaired. The theory does, indeed, seem to disagree with the doctrine of our textbooks of moral philosophy and theology, which maintains that freedom of the will can be diminished or destroyed only through defective or confused action of the intellect. There is, however, no real opposition except on the assumption that the will and intellect in a diseased mind co-operate and harmonize as perfectly as in a mind that is sane. In the latter the will has power to determine itself in accordance with the ideas and motives presented by the intellect; in the former this power may sometimes be lacking. The inference from intellectual advertence to volitional freedom may, as noted above, be valid in the one case, and quite invalid in the other. This consideration is manifestly of great importance in determining whether a suicide is worthy of Christian burial. If he is afflicted with ideational or impulsive insanity, the mere fact that his intelligence seemed to be normal, and all his acts deliberate, at the time of his self-destruction, is not always conclusive proof of volitional freedom and moral guilt. In what is called moral insanity there is sometimes the same lack of self-control as in impulsive insanity, together with a perversion of the feelings, passions, and moral notions. It constitutes, therefore, an additional obstacle to freedom in so far as it interferes with normal intellectual action through abnormally strong passions and false ideas of right and wrong. Obviously, however, the mere fact that the affections, passions, or moral notions are perverted, for example, with regard to sexual matters, is not always evidence of true insanity, still less of that variety of insanity that directly hampers freedom of the will.

Adults who have always been insane can receive baptism, since, as in the case of infants, the Church's intention supplies what is lacking. If they have ever been sane, they can be baptized when in danger of death or or if incurable, provided they had when sane a desire for the sacrament. The insane cannot be sponsors at baptism. They may receive confirmation. Communion should not be given to those who have always been insane. Those who, before becoming insane, were pious and religious, should be given Communion when in danger of death. When there are lucid intervals, Communion may then be administered. The same applies to extreme unction. In Holy orders, insanity is an irregularity under the head of defect. A candidate temporarily insane through some transient and accidental cause may, after recovery, be ordained. One deranged after ordination may exercise his orders, if he regains his sanity. The perpetually insane cannot marry. But "if the patient has lucid intervals, the marriage contracted during such an interval is valid, though it is not safe for him to marry on account of his inability to rear children." (St. Thomas In IV Sent., dist. xxxiv, q. i, art. 4.)

Conolly, Construction and Government of Lunatic Asylums (London, 1847); Bucknill and Tuke, Psychological Medicine (London, 1879); Hammond, Treatise on Insanity (New York, 1893); Maudsley, Responsibility in Mental Disease (New York, 1899); Church and Peterson, Nervous and Metal Diseases (Philadelphia, 1901); Walsh, The Popes and Science (New York, 1908); Esquirol, Des maladies mentales (Paris, 1838); Gaupp, Die Entwickelung der Psychiatrie im 19. Jahrhundert(Berlin, 1900); Brockhaus in Konversationslexikon, s. v. Irrenanstalten.

JOHN A. RYAN

Early Christian Inscriptions

Inscriptions of Christian origin form, as non-literary remains, a valuable source of information on the development of Christian thought and life in the early Church. They may be divided into three main classes: sepulchral inscriptions, epigraphic records, and inscriptions concerning private life. The material on which they were written was the same as that used for heathen inscriptions. For the first two and most important classes the substance commonly employed was stone of different kinds, native or preferably imported. The use of metal was not so common. When the inscription is properly cut into the stone, it is called a titulus or marble; if merely scratched on the stone, the Italian word graffito is used; a painted inscription is called dipinto, and a mosaic inscription — such as are found largely in North Africa, Spain, and the East — bears the name of opus musivum. It was a common practice in Greek and Latin lands to make use of slabs already inscribed, i. e. to take the reverse of a slab containing a heathen inscription for the inscribing of a Christian one; such a slab is called an opisthograph. The form of the Christian inscriptions does not differ from that of the contemporary pagan inscriptions, except when sepulchral in character, and then only in the case of the tituli of the catacombs. The most common form in the East was the upright "stele" (Gk. stele, a block or slab of stone), frequently ornamented with a fillet or a projecting curved moulding; in the West a slab for the closing of the grave was often used. Thus the greater number of the graves (loculi) in the catacombs were closed with thin, rectangular slabs of terra-cotta or marble; the graves called arcosolia were covered with heavy, fiat slabs, while on the sarcophagi a panel (tabula) or a disk (discus) was frequently reserved on the front wall for an inscription.

The majority of the early Christian inscriptions, viewed from a technical and palæographical standpoint, give evidence of artistic decay: this remark applies especially to the tituli of the catacombs, which are, as a rule, less finely executed than the heathen work of the same time. A striking exception is formed by the Damasine letters introduced in the fourth century by Furius Dionysius Filocalus, the calligraphist of Pope Damasus I (q. v.). The other forms of letters did not vary essentially from those employed by the ancients. The most important was the classical capital writing, customary from the time of Augustus; from the fourth century on it was gradually replaced by the uncial writing, the cursive characters being more or less confined to the graffito inscriptions. As to the language, Latin inscriptions are the most numerous, in the East Greek was commonly employed, interesting dialects being occasionally found (e.g. in the recently deciphered Christian inscriptions from Nubia in Southern Egypt). Special mention should also be made of the Coptic inscriptions. The text is very often shortened by means of signs and abbreviations. Specifically Christian abbreviations were found side by side with the usual pagan contractions at an early date. One of the most common of the latter, "D. M." (i. e. Diis Manibus, to the protecting Deities of the Lower World), was stripped of its pagan meaning, and adopted in a rather mechanical way among the formulæ of the early Christians. In many cases the dates of Christian inscriptions must be judged from circumstances; when the date is given, it is the consular year. The method of chronological computation varied in different countries. Our present Dionysian chronology (see CHRONOLOGY; DIONYSIUS EXIGUUS) does not appear in the early Christian inscriptions.

SEPULCHRAL INSCRIPTIONS

The earliest of these epitaphs are characterized by their brevity, only the name of the dead being given. Later a short acclamation was added (e. g. "in God", "in Peace"); from the end of the second century the formulæ were enlarged by the addition of family names and the date of burial. In the third and fourth centuries the text of the epitaphs was made more complete by the statement of the age of the deceased, the date (reckoned according to the consuls in office), and laudatory epithets. For these particulars each of the lands comprising the Roman empire had its own distinct expressions, contractions, and acclamations. Large use was made of symbolism (q. v.). Thus the open cross is found in the epitaphs of the catacombs as early as the second century, and from the third to the sixth century the monogrammatic cross in its various forms appears as a regular part of the epitaphs. The cryptic emblems of primitive Christianity are also used in the epitaphs, e.g. the fish (Christ), the anchor (hope), the palm (victory) and the representation of the soul in the other world as a female figure (orante) with arms extended in prayer. Beginning with the fourth century, after the victory of the Church over paganism, the language of the epitaphs was more frank and open. Emphasis was laid upon a life according to the dictates of Christian faith, and prayers for the dead were added to the inscription. The prayers inscribed thus early on the sepulchral slabs reproduce in large measure the primitive liturgy of the funeral service. They implore for the dead eternal peace (see PAX) and a place of refreshment (refrigerium), invite to the heavenly love-feast (Agape), and wish the departed the speedy enjoyment of the light of Paradise, and the fellowship of God and the saints.

A Perfect example of this kind of epitaph is that of the Egyptian monk Schenute; it is taken verbally from e ancient Greek liturgy. It begins with the doxology, "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen", and continues: "May the God of the spirit and of all flesh, Who has overcome death and trodden Hades under foot, and has graciously bestowed life on the world, permit this soul of Father Schenute to attain to rest in the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the place of light and of refreshment, where affliction, pain, and grief are no more. O gracious God, the lover of men, forgive him all the errors which he has committed by word, act, or thought. There is indeed no earthly pilgrim who has not sinned, for Thou alone, O God, art free from every sin." The epitaph repeats the doxology at the close, and adds the petition of the scribe: "O Saviour, give peace also to the scribe." When the secure position of the Church assured greater freedom of expression, the non-religious part of the sepulchral inscriptions was also enlarged. In Western Europe and in the East it was not unusual to note, both in the catacombs and in the cemeteries above ground, the purchase or gift of the grave and its dimensions. Commonly admitted also into the early Christian inscriptions are the pagan minatory formulæ against desecration of the grave or its illegal use as a place of further burial.

HISTORICAL AND THEOLOGICAL INSCRIPTIONS

To many of the early Christian sepulchral inscriptions we are indebted for much information concerning the original development of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, besides which they are of great value as a confirmation of Catholic truths. Thus, for example, from the earliest times we meet in them all the hierarchical grades from the door-keeper (ostiarius) and lector up to the pope (see ORDERS, HOLY). A number of epitaphs of the early popes (Pontianus, Anterus, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Eutychianus. Caius) were found in the so-called "Papal Crypt" in the Catacomb of St. Callistus on the Via Appia, rediscovered by De Rossi and well known to every pilgrim to Rome (see CEMETERY, sub-title Early Roman Christian Cemeteries). Numbers of early epitaphs of bishops have been found from Germany to Nubia. Priests are frequently mentioned, and reference is often made to deacons, subdeacons, exorcists, lectors, acolytes, fossores or grave-diggers, alumni or adopted children. The Greek inscriptions of Western Europe and the East yield especially interesting material; in them is found, in addition to other information, mention of archdeacons, archpriests, deaconesses, and monks. Besides catechumens and neophytes, reference is also made to virgins consecrated to God, nuns, abbesses, holy widows, one of the last-named being the mother of Pope St. Damasus I (q. v.), the celebrated restorer of the catacombs. Epitaphs of martyrs and tituli mentioning the martyrs are not found as frequently as one would expect, especially in the Roman catacombs. This, however, is easily explained by recalling the circumstances of burial in the periods of persecution, when Christians must have been contented to save and to give even secret burial to the remains of their martyrs. Many a nameless grave among the five million estimated to exist in the Roman catacombs held the remains of early Christians who witnessed to the Faith with their blood. Another valuable repertory of Catholic theology is found in the dogmatic inscriptions in which all important dogmas of the Church meet (incidentally) with monumental confirmation. The monotheism of the worshippers of the Word — or Cultores Verbi, as the early Christians loved to style themselves — and their belief in Christ are well expressed even in the early inscriptions. Very ancient inscriptions emphasize, and with detail the most profound of Catholic dogmas, the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. In this connexion we may mention the epitaph of Abercius (q. v.), Bishop of Hieropolis in Phrygia (second century), and the somewhat later epitaph of Pectorius (q. v.) at Autun in Gaul. The inscription of Abercius speaks of the fish (Christ) caught by a holy virgin, which serves as food under the species of bread and wine; it speaks, further, of Rome, where Abercius visited the chosen people, the Church par excellence. This important inscription aroused at first no little controversy among scholars, and some non-Catholic archæologists sought to find in it a tendency to pagan syncretism. Now, however, its purely Christian character is almost universally acknowledged. The original was presented by Sultan Abdul Hamid to Leo XIII, and is preserved in the Apostolic Museum at the Lateran. Early Christian inscriptions confirm the Catholic doctrine of the Resurrection, the sacraments, the veneration of the Blessed Virgin, and the primacy of the Apostolic See. It would be difficult to over-estimate the importance of these evidences, for they are always entirely incidental elements of the sepulchral inscriptions, all of which were pre-eminently eschatological in their purpose.

POETICAL AND OFFICIAL INSCRIPTIONS

While the copious material obtained from the early Christian epitaphs, especially the inscriptions of the Roman (Latin) and the Greek-Oriental groups, is equivalent to a book in stone on the faith and life of our Christian forefathers, the purely literary side of these monuments is not insignificant. Many inscriptions have the character of public documents; others are in verse, either taken from well-known poets, or at times the work of the person erecting the memorial. Fragments of classical poetry, especially quotations from Virgil, are occasionally found. The most famous composer of poetical epitaphs in Christian antiquity was Pope Damasus I (366-384), mentioned above. He repaired the neglected tombs of the martyrs and the graves of distinguished persons who had lived before the Constantinian epoch, and adorned these burial places with metrical epitaphs in a peculiarly beautiful lettering. Nearly all the larger cemeteries of Rome owe to this pope large stone tablets of this character, several of which have been preserved in their original form or in fragments. Besides verses on his mother Laurentia and his sister Irene, he wrote an autobiographical poem in which the Saviour is addressed: "Thou Who stillest the waves of the deep, Whose power giveth life to the seed slumbering in the earth, who didst awaken Lazarus from the dead and give back the brother on the third day to the sister Martha; Thou wilt, so I believe, awake Damasus from death."Eulogies in honour of the Roman martyrs form the most important division of the Damasine inscriptions. They are written in hexameters, a few in pentameters. The best known celebrate the temporary burial of the two chief Apostles in the Platonia under the basilica of St. Sebastian on the Via Appia, the martyrs Protus and Hyacinth in the Via Salaria Antiqua, Pope Marcellus in the Via Salaria Nova, St. Agnes in the Via Nomentana, also Saints Laurence, Hippolytus, Gorgonius, Peter and Marcellinus, Eusebius, Tarsicius, Cornelius, Eutychius, Nereus and Achilleus, Felix and Adauctus. Damasus also placed a metrical inscription in the baptistery of the Vatican, and set up others in connexion with various restorations, e. g. an inscription on a stairway of the cemetery of St. Hermes. Altogether there have been preserved as the work of Damasus more than one hundred epigrammata, some of them originals and others written copies. More than one half are probably correctly ascribed to him, even though it is necessary to remember that after his death Damasine inscriptions continued to be set up, i. e. inscriptions in the beautiful lettering invented by Damasus or rather by his calligrapher Furius Dionysius Filocalus. Some of the inscriptions, which imitate the lettering of Filocalus, make special and laudatory mention of the pope who had done so much for the catacombs. Among these are the inscriptions of Pope Vigilius (537-55), a restorer animated by the spirit of Damasus. Some of his inscriptions are preserved in the Lateran Museum. The inscriptions just mentioned possess as a rule a public and official character. Other inscriptions served as official records of the erection of Christian edifices (churches, baptisteries, etc.). Ancient Roman examples of this kind are the inscribed tablet dedicated by Boniface I at the beginning of the fifth century to St. Felicitas, to whom the pope ascribed the settlement of the schism of Eulalius, and the inscription (still visible) of Pope Pope Sixtus III in the Lateran baptistery, etc. The Roman custom was soon copied in all parts of the empire. At Thebessa in Northern Africa there were found fragments of a metrical inscription once set up over a door, and in almost exact verbal agreement with the text of an inscription in a Roman church. Both the basilica of Nola and the church at Primuliacum in Gaul bore the same distich:

Pax tibi sit quicunque Dei penetralia Christi,
pectore pacifico candidus ingrederis.

(Peace be to thee whoever enterest with pure and gentle heart into the sanctuary of Christ God.) In such inscriptions the church building is generally referred to as domus Dei, domus orationis (the house of God, the house of prayer). The present writer found an inscription with the customary Greek term Kyriou (House of the Lord) in the basilica of the Holy Baths, one of the basilicas of the ancient Egyptian town of Menas. In Northern Africa, especially, passages from the psalms frequently occur in Christian inscriptions. The preference in the East was for inscriptions executed in mosaic; such inscriptions were also frequent in Rome, where, it is well known, the art of mosaic reached very high perfection in Christian edifices. An excellent and well-known example is the still extant original inscription of the fifth century on the wall of the interior of the Roman basilica of Santa Sabina on the Aventine over the entrance to the nave. This monumental record in mosaic contains seven lines in hexameters. On each side of the inscription is a mosaic figure: one is the Ecclesia ex gentibus (Church of the Gentiles), the other the Ecclesia ex circumcisione (Church of the Circumcision). The text refers to the pontificate of Celestine I, during which period an Illyrian priest named Peter founded the church.

Other parts of the early Christian churches were also occasionally decorated with inscriptions, e. g. the titles of roofs and walls. It was also customary to decorate with inscriptions the lengthy cycles of frescoes depicted on the walls of churches. Fine examples of such inscriptions have reached us in the "Dittochæon" of Prudentius, in the Ambrosian tituli, and in the writings of Paulinus of Nola.

It should be added that many dedicatory inscriptions belong to the eighth and ninth centuries, especially in Rome, where in the eighth century numerous bodies of saints were transferred from the catacombs to the churches of the city (see CATACOMBS).

GRAFFITI

Although apparently of little value and devoid of all monumental character, the graffiti (i. e. writings scratched on walls or other surfaces) are of great importance historically and otherwise. Many such are preserved in the catacombs and on various early Christian monuments. Of special importance in this respect are the ruins of the fine edifices of the town of Menas in the Egyptian Mareotis (cf. "Proceedings of Society for Bibl. Archæology", 1907, pp. 25, 51, 112). The graffiti help in turn to illustrate the literary sources of the life of the early Christians. (See also OSTRAKA.)

DE ROSSI, Inscriptiones christian urbis Rom septimo s culo antiquiores (Rome, 1861); LE BLANT, Manuel d'épigraphie chrétienne (Paris, 1869); RITTER, De compositione titulorum christianorum sepulcralium (Berlin, 1877); M'CAUL, Christian Epitaphs of the First Six Centuries (London, 1869); NORTHCOTE AND BROWNLOW, Epitaphs of the Catacombs (London, 1879); KAUFMANN, Handbuch der christlichen Archäologie, pt. III, Epigraphische Denkmäler (Paderborn, 1905); SYSTUS, Notiones archæologiæ christian, vol. III, pt. I, Epigraphia (Rome, 1909).

C. M. KAUFMANN

Inspiration of the Bible

The subject will be treated in this article under the four heads:

I. Belief in Inspired books;
II. Nature of Inspiration;
III. Extent of Inspiration;
IV. Protestant Views on the Inspiration of the Bible.

I. BELIEF IN INSPIRED BOOKS

A. Among the Jews

The belief in the sacred character of certain books is as old as the Hebrew literature. Moses and the prophets had committed to writing a part of the message they were to deliver to Israel from God. Now the naby (prophet), whether he spoke or wrote, was considered by the Hebrews thw authorized interpreter of the thoughts and wishes of Yahweh. He was called, likewise, "the man of God," "the man of the Spirit" (Osee, ix, 7). It was around the Temple and the Book that the religious and national restoratiion of the Jewish people was effected after their exile (see II Mach., ii, 13, 14, and the prologue of Ecclesiasticus in the Septuagint). Philo (from 20 B.C. to A.D. 40) speaks of the "sacred books", "sacred word", and of "most holy scripture" (De vita Moysis, iii, no. 23). The testimony of Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-95) is still more characteristic; it is in his writings that the word inspiration (epipnoia) is met for the first time. He speaks of twenty-two books which the Jews with good reason consider Divine, and for which, in case of need, they are ready to die (Contra Apion., I, 8). The belief of the Jews is the inspiration of the Scriptures did not diminsh from the time in which they were dispersed throughout the world, without temple, without altar, without priests; on the contrary this faith increased so much that it took the place of everything else.

B. Among the Christians

The gospel contains no express declaration about the origin and value of the Scriptures, but in it we see that Jesus Christ used them in conformity with the general belief, i.e. as the Word of God. The most decisive texts in this respect are found in the Fourth Gospel, v, 39; x, 35. The words scripture, Word of God, Spirit of God, God, in the sayings and writings of the Apostles are used indifferently (Rom., iv, 3; ix, 17). St. Paul alone appeals expressly more than eighty times to those Divine oracles of which Israel was made the guardian (cf. Rom., iii, 2). This persuasion of the early Christians was not merely the effect of a Jewish tradition blindly accepted and never understood. St. Peter and St. Paul give the reason why it was accepted: it is that all Scripture is inspired of God (theopneustos) (II Tim., ii, 16; cf. II Pet., i, 20 21). It would be superfluous to spend any time in proving that Tradition has faithfully kept the Apostolic belief in the inspiratiion of Scripture. Moreover, this demonstaration forms the subject-matter of a great number of works (see especially Chr. pesch, "De inspiratione Sacrae Scripturae", 1906, p. 40-379). It is enough for us to add that on several occasions the Church has defined the inspiration of the canonical books as an article of faith (see Denzinger, Enchiridion, 10th ed., n. 1787, 1809). Every Christian sect still deserving that name believes in the inspiration of the Scriptures, although several have more or less altered the idea of inspiration.

C. Value of this Belief

History alone allows us to establish the fact that Jews and Christians have always believed in the inspiration of the Bible. But what is this belief worth? Proofs of the rational as well as of the dogmatic order unite in justifying it. Those who first recognized in the Bible a superhuman work had as foundation of thier opinion the testimony of the Prophets, of Christ, and of the Apostles, whose Divine mission was sufficiently established by immediate experience or by history. To this purely rational argument can be added the authentic teaching of the Church. A Catholic may claim this additional certitude without falling into a vicious circle, because the infallibility of the Church in its teaching is proved independently of the inspiration of Scripture; the historical value, belonging to Scripture in common with every other authentic and truthful writing, is enough to prove this.

II. NATURE OF INSPIRATION

A. Method to be followed

(1) To determine the nature of Biblical inspiration the theologian has at his disposal a three fold source of information: the data of tradition, the concept of inspiration, and the concrete state of the inspired text. If he wishes to obtain acceptable results he will take into account all of these elements of solution. Pure speculation might easily end in a theory incompatible with the texts. On the other hand, the literary or historical analysis of these same texts, if left to its own resources, ignores their Divine origin. Finally, if the data of tradition attest the fact of inspiration, they do not furnish us with a complete analysis of its nature. Hence, theology, philosophy, and exegesis have each a word to say on this subject. Positive theology furnishes a starting point in its traditional formulae: viz., God is the author of Scripture, the inspired writer is the organ of the Holy Ghost, Scripture is the Word of God. Speculative theology takes these formula, analyses their contents and from them draws its conclusions. In this way St. Thomas, starting from the traditional concept which makes the sacred writer an organ of the Holy Ghost, explains the subordination of his faculties to the action of the Inspirer by the philosophical theory of the instrumental cause (Quodl., VII, Q. vi, a. 14, ad 5um). However, to avoid all risk of going astray, speculation must pay constant attention to the indications furnished by exegesis.

(2) The Catholic who wishes to make a correct analysis of Biblical inspiration maust have before his eyes the following ecclesiastical documents: (a) "These books are held by the Church as sacred and canonical, not as having been composed by merely human labour and afterwards approved by her authority, nor merely because they contain revelation without error, but because, written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their author, and have been transmitted to the Church as such." (Concil. Vatic., Sess. III, const. dogm, de Fide, cap. ii, in Denz., 1787). (b) "The Holy Ghost Himself, by His supernatural power, stirred up and impelled the Biblical writers to write, and assisted them while writing in such a manner that they conceived in their minds exactly, and determined to commit to writing faithfully, and render in exact language, with infallible truth, all that God commanded and nothing else; without that, God would not be the author of Scripture in its entirety" (Encycl. Provid. Deus, in Dena., 1952).

B. Catholic View

Inspiration can be considered in God, who produces it; in man, who is its object; and in the text, which is its term.

(1) In God inspiration is one of those actions which are ad extra as theologians say; and thus it is common to the three Divine Persons. However, it is attributed by appropriation to the Holy Ghost. it is not one of those graces which have for their immediate and essential object the sanctification of the man who received them, but one of those called antonomastically charismata, or gratis datae, because they are given primarily for the good of thers. Besides, inspiration has this in common with every actual grace, that it si a transitory participation of the Divine power; the inspired wirter finding himself invested with it only at the very moment of writing or when thinking about writing.

(2) Considered in the man on whom is bestowed this favour, inspiration affects the will, the intelligence and all the executive faculties of the writer. (a) Without an impulsion given to the will of the writer, it cannot be conceived how God could still remain the principal cause of Scripture, for, in that case, the man would have taken the initiative. Besides that the text of St. Peter is peremptory: "For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost" (II Pet., i, 21). The context shows that there is question of all Scripture, which is a prophecy in the broad sense of the the word (pasa propheteia graphes). According to the Encyclical Prov. Deus, "God stirred up and impelled the sacred writers to determine to write all that God meant them to write" (Denz., 1952). Theologians discuss the question whether, in order to impart this motion, God moves the will of the writer directly or decides it by proposing maotvies of an intellectual order. At any rate, everybody admits that the Holy Ghost can arouse or simply utilize external influences capable of acting on the will of the sacred writer. According to an ancient tradition, St. Mark and St. John wrote their Gospels at the instance of the faithful.

What becomes of human liberty under the influence of Divine inspiration? In principle, it is agreed that the Inspirer can take away from man the power of refusal. In point of fact, it is commonly admitted that the Inspirer, Who does not lack means of obtaining our consent, has respected the freedom of His instruments. An inspiration which is not accompanied by a revelation, which is adapted to the normal play of the faculties of the human soul, which can determine the will of the inspired writer by motives of a human order, does not necessarily suppose that he who is its object is himself conscious of it. If the prophet and the author of the Apcoalypse know and say that their pen is guided by the Spirit of God, other Biblical authors seem rather to have been led by "some mysterious influence whose origin was either unknown or not clearly discerned by them." (St. Aug., De Gen. ad litt., II, xvii, 37; St. Thomas II-II, Q. clxxi, a. 5; Q. cixxiii, a.4). However, most theologians admit that ordinarily the writer was conscious of his ow inspiration. From waht we have just said it follows that inspiration does not necessarily imply exstasy, as Philo and, later, the Montanists thought. It is true that some of the orthodox apologists of the second century (Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, St. Justin) have, in the description which they give of Biblical inspiration, been somehat influenced by the ideas of divination then current amongst the pagans. They are too prone to represent the Biblical writer as a purely passive intermediary, something after the style of the Pythia. Nevertheless, they did not make him out to be an energumen for all that. The Divine intervention, if one is conscious of it, can certainly fill the human soul with a certain awe; but it does not throw it into a state of delirum.

(b) To induce a person to write is not to take on oneself the responsibility of that writing, more especially it is not to become the author of that writing. If God can claim the Scripture as His own work, it is because He has brought even the intellect of the inspired writer under His command. However, we must not represent the Inspirer as putting a ready amde book in the mind of the inspired person. Nor has He necessarily to reveal the contens of the work to be produced. No matter where the knowledge of the writer on this point comes from, whether it be acquired naturally or due to Divine revelation, inspiration has not essentially for its object to teach somethin new to the sacred writer, but to render him capable of writing with Divine authority. Thus the author of the Acts of the Apostles narrates events in which he himself took part, or which were related to him. It is highly probable that most of the sayings of the Book of Proverbs were familiar to the sages of the East, before being set down in an inspired writing. God, inasmuch as he is the principal cause, when he inspires a writer, subordinates all that writer's cognitive faculties so as to make him accomplish the different actions which would be naturally gone through by a man who, first of all, has the design of composing a book, then gets together his materials, subjects them to a critical examination, arranges them, makes them enter into his plan, and finally brands them with the mark of his personality -- i.e. his own pecualiar style. The grace of inspiration does not exempt the writer from personal effort, nor does it insure the perfection of his work from an artistic point of view. The author of the the Second Book of Machabeees and St. Luke tell the reader of the pains they took to document their work (II mach., ii, 24-33; Luke, i, 1-4). The imperfections of the work are to be attributed to the instrument. God can, of course, prepare this instrument beforehand, but, a the time of using it, He does not ordinarily make any change in its conditions. When the Creator applies His power to the faculties of a creature outside of the ordinary way, he does so in a manner in keeping with the natural activity of these faculties. Now, in all languages recourse is had to the comparison of light to explain the nature of the human intelligence. That is why St. Thomas (II-II, Q. clxxi, a. 2; Q. clxxiv, a. 2, ad 3um) gives the name of light or illumination to the intellectual motion communicated by God to the sacred wirter. After him, then, we may say that this motion is a pecualir supernatural participation of the Divine light, in virtue of which the writer conceives exactly the work that the Holy Ghost wants him to write. Thanks to this help given to his intellect, the inspired writer judges, with a certitude of Divene order, not only of the opportuneness of the book to be written, but also of the truth of the details and of the whole. However, all theologians do not analyse exactly in the same manner the influence of this light of inspiration.

(c) The influence of the Holy Ghost had to extend also to all the executive faculties of the sacred writer -- to his memory, his imagination, and even to the hand with which he formed the letters. Whether this influence proceed immediatley from the action of the Inspirer or be a simple assistance, and, again, whether this assistance be positive or merely negative, in any case everyone admits that its object is to remove all error from the inspired text. Those who hold that even the words are inspired believe that it also forms an integral part of the grace of inspiration itself. However that may be, there is no denying that the inspiration extends, in one way or aother, and as far as needful, to all those who have really cooperated in the composition of the sacred test, especially to the secretaries, if the inspired person had any. Seen in this light, the hagiographer no longer appears a passive and inert instrument, abased as it were, by an exterior impulsion; on the contrary, his faculties are elevated to the service of a superior power, whihc, although distinct, is none the less intimately present and interior. Without losing anything of his personal life, or of his liberty, or even of his spontaneity (since it may happen that he is not conscious of the power which leads him on), man becomes thus the interpreter of God. Such, then is the most comprehensive notion of Divine inspiration. St. Thomas (II-II, Q., cixxi) reduces it to the grace of prophecy, in the broad sense of the word.

(3) Considered in its term, inspiration is nothing else but the biblical text itself. This text was destined by God, Who inspired it, for the universal Church, in order that it might be authentically recognized as His written word. This destination is essential. Without it a book, even if it had been inspired by God, could not become canonical; it would have no more value than a private revelation. That is why any writing dated from a later period than the Apostolical age is condemned ipso facto to be excluded from the canon. The reason of this is that the deposit of the public revelation was complete in the time of the Apostles. they alone had the mission to give to the teaching of Christ the development which was to be opportunely suggested to them by the Paraclete, John xiv, 26 (see Franzelin, De divina Traditione et Scriptura (Rome, 1870), thesis xxii). Since the Bible is the Word of God, it can be said that every canonical text is for us a Divine lesson, a revelation, even though it may have been written with the aid of inspiration only, and without a revelation properly so called. For this cause, also, it is clear that an inspired text cannot err. That the Bible is free from error is beyond all doubt, the the teaching of Tradition. The whole of Scriptural apologetics consists precisley in accounting for this exceptional prerogative. Exegetes and apologists have recourse here to considerations which may be reduced to the following heads:

• the original unchanged text, as it left the pen of the sacred writers, is alone in question.
• As truth and error are properties of judgment, only the assertiions of the sacred writer have to be dealt with. If he makes any affirmation, it is the exegete s duty to discover its meaning and extent; whether he expresses his own views or those of others; whether in quoting another he approves, disapproves, or keeps a silent reserve, etc.
• The intention of the writer is to be found out according to the laws of the language in which he writes, and consequently we must take into account the style of literatur he wished to use. All styles are compatible with inspiration, because they are all legitimate expressions of human thought, and also, as St. Augustine says (De Trinitate, I, 12), "God, getting books written by men, did not wish them to be composed in a form differing from that used by them." Therefore, a distinciton is to be made between the assertion and the expression; it is by means of the latter that we arrive at the former.
• These general principles are to be applied to the different books of the Bible, mutatis mutandis, according to the nature of the matter contained in them, the special purpose for which their author wrote them, the traditional explanation which is given of them, the traditional explanation which is given of them, and also according to the decisions of the Church.

(1) Those which are wrong because insufficient.

(a) The approbation given by the Church to a merely human writing cannot, by itself, make it inspired Scripture. The contrary opinion hazarded by Sixtus of Siena (1566), renewed by Movers and Haneberg, in the nineteenth centruy, was condemned by the Vatican Council. (See Denz., 1787).

(b) Biblical inspiration even where it seems to be at its minimum -- e.g., in the historical books -- is not a simple assistance given to the inspired writers to prevent him from erring, as was thought by Jahn (1793), who followed Holden and perhaps Richard Simon. In order that a text may be Scripture, it is not enough "that it contain revelation without error" (Conc. Vatic., Denz., 1787).

(c) A book composed from merely human resources would not become an inspired text, even if approved of, afterwards, by the Holy Ghost. This subsequent approbation might make the truth contained in the book as credible as if it were an article of the Divine Faith, but it would not give a Divine origin to the book itself. Every inspiration properly so called is antecedent, so much so that it is a contradiciton in terms to speak of a subsequent inspiration. This truth seems to have been lost sight of by those moderns who thought they could revive-at the same time making it still less acceptable -- a vague hypothesis of Lessius (1585) and of his disciple Bonfrère.

(1) Those which err by excess

A view which errs by excess confounds inspiration with revelation. We have just said that these two Divine operations are not only distinct but may take place separately, although they may also be found together. As a matter of fact, this is what happens whenever God moves the sacred writer to express thoughts or sentiments of which he cannot have acquired knowledge in the ordinary way. There has been some exaggeration in the accusation brought against early writers of having confounded inspiration with revelation; however, it must be admitted that the explicit distinction between these two graces has become more and more emphasized since the time of St. Thomas. This is a very real progress and allows us to make a more exact psychological analysis of inspiration.

III. EXTENT OF INSPIRATION

The question now is not whether all the Biblical books are inspired in every part, even in the fragments called deuterocanonical: this point, which concerns the integrity of the Canon, has been solved by the Council of Tent (Denz., 784). but are we bound to admit that, in the books or parts of books which are canonical, there is absolutely nothing, either as regards the matter or the form, which does not fall under the Divine inspiration?

A. Inspiration of the Whole Subject Matter

For the last three centuries there have been author-theologians, exegetes, and especially aplogists -- such as Holden, Rohling, Lenormant, di Bartolo, and others -- who maintained, with more or less confidence, that inspiration was limited to moral and dogmatic teaching, excluding everything in the Bible relating to history and the natural sciences. They think that, in this way, a whole mass of difficulties against the inerrancy of the bible would be removed. but the Church has never ceased to protest against this attempt to restrict the inspiration of the sacred books. This is what took place when Mgr d Hulst, Rector of the Institut Catholique of paris, gave a sympathetic account of this opinion in "Le Correspondant" of 25 Jan., 1893. The reply was quickly forthcoming in the Encyclical Providentissimus Deus of the same year. In that Encyclical Leo XIII said:

It will never be lawful to restrict inspiration merely to certain parts of the Holy Scriptures, or to grant that the sacred writer could have made a mistake. Nor may the opinion of those be tolerated, who, in order to get out of these difficulties, do not hesitate to suppose that Divine inspiration extends only to what touches faith and morals, on the false plea that the true meaning is sought for less in what God has said than in the motive for which He has said it. (Denz., 1950)

In fact, a limited inspiration contradicts Christian tradition and theological teaching.

B. Verbal Inspiration

Theologians discuss the question, whether inspiration controlled the choice of the words used or operated only in what concerned the sense of the assertions made in the Bible. In the sixteenth century verbal inspiratiion was the current teaching. The Jesuits of Louvain were the first to react against this opinion. They held "that it is not necessary in order that a text be Holy Scripture, for the Holy Ghost to have inspired the very material words used." The protests against this new opinion were so violent that Bellarmine and Suarez thought it their duty to tone down the formula by declaring "that all the words of the text have been dictated by the Holy Ghost in what concerns the substance, but differently according to the diverse conditiions of the instruments." This opinion went on gaining in precision, and little by little it disentangled itself from the terminology which it had borrowed from the the adverse opinion, notably from the word "dictation." Its progress was so rapid that at the beginning of the nineteenth century it was more commonly taught than the theory of verbal inspiration. Cardinal Franzelin seems to have given it its definite form. During the last quarter of a century verbal inspiration has again found partisans, and they become more numerous every day. However, the theologians of today, whilst retaining the terminology of the older school, have profoundly modified the theory itself. They no longer speak of a material dictation of words to the ear of the writer, nor of an interior revelation of the term to be employed, but of a Divine motion extending to every faculty and even to the powers of execution to the writer, and in consequence influencing the whole work, even its editing. Thus the sacred text is wholly the work of God and wholly the work of man, of the latter, by way of instrument, of the former by way of principal cause. Under this rejuvenated form the theory of verbal inspiration shows a marked advance towards reconcilation with the rival opinion. From an exegetical and apologetical point of view it is indifferent which of these two opinions we adopt. All agree that the characteristics of style as well as the imperfections affecting the subject matter itself, belong to the inspired writer. As for the inerrancy of the inspired text it is to the Inspirer that it must be finally attributed, and it matters little if God has insured the truth of His Scripture by the grace of inspiration itself, as the adherents of verbal inspiration teach, rather than by a providential assistance.

IV. PROTESTANT VIEWS ON THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE

A. At the Beginning of the Reformation

(1) As a necessary consequence of their attitude towards the Bible, which they had taken as their only rule of Faith, the Protestants were led at the very outset to go beyond the ideas of a merely passive inspiration, which was commonly received in the first half of the sixteenth century. Not only did they make no distinction between inspiration and revelation, but Scripture, both in its matter and style, was considered as revelation itself. In it God spoke to the reader just as He did to the Israelites of old from the mercy-seat. Hence that kind of cult which some protestants of today call "Bibliolatry." In the midst of the incertitude, vagueness, and antinomies of those early times, when the Reformation like Luther himself, was trying to find a way and a symbol, one can discern a constant preoccupation, that of indissolubly joining religious belief to the very truth of God by means of His written Word. The Lutherans who devoted themselves to composing the Protestant theory of inspiration were Melanchthon, Chemzitz, Quenstedt, Calov. Soon, to the inspiration of the words was added that of the vowel points of the present Hebrew text. This was not a mere opinion held by the two Buxtorfs, but a doctrine defined, and imposed under pain of imprisonment, and exile, by the Confession of the Swiss Churches, promulgated in 1675. These dispositions were abrogated in 1724. The Purists held that in the Bible there are neither barbarisms nor solecisms; that the Greek of the New Testament is as pure as that of the classical authors. It was said, with a certain amount of truth, that the Bible had become a sacrament for the Reformers.

(2) In the seventeenth century began the controversies which, in course of time, were to end in the theory of inspiration now generally accepted by Protestants. The two principles which brought about the Reformation were precisely the instruments of this revolution; on the one side, the claim for every human soul of a teaching of the the Holy Ghost, which was immediate and independent of of every exterior rule; on the other, the right of private judgment, or autonomy of individual reasoning, in reading and studying the Bible. In the name of the first principle, on which Zwingli had insisted more than Luther and Calvin, the Pietists thought to free themselves from the letter of the Bible which fettered the action of the Spirit. A French Huguenot, Seb. Castellion (d. 1563), had already been bold enough to distinguish between the letter and the spirit; according to him the spirit only came from God, the letter was no more than a "case, husk, or shell of the spirit."

The Quakers, the followers of Swedenborg, and the Irvingites were to force this theory to its utmost limits; real revealation -- the only one which instructs and sanctifies -- was that produced under the immediate influence of the Holy Ghost. While the Pietists read their Bible with the help of interior illumination alone, others, in even greater numbers, tried to get some light from philological and historical researches which had received their decisive impulse from the Renaissance. Every facility was assured to their investigations by the principle of freedom of private judgment; and of this they took advantage. The conclusions obtained by this method could not be fatal to the theory of inspiration by revelation. In vain did its partisans say that God's will had been to reveal to the Evangelists in four different ways the words which, in reality, Christ had uattered only once; that the Holy Ghost varied His style accoring as he was dictation to Isaias or to Amos -- such an explanation was nothing short of an avowal of the ability to meet the facts alleged against them. As a matter of fact, Faustus Socinus (d. 1562) had already held that the words and, in general, the style of Scripture were not inspired. Soon afterwards, George Calixtus, Episcopius, and Grotinus made a clear distinction between inspiration and revelation. According to the last-named, nothing was revealed but the prophecies and the words of Jesus Christ, everything else was only inspired. Still further, he reduces inspiration to a pious motion of the sould {see "Votum pro pace Ecclesiae" in his complete works, III (1679), 672}. The Dutch Arminian school then represented by J. LeClerc, and, in France, by L. Capelle, Daillé, Blondel, and other, followed the same course. Although they kept current terminology, they made it apparent, nevertheless, that the formula, "The Bible is the Word of God," was already about to be replaced by "The Bible contains the Word of God." Morever, the term word was to be taken in an equivocal sense.

B. Biblical Rationalism

In spite of all, the Bible was still held as the criterion of religious belief. To rob it of this prerogative was the work which the eighteenth century set itself to accomplish. In the attack then made on the Divine inspiration of the Scriptures three classes of assailants are to be distinguished.

(1) The Naturalist philosophers, who were the forerunners of modern unbelief (Hobbes, Spinoza, Wolf); the English Deists (Toland, Collins, Woolston, Tindal, Morgan); the German Rationalists (Reimarus, Lessing); the French Encyclopedists (Voltaire, Bayle) strove by every means, not forgetting abuse and sarcasm, to prove how absurd it was to claim a Divine origin for a book in which all the blemishes and errors of human writings are to be found.

(2) The critics applied to the Bible, the methods adopted for the study of profane authors. They, from the literary and historic point of view, reached the same conclusion as the infidel philosophers; but they thought they could remain believers by distinguishing in the Bible between the religious and the profane element. The latter they gave up to the free judgment of historical criticism; the former they pretended to uphold, but not without restrictions, which profoundly changed its import. According to Semler, the father of Biblical Rationalism, Christ and the Apostles accommodated themselves to the false opinions of their contemporaries; according to Kant and Eichborn, everything which does not agree with sane reason must be regarded as Jewish invention. Religion restricted within the limits of reason -- that was the point which the critical movement initiated by Grotius and LeClerc had in common with the philosophy of Kant and the theology of Wegscheider. The dogma of plenary inspiration dragged down with it, in its final ruin, the very notion of revelation (A. Sabatier, Les religions d'autorité et la religion de l'espirit, 2nd ed., 1904, p. 331).

(3) These philosophical historical controversiers about Scriptural authority caused great anxiety in religious minds. There were many who then sought their salvation in one of the principles put forward by the earlly Reformers, notably by Calvin: to wit, that truly Christian certitude came from the testimony of the Holy Spirit. Man had but to sound his own soul in order to find the essence of religion, which was not a science, but a life, a sentiment. Such was the verdict of the Kantian philosophy then in vogue. It was useless, from the religious point of view, to discuss the extrinsic claims of the Bible; far better was the moral experience of its intrinisc worth. The Bible itself was nothing but a hostory of the religious experiences of the Prophets, of Christ and His Apostles, of the Synagogue and of the Church. Truth and Faith came not from without, but sprang from the Christian conscience as their source. Now this conscience was awakened and sustained by the narration of the religious experiences of those who had gone before. What mattered, then, the judgment passed by criticism on the historical truth of this narration, if it only evoked a salutary emotion in the soul? Here the useful alone was true. Not the text, but the reader was inspired. Such, in its broad outlines, was the final stage of a movement which Spener, Wesley, the Moravian Brethren, and, generally, the Pietists initiated, but of which Schleiermacher (1768-1834) was to be the theologian and the propagator in the nineteenth century.

C. Present Conditions

(1) The traditional views, however, were not abandoned without resistance. A movement back to the old idea of the theopneustia, including verbal inspiration, set in nearly everywhere in the first half of the nineteenth century. This reaction was called the Réveil. Among its principal promoters must be mentioned the Swiss L. Gaussen, W. Lee, in England, A. Dlorner in Germany, and, more recently, W. Rohnert. their labours at first evoked interest and sympathy, but were destined to fail before the efforts of a counter-reaction which sought to complete the work of Schleiermacher. it was led by Alex, Vinet, Edm. Scherer, and E. Rabaud in France; Rich. Rothe and especially Ritschl in Germany; S.T. Coleridge, F.D. Maurice, and Matthew Arnold in England. According to them, the ancient dogma of the theopneustia is not to be reformed, but given up altogether. In the heat of the struggle, however, university professors like E. Reuss, freely used the historical method; without denying inspiration they ignored it.

(2) Abstracting from accidental differences, the present opinion of the so-called progressive Protestants (who profess, nevertheless, to remain sufficiently orthodox), as represented in Germany by B. Weiss, R.F. Grau, and H Cremer, in England by W. Sanday, C. Gore, and most Anglican scholars, may be reduced to the following heads: (a) the purely passive, mechanical theopneustia, extending to the very words, is no longer tenable. (b) Inspiration had degrees: suggestion, direction, elevation, and superintendency. All the sacred writers have not been equally inspired. (c) Inspiration is personal that is, given directly to the sacred writer to enlighten, stimulate, and purify his faculties. This religious enthusiasm, like every great passion, exalts the powers of the soul; it belongs, therefore, to the spiritual order, and is not merely a help given immediately to the intellect. Biblical inspiration, being a seizure of the ntire man by the Divine virtue, does not differ essentially from the gift of the Holy Spirit imparted to all the faithful. (d) It is, to say the least, an improper use of language to call the sacred text itself inspired. At any rate, this text can, and actually does, err not only in profane matters, but also in those appertaining more or less to religion, since the Prophets and Christ Himself, notwithstanding His Divinity, did not possess absolute infallibility. (Cf. Denney, A Dict. of Christ and the Gospels, I, 148-49.) The Bible is a historical document which taken in its entirety contains the authentic narrative of revelation, the tidings of salvation. (c) Revealed truth, and, consequently, the Faith we derive from it are not founded on the Bible, but on Christ himself; it is from Him and through Him that the written text acquires definitely all its worth. But how are we to reach the historical reality of Jesus -- His teaching, His institutions -- if Scripture, as well as Tradition, offers us no faithful picture? The question is a painful one. To establish the inspiration and Divine authority of the Bible the early Reformers had substituted for the teaching of the Church internal criteria, notably the interior testimony of the Holy Spirit and the spiritual efficacy of the text. Most Protestant theologians of the present day agree in declaring these criteria neither scientific nor traditional; and at any rate they consider them insufficient. (On the true criterion of inspiration see CANON OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.) They profess, consequently, to supplement them, if not to replace them altogether, by a rational demonstration of the autheticity and substantial trustworthiness of the Biblical text. The new method may well provide a starting-point for the fundamental theology of Revelation, but it cannot supply a complete justification of the Canon, as it has been so far maintained in the Churches of the Reformation. Anglican theologians, too, like Gore and Sanday, gladly appeal tot he dogmatic testimony of the collective conscience of the universal Church; but, in so doing, they break with one of the first principles of the Reformation, the autonomy of the individual conscience.

(3) The position of liberal Protestants (i.e. those who are independent of all dogma) may be easily defined. The Bible is just like other texts, neither inspired nor the rule of Faith. Religious belief is quite subjective. So far is it from depending on the dogmatic or even historical authority of a book that it gives to it, itself, its real worth. When religious texts, the Bible included, are in question, history -- or, at least, what people generally believe to historical -- is largely a product of faith, whcih has transfigured the facts. The authors of the Bible may be called inspired, that is endowed with a superior perception of religious matters; but this religious enthusiasm does not differ essentially from that which animated Homer and Plato. This is the denial of everything supernatural, in the ordinary sense of the word, as well in the Bible as in religion in general. Nevertheless, those who hold this theory defend themselves from the charge of infidelity, especially repudiating the cold Rationalism of the last century, which was made up exclusively of negations. They think that they remain sufficiently Christian by adhering to the religious sentiment to which Christ ahs given the most perfect expression yet known. Following Kant, Schleiermacher, and Ritschl, they profess a religion freed from all philosophical intellectualism and from every historical proof. Facts and formulae of the past have, in their eyes, only a symbolic and a transient value. Such is the new theology spread by the best-known professors and writers especially in Germany -- historians, exegetes, philologists, or even pastors of souls. We need only mention Harnack, H.J. Holtzmann, Fried. Delitzsch, Cheyne, Campbell, A. Sabatier, Albert and John Réville. it is to this transformation of Christianity that "Modernism", condemned by the Encyclical Pascendi Gregis, owes its origin.

In modern Protestantism the Bible has decidely fallen from the primacy which the Reformation had so loudly conferred upon it. The fall is a fatal one, becoming deeper from day to day; and without remedy, since it is the logical consequence of the fundamental principle put forward by Luther and Calvin. Freedom of examination was destined sooner or later to produce freedom of thought. (Cf. A. Sabatier, Les religions d'autorite et la religion de l'espirité, 2nd ed., 1904, pp. 399-403.)

CATHOLIC WORKS.-FRANZELIN, Tractatus de divina traditione et scriptura (2nd ed., Rome, 1875), 321-405; SCHMID, De inspirationis bibliorum vi et ratione (Louvain, 1886); ZANECCHIA, Divina inspiratio Sacrae Scripturae (Rome, 1898); Scriptor Sacer (Rome, 1903); BILLOT, De inspiratione Sacrae Scripturae (Rome, 1903); CH. PESCH, De inspiratione Sacrae Scripturae (Freiburg im Br., 1906); LAGRANGE in Revue Biblique (Paris, 1895), p. (London,6 Nov., 1897, to 5 Feb., 1898); HUMMELAUER, Exegetisches zur Inspirationsfrage (Freiburg im Br., 1904); FONCK, Der Kampf um die Warheit der heil. Schrift seit 25 Jahren (Innsburck, 1905); DAUSCH, Die Schrifitnspiration (Freiburg im Br., 1891); HOLZHEY, Die Inspiration de heil. Schrift in der Anschauung des Mittelaters (Munich, 1895); CH. PESCH, Zur neuesten Geschichte der Katholischen Inspirationslehre (Freiburg im Br., 1902)

PROTESTANT WORKS.-GUSSEN, Theopneustic (2nd ed., Paris, 1842), tr. Pleanry Inspiration of Holy Scripture; LEE, Inspiration of Holy Scripture (Dublin, 1854); ROHNERT, Die Inspiration, der heil, Schrift und ihre Bestreiter (Leipzig, 1889); SANDAY, The oracles of God (London, 1891); FARRAR, The Bible, Its meaning and Supremacy (London, 1897); History of Interpretation (London 1886); A Clerical Symposium on Inspiration (London, 1884); RABAUD, Histoire de la doctrine de l inspriaation dans les pays de langue francaise depuis la Reforme jusqu a nos jours (Paris, 1883).

ALFRED DURAND

Installation

(Lat. installare, to put into a stall).

This word, strictly speaking, applies to the solemn induction of a canon into the stall or seat which he is to occupy in the choir of a cathedral or collegiate church. It is the symbolical act (institutio corporalis) by which a canon is put in possession of the functions which he exercises in the chapter, and by which the chapter admits him. The ceremonies of this installation are regulated by local usage; very often they consist in the assignment of a staff in the choir and a place in the hall in which the meetings of the chapter are held. At the same time the dean invests the new canon with the capitular insignia, puts the biretta on his head, and receives his profession of faith and his oath to observe the statutes of the chapter. The term installation is also applied to the institutio corporalis, or putting in possession of any ecclesiastical benefice whatsoever (see INSTITUTION, CANONICAL); or, again, to the solemn entry of a parish priest into his new parish, even when this solemn act takes place after the parish priest has really been put in possession of his benefice. The corresponding ceremony for a bishop is known as enthronization (q.v.).

AYERR, De symbolica canonicorum et canonicarum investitura (Göttingen, 1768); MAYER, Thesaurus novus juris ecclesiastici (Ratisbon, 1791-1794); FERRARIS, Prompta bibliotheca, s.v. Canonicatus, II (Paris, 1861), 134-138; HINSCHIUS, System des katholischen Kirchenrechts, II (Berlin, 1878), 700.

A. VAN HOVE

Instinct

DEFINITIONS

In both popular and scientific literature the term instinct has been given such a variety of meanings that it is not possible to frame for it an adequate definition which would meet with general acceptance. The term usually includes the idea of a purposive adaptation of an action or series of actions in an organized being, not governed by consciousness of the end to be attained. The difficulty is encountered when we attempt to add to this generic concept specific notes which shall differentiate it from reflex activities on the one hand and from intelligent activities on the other. Owing to the limitation of our knowledge of the processes involved, it may not always be possible to determine whether a given action should be regarded as reflex or instinctive, but this should not prevent us from drawing, on theoretical grounds, a clear line of demarcation between these two modes of activity. The reflex is essentially a physiological process. The reflex arc is an established neural mechanism which secures a definite and immediate response to a given physical stimulus. The individual may be conscious of the stimulus or of the response or of both, but consciousness does not in any case enter into the reflex as an essential factor. Instincts, in contradistinction to reflexes, are comparatively complex. Some writers are so impressed with this characteristic of instinct that they are disposed to agree with Herbert Spencer in defining it as an organized series of reflexes, but this definition fails to take into account the fact that consciousness forms an essential link in all instinctive activities. It has been suggested as a distinctive characteristic of instinct that it arises from perception, whereas the Source of a reflex is never higher than a sensation. Baldwin includes under instinct only reactions of a sensory-motor type. From a neurological point of view, in mammals at least, instinct always involves the cerebral cortex, the seat of consciousness, while the reflex is confined to the lower nerve centres. An obvious difference between reflexes and instincts is to be found in the fact that in the reflex the response to the stimulus is immediate, whereas the culmination of the instinctive activity, in which its purposive character appears, may be delayed for a considerable time.

The chief difficulties in defining instinct are encountered in differentiating instinctive from intelligent activities. If the mode of origin of instinct and habit be left out of account, the two processes will be seen to resemble each other so closely that it is well-nigh impossible to draw any clear line of distinction between them. This circumstance has led to the popular conception of instinct as race habit, a view of the subject which finds support in so eminent an authority as Wilhelm Wundt; but this definition implies a theory of origin for instinct which is not universally accepted. Again, the Schoolmen and many competent observers, among whom E. Wasmann, S.J., is prominent, find the characteristic difference between instinctive and intelligent activities in the fact that one is governed exclusively by sensation, or by sensory associative processes, while the other is governed by intellect and free will. They accordingly attribute all the conscious activities of the animal to instinct, since, as they claim, none of these activities can be traced to intellect in the strict sense of the word. St. Thomas nowhere treats in detail of animal instinct, but his position on the subject is rendered none the less clear from a great many passages in the "Summa Theologica". He is in full agreement with the best modern authorities in laying chief emphasis on the absence of consciousness of the end as the essential characteristic of instinct. He says (op. cit., I-II, Q. xi, a. 2, C.): "Although beings devoid of consciousness (coqnitio) attain their end, nevertheless they do not attain a fruition of their end, as beings do who are endowed with consciousness. Consciousness of one's end, however, is of two kinds, perfect and imperfect. Perfect consciousness is that by which one is conscious not only of the end, and that it is good, but also of the general nature of purpose and goodness. This kind of consciousness is peculiar to rational natures. Imperfect consciousness is that by which a being knows the purpose and goodness in particular, and this kind of consciousness is found in brute animals, which are not governed by free will but are moved by natural instinct towards those things which they apprehend. Thus the rational creature attains complete enjoyment (fruitio); the brute attains imperfect enjoyment, and other creatures do not attain enjoyment at all." Wasmann's concept of instinct is in strict agreement with that of St. Thomas, while it is more explicit. He divides the instinctive activities of animals into two groups: "Instinctive actions in the strict, and instinctive actions in the wider acceptation of the term. As instances of the former class we have to regard those which immediately spring from the inherited dispositions of the powers of sensile cognition and appetite; and as instances of the latter those which indeed proceed from the same inherited dispositions but through the medium of sense experience." (Instinct and Intelligence in the Animal Kingdom, p. 35.)

There is a growing tendency in biology and comparative psychology to restrict the term instinct to inherited purposive adaptations. Many writers add to this two other characteristics: they insist that an instinct must be definitely fixed or rigid in character, and that it must be common to a large group of individuals. Baldwin regards instinct as "a definitely biological, not a psychological conception" (Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology). He adds that "no adequate psychological definition of instinct is possible, since the psychological state involved is exhausted by the terms sensation (and also perception), instinct-feeling, and impulse." (Ibid.) The divergent views entertained by writers on the subject concerning the nature and origin of instinct naturally find expression in the currently accepted definitions of the term, a few of which are here appended : —

• "Instinct, natural inward impulse; unconscious, involuntary or unreasoning prompting to any mode of action, whether bodily or mental. instinct, in its more technical use, denotes any inherited tendency to perform a specific action in a specific way when the appropriate situation occurs; furthermore, an instinct is characteristic of a group or race of related animals." (New International Dictionary.)
• "Instinct, a special innate propensity, in any organized being, but more especially in the lower animals, producing effects which appear to be those of reason and knowledge, but which transcend the general intelligence or experience of the creature; the sagacity of the brute." (Century Dictionary.)
• "Instinct, an inherited reaction of the sensory-motor type, relatively complex and markedly adaptive in character, and common to a group of individuals." (Baldwin, "Dictionary of Philosophy and Psychology ".)
• "Instinct is the hereditary, suitable (adaptive) disposition of the powers of sensitive cognition and appetite in the animal." (Wasmann, op. cit., 36.)
• "Habit differs from instinct, not in its nature, but in its origin; the last being natural, the first acquired." (Reid.)
• "Instinct is a purposive action without consciousness of the purpose." (E. von Hartmann, "Philosophy of the Unconscious", tr. Coupland.)
• "Instinct is reflex action into which there is imported the element of consciousness. The term is therefore a generic one, comprising all those faculties of mind which are concerned in conscious and adaptive action, antecedent to individual experience, without necessary knowledge of the relation to individual experience, without necessary knowledge of the relation between means employed and ends attained, but similarly performed under similar and frequently recurring circumstances by all the individuals of the same species." (Romanes, "Animal Intelligence", New York, 1892, p. 17.)
• "Movements which originally followed upon simple or compound voluntary acts, but which have become wholly or partially mechanized in the course of individual life and of generic evolution, we term instinctive actions." (Wundt, "Human and Animal Psychology", London, 1894, p. 388.)

ORIGIN

A great many theories have been advanced to account for the origin of instinct. These theories may be grouped under three heads:

The name of Charles Darwin has been prominently associated with the reflex theory, sometimes called the theory of natural selection. This assumes that instincts, like anatomical structures, tend to vary from the specific type, and these variations, when advantageous to the species, are gradually accumulated though natural selection. In his chapter on instinct in the "Origin of Species", Darwin says: "It will be universally admitted that instincts are as important as corporal structures for the welfare of each species under its present conditions of life. Under changed conditions of life, it is at least possible that slight modifications of instinct might be profitable to a species; and if it can be shown that instincts do vary ever so little, then I can see no difficulty in natural selection preserving and continually accumulating variations of instinct to any extent that was profitable. It is thus, as I believe, that all the most complex and wonderful instincts have originated." (Op. cit., New York, 1892, vol. I, p. 321.) The difficulty with this theory is that it fails to account for the survival of the early beginnings of an instinct before it is of utility. It has also been urged against it that it does not account for the co-ordination of the muscular groups which are frequently involved in instinct. Similar objections, of course, have been urged against natural selection as the origin of many complex anatomical structures. The adaptive character, in the one case as in the other, points to the operation of an intelligence that altogether transcends the scope of the mental powers of the creatures in question.

The second theory, that of lapsed intelligence, has assumed many forms, and has found many defenders among comparative psychologists and biologists during the last half century. Among the best-known authors espousing this theory may be mentioned Wundt, Eimer, and Cope. The two main difficulties in the way of the acceptance of this theory are, first, the high grade of intelligence demanded at very low levels of animal life, and second, it assumes the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Wundt rejects intelligence in the strict acceptation of the term as the source of animal instinct. His position is best stated in his own words: "We may reject at once as wholly untenable the hypothesis which derives animal instinct from an intelligence which, though not identical with that of man, is still, so to speak, of equal rank with it. At the same time we must admit that the adherents of an intellectual theory in a more general sense are right in ascribing a large number of the manifestations of mental life in animals not, indeed, to intelligence, as the intellectualists sensu stricto do, but to individual experiences, the mechanism of which can only be explained in terms of association." (Op. cit., p. 389.) After dealing with another phase of this subject, he continues: "Only two hypotheses remain, therefore, as really arguable. One of them makes instinctive action a mechanized intelligent action, which can be in whole or in part reduced to the level of the reflex; the other makes instinct a matter of inherited habit, gradually acquired and modified under the influence of the external environment in the course of numberless generations. There is obviously no necessary antagonism between these two views. Instincts may be actions originally conscious, but now become mechanical, and they may be inherited habits." (Ibid., p. 393.) After discussing human instincts and their relation to animal instincts, Wundt concludes: "External conditions of life and voluntary reactions upon them, then, are the two factors operative in the evolution of instinct. But they operate in different degrees. The general development of mentality is always tending to modify instinct in some way or another. And so it comes about that of the two associated principles the first, — adaptation to environment, — predominates at the lower stages of life; the second, — voluntary activity, — at the higher. This is the great difference between the instincts of man and those of the animals. Human instincts are habits, acquired or inherited from previous generations; animal instincts are purposive adaptations of voluntary action to the conditions of life. And a second difference follows from the first: that the vast majority of human instincts are acquired: while animals . . . are restricted to connate instincts, with a very limited range of variation." (Ibid., 409.)

Romanes seeks to solve the problem of the origin of instinct by combining these two theories, accounting for the more rigid instincts of animals on the basis of natural selection and for the more plastic instincts by the inheritance of mechanized habits. He calls the former class of instincts primary and the latter secondary. More recently, the theory of organic selection has been advanced. According to this theory purposive adaptations of all kinds, whether intelligent or organic, are called upon to supplement incomplete endowment, and thus to keep the species alive until variations arc secured sufficient to make the instinct relatively independent.

It is evident from the definitions and theories given above that several distinct things are included under the term instinct. This finds expression in the division of instincts into primary and secondary suggested by Romanes, and into connate and acquired instincts (Wundt). Darwin emphasized the same fact when he claimed that many instincts may have arisen from habit, and then adds: "but it would be a serious error to suppose that the greater number of instincts have been acquired by habit in one generation and then transmitted by inheritance to succeeding generations. It can be clearly shown that the most wonderful instincts with which we are acquainted, namely, those of the hive-bee and of many ants, could not possibly have been acquired by habit." (Op. cit., vol. I, 321.) Formerly, instincts interested naturalists chiefly because they were regarded as so many illustrations of the intelligence of the Creator, and, indeed, where it is a question of "primary", or "inherited", instincts — or instincts in "the strict sense of the term", as Wasmann designates them — the problem of origin is similar to that of the origin of anatomical characteristics. Evidently we shall have to account for such elaborate instincts as that which determines the conduct of the caterpillar or the emperor moth in building its cocoon along the same lines which we adopt in accounting for the origin of complicated anatomical structures. The intelligence displayed far transcends that which could possibly have been possessed by such lowly creatures. The "secondary", or "acquired", instincts have a theoretical interest of an entirely different character, arising out of the problems of the nature of animal intelligence and the origin of man. Monists, and in general all those who accept the brute origin of man, seek to obliterate the essential difference between man and the animal; hence they ascribe to the animal an intelligence which differs only in degree from that possessed by man. While at first sight this would seem to lift the animal up to the plane of human life, what it does in reality is to lower man to the plane of brute life.

It may easily be demonstrated that many of the instincts in animals are capable of modification in the course of individual experience. Acts that are determined by a new element in the environment may be frequently repeated by a large number of the species; this repetition soon begets a habit which, to all intents and purposes, is identical with instinct. Such mechanized habits are, as we have seen, classified by some observers as instincts, and if such a habit be inherited, as some claim it may be, then no one would refuse to it the name of instinct. The real importance attaching to this problem arises from the form of consciousness that is operative in building up such habits, or secondary instincts. Aristotle and the Schoolmen attributed these purposive adjustments to the appetitus sensitivus. They found no need of calling into play any higher faculty than sensory perceptions of particular objects and the recognition of their desirability or the reverse. This view is developed by Wasmann. It should be observed, however, that the term instincts as used by the Scholastics and by Wasmann refers not only to the neural mechanism or habit in the animal, but to the sensory powers which enable the animal to adjust its spontaneous activities to its surroundings. The term "was not taken merely as a constituent part of the sensitive power of cognition and appetite but as the adaptive, natural disposition of animal sensation, which constitutes the vital principle that governs the spontaneous actions of the animal. . . . For apart from and beyond inherited, instinctive knowledge, scholastic philosophy ascribed to the animal a sensile memory and a power of perfecting inborn instincts though sense experience; it acknowledges in the animal not only complete hereditary talents for certain activities, but to a certain degree talent and ability acquired by sense experience and by practice." (Wasmann, op. cit., 138-39.) Wundt, as we have seen, denies to the animal intelligence of the same order as that possessed by man. A great deal of confusion has been imported into this subject by a loose and unjustifiable use of the terms reason and intelligence. To the superficial observer, of course, the power of sensory perception and association possessed by the animal resembles intelligence, but the terms have widely different signification. Intelligence in its lowest degree always implies as an essential characteristic the power of abstraction and generalization on which freedom of election rests, and, until it is shown that animals possess such a power, it is unjustifiable to attribute such intelligence to them as the school of naturalists do who approach the subject with the foregone conclusion that human intelligence originated from that of the brute, and differs only from it in degree.

HUMAN INSTINCTS

The question of the nature of human instincts and the treatment which they should receive is involved in many practical issues of the utmost consequence in the field of education. As we have seen above, some writers speak of acquired instincts, meaning thereby highly developed or mechanized habits; but it will be more convenient here to confine the use of the term to instincts in the proper sense of the word, that is, to innate or inherited tendencies, and to speak of modes of activity established in individual life through repetition as habits. The most striking characteristic of human instincts as contrasted with instincts in the brute is plasticity. It is, in fact, this characteristic of human instinct that renders education both possible and necessary. Among the higher animals many instincts are relatively plastic, that is, they are modified by the individual experience of the animal. This renders it possible to train animals to act in ways that are not provided for by definitely organized tendencies. The plasticity of the animal's instincts is in some direct proportion to the development of the brain and of the power of sense perception and sensory association, but when we turn to man we find that his intelligence, which asserts itself at a very early date in infancy, begins to modify all instinctive activities as soon as they appear, a fact which renders it difficult to observe unmodified instincts in adult life. There are, therefore, two things to be taken into account: the plasticity of the instinct and the power of intellect and free will that is brought to bear in modifying it. In both of these respects there is a striking contrast observable between man and the animal.

It should be noted here as of special importance to the discussion that human instincts do not all make their appearance at birth. It is true that instinct causes the newly born babe to seek its mother's breast and to perform sundry other necessary functions, but many of the instincts make their appearance for the first time in the appropriate phase of neural and mental development. Again, while the appearance of the instinct is relatively late in the developmental series, it frequently, as in the case of coquetry and maternity, antedates by some years the adult function to which it refers. This renders the instincts much more plastic, or, in other words, much more amenable to the control of educative agencies than they would be if they appeared for the first time amid the stress of the fully developed emotions and passions to which they refer. This antedating of the function may be regarded as an indication of the vestigial character of the instincts in question. The work in the field of genetic psychology and of child study during the past few decades has revealed the presence and the important functions of many hitherto neglected instincts in the life of the child. These instincts cannot be neglected or they will run wild and produce their crop of undesirable results; they cannot be suppressed indiscriminately, because they are the native roots on which all habits that are of enduring strength in human life are grafted. On the other hand, many instincts are highly undesirable; their full development would, in fact, mean the production of criminals. For explanation of these instincts we are referred by many to the savage state from which civilized man has gradually emerged. "In the case of mankind, the self-assertion, the unscrupulous seizing upon all that can be grasped, the tenacious holding of all that can be kept, which constitute the essence of the struggle for existence, have answered. For his successful progress through the savage state, man has been largely indebted to those qualities which he shares with the ape and tiger. . . . But, in proportion as men have passed from anarchy to social organization, and in proportion as civilization has grown in worth, these deeply ingrained serviceable qualities have become defects. . . . In fact, civilized man brands all these ape and tiger promptings with the name of sins; he punishes many of the acts which flow from them as crimes; and, in extreme cases, he does his best to put an end to the survival of the fittest of former days by axe and rope." (Huxley, "Evolution and Ethics", New York, 1894, pp. 51-52.) Clearly, then, some instincts must be suppressed and others must be reinforced. It is the business of education to guide the native impulses of the child into proper channels and to build upon them the habits of civilized life. So far there is practical agreement in the field, but what standard shall be employed in determining which instincts shall be inhibited and which reinforced, and what methods shall be employed in directing the tide of instinctive activity? In these questions there is anything but agreement.

Many of those educators who believe in the brute origin of man assume that the standard of selection here must be the same as that in the animal kingdom, namely, the conscious activities of each individual. They would have the child with his meagre endowment of intellect determine for himself, "experimentally", which instincts to suppress and which to cultivate. This thought is embodied in the "culture epoch" theory, which finds so much favour with many modern educators. This theory is founded on the assumption that the child recapitulates in the unfolding of his conscious life the history of the race; and it further assumes that the proper mode of treatment is to lead each phase of this recapitulation to function when it appears in the child's development. The child is to determine by his own experience the unsatisfactory character of the earlier phase, and thus be led to recognize the desirability of moving on to the later and higher phase. In these respects the Christian Church has always maintained a policy exactly the opposite of the one here outlined. She maintains that, whatever may be the nature of the child's instincts, he must be led from the beginning to function only on the highest plane attained by the adult whether through reason or Revelation. She further maintains that the standard of selection is not the choice of the individual child, but the standard of truth and goodness which has been revealed to man and has been accepted by the wisdom of the race. She has always maintained the principle of authority both in matters of doctrine and of conduct, as opposed to private judgment and individual choice, which, in her eyes, lead to anarchy.

Moreover, the Church's position in this matter is in entire agreement with the secure findings of biology and psychology. The doctrine of recapitulation on which the culture epoch theory rests is a doctrine of embryology where it is held that ontogeny is a recapitulation of phylogeny, i.e., that the individual embryo recapitulates in its development the successive stages in the development of the race; but it should be observed that this doctrine is purely anatomical. Many biologists believe that the eye in race history was made by seeing and the lung by breathing; but no biologist would maintain for a moment that the eye in embryonic development was made by seeing and the lung by breathing. In fact, high levels of animal life are never reached except in those cases where the offspring is carried forward without functioning to the adult plane by the parent. And it may be rightly argued from analogy that, even if it be granted that the child's mental life is a recapitulation of the race life, the only way of bringing him up to the adult plane is through society's functioning for him, though its educative agencies, until he reaches adult stature. The culture epoch theory, which leads the child to function in each successive "culture epoch", would, therefore, not only retard his proper development, but it would inevitably initiate a violent retrogression.

General works on evolution, psychology, and comparative psychology; cf. in particular MORGAN, Some Definitions of Instinct in Natural Science (London, May, 1895); IDEM, Habit and Instinct (London, 1896); IDEM, Animal Behaviour (London, 1900); IDEM, Introduction to Comparative Psychology (London, 1894); ROMANES, Animal Intelligence (New York, 1892); IDEM, Mental Evolution in Animals (New York, 1891); IDEM, Darwin and After Darwin, I (Chicago, 1896); MIVART, Lessons from Nature (London, 1879); IDEM, Origin of Human Reason (London, 1899); WASMANN, Instinct and Intelligence in the Animal Kingdom (St. Louis, 1903); LUBBOCK, Ants, Bees and Wasps (New York, 1893); GROOS, Play of Animals (New York, 1898); IDEM, Play of Man (New York, 1901); BALDWIN in Science of 20 March and 10 April (1896); IDEM, Story of the Mind (New York, 1898); IDEM in Dict. of Philos. and Psychol. (New York, 1901), s. v. lnstinct and Organic Selection; LICATA, Fisiologia dell' istinto (Naples, 1879); MASCI, Le teorie sulla formazione naturale dell' istinto (Naples, 1893).

THOMAS EDWARD SHIELDS

Institute of Mary

The official title of the second congregation founded by Mary Ward. Under this title Barbara Babthorpe, the fourth successor Mary Ward as "chief superior", petitioned for and obtained the approbation of its rule in 1703. It is the title appended to the signatures of the first chief superiors, and mentioned in the "formula of vows" of the first members. "Englische Fräulein", "Dame Inglesse", "Loretto Nuns", are popular names for the members of the institute in the various countries where they have established themselves. On the suppression, in 1630, of Mary Ward's first congregation, styled by its opponents the "Jesuitesses", the greater number of the members returned to the world or entered other religious orders. A certain number, however, who desired still to live in religion under the guidance of Mary Ward, were sheltered with the permission of Pope Urban VIII in the Paradeiser Haus, Munich, by the Elector of Bavaria, Maximilian I. Thence some of the younger members were transferred at the pope's desire to Rome, there to live with Mary Ward and be trained by her in the religious life. Her work, therefore, was not destroyed, but reconstituted with certain modifications of detail, such as subjection to the jurisdiction of the ordinary instead of to the Holy See immediately, as in the original scheme. It was fostered by Urban and his successors, who as late as the end of the seventeenth century granted a monthly subsidy to the Roman house. Mary Ward died in England at Heworth near York in 1645, and was succeeded as chief superior by Barbara Babthorpe, who resided at Rome as head of the "English Ladies", and on her death was buried there in the church of the English College. She was succeeded as head of the institute by Mary Pointz, the first companion of Mary Ward. The community at Heworth removed to Paris in 1650. In 1669 Frances Bedingfield, one of the constant companions of Mary Ward, was sent by Mary Pointz to found a house in England. Favoured by Catherine of Braganza, she established her community first in St. Martin's Lane, London, and afterwards at Hammersmith. Thence a colony moved to Heworth, and finally in 1686 to the site of the present convent, Micklegate Bar, York. In addition to that at Munich, two foundations had meantime been made in Bavaria--at Augsburg in 1662, at Burghausen in 1683.

At the opening of the eighteenth century the six houses of Munich, Augsburg, Rome, Burghausen, Hammersmith, and York were governed by local superiors appointed by the chief superior, who resided for the most part at Rome, and had a vicaress in Munich. Thus, for seventy years the institute carried on its work, not tolerated only, but protected by the various ordinaries, yet without official recognition till the year 1703, when at the petition of the Elector Maximilian Emanuel of Bavaria, Mary of Modena, the exiled Queen of England, and others, its rule was approved by Pope Clement XI. It was not in accordance with the discipline of the Church at that time to approve any institute of simple vows. The pope was willing, however, to approve the institute as such, if the members would accept enclosure. But fidelity to their traditions, and experience of the benefit arising from non-enclosure in their special vocation, induced them to forego this further confirmation. The houses in Paris and in Rome were given up about the date of the confirmation of the rule in 1703. St. Pölten (1706) was the first foundation from Munich after the Bull of Clement XI. In 1742 the houses in Austria and its dependencies were by a Bull of Benedict XIV made a separate province of the institute, and placed under a separate superior-general. The Austrian branch at present (1909) consists of fourteen houses. In Italy, Lodi and Vicenza have each two dependent filials. When the armies of the first Napoleon overran Bavaria in 1809, the mother-house in Munich and the other houses of the institute in Germany--Augsburg, Burghausen, and Altötting excepted--were broken up and the communities scattered. On the restoration of peace to Europe, King Louis I of Bavaria obtained nuns from Augsburg, and established them at Nymphenburg, where a portion of the royal palace was made over to them. In 1840 Madame Catherine de Graccho, the superior of this house, was appointed by Gregory XVI general superior of the whole Bavarian institute. At the present day there are 85 houses under Bavaria, with 1153 members, 90 Postulants, 1225 boarders, 11,447 day pupils and 1472 orphans. Four houses in India, one at Rome, and two in England are subject to Nymphenburg. The house in Mainz escaped secularization, being spared by Napoleon on the condition that all connection with Bavaria should cease. It is now the mother-house of a branch which has eight filial houses.

When vigour was reviving in the institute abroad, the Irish branch was founded (1821) at Rathfarnham, near Dublin, by Frances Ball, an Irish lady, who had made her novitiate at York. There are now 19 houses of the institute in Ireland, 13 subject to Rathfarnham and 6 under their respective bishops. The dependencies of Rathfarnham are in all parts of the world--3 houses in Spain, 2 in Mauritius, 2 at Gibraltar, 10 in India, 2 in Africa, 10 in Australia, with a Central Training College for teachers at Melbourne (1906). There are 8 houses of the institute in Canada, 3 in the United States, 7 in England, about 180 houses in all. Owing to the variety of names and the independence of branches and houses, the essential unity of the institute is not readily recognized. The "English Virgins", or "English Ladies", is the title under which the members are known in Germany and Italy, whilst in Ireland, and where foundations from Ireland have been made, the name best known is "Loretto Nuns", from the name of the famous Italian shrine given to the mother-house at Rathfarnham. Each branch has its own novitiate, and several have their special constitutions approved by the Holy See. The "Institute of Mary" is the official title of all; all follow the rule approved for them by Clement XI, and share in the approbation of their institute given by Pius IX, in 1877.

The sisters devote themselves principally to the education of girls in boarding-schools and academies, but they are also active in primary and secondary schools, in the training of teachers, instruction in the trades and domestic economy, and the care of orphans. Several members of the institute have also become known as writers.

M. LOYOLA

Institute of Mission Helpers of the Sacred Heart

In the autumn of 1888, there came to Baltimore, Maryland, a convert, Mrs. Hartwell, who previous to her reception into the Church had been interested in works of charity. Under the spiritual direction of Father Slattery, provincial of St. Joseph's Society for the coloured missions she began to catechize the negro children, and was soon joined by some companions. In the autumn of 1890, these ladies wishing to become religious laid the foundations of a community under the name of "Mission Helpers, Daughters of the Holy Ghost". The work was missionary and catechetical, but was exclusively for the coloured race, the sisters binding themselves thereto by a special vow. Very soon an industrial school for girls was opened. In 1895, the name of the institute was changed to "Mission Helpers of the Sacred Heart" and the members were dispensed from the "negro" vow. Thus there was no longer any distinction made as to race in the work of the sisters, which from that time was to embrace all the neglected poor. Hence, the field of missionary and catechetical labour was greatly broadened. A direct result of this change was the opening in 1897 of a school for deaf-mutes, at the request of Cardinal Gibbons. This school, St. Francis Xavier's, was the first Catholic institution for deaf-mutes in the ecclesiastical province of Baltimore. In Porto Rico, also, there was no provision whatsoever for deaf-mutes who were poor, until the Mission Helpers opened a school there, shortly after making their foundation in San Juan in 1902. This was a heavy undertaking, as the demands on the sisters for missionary and catechetical work in Porto Rico were very great, and the need urgent.

At the first general chapter of the institute, which was held on 5 November, 1906, by command of Cardinal Gibbons, a constitution was adopted, and a superior general and her assistants elected according to its prescriptions. At this first election Mother M. Demetrias was chosen as mother general. The community was then officially declared canonically organized. Two important matters were settled about that time by ecclesiastical authority. The sisters were released from the observance of the vow which they had made to offer their prayers and good works for the welfare of the clergy, it having been declared uncanonical. Perpetual adoration was also discontinued because of the bodily hardship it entailed. On account of their missionary labours the sisters were unable to keep up the work of adoration, without grave detriment to their health, consequently it was decided to restrict it to the First Fridays. The active work of the institute as outlined by the constitution embraces the keeping of industrial schools for coloured girls; schools for deaf-mutes; day-nurseries; teaching catechism and giving instruction wherever needed; visiting the poor in their own homes, and in institutions, such as hospitals and alms-houses, and preparing the dying for the last sacraments. There are houses of the institute in New York, Trenton, Porto Rico, and Baltimore.

SISTER M. de SALES

Irish Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Founded by Frances Mary Teresa Ball, under the direction and episcopal jurisdiction of the Most Rev. D. Murray, Archbishop of Dublin. By the archbishop's desire, Frances Ball had prepared herself for this undertaking by a two years' novitiate in St. Mary's Convent, Micklegate Bar, York. Two other Irish ladies, Miss Ellen Arthur and Miss Anne Therry, offered to join the new foundation and were accepted. On 4 November, 1822, the three pioneers took possession of Rathfarnham Abbey, which had been purchased by the Archbishop of Dublin to serve as a mother-house and novitiate. The wide-spreading fame of the superior education afforded in the Dublin Archdiocese by the Loretto nuns -- as they are commonly called -- brought demands for their services throughout Ireland. The first offshoot was planted in Navan, County Meath, in the year 1833. This convent has now a filiation in Mullingar. The convents in North Great George's Street and Stephen's Green, Dublin, come next in the order of foundations. The year 1836 was signalized by the rescript of Pope Gregory XVI addressed to the Most Rev. D. Murray, Archbishop of Dublin, which ordained that: "Those who have associated themselves and shall hereafter associate themselves to this institute cannot depart to another, even though observing rules of a more rigid discipline without the express permission of the Apostolic See." The year 1840 was marked by the erection of the first church in Ireland dedicated to the Sacred Heart, in Loretto Abbey, Rathfarnham. The same year saw the building of a smaller, but very beautiful, abbey in Dalkey, and also the opening of negotiations for another abbey in Gorey, which prepared the way for a future Loretto in the town of Wexford.

In spite of her prudent reluctance to favour the repeated applications for an extension of the Irish sisters' work into foreign countries, Reverend Mother Ball at last yielded to the solicitations of Dr. Carew, Archbishop of Calcutta, and sanctioned the departure of volunteers for the Indian mission on 23 August, 1841. To Loretto House, Calcutta, have been added convents in Darjeeling, Lucknow, Assansol, Intally, Simla, etc. In addition to the boarding and day schools the sisters conduct orphanages and attend diligently to the religious instruction of adults. The success in India led to an appeal for nuns from Dr. Collier, Vicar Apostolic of Madras, which appeal was granted in 1846. Immediately afterwards the Vicar Apostolic of Gibraltar urged a like petition. Two Loretto convents are established on the Rock. The Most Rev. Dr. Power, Archbishop of Toronto, begged for a Loretto community in 1847. The under-named filiations own Loretto Abbey, Toronto, as their headhouse: the convents in the city and suburbs, likewise in Belleville, Lyndsay, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Guelph, Stratford, Chicago, Joliet, and Sault Sainte Marie. The foundations in Fermoy and Omagh (Ireland) were supplied with members from Rathfarnham in the years 1853-5. The former has two filiations -- at Youghal and Clonmel. The Letterkenny Loretto was the first convent founded in the Diocese of Raphoe, County Donegal, since the Reformation. The convents at Bray, Baymount, Kilkenny, and Killarney were also founded by Reverend Mother Ball. After a lingering illness, borne with saintly fortitude, the foundress died on Whit-Sunday, 19 May, 1861.

The most noteworthy events in the institute since her death have been: First, the approval and confirmation of the constitutions peculiar to Loretto Abbey, Rathfarnham, and its filiations by Pope Pius IX, the said constitutions having been sanctioned and transmitted to Rome by Cardinal Cullen in 1861, for the usual examination by the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda. Second, the transfer of the community at Baymount to Balbriggan. The foundation of a convent in Ballarat, Australia, from which proceeded the convents at Sydney, Portland, Perth, Adelaide, and Melbourne. To the latter is attached the Central Training College for Teachers, instituted by the Australian bishops and intrusted by their lordships to the management of the Loretto nuns. Third: large day schools were established in Enniscorthy, County Wexford, and in Rathmines, County Dublin. Fourth: foundations have been made in Seville, Madrid, and Yalla, in Spain. In Ireland the educational work of the Loretto nuns ranges through the three systems of primary, secondary, and university education -- the girls' various successes culminating in the winning of studentships and examinerships in the gift of the Royal University of Ireland. in other countries the Loretto nuns invariably work up to the requisite standard fixed by the extern educational authorities. (See INSTITUTE OF MARY.)

SISTER MARY GERTRUDE

Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools

NATURE AND OBJECT

The Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools is a society of male religious approved by the Church, but not taking Holy orders, and having for its object the personal sanctification of its members and the Christian education of youth, especially of the children of artisans and the poor. It accepts the direction of any kind of male educational institution, provided the teaching of Latin be excluded; but its principal object is the direction of elementary gratuitous schools. This congregation was founded in 1680, at Reims, France, by St. John Baptist de La Salle, then a canon of the metropolitan church of that city. Being struck by the lamentable disorders produced among the multitude by their ignorance of the elements of knowledge, and, what was still worse, of the principles of religion, the saint, moved with great pity for the ignorant, was led, almost without a premeditated design, to take up the work of charitable schools. In order to carry out the last will of his spiritual director, Canon Roland, he first busied himself with consolidating a religious congregation devoted to the education of poor girls. He then seconded the efforts of a zealous layman, M. Nyel, to multiply schools for poor children. Thus guided by Providence, he was led to create an institute that would have no other mission than that of Christian education.

However, it would be a serious error to insinuate that until the end of the seventeenth century the Catholic Church had interested herself but little in the education of the children of the people. From the fifth to the sixteenth century, many councils which were held, especially those of Vaison in 529 and Aachen in 817, recommended the secular clergy and monks to instruct children. In 1179 the Third Council of Lateran ordained that the poor be taught gratuitously, and in 1547 the Council of Trent decreed that in connexion with every church, there should be a master to teach the elements of human knowledge to poor children and young students preparing for orders. There were, therefore, numerous schools — petites écoles — for the common people in France in the seventeenth century, but teachers were few, because the more clever among them abandoned the children of the poor to teach those of the wealthier class and receive compensation for their work. It was evident that only a religious congregation would be able to furnish a permanent supply of educators for those who are destitute of the goods of this world. The institutes of the Venerable César de Bus in 1592 and of St. Joseph Calasanctius (1556-1648) had added Latin to the course of studies for the poor. The tentatives made in favour of boys by St. Peter Fourier (1565-1640) and Père Barré, in 1678, failed; the work of M. Demia at Lyons in 1672 was not to spread. Then God raised up St. John Baptist de La Salle, not to create gratuitous schools, but to furnish them with teachers and give them fixed methods. The undertaking was much more difficult than the founder himself imagined. At the beginning he was encouraged by Père Barré, a Minim, who had founded a society of teaching nuns, Les Dames de Saint-Maur. The clergy and faithful applauded the scheme, but it had many bitter adversaries. During forty years, from 1680 to 1719, obstacles and difficulties constantly checked the progress of the new institute, but by the prudence, humility, and invincible courage of its superior, it was consolidated and developed to unexpected proportions.

DEVELOPMENT

In 1680 the new teachers began their apostolate at Reims; in 1682 they took the name of "Brothers of the Christian Schools"; in 1684 they opened their first regular novitiate. In 1688 Providence transplanted the young tree to the parish of St-Sulpice, Paris, in charge of the spiritual sons of M. Olier. The mother-house remained in the capital until 1705. During this period the founder met with trials of every kind. The most painful came from holy priests whom he esteemed, but who entertained views of his work different from his own. Without being in any way discouraged, and in the midst of the storms, the saint kept nearly all of his first schools, and even opened new ones. He reorganized his novitiate several times, and created the first normal schools under the name of "seminaries for country teachers". His zeal was as broad and ardent as his love of souls. The course of events caused the founder to transfer his novitiate to Rouen in 1705, to the house of Saint-Yon, in the suburb of Saint-Sever, which became the centre whence the institute sent its religious into the South of France, in 1707. It was at Rouen that St. John Baptist de La Salle composed his rules, convoked two general chapters, resigned his office of superior, and ended his earthly existence by a holy death, in 1719. Declared venerable in 1840, he was beatified in 1888, and canonized in 1900.

SPIRIT OF THE INSTITUTE

The spirit of the institute, infused by the example and teachings of its founder and fostered by the exercises of the religious life, is a spirit of faith and of zeal. The spirit of faith induces a Brother to see God in all things, to suffer everything for God, and above all to sanctify himself. The spirit of zeal attracts him towards children to instruct them in the truths of religion and penetrate their hearts with the maxims of the Gospel, so that they may make it the rule of their conduct. St. John Baptist de La Salle had himself given his Brothers admirable proofs of the purity of his faith and the vivacity of his zeal. It was his faith that made him adore the will of God in all the adversities he met with; that prompted him to send two Brothers to Rome in 1700 in testimony of his attachment to the Holy See, and that led him to condemn openly the errors of the Jansenists, who tried in vain at Marseilles. and Calais to draw him over to their party. His whole life was a prolonged act of zeal: he taught school at Reims, Paris, and Grenoble, and showed how to do it well. He composed works for teachers and pupils, and especially the "Conduite des écoles" the "Devoirs du chrétien", and the "Règles de la bienséance et de la civilité chrétienne".

The saint pointed out that the zeal of a religious educator should be exercised by three principal means: vigilance, good example, and instruction. Vigilance removes from children a great many occasions of offending God; good example places before them models for imitation; instruction makes them familiar with what they should know, especially with the truths of religion. Hence, the Brothers have always considered catechism as the most important subject taught in their schools. They are catechists by vocation and the will of the Church. They are, therefore, in accordance with the spirit of their institute, religious educators: as religious, they take the three usual vows of poverty, chastity, and obedience; as educators, they add the vow of teaching the poor gratuitously according to the prescriptions of their rule, and the vow of remaining in their institute, which they may not leave of themselves even for the purpose of joining a more perfect order. Besides, the work appeared so very important to St. John Baptist de La Salle that, in order to attach the Brothers permanently to the education of the poor, he forbade them to teach Latin.

GOVERNMENT

The institute is governed by a superior general elected for life by the general chapter. The superior general is aided by assistants, who at the present time number twelve. He delegates authority to the visitors, to whom he confides the government of districts, and to directors, whom he places in charge of individual houses. With the exception of that of superior general, all the offices are temporary and renewable. The general chapters are convoked at least every ten years. Thirty-two have been held since the foundation of the congregation. The vitality of an institute depends on the training of its members. God alone is the author of vocations. He alone can attract a soul to a life of self-denial such as that of the Brothers. The mortification this life enjoins is not rigorous, but renouncement of self-will and of the frivolities of the world should gradually become complete. The usual age for admission to the novitiate of the society is from sixteen to eighteen years. Doubtless there are later vocations that are excellent, and there are earlier ones that develop the most beautiful virtues. If the aspirant presents himself at the age of thirteen or fourteen, he is placed in the preparatory or junior novitiate. During two or three years he devotes himself to study, is carefully trained to the habits of piety, and instructed how to overcome himself, so as one day to become a fervent religious.

The novitiate proper is for young men who have passed through the junior novitiate, and for postulants who have come directly from the world. During a whole year they have no other occupation than that of studying the rules of the institute and applying themselves to observe them faithfully. At the end of their first year of probation, the young Brothers enter the scholasticate, where they spend more or less time according to the nature of the duties to be assigned to them. As a rule, each of the districts of the institute has its three departments of training: the junior novitiate, the senior novitiate, and the scholasticate. In community, subjects complete their professional training and apply themselves to acquire the virtues of their state. At eighteen years of age, they take annual vows; at twenty-three, triennial vows; and when fully twenty-eight years of age, they may be admitted to perpetual profession. Finally, some years later, they may be called for some months to the exercises of a second novitiate.

METHODS OF TEACHING

In enjoining on his disciples to endeavour above all to develop the spirit of religion in the souls of their pupils, the founder only followed the traditions of other teaching bodies — the Benedictines, Jesuits, Oratorians, etc., and what was practised even by the teachers of the petites écoles. His originality lay elsewhere. Two pedagogic innovations of St. John Baptist de La Salle met with approval from the beginning:

• (1) the employment of the "simultaneous method";
• (2) the employment of the vernacular language in teaching reading.

They are set forth in the "Conduite des écoles", in which the founder condensed the experience he had acquired during an apostolate of forty years. This work remained in manuscript during the life of its author, and was printed for the first time at Avignon in 1720.

(1) By the use of the simultaneous method a large number of children of the same intellectual development could thenceforward be taught together. It is true that for ages this method had been employed in the universities, but in the common schools the individual method was adhered to. Practicable enough when the number of pupils was very limited, the individual method gave rise, in classes that were numerous, to loss of time and disorder. Monitors became necessary, and these had often neither learning nor authority. With limitations that restricted its efficacy, St. Peter Fourier had indeed recommended the simultaneous method in the schools of the Congrégation de Notre-Dame, but it never extended further. To St. John Baptist de La Salle belongs the honour of having transformed the pedagogy of the elementary school. Here required all his teachers to give the same lesson to all the pupils of a class, to question them constantly, to maintain discipline, and have silence observed. A consequence of this new method of teaching was the dividing up of the children into distinct classes according to their attainments, and later on, the formation of sections in classes in which the children were too numerous or too unequal in mental development. Thanks to these means, the progress of the children and their moral transformation commanded the admiration even of his most prejudiced adversaries.

(2) A second innovation of the holy founder was to teach the pupils to read the vernacular language, which they understood, before putting into their hands a Latin book, which they did not understand. It may be observed that this was a very simple matter, but simple as it was, hardly any educator, except the masters of the schools of Port-Royal in 1643, had bethought himself of it; besides, the experiments of the Port-Royal masters, like their schools, were short lived, and exercised no influence on general pedagogy. In addition to these two great principles, the Brothers of the Christian Schools have introduced other improvements in teaching. They likewise availed themselves of what is rational in the progress of modern methods of teaching, which their courses of pedagogy, published in France, Belgium, and Austria, abundantly prove.

THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

At the death of its founder, the Brothers of the Christian Schools numbered 27 houses and 274 Brothers, educating 9000 pupils. Seventy-three years later, at the time of the French Revolution, the statistics showed 123 houses, 920 Brothers, and 36,000 pupils (statistics of 1790). During this period, it had been governed by five superiors general: Brother Barthélemy (1717-20); Brother Timothée (1720-51); Brother Claude (1751-67); Brother Florence (1767-77); and Brother Agathon (1777-98, when he died). Under the administration of Brother Timothée successful negotiations resulted in the legal recognition of the institute by Louis XV, who granted it letters patent, 24 September, 1724; and in virtue of the Bull of approbation of Benedict XIII, 26 January, 1725, it was admitted among the congregations canonically recognized by the Church. The most prominent of its superiors general in the eighteenth century was Brother Agathon. A religious of strong character, he maintained the faithful observance of the rules by the Brothers; a distinguished educator, he published the "Douze vertus d'un bon Maître", in 1785; an eminent administrator, he created the first scholasticates, in 1781, and limited new foundations to what was indispensable, aiming rather, when the storm was gathering on the horizon, to fortify an institute that had already become relatively widespread. The congregation, however, was hardly known outside of France, except in Rome, 1700; Avignon, 1703; Ferrara, 1741; Maréville, 1743; Lunéville, 1749; and Morhange in Lorraine, 1761; Estavayer in Switzerland, 1750; Fort Royal, Martinique, 1777.

Whilst adhering to their methods of teaching during the eighteenth century, the Brothers knew how to vary their application. The superiors general insisted on having the elementary schools gratuitous and by far the more numerous. In accordance with the course of studies set down in the "Conduite des écoles", the Brothers applied themselves to teach very thoroughly reading, writing, the vernacular, and especially the catechism. The boarding school of St-Yon at Rouen, established in 1705 by St. John Baptist de La Salle himself, served as a model for like institutions: Marseilles in 1730, Angers in 1741, Reims in 1765, etc. It was proper that in these houses the course of studies should differ in some respects from that in the free schools. With the exception of Latin, which remained excluded, everything in the course of studies of the best schools of the time was taught: mathematics, history, geography, drawing, architecture, etc. In the maritime cities, such as Brest, Vannes, and Marseilles, the Brothers taught more advanced courses in mathematics and hydrography. Finally, the institute accepted the direction of reformatory institutions at Rouen, Angers, and Maréville. It was this efflorescence of magnificent works that the French Revolution all but destroyed forever.

THE BROTHERS DURING THE REVOLUTION

The revolutionary laws that doomed the monastic orders on 13 February, 1790, threatened the institute from 27 December, in the same year, by imposing on all teachers the civic oath voted on 27 November. The storm was imminent. Brother Agathon, the superior general endeavoured to establish communities in Belgium, but could organize only one, at St-Hubert in 1791, only to be destroyed in 1792. The Brothers refused to take the oath, and were everywhere expelled. The institute was suppressed in 1792, after it had been decreed that it "had deserved well of the country". The storm had broken upon the Brothers. They were arrested, and more than twenty were cast into prison. Brother Salomon, secretary general, was massacred in the Carmes (the Carmelite monastery of Paris); Brother Agathon spent eighteen months in prison; Brother Moniteur was guillotined at Rennes in 1794; Brother Raphael was put to death at Uzès; Brother Florence, formerly superior general, was imprisoned at Avignon; eight Brothers were transported to the hulks of Rochefort, where four died of neglect and starvation in 1794 and 1795.

All the schools were closed and the young Brothers enrolled in the army of the Convention. At the peril of their lives some of the older Brothers continued to teach at Elbeuf, Condrieux, Castres, Laon, Valence, and elsewhere, to save the faith of the children. The Brothers of Italy had received some of their French confrères at Rome, Ferrara, Orvieto, and Bolsena. During this time, Brother Agathon, having left his prison, remained hidden at Tours, whence he strove to keep up the courage, confidence in God, and zeal of his dispersed religious. On 7 August, 1797, Pope Pius VI appointed Brother Frumence vicar-general of the congregation. In 1798 the Italian Brothers were in their turn driven from their houses by the armed forces of the Directory. The institute seemed ruined; it reckoned only twenty members wearing the religious habit and exercising the functions of educators.

RESTORATION OF THE INSTITUTE. 1802-1810

In July, 1801, the First Consul signed the concordat with Pius VII. For the Church of France this was the spring of a new era; for the Institute of the Brothers of the Christian Schools it was a resurrection. If at the height of the storm some Brothers continued to exercise their holy functions, they were only exceptional cases. The first regular community reorganized at Lyons in 1802; others in 1803, at Paris, Valence, Reims, and Soissons. Everywhere the municipalities recalled the Brothers and besought the survivors of the woeful period to take up the schools again as soon as possible. The Brothers addressed themselves to Rome and petitioned the Brother Vicar to establish his abode in France. Negotiations were begun, and thanks to the intervention of his uncle, Cardinal Fesch, Bonaparte authorized the re-establishment of the institute, on 3 December, 1803, provided their superior general would reside in France. In November, 1804, the Brother Vicar arrived at Lyons, and took up his residence in the former petit collège of the Jesuits. The institute began to live again.

Nothing was more urgent than to reunite the former members of the congregation. An appeal was made to their faith and good will, and they responded. Shortly after the arrival of Brother Frumence at Lyons, the foundation of communities began. There were eight new ones in 1805, and as many in 1806, four in 1807, and five in 1808. Brother Frumence dying in January, 1810, a general chapter, the tenth since the foundation, was assembled at Lyons on 8 September following, and elected Brother Gerbaud to the highest office in the institute. Brother Gerbaud governed until 1822. His successors were Brother Guillaume de Jésus (1822-30); Brother Anaclet (1830-38); Brother Philippe (1838-74); Brother Jean-Olympe (1874-75); Brother Irlide (1875-84); Brother Joseph (1884-97); and Brother Gabriel-Marie elected in March, 1897. He is the thirteenth successor of St. John Baptist de La Salle.

THE INSTITUTE FROM 1810 TO 1874

After 1810 communities of the Brothers multiplied like the flowers of the fields in spring-time after the frosts have disappeared. Fifteen new schools were opened in 1817, twenty-one in 1818, twenty-six in 1819, and twenty-seven in 1821. It was in this year that the Brother Superior General, at the request of the municipality, took up his residence in Paris, with his assistants. The institute then numbered 950 Brothers and novices, 310 schools, 664 classes, and 50,000 pupils. Fifteen years had sufficed to reach the same prosperous condition in which the Revolution found it in 1789. It must not, however, be admitted that, in consequence of the services rendered by the Brothers to popular education, they always enjoyed the favour of the Government. From 1816 to 1819, Brother Gerbaud, the superior general, had to struggle vigorously for the preservation of the traditional methods of the congregation. The mutual or Lancasterian method had just been introduced into France, and immediately the powerful Société pour l'Instruction Elémentaire assumed the mission of propagating it. At a time when teachers and funds were scarce, the Government deemed it wise to pronounce in favour of the mutual school, and recommended it by an ordinance in 1818. The Brothers would not consent to abandon the "simultaneous method" which they had received from their founder, and on this account they were subjected to many vexations. During forty years the supporters of the two methods were to contend, but finally the "simultaneous" teachers achieved the victory. By holding fast to their traditions and rules the Brothers had saved elementary teaching in France.

The expansion of the Christian schools was not arrested by these struggles. In 1829 there were 233 houses, including 5 in Italy, 5 in Corsica, 5 in Belgium, 2 in the Island of Bourbon, and 1 at Cayenne; in all, 955 classes and 67,000 pupils. But the Government of Louis-Philippe obstructed this benevolent work by suppressing the grants made to certain schools: eleven were permanently closed, and twenty-nine were kept up as free schools by the charity of Catholics. The hour had now come for a greater expansion. Fortified and rejuvenated by trial, fixed for a long time on the soil of France, augmented by yearly increasing numbers, the institute could, without weakening itself, send educational colonies abroad. Belgium received Brothers at Dinant in 1816; the Island of Bourbon, 1817; Montreal, 1837; Smyrna, 1841; Baltimore, 1846: Alexandria, 1847; New York, 1848; St. Louis, 1849; Kemperhof, near Coblenz, 1851; Singapore, 1852; Algiers, 1854; London, 1855; Vienna, 1856; the Island of Mauritius, 1859; Bucharest, 1861; Karikal, India, 1862; Quito, 1863. In all of these places, the number of houses soon increased, and everywhere the same intellectual and religious results proved a recommendation of the schools of the Brothers.

The period of this expansion is that of the generalship of Brother Philippe, the most popular of the superiors of teaching congregations in the nineteenth century at the time of the Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71. Under his administration, the institute received its most active impetus. When Brother Philippe was elected superior general, in 1838, the number of schools and of Brothers was already double what it was in 1789; when he died, in 1874, it had increased in entirely unexpected proportions. The venerable superior saw the number of houses rise from 313 to 1149; that of the Brothers from 2317 to 10,235; that of their pupils from 144,000 to 350,000. And as in France, and through the benevolence of the hierarchy, Belgium, North America, the Indies, and the Levant multiplied Christian schools. Assuredly, Brother Philippe was aware that, for a religious institute, the blessing of numbers is less desirable than the progress of the religious in the spirit of their vocation. In order to strengthen them therein, the superior general composed seven volumes of "Meditations", and a large number of instructive "Circular Letters", in which are explained the duties of the Brothers as religious and as educators. Every year at the time of the retreats, until he was eighty years of age, he travelled all over France, and spoke to his Brothers in most ardent language, made still more impressive by the saintly example of this venerable old man.

THE INSTITUTE FROM 1874 TO 1908

The generalship of Brother Irlide was marked by two principal orders of facts: a powerful effort to increase the spiritual vigour of the institute by introducing the Great Exercises or retreats of thirty days; and the reorganization as free schools of the French schools which the laicization laws from 1879 to 1886 deprived of the character of communal schools. This period witnessed, especially in two regions, the establishment and multiplication of Brothers' schools. The districts of Ireland and Spain, where such fine work is going on, were organized under the administration of Brother Irlide. Indefatigable in the fight, he asserted the rights of his institute against the powerful influence which strove to set them aside. He had broad and original views which he carried out with a strong, tenacious will. What his predecessor had accomplished by indomitable energy, Brother Joseph, superior general from 1884 to 1897, maintained by the ascendency of his captivating goodness. He was an educator of rare distinction and exquisite charm. He had received from Pope Leo XIII the important mission of developing in the institute the works of Christian perseverance, so that the faith and morals of young men might be safeguarded after leaving school. One of his great delights was to transmit this direction to his Brothers and to see them work zealously for its attainment. Patronages, clubs, alumni associations, boarding-houses, spiritual retreats, etc., were doubtless already in existence; now they became more prosperous. For many years the alumni associations of France had made their action consist in friendly but rare reunions. The legal attempts against liberty of conscience forced the members into the Catholic and social struggle. They have formed themselves into sectional unions; they have an annual meeting, and have created an active movement in favour of persecuted Catholic education. The alumni associations of the Brothers in the United States and Belgium have their national federation and annual meeting.

It is especially in France that the work of the spiritual retreats, of which the chief centre has been the Association of St. Benoit-Joseph Labre, has been developed. Founded in Paris in 1883, it had, twenty-five years later, brought together 41,600 young Parisians at the house of retreat, at Athis-Mons. About the same time, "retreats previous to graduation" were gradually introduced in the schools of all countries with the view of the perseverance in their religious practices of the graduates entering upon active life. During the administration of Brother Gabriel-Marie, and until 1904, the normal progress of the congregation was not obstructed. The expansion of its divers works attained its maximum. Here are the words of one of the official reports of the Universal Exposition of Paris in 1900: "The establishments of the Institute of Brothers of the Christian Schools, spread all over the world, number 2015. They comprise 1500 elementary or high schools; 47 important boarding-schools; 45 normal schools or scholasticates for the training of subjects of the institute, and 6 normal schools for lay teachers; 13 special agricultural schools, and a large number of agricultural classes in elementary schools; 48 technical and trade schools; 82 commercial schools or special commercial courses."

Such was the activity of the Institute of St. John Baptist de La Salle when it was doomed in France by the legislation that abolished teaching by religious. Not the services rendered, nor the striking lustre of its success, nor the greatness of the social work it had accomplished, could save it. Its glory, which was to render all its schools Christian, was imputed to it as a crime. In consequence of the application of the law of 7 July, 1904, to legally authorized teaching congregations, 805 establishments of the Brothers were closed in 1904, 196 in 1905, 155 in 1906, 93 in 1907, and 33 in 1908. Nothing was spared. The popular and free schools to the number of more than a thousand; the boarding and half-boarding schools such as Passy in Paris, those at Reims, Lyons, Bordeaux, Marseilles, etc.; the cheap boarding schools for children of the working class, such as the admirable houses of St. Nicholas, the technical and trade schools of Lyons, Saint-Etienne, Saint-Chamond, Commentry, etc.; the agricultural institutions of Beauvais, Limoux, etc. — all were swept away. The blows were severe, but the beautiful tree of the institute had taken root too firmly in the soil of the whole Catholic world to have its vitality endangered by the lopping off of a principal branch. The remaining branches received a new afflux of sap, and on its vigorous trunk there soon appeared new branches. From 1904 to 1908, 222 houses have been founded in England, Belgium, the islands of the Mediterranean, the Levant, North and South America, the West Indies, Cape Colony, and Australia.

SCHOOLS OF EUROPE AND THE EAST

When their schools were suppressed by law in France, the Brothers endeavoured with all their might to assure to at least a portion of the children of the poor the religious education of which they were about to be deprived. At the same time the institute established near the frontiers of Belgium and Holland, of Spain and Italy, ten boarding-schools for French boys. The undertaking was venturesome, but God has blessed it, and these boarding-schools are all flourishing. Belgium has 75 establishments conducted by the Brothers, comprising about 60 popular free schools, boarding-schools, official normal schools, and trade schools known as St. Luke schools. There are 32 houses in Lorraine, Austria, Hungary, Bohemia, Galicia, Albania, Bulgaria, and Rumania. Spain, including the Canaries and the Balearic Isles, has 100 houses of the institute, of which about 80 are popular gratuitous schools. In Italy there are 34 houses, 9 of which are in Rome. The Brothers have been established over fifty years in the Levant, Turkey, Syria, and Egypt. The 50 houses which they conduct are centres of Christian education and influence, and are liberally patronized by the people of these countries. The district of England and Ireland comprises 25 houses, the Brothers for the most part being engaged in the "National" schools. In London they direct a college and an academy; in Manchester, an industrial school; and in Waterford, a normal school or training college, the 200 students of which are King's scholars, who are paid for by a grant from the British Government. In India, the Brothers have large schools, most of which have upwards of 800 pupils. Those of Colombo, Rangoon, Penang, Moulmein, Mandalay, Singapore, Malacca, and Hong Kong in China, stand high in public estimation. They are all assisted by government grants.

SCHOOLS IN AMERICA

The institute has already established 72 houses in Mexico, Cuba, Ecuador, Colombia, Panama, Argentina, and Chile. When Brother Facile was appointed visitor of North America in 1848, he found in Canada 5 houses, 56 Brothers and 3200 pupils in their schools. In 1908, the statistics show 48 houses, and nearly 20,000 pupils. The parochial schools are gratuitous, according to the constant tradition of the institute. The most important boarding-school is Mount St. Louis, Montreal. At the request of the Most Reverend Samuel Eccleston, Brother Philippe, superior general, sent three brothers to Baltimore in 1846. The district of which Baltimore has become the centre now contains 24 houses, the Brothers of which for the most part are engaged in gratuitous parochial schools; they also conduct five colleges; a protectory; and the foundations of the family of the late Francis Anthony Drexel of Philadelphia, namely, St. Francis Industrial School, at Eddington, Pa.; the Drexmor, a home for working boys at Philadelphia; and the St. Emma Industrial and Agricultural College of Belmead, Rock Castle, Va., for coloured boys. The district of New York is the most important in America. It comprises 38 houses, most of the Brothers of which are engaged in teaching parochial gratuitous schools. In addition to these they conduct Manhattan College, the De La Salle Institute, La Salle Academy, and Clason Point Military Academy, in New York City, and academies and high schools in other important cities. The New York Catholic Protectory, St. Philip's Home, and four orphan asylums and industrial schools under their care contain a population of 2500 children.

The district of St. Louis contains 19 houses, the majority of the Brothers of which are doing parochial school work. They conduct large colleges at St. Louis and Memphis, and important academies and high schools at Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis, Duluth, St. Joseph and Santa Fé. They also have charge of the Osage Nation School for Indian boys at Gray Horse, Oklahoma. The district of San Francisco comprises 13 houses, and as in the other districts, the Brothers are largely engaged in parochial schools; but they also conduct St. Mary's College at Oakland, the Sacred Heart College at San Francisco, and the Christian Brothers' College at Sacramento, together with academies at Berkeley, Portland, Vancouver, and Walla Walla, and the St. Vincent Orphan Asylum, Marin Co., California, which contains 500 boys. The total number of pupils of the Brothers in the United States is thirty thousand. Their 94 houses are spread over 33 archdioceses and dioceses. It would not be possible in such an article as this to recall the memory of all the religious who, during the last sixty years, figured prominently in this development of their institute. Among those who have been called to their reward, we may however mention the revered names of Brothers Facile and Patrick, assistants to the superior general.

INTELLECTUAL ACTIVITY

The Brothers of the Christian Schools are too much absorbed by the work of teaching to devote themselves to the writing of books not of immediate utility in their schools. But, for the use of their pupils, they have written a large number of works on all the specialities in their courses of studies. Such works have been written in French, English, German, Italian, Spanish Flemish, Turkish, Annamite, etc. The Brothers' schoolbooks treat of the following subjects: Christian doctrine, reading, writing, arithmetic, geometry, algebra, trigonometry, mechanics, history, geography, agriculture, physics, chemistry, physiology, zoology, botany, geology, the modern languages, grammar, literature, philosophy, pedagogy, methodology, drawing, shorthand, etc.

Annales de l'institut des frères des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1883); Essai historique sur la maison mère de l'institut des frères des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1905); DUBOIS-BERGERSON, Les nouvelles écoles à la Lancaster comparées avec l'enseignement des frères des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1817); La vérité sur l'enseignement mutuel (Paris, 1821); RENDU, L'association en général, et particulièrement l'association charitable des frères des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1845); D'ARSAC, Les frères des écoles chrétiennes pendant la guerre franco-allemande de 1870-1871 (Paris, 1872); Rapport de l'académie française sur le prix de Boston, décerné à l'institut des frères des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1872); American Catholic Quarterly Review (October, 1879); Reports of the universal exhibitions of Paris, Vienna, Chicago, etc.; CAISSE, L'institut des frères des écoles chrétiennes, son origine, son but et ses œuvres (Montreal, 1883); CHEVALIER, Les frères des écoles chrétiennes et l'enseignement primaire (Paris, 1887); RENDU, Sept ans de guerre à l'enseignement libre (Paris, 1887); Catholic World (August, 1900; September, 1901); DES CILLEULS, Histoire de l'enseignement primaire (Paris, 1908); AZARIAS, Educational Essays (Chicago, 1896); GOSOOT, Essai critique sur l'enseignement primaire en France (Paris, 1905); JUSTINUS, Déposition dans l'enguête sur l'enseignement secondaire (Paris, 1899); CAlL, Rapport sur l'enseignement technique dans les écoles catholiques en France (Paris, 1900); Autour de l'enseignement congréganiste (Paris, 1905); VESPEYREN, La lutte scolaire en Belgique (Brussels, 1906); Bulletin de l'œuvre de Saint Jean Baptiste de La Salle; Bulletin des écoles chrétiennes; Bulletin de l'œuvre de la jeunesse; L'éducation chrétienne; Bulletins of the Various alumni associations formed by graduates of the Brothers' Schools; Bulletins and reports published by colleges, normal schools, etc.; Biographies of Brothers Irénée, Salomon, Philippe, Joseph, Scubilion, Exupérien, Auguste-Hubert, Alpert, Léon de Jésus etc.; Directoire pédagogique a l'usage des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1903); Conduite à l'usage des écoles chrétiennes (Paris, 1903); Eléments de Pédagogie pratique (Paris, 1901); Traité théorique et pratique de Pédagogie (Namur, 1901); Manuel de Pédagogie à l'usage des écoles primaires catholiques (Paris, 1909).

BROTHER PAUL JOSEPH.

Roman Historical Institutes

Collegiate bodies established at Rome by ecclesiastical or civil authority for the purpose of historical research, notably in the Vatican archives.

I. THE EARLIEST SCIENTIFIC USES OF THE VATICAN ARCHIVES

In purely business matters or those of a political or diplomatic nature, the Roman ecclesiastical authorities have always relied on the material abundantly stored up in their archives. A glance at the papal "Regesta" of the thirteenth century shows occasional reference to documents formerly kept in the archives, but which had been lost. In time these references multiply and point to a constant official intercourse between the Curia and the keepers of the Apostolic archives. It is rare that such references disclose a purely scientific interest, and then only when foreign authorities inquire after documents that would facilitate domestic researches on given topics. Then, as now, it was the official duty of the personnel of the archives to attend to all such matters. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the awakening critical investigation of the past led some scholars to resort to the rich treasures of the papal archives, and they were always treated with the utmost courtesy. The most far-reaching and efficient use of the archives for historical purposes began with Cæsar Baronius, later cardinal, and author of the well-known monumental work on ecclesiastical history, undertaken at the instance of St. Philip Ned, "Annales ecclesiastici a Christo nato ad annum 1198", in twelve folio volumes (Rome, 1588-1593). Through this work, and in the several continuations of it by others, the world first learned of the great wealth of historical documents contained in the Roman archives, and especially in the archives of the Vatican. The extensive "Bullaria", or compilations of papal decrees, general and particular (see BULLS AND BRIEFS), are drawn in part from the archives of the recipients, but could never have reached their imposing array of volumes had not the Vatican furnished abundant material.

In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, ecclesiastical historians and the writers of the almost countless monographs (some of them very valuable) concerning local churches, monasteries, ecclesiastical institutions, etc. were greatly aided by the officials of the archives, themselves often scholarly investigators. In this respect the papal archivist, Augustin Theiner (1804-74) accomplished very far-reaching work, of great service to certain medieval countries or groups of countries, when he published, in many folio volumes, a multitude of documents relative to the ecclesiastical and civil history of Northern, Eastern, and Southern Europe, also a documentary treatise in three folio volumes on the temporal dominion of the pope and its administration. In the same period, i.e. from about 1850 to 1875, several other investigators, chiefly German and Austrian, in one way or another secured admittance to the papal archives. These events and other influences increased the desire of all scholars for the opening of this valuable repository of important historical documents. Although under Pius IX it became somewhat easier to obtain a permit for private research, the turbulent political conditions of his reign forbade anything like a general opening of the Vatican Archives.

II. OPENING OF THE VATICAN ARCHIVES

"We have nothing to fear from the publication of documents", exclaimed Leo XIII, when on 20 June, 1879, he appointed the ecclesiastical historian, Joseph Hergenröther, "Cardinal Archivist of the Holy Roman Church" (Palmieri, "Introite ed Esiti di Papa Niccolò III", Rome, pp. xiv, xv; Friedensburg, "Das kgl. Preussische Historische Institut in Rom", Berlin, 1903, passim). By this act he opened to students the archives of the Vatican, more especially what are known as the secret archives, despite strong opposition from several quarters. It took until the beginning of 1881 to arrange all preliminaries, including the preparation of suitable quarters for the work, after which date the barriers were removed which, until then, with a few exceptions, had shut out all investigators. The use of these treasures was at length regularized by a papal Decree (regolamento) of 1 May, 1884, whereby this important matter was finally removed from the province of discussion. In the meantime the pope had addressed to the three cardinals, Pitra, De Luca, and Hergenröther, his now famous letter on historical studies (18 Aug., 1883).

III. SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE SECRET ARCHIVES

Hitherto very little was known of the contents of this vast treasury; now its great wealth came to be widely appreciated — Briefs, Bulls, petitions, department records, reports of nuncios and other reports, diaries, documentary collections, privileges, legal titles of the most miscellaneous kind, etc. Progress was at first rather slow, for no systematic use of the archives could be planned until the workers had familiarized themselves with the material at hand. The over-hasty treatment that, in the beginning, the thirteenth century material received, revealed quite clearly how much there was to learn before the archives could be used to the best advantage. Gradually, however, good order was introduced in all kinds of research work, in which task notable services were rendered by the historical institutes which from time to time were established in close relation to the Vatican Archives. Research work in these archives may be divided into individual and collective, or general and special. Individual researches are made by individual scholars, while collective work is conducted by several who have either united for that purpose, or belong permanently to some association. General research devotes itself to the larger outlines of ecclesiastical history, while special research seeks the solution of particular problems, more or less far-reaching in importance. Both methods may be combined, objectively and subjectively; an individual investigator may work at a general theme, while an association may take up the study of a restricted or specific problem, and vice versa. The results of Vatican historical study are to be found in periodicals, essays, and books, also disseminated in large historical collections devoted to other classes of historical material, and containing the results of other investigations, e.g. the "Monumenta Germaniæ Historica". A study of the published material exhibits long series of original documents, narratives based on copious documentary material, and occasionally narratives based on information obtained in the archives, but unaccompanied by the documents or by reference to them.

IV. FIELD OF INVESTIGATION

While it is but natural that the study of documents should be chiefly done in the Vatican archives, most investigators also carry on work in the important collection of printed books known as the Vatican Library. In October, 1892, there was opened in connexion with the archives and the Library a consultation library, the "Bibliotheca Leoniana", in order to facilitate research, historical and Biblical. Governments, academies, libraries, archives, and corporations contributed to it, and it has already reached very large proportions. The archives themselves are so organized that nearly every student of history may discover there something of special importance in his own province. The numerous other archives and manuscript-collections of Rome are also open, as a rule, to the student; indeed, few workers limit themselves exclusively to Vatican materials. Moreover, studies begun in the Vatican are often supplemented by scientific excursions to other Italian cities, either on the student's homeward journey or during some vacation period; such excursions have at times resulted in surprising discoveries. An exhaustive examination of Italian archives and libraries leads occasionally to a larger view of the subject than was originally intended by the investigator, for whom in this way new questions of importance spring up, the definite solution of which becomes highly desirable. Experience, therefore, and the detailed study of the numerous repertories, indexes, and inventories of manuscripts, have made it necessary to organize permanently the scientific historical researches carried on in the interest of any given country. This means a saving of money and of labour; in this way also more substantial achievements can be hoped for than from purely individual research. Consequently, institutes for historical research were soon founded in Rome, somewhat on the plan of the earlier archæological societies. While the opening of such institutes is a nobile offlcium of any government, private associations have made serious sacrifices in the same direction and sustained with success the institutes they have called into life. The state institutes investigate all that pertains to national relations or intercourse (religion, politics, economics, science, or art) with the Curia, with Rome, or, for that matter, with Italy. Many of these institutes do not attempt to go further, and their field is certainly comprehensive and in itself admirable. Others devote themselves to similar researches, but do not neglect general questions of interest to universal history, profane or ecclesiastical, or to the history of medieval culture. Of course, only the larger institutes, with many workers at their disposal, can satisfactorily undertake problems of this nature.

V. HISTORICAL INSTITUTES AT THE VATICAN ARCHIVES

England

At the end of 1876 the Rev. Joseph Stevenson, who was employed by the English Public Record Office to obtain transcripts of documents of historical importance in the Vatican archives, resigned his appointment, and Sir Thomas Hardy, on Cardinal Manning's recommendation, appointed the late Mr. W. H. Bliss as his successor. Though for years Stevenson and Bliss conducted their researches alone, in the last decade other English investigators, chiefly younger men, had been detailed to Rome by the home Government to co-operate with Bliss and hasten the progress of his work. Bliss died very suddenly of pneumonia, at an advanced age, 8 March, 1909, and though his place has not yet been filled by the English Government, English investigators continue the work, under direction of the Record Office; they strictly confine themselves, however, to the search for English documents. Scientific use of this material was not called for, and was therefore not undertaken. Short résumés were provided in English of the contents of the documents in question, so as to facilitate the widest possible use to those who had not sufficient mastery of Latin and Italian. So far there have appeared: "Calendars of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland:"

• I. "Papal Letters" (London, since 1892 seven volumes to date, the eighth in course of preparation);
• II. "Petitions to the Pope" (1 vol.). The reports of these investigations are to be found in the "Annual Reports of the Deputy Keeper of the Public Records", the first one, covering 1877, 1878, and 1879, is found under the year 1880.

In addition to the medieval material, numerous extracts and transcripts of a political nature were made from sixteenth- and seventeenth-century documents, transmitted to the Record Office and partly used in the "Calendars of State Papers".

France

The Ecole Française de Rome, originally one with that of Athens, employs almost constantly historical investigators at the Grande Archivio of Naples; they devote themselves to the documents of the Angevin dynasty. This institute has an organ of its own, the "Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire", in whose pages are found not only historical studies properly so called, but also papers on the history of archæology and of art. The institute has s home in the Palazzo Farnese, where its director lives, and where a rich library is housed. It was founded in 1873, and during the reign of Pius IX, long before the opening of the secret archives, inaugurated its great achievement, the editing of the papal "Regesta" of the thirteenth century, a gigantic and yet unfinished task. Scholars of international reputation have figured among its directors; its present head is Monsignor Louis Duchesne, whose monumental work, the "Liber Pontificalis", and numerous other productions, place him in the forefront of Church historians. The "Bibliothèque des Ecoles Françaises d'Athènes et de Rome", is made up of lengthy monographs by pupils of the Ecole, treating of divers subjects connected with their studies in the Vatican archives and library. The papal "Regesta" of the thirteenth century, the "Liber Pontificalis", and the "Liber Censuum" (Fabre-Duchesne) form a second series of historical publications to the credit of the French school. A third series is made up of documents selected from the fourteenth-century papal "Regesta", and is entitled "Lettres des papes d'Avignon se rapportant à la France". The slow progress of so many learned enterprises is a matter of general regret, nor can one always approve the methods employed, though no one can deny the very great utility of these scholarly studies and researches for the history of the papacy and its international relations. The chaplains of the French National Institute of St-Louis des Français have recently undertaken a work closely related to that of the Ecole Française, the publication in concise regesta-like form of all letters of the Avignon popes. Gratifying progress is being made with the "Regesta" of John XXII. The review known as the "Annales de St-Louis des Français", whose contributions to ecclesiastical history were noteworthy, has been discontinued. Other works of a learned historical nature have been published by the chaplains of this institute, the results of their diligent researches in the Vatican archives.

German Catholic Institutes

The chaplains of the German national institute of Santa Maria di Campo Santo Teutonico were among the first to profit by the opening of the secret archives for the conduct of scientific research in the field of German ecclesiastical history. Monsignor de Waal, director of the institute, founded the "Römische Quartalschrift für Archäologie und Kirchengeschichte" as a centre for historical research more modest and limited in scope, and it fulfils this purpose in a creditable manner. To the students of history at the Campo Santo is owing the founding, at Rome, of the Görres Society Historical Institute. This institute, established after long hesitation, sufficiently explained by the slender resources of the society, is now a credit to its founders (besides regular reports, begun in 1890, on the work of this institute, and filed in the records of the society, see Cardauns, "Die Görres Gesellschaft, 1876-1901", Cologne, 1901, pp. 65-73). In 1900 a new department was added and placed under the guidance of Monsignor Wilpert, for the study of Christian archæology and the history of Christian art. The Roman labours of the Görres Society Institute deal chiefly with nunciature reports, the administration records of the Curia since 1300, and the Acts of the Council of Trent. Other publications, more or less broad in scope, are published regularly in the "Historisches Jahrbuch", among its "Quellen und Forschungen", or in other organs of the Görres Society. The twelve stout volumes in which this institute proposes to edit exhaustively the Acts and records of the Council of Trent, represent one of the most difficult and important tasks which could be set before a body of workers in the Vatican archives. The aforesaid investigation of medieval papal administration and financial records, which the institute investigates in cooperation with the Austrian Leo Society, open up a chief source of information for the history of the Curia in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

The results accomplished by this purely private association surpass greatly those of many governmental institutes. The Görres Society Institute maintains at Rome no library of its own, but aids efficiently in the growth of the fine library at the Campo Santo Teutonico, near the Vatican. The Leo Society supports at Rome a trained investigator, who devotes his time to publications from the papal treasury (Camera), records of the later Middle Ages. The present director of the Görres Society Institute is Dr. Stephan Ehses.

Austria

The Austrian institute (Instituto Austriaco di studi storici), established by Theodor von Sickel, and now directed by Professor von Pastor, has existed since 1883. It affords young historical workers the means of familiarizing themselves during a brief sojourn at Rome with the rich manuscript materials accumulated there, and in this way enables them to produce monographs of value. It cooperates in the publication of the nunciature reports, and contemplates the publication of the correspondence of the legates and the ambassadors at the Council of Trent. Among the publications of this institute are Sickel's study on the "Privilegium Ottonianum"; his edition of the "Liber Diurnus"; and his noteworthy "Römische Berichte" (Roman reports). Several valuable studies by this institute have appeared in the "Mittheilungen des österreichischen Institutes für Geschichtsforschung," dealing with the work of the medieval papal chancery, while Ottenthal's "Chancery Rules" and Tangl's "Chancery Regulations" are constantly referred to in every recent work on the Middle Ages. The numerous historical commissions which were sent from Bohemia to Rome (concerning which, see below) may be considered as auxiliaries of the Austrian Institute.

Prussia

A short history of the founding of the Prussian historical institute was published by Friedensburg (Berlin, Academy of Sciences). The project dates back to 1883, but it was not until May of 1888 that Konrad Schottmüller succeeded in opening a Prussian Historical Bureau that began modestly enough, but soon developed into the actual Prussian Institute, reorganized (12 November, 1902) on a materially enlarged scale, and now the most important of all historical institutes at Rome, owing largely to the efforts of its present director, Professor Kehr. In addition to the general work of historical investigations, special departments are conducted for the history of art and for patristic and Biblical research. Besides its own publication," Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven" the institute issues a series of German nunciature reports (eleven volumes since 1897). The Library of the Institute, besides extensive monographs on various subjects, has published the useful "Repertorium Germanicum", and, in co-operation with the Instituto Storico Italiano, the "Registrum chartarum Italiæ", a series of independent volumes. These researches take in Italian, German, French, English, and Spanish archives; Austria and Switzerland are likewise visited occasionally. The library of the institute ranks, with that of the Palazzo Farnese, among the best historical libraries in Rome.

Hungary

The "Hungaricorum Historicorum Collegium Romanum", though no longer in existence, owed its inception in 1892 to the efforts of Monsignor Fraknói, and published under his direction (since 1897) the "Monumenta Vaticana historiam regni Hungariæ illustrantia", whose two series in ten folio volumes are a lasting tribute to the munificence of Fraknói. Other noteworthy monographs based on Roman documents and illustrating the history of Hungary must be credited to this institute.

Belgium

The "Institut historique Belge à Rome" was founded in December, 1904. The minister of state defined its purpose to be the searching of Italian archives, and especially those of the Vatican, for historical material bearing on Belgium, and the publication of the results obtained. The project included a centre for individual Belgian investigators as well as for students assisted by the State, where all might find an adequate library and facilities for securing historical data of every kind. The institute, it is hoped, will eventually become an "Ecole des hautes études" for the study of ecclesiastical and profane history, classical philology, archæology, and the history of art. Its first director was Dom Ursmer Berlière, of the Abbey of Maredsous (1904-1907); his successor is Dr. Gottfried Kurth, professor emeritus at the University of Liège. The institute has published thus far two volumes of "Analecta Vaticano-Belgica":

• I, "Suppliques de Clément VI" (1342-1352), by Berlière;
• II, "Lettres de Jean XXII" (1316-1334), vol. I (1316-1324), by Fayen.

The following are in preparation:

• "Lettres de Jean XXII", vol. II, by Fayen;
• "Suppliques d'Innocent VI" (1352-1362), by Berlière;
• "Lettres de Benoit XII" (1334-1342), by Fierens.

Two other volumes are under way. By his pamphlet "De la création d'une école Belge à Rome" (Tournai, 1896), Professor Cauchie of Louvain contributed greatly to the founding of the institute.

Holland

The Netherland institute grew out of various historical commissions, the last of which was established 20 May, 1904. Its two representatives, Dr. Brom and Dr. Orbaan, were appointed on 31 March, 1906, director and secretary respectively of the state institute founded on this date, and of which they thus became the first members (Brom, "Nederlandsche gesehiedvorsching en Rome", 1903). This institute aims at a systematic investigation of Holland's ecclesiastical and political relations, and of her artistic, scientific, and economic relations, with Rome and Italy during the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, a period of very great importance for Holland. A yearly report of the institute and its library appears at The Hague in "Verslagen omtrent's Rikjs onde archieven". Besides a number of essays and minor works, there appeared at The Hague, during 1908, a work by Brom, "Archivalia in Italie"; part I, Rome, "Vaticaansch Archief". All historical material in Italian archives bearing on the Netherlands will be concisely described in this series of volumes; the first part contains 2650 numbers, and is specially valuable because of the excellent conspectus it offers of the contents of the Vatican archives. A work by Orbaan, on Dutch scholars and artists in Rome, is ready for the press (1910).

VI. MISCELLANEOUS RESEARCHES IN THE VATICAN ARCHIVES

The institutes above-mentioned offer a very incomplete idea of the historical work done in the Vatican archives. Many Frenchmen, Germans, Austrians, Belgians, and others flock to Rome and spend much of their time in private investigations of their own. Most of these workers attach themselves to some institute and profit by its experience. Among Americans we may mention Professor Charles Homer Haskins, who familiarized himself with the treasures contained in the archives and library, and made a report on the same for the "American Historical Review", reprinted in the "Catholic University Bulletin", Washington, 1897, pp. 177-196; Rev. P. de Roo, who laboured for several years on the "Regesta" of Alexander VI; Heywood, who compiled the "Documenta selecta e tabulario Sanctæ Sedis, insulas et terras anno 1492 repertas a Christophoro Columbo respicientia", which he published in phototype in 1892. Other American scholars have profited largely by the immemorial academic hospitality of the popes. Special mention should be made here of the studies of Luka Jelic and Conrad Eubel concerning early missionary enterprises, and of an essay by Shipley on "The Colonization of America" (Lucerne, 1899). For other valuable information see the tenth volume of the "Records of the American Catholic Historical Society of Philadelphia". The time would seem to be at hand for the foundation of an American Catholic historical institute, which would take over the task of collecting and publishing in a systematic way the numerous important documents concerning the American Church preserved in many places at Rome, particularly in the Propaganda archives. Russia has sent historical commissions to Rome repeatedly, and for several years at a time. The names of Schmurlow, Brückner, Pierling, Forster, Wiersbowski, and others are sufficient reminders of the excellent work accomplished. From Japan came Dr. Murakami, to explore the Propaganda and Vatican archives for a history of the Catholic missions to Japan (1549-1690). Denmark is represented among the investigators by such names as Moltesen, Krarup, and Lindback; Norway by Storm, and Sweden by Tegnér, Elof, Karlson, and others. Moritz Stern, Felix Vernet, and others obtained at the Vatican material for a history of the Hebrews. The Spanish Government was long officially represented by the famous Spanish historian, Ricardo de Hinojosa, while researches in Portuguese history are conducted by MacSwiney. Switzerland entered into this peaceful competition by the labours of Kirsch and Baumgarten in 1899, and since the close of the last century many Swiss have visited Rome for Vatican researches, both as individuals and on official missions. We need only mention the names of Büchi, Wirz, Bernoulli, Steffens, Reinhard, and Stückelberg.

In addition to these and many more names, we must mention the numerous religious who seek in the archives fresh material for general ecclesiastical history, or the history of their order, e. g. the Benedictines and the Bollandists. The writer has observed at work in the archives during the last twenty-one years Dominicans, Jesuits, Franciscans, Minor Conventuals, Capuchins, Trinitarians, Cistercians, Benedictines, Basilians, Christian Brothers, Lateran Canons Regular, Vallombrosans, Camaldolese, Olivetans, Silvestrines, Carthusians, Augustinians, Mercedarians, Barnabites, and others. Women have at times secured temporary admittance, though for intelligible reasons this privilege is now restricted. Since 1879 the archives have welcomed Catholics, Protestants, Hebrews, believers and infidels, Christians and heathens, priests and laymen, men and women, rich and poor, persons of high social standing and plain citizens, of every nation and language. The writer is acquainted with nearly all the great archives of Europe, and knows that none of them afford similar facilities to the historical student or extend him more courtesy. The number of visitors is at all times higher than to other archives, while the freedom allowed in the use of the material is the most far-reaching known; practically nothing is kept hidden.

VII. RESULTS OF VATICAN RESEARCH

It is not easy to determine which branch of historical science derives most benefit from Vatican research, nor is the question a simple one. Chronologically, there is no doubt that so far the most favoured period is that of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The sixteenth century comes next, much light being shed on it by the nunciature reports and the Acts of the Council of Trent. The seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries have hitherto been represented by few works, and these not very comprehensive. From the standpoint of subjects treated, Vatican research falls into three parts:

• (1) The study of the ecclesiastical relations of Rome with individual nations or peoples;
• (2) Roman ecclesiastical administration in all its details;
• (3) the influence exerted by the papacy on the civilized world, whether purely political or of a mixed political and religious nature.

If we consider the medieval period under the first of these subdivisions the results obtained are substantially as follows:

• (a) compilation of correct lists of bishops and titular bishops;
• (b) investigation of the so-called Servitia (communia et secreta), i. e. of certain dues paid at Rome, among them pallium dues;
• (c) completer lists of bishoprics, abbeys, prelateships and churches directly subject to the Holy See;
• (d) lists, as complete as possible, of all kinds of papal ordinances, processes decisions, constitutions, and decrees;
• (e) study of the entire system of minor benefices in so far as affected by curial reservations;
• (f) selection from the petition files of all requests growing out of the said system;
• (g) reports of bishops on the state of their dioceses, and consistorial processes;
• (h) investigation into the influence of the Inquisition, to determine how far the respective local authorities were influenced by the Curia;
• (i) inquiry into the taxes imposed on clergy and Churches for purely ecclesiastical purposes, and into the ways and means of collecting these taxes.

For certain dioceses, ecclesiastical provinces, regions, or entire countries, all these data, together with other items of information, have in the course of time been gathered, and published, by individuals and by associations. They have also, in a general way, been made generally accessible by the publication, as a whole, of the respective papal registers (see REGISTERS, PAPAL), e. g. the "Regesta" publications of the French institute, and the cameral (papal fiscal) reports of the Görres and Leo societies. "Chartularia", or collections of papal Bulls have been published not only for Westphalia, Eastern and Western Prussia, Utrecht, Bohemia, Salzburg, Aquileia, but also for Denmark, Poland, Switzerland, Great Britain, Ireland, and Germany (Repertorium Germanicum), not to speak of other countries. Many a student of the Vatican archives has devoted all his time to a single subject, e. g. Armellini, "Le Chiese di Roma"; Storm, "Die Obligationen der norwegischen Prälaten von 1311-1523"; Samaran-Mollat, "La fiscalité pontificale en France au l4 ^me siècle"; Berlière, "Les 'Libri Obligationum et Solutionum' des archives vaticanes", for the Dioceses of Cambrai, Liège, Thérouanne, and Tournai; Rieder, "Römische Quellen zur Konstanzer Bisthumsgeschichte (1305-1378)".

The work done in the second subdivision is of the greatest importance for questions of history, canon law, and general and medieval culture. The all-pervading activity of the medieval popes has been richly illustrated by various investigators, e. g. Göller on the records of the "Pœnitentiaria"; Kirsch and Baumgarten on the finances (officials, administration) of the College of Cardinals; Baumgarten on the respective offices of the vice-chancellor and the "Bullatores", the residence-quarters of the Curia, its Cursores or messengers; Watzl, Göller, and Schäfer on the finance bureau of the Curia; von Ottenthal on the secretaries and the "Chancery rules"; Tangl and Erler respectively on the "Chancery regulations" and the "Liber Cancellariæ"; Kehr, Berlière, and Rieder on the petition files (libelli supplices), etc. The student will find quite helpful illustration of these delicate labours in the remarkable editions of the "Liber Pontificalis" by Duchesne; the "Liber Censuum" by Duchesne-Fabre; the "Italia Pontificia" by Kehr; the "Hierarchia Catholica Medii Ævi" by Eubel; the "Catalogue of Cardinals" by Cristofori; the "Acts of the Council of Trent", by Ehses, Merkle, and Buschbell, not to speak of numerous other valuable works. As to the third subdivision, i. e. the purely political, or politico-ecclesiastical activities of the popes, no clearly defined distinction can be made, either in the Middle Ages or in more modern times, between these activities and the exercise of purely ecclesiastical authority; their numerous manifestations may be studied in the publications briefly described above. Abundant information is to be found in the publications of the papal "Regesta" and the "Camera" or treasury, records. We learn from them many curious items of profane history, e. g. the population of various kingdoms, grants of tithes to kings and rulers for political purposes, etc. The nunciature reports are rich in this information.

In a general way the Vatican archives and these new historical Roman institutes have been particularly helpful towards a better knowledge of the ecclesiastico-religious relations of individual dioceses, countries, and peoples with the head of the Church and its central administration. So numerous have been the results of investigation published along these lines, that it has hitherto been impracticable to prepare an exhaustive bibliography of the works based on studies in the Vatican archives. Melampo and Ranuzzi, following in the footsteps of Meister, have recently published a very useful, but not at all exhaustive, list of all the books and essays of this kind which had appeared up to 1900: "Saggio bibliografico dei lavori eseguiti nell' Archivio Vaticano" (Rome, 1909). (See VATICAN, sub-title Archives, Library; and BULLARIUM.)

Most of the information on the Roman historical institutes is as yet scattered in essays and book prefaces. Besides the works of FRIEDENSBURG and BROM above referred to, see HASKINS, The Vatican Archives in American Hist. Rev. (October, 1896), reprinted in Catholic Univ. Bulletin (April, 1897); CAUCHIE, De la création d'une école belge à Rome; SCHLECHT in BUCHBERGER, Kirchliches Handlexikon, s. v. Institute, historische; and the financial reports of the various institutes in their respective official publications. Among the accounts published by the various historical commissions the best have always been those of the Poles and the Russians, and are to be found in MELAMPO-RANUZZI.

PAUL M. BAUMGARTEN.

Canonical Institution

(Lat. institutio, from instituere, to establish)

In its widest signification, Canonical Institution denotes any manner, in accordance with canon law, of acquiring an ecclesiastical benefice (Regula prima juris, in VIto). In its strictest sense the word denotes the collation of an ecclesiastical benefice by a legitimate authority, on the presentation of a candidate by a third person (institutio tituli collativa). The term is used also for the actual putting in possession of a benefice (institutio corporalis), and for the approbation requisite for the exercising of the ecclesiastical ministry when an authority inferior to the bishop has power to confer an ecclesiastical benefice (institutio auctorisabilis). (Cf. gloss on "Regula prima juris", in VIto, s. v. "Beneficium".)

I. The institutio tituli collativa (that which gives the title), sometimes also called verbalis (which may be by word of mouth or by writing, as distinguished from the institutio corporalis, or realis), is the act by which an ecclesiastical authority confers a benefice on a candidate presented by a third person enjoying the right of presentation. This occurs in the case of benefices subject to the right of patronage (jus patronatus), one of the principal prerogatives of which is the right of presenting to the bishop a titular for a vacant benefice. It also occurs when, in virtue of a privilege or of a concordat, a chapter, a sovereign, or a government has the right to present to the pope the titular of a bishopric or of an important ecclesiastical office. If the pope accepts the person presented, he bestows the institutio canonica on the titular, The effect of this act is to give the candidate who has been presented (and who till then had only a jus ad rem, i. e. the right to be provided with the benefice) a jus in re or in beneficio, i, e. the right of exercising the functions connected with the benefice and of receiving revenues accruing from it. The right of institution to major benefices rests in the pope, but in the case of minor benefices it may belong to a bishop and his vicar-general, to a vicar capitular, or even to other ecclesiastics, in virtue of a foundation title dating from before the Council of Trent (Sess, XIV, "de Ref.", c. xii), or of a privilege, or of prescription. In all these cases the bishop has the right to examine the candidate, excepting candidates presented by universities recognized canonically (Council of Trent, Sess. VII, "de Ref.", c. xiii; Sess. XXV, "de Ref.", c. ix); even this exception does not apply to parishes (Council of Trent, Sess. XXIV, "de Ref.", c. xviii). Institution ought to be bestowed within the two months following the presentation, in the case of parish churches (Constitution of Pius V, "In conferendis", 16 March, 1567), but canon law has not specified any fixed time with regard to other benefices. However, if the bishop refuses to grant institution within the time appointed by a superior authority, the latter can make the grant itself (see JUS PATRONATUS).

II. The institutio corporalis, also called investitura, or installatio, is the putting of a titular in effective possession of his benefice. Whereas canon law permits a bishop to put himself in possession of his benefice (see ENTHRONIZATION), in the case of minor benefices it requires an actual installation by a competent authority. The bishop may punish any one who takes possession of a benefice on his own authority, and the violent occupation of a benefice in possession of another ecclesiastic entails on the guilty party the loss of all right to that benefice. The right of installation formerly belonged to archdeacons, but is now reserved to the bishop, his vicar-general, or his delegate, ordinarily the dean (decanus christianitatis or foraneus). It is performed with certain symbolical ceremonies, determined by local usage or by diocesan statutes, such, for instance, as a solemn entry into the parish and into the church, the handing over of the church keys, a putting in possession of the high altar of the church, the pulpit, confessional, etc. In some countries there is a double installation: the first by the bishop or vicar-general, either by mere word of mouth, or by some symbolical ceremony, as, for instance, presenting a biretta; the second, which is then a mere ceremony, taking place in the parish and consisting in the solemn entry and other formalities dependent on local custom. In some places custom has even done away with the institutio corporalis properly so called; the rights inherent to the putting in possession are acquired by the new titular to the benefice by a simple visit to his benefice, for instance, to his parish, with the intention of taking possession thereof, provided such visit is made with the authority of the bishop, thus precluding the possibility of self-investiture. When the pope names the titular to a benefice, he always mentions those who are to put the beneficiary in possession.

The following are the effects of the institutio corporalis:

• From the moment he is put in possession the beneficiary receives the revenues of his benefice.
• He enjoys all the rights resulting from the ownership and the possession of the benefice, and, in particular, it is from this moment that the time necessary for a prescriptive right to the benefice counts.
• The possessor can invoke in his favour the provisions of rules 35 and 36 of the Roman Chancery de annali, and de triennali possessione. This privilege has lost much of its importance since the conferring of benefices is now a matter of less dispute than in former times. Formerly, on account of various privileges, and the constant intervention of the Holy See in the collation of benefices, several ecclesiastics were not infrequently named to the same benefice. Should one of them happen to have been in possession of the benefice for a year, it would devolve on the rival claimant to prove that the possessor had no right to the benefice; moreover, the latter was obliged to begin his suit within six months after his nomination to the benefice by the pope, and the trial was to be concluded within a year counting from the day when the actual possessor was cited to the courts (rule 35 of the Chancery). These principles are still in force. The triennial possession guaranteed the benefice to the actual incumbent in all actions in petitorio or in possessorio to obtain a benefice brought by any claimant whatsoever (rule 36 of the Chancery).
• The peaceful possession of a benefice entails ipso facto the vacating of any benefices to which the holder is a titular, but which would be incompatible with the one he holds.
• It is only from the day when bishops and parish priests enter into possession of their benefices that they can validly assist at marriages celebrated in the diocese or in the parish (Decree "Ne temere", 2 August, 1907). Furthermore, in some dioceses the statutes declare invalid any exercise of the powers of jurisdiction attached to a benefice, before the actual installation in the benefice.

III. The institutio auctorisabilis is nothing but an approbation required for the validity of acts of jurisdiction, granted by the bishop to a beneficiary in view of his undertaking the care of souls (cura animarum). It is an act of the same nature as the approbation which a bishop gives members of a religious order for hearing confessions of persons not subject to their authority, and without which the absolution would be invalid; but there is this difference that in the case of the institutio auctorisabilis the approbation relates to the exercise of the ministerial functions taken as a whole. It is the missio canonica indispensable for the validity of acts requiring an actual power of jurisdiction. This institution, which is reserved to the bishop or his vicar-general and to those possessing a quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, is required when the institutio tituli collativa belongs to an inferior prelate, a chapter, or a monastery. The institutio tituli collativa given by the bishop himself implies the institutio auctorisabilis, which, therefore, needs not to be given by a special act.

Decretals of Gregory IX, bk. III, tit. 7, De institutionibus; Liber Sextus, bk. III, tit. 6, De Institutionibus; FERRARIS, Prompta bibliotheca, s. v. Institutio, IV (Paris, 1861), 701-12; HINSCHIUS, System des katholischen Kirchenrechts, II (Berlin, 1878-1883), 649-57, and III, 3-4; SANTI, Prœlectiones iuris canonici, III (Ratisbon, 1898), 116-25; WERNZ, Jus decretalium, II (Rome, 1899), 532-45; GROSS, Das Recht an der Pfründe (Graz, 1887); Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht, LXXXVIII (1908), 768-9, and LXXXIX (1909), 75-8, 327-9.

A. VAN HOVE

Intellect

(Latin intelligere -- inter and legere -- to choose between, to discern; Greek nous; German Vernunft, Verstand; French intellect; Italian intelletto).

The faculty of thought. As understood in Catholic philosophical literature it signifies the higher, spiritual, cognitive power of the soul. It is in this view awakened to action by sense, but transcends the latter in range. Amongst its functions are attention, conception, judgment, reasoning, reflection, and self-consciousness. All these modes of activity exhibit a distinctly suprasensuous element, and reveal a cognitive faculty of a higher order than is required for mere sense-cognitions. In harmony, therefore, with Catholic usage, we reserve the terms intellect, intelligence, and intellectual to this higher power and its operations, although many modern psychologists are wont, with much resulting confusion, to extend the application of these terms so as to include sensuous forms of the cognitive process. By thus restricting the use of these terms, the inaccuracy of such phrases as "animal intelligence" is avoided. Before such language may be legitimately employed, it should be shown that the lower animals are endowed with genuinely rational faculties, fundamentally one in kind with those of man. Catholic philosophers, however they differ on minor points, as a general body have held that intellect is a spiritual faculty depending extrinsically, but not intrinsically, on the bodily organism. The importance of a right theory of intellect is twofold: on account of its bearing on epistemology, or the doctrine of knowledge; and because of its connexion with the question of the spirituality of the soul.

HISTORY

The view that the cognitive powers of the mind, or faculties of knowledge, are of a double order -- the one lower, grosser, more intimately depending on bodily organs, the other higher and of a more refined and spiritual nature -- appeared very early, though at first confusedly, in Greek thought. It was in connexion with cosmological, rather than psychological, theories that the difference between sensuous and rational knowledge was first emphasized. On the one hand there seems to be constant change, and, on the other hand, permanence in the world that is revealed to us. The question: How is the apparent conflict to be reconciled? or, Which is the true representation? forced itself on the speculative mind. Heraclitus insists on the reality of the changeable. All things are in a perpetual flux. Parmenides, Zeno, and the Eleatics argued that only the unchangeable being truly is. Aisthesis, "sense", is the faculty by which changing phenomena are apprehended; nous, "thought", "reason", "intellect", presents to us permanent, abiding being. The Sophists, with a skill unsurpassed by modern Agnosticism, urged the sceptical consequences of the apparent contradiction between the one and the many, the permanent and the changing, and emphasized the part contributed by the mind in knowledge. For Protagoras, "Man is the measure of all things", whilst with Gorgias the conclusion is: "Nothing is; nothing can be known; nothing can be expressed in speech". Socrates held that truth was innate in the mind antecedent to sensuous experience, but his chief contribution to the theory of knowledge was his insistence on the importance of the general concept or definition.

It was Plato, however, who first realized the full significance of the problem and the necessity for coordinating the data of sense with the data of the intellect, he also first explained the origin of the problem. The universe of being, as reported by reason, is one, eternal, immutable; as revealed by sense, it is a series of multiple changing phenomena. Which is the truly real? For Plato there are in a sense two worlds, that of the intellect (noeton) and that of sense (horaton). Sense can give only an imperfect knowledge of its object, which he calls belief (pistis) or conjecture (eikasia). The faculties by which we apprehend the noeton, "the intelligible world" are two: nous, "intuitive reason", which reaches the ideas (see IDEA); and logos, "discursive reason", which by its proper process, viz. episteme "demonstration", attains only to dianoia "conception". Plato thus sets up two distinct intellectual faculties attaining to different sets of objects. But the world of ideas is for Plato the real world, that of sense is only a poor shadowy imitation. Aristotle's doctrine on the intellect in its main outline is clear. The soul is possessed of two orders of cognitive faculty, to aisthetikon, "sensuous cognition", and to dianoetikon "rational cognition" . The sensuous faculty includes aisthesis, sensuous perception", phantasia, "imagination", and mneme, memory". The faculty of rational cognition includes nous and dianoia. These, however, are not so much two faculties as two functions of the same power. They roughly correspond to intellect and ratiocinative reason. For intellect to operate, previous sense perception is required. The function of the intellect is to divest the object presented by sense of its material and individualizing conditions, and apprehend the universal and intelligible form embodied in the concrete physical reality. The outcome of the process is the generalization in the intellect of an intellectual form or representation of the intelligible being of the object (eidos, noeton). This act constitutes the intellect cognizant of the object in its universal nature. In this process intellect appears in a double character. On the one hand it exhibits itself as an active agent, in that it operates on the object presented by the sensuous faculty rendering it intelligible. On the other hand, as subject of the intellectual representation evolved, it manifests passivity, modifiability, and susceptibility to the reception of different forms. There is thus revealed in Aristotle's theory of intellectual cognition an active intellect (nous poietikos) and a passive intellect (nous pathetikos). But how these are to be conceived, and what precisely is the nature of the distinction and relation between them, is one of the most irritatingly obscure points in the whole of Aristotle's works. The locus classicus is his "De Anima", III, v, where the subject is briefly dealt with. As the active intellect actuates the passive, it bears to it a relation similar to that of form to matter in physical bodies. The active intellect "illuminates" the object of sense, rendering it intelligible somewhat as light renders colours visible. It is pure energy without any potentiality, and its activity is continuous. It is separate, immortal, and eternal. The passive intellect, on the other hand, receives the forms abstracted by the active intellect and ideally becomes the object. The whole passage is so obscure that commentators from the beginning are hopelessly divided as to Aristotle's own view on the nature of the nous poietikos. Theophrastus, who succeeded Aristotle as scholiarch of the Lyceum, accepted the twofold intellect, but was unable to explain it. The great commentator, Alexander of Aphrodisias, interprets the nous poietikos as the activity of the Divine intelligence. This view was adopted by many of the Arabian philosophers of the Middle Ages, who conceived it in a pantheistic sense. For many of them the active intellect is one universal reason illuminating all men. With Avicenna the passive intellect alone is individual. Averrhoës conceives both intellectus agens and intellectus possibilis as separate from the individual soul and as one in all men.

The Schoolmen generally controverted the Arabian theories. Albertus Magnus and St. Thomas interpret intellectus agens and possibilis as merely distinct faculties or powers of the individual soul. St. Thomas understands "separate" (choristos) and "pure" or "unmixed" (amiges) to signify that the intellect is distinct from matter and incorporeal. Interpreting Aristotle thus benevolently, and developing his doctrine Aquinas teaches that the function of the active intellect is an abstractive operation on the data supplied by the sensuous faculties to form the species intelligibiles in the intellectus possibilis. The intellectus possibilis thus actuated cognizes what is intelligible in the object. The act of cognition is the concept, or verbum mentale, by which is apprehended the universal nature or essence of the object prescinded from its individualizing conditions. The main features of the Aristotelean doctrine of intellect, and of its essential distinction from the faculty of sensuous cognition, were adhered to by the general body of the Schoolmen.

By the time we reach modern philosophy, especially in England, the radical distinction between the two orders of faculties begins to be lost sight of. Descartes, defending the spirituality of the soul; naturally supposes the intellect to be a spiritual faculty. Leibniz insists on both the spirituality and innate efficiency of the intellect. Whilst admitting the axiom, "Nil est in intellectu quod non prius fuerit in sensu", he adds with much force, "nisi intellectus ipse", and urges spontaneity and innate activity as characteristics of the monad. From the break with Scholasticism, however, English philosophy drifted towards Sensationism and Materialism, subsequently influencing France and other countries in the same direction, as a consequence, the old conception of intellect as a spiritual faculty of the soul, and as a cognitive activity by which the universal, necessary, and immutable elements in knowledge are apprehended, was almost entirely lost. For Hobbes the mind is material, and all knowledge is ultimately sensuous. Locke's attack on innate ideas and intuitive knowledge, his reduction of various forms of intellectual cognition to complex amalgams of so called simple ideas originating in sense perception, and his representation of the mind as a passive tabula rasa, in spite of his allotting certain work to reflection and the discursive reason, paved the way for all modern Sensationism and Phenomenalism. Condillac, omitting Locke's "reflection", resolved all intellectual knowledge into Sensationism pure and simple. Hume, analysing all mental Products into sensuous impressions, vivid or faint, plus association due to custom, developed the sceptical consequences involved in Locke's defective treatment of the intellectual faculty, and carried philosophy back to the old conclusions of the Greek Sensationists and Sophists, but reinforced by a more subtile and acute psychology. All the main features of Hume's psychology have been adopted by the whole Associationist school in England, by Positivists abroad, and by materialistic scientists in so far as they have any philosophy or psychology at all. The essential distinction between intellect, or rational activity, and sense has in fact been completely lost sight of, and Scepticism and Agnosticism have logically followed. Kant recognized a distinction between sensation and the higher mental element, but, conceiving the latter in a different way from the old Aristotelean view, and looking on it as purely subjective, his system was developed into an idealism and scepticism differing in kind from that of Hume, but not very much more satisfactory. Still, the neo-Kantian and Hegelian movement, which developed in Great Britain during the last quarter of the nineteenth century has contributed much towards the reawakening of the recognition of the intellectual, or rational, element in all knowledge.

THE COMMON DOCTRINE

The teaching of Aristotle on intellect, as developed by Albertus Magnus and St. Thomas, has become, as we have said, in its main features the common doctrine of Catholic philosophers. We shall state it in brief outline.

(1) Intellect is a cognitive faculty essentially different from sense and of a supra-organic order; that is, it is not exerted by, or intrinsically dependent on, a bodily organ, as sensation is. This proposition is proved by psychological analysis and study of the chief functions of intellect. These are conception, judgment, reasoning, reflection, and self-consciousness. All these activities involve elements essentially different from sensuous consciousness. In conception the mind forms universal ideas. These are different in kind from sensations and sensuous images. These latter are concrete and individual, truly representative of only one object, whilst the universal idea will apply with equal truth to any object of the class. The universal idea possesses a fixity and invariableness of nature, whilst the sensuous image changes from moment to moment. Thus the concept or universal idea of "gold", or "triangle", will with equal justice stand for any specimen, but the image represents truly only one individual. The sensuous faculty can be awakened to activity only by a stimulus which whatever it be, exists in a concrete, individualized form. In judgment the mind perceives the identity or discordance of two concepts. In reasoning it apprehends the logical nexus between conclusion and premises. In reflection and self-consciousness it turns back on itself in such a manner that there is perfect identity between the knowing subject and the object known. But all these forms of consciousness are incompatible with the notion of a sensuous faculty, or one exerted by means of a bodily organ. The Sensationist psychologists, from Berkeley onwards, were unanimous in maintaining that the mind cannot form universal or abstract ideas. This would be true were the intellect not a spiritual faculty essentially distinct from sense. The simple fact is that they invariably confounded the image of the imagination, which is individualized, with the concept, or idea, of the intellect. When we employ universal terms in any intelligible proposition the terms have a meaning. The thought by which that meaning is apprehended in the mind is a universal idea.

(2) In cognition we start from sensuous experience. The intellect presupposes sensation and operates on the materials supplied by the sensuous faculties. The beginning of consciousness with the infant is in sensation. This is at first felt, most probably, in a vague and indefinite form. But repetition of particular sensations and experience of other sensations contrasted with them render their apprehension more and more definite as time goes on. Groups of sensations of different senses are aroused by particular objects and become united by the force of contiguous association. The awakening of any one of the group calls up the images of the others. Sense perception is thus being perfected. At a certain stage in the process of development the higher power of intellect begins to be evoked into activity, at first feebly and dimly. In the beginning the intellectual apprehension, like the sensations which preceded, is extremely vague. Its first acts are probably the cognition of objects revealed through sensation under wide and indefinite ideas, such as "extended-thing", "moving-thing", "pressing-thing", and the like. It takes in objects as wholes, before discriminating their parts. Repetition and variation of sense-impressions stimulates and sharpens attention. Pleasure or pain evokes interest and the intellect concentrates on part of the sensuous experience, and the process of abstraction begins. Certain attributes are laid hold of, to the omission of others. Comparison and discrimination are also called into action, and the more accurate and perfect elaboration of concepts now proceeds rapidly. The notions of substance and accidents, of whole and parts, of permanent and changing, are evolved with increasing distinctness. Generalization follows quickly upon abstraction. When an attribute or an object has been singled out and recognized as a thing distinct from its surroundings, an act of reflection renders the mind aware of the object as capable of indefinite realization and multiplication in other circumstances, and we have now the formally reflex universal idea.

The further activity of the intellect is fundamentally the same in kind, comparing, identifying, or discriminating. The activity of ratiocination is merely reiteration of the judicial activity. The final stage in the elaboration of a concept is reached when it is embodied for further use in a general name. Words presuppose intellectual ideas, but register them and render them permanent. The intellect is also distinguished according to its functions, as speculative or practical. When pronouncing simply on the rational relations of ideas, it is called speculative; when considering harmony with action, it is termed practical. The faculty, however, is the same in both cases. The faculty of conscience is in fact merely the practical intellect, or the intellect passing judgment on the moral quality of actions. The intellect is essentially the faculty of truth and falsity, and in its judicial acts it at the same time affirms the union of subject and predicate and the agreement between its own representation and the objective reality. Intellect also exhibits itself in the higher form of memory when there is conscious recognition of identity between the present and the past. To the intellect is due also the conception of self and personal identity. The fundamental difficulty with the whole Sensationist school, from Hume to Mill, in regard to the recognition of personality, is due to their ignoring the true nature of the faculty of intellect. Were there no such higher rational faculty in the mind, then the mind could never be known as anything more than a series of mental states. It is the intellect which enables the mind to apprehend itself as a unity, or unitary being. The ideas of the infinite, of space, time, and causality are all similarly the product of intellectual activity, starting from the data presented by sense, and exercising a power of intuition, abstraction, identification, and discrimination. It is, accordingly, the absence of an adequate conception of intellect which has rendered the treatment of all these mental functions so defective. in the English psychology of the last century.

(See also FACULTIES OF THE SOUL; DIALECTIC; EPISTEMOLOGY; EMPIRICISM; IDEALISM; POSITIVISM.)

MICHAEL MAHER

Intendencia Oriental y Llanos de San Martín

Vicariate Apostolic in the province of Saint Martin, Colombia, South America, created 24 March, 1908, and entrusted to the Society of Mary. In place of this vicariate there were formerly two prefectures Apostolic, one created on 23 June, 1903, and the other on 8 January, 1904, after negotiations (dating from 1902) between the Holy See and the Colombian Government for the evangelization of these vast provinces. Surrounded by the Cordilleras, and watered by the Batatas, Garagoa, Guavio, Humades, Meta, and Orinoco Rivers, the territory is still inhabited largely by the uncivilized natives, in number about 50,000, of whom scarcely 10,000 have been baptized.

U. BENIGNI

Intention

(Lat. intendere, to stretch toward, to aim at) is an act of the will by which that faculty efficaciously desires to reach an end by employing the means. It is apparent from this notion that there is a sharply defined difference between intention and volition or even velleity. In the first instance there is a concentration of the will to the point of resolve which is wholly lacking in the others. With the purpose of determining the value of an action, it is customary to distinguish various sorts of intentions which could have prompted it.

First, there is the actual intention, operating, namely, with the advertence of the intellect. Secondly, there is the virtual intention. Its force is borrowed entirely from a prior volition which is accounted as continuing in some result produced by it. In other words, the virtual intention is not a present act of the will. but rather a power (virtus) come about as an effect of a former act, and now at work for the attainment of the end. The thing therefore that is wanting in a virtual, as contrasted with an actual, intention is not of course the element of will, but rather the attention of the intellect, and that particularly of the reflex kind. So, for example, a person having made up his mind to undertake a journey may during its progress be entirely preoccupied with other thoughts. He will nevertheless be said to have all the while the virtual intention of reaching his destination. Thirdly, an habitual intention is one that once actually existed, but of the present continuance of which there is no positive trace; the most that can be said of it is that it has never been retracted. And fourthly an interpretative intention is one that as a matter of fact has never been really elicited; there has been and is no actual movement of the will; it is simply the purpose which it is assumed a man would have had in a given contingency, had he given thought to the matter.

It is a commonplace among moralists that the intention is the chief among the determinants of the concrete morality of a human act. Hence when one's motive is grievously bad, or even only slightly so, if it be the exclusive reason for doing something, then an act which is otherwise good is vitiated and reputed to be evil. An end which is only venially bad, and which at the same time does not contain the complete cause for acting, leaves the operation which in other respects was unassailable to be qualified as partly good and partly bad. A good intention can never hallow an action the content of which is wrong. Thus it never can be lawful to steal, even though one's intention be to aid the poor with the proceeds of the theft. The end does not justify the means. It may be noted here in passing, as somewhat cognate to the matter under discussion, that the explicit and frequently renewed reference of one's actions to Almighty God is not now commonly thought to be necessary in order that they may be said to be morally good. The old-time controversy on this point has practically died out.

Besides affecting the goodness or badness of acts, intention may have much to do with their validity. Is it required, for instance, for the fulfilment of the law? The received doctrine is that, provided the subject is seriously minded to do what is prescribed, he need not have the intention of satisfying his obligation; and much less is it required that he should be inspired by the same motives as urged the legislator to enact the law. Theologians quote in this connection the saying, "Finis præcepti non cadit sub præcepto" (the end of the law does not fall under its binding force). What has been said applies with even more truth to the class of obligations called real, enjoining for instance the payment of debts. For the discharge of these no intention at all is demanded, not even a conscious act. It is enough that the creditor gets his own.

The Church teaches very unequivocally that for the valid conferring of the sacraments, the minister must have the intention of doing at least what the Church does. This is laid down with great emphasis by the Council of Trent (sess. VII). The opinion once defended by such theologians as Catharinus and Salmeron that there need only be the intention to perform deliberately the external rite proper to each sacrament, and that, as long as this was true, the interior dissent of the minister from the mind of the Church would not invalidate the sacrament, no longer finds adherents. The common doctrine now is that a real internal intention to act as a minister of Christ, or to do what Christ instituted the sacraments to effect, in other words, to truly baptize, absolve, etc., is required. This intention need not necessarily be of the sort called actual. That would often be practically impossible. It is enough that it be virtual. Neither habitual nor interpretative intention in the minister will suffice for the validity of the sacrament. The truth is that here and now, when the sacrament is being conferred, neither of these intentions exists, and they can therefore exercise no determining influence upon what is done. To administer the sacraments with a conditional intention, which makes their effect contingent upon a future event, is to confer them invalidly. This holds good for all the sacraments except matrimony, which, being a contract, is susceptible of such a limitation.

As to the recipients of the sacraments, it is certain that no intention is required in children who have not yet reached the age of reason, or in imbeciles, for the validity of those sacraments which they are capable of receiving. In the case of adults, on the other hand, some intention is indispensable if the sacrament is not to be invalid. The reason is that our justification is not brought about without our co-operation, and that includes the rational will to profit by the means of sanctification. How much of an intention is enough is not always quite clear. In general, more in the way of intention will be demanded in proportion as the acts of the receiver seem to enter into the making of the sacrament. So for penance and matrimony under ordinary conditions a virtual intention would appear to be required; for the other sacraments an habitual intention is sufficient. For an unconscious person in danger of death the habitual intention may be implicit and still suffice for the validity of the sacraments that are then necessary or highly useful; that is, it may be contained in the more general purpose which a man has at some time during his life, and which he has never retracted, of availing himself of these means of salvation at so supreme a moment. For the gaining of indulgences the most that can probably be exacted is an habitual intention.

JOSEPH F. DELANY

Intercession (Mediation)

To intercede is to go or come between two parties, to plead before one of them on behalf of the other. In the New Testament it is used as the equivalent of entygchanein (Vulg. interpellare, in Heb., vii, 25). "Mediation" means a standing in the midst between two (contending) parties, for the purpose of bringing them together (cf. mediator, mesites, I Tim., ii, 5).

In ecclesiastical usage both words are taken in the sense of the intervention primarily of Christ, and secondarily of the Blessed Virgin and the angels and saints, on behalf of men. It would be better, however, to restrict the word mediation to the action of Christ, and intercession to the action of the Blessed Virgin, the angels, and the saints. In this article we shall briefly deal with: I. the Mediation of Christ; and at more length with, II. the intercession of the saints.

I. THE MEDIATION OF CHRIST

In considering the Mediation of Christ we must distinguish between His position and His office. As God-man He stands in the midst between God and man partaking of the natures of both, and therefore, by that very fact, fitted to act as Mediator between them. He is, indeed, the Mediator in the absolute sense of the word, in a way that no one else can possibly be. "For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (I Tim., ii, 5). He is united to both: "The head of every man is Christ... the head of Christ is God" (I Cor., xi, 3). His office of Mediator belongs to Him as man, His human nature is the principium quo, but the value of His action is derived from the fact that it is a Divine Person Who acts. The main object of His mediation is to restore the friendship between God and man. This is attained first by the meriting of grace and remission of sin, by means of the worship and satisfaction offered to God by and through Christ. But, besides bringing man nigh unto God, Christ brings God nigh unto man, by revealing to man Divine truths and commands — He is the Apostle sent by God to us and the High-Priest leading us on to God (Heb., iii, 1). Even in the physical order the mere fact of Christ's existence is in itself a mediation between God and man. By uniting our humanity to His Divinity He united us to God and God to us. As St. Athanasius says, "Christ became man that men might become gods" ("De Incarn.", n. 54; cf. St. Augustine, "Serm. De Nativitate Dom."; St. Thomas, III, Q. i, a. 2). And for this Christ prayed: "That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee. . . . I in them, and thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one" (John, xvii, 21-23). The subject of Christ's mediation belongs properly to the articles ATONEMENT; JESUS CHRIST; REDEMPTION. See also St. Thomas, III, Q. xxvi; and the treatises on the Incarnation.

II. INTERCESSION AND INVOCATION

We shall here speak not only of intercession, but also of the invocation of the saints. The one indeed implies the other; we should not call upon the saints for aid unless they could help us. The foundation of both lies in the doctrine of the communion of saints. In the article on this subject it has been shown that the faithful in heaven, on earth, and in purgatory are one mystical body, with Christ for their head. All that is of interest to one part is of interest to the rest, and each helps the rest: we on earth by honouring and invoking the saints and praying for the souls in purgatory, and the saints in heaven by interceding for us. The Catholic doctrine of intercession and invocation is set forth by the Council of Trent, which teaches that

the saints who reign together with Christ offer up their own prayers to God for men. It is good and useful suppliantly to invoke them, and to have recourse to their prayers, aid, and help for obtaining benefits from God, through His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, Who alone is our Redeemer and Saviour. Those persons think impiously who deny that the Saints, who enjoy eternal happiness in heaven, are to be invoked; or who assert either that they do not pray for men, or that the invocation of them to pray for each of us is idolatry, or that it is repugnant to the word of God, and is opposed to the honour of the one Mediator of God and men, Jesus Christ (Sess. XXV).

This had already been explained by St. Thomas:

Prayer is offered to a person in two ways: one as though to be granted by himself, another as to be obtained through him. In the first way we pray to God alone, because all our prayers ought to be directed to obtaining grace and glory which God alone gives, according to those words of the psalm (lxxxiii, 12): 'The Lord will give grace and glory.' But in the second way we pray to the holy angels and to men not that God may learn our petition through them, but that by their prayers and merits our prayers may be efficacious. Wherefore it is said in the Apocalypse (viii, 4): 'And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel' (Summ. Theol., II-II, Q. lxxxiii, a. 4).

The reasonableness of the Catholic teaching and practice cannot be better stated than in St. Jerome's words:

If the Apostles and Martyrs, while still in the body, can pray for others, at a time when they must still be anxious for themselves, how much more after their crowns, victories, and triumphs are won! One man, Moses, obtains from God pardon for six hundred thousand men in arms; and Stephen, the imitator of the Lord, and the first martyr in Christ, begs forgiveness for his persecutors; and shall their power be less after having begun to be with Christ? The Apostle Paul declares that two hundred three score and sixteen souls, sailing with him, were freely given him; and, after he is dissolved and has begun to be with Christ, shall he close his lips, and not be able to utter a word in behalf of those who throughout the whole world believed at his preaching of the Gospel? And shall the living dog Vigilantius be better than that dead lion? ("Contra Vigilant.", n. 6, in P. L., XXIII, 344).

The chief objections raised against the intercession and invocation of the saints are that these doctrines are opposed to the faith and trust which we should have in God alone; that they are a denial of the all-sufficient merits of Christ; and that they cannot be proved from Scripture and the Fathers. Thus Article 22 of the Anglican Church says: "The Romish doctrine concerning the Invocation of Saints is a fond thing vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture, but rather repugnant to the Word of God."

(1) In the article ADORATION it has been clearly shown that the honour paid to angels and saints is entirely different from the supreme honour due to God alone, and is indeed paid to them only as His servants and friends. "By honouring the Saints who have slept in the Lord, by invoking their intercession and venerating their relics and ashes, so far is the glory of God from being diminished that it is very much increased, in proportion as the hope of men is thus more excited and confirmed, and they are encouraged to the imitation of the Saints" (Cat. of the Council of Trent, pt. III, c. ii, q. 11). We can, of course, address our prayers directly to God, and He can hear us without the intervention of any creature. But this does not prevent us from asking the help of our fellow-creatures who may be more pleasing to Him than we are. It is not because our faith and trust in Him are weak, nor because His goodness and mercy to us are less; rather is it because we are encouraged by His precepts to approach Him at times through His servants, as we shall presently see. As pointed out by St. Thomas, we invoke the angels and saints in quite different language from that addressed to God. We ask Him to have mercy upon us and Himself to grant us whatever we require; whereas we ask the saints to pray for us, i.e. to join their petitions with ours. However, we should here bear in mind Bellarmine's remarks: "When we say that nothing should be asked of the saints but their prayer for us, the question is not about the words, but the sense of the words. For as far as the words go, it is lawful to say: 'St. Peter, pity me, save me, open for me the gate of heaven'; also, 'Give me health of body, patience, fortitude', etc., provided that we mean 'save and pity me by praying for me'; 'grant me this or that by thy prayers and merits.' For so speaks Gregory of Nazianzus (Orat. xviii — according to others, xxiv — " De S. Cypriano" in P. G., XXXV, 1193; "Orat. de S. Athan.: In Laud. S. Athanas.", Orat. xxi, in P. G., XXXV, 1128); in "De Sanct. Beatif.", I, 17. The supreme act of impetration, sacrifice, is never offered to any creature. "Although the Church has been accustomed at times to celebrate certain Masses in honour and memory of the Saints, it does not follow that she teaches that sacrifice is offered unto them, but unto God alone, who crowned them; whence neither is the priest wont to say 'I offer sacrifice to thee, Peter, or Paul', but, giving thanks to God for their victories, he implores their patronage, that they may vouchsafe to intercede for us in heaven, whose memory we celebrate upon earth" (Council of Trent, Sess. XXII, c. iii). The Collyridians, or Philomarianites, offered little cakes in sacrifice to the Mother of God; but the practice was condemned by St. Epiphanius (Hær., lxxix, in P. G., XLI, 740); Leontius Byzant., "Contra Nest. et Eutych.", III, 6, in P. G., LXXXVI, 1364; and St. John of Damascus (Hær., lxxix, in P. G., XCIV, 728).

(2) The doctrine of one Mediator, Christ, in no way excludes the invocation and intercession of saints. All merit indeed comes through Him; but this does not make it unlawful to ask our fellow-creatures, whether here on earth or already in heaven, to help us by their prayers. The same Apostle who insists so strongly on the sole mediatorship of Christ, earnestly begs the prayers of his brethren: "I beseech you, therefore, brethren, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the charity of the Holy Ghost, that you help me in your prayers for me to God" (Rom., xv, 30); and he himself prays for them: "I give thanks to my God in every remembrance of you, always in all my prayers making supplication for you all" (Phil., i, 3, 4). If the prayers of the brethren on earth do not derogate from the glory and dignity of the Mediator, Christ, neither do the prayers of the saints in heaven.

(3) As regards the proof from Holy Scripture and the Fathers, we can show that the principle and the practice of invoking the aid of our fellow-creatures are clearly laid down in both. That the angels have an interest in the welfare of men is clear from Christ's words: "There shall be joy before the angels of God upon one sinner doing penance" (Luke, xv, 10). In verse 7 He says simply: "There shall be joy in heaven". Cf. Matt., xviii, 10; Heb., i, 14. That the angels pray for men is plain from the vision of the Prophet Zacharias: "And the angel of the Lord answered, and said: O Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem . . . and the Lord answered the angel . . . good words, comfortable words" (Zach., i, 12, 13). And the angel Raphael says: " When thou didst pray with tears . . . I offered thy prayer to the Lord" (Tob., xii, 12) The combination of the prayers both of angels and saints is seen in the vision of St. John: "And another angel came, and stood before the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given to him much incense, that he should offer of the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar, which is before the throne of God. And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel" (Apoc., viii, 3, 4). God Himself commanded Abimelech to have recourse to Abraham's intercession: "He shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live. . . . And when Abraham prayed, God healed Abimelech" (Gen., xx, 7, 17). So, too, in the case of Job's friends He said: "Go to my servant Job, and offer for yourselves a holocaust; and my servant Job shall pray for you: his face I will accept" (Job, xlii, 8). Intercession is indeed prominent in several passages in this same Book of Job: "Call now if there be any that will answer thee, and turn to some of the saints' (v, 1);" If there shall be an angel speaking for him . . . He shall have mercy on him, and shall say: Deliver him, that he may not go down to corruption" (xxxiii, 23). "They [the angels] appear as intercessors for men with God, bringing men's needs before Him, mediating in their behalf. This work is easily connected with their general office of labouring for the good of men" (Dillman on Job, p. 44). Moses is constantly spoken of as "mediator': "I was the mediator and stood between the Lord and you" (Deut., v, 5; cf. Gal., iii, 19, 20). It is true that in none of the passages of the Old Testament mention is made of prayer to the saints, i. e; holy men already departed from this life; but this is in keeping with the imperfect knowledge of the state of the dead, who were still in Limbo. The general principle of intercession and invocation of fellow-creatures is, however, stated in terms which admit of no denial; and this principle would in due course be applied to the saints as soon as their position was defined. In the New Testament the number of the saints already departed would be comparatively small in the early days.

The greatest of the Fathers in the succeeding centuries speak plainly both of the doctrine and practice of intercession and invocation. "But not the High-Priest [Christ] alone prays for those who pray sincerely, but also the angels . . . as also the souls of the saints who have already fallen asleep (ai te ton prokekoimemenon hagion psychai, Origen, "De Oratione", n. xi, in P. G., XI, 448). In many other places Origen uses similar expressions; indeed it may be said that there is hardly any treatise or homily in which he does not refer to the intercession of the angels and saints. St. Cyprian, writing to Pope Cornelius, says: "Let us be mutually mindful of each other, let us ever pray for each other, and if one of us shall, by the speediness of the Divine vouchsafement, depart hence first, let our love continue in the presence of the Lord, let not prayer for our brethren and sisters cease in the presence of the mercy of the Father" (Ep. lvii, in P. L., IV, 358). "To those who would fain stand, neither the guardianship of saints nor the defences of angels are wanting" (St. Hilary, "In Ps. cxxiv", n. 5, 6, in P. L., X, 682). "We then commemorate also those who have fallen asleep before us, first, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, that God, by their prayers and intercessions, may receive our petitions" (St. Cyril of Jerus., "Cat. Myst.", v, n. 9) in P. G., XXXIII, 1166). "Remember me, ye heirs of God, ye brethren of Christ, supplicate the Saviour earnestly for me, that I may be freed though Christ from him that fights against me day by day" (St. Ephraem Syrus, "De Timore Anim.", in fin.). "Ye victorious martyrs who endured torments gladly for the sake of the God and Saviour; ye who have boldness of speech towards the Lord Himself; ye saints, intercede for us who are timid and sinful men, full of sloth, that the grace of Christ may come upon us, and enlighten the hearts of all of us that so we may love him" (St. Ephraem, "Encom. in Mart."). "Do thou, [Ephraem] that art standing at the Divine altar, and art ministering with angels to the life-giving and most Holy Trinity, bear us all in remembrance, petitioning for us the remission of sins, and the fruition of an everlasting kingdom" (St. Gregory of Nyssa, "De vita Ephraemi", in fin., P. G., XLVI, 850). "Mayest thou [Cyprian] look down from above propitiously upon us, and guide our word and life; and shepherd [or shepherd with me] this sacred flock . . . gladdening us with a more perfect and clear illumination of the Holy Trinity, before Which thou standest" (St. Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. xvii — according to others, xxiv — "De S. Cypr.", P. G., XXXV, 1193). In like manner does Gregory pray to St. Athanasius (Orat. xxi, "In laud. S. Athan.", P. G., XXXV, 1128). "O holy choir! O sacred band! O unbroken host of warriors! O common guardians of the human race! Ye gracious sharers of our cares! Ye co-operators in our prayer! Most powerful intercessors!" (St.Basil, "Hom. in XL Mart.", P. G., XXXI, 524). "May Peter, who wept so efficaciously for himself, weep for us and turn towards us Christ's benignant countenance" (St. Ambrose, "Hexaem.", V, xxv, n. 90, in P. L., XIV, 242). St. Jerome has been quoted above. St. John Chrysostom frequently speaks of invocation and intercession in his homilies on the saints, e. g. "When thou perceivest that God is chastening thee, fly not to His enemies . . . but to His friends, the martyrs, the saints, and those who were pleasing to Him, and who have great power" (parresian, "boldness of speech" — Orat. VIII, "Adv. Jud.", n. 6, in P. G., XLVIII, 937). "He that wears the purple, laying aside his pomp, stands begging of the saints to be his patrons with God; and he that wears the diadem begs the Tent-maker and the Fisherman as patrons, even though they be dead" ("Hom. xxvi, in II Ep. ad Cor.", n. 5, in P. G., LXI, 581). "At the Lord's table we do not commemorate martyrs in the same way that we do others who rest in peace so as to pray for them, but rather that they may pray for us that we may follow in their footsteps" (St. Augustine, "In Joann.", tr. lxxxiv, in P. L., XXXIV, 1847).

Prayers to the saints occur in almost all the ancient liturgies. Thus in the Liturgy of St. Basil: "By the command of Thine only-begotten Son we communicate with the memory of Thy saints . . . by whose prayers and supplications have mercy upon us all, and deliver us for the sake of Thy holy name which is invoked upon us". Cf. the Liturgy of Jerusalem, the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom, the Liturgy of Nestorius, the Coptic Liturgy of St. Cyril, etc. That these commemorations are not later additions is manifest from the words of St. Cyril of Jerusalem: "We then commemorate also those who have fallen asleep before us, first, patriarchs, prophets, apostles, martyrs, that God by their prayers and intercessions may receive our petitions" ("Cat. Myst.", v, in P. G., XXXIII, 1113). (See Renaudot, "Liturgiarum Orientalium Collectio", Paris, 1716.)

We readily admit that the doctrine of the intercession of the saints is a development from the teaching of Scripture and that the practice is open to abuse. But if the carefully-worded and wholesome decrees of the Council of Trent be adhered to, there is nothing in the doctrine or practice which deserves the condemnation expressed in Article xxii of the Anglican religion. Indeed the High Church Anglicans contend that it is not the invocation of saints that is here rejected, but only the "Romish doctrine ", i. e. the excesses prevailing at the time and afterwards condemned by the Council of Trent. "In principle there is no question herein between us and any other portion of the Catholic Church. . . . Let not that most ancient custom, common to the Universal Church, as well Greek as Latin, of addressing Angels and Saints in the way we have said, be condemned as impious, or as vain and foolish" [Forbes, Bishop of Brechin (Anglican), "Of the Thirty-nine Articles", p. 422]. The reformed Churches, as a body, reject the invocation of the saints. Article xxi of the Augsburg Confession says: "Scripture does not teach us to invoke the Saints, or to ask for help from the Saints; for it puts before us Christ as the one mediator, propitiatory, high-priest and intercessor." In the "Apology of the Augsburg Confession" (ad art. xxi, sects. 3, 4), it is admitted that the angels pray for us, and the saints, too, "for the Church in general"; but this does not imply that they are to be invoked. The Calvinists, however, reject both intercession and invocation as an imposture and delusion of Satan, since thereby the right manner of praying is prevented, and the saints know nothing of us, and have no concern as to what passes on earth ("Gall. Confess.", art. xxiv; "Remonst. Conf." c. xvi, sect. 3).

DENZINGER, Enchiridion (10th ed., Freiburg im Br., 1908), n.984; Catechism of the Council of Trent, tr. DONOVAN (Dublin, 1867); ST. THOMAS, II-II, Q. lxxxiii, a. 4; and Suppl., Q. lxxii, a. 2; SUAREZ, De Incarnatione (Venice, 1740-51), disp. lii; PETAVIUS, De Incarnatione (Bar-le-Duc, 1864-70), XV, c. v, vi; BELLARMINE, De Controversiis Christian Fidei, II (Paris, 1608), Controv. quarta, I, xv sqq.; WATERWORTH, Faith of Catholics, III (New York, 1885); MILNER, End of Religious Controversy, ed. RIVINGTON (London, 1896); GIBBONS, Faith of our Fathers (Baltimore, 1890), xiii, xiv; MÖHLER, Symbolism tr. ROBERTSON, II (London, 1847), 140 sqq.

T.B. SCANNELL

Episcopal Intercession

The right to intercede for criminals, which was granted by the secular power to the bishops of the Early Church. This right originated rather in the great respect in which the episcopal dignity was held in the early centuries of Christianity, than in any definite enactment. Reference to its existence is made in the seventh canon of the Council of Sardica about 344 (Mansi, "Collectio Amplissima Conciliorum", III. It is also mentioned by St. Augustine (Epp. cxxxiii and cxxxix, in Migne, P.L., XXXIII, 509, 535), St. Jerome (Ep. lii, in Migne, P.L., XXII, 527-40), and by Socrates in his "Church History" (V, xiv; VII, xvii). St. Augustine repeatedly interceded for criminals with Macedonius, who was then governor of Africa (Epp. clii-cliii, in Migne, P.L., XXXIII, 652). Martin of Tours interceded with Emperor Maximus for the imprisoned Priscillianists in 384-5: and Bishop Flavian of Antioch interceded with Emperor Theodosius I in 387 on behalf of the inhabitants of Antioch, who had wantonly destroyed the imperial statues in that city. St. Ambrose induced Emperor Theodosius I to enact a law which forbade the execution of the death penalty and the confiscation of property until thirty days after sentence had been passed. It was the purpose of this law to leave room for clemency and to prevent the punishing of the innocent [see Bossuet, "Gallia Orthodoxa" pars I, lib. II, cap. v, in "Œuvres Complètes", XII (Bar-le-Duc, 1870), 98]. To enable them to exercise their right of intercession, the bishops had free access to the prisons (Codex Theodosii, app., cap. xiii). They were even exhorted to visit the prisoners every Wednesday and Saturday in order to investigate the cause of their imprisonment, and to admonish the supervisors of the prisons to treat those committed to their charge with Christian charity. In case the prison-keepers were found to be inhuman or remiss in their duty towards their prisoners, the bishops were to report these abuses to the emperor. The rights of the bishops, which were almost unlimited in this respect, were somewhat regulated for the bishops of the Eastern Empire in "Codex Justiniani", lib. I, tit. 4: "De episcopali audientia"; for the bishops of the Western Empire in the "Edicta Theoderici", cap. xiv (Mon. Germ. Leg., V). Closely allied with the right of episcopal intercession was the right of asylum or sanctuary (see RIGHT OF ASYLUM), and the right and duty of the bishops to protect orphans, widows, and other unfortunates. Thus Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrus, interceded with Empress Pulcheria in behalf of the poor of his diocese, who were overladen with taxes; the Third Council of Carthage, held in 399, requested the emperor to accede to the wishes of the bishops by appointing advocates to plead the causes of the poor before the courts, while the Council of Mâcon, held in 585, forbade all civil authorities to begin judicial proceedings against widows and orphans without previously notifying the bishop of the diocese to which the accused belonged.

KRAUS, Realencyklopädie der christlichen Altertümer, I (Freiburg im Br., 1882), 166-7; RATZINGER, Gesch. der kirchlichen Armenpflege (Freiburg im Br., 1884), 133-9; EALES in Dictionary of Christian Antiquities (London, 1876-80), s. v.; LALEMAND, Histoire de la Charité, I (Paris, 1907-).

MICHAEL OTT

Interdict

(Latin interdictum, from inter and dicere).

Originally in Roman law, an interlocutory edict of the praetor, especially in matter affecting the right of possession; it still preserves this meaning in both Roman and canon law. In present ecelesiastical use the word denotes, in general, a prohibition. In addition to the definite meaning it has when referring to the object of this article, the term is often loosely employed in a wider and rather untechnical sense. We speak of a priest, a church, or a practice of devotion being interdicted, to denote a suspended priest, one who either by canon law or by the stricture of his ordinary is forbidden to exercise his sacerdotal functions, a church building that has been secularized, or one in which Divine service is temporarily suspended, because the edifice has incurred "pollution" or lost its consecration, finally, extraordinary practices of devotion are said to be interdicted. But, strictly speaking, interdict is applied only to persons and churches affected by the penal measure or censure called "interdict", and it is exclusively in this sense of the word that the subject is treated here. After explaining its nature and effects we shall mention the interdicts in force by common canonical law.

An interdict is a censure, or prohibition, excluding the faithful from participation in certain holy things. These holy things are all those pertaining to Christian worship, and are divided into three classes:

• the Divine offices, in other words the Liturgy, and in general all acts performed by clerics as such, and having reference to worship
• the sacraments, excepting private administrations of those that are of necessity;
• ecclesiastical burial, including all funeral services.

This prohibition varies in degree, according to the different kinds of interdicts to be enumerated:

First, interdicts are either local or personal; the former affect territories or sacred buildings directly, and persons indirectly; the latter directly affect persons. Canonical authors add a third kind, the mixed interdict, which affects directly and immediately both persons and places; if, for instance, the interdict is issued against a town and its inhabitants, the latter are subject to it, even when they are outside of the town (arg. cap. xvi, "De sent. excomm." in VI). Local interdicts, like personal interdicts, may be general or particular. A general local interdict is one affecting a whole territory, district, town, etc., and this was the ordinary interdict of the Middle Ages; a particular local interdict is one affecting, for example, a particular church. A general personal interdict is one falling on a given body or group of people as a class, e.g. on a chapter, the clergy or people of a town, of a community; a particular personal interdict is one affecting certain individuals as such, for instance, a given bishop, a given cleric. Finally, the interdict is total if the prohibition extends to all the sacred things mentioned above; otherwise it is called partial. A special kind of partial interdict is that which forbids one to enter a church, interdictum ab ingressu ecclesiae mentioned by certain texts. Omitting the mixed interdict, which does not form a distinct class, we have therefore:

• the general local interdicts;
• particular local interdicts;
• general personal interdicts;
• particular personal interdicts;
• prohibitions against entering a church. We may add
• the prohibition obliging the clergy to abstain from celebrating the Divine offices, cessatio a divinis, a measure somewhat akin to a particular local interdict, only that it is not imposed on account of any crime on the part of those whom it affects.

This short account shows us that under the same name are grouped penal measures rather different in nature, but having in common a prohibition of certain sacred things.

Interdict differs from excommunication, in that it does not cut one off from the communion of the faithful or from Christian society, though the acts of religion forbidden in both cases are almost identical. It differs from suspension also in this respect: the latter affects the powers of clerics, inasmuch as they are clerics, while the interdict affects the rights of the faithful as such, and does not directly affect clerics as such but only as members of the Church. Of course, it follows that the clergy cannot exercise their functions towards those under interdict, or in interdicted places or buildings, but their powers are not directly affected, as happens in case of suspension; their jurisdiction remains unimpaired, which allows of a guilty individual being punished, without imperilling the validity of his acts of jurisdiction. This shows that an interdict is more akin to excommunication than to suspension.

Whereas excommunication is exclusively a censure, intended to lead a guilty person back to repentance, an interdict, like suspension, may be imposed either as a censure or as a vindictive punishment. In both cases there must have been a grave crime; if the penalty has been inflicted for an indefinite period and with a view to making the guilty one amend his evil ways it is imposed as a censure; if, however, it is imposed for a definite time, and no reparation is demanded of the individuals at fault, it IS inflicted as a punishment. Consequently the interdicts still in vogue in virtue of the Constitution "Apostolicae Sedis" and the Council of Trent are censures; whilst the interdict recently (1909) placed by Pius X on the town of Adria for fifteen days was a punishment. Strictly speaking, only the particular personal interdict is in all cases a perfect censure, because it alone affects definite persons, while the other interdicts do not affect the individuals except indirectly and inasmuch as they form part of a body or belong to the interdicted territory or place. That is also the reason why only particular personal interdicts, including the prohibition to enter a church suppose a personal fault. In all other cases, on the contrary, although a fault has been committed, and it is intended to punish the guilty persons or make them amend, the interdict may affect and does affect some who are innocent, because it is not aimed directly at the individual but at a moral body, e. g. a chapter, a monastery, or all the inhabitants of a district or a town. If a chapter incur an interdict (Const. "Apost. Sedis", interd., n. 1) for appealing to a future general council, the canons who did not vote for the forbidden resolution are, notwithstanding, obliged to observe the interdict. And the general local interdict suppressing all the Divine offices in a town will evidently fall on the innocent as well as the guilty. Such interdicts are therefore inflicted for the faults of moral bodies, of public authorities as such, of a whole population, and not for the faults of private individuals.

Who have the power of imposing an interdict, and how does it cease? In general, the reader may be referred to CENSURES, ECCLESIASTICAL, and Excommunication. We shall add a few brief remarks.

Any prelate having jurisdiction in foro externo can impose an interdict on his subjects or his territory. It may be provided for in the law and then, like other censures (q.v.), can be ferendae or latae sententiae. A particular personal interdict is removed by absolution, other interdicts are said to be "raised", but this does not imply any act relative to the individuals under interdict; when imposed as a punishment these interdicts may cease on the expiration of a definite time.

(1)General local interdict

A general local interdict is -- for a whole population, town, province, or region -- the almost complete suspension of the liturgical and sacramental Christian life. Examples of it exist as early as the ninth century, under the name of excommunication (see in particular the Council of Limoges of 1031). Innocent III gave this measure the name of interdict and made vigorous use of it. It will suffice to recall the interdict imposed in 1200 on the Kingdom of France, when Philip II Augustus repudiated Ingeburga to marry Agnes of Meran; and that on the Kingdom of England in 1208, to support the election of Stephen Langton to the See of Canterbury against John Lackland, which lasted till the submission of that king in 1213. It was a dangerous weapon, but its severity was mitigated little by little, and at the same time it was less frequently employed. The last example of a general interdict launched by the pope against a whole region seems to have been that imposed by Paul V in 1606 on the territory of Venice, it was raised in the following year. A quite recent example of a general, local, and personal interdict, but of a purely penal nature, is the interdict placed by Pius X on the town and suburbs of Adria in Northern Italy, by decree of the Sacred Congregation of the Consistory, on 30 September, 1909, to punish the population of Adria for a sacrilegious attack made on the bishop, Mgr. Boggiani, in order to prevent him from transferring his residence to Rovigo. The interdict was to last for fifteen days, and contained the following provisions: "Prohibited are: (a) the celebration of the Mass and all other liturgical ceremonies; (b) the ringing of bells; (c) the public administration of the sacraments; (d) solemn burial. The following alone are permitted: (a) the baptism of children, the administration of the other sacraments and of the Viaticum to the sick, (b) the private celebration of marriages; (c) one Mass each week for the renewal of the Holy Eucharist." It was recalled that the violation of this interdict constitutes a mortal sin for all and imposed an irregularity on clerics (Acta Ap. Sedis, 15 Oct., 1909, p. 765).

To return to the subject of a general local interdict, but non-personal in kind, the law authorizes the private celebration of Mass and the choir office, the doors of the church being closed (c. lvii, "De sent. exc.", and c. xxiv, eod. in VI), and also the administration of confirmation; on the other hand canonical authors did not allow extreme unction for the sick, but Pius X permits it. To these relaxations must be added the exceptions made in time of interdict for the celebration of the great feasts of Christmas, Easter, Pentecost, the Assumption, Corpus Christi, and its octave.

(2)The particular local interdict

The particular local interdict has the same effects, but they are limited to the interdicted place or church. The above-mentioned mitigations, however, are not allowed. Whoever knowingly celebrates or causes to be celebrated the Divine offices in an interdicted place incurs ipso facto the prohibition against entering the church until he has made amends (Const. Ap. Sedis, interd., n. 2); and any cleric who knowingly celebrates any Divine office in a place interdicted by name becomes irregular (C. xviii, "De sent. excomm." in VI), but not if he administers a sacrament to an interdicted individual, as the law has not legislated for such a case.

(3) The general personal interdict

The general personal interdict, which, we have seen, may be combined with the local interdict, has the same effects for all the persons who form or will form part of the group, community, or moral person under interdict: all the canons of a chapter, all the religious of a convent, all the inhabitants of a town, all those domiciled in the place, etc. They, however, escape from the interdict who are not members or who cease to be members of the body affected, e. g. a canon appointed to another benefice, a stranger who leaves the town, etc. But the mere change of locality has no liberating effect, and the interdict follows the individual members of the body wherever they may go.

(4) The particular personal interdict

The particular personal interdict, which is a real censure, affects individuals much in the same way as excommunication. They may not assist at the Divine offices or at Mass, and if they are interdicted by name they should be put out, however, if they refuse to withdraw it is not necessary to suspend the service since, after all, the interdict does not deprive them of the communion of the faithful. They may not demand to receive the sacraments, except Penance and the Viaticum, and it is not lawful to administer them. They are to be deprived of ecclesiastical burial, but Mass and the ordinary prayers may be said for them. A cleric violating the interdict becomes irregular.

(5) The interdict against entering the church

The interdict against entering the church is a real censure, intended to bring about the amendment of the erring one; it prohibits him from taking part in Divine service in the church and from being accorded a burial service in it. But outside the church he is as if he had not incurred any censure, he can attend Divine service and receive the sacraments in a private oratory and pray in the church when service is not being held in it. The individual is absolved after due satisfaction for his fault.

(6) The cessation from Divine service

The cessation from Divine service, cessatio a divinis, follows the rules of the local interdict, from which it differs, not in its effects, but only because the fault for which it is imposed is not the fault of the clerics who are prohibited from celebrating the Divine service. It forbids the holding of Divine service and the administration of the sacraments in a given sacred place. It is a manifestation of sorrow and a kind of reparation for a grievous wrong done to a holy place. This cessatio a divinis is not imposed ipso facto by the law; it is imposed by the ordinary when and under the conditions that he judges suitable.

There are five interdicts latae sententiae, two of which are mentioned in the Constitution "Apostolicae Sedis", two decreed by the Council of Trent, and one added by the Constitution "Romanus Pontifex" of 23 August, 1873:

1. "Universities, colleges, and chapters, whatsoever be their name, that appeal from the ordinances or mandates of the reigning Roman pontiff to a future general council, incur an interdict specially reserved to the Roman pontiff." This interdict is imposed for the same crime as the specially reserved excommunication no. 4 [see EXCOMMUNICATION, VII, A, (a)], but the excommunication falls on the individuals, and the interdict on the group, or moral persons, by whatever name they be called, and who cannot be excommunicated as such.
2. "Those who knowingly celebrate or cause to be celebrated the Divine offices in places interdicted by the ordinary or his delegate, or by the law; those who admit persons excommunicated by name to the Divine offices, the sacraments of the Church, or to ecclesiastical burial, incur pleno jure the interdict against entering the church, until they have made amends sufficient in the opinion of him whose order they have contemned." This interdict, which is borrowed, except for a few minor modifications, from c. viii, "De privilegiis", in VI of Boniface VIII, is therefore reserved to the competent prelate. Its object is to ensure the observance, on the one hand, of the local interdict, and, on the other, of excommunication by name (see EXCOMMUNICATION, vol. V, p. 680, subtitle Vitandi and Tolerati).
3. The Council of Trent (Sess. VI, cap. i, "De Ref.") imposes on bishops the duty of residence; it prescribes that those who absent themselves without a sufficient reason for six continuous months are to be deprived of a quarter of their annual revenue; then of another quarter for a second six months' absence; after which, the council continues, "as their contumacy increases . . . the metropolitan will be bound to denounce to the Roman pontiff, by letter or by messenger, within three months, his absent suffragan bishops, and the senior resident suffragan bishop will be obliged to denounce his absent metropolitan, under penalty of interdict against entering the church, incurred eo ipso. The obligation of denouncing begins, therefore, only after an entire year's absence, and the interdict is incurred only if the denunciation has not been made within the next three months.
4. The Council of Trent (Sess. VII, cap. x, "De Ref.") forbids chapters, during the vacancy of a see, to grant dimissory letters within a year dating from the vacancy, unless to clerics who are arctati, i.e. obliged to obtain ordination on account of a benefice; this prohibition carries with it the penalty of interdict. The Council of Trent having later (Sess. XXIV, cap. xvi, "De Ref.") obliged the chapter to name a vicar capitular within eight days, the interdict can be incurred by the chapter only for dimissory letters granted during these eight days. It is disputed whether or not the vicar capitular would incur the interdict for this fault (Pennacchi in Const. "Ap. Sedis", IT. 469).
5. The Constitution "Romanus Pontifex" aims at preventing those who are elected by the chapters or named by the civil authorities from undertaking the administration of their church under the name or title of vicar capitular. Besides the excommunication incurred by the chapters and the person elected (see EXCOMMUNICATION, sub-title Excommunications Pronounced or Renewed Since the Constitution "Apostolica Sedis"), Pius IX imposes on "those among them who have received the episcopal order a suspension from the exercise of their pontifical powers and the interdict against entering the church, pleno jure and without any declaration."

A. BOUDINHON

Psychology of Interest

(Lat. interest; Fr. intérêt; Germ. interesse). The mental state called interest has received much attention in recent psychological literature. This is largely due to the German philosopher Herbart. The important position he has won for it in the theory of education makes it deserving of some treatment in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Psychologists have disputed as to the exact meaning to be assigned to the term and the precise nature of the mental state.

PSYCHOLOGY OF INTEREST

Interest has been variously defined as a kind of consciousness accompanying and stimulating attention, a feeling pleasant or painful directing attention--the pleasurable or painful aspect of a process of attention--and as identical with attention itself. Thus it may be said, I attend to what interests me; and, again, that to be interested and to attend are identical. The term interest is used also to indicate a permanent mental disposition. Thus I may have an interest in certain subjects, though they are not an object of my present attention. However interest be defined, and whether it be described as a cause of attention, an aspect of attention, or as identical with attention, its special significance lies in its intimate connection with the mental activity of attention. Attention may be defined as cognitive or intellectual energy directed towards any object. It is essentially selective, it concentrates consciousness on part of the field of mental vision, whilst it ignores other parts. Attention is also purposive in character. It focuses our mental gaze in order to attain a clearer and more distinct view. It results in a deeper and more lasting impression, and therefore plays a vital part both in each cognitive act and in the growth of knowledge as a whole. The English Associationist school of psychology and most Empiricists, in treating of the genesis of knowledge, seem to look on the intensity or frequency of the stimulus as the most influential factor in the process of cognition. As a matter of fact, what the mind takes in depends almost entirely on this selective action of attention.

Out of the total mass of impressions, streaming in at any moment through the various channels of sense, it is only those to which attention is directed that rise to the level of intellectual life, or take real hold of the mind. What these are will be determined by interest. We are interested in what is connected with our past experience, especially in what is partly new, yet partly familiar. Pleasant feelings and painful feelings are original excitants of attention; there are other experiences also--neutral perhaps in themselves, but associated with these latter--which generate fear or hope, and so become interesting. Though our attention may be temporarily attracted by any sudden shock or unexpected impression of unusual intensity, we do not speak of this as interesting, and our attention soon wanes. Isolated experiences, except in so far as they may stimulate the intellect to seek to correlate them with some previous cognitions, do not easily hold the mind. Repeated efforts are required to keep our attention fixed on an unfamiliar branch of study (as e.g. a new language or science). But in proportion as each successive act of observation or understanding leaves a deposit in the form of an idea in the memory, ready to be awakened by partially similar experiences in the future, there as gradually built up in the mind a group or system of ideas constituting our abiding knowledge of the subject. Such series of experiences, with the group of ideas thus deposited in the memory, render similar acts of cognition easy and agreeable in the future. In fact they develop a kind of appetite for future related experiences, which are henceforth assimilated, or, in Herbartian language, apperceived, with facility and satisfaction. The latent group of ideas bearing in any topic constitute an interest in the sense of a permanent disposition of the mind, whilst the feeling of the process of apperception, or assimilation, is interest viewed as a form of actual consciousness. But an event of a bizarre or novel character, which we may find difficulty in comprehending or assimilating with past experience, may also fascinate our mind. The strange, the horrible, may thus awaken at least temporarily a keen, if morbid, interest. Still, in so far as such experiences may excite fear or anxiety, they come under the general principle that interest is associated with personal pleasure or pain.

Broadly speaking, then, all those things which arouse or sustain non-voluntary or spontaneous attention are interesting whilst phenomena to which we can attend only with voluntary effort are uninteresting. The child is interested in its food and its play, also in any operations associated with pleasure or pain in the past. The boy is interested in his games, in those exercises which he has come to connect with his own well-being, and in branches of study which have already effected such a lodgment in the mind that new ideas and items of information are readily assimilated and associated with what has gone before. Men are interested in those subjects which have become interwoven and connected with the main occupations of their lives.

PEDAGOGICS

The psychology of interest being thus understood, its capital importance in the work of education becomes obvious. It is in his insistence on the value of this mental and moral force, and his systematic treatment of it in application to the business of teaching that Herbart's chief importance as an educationist lies. In proportion as the teacher can awaken and sustain the interest of the pupil, so much greater will be the facility, the rapidity and the tenacity of the mental acquisition of the latter. It must be admitted that, in beginning most branches of knowledge, a number of "dry" facts, which possess little interest of themselves for the child, have usually to be learned by sheer labour. The spontaneous attention of the pupil will not fix on and adhere with satisfaction to the ideas presented in the opening pages of a text-book. Here the teacher is compelled to demand the effort of voluntary attention, even though it be not pleasant, on the part of the pupil. Still, he will wisely do his utmost to make some of the future utility of the immediate labour intelligible to the student, and in this way attach mediate interest to that which is dull and unattractive in itself. Moreover, as the protracted effort of attention to what is in itself uninteresting is fatiguing, he will keep the lessons in these subjects short at first, and vary the monotony by enlivening and useful bite of information, illustrations, comments, and the like, which will afford relief and rest between the attacks on the substance of the lesson. At this stage the master aims at being an interesting teacher; he cannot as yet make his subject interesting, which, however, should be his ultimate goal.

But, as the student advances, there is being formed in his mind an increasing group of cognitions, a growing mass of ideas about this branch of study, which makes the entrance of each new idea connected with it easier and more welcome. There is a feeling of satisfaction as each new item fits into the old, and is assimilated or "apperceived" by the latter. The pupil begins to feel that the ideas he already possesses give him a certain power to understand and manipulate the subject of his study. He has become conscious of an extension of this power with each enlargement of his knowledge, and the desire for more knowledge begins to manifest itself. Here we have apperceptive attention or immediate interest. To generate this immediate interest in the subject itself being a main object of the teacher, this purpose should determine his exposition of the subject as a whole, and also guide him in dealing with the student from day to day. His exposition should be orderly, proceeding logically with proper divisions: the more important principles or ideas should be firmly fixed by repetition, the subdivisions located in their proper places, and their connection with the heads under which they fall made clear. By this means the ideas about the subject introduced into the mind of the pupil are built up into a rational or organized system. This secures greater command of what is already known, as well as greater facility in the reception of further knowledge, and so expedites the growth of interest. But besides this orderliness of exposition in the treatment of the matter, which might be formal and lifeless, the teacher must be continually adapting his instruction to the present condition of the pupil's mind. He must constantly keep in view what ideas the student has already acquired. He has to stir up the related set of ideas by judicious questions or repetitions, and excite the appetite of curiosity, when about to communicate further information; he has to show the connection and bind the new item with the previous knowledge by comparison, illustration, and explanation. Finally, he is to be alive to every opportunity to generalize, and to show how the new information may be applied by setting suitable exercises or problems to be worked out by the pupil himself. He thus leads the pupil to realize his increase of power, which is one of the most effective means of fostering active interest both in the subject itself and in the relation of its various parts with the whole.

Modern pedagogy, however, especially since Herbart, insists on the value of interest not only as a means, but as an educational end in itself. For the Herbartian school the aim of education should be the formation of a man of "many-sided interest". This is to be attained by the judicious cultivation of the various faculties intellectual, emotional, and moral--that is by the realization of man's entire being with all its aptitudes. It may be conceded that, with certain qualifications and reservations, there is a substantial amount of truth in this view. Worthy interests ennoble and enrich human life both in point of dignity and happiness. The faculties, mental and physical, clamour for exercise; man's activities will find an outlet; the capacities of his soul are given to be realized. Ceteris paribus, one good test of the educational value of any branch of study, and of the efficiency of the method by which it has been taught, is to be found in the degree in which it becomes a permanent interest to the mind. The exercise of our mental powers on a subject, which has already created for itself a real interest, is accompanied by pleasure. A man's business or profession, when he is working independently for himself, should, and normally does, become a topic of keen interest. But, unless his life is to be very narrow and stinted, he should also have other interests. His leisure hours require them. Wholesome intellectual, social, and æsthetic interests are amongst the most effective agencies for overcoming the temptations to drink, gambling, and other degrading forms of amusement. The pressure of ennui and idleness will develop a most harmful discontent, unless the faculties find suitable employment. The man who, after a number of years devoted exclusively to the work of making money, retires from business in order to enjoy himself, is liable to find life almost insupportable through want of interesting occupation. A subject, respecting which the mind is in possession of an organized system of ideas, is necessary to man for the agreeable exercise of his faculties, and such an interest requires time for its growth. Although then it is erroneous to maintain that many-sided interest or culture, however rich and varied, constitutes morality or supplies for religion, still it may be readily acknowledged that a judicious equipment of worthy interests, intellectual, æsthetic, and social is a powerful ally in the battle with evil passions, and also one of the most precious elements of human well-being with which a wisely planned scheme of education can equip the human soul.

MICHAEL MAHER

Interest

Notion of interest

Interest is a value exacted or promised over and above the restitution of a borrowed capital.

• Moratory interest, that is interest due as an indemnity or a penalty for delay in payment, is distinguished from
• compensatory interest, which indemnifies the lender for the danger he really runs of losing his capital, the loss that he suffers or the gain of which he deprives himself in disembarrassing himself of his capital during the period of the loan, and from
• lucrative interest, which is an emolument that the lender would not gain without lending.

Interest originates in the loan of goods for consumption, which permits the borrower to expend or to destroy the things lent, on condition of giving back an equal number of the same kind or quality. The sum to be paid for the usage of an article, which must itself be given back, is called hire. Everything which is consumed by usage: corn, wine, oil, fruit, etc., can be the matter of a loan (former sense), but ordinarily it is a sum of money which is lent.

Legitimacy of lending at interest

Is it permitted to lend at interest? Formerly (see Usury) the Church rigorously condemned the exacting of anything over and above capital, except when, by reason of some special circumstance, the lender was in danger of losing his capital or could not advance his loan of money without exposing himself to a loss or to deprivation of a gain. These special reasons, which authorise the charging of interest, are called extrinsic titles.

Besides these compensatory interests, the Church has likewise admitted moratory interest. In our day, she permits the general practice of lending at interest, that is to say, she authorizes the impost, without one's having to enquire if, on lending his money, he has suffered a loss or deprived himself of a gain, provided he demand a moderate interest for the money he lends. This demand is never unjust. Charity alone, not justice, can oblige anyone to make a gratuitous loan (see the replies of the Penitentiary and of the Holy Office since 1830).

What is the reason for this change in the attitude of the Church towards the exaction of interest? As may be more fully seen in the article Usury, this differece is due to economical circumstances. The price of goods is regulated by common valuation, and the latter by the utility that their possession ordinarily brings in a given centre. Now, today, otherwise than formerly, one can commonly employ one's money fruitfully, at least by putting it into a syndicate. Hence, today, the mere possession of money means a certain value. Whoever hands over this possession can claim in return this value. Thus it is that one acts in demanding an interest.

Just rate of interest

Even today one can still sin against justice by demanding too high an interest, or usury, as it is called. What interest then is just and moderate? Theoretically, and in an abstract way, the fair rate of interest nearly corresponds to the average gain that those engaged in business may generally expect in a determined centre. It nearly corresponds, for the interest being guaranteed, whilst the profit is uncertain, we must discount the value of an insurance premium from the average profit. Accordingly, in a determined centre, if those who sink their money in buildings, land, or industrial undertakings generally look for a profit of 6 percent, the just rate of interest will be about 4 or 5 percent. This rate covers the risks and ordinary inconveniences of lending. But if one had to run special risks or had to give up an extraordinary premium, one might in all justice exact a higher rate of interest. Such, therefore, is the theoretical rule. In practice, however, as even the answer of the Sacred Penitentiary shows (18 April, 1889), the best course is to conform to the usages established amongst men, precisely as one does with regard to other prices, and, as happens in the case of such prices, particular circumstances influece the rate of interest, either by increasing or lowering it. In this way, the security offered by advances to the governments of wealthy countries and those that cover mortgages diminish the rate for public loans and loans on mortgage. On the contrary, the interest on shipping, and mercantile business is higher than that in civil business, on account of the greater uncertainty in sea voyages and in commercial enterprise.

A. VERMEERSCH

Interims

(Lat. interim, meanwhile.)

Interims are temporary settlements in matters of religion, entered into by Emperor Charles V (1519-56) with the Protestants.

I. THE INTERIM OF RATISBON

The Interim of Ratisbon, published at the conclusion of the imperial diet, 29 July, 1541. It was based on the result of the previous conference between Catholics and Protestants, in which an agreement had been reached on the idea of justification and other points of doctrine. Consequently the imperial "recess" enacted that the adjustment of the religious question should be postponed until the next general council or imperial diet; that meanwhile the Protestants should not go beyond or against the articles agreed upon; that an ecclesiastical reform be inaugurated by the prelates; that the Peace of Nuremberg (1532) should be maintained; that monasteries and chapter-houses should remain intact; that the ecclesiastics should retain their possessions; that the Protestants should not draw anyone to their side; that all judicial proceedings in matters of religion should be suspended; that the imperial court of justice (Reichskammergericht) should remain as before; and that the recess of Augsburg (1530) should remain in force. Owing to the opposition of the Protestants, Charles V in a secret declaration made concessions to them, which practically nullified the recess. The articles agreed upon were to be accepted in the sense of their theologians; the monasteries and chapter-houses might be called on to inaugurate a reform; the ecclesiastics, monasteries, and chapter-houses, that had embraced the Confession of Augsburg, were to remain in the full possession of their property; the Protestants were not to compel the subjects of Catholic princes to embrace their Faith, but if anyone came to them spontaneously, he was not to be hindered; the members of the imperial court of justice were not to be molested, if they turned Protestants; and the recess of Augsburg was to have force only in matters not appertaining to religion.

II. THE INTERIM OF AUGSBURG

The Interim of Augsburg, published at the conclusion of the imperial diet, 30 June, 1548. In twenty-six chapters, it comprised statements on matters of doctrine and ecclesiastical discipline. The points of doctrine were all explained in the sense of Catholic dogma, but couched in the mildest and vaguest terms; and wherever it was feasible, the form and the concept approached the Protestant view of those subjects. In matters of ecclesiastical discipline two important concessions were made to the Protestants, viz, the marriage of the clergy, and Communion under both kinds. In addition, an imperial ordinance enjoined on the Catholic clergy the execution of reforms in the choice and ordination of ecclesiastics, the administration of the sacraments, and other similar matters.

III. THE INTERIM OF ZELLA

The Interim of Augsburg was meant principally for the Protestants, whose return to the Catholic Faith was looked for; but nearly everywhere they very strongly opposed it. In order to make it less objectionable, a modification was introduced by Melanchthon and other Protestant divines, commissioned thereto by Elector Maurice of Saxony (1521-53). In a meeting held at Alt-Zella in November, 1548, they explained in a Protestant sense what they considered essential points of doctrine, e.g. justification and others; they accepted the non-essentials or adiaphora, such as confirmation, Mass, the use of candles, vestments, holy days, etc. The document then drawn up became known as the Interim of Zella, or the Small Interim. In the diet held at Leipzig in December, 1548, it was adopted by the estates of the Electorate of Saxony, and was then called the Interim of Leipzig, or the Great Interim.

PASTOR, Die kirchlichen Reunionsbestrebungen während der Regierung Karls V. (Freiburg im Br., 1879); IDEM, Gesch. der Päpste, V (Freiburg im Br., 1909); JANSSEN-PASTOR, Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, III (Freiburg im Br., 1899); KAULEN in Kirchenlex, (Freiburg im Br., 1889), s. v. Interim; ISSLEIB in Realencyk. für prot. Theol. (Leipzig, 1901), s. v. Interim.

FRANCIS J. SCHAEFER

Internuncio

(Lat. inter, between; nuntius, messenger.)

The name given in the Roman Curia to a diplomatic agent who, though not belonging to the five highest classes of the papal diplomatic service (legatus a latere, nuncio with full powers of a legatus a latere, legate, nuncio of the first class, and nuncio of the second class), is, nevertheless, chief of a legation (chef de mission). He may have several subordinates, and, on the other hand, his household may consist only of a private secretary. The nomination of internuncios follows no fixed rule; they have been, and still are, accredited indiscriminately to countries differing widely in ecclesiastical importance, e. g. Luxemburg, Chile, Holland, Brazil. Formerly the powers of an internuncio were necessarily extensive, owing to the lack of telegraph service and the slow postal deliveries; they are now almost entirely confined to routine work. In exceptional cases extraordinary powers are given to the internuncio, when important affairs are in question. As conditions in the various countries to which internuncios are ordinarily sent differ considerably, their general powers are regulated accordingly; in consequence, no general statement of the duties of an internuncio is possible.

Nor can the ecclesiastical dignity or position at court of the internuncio be determined with more exactitude. It is safe to say that they are always domestic prelates or titular archbishops. The simple prelature has always been the rule for the internuncios of Holland and Luxemburg, the last of whom was Mgr. Tarnassi. The internuncios accredited to South America in the last century were mostly titular archbishops. At present (summer of 1909), the only internuncios are those in Argentina and Chile, and both are titular archbishops. The earlier arrangement, that internuncios should bear the title of Apostolic delegate and envoy extraordinary, no longer obtains. The last case of the kind occurred in Portugal about the middle of the nineteenth century.

Internuncios, when promoted, are appointed nuncios; in rare instances they become Apostolic delegates. Too much confidence must not be placed in earlier works on papal diplomacy, apropos of this office; according to the requirements of the moment, the Curia increases or diminishes both its scope and its powers.

PAUL MARIA BAUMGARTEN

Biblical Introduction

A technical name which is usually applied to two distinct, but intimately connected, things. First, it designates the part of Scriptural science which is concerned with topics preliminary to the detailed study and correct exposition of Holy Writ. Next, it is given to a work in which these various topics are actually treated.

I. SCOPE AND DIVISIONS

As is commonly admitted at the present day, the general object of Biblical introduction is to supply the student of the sacred books of the Old and New Testaments with the knowledge which is necessary, or at least very desirable, for the right interpretation of their contents. Thus understood, the scope of an introduction to the inspired writings which make up the Bible is substantially that of an introduction to other writings of antiquity. An introduction helps materially the student of the text of these writings to know beforehand and in a precise manner the personal history and actual surroundings of the author to whom each writing is ascribed, to become acquainted with the date of composition and the general form and purpose of the works before him, to acquire familiarity with the leading features of the ancient languages in which the various books were originally written, to realize distinctly the peculiar literary methods employed in their composition, to know something of the various fortunes (alterations, translations, etc.) which have befallen the text in the course of ages, etc. An introduction, too, whether the work for which it is designed be profane or sacred, has usually a limited scope. It is not supposed to treat of each and every topic the knowledge of which might be useful for the right understanding of the books in question. It is justly regarded as sufficient for all practical purposes, when, by the information which it actually imparts, it enables the reader of the works of antiquity to start intelligently on the detailed study of their text. Owing, however, to the fact that the books of the Bible are not simply ancient, but also inspired, writings, the scope of Biblical introduction embraces the various questions which are connected with their inspired character, and which, of course, have no place in an introduction to merely human productions. For this same reason, too, certain topics — such as the questions of integrity and veracity — which naturally belong to treatises preliminary to the study of any ancient writing, assume a very special importance in Biblical introduction.

Biblical introduction is frequently, and indeed aptly, divided into two parts, general and special, the former embracing the preliminary questions which concern the Bible as a whole, the latter being restricted to those which refer to the separate books of Holy Writ. The field of general introduction has long been, and is still, surveyed from different standpoints by Biblical scholars. It no longer embraces a detailed description of the Oriental languages and of the Hellenistic Greek, but is universally limited, in regard to those languages, to a brief exposition of their leading characteristics. With regard to the questions which pertain to the antiquities, geography and chronology of the Bible, some scholars are still of the opinion that they should be dealt with in a general introduction to the study of the Holy Scriptures; most, however — and rightly, as it seems — think that they do not belong to the field of general introduction; the proper place for such topics is either in special treatises or in the body of works on Biblical history. Again, a certain number of scholars regard as forming a part of general introduction the history of God's chosen people, of Divine Revelation, of Biblical theology, of the religious institutions of Israel. They rightly urge that a previous acquaintance with that history is invaluable in the pursuit of Biblical exegesis. It remains true, however, that the study of the historical, doctrinal, etc., contents of Holy Writ is usually considered outside the sphere of general introduction, and may be more profitably followed in distinct treatises bearing the respective names of sacred history, history of Biblical Revelation, Biblical theology, history of the religion of Israel. It thus appears that, at the present day, the tendency is to restrict the object of general introduction to a few questions, particularly to those which help directly to determine the value and meaning of the Sacred Writings considered as a whole. In point of fact, that object, as conceived especially by Catholics, is limited to the great questions of the inspired and canonical character of the Scriptures, their original text and principal translations, the principles and history of their interpretation. As already stated, special introduction deals with the preliminary topics which concern the separate books of the Bible. It is very naturally divided into special introduction to the Old Testament and special introduction to the New Testament. As the Divine authority of the books of either Testament is established by the study of the general introduction to the Bible, so the topics treated in the special introduction are chiefly those which bear on the human authority of the separate writings of the Bible. Hence the questions usually studied in connexion with each book or with a small group of books, such for instance as the Pentateuch, are those of authorship, unity, integrity, veracity, purpose, source of information, date and place of composition, etc. Instead of the divisions of Biblical introduction which have been set forth, numerous writers, particularly in Germany, adopt a very different grouping of the topics preliminary to the exegetical study of the Sacred Scriptures. They do away with the division of Biblical introduction into general and special, and treat of all the questions which they connect with the books of the Old Testament in an "Introduction to the Old Testament" and of all those which they examine with reference to the books of the New Testament in an "Introduction to the New Testament". In either "Introduction" they ordinarily devote a first section to the topics which refer to the contents, date, authorship, etc. of the separate books, and a second section to a more or less brief statement of the canon, text and versions, etc. of the same books considered collectively. Their distribution of the topics of Biblical introduction leaves no room for hermeneutics, or scientific exposition of the principles of exegesis, and in this respect, at least, is inferior to the division of Biblical introduction into general and special, with its comprehensive subdivisions.

II. NATURE AND METHOD OF TREATMENT

Catholic scholars justly regard Biblical introduction as a theological science. They are indeed fully aware of the possibility of viewing it in a different light, of identifying it with a literary history of the various books which make up the Bible. They distinctly know that this is actually done by many writers outside of the Church, who are satisfied with applying to the Holy Scriptures the general principles of historical criticism. But they rightly think that in so doing these writers lose sight of essential differences which exist between the Bible and merely human literature, and which should be taken into account in defining the nature of Biblical introduction. Considered in their actual origin, the sacred books which make up the Bible have alone a Divine authorship which must needs differentiate Biblical introduction from all mere literary history, and impart to it a distinctly theological character. In view of this, Biblical introduction must be conceived as an historical elucidation, not simply of the human and outward origin and characteristics of the sacred records, but also of that which makes them sacred books, viz., the operation of the Holy Ghost Who inspired them. Again, of all existing literatures, the Bible alone has been entrusted to the guardianship of a Divinely constituted society, whose plain duty it is to ensure the right understanding and correct exposition of the written word of God, by seeing that the topics preliminary to its exegesis be fittingly treated by Biblical introduction. Whence it readily follows that Biblical introduction is, by its very nature, a theological discipline, promoting, under the authoritative guidance of the Church, the accurate knowledge of Divine Revelation embodied in Holy Writ. For these and for other no less conclusive reasons, Catholic scholars positively refuse to reduce Biblical introduction to a mere literary history of the various books which make up the Bible, and strenuously maintain its essential character as a theological science. While doing so, however, they do not intend in the least to deny that the topics which fall within its scope should be handled by means of the historico-critical method. In fact, they distinctly affirm that Biblical introduction should be both historical and critical. According to them, constant appeal must be made to history as to a valuable source of scientific information concerning the questions preliminary to the study of the Bible, and also a witness whose positive testimony, especially with regard to the origin and the transmission of the Sacred Books, no one can lightly set aside without laying himself open to the charge of prejudice. According to them, too, the art of criticism must be judiciously employed in the study of Biblical introduction. It is plain, on the one hand, that the science of Biblical introduction can be said to rest on a solid historical basis only in so far as the data supplied by the study of the past are correctly appreciated, that is, are accepted and set forth as valid to the precise extent in which they can stand the test of sound criticism. It is no less plain, on the other hand, "that nothing is to be feared for the Sacred Books, from the true advance of the art of criticism; nay more, that a beneficial light may be derived from it, provided its use be coupled with a real prudence and discernment" (Pius X, 11 Jan., 1906).

III. HISTORY

As a distinct theological discipline, Biblical introduction is indeed of a comparatively recent origin. Centuries, however, before its exact object and proper method of study had been fixed, attempts had been made at supplying the readers and expositors of Holy Writ with a certain amount of information whereby they would be more fully prepared for the better understanding of the Sacred Writings. In view of this, the history of Biblical introduction may be extended back to the early years of the Church, and made to include three principal periods: patristic times; Middle Ages; recent period.

(1) Patristic Times

The early ecclesiastical writers were directly concerned with the exposition of Christian doctrines, so that their works relative to Holy Writ are distinctly hermeneutical, and present only occasionally some material which may be utilized for the treatment of the questions which pertain to Biblical introduction. Of the same general nature are the writings of St. Jerome, although his prefaces to the various books of Scripture, some of his treatises and of his letters deal explicitly with certain introductory topics. St. Augustine's important work, "De Doctrinâ Christianâ", is chiefly a hermeneutical treatise, and deals with only a few questions of introduction in book II, chapters viii-xv. One of the writers most frequently mentioned in connexion with the first period in the history of Biblical introduction is a certain Greek, Adrian (died about a.d. 450), who is probably the same as the Adrian addressed by St. Nilus as a monk and a priest. He certainly belonged to the Antiochene school of exegesis, and was apparently a pupil of St. John Chrysostom. He is the author of a work entitled Eisagoge eis tas Theias Graphas, "Introduction to the Divine Scriptures", which has indeed supplied the specific name of introduction for the theological science treating of topics preliminary to the study of Holy Writ, but which, in fact, is simply a hermeneutical treatise dealing with the style of the sacred writers and the figurative expressions of the Bible (P. G., XCVIII). The other principal writers of that period are: St. Eucherius of Lyons (died about 450), whose two books, "Instructiones ad Salonium filium", are rather a hermeneutical than an introductory work; the Benedictine Cassiodorus (died about 562), whose treatise "De institutione Divinarum Scripturarum" sums up the views of earlier writers and gives an important list of Biblical interpreters, chiefly Latin; the African bishop Junilius (died about 552), who belongs to the school of Nisibis, and whose "Instituta regularia divinæ legis" resembles most a Biblical introduction in the modern sense of the expression; lastly, St. Isidore of Seville (died 636), whose "Etymologiæ" and "Proœmia in libros V. et N. Testamenti" supply useful material for the study of Biblical introduction.

(2) Middle Ages

During this period, as during the one just described, the preoccupations of the ecclesiastical writers were chiefly doctrinal and exegetical, and their methods of study had usually little to do with the historico-critical method of investigation by means of which, as we have seen, questions introductory to the interpretation of the Bible should be treated. Most of them were satisfied with a mere repetition of what had been said by St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and Cassiodorus. This they did in the prefaces which they prefixed to their commentaries on the Sacred Books, and the purpose of which is directly hermeneutical. The only remarkable work on introduction produced in the Middle Ages is the one which the Jewish convert Nicholas of Lyra (died 1340) placed at the beginning of his "Postilla Perpetua", and in which he treats of the canonical and uncanonical books, the versions of the Bible, the various senses of Holy Writ, and the rules of interpretation.

(3) Recent Period

This is by far the most important and most fruitful period in the history of Biblical introduction. Since the sixteenth century this branch of theological learning has been more and more cultivated as a distinct science, and has gradually assumed its present form. The first work of this period was published at Venice, in 1566, by the Dominican Sixtus of Siena (died 1599). It is entitled "Bibliotheca sancta ex præcipuis Catholicæ Ecclesiæ auctoribus collecta", and treats in eight books of the sacred writers and their works, of the best manner of translating and explaining Holy Writ, and gives a copious list of Biblical interpreters. Among the Catholic authors on introduction who soon followed Sixtus the following deserve a special mention: Arias Montanus (died 1598), whose "Prolegomena" in his Polyglot (Antwerp, 1572) forms a valuable introduction; Salmeron (died 1585), whose "Prolegomena Biblica" appears in the first volume of his works (Madrid, 1598); Serarius (died 1642) whose "Præloquia" (Antwerp, 1625) was selected by Migne as the most suitable general introduction with which to begin his "Sacræ Scripturæ Cursus Completus"; the Oratorian Lami (died 1715), the learned writer of the "Apparatus ad Biblia sacra" (Paris, 1687); the Benedictine Martianay (died 1717); and the able theologian Ellies Dupin (died 1719). Meantime the Protestants, somewhat belated by doctrinal bias, brought forth a certain number of general introductions, among which may be mentioned those of Rivet (Dordrecht, 1616); Walther (Leipzig, 1636); Calov (Wittenberg, 1643); Brian Walton (London, 1637); and Heidegger (Zurich, 1681) The first scholar to depart from the unsatisfactory method of treating topics preliminary to the study of Holy Writ which had hitherto prevailed, and which had made some of the writings of his immediate predecessors dogmatic treatises rather than works on Biblical introduction, was the French Oratorian Richard Simon (1638-1712). According to him the Sacred Books, no less than the various Biblical translations and commentaries, are literary products which must bear the impress of the ideas and the methods of composition prevalent at the time when they were written, so that, to view and appreciate these works aright, one should study them carefully in themselves and in the light of the historical events under which they came into existence. A study at once historical and critical appeared also to him the best means for disposing of unsound theories, and for vindicating the inspired character of the Bible, which had been recently impugned by Hobbes and Spinoza. Hence the name of "Histoire Critique", which he gave to his epoch-making introductions to the Old Testament (Paris, 1678), to the text (Rotterdam, 1689), versions (Rotterdam, 1690), and commentaries (Rotterdam, 1693) of the New Testament. Simon's methods and conclusions were at first strenuously opposed, and afterwards set aside by Catholics and by Protestants alike. The most noteworthy works of the eighteenth century on introduction, on the basis of the ancient method, are, among Catholics, those of Calmet (Paris, 1707-20); Goldhagen (Mainz, 1765-68); Fabricy (Rome, 1772); Marchini (Turin, 1777); and Mayer (Vienna, 1789); and, among Protestants, those of Hody (Oxford, 1705); Carpzov (Leipzig, 1721-28); J. D. Michaelis (Göttingen, 1750; Hamburg, 1787).

The true method of Biblical introduction set forth and applied by Simon was not destined, however, to be discarded forever. The rationalists were the first to use it, or rather to abuse it, for their anti-dogmatic purposes. Ever since the latter part of the eighteenth century, they, and those more or less affected by rationalistic tendencies, have very often openly, and at times with rare ability, treated Biblical introduction as a mere literary history of the Sacred Writings. As belonging to the critical school, the following writers on introductory topics may be mentioned: Semler (died 1791); Eichhorn (died 1827); de Wette (died 1849); Bleek (died 1859); Vatke (died 1882); Riehm (died 1888); Kuenen (died 1891); Reuss (died 1891); Scholten; Hilgenfeld; Wellhausen; W. R. Smith (died 1894); S. Davidson (died 1898); Strack; Wildeboer; E. Kautzsch; F. E. Koenig; Jülicher; Cornill; Baudissin; H. Holtzmann; Bacon; Budde; Cheyne; Kent; Moffatt; Von Soden; Pfleiderer; to whom may be added, as occupying in the main similar positions, B. Weiss; Salmon; Driver; A. B. Davidson (died 1902); Curtiss (died 1904); Ottley; Kirkpatrick; Ryle; Briggs; Bennett; Adeney; C. H. H. Wright; McFayden; and Geden. The following are the principal Protestant writers who meantime have striven to stay the progress of the critical school by treating the questions of Biblical introduction on conservative lines: Hengstenberg (died 1869); Hofmann (died 1877); Hävernick (died 1845); Keil (died 1888); Bissell; Gloag; Godet (died 1900); Westcott (died 1902); Harman; Sayce; Sanday; Green (died 1900); Dods; Kerr; Burkitt; Zahn; Mackay; Urquhart; and Orr.

During the same period Catholics have produced numerous works on Biblical introduction, and used in them, in various degrees, the historico-critical method of investigation. These works may be briefly given under four general heads, as follows:

• General Introduction to Holy Writ: Dixon, "Intr. to the Sacred Scriptures" (Dublin, 1852); Trochon, "Introd. générale" (Paris, 1886-87); Chauvin, "Leçons d'Int. générale" (Paris, 1897); Breen, "General and Critical Introd. to the Holy Scripture" (Rochester, 1897); Gigot, "General Introd. to the H. Script." (New York, 1899); Telch, "Intr. Generalis in Scripturam Sacram" (Ratisbon, 1908).
• General and Special Introd. to both Testaments: Alber, "Institutiones Scrip. Sac. Antiq. et Novi Test." (Budapest, 1801-08); Scholz, "Allgem. Einleit. in die heilige Schrift des A. und N. T." (Cologne, 1845-48); Glaire, "Introd. historiq. et critiq. aux Livres de l'A. et du N. T." (Paris, 1838-); Haneberg, "Geschichte der bibl. Offenbarung als Einleitung ins alte und neue Testam." (Ratisbon, 1849); Gilly, "Préeis d'Introd. générale et particulière à l'Ecrit. Ste" (Nimes, 1867); Lamy, "Introd. in Sac. Scripturam" (Mechlin, 1867); Danko, "Hist. Revelationis divinæ V. T." (Vienna, 1852); Idem, "Hist. Rev. divinæ N. T." (Vienna, 1867); Kaulen, "Einleitung in die heilige Schrift des A. und N. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1876); Vigouroux and Bacuez, "Manuel Biblique" (Paris, 1879); Ubaldi, "Introd. in Sacr. Script." (Rome, 1877-81); Cornely, "Introd. historica et critica in U. T. libros" (Paris, 1885-87); Trochon and Lesêtre, "Introd. à l'Etude de l'Ecrit. Sainte" (Paris, 1889-90); Barry, "The Tradition of Scripture" (New York, 1906).
• Special Introd. to the Old Testament: Jahn, "Einleit. in die göttliche Bücher des A. Bundes" (Vienna, 1793); Ackermann, "Introd. in lib. sacros V. Test." (Vienna, 1825-9); Herbst, "Hist. Krit. Einleitung in die heilige Schriften des A. T." (Karlsruhe, 1840-44); Reusch, "Lehrbuch der Einl. in das A. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1864); Zschokke, "Hist. sacra V. T." (Vienna, 1872); Neteler, "Abriss der alttest. Literaturgeschichte" (Münster, 1870); Martin, "Intr. à la Critique générale do l'A. T." (Paris, 1886-89); Schöpfer, 'Gesch. des A. T." (Brixen, 1894); Gigot, "Special Intr. to O. T." (New York, 1901, 1906).
• Special Introduct. to the New Testament: Feilmoser, "Einl. in die Bücher des N. Bundes" (Innsbruck, 1810); Unterkircher, "Einl. in die B. des N. T." (Innsbruck, 1810); Hug, "Einl. in die heil. Schriften des N. T." (Tübingen, 1808); Reithmayer "Einl. in die kanonisch. B. des N. T." (Ratisbon, 1852); Maier, "Einl. in die Schrif. des N. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1852); Markf, "Introd. in sacros libros N. T." (Budapest, 1856); Güntner, "Introd. in sacros N. T. libros" (Prague, 1863); Langen, "Grundriss der Einleitung das N. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1868); Aberle, "Einl. in das N. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1877); Trenkle, "Einl. in das N. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1897); Schaefer, "Einl. in das N. T." (Paderborn, 1898); Belser, "Einl. in das N. T." (Freiburg im Br., 1901); Jacquier, "Histoire des Livres du N. T." (Paris, 1904-08); Brassac, "Nouveau Testament" (Paris, 1908, 1909), twelfth recast edition of vols. III and IV of Vigouroux's "Manuel Biblique".

From among the introductory works recently published by Jewish scholars the following may be mentioned: J. Fürst, "Geschichte der biblischen Literatur und des judisch-hellenistischen Schriftens" (Leipzig, 1867-70); Cassel, "Geschichte der judischen Literatur" (Berlin, 1872-73); J. S. Bloch, "Studien zur Geschichte der Sammlung der A. Literatur" (Leipzig, 1875); A. Geiger, "Einleitung in die biblischen Schriften" (Berlin, 1877); Wogue, "Histoire de la Bible et de l'Exégèse biblique jusqu'à nos jours" (Paris, 1881). Besides the separate works on Biblical introduction which have been mentioned, valuable contributions to that branch of Scriptural science are found in the shape of articles in the Dictionaries of the Bible and the general encyclopedias already published or yet issuing.

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Introit

The Introit (Introitus) of the Mass is the fragment of a psalm with its antiphon sung while the celebrant and ministers enter the church and approach the altar. In all Western rites the Mass began with such a processional psalm since the earliest times of which we have any record. As it was sung by the choir it is not, of course, to be found in sacramentaries; but introits are contained in the first antiphonaries known (the Gregorian Antiphonary at Montpellier, the St. Gall manuscript, that represent a seventh-century tradition, etc.; see Leclercq in "Dict. d'archéologie chrétienne", s. v. "Antiphonaire"). The First Roman Ordo (sixth to seventh century) says that as soon as the candles are lit and everything is ready, the singers come and stand before the altar on either side, "and presently the leader of the choir begins the antiphon for the entrance (antiphona ad introitum)". As soon as the deacons hear his voice they go to the pope, who rises and comes from the sacristy to the altar in procession ("Ordo Rom. I", ed. Atchley, London, 1905, p. 128). There is every reason to suppose that as soon as the Western liturgies were arranged in definite forms, the entrance was always accompanied by the chant of a psalm, which from that circumstance was called at Rome Introitus or Psalmus or Antiphona ad Introitum. The old Gallican Rite called it Antiphona ad Pr legendum; at Milan it is the Ingressa; in the Mozarabic, Carthusian, Dominican, and Carmelite books, Officium. The Introit was a whole psalm sung with the Gloria Patri and Sicut erat verses, preceded and followed by an antiphon in the usual way. No doubt originally it was sung as a solo while the choir repeated a response after each verse (the psalmus responsorius of which we still have an example in the Invitatorium at Matins), then the later way of singing psalms (psalmus antiphonarius) was adopted for the Introit too. The "Liber Pontificalis" ascribes this antiphonal chant at the Introit to Pope Celestine I (422-32): "He ordered that the psalms of David be sung antiphonally [ antiphonatim, by two choirs alternately] by all before the Sacrifice, which was not done before; but only the epistle of St. Paul was read and the holy Gospel" (ed. Duchesne, I, Paris, 1886, 230). The text seems even to attribute the use of the Introit-psalm in any form to this pope. Medieval writers take this idea from the "Liber Pontificalis", e. g. Honorius of Autun, "Gemma animæ" (in P. L., CLXXII): "Pope Celestine ordered psalms to be sung at the entrance (ad introitum) of the Mass. Pope Gregory [I] afterwards composed antiphons in modulation for the entrance of the Mass" (I, lxxxvii). Probst thought that Gelasius I (492-96) invented the Introit (Die abendländische Messe vom 5 bis zum 8 Jahrhundert, Münster, 1896, 36). It is perhaps safest to account for our Introit merely as a development of the processional psalm sung during the entrance of the celebrant and his ministers, as psalms were sung in processions from very early times. But it soon began to be curtailed. Its object was only to accompany the entrance, so there was no reason for going on with it after the celebrant had arrived at the altar. Already in the First Roman Ordo as soon as the pope is ready to begin Mass he signs to the choir-master to leave out the rest of the psalm and go on at once to the Gloria Patri (ed. Atchley, p. 128). Since the early Middle Ages the psalm has been further shortened to one verse (Durandus, "Rationale", IV, 5). So it received the form it still has, namely: an antiphon, one verse of a psalm, Gloria Patri, Sicut erat, the antiphon repeated. In the Milanese Rite the antiphon of the Ingressa is not repeated except in Requiem Masses; on the other hand, in some medieval uses it was repeated several times (Durandus, loc. cit.). On great feasts the Carmelites still repeat it twice at the end. The antiphon is taken as a rule from the Psalter (Durandus calls such introits regulares); sometimes (e.g. second and third Christmas Mass, Ascension-Day, Whit-Sunday, etc.) from another part of the Bible; more rarely (Assumption, All Saints, many Masses of Our Lady -- "Salve sancta parens", Requiems, etc.) it is a composition by some later writer. The verse of the psalm in the earlier introits is the first (obviously still a fragment of the whole), except that when the antiphon itself is the first verse the "psalm" is the next (twelfth and fifteenth Sundays after Pentecost, etc.). In later times it has become common to choose a suitable verse regardless of this rule (e. g. the Crown of Thorns Mass for Friday after Ash Wednesday, St. Ignatius Loyola on 31 July, etc.). The text of the psalms used in the introits (as throughout the Missal) is not the Vulgate but the Itala. In Paschal time two Alleluias are added to the antiphon, sometimes (Easter Day, Low Sunday, the Third and Fourth Sundays after Easter, etc.) there are three. In Requiems and Masses de tempore in Passiontide, when the Psalm Judica is not said, there is no Gloria Patri at the Introit. On Holy Saturday and at the chief Mass on Whitsun Eve (when the prophecies are read) there is no Introit at all. The reason of this is obvious. The Introit accompanies the entrance; but on these occasions the celebrant has been at the altar for some time before Mass begins. We name Masses (that is the complex of changeable prayers that make up the Puerperium) from the first words of the Introit by which they begin. Thus the Mass for the first Sunday of Advent is called Ad te leva; the two Masses of the Sacred Heart are distinguished as Miserability and Exordium; a Mass for the dead is spoken of as a Requiem, and so on. There is nothing corresponding to our Introit in the Eastern rites. In all of them the liturgy begins quite differently. The preparation (vesting, preparation of the offerings) takes place in the sanctuary, so there is no procession to the altar.

RITUAL OF THE INTROIT

At high (or sung) Mass till quite lately the rule had obtained that the choir did not begin the Introit till the celebrant began the first prayers at the foot of the altar. Now the new Vatican "Gradual" (1908) has restored the old principle, that it is to be sung while the procession moves from the sacristy to the altar. ("De redivivus servanda in cant miss" in the introduction.) It should therefore be begun as soon as the head of the procession appears in the church. One or more cantors sing to the sign*, all continue; the cantors alone sing the first half of the psalm and the V. Gloria Patri (ibid.). The celebrant, having finished the preparatory prayers at the altar-steps, goes up to the altar and kisses it (saying meanwhile the two short prayers, A ufer a nobis and Oranges te); then, going to the left (Epistle) side, he reads from the Missal the Introit, just as it is sung. This is one of the continual reactions of low Mass on high Mass. When the custom of low Mass began (in the early Middle Ages) the celebrant had to supply all the parts of deacon, subdeacon, and choir himself. Then, as he became used to saying these parts, he said them even at high Mass, too; they were, besides, chanted by others. So the rule has obtained that everything is said by the celebrant. The recital of the Introit should be considered as the real beginning of Mass, since what has gone before is rather of the nature of the celebrant's preparation. For this reason he makes the sign of the cross at its first words, according to the general rule of beginning all solemn functions (in this case the Mass) with that sign. At Requiem Masses he makes the cross not on himself but over the Missal, quasi aliquem benedicens says the rubric (Ritus cel., xiii, 1). This is understood as directing the blessing to the souls in purgatory. At low Mass there is no change here, save the omission of the chant by the choir.

Of the medieval commentators see especially DURANDUS, Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, IV, 5; BENEDICT XIV, De S. Miss Sacrificio, II 4; DuCHESNE, Origines du culte chrétien (Paris, 1898), 154-155; GIHR, Das heilige Messopfer (Freiburg im Br., 1897), 346-57.

ADRIAN FORTESCUE

Intrusion

(Latin intrudere.)

Intrusion is the act by which unlawful possession of an ecclesiastical benefice is taken. It implies, therefore, the ignoring of canonical institution, which is the reception of the benefice at the bands of him who has the right to bestow it by canon law. The necessity of proper canonical institution rests primarily on certain passages of the New Testament (John, x, 1; Hebr., v, 4), in which a legitimate mission from properly constituted authority in the Church is postulated. This is reaffirmed by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIII, can. vii), and in the "Corpus Juris Canonici" it is decreed: "An ecclesiastical benefice may not be taken possession of without canonical institution" (cap. i, De reg. jur., in vi). Intrusion does not necessarily signify the employment of force in entering upon a benefice. To constitute him an intruder or usurper in the ecclesiastical sense, it is sufficient that the person has no true canonical title to the benefice when he takes possession. Historical examples of intrusion on a large scale are not wanting. To pass over the many violations of the Church's right during the investiture struggles of medieval times, we find wholesale intrusion practised in France in the reigns of Louis XIV and Napoleon I, when ecclesiastics, nominated to episcopal sees but whose elections were never confirmed by the pope, ruled the dioceses into which they were thus intruded. Pius IX, in his Constitution "Romanus Pontifex", decreed excommunication and privation of dignities against members of a cathedral chapel who hand over the administration of a diocese to one who, although nominated, has not yet presented his letters of canonical institution. When laymen have the right of presentation to a benefice, the confirmation of ecclesiastical authority is necessary before actual possession can be obtained. The nominee who does not wait for this canonical induction is an intruder.

The definition is also extended to persons who, having been repelled even unjustly by their ecclesiastical superiors, seek the aid of the civil power to obtain possession under pretext of abuse. As an intruder has no true title to receive the revenues of the benefice which he uncanonically holds, he is bound in conscience to make restitution of what are ill-gotten gains to the lawful titular. Even if the latter die, it does not legalize the position of the intruder, for in that case the restitution must be made to the true titular's lawful successor in the benefice. To remove the irregularity incurred by intrusion,, the papal power must be invoked, as the censure is reserved to the Holy See. A dispensation from such an irregularity is the more difficult to obtain in proportion to the falsity of the title invoked or the employment of violence in entering on the benefice. Canonists also extend the term intrusion to the keeping possession of a benefice by a hitherto lawful possessor, after it has been vacated by violation of certain decrees of the Church. Thus, titulars of one benefice who fraudulently present themselves for examination in a concursus to obtain a benefice for another by impersonating him, who obtain a benefice for others on the understanding that they are to be rewarded for it, or who seek a benefice with the intention of resigning it to another with a secret provision that they are to receive a pension from its revenues, lose the right to their own benefices, which thus canonically become vacant. By retaining possession of them in such cases, they become intruders.

CRAISSON. Manuale Totius Juris Canonici, I (Paris, 1899); FERRARIS, Bibliotheca Canonica, I (Rome, 1885), s.v. Beneficium; WERNZ, Jus Decretalium, II (Rome. 1899).

WILLIAM H. W. FANNING

Intuition

Intuition (Latin intueri, to look into) is a psychological and philosophical term which designates the process of immediate apprehension or perception of an actual fact, being, or relation between two terms and its results. Hence the words Intuitionism or Intuitionalism mean those systems in philosophy which consider intuition as the fundamental process of our knowledge or at least give to intuition a large place (the Scottish school), and the words Intuitive Morality and Intuitional Ethics denote those ethical theories which base morality on an intuitive apprehension of the moral principles and laws, or consider intuition as capable of distinguishing the moral qualities of our actions (Shaftesbury, Hutcheson Reid, Dugald Stewart). As an element of educational method intuition means the grasp of knowledge by concrete, experimental or intellectual, ways of apprehension. The immediate perception of sensuous or material objects by our senses is called sensuous or empirical intuition, the immediate apprehension of intellectual or immaterial objects by our intelligence is called intellectual intuition. It may be remarked that Kant calls empirical intuitions our knowledge of objects through sensation, and pure intuition our perception of space and time as the forms a priori of sensibility. Again, our intuitions may be called external or internal, according as the objects perceived are external objects or internal objects or acts.

The importance of intuition as a process and element of knowledge is easily seen if we observe that it is intuition which furnishes us with the first experimental data as well as with the primary concepts and the fundamental judgments or principles which are the primitive elements and the foundation of every scientific and philosophical speculation. This importance, however, has been falsely exaggerated by some modern philosophers to an extent which tends to destroy both supernatural religion and the validity of human reason. There has been an attempt, on their part, to make of intuition, under different names, the central and fundamental element of our power of acquiring knowledge, and the only process or operation that can put us into contact with reality. So we have the creation or intuition of the ego and non ego in the philosophy of Fichte; the intuition or intellectual vision of God claimed by the Ontologists in natural theology (see ONTOLOGISM), W. James's unconscious intuition or religious experience (The Varieties of Religious Experience), Bergson's philosophy of pure intuition the experience or experiential consciousness of the Divine of the Modernists (Encyclical "Pascendi gregis"). According to the Ontologists, our knowledge of notions endowed with the character of necessity and universality, as well as our idea of the Infinite, are possible only through an antecedent intuition of God present in us. Other philosophers start from the principle that human reasoning is unable to give us the knowledge of things in themselves. The data of common sense, our intellectual concepts, and the conclusions reached through the process of discursive reasoning do not, they say primarily represent reality, but acting under diverse influences such as those of our usual and practical needs, common sense and discursive reason result in a deformation of reality; the value of their data and conclusions is one of practical usefulness rather than one of true representation (see PRAGMATISM). Intuition alone, they maintain, is able to put us in communication with reality and give us a true knowledge of things. Especially in regard to religious truths, some insist, it is only through intuition and internal experience that we can acquire them. "God", says the Protestant A. Sabatier in his Esquisse d'une philosophie de la religion, "is not a phenomenon which can be observed outside of the ego, a truth to be demonstrated by logical reasoning. He who does not feel Him in his heart, will never find Him outside . . . . We never become aware of our piety without at the same time feeling a religious emotion and perceiving in this very emotion, more or less obscurely, the object and the cause of religion, namely, God." The arguments used by the Schoolmen to prove the existence of God, say the Modernists, have now lost all their value; it is by the religious feeling, by an intuition of the heart that we apprehend God (Encycl. "Pascendi gregis" and "II programma dei modernisti").

Such theories have their source in the principle of absolute subjectivism and relativism -- the most fundamental error in philosophy. Starting with Kant's proposition that we cannot know things as they are in themselves but only as they appear to us, that is, under the subjective conditions that our human nature necessarily imposes on them, they arrive at the conclusion that our rational knowledge is subjectively relative, and that its concepts, principles, and process of reasoning are therefore essentially unable to reach external and transcendental realities. Hence their recourse to intuition and immanence. But it is easy to show that if intuition is necessary in every act of knowledge, it remains essentially insufficient in our present life, for scientific and philosophical reflection. In our knowledge of nature we start from observation; but observation remains fruitless if it is not verified by a series of inductions and deductions. In our knowledge of God, we may indeed start from our nature and from our insufficiency and aspirations, but if we want to know Him we have to demonstrate, by discursive reasoning, His existence as an external and transcendent Cause and Supreme End. We may indeed, in Ethics have an intuition of the notion of duty, of the need of a sanction; but these intuitive notions have no moral value if they are not connected with the existence of a Supreme Ruler and Judge, and this connection can be known only through reasoning. The true nature, place, and value of intuition in human knowledge are admirably put forth in the Scholastic theory of knowledge. For the Schoolmen the intuitive act of intellectual knowledge is, by its nature, the most perfect act of knowledge, since it is an immediate apprehension of and contact with reality in its concrete existence, and our supreme reward m the supernatural order will consist in the intuitive apprehension of God by our intelligence: the beatific vision. But in our present conditions of earthly life, our knowledge must of necessity make use of concepts and reasoning. All our knowledge has its starting-point in the intuitive data of sense experience, but in order to penetrate the nature of these data, their laws and causes, we must have recourse to abstraction and discursive reasoning. It is also through those processes and through them alone that we can arrive at the notion of immaterial beings and of God himself (St. Thomas "Contra Gentes", I, 12; "Summa Theologica" I:84-88, etc.) . Our mind has the intuition of primary principles (intellectus) but their application, in order to give us a scientific and philosophical knowledge of things, is subject to the laws of abstraction and successive reasoning (ratio, discursus, cf. I:58:3, II-II:49:5, ad 2um). Such a necessity is, as it were, a normal defect of human intelligence; it is the natural limit which determines the place of the human mind in the scale of intellectual beings.

Concepts and reasoning therefore are in themselves inferior to intuition; but they are the normal processes of human knowledge. They are not, however a deformation of reality, though they give only an imperfect and inadequate representation of reality -- and the more so according to the excellency of the objects represented -- they are a true representation of it.

GEORGE M. SAUVAGE

Inventory of Church Property

By inventory (Lat. inventarium) is meant a descriptive list in which are enumerated systematically, item by item, the personal and real property, rights, titles, and papers or documents of a person, an estate, or any institution. Inventories are prescribed by law to control effectively the management of any trust, inheritance, guardianship, etc., by an executor or administrator. Thus, an inventory is to be made at the beginning of a given administration; when the period of management has expired, the out-going official must produce all the things which appear in this inventory or were added later, excepting those which have been consumed or rendered useless. Then the inventory is to be verified. This formality is discharged, as the case may demand, by an authorized official, a notary, or merely in the presence of witnesses. A measure so useful for the proper administration of property of all kinds could not fail to find a place among the regulations for the management of church property, seeing that this was not administered by its owners, and that those in charge of it were all bound to render an annual account to the bishop (Council of Trent, Sess., XXII, c. vii). It must be admitted, however, that the old writers on canon law prior to the Council of Trent, though they implicitly suppose an inventory of church property, make no formal mention of it. The only texts that refer to it clearly are those ordering bishops to separate carefully their own property from that of the Church, so that their heirs may not seize the goods of the Church, or the Church lay claim to their proper belongings (Can. Apost., xl; Council of Antioch, 341, can. xxiv and xxv; Cod. Eccl. Afric., can. lxxxi, etc.). The most important document relating to the inventories of church property is the Motu Proprio, "Provida", of Sixtus V, 29 April, 1587. The pope had decreed the establishment of a general ecclesiastical record office at Rome, where inventories of all the church property in Italy should be kept; he abandoned this project on being informed that such inventories existed in the archives of many bishoprics and that the bishops verified them when making their pastoral visitations. However, he commanded all ordinaries who did not follow this practice to have an inventory of the property of all the churches and ecclesiastical establishments within their territories made within the space of one year; all administrators were obliged to draw up, within twelve months after entering into office, an inventory of the property confided to them and to send it to the ordinary.

The Roman Council of 1725 under Benedict XIII (tit. xii, c. i) renewed the order of Sixtus V, and gave as an appendix a model of a suitable inventory in twenty-eight paragraphs (the text of Sixtus V and the specimen inventory are contained in the "Acta Conc. Recent. Collect. Lacensis", I, col. 416). As a model of an inventory we might also refer to the instructions given for the general visitation of Rome ordered by Pius X in his Bull of 11 February, 1904 (see Analecta Eccles., 1904). Since the Council of Rome almost every assembly of bishops has prescribed the making of inventories of church property; suffice it to mention, among the more important recent councils, the Second Council of Westminster in 1855, the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore in 1884 (art. cclxviii sq.), and the Plenary Council of Latin America, held at Rome in 1899 (art. cclxv, dcccxli, dcccli). To these must be added the ecclesiastico civil laws of various countries. Every administrator of church property and every beneficiary must therefore, on assuming office, draw up an exact inventory of the personal and real property confided to his care. Of this inventory two copies are usually to be made -- one to be kept in the archives, the other to be sent to the bishop (in some countries a third copy has to be sent to the civil authorities). When his term of office expires, the administrator or beneficiary must hand over to his successor all the articles entered in the inventory; this verification is done in a document which discharges the retiring official, and places the responsibility on his successor; as in the case of the inventory, two or three copies of this document are to be made. During the period of management the administrator must keep his inventory up to date, that is to say, he must make a record, with due legal formalities, of any property acquired, alienated, changed, or reinvested. Finally, during his episcopal visitations, the bishop, who has the right of approving the inventories, must have them produced and see that they are accurate.

For bibliography, see PROPERTY, ECCLESIASTICAL.

A. BOUDINHON

Canonical Investiture

(Lat. investitura, from investire, to clothe.)

Canonical Investiture is the act by which a suzerain granted a fief to his vassal, and the ceremonies which accompanied that grant. From the middle of the eleventh century, and perhaps during the first half of that century, the term was used to designate the act and the ceremonies by which princes granted to bishops and abbots, besides their titles, the possessions which constituted their benefices, and the political rights which they were to exercise (see INVESTITURES, CONFLICT OF). The putting in possession was done after the investiture by enthronization (q. v.). The decretals use the word investitura to signify the concession of an ecclesiastical benefice; only since the thirteenth century has it signified the act of putting one in possession of such a benefice. This is the sense in which it is now used; it is synonymous with Institutio corporalis. (See INSTITUTION, CANONICAL; INSTALLATION.)

HINSCHIUS, System des katholischen Kirchenrechts (Berlin, 1878), II, 654; KAULEN in Kirchenlex., s.v. Investitur, VI (Freiburg im Br., 1889), 843-44.

A. VAN HOVE

Conflict of Investitures

(Ger. Investiturstreit.)

The terminus technicus for the great struggle between the popes and the German kings Henry IV and Henry V, during the period 1075-1122. The prohibition of investiture was in truth only the occasion of this conflict; the real issue, at least at the height of the contest, was whether the imperial or the papal power was to be supreme in Christendom. The powerful and ardent pope, Gregory VII, sought in all earnestness to realize the Kingdom of God on earth under the guidance of the papacy. As successor of the Apostles of Christ, he claimed supreme authority in both spiritual and secular affairs. It seemed to this noble idealism that the successor of Peter could never act otherwise than according to the dictates of justice, goodness, and truth. In this spirit he claimed for the papacy supremacy over emperor, kings, and princes. But during the Middle Ages a rivalry had always existed between the popes and the emperors, twin representatives, so to speak, of authority. Henry III, the father of the young king, had even reduced the papacy to complete submission, a situation which Gregory now strove to reverse by crushing the imperial power and setting in its place the papacy. A long and bitter struggle was therefore unavoidable.

It first arose through the prohibition of investitures, à propos of the ecclesiastical reforms set afoot by Gregory. In 1074 he had renewed under heavier penalties the prohibition of simony and marriage of the clergy, but encountered at once great opposition from the German bishops and priests. To secure the necessary influence in the appointment of bishops, to set aside lay pretensions to the administration of the property of the Church, and thus to break down the opposition of the clergy, Gregory at the Lenten (Roman) Synod of 1075 withdrew "from the king the right of disposing of bishoprics in future, and relieved all lay persons of the investiture of churches". As early as the Synod of Reims (1049) anti-investiture legislation had been enacted, but had never been enforced. Investiture at this period meant that on the death of a bishop or abbot, the king was accustomed to select a successor and to bestow on him the ring and staff with the words: Accipe ecclesiam (accept this church). Henry III was wont to consider the ecclesiastical fitness of the candidate; Henry IV, on the other hand, declared in 1073: "We have sold the churches". Since Otto the Great (936-72) the bishops had been princes of the empire, had secured many privileges, and had become to a great extent feudal lords over great districts of the imperial territory. The control of these great units of economic and military power was for the king a question of primary importance, affecting as it did the foundations and even the existence of the imperial authority; in those days men had not yet learned to distinguish between the grant of the episcopal office and the grant of its temporalities (regalia). Thus minded, Henry IV held that it was impossible for him to acknowledge the papal prohibition of investiture. We must bear carefully in mind that in the given circumstances there was a certain justification for both parties: the pope's object was to save the Church from the dangers that arose from the undue influence of the laity, and especially of the king, in strictly ecclesiastical affairs; the king, on the other hand, considered that he was contending for the indispensable means of civil government, apart from which his supreme authority was at that period inconceivable.

Ignoring the prohibition of Gregory, as also the latter's effort at a mitigation of the same, Henry continued to appoint bishops in Germany and in Italy. Towards the end of December, 1075, Gregory delivered his ultimatum: the king was called upon to observe the papal decree, as based on the laws and teachings of the Fathers; otherwise, at the following Lenten Synod, he would be not only "excommunicated until he had given proper satisfaction, but also deprived of his kingdom without hope of recovering it". Sharp reproval of his libertinism was added. If the pope had given way somewhat too freely to his feelings, the king gave still freer vent to his anger. At the Diet of Worms (January, 1076), Gregory, amid atrocious calumnies, was deposed by twenty-six bishops on the ground that his elevation was irregular, and that consequently he had never been pope. Henry therefore addressed a letter to "Hildebrand, no longer pope but a false monk" : — "I, Henry, king by the grace of God, with all my bishops say to thee: 'Descend! Descend, thou ever accursed!'" If the king believed that such a deposition, which he was unable to enforce, was of any effect, he must have been very blind. At the next Lenten Synod in Rome (1076) Gregory sat in judgment upon the king, and in a prayer to Peter, Prince of the Apostles, declared: "I depose him from the government of the whole Kingdom of Germany and Italy, release all Christians from their oath of allegiance, forbid him to be obeyed as king . . . and as thy successor bind him with the fetters of anathema". It availed little that the king answered ban with ban. His domestic enemies, the Saxons and the lay princes of the empire, espoused the cause of the pope, while his bishops were divided in their allegiance, and the mass of his people deserted him. The age was yet too deeply conscious that there could be no Christian Church without communion with Rome. The royal supporters grew ever fewer; in October a diet of the princes at Tribur obliged Henry to apologize humbly to the pope, to promise for the future obedience and reparation, and to refrain from all actual government, seeing that he was excommunicate. They decreed also that if within a year and a day the excommunication was not removed, Henry should forfeit his crown. Finally, they resolved that the pope should be invited to visit Germany in the following spring to settle the conflict between the king and the princes. Elated at this victory Gregory set out immediately for the north.

To the general astonishment, Henry now proposed to present himself as a penitent before the pope, and thereby obtain pardon. He crossed Mont Cenis in the depth of winter and was soon at the Castle of Canossa, whither Gregory had withdrawn on learning of the king's approach. Henry spent three days at the entrance to the fortress, barefoot and in the garb of a penitent. That he actually stood the whole time on ice and snow is of course a romantic exaggeration. He was finally admitted to the papal presence, and pledged himself to recognize the mediation and decision of the pope in the quarrel with the princes, and was then freed from excommunication (January, 1077). This famous event has been countless times described, and from very divergent points of view. Through Bismarck, Canossa became a proverbial term to indicate the humiliation of the civil power before the ambitious and masterful Church. Recently, on the other hand, not a few have seen in it a glorious triumph for Henry. When the facts are carefully weighed, it will appear that in his priestly capacity the pope yielded reluctantly and unwillingly, while, on the other hand, the political success of his concession was null. Henry had now the advantage, since, released from excommunication, he was again free to act. Comparing, however, the power which thirty years earlier Henry III had exercised over the papacy, we may yet agree with those historians who see in Canossa the acme of the career of Gregory VII.

The German supporters of the pope ignored the reconciliation, and proceeded in March, 1077, to elect a new king, Rudolf of Rheinfelden. This was the signal for the civil war during which Gregory sought to act as arbiter between the rival kings and as their overlord to award the crown. By artful diplomacy Henry held off, until 1080, any decisive action. Considering his position sufficiently secure, he then demanded that the pope should excommunicate his rival, otherwise he would set up an antipope. Gregory answered by excommunicating and deposing Henry for the second time at the Lenten Synod of 1080. It was declared at the same time that clergy and people should ignore all civil interference and all civil claims on ecclesiastical property, and should canonically elect all the candidates for ecclesiastical office. The effect of this second excommunication was inconsiderable. During the preceding years the king had collected a strong party; the bishops preferred to depend on the king rather than on the pope; moreover, it was believed that the second excommunication was not justified. Gregory's party was thus greatly weakened, At the Synod of Brixen (June, 1080) the king's bishops listened to ridiculous charges and exaggerations, and deposed the pope, excommunicated him, and elected as antipope Guibert, Archbishop of Ravenna, otherwise a learned and blameless man. Gregory had relied on the support of the Normans in Southern Italy and of the German enemies of the king, but the former sent him assistance. Thus when in October, 1080, his rival for the throne was slain in battle, Henry turned his thoughts on the papal capital. Four times, from 1081 to 1084, he assaulted Rome, in 1083 captured the Leonine City, and in 1084, after an unsuccessful attempt at a compromise, gained possession of the entire city.

The deposition of Gregory and the election of Guibert, who now called himself Clement III, was confirmed by a synod, and in March, 1084, Henry was crowned emperor by his antipope. The Normans arrived too late to prevent these events, and moreover proceeded to plunder the town so mercilessly that Gregory lost the allegiance of the Romans and was compelled to withdraw southward with his Norman allies. He had suffered a complete defeat, and died at Salerno (25 May, 1085), after another ineffectual renewal of excommunication against his opponents. Though he died amid disappointment and failure, he had done indispensable pioneer work and set in motion forces and principles that were to dominate succeeding centuries.

There was now much confusion on all sides. In 1081 a new rival for the crown, the insignificant Count Herman of Salm, had been chosen, but he died in 1088. Most of the bishops held with the king, and were thus excommunicate; in Saxony only was the Gregorian party dominant. Many dioceses had two occupants. Both parties called their rivals perjurers and traitors, nor did either side discriminate nicely in the choice and use of weapons. Negotiations met with no success, while the synod of the Gregorians at Quedlinburg (April, 1085) showed no inclination to modify the principles which they represented. The king, therefore, resolved to crush his rivals by force. At the Council of Mainz (April, 1085) fifteen Gregorian bishops were deposed, and their sees entrusted to adherents of the royal party. A fresh rebellion of the Saxons and Bavarians forced the king's bishops to fly, but the death of the most eminent and a general inclination towards peace led to a truce, so that about 1090 the empire entered on an interval of peace, far different, however, from what Henry had contemplated. The Gregorian bishops recognized the king, who consequently withdrew his support from his own nominees. But the truce was a purely political one; in ecclesiastical matters the opposition continued unabated, and recognition of the antipope was not to be thought of. Indeed, the political tranquillity served only to bring out more definitely the hopeless antithesis between the clergy who held with Gregory and those who sided with the king.

There are yet extant numerous contemporary polemical treatises that enable us to follow the warfare of opinions after 1080 (of the preceding period few such documents remain). These writings, usually short and acrimonious, were widely scattered, were read privately or publicly, and were distributed on court and market-days. They are now collected as the "Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontificum", and are to be found in the Monumenta Germaniæ historica". It is but natural that the principles advocated in these writings should be diametrically opposed to one another. The writers of Gregory's party maintain that unconditional obedience to the pope is necessary, and that, even when unjust, his excommunication is valid. The king's writers, on the other hand, declare that their master is above responsibility for his actions, being the representative of God on earth, and as such overlord of the pope. Prominent on the papal side were the unbending Saxon Bernhard, who would hear of no compromise and preferred death to violation of the canons, the Swabian Bernold of St. Blasien, author of numerous but unimportant letters and memorials, and the rude, fanatical Manegold of Lautenbach, for whom obedience to the pope was the supreme duty of all mankind, and who maintained that the people could depose a bad ruler as rightfully as one would dismiss a swineherd who had failed to protect the drove entrusted to his care. On the side of the king stood Wenrich of Trier, calm in diction, but resolute, Wido of Osnabrück, a solid writer, afterwards bishop, whose heart was set on peace between the emperor and the pope, but who opposed Gregory for having unlawfully excommunicated the king and for inducing the latter's feudatories to break their oath of allegiance.

On the royal side, also, was a monk of Hersfeld, otherwise unknown, who reveals a clear grasp of the real issue in his pamphlet "De unitate ecclesiæ", wherein he indicates the matter of supremacy as the real source of the conflict. Monarchy, he said, comes directly from God; consequently, to Him alone is the king responsible. The Church, on the other hand, is the totality of the faithful, united in one society by the spirit of peace and love. The Church, he goes on, is not called to exercise temporal authority; she bears only the spiritual sword, that is, the Word of God. Here, however, the monk went far beyond the age in which he lived. In Italy the adherents of Gregory outmatched their rivals intellectually. Among their number was Bonizo of Sutri, the historian of the papal side, a valuable writer for the preceding decades of the conflict, naturally from the standpoint of the pontiff and his adherents. Anselm, Bishop of Lucca, and Cardinal Deusdedit, at Gregory's request, compiled collections of canons, whence in later times the ideas of Gregory drew substantial support. To the royal party belonged the vacillating Cardinal Beno, the personal enemy of Gregory and author of scandalous pamphlets against the pope, also the mendacious Benzo, Bishop of Alba, for whom, as for most courtiers, the king was answerable only to God, while the pope was the king's vassal. Guido of Ferrara held more temperate opinions, and endeavoured to persuade the moderate Gregorians to adopt a policy of compromise. Petrus Crassus, the only layman engaged in the controversy, represented the youthful science of jurisprudence and strongly advocated the autonomy of the State, maintaining that, as the sovereign authority was from God, it was a crime to war upon the king. He claimed for the king all the rights of the Roman emperors, consequently the right to sit in judgment on the pope.

In 1086 Gregory was succeeded by a milder character, Victor III, who had no desire to compete for the supreme authority, and drew back to the position that the whole strife was purely a question of ecclesiastical administration. He died in 1087, and the contest entered on a new period with Urban II (1088-99). He shared fully all the ideas of Gregory, but endeavoured to conciliate the king and his party and to facilitate their return to the views of the ecclesiastical party. Henry might perhaps have come to some arrangement with Victor, had he been willing to set aside the antipope, but he clung closely to the man from whom he had received the imperial crown. In this way war soon broke out again, during which the cause of the king suffered a decline. The antipope's bishops gradually deserted him in answer to Urban's advantageous offers of reconciliation; the royal authority in Italy disappeared, while in the defection of his son Conrad and of his second wife Henry suffered an additional humiliation. The new crusading movement, on the other hand, rallied many to the assistance of the papacy. In 1094 and 1095 Urban renewed the excommunication of Henry, Guibert, and their supporters. When the pope died (1099), followed by the antipope (1100), the papacy, so far as ecclesiastical matters were concerned, had won a complete victory. The subsequent antipopes of the Guibertian party in Italy were of no importance. Urban was succeeded by a less able ruler, Paschal II (1099-1118), whom Henry at first inclined to recognize. The political horizon meanwhile began to look more favourable for the king, who was now universally acknowledged in Germany. He was anxious to secure in addition ecclesiastical peace, sought to procure the removal of his excommunication, and publicly declared his intention of making a pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulchre. This, however, did not satisfy the pope, who demanded the renunciation of the right of investiture, still obstinately claimed by Henry. In 1102 Paschal renewed the anathema against the emperor. The revolt of his son (Henry V), and the latter's alliance with the princes who were dissatisfied with the imperial policy, brought matters to a crisis and occasioned the greatest suffering to the sorely tried emperor, who was now ignominiously outwitted and overcome by his son. A decisive struggle was rendered unnecessary by the death of Henry IV in 1106. He had untiringly defended the inherited rights of the royal office, and had never sacrificed any of them.

From the beginning Henry V had enjoyed the support of the pope, who had relieved him of excommunication and had set aside his oath of allegiance to his father. At and after the Pentecost Synod of Nordhausen, in 1105, the king dispelled the last remnants of the schism by deposing the imperial occupants of the episcopal sees. The questions, however, which lay at the root of the whole conflict were not yet decided, and time soon showed that, in the matter of investitures, Henry was the true heir of his father's policy. Cold, calculating, and ambitious, the new monarch had no idea of withdrawing the royal claims in this respect. Notwithstanding repeated prohibitions (at Guastalla in 1106, and at Troyes in 1107), he continued to invest with ostentation the bishops of his choice. The German clergy raised no protest, and made it evident in this way that their earlier refusal of obedience to the emperor arose from the fact of his excommunication, not from any resentment occasioned by his interference in the affairs of the Church. In 1108 excommunication was pronounced upon the giver and receiver (dans et accipiens) of investiture, and thus affected the king himself. As Henry had now set his heart on being crowned emperor, this decision precipitated the final struggle. In 1111 the king marched with a strong army on Rome. Eager to avoid another conflict, Paschal attempted a radical solution of the question at issue; the German clergy, he decided, were to restore to the king all their estates and privileges and to maintain themselves on tithes and donations; under these circumstances the monarchy, which was interested only in the overlordship of these domains, might easily dispense with the investiture of the clergy. On this understanding peace was established at Sutri between pope and king. Paschal, who had been a monk before his elevation, undoubtedly executed in good faith this renunciation of the secular power of the Church. It was but a short step to the idea that the Church was a spiritual institution, and as such had no concern with earthly affairs.

The king, however, cannot have doubted for a moment that the papal renunciation would fall before the opposition of both ecclesiastical and secular princes. Henry V was mean and deceitful, and sought to entrap the pope. The king having renounced his claim to investiture, the pope promulgated in St. Peter's on 12 February, 1112, the return of all temporalities to the Crown, but thereby raised (as Henry had foreseen) such a storm of opposition from the German princes that he was forced to recognize the futility of this attempt at settlement. The king then demanded that the right of investiture be restored, and that he should be crowned emperor; on the pope's refusal, he treacherously seized him and thirteen cardinals, and hurried them away from the now infuriated city. To regain his freedom, Paschal was forced, after two months imprisonment, to accede to Henry's demands. He granted the king unconditional investiture as an imperial privilege, crowned him emperor, and promised on oath not to excommunicate him for what had occurred.

Henry had thus secured by force a notable success, but it could have no long duration. The more ardent members of the Gregorian party rebuked the "heretical" pope, and compelled him to retire step by step from the position into which he had been forced. The Lateran Synod of 1112 renewed the decrees of Gregory and Urban against investiture. Paschal did not wish to withdraw his promise directly, but the Council of Vienna, having declared the imperial privilegium (privilege, derivatively, a private law) a pravilegium (a vicious law), and as such null and void, it also excommunicated the emperor. The pope did not, however, break off all intercourse with Henry, for whom the struggle began to assume a threatening aspect, since now, as previously under his father, the difficulties raised by ecclesiastical opposition were aggravated by rebellion of the princes. The inconsiderate selfishness of the emperor, his mean and odious personality, made enemies on every side. Even his bishops now opposed him, seeing themselves threatened by him and believing him set on sole mastery. In 1114 at Beauvais, and in 1116 at Reims, Cologne, Goslar, and a second time at Cologne, excommunication of the emperor was repeated by papal legates. Imperial and irresolute bishops, who refused to join the papal party, were removed from their sees. The emperor's forces were defeated simultaneously on the Rhine and in Saxony. In 1116 Henry attempted to enter into negotiations with the pope in Italy, but no agreement was arrived at, as on this occasion Paschal refused to enter into a conference with the emperor.

After Paschal's death (1118) even his tolerant successor, Gelasius II (1118-19), could not prevent the situation from becoming daily more entangled. Having demanded recognition of the privilege of 1111 and been referred by Gelasius to a general council, Henry made a hopeless attempt to revive the universally detested schism by appointing as antipope, under the name of Gregory VIII, Burdinus, Archbishop of Braga (Portugal), and was accordingly excommunicated by the pope. In 1119 Gelasius was succeeded by Guido of Vienna as Callistus II (1119-24); he had already excommunicated the emperor in 1112. Reconciliation seemed, therefore, more remote than ever. Callistus, however, regarded the peace of the Church as of prime importance, and as the emperor, already on better terms with the German princes, was likewise eager for peace, negotiations were opened. A basis for compromise lay in the distinction between the ecclesiastical and the secular elements in the appointment of bishops. This mode of settlement had already been discussed in various forms in Italy and in France, e. g. by Ivo of Chartres, as early as 1099. The bestowal of the ecclesiastical office was sharply distinguished from the investiture with imperial domains. As symbols of ecclesiastical installation, the ring and staff were suggested; the sceptre served as the symbol of investiture with the temporalities of the see. The chronological order of the formalities raised a new difficulty; on the imperial side it was demanded that investiture with the temporalities should precede consecration, while the papal representatives naturally claimed that consecration should precede investiture. If the investiture were to precede, the emperor by refusing the temporalities could prevent consecration; in the other case, investiture was merely a confirmation of the appointment. By 1119 the articles of peace were agreed upon at Mouzon and were to be ratified by the Synod of Reims. At the last moment, however, negotiations were broken off, and the pope renewed the excommunication of the emperor. But the German princes succeeded in reopening the proceedings, and peace was finally arranged between the legates of the pope, the emperor and the princes on 23 September, 1122. This peace is usually known as the Concordat of Worms, or the "Pactum Calixtinum".

In the document of peace, Henry yields up "to God and his Holy Apostles Peter and Paul and to the Holy Catholic Church all investitures with ring and staff, and allows in all Churches of his kingdom and empire ecclesiastical election and free consecration". On the other hand, the pope grants to "his beloved son Henry, by the Grace of God Roman Emperor, that the election of bishops and abbots in the German Empire in so far as they belong to the Kingdom of Germany, shall take place in his presence, without simony or the employment of any constraint. Should any discord arise between the parties, the emperor shall, after hearing the advice and verdict of the metropolitans and other bishops of the province lend his approval and support to the better side. The elected candidate shall receive from him the temporalities (regalia) with the sceptre, and shall discharge all obligations entailed by such reception. In other portions of the empire, the consecrated candidate shall within six months receive the regalia by means of the sceptre, and shall fulfil towards him the obligations implied by this ceremony. From these arrangements is excepted all that belongs to the Roman Church" (i. e. the Papal States). The different parts of the empire were therefore differently treated; in Germany the investiture was to precede the consecration, while in Italy and Burgundy it followed the consecration and within the succeeding six months. The king was deprived of his unrestricted power in the appointment of bishops, but the Church also failed to secure the full exclusion of every alien influence from canonical elections. The Concordat of Worms was a compromise, in which each party made concessions. Important for the king were the toleration of his presence at the election (prœsentia regis), which lent him a possible influence over the electors, and of investiture before consecration, whereby the elevation of an obnoxious candidate was rendered difficult or even impossible. The extreme ecclesiastical party, who condemned investitures and secular influence in elections under any form, were dissatisfied with these concessions from the very outset and would have been highly pleased, if Callistus had refused to confirm the Concordat.

In appraising the significance of this agreement it remains to be seen whether it was intended as a temporary truce or an enduring peace. Doubts might very well be (and indeed have been) entertained on this matter, since formally the document is drawn up only for Henry V. But a close examination of our sources of information and of contemporary documents has shown that it is erroneous to maintain that the Concordat enjoyed but a passing recognition and was of small importance. Not only by the contracting parties, but also by their contemporaries, the compact was regarded as an enduring fundamental law. It was solemnly recognized not only as an imperial statute, but as a law of the Church by the Lateran Œcumenical Council of 1123. We also know from Gerhoh of Reichersberg, who was present at the council, that in addition to the imperial document, which it has been held was alone read, that of the pope was also read and sanctioned. As Gerhoh was one of the chief opponents of the Concordat, his evidence in favour of an unpleasant truth cannot be doubted. That the agreement was to possess perpetual binding power, neither party, of course, intended — and the Concordat was very far from securing such continued recognition, since it reveals at most the anxiety of the Church for peace, under the pressure of certain circumstances. By new legislative act the provisions were modified. Under King Lothair (1125-37) and at the beginning of the reign of Conrad III (1138-52) the Concordat was still unchallenged and was observed in its entirety. In 1139, however, Innocent II, in the twenty-eighth canon of the Council of Rome, confined the privilege of electing the bishop to the cathedral chapter and the representatives of the regular clergy, and made no mention of lay participation in the election. The ecclesiastical party assumed that this provision annulled the king's participation in elections and his right to decide in the case of an equally divided vote of the electors. If their opinion was correct, the Church alone had withdrawn on this point from the compact, and the kings had no need to take cognizance of the fact. In truth the latter retained their right in this respect, though they used it sparingly, and frequently waived it. They had ample opportunity to make their influence felt in other ways. Frederick I (1152-90) was again complete master of the Church in Germany, and was generally able to secure the election of the candidate he favoured. In case of disagreement he took a bold stand and compelled the recognition of his candidate. Innocent III (1198-1216) was the first to succeed in introducing free and canonical election into the German Church. Royal investiture after his time was an empty survival, a ceremony without meaning.

Such was the course and the consequence of the investiture conflict in the German Empire. In England and France, the strife never assumed the same proportions nor the same bitterness. It was owing to the importance of the German Empire and the imperial power that they had in the first instance to bear the brunt of the fight. Had they suffered defeat, the others could never have engaged in the contest with the Church.

The Conflict in England

In England the conflict is part of the history of Anselm of Canterbury (q. v.). As primate of England (1093-1109), he fought almost singlehanded for the canon law against king nobility and clergy. William the Conqueror (1066-87) had constituted himself sovereign lord of the Church in England; he ratified the decisions of the synods, appointed bishops and abbots, determined how far the pope should be recognized, and forbade all intercourse without his permission. The Church in England was therefore practically a national Church, in spite of its nominal dependence on Rome. Anselm's contest with William II (1087-1100) was concerned with other matters, but during his residence in France and Italy he was one of the supporters of ecclesiastical reform, and, being required on his return to take the oath of fealty to the new king (Henry I, 1100-35) and receive the bishopric from his hands, he refused to comply. This led to the outbreak of the investiture quarrel. The king despatched successive embassies to the pope to uphold his right to investiture, but without success. In his replies to the king and in his letters to Anselm, Paschal strictly forbade both the oath of fealty and all investitures by laymen. Henry then forbade Anselm, who was visiting Rome, to return to England, and seized his revenues, whereupon, in 1105, the pope excommunicated the councillors of the king and all prelates who received investiture at his hands. In the same year, however, an agreement was arrived at, and was ratified by the pope in 1106, and by the Parliament in London in 1107. According to this concordat the king renounced his claims to investiture, but the oath of fealty was still exacted. In the appointment of the higher dignitaries of the Church, however, the king still retained the greatest influence. The election took place in the royal palace, and, whenever a candidate obnoxious to the king was proposed, he simply proposed another, who was then always elected. The chosen candidate thereupon swore the oath of fealty, which always preceded the consecration. The separation of the ecclesiastical office from the bestowal of the temporalities was the sole object attained, an achievement of no very great importance.

In France the question of investiture was not of such importance for the State as to give rise to any violent contention. The bishops had neither such power nor such extensive domains as in Germany, and but a certain number of the bishops and abbots were invested by the king, while many others were appointed and invested by the nobles of the kingdom, the counts and the dukes (i. e. for the so-called mediate bishoprics). The bishoprics were often dealt with in a very arbitrary manner, being frequently sold, presented as a gift, and bestowed upon kinsmen. After the reconciliation between the pope and king, in 1104, the right of appointment was tacitly renounced by the kings, and free election became the established rule. The king retained, however, the right of ratification, and exacted, usually after the consecration, the oath of fealty from the candidate before he entered on the use of the temporalities. After some minor conflicts, these conditions were extended to the mediate bishoprics. In some cases, e. g. in Gascony and Aquitaine, the bishop entered into immediate possession of the temporalities on the ratification of his election. It was in France, therefore, that the requirements of the Church were most completely fulfilled.

MEYER VON KNONAU, Jahrbücher des deutschen Reiches unter Heinrich IV und Heinrich V, I-VII (Leipzig, 1890-1909); RICHTER, Annalen des deutschen Reiches im Zeitalter der Ottonen und Salier, II (Halle, 1897-98); HAMPE, Deutsche Kaisergeschichte in der Zeit der Salier und Staufer (Leipzig, 1909); HEFELE-KNÖPFLER, Conciliengeschichte, V (2nd ed., Freiburg, 1886); HAUCK, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands im Mittelalter, III (3rd and 4th eds., Leipzig, 1906); GFRÖRER, Papst Gregorius VII, I-VII (Schaffhausen, 1859-61); MARTENS, Gregor VII., I, II (Leipzig, 1894); SCHÄFER, Zur Beurteilung des Wormser Konkordats, in Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie, phil.-hist. Klasse, I (1905), 1-95; BERNHEIM, Das Wormser Konkordat (Breslau, 1906); RUDORFF, Zur Erklärung des Wormser Konkordats (Weimar, 1906); SCHARNAGL, Der Begriff der Investitur (Stuttgart, 1908); SCHMITZ, Der englische Investiturstreit (Innsbruck, 1884); LIEBERMANN, Anselm von Canterbury und Hugo von Lyon in Hist. Aufsätze dem Andenken an G. Waitzgewidmet (Hanover, 1886); RULE, Life and Times of St. Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury (London, 1882); CHURCH, St. Anselm (London, 1888); IMBART DE LA TOUR, Les élections épiscopales dans l'église de France du IXe au XIIe siècle (Paris, 1890).

KLEMENS LÖFFLER

Invitatorium

The Invitatorium, as the word implies, is the invitation addressed to the faithful to come and take part in the Divine Office. The psalm "Venite" has been used for this purpose from the earliest times. In the life of St. Porphyrius of Gaza we read that this saint, wishing the people to join in prayer, caused the "Venite exultemus Domino" to be sung, and the people replied "Alleluia" after each verse. In the Benedictine Office the "Venite exultemus Domino" is recited daily at the beginning of the nocturns in the night Office and is called the Invitatorium. It is never omitted, but the antiphons that follow each verse are changed according to whether it is a ferial or a saint's Office that is being recited. These antiphons are repeated twice before the psalm and once after the "Gloria Patri ". The Rule of St. Benedict calls this psalm the Invitatorium, while the Rule of the Master (Magister Anonymus, a Frankish author of the seventh century) calls it the Responsorium hortationis. The Mozarabic Liturgy makes use of an expressive word: sonus, as if to signify the bell that calls to the church. The most ancient Roman Liturgy we know of did not contain an Invitatorium; for it is omitted in the primitive liturgy, which is represented in our days by that of the last three days of Holy Week. If we find it in the Office of the Dead, it is because it was introduced at a later period. The Council of Aachen (816) mentions the invitatory psalm "Venite" and forbids its use in the Office of the Dead. This same canon, in speaking of the manner of reciting the Invitatorium, employs the very words of the Rule of St. Benedict, which shows clearly that the use of this psalm was closely connected with the monastic Office.

The Invitatorium was purposely said slowly, like the preceding psalm: "Domine quid multiplicati sunt". This was to enable the monks who were coming to the vigil to arrive in time for the beginning of the Office. Indeed, it really seems that these two preliminary psalms (Ps. iii and xciv) were the prayers said privately by the monks while rising and coming to choir: "Ego dormivi et soporatus sum et exsurrexi." It is possible that in the course of time the custom was introduced of reciting them aloud in choir, while awaiting the arrival of those who were late, and thus, after a while, they were inserted in the Office itself. In effect, the psalm "Venite" would seem to be addressed to those who were to come to the vigil rather than to those who were already there. At Rome, on the feast of the Epiphany, there was no Invitatorium. The psalmody began, and still begins, with the psalms of the first nocturn and their antiphons. "Hodie non cantamus Invitatorium sed absolute incipimus" (To-day we chant no Invitatory but begin without it) is an instruction in a rubric of the Vatican antiphonary. The psalm "Venite" was recited with its own antiphon in its proper place, that is to say, the last of the psalms of the second nocturn. Later this psalm became the first psalm of the third nocturn, and the antiphon was repeated just as when it was used at the Invitatorium. Amalarius and Durandus of Mende try as usual to explain it mystically, but the most probable explanation is that the Invitatorium was suppressed because the psalm was recited later and they did not wish to recite it twice in the same Office.

The Benedictine Breviary, which had hymns for its third nocturn, had not the same reason for excluding it and so retained it on the feast of the Epiphany. We see, nevertheless, that, before the ninth century, the Roman Liturgy had not the Invitatorium, at least not as regularly as the Benedictine Liturgy. It is likely that it was first introduced out of imitation of the monastic practice, on those days alone on which the people assisted at the vigil, when the Invitatorium would thus be addressed to some one. The "Ordines Romani" inform us that, on great festivals, two nocturnal offices were celebrated: one, without the Invitatorium, was recited by the priests of the papal chapel in their chapel; the other with the Invitatorium, at which the people assisted. Amalarius tells us that in his time only the Office for the vigil of Sunday had the Invitatorium, the ferial Office had not, because the people did not assist at it. On the feast of the Commemoration of the Dead the Invitatorium was recited, because the faithful came that day to pray for the deceased, but this brings us to a much later date. Most likely the origin of the Invitatorium is to be found in the call by which the monks were awakened: "Venite adoremus Dominum", which soon became the anthem or the refrain of the psalm "Venite exultemus Domino" which this prayer naturally recalled. Amalarius calls our attention to a peculiar fact. On week-days the Invitatorium was recited without the insertion of the antiphons: "Invitatorium diebus festivis hebdomadibus sine modulatione Antiphone solet dici." The version of the psalm "Venite exultemus" used in the Breviary is that of the ancient Roman psalter, which differs in some passages from the Vulgate.

H. LECLERCQ

School of Iona

Iona is the modern name derived by change of letter from Adamnan's Ioua; in Bede it is Hii; the Gaelic form is always I or Y, which becomes Hy by prefixing the euphonic h. This rugged, storm-swept island, three miles long and one in average breadth, and about a mile distant from the Ross of Mull, was next to Armagh the greatest centre of Gaelic Christianity -- the latter was Patrick's city and primatial see; the former Columba's monastic city, a "primatial island", and the light of all the North. Yet closely connected with Ireland for at least 600 years it may be described as an Irish island in the Scottish seas. Columba, born in 521 landed with twelve of his monks at the southern extremity of the island -- ever since called Porta Churraich, or the Bay of the Island -- on Whitsun Eve 12 May, 563. Whether he came to do penance for his share in the battle of Cuildreinhne two years before, or, as the Irish "Life" says, "to preach the Gospel to the men of Alba and to the Britons and to the Saxons" -- which in any case was his primary purpose -- we cannot now determine. It appears that he got a grant of the island from his relative Conall King of Dalriada. which was afterwards confirmed by Brude, King of the Picts, when the latter was converted by the preaching of Columba, who immediately set to work to build his monastery, more Scottorum of earth, timber, and wicker-work. Hence not a trace now remains of those perishable buildings -- all the existing ruins are medieval. A Celtic monastery consisted of a group of beehive cells around a central church or oratory, the other principal buildings being the common refectory or kitchen, the library or scriptorium, the abbot's house, and the guest-house. Adamnan, after Columba himself the brightest ornament of the School of Iona, in his "Life" of the founder, makes explicit references to the tabulae, waxen tablets for writing; to the pens and styles, graphia and calami, and to the ink-horn, cornicula atramenti, to be found in the scriptorium. Columba was certainly a most accomplished scribe if the "Book of Kells" be his own work, and he was engaged in copying one of the psalms when, overtaken by mortal illness, he directed his nephew Baithen to write the rest. And we are told, too, that Baithen during his brief abbacy of three years in succession to Columba was, like his master engaged in "writing, praying and teaching up to the hour of his happy death". When asked about the learning of Baithen, Fintan one of his monks replied: "Be assured that he had no equal on this side of the Alps in his knowledge of Sacred Scripture, and in the profundity of his science" -- and he was at once a pupil and a professor of the School of Iona. Language like this might be considered exaggerated if we did not possess the writings of Adamnan, the ninth abbot and the most illustrious scholar of Iona.

Adamnan, otherwise Eunan, a native of Drumhome, in County Donegal, and a tribal relative of Columba, was educated from his youth in Iona, and it may be said that all his learning was the learning of Iona. His "Life of Columba", written at the request of the brotherhood, in Latin, not in Gaelic, is on the whole one of the most valuable works of the Western Church of the seventh century that have come down to us. He gives us more accurate and authentic information of the Gaelic Churches in Ireland and Scotland than any other writer, not excepting even Venerable Bede, who described him as "a good and wise man, and most nobly instructed in the knowledge of the Scriptures". But he was much more. We know from his writings that he was an accomplished Latin scholar, a Gaelic scholar too-Gaelic was his mother tongue-while he had a considerable acquaintance with Greek and some even with Hebrew. He was, moreover, painstaking, judicious, and careful in citing his authorities. He has also left us an admirable treatise "On the Holy Places" in Palestine which he compiled from the narrative of a shipwrecked French bishop named Arculfus, who returning from the Holy Land was cast on the shores of Iona. This is an invaluable treatise from which Bede has extracted long passages for his history, showing that its authority was as great in his own day as it has ever since continued to be in the estimation of scholars. This learned man was a true monk, and like Columba himself took a share in the manual labour of the monastery. With his own strong arms he helped to cut down as many oak trees in one of the neighbouring islands -- perhaps Erraid -- as sufficed to load twelve boats, and no doubt he had a share in building the boats and framing the monastic cells, like the cell of Columba, which was, he tells us, tabulis suffulta, framed of planks, and harundine tecta, thatched with reeds.

During the century that closed with the death of Adamnan, Iona was in its glory, Columba and his monks had converted to the faith the whole of Pictland with its rulers. It sent three famous prelates to found and rule over Lindisfarne, second only to Iona itself as a centre of religious learning and influence in the North of Saxonland. Aidan, Finan, and Colman are men whose well-deserved eulogy has been recorded by Venerable Bede. The unhappy disputes about the frontal tonsure and the true time for celebrating Easter, caused much disturbance during the seventh century both in Iona itself and in its daughter houses. Even when Ireland and England had given up the strife and adopted the Roman Easter, the monks of Iona, true to the traditions of their sainted founder, still clung tenaciously to the old Easter. And so late as 716, when Iona itself conformed to the Roman usage, some of the daughter houses in Pictland stubbornly held to the ancient discipline. This stubbornness brought about a few years later the expulsion of the Columban monks from Pictland by Nectan, King of the Picts, who had accepted the Roman discipline.

The ninth century brought woe and disaster to both Iona and Lindisfarne from the pagan Danes who ravaged all the British coasts. In 793 they destroyed the church of Lindisfarne with great rapine and slaughter. In 795 they made their first attack on Iona, but the monks on that occasion appear to have escaped with their lives. But in 806 sixty-eight of the community were slain at Port na Mairtir on the eastern shore of the island, and the white sands somewhat north were the scene of the massacre of another band of martyrs. A few years later again, in 814, Abbot Cellach found it necessary to transfer the primacy of the Columban Order from Iona-which Adamnan calls "this our primatial island"-to the monastery of Kells in Ireland, bringing with him the shrine containing Columba's relics which was however brought back later on. In 825 there was a further massacre of Iona monks, namely of St. Blaithmac who refused to give up the shrine, and his holy companions. Blaithmac's heroic death was celebrated in Latin verse by Walafridus Strabo, Abbot of Reichenau, South Germany. In 908 St. Andrews was formally recognized as the primatial see of Scotland, from which year we may date the disappearance of Iona's insular primacy. In the beginning of the thirteenth century, 1204, the ancient Celtic monastery finally disappeared, and a new Benedictine one was established by authority of the pope; but the original graveyard -- the Reilig Odhrain -- was still regarded as the holiest ground in Scotland, and is now crowded with the inscribed tombstones of the kings, chieftains and prelates who rest beneath.

JOHN HEALY

Ionian Islands

A group of seven islands (whence the name Heptanesus, by which they are also designated) and a number of islets scattered over the Ionian Sea to the west of Greece, between 36 deg. and 40 deg. N. lat., and 19 deg. and 23.5 deg. E. long. The seven islands are: Corfu (Kerkyra, Corcyra), Paxos, Leucadia or Santa Maura, Ithaca or Thiaki, Cephalonia, Zante or Zacynthus, and Cerigo or Cythera. Of the islets the most important are: Antipaxos, Othronos, and Anticythera or Cerigotto. The Ionian Isles have a total area of about 1095 square miles. The population amounts to 261,930, among them being 6615 Catholics of the Latin Rite, while the remainder, with the exception of a few thousand Jews and a small number of Mussulmans, belong to the Greek Orthodox Church. The climate of the islands is in general very mild and salubrious, and, in spite of the mountainous character of the land, there is a fairly extensive output of cotton, wine, oil, and raisins.

The Ionian Isles are frequently mentioned or described by the ancient Greek and Latin authors, for whom they had many mythological associations. Many remains of antiquity are even to-day found on these islands (Rieman, "Recherches archéologiques sur les iles ioniennes," Paris, 1879-80). They all remained under Byzantine rule until about the end of the eleventh century, when the Normans of the Two Sicilies obtained possession of Corfu. In 1386 Venice took the islands, and retained them until the end of the eighteenth century. The Treaty of Campo Formio in 1797 gave them to France, which formed them into the three provinces of Ithaca, Corfu, and the Aegean Sea. In 1799 the Russian fleet seized the Ionian Isles, and they were constituted a small state tributary to Turkey, but in 1802 the Treaty of Amiens declared them free under the protectorate of Russia. In 1807 the Peace of Tilsit gave them back to France, and General Berthier was installed as their governor. The Second Treaty of Paris (November, 1815) placed them under English protection. An aristocratic government was then once more organized; the legislative functions were vested in a chamber of seventy deputies, eleven nominated by the Government and fifty-nine elected by the people; the executive power belonged to a Senate consisting of a president, appointed by the protecting power, and five senators elected for five years by the deputies from their own body. An English lord commissioner controlled foreign relations and the police. England enjoyed the right of garrisoning the forts and of military administration. After the French Revolution of 1848, an insurrection broke out in Cephalonia with the object of uniting the islands to Greece, but was rigorously repressed by England in 1849. From that time, however, the first vote of the Chamber, whenever it assembled, was in favour of the union with Greece, after which vote it was immediately dissolved. The English Government, after sending Mr. Gladstone to investigate the feeling of the population, at last decided to surrender the islands to Greece. King George I, upon ascending the throne at Athens, in 1863, consented to succeed Otho I only upon England's undertaking to cede the Ionian Archipelago to the Hellenic Kingdom. This cession was effected between 21 May and 2 June, 1864. The Ionian Isles have since then formed the three nomarchies, or departments, of Corfu, Cephalonia, and Zante. Cerigo alone has been incorporated in the continental nomarchy of Messenia.

The Ionian Isles must have received the Gospel at a comparatively early date. The first known Bishop of Corfu is Apollodorus, or Alethodorus, who assisted at the Council of Nicaea in 325 (Gelzer, "Patrum nicaenorum nomina," LXIII, no. 168; see also the list of ancient Greek bishops in Le Quien, II, 232-5.) After the consummation of the Eastern Schism, the Ionian bishoprics remained in the power of the schismatics. Until 1260 the archipelago of the seven islands counted scarcely any Catholics. Under the domination of the House of Anjou, Catholicism made some progress there, and this was continued from 1386 to 1797, under Venetian rule. In the thirteenth century Zante and Cephalonia were made Latin bishoprics, suffragan to Corinth until 1386. These two dioceses (Zante and Cephalonia) were then made one and suffragan to Corfu, which was then raised to the status of an archbishopric (see the list of Latin bishops of the three sees in Le Quien, III, 877-82, 889-92; completed by Gams, 399, 430, and Eubel, I, 217). The political vicissitudes through which the Ionian Archipelago passed during the nineteenth century brought adversity to the Catholic missions, which, however, suffered less after 1850. At the time of the cession of the islands to Greece in 1864, the Hellenic Government promised to secure to the three Latin bishoprics their former rights and privileges. The archdiocese of Corfu (which besides the island of that name, comprises the islands and islets of Merlera, Phano, Samothrace, Paxos, and Antipaxos, as well as a few places in Epirus on the mainland between the towns of Parga and Sasina) is now governed by a resident archbishop, who is at the same time Administrator Apostolic of the Diocese of Zante-Cephalonia. This last diocese comprises, besides the two islands from which it derives its name, those of Santa Maura Leucas (or Leucadia), Ithaca, and Cerigo. The archdiocese numbers about 6000 Catholics, all of the Latin Rite; the Diocese of Zante-Cephalonia, 615 (Missiones catholicae, 1907, 145-7). (See CORFU, ARCHDIOCESE OF; ZANTE-CEPHALONIA, DIOCESE OF.) The Orthodox hierarchy until 1900 consisted of seven dioceses, one for each of the principal islands of the Ionian Archipelago; since then it has numbered but five, that of Paxos having been suppressed, and the two titles of Leucas and Ithaca united into one. Formerly dependent on the Phanar of Constantinople, the ecclesiastical eparchies of the ancient septinsular republic became connected in 1866 with the Holy Synod of Athens, to which they are still subject [Théarvic, "L'Eglise de Grèce" in Echos d'Orient," III (1899-1900), 288 sqq.]. (See GREECE.)

BONDELMONTE, Liber insularum Archipelagi, written in fifteenth century and published by Sinner in 1824; KENDRICK, The Ionian Islands (London, 1822); MURRAY, Handbook for Travellers in the Ionian Islands (London, 1840); D'ISTRIA, Les iles Ioniennes sous la domination venitienne et le protectorat anglais (Athens, 1859); WHYTE-JERVIS, The Ionian Islands during the present century (London, 1864); LENORMANT, L'annexion des iles Ioniennes in Revue des Deux Mondes (Jan., 1864); KIRCKWALL, Four Years in the Ionian Islands (London, 1864); BURSIAN, Geographie von Griechenland, II (Leipzig, 1872); CHIOTIS, Historia tou Hioniou kratous (Athens, 1874); NOLHAC, La Damatie, les iles Ioniennes et le mont Athos (Paris, 1882); RIEMANN, Recherches archeologiques sur les iles Ioniennes (Paris, 1879-80); MAVROGIANNIS, Historia ton Hionion nesov (Athens, 1899).

S. SALAVILLE

Ionian School of Philosophy

The Ionian School includes the earliest Greek philosophers, who lived at Miletus, an Ionian colony in Asia Minor, during the sixth century B.C., and a group of philosophers who lived about one hundred years later and modified the doctrines of their predecessors in several respects. It is usual to distinguish, therefore, the Earlier Ionians and the Later Ionians.

Earlier Ionians

This group includes Thales, Anaximander, and Anaximenes, with whom the history of philosophy in Greece begins. They are called by Aristotle the first "physiologists", that is "students of nature". So far as we know they confined their philosophical enquiry to the problem of the origin and laws of the physical universe. They taught that the world originated from a primitive substance, which was at once the matter out of which the world was made and the force by which the world was formed. Thales said that this primitive substance was water; Anaximander said that it was "the boundless" (to apeiron); Anaximenes said that it was air, or atmospheric vapour (aer). They agreed in teaching that in this primitive substance there is an inherent force, or vital power. Hence they are said to be Hylozoists and Dynamists. Hylozoism is the doctrine of animated matter, and Dynamism the doctrine that the original cosmothetic force was not distinct from, but identical with, the matter out of which the universe was made. From the scanty materials that have come down to us -- a few fragments of the writings of the early Ionians, and allusions in Aristotle's writings -- it is impossible to determine whether these first philosophers were Theists or Pantheists, although one may perhaps infer from their hylozoistic cosmology that they believed God to be at once the substance and the formative force in the universe.

Later Ionians

This group includes Heraclitus Empedocles, and Anaxagoras, who lived in the fifth century B.C. These philosophers, like the early Ionians, were deeply interested in the problem of the origin and nature of the universe. But, unlike their predecessors, they distinguished the primitive world forming force from the primitive matter of which the world was made. In Heraclitus, however, and, to a certain degree, in Empedocles, this mechanism -- the doctrine that force is distinct from matter -- is expressed hesitatingly and in figurative language. Anaxagoras is the first Greek philosopher to assert definitely and unhesitatingly that the world was formed from a primitive substance by the operation of a force called Intellect. For this reason he is said by Aristotle to be "distinguished from the crowd of random talkers who preceded him" as the "first sober man" among the Greeks. Heraclitus was so impressed with the prevalence of change among physical things that he laid down the principle of panmetabolism: panta rei, "all things are in a constant flux". Empedocles has the distinction of having introduced into philosophy the doctrine of four elements, or four "roots", as he calls them, namely, fire, air, earth, and water, out of which the centripetal force of love and the centrifugal force of hatred made all things, and are even now making and unmaking all things. Anaxagoras, as has been said, introduced the doctrine of nous, or Intellect. He is blamed however, by Socrates and Plato for having neglected to make the most obvious application of that doctrine to the interpretation of nature as it now is. Having postulated a world-forming Mind, he should they pointed out, have proceeded to the principle of teleology, that the Mind presiding over natural processes does all things for the best. None of these early philosophers devoted attention to the problems of epistemology and ethics. Socrates was the first to conduct a systematic inquiry into the conditions of human knowledge and the principles of human conduct.

WILLIAM TURNER

Ionopolis

A titular see in the province of Paphlagonia, suffragan of Gangres. The city was founded by a colony from Miletus already established at Sinope, and at first took the name of Abonouteichos. There, in the second century A.D., was born the false prophet Alexander, who caused the erection of a large temple to Apollo, and thus secured rich revenues. The city was afterwards called Ionopolis. Le Quien (Oriens Christ., I, 555) mentions eight bishops between 325 and 878; it had others since then, for the see is mentioned in the later "Notitiae episcopatuum." Ionopolis, to-day called Ineboli, is a Black Sea port, numbering 9000 inhabitants, 1650 of whom are Greek schismatics, and 230 Armenians; all the remainder are Turks. It is a caza of the sanjak and the vilayet of Castamouni, and enjoys a very healthy and pleasant climate.

CUINET, La Turquie d'Asie, IV (Paris, 1894), 466-69.

S. VAILHÉ

Iowa

Iowa is one of the North Central States of the American Union, and is about midway between the Atlantic and the Pacific Oceans. It lies between two great rivers, the Mississippi and the Missouri, the Mississippi forming its eastern boundary and separating it from the States of Illinois and Wisconsin; the Missouri and its chief tributary, the Big Sioux, forming its western boundary, and separating it from the States of Nebraska and South Dakota. It extends from 40 deg. 36 min. to 43 deg. 30 min. north latitude. In the south-east corner, in Lee County, the boundary projects below the parallel, following the channel of the Des Moines River down to its junction with the Mississippi. The state is 310 miles from east to west and 210 miles from north to south, and has an area of 56,025 square miles, or 35,856,000 acres, being nearly the same size as Wisconsin or Illinois.

Physical Characteristics

The surface of the state is an undulating prairie, part of the Great Central Plain of North America. It rises gradually from the south-east corner, where the lowest point is but 444 feet above the sea-level, towards the north-west, to the Divide (an elevated plain beginning in Dickinson County in the north-western part of the state), where the highest point (1694 feet) is reached. The ridge then crosses the state from north to south, parallel with the western boundary and about 60 miles east of it, until it reaches Adair County, whence it sweeps eastwards to Appanoose County. That part of the state east of the Divide, comprising over two-thirds of its surface, is drained by rivers flowing in a southeasterly direction into the Mississippi and its tributaries. The principal rivers of this system are the upper Iowa, Turkey, Maquoketa, Wapsipinicon, Cedar, Skunk, and Des Moines. Of these the Des Moines is by far the largest and most important, rising in Minnesota and flowing diagonally across the entire state. West of the Divide the rivers flow southwesterly into the Missouri and its tributaries, and, as the watershed is near the western boundary of the state, the rivers have shorter courses and a more rapid flow than those of the eastern system. The principal western rivers are the Big Sioux, Rock, Floyd, Little Sioux, Boyer, and Nishnabotna. The principal lakes of Iowa are Spirit Lake, which is the largest, Lake Okoboji, a popular summer resort, Clear Lake, and Storm Lake. These are small but beautiful sheets of water situated in the north-western part of the state which is an extension of the lake region of Minnesota. Along the largest rivers are valleys from one to ten miles in width, bordered by irregular lines of bluffs. The picturesque ravines and bold rocky bluffs, ranging in height from 200 to 400 feet, along the Mississippi from Dubuque northwards, lend to that portion of the river a striking beauty all its own. There is but little native forest in the state, the timber being chiefly confined to the valleys of the rivers and the bordering bluffs. It was found, however, that all deciduous trees throve on the soil of the prairies; by special legislation, offering fiscal privileges, the farmers were encouraged to plant, and now woodland groves near the farmhouses are seen in all parts of the state, adding picturesqueness to the scenery. The principal trees are the cottonwood, ash, elm, maple, hickory, black walnut, poplar, box elder, cedar, and varieties of oak. There are no miasmatic bottomlands in the state; the air is dry and invigorating, and the general climatic influences salubrious. During the last ten years (1899 to 1908 inclusive) the average extremes of temperature were 102 deg. above to 31 deg. below zero; the average mean temperature was 48 deg. above zero. During the same time the average rainfall was 33 inches. For the year 1908, the mean temperature was 49.5 deg.; the highest temperature was 101 deg. (3 August) in Mahaska and Wapello Counties in the southern part of the state; the lowest temperature reported for the year was 18 deg. below zero (29 January) in Emmet and Winnebago Counties in the northern part of the state. The average amount of rain and melted snow for the year was 35.26 inches.

Industries and General Social Conditions

Iowa has less waste land than any other of the United States, 97 per cent of its surface being tillable. The soil of the greater part of the state consists of a dark drift loam from two to five feet deep and of wonderful fertility. In the western part of the state is found the bluff soil, or loess, believed to be the deposit of the winds from the plains of Kansas and Dakota; this soil is deep and very rich, and is peculiarly adapted to the growth of fruit trees. The soil of the river valleys consists of waste carried down from higher levels, and is known as alluvium; it is the richest soil in the state. Because of the richness of its soil Iowa has long held a leading place among the agricultural states of the Union. Travellers over the state cannot but be impressed by the sight of its vast fields of Indian corn and oats. More than one-half of its population are engaged in farming. The value of the agricultural products of the state in 1908, according to the United States Department of Agriculture, was $376,076,646. This includes 287,456,000 bushels of Indian corn, valued at $149,477,000, and 110,444,000 bushels of oats, valued at $46,386,000. The state ranks first in the production of oats and in the number of swine; second only to Illinois in the production of corn, second to Texas in the number of meat cattle, second to New York in the number of dairy cows, and second to Illinois in the number of horses. Iowa is famous for its dairy products, and the State Department of Agriculture estimates the value of these products for the year 1908 at $44,500,000.

The most important mineral deposit in the state is bituminous coal; the coal-fields include an area of approximately 20,000 square miles in the southern and central parts of the state. The output in 1908 was 7,149,517 tons, valued at $11,772,228. Gypsum for stucco and plaster is found in Webster County, and clay for tile- and brick-making is abundant. In the year 1908 the value of clay products was $4,078,627. The mines in the vicinity of Dubuque, which attracted the first white people to the state, and which became known as the Mines of Spain, are still yielding lead and zinc ore. The manufactures of the state are steadily increasing, because of its growth and prosperity, and the possession of native coal. The value of the output of manufactures for the last statistical year, 1905, was $160,572,313. The Mississippi is now the only river navigable for large boats, the shifting channel and sand-bars of the Missouri constituting great obstacles to navigation. But the facilities for transportation are excellent, the state being covered by a network of railways, including seven great trunk lines. The total mileage of railways in the state, in 1908, was 9886.2 and the total mileage of electric interurban railways was 245.18. According to Federal estimates made in 1908, the population of Iowa was 2,196,970. By the last State Census (1905) the population — 2,210,050 — was made up of: 1,264,443 native whites of native parentage; 648,532 native whites of foreign parentage; 282,296 foreign-born whites; 14,831 coloured. There were only 53 Chinese in the state; but 39 per cent of the foreign-born population were born in Germany. Added to the immigrants from Germany, those from Sweden, Norway, and Denmark make 63.69 per cent of the foreign-born population derived from Teutonic races. Eight per cent of the foreign-born came from Ireland. Most of the native-born population are descendants of immigrants from the New England States, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois. There were many Frenchmen among the earliest settlers (Bishop Loras preached sermons in the cathedral in French as well as in English), but there are now but few descendants of French families in the state. Prior to 1852, the immigrants from foreign countries were largely from Ireland and Germany, with the Irish in the majority; these immigrants settled in the eastern part of the state, and there were among them a large proportion of Catholics. But since that year the immigration has been largely from the Teutonic nations. The State Census of 1905 gives the membership of the four leading Churches as follows: Methodist Episcopal, 162,688; Catholic, 158,000; Lutheran, 91,889; Presbyterian, 47,765. According to Federal estimates in 1908, Des Moines, the capital and largest city, had a population of 83,717; the next largest cities in order are Dubuque, Sioux City, and Davenport.

An admirably organized system of public schools exists throughout the state, generous provision for that purpose having been made by the State Constitution. The schools are supported chiefly by local taxation and the interest on the permanent school fund. Education is compulsory, the parents and guardians of children between the ages of seven and fourteen years inclusive being compelled to send them to some public, parochial, or private school for at least sixteen consecutive weeks during each school year. By statute passed in 1909, the attendance of the children during these sixteen weeks is excused for such time as they are attending religious service or receiving religious instruction. The State Superintendent of Public Instruction has general supervision of the public schools. In each county there is elected a county superintendent. Some of the townships of the counties constitute each a single district having one or two central schools, but generally the townships are subdivided into subdistricts and independent districts, where the latter consist of cities, the schools are managed by boards of education. No religious instruction is given, the Bible is not excluded from any public school or institution, but no pupil can be required to read it contrary to the wishes of his parent or guardian.

In 1908 the number of schoolhouses was 13,914, the number of teachers 27,950, the enrolment of pupils 526,269, and the total appropriation for educational purposes for the year $1,936,363. There are 534 high schools in the state in which the course of study, generally speaking, covers four years. The State University, the head of the public school system is located at Iowa City. It was established in 1847; in 1908 it had 164 professors and instructors, and 2315 students enrolled. The State also maintains the College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, at Ames, and the Normal School at Cedar Falls. There are in the state 276 private denominational and higher educational institutions. The Juvenile Court Law has been for several years in force in Iowa. Under the provisions of the law, offending children under the age of sixteen years are no longer treated as criminals, nor confined in jails. They, as well as neglected children, are treated as wards of the state and, under the supervision of probationary officers, are kept in their own or other homes, or sent to the State Industrial Schools. Many girls are sent to the Houses of the Good Shepherd.

Catholic Education

Through the unremitting zeal of the present Archbishop of Dubuque and his predecessors in office, and their labours among the clergy and people, the cause of Catholic religious education has so advanced that parochial schools exist in all the parishes of considerable size in the state, and are taught chiefly by religious orders. In the year 1909, there are in the state 36,942 pupils attending the parochial schools. These schools are supplemented by 36 academies and high schools in which 5812 students are taught; and to complete the system are two diocesan colleges: St. Joseph's College, at Dubuque, with 280 students, and St. Ambrose College, at Davenport, with 167 students. At Dubuque, the metropolitan city of the archdiocese, where the enrolled number of pupils attending the public schools is 4084, the number attending the parochial schools is 3000. The city is surrounded by a cordon of Catholic institutions, educational and charitable, and has become widely known as a centre of Catholic education.

History

The first white men who saw Iowa were the French Jesuit Father Marquette and Louis Joliet, who on the 17th day of June, 1673, coming down the mouth of the Wisconsin River, discovered the Mississippi and faced the picturesque bluffs of the Iowa shore. The first landing on Iowa territory recorded by Father Marquette in his journal was near Montrose, in Lee County, where he had a peaceful and memorable meeting with the natives. One hundred and fifteen years passed away from the time of Father Marquette's discovery until the first white settlement was made within the limits of the state. In 1788 Julien Dubuque, a French Canadian trader, obtained from the Indians a grant of land, in which to mine for lead; it extended seven leagues along the west bank of the Mississippi and was three leagues in width, including the territory on which now stands the city of Dubuque. This grant was afterwards confirmed by Baron de Carondelet, the Spanish governor of the province of Louisiana, and the strip of land became known as the Mines of Spain. Here Dubuque, with ten other Canadians, and aided by the Indians, operated the mines until his death in 1810, when the whites were driven out. Dubuque was buried on the top of an isolated bluff just below the present limits of the city of Dubuque, and a large cross marked his grave for many years. This became a well-known landmark to river men on the upper Mississippi, and is mentioned in books of travel. In 1832, in the territory east of the Mississippi, occurred the war with the Indians known as the Black Hawk War. This resulted in a treaty, made in the same year, by which the Indians relinquished that part of Iowa known as the Black Hawk Purchase, containing six million acres of land, lying immediately west of the Mississippi River, about ninety miles in width, and north of the Missouri State line. Although this was not the first concession of territory in Iowa by the Indians, it was the first which opened any portion of the land for settlement by the whites. Settlements were made in 1833 at Dubuque and at other points near the Mississippi River. Within ten years the title to practically all of the state was secured by treaties with the Indians. Attracted by glowing accounts of the richness of the soil, immigrants came pouring in from the New England states, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, North Carolina, Missouri, and other states.

In 1834 that part of the Louisiana Purchase now included in the State of Iowa was made a part of the Territory of Michigan; in 1836 it was attached to, and made a part of, the new Territory of Wisconsin, and in 1838 was established separately as the Territory of Iowa. On 28 December, 1846, it was admitted to the Union as the twenty-ninth State, being the fourth state created out of the Louisiana Purchase. In 1854 the first railroad was built from Davenport west, and railroad-building then extended rapidly. In the same year was passed a law, prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors which, with some changes, is still on the statute books. In 1857 the state adopted a revised Constitution which, with a few amendments, is still the law. The progress of the state was checked by the Civil War, at the close of which, however, immigration recommenced, and population and wealth increased. Although the population in 1860 was less than 700,000, the state furnished, during the Civil War, 75,519 volunteers.

The Church in Iowa

The first Mass celebrated within the limits of Iowa was said in the year 1833, by the Rev. C.P. Fitzmorris, of Galena, Illinois, in the home of Patrick Quigley in the city of Dubuque, and the first Catholic church in the state was built at Dubuque by the celebrated Dominican missionary, Samuel Mazzuchelli, in 1836. On 10 December, 1837, the Very Rev. Mathias Loras, Vicar-General of the Diocese of Mobile, Alabama, was consecrated first Bishop of Dubuque. Bishop Loras was a native of Lyons, France, and was a worthy comrade of Bl. Jean Baptiste Vianney, the celebrated Curé of Ars. Going to France for priests and financial aid, Bishop Loras arrived in Dubuque with two priests and four deacons on the 19th day of April, 1839. His diocese included all the territory between the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers, from the northern limit of the State of Missouri to the British Possessions. In his diocese he found but three churches and one priest, Father Mazzuchelli. The indefatigable labours of Bishop Loras in personally attending to the spiritual wants of the scattered settlers in his vast territory, in building churches and procuring funds, and in inducing immigration from the Eastern States and from Europe, have secured him a high rank among the pioneer missionaries and church-builders of this country. In 1843, he brought from Philadelphia the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, who established their mother-house near Dubuque and have become widely known as successful teachers. In 1849 he gave a home to the Trappist monks from Mount Melleray, Ireland, who founded the Abbey of New Melleray, still in existence, twelve miles from Dubuque. When he died (19 February, 1858) there were within the limits of the State of Iowa, 48 priests, 60 churches, and a Catholic population of 54,000. In 1850 the territory north of the State of Iowa had been formed into the Diocese of St. Paul. He was succeeded by his coadjutor, the Rt. Rev. Clement Smyth, who had been Prior of New Melleray Abbey. Bishop Smyth was a man of great scholarly attainments and was the founder of the school for young men which still flourishes in the Abbey of Mount Melleray, Ireland. His uniform courtesy and gentleness won all hearts, and he was noted for his ardent patriotism during the strenuous days of the Civil War. During his short episcopacy he cemented and greatly extended the work of Bishop Loras and died 23 September, 1865, lamented by priests and people.

On 30 September, 1866, in St. Raphael's Cathedral, Dubuque, the Rev. John Hennessy, pastor of St. Joseph's church, St. Joseph, Missouri, was consecrated Bishop of Dubuque. Bishop Hennessy was renowned as a pulpit orator, and was a man of rare executive ability. The thirty-four years of his episcopacy were an era of great progress for the Diocese of Dubuque. Priests and teachers, churches and schools were multiplied in all parts of the state, new religious orders were introduced, and hospitals and asylums founded. The work became too great for one man, and in 1881 the diocese was divided, and the new Diocese of Davenport founded, comprising the southern portion of the state. In 1893 Bishop Hennessy was made first Archbishop of Dubuque; he died 4 March, 1900.

On 24 July, 1900, Rome selected as successor to Archbishop Hennessy, the Most Rev. John J. Keane, titular Archbishop of Damascus, at one time Bishop of Richmond, Va., and first rector of the Catholic University of America. The results of his great ability and wide experience are shown in the marvelous growth of the Church within the limits of the state since his arrival. In the Archdiocese of Dubuque, he has thoroughly organized his clergy, increased the number of priests and parishes, and, by his episcopal visitations, has become acquainted with all parts of his territory. The cause of religious education has been the object of his special care, and the flourishing state of St. Joseph's College and other institutions of higher learning, and the number of children attending the parochial schools demonstrate the success of his labours. He expends all the revenues from the property of the archdiocese in the building of churches and schools. Among new orders introduced by him are: the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, who have two houses, one in Dubuque, the other in Sioux City; the Sisters of the Order of St. Dominie; the Brothers of Mary. He has also organized an apostolate band of diocesan priests. An enthusiastic advocate of temperance, many temperance societies have been formed at his instance. At his advent, in the cities in the eastern part of the state, the provisions of the modified liquor law, known as the Mulct Law, were entirely ignored, and saloons were open on Sundays. Archbishop Keane, by his sermons and addresses, and attendance at public meetings, aroused public sentiment in favour of the law, with the result that now, in all parts of the state, the Mulct Law is strictly carried out, and the observance of Sundays enforced. In 1902, at the instance of the archbishop, twenty-four counties in the north-western part of the state were separated from the archdiocese and formed into the Diocese of Sioux City.

The province of Dubuque includes the States of Iowa, Nebraska, and Wyoming. The State of Iowa is divided into three dioceses. (1) The Archdiocese of Dubuque occupies that part of the state north of the counties of Polk, Jasper, Poweshiek, Iowa, Johnson, Cedar, and Scott, and east of the counties of Kossuth, Humboldt, Webster, and Boone, and has an area of 18,048 square miles. (2) The Diocese of Sioux City comprises 24 counties in the north-western part of the state, west of Winnebago, Hancock, Wright, Hamilton, and Story Counties, and north of Harrison Shelby, Audubon, Guthrie, and Dallas Counties, its area being 14,518 square miles. The present Bishop of Sioux City is the Rt. Rev. Philip Joseph Garrigan, residing at Sioux City, Iowa. (3) The Diocese of Davenport, with an area of 22,873 square miles, comprises all that portion of the state south of the other two dioceses and extends from the Mississippi River to the Missouri River. The present Bishop of Davenport is the Rt. Rev. James Davis, Davenport, Iowa. In 1909, according to the Wiltzius "Official Catholic Directory," there were in the state 579 churches, 492 priests, 27 different religious orders, 28 hospitals and asylums, and a total of 37,154 children being taken care of in schools and other institutions. The Catholic population of the state is as follows: Diocese of Dubuque 111,112; Diocese of Davenport, 75,518; Diocese of Sioux City, 54,543. Total Catholic population, 241,173.

The best of feeling exists amongst the different denominations, and there is but little bigotry anywhere in the state. The Constitution provides that the General Assembly shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, and that no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office, or public trust, and no person shall be deprived of any of his rights, privileges, or capacities, or disqualified from the performance of any of his public or private duties, or rendered incompetent to give evidence in any court of law or equity in consequence of his opinions on the subject of religion. By statute, the disturbance of public worship is punished by fine or imprisonment, and the breach of Sunday by "carrying firearms, dancing, hunting, shooting, horse racing, or in any manner disturbing a worshipping assembly or private family, or buying or selling property of any kind, or engaging in any labour except that of necessity or charity" is punished by fine and imprisonment. In general all stores in cities and towns are closed on Sunday. The customary form of oath is: "I do solemnly swear." Placing the hand on the Bible is not required. A person conscientiously opposed to taking an oath may affirm. The use of blasphemous or obscene language is prohibited under penalty of fine and imprisonment. By custom, a chaplain is appointed by each branch of the Legislature, and the daily sessions are opened with prayer. In addition to Sunday, the only days which are recognized as religious holidays are Christmas and Thanksgiving Day. By statute, no minister of the Gospel, or priest of any denomination is allowed, in giving testimony, to disclose any confidential communications properly entrusted to him in his professional capacity and proper to enable him to discharge the functions of his office according to the usual course of practice or discipline. The statutes of the state provide that any three or more persons of full age, a majority of whom shall be citizens, may incorporate themselves for the establishment of churches, colleges, seminaries, temperance societies, or organizations of a benevolent, charitable, or religious character. Any corporation so organized may take and hold by gift, purchase, devise, or bequest, real and personal property for purposes appropriate to its creation. The corporation shall endure for fifty years and may be then reincorporated. As a rule, real estate in the State of Iowa belonging to the Catholic Church is held in each diocese in the name of the bishop. All grounds and buildings used for benevolent and religious institutions and societies devoted to the appropriate objects of these institutions, not exceeding 160 acres in extent, and not leased or otherwise used with a view to pecuniary profit, are exempt from taxation. Cemeteries are also exempt. The State imposes what is called a collateral inheritance tax of 5 per cent on all property within the state which passes, by will, or by the statutes of inheritance, or by deed to take effect after the death of the grantor, to collateral heirs or strangers to the blood. From this tax are exempt bequests or deeds to charitable, educational, or religious institutions within the state, and, by a statute passed in 1909, there is also exempt from this tax "any bequest not to exceed $500 to and in favour of any person having for its purpose the performance of any religious service to be performed for and in behalf of decedent or any person named in his or her last will, or any cemetery associations," thus exempting bequests for Masses. Clergymen are excused from jury service, and the Constitution of the State provides "that no person having conscientious scruples against bearing arms shall be compelled to do military duty in time of peace."

Prohibition of the sale of intoxicating liquors is still the law of the state, but in cities where a majority of the voters consent, liquors may be sold by complying with the "Mulct Law," the principal conditions imposed by which are: the written consent of the owners of property situated within fifty feet of the proposed place of sale; the payment of a tax of $600 annually to the state; the giving of a bond of $3000. The liquors must be sold in one room, having but one exit, with no tables or chairs therein and no curtains on the windows to obstruct the view; there must be no sales to minors or drunkards, nor after ten o'clock at night; the place must be closed on Sundays and legal holidays, and in no case shall the business be conducted within 300 feet of a church building or schoolhouse. In the state penitentiaries, each warden is required to appoint "some suitable minister of the Gospel as chaplain" and all regular officiating ministers of the Gospel are authorized to visit the penitentiaries at pleasure. This privilege is, in fact, true of all public institutions of the state.

Marriage is regarded as a civil contract, and, outside of the usual degrees of consanguinity, is valid between a male of sixteen years and a female of fourteen years. It can be solemnized by any minister of the Gospel or civil magistrate. Previous to the solemnization, a licence must be obtained from the clerk of the district court of the county in which the marriage is to be performed. If the parties are minors the written consent of their parents or guardians is required. Divorces can be granted by the district court for any of the following causes: desertion, adultery, felony, habitual drunkenness, cruel and inhuman treatment. In no case can either of the parties divorced marry again within a year, unless specially permitted to do so by the decree. Any person of full age and of sound mind can make a valid testamentary disposition of all his property subject to the homestead and dower right of his wife and the payment of his debts. But no devise or bequest to any corporation organized for religious, charitable, or educational purposes or for any purpose of a similar character, is valid in excess of one-fourth of the testator's estate after payment of debts, in case a wife, child, or parent survive the testator. The will must be in writing, signed by the testator in presence of two witnesses, who must attest the same in writing, except that verbal wills of personal property to the value of three hundred dollars are valid. Associations for cemetery purposes may be incorporated under statutes provided for that purpose, and the land so occupied is exempt from tax, but throughout the state Catholic cemeteries, like all other church property, is held in the name of the bishop of the diocese.

For reasons, none of which had anything to do with religion, Catholics have generally allied themselves with the Democratic party which has for many years been the minority party in the state, and therefore few of them have attained political eminence. The following Catholic laymen have been prominent in the history of the state: George W. Jones, first delegate to Congress from Michigan Territory, introduced in Congress bills creating the Territory of Wisconsin and the Territory of Iowa, afterwards U.S. Senator from Iowa for twelve years, and Minister to Bogota; Patrick Quigley, pioneer benefactor of the Church; Charles Corkery, postmaster of Dubuque under President Buchanan, and prominent in colonization work; D.A. Mahony, founder and first editor of the Telegraph-Herald, and imprisoned in Fort Lafayette by order of Secretary Stanton; John S. Murphy, a brilliant editor of the same paper; William J. Knight, one of the leaders of the Bar of the state and counsel for two railways; M.J. Wade, Representative in Congress; M.D. O'Connell, Solicitor of the Treasury, Washington; Jerry B. Sullivan, Democratic candidate for Governor.

GUE, History of Iowa (New York, 1903); SALTER, Iowa (Chicago, 1905); DE CAILLY, Life of Bishop Loras (New York, 1897); Census of Iowa, 1905 (Des Moines); Statistical Abstract of U.S., 1908 (Washington); Census of Manufactures, 1905, Iowa Bulletin No. 32 (Washington, 1906); Climatological Service, Iowa Section, Report for December, 1908 (Washington); Crop Reporter, Department of Agriculture, December, 1908 (Washington); Biennial Report, Department of Public Instruction (Des Moines, 1909).

JOHN I. MULLANY

Arnold Ipolyi

(Family name originally STUMMER)

Bishop of Grosswardein (Nagy-Várad), b. at Ipoly-Keszi, 20 Oct., 1823; d. at Grosswardein, 2 December 1886. At the age of thirteen years he entered the ranks of the alumni of the Archdiocese of Gran (Esztergom), studied two years in the Emericianum at Presburg (Pozsony) and later at Tyrnau (Nagy-Szombat), and finished at the Pazmaneum at Vienna, where he attended lectures on theology for four years. In 1844 he entered the seminary of Gran, took minor orders in 1845, and was ordained priest in 1847. From 1845 to 1847 he acted as tutor in the family of Baron Mednyánszky, was then curate at Komorn-Sankt-Peter (Komárom-Szen-Péter), in 1848 preacher at Presburg, in 1849 spent a short time as tutor in the family of Count Palffy, and became in this year parish priest of Zohor. Even before his ordination he concerned himself with historical and art-historical matters. In 1854 his "Ungarische Mythologic" came out, as the firstfruit of his work, in which he treats of the ancient religion of Hungary. Although the work won the prize offered by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the author afterwards withdrew it from the press, so that at the present time it is very rare. In 1860 Ipolyi became parish priest at Török-Szent-Miklós. Accompanied by Franz Kubinyi and Emerich Henszlmann, he made in 1862 a journey to Constantinople, where he discovered the remainder of the library of Matthias Corvinus. In 1863 he was made canon of Eger, and in 1869 director of the Central Ecclesiastical Seminary at Pesth; in 1871 he became Bishop of Neusohl (Besztereze-Bánya), and in 1886 Bishop of Grosswardein where he died on 2 December of the same year. Ipolyi was member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, as well as a member of different learned Societies at home and abroad. He was one of the founders and at first vice-president, then president of the Hungarian Historical Society. His literary activity extended into the provinces of history, art-history, archaeology, and Christian art. He enriched the Hungarian National Gallery with sixty valuable paintings. He bequeathed to Grosswardein in his will, for the purpose of founding a museum, his collections which had been brought together with a great expert knowledge of art. Of his literary works, in addition to his "Mythologie", the following are well known: "Biography of Michael Veresmarti", an author of the seventeenth century (Budapest, 1875); the "Codex epistolaris Nicolai Olah", in tyhe "Monumenta Hungariae Historica: Scriptorum", XXV (Budapest, 1876); the "Biographie der Christina Nyáry von Bedez" (Budapest, 1887), in Hungarian; also the "Historische und kunsthistorische Beschreibung der ungarischen Kronisignien" (Budapest, 1886), in Hungarian. A collection of his lesser works has appeared in five volumes (Budapest, 1887).

SZINNYEY, Leben und Werke ungarischer Schriftsteller, V, 145-158; POR, Leben und Werke A. Ipolyyis, Bischofs von Grosswardein (Presburg, 1886); also the memorial oration on Ipolyi by FRAKNOI in Jahrbuch der Ung. Akademie der Wissenschaften, XVII, 1888 (all in Hungarian).

A. ALDASY

Blessed Ippolito Galantini

Founder of the Congregation of Christian Doctrine of Florence; b. at Florence of obscure parentage, 12 October. 1565; d. 20 March, 1619. While still a child a wonderful cure turned his thoughts towards the service of God, and he devoted himself to teaching the truths of the Christian religion in the Jesuit church of Florence. He was only twelve years old when he attracted the attention of the Archbishop Alexander de' Medici (afterwards Leo XI), who gave him the church of Sta Lucia al Prato in which to carry on his work. He divided his time between his trade of silk-weaving and the religious instruction of poor children and adults, and at sixteen felt impelled to found a society for this purpose. The opposition aroused by his solicitude for the poor he overcame by the exercise of wonderful patience. Generous benefactors made it possible for him to erect an oratory, which Clement VIII dedicated in honour of St. Francis, in 1602, and in which the work begun at Sta Lucia was continued. The foundation was called the Congregation of Christian Doctrine under the invocation of Sts. Francis and Lucy. It was divided into fifteen classes, according to the age and religious knowledge of the pupils, each class being governed by special rules and assisting in the instruction of the class below. The members of the first class were admitted to the congregation after a good confession.

Ippolito was indefatigable in his work, collecting alms from the wealthy Florentines, which he distributed among the poor, founding and reorganizing branches of his congregation, which spread to Volterra, Lucca, Pistoia, Modena, etc. He introduced the practice of nocturnal adoration to draw the people from the theatre and sinful amusements. In Florence, the members of his congregation, by reason of their modesty, were called Van Chetoni. Ippolito was the object of violent persecution, envy and malice accusing him of sharing the errors of Luther, of introducing new rules and reforms. One of his spiritual sons accused him before the pope and Grand Duke Cosimo of excessive severity, but the charge was not sustained, and Ippolito's congregation was declared to be for God's glory and the public good. Shortly before the holy man's death the grand duke founded a perpetual chaplaincy for the order. Ippolito made a pilgrimage to Loreto to place his foundation under the protection of the Blessed Virgin. The statutes of the congregation were approved by the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars, and confirmed by Leo XII in a decree of 17 September, 1824. The founder was beatified by the same pontiff, 13 May, 1825. His ascetical works, written for the government and direction of his congregation, had been approved by Benedict XIV in 1747, and were published at Rome in 1831, together with a brief life of the saint by Canon Antonio Santelli.

BRISCHAR in Kirchenlex., s.v. Doctrinarier.

BLANCHE M. KELLY

Ipsus

A titular see of Phrygia Salutaris, suffragan of Synnada. The locality was famous as the scene of the great battle fought in 301 B.C.between the successors of Alexander, in which Antigonus was slain and his kingdom divided between his rivals. As Ipsos or Hypsos the city is mentioned by Hierocles and George of Cyprus and in most of the medieval "Notitiae Epicopatuum". Le Quien (Oriens Christianus, I, 840-4I), names four of its bishops; Lucian, at the Council of Chalcedon in 451; George, at the Seventh Council in 787, Photius and Thomas at the Councils of Constantinople in 868 and 878. The city was situated at the junction of two roads, one leading to Byzantium and the other towards Sardeis; the exact site has not been discovered. Modern geographers identify it with the ruins of Ipsili-Hissar; others, like Ramsay ("Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia", Oxford, 1897, 748), with those of Tchai, 82 miles from Apamea.

S. VAILHÉ

Ireland

GEOGRAPHY

Ireland lies in the Atlantic Ocean, west of Great Britain, from which it is separated in the north-east by the North Channel, in the east by the Irish Sea, and in the south-east by St. George's Channel. Situated between the fifty-first and fifty-sixth degrees of latitude, and between the fifth and eleventh parallels of longitude (Greenwich), its greatest length is 302 miles, its greatest breadth 174 miles, its area 32,535 square miles. It is divided into four provinces, these being subdivided into thirty-two counties. In the centre the country is a level plain; towards the coast there are several detached mountain chains. Its rivers and bays are numerous, also its bogs; its climate is mild, though unduly moist. In minerals it is not wealthy like Great Britain, but is soil is generally more fertile, and is specially suitable for agriculture and pasturage.

EARLY HISTORY

In ancient times it was known by the various names of Ierna, Juverna, Hibernia, Ogygia, and Inisfail or the Isle of Destiny. It was also called Banba and Erin, and lastly Scotia, or the country of the Scots. From the eleventh century, however, the name Scotia was exclusively applied to Caledonia, the latter country having been peopled in the sixth century by a Scottish colony from Ireland. Henceforth Ireland was often called Scotia Major and sometimes Ireland, until, after the eleventh century, the name Scotia was dropped and Ireland alone remained. Even yet it is sometimes called Erin—chiefly by orators and poets. Situated in the far west, out of the beaten paths of commercial activity, it was little known to the ancients. Festus Avienus wrote that it was two days' sail from Britain. Pliny thought that it was part of Britain and not an island at all; Strabo that it was near Britain, and that its inhabitants were cannibals; and all that Caesar knew was that it was west of Britain, and about half its size. Agricola beheld its coastline from the opposite shores of Caledonia, and had thought of accepting the invitation of an Irish chief to come and conquer it, believing he could do so with a single legion. But he left Ireland unvisited and unconquered, and Tacitus could only record that in soil and climate it resembled Britain, and that its harbours were then well known to foreign merchants.

But if we have not any detailed description from his lively pen, the native chroniclers have furnished us with abundant materials, and, if all they say be true, we can understand the remark of Camden that Ireland was rightly called Ogygia, or the Ancient Island, because in comparison, the antiquity of all other nations is in its infancy. Passing by the absurd story that it was peopled before the Deluge, we are told that, beginning with the time of Abraham, several successive waves of colonization rolled westward to its shores. First came Parthalon with 1000 followers; after which came the Nemedians, the Firbolgs, and the Tuatha-de-Dananns, and lastly the Milesians or Scots. In addition, there were the Fomorians, a people of uncertain origin, whose chief occupation was piracy and war, and whose attacks on the various settlers were incessant. These and the Milesians excepted, the different colonists came from Greece, and all were of the same race. The Milesians came from Scythia; and from that country to Egypt, from Egypt to Spain, from Spain to Ireland their adventures are recorded in detail. The name Scot which they bore was derived from Scota, daughter of Pharaoh of Egypt, the wife of one of their chiefs; from their chief Miledh they got the name Milesians, and from another chief Goidel they were sometimes called Gadelians, or Gaels. The wars and battles of these colonists are largely fabulous, and the Partholanians, Nemedians, and Fomorians belong rather to mythology than to history. So also do the Dananns, though sometimes they are taken as a real people, of superior knowledge and skill, the builders of those prehistoric sepulchral mounds by the Boyne, at Dowth, Knowth, and Newgrange. The Firbolgs however most probably existed, and were kindred perhaps to those warlike Belgae of Gaul whom Caesar encountered in battle. And the Milesians certainly belong to history, though the date of their arrival in Ireland is unknown. They were Celts, and probably came from Gaul to Britain, and from Britain to Ireland, rather than direct from Spain. Under the leadership of Heremon and Heber they soon became masters of the island. Some of the Firbolgs, it is said, crossed the seas to the Isles of Arran, where they built the fort of Dun Engus, which still stands and which tradition still associates with their name. Heber and Heremon soon quarrelled, and, Heber falling in battle, Heremon became sole ruler, the first in a long line of kings. This list of kings, however, is not reliable, and we are warned by Tighearnach, the most trustworthy of Irish chroniclers, that all events before the reign of Cimbaeth (300 B.C.) are uncertain. Even after the dawn of the Christian Era fact and fiction are interwoven and events are often shrouded in shadows and mists. Such, for instance, are the exploits of Cuchullain and Finn Macumhael. Nor have many of these early kinds been remarkable, if we except Conn of the Hundred Battles, who lived in the first century after Christ; Cormac, who lived a century later; Tuathal, who established the Feis of Tara; Niall, who invaded Britain; and Dathi, who in the fifth century lost his life at the foot of the Alps.

The Irish were then pagans, but not barbarians. Their roads were indeed ill-constructed, their wooden dwellings rude, the dress of their lower orders scanty, their implements of agriculture and war primitive, and so were their land vehicles, and the boats in which they traversed the sea. On the other hand, some of their swords and shields showed some skill in metal-working, and their war-like and commercial voyages to Britain and Gaul argue some proficiency in shipbuilding and navigation. They certainly loved music; and, besides their inscribed Ogham writing, they had a knowledge of letters. There was a high-king of Ireland (ardri), and subject to him were the provincial kings and chiefs of tribes. Each of these received tribute from his immediate inferior, and even in a sept the political and legal administration was complete. There was the druid who explained religion, the brehon who dispensed justice, the brughaid or public hospitaller, the bard who sang the praises of his chief or urged his kinsman to battle; and each was an official and had his appointed allotment of land. Kings, though taken from one family, were elective, the tanist or heir-apparent being frequently not the nearest relation of him who reigned. This peculiarity, together with gavelkind by which the lands were periodically redistributed, impeded industry and settled government. Nor was there any legislative assembly, and the Brehon law under which Ireland lived was judge-made law. Sometimes the ardri's tribute remained unpaid and his authority nominal; but if he was a strong man he exacted obedience and tribute. The Boru tribute levied on the King of Leinster was excessive and unjust, and led to many evils. The pagan Irish believed in Druidism, resembling somewhat the Druidism Caesar saw in Gaul; but the pagan creed of the Irish was indefinite and their gods do not stand out clear. They held the immortality and the transmigration of souls, worshipped the sun and moon, and, with an inferior worship, mountains, rivers, and wells. And they sacrificed to idols, one of which, Crom Cruach, they are said to have propitiated with human sacrifices. They also believed in fairies, holding that the Tuatha-de-Dananns, when defeated by the Milesians, retired into the bosom of the mountains, where they held their fairy revels. One of the women fairies (the banshee) watched the fortunes of great families, and when some great misfortune was impending, the doomed family was warned at night by her mournful wail.

EARLY CHRISTIAN PERIOD

Intercourse with Britain and the Continent through commerce and war sufficiently accounts for the introduction of Christianity before the fifth century. There must have been then a considerable number of Christians in Ireland; for in 430 Palladius, a bishop and native of Britain, was sent by Pope Celestine "to the Scots believing in Christ". Palladius, however, did little, and almost immediately returned to Britain, and in 432 the same pope sent St. Patrick. He is the Apostle of Ireland, but this does not imply that he found Ireland altogether pagan and left it altogether Christian. It is however quite true that when St. Patrick did come paganism was the predominant belief, and that at his death it had been supplanted as such by Christianity. The extraordinary work which St. Patrick did, as well as his own attractive personal character, has furnished him with many biographers; and even in recent years his life and works have engaged erudite and able pens. But in spite of all that has been written many things in his life are still doubtful and obscure. It is doubtful when and where he was born, how he spent his life between his first leaving Ireland and his return, and in what year he died. It has been maintained that he never existed; that he and Palladius were the same man; that there were two St. Patricks; again, some, like Jocelin, have multiplied his miracles beyond belief. These contradictions and exaggerations have encouraged the scoffer to sneer; and Gibbon was sure that in the sixty-six lives of St. Patrick there must have been sixty-six thousand lies. In reality there seems no solid reason for rejecting the traditional account, viz., that St. Patrick was born at Dumbarton in Scotland about 372; that he was captured and brought to Ireland by the Irish king, Nial; that he was sold as a slave to an Ulster chief Milcho, whom he served for six years; that he then escaped and went back to his own people; that in repeated visions he, a pious Christian, heard the plaintive cry of the pagan Irish inviting him to come amongst them; that, believing he was called by God to do so, he went first to the monastery of St. Martin of Tours, then to that of St. Germanus of Auxerre, after which he went to Lerins and to Rome; and then, being consecrated bishop, he was sent by Pope Celestine to Ireland, where he arrived in 432.

From Wicklow, where he landed, his course is traced to Antrim; back by Downpatrick, near which he converted Dichu and got from him a grant of land for his first church at Saul; then by Dundalk, where Benignus was converted; and to Slane, where in sight of Tara itself he lighted the paschal fire. The enraged druids pointed out to the ardri the heinousness of the offence, for during the great pagan festival then being celebrated it was death to light any fire except at Tara. But St. Patrick came to Tara itself, baptized the chief poet, and even the ardri; then marched north and destroyed at Leitrim the idol, Crom Cruach, after which he entered Connaught, and remained there for seven years. Passing through Connaught to Ulster, he went through Donegal, Tyrone, and Antrim, consecrated Macarten Bishop of Monaghan, and Fiace Bishop of Sletty; after which he entered Munster. Finally he returned to Ulster, and died at Saul in 493. His early captivity in Ireland interfered seriously with his education, and in his Confession and in his Epistle to Caroticus, both of which have survived the wreck of ages, we can discover no graces of style. But we see his great familiarity with the Scripture. And the man himself stands revealed; his piety, his spirit of prayer, his confidence in God, his zeal, his invincible courage. But while putting his entire trust in God, and giving Him all the glory, he rejected no human aid. Entering into a pagan territory he first preached to the chief men, knowing that when they were converted the people would follow. Wonderful indeed was his labour, and wonderful its results. He preached in almost every district in Ireland, confounded in argument the druids and won the people from their side; he built, it is said, 365 churches and consecrated an equal number of bishops, established schools and convents, and held synods; and when he died the whole machinery of a powerful Church was in operation, fully equal to the task of confirming in the faith those already converted and of bringing those yet in darkness into the Christian fold.

One of the apostle's first anxieties was to provide a native ministry. For this purpose he selected the leading men—chiefs, brehons, bards—men likely to attract the respect of the people, and these, after little training, and often with little education, he had ordained. Thus equipped the priest went among the people, with his catechism, missal, and ritual, the bishop in addition his crosier and bell. In a short time, however, these primitive conditions ceased. Abut 450 a college was established at Armagh under Benignus; other schools arose at Kildare, Noendrum, and Louth; and by the end of the fifth century these colleges sent forth a sufficient supply of trained priests. Supported by a grant of land from the chief of the clan or sept and by voluntary offerings, bishop and priests lived together, preached to the people, administered the sacraments, settled their disputes, sat in their banquet halls. To many ardent natures this state of things was abhorrent. Fleeing from men, they sought for solitude and silence, by the banks of a river, in the recesses of a wood, and, with the scantiest allowance of food, the water for their drink, a few wattles covered with sods for their houses, they spent their time in mortification and prayer. Literally they were monks, for they were alone with God. But their retreats were soon invaded by others anxious to share their penances and their vigils, and to learn wisdom at their feet. Each newcomer built his little hut, a church was erected, a grant of land obtained, their master became abbot, and perhaps bishop; and thus arose monastic establishments the fame of which soon spread throughout Europe. Noted examples in the sixth century were Clonard, founded by St. Finian, Clonfert by St. Brendan, Bangor by St. Comgall, Clonmacnoise by St. Kieran, Arran by St. Enda; and, in the seventh century, Lismore by St. Carthage and Glendalough by St. Kevin.

There were still bardic schools, as there was still paganism, but in the seventh century paganism had all but disappeared, and the bardic were overshadowed by the monastic schools. Frequented by the best of the Irish, and by students from abroad, these latter diffused knowledge over western Europe, and Ireland received and merited the title of Island of Saints and Scholars. The holy men who laboured with St. Patrick and immediately succeeded him were mostly bishops and founders of churches; those of the sixth century were of the monastic order; those of the seventh century were mostly anchorites who loved solitude, silence, continued prayer, and the most rigid austerities. Nor were the women behindhand in this contest for holiness. St. Brigid is a name still dear to Ireland, and she, as well as St. Ita, St. Fanchea and others, founded many convents tenanted by pious women, whose sanctity and sacrifices it would be indeed difficult to surpass. Nor was the Irish Church, as has been sometimes asserted, out of communion with the See of Rome. The Roman and Irish tonsures differed, it is true, and the methods of computing Easter, and it may be that Pelagianism found some few adherents, though Arianism did not, nor the errors as to the natures and wills of Christ. In the number of its sacraments, in its veneration for the Blessed Virgin, in its belief in the Mass and in Purgatory, in its obedience to the See of Rome, the creed of the early Irish Church was the Catholic creed of to-day (see CELTIC RITE). Abroad as well as at home Irish Christian zeal was displayed. In 563 St. Columba, a native of Donegal, accompanied by a few companions, crossed the sea to Caledonia and founded a monastery on the desolate island of Iona.

Fresh arrivals came from Ireland; the monastery with Columba as its abbot was soon a flourishing institution, from which the Dalriadian Scots in the south and the Piets beyond the Grampians were evangelized; and when Columba died in 597, Christianity had been preached and received in every district in Caledonia, and in every island along its west coast. In the next century Iona had so prospered that its abbot, St. Adamnan, wrote in excellent Latin the "Life of St. Columba", the best biography of which the Middle Ages can boast. From Iona had gone south the Irish Aidan and his Irish companions to compete with and even exceed in zeal the Roman missionaries under St. Augustine, and to evangelize Northumbria, Mercia, and Essex; and if Irish zeal had already been displayed in Iona, equal zeal was now displayed on the desolate isle of Lindisfarne. Nor was this all. In 590 St. Columbanus, a student of Bangor, accompanied by twelve companions, arrived in France and established the monastery of Luxeuil, the parent of many monasteries, then laboured at Bregenz, and finally founded the monastery of Bobbio, which as a centre of knowledge and piety was long the light of northern Italy. And meantime his friend and fellow-student St. Gall laboured with conspicuous success in Switzerland, St. Fridolin along the Rhine, St. Fiacre near Meaux, St. Kilian at Wurzburg, St. Livinus in Brabant, St. Fursey on the Marne, St. Cataldus in southern Italy. And when Charlemagne reigned (771-814), Irishmen were at his court, "men incomparably skilled in human learning".

In the civil history of the period only a few facts stand out prominently. About 560, in consequence of a quarrel with the ardri Diarmuid about the right of sanctuary, St. Columba and Rhodanus (Reudan) of Lorrha publicly cursed Tara, an unpatriotic act which dealt a fatal blow at the prospect of a strong central government by blighting with maledictions its acknowledged seat. Nearly thirty years later the National Convention of Drumceat restrained the insolence and curtailed the privileges of the bards. In 684 Ireland was invaded by the King of Northumbria, though no permanent conquest followed. And in 697 the last Feis of Tara was held, at which, through the influence of Adamnan, women were interdicted from taking part in actual battle. At the same time the ardri Finactha, at the instance of St. Moling, renounced for himself and his successors the Boru tribute. As the eighth century neared its close, religion and learning still flourished; but unexpected dangers approached and a new enemy came, before whose assaults monk and monastery and saint and scholar disappeared.

These invaders were the Danes from the coasts of Scandinavia. Pagans and pirates, they loved plunder and war, and both on land and sea were formidable foes. Like the fabled Fomorians of earlier times they had a genius for devastation. Descending from their ships along the coast of western Europe, they murdered the inhabitants or made them captives and slaves.

In Ireland as elsewhere they attacked the monasteries and churches, desecrated the altars, carried away the gold and silver vessels, and smoking ruins and murdered monks attested the fury of their assaults. Armagh and Bangor, Kildare and Clonmacnoise, Iona and Lindisfarne thus fell before their fury. Favoured by disunion among the Irish chiefs, they crept inland, effected permanent settlements at Waterford and Limerick and established a powerful kingdom at Dublin; and, had their able chief Turgesius lived much longer, they might perhaps have subdued the whole island. For a century after his death in 845 victory and defeat alternated in their wars; but they clung tenaciously to their seaport possessions, and kept the neighbouring Irish in cruel bondage. They were, however, signally defeated by the Ardri Malachy in 980, and Dublin was compelled to pay him tribute. But, able as Malachy was, an abler man soon supplanted him in the supreme position. Step by step Brian Boru had risen from being chief of Thomond to be undisputed ruler of Munster. Its chiefs were his tributaries and his allies; the Danes he had repeatedly chastised, and in 1002 he compelled Malachy to abdicate in his favour.

It was a bitter humiliation for Malachy thus to lay down the sceptre which for 600 years had been in the hands of his family. It gave Ireland, however, the greatest of her high-kings and unbroken peace for some years. War came when the elements of discontent coalesced. Brian had irritated Leinster by reviving the Boru tribute; he had crushed the Danes; and these, with the Danes of the Isle of Man and those of Sweden and the Scottish Isles, joined together, and on Good Friday, 1014, the united strength of Danes and Leinstermen faced Brian's army at Clontarf. The victory gained by the latter was great; but it was dearly bought by the loss of Brian as well as his son and grandson. The century and a half which followed was a weary waste of turbulence and war. Brian's usurpation encouraged others to ignore the claims of descent. O'Loughlin and O'Neill in the North, O'Brien in the South, and O'Connor beyond the Shannon fought for the national throne with equal energy and persistence; and as one set of disputants disappeared, others replaced them, equally determined to prevail. The lesser chiefs were similarly engaged. This ceaseless strife completed the work begun by the Danes. Under native and Christian chiefs churches were destroyed, church lands appropriated by laymen, monastic schools deserted, lay abbots ruled at Armagh and elsewhere. Bishops were consecrated without sees and conferred orders for money, there was chaos in church government and corruption everywhere. In a series of synods beginning with Rathbreasail (1118) and including Kells, at which the pope's legate presided, many salutary enactments were passed, and for the first time diocesan episcopacy was established. Meanwhile, St. Malachy, Archbishop of Armagh, had done very remarkable work in his own diocese and elsewhere. His early death in 1148 was a heavy blow to the cause of church reform. Nor could so many evils be cured in a single life, or by the labours of a single man; and in spite of his efforts and the efforts of others the decrees of synods were often flouted, and the new diocesan boundaries ignored.

THE ANGLO-NORMANS

In Henry II of England an unexpected reformer appeared. The murderer of Thomas a' Becket seemed ill-fitted for the role, but he undertook it, and in the first year of his reign (1154) he procured a Bull from the English-born Pope Adrian IV authorizing him to proceed to Ireland "to check the torrent of wickedness to reform evil manners, to sow the seeds of virtue." The many troubles of his extensive kingdom thwarted his plans for years. But in 1168 Macmurrogh, King of Leinster, driven from his kingdom sought Henry's aid, and then Adrian's Bull was remembered. a first contingent of Anglo-Normans came to Ireland in 1169 under Fitzgerald, a stronger force under Strongbow (de Clare, Earl of Pembroke) in 1170, and in 1171 Henry himself landed at Waterford and proceeded to Dublin, where he spent the winter, and received the submission of all the Irish chiefs, except those of Tyrconnell and Tyrowen. These submissions, however, aggravated rather than lessened existing ills. The Irish chiefs submitted to Henry as to a powerful ardri, still preserving their privileges and rights under Brehon law. Henry, on his side, regarded them as vassals holding the lands of their tribes by military service and in accordance with feudal law. Thus a conflict between the clan system and feudalism arose. Exercising his supposed rights, Henry divided the country into so many great fiefs, giving Meath to be Lacy, Leinster to Strongbow, while de Courcy was encouraged to conquer Ulster, and deCogan Connaught. At a later date the deBurgos settled in Galway, the Fitzgeralds in Kildare and Desmond, the Butlers in Ossory. Discord enfeebled the capacity of the Irish chiefs for resistance; nor were kernes and gallowglasses equal to mail-clad knights, nor the battle-axe to the Norman lance, and in a short time large tracts had passed from native to foreign hands.

The new Anglo-Irish lords soon outgrew the position of English subjects, and to the natives became tyrannical and overbearing. Ignoring the many evidences of culture in Ireland, her Romanesque architecture, her high crosses, her illuminated manuscripts, her shrines and crosiers, the scholars that had shed lustre on her schools, the saints that had hallowed her fame throughout Europe—ignoring all these, they despised the Irish as rude and barbarous, despised their language, their laws, their dress, their arms; and, while not recognizing the Brehon law, they refused Irishmen the status of English subjects or the protection of English law. At last, despairing of union among their own chiefs, or of justice from Irish viceroy or English king, the oppressed Irish invited Edward Bruce from Scotland. In 1315 he landed in Ireland and was crowned king. Successful at first, his allies beyond the Shannon were almost annihilated in the battle of Athenry (1316); and two years later he was himself defeated and slain at Faughart. His ruin had been effected by a combination of the Anglo-Irish lords, and this still further inflated their pride. Titles rewarded them. Birmingham became Lord of Athenry and Earl of Louth, Fitzgerald Earl of Kildare, his kinsman Earl of Desmond, de Burgo Earl of Ulster, Butler Earl of Ormond. But these titles only increased their insolence and disloyalty. Favoured by the weakness of the viceroy's government the native chiefs recovered most of the ground they had lost.

Meanwhile the De Burgos in Connaught changed their name to Burke, and became Irish chiefs; many others followed their example; even the ennobled Butlers and Fitzgeralds used the Irish language, dress, and customs, and were as turbulent as the worst of the native chiefs. To recall these colonists to their allegiance the Statute of Kilkenny made it penal to use Irish customs, language, or law, forbade intermarriage with the mere Irish, or the conferring of benefices on the native-born. But the barriers of race could not be maintained, and the intermarrying of Irish with Anglo-Irish went on. The long war with France, followed by the Wars of the Roses, diverted the attention of England from Irish affairs; and the viceroy, feebly supported from England, was too weak to chastise these powerful lords or put penal laws in force. The hostility of native chiefs was bought off by the payment of "black rents". The loyal colonists confined to a small district near Dublin, called "the Pale", shivered behind its encircling rampart; and when the sixteenth century dawned, English power in Ireland had almost disappeared. Those within the Pale were impoverished by grasping officials and by the payment of "black rents". Outside the Pale the country was held by sixty chiefs of Irish descent and thirty of English descent, each making peace or war as he pleased. Lawlessness and irreligion were everywhere. The clergy of Irish quarrelled with those of English descent; the religious houses were corrupt, their priors and abbots great landholders with seats in Parliament, and more attached to secular than to religious concerns; the great monastic schools had disappeared, the greatest of them all, Clonmacnoise, being in ruins; preaching was neglected except by the mendicant orders, and these were utterly unable to cope with the disorders which prevailed.

THE TUDOR PERIOD

Occupied with English and Continental affairs, Henry VIII, in the beginning of his reign, bestowed but little attention on Ireland, and not until he was a quarter of a century on the throne were Irish affairs taken seriously in hand. The king was then in middle age, no longer the defender of the Faith against Luther, but, like Luther, a rebel against Rome; no longer generous or attractive in character, but rather a cruel capricious tyrant whom it was dangerous to provoke and fatal to disobey. In England his hands were reddened with the best blood of the land; and in Ireland the fate of the Fitzgeralds, following the rebellion of Silken Thomas, struck Irish and Anglo-Irish alike with such terror that all hastened to make peace. O'Neill, renouncing the inheritance of his ancestors, became Earl of Tyrone; Burke became Earl of Clanrickard, O'Brien Earl of Thomond, Fitzpatrick Lord of Ossory; the Earl of Desmond and the other Anglo-Irish nobles were pardoned all their offences, and at a Parliament in Dublin (1541) Anglo-Irish and Irish attended. And Henry, who like his predecessors had been hitherto but Lord of Ireland (Dominus Hiberniae), was now unanimously given the higher title of king. This Parliament also passed the Act of Supremacy by which Henry was invested with spiritual jurisdiction, and, in substitution for the pope, proclaimed head of the Church. As the proctors of the clergy refused to agree to this measure, the irate monarch deprived them of the right of voting, and in revenge confiscated church lands and suppressed monasteries, in some cases shed the blood of their inmates, in the remaining cases sent them forth homeless and poor. These severities, however, did not win the people from their faith. The apostate friar Browne, whom Henry made Archbishop of Dublin, the apostate Staples, Bishop of Meath, and Henry himself, stained with so many adulteries and murders, had but poor credentials as preachers of reform; whatever time-serving chiefs might do, the clergy and people were unwilling to make Henry pope, or to subscribe to the varying tenets of his creed. His successor, an ardent Protestant, tried hard to make Ireland Protestant, but the sickly plant which he sowed was uprooted by the Catholic Mary, and at Elizabeth's accession all Ireland was Catholic.

Like her father Henry, the young queen was a cruel and capricious tyrant, and in her war with Shane O'Neill, the ablest of the Irish chiefs, she did not scruple to employ assassins. She was neither a sincere Protestant nor a willing persecutor of the Catholics; and though she re-enacted the Act of Supremacy and passed the Act of Uniformity, making Protestantism the state creed, she refused to have these acts rigorously enforced. But when the pope and the Spanish king declared against her, and the Irish Catholics were found in alliance with both, she yielded to her ministers and concluded, with them, that a Catholic was necessarily a disloyal subject. Henceforth toleration gave way to persecution. The tortures inflicted on O'Hurley, Archbishop of Cashel, and O'Hely, Bishop of Mayo, the Spaniards murdered in cold blood at Smerwick, the desolation of Munster during Desmond's rebellion, showed how cruel her rule could be. Far more formidable than the rebellion of Desmond, or even than that of Shane O'Neill, was the rebellion of Hugh O'Neill, Early of Tyrone. No such able Irish chief had appeared since Brian Boru. Cool, cautious, vigilant, he laid his plans with care and knew how to wait patiently for results. Never impulsive, never boastful, wise in council and wary in speech, from his long residence in London in his youth he learned dissimulation, and was as crafty as the craftiest English minister. Repeatedly he foiled the queen's diplomatists in council as he did her generals in the field, and at the Yellow Ford (1598) gained the greatest victory ever won in Ireland over English arms. What he might have done had he been loyally supported it is hard to say. For nearly ten years he continued the war; he continued it after his Spanish allies had brought upon him the disaster of Kinsale; after his chief assistant, O'Donnell, had been struck down by an assassin's hand; after Carew had subdued Munster, and Mountjoy had turned Ulster into a desert; after the Irish chiefs had gone over to the enemy. And when he submitted it was only on condition of being guaranteed his titles and lands; and by that time Elizabeth, who hated him so much and so longed for his destruction, had breathed her last.

UNDER THE STUARTS

James I (1603-25) was the first of the Stuart line, and from the son of Mary Stuart the Irish Catholics expected much. They were doomed, however, to an early disappointment. The cities which rejoiced that "Jezabel was dead", and that now they could practise their religion openly, were warned by Mountjoy that James was a good Protestant and as such would have no toleration of popery. Salisbury, who had poisoned the mind of the queen against the Catholics, was equally successful with her successor, with the result that persecution continued. Proclamations were issued ordering the clergy to quit the kingdom; those who remained were hunted down; O'Devany, Bishop of Down, and others were done to death. The Acts of Supremacy and uniformity were rigorously enforced. The Act of Oblivion, under which participants in the late rebellion were pardoned, was often forgotten or ignored. English law, which for the first time was extended to all Ireland, was used by corrupt officials to oppress rather than to protect the people. The Earl of Tyrone and the Early of Tyroconnell (Rory O'Donnell) was so spied upon and worried by false charges of disloyalty that they fled the country, believing that their lives were in danger; and to all their pleas for justice the king's response was to slander their characters and confiscate their lands. It is indeed true that Irish juries found the earls guilty of high treason, and an Irish Parliament, representing all Ireland, attained them. But these results were obtained by carefully packing the juries, and by the creation of small boroughs which sent creatures of the king to represent them in Parliament. And the Catholic members acquiesced under threat of having enacted a fresh batch of penal laws. Thus, aided by corrupt juries and a complaisant Parliament, James I was enabled to plant the confiscated lands of Ulster with English Protestants and Scotch Presbyterians. Other plantations had fared badly. That of King's and Queen's County in Mary's reign had decayed; and the plantation of Munster after the Desmond war had been swept away in the tide of O'Neill's victories. The plantation of Ulster was more thorough and effective than either of these. Whole districts were given to the settlers, and these, supported by a Protestant Government, soon grew into a powerful and prosperous colony, while the despoiled Catholics, driven from the richer to the poorer lands, looked helplessly on, hating those colonists for whose sake they had been despoiled.

Under the new king, Charles I (1625-49), the policy of persecution and plantation was continued. Under pretence of advancing the public interest and increasing the king's revenue, a crowd of hungry adventurers spread themselves over the land, inquiring into the title by which lands were held. With venal judges, venal juries, and sympathetic officials to aid them, good titles were declared bad, and lands seized, and the adventurers were made sharers in the spoil. The O'Byrnes were thus deprived of their lands in Wicklow, and similar confiscations and plantations took place in Wexford, King's County, Leitrim, Westmeath, and Longford. Hoping to protect themselves against such robbery, the Catholics offered the king a subsidy of £120,000 in exchange for certain privileges called "graces", which among other things would give them indefeasible titles to their estates. These "graces" granted by the king, were to have the sanction of Parliament to make them good. The money was paid, but the "graces" were withheld, and the viceroy, Strafford, proceeded to Connaught to confiscate and plant the whole province. The projected plantation was ultimately abandoned; but the sense of injustice remained. All over the country were insecurity, anxiety, unrest, and disaffection; Irish and Anglo-Irish were equally menaced. Seeing the futility of appealing to a helpless Parliament, a despotic viceroy, or a perfidious king, the nation took up arms.

To describe the rebellion as the "massacre of 1641" is unjust. The details of cruel murders committed and horrible tortures inflicted by the rebels are mischievously untrue. On the other hand, it is true that the Protestants suffered grievous wrong, and that many of them lost their lives, exclusive of those who fell in war. The Catholics wanted the planters' lands; when driven away in wintry weather, without money, or food, or sufficient clothes, many planters perished of hunger and cold. Others fell by the avenging hand of some infuriated Catholic whom they might have wronged in the days of their power. Many fell defending their property or the property and lives of their friends. The plan of the rebel leaders, of whom Roger Moore was chief, was to capture the garrison towns by a simultaneous attack. But they failed to capture Dublin Castle, containing large stores of arms, owing to the imprudence of Colonel MacMahon. He imparted the secret to a disreputable Irishman named O'Connolly, who at once informed the Castle authorities, with the result that the Castle defences were strengthened, and MacMahon and others arrested and subsequently executed. In Ulster, however, the whole open country and many towns fell into the rebels' hands, and Munster and Connaught soon joined the rebellion, as did the Catholics of the Pale, unable to obtain any toleration of their religion, or security of their property, or even of their lives. Before the new year was far advanced the Catholic Bishops declared the rebellion just, and the Catholics formed a confederation which, from its meeting place, was called the "Confederation of Kilkenny". Composed of clergy and laity its members swore to be loyal to the king, to strive for the free exercise of their religion, and to defend the lives, liberties, and possessions of all who took the Confederate oath. Supreme executive authority was vested in a supreme council; there were provincial councils also, all these bodies deriving their powers from an elective body called the "General Assembly".

The Supreme Council exercised all the powers of government, administered justice, raised taxes, formed armies, appointed generals. One of the best-known of these officers was General Preston, who commanded in Leinster, having come from abroad with a good supply of arms and ammunition, and with 500 trained officers. A more remarkable man still was General Owen Roe O'Neill, nephew of the great Earl of Tyrone, who took command in Ulster, and whose defence of Arras against the French caused him to be recognized as one of the first soldiers in Europe. He also, like Preston, brought officers, arms, and ammunition to Ireland. At a later state came Rinuccini, the pope's nuncio, bringing with him a supply of money. Meanwhile, civil war raged in England between king and Parliament; the Government at Dublin, ill supplied from across the Channel, was ill fitted to crush a powerful rebellion, and, in 1646, O'Neill won the great victory of Benburb. But the strength of which this victory was the outcome was counterbalanced by elements of weakness. The Catholics of Ulster and those of the Pale did not agree; neither did Generals O'Neill and Preston. The Supreme Council, with a feeble old man, Lord Mountgarret, at its head, and four provincial generals instead of a commander-in-chief, was ill-suited for the vigorous prosecution of a war. Moreover, the influence of the Marquis of Ormond was a fatal cause of discord. A personal friend of the king, and charged by him with the command of his army and with the conduct of negotiations, a Protestant with Catholic friends on the Supreme Council, his desire ought to have been to bring Catholic and Royalist together. But his hatred of the Catholics was such that he would grant them no terms, even when ordered to do so by His Majesty. The Catholics' professions of loyalty he despised, and his great diplomatic abilities were used to sow dissensions in their councils and to thwart their plans. Yet the Supreme Council, dominated by an Ormondist faction, continued fruitless negotiations with him, agreed to a cessation when they themselves were strong and their opponents weak, and agreed to a peace with him in spite of the victory of Benburb, and in spite of the remonstrances of the nuncio and of General O'Neill. Nor did they cease these relations with him even after he had treacherously surrendered Dublin to the Parliament (1647), and left the country. On the contrary, they still put faith in him, entered into a fresh peace with him in 1648, and when he returned to Ireland as the Royalist viceroy they received him in state at Kilkenny. In disgust, General O'Neill came to a temporary agreement with the Parliamentary general, and Rinuccini, despairing of Ireland, returned to Rome.

The Civil War in England was then over. The Royalists had been vanquished, the king executed, the monarchy replaced by a commonwealth; and in August, 1649, Oliver Cromwell came to Ireland with 10,000 men. Ormond meanwhile had rallied his supporters, and, with the greater part of the Catholics of Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, the Protestants of the Pale and of Munster, and great part of the Ulster Presbyterians, his strength was considerable. His obstinate bigotry would not allow him to make terms with the Ulster army, and he thus lost the support of General O'Neill at a critical time. Early in August he had been disastrously beaten by the Puritan general Jones, at Rathmines; in consequence he offered no opposition to Cromwell's landing and made no attempt to relieve Drogheda. It was soon captured by Cromwell and its garrison put to the sword. A month later the same fate befell Wexford. Waterford repelled Cromwell's attack, and Clonmel and Kilkenny offered him a stout resistance; but other towns were easily captured, or voluntarily surrendered; and when he left Ireland, in May, 1650, Munster and Leinster were in his hands. His successors, Ireton and Ludlow, within two years reduced the remaining provinces. Meanwhile Owen Roe O'Neill had died after making terms with Ormond, but before meeting with Cromwell. The Catholic Bishops, however, repudiated Ormond, who then left Ireland. Some negotiations subsequently between Lord Clanricarde and the Duke of Lorraine came to nothing, and the long war was ended in which more than half the inhabitants of the country had lost their lives.

In the beginning of the rebellion many Englishmen subscribed money to put it down, stipulating in return for a share of the lands to be forfeited, and thus hatred of the Catholics was mingled with hope of gain. The English Parliament accepted the money on the terms proposed, and the subscribers became known as "adventurers", because they adventured their money on Irish land. When the rebellion was over, the problem was to provide the lands promised, and also to provide lands for the soldiers who were in arrears of pay. It was a difficult problem. There was an Act for Settling Ireland, and and Act for the Satisfaction of Adventurers in Lands and Arrears due to the soldiers and other public Debts; there was a High Court of Justice to determine who were guilty of rebellion; there were soldiers who had got special terms when laying down their arms; and there were those who had never had a share in the rebellion, but had merely lived in the rebel quarters during the war. The best of the lands east of the Shannon were for the adventurers and soldiers, the dispossessed being driven to Connaught. To determine where the planters were to be settled and where the transplanted, and what amount they were to get, there were commissions, and committees, and surveys, and court of claims. Nor was it till 1658 that the Cromwellian Settlement was complete, and even then many of the transplanted protested their innocence of any share in the rebellion, and many of the adventurers and soldiers complained that they had been defrauded of their due. In the amount of suffering it entailed and wrong inflicted the whole scheme far exceeded the plantation of Ulster. But it failed to make Ireland either English or Protestant, and in setting up a system of alien landlords and native tenants it proved the curse of Ireland and the fruitful parent of many ills.

To the Irish Cromwell's death in 1658 was welcome news, all the more so because Charles II (1860-85) was restored. For their attachment to the cause of the latter they had suffered much; and now the Catholic landlord in his Connaught cabin and the Irish soldier abroad felt equally assured that the recovery of their lands and homes was at hand. They soon learned that Stuart gratitude meant little and that Stuart promises were written on sand. Had Charles been free to act, the Cromwellian Settlement would not have endured; for he loved the Catholics much more than he loved the Puritans. But the planters were a dangerous body to provoke, sustained as they were by the English Parliament and by the king's chief adviser, Ormond, who indeed hated the Cromwellians, but hated the Catholics much more. Some attempt, however, was made to right the wrong that had been done, and by the Act of Settlement, six hundred innocent Catholics were restored to their lands. Many more would have been restored had the court of claims been allowed to continue its sittings. The irate planters wanted to know what was to become of them if the despoiled papist thus back their lands; utterings threats and even breaking out into rebellion they alarmed the king. Under Ormond's advice the Act of Explanation was then passed (1665) and the court of claims set up by the Act of Settlement closed its doors, though three thousand cases remained untried. Thus the Cromwellians who had murdered the king's father were, with few exceptions, left unmolested while the Catholics were abandoned to their fate. Before the rebellion two-thirds of the lands of the country were in the hands of the latter; after the Act of Explanation scarcely one-third was left them, a sweeping confiscation especially in the case of men who were denied even the justice of a trial. After this the toleration of the Catholics was but a small concession. Not, however, during the whole of Charles's reign; for Ormond, now a duke, filled the office of viceroy for many years; he at least would maintain Protestant ascendancy, and exclude the Catholics from the bench and the corporations. In the English Council and in Parliament he bitterly attacked and defeated the proposed revision of the Act of Settlement. He does not appear to have had any sympathy with the lying tales of Oates and Bedloe, or with the storm of persecution which followed, and he disapproved of the judicial murder of Oliver Plunket. But his aversion from the Catholics continued, and was in no way chilled by advancing age. One of the last acts of Charles was to dismiss him from office as an enemy to toleration. The king himself soon after died in the Catholic Faith, and James II, an avowed Catholic, succeeded, the first Catholic sovereign since the death of Mary Tudor.

Religious toleration had then made little progress throughout Europe, and England, aggressively Protestant, looked with special disfavour on Catholicism. In these circumstances James II should have moved with caution. He should have taken account of national prejudices and the temper of the times, and respected established institutions; while conscientiously practising his own religion, he should have sought for no favour for it, at least until the nation was in a more tolerant and yielding mood. Instead of this, and in defiance of English bigotry and English law, he appointed Catholics to high civil and military offices, opened the corporations and the universities to them, had a papal nuncio at his court, and issued a declaration of Indulgence suspending the penal laws. When the Protestant bishops refused to have this declaration read from their pulpits he prosecuted them. Their acquittal was the signal for revolt, and James, deserted by all classes, fled to France leaving the English throne to William of Orange, whom the Protestants invited from Holland. Meanwhile sweeping changes had been effected in Ireland by the viceroy, the Duke of Tyreconnell, a militant Catholic and a special favourite of King James. Protestant magistrates, sheriffs, and judges had been displaced to make room for Catholics; the army and corporations underwent similar changes; and the Act of Settlement was to be repealed. Timid Protestants trembling for their lives fled to England; others formed centres of resistance to the viceroy in Munster and Connaught, and, in Ulster, Derry and Enniskillen expelled the Catholics and closed their gates against the viceroy's troops. This was rebellion, for James, though repudiated in England, was still King of Ireland. In March, 1689, he arrived at Kinsale from France to subdue these rebels. But the task was beyond his strength. Derry and Enniskillen defied all his attacks, and a Wiliamite force, issuing from the latter town, almost annihilated a Jacobite army at Newton-Butler.

Disaffection became general among the Protestants when the Irish Parliament repealed the Act of Settlement and attained eighteen hundred persons who had fled to England through fear; and when, in August, a Williamite force of twenty thousand landed at Carrickfergus, the Protestants everywhere welcomed it. This great force, however, effected nothing, and in June, 1690, William himself came and encountered James on the banks of the Boyne. The battle was fought on 1 July, and resulted in the defeat of James. Hastening to Dublin he told the Duchess of Tyrconnell that the Irish soldiers had shamefully run away, to which the lady is said to have replied; "But your Majesty won the race." The retort was just. The Irish cavalry behaved with conspicuous gallantry, as did the greater part of the infantry. Some of the latter did run away, but not so fast as James himself, who fled taking the ablest of the Irish generals, Sarsfield, with him. That the Irish were no cowards was soon shown by their defence of Athlone and the still more glorious defence of Limerick. After being compelled to raise the siege of the latter city, King Williams left for England, committing the civil authority to lords justices and the military command to General Ginkel. In the following year Ginkel captured Athlone, owing to the carelessness of the Jacobite general, St-Ruth; and on 12 July, 1691, the last great battle of the war was fought at Aughrim. The Irish were not inferior to their opponents in numbers, discipline, or valour, and though overmatched in heavy guns they had the advantage of position. Nor was St-Ruth inferior to Ginkel in military capacity. His dispositions were excellent, and after several hours' desperate fighting Ginkel was driven back at every point. Just then St-Ruth was struck down by a cannon ball. Panic-stricken, the Irish fell back, allowing their opponents to advance and inflict on them a crushing defeat. The surrender of Galway and Sligo followed, and in a short time Ginkel and his whole army were before the walls of Limerick. When he had effectually surrounded it and made a breach in the walls, further resistance was seen to be hopeless, and Sarsfield and his friends made terms. By the end of the year the war was over, King William had triumphed, and Protestant ascendancy was secure.

THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

By the Treaty of Limerick the Catholic soldiers of King James were pardoned, protected against forfeiture of their estates, and were free to go abroad if they chose. All Catholics might substitute an oath of allegiance for the oath of supremacy, and were to have such privileges "as were consistent with the laws of Ireland, or as they did enjoy in the reign of Charles II". King William also promised to have the Irish Parliament grant a further relaxation of the penal laws in force. This treaty, however, was soon torn to shreds, and in spite of William's appeals the Irish Parliament refused to ratify it, and embarked on fresh penal legislation. Under these new laws Catholics were excluded from Parliament, from the bench and bar, from the army and navy, from all civil offices, from the corporations, and even from the corporate towns. They could not have Catholic schools at home or attend foreign schools, or inherit landed property, or hold land under lease, or act as executors or administrators, or have arms or ammunition, or a horse worth £5. Neither could they bury their dead in Catholic ruins, or make pilgrimages to holy wells, or observe Catholic holidays. They could not intermarry with the Protestants, the clergyman assisting at such marriages being liable to death. The wife of a Catholic landlord turning Protestant got separate maintenance; the son turning Protestant got the whole estate; and the Catholic landlord having only Catholic children was obliged at death to divide his estate among his children in equal shares. All the regular clergy, as well as bishops and vicars-general should quit the kingdom. The secular clergy might remain, but must be registered, nor could they have on their churches either steeple or bell. This was the Penal Code, elaborated through nearly half a century with patience, and care, and ingenuity, perhaps the most infamous code ever elaborated by civilized man.

Such legislation does not generate conviction, and, in spite of all, the Catholics clung to their Faith. Deprived of schools at home, the young clerical student sought the halls of Continental colleges, and being ordained returned to Ireland, disguised perhaps as a sailor and carried in a smuggler's craft. And in secrecy and obscurity he preached, taught, lived, and died, leaving another generation equally persecuted to carry on the good fight. Poverty was his portion, and frequently the prison and the scaffold; and yet, while Protestantism made no progress, Catholicism more than held its own. In 1728 the Catholics were to the Protestants as five to one, and half a century later Young calculated that to make Ireland Protestant would take 4000 years. Indeed the Protestant clergy made no serious effort to convert the Catholics; nor was this the object of the Penal Code. Passed by Protestants possessing confiscated Catholic lands, it object was to impoverish, to debase, to degrade, to leave the despoiled Catholics incapable of rebellion and ignorant of their wrongs. In this respect it succeeded. A few Catholics, with the connivance of some friendly Protestants, managed to hold their estates; the remainder gradually sank to the level of cottiers and day-labourers, living in cabins, clothed in rags, always on the verge of famine. Shut out from every position of influence, rackrented by absentee landlords, insulted by grasping agents and drunken squireens, paying tithes to a Church they abhorred, hating the Government which oppressed them and the law which made them slaves, their condition was the worst of any peasantry in Europe. From a land blighted by such laws the enterprising and ambitious fled, seeking an outlet for their enterprise and ambition in happier lands. In the time of Elizabeth and James, and still more in Cromwell's time, thousands joined the army of Spain. But in the latter half of the seventeenth century the stream was diverted to France, then the greatest military power in Europe. Thither Sarsfield and his men went after the fall of Limerick, and in the fifty years which followed 450,000 Irish died in the service of France. They fought and fell in Spain and Italy, in the passes of the Alps, in the streets of Cremona, at Ramillies and Malplaquet, at Blenheim and Fontenoy. Irishmen were marshals of France; an Irishman commanded the armies of Maria Theresa; another the army of Russia; and there were Irish statesmen, generals, and ambassadors all over Europe. Beyond the Atlantic, Irish had settled in Pennsylvania and Maryland, in Kentucky and Carolina and the New England states; Irish names were appended to the Declaration of Independence; and Irish soldiers fought throughout the War of Independence.

Now were soldiers and statesmen the only Irish exiles whom penal laws had sent abroad. The decay of schools and colleges continued from the eleventh to the sixteenth century; nor did Ireland in that period produce a single great scholar, except Duns Scotus, who was partly educated broad. Any hope of a revival of learning in the sixteenth century was blasted by the suppression of monasteries and the penal laws; early in the seventeenth century, however, Irish colleges were already established at Louvain, Salamanca, and Seville, at Lisbon, Paris, and Rome. In these colleges the brightest Irish intellects learned and taught, and Colgan and O'Clery, Lynch and Rothe, Wadding and Keating recalled the greatest glories of their country's past. At home Trinity College had been established (1593) to wean the Irish from "Popery and other ill qualities"' but the Catholics held aloof, and either went abroad or frequented the few Catholic schools left. The children of the poor, avoiding the Protestant schools, met in the open air, with only some friendly hedge to protect them from the blast; but they met in fear and trembling, for the hedge-school and its master were proscribed. Thus was the lamp of learning kept burning during the long night of the penal times.

In the Irish Parliament meanwhile a spirit of independence appeared. As the Parliament of the Pale it had been so often used for factious purposes that in 1496 Poyning's Law was passed, providing that henceforth no Irish Parliament could meet, and no law could be proposed, without the previous consent of both the Irish and English Privy Councils. Further, the English Parliament claimed the right to legislate for Ireland; and in the laws prohibiting the importation of Irish cattle (1665), and Irish woollen manufactures (1698), and that dealing with the Irish forfeited estates (1700), it asserted its supposed right. The Irish Parliament, dominated by bigotry and self-interest, had not the courage to protest, and when one member, Molyneux, did, the English Parliament condemned him, and ordered his book to be burned by the common hangman. Moreover, it passed an Act in 1719 expressly declaring that it had power to legislate for Ireland, taking away also the appellate jurisdiction of the Irish House of Lords. The fight made by Swift against Wood's halfpence showed that, though Molyneux was dead, his spirit lived; Lucas continued the fight, and Grattan in 1782 obtained legislative independence. England was then beaten by the American colonies; an Irish volunteer force had been raised to defend Ireland against a possible invasion, and it seems certain that legislative independence was won less by Grattan's eloquence than by the swords of the Volunteers. These events favoured the growth of toleration. The Catholics, in sympathizing with Grattan and in subscribing money to equip the Protestant Volunteers, earned the goodwill of the Protestant Nationalists; in consequence the penal laws were less rigorously enforced, and from the middle of the century penal legislation ceased. In 1771 came the turn of the tide, when Catholics were allowed to hold reclaimed bog under lease. The grudging concession was followed in 1774 by an Act substituting an oath of allegiance for the oath of supremacy; in 1778 by an Act enabling Catholics to hold all lands under lease; and in 1782 by a further Act allowing them to erect Catholic schools, with the permission of the Protestant bishop of the diocese, to own a horse worth more than £5, and to assist at Mass without being compelled to accuse the officiating priest. Nor were Catholic bishops any longer compelled to quit the kingdom, nor Catholic children specially rewarded if they turned Protestant. Not for ten years was there any further concession, and then an Act was passed allowing Catholics to erect schools without seeking Protestant permission, admitting Catholics to the Bar, and legalizing marriages between Protestants and Catholics. Much more important was the Act of 1793 giving the Catholics the Parliamentary and municipal franchise, admitting them to the universities and to military and civil offices, and removing all restrictions in regard to the tenure of land. They were still excluded from Parliament, from the inner Bar, and from a few of the higher civil and military offices.

Always in favour of religious liberty, Grattan would have swept away every vestige of the Penal code. But, in 1782, he mistakenly thought that his work was done when legislative independence was conceded. He forgot that the executive was still left independent of Parliament, answerable only to the English ministry; and that, with rotten boroughs controlled by a few great families, with an extremely limited franchise in the counties, and with pensioners and placement filling so many seats, the Irish Parliament was but a mockery of representation. Like Grattan, Flood and Charlemont favoured Parliamentary reform, but, unlike him, they were opposed to Catholic concessions. As for Foster and Fitzgibbon, who led the forces of corruption and bigotry, they opposed every attempt at reform, and consented to the Act of 1793 only under strong pressure from Pitt and Dundas. These English ministers, alarmed at the progress of French revolutionary principles in Ireland, fearing a foreign invasion, wished to have the Catholics contented. In 1795 further concessions seemed imminent. In that year an illiberal viceroy, Lord Westmoreland, was replaced by the liberal-minded Lord Fitzwilliam, who came understanding it to be the wish of Pitt that the Catholic claims were to be conceded. He at once dismissed from office a rapacious office-holder named Beresford, so powerful that he was called the "King of Ireland"; he refused to consult Lord Chancellor Fitzgibbon or Foster, the Speaker; he took Grattan and Ponsonby into his confidence, and declared his intention to support Grattan's bill admitting Catholics to Parliament. The high hopes raised by these events were dashed to the earth when Fitzwilliam was suddenly recalled, after having been allowed to go so far without any protest from Portland, the home secretary, or from the premier, Pitt. The latter, disliking the Irish Parliament because it had rejected his commercial propositions in 1785, and disagreed with him on the regency in 1789, already mediated a legislative union, and felt that the admission of Catholics to Parliament would thwart his plans. He was probably also influenced by Beresford, who had powerful friends in England, and by the king, whom Fitzgibbon had mischievously convinced that to admit Catholics to Parliament would be to violate his coronation oath. Possibly, other causes concurred with these to bring about the sudden and disastrous change which filled Catholic Ireland with grief, and the whole nation with dismay.

The new viceroy, Lord Camden, was instructed to conciliate the Catholic bishops by setting up a Catholic college for the training of Irish priests; this was done by the establishment of Maynooth College. But he was to set his face against all Parliamentary reform and all Catholic concessions. These things he did with a will. He at once restored Beresford to office and Foster and Fitzgibbon to favour, the latter being made Earl of Clare. And he stirred up but too successfully the dying embers of sectarian hate, with the result that the Ulster factions, the Protestant "Peep-of-Day Boys" and the Catholic "Defenders", became embittered with a change of names. The latter, turning to republican and revolutionary ways, joined the United Irish Society; the former became merged in the recently formed Orange Society, taking its name from William of Orange and having Protestant ascendancy and hatred of Catholicism as its battle cries. Extending from Ulster, these rival societies brought into the other provinces the curse of sectarian strife. Instead of putting down both, the Government took sides with the Orangemen; and, while their lawless acts were condoned, the Catholics were hunted down. An Arms' Act, an Insurrection Act, an Indemnity Act, a suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act placed them outside the pale of law. An undisciplined soldiery, recruited from the Orange lodges, were than let loose among them. Martial law, free quarters, flogging, picketing, half-hanging, destruction of Catholic property and life, outrages on women followed, until at last Catholic blood was turned into flame. Then Wexford rose. Looking back, it now seems certain that, had Hoche landed at Bantry in 1796, had even a small force landed at Wexford in 1798, or a few other counties displayed the heroism of Wexford, English power in Ireland would, temporarily at least, have been destroyed. But one county could not fight the British Empire, and the rebellion was soon quenched in blood.

Camden's place was then given to Lord Cornwallis, who came to Ireland for the express purpose of carrying a Legislative Union. Foster refused to support him and joined the opposition. Fitzgibbon, however, aided Cornwallis, and so did Castlereagh, who for some time had discharged the duties of chief secretary in the absence of Mr. Pelham, and who was now formally appointed to the office. And then began one of the most shameful chapters in Irish history. Even the corrupt Irish Parliament was reluctant to vote away its existence, and in 1799 the opposition was too strong for Castlereagh. But Pitt directed him to persevere, and the great struggle went on. On one side were eloquence and debating power, patriotism, and public virtue, Grattan, Plunket, and Bushe, Foster, Fitzgerald, Ponsonby, and Moore, a truly formidable combination. On the other side were the baser elements of in Parliament, the needy, the spendthrift, the meanly ambitious, operated upon by Castlereagh, with the whole resources of the British Empire at his command. The pensioners and placemen who voted against him at once lost their places and pensions, the military officer was refused promotion, the magistrate was turned off the bench. And while anti-Unionists were unsparingly punished, the Unionists got lavish rewards. The impecunious got well-paid sinecures; the briefless barrister was made a judge or a commissioner; the rich man, ambitious of social distinction, got a peerage, and places and pensions for his friends; and the owners of rotten boroughs to large sums for their interests. The Catholics were promised emancipation in a united Parliament, and in consequence many bishops, some clergy, and a few of the laity supported the Union, not grudging to end an assembly so bigoted and corrupt as the Irish Parliament. By these means Castlereagh triumphed, and in 1801 the United Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland opened its doors.

SINCE THE UNION

The next quarter of a century was a period of baffled hopes. Anxious to stand well with the Government, Dr. Troy, the Archbishop of Dublin, had been a strong advocate of the Union, and had induced nine of his brother bishops to concede to the king a veto on episcopal appointments. In return, he wanted emancipation linked with the Union, and Castlereagh was not averse; but Pitt was non-committal and vague, though the Catholic Unionists had no doubt that he favoured immediate concession. Disappointment came when nothing was done in the first session of the United Parliament, and it was increased when Pitt resigned office and was succeeded by Addington, a narrow-minded bigot. Cornwallis, however, assured Dr. Troy that Pitt had resigned, unable to overcome the prejudices of the king, and that he would never again take office if emancipation were not conceded. Yet, in spite of this, he became premier in 1804, no longer an advocate of emancipation but an opponent, pledged never again to raise the question in Parliament, during the lifetime of the king. To this pledge he was as faithful as he had been false to his former assurances; and when Fox presented the Catholic petition in 1805, Pitt opposed it. After 1806, when both Pitt and Fox died, the Catholic champion was Grattan, who had entered the British Parliament in 1805. In the vain hope of conciliating opponents he was willing, in 1808, to concede the veto. Dr. Troy and the higher Catholics acquiesced; but the other bishops were unwilling, and neither they nor the clergy, still less the people, wanted a state-paid clergy or state-appointed bishops. The agitation of the question, however, did not cease, and for many years it distracted Catholic plans and weakened Catholic effort. Further complications arose when, in 1814, the prefect of the Propaganda, Quarantotti, issued a rescript favouring the veto. He acted, however, beyond his powers in the absence of Pius VII, who was in France, and when the pope returned to Rome, after the fall of Napoleon, the rescript was disavowed.

In these years the Catholics badly needed a leader. John Keogh, the able leader of 1793, was then old, and Lords Fingall and Gormanstone, Mr. Scully and Dr. Dromgoole, were not the men to grapple with great difficulties and powerful opponents. An abler and more vigorous leader was required, one with less faith in petitions and protestations of loyalty. Such a leader was found in Daniel O'Connell, a Catholic barrister whose first public appearance in 1800 was on an anti-Unionist platform. A great lawyer and orator, a great debater, of boundless courage and resources, he took a prominent part on Catholic committees, and from 1810 he held the first place in Catholic esteem. Yet the Catholic cause advanced slowly, and, when Grattan died in 1820, emancipation had not come. Nor would the House of Lords accept Plunket's Bill of 1821, even though it passed the House of Commons and conceded the veto. At last O'Connell determined to rouse the masses, and in 1823, with the help of Richard Lalor Sheil, he founded the Catholic Association. Its progress at first was slow, but gradually it gathered strength. Dr. Murray, the new Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, joined it, and Dr. Doyle, the great Bishop of Kildare; other bishops followed; the clergy and people also came in; and thus rose a great national organization, supervising from its central office in Dublin subsidiary associations in every parish; maintained by a Catholic rent; watching over local and national affairs, discharging, as Mr. Canning described it, "all the functions of a regular government, and having obtained a complete mastery and control over the masses of the Irish people". The Association was suppressed in 1825 by Act of Parliament; but O'Connell merely changed the name; and the New Catholic Association with its New Catholic rent continued the work of agitation as of old. Nor was this all. By the Catholic Relief Act of 1793 the forty-shilling freeholders obtained the franchise. These freeholders, being so poor, were necessarily in the power of the landlords and were wont to be driven to the pools like so many sheep. But now, protected by a powerful association, and encouraged by the priests and by O'Connell, the freeholders broke their chains, and in Waterford, Louth, Meath, and elsewhere they voted for the nominees of the Catholic Association at elections, and in placing them at the head of the pool humbled the landlords. When they returned O'Connell himself for Clare in 1828, the crisis had come. The Tory ministers, Welllington and Peel, would have still resisted; but the people were not to be restrained: it must be concession or civil war, and rather than have the latter the ministers hauled down the flag of no surrender, and passed the Catholic Relief Bill of 1829. The forty-shilling freeholders were disfranchised, and there were some vexations provisions excluding Catholics from a few of the higher civil and military offices, prohibiting priests from wearing vestments outside their churches, bishops from assuming the titles of their sees, regulars form obtaining charitable bequests. In other respects Catholics were placed on a level with other denominations, and at last were admitted within the pale of the constitution.

From that hour O'Connell was the uncrowned king of Ireland. Where he led the people followed. They cheered him when he praised Lord Anglesey and when he attacked him; when he supported the Whigs and when he described them as "base, brutal and bloody"; when he advocated the Repeal of the Union and when he abandoned the Repeal agitation; and when, after long years of waiting for concessions that never came, he again unfurled the flag of Repeal, they flocked to hear him, and laughed or wept with him, responsive to his every mood. Finally, to leave him free to devote his whole time to public affairs they subscribed yearly to the O'Connell tribute, given him thus an income which never fell below £16,000 and often went far beyond that figure. And yet the legislative results of nearly twenty years of such devotion and sacrifice were poor. The National Education system, established in 1831, required much amendment before it worked smoothly, and even now is far from being an ideal system. The Commutation of Tithes Act only transferred the odium of collection from the parson to the landlord, but gave little relief to the people. The Poor Law system, though it often relieved destitution, too often encouraged idleness and immorality. And the Corporation Act, while reforming a few of the corporations, abolished many. Nor could anything be more complete than the failure of the Repeal agitation. The explanation is not far to seek. O'Connell had a wretched party, men without capacity or patriotism. His acceptance of offices for his friends and his alliances with the Whigs was surely not a sound policy. And when he took up Repeal in earnest he was already old, with the shadow of death upon him. Lastly, as he neared the end, he lost the support of the Young Irelanders, the most vigorous and capable section of his followers. These things embittered his last days and hastened his death in 1847.

Meantime the shadow of famine had fallen upon the land. The potato blight first appeared in Wexford, in 1845, whence it marched with stealthy tread all over the country, poisoning the potato fields as it passed. The stalks withered and died, the potatoes beneath the soil became putrid, and when they were dug and the sound ones separated from the unsound ones and put into pits, it was soon discovered that disease had entered the pits. The reckless creation of forty-shilling freeholders by the landlords for political purposes, the reckless subdivision of holdings by the tenants, had so augmented the population that in 1845 the inhabitants of Ireland were well beyond 8,000,000, most of them living in abject poverty with the potato as their only food. And now, with half the crop of 1845 gone and with the loss of the whole crop in the two succeeding years, millions were face to face with hunger. To cope with such a calamity required heroic measures, and O'Connell urged that distilleries should be closed, the export of provisions prohibited, public granaries set up, and reproductive works set on foot. But the premier, Peer, minimized the extent of the famine, and Lord John Russell, who succeeded him in 1846 was equally sceptical. He would neither stop distilling nor the export of provisions, nor build railways; and when he set up public works they were not reproductive, and the money expended on them, largely levied on the rates, was squandered by corrupt officials. Ultimately indeed he set up government stores, and in many cases food was distributed free. Charity supplemented the efforts of Government, and with no niggard hand. There were Quaker, Evangelical, and Baptist relief committees, and subscriptions from Great Britain and from Continental Europe, from Australia and from the West Indies. But America was generous most of all. In every city from Boston to New Orleans meetings were held and subscriptions given. Philadelphia sent eight vessels loaded with provisions; Mississippi and Alabama large consignments of Indian corn; railroads and shipping companies carried relief parcels free; and the Government turned some of the war vessels into transports to carry food to the starving millions beyond the Atlantic. Yet were the sufferings of the people great, and the number of deaths from famine and famine-fever appalling. Thousands lived for weeks on cabbage and a little meal, on cabbage and seaweed, on turnips, on diseased horse and ass flesh; and one case is recorded where a woman ate her dead child. Men died from cold as well as from hunger. They died on the roads and in the fields, at the relief works and on their way to them, at the workhouses and at the workhouse doors. They died in their cabins unattended, often surrounded by the dying and frequently by the dead. Flying from the country they died in the hospitals of Liverpool or Glasgow, or on board the sailing vessels to America. And thousands who crossed the ocean reached America only to die. In 1848 and in 1849 the famine was only partial, but in the latter year cholera appeared. In 1851 the famine was over, and such was the havoc wrought that a population, which at the previous rate of increase should have been 9,000,000, was reduced to 6,500,000.

The conduct of the landlords during this terrible time was selfish and cruel. With few exceptions they gave no employment and no subscriptions to the relief funds. Unable to get rents from tenants unable to pay, they used their right to evict, and in thousands of cases the horrors of eviction were added to the horrors of famine. Retribution soon followed. The evictors, without rents and crushed by poor-rates, became hopelessly insolvent. The British Parliament considered them a nuisance and a curse, and in 1849 passed the Encumbered Estates Act, under which a creditor might petition to have the estate sold and his debt paid. Insolvent landlords were thus sent adrift, and solvent men took their places, and to such an extent that in a few years land to the value of £20,000,000 changed hands. But the new landlords were no better than the old. They raised rents, confiscated the tenant's improvements, worried him with vexatious estate rules, evicted him cruelly; and from 1850 to 1870 was the period of the great clearances. The necessary result was a constant and ever-increasing stream of emigration from Ireland, chiefly to America. Nor would British statesmen do anything to stem the tide, Lord John Russell would not interfere with the rights of property by passing a Land Act. Lord Derby was a landlord with a landlord's strong prejudices. Lord Palmerston declared that tenant right was landlord wrong. Nothing could be expected from the Irish members. Sadleir and Keogh broke up the Tenant Right party; Lucas was dead; Duffy in despair went to Australia; Moore was out of Parliament; and from 1855 to 1870 the Irish members were but placehunters and traitors. In these circumstances the Irish peasant joined the Ribbon Society, which was secret and oath-bound, and specially charged to defend the tenants' interests. Agrarian outrages naturally followed. The landlord evicted, the Ribbonman shot him down, and the evictor fell unpitied by the people, who refused to condemn the assassin. After 1860 the Robbonmen were gradually merged in the Fenian Society, which extended to America and England, and had national rather than agrarian objects in view. The Irish are not good conspirators, and the attempted Fenian insurrection in 1867 came to nothing. But the mediated assault on Chester Castle, the Clerkenwell explosion, and the Fenian raids into Canada showed the extent and intrepidity of Irish disaffection. An increasing number of Englishmen began to think that the non possumus attitude of Lord Palmerston was no longer wise; and with the advent to power of Mr. Gladstone in 1868, at the head of a large Liberal majority, the case of Ireland was taken up.

The Catholic masses had a threefold grievance calling urgently for redress: the state Church, landlordism, and educational inequality. Mr. Gladstone called them the three branches of the Irish ascendancy upas tree. Commencing with the Church, he introduced a Bill disendowing and disestablishing it. Commissioners were appointed to wind it up, taking charge of its enormous property, computed at more than £15,000,000 ($75,000,000). Of this sum, £10,000,000, ultimately raised to £11,000,000, was given to the disestablished Church, part to the holders of existing offices, part to enable the Church to continue its work. A further sum of nearly £1,000,000 was distributed between Maynooth College, deprived of its annual grant, and the Presbyterian Church deprived of the Regium Donum, the latter getting twice as much as the former. The surplus was to be disposed of by Parliament for such public objects as it might determine. This was generous treatment for the state Church which had been so conspicuous a failure. Supported with an ample revenue, and by the whole power of the State, its business was to make Ireland Protestant and English. It succeeded only in intensifying their attachment to Catholicity and their hatred of Protestantism and England. In 1861, after the havoc wrought by the famine, the Catholics were seven times as numerous as the members of the state Church. There were many parishes without a single Protestant; and in a poor country a Church numbering but 600,000 persons had an income of nearly £700,000, mostly drawn from people of a different creed, who at the same time had their own Church to support. Yet there were members of Parliament who described Mr. Gladstone's Bill as robbery and sacrilege. The House of Lords, afraid to reject it altogether, emasculated it in committee. And Ulster Protestants declared that if it became law they would kick the Queen's crown into the Boyne. Ignoring these threats, Mr. Gladstone rejected the Lords' amendments, though on some minor points he gave way, and in spite of all opposition the Bill became law. And thus one branch of the upas tree came crashing to the earth. The Land Act of 1870 was well-meant, but in reality gave the tenants no protection against rackrenting or eviction. Two years later the Ballot Act freed the Irish tenant from the terrors of open voting.

In 1873 the education question was reached. And first as to the primary schools. What the Catholic primary schools were in the early years of the nineteenth century we learn from Carleton. The teacher, the product of a local hedge-school and of a Munster classical school, or perhaps an ex-student of Maynooth, had first been employed as a tutor in some farmer's family. Then he became a hedge-schoolmaster, and the manner in which he attained to this position was peculiar. Challenging the schoolmaster already in possession to a public disputation, they met at the church gates on Sunday in presence of the congregation. The intellectual swordplay between the combatants was keenly relished, and, if the younger man won the applause of the audience by his depth of learning and readiness of reply, his opponent left the district and the victor was installed in his place. His school, built by the roadside by the people's voluntary efforts, was of earthen sods, with an earthen floor, a hole in the roof for a chimney, and stones for the pupils' seats. In many districts the teacher received little fees, but the people supplied him liberally with potatoes, meal, bacon, and turf, and entertained him at their houses. A century before Carleton's time the Charter schools were established, and endowed to educate the children of the destitute poor. They were to give industrial as well as literary training, and took religion and learning as their motto. But they became dens of infamy, with incompetent and immoral teachers, who taught the pupils nothing except to hate Catholicism. As such the schools were shunned by the Catholics, and were manifest failures, and yet till 1832 they received government grants. Such societies as the Society for Discountenancing Vice, the London Hibernian Association, and the Baptist Society were proselytizing institutions. The Kildare Street Society founded in 1811, though Protestant in its origin, was on different lines. The design was to have Catholics and Protestants educated together in secular subjects, leaving their religious training to the ministers of their religion outside of school hours. O'Connell favoured the scheme and joined the governing board, grants were obtained from Parliament, and for some years all went well. But again the bread of knowledge given to Catholics was steeped in the poison of proselytism. The bigots insisted on having the Bible read in the schools "without note or comment"; the Society was then vigorously assailed by John MacHale, at the time a young professor at Maynooth, and O'Connell retired from the board.

Recognizing the failure of such a system, Lord Stanley; the Irish chief secretary, passed through Parliament in 1831 a bill empowering the lord lieutenant to constitute a National Board of Education with an annual grant for building schools, and for payment of teachers and inspectors. Religious instruction was to be given on one day of the week by ministers of the different religions to children of their own Faith. The schools were open to all denominations, and even "the suspicion of proselytism" was to be excluded. But the Catholics were treated unfairly. In spite of their numbers they were given but two of the seven members of the Board. Mr. Carlisle, a Presbyterian, was made resident commissioner, and as chief executive officer appointed non-Catholics to the principal offices; and he and his fellow-commissioner, Dr. Whately, the Protestant Archbishop of Dublin, compiled lesson-books, in which the history of Ireland and the Catholic religion were treated with injustice. In a few years the original rules of the Board were so changed that Catholic priests were entirely excluded from all Ulster schools under Presbyterian management. Outside of Ulster, a bigoted Protestant clergyman, named Stopford, was able in 1847 to abrogate the rule compelling Catholic child in Protestant schools to leave when the hour for religious instruction arrived. This left it optional with the children to remain, and brought much suffering on poor Catholics at the hands of tyrannical and bigoted landlords.

Among the Catholic bishops there was toleration rather than approval of the National system. But Dr. MacHale, who had become Archbishop of Tuam in 1834, opposed the system from the first, believing that education not founded on religion was a curse. He preferred to have in his diocese the Christian Brothers' schools in which religious instruction was given the premier place. Dr. Murray of Dublin and Dr. Crolly of Armagh were not so hostile, and, when the matter was referred to Rome in 1841, the reply was that the National system might be given a further trial. The "Stopford Rule" strengthened MacHale's hands, as did a board rule in 1845 providing that all schools even partially erected by a board grant should be vested in the Board itself, and not as hitherto in the local manager, who in Catholic schools was usually the priest. MacHale also objected to the disproportionately small representation of Catholics on the Board, to the character of the lesson-books, to the large number of non-Catholics in the higher positions. These attacks told. In 1850 the Synod of Thurles condemned the National schools as then conducted. In 1852 Dr. Murray of Dublin died, and was succeeded by Dr. Cullen, who shared MacHale's views. The following year Whately's lesson-books were withdrawn from the Board's lists, and Whately in consequence resigned his seat. In 1860 the board was enlarged from seven to twenty, and thenceforth half of these were to be Catholics. The "Stopford Rule" and the rule regarding the vesting of schools were abrogated, and, with the resident commissioner a Catholic, the system became more acceptable to Catholics. For the training of teachers however there was only one Training College under non-Catholic control, but the Catholics established the Training College at Drumcondra, and in 1883 that at Baggot Street, Dublin, and since then they have established others at Belfast, Limerick, and Waterford. But even as the National system stood in 1873, Mr. Gladstone thought that the Catholics had no substantial grievance, and did nothing.

Nor did he interfere with the state of things in intermediate education, though the inequality which existed was glaring. The diocesan free schools of Elizabeth, maintained by county contributions, and the free schools of James I and those of Erasmus Smith, maintained by confiscated Catholic lands, were under Protestant management and as such generally shunned by Catholics. Further, the Protestants were the richer classes, and, though their Church had been disestablished, it had been but partially disendowed. The Dissenters also had wealth and had well-equipped schools. But the Catholics, long prohibited from having any schools, got no help from the state even when the pressure of penal legislation had been removed. They had, however, set manfully to work, and, partly by private donations, principally by collections, had established colleges all over the land. Carlow College was founded in 1793, Navan College in 1802, St. Jarlath's College, Tuam, in 1817, Clongowes by the Jesuits in 1814, and others in the years that followed. but they could get no state assistance till 1879, when the Intermediate Education Act was passed. The yearly interest on £1,000,000 was then appropriated for prizes and exhibitions to pupils, and for result fees to colleges, and without distinction of creed, following competitive examinations to be annually held. The system, depending so much on examination and encouraging cramming, is certainly not ideal, but is has been of enormous assistance to struggling Catholic schools.

It was in the field of higher education that Catholics suffered most. In 1795 Maynooth College had been founded for the education of the clergy. Its annual Parliamentary grant had been lost in 1869, but it nevertheless continued to flourish, and flourishes still as one of the first ecclesiastical colleges in the world. There were other ecclesiastical colleges at Carlow, Thurles, Waterford, and Drumcondra. But the laity had only Trinity College or the Queen's Colleges. The former had first opened its doors to Catholics in 1793, but would give them no share in its emoluments, nor did it abolish religious tests till 1873. The Queen's Colleges, three in number, one at Galway, one at Cork, and one at Belfast, were constituent colleges of the Queen's University, and were meant by Peel to do for higher education what Stanley had done for the primary schools. But the Catholic bishops' demand to have some adequate provision made for religious teaching, some voice in the appointment and dismissal of professors, and separate chairs in history and philosophy, not been acceded to, the Queen's Colleges were denounced by Dr. MacHale as godless colleges, and condemned by Rome as intrinsically dangerous to faith and morals; and at the Synod of Thurles, in 1850, it was resolved on the advice of Rome to set up a Catholic University. The model given was the University of Louvain. A committee was then appointed, subscriptions received both from Ireland and from abroad, a site was purchased in Stephen's Green, Dublin, Dr. Newman was made first rector, professors and lecturers were appointed, and in 1854 work was begun.

But there were difficulties from the first. The nation still felt the effects of the famine, the secondary schools were but imperfectly organized and unable to furnish sufficient students, and Dr. MacHale and Dr. Cullen did not agree. Dr. MacHale complained that the administration was too centralized, that he could get no details of the expenditure, that there were too many Englishmen among the professors. He objected also to Dr. Newman. Though the great Oratorian loved Ireland, he was an Englishman with English ideas, and wanted Oxford and Cambridge men as his colleagues. MacHale, on the contrary, would have the whole atmosphere of the University Irish, and thus, trained by Irish teachers, Irish students would go forth to exhibit the highest capabilities of the Irish character. Dr. Cullen did not fully share these views, and generally agreed with Newman. Not always, however, for he objected to have Newman appointed an Irish bishop, and he disliked Newman's excessive partiality for professors trained in the English universities. This want of harmony was not conducive to enthusiasm or efficiency, and the pecuniary contributions obtained left the various faculties woefully undermanned. Nor could nay provision be made for students' residence or for tutorial superintendence. Most fatal of all, the Government refused to give a charter, and students could not be expected to frequent a university where they could get no degree. Unable to succeed where the elements of failure were so many, Newman resigned in 1857. In 1866 the Government of Earl Russell granted a supplemental charter making the Catholic University a constituent college of the queen's University, a sort of fourth Queen's College, but the charter was found to be illegal. Nor did Lord Mayo's attempt to settle the university question in 1868 succeed, and thus the Catholic University struggled painfully on.

Nor was Mr. Gladstone's Bill of 1873 satisfying. He proposed to abolish the Queen's University and the Queen's College, Galway, and to have Dublin University separated from Trinity College, but with Trinity College, the Queen's Colleges at Belfast and Cork, Magee College and the Catholic University as constituent colleges. From Trinity College £12,000 a year would be taken and given to the Dublin University, which would have in all an income of £50,000, for the payment of examiners and professors and the founding of fellowships, scholarships, and prizes to be competed for by students of all the constituent colleges. There was to be a senate, at first wholly nominated by the Crown and subsequently half and half by the Crown and Senate. The endowment of the Queen's Colleges would remain, though the Catholic University would get nothing; nor would there be in any of the colleges any endowment for chairs of history, theology, or philosophy. This was perpetuating the inferior position of the Catholic University, as it was perpetuating the endowment of the godless colleges, and it would be almost impossible for the Catholics ever to have their proper share of representation in the Senate. Finally, men asked what sort of university that was which had no chairs of history or philosophy. The Bill in fact satisfied nobody, and Mr. Gladstone being defeated resigned office.

It will be convenient here to anticipate. In 1879 the Queen's University was abolished and the Royal University took its place, empowered to give degrees to all comers who passed its examinations. The Queen's Colleges were left. In 1882 the Catholic University passed under Jesuit control, and of the twenty-eight fellowships of £400 a year founded by the Royal University fourteen were given to the Catholic University staff. With this slender indirect endowment it entered the lists with the Queen's Colleges and beat them all. Subsequently there were two University commissions, one dealing with the Royal University, the other with Trinity College, but nothing was done. Finally, in 1908, Mr. Birrell passed his Irish Universities Act leaving Trinity College untouched. Abolishing the Royal University, the Act sets up two new universities, the Queen's University with the Queen's College at Belfast, and the National University at Dublin, with the Queen's Colleges at Cork and Galway and a new college at Dublin as constituent colleges. In these colleges there are new governing bodies, largely Catholic and National, but religious services of any kind are prohibited within the precincts, and there are no religious tests. This change has resulted in the Jesuits severing their connection with the Catholic University, the buildings of which have been taken over by the new Dublin college.

To go back, when Mr. Gladstone was replaced by the Tories, in 1874, a new Irish party had been already formed demanding an Irish Parliament, with full power to deal with purely domestic matters. It was called the Home Rule party, Mr. Butt, a Protestant lawyer of great ability, being its chief. At the general election in 1874, sixty Home Rulers were returned. But Mr. Butt accomplished nothing. His own methods of conciliation and argument were not the most effective. His party, nominal Home Rulers, were mostly place-hunters, and except the Intermediate Education Act of 1878 there were no legislative results. Mr. Butts died in 1879, and for a brief period the Home Rule leader was Mr. Shaw; but after the general election of 1880 Mr. Shaw was deposed, and a younger and more vigorous leader was appointed in the person of Charles Stewart Parnell. There had been a serious failure of the potato crop in 1877 and 1878, but in 1879 there was only half the average yield. The landlords unable to get their rents began to evict, and it seemed as if the horrors of 1847 were to be renewed. Large relief funds were collected and disbursed by the Duchess of Marlborough, the viceroy's wife, and by the Lord Mayor of Dublin; and Mr. Parnell went to America in the last days of 1879 and appealed in person to the friends of Ireland. He was accompanied by Mr. John Dillon, son of Mr. Dillon, the rebel of 1848. Within two months they addressed meetings in sixty-two cities, bringing back with them to Ireland £40,000 ($200,000). Nor would Mr. Parnell have come back in March but that the Tory premier, Lord Beaconsfield, had dissolved Parliament. Appealing to the county on an anti-Irish cry, his answer came in a crushing defeat, and in the return of Mr. Gladstone to power with a strong Liberal majority. Of the Home Rulers returned many were mere Whigs, but a sufficient number favoured an active policy to depose Mr. Shaw and put Mr. Parnell in his place.

In 1879 the Torries had followed up the Intermediate Act by the Royal University Act, which left the Queen's Colleges and Trinity College untouched, but set up the Royal University, a mere examining board. But they would do nothing to restrain the landlords and nothing effective to relieve Irish distress. Better was expected from the new Liberal Government which included, besides Mr. Gladstone, such men as Bright, Chamberlain, and Forster, the latter appointed chief secretary for Ireland. Yet the Liberals were slow to move, and not until evictions had swelled to thousands did they introduce the Compensation for Disturbance Bill. It was thrown out in the Lords and not reintroduced. But the Irish peasants were in no humour to acquiesce in their own destruction and already a great land agitation was shaking Ireland from sea to sea. Begun in Mayor by Mr. Michael Davitt, the son of a Mayo peasant, and favoured by the prevailing distress and by the heartlessness of the landlords, it rapidly spread. Mr. Parnell soon joined it, and in October, 1979, the Land League was formed, its declared object being to protect tenants from eviction and to substitute peasant proprietary for the existing system of landlorism. Extending to America, many branches were formed there and large subscriptions sent home. In November, 1879, an abortive prosecution of Mr. Davitt and others only strengthened the League. In the new year a Mayo land agent, Captain Boycott, roused the ire of his tenants by issuing processes and threatening evictions; in consequence no servant would remain with him, no labourer would work for him, no shopkeeper would deal with him, no neighbour would speak to him. This system of ostracism became known as boycotting, and was freely used by the League against landlords, agents, and grabbers, with the result that they were compelled to make terms with the people. Government was unable to aid the boycotted, and before the end of 1880 the law of the League had supplanted the law of the land.

These events changed Mr. Forster in a coercionist. He prosecuted Mr. Parnell and thirteen others in November, 1880, but failed to convict them. Then he asked for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. Mr. Gladstone reluctantly acquiesced, and early in 1881, after a fierce struggle with the Irish members, the measure passed. In a short time nearly two hundred persons were in jail without trial. Mr. Gladstone next passed a comprehensive Land Act, setting up courts to fix rents, and giving increased facilities to tenants to purchase their holdings. But the Irish members, angered because of the Coercion Act, received the Land Act without gratitude; and Mr. Parnell advised the tenants not to rush to the land courts, but rather go there with a limited number of test cases. Mr. Gladstone retorted by imprisoning Mr. Parnell and his principal lieutenants. For the next few months terror reigned supreme. Mr. Forster filled the jails, broke up meetings, suppressed newspapers, and yet succeeded so ill in pacifying the country that he felt compelled to ask for more drastic coercion. Mr. Gladstone, however, had had enough of coercion, and in May, 1882, Lord Cowper, the viceroy, and Mr. Forster were relieved of office, and Mr. Parnell and his colleagues were set free; and by an arrangement often called the Kilmainham Treaty an Arrears' Bill was to be introduced, while Parnell on his side, was to curb the agitation and gradually re-establish the reign of law.

On the evening of 6 May these happy changes were fatally marred by the murder in the Phoenix Park, Dublin, of the under-secretary, Mr. Burke, and of the new chief secretary, Lord Frederick Cavendish. The assassins, entirely unconnected with the Land League, belonged to a secret society called the Invincibles. Mr. Parnell was stunned, the Irish cause grievously injured, and in England there was a cry of rage. A new Coercion Act was passed and vigorously enforced, and during the remainder of Gladstone's parliament between the Irish and the Liberals there was bitter enmity. But meanwhile Parnell's power increased. In place of the suppressed land League the National League was established, and spread over the United Kingdom and America. Mr. Parnell, while opposing Mr. Dillon's project of a renewed land agitation and Mr. Davitt's scheme of land nationalization, was aided by the Fenians; and though English intrigue succeeded in obtaining a papal rescript condemning a testimonial that was being raised for him, its only effect was to increase the subscriptions. Being friendly with the Tories, he joined with them to defeat Mr. Gladstone in 1885, and for a brief period Lord Salisbury was premier. He governed without coercion, and passed the Ashbourne Act, which advanced £5,000,000 to Irish tenants for the purchase of their holdings. In return, Mr. Parnell advised the Irish electors in Great Britain to vote for the Tories at the general election in October, 1885. But the Liberals were given a majority over the Tories, though not sufficient to form a government without the Irish. On the understanding that Home Rule was to be conceded, Liberals and Irish coalesced, the Tories were turned out, and Gladstone because premier and brought in his Home Rule Bill of 1886, setting up an Irish Parliament with an executive dependent on it. Deserted by a large section of his followers under Bright, Chamberlain, and Hartington, he was defeated, and going to the country was seriously defeated at the polls. In August Lord Salisbury was again in office at the head of the Tories and Liberal Unionists, and in overwhelming strength.

The rejection of Mr. Parnell's Bill of 1886 providing for the admission of leasholders to the benefits of the Land Act of 1881, and for a revision of judicial rents to meet the recent heavy fall in prices, led to the starting of the Plan of Campaign by Messers. Dillon and O'Brien. The tenant was to offer his landlord a fair rent; and if it was refused he banked the money and fought the landlord, and was assisted by his fellow tenants throughout the land. The Plan was not approved or by Mr. Parnell, and it had the unfortunate effect of placing the perpetual Coercion Act of 1887 on the Statute Book. But it caused the Government to pass the very measure they had so lately rejected, and it compelled many of the poorer landlords to make terms with the tenants. While on the one hand the Plan was thus put in operation in Ireland, and on the other hand the Coercion Act, the Liberals and Irish worked well together in Parliament and on British platforms, the London "Times", always the bitter enemy of Ireland, became enraged, and in its anxiety to do harm published a series of articles on Parnellism and Crime. It relied, as it pretended, on authentic documents which connected Parnell and his colleagues with crime, and showed that Parnell himself condoned the Phoenix Park murders. A Special Commission appointed by Parliament discovered that the chief letters were forgeries and that the "Times" had been fooled by a disreputable Irishman named Richard Pigott. The forger confessed his crime and then committed suicide, and Parnell became the hero of the hour. When the Special Commission issued its report, early in 1890, the tide had turned with a vengeance against the Tories. Their majority was then seriously diminished, and when the general election came it was certain that nothing could prevent the triumph of Home Rule. In the midst of these bright hopes for Ireland there came the mournful wail of the banshee, and, even before the Special Commission report was issued, Captain O'Shea had filed a petition for divorce on the ground of his wife's adultery with Mr. Parnell. There was no defence, and could be none, and the decree was issued, Mr. Gladstone evidently expected that Mr. Parnell would have retired from the leadership, and, finding that he did not, intimated that his continuance in that position would wreck Home Rule. The Irish party which had re-elected Mr. Parnell were not prepared to go so far, and, as he would not retire even for a day, they deposed him. A minority still supported him, and at the head of these he appealed to the Irish people. Week after week he attended meetings and made speeches. But his health, already bad, could not stand the strain; the stubborn and reckless fight ended in his collapse, and at Brighton, on the 6th of October, 1891, the greatest Irish leader since O'Connell breathed his last.

In the years that followed faction was lord of all. At the general election in 1892 the Parnellite members were reduced to nine, while the anti-Parnellites were seventy-two, and at the election in 1895 there was no material change. To argument and entreaty the minority refused to listen, and though the anti-Parnellite leaders, Mr. MacCarthy and Mr. Dillon, were ready to make any sacrifice for unity and peace, their opponents rejected all overtures; and under the shelter of Parnell's name they continued to shout Parnell's battle-cries. At last patriotism triumphed over faction, and in 1900 Mr. John Redmond, the Parnellite leader, was elected chairman of the reunited Irish party. Much had been lost during these years of discord in unity and strength, in national dignity and self-reliance. To faction it was due that the Liberal victory of 1892 was not more sweeping; that, in consequence, the Home Rule Bill of 1893 was rejected by the Lords; and that, in 1894, Mr. Gladstone retired, baffled and beaten, from the struggle. At the elections of 1895 and 1900 the Tories were victorious, and during their long term of power the Coercion Act was frequently enforced. But there were concessions also. In 1890, Mr. Balfour's Land Act provided £33,000,000 for Irish land purchase, and in 1891 the Congested Districts Board was established. In 1896, there was an amending Land Act; and in 1898, the Local Government Act transferred the government of counties and rural districts from the non-representative Grand Juries to popularly elected bodies. A further important Act was that of Mr. Wyndham, in 1903, providing more than £100,000,000 for the buying out of the whole landlord class. Mr. Wyndham also favoured a policy of devolution, that is a delegation to local bodies of larger powers. But nothing was done till the Liberals came into office in 1906, and they had nothing more generous to offer than Mr. Birrell's National Councils Bill, a measure so halting and meagre, that an Irish National Convention rejected it with scorn. Mr. Birrell has been more fortunate in his University Bill, which, though not establishing a purely Catholic University, provides one in which Catholic influences will predominate. In recent years also the programmes both in the national and secondary schools have been made more practical, facilities have been given for agricultural and technical education, and the great ecclesiastical college of Maynooth continues to maintain its reputation as the first ecclesiastical college in the world.

RELATIONS BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE

By the Catholic Relief Act of 1829 legal proscription ceased for the Catholic Church, as did legal ascendancy for the Protestant Church by Mr. Gladstone's Act of 1869. In practice, however, Protestant ascendancy largely remains still. Only within living memory was the first Catholic lord chancellor appointed in the person of Lord O'Hagan; Catholics are still excluded, except in rare instances, from the higher civil and military offices; and from the lord-lieutenancy they continue to be excluded by law.

ECCLESIASTICAL ORGANIZATION

The Catholic Church, divided into four provinces, not, however, corresponding with the civil divisions, is ruled by four archbishops and twenty-three bishops. But the number of dioceses is more than twenty-seven, for there have been amalgamations and absorptions. Cashel, for instance, has been joined with Emly, Waterford with Lismore, Kildare with Leighlin, Down with Connor, Ardagh with Clonmacnoise, Kilmacduagh with Galway, the bishop of Galway being also Apostolic Administrator of Kilfenora. In many dioceses there are chapters, in others none. The number of parishes is 1087. A few are governed by administrators, the remainder by parish priests, while the total number of the secular clergy—parish priests, administrators, curates, chaplains, and professors in colleges—amounts to 2967. There are also many houses of the regular clergy: Augustinians, Capuchins, Carmelites, Fathers of the Holy Ghost, Dominicans, Franciscans, Jesuits, Marists, Order of Charity, Oblates, Passionists, Redemptorists, and Vincentians. The total number of the regular clergy is 666. They are engaged either in teaching or in giving missions, but not charged with the government of parishes. There is, however, one exception—that of the Passionists of Belfast, who have charge of the parish of Holy Cross in the city. There are the two Cistercian abbeys of Mount Melleray and Roscrea, each ruled by a mitred abbot, and having forty-three professed priests.

STATISTIC

The population of Ireland has been steadily diminishing. In 1861, it was 5,798,564; in 1871, 5,412,377; in 1881, 5,174,836; in 1891, 4,704,751; in 1901, 4,458,775. The decrease is due to emigration, and as the great majority of the emigrants are Catholics, the Catholic population has suffered most. In 1861, it numbered 4,505,265; in 1871, 4,150,867; in 1881, 3,960,891; in 1891, 3,547,307; in 1901, 3,310,028. In the period from 1851 to 1901 the total number of emigrants, being natives of Ireland, who left Irish ports was 3,846,393. No less than 89 per cent went to the United States, the remainder going to Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. The saddest feature of this exodus is that 82 per cent of the emigrants were between 15 and 35 years of age. The healthy and enterprising have gone, leaving the weaker in mind and body at home, one result being that the number of lunatics increased from 16,505 in 1871 to 21,188 in 1891. In the latter year the total number of primary schools was 9157, of which 8569 were under the National Board, 97 under the Christian Brothers and other communities, and 471 other primary schools. In 1908 the total number of National Board schools was 8538 under 3057 managers, of whom 2455 were clerical and 602 laymen. Of the clerical managers 1307 were Catholics, 713 were Protestant Episcopalians, 379 Presbyterians, 52 Methodists, and 4 unclassed. In 1901 the number of pupils in all the primary schools was 636,777, of whom 471,910 were Catholics. There has been a steady improvement in the matter of illiteracy. In 1841 the percentage of those above five years who could neither read not write was 53; in 1901 it had fallen to 14. Of the whole population 14 per cent could speak Irish. In 1901 there were 35,373 pupils in the Intermediate schools, the number of Catholics being 78 per cent of the total Catholic population. The Catholic girls in these schools were for the most part educated in the various convents. The boys were educated in the diocesan colleges, or in the colleges of the religious orders, and a proportion also in the Christian Brothers' schools. "In Colleges of Universities and other Colleges", in 1901, there were 3192 students, of whom 91 were females. The highest form of ecclesiastical education is obtained at Maynooth, other such colleges being All Hallows and Clonliffe in Dublin, Thurles, Waterford, and Carlow colleges.

CHURCH PROPERTY, CHURCHES, SCHOOLS, CEMETERIES

Church property is usually held in trust by the parish priest for the parish, the bishop for the diocese, the religious superior for his order, and often associated with other trustees. In many cases the title-deeds have been lost, but undisputed possession is considered sufficient, and the parish-priest or other superior for the time being is recognized as the legal owner of the church, church grounds, and cemetery, if there be such. New churches are built on land purchase out, or acquired free of rent or under very long lease, and church and ground are exempt from taxation. New cemeteries belong to the District Council, and many of the older cemeteries have been taken over by the same authority. Schools under the National Board are either vested or non-vested. If vested, they are held by trustees—usually the priest, who is manager, and two others—and in this case only two-thirds of the cost of building is granted by Government. In the case of non-vested schools, which are the property of the National Board itself, the full amount for building is granted by Government, and the school is also kept in repair, while in vested schools repairs have to be made by the manager. Both in vested and non-vested schools the National Board regulates the programme, selects the school books, and provides for the cost of examination and inspection. The appointment and dismissal of teachers rests with the manager, from whom in the Catholic schools there is an appeal to the bishop. All these are exempted from taxation. Clergymen of all denominations get loans from Government on easy terms to build residences. These houses, however, are not exempt from taxation, and belong to the clergyman and his successors, not to himself personally.

PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS

Prisons are under government management, and always have a Catholic chaplain, when there are Catholic inmates. So also have workhouses, asylums, and county hospital, which are under the local authority. Reformatories and industrial schools in the great majority of cases are under Catholic management, but they must be certified as suitable by a government official and are subject to government inspection from time to time. In 1900 there were in Ireland six reformatories and seventy industrial schools; the number of both sexes in the former being 624 and in the latter 8221. Both reformatories and industrial schools are maintained partly by a government grant and partly by the local rates.

LEGAL STATUS OF THE CLERGY

The clergy have, with some few exceptions, the usual rights of citizens. They can receive and dispose of property by will as all others, and they can vote at elections. But they are excluded by law from the House of Commons, though not from the House of Lords; and they are excluded from the County and District Councils, though not from the various committees appointed by these bodies. They are exempt from military service and from serving on juries. Public worship is free; but priests may not celebrate the Mass outside the churches or private houses, nor appear publicly in their vestments, nor have religious processions through the streets; nor many the regular clergy go abroad in the distinctive dress of their order. These laws, however, are not enforced and not infrequently processions do take place through the streets, and the regular clergy do go abroad in their distinctive dress. Similarly, it is illegal for religious orders of men to admit new members; but this provision of the Catholic Relief Act of 1829 has never been enforced.

LAWS RELATING TO CHARITABLE BEQUESTS, MARRIAGE, DIVORCE

Generally speaking, all bequests for the advancement of public worship are valid; but bequests for superstitious uses are void. A bequest, for instance, to maintain a light before an image for the good of one's soul is void; but the bequests for Masses are good, unless left to a member of a religious order as such, the reason being that religious orders are still technically illegal. For the validity of a will nothing is required but that the testor be of sound mind at the time, and free from undue influence, and that the document be signed by two witnesses. As to marriage, it is necessary that the contracting parties should be free, and that the mutual consent be given in the presence of two witnesses and a clergyman, or registrar duly appointed for the purpose. In the Irish courts no marriage can be dissolved; only a judicial separation can be obtained. When such a separation is obtained there is no difficulty in having a Bill passed through Parliament dissolving the marriage.

THE PRESS

There is no purely Catholic newspaper acting as the mouthpiece either of an individual diocese or of the Irish Church. There are, however, in most of the provincial towns weekly newspapers, often owned by Catholics, and always ready to voice Catholic opinion. In Cork and Belfast there are daily papers animated with the same spirit, and in Dublin the "Freeman's Journal" and the "Daily Independent". In Dublin also is the "Irish Catholic", which is a powerful champion of Catholicity; and there is the "Leader", not professedly Catholic, but with a vigorous and manly Catholic tone. These two are weeklies. Published monthly are the "Irish Monthly" under the Jesuits, the "Irish Rosary" under the Dominicans, the "Irish Educational Review", dealing with Catholic educational matters, and the "Irish Ecclesiastical Record", edited by Dr. Hogan of Maynooth, under episcopal supervision. There is also the "Irish Theological Quarterly", which, as its name implies, is published quarterly, and conducted by the professors of Maynooth College with an ability, an extent of knowledge, a grasp of the subjects treated, and a vigour and freshness of style worthy of Maynooth College in its palmiest days.

Annals of the Four Masters (Dublin, 1856); Annals of Ulster (Dublin, 1887); Annals of Loch Ce (London, 1871); Annals of Clonmacnoise (Dublin, 1896); LELAND, History of Ireland (London, 1773); JOYCE, Short History of Ireland (London, 1893); KEATING, History of Ireland (Dublin, 1859); HAVERTY, History of Ireland (Dublin, 1860); FERGUSON, The Irish before the Conquest (London, 1868); RICHEY, Lectures on Irish History (London, 1860); HYDE, Literary History of Ireland (London, 1899); D'ALTON, History of Ireland (London, 1906).

FOR THE PAGAN AND EARLY CHRISTIAN PERIODS:—Senchus Mor (Dublin, 1865-1901); O'CURRY, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Irish (Dublin, 1873); IDEM, MSS. Materials of Ancient Irish History (Dublin, 1861); JOYCE, Social History of Ancient Ireland (London, 1903); JUBAINVILLE, The Irish Mythological Cycle (Dublin, 1903); WARE, Works, ed. HARRIS (Dublin, 1739-64); O'DONOVAN, Book of Rights (Dublin, 1847); WALKER, History of the Irish Bards (Dublin, 1786); STOKES, Tripartite Life of St. Patrick (London, 1887); LANIGAN, Ecclesiastical Hist. of Ireland (Dublin, 1822); HEALY, Ancient Schools and Scholars (Dublin, 1896); IDEM, Life and Writings of St. Patrick (Dublin, 1905); BURY, St. Patrick and his Place in History (London, 1905); MORRIS, St. Patrick, Apostle of Ireland (London, 1890); ZIMMER, Celtic Church (London, 1902); MORAN, Essays on the Early Irish Church (Dublin, 1864); W. STOKES, Ireland and the Celtic Church (London, 1892); IDEM, Lives of the Saints from the Book of Lismore (London, 1890); IDEM, The Felire of Aengus (Dublin, 1880); USHER, Works (Dublin, 1847); OLDEN, Church of Ireland (London, 1892); ADAMNAN, Life of St. Columba (Dublin, 1857); ARCHDALL, Monasticon Hibernicum (Dublin, 1873); REEVES, The Culdees (Dublin, 1864); PETRIE, Round Towers (Dublin, 1845); O'FLAHERTY, Ogygia (Dublin, 1793); HALLIDAY, Scandinavian Kingdom of Dublin (Dublin, 1882); WORSAE, The Danes in England, Scotland and Ireland (London, 1852); TODD, Wars of the Gael and Gall (London, 1867); DASENT, Burnt Njal (Edinburgh, 1861); O'HANLON, Life of St. Malachy (Dublin, 1859); see also (in Migne's Patrologia) the works of ALCUIN, BEDE, ST. BERNARD, COGITOSUS, ST. COLUMBANUS, DONATUS, DUNGAL, ST. GALL, MARIANUS, SCOTUS, SCOTUS ERIUGENA; and for incidental references in the earlier part, the works of HERODOTUS, PLINY, STRABO, CAESAR, TACITUS, CLAUDIAN, and GIBBON.

FOR THE PLANTAGENET AND TUDOR PERIODS:—SWEETMAN, Calendars of State Papers; GIRALDUS CAMBRENSIS, Work (London, 1861-91); LYNCH, Cambrensis Eversus (Dublin, 1855); MISS STOKES, Early Christian Art in Ireland (London, 1887); ORPEN, The Lay of Dermot and the Earl (London, 1892); THIERRY, Norman Conquest (Bohn Series); MALONE, Adian IV and Ireland (Dublin, 1899); GINNELL, The Doubtful Grant of Ireland (Dublin, 1899); GOSSELIN, Power of the Popes in the Middle Ages (London, 1853); KING, Church History of Ireland (Dublin, 1898); GILBERT, Viceroys of Ireland (Dublin, 1865); O'CONNOR DON, The O'Connors of Connaught (Dublin, 1891); WARE, Annals (Dublin, 1704); GILBERT, Historic and Municipal Documents (Dublin, 1870); COX, Hibernia Anglicana (London, 1689); Ancient Irish Histories (Dublin, 1809); LINGARD, History of England; O'FLAHERTY, Iar Connaught (Dublin, 1846); ORDERICUS VITALIS, History of England and Normandy (Bohn); STOKES, Ireland and the Anglo-Norman Church (London, 1897); MANT, History of the Church of Ireland (London, 1841); CLYNN AND DOWLING, Annals (Dublin, 1849); COLTON, Visitation Statute of Kilkenny (Dublin, 1843); DAVIES, Historical Tracts (London, 1786); MEEHAN, History of the Geraldines (Dublin, 1878); HARRIS, Hibernica (Dublin, 1770); FROISSART, Chronicle (London, 1895); Correspondence relating to Ireland (reign of Henry VIII), Hamilton's Calendars of State Papers (1509-1600); Carew Papers (1509-1624); BAGWELL, Ireland under the Tudors (London, 1885-90); GREEN, Short History of the English People (London, 1878); GASQUET, Edward VI and the Book of Common Prayer (London, 1891); IDEM, Henry VIII and the English Monasteries (London, 1899); Harleian Miscellany (London, 1808-13); D'ALTON, Archbishops of Dublin (Dublin, 1838); MORAN, Archbishops of Dublin (Dublin, 1864); MORRIN, Calendar of the Patent Rolls (Dublin, 1861); CAMDEN, Annals (London, 1635); FROUDE, History of England (London, 1898); O'SULLIVAN, Catholic History of Ireland (Eng. tr. Dublin, 1903); CARTE, Life of Ormond (London, 1736); HOLINSHED, Chronicle (London, 1574); O'CLERY, Life of Red Hugh O'Donnell (Dublin, 1893); FYNES MORYSON, Irish Wars (London, 1617); CUELLAR, Narrative (London, 1897); MACGEOGHEGAN, History of Ireland (Dublin, 1844); HOGAN, Ireland in 1598 (Dublin, 1878); Pacata Hibernia (London, 1896).

FOR THE STUART PERIOD:—RUSSELL AND PRENDERGAST, Calendars (1603-25); GARDINER, History of England (1844); Stuart Tracts (London, 1903); MEEHAN, Earls of Tyrone and Tyroconnell (Dublin, date uncertain); HILL, Plantation of Ulster (Belfast, 1877); STRAFFORD, Letters (London, 1739); BELLING, History of the Irish Confederation (Dublin, 1882); HICKSON, Ireland in the 17th Century (London, 1884); CLANRICARDE, Memoirs (Dublin, 1744); MAHAFFY, Calendars of State Papers (625-60); PRENDERGAST, Cromwellian Settlement (London, 1870); TEMPLE, History of the Irish Rebellion (Dublin, 1724); WARNER, History of the Rebellion (London, 1767); CLARENDON, History of the Rebellion (London, 1720); PETTY, Tracts (Dublin, 1769); CASTLEHAVEN, Memoirs (Dublin, 1815); GILBERT, Contemporary History (1641-52), (Dublin, 1879); RINUCCINI, Letters (Dublin, 1873); MURPHY, Cromwell in Ireland (Dublin, 1897); MORLEY, Cromwell (London, 1900); GARDINER, Cromwell (London, 1897); IDEM, History of the Commonwealth (London, 1894-1901); Cromwell's Letters and Speeches (London, 1846); D'ALTON, History of Drogheda (Dublin, 1844); LENIHAN, History of Limerick (Dublin, 1866); RANKE, History of England in the 17th Century (Clarendon Press); The Down Survey (Dublin, 1851); MORAN, Persecutions under the Puritans (Callan, 1903); IDEM, Life of Oliver Plunkett (Dublin, 1870); MOUNTMORRES, Irish Parliament 1634-66 (London, 1792); Diaries of PEPYS and EVELYN; WALSH, Irish Remonstrance; CLARKE, James II (London, 1816); MACAULAY, History of England; SOMERS, Tracts; Jacobite Narrative of the War in Ireland (Dublin, 1892); Macariae Excidium (Dublin, 1851); STORY, Impartial History (London, 1691); STORY, Continuation of the War (London, 1693); Diary of Dean Davies (Camden Society); BELLINGHAM, Diary; The Rawdon Papers (London, 1819); MURPHY, Our Martyrs (Dublin, 1896); MEEHAN, Franciscan Monasteries of the 17th Century (Dublin, —); HOGAN, Hibernia Ignatiana (Dublin, 1880); MASON, Parliaments in Ireland (Dublin, 1891); PRENDERGAST, Ireland from 1660 to 1685 (London, 1887); KING, State of the Irish Protestants (Cork, 1768); COLGAN, Trias Thaumaturga (Louvain, 1647); Calendars of the Stuart Papers at Windsor; SCULLY, Penal Laws (Dublin, 1812).

FOR THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY:—FROUDE, English in Ireland (London, 1895); LECKY, History of Ireland in the 18th Century (London, 1902); YOUNG, Tour in Ireland (London, 1892); SWIFT, Prose Works (London, 1905); BERKELEY, Works (Clarendon Press, 1871); O'CALLAGHAN, Irish Brigade in the Service of France; D'ALTON, King James's Army List (Dublin, 1855); SWIFT MACNEILL, The Irish Parliament (London, 1888); MOLYNEUX, Ireland's Case Stated (Dublin, 1698); LECKY, Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland; DELANEY, Autobiography (London, 1861); Charlemont Papers and HARDY, Lord Charlemont (London, 1810); BARRINGTON, Rise and Fall of the Irish Nation (Dublin, 1853); IDEM, Personal Sketches (London, 1827); GRATTAN, Speeches (London, 1822); Journals of the Irish House of Commons; Irish Parliamentary Debates (1781-97); BALL, Irish Legislative Systems (London, 1888); PLOWDEN, Historical Review (London, 1803); MOORE, Lord Edward Fitzgerald (London, 1897); WOLFE TONE, Autobiography (London, 1893); MADDEN, United Irishmen (Dublin, 1857); Secret Service under Pitt (London, 1892); HAY, History of the Rebellion, also the Histories of TELLING, CLONEY, GORDON, KAVANAGH, and MAXWELL; FITZPATRICK, Sham Squire (Dublin, 1895); IDEM, Ireland before the Union (Dublin, 1880); SEWARD, Collectanea Hibernica (Dublin, 1812); GRATTAN, Life and Times of Henry Grattan (London, 1839); MACNEVIN, Pieces of Irish History (New York, 1807); HOUT, Memoirs (London, 1838); Cornwallis Correspondence (London, 1859); GUILLON, La France et l'Irlande (Paris, 1888); STANHOPE, Pitt (London, 1861); ASHBOURNE, Pitt (London, 1898); COOTE, History of the Union (London, 1802); Castlereagh Correspondence (London, 1848).

PERIOD SINCE THE UNION:—MITCHELL, History of Ireland (Glasgow, 1869); MACDONAGH, The Viceroy's Postbag (London, 1904); Lord Sidmouth's Life (London, 1847); COLCHESTER, Diary (London, 1861); CANNING, Correspondence (London, 1887); PLOWDEN, History, 1800-10 (Dublin, 1811); DUNLOP, Daniel O'Connell (London, 1900); MACDONAGH, Daniel O'Connell London, 1903); O'Connell's Correspondence (London, 1888); FITZPARTICK, Dr. Doyle (Dublin, 1880); DOYLE, Letters on the State of Ireland (Dublin, 1826); PEEL, Memoirs (London, 1856); CLONCURRY, Recollections (London, 1849); WYSE, History of the Catholic Association (London, 1829); SHEIL, Speeches (London, 1845); IDEM, Sketches (London, 1855); The Annual Register; O'BRIEN, Life of Drummond (London, 1889); JOHN O'CONNELL, Recollections (London, 1849); Halliday Pamphlets; O'RORKE, Irish Famine (Dublin, 1902); O'BRIEN, Fifty Years of Concessions to Ireland (London, 1885); O'CONNOR, The Parnell Movement (London, 1887); A. M. SULLIVAN, New Ireland; GREVILLE, Memoirs (London, 1888); Hansard's Parliamentary Reports; LUCAS, Life of F. Lucas (London, 1886); DUFFY, The League of North and South (London, 1886); IDEM, Four Years of Irish History (London, 1883); IDEM, Young Ireland (London, 1880); Devon Commission Report (Dublin, 1847); CARLISLE, Speeches (Dublin, 1865); O'LEARY, Fenians and Fenianism (London, 1896); BUTT, Land Tenure in Ireland (Dublin, 1866); MORLEY, Life of Gladstone (London, 1905); BARRY O'BRIEN, Life of Parnell (London, 1899); REID, Life of Foster (London, 1888); DAVITT, Fall of Feudalism in Ireland (London, 1904); PLUNKETT, Ireland in the New Century (London, 1904); O'RIORDAN, Catholicity and Progress in Ireland (London, 1905); MACCAFFREY, History of the Church in the Nineteenth Century (2 vols., Dublin, 1909); O'DEA, Maynooth and the University Question (Dublin, 1903). For Statistics see Thom's Directories and The Irish Catholic Directory.

E.A. D'ALTON

Irish Literature

It is uncertain at what period and in what manner the Irish discovered the use of letters. It may have been through direct commerce with Gaul, but it is more probable, as McNeill has shown in his study of Irish oghams, that it was from the Romanized Britons that they first learned the art of writing. The Italian alphabet, however, was not the first to be employed in Ireland. Whoever the early Irish may have been who first discovered letters, whether from intercourse with Britain or with Gaul, they did not apparently bring either the Latin or the Greek alphabet back with them to Ireland, but they invented an entirely new one of their own, founded with considerable skill upon the Latin; this was used in very early times by the Irish Celts for inscriptions upon pillars and gravestones. This ogham script, as it is called, consists of lines, straight or slanting, long or short, drawn either over, under, or through a given straight line, which straight line is in lapidary inscriptions usually formed by the angular edge of a rectangular upright stone. Thus, four cuts to the right of the line stand for S, to the left of the line they mean C, and if they pass through the line they mean E. None of even the oldest Irish manuscripts preserved to us is anything like as ancient as these lapidary inscriptions. The language of the ogham stones is in fact centuries older than that of the very oldest vellums, and agrees to a large extent to what has been found of the old Gaulish linguistic monuments. Early Irish literature and the sagas relating to the pre-Christian period of Irish history abound with references to ogham writing, which was almost certainly of pagan origin, and which continued to be employed up to the Christianization of the island. It was eventually superseded by the Roman letters which were introduced by the Church and must have been propagated with all the prestige of the new religion behind them; but isolated ogham inscriptions exist on grave stones erected as late as the year 600. When the script was introduced into Ireland is uncertain, but it was probably about the second century. Although it answered well, indeed better than the rounded Roman letters, for lapidary inscriptions, yet it was too cumbrous an invention for the facile creation of a literature, though a professional poet may well have carried about with him on his "tablet-staves", as the manuscripts call them, the catchwords of many poems, sagas and genealogies. Over a couple of hundred inscribed ogham stones still exist, mostly in the south-west of Ireland, but they are to be found sporadically wherever the Irish Celt planted his colonies in Scotland, Wales, Devonshire, and even further East.

Earliest Manuscripts. The earliest existing examples of the written Irish language as preserved in manuscripts do not go back farther than the eighth century; they are chiefly found in Scriptural glosses written between the lines or on the margins of religious works in Latin, preserved on the Continent, wither they were carried by early Irish missionaries in the numerous monasteries which they founded in Switzerland, Germany, France, and Italy. The oldest piece of consecutive Irish preserved in Ireland is found in the "Book of Armaugh", written about the year 812. These early glosses, though of little except philological interest yet show the wide learning of the commentators and the extraordinary development, even at that early period, of the language in which they wrote. Their language and style, says Kuno Meyer, stand on a high level in comparison with those of the Old High German glosses. "We find here", he writes, "a fully-formed learned prose style which allows even the finest shades of thought to be easily and perfectly expressed, from which we must conclude that there must have been a long previous culture [of the language] going back at the very least to the beginning of the sixth century" (Kultur der Gegenwart, part I, section xi, p. 80). These glosses are to be found at Wertzburg, St. Gall, Karlsruhe, Milan, Turin, St. Paul in Carinthia, and elsewhere. The "Liber Hymnorum" and the "Stowe Missal" are, after the glosses and the "Book of Armaugh" perhaps the most ancient manuscripts in which Irish is written. They date from about the year 900 to 1050. The oldest books of miscellaneous literature are the "Leabhar na h-Uidhre", or "Book of the Dun Cow", transcribed about the year 1100, and the "Book of Leinster", which dates from about fifty years later. Both these books are great miscellaneous literary collections. After them come many valuable vellums. The date at which these manuscripts were penned is no criterion of the date at which their contents were first written, for many of them contain literature which, from the ancient forms of words and other indications, must have been committed to writing as early as the seventh century at least. We cannot carry these pieces farther back linguistically, but it is evident from their contents that many of them must have been handed down orally for centuries before they were committed to writing. It must also be noted that a seventeenth century manuscript may sometimes give a more correct version of a seventh-century piece than a vellum many centuries older.

Early Christian Scholars in Ireland. It happens that Ireland's first great saint is also the first person of whom it can be said without hesitation that some at least of the writings ascribed to him are really his. We actually possess a manuscript (Book of Armaugh) 1100 years old, containing his "Confession" or apology. There is no reason, however, for supposing that it was with St. Patrick that a knowledge of the Roman alphabet was first brought to Ireland. Before his arrival there were Christians in Munster. At the beginning of the third century there were British missionaries at work, according to Zimmer, in the southern province of the island. Bede says distinctly that Paladius was sent from Rome to the Irish who already believed in Christ "ad Scottos in christum credentes" (Eccl. Hist., bk. I, xiii). Pelagius, the subtle heresiarch who taught with such success at Rome, and who acquired great influence there, was of Irish descent. "Habet", says St. Jerome, "progenium Scotticæ gentis de Brittanorum vicinia" (P.L., XXIV, 682, 758). He came probably from those Irish who had settled in Wales and South Britain. His friend and teacher Celestius is said by some to have been an Irishman also, but this is doubtful. Sedulius, however (Irish Siadal, now Shiel in English), the author of the "Carmen Paschale", who flourished in the first half of the fifth century, and who has been called the Virgil of theological poetry, was almost certainly an Irishman. Indeed the Irish geographer Dicuil in the eighth century calls him noster Sedulius, all of which shows that some Irish families at least were within the reach of a cosmopolitan literary education in the fourth and fifth centuries and that they were quick to grasp it.

Existing Manuscript Literature. Although so many scholars have during the last fifty years given themselves up to Celtic studies, it remains true that the time has not yet come, nor can it come for many years when it will be possible to take anything like an accurate survey of the whole field of Irish literature. Enormous numbers of important MSS. still remain unedited; many gaps occur in the literature which have never been filled up, unless perhaps here and there by some short piece in a learned magazine; of many periods we know little or nothing. There are poets known to us at present practically only by name, whose work lies waiting to be unearthed and edited, and so vast is the field and so enormous the quantity of matter to be dealt with that there is room for an entire army of workers, and until much more pioneer work has been done, and further researches made in Irish grammar, prosody, and lexicography, it will be impossible to reduce the great mass of material into order, and to date it with anything like certainty. The exact number of Irish manuscripts still existing has never been accurately determined. The number in the Royal Irish Academy, Dublin, alone is enormous, probably amounting to some fifteen hundred. O'Curry, O'Longan, and O'Beirne catalogued a little more than half the manuscripts in the Academy, and the catalogue filled thirteen volumes containing 3448 pages; to these an alphabetic index of the pieces contained was made in three volumes, and an index of the principle names, etc. in thirteen volumes more. From an examination of these books one may roughly calculate that the pieces catalogued would number about eight or ten thousand, varying from long epic sagas to single quatrains or stanzas, and yet there remains a great deal more to be indexed, a work which after a delay of very many years is happily now at last in process of accomplishment. The library of Trinity College, Dublin, also contains a great number of valuable manuscripts of all ages, many of them vellums, probably about 160. The British Museum, the Bodeian Library at Oxford, the Advocates Library in Edinburgh, and the Bibliothèque Royale in Brussels are all repositories of a large number of valuable manuscripts.

Contents of the Manuscripts. From what we know of the contents of the existing manuscripts we may set down as follows a rough classification of the literature contained in them. We may well begin with the ancient epics dating substantially from pagan times, probably first reduced to writing in the seventh century or even earlier. These epics are generally shot through with verses of poetry and often with whole poems, just as in the case of the French chantefable, "Aucassin et Nicollet". After the substantially pagan efforts may come the early Christian literature, especially the lives of the saints, which are both numerous and valuable, visions, homilies, commentaries on the Scriptures, monastic rules, prayers, hymns, and all possible kinds of religious and didactic poetry. After these we may place the many ancient annals, and there exists besides a great mass of genealogical books, tribal histories, and semi-historical romances. After this may come the bardic poetry of Ireland, the poetry of the hereditary poets attached to the great Gaelic families and the provincial kings, from the ninth century down to the seventeenth. Then follow the Brehon laws and other legal treaties, and an enormous quantity of writings on Irish and Latin grammar, glossaries of words, metrical tracts, astronomical, geographical, and medical works. Nor is there any lack of free translations from classical and medieval literature, such a Lucam's "Bellum Civile", Bede's "Historica Ecclesiastica", Mandeville's "Travels", Arthurian romances and the like. Finally there exists a rich poetical literature of the last three centuries, and certain prose works such as Keating's invaluable history of Ireland, with great quantities of keenes, hymns, love-songs, ranns, bacchanalian, Jacobite, poetical, and descriptive verses, of which thousands have still to be found, although an enormous number have perished. To this catalogue may perhaps be added the unwritten folk-lore of the island both in prose and verse which has only lately begun to be collected, but of which considerable collections have already been made. Such, then, is a brief and bald résumé of what the student will find before him in the Irish language.

There may be observed in this list two remarkable omissions. There is no epic handed down entirely in verse, and there is no dramatic literature. The Irish epic is in prose, though it is generally interwoven with numerous poems, for though many epopees exist in rhyme, such as some of the Ossianic poems, they are of modern date, and none of the great and ancient epics we constructed in this way. The absence of the drama, however, is more curious still. Highly cultivated as Irish literature undoubtedly was, and excellent scholars both in Greek and Latin as the early Irish were, nevertheless they do not seem to have produced even a miracle play. It has been alleged that some of the Ossianic poems, especially those containing a semi-humorous, semi-serious dialogue between the last of the great pagans, the poet Oisin (Ossian he is called in Scotland), and the first of the great Christian leaders, St. Patrick, were originally intended to be acted, or at least recited, by different people. If this be really so, then the Irish had at least the rudiments of a drama, but they never appear to have carried it beyond these rudiments, and the absence of all real dramatic attempt, however it may be accounted for, is one of the first things that is likely to strike with astonishment the student of comparative literature.

Early Irish Epic or Saga. During the golden period of the Greek and Roman genius no one thought of writing a prose epic or a saga. Verse epics they left behind them, and history, but the saga of the Northmen, the sgeul or úrsgeul of the Gael, was unknown to them. It was only in a time of decadence that a body of Greek prose romance appeared, and the Latin language produced in this line little of a higher character that the "Golden Ass" or the "Gesta Romanorum". In Ireland, on the other hand, the prose epic or saga developed to an abnormal degree, and kept on developing, to some extent at least, for well over a thousand years. It is probable that very many sagas existed before the coming of Christianity, but it is highly improbable that any of them were written down in full length. It was no doubt only after the full Christianization of the island, when it abounded in schools of learning, that the Irish experienced the desire to write down their primitive prose epics and as much as they could recapture of their ancient poetry. In the "Book of Leinster", a manuscript of the middle twelfth century, we find a list of the names of 187 epic sagas. The ollamh (ollav), or arch-poet, who was the highest dignitary among the poets, and whose training lasted for some twelve years, was obliged to learn two hundred and fifty of these prime sagas and one hundred secondary ones. The manuscripts themselves divide these prime sagas into the following romantic categories, from the very names of which we may get a glance of the genius of the early Gael, and form some conception of the tragic nature of his epic:--Destruction of Fortified Places, Cow Spoils (i.e., cattle-raids), Courtships or Wooing, Battles, Stories of Caves, Navigations, Tragical Deaths, Feasts, Sieges, Adventures of Travel, Elopements, Slaughters, Water-eruptions, Expeditions, Progresses, and Visions. "He is no poet", says the Book of Leinster, "who does not synchronize and harmonize all these stories."

In addition to the names of 187 sagas in that book, there exist the names of many more that occur in the tenth or eleventh century tale of MacCoise, and all the known ones, with the exception of one added later and another in which there is evidently an error in transcription, refer to events prior to the year 650 or thereabouts. We may take it then that the list was drawn up in the seventh century. Who were the authors of these sagas? That is a question that cannot be answered. There is not a trace of authorship remaining, if, indeed, authorship be the right word for what is far more likely to have been the gradual growth of stories, woven around racial, or tribal, or even family history, and in some cases around incidents of early Celtic mythology, thus forming stories which were ever being told and retold, burnished up and added to by professional poets and saga-tellers, and which were, some of them, handed down for perhaps countless generations before they were ever put on parchments or before lists of their names and contents were made by scholars. Those which recount ancient tribal events or dynastic wars were probably much exaggerated, magnified, and undoubtedly distorted during the course of time; others, again, of more recent growth, give us perhaps fairly accurate accounts of real events.

It seems quite certain that, as soon as Christianity had pervaded the island, and bardic schools and colleges had been formed alongside of the monasteries, there was no class of learning more popular than that which taught the great traditionary doings, exploits, and tragedies of the various tribes and families and races of Ireland. Then the peregrinations of the bards and the inter-communication among their colleges must have propagated throughout all Ireland any local traditions that were worthy of preservation. The very essence of the national life of the island was embodied in these stories, but, unfortunately, few only of their enormous number have survived to our days, and even these are mostly mutilated or preserved in mere digests. Some, however, exist at nearly full length, although probably in no case are they written down in the ancient vellums in just the same manner as they would have been recounted by the professional poet, for the writers of most of the early vellums were not the poets but generally Christian monks, who took an interest and a pride in preserving the early memorials of their race, and who cultivated the native language to such an amazing degree that at a very early period it was used alongside Latin, and soon almost displaced it, even in the domain of the Church itself. This patriotism of the Irish monks and this early cultivation of the vernacular are the more remarkable when we know that it is the very reverse of what took place throughout the rest of Europe, where the almost exclusive use of Latin by the Church was the principal means of destroying native and pagan tradition. In spite, however, of the irrevocable losses inflicted upon the Irish race by the Northmen from the end of the eighth to the middle of the eleventh century, and of the ravages of the Normans after their so-called conquest, and of the later and more ruthless destructions wrought wholesale and all over the island by the Elizabethan and Cromwellian English, O'Curry was able to assert that the content of the strictly historical tales known to him would be sufficient to fill up 4000 large quarto pages. He computes that the tales belonging to the Ossianic and the Fenian cycle would fill 3000 more, and that, in addition to these, the miscellaneous and imaginative cycles which are neither historical nor Fenian, would fill 5000, not to speak of the more recent and novel-like productions of the later Irish.

Pagan Literature and Christian Sentiment. The bulk of the ancient stories and some of the ancient poems were probably, as we have seen, committed to writing by monks of the seventh century, but are themselves substantially pagan in origin, conception, and colouring. And yet there is scarcely one of them in which some Christian allusion to heaven, or hell, or the Deity, or some Biblical subject, does not appear. The reason of this seems to be that, when Christianity succeeded in gaining the upper hand over paganism, a kind of tacit compromise was arrived at, by means of which the bard, and the filè (i.e., poet), and the representative of the old pagan learning were permitted by the sympathetic clerics to propagate their stories, tales, poems, and genealogies, at the price of tacking on to them a little Christian admixture, just as the vessels of some feudatory nations are compelled to fly at the masthead the flag of the suzerain power. But so badly has the dovetailing of the Christian into the pagan part been performed in most of the oldest romances that the pieces come away quite separate in the hands of even the least skilled analyser, and the pagan substratum stands forth entirely distinct from the Christian accretion. Thus, for example, in the evidently pagan saga called the "Wooing of Etain", we find the description of the pagan paradise given its literary passport, so to speak, by a cunningly interwoven allusion to Adam's fall. Etain was the wife of one of the Tuatha De Danann., who were gods. She is reborn as a mortal--the pagan Irish seem, like the Gaulish druids, to have believed in metempsychosis--and weds the king of Ireland. Her former husband of the Tuatha De Danann race still loves her, follows her into life as a mortal, and tries to win her back by singing to her a captivating description of the glowing unseen land to which he would lure her. "O lady fair, wouldst thou come with me" he cries "to the wondrous land that is ours", and he describes how "the crimson of the foxglove is in every brake--a beauty of land the land I speak of. youth never grows into old age there, warm sweet streams traverse the country", etc.: and then the evidently pagan description of this land of the gods is made passable by an added verse in which we are adroitly told that, though the inhabitants of this glorious country saw everyone, yet nobody saw them, "because the cloud of Adam's wrongdoing has concealed us".

It is this easy analysis of the early Irish literature into its ante-Christian and post-Christian elements which lends to it an absorbing interest and a great value in the history of European thought. For, when all spurious accretions have been stripped off, we find in it a genuine picture of pagan life in Europe, such as we look for in vain elsewhere. "The church adopted [in Ireland] towards Pagan sagas the same position that it adopted toward Pagan law. . . . I see no reasons for doubting that really genuine pictures of a pre-Christian culture are preserved to us in the individual sagas" (Windisch, Irische Texte, I, 258). "The saga originated in Pagan and was propagated in Christian times, and that too without its seeking fresh nutriment, as a rule, from Christian elements. But we must ascribe it to the influence of Christianity that what is specifically pagan in Irish saga is blurred over and forced into the background. And yet there exist many whose contents are plainly mythological. The Christian monks were certainly not the first who reduced the ancient sagas to fixed form. but later on they copied them faithfully and promulgated them after Ireland had been converted to Christianity" (ibid., 62).

Irish Literature and Early Europe. When it is understood that the ancient Irish sagas record, even though it be in a more or less distorted fashion, in some cases reminiscences of a past mythology, and in others real historical events, dating from the pagan times, then it needs only a moment's reflection to realize their value. "Nothing" writes Zimmer "except a spurious criticism which takes for original and primitive the most palpable nonsense of which Middle-Irish writers from the Twelfth to the Sixteenth century are guilty with regard to their own antiquity, which is in many respects strange and foreign to them, nothing but such a criticism can on the other hand make the attempt to doubt of the historical character of the chief persons of the saga cycles. For we believe that Méve, Conor MacNessa, Cuchulainn, and Finn MacCumhail (Cool) are just as much historical personalities as Arminius or Dietrich of Berne or Etzel, and their date is just as well determined." (Kelt-Studien, fasc. ii, 189.) The first three of these lived in the first century B.C., and Finn in the second or third century. D'Arbois de Jubainville expresses himself to the same effect. "We have no reason", he writes, "to doubt the reality of the principal rôle in this [cycle of Cuchulainn]" (Introduction à l'étude de la littérature celtique, 217); and of the story of the Boru tribute imposed on Leinster in the first century he writes: "The story has real facts for a basis though certain details may have been created by the imagination"; and again, "Irish epic story, barbarous though it be, is, like Irish law, a monument of a civilization far superior to that of the most ancient Germans" (L'épopée celtique en Irlande, preface, p. xli.). "Ireland in fact", writes M. Darmesteter in his "English Studies", summing up his legitimate conclusions derived from the works of the great Celtic scholars, "has the peculiar privilege of a history continuous from the earliest centuries of our era to the present days. She has preserved in the infinite wealth of her literature a complete and faithful picture of the ancient civilization of the Celts. Irish literature is therefore the key which opens the Celtic world (Eng. tr., 1896, 182). But the Celtic world means a large portion of Europe and the key to its past history can be found at present nowhere else than in the Irish manuscripts. Without them we would have to view the past history of a great part of Europe through that distorting medium, the coloured glasses of the Greeks and Romans, to whom all outer nations were barbarians, into whose social life they had no motive for inquiring. Apart from Irish literature we would have no means of estimating what were the feelings, modes of life, manners, and habits of those great Celtic races who once possessed so large a part of the ancient world, Gaul, Belgium, North Italy, parts of Germany, Spain, Switzerland, and the British Isles, who burnt Rome, plundered Greece, and colonized Asia Minor. But in the ancient epics of Ireland we find another standard by which to measure, and through this early Irish medium we get a clear view of the life and manners of the race in one of its strongholds, and we find many characteristic customs of the continental Celts, which are just barely mentioned or alluded to by Greek and Roman writers, reappearing in all the circumstance and expansion of saga-telling.

Of such is the custom of the "Hero's Bit", mentioned by Posidonius, upon which one of the most famous Irish sagas, "Bricriu's Feast", is founded. Again the chariot, which had become obsolete in Gaul a couple of hundred years before Caesar's invasion, is described repeatedly in the sagas of Ireland, and in the greatest of the epic cycles the warriors are always represented as fighting from their chariots. We find, as Diodorus Siculus mentions, that the bards had power to make battles cease by interposing with song between the combatants. Caesar says (Gallic War, bk. VI, xiv) the Gaulish druids spent twenty years in studying and learned a great number of verses, but Irish literature tells us what the arch-poet, probably the counterpart of the Gaulish druid, actually did learn. "The manners and customs in which the men of the time lived and moved are depicted", writes Windisch, "with a naive realism which leaves no room for doubt as to the former actuality of the scenes depicted. In matter of costume and weapons, eating and drinking, building and arrangement of the banqueting hall, manners observed at the feasts and much more, we find here the most valuable information" (Ir. Texte I, 252). "I insist", he says elsewhere, "that Irish saga is the only richly-flowing source of unbroken Celtism." "It is the ancient Irish language", says d'Arbois de Jubainville, "that forms the connecting point between the neo-Celtic languages and the Gaulish of the inscribed stones, coins, and proper names preserved in Greek and Roman literature." It is evident then that those of the great Continental nations of to-day whose ancestors were mostly Celtic, but whose language, literature, and traditions have completely disappeared, must, if they wish to study their own past, turn themselves to Ireland, and there they will find the dry bones of Posidonius and Caesar rise up before them in a ruddy covering of flesh and blood which, for the first time, will enable them to see what manner of men were their own forebears.

Three Principal Saga Cycles. There are three great cycles in Irish story-telling, two of them very full, but the third, in many ways the most interesting, is now but scantily represented. This last cycle was the purely mythological one, dealing with the Tuatha De Danann, the gods of good, and the Fomorians, gods of darkness and evil, and giving us, under the apparently early history of the various races that colonized Ireland, really a distorted early Celtic pantheon. According to these accounts, the Nemedians first seized upon the islands and were oppressed by the Fomorians, who are described as African sea-robbers; these races nearly exterminated each other at the fight round Conning's Tower on Tory Island. Some of the Nemedians escaped to Greece and came back a couple of hundred years later calling themselves Firbolg. Others of the Nemedians who escaped came back later, calling themselves the Tuatha De Danann. These last fought the battle of North Moytura and beat the Firbolg. They fought the battle of South Moytura later and beat the Fomorians. They held the island until the Gaels, also called Milesians or Scoti, came in and vanquished them. From these Milesians the present Irish are mostly descended. Good sagas about both of these battles are preserved, each existing in only a single copy. Nearly all the rest of this most interesting cycle has been lost or is to be found merely in condensed summaries. These mythological pieces dealt with people, dynasties, and probably the struggle between good and evil principles. There is over it all a sense of vagueness and uncertainty.

The heroic cycle (or Red Branch, Cuchulainn, or Ulster Cycle as it is variously called), on the other hand, deals with the history of the Milesians themselves within a brief but well-defined period, and we seem here to find ourselves not far removed from historical ground. The romances belonging to this cycle are sharply drawn, numerous, and ancient, many of them fine both in conception and execution. The time is about the birth of Christ, and the figures of Cuchulainn (Coohullin), King Conor Mac Nessa, Fergus, Naoise (Neesha), Meadhbh (Mève), Déirdre, Conall Cearnach, and their fellows, have far more circumstantially about them than the dim, mist-magnified, distorted forms of the mysterious Dagda, Nuada of the Silver Hand, Bres, Balor of the Evil Eye, Dana, and the other beings which we find in the mythological cycle. The best known and greatest of all these sagas is the "Táin Bo Chuailgne", or "Cattle-Raid of Cooley", a district in the county of Louth. It gives a full account of the struggle between Connacht and Ulster, and the hero of the piece, as indeed of the whole Red Branch cycle, is the youthful Cuchulainn, the Hector of Ireland, the most chivalrous of enemies. This long saga contains many episodes drawn together and formed into a single whole, a kind of Irish Iliad, and the state of society which it describes from the point of culture-development is considerably older and more primitive than that of the Greek epic. The number of stories that belong to this cycle is considerable. Standish Hayes O'Grady has reckoned ninety-six (appendix to Eleanor Hull's "Cuchulainn Saga"), of which eighteen seem now to be wholly lost, and many others very much abbreviated, though they were all doubtless at one time told at considerable length.

After the Red Branch or heroic cycle we find a very comprehensive and even more popular body of romance woven round Finn Mac Cumhail (Cool), his son Oscar, his grandson Oisin or Ossian, Conn of the Hundred Battles of Ireland, his son Art the Lonely, and his grandson Cormac of the Liffey, in the second and third centuries. This cycle of romance is usually called the Fenian cycle because it deals so largely with Finn Mac Cumhail and his Fenian militia. These, according to Irish historians, were a body of Irish janissaries maintained by the Irish kings for the purpose of guarding their coasts and fighting their battles, but they ended by fighting the king himself and were destroyed by the famous cath (or battle of) Gabhra (Gowra). As the heroic cycle is often called the Ulster cycle, so this is also known as the Leinster cycle of sagas, because it may have had its origin, as MacNeill has suggested, amongst the Galeoin, a non-Milesian tribe and subject race, who dwelt around the Hill of Allen in Leinster. This whole body of romance is of later growth or rather expresses a much later state of civilization than the Cuchulainn stories. There is no mention of fighting in chariots, of the Hero's Bit, or of many other characteristics which mark the antiquity of the Ulster cycle. Very few pieces belonging to the Finn story are found in Old Irish, and the great mass of texts is of Middle and Late Irish growth. The extension of the story to all the Gaelic-speaking parts of the kingdom is placed by MacNeill between the years 400 and 700; up to this time it was (as the product of a vassal race) propagated only orally. Various parts of the Finn saga seem to have developed in different quarters of the country, that about Diarmuid of the Love Spot in South Munster, and that about Goll the son of Morna in Connacht. Certain it is that this cycle was by far the most popular and widely spread of the three, being familiarly known in every part of Ireland and of Gaelic-speaking Scotland even to the present day. It developed also in a direction of its own, for though none of the heroic tales are wholly in verse, yet the number of Ossianic epopees, ballads, and poems is enormous, amounting to probably some 50,000 lines, mostly in the more modern language.

Early Christian Literature. Perhaps no country that ever adopted Christianity was so thoroughly and rapidly permeated and perhaps saturated with its language and concepts as was Ireland. It adopted and made its own in secular life scores and hundreds of words originally used by the Church for ecclesiastical purposes. Even to the present day we find in Irish words like póg, borrowed from the Latin for "[the kiss] of peace", pac[ is], Old Irish póc; the word for rain, báisteach, is from baptizare, and meant originally "the water of baptism". From the same root comes baitheas, "the crown of the head", i.e. the baptized part. A common word for warrior, or hero, laich, now laoch, is simply from laicus, a layman. The Latin language was, of course, the one used for religious purposes, both in prose and verse, for some time after the introduction of Christianity. In it were written the earliest hymns: Patrick used it in his "Confession", as did Adaman in his "Life of Columcille". But already by the middle of the eighth century the native language had largely displaced it all over Ireland as a medium for religious thought, for homilies, for litanies, books of devotion, and the lives of saints. We find the Irish language used in a large religious literature, much of which is native, some of which represents lost Latin originals which are now known to us only in the Irish translations. One interesting development in this class of literature is the visions-literature beginning with the vision of St. Fursa, which is given at some length by Bede, and of which Sir Francis Palgrave states that "tracing the course of thought upwards we have no difficulty in deducing the poetic genealogy of Dante's Inferno to the Milesian Fursæus". These "visions" were very popular in Ireland, and so numerous they gave rise to the parody, the twelfth century "Vision of Mac Conglinne". More important than these, however, are the lives of the saints, because many of them, dating back to a very remote period, throw a great deal of light on the manners of the early Irish. In the first half of the seventeenth century Brother Michael O'Cleary, a Franciscan, travelled round Ireland and made copies of between thirty and forty lives of Irish saints, which are still preserved in the Burgundian library at Brussels. Nine, at least, exist elsewhere in ancient vellums. A part of one of them, the voyage of St. Brendan, spread all through Europe, but the Latin version is much more complete than any existing Irish one, the original having probably been lost.

Irish Historical Literature. Owing to the nature of the case, and considering the isolation of Ireland, it is extremely difficult, or rather impossible, to procure independent foreign testimony, to the truth of Irish annals. But, although such testimony is denied us, yet there happily exists another kind of evidence to which we may appeal with comparative confidence. This is nothing less than the records of natural phenomena reported in the annals, for if it can be shown by calculating backwards, as modern science has enabled us to do, that such natural phenomena as the appearance of comets or the occurrence of eclipses are recorded to the day and hour by the annalists, then we can also say with something like certainty that these phenomena were recorded at their appearance by writers who personally observed them, and whose writings must have been actually consulted and seen by these later annalists whose books we now possess. If we take, let us say, the "Annals of Ulster", which treat of Ireland and Irish history from about the year 444, but of which the written copy dates only from the fifteenth century, we find that they contain from the year 496 to 884 as many as eighteen records of eclipses and comets, and all these agree exactly to the day and hour with the calculations of modern astronomers. How impossible it is to keep such records unless written memoranda are made of them at the time by eyewitnesses is shown by the fact that Bede, born in 675, in recording the great solar eclipse which took place only eleven years before his own birth, is yet two days astray in his date; while on the other hand the "Annals of Ulster" give, not only the correct day, but the correct hour, thus showing that their complier, Cathal Maguire, had access either to the original, or a copy of an original, account by an eyewitness. Whenever any side-lights have been thrown from an external quarter on the Irish annals, either from Cymric, Saxon, or Continental sources, they have always tended to show their accuracy. We may take it then without any credulity on our part, that Irish history as recorded in the annals may be pretty well relied upon from the fourth century onward.

The first scholar whom we know to have written connected annals was Tighearnach, Abbott of Clonmacnoise, who died in 1088. He began in Latin with the founding of Rome; later on he makes occasional mention of Irish affairs, and lays it down that Irish history is not to be trusted before the reign of Cimbaed, that is, prior to about the year 300 B.C., "Omnia monimeta Scotorum [the Irish were always called Scotti till into the late Middle Ages] usque Cimbaed incerta erant." In the fourth century B.C. the references to Ireland become fuller and more numerous, they are partly in Latin, partly in Irish, but towards the end of the work Latin gives way to the native speech. The greatest book of annals, with a few trifling exceptions also the latest, is known under the title of the "Four Masters" (q. v.). It is evident from the entries that the compilers of the "annals of Ulster" and the rest copied from ancient originals. In the "Annals of Ulster" for instance, we read under the year 439 "Chronicon magnum scriptum est", at the years 467 and 468 the compiler writes "sic in libro Cuanach inveni", at 482 "ut Cuana scriptsit", at 507 "secundum librum Mochod", at 628 "sicut in libro Dubhdaleithe narratur", etc. No nation in Europe can boast of so continuous and voluminous a history preserved in a vernacular literature. The only surviving history of Ireland as distinguished from annals was written Geoffrey Keating, a learned priest, in the first half of the seventeenth century; it also is taken, almost exclusively, from the old vellum manuscripts then surviving, but which mostly perished, as Keating no doubt foresaw they would, in the cataclysm of the Cromwellian wars.

Irish Poetry. There is no other vernacular poetry in Europe which has gone through so long, so unbroken, and so interesting a period of development as that of the Irish. The oldest poems are ascribed to the early Milesians and are perhaps the most ancient pieces of vernacular literature existing. None of the early poems rhymed. There is little we can see to distinguish them from prose except a strong tendency, as in the Teutonic languages, toward alliteration, and a leaning toward dissyllables. They are also so ancient as to be unintelligible without heavy glosses. It is a tremendous claim to make for the Celt that he taught Europe to rhyme, yet it has often been made for him, and not by himself, but by such men as Zeuss, the father of Celtic learning, Constantine Nigra, and others. Certain it is that as early as the seventh century we find the Irish had brought the art of rhyming verses to a high pitch of perfection, that is, centuries before most of the vernacular literatures of Europe knew anything at all about it. Nor are their rhymes only such as we are accustomed to in English, French, or German poetry, for they delighted not only in full rhymes, like these nations, but also in assonances, like the Spaniards, and they often thought more of a middle rhyme than of an end rhyme. The following Latin verses, written no doubt after his native models by Aengus Mac Tipraite some time prior to the year 704, will give the reader an idea of the middle or interlinear rhyming which the Irish have practiced from the earliest times down to the present day:

Martinus mirus more
Ore laudavit Deum,
Puro Corde cantavit
Atque amavit Eum.

A very curious and interesting peculiarity of a certain sort of Irish verse is a desire to end a second line with a word with a syllable more than that which ends the first, the stress of the voice being thrown back a syllable in the last word of the second line. Thus, if the first line end with an accented monosyllable, the second line will end with a dissyllabic word accented on its first syllable, or if the first line end with a dissyllable accented on its penultimate the second line will end with a trisyllable accented on its ante-penultimate. This is called aird-rinn in Irish, as:

Fall'n the land of learned mén
The bardic band is fállen,
None now learn a song to sing
For long our fern is fading.

This metre, which from its popularity must be termed the hexameter of the Irish, is named Deibhidhe (D'yevvee), and well shows in the last two lines the internal rhyme to which we refer. If it be maintained, as Thurneysen maintains, that the Irish derived their rhyming verses from the Latins, it seems necessary to account for the peculiar forms that so much of this verse assumed in Irish, for the merest glance will show that the earliest Irish verse is full of tours de force, like this "aird-runn", which cannot have been derived from Latin. After the seventh century the Irish brought their rhyming system to a pitch of perfection undreamt of by any nation in Europe, even at the present day, and it is no exaggeration to say that perhaps by no people was poetry so cultivated and, better still, so remunerated as in Ireland.

There were two kinds of poets known to the early Gael. the principle of those was called the filè (filla); there were seven grades of filès, the most exalted being called an ollamh (ollav). These last were so highly esteemed that the annalists often give their obituaries, as though they were so many princes. It took from twelve to twenty years to arrive at this dignity. Some fragments of the old metrical textbooks still exist, showing the courses required from the various grades of poets, in pre-Norse times. One of these, in elucidation of the metric, gives the first lines of three hundred and fifty different poems, all no doubt well known at the time of writing, but of which only about three have come down entire to our own time. If there were seven species of filès there were sixteen grades of bards, each with a different name, and each had its own peculiar metres (of which the Irish had over 300) allotted to him. During the wars with the Norsemen the bards suffered fearfully, and it must have been at this time, that is during the ninth and tenth centuries, that the finely-drawn distinction between poets and bards seems to have come to an end. So highly esteemed was the poetic art in Ireland that Keating in his history tells us that at one time no less than a third of the patrician families of Ireland followed that profession. These constituted a heavy drain on the resources of the country, and at three different periods in Irish history the people tried to shake off their incubus. However, Columcille, who was a poet himself, befriended them; at the Synod of Drum Ceat, in the sixth century, their numbers were reduced and they were shorn of many of their prerogatives; but, on the other hand, public lands were set apart for their colleges, and these continued until the later English conquest, when those who escaped the spear of Elizabeth fell beneath the sword of Cromwell.

Modern Irish Poetry. Much of the ancient poetry in the schools was in the nature of a memoria technica, the frame in which valuable information was enshrined, but the bards attached to the great houses chanted a different strain. So numerous are the still-surviving poems from the Battle of Clontarf down to the sixteenth century that Meyer has remarked that the history of Ireland could be written out of them alone. When the great houses fell beneath the sword of Elizabeth, of Cromwell, and of William, it is unnecessary to mention that the entire social fabric of Gaeldom fell with them, and amongst other things the colleges of the bards and brehons, which had existed, often on the same spot and in possession of the same land, for over a thousand years. The majority of learned men were slain, or driven out, or followed their masters into exile. No patrons for the native arts remained in Ireland, and, worse still, there was no security for the life of the artist. The ancient metres, over three hundred of which had at one time been cultivated, and which, although reduced to less than a score in the Elizabethan period, were still the property only of the learned and highly educated, so intricate were the verse forms, now died away completely. There was, perhaps, not a single writer living by the middle of the eighteenth century who could compose correct verses in the classical metres of the schools.

On the other hand, however, there arose a new kind of poetry, in which the consonant rhyming of the old school was replaced by vowel chiming or vowel rhyming, and in which only the syllables on which the stress of the voice fell were counted; a splendid lyrical poetry sprung up amongst the people themselves upon these lines. The chief poets in these latter times were in very reduced circumstances, mostly school masters or farmers, and very different indeed in status from the refined, highly educated, and stately poets who had a century or two before sat at the right hand of powerful chieftains advising them in peace and war. A usual theme of the new poets, who seemed to revel in their newly found freedom of expression, was the grievances of Ireland sung under a host of allegorical names, the chances of the Stuarts returning, and the bitterness of the present compared with the glories of the past, or the vision of Ireland appearing as a beautiful maiden. The poets of the South used even to hold annual bardic sessions, though such attempts must always have been attended with great danger, for the possession of a manuscript was often a sufficient cause for persecuting or imprisoning the possessor; many fine books were on this account hidden away or walled up lest they should bring the owner into trouble with the authorities. Even as late as 1798, the grammarian Neilson of County Down, who was a Protestant clergyman of the Established Church and perfectly loyal to the Government, was arrested by a dozen dragoons and accused of treason because he preached in Irish.

It is very difficult to convey in the English language any idea of the beautifully artistic and recondite measures in which the poets of the last two or three centuries have rejoiced, both in Ireland and in the Highlands of Scotland, where also they produced a splendid lyrical outburst, about the same time as in Ireland, and on the same lines. Suffice it to say that most of their modern poetry was written and is being written to this very day upon a wonderful scheme of vowel sounds, arranged in such a manner that first one and then another vowel will strike the ear at skillfully recurring intervals. Some poems are written entirely on the æ sound, others on the ú (oo), í (ee) or á (au) sounds, but most upon a delightful intermingling of two or more of them. Here is a typical verse of Tadhg Gaelach O'Sullivan, who died in 1800 and who consecrated his muse, which had first led him astray, to the service of religion, his poems producing a sound effect for good all over the South of Ireland. The entire poem was made upon the sounds of é (æ) and o, but, while the arrangement in the first half of the verse is o/é, é/o, o, the arrangement in the second half is o, é/o, é/o, é/é. To understand the effect that this vowel rhyming should produce, we must remember that the vowels are dwelt upon in Irish, and not passed over quickly as they are in English:

The p oets we pra ise are up-ra ising the n otes
Of their l ays, and they kn ow how their t ones will delight,
For the g olden-haired l ady so gr aceful so p oseful
So Ga elic so gl orious enthroned in our sight.
Unf olding a t ale how the so ul of a f ay
Must be cl othed in the fr ame of a l ady so bright,
Unt old are her gr aces, a r ose in her f ace is,
And n o man so sta id is but fa ints at her sight.

Owen Roe O'Sullivan, the witty and facetious namesake of the pious Tadhg Gaelach, is the best know of the southern poets, and Raftery, who, like his famous Scottish contemporary Donnchadh Bán Mackintyre, was completely illiterate, but who composed some admirable religious as well as secular pieces, is best known in Connacht.

Irish Folk-Literature. If any country in the world has ever undergone an educational martyrdom it is Ireland. From 1649, down almost to the present day, her Catholic population were either denied education by law or given an education which taught them to neglect their own country. Under the carefully devised system of "National" education, as it was called, which came into being about the year 1830, and which supplanted the hedge schools of the natives, the children, who over a great part of Ireland were still Irish-speaking, were deprived of the right of being taught to read or write the language of their homes. Over a great part of the island, schoolmasters who knew no Irish were appointed to teach children who knew no English. Needless to say this entailed a horrible amount of useless suffering all round, and blasted for over two generations the life-prospects of many hundreds of thousands of Irish children by insisting upon their growing up unable to read or write, sooner than teach them to read or write the only language that they knew. Up to this period, Irish MSS. which had, on the relaxation of the penal laws, ceased to be dangerous possessions, were commonly possessed and cherished, but from this time forward the peasantry began to neglect them. The new generation, taught in the government schools, conceived that Irish was the mark of the beast, and grew ashamed of it, and as a natural consequence the manuscripts perished by the hundreds and thousands. Admirable poets existed in Connacht and in Ulster in the middle and at the close of the eighteenth century whose works have absolutely disappeared, except for a very few that were enshrined in people's memories. The books that contained them were lost, torn up or burned. It is only a few years ago that an English gentleman stopping for the fishing at a farm-house in a midland county found a whole washing-basket full of Irish manuscripts thrown into the river to make room on the loft for his portmanteau. A friend saved for the present writer three manuscripts which he had found the children tearing up on the floor in a house in County Clare, one of which contained one of the most valuable sagas known for elucidating the belief in metempsychosis of the ancient Irish, one for which d'Arbois de Jubainville, who was aware of its existence, had searched the libraries of Europe in vain.

The story continued thus until the rise of the Gaelic League and its rapid spread during the last few years. But in spite of the enormous loss of modern MSS. the memory of the people has preserved a very large quantity of folk-poems on all the usual topics of folk-poetry, songs of religion, love, wine (or its Irish equivalent), and beauty; eulogies, laments, death-songs, etc. These have only recently been to some extent recovered. In prose also the people have a large unwritten literature of folk-stories, the equivalent of the German Märchen, but as a rule much longer and better told. Many of these are stories of Finn and his Fenian warriors already mentioned, but many others are of pure Aryan origin and have their counterparts in most Aryan literature. Of these, too, it is only recently that collections have been made. There is one remark which must not be omitted about this folk-poetry and indeed about Irish MS poetry as well--it possesses scarcely anything in the nature of a ballad. Lyrics couched in the most exquisitely artful rhyme, and delicate and bacchanalian and religious poetry of all sorts, Ireland and the Highlands of Scotland produced in plenty. But they have almost nothing in the nature of the splendid lowland ballads. They could not tell a story in verse. With the exception of the Ossianic poems and a few poems of the classic school there was never an attempt made to recount a striking tale through the medium of verse.

Modern Irish Printed Literature. For long it was believed that the Celtic languages were connected with the East--with the Phoenicians according to a favourite theory--or at least that they had nothing in common with the Aryan or Indo-European group of tongues. All the scholars of the eighteenth century and the beginning of the nineteenth took up this attitude. Even the great German scholar Bopp excluded Celtic from his Indo-European grammar. Lhuyd, the Welsh antiquary, had already shown early in the eighteenth century the close co-relationship between all the Celtic tongues, but it remained to the Bavarian Zeuss to prove to the world beyond yea or nay in his "Grammatica Celtica" published in 1853 that the Celtic languages were Indo-European. Since that day Celtic scholarship, based on Zeuss's monumental work has made enormous strides. The work of the great native Irish scholars O'Curry and O'Donovan, who first penetrated the difficult heritage of the Brehon Laws, and who from their marvelous and unique acquaintance with Irish manuscripts first gave the world a general knowledge of Irish literature, was succeeded by the more strictly scientific labours of Whitley Stokes, Father Edmund Hogan, S. J., Robert Atkinson, and of Standish Hayes O'Grady (whose acquaintance with the modern and ancient literature makes him the legitimate successor of O'Donovan and O'Curry), of W. M. Hennessey and Father Bartholomew McCarthy, all in Ireland, while Zeuss found a worthy successor in Ebel, who published a corrected and augmented version of his "Grammatica" in 1871. In recent days Windisch, Thurneysen, Zimmer, and Kuno Meyer have done immense work in the same field. In France, Gaidoz founded the "Revue Celtique" in 1870, afterwards edited by d'Arbois de Jubainville, and of which twenty-eight volumes have appeared; in them many Irish texts have been published and much light thrown upon Celtic subjects in general. The "Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie" made its appearance in 1896, and was followed by the "Archiv für celtische Lexicographie".

Up to this point, and by most of those learned men, the Irish language was regarded as a subject for pure scholarship only, and as a thing dead, having no immediate or necessary connexion with the country or the people that had given it birth. Their scholastic labours, however, may to some extent have paved the way for the popular movement which succeeded. Certain it is that a great popular movement in favour of the language and literature sprang up at the very close of the nineteenth century in Ireland itself, under the auspices of a society called the Gaelic League, founded upon a previous society called the Gaelic Union, which was an offshoot from an older and still existing body, the Society for the Propagation of the Irish Language. The Gaelic League was founded in the year 1893; the objects were: (1) The preservation of Irish as the national language in Ireland and the extension of its use as a spoken tongue. (2) The study and publication of existing Irish literature and the cultivation of a modern literature in Irish.

Such was the intellectual stagnation in Ireland at the period of this foundation that it would be safe to assert that there were not, at the time, more than a few hundred people living, if so many, who could read or write in Irish. After many years of silent labour and much painful uphill toil, the League has at last become a widely spread popular movement throughout the Irish world. Hundreds of books have been written and published under its auspices and many thousands of people have been taught to read them. It publishes a weekly and a monthly paper, and it has done a great deal toward collecting the rapidly-perishing folklore of the country. The number of working affiliated branches belonging to the League, carrying on education work from week to week, in the year 1908, was in Munster 192, in Leinster 115, in Ulster, 113, and in Connacht 74. There were 22 branches in Scotland, 11 in England, and a few more isolated ones scattered over England and America. The League is governed by a president, two vice-presidents, and an annually elected executive of forty-five members, of whom fifteen must reside in or near Dublin, the rest represent various parts of the country and Scotland and England. These meet once a month in Dublin and govern the League. They controlled and paid out of their own funds in 1908 seven organizers for Conn's Half of Ireland (Connacht and Ulster), and there were forty-two district teachers working for the League in this part of Ireland. In Mogh's Half (Leinster and Munster) there were six organizers and eighty district teachers. There are also six colleges connected with and practically funded by the Gaelic League, at Ballingeary in Cork, at Partry in Mayo, at Cloghaneely in Donegal, at Ring in Waterford, and one each in Dublin and Belfast. The country colleges have two terms, each of which lasts about six weeks. The Dublin and Belfast colleges are open during the winter. There were over two hundred students at each of the Cork and Mayo colleges in 1908.

Scores of writers in Irish have arisen under the impetus of the new movement, scarcely one of whom, it is safe to say, would ever have put pen to paper in English. Perhaps the best-known and most idiomatic writer in Irish at the present day in Canon Peter O'Leary, P. P., of Castlelyons in County Cork. He is a novelist, grammarian, and writer on miscellaneous subjects. Michael Breathnach (or Walsh), J. J. Doyle, T. Haynes, Father Dineen, M. O'Malley, P. O'Conaire, Conan Maol (P. J. O'Shea), P. O'Shea, Agnes O'Farrelly, J. P. Craig, and Michael MacRuaidhri (Rogers) are all story writers or novelists. D. O'Flaherty, M. Timoney, Patrick O'Leary, M. MacRuaidhri, the Rev. Dr. Sheehan, and the O'Malley brothers have all been rescuing Irish folk-lore both in prose and verse. The League abounds in grammarians, a phase of its activity which recalls to us the Greek renaissance of the sixteenth century. Fathers O'Leary, O'Reilly, Edmund Hogan S. J., Crehan, Dr. Bergin, Dr. Henry P. McGinley, J. H. Loyd, D. Foley, S. O'Cathain, and J. Craig have all worked on grammar as well as on other scholastic and literary subjects; while the Rev. Dr. Henebry, Father Hayden, S. J., Dr. Quiggin and Father Mullin have written upon Irish pronunciation and dialects. Voluminous writers on history and other subjects are Michael Breathnach (d. in October, 1908), Eoghan O'Neachtain, and Sean O'Kelly. Father Dineen is a lexographer, editor of texts, and miscellaneous writer. Father John C. McErlean, S. J., R. Foley, and Tadhg O'Donoghue are all editors of texts; the latter is also a poet and miscellaneous writer. Canon O'Leary, Father T. O'Kelley, T. Hayes, W. Ryan, P. O'Conaire, Dr. O'Beirne and F. Patridge have all written plays; Father O'Kelly has written the libretto of an Irish opera which was produced in 1909.

The Gaelic league has also published editiones principes of the poetry of Owen Roe O'Sullivan, Seághan Clárach MacDonnell, Pierce Ferriter, Geoffrey Keating, Geoffrey O'Donohue of the Glen, Pierce Fitzgerald, Murphy of Raithineach, Collum Wallace, and others. The works of all these poets existed previously only in scattered manuscripts or in the mouths of the people until the League saved them. The Irish Texts Society, founded in London in 1898, has published ten handsome volumes of hitherto unpublished Irish texts, including Keating's "History" in three volumes. T. O'Concannon, M. Foley, Rev. P. O'Sullivan (a Protestant clergyman), P. Stanton, the late Denis Fleming, and others have been enriching Irish by translations from English and other languages. Nearly all the Catholic and Nationalist papers publish more or less Irish in every issue, so there is little danger of the language ceasing to be written. Of the 11,332 students who followed the various courses under the intermediate, or secondary, school system in 1908-09, 6085 took up Irish as one of their subjects. The language is also taught more or less satisfactorily in 3047 primary schools out of 8538. Of these schools, however, many belong to the more Protestant counties of the North of Ireland, and these have as yet had little to do with the new movement. The School of Irish Learning under Dr. Bergin, of which Kuno Meyer was the practical founder, gives higher university teaching in comparative philology, phonology, comparative grammar, and the reading of the old vellum MSS. Its courses in 1908-09 were attended by over 30 students, its journal "Eriu" and its "Anecdota Hibernica" are known to all Celtic scholars.

We may now briefly sum up what we have said about the native Gaelic literature. The Irish probably learnt the use of letters in the second century, but did not use the Roman alphabet until the country was converted to Christianity in the fourth and fifth centuries. The earliest existing manuscripts do not go back earlier than the eighth century, but the inscribed Ogham stones are centuries older than these. The early epics and sagas contain a substantially accurate picture of pagan times and of pagan manners and customs. The feeling of the Church was from the first thoroughly sympathetic towards the native language and native scholarship. The number of existing Irish manuscripts is great, but it is difficult to say with accuracy what they contain, nor can they be certainly dated and sifted until Celtic studies have made further progress. The introduction of Christianity left its mark deeply upon the people and on the language. The Irish annals may be substantially relied on from the fourth century onwards. The Irish had already highly developed the use of rhyme as early as the seventh century, and Zeuss, the father of Celtic learning, Constantino Nigra, and others ascribe the invention of rhyme to the Celts, but Thurneysen and other deny that. There has been a great loss of manuscripts in recent times, but owing to the literary revival brought about by the Gaelic League during the last fifteen years there is small fear of any further losses in this direction. Under the stimulus of the new literary movement, dozens of Irish writers have sprung up, and a new literature of novels, stories, dramas, history, and poetry has arisen. This brings the story of Irish literature to a close. Whether the new movement will be an enduring one or not, no one can yet tell, but in 1909 the County Councils (i.e., the elective governing bodies) of twenty counties, including the whole of Munster and Connacht, 130 urban and district councils out of about 170, the general council of county councils (the largest really representative body in Ireland), the corporations of Dublin and other cities, and the Convention of the Irish Race, held in February 1909, at which were present between two and three thousand delegates from public bodies, branches of the United Irish League and A. O. H., all passed resolutions asking the Senate of the new National University of Ireland to make a knowledge of Irish an essential for matriculation. From which it would appear that there is up to the present no falling off of Gaelic enthusiasm, but rather a desire to rebuild the nation, if possible, upon native lines.

ANGLO-IRISH LITERATURE

When the Norman knights landed in Ireland they arrived speaking Norman French, but they soon dropped French, and, becoming assimilated with the natives, used Irish only as their common language. The Palesmen, however, and the inhabitants of some of the walled cities like Kilkenny must have spoken early English side by side with French. About the oldest book produced on Irish soil which contains written English is a vellum MS of 64 leaves in the British Museum marked Harl. 913, written in the first quarter of the fourteenth century, very probably at the Grey Abbey of Kildare, which contains among other writings no less than sixteen Old English pieces, some of which were composed in Ireland, for one is on the death of De Birmingham, the life-long enemy of the Irish, and another contains two Irish words, russin (Irish, ruisin, a luncheon) and corrin (Irish, cuirín, a pot or wallet). One piece is attributed to a friar Michel Kyldare, which would make it appear that the author is an Irishman. One or two other vellum MSS. of the fifteen century also exist in English writing which may have been produced in Ireland, "A Conquest of Ireland", "Secreta Accrotorum", and the Lamboth MS. 623, a kind of sixteenth-century miscellany; but with these very trifling exceptions, up to almost the end of the sixteenth century all literature written in Ireland had been either in Irish or Latin. Strange as it may appear, the Latin language, although it yielded to Irish in the eighth century as a literary medium, was nevertheless almost universally learned in Ireland as spoke language by anyone of any pretensions to breeding and culture. Blessed Edmund Campion, who wrote his "History of Ireland" in 1571, writes thus of the "Meere Irish": "Without either precepts or observation of congruity, they speake Latin like a vulgar language learned in their common schools of Leachcraft and law."

The earliest books of importance written in Ireland in the English language were probably Spenser's "View of the present state of Ireland" and Hammer's "Chronicle". In the seventeenth century, however, Ireland produced a more vigorous literature in English, which began to be written occasionally by natives as well as Palesmen. Stanihurst (1547-1618), although he wrote "De rebus in Hibernia gestis" in Latin, was perhaps the first Irish-born man (he was a native of Dublin) to attempt more ambitious things in English verse. He translated the first four books of Virgil's Æneid into "English heroic verse" in 1583, but only aroused the scornful derision of his English contemporaries by his effort. The seventeenth century, however, was in Ireland an era of great men and great learning, if not great literature. It witnesses from start to finish a war of race and of religion, miserable and merciless, a long drawn out agony. Such eras are necessarily fatal to literature. During this century Keating and McFirbis wrote in Irish, O'Mulchonry in Irish and Latin and translated from the Spanish. O'Sullevan Bearr wrote his great history of the Irish wars in Latin. Ussher, the renown scholar and ecclesiastic, the glory of the Pale, wrote in Latin and English. Stanihurst, his uncle, answered him in Latin; Ward, Colgan, and O'Clery wrote in Irish and Latin. Ware wrote in Latin. So did Lynch and Luke Wadding, pride of the Franciscan Order. Of all the great writers and scholars of the seventeenth century Keating, McFirbis, and O'Flaherty were the only ones who remained throughout upon their native soil. During many years the lives of most of these men would not have been worth an hour's purchase had they been caught upon their native soil.

It is indeed only with the advent of Molyneux (b. in 1656), that we find the first Irishman who used the English language with effect on behalf of Ireland herself. He forms a kind of connecting link between the nationality of the Catholic and Celtic Irish, by this time largely banished, broken, or exterminated, and those Protestant nationalists who waxed ever stronger during the succeeding century. A scientific and learned writer of renown, a friend of Locke, and by training and inclination a philosopher, Molyneux was moved to write his "Case of Ireland" is 1698 by his indignation at the violent action of the English Parliament in ruining Ireland by forcibly throttling its woolen trade to help the traders of England. His book was by order of the British House of Commons burnt by the common hangman. But it found a mighty echo soon after in the sæva indignatio of Swift, and its legitimate consummation, three-quarters of a century later, in the burning eloquence of Gratten and the humiliation of England. One brilliant Irish writer of this century, Count Hamilton (b. at Roscrea, in 1646; d. 1720) used French for his literary medium. His "Mémoires du Chevalier de Gramont" is a delightful classic, which gives a brilliant description of the Court of Charles II.

A number of poets of Anglo-Irish birth, but chiefly of English upbringing, whose names figure rather prominently in the story of English literature, are found through this and the next century. Of these, one of the most remarkable as a man, though hardly as a poet, was Roger Noyle, Earl of Orrery, a son of the Earl of Cork. He was at once soldier, statesman, courtier, playwright, poet and romancist. A bloody supporter of Cromwell, the murderer of the Bishop of Ross, and extirpator of the native Irish, he had the wit to turn with the times, and under Charles II to exchange the rusty broadsword of Oliver for the polished pen of the wit and the graceful jibe of the courtier. A different character was Wentworth Dillon, Earl of Roscommon (1633-1684), whom Pope characterized as the most correct writer of English verse before Addison; he was almost the only moral writer of the reign of the "merry monarch". Denham (1615-1658), "majestic Denham" as Pope calls him, was also an Irishman, and was in a way a forerunner both of Dryden and of Pope, and had much of the strength of the one and of the pointed antithesis and classic polish of the other. "He is one of the writers", says Dr. Johnson, "that improved our taste and advanced our language." His lines on the river Thames are widely known even still, though it is safe to say that not one in a thousand knows they were composed by an Irishman. Richard Flecknoe (d. 1678), whom Dryden damned as being "without dispute . . . through all the realms of nonsense absolute", was another Irishman. So were Tate and Brady, the translators of the Psalms into a kind of doggerel verse, which, bad as it was, held its own in Protestant worship for generations. So was Southern, the celebrated playwright, who made seven hundred pounds by a single play, while "glorious John" Dryden had to confess that he never made more than one hundred. So was Farquhar (1678-1707), born in Derry, one of the most brilliant dramatists of his age. So was the inimitable Richard Steele (1676-1729), whose delightful essays glorified the "Spectator". So was Parnell, the poet (1679-1717). Congreve too, the witty dramatist, though born in England, was educated in Ireland.

Of all these men, however, and many more who might be mentioned, it may at once be predicated that though born in Ireland they did not draw from the land of their childhood any inspiration whatsoever. They were in Ireland but not of her; England they looked upon as their real country; to her and her alone they consecrated their talents. But in justice to them it must be remembered that men who would rise by the pen or shine in literature in the English language must look to England and to it alone, for there only was to be had a public who would understand them. It is really with Jonathan Swift (1667-1745) that English literature in Ireland for the first time allowed itself to be coloured, in part at least, by the country of its birth. For although the bulk of Swift's direct, lucid, powerful, and nervous writings belong to England, yet a considerable portion of them are a direct outcome of his Irish life and his Irish surroundings. It is true that Molyneux had preceded him as an exponent of that Protestant nationalism which, by making the English in Ireland as independent as possible of the English in England, tended also in some measure towards the uplifting of the enslaved and disenfranchised native Irish. But Molyneux did not wield the pen of Swift. He was a thinker, not a stylist, a philosopher rather than a writer. Swift was both. He who in England had been beyond all comparison the most powerful political pamphleteer of his day, the protagonist and mainstay of his party, became in Ireland the determined support of the civil rights of his fellow countrymen and their outspoken champion against English aggression. His services to his native country rendered his name endeared to hundreds of thousands of native Irish Catholics, men whom he himself looked on, and quite truly, as being powerless in Ireland either for good or evil, merely "hewers of wood and drawers of water". Indeed the dean was, like all other Protestant dignitaries of his day, the declared enemy, if not of the Irish race, at least of the Irish language which was the only one used by the great majority of the native inhabitants. At one time he thought he had a scheme by which the Irish language "might easily be abolished and become a dead one in half an age, with little expense and less trouble". "It would be", he said again, "a noble achievement to abolish the Irish language in the kingdom" but whatever his scheme was he did not further enlighten the public upon it and it died with him. One of his own most spirited poems, "O'Rourke's Feast", is a translation from the Irish, perhaps the first of the kind ever made in Ireland. He heard it sung at a banquet in the County Leitrim, and was so taken by the air that he asked for a translation, and was told that McGovern, the author, could give it to him in either Latin or English. Several other poems of the dean's relate to his life in Ireland and his surroundings there.

It is because a certain percentage of Swift's writings both in prose and verse are concerned with the people and conditions of Ireland, that he may be regarded as the father of Anglo-Irish literature, a term which can properly be applied only to literature coloured or inspired by Ireland or Irish themes, written in the English language but by Irish-born people. If this definition of Anglo-Irish literature be correct, it would exclude almost all of Swift's predecessors and his successors also, for indifference to Ireland on the part of Irish writers of English did not by any means end with Swift. With the eighteenth century, it became increasingly difficult to place Irish-born writers, for an ever-growing number belong, like Swift, to both countries. It is hard to see how by any stretch of the imagination Laurence Sterne, the author of "Tristram Shandy", though born and partly educated in Ireland, could be called an Anglo-Irish writer. Ireland, as the Psalmist says, was not in all his thoughts. The same is true of Sir Philip Francis, the reputed author of "Letters of Junius". Even our beloved Goldsmith (1728-1774), typical and altogether delightful Irishman though he was, cannot properly be termed an Anglo-Irish poet. His "Vicar of Wakefield" struck a new note in English literature and even profoundly affected the rising genius of Goethe, but neither it, nor his plays, nor his poetry concerned themselves even indirectly with his native country. What is true of Goldsmith is true to some extent even of Richard Brinsley Sheridan (1751-1816), who was of pure Milesian descent, and whose nature, like that of Goldsmith was Irish in the extreme. Bishop Berkeley (1684-1753), on the other hand, after whom the State University of California is named, is really an Irish writer. His wonderful "Queries" are almost as pertinent to the case of Ireland today as they were eight score years ago. Edmund Burke (1730-1797), the profoundest and perhaps the noblest political thinker that the British Isles ever produced, while he was never for a moment forgetful of the country of his birth, yet belongs for the most part, as far as his writings go, to England and English politics.

It is apparent from what we have written that Ireland gave to England in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries some of its most distinguished authors, that these authors, though born in Ireland and born amidst Irish surroundings, were mostly of English descent, and turned naturally for a public to the England of their fathers, whose language they spoke and wrote. It is also evident that, as time went on, an ever-increasing number of Irish Gaels (still unemancipated and denied education in their own language) joined the rank of those Irish writers who looked to an English and not an Irish public. It is only in the nineteenth century, however, that we get a vigorous and thriving Anglo-Irish literature, inspired wholly by Irish themes and written mainly for the Irish people themselves. The foremost of these new Anglo-Irish writers were, in prose, Miss Edgeworth, and in poetry, Thomas Moore.

Maria Edgeworth (1767-1849), the creator of the Anglo-Irish novel, was the scion of a good family. some of whose members belonged to the Catholic and some to the Protestant religion. She herself belonged to the latter, but it was a relative of hers (see EDGEWORTH, HENRY ESSEX) who attended the unfortunate Louis XVI to the scaffold. She was gifted with a mind as singularly open and unprejudiced as it was acute and observant. To this she united an admirable style, clear and pungent, and a dramatic power of presentment which rarely failed her. She never looked upon herself as a writer with a mission, but undoubtedly she was not without a certain didactic sense which impelled her to point out to Irishmen in her novels, some of the absurdities and faults of which they were guilty. Her "Castle Rackrent", the story of the downfall through its own reckless squandering of a great Irish family, as told through the mouth of an ancient servitor of their house, is a tale of very great power. In her novel the "Absentee" she attacks, and with equal force though in a different vein, another side of the same social evil who effects she had portrayed so powerfully in "Castle Rackrent". Following Macklin (really McLaughlin) in his play of "The True-Born Irishman" produced in 1763, she holds up to merciless ridicule the Irish land-owners who deserted their own estates to try to cut a figure in London, and there compete with men who were at once much wealthier than themselves and also, so to speak, born and bred to the life of the English metropolis. Her "Moral Tales" are frequently reprinted even to this day. Miss Edgeworth cannot in any political sense be called a nationalist writer. The cry "Ireland a Nation" never appealed to her, nor does the struggle of the native Irish against the English garrison, nor the doings of the men of '98, nor the feelings of the natives against the settlers. With her began the Irish novel, but not the Irish political novel. Her contemporary Lady Morgan (1783-1859) wrote Irish novels also, but no one ever reads them now, while Miss Edgeworth's popularity is perennial.

Of a different temperament was Thomas Moore (1779-1852), the first great Anglo-Irish poet. It is true that he had some few predecessors, among whom were Ned Lysaght, the poet of Gratten and the Volunteers, and William Drennan, the poet of the United Irishmen, but he owed nothing to any of them. A Catholic and in his youthful days a sympathizer with the men of the '98 rebellion, and with Irish national aspirations, his muse spread the name and fame of his native land throughout thousands upon thousands of those gilded drawing-rooms, where, before that, Irish aspirations or even the very name of Erin would have been met only by a scoff or perhaps some still more emphatic disapproval. While rescuing the admirable ancient muse of Ireland from oblivion he wedded it to the most melodious songs that the English language had yet produced, and he never shrank from insisting upon the national character both of his music and of his verses, nor hesitated to depict the sad and oppressed state of his mother country. Who can say what considerable if indirect influences Moore's verses may have exercised on the hearts of men, when it came, as it soon after did, to dealing with the gravest Irish problems in the House of Commons, including the emancipation of the Catholics. Just as Sir Walter Scott's novels effected a profound change in the outlook of England upon Scotland, and of the Lowlanders upon the Highlanders, so Moore's "melodies" must have made hundreds of thousands of Englishmen and loyalists for the first time familiar with the wrongs, the aspirations, and the inner soul of Ireland. Not that Moore was in any sense a poet of the people; he was a poet rather of the cultured classes and of the drawing-room, and thus the very antithesis of Burns. It is safe to say that the Irish peasantry themselves never grasped his memories as a popular possession or sang them commonly at their firesides. But with the cultured classes his vogue was enormous. Probably no poet ever lived whose lines penetrated into so many drawing-rooms alien in sympathy to himself and his ideals.

It has been of late years the custom on many sides to decry Moore. It is, however, hard to subscribe to almost any of the complaints. It is true that divorced to a certain extent from the life of the native Gael, and being ignorant of the national language, he takes war tunes and welds them to love-songs and takes love-songs and makes slogans of them. This is a real fault of commission; with regard to other criticisms it is not always fair to judge a poet for faults of omission, or in other words fro not being what nature did not make him. Above all it is hard to accuse of time-serving or of pusillanimity a poet who could imperil his popularity in England by such a vigorous melody as that in which he compares the oppression of Ireland to the captivity of the Jews and prophecies the destruction of her tyrant. A great deal of Moore's success as a poet is due to the national music of Ireland to which his songs are wed, and lyrics such as "Avenging and Bright", "The Minstrel Boy", "Let Erin Remember", "When he who adores the", and "She is far from the land" have become almost embedded in the life of Ireland and part and parcel of the national mind.

Moore died in 1852, but long before his death there had sprung into being a distinctly Irish literature, inspired by Irish feelings and ideals, and looking not to an English but an Irish public. The poets Callahan and Walsh were its precursors. The foundation by Davis, Dillon, and Duffy of the weekly paper "The Nation" in 1842 produced a profound effect all over Ireland, but the Young Ireland writers who then arose never attempted to reach the people through any other medium than English, although at this time Irish was still the familiar speech of about four millions. Of the poets of the Young Ireland movement two stand out pre-eminently, Thomas Davis (d. 1845) and Clarence Mangen (d. 1849). Davis sang, not so much because he was born with the divine afflatus, as because he deliberately set himself to act upon the soul of the people, through the medium of poetry. In this he succeeded, for his vigorous political verse, ballads and other national and patriotic songs, thrown off in haste and not always polished, though generally powerful, exercised a profound effect upon Ireland. Mangen on the other hand, though a Young Irelander by conviction, shrank from the glare and blare of political movements, led a lonely life, consumed by the fires of his own thoughts. Though the effect of his poems upon the people was far less than that of Davis, he, when at his best, as in his "Dark Rosaleen", attained to heights which would have been impossible to the other. By far the greatest prose writer of the Young Ireland movement was that ardent rebel against English rule, John Mitchel (1815-1872), of whom it is safe to say, that no man born in Ireland, Swift alone excepted, ever made such powerful use of the English tongue as a medium of thought, instruction, and invective. His powers of sardonic scorn and indignation are very Swiftian, and his "Last Conquest of Ireland (perhaps)" is one of the most scathing political works ever written, while his "Jail Journal" gives a good idea of the man himself.

At this time also appeared a group of novelists whose works have never ceased to be popular for nearly two generations. Of these the most remarkable was Carleton (1794-1859), who understood the peasantry and depicted their feelings in a way that no one else has ever done. In books like "Fardoroughs the Miser", the "Black Prophet", and "Traits and Stories of the Irish Peasantry", he portrays not so much the life as the passions of the people with vividness and power. Samuel Lover (1797-1868), on the other hand, and John Banim (1798-1844), were the novelists of the bourgeoise class, and Charles Lever (1797-1868) and perhaps W. H. Maxwell, of the rocking, sporting, jovial gentry, whose day of doom was even then approaching, though they knew it not. The gentle and retiring Gerald Griffin, a poet also, gave Ireland at least one novel of supreme excellence in the "Colleen Bawn", and Sheridan Le Fanu (1814-1873) left behind him some very weird stories, the excellent ballad "Shamus O'Brien", and a capital novel of eighteenth century life in Ireland, "The House by the Churchyard". On the whole it may be said of the Young Ireland movement that it, more than any other movement before or after it, worked by and through letters; but strong political passions do not make for a true and abiding literature; and the vigorous ballads and political verses of Davis, Gavan Duffy (q. v.), and D'Arcy McGee and their group seem to us to-day to contain but little originality. After the great famine, and the dispersion of the Young Irish group, Ireland lay exhausted and listless until the Fenian movement stirred her into action once more, in the sixties. But this movement passed off without any great influence on literature. Charles Kickham, whose peasant ballads are admirable and whose novel of "Knocknagow" is still widely read, is almost the only literary Fenian of any note. Then came the land war and the Parnell movement, but it too produced no literary output of any consequence. The ballads and poems of Timothy D. Sullivan are probably the most popular and enduring of these writings.

Through all these periods of storm and stress, but almost wholly untouched by them so far as their art went, lived Sir Samuel Ferguson, the first and greatest poet to drawn extensive inspiration from Ireland's Gaelic past, William Allingham (1824-1889), a graceful singer of the fairies, and Aubrey de Vere (1814-1902), the friend of Tennyson, and at once the most productive and the most essentially Catholic poet ever born in Ireland. Of these names Ferguson's is the greatest. A scholar, an antiquary, and a successful man of the world, he gave Ireland her best epic poems in his "Conary" and his "Congal", while his translations from the Irish language have seldom been excelled. Dowden characterizes him as "the only epic poet of the Victorian age" and Stopford Brooke as "the first and perhaps the best of all who have striven to bring into recognition, light, and beauty the Ancient Sagas and tales of Ireland.

Taking as a whole the popular English poetry of Ireland, as produced from the close of the eighteenth to the last decade of the nineteenth century, we find it replete with notes and themes that would be practically unrepresented in English literature were it not for Ireland. Through a vast proportion of this poetry flame the lightnings of rebellion. To this is frequently joined a devout Catholicism; for though the worst of the Ascendancy was over, and the blood-hounds were no longer taught, in the words of Davis, alike to run upon the scent of wolf and friar", still the memory of those days remained, and continued to colour men's passions and their poetry. Almost all of it is shot through with insistent national aspirations. Then we have the poetry of exile, which fills so dreadful a space in every Irish anthology, the wail of the immigrant, the cry of the coffin ship, the poetry of misery--the misery not of units but of a whole country--for as Stopford Brooke has well put it, "Ireland has added to English literature this poetry of the Sword, the Famine and the pestilence" (Preface to the "Treasury of Irish Poetry").

The early English verses of the Irish peasant himself, as distinguished from the poets of education. were made upon the models of his native songs, and consisted principally of word-rhyming. Unhappily no collection has been made of these pieces which are of great interest, for their manner rather than for their matter.

The last decade of the nineteenth century ushered in a fresh era for English-Irish poetry. A new band of poets made their appearance who sacrificed less to passion and more to craftsmanship. The Gaelic movement, unlike the upheavals that went before it, has created an atmosphere which is more favourable to poetry than the reverse, and many of these poets have written under its influence. Others of them, however, as Stopford Brooke writes in the preface to his and Rolleston's anthology, "have been so deeply influenced by Wordsworth, Keats, and in part by Shelley, that even when they write on Irish subjects the airs of England breathe and the waters of England ripple in their poetry". Of all these new writers there is an almost universal consensus of opinion that the greatest is William Butler Yeats. He has in his art applied the most refined technique to a subject-matter drawn alternately from things symbolic or mystic, or from nature in its simplest moods, or again from the old Irish sagas and folklore, which he visualizes from his own standpoint. Mysticism also is the prevailing note of George Russell ("A. E."), painter, poet, and editor. On the other hand religion and simple faith are the distinguishing characteristics of Katherine Tynan Hinkson. Ardent love of country and depth of feeling mark the works of Anna McManus ("Ethna Carbery"). Almost all the poets of the last fifteen years draw their inspiration more or less from Ireland and things Gaelic.

The greatest Irish historian of the last half century has been beyond all question W. E. Hartpole Lecky (1838-1903). His earliest writings were coloured by a strong nationalism; this, however, gradually departed from him. Of the seventeen volumes of his "History of England" in the eighteenth century, five are given up to the history of Ireland in the same period, and are written with an admirable impartiality which makes them a valuable and necessary antidote to the biassed picture of Froude. After Lecky's work, Alexander Richey's (1830-1883) "Lectures on Irish history" present us with what are probably the soundest and most philosophic studies that have appeared on this subject. Another book which has produced a deep effect upon the country and upon the current of historic thought has been Alice Stopford Green's "Making of Ireland and its Undoing" which appeared in 1908. A. M. Sullivan's "Story of Ireland" and P. W. Joyce's "Social History of Ireland" are two popular and useful works.

We must now turn to Anglo-Irish drama. The Irish have always been a dramatic race, and also a race of born actors. Beginning with Lodowick Berry, an Irishman whose play of "Ram Alley" was actually written during Shakespeare's life, Ireland has given to England an entirely disproportionate number of her best dramatists and actors. It is necessary to mention only the names of Southern, Macklin, Farquhar, Steele, Goldsmith, Sheridan, O'Keefe, Kenney--and so on through Sheridan Knowles, Dion Boucicault and the two great operatic composers, Michael Balfe and William Vincent Wallace, down to Bernard Shaw, to show how deeply this branch of English literature is beholden to Irishmen. Now again a vigorous Anglo-Irish drama is in full swing, and the Abbey Theatre, Dublin, under the direction of Lady Gregory and Mr. Yeats, where some forty-nine of fifty new plays by Irish writers have recently been produced, has aroused a great deal of interest and is undoubtedly the most remarkable development of Irish literature at the present day.

In romance Ireland seems at present to fall far short of the palmy days of Carleton and Lever, Le Fanu and Lover, Banim and Gerald Griffin. Of romance proper, Standish O'Grady, to whose stimulating books dealing with Gaelic Ireland a host of younger men owe inspiration, is the leading representative. One of the best novel-writers of the day is Canon Sheehan of Doneraile, who has struck a new note in literature by his brilliant and sympathetic descriptions of clerical life in the Catholic church. Other well-known and widely-read authors are Jane Barlow, Lady R. M. Gilbert, Rev. James Hannay, Emile Lawless, the poet of the "Wild Geese", Katherine Tynan Hickson, and Shan Bullock. Nor can we close this article without some allusion to the translators of and adapters from the Irish, of whom two stand out pre-eminently, Lady Gregory in prose and Dr. Sigerson in verse. The one has popularized the ancient Irish sagas, and the other, in his "Bards of Gael and Gall" has given us in English verse a long vista of Irish poetry reaching back for some fourteen hundred years and lost in the dim twilight of bygone ages. Of memoirs and autobiographical works the most remarkable are Swift's "Journal to Stella", Wolf Tone's "Diary", the "Memoirs of Joseph Holt", a leader of the Irish rebellion of 1798, Carleton's "Autobiography" (1896), Miles Byrne's "Memoirs" (he was another '98 man), and the remarkable series of letters, mostly unpublished, written by John O'Donovan on his official investigations of Irish topography--perhaps one of the most extensive collections of official letters in the world.

GENERAL LITERATURE.--O'REILLY, Irish Writers, ed. for the Iberno-Celtic Society (Dublin, 1820); O'CURRY, Lectures on the Manuscript Materials of Ancient Irish History (re-issue, Dublin, 1878); Idem, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Irish, with introduction by W. K. Sullivan (3 vols., Dublin, 1873); DOUGLAS HYDE, Story of early Gaelic Literature (London, 1895); Idem, A Literary History of Ireland (London, 1899); TOURNEUR, Esquisse d'une histoire des études celtiques (Liège, 1905); DOTTIN, La littérature gaëlique de Irlande; MEYER, Die irisch-gälische Literatur in Kultur der Gegenwart (Berlin and Leipzig, 1909); JOYCE, Social History of Ancient Ireland (2 vols., London, 1903); ELEANOR HULL, A Textbook of Irish Literature (2 vols, Dublin, 1906-08); O'GRADY, Catalogue of Irish MSS. in the British Museum.
DOGHAM ALPHABET.--BRASH, The Ogham inscribed monuments of the Gaedhil in the British Islands (London, 1879); FERGUSON, Ogham Inscriptions in Ireland, Wales, and Scotland (Edinburgh, 1887); MACALISTER, Studies in Irish Epigraphy (3 vols., London, 1897-1907); JOHN MacNEIL, The Irish Ogham Inscriptions in Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy (July, 1909); HYDE, Literary History of Ireland, xi; RHYS, articles passim in the Proc. R. I. A. and elsewhere.
EARLY MSS. AND GLOSSES.--WHITLEY STOKES and STRACHAN, Thesaurus Palæohibernicus (2 vols., Cambridge, 1901-1903); this contains the sum of all the glosses published previously by many different Celtologists.
EPIC LITERATURE.--D'ARBOIS de JUBAINVILLE, Essai d'un catalogue de la littérature épique de l'Irlande (Paris, 1883); Idem, Le cycle mythologique irlandais, et la mythologie celtique (Paris, 1884); Idem, Cours de littérature celtique, especially volume V, which contains translations of eleven pieces from the Ulster, three form the Leinster, and two from the mythologic cycles; WINDISCH, Die altirische Heldensage Táin Bó Cúalnge, Irish text with tr., notes, and glossary (Leipzig, 1905); WINDISCH and STOKES in Irische Texte (Leipzig, 1880-1909); WINIFRED FARADAY, The Cattle-raid of Cualnge (London, 1904); ELEANOR HULL, The Cuchullin Saga (London, 1898); WHITLEY STOKES, The Destruction of Da Derga's Hostel (Paris, 1902); Idem, The Second Battle of Maytura in Revue Celtique, XII, 52; THURNEYSEN, Sagen aus dem alten Irland (Berlin, 1901) (contains translations of fourteen sagas); MEYER, the Battle of Ventry, in series Anecdota Oxoniensia (Oxford, 1885); Idem, Death Tales of Ulster Heroes in Proc. R. I. A., Todd Lecture Series (Dublin, 1906); Idem, The Story of MacDatho's Pig and Hound, in Anecdota Oxoniensia, medieval and modern series, part VIII (Oxford, 1894), 51; HENDERSON, Bricriu's Feast, edited for the Irish Texts Society (London, 1899); PATRICK MacSWEENEY, The Marital Career of Conghal Clairingneach, edited for the Ir. Texts Soc. (London, 1902); O'BEIRNE CROWNE, Táin Bó Fraich, in Proc. R. I. A. (Dublin, 1870); Idem, The Courtship of Bec Fola, ibid; LIZERAY and O'DWYER, Livre des Invasions [i.e., Leabhar Gabála] (Paris, 1884); STANDISH HAYES O'GRADY, Silva Gadelica (2 vols., London, 1892). Irish text and translation of thirty-one pieces containing many Fenian stories; EDMUND HOGAN, The Battle of Rosnaree in Proc. R. I. A, Todd Lecture series (Dublin, 1892); HENNESSY, The Intoxication of the Ultonians in Proc. R. I. A, Todd Lecture Series (Dublin, 1884). For other sagas see Irische Texte (Leipzig, 1884-90), The Revue Celtique, the Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie (Halle, 1896-1909), and Eriu (Dublin).
FENIAN POEMS AND OSSIANIC SAGAS.--The Transactions of the Ossianic Society (6 vols., Dublin, 1854-1861); O'CURRY, Cath Mhuighe Léana (Dublin, 1855); J. F. CAMPBELL (of Islay), Leabhar na Féinne (London, 1872); McLAUGHLIN and SKENE, Book of the Dean of Lismore (Edinburgh, 1862); CAMERON, Reliquiæ Celticæ (2 vols., Inverness, 1892); JOHN MacNEILL, Duannaire Finn, ed. for the Irish Texts Society, VII (London, 1908).
EARLY IRISH BELIEFS.--See MEYER and DAVID NUTT, The Voyage of Brann (2 vols., London, 1897).
LIVES OF SAINTS.--WHITLEY STOKES, Lives of Saints from the Book of Lismore (Oxford 1890); Idem, Tripartite life of St. Patrick (London, 1887); O'GRADY, Silva Gadelica; EDMUND HOGAN, Latin Lives of the Saints as Aids toward the Translation of Irish Texts in Proc. R. I. A, Todd Lecture series, V (Dublin, 1894).
SEVENTH-CENTURY SAGA.--O'DONOVAN, Battle of Magh Rath, edited for the Irish Archæological Society (Dublin, 1842).
NORSE INVASIONS.--TODD, Wars of the Gaedhil with the Gaill in Rolls Series (London, 1867); O'DONOVAN, Three Fragments of Annals, edited for the Archæological and Celtic Society (Dublin, 1860).
TWELFTH-CENTURY BURLESQUE.--MEYER, The Vision of Mac Conglinne (London, 1892).
EARLY POETRY.--MEYER, King and Hermit (London, 1903); Idem, Stories and Songs from Irish MSS. in Otia Merseiana.
IRISH INFLUENCE ON THE CONTINENT.--ZIMMER, Ueber die bedeutung des irischen Elements für die mittelalterliche Cultur in Preussiche Jahrbücher (January, 1887).
VERSIONS FROM FOREIGN LITERATURE.--MEYER, Die irische Alexandersage in Irische Texte, II, ii; Idem, The Irish Odyssey (London, 1886); CALDER, Ir. vers. of Virgil's Æneid. Irish Text Society, VI, WHITLEY STOKES, Abridgment of the Book of Ser Marco Polo in Celt. Zeitsch., I, 245; Idem, The Gaelic Maundeville, ibid., II, 1; ROBINSON, Two Fragments of an Irish Romance of the Holy Grail, ibid, IV, 381; Idem, Irish Life of Fuy of Warwick, ibid, VI; WHITLEY STOKES, Destruction of Troy (Calcutta, 1882), which was also published in Irische Texte (Leipzig, 1884); MACALISTER, Story of the Crop-eared Dog and Story of Eagle Boy, two Arthurian romances, edited for the Irish Text Society, X (London, 1908); WHITLEY STOKES, Stair Fortibus in Revue Celtique, XX; Idem, Civil War of the Romans in Irische Texte (Leipzig, 1909). See also Revue Celtique, XI, 39;, XV, 79, for articles on this subject.
ANNALS AND HISTORY.--WHITLEY STOKES, Annals of Tigernach in Revue Celtique, XVII; HENNESSY and MacCARTHY, The Annals of Ulster in the Roll Series (4 vols., Dublin, 1887-1901); HENNESSEY, Chronicon Scotorum (Dublin, 1866); O'DONOVAN, The Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland (i.e., The Four Masters, q. v.); Denis Murphy, The Annals of Clonmacnoise, a seventeenth-century English translation of a lost Iris original (Dublin, 1896); Idem, Life of Red Hugh O'Donnell written by LUGHAIDR O'CLEIRIGH, Irish text and translation (Dublin, 1893); ALEXANDER BUDGE, Cathréim Cellacháin Caisill (Christiania, 1905); BEST, Leabhar Oiris in Eriu, I, 74; HENNESSEY, Annals of Loch Cé in Rolls Series (2 vols, 1871).
ANCIENT LAW.--See Ancient Laws of Ireland (i.e., the Brehon Laws, q. v.) in Rolls Series (8 vols., Dublin, 1865-1901); D'ARBOIS JUBAINVILLE, Etudes sue le droit celtique (2 vols., Paris, 1895); O'DONOVAN, The Book of Rights, edited for the Celtic Society (Dublin, 1874); MEYER, Law of Adamnan (Oxford, 1905); O'KEEFE, Law of Sunday in Eriu, II, 189; WHITLEY STOKES, The Irish Ordeals in Irische Texte, III, 183; see also Anecdota from Irish MSS (3 vols., Dublin, 1907-10), and Eriu (1904-10).
INFLUENCE OF LATIN ON IRISH.--VENDRYES, De Hibernicis Vocabulis quæ a Latina lingua originem duxerunt (Paris, 1902).
VISIONS.--WHITLEY STOKES, The Vision of Adamnan (Simla, 1870), and in Revue Celtique, XII, p. 420; WINDISCH in Ir. Texte, I, 165-196; MEYER and FRIEDEL, Vision de Tondale (Paris, 1907); BOSWELL, An Irish Precursor of Dante.
RELIGIOUS LITERATURE IN PROSE AND VERSE.--The Irish Liber Hymnorum, ed. ATKINSON and BERNARD, for the Henry Bradshaw Society, vols. XIII, XIV; ATKINSON, The Passions and Homilies from the Leabhar Breac. text, translation, and glossary, in Proc. R. I. A. Todd Lecture Series II (Dublin, 1887); WHITLEY STOKES, Saltair na Rann (Oxford, 1883); Idem, The Martyrology of Oengus the Culdee (London, 1905); O'DONOVAN, TODD, and REEVES, The Martyrology of Donegal (Dublin, 1864); Idem, The Martyrology of Gorman (London, 1895), edited for the Henry Bradshaw Society, vol. IX (1895); ATKINSON, Three Shafts of Death, R. I. Academy, MS. series, vol. II; O'BRIEN, Eochair-sgiath an Aifrinn (Dublin, 1900); MEYER, Colgu's scuap chábuid in Otia Merseiana, II (Liverpool), 92; WHITLEY STOKES, The Ever-new tongue in Eriu, II (Dublin); MEYER, Old Irish Treatise on the Psalter, Hibernica Minora (Oxford, 1894).
OLD IRISH METRIC.--O'MULLOY, Grammatica Latino-Hibernica (Rome, 1677), 144-280, re-edited and translated by O'FLANNGHAILE (Dublin, 1908); ATKINSON, Irish metric, an inaugural lecture of Celtic philology (Dublin, 1884); THURNEYSEN, Irische Texte, III, 1, pp 1-182; Idem, Zur irischen Accent- und Verslehre in Revue Celtique, VI; MEYER, Primer of Irish Metrics (Dublin, 1909); ZIMMER, Ueber altiriche Betonuna und Verskunst in Keltische Studien, II (Berlin, 1884).
BARDIC POETRY.--O'DONOVAN, Topographical Poems, edited for the Irish Archæological and Celtic Society (Dublin, 1841, 1862); STERN, Bardic poems from a collection in Copenhagen in Zeit. für celt. Phil., II; O'GRADY, Catalogue of Irish MSS. in the British Museum.
MODERN IRISH POETRY.--The Gaelic Journal (Dublin, 1882-1909); HARDIMAN, Irish Minstrelsy (2 vols., London, 1831); HYDE, Irish Poetry, An essay in Irish with translation (Dublin, 1902); Idem, Love songs of Connacht (4th ed., Dublin, 1909); Idem, Religious songs of Connacht (2 vols., Dublin, 1906); Idem, Poems ascribed to Raftery (Dublin); DINNEEN, Egan O'Rahilly's poems, edited for the Irish Texts Society (1900); MacGIOLLA MEIDHRE (i.e., MacCONMARA), The Midnight Court, ed. STERN, Ger. tr. in Zeit für celt. Phil., V (1905), and by O'BRIEN and O'CONNELL without tr. (Dublin, 1909); DONCHADH RUADH MacCONMARA, Poems, ed. FLANNERY (Dublin, 1897), another edition was brought out edited by FOLEY (Dublin, 1908); O'DALY, Poets and Poetry of Munster, with tr. by MANGAN, vol. I (Dublin, 1849); II, with tr. by SIGERSON (Dublin, 1860); O'LOONEY, Poems written by the Clare Bards (Dublin, 1863); WALSH, Irish Popular Songs (Dublin, 1847); O'DALY, Irish Language Miscellany (1876); MICHAEL and THOMAS O'MALLEY, Amhráin Chlainne Gaedhal (Dublin, 1905).
Within the past few years the poems of a number of seventeenth and eighteenth century writers have been collected and edited for the first time by JOHN MAC ERLEAN, Poems of Geoffrey Keating (Dublin, 1900); DINEEN, Poems of Geoffrey O'Donoghue of the Glen; Idem, Poems of Pierce Ferriter; Idem, Poems of Seighan Clárach Mac Donnell; idem, Poems of Owen Roe O'Sullivan; Idem, Poets of Maigue, John O'Twomy and Andrew Magrath; Idem, Poems of Tadhg Gaelach O'Sullivan; T. O'Donoghue, Poems of Seághan, O'Murchadha na Raithineach; R. FOLEY, Poems of Pierce Fitzgerald; J. H. Lloyd, the Poems of Colm Wallace, a recent Connacht poet.
FACSIMILES OF IRISH MSS.--The Book of the Dun Cow, a MS. of about A.D. 1100; the Book of Leinster, a MS. of about A.D. 1150; the Yellow Book of Lecan; the Book of Ballymote; the Lebhar Breac, or Speckled Book. "Rawlinson B. 502" (a Bodleian MS., Oxford, 1909).
ANGLO-IRISH LITERATURE.--CROFTON CROKER, The Popular Songs of Ireland (London, 1839); McCarthy, Poets and Dramatists of Ireland (Dublin, 1846); D'ARCY McGEE, Irish writers of the 17th Century (Dublin, 1846); HEUSER, Die Kildare-Gedichte, die ältesten Mittelenglischen Denkmäler in anglo-irische Ueberlieferung (Bonn, 1904); STOPFORD BROOKE and ROLLESTON, Treasury of Irish Poetry in the English Tongue (London, 1900); READ, Cabinet of Irish Literature (4 vols, London, 1902); COOKE, The Dublin Book of Irish Verse, 1728-1909 (Dublin, 1909); GAVAN DUFFY, Ballad Poetry of Ireland (Dublin, 1845); WILLIAM, Poets and Poetry of Ireland (Boston, 1991); HAYES, Ballads of Ireland (2 vols., 1855); SPARLING, Irish Minstrelsy (London, 1887); YEATS, A Book of Irish Verse, selected from modern writers (London, 1895); O'DONOGHUE, Biographical Dictionary of the Poets of Ireland (Dublin, 1901); WELSH, Irish Literature (10 vols., Philadelphia, 1904).

DOUGLAS HYDE

Ven. William Ireland

( Alias Ironmonger.)

Jesuit martyr, born in Lincolnshire, 1636; executed at Tyburn, 24 Jan. (not 3 Feb.), 1679; eldest son of William Ireland of Crofton Hall, Yorkshire, by Barbara, a daughter of Ralph Eure, of Washingborough, Lincolnshire (who is to be distinguished from the last Lord Eure) by his first wife. He was educated at the English College, St. Omer; admitted to the Society of Jesus at Watten, 1655; professed, 1673; and was for several years confessor to the Poor Clares at Gravelines. In 1677 he was sent on the English Mission and appointed procurator of the province. On the night of 28 September, 1678, he was arrested by Titus Oates in person, and amongst others who shared his fate was John Grove, a layman, the nominal occupier of that part of Wild House, London, occupied by the Jesuits, the Spanish ambassador living under the same roof. After rigorous confinement in Newgate they were both sentenced to death on 17 December following, together with Thomas Pickering, for having, in the rooms of William Harcourt, the Jesuit, on the previous 19 August, planned to assassinate the king. Oates and Bedloe swore that Grove was to have £1500 for the job, and Pickering 30,000 Masses. Ireland, in a journal written in Newgate, accounted for every day of his absence from London between 3 August and 14 September, but a woman having sworn that she saw him in Fetter Lane, on 20 August, all three were found guilty, and after two reprieves Ireland and Grove were executed together, Grove saying: "We are innocent, we lose our lives wrongfully, we pray God to forgive them that are the causes of it."

Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v.; G.E.C(OKAYNE), Peerage of England, III (London, 1890), 294; Harleian Soc. Publ., L (London, 1902), 338; CHALLONER, Missionary Priests, II (London and Derby, s. d.), 361; POLLOCK, The Popish Plot (London, 1903).

JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT

St. Irenaeus

Bishop of Lyons, and Father of the Church.

Information as to his life is scarce, and in some measure inexact. He was born in Proconsular Asia, or at least in some province bordering thereon, in the first half of the second century; the exact date is controverted, between the years 115 and 125, according to some, or, according to others, between 130 and 142. It is certain that, while still very young, Irenaeus had seen and heard the holy Bishop Polycarp (d. 155) at Smyrna. During the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, Irenaeus was a priest of the Church of Lyons. The clergy of that city, many of whom were suffering imprisonment for the Faith, sent him (177 or 178) to Rome with a letter to Pope Eleutherius concerning Montanism, and on that occasion bore emphatic testimony to his merits. Returning to Gaul, Irenaeus succeeded the martyr Saint Pothinus as Bishop of Lyons. During the religious peace which followed the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, the new bishop divided his activities between the duties of a pastor and of a missionary (as to which we have but brief data, late and not very certain) and his writings, almost all of which were directed against Gnosticism, the heresy then spreading in Gaul and elsewhere. In 190 or 191 he interceded with Pope Victor to lift the sentence of excommunication laid by that pontiff upon the Christian communities of Asia Minor which persevered in the practice of the Quartodecimans in regard to the celebration of Easter. Nothing is known of the date of his death, which must have occurred at the end of the second or the beginning of the third century. In spite of some isolated and later testimony to that effect, it is not very probable that he ended his career with martyrdom. His feast is celebrated on 28 June in the Latin Church, and on 23 August in the Greek.

Irenaeus wrote in Greek many works which have secured for him an exceptional place in Christian literature, because in controverted religious questions of capital importance they exhibit the testimony of a contemporary of the heroic age of the Church, of one who had heard St. Polycarp, the disciple of St. John, and who, in a manner, belonged to the Apostolic Age. None of these writings have come down to us in the original text, though a great many fragments of them are extant as citations in later writers (Hippolytus, Eusebius, etc.). Two of these works, however, have reached us in their entirety in a Latin version:

• A treatise in five books, commonly entitled Adversus haereses, and devoted, according to its true title, to the "Detection and Overthrow of the False Knowledge" (see GNOSTICISM, sub-title Refutation of Gnosticism). Of this work we possess a very ancient Latin translation, the scrupulous fidelity of which is beyond doubt. It is the chief work of Irenaeus and truly of the highest importance; it contains a profound exposition not only of Gnosticism under its different forms, but also of the principal heresies which had sprung up in the various Christian communities, and thus constitutes an invaluable source of information on the most ancient ecclesiastical literature from its beginnings to the end of the second century. In refuting the heterodox systems Irenaeus often opposes to them the true doctrine of the Church, and in this way furnishes positive and very early evidence of high importance. Suffice it to mention the passages, so often and so fully commented upon by theologians and polemical writers, concerning the origin of the Gospel according to St. John (see JOHN, GOSPEL OF SAINT), the Holy Eucharist, and the primacy of the Roman Church.
• Of a second work, written after the "Adversus Haereses", an ancient literal translation in the Armenian language. This is the "Proof of the Apostolic Preaching." The author's aim here is not to confute heretics, but to confirm the faithful by expounding the Christian doctrine to them, and notably by demonstrating the truth of the Gospel by means of the Old Testament prophecies. Although it contains fundamentally, so to speak, nothing that has not already been expounded in the "Adversus Haereses", it is a document of the highest interest, and a magnificent testimony of the deep and lively faith of Irenaeus.

Of his other works only scattered fragments exist; many, indeed, are known only through the mention made of them by later writers, not even fragments of the works themselves having come down to us. These are

• a treatise against the Greeks entitled "On the Subject of Knowledge" (mentioned by Eusebius);
• a writing addressed to the Roman priest Florinus "On the Monarchy, or How God is not the Cause of Evil" (fragment in Eusebius);
• a work "On the Ogdoad", probably against the Ogdoad of Valentinus the Gnostic, written for the same priest Florinus, who had gone over to the sect of the Valentinians (fragment in Eusebius);
• a treatise on schism, addressed to Blastus (mentioned by Eusebius);
• a letter to Pope Victor against the Roman priest Florinus (fragment preserved in Syriac);
• another letter to the same on the Paschal controversies (extracts in Eusebius);
• other letters to various correspondents on the same subject (mentioned by Eusebius, a fragment preserved in Syriac);
• a book of divers discourses, probably a collection of homilies (mentioned by Eusebius); and
• other minor works for which we have less clear or less certain attestations.

The four fragments which Pfaff published in 1715, ostensibly from a Turin manuscript, have been proven by Funk to be apocryphal, and Harnack has established the fact that Pfaff himself fabricated them.

ALBERT PONCELET

Sister Irene

(Catherine FitzGibbon.)

Born in London, England, 12 May, 1823; died in New York, 14 August, 1896. At the age of nine emigrated to Brooklyn, New York, with her parents, and in 1850 joined the community of the Sisters of Charity at Mount St. Vincent, New York, taking in religion the name of Irene. During her novitiate she taught in St. Peter's parish school, and finally became sister servant there. At that time no public provision was made to take are of abandoned infants. When picked up in the streets, they were sent to the municipal charity institutions to be looked after by paupers. Many were left at the doors of the sisters' schools and houses, in the evident hope that they might receive from them some special consideration. Sister Irene, noting the constant increase in number of these waifs, suggested the establishment of a foundling asylum, such as had long existed in Europe. Archbishop McCloskey sanctioned the project and in 1869 Sister Irene was assigned to carry it into effect. After visiting the public homes for infants in several cities she organized a woman's society to collect the necessary found for the proposed asylum with Mrs. Paul Thebaud as its head. By their aid a house (17 East Twelfth Street) was hired, and here on 11 October, 1869, the foundling asylum was opened with a crxche at its door. On the evening of the same day it held its first infant, and forty-four others followed before the first month passed. Within a year a large house (3 Washington Square, North) had to be taken.

In 1870 the city was authorized by the Legislature to give the asylum the block bounded by Third and Lexington Avenues, Sixty-eighth and Sixty-ninth Streets, for the site of a new building, and $100,000 for the building fund, provided a similar amount was raised by private donation. Of the required sum, $71,500 was realized by a fair held in 1871, and $27,500 came from three private donations. The new building was opened in October, 1873. The city pays 45 cents a day each for all children cared for under two years of age, and 32 cents for all over that age. It costs (1909) $1000 a day to run the institution, in which from six to seven hundred children are sheltered, with more than 1500 others on the outdoor list. In addition to what is paid by the city, $40,000 is donated annually by Catholic charity to carry on the work. Since it was opened, 50,000 children have been placed in good homes throughout the country, the average of those thus given for adoption being from two and a half to three years. The title of "The Foundling Asylum", under which it was incorporated in 1869, was changed by legal enactment in 1891 to "The New York Foundling Hospital". In addition to caring for the children, homeless and indigent mothers are also provided for, to the yearly average of five hundred. St. Ann's Maternity Hospital was opened for them in 1880 and in 1881 a children's hospital at Spuyten Duyvil on the Hudson. Sister Irene's whole life was given to the care of foundlings, and just before she died she added the Seton Hospital for incurable comsuptives, the cost of which ($350,000) she collected herself.

THOMAS F. MEEHAN

Irenopolis

A titular see of Isauria, suffragan of Seleucia. Five of its bishops are known: John (325), Menodorus (451), Paul (458), George (692), Euschemon (878). The city is mentioned by Hierocles in the sixth century and George of Cyprus in the seventh. It figures in the "Notitia Episcopatuum" of Anastasius, Patriarch of Antioch in the sixth century, and in the "Nova Tactica" of the tenth century, as attached to the Patriarchate of Constantinople. At this period the Byzantine emperors had taken the province of Isauria from the Patriarchate of Antioch. Ramsay ("Asia Minor," London, 1890, p. 365), following Sterrett, identifies Irenopolis of Isauria with Irnebol, of which he does not indicate the exact situation. Coins found bearing the name Irenopolis belong rather to a city of the same name located in Cilicia, the ancient Neronias, some of whose bishops are also known.

LE QUIEN, Oriens Christianus, II, 897-900, 1029 sq.

S. VAILHÉ

Ignacio de Iriarte

Painter, b. at Azcoitia, Guipuzcoa, in 1620; d. at Seville, 1685. Iriarte was the son of Esteban de Iriarte and Magdalena Zabala, and received his early education at home, but in 1642 went to Seville, and entered the studio of the elder Herrera. Here he learned to understand colouring, but he was never able to draw the human figure with spirit or accuracy, and therefore determined to devote his attention exclusively to landscape, and was the one Spanish artist who walked that rarely trodden path, and obtained in it the greatest possible celebrity. In 1646 we hear of him as residing at Aracena, near to the mountains, and there it was that he married Doña Francisca de Chaves, but his first wife lived a very short time, and in 1649 he married in Seville his second wife Doña Maria Escobar. He was an original member of the Academy of Seville, its first secretary in 1660, and again secretary from 1667 to 1669. For very many years, he was the intimate friend and associate of Murillo, who praised his landscapes very highly, and on many occasions the two artists worked together, Murillo executing the figures, and Iriarte the landscape. In consequence, however, of a dispute with reference to a series of pictures on the life of David, this division of labour came to an end, and the two painters, both of them men of great determination, decided to work separately and not in conjunction. Murillo painted the whole of the picture representing an episode in the life of David, and Iriarte contented himself with his exquisite landscapes, as a rule wild and rugged scenes, somewhat allied to those of Salvator Rosa, in which at that time he was the greatest exponent. There is a landscape preserved at Madrid in an unfinished condition, with the figures merely sketched in by Murillo and the background left incomplete by Iriarte, and this is said to have been left incomplete at the time of the quarrel. The painter has been called the Spanish Claude Lorraine, and Murillo declared that his best landscapes were painted "by Divine inspiration", but the comparison and statement are not accurate, as there is a forced character and an imaginary romance about Iriarte's landscapes with an extraordinary lack of atmosphere. They are, however, pleasing and attractive, although rare. His works are to be found principally in Madrid, but can also be studied in the galleries of St. Petersburg and the Louvre.

QUILLIET, Dictionaire des Peintres Espagnols (Paris, 1816); DE CASTRO Y VELASCO, El Museo Pictorico y Escala Optica (Madrid, 1715); STIRLING-MAXWELL, Annals on the Artists of Spain (London, 1848); HUARD, Vie Complete des Peintres Espagnols (Paris, 1839); HARTLEY, A Record of Spanish Painting (London, 1904).

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

The Irish (in countries other than Ireland)

I. IN THE UNITED STATES

Who were the first Irish to land on the American continent and the time of their arrival are perhaps matters of conjecture rather than of historical proof; but that the Irish were there almost at the beginning of the colonial era is a fact support by historical records. The various nations of Europe whose explorers had followed Columbus were alive to the possibilities of land conquest in the new continent. For this purpose colonists were needed, and expeditions were fitted out under government protection, which brought over the earliest settlers. England was especially active in promoting these expeditions, and during the seventeenth century, various colonies, beginning with that of Jamestown in 1607, were planted with immigrants, most of them of English nationality. Irish names, however, are met with occasionally in the documents relating to these settlements; it is certain that there were Irish Catholics in the Virginia Colony prior to 1633. In the narrative of the voyage of the Jesuit Father Andrew White and his associates in the "Dove and "Ark" from England to Maryland in 1633 in Lord Baltimore's expedition, we are told that on the way over they put in at Monserrat (one of the smallest of the Caribbean Islands) where they found a colony of Irishmen "who had been banished from Virginia on account of professing the Catholic Faith" (see Old Catholic Maryland, p. 14). The accepted history of that island attests the fact that it was originally settled by Irish, although at present the white population has largely disappeared. A modern traveller (Stark, 1893) says: "It is not surprising therefore that the descendants of the slaves who belonged to the Irish settlers all have Irish names, and speak a jargon of Irish, English, and African in which the brogue predominates. While Father White and most of his companions who first planted the cross in Maryland were of English origin, it is equally true that Ireland, as well as other Catholic lands in Europe contributed their quota of missionaries who nourished the Faith in the early Maryland settlement, and among the Jesuit missionaries of these times we find Fathers Carroll, Murphy, Hayes, Quinn, O'Reilly, Casey, and others whose names indicate their Celtic origin.

But the beginnings of immigration from Ireland to America, in such numbers and under such circumstances so notable as to become a matter of definite historical record, may be said to date from the subjugation of Ireland by Cromwell in 1651. Under that merciless conqueror the English policy of transplanting the Irish was ruthlessly carried out. The native Irish were deprived of their lands, routed from their homes, and ordered to remove their families and such effects as were permitted to the Province of Connaught in the west, where a certain territory, mostly wild and desolate, had been prescribed, within which they were to remain under military surveillance and establish a new residence. Those who refused suffered various punishments and sometimes death. In many cases the complaisant commissioners appointed by Cromwell ordered the deportation of the recalcitrant Irish to the American plantations, and enterprising merchants from Bristol and London carried on a lucrative business in shipping and transferring these unfortunate victims to their destination. In order to sustain their traffic, leave was granted to fill their ships which such destitute or homeless inhabitants (made such by their conquerors) as might be delivered to them by the military governor for transportation abroad, so that, as the records show, during the years 1651 to 1654, 6400 young exiles (mostly young men and women) were carried away and delivered, some to Barbados, and some to the different English colonies in America. Two thousand more boys and girls were shipped the following year to Barbados and to the American plantations, and it has been estimated that in the year 1660 there were 10,000 Irish who had been distributed thus among the different English colonies in America (see American Catholic Quarterly Review, IX, 37). Of the total number thus shipped out of Ireland across the main, the estimates vary between 60,000 and 100,000 [Lingard, "History of England", X (Dolman ed., 1849), 366].

Prior to this deportation there had been some voluntary emigration from Ireland to America; with the development of the colonies this emigration increased and later assumed such enormous proportions that, before attempting to trace its progress, it may be useful to inquire what were the causes which compelled over five million people, pouring out in a continuous stream for nearly two centuries, to abandon their native land, with all its associations, religious, domestic, and national, and seek homes for themselves and their families beyond the Western Ocean.

For over a hundred years before the Cromwellian era Ireland had been distracted by the frequent invasions of the English under desperate and unscrupulous leaders, whose professed purpose was to re-establish English supremacy in Ireland, and to force the new religion of Henry VIII upon her clergy and laity. The old religion which the nation as a whole had cherished for over a thousand years was proscribed, and her churches, monasteries, and other shrines of religion plundered. The lands attached to them were confiscated by the Crown, and parcelled out among the greedy adventurers, whose success in despoiling the true owners of their property meant their own enrichment. The adherents of the old Faith, comprising as they did much more than five-sixths of the population, were made outlaws, their homes destroyed, their estates forfeited and their liberties and life itself were the price they had to pay for their refusal to conform to the new religion. In aid of the policy of exterminating the Catholic Irish (of which no concealment was made) a system of penal laws was put into force, under which they were disfranchised, disqualified from acquiring or holding property, compelled to remain illiterate, fined, imprisoned, and many of them tortured with every refinement of cruelty. Their bishops and priests were classed as felons, a price set on their heads, and an incredible number of both clergy and people who adhered loyally to the religion of their forefathers were either put to the sword or hanged, drawn, and quartered. So cruel and atrocious was this code that Edmund Burke described it as "a truly barbarous system; where all the parts are an outrage on the laws of humanity and the laws of nature; it is a system of elaborate contrivance, as well fitted for the oppression, imprisonment and degradation of a people, and the debasement of human nature itself, as ever proceeded from the perverted ingenuity of man". "The law", says another writer, "did not suppose the existence of an Irish Roman Catholic, nor could they even breathe without the contrivance of government" (Lecky, Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, I, 246).

Concurrently with the enforcement of these laws, various schemes were projected by the English adventurers, some as early as the reign of Elizabeth (1573), for the colonization of Ireland chiefly with English and Scottish settlers. For instance, in 1709, in pursuance of the policy of stamping out the Irish and replacing them with a more tractable race, 820 families of German Palatines, comprising 3073 persons, landed at Dublin at a cost to the government of £34,000 (Young, I, 371). Military expeditions were organized and sent over to take possession of the lands of the disaffected Irish. Great tracts of land, sometimes embracing whole counties, were declared confiscated to the Crown and were allotted to the "gentlemen undertakers" who financed these enterprises. Under James I 5,000,000 acres, and under Charles I about 2,500,000 acres were thus confiscated. The native Irish chiefs and their clansmen naturally resisted these attempts to dispossess them of their lands. If they remained passive some provocation was invented for goading them into rebellion. In either case, they were adjudged to be rebels who might lawfully be hunted and shot down on sight. The methods adopted to crush them were cruel in the extreme, their cattle were taken from them, their houses levelled, and their harvests burned. Men, women, and children were indiscriminately shot down and even hanged by a brutal soldiery, and the remnant which escaped found shelter in the neighbouring bogs and mountains where they were hunted to death as outlaws or perished from starvation.

In other parts of Ireland, where these methods of transplantation or extermination had not yet been attempted and where the inhabitants had escaped the horrors of this guerrilla warfare, there were hundreds of thousands of fertile acres. These were then and had been for over three hundred years in the undisputed possession of their owners, the native Irish, and were held under the tribal system of tenure. As a pretext for dispossessing these lawful proprietors from their lands and making them available for plantation, a Royal Commission, appointed for the purpose, declared the titles defective, and over ha;f a million acres of land not heretofore confiscated were adjudged to have reverted to the Crown. In consequence the true owners, against which no disaffection could be alleged, were forced either to retire, or were permitted to remain practically as tenants, upon onerous conditions, on a small portion of their former holdings, the balance being reserved in part to the Crown, and in part being distributed among the adventurers who had advanced money for carrying out the scheme, and the soldiers as a reward for services rendered. The reformers, or "discoverers" as they were called, who attacked these titles before the Commission, were likewise rewarded by grants of portions of the plundered lands. Speaking of these various changes in the ownership of the land, Arthur Young, an impartial Protestant observer, writing in 1776 (Tour of Ireland, Vol. II, p. 59), says: "Nineteen-twentieths of the kingdom (comprising 11,420, 682 Irish acres or nearly 21,000,000 acres, English measure) changed hand from Catholic to Protestant. . . . So entire an overthrow of landed possessions is, within the period, to be found scare within any country in the world. In such great revolutions of property the ruined proprietors had usually been extirpated or banished." While the enforcement of these laws and such methods of conquest bore heaviest on Roman Catholics, yet the Presbyterian Irish, chiefly in the north, and the Quakers were likewise made to suffer for their attachment to their country and to the religion which their consciences dictated, so that no element of the native population escaped the savage vengeance of their English conquerors. The periods of respite were few, and the calm was only the peacefulness of death and desolation.

At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the population of Ireland, as a result of this barbarous treatment, had been reduced to about one and a half million souls. Lest the survivors, in whom the native instinct of industry and enterprise still prevailed, should draw any measure of prosperity to themselves and away from England, the legislation for Ireland was steadily directed toward the restraint, if not the absolute ruin, of all her trade and commerce. Embargoes were laid on the exportation from Ireland of cattle, meat, and other food products, and the exportation of wool and woolen goods to any other country than England (which manufactured a supply sufficient for home consumption) was forbidden under heavy penalties so that in 1699 as many as 40,000 weavers were denied of the means of livelihood and many of them the forced to emigrate. Such trading as was not positively forbidden had to be carried out only in English built ships, to the ruin, of course, of the seaboard towns and the shipbuilding industries of Ireland, and in 1696 all import trade direct to Ireland, whether from foreign countries, or from the English colonies was prohibited; even the linen industry, then slowly growing, was checked by heavy duties imported on its sailcloth and other manufactures exported to England, where alone they were allowed to find a market. With the success of the American patriots and the re-establishment of the Irish Parliament in 1782, some prospect of improvement appeared, only to be dispelled by the Act of Union of 1800. Their legislative independence thus extinguished, their trade and commerce destroyed, with every avenue for honourable occupation closed against them, the Irish people were thrown back on the soil for their means of support and became victims of a system of landlordism with its rents, fines, and rack-rents, its tithes and other iniquitous conditions under which human beings could not live except by almost super-human industry and self-denial.

These, briefly stated, were the conditions which confronted the Irish yet remaining on their native soil at the close of the eighteenth century. That those who could should go elsewhere to find relief was most natural. As a result, a tide of emigration set in, to be continued during two centuries, carrying away millions of the people who were destined to become so important an element in the establishment and maintenance of the American Republic. It was no ordinary overflow of a surplus population, seeking new fields of industry, nor the enterprise of adventurous spirits induced, as had been other colonists, by the promise of rich rewards, but rather the mournful flight of a people seeking to escape the ruin which had overtaken so many of their fellow-countrymen, and which as surely was to be their lot if they remained at home. During the period of 1680 to 1720 thousands of woolen weavers, mostly Protestants from Ulster, deprived of their means of livelihood, and dissenters as well as Roman Catholics anxious to avoid persecution, had left Ireland for the American Colonies, where they "were changed into enemies who paid off old scores in the war of American Independence" (Gregg, "Irish History", 92). Other Catholic Irish from the middle and south of Ireland had likewise voluntarily emigrated to the different colonies, through which they dispersed, to find or make homes for themselves and their families where circumstances favoured.

In the early years of the eighteenth century we find abundant records of Irish emigration. Thus, in 1718, five ships arrived in Boston with 200 emigrants from Ulster. So considerable was the influx that, in 1720, the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony passed an ordinance directing that "certain families recently arrived from Ireland be warned to move off", and, in 1723, another ordinance was passed requiring all Irish emigrants to be registered. During the years 1736-1738 ten ships arrived at Boston harbour bearing 1000 such immigrants, and hardly a year passed without a fresh infusion of Irish blood into the existing population. Irish names frequently appeared in the early records of many of the New England towns, showing how widely the immigration had distributed itself, and in some cases those emigrating from particular localities in Ireland were numerous enough to establish their own independent settlements, to which they gave the names of their Irish home places, such as the towns of Belfast, Limerick, and Londonderry in Maine, Dublin, Derryfield, and Kilkenny in New Hampshire, and Sullivan and Carroll Counties in the latter state, and this practice was followed in many instances by the Irish arriving in other colonies, notably Pennsylvania and New York, where the names of counties and towns of Ireland attest to the place of origin of the first settlers. It was from Irish settlers in New Hampshire that Stark's Rangers were recruited who fought the battle of Bennington and took part in the campaign leading to the surrender of Burgoyne. The official military records of the province of New York show that from early times Irishmen were there in large numbers. Thomas Dongan, the first colonial governor (appointed in 1683), who gave New York its first charter of liberties, was a native of the County Kildare and a Catholic. The muster-rolls of the various military companies which were maintained under British rule down to the time of the Revolution and participated in the French and Indian Wars show a large proportion of unmistakable Irish names, and there were some thousands of Irish soldiers in the various regiments of the line and of the militia of New York serving in the Continental Army.

On account of its reputation for religious tolerance and wise administration, William Penn's colony attracted Irish settlers in unusual numbers. Penn's trusted agent and administrator of the affairs of the colony during the period 1701-1751, James Logan, distinguished for his high character and the ability with which he discharged his trust, was a native of Lurgan, Ireland; among the "first purchasers" who embarked with Penn on the "Welcome", arriving with Penn in 1682, we find the names of several Irishmen, who with their families had left their native towns of Wexford and Cashel respectively for America. (See list in Scharff and Westcott, "History of Philadelphia", I, 99.) Other early Irish immigrants arriving at Philadelphia were, Patrick, Michael, and Philip Kearney, natives of Cork, among whose descendants may be named General Stephan W. Kearney, first governor of California, Commodore Lawrence Kearney, and the dashing General Phil Kearney, the distinguished soldier of the Civil War, and, in 1719, George Taylor, later one of the signers of the Declaration of Independence. In 1727, 1155 Irish landed at Philadelphia and in 1728, 5600 more. Holmes's "American Annals" states that out of a total of 6310 immigrants, arriving during 1729 by way of the Delaware River, 5655 were Irish. In one week alone, as reported by the "American Weekly Mercury" of 14 August, 1729, there arrived "about two thousand Irish, and an abundance more daily expected". In 1737 thirty-three vessels are registered as arriving at Philadelphia bringing passengers from different ports in Ireland, and although definite statistics are not available, there is sufficient evidence to show that this tide of emigration did not slacken for many years. So great was it that in 1735 a bill was introduced in Parliament to prohibit emigration from Ireland entirely. The great number of Irish in Pennsylvania at the beginning of the War of Independence, their high character, and important standing in that community indicate how large and valuable had been the immigration there.

Besides the Irish who had come into Virginia Colony before referred to, there was other emigration to it, as well as to the Carolinas, while as early as 1734 a colony of 500 Irish settlers planted themselves on the Santee River; among these are to be found such names as Rutledge, Jackson, and Calhoun, which a generation later were to be famous in the history of the United States. Other settlements in the United States were made by Irish immigrants who had come thither from the northern Colonies. From various town and other colonial records (see Hanna, "Scotch-Irish", II, 9 and passim), it has been ascertained that Irish emigrants had settled in Pennsylvania in 1682, in North Carolina in 1683, in South Carolina and New Jersey in 1700. The historian of South Carolina (Ramsay) writes, "but of all other countries none has furnished the Province with so many inhabitants as Ireland" (Vol 1., 20). The disastrous famine of 1740, like that still more terrible one a hundred years later, greatly increased the immigration to America; besides those who left from Galway, Dublin, and other ports it is recorded that for "several years afterwards 12,000 emigrants annually left Ulster for the American plantations", and that "from 1771 to 1773 the whole emigration from Ulster is estimated at 30,000 of whom 10,000 are weavers". (Lecky, "History of England in the Eighteenth Century", II, 261; Froude, "England in Ireland", II, 125.)

There are no official records of immigration to the United States prior to 1820. But with reference to the period from 1776 to 1820 the Bureau of Statistics has adopted an estimate, based on the most reliable data which could be obtained, showing 250,000 as the total immigrants of all nationalities arriving in the United States during that time. In his notebook for 1818, Bishop Connolly says, "At present there are here [New York] about 16,000 Catholics — mostly Irish; at least 10,000 Irish Catholics had arrived in New York only within these last three years. They spread", he adds, "over all the large states of this country and make their religion known everywhere." And beginning about this time, namely the close of the second war with England, 1812-1815, the stream of Irish emigration, which before had been largely Presbyterian, was changed, so that Catholic Irish have ever since constituted the bulk of such immigration into the United States. The number recorded as arriving from Ireland in the year 1820, the first year of the official registration of immigrants, is 3614, and judging from these figures and from the proportion of immigrants arriving prior to the War of Independence, we may safely say that, out of the above official estimate of 250,000 as the total number of immigrants during the period from 1776 to 1820, at least 100,000 were Irish.

Since the year 1820 the number of immigrants arriving in the United States from Ireland is shown by the official records as follows: —

1821-1830: 50,724
1831-1840: 207,381
1841-1850: 780,719
1851-1860: 914,119
1861-1870: 435,778
1871-1880: 436,871
1881-1890: 655,482
1891-1900: 403,496
Total: 3,884,570

and for the years 1901 to 1908 inclusive as follows: —

1901: 30,561
1902: 29,138
1903: 35,300
1904: 36,142
1905: 37,644
1906: 34,995
1907: 34,530
1908: 21,382
Total: 259,692

(See Reports of Com. General of Immigration for 1906-7-8 and "Immigration", p. 4338), the above figures indicating that emigration from Ireland during the past eight years has been maintained at nearly the same average as during the last preceding decade. As a result the population of Ireland has diminished according to the censuses from 1861 to 1901 at the following rate per cent: —

1861: 11.8 percent
1871: 6.7
1881: 4.4
1891: 9.1
1901: 5.2

(See Statesman's Year-Book, 1907).

The greatest immigration in any one year was in 1851 when 221,253 persons are recorded as arriving; next to this was the year 1850 with the arrivals numbering 164,004. The arrivals during the decade 1841 to 1850 were nearly four times greater than those of the preceding ten years, and this number in turn was exceeded by the figures for the next succeeding decade 1851-1860, when the highest level in the history of Irish immigration to the United States was reached. The statistics given above show a total immigration from Ireland between 1820 and 1907 of 4,144,262 persons, to which add 100,000, the number as above estimated for the years 1776 to 1820, making a total of 4,244,262, exclusive of the Irish who were in the United States prior to the Revolution. But there are reasons for believing that the figures thus given underestimate the actual volume of Irish immigration. During the decade 1841-1850 Irish labourers went in large numbers every year to England in search of employment, and many of them remained, especially in Liverpool, the population of which became in time to a large extent Irish. In 1846 alone, 278,005 Irish of both sexes were reported to have left Ireland for Liverpool, whence most of them embarked for America (see British Commissioners' Report", cited in O'Rourke's "History of the Great Irish Famine", pp. 487-8).

Many such emigrants sailed directory to the United States and arrived in largest numbers at the port of New York. During the years 1847-70, the State of New York through its Emigration Commission maintained a system of registration of aliens arriving at that port, and the records thus kept show the total of Irish immigrants largely exceeding the number reported by the National Bureau of Statistics. These variations may be explained by remembering that under the New York system immigrants were classified according to the country of their nativity, while in the Federal reports for the most part classification is made according to the "country of last permanent residence" of the immigrant, so that those who had left Ireland and had sojourned for a while in England were not classified as Irish immigrants. Again during the same period there was a large immigration to Canada, some of it officially promoted and assisted by public money (O'Rourke, op. cit., p. 483). Much of it was destined for America, but was diverted to Canada by English shipowners, who found it easier to deliver their human freight there than at the port of New York, where the condition and circumstances of the immigrant were more carefully scrutinized.

The United States Bureau of Statistics estimates the total immigration into Canada between 1821 and 1890 at 3,000,000, of which it is safe to assume that more than half came from Ireland. No official record has been kept of immigrants arriving in the United States from Canada, except in certain cases neither numerous nor important enough to be mentioned here, and it is impossible to state the precise number of persons of Irish birth who, sooner or later after their arrival in Canada, crossed the borders and thus increased the Irish element in the United States. That the number was very large there is abundant evidence. In an official statement presented in 1890 to the Canadian House of Parliament, the opinion was expressed that over one-half of the immigrants arriving in Canada ultimately removed to the United States. (See Immigration into the U. S., in U. S. Bureau of Statistics, 1909, p. 4335.) And it has been argued that if the 3,000,000 immigrants arriving in Canada had had to remain there, the total population of the Dominion must have increased far beyond 5,371,315, the figures officially reported in 1901. These considerations, we think, justify a revision and correction of the estimate of Irish immigration into the United States (for the period 1820 to 1903), which up to the present time has been officially quoted at "about four million"; we would say that, taking the entire period from the War of Independence (1776) to and including 1908, such immigration easily numbers five and a half million souls.

Recurring to the statistics of recorded immigration, we find the number of persons of Irish nativity included in the resident population of the continental United States at the close of each decennial period since 1850 to be as follows: —

1850: 961,719
1860: 1,611,304
1870: 1,855,827
1880: 1,854,571
1890: 1,871,509
1900: 1,615,459

[see Abstract of 12th (1900) census, p. 9].

And the same census (1900) shows that in that year there were 4,968,182 persons resident in the United States of whose parents at least one was born in Ireland, including the 1,615,459 residents above specified, who were themselves of Irish birth. Of these 67 per cent were located in the states of the North Atlantic division and twenty-two per cent in the North Central division. About three-fourths of the above foreign-born population shown by the census of 1900 were comprised in the following eight states with the respective numbers set opposite:

New York: 425,553
Massachusetts: 249,916
Pennsylvania: 205,909
Illinois: 114,563
New Jersey: 94,844
Connecticut: 70,994
Ohio: 56,918
California: 44,476

While the twelve cities having the largest population of Irish nativity were as follows:

New York: 275,102
Chicago, Ill: 73,912
St. Louis, Mo.: 19,421
Providence, R.I.: 18,686
San Francisco, Cal: 15,963
Newark, N. J.: 12,792
Philadelphia: 98,427
Boston, Mass.: 70,147
Jersey City, N. J.: 19,314
Pittsburgh, Pa.: 18,620
Cleveland, O.: 13,120
Lowell, Mass.: 12,147

Beyond the immediate ancestry of persons comprising the population, no classification according to race origin has been made in any census, and there is consequently no official record showing what part of the native-born population (excluding descendants of the first degree) is of Irish origin. But various unofficial estimates have been made. In 1851 Hon. W.E. Robinson, M.C., in a carefully prepared disclosure (reported in the "New York Tribune", 30 July, 1851) refuting the claim then urged by various public writers and speakers that the population of the United States was chiefly Anglo-Saxon in character, presented statistics of emigration showing that not more than one-eighth of the population could be considered as of Anglo-Saxon origin and that out of a population then (1850) numbering 23,191,876 there were: —

Irish born: 3,000,000
Irish by blood: 4,500,000
making a total Irish element of: 7,500,000

Rev. Stephen Byrne, O. S. D., author of "Irish Emigration to the United States", puts the Celtic element at one-half of the present (1873) population, the Anglo-Saxon at one-fourth. The official census of 1870 gives the total population of the United States as 38,696,984. And the New York "Irish World" (25 July, 1874), speaking of the census, claims that two-thirds of the people are Celts by birth or descent and only about one-ninth are Anglo-Saxon, and in a tabulated statement of the components of the population, that journal estimates the "joint product in 1870 of Irish Colonial element and subsequent Irish immigration (including that from Canada) at 14,325,000" (cited from O'Kaine Murray's "History of the Catholic Church in the United States", p. 611).

In 1882 Philip H. Baganel, an English writer, in his work "The American Irish", p. 33, states: "the American Irish themselves lay claim to a population of between ten and fifteen millions. There can be no doubt that the amount of Celtic blood in the American people is very much greater than they themselves would like to allow." Since 1870, 1,749,460 immigrants from Ireland have arrived, according to the above-quoted official statistics, apart from those arriving through Canada, and if the estimated Irish element of that year has doubled itself and no more, during the forty years which have now elapsed, the number of persons of Irish birth or origin in the continental United States would appear now to be not less than thirty millions. We have referred to the Irish immigration for 1851 as the largest in history. The steady and extraordinary increase from 44,821 in 1845 to 257,372 in 1851 (figures of Thom's Almanac for 1853, cited in O'Rourke, "History, etc.", p. 496) compels attention chiefly on account of the tragical causes from which it arose and the distressing conditions under which the immigrants of that period established themselves ion the United States.

As is well known the potato blight appeared in Ireland in 1845, as it had appeared before, namely in 1740, 1821, and in several later years. By 1846 it extended over the whole country, so that nowhere in the land were there any potatoes fit either for food for human belongs or for seed. But side by side with the blackened potato fields there were abundant crops of grain which were in no way affected by the potato blight. These, however, were disposed of frequently by distraint, as the sole means of providing the rent for the landlord, while the unfortunate tenants by whose labour they had been produced were left without food. Famine which brought fever and other miseries in its train set in, so that tens of thousands of people sank into their graves, many of them dying within the shelter of the poorhouses. There were evictions without limit, many of them under heart-rending circumstances. Dr. Nulty, Bishop of Meath, tells of 700 human beings evicted in one day in 1847 from one estate (Parnell Movement, p. 114), and other appalling instances may be cited. In 1847 there were in the Irish workhouses 104,455 persons, of whom 9,000 were fever patients (O'Rourke, "History of the Great Irish Famine", p. 478). Nearly three-quarters of a million were employed on public works which had been devised as a means of relieving the distress, and 3,020,712 persons were receiving daily rations of food from the Government (ibid, 471).

Of the horrors of that time it is almost impossible to speak with moderation. "While myriads starved to death in Ireland" says O'Neill Daunt (Ireland and her Agitators, p. 231), "ships bursting with grain and laden with cattle were leaving every port for England. There would have been no need for the people to emigrate if their food did not emigrate. But the exhausting result of the Union had brought matters to a point that compelled Ireland to sell her food to supply the enormous money drain. The food is first taken away and then its price is taken away also." "The Union has stripped them" (the Irish people) "of their means and the only alternatives left to the perishing multitude were the work-house, emigration, or the grave." The condition to which the Irish people were thus reduced was extremely pitiable and excited the sympathy of the whole world. "The peoples of Europe sent alms, the Turks opened their hearts and hands, while ship after ship freighted generously from the American shores passed fleets of English vessels carrying away from a dying people the fruits of their own labour (see Lester, "Glory and Shame of England", I, 161). 114 ships carrying provisions, the result of charitable contributions for a starving nation, landed their cargoes in Ireland in 1847 (O'Rourke, "History, etc." p. 512), and the United States, responding to the universal sentiment of the nation, sent its to ships of war, the "Jamestown" and "Macedonian", on these errands of mercy. From these causes the population of Ireland was diminished during the famine period by two and a half million souls: they disappeared by death and emigration. it was to America that by far the greatest number of emigrants went.

The transportation of emigrants in those early days was attended with such cruel conditions that reviewing them now after a lapse of fifty years, it seems almost incredible that they should have been tolerated by any civilized nation. The ships employed in this service were only too often broken-down freight ships, in which merchants were unwilling to entrust valuable merchandise. The humane provisions of modern times with respect to light, ventilation, and cleanliness were wholly unknown. More often than not the ships were undermanned, so that in case of a storm the passengers were required to lend a hand in doing the work of sailors. The provisions supplied were always uncooked, scanty in amount, and frequently unfit for use. With favourable weather the voyage lasted from six to eight weeks. Against head-winds and storms the old hulks were frequently from twelve to fourteen weeks on the way. With the emigrants already predisposed by famine and hardship, it is not to be wondered at that fever often broke out on board ship and that many died and their remains were tossed overboard during the voyage. This was especially true in the British vessels, in which the death-rate exceeded that of the vessels of all other nationalities (see Kapp, "Immigration", p. 34).

As a result these emigrant ships when reaching the United States were in many instances little else than floating hospitals. When they arrived in port the shipmaster made haste to discharge his human cargo, and the sick and dying, as well as those who had survived unharmed, were put ashore on the wharves and the public landing-places and were left to their fate. Some of the sick, when they reached New York, were fortunate enough to gain admission to the Marine Hospital; others were carried to the sheds and structures which had been provided by the brokers and agents of the shipowners, under their agreement with the municipal authorities to provide for such sick emigrants as they might land. But the treatment of the emigrants in these institutions was little less brutal than they had experienced on shipboard. The food there was often unfit for any human being, still less for the sick. Sanitary conditions were ignored, and medical attendance was rarely adequate to the existing needs. Not only the sick and dying, but often the corpses of the dead, were huddled together. One instance is specified where the bodies of two who had died four to five days before were left unburied upon the cots whereon they had died, in the same room with their sick companions (see Maguire, "The Irish in America", p. 186). So fatal were these conditions that it has been estimated by medical statisticians that not less than 20,000 emigrants perished by ship fever and in the various emigrant hospitals in American ports in the year 1847 (Kapp, "Immigration", p. 23).

Those of the emigrants who survived the hardships of the voyage and retained strength enough to go about encountered troubles of a different kind. Boarding-house runners, ticker-sellers, and money-changers swarmed about the landing-places. Boarding-house charges were fraudulently multiplied, money-brokers practiced their calling at extortionate rates, while the selling of fraudulent railroad-tickets was one of the commonest practices by which the poor immigrant was plundered. As a result the able-bodied immigrant was compelled to remain in and around new York without means to help himself or his family, and this oftentimes became a charge upon the charity of the public. So gross did these abuses become that a number of the most prominent citizens of New York applied to the Legislature for relief. Included in these were Archbishop Hughes, Andrew Carrigan, John E. Devlin, Charles O'Connor, James T. Brady, John McKeon, Gregory Dillon, and other men of Irish blood who were identified with the Irish Emigrant Society, which had been organized for the purpose of aiding the Irish immigrants arriving at the port of New York.

The result of their exertion was the creation by Act of Legislature of the State of New York of the board generally known as the "Commissioners of Emigration", composed of men of the highest standing in the community, who served without compensation, and to whom was entrusted the general care and supervision of the immigrants as they arrived. Gulian C. Verplanck, distinguished alike as scholar and public-spirited citizen of New York, served during twenty-three years as president of this board, and although not of Irish blood, his long and faithful service in the behalf of the Irish immigrants ought not to pass without honourable mention in these pages. Under the watchful supervision thus established the evils complained of were gradually overcome, notwithstanding persistent opposition from shipowners and emigrant runners. In 1855 the first state emigration depot was opened in Castle Garden at the lower end of Manhattan Island, and since then millions of immigrants have streamed through this gateway, under the inspection and protection of the officials, on their way to the various places throughout the land where they were to make their homes. In 1874 the Congress of the United States assumed control of the question of immigration, and the admission and supervision of arriving immigrants are now in charge of a Commissioner of General Immigration appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury. In 1884 a Home and Mission House were established in close proximity to Castle Garden for the protection of Irish immigrant girls. This institution was founded by Cardinal John McCloskey, with the co-operation of other prelates, and was placed in charge of Rev. John J. Riordan, a zealous Irish priest who gave his life in its service. The beneficent work of the Home in sheltering unprotected women, and in promoting their moral and material welfare, is universally recognized.

Speaking of the distribution of the immigrants upon their arrival in the United States, Bishop J. L. Spalding estimates (Mission of the Irish People, p. 113) that only eight in one hundred of the Irish emigrating to the United States have been employed in agricultural pursuits, a percentage smaller than that of the emigrants from any other country, the remaining ninety-two going to make up the tenement-house population in the larger cities. He asserts further (op. cit. p. 166) that the agricultural settlers became such more by accident than from choice, following the lines of the railroads or the canals on which they laboured, saving their wages and buying lands. This tendency of the Catholic Irish to congregate in the large cities was seen to be attended by consequences so injurious both morally and materially to the well-being of the immigrants, that efforts were made from time to time to withdraw them from the large cities in which they arrived and to settle them on the land. Bishop Fenwick of Boston planted a colony in Maine, and Bishop Reynolds of Charleston, S. C., diverted some of the immigrants from Liverpool to his diocese. About 1848-50, two French bishops, Mathias Loras of Dubuque and Joseph Cretin of St. Paul, induced and helped many of the Irish to settle in the states of Iowa and Minnesota, and in 1850 Bishop Andrew Byrne of Little Rock welcomed a colony of Irish Catholics brought over by Father Hoar of Wexford. Of these latter, only a small number remained in Arkansas, the rest going to Iowa, where they established a colony known as "New Ireland".

After the Civil War the question of Irish colonization engaged the attention of various prelates, including Archbishop John Ireland (then Bishop) of St. Paul, who established the St. Paul Catholic Colonization bureau; through his efforts various colonies were established in Minnesota. Later, in May, 1879, the Irish Catholic Colonization Association of the United States was established at Chicago, under the auspices of various archbishops, with the co-operation of eminent Irish Catholic laymen, and during the ensuing decade it assisted many immigrants to find homes in the Western states. Other parish or local societies took up the work of colonization in their own neighbourhood, and successful colonies were established in Minnesota and Kansas. In all these organized efforts at colonization the promoters have aimed to provide for the religious needs of the colonists, by securing the services of priests and the building of churches and schools, at the same time that homes and other material assistance were provided for them. These movements for the colonization of Irish immigrants differed from the ordinary schemes of emigration in that the promoters did not invite or encourage the Irish to leave their native land, but for those who had arrived or resolved to come they sought to provide homes free from the distressing and degraded conditions which so many of those who remained in the large cities had to face.

The entire white population of the Colonies at the outbreak of hostilities in 1775 has been estimated by various authorities, including the historian Bancroft, at 2,100,000, of which about one-third was settled in New England, and the remaining two-thirds in New York, Pennsylvania, and the Southern Colonies. Dr. Carroll estimated the Catholics in all the Colonies at that time at 25,000. It is well known that a considerable number of the colonists were adverse to the War of Independence, and these refrained from giving any support to the struggling Colonies. Lecky estimates (England in the Eighteenth century, IV, 153) that one-half of the Americans were either openly or secretly hostile to the revolution. Other writers are content to fix the proportion of those who were disaffected towards the cause of the patriots at one-third of the entire population. but the records show very few, if any, Irish, whether Catholics or Protestants, among those lukewarm patriots. On the contrary, Irish immigrants, and the sons of Irishmen in the various colonies were among the most active and unwavering supporters in the cause of liberty. Ramsay says, in his "History of the American Revolution", II, 311: "the Irish in America, with few exceptions, were attached to independence". Whether in the counsels of state, or while enduring the hardships of military service, or by the material and financial support which they gave to the struggling colonists, they contributed so generously of their blood and treasure that without their aid the issue of the contest may well appear doubtful.

In June, 1779, when Parliament was investigating the reverses sustained by the British armies in their American campaigns, Joseph Galloway, who had held various offices under the Crown in Philadelphia until the evacuation of that city in 1778 was asked: "That part of the rebel army that enlisted in the service of congress were they chiefly composed of natives of America, or were the greatest part of them English, Scotch and Irish?" His answer was: "The names and places of their nativity being taken down, I can answer the question with precision. They were scarcely one-fourth natives of America; about one-half Irish; the other fourth English and Scotch." And this was confirmed by the English Major General Robinson, who, testifying before the same committee, said: "I remember General Lee telling me that half of the rebel army were from Ireland" ("House of Commons Reports", 5th Session, 14th Parliament, III, 303, 431; see also "The Evidence as given before a committee of the House of Commons on the detail and conduct of the American War, London, 1785", cited in Bagenal, "The American Irish", p. 12). And these facts gave point to the taunt thrown at the ministers by Lord Mountjoy during the debate in Parliament over the repeal of the Penal Laws: "You have lost America through the Irish." "It is a fact beyond question" says Plowden, "that most of the early successes in America were immediately owing to the vigorous exertions and prowess of the Irish immigrants who bore arms in that cause" (Historical Review of the State of Ireland, II, 178). The historians Marmion and Gordon write to the same effect.

Speaking of the Irish immigrants a recent American writer, Douglas Campbell says: "They contributed elements to American thought and life without which the United States of to-day would be impossible. By them American Independence was first openly advocated and but for their efforts seconding those of New England Puritans that Independence would not have been secured" (The Puritan in Holland, England, and America, II, 471). And Lecky speaking of the Ulster emigrants writes: "They went with hearts burning with indignation, and in the War of Independence they were almost to a man on the side of the insurgents. They supplied some of the best soldiers of Washington. The famous Pennsylvania Line was mostly Irish" (op. cit., II, 262). So, too, we may add, the Maryland Line was largely made up of Irish exiles or of the sons of Irishmen. The colonial records of New York, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, the Carolinas and other localities show that from Lexington to Yorktown Irishmen took part in every campaign, and W. E. Robinson declares, "There was no battlefield in the Revolution in which Irish blood did not flow freely for American Independence". Nor did the Irish shrink from making large pecuniary sacrifices for the cause. In 1870, when the Continental Army, severely tried by nearly five years of exhausting struggle, was in desperate straits for necessary clothing and supplies, to say nothing of the pay of the troops, a fund of two million dollars was raised by subscription from ninety of the most prominent American patriots in the Pennsylvania Colony. Twenty-nine of these subscribers were Irish either by birth or parentage, all members of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick, and their united subscriptions amounted to four hundred and forty thousand dollars.

Among the signers of the Declaration of Independence thirteen (some authorities claim more) were of Irish origin. They were Matthew Thorton and William Whipple who signed for New Hampshire, James Smith, James Wilson, and George Taylor of Pennsylvania, Thomas Lynch, Jr., and Edward Rutledge of South Carolina, George Read and Thomas McKean of Delaware, Charles Carroll of Carrollton, Maryland, Thomas Nelson, Jr., of Virginia, William Hooper of North Carolina, and Philip Livingston of New York. It was promulgated over the signatures of the President of the Continental Congress and of Charles Thompson, its Irish secretary. Col. John Nixon, a member of the Committee of Safety and son of an Irishman born in the County of Wexford, first read that document to a great concourse of people assembled in the State House yard, Philadelphia, and it was first printed from the press of another Irishman, John Dunlap of Tyrone, who had already (1771) started the "Pennsylvania Packet", the first daily newspaper published in the United States. The convention whose deliberation produced the written constitution upon which the Government rests, included among its members a large proportion of Irishmen. Prominent among them were William Livingston, the first Governor of New Jersey, William Paterson, later to be Governor of the same state, Daniel Carroll of Maryland, Thomas FitzSimons of Philadelphia, George Read of Delaware, Richard Dobbs Spaight, afterwards Governor of North Carolina and Hugh Williamson of the same state, Pierce Butler and John Rutledge of South Carolina, the latter to become afterwards Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. One of the most influential men in the service of the struggling patriots was Charles Thompson, born in the County of Derry, Ireland, who had arrived at Newcastle, Delaware, in 1740. He was the confidential friend of every leader of the Colonies throughout the struggle, and his knowledge of affairs and administrative capacity were so universally conceded that he was chosen secretary of the First Continental Congress, serving the succeeding congresses in the same capacity for a period of fourteen years.

Among the officers of Irish nationality in the Continental Army who won distinction by brilliant service, we may name the following. General Henry Knox, son of a Belfast emigrant, who was master of ordnance, served in every battle with Washington, and was appointed first secretary of War on the organization of Government in 1789. General John Stark, the hero of Bennington, another native of Ireland. General Anthony Wayne whose father had emigrated from Limerick, and who commanded the troops sometimes known as the "Line of Ireland". His successful campaigns in Georgia and the Carolinas and at the battle of Monmouth are historic. For his services, including the recapture of Stony Point from the British, Congress voted him its thanks and a gold medal. General Richard Montgomery, a native of Donegal, in command of the expedition to Canada, who fell before Quebec in 1775, one of the earliest victims in the cause of American liberty. A monument to him in St. Paul's churchyard in the city of New York marks the nation's appreciation of his services. General Stephan Moylan, a native of Cork, of which city his brother was the Catholic bishop. He was First Quartermaster General of the Continental Army and afterwards commanded the Pennsylvania troops known as Moylan's Dragoons. Richard Butler, a native of Kilkenny, who participated in many engagements, and was present at the surrender of Yorktown. Daniel Morgan, a native of Ballinascreen, County Derry, Ireland, the hero of Cowpens, North Carolina, where with five hundred men, mostly Irish, and sons of Irishmen, he defeated twice the number of British troops and took many of them prisoners. Edward Hand, a native of county Kerry, who had served as surgeon of the Irish brigade (of France) in Canada. On the retirement of the French, he cast his lot with the Americans and served throughout the Revolutionary War with distinction. Andrew Lewis, an emigrant from Donegal, who came to Virginia in 1732, and served with his four brothers until the close of the war. His statue in Capitol Square in the city of Richmond shows that his adopted state, Virginia, recognized him as one of her most distinguished sons. George Clinton was the son of Charles Clinton, and native of Longford, Ireland, who landed at Cape Cod in 1729. Besides his military service he became the first Governor of New York, in which capacity he served twenty-one years and was then (1801) chosen Vice-President of the United States. His brother James was in charge of one of the New York regiments and succeeded to the command made vacant by the death of General Montgomery, and his nephew De Witt Clinton became governor of that state in 1817. John Sullivan, one of the most distinguished commanders in the Revolutionary War, was son of John Sullivan, an Irish immigrant from Limerick who settled in Belfast, Maine in 1723. His capture of Fort William and Mary near Portsmouth in 1774, was the first blow struck for independence. Besides many other civil offices which he filled after the close of the war, he was President of the Commonwealth of New Hampshire. His brother James Sullivan was chosen Governor of Massachusetts. In addition we might name General Walter Stewart and William Irvine, who regiments formed part of the famous Pennsylvania Line. William Thompson, William Maxwell, James Hogan, John Rutledge, brother of Edward Rutledge, one of the signers, Colonel Charles Lynch, son of John Lynch, an Irish immigrant who with his brother John founded the settlement now known as Lynchburg, Va., besides many others whose names would unduly extend this list. In recounting the part taken by the Irish in achievement of our independence, it would be ungracious if we neglected to record the presence and the services of those other Irish who, equally exiles as their brothers in America, had taken service in the armies of France and had thereby become allies in that memorable struggle, fighting American battles both by sea and land under the banner of the fleur-de-lis. We refer especially to the Dillon and Walsh regiments of Catholic and Irish troops which in October, 1781, under de Rochambeau and de Grassi helped to surround the army of Cornwallis at Yorktown and compelled its surrender to the "combined forces of America and France".

The first naval engagement of the War of Independence was fought and won 11 May, 1775, shortly after the battle of Lexington, by Jeremiah O'Brien of Machias, Maine. This son of an Irish immigrant with his four brothers and a few other townsmen went out in O'Brien's lumber schooner "The Liberty", and against great odds attacked and captured the British armed schooner, "Margaretta", the captain of which had previously ordered the pine tree set up in the town as a liberty pole to be taken down. Easily the foremost figure in the naval service of the American patriots was the Catholic Irishman John Barry (q. v.), a native of Wexford, to whom a commission was issued by the Continental Congress on 14 October, 1775, when he was placed in command of the "Lexington" and later commanded the "Alliance". With the former he captured the British war vessel the "Atlanta", and, adds the historian, "the 'Lexington' was thus the first vessel that bore the Continental flag to victory upon the ocean" (see Preble, "Origins of the Flag", p. 243). How highly Barry's character and ability were esteemed may be judged from the circumstance that the British General Howe offered £2000 and the command of the best frigate in the English navy if he would abandon the service of the patriots; to which Barry made the memorable answer that he had devoted himself to the cause of his country and not the value and command of the whole English fleet could seduce him from it (see Frost, "History of the American Navy", p. 86). On 4 July, 1794, after the Government had regularly organized its navy, its first commission was issued to John Barry who thus became its senior captain, the highest rank then known in the naval service. These appointments, together with his devoted service continued throughout the war, clearly justify the designation of "Father of the American Navy" accorded to Barry. His remains are interred in St. Mary's Catholic Churchyard in Philadelphia and a life-sized statue erected (1906) by the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick within the precincts of Independence Hall attests to the esteem in which Barry as held. It should not be overlooked that Barry's life as a Catholic was as consistent and edifying as his public career was patriotic and valuable to the country of his adoption.

In the second war with England (1812) the services rendered by the Irishmen and the sons of Irishmen were among the most important in that memorable context. Johnson Blakely, who fought and captured the British frigate "Reindeer", was Irish by birth. Steven Decatur, who captured the "Macedonian" was of Irish parentage. So were Charles Stewart, Captain James Lawrence, and Thomas McDonough whose victory on Lake Champlain was a famous achievement. At the battle of Lake Erie the British fleet was almost annihilated, and the most brilliant naval victory of the war was won under the command of Oliver Hazard Perry, the son of an Irish mother (Sarah Alexander). On land, the last decisive battle of the war, that at New Orleans, was won by troop largely of Irish origin under the leadership of Andrew Jackson, another son of Irish parents.

The devotion of the Irish in America to the country of their adoption and their readiness to sacrifice themselves in her defence were again conspicuously demonstrated when the safety of the republic was imperilled by the unfortunate Civil War. During that long struggle (1861-1865), Irish patriotism and Irish valour were everywhere in evidence, and impartial historians have freely acknowledged the great and important military service rendered by the Irish element in defence of the Union. There are no statistics showing the full percentage of the Irish element in the federal services in that war, but that it constituted a very large proportion there can be no doubt. A table published by C. G. Lee of Washington, an authority on the statistics of the Civil War, shows the enlistment in the Union army of 144,200 men of Irish birth. D. P. Conyngham, the historian of the Irish brigade, estimated the number of Irishmen so enlisted at 175,000 (see "The Irish Brigade and its Campaigns", p. 8). but these figures very inadequately represent the part taken by Irishmen and their descendants in the defense of the Union. In the analysis of the nationality of 337,800 soldiers from the State of New York, compiled by B. A. Gould, actuary of the U. S. Sanitary Commission (see "New York in the War of the Rebellion", p. 49, by Frederick Phisterer, late Captain of the U. S. Army), the race or nationality by birth of 230,267 of them was obtained by official records and, estimating from these it was found that of such total number of soldiers supplied from that state there were:

Natives of the United States: 203,622
Of foreign birth: 134,178

the latter being divide as follows:

Natives of Ireland: 51,206
Natives of Germany: 36,680
Natives of British America: 19,985
Natives of England: 14,024
Natives of other foreign countries: 12,283
Total: 134,178

Of those registered as natives of the United States, it is safe to assert that a large part was made up of sons of Irish parents and, judging from the history of Canadian immigration, that the number credited to British America included many others, sons of Irish emigrants to Canada who, later, had taken up their residence in the United States. In view of the great extent of the Irish element already present in the population registered as native-born, as before indicated, it can hardly be questioned that at least one-fourth of the soldiers so recorded were descendants of Irish immigrants. If to these we add only a fraction of those registered as native to British America, sons of Irish emigrants who had landed in Canada before taking up residence in the United States, the Irish race would appear to have furnished about one-third of the entire quota of soldiers supplied by the State of New York in defence of the Union. But the troops from other states, notably Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Illinois, included in each case a large contingent of soldiers of Irish birth or descent, whose number may fairly be estimated as between one-third and one-fourth of the total number of troops supplied by those several states. Not a few regiments were composed almost exclusively of men of Irish birth or Irish descent, such as the 9th and 28th Massachusetts volunteers under the command of Colonel Cahill and Colonel Richard Byrnes respectively, and later under Colonel Thomas Cass (who fell at Malvern Hill) and Colonel Patrick Guiney; the 88th New York Volunteers under Colonel Patrick Kelly, and the 69th of the same state which assembled under the order of their colonel, Michael Corcoran, bidding his men to "rally to the support of the Constitution and the laws of the United States" — a sentiment which was the inspiration of the subsequent outpouring of Irish soldiers in defence of the Union; 166th Pennsylvania Volunteers, recruited in Philadelphia, and later forming part of Meagher's Irish brigade, which went to the front in command of Colonel Dennis Heenan; the 37th N. Y. (Irish Rifles); and Meagher's Zouaves under the command of Thomas F. Meagher.

At the very outset of the war, an Irish brigade made up of about 2000 Catholic Irishmen was organized in Chicago by Colonel James A Mulligan, who after four years of hard service fell mortally wounded in one of the engagements at Winchester, Va. An Irish legion, composed almost exclusively of Irish Catholic soldiers, was mustered into service as the 90th Illinois Volunteers, recruited largely through the exertions of an Irish priest, Father Dunn, and was one of the first regiments to respond to the president's call for troops. The first fortification thrown up for the defence of Washington was Fort Corcoran, on Arlington Heights, built by the men of the New York 69th Regiment. When the ranks of these regiments had been thinned by death or from disability by wounds or disease, they were filled with fresh volunteers, many of them being immigrants only recently arrived from Ireland. One of these, the 69th of New York, was thus recruited thrice during the war. Besides these entire regiments of Irish soldiers, there were many regiments from the different states, each containing one or more companies composed exclusively of Irishmen. Later the Irish brigade of New York was organized under the command of General Thomas F. Meagher, with the 69th as its nucleus, the 63rd and 88th regiments of New York being added, numbering in all over 2500 men. Another Irish legion, better known as the Corcoran Legion, composing four full regiments, namely the 69th, 115th, 164th and 170th, was organized in 1862 by General Michael Corcoran upon his return to New York after a year's confinement in a confederate war prison. Irish priests, among then Rev. (now Archbishop) John Ireland, Bernard O'Reilly, Lawrence S. McMahon, afterwards Bishop of Hartford, William Corby, Thomas J. Mooney, James Dillon, John Scully, Daniel Mullen, Philip Sheridan, Paul Gillan, Edward McKee, and others, accompanied the regiments as chaplains, sharing the hardships of war with them. To recount the deeds of the Irish soldiers in that war would be to write a history of most of its important battles. At Antietam, Williamsburg, Fair Oaks, Chickahominy, Malvern Hill, Chancerlorsville, Spottsylvania, Bull Run, Gettysburg, the Wilderness and Fredericksburg, the Irish soldier was found in the fore-front of battle, braving every danger, and unhesitatingly giving up life itself in defence of the flag of his adopted country.

The official war records contain frequent acknowledgement of the valuable service rendered by Irish regiments in these various battles, and distinguished officers in both contending armies have testified to the heroic conduct of the Irish soldier. There are no statistics to show the total number of men of Irish blood who in the various armies and during the four years of struggle gave their lives in defence of their country but it was unquestionably very great. At Fredericksburg alone, in the memorable attack on Marye's Heights, the Irish brigade was so depleted that the number of men remaining alive was so small that not enough were left over for a general to command, and General Meagher, their commander, thereupon resigned his commission (see "The Irish Brigade", pp. 349, 350, 356). According to the statistics over 4000 men of the brigade and legion lost their lives on the field of battle, or of wounds received, or of disease contracted in the service. The 69th New York lost 998 men during the war. At Antietam, out of 18 officers and 210 men engaged, it lost in killed and wounded 16 officers and 112 men. Out of 1703 men enlisted in the Irish 28th of Massachusetts from the organization to the close of service, the killed, wounded, and missing in action reached the large number of 1133, of whom 408 were killed or wounded in the campaign of the Wilderness (The Irish Brigade, p. 586). And the last Union general killed in the war was the Irish General Thomas H. Smith, who fell at Petersburg on April, 1865.

Space does not permit an enumeration of all the names of men of Irish blood who held responsible command in the Union armies of that war. Some of the generals were Logan, Lalor, and Dougherty of Illinois, Gorman of Minnesota, Magenis and Sullivan of Indiana, Reilly and Mulligan of Ohio, Stevenson of Missouri, and with him James Shields, already a hero of two wars and United States Senator from three states, Shirley of Michigan, Smith of Delaware, Meagher, Corcoran, Patrick H. O'Rourke, P. H. Jones, and Thomas F. Sweeney of New York, George G. Meade, Geary, and Birney of Pennsylvania, McPherson, McDowell, and McCook, the dashing Phil McKearney, and George B. McClellan. It was another Irishman's son, "little" Phil Sheridan, the greatest cavalry leader of the war, whose brilliant work just preceding the surrender at Appomattox undoubtedly contributed greatly to that result. When hostilities ceased, Sheridan as lieutenant general occupied the next to highest rank in the military service of the country, while at the same time the highest command in the navy was held by Admiral Porter, the descendant of an Irishman, the next highest command being held by Admiral Rowan, a native-born Irishman.

While men of the Irish race were engaged on the battlefield in defence of their adopted country, accompanied and encouraged by the clergy, the religious orders of women within the Church were no less diligent in nursing the sick and wounded in camps and hospitals. Among these volunteer nurses it is no exaggeration to say that the Irish element predominated. Thus in July, 1862, at the request of the Secretary of War, a band of seven Sisters of Mercy left New York and took charge of the Soldiers' Hospital at Beaufort, N. C. which was later on transferred to Newbern. This was in charge of Mother Augustine McKenna, a native of County Monaghan, Ireland. Several of these, exhausted by the hardships incident to their work, gave up their lives only to be replaced by others from their community in New York. The hospital at Jefferson City, Mo. was put in charge of another company of nuns of the same order who came from their home in Chicago, and when this institution had to be abandoned, they took charge of the hospital department of the steamboat "Empress", which was about to start for the battlefield of Shiloh. These Chicago sisters were in charge of Mother Alphonsus Butler, and Confederate and Union soldiers alternately came under their care (see "Annals of the Sisters of Mercy", III, 279, 284). The Stanton and Douglas military hospitals were placed in charge of the same sisters. The Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul sent from Emmitsburg and other houses many of their members, whose ministrations in the hospital at Norfolk and elsewhere elicited the grateful admiration of Protestant and Catholic alike.

The Hospital of the Good Samaritan at Cincinnati was the gift of some enlightened and appreciative Protestant gentlemen to Sister Anthony, born at Limerick, whose services in the field hospitals had won for her the title of "Ministering Angel of the Army of the Tennessee" (see McGuire, "Irish in America", p. 482). The earliest use of the Mercy Hospital at Pittsburgh, established by the Irish Sisters of Mercy, was for the relief of the sick and disabled soldiers returning from the Mexican War, 1848. At Helena and Little Rock, Ark., hospitals were maintained by the same community, who served the sick and wounded, now of the Union, next of the Confederate, forces, as the fortunes of war shifted the control of the territory in which the hospital stood. There were Irish women in the community of the Sisters of St. Joseph who served at Harrisburg, caring for the disabled soldiers and taking charge of the floating hospitals that received the wounded from the Virginia battle-fields. The same community afterwards (1864) opened and maintained an asylum at Philadelphia for the orphaned daughters of the Union soldiers of the Civil War (Hist. Sketch of the Church in Philadelphia, p. 193), and all over the country the orphans, made such by war, found shelter under the hospitable roofs of one or another of the religious communities, whose members were largely of the Irish race.

The record of the service rendered by the Irish in that war would be incomplete without reference to the part taken by John Hughes, the great Irish Archbishop of New York. This distinguished prelate, the friend of President Abraham Lincoln and his Secretary of State, William H. Seward, undertook at their request a confidential mission to Europe in 1861, where at the French Court and in other influential circles he advocated the justice of the conduct of the government at Washington in resisting the secession of the States and the consequent disruption of the Union. At that time the British Government and English public men with few notable exceptions had manifested their hostility to the Government, as they continued to do afterwards, and efforts were being made (as was believed) to engage France in an alliance with England, with a view to their joint acknowledgment of the Southern States as an independent nation. This would have entitled the Confederacy to all the rights of a belligerent, and would have permitted England to become its ally openly and to furnish troops and supplies in support of the rebellion. But the efforts in question failed, and the Government gratefully acknowledged the patriotic services performed by Archbishop Hughes in that behalf.

But the genius of the Irish race, which thus helped found the Republic and to preserve it when it needed defenders, was not lacking in times of peace in the development of the country and in the practice of the arts and sciences. One of the greatest enterprises of the last century, and the one which contributed most to the supremacy of the State of New York, namely the construction of the Erie Canal, was planned and carried out during the year 1817-18 by De Witt Clinton, then governor of that state, who was a descendant of Charles Clinton, himself an immigrant, born at Longford, Ireland, as already noted. But this great enterprise had already, as early as 1874, been publicly advocated by another Irish immigrant, Christopher Coles, then living in the city of New York, who had been an engineer and an instructor in the Continental Army. With almost prophetic insight, the same Irish immigrant proposed a system of water supply for New York City by means of aqueducts, models of which he publicly exhibited, thus anticipating by more than half a century the existing Croton aqueduct system. Another Irishman's son, James Sullivan, Governor of Massachusetts, projected the Middlesex (Mass,) Canal. It is a well-known fact that the actual work of construction of the railroads and canals during the greater part of the last century was accomplished mainly by Irish hands and Irish energy. In the higher plane of railroad operation Irish talent and ability have been constantly in evidence, and in the honest and successful administration of the affairs of a railroad system, no name stands higher than that of the late Samuel Sloan, an emigrant from the north of Ireland. An Irish surveyor, Jasper O'Farrell, laid out the city of San Francisco. Among the California pioneers (1828) there were Irish Martins, Sullivans, and Murphys, including Don Timotheo Murphy, who had lived two years in Peru, and who with O'Farrell gave the land on which the first orphan asylum in San Francisco was built. In later days, the Floods, Friars, and O'Briens are associated with the successful development of the great mining industries of that state, while Eugene Kelly, another great Catholic Irishman of San Francisco, stands out as a type of the successful merchant and banker.

In scientific investigation and discovery, Robert Fulton, whose name is identified with the first success of steam navigation in America, Samuel F. B. Morse of electric telegraph fame, and Cyrus McCormick, the inventor of the mowing machine, which has revolutionized agricultural operations the world over were sons or grandsons of Irish immigrants from Ulster. The cotton industry, to which new England owes so much of its wealth, had its beginning in the inventions and improvements in machinery designed by, and under the direction of Patrick, Tracy, Jackson, the son of an Irish immigrant, who had settled at Newburyport, Mass. A cotton mill erected by him in Waltham, Mass., in 1813, is said to have probably been the first one in the world to have combined all the operations necessary for converting the raw cotton into finished cloth (see McGee, "Irish Settlers, etc.", p. 217-218. It was the same Patrick Tracey Jackson who founded the city of Lowell (named after his partner in business) and connected that city with metropolis of New England by building the Boston and Lowell Railroad (McGee, op cit., 220-222).

Passing to the arts, we find that in the country's history, many representatives of the Irish race who have risen to eminence, Thus in sculpture, Thomas Crawford, whose statue of Armed Liberty surmounts the dome of the Capitol in Washington, and whose bronze doors at the entrance to the building are a notable work of art; Launt Thompson; Martin and Joseph Milmore; James E. Kelly, and Augustus St. Gaudens, whose statues of Lincoln in Chicago and Farragut and Sherman in New York, and the Parnell memorial in Dublin (his last work), are among his admired productions. In architecture, the young Irishman, James Hoban, resident of Charleston, whose plan for the construction of the Executive Mansion (the White House) at Washington was adopted in competition with others. In portrait painting, John Singleton Copley, Charles C. Ingam, and John Ramage, accounted the best miniature painter of his time (1789), and to whom George Washington sat for his portrait; William McGrath, J. Francis Murphy, Thomas Hovedon, and Thomas S. Cummings. Asa Gray, the famous botanist, was the grandson of an immigrant from Ulster. In horticulture, John Barry and William Doogue, who laid out the grounds of the Centennial exhibition in Philadelphia, and the Public Gardens at Boston, were of Irish birth. In music, Patrick S. Gilmore. As exponents of the dramatic art, Lawrence Barrett, John McCullough, William James Florence, Dion Boucicault, John Brougham, John Drew, Barney Williams (O'Flaherty) stand forth as types of Irish genius which instructed and delighted bygone generations. In literature the American Irish may claim as representative of their race the scholarly Kenricks, Francis Patrick, Archbishop of Baltimore, and Peter Richard, Archbishop of St. Louis, both born in Dublin, John England, Bishop of Charleston, a native of Cork, Edmund O'Callghan, the historian of New York, John Mitchell, Brother Azarius (P. F. Mullany), John Gilmary Shea, John O'Kane Murray, Father James Fittin, the historian of the Church in New England, Rev. Stephen Byrne, O. S. D., Rev. John O'Brien, Rev. Bernard O'Reilly, Matthew Carey, James McShery, Henry Giles, William E. Robinson ("Richelieu"), John R.G. Hassard, for many years managing editor of the "New York Tribune", D. P. Conyngham, and many others. Among the poets are John Savage, Rev. Abram J, Ryan, the 'poet priest of the South", Rev. W, D. Kelly, Richard Dalton Williams, physician and littérateur, John Boyle O'Reilly, whose excellent verse rivals, if it does not surpass his prose writings, Charles G. Halpine (Miles O'Reilly), and Theodore O'Hara, whose lyric "The Bivouac of the Dead" will ever remain a classic.

Among the journalists and publishers of Irish birth or parentage, we may name John Dunlap, publisher (1771) of the "Pennsylvania Packet"; Matthew Carey who (1785) founded the "Pennsylvania Herald" and in 1790 issued the first Catholic Bible published in the United States; Matthew Lyon, the "Hampden of Congress" who (1793) published the "Farmer's Library", one of the earliest newspaper published in Vermont; George Pardow of the "Truth Teller" 1828; Rev. R. J. O'Flaherty, who edited "The Jesuit", and his successors, the publishers and editors of the "Boston Pilot", namely, Patrick Donahue, Thomas D'Arcy McGee, Rev. John Roddan, John Boyle O'Reilly; Thomas O'Connor, publisher of the "Shamrock", whose son Charles became the most distinguished jurist of his time; Bishop John England, who founded and edited the "Catholic Miscellany"; Rev. James Keogh, first editor of the "Philadelphia Catholic Standard"; Bishop Michael O'Connor, who founded the "Pittsburgh Catholic", and Rev. Tobias Mullen, afterwards Bishop of Erie, who continued its publication; Bernard Dornin, an exile with Emmet and MacNevin, and John Doyle, early publishers of Catholic books in New York; Dr. P. E. Moriarty, O. S. A., distinguished both as a writer and controversialist; Daniel W. Mahoney and Charles A. Hardy, who published "The Catholic Standard" of Philadelphia and later "The American Catholic Quarterly Review", under the editorship of the scholarly Dr. James A. Cocoran; James A. McMaster, editor of the "Freeman's Journal"; Patrick J. Meehan, of the "Irish American"; Edward Dungan and James B. Kirker and their successor; Felix E. O'Rourke, Denis and James Sadlier, all of New York; Eugene Cummiskey and John Murphy of Baltimore; Lawrence Kehoe of New York; besides many other Irishmen and sons of Irishmen whose names are identified with Irish and Catholic journalism and the publication of Irish and Catholic literature in the United States. Prominent in the ranks of secular journalism were Horace Greeley, of the "New York Tribune", E. L. Godkin, of the "New York Evening Post", William Cassidy of the "Albany Argus", Henry O'Reilly of the "Rochester Adviser", and Hugh J. Hastings.

Nearly one-half of all the presidents of the United States have been of Celtic extraction. The list includes James Monroe, James K. Polk, Andrew Jackson, James Buchanan, Ulysses S. Grant, Chester A. Arthur, Benjamin Harrison, Andrew Johnson, and William McKinley. And at no time since the establishment of the Government has the Irish race been without representation in Congress, among the judiciary, in the diplomatic service, and in the cabinets of presidents. Many of the men named for their distinguished military services afterwards held posts of honour in the civil service of the Government. To the names already mentioned of patriots of the Revolution, who afterwards became governors or chief justices of their respective states, we may add William Claiborne, of Irish birth, first Governor of Louisiana when that state was admitted to the Union (1812), Andrew Jackson, Governor of Florida, General James Shields, first Governor of the Oregon Territory, Thomas F. Meagher, first Governor of Montana territory, and Edward Kavanaugh, Governor of Maine in 1843. At the bar and on the bench the list of names of Irish men who acquired distinction would fill a volume. When an attempt was made in 1813 in a New York court to compel the Jesuit Father Anthony Kohlman to disclose matters communicated to him in a confession, it was the Irish Presbyterian lawyer, William Sampson, one of the exiles of '98, who justified Father Kohlman's refusal to reveal the information thus acquired and vindicated the principal (since incorporated in statute law) protecting ministers of the Gospel against being compelled to disclose matters so communicated. Another Irish exile, Thomas Addis Emmet, attained distinction as one of the leaders of the bar in New York. In later days James T. Brady, David Graham, Charles O'Connor, John McKeon, Charles P. Daly, who to his judicial accomplishments added those of broad scholarship and served for many years as President of the American Geographical Society, Robert J. Dillon, Richard O. Gorman of New York, Francis Kernan of Utica, afterwards U. S. Senator from New York, Bernard Casserly, U. S. Senator from California, Daniel Dougherty of Philadelphia, Patrick A. Collins of Boston, are a few only of the names of men of that profession who by their talents and high character have reflected honour on the race from which they sprang.

In medicine another distinguished Irish exile of '98, William James MacNevin, achieved national reputation in his profession. Prior to his time, Edward Hand, John Hart, Richard Ferguson and Ephraim McDowell, all natives of Ireland, had attained distinction as practitioners in this country. Irish physicians and surgeons were found attached to all the Irish regiments serving in the Civil War. A few are now surviving, honoured wherever known. Together they constituted a body of devoted and self-sacrificing men, true to the noblest ideals of their profession. In 1902 it was an Irish American, Surgeon Major James Carroll, who with another United Sates Army surgeon deliberately submitted himself to the perilous experiment then being made by the Government to ascertain by what means the yellow-fever germ was transmitted. As a result he contracted the disease and gave up his life as a sacrifice in the cause of science for the good of humanity. To the American-born son of Irish immigrants, Dr. Joseph O'Dwyer, humanity the world over is indebted for the process of intubation of the larynx in cases of diphtheria and the invention of the instruments used in that operation. Always known for his charities, Dr. O'Dwyer declined to patent his invention, thereby sacrificing large pecuniary gains. The merit of these inventions was recognized by the medical profession both in this country and in Europe, and their use has resulted in saving the lives of thousands of children. The Carney Hospital, devoted to the relief of suffering humanity, was a gift to the citizens of Boston from Andrew Carney, a successful Irishman resident in that city. A similar foundation was established at St. Louis, Mo., named after the donor, John Mullanphy, another prosperous Irishman, who likewise established the Mullanphy orphanage, a religious and charitable endowment at St. Louis.

Cornelius Heeny, an Irishman resident in Brooklyn, gave a large estate to the "Brooklyn Benevolent Society"" in trust for the poor, and especially poor orphan children, and procured the incorporation of the society, which continues to administer his charity. Still another Irish immigrant, Judge Miles P. O'Connor, established and endowed a home for orphans at San José, Cal., besides distributing a large fortune during his lifetime towards the support of works of charity and religion throughout the country. A statue in one of the public squares of New Orleans, inscribed "Margaret", marks the appreciation of the people of that community for Margaret Haughery, an Irishwoman whose charitable labours during life won for her the title of "the orphan's friend", and who bequeathed a considerable fortune for the support of the orphan asylum which she had greatly helped to establish. Of the lesser gifts of Irish men and women to the cause of religion and humanity it would be impossible to give even a summary. It is enough to state that no people have given more freely or more steadily for these object than have the Irish, and that a great number of the churches, chapels, convents, hospitals, asylums, and homes for sick and destitute humanity which are the boast of the present generation have all had their origin in the piety, goodwill, and generous contributions of the early Irish immigrants and their descendants.

A notable feature in the history of the Irish arriving in this country has been their tendency to associate themselves in societies composed exclusively of persons of their own race. As early as 1737 we find twenty-six "Gentlemen, merchants and others, natives of Ireland or of Irish extraction" assembled at Boston on St. Patrick's Day to organize the Charitable Irish Society. The professed object of their association was to relieve their fellow-countrymen who might be in need and to preserve the spirit of Irish nationality. With like purpose the Society of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick was established at Philadelphia in 1771, the New York society of the same name in 1784, the Hibernian Society for the Relief of Emigrants from Ireland in Philadelphia in 1790, and the Hibernian Society of Charleston, S. C., in 1799. Later on, and as the Irish element in the population increased, similar societies were established in other cities with the same benevolent purposes. In all of them the bond of union was the Irish nationality of the members either by birth or parentage, and the maintenance of such national spirit was one of the objects of the society. But this devotion to the history and traditions of their native land was constantly and inseparably coupled with an unwavering attachment to their adopted country and the Irish in America have demonstrated beyond question that their affection for the land from which they or their fathers had sprung was no hindrance to the discharge of their duty as American citizens. Indeed, it needed no declaration to prove that men who were thus associated were devoted to the interests of their adopted country, for the list of men who, having done valiant service for that country in its hour of need, became later the trusted officers of the Government which they had helped to establish, and held high rank in the social and business circles of the respective communities in which they lived.

With the great increase in the volume of immigration in later years (we refer to the period since 1820), the Irish immigrants, both those newly arriving, then mostly Catholics, as well as those already residing in the country, found themselves confronted with a deep-seated sense of antagonism based on both racial and religious prejudice entertained by certain elements of the population. While this spirit of hostility was avowed against all residents of foreign birth, Irish Catholics, by reason of their religion, their large numbers, and the resulting influence which as citizens they exercised in the political contests of the time, were singled out as a class to be especially attacked by this un-American section of the nation. This anti-Irish and anti-Catholic sentiment was of unmistakable English origin. It had its beginning here in the legislation of the Colonies, which, copying the English penal laws directed against Catholic Ireland, proscribed the Catholic religion and ostracized the Irish "Papists". It was embodied in the state church establishments of several of the colonies. Although the principal of freedom of religion was definitely incorporated in the Federal Constitution, yet so persistent and obstinate was this prejudice that it found expression in the original constitutions of various of the states which made the profession of the Protestant religion a condition of holding office in the Government. It was further manifested in the repeated efforts to change the naturalization laws so as to withhold the rights and privileges of citizenship from all immigrants except upon onerous conditions, including a fourteen years' residence in the country.

We are not attempting to detail the history or development of this spirit of prejudice against the Irish Catholic immigrant. Suffice it to say that it was only too real and widespread, and that, under the guidance of bigots and unprincipled agitators, it took shape and form in the various native American and Know-Nothing movements which were organized during the period of 1830 to 1855. As a result of the activities of these associations, Irish Catholics in many parts of the country, almost alone among all classes of the population, were subjected to insult and oppression and were made the victims of mob violence, their dwellings demolished, their families made homeless, their churches and convents fired, and their clergy ill-treated. Prior to any threatening manifestation of this anti-Irish sentiment, there had existed various societies made up of Irishmen or their descendants, known as the Sons of Erin, Montgomery-Greens, Irish Volunteers, various Provident Societies, and others, whose social and benevolent purposes in no wise diminished the patriotic attachment of their members to the country of their adoption. Although the number of such societies and their membership were comparatively small, yet they served as rallying-points for the maintenance of the spirit of Irish nationality, and as centres of the charitable activity of their members. When the fateful spirit of native Americanism darkened the land and the Irish Catholics realized the need of sustaining one another against a common aggressor, these societies multiplied, and many of the Irish thus became proficient in military drill and the use of arms. There were likewise various county associations, composed of immigrants or their descendants from the various counties of Ireland and named after their respective counties.

The great increase in these societies, and the fact that in important political contests their members were arrayed almost in a unit in opposition to political parties identified with these anti-Catholic movements, were made pretexts for accusing the Irish of a certain clannishness which unfitted them to be good citizens. Some, even of their own co-religionists (though not of their race), deplored the fact that the Irish seemed to have isolated themselves from their fellow citizens, and thereby subjected themselves, however undeservedly, to the reproach of having put Irish nationality above American citizenship. But the wrongs committed against the Catholic Irish immigrants (at that time mostly poor and incapable of resistance), the insults and injuries put upon them because of their race and faith, and the attacks upon their persons and property, which almost without exception went unpunished by law, are an effective answer to these criticisms.

In later days many Gaelic societies have been organized, as well as various Home Rule associations and branches of the Irish Land League. Through these organizations the Irish in America have sought to co-operate with their brethren at home in the movements undertaken for the improvement of the political, social, and industrial conditions of the Irish people in their native land, and the success attending those movements is due in large part to the sympathy of the American Irish and their generous contributions of money. The constant affection manifested in a practical way by the Irish in America for their less fortunate brethren in Ireland may be judged by the large amounts of money remitted to the latter out of the earnings of the Irish in this country. As early as 1834 R. R. Madden ascertained (see Madden, "Memoirs", p. 105) that $30,000 was then being sent over annually. This assistance was increased from year to year until during the period from 1848 to 1864 the American Irish sent home no less a sum than £13,000,000, that is $65,000,000 (see Parnell Movement, p. 166). The report of the British Emigration Commissioners for 1873 (cited in O'Rourke, op. cit., p. 503), states that in 1870, £727,408 (equal to $3,000,000) was sent to Ireland from North America, and that in the twenty-three years from 1848 to 1870 £16,634,000 or $83,000,000 was so remitted though banks and commercial houses, apart from the money sent through private channels. The historian whom we have quoted estimates the total transmitted through all channels to relatives and friends in Ireland by the Irish in America at £1,000,000 annually, or in all the enormous sum of over £20,000,000 ($100,000,000) for the twenty-three years proceeding the date when he wrote (1874). That the amount remitted from that time to the present has been equally large, there can hardly be any doubt.

The most prominent, as it is the most distinctively Irish perhaps, among the societies to which we have referred, is the Ancient Order of Hibernians, which was organized in America in the year 1836 for the avowed purpose of promoting friendship, unity, and Christian charity among its members, and the advancement of the principles of Irish nationality. Many of the branches maintain systems of insurance, paying death benefits not exceeding $3,000. In 1908 it had a total membership of 200,000 persons associated in 2365 divisions, distributed in forty-seven states and the territories of the Union. The property owned by the order was valued (1906) at $1,722,069. During the last twenty-three years the order paid out for sick and funeral benefits $7,174,156, and in other charitable donations $4,481,146, besides many contributions for the relief of sufferers from extraordinary calamities, the latest being the gift of $40,000 in aid of those who suffered in the San Francisco earthquake of 1906. Its contributions in support of education include an endowment of $50,000 to the Catholic University at Washington and $10,000 to Trinity College, Washington, besides over 500 scholarships in various colleges and academies throughout the country, and it has given over $25,000 in aid of the work of the Gaelic League for the revival of the Irish language and literature. Other societies such as The Emerald Beneficial Association, The Irish Catholic Benevolent Union, founded in 1896 for benevolent purposes and composed almost entirely of members of Irish nationality, have a large membership in various states and territories. Besides these societies which are of national extent, numerous other smaller societies have been organized, mostly since 1840, and in the larger cities of the Eastern states, each society comprising immigrants or their descendants from particular counties in Ireland. Their purposes are purely social and benevolent, and their memberships nearly all Catholics,

Of the relations of the Roman Catholic Irish to the Church in America it is almost needless to speak. Not only do the Catholics of other nationalities, but their fellow-citizens of other faiths, acknowledge the great services rendered by the Irish in America to the up-building of the Church. So identified have they been with the progress of the Church that their race and religion united have made them a marked element in the community. The mission of the Irish race, as evidenced by the part they have taken in the support of religion in the United States has been the theme of many writers, and it would be as endless as unnecessary a task to detail here what the Irish have done in that respect. Their number alone, coming from a land where they had suffered so greatly for conscience' sake, implied a corresponding religious activity and influence in the United States, where they were released from the restraints to which they were subject at home. With their constantly increasing numbers, they provided in turn the laity with which new congregations were formed and the clergy which supplied to a large extent their spiritual needs. From the time of the first Bishop, John Carroll, of the See of Baltimore, to the present day there is hardly a diocese or archdiocese in continental United States but has been governed by prelates of Irish birth or descent. In the earlier days of the Republic and continuing to about 1830, bishops of other nationalities, chiefly French bishops, had much the larger share in the government of the Church; but with the steady and large accession of the Irish to the Catholic population, the latter acquired a predominance which has ever since been maintained.

At the time of the First Provincial Council of Baltimore (1829) two only of the nine prelates constituting the hierarchy were of Irish birth. At the time of the Third Council (1837) there were four such prelates. In 1846, of the twenty-three diocese represented in the Sixth Council, ten sent bishops of Irish origin. In 1852, of the incumbents of the twenty-seven sees. fifteen were of the Irish race. In 1876 the hierarchy of the Church included four archbishops, who were Irish either by birth or descent, and twenty-eight bishops sprung from the same race. Of the fourteen provinces now (1906) constituting the territorial divisions of the Church in the continental united States, nine are governed by archbishop of Irish blood, and forty-eight of the bishops of the seventy-eight dioceses comprised in these provinces are of the Irish race. The same race has furnished the two cardinals with which the Church in the United States has been honoured, viz.: John McCloskey, formerly Archbishop of New York, and James Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore.

It would be difficult, if not impossible, to apportion the Catholic laity of the present day strictly according to their racial origins, but in view of the immigration figures as before ascertained, and the proportion of ecclesiastics of Irish origin engaged in the service of religion, it is safe to assume that more than one-half of the total number of Catholics in the United States come of Irish stock. As regards the moral and material aid contributed by the Irish in the United States in support of religion, the distinguished French Jesuit Rev. A. J. Thébaud, in his work, "Ireland, Past and Present" (p. 453), quotes approvingly the language of John Francis Maguire, M. P., who says "What Ireland has done for the American Church, every bishop, every priest can tell. Throughout the vast extent of the United States, there is scarcely a church, an academy, a hospital, or a refuge in which the piety, the learning, the zeal, and the self-sacrifice of the Irish — of the priest or the professor, of the Sisters of every order or denomination — are not to be traced; there is scarcely an ecclesiastical seminary for English-speaking students in which the great majority of those now preparing for the service of the sanctuary do not belong, if not by birth, at least by blood, to that historic land to which the grateful church of past ages accorded the proud title, "Insula Sanctorum" (McGuire, "The Irish in America", p. 540).

Still another competent judge, the distinguished Bishop J. L. Spalding, in his work "The Mission of the Irish Race", says (p. 61): "As in another age men spoke of the gesta Dei per Francos, so we may now speak of the gesta Dei per Hibernos. Were it not for Ireland, Catholicism would to-day be feeble and non-progressive in England, America, and Australia. Nor is the force of this affirmation weakened by the weight and significance which must be given to what the converts in England, and the German and the French in the United States, have done for the Church. The Irish have made the work of the convert possible and effective, and they have given to Catholicism in this country a vigour and cohesiveness which enable it to assimilate the most heterogeneous elements, and without which it is not at all certain that the vast majority of Catholics emigrating hither from other lands would not have been lost to the Church, 'No other people', to repeat what I have written elsewhere, 'could have done for the Catholic Church in the United States what the Irish people have done. Their unalterable attachment to their priests; their deep Catholic instincts, which no combination of circumstances has ever been able to bring into conflict with their love of country; the unworldly and spiritual temper of the national character; their indifference to ridicule and contempt and their unfailing generosity, all fitted them for the work which was to be done, and enabled them, in spite of the strong prejudices against their race which Americans have inherited from England, to accomplish what would not have been accomplished by Italian, French, or German Catholics'."

II. IN AUSTRALIA

Nowhere in modern times has the Church made such substantial progress as in the United States of America and in the great island commonwealth of Australasia. In both Irish immigration has been a large contributing factor to this development, and between both, notwithstanding the immense intervening distance, there is to be found in the early records a curious correlation of pioneer effort. To the political and economic results of British rule in Ireland both of these countries owe no little part of their present-day vigour and expansion. It was the declaration of American independence that stopped the transportation of British convicts across the Atlantic, and forced the establishment at Botany Bay, in January, 1788, of the first penal settlement on the Australasian continent. Thither the religious persecutions in Ireland and the political disturbances there sent many unfortunate representatives of the race. Thousands of these prisoners, transported from Ireland for political or religious offenses, were exiled without any intimation of the duration of the sentences passed on them by drumhead courts-martial. Hence, under the date of 12 November, 1796, there is record of Governor Hunter writing back from the colony to the authorities of the Home Office in England that the "Irish Defenders were threatening to resist all orders because of the indeterminate term of their sentences, "as they may otherwise be kept longer than is just in servitude". In May, 1802, Governor King also wrote, praying the home government not to send any more Irishmen there, and as "few as possible of those convicted of sedition and republican practices, otherwise in a very short time the whole colony would be imbued with the same seditious spirit."

But their protests had no effect whatever, and the number of exiles constantly increased until in a short time it amounted to more than a thousand. Confessors of the Faith, as most of them were in their native land, they had to face in bondage even more savage persecution under rules framed to compel them to join in Protestant religious services. Deprived of priest, sacraments, and religious instruction, they saw the Government attempting to rob their children of their Faith. Remonstrance to the home authorities was long useless. Among the early Irish political felons transported to Botany Bay were three priests who had been sentenced for alleged complicity in the political troubles of 1798 in Ireland. These priests were Father James Harold, pastor of Rathcoole, Dublin; Father James Dixon, a native of Castlebridge, County Wexford; and Father Peter O'Neill, pastor of Ballymacoda, County Cork, a grand-uncle of the Fenian leader, Peter O'Neill Crowley, who was killed in the rising of 1867. Father O'Neill was not only sentenced on a trumped-up charge of sedition, but was most barbarously flogged before he left Ireland. The frequent remonstrances to the home authorities against the injustice of denying them the ministrations of their Faith had at last lead to the issue of instructions to the Governor in 1802 to allow one of these transported ecclesiastics to exercise his spiritual functions. Governor King accordingly designated, on 19 April, 1803, Father Dixon to take charge of the Catholic congregation, and under this government supervision the first Mass was said by him in Sydney, on Sunday, 15 May, 1803. The chalice was made of tin by one of the convicts; the vestments were fashioned out of some old damask curtains. For a time there was no altar-stone, and the sacred oils had to be brought in from Rio de Janiero. The Holy See, in 1804, made Father Dixon Prefect Apostolic of this new territory, called then New Holland, the first ecclesiastical appointment for the new church. Fathers O'Neill and Harold also received faculties from Rome. The former was allowed to return to Ireland, 15 January, 1803, and the latter was sent to Tasmania, but there is no record that he was allowed to officiate there. This period of toleration did not last long, for, on the persistently circulated reports of bigoted fanatics that the congregations at the Masses were gatherings of traitors and mere subterfuges of the Irish convicts to mature plans for another rebellion, the Governor, before the close of 1804, revoked the permission for the celebration of Mass, and under penalty of twenty-five lashes for the first, and fifty for the second absence, all the colonists without distinction were ordered to attend the Church of England service. Worn out by his long labour and hardships, Father Dixon returned, in 1808, to Ireland, where he died, 4 January, 1840, in his eighty-second year, pastor of Crossabeg in the Diocese of Ferns.

In the archives of Propaganda at Rome, there is a memorandum presented to the congregation, 28 August, 1816, by Rev. Richard Hayes, O. S. F., which begins: "The undersigned certifies that neither in the Colony of Sydney Cove, where there are several thousand Irish Catholics, nor in any part of New Holland, is there at present any priest or Catholic Missionary." Father Hayes' brother, Michael, a native of Wexford, was there as one of those United Irishmen transported after the rebellion of 1798, and had sent word to Rome, where Father Hayes was residing at St. Isodore's convent, of their spiritual destitution. The appeal for help was answered by a Cistercian Father, Jeremiah F. Flynn, who was then in Rome, after labouring for three years in the mission in the West Indies, part of the time under the direction of Archbishop Carroll of Baltimore. He volunteered to go to Australia was secularized and made Prefect Apostolic of New Holland, with faculties to administer the Sacrament of Confirmation. After some delay in getting enough funds for his outfit and making a vain application to the Governor for an official sanction for his project, he set out without this permission and landed at Sydney, 14 November, 1817. Governor Macquire, on whom he called the next day for permission to exercise his ministry, bluntly announced his determination not to allow any Popish missionary to intrude on this Protestant colony, and ordered him to depart on the ship that brought him. On the pretext, therefore, that he had come to the colony without sanction of the British authorities, Father Flynn was arrested and deported back to England. Previous to this he had remained concealed for several weeks in the house of an Irishman, William Davis, who had been transported for making pikes for the insurgents of 1798, venturing forth only at night to minister to the faithful. He said Mass in the house, reserving the Blessed Sacrament in a cedar press, guarded faithfully by the pious Davis family and their friends for more than two years, until the next priest arrived in the country. Davis later gave the house, and the garden about it, as a site on which to build St. Patrick's church. He was flogged twice and then imprisoned for refusing to attend the Protestant services. At his death, 17 August 1843, he was 78 years old.

The great Bishop John England, of Charleston, U. S. A., who was then a pastor and a leader in the struggle for Catholic Emancipation in Ireland, was among those who interested themselves in bringing the persecution of the Australian Catholics to the attention of the authorities in England, and so great was the indignation aroused that the Government was forced to make provision for two Catholic Chaplains to be sent to New South Wales. Fathers Philip Connolly, a native of Kildare, and John Joseph Thery, a native of Cork, at once volunteered and landed at Sydney, 4 May, 1820. Father Thery remained at Sydney and Father Connolly soon proceeded to Hobart, Tasmania, where he arrived in March, 1821, and dedicated his first humble chapel to the Irish Saint Virgilius. At Sydney Father Thery remained in charge until 1838 when he was transferred by Bishop Polding to be his representative and vicar-general in Tasmania. In 1832 there were from 16,000 to 18,000 Catholics in the colony of New South Wales, nearly all of them Irish of birth or descent. Dr. Ullathorne in a pamphlet, "The Catholic Mission in Australia", published in London in 1837, set down the number of transported persons then in the colonies at 53,000. He was largely instrumental in brining about a reform of the abuses of transportation and the prison system in the colonies, and during a visit to Ireland in 1839, secured several priests for the Australian mission.

In the work he did for the reform of the abuses in the penal colonies he says his great helper was an Irish priest, Father John McEneroe, one of the most notable men of the pioneer times, and for thirty-six years a leading figure in New South Wales. Born in Ardsalla, County Tipperary, 26 December, 1795, he was ordained at Maynooth in 1820 and held for a short time a professorship at the Meath Diocesan Seminary. Then at the invitation of Bishop England of Charleston, U. S. A., he went to America and laboured on the South Carolina missions with great zeal for seven years. Ill health forced him to return to Ireland in 1829. But the woes of the Catholics of Australia appealed so forcefully to him that he accepted the appointment of chaplain to the penal colony and arrived in Sydney in 1832. Until his death in August, 1868, he was without question one of the most influential promoters of the progress of the Church in Australasia. From the first his main energy was bent on the establishment of an Australian hierarchy. He sent a letter direct to the pope. "As in all new colonies", he tells the Holy Father, "so in this few subjects can be found for the priesthood for many years to come; a few priests may be procured from the Catholic countries of Europe, but it is from Ireland that they should naturally be provided for this mission, as ninety-five of every one hundred Catholics in all these colonies are Irish or of Irish descent."

Several years later the idea was carried out in part. In a visit of Bishop Goold to Rome in 1873, the question of nationality once more came up. "As regard the objection", he replied, "that the bishops of Australia are all Irish it appears to me to have no solid foundation to rest upon; on the contrary, any other course would be ridiculous. As a matter of fact the Catholic Europeans who form our congregations are, with very few exceptions, Irish. . . . It must be added that the purport of the aforesaid objection is to introduce English instead of Irish bishops to the Australian church, and hence the expediency of appointing Irish prelates becomes all the more apparent, for everyone is aware of the special antipathy of the Irish toward England" (Moran, "History of the Catholic Church in Australasia", 786, 787). Bishop Goold was born in Cork, 4 November, 1812, joined the Augustinians, and after his ordination in Italy, volunteered for the Australian mission. The list of the prelates of the Church in Australia shows the pope and his advisors in the main followed the lines indicated in what was said by Bishop Goold and Father MacEneroe.

Bishop Goold, from Irish foundations, introduced into the country the Jesuits, the Christian Brothers, the Sisters of Mercy, the Sisters of the Good Shepherd, and the Presentation Nuns. At his invitation Fathers William Kelly and Joseph Lentaigne of the Irish Province had begun a foundation in Melbourne, 21 September, 1865. The Sisters of Charity of the Irish Congregation were the first to volunteer to serve the settlements in Botany Bay, and the community sent there by Mother Mary Aikenhead arrived at Port Jackson 31 December, 1838; one of this band was a novice, Mary Xavier Williams, born in Kilkenny, 12 July, 1800. She made her vows in Sydney in 1838, and was the first religious to have that privilege on Australian soil. She lived to be ninety-two, dying at Hobart, 8 March, 1892, the sole survivor of the pioneer community. The Sisters of Mercy, from Baggot Street, Dublin, next arrived, 7 January, 1846.

Mention has been made of the location of the Reverend Philip Connolly as the first priest in Tasmania, in March, 1821. Three years later, on 7 May, 1824, the Reverend Samuel Coote arrived from Dublin on a ship chartered by Roderick O'Connor, a brother of the Chartist leader Fergus O'Connor, to carry his family and a few other settlers to Van Dieman's Land. O'Connor was not then a Catholic but became one later, and was the donor of £10,000 to the Hobart cathedral building fund. It was here that Thomas Francis Meagher and the other political exiles of 1848 took up their residence. Father Connolly died 3 August, 1839. His old friend Father Thery, transferred from Sydney, carried on the work until after the appointment of Bishop Wilson to the see in 1842, when he retired. Bishop Wilson died on 30 June, 1866, and his successor was Bishop (later Archbishop) Daniel Murphy, a native of Cork, who presided in Rome at the funeral of the liberator, Daniel O'Connell, and lived to be a centenarian.

In South Australia the tone of public opinion in the early days was anti-Irish and anti-Catholic, and the growth of the Church was slow. The first bishop was the Reverend Francis Murphy, a native of the County Meath, who reached Adelaide in September, 1844. Thomas Mooney, an Irishman, was the first Catholic settler in Western Australia; but it was not until 1843 that Father John Brady, an Irish priest born at Cavan, and who for twelve years had laboured as a missionary in the Mauritius, was appointed to take charge of the district. In 1845 he was consecrated Bishop of Perth. For years he lived a life of apostolic poverty, tireless in his zeal as a missionary, and died in France, 3 December, 1871.

Father Thery was the first priest to visit the Queensland section, and the roll of his successors is an almost continuous list of Irish names. The Emigration Society in the early sixties of the last century directed many Irish families to Queensland. A Franciscan from Dublin, Reverend Patrick Bonaventure Geoghehan, was the first pastor in Victoria and celebrated the first Mass in Melbourne on 19 May, 1839. In May, 1841, the number of Catholics there was 2073, and on St. Patrick's Day, 1843, the St. Patrick's Society had a parade of 150 members.

An Irishman, Thomas Poynton, was the first Catholic settler of New Zealand, where he took charge of a store and sawing station in Hokianga, in 1828. He had married at Sydney the daughter of a Wexford Irishman, Thomas Kennedy. In the course of time a daughter was born to them, and the mother took the child to Sydney to be baptized, a distance of 1000 miles. The next child was a boy who was also taken to Sydney for baptism, but this time the ship went round by Hobart, and the distance was 2000 miles. Mr. Poynton himself made three visits to Sydney to try to get missionaries to devote themselves to the care of the New Zealand Catholics, and when the Marists and Bishop Pompalier finally did arrive there he was of much assistance to them. Among the settlers they ministered to was an Irishman named Cassidy who had married the daughter of a Maori chief.

In all this it can be seen how large a part Irishmen had in laying a foundation for the Church in Australia. The details of their association with secular affairs are equally prominent and honourable. They contributed their share and more than their share in building up responsible governments in the first four eastern States, and in the culminating federation of the great Commonwealth on 1 January 1901. In the development and solution of the important public issues of education, the tariff, vote by ballot, adult suffrage, the selection of land, agrarian legislation, the labour movement of 1873, Irish energy, executive ability, and political acumen contributed a large part. It is only necessary to mention as types such men as Sir Charles Gavan-Duffy, Sir John O'Shannessey, Nicholas Fitzgerald, Augustus Leo Kenny, James Coughlin, M. O'Grady, Daniel Brophy, Sir Patrick Buckley, John Curnin, and Morgan S. Grace (see also lists in the article Australia). In the delegates to the three great Australasian Catholic Conferences (the first at Sydney in September, 1900, the second at Melbourne in 1904, and the third at Sydney in September, 1909), the numerical strength and influence of the Irish in Australia was amply evidenced. The million Catholics that the estimates give for 1910 show without question that the early proportion of the Irish element is well maintained. Nor have they ever been forgetful of the land of their birth and their ancestors. In the famine years of the last century, contributions were sent back to help the sufferers. The Hibernian Australasian Catholic Benefit Society, founded in 1871, has many thousands of members, and has spread to every state of the Commonwealth and to New Zealand (see Australia).

III. IN CANADA

The parish registers show that the Irish race was fairly well represented in New France, even in the early years of this colony. O'Farrell, in his "Irish Families in Ancient Quebec Records" (Montreal, 1872; 1908) asserts that of the 2600 families that made up the population of lower Canada at the close of the seventeenth century, wellnigh one hundred families were native of Ireland, and in about thirty other cases the husband or wife was of Irish birth. But these numbers would seem to be exaggerated. A careful study of Mgr Tanguay's "Dictionnaire généalogique" (7 volumes, Montreal, 1871), between 1625 and 1700, reveals thirty or forty names like Kelly, Casey, Murphy, Leahy, and others equally Celtic in sound. Mary Kerwin, the daughter of an Irish family who fled to France to preserve the Faith, came to Canada in 1643, and died a nun in the Hôtel-Dieu, Quebec, in 1687. Tanguay makes special mention of an Irishman, Teigue Cornelius O'Brennan, who married a French wife, Jeanne Chartier, at Quebec, in 1670. These two are the ancestors of the Aubrys and other families still prominent in the Province of Quebec.

The conflict on American soil between the armies of France and England, in the eighteenth century, brought many Irish soldiers to Canada. Some had been enlisted in the service of France; others had been taken prisoner by the French; others were deserters from the English ranks. The President of the Navy Board, at Paris, in a letter to the Canadian Intendants, de la Galissonnière and Hocquart, in 1748, wrote: "If the Irish Catholics, taken prisoners to Canada, ask to remain, the King of France sees no difficulty in their being allowed to do so. The manner in which the English treat their nation ought not to cause them to regret such a change." Desertion was a very common practice in the eighteenth century among the Irish soldiers who were pressed into the English armies, or whose misery at home obliged them to enlist. The author of "The Irish Brigades in the Service of France" gives instances of such desertions to the famous corps of their countrymen in France, where they might enjoy the exercise of their religion then interdicted in the British army, and, further, "that they might obtain in battle some of the vengeance then due for the many oppressions and insults so long inflicted on their creed and race." The Protestant Lord Primate of Ireland, in a letter from Dublin in 1730, to the Duke of Newcastle, wrote: "All recruits raised here are generally considered as persons who may, some time or other, pay a visit to this country as enemies. That those who are enlisted here . . . hope and wish to do so, there is no doubt." This spirit of retaliation will help to explain the presence of so many Irish deserters in Canada in the eighteenth century. They were so numerous, in fact, that they became a menace to British military efficiency in America. It was to the desertion of "Irish papists" that Sir William Johnson, Agent General of Indian Affairs, attributed the uneasiness existing among the Mohawks and other more westerly tribes who had remained loyal to the British. In a letter to the Lords of Trade, in London (28 May, 1756), he asked to be empowered to reward any Indians who would deliver up Irish soldiers who were living amongst them. Letters exist in the archives of the Marine, in Paris, giving Irish soldiers permission to remain in Canada, or to return to France, where they might join their countrymen in the Clare regiment. Many of them, however preferred to remain and settle in New France, where they would be safe from the law enforced by Britain, after the victory of Fontenoy, which stipulated that "Irish officers and soldiers, who had been in the service of France . . . should be disabled from holding any real or personal property, and the real or personal property should belong to the first Protestant discoverer".

The presence of a battalion of the Irish Brigade in Canada between 1755 and 1760 has always been a moot topic. In his "Documentary History", O'Calaghan gives a letter of Doreil, the French Commissary General, to Count D'Argeson, Minister of War, wherein he says that "agreeable to the wish of the Marquis de Vaudreuil, Governor of New France, several battalions of reinforcements should be sent to Canada and among them one Irish battalion", the reason given being that the Irish should be recruited from their fellow-countrymen already in Canada, or from deserters from the enemy. O'Farrell asserts that this battalion landed in Quebec on 26 June, 1755; but this is evidently an erroneous statement, for Doreil's appointment as Commissary General was dated only two months prior to the departure of the fleet, which he and de Vaudreuil accompanied to Canada. Three years later "a battalion of foreign volunteers" — possibly the Irish battalion suggested by Doreil — landed at Louisburg, where they met officers in the French service with such names as Admiral Macnamara, Captain de Carty, M. de Haggerty, and others, who were then operating on the Isle Royale. If, however, Irish soldiers were incorporated in the Béarn Regiment, as O'Callaghan supposes, they saw active service on four historic occasions: (1) on 8 September, 1755, under the leadership of the impetuous Dieskau, when the battalion suffered defeat in the attack on Fort Edward, but when Sir William Johnson, commanding three thousand men, did not dare follow up his victory; (2) in the capture of Fort Oswego from the English, August, 1756, by General de Montcalm, where, according to Houtenac, a French deserter to the English side, "the red faced with green", was conspicuous enough for special mention; (3) in August, 1757, in the surrender of Fort William Henry on Lake George, where de Levis defeated Munroe; (4) in the brilliant defeat of the British, 8 July, 1758, at Ticonderoga, on Lake Champlain, in the important engagement known as the battle of Carillon. In this encounter the French troops, of which the Béarn Regiment formed a part, attacked Abercrombie's army of sixteen thousand, repelled seven successive charges, and killed or wounded four thousand of the enemy, with a loss to themselves of of only thirty officers and three hundred and forty men. No documents, however, have come to light so far to prove the presence of an autonomous Irish corps in this campaign. The correspondence of de Vaudreuil shows that he did not take kindly to the employment of Irish prisoners taken from the English; he even sent a whole company back to France in 1757 to be incorporated ion one of the brigades there. But there were certainly Irish soldiers to be found in the French ranks fighting against the historic enemy; the names of several Irish officers wounded at Carillon such as McCarthy, Floyd, Carlan etc., were sent by Montcalm to the governor after the victory had been gained. Carillon recalls the Celtic heroism displayed at Fontenoy, and this fact, together with the suggestion contained in the letter of the Commissary General, has led chroniclers to surmise the presence at Carillon of a battalion of the famous Irish brigade.

At the close of the war, many disbanded soldiers returned to Europe, while the rest settled in Canada. "The rest of the troops", writes de Levis, "having formed connections in the colony, resolved to remain there." Their long years of service among the French had made the Irish familiar with the language and customs of this people, and the gallicizing of their names, as we find them in the parish registers in the Province of Quebec, shielded the bearers from British retaliation. That retaliation was evidently intended was shown by the persistency with which General Jeffery Amherst, in 1760, refused to grant the articles of the capitulation dealing with the subjects of the King of England taken prisoner while in arms against him. However, owing to the precautions take by the Irish soldiers to identify themselves with the French Canadian peasantry, there is no record of reprisals. The Irish settled down in the Province of Quebec, and while retaining their names, or French variations of them, they were in a few years absorbed by the ambient race. The case of Dr. Timothy O'Sullivan is typical. He was the son of a lieutenant general in the army of James II, and had during sixteen years served as captain of dragoons among the Irish in Spain. In 1716 he started for Ireland to raise recruits for his regiment. During his voyage he was seized by pirates who landed him in New England. He escaped to Canada, settled down, and began to practice the profession of a surgeon. In 1720 he married the widow of M. Dufrost la Jemerais, whose eldest daughter, Madame d'Youville, became in after years the foundress of the Grey Nuns of Canada. O'Sullivan's French Canadian descendants are still to be found under the name of Sylvain. Other instances of assimilation of French and Irish in Canada are preserved for us in the archives of the Marine, in Paris. In 1714, an English ship, bound for Virginia with a score or two of young Irishwomen on board was seized on the Atlantic by a French vessel, "L'Heureux". The passengers were brought to Quebec and distributed among different private families, where their racial identity was soon lost, as nothing more is heard of them. The pathetic case is cited in the same documents of Cullen, or Collins, an Irish soldier who, after the fall of Oswego, in 1756, was seen with his wife and children drifting in an open boat over Lake Ontario on his way to some French settlement. Historic facts like these go to prove that a larger percentage of Irish blood flowed in the veins of the French Canadian population at the end of the eighteenth century than is generally suspected.

There are few traces of systematized Irish immigration to Canada until the beginning of the nineteenth century. The supremacy of the King of England in matters ecclesiastical, so persistently insisted upon during the first years of the English domination, and the evident desire to crush out the Catholic Church, shown so plainly in the "Royal Instruction to Governors" were not of a nature to encourage immigration of Catholics, especially of Irish Catholics, who had suffered so long under unjust laws in their own land. These "Instructions" forbade under severe penalties all appeals to, or correspondence with, any foreign ecclesiastical jurisdiction "of whatever nature or kind whatsoever". No episcopal or vicarial power could be exercised by any person professing the religion of the Church of Rome, but only such as was essentially and indispensable necessary to the free exercise of the Romish religion. A parish priest could not be appointed in a place where Protestants were in the majority. In such parishes the Protestant incumbent should have all the tithes, but the Catholics might have use of the church. In places were Catholics were in a majority, a parish priest might be appointed, but the tithes of the Protestants should be held in reserve for the support of the Protestant clergy. Section 8 of article 43 of the Instructions shows the sentiments which animated the British government in those years. "All ecclesiasticks as may think fit to enter into the holy state of matrimony shall be released from all penalties to which they might have been subjected in such cases by any authority of the See of Rome." Naturally the Irish would shun a colony where such laws were in force, and where even the French Catholic colonists did not know what their destiny was to be; but one of the first British governors, Sir Guy Carleton — a humane and tactful Irishman, born in Tyrone, who declared later that if lower Canada had been preserved to Great Britain, it was owing to the Catholic clergy — did much in his correspondence with the home Government to mitigate the rigour of the obnoxious "Instructions" and to reconcile the Canadians to their new masters. It was the same Carleton, afterwards Lord Dorchester, who, in 1775, successfully defended Quebec, during the American siege, during which General Montgomery, also an Irishman, lost his life.

Succeeding governors of Canada, especially Haldiman and Craig, were less accommodating to Catholics than Carleton, and it was not till the diplomatic and uncompromising Bishop Plessis, one of the illustrious figures in Canadian history, took up the struggle for the liberties of the Church that Catholics began to breathe freely. This prelate succeeded in having the rights of the Church recognized, and left the way open for the immigration to Canada of Catholics of every nationality. When he visited the Upper St. Lawrence, on a pastoral tour, in 1816, he found seventy-five Catholic families in the neighbourhood of Kingston, among them twenty Scotch and Irish, and others as far west as Niagara. Ferland tells us that during the summer of 1820 over thirty families arrived at Quebec from Ireland. They had hoped to better their condition by emigrating, but owing to the unsettled condition of the country and the stagnation of business, they failed miserably. These poor exiles were in the direst poverty, and as winter was approaching, the noble-hearted Bishop Plessis wrote a touching letter to his parish priests in their favour. Meanwhile groups of Irish colonists had begun to arrive and settle in Upper Canada and in the Maritime provinces. In 1803 a Talbot of Malahide, moved by the desire to control the "Paradise of the Hurons" he had read about in Charlevoix, secured six hundred and eighty thousand acres in Western Ontario and gradually opened up this vast district to settlement. Talbot was one of the first to draw his countrymen to that province. In 1825 Peter Robinson began to work on similar lines north of Lake Ontario. He brought two thousand colonists and located them along the banks of the Otanabee, in the neighbourhood of Peterboro. Other groups continued to arrive from time to time to strengthen the Irish element; between 1830 and 1860 two hundred thousand settled in Ontario; and in several counties the Irish still predominate. The Nova Scotia Archives show that Irish settlers were numerous in this province, many of whom were undoubtedly disbanded soldiers of the Cornwallis Regiment. Shortly after the treaty of 1763, Irish Presbyterians settled in Windsor, Truro, Londonderry, and other inland points, where their descendants may still be found. Although the intolerant laws of England were still in force against Catholics, the provincial governors showed themselves more or less conciliatory to the proscribed religion, and Irish Catholic colonists continued to increase in numbers. The appointment of a Vicar Apostolic for Nova Scotia, in 1818, proves that they were already numerous enough to require episcopal care. Bishop Plessis has left us some edifying pages in his "Journal" on the Catholicity of the Irish colony in Halifax in 1815, and the warm reception he met with from the Irish during his tour along the coast of Nova Scotia.

New Brunswick was separated from Nova Scotia in 1784, when the United Empire Loyalists, among whom were a few Protestant Irish, began to arrive. The records of this Province reveal the presence of Irish Catholics even in the early years of the nineteenth century. The Bishop of Quebec found about twenty families at St. John in 1815, and he named St. Malachy as titulary of the small church they were completing there. Immigration to New Brunswick did not start in earnest until after 1830, when the Irish began to carve out homes for themselves along the beautiful St. John River and the shores of the Bay of Fundy, where their descendants are now prosperous. Prince Edward Island, or Isle St-Jean, as it was originally called, was ceded to Great Britain and made a separate province in 1769. It was first settled by the French, but in 1772 MacDonald of Glenaladale brought his hardy Scottish Highlanders over and they took up large tracts of land there. A few Irish, from Ireland and Newfoundland, also settled in Charlottetown during the closing years of that century. According to the Abbé de Calonne, a French missionary working among them, they had neither social nor political influence. This was natural and yet, were it not for the veto of the British authorities, the first Governor, Patterson, would have changed the name of the Island from Isle St-Jean to New Ireland. Irish Catholics continued to arrive every year in groups and singly, and settled on farms and in the growing centres of population. Some of the most distinguished names in the history of Prince Edward Island are found among the descendants of those early Irish settlers. Manitoba and Northwest Territories were then, and for many years later, an unknown land as far as the Irish were concerned.

Emigration from Ireland to Canada continued in earnest from 1820 to 1850. Davin asserts that in the two years following 1832 over eighty thousand Irish landed on Canadian soil, and proportionate numbers continued to arrive every season in sailing vessels, wooden tubs most of them that had been used in the Canadian lumber trade. According to the report of the Agents for Emigrants, in the ten years ending in 1836, 164,338 Irish landed in Quebec, "a convenient stopping-place on the way to the Far West". Thousands, however, made their homes in Lower Canada. A writer in the "Dublin Review" (Oct., 1837), asserts that even then the Irish were an influential body in Quebec and Montreal, and that in the troubles leading up to the Insurrection of 1837 they threw their influence with the French Canadians and the House of Assembly against the oligarchy that were trying to withhold responsible government.

The cholera epidemic of 1832 wrought havoc among the Irish as well as the French, but the year 1847 will always stand out in the history of the race in Canada. In the summer of that year, 100,000 men, women, and children, fleeing from famine and death in Ireland, "were stricken with fever and were lying helpless in the riverports and seaports of Canada". Thousands of these unhappy people died and found only graves where they had hoped to find peace and plenty. Rarely in the annals of a civilized nation have such scenes been witnessed as those enacted, during the eventful summer of 1847, among the fever-stricken Irish in all the quarantine stations along the St. Lawrence and in other points in Canada. Numerous heroic priests and nuns faced death to bring the consolation of religion to these affected people who, conscious of past wrongs, and forced to abandoned their beloved homeland, were yet confident of success in their fight for existence, if only the chance were given them, but who found themselves, on the threshold of their new home, facing a struggle with disease and death. The official figures tell us that in 1847 four thousand one hundred and ninety-two died at sea, four thousand five hundred and seventy-nine on Grosse Isle, seven hundred and twelve at Quebec, five thousand three hundred and thirty at Montreal, seventy-one at St. John, N. B., one hundred and thirty at Lacine, eight hundred and sixty three in Toronto, three hundred and forty-eight at other places in Ontario; but, owing to the circumstances of the time, and the difficulty in getting accurate statistics, these figures are hardly reliable. Other and more trustworthy reports declare the number dead and buried on Grosse Isle alone exceeding ten thousand, while Dr. Douglas, a medical superintendent at the time, estimated that at least eight thousand had been buried at sea. The survivors of the famine years — the few who still survive — recall with tears the memory of those score witnessed in their early childhood; and yet what seemed an irreparable disaster only proved, as in so many other instances in the history of the Irish race, to be a triumph of their Faith, and history has not failed to record it. The Irish, in 1847, brought their traditions with them across the Atlantic, and in those moments of direst sorrow and misery it was their religion which buoyed them up. It will forever be to their glory that, far from yielding to despair at the sacrifices demanded, they accepted their sad fate with sublime resignation, and went to their death blessing the Hand that smote them. A Celtic cross, fitting symbol of Erin and her undying faith, was raised during the summer of 1909, on Grosse Isle, by the Ancient Order of Hibernians, to recall the fever years and the heroism of those that assisted them.

The holocaust of 1847 threw thousands of Irish children on the charity of the public. Those of them who were without friends and relatives were adopted by French Canadians, and were, with all tenderness and sympathy, reared to manhood and womanhood. They learned the language of their foster parents, and, as their forebears, the Irish soldiers of the eighteenth century had done, they married into French families and became identified with the French, very often revealing their origin only in their Celtic names. Their Celtic blood, however, with its concomitant gifts of mind and heart, generously infused into the dominant French race, proved a rare asset to this older people living along the banks of the St. Lawrence, and was the noblest requital the Irish could make for the whole-heated hospitality given to them in 1847.

However, accidents of ethnic absorption, such as occurred in Canada among the French and Irish in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, were the results of exceptional conditions and are not likely to occur again. The Irish in Canada have grown in numbers and in influence in the last half-century, and will be able to shoulder their future burdens alone. The following figures furnished by the Dominion Census Bureau are official, and show the trend of the Irish element, Catholic and non-Catholic, in Canada between the years 1871 and 1901, when the last census was taken. The fluctuation of population showed in several of the provinces was not confined to the Irish alone, and was the indirect result of commercial stagnation consequent on the Confederation Act of 1867.

These figures show an increase in thirty years of 142,307. In 1871 there were still 219, 451 persons who had been born in Ireland; in 1901 there were only 101, 629, marking a decrease, owing to death or emigration from Canada, of 117,822, in the foreign-born Irish population. As the emigration from Ireland in those thirty years was inappreciable, the approximate figures of the native-born Irish Canadian population between 1871 and 1901 was 142, 307 + 117,822 = 260,129. This shows that what the Irish element lost on Quebec and in the Maritime provinces during the period named, it gained in Ontario and the West. Owing to the strides which Canada is making in development, the census of 1911 will undoubtedly show an increase in the Irish population far greater than that of 1901.

British Columbia: 1871: ? — 1901: 20,658
Manitoba: 1871: ? — 1901: 47,418
New Brunswick: 1871: 100,643 — 1901: 83,384
Nova Scotia: 1871: 62,851 — 1901: 54,710
Ontario: 1871: 559,442 — 1901: 624,332
Prince Edward Island: 1871: ? — 1901: 21,992
Quebec: 1871: 123,478 — 1901: 114,842
North-West Territories: 1871: ? — 1901: 18,797
Unorganized Territory: 1871: ? — 1901: 2,588
Total: 1871: 846,414 — 1901: 988,721

The Irish Catholics in Canada, who now number about three-quarters of a million, are fully organized both socially and religiously. They have their churches, schools, convents, colleges, orphanages, etc., many of them imposing-looking institutions. They have their bishops, priests, and their charity and teaching orders of both sexes. They have their fraternal societies of all kinds. They have their writers and their ably edited newspapers. They are represented in every avenue of public life. In commerce and industry they are contributing their share to the wealth of the Canadian nation. Some of the most eminent members of the legal and medical profession in Canada, during the last fifty years, have been, and still are, Irish Catholics; several of them have been knighted for eminence in their respective callings. The Irish have had their governors of provinces, cabinet ministers, senators, members of both Federal and Provincial Parliaments, and they are still well-represented in these functions in the government of the country. Thomas d'Arcy McGee asserted forty years ago that, since 1792, lower Canada was never without an Irishman in its legislative councils. This tradition is kept up not merely in old Quebec, but in the sister provinces, and in the Federal Parliament at Ottawa. An Irish Catholic is (1910) Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and Deputy Governor-General of the Dominion.

IV. IN GREAT BRITAIN

England and Wales

Mr. Joseph Cowen has called the Ireland of the sixth century the "Christian Greece". Irish monks from Iona repeated in England their work in Alba. Irish soldiers helped Athalstan to victory in 937. Early in the eleventh century Irish merchants were trading with Bristol. There, in 1247, died O'Murray, Bishop of Kilmacdaugh. In the same year Irish students resided at Oxford, where, said Newman, "there was from the earliest times, even a street called 'Irishman's Street'". Later a Bishop of Meath died at Oxford. A native of Dundalk, Fits-Ralph, was Chancellor of Oxford in 1333. While the Gaelic-Irish followed the fortunes of Wallace and of Bruce, the Norman-Irish fought for the English against Scotland. Thence for four hundred years the Irish helped England in her continental wars.

Up to the middle of the sixteenth century there was no Irish colony in great Britain. Leland, in 1545, wrote of Liverpool: "Irish merchants come much thither as to a good haven . . . Good merchants at Lyrpole and moch Yrish yarn, that Manchester men do buy there." Irish music had also found favour in England. The Earl of Worcester, writing in 1602, to the Earl of Shrewsbury, said: "Irish tunes are this time most pleasing". Pistol's "Callino custore me" (Henry V, Act IV, sc. 4) has been explained as Colleen oge astore (young girl, my treasure). From some dialect in the plays of this period, Knight things that the costermongers were largely Irish. Among the martyrs of Elizabeth's reign were some Irish-born. James I severely penalized in Ireland his mother's religion. A Catholic landowner was prohibited from appointing a guardian for his heir, who, through the Court of Wards, was brought up by Protestant noblemen. Early in his reign there were three hundred of such children in the Tower of London, and at Lamberth schools. After the Act of Settlement two-thirds of the fertile land passed into Protestant hands. In 1651, Hewson, Governor of Dublin, reported that, "in Dublin, which formerly swarmed with Papists, he knew there now but one, a surgeon and a sensible man". Referring to 1699, Lord Clare (speech on the Union) declared: "so that the whole of your island has been confiscated, with the exception of the estates of five or six families." — "Such of the Roman Catholic gentry as had retained their estates were stripped or all political and many civil rights, and were left virtually at the mercy of a Protestant enemy" (Bryce). To provide for the education of emigrating sons consequent to this state of things, Irish colleges were founded in several parts of the continent. Thence they joined the armies and political life of the nations in which they wee educated, some reaching high positions as officers and statesmen. Thus the idea of emigration was created.

In Charles I's reign ambassadors of foreign powers only were allowed in England to have Catholic chapels. It was in this way that around the Sardinian Chapel in Lincoln's Inn Fields gathered the first considerable Irish colony in London. By 1666, the year of the great fire, a considerable importation of cattle from Ireland to England was going on. To relieve the distress in London a gift of 15,000 bullocks was sent over from Ireland. Ludovic Barry, the first Irish dramatist to write in English, Sir James Ware, the antiquarian McFerbis, the last of the Irish annalists, Denham, Roscommon, and Flecknoe, poets, Cherry, actor and poet, Arthur Murphy, lawyer, dramatists, and editor, and Barry, the painter, were Catholics among the many Irishmen, eminent in science, art, and literature, living in England during the eighteenth century. The comparative fewness of Catholics is explained by the fact that penal laws made learning a crime. "the avowed policy of the [English] Cabinet was to discourage the teaching of the Irish 'better orders' in Ireland. . . . They passed out of the country's ken and became aliens" (Bridges). The difficulty of recruiting sufficient men for the British Army and Navy; the investment abroad of money by Irish Catholics (it being illegal to invest it in Irish land), money which Protestant land owners could have profitably used, the success of the American War of Independence, and possibly ideas of liberty and toleration caught from the French Revolution, made for some relaxation of the penal code. The first Relief Bill came to England in 1778 when there were about 60,000 Catholics there, of whom from 6000 to 8000 were Irish, mostly resident in London. An Irish Relief Bill did not follow until 1793. During the eighteenth century there was a considerable trade between Whithaven and Ulster. The Catholic mission to St. Begh, Whithaven, dates from 1706. Hawkers and traders at this time were frequently passing through London for the Kent hop-pickings. At Croiden Assize, 1767, an Irish priest, Moloney, was condemned to perpetual imprisonment for exercising his functions. At St. Mary's Old Chapel, Lumber St., Liverpool, an Irish priest, Anthony Carroll, served from 1759 to 1766. Another Irish priest, Fr. P. O'Brien, was there from 1760 to 1770. The mission of St. George's Cathedral, Southwark, dates from 1766, when an Irish priest, Father T. Walsh, hired a room in which to say Mass. In condemning the Gordon riots (1780), Burke "supposed" there were not less than 4000 Catholics in London. Manning gave the Catholic population of England in 1788 at 69,000. The famous Irishman, Father Arthur O'Leary, founded St. Patrick's, Soho, in 1792. Froude, writing in 1798, said "Half the sailors and petty officers in the service were Catholics" and inferred that they were mostly Irish.

Consequent upon the removal of the seat of government at the Union, there was less inducement for men of political instincts, social ambitions, or intellectual activities, to remain in Ireland. Before the County and District Councils of 1898 there were neither local or national self-government to attract the first; the absenteeism of richer men baffled the second; dearth of general higher education and learned distinction was felt by the third. Ireland lost the creative power of a native aristocracy, intellectual, financial, or social. Hence her gentry were induced, more and more, to ally themselves to England. But this exile was not of the nobility only. In 1803 a report of a secret Commission of the House of Commons described London and other large English towns as honeycombed with secret societies in communication with the disaffected elements in Ireland. This closing of avenues of distinction; the restriction of industry and trade arising from the Penal Laws, the famines of 1817 and 1822, impelled an increasing immigration, which the famine of 1846-48. the "Black 47", made a permanent factor in national life. Emigration from May, 1851, to 31 December, 1908, drained away 4,126,310 souls or half the national population. In 1846, with only 65 miles of railways, Ireland had a population of 300 to the square mile. "Nearly half as many again as the purely agricultural districts of England support at the present time (1908) and twice as many as Denmark, the model farming country of Europe." In 1901 there were 141 per square mile. The bulk of the Irish emigrants were, naturally, poor. Those who came to the nearest lands, England and Scotland, were the poorest of the poor, being those who had not the means to reach far Australia, or nearer America, or Canada. For years, therefore, they could not make any impression, social or political, on their adopted countries. The influence was simply that of example in fidelity to their religion. Untouched by the spirit of irreligion or indifference rife on the Continent, this example was particularly vivid. Mayhew in his "London Labour" praises the virtue of the London-Irish coster girls and lads. Illicit connections were, he says, the exception rather than the rule among them. Partly from these immigrants, partly for them, a large body of Irish priesthood accumulated in both countries, who, with signal self-sacrifice, devoted themselves to the humblest and most trying duties of their ministry. Educated men, in many cases highly gifted, lived outwardly inglorious lives in surroundings of the squalor, ignorance, and vice that seems inevitable in cities of our civilization. The examples of strenuous faith, of fearless Catholicism, of active piety, which this large body of men must have impressed upon their English and Scots coreligionists, unquestionably deepened and widened the hold and growth of Catholicism in these islands. They were, it has been well said, the most successful missionaries of the Catholic church in the nineteenth century. Railway development, the rise of manufacturing towns and of commercial cities, were powerful attractions to the Irish poor. Curiously enough, scarcely any of these immigrants from an agricultural country settled in agricultural districts.

Politically, the Irish in England scarcely emerged, from non-recognition under O'Connell's appeal to moral force in his agitation for Repeal. Their political awakening was not even complete under the call of Young Ireland to a more active force. Signs of life were visible upon a return to the methods of the United Irish of 1898, attempted by the Irish Revolutionary Brotherhood (Fenianism) of 1859 — open physical force cemented by an oath of secrecy. A large number of the labouring Irish were pronouncedly in favour of this. They and their middle-class fellow countrymen grew to political importance when they reverted to the idea of moral force only, advanced by Isaac Butt in his home rule scheme of 1870 — an idea broadly, but less pacifically, followed by Parnell. It is significant of this increase of political power of the Irish in England that it was the Liverpool convention of the Home Rule Confederation that superseded Butt with Parnell. Concurrent with it was the Irish National Land League originated by Michael Davitt, who, as a former worker in the cotton miles of Lancashire, was very popular with the Irish workers in England. In the United Irish League in Great Britain, the two facets of the Irish party have a most powerful organization, with ramifications everywhere.

From its situation Liverpool would have a large poor Irish population. From 1788-89 there were 260 Catholic baptisms out of 2332, i.e., 111/4 percent. Approximately, the Catholic population of Liverpool in 1788 was 6916; in 1811, 21,359; in 1829, 50,000. (In 1804 there were only 12,000 to 15,000 Catholics in London.) In 1841, the Irish-born in Great Britain numbered 419, 256; in 1851, there were 519,595, of whom 213,907 were in Scotland. It has been claimed that "the outward sign of the great impetus given to Catholicism in Great Britain by the immigration from Ireland was the restoration of the Catholic hierarchy in England". It was therefore appropriate that the first head of the restored hierarchy should be a son of Irish parents. The present Archbishop of Westminster is of Irish descent, as is also his bishop auxiliary and vicar-general and one of his canons. In 1853 Irish Vincentians took charge of the parish of St. Vincent, Sheffield. Later they had a training college at Hammersmith. At present the Irish province has two houses in England. In this year there were 41,400 Catholics, mostly Irish, in the British Army, and a quarter of the Navy was estimated as Irish Catholics. In 1862 the Irish Sisters of Charity were working in Hereford. In 1881 the census of the Parliament Burough of Manchester gives 83/8 percent of its population as Irish (32,750 out of 393,580). In 1908 the Catholic population of Great Britain was 2,130,100, of which 400,000 was in Scotland. In 1909 the Catholic population of England had increased to 1,671,000, with one of its bishops Irish-born and two others of Irish descent. Irish Sisters of Charity are in the Diocese of Westminster and of Shrewsbury, and Irish Christian Brothers are at Bristol. Confessions are officially announced as heard in Irish in the Diocese of Westminster (2 churches), Clifton and Salford (4 churches). Of the 1717 churches, chapels, and stations in England, 48 (23/4 percent) are dedicated to Irish saints, of which 42 are under St. Patrick.

Though the impress of the early Catholic Irish settlers on the social, political, and artistic life of England was absolutely nil, the influence of the Irish-born or Irish descendants of today is important. Of such in the Church are one archbishops and four bishops (and titulars), two abbots, a prior, two rectors of colleges, two provincials, an administrator of a cathedral, the preacher of the "Papal Sermon" at the Vatican Council, several domestic prelates and numerous canons. In the State: a Groom, and also a Lord, in waiting to the king, Somerset Herald, twenty-four army officers, five M. P.'s, three in the Civil Service, two County-Court judges, seven J. P.'s, four Aldermen, two superintendents of Scotland Yard. Referring only to those admitted position, there are, in science, three; in art, a portrait painter, two other artists; one musician, five actors and actresses; two singers in opera. In medicine, a king's physician, and thirteen eminent practitioners. In letters, the founder and first editor of "The Windsor Magazine"; editors of five other newspapers, etc.; forty-four writers, novelists, authors; nine journalists; and many members of educational, and of county, councils.

Assuming the bulk of Irish residents in England are Catholic, the following statistics have interest. (The latest census returns are made up to 1901.) Irish-born inhabitants of England and Wales: 426,565, or 13.1 per 1000 of the whole population of England and Wales and 96 per 1000 of the population of Ireland; a decrease of 7 percent in England and Wales since 1891.

The distribution of 348,685 (or 82 per cent) of the Irish-born inhabitants of England and Wales in 1901 was:

Lancaster, Cheshire 163,569 a decrease of 11.3 per cent since 1891 London 60,211 almost no change since 1891 Surrey, Kent, Middlesex, Essex 33,850 almost no change since 1891 Yorkshire 39,145 decrease of 3953 since 1891 Northumb, Durham, Cumberland 38,480 decrease of more than 9000 since 1891 Hampshire 13,430 increase in 1582 since 1891 348,685 Outside of the metropolis the Irish-born population exceeds 5000 in no one town except the five following (Manchester and Salford being counted as one): Liverpool 45,673 6.7 per cent increase of population against 9.1 percent in 1891 Manchester, Salford 28,194 against 32,270 in 1897 Leeds 6443 Bootle 5857 Birkenhead 5306

The following table shows the number of Irish-born persons per 100,000 of total population in each of the counties of England. It will be seen that the population falls below 4 per cent in counties where agriculture most predominates:

Beds 386 Middlesex (Ex. Metr.) 954 Berks 637 Mon 1047 Bucks 353 Norfolk 240 Cambridges 239 Northants 296 Cheshire 2241 Northumb 1593 Cornwall 538 Notts 420 Cumberland 2387 Oxford 387 Derbyshire 626 Ruts 502 Devon 1135 Salop 489 Dorset 907 Somerset 454 Durham 1895 Staffs 604 Essex (Ex. Metr.) 760 Suffolk 265 Glouc. 623 Surrey (Ex. Metr.) 1071 Hants. 1684 Sussex 752 Hereford 470 Warwick 717 Herts 431 Westmoreland 459 Hunts 251 Wilts 374 Kent (Ex. Metr.) 1148 Worcs 451 Lancs. 3297 Yorks 1092 London 1327

The percentages of Irish-born to the whole population of England and Wales were 2.9 in 1851; 2.1 in 1861; 2.5 in 1871; 2.15 in 1881; 1.8 in 1891; 1.3 in 1901.

Scotland

The earliest authentic record of emigration from Ireland to Scotland is to Argyle, about the year 258 — fighting men who helped kindred tribes in Alba against Roman invaders. The See of the Isles is said to have been founded by St. Patrick about 447. Irish missionaries followed. In 503 Prince Fergus left Ireland to help the Scots of Alba against the Picts. His colony became the basis of a kingdom. In 565 St. Columba of Donegal passed into Scotland, labouring in Iona for thirty-five years. His celebrated declaration against Scots paying tribute to Irish kings practically established the Scottish nation. The Scots of former times recognized their debt by frequent use of the baptismal name Malcolm, i.e., "Servant of Columba". By the ninth century, the Scots were politically a distinct people, though the hierarchy of Northern Ireland kept an ecclesiastical protectorate over Iona as late as 1203. Intercourse between Ireland and Scotland in the thirteenth century is seen in the election of Donnel Oge to chieftainship (1258); who, having lived in Scotland, spoke in Albanian Gaelic. In 1498 Hugh Roe O'Donnell visited James VI in Scotland, concluding with him an offensive and defensive covenant. Through harpers and pipers Irish music penetrated into Scotland. Hardiman says: "The air, as well as the words of Maggy Laidir . . . is Irish." Robin Adair is the Irish "Aileen Aroon"; "John Anderson, my Jo" is at least an echo of "Cruiskeen Lawn".

The General Assembly of 1608 proposed to James "that the sons of noblemen professing popery should be committed to the custody of their friends as are sound in religion", which was effectively done. In 1785 "Irish fishermen were brought from Ireland to teach the natives of Uist the manufacture of kelp from seaweed. Others were brought to the Shetlands because of their dexterity in fishing. . . . The inhabitants of Barra learned fishing from the Irish fishermen."

When Betoun, the last archbishop of the ancient Scottish hierarchy went into exile (1560), English archpriests had jurisdiction over Scotland. On his death, in 1603, the hierarchy came to an end. In 1623 Gregory XV established a prefect of missions for Scotland. In 1631 the Irish Bishop of Down and Conor, Magennis, was put over the Scottish mission by Urban VIII. The second in succession from him was an Irish Franciscan, Patrick Hogarty (1640). In 1651, two Irish Vincentians, Fathers Dugan and White, went as missionaries to Scotland. The former worked for six years in the Hebrides, being very successful in Uist and Barra. In this latter place legends still exist of the curious miracles said to have been worked by him. Father White gave seventeen years to the Eastern highlands. In 1718 there were about forty Catholics in Glasgow. In 1779 Scotland had one bishop and some 17,000 Catholics. In 1793 the first Relief Bill for Catholics was passed.

In 1800 there were three bishops, forty priests, twelve churches, and about thirty thousand Catholics. In 1804 the Scotch had the free exercise of their religion. St. Mary's Cathedral, Edinburgh, dates from 1814; St. Andrew's Glasgow, from 1816. Glasgow, the city of St. Mungow (the Irish St. Kentigurn), ground hallowed by the footsteps of St. Columba, in the early part of this century doubled its population in twenty years, largely caused by immigration from Ireland, a Scottish writer says. In 1829 there were 70,000 Catholics in Scotland, of whom 20,000 were in Glasgow. In 1851 Glasgow had 80,000 Catholics, of whom 62,925 were Irish. In the same year, 11.34 per cent of the population of Paisley were Irish. In 1854, an Irish Vincentian, Father J. Meyers, had charge of St. Mary's Lanark. Five years later the Irish province established a house at Lanark. They have still a house in Scotland. In 1860, the Irish Catholics of Glasgow, with their priests, were much dissatisfied with the manner in which ecclesiastical patronage was distributed. Much antagonism between the Irish and Scotch Catholics ensued. The vicar of the Western District, Murdock, carried the matter to Rome, and after an energetic struggle, won; shortly after he died (1866), and his successor, Grey, received an Irish Vincentian, Fr. J. Lynch, as coadjutor. Schism threatening, Grey resigned, and Lynch was transferred to Limerick. Mgr. Eyre, promoted Apostolic delegate, succeeded to the Western Vicariate, and at last secured peace. It was during this turmoil that the Irish party first raised a cry for the restoration of the hierarchy, which had been suppressed in 1603. In 1864 Cardinal Wiseman advised Propaganda in favour of this restoration. Among other reasons he stated that the overwhelming majority of Catholics in the great commercial and manufacturing towns were poor Irish. In four years, ending in 1835, the number of Catholics in Edinburgh had risen from 700 to 8000, and in Glasgow, from 50 to 24,000. Nothing came of it until 1877, when the question was examined. In the following March (1978), Leo XIII, by the Bull "Ex Supreme", restored the hierarchy in Scotland. In 1874 there were 360,000 Irish in Scotland. Today there are 518,969, of whom 380,000 are in Glasgow. Macintosh, a non-Catholic authority, says "The Roman Catholics have in recent years relatively increased more than any other denomination."

Of the 398 Catholic churches, chapels, and stations in Scotland, 36, or 9.7 per cent, are dedicated to Irish saints. Of these, 12 are under the name of St. Patrick. Of the 13 priests ordained in Scotland in 1909 there were three Irish-born and one Irish descent. One of Scotland's two archbishops is of Irish descent. The Irish political movements noted in England apply, mutatis mutandis, to Scotland; but the social and artistic impress of Irishmen is less marked there than in England. By a papal decree of 15 December, 1909, the Ancient Order of Hibernians in Scotland is now tolerated.

Assuming that the majority of Catholics in Scotland are Irish, the following tables are of interest. In 1901 the total Irish-born population of Scotland was 205,064, being 4.585 per cent of the population. Of the town population, 5.438 per cent; of the country population 2.980 per cent, and distributed as follows: Shetland 27 Dumbarton 9,862 Orkney 38 Argyle 907 Caithness 44 Bute 475 Sutherland 55 Rendrew 25,349 Ross and Crowmarty 97 Ayr 10,632 Inverness 384 Lanark 121,185 Nairn 37 Linlithgow 4,503 Elgin 134 Edinburgh 11,985 Banff 104 Haddington 909 Aberdeen 829 Berwick 173 Kincardine 99 Peebles 298 Forfar 5,802 Selkirk 254 Perth 1,341 Roxburgh 372 Fife 2,062 Dunfries 719 Kinross 40 Kircudbright 409 Clackmannan 359 Wigtown 971 Sterling 4,639

V. IN SOUTH AFRICA

The Catholics of South Africa are for the most part Irish or of Irish descent. They do not form a large proportion of the general population, for the tide of Irish emigration has set chiefly toward America and Australia. Leaving out of account the mission stations founded for work among the native population, it may be said that the distribution of the Catholic churches throughout South Africa roughly indicates the chief centres where Irishmen are found, and the growth of Catholic organization in South African colonies has run on parallel lines with the increase of the Irish Catholic population. When Bishop Ullathorne touched at Cape Town in 1832 on way to Australia, he found there "but one priest for the whole of South Africa". The statistics for 1909 show that for that year there were 298 priests and 1929 religious, men and women. Repeated attempts to gain a footing for Catholicism in South Africa had ended in a dismal failure. But in 1837 a new era began when the Holy See separated the South African colonies from the Vicariate Apostolic of the Maritius and sent as Vicar Apostolic to Cape Town an Irish Dominican, the Rt. Rev. Patrick. R. Griffith. Bishop Griffith's successors in Cape Town to the present day have all been Irishmen (Thomas Grimley, consecrated 1861; John Leonard, 1872; and John Rooney, 1886), and most of the churches in Cape Colony have been founded by Irish priests. Irishmen form about 90 per cent of the Catholic population of the colony.

In 1847 Pius IX divided South Africa into the Western Vicariate (Cape Town and district) and the Eastern Vicariate (Eastern Cape Colony, Natal, etc.). Natal was erected into a separate vicariate three years later. After the rush to the diamond fields had brought many Irish Catholics into the district, Kimberley was erected into a vicariate in 1886 and now includes the Orange River Colony. There were very few Catholics in the Transvaal until the opening out of the Rand gold field brought a rush of Irish immigrants to what is now Johannesburg. Until 1885 the handful of Catholics in the Republic were attached to the Natal vicariate. The Transvaal was then made a prefecture Apostolic. It was erected into a separate vicariate in 1904, when an Irish prelate, the Rt. Rev. W. Miller, O. M. I., was consecrated as its first bishop. Rhodesia is a prefecture Apostolic which has grown out of the Zambesi mission, founded by the Jesuits before the coming of the pioneers of the South African Company brought with it an influx of white settlers. Basutoland is another prefecture, but there is a very limited white population, the Basutos having preserved a semi-independence under the supervision of a British "Resident". The Vicariate Apostolic of the Orange River, erected in 1901, is another district which has a scattered white population, living in a thinly peopled country, where the mission stations have mainly to do the work for the natives. It includes the north-west and part of the centre of Cape Colony, its northern boundary being the lower course of the Orange River. It is interesting to note that the Church obtained its first foothold in this district in 1873, when the Cape Government handed over to Catholic missionaries a mission station in Namaqualand, which had been abandoned by the Protestant Rhenish Society during the Bushman insurrection.

The census of Cape Colony, 1904, states the total population as 2,409,804, of whom 549,741 were whites. The religious census gives the total Catholic population as 37,000 of whom 28,480 were whites. This latter figure includes Catholic soldiers in garrison. Taking 90 per cent as the proportion of Irish Catholics, the total for the two Vicariates (Eastern and Western) would be about 25,000. A large proportion of the priests and religious are Irish, and it has already been mentioned that the Vicar Apostolic of Cape Town is an Irish prelate. So is the Vicar Apostolic of the Eastern District at Port Elizabeth, the Rt. Rev. Hugh McSherry, who was consecrated at Dundalk, in 1896, by Cardinal Logue, primate of all Ireland.

The chief centres of Irish population in the colony are Cape Town and the adjacent townships, and Port Elizabeth, East London, and the adjoining districts. Very few Irish Catholics are resident outside these towns or engaged in farming. There are more than thirty convents in the colony, each the centre of various active good works. The oldest of these convents in South Africa is that of Our Lady of Good Hope, Grahamstown, founded by Irish nuns in 1849. Another instance of Irish pioneer work may be noted — the oldest Church in Grahamstown, St. Patrick's, opened in 1844, was largely built by the voluntary labour of Irish soldiers. There are convents of the Sisters of Nazareth at Cape Town, supported by the offerings of men of all religious denominations. There is a special mission to the leper colony, isolated on Robben Island. Other institutions and charitable works are orphanages, deaf and dumb institutions, and nursing homes. The chief organizations among the Irish Catholics are confraternities established in most of the churches. The St. Vincent de Paul Society is almost exclusively officered by Irishmen. Many of the Catholic schools of the colony receive government aid. The high schools, the most important of which is the Jesuit college at Grahamstown, send up their pupils for the degrees of the University of Cape Town, which is an examining, not a teaching, body. There are about three hundred conversions annually among the white non-Catholic population. The Natal Vicariate includes Natal, Zululand, and the Transkei district of Cape Colony. The priests are mostly French missionaries (Oblates of Mary), but there are some Irish members of the Order, and about one-third of the nuns are Irish. There is a large coloured Catholic population (Africans and Tamil immigrants from India), some 20,000 in all. The ecclesiastical returns up to mid-summer, 1909, fix the white Catholic population at 7458. This includes troops in garrison. The permanent Irish Catholic population (colonists) is estimated at about 3000. They are found chiefly in Durban, Pietermaritzburg, Ladysmith, and the Transkei. Catholic organization is on the same general lines as in Cape Colony. The parochial elementary schools and some of the secondary schools receive government aid.

The Kimberley Vicariate, with its centre in the Diamond City, includes the Orange River Colony, Bechuanaland, and the greater part of Griqualand, an extent of about 200,000 square miles. The Catholics do not number quite 5000. There are some 1500 in Kimberley; about 95 per cent of them are Irish by birth or descent. Scattered in small groups through Bechuanaland and Griqualand there are about 360, nearly all of Irish blood. There are some 2000 in the Orange River Colony, of whom about 80 percent are Irish. The total Irish Catholic population may be taken at between three and four thousand. The vicar Apostolic, the Rt. Rev. Matthew Gaughren, is an Irishman, as was his predecessor. There are only nineteen priests to serve this huge district. Eight are Irish. There are nearly a hundred nuns, of whom half are Irish women. The Sisters of Nazareth have a house at Kimberley and other orders conduct schools for girls at Kimberley, Bloemfontein, Vryburg, Beaconsfield, Kroonstad, and Mafeking. "Our Catholic schools" writes the vicar Apostolic, "are absolutely independent of the Government school system. They are not subject to inspection and they receive no grants. The public school system finds no place for denominational schools, but there is no actual hostility against them.

In the Transvaal vicariate there are some 12,000 Irish Catholics under an Irish Archbishop, the Rt. Rev. William Miller, O. M. I. They are chiefly found in and about Johannesburg. Many of them are Irish Americans, some of whom hold prominent positions in the gold-mining industry. There are also churches in Pretoria and thirteen other centres. Five of the twenty-six priests and about half of the nuns and Christian brothers (167) are Irish. The nuns are mostly engaged in teaching. The Sisters of Nazareth have a house in Johannesburg.

In the scattered mission districts of the Orange River Vicariate there are very few Irish Catholics. There are perhaps twenty of them in the small white populations of Basutoland. In Rhodesia there are about seven hundred. One hears of them from time to time in the narratives of the Jesuit missionaries published in the "Zambesi Mission Record". In the remote regions of the mission in its earliest days the Jesuits often came upon and were gladly helped by an Irish mining prospector or a trooper of the mounted police. When William Woodbyrne was pioneering and prospecting in Mashonaland, his wagon was often for weeks at a time the centre of operations of a Jesuit missionary.

Among notable Irish Catholics in South Africa may be mentioned Michael Gallwey, a lawyer of marked ability and for many years Chief Justice of Natal; the Hon. A. Wilmot, K. S. G., who is Irish on the mother's side; Mr. Justice Shell, one of the judges of Cape Colony; Sir William St. John Carr of Johannesburg; the Hon. John Daverin, M. L. C., and Mr. Beauclerk Uppington, M. L. A. The Catholic episcopate has from the outset been mainly Irish. Though many Irish Catholics are connected with colonial journalism in South Africa, the Catholics have not yet any newspaper of their own. The "Catholic Magazine" published monthly at Cape Town, is their chief literary organ. Some of the missionaries issue regular reports, the most important of which is the "Zambesi Mission Record" (monthly). The leading colleges and convent boarding-schools have their school magazines. The "Catholic Directory for British South Africa", issued annually from the Salesian Press, Cape Town, since 1904, forms a valuable record of progress.

VI. SOUTH AMERICA

In the records of the Latin republics of South America there is ample record of the traditional genius of the sons of St. Patrick to assimilate themselves with whatever people their lot may be presently cast. A number of them took a leading part in the establishment of the independence of several of these governments, and their names are enshrined among their titular heroes of these nations.

In Paraguay, in 1555, there was a revolution headed by one Nicholas Colman. He is reputed to have been a Celt, but the records are not definite. Remembering how intimate, from a remote period, were the social and commercial relations between Ireland and Spain, the parent of most of the South American countries, it is not to be wondered at, perhaps, that even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries so many Irish soldiers of fortune, and missionaries, and adventurers found their way across the ocean to the banks of the Amazon and the Plate. Ignoring Colman's claim as the pioneer, the first Irishman whose name appears without contradiction in South American history is the Jesuit Father Thomas Field, who was born in Limerick in 1549, and spent ten years in Brazil and forty in the famous missions in Paraguay of which, with Father de Ortega, he was the founder. At one time he was the only missionary in all Paraguay, and he lived there longer than any other member of his order. Father Thomas Field's parents were William Field, a physician, and his wife Janet Creah. He took a classical course at Paris, studied philosophy for three years at Louvain, and then entered the Society of Jesus at Rome, 6 October, 1574. After six months in the novitiate he showed such progress and solidity of virtue that he was allowed to volunteer for the mission in Brazil. Leaving Rome on 28 April, 1575, he begged his way on foot to St. James of Compostella in Spain and thence to Lisbon, where he remained for two years, mainly at Coimbra. He arrived in Brazil in 1577, and thenceforward his name is usually found transformed into "Filde". Here, under the guidance of the venerable Father Joseph Anchieta, "the Apostle and Thaumaturgus of Brazil", he was trained in the apostolic life and by him was selected to go to evangelize Tucumán and Paraguay.

Father Anchieta, in his annual letter to his superiors for the year 1591, says: "There are three fathers in Paraguay whom its appears have been sent from Brazil . . . they traverse many and vast regions and have brought many thousands of barbarians to the fold of Christ, a work in which they are much helped by their knowledge of the Guaraní language." And the "Letters" for 1592 and 1594 say "Father Solanio sent Fathers de Ortega and Filde to the Guaraní, and it is known that they converted more than two thousand of them." "Father Thomas Filde and Father de Ortega were sent into the province of Guayrá, which lies between Paraguay and Brazil. They have a residence established in Villa Rica, and from thence they go in missions to give spiritual help to innumerable peoples." Among those converted by them were the Ibiragaras, a nation of ten thousand cannibals. The two missionaries remained in Guayrá for eight years and then proceeded to Asunción. In the early part of 1605, Father Filde was the only Jesuit left in all of Tucumán and Paraguay. During the thirteen years he toiled in these missions it is estimated Father Filde and his companions baptized 150,000 Indians. It was at the village of Parapo that, on 2 July, 1610, 200 of these converts were gathered and formed by Father Macheto Cataldino into "Loreto", the first of the historic "Reductions", and the model for all the subsequent communities that made up the "Christian Republic of Misiones". In 1615 Father Filde was made the teacher of Guaraní and other Indian languages to the young Jesuits who were being trained for the missions. In the catalogue of Irish Jesuits for 1617, Father "Thomas Field" is set down as being in Paraguay. He died at Asunción in 1626, retaining an extraordinary physical vigour to the end, in spite of heroic mortifications and zeal for souls.

With this illustrious soul, the record, honourable in all its details, of the Irish element in the Latin American countries begins. Its ramifications are as extended as they are curious and unexpected. At the period preceding the wars of independence, the remarkable fact is presented of Irish-born viceroys governing Mexico, Peru, and Chile for Spain. There were eight Irish regiments in the Spanish service at the opening of the eighteenth century. At its close the Napoleonic Wars brought Spain as an ally of France under the harrow of many English schemes for the spoilation of her South American treasure house and the emancipation from her rule of the several colonies there. In the invading as well as in the colonial armies Irish soldiers were conspicuous. It was then that the foundations of the chief Irish colony, that of the Argentine Republic, were laid. In 1765 a Captain McNamara with two privateering ships attempted to take Colonia (in front of Buenos Aires) from the Spaniards. His ship caught fire and he, and all but 78 of his crew of 262, were lost. The saved were in large part Irish who settled down in the country and became the progenitors of many families with Celtic patronymies still to be found in the Argentine rural provinces. On 24 June, 1906, General William Carr Beresford, an illegitimate son of the Marquess of Waterford, at the head of another English expedition, which had in its ranks hundreds of Irish soldiers, captured the city of Buenos Aires and held it for nearly two months, only surrendering then to overwhelming odds. Again these soldiers contributed numbers of Irish settlers to the country. On 27 June 1907, a third English expedition under General Whitelocks arrived off Buenos Aires. One of its regiments was the 88th, the famous "Connaught Rangers". It also ended disastrously, but left its Irish addition to the local population.

Following we come to the period, 1810-1824, when Buenos Aires was the revolutionary centre of the various efforts that led to the separation from Spain of her south American colonies, and in most of these Irishmen and their sons were prominent. In Buenos Aires there is no name more honoured in the list of Argentina's patriots than that of Admiral William Brown (q. v.). He had as companions in arms Dillons, O'Gormans, O'Farrells, Sheridans, Butlers, and others. Peter Sheridan, who arrived from Cavan early in the eighteenth century, and Thomas Armstrong from King's County were among the founders of Argentina's great wool industry. Sheridan's brother, Dr. Hugh Sheridan, served under Admiral Brown, and his son, who died at Buenos Aires in 1861, was a famous painter of South American landscapes. The interests of religion in the little Irish colony were first looked after by a friar named Burke, and when he died, Archbishop Murray of Dublin sent out by request Father Patrick Moran, who arrived at Buenos Aires 11 February, 1829. He died there the following May, and was succeeded, October, 1831, by Father Patrick O'Gorman, also from Dublin, who was chaplain until his death, 3 March, 1847, his flock greatly increasing.

In the great Irish exodus following the famine years Argentina received a substantial part of the exile throng. Their counsellor and friend was the Dominican, Fr. Anthony D. Fahy. Born at Loughres, County Gallway, in 1804, he made his ecclesiastical studies at St. Clement's, Rome. Then he spent two years on the missions in the United States, in Ohio and Kentucky, after which he was sent to Buenos Aires, where he arrived in 1843. For more than a quarter of a century, until his death from yellow fever, caught while attending a poor Italian, in 1871, his name is intimately identified with the progress and welfare, spiritual and temporal, of the large Irish community in Buenos Aires. In 1856 he brought out a community of Sisters of Mercy under Mother Mary Evangelist Fitzpatrick from Dublin, and built a spacious convent for them. To this have since been added a hospital, a boarding school for girls, and a home for immigrants. In 1873 a branch convent was established as Mercedes about sixty miles distant. In April, 1881, the irreligious sentiment rife in Buenos Aires drove the whole community of eighteen sisters to Australia. In the meantime the real Catholics of Buenos Aires had become ashamed of the cowardice that had allowed the Sisters of Mercy to be forced out of the city by the anti-clerical faction. Petitions were addressed to the Sisters, to the Bishop of Adelaide, and to Rome, asking that the community be sent back. In 1890, six of the Sisters from the Mount Gambier convent, Adelaide, were permitted to return. Their old convent at Rio Bamba was restored to them; their schools reopened; a house for immigrant girls established and within a year $20,000 subscribed to put their orphanage on a secure footing. Father Fahy, moreover, had priests specially trained for this mission at All Hallows College, Dublin, and established libraries, reading rooms, schools, and other means for improving the life of the colony.

An Irish Passionist, Father Martin Byrne, prepared the way for a foundation of his congregation, the pioneers of which, Fathers Timothy Pacetti and Clement Finnegan, arrived at Buenos Aires from the United States, 14 December, 1880. In 1881 Father Fidelis (James Kent Stone), became the superior of their community, which in a short period was increased to fifteen priests and six novices, mostly Irish Americans. Their fine monastery of the Holy Cross was dedicated on 10 January, 1886, and the splendid church attached to it in 1897. In 1897 Father Fidelis established another house of the Passionists near Valparaiso, Chile, and built and had dedicated on 19 March, 1898, the church attached to the monastery of St. Paul of the Cross at Sarmiento.

For many years the Irish colony at Buenos Aires included the famous statistician Michael G. Mullhall (q. v.). In the same field was William Bulfin, editor of a Catholic weekly "The Southern Cross". Born near Birr, King's County, in 1862, he arrived in Buenos Aires in 1884, and spent several years in ranch and commercial life, during which, over the pen-name "Che Buono" he contributed "Tales of the Pampas" and "Sketches of Buenos Aires" to various magazines and publications. In 1892 he joined forces with Michael Dineen, and became a member of the staff of "The Southern Cross", which had been established in 1874, and finally its proprietor and chief editor, in which capacity, he was a leader of thought and progress of the Irish Argentine community. He died in Ireland during a visit there, 2 February, 1910. Another weekly paper circulating in this section is the "Hiberno-Argentine Review". It is estimated that the Irish form about one per cent of the population of Argentina. As the official statistics record them in the tables as natives of Great Britain, positive figures from that source are unavailable. The unmistakable names show, however, that they are well represented in all the walks of political, commercial, professional, and social life.

Chile and Peru revere the memory of a famous Irishman, Ambrose O'Higgins (q. v.), the "Great Viceroy (1720-1801) and his son, Bernard (q. v.), the dictator of Chile (1776-1842). In more recent years, Peru and Chile owed much to the enterprise of another Irishman, William R. Grace (q. v.). In 1851 he began his extensive business at Callao, Peru, with his partner, John Bryce. General John McKenna, born 20 October, 1771, at Cloger, Co. Tyrone, Ireland, was sent, when a boy, to his uncle, Count O'Reilly, at Madrid, and graduated from the military academy at Barcelona, in 1878. In 1796, he went to Peru, where he became one of the leading governmental functionaries. He was on a public work in Chile when the revolution against Spain broke out in September, 1810, and espoused the patriot cause, in which, under Bernard O'Higgins, he did remarkable service. He was killed in a duel on 21 November, 1814. Vicuna McKenna, the statesman and historian of later years, was his grandson, Other Irishmen notable in South American history are Generals John Thurmond O'Brian, Daniel Florence O'Leary, and John Devereux. O'Brian was born in the south of Ireland in 1790 and reached Buenos Aires in 1816. He was with San Martin's army during the campaigns of Chile and Peru, and at the conclusion of the war, in 1821, turned his attention to mining, at which he essayed some remarkable engineering feats. He visited Europe in 1847 as a diplomatic agent and tried to direct Irish emigration to South America. He died at Lisbon in May, 1861.

In January, 1819, General John Devereux, who is styled the "Lafayette of South America", because he had offered his sword and fortune to Simón Bolivar, the Liberator of Bolivia, was commissioned by the latter to go to Ireland and enlist an Irish legion for the aid of the revolution. He landed nearly 2000 men in South America in January, 1820. The legion won the decisive battle of Carabobo on 24 June, 1821. Among its officers was Colonel (afterwards General) Daniel Florence O'Leary (b. at Cork, 14 Feb., 1801; d. at Rome in 1868), often employed by Bolivar on important diplomatic missions. His memoirs, letters, and documents, compiled by his son, were published by the Venezuelan Government. General John O'Connor, who claimed to be a descendant of the last King of Ireland, raised a regiment of volunteers and brought them to Peru at his own expense, and fought all through the campaigns of Venezuela and New Granada. After the end of hostilities he was made minister of War in Bolivia and died in 1870 at an advanced age. Among other Irish soldiers of note in these wars might be mentioned Major Thomas Craig, Major John King, Colonel Charles O'Carroll, Lieut. Colonel Moran, Captain Charles Murphy, and Lieutenant Maurice O'Connell. All through these Latin republics there are hundreds of families, the grandchildren of these men, who bear these and other Irish names, but who are as Spanish in language and character as any of their compatriots of pure Spanish descent. In Argentina this condition is especially notable.

I. IN THE UNITED STATES: Pendergast, The Cromwellian Settlement of Ireland (New York, 1868); D'Arcy McGee, A History of the Irish Settlers in North America (Boston, 1852); Harrison, The Scot in Ulster (Edinburgh, 1888); D'Arcy McGee, A Popular History of Ireland (Glasgow); Walpole, A Short History of the Kingdom of Ireland (New York, 1882); O'Kane Murray, Popular History of the Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1876); De Courcy, History of the Catholic Church in America, ed. by J. G. Shea (New York, New York, 1857); Bagenal, The American Irish (Boston, 1882); Maguire, The Irish in America (New York, 1868); Immigration into the United States, U. S. Bureau of Statistics, Monograph (Washington, 1903); Thébaud, Ireland, Past and Present (New York, 1901); Stephenson Gregg, Irish History for English Readers (New York, 1886); Kapp, Immigration and the Commissioners of Emigration of the State of New York (New York, 1870); Conyngham, The Irish Brigade and Its Campaigns (New York, 1867); Young, Tour in Ireland (1776-1779) (reprint) (London, 1892); Treacy, Old Catholic Maryland and its early Jesuit Missionaries (1889); O'Donoghue, The Geographical Distribution of Irish Ability (Dublin, 1906); O'Rourke, History of the Great Irish Famine of 1847 (Dublin, 1902); The Original Lists of Persons of Quality; emigrants; religious exiles; political rebels; serving men sold for a term of years; apprentices; children stolen; maidens pressed; and others who went from Great Britain to the American Plantations — 1600-1700, edited from manuscripts preserved etc. by John Camden Hotten (New York, 1874); A. M. Sullivan, New Ireland (Philadelphia, 1878); Lester, The Glory and Shame of England (New York, 1866); O'Connor, The Parnell Movement (London, 1887); O'Neill Daunt, Ireland and Her Agitators (Dublin, 1867); Annals of the Sisters of Mercy (New York, 1889); Spading, The Religious Mission of the Irish People, etc. (New York, 1880); Hanna, The Scotch-Irish, or the Scot in North Britain, North Ireland, and North America (New York, 1802); Abstract of the 12th Census (1900); and other Census and Emigration Reports (Washington); files of the Boston Pilot and other Irish and Catholic newspapers; American Catholic Historical Society Publications (Boston, 1898-1906); American Catholic Historical Researches (Philadelphia, 1884-1910); Cullen, The Story of the Irish in Boston (Boston, 1889); Campbell, History of the Friendly Sons of St. Patrick (Philadelphia, 1892).

II. IN AUSTRALIA: Files of the Freeman's Journal (Sydney); New Zealand Tablet (Dunedin); Advocate, Tribune (Melbourne); The Age (Adelaide); Southern Cross (Perth); Duffy, Life in the Two Hemispheres (London, 1903); and the bibliography given with the article Australia.

III. IN CANADA: Davin, The Irishman in Canada (London, 1877); O'Callaghan, Documentary History of the State of New York, X (Albany, 1858); O'Callaghan, The Irish Brigades in the Service of France (New York, 1874); MacGuire, The Irish in America (London, 1877); Reports of the Canadian Archives (Ottawa, 1905); MacMillan, The Early History of Prince Edward Island (Quebec, 1905); The Canada Yearbook (Ottawa, 1908); Vie de Madame d'Youville (Ville Marie, 1852); Ferland, Biographical Notice of Joseph Octave Plessis, Bishop of Quebec (Quebec, 1864); Têtu, Journal des visits pastorales de Mgr Plessis (Quebec, 1903); Alexis, L'Eglise Catholique au Canada (Quebec, 1909); Morice, History of the Cath. Church in Western Canada (Toronto, 1910); Laut, The Conquest of the Great Northwest (2 vols, Toronto, 1909).

IV. IN GREAT BRITAIN: Bellerheim, Hist. of Cath. Ch. in Scotland, IV (Edinburgh, 1890); MacCaffrey, Hist. of Cath. Ch. in the Nineteenth Century II (Dublin, 1909); O'Brien, Two Centuries of Irish History, 1691-1870 (London, 1907); Gern, The Making of Ireland and Its Undoing (London, 1908); Denvir, The Irish in Britain (London, 1892); Boyle, St. Vincent de Paul and the Vincentians in Ireland, Scotland, and England (London, 1909); Census for England and Wales (London, 1901); Census for Scotland (London, 1901); Journal of the Statistical and Social Inquiry Society of Ireland (Dublin, 1899-1908); Catholic Directory for England (London, 1910); Catholic directory for Scotland (Glasgow, 1910); Statesman's Yearbook (London, 1910); The Catholic Who's Who (London, 1910).

V. IN SOUTH AFRICA: The above article is based on the official census returns and on detailed communications kindly supplied to the writer by the Vicars Apostolic of the Eastern vicariate of Cape Colony, Kimberley, and Natal.

VI. IN SOUTH AMERICA: Southey, History of Brazil (London, 1810; Sp. tr. Rio de Janiero, 1862); Gay, Historia fisica y politica de Chile (Santiago, 1844-65); Simon B. O'Leary, Memorias del General O'Leary (Caracas, 1879); Dawson, South American Republics (London, 1903); Markham, History of Peru (Chicago, 1893); Arana, Historia General de Chile (Santiago, 1884-85); Marion McM. Mullhall, Explorers in the New World (London, 1909); Fitzgerald, Ireland and Her People (Chicago, 1909-1910); Webb, Compendium of Irish Biography (London, 1878); Hogan, Distinguished Irishmen of the Sixteenth Century (London, 1894); Dict. Nat. Biog., s. vv.; The Standard, The Southern Cross (Buenos Aires, files). Also the bibliographies for the articles on the several Latin American counties.

PETER CONDON
THOMAS F. MEEHAN
E.J. DEVINE
D. MONTCRIEFF O'CONNOR
A. HILLIARD ATTERIDGE THOMAS F. MEEHAN

Irish College, in Rome

Towards the close of the sixteenth century, Gregory XIII had sanctioned the foundation of an Irish college in Rome, and had assigned a large sum of money as the nucleus of an endowment. But the pressing needs of the Irish chieftains made him think that, under the circumstances, the money might as well be used for religion by supplying the Irish Catholics with the sinews of war in Ireland as by founding a college for them at Rome. The project was revived in 1625 by the Irish bishops, in an address to Urban VIII. Cardinal Ludovisi, who was Cardinal Protector of Ireland, resolved to realize at his own expense, as a useful and lasting memorial of his protectorate, the desire expressed to the pope by the Irish bishops. A house was rented opposite Sant' Isodoro and six students went into residence 1 January, 1628. Eugene Callanan, archdeacon of Cashel, was the first rector, Father Luke Wadding being a sort of supervisor. Cardinal Ludovisi died in 1632; he was of a princely family with a large patrimony, and he made provision in his will for the college; it was to have an income of one thousand crowns a year; a house was to be purchased for it; and he left a vineyard as Castel Gandolfo where the students might pass their villeggiatura. To the surprise of his heirs no less than of Father Wadding, the cardinal's will directed that the college should be placed under the charge of the Jesuits. Both the heirs and Wadding suspected that provision and disputed it; a protracted lawsuit was finally decided in 1635 in favour of the Jesuits.

On 8 Feb., 1635, they took charge of the college, and governed it until 1772. A permanent residence was secured, which became the home of the Irish students until 1798, and is still the property of the college; it has given its name to the street in which it stands. The Jesuits found eight students before them; one of these, Philip Cleary, after a brilliant academic course, left for the mission in Ireland in 1640, and suffered death for the Faith ten years later. The first Jesuit rector became general of the Society; he was succeeded by Father James Forde who was succeeded in 1637 by Father William Malone, a successful combatant in controversy with Archbishop Usher. In 1650 Monsignor Scarampo of the Oratory, on return from his embassy to the Kilkenny Confederation, brought with him two students to the Irish College; one was Peter Walsh, who became a distinguished Oratorian; the other was Oliver Plunkett, who was kept in Rome as professor at Propaganda until his appointment to the see of Armaugh in 1670, whence he was promoted to a martyr's crown at Tyburn. Philip Cleary's name is amongst those who cause is before the Congregation of Rites; and the cause of Oliver Plinkett is so far advanced that his Alma Mater hopes ere long to venerate him on the altar of its chapel. In the archives of the college is preserved an autograph of Oliver Plunkett, written by him when he was about to leave. John Brennan, one of his contemporaries, also became a professor at Propaganda; whence he was appointed Bishop of Waterford, and then Archbishop of Cashel. Soon after came several remarkable students — Ronin Maginn; James Kusack, Bishop of Meath; Peter Creagh, successively Bishop of Cork and Cloyne, and Archbishop of Dublin.

In the earliest part of the eighteenth century, one of the students, Roch MacMahon, made his name in Irish history as Bishop of Cloger; another, Hugh MacMahon, Archbishop of Armaugh, asserted the precedence of that see to Dublin in a work of great learning, "Jus Primatiale Armacanum". Richard Reynolds at the end of his course was kept in Rome at tutor to the children of the Pretender; James Gallagher became Bishop of Kildare. When we consider that the college had never more than eight students at a time, and had often so few as five, if it had produced no other distinguished alumni than those named, it would have well deserved these words written by the Irish primate, Hugh MacMahon, to the rector: "If the college on account of its slender resources cannot furnish many soldiers, it provides brave and skilled captains." It was then known as the "Seminarium Episcoporum" or nursery of bishops. In other ways, however, the college had its trials and changes. It came into financial difficulties. The villa at Castel Gandolfo was sold to the Jesuit novitiate in 1667, and yet the difficulties did not disappear. It was thought, moreover, that too large a proportion of the able students found a vocation in the Society of Jesus, in spite of the purpose of the college, which trained them for the mission in Ireland. Complaints as to administration were also made, and a Pontifical Commission was deputed to make an official inquiry. It report was not favourable to the Jesuits, and in September, 1772, the college was withdrawn from their control. The present writer thinks that the Jesuits were not without some plausible pleas to justify their management of the college; and it would be strange if a close inquiry into a rectorate of 137 years did not reveal some instances of mismanagement.

The college now passed from the care of the Jesuits, and an Italian priest, Abbate Luigi Cuccagni, was made rector. He was a man of acknowledged ability. Hurter says that he was the ablest of the controversialists who wrote against the form of Jansenism which was patronized by Joseph II, supported by the synod of Pistoia, and had its citadel in the University of Pavia. He is the author of several works which were in high repute in those days; and from the Irish College he edited the "Giornale Ecclesiastico di Roma", then the leading Catholic periodical in Rome. The first prefect of studies appointed under his rectorate was the famous Pietro Tamburini, who afterwards became the leader of Jansenism at Pavia. During his prefectship he delivered his lectures on the Fathers which were afterwards published at Pavia. He had to leave the college after four years; and although some very brilliant students were there in his time, it does not appear that he tried to leave, or if he tried, that he succeeded in leaving, any unorthodox influence on their minds. The rectorate of Cuccagni came to an end in 1798, when the college was closed by order of Napoleon; and thus we come to the close of another period in its history. During those twenty-six years it quite equalled its previous prestige. For, although its number of students was sometimes as low as three, it sent forth Dr. Lanigan the historian, who promoted directly from being a student of the Irish college to the chair of Scripture at Pavia; Dr. Charles O'Connor, author of "Scriptores Rerum Hibernicarum" and several others works; James R. Clerigh, who never became a priest, but was a well-known Catholic leader in Ireland a century ago; Dr. Ryan, Bishop of Ferns; Dr. McCarthy, Coadjutor Bishop of Cork; Dr. Blake, Bishop of Dromore.

Dr. Blake, who was the last student to leave the college at its dissolution in 1798, returned a quarter of a century later to arrange for its revival, which was effected by a brief of Leo XII, dated 18 Feb., 1826. He became the first rector of the restored college, and among the first students who sought admission was Francis Mahoney of Cork, known to the literary world as Father Prout. Having set the college well to work, Dr. Blake returned to Ireland, and was succeeded by Dr. Boylan, of Maynooth, who soon resigned and died in 1830. He was succeeded by a young priest who had just completed a singularly brilliant course at Propaganda, and who governed it with great success until 1849, when he became Archbishop of Armaugh, and then Archbishop of Dublin, and finally Cardinal Cullen. Within two years of his rectorate he had forty students in the college; and to provide proper accommodations for the increasing numbers who sought admission, the present building with the Church of St. Agatha was given to the college in 1835 by Gregory XVI. Two years later Dr. Cullen purchased a fine country villa as a summer home, amid the olive groves which cover the slopes of the Sabine hills near Trivolli. Amongst the distinguished students who passed through the college during Dr. Cullen's rectorate were: Rev. C. P. Meehan; Dr. Edmund O'Reilly, S. J.; Bishop Croke; Cardinal Moran; Archbishop Dunne of Brisbane.

Dr. Cullen was succeeded by Dr. Kirby, well known for his holiness of life. He governed the college for more than forty years. His successor was Michael Kelly, the present coadjutor to the Archbishop of Sydney. The college has received several privileges of various kinds from popes. Before 1870 the students had the privilege of carrying the baldacchino part of the way during the procession on the feast of Corpus Christi, on which occasion the pope carried the Blessed Sacrament. Gregory XVI paid a visit to the college in 1837; and on St. Patrick's Day, 1860, Pius IX assisted at Mass in the college church, after which he held a reception at the college. A similar gift was made to the college during this present year (1909) by Pius X, in memory of his jubilee. The heart of Daniel O'Connell is buried in the college church.

Archives of the Irish College, Rome; La Relazione del Cardinale Marefoschi; Hurter, Nomenclator; Giornale Ecclesiastico di Roma (1780-1798).

M. O'RIORDAN

Irish Colleges, on the Continent

The religious persecution under Elizabeth and James I lead to the suppression of the monastic schools in Ireland in which the clergy for the most part received their education. It became necessary, therefore, to seek education abroad, and many colleges for the training of the secular clergy were founded on the Continent, at Rome, in Spain and Portugal, in Belgium, and in France. The history of the Irish college and of the other Irish establishments in Rome is dealt with in special articles (see Irish College, The, in Rome, etc.). That of the other Irish colleges on the continent may, for the sake of order. be given in separate sections, according to the countries in which they existed.

IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL

Salamanca

The most famous of the Irish colleges in Spain was that of Salamanca, founded, at the petition of Father Thomas White, S. J., by a decree of Philip III, dated 1592, and opened in 1593 with the title: El Real Colegio de Nobles Irlandeses. The support of the students was provided for by a royal endowment. The discipline and management of the college was entrusted to the Jesuit fathers at Salamanca, an Irish father holding the office of vice-rector. The Jesuits continued to govern the college until the order was expelled from Spain in 1767. Since that date the rectors of the college have been selected from amongst the Irish secular clergy, presented by the bishops of Ireland and confirmed by the King of Spain. Dr. Birmingham was the first rector after the departure of the Jesuits. Dr. Curtis, subsequently Bishop of Armaugh, held office from 1781 to 1812, and rendered valuable service to the Duke of Wellington during the Peninsular War. In more recent years,. Dr. William McDonald, of the Diocese of Armaugh, Father Cowan, of Dromore, Father Bernard Maguire, of Cloghger have been rectors. That office is presently held by the Very Rev. Michael O'Doherty, D. D., a priest from the Diocese of Achinry. The Irish college at Salamanca was open to students from all the provinces of Ireland, but in the seventeenth century, the majority of them came from the southern and eastern provinces. It was made cause of complaint that Father White, S. J., was unwilling to receive students from Ulster and Connaught, and the exiled Irish chiefs, O'Neil and O'Donnell, presented a remonstrance on the subject to the King of Spain. The students attended lectures in the famous University of Salamanca, and the college was the nursing mother of many eminent Irish ecclesiastics. Dr. Curtis of Armaugh, Dr. Murray of Dublin, Dr. Kelley of Tuam, Dr. Laffam, and Dr. Everard of Cashel were all alumni of Salamanca, the last four being fellow-students. At present the Irish students at Salamanca number about thirty, and attend lectures at the diocesan seminary which has taken the place of the theology faculty of the ancient university. The college is supported chiefly by ancient endowments, which are subject to the control of the Spanish Government.

Seville

About 1612 a college for Irish students was established at Seville, and managed by secular priests, one of whom was Theobald Stapleton, who afterwards died a martyr in Ireland, being stabbed while administering Holy Communion. In 1619, Father Richard Conrad, S. J., was appointed rector. When he entered upon office, the personnel of the college — superiors, students, and servants — numbered eighteen. They suffered much from poverty. Their condition moved many to compassion. The fishermen at Seville obtained an indult from Pope Paul V, permitting them to fish on six Sundays and holidays each year in order that they might gave the profits of their labour for the support of the Irish students. For the same purpose Irish merchants at Seville granted to the college a percentage on every cask of wine they sold. Soldiers in the Irish Brigade of the Spanish service gave a portion of their pay. With such aid the college continued to exist and was able to send every year two priests to the Irish mission. One of the students of the college, Dominic Lynch, became president in the University of Seville. In 1769, the Irish college at Seville, with all its goods, rents, and rights, was, by royal authority, amalgamated with that of Salamanca.

Madrid

In 1629 a college for Irishmen was founded by Father Theobald Stapleton, who has already been mentioned in connection with the college at Seville. The number of students varied from ten to twenty, supported by the charity of benefactors. The college served as a hospice for those Irish ecclesiastics who, having completed their studies, came to the capital to claim the bounty of £10 which the King of Spain had granted to Irish students in the peninsula, to enable them to return to Ireland. In 1677, Dr. James Lynch, Archbishop of Tuam, resided for some time at Madrid and succeeded in restoring the college to greater prosperity. but eventually it was closed, and its property lost to the Church in Ireland.

Alcalá

In Alcalá, anciently Complutum, famous for its university, and for its polyglot edition of the Bible, an Irish college was founded in 1590, by a Portuguese nobleman named George Sylveira, a descendant, though his mother, of the Macdonnells of Ulster. He bestowed on the college an endowment of the value of £2000, and, at a cost of £1000, built a chapel to his patron, St. George. At Alcalá there were four masters, twenty students, and eight students. The ancient college has long since ceased to exist.

Santiago de Compostela

In 1605 a college for Irish ecclesiastics was founded at Compostela. Philip III bestowed upon it an endowment of £100 a year. It was under the direction of the Jesuits. In 1671 there were six students. At the conclusion of the philosophy course all went to Salamanca for their theological studies. In 1769 the property of the college at Santiago de Compostela was amalgamated with that of the college at Salamanca.

Lisbon

Besides the college in Spain there existed also an Irish establishment in Portugal. The college was founded by Royal Charter in 1593, under the title: Collegio de Estudiantes Irlandeses sub invocaçaon de San Patricio en Lisboa. Like the other Irish colleges in the peninsula it was placed under the management of the Jesuits. The celebrated Stephan White, S. J., was one of its earliest pupils. During the great earthquake which almost destroyed the city of Lisbon in 1755, the Irish college and its inmates suffered no injury. Not long after it suffered from the malice of men. In 1769 it was closed and confiscated by Pombal, under the pretext that it was a Jesuit establishment. But in 1782, an Irish secular priest, Dr. Michael Brady, succeeded in having the college restored to the Irish. Dr. Brady was succeeded in the office of rector by Dr. Bartholomew Crotty, subsequently president of Maynooth, and Bishop of Cloyne. Dr. Crotty held the office of rector from 1801 to 1811. During his tenure of office, an invitation was addressed by Dr. John Baptist Walsh, rector of the Irish college to Paris, to the students in Lisbon, to come to his college at Paris, an invitation of which the bishops of Ireland expressed their disapproval. The number of students in the Irish college as Lisbon during the eighteenth century was from twelve to fourteen. During the French Revolution it increased to thirty or forty, to fall again to fourteen after 1815. Dr. Burke, Archbishop of Tuam, Dr. Talbot, Dr. Russell, and Dr. Carpenter, Archbishop of Dublin; Dr. Verdun, Bishop of Ferns, and Dr. Kelly, Bishop of Waterford, were Lisbon students. During the civil wars in Lisbon, during the nineteenth century, the college was closed, and has not since been reopened.

Besides the colleges for education of secular clergy at Lisbon there was also a convent of Irish Dominican Fathers, and a convent of Irish Dominican nuns, both of which exist at the present day, the former at Corpo Santo, Lisbon, and the latter at Belem in the vicinity.

IN BELGIUM

Louvain

While the colleges in the Peninsula were doing good services for the preservation of the Faith in Ireland, other colleges for the same purpose were established in Flanders. In 1624, a college for the education of priests, with the title "Collegium Pastorale", was founded at Louvain, in virtue of a charter granted by the Holy See, at the instance of the Most Rev. Eugene Macmahon, Archbishop of Dublin. Urban VIII gave a donation for the support of the college, and the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda bestowed on it an allowance of 240 scudi. Burses were also founded by various benefactors, the aggregate value of which amounted to 73, 217 flourins. The first rector of the college was Nicholas Aylmer. The students at the first commencement were six in number. In 1643 there were four priests, and six students in philosophy. At the close of the eighteenth century the number had increased to forty. Many distinguished Irish ecclesiastics were students of the pastoral college at Louvain. One of its rectors, Thomas Stapleton, held also the office of rector of the university for seven terms.

Besides the secular colleges, convents for the Irish regular clergy were established at Louvain. Of these the most ancient and the most celebrated was the Franciscan College of St. Anthony of Padua, founded in 1606 at the request of Florence Conry, Archbishop of Tuam. The number of Irish friars at St. Anthony's in the seventeenth century was about forty. In this convent lived John Cogan, the celebrated Irish hagiologist, author of the "Trias Thaumaturga" and of "Lives of the Irish Saints." Here, too, lived Hugh Ward, Father Mooney, Brendan O'Connor, and Bonaventure O'Doherty, who so ably assisted Michael O'Cleary in collecting materials for the great work known as the "Annals of the Four Masters". The Franciscans of St. Anthony's did great work to the cause of religion by printing books of instruction in the Irish tongue. At Louvain were printed the Irish catechism of Bonaventure O'Hussey (1608), "The Mirror of Penance" by Hugh MacCaughwell (1618), "The Mirror of Religion" by Florence Conry (1626), O'Cleary's vocabulary (1643), "The Paradise of the Soul" by Anthony Gernon (1645), and a moral treatise in English and Irish by Richard MacGiollacuddy (Arsdekin) (1667). It has been truly said of the convent of St. Anthony of Padua at Louvain, "No Franciscan college has maintained with more zeal than this, the character of the order as expressed in their motto, Doctrina et Scientia." At the close of the eighteenth century, the number of friars at St. Anthony's was seventeen. In 1796 the convent was closed to the Irish, and sold. There existed also at Louvain a convent of Irish Dominicans, founded in 1608, known as the convent of the Holy Cross. A letter of the nuncio at Brussels, in 1675, gave the names of thirty-three Dominicans, who had gone from Holy Cross to labour in the mission in Ireland. The Irish Dominican convent in Louvain was closed in 1797. A convent of Irish Benedictine nuns was established at Ypres in 1682, where for more than two centuries Irish women aspiring to religious perfection found a home. This convent has survived to the present day (1910). The colleges, secular and regular, at Louvain during two centuries of their existence gave to the Church in Ireland 32 bishops and about 300 priests, at least 200 of which were graduates in arts at the University of Louvain.

Antwerp

In 1629 a pastoral college was founded at Antwerp by the Rev. Laurence Selgrave, a Leinster priest, who, together with his nephew, the Rev. James Talbot, expended 13,220 flourins on the establishment of a college and became its first rector, as his nephew became its second. After their time the college suffered much from poverty and was on the point of being closed and sold to meet the claims of creditors. But during the rectorate of John Egan, prothonotary Apostolic, it received a fresh impulse. Donations were received, and creditors satisfied. Through the pro-nuncio at Brussels, the Holy See sent subventions from time to time. The number of students, usually about twelve, increased eventually to thirty. They attended lectures at the Jesuit college at Antwerp, where their distinguished countryman, Fr. Richard Archdeacon (Arsdekin), S. J., died in 1690. The pastoral colleges at Louvain and at Antwerp continued to flourish until 1795, when they were closed due to the occupation of Belgium by the French. At various times the bishops of Ireland made representations to the Belgian Government with a view to obtain the transfer of the burses to Ireland, and they have been so far successful that at the present time the annual revenue of the burses is paid through the medium of the British Foreign Office for the education of students at Maynooth College.

Tournai

An Irish college was founded at Tournai by Christopher Cusack. In 1689 there were eight ecclesiastics at Tournai, with an income of 200 scudi. Choiseul, Bishop of Tournai, in a letter to Innocent X, speaks thus of the Irish college: "We have here a College or Seminary of Irish youth where some poor students are supported, receive a Christian education, and are taught the Humanities. They attend the classes at the Jesuits, and are generally the first in merit." The Tournai college, like those at Louvain and Antwerp, was closed in 1795. In 1833, at the insistence of the Most Rev. Dr. O'Higgins, Bishop of Ardagh, the Belgian Government consented to transfer to the Irish college in Rome the sum of 4000 francs from the funds of the old Irish college at Tournai,

IN FRANCE

The colleges in the Peninsula and in Flanders rendered greats service to the Church in Ireland. but the most important of all the Irish colleges on the continent were those established in France.

Douai

The most ancient among these was the college at Douai, founded about 1577 by Reverend Ralph Cusack. Douai was then included in the Flemish territory subject to Spain, and in about 1604 Philip III conferred on the Irish college in that town an endowment of 5000 flourins. In 1667 Douai was taken by Louis XIV, and the Irish college there became subject to French authority. For some years the means of subsistence were scanty and precarious, but in 1750 the college recovered its prosperity. It was subject to a board of provisors who nominated the rector from a list of three candidates provided by the superiors of the Irish college in Paris. The students, about thirty in number, attended lectures at the University of Douai. In 1793 the college was closed, and in 1795 the buildings, valued at 60,000 francs, were alienated by the French Government.

Lille

An Irish college was founded at Lille by Ralph Cusack in virtue of letters patents granted in 1610 by Archduke Albert, and Isabella, Infanta of Spain, the Governors of the Netherlands. Foundations were made for the education of students from the Province of Leinster, more particularly for those from Meath. The right of nominating the rector was vested in the superior of the Irish Capuchins at Bar-su-Aube. The college suffered much from poverty. Its means of support were derived partly from collections made at church doors, and partly from fees received for the services the students rendered by carrying the dead at funerals. The study and use of the Irish language was encouraged, and no one unacquainted to that tongue was eligible to the office of rector. The students numbered from eight to ten, exclusively from Leinster. The college, which was valued at 20,000 francs, was confiscated and sold in 1793.

Bordeaux

In 1603 the Rev. Dermit MacCarthy, a priest of the Diocese of Cork, made his way to Bordeaux with about forty companions. These Irish exiles were hospitably received by Cardinal de Surdis, Archbishop of Bordeaux, who gave them a house and place them in charge of the church of St. Eutropius. The rules of the Irish community were approved by the Archbishop in 1603, and again in 1609, and were finally ratified by Paul V, in the Bull "In supremo apostolicæ dignitatus", 26 April, 1618. The Irish students at Bordeaux, like those from Lille, derived their support from alms collected at the doors of churches in the city, and from fees received from their services at funerals. In 1653, at the conclusion of the War of the Fronde, about 5000 Irish troops, previously in the service of Spain, at the suggestion of Father Cornelius O'Scanlan, rector of the college at Bordeaux, elected to take service under the flag of France. In acknowledgement of the zeal of Father O'Scanlan for the interests of France, the queen regent, Anne of Austria, bestowed on the college an endowment of 1200 livres in support of twelve priests and ten clerics, and conferred on the students the right of naturalization to enable them to receive gifts and possess benefices in the kingdom. On the same occasion the title of "Sainte-Anne-la-Royale" was given to the college. Besides the endowment of Anne of Austria, various bequests were made by benefactors; yet in 1766 the total annual revenue of the college amounted to only 2531 francs. From twenty in the seventeenth century the number of students increased, in the eighteenth, to thirty, and eventually to forty. They attended classes at the Jesuit college in the city. There were also little colonies of Irish students at Toulouse, Auch, Agen, Cahors, Condom, and Périguaux, all subject to the authority of the rector of the Irish college at Bordeaux. The rector of the college was chosen by the votes of the students, and confirmed by the archbishop for a period of three years. The system of appointment by election led to frequent disputes and was eventually abolished. Dr. Robert Barry, Bishop of Cloyne, Dr. Patrick Comerford, Bishop of Waterford, Dr. Cornelius O'Keefe and Dr. Robert Lacy, Bishops of Limerick, Dr. Dominic Bellew, Bishop of Killala, and Dr. Boetius Egan, Bishop of Tuam, were some time students at Bordeaux. Here, too, Geoffrey Keating is said to have been a student. The Abbé Edgeworth and Dr. Richard O'Reilly, subsequently Archbishop of Armaugh, studied for a short time at Bordeaux, whence the former proceeded to Paris, and the latter to Rome. The last superior of the college was the Rev. Martin Glynn, D. D., a native of the diocese of Tuam, who suffered death by sentence of the Revolutionary tribunal, at Bordeaux, 19 July, 1794. The vice-rector of the college, Dr. Everard, escaped. The students were thrown into prison, but were eventually liberated and put on board a vessel bound for Ireland. The college church, valued at 21,000 francs, was confiscated in 1793. The college was also seized but was saved from confiscation by the vigilance of an Irish priest named James Burke. After the revolution, all that remained of the property of the college at Bordeaux was placed by decree of the first consul under the control of the board of administrators of the Irish college in Paris. In 1885 the property at Bordeaux was sold for 285,635 francs and the price invested in French securities in the name of the "Foundation Catholiques Irlandaises en France".

Toulouse

From the commencement of the seventeenth century, there existed at Toulouse a little colony of Irish ecclesiastical students. The Irish college in that town owes its origin to Anne of Austria, who bestowed upon it, at the same time as upon the college at Bordeaux, the title of "Sainte-Anne-la-Royale", with an endowment of 1200 livres a year for the support of twelve priests. The endowment was confirmed by Louis XIV in 1659. At Toulouse the number of students never exceeded ten or twelve, chiefly natives of the province of Munster. Small though the number was, the system of appointing the rector by the votes of the students led to division, and it was judged expedient to submit the rules of discipline to Benedict XIV, who approved them by a letter addressed to the Archbishop of Toulouse on 31 August, 1753. The course of studies extended over a period of eight years, after which the students returned to the mission in Ireland. When the French Revolution broke out, the college possessed an annual revenue of 10,000 francs. In 1793, the college building and furniture, valued at 36,700 francs, were confiscated, and sold by the French Government.

Nantes

Nantes, on the coast of Brittany, was also the seat of an Irish college founded about 1680. In 1728 a new and more commodious college was constructed, and in 1765, by royal letters patent, the priory of St-Crispin was united with it. The number of students, at first about thirty-six, increased to sixty in 1765, and by 1792 it had reached eighty. The college was subject to the University of Nantes, but it had its own professors — two for philosophy and two for theology — who were obliged each term to report to the university the name of their students and the treatises they were to explain. The last rector of the college was Dr. Patrick Byrne, subsequently president of Maynooth College. In 1793 the students of the college were cast into prison and then put on board a vessel which brought them in safety to Cork. The college was not reopened in the nineteenth century. The buildings which escaped alienation were placed under the control of the administration of the Irish college in Paris. They were sold, with the sanction of the Minister of Public Instruction, in 1857, and the proceeds of the sale (100,000 francs) invested in the name of the "Foundation Catholiques Irlandaises"

Poitiers

A college of the Irish Jesuits was founded at Poitiers, in virtue of letters patent granted by Louis XIV, in April, 1674. Five burses for the education of students for the secular priesthood were founded here, two in 1738 by Mrs. John Maher, an Irish lady resident at Barcelona, and three by Jeremy Crowley, at Cork, in 1735. On the suppression of the Jesuits in France, the five burses were transferred to Paris. The college buildings, valued at about 10,500 francs, were alienated by the French Government. The Abbé Thomas Gould was a student at this college; known as the missionary of Poitou he preached with great success in French, and published several works in that language.

The Irish Franciscans had convents in provincial France, at Bar-su-Aube, at Sedan, and at Charleville, and for some years a convent at Paris.

Paris

The most important of all the Irish establishments in France, and on the Continent, was the Irish college in Paris. That venerable institution, which has preserved its existence to the present day, owe its origin the Reverend John Lee, an Irish priest who came to Paris, in 1578, with six companions, and entered the Collège Montaigu. Having completed his studies he became attached to the Church of St. Severin, and made the acquaintance of a French nobleman, John de l'Escalopier, President of the Parliament of Paris. That charitable man placed at the disposal of the Irish students in Paris a house, which served them as a college, of which Father Lee became the first rector about 1605. By letters patent dated 1623, Louis XIII conferred upon the Irish priests and scholars in Paris the right to receive and possess property. The Irish college was recognized as a seminary by the University of Paris in 1624, and at that time it had already sent a large number of priests to the mission in Ireland. But the college founded by Father Lee was not spacious enough to receive the numerous Irish students who came to Paris. Some of them continued to find a home in the Collège Montaigu, others in the Collège de Boncour, while some, who were in affluent circumstances, resided in the Collège de Navarre. This state of things attracted the attention of St. Vincent de Paul and others, who sought to provide them with a more commodious residence. Later still, in 1672, it engaged the attention of the bishops of Ireland, who deputed Dr. John O'Mollony, Bishop of Killaloe, to treat with Colbert as to the establishment of a new college. What the bishops desired was eventually obtained, through the influence of two Irish priests resident in Paris: Dr. Patrick Maginn, formerly first chaplain to Queen Catherine, wife of Charles II of England, and Dr. Malachy Kelly, one of the chaplains of Louis XIV. These two ecclesiastics obtained from Louis XIV authorization to enter on possession of the Collège des Lombards, a college of the University of Paris founded for Italian students in 1333. They rebuilt the college, then in ruins, at their own expense, and became its first superiors. The acquisition of the college was confirmed by letters patent dated 1677 and 1681. Some years later the buildings were extended by Dr. John Farely, and all the Irish ecclesiastical students in Paris found a home in the Collège des Lombards. The number of students went on increasing until, in 1764, it reached one hundred and sixty. It was therefore found necessary to build a second college. The building was commenced in 1769 in rue du Cheval Vert, now rue du Irlandais, and the junior section of the students was transferred to the new college in 1776.

The Irish college in Paris was open to all the counties and provinces in Ireland. The students were divided into two categories, one, the more numerous, consisting of priests already ordained in Ireland, the other of juniors aspiring to orders. Both sections attended the university classes, either at the Collège de Plessis, or at that of Navarre, or at the Sorbonne. The course of study extended over six years, of which two were given to philosophy, three to theology, and one to special preparation for pastoral work. The more talented students remained two years longer to qualify for degrees in theology, or in canon law. In virtue of the Bull of Urban VIII, "Piis Christi fidelium", dated 10 July, 1626, and granted in favour of all Irish colleges already established or to be established in France, Spain, Flanders, or elsewhere, the junior students were promoted to orders ad titulum missionis in Hiberniâ, even extra tempora, and without dimissorial letters, on the representation of the rector of the college — a privilege withdrawn, as regards dimissorial letters, by Gregory XVI in 1835, and now entirely abrogated by transfer of Ireland to the jurisdiction of the Consistorial Congregation in 1908. The students in priestly orders were able to support themselves to a large extent by their Mass stipends. Many burses, too, were founded for the education of students at the Lombard college. Among the founders were nine Irish bishops, thirty-two Irish priests, four medical doctors, some laymen engaged in civil or military pursuits, and a few pious ladies. The college was governed in the eighteenth century by four Irish priests called provisors, one from each province of Ireland. They were elected by the votes of the students, and confirmed by the Archbishop of Paris, who, as superior major, nominated one of them to the office of principal. In 1788, the system of government by provisors was abolished, and one rector appointed.

In 1792 the two Irish colleges in Paris, namely the Collège des Lombards, and the junior college, rue du Cheval Vert, were closed, as were all the other Irish college in France. The closing of the colleges on the Continent deprived the bishops of Ireland of the means of educating their clergy. They therefore petitioned the British Government for authorization to establish an ecclesiastical college at home. The petition was granted, and Maynooth College was founded in 1795. In support of their petition the bishops submitted a statement of the number of Irish ecclesiastics receiving education on the Continent when the French revolution began.

From this statement is appears that out of a total of 478 Irish ecclesiastics receiving education on the Continent, 348 were resident in France, and of these, 180 were students in the Irish colleges in Paris. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, forty students of the Irish college in Paris were raised to the episcopal bench. At the same period Irishmen held an honourable place at the University of Paris. Between 1660 and 1730 more than sixty Irishmen held the office of procurator of the German nation — one of the four sections of the faculty of arts in the ancient university. Dr. Michael Moore, an Irish priest, long held the office of principal of the Collège de Navarre, and was twice elected rector of the university. Many Irishmen held chairs in the university. Dr. Sleyne was professor at the Sorbonne. Dr. Power was professor of the college at Lisieux; Dr. O'Lonergan at the college of Reims. Dr. John Plunkett, Dr. Patrick J. Plunkett, and Dr. Flood, superiors or provisors of the Irish college, were in succession royal professors of theology at the Collège de Navarre. The students of the Irish college in Paris were pronounced opponents of Jansenism. When they returned to their native land, they, like the students of Rome, Salamanca, and Louvain, brought with them "the manners and feelings of cultivated gentlemen and a high sense of clerical decorum".

After the French revolution, the Irish college in Paris was re-established by a decree of the first consul, and placed under the control of a board appointed by the French Government. To it were united the remnants of the property of the other Irish colleges in France which had escaped destruction. The college in Paris lost two-thirds of its endowments owing to the depreciation of French state funds, which had been reduced to one-third consolidated. The total loss sustained by all the Irish foundations in France amounted to 2,416,410 francs, or about $438,000. After the Restoration, the French Government placed at the disposal of the British government three million and a half sterling, to indemnify British subjects in France for the losses they had sustained in the Revolution. In 1816 a claim for indemnity was presented on behalf of the Irish college. That claim was rejected by the privy council in 1825 on the grounds that the college was a French establishment. In 1832 the claim was renewed by Dr. M'Sweeny, director of the college, with the same result. Another attempt to obtain compensation was made by the Rev. Thomas McNamara in 1870. On 9 May in that year a motion was made in the House of Lords for copies of the awards in the case of the Irish college in 1825 and 1832. This step was followed up by a motion in the House of Commons for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the claims of the college to compensation for losses sustained during the French Revolution. The motion was introduced on 30 April, 1875, by Isaac Butt, M. P. for Limerick, and, after a prolonged discussion, it was negatived by 116 to 54 votes.

After 1805 the administration of the college was subject to a "Bureau de Surveillance" which gave much trouble until it was dissolved by Charles X, in 1824. After that date, the superior, appointed on presentation of the four archbishops of Ireland, became official administrator of the foundations, subject to the minister of the interior, and at a later period to the minister of public instruction. The students no longer frequented the university. The professors were Irish priests appointed by the French Government on the presentation of the Irish episcopate. In 1858, with the sanction of the Sacred Congregation of Propaganda, and with the consent of the French Government, the bishops of Ireland placed the management of college in the hands of the Irish Vincentian Fathers. In recent years the number of students has been between sixty and seventy. They are admitted on nomination of the bishops, and, after a course of two years in philosophy and four years in theology, they are ordained and returned to Ireland. In the nineteenth century the college gave to the Church a long array of good priests and bishops, including Dr. Fitz Patrick, Abbott of Melleray; Dr. Maginn, Coadjutor Bishop of Derry; Dr. Keane, of Cloyne; Dr. O'Hea and Dr. Fitz Gerald of Ross; Dr. Gillooly of Elphin, and Dr. Croke of Cashel. Dr. Kelly, the present Bishop of Ross, and Dr. McSherry, vicar Apostolic at Port Elizabeth, South Africa, are also alumni of the college. The present occupant of the see of St. Patrick, H. E. Cardinal Logue, held the chair of dogmatic theology from 1866 to 1874.

In the three hundred years of its existence, the college has not been without a share in the ecclesiastical literature of Ireland. Among the rectors of the college have been Thomas Messingham, prothonotary Apostolic, author of the "Florilegium Insulæ Sanctorum" (Paris, 1624); Dr. Andrew Donlevy, author of an "Anglo-Irish Catechism" (Paris, 1742); Dr. Miley, author of "A History of the Papal States" (Dublin, 1852); Dr. Thomas McNamara, author of "Programmes of Sermons" (Dublin, 1880), "Encheiridion Clericorum" (1882), and several other similar works. Abbé Mageoghegan, Sylvester O'Hallaran, Martin Haverty, and probably Geoffrey Keating, all eminent Irish historians, were students of the college. Dean Kinane, a student and then a professor in the college, is widely known for his "Dove of the Tabernacle" and numerous other devotional works. More recently, the Rev. John MacGuinness, C. M., vice-rector, has published a full course of dogmatic theology. Amongst the rectors of the college, Dr. John Farley and Dr. John Baptist Walsh, in the eighteenth century, and Dr. MacSweeney and the Rev. Thomas MacNamara, in the nineteenth, have been administrators of marked ability. Since 1873 the administration of the property of the college has been invested in a board created by a decree of the Conseil d'Etat. On that board the Archbishop of Paris was represented by a delegate, and he was also the official medium of communication between the Irish episcopate and the French Government. In December, 1906, the law of separation of Church and State in France came into operation. In the January following, the French government notified the British Government of its intention to reorganize the Irish Catholic foundations in France so as to bring them into harmony with the recent legislation regarding the Church. It was further stated that the purpose of the Government was to close the Irish college, to sell its immovable property, and to invest the proceeds of the sale, to be applied together with the existing burses for the benefit of Irish students who shall be admitted, on the presentation to the British Ambassador to France, either to the state schools or to the schools of theology which have taken the place of the diocesan seminaries. A plea for the preservation of the college has been presented on behalf of the bishops of Ireland, through the British Foreign office. The question is still undecided.

The history of the Irish colleges on the Continent is a manifest proof of the tenacity with which Ireland has clung to the Catholic faith. Without the succession of priests prepared in these colleges, the preservation of the faith in Ireland in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries would have been impossible. At the present day the colleges in Ireland are sufficient to supply the needs of the Church in Ireland, but the colleges on the Continent are still useful a s a witness of the past, and they serve to bring a large section of the clergy of Ireland into contact with the life and thought and work of the Church in the ancient Catholic nations on the Continent.

For the Peninsula, Irish Colleges since the Reformation in Eccl. Hist., VIII, 307, 465; Healy, Maynooth College centenary History (Dublin, 1895). — For Belgium, Spellam, Ir. Eccl. Rec., 3rd ser., VIII, 350, 437, 641; Meehan, The Rise and Fall of the Franciscan Monasteries (Dublin, 1877); de Berck, L'Archéologie Irlandaise au couvent de Sainte-Antoine du Padoue à Louvain (Paris, 1869); Tourneur, Esquisee d'une histoire des études celtiques (Liège, 1905). — For France, Boyle, The Irish College in Paris (1578-1905) with a brief sketch of the other Irish colleges in France (London and Dublin, 1905); Idem. in Ir. Eccl. Rec., 4th ser., X, 385; XI, 193, 432; XII, 233; XIV, 24, 289; XV, 48; XVIII, 431; XXI, 285; XXII, 127; XXII, 454; Hurley in Dublin Rev., CX, 45, 353; Bellescheim, Geschichte der katholische Kirche in Irland, II, III (Mainz, 1890-91); Bertrand, Histoire des séminaires de Bordeaux et de Bazas (Bordeaux, 1894); Dançoise, Histoire des établissements religieux fondés à Douai avant a Révolution Française (Douai, 1880); Jourdain, Histoire de l'Université de Paris (Paris, 1888); Pagny, Mémoires historiques et chronologiques sur les séminaires établis dans la ville de Toulouse (Toulouse, 1852).

PATRICK BOYLE

Irish Confessors and Martyrs

The period covered by this article embraces that between the years 1540 and (approximately) 1713. Religious persecution in Ireland began under Henry VIII, when the local Parliament adopted acts establishing the king's ecclesiastical supremacy, abolishing the pope's jurisdiction, and suppressing religious houses. The act against the pope came into operation 1 November, 1537. Its penalties were sufficiently terrible, but the licence of those enforcing it was still more terrible. When they had been at work little over a year the Bishop of Derry wrote to Pope Paul III that the King of England's deputy and his adherents, refusing to acknowledge the pope, were burning houses, destroying churches, ravishing maids, robbing and killing unoffending persons. They kill, he said, all priests who pray for the pope or refuse to erase his name from the canon of the Mass, and they torture preachers who do not repudiate his authority. It would fill a book to detail their cruelty. Intolerable as these evils seemed, they were aggravated beyond measure, three years later, when the general suppression of religious houses was superadded. Then ensued the persecution which the Four Masters likened to that of the early Church under the pagan emperors, declaring that it was exceeded by no other, and could be described only by eyewitnesses.

The extirpation was so thorough that even remembrance of the victims was effaced. In the published catalogue of Irish martyrs submitted recently to the Congregation of Rites, there are but two cases belonging to Henry's reign. The absence of records for this period is easily explained. The destruction of all kinds of ecclesiastical property, and documents especially, accounts for much, since few but churchmen could make such records; but it is perhaps a more probable explanation that scarcely any were made, as it was neither sage nor practicable to have or transmit what reflected upon government under Tudor despotism. Few memorials could be committed to paper before places of refuge had been secured in foreign countries. Then they were taken down from the lips of aged refugees, and as might be expected they exhibit the vagueness and confusion of dates and incidents to which personal reminiscences are subject when spread over long and unsettled periods.

For the time of the suppression there is a partial narrative in the recital of an old Trinitarian friar, written down by one of his brethren, Father Richard Goldie or Goold (Goldæus), an Irish professor at the University of Alcalá. According to this account, on the first announcement of the king's design, Theobald (Burke?), provincial of the order, came to Dublin with eight other doctors to maintain the pope's supremacy. They were cast into prison; Theobald's heart was torn from his living body; Philip, a writer, was scourged, put into boots filled with oil and salt, roasted till the flesh came away from the bone, and then beheaded; the rest were hanged or beheaded; Cornelius, Bishop of Limerick, was beheaded there; Cormac was shot and stoned to death at Galway; Maurice and Thomas, brothers-german, hanged on their way to Dublin; Stephen, stabbed near Wexford; Peter of Limerick and Geoffrey, beheaded; John Macabrigus, lay brother, drowned; Raymond, ex-superior, dragged at a horse's tail in Dublin; Tadhg O'Brien of Thomond, torn to pieces in the viceroy's presence at Bombriste bridge between Limerick and Kilmallock; the Dublin community, about fifty, put to various deaths; those of Adare, cut down, stabbed, or hanged; those of Galway, twenty, burned to death in their convent or, by another account, six were thrown into a lime-kiln, the rest weighted with stones and cast into the sea; those of Drogheda, forty, slain, hanged, or thrown into a pit; at Limerick, over fifty butchered in choir or thrown with weights into the Shannon; at Cork and Kilmallock, over ninety slain by the sword or dismembered, including William Burke, John O'Hogan, Michael, Richard, and Giollabrighde. This is the earliest narrative as regards period. It deals only with the Trinitarians. It had the misfortune to be worked up by Lopez, a fanciful Spanish writer, and consequently has incurred perhaps more discredit than it deserves. The promoters of the cause of the Irish martyrs have not extracted any names from it. Nevertheless, the version given by O'Sullevan Bearr in his "Patriciana Decas", despite many apparent inaccuracies and exaggerations, contains in its main statements a not improbable picture of the experiences of this single order when the agents of rapine and malignity were let loose upon the members. It is as a cry from the torture chamber, expressing the agony of a victim who loses the power to detail accurately the extent of his sufferings or the manner of their infliction.

The first general catalogue is that of Father John Houling, S.J., compiled in Portugal between 1588 and 1599. It is styled a very brief abstract of certain cases and is directed towards canonization of the eleven bishops, eleven priests, and forty-four lay persons whom it commemorates as sufferers for the Faith by death, chains, or exile under Elizabeth. Cornelius O'Devany, the martyred Bishop of Down and Connor, took up the record about the point where Houling broke off, and he continued it until his own imprisonment in 1611. Shortly before that time he forwarded a copy to Father Holywood, S.J., desiring him to take steps to have the lives of those noted therein illustrated at length and preserved from oblivion. O'Devany's catalogue was in David Rothe's hands while he was preparing the "Processus Martyrialis", published, in 1619, as the third part of his "Analecta", which still remains a most important contribution to the subject. During the next forty years Copinger (1620), O'Sullevan Bearr (1621 and 1629), Molanus (1629), Morison (1659), and others sent forth from the press works devoted either wholly or in part to advancing the claims of Irish martyrs to recognition and veneration. In 1669 Antony Bruodin, O.S.F., published at Prague a thick octavo volume of about 800 pages, entitled "Propugnaculum Catholicæ Veritatis", a catalogue of Irish martyrs under Henry VIII, Edward VI, Elizabeth, and James, containing notices of about 200 martyrs, with an index of 164 persons whose Christian names come first as in a martyrology. Bruodin based his work on Rothe's "Analecta", but he made large additions from other writers, as Good, Bourchier, Gonzaga, Baressus, Sanders, Wadding, Alegambe, and Nadasi, and in particular from a manuscript ascribed to Matthew Creagh, Vicar-General of Killaloe, which had been brought to the Irish Franciscans of Prague in 1660.

Practically nothing was done for about two centuries after Bruodin's publication. A proposal to take up the cause of Primate Oliver Plunket within a few years of his martyrdom was discountenanced by the Holy See, lest at that critical juncture such action should become an occasion of political trouble in England. After the English Revolution and the commencement of the new era of oppression that succeeded the capitulation of Limerick, it was manifest that any movement towards canonization of the victims of laws still in force would result in merciless reprisals on the part of the ascendancy. At length, in 1829, the last political hindrances were removed by Catholic Emancipation, but over thirty years were allowed to pass unmarked by any action, either because more immediate demands pressed upon the energies of the Catholic community or because, during the long period for which the matter had been laid aside, the sources of trustworthy information had become so inaccessible or forgotten that the task of accumulating evidence seemed too formidable to undertake. In 1861 Dr. Moran, then Vice-Rector of the Irish College, Rome, and subsequently in succession Bishop of Ossory and Cardinal Archbishop of Sydney, reopened the question by his life of Oliver Plunket, the first of a series of important historical publications, in which he covered the whole period of Irish persecutions from Henry VIII to Charles II. All these publications were effectively, if not professedly, directed towards hastening the Church's solemn recognition of the martyrs. The first of these writings (1861) expressed the hope that the day was not far distant when the long afflicted Church of Ireland would be consoled by the canonization of Oliver Plunket. In 1884, when the last of them, a reissue of Rothe's "Analecta", was published, the intermediate advance had been so great that the editor, then Rothe's successor in Ossory, noted the expression of a wish both in Ireland and abroad "that, although our whole people might justly be regarded as a nation of martyrs, yet some few names, at least, among the most remarkable for constancy and heroism would be laid before the Sacred Congregation of Rites and, if found worthy, be enrolled among the privileged martyrs of Holy Church." While Dr. Moran was thus engaged, Major Myles O'Reilly also entered the long neglected field, and in 1868 he published a collection of memorials in which he brought together, from all the original sources his great industry could reach, biographies of those who suffered for the Faith in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. This collection was made with both zeal and discrimination; it was the first general compilation since Bruodin's, and, coming down to a later date, it contained twice the number of notices in the former one. As a result, in great measure, of these several publications, the case was brought to such a point, about ten years after the reissue of Rothe's "Analecta", that the ecclesiastical authorities were in a position to make preparations for holding the processus ordinarius informativus, the diocesan inquiry which is a preliminary in the process of canonization. The work of collecting evidence, greatly facilitated by the previous labours of Moran and O'Reilly, was entrusted to Father Denis Murphy, S.J. He, unhappily, did not live to submit his testimony; but before his death he had reduced to order a great mass of materials extracted from a larger number of writers than had been used by O'Reilly. The number of individual notices is, however, much less, since Father Murphy excluded, with one or two exceptions, all those whose trials did not culminate in death. His materials were published in 1896, under the title of "Our Martyrs", and the record begun by Father Houling was thus, after three hundred years, completed by his brother Jesuit in form to be submitted in a regular process of canonization.

The usual practice of conducting the preliminary process in the diocese where the martyrs suffered would have entailed the erecting of a tribunal in every diocese in Ireland, a course attended with no advantages. The Archbishop of Dublin, therefore, at the united request of all the Irish bishops, accepted the responsibility of conducting a general investigation for the whole country. But, before further progress could be made, certain unforeseen causes of delay arose which were not removed until the end of the year 1903. In December of that year the vice-postulator issued his requests for the attendance of witnesses in the February following. The initial session was opened by the Archbishop of Dublin, 15 February, 1904. Between that date and 3 August, when the taking of evidence in Ireland was completed, sixty sessions had been held. The testimony of Cardinal Moran was taken by commission in Sydney. When it arrived in Ireland meetings were resumed, 23 October, and continued for some twenty further sessions to complete the return, a transcript of the evidence with exhibits of books and documents. This work was brought to a conclusion at Christmas, and on 5 February, 1905, the full return of the inquiry was delivered to the Congregation of Rites. The number of sessions held was about eighty, in all of which the Archbishop of Dublin presided. Evidence was taken in respect of about three hundred and forty persons, with a view to establish the existence of a traditional belief among learned and pious Catholics that many persons suffered death for the Catholic Faith in Ireland under the penal laws; that these persons did, in fact, suffer martyrdom in defense of the Catholic Faith and of the pope's spiritual authority as Vicar of Christ; and that there is a sincere desire among Irish Catholics, in Ireland and elsewhere, to see these martyrs solemnly recognized by the Church. The chief portion of the evidence was necessarily that derived from records, printed or written. In addition, witnesses testified to the public repute of martyrdom, and traditions to that effect preserved in families, religious orders, various localities, and the country at large, with a particular statement in every case as to the source of the information furnished by the witness. Subsequent to this inquiry the further minor process (processiculus), to collect writings attributed to some of the martyrs, was held January-March, 1907.

The investigation of the claims to the title of martyr made for those who suffered under the Irish penal enactments since 1537, is attended by difficulties that do not arise in the case of their fellow-sufferers in England, difficulties due to the historical situation and to the character of the available evidence. Not more than one-third of Ireland was subject to the rule of Henry VIII when he undertook to detach the island from the Catholic Church. The remainder was governed by hereditary lords under native institutions. The king's deputy at times obtained acknowledgment of the over-lordship supposed to be conferred by the Bull Laudabiliter; but the acknowledgment was so little valued that the population was commonly classified as the king's subjects and the Irish enemies, not, as yet, the Irish rebels. The Church, however, was the Church of Ireland, not the Church of the English Pale, and the claim to Supreme Headship of the Church entailed the effective reduction of the whole island to civil obedience, which, as then understood, required acceptance of the whole English system of laws and manners. Hence, it is not always easy to discern how far the fate of an individual resulted from his fidelity to religion, and how far from defense of ancestral institutions. Again, the evidence is not always satisfactory, for reasons already mentioned. The public records are very defective, as in a country that has experienced two violent revolutions, but the loss so caused might possibly be over-estimated. No large proportion of those put to death had been brought before a regular court. There was a general immunity from consequences which encouraged captains of roving bands and stationary garrisons, provost-martials, and all that class, to carry out the intention of the law without its forms. In such cases there are no records. During the year of the Armada a Spanish ship made prize of a Dublin vessel bound for France. A Cistercian monk and a Franciscan friar were found on board. They said they were the sole survivors of two large monasteries in the North of Ireland which had been burned with the rest of the inmates. There seems to be no other mention of this atrocity.

The list which follows (p. signifying priest; l. layman) includes the names of those persons only in respect of whom evidence was taken at the inquiry held in Dublin. The case of Primate Oliver Plunket has already been conducted successfully through the Apostolic Process by Cardinal Logue, his successor.

(1) Under King Henry VIII

• 1540: The guardian and friars, Franciscan Convent, Monaghan -- beheaded.
• 1541: Robert and other Cistercian monks, St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin -- imprisoned and put to death; as the Cistercians of Dublin surrendered their house and its possessions peaceably, there is possibly confusion as to this instance.

(2) Under Queen Elizabeth

• 1565: Conacius Macuarta (Conn McCourt) and Roger MacCongaill (McConnell), Franciscans -- flogged to death, Armagh, 16 December, for refusing to acknowledge the queen's supremacy.
• 1575: John Lochran, Donagh O'Rorke, and Edmund Fitzsimon, Franciscans -- hanged, 21 January, Downpatrick;
• 1575: Fergall Ward, Franciscan guardian, Armagh -- hanged, 28 April, with his own girdle.
• 1577: Thomas Courcy, vicar-general at Kinsale -- hanged, 30 March;
• 1577: William Walsh, Cistercian, Bishop of Meath -- died, 4 January, in exile at Alcalá.
• 1578: Patrick O'Hely (q.v.), Bishop of Mayo, and Cornelius O'Rorke, p., Franciscans -- tortured and hanged, 22 August, Kilmallock;
• 1578: David Hurley, dean of Emly -- died in prison;
• 1578: Thomas Moeran, dean of Cork -- taken in the exercise of his functions and executed.
• 1579: Thaddæus Daly and his companion, O.S.F. -- hanged, drawn, and quartered at Limerick, 1 January. The bystanders reported that his head when cut off distinctly uttered the words: "Lord, show me Thy ways."
• 1579: Edmund Tanner (q.v.), S.J., Bishop of Cork -- died, 4 June, in prison at Dublin;
• 1579: John O'Dowd, p., O.S.F. -- refused to reveal a confession, put to death at Elphin by having his skull compressed with a twisted cord;
• 1579: Thomas O'Herlahy (q.v.), Bishop of Ross.
• 1580: Edmund MacDonnell (q.v.), p., S.J. -- 16 March, Cork (but the year should be 1575 and the name perhaps O'Donnell);
• 1580: Laurence O'Moore, p., Oliver Plunkett, gentleman, and William Walsh or Willick, an Englishman -- tortured and hanged, 11 November, after the surrender of Dun-an-oir in Kerry;
• 1580: Daniel O'Neilan p., O.S.F. -- fastened round the waist with a rope and thrown with weights tied to his feet from one of town-gates at Youghal, finally fastened to a mill-wheel and torn to pieces, 28 March. He is obviously the person whom Mooney commemorates under the name O'Duillian, assigning the date, 22 April, 1569, from hearsay;
• 1580: Daniel Hanrichan, Maurice O'Scanlan, and Philip O'Shee (O'Lee), priests, O.S.F. -- beaten with sticks and slain, 6 April, before the altar of Lislachtin monastery, Co. Kerry;
• 1580: the prior at the Cistercian monastery of Graeg, and his companions. Murphy, quoting O'Sullevan, says the monastery was Graiguenamanagh; O'Sullevan names the place Seripons, Jerpoint.
• 1581: Nicholas Nugent, chief justice, David Sutton, John Sutton, Thomas Eustace, John Eustace, William Wogan, Robert Sherlock, John Clinch, Thomas Netherfield, or Netterville, Robert Fitzgerald, gentleman of the Pale, and Walter Lakin (Layrmus) -- executed on a charge of complicity in rebellion with Lord Baltinglass;
• 1581: Matthew Lamport, described as a parish priest (pastor) of Dublin Diocese, but more probably a baker (pistor) of Wexford -- executed for harbouring Baltinglass and Father Rochford, S.J.
• 1581: Robert Meyler, Edward Cheevers, John O'Lahy, and Patrick Canavan, sailors of Wexford -- hanged, drawn, and quartered, 5 July, for conveying priests, a Jesuit, and laymen out of Ireland;
• 1581: Patrick Hayes, shipowner of Wexford, charged with aiding bishops, priests, and others -- died in prison;
• 1581: Richard French, p., Ferns Diocese -- died in prison;
• 1581: Nicholas Fitzgerald, Cistercian -- hanged, drawn, and quartered, September, at Dublin.
• 1582: Phelim O'Hara and Henry Delahoyde, O.S.F., of Moyne, Co. Mayo -- hanged and quartered, 1 May;
• 1582: Thaddæus O'Meran, or O'Morachue, O.S.F., guardian of Enniscorthy;
• 1582: Phelim O'Corra (apparently Phelim O'Hara, above);
• 1582: Æneas Penny, parish priest of Killatra (Killasser, Co. Mayo) -- slain by soldiers while saying Mass, 4 May;
• 1582: Roger O'Donnellan, Cahill McGoran, Peter McQuillan, Patrick O'Kenna, James Pillan, priests, and Roger O'Hanlon (more correctly McHenlea, in Curry), lay brother, O.S.F. -- died, 13 February, Dublin Castle, but the date can scarcely be correct for all;
• 1582: Henry O'Fremlamhaidh (anglicized Frawley);
• 1582: John Wallis, priest -- died, 20 January, in prison at Worcester;
• 1582: Donagh O'Reddy, parish priest of Coleraine -- hanged and transfixed with swords, 12 June, at the altar of his church.
• 1584: Dermot O'Hurley, Archbishop of Cashel;
• 1584: Gelasius O'Cullenan, O.Cist., Abbot of Boyle, and his companion, variously named Eugene Cronius and Hugh or John Mulcheran (? Eoghan O'Maoilchiarain), either Abbot of Trinity Island, Co. Roscommon, or a secular priest -- hanged, 21 November, at Dublin;
• 1584: John O'Daly, p., O.S.F. -- trampled to death by cavalry;
• 1584: Eleanor Birmingham, widow of Bartholomew Ball -- denounced by her son, Walter Ball, Mayor of Dublin, died in prison;
• 1584: Thaddæus Clancy, 15 September, near Listowel.
• 1585: Richard Creagh (q.v.), Archbishop of Armagh -- poisoned, 14 October, in the Tower of London. He is included amongst the 242 Prætermissi in the article ENGLISH CONFESSORS AND MARTYRS;
• 1585: Maurice Kenraghty (q.v.), p.; Patrick O'Connor and Malachy O'Kelly, O.Cist. -- hanged and quartered, 19 May, at Boyle.
• 1586: Maurice, or Murtagh, O'Brien, Bishop of Emly -- died in prison at Dublin;
• Donagh O'Murheely (O'Murthuile, wrongly identified with O'Hurley) and a companion, O.S.F. -- stoned and tortured to death at Muckross, Killarney.
• 1587: John Cornelius, O.S.F., of Askeaton; another John Cornelius, S.J., surnamed O'Mahony, born in England of Irish parents from Kinelmeky, Co. Cork, is included among the venerabiles of the English list;
• 1587: Walter Farrell, O.S.F., Askeaton -- hanged with his own girdle.
• 1588: Dermot O'Mulrony, p., O.S.F., Brother Thomas, and another Franciscan of Galbally, Co. Limerick -- put to death there 21 March;
• 1588: Maurice Eustace (q.v.), Jesuit novice -- hanged and quartered, 9 June, Dublin;
• 1588: John O'Molloy, Cornelius O'Dogherty, and Geoffrey Farrell, Franciscan priests -- hanged, drawn, and quartered, 15 December, at Abbeyleix;
• 1588: Patrick Plunkett, knight -- hanged and quartered, 6 May, Dublin;
• 1588: Peter Miller, B.D., Diocese of Ferns -- tortured, hanged, and quartered, 4 October, 1588;
• 1588: Peter (or Patrick) Meyler -- executed at Galway; notwithstanding the different places of martyrdom assigned, these two names may be those of the same person, a native of Wexford executed at Galway;
• 1588: Patrick O'Brady, O.S.F., prior at Monaghan -- Murphy, on slender grounds, supposes him to be the guardian put to death in 1540, but Copinger and after him Curry, in his "Civil Wars in Ireland", state that six friars were slain in the monastery of Moynihan (Monaghan) under Elizabeth, Thaddæus O'Boyle, guardian of Donegal, slain there, 13 April, by soldiers.
• 1590: Matthew O'Leyn, p., O.S.F. -- 6 March, Kilcrea;
• 1590: Christopher Roche, l. -- died, 13 December, under torture, Newgate, London.
• 1591: Terence Magennis, Magnus O'Fredliney or O'Todhry, Loughlin og Mac O'Cadha (? Mac Eochadha, Keogh), Franciscans of Multifarnham -- died in prison.
• 1594: Andrew Strich, p., Limerick -- died in Dublin Castle.
• 1597: John Stephens, p., Dublin province, apparently chaplain to the O'Byrnes of Wicklow -- hanged and quartered, 4 September, for saying Mass;
• 1597: Walter Fernan, p. -- torn on the rack, 12 March, at Dublin.
• 1599: George Power, Vicar-General of Ossory -- died in prison.
• 1600: John Walsh, Vicar-General of Dublin -- died in prison at Chester;
• 1600: Patrick O'Hea, l. -- charged with harbouring priests, died in prison, 4 December, Dublin--probably the Patrick Hayes of 1581 (supra);
• 1600: James Dudall (Dowdall) -- died either 20 November or 13 August, Exeter;
• 1600: Nicholas Young, p., died, Dublin Castle.
• 1601: Redmond O'Gallagher, Bishop of Derry -- slain by soldiers, 15 March, near Dungiven;
• 1601: Daniel, or Donagh, O'Mollony, Vicar-General of Killaloe -- died of torture, 24 April, Dublin Castle;
• 1601: John O'Kelly, p. -- died, 15 May, in prison;
• 1601: Donagh O'Cronin, clerk -- hanged and disembowelled, Cork;
• 1601: Bernard Moriarty, dean of Ardagh and Vicar-General of Dublin -- having his thighs broken by soldiers, died in prison, Dublin.
• 1602: Dominic Collins, lay brother, S.J. -- hanged, drawn, and quartered, 31 October, Youghal.
• 1602: To this year seems to belong the death of Eugene MacEgan, styled Bishop-designate of Ross, of which he was vicar Apostolic, mortally wounded while officiating in the Catholic army. There was no Catholic army on foot in 1606, at which date his name appears in the official list. He was buried at Timoleague.
• The following Dominicans suffered under Elizabeth (1558-1603), but the dates are uncertain: Father MacFerge, prior, and twenty-four friars of Coleraine, thirty-two members of the community of Derry, slain there the same night, two priests and seven novices of Limerick and Kilmallock, assembled in 1602 with forty Benedictine, Cistercian, and other monks, at Scattery Island in the Shannon to be deported under safe conduct in a man-of-war, were cast overboard at sea.

• 1606: Bernard O'Carolan, p. -- executed by martial law, Good Friday;
• 1606: Eugene O'Gallagher, abbot, and Bernard O'Trevir, prior, of the Cistercians of Assaroe, Ballyshannon -- slain there by soldiers;
• 1606: Sir John Burke of Brittas, County Limerick -- for rescuing and defending with arms a priest seized by soldiers, executed at Limerick, 20 Dec., 1606. The date is accurately known from contemporary letters printed in Hogan's "Ibernia Ignatiana".
• 1607: Niall O'Boyle, O.S.F. -- beheaded or hanged, 15 Jan., Co. Tyrone;
• 1607: John O'Luin, O.P. -- hanged at Derry;
• 1607: Patrick O'Derry, p., O.S.F. -- hanged, drawn, and quartered at Lifford (but according to Bruodin, 6 January, 1618);
• 1607: Francis Helam or Helan, p., O.S.F. -- apprehended saying Mass in Drogheda, and imprisoned;
• 1607: Dermot Bruodin, O.S.F., tortured at Limerick -- released at the intervention of the Earl of Thomond, he died of years and labours at Ennis (9 August, 1617, according to Bruodin).
• 1608: Donagh (in religion, William) O'Luin, O.P., prior of Derry -- hanged and quartered there.
• 1610: John Lune, p., Ferns Diocese -- hanged and quartered, 12 November, Dublin.
• 1612: Cornelius O'Devany (q.v.), O.S.F., Bishop of Down and Connor -- executed with Patrick O'Lochran, p., Cork Diocese, 1 February, Dublin.
• 1614: William McGillacunny (MacGiolla Coinigh), O.P. -- executed at Coleraine.
• 1617: Thomas Fitzgerald, p., O.S.F. -- died in prison, 12 July, Dublin.
• 1618: John Honan, p., O.S.F. -- tortured, hanged, and quartered, 14 October, Dublin.
• 1621: Francis Tailler, alderman, Dublin -- died a prisoner in the Castle, 30 January;
• 1621: James Eustace, O.Cist. -- hanged and quartered, 6 September.
• 1628: Edmund Dungan, Bishop of Down and Connor -- died, 2 November, Dublin Castle.
• 1631: Paul (Patrick) Fleming, p., O.S.F. -- put to death by heretics, 13 November, at Benesabe, Bohemia, with his companion, Matthew Hore.
• 1633: Arthur MacGeoghegan, p., O.P. -- hanged, drawn, and quartered, 27 November, Tyburn.
• 1639: John Meagh, p., S.J. -- shot, 31 May, by the Swedish army near Guttenberg, Bohemia.
• 1641: Peter O'Higgin, O.P., prior at Naas -- hanged, 24 March, Dublin.
• 1642: Philip Clery, p.;
• 1642: Hilary Conroy, p., O.S.F. -- but most probably this is the Hilary Conroy, O.S.F., chaplain to Ormond's regiment, hanged at Gowran in 1650 by the Cromwellians;
• 1642: Fergal Ward, O.S.F., and Cornelius O'Brien -- hanged on board ship in the Shannon, by parliamentarians, October;
• 1642: Francis O'Mahony, O.S.F., guardian at Cork -- tortured and hanged, regaining consciousness, he was again hanged with his girdle;
• 1642: Thomas Aquinas of Jesus, p., O.D.C., hanged, 6 July, Drogheda;
• 1642: Angelus of St. Joseph, O.D.C.; Robert (in religion, Malachy) O'Shiel, p., O.Cist. -- hanged, 4 May, Newry;
• 1642: Edmund Hore and John Clancy, priests, Waterford Diocese -- put to death, March, at Dungarvan;
• 1642: Raymund Keogh, p., O.P., Stephen Petit, O.P., prior at Mullingar -- shot while hearing confessions on the battlefield;
• 1642: Cormac Egan, lay brother, O.P.
• 1643: Peter of the Mother of God, lay brother, O.D.C.
• 1644: Cornelius O'Connor and Eugene O'Daly, O.SS.T. -- drowned at sea by a Parliamentarian commander, 11 January;
• 1644: Christopher Ultan or Donlevy, p., O.S.F., died in Newgate, London.
• 1645: Hugh MacMahon, l., and Conor Maguire, Baron of Enniskillen -- executed for complicity in the outbreak of the Confederate War;
• 1645: Henry White, p. -- hanged at Rathconnell, Co. Meath (but before this year, if by Sir C. Coote, as stated);
• 1645: Edmund Mulligan, p., O.Cist., in July, near Clones, slain by Parliamentarians;
• 1645: Malachy O'Queely (q.v.), Archbishop of Tuam;
• 1645: Thaddæus O'Connell, p., O.S.A. -- executed by Parliamentarians after the battle of Sligo;
• 1645: John Flaverty, p., O.P.
• 1647: At the storming of the Rock of Cashel by Inchiquin, 15 September, Richard Barry, p., O.P., William Boyton, p., S.J., Richard Butler, p., O.S.F., James Saul, lay brother, O.S.F., Elizabeth Carney, Sister Margaret, a Dominican tertiary, Theobald Stapleton, p., Edward Stapleton, p., Thomas Morrissey and many others, priests and women, were slain in the church.
• 1648: Gerald FitzGibbon, cleric, and David Fox, lay brother at Kilmallock, Dominic O'Neaghten, lay brother, Roscommon, Peter Costello, p., sub-prior, Straid, Co. Mayo, all Dominicans; Andrew Hickey, p., O.S.F. -- hanged near Adare.

• 1649: Robert Netterville, p., S.J. -- died at Drogheda, 19 June, of a severe beating with sticks;
• 1649: John Vath, p., S.J., and his brother Thomas, secular priest, Dominic Dillon, O.P., prior at Urlar, Richard Oveton, O.P., prior at Athy, Peter Taaffe, O.S.A., prior at Drogheda -- slain in Drogheda massacre;
• 1649: Bernard Horumley (? Gormley), p., O.S.F. -- hanged, Drogheda;
• 1649: Raymund Stafford, p., Paul Synnott, p., John Esmond, p., Peter Stafford, p., Didacus Cheevers and Joseph Rochford, lay brothers, Franciscans -- slain in Wexford massacre;
• 1649: James O'Reilly, p., O.P. -- slain near Clonmel;
• 1649: William Lynch, p., O.P. -- hanged.
• 1650: Boetius Egan, O.S.F., Bishop of Ross, celebrated for exhorting the garrison of Carrigadrehid Castle to maintain their post against Broghill -- dismembered and hanged;
• 1650: Miler Magrath (Father Michael of the Rosary), p., O.P. -- hanged, Clonmel;
• 1650: Francis Fitzgerald, p., O.S.F. -- hanged, Cork;
• 1650: Walter de Wallis, p., O.S.F., and Antony Musæus (? Hussey), p., O.S.F. -- hanged, Mullingar;
• 1650: John Dormer, O.S.F. -- died in prison, Dublin;
• 1650: Nicholas Ugan, or Ulagan, O.S.F. -- hanged with his girdle;
• 1650: Thomas Plunkett and twelve other Franciscans, Eugene O'Teman, O.S.F. -- flogged and cut to pieces by soldiers.
• 1651: Franciscans: Denis O'Neilan, p., hanged, Inchicronan, Co. Clare; Thaddæus O'Carrighy, p., hanged near Ennis; Hugh McKeon, p., died in prison, Athlone; Roger de Mara (MacNamara), p., shot and hanged, Clare Castle; Daniel Clanchy and Jeremiah O'Nerehiny (Nerny), lay brothers, Quin, hanged; Philip Flasberry, hanged near Dublin; Francis Sullivan, p., shot in a cave, Co. Kerry, December; William Hickey, p., hanged;
• 1651: Dominicans: Terence Albert O'Brien (q.v.), O.P., Bishop of Emly; John Wolfe, p., hanged, Limerick; John O'Cuilin (Collins), p., beheaded; William O'Connor, prior at Clonmel, beheaded, and Thomas O'Higgin, p., hanged, Clonmel; Bernard O'Ferrall, p., slain, his brother Laurence, p., hanged, Longford; Vincent Gerald Dillon, chaplain to Irish troops in England, died in prison, York; Ambrose Æneas O'Cahill, p., cut to pieces by cavalry, Cork; Donagh Dubh (Black) and James Moran, lay brothers; laymen: Louis O'Farrall, died in prison, Athlone; Charles O'Dowd, hanged; Donagh O'Brien, burned alive; Sir Patrick Purcell, Sir Geoffrey Galway, Thomas Strich, mayor, Dominic Fanning, ex-mayor, Daniel O'Higgin, hanged after surrender of Limerick; Henry O'Neill, Theobald de Burgo.
• 1652: Secular priests: Roger Ormilius (? Gormley) and Hugh Garrighy -- hanged, Co. Clare;
• 1652:Cornelius MacCarthy, Co. Kerry;
• 1652: Bernard Fitzpatrick, Ossory Diocese;
• 1652: Franciscans hanged: Eugene O'Cahan, guardian at Ennis, Sliabh Luachra, Anthony Broder, deacon, near Tuam, Bonaventure de Burgo, Nielan Locheran, p., Derry.
• 1652: Anthony O'Ferrall, p., Tulsk, John O'Ferrall; Edmund O'Bern, p., O.P. -- beheaded after torture, Jamestown;
• 1652: Laymen hanged: Thaddæus O'Connor Sligo, Boyle; John O'Conor Kerry, Tralee; Thaddæus O'Conor of Bealnamelly in Connaught; Bernard McBriody; Edmund Butler, Dublin; Brigid D'Arcy, wife of Florence Fitzpatrick; Conn O'Rorke -- slain after quarter given.
• 1653: Dominicans: Thaddæus Moriarty, prior at Tralee, hanged, Killarney; Bernard O'Kelly, p. or lay brother, Galway; David Roche, p., sold into slavery, St. Kitts; Honoria Burke and her maid, Honoria Magan, tertiaries, Burrishoole; Daniel Delany, P.P., Arklow, hanged, Gorey.
• 1654: Bernard Conney, O.S.F., died in Galway jail; Mary Roche, Viscountess Fermoy, Cork; William Tirry, p., Augustinian hermit, probably in Co. Cork.
• 1655: Daniel O'Brien, dean of Ferns, Luke Bergin, O.Cist., and James Murchu -- hanged, 14 April.

The Restoration Onwards

• 1665: Raymund O'Moore, p., O.P., Dublin;
• 1679: Felix O'Conor, p., O.P., Sligo;
• 1691: Gerald Fitzgibbon, p., O.P., Listowel;
• 1695: John O'Murrough, p., O.P., Cork;
• 1704: Clement O'Colgan, p., O.P., Derry;
• 1707: Daniel McDonnell, p., O.P., Galway;
• 1707: Felix McDowell, p., O.P., Dublin;
• 1711 (or thereabouts): James O'Hegarty, p., Derry Diocese;
• 1713: Dominic McEgan, p., O.P., Dublin.

Uncertain Dates

• Forty Cistercians of Monasternenagh, Co. Limerick may be the monks mentioned at 1602, though the manner of death is stated differently;
• Daniel O'Hanan, l., died in prison;
• Donagh O'Kennedy, Donagh Serenan, Fulgentius Jordan, Raymund O'Malley, John Tullis, and Thomas Deir, Augustinians, Cork, 1654;
• James Chevers, O.S.F.,
• James Roche, O.S.F.,
• John Mocleus (? Mockler), O.S.F.,
• John O'Loughlin, O.P., two Dominican fathers, Kilmallock.
• Apparently the lay brothers Fitzgibbon and Fox, 1648; Michael Fitzsimon, l., Conn O'Kiennan, hanged, drawn, and quartered, 1615;
• Daniel O'Boyle, O.S.F.;
• Dermot MacCarrha (MacCarthy), p.;
• Donchus O'Falvey, p., perhaps the Daniel Falvey, friar, remanded at Kerry Lent Assizes, 1703;
• John MacConnan, p., possibly the John Oonan (Conan) of Copinger, executed by martial law, Dublin, 1618, and the John Honan, O.S.F., 1617 (the correct date is 1618--see above);
• John O'Grady, p.;
• Thomas Fleming, l,;
• Lewis O'Laverty, p., hanged, drawn, and quartered, 1615.

O'REILLY, Memorials of those who suffered for the Catholic Faith in Ireland (London, 1868); MURPHY, Our Martyrs (Dublin, 1896); Irish Ecclesiastical Record, XIII (1903), 421; MORAN, Historical Sketch of the Persecutions suffered by the Catholics of Ireland under Cromwell and the Puritans (Dublin, 1884); IDEM, History of the Catholic Archbishops of Dublin (Dublin, 1864); Spicilegium Ossoriense, I (Dublin, 1873), III (Dublin, 1884); ROTHE, Analecta Nove et Mira, ed. MORAN (Dublin, 1884); O'SULLEVAN BEARR, Patriciana Decas (Madrid, 1629); BRUODIN, Propugnaculum Catholicæ Veritatis (Prague, 1669).

CHARLES MCNEILL

Irnerius

(GARNERIUS)

An Italian jurist and founder of the School of Glossators, b. at Bologna about 1050; d. there about 1130. Though he was one of the most famous jurists of the Middle Ages, very little is known concerning his life and works, and it is only during the last twenty years that he has received the attention which his influence on the history and development of medieval jurisprudence demands. He was probably little over twenty years of age when he already taught didactics and rhetoric at Bologna. At the instance of Countess Matilda of Tuscany he began to devote himself to the study of jurisprudence, taking the Justinian code as a guide. Up to his time the study of jurisprudence had been much neglected in the empire, and he had to depend to a great extent on private studies, though it is probable that for a time he frequented a law school in Rome. After teaching jurisprudence for a short while in Rome he returned to Bologna, where he founded a new school of jurisprudence in 1084. It appears that some jurisprudence had been taught at Bologna, before Irnerius founded his school, by a certain Pepo and a few others; but the great impulse which juridical studies received at Bologna at this time, and from there began to spread throughout Europe, was entirely due to the school of Irnerius. He introduced the custom of explaining the Roman law by means of glosses, which originally were meagre interlinear elucidations of the text. But since the glosses were often too extensive to be inserted between the lines of the text, he began to write them on the margin of the page, thus being the first to introduce the marginal glosses which afterwards came into general use. After the death of Pope Paschal II, he defended the rights of Emperor Henry V in the papal election and upheld the legality of the election of the imperial antipope, Gregory VIII.

Irnerius is the author of numerous juridical works, but most of them have either been lost, or their genuineness is not sufficiently established. His chief work is "Summa Codicis", which is of a special historical value, because it is the first medieval system of Roman jurisprudence. It was recently edited with a critical introduction by Fitting, "Summa Codicis des Irnerius, mit einer Einleitung" (Berlin, 1894). Another important work generally ascribed to Irnerius is "Quaestiones de juris subtilitatibus". It was also edited by Fitting, "Quaestiones de juris subtilitatibus des Irnerius, mit einer Einleitung" (Festschrift zum 200jährigern Jubiläum der Universitat Halle-Wittenberg, 1894). The other juridical works and glosses that are ascribed to Irnerius are extant only in fragments, or their authorship is still too uncertain.

BESTA, L'opera d'Irnerio, contributo alla storia del diritto Romano (2 vols., Turin, 1896); FITTING, Die Anfanfge der Rechtsschule zu Bologna (Berlin, 1888); SAVIGNY, Geschichte des romischen Rechtes in Mittelatter, IV (Heidelberg, 1834-51), 9--67, 447-70; SCHUPPER, La scuola di Roma e la questione Irneriana in Atti accadem, Lincei (Rome, 1898), 3-168; PESCATORE, Die Glossen des Irnerius (Greifwald, 1890); PATETTA, La Summa Codicis e le Questiones falsamente attribuite ad Irnerio (Turin, 1897), Die Summa Codicis und die Questiones des falamente attribuite ad Irnerio (Turin, 1897); Die Summa Codicis und die Quaestiones des Irnerius in Zeitschrtft fur Rechtsgeschichte, XVII (Rome, 1896), 1- 96; Irnerio secondo la nuova critica storica in Rivista Storica Italiana, XI (Turin, 1894), 607-628.

MICHAEL OTT

Iroquois

A noted confederacy of five, and afterwards six, cognate tribes of Iroquoian stock, and closely cognate languages, formerly occupying central New York, and claiming right of conquest over nearly all the tribes from Hudson Bay to Tennessee River, and westward to Lake Michigan and Illinois River.

The name by which they are commonly known is a French derivative of disputed origin and meaning, but may possibly come from the Algonquin Irinakhow (real snakes), snake being the term by which the Algonquin tribes denoted hostile tribes of alien stock. To the English they were known as the "Five", and afterward the "Six Nations". They called themselves "Ongwanonsionni" (We of the extended house), or "Hodinonsyonni", frequently written and translated "Konoshioni" and "Hodenosanee" (People of the long house). The five original tribes, from east to west, were the "Ganienge-haga" (Flint place people), "Oneniote-aga" (Standing stone people), "Onondage-ga" (Mountain place people), "Goioguen-aga" (Locusts-coming-out-of-place people), and "Tsonontowaga", (Big mountain people, known to the French as "Agnie-ronon", "Onneioute", "Onontague", "Goyogouen", and "Tsonnontouan", and to the English as Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca. To these were added the cognate Tuscarora (Hemp gatherers) from North Carolina, after the war of 1711-12. Each tribe also had one or more figurative names used commonly in the confederate council, the term "Long house" itself being a figurative designation for the confederacy, of which the Mohawk were considered to guard the eastern door, as the Seneca did the western, while the Onondaga watched the sacred council fire in the centre.

The numerous broken tribes "adopted" or taken under protection were never accounted equal members of the confederacy, and full political equality was granted to the Tuscarora only after long years of probation as "infants", "boys", and "observers". Other tribes of Iroquoian stock were the Wyandot, or Huron; Tionontati, or Tobacco nation; and the Neutral Nation of Ontario; the Erie and Conestoga (Andaste, Susquehanna), in Ohio and Pennsylvania and the Nottoway, Tuscarora, and Cherokee, of Virginia and Carolina. Of these only the Wyandot and Cherokee survive. Wherever found, the tribes of this stock showed a marked and recognized intellectual superiority.

No other native Indian government north of Mexico has been the subject of so much study as the confederacy or league of the Iroquois, and probably no other was so complex and exact in detail and so wisely adapted to permit the fullest measure of freedom to each component tribe, while securing united action in all that concerned the whole. In general plan, it might be compared to our own system of independent state and federal jurisdiction, and in fact the Iroquois themselves, at the outbreak of the Revolution, recommended their system as a model for imitation by the American patriots. As in most of the eastern tribes, it was based upon the clan system (see INDIANS, AMERICAN), with descent in the female line, the number of clans varying from three with the Mohawk and Oneida to eight in the others of the original five, the dominant clans being the Bear, Wolf and Turtle. Each tribe had its women's council, chosen from the mothers of the tribe, and taking the initiative in all matters of public importance, including the nomination of members of the chief's council, made up in each tribe, of a certain number of hereditary chiefs (i.e. hereditary to the clan), the same number of alternates, and an additional number chosen for special fitness but without heredity in office. The hereditary chiefs of the first class, fifty in all for the five tribes, acting together, constituted the league council.

As in civilized aristocracies and religious orders, each league councillor at his formal installation, assumed an official hereditary name, by which he was henceforth known in his official capacity, in preference to his ordinary personal name, the official name being that borne by his direct predecessor at the original formation of the league. All nominations to hereditary chiefships, while originating with the women's council, had to be ratified by the tribal and league councils. Elaborate installation or condolence ceremonies signalized the inauguration or the death of a member of the league council, but no official notice was taken of the passing of a lesser chief. No alien could become a member of the tribe except by formal adoption into a clan, and as the right of adoption rested solely with the women as mothers of the clan, the fate of captives for life or death depended upon the will of the women. As the cultivators of the ground, the women also held jurisdiction of the territorial domain, and again, as mothers of the warriors, they decided questions of war and peace. Except for the veto power of the league council, it might be said that the mothers of the confederated tribes constituted the legislative body while the warriors were the executive.

The Iroquois dwelling was the so-called "long house", from 50 to 100 feet in length and from 15 to 20 feet in width, the frame of stout posts set upright in the ground, kept in place with cross-pieces, and covered and roofed with bark. The interior was divided into compartments of equal size along each side, opening upon a central passageway along the whole length of the building. Each compartment, excepting those at the end for storage or guest purposes, sheltered one family, so that as many as twenty families might live under one roof. Fire places were arranged along the passageway, so disposed that one fire accommodated four families. All the occupants of a house were usually closely related by clan kinship, thus constituting a larger family. In the principal towns, frequently designated as "castles", the houses were compactly and regularly arranged, and inclosed within strong palisades. In less important settlements the houses were scattered about in a straggling fashion. Surrounding the villages were cornfields and orchards so extensive as to be a constant theme of wonder to both French and later American invaders.. Besides corn the cultivated squashes, beans, and tobacco, in addition to which their woods and waters furnished abundant supplies of game and fish. Famine, so common in some tribes, was unknown among the Iroquois. They dressed in smoke-tanned buckskin, and their women were potters and basket makers, but not weavers. Their ordinary weapons were the bow, knife, and stone or wooden club, afterward superseded by the steel hatchet or tomahawk of civilized manufacture, but they sometimes in ancient times used also the stone-headed lance, the shield of rawhide or wicker work, and a rude form of body armour. Learning to their sorrow the power of firearms, in their first encounter with Champlain, they made eager efforts to buy guns from contraband Dutch traders with such success that by 1640 a large proportion of their warriors were well equipped and expert gunmen, enabling them to start upon a career of conquest which made the Iroquois name a terror for a thousand miles. Even among savages they were noted for their cruelty, cannibal feasts and sickening torture of captives being the sequel of every successful war expedition, while time after time the fullest measure of their awful savagery was visited upon the devoted missionary..

In Iroquois cosmogony, the central figure is Tharonyawagon, the "Sky Holder", dwelling above the firmament, whose pregnant wife, cast down to the earth in a fit of jealousy, bears a daughter, who, marrying a turtle in human form-the turtle being symbolic of power over earth and water-becomes in turn the mother of twin boys. These, as they grow up, are thenceforth in perpetual conflict, the one, the god of winter and death, forever destroying what his brother, the god of springtime and life, constantly restores. Their mythology and ceremonial are rich and well preserved, almost the whole of their ancient ritual forms being still kept up on the Ontario reserve. Among the principal ceremonies may be noted the Green Corn Dance, a thanksgiving for the new crops, and the "Burning of the White Dog", a solemn sacrifice. Another, in ancient times, was the Feast of the Dead, when the bones of all who had been dead for a term of years were gathered from their temporary resting places and deposited in a common sepulchre. The temporary disposal was by scaffold burial. The athletic ball play, lacrosse, was their principal ceremonial game. Unlike most eastern Indians, the Iroquois were monogamists, but divorce was easy and frequent, the children remaining always with the mother.

The Iroquois languages have been the subject of much study by missionaries and others, and have an abundant literature, philologic, religious, and general. Principal in the first class are Bruyas"s "Radices verborum Iroquaeorum", and Cuoq's "Lexique de la langue Iroquoise", besides an extensive Iroquois-French grammar and dictionary, still in manuscript by Father Marcoux.

According to Iroquois tradition, as interpreted by Hewitt, our best living authority, the league was established through the effort of Hiawatha (River Maker), probably of the Mohawk tribe, about the year 1570, or about forty years before the appearance of the French and Dutch in their country. At this time they numbered altogether probably less than 6000 souls, with powerful and aggressive enemies all around them, chief among these being the Algonquin of Canada. The unfortunate mistake of Champlain in 1609, in allying himself with this tribe in an invasion of the Iroquois country and winning the victory for the Algonquins by the help of the French firearms, was never forgotten or forgiven by the Iroquois, who became from that day the constant and unrelenting enemy of the French, and to this fact was largely due the final fall of Canada. Through contraband trade with the Dutch of Albany, after 1615, the Iroquois quickly supplied themselves with guns, and at once inaugurated a systematic war of conquest or extermination against all the surrounding tribes, particularly those in the French interest. In 1642 the heroic Jesuit missionary Jogues, while on his way to the Hurons, was taken by a Mohawk war party and cruelly tortured until rescued by the Dutch. The same capture and torture, and the same kindly rescue, befell the Jesuit Bresani, in 1644. In 1646, on the conclusion of an uncertain peace with the savages, Father Jogues again offered himself for the Mohawk mission, but shortly after his arrival was condemned and tortured to death on the charge of being the cause of a pestilence and a plague upon the crops.

In the meantime the Iroquois were making constant raids upon the Huron missions about Georgian Bay, as also upon the partly missionized tribes of the lower St. Lawrence. In 1648, a grand army of invasion of at least 1500 Iroquois warriors, largely armed with guns, swept over the Huron country, and within a few months had practically destroyed the tribe, burning the towns and missions, slaughtering hundreds upon hundreds of their people, carrying off 700 captives in one body and whole town populations later, and killing the missionaries, Daniel, Garnier, Lallemant, and the great Brebeuf. Between then and 1675 they wiped out in the same way the Tionontati (1650), Neutrals (1651), Erie (1655), and at last after a long and hard conflict the Conestoga (1675), all of their own kindred stock, those left alive being incorporated into the Iroquois towns. At the same time they were carrying on almost equally desolating warfare with the Mohican on the east, the Algonquin and Ottawa in the North, the Illinois in the far distant West, and the Cherokee, Tutelo and Catawba in the South, while keeping the whole French colony of Canada under a constant terror. They were careful, however, to maintain friendship with the Dutch and the later English, from whom they obtained their war supplies. A careful estimate by Greenhalgh in 1677 gave them then about 2150 warriors-perhaps 8000 souls-of whom, according to Jesuit authorities, nearly one-half were incorporated captives. In 1656, during a brief truce with Canada, a Jesuit mission colony was established among the Onondaga at their own request, with Father Le Mercier as superior, but two years later, upon the discovery of an intended massacre and general descent upon Canada, the mission was secretly abandoned. Another truce, consequent upon a successful expedition by De Tracy, gave brief opportunity for re-establishment, and in 1668 there were three missions in the Iroquois country.

Notwithstanding the hostile attitude of the league, a large number in each tribe, including the incorporated captives from the old missions, was now Christian and disposed to friendship with the French. Accordingly it was decided to attempt to draw out these Christians from the tribes and colonize them into mission towns in the neighbourhood of the French, to be a nucleus of conversion and an additional strength against the Iroquois enemy. One reason for this conclusion was the hostile attitude assumed toward the French missionaries by the new English government of New York. As a consequence of the colonizing policy, mission settlements of Christian Iroquois were established at Quinté Bay, Ontario (Sulpician, 1668; Recollect, 1678-c.1687; Laprarie, near Montreal, alias St. Francois Xavier des Près (Jesuit, 1669); removed to Sault St. Louis and renamed St. Francois Xavier du Sault, 1676, now Caughnawaga); the Mountain, near Montreal (Sulpician, 1676; transferred to Sault au Recollet, c. 1704, and to lake of Two Mountains alias Oka 1720). In 1687 the French governor, Denonville, invaded the western Iroquois territory with an army of nearly 1800 French and 600 Indians, including a detachment of the mission warriors, destroying towns and cornfields, but without bringing the enemy to an important engagement. In 1689 the Iroquois retaliated by landing 1500 warriors at Montreal, ravaging the whole country and butchering 200 men, women and children, carrying off over a hundred more to be tortured in their towns. In the subsequent King William's War, they joined forces with the English against the French, suffering such losses that in 1698 the league numbered only 1230 warriors, not counting those now permanently identified with the French interest.

Largely through the effort of Sir William Johnson, the resident British superintendent, they, as a nation held to the English interest throughout the French and Indian Wars of 1744-48 and 1754-63. Within this period was established the Sulpician mission of the Presentation at Oswegatachi, now Ogdensburg, N.Y., by Father Francis Picquet, which flourished until the transfer of dominion to England. About 1755 the present mission settlement of St. Regis (St. Francis Regis), now bisected by the international boundary line, was established by emigrants from Caughnawaga. Under Johnson's encouragement Episcopalian missionaries worked with success among the Mohawk, for whom the "Book of Common Prayer" was translated into their language. Unsuccessful efforts were also made by the Moravians, but later work by Congregationalists and Methodists has had more result. On the breaking out of the Revolution, about one half of the New York Iroquois fled to Canada, where they enlisted in the British service. The hostiles who remained behind, particularly the Seneca, were humbled by an expedition under command of General John Sullivan, in 1779. The refugees were subsequently assigned lands by the British Government, near Brantford, Ontario, on which they still reside, keeping up their old tribal forms and to a considerable extent, their old native religion. Those remaining in New York, now largely Protestant, have gradually reduced their territorial holdings by successive treaty cessions. About 1845 the larger part of the Oneida removed to Wisconsin. The whole body of the Iroquois in 1908 was distributed as follows: United States-New York, 5455; Wisconsin (Oneida), 2204; Oklahoma (Seneca), 389; Pennsylvania (Seneca), 120; Canada-Ontario, Six Nations on Grand River, 4286; Mohawk of Quinte, 1327; Oneida of the Thames, 777; Iroquois of Givson, about 140; Quebec, Caughnawaga, 2175; St. Regis (Canadian portion), 1449; Lake of Two Mountains, 403. Total about 18,725.

CHARLEVOIX, "Histoire et description general de la Nouvelle France", tr. SHEA (New York, 1886-72); COLDEN, "History of the Five Indian Nations", ed. SHEA (New York, 1866); "Annual Reports of Commissioner of Indian Affairs" (Washington,); COOK, "Journals of the Military Expedition of Major-General John Sullivan" (Albany, 1887); DONALDSON, "The Six Nations of New York"; "Extra Census Bulletin" (Washington, 1982); HEWITT, "Iroquois Cosmogony" in "Twenty-first Report Bureau Am. Ethnology" (Washington, 1903); IDEM, "Cosmogonic Gods of the Iroquois" in "Prac. Am. Asn. Adv. Science", XLIV (Salem, 1896); MORGAN, "League of the Hodenosaunee or Iroquois" (Rochester, 1851); "Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York", ed. O'Callaghan, 1st series (11 vols., Albany, 1856-61); PARKMAN, "The Jesuits in North America" (Boston, 1867); IDEM, "The Old Regime in Canada" (Boston, 1874); IDEM, "Count Frontenac and New France under Louis XIV" (Boston, 1878); IDEM, "Montcalm and Wolfe" (2 vols., Boston, 1884); PILLING, "Bibliography of the Iroquoian Languages"; "Bull. Bur. Am. Ethn." (Washington, 1888); SHEA, "Hist. Of the Catholic Missions among the Indian Tribes of the United States", (New York, 1855); STONE, "Life and Times of sir William Johnson", Bart. (2 vols., Albany, 1865); "The Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents", ed. THWAITE (73 vols., Cleveland, 1896-1901), volumes on "Iroquois: Hurons" etc.

JAMES MOONEY

Irregularity

(Lat. in, not, and regula, rule, i. e. not according to rule)

A canonical impediment directly impeding the reception of tonsure and Holy orders or preventing the exercise of orders already received. It is called a canonical impediment because introduced by ecclesiastical law, for the canons prescribe certain requisites for the licit reception of orders, e.g. moral probity, proper age, legitimate birth, knowledge proportionate to each order, integrity of body, mind, will, and faith. A defect in these qualities prescribed by church regulations is rightly called an irregularity. The direct effect of an irregularity is twofold: first, it prohibits the reception of orders and, second, prevents an order received from being licitly used. Indirectly it impedes one who has become irregular from obtaining an ecclesiastical benefice.

TOTAL OR PARTIAL

Irregu1arity is total when it prohibits the reception of any order and the exercise of every order already received. Such, for example, is the irregularity arising from voluntary homicide. If partial, it interferes with some exercise of an order or prevents only the ascent to a higher order. Thus, the absence of the left eye would not prevent one from ministering as a deacon, but he could not receive the priesthood, and a priest who lost his thumb would become irregular for sacrificing at the altar, but not for hearing confessions.

PERPETUAL OR TEMPORAL

The former irregularity is of its nature enduring; the latter, existent only for a certain period, as a defect of age.

EX DELICTO OR EX DEFECTU

The main division of irregularities is into those which are the consequence of crime (ex delicto) and those which arise from defect (ex defectu), according as they have been imposed by law on account of crimes by reason of which a person becomes unworthy of the reception of orders or their exercise or have been imposed on account of certain defects which would be indecorous in a sacred minister. It is not to be supposed however that irregularity ex delicto has been directly and proximately imposed as a punishment; for when the Church declares one irregular on account of crime, she does not primarily intend the punishment of the guilty one, but rather desires to shield the sanctuary from profanation. As a consequence, irregularity ex delicto resolves itself logically into irrregularity ex defectu. The distinction, however, must be retained in practice, both on account of the laws of dispensation and because irregularity ex delicto is a result of wrongdoing. This distinction has been taken by canonists from a decree of Pope Innocent III (cap. "Accedens", xiv, X, "De purg. canon.").

(1) Irregularities ex Delicto or on Account of Crime

In the primitive Church those who had performed public penance for a crime, whether notorious or secret, were not allowed to receive orders; and if already ordained were not admitted to higher orders. This was the first form of irregularity in the legislation of the Church, if we except certain prescriptions which appear in the New Testament (I Tim., iii, 2; v, 22; Titus, i, 6). After public penance had fallen into desuetude all faults were atoned for by private penance, and then began the distinction found in the "Corpus Juris Canonici" (c. xxxii, § 3, d. l) between public and private crimes, to the effect that the former produced irregularity, while the latter did not. This was the second form that irregularity assumed. At present, however, a different rule obtains, namely, that only those crimes which are expressly mentioned in law, whether they be public or private, can produce irregularity ex delicto; though it must be noted that crimes to which irregularity is attached on account of infamy do not make a person irregular if they remain secret, while the other crimes mentioned in law do produce irregularity, whether they be public or occult. For the incurring of irregularity ex delicto the act must be external, consummated, and of mortal gravity. Hence, if, on account of circumstances, the act be not a mortal sin, no irregularity is incurred; for while it is true that irregularity is not constituted precisely on account of crime, yet, as a matter of fact, it is never imputed unless there be a crime of mortal gravity. The exception to this rule is homicide, which may sometimes make a person irregular when the fault is only venial. It is to be noted that penance cannot prevent the incurring of an irregularity. Suppose there be question of a doubtful crime. If the doubt be one concerning the law (dubium juris), viz, whether there really exists a canonical irregularity on account of a particular crime, then an irregularity is not incurred. If the doubt concern the fact (dubium facti), viz, whether the crime was actually committed or, if so, whether the act was of mortal gravity, canonists reply with a distinction: if the doubtful fact concerns homicide, then it is probable that irregularity was contracted, on account of the peculiar incongruity of homicide with the clerical state; but if the doubt concerns any other fact, then it is probable that the irregularity has not been incurred, for the accused has the benefit of the doubt.

Homicide and Mutilation

(a) Voluntary homicide, even if occult, is a perpetual irregularity both for the reception of Sacred orders and for the obtaining of any ecclesiastical benefice or office. The same holds for procuring the actual abortion of a living fœtus. The penitential practice of the Church, however, presumes that the male fœtus is animated only after forty days, and the female after eighty days. All those who concur in the homicide as instigators or counsellors also incur irregularity, unless they retracted before the deed was committed and so that their retraction could have been known to the actual perpetrators. As for co-operators in a homicide, if several conspire together, or if in a public brawl all joined in the attack and it can not be known who inflicted the fatal wound, all become irregular, at least in the external forum. Those who are in justice bound to prevent a homicide and neglect their duty also incur irregularity. Homicide for the necessary and just defence of one's own life, when no other means would ward off the danger, is free from irregularity; but this is not the case if the killing was unnecessary or if the act was perpetrated in defence of goods or even of the life of another. Accidental homicide or that performed by a person who is irresponsible produces no irregularity. When a person performs a licit act, but omits to use all proper diligence or is not sufficiently skilled, and a death follows, he becomes irregular if he could have foreseen the consequence of his act. It is on this account that Benedict XIV declares that physicians wishing to receive Sacred orders should obtain a conditional dispensation.

(b) Mutilation, in the canonical sense, is the separation from the body of one of its principal members or of some part of the body having a distinct office, as a hand or a foot or an eye. He, therefore, who cuts off a finger is not a mutilator, unless it be the index finger or thumb, which, for a priest, are accounted principal members. Those who mutilate themselves or procure mutilation without just cause incur irregularity. In practice, these two points are to be observed concerning homicide and mutilation: first, in doubt as to the fault where the fact is certain, a conditional dispensation must be obtained; and second, in every case of homicide, even accidental, a priest must abstain from the altar until the case be passed on by proper authority.

Abuse of Baptism

This is an irregularity contracted by those who unconditionally reiterate baptism knowingly and openly. In such a case the persons baptizing, receiving baptism, and those co-operating in it all become irregular. Some authors hold that the same irregularity is contracted by those who confer conditional baptism where there is no prudent doubt that the first baptism was valid. Other canonists deny this and their opinion seems preferable. A person who allows himself to be baptized without necessity by a declared heretic falls also under this impediment. It is evident, however, that this does not affect infants baptized by heretics.

Violation of Censure

Irregularity is incurred under this head by those who presume to exercise orders while under censure, i. e. while excommunicated or suspended. It applies equally to all clerics whether in major or minor orders and to the excommunicate vitandi and tolerandi. But to incur it, the incriminating act must be one of order, not jurisdiction, and it must be performed ex officio, with full knowledge and temerity.

Abuse of Ordination

Those who in bad faith receive Sacred orders from bishops who are under censure become irregular and incur suspension from the order received. If the defect be principally in the one ordained, however, he is suspended, but probably does not incur an irregularity.

Heresy, Apostasy, and Schism

Heretics in general are irregular, whether they were born in heresy or lapsed into it from the Catholic Faith. This irregularity also includes the children of heretics to the second degree in the paternal line, and to the first degree in the maternal. If the parents embrace the Catholic Faith, their offspring is no longer irregular. Those born of Jews and pagans are not comprehended under this irregularity. Children are held irregular if born after their parents have fallen into heresy, and if the parents die in heresy. Some older canonists held that in countries where Catholics and non-Catholics live mixed together this irregularity was not contracted. A decree of the Holy Office (9 July, 1884), however, declares that the children of those who die in heresy are irregular, even in countries where heresy is rampant and unchecked. A schismatic is not irregular, unless he be at the same time a heretic. Such schismatics, however, where heresy is conjoined, even after restoration to the unity of the Church, remain irregular, as do also heretics after abjuration and apostates after penance.

Defect of Fame, or Infamy

This is defined by canonists as a state of lowered dignity, or a privation or diminution of the esteem of men. It is called infamia juris when the law declares one to be infamous either ipso facto or after judicial sentence. To the first class of infames belong those who are guilty of marriage with a prostitute, who attack cardinals, commit rape, engage in duels, embrace heresy. Children of those who commit high treason or lay hands on a cardinal are also infamous. If civil laws intend to brand a guilty person with infamy he is held as infamous by Canon law. To the second class, or those who are held infamous only after judicial sentence, belong all convicted of certain crimes expressed in law or who have been condemned to very degrading punishment. Defect of fame is called infamia facti when one perpetrates any crime which forfeits the good opinion of the community. When one's good name is lost only through a widespread suspicion this is deemed sufficient to impede the reception of Sacred orders. In ancient times certain classes of people, such as hangmen, actors, and others, were considered infamous by their very employment, but at present the actual opinion of the community must be consulted.

(2) Irregularities ex Defectu or on Account of Defect

Proper Age

The Church has prescribed a certain age at which the various ecclesiastical orders may be licitly received (see ORDERS, HOLY).

Defect of Birth

In primitive times illegitimacy was no bar to ordination. In 655 the Ninth Council of Toledo decreed that illegitimate Sons of clerics in major orders should be held as serfs of the Church and not be admitted to Holy orders unless first manumitted by the bishop. In the ninth and tenth centuries those born of violated virgins or of incest began to be held as irregular. Various canons were also formed concerning different details of illegitimacy, until finally a general prohibition against all spurious children being admitted to orders was enacted, on the ground that the stain of birth would be a stain on the sacred ministry. At present, therefore, all illegitimate persons are irregular unless they have been legitimated by the subsequent marriage of their parents or by profession in a religious order or by papal rescript. Foundlings of unknown parentage should receive conditional dispensation. Those also are held to be irregular who, though sprung from valid marriage, were born while their parents were bound by solemn vow or after the reception of Sacred orders.

Defect of Liberty

Slaves are irregular unless liberated by their masters. The same irregularity affects those who are responsible to the civil government for the administration of certain offices or duties, as judges, magistrates, guardians, administrators, soldiers. These are not to be ordained until they have freed themselves from their civil duties and dispelled any suspicion of fraudulent dealings. Those, however, who administer charitable funds or have the care of the poor or orphans are not included. Owing to defect of liberty a husband cannot receive orders during the lifetime of his wife, unless she enter religion or make a vow of chastity.

Defect of Matrimony, or Bigamy

In canonical phraseology, bigamy may be of three kinds. It is called true bigamy when a man has contracted a second marriage after the death of his first wife. Such a person is considered irregular for Sacred orders, because according to Innocent III a second marriage does not signify the union of Christ with His Church in the same manner as does a first marriage. Hence this irregularity is technically called defectus sacramenti (i. e. matrimonii). The impediment is not contracted, however, if either the first or second marriage had not been consummated. Bigamy is called interpretative, when, by fiction of law, a person is accounted as having had two wives, when in reality he had but one. This is the condition of a man who marries a widow or one corrupted by another. Similitudinary bigamy is contracted by a person who, bound by solemn religious vows or by Sacred orders, enters into a so-called marriage. Such a one is considered to have contracted two marriages, the one valid and spiritual with Christ, the other carnal and invalid with his guilty partner.

Defect of Mildness

This impediment, termed in Latin defectus lenitatis, makes those persons irregular who voluntarily, actively, and proximately take part with sanction of public authority in the lawful killing or mutilating of another. The reason of this irregularity is that since Christ was the gentlest of men, and priests are His representatives, they should likewise be models of mildness. This irregularity may be contracted in war. Canonists hold generally that in an unjust war all those soldiers who take part in it fall under this impediment if any of the enemy be killed or mutilated. In a just offensive war, both clerics and laics who personally kill or mutilate others become irregular, but not those who exhort others to action, without taking part in the fighting themselves. In a just defensive war, some canonists say that no one contracts irregularity, not even a cleric who personally serves in the ranks and slays others when laymen are not in sufficient numbers to repel the enemy. Other canonists, however, hold that such a cleric would incur irregularity, and this opinion seems more in accordance with Roman decrees (S. C. C., 13 Jan., 1703; 17 Feb., 1816). Irregularity is not, however, contracted by the mere fact of a person's entering military service. Defect of mildness also constitutes an irregularity for those concerned in legal capital punishment, as judges pronouncing sentences of death, witnesses, accusers, clerks writing out the sentence, and those who carry it into actual execution. As jurymen with us are really judges, they would seem to contract this irregularity likewise. The law is so strict that a judge who decrees a death sentence which was not carried out remains irregular for the reception of Sacred orders. Clerics who prosecute a layman before a court for injuries done to themselves must protest, according to Boniface VIII, that they do not desire sentence of capital punishment, if they wish to keep clear of irregularity. Similar protestation must be made by the ordinary who allows a corpse to be disinterred from the cemetery with a view to proving that some one had committed murder. Those who only remotely concur in a death sentence, as legislators, chaplains, and the like, are not included in this irregularity. As to clerics who practice surgery there is divided opinion among canonists, and while some hold that they contract this irregularity, others deny it, unless they can be shown to have incurred the impediment of homicide or mutilation. Mere disobedience of the Church's laws as to the practice of surgery by a cleric may be a sin, without necessarily being an irregularity.

Bodily Defects

These constitute an impediment to Sacred orders, either because they render a person unfit for the ministry or because his deformity would make him an object of horror and derision. The following are, therefore, irregular: mutilated persons, those having an artificial limb or who are unable to use their hand or thumb or index finger; the blind and those whose vision is too dim to allow them to read the Missal. Some authors, e. g. Noldin, think that, owing to the present ingenious construction of artificial limbs, this defect is no longer an irregularity, as it has ceased to be a deformity. The absence of an eye, even the left eye, may not constitute an impediment if the person can read the Mass without deformity. In case of doubt the bishop is judge, and, when the defect exists, he makes his declaration to Rome, but in practice the Sacred Congregation generally inclines to the severer view. Total deafness, dumbness, and stammering to such an extent as to make it impossible to pronounce complete words are likewise impediments. Paralytics, the lame who cannot properly perform the ceremonies, those who cannot drink wine without vomiting, lepers, those afflicted with the falling sickness, and in general all whose deformity is very notable are irregular.

Defect of Reason

This irregularity includes the insane, energumens, and simpletons.

Defect of Knowledge

Those who have not acquired the knowledge prescribed by the Council of Trent for the various grades of Holy orders cannot be licitly promoted to them. This defect is one that cannot be dispensed in, say canonists, because it falls under the natural law. When its cause, ignorance, disappears, however, the irregularity disappears without any dispensation.

Defect of Confirmation in Faith

This irregularity embraces neophytes recently converted and those who have not received the Sacrament of Confirmation.

CESSATION OF IRREGULARITIES

Many of the irregularities ex defectu cease without dispensation when their cause is removed. Such are the defects of age, liberty, knowledge. The same is to be said of infamy if it is infamia facti. If it be infamia juris, however, there must be a formal restitution of fame. If the infamy was contracted owing to some civil law it ceases in the ecclesiastical forum at the same time as it does in the civil forum. If a person was accounted irregular on account of some occupation in life, the dismissal of such occupation or condition will remove the impediment without any dispensation. All other irregularities need formal dispensation. In this matter the pope has absolute jurisdiction. A limited power of dispensation is conceded to bishops either by law or special faculties. By canon law a bishop can dispense from irregularities arising from similitudinary bigamy; likewise from illegitimacy, but only for minor orders. The Council of Trent declares that bishops may also dispense in all irregularities and suspensions arising from secret crimes, except voluntary homicide and those concerning which proceedings have been instituted before legal tribunals. The bishop can use his dispensing power, however, only for his own diocesan subjects. In voluntary homicide which is public or notorious the pope himself rarely dispenses. In homicide committed for one's own defence as well as secret accidental manslaughter, the bishop can dispense. If the latter deed be public the ordinary's powers extend only to minor orders. Heresy, schism, and apostasy are reserved to the pope, and for them the bishops need special faculties. Bodily defects are to be passed on by the local bishop, but the dispensation must come from the pope. Illegitimacy as an impediment to Sacred orders is reserved to the pope, but it is also removed by a solemn religious profession. Faults committed before baptism do not produce any irregularity. From this sketch it will be seen that Irregularities have been constituted by the Church to preserve the dignity and sanctity of the sacred ministry.

TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s. v.; AICHNER, Compendium Juris Ecclesiastici (Brixen, 1895); FERRARIS, Bibliotheca Prompta, IV (Rome, 1888), s. v.; LAURENTIUS, Institutiones Juris Ecclesiastici (Freiburg im Br., 1908), 49-69; BOENNINGHAUSEN, De Irregularitatibus (Münster, 1863-66); RICHERT, Die Anfänge der Irregularitäten (Freiburg im Br., 1901).

WILLIAM H. W. FANNING.

Irremovability

(Lat. in, not, and removere, to remove)

A quality of certain ecclesiastical offices and dignities. It implies that the incumbent's appointment is, under certain conditions, a perpetual one, or for the term of his natural life. This quality of irremovability, or perpetuity, is attached to the principal ecclesiastical offices, such as those of pope, cardinal, bishop, parish priest etc. A pope can resign his dignity; cardinals, bishops, and parish priests can either resign or be removed only for cause. It is of the removability of the latter especially that this article treats. According to the principal canonists the constitution of the canonical parish includes among its requisite conditions that its rector be irremovable. However, this does not mean that no exception is permitted, for occasionally the rectors of such canonical parishes may have only a vicarious charge for another who is the true parish priest. In some countries the bishop seems to be the parish priest of all or most of the parishes in his diocese, and the actual incumbents are simply his vicars. Thus in France after the Revolution the custom obtained that some thirty thousand succursal parish priests (desservants) were created without canonical institution and without the right of perpetuity, so that they could be removed and transferred by the bishops. The attitude of the Holy See towards this state of things has been one of passivity and toleration, not of approbation. In many missionary countries, as in the United States and England, a similar condition of affairs has obtained. According to the general law of the Church, however, a canonical parish priest is appointed for life and he can be removed from his benefice or office only for grave crimes expressed in law and after a canonical trial, either formal and solemn or, at least summary, in those countries to which the decree on that subject (1880) of the Congregation of Bishops and Regulars has been extended.

Irremovable Rectors in the United States

Up to a comparatively recent date all the rectors having cure of souls in this country were removable at the will of the bishop (ad nutum episcopi). As we have said above, however, this was not in accord with the general law of the Church. Pope Innocent III, in the Fourth General Council of the Lateran (cap. "Extirpandæ", xxx, § "Vero de præb.", iii, 5), and Pope Boniface VIII (cap. "Unic. de capell. mon." in VIº), iii, 18) insist that rectors having cure of souls should be irremovable. This is also inculcated by the Council of Trent (Sess. XXIV, cap. xiii, "De ref."). According to the secretary of the Sacred Congregation of the Council (1846), the latter tribunal, which is the legitimate interpreter of the Council of Trent, has always declared its wish that rectors having cure of souls be irremovable, and this notwithstanding any custom to the contrary. Indeed, in the early ages of the Church, as soon as priests were appointed to definite curacies (tituli), their appointment seems to have been in perpetuity. The reason for this irremovability of one having cure of souls is found in the fact that he is required to be the pastor and shepherd of his flock, to whom his sheep are known. It is, moreover, to the benefit of a parish that its administrator realize that he is secure in his office, as it will inspire him with greater zeal for the spiritual and temporal improvement of his charge. In order to extend these benefits to the United States, it was proposed by the Congregation of the Propaganda in 1883 that rectors having cure of souls in that country should be made canonical parish priests and as such irremovable. The American bishops, however, did not think the time ripe as yet for such development, and finally it was determined that irremovable rectors, who would not, however, have all the rights of canonical parish priests, should be constituted instead. The Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, held in 1884, decreed that in three years from the promulgation of the council each bishop was to select, with the advice of the diocesan consultors, a certain number of the curacies in his diocese and erect them into quasi-parishes, whose rectors would be irremovable. These quasi-parishes were to constitute at least one in ten of all the curacies or missions in the diocese. The first irremovable rectors might be appointed by the ordinary, with the advice of his consultors, without the formality of an examination, or concursus, but after that only when the prescribed examination had been undergone. An exception to the latter rule is made for certain priests whose learning and ability have been already abundantly proved. To obtain the right of making the concursus for an irremovable rectorship, the candidate must have already exercised the sacred ministry in a worthy manner for ten years in the diocese, and demonstrated his capacity for spiritual and temporal administration as a removable rector or in some equivalent office. The examiners having approved all the candidates whom they find worthy of the position, it devolves upon the bishop to designate one from among them who is to be made irremovable rector. Such rectors have quasi-parochial rights and join with the diocesan consultors in recommending candidates for the bishopric when it becomes vacant. In large dioceses, where distance or other causes would make a special concursus for every irremovable rectorship very inconvenient, it is allowed to hold a general examination once a year, and those approved for their learning at that time are qualified for appointment to any irremovable rectorship which falls vacant within the next six years, though the other requisite qualifications for such office are to be passed on each time there is question of an appointment.

Irremovable rectors in the United States may be dismissed from their parishes only for very grave crimes, as dismissal is a very grave punishment. The nature of these crimes must also be expressly designated by ecclesiastical law. Dismissal is inflicted either ipso facto, in which case, however, a declaratory sentence is as a rule necessary, or after a condemnatory sentence following on a trial. The common law of the Church distinguishes those crimes which entail ipso facto dismissal from office from those which require a condemnatory sentence after canonical trial. The former are: heresy, falsification of papal documents, assassination, bodily attack on cardinal or bishop, procuring abortion, unnatural vice, simony, duelling, usurpation of church property, alienation of the possessions of the parish, irregular ordination or neglecting to receive Sacred orders within a year after appointment to a parish. The latter are: neglect of the prescribed clerical costume, non-residence in the parish, usury, inebriety, murder, gambling, perjury, theft and the like, remaining obdurately under censure for a year, incurring certain irregularities, concubinage. To these crimes the Third Council of Baltimore (1884) added other causes for the dismissal of irremovable rectors in the United States: disobedience to the ordinary in matters of grave moment, open neglect of the bishop's mandates concerning parochial schools, repeated incurring of debts without permission of the ordinary and manifest disobedience in payment of debts, collusion with lay trustees in issuing false notes in the name of the parish for the benefit of the rector, fraudulent deception of the ordinary in making the annual parochial statement concerning matters of grave import, public and persistent charges against the morals of the incumbent involving great harm to the parish. The council adds that if an irremovable rector be found incapable of administering his parish, he is to be asked to resign his charge. If he refuse, and it be not possible to appoint a vicar with sufficient revenue for support, the bishop can dismiss the irremovable rector, but in that case he must provide a proper pension for him. As to removable rectors in the United States, they are not left absolutely to the arbitrary will of the ordinary, but are to be dismissed only for cause, which, however, need not be one expressed in law nor necessarily as grave as such. The form of trial to be used in all cases in the United States is prescribed in the instruction "Cum Magnopere" (1884).

Missionary Rectors in England

These incumbents correspond to irremovable rectors in the United States. They have been appointed since 1852 in virtue of a decree of the Propaganda. Their office is perpetual and they have quasi-parochial rights, and they may not be removed except for canonical cause and after judicial investigation. The First Council of Westminster declares (decree xxv, 12) that an assistant priest acquires no right to a permanent appointment to the cure of souls owing to his service, but that such appointment to a missionary rectorship is a right reserved.

SMITH, Elements of Ecclesiastical Law, I (New York, 1895); TAUNTON, The Law of the Church (London, 1906), s. v. Irremoveable Rector; AICHNER, Compendium Juris Ecclesiastici (Brixen, 1895); SMITH, The New Procedure (New York, 1898).

WiLLIAM H. W. FANNING.

Irvingites

A religious sect called after Edward Irving (1792-1834), a deposed Presbyterian minister. They themselves repudiate this name, saying Irving was not their founder but only their "forerunner"; and claim to be the "Catholic Apostolic Church". The sect arose from certain extraordinary "manifestations of the spirit" -- tongues, prophecies, healings, even raising of the dead -- which were said to have taken place during Irving's ministry in London, after his deposition. These lead some of his followers to band themselves together for the purpose of forming a religious body modeled exactly on the lines of the primitive Apostolic Church, as they conceived it. The specialty of their religious belief consists in this: They hold apostles, prophets, evangelists, and pastors (Ephesians, iv, 11-14) to be abiding ministries in the Church, and that these ministries, together with the power and gifts of the Holy Ghost, dispensed and distributed among her members, are necessary for preparing and perfecting the Church for the Second Advent of the Lord; and that the supreme rule in the Church ought to be exercised, as at first, by twelve apostles, not elected and ordained by men, but called and sent forth immediately by God. They are not separated from the Church of the country in which they live. They worship apart, indeed, because they believe that they have a special call to do so. They accept the Apostles' Creed, and the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. It is their form of church government and liturgy which are peculiar to them. During Irving's lifetime six apostles were "separated" for the work of the ministry. After his death six others were added. These twelve apostles were to ordain twelve "prophets", twelve "evangelists" and twelve "pastors". Seven "deacons" were to be chosen for the management of the temporal affairs of the body. This number of central officials has not in fact been adhered to. Each congregation has at its head an "angel", or bishop, who ranks as a "pastor", and who has under him twenty-four priests and seven deacons. The ritual is exceedingly elaborate, resembling in many ways the most splendid functions of the Catholic Church. At Matins and Vespers they have "Proposition" (Exposition) of the Sacrament. On Sundays and holidays they have solemn celebration of the Eucharist with lights, incense, and vestments. They use oil and water in their ritual observances. Their two principal churches are at Albury (Surrey, England), and at Gordon Square, London (England). It should be stated that the so-called lrvingites owe much more to Henry Drummond (1786-1860) than to Irving. At his seat, Albury Park, the earliest meetings of the sect were held, and his wealth was at its disposal. He was one of its office-bearers, and wrote numerous works in its defence. The last of the "apostles" died in 1901, and none has since been appointed. No official statistics are published, but there are known to be congregations not only in England, but also in America, Germany, France, and Switzerland. In 1900 there were 80 churches altogether.

Baxter, Irvingism, in its rise, Progress, and Present State (London, 1836); OLIPHANT, Life of Edward Irving (London, 1862); BLUNT, Dictionary of Sects (London 1874); DAVENPORT, Edward Irving and the Catholic Apostolic Church; HOOK, Church Dictionary (London 1887); R. Story, Life of Story (London, 1863).

T.B. SCANNELL

Isaac

The son of Abraham and Sara. The incidents of his life are told in Genesis 15-35, in a narrative the principal parts of which are traced back by many scholars to three several documents (J, E, P) utilized in the composition of the Book of Genesis (see ABRAHAM).

According to Genesis 17:17; 18:12; 21:6, his name means: "he laughs". He was circumcised eight days after his birth, weaned in due time, and proclaimed the sole legal ancestor of the chosen people (21:1-12). His early years were spent in Bersabee, whence he was taken by his father to Mount Moria to be offered up in sacrifice, and whither he returned after his life had been miraculously spared (21:33; 22:19). His mother died when he was thirty-six years of age (cf. Genesis 17:17; 23:1). A few years later, he married Rebecca, Bathuel's daughter, whom one of his father's servants had, according to Abraham's directions, brought from Mesopotamia (24). The union took place in "the south country", where Isaac then lived, and continued to live after he had joined with Ismael in committing the body of Abraham to burial in the cave of Machpelah (24:62, 67; 25:7-11). Many years elapsed before Isaac's longing entreaty to God for children was actually heard. Of the twins to whom she then gave birth, Esau was beloved by Isaac, while Jacob was Rebecca's favourite (25:21-28). Drought and famine made it necessary for Isaac to take the road down to Egypt, but, at Yahweh's bidding, he stopped on his way thither and sojourned in Gerara, where an incident similar to that of Abraham's disavowal of Sara is recorded of him (26:1-11). We are told next how, through envy of Isaac's prosperity as a husbandman and a herdsman, the Philistines among whom he dwelt began petty persecutions, which the Hebrew patriarch bore patiently, but on account of which he finally withdrew to Bersabee. There he was favoured with a new vision from Yahweh, and entered a solemn covenant with Abimelech, King of Gerara (26:12-33). During the last years of Isaac's career, there occurred the well-known incident of his conferring upon Jacob the Divine blessing, which he had always intended for Esau (27), followed by Isaac's concern to protect Jacob from his brother's resentment and to secure for him a wife from his mother's kindred in Mesopotamia (28:1-5). After Jacob's return, Isaac died at the age of one hundred and eighty, and was buried by his sons in the cave of Machpelah (35:27-29; 49:31).

As delineated in Genesis, the figure of Isaac is much less striking than that of Abraham, his father. Yet, by his manner of life, always quiet, gentle, guileless, faithful to God's guidance, he ever was the worthy heir and transmitter of the glorious promises made to Abraham. He was pre-eminently a man of peace, the fitting type of the Prince of Peace, whose great sacrifice on Mount Calvary was foreshadowed by Isaac's obedience unto death on Mount Moria.

The New Testament contains few, but significant references to Isaac (cf. Matthew 8:11; Luke 12:28; 20:37; Romans 9:7; Galatians 4:28; Hebrews 11:17 sqq.; James 2:21).

The legends and various details concerning Isaac which are found in the Talmud and in Rabbinical writings are of no historical value.

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Isaac of Armenia

(SAHAK)

Catholicos or Patriarch of Armenia (338-439), otherwise known as ISAAC THE GREAT and sometimes as PARTHEV owing to his Parthian origin. He was son of St. Narses and descended from the family of St. Grergory the Illuminator. Left an orphan at a very early age, he received in Constantinople an excellent literary education, particularly in the Eastern languages. After his election as patriarch he devoted himself to the religious and scientific training of his people. Armenia was then passing through a grave crisis. In 387 it had lost its independence and been divided between the Byzantine Empire and Persia; each division had at its head an Armenian but feudatory king. In the Byzantine territory, however, the Armenians were forbidden the use of the Syriac language, until then exclusively used in Divine worship: for this the Greek language was to be substituted, and the country gradually hellenized in the Persian districts, on the contrary, Greek was absolutely prohibited, while Syriac was greatly favoured in this way the ancient culture of the Armenians was in danger of disappearing and national unity was seriously compromised. To save both Isaac invented with the aid of St. Mesrop, the Armenian alphabet and began to translate the Bible; their translation from the Syriac Peshito was revised by means of the Septuagint, and even, it seems, from the Hebrew text (between 410 and 430). The liturgy also, hitherto Syrian was translated into Armenian, drawing at the same time on the Liturgy of St. Basil of Caesarea, so as to obtain for the new service a national colour. Isaac had already established schools for higher education with the aid of disciples whom he had sent to study at Edessa, Melitene, Byzantium, and elsewhere. Through them he now had the principal masterpieces of Greek and Syrian Christian literature translated, e.g. the writings of Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Basil, the two Gregorys (of Nazianzus and of Nyssa), John Chrysostom, Ephrem, etc.

Armenian literature in its golden age was, therefore, mainly a borrowed literature. Through Isaac's efforts the churches and monasteries destroyed by the Persians were rebuilt, education was cared for in a generous way, the pagan worship of Ormuzd which Shah Yezdigerd tried to set up was cast out, and three councils held to re-establish ecclesiastical discipline. Isaac is said to have been the author of liturgical hymns. Two letters, written by him to Theodosius II and to Atticus of Constantinople, have been preserved. A third letter addressed to St. Proclus of Constantinople was not written by him, but dates from the tenth century. Neither did he have any share, as was wrongly ascribed to him, in the Council of Ephesus (431), though, in consequence of disputes which arose in Armenia between the followers of Nestorius and the disciples of Acacius of Melitene and Rabulas, Isaac and his church did appeal to Constantinople and through St. Proclus obtained the desired explanations. A man of enlightened piety and of very austere life, Isaac owed his deposition by the king in 426 to his great independence of character in 430 he was allowed to resume his patriarchal throne. In his extreme old age he seems to have withdrawn into solitude, dying at the age of 110. Neither the exact year nor the precise month of his death is known, but it seems to have occurred between 439 and 441. Several days are consecrated to his memory in the Armenian Church.

NEUMANN, Versuch einer Gesch. der armen. Literatur, 28-30; MOSES DE CHRENE, in LANGLOIS, Collections des historiens anciens et modernes de l' Armenie, II (Paris, 1869), 159-73; LEQUIEN, Oriens Christianus, I, 1375-7; BARDENHEWER, Patrologie, 549; TER-MI-KELlAN, Die armenische Kirche (Leipzig, 1892), 33-9, FINCK, in Gesch. der. Christl. litteraturen des Orients (Leipzig, 1907), 82-5; Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geography, III, 290.

S. VAILHÉ

Isaac of Nineveh

A Nestorian bishop of that city in the latter half of the seventh century, being consecrated by the Nestorian Patriarch George (660-80). Originally a monk of the monastery of Bethabe in Kurdistan, he abdicated for unknown reasons after an episcopate of but five months, and retired to the monastery of Rabban Shapur, where he died at an advanced age, blind through study and austerity. Towards the end of his life he passed under a cloud as his Nestorian orthodoxy became suspected. He was author of three theses, which found but little acceptance amongst Nestorians. Daniel Bar Tubanita, Bishop of Beth Garmai (some 100 miles south-east of Mossul), took umbrage at his teaching and became his ardent opponent. The precise contents of these theses are not known, but they were of too Catholic a character to be compatible with Nestorian heresy. From an extant prayer of his, addressed to Christ it is certainly difficult to realize that its author was a Nestorian. Eager to claim so great a writer, the monophysites falsified his biography, placing his life at the beginning of the seventh century, making him a monk of the Jacobite monastery of Mar Mattai, and stating that he retired to the desert of Scete in Egypt. Since the discovery of Ishodenah's "Book of Chastity" by Chabot in 1895 the above details of Isaac's life are beyond doubt, and all earlier accounts must be corrected accordingly.

Isaac was a fruitful ascetical writer and his works were for centuries the main food of Syrian piety. Only very little of the original Syriac has been published—two chapters on "Grades of Knowledge" and the "Essential Qualities of Virtues" by Zingerle ("Monum. Syriaca", I, 1869, pp. 97-101), and three dialogues by Chabot at the end of his treatise "De Isaaci vita" (see below). A German translation of some six chapters was made directly from the Syriac by Bickell ("Biblioth. der Kirchenvat.", Kempten, 1874). A complete list of Isaac's works is given by Chabot in "De Isaaci vita" and "Notes sur la litt. Syr." in the "Revue Semitique" (1896), p. 254. Isaac's works were early translated in Arabic, Ethiopic, and Greek. The Greek translation was made by two monks of St. Saba, Patrick and Abraham, and published by Nicephorus Theodoces under the title Tou hosiou patros memon Isaak . . . ta eurethenta asketika (Leipzig, 1870). This publication, however, does not represent any precise work of Isaac, but is rather a corpus asceticum, containing treatises, letters, colloquies, all in one. Two Latin recensions thereof have been published: the one entitled "Sermones beati Isaaci de Syria" (Venice, 1506) and the other in the "Max. biblioth. vet. Patrum", XIII (Lyons, 1677). This latter recension is reprinted an Gallandi, XII, and again in Migne, P.G., LXXXVI, 1, 811-86, and bears the title "De Contemptu Mundi". It is erroneously ascribed to Isaac of Antioch, with whom Isaac of Nineveh is often confounded. The Latin gives but half the contents of the Greek, which itself has undergone a number of manipulations. The long letter to Simeon of Caesarea published in Mai's "Nov. Patr. Biblioth.", VIII, 3, forms the last chapter of Theodorus's Greek. Marius Besson published apophthegmata of lsaac's in Greek in "Oriens Christ.", I (1901), 46-60. The Arabic translation of this corpus asceticum is much fuller than the Greek, and divided into four books. Isaac's writings possess passages of singular beauty and elevation, and remind the reader of Thomas à Kempis.

CHABOT, De Isaaci Ninivitiae vita, etc. (Paris and Louvain, 1892); DUVAL, Anc. Litteratures chret. Lit. Syriaque (Paris, 1907); WRIGHT, Short History of Syriac Literature (2nd, ed., London, 1894); BARDENHEWER, Hist. of Ancient Church Literature (tr., Baltimore, 1908).

J.P. ARENDZEN

Isaac of Seleucia

Patriarch of the Persian Church, d. 410. Isaac is celebrated among the patriarchs of the Persian Church for having reorganized it after the terrible persecution that overwhelmed it under Sapor (Shapûr) II. We know little or nothing definite of his early days. According to the most probable tradition he was enabled through the influence he had with King Yazdgerd I, to restore the Catholicate of Seleucia, which had been vacant for twenty-two years. Another account says he was chosen to replace a certain Qayom, who had been deposed by his fellow-bishops for incapacity. Isaac's great work was the organizing of the Council of Seleucia, the equivalent for the Eastern Syrian Church of the Council of Nicaea. The Persian bishops met under the express orders of the monarch at the capital of the Sassanide kingdom. Isaac presided, in concert with Maruthas of Martyropolis, whom the "Western Fathers", i.e., the bishops of the Syrian Province of Antioch, had delegated to assist in the reorganization of the Christian religion in Persia. Two Persian nobles and the Grand Vizier, who represented the king at this important assembly, promulgated a decree authorizing the Christians to practice their religion and to construct churches. They recognized Isaac, the Catholicos of Seleucia, as the sole official head of the Persian Christians, and declared that the secular arm would repress all who were insubordinate to him. Shortly after this great success, which assured the unification and the stability of the Persian Church, Isaac died.

CHABOT, Synodicon orientale (Paris, 1902), BRAUN, Das Buch Synhados (Stuttgart, 1900); De sancta nicaena synodo (Munster, 1898), LABOURET, Le christianisme dans l'Empire perse (Paris, 1904).

J. LABOURT

Isabella I

("LA CATÓLICA" = "THE CATHOLIC")

Queen of Castile; born in the town of Madrigal de las Altas Torres, 22 April, 1451; died a little before noon, 26 November, 1504, in the castle of La Mota, which still stands at Medina del Campo (Valladolid).

She was the daughter of John II, King of Castile, by his second wife, Isabella of Portugal. Being only a little more than three years of age when her father died (1454), she was brought up carefully and piously by her mother, at Arevalo, until her thirteenth year. Her brother, King Henry IV, then took her, together with her other brother, Alfonso, to his court, on the pretext of completing her education, but in reality, as Flórez tells us, to prevent the two royal children from serving as a standard to which the discontented nobles might rally.

The Castilian nobles had been constantly increasing in power during the repeated long minorities through which the crown had passed, and had taken advantage of the weakness of kings like Henry II and John II. At this period they had reached the point of completely stripping the throne of its authority. They availed themselves of Henry IV's incredible imbecility and of the scandalous relations between Joan of Portugal, his second wife, and his favourite, Beltran de la Cueva. Defeated at Olmedo, and deprived of their leader, the Infante Alfonso, who died — by poison, as was believed — on 5 July, 1468, they sought to obtain the crown for the Infanta Isabella, rejecting the king's presumptive daughter, Joan, who was called "La Beltraneja" on the supposition that Don Beltran was her real father. On this occasion Isabella gave one of the earliest proofs of her great qualities, refusing the usurped crown offered to her, and declaring that never while her brother lived would she accept the title of queen. The king, on his part, committed the astounding folly of recognizing Isabella as his immediate heiress, to the exclusion of Joan. Historians have generally been willing to interpret this act of Henry IV as an implicit acknowledgment of his own dishonour. To be strictly just, however, it was not so, for even if Joan was his daughter in fact, as she was by juridical presumption, he might have yielded to the violence of the nobles, who sought to give the crown to Isabella immediately, and compromised with them by making her his heir, as he did in "the Inn of the Bulls" of Guisando (la Venta de los Toros), 19 September, 1468. For a year before this, Isabella had been living at Segovia, apart from the court, which resided at Toledo; after the conclusion of the pact she was at odds with her brother, the king on account of his plan for her marriage.

In 1460 Henry had already offered the hand of Isabella to Don Carlos, Prince of Viana, the eldest son of John II of Aragon, and heir, at the same time, to the Kingdom of Navarre. This Henry did in spite of the opposition of the King of Aragon, who wished to obtain the hand of Isabella (which carried with it the crown of Castile) for his younger son, Ferdinand. Negotiations were protracted until the unhappy death of the Prince of Viana. In 1465 an attempt was made to arrange the marriage between Isabella and Alfonso V of Portugal, but the princess had already chosen Ferdinand of Aragon for a husband and was therefore opposed to this alliance. For the same reason she subsequently refused to marry Don Pedro Girón, Master of Calatrava, a member of the powerful Pacheco family, whom the king sought to win over by this means. Other aspirants for Isabella'a hand were Richard, Duke of Gloucester, brother of Edward IV of England, and the Duke of Guienne, brother of Louis XI of France. The Cortes was assembled at Ocaña in 1469 to ratify the Pact of Guisando, when an embassy arrived from Portugal to renew the suit of Alfonso V for the hand of Isabella. When she declined this alliance, the king went so far as to threaten her with imprisonment in the Alcazar of Madrid, and although fear of the Infanta's partisans prevented him from carrying out this threat, he exacted of his sister a promise not to enter into any matrimonial negotiations during his absence in Andalusia, whither he was on the point of setting out. But Isabella, as soon as she was left alone, removed with the aid of the Archbishop of Toledo and the Admiral of Castile, Don Fadrique Enríquez, to Madrigal and thence to Valladolid, and from there sent Gutierre de Cárdenas and Alfonso de Palencia in search of Ferdinand, who had been proclaimed King of Sicily and heir of the Aragonese monarchy. Ferdinand, after a journey the story of which reads like a novel, for its perils and its dramatic interest, was married to Isabella in the palace of Juan de Vivero, in 1469.

On the death of Henry IV, Isabella, who was then at Segovia, was proclaimed Queen of Castile. But La Beltraneja had been betrothed to Alfonso V of Portugal, and Henry, revoking the Pact of Guisando, had caused her to be proclaimed heiress of his dominions. The Archbishop of Toledo, the Marqués de Villena, the Master of Calatrava, and other nobles, who in her father's lifetime had denied La Beltraneja's legitimacy, now defended her claims. And thus was begun a war between Spain and Portugal which lasted five years, ending with the peace of 1479, when a double alliance was arranged. La Beltraneja, however, abandoned her claims, taking the veil in the monastery of Santa Clara of Coimbra (1480), and with that event the right of Isabella to the throne of Castile became unquestioned. Ferdinand had meanwhile succeeded to the throne of Aragon, and thus the definitive unity of the Spanish nation was accomplished in the two monarchs to whom a Spanish pope, Alexander VI, gave the title of "Catholic" which the Kings of Spain still bear. Isabella displayed her prudence and gentleness — qualities which she possessed in a degree seldom equalled — in the agreement she made with Ferdinand as to the government of their dominions: they were to hold equal authority, a principle expressed in the device or motto, " Tanto monta, monta tanto — Isabel como Fernando (As much as the one is worth so much is the other — Isabella as Fernando)".

The harmonious union of the peoples and the crowns being thus realized, it was necessary to reduce the power of the nobles, who had acquired a position almost independent of the crown and rendered good government difficult. Towards this object the Catholic sovereigns directed their efforts; among the means which they took should be mentioned chiefly: (1) the establishment of the Santa Hermandad (Holy Brotherhood), a kind of permanent military force, very completely organized, supported by the municipal councils, and intended for the protection of persons and property against the violence of the nobles; (2) an improved and properly ordered administration of justice with a wise organization of the tribunals, the establishment of the Chancery at Valladolid, and the promulgation of the royal edicts generally called "Edicts of Montalvo" after the jurisconsult who drew them up; (3) the abolition of the right of coining money, which certain individuals held, and the regulation of the currency laws so as to facilitate commerce; (4) the revocation of extravagant grants made to certain nobles during the reigns of the late monarchs, the demolition of their castles, which constituted a menace to public peace, and the vesting in the crown of the masterships of military orders. To preserve the purity of the Faith and religious unity, against the intrigues of the Jews, who were employing the influence of their wealth and their usurious dealings to pervert Christians, the Catholic sovereigns solicited of Pope Sixtus IV the establishment of the Inquisition.

Their government thus strengthened at home, the sovereigns proceeded to bring to a completion, by the conquest of Granada, the great work of reconquest which had been virtually at a standstill since the time of Alfonso XI. The taking of Zahara, of which the Moors possessed themselves by surprise, afforded an occasion for the war; which opened happily with the conquest of Alhama (March, 1482). The Christians were favoured by the internal troubles of Granada, which were due to the party of the Emir Muley Hassan and his son Boabdil, and, after the death of the former, to the supporters of his uncle Abdallah el Zagal. The sovereigns kept up the war in spite of the serious defeats sustained by them at Ajarquia and Loja, and possessed themselves successively of Coin, Guadix, Almería, Loja, Vélez, Malaga, and Baza. Isabella took a prominent part in this war; not only did she attend to the government of the kingdom, and provide for the support of the army while Ferdinand did battle at its head, but she repeatedly visited the camp to animate the troops by her presence. This was the case at the siege of Malaga, and at that of Baza, where the stern usages of war did not hinder the Moorish leader, Cid Hiaya, from displaying his chivalry towards the queen. She was in danger of being assassinated by a Mohammedan fanatic before the walls of Malaga, and of perishing in the conflagration of the besieging camp at Granada. In consequence of this conflagration the city of Santa Fe was built, to put an end to the vain hopes of the people of Granada, that the Catholic sovereigns would abandon their enterprise. Granada surrendered 2 January, 1492, and the territorial unity of the Spanish monarchy was established. To protect its normal unity, an edict was issued three months later (31 March) expelling from Spain the Jews (170,000 to 180,000 souls), whose cities had admitted the Mussulman invaders in the eighth century, and who constituted a perpetual danger to the independence and security of the nation.

While they were carrying on the war against Granada Christopher Columbus presented himself to the Catholic sovereigns, and to Queen Isabella fell the honour of appreciating the genius who had not been understood at Genoa, at Venice, or in Portugal. Protected first of all by the Spanish friars, he was presented to the queen by her confessor, Padre Hernando Talavera, and Cardinal Mendoza (el Cardenal de España); and with the means which the king and queen procured for him he fitted out the three famous caravels which placed America in communication with the Old World. Sailing, 3 August, 1492, from the port of Palos, he discovered on 12 October — the day on which the feast of Our Lady of the Pillar is observed in Spain — the first of the Bahama Islands.

Not only did Isabella the Catholic always show herself the protectress of Columbus, but she was also the protectess of the American aborigines against the ill-usage of the colonists and adventurers. In 1503, she organized the Secretariate of Indian Affairs, which was the origin of the Supreme Council of the Indies. Isabella was no less the patroness of the great Cisneros in the reformation of the monasteries of Spain, a work which he accomplished under the authority of Alexander VI given by the Brief of March, 1493, and which anticipated the reform afterwards executed throughout the whole Church. The good government of the Catholic sovereigns brought the prosperity of Spain to its apogee, and inaugurated that country's Golden Age. The manufacture of cloths and silks developed at Segovia, Medina, Granada, Valencia, and Toledo, as also that of glass and of steel weapons, of leather and silverware. Agriculture prospered, while navigation and commerce rose to an unprecedented height in consequence of the great discoveries of that epoch.

Queen Isabella by her example led the way in fostering the love of study, and in many respects her Court recalls that of Charlemagne. When she was already a grown woman she devoted herself to the study of Latin, and became an eager collector of books, of which she possessed a great number. Her Castilian has been ranked as a standard of the language by the Spanish Royal Academy. She was extremely solicitous for the education of her five children (Isabella, John, Joan, Maria, and Catherine), and in order to educate Prince John with ten other boys, she formed in her palace a school similar to the Palatine School of the Carlovingians. Her daughters, too, attained to a degree of education higher than was usual at that epoch, and they so combined with their learning the industries peculiarly appropriate to their sex, that Ferdinand the Catholic could imitate Charlemagne in using no article of clothing that had not been spun or sewn by his consort and his daughters. This example of the queen, a model of virtue, piety, and domestic economy, who mended one doublet for her husband the king as often as seven times, exercised a great moral influence on the nobility in discouraging inordinate luxury and vain pastimes. It also fostered learning not only in the universities and among the nobles, but also among women. Some of the latter distinguished themselves by their intellectual attainments — e.g. Beatriz Galinda, called la Latina, Lucia Medrano, and Francisca Nebrija, the Princess Joan and the Princess Catherine (who afterwards became Queen of England), Isabella Vergara, and others who reached great proficiency in philosophy, Latin, and mathematics, and became qualified to fill professional chairs in the universities of Alcalá and Salamanca.

Isabella the Catholic was extremely unhappy in her children. Prince John died in youth, full of the most brilliant promise; Catherine was eventually repudiated by her husband Henry VIII; Joan, heiress to the kingdom, lost her reason. Not the least notable trait in the life of Isabella was the making of that last will and testament, immortalized in Rosales's picture in the Madrid Museum. Her heart was filled with sympathy for the fate of the American Indians, she charged her successors to protect them and to regard them as they regarded their other subjects, and she pointed out Spain's mission in Africa — a mission which the Moroccan question has tardily enough brought to the world's knowledge.

Clemencín, Elogio de la Reyna Católica Da. Isabel in Mem. Acad. de la Historia (Madrid, 1821); FernÁndez y GonzÁlez, Da. Isabel la Católica (Madrid, 18–); MartÍnez de Velasco, Isabel la Católica (Madrid, 1883); Rada y Delgado, Retratos de Isabel la Católica in Boletín Acad. de la Historia (Madrid, 1885); Mariana, Lafuente, and other writers in the history of Spain.

RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO

St. Isabel of France

Daughter of Louis VIII and of his wife, Blanche of Castille, born in March, 1225; died at Longchamp, 23 February, 1270. St. Louis IX, King of France (1226-70), was her brother. When still a child at court, Isabel, or Elizabeth, showed an extraordinary devotion to exercises of piety, modesty, and other virtues. By Bull of 26 May, 1254, Innocent IV allowed her to retain some Franciscan fathers as her special confessors. She was even more devoted to the Franciscan Order than her royal brother. She not only broke off her engagement with a count, but moreover refused the hand of Conrad, son of the German Emperor Frederick II, although pressed to accept him by everyone, even by Pope Innocent IV, who however did not hesitate subsequently (1254) to praise her fixed determination to remain a virgin. As Isabel wished to found a convent of the Order of St. Clare, Louis IX began in 1255 to acquire the necessary land in the Forest of Rouvray, not far from the Seine and in the neighbourhood of Paris. On 10 June, 1256, the first stone of the convent church was laid. The building appears to have been completed about the beginning of 1259, because Alexander IV gave his sanction on 2 February, 1259, to the new rule which Isabel had had compiled by the Franciscan Mansuetus on the basis of the Rule of the Order of St. Clare. These rules were drawn up solely for this convent, which was named the Monastery of the Humility of the Blessed Virgin (Monasterium Humilitatis B. Mariæ Virginis). The sisters were called in the rule the "Sorores Ordinis humilium ancillarum Beatissimf Marif Virginis". The fast was not so strict as in the Rule of St. Clare; the community was allowed to hold property, and the sisters were subject to the Minorites. The first sisters came from the convent of the Poor Clares at Reims. Isabel herself never entered the cloister, but from 1260 (or 1263) she followed the rules in her own home near by. Isabel was not altogether satisfied with the first rule drawn up, and therefore submitted through the agency of her brother Louis IX, who had also secured the confirmation of the first rule, a revised rule to Urban IV. Urban approved this new constitution on 27 July, 1263.

The difference between the two rules consisted for the most part in outward observances and minor alterations. This new rule was also adopted by other French and Italian convents of the Order of St. Clare, but one can by no means say that a distinct congregation was formed on the basis Isabella's rule. In the new rule Urban IV gives the nuns of Longchamp the official title of "Sorores Minores inclusæ, which was doubtlessly intended to emphasize closer union with the Order of Friars Minor. After a life of mortification and virtue, Isabella died in her house at Longchamp on 23 February, 1270, and was buried in the convent church. After nine days her body was exhumed, when it showed no signs of decay, and many miracles were wrought at her grave. In 1521 Leo X allowed the Abbey of Longchamp to celebrate her feast with a special Office. On 4 June, 1637, a second exhumation took place. On 25 January, 1688, the nuns obtained permission to celebrate her feast with an octave, and in 1696 the celebration of the feast on 31 August was permitted to the whole Franciscan Order. They now keep it on 1 September. The history of the Abbey of Longchamp had many vicissitudes. The Revolution closed it, and in 1794 the empty and dilapidated building was offered for sale, but as no one wished to purchase it, it was destroyed. In 1857 the walls were pulled down except one tower, and the grounds were added to the Bois de Boulogne.

AGNES D'HARCOURT, third Prioress of Longchamp (1263-70), wrote the saint's life, Vie de Madame Isabelle, which may be found in the Archives Nationales L. 1021 MSS. (Paris). A Latin translation of this book is given in Acta SS., VII, Aug., 798-808; cf. ibid., 787-98. See also ROULLIARD, La sainte mère, ou vie de Madame Saincte Isabel (Paris, 1619); ANDRÉ, Histoire de Ste Isabelle (Carpentras, 1885); DANIÉLO, Vie de Madame Ste Isabelle (Paris, 1840); BERGUIN, La Bienheureuse Isabelle de France (Grenoble, 1899); DUCHESNE, Histoire de l'abbaye royale de Longchamp, 1255-1789 (2nd ed., Paris, 1904); SBARA-LEA, Bull. Franc., III (Rome, 1765), 64-9; II (1761). 477-86.

MICHAEL BIHL

Isaias

Among the writers whom the Hebrew Bible styles the "Latter Prophets" foremost stands "Isaias, the holy prophet . . . the great prophet, and faithful in the sight of God" (Ecclus., xlviii, 23-25).

I. LIFE

The name Isaias signifies "Yahweh is salvation". It assumes two different forms in the Hebrew Bible: for in the text of the Book of Isaias and in the historical writings of the Old Testament, for example in IV Kings, xix, 2; II Par., xxvi, 22; xxxii, 20, 32, it is read Yeshá`yahu, whereas the collection of the Prophet's utterances is entitled Yeshá`yah, in Greek `Esaías, and in Latin usually Isaias, but sometimes Esaias. Four other persons of the same name are mentioned in the Old Testament (I Esd., viii, 7; viii, 19; II Esd., xi, 7; I Par., xxvi, 25); while the names Jesaia (I Par., xxv, 15), Jeseias (I Par., iii, 21; xxv, 3) may be regarded as mere variants. From the Prophet himself (i, 1; ii, 1) we learn that he was the son of Amos. Owing to the similarity between Latin and Greek forms of this name and that of the Shepherd-Prophet of Thecue, some Fathers mistook the Prophet Amos for the father of Isaias. St. Jerome in the preface to his "Commentary on Amos" (P.L., XXV, 989) points out this error. Of Isaias's ancestry we know nothing; but several passages of his prophecies (iii, 1-17, 24; iv, 1; viii, 2; xxxi, 16) lead us to believe that he belonged to one of the best families of Jerusalem. A Jewish tradition recorded in the Talmud (Tr. Megilla, 10b.) held him to be a nephew of King Amasias. As to the exact time of the Prophet's birth we lack definite data; yet he is believed to have been about twenty years of age when he began his public ministry. He was a citizen, perhaps a native, of Jerusalem. His writings give unmistakable signs of high culture. From his prophecies (vii and viii) we learn that he married a woman whom he styles "the prophetess" and that he had two sons, She`ar­Yashub and Maher­shalal­hash­baz. Nothing whatever indicates that he was twice married as some fancy on the gratuitous and indefensible supposition that the `almah of vii, 14, was his wife.

The prophetical ministry of Isaias lasted wellnigh half a century, from the closing year of Ozias, King of Juda, possibly up to that of Manasses. This period was one of great prophetical activity. Israel and Juda indeed were in sore need of guidance. After the death of Jeroboam II revolution followed upon revolution and the northern kingdom had sunk rapidly into an abject vassalage to the Assyrians. The petty nations of the West, however, recovering from the severe blows received in the beginning of the eighth century, were again manifesting aspirations of independence. Soon Theglathphalasar III marched his armies towards Syria; heavy tributes were levied and utter ruin threatened on those who would show any hesitation to pay. In 725 Osee, the last King of Samaria, fell miserably under the onslaught of Salmanasar IV, and three years later Samaria succumbed to the hands of the Assyrians. In the meantime the Kingdom of Juda hardly fared better. A long period of peace had enervated characters, and the young, inexperienced, and unprincipled Achaz was no match for the Syro­Israelite coalition which confronted him. Panic­stricken he, in spite of the remonstrances of Isaias, resolved to appeal to Theglathphalasar. The help of Assyria was secured, but the independence of Juda was thereby practically forfeited. In order to explain clearly the political situation to which so many allusions are made in Isaias's writings there is here subjoined a brief chronological sketch of the period: 745, Theglathphalasar III, king of Assyria; Azarias (A. V. Uzziah), of Juda; Manahem (A. V. Menahem) of Samaria; and Sua of Egypt; 740, death of Azarias; Joatham (A. V. Jotham), king of Juda; capture of Arphad (A. V. Arpad) by Theglathphalasar III (Is., x, 9); 738, campaign of Theglathphalasar against Syria; capture of Calano (A. V. Calno) and Emath (A. V. Hamath); heavy tribute imposed upon Manahem (IV Kings, xv, 19-20); victorious wars of Joatham against the Ammonites (II Par., xxvii, 4-6); 736, Manahem succeeded by Phaceia (A. V. Pekahiah); 735, Joatham succeeded by Achaz (IV Kings, xvi, 1); Phaceia replaced by Phacee (A. V. Pekah), son of Remelia (A. V. Remaliah), one of his captains; Jerusalem besieged by Phacee in alliance with Rasin (A. V. Rezin), king of Syria (IV Kings xvi, 5; Is., vii, 1, 2); 734, Theglathphalasar, replying to Achaz' request for aid, marches against Syria and Israel, takes several cities of North and East Israel (IV Kings, xv, 29), and banishes their inhabitants; the Assyrian allies devastate part of the territory of Juda and Jerusalem; Phacee slain during a revolution in Samaria and succeeded by Osee (A. V. Hoshea); 733, unsuccessful expeditions of Achaz against Edom (II Par., xxviii, 17) and the Philistines (20); 732, campaign of Theglathphalasar against Damascus; Rasin besieged in his capital, captured, and slain; Achaz goes to Damascus to pay homage to the Assyrian ruler (IV Kings, xvi, 10-19); 727, death of Achaz; accession of Ezechias (IV Kings, xviii, 1); in Assyria Salmanasar IV succeeds Theglathphalasar III, 726, campaign of Salmanasar against Osee (IV Kings, xvii, 3); 725, Osee makes alliance with Sua, king of Egypt (IV Kings, xvii, 4); second campaign of Salmanasar IV, resulting in the capture and deportation of Osee (IV Kings, xvii, 4); beginning of the siege of Samaria; 722, Sargon succeeds Salmanasar IV in Assyria; capture of Samaria by Sargon; 720, defeat of Egyptian army at Raphia by Sargon; 717, Charcamis, the Hittite stronghold on the Euphrates, falls into the hands of Sargon (Is, x, 8); 713, sickness of Ezechias (IV Kings, xx, 1-11; Is, xxxviii); embassy from Merodach Baladan to Ezechias (IV Kings, xx, 12-13; Is., xxxix); 711, invasion of Western Palestine by Sargon; siege and capture of Azotus (A. V. Ashdod; Is., xx); 709, Sargon defeats Merodach Baladan, seizes Babylon, and assumes title of king of Babylon; 705, death of Sargon; accession of Sennacherib; 701, expedition of Sennacherib against Egypt; defeat of latter at Elteqeh; capture of Accaron (A. V. Ekron); siege of Lachis; Ezechias's embasy; the conditions laid down by Sennacherib being found too hard the king of Juda prepares to resist the Assyrians; destruction of part of the Assyrian army; hurried retreat of the rest (IV Kings, xviii; Is., xxxvi, xxxvii); 698, Ezechias is succeeded by his son Manasses. The wars of the ninth century and the peaceful security following them produced their effects in the latter part of the next century. Cities sprang up; new pursuits, although affording opportunities of easy wealth, brought about also an increase of poverty. The contrast between class and class became daily more marked, and the poor were oppressed by the rich with the connivance of the judges. A social state founded on iniquity is doomed. But as Israel's social corruption was greater than Juda's, Israel was expected to succumb first. Greater likewise was her religious corruption. Not only did idolatrous worship prevail there to the end, but we know from Osee what gross abuses and shameful practices obtained in Samaria and throughout the kingdom, whereas the religion of the people of Juda on the whole seems to have been a little better. We know, however, as regards these, that at the very time of Isaias certain forms of idolatrous worship, like that of Nohestan and of Moloch, probably that also of Tammur and of the "host of heaven", were going on in the open or in secret.

Commentators are at variance as to when Isaias was called to the prophetical office. Some think that previous to the vision related in vi, 1, he had received communications from heaven. St. Jerome in his commentary on the passage holds that chapters i-v ought to be attributed to the last years of King Ozias, then ch. vi would commence a new series begun in the year of the death of that prince (740 b.c.; P.L., XXIV, 91; cf. St. Gregory Nazianzen, Orat. ix; P.G., XXXV, 820). It is more commonly held, however, that ch. vi refers to the first calling of the Prophet; St. Jerome himself, in a letter to Pope Damasus seems to adopt this view (P. L., XXII, 371; cf. Hesychius "In Is.", P.G. XCIII, 1372), and St. John Chrysostom, commenting upon Is., vi, 5, very aptly contrasts the promptness of the Prophet with the tergiversations of Moses and Jeremias. On the other hand, since no prophecies appear to be later than 701 b.c., it is doubtful if Isaias saw the reign of Manasses at all; still a very old and widespread tradition, echoed by the Mishna (Tr. Yebamoth, 49b; cf. Sanhedr., 103b), has it that the Prophet survived Ezechias and was slain in the persecution of Manasses (IV Kings, xxi, 16). This prince had him convicted of blasphemy, because he had dared say: "I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne" (vi, 1), a pretension in conflict with God's own assertion in Exod., xxxiii, 20: "Man shall not see me and live". He was accused, moreover, of having predicted the ruin of Jerusalem and called the holy city and the people of Juda by the accursed names of Sodom and Gomorrah. According to the "Ascension of Isaias", the Prophet's martyrdom consisted in being sawed asunder. Tradition shows this to have been unhesitatingly believed. The Targum on IV Kings, xxi, 6, admits it; it is preserved in two treatises of the Talmud (Yebamoth, 49b; Sanhedr., 103b); St. Justin (Dial. c. Tryph., cxx), and many of the Fathers adopted it, taking as unmistakable allusions to Isaias those words of the Heb., xi, 37, "they (the ancients) were cut asunder" (cf. Tertullian, "De patient.", xiv; P.L., I, 1270; Orig., "In Is., Hom." I, 5, P.G., XIII, 223; "In Matt.", x, 18, P.G., XIII, 882; "In Matt.", Ser. 28, P.G., XIII, 1637; "Epist. ad Jul. Afr.", ix, P.G., XI, 65; St. Jerome, "In Is.", lvii, 1, P.L., XXIV, 546-548; etc.). However, little trust should be put in the strange details mentioned in the "De Vit. Prophet." of pseudo­Epiphanius (P.G., XLIII, 397, 419). The date of the Prophet's demise is not known. The Roman Martyrology commemorates Isaias on 6 July. His tomb is believed to have been in Paneas in Northern Palestine, whence his relics were taken to Constantinople in a.d. 442.

The literary activity of Isaias is attested by the canonical book which bears his name; moreover allusion is made in II Par., xxvi, 22, to "Acts of Ozias first and last . . . written by Isaias, the son of Amos, the prophet". Another passage of the same book informs us that "the rest of the acts of Ezechias and his mercies, are written in the Vision of Isaias, son of Amos, the prophet", in the Book of the Kings of Juda and Israel. Such at least is the reading of the Massoretic Bible, but its text here, if we may judge from the variants of the Greek and St. Jerome, is somewhat corrupt. Most commentators who believe the passage to be authentic think that the writer refers to Is., xxxvi-xxxix. We must finally mention the "Ascension of Isaias", at one time attributed to the Prophet, but never admitted into the Canon.

II. THE BOOK OF ISAIAS

The canonical Book of Isaias is made up of two distinct collections of discourses, the one (chapters 1-35) called sometimes the "First Isaias"; the other (chapters 40-66) styled by many modern critics the "Deutero- (or Second) Isaias"; between these two comes a stretch of historical narrative; some authors, as Michaelis and Hengstenberg, holding with St. Jerome that the prophecies are placed in chronological order; others, like Vitringa and Jahn, in a logical order; others finally, like Gesenius, Delitzsch, Keil, think the actual order is partly logical and partly chronological. No less disagreement prevails on the question of the collector. Those who believe that Isaias is the author of all the prophecies contained in the book generally fix upon the Prophet himself. But for the critics who question the genuineness of some of the parts, the compilation is by a late and unknown collector. It would be well, however, before suggesting a solution to analyse cursorily the contents.

First Isaias

In the first collection (cc. i-xxxv) there seems to be a grouping of the discourses according to their subject­matter: (1) cc. i-xii, oracles dealing with Juda and Israel; (2) cc. xiii-xxiii, prophecies concerning (chiefly) foreign nations; (3) cc. xxiv-xxvii, an apocalypse; (4) cc. xxviii-xxxiii, discourses on the relations of Juda to Assyria; (5) cc. xxxiv-xxxv, future of Edom and Israel.

First section

In the first group (i-xii) we may distinguish separate oracles. Ch. i arraigns Jerusalem for her ingratitude and unfaithfulness; severe chastisements have proved unavailing; yet forgiveness can be secured by a true change of life. The ravaging of Juda points to either the time of the Syro­Ephraimite coalition (735) or the Assyrian invasion (701). Ch. ii threatens judgment upon pride and seems to be one of the earliest of the Prophet's utterances. It is followed (iii-iv) by a severe arraignment of the nation's rulers for their injustice and a lampoon against the women of Sion for their wanton luxury. The beautiful apologue of the vineyard serves as a preface to the announcement of the punishment due to the chief social disorders. These seem to point to the last days of Joatham, or the very beginning of the reign of Achaz (from 736-735 b.c.). The next chapter (vi), dated in the year of the death of Ozias (740), narrates the calling of the Prophet. With vii opens a series of utterances not inappropriately called "the Book of Emmanuel"; it is made up of prophecies bearing on the Syro­Ephraimite war, and ends in a glowing description (an independent oracle?) of what the country will be under a future sovereign (ix, 1-6). Ch. ix, 7-x, 4, in five strophes announces that Israel is foredoomed to utter ruin; the allusion to rivalries between Ephraim and Manasses possibly has to do with the revolutions which followed the death of Jeroboam II; in this case the prophecy might date some time between 743-734. Much later is the prophecy against Assur (x, 5-34), later than the capture of Arshad (740), Calano (738), or Charcamis (717). The historical situation therein described suggests the time of Sennacherib's invasion (about 702 or 701 b.c.). Ch. xi depicts the happy reign to be of the ideal king, and a hymn of thanksgiving and praise (xii) closes this first division.

Second section

The first "burden" is aimed at Babylon (viii, 1-xiv, 23). The situation presupposed by the Prophet is that of the Exile; a fact that inclines some to date it shortly before 549, against others who hold it was written on the death of Sargon (705). Ch. xiv, 24-27, foretelling the overthrow of the Assyrian army on the mountains of Juda, and regarded by some as a misplaced part of the prophecy against Assur (x, 5-34), belongs no doubt to the period of Sennacherib's campaign. The next passage (xiv, 28-32) was occasioned by the death of some foe of the Philistines: the names of Achaz (728), Theglathphalasar III (727), and Sargon (705) have been suggested, the last appearing more probable. Chapters xv-xvi, "the burden of Moab", is regarded by many as referring to the reign of Jeroboam II, King of Israel (787-746); its date is conjectural. The ensuing "burden of Damascus" (xvii, 1-11), directed against the Kingdom of Israel as well, should be assigned to about 735 b.c. Here follows a short utterance on Ethiopia (prob. 702 or 701). Next comes the remarkable prophecy about Egypt (xix), the interest of which cannot but be enhanced by the recent discoveries at Elephantine (vv. 18, 19). The date presents a difficulty, the time ranging, according to diverse opinions, from 720 to 672 b.c.. The oracle following (xx), against Egypt and Ethiopia, is ascribed to the year in which Ashdod was besieged by the Assyrians (711). Just what capture of Babylon is alluded to in "the burden of the desert of the sea" (xxi, 1-10) is not easy to determine, for during the lifetime of Isaias Babylon was thrice besieged and taken (710, 703, 696 b.c.). Independent critics seem inclined to see here a description of the taking of Babylon in 528 b.c., the same description being the work of an author living towards the close of the Babylonian Captivity. The two short prophecies, one on Edom (Duma; xxi, 11-12) and one on Arabia (xxi, 13-17), give no clue as to when they were uttered. Ch. xxii, 1-14, is a rebuke addressed to the inhabitants of Jerusalem. In the rest of the chapter Sobna (Shebna) is the object of the Prophet's reproaches and threats (about 701 b.c.). The section closes with the announcement of the ruin and the restoration of Tyre (xxiii).

Third section

The third section of the first collection includes chapters xxiv-xxviii, sometimes called "the Apocalypse of Isaias". In the first part (xxiv-xxvi, 29) the Prophet announces for an undetermined future the judgment which shall precede the kingdom of God (xxiv); then in symbolic terms he describes the happiness of the good and the punishment of the wicked (xxv). This is followed by the hymn of the elect (xxvi, 1-19). In the second part (xxvi, 20-xxvii) the Prophet depicts the judgment hanging over Israel and its neighbours. The date is most unsettled among modern critics, certain pasages being attributed to 107 b.c., others even to a date lower than 79 b.c.. Let it be remarked, however, that both the ideas and the language of these four chapters support the tradition attributing this apocalypse to Isaias. The fourth division opens with a pronouncement of woe against Ephraim (and perhaps Juda; xxviii, 1-8), written prior to 722 b.c.; the historical situation implied in xxviii, 9-29, is a strong indication that this passage was written about 702 b.c. To the same date belong xxix-xxxii, prophecies concerned with the campaign of Sennacherib. This series fittingly concludes with a triumphant hymn (xxxiii), the Prophet rejoicing in the deliverance of Jerusalem (701). Chapters xxxi-xxxv, the last division, announce the devastation of Edom, and the enjoyment of bountiful blessings by ransomed Israel. These two chapters are thought by several modern critics to have been written during the captivity in the sixth century. The foregoing analysis does not enable us to assert indubitably that this first collection as such is the work of Isaias; yet as the genuineness of almost all these prophecies cannot be seriously questioned, the collection as a whole might still possibly be attributed to the last years of the Prophet's life or shortly afterwards. If there really be passages reflecting a later epoch, they found their way into the book in the course of time on account of some analogy to the genuine writings of Isaias. Little need be said of xxxvii-xxxix. The first two chapters narrate the demand made by Sennacherib–the surrender of Jerusalem, and the fulfillment of Isaias's predictions of its deliverance; xxxviii tells of Ezechias's illness, cure, and song of thanksgiving; lastly xxxix tells of the embassy sent by Merodach Baladan and the Prophet's reproof of Ezechias.

Second Isaias

The second collection (xl-lvi) deals throughout with Israel's restoration from the Babylonian exile. The main lines of the division as proposed by the Jesuit Condamine are as follows: a first section is concerned with the mission and work of Cyrus; it is made up of five pieces: (a) xl-xli: calling of Cyrus to be Yahweh's instrument in the restoration of Israel; (b) xlii, 8-xliv, 5: Israel's deliverance from exile; (c) xliv, 6-xlvi, 12: Cyrus shall free Israel and allow Jerusalem to be built; (d) xlvii: ruin of Babylon; (e) xlviii: past dealings of God with his people are an earnest for the future. Next to be taken up is another group of utterances, styled by German scholars "Ebed­Jahweh­Lieder"; it is made up of xlix-lv (to which xlii, 1-7, should be joined) together with lx-lxii. In this section we hear of the calling of Yahweh's servant (xlix, 1-li, 16); then of Israel's glorious home­coming (li, 17-lii, 12); afterwards is described the servant of Yahweh ransoming his people by his sufferings and death (xlii, 1-7; lii, 13-15; liii, 1-12); then follows a glowing vision of the new Jerusalem (liv, 1-lv, 13, and lx, 1-lxii, 12). Ch. lvi, 1-8, develops this idea, that all the upright of heart, no matter what their former legal status, will be admitted to Yahweh's new people. In lvi, 9-lvii, the Prophet inveighs against the idolatry and immorality so rife among the Jews; the sham piety with which their fasts were observed (lvii). In lix the Prophet represents the people confessing their chief sins; this humble acknowledgment of their guilt prompts Yahweh to stoop to those who have "turned from rebellion". A dramatic description of God's vengeance (lxiii, 1-7) is followed by a prayer for mercy (lxiii, 7-lxiv, 11), and the book closes upon the picture of the punishment of the wicked and the happines of the good. Many perplexing questions are raised by the exegesis of the "Second Isaias". The "Ebed­Jahweh­Lieder", in particular, suggest many difficulties. Who is this "servant of Yahweh"? Does the title apply to the same person throughout the ten chapters? Had the writer in view some historical personage of past ages, or one belonging to his own time, or the Messias to come, or even some ideal person? Most commentators see in the "servant of Yahweh" an individual. But is that individual one of the great historical figures of Israel? No satisfactory answer has been given. The names of Moses, David, Ozias, Ezechias, Isaias, Jeremias, Josias, Zorobabel, Jechonias, and Eleazar have all been suggested as being the person. Catholic exegesis has always pointed out the fact that all the features of the "servant of Yahweh" found their complete realization in the person of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He therefore should be regarded as the one individual described by the Prophet. The "Second Isaias" gives rise to other more critical and less important problems. With the exception of one or two passages, the point of view throughout this section is that of the Babylonian Captivity; there is an unmistakable difference between the style of these twenty­seven chapters and that of the "First Isaias"; moreover, the theological ideas of xl-lxvi show a decided advance on those found in the first thirty­nine chapters. If this be true, does it not follow that xl-lxvi are not by the same author as the prophecies of the first collection, and may there not be good grounds for attributing the authorship of these chapters to a "second Isaias" living towards the close of the Babylonian Captivity? Such is the contention of most of the modern non­Catholic scholars.

This is hardly the place for a discussion of so intricate a question. We therefore limit ourselves to stating the position of Catholic scholarship on this point. This is clearly set out in the decision issued by the Pontifical Biblical Commission, 28 June, 1908. (1) Admitting the existence of true prophecy; (2) There is no reason why "Isaias and the other Prophets should utter prophecies concerning only those things which were about to take place immediately or after a short space of time" and not "things that should be fulfilled after many ages". (3) Nor does anything postulate that the Prophets should "always address as their hearers, not those who belonged to the future, but only those who were present and contemporary, so that they could be understood by them". Therefore it cannot be asserted that "the second part of the Book of Isaias (xl-lxvi), in which the Prophet addresses as one living amongst them, not the Jews who were the contemporaries of Isaias, but the Jews mourning in the Exile of Babylon, cannot have for its author Isaias himself, who was dead long before, but must be attributed to some unknown Prophet living among the exiles". In other words, although the author of Isaias xl-lxvi does speak from the point of view of the Babylonian Captivity, yet this is no proof that he must have lived and written in those times. (4) "The philological argument from language and style against the identity of the author of the Book of Isaias is not to be considered weighty enough to compel a man of judgment, familiar with Hebrew and criticism, to acknowledge in the same book a plurality of authors". Differences of language and style between the parts of the book are neither denied nor underrated; it is asserted only that such as they appear, they do not compel one to admit the plurality of authors. (5) "There are no solid arguments to the fore, even taken cumulatively, to prove that the book of Isaias is to be attributed not to Isaias himself alone, but to two or rather to many authors".

III. APPRECIATION OF THE WORK OF ISAIAS

It may not be useless shortly to set forth the prominent features of the great Prophet, doubtless one of the most striking personalities in Hebrew history. Without holding any official position, it fell to the lot of Isaias to take an active part during well nigh forty troublesome years in controlling the policy of his country. His advice and rebukes were sometimes unheeded, but experience finally taught the rulers of Juda that to part from the Prophet's views meant always a set­back for the political situation of Juda. In order to understand the trend of his policy it is necessary to remember by what principle it was animated. This principle he derived from his unshaken faith in God governing the world, and particularly His own people and the nations coming in contact with the latter. The people of Juda, forgetful of their God, given to idolatrous practices and social disorders of many kinds, had paid little heed to former warnings. One thing only alarmed them, namely that hostile nations were threatening Juda on all sides; but were they not the chosen people of God? Certainly He would not allow His own nation to be destroyed, even as others had been. In the meantime prudence dictated that the best possible means be taken to save themselves from present dangers. Syria and Israel were plotting against Juda and her king; Juda and her king would appeal to the mighty nation of the North, and later to the King of Egypt.

Isaias would not hear aught of this short­sighted policy, grounded only on human prudence, or a false religious confidence, and refusing to look beyond the moment. Juda was in terrible straits; God alone could save her; but the first condition laid down for the manifestation of His power was moral and social reformation. Syrians, Ephraimites, Assyrians, and all the rest were but the instruments of the judgment of God, the purpose of which is the overthrow of sinners. Certainly Yahweh will not allow His people to be utterly destroyed; His covenant He will keep; but it is vain to hope that well­deserved chastisement may be escaped. From this view of the designs of God never did the faith of Isaias waver. He first proclaimed this message at the beginning of the reign of Achaz. The king and his counsellors saw no salvation for Juda except in an alliance with, that is an acknowledgment of vassalage to, Assyria. This the Prophet opposed with all his might. With his keen foresight he had clearly perceived that the real danger to Juda was not from Ephraim and Syria, and that the intervention of Assyria in the affairs of Palestine involved a complete overthrow of the balance of power along the Mediterranean coast. Moreover, the Prophet entertained no doubt but that sooner or later a conflict between the rival empires of the Euphrates and the Nile must arise, and then their hosts would swarm over the land of Juda. To him it was clear that the course proposed by Juda's self­conceited politicians was like the mad flight of "silly doves", throwing themselves headlong into the net. Isaias's advice was not followed and one by one the consequences he had foretold were realized. However, he continued to proclaim his prophetical views of the current events. Every new event of importance is by him turned into a lesson not only to Juda but to all the neighbouring nations. Damascus has fallen; so will the drunkards and revellers of Samaria see the ruin of their city. Tyre boasts of her wealth and impregnable position; her doom is no less decreed, and her fall will all the more astound the world. Assyria herself, fattened with the spoils of all nations, Assyria "the rod of God's vengeance", when she will have accomplished her providential destiny, shall meet with her fate. God has thus decreed the doom of all nations for the accomplishment of His purposes and the establishment of a new Israel cleansed from all past defilements.

Judean politicians towards the end of the reign of Ezechias had planned an alliance with the King of Egypt against Assyria and carefully concealed their purpose from the Prophet. When the latter came to know the preparations for rebellion, it was already too late to undo what had been done. But he could at least give vent to his anger (see Is., xxx), and we know both from the Bible and Sennacherib's own account of the campaign of 701 how the Assyrian army routed the Egyptians at Altaku (Elteqeh of Jos., xix, 44), captured Accaron, and sent a detachment to ravage Juda; Jerusalem, closely invested, was saved only by the payment of an enormous ransom. The vindication of Isaias's policy, however, was not yet complete. The Assyrian army withdrew; but Sennacherib, apparently thinking it unsafe to leave in his wake a fortified city like Jerusalem, demanded the immediate surrender of Ezechias's capital. At the command of Ezechias, no answer was given to the message; but the king humbly bade Isaias to intercede for the city. The Prophet had for the king a reassuring message. But the respite in the Judean capital was short. Soon a new Assyrian embassy arrived with a letter from the king containing an ultimatum. In the panic-stricken city there was a man of whom Sennacherib had taken no account; it was by him that the answer was to be given to the ultimatum of the proud Assyrians: "The virgin, the daughter of Sion hath despised thee and laughed thee to scorn; . . . He shall not come into this city, nor shoot an arrow into it. . . . By the way that he came, he shall return, and into this city he shall not come, saith the Lord" (xxxvii, 22, 33). We know in reality how a sudden catastrophe overtook the Assyrian army and God's promise was fulfilled. This crowning vindication of the Divinely inspired policy of Isaias prepared the hearts of the Jews for the religious reformation brought about by Ezechias, no doubt along lines laid down by the Prophet.

In reviewing the political side of Isaias's public life, we have already seen something of his religious and social ideas; all these view-points were indeed most intimately connected in his teaching. It may be well now to dwell a little more fully on this part of the Prophet's message. Isaias's description of the religious condition of Juda in the latter part of the eighth century is anything but flattering. Jerusalem is compared to Sodom and Gomorrah; apparently the bulk of the people were superstitious rather than religious. Sacrifices were offered out of routine; withcraft and divination were in honour; nay more, foreign deities were openly invoked side by side with the true God, and in secret the immoral worship of some of these idols was widely indulged in, the higher-class and the Court itself giving in this regard an abominable example. Throughout the kingdom there was corruption of higher officials, ever-increasing luxury among the wealthy, wanton haughtiness of women, ostentation among the middle-class people, shameful partiality of the judges, unscrupulous greed of the owners of large estates, and oppression of the poor and lowly. The Assyrian suzerainty did not change anything in this woeful state of affairs. In the eyes of Isaias this order of things was intolerable; and he never tired repeating it could not last. The first condition of social reformation was the downfall of the unjust and corrupt rulers; the Assyrians were the means appointed by God to level their pride and tyranny with the dust. With their mistaken ideas about God, the nation imagined He did not concern Himself about the dispositions of His worshippers. But God loathes sacrifices offered by ". . . hands full of blood. Wash yourselves, be clean, . . . relieve the oppressed, judge for the fatherless, defend the widow. . . . But if you will not, . . . the sword shall devour you" (i, 15-20). God here appears as the avenger of disregarded human justice as much as of His Divine rights. He cannot and will not let injustice, crime, and idolatry go unpunished. The destruction of sinners will inaugurate an era of regeneration, and a little circle of men faithful to God will be the first-fruits of a new Israel free from past defilements and ruled by a scion of David's House. With the reign of Ezechias began a period of religious revival. Just how far the reform extended we are not able to state; local sanctuaries around which heathenish abuses had gathered were suppressed, and many `asherîm and masseboth were destroyed. It is true the times were not ripe for a radical change, and there was little response to the appeal of the Prophet for moral amendment and redress of social abuses.

The Fathers of the Church, echoing the eulogy of Jesus, son of Sirach (Ecclus., xlviii, 25-28), agree that Isaias was the greatest of the literary Prophets (Euseb., "Præp. Evang.", v, 4, P.G., XXII, 370; "Synops. Script. S.", among the works of St. Athan., P.G., XXXVIII, 363; St. Cyril of Jerusalem, "In Is., Prooem.", P.G., LXX, 14; St. Isidore of Pelus., "Epist.", i, 42, P.G., LXXVIII, 208; Theodoret., "In Is. Argum.", P.G., LXXXI, 216; St. Jerome, "Prol. in Is.", P.L., XXIV, 18; "Præf. ad Paul. et Eustoch.", P.L., XXXII, 769; "De civ. Dei", XVIII, xxix, 1, P. L., XLI, 585, etc.). Isaias's poetical genius was in every respect worthy of his lofty position as a Prophet. He is unsurpassed in poetry, descriptive, lyric, or elegiac. There is in his compositions an uncommon elevation and majesty of conception, and an unparalleled wealth of imagery, never departing, however, from the utmost propriety, elegance, and dignity. He possessed an extraordinary power of adapting his language both to occasions and audiences; sometimes he displays most exquisite tenderness, and at other times austere severity; he successively assumes a mother's pleading and irresistible tone, and the stern manner of an implacable judge, now making use of delicate irony to bring home to his hearers what he would have them understand, and then pitilessly shattering their fondest illusions or wielding threats which strike like mighty thunderbolts. His rebukes are neither impetuous like those of Osee nor blustering like those of Amos; he never allows the conviction of his mind or the warmth of his heart to overdraw any feature or to overstep the limits assigned by the most exquisite taste. Exquisite taste indeed is one of the leading features of the Prophet's style. This style is rapid, energetic, full of life and colour, and withal always chaste and dignified. It moreover manifests a wonderful command of language. It has been justly said that no Prophet ever had the same command of noble throughts; it may be as justly added that never perhaps did any man utter lofty thoughts in more beautiful language. St. Jerome rejected the idea that Isaias's prophecies were true poetry in the full sense of the word (Præf. in Is., P.L., XXVIII, 772). Nevertheless the authority of the illustrious Robert Lowth, in his "Lectures on the Sacred Poetry of the Hebrews" (1753), esteemed "the whole book of Isaiah to be poetical, a few passages excepted, which if brought together, would not at most exceed the bulk of five or six chapters". This opinion of Lowth, at first scarcely noticed, became more and more general in the latter part of the nineteenth century, and is now common among Biblical scholars.

In addition to general and special commentaries consult: Cheyne, Book of Isaiah chronologically arranged (London, 1870); Idem, Prophecies of Isaiah (London, 1880); Idem, Introd. to the Book of Isaiah (London, 1895); Driver, Isaiah: his life and times and the writings which bear his name (London, 1888); Lowth, Isaiah, translation, dissert. and notes (London, 1778); Skinner, Isaiah (Cambridge, 1896); G. A. Smith, Book of Isaiah (Expositor's Bible, 1888-1890); W. R. Smith, The Prophets of Israel and their place in history (London, 1882); Knabenbauer, Comment. in Isaiam prophetam (Paris, 1887); Condamine, Livre d'Isaie, trad. critique avec notes et comment. (Paris, 1905; a volume of introduction to the same is forthcoming); Le Hir, Les trois grandes prophètes, Isaïe, Jérémie, Ezéchiel (Paris, 1877); Idem, Etudes Bibliques (Paris, 1878); Delitzsch, Commentar über das Buch Jesaja; tr. (Edinburgh, 1890); Duhm, Das Buch Jesaia (Gottingen, 1892); Gesenius, Der Prophet Jesaja (Leipzig, 1820-1821); Ewald, Die Propheten des Alten Bundes (Tübingen, 1840-1841); tr. by F. Smith, (London, 1876–); Hitzig, Der Prophet Jesaja übers. und ausgelegt (Heidelberg, 1833); Kittel, Der Prophet Jesaia, 6th ed. of Dillmann's work of the same title (Leipzig, 1898); Knabenbauer, Erklärung des Proph. Isaias (Freiburg, 1881); Marti, Das Buch Jesaja (Tübingen, 1900).

CHARLES L. SOUVAY

Isaura

Titular see in the Province of Lycaonia, suffragan of Iconium. Isaura, the capital of the Isaurian tribes, an energetic and pillaging people, existed even before the expedition of Alexander. In order not to fall into the power of the Greek generals, Perdiccas and Philip, its inhabitants after a desperate resistance, buried themselves beneath the ruins of their city (Diodorus Siculus, XVIII, 22). Afterwards rebuilt, Isaura was a second time destroyed by P. Servilius, and then ceded to Amyntas, the last King of Galatia, who attempted to rebuild it and make it his capital (25 B.C.). Strabo, who gives these particulars, speaks of two cities, Isaura Palæa, and Isaura Nova, which existed in his time, and the information is correct. In the year 266 of our era Trebullian, one of the thirty tyrants, made Isaura his capital, but he was slain the next year. Ammianus Marcellinus (XIV, 7) in the fourth century speaks of the city as ruined. Isaura Nova is now Dorla in the sanjak and vilayet of Koniah. Ramsay discovered there recently more than fifty Greek inscriptions, the greater number Christian, as well as magnificent tombs. These monuments date from the third, fourth, and fifth centuries of our era. Epitaphs have been found of three bishops, Theophilus, Sisamoas, and Mamas, who lived between the years 250 and 400. Three other bishops are also known, Hilary, 381; Callistratus, somewhat later; Aetius, 451 Lequien, "Oriens christ.", I, 1085). The last named bishop bears the title of Isauropolis, the name of a city which also figures in the "Hieroclis Synecdemus" (ed. Parthey, 675, 12). As no "Notitiæ episcopatuum" makes mention of Isaura, or Isauropolis, Ramsay supposes that the Diocese of Isaura Nova was early joined with that of Leontopolis, the more recent name of Isaura Palæa which is mentioned in all the "Notitiæ". The site of Isaura Palæa has been discovered at Oloubounar in the vilayet of Koniah, where splendid ruins are still to be seen.

Ramsay, Studies in the History and Art of the Eastern Provinces of the Roman Empire (Aberdeen, 1906), 25–58; Smith, Dict. Greek and Roman Geog., II, 65; Texier, Asie Mineure (Paris, 1862), 654–60; Bulletin de correspondance hellénique (1883), 315; (1887), 767–70.

S. VAILHÉ

Ischia

Diocese of Ischia (Isclana).

Ischia, suffragan to Naples, has for its territory the island of Ischia, in the Mediterranean Sea, which, geologically, forms a continuation of the volcanic district of Naples. Monte Epomeo, the highest point of the island (about 2570 feet), has been an extinct crater since 1302. The island has frequently been visited by earthquakes; one of the most disastrous was that of Casamicciola, a small village, in 1883. The island is very fertile and rich in mineral springs, which, owing to the pleasant situation and mild climate, attract many visitors. The two most important hot springs are Fontana d'Ischia and Formello. The capital of the island is Ischia, situated on a rock of basalt, crowned by a castle, which to-day serves as a prison. It was called Pithecusæ by the Greeks and Ænaria by the Romans. It was colonized by the Eubœans. In 474 B.C. it was taken by Hiero I, King of Syracuse, and in 326 by the Romans. The Emperor Augustus gave it to Naples, in exchange for Capri. In the Middle Ages it was often devastated (in 813 by the Saracens; in 1135 by the Pisans). In 1496 it was a refuge for Ferdinand II of Naples, fleeing before Charles VIII of France. In 1807 it was occupied by the British and Sicilians, and was used as a point of defence against the French. In 1179 the first Bishop of Ischia was appointed, Pietro, present at the Third Lateran Council. Other bishops were Fra Bartolomeo Borsolari (1359), an Augustinian, brother of Blessed Giacomo Borsolari, the Dominican, who is buried in the church of S. Domenico; the learned Spanish Cistercian, Michele Cosal (1453); Girolamo Rocca (1672), who restored the cathedral and bishop's residence; Michele Cotignola (1692), who also embellished the cathedral. Ischia has 14 parishes with 32,000 souls.

Cappelletti, Le Chiese d'Italia, XIX (Venice, 1857); Ginocchi, Ischia (Rome, 1884).

U. BENIGNI

Isernia and Venafro

(Diocese of Isernia and Venafro).

Isernia is a city in the province of Campobasso in Molise (Southern Italy), situated on an eminence between Monte Matese and Monte Azzo, in a fertile region not far from Volturno. In the Middle Ages it was noted for the manufacture of parchment, which is carried on there even to-day. It was anciently called Æsernia, and was one of the principal cities of the Samnites. In 295 B.C. it was conquered by the Romans. In the Punic Wars, and, later, in the Social War, it was faithful to the Romans, though in 90 B.C. it was compelled to surrender, after a long resistance, to Vettius Cato, the general of the Samnites. As it was falling into decay, Cæsar Augustus and Nero sent colonies there. Of ancient monuments there are a Roman bridge, the remains of an aqueduct, and especially the lower part of the high walls, formed of massive polygonal blocks, a pre-Roman work. After the Lombardic invasion it was the seat of a countship, founded by the Duke of Benevento. It was destroyed by the Saracens in the ninth century, and in 1199 was sacked by Marcolvaldo, the vicar of the deceased Henry VI. In 1805 it was visited by a severe earthquake, which ruined the ancient cathedral. A very distinguished native of Isernia was the jurisconsult, Andrea d'Isernia (Rampini), professor at the University of Naples (1230–1316); St. Peter Celestine also was of Isernia. According to tradition the Faith was preached at Isernia by St. Photinus, a disciple of St. Peter. More trustworthy is the account of the martyrdom of Sts. Nicandrus and Marcianus under Diocletian. The epoch of the saintly Bishop Benedict is doubtful, though the existence of the episcopal see in the fifth century is certain.

In 1032 the Diocese of Venafro (formerly the seat of Roman country residences), which had its own bishops from the fifth century, was united to Isernia, and in 1230 it was again separated. Pius VII united the Churches in 1818. The united dioceses are suffragans of Capua, have 39 parishes, with 58,000 souls, 1 Capuchin convent, 2 religious houses of women, and 1 educational institution for boys.

Cappelletti, Le Chiese d'Italia, XX (Venice, 1857).

U. BENIGNI

St. Isidore of Pelusium

Born at Alexandria in the latter half of the fourth century; d. not later than 449-50. He is occasionally designated through mistake as Isidore of Damietta. Leaving his family and possessions, Isidore retired to a mountain near the city of Pelusium, the name of which was henceforth connected with his own, and embraced the religious life in the monastery of Lychnos, where he soon became remarkable for his exactitude in the observance of the rule and for his austerities. A passage in his voluminous correspondence affords reason to believe that he held the office of abbot. He is spoken of as a priest by Facundus and Suidas, although neither of these writers informs us concerning the church to which he belonged; it may be that he had no clerical charge, but was only a priest of the monastery. His correspondence gives us an idea of his activity. It shows him fighting against unworthy clerics whose elevation to the priesthood and diaconate was a serious peril and scandal to the faithful. He complains that many laymen were ceasing to approach the sacraments so as to avoid contact with these discreditable men. His veneration for St. John Chrysostom led him to introduce St. Cyril of Alexandria to render full justice to the memory of the great doctor. He opposed the Nestorians, and during the conflict which arose at the end of the Council of Ephesus between St. Cyril and John of Antioch, he believed there was too much obstinacy on St. Cyril's side. He therefore wrote to the latter in urgent terms imploring him, as his father arid as his son, to put an end to this division and not to make a private grievance the pretext for an eternal rupture. St. Isidore was still alive when the heresy of Eutyches began to spread in Egypt; many of his letters depict him as opposing the assertion of only one nature in Jesus Christ. It seems as though his life was scarcely prolonged beyond the year 449, because there is no mention in letters of the Robber Council of Ephesus (August, 449) nor of the Council of Chalcedon (451).

According to Evagrius, St. Isidore was the author of a great number of writings, but this historian tells us nothing further, save that one of these was addressed to Cyril, even leaving us ignorant whether this person was the celebrated Bishop of Alexandria or a namesake. Isidore himself tells incidentally that he composed a treatise "Adversus Gentiles" but it has been lost. Another work "De Fato", which, the author tells us, met with a certain degree of success, has also been lost. The only extant works of St. Isidore are a considerable correspondence, comprising more than 2000 letters. Even this number appears to fall far short of the amount actually written, since Nicephorus speaks of 10,000. Of these we possess 2182, divided into five books which contain respectively 590, 380, 413, 230, and 569 letters. These letters of St. Isidore may be divided into three classes according to the subjects treated: those dealing with dogma and Scripture, with ecclesiastical and monastic discipline, and with practical morality for the guidance of laymen of all classes and conditions. Many of these letters, as is natural, have but a secondary importance, many are mere notes. In this article attention can be drawn only to the principal ones. Among these is the letter to Theologius against the Nestorians, in which Isidore points out that there is this difference between the mother of the gods in fable and the Mother of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, of that the former, as acknowledged by the pagans themselves, conceived and brought forth the fruits of debauchery, whereas the latter conceived without having had intercourse with any man, as is acknowledged says he, by all the nations of the world. His letter to Hierax defends the legitimacy of the veneration of relics; that to Tuba shows that it was considered unbecoming for a soldier to carry a sword in the city in time of peace and to appear in public with arms and military uniform.

His letters addressed to persons following the religious life afford many important clues which enable us to form a fairly exact idea of the intellectual standard then existing in Egyptian monastic centres. Isidore reproaches the monk Thalelæeus with being interested in reading pagan historians and pagan poets which were full of fables, lies, and obscenities capable of opening wounds that had healed and of recalling the spirit of uncleanness to the house from which it had been ejected. His advice with regard to those who were embracing the monastic state was that they should not at first be made to feel all the austerities of the rule lest they should be repelled, nor should they be left idle and exempt from ordinary tasks lest they should acquire habits of laziness, but they should led step by step to what is most perfect. Great abstinences serve no purpose unless they are accompanied by the mortification of the senses. In a great number of St. Isidore's letters concerning the monastic state it may be remarked that he holds it to consist mainly in retirement and obedience; that retirement includes forgetfulness of the things one has abandoned and the renunciation of old habits, while obedience is attended with mortification of the flesh. A monk's habit should if possible be of skins, and his food consist of herbs, unless bodily weakness require something more, in which case he should be guided by the judgment of his superior, for he must not be governed by his own will, but according to the will of those who have grown old in the practice of the religious life.

Although for the most part very brief, the majority of St. Isidore's letters contain much instruction, which is often set forth with elegance, occasionally with a certain literary art. The style is natural, unaffected, and yet not without refinement. The correspondence is characterized by an imperturbable equability of temperament; whether he is engaged at explaining or reprimanding, at disputing or praising, there is always the same moderation, the same sentiments of sincerity, the same sober taste. In the explanation of the Scripture the saint does not conceal his preference for the moral and spiritual sense which he judges most useful for those who consult him. Everywhere he is seen to put in practice the maxims he teaches to others, namely that the life should correspond with the words, that one should practice what one teaches, and that it is not sufficient to indicate what should be done, if one does not translate one's maxims into action.

BOBER, De rate hermeneuticá s, Isidori Pelusiotæ (Cracow, 1878); Bouvy De s. Isidoro pelusiot libri tres (Nîmes, 1885); HEUMANN, Disserlatio de Isidoro Pelusiotâ ejusque epistolis quas maximam partem fictitias esse demonstrator (Göttingen, 1737); LUNDSTRÖM, De Isidori Pelustæ epistolis recensendis prælusiones in Eranos, II (1897), 68-80; NIEMEYFR, De Isidori Pelusiotæ vitâ, scriptis et doctrinâ, commentatio historico-theologica (Halle, 1825); GLÜCK, Isidori Pelusiotæ Summa doctrinæ moralis (Würzburg, I848). His Letters have been edited by DE BILLY in 3 vols. (Paris, 1585), by RITTERSHAUSEN(Heidelberg, 1609), by SCHOTT(Antwerp, 1623), and in P.G., LXXVIII.

H. LECLERCQ

St. Isidore of Seville

Born at Cartagena, Spain, about 560; died 4 April, 636.

Isidore was the son of Severianus and Theodora. His elder brother Leander was his immediate predecessor in the Metropolitan See of Seville; whilst a younger brother St. Fulgentius presided over the Bishopric of Astigi. His sister Florentina was a nun, and is said to have ruled over forty convents and one thousand religious.

Isidore received his elementary education in the Cathedral school of Seville. In this institution, which was the first of its kind in Spain, the trivium and quadrivium were taught by a body of learned men, among whom was the archbishop, Leander. With such diligence did he apply himself to study that in a remarkably short time mastered Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. Whether Isidore ever embraced monastic life or not is still an open question, but though he himself may never have been affiliated with any of the religious orders, he esteemed them highly. On his elevation to the episcopate he immediately constituted himself protector of the monks. In 619 he pronounced anathema against any ecclesiastic who should in any way molest the monasteries.

On the death of Leander, Isidore succeeded to the See of Seville. His long incumbency to this office was spent in a period of disintegration and transition. The ancient institutions and classic learning of the Roman Empire were fast disappearing. In Spain a new civilization was beginning to evolve itself from the blending racial elements that made up its population. For almost two centuries the Goths had been in full control of Spain, and their barbarous manners and contempt of learning threatened greatly to put back her progress in civilization. Realizing that the spiritual as well as the material well-being of the nation depended on the full assimilation of the foreign elements, St. Isidore set himself to the task of welding into a homogeneous nation the various peoples who made up the Hispano-Gothic kingdom. To this end he availed himself of all the resources of religion and education. His efforts were attended with complete success. Arianism, which had taken deep root among the Visigoths, was eradicated, and the new heresy of Acephales was completely stifled at the very outset; religious discipline was everywhere strengthened. Like Leander, he took a most prominent part in the Councils of Toledo and Seville. In all justice it may be said that it was in a great measure due to the enlightened statecraft of these two illustrious brothers the Visigothic legislation, which emanated from these councils, is regarded by modern historians as exercising a most important influence on the beginnings of representative government. Isidore presided over the Second Council of Seville, begun 13 November, 619, in the reign of Sisebut. But it was the Fourth National Council of Toledo that afforded him the opportunity of being of the greatest service to his county. At this council, begun 5 December, 633, all the bishops of Spain were in attendance. St. Isidore, though far advanced in years, presided over its deliberations, and was the originator of most of its enactments. It was at this council and through his influence that a decree was promulgated commanding all bishops to establish seminaries in their Cathedral Cities, along the lines of the school already existing at Seville. Within his own jurisdiction he had availed himself of the resources of education to counteract the growing influence of Gothic barbarism. His was the quickening spirit that animated the educational movement of which Seville was the centre. The study of Greek and Hebrew as well as the liberal arts, was prescribed. Interest in law and medicine was also encouraged. Through the authority of the fourth council this policy of education was made obligatory upon all the bishops of the kingdom. Long before the Arabs had awakened to an appreciation of Greek Philosophy, he had introduced Aristotle to his countrymen. He was the first Christian writer to essay the task of compiling for his co-religionists a summa of universal knowledge. This encyclopedia epitomized all learning, ancient as well as modern. In it many fragments of classical learning are preserved which otherwise had been hopelessly lost. The fame of this work imparted a new impetus to encyclopedic writing, which bore abundant fruit in the subsequent centuries of the Middle Ages. His style, though simple and lucid, cannot be said to be classical. It discloses most of the imperfections peculiar to all ages of transition. It particularly reveals a growing Visigothic influence. Arevalo counts in all Isidore's writing 1640 Spanish words.

Isidore was the last of the ancient Christian Philosophers, as he was the last of the great Latin Fathers. He was undoubtedly the most learned man of his age and exercised a far-reaching and immeasurable influence on the educational life of the Middle Ages. His contemporary and friend, Braulio, Bishop of Saragossa, regarded him as a man raised up by God to save the Spanish people from the tidal wave of barbarism that threatened to inundate the ancient civilization of Spain, The Eighth Council of Toledo (653) recorded its admiration of his character in these glowing terms: "The extraordinary doctor, the latest ornament of the Catholic Church, the most learned man of the latter ages, always to be named with reverence, Isidore". This tribute was endorsed by the Fifteenth Council of Toledo, held in 688.

WORKS

As a writer, Isidore was prolific and versatile to an extraordinary degree. His voluminous writings may be truly said to constitute the first chapter of Spanish literature. It is not, however, in the capacity of an original and independent writer, but as an indefatigable compiler of all existing knowledge, that literature is most deeply indebted to him. The most important and by far the best-known of all his writings is the "Etymologiae", or "Origines", as it is sometimes called. This work takes its name from the subject-matter of one of its constituent books. It was written shortly before his death, in the full maturity of his wonderful scholarship, at the request. of his friend Braulio, Bishop of Saragossa. It is a vast storehouse in which is gathered, systematized, and condensed, all the learning possessed by his time. Throughout the greater part of the Middle Ages it was the textbook most in use in educational institutions. So highly was it regarded as a depository of classical learning that in a great measure, it superseded the use of the individual works of the classics themselves. Not even the Renaissance seemed to diminish the high esteem in which it was held, and according to Arevalo, it was printed ten times between 1470 and 1529. Besides these numerous reprints, the popularity of the "Etymologiae" gave rise to many inferior imitations. It furnishes, abundant evidence that the writer possessed a most intimate knowledge of the Greek and Latin poets. In all, he quotes from one hundred and fifty-four authors, Christian and pagan. Many of these he had read in the originals and the others he consulted in current compilations. In style this encyclopedic work is concise and clear and in order, admirable. Braulio, to whom Isidore sent it for correction, and to whom he dedicated it, divided it into twenty books.

• The first three of these books are taken up with the trivium and quadrivium. The entire first book is devoted to grammar, including metre. Imitating the example of Cassiodorus and Boethius he preserves the logical tradition of the schools by reserving the second book for rhetoric and dialectic.
• Book four, treats of medicine and libraries;
• book five, of law and chronology;
• book six, of ecclesiastical books and offices;
• book seven, of God and of the heavenly and earthly hierarchies;
• book eight, of the Church and of the sects, of which latter he numbers no less than sixty-eight;
• book nine, of languages, peoples, kingdoms, and official titles;
• book ten, of etymology:
• book eleven, of man;
• book twelve, of beasts and birds;
• book thirteen, of the world and its parts;
• book fourteen, of physical geography;
• book fifteen, of public buildings and roadmaking;
• book sixteen, of stones and metals;
• book seventeen, of agriculture;
• book eighteen, of the terminology of war, of jurisprudence, and public games;
• book nineteen, of ships, houses, and clothes;
• book twenty, of victuals, domestic and agricultural tools, and furniture.

In the second book, dealing with dialectic and rhetoric, Isidore is heavily indebted to translations from the Greek by Boethius. Caelius Aurelianus contributes generously to that part of the fourth book which deals with medicine. Lactantius is the author most extensively quoted in the eleventh book, concerning man. The twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth books are largely based on the writings of Pliny and Solinus; whilst the lost "Prata" of Suetonius seems to have inspired the general plan of the "Etymologiae", as well as many of its details.

Similar in its general character to the "Etymologiae" is a work entitled "Libri duo differentiarum". The two books of which it is composed are entitled respectively, "De differentiis verborum" and "De differentiis rerum". The former is a dictionary of synonyms, treating of the differences of words with considerable erudition, and not a little ingenuity; the latter an exposition of theological and ascetical ideas, dealing in particular with the, Trinity and with the Divine and human nature of Christ. It suggests, and probably was inspired by, a similar work of Cato's, It is supplementary to the first two books of the "Etymologiae". The "Synonyma", or, as it is sometimes called on account of its peculiar treatment, "Liber lamentationum", is in a manner illustrative of the first book of the "Differentiae". It is cast in the form of a dialogue between Man and Reason. The general burden of the dialogue is that Man mourns the condition to which he has been reduced through sin, and Reason comforts him with the knowledge of how he may still realize eternal happiness. The second part of this work consists of a dissertation on vice and virtue. The "De natura rerum" a manual of elementary physics, was composed at the request of King Sisebut, to whom it is dedicated. It treats of astronomy, geography, and miscellanea. It is one of Isidore's best known books and enjoyed a wide popularity during the Middle Ages. The authenticity of "De ordine creaturarum" has been questioned by some critics, though apparently without good reason. Arevalo unhesitatingly attributes it to Isidore. It deals with various spiritual and physical questions, such as the Trinity, the consequences of sin, eternity, the ocean, the heavens, and the celestial bodies.

The subjects of history and biography are represented by three important works. Of these the first, "Chronicon", is a universal chronicle. In its preface Isidore acknowledges, his indebtedness to Julius Africanus; to St. Jerome's rendering of Eusebius; and to Victor of Tunnuna. The "Historia de regibus Gothorum, Wandalorum, et Suevorum" concerns itself chiefly with the Gothic kings whose conquests and government deeply influenced the civilization of Spain. The history of the Vandals and the Suevi is treated in two short appendixes. This work is regarded as the chief authority on Gothic history in the West. It contains the interesting statement that the Goths descended from Gog and Magog. Like the other Historical writings of Isidore, it is largely based on earlier works of history, of which it is a compendium- It has come down to us in two recensions, one of which ends at the death of Sisebut (621), and the other continues to the fifth year of the reign of Swintila, his successor. "De viris illustribus" is a work of Christian biography and constitutes a most interesting chapter in the literature of patrology. To the number of illustrious writers mentioned therein Braulio added the name of Isidore himself. A short appendix containing a list of Spanish theologians was added by Braulio's disciple, Ildephonsus of Toledo. It is the continuation of the work of Gennadius, a Semipelagian priest of Marseilles, who wrote between 467 and 480. This work of Gennadius was in turn, but the continuation of the work of St. Jerome.

Among the scriptural and theological works of St. Isidore the following are especially worthy of note:

• "De ortu et obitu patrum qui in Scriptura laudibus efferuntur" is a work that treats of the more notable Scriptural characters. It contains more than one passage that, in the light of modern scholarship, is naive or fantastic. The question of authenticity has been raised, though quite unreasonably, concerning it.
• "Allegoriae quaedam Sacrae Scripturae" treats of the allegorical significance that attaches to the more conspicuous characters of Scripture. In all some two hundred and fifty personalities of the Old and New Testament are thus treated.
• "Liber numerorum qui in Sanctis Scripturis occurrunt" is a curious dissertation on the mystical significance of Scriptural numbers.
• "In libros Veteris et Novi Testamenti prooemia", as its name implies, is a general introduction to the Scriptures, with special introductions for particular books in the Old and New Testament.
• "De Veteri et Novo Testamento quastiones" consists of a series of questions concerning the Scriptures.
• "Secretorum expositiones sacramentorum, seu quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum" is a mystical rendering of the Old Testament books, of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue, Judges, Kings, Esdras, and Machabees. It is based on the writings of the early Fathers of the Church.
• "De fide catholica ex Veteri et Novo Testamento, contra Judaeos" is one of the best known and most meritorious of Isidore's works. It is of an apologetico-polemical character and is dedicated to Florentina, his sister, at whose request it is said to have been written. Its popularity was unbounded in the Middle Ages, and it was translated into many of the vernaculars of the period. It treats of the Messianic prophecies, the passing of the Old Law, and of the Christian Dispensation. The first part deals with the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, and His return for the final judgment. The second part is taken up with the unbelief of the Jews, the calling of the Gentiles, and the passing of the Sabbath. In all, it is an appeal to the Jews to accept Christianity.
• "Sententiarum libri tres" is a compendium of moral and dogmatic theology. Gregory the Great and St. Augustine are the most generous contributors to its contents. The Divine attributes, creation, evil, and miscellanea are the subjects treated in the first book. The second is of a miscellaneous character; whilst the third deals with ecclesiastical orders, the judgment and the chastisement of God. It is believed that this work greatly influenced Peter Lombard in his famous "Book of Sentences",
• "De ecclesiasticis officiis" is divided into two books, "De origine officiorum" and "De origine ministrorum". In the first Isidore treats of Divine worship and particularly the old Spanish Liturgy. It also Contains a lucid explanation of the Holy, Eucharist. The second treats of the hierarchy of the Church and the various states of life. In it much interesting information is to be found concerning the development of music in general and its adaptation to the needs of the Ritual.
• "Regula monachorum" is a manner of life prescribed for monks, and also deals in a general way with the monastic state. The writer furnishes abundant proof of the true Christian democracy of the religious life by providing for the admission of men of every rank and station of life. Not even slaves were debarred. "God", he said, "has made no difference between the soul of the slave and that of the freedman." He insists that in the monastery all are equal in the sight of God and of the Church.

The first edition of the works of Isidore was published in folio by Michael Somnius (Paris, 1580). Another edition that is quite complete is based upon the manuscripts of Gomez, with notes by Perez and Grial (Madrid, 1599). Based largely upon the Madrid edition is that published by Du Breul (Paris, 1601; Cologne, 1617). The last edition of all the works of Isidore, which is also regarded as the best, is that of Arevalo (7 vols., Rome, 1797-1803). It is found in P. L., LXXXI-LXXXIV. The "De natura rerum was edited by G. Becker (Berlin, 1857). Th. Mommsen edited the historical writings of St. Isidore ("Mon. Germ. Hist.: Auct. antiquiss.", Berlin, 1894). Coste produced a German translation of the "Historia de regibus Gothorum, Wandalorum et Suevorum" (Leipzig, 1887).

JOHN B. O'CONNOR

Isidore of Thessalonica

Cardinal and sometime Metropolitan of Kiev or Moscow, b. at Thessalonica (Saloniki) towards the end of the fourteenth century; d. at Rome, 27 April, 1463. He was one of the chief Eastern defenders of reunion at the time of the Council of Florence. The date of his birth is unknown, nor is his nationality certain. He has been variously described as a Bulgar and a Greek. In any case all his education was Greek. He arrived at Constantinople, became a monk, and was there made hegumenos of the monastery of St. Demetrius. He had evidently received an unusually complete education: he knew Latin well, and had considerable fame as a theologian. He was also an accomplished orator; he seems from the beginning to have been eager for reunion with the West. It was the time when the Court of Constantinople, on the eve of its final destruction by the Turks, was considering the chance of rescue from the Western princes as a result of reuniting with Rome. In 1434 Isidore was sent to Basle by Emperor John VIII (1425-48) as part of an embassy to open negotiations with the Council of Basle. Here he made a mellifluous speech about the splendour of the Roman Empire at Constantinople. On his return he continued to take part in all the preparations for reunion among his own people. In 1437 he was sent by the Byzantine patriarch (Joseph II, 1416-39, a conspicuous friend of reunion, who died a Catholic at Florence) to be Metropolitan of Moscow (or was his title Kiev? He is constantly called Bishop of Kiev, though he certainly went to Moscow and stayed there. They were two separate sees. Kiev was the old metropolis of Russia. Moscow was made so about this time). As soon as he arrived he began to arrange a Russian legation for the council about to be held at Ferrara. The Russian tsar, Vasili II (1425-62), made difficulties about this, and let him go eventually only after he had promised to come back with "the rights of Divine law and the constitution of the holy Church" uninjured. Syropulus and other Greek writers charge Isidore with perjury because in spite of this he accepted the union. Isidore set out with a great following on 8 Sept., 1437, travelled by Riga and Luebeck, and arrived at Ferrara on 15, August, 1438. On the way he offended his suite by his friendly conduct towards the Latins. At Ferrara and at Florence, whither the council moved in January, 1439, Isidore was one of the six chief speakers on the Byzantine side. Together with Bessarion he steadfastly worked for the union, and never swerved afterwards in his acceptance of it.

After the council, the pope (Eugene IV, 1431-47) made him his legate for all Russia and Lithuania. On his way back news reached Isidore, at Benevento, that he had been made Cardinal-Priest of the Title of St. Peter and St. Marcellinus. This is one of the few cases in which a person not of the Latin Rite has been made a cardinal. From Budapest in March, 1440, he published an encyclical calling on all Russian bishops to accept the union. But when he at last arrived in Moscow (Easter, 1441), and proclaimed the union in the Kremlin church, he found that the tsar and most of the bishops and people would have none of it. Then, at the tsar's command, six Russian bishops met in a synod, deposed Isidore, and shut him up in prison. He escaped, fled to Rome, and was graciously received by the pope in 1443. Nicholas V (1447-55) sent him as legate to Constantinople to arrange the reunion there in 1452, and gave him two hundred soldiers to help the defence of the city. On 12 December of that year he was able to unite three hundred of the Byzantine clergy in a celebration of the short-lived reunion. He saw the taking of the city by the Turks on 29 May, 1453, and only escaped the massacre by dressing up a dead body in his cardinal's robes. While the Turks were cutting off its head and parading it through the streets, the real cardinal was shipped off to Asia Minor with a number of insignificant prisoners, as a slave. Afterwards he wrote an account of the horrors of the siege in a letter to Nicholas V (P.G., CLIX, 953). He escaped from captivity, or bought himself free, and came back to Rome. Here he was made Bishop of Sabina, presumably adopting the Latin Rite. Pius II (1458-64) later gave him two titles successively, those of Patriarch of Constantinople and Archbishop of Cyprus, neither of which he could convert into real jurisdiction. He died at Rome on 27 April, 1463.

All histories of the Council of Florence describe the adventures of Cardinal Isidore. See especially PASTOR, Geshichte der Paepste, I (3rd and 4th ed., Freiburg im Br., 1901), 585, etc., and his references. The Monumenta Hungariae historica, XXI, 1, contain two versions of the letter to Nicholas V (pp. 665-95, 696-702); see KRUMBACHER, Byzantinische Litteraturgeschichte (Munich, 1897), 311. Consult also STRAHL, Geschichte der russischen Kirche, I (Halle, 1830), 444; FROMMANN, Kritische Beitraege zur Geschichte der Florentiner Kircheneinigung (Halle, 1872), 138 seq.; HEFELE, Conciliengeschichte, VII (Freiburg im Br., 1886), passim.

ADRIAN FORTESCUE

St. Isidore the Labourer

A Spanish daylabourer; b. near Madrid, about the year 1070; d. 15 May, 1130, at the same place. He was in the service of a certain Juan de Vargas on a farm in the vicinity of Madrid. Every morning before going to work he was accustomed to hear a Mass at one of the churches in Madrid. One day his fellow-labourers complained to their master that Isidore was always late for work in the morning. Upon investigation, so runs the legend, the master found Isidore at prayer, while an angel was doing the ploughing for him. On another occasion his master saw an angel ploughing on either side of him, so that Isidore's work was equal to that of three of his fellow-labourers. Isidore is also said to have brought back to life the deceased daughter of his master and to have caused a fountain of fresh water to burst from the dry earth in order to quench the thirst of his master. He was married to Maria Torribia, a canonized saint, who is venerated in Spain as Maria della Cabeza, from the fact that her head (Spanish, cabeza) is often carried in procession especially in time of drought. They had one son, who died in his youth. On one occasion this son fell into a deep well and at the prayers of his parents the water of the well is said to have risen miraculously to the level of the ground, bringing the child with it, alive and well. Hereupon the parents made a vow of continence and lived in separate houses. Forty years after Isidore's death, his body was transferred from the cemetery to the church of St. Andrew. He is said to have appeared to Alfonso of Castile, and to have shown him the hidden path by which he surprised the Moors and gained the victory of Las Nevas de Tolosa, in 1212. When King Philip III of Spain was cured of a deadly disease by touching the relics of the saint, the king replaced the old reliquary by a costly silver one. He was canonized by Gregory XV, along with Sts. Ignatius, Francis Xavier, Teresa, and Philip Neri, on 12 March, 1622. St. Isidore is widely venerated as the patron of peasants and day-labourers. The cities of Madrid, Leon, Saragossa, and Seville also, honour him as their patron. His feast is celebrated on 15 May.

His Life, as first written in 1265 by John, a deacon of the church of St. Andrew, at Madrid, and supplemented by him in 1275, is printed in Acta S.S., May, III, 515-23. It served as the basis for LOPE DE VEGA's religious poem San Isidro (1599). Acta SS., loc. cit., 512-559; BUTLER, Lives of the Saints, 10 May; BARING-GOUID, Lives of the saints, 10 May; TAMAYO Martyrologium Hispanicum, III (Lyons, 1655), 191-98; QUARTINO, Vita di, S. Isidoro agricola (Turin, 1882).

MICHAEL OTT

Isionda

A titular see in the province of Pamphylia Secunda; it was a suffragan of Perge. Artemidorus, mentioned by Strabo (XII, vii, 2; XIII, iv, 15), places this city in Pisidia, and Strabo himself (XIII, iv, 17) locates it, under the name of Isinda, in the region of Termessos. Polybius (Excerta de leg., 31), Ptolemy (V, 5), and Stephen of Byzantium call it Isionda, Isindos, Pisinda, Sinda; it is similarly refered to in the "Notitiae episcopatuum." Lequien (Oriens Christ., I, 1033) gives the names of five bisihops who assisted at the OEcumenical Councils of Nicaea, Ephesus, Chalcedon and Constantinople (553), and at the Photian synod in 878. The probable location of this town, which has no history, is at Istanoz or Stanos, a nahié of the sanjak of Adalia, in the vilayet of Koniah.

S. VAILHÉ

José Francisco de Isla

Spanish preacher and satirist, b. at Villavidantes (Kingdom of Leon), 24 March, 1703; d. at Bologna, 2 November, 1782. Isla's life was far more eventful that that usually led by members of a religious order. Having broken off a premature betrothal, he entered the Society of Jesus at the age of sixteen, and, on the termination of his two years' novitiate, was sent to the renown University of Salamanca. Here he studied philosophy for two years and theology for four, and was then appointed forthwith to the chair of exegesis and later to that of philosophy. He continued his professional activities at various colleges until 1747, winning at the same time the reputation of a popular preacher. At the same time he did not neglect his talent for poetry and his taste for literature, and gave proof of a waggish, satirical vein. But this talent was to cause him not a few troubles. The first of these resulted in an assignment to pastoral duties at San Sebastian, where fortunately he was kept for but a short time. In 1750 the formidable satirist was sent to the residence of the professed fathers at Valladolid to preach. While this appointment was a new recognition of his ability as a preacher, the attempt of Queen Maria Barbara to secure him as her confessor indicates his piety. By well-put objections Isla escaped the office, but another suggestion from the court, where Isla's eminent literary gifts had already attracted notice, that the talented writer should devote himself entirely to literary work, was received with favour by his spiritual superiors. In consequence Isla, in 1752, was assigned exclusively to literary work, varied only by occasional summons to the pulpit, which he regarded as interruptions to his literary activity.

The years 1758 and 1759 deprived him of his three greatest patrons -- Pope Benedict XIV, Queen Maria Barbara, and King Ferdinand VI -- and ushered in for him a period of bitter trials. As early as 1758 the persecution of his order in Portugal began, and the earliest symptoms of a similar storm soon made their appearance in Spain. Sent to Galicia in 1760, Isla devoted himself with great spiritual fruits to giving public missions and the exercises of St. Ignatius. The royal decree, which two years later forbade any Jesuit to publish a new book, paralyzed his literary activity, and, after various preparatory decrees of a like nature, the Jesuits were finally banished from every part of Spain in 1767. Isla, moreover, was visited by a personal affliction, an apoplectic stroke causing a temporary paralysis of the mouth and tongue. The painful journey into exile -- first to Corsica for a residence of fourteen dreary months, and then to the Papal States -- his grief at the suppression of his order, the eight succeeding years of stress pending his delivery by death, are described by Isla himself with his usual imperturbable good-humor in his letters to his sister. The concluding years of his life were made somewhat more pleasant, thanks to the noble hospitality extended to him by Count Tedeschi at Bologna. He died in the seventy-ninth year of his age.

Isla's fame rests much less on his activities as a preacher and his pastoral labours than on his humorous and satirical writings. His earliest literary experiment was the "Juventud triunfante" (the "Triumph of Youth") a description of a festival in which Isla gives a skillfully exaggerated account of the already excessively elaborate preparations made by the University of Salamanca to celebrate the canonization of Stanislaus Kostka and Aloysius Gonzaga (1727). His second publication may be described as a pure satire on the singular methods of the surgery of his day. For his next subject he was again to choose a national festival, celebrating for little Navarre the accession of Ferdinand VI. This work he entitled: "Triunfo del Amor ye de la Lealtad: Dia grande de Navarre." ("The triumph of Love and Loyalty" or "The Great Day of Navarre"); it was not intended to be a formal satire on the exaggerated national consciousness of the Navarese, but the bombastic extravagance of the language renders it rather a masterly travesty than a serious eulogy. The work, however, which keeps Isla's name still living in the pages of literature, is his romance on pulpit oratory, the "Historia del Famoso predicador Frey gerundio de Compazas" (History of the celebrated preacher, Frey Gerundio de Compazas, alias Zotes), whom he himself called "a preaching Don Quixote". It is a clever satire, in which he exposes the complete decay of pulpit oratory in Spain. In the form of a broadly-sketched biography, this clever romance, in spite of the condemnation of the Inquisition, circulated throughout Europe in numerous editions and translations. The latest critical edition appeared at Leipzig in 1885 (prepared by Professor Eduard Lidforss). The work was first translated into English by Baretti (London, 1772); there are three translations in German, and many in French. One modern critic (Zarnckes, "Lit. Centralblat für Deut., 1886) sets Isla's romance above Don Quixote.

Another work of Isla's written in the last years of his life, long engaged the attention of critics, namely his adaptation of "Gil Blas", which appeared posthumously under the title "Adventures de Gil Blas de Santillane, robadas á España, adoptadas en Francia por Mons. Le Sage, restituidas á su patria y a su lengua nativa, por un Español zeloso, que no sufre que se burlen de su nación" (Adventures of Gil Blas of Santillana, stolen from Spain and appropriated in France by M. Le Sage, restored to their country and their native tongue by a jealous Spaniard, who will not suffer his country to be made sport of). Isla's sermons were published in six volumes at Madrid in 1792 and 1793, but no new edition has been issued, nor have they been translated into other languages. They are, however, highly esteemed in Spain, and occupy an important place in the history of the development of pulpit oratory in that country. Of his many translations from other tongues, that of P. Croiset's "Année chrétienne", unfortunately not completed, is the most important. His three apologetic works for his order could not be printed at that period; one of them has been lost, a second has been recently published. Among his literary remains was discovered a translation of the Italian burlesque epic "Il Cicerone," by Abbot Gian Carlo Passaroni, a picture of contemporary Italian life in society and literary circles. Isla's intimate correspondence with his sister was published in four volumes in 1785-86, a new edition being issued fifteen years later with two additional volumes. Monlau has inserted this correspondence with forty-four further letters in the "Select Works of Isla" (1850; new ed., 1870). The second centenary of Isla's birth was celebrated with great festivity in many towns in Spain on 24 March, 1903, clearly indicating that his name still lives in the memory of his countrymen.

There are five more or less complete Biographies of Isla: by de Salan (Madrid, 1803); Von Murr, Journal (Nuremburg, 1783), II; Monlau in Selected Works of Isla (Madrid, 1850); Godeau, Les Précheurs burlesques in Espagne au XVIIIe siècle. Etude sur le P. Isla (Paris, 1891); Baumgartner in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach (1905), 82-92, 182-205, 299-315.

NICHOLAS SCHEID

Islam (Concept)

Islam, an Arabic word which, since Mohammed's time, has acquired a religious and technical significance denoting the religion of Mohammed and of the Koran, just as Christianity denotes that of Jesus and of the Gospels, or Judaism that of Moses, the Prophets, and of the Old Testament.

Grammatically, the word Islam is the infinitive of the so-called fourth verbal form of the regular intransitive stem salima, "to be safe", "to be secure", etc. In its second verbal form (sallama) it means "to make some one safe" and "to free", "to make secure", etc. In its third form (salama), it signifies "to make peace", or "to become at peace", i.e. to be reconciled". In its fourth form (aslama), the infinitive of which is islam, it acquires the sense of "to resign", "to submit oneself" or "to surrender". Hence Islam, in its ethico-religious significance, means the "entire surrender of the will to God", and its professors are called Muslimun (sing. Muslim), which is the participial form, that is "those who have surrendered themselves", or "believers", as opposed to the "rejectors" of the Divine message, who are called Kafirs, Mushriks (that is those who associate various gods with the Deity), or pagans.

Historically, of course, to become a Muslim was to become a follower of Mohammed and of his religion; and it is very doubtful whether the earliest Muslims or followers of Mohammed, had any clear notion of the ethico-religious significance of the term, although its later theological development is entirely consistent and logical. According to the Shafiites (one of the four great Mohammedan schools of theology), Islam, as a principle of the law of God, is "the manifesting of humility or submission, and outward conforming with the law of God, and the taking upon oneself to do or to say as the Prophet has done or said"; and if this outward manifestation of religion is coupled with "a firm and internal belief of the heart", i.e. faith, then it is called Iman. Hence the Mohammedan theological axiom "Islam is with the tongue, and Iman is with the heart." According to the Hanafites (another of the four above-mentioned schools), however, no distinction is to be made between the two terms, as Iman, according to them, is essentially included in Islam.

Islam is sometimes divided under two heads of "Faith", or "Iman", and "Practical Religion", or "Din". Faith (Iman) includes a belief in one God, omnipotent, omniscient, all-merciful, the author of all good, and in Mohammed as His prophet, expressed in the formula: "There is no God but God, and Mohammed is the Prophet of God." It includes also, belief in the authority and sufficiency of the Koran, in angels, genii, and the devil, in the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, the day of judgment, and in the God's absolute decree for good and evil. Practical religion (Din), on the other hand, consists of five observances, viz.: recital of the formula of belief, prayer with ablution, fasting, almsgiving, and the pilgrimage to Mecca. For further details see KORAN and MOHAMMEDANISM.

GABRIEL OUSSANI

Isleta Pueblo

The name of two pueblos of the ancient Tigua tribe, of remote Shoshoncan stock. The older and principal is on the west bank of the Rio Grande about twelve miles below Albuquerque, New Mexico. The other, an offshoot from the first and sometimes distinguished as Isleta del Sur (Isleta of the South), is on the Texas side of the Rio Grande, a few miles below El Paso. The original Isleta (i.e. islet) was so named by the Spaniards from its position on a tongue of land projecting into the stream; the native name, Shiewhibak, seems to refer to a knife used in connection with a certain ceremonial foot race. It was first entered by the Spanish commander, Coronado in 1540, and again in 1582-3 by Espejo (q.v.) while trying to ascertain the fate of Father Rodriguez and two other Franciscan missionaries who had been murdered by Indians in the vicinity a year earlier. Before 1629 it had become the seat of the Franciscan mission of San Antonio. At a later period it received many refugees from outlying pueblos abandoned in consequence of Apache raids, until at the outbreak of the great Pueblo revolt in 1680 it may have numbered 2000 souls. Owing to the large number of Spaniards in the pueblo at the time they were not molested in the general massacre, but the natives, after having made submission to Governor Otermin the following year, secretly withdrew to join the enemy, in consequence of which Otermin burned the pueblo, carrying all the remaining Indians, 400 in all, to El Paso where he colonized them in the new town of Isleta del Sur, re-establishing at the same time the mission of San Antonio. In 1692-3 Vargas reconquered the Pueblo country and mission work was soon after resumed. About the year 1710, or a few years later, the original Isleta was reoccupied by the Tigua, and a new mission established there under the name of San Agustin. With the growth of the Spanish population the importance of the Indian missions correspondingly decreased. In 1780-1 one-third of the whole Pueblo population was swept away by smallpox, in consequence of which most of the missions were abandoned, but that at Isleta continued to exist under Spanish and Mexican rule for fifty years longer, when it became virtually a secular church. The pueblo now has a population of about 1100, rating third among the Pueblo towns, and has both a government and a Catholic day-school. In culture, social organization and ceremonial forms the inhabitants resemble the Pueblo generally. In Isleta del Sur the few remaining inhabitants, although very much Mexicanized still keep up some Indian forms and retain their native language.

BANCROFT, Hist. Arizona and New Mexico; BANDELIER, Arch. Inst. papers; Commissioner Ind. Affs. Annual Repts., etc., for which see under Indians, American.

JAMES MOONEY

Simon Islip

An Archbishop of Canterbury, b. at Islip, near Oxford; d. at Mayfield, Sussex, 26 April, 1366. He was educated at Oxford, where he proceeded doctor in canon, and civil law, being elected Fellow of Merton in 1307. His talents and learning as ecclesiastical lawyer soon won for him many benefices and preferments. Having for a time been rector of Easton, near Stamford, he exchanged this place in 1332 for the archdeaconry of Stow, which he only held for one year. He also held the rectory of Horncastle. Bishop Burghersh of Lincoln, then treasurer and Chancellor of England, made him a prebendary of Lincoln Cathedral in 1327, and he held successively the prebends of Welton Brinkhall, Aylesbury, and Welton Beckhall, while in 1337 he became vicar-general for the diocese. At this time he was much in London where he entered the king's service as one of the royal chaplains. Edward III trusted him also in diplomatic and political affairs, appointed him a member of the council and in 1346 gave Islip extensive powers during his own absence in France. In 1343 he had been made archdeacon of Canterbury and subsequently he was made dean of arches. He also held the prebend of Mora in St. Paul's Cathedral and a stall at Lichfield. John Stratford, the Archbishop of Canterbury, died in 1348 while the Black Death was raging. His two successors, John Ufford and Thomas Bradwardine, died of the plague within a few weeks of each other, the former before consecration. On 20 Sept. 1349, Simon Islip was elected archbishop, but within three weeks the pope conferred the see on him by provision. He was consecrated just before Christmas and received the pallium at the following Easter. The archdiocese had suffered from the pestilence and there was a dearth of clergy, so that the first work Islip was called on to undertake was a visitation, during which he laboured with energy to restore ecclesiastical discipline.

At this time, and after the renewed outbreak of the Black Death in 1362, he took particular pains to regulate the stipends of the unbeneficed clergy, who were induced by the greatly diminished number of priests to exact higher remuneration for their services than formerly. He next succeeded in terminating the ancient dispute between the archbishops of canterbury and York, as to the right of the latter to bear his cross in the province of the former. The final arrangement, suggested by the king, agreed to by both archbishops, and confirmed by the pope, was that the Archbishop of York might carry his cross in the province of Canterbury on condition that each archbishop should within two months of his confirmation present to the shrine of St. Thomas a golden image of an archbishop. Though he was a favourite of the king, he did not hesitate to resist royal exactions, and he addressed a vigorous remonstrance on the subject to Edward III. This being supported by the action of a synod over which the archbishop presided, and which refused the king's demand for a tenth of ecclesiastical income for six years, proved effectual to check the corrupt system of purveyance. Copies of this remonstrance, the " Speculum Regis Edwardi", are in the Bodleian library (MS. 624) and the British Museum (Harl. MS. 2399; Cotton MSS., Cleopatra D. IX and Faustina B. i.). Islip was a munificent benefactor of Oxford University, and founded a college which he intended should afford special facilities for monks to obtain the advantages of a university course, but the difficulties proved insurmountable, and after his death his foundation continued as a dependence on Christ Church, Canterbury, until it was absorbed by Cardinal Wolsey, in his foundation of Christ Church, Oxford. During his lifetime he had the reputation of being a sparing and niggardly administrator of the temporalities of his see, but this seems to be explained partly by the nature of the times, which called for economy and the wise husbandry of resources, and partly by his own temperament, which was frugal and averse to display. Both his enthronement and his funeral at Canterbury were by his own desire marked by the utmost simplicity, but his generous bequests to the monks of Canterbury show that this was not due to lack of interest in his cathedral church. In 1363 the archbishop suffered a paralytic stroke which he survived for three years, although by depriving him of the power of speech, it practically closed his career.

Literae Cantuarienses, ed. SHEPPARD, R. S. II (London, 1887-88); WALSINGHAM, Historica Anglicana, ed., RILEY, R. S. (London, 1863-4); WOOD, History and Antiquities of Oxford (Oxford, 1786); WHARTON, Anglia Sacra (London, 1691); HOOK, Lives of the Archbishops of Canterbury, IV (London, 1860-84); MOISANT, De Speculo regis Edwardi III, seu tractatu quem de mala regni administratione conscripsit Simon Islip (Paris, 1891); TOUT in Dict.Nat. Biog., s. v.

EDWIN BURTON

Ismael

(Sept. 'Ismaél; Vulg. Ismahel, in I Par., i, 28, 20, 31).

The son of Abraham and Agar, the Egyptian. His history is contained in parts of Gen., xvi-xxv, wherein three strata of Hebrew tradition (J, E, P) are usually distinguished by contemporary scholars. The name "Ismael", which occurs also in early Babylonian and in Minæan, was given to the child before its birth (Gen., xvi, 11), and means: "may God hear". As Sarai, Abram's wife, was barren, she gave him, in accordance with the custom of the time, her handmaid, Agar, as concubine, in order to obtain children through her. Agar's conception of a child soon led to her flight into the wilderness, where the angel of Yahweh appeared to her, bade her to return to her mistress, and fixed the name and character of her future son. After her return to Bersabee, she brought forth Ismael to Abram, who was then eighty-six years old (xvi). Ismael was very dear to the aged patriarch, as is shown by his entreaty of God in Ismael's behalf, when the Almighty promised him a son through Sara. In answer to this earnest entreaty, God disclosed to Abraham the glorious future which awaited Ismael: "As for Ismael, I have also heard thee. Behold, I will bless him, and increase, and multiply him exceedingly: he shall beget twelve chiefs, and I will make him a great nation." Ismael was not the destined heir of the covenant; yet, as he belonged to Abraham's family, he was submitted to the rite of circumcision when the patriarch circumcised all the male members of his household. He was then a lad of thirteen (xvii). Abraham's tender love towards Ismael manifested itself on another occasion. He resented Sara's complaint to him, when, on the great festival given at the weaning of Isaac, she requested Agar's and Ismael's summary dismissal because she "had seen the son of Agar the Egyptian playing with [ or mocking] Isaac her son". Ismael was Abraham's own "son", and indeed his first- born. At this juncture, God directed Abraham to accede to Sara's request, comforting him with the repeated assurance of future national greatness for Ismael. Whereupon the patriarch dismissed Agar and Ismael with a modicum of provision for their journey. As their scanty provision of water was soon exhausted, Ismael would have certainly perished in the wilderness, had not God shown to Agar a well of water which enabled her to revive the dying lad.

According to God's repeated promise of future greatness for Agar's son, Ismael grew up, lived in the wilderness of Paran, became famous as an archer, and married an Egyptian wife (xxi, 8-21). He became the father of twelve chiefs, whose names and general quarters are given in Gen., xxv, 12-16. Only one daughter of Ismael is mentioned in Holy Writ, where she is spoken of as one of Esau's wives (cf. Gen., xxviii, 9; xxxvi, 3). The last incident known of Ismael's career is connected with Abraham's burial, in which he appears associated with Isaac (xxv, 9). Ismael died at the age of one hundred and thirty-seven, "and was gathered unto his people" (xxv, 17).

In his Epistle to the Galatians (iv, 21, sqq.) St. Paul expands allegorically the narrative of Ismael and Isaac, urging upon his readers the duty of not giving up their Christian freedom from the bondage of the Law. Of course, in so arguing, the Apostle of the Gentiles did not intend to detract in any way from the historical character of the narrative in Genesis. With regard to the various difficulties, literary and historical, suggested by a close study of the Biblical account of Ismael's life, suffice it to say that each and all will never cause a careful and unbiased scholar to regard that account otherwise than as portraying an ancient historical character, will never induce him to treat otherwise than as hypercritical every attempt, by whomsoever made, to resolve Ismael into a conjectural personality of the founder of a group of Arabic tribes. And this view of the matter will appear most certain to any one who compares the Biblical narrative with the legends concerning Ismael which are embodied in the Talmud, the Targum, and the other rabbinical works; while the latter are plainly the result of puerile imagination, the former is decidedly the description of an ancient historical figure.

See bibliography to Isaac, to which may be added, Driver in Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, s. v. Ishmael; Seligsohn in The Jewish Encyclopedia, s. v. Ishmael.

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Ispahan

A Catholic Armenian Latin see. Under the name of Aspandana it was once one of the principal towns of Media. Christianity must have penetrated into the land at an early period, for in 424 we meet the name of its bishop, Aphraat. Several other bishops of this see are historically known: Abraham in 497, another Abraham in 554, Ahron in 576 (Chabot, "Synodicon orientale", Paris, 1902,674), two others in 987 and 1111 (Lequien, "Oriens Christianus", II, 1305). Ispahan owes its prosperity to a shah of the Sofis dynasty, Abbas I, who made it his capital at the end of the sixteenth century; he drew thither from all parts merchants, artists, artisans, agriculturists, embellished the town with many fine buildings, and enlarged it to such an extent that it was about six miles in circumference, had nearly 600,000 inhabitants and was looked upon as one of the finest and richest towns in the world. Djulfa, the Armenian quarter, created by the shah himself, was, and is still, separated from Ispahan by the Zender Roud river. About 1600 Abbas I, desirous of an alliance with Christian European States in order to destroy the Ottoman power, entered into relations with Clement VIII and the King of Spain, and both promised him missionaries. The first to come were Portuguese Augustinians from Goa (1602). In 1604 the pope, who did not know the arrival of the Augustinians, entrusted the Persian mission to the Discalced Carmelites, of whom a few settled in Ispahan in December 1607. Then came French Capuchin missionaries in 1628, French Jesuits in 1645, and Dominicans a little later. Although the shahs did not make the Catholic missionaries welcome, they nevertheless allowed them in the course of the seventeenth century to continue their ministry to the Armenians and Chaldeans, to erect churches and schools, and even to convert a few Moslems. When the celebrated Jesuit Father Alexander de Rhodes, died, he was given magnificent obsequies. During the entire eighteenth century persecutions were so serious as to cause the departure of the European missionaries, and even the Catholic natives left the town.

The Latin Diocese of Ispahan were created in 1629; in 1638 a second one was created, known as Babylon, and until 1693 both were under one administrator. The bishop generally resided at Ispahan and was still there in 1699, as well as the five religious communities mentioned above, when the Bishop of Ancyra was sent by the pope as ambassador to the shah. The taking of Ispahan by the Afghans in 1722 necessitated the closing of these Catholic establishments. In 1838, when Eugene Boré visited Ispahan, there were but few Catholics left. Propaganda re-established the mission in 1840, and it was placed in care of the Lazarists. Their superior became Apostolic prefect; a school had already been established at Ispahan. In 1852 liberty of conscience was granted. In 1874, when Rome created the Persian Apostolic Delegation for the Orientals, the Latin Diocese of Ispahan was removed from the jurisdiction of the See of Babylon, of which it had become a suffragan in 1848. Today this diocese directly depends on the Holy See; Mgr Lesné, its administrator, who is titular Archbishop of Philippopolis and Apostolic delegate, resides at Ourmiah. There are about 350 Catholics of the Latin Rite in Persia, out of a total population of over eight millions; they are under the care of fifteen Lazarist fathers. The Catholic Armenian Diocese of Ispahan, erected on 30 April, 1850, is under the jurisdiction of Monsignor Paolo Pietro Sabbaghian, the Armenian Patriarch of Cilicia, and contains about 7700 Catholic Armenians, with eleven secular priests, four churches, and one convent. The faithful in Ispahan proper number 560, out of a population of 80,000 inhabitants; and there are still many in the region of Durmiah. The Gregorian Armenians, about 50,000 in Persia, are quite numerous at Djulfa, a suburb of Ispahan, and have a bishop of that title.

LEQUIEN, Oriens Christianus, I, 1425; III, 1389-1392; SHIRLEY, Relations of his travels into Persia (London, 1613); Brièves relations des progrès de l'Evangile au royaume des Perses (Liège, 1610); Relation du voyage de Perse, faict par le R. P. Pacifique de Provins (Paris, 1631); BERTHOLD-IGNACE, Histoire de l'establissement de la Mission de Perse (Paris, 1835); SCHEFER, Estat de la Perse en 1660 par le P. Raphael du Mans (Paris, 1890); with abundant bibliography; PIOLET, Les missions catholiques françaises au XIX siècle, I (Paris, 19_), 185-222; Missiones catholicæ (Rome, 1907), 177, 179, 756; Annales de la Congrégation de la Mission (Paris), passim; MALCOLM, Sketches of Persia (Philadelphia, 1828).

S. VAILHÉ

Israelites

The word designates the descendants of the Patriarch Jacob, or Israel. It corresponds to the Hebrew appellation "children of Israel", a name by which -- together with the simple form "Israel" -- the chosen people usually called themselves in Old-Testament times. Foreigners and Israelites speaking of themselves to foreigners used the term "Hebrews", commonly explained as denoting those who have come from "the other side" of the river (the Euphrates). Another synonym for Israelites is the term Jews (Ioudaioi), especially used by classical authors, but also often found in Josephus and in the New-Testament writings. The object of the present article is distinctly geographical and ethnographical, leaving, as far as possible, the other topics connected with the Israelites to be dealt with in the article on JEWS AND JUDAISM, or in particular articles on the leading personages or events in Israel's history.

SEMITIC RELATIONSHIP

The Israelites belong to the group of ancient peoples who are designated under the general name of Semites, and whose countries extended from the Mediterranean Sea to the other side of the Euphrates and Tigris, and from the mountains of Armenia to the southern coast of Arabia. According to the Biblical classification of the descendants of Noe (Gen., x), it is clear that the semitic group included the Arabs, Babylonians, Assyrians, Arameans, and Hebrews, to which peoples modern ethnographers add, chiefly on linguistic grounds, the Phoenicians and Chanaaneans. It thus appears that the Israelites of old claimed actual kinship with some of the most powerful nations of the East, although the nearness or remoteness of this kinship cannot be determined at the present day. As might be expected, their ethnic relation to the Semitic tribes who, together with the Israelites, make up the sub-group of the Terabites, is more definitely known.

The Moabites, the Ammonites, the Edomites, and the Israelites were tribes of kindred origin, a fact which is readily acknowledged by contemporary scholars. It shows no less plainly that the children of Israel were also conscious of a close relationship with both the Arameans (Syrians) to the north-east and the Sinaitic nomads to the south of Palestine; and there is no doubt that, despite the rejection of Israel's kinship with Aram by some recent critics, both the Aramean and the Arabian relationships of Israel should be admitted. In the abstract, these relationships are not exclusive of each other, for there is no reason to suppose that ancient Israel was more homogeneous than any other migratory and conquering people; and in the concrete, both the relationships in question are equally borne witness to in the earliest historical records (cf. Gen., xxiv, 4, 10; xxvii, 43; xxix, 4, etc., in favour of Israel's relationship with Aram).

EARLY MIGRATION

The history of the Israelites begins with the migration of the kindred tribes mentioned in the above table, in the person of their ancestor, Thare, from Babylonia. The starting-point of this memorable migration was, according to Gen., xi, 28, 31, "Ur of the Chaldees ", which has recently been identified with Mugheir (Muqayyar; Accadian Uriwa, an important city in ancient days, some six miles (distant from the right bank of the Euphrates, and about 125 miles north-west of the Persian Gulf. Its actual goal, according to Gen., xi, 31, was "the land of Chanaan". The movement thus generally described is in distinct harmony with the well-ascertained fact that at an early date Babylonian enterprise had penetrated to Palestine and thereby opened up to the Semitic element of Chaldea a track towards the region which at the present day is often regarded as the original centre of the dispersion of the Semites, viz. Northern Arabia. The course taken was by way of Haran (in Aram), a city some 600 miles north-west of Ur, and its rival in the worship of the Moon-god, Sin. Not in worship alone, but also in culture, laws, and customs, Haran closely resembled Ur, and the call of Abraham -- God's command bidding him to seek a new country (Gen., xii, l) -- was doubtless welcome to one whose purer conception of the Deity made him dissatisfied with his heathen surroundings (cf. Jos., xxiv, 2 sq.). There is also reason to think that at this time Northern Babylonia was greatly disturbed by invading Kassites, a mountain race related to the Elamites. While, then, Thare's second son, Nachor, remained in Haran, where he originated the Aramaic settlement, Abraham and Lot went forth, passed Damascus, and reached the goal of their journey. The settlements which Holy Writ connects with Abraham and Lot need only to be mentioned here. The tribes directly related to Lot were those of Moab and Ammon, of which the former established itself east of the Dead Sea, and the latter settled on the eastern side of the Amorrhite kingdom which extended between the Arnom and the Jeboc. Of the tribes more immediately related to Abraham, the Ismaelites and the Madianites seem to have lived in the Peninsula of Sinai; the Edornites took possession of Mount Seir, the hilly tract of land lying south of the Dead Sea and east of the Arabah; and the Israelites settled in the country west of the Jordan, the districts with which they are more particularly connected in the Book of Genesis being those of Sichem, Bethel, Hebron, and Bersabee. The history of the Israelites in these early times is chiefly associated with the Patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel), all of whom kept a distinct remembrance of their close kinship with the Semitic settlement in Aram (cf. Gen., xxiv; xxviii), and the first of whom appears to have reached Chanaan about 2300 B.C., when he came into passing contact with Egypt (Gen., xii) and Elam (Gen., xiv) (see BABYLONIA).

III. SOJOURN IN EGYPT

The intercourse of Abraham with Egypt, just referred to, gave place eventually to one of much longer duration on the part of his descendants, when the Israelites went down to Egypt under the pressure of famine, and settled peaceably in the district of Gessen, east of the Delta. The fact of this later migration of Israel fits in well with the general data afforded by Egyptian history. About 2100 B.C. Lower Egypt had been invaded and conquered by a body of Asiatics, probably of Semitic origin, called the Hyksos, who established themselves at Zoan (Tanis), a city in the Delta, about 35 miles north of Gessen. Their rule, to which the fifteenth, sixteenth, and seventeenth dynasties are assigned, lasted 511 years, according to Manetho (cf. Josephus, "Contra Ap.", I, xiv). It was of course repulsive to the native princes, whose authority was restricted to Thebes, while it proved attractive to other invading bodies, Asiatic like the Hyksos themselves. Among these later arrivals are naturally reckoned the Israelites, who probably entered Egypt sometime prior to 1600 B.C., the date assigned for the eventual expulsion of the Hyksos by the Egyptian native kings. The position of Gessen has been fixed by recent excavations, and, as the Israelites were left to pursue without molestation their pastoral life in that region, they rapidly increased in numbers and wealth. The history of Israel's settlement in Egypt is connected particularly with Joseph, Jacob's beloved son by Rachel.

IV. THE EXODUS AND THE WANDERINGS

The final expulsion of the Hyksos by the native princes deprived the Israelites of their natural protectors; "nevertheless, the kings of the eighteenth dynasty, who came upon the scene about this time, did not interfere with them. On the contrary, these kings were themselves Asiatic in tone, marrying Syrian wives and introducing foreign customs. One of them, Amenhotep III, married Tyi, a Syrian princess and sun-worshipper, and their son, Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV), abandoned the national religion for the worship of the solar disc; and when this led to friction with the priesthood of Thebes, he changed his capital to Tell el-Amarna, and surrounded himself both in his temples and in the government of the country with foreigners. After his death, there was a reaction, the foreigners were ejected, and the national religion and party triumphed The next kings, therefore, those of the nineteenth dynasty, gave no quarter to foreigners, and these were the kings who knew riot Joseph, but made the lives of the Hebrews 'bitter with hard bondage, in mortar and in all manner of service in the field.' There was good reason why tyrannical kings like those who now arose should view with alarm the rapid increase of the Hebrews, seeing that they were aliens, and lived in a quarter where, if inclined to be disloyal, they could lend invaluable aid to Asiatic invaders" (Souttar "A Short History of Ancient Peoples", New York, 1903, 200 sq.). The particular Pharaoh of the nineteenth dynasty who treated the Israelites with special rigour was Rameses II, who became king at about the age of eighteen and reigned upwards of sixty years (about 1300-1234 B.C.). He employed them on field labour (Ex., i, 14); engaged them upon the store cities of Phithom (the ruins of which, eleven or twelve miles from Ismailia, show that it was built for that monarch) and Ramesse, thus called after his name; and finally made a desperate attempt to reduce their numbers by organized infanticide. Had not God watched over His people, Israel's ruin would have been simply a question of time. But He raised up Moses and commissioned him to free them from this harsh and cruel oppression. This Divine call reached Moses while he was living in the Peninsula of Sinai, whither he had fled from Pharaoh's wrath, residing among the Madianites or Kenites, who, like himself, traced their descent from Abraham. With the help of his brother, Aaron, and by means of the various scourges known as the plagues of Egypt, Yahweh's envoy finally prevailed upon Rameses' son and successor, Merneptah I (1234-14 B. c.; cf. Ex. ii, 23), to let Israel go free. In haste and by night, the Israelites left the land of bondage, turned eastward, and directed their course towards the Isthmus of Suez and the Red Sea, thus avoiding contact with the Egyptian troops which then occupied, at least in part, the Mediterranean coast, and making from the first for the encampments of their kindred, the Madianites, near Sinai.

While this general direction can hardly be doubted, the localities through which Israel passed cannot now be identified with certainty. The first movement of the Israelites was from " Ramesse to Socoth (Ex., xii, 37). The former of these two places has often been regarded as the same as Zoan (Tanis) which is called in many papyri

Pa-Ramessu Meriamum (the Place of Rameses II), but it is more probably to be located at Tell er-Retabeh, "in the middle of the length of the Wady Tumilat, about twenty miles from Ismailia on the East (Flinders Petrie), and only eight miles distant from Phithom. The name of the second place, Socoth, is probably a Semitic adaptation of the Egyptian word thku[t] which designated the district where the city of Phithom was situated. Proceeding thence, Israel encamped in Etham (Ex., xiii, 20; Num., xxxiii, 6), a term which is supposed to refer to the southern fortress (Egypt. Htem) of Thku (Socoth), on the eastern frontier of Egypt, upon the edge of the Wilderness of Etham, or Sur (cf. Ex., xv, 22; Num., xxxiii, 8). At this point the children of Israel changed their easterly direction, and journeying southward reached Phihahiroth, which is described in Exodus, xiv., 2, as "between Magdal and the sea over against Beelsephon". None of the places just spoken of have been identified; indeed, even the portion of the Red Sea which the Hebrews crossed miraculously, is a matter of controversy. Various writers maintain that at the time of Exodus the western arm of the Red Sea, now called the Gulf of Suez, from the modem town near its northern extremity, extended some thirty or forty miles farther north, and they admit for the actual place of crossing some point of this extension of the Red Sea. Others, on the contrary, apparently with greater probability, think that in the time of Moses the northern limit of the Gulf of Suez did not vary much, if at all, from what it is at the present day, and they maintain that the crossing took place at some point of the present head of the gulf, not far north of the present Suez, the ancient Greek name of which (Clysma) appears to embody a tradition of the Egyptian disaster. It is often and ably argued that after the Red Sea, the Israelites, resuming their journey in an easterly direction, took the haj route now followed by pilgrims going from Cairo to Mecca, running eastward across the Peninsula of Sinai to Elath at the northern point of the eastern arm of the Red Sea -- the Gulf of Akabah, as it is called. To most writers, however, there does not seem to be sufficient reason for giving up the time-honoured view which holds that the Hebrews proceeded southward until they reached the traditional Mount Sinai.

On the basis of this latter view, Israel's intervening stations between the place of crossing and Mount Sinai have been identified as follows. After three days' march through the Wilderness of Sur, on the narrow and comparatively level coast-track of the Gulf of Suez, the Israelites came to a spring named Mara (Exod., xv, 22 sq.), probably the 'Ain Hawara, with its bitter waters. They next reached the oasis of Elim, usually identified with Wady Gharandel, where there are, even at the present time, wells and palms (Exod., xv, 27). Proceeding southward, they followed the road which winds by the Wady Tayibeh until it strikes the seashore, at which point the encampment by the sea (Numb., xxxiii, 10) is naturally placed. Before turning inland the coast-track expands into a plain four or five miles broad, called el-Markha, and probably to be identified with the Wilderness of Sin (Exod., xv, 1), wherein the stations of Daphea and Alus (Numb., xxxiii, 12, 13) were presumably situated. Thence Moses led his people in the direction of the sacred mount of Sinai, the next station being at Raphidim (Exod., xvii, 1), which is commonly regarded as identical with Wady Feiran, a long and fertile plain overhung by the granite rocks of Mount Sherbal, probably the Horem of Holy Writ. From Feiran the road winds through the long Wady es-Scheykh and leads to the extensive plain er-Rahah, which is directly in front of Mount Sinai, and which offered more than sufficient standing ground for all the children of Israel. It is true that none of the foregoing identifications enjoys more than a certain amount of probability and that, consequently, their aggregate cannot be considered as an unquestionable proof that the traditional road along the Gulf of Suez is the one actually followed by the Hebrews. Yet, as may readily be seen, it is a fact of no small importance in favour of the route described that its distance of some 150 miles between the place of crossing and Mount Sinai admits of a natural division into stages which on the whole correspond well to the principal marches of the Hebrews; for nothing of the kind can be put forth in support of their position by the contemporary scholars who prefer to the traditional road an eastward one running across the Peninsula of Sinai to the northern shore of the Gulf of Akabah.

On leaving Sinai, under the guidance of Moses' brother-in-law, the Israelites proceeded in a northerly direction towards the Wilderness of Pharan, the barren region of et-Tih which lies south of Chanaan and west of Edom. They seem to have approached it the shore of the eastern arm of the Red Sea, now called the Gulf of Akabah. Of the various places mentioned as being on their route only two have been identified with some degree of probability. These are Kibroth Hattawah (graves of lust), regarded as identical with Erweis el-Ebeirig, and Hazeroth, apparently identical with the modern 'Ain Hudherah (cf. Numb., xi, 34; xxxiii, 16, 17). On entering the Desert of Pharan, the people established themselves at Cades, also Cadesbarne (the holy place), which has been identified with great probability with 'Ain Kedis, some fifty miles south of Bersabee (Numb., xxxiii, 36). Proceeding northward, after the return of the spies whom they had sent to explore Southern Palestine, they made a mad attempt to force their way into Chanaan. They were repulsed by the Chanaanites and the Amalecites at Sephaath, a place subsequently named Horma (cf. Judges, i, 17; now Sebaita) and some thirty-five miles north of Cades. (Cf. Numb., xii, xiv.) Then began a most obscure period in Israel's life. During thirty-eight years they wandered in the Badiet et Tih (Wilderness of the Wanderings) on the southern confines of Chanaan, apparently making Cades the centre around which their movements turned. " It is possible that while here, they came, for the first time since the Exodus, into contact with the Egyptians. An inscription of the Pharaoh Mernptah has been found recently (at Thebes, in 1896), the close of which relates the conquest by the Egyptians of the land of Chanaan and of Ashkelon, and then adds: 'The Israelites are spoiled so that they have no seed; the land of Khar [perhaps, the land of the Horites, i.e. Edom] is become like the windows of Egypt. Of the circumstances alluded to nothing positive is known; but the situation of the Israelites implied in the inscription is in or near Southern Palestine, and, as the fuller records of later date show no trace of any relations between Israel and Egypt until the time of Solomon, the sojourn at Cades seems to be the only occasion that will suit the conditions. On the assumption that the Exodus took place in the reign of Mernptah, the only alternative to the view just set forth is to regard the inscription as a boastful account of the Exodus itself', considered as an expulsion of the Israelites". (Wade, "Old Test-Hist.").

In the beginning of the fortieth year of Israel's wanderings, the march towards Chanaan was resumed from Cades. In approaching Palestine this second time, it was determined to avoid the southern frontier, and to enter the Land of Promise by crossing the Jordan at the northern end of the Dead Sea. The shortest road for this purpose was through the territories of Edom and Moab, and Moses asked permission from the King of Edom to take this route, reminding him of the relationship between his people and Israel. His refusal compelled the Israelites to journey southward towards the Gulf of Akabah, and there to skirt the southern possessions of Edom, whence they marched northward, skirting the eastern frontier first of Edom and next of Moab, and finally encamping over against the River Arnon (the modern Wady Mojib). Such is the general line of March commonly admitted by scholars between Cades and the Arnon. Owing, however, to the fact that the several lists of Israel's stations in Numb., xx, 22-xxi, 11; xxxiii; Deut., x, 6, 7, contain differences as to the encampments which they mention, and as to the time which they assign to Aaron's death, some uncertainty remains as to which side of Edom -- east or west -- the Hebrews actually skirted on their way to the Arnon. With regard to the various stations named in those lists, a still greater uncertainty prevails. In point of fact, only a few of them can be identified, among which may be mentioned the place of Aaron's death, Mount Hor, which is probably the modem Jebel Madurah on the western border of Edom, some thirty or forty miles north-east of Cades; and next the encampment at Asiongaber, a place which may be identical with 'Ain el Gudyan which lies about fifteen miles north of the Gulf of Akabah. Resuming their march towards the Jordan, the Children of Israel crossed the Amon, and encountered the hostility of the Amorrhite chief, Sehon, who had taken from Moab the territory between the Arnon and the Jeboc (Wadv Zerkah). They defeated him at Jasa (not now identified), captured his capital Hesebon (the modem Resban), Jazer (Beith Zerah, three miles north of Hesebon), and the other cities of his dominions. They were thus brought into contact, and apparently also into conflict, with the northernmost kingdom of Basan, which lay between the Jeboc and the foot of Mount Hermon. They gave battle to its king, Og, defeated him at Edrei (now Edr'a), and took possession of his territory. Their victories and, still more, their occupation of the land north of Moab by Ruben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasses aroused the enmity of the Moabites who, at this juncture, summoned Balaam to curse the Israelites, and who succeeded but too well in their efforts to betray them into idolatry at Settim (Accacids), in the plains of Moab, over against Jericho (Eri'ka). The crowning events of the Wanderings were the induction of Josue into office as Moses' successor in command, and the death of Moses himself on one of the heights of the Abarim (Numb., xxvii, 12), which is variously called Nebo (Jebel Neba; Deut., xxxii, 49) or Phasga (Ras Siaghah; Deut., iii, 27), the western projection of Mount Nebo.

V. THE CONQUEST OF CHANAAN

Soon after the death of Moses, Josue resolved to attempt the invasion and conquest of Chanaan proper, or the country west of the Jordan, which Israel's great lawgiver had indeed contemplated, but had not been allowed to effect. In some respects this was at the time a hard task. The crossing of the Jordan was in itself a difficult .undertaking. The heights on the other side of the river were crowned with numerous cities, strongly walled, and therefore able to offer a stout resistance. Even the population in the lowlands was much superior to the Israelites in the art and appliances of war, in touch, as they had long been, with the advanced civilization of Babylonia and Egypt. In some other respects the work of conquest was then comparatively easy. The various peoples (Chanaanites, Hethites, Amorrhites, Pherezites, etc.) who made up the population of Western Palestine, constituted a number of mostly independent cities, distracted by those mutual jealousies which have been revealed by the Tell el-Amarna tablets, and hence not likely to combine their forces against Israel's invasion. "Moreover there was no possibility of outside alliances against the intruders. Tyre and Sidon, and other cities of the coast, were going their way, increasing their wealth and commercial connections by peaceful means, and were averse to entangling foreign complications. The Amorrhites east of the Jordan were the most formidable remnant of their decaying race, and they had been rendered powerless; while the Philistines, themselves a strange people, had not yet grown into power " (McCurdy). Circumstances such as these naturally called for Josue's prompt and vigorous action. With God's special help he crossed the Jordan at the head of all the tribes encamped at Galgal, identified with the modern Tell Jiljulieh, four miles from the river, and thence advanced upon Jericho. This city was one of the keys to the trans-Jordanic region, and it soon fell into his power. He next proceeded by the pass of Machmas (the Wady Suweinit) against Hai, a town two miles east of Bethel, and captured it by strategem. After this rapid conquest of Central Chanaan, Josue made alliance with he Gabaonites,. who had outwitted him, and won the memorable batttle of Bethoron over the five kings of the nearest Amorrhite peoples. This victory was followed up by the subjugation of other districts of Southern Palestine, a work which seems to have been accomplished mainly by the tribes of Simeon and Juda, assisted by the Cinites and the Calebites. Meantime, the kings of the north had rallied around Jabin, King of Azor in Galilee, and mustered their hosts near the Waters of Merom (Lake Huleh). At the head of the House of Joseph, the Jewish leader took them by surprise, defeated them, and subdued numerous northern towns. Josue's glorious achievements secured for the tribes of Israel a firm foothold in Chanaan,. by means of which they settled in their allotted territories. Great. however, as were these victories, they failed, even in conjunction with the efforts of the individual tribes (an account of which is supplied in the scattered notices in the Book of Josue and by the opening chapter of that of Judges), to complete the subjugation of Palestine. Many of the larger cities, together with the cultivated valleys and the coast-land, were still, and remained for a long time, in the possession of Chanaan's earlier inhabitants.

VI. THE PERIOD OF THE JUDGES

As long as Josue lived, his personality and his generalship succeeded in keeping up among the Israelites some manner of central authority, despite the tribal rivalries which manifested themselves even during the conquest of Western Palestine. When he died, with a previously appointed successor, all central authority actually ceased, and the bonds of union between the different tribes were quickly dissolved. The tribes were dispersed in different districts, and the Semitic love of tribal independence strongly reasserted itself among them. The immediate pressure of the war of conquest was no longer felt, and in many cases the distinct Hebrew communities were either unwilling or unable to exterminate the older population which survived in the land. The bond of union which naturally arises from close kinship, was likewise considerably relaxed by intermarriage between the Israelites and the Chanaanites. Even the bond created by the community of religion was time and again seriously impaired in Israel by the corruption of the ancestral worship of Yahweh with the attractive cult of the Baalim of Chanaan. This deep disunion of the tribes accounts naturally for the fact that, during a long period after the death of Moses' successor, each section of Israel's possessions was in its turn harassed and humiliated by a powerful foreign foe, and each time delivered from his oppression by a military leader, "judge " as he is called, whose authority never extended over the whole land. In the course of time, the drawbacks of such disunion were felt by the Israelites, and in order to withstand their enemies more effectively by concerted action, they wished for a king. Their first attempts in this direction were indeed unsuccessful: Gedeon refused the crown which they offered him, and Abimilech, his son, who accepted it, proved an unworthy ruler. Yet the longing of the Hebrew tribes for a monarchy could not be suppressed; during Israel's fierce conflict with the Philistines, Samuel, the last judge, wielded the universal and absolute power of a monarch with the title and the insignia of royalty; and when to the hostility of Western enemies was joined that of Eastern foes, like the Ammonites, the Israelites strenuously asked for a king and finally obtained one in the person of the Benjamite Saul.

VII. THE UNDIVIDED KINGDOM

Israel's first monarch resembled in many respects the judges who had preceded him, for the simple reason that, under his rule, the Hebrew tribes did not really coalesce into a nation. He was indeed the King of All Israel; his royal title and authority were to be hereditary, and at his summons all the tribes rallied around him. With their common help, he rescued the men of Jabes Galaad from impending destruction at the hands of the Ammonites, fought for a time successfully against the Philistines, and overcame the Amalecites. All the while, however, his kingship was little more than a judgeship. His court and ways of life were simple in the extreme; he had no standing army, no governors over subordinate districts; the war against the Philistines, the great enemies of Israel in his day, he waged like the judges of old, by hasty and temporary levies; and when he died at Gelboe, the profound and inveterate disunion of the tribes, which had been momentarily checked, immediately reappeared; most of them declared themselves in favour of his son, Isboseth, but Juda gathered around David and made him king in Hebron. In the civil war which ensued, "David grew always stronger and stronger", with the final result that his sovereignty was formally and voluntarily acknowledged by the elders of all the tribes. The new king was the real founder of the Hebrew monarchy. One of his first cares was to secure for Israel a political and religious capital in Jerusalem, a city of considerable size and of considerable natural strength. His military genius enabled him gradually to overcome the various nations who had cruelly oppressed the chosen people in the days of the judges. On the south-west he fought against the Philistines, and took from them the town of Geth (Tell es-Safi), and a great part of their dominions. On the south-east, he conquered and established garrisons in the territory of Edom. To the east of the Jordan he attacked and wellnigh exterminated the Moabites, while on the north-east he overthrew the Syrians of Soba as well as those of Damascus who had marched to the defence of their kindred. Finally, he waged a protracted war against the Ammonites, who had entered into a defensive alliance with several of the Syrian princes, and wreaked upon them a frightful vengeance. The possessions secured by these various wars formed a vast empire whose boundaries remained forever after the ideal extent of the Realm of Israel, and whose wise internal organization, on regular monarchical lines, greatly promoted the agricultural and industrial interests of the Hebrew tribes.

Under such circumstances one might not unnaturally have supposed that the old tribal jealousies were at an end forever. And yet, on the occasion of the king's domestic broils, a rebellion broke out which for a while threatened to rend the nation asunder on the old, deep lines of cleavage. This disaster was, however, happily averted, and at his death David left to his son Solomon an undivided kingdom. David's reign had been pre-eminently a period of war and of territorial acquisition; Solomon's rule was, in the main, an era of peace and commercial achievement. Of special value to the new monarch were the friendly relations between Phnicia and Israel, continued from David's time. Through the help of Tyre he erected the Temple and other beautiful edifices in Jerusalem; the help of Tyre also enabled him to maintain for a time something of a foreign commerce by the Red Sea. His relations with Egypt were likewise peaceful and profitable. He received in marriage the daughter of Psibkhenao II, the last Pharaoh of the twenty-first dynasty, and kept up with Egypt a brisk overland commerce. He carried on a friendly intercourse and lively trade with the Hittites of Cilicia and of Cappadocia.

Unfortunately, his love of splendour and luxury, his unfaithfulness to Yahweh's law and worship, gradually betrayed him into oppressive measures which especially alienated the northern tribes. In vain did he strive to overrule this dissatisfaction by doing away with the ancient territorial divisions of the tribes, and by appointing the Ephraimite Jeroboam as collector of taxes of the house of Joseph: his tampering with the old tribal principle did but increase the general discontent, and the great authority with which he invested the son of Nabat simply afforded the latter better opportunity to realize the extent of the disaffection of the northern tribes and to avail himself of it to rebel against the king. About this same time, Edom and Moab revolted against Solomon's suzerainty, so that, towards the end of his reign, everything threatened the continuity of the empire of Israel, which had always contained the hidden germs of disruption, and which, to a large extent, owed its very existence to the extreme temporary weakness of the great neighbouring nations of Egypt and Assyria.

VIII. THE KINGDOM OF ISRAEL

Roboam's insulting reply to the northern tribes, when, gathered at Sichem, after Solomon's demise, they asked for some relief from the heavy yoke put upon them by the late monarch, was the immediate occasion of their permanent rupture with the line of David and the southern tribes. Under Jerboa's headship they formed (c. 937 B.C.) a separate kingdom which is known as the Kingdom of Israel, in contradistinction to that of Juda, and which greatly surpassed the latter in extent and population. The area of the Northern Kingdom is estimated at about 9000 square miles, with a population of about four or five millions. It included eight tribes, viz., on the west of the Jordan, Ephraim, one-half of Manasses, Issachar, Zabulon. Aser, Nephtali with the coastline between Acre and Joppe; on the east of the Jordan, Ruben, Gad, and one-half of Manasses. Its vassal-states were Moab and so much of Syria as had remained subject to Solomon (III Kings, xi, 24; IV Kings, iii, 4). The Kingdom of Juda included that tribe itself together with that of Benjamin, and -- at least eventually -- a part, if not the whole, of Simeon and Dan. Its area is estimated at 3400 miles, with a population of about one million and three quarters. Besides this, Edom continued faithful to Juda for a time. But while the Northern Kingdom was larger and more populous than the Southern, it decidedly lacked the unity and the seclusion of its rival, and was therefore the first to succumb, a comparatively easy prey to the eastern conquerors, when their victorious march brought them to the western lands. The history of the newly formed kingdom may be conveniently divided into three great periods, during which various dynasties ruled in Israel, while the line of David continued in sole possession of the throne of Juda. The first period extends from Jeroboam to Achab (937-875 1 B.C.). The kings of this opening period were as follows:

Of the twenty-two years of Jeroboam's reign, few details have come down to us. At first, the founder of the Northern Kingdom took for his capital the city of Sichem, in which Abimelech had once set up kingdom, and in which the actual outbreak of the revolt against Juda had just occurred; he exchanged it for the beautiful Thersa, eleven miles to the north-east. To offset the attractiveness of Jerusalem and the influence of its Temple, he extended his royal patronage to two ancient sanctuaries, Dan and Bethel, the one at the northern, and the other at the southern, extremity of his realm. To guard against Juda's invasion of his territory, he built strong fortresses on both sides of the Jordan. With regard to Jeroboam's early military expeditions, Biblical narrative imparts no distinct information: it simply represents as practically continual the war which soon broke out between him and Roboam (cf. III Kings, xiv, 30; xv, 6). From the Egyptian inscriptions at Karnak it appears that the Northern Kingdom suffered much in connection with the invasion of Juda by Sesac, the first king of the twenty-second dynasty, so that it is not likely that this invasion was the result of Jeroboam's appeal Egypt for help in his conflict with the King of Juda. The hostilities between the sister kingdoms continued under Abiam, Roboam's son and successor. and in their pursuit, Jeroboam was, according to the chronicler's account, badly worsted (II Para!ip., iii). Jeroboam's own line lasted only through his own son Nadab, who, after reigning two years, was slain by a usurper, Baasa of Issachar (913 B.C.), while Israel besieged the Philistine fortress of Gebbethon (probably Kibbiah, six or seven miles north-east of Lydda). After his accession, Baasa pushed the war so vigorously against Asa, King of Juda, that, to save Jerusalem from an impending siege, the latter purchased the help of Benadad I, of Damascus, against Israel. In the conflict with Syria which ensued, Baasa lost much of the territory on the west of the Upper Jordan and the Sea of Galilee, with the fateful result that the controlling power in the west was now no longer Hebrew, but Aramean. Baasa was succeeded by his son Ela, whose reign lasted only a part of two years (889-87 B.C.). His murderer, Zambri, got himself proclaimed king, but perished after a few days giving place to his military competitor, Amri (887-75 B.C.), the skillful head of a new dynasty in Israel. Under Amri, Samaria, admirably and strongly situated in Central Palestine, some twelve miles to the west of Thersa, became, and remained to the end, the capital of the Northern Kingdom. Under him, too, the policy of hostility which had hitherto prevailed between Juda and Israel was exchanged for one of general friendship based on common interests against Syria. In some directions, indeed, Amri suffered considerable losses, as, east of the Jordan, Ramoth and other cities of Galaad fell into the power of the King of Damascus, while on the west of the same river, he was forced to grant to that monarch trading privileges (cf. III Kings xx, 34). But in other directions he succeeded in extending his authority. The inscription of' Mesa proves that he brought Moab under tribute. He cemented Israel's alliance with Tyre by the marriage of his son Achab with Jezabel, the daughter of the Tyrian priest and king, Ethbaal. His territories, now apparently limited to the tribes of Ephraim, Manasses, and Issachar, with a portion of Zabulon, were consolidated under his firm rule, so much so that the Assyrians, who henceforth carefully watched over the affairs of Palestine, designated Israel under the name of "the House of Amri", even after his dynasty had been overthrown

The second period comprises the kings from Achab to Jeroboam II (875-781 B.C.). These kings were as follows:

The reign of Achab, Amri's son and successor, was a memorable one in the history of the chosen people. It was marked at home by a considerable progress of Israel in the arts of peace (cf. Ill Kings, xxii, 39); by the public adoption of the Phoenician worship of Baal and Astarthe (D.V. Ashtaroth, Ashtoreth), and also by a strenuous opposition to it on the part of the Prophets in the person of Elias, the leading religious figure of the time. Abroad, Israel's friendly relations with Juda assumed to permanent character by the marriage of Athalia the daughter of Achab and Jezabel, with Joram the son of Josaphat; and in point of fact, Israel was a t peace with Juda throughout the twenty-two years of Achab's reign. Israel's chief neighbouring foe was Syria over whose ruler, Benadad II, Achab won two important victories (875 B.C.). Yet, upon the westward advance of their common enemies, the Assyrians, under Salmanasar II, the kings of Israel and Syria united with other princes of Western Asia against the Assyrian hosts, and checked their onward march at Karkhar on the Orontes in 854 B.C. Next year, Achab resumed hostilities against Syria and fell mortally wounded in battle before Ramoth Galaad. Achab's Son, Ochozias, died after a short reign (853-51 B.C.) and was succeeded by his brother Joram (851-42 B.C.). The two wars of Joram's reign Were unsuccessful, although, in both, Israel had the help of the Southern Kingdom. The first was directed against Mesa, King of Moab, who, as related in Holy Writ and in his own inscription (known as "the Moabitic St one"), had thrown off the yoke of Israel, and who did not hesitate, when very hard pressed, to offer his oldest son as a burnt-offering to Chamos (A.V. Chemosh). The second was waged against Damascus and proved exceedingly disastrous: Samaria nearly fell into the hands of the Syrians; Joram himself was seriously wounded before Ramoth Galaad, and next slain, at Jezrael, by one of his officers, Jehu, who assumed the crown and began a new dynasty in Israel. Jehu's long reign of twenty-eight years (842-14 B.C.), was most inglorious. Israel's deadly foe was the Syrian king Hazael, who had also reached the throne by the murder of his master, Benadad II. Instead of helping him to withstand the attacks of Salmanasar II, Jehu secured peace with Assyria by the payment of a tribute (842 B.C.), and let Hazael face single-handed the repeated invasions of the Assyrian king. Apparently, he had hoped thereby to weaken the Aramean power, and perhaps even to get rid of it altogether. It so happened, however, that after a while Salmanasar desisted from his attacks upon Hazael, and thus left the latter free to turn his arms against Israel and against Juda, its ally. The Syrian king secured for Damascus not only Basan and Galaad, and the whole of the country east of the Jordan, but also Western Palestine, destroyed the Philistine city of Geth, and was bought off by Joas of Juda with the richest spoil of his palace and temple. Joachaz (814-797 B.C.), the son and successor of Jehu, was compelled during the greater part of his reign to accept from Hazael and his son, Bernadad III, the most humiliating conditions yet imposed upon a King of Israel (cf. IV Kings, xiii, 7) . Relief, however, came to him when the resources of Damascus were effectively crippled by Assyria during the closing years of the ninth century B.C. Israel's condition was further improved under Joas (797-81 B.C.), who actually defeated Syria three several (sic) times, and reconquered much of the territory -- probably west of the Jordan -- which had been lost by Joachaz, his father (cf. IV Kings, xiii, 25).

The third period in the history of the Northern Kingdom extends from Jeroboam II to the fall of Samaria (781-22 B.C.). On the basis of the Assyrian inscriptions combined with the data of Holy Writ, the chronology of the last period may be given approximately as follows:

During the long reign of Jeroboam II, the Northern Kingdom enjoyed an unprecedented prosperity. Owing chiefly to the fact that Israel's enemies had grown weaker on every side, the new king was able to eclipse the victories achieved by his father, Joas, and to maintain for a while the old ideal boundaries both east and west of the Jordan (IV Kings, xiv, 28). Peace and security followed on this wonderful territorial extension, and together with them a great artistic and commercial development set in. Unfortunately, there set in also the moral laxity and the religious unfaithfulness which were in vain rebuked by the Prophets Amos and Osee, and which surely presaged the utter ruin of the Northern Kingdom. Jeroboam's son, Zacharias (740 B.C.) was the last monarch of Jehu's's dynasty. Ile had scarcely reigned six months when a usurper, Sellum, put him to death. Sellum, in his turn, was even more summarily dispatched by the truculent Manahem. The last-named ruler had soon to face the Assyrian power directly, and, as he felt unable to withstand it, hastened to proffer tribute to Theglathphalasar Ill and thereby save his crown (738B.C.). His son Phaceia reigned about two years (737- B.C.) and was slain by his captain, Phacee, who combined with Syria against Achaz of Juda. In his sore distress, Achaz appealed for Assyrian help, with the result that Theglathphalasar again (734 B.C.) invaded Israel, annexed Galilee and Damascus, and carried many Israelites into captivity. Phacee's murderer, Osee, was Assyria's faithful vassal as long as Theglathphalasar lived. Shortly afterwards, at the instigation of Egypt, he revolted against Salmanasar IV, Assyria's new ruler, whereupon Assyrian troops overran Israel and laid siege to Samaria, which, after a long resistance, fell, near the close of the year 722 B.C., under Sargon II, who had meantime succeeded Salmanasar IV. With this ended the Northern Kingdom, after an existence of a little more than two hundred years. (For the fate of the Israelites left in Palestine or exiled, see CAPTIVITIES OF THE ISRAELITES.)

IX. THE KINGDOM OF JUDA

Of the two kingdoms formed upon the disruption of Solomon's empire, the Southern Kingdom, or Kingdom of Juda, was in several respects the weaker, and yet was the better fitted to withstand the assaults of foreign enemies. Its general relations with Israel, Egypt, and Assyria, during the existence of the Northern Kingdom, have been brieflv mentioned in connection with the history of that kingdom, and need not be more fully set forth here. Hence the following sketch of the Kingdom of Juda deals exclusively with the period of its existence subsequent to the overthrow of the Kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians. At the time of the fall of Samaria, Ezechias was King of Juda (725-696 B.C.). He long persevered in the allegiance which his father, Achaz, had pledged to Assyria; Sargon's death, however, in 705 B. c., appeared to him and other Western princes a favourable opportunity to throw off the Assyrian yoke. He therefore formed with them a powerful league against Sennacherib, Sargon's successor. In due time (701 B.C.), the Assyrian forces invaded Western Asia, captured several Judean cities, and compelled Ezechias to renounce the league and pay an enormous fine. Not long afterwards, Sennacherib ravaged Juda again, and haughtily threatened Jerusalem with destruction . In accordance with Isaias's prophecy, however, his threats came to naught: " the Angel of the Lord decimated his army, and disturbances in the East recalled him to Nineveh (IV Kings, xviii, 13; xix). It was under Ezechias that Juda came in contact for the first time with Babylonia (IV Kings, xx). The long reign of his son, Manasses (696-41 B.C.), was, almost throughout, marked by religious degeneracy and faithful vassalage to Assyria. In the latter part of it, Juda rebelled against Asarhaddon, Sennacherib's son and successor, but the insurrection was speedily crushed, and misfortune brought back Manasses to the worship of the true God. The brief reign of Amon (641-39 B.C.) was an imitation of the first and the worst practices of his father. In 608 B.C. Palestine was traversed by an Egyptian army under Nechao II, a prince of the twenty-sixth dynasty, ambitious to restore to his country an Asiatic empire. As a faithful vassal of Assyria, the pious King Josias (639-08 B. c.) marched out to arrest Pharaoh's progress. He was defeated and slain at Mageddo, and his kingdom became an Egyptian dependency. This vassalage was indeed short-lived. The Chaldean Nabuchodonosor, on his victorious March to Egypt, invaded Juda for the first time, and Joakim (A.V. Jehoiakim) (608-597 B.C.), the eldest son and second successor of Josias, became a vassal of Babylon in 604 B.C. Despite the advice of the Prophet Jeremias, the Jewish king rebelled in 598. Next year, the newly enthroned king, Joachin (A.V. Jehoiakin), was taken, with Jerusalem, and was carried captive to Babylon together with many of his subjects, among whom was the Prophet Ezechiel. In 588 B.C., Juda rebelled again under Sedecias (597-86 B.C.), the third son of Josias. In July, 586 B.C., the Holy City surrendered, and its blinded king and most of his people were deported to Babylon. Thus began the Babylonian exile (see CAPTIVITIES OF THE ISRAELITES).

X. AFTER THE BABYLONIAN EXILE

"Politically and nationally the Babylonian captivity put an end for ever to the people of Israel. Even when, 350 years later, there was once more a Jewish state, those who formed it were not the people of Israel, not even the Jewish nation, but that portion which remained in the mother country of a great religious organization scattered over all Asia and Egypt" (Cornill). The exiles who, in 538 B.C., availed themselves of Cyrus's permission to return to Palestine, were mostly Judeans, whose varied fortunes after their settlement in and around Jerusalem belong in a very particular manner to the history of Judaism and consequently need be set forth only in the briefest manner in the present article. Prompted by the religious impulse which had led them to come back to the land of their fathers, their first concern in reaching it was to resume God's holy worship. Their perseverance in rearing the second Temple was finally crowned with success in 516 B.C., despite the bitter and prolonged opposition of the Samaritans. Their great leaders -- not only the Prophets of the time (Zachary and Malachy), but also their local secular heads (Nehemias and Esdras) -- were religious reformers, whose one purpose was to secure the people's fidelity to God's law and worship. They made no attempt to set up a monarchy of their own, and as long as the Persian Empire lasted they and their descendants gloried in their loyalty to its rulers. Within the Persian period falls the formation of the Jewish military colony at Elephantine, the existence and religious worship of which have been disclosed by Judeo-Aramean papyri discovered quite recently. The conqueror of Persia, Alexander the Great, seems to have bestowed special privileges upon the Jewish community of Palestine, and to have granted to the Jews who settled in Alexandria -- a city which he founded and called after his name -- equal civil rights with the Macedonians (331 B.C.).

Alexander died before consolidating his empire. During the period of bloodshed which followed his death, Palestine was the bone of contention between the Syrian and Egyptian kings, often changed masters, and suffered oppression and misery at each change. As time went on, the welfare, moral and religious, of the Palestinian Jews was more and more seriously threatened by the influence of Hellenism, at first chiefly exercised by the Ptolemies from Alexandria as the centre (323-202 B.C.), and later by Antiochus III, the Great, of Syria, and his two successors Seleucus IV and Antiochus Epiphanes, reigning at Antioch (202-165 B.C.). Under this last named Syrian prince, Hellenism appeared to be on the point of stamping Judaism out of Palestine. The high-priests of the time, who were the local rulers of Jerusalem, adopted Greek names, and courted the king's favour by introducing or encouraging Hellenic practices among the inhabitants of the Holy City. At length Antiochus himself resolved to transform Jerusalem into a Greek city, and to destroy Judaism from the towns of Palestine and, indeed, from all his dominions. A most cruel and systematic persecution ensued, in the course of which the Machabees rebelled against their oppressors. The final result of the Machabean revolt was the overthrow of the Syrian power and the rise of an independent Jewish kingdom.

Under the Asmonean dynasty (135-63 B.C.) the Palestinian Jewish community gradually spread, by conquest and forcible conversion, from its narrow limits in Nehemias's time, to practically the extent of the territory of ancient Israel. Internally, it was divided between the two rival sects of the Pharisees and the Sadducees, themselves the slow outcome of the twofold movement at work during the Syrian suzerainty, the one against, and the other in favour of, Hellenism. The war which broke out between the last two Asmonean kings, John Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II, who were supported by the Pharisees and the Sadducees respectively, gave to the Romans the 9pportunity they had long sought for intervening in Judean affairs. In 63 B.C. Pompey invested and took Jerusalem, and put an end to the last Jewish dynasty. Up to 37 B.C., the year of the accession of the Idumean Herod to the throne of Judea, the history of the Palestinian Jews reflects, for the most part, the vicissitudes of the tangled politics of the Roman imperatores. Herod's despotic reign (37 B.C. to A.D. 4) was marked by a rapid growth of Hellenism in nearly every city of Palestine, and also by a consolidation of Pharisaism in the celebrated schools of Hillel and Shammai. Upon the death of Herod, the Emperor Augustus divided his kingdom and placed Judea under procurators as a part of the Roman Province of Syria. The last political struggles to be mentioned are (1) the Jewish revolt against Rome in A. D. 66, which ended in the fall of Jerusalem in A.D. 70; (2) the rebellion of liar Cochba in A.D. 132 under the Emperor Adrian, who finally transformed Jerusalem into the Roman colony of Ælia Capitolina from which all Jews were banished. Ever since then, the Jews have been scattered in many countries, often persecuted, yet surviving, always hoping in some manner for a future Messias, and generally influenced by the customs, and morals, religious beliefs of the nations among whom they live.

Besides the works on Biblical history referred to in the bibllography to ISAAC, the following deserve special mention: VIGOUROUX, Bible et dcouvertes modernes (Paris, 1896); SAYCE, Higher Criticism and the Verdict of the Monuments(London, 1894); McCURDY, History, Prophecy and the Monuments (New York, 1895; new ed. announced, 1909); LAGRANGE, Etudes sur les religions sémitiques (Paris, 1903); PINCHES, The Old Testament in the Light of the Historical Records and Legends of Assyria and Babylonia (London, 1903); WINCKLER, History of Israel (Berlin, 1903); BREASTED, Ancient Records of Egypt (Chicago, 1906-07); VINCENT, Chanaan d'après l'exploration récente (Paris, 1907); CORNILL, History of the People of Israel, tr. (Chicago, 1899); SOUTTAR, A Short History of Ancient Peoples (New York, 1903); WADE, Old Testament History (New York, 1904).

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Issachar

The exact derivation and the precise meaning of the name are unknown. It designates, first, the ninth son of Jacob and the fifth son of Lia (Gen., xxx, 16-18; xxxv, 23; 1 Par., ii, 1), on whom it was bestowed on account of some particular circumstance connected with his birth (cf. Gen., xxx, 14-18), and of whom nothing is told in Holy Writ besides the fact that, at the descent into Egypt, he had four sons (Gen., xlvi, 13; Num., xxvi, 23, 24; 1 Par., vii, 1).

It designates, in the second place, one of the tribes of Israel, which had the ninth son of Jacob for its ancestor. Our knowledge of the tribe of Issachar is rather meagre. During the journey through the wilderness, that tribe, along with those of Juda and Zabulon, marched on the east of the tabernacle (Num., ii,5). It contained 54,400 warriors when the first census was taken at Mount Sinai (Num., i, 28 sq.), and 64,300 at the time of the second census (Num., xxvi, 25). After the entrance into Western Palestine, this tribe was one of the six which stood on Mount Garizim during the ceremony of the cursing and the blessing (Deut., xxvii, 12). The precise limits of its territory are not, given in Holy Writ. Its general boundaries were Zabulon and Nephtali to the north, Manasses to the south and to the west, the Jordan to the east. Its lot, according to Jos., xix, 17-23, comprised sixteen cities and their villages, prominent among which were the cities of Jezrael, Sunem, Engannim, and Anaharath. Within its territory was the great plain of Esdraelon, the general form of which enabled the Hebrew poet (Gen., xlix, 14) to describe Issachar as "a large-limbed ass stretching himself between the sheepfolds", and the fertility of which is praised by travellers down to the present day. The tribe played an important part during the period of the Judges (Judges, v, 15; x, 1, 2); and in the time of David it counted 145,600 warriors (I Par., vii, 1-5). Its history during the royal period was likewise important, and the third king of Northern Israel belonged to that tribe (111 Kings, xv, 27). The Prophet Ezechiel places Issachar among the Southern tribes between Simeon and Zabulon (Ezech., xviii, 25, 26), and St. John names it between Levi and Zabulon (Apoc., vii, 7).

See Comm. on Genesis and Biblical Histories in bibliography to ISAAC, to which may be added: ROBINSON, Biblical Researches in Palestine, III (Boston, 1841); STANLEY, Sinai and Palestine (New York, 1859); SMITH, Historical Geography of the Holy Land (New York, 1897).

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Issus

A titular see of Cilicia Prima, suffragan of Tarsus. The city is famous for a whole series of battles fought there at different periods. The first was the victory of Alexander over Darius in 333 B. c., next that of Septimius Severus over Pescennius Niger, in A.D. 194, that of Heraclius over Chosroes in A.D. 622, finally that of the Sultan of Egypt, Bibars, over the Armenian King Hetoum in August, 1266. So many combats were fought at Issus because in its vicinity was the famous defile leading along the seashore from Cilicia to Syria, the "Gates of Syria", or highway from Asia Minor into the Syrian Orient. Issus is not mentioned in the "Notitiæ Episcopatuum" of the Patriarchate of Antioch, to which Cilicia belonged (Echos d'Orient, X, 94, 145), and it is not known in what manner it became a titular see of the Latin Church. Its ruins are situated near Ayaz.

ALISHAN, Sissouan ou I'Arméno-Cilicie (Venice, 1899), 476-81.

S. VAILHÉ

St. Ita

Saint Ita, called the "Brigid of Munster"; b. in the present County of Waterford, about 475; d. 15 January, 570. She became a nun, settling down at Cluain Credhail, a place-name that has ever since been known as Killeedy--that is, "Church of St. Ita"--in County Limerick. Her austerities are told by St. Cuimin of Down, and numerous miracles are recorded of her. She was also endowed with the gift of prophecy and was held in great veneration by a large number of contemporary saints, men as well as women. When she felt her end approaching she sent for her community of nuns, and invoked the blessing of heaven on the clergy and laity of the district around Killeedy. Not alone was St. Ita a saint, but she was the foster-mother of many saints, including St. Brendan the Voyager, St. Pulcherius (Mochoemog), and St. Cummian Fada. At the request of Bishop Butler of Limerick, Pope Pius IX granted a special Office and Mass for the feast of St. Ita, which is kept on 15 January.

W. H. GRATTAN-FLOOD

Italians in the United States

Christopher Columbus, an Italian, was the leader of those who in succeeding centuries were led by the Providence of God, through economic necessities, to propagate the Faith in the New World. The immediate Italian followers of Columbus were John Cabot, the first navigator to reach the coast of North America, his son Sebastian, who reached Labrador, Amerigo Vespucci, who gave his name to the continent, and Verrazzano, the discoverer of New York Bay and of the Hudson River. Previous legendary discoveries did not open the continent to Christian civilization, as did the discovery of Columbus and the explorations of those Italians who followed him.

It is true, however, that the expeditions of Columbus and his successors were not made in the service of the Italian States, and therefore the first settlers were not Italian. It is a curious fact that the history of Massachusetts supplies a number of family names which have led some investigators to claim that the Italians or persons of Italian origin fixed their homes there at a very early date. The supporters of this view hold that the Cabots of Massachusetts are descendants of the explorer Sebastian Cabot. They also point to the spelling Begelo, which occurs in the diary of Samuel Sewall (1674-1729), as the oldest form of the well-known New England name of Bigelow, and to such other names as Mico, Brisco, Cotta, Tenno, and Bristo, which are of a more or less marked Italian type. Even if these speculations be well founded, it is certain that the bearers of these names soon lost their national identity among their far more numerous Puritan neighbours.

Still, although the stream of Italian immigration did not set in until much later, completeness demands some mention of the few distinguished Italians who came to the American colonies, or the United States, as scattered precursors of the latter-day tide. Among those who found their way to America in the eighteenth century was Lorenzo da Ponte, (q.v.), the librettist of Mozart's "Le Nozze di Figaro" and "Don Giovanni". Another name worthy of note is that of Constantino Brumidi, who produced many noteworthy paintings, among them those in the Capitol at Washington, where he died in 1880. Father Joseph M. Finotti, the author of "Bibliographia Catholica Americana" and several other widely known works, came to this country from Italy in 1845. There have been several other early Italian immigrants worthy of note. At the time of the Revolution of '48 many well-known Italians came to the United States and lived there for some time. The best known of these was Garibaldi, who resided two years on Staten island working in a candle factory.

Since the year 1880, when Italian immigration to America began to assume its present enormous proportions, the problems arising out of it have become extremely grave for both the Italian and the United States Governments. At first, owing to the great density of the population of Italy — 257 to the square mile in 1881, and 294 to the square mile in 1901 — this movement of the surplusage was regarded in the mother country as a great relief. Now, however, both agricultural labourers and those available for building and manufacturers having become scarce, in proportion to the larger demands of a growing industrial and commercial activity, the Italian Government has become seriously alarmed at this continued drain upon the population. Laws have been enacted, or are being prepared, ostensibly for the protection of the emigrants, but in reality to preserve for Italy the fruit of the labour of her children. It is true that many millions of dollars are sent to Italy every year by the Italians residing in America, but this sum, which is placed by some authorities at as high a figure as sixty millions, hardly repays Italy for the loss she sustains, first in having nurtured and partly educated hundreds of thousands of men who have afterwards given their labour to a nation to which they cost nothing; second, in losing a great part of the industrial production which she might have had, and which, considering the difference in the standards of living and of wages, would have amounted to an immense sum for Italy. As a compensation for these losses Italy receives back a certain number of immigrants who, after having lived abroad for a number of years, return to their country with what appears there to be a little fortune. It is natural that this should be regarded with favour in Italy.

For this reason the attitude of the Italian Government is passive. It permits people to emigrate, but emigrants are still subject to conscription, and they are more or less under the eye of the consuls and partly protected by societies subsidized by the commissioner of emigration, an official of the ministry of foreign affairs in Rome. For obvious reasons American regards this movement from a very different point of view. It is true that even the immigrants who, after a stay of some years, return to Italy with their savings have contributed to the wealth of the United States a great deal more than the sums they take away, but America does not need money as much as she needs good citizens, although it is always desirable for the sake of national economy that the money accumulated in America should be there invested. Both nations, though in different ways, are equally interested in Italian migration. Its cause, it must be emphatically stated, is economic. Those who repeat that Italians emigrate to America because of their desire of more liberty and political opportunity forget that forty years ago Howells wrote that it is "difficult to tempt from home any of the homekeeping Italian race". The race remained homekeeping during the long period of foreign domination and during the troublesome and disorderly period of the Revolution; it began to feel the need of emigrating many years after the unification of Italy, and the reasons that induced the Italians to become a migratory race are entirely economic. The system of conscription, the new bureaucracy, the type of the new Government, the diffusion of popular education, the improvement in the means of transportation, the progress of industrial enterprises, lead many of the Italian peasantry to leave, first, their native villages, then the province, and, at last, the country. The construction of great railroads has attracted thousands of unskilled labourers to the borders of Italy, where they can earn much more than they could in their native hamlets. France, Germany, South America, then began to attract these labourers, who, however, after one season, would return home with their savings. They would, of course, ultimately be attracted to those countries which offered them the highest pay and the most constant employment. The United States thus attracted these emigrants, especially those of Southern Italy.

This fact can also be explained by other economic causes. Prof. Pantaleoni (in the "Giornale degli Economisti") affirms that during the year 1891, when the emigration from Italy reached 100,000, Northern Italy, with 48 per cent of the national wealth, paid 40 per cent of the taxes; Central Italy, with 25 per cent of the national wealth, paid 28 per cent of the taxes; Southern Italy, with only 28 per cent of the national wealth, paid 32 per cent of the national taxes. The system of taxation was the chief cause of the lack of enterprise in agricultural pursuits. The owners of the land did not improve it for fear that the tax might be increased, and to these heavy taxes the monopoly of the tobacco and the family tax were added, rendering the situation of the agrarian classes almost unendurable. Italy was then the weakest of European nations, and the bleeding of the masses became a necessity in order to maintain the Government. The young nation paid $200,000 a day for interest on the public debt, and, after paying this, as well as the salaries of the civil employees, the pensions, and the expenses of worship, only a small part of the national budget remained available for national expenditures such as the army, navy, public instruction, railways, police, the maintenance of prisons, etc. Under these conditions depreciated labour had to find another field and a better market. Agriculture was no longer profitable, in many places. Unimproved lands, with primitive methods, did not yield great profits, and a large part of these were absorbed by taxation.

The letters of the first emigrants announced to their friends the favourable conditions of the labour market abroad, and especially in the United States. A rush of emigrants followed immediately. Soon the good news was confirmed by returning emigrants, with "fortunes" of a few hundred dollars. Since then the stream of immigration continued with two interruptions caused by the two great industrial crises of 1893 and 1907. The official statistics of Italian immigration into the United States, from 1831 to 1908, are given below. It should be remembered, however, that the figures previous to 1890 are not so accurate as those for the succeeding years.

1831-1870: 25,082 immigrants
1870-1880: 55,759
1880-1890: 307,309
1890: 52,093
1891: 76,055
1892: 62,137
1893: 72,916
1894: 43,967
1895: 36,961
1896: 68,060
1897: 59,431
1898: 58,613
1899: 77,419
1900: 100,135
1901: 135,996
1902: 178,375
1903: 230,622
1904: 193,296
1905: 221,479
1906: 273,120
1907: 285,731
1908: 128,503
Total: 2,743,059

Between 1821 and 1850 the Italian immigration into the United States amounted to 4531. Since then the figures by decades are as follows: —

1851-1860: 9,231 immigrants
1861-1870: 11,728
1871-1880: 55,759
1881-1890: 307,309
1891-1900: 651,899
1901-1908: 1,647,102

It should be borne in mind, however, that a large number of immigrants returned to Italy, and therefore, in the official statistics, some immigrants are necessarily counted twice and even three times. Statistics have not been compiled of the number of immigrants returning to Italy, but from what has been obtained during the last few years when more attention has been given to this important phenomenon, it is safe to say that almost one million of the Italians counted in the general total of immigrants into the United States have returned to Italy. Their number, however, is perhaps more than made up by the children of Italian parentage born in the United States. On account of the peculiar environment of the Italian quarters of the great cities, many of these American-born Italians may be considered as Italian rather than American. The number of the Italians in the United States at the beginning of the year 1910 can therefore be roughly estimated at about 2,250,000.

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS AND DISTRIBUTION

In the statistics taken by the Federal Government at the immigration station, the Northern Italians are separated from the Southern Italians and Sicilians. From these statistics it appears that, of the total Italian immigration into the United States, 80 per cent is composed of Southern Italians and Sicilians. This means that the Latin type is ethnically predominant among them, since the Northern Italians, as is well known, have a considerable Teutonic element in their composition. One important thing to note is that those Italians who emigrate to the United States with the intention of returning to Italy include only a very small proportion of women. On the whole the women constitute no more than 30 per cent of the Italians in the United States — according to some estimates considerably less. But the percentage of Italian women passing through the immigration station at Ellis Island, which was almost negligible ten years ago, is now rapidly increasing.

Economically, the Italian element has not contributed as largely to the progress of the United States as have other races. They have, however, enjoyed their share of American prosperity. Italians pay taxes to the City of New York on more than 100,000,000 dollars value of real estate. They have, besides, large sums in the banks. The silk industry is to a large extent in their hands, and so is the fruit and grape industry in California. They carry on an extensive manufacture of macaroni in many cities, while their unwillingness to give up their national dishes is partly responsible for the rapid increase of Italian-American commerce which, in 1909, exceeded 100,000,000 dollars. Eighty per cent of the Italian-American immigrants are unskilled workers. The number of skilled workers among them was very small, nearly all the immigrants being rustics up to a few years ago, but the proportion is rapidly increasing, while the immigrants from the cities are beginning to come in larger numbers.

Statistics of Italian marriages are lacking, but it is a fact that the Italian prefers to marry an Italian, and many Italian girls cross the ocean by every steamer and are married to the men who have sent for them at the immigration station. Statistics are also lacking as to the birth rate among the Italians in America. In the State of Massachusetts the average number of children in families in which both husband and wife are children of natives, is less than two, while the number in families in which the husband and wife are foreign born is over four. This, perhaps, may be taken to be a fair average for the Italian families in the United States. The Italians can be considered one of the strongest races among the immigrants, yet it is sad to note that, on account of the crowding in the cities, of the lack of air in the tenements, and perhaps also because of ignorance of practical hygiene, mortality among them in this country is 3.6 per cent, that is, higher than that of any other nationality. In deaths from measles, diphtheria, scarlet fever, and broncho-pneumonia, Italians reach a higher percentage than any other nationality.

The Italian working population of the United States is approximately 1,200,000. Of these 800,000 were engaged in agriculture, and 400,000 in trades, mining, etc., before emigration; 1,000,000 living in towns of less than 10,000 population, and 200,000 in larger towns. Their distribution in the United States, in respect to occupations, is as follows: agriculture, 80,000; mining of all kinds, 100,000; factory work, 500,000; building- and railroad-industries, 520,000. In respect of local distribution, 200,000 inhabit towns of less than 10,000 population, and 1,000,000 inhabit larger towns. Hence it appears that the vast majority of Italian immigrants were occupied in agriculture at home and do not engage in agricultural pursuits in the United States. Only a small part of the Italians coming to the United States devote themselves to agriculture. It is worth noting that 60 per cent of the Italians engaged in agriculture in the United States come from Northern Italy, although Northern Italians from less than 20 per cent of the total immigration. In the vicinity of the large cities of the East, where truck-farming and chicken-raising can be made very remuneratively, Italians have established themselves on the small farms abandoned by the children of Americans who go to the city. Thus the neighborhood of Boston, all the Connecticut Valley, and the western part of the State of New York have several hundred farms occupied by Italians. In the southern part of New Jersey, also, the Italians have devoted themselves to agriculture and especially to grape-growing. It is in California, however, that Italians have achieved most success as cultivators. Throughout the South, and especially in Louisiana, the Italians work as farmers with remarkably good results. In West Virginia their success is not so marked, and some promising colonies have failed miserably. The states which have the largest proportion of Italian immigrants are: the New England States with 200,000, of whom 50,000 live at Boston; New Jersey, 250,000, of whom 60,000 live at Newark; New York, 700,000, of whom 500,000 live in the City of New York; Pennsylvania, 300,000, of whom 100,000 live at Philadelphia; Illinois, 100,000, of whom 50,000 live at Chicago; Louisiana, 60,000, of whom 30,000 live at New Orleans; California, 50,000, of whom 25,000 live at San Francisco. Of the Northern Italians, four-fifths are found in the States of Illinois, Ohio, New Jersey, Colorado, California. Of the Southern Italians and Sicilians, four-fifths are found in the States of New York, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Connecticut. As to occupation, the Italians of the New England States, of New York, and New Jersey are chiefly occupied in mills or on railroads; in Pennsylvania a large number are working in the mines, where, however, the Slavic element is growing stronger every day. The steel and the coke industries in Pennsylvania also employ a considerable number of Italians.

From what precedes it appears at once that 87 per cent of the Italians of the United States are settled in the New England and North Atlantic divisions, and that of these nearly 80 per cent crowd into the large cities. This congestion presents a most serious problem. The phenomenon, however, is not peculiar to the Italians; it is also to be observed in the case of other nationalities which are in the same economic condition as the Italians. The city offers a large number of various resources; it furnishes work to the newcomer from the start, and it needs the newcomer for a variety of occupations which he alone can fill. The Italian immigrant is perhaps the most adaptable of all in this respect; he is intelligent, in most cases sober, faithful in his work, always looking for an opportunity to increase his salary. He goes from one shop to another, from the railroad tracks to the mill. The country offers the Italian immigrant a kind of occupation which he looks upon with disgust, an occupation which reminds him of centuries of oppression and slavery. There was a time in Italy when agriculture was productive, when the owners of the land gave their energies to it, when they considered the working people their wards; but landowners began to live in the city and neglect the country, and the country which had produced enough for lord and peasant, now produced enough for neither. Yet these poor serfs of the soil, in whom the love of the fields is inborn, bring that love with them, and go to the city because there they can easily accumulate enough to buy the piece of land they long for in their native village. Those who have studied the problem of the distribution of Italian immigrants in the United States have forgotten two most important facts: (1) the disgust of the immigrants for agricultural work, which they associate with sufferings and poverty; (2) the desire — almost general — among the immigrants to return to their native land. The first of these two facts is only temporary and disappears with changed economic conditions.

Italians do not come to the United States with the idea of settling there, as did the immigrants from North-Western Europe a generation or two ago. It is true, however, that almost all Italian immigrants ultimately adopt the United States as their permanent home, but all arguments based on this fact are futile. So many have asked: If it be true that the vast majority of the Italian immigrants settle permanently, with their families, in the United States, why not try to distribute them better in the West and South, instead of letting them crowd into the cities of the East? Such reasoning as this has led to efforts on the part of the Federal Government to distribute the Italian immigrants more advantageously — such, for example, as the establishment of the information bureau at Ellis Island. This is like applying a social and economic cure to what is essentially a psychologic phenomenon. The Italian is the most idealistic of all immigrants. The money which he wants to accumulate, which he has reason to believe he will sooner accumulate in the city than the country, he does not want for its own sake. The feelings of the Italian who leaves his country have been beautifully described by Manzoni in his masterly novel: "To the mind of him who voluntarily departs in the hope of making a fortune in a strange country, the dreams of wealth vanish. . . . He is astonished at his own courage in having gone so far, and would return home at once if he did not think that at some future day he will be able to return rich. Sad and bewildered, he enters the crowded cities; the long rows of houses, and the streets upon streets, take away his breath; in presence of the magnificent monuments which tourists admire, he can only think with painful yearning of the little farm, of the village, of the little house which he has long desired to possess, and which he will buy when he returns rich to his native mountains." It is this mental attitude that defeats every attempt to properly distribute the Italian immigration: anxious, above all, to return to Italy with a certain sum of money, the immigrant knows that he can earn that sum more quickly in the city than in the country, and for that reason he prefers the city. Here is the key to the whole problem; for this point of view is common to all immigrants except those — obviously undesirable as settlers in the United States — whose criminal past debars them from all hope of a return to Italy.

How can the newly arrived immigrant be persuaded that, whatever he may think now, he will eventually be glad to make his and his family's home in the United States? Even if it were possible to persuade him of this, there would still remain the financial difficulty. To go West, he needs money — to buy land, to live during the first year, to take care of the family in Italy — and the average Italian immigrant comes here with just enough money to pass through the immigration station. In most cases the money spent for the journey represents a loan, which must be repaid out of the immigrant's first earnings. This explains in part the large sums of money sent back to Italy by immigrants. All projects, therefore, for the distribution of Italian immigrants in the United States should be made subject to these two facts: the set purpose of the newly arrived immigrant to return to Italy, and his lack of money. Of all the Italians who pass the United States immigration officials at Ellis Island, 90 per cent already have friends in their new country to whom they can go, and who, in most cases, have already found employment for them. In many cases the newcomer is placed in the hands of some Italian "banker", who sells passages, acts as notary public, sells real estate, and furnishes contractors with Italian labour. The immigrants are at first glad to accept whatever employment may be offered them; when the initial difficulties have been overcome by their persistence and sobriety, and when they have realized that money cannot be as quickly made in America as they had imagined, they next discover the economical advantage of maintaining the whole family in America rather than dividing earnings between board in American and remittances to Italy. The wife, or the betrothed girl, is then brought over, with the idea of working hard, side by side, so as to be able all the sooner to return to Italy together. They buy furniture on the instalment plan and spend their savings; the children grow up in America without any knowledge of Italy or the Italian language. Then one of the old people at home dies, and the crisis comes. The immigrant goes back to Italy and finds that, accustomed as he now is to a different environment, he no longer feels at home in his native country. He regulates his family affairs and brings with him to American his surviving parent. Thus the home is transplanted to the United States, and the Italian becomes an American in spirit as well as in residence.

How long does it take for the average immigrant to go through the process? Sometimes two or three years, sometimes fifteen or even twenty. It is certain, however, that when this evolution is completed the immigrant is a city dweller, and cannot be induced to give up city life.

The only hope of solving the problem would seem to be in giving good advice to intending emigrants before they leave Italy. An Italian peasant will always sooner believe a fellow-townsman, however ignorant, than an agent of the Government. Experience in California, as well as in some parts of Texas, shows that a successful agricultural colony of Italians grows very rapidly, while an unsuccessful one just as rapidly disappears. Every effort should therefore be made to reach the Italian in his own country through his friends in America, in such a way as to convince him that it will be to his advantage to go to some agricultural settlement where others of his countrymen are successful and prosperous. As the Italian immigrant can, unquestionably, be of more service, both to himself and to his new country, as a farmer than as a sweat-shop worker or a miner, any expenditure with a view to the attainment of this desirable result would be well repaid.

RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION

Since the discovery of the new continent the sons of Saint Francis have been indefatigable in their work in the new vineyard of the Lord. When the immigrants began to come in large numbers the Franciscans were already at work among them, instructing them, and comforting them in the trials of their new life. St. Anthony's Church, founded in 1866, was the first Italian parish to be organized in the Archdiocese of New York, and its pastors, the Franciscan Fathers, have established missions all over the country, faithfully imitating their seraphic founder by their zeal. Notable among the pioneer Franciscans were Father Pamfilo da Magliano, founder of St. Bonaventure's College at Allegany, New York; Leo Paccillio, first pastor of St. Anthony's church and parish, New York; Anacletus De Angelis, who raised a monument to his order by building the church and convents of St. Anthony. The Franciscans were followed by the Jesuits, the Scalabrini Fathers, the Salesians, the Passionists, and the Augustinians. The American episcopate has at all times endeavoured to provide the Italian immigrants with churches and Italian priests. In some cases these efforts did not prove very successful on account of the difficulty of persuading Italians to support their church, a difficulty which can easily be explained when it is borne in mind that the Church in Italy is supported by what might be called indirect taxation. Whenever possible, parochial schools have been established, and in most of them both English and Italian are taught. These schools are looked upon very favourably by the Italians, and an effort ought to be made to extend their influence; very often the parents are brought to the Church through the influence of the pupils of the parochial schools.

In New York City, where the problem of Italian immigration is more acute than anywhere else in the country, Archbishop Farley has done his utmost, helped by Dr. Ferrante, his secretary. Archbishop Quigley of Chicago, Bishop Fitzmaurice of Erie, and Bishop Canevin of Pittsburgh have done much to give Italians churches and schools. In some cases priests of other nationalities have even learned the Italian language in order to be able to minister to the needs of the Italians, and a most notable instance of this kind is that of Father C. Wienker, of the Diocese of Erie, who for many years has faithfully worked among the Italians of the bituminous mines of western Pennsylvania. Among the laymen who have contributed of their wealth to promote the religious welfare of of the Italians must be mentioned the members of the Iselin family who built the Italian church at New Rochelle, N.Y., and several churches and schools in the mining towns of western Pennsylvania. The Church does not neglect the immigrants at their first landing. It is then that they need most assistance. The San Raffaele Society was organized in New York in the year 1893 for the protection of Italian immigrants. Archbishop Farley is the president, the Rev. Gherardo Ferrante is the superintendent, and the Rev. G. Moretto is the managing director. There are in the United States two Italian Catholic weeklies: the "Italiano in America", published by the Salesians, and the "Verité", published partly in English at Philadelphia. One of the strongest evidences of the religious disposition of the Italians in the United States is the fact that over one-half of the eight hundred benevolent societies existing among them bear the names of patron saints of various Italian towns, and in most cases a yearly festival is celebrated in honour of the patron. These festivals, and the parades of all kinds for which they are the occasions, are somewhat apt to give outsiders an unfortunate impression of popular Italian religion. It is true that among the lower classes the cult of the saints is misunderstood and overemphasized, but at the same time these celebrations are proof of a strong attachment to their native homes and of the religious feeling with which it is associated. It is to be regretted that unscrupulous liquor dealers make of these festivals the occasion for a sale of intoxicants which indirectly leads to disorders and even murders.

The following religious statistics are taken from the "Official Catholic Directory": —

• Archdiocese of Baltimore: 3 Italian churches; 3 priests.
• Archdiocese of Boston: 8 Italian churches; 15 priests; 2 parochial schools (8 Franciscan Sisters; 4 Sisters of the Sacred Heart), attended by 724 pupils.
• Archdiocese of Chicago: 10 Italian churches; 6 Fathers, O.S.M.; 13 secular priests; 1 parochial school (10 Sisters of the Sacred Heart), attended by 850 pupils.
• Archdiocese of Cincinnati: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Archdiocese of Milwaukee: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests.
• Archdiocese of New Orleans: 1 Italian church; 5 priests.
• Archdiocese of New York: 26 Italian churches; 55 priests; 6 parochial schools (20 Sisters of the Third Order of Saint Francis, 3 Sisters of Jesus and Mary, 10 Sisters of Charity, 7 Sisters of the Sacred Heart, 31 lay teachers), attended by 3397 pupils; 1 industrial school for boys and girls; 15 chapels; 1 college; 1 seminary; 1 Catholic hospital, with 27 Sisters of the Sacred Heart; 1 orphan asylum, with 13 sisters of the Sacred Heart and 202 inmates; 1 day nursery, with 8 Pallotine Sisters, 56 boys and 52 girls.
• Archdiocese of Oregon City: 1 Italian church; 2 priests.
• Archdiocese of Philadelphia: 13 Italian churches; 21 priests; 3 parochial schools (25 Sisters of Saint Francis), attended by 1615 pupils; 1 orphan asylum, with 10 Sisters of Saint Francis; 1 industrial school, kindergarten, and day nursery, with 22 missionary Sisters of the Third Order of Saint Francis, 164 boys and 162 girls.
• Archdiocese of St. Louis: 3 Italian churches; 5 priests; 1 parochial school (2 lay teachers), attended by 117 pupils.
• Archdiocese of St. Paul: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests.
• Archdiocese of San Francisco: 3 Italian churches; 5 priests.
• Diocese of Albany: 4 Italian churches; 4 priests; 1 seminary with 8 professors and 90 students.
• Diocese of Altoona: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests; 1 parochial school with 56 pupils.
• Diocese of Brooklyn: 11 Italian churches; 16 priests; 2 parochial schools, with 3 Sisters of St. Francis, 11 Sisters of the Sacred Heart, 3 lay teachers, 815 pupils; 1 kindergarten, with 3 teachers, 52 boys, 85 girls.
• Diocese of Buffalo: 8 Italian churches; 12 priests; 4 parochial schools, with 2 Sisters of St. Joseph, 10 Sisters of St. Mary, 8 Sisters of St. Francis, 983 pupils.
• Diocese of Burlington: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests.
• Diocese of Cleveland: 7 Italian churches; 7 priests.
• Diocese of Columbus: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests.
• Diocese of Davenport: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Denver: 3 Italian churches; 5 priests; 2 parochial schools, with 8 Sisters of the Sacred Heart, 10 Sisters of Charity, and 620 pupils.
• Diocese of Detroit: 1 Italian church; 1 priest; 1 parochial school with 78 pupils.
• Diocese of Duluth: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests.
• Diocese of Erie: 6 Italian churches; 7 priests; 1 parochial school, with 2 Sisters of Mercy and 170 pupils.
• Diocese of Fall River: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Harrisburg: 3 Italian churches; 3 priests
• Diocese of Hartford: 6 Italian churches; 9 priests; 3 parochial schools, with 2 Sisters of the Precious Blood, 10 Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart, 5 Sisters of Our Lady of Compassion, and 385 pupils.
• Diocese of Helena: 1 Italian church; 1 priest; 1 parochial school, with 5 Sisters of Charity, 1 lay teacher, and 270 pupils.
• Diocese of Indianapolis: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Little Rock: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Marquette: 4 Italian churches; 4 priests.
• Diocese of Mobile: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Monterey and Los Angeles: 2 Italian churches; 2 priests.
• Diocese of Nashville: 1 Italian church; 2 priests; 1 parochial school, with 4 Sisters of Charity of Nazareth and 140 pupils.
• Diocese of Natchez: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Newark: 19 Italian churches; 20 priests; 6 parochial schools, with 4 Baptistine Sisters, 4 Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart, 2 Sisters of Charity, 5 Sisters of St. Francis, 4 Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, 1 lay teacher, and 1289 pupils; 1 orphan asylum with 12 sisters and 92 orphans.
• Diocese of Peoria: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Pittsburg: 13 Italian churches; 20 priests; 2 parochial schools, with 4 Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, 1 lay teacher, and 307 pupils.
• Diocese of Providence: 2 Italian churches; 5 priests.
• Diocese of Rochester: 3 Italian churches; 3 priests; 1 parochial school, with 5 Sisters of St. Joseph and 271 pupils.
• Diocese of Sacramento: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of St. Augustine: 1 Italian church; 1 priest.
• Diocese of Scranton: 12 Italian churches; 15 priests; 1 parochial school, 6 Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart, and 200 pupils.
• Diocese of Seattle: 1 Italian church; 1 priest; 1 parochial school, with 10 Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart and 110 pupils.
• Diocese of Springfield: 4 Italian churches; 4 priests.
• Diocese of Superior: 3 Italian churches; 3 priests; 1 parochial school, with 4 Franciscan Sisters and 200 pupils.
• Diocese of Syracuse: 1 Italian church; 2 priests.
• Diocese of Trenton: 12 Italian churches; 14 priests.
• Diocese of Wheeling: 5 Italian churches; 6 priests.
• Summary: 219 Italian churches; 315 priests; 41 parochial schools; 254 teachers, including 70 Sisters of the Sacred Heart, 27 Sisters of Charity, 12 Franciscan Sisters, 4 Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, 24 Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, 4 Baptistine Sisters, 3 Sisters of St. Dominic, 7 Sisters of St. Joseph, 38 Sisters of St. Francis, 2 Sisters of the Precious Blood, 4 Sisters of Charity of Nazareth, 5 Sisters of Our Lady of Compassion, 4 Sisters of Jesus and Mary, 2 Sisters of Mercy, 2 Sisters of St. Mary, 39 lay teachers, and 12,697 pupils; 15 chapels; 1 industrial school; 1 kindergarten; 1 day nursery with 8 Pallotine Sisters, 230 boys and 224 girls; 2 seminaries; 1 Catholic hospital; 1 home for Italian immigrants; 3 orphan asylums with 317 orphans.

For statistics of the immigration movement, see the Reports of the Commissioner General of Immigration (Department of Commerce and Labor, Washington, D.C.) and the Bollettino dell' Emigrazione (published at Rome by the Commissioner of Emigration, Ministry of Foreign Affairs). For a general survey of Italian Immigration: PECORINI, Gli Americani nella Vita Moderna (Milan, 1909), xxiv. For social, moral, and economic conditions of the Italians in the United States and for criminal statistics, LORD, TRENOR, AND BARROWS, The Italian in America (New York, 1905). For conditions among Italians occupied in agriculture in the United States, PECORINI, The Italian as an Agricultural Laborer, in Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science: Labor and Wages (Philadelphia, 1909). For an exhaustive study of Italian immigration from the Italian point of view, PREZIOSI, Gl'Italiani negli Stati Uniti del Nord (Milan, 1909).

JOHN DE VILLE

Italo-Greeks

The name applied to the Greeks in Italy who observe the Byzantine Rite. They embrace three classes: (1) the ecclesiastical communities which have followed the Greek Rite since the Byzantine period; (2) the Greek colonies in the various maritime cities and at Rome; (3) the descendants of the Greeks and Albanians who emigrated en masse into Southern Italy after the Turkish occupation of the Balkans, and established towns, or at least formed powerful groups by themselves; they long maintained their native language and customs, and even now observe the Greek Rite, though in other respects they have been absorbed in the Italian population.

(1) As to the first class, it is difficult to say whether the Greek Rite was followed in any diocese of Southern Italy or Sicily before the eighth century. But the gradual hellenization of those regions, as well as the founding of numerous Greek monasteries, must have affected liturgical life. The spread of Greek monasticism in Italy received a strong impulse from the Saracenic invasion of Palestine and Egypt, and later from the Iconoclastic persecutions. The monks naturally retained their rite, and as the bishops were not infrequently chosen from their number, the diocesan liturgy, under favourable conditions, could easily be changed, especially since the Lombard occupation of the inland regions of Southern Italy cut off the Greeks in the South from communication with the Latin Church, whose intellectual culture, moreover, was far inferior to that of Byzantium.

When, in 726, Leo the Isaurian, by a stroke of his pen, withdrew Southern Italy from the patriarchal jurisdiction of Rome and gave it to the Patriarch of Constantinople, the process of hellenization became more rapid; it received a further impulse when, on account of the Saracenic occupation of Sicily, by Greeks and hellenized Sicilians repaired to Calabria and Apulia. Still it was not rapid enough to suit the Byzantine emperors, who feared lest those regions should again fall under the influence of the Western Empire, like the Duchy of Rome and the Exarchate of Ravenna. Finally, after the Saxon emperors had made a formidable attempt to drive the Greeks from the peninsula, Emperor Nicephorus Phocas and the Patriarch Polyeuctos made it obligatory on the bishops, in 968, to adopt the Greek Rite. This order aroused lively opposition in some quarters, as at Bari, under Bishop Giovanni. Nor was it executed in other places immediately and universally. Cassano and Taranto, for instance, are said to have always maintained the Latin Rite. At Trani, in 983, Bishop Rodostamo was allowed to retain the Latin Rite, as a reward for aiding in the surrender of the city to the Greeks. About the middle of the eleventh century, however, Bishop Giovanni II joined the schism of Michael Caerularius. In every diocese there were always some churches which never forsook the Latin Rite; on the other hand, long after the restoration of that rite, there remained Greek churches with native Greek clergy.

The restoration of the Latin Rite began with the Norman conquest in the eleventh century, especially in the first period of the conquest, when Norman ecclesiastics were appointed bishops. Another potent factor was the reform of Gregory VII, who in his efforts to repress marriage among the Latin clergy found no small obstacle in the example of the Greek priests. However, he and his successors recognized the Greek Rite and discipline wherever it was in legitimate possession. Moreover, the Latin bishops ordained the Greek as well as the Latin clergy. In the course of time the Norman princes gained the affection of their Greek subjects by respecting their rite, which had a strong support in the numerous Basilian monasteries (in the fifteenth century there were still seven of them in the Archdiocese of Rossano alone). The latinization of the dioceses was complete in the sixteenth century. Among those which held out longest for the Greek Rite were Acerenza (and perhaps Gravina), 1302; Gerace, 1467; Oppido, 1472 (when it was temporarily united to Gerace); Rossano, 1460; Gallipoli, 1513; Bova (to the time of Gregory XIII), etc. But even after that time many Greek priests remained in some dioceses. In that of Otranto, in 1583, there were still two hundred Greek priests, nearly all native. At Reggio, Calabria, Count Ruggiero in 1092 had given the Greeks the church of S. Maria della Cattolica, whose clergy had a protopapa, exempt from the jurisdiction of the bishop; this was the ease until 1611. In 1695 there were in the same dioceses fifty-nine Greek priests; after thirty years there was only one. Rossano still had a Greek clergy in the seventeenth century. The few native Greek priests were afterwards absorbed in the tide of immigration (see below). Of the Basilian monasteries the only one left is that of Grottaferrata, near Rome. In Sicily the latinization was, for two reasons, accomplished more easily and radically. First, during the rule of the Saracens most of the dioceses were left without bishops, so that the installation of Latin bishops encountered no difficulty; secondly, the Normans had come as liberators, and not as conquerors.

(2) Important Greek colonies, founded chiefly for commercial reasons, were located at Venice, Ancona (where they obtained from Clement VII and Paul III the church of S. Anna, which they lost in 1833, having been declared schismatical in 1797), Bari, Lecce (where, even in the nineteenth century, in the church of S. Nicola, Divine worship was carried on in the Greek tongue, though in the Latin Rite), Naples (where they have the church of SS. Pietro e Paolo, erected in 1526 by Tommaso Paleologo Assagni), Leghorn (where they have the church of the Annunziata, 1607).

In Rome, where Greek was the official language of the Church until the third century, there was always a large colony observing the Greek Rite. From the end of the sixth century until the ninth and tenth there were several Greek monasteries among which were Cella Nova, near S. Saba; S. Erasmo; S. Silvestro in Capite; the monastery next to S. Maria Antiqua at the foot of the Palatine. Like other nations, the Greeks before the year 1000 had their own schola at Rome. It was near the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin. Even in the pontifical liturgy — at least on some occasions — a few of the chanted passages were in Greek: the custom of singing the Epistle and Gospel in both Latin and Greek dates from that period (Gaisser, "Brani greci nella liturgia latina" in "Rassegna Gregoriana," 1902, nos. 7, 8, 9). At present (1909) there are in Rome two Greek Catholic churches: S. Atanasio, belonging to the Greek College, and S. Maria in Domnica al Celio, belonging to the Basilian monks of the Congregation of Choueir.

(3) Besides the first large emigration of Albanians which took place between 1467 and 1470, after the death of the celebrated Scanderbeg (when his daughter, who had become the Princess of Bisignano, invited her countrymen to the Kingdom of Naples), there were two others, one under Sultan Selim II (1566-1574), directed to the ports along the Adriatic and to Leghorn; the other about 1740. In the course of time, owing to assimilation with the surrounding population, the number of these Italo-Greeks diminished, and not a few of their villages became entirely Latin. The following is a list of towns with an Albanian population. In Calabria and Basilicata: Castroregio, Farneto, S. Paolo, S. Costantino, Plataci, Civita Percile, Frassineto, S. Basilio, Fermo, Lungro, Acquaformosa (Cassano Ionico), Marri, S. Benedetto d'Ullano, S. Sofia di Epiro (Diocese of S. Marco and Bisignano), Macchia, S. Demetrio Corone, S. Cosmo, S. Giorgio Albanese, Vaccariso Albanese (Diocese of Rossano); a total of 37,000 souls and about fifty priests. Five other districts in the same region are completely latinized. In Sicily, Italo-Greeks are found at Piana dei Greci, Palazzo Adriano, Contessa Entellina (Diocese of Monreale), Mezzofuso, Palermo (Diocese of Palermo), and Messina, where in the chureh of S. Maria del Graffeo the Latin Rite is observed in the Greek tongue; a total of about 22,000 souls and forty priests. Other Italo-Greek colonies were at Villabadessa (Diocese of Atri and Penne); Pianiano, near Acquapendente; and Cargese, in Corsica.

To educate the clergy of these Greeks Gregory XIII founded in 1577 at Rome the Greek College of S. Atanasio, which served also for the Greek Catholics of the East and for the Ruthenians, until a special college was instituted for the latter purpose by Leo XIII. Among the alumni of S. Atanasio was the celebrated Leo Allatius. Another Greek ecclesiastical college was founded at Palermo in 1715 by P. Giorgio Guzzetta, founder of an oratory of St. Philip Neri among the Greek clergy. At Fermo the seminary of SS. Pietro e Paolo existed from 1663, erected by the Propaganda to supply priests for Albania. It was suppressed in 1746. Finally Clement XII, in 1736, founded the Corsini College in the ancient Abbey of S. Benedetto d'Ullano, whence it was transferred in 1794 to S. Demetrio Corone, in the ancient Basilian monastery of S. Adriano. Since 1849, however, and especially since 1860, this college has lost its ecclesiastical character and is now secularized.

Ecclesiastical Status

The Italo-Greeks are subject to the jurisdiction of the diocesan bishops; several times, but in vain, they have sought exemption. However, the popes have long wished them to have a titular archbishop, resident in Rome, for the ordination of their priests, and to lend splendour to Divine service. The first of these was Gabriele, titular Archbishop of Mitylene. When Clement XII established the Corsini College, he placed it in charge of a resident bishop or archbishop of the Greek Rite. At present this episcopus ordinans for the Greeks of Calabria resides at Naples. In 1784 the Greeks of Sicily obtained from Pius VI an episcopus ordinans resident at Piana dei Greci. Naturally, the position of a people whose rite and discipline differed m many points from those of the surrounding population, required special legislation. Benedict XIV, in the Bull "Etsi pastoralis" (1742), collected, co-ordinated, and completed the various enactments of his predecessors, and this Bull is still the law. The Holy See has always endeavoured to respect the rite of the Italo-Greeks, on the other hand, it was only proper to maintain the position of the Latin Rite. No member of the clergy may pass from the Greek to the Latin Rite without the consent of the pope; and no layman without the permission of the bishop. The offspring of mixed marriages belong to the Latin Rite. A Greek wife may pass to the Latin Rite but not a Latin husband to the Greek Rite. Much less would a Latin be allowed to become a priest of the Greek Rite, thus evading the law of celibacy. As regards the Eucharist, any promiscuity of Greeks and Latins is forbidden, except in case of grave necessity, e.g. if in a given locality there should be no Greek church. Where custom has abolished communion under both kinds, a contrary usage must not be introduced.

RODOTA, Dell' origine. . .de rito greco in Italia (Rome, 1758-63); DE CORONEL, L'autonomia ecclesiastica degli italo-albanesi della Calabria e della Basilicata (1903); COTRONEO, Il rito greco in Calabria (Reggio in Calabria, 1902); DE MARTINIS, Juris Pontificii de Propaganda Fide, pt. II (Rome 1888); Bullarium Pontificium S.C. de Prop. Fide (8 vols., Rome, 1839); GAY. L'Italie meridionale et l'empire byzantin depuis l'avenement de Basile I jusqu'a la prise de Bari par les Normands 867-1071 (Paris, 1904); CHALANDON, Histoire de l'Italie meridionale sous la domination normande (Paris, 1908); CHARON, Le quinzieme centenaire de St. Jean Chrysostome (Rome, 1909), 258-264; GAISSER, I canti ecclesiastici italo-greci in Rassegna Gregoriana, IV (Rome, 1905), 385-412; IDEM, Brani greci nella litugia latina, ibid. (1902), fasc. 7, 8, 9.

U. BEGNINI

Italy

In ancient times Italy had several other names: it was called Saturnia, in honour of Saturn; Œnotria, wine-producing land; Ausonia, land of the Ausonians; Hesperia, land to the west (of Greece); Tyrrhenia, etc. The name Italy (Gr. Italia), which seems to have been taken from vitulus, to signify a land abounding in cattle, was applied at first to a very limited territory. According to Nissen and to others, it served to designate the southernmost portion of the peninsula of Calabria; but some authorities, as Cocchia and Gentile, hold that the name was given originally to that country between the Sele and the Lao which later was called Lucania. We find the name Italy in use, however, among Greek writers of the fifth and the fourth centuries b.c. (Herodotus, Thucydides, Aristotle, Plato); and in 241 b.c., in the treaty of peace that ended the First Punic War, it served to designate peninsular Italy; while in 202 b.c., at the close of the Second Punic War, the name of Italy was extended as far as the Alps.

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Italy has an area of 110,646 square miles, of which 91‚393 are on the Continent of Europe, and 19,253 on the islands. The area of Italy, therefore, is little more than half that of France.

Under the Romans and in the Middle Ages, under the powerful republics of Amalfi and of Pisa, of Genoa and of Venice, Italy ruled the Mediterranean Sea, which, however, after the discovery of America, ceased to be the centre of European maritime activity. The centre of European interests was carried towards the west: the Italian republics fell into decay, and sea power went to the countries on the Atlantic Ocean. But the opening of the Suez Canal (1869) and the tunnelling of the Alps (Fréjus, 1871; St. Gothard, 1884; Simplon, 1906), which brought Central and North-western Europe into easy communication with Italian ports, and especially with Genoa, have restored to the Mediterranean much of its former importance and made of Italy a mighty bridge between Europe and the Levant. Of the three great peninsulas of Southern Europe, Italy is that whose adjoining seas penetrate deepest into the European Continent, while its frontiers border on the greatest number of other states (France, Switzerland, Austria) and are in contact with a greater number of races: French, German, Slav.

Before Italy took its present form it was part of a great body of land called by geologists Tyrrhensis, now covered by the waters of the Tyrrhenian Sea, which was united to Africa. In fact, a great part of the Tuscan Archipelago and of the other islands of the Tyrrhenian Sea, the masses of the Peloritan Mountains in Sicily, of Aspromonte and of Sila in Calabria, the Roian Alps, formed of archaic rocks, all are fragments of an ancient land now for the most part submerged. Another fact that gave to the configuration of Italy its present characteristic lines was the recession of the sea from that great gulf which became the fertile plain of the Po. Glaciers that at one time occupied the greater portion of Northern Italy gave rise to many moraine ranges. When the promontory of Gargano was an island, the Adriatic Sea, which separated that elevation from the Apennines and which occupied all the table-land of Apulia, projected an arm towards the south through the Sella di Spinazzola and the valley of the rivers Basentiello and Bradano, until it met the Ionian Sea. Therefore Italy is a recent formation, and consequently is subject to telluric phenomena that are unknown, or are less frequent, in the neighbouring countries. It is due to these causes that Sicily was separated from the Continent and became an island. Within historical times, the coast of Pozzuoli, near Naples, has undergone a slow depression that caused the columns of the temple of Serapis to sink into the sea, from which they emerged later through a rising movement of the ground. In consequence of the earthquake that destroyed Messina and Reggio (28 December, 1908), the ground has undergone alteration, and telluric movements show no tendency to cease. Italy has the characteristic shape of a riding hoot, of which the top is represented by the Alps, the seam by the Apennines, and the toe, the heel, and the spur, respectively, by the peninsulas of Calabria, Salento, and Gargano. The country consists of a continental portion that terminates at almost the forty-fourth parallel, between Spezia and Rimini, of peninsular, and of insular portions. It is customary to divide the peninsular portions into two parts: Central Italy and Southern Italy, of which the former is contained between the forty-fourth parallel and a straight line that connects the mouth of the Trigno River with that of the Garigliano, marking the narrowest part of the peninsula between the Adriatic and the Tyrrhenian Seas. Southern Italy is the part of the peninsula which lies south of this line. Northern Italy includes Piedmont, Lombardy, Venice, Emilia, and Liguria; Central Italy includes Tuscany, Umbria, and Lazio; Southern Italy includes Campania, the Basilicata, and Calabria.

Insular Italy will be found treated of under the articles SICILY; SICILIES, KINGDOM OF THE TWO; SARDINIA. Piedmont, Lombardy, Tuscany, Venice, and the historic towns within those regions will also be found the subject of separate articles. Concerning the temporal power of the popes and events culminating in the seizure of Rome in 1870 see the articles TEMPORAL POWER and PAPAL STATES.

Coast-line and Seas

The coast-line of the Italian Peninsula measures 2100 miles. Its principal harbours are the Gulf of Genoa, the first commercial port in Italy; the Gulf of Spezia, an important naval station; Civitavecchia, an artificial harbour; the harbours of Gaeta, Naples, and the Gulf of Taranto; Brindisi, a natural port; the Gulf of Manfredonia, and the lagoons of Venice. The principal seas are:

(1) the Sea of Italy

Also known as the Tyrrhenian Sea, which lies between the islands of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica and the mainland. It slopes from its shores to its centre, where it attains a depth of more than two and one-quarter miles, and scattered over it are the Tuscan Archipelago, the Ponza and Parthenopian Island groups, the Ægadian Islands, the volcanic Island Ustica, and the Lipari or Æolian Islands, the latter being all extinct volcanoes with the exception of Stromboli. The tides of this sea vary by only eight or twelve inches; it abounds in coral banks, and anchovy, sardine, and tunny fishing is remunerative along the coasts of Sicily and Sardinia.

(2) Ligurian Sea

The Gulf of Genoa is the most inland and also the most northerly part of this open sea, which extends to the south as far as the Channels of Corsica and of Piombino, through which it communicates with the Tyrrhenian Sea. It is open towards the Mediterranean, while its south-western limit is a line drawn from Cape Lardier, in Provence, to Cape Revellata in Corsica. The tides of this sea vary from six to eight inches. On account of its depth and of the absence of tributary rivers, it contains few fish.

(3) Sea of Sicily; Sea of Malta

That branch of the Mediterranean that lies between Tunis and Sicily is called the Channel of Tunis or of Sicily, and has a minimum breadth of 90 miles. The branch that separates the Maltese Islands from Sicily is called the Malta Channel and has a minimum breadth of 51 miles. In the former, at an average depth of 100 fathoms, there is a submarine bank that unites Africa and Sicily; it has extensive shoals, known for their volcanic phenomena. Sponge and coral fisheries in this sea are lucrative. The tides are higher than those of other Italian waters, and a singular phenomenon, called marrobbio, is observed here, being a violent and dangerous boiling of the sea, having, possibly, a volcanic origin.

(4) Ionian Sea

This is an open sea between Sicily and the Calabrian and the Salentine peninsulas, and the western coasts of the Balkan Peninsula; it communicates with the Tyrrhenian Sea by the Strait of Messina, which was formed by the catastrophe that violently detached Sicily from the Continent. This strait, which is one of the most frequented waterways of Europe, is funnel-shaped, having a breadth of 20 miles at its southern, and of 2 miles at its northern, opening. On the line between the islands of Sicily and Crete, the Ionian Sea reaches a depth of 2¾ miles, the greatest that has been found so far in the Mediterranean Sea. While the tides on the African coast rise over six feet, those on the coast of Italy are very slight; they are all the stronger, however, in the Strait of Messina, where the currents that pass between the Tyrrhenian and the Ionian Seas, especially when the wind blows, form vortices and surges that beat violently against the coast of Calabria. The fantasy of the ancients personified these two phenomena, in the monster Scylla, for the Calabrian coast, and Charybdis on the Sicilian side (Homer, "Odyss.", I, xii; Virgil, "Æneid", III, 420-425).

(5) Adriatic Sea

This sea lies between the Italian and the Balkan Peninsulas, with an area of 51,000 sq. miles. It abounds in fish of exceptionally good quality.

Orology

Italy is a country of mountains and hills, with few high table-lands; while, of the latter, the two most important, those of Tuscany and of the Murgie, are broken and surmounted by hills and mountainous groups. Lowland plains are, on the contrary, the dominant characteristic of Northern Italy; plains, in fact, occupy about one-third of the surface of the country. The principal mountains of Italy are:

(1) The Alps

They form a system of parallel ranges, at the north of Italy, forming an arc that presents its convex side to the west; they extend from the pass of Cadibona to the masses of Mt. Blanc, which is the highest point of the Alpine range (15,780 feet), and from that point, following a north-easterly direction, they extend to Vienna on the Danube. One of the greater eastern branches of this system, the Carnic and the Julian Alps, diverges in a south-easterly direction and terminates in the Fianona Point on the Gulf of Quarnero. Their length, from the pass of Cadibona to Cape Fianona, is nearly 735 miles. Their mean height is 6500 feet. The Italian watershed of the Alps is steep, with short spurs and deep valleys, while the opposite side is a gentle slope. Hence the facility of crossing over the Alps from without (France, Germany), and the corresponding difficulty of the passage from the Italian side, as history has shown by foreign invasions. The Alps are of climatic benefit to Italy, for they are a screen against the cold winds from the north, while the vapours of warm winds from the Mediterranean and the Adriatic Seas are condensed on the Alpine heights, producing the copious rains and snows that result in those numerous glaciers which are reservoirs for the rivers. The inhabitants of the Alps are a strong and robust people, sober, and attached to their native valleys. Temporary emigration, due to the nature of the land, is very great, but permanent emigration is rare. With the Alps is connected the typical Italian figure of the chimney-sweep evoked by the fancy of artists and of poets.

(2) The Apennines

They form parallel trunk chains, arranged in echelon, like the tiers of a theatre; they extend from the Pass of Cadibona to the Strait of Messina and are continued in the northern mountains of Sicily as far as Cape Boeo. The range is of much less elevation than the Alps, its mean height being 3900 feet, nor has it the imposing, wild, and varied aspect of the Alps. Its summits are bare and rounded, the valleys deep, and cultivation goes on well up the heights. The sides were once covered with forests, but that wealth of vegetation has been improvidently destroyed everywhere along this range, and, consequently, iron grey, the ashy colour of calcareous rocks, and the red brown of clay and sand-beds are the predominant tints of the country. The highest summit is that of Mt. Corno (9585 feet) in the group of the Gran Sasso. On account of their latitude and of their proximity to the sea, the Apennines have neither snow-clad peaks nor glaciers, and, while the Pre-Alpine hills are of moraine origin the Pre-Apennine hills were formed of sands, clay, flint and other substances disintegrated and transformed by the waters. Rains are frequent on the Apennines in autumn and winter.

The configuration of the Apennine system is simple at its two extremities, but it becomes complex towards the centre, where it consists of a group of parallel chains, arranged in steps, those curving towards the east constituting the Sub-Apennine range; while those groups that extend along the Tyrrhenian and the Adriatic coasts constitute the Anti-Apennine system. Geographers do not agree on the determining lines of these three divisions. We will adopt the line from Cadibona Pass (1620 feet) to Bocca Serriola (2400 feet) between the Tiber and the Metauro Rivers, for the northern division; from Bocca Serriola to the Pass of Rionero between the Rivers Sangro and Volturno, for the Central Apennines, and from this point to Cape Armi, for the southern division. The Northern Apennines encircle the southern basin of the Po, in a north-west to south-east direction, and the Pass of Cisa (3410 feet) divides them into two sections, the Ligurian and the Emilio-Tuscan.

(a) The Ligurian Apennines

They form an arc around the Gulf of Genoa and have their crest near and parallel to the coast; but, to the north of Genoa, they deviate towards the east. Their southern spurs are short and steep; those towards the Po are longer and more ramified, the two principal ones among them being those of Mt. Antola and of Mt. Penna, the former of which fans out between the Scrivia and Trebbia Rivers and contains Mt. Ebro (5570 feet) and Mt. Lesima (5760 feet), and it terminates near the Po, forming the Pass of Stradella; that of Mt. Penna, with numerous branches between the Trebbia and the Taro Rivers, contains Mt. Misurasca, or Bue (5930 feet), which is the highest point of this section. The Langhe and the hills of Monferrato, which last are called also Hills of the Po, famous for their sparkling wines, form a species of promontory of the Ligurian Apennines, enclosed between the Po, the Tanaro, and the western part of the Bormida. All this hilly region consists, superficially, of greenish and of yellowish sands, and below the surface, of clay and of bluish marl, alternating with veins of gypsum, of gravel, and at times of lignite. During the Miocene period, this region was a continuation of the Gulf of the Po and communicated with the Mediterranean Sea by the channel, or possibly the archipelago, of Cadibona. Four railroads cross this section:

• (i) the Savona-Torino, with a branch to Alessandria through the Cadibona Pass;
• (ii) the Genova-Ovada-Asti near the summit of the Turchino;
• (iii) the Genova-Novi, with two tunnels near the summit of the Giovi Pass;
• (iv) the Spezia-Parma, with the Borgallo tunnel.

(b) The Emilio-Tuscan-Apennines

There are characteristic differences between the two slopes of this section of the Apennines. The branches towards the north-east, that is towards the Adriatic Sea, are parallel, and perpendicular to the crest that separates the watersheds; they terminate at a short distance from the Emilian Way. The most important branch, on account of its length and ramifications, and also because it separates Northern Italy from Central Italy, is the one which is called Alps of Luna, beginning in the dorsal spur of Mt. Maggiore (4400 feet), between the Marecchia and the Metauro Rivers and divided into three branches, the last of which closes the great valley of the Po near the Pass of Cattolica. On the south-western watershed the spurs are almost parallel to the mother chain and are separated from it by broad longitudinal valleys, forming the Sub-Apennines of Tuscany.

(c) The Tuscan or Metalliferous Anti-Apennines

They consist of a group of parallel chains, directed from north-west to south-east on the Tuscan uplands, ploughed by the Ombrone of Pistoia. The eastern chain, towards the Arno River and the valley of Chiana, is formed by the wine-producing mountains of Chianti, Montepulciano, and Cetona. The interior chains consist of the mountains of Siena, abounding in marbles, the mountains of Volterra, that yield alabaster, and those of Montalcino, and they terminate in the volcanic mass of Mt. Amiata, the highest point of the Anti-Apennines (5640 feet). The coast range, abounding in metals, includes the mountains of Leghorn, the Cornate di Gerfalco, and the Poggio Montieri. They contain mines of copper, lead, zinc, salt, and are rich in borax and lignite coal. The highest point of the Emilio-Tuscan Apennines is Mt. Cimone (7190 feet). Other summits are the Alps of Succiso (6610 feet) and Mt. Cusna (6960 feet). Two railroads cross this section: the Bologna-Firenze and the Faenza-Firenze. Wherefore northern and central Italy are connected by five railroads which, together with the common roads, constitute the unifying system between these two divisions of the country.

The Central Apennines are divided into two sections, the Umbro-Marchesan, from Bocca Serriola to the Torrita Pass, between the Velino and the Tronto Rivers, and the Apennines of the Abruzzi, from the Torrita Pass (3280 feet) to that of Rionero.

(d) The Umbro-Marchesan Apennines

This range is not formed of a single, well-defined chain, as is the case in the Northern Apennines, but, of three parallel ranges, in echelon, that gradually approach the Adriatic Sea towards the south. The first chain, that is the western one, is merely the prolongation of the Northern Apennines, and extends from Bocca Serriola to the highland plain of Gubbio, to terminate on the low plain of Foligno. The second, or middle, range, called also Chain of Mt. Catria, contains many peaks over 4900 feet, Mt. Catria being 5570 feet high. These two ranges are connected by a highland plain which terminates at the defile of Scheggia (1930 feet) and over which passed the ancient Flaminian Way. The eastern or Mt. San Vicino range begins to the right of the Metauro River and follows a north-easterly direction. It is cut by many openings through which flow the rivers that rise in the central chain and empty into the Adriatic Sea. From Mt. San Vicino this range takes a southerly direction and forms the Sibilline Mountains, of which the chief summits are Mt, Regina (7650 feet) and Mt. Vettore (8100 feet). Towards the Adriatic Sea the Sub-Apennine range consisted of chains parallel to the Apennines, but it was worn away by the waters and only the mountains of Ascensione, Cingoli, and Conero remain to mark the position that it occupied. The Umbrian or Tyrrhenian Sub-Apennines are divided into two principal groups. The first of these is between the Tiber and the Valley of Chiana, and beyond the Scopettone Pass (920 feet), it receives the names of Alta di S. Egidio (3400 feet), Perugia Mountains, Poggio Montereale and others. The second group stands between the Tiber, the Topino, and the Maroggia Rivers, containing the Deruta Mountains, Mt. Martano (3500 feet), and Mt. Torre Maggiore (3560 feet). There is but one railroad that crosses this section of the Central Apennines; it is the one between Ancona and Foligno that passes near Fossato, through a tunnel about a mile and a quarter long.

(e) The Abruzzan Apennines

This section consists of three high ranges that form a kind of ellipse of which the major axis is in a south-easterly direction. They enclose the lofty plain of the Abruzzi that is divided into the Conca Aquilana, to the east, through which flows the River Aterno, and the Conca di Avezzano or of the Fucino, to the west. The eastern range extends from the defile of Arquata to the Sangro River and is divided into three stretches, namely, the group of Pizzo di Sevo (7850 feet), from the Tronto River to the Vomano; the Gran Sasso d'Italia, between the Vomano and the Pescara Rivers, the highest group of the peninsula, its greatest elevation being that of Mt. Corno (9560 feet); and third, the group of the Majella, which is preceded by the Morone chain and the highest point of which is Mt. Amaro (9170 feet). Bears are still to be found in these mountains. The middle range of the Abruzzan Apennines parts from the Velino River near Mt. Terminillo and divides into the groups of Mt. Velino and of Mt. Sirente, from which the range is continued to the south-east, by the Scanno Mountains, which are separated from those of Majella by the plains of Solmona and of Cinquemiglia.

(f) The Roman Sub-Apennines

The Sabine Mountains rise between the Aniene, the Tiber, the Nera, the Velino, and the Turano Rivers, containing Mt. Pellecchia (4487 feet); they are a continuation of the mountains of Spoleto and develop a most picturesque region that is rich in historic memories. The Simbruini Mountains stand between the Turano and the Aniene Rivers, following the direction of the Sabine Mountains. Between the Sacco and the Aniene Rivers are the Ernici Mountains, which are of volcanic nature. They are followed in a north-westerly direction by the Palestrina Mountains, which contain Mt. Guadagnolo (3990 feet) and which are separated from the saddle of Palestrina (1130 feet) and from the Alban Mountains, which belong to the Anti-Apennines.

(g) The Roman Anti-Apennines

This range extends from the Fiora to the Garigliano rivers and is divided into two parts. Between the Rivers Fiora and Tiber there is a predominance of volcanic groups like that of the Volsini Mountains (2270 feet) that form a chain of volcanic stone around Lake Bolsena, which was formed, possibly, by the reunion of several extinct craters. This group is followed by the Cimini Mountains around Lake Vico; the Sabatini Mountains around Lake Bracciano: Mt. Soracte (2270 feet), standing solitary on the Tiber, and the Tolfa Mountains (2000 feet) on the sea; these are rich in alum. The Alban Mountains, also of volcanic character, rise between the Rivers Tiber, Garigliano, Sacco or Tolero, and the sea, with their highest elevation in Mt. Cavo (3100 feet) near Rome. Beyond the gap of Velletri rise the Volscian Mountains, which are of a calcareous nature and which extend to the Garigliano. They are divided into three groups: the Lepini Mountains, containing Mt. Semprevisa (5000 feet), the Ausonian Mountains, and the Aurunci Mountains, which contain Mt. Petrella (5000 feet.) and which form the promontory of Gaeta. There are three railroads that cross this section of the Apennines: the Chieti-Aquila-Terni-Roma, the Chieti-Solmona-Avezzano-Roma, and the Aquila-Isernia-Naples.

The Southern Apennines are divided into three parts: the branch that is formed by the Neapolitan and Lucan Apennines, the true continuation of the Central Apennines, of which they preserve both the nature and the direction; the Apennines of Calabria, which are different in direction, aspect, and nature from the Apennines, having an Alpine character; the Murgie range, also differing in origin and characteristics from the Apennines.

(h) The Neapolitan Apennines

This range extends from the Pass of Rionero to the saddle of Conza. Beginning at the north, there is first the highland plain of Carovilli, and then the mountains of Frentani or of Campobasso. These are followed by the vast highland plain of the Sannio and by that of Irpino which forms the eastern border of the Beneventana basin and terminates at the saddle of Conza. This series of elevations, although of medium height, marks the principal axis of the Apennine range.

(i) The Neapolitan Tyrrhenian Sub-Apennines

They are formed of the groups of the Matese and of the Terminio, and of the Avellino Mountains. The Matese group, which is totally isolated, has its highest elevation in Mt. Miletto (6700 feet) and consists of two parallel trunks that are very close together, having between them a narrow height that contains a small lake. The group of the Terminio (about 6000 feet high), which contains Mt. Accellica and Mt. Cervialto, constitutes one of the most important oro-hydrographic points of Southern Italy. They abound in springs, and from them come the fresh waters of the Serino with which Naples is supplied through an aqueduct. Between the two above groups rise the Avellino Mountains that close the Beneventana basin. These are groups that are isolated by deep clefts, chief among them being Mt. Vergine (4800 feet) which has upon it a celebrated sanctuary.

(j) The Neapolitan Tyrrhenian Apennines

This Anti-Apennine range extends in the direction of the Roman Anti-Apennines, through the volcanic group of Roccamonfina and of Mt. Maggione, to the Volturno River. On the coast is the region of Campi Flegrei, formed of small, extinct volcanoes; then the active volcano Mt. Vesuvius (4070 feet), and after that the Lattari or Sorrento chain which forms the peninsula of Sorrento and terminates at Campanella Point.

(k) The Neapolitan Adriatic Anti-Apennines

They consist of the Gargano group which is entirely isolated and which differs from the Apennines in origin and in nature. It projects into the Adriatic Sea (the Gargano Head) for 30 miles and the River Candelaro now takes the place of the branch of the sea that formerly separated this group from the peninsula. The elevation rises steep above that river and the Gulf of Manfredonia, forming a series of forest-covered terraces upon which stand dome-shaped summits, as Mt. Calvo (3460 feet), and sloping down towards the north upon Lake Varano. From this side of Mt. Cornacchia (3800 feet) the Capitanata Mountains branch towards the north and pass around the plain of Apulia on the west.

(l and 2) Lucan Apennines

This is a chain that extends from the Sella di Conza to the Scalone Pass and is bounded by the Sele River, the Ofanto with its affluent the Locone, the Bradano and its affluent the Basentiello, the coast of the Gulf of Taranto, the Isthmus of Calabria, and the Tyrrhenian Sea. The range is divided into two parts by the plain of San Loja, which is crossed by a highway and by the Napoli-Potenza railroad. The northern part is grouped around Mt. Santa Croce (4670 feet) that gives out several ramifications, one of which extends to the group of Mt. Volture, an extinct volcano on the right of the Ofanto River. The second, southern division contains the Maddalena Mountains (Mt. Papa, 6560 feet), a short and rugged chain that runs from north to east, and the nearly isolated group of the Pollino which bars the entrance of the peninsula of Calabria and contains the highest summits of the Southern Apennines, Mt. Pollino and Serra Dolcedormi. The group of the Cilento which projects into the sea at Capes Licosa and Palinuro may be considered as the Lucan Sub-Apennines. It is separated from the Apennines by the longitudinal valley of Diano and constitutes one of the wildest and most broken borders of Italy. Its principal summits are Mt. Cervati (6000 feet), Mt. Sacro (5600 feet), and Mt. Alburno.

(3) Murgie

The Apulian group of the Murgie constitutes a system of its own, different from the Apennines in shape, origin, and nature. Its boundaries are the Ofanto River and its affluent the Locone, the Sella di Spinazzola, the Basentiello River, the Bradano, and the coasts of the Ionian and the Adriatic Seas. The Murgie are hills that are surmounted here and there by rounded elevations. Their height, which at the north is nearly 2000 feet, decreases more and more towards the southeast. There are no rivers or streams among these hills, for they absorb the rain-waters into deep clefts that are called lame or gravine. When the sea occupied the plain of Apulia and extended towards the south as far as the Ionian Sea, the Murgie were separated from Italy and were divided into islands and submarine banks.

(4) The Calabrian Apennines

The mountains of Calabria, by their crystalline and granite nature, by their alpine appearance and by difference of direction, form a system that is independent of the Apennines. Their boundaries are a line drawn from the mouth of the Crati River to the Scalone Pass and the coasts of the Tyrrhenian and of the Ionian Seas. They constitute a straitened territory of mountain groups that are separated by deep depressions, or united by sharp crests, in which communication becomes very difficult. The highlands are covered with forests, and the lowlands with orange groves, vineyards, olive trees, and kindred plantations. These mountains are divided into four groups: first, the Catena Costiera, between the sea and the Crati River, extending from the Pass of Scalone to the River Amato; it contains Mt. Cocuzzo (5000 feet). As its name implies, this chain is always very near the sea, rising steeply to a mean height of 3700 feet, while at its southern extremity it is united with the highland plain of Sila. The second group is a vast highland plain of a mean height of 3900 feet, with gaps, here and there, through which flow the streams that rise on the plain. The highest summit is Botte Donato (6300 feet). The name of Sila is connected with the Latin silva and with the Greek hyle (forest) and refers to the rich growth of tall trees that covered the plain in ancient times, and even then were utilized in naval construction. To the south of Sila, between the Gulfs of Squillace and Santa Eufemia, there is the Pass of Marcellinara (800 feet), which was possibly a sea canal before the Strait of Messina existed. This pass separates the Sila from the third group, called the Sierre, which contains Mt. Pecoraro and which extends to Mercante Pass, terminating in the sea, at Cape Vaticano on the promontory of Monteleone (1600 feet). The fourth group rises between Mercante Pass and the Strait of Messina; it is Aspromonte, a vast conical mass of granite that rises by wooded grades and terraces. It contains Mt. Alto (6500 feet).

Plains

(1) Plain of the Po

The spurs of the Alps and of the Apennines that are directed towards the valley of the Po never reach the shores of that river; on the contrary, there stretches between the base lines of those two mountain systems the vast plain of the Po (17,500 sq. miles), which may be compared to a great amphitheatre, open towards the east, the Alpine and the Apennine watersheds forming its tiers and the plain its arena. Its uniformity is broken by the hills of Monferrato and by those of the Langhe, by the Euganean hills, and by the Berici Mountains. If the sea should rise 300 feet, it would reach the base of the Monferrato hills and would enter the Apennine valleys; and if it should rise 1300 feet more it would enter the valleys of Piedmont. This plain of the Po, which is divided into plains of Piedmont, Lombardy, and Venice, on the left of the river, and into plains of Marengo and of Emilia on its right, was formerly a gulf of the Adriatic Sea that was filled in by the alluvial deposits of the rivers and was levelled by inundations. This process of filling in the Adriatic Sea is continuous, as is shown by the fact that the delta of the Po is carried forward by nearly twenty-six feet each year, while Ravenna, which in the time of the Romans was a naval station, is now five miles from the sea. The Alps contributed a greater portion of alluvial materials than did the Apennines, and therefore the course of the Po was thrown towards the lower range, so that the plain on the left of the river is greater than that on the right. The low plain of the Po has two light slopes that meet in the thalwegg of that river; one of them descends gradually from west to east (Cuneo, 1700 feet). While this plain covers only a third of the surface of the valley of the Po, it is nevertheless the historical and political centre of that valley.

(2) Plains of Central Italy

Between the mouth of the Magra River and Terracina there is a lengthy extent of low plains that vary considerably in breadth. These plains are monotonous and sad, in contrast with those of the river valleys, as that of the Ombrone, those of the Arno and of other rivers, which are fertile and beautiful. First there is the plain of Tuscany divided into the low plains of the basin of the Arno and the Maremma, of which the former were once marshy and unhealthy, especially that of the valley of Chiana; but, through the great hydraulic works of the Medicis of the sixteenth century, they are now most fertile and are model expositions of agriculture.

(3) The Tuscan Maremma

This is a low expanse of level land where the rain-waters become stagnant and where the streams are sluggish on account of the too gentle slope of the land, and therefore they accumulate their refuse; this disadvantage, however, is now turned to profit in the fertilization of the ground by what is known as the filling-in system.

(4) The Roman Campagna

The lightly undulating Roman Campagna lies on either side of the lower Tiber, and, although it has the monotony and sadness of all plains, it has a grandeur in itself, in its beautiful sunsets and in the gigantic and glorious ruins that witness how great a life there was in these now deserted places, abandoned to herds of cattle and to wild boars. The remains of the consular roads that traverse this plain in every direction, reminding one of the victorious armies that marched over them, are now scarcely to be discerned under the brush; the waters, no longer checked, have left their channels and formed extensive marshes, where malaria reigns; and houses and tillage are not to be found on the Campagna at many miles from Rome.

(5) The Pontine Marshes

From Cisterna to Terracina and from Porto d'Anzio to Mt. Circeo there lies a swampy expanse, 25 miles in length and from 10 to 11 miles in breadth, called in ancient times Agro Pomenzio, and now Pontine Marshes. Formerly this tract was cultivated and healthy, only a little swamp existing near Terracina; and in the fifth century of the Roman Era the Censor Appius constructed over it the magnificent way that bears his name. But the provinces having been depopulated by wars, and the cultivation of the soil having been interrupted, the stagnant waters overlaid all. The Consul Cethegus, however, by new drainage, made these lands healthy again, but the civil wars reduced them to a worse condition than the one from which they were redeemed; and in the time of Augustus, as Horace tells us, the Appian Way ran solitary through that vast swamp. Augustus and his successors attempted to drain the tract once more; but the barbarians destroyed every vestige of their work, Popes Leo I, Sixtus II, Clement XIII, and especially Pius VI, resumed the undertaking, and by means of large canals restored it to agriculture; but once more the region is unhealthy, and almost without inhabitants.

(6) Plains of Southern Italy

The plains of Southern Italy cover nearly four-tenths of its surface, the regions which contain more of them being Campania and Apulia. There are none in the Basilicata, and few in Calabria. On the Tyrrhenian Sea, there are;

(a) the Campania Plain

This plain extends along the coast between the Garigliano and the Sarno Rivers. Over it rise the volcanoes of the Campi Flegrei and that of Vesuvius. This is the Campania Felix of antiquity, a region of extraordinary beauty and of exceptional fertility due to the volcanic soil and to the maritime climate.

(b) The Plain of Pesto, or of the Sele

The second is much smaller than the first. It is situated at the mouth of the Sele River, not far from where stood Posidonia, or Pæstum, the city of roses, famous for its life of delights and delicacy, but already in ruins at the beginning of the Roman Empire. Now these places are marshy and unhealthy.

(c) The Plain of Santa Eufemia

It is situated at the end of the gulf of the same name and traversed by the Amato River, and the Plain of Gioja, traversed by the River Mesima. They are small, marshy, and unhealthy plains in the shape of amphitheatres, formed by the alluvial deposits of those two rivers. Looking towards the Ionian Sea is the plain of Sibari, where once stood, at the mouth of the Crati River, the Greek city for which the plain is named. It is of alluvial origin and nature, as are the preceding two. Towards the Adriatic Sea the plains of the coast of Apulia have their northern terminal in the famous Tavoliere delle Puglie which is almost a steppe, treeless, monotonous, and sad, exposed to the winds and traversed by a few streams that change their channels. Formerly this plain was used for winter pasturage, but, the soil being fertile, corn is now grown. It is bounded by the Candellaro River, the Apennines, the Ofanto River, and the Gulf of Manfredonia. On the Salentine peninsula there is a species of Tavoliere, contained between the Brindisi-Oria railroad and a line drawn from Torre dell' Orso, on the Adriatic Sea, to Nardò on the Ionian.

Volcanoes and Earthquakes

As Italy is one of the most recently developed parts of the mainland and of the crust that has risen above the waters, it is subject to the phenomena that are due to that internal energy of the earth called volcanism, which is manifested in the various forms of volcanic activity, in earthquakes and in microseisms. The valley of the Po contains no active volcano, but the Berici Mountains and the Euganean Hills that are rich in thermal springs (as at Abano) were, in remote times, two very active centres, as is shown by the great quantity of volcanic matter around them. In the peninsula of Italy and on the islands, volcanic activity is still very great, especially towards the Tyrrhenian coast. The Apennine zone that extends from the group of Mt. Amiata to Mt. Roccamonfina is almost entirely covered by extinct volcanoes: the San Vincenzo hills, to the north of Campiglia, and the Sassofondino hills, to the west of Roccastrada, are of volcanic nature, as is also the great cone of Mt. Amiata, which is the highest volcanic elevation of the peninsula; to the east of the Amiata rises the picturesque basaltic mass of Radicofani, and the Lakes of Bolsena (Vulsinio), Vico (Cimino), Bracciano (Sabatino), and Albano (Latino) are merely the principal craters of the many volcanoes that form the Roman group. A great number of these volcanoes began their activity under the sea which they filled in with their products, creating in this way the broken Campagna that consists chiefly of volcanic materials. In the valley of the Tolero or Sacco, near Frosinone, rise the Ernici volcanoes, of which the chief summits are those of Posi, Ticchiena, Callano, and of San Giuliano; and to the south of the plain through which the Volturno River flows stands the group of extinct craters that constitute Mt. Roccamonfina. The volcanic group of Naples is the most important one of them all, and the most famous, because it contains the oldest active volcano in Europe, namely Mt. Vesuvius (4000 feet). That ancient volcano rises between the destroyed cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum, at about six miles from Naples. Diodorus Siculus, Vitruvius, Plutarch, and Strabo speak of it as a volcano that had been extinct for centuries in their day. In the year 79 of the Christian Era it suddenly became active again, burying in molten stone, sand, and ashes the cities of Stabia, Herculaneum, and Pompeii, and by its noxious vapours terminating the life of Pliny the Elder. Between the years 79 and 1631 Vesuvius had a few eruptions: those of 203, 472, 512, 689, 913, 1036, 1139, 1500; but, on 16 December, 1631, the diameter of the crater was increased nearly two miles, and nearly 72,000,000 cubic metres of lava were ejected from it in a few hours, while there descended from the summit devastating torrents of boiling mud. Thereafter eruptions became more frequent, the principal ones having occurred in 1737, 1794, 1822, 1858, 1861, 1862, 1868, 1872, and the last in 1906; but flickering flames and smoke are almost always emerging from the crater. The Campi Flegrei to the west of Naples occupy a surface of nearly 60 sq. miles and consist of low craters that have been partly filled in by the waters. Notable among these are Mt. Montenuovo, which was developed in a single night in September, 1530; and Mt. Solfatara, from the fissures of which, called chimneys, there constantly emanate smoke and vapours of sulphuretted hydrogen. The Vulture volcanic region to the east of the Apennines is not allied to the Tyrrhenian volcanic region. The Vulture consists of two concentric craters of winch the interior one is more recent; this contains the two small lakes of Monticchio (2050 feet).

Thermal springs are very abundant in Italy, especially those containing sulphur and carbonic acid. Of gaseous springs, there are in Italy the so-called fumaiole that emit aqueous vapour with carbonic acid, the boraciferous blowers of Tuscany, and the sulphur-producing spring of Pozzuoli which burst into an eruption in 1198, Near Rome there are the Albula Springs. Lastly there are the mephitic springs that produce carbonic acid, the most famous of them being the so-called Grotta del Cane, near the Lake of Aguano, which is an ancient, extinct crater, near Naples.

Besides her volcanic characteristics, Italy, like Japan, is the classic land of earthquakes. The regions that are most subject to them are;

• (a) the southern parts of the Alps,
• (b) the coast region of the basin of the Po, from Venice to Pesaro,
• (c) the Apennines of the Marches and of the Abruzzi,
• (d) the neighbourhood of Mt Vesuvius, that of Mt. Vulture, and that of Mt. Etna,
• (e) the Luco-Calabrian district,
• (f) the islands of volcanic origin.

Of the famous catastrophes due to earthquakes, the best known are those of 1783, in Calabria, when there were destroyed 109 cities and villages, under the ruins of which 32,000 people were buried; the one of 1857 in the Basilicata that cost 10,000 victims to Potenza and its neighbourhood. The earthquake that shook the western Ligurian Riviera in 1887, although the most terrible catastrophe of its kind that has befallen continental Italy, was, withal, much less severe than those that have visited the southern portion of the peninsula. Calabria may be said to have heen for ten years on the brink of the earthquake that culminated fatally on the morning of 28 December, 1908, when, in a few moments, the city of Messina, with 150,000 inhabitants, the city of Reggio, with 45,000 inhabitants, the town of Sille, and other smaller ones, were razed to the ground, burying more than 100,000 people under their ruins. Italy was comforted by all the civilized nations, and especially the United States, which built a town in the beautiful district of Santa Cecilia, in the neighbourhood of Messina, with nearly 1500 frame houses, after the fashion of Swiss chalets, prettily finished, and painted in white. The United States Avenue, parallel with the sea, and Theodore Roosevelt Avenue, parallel with the torrent of Zaera, divide the town into four quarters that are intersected by streets having the names of those generous Americans who helped in the work: Commander Belknap of the Navy, who was the head of the relief Commission; Lieutenants Buchanan and Spofford; Engineer Elliot, director of construction; Dr. Donelson, and others.

Hydrography

(1) Rivers

The rivers of Continental Italy empty into the Adriatic and the Ligurian Seas. The water-courses of the Ligunian slope are rapid torrents, dry in summer, while in autumn and in winter they carry enormous volumes of water. Chief among them are the Roja, the longest and most important water course of Liguria, on the banks of which are Tenda and Ventimiglia; the Taggia; the Centa, which is formed of the Arroscia and the Neva; the Bisagno and the Polcevera, between the mouths of which is the city of Genoa; and the Entella. The Adriatic watershed being bounded by the Alps and by the Apennines, it follows that the rivers flowing from the latter mountains are shorter than those coming from the Alps, and as they do not receive the drainage of the glaciers, but only that of the snow and of the rains, they have the nature of torrents, rather than that of rivers. This is a providential condition because it minimizes the danger of inundations in the valley of the Po; for the rivers of the Apennines come down charged with alluvial matter and enter the Po almost at right angles, engaging its channel; but the Alpine rivers that flow into the Po, farther down its stream, with less turbulence, yet with a strong flood, spread the alluvial deposits of the other rivers over the entire bed. Notwithstanding this, the bed of the Po tends continually to rise, and the waters of that river, contained by embankments, are seven, ten, and even seventeen feet above the level of the lands through which they flow.

The rivers of Continental Italy that empty into the Adriatic Sea are divided into four groups: (a) the Po and its tributaries; (b) the Venetian rivers; (c) the rivers of the Romagna, and (d) the rivers of Istria, grouped on account of their special characteristics.

(a) The Po

The Po, which is the principal river of Italy, rises on the Piano del Re, on Mt. Viso, at a height of 6500 feet above the sea. It makes a first descent of 500 feet in a distance of only 10 miles, after which it opens into the plain near Saluzzo, and from there follows a northerly direction as far as Chivasso, where the Cavour Canal begins. Throughout the remainder of its course it flows from west to east, winding along the 45th parallel, and empties into the sea through a vast delta, the chief branch of which is Po della Maestra, which is unnavigable, while the other branch, the Po delle Tolle, has two navigable entrances. The surface of its basin is 27 square miles and its mean flood is 53,000 cubic feet per second, but when at its height, more than 70,000 cubic feet. In the middle of its course, at Cremona, its greatest breadth is three fifths of a mile, hut at its greatest height, farther down the valley, it attains a breadth of two and one-half miles. Notwithstanding the volume of its waters, the Po is not well suited to navigation, on account of the instability of its bed, for which no artificial remedy has heen found. Available navigation begins at Casale for boats of about 9 tons, and from Pavia to the sea the river is navigable for boats of 120 to 130 tons. The River Po, unlike the Rhine, the Danube, and the Elbe, was never a politically unifying element, having always divided the inhabitants of its valley into two parts.

(b) Among the Venetian rivers

The principal Venetian river is the Adige, which is the second river of Italy; after that are the Brenta, the Piave, the Tagliamento, the Isonzo, and others. The Alpine basin of the Adige has the shape of a triangle, with its summit at Verona, and its base on the Alps, between the Reschen hill, where are the sources, and the base of Tolbach, where are the sources of the Rienz. It enters the Italian region at Salurno and receives the Noce River, on the right, and the Avisio on the left, and it passes the boundary between the Kingdom of Italy and the Austrian Empire to the south of Ala. At Verona it enters the plain and flows parallel to the Po, flanked by massive embankments. Between the two rivers is a territory, portions of which have yet to be redeemed, as are the valleys of Verona, while the remaining portion is drained already by a labyrinth of canals, as for example, the Polesine. The Adige empties into the Adriatic Sea, after a course of 248 miles, having an average breadth of 330 feet between Trent and Verona, and of 220 feet between Verona and the sea. The Venetian rivers enter the plain charged with alluvial materials that would make them overflow, if they were not held in their beds by artificial embankments. Although the sources of some of these rivers are known, it is difficult to say where and how they empty into the sea; the Bacchiglione is a type of them.

(c) The Rivers of Romagna

The Po di Volano, once a branch of the Po, with which river, however, it is no longer connected, rises in the springs of the plain near Cento; at Ferrara it divides into two branches, one of which is navigable and, flowing towards the east, empties into the sea at Porto Volano; the other branch, which is not available for navigation, turns towards the south-east, terminating against the embankment of the Reno, a river that rises near Prunetta, passes to the east of Bologna, flows by Pieve di Cento, and, turning towards the east, enters the old channel of the Po di Primaro and empties into the sea at Porto Primaro, after a course of 124 miles. The Idice, Santerno, and the Senio are its affluents.

(d) The rivers of Istria

They are very short, with little water, and flow in channels from which they disappear into the ground, to appear again in other channels or near the sea. The Recca-Timavo is the most important one of them; after a course of 28 miles in a narrow channel, it disappears into a cave, and it is probable that its waters go through the Carso and that they are the same that emerge from great springs, near Monfalcone, and empty into the Monfalcone Gulf under the name of Timavo. The other rivers, the Dragogna, the Quieto, the Lerne, which rises under the name of Foiba, all develop fords at their mouths, and the Foiba disappears and reappears several times; the Arsa empties into the Gulf of Quarnero.

On account of the bow shape of the Central Apennines the rivers that empty into the Adriatic Sea are very short and almost straight, while those that empty into the Tyrrhenian Sea are longer, and have a sinuous course in the longitudinal valleys through which they flow. They cut narrow channels through the mountain ranges or at times form cataracts like those of Marmore, near Terni (530 feet), those of Tivoli, and those of the Fibreno. Many of the long valleys between the Anti-Apennine and the Sub-Apennine ranges were occupied by lakes that were either filled in naturally by the alluvial deposits of the rivers or were artificially drained, as were the valley of Chiana, the valley of the Tiber, the plain of Foligno, the lands of Reati, of Fucino, and others. The Arno River, which has an average breadth of from 330 to 500 feet, rises on Mt. Falterona (5400 feet) and flows towards the southeast between the Apennines and the Pratomagno, through a beautiful spacious valley that is the continuation of the Val di Chiana and is called Casentino. It appears that formerly the Arno flowed into the lake that occupied the valley of Chiana and was a tributary of the Tiber through the Paglia. Now the Arno, abreast of Arezzo, arches round the Pratomagno and flows through a series of narrow passes between that chain and the mountains of Chianti. At Pontassieve it receives the Sieve which flows through the valley of Mugello, and then, turning directly to the west, it enters upon the second straight course; it flows through Florence, receives the Bisenzio and the Ombrone of Pistoia and flows through the plain of Prato which was once the bottom of a lake; it enters the Pass of Golfolina, 7 miles in length, between Mt. Albano and the mountains of Chianti; thereafter it receives the Pesa, the Elsa, and the Era, on the left, and the Pescia on the right — and in all this second course it flows over a low plain, between powerful artificial embankments. It empties into the sea at 6 miles from Pisa through a delta that is carried forward 16 feet each year. The Tiber (Tiberis). — This is the most famous of all rivers, because there stands on its banks the city which of all has exercised the greatest influence upon the world, in ancient, as well as in modern, times. Geographically, the Tiber is the second river of Italy, in relation to its basin, and the third, in relation to its length, the first and the second being the Po and the Adige respectively. It flows from north to south, winding along the tenth meridian East of Greenwich, with an average breadth of about 500 feet, while the volume of its flood is 9500 cubic feet per second. It has a very sinuous course which is divided into four parts; the first of them is through a longitudinal valley, between the Apennines and the Sub-Apennines, called the Valley of the Tiber, the river passing by the town of Santo Sepolcro and the Città di Castello. It leaves Perugia on the right and receives the Chiascio, a river that has for affluents the Topino, which comes from the plain of Gubbio, and the Maroggia which itself receives the abundant waters of the Clitunno. At its juncture with the Chiascio, the Tiber begins its second tract: flowing in a south-easterly direction through a narrow valley of the Sub-Apennines of Umbria, it leaves Todi on its right and flows through the pass of the Forello, to receive the Paglia near Orvieto. The third division is in a south-easterly direction from the juncture of the Paglia to Passo Corese, where the Tiber receives the Nera, its largest tributary. The Nera, near Terni, receives the waters of the Velino through the falls of Marmore which are 530 feet high, the second waterfall of Italy, the first being that of Toce. The fourth division of the Tiber is through the Roman Agro, from Passo Corese to its mouth. The river divides Rome into two parts, and a little beyond the city it receives the Aniene, or Teverone, which forms the waterfall of Tivoli (347 feet) at the town of that name. The Tiber always carries a great amount of alluvial material, and consequently its mouth has always made encroachment upon the sea, and does so now by about 13 feet each year. The Isola Sacra divides the river into two branches; the southern one which washes Ostia is not navigable; the other, to the north, known as the Fiumicino Channel, is navigable and is formed by the so-called Trajan ditch. The Garigliano River in the first part of its course is called the Lin (Liris), but, after receiving the Rapido, it takes the name of Garigliano, because the Rapido in its lower part preserves its ancient name of Gari. Changing its direction, the Garigliano River flows around the Aurunci Mountains into the Gulf of Gaeta. In its higher course the River Liri, near Capistrello, receives the waters of the basin of Fucino through a subterranean passage nearly four miles long, the volume of the waters of the Liri being increased by 10,600 cubic feet per second.

The rivers of Southern Italy empty into three different seas, the Tyrrhenian, the Ionian, and the Adriatic. With the exception of the Volturno, the Sele, the Bradano, the Basento, and the Sinni, none of the streams of Southern Italy deserve the name of river; they have the nature rather of torrents, especially those of Calabria which, when running full, are very destructive. The rivers of the Adriatic watershed flow perpendicularly to the coasts, with the exception of the Candellaro, which flows in a south-easterly direction; those on the Tyrrhenian in their upper courses form longitudinal valleys. The alluvial plain of Sibari, which is the largest plain of Calabria, was developed by the Crati and its affluents.

The principal rivers of Southern Italy are: the Volturno (115 miles) which rises at Capo d'Acqua, on Mt. Rocchetta, with a considerable volume of water, receives the Vandra that flows from the plain of Carovilli, increased by the waters of the Cavaliere, on the banks of which stands Isernia. The Volturno thereafter flows through a broad valley, the bottom of which consists of the alluvial deposits of that river which, at the height of Presenzano, turns into a direction parallel to the Matese Mountains; in former times it probably maintained a southerly direction through the Teano depression and flowed along the present bed of the Saccione River. It receives the Calore River which flows into the Volturno at almost right angles, while the latter, turning to the west, flows through the Caiazzo Pass and opens onto the plain at Capua, with a breadth of about 500 feet, and from there on it is navigable as far as the sea (17½ miles). It flows into the sea through swampy lowlands that have been developed by its own alluvial deposits. The Sele takes its rise from numerous copious springs. Its principal affluent is the Tanagro, which disappears into the ground at Polla and appears again about one-third of a mile farther down the valley. The most important river of the Ionian versant is the Crati, that rises on the highland plain of Sila, passes through Cosenza, and flows through the depression between the Sila and the coast chains of the Apennines, which constitutes the valley of Cosenza. Near its mouth it receives the Coscile or Sibari, flowing from the Campotenese Pass, after having been engrossed by the waters of the Pollino. The Basento passes by Potenza and flows into the sea near the ruins of the ancient Metaponto. The Salerno-Potenza-Taranto railroad lies along the whole course of this river. The only stream of any importance on the Southern Adriatic watershed is the Ofanto River which beyond Conza describes an arc around the Vulture mass, the waters from which flow into the Ofanto through the Rendina River; the Locone is another of its affluents. Between the latter and the sea, the Volturno River supplies the waters of the artificial canal by which it is connected with Lake Salpi.

(2) Lakes

The Italian region has more lakes than rivers, especially on the plain of the Po, at the foot of the Alps. They are usually divided into (a) pre-Alpine lakes, (b) volcanic lakes, and (c) coast lakes.

(a) Pre-Alpine Lakes

These lakes that temper the climate of the Continental portion of the pre-Alpine region are one of the principal causes of the fertility of the soil, making possible the cultivation of the southern plains. The zone that contains them extends from Lake Orta to Lake Garda and is north of the moraine hills that close the entrance of the valleys of the Central Alps. Lake Orta or Cusio, north-west of Arona, is 950 feet above the level of the sea and has an area of about 7 sq. miles, with a maximum depth of 80 fathoms; its waters flow through the Nigaglia River into the Strona, a stream that enters into the Toce River which itself empties into Lake Maggiore (Lacus Verbanus). This lake stretches from north to south, the principal streams that flow into it being, at the north, the Ticino and the Maggia; on the west the Toce, and on the east the Tresa, which flows from Lake Lugano, and the Bardello which flows from Lake Varese. The River Ticino flows into Lake Maggiore at Magadino and leaves it at Sesto Calende. In its Gulf of Pallanza, Lake Maggiore contains the Borromean Islands, so famous for their beauty. The principal towns situated on the shores are Locarno in Canton Ticino, Pallanza, Intra, Luino, and Arona, the birth-place of St. Charles Borromeo, where stands his colossal statue in bronze, erected in 1697, having a height of 100 feet, including the pedestal, and representing the saint in the act of blessing Arona. Lake Lugano or Ceresio lies between Lake Maggiore and Lake Como; the Agno is the principal stream that flows into it, while its waters empty into Lake Maggiore through the Tresa River, On the shores of this lake are Lugano at the north, and Porlezza at the north-east, Capolago at the south, and Ponte Tresa at the west. Lake Como or Lario is formed by the River Adda that enters the lake at Colico and leaves it at Lecco, to form the minor lakes of Pescarenico, Olginate, and Brivio. Other streams flowing from Lake Como are the Mera, which receives the Liro, and the Pioverna. To the north of Lake Como is the minor lake of Mezzola through which flows the Mera. This small lake is in reality the narrowed part of Lake Como, developed by the alluvial deposits of the Adda. Bellagio Point divides Lake Como into two branches, the south-western one, which terminates at Como, and a south-eastern branch called Lake Lecco. Its varied shores are a beautiful garden of luxuriant vegetation, studded with villages, chapels, inns, and sumptuous villas. Manzoni made it still more celebrated by the description that he gave of it in his immortal novel, "I Promessi Sposi". Lake Iseo or Sebino is situated between Lakes Como and Garda, at the entrance of the valley of Camonica, and is formed by the Oglio River which enters it at Lovere and flows from it at Sarnico. It contains the island of Monte Isola on which are two villages of fishermen. Lake Garda or Benaco is the largest of the Italian lakes and the most southerly one of the Sub-Alpine region. The River Sarca is the principal stream that flows into it, while the Mincio is its chief outlet. Its smiling shores are covered with a growth of southern vegetation, the most notable places upon them being Riva, Salò, Desenzano, Peschiera, and Bardolino. The narrow peninsula of Sermione that protrudes into the lake between Desenzano and Salò was the happy sojourn of the Latin poet Catullus (Catul., XXXI, i); it is nearly two miles in length. Lake Idro is formed by the Chiese River, which is an affluent of the Oglio; it has an area of over 4 sq. miles, and its surface is 1200 feet above the level of the sea. Other minor lakes are those of Azeglio to the south-east of Ivrea, Varese, Alserio, Pusiano, Annone, and Segrino, between Como and Lecco; Lake Endine or Spinone between Val Seriana and Lake Iseo; Lake Molveno, Lake Ledro, west of Riva, and Lakes Caldonazzo and Levico, from which flows the Brenta.

The lakes of the peninsula, besides being smaller than those of Continental Italy, are, almost all of them, of a volcanic nature, or are coast lakes. The lakes of Montepulciano and of Chiusi, however, at the southern extremity of the valley of Chiana, constitute a class of their own, together with Lakes Perugia and Matese, the latter, on the mountain group of the same name, having a length of 25 miles and a breadth of 625 mile, To this class belongs also the small Lake of Pergusa, in the Erei Mountains, in Sicily. The Lake of Perugia or Trasimeno is the largest lake of peninsular Italy and contains three islands, Polvese, Maggiore, and Minore. Its shores are low and marshy, and its waters, which abound in fishes, are carried by an artificial outlet into a sub-affluent of the Tiber. The lake in fact is a remnant of a larger one that covered nearly all of the valley of Chiana, and there is a project on foot to drain it dry. It was near Lake Trasimeno that Hannibal defeated the Romans in 217 b.c. The two minor lakes of Montepulciano and of Chiusi are of the same nature, and were probably a part of Lake Trasimeno, At the first of the two begins the Canal of Chiana, a work of the Grand Dukes of Tuscany, which drains the Chiana valley and directs its waters into the Arno. From the second. flows the Chiana River, which empties into the Paglia, au affluent of the Tiber. Wherefore, through these two lakes, connected by a canal, the Tiber and the Arno communicate with each other.

(b) Volcanic Lakes

Volcanic lakes are very plentiful in the peninsula; they are so called because they occupy the craters of extinct volcanoes, which accounts for their small dimensions. The principal one among them is Lake Bolsena (Lacus Vulsinius), containing two islands, Bisentina and Martana, on the second of which, it is said, Amalasuntha, the only daughter of Theodoric, was killed by Teodato in 534, The outlet of this lake is the Marta River. Other smaller volcanic lakes are those of Bracciano or Sabatino and Vico (Lacus Ciminus) which is situated between Lakes Bolsena and Bracciano at a height of 1650 feet above the level of the sea; also Lakes Albano and Nemi, near Rome, on the Albanian Mountains, having an area of 2.33 sq. miles and of .625 sq. miles, respectively, and an altitude of 961 ft. and of 1050 ft. Lake Albano having a depth of 558 ft., and Lake Nemi, a depth of 112 ft.; lastly, Lakes Averno, Agnano, and Lucrino, with others, in the Campi Flegrei, and Lake Gurrita, to the northwest of Mt. Etna.

(c) Coast Lakes

The Italian region abounds in lakes of this kind, but in many cases, rather than lakes, they are swamps that should be drained and their sites redeemed for agriculture. Among them the best-known are Lake Varano, to the north of Mt. Gargano; that of Salpi, between the Ofanto and the Carapella Rivers; Lake Lesina; Lake Massaciucoli, near the mouth of the Serchio (nearly 25 sq. miles); Lake Orbetello to the east of Mt. Argentario, with an area of 10 sq. miles; Lake Salso between the Carapella and Manfredonia; Lake Fondi to the east of Terracina; and the Lake of Fogliano, to the west of the Pontine Marshes; the lakes of Alimeni, in the Salentine peninsula; the swamps of Quartu, near Cagliari.

(3) Canals

There is no country in which a system for the distribution of waters is more complete than is that of northern Italy, a pre-eminence which the other portions of the kingdom do not share. In the country between the Adda and the Ticino, especially, a close network of canals and ditches, rivulets and aqueducts, now meeting, now separating from each other, intersecting or passing over and under one another, makes all the waters, whether of spring, river, or rain, available. Probably works of this kind existed in ancient times; it is certain, however, that they were resumed in the twelfth century; and from that time, the Italians spent enormous sums of money on this undertaking and employed in it a special intelligence that established their position as the first hydrologists of Europe. There is no greater manifestation of the wealth and of the civilization of medieval Italian Republics than these gigantic works.

Physical Divisions

Northern Italy is divided into the following regions, Piedmont, Lombardy, Venice, Emilia, and Liguria, which are politically subdivided into provinces. Piedmont, Lombardy, and Venice are the subjects of special articles.

Emilia is subdivided into the provinces of Bologna, Ferrara, Forlì, Modena, Parma, Piacenza, Ravenna, Reggio nell' Emilia. Emilia, a region through which passes the ancient Emilian Way, whence the name, is quadrilateral in shape and embraces the territory formed by the north-east watershed of the Northern Apennines, and by the triangular plain, the sides of which are the Emilian Way, the Po, and the Adriatic Sea. The former is a rolling country ploughed by torrential streams that have washed out deep valleys, on which account its inhabitants live on the mountain sides; the apex of the triangular plain points towards Piacenza, while the base between Rimini and the mouths of the Po attains a length of 60 miles. It is a part of the great plain of the Po, the origin and nature of which it shares. In the district between Ferrara, the Po della Maestra, and Ravenna, it has lands that have not yet been drained, containing the so-called valli or lagoons of Comacchio, abounding in fish, and near which stands the town of the same name. They are connected with the sea by the Magnavacca Canal. Some of these valleys, like the polders of Holland, have been drained and are very fertile. The River Reno divides this region into two parts: the western, Emilia properly so-called, and the eastern, Romagna, a name that recalls the time when Ravenna was capital of the Western Roman Empire, and therefore called Romandiola, meaning Little Rome. All the roads from France, Germany, and Austria that lead directly to Brindisi, and by the Suez Canal to the Indies, pass through Emilia. The climate of this region is almost the same as that of the Continent, and agriculture is its chief industry, principally corn, sugar-beet, and cattle raising. In the lands around Bologna and Ferrara the cultivation of hemp predominates, of which staple these two districts are the chief centres of production. The cities of Emilia, with the exception of Ferrara and Ravenna, are all built on the Emilian Way, which skirts the base of the Apennines. Piacenza (pop. 36,000), on the Po, was an ancient Roman colony that became a republic in the Middle Ages and later with Guastalla a duchy of the House of Farnese. It is now a stronghold, defending the Pass of Stradella. Its communal palace of the thirteenth century and its cathedral of the twelfth century are notable structures. Piacenza was the birth-place of Melchiorre Gioja (1797-1829) and of the famous man of letters, Pietro Giordani. To the south-west of this city is the Field of Roncaglia, where the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa convoked his feudal lords to support the claims of the empire (1154-1159). The city of Bobbio (pop. 5000), on the River Trebbia, is famous for the convent founded there by St. Columbanus; and on the lower course of that river was fought a battle in 218 b.c. between Hannibal and the Romans, and one between MacDonald and Suvaroff in 1799. On the Arda is Fiorenzuola d'Arda (pop. 12,000), the birthplace of Cardinal Giulio Alberoni. In its neighbourhood were discovered the ruins of the ancient Veleia, and among them the famous Table of Trajan. Near Borgotaro, on the Taro River, where it receives the Ceno, is Fornovo, where Charles VIII of France defeated the Italian Confederation in 1495. In the valley of Stirone is Salsomaggiore, famous for its therapeutic springs; and in the plain is Borgo San Donnino (pop. 12,000), with its Gothic cathedral, and Busseto, the birth-place of the great musician Giuseppe Verdi. Parma (pop. 48,000), a very ancient Etruscan city on the Parma River, contains noble monuments, such as its cathedral and its baptistery. It became famous by its defence against Frederick II, who besieged it unsuccessfully (1247-48). It was the capital of a duchy under the princes of the House of Farnese and under the Bourbons of Spain. At the foot of the Pietra Bismantova (3440 feet) is the Castle of Canossa, where Queen Adelaide took refuge and where Gregory VII humiliated the Emperor Henry IV. Reggio (pop. 59,000), on the Crostolo River, once the capital of Cisalpine Gaul, was the birth-place of the poet Ariosto and of the famous astronomer of our times, Angelo Secchi, S.J. Where the River Secchia opens into the plain, stands Sassuolo, famous on account of its volcanic phenomena, called salse; and to the north-east is Modena (pop. 63,000), the ancient Roman city of Mutina, which became the capital of a duchy and was the birth-place of the naturalist Spallanzani, of Sadoleto, of Sigonio, and of Tassoni. It contains a military school, Vignola is the birth-place of Ludovico Antonio Muratori, and contains the famous Abbey of San Silvestro. Faenza (pop. 40,000) on the Lamone River was once famous for its majolica, called Faïence by the French. It is the birth-place of the physicist Torricelli. Cesena (pop. 42,000) is the birth-place of Pius VI and of Pius VII. Rimini (pop. 44,000), at the termination of the Emilian, and the beginning of the Flaminian Way, is rich in historical memories. It contains the bridge and the arch of Augustus, the church of St. Francis, called the Malatestan Temple, after the Malatestas, lords of the city, who caused the church to be built by Leon Battista Alberti. Two hours from Rimini, between the Marecchia and the Conca Rivers, rises San Leo, the stronghold where Berengarius II was made prisoner by Otto I and where the famous Cagliostro died. Ravenna (pop. 36,000), a most important port under the Romans, became the capital of the Western Empire, later the capital of the Goths, and finally of the Greek Exarchate. It has exceptionally fine examples of Byzantine architecture, among which should be mentioned the basilica of San Vitale. It is in this city that the immortal Catholic poet Dante Alighieri died, and where also is preserved his sepulchre. The ancient military port that was constructed by Augustus is now covered over, and the town is at a distance from the coast, with which it is connected by a small canal, 5 miles in length. Along the coast stretches the famous Pineta, 25 miles long, and from 1 to 2½ miles broad; but the negligence with which it is treated is allowing it to waste away. Liguria comprises the provinces of Genoa and Porto Maurizio and is bounded by the Apennines and the Ligurian Alps, and by the Roia and the Magra rivers. It is a mountainous country, with no other plains than the small one near Albenga. The mountain spurs that project into the sea produce an arc-shaped bay at the highest point of which is the port of Genoa. Rains, especially in the Apennines, are abundant (50 inches). This region is separated from the rest of Continental Italy by steep mountain ranges, but this barrier has been overcome by railroads that have made Liguria the natural outlet to the Mediterranean Sea for the valley of the Po and for western Germany. It has a maritime climate, but the natural fertility of its soil does not correspond with that climatic advantage, and therefore its inhabitants devote themselves to a seafaring life, as the fisheries along this coast are not remunerative. Sixty-one per cent of the population live on the coast. Where its soil is arable, Liguria produces oil, fruits, and flowers; but commerce is its chief industry. Between the Polcevera and the Bisagno Rivers, in the form of an amphitheatre, stands Genoa. (q. v.)

Central Italy contains five regions: Tuscany, (q. v.), Umbria, Lazio, the Marches, Abruzzo and Molise. While northern Italy may be called the head, central Italy is the heart of Italy, for it was this section of the country which in ancient times, as well as in the Middle Ages, predominated by its prowess, by its laws, and by its religion, as in modern times by its arts and by its letters. The fertile genius of its inhabitants, together with the happy conditions of its soil and freedom from prolonged foreign domination, all conspire to intensify an artistic and literary sentiment and to maintain in the race the ethnical type of its ancestors, the Etruscans, the Marsians, the Umbrians, and the Latins — who together conquered the world. The chief occupation of its inhabitants is farming, there being few manufacturing industries. Although this section has a coastline of 600 miles, it has only three ports: Ancona, which is the only one on the Adriatic Sea, and Leghorn and Civitavecchia on the Tyrrhenian Sea. The coasts of the latter sea being almost without inhabitants, owing to the malaria, Tuscany and Lazio have little or no seafaring populations; the corresponding shores on the Adriatic Sea, however, are abundantly peopled, but, as they are straight and low, they have no natural harbours, and consequently at the mouths of rivers small canal-ports have been dug out for fishing craft. This explains why the Marches and the Abruzzi have a considerable seafaring population that is devoted to the fishery, and not to navigation, as is the case in Liguria and Venice. The principal inland cities are Florence, on the banks of the Arno, and Rome on the Tiber. All the others, as Siena, Perugia, Urbino, and Pesaro, are famous cities that flourished in past centuries; but they have not a brilliant future under present economical conditions.

Umbria consists of a single province called Perugia. It has an area of 3800 sq. miles, an estimated population, on 1 January, 1908, of 693,253 inhabitants. It is an essentially mountainous region, of which the elevation is determined by the dorsal aspect of the Apennines and by the parallel chains of the Umbrian Sub-Apennines that form the upper basin of the Tiber, the valley of Foligno, and the basin of the Nera and its affluents, or the highland plain of Norcia, the basin of Rieti, and the Sabine mountains. In the Middle Ages, the preference given to the Tuscan roads over the Flaminian Way, left Umbria in an isolated position, on which account it lived apart a life of faith and of artistic inspiration all its own. It has a mild climate, and agriculture and the raising of cattle are the chief occupations of its inhabitants. Perugia (pop. 61,000), one of the twelve Etruscan lucumonies or sacred towns, not far from the Tiber, contains many monuments of art, for the most part churches, and many antiquities. It was the adopted country of the Perugian Pietro Vannucci (1446-1524), the master of Raphael. Orvieto (pop. 18,000) is famous for its magnificent thirteenth-century cathedral, one of the grandest in Italy, especially on account of its splendid façade. At Gubbio, on the Chiascio, the Gubbio Tables were found. Assisi, the birth-place of St. Francis and of St. Clare, was the cradle of the Order of the Friars Minor. Its convent and church contain treasures of the mystic art of Umbrian painters and are the objects of devout pilgrimages. Spoleto (pop. 25,000), between the Ticino and the Maroggia Rivers, was the seat of a powerful Longobard duchy, and afterwards the residence of the Frankish dukes, of whom the last two, Guido and his son Lambert, were Kings of Italy. Terni (pop. 30,000), the ancient Interamna, home of the historian Tacitus, is now the site of important metallurgical works that use the waters of the Nera River, into which flows the Velino, over the famous Falls of Terni. Norcia (Nursia) was the home of St. Benedict; Narni, a very ancient city, on a precipitous height near the Nera, was the home of the Condottiere Gattamelata; Rieti is on a high plain called Agro Reatino, one of the most fertile lands in Italy, where celebrated grain is produced.

Lazio consists of but one province, called Rome, and has an area of 7400 sq. miles, a population estimated to be 1,300,014 inhabitants, on the 1st January, 1908. Its boundaries are the Mediterranean from the mouth of the Fiora to Terracina, and the Rivers Liri, Turano, Farfa, Tiber, and Paglia. It includes the Roman Sub-Apennines and Anti-Apennines, the deserted, undulating Roman Campagna, the Pontine Marshes, and the promontories of Linaro, Anzio, and Circeo. The lands on the right of the Tiber, formerly inhabited by the Etruscans and afterwards conquered by the Romans, constitute the territory of Viterbo and the Campagna of Civitavecchia. The Albanian and Sabine hills and the valley of the Tiber among them constitute the Comarca, better known by the name of Agro Romano; the valley of the Sacco or Tolero, with the hills that surround it, forms a region that is called Ciociaria on account of the style of footgear affected by its inhabitants. Lazio has essentially a maritime climate. The principal occupation of its inhabitants is the growing of corn, grapes, and olives, and the raising of horses and of cattle. The region is represented by Rome, that owes its origin and the beginning of its greatness to the advantages of its topographical position. In the volcanic zones of the Roman Anti-Apennines the centres of population are on the hill-tops, the principal ones being Acquapendente, an Etruscan city on the Paglia, that received its name on account of a neighbouring waterfall; Bolsena, on the lake of the same name; Montefiascone, to the south of that lake, famous for its Moscato wine; Viterbo, on the skirts of Mt. Cimino, rich in historical memories of the popes, and in the neighbourhood of which are the famous hot springs called Bulicame: Civita Castellana, near the ruins of the ancient Faleria and of the Castello di Patierno, where Otto II died; Corneto, built on the site of the ancient Tarquinia; Civitavecchia (pop. 17,000), the ancient Centumcellæ, a port built by Trajan, and now the principal one of Lazio, Rome (q. v.). Ostia, founded by Ancus Marcius, was the ancient port of Rome, but now its ruins are totally buried and at a distance of one and a half miles from the sea. In the valley of the Aniene is Subiaco, and near it the cave to which St. Benedict, the founder of monasticism in the West, was wont to withdraw; Tivoli (Tibur) contains many ruins of ancient monuments and palaces. The falls of the Athene River at this point furnish Rome with electricity. In this neighbourhood are found the rich quarries of travertine marble that the Romans used so much in their monuments, and the sulphur springs, which are a bathing resort. By the wooded and vine-clad Albanian hills are the Castelli Romani, small villages that are popular summer resorts; Frascati, near the ruins of ancient Tusculum; Castelgandolfo, the papal villa; Marino; Ariccia, that has a splendid viaduct; Albano and Velletri (pop. 19,000). In the valley of the Sacco are Palestrina, upon the ruins of the ancient Præneste, which was the home of Pier Luigi, known as Palestrina, the prince of sacred music. Here remain still the ruins of the Temple of Fortune, famous for its oracles, called sortes prœnestinœ. Anagni, the home of Boniface VIII, who there received grievous offence at the hands of Sciarra Colonna and of Nogaret, envoy of Philip the Fair, King of France. Alatri, which has a Pelasgian burial-ground; Terracina (pop. 11‚000) on the sea, the former Anxur, a watering-place that was much frequented by the ancient Romans.

The Marches, comprising the provinces of Ancona, Ascoli Piceno, Macerata, Pesaro e Urbino, is bounded by the Apennines, the Adriatic Sea, the Marecchia River at the north, and the Tronto at the south; it unites the ancient maritime Umbria and the northern half of the ancient Picenum. Originally, its elevation was formed by a group of mountain chains, parallel to the Apennines and diminishing in height as they approached the sea, but the rivers washed their way through these hills, cutting deep passes into them, so that now are seen only some isolated trunks that indicate the primitive direction of the chains. The climate of the Marches is less mild than that of Tuscany, and agriculture is its chief industry, while the fisheries, if they were well directed, would make the fortune of the numerous portion of the population that lives by that industry. This region, which in ancient times was inhabited by different peoples, became Romanized after the Flaminian Way, which was the chief outlet of Rome, had been carried through; but it lost somewhat of its importance when preference came to be given to the shorter way through Tuscany. It is a mountainous country that was subject to petty lordships, some of which were promoters of literature and the arts. The principal centres of population and places of historic interest are: Urbino (pop. 18,000), formerly the capital of a duchy (1213-1631) that was made famous by its fine arts; it was the birth-place of Raphael and of Bramante; Pesaro (pop. 25,000) at the mouth of the Foglia, the birth-place of the great musician Gioachino Rossini, and of the philosopher Terenzio Mamiani; Senigallia (pop. 23,000), the birth-place of Pius IX; Jesi (pop. 23,000), the birth-place of the Suabian Emperor Frederick II; Ancona (pop. 56.000), on the incline of a hill which forms an angle projecting into the sea. After Triest and Venice it is the most important port on the Adriatic Sea; it is famous for its heroic and successful defence when besieged in 1144 by Frederick Barbarossa. Not far from the mouth of the Musone, on a pleasant height, is Loreto, with its famous sanctuary, erected from plans by Bramante, and which according to pious tradition contains the Holy House of Nazareth that was transported from Dalmatia, by angels, to the place where later was erected this beautiful temple in honour of the glories of the Virgin. Macerata (pop. 23,000), between the Chienti and the Potenza, containing a university; Recanati (pop. 17,000), the birth-place of the modern lyric poet Giacomo Leopardi; Tolentino (pop. 13,000), famous for its sanctuary of St. Nicholas, of the Order of Hermits of St. Augustine. It was here that the treaty was signed between Napoleon I and Pius VI in 1797, and here, also, Murat was defeated in 1815. Camerino (pop. 12,000) was once the seat of a duchy, and has still a free university; Fermo (pop. 21,000) distinguished itself in the First Punic War by its firm fidelity to the Romans, whence its name; and finally, on the right of the Tronto, amid fertile lands, is Ascoli Piceno (pop. 29,000), a very ancient city and an enemy of Rome.

Abruzzi and Molise

The boundaries of Abruzzi and Molise are the Tronto River, the Adriatic Sea, the Fortore River, and an irregular line towards the Apennines. This region consists of the Altipiano or Abruzzo-Aquilano, along the seashore, which is divided into Abruzzo Teramano and Chietino; Molise, that consists of the entire watershed between the Sangro and the Fortore Rivers; the Marsica, which is formed of the basin of the Fucino River and of the upper valleys of the Liri and of the Salto. The climate is variable; severe on the uplands of Aquila and mild on the coast. The land is not very fertile, but pastoral pursuits are considerably developed: the flocks go for wintering to the Agro Romano or to Apulia, and especially to Capitanata, following very ancient grass-grown tracks called tratturi, which the flocks alone use. Industries are not flourishing, but they are being developed by the hydro-electric plants. The central part of this region may be called the Helvetia of the peninsula; in ancient times it was the home of the intrepid Sabini, Marsi, Marrucini, Peligni, and Frentani, who for more than a century checked the progress of Roman arms. They were subjugated, and then revolted under the Italic League; but Rome triumphed again, and from that time these people furnished the sinew of the Roman armies. Being a mountainous and poor country, it had little importance in the Middle Ages. Abruzzians have a great love for their native region; each winter great numbers of them, poor, honest, and industrious, go in search of work to Rome and to Naples, hut invariably return to their homes in the spring, with their savings. This population furnishes the largest contingent of Italian cooks, scullions, stable boys, hotel servants, and policemen. The principal centres of population are Teramo (pop. 24,000) on the Tordino River, formerly the capital of the Pretuzii, whence the name Aprutium, Abruzzo; Aquila (pop. 21,000) on the Aterno River, founded in 1240 by Frederick II, not far from the ruins of Amiterno, the capital of the Sabines and birth-place of Sallust; it is famous for its saffron; Solmona (pop. 18,000), a city of the Peligni and the home of Ovid; Castel di Sangro a strategic point at the opening of the Aquila-Naples road; Lanciano (pop. 18,000) has a beautiful cathedral; Campobasso (pop. 15,000), having a very old cutlery industry, and Tagliacozzo, at the source of the Salto or Imele River, an affluent of the Velino, where Conradin was defeated by Charles of Anjou, in 1268. Avezzano, formerly on the now drained Fucino River, is the most important place in the Marsica.

Southern Italy

The line drawn from the mouth of the Trigno River, on the Adriatic Sea, to that of the Garigliano, on the Tyrrhenian Sea, marks the shortest distance between those two waters and separates Southern from Central Italy. This division of the peninsula lies between three seas, the Adriatic, the Ionian, and the Tyrrhenian, and at its southern extremity, bifurcates into two peninsulas, the Salentine, which follows a south-easterly direction, and the Calabrian, which follows a south-westerly direction; and as the coasts are much more sinuous than those of Central Italy, it has yet other smaller peninsulas; they are the peninsula of Gargano, that of Sorrento, the promontory of Monteleone, and the headland of Sila, between the Gulfs of Squillace and of Taranto. The distance between the Gulf of Salerno and that of Manfredonia is 80 miles; between the Gulf of Taranto and the Tyrrhenian Sea, 30 miles, and between the Gulfs of Squillace and of Santa Eufemia 18 miles. Southern Italy is divided into the following regions: Campania, Apulia, the Basilicata, and Calabria. On account of its distance from the rest of Italy, which was increased by want of ways of rapid communications, Southern Italy had a civil and political life of its own; it suffered little from the incursions of the barbarians, but was occupied by the Greeks and by a few Normans who established there the first Kingdom of Italy. The Carlovingians and the Othonians did not succeed in binding it to the empire. Notwithstanding the fact that the peoples of the two watersheds of Southern Italy were politically united for eight centuries, and notwithstanding the undeniable ascendancy of Naples, its capital, the various sections of which this region consists were almost strangers to each other until within recent years, although the Apennines offered no serious obstacles to communication between the different parts of the country; this was due to the want of roads, for which little provision has been made, although laws have been passed to that effect. The great majority of the inhabitants are agriculturists whose homes, contrary to the custom in Northern and in Central Italy, are in the towns, of which they have all the vices, without any of the rural virtues. The country is divided into vast estates whose owners live at Naples or abroad, so that the labourer gives his day's work without any interest or love for the soil he cultivates. The soil is very fertile and rewards even the poorest tillage. The principal products are maize, corn, wine, olives, almonds, figs, and vegetables. Notwithstanding its length of coast, the region contains a sparse maritime population, and therefore secures little advantage from a sea that teems with riches for other people. Its industries are as yet little developed; nevertheless, there is already a naval arsenal at Castellamare, important metallurgical works at Naples and at Pozzuoli; factories for farinaceous foods, cotton mills, and others (Laws of 31 March, 1904, and 15 July, 1906, in favour of the Basilicata, of the South of Italy, Sicily and Sardinia).

Campania comprises the provinces of Avellino or Principato Ulteriore, Benevento, Caserta or Terra di Lavoro, Naples, and Salerno or Principato Citeriore. It stretches from the Bay of Terracina to the Gulf of Policastro, except the valleys of the Tolero or Sacco and the Liri. Its elevation is formed by the Neapolitan and the Lucan Sub-Apennines and by the Neapolitan Anti-Apennines which form three different sub-regions, the Campania Plain or Terra di Lavoro, the Beneventana Basin, and the mountains of Cilento. The ancient Campania (from campus), so famous for the fertility of its soil and for the enchantments of its coast. extended from the Garigliano to the Gulf of Policastro and was the ancient seat of the Oscians and of the Ausonians. It was later subjugated by the Etruscans and the Samnites, and later still by the Romans, who made it a place of recreation. This delightful region, which seems to have been destined always to be conquered, whether by Romans or Greeks, Normans, French, or Spaniards, always assimilated its conquerors to itself, by the fascination of its beauty. Its climate is variable, and agriculture is the chief occupation of its people; the raising of cattle, however, is not much pursued. The industries are few, but they are being developed gradually by means of fiscal assistance, for which provision is made by the recent law that was promulgated in behalf of Southern Italy. The chief cities of this section are placed along the coast, between the coast and the Sub-Apennines, and between this mountain range and the Apennines. In the valley of the Liri is the thriving town of Sora (pop. 16,000), with its famous paper mills, called the Fibreno, after the waterfall of this tributary of the Liri which furnishes their power; the town is of Pelasgic origin; Arpino, the birth-place of Marius and of Cicero; Pontecorvo, a former possession of the Church; Aquino, the home of Juvenal and of St. Thomas, the prince of scholastic philosophy; on the Gari is Cassino, above which there stands upon an eminence the great Abbey of Montecassino, mother-house of the order established in 519 by St. Benedict of Nursia and the most ancient monastery in western Europe; Capua (pop. 14,000), on the Volturno River, a strong town that was founded by the Longobards on the ruins of the ancient Casilinum, where Narses defeated the Goths, and further to the south-east is Santa Maria Capua Vetere (pop. 22,000), occupying a part of the site of ancient Capua, which proved so harmful to the interests of Hannibal, and which, until the defeat of the Longobards, remained the second city of Italy; it was destroyed by the Saracens. The chief town of the Beneventana basin is Benevento. Avellino is an agricultural city in the neighbourhood of which is the famous sanctuary of Monte Vergine to which pilgrimages are made. In the Campania plain are Caserta (pop. 33,000), founded by the Longobards in the eighth century, having a villa and royal palace, built by Charles III of Bourbon; this wonderful architectural production of Vanvitelli, after many years of deplorable abandonment, is about to be restored by Victor Emmanuel III; Nola (pop. 15,000), a very ancient city where Augustus died and where were born St. Paulhius, one of the best Christian poets, and the apostate Giordano Bruno; Aversa (pop. 23,000), the first possession of the Normans in Italy; Montesarchio, southeast of Benevento, is probably in the neighbourhood of the ancient Caudium on the Appian Way; from which the famous pass, so fateful to the Romans, was named the Caudine Forks. On the coast is Gaeta, a stronghold; it has a good port and is noted for the sieges that it underwent in 1799, 1806, and 1861. Pius IX took refuge there in 1848, as did also the last King of Naples, Francis II of Bourbon. Naples is treated in a special article (q. v.). In Pozzuoli (pop. 17,000) the ruins of the Temple of Augustus and of that of Serapis are witnesses of the former splendour of the town, near which is obtained the pozzolana earth that is excellent for building purposes. At the foot of Mt. Vesuvius are Portici and Resina, under which, at a depth of from 65 to 100 feet lies Herculaneum that was buried under torrents of lava in the year 79 of the Christian Era. Farther to the east are the ruins of Pompeii, buried also by the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius; but, contrary to what happened at Herculaneum, Pompeii was buried under heaps of ashes, on which account the excavations that were begun there in 1748 were relatively easy, and now the town is almost entirely unearthed. Another city destroyed by Mt. Vesuvius, in the same eruption, was Stabiæ over which is now built Castellamare, amid attractive surroundings, and having a good harbour and important docks. Sorrento, a beautiful spot, was the home of Torquato Tasso. The Parthenopian Islands rise around the Bay of Naples; they are Nisida, at the entrance of the Gulf of Baja; Procida that gave its name to the conspirator Giovanni da Procida, the enemy of the French; Ischia, with the volcano of Epomeo; Capri, mountainous and picturesque, and famous for its blue cave and for its wines; it was the last home of Tiberius. Salerno (pop. 42,000) is at the northernmost point of the gulf of its name; it was once the seat of a famous school of medicine and was an important place under the Longobard and the Norman kings; the cathedral of St. Matthew, where the great Pope Gregory VII is buried. was erected by Robert Guiscard and is one of the grandest Norman structures in Italy. Amalfi, in the Middle Ages, one of the strongest of the maritime republics, a rival of Genoa and of Pisa, was destroyed by them. It had the glory of framing laws, the "Amalfian Tables", by which maritime and commercial relations were regulated. Cava dei Tirreni contains a famous abbey of the Benedictine Order. To the south-east of the mouth of the Sele are the much admired ruins of Pæstum, which was founded by the Greeks, about the year 600 b.c., under the name of Poseidonia; the Temple of Neptune there is one of the most beautiful examples of Greek architecture in existence. Eboli (pop. 12,000) is an important road centre of this part of Italy.

Apulia comprises the provinces of Bari or Terra di Bari, Foggia or Capitanata, Lecce or Terra d'Otranto. The territorial boundaries of this region are the coasts of the Ionian Sea, as far as the mouth of the Bradano, this river and its tributary the Basentiello, the Saddle of Spinazzola, the Locone, the crest of the Apennines and that of the mountains of Capitanata as far as the mouth of the Biferno. Its topographical configuration is determined by the Promontory of Gargano, by the heights of the Murgie, and by the Tavoliere. The Murgie heights and the Promontory of Gargano at one time were two separate islands, and it is probable that the southern Murgie, to the south-east of Brindisi and Taranto were also islands. Apulia was debarred from exercising influence on neighbouring peoples, and its subjugation by them was made easy by reason of its position, its topographical conditions, and the character of its inhabitants, the Apulians, the Daunians, the Messapians, the Japygians, who were never of a warlike disposition. In ancient times, as at present, Apulia was the station between the East and the West; it was in the possession of the Greeks until the tenth century, when the Normans conquered it and established there the countship of Apulia, their first possession. This region has a mild climate and is essentially an agricultural country, wonderfully fertile in some parts; it has the disadvantage of lacking a sufficiency of water, but this defect is being remedied by the construction of a great aqueduct that will bring the waters of the Sele to this section. Its chief products are wines, oil, grain, almonds, and figs. Manufacturing industries are as yet little developed, Its principal towns are Foggia (pop. 53,000), the capital, on the right bank of the Celone River, in the heart of the Tavoliere; it is a railroad centre and a grain and wool market; it contains the notable ruins of the palace of Frederick II; Lucera (pop. 17,000), an ancient city upon a height, destroyed in the seventh century and rebuilt by Frederick II, who took to it Saracens from Sicily; Manfredonia (pop. 12,000) was founded by King Manfred, near the ruins of Sipontum; Monte Sant' Angelo, at the foot of Gargano, contains the famous sanctuary of St. Michael the Archangel; Cerignola (pop. 33,000), famous for the victory of the Spaniards over the French in 1503; Barletta (pop. 42,000), a former fortress, on the coast; here occurred the challenge of Barletta on 16 May, 1503; and in its neighbourhood was Cannæ, where Hannibal destroyed the Roman army; Trani, a port that was famous during the Crusades; Bari (pop. 78,000), a commercial port, containing the famous sanctuary of St. Nicholas. In the interior is Canosa (pop. 24,000), the ancient Canusium, not far from the position on the Ofanto River where the Romans found refuge after the defeat of Cannæ; it contains ancient tombs and also that of Bohemund the crusader; Altamura, on the Murgie Mountains, was the birth-place of the musician Mercadante. Terra d'Otranto, which comprises nearly the entire Salentine peninsula, was called the Tuscany of Southern Italy. Its four important seaports, Brindisi, Otranto, Taranto, and Gallipoli are situated respectively at the angles of a quadrangle, in the interior of which is Lecce, the capital. Brindisi (pop. 25,000), which is built on two inlets in the shape of horns, was in the time of the Romans a most important commercial and naval port, where the Appian, the Trajan, and the Tarentine Ways terminated. It was neglected in the Middle Ages, but in our days it has returned to new life and has become a station of communication with India. Otranto is famous for its sack by the Turks in 1480. Gallipoli (pop. 14,000) does a considerable commerce in oil and in wines. Taranto (pop. 61,000), the ancient Tarentum, is on the canal that unites the Mare Grande and the Mare Piccolo; it was founded by the Spartans, and through the fall of Sibani, became the strongest and richest town of Magna Græcia, but decayed after its defeat by the Romans; now it is one of the three principal points of naval defence and supplies of the Kingdom of Italy, the other two being Spezia and the Maddalena. Lecce (pop. 32,000) stands at a distance of less than a mile from the sea in a fertile plain, where tobacco is cultivated.

The Basilicata forms a single province called Potenza, after the name of its chief town. It is bounded by the valley between the Murgie and the Apennines, the Ofanto River, the group of Mt. Santa Croce, the Maddalena Mountains, the Pollino group, and the Ionian Sea. It has the shape of a horseshoe, with its calks on the Ionian Sea. Originally the Basilicata must have been a high plain, like that of Sila, but having been deeply ploughed by the waters, it became a rough and disjointed country, in which communication is very difficult. Its coasts are infected by malaria, on account of the swamps formed by the rivers and of neglect; and yet on these now deserted coasts there flourished Metapontum and Eraclea, cities of Magna Græcia. Besides its dense forests, the mode of life of its inhabitants, separated as they are from the rest of the country on account of the difficulty of communications, contributes to keep this region in a condition inferior to that of the other parts of the kingdom. The climate varies with the altitudes, and is also subject to sudden changes. Agriculture and herding are the principal occupations of its people, among whom industries and commerce are not developed. In view of the fact that the country is divided into vast estates, the peasants are very poor, and they emigrate, so that the census of 1901 showed a great falling off in the population. Potenza (pop. 16 000), the chief town, built at a height of 2700 feet above the sea, near the source of the Basento River, is relatively a modern city, because the ancient one, which was on the plain, at the place called La Murata, was destroyed by Frederick II and by Charles of Anjou. Melfi (pop. 15,000), on the slopes of Mt. Vulture, was the capital of the Normans and a stronghold of Robert Guiscard. Venosa was the home of Horace; Matera (pop. 17,000) has a splendid site.

Calabria comprises the provinces of Catanzaro or Calabria Ulteriore II, Cosenza or Calabria Citeriore, Reggio Calabria or Calabria Ulteriore I. Calabria includes the extreme western limit of the Italian peninsula and is connected with the rest of Italy by the Pollino group, which is its northern boundary, on all other sides it is bounded by the sea. A considerable narrowing between the Gulfs of Santa Eufemia and Squillace divides Calabria into its northern and southern parts. In ancient times it was called Bruzio, and on its Ionian coast stood the luxurious Sibari and the powerful Cotrone, with other famous cities of Magna Græcia. In the Middle Ages the pirates infested the coasts, whose inhabitants were driven to the mountains and abandoned the care of the waters so that the coasts became swampy; this is the reason why Calabria does not furnish a maritime population in proportion to the development of its coasts. Calabria is the land of all Europe that is most desolated by earthquakes. Its climate varies, according to altitude, between a southern climate on the Ionian coast and an Alpine one on the heights. It is an agricultural country of which the principal products are grain, oil, wines, figs, and especially bergamot, for the extraction of its essence. The extensive forests of Sila produce timber; there is some grazing of cattle, but the prevalence of vast landed estates keeps the labourers in poverty, and they emigrate to countries beyond the sea. Beginning at the north, the principal cities are Cosenza (pop. 21,000), capital of the Bruttians, on the Crati River, at its confluence with the Basento, in the bed of which, according to tradition, Alaric was buried with his treasures. On the mountain sides there are distributed sixteen Albanian towns, of which Spezzano is the most important. Corigliano (pop. 13,000) has a beautiful castle. San Giovanni in Fiore (pop. 13,000), on the Sila, was so called on account of a famous abbey that it contains; here, in 1844, the brothers Bandiera, who landed at the mouth of the Neto River to bring about an insurrection in Calabria, were defeated and taken prisoners. Castrovillari (pop. 10,000) is an ancient city on the slope of the Pollino, and Paola on the Tyrrhenian coast, the birth-place of St. Francis of Paola, the founder of the Order of Minims (1416-1507), contains a very famous sanctuary. Catanzaro (pop. 32,000) is built upon a height above the valley of Marcellinara. Squillace, on the gulf of the same name, was the birth-place of Cassiodorus, a civil officer of Theodoric. Cotrone, on the site of the victorious rival of Sibari. and seat of the Pythagorean school, is now only a small port. At Pizzo, on the Gulf of Santa Eufemia, Joachim Murat, once King of Naples, was shot 17 October, 1815. Nicastro (pop. 18,000) has a population of Albanian origin. Filadelfia was founded in 1783 by the survivors of Castelmenardo, a town that was destroyed by an earthquake. Reggio (pop. 45,000), a beautifully situated city of Greek origin, has undergone many calamities at the hands of men and by the action of nature; it was devastated by the Romans, by Totila, by the Saracens, by the Pisans, by Robert Guiscard, and by the Turks, and it was almost totally destroyed by the earthquake of 1783. It rose again, beautiful and splendid, but a more terrible earthquake. on 28 December. 1908, reduced it to a heap of ruins, under which were buried more than the half of its inhabitants. As has been seen, large cities are numerous in Italy; in fact, that country contains a greater number of them, in proportion to territorial extent and to population, than does any other country in Europe; there are 65 cities with a population of more than 35,000 inhabitants each. This abundance of large cities, surrounded by smaller ones, is of great historical and artistic importance; it is also the cause of the limited influence of the capital upon the life of the nation, in contrast with the rule that obtains in other countries.

Climatology

As a whole, Italy has a good climate, due to the Alpine wall that screens it from the northern wind and to the sea that surrounds it on three sides. From the Tyrrhenian and the Adriatic Seas arise vapours, with alternating winds, those from the south-west (Libeccio) and those from the south-east (Scirocco), which blow from the middle of September to the end of spring and which accumulate the sea vapours on the Apennine heights, where they are precipitated in rain and snow, and whence they furnish to the soil the humidity necessary for vegetation. Unhappily, the ill-advised devastation of forests over a great portion of the Apennines has destroyed, in great measure, what provident nature had done in that connexion for the good of Italy. The mean rainfall as a rule is between 20 inches and 60 inches, but it is subject to a considerable fluctuation on account of topographical conditions; so that it increases to a maximum of 100 inches on the Alps. The Tyrrhenian coast has a heavier waterfall than that of the Adriatic; while the plain of Apulia and the Salentine peninsula are the driest regions of Italy. In the north the most copious rainfalls occur in October and in the spring, and then the rivers of the valley of the Po are at their highest, whereas little rain falls in winter. In peninsular and in insular Italy the winter rains, on the contrary, are heaviest, and the absence of drainage causes the waters that overflow from the river-beds to inundate the lowlands of the coast and thereby to develop malaria. from which only six provinces are free. The regions where this evil prevails to the greatest extent are the Tuscan Maremma, the Roman Agro, the Basilicata, and almost the whole of Sardinia. Snow falls with frequency in the Alpine region and in the valley of the Po; it is more abundant along the Adriatic watershed than on that of the Tyrrhenian Sea.

Fauna and Flora

Italy lies within the Palearctic region, in which live a majority of the animals useful to man. It lies within the Mediterranean division of the floral kingdom and contains five botanical divisions:

• (1) the Alpine region, limited to the higher parts of the Alps and of the Apennines, between the highest line of forest vegetation and the lowest line of perpetual snows; characteristic of it are the edelweiss (Leontopodium alpinum), the rhododendron and the Alpine grasses of the reed (Cyperaceœ), the rush and the clover variety.
• (2) The mountain or forest region, of which the pines and beeches are characteristic.
• (3) The region of the Po, devoid of forests and of evergreens; here grow vines, the elm, the mulberry, the poplar, the willow, the elder, hemp, flax, etc.
• (4) The Mediterranean or evergreen region, which comprises the remainder of the peninsula and of which are characteristic the evergreen trees and plants, as the olive, the fir, the cypress, the orange, the lemon, the myrtle, and the oleander.
• (5) The submarine region, which comprises the various sea-weeds.

The Italian flora contain 14,912 species, of which 325 have been introduced from Asia, Africa, and America.

DEMOGRAPHY

(1) The People of Italy

It would seem that in the quaternary period man lived in Italy, together with species of animals that have been lost or have emigrated, and witnessed those great commotions of the earth through which the sea receded from the lands of the Po, the Apennines arose, and the volcanoes of Lazio and of Campania became active. There has been much discussion as to the origin of the early inhabitants of Italy, as to the way by which they came, and as to the periods of their immigration, but, until now, only the most contradictory hypotheses have been reached. The most recent results that have been furnished by palætiology, by linguistics, and by archæology would show that Italy and a considerable part of Western Europe were primitively occupied by a race having a dolichocephalic cranium, and therefore of a branch of the family of Cham. Relatively nearer to our times, there are two orders of the Aryan immigration into Italy: the primitive and the posterior immigrations. In the former (1200-800 b.c.) we find two very ancient races, the Messapico-Iapygian, which came of the Illyrian trunk, and the Italic, properly so called. It would seem that the Messapians came by sea from Greece; and at a later period, by land, the Iapygians, who occupied the Adriatic coast, from Gargano to Cape Leuca, and were, possibly, the historical Autochthonians of the peninsula. The Italics, who are divided into two great families, the Latins and the Umbrians, descended into Italy from the East, or, as seems more probable, from the North, by the valleys of the Inn, of the Adige, and of the Adda, and occupied the plain of the Po; but, other peoples appearing, they moved to the south of the peninsula and became identified with the Latins, occupying the western watershed and dividing into the branches called Oscans, Ausonians, and Œnotrians or Italics. Then came the Umbrians, whose rule lasted a short time; and, having heen defeated by the Gauls on the Po and by the Etruscans on the Arno, they withdrew to that region to which they gave the name of Umbria. But, a great family of this race, the Sabines, passed farther on and established itself on the highland of Rieti, nearer Campania and Apulia; and having increased greatly in their new territory, they gave origin to the Samnian, Marsian, Pelignian, Vestinian, Marrucinian, and other peoples.

That broad territory that lies between the right of the Tiber, the Apennines, and the sea, came to be inhabited by the Etruscans, called also Rasenans or Tyrrhenians. As to the origin of this people there are two opinions, that of Herodotus, according to which the Etruscans came by sea, driven from Lydia by famine; and the other, that of Niebuhr, Mommsen, and Helbig, according to which the Tyrrhenians came into Italy by land, over the Rhætian Alps. Of the primitive inhabitants of Italy, these were the ones who reached the highest degree of civilization, as is shown by the splendid remnants of their cities and by the objects found in their tombs; it is a pity that their language is not yet known. Later immigrations were those of the Gauls and of the Greeks. The Gauls, who were formerly held to be of Celtic origin, which now, however, is doubted, came down from the Alps at the beginning of the sixth century b.c., divided into several families: Cenomanian, Insubrian, Boian, Senonian, etc. They were harsh and rapacious peoples, who made Cisalpine Gaul return to the barbarous state out of which the Etruscans had taken it, and often, in later historical ages, their nefarious influence was carried over the whole of Italy. On the southern portion of the peninsula there were established numerous Greek colonies, whose cities, as we have seen, arose to great power and splendour, whence the name Magna Grœcia, given to the southern part of Italy. This portion of the peninsula was also inhabited by the Ligurians and by the Venetians, the origin of which races is not yet established. Some persons consider the Ligurians to be a very ancient race, preceding the Aryans and allied to the Iberians, while other authorities hold that the Ligurians were of Celtic origin. However that may be, this people occupied a great portion of the western watershed of Italy, and then, expelled by the Italics and by the Etruscans, they sought new homes on the Rhone and on the Pyrenees. It would seem that the Venetian race originated in Illyria and that its expansion in Continental Italy was stopped by the Gauls; at any rate, this people, who, unlike the Etruscans, had not abandoned a pastoral life and its habits, knew a great deal about agriculture, which was the basis of private life and social relations among the primitive Italic peoples.

(2) Population

In 1770 the population of the territory that now constitutes the Kingdom of Italy was in round numbers 16,477,000 inhabitants; at the beginning of the nineteenth century it had grown to 18,125,000; and the census of 1901 showed a population of 32,475,253 inhabitants, implying an average annual increase of 7.38 per cent from 31 December, 1881. On 1 January, 1908, Italy had 33,909,776 inhabitants, being, therefore, the sixth state of Europe from the standpoint of population. The mean density of the population is 307 inhabitants per sq. mile, which is the highest in Europe, after Belgium, Holland, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; but, when it is considered that those countries are agricultural, industrial, and commercial while Italy is devoted essentially to agriculture, and is backward in the development of that industry, its population is shown to be dense, which accounts for emigration. The population, moreover, is very unevenly divided over the territory, according as life is more or less easily supported by the fertility of the soil, by industry, or by commerce. The most crowded population is that of the province of Naples: 3448 inhabitants per Sq. mile; after that come the province of Milan, the district of Genoa, the coast of Apulia, between Barletta and Monopoli, and the slope of Mt. Etna. The province of Sassari is the one least inhabited (80 inhabitants per sq. mile); but there are extensive regions, such as the Roman Campagna and the plateau of the Murgie, that are almost uninhabited. As to the distribution of population, 71.8 per cent of the inhabitants live in towns and 28.2 per cent live a country life. It is only in Venice and in Tuscany that the numbers of the town and country dwellers almost balance each other, while in Emilia, the Marches, and Umbria the country population is almost double that of the towns, while the opposite is the case in Sicily and in Sardinia. It is to be regretted that an ever-increasing tendency towards agglomeration is manifested, which, together with the absence of the landowners from the small centres where their properties are located, is the source of great economical, educational, and moral evil.

Foreign residents in the kingdom, on 10 January, 1901, which is the date of the last census, numbered 61,606, of whom 37,762 were permanent residents, and of these there were 9079 Swiss, 7995 Austrians, 5748 Germans, and 5033 French, after whom came in order of numbers the English and the North Americans.

The highest averages of marriages are furnished by Abruzzi and Molise (9.1), Campania and Calabria (8.1), Apulia (8.2), and the Basilicata (9). The highest birthrates are those of Lombardy, Venice, Apulia, and Calabria. And here it maybe observed that depopulation through the vice of neo-Malthusianism begins to show itself also in Italy, especially in the large cities, considering that the average of 36, in 1872-75, is reduced now to 31.4, notwithstanding the fact that the average of marriages has remained approximately constant; and while there is an average excess of 10.6 per 1000 of births over deaths, it is due, not entirely to the increase in births, but to the notable decrease in mortality, the average of which has fallen from 30.5, in 1872-75, to 20.8 in 1907. Sociology cannot overlook the alarming increase in the number of the still-born which is found especially in the cities of more than 100 000 inhabitants. In 1907 there were 4.33 for every 100 births, including those born dead. The lowest averages of mortality are furnished by Piedmont and by Liguria (19.7); and the highest are those of Lombardy (23), Apulia (25), the Basilicata (27), and Sardinia (24). Tubercular and intestinal maladies and pneumonia furnish the highest figures to the death-rate, together with acute and chronic bronchitis and heart disease. In 1907 there were 1315 homicides (3.9 per 100,000 inhabitants) and 2312 suicides (6.9 per 100,000 inhabitants).

(3) Emigration

Italy is subject to this very important sociological phenomenon, not only on account of over-population, as some believe, but, because capital does not promote industries, which is due to a moral as well as to an economic cause, the former being a lack of confidence between lender and borrower, and the latter, an exaggerated fiscalism and the want of a protective tariff; it is due also to a social cause, namely the subverting theories with which socialism inspires the working classes. These are the true mediate reasons for Italian emigration that produces a lack of labour, and, therefore, economical disorder, which itself is the immediate cause of Italian expatriation; all the other causes, such as the example of relatives and of friends who emigrate, the cheapness of travel, the facility of receiving news and of returning home, and the propaganda of navigation companies are of little consequence, when they do not rest upon economic uneasiness — which has been the determining element of every migratory movement in the world — nor can any human power prevent its effects. The law of 31 January, 1901, regulates emigration, and it is to be hoped that its provisions will remain in force, because the State should not promote, encourage, or guide the currents of emigration. Figures are clearer than words in these matters.

The difference between temporary and permanent emigration is no longer taken into account in statistics, for the very good reason that it does not show positive facts, either because of the facility of translocation, or because the emigrant, having found work and comforts at the place to which he has emigrated, may establish there his home. In any case, temporary emigration occurs more frequently from the provinces of Venice, Lombardy, and Piedmont, and is directed more especially towards France, Switzerland, Austria, and the Balkans. Sixty-four per cent of the emigrants are farm labourers. The regions that furnished the largest numbers to the total emigration in 1906 were Piedmont, Venice, the Marches, the Abruzzi, Campania, the Basilicata, Calabria, and Sicily. With relation to transoceanic emigration the largest proportions per 100,000 were furnished by the Marches (2222), the Abruzzi (3593), Campania (2677), the Basilicata (3764), Calabria (3953), and Sicily (3390). From 1 July, 1906, to 30 June, 1907, there emigrated to the United States 285,731 Italians, nearly 43 per cent of the total of emigration. In 1907, during the economical crisis in the United States, 154,500 Italians who had emigrated returned to their country, and there was a suspension in emigration — only a suspension, because in the first six months of 1909 there were 210,432 emigrants, of whom 187,086 went to the United States, an increase of 152,320 and 151,406, respectively, over the corresponding figures for the first six months of 1908. The undesirable element in Italian emigration is not furnished by the illiterate cafone, who has given — and continues to give — actual value to lands in the United States, but rather, by ungodly educated emigrants who use their unfortunate fellow-countrymen, as well as the native of his class, for their own ends. Is Italian emigration a good or an evil? For the economy of Italy it is a good, seeing that the credit of Italians in foreign countries, on 31 December, 1908, in the savings postal accounts amounted to 290,979,711.94 lire ($12,000,000 nearly), and the deposits of emigrants for the period of 1 January, 1909, to 31 August, 1909, amounted to 21,702,664.20 lire. In other words, there are nearly 4,000,000 Italians scattered over the world, like the overflow of a prolific and sober race, in search of better living; and over the world is said advisedly, because the Italian emigrant, overcoming all obstacles, as poverty and ignorance, goes, exploited and little protected withal, into distant lands, among peoples whose customs are totally different from his own, and whose languages are unknown to him. This adaptability to climate and to social life is indicative of his cosmopolitan character.

(4) Language and Religion

Although the population of Italy is ethnically mixed, and although there is considerable variation in its physical types, it is nevertheless different from that of all the other countries of Europe in the astonishing unity of its culture, of its language, and of its religion. That which is foreign is soon absorbed; and the Italian nation has the further advantage that, although it has a population of nearly 36,000,000 inhabitants, only 2,000,000 of them are subject to foreign governments. The Roman conquests spread popular Latin, first, over Italy, and then over the known world; it was at first slowly altered by the linguistic habits of the various countries, and then, more rapidly, through the decay of the Roman Empire and through distance from Rome. Thus originated the Romanesque or neo-Latin languages, and the first of them, by its historical excellence, is the Italian, which is the pure and clear continuance of vulgar Latin, because the latter, in Italy, was unaccompanied by other tongues. Formerly it was the principal commercial language known by foreign peoples, especially by those of the Levant. At present it is spoken by nearly 36,000,000 people.

The dialects that properly belong to the Italian system are the Tuscan, which is the typical and the literary language of the Italians, the Venetian, Corsican, Sicilian and Neapolitan, the Umbro-Roman, and the Marchisan. To the Gallo-Italic system belong the dialects of Liguria and of Piedmont and the Lombard-Emilian. Those are the principal dialects, spoken in the various regions after which they are respectively named, having themselves subdivisions that are due to phonetic alterations. To the neo-Latin non-Italian dialects belong the Franco-Provençal, which is spoken in the high valleys of the Western Alps, and the Ladino or Reto-Roman dialect, which is spoken in the Canton of the Grisons, in Friuli, and in Molise. The German language is spoken in Piedmont and in Venetia by the descendants of colonies that were established in those provinces in the eleventh and in the twelfth centuries. The language of Albania is spoken by the descendants of colonists who went to Southern Italy and to Sicily, in 1461, with Skanderbeg after the fall of Albanian independence. The descendants of the Greeks who migrated to Calabria and to the territory of Otranto, between the ninth and the eleventh centuries, preserve their original language. In all, there are nearly 770,000 persons in Italy who speak languages other than Italian.

The predominant religion is the Catholic, to which belong 97.12 per cent of the population. The census of 1901 showed the presence of 65,595 Protestants and of 35,617 Jews, while 795,276 persons made no mention of their religion in their declarations.

(5) Arts

In the first half of the Middle Ages, among the fine arts religious architecture reached a certain degree of perfection; the churches which it created reproduced the ancient Roman basilicas (Santa Maria Maggiore, San Clemente, and others, in Rome), and its baptisteries, octagonal in form, imitated cellœ of the Roman baths; in this way the Christian-Roman or neo-Latin style was developed. At the same time the Greeks brought the Byzantine style to Italy (San Vitale in Ravenna, 537, and San Marco in Venice, 876). Towards the year 1000 there appeared in Italy the Romanesque style, which substituted the vaulted roof for the plain ceiling (the cathedral of Pisa); while Arabic influence was felt in Sicily in the construction of the magnificent cathedral of Monreale and of its adjacent cloister. Towards the latter part of the Middle Ages, painting, through the impetus given to it by Giotto, produced true masterpieces. Among the painters who became famous at that time are Senesi, Buoninsegna, and Martini, the two Gaddi, Fra Angelico, and Masaccio, who was the true founder of the modern school of painting. Among the famous sculptors were the two Pisanos, Orgagna, Ghiberti, and — most famous of them all — Donatello (1386-1466), who may be called the Masaccio of sculpture. Finally, we should name Luca della Robbia, a popular sculptor who invented the terra-cotta process that is known by his name. The erroneously so-called Gothic style that was developed in France was brought into Italy, where, however, it was not fully adopted, except in the cases of the church of St. Francis at Assisi and of the cathedral of Milan; the churches of Santa Maria Novella and of Santa Croce in Florence, the cathedrals of Siena and of Orvieto and others are based upon it, as are, among other civil edifices, the Ducal Palace in Venice, the Orgagna Loggia, in Florence, and the communal palaces of Udine and Siena.

The Renaissance in the first decades of the sixteenth century led to the further development of the fine arts, and great masterpieces were produced. Here it is enough to mention the three great names of Leonardo da Vinci (1425-1519), Michelangelo Buonarroti (1474-1564), and of Raphael Sanzio (1483-1520), which have made that age immortal. In architecture Roman forms were adopted, and the first examples of Renaissance architecture were the churches of Santa Maria dei Miracoli in Venice, San Lorenzo in Florence, etc.; and among civil buildings, the Pitti and the Strozzi palaces in Florence, the ducal palace of Urbino, etc. The best architects were Bramante, Giacomo Barozzi, called Vignola, Peruzzi, Palladio, the two Sangallos, Sansovino, and Buonarroti, who planned the cupola of St. Peter's. Sacred music reached its acme in the compositions of Palestrina (1529-1594). The straining after odd and exaggerated forms which were condemned in the literature of the seventeenth century also appears in the architecture and in the sculpture of that time. Bernini (1598-1680) and Borromini (1599-1677), men of great but bizarre genius, introduced the barocco style which was disfigured by their imitators. But painting remained free from the defects of that period, through the influence of Dolci, Sassoferrato, the two Carracci, Albani, Domenichino, and Guido Reni. The heavy and contorted manner of building which prevailed in the seventeenth century gave way to a lighter but peculiar style marked by ornamentation; it was brought to Italy from France. This style, which is called rococo, corresponds to what in literature is known as preciosity; but towards the middle of the eighteenth century classical forms were revived, especially in the works of the famous architects Vanvitelli and Juvara, while Canova restored its simplicity to sculpture, combining the study of nature with that of classic forms. Music also continued its ascendant progress under Pergolesi, Porpora, and Paisiello. In the nineteenth century architecture attempted the "liberty" style, which came from beyond the Alps; sculpture developed, as is shown by the names of Bertolini, Tenerani, Dupré, Monteverde, and others; but painting produced less noted names (Celentano, Fracassini, Morelli, Maccari, Michetti, etc.). Profane music, on the other hand, reached its greatest height in Bellini, Donizetti, Rossini, and Verdi.

ECONOMICAL FACTORS

(1) Agriculture

Italy was once the classic land of agriculture; but, in our day, notwithstanding a reawakening that foretells better times, it is one of the countries in which agriculture is most backward. This is due to many causes, of which the chief are fiscalism and the landlord system (there were 3,351,498 landed proprietors in 1882, which number was reduced to 3,286,691 in 1901); absenteeism and the inertia of the large landowners, the ignorance of agriculture and the lack of capital and of agrarian credit are also to blame. And consequently the average yield of an acre of corn in Italy is less than one-half the yield in Germany and England, notwithstanding better conditions of soil and of climate. Exact data concerning these matters will not be had until the valuations that are made conformably to the law of March, 1886, are available. So far investigations have been limited to agricultural products, to the silk-worm industry and to the cultivation of tobacco. But, in order to remedy this evil, there was established, in 1907, an office for the express purpose of collecting agricultural statistics. The production of wheat is inferior to the demands of the population, and great quantities of that staple are imported, notwithstanding the high duty. On the other hand, there is an over-production of wine. The cultivation of vegetables is important, as is also that of kitchen herbs and of fruits, in which there is a great deal of exportation that could be profitably increased if refrigerator cars were used for transportation, as in America. In the production of silk-worms, Italy is the leading country of Europe, and the third, after Japan and China, in the world: in 1906, there were produced 538,380 new cocoons, and the native and the imported cocoons that were spun by the factories throughout the kingdom produced a total of 6666 tons. Among industrial plants hemp and flax hold an important place in Italian agriculture, there being a yearly product of nearly 80,000 tons of the former and of nearly 20,000 tons of the latter, furnished in greater part by Lombardy. Among the other industrial plants are the sumac and the manna in Sicily, saffron in Aquila, liquorice, hops, madder, straw for the manufacture of hats, etc. Cotton is imported from America, and of late years there has been a successful effort to cultivate beet-root for the manufacture of sugar, and also to cultivate tobacco, which, in 1905, yielded a product of more than 7000 tons from 12,500 acres. Horticulture also has made notable progress in recent times, especially in Tuscany and on the Ligurian Riviera, which has an exceptionally favourable climate for this industry. Unfortunately, notwithstanding so many favourable conditions, agriculture, which is a source of great profit in foggy England, in Italy is in a rudimentary state as yet. Between 1867 and 1906 there were reafforested, at the expense of the Government and with its assistance, 114,000 acres, costing in all $1,700,000, a very small showing in the presence of the serious problem of reafforestation.

(2) Live Stock

There is not much raising of live stock in Italy, not enough even to supply the home demand, in which that country is behind the nations of Central and of Northern Europe; and it is not easy to understand why agriculturists do not profit by the advantages offered by the Government in this connexion. The animals that are chiefly raised are oxen, horses, asses, mules, goats, sheep, and hogs. On account of the natures of the different peoples, in northern Italy is found chiefly the raising of the larger animals, while on the peninsula the raising of smaller animals is prevalent. Poultry and eggs are a special source of wealth; still their supply is not equal to the demand. The fisheries, of river and of sea, are neglected by the Government; each year there is a retrogression in these pursuits that is stayed by the co-operative efforts of a few fishermen of the Adriatic shores of the Marches, assisted by their priests.

(3) Minerals

In view of the lack of coal, Italy is not very rich in mineral products, although lignite, anthracite, and peat are not scarce. It is the first country in the production of sulphur, however, as we have seen, when speaking of Sicily; formerly there was no competition in this commodity, but now California has closed the American markets to the Italian product, Italy abounds in salts (Salsomaggiore and Volterra); it is rich also in iron ores of the best quality, found in the regions of Brescia, Bergamo, and Comasco, and more especially in the island of Elba. In Liguria, Piedmont, and Venice is found copper, but more abundantly in Tuscany, near Campiglia Marittima, where there is a great establishment for smelting the ores of Lanzi and of Mt. Temperino; these mines were known to the Etruscans and to the Romans, who left there the traces of their industrial spirit. The greatest yield of mercury is obtained from the mines of Grosseto, near Mt. Amiata, and from those of Siena. In 1906 the total production of minerals, in which 69,224 workmen were employed, amounted to a value of $20,000,000. Another source of wealth to Italy are the quarries that produce valuable materials for construction, as pozzolana (cement), volcanic tufa, calcite, sandstone, etc., and stone, such as decorative and statuary marbles, granite, slate, peperine etc., as well as other materials for use in the arts, such as pumice stone, lithographic stone, asbestos, and colouring clays, etc. Italy is rich in thermal and in mineral waters that compare favourably, from the therapeutic standpoint, with those of other countries, and they could be made the sources of considerable profit, if they were competently exploited. Among these thermal waters special mention should be made of those of Acqui (Alessandria), Salsomaggiore (Parma), Telese (Benevento), and Bormio. Among the mineral waters, the following obtain highest favour: Montecatini (Tuscany), Recoaro (Venice), San Gemini and Nocera (Umbria), and Ischia and Casamicciola (Naples).

Of late years Italy has not been idle in regard to the redemption of lands: from 1884 to the present time nearly 4,000,000 acres have been redeemed, whether by the process of filling-in, by draining, or by the use of hydraulic machines. In 1905 the King of Italy, at the petition of the American agriculturist Lubin, initiated the establishment of an International Agricultural Institute which, totally independent of all political connexion, should study agricultural conditions in the different countries for the general good. All the Powers accepted the initiative and appointed each a representative in accordance with it, so that the institution is now an accomplished fact.

(4) Industries

Industries and manufactures fell from the prosperous condition in which they were in the Middle Ages when Italy was the teacher of other countries. Political dissensions, internal strife, and lack of technical instruction, the want of capital, and an exaggerated protectionism produced a certain relaxation and want of care, in consequence of which national industry neither followed the progress of the times nor even produced the supply required by national demand; and it fell entirely upon the discovery of steam, which revolutionized the economy of peoples and of states. But in recent years Italy has reawakened and, notwithstanding obstacles in the way of development, increased by an exaggerated and ill-advised fiscalism, has made notable progress in its industrial life, especially through the intelligent efforts of its northern population, to the extent, in fact, of attaining the highest ranks in the silk industry, as well as in those of cotton, wool, leather, of the metals, and of alimentary products (cheese, salted meats, and pastes). Notable also are the soap industry, the chemical products and the paper industries, the manufacture of artistic furniture, of jewellery, of objects in straw, matches, glasses, beads, porcelains, majolica, mosaics, and, in general, all of the artistic industries, due to the natural good taste of the Italian people. Visitors to Italy take into the country from $60,000,000 to $80,000,000 each year. Available fuel and motor power are the measure of industrial activity, and in 1887, in which year regular investigations on these points began, the amount of fuel used in the industries aggregated a tonnage of 4,004,065, representing a value uf $18,000,000 while, in 1905, according to the most recent statistics, the tonnage was 6,912,183, with a value of $33,000,000. The importation of coal alone, deducting the amount of that commodity that was exported or entered into the manufacture of conglomerates, was nearly 6,000,000 tons. The total sum of the various motor forces available on 1 January, 1904, according to the statistics of the "Ispettorato generale dell' Industria e Commercio", published in 1906, was as follows: steam engines, 2,472,133 horse power; gas motors, 45,855 horse power; hydraulic forces, 490,000 horse power; motors of other kinds, exclusive of windmills, 446 horse power — total, 3,008,452. As regards textile industries, in which Italy is making an effort to regain the primacy that it enjoyed in the glorious Middle Ages, we give in round numbers the following approximate data:—

The mechanical industries, in the working of iron, are also growing, as in the manufacture of arms, foundries, and naval construction. Coal has been used until now almost exclusively in the industries, and consequently Italy is yearly a tributary to foreign countries in the sum of nearly $50,000,000; but now it can substitute electrical power, derived from its numerous watercourses, an inexhaustible wealth that Raddi estimates to be equal to 10,000,000 horse power. This is the white coal, according to the happy expression of Bergès, which will be capable of supplying both the great and the small industries; and the Italian mind must have presaged this new force, in which the future prosperity of Italy lies, seeing that in this country, where, nearly a century ago, Volta discovered the electric pile, have appeared also the two greatest transformers of electrical energy, Pacinotti and Galileo Ferraris; while Marconi, utilizing the Hertzian waves, has opened up a new horizon.

The principal centres of the silk industry are Milan, Como, Genoa, Turin, and Florence; those of the cotton industry are Milan, Bergamo, Como, Turin, Novara, Genoa, Salerno, Udine, and Pisa; the principal centres for the wool industry are the Biellese, Vicenza (Schio), and Tuscany; the principal centres for the manufacture of linen textures and for the hemp industry are in Lombardy. Emilia, Venice, and Campania; the metallurgical industries are centred at Follonica (Grosseto), Cecina, Piombino, Portoferraio, Terni, Iglesias, and Pertusola in Sardinia. Pozzuoli, Terni, and Brescia enjoy a high reputation for their metallurgical industries in general, and for the manufacture of arms in particular, while the products of important shops in Lombardy, Piedmont, Venice, Tuscany, Liguria, and Naples, in marine engines, railroad supplies, automobiles, and kindred productions enjoy high favour. Naples, Leghorn, Spezia, Genoa, and Sestri Ponente have considerable dock yards, while the largest arserials are at Spezia, Venice, Naples, Castellammare di Stabia, and Taranto. Italy occupies an important position with regard to the industrial trades, the development of which is being promoted through the establishment of the museums of Turin, of Rome and of Naples, and by the opening of industrial schools. Florence, Venice, and Rome are famous for their mosaic productions; Venice, the Romagna, the Milanese, and Tuscany, for their terra-cotta, majolica, and porcelain arts; Venice and Murano for their mirrors, for glass, and for glass beads; Naples, Genoa, Leghorn, and Trapani are famous for their coral works, and Turin, Naples, Venice, Rome, and Florence, for their bronzes, statues, pictures, tapestry, etc. Tuscany, and especially Florence, enjoys a good reputation for the manufacture of straw hats, as do the establishments of Piedmont, Lombardy, and Liguria for the manufacture of paper, and especially so Fabriano, in the Marches, for its hand-made paper, one of the oldest establishments of its kind in Europe. Milan is the principal centre of Europe for the printing of music and is the chief centre of Italy for the polygraphic industries. In alimentary products Liguria and Naples lead for pastry, and Bologna and Modena for their sausages; Liguria for salt fish; Lombardy for its cheeses; Tuscany and Liguria lead in the production of oil. The best-known wines, enjoying high esteem in foreign countries, are Barolo, Barbera, Grignolino, and Vermouth of Piedmont; Sangiovese and Canino, of the Romagna; Chianti, Pomino, and Rufina, of Tuscany; Orvieto and Aleatico, of Umbria; the wines of the Roman Castelli; Tauraso, Capri, and Falerno, from the southern provinces.

(5) Commerce

More intimate relations with the principal powers, with which Italy has commercial treaties, and the increase of ways of communication by land and sea, especially the tunnelling of Fréjus, the St. Gotthard, and the Simplon, and the opening of the Suez Canal, have facilitated commercial relations and have increased the intercourse of Italy with other countries. This is sufficiently shown by the fact that, while the sum total of Italian commerce in 1861 was of a value of $3,200,000, it was of a value of $922,000,000 in 1907, exclusive of precious metals, of which amount $552,000,000 represent the imports, and $370,000,000 the exports. The most important commercial centres are Lombardy, Piedmont, Liguria, and Venice, which is due not only to the greater activity of the inhabitants of those regions and to their contact with the neighbouring foreign peoples, but also to the many good highways of those provinces, and to their navigable canals and railroad development. In the second rank are Emilia, Tuscany, the Marches, Umbria, and Lazio. The commerce of Southern Italy and of Sicily is yet at a low standard, although it is slowly awakening. The greater portion of foreign commerce is done by maritime transportation, the most active ports being those of Genoa, Leghorn, Naples, Palermo, Catania, Brindisi, and Venice. The economical conditions of Italy, on the whole, are not unfavourable, but the nation is far from enjoying the prosperous conditions to which other countries have attained in this regard. The weak points are in the backward unscientific conditions of agriculture and of the raising of cattle, wavering on the verge of excessive cultivation; while there is a considerable danger in the exaggerated protectionism that gradually is fixing its roots in the sentiment of the people and in that of nations.

The merchant marine is not at the height that it attained in the Middle Ages under the glorious maritime republics, and a complication of historical and of geographical causes, added to the inertia of Governments and to the lack of judicial protection, have obstructed its favourable progress. Nevertheless private enterprise has not been abated in the development of the merchant marine, although it be true that it has not attained the favourable results that have crowned like efforts in other countries. In the last four years, however, the Società di Navigazione Generale Italiana, the Veloce Company, the Italia Company, the Italian-Lloyd, the Sabaudo-Lloyd, and the Società Siculo-Americana have added thirty-five large, twin-screw, transatlantic steamships to the emigrant service, with a capacity of 240,000 tons burden, and accommodation for nearly 70,000 passengers, which was done at an expense of not less than $28,000,000. The Italian merchant marine occupies the seventh position among those of the large countries. The State, to assist the merchant marine, grants navigation prizes and compensation for the construction of ships and for repairs that are carried out in Italian yards, amounting in all to a yearly maximum of $1,600,000. This system, however, which has been in force since 1886, and involving a larger sum of money, has not produced the results desired, because the cost of construction in Italian yards is higher than those in other countries, and consequently the Government's compensation is without practical effect. According to a new bill, the direct protection of the State would assist the mercantile marine by a compensation of equipment for a duration of not less than ten months per ton burden and by compensation for velocity, for every half mile above a 14-knot speed, as well as per ton. For ships constructed in foreign yards, the bill provides that these compensations be one-half of those granted in the case of ships that are built at home. It grants a great many reimbursements of taxes and other compensations to the thirty-one shipyards of the kingdom, if they use the home metallurgical products. This bill continues the former policy of uniting the metallurgical, the shipyard, and the navigation interests. The sum total of merchandise that was shipped or unloaded in 1906 amounted to 23,287,916 tons, of which less than half (10,503,815 tons) was carried on Italian bottoms; this is worthy of consideration, in view of the fact that 75% of the value of Italian commerce with foreign powers is transported by sea. There are 302,296 persons bearing certificates of matriculation or whose names appear on the registers of seafaring people. On 31 Dec., 1907, 4981 sailing ships, with a tonnage of 503,260, and 548 steamships with a tonnage of 497,537, had received certificates of nationalization.

(6) Coinage

The metrical system is in force in Italy for the measure of objects and of value; the lira is the unit of value; its nominal worth is 20 cents. Italy, France, Belgium, Greece, and Switzerland form the Latin Monetary Union, having a bimetallic basis, which is imperfect, however, because since 1879, suspicion has attached to the coinage of the pieces of five lire; the fractional coins were nationalized. From 1862 to 1907 the State coined, in all denominations, a sum total of $220,000,000 and a sum total of $154,000,000 were withdrawn from circulation, with a loss of 7.2 per cent on their nominal value. On 31 December, 1907, the treasury resources were: gold, 303,313,673 lire; silver, 71,862,419 lire; nickel, 2,537,285 lire; copper, 2,595,212 lire; total, 380,309,129 lire ($76,061,826).

The Bank of Italy, the Bank of Naples, and the Bank of Sicily are the only financial establishments that are authorized by law to issue bank-notes that are legal currency; this authorization is for a limited time and upon condition of financial compensation to the State; the bank-notes are for values of 50, 100, 500, and 1000 lire respectively (law of 9 October, 1900). The Treasury also issues state notes of 5, of 10, and of 25 lire, all legal currency, and to some extent, legal tender, because, although they are de jure convertible into metallic money, the treasury de facto does not redeem them. This kind of paper circulation is limited by law to 467,500,000 lire, and on 31 December, 1907, it actually amounted to 437,518,410 lire, being 26.8 per cent of the gold security. The amount of the bank-notes in circulation on the same date was 1,851,541,950 lire, being 72.4 per cent of the gold reserve. In sum, the paper circulation on 31 December, 1907, amounted to 2,289,060,360 lire, or 68 lire per head of the population.

(7) Labour Organization

The highest wages for workmen in the manufacturing industries and in commerce is of slightly more than a dollar a day, and the lowest is 30 cents, for men; and the salaries for women vary from 60 to 10 cents a day. According to the census of 1901, there were 2,471,672 wage-earning women, above the age of 9 years, as compared with 5,662,672 men; and according to the declaration made by employers conformably with the law of 19 June, 1902, concerning the work of women and of children, there were, in 14,510 establishments, 414,915 workmen and 414,975 working women. The laws of 17 May, 1898, and of 29 June, 1903, compel the employer, in some trades, to insure his workmen against accidents in work, and by the law of 8 July, 1883, the Cassa Nazionale was established for that purpose, without, however, prohibiting such insurance in private companies or in syndicates of mutual insurance. According to the statistics of the Ufficio del Lavoro, working men and women, insured and non-insured, who suffered through accident, in 1906, numbered 166,561, of whom 9963 were women; there were 398 cases of death and 259 accidents in which many workmen suffered. It should be noted that the great increase in the number of accidents is not to be ascribed to a noteworthy increase of industrial activity, or to less prudence, but rather to the malice of the workmen, and it is extremely doubtful whether there does not exist a medical criminal school, established for the purpose of encouraging the men to simulate serious injuries. Recently a bill has been introduced into the Legislature to remove these evils, which cause high insurance premiums and are otherwise detrimental to industry and to insurance societies. The statistics compiled by the "Ispettorato generale del Credito e della Previdenza" in 1906 show that there were 63,369 accidents for which financial compensation to the amount of $120,900 was paid. In 1905 there were 540,850 workmen insured in the Cassa Nazionale di assicurazione; the number of injured among them amounted to 145.50 per 1000, and the indemnities paid to $830,000. In the third quarter of the year 1908 there were 48,621 accidents.

Regarding the organization of workmen, on 1 January, 1908, there were 4477 leagues, having a membership of 612,804 industrial workmen; on 1 January, 1909, there were 98 camere del lavoro, having 3834 sections with 501,220 members; 43 of these camere belonged to the Confederazione del Lavoro; there were 22 federazioni of trades, on 1 January, 1908, with 2550 sections and 191,599 members. There were 2814 leagues registered in the camere del lavoro, and 1324 in the federazioni of trades, while 339 were independent. In 1906 there were 1302 strikes, affecting 257,809 workmen; in 1907 there were 1963 strikes, affecting 276,535 workmen, and in 1908 there were 1543 strikes in which 218,289 workmen participated. The year 1907 developed the greatest number of strikes, much in excess of those of 1903, in which latter-named year there occurred the maximum of industrial strikes. The chief cause of strikes related to wages, to hours, to the monopoly of labour, and to discipline, and, as is natural, the first two produced the greatest number of strikes, and questions of discipline more than those related with the monopoly of labour. In 1906 20.5 per cent of the strikes were entirely successful, while 2.53 per cent were unsuccessful; in 1907, 25.5 per cent succeeded, as compared with 27.7 per cent that failed; in 1908, 21.1 per cent were successful, and 36.4 per cent failed. The remainder were partly successful. In the first quarter of 1909 there were 217 strikes, in which 34,118 workmen took part. There are in all Italy 69 organizations for the defence of the demands of workmen in the industries and in commerce.

The habit of making savings, which is one of the forms of natural provision, and also that of attending to the needs of parents have always obtained among Italians, especially in the labouring classes, whether agricultural or industrial, with greater force, in fact, than that of physical and intellectual development, and this is reflected in the remittances made by emigrants to their homes. Prior to the establishment of savings banks, these fruits of economy were merely hoarded up by individuals and exposed to the dangers of loss; when those banks were established, however, offering ample security through the supervision of the State, and also facilities in relation to time and place, the proportion of savings was vastly increased. In 1872, there were 120 savings banks in Italy, a number that has been increased now to 208, while the number of depositors, which was 676,237, has now grown to 2,048,364. The aggregate of deposits in 1872 amounted to nearly $100,000,000, and is now equal to $400,000,000. The people's banks, which take savings accounts, had, in 1898, deposits to the sum of $75,000,000, and now have deposits of a total of $147,000,000; and the post-office savings bank that was established in 1876 has now 5,000,000 depositors, with accounts to their favour of more than $300,000,000. The sum total of savings, therefore, may be estimated, in round numbers, at $800,000,000. Unhappily the savings banks are obliged to invest their deposits in state bonds and in first-class hypothecary loans, while the post-office bank invests deposits in loans to the Communes and to the provinces; the former, therefore, are not available in the manufacturing industries and in agriculture. Here it may be observed that while the figures given above are evidence of the habit of Italians of making savings, which is nothing but deferring consumption, those figures show also the want of the habit of placing savings in profitable investments, that other form of provision which consists in renouncing the possession of the sum saved, that is, of the power of consumption, to transform it into other powers, or for one's own security against want. Hence the slow and laboured progress of the professional unions and of the leagues, of the societies of mutual assistance and of insurance against sickness, loss of employment, or old age, the existence of which institutions depends upon the contributions of their members. Possibly this condition may be in a measure due to the malversation of funds by the directors of such corporations and to the failure of kindred establishments that are without solid foundations or competent direction, all of which causes have increased the want of economical confidence that is instinctive in the Italian character. The proof of this is furnished by the national bank that was established in 1898 for insurance against disability and against old age for workmen, conformably with the law of 31 May, 1907, No. 376; for in this establishment notwithstanding its total amount of funds of nearly $13,000,000, there were registered on 28 February, 1909, only 297,749 workmen, mainly by public corporations which, in their own interests, wished to provide for the old age of their employees.

COMMUNICATIONS

(1) Highways

The highways of Italy, exclusive of those bordering on private property, in 1904, measured in the aggregate 85,757,300 miles; while there was a total length of 35,400 miles of mule and foot roads.

(2) Railroads

The first railroad in Italy, the Napoli-Portici, was opened on 4 October, 1839; in 1871 there were 3960 miles of railroad in operation, and on 30 June, 1907, there were 10,705 miles of railroads. The principal railroad lines are:

• (1) the one from Turin to Venice, by Novara, Milan, and Verona;
• (2) that from Turin to Brindisi, the station of the Indies, by Piacenza, Bologna, Ancona, Foggia, Bari, and Otranto;
• (3) that from Genoa to Naples, by Pisa, Rome, Salerno, and Reggio-Calabria.

The Italian railroads and those of France communicate by two lines, that from Genoa to Marseilles and that from Turin to Lyons, through the Fréjus, and they will soon connect, also, by the Cuneo-Nice line. They connect with the Swiss and with the German railroads by the Novara-Luino-Bellinzona line, by the Milan, Chiasso, Lugano, Bellinzona, and Airolo (the st. Gotthard road), by the Genoa, Alessandria, Novara, Domodossola (the Simplon Way); lastly, the Italian railroads connect with those of Austria by the Verona-Trent (the Brennero line), by the Venice-Udine (the Pontebba line) and by the Udine, Cormons, Görz, and Monfalcone line.

(3) Tramways

The first tramway that was operated by mechanical traction was opened in 1875 between Turin and Moncalieri, and on 31 December, 1904, there were 2450 miles of tramway lines in operation, 475 miles being electrified; and the combined personnel employed on all these lines included 14,742 persons. With the tramways are connected waterways, aggregating a length of 1100 miles by river, and 680 miles by navigable canals. Interior navigation, however, has been neglected until now by Italy, to the detriment of commerce and of industry, and it is a matter for congratulation that the Bertolini bill, bearing upon this matter, became law on 2 Jan., 1910.

(4) The Postal Service

On 30 June, 1908, the postal-telegraph offices and the places for collection numbered together 10,580, an average of 28 for each 100,000 inhabitants; there were, moreover, 143 such offices on wheels or afloat. This important public service is due in great measure to mutual conventions with other countries, on the basis established at Berne, 9 October, 1874, and developed in subsequent congresses (Berne, 1876; Paris, 1878 and 1880; Lisbon, 1885; Vienna, 1891; and Washington, 1897), leading to the establishment of the Universal Postal Union. In some foreign places where the Italian colonies are considerable, whether through the number of emigrants or by the importance of their commerce, post-offices have been established, as in the Republic of San Marino, in Albania, Tripolitania, and Crete, at Constantinople, Valona, Salonica, Jerusalem, and in the Italian colony of Eritrea and Somalia. On 30 June, 1908, there were in all 24,198 employees in the postal and telegraphic service, and in 1908-1909 the postal, telegraph, and telephone receipts continued to increase, notwithstanding the effects of the great economical crisis in the United States that caused a stagnation in business, in exchanges, and in emigration. The combined expenses in 1898-1899 amounted to $12,490,000, and in the last year of the following decade, that is, 1907-1908, they amounted to $24,610,000. The combined issue of stamps, postal orders, post-cards, cards for packages, registrations, and answers prepaid amounted in value to $17,296,000. During the above year there were 12,749,309 packages mailed, and 2,205,214 packages were received from foreign countries. These figures were due no doubt to the convention with the United States, providing for the direct exchange of packages of from 6 lb. to 11 lb., which came into force on 1 August, 1908. There were established 11 automobile services; and in order to expedite the distribution of letters and of telegrams in Rome, Milan, and Naples, there is about to be established the pneumatic postal service of the American engineer Batcheller, in a total length of 23.4 miles of tubes. By the law of 5 April, 1908, the postal service of the navigation lines between Italy and the islands of Sicily and of Sardinia was placed under the administration of the railroads of the State, while the postal and the commercial service of other lines is entrusted to private parties, with the assistance of a subsidy by the State to which, however, all profits above 5 per cent. must be paid. The contract period is limited to twenty years, the present contracts coming to an end on 30 June, 1910.

(5) Telegraphs

Statistics for 30 June, 1908, show that there were 30,650 miles of telegraph lines, with 157,044 miles of wires; the submarine cables belonging to the State are of a combined length of approximately 1250 miles, There are 5312 telegraph offices belonging to the Government, while the number of those belonging to railroads and to other companies is 2582; in all, 7894.

(6) Telephones

Telephone service was established in Italy in 1881, and, until 1907 it was furnished by private companies, except for international communication; but, by the law of 15 July, 1907, the State assumed control of city telephones, for which purpose was established the Direzione Generale dei Telefoni. There are 10 international lines, and 303 lines between cities. Moreover, there are four submarine telephone cables of a combined length of 22 miles. On 30 June, 1908, there were 2988 telephone employees and 50,278 subscribers to city telephones.

(7) Wireless Telegraphs

Italy has 14 fixed wireless telegraph stations that transmitted, in the period of 1907-1908, 1478 messages, containing 29,320 words, and received 4760 messages containing 77,186 words.

HISTORY

With the foundation of Rome (754 b.c.) the historical life of Italy begins. About 600 b.c. the Gauls appear settled on either side of the Po (Padus); to the west along the Mediterranean are the Ligurians, and eastward around the Adriatic the tribes of Venice and Istria. In central Italy the Etrurians, of mysterious origin, had reached a high degree of civilization, as their sepulchral architecture and art remain to prove. Their neighbours, the Italici, were divided into two great groups, the Latin tribes and those of Umbro-Sabine origin. To the south was "Greater Greece" (Magna Græcia), a number of Greek colonies, the most important of which was Tarentum. This is not the place to relate how gradually the small city of Rome extended its rule until all Italy, the Mediterranean lands, Gaul and Germany, Egypt and the hither Orient, i. e. the known world (orbis terrarum) acknowledged its authority (see ROME). In those centuries of conquest and assimilation Rome was alternately a kingdom, a republic, and finally an empire. It was under the first Roman emperor, Augustus Cæsar, and through his world-wide edict, that Jesus Christ came to be born at Bethlehem in Judea, and in an incredibly short time the religion of the Crucified One had been established at Rome (Romans, i, 17; xv, 23; Suetonius, "Vita Claudii", xxv; Tertullian, "De Præscr.", xxxvi; Tacit., "Ann.", lib. XV, xliv; see PETER, SAINT; PAUL, SAINT), had penetrated all parts of the peninsula and made converts in every class. Not to speak of the more or less reliable claims of many Italian cities to Apostolic origins for their churches (Cappelletti, "Le chiese d' Italia", Venice, 1844-71; J. Rivière, "La propag, du Christ. dans les trois premiers siècles", Paris, 1907), the historian Eusebius exhibits Christianity as vigorous and expansive in Italy previous to Constantine (see Fabricius, "Lux salutaris Evangelii"; Harnack, "Mission und Ausbreitung des Christenthums", 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1905; Duchesne, "Hist. Ancienne de l'Eglise", I, Paris, 1906, and Idem, "The Roman Church before Constantine", New York, 1909).

Political necessity eventually led to the abandonment of Rome as the administrative centre of the unwieldy empire and the foundation (327) of a new city (Constantinople, New Rome) on the site of ancient Greek Byzantium, in a situation so incomparable for defence and attack that for many centuries the new city was impregnable (Bury, "History of the Later Roman Empire", London, 1889). In the meantime had been fought (311) near Rome the battle of the Milvian Bridge which sealed the fate of paganism, though in the higher classes and amid the rural population it lingered to the end of the fourth century (De Broglie, "L'église et l'empire romain au IV ^me siècle", Paris, 1856-66; Duchesne, "Hist. ancienne de l'Eglise", II, Paris, 1907; Allies, "The Formation of Christendom", IV, VI, London, 1861-95; G. Boissier, "La fin du paganisme", 5th ed., Paris, 1907). Outside of Rome, the cities of Milan, Aquileia, and Ravenna acquired ecclesiastical rank and influence, largely for political reasons. The synodal life of the peninsula was vigorous (Hefele, "History of the Councils") in the fourth and fifth centuries, particularly at Rome, and the relations with Constantinople were close and often friendly, a situation that was sadly affected by the momentous Acacian schism that divided Constantinople and Rome for thirty-five years (484-519) and inaugurated, though remotely, the final separation of Italy from the Eastern Empire.

The barbarian invasions reached their height at precisely this time. After a century of destructive assaults on various parts of the empire, including the capture of Rome (408) by Alaric, King of the Goths, the Roman imperial authority collapsed in Italy, where Odoacer, King of the Heruli, ruled the peninsula (476-93) until overthrown by Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths (493-526). Despite the beneficent genius of this great king, and the efforts of his patriotic prime minister, Cassiodorus, the short-lived Ostrogothic State fell before the assaults of the Byzantine generals Belisarius and Narses (553), and Italy was again part of the Roman Empire, governed by an exarch at Ravenna, subject also to the cæsaropapism of its Byzantine rulers (see VIGILIUS, POPE; THREE CHAPTERS, THE) and helpless as before in presence of new invasions (Hodgkin, "The 'Variæ' of Cassiodorus"; Pfeilschifter, "Theod. d. Grosse und d. Kirche", 1896; Bury, "Later Roman Empire"). In 568 the German Langobardi (Lombards) overran Northern Italy and by the middle of the eighth century had almost extinguished Byzantine authority in the peninsula (Hodgkin, "Italy and her Invaders", London, 1880; Kurth, "Origines de la civilisation moderne", Paris, 1905; Grisar, "Gesch. Roms u. der Päpste", I, Freiburg, 1901; Dahn, "Könige der Germanen", Munich, 1861-97). Rome itself was on the point of falling into their hands, when Pope Stephen II made his famous journey across the Alps and persuaded King Pepin (754) to intervene and save the Romans from a yoke that they equally feared and detested. He took from the Lombards the Pentapolis and Romagna, former Byzantine territory, twenty-four cities, and gave them to the Roman Church (see PEPIN THE SHORT). Again in 774, at the call of Pope Adrian, Charlemagne entered Italy, suppressed the Lombard kingdom, united it with his own, and by new gifts added the greater part of the exarchate to the papal possessions.

The generosity of the faithful, the political results of the attempt to spread Iconoclasm in Italy, the hard need of self-defence, and culpable neglect on the part of the Byzantine court, had already done much to make the papacy a quasi-sovereign power. Thus arose in Italy the States of the Church (Stato Ecclesiastico, Patrimonium Petri, Temporal Power; Duchesne, "Les premiers temps de l'état pontifical", 2nd ed., Paris, 1904; Miles, "History of the States of the Church; Schnürer, "Entstehung des Kirchenstaats", 1894). At Christmas, 800, Charlemagne was crowned Western emperor by Leo III in the Basilica of St. Peter (J. de la Servière, "Charlemagne et l'Eglise", Paris, 1904), and for the next two centuries his descendants laid claim to, and occasionally enforced the title of King of Italy, constantly disputed by the Italian descendants of great Frankish nobles and by other ambitious and violent rivals, foremost among them the factious nobles of Rome, represented typically by the Counts of Tusculum, whose rule in the tenth century was the occasion of shameful ecclesiastical disorder (see PAPACY). While in Northern and Central Italy during the ninth and tenth centuries, the bishops often represented, as missi dominici, the imperial power, the Lombard duchies to the south (Spoleto, Friuli, Benevento) were never able to overcome their chronic anarchy long enough to withstand a new peril, the invasion of the Saracens. In the ninth century the latter seized on Corsica and (848) advanced to the gates of Rome; in the eleventh century they conquered Sardinia and Sicily, and meanwhile set foot firmly in some districts of Southern Italy, the greater part of which, however, continued always subject to Constantinople, and took on in this period strongly accentuated Greek characteristics (C. Lenormant, "La Grande Grèce", Paris, 1884).

With Otto I the German imperial authority reasserted (951) its right to the crown of Italy, and henceforth made use of the episcopal sees, especially in Northern and Central Italy, in order to sustain its claims (Cantù, "Storia degli Italiani", 4th ed., Turin, 1893-96; M. Hartmann, "Gesch. Italiens im Mittelalter", 1897-1903; Leo, "Gesch. der ital. Staaten", 1829-32). Secularly minded bishops were only too often imposed on the population of these cities, which soon resented the feudal rights and privileges of their spiritual rulers, while these, on the other hand, found support in the German emperor, whose ambitious aims at that period culminated in the world-empire that Otto III (died 1002) hoped to realize (Dresdner, "Kultur- u. Sittengesch. d. ital. Geistlichkeit im 10. u. 11. Jahrhundert", Berlin, 1890; A. Vogel, "Ratherius v. Verona u. das 10. Jahrhundert", 1854; Atto of Vercelli," De pressuris ecclesiasticis", in P. L., CXXXIV). The second half of the eleventh century ushered in the long and disastrous conflict between the papacy and the empire, whose protagonists were Gregory VII (died 1085) and Henry IV (died 1106). Meanwhile a new political power, the Normans, had been growing up in Southern Italy at the expense of the Byzantines, the Saracens, and the remnants of the former Lombard duchies. During the first half of the eleventh century descendants of the ninth- and tenth-century Northmen had sought fortune in these lands and found it; by 1070 their new kingdom was held as a fief of the Apostolic See, a new order of things made possible by the length and intensity of the conflict between the papacy and the Western Empire and the wretched weakness of the Byzantines (Von Schack, "Normannen in Sicilien", 1889; Von Heinemann, "Normannen in Unteritalien u. Sicilien", I, 1894; Chalandon, "Domination normande en Italia et en Sicile", Paris, 1907; Dondorf, "Normannen u. ihre Bedeutung f. europ. Culturleben", 1875). Owing to them, and to the hearty support of the Lombard League of cities, the papacy was victorious in the first phase of its conflict with the empire (Peace of Venice, 1177).

Matilda, Countess of Tuscany (1064-1115), had meanwhile passed away, and left to the papacy her vast possessions in central Italy (Reggio, Lucca, Modena, Mantua, Ferrara, etc.), a new bone of contention with the empire that asserted its overlordship over rights of inheritance and administration (Tosti, "La Contessa Matilde", 3rd ed., Rome, 1886; Renée, "La grande Italienne", Paris, 1859; M. Huddy, "The Countess Mathilda", London, 1905). When Emperor Henry VI married in 1194 Constance, heiress of the great Norman house, the Kingdom of Sicily (with Southern Italy) passed into the hands of the Hohenstaufen, a combination most odious to the papacy, which rightly feared the near extinction of its independence. Out of this union of the imperial German crown and the royal crown of Sicily arose the second phase of the great medieval conflict between pope and emperor (see FREDERICK II; GREGORY IX, POPE; HONORIUS III, POPE) that ended (1265) in the complete ruin of the Hohenstaufen and the establishment of a French dynasty, the House of Anjou, on the throne of Naples. Only a few years did Charles of Anjou retain Sicily, for the native population came to detest the French knights and in the famous "Sicilian Vespers" (1282) cast off the yoke of France and called in the Spanish line of Aragon (Broglio, "Storia del Vespro Siciliano", Milan, 1858; see "Scienza e Fede", 1882, 241-61).

Meantime, Italian genius had been culminating variously during this stirring thirteenth century. Education had been nobly fostered by the growth of universities like Bologna and Padua, created or protected by the papacy; law and order had been put on a solid basis by the growth and academic acceptance of the Roman Law (see LAW; PANDECTS); and by the new codification of the canon law (DECRETALS, PAPAL; CORPUS JURIS CANONICI); religion had been honoured and confirmed by the rise of the Mendicant orders (Franciscans, Dominicans); the fine arts had thriven despite feudal and municipal conflict endlessly various and passionate (Cimabue, Giotto, the Pisani); the civic spirit had developed with the growth of the communes in wealth, population, and self-consciousness, especially in Northern and Central Italy. Commerce and industry had taken on vast proportions (Venice, Florence, Milan, Genoa, Pisa); a glorious vernacular literature had sprung up (Dante), and in general Italy had entered deeply into all the phases of human activity that she was soon to develop so rapidly and so richly. At the same time the papacy, which with Innocent III (died 1216) had entered the "trecento" as arbiter of rulers, peoples, and nations and the acknowledged conscience of Europe, touched its lowest depths of humiliation when the century ended.

French ambition and interests had gradually been supplanting the immemorial imperial influence, and with the death of Boniface VIII (1303) and the establishment of Avignon (1307) as the future seat of the papacy, a new political order set in for the peninsula. The Angevin kings dominated the south, while in the north the last traces of German overlordship (imperial vicars) disappeared after the ill-fated attempts of Henry VII (1308-13) and Louis the Bavarian (1314-47) to dominate in Italy after the manner of the Ottos and the Fredericks. The former power of empire and papacy was now eagerly divided up between their more or less authorized representatives, and soon the "age of the despots", the nubes tyrannorum, set in, bold and resourceful men who kept and increased on all sides the power they had once obtained. The Visconti and Sforza at Milan, the Baglioni at Perugia, the Malatesta at Ravenna, the Scaligers at Verona, and a hundred others are types of a masterful and unique race that dominated for personal ends the prevailing anarchy (J. A. Symonds, "The Age of The Despots", New York, 1888). The great Spanish captain and cardinal, Gil d' Albornoz, between 1350 and 1370 restored in great measure the papal authority in its hereditary possessions (Wurm, "Cardinal Albornoz", 1894), but it was not until after the close of the Western Schism (1417) that in Martin V the States of the Church again recognized in a practical way the domination of the pope (Von Reumont, "Gesch. d. Stadt Rom", Berlin, 1867).

Fifteenth-century Italy beheld the famous reform councils of Basic (1431), Ferrara-Florence (1438-39), the vain attempts at a parliamentary organization of the Roman Church, the equally vain efforts at reunion with the Greeks, the fall of Constantinople (1453), the rapid and influential development of a pagan-minded humanism (Symonds, "The Revival of Learning in Italy", New York, 1888; Burckhardt, "The Culture of the Renaissance") and of the fine arts, the moral disorders of some high-placed ecclesiastics, offset however by an extraordinary development of sanctity (St. Bernardine of Sienna, St. John Capistran, St. Antonine of Florence, St. Frances of Rome, and others). For a while the well-known "five states" of Italy (Milan, Venice, Florence, Naples, Rome) represented the political order, but from the end of the fifteenth and the first half of the sixteenth century Spain and the pope divided the mastery of the peninsula until early in the eighteenth century. After vain efforts to establish its suzeraintÿ at Naples and Milan, France was obliged to abandon the rich prize, and after the first quarter of the sixteenth century no longer repeated its earlier attempts at the hegemony of the peninsula. The Protestant Reformation made little headway in Italy, owing to the vigorous measures of the civil and ecclesiastical order, the antipathetic genius of the people, the Inquisition (reorganized at Rome, 1542), the Society of Jesus (1540), the Council of Trent (1545-63), the lives of holy reformers like St. Charles Borromeo, the new orders and congregations, and the combined religious, ecclesiastical, and theological activities known as the Counter-Reformation (Cantù, "Gli eretici d' Italia", Florence, 1865-67; see PROTESTANTISM; SOCINIANISM; GIORDANO BRUNO).

The seventeenth and eighteenth centuries offer a rather sad spectacle in the various politico-ecclesiastical conflicts of Catholic states with the Holy See, in large measure, however indirectly, a result of the Thirty Years War (1618-48), e. g. Naples apropos of the so-called Monarchia Sicula; the conflict of Venice in 1605-07 with Paul III, on which occasion its state-theologian, Fra Paolo Sarpi, contributed power fully to the Venetian opposition; the stubborn purpose of Victor Amadeus II, Duke of Savoy, to control fully all larger ecclesiastical appointments in his state; the offensive attitude of Louis XIV apropos of his ambassador's impossible privileges (1685), and other similar troubles. To these may be added the political workings of Jansenism (see JANSENIUS AND JANSENISM; also UNIGENITUS) and Gallicanism (q. v.), and the concern for the safety of Christendom against the encroachments of Islam. By the Treaty of Utrecht (1713-14) Austria succeeded Spain in Northern Italy (Mantua, Milan) and later (1737) obtained the Grand Duchy of Tuscany. Savoy received Sardinia (1720) and by the middle of the century, Naples and Sicily, Parma and Piacenza acknowledged the rule of Spanish Bourbons. The ecclesiastical relations of the new powers with the Holy See, much troubled in the previous fifty years, were placed on a more satisfactory basis by a series of concordats, with Sicily in 1741, Sardinia in 1742, and Milan in 1745 (Vincenzo Nussi, "Concordata" etc., Rome, 1870). The Patriarchate of Aquileia, whose territory lay partly in Austria and partly in the Republic of Venice, was divided into two archiepiscopal sees, Görz for Austria and Udine for Venice. Italy was henceforth alternately the instrument of Spanish or Austrian policy, as was seen when in 1767 the Bourbons of Naples, Parma, and Piacenza expelled the Jesuits, and in 1786 when the ill-famed Synod of Pistoia promulgated in Italy the anti-ecclesiastical principles and measures of the Austrian Emperor Joseph II (see POPE PIUS VII; SCIPIO RICCI). Religious life nevertheless flourished in Italy where the orders of the Redemptorists (1732) and the Passionists (1741) were established by their respective holy founders, St. Alphonsus Liguori and St. Paul of the Cross. Ecclesiastical learning was also vigorously cultivated, and few ages show more erudite scholars than Muratori, Mansi, Bianchi, Bianchini, the Ballerini brothers, Zaccharia, Nons, and others.

The French Revolution put an end to the ancient Republic of Venice (1797) which fell to Austria, while the latter lost Lombardy, where the short-lived Cisalpine Republic of northern Italy was soon followed by the equally ephemeral Ligurian (Genoa, 1798), the Roman (1798), and the Parthenopean (Naples, 1799) republics. The Congress of Vienna (1815) restored the ante-revolution situation, save in Venice, which remained subject to Austria, henceforth mistress of northern and central Italy, the rest of Italy being subject to three other powers, the Kingdom of Sardinia (Turin), the papacy, and the Spanish Bourbons of Naples and Sicily. The second quarter of the nineteenth century is noted for a deep unrest in Italy against Austrian rule (the Carbonari, also Mazzini, Gioberti, Balbo, and others) culminating in a general adhesion of all the dissatisfied to the House of Piedmont whose prime minister, Cavour, was henceforth the soul of the new Italian unity (Kraus, "Cavour", Munich, 1901; Von Reumont, "Charakterbilder", 1886). The revolutionary agitations of 1848 led to the flight of Pius IX to Gaeta and the establishment of the second "Roman Republic" soon suppressed by the French under General Oudinot (July, 1849).

Prior to 1859, Italy was divided into the following states: the Kingdom of Sardinia, the Duchies of Modena, Parma, and Piacenza, the Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the Pontifical States, the Republic of San Marino, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies and the Principality of Monaco. The Italian territories subject to foreign powers were: Corsica, belonging to France; the group of Malta, belonging to England; the Canton Ticino, belonging to Switzerland; Lombardy, Venice, Trent, Triest, and Istria, belonging to the Austrian Empire. In 1848 Piedmont went to war with Austria for Italian independence, but was defeated at Novara in 1849. Ten years later, however, Piedmont made an alliance with France, the second war of independence was declared, and Austria having been defeated at Solferino, 20 July, 1859, by the Franco-Sardinian allies, Lombardy was annexed to Piedmont. In 1860 the Duchies of Modena and Parma, the Grand Duchy of Tuscany and the Romagnas (12 March), the Marches and Umbria (5 November), Naples and Sicily (21 October), were incorporated with Piedmont, and on 17 March, 1861, the Parliament at Turin proclaimed the Kingdom of Italy. In 1866, by its alliance with Prussia, Italy obtained Venice; finally, on 20 September, 1870, Rome, having been taken by force of arms, declared its union with the Kingdom of Italy through the plebiscite (2 October) of that year.

In the formation of the new kingdom, says Minghetti, the revolution was the impelling force, not abandoned, however, to the hands of conspirators unorganized and without authority, but directed by the government of Piedmont, especially by Baron Cavour, who used it in the interest of Piedmontese supremacy, while he appealed to the sentiments of independence and of Italianism very strong in the people of northern Italy. By these two forces, ably manipulated, Cavour secured the political unity of Italy under the sceptre of Savoy. The unification of Italy was essentially an act of the Piedmontese Government; otherwise Cavour himself and Massimo d'Azeglio would not have said that once Italy was created it remained to create Italians, nor would there be still, after fifty years of legal unity, that latent germ of regionalism which occasionally asserts itself more or less vigorously. 1f the truth of history be regarded, it will be recognized that the idea of Italian unity arose towards the end of the eighteenth century; with the exception perhaps of Machiavelli, who thought Duke Valentino (Cæsar Borgia) able to bring about the union of the Italians, not one of the great men of Italy like Dante, Petrarch, and others, and none of the popes, had the idea of Italian unity. Joachim Murat, by his Rimini proclamation (1815), first suggested this idea but was not understood and was left to perish alone. His idea, however, was taken up and was vigorously pressed by the enemies of Christianity who held that, if, under the pretext of the unification of Italy, his temporal power should be wrested from the pope, the Church of Christ would of necessity come to an end. In 1871 Rome was declared the capital of the Kingdom of Italy. In that same year Pius IX refused to accept the Law of Guarantees (see GUARANTEES, LAW OF), and in 1878 issued the decree "Non Expedit" against Catholic participation in elections to the Italian Chambers. Pius X modified this measure (1905), and has permitted, under given circumstances, the participation of Catholics in the national elections.

POLITICAL AND CIVIL GOVERNMENT

(1) Political Establishment

The Kingdom of Italy took the form of a constitutional monarchy, hereditary in the male line of the House of Savoy, according to the Salic law, and conformably to the Fundamental Statute that was promulgated by King Charles Albert on 4 March, 1848, for the Sardinian states. This statute which was extended to the various parts of Italy, as they were annexed by the Piedmontese realm, is similar to the French Constitution of 1830; according to it, sovereignty is divided between the king and the nation, the latter electing its representatives by popular suffrage. The legislative power is exercised by the king and Parliament, which consists of the Senate and of the Chamber of Deputies. With the exception of the right of initiative, which is common to all, these three governmental entities have each special functions: it is the province of the king to convoke both houses of Parliament, to close the sessions, to dissolve the Chamber of Deputies, to sanction and promulgate the laws. The Senate and the Chamber of Deputies have the functions of legislation and of watching over the finances, that is to say, the approval of the state budget, which is prepared by the executive branch of the Government; the houses of Parliament have also the function of investigation in both political and administrative matters; it is exercised through interrogation, interpellation, inquest, committees of vigilance, and by other means. Laws of taxation, however, and those concerning the budget must first be approved by the Chamber. On the other hand, the Senate has judicial functions, that is, by royal decree the house may be turned into a high court of justice, to pass upon cases of high treason and of attempts against the security of the State and to judge the ministers who may be accused by the Chamber of Deputies. The latter consists of 508 members who are elected upon the uninominal system by as many electoral constituencies, into which the nation is divided, there being an average population of 66,000 inhabitants for each constituency; the constituent districts may be changed every five years. The period between two general elections is called a legislatura, of which there have been 23, since 8 May, 1848, when the first legislatura was opened. The electoral franchise is exercised by all male citizens who, enjoying their civil and political rights, have attained the age of twenty-one years, know how to read and write (Electoral Law of 28 March, 1895), and have the minimum requirements of intellectual capacity and of income. All citizens who have attained the age of thirty years and who enjoy political and civil rights are eligible to office. In 1909 there were 2,930,473 registered voters, an average of 11.7 per cent of the total population of the kingdom. In the last general election there were 1,903,687 voters, or 65.3 per cent of the total electorate.

The Senate consists of members, partly hereditary (the princes of the blood), and partly appointed by the king for life, and without a definite limitation in their number, the age of forty years being a requisite for appointment. Since 1848, 1392 senators have been appointed, there being 370 of them at the present time, not counting the princes of the blood, who become senators at the age of twenty-one years and receive the voting power at the age of twenty-five. Senators and deputies enjoy personal immunity in penal matters, and therefore the Senate alone is competent to judge a senator; while to judge a deputy the magistrate must have the consent of the Chamber of Deputies. A senator or a deputy cannot be arrested, except in flagrante delicto. Their Service is without financial remuneration. The king, as the head of the executive power has the assistance of ministers who are responsible to Parliament; they constitute the cabinet, and are responsible collectively for the official acts of each. They are named and dismissed by the king, who, however, in the exercise of this function must hold in account the manifest tendencies of the Chamber; wherefore the government of Italy is strictly parliamentary. The minister who is the head of the cabinet, called also president of the council, represents the unity of action of the Government, in contraposition to the diversity of functions among the different ministers. The royal prerogatives are: power to declare war, to conclude treaties of peace and of alliance, providing they do not require the cession of territory or of funds, the right of pardon, and that of decree. In the relations of individuals to the State the constitution establishes the following general principles of justice: legal equality, individual liberty, inviolability of domicile, that of property and of public debt, liberty of the press, freedom of association and of meetings, and, finally, equity and proportion in taxation.

(2) Church and State

The first article of the constitution of the kingdom declares the Catholic religion to be the only state religion. Nevertheless the Italian State and its jurisprudence are atheistical; and in all solemn public functions, as in speeches from the throne, for several years past, any reference to the Divinity is studiously avoided, while the Government, whether conservative or liberal, has always been more or less covertly Voltairian and given to State-worship. The famous formula of Cavour, "A free church in a free state", which is a truth in the United States of America, in Italy is applied only to the domestic concerns of the Church; in all else the Church, in civil and in parliamentary matters, is subject to the State through a jus singulare, which places it in a worse condition than a private citizen in regard to property rights. The laws affecting the Church in Italy are mainly Articles 1 to 18 of the Fundamental Statute of the kingdom; the fundamental constitutional law of 13 May, 1871, on the prerogatives of the sovereign pontiff and on the relations of the State to the Church, called the Law of Guarantees; the law on the suppression of regular and of secular ecclesiastical legal entities, and on the conservation of others (laws of 7 July, 1866, and 5 August, 1867). By the eighteenth article of the constitution, excepting Rome and the six suburbicarian episcopal sees, the revenues from ecclesiastical benefices that are vacant belong as of royal right to the Crown, which, after deducting expenses of administration and those incurred in the interest of the vacant benefice, ought to apply the funds to purposes of worship and of charity, such as subsidies to priests and parochial needs, public worship, and the repair of poor churches. By the Law of Guarantees, the person of the sovereign pontiff is sacred and inviolable; offences committed against him are punished as those committed against the king; royal honours are granted to him; the precedence recognized in him by Catholic sovereigns is maintained, and he is given the right to have guards for his person and for the protection of his palaces. The latter, that is the Vatican, the Palace of the Lateran and the Villa of Castel Gandolfo, with all their appurtenances, enjoy the right of extraterritoriality, which makes them free from visitations and inspections by public authorities, without the authorization of the pope. The exercise of his spiritual ministry is freed from all intervention by extraneous authority, and to this end the pope is given the right to post his decrees on the doors of the churches of Rome, without censorship and with immunity for those persons whose office it is to make such publication. The law also ensures to the sovereign pontiff freedom of correspondence with the Catholic world, there being preserved to him, with this object, the head houses of the various religious orders in Rome, while he is given the faculty of establishing postal and telegraphic offices, with employees of his choosing, at his residence. The envoys of the pope and those accredited to him by foreign powers are guaranteed the prerogatives and immunities that are recognized in diplomatic agents, by international law. Finally, the law sets aside an annuity of $645,000, to be paid to the pope for the needs of the Holy See, for the maintenance of the Apostolic palaces, and for the salaries of servants attached to his person; this annuity is exempted from taxation for all time. During a vacancy of the pontifical throne no judicial or political authority may interfere with the personal liberty of cardinals, and the Government is obliged to protect the meetings of the conclave from any external violence. The cardinalate is among the titles that make the holder eligible to the Senate, and, in matters of ceremonial precedence and of military honours, cardinals are made equal with the princes of the blood. The law assigns a sum of $20,000 to be paid to the Holy See for the maintenance of the houses of the various religious orders, excepting that of the Jesuits.

The right of royal exequatur over the acts of the sovereign pontiff and that of royal placet over the acts of diocesan bishops, is exercised by the State only in regard to the use of ecclesiastical property and to the provision for the benefices, except in the city of Rome and in the suburbicarian sees; this royal prerogative, however, is of a provisional nature, because it is to cease with the re-arrangement of ecclesiastical property that is promised by the Law of Guarantees. All religious character has been taken from matrimony and from oaths; all intervention that the Church exercised in public charities and in education, according to historical tradition, has been suppressed and has been more and more replaced by lay authority; the cemeteries have been placed under civil authority; the courses of theology have been abolished in the universities, as has also the office of military chaplain, except in the case of penal establishments; there remains only the ancient custom of blessing the flags in the army and in the navy. The law that suppressed religious corporations, the regular ecclesiastical bodies having legal personality, and kindred secular ecclesiastical bodies, that is simple benefices, collegiate churches, chaplaincies, prelacies, pious legacies, and every other perpetual religious institution having religious cult for its object, was deprived of legal personality, which, contrary to Roman and canon law, is merely a concession of the State, while the property of these establishments was absorbed into the public treasury and civil patrons were given the right to receive in part the goods of the suppressed benefices. The same laws, however, maintained the episcopal sees, the seminaries, cathedral chapters (although reducing the number of canons), the confraternities, and the administratorships. A part of the property of these bodies, excepting parishes, confraternities, and administrations, equivalent to 30 per cent of their value, was taken into the public treasury for the benefit of the State, and the remainder of their real possessions was transformed into movable property, i. e., into state revenues, less 5 per cent for the expense of administration, exception being made of parishes, confraternities, artistic buildings and those destined to religious cult, and the building necessary to these bodies in performance of their functions, as episcopal palaces, seminaries, and others. Simultaneously with the suppression of ecclesiastical bodies, there was established an autonomous administration, independent of government superintendence, called Fondo per il Culto, with the function of administrating the property of the suppressed bodies, despoiled of 30 per cent of its value and converted into public bonds, and of applying the income thereof to the purposes of religion and charity. The first duty of this administration was to provide for the charges upon the suppressed bodies in the cases of the existence of their personal incumbents, who have the right to require such provision through process of law; the duty also devolved upon this establishment of paying pensions to the members of suppressed religious orders; and when the pensions become extinct, three-fourths of the capital sum registered in favour of the Fondo per il Culto, representing the property of the suppressed corporations, will revert to the State. The administration in question is obliged to supplement the episcopal incomes that may not have reached the sum of $1200, as also to supplement the salaries of parish priests whose net income is less than $200. Under the pretext of distributing the remainder of its revenue in equitable proportions among the different ecclesiastical benefices, but in reality to bolster up the Fondo per il Culto, upon which were imposed expenses beyond its resources, all the ecclesiastical bodies that were retained are obliged to make yearly increasing contributions, called "quota of assistance". As to the confraternities, the law places them among the bodies who must assist in the support of the infirm; and as these institutions have always secondary, beneficent ends, the State obliges them to render account of their operations in this field, and authorizes the communes to require them to divert their resources to lay works, for local benefit, allowing the confraternity only a minimum annuity for expenses of religious worship. Wherefore, of all the property of the Church in Italy, the State has left only a small portion to the bodies that have been retained, and that under strong vigilance and censorship, as regards either the diminution or the increase of that remnant. Another portion was taken from proprietary bodies, to establish a fund for religious cult; and a small part was taken from the Church, to be returned to lay patrons who might ask for it, or to apply it to purposes of instruction and of beneficence. In short the greater part of the ecclesiastical property, under different showings and by subtle expedients, was confiscated.

(3) Ecclesiastical Circumscription

The territory of the kingdom is divided into 275 dioceses, including that of Rome, the Pontifical See, of which the bishop is the Vicar of Jesus Christ, successor of the Prince of the Apostles and Pontiff of the Universal Church; 6 dioceses are suburbicarian, namely, Ostia and Velletri, Porto and Santa Rufina, Albano, Frascati, Palestrina, and Sabina. The titular cardinalates, i. e. the suburbicarian sees, the titular churches, and the diaconal ones existing in Rome number 75. Of Italian sees, 75 are immediately subject to Rome, of which 13 are governed by archbishops, and the remaining 200 constitute 37 ecclesiastical provinces, consisting each of a metropolitan see, which is one of the archdioceses, and of a number of suffragan sees that are governed by bishops. Among the metropolitan sees, that of Venice is that of a patriarchate. There are 11 abbeys and prelacies nullius diœceseos. Each diocese is subdivided into parishes, of which there are 20,685 in all the kingdom; there are 60,446 churches, chapels, and public oratories, the service of which is maintained by 69,310 priests, regular and secular. The episcopal seminaries have 21,453 students. There are 30,564 religious; lastly, the Catholic educational establishments consist of 532 schools for boys, having 55,870 scholars, and 1302 for girls, with 102,491 scholars.

(4) Codes

In Italy there are seven codes, namely, the civil, the commercial, the penal, the civil procedure, the penal procedure, the military, and the mercantile marine codes. The confusion between Roman and canon law, Germanic and Italian written law, and local common law obstructed the straightforward and expeditious administration of justice; and this gave rise to the first codifications, chief among which in Italy is the "Codice Vittorio", formulated in 1723, under Victor Amadeus III of Savoy; but the most important and best prepared work of codification was without doubt the "Codice Napoleone", which was published on 21 March, 1804, and which served as a model for the civil legislation of almost every country in Europe or in America, including the states into which Italy was divided; the present civil code of the kingdom is directly derived from it, and for this reason, the history of French law is of great importance for the interpretation of Italian law. The authors of the Napoleonic Code were not carried away by the doctrines of the school of natural right, as were German legislators, but they sought in the countries de droit coutumier and in the jurisprudence of parliaments guides to make the Roman written law, the Germanic law, and the law of the land more harmonious with the requirements of the times. Once Italy had constituted itself into a nation, there was felt the need of a common civil code which should unify the various codes of the former states of the peninsula; accordingly, on 25 June, 1865, there was published the Civil Code of the Kingdom of Italy, which went into force on 1 January, 1866. This code, which is based upon Roman law, is the only civil law of the land; and it needs some reformation to make it more consonant with new economical and social needs. The code consists of three books and, like the French code, follows the clear and traditional Gaian division: "Omne jus, quo utimur, aut ad personas, aut ad res, aut ad actiones pertinet." Furthermore, the code is preceded by twelve articles which, as leges legum, lay down rules for the publication, the interpretation, and the application of laws in general. The very ancient rules of merchant guilds, which date back to the eleventh century and which did much to promote the greatness of the Italian communes, were the source of the commercial legislation, and little by little they were systematically put in order, so that between the years 1200 and 1800 the various statutes, when approved by the overlord, came to constitute the written mercantile law of the different states of Italy. By two ordinances of Louis XIV (1673, 1681) the commercial law was codified and from this the Napoleonic Code was partly taken (1808). The latter was carried by French arms into many European countries. The Italian Code, the Albert Code of 1842, and the code of 1865 also were modelled on the French Code. But, as the one of 1865 was no longer in harmony with the modern conditions of traffic, it was succeeded on 1 January, 1883, by the new Code of Commerce, which shows progress by the wealth of its contents, by its recognition of the freedom of the contracting parties, by the simplicity of its forms, by the conciseness of its language, and by its efficacious protection of credit, specially in regard to exchange. Rumania adopted this code, almost literally, in 1887. Contrary to the order obtaining in civil matters, the law regards commercial matters as resting, primarily, on the code and on commercial legislation; in the second place, on mercantile practices; and in the third place, on civil law. The code is divided into four books; the first relates to commerce in general, the second to maritime commerce and to navigation, the third to bankruptcy, and the fourth to commercial causes.

Before the unification of Italy, each one of the states into which the country was divided had penal laws of its own; when, however, the union had been accomplished, the Albert Code of 1859, which was in force in Piedmont, was made applicable to the other states, excepting Tuscany, where there remained in force the Code of 1853. Reasons, analogous to those suggested in relation with commercial matters, made apparent the need of a new penal code, and one was published on 30 June, 1889, which came into force on 1 January of the following year. This code deals first with transgressions and punishments in general, and then with transgressions in detail, and it adopts the rational, ontological division of violations of the law into felonies and misdemeanors. On the other hand, in the case of participation of several persons in a crime, by articles 63 and 64, the law accepts the sound doctrine of aiding and abetting, while the system of intensive cumulation of punishments of Bauer was adopted for cases of multiplicity of crimes and punishments. With regard to relapsed criminals the following principles were adopted:—

• (a) relapse into crime aggravates its malice against the State;
• (b) such malice may be incurred even though the criminal has not hitherto been brought to the bar for his crimes;
• (c) the fact that a crime is habitual must be kept in sight;
• (d) a crime can only be branded as habitual if committed within a certain fixed period of time dating from last conviction.

The system of punishment adopted, and known as the Irlandese, consisted in:—

• (a) a period of solitary confinement;
• (b) a period of hard labour with solitary confinement at night;
• (c) a period of intermediate imprisonment;
• (d) a period of ticket-of-leave.

Imprisonment for life has taken the place of the death sentence, and periods of imprisonment for various offences vary from three days to twenty-three years, with or without hard labour according to the nature of the offence. Another penalty enforced for periods of not less than a month and not more than three years is enforced residence within assigned limits but without imprisonment. The only financial punishment is in the nature of a fine of not less than $2 and not more than $2000. Finally, there is the loss of civil and political rights, and of public office, which may he temporary, for periods varying from three months to five years, or it may be perpetual. The punishments for misdemeanours are arrest for not less than one day or more than 2 years, and fine, of not less than $0.20 or more than $400, and finally suspension from the practice of a profession or of a trade, for a period of not less than three days or more than two years. Domiciliary arrest and judicial reprimand may be substituted for other punishments; admonition, surveillance, and forced residence in a certain place are additional punishments. A recent law sanctions conditional condemnation. Causes that may nullify the trials besides the death of the accused, are amnesty, or withdrawal of the charge by the interested party, and prescription. A special reason for annulling a trial in cases of misdemeanour is voluntary surrender. Amnesty, pardon and rehabilitation are special causes of the nullification of a trial. In civil proceedings the usual course is to issue a summons citing the individual to appear for trial on a fixed day. Arrest in civil proceedings is the exception. Finally, as the present Code of Penal Procedure does not fulfil the modern requirements of a speedy trial and of fairness to the accused, several modifications have already been provided, especially in the preparation of the case for the purpose of avoiding the evils of long preliminary arrest, which violates the principles of habeas corpus, especially as the State pays no indemnity to those detained in prison while awaiting trial.

(5) Judicial Establishment

Justice emanates from the king and is administered in his name by judges whom he appoints. To secure judicial independence judges cannot be degraded, their salaries cannot be withheld, and their residences cannot be changed. In Italy the function of the judge is limited to recognizing the existence of a law and to applying it. As regards the acts of the executive power, these, to be valid before the courts, must be conformable to the laws. For the administration of justice the kingdom is divided into five principal districts with High Courts of Appeal, for civil cases, subdivided into twenty districts with Courts of Appeal, for both civil and criminal cases and consisting each of one or more Assize Circuits, which have only criminal jurisdiction, there are 162 districts of civil and criminal tribunals, and 1535 preture, or petty-sessions courts having civil and criminal jurisdiction. Every commune, according to its population, has one or more arbitration judges, dealing only with civil cases. These unsalaried officials may be called on to arbitrate money disputes, and they have the right to pass sentence in trials not involving sums of more than $20. The prætor, who sits alone in his court, is the representative of the law in the popular imagination, and the State attaches to his office many functions of a purely administrative nature; in civil matters his court is also one of appeal from the sentence of the arbitration magistrates, and is the court of first instance for civil cases involving sums of more than $20 and less than $300, and for cases of possession, whatever be the sums involved, excepting questions of taxation, in which only the tribunals have jurisdiction. The prætor has jurisdiction in all felonies and misdemeanours in which the accused may be sentenced to confinement or imprisonment for not more than three months, to restriction of residence for not more than one year, or to a fine of not more than $200. Each tribunal consists of three members and has civil and commercial jurisdiction, as a court of first instance, in all cases that are above the competency of the prætor, from whose judgments there is an appeal to the tribunal. In criminal matters, the Tribunal is the court of first instance, in cases not belonging to the jurisdiction of the prætors or of the Assize Courts, and it hears appeals from the sentences of the prætor. Jurisdiction in the second instance, in cases that are appealed from civil or criminal tribunals, belongs to the Courts of Appeal, which consist each of five members. The Assize Courts consist each of a president, who is a state judge, and of twelve citizens, called jurors, who are selected by lot from the district lists of those who are duly qualified by age and by intelligence, to fill the office. The Assize Courts have jurisdiction in criminal cases in which the punishment may be imprisonment or other restriction of personal liberty, for a period of not less than five years or more than ten years, and also in Cases concerning political rights, those relating to the offences by ministers of religion in the exercise of their functions, and to public violations of the liberty of the press.

The High Courts of Appeal are the supreme custodians of the law and of judicial functions, and therefore their jurisdiction is limited to matters of law, determining only the question of legal error on the part of inferior courts, confirming the sentence, if such error be not found, or, on the contrary, annulling the sentence and ordering the rehearing of the case by another judge. If the new judge does not observe the principles of law laid down by the High Court of Appeal, the defeated party may again appeal to a competent High Court of Appeal, which will thereupon decide on the merits of the case, such decision to be final. Contrary to the functions of the other High Courts of Appeal, which are established respectively at Turin, Florence, Naples, and Palermo, that of Rome is final in criminal, in revenue, and in ecclesiastical matters. According to statistics of 1904, published in 1908, civil proceedings were instituted in 1,900,856 cases, an average of 57 per cent of the population, the greater number of which originated in the southern provinces; the criminal statistics of the year show 804,683 indictments, 523,206 for felony and 281,477 for misdemeanours. The number of convictions, which in 1881 was 305,593, was increased by 24.29 per cent to 379,820 in 1904. Crimes of violence, resistance to authorities, commercial dishonesty, crimes against public and private morality, and criminality among juveniles have increased. All suggest remedies for this condition of things, ignoring, either through stupidity or malice, the fact that the only remedy consists in religious education.

(6) Administrative Departments

The ministries are the superior directing offices of the Italian administration at the capital; each one of them is under a minister assisted by a sub-secretary of state; they are eleven in number, and are known as Ministers of the Interior, of Foreign Affairs, of Finance, of the Treasury, of War, of the Navy, of Clemency, of Justice and of Religious Worship, of Public Works, of Agriculture, of Industry and Commerce, and of Public Education. There is a Council of State, the function of which is to advise the Government; it is a supreme assembly whose duty it is, besides that of administrative justice, to give the administration "opinions", which are called "obligatory" in those cases in which the law obliges the minister to seek such opinions; and in these cases, if the Council be not consulted, the administrative act is unconstitutional and legally void. Another supreme assembly, exercising control over the public administration, is the Court of Accounts; its chief functions are to examine all decrees, from the standpoint of their legality, and thereafter to affix to such decrees its approval, after which they become executive, to control and audit all income and expenditure, to represent the State in all litigation over public funds or other securities of the State or for which the State is liable, and over those salaried officials guilty of peculation or maladministration of public funds.

(7) Political Divisions

The kingdom is divided into 69 provinces, 284 departments, 1805 boroughs, and 8290 communes. The province and the commune are self-governing entities, having a legal personality, exercising their activity in their own interest and indirectly in the interest of the State; they are, moreover, territorial organs of the national administration. On the other hand, the district is a hierarchical division of the province, while the borough is a division of the large communes or an aggregation of small ones and is an electoral territory, and in some measure a judicial and fiscal one. Although the commune is a natural division, like the Italian province, it is a creation of the Italian law. In the province, which is regarded as the local arm of governmental administration, the State exercises its functions through a prefect, who represents the central executive power and is assisted by a prefectoral council and an office of his own. Under him are the sub-prefects at the capitals of districts, the executive and governmental offices, and the public charities. In the commune the State exercises its functions through a syndic, who, therefore, is a government officer. The province and the commune have deliberative bodies that are self-governing and are called respectively provincial council and communal council; they consist of a membership that varies in numbers according to population, there being from sixty members to twenty members in the provincial councils, and from eighty to fifteen in the communal council, all of whom are elected by the people. The executive branch of the province is the deputation, consisting of from ten to six members, according to population, while that of the commune is composed of the syndic and the communal board, which consists of from ten to two members called assessors. All of these bodies are drawn from their respective councils. The prefect, representing the State, exercises juridic control over all the acts of the provincial council, of the communal council, of the deputation, and of the boards; and if they be not according to law, he annuls them. By administrative control, a semi-elective assembly, called provincial board, over which the prefect presides, examines, for its approval, all of those acts of the above bodies that are beyond those of normal administration, as are the alienation or the hypothecation of capital, expenses that are binding upon the budget for more than five years, regulations, etc. Finally, for weighty reasons of public order or because of maladministration, the Government may dissolve the communal or the provincial councils and name, to replace them, a commissary for the commune, and a commission for the province, for the time required to reconstruct the councils.

(8) Administration of Justice

In Italy, conformably with the principle of unum jus, una jurisdictio, all differences between the citizen, the self-governing political divisions of the country, and the State are referred to the judicial power, whether it be a question of civil or of political rights; but controversies concerning private interests or damage through a given act of the Government are referred to two administrative bodies which have jurisdiction in litigation of this nature; they are the administrative board, in each province, and the Council of State (sections 4 and 5). The former determines the right and wrong, in the first instance, of cases of illegality on the part of provincial or of communal administrators or of those of corporations, in acts that may be done by those officials to the detriment of private persons or of corporations in cases that are enumerated by the law. The Council of State judges in cases of appeal from the decisions of the provincial administrative boards (section 5); moreover it exercises jurisdiction alone in cases of incompetency, of abuse of power, or of violation of the law by a deliberating administrative body, except in regard to acts of government done in the exercise of political power (section 4). By this novel institution, which the executive power has borrowed from the judicial, the Staatsrecht has been established in Italy. In the not remote possibility of conflict between the judicial and the executive powers, the Court of Cassation of Rome, which is the supreme organ of the judicial branch of government, has the deciding power. Finally, for the protection of the property of the commune, under certain conditions, the actio popularis procuratoria may be exercised by any taxpayer, as actio suppletiva, to supplement the work of the communal authorities, or as actio correctiva, in pursuance of a right of the commune against its functionaries; but the actio popularis, or motion on behalf of the people, must be made before the usual magistrate, whether criminal or civil, excluding, however, the administrative magistrate.

(9) Finance

The new Kingdom of Italy not only inherited the financial burdens of the former Italian states, but also bore those of the debt incurred on account of the wars and of the expense of maintaining the army on a war footing, so that the first budget (1862) was closed with a deficit of nearly $90,000,000, which in 1866, on account of the war for the acquisition of Venice, was increased to $144,000,000. From that time the financial policy of Italy has had no other purpose than to balance its budget, and consequently new taxes were imposed upon the people, e. g. by the taxation of the grinding of cereals and by an increase of one-tenth on all direct taxation, while the expense of the civil administration was reduced from $6,300,000 to a little more than $4,000,000, notwithstanðing the annexation of Venice; and the military expenses were reduced from $116,000,000 to little more than $37,000,000. As, notwithstanding these measures, the deficit continued, the law of 11 August, 1870, increased existing taxations and created new taxes, till finally, in 1875, the budget closed with a surplus of nearly $3,000,000; nevertheless the former deficits still weighed upon the treasury: 50 per cent of the receipts was disbursed in the payment of interest on debt, and the compulsory acceptance of paper currency encumbered circulation and maintained money at a high price, impeding the development of national progress. Under these conditions the parliamentary revolution of 8 March, 1876, was accomplished, and the party of Cavour (the right) fell from power. The party of the opposition, having assumed the administration of public affairs, directed its financial policy towards the equalization of taxes by reducing some of them and by increasing others; in 1884 it abolished the odious tax on the grinding of cereals, which brought over $16,000,000 to the treasury. To this great loss of revenue was added an increase of 83.18 per cent to the expenses of administration and defence, besides the interest on the debt caused by the suppression of compulsory acceptance of paper currency; and, in the fiscal year of 1885-86 there reappeared the deficit, which in 1888-89 reached the sum of $50,000,000. The Government then bethought itself of putting a stop to the increase of burdens upon the budget and of eliminating all unnecessary expense; as, however, the finances remained unbalanced and the debt was increased by the war in the colony of Eritrea, further economies and new taxes were devised; so that, in the fiscal year 1895-96, when Italy celebrated the twenty-fifth anniversary of the taking of Rome, it was possible to foresee financial equilibrium; but, owing to the war with Abyssinia, that expectation was not realized until the fiscal year 1897-98. Then, however, the position of the treasury being more favourable and circulation having become more free, there were three objects towards which financial policy could tend: the immediate lightening of taxation, the improvement of the public service, and the preparation for the conversion of the debt; and the economical awakening of the nation and the improvement of financial conditions made it possible to seek the attainment of these three ends almost simultaneously; thus, while the expense for the army and for the navy was increased, the law of 23 January, 1902, abolished the internal taxes on farinaceous products; by the law of 22 April, 1905, the State assumed control of the railroads, and by the law of 29 June, 1906, was effected the conversion of the Rente, the 5 per cent gross and the 4 per cent net, into 3.5 per cent net. In the period from 1862 to 1907-1908 the receipts amounted to $12,260,000,000, the expenses to $12,883,000,000, with a total deficit of $1,623,000,000. The Treasury receipts for the year 1907-1908 amounted to nearly $400,000,000, the expenditure for the same period being $340,000,000. The extraordinary cash expenses for the same year amounted to $41,000,000. The intangible expenses, which, in 1868, represented 50.28 per cent of the total of extraordinary expenses, amounted only to 39.85 per cent for 1907-1908. The greater portion of these disbursements is connected with the payment of interest on the debts and with the payment of civil and of military pensions. From the establishment of the kingdom to the last named fiscal year, the State has paid more than $5,000,000,000 in interest on debts. From 1868 to 1907-1908 this expense has been increased by $32,000,000, 39.8 per cent. This increase is due to the suppression of compulsory paper money in 1882, to the expense for the war in Abyssinia, to the redemption of the Adriatic railways, and to the provision of funds for the operation of the state railways. The expenses for pensions in the same period of time increased by 76.09 per cent; general expenses of civil administration, which in 1886 were $3,750,000, are now more than $8,000,000, haying increased 221.49 per cent, while those of the public service have increased about 219.55 per cent. The increase of $35,500,000 between 1868 and 1907-1908 in the ordinary military expenses is the result of an increase in the war budget of $17,200,000 and of $18,300,000 for the navy. The nominal capital of the public debt on 30 June, 1908, was $2,655,000,000. The law on the administration of the property of the State and on the general accounts, and the corresponding rules and regulations, establishes the methods for all accounting, whether in regard to economical or to property matters or in regard to the budget.

DEFENCE OF ITALY

The Alps and the sea, the natural boundaries of Italy, constitute the best frontiers that a nation could desire, while they do not isolate the country from the neighbouring states. But the many political vicissitudes that Italy has undergone have left considerable portions of the Alpine region in foreign hands; consequently the northern barrier is partially nullified for defensive purposes; and with a view to strengthening the weakened points of the western frontier, many fortifications were built, as those of Zuccarello, St. Bernard, Tenda, Fenestrelle, Assietta, Cenisio, and others. The River Po constitutes the second line of defence, protected along its western portion by the fortresses of Genoa and of Alessandria; at the centre, by those of Piacenza and Pizzighettone, and on the east, by the Quadrilateral and by Venice. The Northern Apennines constitute the third line of defence; it is not as strong as the former two, but is none the less important because it is oblique to the line of invasion; on the west it has the fortresses of Genoa and of Piacenza, and the fortifications of Bologna at the centre. Peninsillar Italy has no lack of good positions for defence, but they are of little value if the army be not supported by a powerful fleet. It should be noted, as history shows, that the determining events of war in Italy always take place — or thus far have done so — on the Continental portion of the territory. The present parliamentary committee of inquiry or the army, in order to correct the serious defects in the defence of the frontier, has proposed the establishment of new defensive works costing approximately $28,000,000 for the land frontiers, and $10,000,000 for the coasts.

(1) Army

The army is divided into the permanent army, the movable militia, and the territorial militia. All citizens capable of bearing arms are obliged to serve in the army or in the navy (law of 6 August, 1888); this compulsory service extends from 20 to 39 years of age, partly in the ranks and partly under unlimited leave; while service in the ranks should be three years, a new law has reduced the length of service to two years. After the eighth or ninth year of compulsory service, the citizen is transferred from the permanent army to the movable militia, where he remains registered until 31 December of the twelfth year of compulsory service, and during the last seven years of it he is in the territorial militia. The recruiting is done under the mixed system, that is, national, with movable posts, in time of peace, to strengthen the sentiment of union; and territorial in the case of mobilization; the first is based upon the district, and the second upon the regimental reserves. In 1907 and 1908, 225,000 men constituted the army on a peace footing; on this basis the average strength of a company of infantry is 80 men. About 29,300 men of all arms (except cavalry) on unlimited leave are recalled each year for instruction, that is, less than 22 men per company, as compared with 75 who are recalled in Germany, 100 in France, and 135 in Austria-Hungary. The contingent of men that must join the ranks is determined annually by Parliament and is thereafter divided among the provinces, the districts, and the commanderies; it constitutes the first draft; the men over and above that number are given unlimited leave and belong to the second draft. Whether a man will belong to the first or second draft will depend on the number of men in his year, on the number of recruits wanted, on the chance of his drawing a high number from the urn, and on the number of recruits dismissed as unfit for military service. The third draft consists of young men who have been declared capable of bearing arms, but who are exempt from service in the ranks for family reasons, determined by law (law of 15 December, 1907). Soldiers registered in the second class may be called to arms in time of peace once or oftener, but for a combined length of time of not more than six months (law of 24 December, 1908). The rapid or progressive increase in the losses of the yearly contingent, notwithstanding the growth of the population, is alarming. In the decade comprising the call of those born between 1864 and 1873, 18.44 per cent of those registered were excused from service; in the call for 1906 the proportion of those excused from service was 26.09 per cent, 14.48 per cent of these on account of weak chests and 19.24 per cent on account of diseased constitutions, making 33.72 per cent. Wherefore more than one-third of those excused from service owe their release to lack of nutrition or to the effects of vicious living, and in 1909, 39 out of every 100 conscripts have been found unfit to bear arms; in the southern provinces those unfit for service amount to three-fifths of the whole; Sicily furnishes an average of 1 out of 5 competent for the service, and Sardinia only 1. The insufficiently nourished come from the country, and those broken down by vice from the towns and large centres. There is a markedly increasing reluctance among the young men in answering the call to arms and in presenting themselves for military training. Between 1901 and 1905, 8.1 per cent were disaffected: in 1906, 8.8 per cent; and in 1906 alone the number of defaulters was 11,443. Nor does the number seem to have diminished in succeeding years.

The law of 20 June, 1897, divides the Italian army in time of peace into twelve army corps of two divisions each; the territory of a division is subdivided into eighty-eight districts, the recruiting for each division being under the charge of from two to seven of these districts in time of peace, while mobilization is under the charge of the regimental reserves. Each division contains two brigades of infantry, consisting of two regiments, one of cavalry and one of artillery, besides two skeleton regiments of infantry and one section of artillery of the movable militia. The Bersaglieri and the Alpine regiments are under the direct orders of the commanders of army corps. The territorial service of troops and of administration is under territorial direction, 13 for the artillery, 15 for the engineers, 12 for the sanitary corps, 12 for the commissary department, and 13 military tribunals. There are 96 regiments of infantry, two of them grenadiers, and 94 of the line, and consisting each of 3 battalions of 4 companies, each company in time of war consisting of 250 men; 12 regiments of bersaglieri, each of 3 battalions, with 1 cyclist company for each regiment; 7 Alpine regiments that are divided into 22 Battalions and 75 companies. The permanent army and the movable militia are armed with the Manlicher-Carcano rifle, model 91, calibre 6.5 mm., with a fixed magazine for 6 cartridges; the territorial militia is armed with a modification of the Wetterly rifle. The total force of the army in time of peace consists of 13,765 officers and 272,187 non-commissioned officers and men, and 52,548 horses and mules. In 1908 the army on a war-footing amounted to 3,401,038 men, that is, 272,187 men under arms; 488,487 men on leave; 372,560 in the movable militia, and 2,274,737 belonging to the territorial militia, besides 39,067 officers.

The infantry and cavalry officers are educated at the Military School of Modena, and those of the artillery and of the engineers at the Military Academy of Turin; there are, moreover, the military colleges of Naples and of Rome for primary military education, while the School of War, the School of Application for the artillery and the engineers, the Central School of Marksmanship for artillery, furnish instruction to officers; non-commissioned officers are taught at the Central Military School of Defence; and surgeons are trained at the School of Applied Military Hygiene.

The service of military intendance is exercised by twelve bodies, having the function of direction and vigilance, and by twenty-four commissary sections, stationed with each commander of an army corps or of a division. This body, in time of war, has the duty of assuring the subsistence of the army, of managing the funds, and of providing the uniforms and equipment; while the accountants have charge of the accounts and administration in these matters. The regiments provide themselves by means of the fixed allowance granted by the State per man and per day of service as follows; daily pay 10 centimes; food 61 centimes; uniform 12 centimes; extras 16 centimes, total, 99 centimes, or nearly 20 cents. This allowance goes to meet the cost of mess, uniform, etc., and is used by each regiment to best advantage.

The permanent Council of Administration of the regiment has charge of the regiment's administrative matters and is responsible to the ministry. This system, which has the merit of being a well-ordered decentralization of power does not satisfy present military requirements; whether through the interference of the central administration or because the assignment is no longer in harmony with economical conditions, the messes of the regiments are either in debt or must have recourse to makeshifts.

(2) Navy

For the administration of the navy the coasts of the Kingdom of Italy are divided into three maritime departments: Spezia, Naples, and Venice. The department of Spezia comprises the coast from the French frontier to Terracina, the island of Sardinia and its dependencies, and the Tuscan Archipelago; the department of Naples comprises the coast from Terracina to Cape Santa Maria di Leuca and the island of Sicily and its dependencies; the department of Venice includes the littoral from Cape Santa Maria di Leuca to the Austrian frontier. The twenty-four maritime divisions, the six arsenals, the ports of construction, the depots of stores and of coal, the maritime fortifications and the sixty-four telegraphic posts along the coast are all under their respective maritime division. The recruiting for the navy is, in principle, identical with that for the army: all citizens registered in the twenty-four maritime divisions are liable to be called for naval service, those who have served their time are put on unlimited leave, and are at once transferred to the permanent army, so that, with the exception of the officers, there is scarcely any naval reserve. In 1908 there were in the naval service 23,143 men, afloat, 5249 on the coasts, and 2035 officers; total peace strength, 30,427 men. In 1909 the fleet consisted of 15 battleships, 10 armoured cruisers, 25 protected cruisers, 122 torpedo-boats, torpedo-gunboats, and torpedo-destroyers, and 7 submarines. There were, moreover, 2 battleships, 1 protected cruiser, and 10 torpedo-boats in course of construction.

In 1909-1910 the expenses on naval construction are anticipated to amount to nearly $9,000,000. Italy is the seventh of the naval powers and has an efficient tonnage of 150,980. The naval academy at Leghorn and the engineering school of Venice provide officers for the navy.

EDUCATION

In the Kingdom of Italy education is divided into primary or elementary, secondary and superior, and the scholastic administration, in general, is under the Ministry of Public Instruction, which is assisted by a partly elective Superior Council, consisting of thirty-two members; local educational administration, excluding universities, is under the prefect, a provincial scholastic council, the superintendent of studies, the board of vigilance for the technical and nautical institutes, and the district inspectors of the elementary schools. Elementary instruction is divided into two grades, the lower and the superior, each of which is divided into three classes, and the law compels the communes to furnish it; it is, as a rule, gratuitous, and parents and guardians are obliged to see that their charges receive it between the ages of six years and twelve years, unless they provide otherwise for their children's instruction (laws of 15 July, 1877, and 8 July, 1904). The State furnishes primary instruction, also, in schools established in foreign parts. No citizen is allowed to vote who has not passed the examination at the end of the primary course. The normal schools train the teachers of the elementary schools. It is evident, however, that compulsion in regard to this elementary education, both so far as the communes and the heads of families are concerned, is as yet only a laudable wish, seeing the very slow diminution in the numbers of those unable to read and write. Those who did not know how to read and write, according to the census of 1872 constituted an average of 68.7 per cent of the population; the same class, in the census of 1901, furnishes a corresponding average of 52.3. The illiterate among the army conscripts born in 1886 numbered 50,642, or 29.3 per cent of the enrolled, and the corresponding figures of the navy conscripts born in 1885 were 5833 or 48.7, In the marriages contracted in 1906 there was a proportion of 29.3 per cent of the men, and 42.1 per cent of the women illiterate. The causes of permanent illiteracy, notwithstanding expenditure and government effort, are poverty of workingmen's families, which are constrained to make their children earners before they have reached the age of twelve years; the moral debasement of the teachers who, with some exceptions, have become apostles of socialism and atheism, because of their miserable remuneration, which is inferior to the salary of a workman; the want of care on the part of the communes in regard to the hygiene of the schools, which makes the school a repellent rather than an attractive centre; the fact that the agricultural population is scattered through the country, which makes profitable attendance at school difficult for the children; many children leave school without having acquired instruction, knowing scarcely how to write their names. What are the remedies?

There is only one: the liberty of elementary teaching in the broadest sense of the word, not only as regards the teachers but also as regards the course of studies, except on questions of morality; and the establishment of premiums in proportion to the number of children who obtain the diploma of the course.

According to the law of 13 November, 1859, secondary instruction is of two kinds, classical and technical. The classical course of the first grade is given in the gymnasia (colleges) and extends over a course of five years; that of the second grade is given in the lyceums, the course being three years. The technical instruction is also of two grades, the first, given in the technical schools, lasts three years, and the second, in the technical or in the nautical institutes, the course lasting four years. Ordinarily the burden of secondary instruction is divided among the State, the province, and the communes.

Of other special courses of secondary instruction that are not wholly allied with those to which reference has already been made are given by the State under the ministry of Public Instruction and under that of Agriculture, Industry and Commerce, and also by the autonomous divisions of the kingdom.

There are thirteen government institutes for the study and assistance of the fine arts, and as many other establishments of the same kind that are not governmental, with two hundred and twenty-seven teachers. In the school year of 1905-1906 these schools had in all 3759 students, a decrease of 445 during the preceding five years. There are five conservatories of music belonging to the Government and forty-eight private institutions, with five thousand five hundred students and four hundred and forty-four teachers. Superior instruction includes four faculties: law, medicine and surgery, mathematics, physics and natural science, philosophy, and rhetoric. There belong to it also the schools of pharmacy and the independent veterinary schools of Milan, Naples, and Turin, the schools of applied engineering of Rome and of Bologna, the superior schools of commerce of Bari, Genoa, Venice, Milan, and Rome, those of agriculture of Milan, Portici, Perugia, and Florence, those for teachers at Rome and at Florence, and the naval school at Genoa. Superior instruction is given in seventeen state universities, which, in the Middle Ages, had been centres of knowledge and culture for all Europe: the Universities of Bologna (1200?), Padua (1222?), Naples (1224), Rome (1303), Cagliari, Catania, Genoa, Macerata, Messina, Modena, Palermo, Parma, Pavia, Pisa, Sassari, Siena, and Turin. There are four free universities, those of Perugia, Camerino, Urbino, and Ferrara. Higher education is also furnished by three law schools connected with the lyceums of Aquila, Bari, and Catanzaro, by the three polytechnic schools of Milan, Turin, and Naples, by the Finishing Institute of Social Science at Florence and by the Scientific and Literary Academy at Milan. In the scholastic year of 1893-1894, these universities and higher educational establishments were attended by 22,289 students, an average of 71.9 per 100,000 inhabitants; and in the scholastic year of 1905-1906 the number of students was 27,009, an average of 81 per 100,000 of the population. The professors are divided into ordinary (who are irremovable), extraordinary, special lecturers, and privat-dozents. The university is governed by a rector, appointed by the king on the recommendation of the body of ordinary professors, by an academic council, consisting of the rector and of the presidents of the different faculties, and by the general assembly of professors. There are other institutions connected with public instruction, as the libraries, some of which enjoy the prerogative of incorporation, while others are merely the property of the State, of the commune, or of the province. The public has not the same free use of all these libraries, there being a distinction between those that are independent and those that are annexed to other institutions, or to offices, as those of the ministries, of the Senate, of the Chamber of Deputies, etc.; the first are public in the full sense of the word, while the second are so only upon certain conditions. Only persons over the age of sixteen years may receive books for reading in the libraries. Books are permitted to be taken out of the library only in special cases. There are approximately 1830 libraries open to the public, 32 of them belonging to the Government.

Other educational institutions are: the national boarding schools for boys, and those for girls, under the direct supervision of the Ministry of Public Instruction; institutions belonging to the provinces or to the communes; endowed institutions; the seminaries; and private boarding schools. Those of the Government are 43 in number for boys, and 8 for girls, and according to the last statistics the former had 4165, and the latter 593 pupils. The others together number 880, with 60,000 boarders. There are no precise statistics as to the teachers in boarding schools for boys; it is known, however, that in 1906, 360 of the directors, approximately, were laymen, while the remainder were of the regular or of the secular clergy. In 320 boarding schools, all the teachers were laymen; in 215 all were ecclesiastics, and in the remainder of these schools the teachers were, some ecclesiastics, and some laymen. The number of persons who are connected with the administration and with the teaching of the boarding schools for girls is nearly 8686, of whom only 3587 are lay, the remainder belonging to the secular clergy or to religious congregations. New publications, including new editions of works already published, amounted to 9975 in the year 1900, at which time statistics on this subject were discontinued; this was exclusive of monthly publications, which, in 1898, amounted to 971. There were 151 new daily papers, and the total number of periodicals in 1905 was 3120, published in 363 cities, 815 of these publications dealing with politics, and 147 daily. Lombardy has the greatest proportion of periodicals (544), and the Basilicata the smallest (11).

Charities

Charity, which was unknown to paganism, is a Christian growth that found a fertile soil in Italy, the home of the head of the Christian Church; and under his influence that country developed a wealth of beneficent institutions for the relief of every form of want; while the Council of Trent formulated laws to prevent the waste of the funds of the poor (Sess. VII, "De reform.", c. xv; Sess. XXV, "De reform.", c. viii). And the stream of charity flows on, notwithstanding the exclusion of the Church from all intervention in charitable works, for, between 1881 and 1905, there were founded 1626 new charitable institutions, with a combined capital of nearly 27,000,000, while the donations and legacies of that same period to already existing establishments amounted to 31,328, with an aggregate value of $56,000,000. There are 27,078 charities in Italy, with an aggregate capital of $400,000,000, an average of $12 per inhabitant; their combined income is nearly $34,000,000, and their charitable disbursements amount to $22,000,000. The English system of official charities (taxation on behalf of the poor) is unknown in Italy, where charity is left to the voluntary action of individuals, and as we shall see is made compulsory only in fixed cases. The law of 17 July, 1890, limits the action of the State to protecting and favouring the free exercise of public charities, to watching over the opere pie, which are the chief benefactors of the poor, and to reforming them by the union of several, by statutory revision, and by the changing of their purpose. In Italy the forms in which charity is generally practised are: aid to infants (foundling asylums, orphanages, asylums for education, hospices, etc.); aid to those who are in want and unable to work (retreat for mendicants, dormitories, etc.); eleemosynary aid (economical restaurants, patronages, home assistance. etc.); hospital aid (hospitals, insane asylums, etc.), and monti di pietà. The law requires the existence of a charity association in each commune for the care of the interests of the poor; its members are taken from the communal council and consist of a president and of from 4 to 12 councillors, according to the population. The charitable association and the opere pie are required by law to give aid in urgent cases, to support the needy who are unable to work, where there is no local home for the poor, and to care provisionally for orphans and for deserted minors, for the blind, and for the deaf mutes who are poor.

Besides the work of institutions that are created for the purpose, the State, the province, and the commune are obliged to provide otherwise for certain public charities; thus the commune is compelled to provide sanitary service, doctors, midwives, surgeons, and medicines for the poor, when they are not provided for by any institution. The province is bound to care for the insane poor, and the law divides between the province and the commune the expense of the support of foundlings. Lastly, the support of those who are not able to work falls upon the State, when the province and the commune are unable to provide for them. According to the last statistics, in 1899, the communes spent $9,000,000 in public charity; the provinces spent $4,600,000; and the State, in 1905-1906, spent $1,500,000. There were assisted by orphan asylums or placed out with nurses directly by the communes, in the five years from 1902 to 1906, 127,586 children, of whom 8456 were born in lawful wedlock. According to the last statistics of the monti di pietà, on 31 December, 1903, there were 527 of these establishments that loaned money on 4,790,539 pledges to the amount of $14,000,000, of which 1,405,206 were renewed for an amount of $4,899,205; there were 4,425,422 redemptions for an amount of $13,348,493 and 412,336 sales of a total amount of $769,345.

All institutions of public beneficence are under the watchful care of the Government with the assistance of a superior council for public aid and charity, which has an advisory function. In all that concerns economical ends, local vigilance is exercised by provincial commission; and the administration of any opera pia may be dissolved for grave reasons, but must be reconstructed.

HYGIENE AND HEALTH

Sanitation, which is an important juridical and social function of the modern State, has made no little progress in Italy, where it is regulated, in general, for all the kingdom by the law of 7 August, 1907, by other sanitary laws, and by corresponding rules and regulations, while it is regulated for local purposes by various provincial and communal regulations of importance. The sanitary laws provide for the safety of the public health by a series of imposts on the citizen, and by police restrictions regarding the practice of medicine, of surgery, of the veterinary art, of pharmacy, and of obstetrics, all of which professions are subject to supervision and have special obligations imposed upon them for the security of the sick and for the gratuitous attendance of the poor.

In order to prevent the spreading of infectious diseases, physicians are obliged to denounce cases of infectious disease, and citizens are obliged to submit to visitations, to disinfections, and to vaccination. Under this head comes a special supervision over aqueducts, the sewage system, and the right of the Minister of the Interior to prevent or to suppress evils regarded as causes of contagious disease. There are, moreover, burial laws, the chief end of which is to prohibit the burial of bodies elsewhere than in cemeteries, exception being made in favour of illustrious personages and of private burial grounds that are situated in the country and not open to the public. Landing in Italy is made under special supervision, for which purpose there is a medical officer in each port. There are many pure food regulations, the first of which is the right of inspection and that of provisional seizure of suspected articles by the sanitary authorities, the establishment of laboratories for chemical analysis, the prohibition of slaughtering unhealthy animals, or of any animals outside of the regular slaughter houses. Special attention is given to preventing the adulteration of wines and to the prevention of skin diseases.

Hygiene is under the Minister of the Interior, and in charge of the prefects, the sub-prefects and the syndics, under him. He is assisted by a superior sanitary council, or advisory body, and by a General Directory of Sanitation; the prefect is assisted by a Provincial Sanitary Council; the former care for the sanitary conditions of the whole kingdom; the latter, for the communes of the whole province. In each province there is a physician and a provincial office whose function is to watch over the sanitary service, the hygienic conditions of the communes, the sanitary institutions and the execution of the sanitary laws; the physician investigates the causes of diseases and inspects pharmacies, hospitals, etc. There is a provincial veterinary whose business is to supervise disease among animals. In each commune, moreover, there is a sanitary officer, who, besides his supervisory duties, must inform the syndic and the provincial physician of all circumstances that may in any way affect health or hygiene.

FOREIGN POSSESSIONS

(1) Colonies

At about the time of the Mahdi's revolt in Upper Egypt, European nations were seized with the desire of acquiring lands in Africa; Italy also entered upon the course of colonial conquest, and consequently it has come into the possession of territories, and has created protectorates and zones of influence on the western coast of the Red Sea, on the Gulf of Aden, and on the Indian Ocean.

The direct possessions of Italy are the colonies of Eritrea and Italian Somalia (Benadir). The colony of Eritrea originated in the possession of the Bay of Assab, which was proclaimed by the law of 5 July, 1882. The colony extends along the western coast of the Red Sea from Cape Kasar (18.2° N.) to Cape Doumeirah (12.30° N.) on the Strait of Bab-el-Mandeb. From Cape Kasar the boundary line has a generally south-western direction to the confluence of the Khor-Um-Hagar and the Setit Rivers. The southern or Abyssinian boundary is formed by a line drawn towards the west from the confluence of the Khor-Um-Hagar and the Setit Rivers, along the latter stream, to its confluence with the Maiteb, and follows the course of the latter to the Mareb at the confluence of the Mai-Ambessa; it follows the Mareb River as far as its junction with the Belesa, and then the latter river, after which it follows the course of the Munma, and turning to the south-east, at a distance of 37 miles from the coast it reaches the frontier of French Somalia, near which the boundary line leaves the extreme point of Doumeirah and follows the watershed line of the promontory of that name, for one mile, and turns to the place called Bisidiro on the Weima; from this point it turns east and south-east as far as Daddato (Italo-British Agreements of 15 April, 1891; 7 December, 1898; 1 June, 1899; 16 April, and 22 November, 1901; Italo-French Protocols of 24 January, 1900, and 10 July, 1901; Italo-British Ethiopian Convention of 15 May, 1902; Italo-Ethiopian Conventions of 10 July, 1900, and 16 May, 1908). The Archipelago of Dahlac and the minor islands along the Dancala coast belong to the Colony of Eritrea. The Colony of Somalia consists of that region of eastern Africa that lies between the Sultanate of Obbia, which is an Italian protectorate, the Giuba River, the Indian Ocean, Ethiopia, and English Somalia. The boundary between Somalia and the Ethiopian Empire is a line that, beginning at Dolo, reaches the confluence of the Daua and the Ganale Rivers, and, to the north of the fourth parallel, it takes an easterly course, as far as Uebi-Scebeli, which is located at the extreme north of the Baddi Addi country; from Uebi-Seebeli it follows a north-easterly direction towards British Somaliland.

The Colony of Eritrea, within its present boundaries, has an area of nearly 50,000 sq. miles, of which the Dahlac Archipelago occupies 580, and its population is 279,551 inhabitants, of whom 3949 are Italian. The area of the Colony of Somalia may be estimated at 146,000 sq. miles, with half a million of inhabitants who, along the coast, are Somalians, and in the interior, Galla. The plain of Danakil and the coast country about Massowah, in Eritrea, are worthless for agricultural purposes, but the higher portion of the territory and the lands which are intermediary between it and those of the coast and which are watered by the Barka and by the Anseba Rivers, may become fertile through a good system of irrigation. In the colony there is little industry and less commerce, as is shown by the statistics of the custom house of Massowah, which show imports for a value of 2 millions of dollars, and exports for $600,000, approximately. The United States send to the colony only petroleum, and cotton textiles, carried in English bottoms, for a value of about $40,000, and they export a small amount of hides. Commerce by caravan with Ethiopia increases continually; in 1906 it amounted to $1,200,000 for imports, and to nearly $2,000,000 for exports. The commerce of the country is in the hands of Greeks and of Banians, Indian merchants. Hair, musk, wax, medicinal plants, and especially pearls and mother-of-pearl, are exported. The imports of the Colony of Somalia for 1906 amounted to $720,000, and the exports to $546,000. The principal exports include animal products. hair, ivory, and amber. The arrivals at the port of Massowah numbered 146 steamships, and 1893 sailing vessels, with an aggregate tonnage of 164,148; the clearances were 147 steamers and 1874 sailing vessels, with an aggregate tonnage of 204,814. In Eritrea there are 10 post offices, for both the postal and telegraph services; there are 4 offices of the kind in Somalia. The number of postal orders issued in the Colony of Eritrea in 1904-1906 was 28,619, to the value of $3,650,000, and 14,507 were cashed, for an aggregate sum of $2,770,000. There were 2395 deposits in the postal savings banks, amounting in all to $100,000, and there were 1305 withdrawals to the amount of $70,000. The number of telegrams sent was 15,697, and of those received, 2610. The telegraph system of Eritrea consists of:

• (a) Massowah-Assab and the Assab-Perim cables, which connect with the wires of the Eastern Telegraph Company;
• (b) the land line of Massowah-Asmara-Cheren-Sabderat, which at Kassala connects with the Sudano-Egyptian wires;
• (c) the Asmara-Addis-Abeba line.

The law of 14 July, 1907, authorized the expenses for the establishment of wireless telegraph stations at Asmara, in the Colony of Eritrea, and at Mogadiscio, Brava, Merka Giumbo, Bardera, and Lugh, in Somalia. The first railroad line, the Massowah-Saati, 16½ miles long, was opened in 1887; thereafter, the line was extended to Ghinda, and so attained a length of 43 miles. In 1907 the Ghinda-Asmara line, 31 miles long, was opened to traffic. The colonial budget is approximately $2,000,000, both for receipts and expenses; and the nation's African expenses since 1882 have amounted to nearly $92,000,000, exclusive of provisions and materials to the army and to the navy. The corps of colonial troops consists of 126 officers and 4451 men, 193 horses, 521 small mules, 147 mules, and 10 scouting camels. Each one of the colonies is governed by a civil governor, assisted by residents, who are placed under his orders. The chief centres of population in Eritrea are Massowah (population, 10,000), situated upon an islet that is connected with the mainland by an embankment, Keren (population, 2000), and Asmara, the capital. The chief places in Somalia are the ports of Brava, Merka, Mogadiscio, Marshek, and Obbia. The administration of justice is under colonial judges, and is based upon Moslem jurisprudence (Cheriat), the common native law (Testur), and the different religious regulations and habits.

(2) Protectorates

Under the protectorate of the Kingdom of Italy are;

• (a) the territory of the Sultan of the Migiurtins, which extends along the coasts of the Gulf of Aden and of the Indian Ocean from Bender-Ziade (49° E. of Greenwich) to Cape Bovven in the Bay of Dar-es-Saleh (Convention of 7 April, 1889, and 18 August, 1901);
• (b) the territory of Nogal, the head of which is Sayed ben Abdallah, called the Mullah; this territory extends from Cape Bovven to Cape Garad (Agreement of Illig, 5 March, 1905);
• (c) the territory of the Sultan of Obbia, which extends from Cape Garad to the northern boundary of the territory of Uarsceik, 2° 30' N. (Treaty of 8 February, 1889).

The limits of the zone of influence in Somalia were established by the Italo-British protocols of 24 March, 1891, and 5 May, 1894. They first established the western and the southern boundaries by a line which, from the sea, follows the wady of the Giuba River to the sixth degree of northern latitude, and from there to the thirty-fifth meridian E. of Greenwich, where it reaches the Blue Nile. The second protocol established the boundary by a line from Gildessa towards the eighth degree of N. latitude, along the north-eastern frontier of the territories of the Girri, Bertiri, and Rer Ali tribes; from that point, the line follows latitude 8° N. to its intersection with parallel 48° E. of Greenwich, whence it goes to the intersection of latitude 9° N. with the parallel of 49° E. of Greenwich, and thence on follows that meridian to the sea. Bender-Ziade, although situated to the west of the forty-ninth meridian, is included within the sphere of Italian influence.

By the agreement of 7 June, 1902, the Chinese Government recognized the concession of Tien-tsin, in China, a small territory that is situated on the right of the Pei-ho River, which constitutes the southern boundary for nearly a mile; on the east this territory is conterminous with the Russian concession, and on the west with the Austrian concession, while the lands of the Imperial Chinese Railroad Company form its northern boundary; its area is nearly 18 sq. miles and it contains a village and some salt mines; its native inhabitants number about 17,000. The concession is in charge of the consul, who is assisted by an administrator.

For the history of Italy see the medieval annals, best collected in the monumental work of MURATORI, Scriptores Rerum Italicarum, etc. (500-1500) in 28 folio volumes (Milan, 1725; new ed., small 8°, Città di Castello, 1900); see also his valuable Annali d'Italia — from the beginning of the Christian era to 1749 — (12 vols., Milan, 1744-49); SIGONIUS, Hist. de regno Italiœ, 570-1200; BALAN, Storia d'Italia (2nd ed., Modena, 1894); HEGEL, Storia della costtituzone dei municipi italiani (Milan, 1861); SISMONDI, Hist. des républiques italiennes du moyen-âge (Paris, 1817-18), non-Catholic and often prejudiced; LANZANI, I communi, da Carlomagno ad Henrico VII (Milan, 1880); FICKER, Forschungen zur Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte Italiens (Innsbruck, 1894); MANN, History of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages (St. Louis, 1904 sqq.), and PASTOR, History of the Popes since the End of the Middle Ages, tr. ANTROBUS (London and St. Louis, 1902-); VAN DUERM, Pouvoir temporel des Papes (Lille, 1890); PERTILE, Storia del diritto italiano (Padua, 1887-88); LITTA, Famiglie celebri italiane (Milan, 1815-69); COPPI, Le università italiane nel medio evo (2nd ed., Florence, 1880); BALZANI, Le cronache italiane nel medio evo, also in English transl., S. P. C. K.; TONIOLO, Le buone tradizioni della storia d'Italia (Lendinara, 1891); AMPÈRE, L'Histoire d'Italie et ses historiens in Rev. des Deux Mondes, V, 1856, 45-81. Histories of Italy should be read with caution, as writers are frequently moved by anti-papal or anti-Catholic prejudice or passion.

LUIGI TACCHI VENTURI.

Italian Literature

Origins and Development

The modern language of Italy is naturally derived from Latin, a continuation and development of the Latin actually spoken among the inhabitants of the peninsula after the downfall of the Roman Empire. It is still disputed how far this spoken Latin was identical with the classical literary language of Rome, the Latinus togatus, and how far it was a merely popular tongue, the sermo rusticus. Most probably it was a mixture of the two — the latter, owing to the changed social conditions, predominating. A small number of words derived from Greek are in part relics of the epoch of Byzantine domination, in part introduced later through the Crusades and through commerce; the Saracenic invasions have left traces in a very few Arabic words, chiefly in Sicily; a certain number of words have come indirectly from the Latin through French or Provençal; even the long centuries of Teutonic conquests and inroads caused only a comparatively slight influx of words of Germanic origin.

In the "De Vulgari Eloquentia" (i, 10-16), Dante speaks of the "many discordant varieties of the Italian vernacular", and rejects them all in favour of the "illustrious, cardinal, courtly, and curial vernacular in Italy", the standard and ideal national language, "which belongs to every city of Italy, and seems to belong to none, and by which all the municipal dialects of the Italians are measured, weighed and compared". These dialects fall into three groups:

• (1) Ligurian, Piedmontese, Lombard and Emilian, and Sardinian, which form a Gallo-Italian group apart from the vernacular of the rest of the peninsula;
• (2) Venetian, Corsican, Sicilian, Neapolitan, Umbrian, and the dialects of the Marches and of Rome, which, though diverging from true Italian, form one system with it;
• (3) Tuscan.

But the national and literary language, the "illustrious vernacular", is one and the same throughout the land. This language is not an artificially formed Italian, stripped of the accidental peculiarities of place and race; but substantially the vernacular of Tuscany, and more particularly of Florence, as established by the great Florentine writers of the fourteenth century, adopted by those of other districts in the Renaissance, and formulated by the famous Accademia della Crusca, which was founded in the latter part of the sixteenth century.

From the seventh century onwards, we begin to find traces in extant documents, from various parts of Italy, of the use of the vernacular, in the shape of forms that are more or less Italian inserted into the corrupt Latin of the epoch. Italian familiar names of men and Italian names of places rapidly appear; and, in a document of 960 in the Archives of Montecassino, a whole sentence, four times repeated, is practically Italian: Sao ko kelle terre, per kelle fini que ki contene, trenta anni le possette parte sancti Benedicti (I know that those lands, within these boundaries that are here contained, the party of St. Benedict has possessed them thirty years). A confessio, or formula of confession, from an abbey near Norcia, probably of the end of the eleventh century, shows passages still nearer to the Italian of to-day. Fifty years later we meet literary composition in the vernacular. The inscription formerly on the cathedral of Ferrara, of 1135, consists of two rhyming couplets of Italian verse. Four lines, known as the "Cantilena Bellunese", also in rhymed couplets, inserted in a fragment of a chronicle, allude to the taking of Casteldardo by the people of Belluno in 1193. In a contrasto (a dialogue in verse between lover and lady) by Raimbaut de Vaqueiras (c. 1190), the lady answers in Genoese to the Provençal advances of the poet. The "Ritmo Laurenziano", a cantilena in praise of a bishop by a Tuscan, and the "Ritmo Cassinese", an obscure allegorical poem in the Apulian dialect, are both probably of the end of the twelfth century. To the same epoch belongs a series of twenty-two sermons in a northern Italian dialect mixed with French, published by Wendelin Foerster, which are the earliest extant specimens of vernacular preaching in Italy.

The Thirteenth Century (Il Ducento)

The Italians naturally regarded the language and traditions of Rome as their own, and still clung to the use of Latin while a vernacular literature was already flourishing in France and Provence. Italian literature, strictly speaking, begins with the early years of the thirteenth century. Among the influences at work in its formation must first be mentioned the religious revival wrought by St. Francis of Assisi and his followers bearing lyrical fruit in the Lauda, the popular sacred song, especially in Central Italy. St. Francis himself composed one of the earliest Italian poems, the famous "Cantica del Sole", or "Laudes Creaturarum" (1225), a "sublime improvisation" (as Paschal Robinson well calls it) rather than a strictly literary production. The growing self-consciousness of the individual states and cities later gave rise to the chronicles and local histories. Provençal troubadours, who settled at the petty Courts of Ferrara and Monferrato, or passed southwards into the Kingdom of Sicily, brought the conventions of their artificial love poetry with them. Equally influential with the Franciscan movement, though in a totally different spirit, was the impulse given to letters by the highly cultured, but immoral and irreligious court of the Emperor Frederick II and his son Manfred, whose Kingdom of Sicily included not only that island, but also Naples and all the south of the peninsula.

Dante wrote: "From the fact that the royal throne was in Sicily, it came to pass that whatever our predecessors wrote in the vulgar tongue was called Sicilian" (V. E., i, 12). The writers of this Sicilian school were drawn from all parts of Italy. They did not normally use the Sicilian dialect, but wrote in a vernacular practically identical with what became the literary language of the whole nation. Their productions are almost exclusively love poems derived from those of Provence. Frederick himself (died 1250) and his chancellor, Pier delle Vigne (died 1249), wrote in this fashion. Many of these poets, like Ruggiero de Amicis (died 1246), Arrigo Testa (died 1247), and Percivalle Doria (died 1264), were of high social position, notable in the history of the epoch, dying on the scaffold or the battlefield; but their lyrics are lacking in individuality, conventional, and artificial in sentiment and treatment. Noteworthy poets of this school are Giacomo da Lentino, "Il Notaro", who was one of the emperor's notaries in 1233; Rinaldo d'Aquino, a kinsman of St. Thomas, whose lament of a girl whose lover had gone on the Crusade was probably written in 1242; Giacomo Pugliese da Morra, in whom we find a trace of popular realism; and Cielo dal Camo, or d'Alcamo, whose contrasto, "Rosa fresca aulentissima", now held to have heen written after 1231, is strongly tinged with the local dialect of Sicily. A more personal note is struck in the pathetic poem of King Enzo of Sardinia (died 1272), "S'eo trovasse", written from his prison at Bologna, which brings the Sicilian epoch to a dramatic close. The last poet of the Sicilian school is Guido delle Colonne (died after 1288), who also wrote the "Historia Trojana" in Latin prose, and is mentioned with praise by both Dante and Chaucer.

The earlier Tuscan poets, such as Pannuccio dal Bagno, of Pisa, and Folcaccluero de' Folcacchieri, of Siena (c. 1250), are closely associated with the Sicilians. But from the outset the Tuscans did not restrict themselves to erotic poetry, but sang of religious, satirical, and political themes as well. Guittone del Viva (1230-94), known as Fra Guittone d'Arezzo, shows himself an imitator of the Provençals in his love lyrics, but writes with vigour and sincerity in his religious and political poems, especially in his canzone on the defeat of the Florentines at Montaperti (1260). He is also the author of a collection of letters, one of the earliest achievements of Italian prose. By the middle of the century, in addition to the canzone, or ode (which was taken over from the Provençals), we find in Central Italy two forms of lyrical poetry purely Italian in their origin: the ballata and the sonnet. The overthrow of the Suabian monarchy in the South, by the victory of Charles of Anjou (1266), shifted the centre of culture to Bologna and Florence. A number of disciples of Guittone now appear, of whom Chiaro Davanzati (date uncertain), of Florence, and Bonaggiunta Urbicciani, of Lucca (died after 1296), are the most noticeable. Of a far higher order is the poet who inaugurated the dolce stil nuovo, the "sweet new style", of which Dante speaks — Guido Guinizelli of Bologna (died 1276). Guido wrote of the noblest love in a spirit that anticipates the "Vita Nuova", and thereby founded a school to which the poets of the last decade of the century belonged, even as their predecessors had adhered to that of Guittone. The chief of these is Guido Cavalcanti (died 1300), the chosen friend of Dante. He composed an elaborate canzone on the philosophy of love, in which poetry is smothered by metaphysics; but m his minor lyrics, original in motive and personal in sentiment, he brought the ballata and the sonnet to a degree of perfection previously unattained. With him and Dante is associated another Florentine poet, Lapo Gianni (died 1323), whose work belongs to this epoch although he outlived it. In another vein, we have the humorous and satirical pieces of Rustico di Filippo (died circa 1270) and the "Tesoretto" of Brunetto Latini (died 1294), an allegorical didactic poem which influenced the external form of the "Divina Commedia". The religious poetry of Umbria, developing under Franciscan influence, culminates in the mystical laudi of Jacopone da Todi (died 1306), one of the most truly inspired sacred poets that the world has seen.

In comparison with the poetry, the Italian prose literature of this century is insignificant. The chief chronicler of the epoch, Fra Salimbene of Parma (died 1288), wrote in Latin; Brunetto Latini composed his encyclopedic work, the "Trésor", in French. Many of the literary productions formerly assigned to this are now known to belong to a later epoch, and it is impossible to say with certainty whether those that are authentic should be placed at the end of the thirteenth or at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Among these are the "Cento Novelle Antiche", a collection of short stories drawn from various sources, and the "Tavola Ritonda", an Italian version of the romance of Tristram. Fra Ristoro of Arezzo, in 1282, completed an elaborate treatise on cosmography, "Della Composizione del Mondo". Most of the prose of this epoch is simply translated from the Latin or French. To Bono Giamboni (died after 1296), a Florentine who italicized Brunetto Latini's" Trésor", are attributed three ethical treatises (possibly of a later date), based upon medieval Latin models, but not mere translations; the most important of these, the "Introduzione alle Virtù", derived in part from Boethius and Prudentius, is a striking religious allegory in which the Soul is led by Philosophy to the palace of Faith to witness the triumph of the Church, and herself attain to spiritual freedom.

The Fourteenth Century (Il Trecento)

Through the triumph of the Guelphs, the chief place in Italian culture is now held by Florence instead of Sicily. Italian literature has become mainly republican in temper‚(even when professedly imperialist) and Tuscan in language. The philosophical glory of St. Thomas causes even belles lettres to be deeply tinged with scholasticism; while the growing antagonism to the political actions of the popes, particularly during the Babylonian Captivity of Avignon, gives an anti-clerical tone to much of the poetry and prose of the century. At the close of the epoch the revival of classical studies begins to make itself felt. In the hands of three great Tuscan writers — Dante Alighieri (1265-1321), Francesco Petrarca (1304-1374), and Giovanni Boccaccio (1313-1375) — the national literature and the national language appear in full maturity and artistic perfection.

In his "Vita Nuova" (c. 1295), Dante still belongs to the preceding century, while uplifting the ideals of love set forth by Guido Guinizelli to the heights of Catholic mysticism. His "Rime", more particularly his canzoni, develop the lyrical forms of his predecessors, while investing them with fresh passion and with philosophical authority. With his "Convivio" (circa 1306 — unfinished, but the earliest monumental work of Italian prose) he intended to bring down the scholastic learning of his age to the understanding of the general reader. The "Divina Commedia" (1314-21), the noblest expression of the Italian spirit in poetry and a landmark in the history of man, sums up the intellectual gain and the spiritual progress of the nine centuries since the fall of the Roman Empire, while faithfully depicting the highest aspirations and whole moral atmosphere of the poet's own epoch. In spiritual insight, dramatic intensity, sureness of touch, and terseness of expression, it has never been surpassed. In it modern Europe first produced a masterpiece to rival those of the classical world. Petrarca brings the canzone and the sonnet to their ultimate technical perfection in his lyrical poems, the "Canzoniere" or "Rime", a series of miniature paintings of all the varying moods of the soul passing through earthly love and patriotic enthusiasm to find its rest in religion. His "Trionfi", a poem in terza rima, in ten cantos, deal with the same matter in allegorical fashion, giving a symbolical representation of his own life. In his voluminous Latin writings — letters, treatises, and poems — he appears as the first of the Humanists, the precursor of the Renaissance. The worshipper of Dante and intimate friend of Petrarca, Boccaccio, in his "Filostrato" and "Teseide", established ottava rima (previously only used in popular verse) as the normal measure for Italian narrative poetry. In his "Ameto" he introduced the prose pastoral and the vernacular eclogue. His grossly immoral "Fiammetta" may be said to inaugurate the modern psychological novel. In the hundred stories of the "Decameron", he gave perfect artistic form to the novella, or short story, imbuing it with modern life. Written in an ornate and poetical prose, lacking in simplicity and directness, the "Decameron" gives an unsurpassable picture of certain aspects of fourteenth century society, but is disfigured by obscenity, and permeated by a superficial and sensual ideal of life.

This century in Italy, as elsewhere, is the golden age of vernacular ascetical and mystical literature, producing a rich harvest of translations from the Scriptures and the Fathers, of spiritual letters, sermons, and religious treatises no less remarkable for their fervour and unction than for their linguistic value. From the earliest years of the Trecento have come down the sermons of the Dominican, B. Giordano da Rivalto (died 1311). The exquisite "Fioretti di San Francesco", now known to be a translation from the Latin, date from about 1328. Prominent among the spiritual writers, who thus set themselves to open the Church's treasury to the unlearned, are the Augustinians, B. Simone Fidati da Cascia (died 1348) and Giovanni da Salerno (died 1388), whose works have been edited by P. Nicola Mattioli; and the Dominicans, Domenico Cavalca, a copious translator, and Jacopo Passavanti (died 1357), whose "Specchio della Vera Penitenza" is a model of style and language. The admirable letters of B. Giovanni Colombini (died 1367) and the mystical lyrics of his follower, Bianco dall' Anciolina (El Bianco da Siena), have the glowing fervour, the Divine madness, of the first Franciscans. In a less exalted vein, the epistles of the monk of Vallombrosa, B. Giovanni dalle Celle (died 1396), extend from the forties to the nineties of the century. Supreme above them all, a figure worthy, from the mere literary point of view, to stand by Dante and Petrarca, is St. Catherine of Siena (1347-80), whose "Dialogo" is the greatest mystical work in prose in the Italian language, and whose "Letters" have hardly been surpassed in the annals of Christianity.

Minor poets are numerous. Ceceo Angiolieri of Siena (died circa 1312), the Italian Villon, wrote humorous and satirical sonnets of amazing vigour and originality on subjects mainly drawn from low life. Folgore da San Gimignano (died after 1315) pictured the fashionable existence of the young nobles of Siena with the touch of a painter. Guittoncino de' Sinibuldi, known as Cino da Pistoia (died 1337), also won renown as a jurist; the friend of Dante, whose "Rime" he imitated, his best amatory and political lyrics are hardly unworthy of his master. Francesco da Barberino (died 1348), who was influenced by French and Provençal models, is the author of two somewhat insipid allegorical didactic poems. A higher note is struck by the Florentine exile, Fazio degli Uberti (died after 1368), whose "Dittamondo", a long poem in terza rima, "was intended as an earthly parallel to Dante's Sacred Poem, doing for this world what he did for the other" (Rossetti); he surpassed himself in splendid patriotic lyrics, which give spirited expression to the new national Ghibellinism of Italy. Antonio Pucci of Florence (died 1374) is the chief literary representative of the popular poetry of the age.

With the early years of the century begins the series of chronicles and diaries in the vernacular. Dino Compagni (died 1324), to whom is also ascribed the "Intelligenza", an allegorical poem in nona rima, describes the factions of the Bianchi and Neri in Florence with patriotic indignation and impartiality. Giovanni Villani (died 1348) and his brother Matteo (died 1363) wrote the whole history of Florence from the legendary origins down to the year of the latter's death; their work, in addition to its supreme historical value, is a monument of the purest Tuscan prose. Minor chroniclers arose all over Italy; we will mention only the two Sienese, Agnolo di Tura and Neri di Donato, and the Benedictine Abbot Niccolò of Gavello, who wrote the "Libro del Polistore", a kind of universal history (still only in part published) which ends in 1367. In fiction, the "Reali di Francia" of Andrea da Barberino, written at the end of the century, renders the chivalrous tales of Charlemagne and his Paladins from the French; the "Pecorone" of Ser Giovanni Fiorentino (c. 1378) is a collection of tales in imitation of Boccaccio. Franco Sacchetti (1335-1400), less artificial than Boccaccio, adapted the novella to a moral purpose; he also wrote evangelical sermons, and poems, both playful and serious, frequently of real lyrical beauty, in which the literature of the Florentine Trecento comes to a pleasant close.

The Renaissance

There are two distinct epochs in the history of the Italian Renaissance: the earlier, including the greater part of the fifteenth century (Il Quattrocento), from the return of the popes from Avignon (1377) to the invasion of Charles VIII (1494); the later, comprising the sixteenth century (Il Cinquecento), from the defeat of the French at Fornovo (1495) to the devolution of the Duchy of Ferrara to the Holy See (1597). Allowing for some necessary overlapping, the literature of the epoch falls into two corresponding periods.

The Quattrocento is an intermediate period between the mainly Tuscan movement of the fourteenth, and the general Italian literature of the sixteenth, century. It developed under the auspices of the princes who were forming hereditary states on the ruins of the communes, and is at first marked by the continuance of the work (inaugurated by Petrarch) of recovering classical writers and copying manuscripts, while the vernacular was despised, and authors attempted to write Latin verse and prose in the manner of the ancients. Greek scholars flocked to Italy, and the influence of Plato, translated into Latin by Leonardo Bruni (died 1444) and Marsilio Ficino (died 1495), became paramount. The latter, who was bent on harmonizing Plato with Christianity, and who also translated Plotinus, was instrumental in founding the Florentine neo-Platonic Academy. Some of these Humanists were purely pagan in spirit, like Poggio Bracciolini (died 1459), Antonio Beccadelli, called Panormita (died 1471), and Francesco Filelfo (died 1481). But there were others, such as the Camaldolese monk, Ambrogio Traversari (died 1439), Palla Strozzi (died 1462), Giannozzo Manetti (died 1459), Guarino Veronese (died 1460), Vittorino da Feltre (died 1446), and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463-94), who could reconcile their worship of antiquity with their living faith in the Catholic Church. Among these Christian Humanists were two popes, Nicholas V (died 1455) and Pius II (died 1464). A vivid picture of the literary life of the age is given in the "Vite d'uomini illustri" of the Florentine bookseller, Vespasiano da Bisticci (1421-98). In the earlier part of the century, vernacular literature is of minor importance. Leonardo Giustiniani of Venice (1388-1446) wrote popular love poetry and religious laudi, some of which have been attributed to Jacopone da Todi. The Florentine architect, Leon Battista Alberti (1406-72), is the author of artistic treatises and moral dialogues, especially the four books of "Della Famiglia", in a Tuscan tinged with Latinisms. Feo Belcari (1410-84) wrote mystery plays and religious poems, and also lives of B. Giovanni Colombini and his followers, with the devout simplicity of an earlier age. Also in religious literature we have the ascetical letters of B. Giovanni Dominici (died 1419), a strenuous opponent of the pagan tendencies of the classical revival, and the vernacular sermons (1427) of St. Bernardine of Siena.

In the latter part of the century, mainly through the influence of Lorenzo de' Medici and the dukes of Ferrara, Italian again triumphed over Latin. Three poets appear, almost of the first class: Lorenzo de' Medici himself (1449-92), Angelo Poliziano (1454-94), and Matteo Maria Bolardo (1434-94). Of extraordinary versatility as a poet, Lorenzo left the imprint of his striking personality upon all he wrote and, especially in his subjects drawn from country life, shows a keen feeling for nature. The ballate and canzonette of Poliziano have the true lyrical note, while his "Stanze per la Giostra" are impregnated with the spirit of Florentine painting, and his "Orfeo" handles a mythological subject in the style of a religious mystery play. Bolardo's "Canzoniere", somewhat Petrarchan in tone, but largely original in form, is the finest collection of love poems of the century; his unfinished "Orlando Innamorato", a poetic romance in ottava rima, gives fresh life to the Carlovingian legends by informing them with the spirit of the Arthurian Cycle. Among lesser poets of the Medicean circle, Luigi Pulci (1432-1484), in his "Morgante ", treated the adventures of Orlando with a fantastic mingling of seriousness and japery; Girolamo Benivieni (1453-1542), a noble mystical and patriotic spirit who outlived his age, sang of celestial love "according to the mind and opinion of the Platonists" (1487), and became the lyrical interpreter of the aspirations of Savonarola, At the northern courts, the blind poet Francesco Bello followed in Boiardo's footsteps with his "Mambriano" (1496); the Ferrarese courtier Antonio Tebaldeo (1463-1537), whose poetry all belongs to the fifteenth century, exaggerated the defects of Petrarch and versified the politics of his patrons; Antonio Cammelu, called "Il Pistoia" (1441-1502), produced an extraordinarily vivid series of satirical sonnets which are historical documents of high importance. In the South, the two chief literary figures are the Neapolitans, Giovanni Pontormo (1426-1503) and Jacopo Sannazaro (1458-1530). The former, who gave his name to a famous academy, wrote only in Latin, which, alike in prose and verse, he used as though it were his own tongue. The latter owes his fame to his Latin "Eclogæ Piscatoriæ" and his Italian "Arcadia", in prose and verse, which influenced the literature of Elizabethan England; his chief Latin poem, "De Partu Virginis", was not published until 1526. The most important Italian historical work of the fifteenth century is the "Storia di Milano" of Bernardino Corio (1459-1510), of special value for its minute and vivid picture of the reigns of the dukes of the Sforza family. The Cinquecento witnessed the Tuscan vernacular finally established as the literary language of Italy, and the classical studies of the past bearing fruit no longer in pedantic imitation, but in a national literature which is classical only in its perfection of form. In prose, Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527) and, in poetry Lodovico Ariosto (1474-1533), are the master spirits of the age. Machiavelli's political and historical works, admirable in clarity, brevity, and efficacy of expression, penetrating in insight, and at times noble in patriotic aspiration, are open to severe condemnation as virtually excluding moral considerations from the sphere of public life. Next to Dante, Ariosto is the greatest poet that Italy has produced. His "Orlando Furioso", a romantic epic continuing the matter of Boiardo's chivalrous poem, but conforming to classical models, has all the highest qualities of style, imagination, and humour; but, while faithfully reflecting the society of the early Cinquecento, it is stained with the licentiousness and lack of noble ideals that characterize the age. His "Satires", or epistles in verse, give a perfect portrait of the poet himself, and sketch the life of the times with a master's hand. In his "Rime", notwithstanding occasional Petrarchan imitations, we recognize a sincerity of utterance and a genuine passion which are rare in the lyrical poetry of that day. Next to these two giants stands Francesco Guicciardini (1483-1540), pitiless investigator of men's secret motives in his "Storia d'Italia" and his political writings, endowed with a rare power of historical portraiture, but devoid of enthusiasm and all lofty aspirations.

A higher ideal of life and conduct is expressed in the "Cortegiano" of Baldassare Castiglione (1478-1529), the picture of the perfect gentleman, which at the close rises on the wings of Platonic love to the mystical contemplation of celestial beauty. Pietro Bembo (1470-1547), the literary high-priest of the century, touched the latter theme, less nobly, in his "Asolani"; his poetry is little more than a servile imitation of Petrarch; but his "Prose", in which he formulated the rules of the Italian language, and the zeal with which he set the example of editing the vernacular classics, were influential in creating a standard of good taste. To the same poetic school as Bembo belong the Petrarchists, Francesco Maria Molza (1489-1544), Giovanni Guidiccioni (1500-41), Giovanni della Casa (1503-56), all noted for perfection of technic rather than for originality of thought; Vittoria Colonna (1490-1547), whose saintly life illumines her poetry, Gaspara Stampa (1523-54), in whose lyrics we find the faithful delineation of a profound and unhappy passion; and the great artist, Michelangelo Buonarroti (1475-1564), raised above the others by loftiness of thought and rugged vigour of style. A versatile Southerner, Luigi Tansillo (1510-68), shows marked individuality alike in his lyrics and in his idyllic poems. Among burlesque poets are the witty but immoral Francesco Berni (1498-1535), and Teofilo Folengo (1492-1544), whose "Macaronea", or "Baldus", is a burlesque epic written in an extravagant but subtile blend of Latin and Italian, the poesia maccheronica, of which he was the perfecter but not the inventor.

Didactic poems in blank verse, in imitation of Virgil's Georgics, were composed by Giovanni Rucellai(1475-1526) and Luigi Alamanni (1495-1556), while Gian Giorgio Trissino (1478-1550), one of the chief literary critics of the age, essayed the heroic epic in the same metre in his "Italia liberata dai Goti". Numerous writers strove to tread in Ariosto's footsteps with romantic epics, of which the "Amadigi" of Bernardo Tasso (1493-1569), the father of Torquato, is the most successful. In the religious poetry of Celio Magno (1536-1602), we find the renovation of spiritual ideals caused by the Catholic reaction, and this is no less marked in Torquato Tasso (1544-95), with whom the poetry of the Italian Renaissance ends. Modelled upon classical rules, Tasso's "Gerusalemme Liberata" is at once a heroic and a religious epic, stately and musical, in which the minor charms of romance and sentiment are not lacking. He likewise won a high place as lyrist and dramatist, and, at the end of his life, composed a didactic poem, "Il Mondo Creato", the merits of which are theological rather than poetical.

The Renaissance in Italy produced no great national drama. The Italian comedy of the Cinquecento is directly imitated from Plautus and Terence, but attempts to adapt the plots and characters of the Latin playwrights to the conditions of life in the sixteenth century. Here, as in the romantic epic, Ariosto stands supreme. His earlier comedies (1508-1509) are written in prose, his later (1520-1531) in verso sdrucciolo, blank verse ending in a dactyl, intended to reproduce the trimeter iambic of the Latin comedians. They give us vivid pictures of the times; the dialogue is natural and brilliant, the characterization superficial but clever; but they are disfigured by deplorable obscenity. Between Ariosto's earlier and later comedies come the "Calandria" of Bernardo da Bibbiena (1513) and the "Mandragola" of Machiavelli (after 1512), both in prose; the latter is a work of real dramatic power, but cynical and immoral to the last degree. This, unfortunately, applies to much of the comedy of the century, and is found at its worst in the plays of the infamous Pietro Aretino (1492-1556). The tragedies are poorer, and have no relation with the life of the age; they are mere rhetorical imitations of the Greek tragedians and of Seneca, the "Torrismondo" of Torquato Tasso (1587) alone rising above mediocrity. Far more attractive are the pastoral lyrical dramas, Tasso's "Aminta" (1573) and its worthy rival, the "Pastor Fido" of Battista Guarini (1585), masterpieces of their kind, in which what is artificial and conventional in sentiment is idealized and made acceptable by the melodiousness of the poetry with which it is clothed.

Besides Machiavelli and Guicciardini, Florence produced a number of admirable historians, especially Jacopo Nardi(1476-1555), Donato Giannotti (1492-1572), and Benedetto Varchi (1502-65). At Venice, besides the official histories of Bembo and Paolo Paruta (died 1598), we have the voluminous "Diarii" of Marino Sanudo (1466-1536), which enable us to reconstruct the public and private life of the republic day by day. Angelo di Costanzo (1507-91) wrote the history of Naples with accuracy and simplicity. The autobiography of Benvenuto Cellini (1500-71) and the series of "Vite" of the painters, sculptors, and architects, by Giorgio Vasari (1531-74) bring the artistic side of the Renaissance vividly before our eyes. Bernardino Baldi (1553-1617), also an idyllic and didactic poet of an austere spirit, composed admirable monographs on the lives and times of the first two dukes of Urbino. Two novelists, Matteo Bandello (1480-1560) and Giambattista Giraldi (1504-75), have the merit of being less immoral than Boccaccio. Among minor prose treatises the "Galateo" of Giovanni della Casa, a manual of good breeding, has made its title proverbial. The translation of Tacitus by Bernardo Davanzati (1529-1606) is a model of style. Among grammarians and literary critics, besides Bembo, Trissino, and Varchi, should be mentioned Leonardo Salviati, who played a leading part in the foundation of the "Accademia della Crusca" in 1582. The spiritual element in vernacular literature is represented by the "Vita e Transito della beata Osanna da Mantua", by Girolamo Montolivetano (1505); the "Trattato del Purgatorio" of St. Catherine of Genoa (died 1510); the mystical writings of her godchild, the Carmelite nun, Battista Vernazza (died 1587); the Letters of St. Catherine de' Ricci (died 1590); and the "Combattimento Spirituale" (circa 1585) of Lorenzo Scupoli, still so widely used among us for purposes of devotion.

The Decadence

The creative genius of the Italians had been exhausted by the Renaissance, and the life of the nation crushed down by the foreign yoke of Spain, imposed on the peninsula by the Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis (1559). Already in the latter part of the sixteenth century the decline had set in; it lasted through the whole of the seventeenth (Il Seicento), and the first half of the eighteenth century (Il Settecento), which together form the least fruitful epoch in the history of Italian literature. Exaggeration and extravagance, with corrupted taste and frantic straining after novelty (in part a reaction against the frigid classicism in which the Renaissance ended), are the characteristics of earlier seventeenth-century poetry, of which the most typical work is the "Adone" of the Neapolitan poet, Giovanbattista Marini (1569-1625), a profoundly immoral poem with a pretended ethical intention. Alessandro Tassoni (1565-1635) parodied the heroic poem in his comic epic, "La Secchia Rapita", and assailed the Spanish oppressors of his country in his prose "Filippiche". A new school of lyrical poetry was inaugurated by Gabriello Chiabrera (1552-1637), who attempted, with only partial success, to adopt the metres of the Greek and Roman poets for Italian verse. He was followed, with less refined taste and more virility, by Fulvio Testi (1593-1646), whose patriotic poems strike a higher note. Among satirical poets, natural fruit of a corrupt age, is the Neapolitan painter, Salvator Rosa (1615-73). The inevitable reaction against the inflated mannerisms of the Marinisti led to a movement for reforming Italian poetry by a return to nature and simpler ideals. To this latter school belong Vincenzo Filicaja (1642-1707), a deeply religious poet, the best of whose sonnets are the poetic gems of his age, Benedetto Menzini (1646-1704), a Florentine priest, who was also successful as a writer of satires; and Alessandro Guidi (1650-1712), called "the Italian Pindar", who introduced greater freedom into the rhythmical structure of the canzone. This movement culminated in the famous "Accademia dell' Arcadia", inaugurated at Rome in 1690, which soon sank into an affected pastoralism and artificial simplicity, as false to nature and to true poetry as the mannerisms which it was intended to combat.

Although the greatest Italian of the epoch, Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), belongs to science rather than to literature, his writings are distinguished by the highest literary excellences. Francesco Redi (1626-1698), a distinguished physician, was also a poet and philologist. Three Jesuits are among the chief prose writers of the century, combining devotion and learning with a literary style which, though far less free than Galileo's from the faults of the age, is unsurpassed by any of their contemporaries. Father Sforza Pallavicino (1607-1667) composed the official history of the Council of Trent, in refutation of that of Fra Paolo Sarpi (1552-1623), and ethical and religious treatises, of which the "Arte della Perfezione Cristiana" and the four books "Del Bene", philosophical dialogues held in the villa of Cardinal Alessandro Orsini at Bracciano, are still read; Father Daniello Bartoli (1608-85), a prolific and brilliant author, wrote the history of the Society of Jesus in a style which is typical of the Seicento at its best, Father Paolo Segneri (1624-94) reformed the art of religious oratory and freed it from the corruptions of the times. Prominent among historians are Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio (1579-1644), a trusted diplomatist of the Holy See, and Enrico Caterino Davila (1576-1631), who wrote on the Civil Wars of France. A little later, the study of history was set upon a scientific basis by Giambattista Vico (1668-1744) and Lodovico Antonio Muratori (1672-1750). Vico showed how history is illumined by the application of jurisprudence and philosophy; Muratori, that worthy priest to whom the student of the Middle Ages owes more than to any other man, taught by his own example that history must be founded in documentary research, and prepared the ground for subsequent scholars. In philology and literary criticism must be mentioned Carlo Dati (1619-76), who is associated with the Accademia della Crusca (of which the first Dictionary had been published in 1612); Gianvincenzo Gravina (1664-1718), who was one of the founders of the Arcadia; and the Sienese, Girolamo Gigli (1660-1722), the zealous editor of St. Catherine. The Jesuit Girolamo Tiraboschi (1731-94) compiled the voluminous history of Italian literature which is still indispensable.

By the middle of the eighteenth century dynastic changes had swept away most of the old decadent reigning houses, and by the Peace of Aachen (1748) the reactionary yoke of Spain was forever lifted from Italy. The latter half of the century shows a moral and intellectual awakening, but at the same time the growth of a sceptical and irreligious spirit, due in part to French influence. It is an epoch of scientists and political economists, among the latter Cesare Beccaria (1738-94) winning the most permanent fame. In poetry, Pietro Trapassi (1698-1782), better known as Metastasio, brought the melodrama to the ultimate perfection of which it is capable, investing it with tragic dignity and lyrical beauty. Carlo Goldoni (1707-93) reformed Italian comedy, withdrawing it from pedantry and buffoonery to the representation of real life and character. With Giuseppe Baretti (1718-89), the critic who lashed literary affectations and pleaded for virile sincerity in letters, Piedmont made a significant entry into Italian literature. Finally, two great poets arose, a Lombard priest and a Piedmontese nobleman, who anticipated the new age and used poetry as an instrument for social progress: Giuseppe Parmi (1729-99) and Vittorio Alfieri (1749-1803). Parini's chief poem, "Il Giorno", satirizes the corrupt and effeminate life of the aristocracy, and protests against the injustice of class; his "Odi", no less admirable in style, bring the same virile note into lyrical poetry. Alfieri, besides composing robust sonnets and satires, produced a long series of austere and powerful tragedies which are in the main a protest against every kind of tyranny and oppression, and a trumpet-call to the nation to put on the armour of manliness and endurance.

Modern Literature

At the beginning of the nineteenth century the ideals of the French Revolution had penetrated into Italy, while the establishment first of the Cisalpine Republic and then of the short-lived Napoleonic Italian kingdom inspired national feeling and gave hope of ultimate independence. These events had naturally a profound influence upon Italian literature, which, for the next fifty years, is divided between the Classic and the Romantic schools; the former attempting to accomplish the work of renovation by adapting classical models to the new conditions, the latter appealing less to form than to the picturesque aspects of history (particularly of the Middle Ages), to popular sentiment, and to nature.

Vincenzo Monti (1754-1828) is the head of the Classical school in poetry, though his earlier works belong to the preceding century. With no great originality, no stability of thought or constancy of ideals, he has inexhaustible fertility and a vigour of style that is frequently impressive. Ugo Foscolo (1778-1827) is, like Monti, a literary critic as well as poet, but a consistent patriot. His masterpiece, "I Sepolcri", is a poetical epistle in blank verse, classical in thought, lofty in style, and rich in imagery; the "Ultime lettere di Jacopo Ortis", his best known prose work, is an unwholesome and morbid production. Among minor writers of the Classical school are the poet Ippolito Pindemonte (1753-1828), the translator of the Odyssey, who answered Foscolo's "Sepolcri" from the religious standpoint; Antonio Cesan (1760-1828), a priest of Verona, whose aim was to purify the language by the standard of the Tuscan writers of the Trecento; Giulio Perticari (1779-1822), the son-in-law of Monti, with whose linguistic labours in connexion with the revision of the "Vocabolario della Crusca" he was closely associated; Carlo Botta (1766-1837), who attempted to follow in the footsteps of the Latin historians and the great Florentines of the sixteenth century. Belonging more to the Classic than the Romantic school, Giacomo Leopardi (1798-1837) is a solitary and tragic figure. Domestic unhappiness, physical health early shattered by excessive application to study, unrequited love, combined with loss of the Catholic Faith in which he had been reared, drove him into crude pessimism. No Italian since Petrarch had reached the lyrical beauty of his "Canti", in which the contrast between the past and present of his country, the worship of antiquity, political disillusion, hopeless love, and, at length, even the contemplation of nature find utterance in sheer despair.

The founder of the Romantic school is Giovanni Berchet (1783-1851), of Milan, who in 1816 characterized the Classical school as "poetry of the dead", and the Romantic school as "poetry of the living"; his own patriotic lyrics, a little later, won him the title of "the Italian Tyrtæus". To the Romanticists belongs the noblest figure in Italian literature of the nineteenth century, the great Catholic writer, Alessandro Manzoni (1785 1873), whose life was ruled and his art inspired, by religion and patriotism alone. In his "Inni Sacri" (1815-22), he gives lyrical expression to the chief mysteries of the Faith; in his ode on the death of Napoleon, "Il Cinque Maggio", he passes judgment on the mighty conqueror's Career in the light of religion. His lyrical dramas, "Il Conte di Carmagnola" (1820) and "L'Adelchi" (1822), are deficient in true dramatic qualities, but notable for the choral interludes, patriotic no less than religious in their aim. The same ideals inform his masterpiece, "I Promessi Sposi" (1827), a realistic romance with a historical background, as admirable in characterization and description, in pathos and in humour, as it is lofty in its idealism. To the school of Manzoni, similarly combining fervent Catholicism with nationalistic enthusiasm, belong Tommaso Grossi (1790-1853), poet and novelist; Silvio Pellico (1789-1854), whose "Le Mie Prigioni" describes with pathetic detail and Christian resignation his cruel imprisonment at the hands of the Austrians; and Cesare Cantù (1804-95), better known for his later voluminous works on history. Political considerations colour most of the literature of the middle of the century, whether it be the historical writings of Cesare Balbo (1789-1853), the satirical and patriotic poems of Giuseppe Giusti (1809-50), the revolutionary lyrics of Gabriele Rossetti (1783-1854), the tragedies of Giovanbattista Niccolini (1782-1861), or the once admired romances of Francesco Domenico Guerrazzi (1804-73). The "Storia d'Italia nel Medio Evo" of Carlo Troya (1784-1858), the "Storia della Repubblica di Firenze" of Gino Capponi (1792-1876), and the "Storia dei Mussulmani di Sicilia" of Michele Amari (1806-89) are works of more permanent value. Niccolò Tommaseo (1802-74), poet and patriot, who united the study of philology with that of philosophy, made his name dear to students of Dante and St. Catherine.

Midway between this epoch and our own, belonging by the character of his art to the old rather than to the new era, stands a true, though not a great, poet, Giacomo Zanella (1820-89), a learned professor and devout Catholic priest. In Zanella's work the cult of science, the love of nature, an ardent patriotism, and profound religious convictions are nobly blended. He is at his best in his lyrics; and in the last of these, an ode to Leo XIII, he pleads for a reconciliation between Church and State, the wedding of the Cross of Christ with the Savoyard cross on the national banner. Since the unification of Italy, more has been accomplished in economics and in social science than in pure literature. One modern Italian, indeed, takes his place among the foremost European poets of the nineteenth century — Giosuè Carducci (1836-1906). A bitter opponent of the Christian ideal and a strenuous democrat, Carducci has given poetic form to the anti-clerical side of the Revolution that has made Italy one, and has expressed the paganism that is latent in the Italian genius. In his masterpiece, the "Odi Barbare", he casts his essentially modern matter into new rhythmical forms modelled upon the lyrical metres of the classical poets of Greece and Rome. His prose writings and professorial teaching have been influential in creating a high standard of literary criticism and scholarship in Italy. In this latter field much, too, is due to the veteran historian Pasquale Villan (born 1827). Of living poets (in 1909) the place of honour belongs to Giovanni Pascoli (born 1855), whom the contemplation of nature and the life of the peasants in the fields inspire to short poems that are classical in their beauty. Alike in verse and in prose, Gabriele d'Annunzio (born 1864) has perverted extraordinary talents to the basest literary uses; it is impossible to believe that his gorgeous rhetoric, with its elaboration of sensual passion and its gross obscenity, can win any permanence. The mantle of Manzoni has fallen upon the pupil of Zanella. Antonio Fogazzaro (born 1842), a Catholic and an idealist, whose romances tower above the rest of modern Italian fiction, and of which the keynote is found in the author's conviction that the one mission of art is to strengthen the Divine element in man.

Archivio Glottologico Italiano (Rome, quarterly); MORANDI, Origine della lingua italiana (Città di Castello, 1892); CAIX, Le origini della lingua poetica italiana (Florence, 1880); MONACI, Crestomazia italiana dei primi secoli (Città di Castello, 1889-97); TIRABOSCHI, Storia della letteratura italiana; TORRACA, Studi sulla lirica italiana del Ducento (Bologna, 1902); BANTOLI, Storia della letteratura italiana (Florence, 1878-84); GASPARY, Geschichte der italienischen Literatur (Berlin, 1885-88); tr. into Italian, with additions, by ZINGARELLI AND ROSSI (Turin, 1887-1901); OELSNER, Gaspary's History of Early Italian Literature to the Death of Dante (London, 1901); D'ANCONA AND BACCI, Manuale della letteratura italiana (Florence, 1892-94); FORNACIARI, Disegno storico della letteratura italiana (Florence, 1898); D'ANCONA, Origini del teatro italiano (Turin, 1891); BURCKHARDT, Die Cultur der Renaissance in Italien (new ed., Leipzig, 1901); VOIGT, Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Alterthums (Berlin, 1859); Italian tr., enlarged, by VALBUSA (Florence, 1888-97); SYMONDS, The Renaissance in Italy: Italian literature (London, 1881); DORNIS, La poésie italienne contemporaine (Paris, 1898); GARNETT, History of Italian Literature (London, 1898); KING AND OKEY, Italy To-day (London, 1901); GREENE, Italian Lyrists of To-day (London, 1893).
A comprehensive literary history, by various hands, is now in course of publication at Milan: NOVATI, Origini della lingua; ZINGARELLI, Dante; VOLPI, Il Trecento; ROSSI, Il Quattrocento; FLAMINI, Il Cinquecento; BELLONI, Il Seicento; CONCARI, Il Settecento; MAZZONI, L'Ottocento. The quarterly Giornale Storico della letteratura italiana, edited by NOVATI AND RENIER (Turin), is indispensable to students.

EDMUND G. GARDNER.

Ite Missa Est

This is the versicle chanted in the Roman Rite by the deacon at the end of Mass, after the Post-Communions. It is our formula of the old dismissal (apolysis) still contained in all liturgies. It is undoubtedly one of the most ancient Roman formulæ, as may be seen from its archaic and difficult form. All the three oldest Roman Ordines contain it. "Ordo Rom. I" says: "When the prayer [Post-Communion] is over, that one of the deacons appointed by the archdeacon looks towards the pontiff to receive a sign from him and then says to the people: Ite missa est. They answer: Deo gratias (ed. Atchley, London, 1905, p. 144. See also "Ordo Rom. II", 15; "Ordo Rom. III", 18). The medieval commentators were much exercised to explain the meaning of the strange expression. Durandus (Rationale, IV, 57) suggests several interpretations. It has been thought that a word is omitted: Ite, missa est finita; or est is taken absolutely, as meaning "exists", is now an accomplished fact". The real explanation seems to lie rather in interpreting correctly the word missa. Before it became the technical name of the holy Liturgy in the Roman Rite, it meant simply "dismissal". The form missa for missio is like that of collecta (for collectio), ascensa (ascensio), etc. So Ite missa est should be translated "Go it is the dismissal." (See Florus the Deacon, "De expositione Missæ", P.L., CIX, 72.) On certain days which have the character of fasting or penance, this versicle is replaced by the words Benedicamus Domino. The fact is noticed by medieval liturgists (e.g., Durandus, IV, 57 -- cf. "Micrologus", xxxiv; etc.) since about the eleventh century. The three Roman Ordines before the tenth century know only the form Ite missa est. The explanation is that originally the people were not dismissed on such days, but stayed in church for further prayers after Mass, suitable to fasting days (so Bona, "Rerum liturg. libri duo", II, xx, n.3). This is confirmed by a now extinct medieval custom of singing Benedicamus Domino at the end of midnight Mass at Christmas, because Lauds follow at once (Durandus, op. cit., IV, 57, §7). So the idea obtained that Ite missa est implies a festal Mass. Our present rule that it follows the Gloria in Excelsis (and therefore the Te Deum in the Office) is noted in "Micrologus" (xlvi). Either versicle was always answered by the obvious response Deo gratias, implying thanks that the Sacrifice has been offered -- is now complete. At Requiems (since they have no Gloria) Ite missa est is not said. In this case the versicle is Requiescant in pace. The response is Amen. John Beleth (twelfth century) says that this arose "only from a general custom" ("Rat. div. offic." in P.L., CCII, 49). Till about the twelfth century the Ite missa est really ended the liturgy, as its form implies. In the First Roman Ordo, immediately after it the text continues: "Then the seven candlesticks are carried before the pontiff . . . to the sacristy" (ed. Atchley, p. 146). It was not till the sixteenth century (Missal of Pius V) that the accretions to the Mass that had gradually been introduced (Placeat, blessing, last Gospel -- all originally private prayers) were definitely recognised as part of the liturgy to be said at the altar.

The corresponding dismissals in the other Western rites are: at Milan, V. "Procedamus in pace." R. "In nomine Christi"; Mozarabic, "Solemnia completa sunt in nomine D. N. I. C: votum nostrum sit acceptum cum pace." R. "Deo gratias" ("Missale Mixtum", P. L., LXXXV, 120). Of the Eastern rites that of the "Apostolic Constitutions" dismisses the people with the form: "Go in peace" (Brightman, "Eastern Liturgies", p. 27). The Antiochene and Byzantine Liturgies end with the deacon's announcement: "Let us go forth in peace." R. "In the name of the Lord"; and then a short "prayer of dismissal" said by the celebrant (op. cit., 67, 397); so also the Alexandrine Rite (ibid., 142): while the Nestorians have only a prayer and blessing by the celebrant (ibid., 303).

Present Ritual

At high Mass, as soon as the last Post-Communion is ended, the celebrant and ministers go to the middle of the altar and stand in line. The celebrant turning to the people sings Dominus vobiscum (the usual introduction to any announcement), and remains facing them. When the choir has answered, the deacon turns round and, with hands joined, sings Ite missa est to its proper tone, the choir answering Deo gratias to the same notes. In the former Missal ten melodies were provided for various solemnities. The idea is to sing this last versicle to the tone of the first Kyrie eleison, so that Mass ends with the same chant as that with which it began. To carry this out more completely the new Vatican Missal provides nineteen tones, most of them very elaborate (for Ite missa est and Benedicamus Domino), corresponding to the various masses in the Kyriale". The tone of the first Kyrie should always be used. In figured masses the Ite missa est should be sung to the tone of the plain-song mass provided for the occasion. From Holy Saturday till White Saturday (Sabbatum in albis), inclusively, two Alleluias are added to both versicle and response; in this case they have a special melody (the first in the Missal), which does not correspond to the Kyrie. At Masses that have no Gloria in excelsis (therefore in the Office de tempore of Advent and Lent, vigils, and ember-days, except Maundy Thursday and Holy Saturday; at Votive Masses, except those of the B.V.M. when celebrated on Saturday, Votive Masses of Angels, and, for a grave cause, when violet vestments are not used in the Mass -- "Rubr. Gen." of the Missal, viii, 4) the celebrant turns back to the altar after the Dominus vobiscum, and the deacon, facing the altar, sings, Benedicamus Domino, to the same tone (of the Kyrie); the answer is the same, Deo gratias. At all Requiems in the same manner he sings, to the tone provided in the Missal. Requiescant in pace (in the plural, even when Mass is said for one person -- S. R. C., 22 Jan., 1678). R. Amen. As soon as the deacon has finished his versicle the celebrant turns back to the altar and waits; the deacon and subdeacon kneel on the suppedaneum. When the answer of the choir is finished the celebrant says the prayer Placeat and then gives the blessing. The celebrant himself says Benedicamus Domino or Requiescant in pace in a low voice while the deacon sings, because these are prayers. He does not say Ite missa est, because this is an announcement to the people. At a sung Mass the celebrant sings the deacon's part, at a low Mass he says it. Otherwise there is no change.

BERNOLD OF CONSTANCE in the "Micrologus" in "P.L"., CLI, 973-1022, xlvi; JOHN BELETH, "Rationale divinorum officiorum" in "P.L"., CII, 14-166, xlix; DURANDUS, "Rationale", IV, 57, and all the medieval commentators: BONA, "Rerum liturgicarum libri duo," xx; BENEDICT XIV, "De S. Missæ Sacrificio", II, xxiv; GIHR, "Das heilige Messopfer" (Freiburg im Br., 1897), 714-17; DE HERDT, "Sacræ Liturgiæ praxis "(Louvain, 1894), I, 481-83.

ADRIAN FORTESCUE

Itineraria

(MEDIEVAL CHRISTIAN GUIDE-BOOKS: Lat. iter, gen. itineris, journey)

Under this term are comprised two kinds of works: travellers' relations describing the places and countries visited by them, together with such incidents of the voyage as are worth noting; and compilations intended to furnish information for the guidance of travellers, i.e. works which we now distinguish as books of travel and guide-books. Nearly all the itineraria of the Middle Ages have for their subject the journey to the Holy Land and neighbouring countries. In those days, when travelling was beset with difficulties and dangers, long journeys were rarely undertaken except under the impulse of religious motives. The devout were especially attracted by the places hallowed by the presence of the Saviour or famous in sacred story; and, because of the unusual interest attaching to these holy places, many wrote an account of their pilgrimage, while others gathered the information furnished by these writers for the use of future pilgrims or for the instruction of those who could not undertake the voyage. Though a number of these works, especially of the older ones, have perished, an extensive literature remains, and it is of the greatest value for the history of the Church and Christian archæology as well as for the study of the Bible. The relations of pilgrims, who speak as eye-witnesses, are naturally of greater importance than the works of mere compilers.

The oldest extant pilgrim's relation is the "Itinerarium Burdigalense" — or "Itinerarium Hierosolymitanum", as it is also called — by an anonymous writer commonly known as "the Pilgrim of Bordeaux", who visited the Holy Land in 333-4, going by land through Northern Italy and the valley of the Danube to Constantinople, thence through Asia Minor and Syria, and returning by way of Macedonia, Otranto, Rome, and Milan. The report of his journey outside Palestine is little more than a dry enumeration of the cities through which he passed, and of the places where he stopped or changed horses, with their respective distances. For the Holy Land he also briefly notes the important events which he believes to be connected with the various places. In this he falls into some strange blunders, as when, for instance, he places the Transfiguration on Mount Olivet. Such errors, however, are also found in subsequent writers. His description of Jerusalem, though short, contains information of great value for the topography of the city.

Very different from the above is the account of her pilgrimage written by a nun for the sisters of her community towards the end of the same century (c. 385). Gamurrini, who discovered it in the library of Arezzo in 1884, attributed it to Saint (?) Silvia of Aquitaine, the sister of Rufinus, prefect of the prætorium under Theodosius the Great and his successor Arcadius, whence it became known as the "Peregrinatio Sanctæ Silviæ". Dom M. Férotin, however, later showed (Rev. des Questions Historiques, Oct., 1903) that the real authoress is a native of Galicia, Spain, whose name is variously given as Etheria, Echeria, and Egeria. She seems to have been a lady of importance with friends at court, possibly a relative of Theodosius himself (who was a Galician). Wherever she went, the clergy, even bishops, attended her and acted as her guides, while imperial officers gave her a military escort where the road was unsafe. During her pilgrimage of over three years, she visited Western and Eastern Palestine, Idumea, Sinai, Egypt, Asia Minor, Syria, and Mesopotamia. She is a keen observer, and writes with a certain charm in spite of her crude, provincial Latin. The work, unfortunately, exists only in a fragmentary state, though the lacunæ at the beginning are partly filled up by extracts found in the treatise "De Locis. Sanctis" of Peter the Deacon, a writer of the twelfth century (Geyer, pp. 107-21). While it furnishes very valuable topographical details about Jerusalem, its description of the churches and of the religious ceremonial then in use makes it of special interest to the liturgiologist. Its value in this respect is well brought out by Dom Cabrol in his work "La Peregrinatio Silviæ: Les églises de Jérusalem, la discipline et la liturgie au IV ^e siècle" (Paris, 1895). The text of the "Peregrinatio" has often been edited and studied. A study from a philological point of view was published in the United States by Professor Edw. A. Bechtel — "Sanctæ Silviæ Peregrinatio. The Text and a Study of the Latinity" (Chicago, 1902). The Spanish nun Egeria (for this is probably the correct form of the name) was followed in 386 by two other ladies of quality, the Roman matron St. Paula and her daughter Eustochium. The account of their pilgrimage through Palestine and Egypt, written by St. Jerome after Paula's death (Epist. cviii ad Eustoch.), was intended to make known the virtues of the holy pilgrim, rather than to describe the places she visited; still it contains much useful matter.

No pilgrim's narrative of the fifth century is extant. The author of the "Epistola ad Faustum", or "Epitome de aliquibus locis sanctis", commonly ascribed to St. Eucherius, Bishop of Lyons (died a.d. 450), obtained his information by reading the accounts of, and conversing with, pilgrims. The relation of Theodosius "De situ Terræ Sanctæ", discovered in 1864, belongs to the first half of the sixth century (c. 530). It is written somewhat after the manner of the "Itinerarium Burdigalense", with the valuable feature of indicating the distances between the different sites of the Holy City. Of Theodosius himself nothing certain is known. Little more is known of Antoninus of Piacenza, who made the pilgrimage about 570. In manuscripts he is sometimes styled Antoninus the Martyr, through ignorant confusion of the writer with the martyr St. Antoninus who is venerated at Piacenza. He is the last writer who saw Palestine before the Moslem conquest. Although he covered in his travels nearly the same extensive territory as the Spanish nun, his work contains but few details not found in other writers; it is, moreover, marred by gross errors and by fabulous tales which betray the most naive credulity. A century later (c. 670) the French bishop Arculf was wrecked on the western coast of Britain after visiting the Holy Land. To this accident we owe St. Adamnan's "De locis sanctis libri tres". Having been hospitably received by St. Adamnan, then abbot of the famous Monastery of Iona, Arculf described to him his voyage and drew for him the plans of some of the churches of Jerusalem. Adamnan wrote down the narrative on tablets of wax, and later edited it in three books, adding, however, matter derived from other sources. The work is important, as it contains the first description of Jerusalem after the changes wrought by the Persian conquest under Chosroes (614), and the Arab occupation under Omar (637). It was long accepted as the authority on Palestine. Venerable Bede's "De Locis Sanctis" is mainly taken from Adamnan's work. St. Willibald, nephew of St. Boniface and Bishop of Eichstätt, had travelled in his youth for eight years (721-729), three of which he spent in the Holy Land. In his later days he related his life and travels to the nuns of the monastery of Heidenheim. Two reports of his story have come down to us. The first, "Hodœporicon Sancti Willibaldi", was written (c. 785) by a relative of the saint, a nun of the monastery, from notes which she took while he was speaking. The other, "Itinerarium Sancti Willibaldi", was probably composed from memory, after Willibald's death, by one of the two deacons who accompanied him in his visits to the monastery. Though better in style, it is less reliable than the first and contains details which the writer obtained elsewhere. The last itinerarium of any consequence before the Crusades is that of the French monk Bernard, who with two of his fellow-religious visited Egypt and Palestine (868-9). He is the first to make mention of the holy fire which is now such a conspicuous feature in the Greek celebration of Holy Saturday in the church of the Holy Sepulchre. Of the unimportant works of the next two centuries, the relation of Ingulf, Abbot of Croydon, may be mentioned, because it shows to what dangers pilgrims were exposed at that time. Of the seven thousand persons with whom he started on his pilgrimage (1064) more than three thousand perished.

With the beginning of the Crusades the works on Palestine become very numerous, and after the loss of the country by the Latins they increase rather than diminish. Those which relate to the events of the crusading period do not concern us here. They may be found in such collections as Bongars, "Gesta Dei per Francos" (Hanau, 1611), "Recueil des historiens des croisades" (Paris, 1844-86), and "Publications de la Société de 1'Orient Latin, Série Historique" (Geneva, 1877-85). Of the others, a long list of which is given by Tobler and Röhricht, only the more important can be noticed. The first of these is the relation of the Russian abbot (hequmenos) Daniel, the earliest extant record of a Russian pilgrimage to the Holy Land. He came there shortly after the Christian occupation (c. 1106), and visited most of the holy places and sanctuaries, with a monk of the monastery of St. Sabas as guide. His description of what he himself saw is generally accurate, and he gives a fair picture of the country a few years after it was taken by the Crusaders. The Russian text with a French translation was published by Noroff (St. Petersburg, 1864); an English translation is given in "Palestine Pilgrims' Texts". The best medieval work on Palestine is beyond doubt the "Descriptio Terræ Sanctæ" of Burchard (also wrongly called Brocard, Bocard, etc.) de Monte Sion, a German Dominican, who spent ten years in the country (c. 1274-84). Burchard is an observer with something like the modern spirit of exactness, and is as careful in relating as he is exact in observing, distinguishing fact from mere conjecture, and what he has himself seen from what he takes on the authority of others. However, being the child of an uncritical age, he records many a legend. To the description of the land he adds a description of its fauna and flora, and a disquisition on the various religions professed by its inhabitants. The work was very popular in the Middle Ages, and because of its great value has often been printed. Burchard de Monte Sion must not be confounded with Burchard of Strasburg, a pilgrim of the twelfth century (1175), a fragment of whose itinerarium is extant.

Another Dominican, the Florentine Ricoldo da Monte di Croce, deserves to be noticed, less for the account of his visit to the Holy Places (1288-9) than for the interesting relation of his mission to Bagdad, where the Dominicans were then labouring for the conversion of the Tatars. His work consists of two parts: the first is the journal of his pilgrimage through Palestine, in which the exercises of piety of the band of pilgrims with which he was associated and his own personal emotions occupy a large place; the second contains a description of his adventures on his journey to Persia, and of the manners, customs, and religion of the Tatars. It is owing to this second part that the work was soon translated into Italian and French. The Latin text of the "Itinerarium" was first published by Laurent in his "Peregrinatores medii ævi quatuor" (Leipzig, 1864; 2nd ed., 1873). For an extensive notice of Ricoldo, see "Rev. Bibl.", II (1893), pp. 44, 182, 584. "De Itinere Terræ Sanctæ" by Ludolph, pastor of Suchem in the Diocese of Paderborn, is considered the best relation of the fourteenth century. The author spent five years in Palestine (1336-41). John Poloner — by some said to be a German, by others a Pole — is, as far as we know, the first pilgrim who drew a map (now unfortunately lost) of the Holy Land. His "Peregrinatio ad Terram Sanctam" (1422) is in many places copied from Burchard de Monte Sion. The best work of the fifteenth century is the voluminous "Evagatorium in Terræ Sanctæ, Arabiæ et Egypti peregrinationem" of the Dominican Felix Faber, or Fabri. The author, who was twice in the East (1480 and 1483), is somewhat credulous, but reliable in what he himself observed. For travels to the Far East during medieval times, see ODORIC OF PORDENONE, BLESSED; RUBRUK, WILLIAM OF; POLO, MARCO.

TEXTS. — Library of the Palestine Pilgrims' Text Society (London, 1897); GEYER, Itinera Hierosolymitana sœculi IV-VIII in Corpus Scrip. Eccles. Latin., XXXVIII (Vienna, 1898); Publications de la Société de l'Orient Latin, Série Géograph. (Geneva, 1880-5); Itinerarium Burdig. in P. L., VIII, 783 sqq.; Ep. ad Eustoch., ibid., XXII, 878 sqq.; Itiner. Antonini, ibid., LXXII, 890 sqq.; ADAMNAN, De situ Terrœ Sanctœ, ibid., LXXXVIII, 779 sqq.; Itiner. Bernardi, ibid., CXXI, 569 sqq.; Hodœporicon S. Willibaldi in Acta SS., July, II, 501. See TOBLER, Bibliographia geographica Palœstinœ (Leipzig, 1867); RÖHRICHT, Bibliotheca grogr. Palœstinœ (Berlin, 1890).

F. BECHTEL.

Itinerarium

A form of prayer used by monks and clerics before setting out on a journey, and for that reason usually printed at the end of the Breviary, where it can be conveniently found when required. Most probably the use of such prayers originated in monastic observance. The early rules of the Fathers of the Desert — St. Anthony and St. Pachomius — as well as that of St. Basil, legislate minutely as to the behaviour of monks when travelling, and impose various restrictions and duties upon them. St. Benedict, whose rule, more than any other, has exerted so wide an influence over all ecclesiastical customs, monastic and otherwise, in the Western Church, laid down (chap. lxvii) that when any of the brethren were to be sent on a journey, they should, before setting out, commend themselves to the prayers of the abbot and community, by whom they were to be daily remembered during their absence from the monastery. According to monastic tradition, if the absence were to be only a short one, i. e. if they were to return the same or the following day, they merely asked the abbot's blessing, usually at the conclusion of one of the canonical hours, and then requested the prayers of the community.

But if the journey was, to occupy a longer time, a more solemn form of itinerarium was customary. Kneeling or lying prostrate at the altar steps, some versicles and prayers were recited over them by the abbot, who then dismissed the travellers with his blessing and the kiss of peace. This was most likely the origin of the itinerarium as we have it at present. The constitutions of the various orders and congregations usually legislate for the particular prayers to be used by their members before a journey, and the duty of a community to pray for those who may be travelling is fulfilled at the present day by the versicle "Divinum auxilium", said for absent brethren at the end of each of the canonical hours. The inclusion of the itinerarium in the secular Roman Breviary indicates that its use is at least recommended to all clerics, though not obligatory. The "Cæremoniale Episcoporum" directs that a prelate ought to recite it with his chaplains or household before commencing a Journey; and Gavanti mentions an ancient pontifical containing a longer form of itinerarium for the use of prelates. The usual form consists of the canticle "Benedictus" with antiphon, certain versicles, and several collects. Two of these latter are very ancient, being found in the Gregorian Sacramentary. In some modern editions of the monastic Breviary a shorter form of itinerarium is also given, for use "ante ambulationem extra monasterium".

DURAND, Rationale Divini Officii (Venice, 1568); HAEFTEN, Disquisitiones Monast. (Antwerp, 1644); GAVANTI, Thesaurus Sacrorum Rituum (Venice, 1744); MARTÈNE, De Antiquis Monachorum Ritibus (Lyons, 1790).

G. CYPRIAN ALSTON.

Franz Ittenbach

Historical painter; born at Königswinter, at the foot of the Drachenfels, in 1813; died at Düsseldorf, 1879. He was a pupil at the age of nineteen at the Academy of Düsseldorf, receiving also private lessons from its president, Schadow. He was an exceedingly religious man, and associated with himself three of his friends and fellow-students, Karl and Andreas Müller, and Ernst Deger, and the four men travelled about in Germany, studying and painting together. He persistently declined any commissions for mythological or pagan subjects, and as a rule devoted his energies exclusively to church decoration, preceding the execution of his greatest works by devout religious exercises, including confession and communion. His finest paintings are to be found at Bonn, in the church of St. Remigius, and in Breslau in a church dedicated to the same saint. There is also a remarkable "Holy Family" dated 1861, painted for Prince Liechtenstein in his private chapel near Vienna, and many other works by him are in various Catholic churches in Germany. His only important fresco was painted in 1844 in a church at Remagen. He was a very popular painter in court circles, a member of most of the European academies, and the recipient of many medals and decorations. His colouring is correct and delicate, and yet of remarkable brilliance, and his pictures have a suave and attractive religious aspect and create a strong emotion in the minds of those who gaze at them. He painted a few portraits, but they were unimportant; his main work was in his altar-pieces.

See various numbers of the Zeitschrift für Bildende Kunst (1879 and later years).

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON.

St. Ives

(St. Yves)

St. Ives, born at Kermartin, near Tréguier, Brittany, 17 October, 1253; died at Louannee, 19 May, 1303, was the son of Helori, lord of Kermartin, and Azo du Kenquis. In 1267 Ives was sent to the University of Paris, where he graduated in civil law. He went to Orléans in 1277 to study canon law. On his return to Brittany having received minor orders he was appointed "official", or ecclesiastical judge, of the archdeanery of Rennes (1280); meanwhile he studied Scripture, and there are strong reasons for holding that he joined the Franciscan Tertiaries sometime later at Guingamp. He was soon invited by the Bishop of Tréguier to become his "official", and accepted the offer (1284). He displayed great zeal and rectitude in the discharge of his duty and did not hesitate to resist the unjust taxation of the king, which he considered an encroachment on the rights of the Church; by his charity he gained the title of advocate and patron of the poor. Having been ordained he was appointed to the parish of Tredrez in 1285 and eight years later to Louannee, where he died. He was buried in Tréguier, and was canonized in 1347 by Clement VI, his feast being kept on 19 May. He is the patron of lawyers, though not, it is said, their model, for — "Sanctus Ivo erat Brito, Advocatus et non latro, Res miranda populo."

Acta SS., May, V, 248; Life by DE LA HAYE (Morlaix, 1623); and by NORBERT (Paris, 1892); DANIEL, Monuments originaux (St-Brieux, 1887); Analecta Bolland., II, 324-40; VIII, 201-3; XVII, 259.

A.A. MACERLEAN

Levi Silliman Ives

Born at Meriden, Connecticut, U.S.A., 16 September, 1797; d. at New York, 13 October, 1867. He was one of the most distinguished converts to the Church made in the United States through the influence of the Tractarian Movement of 1848-49. The war of 1812 with England broke out while he was at school, and he joined the army, serving for a year. His further education he received at Hamilton College. In 1823 he was ordained a minister of the Protestant Episcopal Church, and officiated at several charges in New York and Pennsylvania until 1831, when he was elected Bishop of North Carolina. Here he took great interest in the education and religious training of the coloured people of that section. Deeply interested by the Oxford Movement, he founded at Valle Crucis in North Carolina a religious community, called the "Brotherhood of the Holy Cross". The members, a few clergymen and zealous laymen, observed a community rule and went about preaching Tractarian ideas. So warm was the advocacy of the Oxford theories by Bishop Ives that he was arraigned for them before the convention of the Episcopal Church. His explanations were accepted for a time, but the "Brotherhood of the Holy Cross" was dissolved. In 1852 he went to Rome and made his submission to the pope, and thus, as he said himself, "abandoned a position in which he had acted as a minister of the Protestant Episcopal Church for more than thirty years, and as a bishop of the same for more than twenty, and sought late in life admission as a layman into the Holy Catholic Church, with no prospect before him, but simply peace of conscience and the salvation of his soul." His wife, who was a daughter of the Protestant Bishop Hobart, also became a convert. Returning to the United States he acted as professor of rhetoric at St. Joseph's Seminary, New York, and lectured to the pupils of several convents, concerning himself also in charity work. In the latter field he established the Catholic Protectory in New York, and was the first president of that institution.

      Ives, Trials of a Mind in its Progress to the Catholic Faith (Boston, 1853); Shea, The Catholic Church in the U. S. (New York, 1856); Appleton's Cyclopædia of Amer. Biog., s. v.

THOMAS F. MEEHAN

St. Ivo of Chartres

(Yvo, Yves).

One of the most notable bishops of France at the time of the Investiture struggles and the most important canonist before Gratian in the Occident, born of a noble family about 1040; died in 1116. From the neighbourhood of Beauvais, his native country, he went for his studies first to Paris and thence to the Abbey of Bee in Normandy, at the same time as Anselm of Canterbury, to attend the lectures given by Lanfranc. About 1080 he became, at the desire of his bishop, prior of the canons of St-Quentin at Beauvais. He was then one of the best teachers in France, and so prepared himself to infuse a new life into the celebrated schools of Chartres, of which city he was appointed bishop in 1090, his predecessor, Geoffroy, having been deposed for simony. His episcopal government, at first opposed by the tenants of Geoffroy, ranged over a period of twenty-five years. No man, perhaps, is better portrayed in his writing than is Ivo in his letters and sermons; in both he appears as a man always faithful to his duties, high-minded, full of zeal and piety, sound in his judgments, a keen jurist, straight-forward, mindful of others' rights, devoted to the papacy and to his country, at the same time openly disapproving of what he considered wrong. This explains why he has been sometimes quoted as a patron of Gallican Liberties and looked upon by Flaccus Illyricus as one of the "witnesses to the truth" in his "Catalogus". Very often Ivo was consulted on theological, liturgical, political, and especially canonical matters. Of his life little more is known than may be gathered from his letters. As bishop he strongly opposed Philip the First, who wished to desert Bertha, his legitimate wife, and marry Bertrade of Anjou (1092); his opposition gained him a prison cell. In the Investiture struggle then raging in France, and especially in Germany, Ivo represented the moderate party. Though he died too early to witness the final triumph of his ideas with the Concordat of Worms (1122), his endeavours and his doctrines may be said to have paved the way for an agreement satisfactory to both sides. His views on the subject are fully expressed in several of his letters, especially those of the years 1099, 1106, and 1111 (Epistolae, lx, clxxxix, ccxxxii, ccxxxvi, ccxxxvii, etc.); these letters are still of interest as to the question of the relationship between Church and State, the efficacy of sacraments administered by heretics, the sin of simony, etc.

Works

The printed works of Ivo of Chartres may be arranged into three categories; canonical writings, letters, and sermons.

Canonical writings

For the canonical works cf. CANONS, COLLECTIONS OF ANCIENT, sub-title Collection of Yvo of Chartres. Suffice it to mention here the "Decretum" in seventeen books and the "Panormia" in eight books, the latter being undoubtedly the work of Ivo himself, with material taken from the former. Both of these were composed before 1096, but the "Panormia" enjoyed a far greater success than the "Decretum"; we immediately find it at Durham and elsewhere in England, at Naumburg in Germany, etc. One of the improvements of this collection on the works of Burchard of Worms (d. 1025) consists in this: that Ivo gives a far greater number of canons, adding to those of Burchard canons taken from Italian sources. As may be easily seen, theology and canon law are not yet precisely marked off from one another"--a defect which holds also for previous collections; the chapters on the Trinity, Incarnation, and especially the sacraments are worth seeing in this connection. But the most important feature of Ivo's work is perhaps his preface, "Prologus", which give new rules for solving the old problem of the discrepancies occurring in the texts of the Fathers and the councils.

Letters

The letters of Ivo, 288 in number (Merlet has added 40 more), from which we gather nearly all that we know of his life, are in the edition of Migne together with those of his correspondents. Many are of a special interest as to the political and religious questions of the time; not a few are answers to difficulties referring to moral, liturgical, or canonical matters; some discuss problems of dogmatics. The popularity of these letters was very great, as may be gathered from the fact that they appear in the catalogues of many monastic libraries; numerous manuscripts are still extant.

Sermons

The twenty-five sermons are sometimes treatises on liturgical, dogmatic, or moral questions and bear witness to the great piety and science of Bishop Ivo. The "Micrologus" which has been attributed to him belongs to Bernold of Constance. Other works, such as the "Tripartita" (collection of canons), "Commentary on the Psalms", etc., are still unprinted.

Influence of writings The influence of Ivo's works may be seen in the writings of nearly all the theologians and canonists of his day and for some time afterwards: Alger of Liege and Hugh of St. Victor, not to mention others, depend largely on the materials put together in the "Decretum" and "Panormia"; and Hugh has also borrowed from Ivo's sermons on Holy orders, dedication of churches, etc. The connection of ideas between the "Prologus" and the scheme of Abelard's "Sic et Non" or Gratian's "Concordantia" is obvious. The saint's feast is kept, since 1570, on 20 May; it is not known when he was canonized.

Ivo's works are found in P.L., CLXI, Decretum and Panormia: CLXII, Letters and Sermons in Mon. Germ. His.: Lites Imperatorum et Pontificum, II, 640-57; MERLET, Lettres de Saint Ives eveque de Chartres (1885); FOURNIER, Les collections canoniques attribuees a Yves de Chartres in Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des Chartres (1896 et 1897); IDEM, Yves de Chartres et le Droit canonique in Revuedes Questions Historiques (1898); Histoire litteraire de la France, X, 102-47.

J. DE GHELLINCK

Ivory

Ivory (French ivoire; Italian avorio; Latin ebur), dentine, the tusks of the elephant, hippopotamus, walrus, and other animals: a tough and elastic substance, of a creamy white, taking a high and lasting polish, largely employed in the arts since pre-historic times, and used extensively in making or adorning ecclesiastical objects by the primitive and medieval Christians. In the museums of Europe there are examples of pre-historic incised and carved ivories, and also many specimens of Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman bas-reliefs, statues, diptychs, plaques, and caskets. The classical authors frequently allude to ivory, and the Old Testament terms with references to its employment, even using its attributes as poetic qualifications, in the same way as the church does to-day in the Litany of Loretto ("Tower of ivory"). As soon as the Christians were free to display the symbols of their faith and illustrate its history pictorially, they adopted the art then in vogue for this purpose, and among their first aesthetic expressions, carved ivory diptychs were the most important; they followed closely the designs used in consular diptychs, excepting that symbolism and poetic imagery took the place of representations of mythological subjects. They consisted of two plates of ivory, hinged so as to fold together like a book; the inside of each leaf was slightly counter- sunk, with a narrow raised margin, so as to hold the wax that received the writing, while the outside of the leaves was profusely adorned with carvings. They were used for various purposes, such as listing the names of the baptized, bishops, martyrs, saints, and benefactors, and of the living and the dead who were to be prayed for.

That these diptychs suggested ivory plaques for book covers, reliquary doors and triptych shrines, is obvious; hundreds of plaques are in existence, dating from the time of Constantine to the sixteenth century, and many of them are exquisite works of art; in the British Museum there is one, six inches by four, divided into thirty panels, less than an inch square, and each compartment contains a scene from the life of the Blessed virgin, all being beautiful examples of ivory sculpture. Another use the early Christians found for ivory was the making of cylindrical pyxes from a cross section of the elephant tusk; upon the covers, they carved figures of Our Lord, St. Peter, and St. Paul, and on the side the Apostles and biblical subjects. Again, somewhat later, no doubt remembering that Solomon made "a great throne of ivory" (III Kings 10:18), they overlaid their episcopal chairs with carved ivory tablets, as may be seen at Ravenna in the chair of St. Maximian, archbishop of that city (546). After the fifth century, possibly before, ivory crosiers were in use; eighty or more of them are now in existence, including those said to have belonged to a number of the saints. At the same time liturgical combs of ivory were in use. A beautiful example, the comb of St. Lupus (623), is in the treasury of St-Etienne at Lens. Representations of the Crucifixion in ivory upon various objects, are common, but not the crucifix. Most of the crucifixes date from the seventeenth century, and of these there are many, but of the earlier ones, only five have survived the action of time and the fanaticism of the Reformers. During the whole of the Middle Ages ivory was extensively used for paxes (instrumenta pacis), tabernacles, portable altars, caskets, holy-water buckets, statuettes, rosary-beads, seals, and the decoration of ecclesiastical furniture.

CARYL COLEMAN

Diocese of Ivrea

Suffragan of Turin, Northern Italy. The city is situated on the right bank of the Dora Baltea and has a fine view of the Great St. Bernard. A city of the Salassi, it received a Roman colony in 90 B.C. In the Lombard period it was the seat of a dukedom. In 870 Emperor Guy of Spoleto gave the Mark of Ivrea to his brother Anscarius, whose descendants, especially Berengarius II (950) and Arduinus (1002), aspired to the title of King of Italy. Soon afterwards Ivrea had to contend vigorously for its communal freedom against the marquesses of Monferrat. Finally, in 1248, Frederick II gave it to the Count of Savoy. During the war between France and Spain for the possession of Lombardy there was, for a long time, a Spanish garrison in the fortress of Ivrea. By the Peace of Cateau-Cambrésis (1559) it was restored to the House of Savoy. It was besieged and taken by the French in 1554, 1641, 1704, 1796. In 1800 Lannes put the Austrians to flight at the pass of the Chiusella. There is a noteworthy festival at Ivrea, the burning of the scarlo (a tree decked out with fireworks), the origin of which is unknown. Legend traces the cathedral back to the middle of the fifth century, when the ancient temple of Apollo is said to have been consecrated to the service of the true God. It contains a valuable painting by Perugino. The episcopal see is said to have been established by St. Eusebius of Vercelli about the middle of the fourth century. The first historically certain bishop is Eulogius (c. 451). Among the other bishops were St. Veremundus (969); Hugo (1053), a son of King Arduinus; the Cistercian Peter (1305), afterwards transferred to Salonica; Alberto Gonzaga (1288); Giuseppe di Ceva (1614), who restored the episcopal palace and adorned it with paintings; also the present (1909) Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Richelny, made Bishop of Ivrea in 1886. The diocese has 138 parishes, with 220,000 souls; 4 religious houses of men and 10 of women; 6 schools for boys, and 5 schools for girls, and a Catholic paper.

SAVIO, Gli antichi vescovi d'Italia; ANON., Cenni storici sulla provincia d'Ivrea (1843); SAROGLIA, Memorie storiche della Chiesa d'Ivrea (Ivrea, 1881); IDEM, Eporedia sacra (Ivrea, 1887).

U. BENIGNI

Fernando de Alba Ixtlilxochitl

Born 1568; died 1648. The most illustrious of the native Mexican historians and the great-grandson of Don Fernando Ixtlilxochitl, fifth son of Netzahualpilli, King of Texcoco, and of his wife Doña Beatriz Panantzin, daughter of Cuitlahuac, last but one of the Aztec emperors. He was educated in the college of Santa Cruz de Tlaltelolco, but, notwithstanding his illustrious birth, education, and ability, he lived for a long time in dire poverty, and the greater part of his works were written to relieve his wants. He gives a detailed account of the important part played by his great-grandfather Don Fernando in the conquest of Mexico and the pacification of the Indians of New Spain, praising him in every possible way, and blaming the ingratitude of the conquerors. "His descendants", says the writer, "were left poor and neglected, with scarcely a roof to shelter them, and even this is gradually being taken from them." In "La Entreaty de los Españoles en Texcoco" he again remarks: "The sons, daughters, grandchildren, and relations of Netzahualcoyotl and Netzahualpilli are ploughing and digging to earn their daily bread and to pay ten reales and half a measure of corn to his Majesty. And we, the descendants of a royal race, are being taxed beyond every lawful right." Partly owing to the appeal made in his works, and partly to the favour of Fray Garcia Guerra, who afterwards became Archbishop and Viceroy of New Spain, some land concessions were granted Don Fernando, and he was appointed interpreter in the Indian judiciary court. The "Historia de la Nación Chichemeca" was his last work, but this he left unfinished, having reached only the period of the siege of Mexico. This is the best of his works. The facts are fairly well defined, the chronology is more exact, the editing much better, and more care is taken in the orthography of Texcocan names. His other works contain very important data for the history of Mexico, but they are written without order or method, the chronology is very faulty, and there is much repetition. For his writings he availed himself of the ancient Indian hieroglyphic paintings, and the traditions and songs of the Indians; he indicates those which he has consulted--all of them more than eighty years old. His works recently published to commemorate the fourth centenary of the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus, are:

• A summary of all the events that occurred in New Spain and of many things known and accomplished by the Tultecas from the creation of the world to their destruction, and from the coming of the third Chichemeca settlers up to the invasion of the Spaniards, taken from the original history "La Nueva España";
• History of the Chichemecas to the time of the coming of the Spaniards. (To this is added: (a) Part of the history of Netzahualcoyotl; (b) List of 154 names of the cities subject to the three kings of Mexico, Tlacopan, and Texcoco; (c) Another section of the history of Netzahualcoyotl; (d) The Ordinances or Laws of Netzahualcoyotl; (e) Account of Netzahualpilli, son of Netzahualcoyotl.)
• Order and ceremonial for the creation of a Lord, established by Topiltz, Lord of Tula.
• The coming of the Spaniards to New Spain.
• Entrance of the Spaniards into Texcoco.
• Accounts of the country and settlers of this part of America known as New Spain.
• Brief account, in the form of a memorial, of the history of New Spain and its dependencies up to the time of the coming of the Spaniards. (To this are added (a) Account of the other Lords of New Spain; (b) Accounts of the origin of the Xochimilcas.)
• Summary of the History of New Spain from the beginning of the world to the present era, collected and taken from the histories, paintings, written memorials, and folk songs of the natives.
• History of the Chichemeca nation (95 chapters).
• Songs of Netzahualcoyotl and historic fragments of the life of the same. There seems, however, to be but little reason for attributing this last to Ixtlilxochitl.

CAMILLUS CRIVELLI

Diocese of Jaca

( Also JACCA; Lat. JACCENSIS).

Located in the Spanish province of Huesca. Jaca, the chief town of the mountain district of Sobrarbe, is situated on the left bank of the Aragon, a tributary of the Ebro, about 2400 feet above sea-level. It was once the capital of the Jaccetani, a tribe mentioned by Strabo. This territory was the scene of battles between Sertorius and Pompey and later between Pompey's son Sextus and Caesar's generals.

Ecclesiastically Jaca belonged originally to the Diocese of Huesca. When in 713 the town of Huesca was seized by the Moors, its prelates were replaced by itinerant bishops, sometimes called bishops of Aragon, sometimes bishops of Huesca or Jaca, who lived either at Jaca or in the neighbouring monasteries of San Juan de la Pena, San Pedro de Siresa, and Sásave. A council held at Jaca in 1063 determined anew the boundaries of the Diocese of Huesca, which thereafter included the present dioceses of Huesca, Jaca, and Barbastro, as well as a part of the Diocese of Lerida. Jaca was then made the permanent seat of the diocese. At the same time Sancho II was appointed Bishop of Huesca, and hastened to request the pope to confirm the decisions of the council. Meanwhile, however, King Sancho Ramirez of Aragon (1063-94) had won back from the Moors the city of Barbastro, and had granted it to the Bishop of Roda. Garcia, the new Bishop of Huesca (1076-86), regarded this as an infringement of the rights of jurisdiction granted the Bishop of Jaca by the Council of Jaca. He therefore renewed his petition to the new pope (Gregory VII) to have the decisions of the council confirmed, which request the pope granted (cf. Jaffé, "Reg. Pont. Roman", I, 2nd ed., Berlin, 1885, n. 5098). As, however, Bishop Raimundo of Rodo also obtained the confirmation of all his privileges from Gregory, a violent dispute arose between the Bishops Huesca and Roda as to jurisdiction over the churches of Barbastro, Bielsa, Gistao, and Alquezar, which in 1080 was decided by the king in favour of the Bishop of Roda. In November, 1096, King Pedro I of Aragon won back Huesca from the Moors, and Urban II now decreed (11 May, 1089) that, instead of Jaca, Huesca should again be the seat of the bishop (cf. Jaffé, op. cit., I, 5703). But Jaca itself had a separate existence under a vicar-general, independent of the Bishop of Huesca. It also retained its own cathedral chapter, which originally followed the Rule of St. Augustine, but in 1270 both this chapter and that of Huesca were secularized. Jaca was again erected into a separate diocese and was made suffragan to the Metropolitan See of Saragossa by a Bull of Pius V (18 July, 1571), which decision was carried into effect on 26 February, 1572. The first bishop was Pedro del Frago.

Statistics

According to the diocesan statistics of 1907 Jaca possessed 73,659 inhabitants, 151 parishes, 151 parish churches, 239 public and 10 private oratories, 236 secular priests, 30 regulars, and 54 sisters. The religious orders and congregations in the diocese are: Augustinian Hermits, one monastery and novitiate; Piarists, 2 houses for the training of boys; Benedictine nuns, 1 convent and 18 professed sisters in the city of Jaca; Sisters of Mercy of St. Anna, who have charge of the hospital at Jaca; Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Mary, 1 house at Jaca; sisters of Mercy of St. Vincent de Paul, with a school at Jaca, and the Little Sisters of the Aged Poor, with a home for the aged in a suburb of Jaca. The cathedral dedicated to the Most Blessed Virgin of Pilar is a three- aisled basilica in Byzantine style, belonging in the main to the eleventh century; it was consecrated in 1063 and altered in the fifteenth and eighteenth centuries. A religious and civil festival is held on the first Friday of May; it is called "Primer Viernes de Mayo", in memory of a victory said to have been won over the Moors in the eighth century by Count Aznar aided by the women of Jaca. It is celebrated with a solemn procession in which the entire cathedral chapter takes part. In the environs of Jaca are many hermitages, notably that of San Juan de la Pena. La Vergen de la Cueva is venerated in the same cave in which three hundred nobles gathered at the time of the Arab invasion and proclaimed Garcio Ximenez King of Sobrarbe.

GREGOR REINHOLD

Henry Moore Jackson

Knight, born in Grenada, 1849; died in London, 29 August, 1908. The youngest son of the Anglican Bishop of the Leeward Islands, he was educated in England at Marlborough and Clifton Colleges, and at the Royal Military Academy. He entered the Royal Artillery in 1870, retiring with the rank of captain in 1885. He entered the colonial service in 1880, when he was appointed commandant of the Sierra Leone police. He was commissioner for Turks and Caicos Islands, 1885-90, and Colonial Secretary of the Bahama Islands, 1890-93. As Colonial Secretary of Gibraltar, 1894-1901, it fell to his lot to carry out the plans for the new harbour works, which had already received the approval of the Admiralty and of the War Office. His early scientific training enabled him to point out defects in the plans, and to suggest improvements which saved the Government much useless expenditure. In recognition of his efficiency he was made in 1899 a Knight Commander of the Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George. In 1901 he was appointed Governor of the Leeward Islands, and after holding this position for less than one year was appointed Governor of the Fiji Islands and High Commissioner of the Western Pacific. After a careful study of the difficult problems which he there found awaiting a solution, he drew up an exhaustive report, accompanied with a series of recommendations which were accepted almost without modification by the Colonial Office. In Fiji he showed a very remarkable power of inspiring the natives with a belief in the justice of English rule, and with personal attachment to himself. This power he exhibited also in Trinidad, to which he was appointed in 1904. When he landed the colony was still suffering from the consequences of the serious riots, which had recently occurred. After three years of untiring labour the state of feeling in the colony was entirely changed. He became a Catholic in 1880, and from the day of his reception into the Church he never willingly missed daily Mass. In recognition of his services to the Church in the various colonies with which he was connected, he was made a member of the Order of St. Gregory the Great in 1904, and as recognition of his great services to the State, the king conferred on him, shortly before his death, the Grand Cross of St. Michael and St. George.

C. SCHREINER

Jacob

The son of Isaac and Rebecca, third great patriarch of the chosen people, and the immediate ancestor of the twelve tribes of Israel. The incidents of his life are given in parts of Gen., xxv, 21-1, 13, wherein the documents (J, E, P) are distinguished by modern scholars (see ABRAHAM, I, 52). His name-- possibly an abbreviation of Jacob-El (Babylonian: Ya kub-ilu), with which compare Israel, Ismael etc. -- means "supplanter", and refers to a well-known circumstance of his birth (Gen., xxv, 25). His early years were marked by various efforts to get the birthright from his brother Esau. His struggle for it began before he was born (xxv, 22-5). Later, he took advantage of Esau's thoughtlessness and despair to buy it from him for a pottage of lentils (xxv, 29-33). In virtue of this purchase, and through a ruse, he finally got it by securing the blessing which Isaac intended for Esau (xxvii, 1-37), Then it was that, to escape his brother's avenging wrath, and apparently also to obtain a wife from his parents' stock, he fled to Haran, the dwelling place of Laban, his maternal uncle (xxvii, 41-xxviii, 5). On his way thither, he had at Luza the vision of the angels ascending and descending by a mysterious ladder which reached from earth to heaven, and of Yahweh renewing to him the glorious promises which He had made to Abraham and to Isaac; in consequence of this, he called the place Beth-El, and vowed exclusive worship to Yahweh should He accompany him on his way and bring him back safely home (xxviii, 11-22). Jacob's relations with Laban's household form an interesting episode, the details of which are perfectly true to Eastern life and need not be set forth here. Besides blessing him with eleven children, God granted to Jacob a great material prosperity, so that Laban was naturally desirous of detaining him. But Jacob, long wearied with Laban's frequent trickery, and also bidden by God to return, departed secretly, and, although overtaken and threatened by his angry father-in-law, he managed to appease him and to pursue his own way towards Chanaan (xxix-xxxi). He managed also--after a vision of angels at Mahanaim, and a whole night's wrestling with God at Phanuel, on which latter occasion he received a new blessing and the significant name of Israel--to appease his brother Easu, who had come to meet him with 400 men (xxxii-xxxiii, 16).

Passing through Socoth, Jacob first settled near Salem, a city of the Sichemites, and there raised an altar to the God of Israel (xxxiii, 17-20). Compelled to leave on account of the enmity of the Chanaanites--the precise occasion of which is uncertain--he went to Bethel, where he fulfilled the vow which he had made when on his way to Haran (xxxiv-xxxv, 15). Proceeding farther south, he came to Ephrata, where he buried Rachel, who died giving birth to Benjamin, and where he erected a pillar on the site of her grave. Thence, through Migdal- Eder, he came to Hebron, where he was joined by Esau for their father's burial (xxxv, 16-29). In Hebron, Jacob lived quietly as the head of a numerous pastoral family, received with inconsolable grief the apparent evidence of Joseph's cruel death, passed through the pressure of famine, and agreed most reluctantly to his separation from Benjamin (xxxvii, 1-4; xlii, 35-38; xliii, 1-14). The news that Joseph was still alive and invited him to come to Egypt revived the patriarch, who, passing through Bersabee, reached Egypt with his sons and grandchildren (xlv, 25-xlix). There it was given him to meet Joseph again, to enjoy the honours conferred upon him by Pharaoh, and to spend prosperously his last days in the land of Gessen. There, on his death- bed, he foretold the future of fortunes of the respective descendants of his sons, and passed away at the age of 147 (xlvi, 29-xlix). According to his last wishes, he was buried in the land of Chanaan (1, 1-13). Despite the various difficulties met with in the examination of the Biblical narrative and dealt with in detail by commentators, it is quite certain that the history of Jacob is that of a real person whose actual deeds are recorded with substantial accuracy. Jacob's character is a mixture of good and evil, gradually chastened by the experience of a long life, and upon the whole not unworthy of being used by God for the purpose of His mercy towards the chosen people. The Talmudic legends concerning Jacob are the acme of fancy.

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Jacob of Jüterbogk

(In the world BENEDICT STOLZENHAGEN).

Theologian and canonist, born of poor parents near Jüterbogk, Brandenburg, Germany, 1381; died at Erfurt in 1465. In 1401 he entered the Cistercian monastery of Paradies, in Poland; hence his names Jacobus de Polonia, Jacobus de Paradiso, and Jacobus Cisterciensis. Being sent to the University of Krakow by his abbot, he obtained the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and Theology, and thereafter became professor theology and preacher at that university. Displeased at the loose discipline of his order, he entered the Carthusian monastery at Erfurt in 1441, taught canon law at the university of that place for many years, and was elected rector in 1456. From the time of his entrance into the Carthusian Order he is often called Jacobus Carthusianus, Jacobus de Clusa, and Jacobus de Ergordia. He was full of zeal for reform in the Church, and in some of his writings severely criticizes Italian ecclesiastics for bestowing responsible benefices upon incapable and unworthy persons. Like many other great men of his time, he advocated the so-called conciliar theory, that a general council is above the pope.

He is the author of about eighty treatises, mostly on theological and canonical subjects. The following twelve of his works have been printed: "Quodlibetum statuum humanorum", a sort of treatise on moral theology explaining the obligations of men in the various states of life; "Tractatus de animabus erutis a corporibus", an interesting treatise on the condition of the human soul after death -- seven editions of this work were published; "De valore Missarum pro defunctis celebratarum" (the preceding three incunabula contain neither place nor date of publication; the first came out at Esslingen in 1475, the second at Erfurt about 1463, the third in 1493 at an unknown place). "De causis multarum passionum", edited by Pez in "Bibliotheca ascetica" (Ratisbon, 1835), VII, 389-444; "De indulgentiis", a dogmatically correct treatise on indulgences, edited by Walch in "Monumenta inedita medii aevi" (Göttingen, 1764), II, ii, 163 sq.; "Petitiones religiosorum pro reformatione sui status", edited by Klüpfel in "Vetus Biblioth. ecclesiastica" (Freiburg im Br., 1780), 146 sq.; "De negligentia praelatorum", edited by Walch, loc. cit., I, fasc. 4; "Avisamentum ad papam pro reformatione ecclesiae", a memorial addressed to Pope Nicholas V, in which the author urges a reform in the Church, edited by Klupfel, loc. cit., 134 sq.; "De septem statibus ecclesiae", edited by Walch, loc. cit., II, fasc. 2; "Sermones dominicales" (date and place of publication unknown); "De erroribus et moribus Christianorum" (Lubeck, 1488); "Lavacrum conscientiae" (Cologne, 1506), of which more than nine editions were published in the fifteenth century.

MICHAEL OTT

Jacobus de Teramo

(AB ANCHARANO), belonging to the family of Palladini, canonist and bishop, born in 1349 at Teramo in Italy; died in 1417 in Poland. After studying jurisprudence at Padua he was archdeacon at Aversa in 1384, and later Secretary of Papal Briefs and of the Poenitentiaria at Rome. He became successively Bishop of Monopoli (1391), of Tarentum (1400), of Florence (1401), and of Spoleto (1410). As Bishop of Spoleto he was also governor of the Duchy of Spoleto. In 1417 Pope Martin V sent him as legate to Poland, where he died the same year. He is the author of a commentary on Lombard's "Book of Sentences" (Augburg, 1472); a dialogue entitled "De Pontificis Romani monarchia" (unprinted); and a peculiar little volume entitled "Consolatio peccatorum", or "Processus Luciferi contra Jesum Christum". The last work is a lawsuit between the Devil and Jesus Christ. The Devil is represented as suing Christ for having infringed upon the rights of his ownership by descending into hell. At the first trial Solomon acts as judge, while Moses is counsel of Jesus Christ and Belial for the Devil. At the second trial the Patriarch Joseph is judge, Aristotle and Isaias defend Jesus Christ, and the Emperor Augustus and Jeremias defend the Devil. In both trials the decision is in favour of Christ, but at the second trial the Devil is granted the right to take possession of the bodies and souls of the damned at the last judgement. This work was printed repeatedly and translated into several languages, but was later placed on the Index.

MICHAEL OTT

Blessed Jacopo de Voragine

( Also DI VIRAGGIO).

Archbishop of Genoa and medieval hagiologist, born at Viraggio (now Varazze), near Genoa, about 1230; died 13 July, about 1298. In 1244 he entered the Order of St. Dominic, and soon became famous for his piety, learning, and zeal in the care of souls. His fame as a preacher spread throughout Italy, and he was called upon to preach from the most celebrated pulpits of Lombardy. After teaching Holy Scripture and theology in various houses of his order in Northern Italy, he was elected provincial of Lombardy in 1267, holding this office until 1286, in which year he become definitor of the Lombard province of Dominicans. In the latter capacity he attended a chapter at Lucca in 1288, and another at Ferrara, in 1290. In 1288 he was commissioned by Pope Nicholas IV to free the Genoese from the ban of the Church, which they had incurred for assisting the Sicilians in their revolt against the King of Naples. When Archbishop Charles Bernard of Genoa died, in 1286, the metropolitan chapter of Genoa proposed Jacopo de Voragine as his successor. Upon his refusal to accept the dignity, Obizzo Fieschi, the Patriarch of Antioch whom the Saracens had driven from the see, was transferred to the archiepiscopal See of Genoa by Nicholas IV in 1288.

When Obizzo Fieschi died, in 1292, the chapter of Genoa unanimously elected Jacopo de Voragine as his successor. His again endeavoured to evade the archiepiscopal dignity, but was finally obliged to yield to the combined prayers of the clergy, the Senate, and the people of Genoa. Nicholas IV wished to consecrate him bishop personally, and called him to Rome for that purpose; but shortly after the arrival of de Voragine the pope died, and the new bishop was consecrated at Rome during the succeeding interregnum, on 13 April, 1292. The episcopate of Jacopo de Voragine fell in a time when Genoa was a scene of continuous warfare between the Rampini and the Mascarati, the former of whom were Guelphs, the latter Ghibellines. The archbishop, indeed, effected an apparent reconciliation between the two hostile parties in 1295; but the dissensions broke out anew, and all his efforts to restore peace were useless. In 1292 he held a provincial synod at Genoa, chiefly for the purpose of identifying the relics of St. Syrus, one of the earliest bishops of Genoa (324?). The cult of Jacopo de Voragine, which seems to have begun soon after his death, was ratified by Pius VII in 1816. The same pope permitted the clergy of Genoa and Savona, and the whole Order of St. Dominic, to celebrate his feast as that of a saint.

Jacopo de Voragine is best known as the author of a collection of legendary lives of the saints, which was entitled "Legenda Sanctorum" by the author, but soon became universally known as "Legenda Aurea" (Golden Legend), because the people of those times considered it worth its weight in gold. In some of the earlier editions it is styled "Lombardica Historia", which title gave rise to the false opinion that this was a different work from the "Golden Legend". The title "Lombardica Historia" originated in the fact that in the life of Pope Pelagius, which forms the second last chapter of the "Golden Legend", is contained an abstract of the history of the Lombards down to 1250 (Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., XXIV, 167 sq.). In the preface to the "Golden Legend" the author divides the ecclesiastical year into four periods, which he compared to four epochs in the history of the world, viz. a time of deviation, renovation, reconciliation, and pilgrimage. The body of the work, which contains 177 chapters (according to others, 182), is divided into five sections, viz. from Advent to Christmas, from Christmas to Septuagesima, from Septuagesima to Easter, from Easter to Octave of Pentecost, and from the Octave of Pentecost to Advent. If we are to judge the "Golden Legend" from an historical standpoint, we must condemn it as entirely uncritical and hence of no value, except in so far as it teaches us that the people of those times were an extremely naive and thoroughly religious people, permeated with an unshakable belief in God's omnipotence and His fatherly care for those who lead a saintly life.

If, on the other hand, we view the "Golden Legend" as an artistically composed book of devotion, we must admit that it is a complete success. It is admirably adapted to enhance our love and respect towards God, to foster our devotion towards His saints, and to animate us with a holy zeal to follow their example. The chief object of Jacopo de Voragine and of other medieval hagiologists was not to compose reliable biographies or to write scientific treatises for the learned, but to write books of devotion that were adapted to the simple manners of the common people. It is due to a wrong conception of the purpose of the "Golden Legend" that Luis Vives (De causis corruptarum artium, c. ii), Melchior Canus (De locis theologicis, xi, 6), and others have severely denounced it; and to a true conception that the Bollandists (Acts SS., January, I, 19) and many recent hagiologists have highly praised it. That the work made a deep impression on the people is evident from its immense popularity, and from the great influence it had on the prose and poetic literature of many nations. It became the basis of many passionals of the Middle Ages and religious poems of later times. Longfellow's "Golden Legend", which, with two other poems, forms the trilogy entitled "Christus", owes its name and many of its ideas to the "Golden Legend" of de Voragine.

Bernard Guidonis (d. 1331), also a Dominican, made a vain attempt to supplant it by a more reliable work of the same character, which he entitled "Speculum Sanctorum". In 1500 as many as seventy-four Latin editions of the "Legenda Aurea" had been published, not counting the three translations into English, five French, eight Italian, fourteen Low German, and three Bohemian. The first printed edition was in Latin, and was produced at Basle in 1470. Many succeeding editions contain additions of the lives of later saints or of feasts introduced after the thirteenth century. The best Latin edition was prepared by Graesse (Dresden and Leipzig, 1846, 1850, and Breslau, 1890). The first English edition was printed by William Caxton at London in 1483 from a version made about 1450. It was inscribed:

The Golden Legend. Fynysshed at Westmere the twenty day of Novembre/ the yere of our Lord M/CCCC/LXXXIII/. By me Wyllyam Caxton.

In this edition some of the less credible legends of the original are omitted. The publication was made at the instance of the Earl of Arundel, who agreed to take "a reasonable number of copies", and to pay as an annuity "a buck in summer and a doe in winter" (see Putnam, "Books and their Makers in the Middle Ages", New York and London, II, 1897, 118). Caxton's edition was re-edited and modernized by Ellis (London and New York, 1900). The first French version that appeared in print was made by Jean Batallier, and printed at Lyons in 1476. A French translation, made by Jean Belet de Vigny in the fourteenth century, was first printed at Paris in 1488. Recent French editions were prepared by Brunet, signed M. G. B. (Paris, 1843 and 1908); by de Wyzewa (Paris, 1902); and by Roze (Paris, 1902). an Italian translation by Nicolas Manerbi was printed in 1475, probably at Venice; a Bohemian one was printed at Pilsen between 1475 and 1479, and another at Prague in 1495; a Low German one at Delft in 1472, and at Gouda in 1478. A German reproduction in poetry was made by Kralik (Munich, 1902).

Another important work of Jacopo de Voragine is his so-called "Chronicon Genuense", a chronicle of Genoa reaching to 1296. Part of this chronicle, which is a valuable source of Genoese history, was published by Muratori in "Rerum Italicarum Scriptores" (Milan, 1723-51), IX, 5-56. Concerning it see Mannucci, "La cronaca di Jacopo da Viraggio" (Geneva, 1904). He is also the author of a collection of 307 sermons, "Sermones de sanctis, de tempore, quadragesimales, de Beata Maria Virgine". They have been repeatedly printed, both separately and collectively. The earliest edition of the whole collection was printed in 1484, probably at Venice, where they were published a second time in 1497 and repeatedly thereafter. His remaining literary productions are "Defensorium contra impugnantes Fratres Praedicatores" (Venice, 1504), which is a defence of the Dominicans against some who accused them of not leading an Apostolic life; "Summarium virtutum et vitiorum" (Basle, 1497), which is an epitome of a work of the same title, written by William Peraldus, a Dominican who died about thirty years before Jacopo de Voragine. A theological work, entitled "De operibus et opusculis Sancti Augustini", is also generally ascribed to him, but its authenticity has not yet been sufficiently established. It is known that he was a close student of St. Augustine. Some, relying on the authority of Sixtus of Siena, ascribe to him also an Italian translation of the Bible, but no manuscript or print of it has ever been found.

MICHAEL OTT

Jacopone da Todi

(Properly called JACOPO BENEDICTI or BENEDETTI).

Franciscan poet, born at Todi in the first half of the thirteenth century; died at Collazzone about 1306. Very little is known with certainty about the life of this extraordinary man. Although the oldest lives go back only to the fifteenth century, yet a few earlier records exist. The oldest and most authentic document we have is Jacopone's signature to the manifesto of Cardinals Jacopo and Pietro Colonna against Boniface VIII, dated Lunghezza (between Rome and Tivoli), 10 May, 1297. [See text in "Archiv für Litteratur and Kirchengesch.", V (1889), 509 sq.] Angelo Clareno in his "Chronica septem Tribulationum", written about 1323 ["Archiv f. Litt. u. Kirchengesch.", II (1886), 308; Döllinger, "Beitrage zur Sektengesch.", II (Munich, 1890), 492], mentions Jacobus Tudertus among those spiritual friars who, in 1294, sent a deputation to Celestine V (q.v.), to ask permission to live separate from the other friars and observe the Franciscan Rule in its perfection - a request which was granted. The next reference to the poet is found in Alvarus Pelagius's "De Planctu Ecclesiae", written principally in 1330; he quotes two of Jacopone's sayings (lib. II, cc. lxxiii and lxxvi; ed. Venice, 1560, f. 196 r b, and f. 204 r b), and calls him a perfect Friar Minor. This passage occurs also in "Chronica XXIV generalium" ("Analecta Franciscana", III, Quaracchi, 1897, 460), which was compiled in great part before 1369 and completed in 1374. About 1335 the "Catalogus sanctorum Fratrum Minorum" (in "Speculum Vitae beati Francisci et Sociorum eius", Venice, 1504, f. 200 r; cf. the separate reprint of the "Catalogus" by Lemmens, Rome, 1903, 9) uses even more emphatic words of praise. Some further details about Jacopone are given by Bartholomew of Pisa in 1385 ["Liber conformitatum" (ed. Milan, 1510), fructus VIII, pars ii, f. 60 v a to f. 61 v a; cf. "Analecta Franciscana", IV (Quaracchi, 1906), 235-40]. It may be taken for granted that all these writers knew nothing of the detailed lives of Jacopone which appear in the fifteenth century. The "Chronica XXIV generalium" and Bartholomew of Pisa would certainly have inserted one or other, as they were wont to do in other cases. Those lives can all be reduced to one, inserted in the chronicle commonly called "Franceschina", attributed to Jacopo Oddi, O.F.M. (d. 1488; see bibliography). The historical value of this and similar lives has been recntly denied by Giulio Bertoni ("La Leggenda Jacoponica" in "Fanfulla della Domenica", Rome, 10 June, 1906), on the ground that this legend has too many points of resemblance with the "Legends of St. Francis". But these resemblancs between the lives of the saints have already become a commonplace, and in this case are not to be taken seriously. On the other hand, Bertoni is right in rejecting the description of the circumstances in which each poem of Jacopone was written. The part of his life is rather to be considered as a commentary on the poems of Jacopone. As to the real sources of his life, the author himself, in the Tobler version (see bibliography), points out that he has collected the reminiscences and traditions concerning Jacopone still extant among the older friars in the Umbrian converts of his epoch.

With the help of the aforesaid sources and of some allusions in Jacopone's poems, we can gather the following facts of his life. Born at Todi (1228?), of the noble family of Benedetti, Jacopone took up the study of law -- probably at Bologna, as might be inferred from the fact that this was the most famous school of law at the time, and from the manner in which he speaks of Bologna in the poem "Senno me pare e cortesia" (Modio, "I Cantici del B. Jacopone da Todi", Rome, 1558, 109). On returning home, he exercised -- the legends say with some avarice -- the profession of an advocate (procuratore). In course of time (1267?) he married a noblewoman, who in one version of the legend is called Vanna, daughter of Bernardino, Count of Collemedio (Coldimezzo near Todi) (La Verna, IV, 1906, 386). It was the great piety and the tragical death of his young spouse that brought about an entire change in Jacopone. A great feast was being celebrated at Todi -- probably in 1268. Among the onlookers was Jacopone's wife in rich array. Suddenly the raised platform from which she was witnessing the spectacle gave way, crushing her fatally. When the poet reached her side Vanna was already dying; on opening her dress, he found a hair cloth beneath the splendid robes. The terrible blow caused by his wife's death, together with the evidence of her secret penance for his sins, made such an impression on Jacopone that for many years he seemed to be no longer himself. Abandoning his profession, and wearing the habit of a Franciscan Tertiary (bizochone), he led a roaming life for a full decade (see the poem "Que farai fra Jacopone" in Modio, 73). During this period he was the terror of his friends and relations, and became a sort of Christian Diogenes. It was then probably that the former proud doctor of law, Jacopo dei Benedetti, mocked and scoffed at by the boys in the streets of Todi, received the nickname of Jacopone. Once, saddled and bridled like an ass, he crawled on all fours in the public swuare of Todi; on another occasion, to the great confusion of his family, he appeared at a wedding in his brother's house, tarred and feathered from top to toe. When asked by a citizen to carry home a pair of capons for him, Jacopone brought them to the man's family tomb, saying that this was his true house. Jacopone's folly was however the folly of the Cross, as he says:

Senno me pare e cortesia
Empazir per lo bel Messia.
(A wise and courteous choice he'd make
Who'd be a fool for the dear Lord's sake.)

About 1278 he sought admission into the Order of Friars Minor at his native town, a request which after some difficuly was granted. Out of humility he chose to be a lay brother. In the great convent of S. Fortunato, at Todi, the so-called party of the "Community" of the Franciscan Order certainly prevailed. This party was strongly opposed to that of the more zealous friars, called the "Spirituals". The sympathies of Jacopone were with the latter. Boniface VIII, who had under unusual circumstances succeeded Celestine V, the friend of Spirituals, having recalled all privileges granted by his predecessor and thus subjected anew the zealous friars to their regular superiors, and having engaged in a struggle with the two Cardinals Colonna, Jacopone took sides with these two protectors of the Spirituals against the pope. Perhaps there were also personal reasons for enmity between Boniface and the poet, dating from the time when the former, then a young man (1260), obtained an ecclesiastical benefice at Todi, where his uncle Peter was bishop from 1252 to 1276 (see Eubel, "Hierarchia cath. med. aevi", I, 530; Tosti, "Storia di Bonifazio VIII", Monte Cassino, I, 1846, 221; Finke, "Aus den Tagen Bonifaz VIII", Münster, 1902, 4). Palestrina, the stronghold of the Colonnas, having been taken in 1298 by the papal troops, Jacopone was imprisoned in the fortress above the town, known to-day as Castel San Pietro. Some of Jacopone's most touching, and also most agressive, poems were composed in this dungeon. Not even in the great Jubilee of 1300 did Jacopone obtain pardon, the Colonnas and their partisans having been excluded from the Jubilee by a special Bull (see text in Tosti, l.c., II, 283). Boniface VIII was captured at Anagni on 7 Sept., 1303, and upon his death, which occured shortly afterwards (11 Oct.), Jacopone was set at liberty. Now an old man, broken down, tried and purified by hardships, he withdrew first to Pantanelli, a hermitage on the Tiber, three hours distant from Orvieto (La Verna, l. c., 390), then to Collazzone, a small town situated on a hill between Perugia and Todi. There is no record of a Franciscan monastery at that place, but there was a Poor Clare Convent, S. Lorenzo, served as was usual by Franciscan Friars (see Livarius Oliger, "Dove e morto il B. Jacopone da Todi?" in "Voce di S. Antonio", Quaracchi, 13 Feb., 1907). It was here that Jacopone died on 25 Dec., 1306, just at the moment when the priest was intoning the Gloria in Excelsis Deo at the midnight Mass; his last moments were consoled by the presence of his faithful friend, Blessed John of La Verna, from whom he had especially desired to receive the Last Sacraments, and who really arrived just before the poet's death.

His body was brought to Todi and buried in the church of the Poor Clares of Montecristo (Tobler's version of the legend) or Montesanto (Bartholomew of Pisa, Marianus Florentinus), outside the walls of Todi. In 1433 it was discovered in Montecristo and removed to the Franciscan church of S. Fortunato inside the town, where his tomb is still to be seen, embellished by Bishop Cesi in 1596 and adorned by a beautiful inscription: "Ossa. Beati Jacoponi. De Benedictis. Tudertini. Fratris Ordinis Minorum. Qui stultus propter Christum. Nova mundum arte delusit. Et caelum rapuit. Obdormivit in Domino. Die XXV Martii. An. Dom. MCCXCVI. Ang. Caes. Episc. Tudert. Hic collocavit ann. MDXCVI." "Here lie the bones of Blessed Jacopone dei Benedetti da Todi, Friar Minor, who, having gone mad with love of Christ, by a new artifice deceived the world and took Heaven by violence ...

(translation of Knox Little.) The date, 25 March, 1296, is however obviously erroneous. Jacopone is often called blessed, and has been considered a "blessed" or a "saint", in the technical sense of the words, by different authors. As a matter of fact, Jacopone has not been beatified or canonized by the Church, although various efforts have been made in this direction -- for example, by the municipal council of Todi in 1628, and by the chapter of the cathedral of Todi in 1676. Lastly, in the years 1868 and 1869 the postulator of the causes of saints of the Friars Minor collected call the documents proving the cultus ab immemorabili paid to Jacopone, in order to obtain its official confirmation [see "Tudertina Confirmationis Cultus ab immemorabili tempore praestiti Jacobo a Tuderto Ord. Min. S. Francisci, Beato Jacopone vulgo nuncupato (Rome, 1869), in archives of the postulator general O.F.M.]. The chief obstacle to the confirmation of the cultus lies in the part Jacopone took against Boniface VIII and the satires he wrote against this much calumniated pope.

The iconography of Jacopone is not very rich. In the cathedral of Prato is a beautiful fifteenth-century fresco, often reproduced. The fourteenth-century Codex Strozzi 174 at the Laurentian Library, Florence, containts a miniature of the poet; another miniature (certainly conventional) is found in the "Franceschina" of the Portiuncula. The church of S. Fortunato of Todi is adorned by two picture of Jacopone -- one over his tomb (1596), another in a side chapel together with the portraits of four other saints (seventeenth century). Jacopone was believed to have died not so much from bodily ailment as from the excess of Divine love, which at last broke his heart (Modio, preface). The chief interest attaching to Jacopone is derived from his literary works. Of his poems, written almost all in his native Umbrian dialect, seven early editions exist but no modern critical one.

• The first is printed at Florence, 1490. It is almost a critical edition and contains 102 Italian pieces. [See accurate description in "Miscellanea Francescana", I (Foligno, 1886), 21-29.] The other editons are:
• Brescia, 1495, containing (in addition to compositions of other poets) 122 poems, of which seven are in Latin;
• Venice, 1514 -- 139 songs;
• Venice, 1556 - repetition of the preceding;
• Rome, 1558 -- by Modio, with life of Jacopone in the preface, best edition after that of 1490, which it follows in the number of poems (102);
• Naples, 1615 -- reprint of the Roman edition with slight alterations;
• Venice, 1617 -- by Francesco Tresatti, O.F.M. -- the best known by least critical edition, containing 211 copiously annotated songs, many of which certainly do not belong to Jacopone.

Alessandro de Mortara published a few hitherto unedited poems of Jacopone (Lucca, 1819). Towards the middle of the nineteenth century, Ozanam revived general interest in Jacopone by his "Poètes franciscains". Since then many have written on the subject and expressed their appreciation of these medieval songs. Jacopone was certainly a true poet, so much so that some of his productions, as "In foco l'amor mi mise" and "Amor di caritate", have been attributed to St. Francis himself. Both are at the head of Umbrian poets. Jacopone's rhymes, simple, at times even rough in expression, but profound and tender in sentiment, were less adapted to the cultured classes than the "Divina Commedia" of Dante, but were sung with enthusiasm by the people. How much Jacopone's poetry was appreciated down to the seventeenth century is shown by the numberless manuscripts which contain them, often in the particular dialect of the region where they were written, and by the fact that almost every old Italian spiritual song has been ascribed to him. These laudi were especially in use among the so-called Laudesi and the Flagellants, who sang them in the towns, along the roads, in their confraternities, and in sacred dramatical representations. Even the "Stabat Mater Dolorosa", the authorship of which is still attributed to Jacopone with greater probability than to any other competitor (Gihr), was sung in the same way. (See, on this point, D'Ancona, "Origini del Teatro Italiano", I, Turin, 1891, 114, 155-62, 550- 2.)

Jacopone's prose works are much less generally known than his poems. They consist mainly of small spiritual treatises, somewhat resembling the well-known golden saying of Blessed Giles (see AEGIDIUS OF ASSISI), but they are more connected. The Latin text of these may be found in part in Bartholomew of Pisa (l. c.) and in many manuscripts. An Italian version, translated from Bartholomew of Pisa, is found in the "Franceschina" and some other versions of the life of Jacopone. Another fifteenth century Italian version, ascribed to Feo Belcari, together with the treatises of Ugo Panciera at Venice (s. d.); ed. Parenti at Modena in 1832; and finally in "Prose di Feo Belcari edite ed inedite", III (Rome, 1843), by Gigli; cf. E. Böhmer in "Romanische Studien", I (Halle, 1871), 123-32. Finke (l. c.) suspects that a treatise in the MS. J 491, no. 799, in the National Archives of Paris, and directed to the King of France by "Illiteratus Jacob", belongs to Jacopone.

NOTES

(1) LIVES. - In Franceschina, a manuscript chronicle by JACOPO ODDI (d. 1488), of which four codices exist: two at Perugia, one at Portiuncula (Assisi), one at Norcia (Umbria). Description of the one existing in the public library at Perugia is given by PERCOPO, La Vita e le Laudi di Fra Jacopone da Todi nello Specchio de l'Ordene Menore (Franceschina) in Il Propugnatore, XIX (bologna, 1886), 151-212. Almost identical with this is the life edited by TOBLER in Zeitschrift fur romanische Philologie, II (Halle, 1878), 26-39; cf. ibid., III (1879), 178-92; and another of MARIANO FLORENTINO (?), edited by LIVARIUS OLIGER in Luce e Amore, IV (Florence; 1907), 418-26; 473-89. There is also a shorter version: POSSEVINO, Vite de' Santi e Beati di Todi (Perugia, 1597), 98-113; MODIO, I Cantici del B. Jacopone da Todi (Rome 1558), preface; DAL GAL, La Verna (Rocca S. Casiano, 1906), 385-92; JACOBILLI, Vite de Santi e Beati dell' Umbria, III (Foligno, 1661), 215-19; WADDING, Annales, V (2nd ed.) 407-14, VI, 77-84. (2) MODERN LIVES AND TREATISES. - MACDONNELL, Sons of Francis (London 1902), 354-86, with good samples of translations of Jacopone's poetry - see also, ibid., 401-2; ANON., Jacopone da Todi in Quarterly Review (London, Jan., 1910), 53-72; DORSEY, The Mad Penitent of Todi (Notre Dame, Ind., s. d.) (a novel); OZANAM, Les Poetes franciscains en Italie au treizieme siecle (Paris, 1852), many successive editions - German tr. by JULIUS (Munster, 1853), Italian tr. by FANFANI (Prato, 1854); D'ANCONA, Jacopone da Todi, il Giullare di Dio del secolo XIII in Nuova Antologia, 2nd series, LI of the whole collection (Rome, 1880), 193-228, 438-70, reprinted in D'ANCONA, Studi della Letteratura italiana dei primi secoli (Ancona, 1884), 3-104; THODE, Franz von Assisi und die Anfange der Kunst der Renaissance in Italien (2nd ed., Berlin, 1904), 440-51; GEBHART, L'Italie mystique (Paris, 1890), 257- 70; ALVI, Jacopone da Todi (Todi, 1906) - full of inaccuracies, see Voce di San Antonio, XII (Rome, 1907), 19-20; BRUGNOLI, Fra Jacopone da Todi, publication of Societa internazionale di Studi Francescani in Assisi (Assisi, 1907). (3) ON WORKS AND PARTICULAR QUESTIONS. - BOHMER, Jacopone da Todi ... in Romanische Studien, I (Halle, 1871), 123-61; MOSCHETTI, I Codici Marciai contenenti Laude di Jacopone da Todi (Venice, 1888); TENNERONI, Inizii di antiche Poesie italiane religiose e morali con prospetto dei Codici che le contengono e Introduzione alle Laudi spirituali (Florence, 1909), preparatory work for critical edition of Jacopone. Partial German translation of Jacopone's poetry, with good introduction: SCHLUTTER AND STORK, Ausgewahlte Gedichte Jacopone's da Todi (Munster, 1864); FELDER, Jacopones Marienminne (Stans, 1903), Franch tr. La Madonne dans les Poesies de Jacopone de Todi in Etudes Franciscaines (Couvin, Belgium, March and April, 1904); LATINI, Dante e Jacopone e loro contatti di pensiero e di forma (Todi, 1900). On the Stabat Mater Dolorosa see JULIAN, Dictionary of Hymnology (2nd impression of 2nd ed., London, 1908), 1081-84, where the numerous English translations, old and new, are indicated; see, ibid., 575 and passim; CHEVALIER, Repertorium Hymnologicum, II (Louvain, 1892), 599-600, with copious bibliography; HENRY, The Two Stabats in American Cath. Quarterly Review, XXVIII (1903); GIHR, Die Sequenzen des romischen Messbuches (Freiburg im Br., 1887), 80-130; TENNERONI, Lo Stabat Mater e Donna del Paradiso (Todi, 1887); COLARULLI, La Satira, "O Papa Bonifatio, molt ay jocato al mondo", e la Sequenza "Stabat Mater" di Fra Jacopone da Todi (Todi, 1906); MARINI, L'Estetica dello Stabat Mater (Siena, 1897); GIOIA, LO "Stabat Mater Speciosa" di Jacopone da Todi (Rome, 1892); GHILARDI Il B. Jacopone da Todi e la sua prigionia in Luce e Amore, III (Florence, 1906), 931-36.

LIVARIUS OLIGER

Joseph Jacotot

French educator, b. at Dijon, March, 1770; d. at Paris, 30 July, 1840. He studied in the college of his native city, where, at the age of nineteen, he was appointed professor of classical literature. Later he filled successively the chairs of the methods of sciences (1796), ancient languages (1797), higher mathematics (1803), Roman law (1806), and pure mathematics (1809). A member of the House of Representatives during the Hundred Days, he expressed his preference for the Empire, and, at the time of the Second Restoration, his hostility, to the Bourbons, made it necessary for him to leave France. Going to Belgium, he taught privately at Mons and Brussels, and in 1818 was appointed professor of the French language and literature in the University of Louvain. The Revolution of 1830 allowed him to return to France. He went first to Valenciennes, and in 1838 to Paris, endeavouring to propagate his method of teaching, and working for "the intellectual emancipation" of his fellow-men. His works under the common title of "Enseignement Universel" are: "Langue maternelle" (Louvain, 1822); "Langues étrangères" (Louvain, 1824); "Musique, Dessin et Peinture" (Louvain, 1824); "Mathématiques" (Louvain, 1828); "Droit et philosophie panécastique" (Paris, 1839). He also wrote many articles in the "Journal de l'émanicipation intellectuelle", published by his two sons (1829-42), who also edited his "Mélanges posthumes" (Paris, 1841). When Jacotot began to teach at Louvain he knew neither Flemish nor Dutch, while many of his pupils could not understand French. To overcome this difficulty he gave them both the French text and the Dutch translation of Fénelon's "Télémaque". They were to memorize some sentences of the French and carefully compare them with the Dutch, every day repeating what they knew and adding a little more. After some time Jacotot was surprised at their progress, for with no other help they had mastered the rules of spelling and grammar and could apply them correctly. Encouraged by this success, Jacotot thought he had found a universal method and adapted it to all branches of knowledge.

This method rightly recognizes the necessity of the student's own efforts and mental work, and it also endeavours to apply the principle that all knowledge is so connected that know one thing well, i.e. to know it n all its connections, supplies the key to a more perfect and extensive knowledge of other subjects also. Hence it matters little where the student begins, or what book he uses, provided the proceeds rightly. Generally, instead of starting with the first elements, Jacotot would have him begin with something complex, which the student himself would analyze into its elements -- comparing these, noting their similarities and differences, and thus finding the rules for himself. Among the number of principles which sum up Jacotot's method, we may mention the following: "Know something well, and always refer everything else to that". "Everyone can be his own master". "Everybody can teach, and teach even what he does not know". More paradoxical are the two axioms which are given as the bases of the whole method: "All men are of equal intelligence", that is, the same general ideas are found in every work, and consequently man should strive to master one thing well and refer everything to what he knows already. However exaggerated such principles, and even the whole method, may seem, and however vehement at times Jacotot may have been in defending them, it must be conceded that they emphasize a few vital points, the necessity of personal effort and application on the part of the student, the connection more or less immediate of all ideas, the need of order and method, and the importance of thoroughness in knowledge.

C.A. DUBRAY

Jacques de Vitry

Historian of the crusades, cardinal Bishop of Acre, later of Tusculum, b. at Vitry-sur-Seine, near Paris, probably about 1160; d. at Rome, 1240. After attending the University of Paris, then in its infancy, he visited Marie d'Oignies, a mystic of the Diocese of Liège, attracted by her reputation for holiness. On her advice he became a canon regular, returned to Paris for ordination to the priesthood, and thereafter devoted himself to preaching; from 1210 to 1213 he was one of the most noted preachers of the crusade against the Albigenses. In fact so great was his renown throughout Christendom that the Latin clergy of St. John of Acre chose him as their bishop. He accepted the episcopal dignity with the approbation of Honorius III. From Palestine he went to Egypt and was present at the capture of Damietta (1218-20), an account of which he wrote to the pope. The leaders of the crusade complained of his imperious temper and attributed their reverses to his stubbornness. In 1227 he returned to Rome but soon resumed the offensive against the heretics of the Diocese of Liège. In 1229 Gregory IX allowed him to resign the See of Acre, created him a cardinal and Bishop of Tusculum and later legate in France and in Germany. He did not long survive his refusal of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem; at his request his body was conveyed to Oignies.

Among his works are letters to Pope Honorius, which form an important source of the history of the Egyptian crusade (ed. Roehrich, "Zeitschrift fuer Kirchengesch.," XIV-XVI), a collection of sermon-models for the use of preachers; a "Liber de mulieribus Leodiensibus," the most celebrated of these being Marie d'Oignies, whose wonderful visions the author relates (ed. Acta SS., June, IV, 636, 666), finally the "Historia Orientalis seu Hierosolymitana," his principal work, an account, at first hand, of the conditions in the Holy Land in the thirteenth century. He was of an inquiring and observant mind and conceived the plan — a remarkable one for the age in which he lived — of writing a geographical description of Palestine.

The first book is wholly devoted to that land and gives its history from the time of Mohammed; describing the expansion of Islam, he gives many picturesque details concerning Oriental idolaters, the Turcomans, the Bedouins, and especially the Assassins, subjects of the Old Man of the Mountain. His recount of the crusades is followed by praise for the fertility of Palestine under Christian domination, and for the efforts of the Italians, French, Germans, Bretons, and English to colonize it. He likewise dwells upon the characteristics of the various indigenous nations and of the "Pullani," half-breeds, to whose vices he attributes the reverses of the Christians. The writer then undertakes a regular description of the physical geography of the country, and gives a great many particulars, half real and half fabulous, regarding its climate, flora, fauna, minerals, its barbarous and extraordinary nations, the Amazons, etc. The honey gathered from the reeds (ex calamellis) was, of course, only cane sugar. A still more curious account is that which he gives of the magnetic compass: "Acus ferrea postquam adamantem contigerit, ad stellam septentrionalem, quae velut axis firmamenti aliis vergentibus non movetur, semper convertitur. Unde valde necessaria est navigantibus in mari." (Bongars, "Gesta Dei," I, 1106.) The remainder of the book is a history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Book II, a dismally painted picture of the Christians of the East, closes with an account of the monastic orders and the hierarchy of Palestine. A third book, the story of the Egyptian crusade, is not from Jacques de Vitry, but from the pen of Oliver the Scholastic, Bishop of Paderborn.

Historia orientalis, ed. BONGARS, Gesta Dei per Francos, I, 1047-1145; French tr. in GUIZOT'S Collection des memoires, XXII: DAUNOU, Jacques de Vitry (Histoire litteraire de la France), XVIII (1835); BARROUX, Jacques de Vitry (Paris, 1885).

LOUIS BREHIER

François Jacquier

French mathematician and physicist, born at Vitry-le-Francois, 7 June, 1711; died at Rome, 3 July, 1788. His early education was entrusted to an ecclesiastic, who soon recognized in him an inclination to science and mathematics, and endeavoured to cultivate it. When sixteen years old, Francois, entered the Order of Friars Minor, and after profession was sent to Rome, to complete his studies in the French convent of the order, La Trinité du Mont. With the permission of his superiors he specialized in mathematics, and at the same time, as a sort of mental diversion, devoted himself to the study of the ancient languages. He became very proficient in Hebrew, and spoke Greek as though it were his mother-tongue. His labours and learning gained for him the patronage of Cardinals Alberoni and Portocarrero. He accompanied Cardinal Alberoni on his legation to Ravenna, and was appointed to inspect the work begun by Manfredi to prevent the repeated innudations of that territory. On his return he was given the chair of Sacred Scripture at the College of the Propaganda, and was also detailed by the general chapter of the Friars Minors, assembled at Marseilles, to work upon the annals of the order. The King of Sardinia named him professor of physics at the University of Turin in 1745, but Cardinal Valenti, prime minister of Benedict XIV, eager to retain so learned a man in Rome, had him assigned to the chair of experimental physics at the Roman College. Here he was in continual demand for consultation upon scientific matters. In 1763 he was appointed instructor in physics and mathematics to the young Prince Ferdinand at Parma. He was appointed in 1773 to the chair of mathematics at the Roman College, on the occasion of the suppression of the Jesuits. At his death he was connected with nearly all the great scientific and literary societies of Europe. The most important of his works are:

• "Isaaci Newtoni philosophiæ naturalis principia mathematica, perpetuis commentariis illustrata" (4 parts in 3 vols. 4to, Feneva, 1739-42), in collaboration with P. Lesuer;
• Parere e riflessioni sopra I danni della cuppola di San-Pietro" (4to, Rome, 1743);
• "Elementi di perspecttiva secondo I princpi di Taylor" (8 vo, Rome, 1745);
• "Institutiones Philosophicæ ad studia theologica potissimum accommodata" (6 vols. in 12 mo, Rome, 1757), reprinted many times at Rome, Venice, and in Germany, and later translated into Spanish;
• "Eléments du calcul intégral" (4to, Parma, 1768), a work highly esteemed and more complete than any that had been published up to that time.

E.P. TIVNAN

Jaén

(GIENNENSIS)

Diocese in Southern Spain. The city of Jaén, capital of the province of the same name, is situated in north-eastern Andalusia on the lower part of the north-eastern slope of Monte Jabalcuz about 1800 feet above sea-level. In 1900 the population was 26,434. During the period 1013-90 the city of Jaén, the Romans' Aurgi, was the capital of the independent Moorish Kingdom of Djayyan, and was reconquered from the Moors by St. Ferdinand III of Castile and Leon in April, 1246. According to local tradition the first bishop was St. Euphrasius, supposed to be one of the seventy disciples. He is said to have been sent to Southern Spain, together with St. Torquatus and five other pupils of the Apostles, by Sts. Peter and Paul, and to have settled at Iliturgis (now Andújar), where he is reputed to have suffered martyrdom in the year 68 [cf. Henschenius, "De adventu in Hispaniam Sanctorum Torquati etc." in "Acta SS.," III, May (Brussels, 1680), 442-4; Terrones y Robres, "Vida, martirio, translación y milagros de S. Eufrasio, obispo y patrón de Andújar" (Granada, 1657)]. Other predecessors of the bishops of Jaén are, according to local investigations, the bishops of Cazlona (Episcopi Castulonenses), who were active in the period 298-656, and finally four of the bishops of Baeza (Episcopi Beatienses), flourishing between the seventh and the thirteenth centuries. The list of the bishops proper of Jaén does not begin until 1248, when the see was transferred from Baeza to Jaén. The last Bishop of Baeza was Fray Domingo, O.P. (1227-48); the first Bishop of Jaén was Pedro I Martinez (1249-50). The most notable among the sixty-four bishops who have governed the Diocese of Jaén are: St. Pedro III Pascual (1296-1300) and Gonzalo de Zunyiga (1422-56), who both died as martyrs in Moorish prisons; the sixty-fourth bishop, Juan Jose Laguarda y Fenollera (1906-9), was appointed Bishop of Barcelona at the consistory of 29 April, 1909, since which date the See of Jaén has been vacant.

STATISTICS

The Diocese of Jaén is suffragan of Granada: it is bounded on the north by the Diocese of Ciudad Real, on the east by the Archdiocese of Toledo, on the south by the Archdiocese of Granada and the Diocese of Guadix, on the west by the Diocese of Cordova. According to the latest official diocesan statistics (1 January, 1905) it contains about 395,000 inhabitants, 12 deaneries (arciprestazgos) divided into 136 parishes, 136 parish churches, and 6 dependent churches. There are four male religious congregations with 4 monasteries, 10 cloistered female congregations with 27 houses, and 11 uncloistered with 29 houses. The chapter of the cathedral at Jaén has 12 canonries, besides which the old chapter (6 canonries) still exists at Baeza. There is also the theological seminary of San Felipe Neri at Baeza in addition to the diocesan seminary (Seminario Conciliar) at Jaén. Other educational institutions are the Colegio del Santisimo Sacramento for theological studies, and the Colegio de San Eufrasio for the education of choir-boys, both at Jaén. The massive Cathedral of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin stands in the highest part of the city of Jaén. It was begun in 1532 by Pedro de Valdelvira, and is a fine specimen of early Spanish Renaissance. In a shrine by the high altar is preserved the famous Santo Rostro or Santa Faz, a handkerchief of Saint Veronica, which is annually exhibited to the people on Good Friday and on the Feast of the Assumption.

DE XIMENA JURADO, Catalogo de los obispos de las iglesias catedrales de la diocesis de Jaén (Madrid, 1654); DE RUS PUERTA, Historia eclesiatica del reino y obispado de Jaén (Jaén, 1634), the first part of which is alone printed, the second part being in the National Library at Madrid (MS. Q 58); DEL BILCHES, Santos y Santuarios del obispado de Jaén y Baeza (Madrid, 1653); GAMS, Kirchengesch. von Spanien, III (Ratisbon, 1876), i, 48 sq., 160, 426 sq.

GREGOR REINHOLD

Jaenbert

(Jaenberht, Janbriht, Janibert, Jambert, Lambert, Lanbriht, Genegberht.)

Thirteenth Archbishop of Canterbury; died at Canterbury 11 or 12 August, 791: the exact date is uncertain; Florence of Worcester and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle place it in 790; Symeon of Durham, the better authority, in 791. Nothing is known of his life till 760, when he was elected Abbot of St. Augustine's, Canterbury, and blessed by Archbishop Bregwin. When the archbishop died he was buried at Christ Church, and Jaenbert asserted the rights of his own abbey as the traditional burying-place with such vigour that according to a late tradition the monks of Christ Church elected him archbishop to avoid his appeal to Rome. He was consecrated on 2 February, 766, and received the pallium from Pope Paul I in 767. During his pontificate the struggle of Kent against the growing power of Offa of Mercia ended in the defeat of the former kingdom. Offa's policy for the aggrandizement of Mercia involved the creation of a separate archbishopric independent of Canterbury, and though Jaebert opposed this vigorously, Offa obtained the pope's consent, and the papal legates George and Theophylact held a council at Chelsea in 787 where Jaebert was forced to surrender much of the jurisdiction of Canterbury to Higbald, the newly elected Archbishop of Lichfield. The extent of the territory transferred is not recorded. Silver coins were minted by Jaebert, he being the earliest Archbishop of Canterbury of whose coinage specimens have been preserved.

EDWIN BURTON

Jaffa

A titular see in the Patriarchate of Jerusalem. The city of Jaffa is very ancient. Even before the arrival of Josue in Palestine it is mentioned on the pylons of Karnak and the cuneiform tablets of Tell-el-Amarna. Several Greek authors, relying on native legends, traced its foundation to Jopes (Cassiopeia), daughter of Aeolus, and made it the scene of the fable of Andromeda exposed on a rock and delivered by Perseus. Assigned to the tribe of Dan (Jos., xix, 46), Japho, or Jaffa, seems not to have belonged to the Jews before the reign of David, who conquered the maritime region (Judges, i, 34; xviii, 1; II Kings, viii, 1; Ecclus., xlvii, 8). In the time of Solomon it served as the port of landing for the cedars sent by Hiram for the construction of the Temple of Jerusalem (II Par., ii, 16). After the death of Solomon it probably recovered its independence or fell into the power of the kings of Israel. The Prophet Jonas took ship there for Tharsis (Jonas, i, 3), and King Ezechias brought it once more under the power of the Kingdom of Juda (IV Kings, xviii, 8). In this condition it is several times mentioned in the inscriptions of the kings of Assyria, whose domination passed later to the Chaldeans and Persians. In the reign of Cyrus Jaffa again served as a landing-port for the materials destined for the reconstruction of the Temple (I Esd., iii, 7). After the expedition of Alexander the Great (333 B.C.) the city passed into the power alternately of Syria and Egypt. In consequence of violent wrong done the Jewish population, Judas Machabeus attacked the harbour at night and burned all the vessels (II Mach., xii, 3-7). Shortly afterwards (about 142 B.C.) his brothers Jonathas and Simon Machabeus took final possession of the city (I Mach., x, 74-6). Pompey captured it from the Jews in 63 B.C., and during the period of more than a century, until it became entirely Roman, the city changed masters several times.

Jaffa, which had now become Joppe, soon counted Christians among its inhabitants. It was there that St. Peter raised to life the widow Tabitha, a name interpreted Dorcas (Acts, ix, 36-42), whose tomb is still the object of a popular pilgrimage; there, too, in the house of Simon the Tanner, he had the symbolical vision of the unclean animals (Acts, x, 1-23). At the time of the great Jewish revolt against the Romans, Joppe was taken by Cestius Gallus, Governor of Syria, and its inhabitants slaughtered to the number of 8400. The fugitives from the city and vicinity afterwards reassembled there, and turned to piracy, which brought about a second intervention of the Romans and the violent death of 4200 persons. The city was then razed to the ground. Being without importance during the first centuries of Christianity, Joppe did not possess a bishop until the fifth century (Le Quien, "Oriens Christianus," III, 627); a very small number of its Greek or Latin bishops are known (ibid., III, 625-30, 1291; Eubel "Hierarchia catholica medii aevi," Munich, I, 297; II, 186). After the Arab conquest and the destruction of Caesarea Maritima in the seventh century, Jaffa acquired some importance and became the chief seaport of Palestine. Captured by the crusaders, it became, under Godfrey of Bouillon, the County of Jaffa and Ascalon, feudatory to the King of Jerusalem. One of its counts, John of Ibelin, wrote the principal book of the Assizes of the Kingdom of Jerusalem. Retaken by Saladin in 1187, and surrendered to Richard Coeur de Lion in 1192, Jaffa was reconquered in 1197 by the Sultan Melek-el-Adel, who had 20,000 Christians massacred there. In 1204 it fell once more into the power of the Christians, who held it until 1268, when Sultan Bibars of Egypt took possession of it and completely destroyed it. Bonaparte took it by assault in 1799, and was accused, perhaps wrongfully, of having poisoned the Ottoman garrison and his own soldiers infected with the pest. Ibrahim Pasha, the son of Mehemet Ali, captured the city in 1831, and seven years later it was destroyed by earthquake.

Jaffa is connected by railroad with Jerusalem; its harbour, which is difficult of access, received 1789 steam or sailing vessels in 1907, and transacted business to the extent of 28 million francs ($5,600,000) — 17,000,000 imports and 11,000,000 exports. The city is surrounded by magnificent orange groves, and has now entirely recovered from all its misfortunes, the census of 1905 crediting it with a population of more than 40,000 souls. Among these are 5000 Jews, 1000 Protestants (mostly foreigners), 3550 Orthodox Greeks, 100 schismatic Armenians, 1770 Catholics (of whom 1010 are Latins, 215 Maronites, 510 Melchites, and 35 Syrians). The remainder of the population (about 30,000) is Mussulman. Franciscan Fathers direct the parish church and a school for boys. The Brothers of the Christian Schools have a boarding-school, two day-schools, and a commercial school. Italian Catholics also have a school for boys. The Sisters of St. Joseph and the Franciscan Sisters have each a boarding and a day school. There is also a French hospital conducted by nuns. The other (non-Catholic) Christian communities, especially the Protestants, also have schools, hospitals, and orphanages.

VIGOUROUX, Joppe in Dict. de la Bible; MEISTERMANN, Nouveau Guide de Terre Sainte (Paris, 1907), 19-27; GUERIN, Description de la Palestine. Judee, I, 1-22.

S. VAILHÉ

Diocese of Jaffna

(JAFFNENSIS.)

Situated in the northern portion of Ceylon, Jaffna comprises the northern and north-central provinces of the island. Christianity in Jaffna dates back as far as the time of St. Francis Xavier. In 1548 St. Francis visited Manaar and came to Jaffna to persuade the king to cease his persecutions against the Christians. In 1580, under the protection of the Portuguese, the first Catholic church was built at Jaffna. The whole peninsula surrendered in 1591 to Andrea Furtado de Mendoza. Almost the entire population subsequently abjured idolatry and embraced Christianity. The fort of Jaffna capitulated to the Dutch in 1658. At that time there were in the peninsula 50 priests, 1 Jesuit college, 1 Franciscan and 1 Dominican convent, and 14 churches. The Dutch immediately manifested the most hostile disposition towards the Catholics. The priests and monks were banished, and giving them shelter was declared a capital offence. From that time dates the long persecution which ended only with the surrender of Ceylon to the British in 1796. To this diocese belongs the Island of Manaar rendered famous by the apostolic labours of St. Francis Xavier and by the martyrdom of from 600 to 700 Christians, who were executed by order of the King of Jaffna. Madhu, though a solitary spot in the middle of the jungle, has also its historical fame. For a long time during the Dutch persecution it was the refuge of native Christians. To this spot they had transported a statue of Our Lady which is now enshrined in the new church. Madhu has developed into an important pilgrimage, where more than 40,000 pilgrims congregate every year for the feast of the Visitation.

In 1845 Ceylon was divided into the two vicariates of Colombo and Jaffna, with Bishop Orazio Bettachini as vicar Apostolic of the latter. In 1847 the Oblates of Mary Immaculate arrived in Ceylon. In 1857 the Jaffna vicariate was handed over to the Oblates, and on the death of Bishop Bettachini, Bishop Semeria, O.M.I., was appointed vicar Apostolic. In 1868 Bishop Christopher Bonjean, O.M.I., succeeded Bishop Semeria. He had been in the missions for nine years in India and in 1856 had crossed over to Ceylon to join the Oblate Congregation. During his administration a great impulse was given to primary education. The pernicious effects of the Protestant and Hindu schools were more than counterbalanced by the activity of the bishop and the missionaries. Subsequently Bishop Bonjean was transferred to the metropolitan See of Colombo. Bishop Theophile Melirzan, O.M.I., succeeded him at Jaffna and, following in his footsteps, was named Archbishop of Colombo in 1893. In the same year Henri Joulain, Q.M.I., was appointed Bishop of Jaffna.

The entire population of the diocese is 499,200; the Catholics numbering 45,500. The diocese is in the hands of the Oblates; 3 secular priests help in the parochial ministry. The total number of missionaries is 46. Attached to the cathedral is St. Martin's seminary for the education of junior students aspiring to the priesthood. St. Patrick's college and boarding school is the most flourishing institution of the northern province. It has a staff of 6 European fathers, 1 native father, 2 brothers, and 15 native professors. The average number of students is 450. It is especially devoted to higher English education, and prepares its students for the Cambridge Junior and Senior examinations and for the London University Intermediate. Some years ago it was thought expedient to come into closer contact with non-Catholics and especially with the higher classes of Hindus. For this purpose a Hindu boarding school was attached to St. Patrick's college. The boarders number 100, with good prospects for the future. Jaffna convent, conducted by the Sisters of the Holy Family of Bordeaux, follows the same junior and senior courses, for the education of girls, as St. Patrick's. To the convent is attached a girls' orphanage. The native Brothers of St. Joseph are occupied in teaching at Jaffna, Kayts, Manaar, and Mullaitivu. The native Sisters of St. Peter conduct primary schools in all the important stations of the diocese. There are 127 schools under the control of the missionaries, for the vernacular and primary English education. At the two industrial schools of Colombogam and Mullaitivu 125 orphan boys are taught agriculture and useful trades. The diocese has conferences of St. Vincent de Paul and young men's associations for the working classes. St. Joseph's Catholic Press is the home of the Jaffna Catholic Guardian, a weekly paper devoted to the interests of the diocese. A Catholic Club has just been founded for the purpose of interests of the Catholic community.

Catholic Directory (Madras, 1908); BONJEAN. Jaffna Directory.

J.F. ALBERT LORTIE

Jainism

A form of religion intermediate between Brahminism and Buddhism, originated in India in pre-Christian times, and has maintained its heretical attitude towards Brahminism down to the present day. The name is derived from jina, conqueror, one of the epithets popularly applied to the reputed founder of the sect. Jainism bears a striking resemblance to Buddhism in its monastic system, its ethical teachings, its sacred texts, and in the story of its founder. This closeness of resemblance has led not a few scholars— as Lassen, Weber, Wilson, Tiele, Barth— look upon Jainism as an offshoot of Buddhism and to place its origin some centuries later than the time of Buddha. But the prevailing view to-day— of Bühler, Jacobi, Hopkins, and others— that Jainism in its origin is independent of Buddhism and, perhaps, is the more ancient of the two. The many points of similarity between the two sects are explained by the indebtedness of both to a common source, namely the teachings and practices of ascetic, monastic Brahminism. Of the reputed founder of Jainism we have but few details, and most of these are so like what we read of the beginnings of Buddhism that one is strongly led to suspect that here at least one is dealing with a variation of the Buddha-legend. According to Jainist tradition, the founder lived in the sixth century b.c., being either a contemporary or a precursor of Buddha. His family name was Jnatriputra (in Prakrit, Nattaputta), but, like Gotama, he was honoured with the laudatory names of Buddha, the enlightened, Mahavira, the great hero, and Jina, the conqueror. These last two epithets came to be his distinctive titles, while the name Buddha was associated almost exclusively with Gotama. Like Buddha, Jina was the son of a local raja who held sway over a small district in the neighbourhood of Benares. While still a young man he felt the emptiness of a life of pleasure, and gave up his home and princely station to become an ardent follower of the Brahmin ascetics. If we may trust the Jainist scriptures, he carried the principle of self-mortification to the extent that he went about naked, unsheltered from the sun, rain, and winds, and lived on the rudest vegetarian fare, practising incredible fasts. Accepting the principle of the Brahmin ascetics, that salvation is by personal effort alone, he took the logical step of rejecting as useless the Vedas and the Vedic rites. For this attitude towards the Brahmin traditions he was repudiated as a heretic. He gathered eleven disciples around him, and went about preaching his doctrine of salvation. Like Buddha he made many converts, whom he organized under a monastic rule of life. Associated with them were many who accepted his teaching in theory, but who in practice stopped short of the monastic life of extreme asceticism. These were the lay Jainists, who, like the lay Buddhists, contributed to the support of the monks.

The Jainists seem never to have been so numerous as the Buddhists. Though they claim a membership of over a million believers, laity included, recent statistics of India show that their number is not greater than half a million. On the question of the propriety of going about naked, the Jainist monks have for ages been split into two sects. The White-Robed Sect, whose monks. are clothed in white garments, is the more numerous, flourishing chiefly in N. W. India. To this sect belong a few communities of Jainist nuns. The naked ascetics, forming the other sect, are strongest in the South of India, but even here they have largely restricted the custom of nakedness to the time of eating. As the Buddhist creed is summed up in three words, Buddha, the Law, the Order, so the Jainist creed consists of the so-called three jewels, Right Belief, Right Knowledge, Right Conduct. Right Belief embraces faith in Jina as the true teacher of salvation and the acceptance of the Jainist scriptures as his authoritative teaching. These scriptures are less extensive, less varied, than the Buddhist, and, while resembling the latter to a large degree, lay great stress on bodily mortification. The canon of the White-robed Sect consists of forty-five Agamas, or sacred texts, in the Prakrit tongue. Jacobi, who has translated some of these texts in the "Sacred Books of the East", is of the opinion that they cannot be older than 300 b.c. According to Jainist tradition, they were preceded by an ancient canon of fourteen so-called Purvas, which have totally disappeared. With the Jainist, "Right Knowledge" embraces the religious view of life together with the end of man, while "Right Conduct" is concerned with the main ethical precepts and with the ascetic, monastic system.

The Jainist, like the Buddhist and the pantheistic Brahmin, takes for granted the doctrine of Karma and its implied rebirths. He, too, views every form of earthly, bodily existence as misery. Freedom from rebirth is thus the goal after which he aspires. But, while the pantheistic Brahmin and the primitive Buddhist looked for the realization of the end in the extinction of conscious, individual existence (absorption in Brahma, Nirvana), the Jainist has always tenaciously held to the primitive traditional belief in a final abode of bliss, where the soul, liberated from the necessity of rebirth on earth, enjoys forever a spiritual, conscious existence. To attain this end, the Jainist, like the Buddhist and the pantheistic Brahmin, holds that the traditional gods can aid but little. The existence of the gods is not denied, but their worship is held to be of no avail and is thus abandoned. Salvation is to be obtained by personal effort alone. To reach the longed-for goal, it is necessary to purify the soul of all that binds it to a bodily existence, so that it shall aspire purely and solely after a spiritual life in heaven. This is accomplished by the life of severe mortification of which Jina set the example. Twelve years of ascetic life as a Jainist monk and eight rebirths are necessary to constitute the purgatorial preparation for the Jainist heaven. While the Jains are not worshippers of the Hindu gods, they erect imposing temples to Jina and other venerated teachers. The images of these Jainist saints are adorned with lights and flowers, and the faithful walk around them while reciting sacred mantras. Jainist worship is thus little more than a veneration of a few saints and heroes of the past.

On its ethical side— sphere of Right Conduct— is largely at one with Brahminism and Buddhism. There are, however, a few differences in the application of the principle of not killing. The sacredness of all kinds of life implied in the doctrine of metempsychosis has been more scrupulously observed in practice by the Jain than by the Brahmin or the Buddhist. The Brahmin tolerates the slaughter of animals for food, to provide offerings for the sacrifice, or to show hospitality to a guest; the Buddhist does not scruple to eat meat prepared for a banquet; but the Jain reprobates meat-food without exception as involving the unlawful taking of life. For similar reasons the Jain does not content himself with straining his drinking water and with remaining at home during the rainy season, when the ground is swarming with lower forms of life, but when he goes forth, he wears a veil before his mouth, and carries a broom with which he sweeps the ground before him to avoid destruction of insect life. The Jainist ascetic allows himself to be bitten by gnats and mosquitoes rather than risk their destruction by brushing them away. Hospitals for animals have been a prominent feature of Jainist benevolence, bordering at times on absurdity. For example, in 1834 there existed in Kutch a temple hospital which supported 5000 rats. With all this scrupulous regard for animal life the Jain differs from the Buddhist in his view of the lawfulness of religious suicide. According to Jainist ethics a monk who has practised twelve years of severe asceticism, or who has found after long trial that he cannot keep his lower nature in control, may hasten his end by self-destruction.

JACOBI, The Jaina Sutras, vols. XXII and XLV of the Sacred Books of the East; HOPKINS, The Religions of India (Boston, 1895); HARDY, Der Buddhismus nach älteren Paliwerken (Münster, 1890); MONIER WILLIAMS, Buddhism (London, 1889); BARTH, The Religions of India (London. 1891).

CHARLES F. AIKEN.

Jamaica

The largest of the British West Indian islands, is situated in the Caribbean Sea, between latitude 17 deg. 43 min. and 18 deg. 32 min. N., and longitude 76 deg. 11 min. and 78 deg. 30 min. W. It is 90 miles south of Cuba, 100 west of Haiti, and 554 miles from Colon. The nearest point of the continent of America is about 400 miles southwest of the island. The name Jamaica is said to be derived from Arawak words denoting water and wood, signifying a fertile land. The island is 144 miles long, and from 21.5 to 49 miles broad. Its area is 4207.5 square miles, of which about 646 are flat, consisting of alluvium, marl, and swamp. There are some mineral deposits in the island, the most abundant being copper. The surface of the island is very mountainous, almost 2000 square miles of it being above an altitude of 1000 feet. The culminating point, Blue Mountain Peak, is 7360 feet high.

FLORA AND FAUNA

There are over two thousand distinct species of flowering plants and some four hundred and seventy varieties of ferns in Jamaica. The economic woods include: logwood, lignum-vitae, cedar, mahogany, mahoe, fustic, bullet-wood, yacca satin-wood, and cashaw. The medicinal woods and plants are quassia, cinchona, gamboge, sarsaparilla, senna, belladonna, castor-oil, ginger, tamarind, and tobacco. Dietetic: coffee, cocoa, arrow-root, pimento, cane, plantain, yam, and sweet potato. Among the fruit trees, all the citrus family abound, mango, star-apple, bread-fruit, banana, cocoa-nut, custard-apple, avocado pear, pineapple, etc.

TOPOGRAPHY

The island is divided into three counties: Surrey, Middlesex, and Cornwall, and each into five parishes: Portland, St. Thomas, St. Andrew, Kingston, Port Royal; St. Mary, St. Ann, St. Catherine, Clarendon, Manchester; Hanover, St. James Trelawny, St. Elizabeth, Westmoreland.

POPULATION AND VITAL STATISTICS

The first recorded attempt at enumerating the population of Jamaica was in 1660, when "the relicts of the army" were stated to be 2200, and the planters, merchants, and others about the same number. In 1775, there were 13,737 whites, free coloured 4093, slaves 192,787. In 1834 — the year of negro emancipation — it was computed that there were 15,000 whites, 5000 free blacks, 40,000 coloured, 311,070 slaves, making a total of 371,070. In June, 1844, the census gave whites 13,816, coloured 81,074, and blacks 346,374; total 441,264. The population in 1891 was 639,493 of whom 14,692 were white, 121,755 were coloured, 486,624 black, 10,116 coolies (East Indians), 481 Chinamen, and 3623 not described. The total estimated population in 1907 was 830,261. The Registrar-General's statistics show that upwards of 65 per cent of births were those of illegitimate children. Many of these are the offspring of consistent or permanent concubinage rather than of promiscuity. In this connection it must not be forgotten that the ancestors of the majority of this people some two generations ago were permitted and encouraged to breed like cattle, and were denied admission to the marriage state. In 1881 there were over 10,000 Catholics in Jamaica; in 1891 there were 12,000, and at the present date (1908) about 14.000. The average annual birthrate for ten years 1896-7 to 1906-7, was 36.5 per 1000 of the estimated mean population. For the same period the mean average death-rate of population per 1000 was 23.2. The population of Kingston is some 50,000, Spanish Town 5690, Montego Bay 4760, Port Antonio 2500, Falmouth 3100, Mandeville 1500.

CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY

Intimately associated with vital statistics comes the question of climate. Jamaica, being a tropical island, was formerly looked on as injurious as a residence to the inhabitants of northern latitudes. This theory has been completely refuted, and for many years past the invalid and tourist is resorting in increasing numbers to this "Riviera of the West," which is an ideal sojourn for the health-seeker. The diversity of surface, from the plains to the plateaux and mountain slopes, affords a variety of climate suitable to any requirement. The table of 1899 given in the next column will illustrate this fact, at varying altitudes and localities.

Meteorological records are wanting for Manchester and St. Elizabeth highlands, which are much drier than other hill districts of the island. There are many mineral springs valuable for the cure of acute and chronic diseases, especially gout and rheumatism. Two of them possess very remarkable curative properties: the hot sulphurous springs of Bath, and the warm saline spring at Milk River.

Locality Temperature Humidity Rainfall Mean Mean Mean Annual Total Annual Annual Annual (%) (inches) (deg. F) Range 7 a.m. 3 p.m. (F deg.) Kingston, Public Gardens, elev. 60 ft. 79.4 16.2 81 63 46.78 Hope Gardens, elev. 700 ft. 77.3 20.9 87 67 62.39 Cinchona Gardens elev. 4900 ft. 62.9 12.2 83 84 90.08

HISTORY

Jamaica was discovered by Columbus on 3 May, 1494. He landed probably at or near St. Ann's Bay, called by him Sancta Gloria, owing to the great beauty of the environs. Nine years later his caravels were wrecked at Puerto Bueno — the present Dry Harbour. He gave the name Santiago to the island, which was but partially colonized by the Spaniards, and was never popular with them. They first introduced horses, cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, and domestic poultry. To the Spaniards Jamaica is also indebted for the orange, lemon, lime, and other fruit trees; the coffee tree is due however to British initiative about the year 1721. From the constituents of the shell mounds throughout the island and the absence therefrom of all objects of a European character, it would appear that these accumulations represent the kitchen middens of the pre-Columban aboriginal inhabitants. These remains found principally in caves, comprise: (a) crania and other bones (human), (b) stone implements (celts, etc.), (c) objects of pottery (various), (d) ornamental beads (chalcedony), kitchen middens containing shells (principally marine), broken pottery, fish and coney bones, stone implements, and ashes. Their cottages were built on stockade posts set vertically side by side in a trench. For animal food they depended principally on the sea, and on their festivals or barbecues the entire village went out on marine or river excursions. Their gardens yielded arrow-root, beans, cassava, cucumbers, melons, maize, and yams; for fruit they cultivated the guava, mammee, papaw and star-apple. They cultivated cotton and wound it for cordage and twisted it into yarn for making garments. The only domestic animals were probably the muysea duck and the alca, a small dog. The aborigines were most probably a tribe of the Arawak Indians, and not Caribs, who were cannibals. The Arawaks were a gentle and inoffensive people as their name (meal-eaters) signifies. They believed in a Supreme Being (Jocahuna), in a future state, and had a tradition about a deluge. Their form of government was patriarchal. They smoked tobacco and played a football game called bato, in which both men and women joined.

Spanish Occupation

A review of the period of Spanish occupation is one which reflects very little credit on Spanish colonial administration in those days. Their treatment of the aboriginal inhabitants, whom they are accused of having practically exterminated, is a grave charge, and if true, cannot be condoned on the plea that such conduct was characteristic of the age, and that as bad or worse was perpetrated by other nations even in later years. In the few places where the Spaniards settled, they invariably built a church, sometimes a monastery, and occasionally a theatre. Sevilla-Nueva (or Sevilla d'Oro) was the capital of the island from 1510 till 1520, when Diego Columbo founded a new capital, Santiago de la Vega, which is now known as Spanish Town. In 1521 orders were received from Spain to cease from making the native Indians slaves. Las Casas, deservedly called "Protector-General of the Indians," was instrumental in inducing the pope to issue a Bull in 1542, restoring the Indians to freedom. Unhappily this concession came too late for the aboriginal inhabitants of the island. Soon after, Africans were imported into Jamaica as slaves. The discreditable failure to capture San Domingo by the expedition under Admiral Penn — father of the founder of Pennsylvania — and General Venables, described by Carlyle as "the unsuccessfulest enterprise Oliver Cromwell had concern with," ended in a successful descent on Jamaica, which was captured in May, 1655.

English Occupation

"To signalise the capture of St. Iago" by the English "a small leaven of Puritan feeling and a large amount of ruffianism led the troops into a display of energy. . . . The abbey and the two churches were demolished and the bells melted down for shot" (Gardner). The poet Milton, secretary to Cromwell, justified this invasion of the West Indies on the ground of "the most noble opportunities of promoting the Glory of God, and enlarging the bounds of the Kingdom of Christ, which we do not doubt will appear to be the chief end of our late expedition to the West Indies." The advent of the English adventurer gave a considerable impetus to trade with the outside world. The chief seaport of the island, now Port Royal, soon became "a nest of iniquity and a centre of rude luxury, the emporium of the loot of the buccaneer. . . . no form of vice was wanting, no indulgence too extravagant for its lawless population." But it paid the penalty of its lawlessness, being wiped out by an earthquake on 7 June, 1692, after which event Kingston, the present capital, was established. As a means of repeopling the island, which was being decimated by fever, a large number of Royalists in Ireland were seized and sent out as slaves by the English. "As a result of Cromwell's Irish policy one thousand young women and the same number of young men were by order of the Council of State arrested in Ireland and shipped to Jamaica, while the sheriffs of several counties of Scotland were instructed to apprehend all known idle, masterless robbers and vagabonds, male and female, and transport them to the island" (Ellis). In 1660 the population of Jamaica was about 4500 whites and some 1500 negroes. Jamaica was ceded to England by the treaty of Madrid in 1670. On the accession of James II, the Duke of Albemarle (a Catholic), son of General Monk, was appointed governor of Jamaica. One of his suite was Sir Hans Sloane, founder of the British Museum.

Slavery

The war with the American colonies met with little sympathy in Jamaica. The assembly petitioned George III to grant more political autonomy to the struggling colonists. In 1778 France, which had recognized the independence of the new republic, was forced into war by England, and Jamaica, like the rest of the West Indies, suffered accordingly. Seven years later the maroons, or half-breed negroes, rose in rebellion, repulsed both the colonial militia and the regular troops, devastated large tracts of country, and were not finally overpowered till 1790. Some 600 of them, men, women, and children were deported to Nova Scotia, and subsequently to Sierra Leone. In the eighteenth century 700,000 negro slaves were landed in Jamaica. When, in 1807, the slave trade was abolished in the British colonies, there were some 320,000 slaves in Jamaica. Slavery was destined to continue there for more than another quarter of a century. The local Government, which consisted almost entirely of slave holders and sympathizers with slavery, was a negrophobic plutocracy, and the Anglican, or Episcopalian, clergy were in sympathy with the assembly, as they were dependent on it for their stipends. Ministers of other Protestant denominations were working for the education and enlightenment of the negroes, only to be reviled, hindered, and persecuted by the dominant party. A serious outbreak among the slaves occurred in 1831, property to the value of $3,500,000 being destroyed. The law emancipating the slaves passed by the British Parliament was accepted by the Jamaica Assembly in 1833 under strong protests, and on 1 August, 1834, slavery was abolished in the island. The number of slaves for whom compensation was paid by the British Government was 225,290, the amount awarded having been $29,269,875. As an immediate result of the emancipation of the negroes, the want of labourers was soon experienced. In 1844 immigration of hill- coolies from Hindustan was sanctioned by the Legislative Council. During the past sixty years, some 30,000 Hindu agricultural labourers have been imported into the island, of whom over 10,000 have, during the last twenty years, returned to India, taking back with them more than $350,000 in government bills of exchange.

Catholic Revival

From the time of the expulsion of the Spaniards in 1655, and especially after the adoption of the Toleration Act of 1688, which "afforded liberty of conscience to all persons except papists" (Gardner), Catholic revival in the island was debarred. It was not until 1792 that the first instalment of freedom of worship was granted to them. Dr. Douglas, Vicar Apostolic of the London District, and ecclesiastical superior of the Catholics in the British West Indies, sent out an Irish Franciscan, Father Quigley, in 1798, who did pioneer work for seven years, and died in 1805. He was succeeded by Fathers Rodriguez d'Arango and Campos Benito, both Franciscans. By a Brief of Gregory XVI dated 10 January, 1837, the British West Indies were divided into three vicariates Apostolic: the Windward Islands, British Guiana and Jamaica. Father Benito was appointed first Vicar Apostolic of this island in 1837. The same year two Jesuits, Fathers Cotham, an Englishman, and Dupeyron, a Frenchman, arrived. They, with the Vicar Apostolic and Father Duquesnay, the first native of Jamaica raised to the priesthood, formed the whole ecclesiastical body. Asiatic cholera broke out in Jamaica in October, 1850, claiming over 30,000 victims; the Catholic clergy won the highest praise for their self-sacrifice and heroism during the plague. In 1835 the Vicar Apostolic, Benito, died and was succeeded by Father Dupeyron, S.J., the first Jesuit to act as Vicar Apostolic of Jamaica.

Jesuit Administration

We have now to deal with the mature development of the mission in the nineteenth century. Numerically it was small, but it had attracted public attention by its philanthropic and religious work. With the accession of Father Dupeyron the Jamaica mission came formally under the control of the Society of Jesus, and has remained so ever since. The new Vicar Apostolic, hampered like his predecessors by a paucity of labourers and scantiness of resources, could continue only to watch over and safeguard that which had already been effected.

In 1857 four Sisters of the Third Order Regular of St. Francis arrived in Jamaica from Glasgow, to instruct the coloured children. In a short time they opened a poor school and subsequently a high school for young ladies, both destined to do excellent work. In 1866 Father Joseph Sidney Woollett, S.J., of the English province, received sub-delegate powers of Vicar Apostolic. The following year Father Hathaway, S.J., arrived from England. He was a distinguished graduate of the University of Oxford, and had been a Fellow of Worcester College, and subsequently dean and bursar. In 1849 he accepted the incumbency of Shadwell, near Leeds. Becoming a Catholic in 1851, he joined the Society of Jesus at the age of thirty-eight. He was a most zealous, self-denying, hardworking priest, an eloquent and persuasive preacher, and a cultured scholar; yet for years he taught the poor school for boys (St. Joseph's), until his health broke down. He died in 1891. The number of Catholics in Jamaica in 1872 did not exceed 6000; the greater portion of them lived in Kingston, where there were two churches. Seven chapels supplied the wants of the sparsely scattered rural Catholic population. There were about 400 children, boys and girls, attending the convent schools and St. Joseph's in the capital. In August, 1880, a cyclone passed over the east end of the island, destroying nearly all the wharves in Kingston. The Catholic churches and schools were wrecked, but were soon replaced through the generosity of the faithful in England and the United States, and the efforts of Father Thomas Porter, S.J., Vicar Apostolic from 1877 till 1888. After some forty consecutive years of priestly labour, Father Joseph Dupont, S.J., died in 1887. To perpetuate his memory, the citizens of Kingston, irrespective of creed or class, erected a marble statue in the Parade Square of the city. The statue was overturned and broken by the earthquake of 1907.

Bishop Gordon

Before his arrival in Jamaica, the Right Reverend Charles Cordon, S.J., D.D., who succeeded Father Porter as Vicar Apostolic, had been consecrated Bishop of Thyatira in partibus infidelium. He set about supplying the most pressing needs of the mission. Efficient elementary schools were started. In 1891 Holy Trinity church was improved, a tower, the Lady chapel, a sacristy, and baptistery being added at a cost of $12,500. Finally a hall to afford recreation and instruction for Catholic men, and for the meetings of the church guilds and sodalities, was completed in 1905 and named "Gordon Hall" after its founder. The hall and the church were both destroyed by the earthquake of 1907. Dr. Gordon also brought the Salesians into Jamaica, placing at their disposal a large property, Reading Pen, near Montego Bay, to be used for an agricultural college. In 1894 the care of the Jamaica mission was transferred to the Maryland-New York province of the Society, from the English province which had served it from the year 1855. In 1905 Father John Joseph Collins, S.J., was appointed administrator Apostolic of the vicariate, and in 1907 he was raised to the episcopacy as Bishop of Antiphellos in partibus infidelium and Vicar Apostolic of Jamaica.

Education

One of the first subjects to which the friends of emancipation turned their attention after the abolition of slavery was the education of the predial population of the West Indies. In Jamaica, however, there had been very little progress. The grant which had been made by the imperial Parliament was discontinued in 1844, and all that was done for elementary education in Jamaica was the grant of $15,000 per annum by the legislature for the next twenty years. A training college for educating teachers was established in 1870. In 1850 some Spanish Jesuits, who had been banished from New Granada by the Liberal revolutionary party, arrived at Kingston and opened what was called the Spanish College and what is now St. George's College, a school of higher education for boys of the middle and upper classes. Most of the refugee priests left Jamaica shortly afterwards for Guatemala, but the work they inaugurated was carried on by Father Simond, S.J. The college was closed about 1865, and opened again in 1868. Many prominent men in the island of all denominations have been educated there. In 1870 it ceased to be a boarding establishment. On the coming of the American Jesuits, the college was transferred to Winchester Park, in the suburbs of Kingston.

Elementary education for Catholics had been left very much in abeyance up to Bishop Gordon's arrival in 1889. The convent primary school had not more than 150 children, St. Joseph's school for boys not as many, and some half-dozen schools in various parts of the island, with a fluctuating attendance of under one hundred, were all that represented Catholic elementary education in Jamaica. The advent of the Sisters of Mercy from the parent-house, Bermondsey, London, in December, 1890, soon gave an additional impetus to Catholic education. Fifteen years later there were in all some two thousand children attending the various schools of the Sisters of St. Francis, and considerably over one thousand in the schools of the Sisters of Mercy. In addition, there are two orphanages at the Convent of Mercy, as well as two industrial schools (under Government), and a high school for girls. A house of mercy has also been established for the protection of young women.

Recent Events

The history of the colony from 1850 till 1865 might be described as a political tempest in a teapot. The Assembly and the Executive were at a dead-lock. Trouble was brewing in the country. During 1864 a severe drought had greatly impoverished the people, and the American Civil War had increased the price of imported bread-stuffs. Agitators had called on the coloured population to assert themselves, and the cry of "colour for colour and blood for blood" was raised. A partial rebellion, limited to the parish of St. Thomas, broke out among the black population in 1865. Some magistrates and officials were butchered at the beginning of the outbreak, but martial law was proclaimed, and the rebellion was quickly suppressed by methods which a Royal Commission pronounced later to have been unnecessarily severe. The chief agitators were hanged, after which Governor Eyre was recalled by the British authorities and was succeeded by Sir John Peter Grant, during whose term of office (1865-74) a number of important reforms were introduced. He brought an order in council abolishing the Legislative Assembly and establishing Crown government. The new legislature was designated the "Legislative Council of Jamaica" consisting of the Governor, six official members, and three non-official members. A privy council was also provided; a new revenue system was established; the police were organized; and other useful departments — judicial, public works, and banks — were re-arranged or founded. In 1871 the State, or Anglican, Church in Jamaica was disestablished. The seat of the civil government was transferred from Spanish Town to Kingston during the same year. The Rio Cobre irrigation works completed at a cost of $650,000 have in recent years converted the lowlands of the parish of St. Catherine into a huge banana plantation. In 1868 the cultivation of cinchona as an economic industry was started by Government; and the rapidly increase in banana trade between Port Antonio and the United States has been the salvation of the island financially during the last twenty-five years.

In Nov., 1875, a cyclone occurred, followed by another in Aug., 1880. The advent of Sir Henry Norman as governor to the colony in Dec., 1883, was signalized by the establishment of a revised constitution (promulgated by an order in council of Queen Victoria), consisting of a governor, a privy council, and a legislative council. The first is appointed by the sovereign for five years, and holds office during the sovereign's pleasure. The privy council consists of the senior military officer (not being below the rank of lieutenant-colonel), the colonial secretary, the attorney-general; and such other persons, not to exceed eight, provisionally appointed by the governor subject to the approval of the sovereign. The legislative council consists of the president (the governor), five ex-officio members, ten nominated members, and fourteen elected members (one for each of the fourteen parishes).

In 1890 the Jamaica Government Railway was sold to an American syndicate for $500,000 in cash, and $3,500,000 in second mortgage debentures. An international exhibition was opened (27 Jan., 1891), by the then Prince George of Wales. The guarantee fund was $120,000, total visitors, 302,830. Sir Henry Blake was then administering the affairs of the colony as governor.

In 1893 a board of education was formed. The abolition of fees in elementary schools was provided for by a house tax. In 1896 a scheme for the sale of Crown lands to small settlers was instituted. In 1898 direct cable service between Jamaica and England was established. The Imperial Direct Line of steamers was inaugurated with $200,000 annual subsidy — half from Jamaica, and half from the Imperial Government. Port Royal was created a separate parish in the same year.

AGRICULTURE AND COMMERCE

There is an agricultural society with some fifty affiliated branches in the various parishes of the island. Lectures and practical demonstrations have been organized by the society. Of the 2,500,000 acres of land in Jamaica, 1,310,000 are in wood and ruinate, and 775,000 under cultivation, 360,000 grazing land, and 215,000 under tillage). There are 143,000 acres of government or Crown land unoccupied. The following table shows the area under cultivation the last year of each of the three decades:

Year Canes Coffee Cocoa Ginger Corn Tobacco Bananas 1885 40,500 19,650 415 148 925 86 ? 1895 30,970 23,640 1,687 84 384 230 18,850 1905 24,420 21,480 6,532 184 86 378 32,675

In 1902-3 over 14,000,000 bunches of bananas valued at $5,673,750 were exported. Over 95 per cent of these went to America. It was officially estimated that the loss to the island by the cyclone the following year, through destruction and damage to crops and buildings and loss of trade, was $12,500,000. The estimated number of cattle, horses, etc. in the island in 1904-5 was: horned stock, 107,695; horses, 57,908; asses, 18,500.

Shipping

Number and tonnage of vessels that entered in the ports of the island for the year 1907:

Type Nationality Number Tonnage Sail British 182 15,974 Sail Foreign 49 28,441 Steam British 312 506,683 Steam Foreign 932 968,189

Quantity and value of the chief exports in 1907:

Commodity Quantity Value Sugar 15,499 hhds. $592,710 Rum 14,630 puns. 670,570 Coffee 54,861 cwts. 442,320 Pimento 85,294 cwts. 394,480 Dyewood 34,004 tons 417,560 Fruit 5,053,020 Tobacco 134,425 Minor products 1,675,590

Thus the relative importance of the island's exports that year was: sugar 6.3, rum 7.1, coffee 4.7, dyewood 4.4, pimento 4.2, fruit 53.8, tobacco 1.4, minor products 17.8. Of the exports, 57.2 per cent in value went to the United States of America, and 29.8 per cent to the United Kingdom.

Currency

Gold and silver coins current in Great Britain and Ireland are legal tender to any extent, and local nickel pennies, half pennies, and farthings are legal tender to the extent of twelve pence (one shilling) in one payment. Paper money consists of the notes of the Colonial Bank, and of the Bank of Nova Scotia, of 1 to 5 pounds sterling and upwards. The other coins here are American gold coins. English weights and measures are in use in the colony. There are three daily newspapers published at Kingston and twelve others (six weekly, four monthly, and two quarterly) at Kingston and other parts of the island.

Means of Communication

The whole length of main roads on the island aggregates close on 2000 miles; they are sufficiently broad almost everywhere for a double line of traffic, and are generally maintained in excellent condition. The first railway in Jamaica was opened between Kingston and Spanish Town in 1845. It was extended to Old Harbour in 1867, and from there to Porus in 1885, as well as the branch line to Ewarton from Spanish Town in the same year. In 1890 American capitalists extended the line to Montego Bay, a distance of 113 miles, and to Port Antonio, a distance of 54 miles. An electric tram line, some 24 miles in extent, serves Kingston and its suburbs. The first steamship communication between Jamaica (Kingston) and the United States (New York) was begun in 1860. Jamaica joined the Universal Postal Union in 1877. There is a fortnightly mail service to and from England direct, also one via New York, a weekly service to the United States. There are 160 post and 64 telegraph offices in the island — and two lines of cables connect Jamaica with America.

THE EARTHQUAKE OF 1907

A shock of earthquake of great severity occurred about 3:30 p.m. on Monday, 14 January, 1907. It lasted for upwards of twenty seconds; its greatest intensity was experienced along the foreshore of Kingston harbour. A large proportion of the buildings of the capital were either destroyed or badly damaged. The injuries to the submarine cables indicated that the gravamen of the shock was experienced at a depth of about a mile. The greater part of the business area of the city was destroyed, most of it by fire. The loss of life and property was estimated at about 800 persons and about $10,050,000 (Handbook of Jamaica, 1909). Almost of the churches in the city were either completely wrecked or damaged beyond repair, and the majority of the public buildings, institutions, and the two convents, and their schools suffered equally. The cataclysm was one of the most calamitous events which has occurred in the history of the colony. Generous offers of pecuniary aid were made by most of the large cities of the United States, but were declined by the local Government. Some of the ships of the United States Atlantic fleet landed a party of medical officers, and equipment for the temporary field hospital at the Jesuits' college at Winchester Park. These surgeons did excellent work. A body of American marines was landed at the request of the authorities to quell an uprising among the prisoners at the general penitentiary. This action was subsequently taken exception to by the governor, and consequently the American admiral had no alternative but to withdraw his squadron, leaving, however, supplies, medicines, etc. for the use of the sufferers. Subsequently the Imperial Government expressed regret at the action of its representative, who shortly afterwards resigned. A Mansion House (London) fund to relieve the distress was promptly started, and realized some $277,000. A free grant was made by the Imperial Parliament of $750,000 and a temporary loan of $4,000,000 at 3 per cent. The funds subscribed from all sources were distributed by a relief committee. Up to 31 Dec., 1908, loans to the value of $1,317,150 had been made. Thanks to the energy of Dr. Collins, the Vicar Apostolic, most of the damaged Catholic schools were repaired or rebuilt in a few months. A new Catholic church dedicated to the Holy Trinity is being erected near Winchester Park in place of the former one which was ruined by the earthquake.

DEPENDENCIES

The Turks and Caicos Islands, which geographically form part of the Bahama group, are dependencies of Jamaica. They have an area of 162.5 square miles and a population of some 5300. The exports are salt and sponges. The seat of government is at Grand Turk, the town containing 1750 inhabitants. The Cayman Islands, having an area of about 225 square miles, are situated some 180 miles to the W.N.W. of Negril Point, Jamaica. They were discovered by Christopher Columbus and named by him Las Tortugas, on account of the turtles with which the coast swarmed. The estimated population of the three islands, Grand Cayman, Cayman Brac, and Little Cayman, is 5000 for the largest island, and about 1000 between the two smaller islands. The exports are coco-nuts, turtles, phosphates, ropes, cordage, etc., made from the palm-thatch which grows in abundance. Shipbuilding to a limited extent goes on; sloops and schooners of from 40 to 70 tons register are built from native woods, mahogany, cedar, calabash, cashaw, etc., and sold in Cuba. The Cayman group has an administrator and local justices and forms a dependency under the jurisdiction of Jamaica.

LONG, History of Jamaica (3 vols., London, 1774); BRIDGES, The Annals of Jamaica (2 vols., London, 1820); GARDNER, A History of Jamaica (London, 1873); ELLIS, A Short Sketch of a History of the Church of England in Jamaica (Kingston, Jam., 1891); HILL, The Geology and Physical Geography of Jamaica (Cambridge, Mass., 1899); CUNDALL, Jamaica in 1905, Handbook, etc. (Kingston, Jam., 1905); Handbook of Jamaica (London and Kingston, Jam., annual publication).

J.F. DONOVAN

Denis Jamay

Franciscan, missionary, date and place of birth unknown; died in France, 1625; an important figure in the early history of the Church in Canada. In 1615 he was chosen by his superiors in France as provincial commissary and chief of the first band of Recollect friars, who were also the first missionaries of Canada. Leaving France on the 24 April, 1615, he arrived at Tadoussac on 24 May, and went immediately with Champlain to meet the savages at Sault St. Louis. On 24 June, 1615, at Riviere des Prairies, he celebrated the first Mass said in the country by its first missionaries. In 1616 Father Jamay returned to France with Champlain to urge before the king and the "Associates" of Rouen the material and spiritual interests of the colony. In 1620, again elected commissary provincial, he returned to Canada with Champlain and his wife. On reaching Quebec he exhorted the colonists to obey the viceroy and his lieutenant, Champlain. Having completed the first regular convent of the Recollects at Quebec, he blessed it and dedicated it to Our Lady of the Angels. He returned to France in 1621.

ODORIC-M. JOUVE

Epistle of St. James

The questions concerning this epistle are treated in the following order:

I. Author and Genuineness;
II. Tradition as to the Canonicity;
III. Analysis and Contents of the Epistle;
IV. Occasion and Object;
V. To whom addressed;
VI. Style;
VII. Time and Place of composition.

I. AUTHOR AND GENUINENESS

The author is commonly identified with the Lord's brother, the Bishop of Jerusalem (see ST. JAMES THE LESS; the view that the Lord's brother must be identified with James, the son of Alpheus, is by far the most probable). Internal evidence (contents of the Epistle, its style, address, date, and place of composition) points unmistakably to James, the Lord's brother, the Bishop of Jerusalem, as the author; he exactly, and he alone, fulfils the conditions required in the writer of the Epistle. External evidence begins at a comparatively late date. Some coincidences, or analogies, exist between the Epistle and the Apostolic Fathers (Clement of Rome, the Pastor Hermas, St. Justin, St. Irenæus; see Mienertz, "Der Jacobusbrief", Freiburg im Br., 1905, p. 55 sqq.). The literary relation between the Epistle of James and the Epistle to the Romans is doubtful. Its later recognition in the Church, especially in the West, must be explained by the fact that it was written for Jewish Christians, and therefore not widely circulated among the Gentile Churches. From the middle of the third century, ecclesiastical authors cite the Epistle as written by St. James, the brother of the Lord. See the testimonies in the section following. The greater number of the Fathers in the Western Church identify the author with James the Apostle. In the Eastern Church, however, the authority of Eusebius and St. Epiphanius may explain some ecclesiastical doubts about the Apostolic origin of the Epistle, and consequently about its canonicity.

II. TRADITION AS TO CANONICITY

In the first centuries of the Church the authenticity of the Epistle was doubted by some, and amongst others by Theodore of Mopsuestia; it is therefore deuterocanonical. It is wanting in the Muratorian Canon, and because of the silence of several of the Western Churches regarding it, Eusebius classes it amongst the Antilegomena or contested writings (Hist. eccl., III, xxv; II, xxiii); St. Jerome gives the like information (De vir. ill., ii), but adds that with time its authenticity became universally admitted. In the sixteenth century its inspired nature was contested by Erasmus and Cajetan; Luther strongly repudiated the Epistle as "a letter of straw", and "unworthy of the apostolic Spirit", and this solely for dogmatic reasons, and owing to his preconceived notions, for the epistle refutes his heretical doctrine that Faith alone is necessary for salvation. The Council of Trent dogmatically defined the Epistle of St. James to be canonical. As the solution of this question of the history of the canonicity of the Epistle depends chiefly on the testimony of the ancient Fathers, it remains to be seen whether it is quoted by them as Scripture. (a) In the Latin Church it was known by St. Clement of Rome (before A.D. 100), the Pastor Hermas (about A.D. 150), St. Irenæus (125?-202?, 208), Tertullian (d. about 240), St. Hilary (d. 366), St. Philaster (d. 385), St. Ambrose (d. 397), Pope Damasus (in the canon of about A.D. 382), St. Jerome (346-420), Rufinus (d. 410), St. Augustine (430), and its canonicity is unquestioned by them. (b) In the Greek Church, Clement of Alexandria (d. 217), Origen (d. 254), St. Athanasius (d. 373), St. Dionysius the Areopagite (about A.D. 500), etc., considered it undoubtedly as a sacred writing. (c) In the Syrian Church, the Peshito, although omitting the minor Catholic Epistles, gives that of St. James; St. Ephraem uses it frequently in his writings. Moreover, the most notorius heretics of Syria recognised it as genuine. Thus we find that Nestorius ranked it in the Canon of Sacred Books, and James of Edessa adduces the testimony of James, v, 14. The Epistle is found in the Coptic, Sahidic, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Armenian versions. Although, therefore, the canonicity of the Epistle of St. James was questioned by a few during the first centuries, there are to be found from the very earliest ages, in different parts of the Church, numerous testimonies in favour of its canonicity. From the end of the third century its acceptance as inspired, and as the work of St. James, has been universal, as clearly appears from the various lists of the Sacred Books drawn up since the fourth century.

III. ANALYSIS AND CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE

The subjects treated of in the Epistle are many and various; moreover, St. James not infrequently, whilst elucidating a certain point, passes abruptly to another, and presently resumes once more his former argument; hence it is difficult to give a precise division of the Epistle. It is doubtful whether the sacred writer intended any systematic arrangement of subject; indeed, it is more probable that he did not, for in the Hebrew Sapiential Books of the Old Testament, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Ecclesiasticus, to which the present Epistle may in many ways be likened, the order in which the moral sentences stand does not seem to suggest any connection between them. It will therefore be more expedient to give a simple enumeration of the subjects treated in the Epistle:

• Inscription (i, 1);
• persecutions are to be borne with patience and joy (2-4);
• wisdom must be asked of God with confidence (5-8);
• humility is recommended (9-11);
• God is not the author of evil but of good (12-18);
• we must be slow to anger (19-21);
• not faith only, but also good works are necessary (22-27).
• Against respect of persons (ii, 1-13);
• another exhortation to good works (14-26).
• Against the evils of the tongue (iii, 1-12);
• against envy and discord, 13-18.
• Against wars and contentions (iv, 1-3);
• against the spirit of this world and pride (4-10);
• against detraction (11-13a);
• against vain confidence in worldly things (13b-16).
• Against the rich that oppress the poor (v, 1-6);
• exhortation to patience in the time of oppression (7-11), and to avoid swearing (12);
• of the anointing of the sick (13-15);
• of prayer (16);
• we must have at heart the conversion of sinners (19-20).

This enumeration shows that St. James inculcates especially: patience and perseverance in adversity, temptations, and persecutions; the necessity of good works, mercy, and charity. For the question of apparent opposition between St. James and St. Paul with regard to "faith and works" see EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

IV. OCCASION AND OBJECT

A. Occasion

St. James seems to have been moved to write his Epistle on witnessing that the first fervour of the Jewish Christians had grown cold, and that, owing to various causes, both external and internal, a certain spirit of discouragement had declared itself amongst them.

(1) External Causes. The new Christian converts found themselves at first the object of the indifference only of their fellow townsfolk, the greater number of whom still remained in unbelief; but this attitude very soon changed to one of hostility and even persecution. These early converts, belonging as they mostly did to the poorer classes, found themselves oppressed by the wealthy unbelievers; some were refused employment, others were denied their wages (v, 4); at other times they were mercilessly dragged before the tribunals (ii, 6); they were persecuted in the synagogues, and were, besides, reduced to extreme want and even starvation (ii, 15-17).

(2) Internal Causes. In the midst of these trials the faith of many began to languish (ii, 14, 20, 26), and the evil ways they had abandoned at their conversion were gradually indulged in once more. Thus it came to pass that the poor were despised in the sacred assemblies (ii, 1-9); there were breaches of brotherly charity (ii, 7); some arrogated to themselves the office of teacher who were unfitted (iii, 1, 13); many were guilty of detraction and other sins of the tongue (iii, 1-12; iv, 11-13); there were contentions and lawsuits (iv, 1-2); some indulged in swearing (v, 12); others neglected assiduous prayer (v, 13, 17-18); pride and vainglory were yielded to (iv, 6-10); even some of the sacred rites seem to have been overlooked (v, 14-16). Such were the evils that the Epistle sought to remedy.

B. Object

St. James wrote his Epistle for a moral purpose, and addressed his co-religionists as their pastor, in his quality of Bishop of Jerusalem, in order: (1) to exhort them to constancy in the faith in spite of the persecutions and trials they were undergoing, and to give them comfort in their tribulations; (2) to correct the abuses and extirpate the evils amongst them, by urging them to make their conduct conformable to their faith, and by earnestly reminding them that faith alone would not save them unless they added good works.

V. TO WHOM ADDRESSED

St. James wrote his Epistle for the Jewish Christians outside Palestine, who, for the greater part, were poor and oppressed. This we gather with certitude from the inscription (i, 1), and from various indications in the text.

A. The words, i, 1, "to the twelve tribes" can mean the whole Jewish nation; but the words following, "which are scattered abroad", designate clearly the Jews of the Dispersion. The Jews in Palestine, surrounded by Gentiles, were not considered as "scattered abroad". That he addressed the Jewish Christians only becomes evident by the fact that the author styles himself "the servant of God, and of our Lord Jesus Christ", and by this title he indicates clearly that he writes to the disciples of Christ only.

B. That the readers were Jewish appears still more evidently from the Epistle itself. St. James takes for granted that those whom he addressed were well versed in the writings of the Old Testament. Moreover, he calls them not only his "brethren", which name taken by itself does not remove all doubt, but he so clearly shows them to be Christians that it is incomprehensible how any critics understand unconverted Jews to be the "brethren" to whom the Epistle was written. Thus in i, 18, he writes to those whom God "of his own will hath begotten by the word of truth, that they might be some beginning of his creature"; in ii, 1, he admonishes them as follows: "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ of glory with respect to persons"; in ii, 7, he refers to them when he writes of "the good name [of Christ] that is invoked upon you"; in v, 7, they are to be patient "until the coming of the Lord"; etc. Further proof is afforded by the date of composition.

C. The context does not reveal who were the particular Jewish converts, to whom the Epistle was addressed. We gather, however, that St. James appeals to certain Christians, labouring under the stress of particular circumstances, in order to warn them against special perils; no one will easily admit that the vices against which he inveighs and the errors which he condemns were to be met with in each and every community of Jewish converts. Therefore the conclusion that he addressed some particular Churches forces itself upon our minds. As, according to the most probable opinion, the Epistle was not written later than about A.D. 50, we may conclude that it was written to some of the Churches of Syria or of another country not far distant from Jerusalem.

VI. STYLE

The style is sententious, figurative, often poetical, and may be compared to that of the Prophetical and Sapiential Books of the Old Testament. It is rapid, betrays emotion, and is not wanting in those vehement outbursts of feeling customary with the writers of that period, and which so powerfully set the force of the argument before the reader. It has already been noticed that the different sentences of the Epistle may be divided into hemistichs of parallel meaning; this is quite in keeping with the distinctly Hebraic style of the whole Epistle; it is a well known fact that the classical period is not found in Hebrew, but that the short members of a proposition are continually in juxtaposition.

VII. TIME AND PLACE OF COMPOSITION

A. Time

The Epistle was probably written about A.D. 47. The reference to the persecutions (ii, 6) is in the present tense, and indicates a stage of suffering which has not yet receded into the past of history. Now, in A.D. 44 the Churches of Judea were exposed to the persecution inflicted by Herod Agrippa, in which James, the son of Zebedee, was murdered (Acts, xii, 1 sqq.). Moreover, the author could not have written after the Council of Jerusalem (A.D. 51), where James acted as president, without some allusion to his decision unanimously accepted (Acts, xv, 4 sqq.). Another indication also derived from indirect internal evidence, is an allusion to the hungry and naked poor (of Jerusalem, ii, 15 sqq.); they suffered probably from the famine foretold by Agabus (Acts, xi, 28-30), and usually identified with one mentioned by Josephus (Antiq., XX, ii, 5), A.D. 45.

B. Place of Composition

The Epistle was probably written by St. James in Jerusalem; this we may conclude from the study of the life of the author (see JAMES THE LESS, SAINT), and this opinion finds favour with nearly all its critics.

Consult Introductions to the New Testament. It will suffice to indicate some recent commentaries and special studies in which the earlier bibliography is mentioned. CATHOLIC WORKS:-ERMONI IN VIGOUROUX, Dict. de la Bible, s.vv. Jacques (Saint) le Majeur, Jacques (Saint) le Mineur, Jacques (Epître de Saint); JACQUIER, Histoire des livres de Nouveau Testament (Paris, 1909); MEINERTZ, Der Jacobusbrief und sein Verfasser in Schrift und Ueberlieferung (Frieburg im Br., 1905); CALMES, Epître catholiques, Apocalypse (Paris, 1905); VAN STEENKISTE-CAMERLYNCK, Commentarius in Epistolas Catholicas (Bruges, 1909). NON-CATHOLIC WORKS:-LIPSIUS, Die apocryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden (Braunschweig, 1883-1890); SPITTA, Der Brief des Jacobus (Göttingen, 1896); MAYOR, The Epistle of St. James (London, 1892); IDEM in HASTINGS, Dict. of the Bible, s.vv. James and James, The General Epistle of; PLUMPTRE, The General Epistle of St. James (Cambridge, 1901); EMMETT in HASTINGS-SELBIE, Dict. of the Bible, s.v. James, Epistle of.

A. CAMERLYNCK

James of Brescia

Theologian of the fifteenth century. He entered the Dominican Order at Brescia, his native city, and in 1450 was appointed to the office of inquisitor. He aided the papal auditor, Bernardo da Bosco, in putting an end to the teaching of impious doctrines at Bergamo. He also took a prominent part in the controversy between the Dominicians and the Minorites with regard to the Precious Blood. During Easter Week, 1462, St. James of the Marches, a celebrated Minorite preacher, maintained in a sermon at Brescia that the Blood separated from the Body of Christ during His Passion was thereby separated from His Divinity, and consequently was not entitled to adoration during the time that Christ remained in the sepulchre. As this doctrine had been proscribed by Clement VI in 1351, James of Brescia cited James of the Marches to appear before his tribunal in case he should not retract. A dispute at once arose between the Dominicans and Friars Minor. Shortly before, in a Bull written at Tivoli, Pius II had declared that it was not contrary to Christian Faith to hold that Christ did not reassume a part of the Blood he shed in His Passion. This declaration narrowed down the controversy to the question: Whether the Blood which Christ shed in His Passion and reassumed at His Resurrection was adorable as the Blood of the Son of God during the three days that it was separated from His Body. The affirmative was maintained by the Dominicans, the negative by the Minorites. The pope ordered a solemn disputation to be held before the pontifical court at Christmas, 1462 (1463, according to many). James of Brescia was one of three theologians who represented the Dominicians. Among the Minorite champions was Francesco della Rovere, later Pope Sixtus IV. After a debate of three days, a consultation was held by the pope and the cardinals, but no definitive decision was pronounced. In a Constitution dated 1 August, 1464, two weeks before his death, Pius forbade all further disputation on the subject. A full presentation of the Dominican side of this controversy is preserved in an unpublished treatise written by James of Brescia and his two colleagues. Other theological works attributed to James are no longer extant.

J.A. MCHUGH

James of Edessa

A celebrated Syrian writer, b. most likely in A.D. 633; d. 5 June, 708. He was a native of the village of `En-debha, in the district of Gumyah, in the province of Antioch. During several years he studied Greek and Holy Writ at the famous convent of Kennesrhe, on the left bank of the Euphrates, opposite Europus (Carchemish). After his return to Syria he was appointed Bishop of Edessa, about A.D. 684, by the Patriarch Athanasius II, his former fellow-student. Equally unable to enforce canonical rules and to connive at their infringement, he resigned his see after a four years' episcopate, and withdrew to the convent of Kaisum (near Samosata), while the more lenient Habhibh succeeded him as Bishop of Edessa. Shortly afterwards he accepted the invitation of the monks of Eusebhona (in the Diocese of Antioch) to reside at their convent, and there he commented for eleven years on the Sacred Scriptures in the Greek text, doing his utmost to promote the study of the Greek tongue. Owing to the opposition which he met on the part of some of the monks who did not like the Greeks, he betook himself to the great convent of Tell-'Adda (the modern Tell-'Addi), where, for nine years more, he worked at his revision of the Old Testament. Upon Habhibh's death he took possession again of the episcopal See of Edessa, resided in that city for four months, and then went to Tell-Adda to fetch his library and his pupils, but died there. James of Edessa was a Monophysite, as is proved by the prominent part he took in the synod which the Jacobite patriarch Julian convened in 706, and by one of his letters in which he speaks of the orthodox Fathers of Chalcedon as "the Chalcedonian heretics". In the literature of his country he holds much the same place as St. Jerome does among the Latins (Wright). For his time, his erudition was extensive. He was not only familiar with Greek and with older Syriac writers, but he also had some knowledge of Hebrew, and willingly availed himself of the aid of Jewish scholars, whose views he often records. His writings, which are not all extant, were very varied and numerous. Among them may be noticed first, his important revision of the Old Testament. This work was essentially Massoretic. James divided the Sacred Books into chapters, prefixing to each chapter a summary of its contents. He supplied the text with numerous marginal notes, of which one part gives readings from the Greek and the Syrian versions at his disposal, and the other part indicates the exact pronunciation of the words of the text. Some of the notes contain extracts from Severus of Antioch; while, at times, glosses are inserted in the text itself. Unfortunately, only portions of this revision have come down to us. These are: practically the whole Pentateuch and the Book of Daniel, preserved in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris (Syric. nos. 26, 27); the two Books of Samuel with the beginning of Kings, and the prophecy of Isaias, found in the British Museum (Add. 14429, 14441). The other principal writings of James of Edessa on Biblical topics are: (1) his unfinished "Hexameron", or work on the six days of creation, which is divided into seven treatises, and which opens with a dialogue between the author and Constantine, one of his disciples. James's "Hexaemeron" is preserved in two MSS., one of which is found in Leyden, and the other in Lyons; (2) commendaries and scholia on the Sacred Writings of both Testments, which are cited by later authors such as Dionysius bar-Salibi, Bar-Hebraeus, and Severus. Some of his scholia have been published in the Roman edition of the works of St. Ephraem, and, at different times, by Phillips, Wright, Schröter, and Nestle; (3) letters treating of questions relative to Holy Writ, and mostly yet unpublished. As a liturgical author, James of Edessa drew up an anaphora, or liturgy, revised the Liturgy of St. James, wrote the celebrated "Book of Treasures", composed orders of baptism, of the blessing of water on the eve of the Epiphany, and of the celebration of matrimony, to which may be added his translation of Severus's order of Baptism, etc. He is also the author of numerous canons; of important homilies, a few of which survive in MS; of a valuable "Chronicle" which he composed in 692, and of which a few leaves only are extant; of an "Enchiridion", or tract on technical philosophical terms; of a translation of the "Homiliae Cathedrales", written in Greek by Severus of Antioch; and of the "Octoechus" by the same author; of a biography of James of Sarugh, of a translation from the Greek of the apocryphal "History of the Rechabites", of a Syriac grammer, a few fragments of which are extant in Oxford and London, and in which he advocated and illustrated a novel system of indicating the vocalic element not found in the Syrian alphabet; and, finally, of an extensive correspondence with a large number of persons throughout Syria.

J. S. ASSEMANI, Bibliotheca Orientalis, I (Rome, 1719), II, (Rome 1721); MAI. Script. Vet. Nova collectio (Rome, 1825-38); CERIANI, Monumenta sacra et profana (Milan 1863); BALL, in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Jacobus Edessenus; NESTLE, Syrische Grammatik mit Litteratur (Berlin, 1888); MERX, Historia artis grammatiae apud Syros (Leipzig, 1889); WRIGHT, Catalogue of the Syriac MSS. in the British Museum (London, 1870--); IDEM, A Short History of History of Syriac Literature (London, 1894): BROCKEL-MANN, Syriche Grammatik mit Litteratur (Berlin, 1899), DUVAL, Grammaire Syriaque (Paris, 1881); IDEM, Litterature Syriaque (3rd ed., Paris, 1907).

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

James of Sarugh

A writer of the Syrian Church "the flute of the Holy Spirit and the harp of the believing church"; b. at Kurtam, 451, probably in the district of Sarugh; his father was a priest; d. at Batnan 29 Nov., 521. Three biographies of him are extant in Syric: first by James of Edessa (seventh century), the second anonymous, and the third by a certain George, probably George, Bishop of Sarugh, contemporary of James of Edessa. We do not know where he was educated, nor when and how he was ordained to the priesthood. He became "periodeutes" or "chorepiscopus" of Haura in the district of Sarugh, whence in 502 he wrote to the city of Edessa, threatened by the Persians, and in 519 to the Christians of Najran: in 519 he became Bishop of Batnan, the chief city of Sarugh. Assemani (Bibliotheca Orientalis, I, 290 sq.) has endeavoured indeed to prove against Renaudot the orthodoxy of James of Sarugh, but from this writer's letters to the monks of the convent of Mar-Bassus (published by Martin in the "Zeitschrift der deutschen morgenl. Gesellschaft", XXX. 217 sqq.) it is evident that he was always a Monophysite and continued such to his death. However, he took practically no share in the Christological polemics of his time and devoted his activity to study and literature. He is especially famous for his metrical homilies in the dodecasyllabic verse of which, says Bar-Hebraeus, he composed seven hundred and sixty. Of these barely one-half has come down to us, and a few only have heen published, e.g. on Simeon Stylites (in Assemani, "Acta Martyrum", Il. 230 sqq.), on virginity, fornication, etc. (in Overbeck, "S. Ephraemi Syri . . . opera selecta", pp. 385 sq.), two on the Blessed Virgin Mary (in Abbeloos, "De vita et scriptis S. Jacobi Sarugensis", Louvain, 1867), on the chariot of Ezechiel (in Moesinger, "Monum. Syr.", II). He wrote the first one (on Ezechiel's chariot) when only twenty-two years of age. His prose writings were comparatively few. The most important besides the letters already mentioned are a letter to Paul of Edessa of 519, a letter to the pantheist Bar-Sudaili published by Frothingham ("Stephen Bar-Sudaili. etc.", Leyden, 1886, p. 10 sqq.), a liturgy (tr. Renaudot, "Liturg. Orient. Collectio", II, 356), an order of baptism (ed. and tr. Assemani, "Cod. Liturg. Eccl. Univ.", II, 309, III, 184), festal homilies (Ger. tr. Zingerle, "Sechs Hom. d. heil. Jacob v. Sarug", 1867).

WRIGHT, A Short History of Syriac Literature (London, 1894); DUVAL, La litterature Syriaque, 3rd ed. (Paris, 1907), pp. 351-854; ASSEMANI, Bibliotheca Orieritalis, I, c. XXVII.

H. HYVERNAT

St. James of the Marches

Franciscan, b. of a poor family named Gangala, at Monteprandone, March of Ancona, Italy, 1391; d. at Naples, 28 Nov., 1476. He is generally represented holding in his right hand a chalice, out of which a snake is escaping --an allusion to some endeavours of heretics to poison him or, less likely, to the controversy about the Precious Blood. He began his studies at Offida under the guidance of his uncle, a priest, who soon afterwards put him to school at Ascoli. At the University of Perugia he took the degree of Doctor in Civil Law. After a short stay at Florence as tutor in a noble family, and as judge of sorcerers, James was received into the Order of the Friars Minor, in the chapel of the Portiuncula, Assisi, 26 July, 1416. Having finished his novitiate at the hermitage of the Carceri, near Assisi, he studied theology at Fiesole, near Florence, under St. Bernardine of Siena. On 13 June, 1420, be was ordained priest, and soon began to preach in Tuscany, in the Marches, and Umbria; for half a century he carried on his spiritual labours, remarkable for the miracles he performed and the numerous conversions he wrought. From 1427 James preached penance, combated heretic, and was on legations in Germany, Austria, Sweden, Denmark, Bohemia, Poland, Hungary, and Bosnia. In the last-mentioned country he was also commissary of the Friars Minor. At the time of the Council of Basle he promoted the union of the moderate Hussites with the Church, and that of the Greeks it the Council of Ferrara-Florence. Against the Turk, he preached several crusades, and at the death of St. John Capistran, in 1456, James was sent to Hungary as his successor. In Italy he fought the Fraticelli instituted several montes pietatis, and preached in all the greater cities; Milan offered him the bishopric in 1460, which he declined. St. James belonged to the Observant branch of the Friars Minor, then rapidly spreading and exciting much envy. How much he suffered on this account is shown in a letter written by him to St. John Capistran, published by Nic. Dal-Gal, O.F.M., in "Archivum Franciscanum Historicum", I (1908), 94-97. Under Callistus III, in 1455, he was appointed an arbiter on the questions at issue between Conventuals and Observants. His decision was published 2 Feb., 1456, in a papal Bull, which pleased neither part . A few years later, on Easter Monday, 1462, St. James, preaching at Brescia, uttered the opinion of some theologians, that the Precious Blood shed during the Passion was not united with the Divinity of Christ during the three days of His burial. The Dominican James of Brescia, inquisitor, immediately cited him to his tribunal. James refused to appear, and after some troubles appealed to the Holy See. The question was discussed at Rome, Christmas, 1462 (not 1463, as some have it), before Pius II and the cardinals, but no decision was given. James spent the last three years of his life at Naples, and was buried there in the Franciscan church of S. Maria la Nuova, where his body is still to be seen. Beatified by Urban VIII, 1624, he was canonized by Benedict XIII, 1726. Naples venerates him as one of its patron saints (feast, 28 Nov.).

The works of St. James of the Marches have not as yet been collected. His library and autographs are preserved in part at the Municipio of Monteprandone (see Crivellucci, "I codici della libreria raccolta da S. Giacomo della Marca nel convento di S. Maria delle Grazie presso Monteprandone", Leghorn, 1889). He wrote "Dialogus contra Fraticellos" printed in Baluze-Mansi, "Miscellanea", II, Lucca, 1761, 595-610 (cf. Ehrle in "Archiv für Litt. u. Kirchengeschichte", IV, Freiburg im Br., 1888, 107-10). His numerous sermons are not edited. For some of them, and for his treatise on the "Miracles of the Name of Jesus", see Candido Mariotti, O.F.M., "Nome di Gesù ed i Francescani", Fano, 1909, 125-34. On his notebook, or "Itinerarium", See Luigi Tasso, O.F.M., in "Miscellanea Francescana", I (1886), 125-26: "Regula confitendi peccata" was several times edited in Latin and Italian during the fifteenth century. "De Sanguine Christi effuse" and some other treatises remained in manuscript.

PETRUCCI, Vita et res gesitæ B. Jacobi Piceni, edited by WADDING (Lyons, 1641). Other original information is found in B. Bernardini Aquilani Chronica Fratrum Minorum Observuntiæ, ed. LEMMENS (Rome, 1902), 66 sqq.; GLASSBERGER in Analecta Franciscana, II (Quaracchi, 1887), 393-96. Much material and papal documents are given in WADDING, Annales, 2nd ed., IX-XVI (Rome, 1724-36), See also WADDING, Scepters (Rome 1806), 126; SBARALEA, Supplementum ad Scriptores (Rome 1806), 375 ARTUR, Martyrologium Franciscanum, 2nd ed (Paris 1653), 578-80. Lives: LÉON (de Clary), Lives of the Saints and Blessed of the three orders of St. Francis, IV (Taunton 1887), 125 -51; JOS. Ma. d'Evora, Compendio della vita di S, Giacomo della Marca (Rome, 1726); GASPARE DA MONTE SANTO, Gesta dell' apostolico San Giacomo della Marca Anconitana (Ascoli,1804); GIUSEPPE ARCANGELO Di FRATTA MAGGIORE, Vita dell' apostolico eroe S. Giacomo della Marca, 2nd ed. (Naples, 1851); CELSO MARIA Di FFLTRE, Compendia Storico delta vita di S. Giacomo della Marca (Venice, 1876): CIACINTO NICOLAI, Vita Storica di San Giacomo della Marca (Bologna, 1876); LÉON, Vita de St-Jacques de la Marche, Franciscain de l'Observance (1391-1476) (Paris, l894); GAETANO ROCCO DA NAPOLI, Compendio delta Vita di San Giacomo della Marca (Naples, 1909).

LIVARIUS OLIGER

James Primadicci

(Or Primadizzi.)

Born at Bologna; died in the same city in 1460. As early as the year 1426 he was known to h is brethren of the Franciscan Order as an ardent promoter of the strict observance of the rule. When in 1431 Eugene IV had given orders that from among the Observantine friars then assembled in chapter at Bologna, the six ablest men be set apart to be engaged exclusively by the Holy See on grave and difficult missions, James was deemed worthy of this distinction. Accordingly, in 1437, the same pontiff placed him at the head of a legation consisting of Friars Minor, commissioned to prepare the way for the union of the Armenia Church with the Holy See. The undertaking proved successful owing chiefly to the efforts of James, as may be gathered from a letter of the Imperial Council at Caffia to Eugene IV. Hence in 1439 James was privileged to present to legates of the Armenian Patriarch to the Fathers of the Council at Florence. Again, in 1444, his name appears on the long list of Friars Minor whom the pope had sent out as his nuncios to solicit the aid of the princes and people of Europe in the matter of a projected crusade. To James was assigned the Exarchate of Ravenna. Later on, his power and jurisdiction were extended over the whole of Italy. At the end of the following year he journeyed to the East in the capacity of papal commissary. From 1446 to 1449 James held the office of vicar general of the Cismontane branches of the Observance. In 1447 he convened a chapter at St. Mary of the Angels (Assisi), on which occasion new statutes were drawn up. God has been pleased to glorify the zealous Franciscan since his death by numerous miracles.

THOMAS PLASSMANN

St. James the Greater

(Heb. Yakob; Sept. Iakob; N.T. Greek Iakobos; a favourite name among the later Jews).

The son of Zebedee (q.v.) and Salome (Cf. Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40; 16:1). Zahn asserts that Salome was the daughter of a priest. James is styled "the Greater" to distinguish him from the Apostle James "the Less," who was probably shorter of stature. We know nothing of St. James's early life. He was the brother of John, the beloved disciple, and probably the elder of the two.

His parents seem to have been people of means as appears from the following facts.

• Zebedee was a fisherman of the Lake of Galilee, who probably lived in or near Bethsaida (John, i, 44), perhaps in Capharnaum; and had some boatmen or hired men as his usual attendants (Mark, i, 20).
• Salome was one of the pious women who afterwards followed Christ and "ministered unto him of their substance" (cf. Matt., xxvii, 55, sq.; Mark, xv, 40; xvi, 1; Luke, viii, 2 sq.; xxiii, 55-xxiv, 1).
• St. John was personally known to the high-priest (John, xviii, 16); and must have had wherewithal to provide for the Mother of Jesus (John, xix, 27).

It is probable, according to Acts 4:13, that John (and consequently his brother James) had not received the technical training of the rabbinical schools; in this sense they were unlearned and without any official position among the Jews. But, according to the social rank of their parents, they must have been men of ordinary education, in the common walks of Jewish life. They had frequent opportunity of coming in contact with Greek life and language, which were already widely spread along the shores of the Galilean Sea.

Relation of St. John to Jesus

Some authors, comparing John 19:25 with Matthew 28:56 and Mark 15:40, identify, and probably rightly so, Mary the Mother of James the Less and of Joseph in Mark and Matthew with "Mary of Cleophas" in John. As the name of Mary Magdalen occurs in the three lists, they identify further Salome in Mark with "the mother of the sons of Zebedee" in Matthew; finally they identify Salome with "his mother's sister" in John. They suppose, for this last identification, that four women are designated by John, xix, 25; the Syriac "Peshito" gives the reading: "His mother and his mother's sister, and Mary of Cleophas and Mary Magdalen." If this last supposition is right, Salome was a sister of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and James the Greater and John were first cousins of the Lord; this may explain the discipleship of the two brothers, Salome's request and their own claim to the first position in His kingdom, and His commendation of the Blessed Virgin to her own nephew. But it is doubtful whether the Greek admits of this construction without the addition or the omission of kai (and). Thus the relationship of St. James to Jesus remains doubtful.

His life and apostolate

The Galilean origin of St. James in some degree explains the energy of temper and the vehemence of character which earned for him and St. John the name of Boanerges, "sons of thunder" (Mark 3:17); the Galilean race was religious, hardy, industrious, brave, and the strongest defender of the Jewish nation. When John the Baptist proclaimed the kingdom of the Messias, St. John became a disciple (John 1:35); he was directed to "the Lamb of God" and afterwards brought his brother James to the Messias; the obvious meaning of John, i, 41, is that St. Andrew finds his brother (St. Peter) first and that afterwards St. John (who does not name himself, according to his habitual and characteristic reserve and silence about himself) finds his brother (St. James). The call of St. James to the discipleship of the Messias is reported in a parallel or identical narration by Matthew 4:18-22; Mark 1:19 sq.; and Luke 5:1-11. The two sons of Zebedee, as well as Simon (Peter) and his brother Andrew with whom they were in partnership (Luke 5:10), were called by the Lord upon the Sea of Galilee, where all four with Zebedee and his hired servants were engaged in their ordinary occupation of fishing. The sons of Zebedee "forthwith left their nets and father, and followed him" (Matthew 4:22), and became "fishers of men". St. James was afterwards with the other eleven called to the Apostleship (Matt., x, 1-4; Mark, iii, 13-19; Luke, vi, 12-16; Acts, i, 13). In all four lists the names of Peter and Andrew, James and John form the first group, a prominent and chosen group (cf. Mark, xiii, 3); especially Peter, James, and John. These three Apostles alone were admitted to be present at the miracle of the raising of Jairus's daughter (Mark, v, 37; Luke, viii, 51), at the Transfiguration (Mark, ix, 1; Matt., xvii, 1; Luke, ix, 28), and the Agony in Gethsemani (Matt., xxvi, 37; Mark, xiv, 33). The fact that the name of James occurs always (except in Luke, viii, 51; ix, 28; Acts, i, 13--Gr. Text) before that of his brother seems to imply that James was the elder of the two. It is worthy of notice that James is never mentioned in the Gospel of St. John; this author observes a humble reserve not only with regard to himself, but also about the members of his family.

Several incidents scattered through the Synoptics suggest that James and John had that particular character indicated by the name "Boanerges," sons of thunder, given to them by the Lord (Mark, iii, 17); they were burning and impetuous in their evangelical zeal and severe in temper. The two brothers showed their fiery temperament against "a certain man casting out devils" in the name of the Christ; John, answering, said: "We [James is probably meant] forbade him, because he followeth not with us" (Luke, ix, 49). When the Samaritans refused to receive Christ, James and John said: "Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them?" (Luke, ix, 54; cf. v. 49).

His martyrdom

On the last journey to Jerusalem, their mother Salome came to the Lord and said to Him: "Say that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left, in thy kingdom" (Matt., xx, 21). And the two brothers, still ignorant of the spiritual nature of the Messianic Kingdom, joined with their mother in this eager ambition (Mark 10:37). And on their assertion that they are willing to drink the chalice that He drinks of, and to be baptized with the baptism of His sufferings, Jesus assured them that they will share His sufferings (Mark 5:38-39).

James won the crown of martyrdom fourteen years after this prophecy, A.D. 44. Herod Agrippa I, son of Aristobulus and grandson of Herod the Great, reigned at that time as "king" over a wider dominion than that of his grandfather. His great object was to please the Jews in every way, and he showed great regard for the Mosaic Law and Jewish customs. In pursuance of this policy, on the occasion of the Passover of A.D. 44, he perpetrated cruelties upon the Church, whose rapid growth incensed the Jews. The zealous temper of James and his leading part in the Jewish Christian communities probably led Agrippa to choose him as the first victim. "He killed James, the brother of John, with the sword." (Acts 12:1-2). According to a tradition, which, as we learn from Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., II, ix, 2, 3), was received from Clement of Alexandria (in the seventh book of his lost "Hypotyposes"), the accuser who led the Apostle to judgment, moved by his confession, became himself a Christian, and they were beheaded together. As Clement testifies expressly that the account was given him "by those who were before him," this tradition has a better foundation than many other traditions and legends respecting the Apostolic labours and death of St. James, which are related in the Latin "Passio Jacobi Majoris", the Ethiopic "Acts of James", and so on.

St. James in Spain

The tradition asserting that James the Greater preached the Gospel in Spain, and that his body was translated to Compostela, claims more serious consideration.

According to this tradition St. James the Greater, having preached Christianity in Spain, returned to Judea and was put to death by order of Herod; his body was miraculously translated to Iria Flavia in the northwest of Spain, and later to Compostela, which town, especially during the Middle Ages, became one of the most famous places of pilgrimage in the world. The vow of making a pilgrimage to Compostela to honour the sepulchre of St. James is still reserved to the pope, who alone of his own or ordinary right can dispense from it. In the twelfth century was founded the Order of Knights of St. James of Compostela (see SAINT JAMES OF COMPOSTELA, ORDER OF).

With regard to the preaching of the Gospel in Spain by St. James the greater, several difficulties have been raised:

• St. James suffered martyrdom A.D. 44 (Acts 12:2), and, according to the tradition of the early Church, he had not yet left Jerusalem at this time (cf. Clement of Alexandria, "Strom.", VI, Apollonius, quoted by Euseb., "Hist. Eccl." VI, xviii).
• St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans (A.D. 58) expressed the intention to visit Spain (Romans 15:24) just after he had mentioned (15:20) that he did not "build upon another man's foundation."
• The argument ex silentio: although the tradition that James founded an Apostolic see in Spain was current in the year 700, no certain mention of such tradition is to be found in the genuine writings of early writers nor in the early councils; the first certain mention we find in the ninth century, in Notker, a monk of St. Gall (Martyrol., 25 July), Walafried Strabo (Poema de XII Apost.), and others.
• The tradition was not unanimously admitted afterwards, while numerous scholars reject it. The Bollandists however defended it (see Acta Sanctorum, July, VI and VII, where other sources are given).

The authenticity of the sacred relic of Compostela has been questioned and is still doubted. Even if St. James the Greater did not preach the Christian religion in Spain, his body may have been brought to Compostela, and this was already the opinion of Notker. According to another tradition, the relics of the Apostle are kept in the church of St-Saturnin at Toulouse (France), but it is not improbable that such sacred relics should have been divided between two churches. A strong argument in favour of the authenticity of the sacred relics of Compostela is the Bull of Leo XIII, "Omnipotens Deus," of 1 November, 1884.

A. CAMERLYNCK

St. James the Less

THE IDENTITY OF JAMES

The name "James" in the New Testament is borne by several:

1. James, the son of Zebedee -- Apostle, brother of John, Apostle; also called "James the Greater".
2. James, the son of Alpheus, Apostle -- Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13.
3. James, the brother of the Lord -- Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3; Galatians 1:19. Without a shadow of doubt, he must be identified with the James of Galatians 2:2 and 2:9; Acts 12:17, 15:13 sqq. and 21:18; and I Corinthians 15:7.
4. James, the son of Mary, brother of Joseph (or Joses) -- Mark 15:40 (where he is called ò mikros "the little", not the "less", as in the D.V., nor the "lesser"); Matthew 27:56. Probably the son of Cleophas or Clopas (John 19:25) where "Maria Cleophæ" is generally translated "Mary the wife of Cleophas", as married women are commonly distinguished by the addition of their husband's name.
5. James, the brother of Jude -- Jude 1:1. Most Catholic commentators identify Jude with the "Judas Jacobi", the "brother of James" (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13), called thus because his brother James was beter known than himself in the primitive Church.

The identity of the Apostle James (2), the son of Alpheus and James (3), the brother of the Lord and Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts 15, 21), although contested by many critics and, perhaps, not quite beyond doubt, is at least most highly probable, and by far the greater number of Catholic interpreters is considered as certain (see BRETHREN OF THE LORD, where the chief argument, taken from Galatians 1:19, in favour of the Apostleship of St. James, the brother of the Lord, is to be found). The objection moved by Mader (Biblische Zeitschrift, 1908, p. 393 sqq.) against the common statement that "Apostles" in Galatians 1:19 is to be taken strictly in the sense of the "Twelve" has been strongly impugned by Steinmann (Der Katholik, 1909, p. 207 sqq.). The James (5) of Jude 1:1 must certainly be identified with James (3), the brother of the Lord and the Bishop of Jerusalem. The identification of James (3), the brother of the Lord and James (4), the son of Mary, and probably of Cleophas or Clopas offers some difficulty. This identification requires the identity of Mary, the mother of James (Matthew 27:56; Mark 15:40), with Mary the wife of Cleophas (John 19:25), and, consequently, the identity of Alpheus (2) and Clopas (4). As Clopas and Alpheus are probably not two different transcriptions of the same Aramaic name Halpai (see CLEOPHAS), it must be admitted that two different names have been borne by one man. Indeed, there are several examples of the use of two names (a Hebrew and a Greek or Latin name) to designate the same person (Simon-Petrus; Saulus-Paulus), so that the identity of Alpheus and Cleophas is by no means improbable.

On the whole, although there is no full evidence for the identity of James (2), the son of Alpheus, and James (3), the brother of the Lord, and James (4), the son of Mary of Clopas, the view that one and the same person is described in the New Testament in these three different ways, is by far the most probable. There is, at any rate, very good ground (Galatians 1:19, 2:9, 2:12) for believing that the Apostle James, the son of Alpheus is the same person as James, the brother of the Lord, the well-known Bishop of Jerusalem of the Acts. As to the nature of the relationship which the name "brother of the Lord" is intended to express, see BRETHREN OF THE LORD.

JAMES IN THE SCRIPTURES

Had we not identified James, the son of Alpheus with the brother of the Lord, we should only know his name and his Apostleship. But the identity once admitted, we must consequently apply to him all the particulars supplied by the books of the New Testament. We may venture to assert that the training of James (and his brother Jude), had been that which prevailed in all pious Jewish homes and that it was therefore based on the knowledge of the Holy Scripture and the rigorous observance of the Law. Many facts point to the diffusion of the Greek language and culture throughout Judea and Galilee, as early as the first century b.c.; we may suppose that the Apostles, at least most of them, read and spoke Greek as well as Aramaic, from their childhood. James was called to the Apostolate with his brother Jude; in all the four lists of the Apostles, he stands at the head of the third group (Matthew 10:3; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13). Of James individually we hear no more until after the Resurrection. St. Paul (I Corinthians 15:5-7) mentions that the Lord appeared to him before the Ascension.

Then we lose sight of James till St. Paul, three years after his conversion (a.d. 37), went up to Jerusalem. Of the Twelve Apostles he saw only Peter and James the brother of the Lord (Galatians 1:19; Acts 9:27). When in the year 44 Peter escaped from prison, he desired that news of his release might be carried to James who held already a marked preeminence in the Church of Jerusalem (Acts 12:17). In the Council of Jerusalem (a.d. 51) he gives his sentence after St. Peter, declaring as Peter had done, that the Gentile Christians are not bound to circumcision, nor to the observance of the ceremonial Mosaic Law, but at the same time, he urged the advisability of conforming to certain ceremonies and of respecting certain of the scruples of their Jewish fellow-Christians (Acts 15:13 sqq.). On the same occasion, the "pillars" of the Church, James, Peter, and John "gave to me (Paul) and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision" (Galatians 2:9). He publicly commended the great charter of Gentile freedom from the Law, although he still continued the observance in his own life, no longer as a strict duty, but as an ancient, most venerable and national custom, trusting to "be saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 15:11). When afterwards some came from James to Antioch and led Peter into dissimulation (Galatians 2:12), his name was used by them, though he had given them no such commandment to enforce their interpretation of the concordat which, on his proposal, had been adopted at the Council of Jerusalem. When St. Paul after his third missionary journey paid a visit to St. James (a.d. 58), the Bishop of Jerusalem and "the elders" "glorified the Lord" and advised the Apostle to take part in the ceremonies of a Nazarite vow, in order to show how false the charge was that he had spoken of the Law as no longer to be regarded. Paul consented to the advice of James and the elders (Acts 21:1 sqq.). The Epistle of St. James reveals a grave, meek, and calm mind, nourished with the Scriptures of the Old Testament, given to prayer, devoted to the poor, resigned in persecution, the type of a just and apostolic man.

JAMES OUTSIDE OF THE SCRIPTURES

Traditions respecting James the Less are to be found in many extra-canonical documents, especially Josephus (Antiq., XX, ix, 1), the "Gospel according to the Hebrews" (St. Jerome, De vir. ill., II), Hegesippus (Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", II, xxiii), the pseudo-Clementine Homilies (Ep. of Peter) and Recognitions (I, 72, 73), Clement of Alexandria (Hypot., vi, quoted by Eusebius, "Hist. eccl.", II, i). The universal testimony of Christian antiquity is entirely in accordance with the information derived from the canonical books as to the fact that James was Bishop of the Church of Jerusalem. Hegesippus, a Jewish Christian, who lived about the middle of the second century, relates (and his narrative is highly probable) that James was called the "Just", that he drank no wine nor strong drink, nor ate animal food, that no razor touched his head, that he did not anoint himself or make use of the bath, and lastly that he was put to death by the Jews. The account of his death given by Josephus is somewhat different. Later traditions deserve less attention.

For bibliography see EPISTLE OF SAINT JAMES; Protoevangelium Jacobi and Liturgy of St. James.

A. CAMERLYNCK

Blessed James Thompson

(Also known as James Hudson).

Martyr, born in or near York; having nearly all his life in that city, died there, 28 November, 1582.

He arrived at Dr. Allen's college at Reims 19 September, 1580, and in May of the next year, by virtue of a dispensation, was admitted at Soissons, with one Nicholas Fox, to all Sacred orders within twelve days, although at the time he was so ill that he could hardly stand. He was sent on the mission the following 10 August, and was arrested at York on 11 August, 1582. On being taken before the Council of the North he frankly confessed his priesthood, to the astonishment of his fellow citizens who knew that he had not been away more than a year. He was then loaded with double irons and was imprisoned, first in a private prison, till his money was exhausted, and then in the castle. On 25 November he was brought to the bar and condemned to the penalties of high treason. Three days later he suffered with great joy and tranquillity at the Knavesmire, protesting that he had never plotted against the queen, and that he died in and for Catholic Faith. While he was hanging, he first raised his hands to heaven, then beat his breast with his right hand, and finally made a great sign of cross. In spite of his sentence, he was neither disembowelled nor quartered, but was buried under the gallows.

JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT

Leopold Janauschek

Cistercian, born at Brünn, Moravia, 13 October, 1827; died 23 July, 1898, at Baden, near Vienna. In 1846 he received the religious habit at the Cistercian Abbey of Zwettl, Lower Austria, where he was professed in 1848. His superiors then sent him to their house of studies of Heiligenkreuz near Vienna, where he studied philosophy and theology, and after his ordination to the priesthood was made professor of history and canon. His learned works on these sciences soon attracted attention and won for him in 1858 the chair of ecclesiastical history in the University of Vienna. But in 1859 he was recalled by his superiors to Heiligenkreuz, where he continued as professor until 1877. During this time he composed his first great work, "Originum Cisterciensium Liber Primus" (Vienna, 1877), in which he describes the foundation of the Order of Citeaux, its organization and extension, and mentions many of those who, under various titles, had honoured it. He gives a lengthy account of 742 ancient abbeys of monks, founded between the end of the eleventh and the end of the seventeenth centuries. Each of the genealogical and chronological tables, as well as the entire work itself, supposes colossal labour of research and compilation. He was unable to publish the second volume, which was to have been devoted to the monasteries of Cistercian nuns, and for which he had collected a great deal of material; but it will be utilized by the continuator of his work. He also published, at this period, a work of less importance on the history of the Cistercian Order.

His second great work is entitled "Bibliographia Bernardina". In 1891, on the occasion of the eighth centenary of the birth of St. Bernard, the Cistercian Congregation of Austria prepared four volumes for the glory of this illustrious doctor, under the title of "Xenia Bernardina". Janauschek gave his assistance in the preparation of the first three volumes, but the fourth, "Bibliographia Bernardina" (Vienna, 1891), was entirely his own work. He there treats successively of the different editions of the works of St. Bernard and their translations, the essays on the life of the saint, various panegyrics, his biographers, the inscriptions in his honour, the opinions of ecclesiastical historians, etc. These great works of Janauschek exhibit profound research, unconquerable perseverance, and great skill in classification. For these works the author was obligated to search many libraries and consult numerous archives; the books noticed in "Xenia Bernardina" amount to 2761 printed, and 119 manuscript volumes. The author was also obliged to communicate with many learned men. Despite weak health, which for many years permitted him to leave his room only at rare intervals, he persevered at his great task until interrupted by death.

EDMOND M. OBRECHT

Alexandre Vincent Jandel

General of the Dominican order, born at Gerbevilliers (Lorraine), 18 July, 1810; died at Rome, 11 December, 1872. He was remarkable from his earliest years for intelligence and resolution, qualities derived chiefly from his mother, a person of rare endowments, who did not fear to succour priests during the Revolution. After a brilliant collegiate course at Nancy, he entered the diocesan seminary in that city, where his success was equally great. Jandel was ordained priest 20 September, 1834, then appointed professor of Scripture, and soon afterwards rector of the seminary at Pont-à-Mousson. The young superior was regarded as a model of sanctity and learning. At this time he became acquainted with Bautain, Gerbet, Ratisbonne, and many other distinguished men, among them Lacordaire. Such was the impression made on him by Lacordaire, that he began to think of entering the Domninican Order, which the great preacher proposed to restore in France, where it had been destroyed by the Revolution. In 1839 he therefore went to Rome, consulted Gregory XVI on the matter, and finally received the habit on 15 May, 1841. Two years afterwards Jandel and Lacordaire commenced the great work of re-establishing their order in France. Lacordaire was an orator; Jandel was a ruler of men, calm, grave, sagacious, tenacious of traditions and customs, and pre-eminently practical. Though he had not the genius of his associate, he preached with great results. A sermon at Lyons on the power of the Cross led to his being challenged by a Freemason to prove the truth of his words in the lodge; he entered it, produced his crucifix, and made the sign of the cross; instantly the lights were extinguished, the furniture was thrown about, and all but he fled in terror from the scene of confusion.

Many holy persons in France placed themselves under his guidance. Pius IX, however, called him to Rome, and made him in 1850 vicar-general of the order ad beneplacitum, and in 1855 general for six years. He was soon recognized as the greatest religious superior and one of the most enlightened spiritual directors in the city. Of those whom he instructed at this time, two may be mentioned: Cardinal Manning and Father Burke. A born administrator, he infused new life into the order. Several provinces were re-established, and houses opened everywhere. The Dominican nuns (second order) and tertiaries were also greatly indebted to his zeal. He also did much to promote devotion to the rosary and to propagate the doctrine of St. Thomas. Such were the services he rendered to the Holy See especially as regarded the Zouaves, that Pius IX, who was warmly attached to him, intended to make him a cardinal; but Providence disposed otherwise, for he was elected general of the order, 7 June, 1862. He visited Ireland twice, and only weak health prevented him from visiting America. New editions of liturgical books and of the "constitutions" or legislation formed part of his characteristic work. He also paid great attention to foreign missions. During his term of office sixteen Dominicans were beatified or canonized. He presidedat two chapters of the order (Ghent, 1971), and he is justly considered as one of the greatest generals that the order has had during the seven centuries of its existence.

The stand authority is Cormier, Vie du Révérendissime Père Jandel, soixante-troisième Maître Général des Frères Prêcheurs (Paris, 1890).

REGINALD WALSH

St. Jane Frances de Chantal

Born at Dijon, France, 28 January, 1572; died at the Visitation Convent Moulins, 13 December, 1641.

Her father was president of the Parliament of Burgundy, and leader of the royalist party during the League that brought about the triumph of the cause of Henry IV. In 1592 she married Baron de Chantal, and lived in the feudal castle of Bourbilly. She restored order in the household, which was on the brink of ruin, and brought back prosperity. During her husband's absence at the court, or with the army, when reproachd for her extremely sober manner of dressing, her reply was: "The eyes which I must please are a hundred miles from here". She found more than once that God blessed with miracles the care she gave the suffering members of Christ. St. Francis de Sales's eulogy of her characterizes her life at Bourbilly and everywhere else: "In Madame de Chantal I have found the perfect woman, whom Solomon had difficulty in finding in Jerusalem". Baron de Chantal was accidently killed by a harquebus while out shooting in 1601. Left a widow at twenty-eight, with four children, the broken-hearted baroness took a vow of chastity. In all her prayers she besought God to send her a guide and God, in a vision, showed her the spiritual director He held in reserve for her. In order to safeguard her children's property, she was obliged to go and live at Monthelon in the home of her father-in-law, who was ruled over by an arrogant and wicked servant. This was real servitude, which she bore patiently and gently for seven years. At last her virtue triumphed over the ill will of the old man and house keeper.

During Lent, 1604, she visited her father at Dijon, where St. Francis de Sales was preaching at the Sainte Chapelle. She recognized in him the mysterious director who had been shown her, and placed herself under his guidance. Then began an admirable correspondence between the two saints. Unfortunately, the greater number of letters are no longer in existence, as she destroyed them after the death of the holy bishop. When she had assured the future security of children, and when she had provided the education of Celse-Bénigne, her fourteen year old son, whom she left to her father and her brother, the Archbishop of Bourges, she started for Annecy, where God was calling her to found the Congregation of the Visitation. She took her two remaining daughters with her, the elder having recently married the Baron of Thorens, a brother of St. Francis de Sales. Celse-Bénigne, impetous like those of her race, barred his mother's way by lying across the threshold. Mme de Chandal stopped, overcome: "Can the tears of a child shake her resolution?" said a holy and learned priest, the tutor of Celse-Benigne. "Oh! no", replied the saint, "but after all I am a mother!" And she stepped over child's body.

The Congregation of the Visitation was canonically established at Annecy on Trinity Sunday, 6 June, 1610. Its aim was to receive, with a view to their spiritual advancement, young girls and even widows who had not the desire or strength to subject themselves to the austere ascetical practices in force in all the religious orders at that time. St. Francis de Sales was especially desirous of seeing the realization of his cherished method of attaining perfection, which consisted in always keeping one's will united to the Divine will, in taking so to speak one's soul, heart, and longings into one's hands and giving them into God's keeping, and in seeking always to do what is pleasing to Him. "I do always the things that please him" (John, viii, 29). The two holy founders saw their undertaking prosper. At the time of the death of St. Francis de Sales in 1622, the order already counted thirteen houses; there were eight-six when St. Jane Frances died; and 164 when she was canonized.

The remainder of the saint's life was spent under the protection of the cloister in the practice of the most admirable virtues. If a gentle kindness, vivified and strengthened by a complete spirit of renunciation, predominates in St. Francis de Sales, it is firmness and great vigour which prevails in St. Jane Frances; she did not like to see her daughters giving way to human weakness. Her trials were continuous and borne bravely, and yet she was exceedingly sensitive. Celse-Bénigne was an incorrigible duellist. She prayed so fervently that he was given the grace to die a Christian death on the battle-field, during the campaign against the Isle of Ré (1627). He left a daughter who became the famous Marquise de Sévigné. To family troubles God added interior crosses which, particularly during the last nine years of her life, kept her in agony of soul from which she was not freed until three months before her death.

Her reputation for sanctity was widespread. Queens, princes, and princesses flocked to the reception-room of the Visitation. Wherever she went to establish foundations, the people gave her ovations. "These people", she would say confused, "do not know me; they are mistaken". Her body is venerated with that of St. Francis de Sales in the church of the Visitation at Annecy. She was beatified in 1751, canonized in 1767, and 21 August was appointed as her feast day.

The life of the saint was written in the seventeenth century, with inimitable charm, by her secretary, Mother de Chaugy. Monsignor Bougaud, who died Bishop of Laval, published in 1863 a "Histoire de Sainte Chantal" which had a great and well-deserved success.

The words of the saint comprise instructions on the religious life, various minor works, among which is the admirable "Deposition for the Process of Beatification of St. Francis de Sales", and a great many letters. The Saint's qualities are seen in her precise and vigorous style, void of imagery but betraying a repressed emotion, and bursting forth spontaneously from the heart, anticipating in its method the beautiful French of the seventeenth century. The book which may be called her masterpiece, "Réponses sur les Régles, Constitutions et Coutumes", a truly practical and complete code of the religious life, is not in circulation.

RAPHAL PERNIN

Ferdinand Janner

Theologian, born at Hirschau, in the Upper Palatinate (Bavaria), 4 Feb., 1836; died 1 November, 1895. He completed his studies at the Latin school of Amberg, taking his philosophical course at that lyceum, studied theology at Wurzburg and Ratisbon, and was ordained priest 13 August, 1858. After devoting himself to parish work for a time, he again took up his studies at Wurzburg, where he obtained the degree of Doctor of Theology, after which he was successively, chaplain at Weiden, in 1863 prefect of the Ratisbon seminary, 1865 professor of religion and history at the gymnasium of Speyer, 1867 professor of ecclesiastical history, Christian archaeology, and history of art at the Ratisbon lyceum, 1883 diocesan consultor. He retired from active life in the year 1888.

Janner's principal work is "Geschichte der Bischofe von Regensburg", the three published volumes of which bring the history to the sixteenth century (Ratisbon, 1883-86). He also wrote: "De factis dogmaticis" (Wurzburg, 1861); "Infallibilem ecclesiam Catholicam esse in diiudicandis factis dogmaticis" (Speyer, 1866); "Das officium unius martyris de communi in seinem Zusammenhang erklart" (Speyer, 1867); "Das Heilige Land, und die heiligen Statten, ein Pilgerbuch" (Ratisbon, 1869); "Missale parvun sive Missale Romanum in breviorem et commodiorem formam redactum: (Ratisbon, 1870); "Die Bauhutten des deutschen Mittelaters" (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1876); "Nicolas von Weis, Bischof zu Speyer" (Wurzburg, 1876); "Die Schotten in Regensburg, die Kirsche zu St. Jacob und deren Nordportal" (Ratisbon, 1885); a translation of the Breviary "Das romische Brevier in deutscher Sprache" (4 vols., Ratisbon, 1890). He also wrote "Personen-und Sachregister zu Rass, Die Con vertiten seit der Reformation", I-X (Freiburg im Br., 1872).

FRIEDRICH LAUCHERT

Matthew of Janow

A medieval ecclesiastical author, born in the fourteenth century in Bohemia; died at Prague, 30 Nov., 1394. Son of Wenzel of Janow, a Bohemian knight, he began his studies at Prague and continued them at the University of Paris where he graduated after a residence of nine years. Hence his title of Parisian Master (Magister Parisiensis). In 1381 he was appointed canon and confessor in the cathedral of Prague, offices which he held until his death. He was never a preacher of the first rank, but was conspicuous for his great zeal in the confessional. Between the years 1388 and 1392 he composed several treatises which he later collected under the title "Regulae Veteris et Novi Testamenti" The work has never been published in its entirety, nor is it to be found complete in any one manuscript. Parts of it were wrongly ascribed to John Hus and published with his writings (Nuremberg, 1588, I, 376-471).

Janow attributed the evils in the Church to the contemporary Papal Schism, the large number of papal exemptions and reservations, and the excessive importance attached by some Christians to accidental external practices. Owing to the abuses which at times attended the veneration of saints and relics, he ultimately advocated the removal of such special objects of piety from the churches. He was misled into this extreme view by his desire of promoting an intense interior devotion to the Blessed Eucharist. The frequent and even daily reception of Holy Communion by the laity was, according to him, not only desirable but almost necessary. At the Synod of Prague in 1389 such encouragement of daily Communion was prohibited, and the veneration of images defended. Janow's retraction of his erroneous views and his repeated protestations of never-failing loyalty to the Catholic Church are sufficient evidence that he cannot be styled, as is frequently done, a forerunner of Hus.

N.A. WEBER

Cornelius Jansen, the Elder

( Also Jansens, Janssen, Janssenius or Jansenius Gandaviensis).

Exegete, born at Hulst, Flanders, 1510; died at Ghent, 11 April, 1576. He received his early education at Ghent from the Brethren of the Common Life (called at Ghent the Hieronymites), and later studied theology and Oriental languages at Louvain. After he had become a licentiate of theology in 1534, he lectured, at the request of the abbot of the Premonstratensian Abbey of Tongerloo, to the young monks on the Holy Scriptures until 1542, from which date until 1562 he discharged the duties of pastor of the parish of St. Martin at Courtrai (Kortryk) with great success. Having finally attained the degree of Doctor of Theology in 1562, he was immediately appointed professor of theology at the University of Louvain, became in the following year dean of the collegiate seminary of St. James, and attended the last sessions of the Council of Trent as delegate of the university. On his return, King Philip II appointed him first bishop of the newly founded See of Ghent, which dated only from 1559. For a long time he refused to assume the dignity, on account of the difficult conditions in the diocese, and was not preconized until 1568, by Pius V. As bishop he devoted himself especially to checking the advance of Protestantism, and to carrying out with the greatest exactness the decrees of the Council of Trent. With this object in view, he founded a seminary for priests at Ghent in 1569, held diocesan synods in 1571 and 1574, and published a ritual for his diocese. He was entrusted with the compilation of a ritual to be used in the ecclesiastical province of Mechlin, but did not finish it. While at Tongerloo he wrote a great deal, and, as pastor at Courtrai, had already become widely known for his exegetical work.

Among Jansen's writings is the "Concordia evangelica." (Louvain, 1529), to which he later added the "Commentarius in Concordiam et totem historiam evangelicam" (Louvain, 1572), undoubtedly his best work. He published also: "Commentarius in Proverbia Salomonis" (Louvain, 1567), and "Commentarius in Ecclesiasticum" (Louvain, 1569), both of which were republished in one work at Antwerp in 1589; "Commentarius in omnes Psalmos Davidicos" (Louvain, 1569), with an introduction to each psalm, an excellent paraphrase of the text, and explanations of the difficult passages; "Paraphrases in ea Veteris Testamenti Cantica, quae per ferias singulas totius anni usus ecclesiasticus observat" (Louvain, 1569). After his death appeared "Annotationes in Librum Sapientiae" (Louvain, 1577).

Cornelius Jansen was one of the most distinguished among the exegetes of the sixteenth century, and his masterpiece, the aforesaid "Concordia, Evangelica" was epoch-making in the history of Catholic exegesis, for he insisted on the literal interpretation, as against the mystical interpretation of his predecessors, emphasized also the importance of the original text, and of a profound study of Oriental languages as aids to a full comprehension of the Vulgate.

PATRICIUS SCHLAGER

Johann Janssen

Historian, born 10 April, 1829, at Kanten, Germany; died 24 December, 1891, at Frankfort-on-the-Main. He received his early education in a school of his native town. His course was interrupted, however, from the early part of 1842 to the spring of 1844, during which time he worked as an apprentice to a coppersmith. It soon became apparent, however that he had no aptitude for this trade, and he was allowed to return to school. In 1846 he went to the gymnasium of Recklinghausen, from which he graduated in the autumn of 1849. During the years 1849-54 he frequented the Universities of Munster, Louvain, Bonn, and Berlin, where he devoted himself to the study of theology and history; in August, 1853, he obtained the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from the University of Bonn, in virtue of a Latin dissertation on the life of Wibald, Abbot of Stablo and Corvey (1098-1158); in August, 1854, he opened a course of history as Privatdozent at the Academy of Munster, but shortly afterwards, in September of the same year, he was asked to take the chair of history for the Catholic students of the gymnasium at Frankfort-on-the-Main. He retained this position up to the time of his death in 1891.

Not satisfied with attending to the ordinary duties of the classroom, Janssen devoted his spare time to historical research, the results of which were embodied in many learned volumes. At the same time he took every opportunity to visit centres of learning; thus in 1865-64 he spent several months in Italy and Rome, where he consulted the archives of the Vatican on matters relating to the Thirty Years War and to the first partition of Poland. In 1875-76 he was a deputy to the Prussian Diet, joined the Centre party, and spent much time in Berlin. This sojourn in the German capital was used not only to defend the interests of his constituency in Parliament, but also to widen the range of his knowledge by personal intercourse with learned and public men. From the days of his childhood he conceived the desire of serving God in the priesthood. The delicate state of his health prevented the execution of this cherished plan for some time; but finally he was ordained priest at Limburg, 26 March, 1860. In 1866 he was appointed spiritual counsellor by Archbishop Hermann von Vicari of Freiburg, and in 1880 Pope Leo XIII made him a prelate and a prothonotary Apostolic ad instar participantium.

Janssen is the author of many valuable works on historical subjects. It was while he was at the University of Louvain that be resolved to make the study of history his principal work for the remainder of his life. His first work was a Latin biography of Abbot Wibald, which appeared in a revised form in German (1854). In 1856 he published a volume of historical documents relating to the Diocese of Munster (Die Geschichtsquellen des Bisthums Munster, 3 vols.). In 1881 appeared the essay "Frankreichs Rheingeluste und deutschfeindliche Politik in fruheren Jahrhunderten", in which he laid bare the traditional diplomacy of France, hostile to Germany and intent upon extending the boundary line as far as the Rhine. In 1863 he published an essay upon Schiller as an historian (Schiller als Historiker), in which he made it plain that the great German poet, in his historical writings, indulged too much in his imagination. For many years he was engaged in sifting part of the manuscript material found in the archives of Frankfort; and the result of these labours was the publication of "Frankfurts Reichscorrespondenz, 1376-1519" (2 vols., 1863-73). In the essay "Zur Genesis der ersten Theilung Polens" (1865) he explained the circumstances under which the former Kingdom of Poland was robbed of part of its dominions by neighbouring countries. A biography of the man whom he considered as his teacher and guide appeared in three volumes in 1868 under the title "Johnnn Friedrich Boehmers Leben, Briefe und kleinere Schriften". In 1876-77 appeared in two volumes another biography of a renowned scholar and convert to the Catholic Faith, Count Friedrich Leopold zu Stolberg. In the work "Zeit- und Lebensbilder" (1875) he published in book form a number of essays on the men and events of his time.

The most important work is his "History of the German people" (Geschichte des deutschen Volkes seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters). The first suggestion of such an undertaking was made by his master and friend, Johann Friedrich Boehmer, in 1853. At first he planned to write a complete history of Germany from the remotest times to his own day but soon this plan had to be abandoned, and he confined himself to the period beginning with the end of the Middle Ages. Eight volumes have appeared; six were given to the public by Janssen himself (1876-88), and two by his pupil and friend Ludwig Pastor (1893-94) from materials collected by Janssen and they reach as far as the time of the Thirty Years War, which commenced in 1618. The great merit of this work is that Janssen treated not only of the political but also of the religious, social, and economic conditions of Germany, that he was very faithful to the sources of information and very impartial, that he made the authorities speak for themselves, and that he destroyed the common conception, according to which the Middle Ages presented nothing but corruption and moral decay. Valuable additions to this work are found in two small volumes written in reply to adverse criticism ("An meine Kritiker", 1882; "Ein zweites Wort an meine Kritiker", 1884). Most of the works of Janssen had a large sale, and appeared in several editions; this is particularly the case of the "History of the German People", which has been translated, partly, at least, into French and English. Janssen was a very prolific writer: to the works which have just been mentioned he added a number of articles written for reviews and other publications.

Owing to the literary and critical merits of his works Janssen must be placed among the foremost Catholic historians of the last century. In his great work he deals much with the origin and the great leaders of the Protestant Reformation, yet he is always most moderate in tone, and never uses expressions which might give offence. The same attitude of deference and respect was shown in his personal relations towards those who differed from him in faith; and in this manner he won the esteem and confidence of Protestants, among whom he found many friends.

Despite Janssen's great learning he remained humble; worldly honours and ecclesiastical dignities had no attraction for him.

In 1864 efforts were made to win him for the diplomatic service of the Vatican; some time later he was mentioned for a vacant bishopric; in 1883 Pope Leo XIII contemplated summoning him to Rome for the direction of the Vatican Archives; in 1890 the cardinalate was to be conferred on him; but Janssen succeeded in escaping all these honours. We gave often and abundantly to the poor, to the sick, to churches, and to institutions of mercy. An asylum for the poor and abandoned children of Frankfort, erected in 1894 in the town of Oberursel, owes its existence largely to his efforts. Janssen was a great scholar and an exemplary priest, though he never exercised the ecclesiastical ministry.

FRANCIS J. SCHAFFER

Jansenius and Jansenism

Cornelius Jansen, Bishop of Ypres (Cornelius Jansenius Yprensis), from whom Jansenism derives its origin and name, must not be confounded with another writer and bishop of the same name Cornelius Jansenius Gandavensis (1510-1576), of whom we possess several books on Scripture and a valuable "Concordia Evangelica."

I. LIFE AND WRITINGS

The subject of this article lived three-quarters of a century later than his namesake. He was born 28 October, 1585, of a Catholic family, in the village of Accoi, near Leerdam, Holland; died at Ypres, 6 May, 1638. His parents, although in moderate circumstances, secured for him an excellent education They sent him first to Utrecht. In 1602 we find him at the University of Louvain, where he entered the College du Faucon to take up the study of philosophy. Here he passed two years, and at the solemn promotion of 1604 was proclaimed first of 118 competitors. To begin his theological studies he entered the College du Pape Adrien VI, whose president, Jacques Janson, imbued with the errors of Baius and eager to spread them, was to exert an influence on the subsequent course of his ideas and works. Having hitherto been on amicable terms with the Jesuits, he had even sought admission into their order. The refusal he experienced, the motives of which are unknown to us, seems not to be altogether unrelated to the aversion he subsequently manifested for the celebrated society, and for the theories and practices it championed. He was also associated with a young and wealthy Frenchman, Jean du Verger de Hauranne, who was completing his course of theology with the Jesuits, and who possessed a mind subtile and cultured, but restless and prone to innovations, and an ardent and intriguing character. Shortly after his return to Paris towards the end of 1604, du Verger was joined there by Jansenius, for whom he had secured a position as tutor. About two years later he attracted him to Bayonne, his native town, where he succeeded in having him appointed director of an episcopal college. There, during eleven or twelve years of studies ardently pursued in common, on the Fathers and principally on St. Augustine, the two friends had time to exchange thoughts and to conceive daring Projects. In 1617, while du Verger, who had returned to Paris, went to receive from the Bishop of Poitiers the dignity of Abbot of St-Cyran, Jansenius returned to Louvain, where the presidency of the new College de Sainte Pulcherie was confided to him. In 1619 he received the degree of Doctor of Theology, and afterwards obtained a chair of exegesis. The commentaries which he dictated to his pupils, as well as several writings of a polemical nature, brought him in a short time a deserved renown.

These writings of Jansenius were not at first intended for publication, in fact they did not see the light until after his death. They are concise, clear and perfectly orthodox in doctrine. The principal ones are "Pentateuchus, sive commentarius in quinque libros Mosis" (Louvain, 1639), "Analecta in Proverbia Salomonis, Ecclesiasten, Sapientiam, Habacuc et Sophoniam" (Louvain, 1644); "Tetrateuchus, seu commentarius in quatuor Evangelia" (Louvain,1639). Some of these exegetical works have been printed more than once. Among his polemical works are "Alexipharmacum civibus Sy vaeducensibus propinatum adversus ministrorum fascinum" (Louvain 1630); then, in reply to the criticism of the Calvinist Gisbert Voet, "Spongia notarum quibus Alexipharmacum aspersit Gisbertus Voetius" (Louvain, 1631). Jansenius published in 1635, under the pseudonym of Armacanus, a volume entitled "Alexandri Patricii Armacani Theologi Mars Gallicus seu de justitia armorum regis Galliae libri duo". This was a bitter and well-merited satire against the foreign policy of Richelieu, which was summed up in the odd fact of the "Most Christian" nation and monarchy constantly allying themselves with the Protestants, in Holland, Germany, and elsewhere, for the sole purpose of compassing the downfall of the House of Austria.

The same author has left us a series of letters addressed to the Abbot of St-Cyran, which were found among the papers of the person to whom they were sent and printed under the title: "Naissance du jansenisme decouverte, ou Lettres de Jansénius à l'abbé de St-Cyran depuis l'an 1617 jusqu'en 1635" (Louvain, 1654). It was also during the course of his professorate that Jansenius, who was a man of action as well as of study, journeyed twice to Spain, whither he went as the deputy of his colleagues to plead at the Court of Madrid the cause of the university against the Jesuits; and in fact, through his efforts their authorization to teach humanities and philosophy at Louvain was withdrawn. All this, however, did not prevent him from occupying himself actively and chiefly with a work of which the general aim, born of his intercourse with St-Cyran, was to restore to its place of honour the true doctrine of St. Augustine on grace, a doctrine supposedly obscured or abandoned in the Church for several centuries. He was still working on it when, on the recommendation of King Philip IV and Boonen, Archbishop of Mechlin, he was raised to the See of Ypres. His consecration took place in 1636, and, though at the same time putting the finishing touches to his theological work, he devoted himself with great zeal to the government of his diocese. Historians have remarked that the Jesuits had no more cause to complain of his administration than the other religious orders.

He succumbed to an epidemic which ravaged Ypres and died, according to eyewitnesses, in dispositions of great piety. When on the point of death he confided the manuscript which he cherished to his chaplain, Reginald Lamaeus, with the command to publish it after taking counsel with Libert Fromondus, a professor at Louvain, and Henri Calenus, a canon of the metropolitan church. He requested that this publication be made with the utmost fidelity, as, in his opinion, only with difficulty could anything be changed. "If, however," he added, "the Holy See wishes any change, I am an obedient son, and I submit to that Church in which I have lived to my dying hour. This is my last wish."

The editors of the "Augustinus" have been wrongly accused of having intentionally and disloyally suppressed this declaration, it appears plainly enough on the second page in the original edition. On the other hand its authenticity has been contested by means of external and internal arguments, founded notably on the discovery of another will, dated the previous day (5 May), which says nothing regarding the work to be published. But it is quite conceivable that the dying prelate was mindful of the opportunity to complete his first act by dictating to his chaplain and confirming with his seal this codicil which, according to the testamentary executors, was written only half an hour before his death. It has been vainly sought, a priori, to make the fact appear improbable by alleging that the author was in perfect good faith as to the orthodoxy of his views. Already, in 1619, 1620, and 1621, his correspondence with St-Cyran bore unmistakable traces of a quite opposite state of mind; in it he spoke of coming disputes for which there was need to prepare; of a doctrine of St. Augustine discovered by him, but little known among the learned, and which in time would astonish everybody, of opinions on grace and predestination which he dared not then reveal "lest like so many others I be tripped up by Rome before everything is ripe and seasonable". Later, in the "Augustinus" itself (IV, xxv-xxvii), it is seen that he scarcely disguises the close connection of several of his assertions with certain propositions of Baius, though he ascribes the condemnation of the latter to the contingent circumstances of time and place, and he believes them tenable in their obvious and natural sense.

Nothing, therefore, authorized the rejection of the famous declaration, or testament, of Jansenius as unauthentic. But neither is there any authorization for suspecting the sincerity of the explicit affirmation of submission to the Holy See which is therein contained. The author, at the time of his promotion to the doctorate in 1619, had defended the infallibility of the pope in a most categorical thesis, conceived as follows: "The Roman Pontiff is the supreme judge of all religious controversies, when he defines a thing and imposes it on the whole Church, under penalty of anathema, his decision is just, true, and infallible." At the end of his work (III, x, Epilogus omnium) we find this protestation perfectly parallel with that of his testament: "All whatsoever I have affirmed on these various and difficult points, not according to my own sentiment, but according to that of the holy Doctor, I submit to the judgment and sentence of the Apostolic See and the Roman Church, my mother, to be henceforth adhered to if she judges that it must be adhered to, to retract if she so wishes, to condemn and anathematize it if she decrees that it should be condemned and anathematized. For since my tenderest childhood I have been reared in the beliefs of this Church; I imbibed them with my mother's milk; I have grown up and grown old while remaining attached to them; never to my knowledge have I swerved therefrom a hair's-breadth in thought, action or word, and I am still firmly decided to keep this faith until my last breath and to appear with it before the judgment-seat of God." Thus Jansenius, although he gave his name to a heresy, was not himself a heretic, but lived and died in the bosom of the Church. In view of the fact that he consciously and deliberately aimed at innovation or reforming, it would certainly be difficult to exculpate him entirely or declare that his attitude was in no wise presumptuous and rash; but impartial history may and should take into account the peculiar atmosphere created about him by the still smouldering controversies on Baianism and the widespread prejudices against the Roman Curia. To determine the extent to which these and similar circumstances, by deluding him necessarily diminished his responsibility, is impossible, that is the secret of God.

II. THE "AUGUSTINUS" AND ITS CONDEMNATION

After the death of Jansenius, the internuncio Richard Aravius vainly endeavoured to prevent the printing of his manuscript; this undertaking, actively furthered by the friends of the dead man, was completed in 1640. The folio volume bore the title: "Cornelii Jansenii, Episcopi Yprensis, Augustinus, seu doctrina S. Augustini de humanae naturae sanitate, aegritudine, medicina, adversus Pelagianos et Massilienses". It was divided into three volumes, of which the first, chiefly historical, is an exposition in eight books of Pelagianism; the second, after an introductory study on the limitations of human reason, devotes one book to the state of innocence or the grace of Adam and the angels, four books to the state of fallen nature, three to the state of pure nature; the third volume treats in ten books of "the grace of Christ the Saviour", and concludes with "a parallel between the error of the Semipelagians and that of certain moderns", who are no other than the Molinists. The author, if we are to accept his own statement, laboured for twenty years on this work, and to gather his materials he had ten times read the whole of St. Augustine and thirty times his treatise against the Pelagians. From these readings emerged a vast system, whose identity with Baianism neither skilful arrangement nor subtile dialectic could disguise.

His fundamental error consists in disregarding the supernatural order, for Jansenius as for Baius, the vision of God is the necessary end of human nature; hence it follows that all the primal endowments designated in theology as supernatural or preternatural, including exemption from concupiscence, were simply man's due. This first assertion is fraught with grave consequences regarding the original fall, grace, and justification. As a result of Adam's sin, our nature stripped of elements essential to its integrity, is radically corrupt and depraved. Mastered by concupiscence, which in each of us properly constitutes original sin, the will is powerless to resist; it has become purely passive. It cannot escape the attraction of evil except it be aided by a movement of grace superior to and triumphant over the force of concupiscence. Our soul, henceforth obedient to no motive save that of pleasure, is at the mercy of the delectation, earthly or heavenly, which for the time being attracts it with the greatest strength. At once inevitable and irresistible, this delectation, if it come from heaven or from grace, leads man to virtue; if it come from nature or concupiscence, it determines him to sin. In the one case as in the other, the will is fatally swept on by the preponderant impulse. The two delectations says Jansenius, are like the two arms of a balance, of which the one cannot rise unless the other be lowered and vice versa. Thus man irresistibly, although voluntarily, does either good or evil, according as he is dominated by grace or by concupiscence; he never resists either the one or the other. In this system there is evidently no place for purely sufficient grace; on the other hand it is easy to discern the principles of the five condemned propositions (see below).

In order to present this doctrine under the patronage of St. Augustine, Jansenius based his argument chiefly on two Augustinian conceptions: on the distinction between the auxilium sine quo non granted to Adam, and the auxilium quo, active in his descendants; and on the theory of the "victorious delectation" of grace. A few brief remarks will suffice to make clear the double mistake. In the first place the auxilium sine quo non is not, in the idea of Augustine, "a grace purely sufficient", since through it the angels persevered; it is on the contrary a grace which confers complete power in actu primo (i.e. the ability to act), in such a way that, this being granted, nothing further is needed for action. The auxilium quo, on the other hand, is a supernatural help which bears immediately on the actus secundus (i.e. the performance of the action) and in this grace, in so far as it is distinguished from the grace of Adam, must be included the whole series of efficacious graces by which man works out his salvation, or the gift of actual perseverance, which gift conducts man infallibly and invincibly to beatitude, not because it suppresses liberty, but because its very concept implies the consent of man. The delectation of grace is a deliberate pleasure which the Bishop of Hippo explicitly opposes to necessity (voluptas, non necessitas); but what we will and embrace with consenting pleasure, we cannot at the same time not will, and in this sense we will it necessarily. In this sense also, it is correct to say, "Quod amplius nos delectat, secundum id operemur necesse est" (i.e. in acting we necessarily follow what gives us most pleasure). Finally, this delight is called victorious, not because it fatally subjugates the will, but because it triumphs over concupiscence, fortifying free will to the point of rendering it invincible to natural desire. It is thus clear that we can say of men sustained by and faithful to grace, "Invictissime quod bonum est velint, et hoc deserere invictissime nolint".

The success of the "Augustinus" was great, and it spread rapidly throughout Belgium, Holland, and France. A new edition, bearing the approbation of ten doctors of the Sorbonne, soon appeared at Paris. On the other hand, on 1 August, 1641, a decree of the Holy Office condemned the work and prohibited its reading; and the following year Urban VIII renewed the condemnation and interdiction in his Bull "In eminenti". The pope justified his sentence with two principal reasons: first, the violation of the decree forbidding Catholics to publish anything on the subject of grace without the authorization of the Holy See; second, the reproduction of several of the errors of Baius. At the same time, and in the interests of peace, the sovereign pontiff interdicted several other works directed against the "Augustinus". Despite these wise precautions the Bull, which some pretended was forged or interpolated, was not received everywhere without difficulty. In Belgium, where the Archbishop of Mechlin and the university were rather favourable to the new ideas, the controversy lasted for ten years. But it was France which thenceforth became the chief centre of the agitation. At Paris, St-Cyran, who was powerful through his relations besides being very active, succeeded in spreading simultaneously the doctrines of the "Augustinus" and the principles of an exaggerated moral and disciplinary rigorism, all under the pretence of a return to the primitive Church. He had succeeded especially in winning over to his ideas the influential and numerous family of Arnauld of Andilly, notably Mère Angélique Arnauld, Abbess of Port-Royal, and through her the religious of that important convent. When he died, in 1643, Doctor Antoine Arnauld quite naturally succeeded him in the direction of the movement which he had created. The new leader lost no time in asserting himself in startling fashion by the publication of his book "On Frequent Communion", which would have been more correctly entitled "Against Frequent Communion" but which, as it was written with skill and a great display of erudition, did not a little towards strengthening the party.

Although the Sorbonne had accepted the Bull "In eminenti", and the Archbishop of Paris had, in 1644 proscribed the work of Jansenius, it continued to be spread and recommended, on the pretext that authority had not rejected a single well-determined thesis. It was then (1649) that Cornet, syndic of the Sorbonne, took the initiative in a more radical measure; he extracted five propositions from the much-discussed work, two from the book "On Frequent Communion", and submitted them to the judgment of the faculty. This body, prevented by the Parlement from pursuing the examination it had begun, referred the affair to the general assembly of the clergy in 1650. The greater number considered it more fitting that Rome should pronounce, and eighty-five bishops wrote in this sense to Innocent X, transmitting to him the first five propositions. Eleven other bishops addressed to the sovereign pontiff a protest against the idea of bringing the matter to trial elsewhere than in France. They demanded in any case the institution of a special tribunal, as in the "De auxiliis" affair, and the opening of a debate in which the theologians of both sides should be allowed to submit their arguments. The decision of Innocent X was what might have been expected: he acceded to the request of the majority, keeping in view as far as possible the wishes of the minority. A commission was appointed, consisting of five cardinals and thirteen consultors, some of whom were known to favour acquittal. Its laborious examination lasted two years: it held thirty-six long sessions, of which the last ten were presided over by the pope in person. The "Augustinus" which, as has been said, had friends on the bench, was defended with skill and tenacity. Finally its advocates presented a table of three columns, in which they distinguished as many interpretations of the five propositions: a Calvinistic interpretation, rejected as heretical, a Pelagian or Semipelagian interpretation, identified by them with the traditional doctrine, also to be cast aside, and lastly, their interpretation, the idea of St. Augustine himself, which could not but be approved. This plea, skilful as it was could not avert the solemn condemnation, by the Bull "Cum occasione" (31 May, 1653), of the five propositions, which were as follows:

• Some of God's commandments are impossible to just men who wish and strive (to keep them) considermg the powers they actually have, the grace by which these precepts may become possible is also wanting;
• In the state of fallen nature no one ever resists interior grace;
• To merit, or demerit, in the state of fallen nature we must be free from all external constraint, but not from interior necessity,
• The Semipelagians admitted the necessity of interior preventing grace for all acts, even for the beginning of faith; but they fell into heresy in pretending that this grace is such that man may either follow or resist it;
• To say that Christ died or shed His blood for all men, is Semipelagianism.

These five propositions were rejected as heretical, the first four absolutely the fifth if understood in the sense that Christ died only for the predestined. All are implicitly contained in the second, and through it, all are connected with the above-mentioned erroneous conception of the state of innocence and the original fall. If it be true that fallen man never resists interior grace (second proposition), it follows that a just man who violates a commandment of God did not have the grace to observe it. That he therefore transgresses it through inability to fulfil it (first proposition). If, however, he has sinned and thus demerited, it is clear that, to demerit, the liberty of indifference is not requisite, and what is said of demerit must also be said of its correlative, merit (third proposition). On the other hand, if grace is often wanting to the just, since they fall, it is wanting still more to sinners; it is therefore impossible to maintain that the death of Jesus Christ assured to every man the graces necessary for salvation (fifth proposition). If this be so, the Semipelagians were in error in admitting the universal distribution of a grace which may be resisted (fourth proposition).

III. RESISTANCE OF THE JANSENISTS

Well received by the Sorbonne and the General Assembly of the Clergy, the Bull "Cum occasione" was promulgated with the royal sanction. This should have opened the eyes of the partisans of Jansenius. They were given the alternative of finally renouncing their errors, or of openly resisting the supreme authority. They were thrown for the moment into embarrassment and hesitation, from which Arnauld extricated them by a subtlety: they must, he said, accept the condemnation of the five propositions, and reject them, as did the pope, only, these propositions were not contained in the book of the Bishop of Ypres, or if they were found therein, it was in another sense than in the pontifical document; the idea of Jansenius was the same as that of St. Augustine, which the Church neither could, nor wished to, censure. This interpretation was not tenable; it was contrary to the text of the Bull, no less than to the minutes of the discussions which had preceded it, and throughout which these propositions were considered and Presented as expressing the sense of the "Augustinus". In March, 1564, thirty-eight bishops rejected the interpretation, and communicated their decision to the sovereign pontiff, who thanked and congratulated them. The Jansenists persisted none the less in an attitude opposed alike to frankness and to logic. The occasion soon arrived for them to support this with a complete theory. The Duc de Liancourt, one of the protectors of the party, was refused absolution until he should change his sentiments and accept purely and simply the condemnation of the "Augustinus". Arnauld took up his pen and in two successive letters protested against any such exaction. Ecclesiastical judgments, he said, are not all of equal value, and do not entail the same obligations; where there is question of the truth or falsity of a doctrine, of its revealed origin or its heterodoxy, the Church in virtue of its Divine mission is qualified to decide; it is a matter of right. But if the doubt bears upon the presence of this doctrine in a book, it is a question of purely human fact, which as such does not fall under the jurisdiction of the supernatural teaching authority instituted in the Church by Jesus Christ. In the former case, the Church having pronounced sentence, we have no choice but to conform our belief to its decision; in the latter, its word should not be openly contradicted it claims from us the homage of a respectful silence but not that of an interior assent. Such is the famous distinction between right and fact, which was henceforth to be the basis of their resistance, and through which the recalcitrants pretended to remain Catholics, united to the visible body of Christ despite all their obstinacy. This distinction is both logically and historically the denial of the doctrinal power of the Church. For how is it possible to teach and defend revealed doctrine if its affirmation or denial cannot be discerned in a book or a writing, whatever its form or its extent? In fact, from the beginning, councils and popes have approved and imposed as orthodox certain formulas and certain works, and from the beginning have proscribed others as being tainted with heresy or error.

The expedient contrived by Arnauld was so opposed to both fact and reason that a number of Jansenists who were more consistent in their contumacy, such as Pascal, refused to adopt it or to subscribe to the condemnation of the five propositions in any sense. The greater number, however, took advantage of it to mislead others or deceive themselves. All of them, moreover, through personal intercourse, preaching, or writing, displayed extraordinary activity in behalf of their ideas. They aimed especially, following the tactics inaugurated by St-Cyran, at introducing them into religious orders, and in this way they were in a measure successful, e.g. with the Oratory of Berulle. Against the Jesuits, in whom from the first they had encountered capable and determined adversaries, they had vowed a profound antipathy and waged a war to the death. This inspired the "Provinciales" which appeared in 1656. These were letters supposedly addressed to a provincial correspondent. Their author Blaise Pascal, abusing his admirable genius, therein lavished the resources of a captivating style and an inexhaustible sarcastic humour to taunt and decry the Society of Jesus, as favouring and propagating a relaxed and corrupt moral code. To this end the errors or imprudences of some members, emphasized with malicious exaggeration, were made to appear as the official doctrine of the whole order. The "Provinciales" were translated into elegant Latin by Nicole disguised for the occasion under the pseudonym of Wilhelmus Wendrochius. They did a great deal of harm.

However, the Sorbonne, again declaring itself against the faction, had, by 138 votes against 68, condemned the latest writings of Arnauld, and, on his refusal to submit, it dismissed him, together with sixty other doctors who made common cause with him. The assembly of bishops in 1656 branded as heretical the unfortunate theory of right and of fact, and reported its decision to Alexander VII, who had just succeeded Innocent X. On 16 October the pope replied to this communication by the Bull "Ad sanctam Beati Petri sedem". He praised the clear-sighted firmness of the episcopate and confirmed in the following terms the condemnation pronounced by his predecessor: "We declare and define that the five propositions have been drawn from the book of Jansenius entitled 'Augustinus', and that they have been condemned in the sense of the same Jansenius and we once more condemn them as such." Relying on these words, the Assembly of the Clergy of the following year (1657) drew up a formula of faith conformable thereto and made subscription to it obligatory. The Jansenists would not give in. They claimed that no one could exact a lying signature from those who were not convinced of the truth of the matter. The religious of Port-Royal were especially conspicuous for their obstinacy, and the Archbishop of Paris, after several fruitless admonitions, was forced to debar them from receiving the sacraments. Four bishops openly allied themselves with the rebellious party: they were Henri Arnauld of Angers Buzenval of Beauvais, Caulet of Pamiers, and Pavillon of Aleth. Some claimed besides that the Roman pontiff alone had the right to exact such subscription. In order to silence them, Alexander VII, at the instance of several members of the episcopate, issued (15 February 1664) a new Constitution, beginning with the words, "Regiminis Apostolici". In this he enjoined, with threat of canonical penalties for disobedience, that all ecclesiastics, as well as all religious, men and women, should subscribe to the following very definite formulary:

I, (Name), submitting to the Apostolic constitutions of the sovereign pontiffs, Innocent X and Alexander VII, published 31 May, 1653 and 16 October, 1656, sincerely repudiate the five propositions extracted from the book of Jansenius entitled 'Augustinus', and I condemn them upon oath in the very sense expressed by that author, as the Apostolic See has condemned them by the two above mentioned Constitutions (Enchiridion, 1099).

It would be a mistake to believe that this direct intervention of the pope sustained as it was by Louis XIV, completely ended the stubborn opposition. The real Jansenists underwent no change of sentiment. Some of them, such as Antoine Arnauld and the greater number of the religious of Port-Roval, defying both the ecclesiastical and the civil authority, refused their signature, on the pretext that it was not in the power of any person to command them to perform an act of hypocrisy, others subscribed, but at the same time protesting more or less openly that it applied only to the question of right, that the question of fact was reserved and should be so, since in this respect the Church had no jurisdiction, and above all no infallibility. Among those who stood for explicit restriction and hence for refusal to sign the formulary as it was, must be numbered the four bishops mentioned above. In the mandates through which they communicated to their flocks the Bull "Apostolici" they did not hesitate expressly to maintain the distinction between fact and right. The pope being informed of this, condemned these mandates, 18 January, 1667. He did not stop there, but, in order to safeguard both his authority and the unity of belief, he decided, with the full approbation of Louis XIV to subject the conduct of the culprits to a canonical judgment, and for this purpose he appointed as judges nine other members of the French episcopate.

IV. THE PEACE OF CLEMENT IX

In the midst of all this, Alexander VII died, 22 May, 1667. His successor Clement IX wished at first to continue the process, and he confirmed the appointed judges in all their powers. However, the king, who had at first displayed great zeal in seconding the Holy See in the affair, seemed to have let his ardour cool. Rome had not judged it expedient to yield to all his wishes regarding the formation of the ecclesiastical tribunal. Together with his court he began to be apprehensive lest a blow should be struck at the "liberties" of the Gallican Church. The Jansenists skilfully turned these apprehensions to their profit. They had already won over several ministers of state, notably Lyonne, and they succeeded in gaining for their cause nineteen members of the episcopate, who in consequence wrote to the sovereign pontiff and to the king. In their petition to the pope these bishops, while protesting their profound respect and entire obedience, observed that the infallibillty of the Church did not extend to facts outside of revelation. They further confounded purely human or purely personal facts with dogmatic facts, i.e. such as were implied by a dogma or were in necessary connection with it, and under cover of this confusion, they ended by affirming that their doctrine, the doctrine of the four accused bishops, was the common doctrine of the theologians most devoted to the Holy See, of Baronius, Bellarmine, Pallavicini, etc. The same assertions were repeated in a more audacious form in the address to the king, in which they spoke also of the necessity of guarding against theories which were new and "harmful to the interests and safety of the State". These circumstances brought about a very delicate situation, and there was reason to fear that too great severity would lead to disastrous results. On this account the new nuncio, Bargellini, inclined towards a peaceful arrangement, for which he obtained the pope's consent. D'Estrées, the Bishop of Laon, was chosen as mediator, and at his request there were associated with him de Gondren, Archbishop of Sens. and Vialar, Bishop of Chalons, both of whom had signed the two petitions just spoken of, and were, therefore, friends of the four accused prelates. It was agreed that these last should subscribe without restriction to the formulary and cause it to be subscribed to in like manner by their clergy in diocesan synods, and that these subscriptions should take the place of an express retractation of the mandates sent out by the bishops. Pursuant to this arrangement they convened their synods, but, as later became known all four gave oral explanations authorizing respectful silence on the question of fact, and it would seem that they acted thus with some connivance on the part of the mediators, unknown, however, to the nuncio and perhaps to d'Estrées. But this did not prevent them from affirming, in a common address to the sovereign pontiff, that they themselves and their priests had signed the formulary, as had been done in the other dioceses of France.

D'Estrées for his part wrote at the same time: "The four bishops have just conformed, by a new and sincere subscription, with the other bishops". Both letters were transmitted by the nuncio to Rome, where Lyonne, also alleging that the signatures were absolutely regular, insisted that the affair should be brought to an end. For this reason the pope, who had received these documents 24 September, informed Louis XIV of the fact about 28 September, expressing his joy for the "subscription pure and simple" which had been obtained, announcing his intention to restore the bishops in question to favour and requesting the king to do the same. However, before the Briefs of reconciliation thus announced had been sent to each of the four prelates concerned, rumours which had at first been current with regard to their lack of frankness grew more definite, and took the shape of formal and repeated denunciations. Hence, by order of Clement IX, Bargellini had to make a new investigation at Paris. As the final result he sent to Rome a report drawn up by Vialar. This report stated with regard to the four bishops: "They have condemned and caused to be condemned the five propositions with all manner of sincerity, without any exception or restriction whatever, in every sense in which the Church has condemned them"; but he then added explanations concerning the question of fact which were not altogether free from ambiguity. The pope, no less perplexed than before, appointed a commission of twelve cardinals to obtain information. These secured, it seems, the proof of the language made use of by the bishops in their synods. Nevertheless, in consideration of the very grave difficulties which would result from opening up the whole case again, the majority of the commission held that they might and should abide practically by the testimony of the official documents and especially by that of the minister I,yonne regarding the reality of the "subscription pure and simple", at the same time emphasizing anew this point as the essential basis and the condition sine qua non of peace.

The four Briefs of reconciliation were then drawn up and dispatched; they bear the date, 19 January, 1669. In them Clement IX recalls the testimony he had received "concerning the real and complete obedience with which they had sincere}y subscribed to the formulary, condemning the five propositions without any exception or restriction, according to all the senses in which they had been condemned by the Holy See". He remarks further that being "most firmly resolved to uphold the constitutions of his predecessors, he would never have admitted a single restriction or exception". These preambles were as explicit and formal as possible. They prove, especially when compared with the terms and object of the formulary of Alexander VII, how far wrong the Jansenists were in celebrating this termination of the affair as the triumph of their theory, as the acceptance by the pope himself of the distinction between right and fact. On the other hand it is clear from the whole course of the negotiations that the loyalty of these champions of a stainless and unfaltering moral code was more than doubtful. At all events, the sect profited by the muddle these manoeuvres had created to extend its conquest still further and to get a stronger hold on several religious congregations. It was favoured by various circumstances. Among them must be included the growing infatuation in France for the so-called Gallican Liberties, and in consequence a certain attitude of defiance, or at least indocility, towards the supreme authority; then the Declaration of 1682, and finally the unfortunate affair of the Régale. It is worthy of remark that in this last conflict it was two Jansenist bishops of the deepest dye who most energetically upheld the rights of the Church and the Holy See, while the greater number of the others too readily bowed before the arrogant pretensions of the civil power.

V. JANSENISM AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

Despite the reticence and equivocation which it allowed to continue, the "Peace of Clement IX" found a certain justification for its name in the period of relative calm which followed it, and which lasted until the end of the seventeenth century. Many minds were tired of the incessant strife, and this very weariness favoured the cessation of polemics. Moreover the Catholic world and the Holy See were at that time preoccupied with a multitude of grave questions, and through force of circumstances Jansenism was relegated to second place. Mention has already been made of the signs of a recrudescence of Gallicanism betrayed in the Four Articles of 1682, and in the quarrels of which the Régale was the subject. To this period also belongs the sharp conflict regarding the franchises, or droit d'asile (right of asylum), the odious privilege concerning which Louis XIV showed an obstinacy and arrogance which passed all bounds (1687). Moreover, the Quietist doctrines spread by de Molinos, and which seduced for a brief period even the pious and learned Fénelon as well as the relaxed opinions of certain moralists, furnished matter for many condemnations on the part of Innocent XI, Alexander VIII, and Innocent XII. Finally, another impassioned debate had arisen which drew into the arena several groups of the most distinguished and best intentioned theologians, and which was only definitively closed by Benedict XIV, namely the controversy concerning the Chinese and Malabar Rites. All these combined causes had for a time distracted public attention from the contents and the partisans of the "Augustinus". Besides, "Jansenism" was beginning to serve as a label for rather divergent tendencies, not all of which deserved equal reprobation. The out-and-out Jansenists, those who persisted in spite of everything in upholding the principle of necessitating grace and the consequent errors of the five propositions, had almost disappeared with Pascal. The remainder of the really Jansenist party without committing itself to a submission pure and simple, assumed a far more cautious demeanour. The members rejected the expression "necessitating grace", substituting for it that of a grace efficacious "in itself", seeking thus to identify themselves with the Thomists and the Augustinians.

Abandoning the plainly heretical sense of the five propositions, and repudiating any intention to resist legitimate authority, they confined themselves to denying the infallibility of the Church with regard to dogmatic facts. Then, too, they were still the fanatical preachers of a discouraging rigorism, which they adorned with the names of virtue and austerity, and, under pretext of combating abuses, openly antagonized the incontestable characteristics of Catholicism especially its unity of government, the traditional continuity of its customs, and the legitimate part which heart and feeling play in its worship. With all their skilful extenuations they bore the mark of the levelling, innovating, and arid spirit of Calvinism. These were the fins Jansénistes. They formed thenceforth the bulk of the sect, or rather in them the sect properly so called was summed up. But apart from them, though side by side with them, and bordering on their tendencies and beliefs, history points out two rather well-defined groups known as the "duped Jansenists" and the "quasi-Jansenists". The first were in good faith pretty much what the fins Jansénistes were by system and tactics: they appear to us as convinced adversaries of necessitating grace, but no less sincere defenders of efficacious grace; rigorists in moral and sacramental questions, often opposed, like the Parlementarians, to the rights of the Holy See; generally favourable to the innovations of the sect in matters of worship and discipline. The second category is that of men of Jansenist tinge. While remaining within bounds in theological opinions, they declared themselves against really relaxed morality against exaggerated popular devotions and other similar abuses. The greater number were at bottom zealous Catholics, but their zeal, agreeing with that of the Jansenists on so many points, took on, so to speak, an outer colouring of Jansenism, and they were drawn into closer sympathy with the party in proportion to the confidence with which it inspired them. Even more than the "duped" Jansenists they were extremely useful in screening the sectarians and in securing for them, on the part of the pastors and the multitude of the faithful, the benefit either of silence or of a certain leniency.

But the error remained too active in the hearts of the real Jansenists to endure this situation very long. At the beginning of the eighteenth century it manifested itself by a double occurrence which revived all the strife and trouble. The discussion began afresh with regard to the "case of conscience" of 1701. A provincial conference was supposed to inquire whether absolution might be given to a cleric who declared that he held on certain points the sentiments "of those called Jansenists", especially that of respectful silence on the question of fact. Forty doctors of the Sorbonnet -- among them some of great renown, such as Natalis Alexander -- decided affirmatively. The publication of this decision aroused all enlightened Catholics, and the "case of conscience" was condemned by Clement XI (1703), by Cardinal de Noailles, Archbishop of Paris, by a large number of bishops, and finally by the faculties of theology of Louvain, Douai, and Paris. The last-named, however as its slowness would indicate, did not arrive at this decision without difficulty. As for the doctors who signed, they were terrified by the storm they had let loose, and either retracted or explained their action as best they might, with the exception of the author of the whole movement, Dr. Petitpied, whose name was erased from the list of the faculty. But the Jansenists, though pressed hard by some and abandoned by others, did not yield. For this reason Clement XI, at the request of the Kings of France and Spain, issued 16 July 1705, the Bull "Vineam Domini Sabaoth" (Enchiridion, 1350) in which he formally declared that respectful silence was not sufficient for the obedience due to the constitutions of his predecessors. This Bull, received with submission by the assembly of the clergy of 1705, in which only the Bishop of Saint-Pons obstinately refused to agree with the opinion of his colleagues, was afterwards promulgated as a law of the State. It may be said to have officially terminated that period of half a century of agitation occasioned by the signing of the formulary. It also terminated the existence of Port-Royal des Champs, which up to that time had remained a notorious centre and hotbed of rebellion.

When it was proposed to the religious that they should accept the new Bull, they would consent only with this clause: "that it was without derogating from what had taken place in regard to them at the time of the peace of the Church under Clement XI". This restriction brought up again their entire past, as was clearly shown by their explanation of it, and therefore made their submission a hollow pretence. Cardinal de Noailles urged them in vain; he forbade them the sacraments, and two of the religious died without receiving them, unless it were secretly from a disguised priest. As all measures had failed, it was high time to put an end to this scandalous resistance. A Bull suppressed the title of the Abbey of Port-Royal des Champs, and reunited that house and its holdings to the Paris house. The Court gave peremptory orders for a prompt execution, and, despite all the means of delay contrived and carried out by those interested, the pontifical sentence had its full effect. The surviving choir religious were scattered among the convents of the neighbouring destroyed dioceses (29 October 1709). This separation had the desired good results. All the rebellious nuns ended by submitting, save one, the mother prioress, who died at Blois without the sacraments, in 1716. The Government wishing to eradicate even the trace of this nest of errors, as Clement XI called it, destroyed all the buildings and removed elsewhere the bodies buried in the cemetery.

During the disputes concerning the "case of conscience", a new book came cautiously on the scene another "Augustinus", pregnant with storms and tempests, as violent as the first. The author was Paschase Quesnel, at first a member of the French Oratory, but expelled from that congregation for his Jansenistic opinions (1684), and since 1689 a refugee at Brussels with the aged Antoine Arnauld whom he succeeded in 1696 as leader of the party. The work had been published in part as early as 1671 in a 12mo volume entitled "Abrégé de la morale de l'Evangile, ou pensées chrétiennes sur le texte des quatres évangélistes". It appeared with the hearty approbation of Vialar, Bishop of Châlons, and, thanks to a style at once attractive and full of unction which seemed in general to reflect a solid and sincere piety, it soon met with great success. But in the later development of his first work, Quesnel had extended it to the whole of the New Testament. He issued it in 1693, in an edition which comprised four large volumes entitled, "Nouveau testament en francais avec des réflexions morales sur chaque verset". This edition, besides the earlier approbation of Vialar which it inopportunely bore, was formally approved and heartily recommended by his successor, de Noailles, who, as subsequent events showed, acted imprudently in the matter and without being well-informed as to the contents of the book. The "Réflexions morales" of Quesnel reproduced, in fact, the theories of the irresistible efficaciousness of grace and the limitations of God's will with regard to the salvation of men. Hence they soon called forth the sharpest criticism, and at the same time attracted the attention of the guardians of the Faith. The Bishops of Apt (1703) Gap (1704), Nevers, and Besancon (1707) condemned them, and, after a report from the Inquisition, Clement XI proscribed them by the Brief "Universi dominici" (1708) as containing the propositions already condemned and as manifestly savouring of the Jansenist heresy". Two years later (1710) the Bishops of Lucon and La Rochelle forbade the reading of the book.

Their ordinance, posted in the capital, gave rise to a conflict with Noailles, who, having become cardinal and Archbishop of Paris, found himself under the necessity of withdrawing the approbation he had formerly given at Chalons. However, as he hesitated, less through attachment to error than through self love, to take this step, Louis XIV asked the pope to issue a solemn constitution and put an end to the trouble. Clement XI then subjected the book to a new and very minute examination, and in the Bull "Unigenitus" (8 September, 1713) he condemned 101 propositions which had been taken from the book (Enchiridion, 1351 sq.). Among these were some propositions which, in themselves and apart from the context, seemed to have an orthodox sense. Noailles and with him eight other bishops, though they did not refuse to proscribe the book, seized this Pretext to ask explanations from Rome before accepting the Bull. This was the beginning of lengthy discussions the gravity of which increased with the death of Louis XIV (1715), who was succeeded in power by Philippe d'Orléans. The regent took a much less decided stand than his predecessor, and the change soon had its effect on various centres, especially on the Sorbonne, where the sectaries had succeeded in winning over the majority. The faculties of Paris, Reims, and Nantes, who had received the Bull, revoked their previous acceptance. Four bishops went even farther, having recourse to an expedient of which only heretics or declared schismatics had hitherto bethought themselves, and which was essentially at variance with the hierarchical concept of the Church; they appealed from the Bull "Unigenitus" to a general council (1717). Their example was followed by some of their colleagues, by hundreds of clerics and religious, by the Parlements and the magistracy Noailles, for a long time undecided and always inconsistent, ended by appealing also, but "from the pope obviously mistaken to the pope better informed and to a general council".

Clement XI, however, in the Bull "Pastoralis officii" (1718), condemned the appeal and excommunicated the appellants. But this did not disarm the opposition, which appealed from the second Bull as from the first Noailles himself published a new appeal, no longer chiefly to the pope "better informed", but to a council, and the Parlement of Paris, suppressed the Bull "Pastoralis". The multiplicity of these defections and the arrogant clamour of the appellants might give the impression that they constituted, if not a majority, at least a very imposing minority. Such, however, was not the case, and the chief evidence of this lies in the well-established fact that enormous sums were devoted to paying for these appeals. After allowing for these shameful and suggestive purchases, we find among the number of the appellants, one cardinal, about eighteen bishops, and three thousand clerics. But without leaving France, we find opposed to them four cardinals, a hundred bishops, and a hundred thousand clerics, that is, the moral unanimity of the French clergy. What is to be said, then, when this handful of protesters is compared to the whole of the Churches of England, the Low Countries, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Naples, Savoy, Portugal, Spain, etc., which, on being requested to pronounce, did so by proscribing the appeal as an act of schism and foolish revolt? The polemics, however, continued for several years. The return to unity of Cardinal de Noailles, who submitted without restriction in 1728 six months before his death, was a telling blow to the party of Quesnel. Henceforth it steadily grew less, so that not even the scenes that took place at the cemetery of Saint-Médard, of which mention is made below. restored it. But the Parlements. eager to de clare themselves and to apply their Gallican and royalist principles, continued for a long time to refuse to receive the Bull "Unigenitus". They even made it the occasion to meddle in scandalous fashion in the administration of the sacraments, and to persecute bishops and priests accused of refusing absolution to those who would not submit to the Holy See.

VI. THE CONVULSIONARIES

We have reviewed the long series of defensive measures contrived by the Jansenists rejection of the five propositions without rejection of the "Augustinus", explicit distinction between the question of right and the question of fact; restriction of ecclesiastical infallibility to the question of right; the tactics of respectful silence, and appeal to a general council. They had exhausted all the expedients of a theological and canonical discussion more obstinate than sincere. Not a single one of these had availed them anything at the bar of right reason or of legitimate authority. They then thought to invoke in their behalf the direct testimony of God Himself, namely, miracles. One of their number, an appellant, a rigorist to the point of having once passed two years without communicating, for the rest given to a retired and penitent life, the deacon Francois de Paris had died in 1727. They pretended that at his tomb in the little cemetery of Saint-Médard marvellous cures took place. A case alleged as such was examined by de Vintimille, Archbishop of Paris, who with proofs in hand declared it false and supposititious (1731). But other cures were claimed by the party, and so noised abroad that soon the sick and the curious flocked to the cemetery. The sick experienced strange agitations, nervous commotions, either real or simulated. They fell into violent transports and inveighed against the pope and the bishops, as the convulsionaries of Cévennes had denounced the papacy and the Mass. In the excited crowd women were especially noticeable, screaming, yelling, throwing themselves about, sometimes assuming the most astounding and unseemly postures. To justify these extravagances, complacent admirers had recourse to the theory of "figurism". As in their eyes the fact of the general acceptance of the Bull "Unigenitus" was the apostasy predicted by the Apocalypse, so the ridiculous and revolting scenes enacted by their friends symbolized the state of upheaval which, according to them, involved everything in the Church. They reverted thus to a fundamental thesis such as has been met with in Jansenius and St-Cyran, and which these latter had borrowed from the Protestants. A journal the "Nouvelles Ecclesiastiques", had been founded in 1729 to defend and propagate these ideas and practices, and the "Nouvelles" was profusely spread, thanks to the pecuniary resources furnished by the Boîte à Perrette, the name given later to the capital or common fund of the sect begun by Nicole, and which grew so rapidly that it exceeded a million of money. It had hitherto served chiefly to defray the cost of appeals and to support, in France as well as in Holland, the religious, men and women, who deserted their convents or congregations for the sake of Jansenism.

The cemetery of Saint-Médard, having become the scene of exhibitions as tumultuous as they were indecent, was closed by order of the court in 1732. The oeuvre des convulsions, as its partisans called it, was not, however, abandoned. The convulsions reappeared in private houses with the same characteristics, but more glaring. Henceforth with few exceptions they seized only upon young girls, who, it was said, possessed a divine gift of healing. But what was more astonishing was that their bodies, subjected during the crisis to all sorts of painful tests, seemed at once insensible and invulnerable; they were not wounded by the sharpest instruments, or bruised by enormous weights or blows of incredible violence. A convulsionary, nicknamed "la Salamandre", remained suspended for more than nine minutes above a fiery brazier, enveloped only in a sheet, which also remained intact in the midst of the flames. Tests of this sort had received in the language of the sect the denomination of secours, and the secouristes, or partisans of the secours, distinguished between the petits-secours and the grands-secours, only the latter being supposed to require supernatural force. At this point, a wave of defiance and opposition arose among the Jansenists themselves. Thirty appellant doctors openly declared by common consent against the convulsions and the secours. A lively discussion arose between the secouristes and the anti-secouristes. The secouristes in turn were soon divided into discernantes and melangistes, the former distinguishing between the work itself and its grotesque or objectionable features, which they ascribed to the Devil or to human weakness, while the latter regarded the convulsions and the secours as a single work coming from God, in which even the shocking elements had purpose and significance.

Without entering further into the details of these distinctions and divisions, we may ask how we are to judge what took place at the cemetery of Saint-Médard and the matters connected therewith. Whatever may have been said on the subject, there was absolutely no trace of the Divine seal in these happenings. It is needless to recall St. Augustine's principle that all prodigies accomplished outside the Church, especially those against the Church, are by the very fact more than suspicious: "Praeter unitatem, et qui facit miracula nihil est". Two things only call for remark. Several of the so-called miraculous cures were made the subject of a judicial investigation, and it was proved that they were based only on testimonies which were either false, interested, preconcerted, and more than once retracted, or at least valueless, the echoes of diseased and fanatic imaginations. Moreover, the convulsions and the secours certainly took place under circumstances which mere good taste would reject as unworthy of Divine wisdom and holiness. Not only were the cures, both acknowledged and claimed, supplementary of one another, but cures, convulsions, and secours belonged to the same order of facts and tended to the same concrete end. We are therefore justified in concluding that the finger of God did not appear in the whole or in any of its parts. On the other hand, although fraud was discovered in several cases, it is impossible to ascribe them all indiscriminately to trickery or ignorant simplicity. Critically speaking, the authenticity of some extraordinary phenomena is beyond question, as they took place publicly and in the presence of reliable witnesses, particularly anti-secourist Jansenists. The question remains whether all these prodigies are explicable by natural causes, or whether the direct action of the Devil is to be recognized in some of them. Each of these opinions has its adherents, but the former seems difficult to uphold despite, and in part perhaps because of, the light which recent experiments in suggestion, hypnotism, and spiritism have thrown on the problem. However this may be, one thing is certain; the things here related served only to discredit the cause of the party which exploited them. Jansenists themselves came at length to feel ashamed of such practices. The excesses connected with them more than once forced the civil authorities to intervene at least in a mild way; but this creation of fanaticism succumbed to ridicule and died by its own hand.

VII. JANSENISM IN HOLLAND AND THE SCHISM OF UTRECHT

Injurious as Jansenism was to religion and the Church in France, it did not there lead to schism properly so called. The same does not hold good of the Dutch Low Countries, which the most important or most deeply implicated of the sectaries had long made their meeting place, finding there welcome and safety. Since the United Provinces had for the most part gone over to Protestantism, Catholics had lived there under the direction of vicars Apostolic. Unhappily these representatives of the pope were soon won over to the doctrines and intrigues of which the "Augustinus" was the origin and centre. De Neercassel, titular Archbishop of Castoria, who governed the whole church in the Netherlands from 1663 to 1686, made no secret of his intimacy with the party. Under him the country began to become the refuge of all whose obstinacy forced them to leave France and Belgium. Thither came such men as Antoine Arnauld, du Vaucel, Gerberon, Quesnel, Nicole, Petitpied, as well as a number of priests, monks, and nuns who preferred exile to the acceptance of the pontifical Bulls. A large number of these deserters belonged to the Congregation of the Oratory, but other orders shared with it this unfortunate distinction. When the fever of the appeals was at its height, twenty-six Carthusians of the Paris house escaped from their cloister during the night and fled to Holland. Fifteen Benedictines of the Abbey of Orval, in the Diocese of Trier, gave the same scandal. Peter Codde, who succeeded Neercassel in 1686, and who bore the title of Archbishop of Sebaste, went further than his predecessor. He refused to sign the formulary and, when summoned to Rome, defended himself so poorly that he was first forbidden to exercise his functions, and then deposed by a decree of 1704. He died still obstinate in 1710. He had been replaced by Gerard Potkamp, but this appointment and those that followed were rejected by a section of the clergy, to whom the States-General lent their support. The conflict lasted a long time, during which the episcopal functions were not fulfilled. In 1723 the Chapter of Utrecht i.e. a group of seven or eight priests who assumed this name and quality in order to put an end to a precarious and Painful situation, elected, on its own authority, as archbishop of the same city, one of its members, Cornelius Steenhoven, who then held the office of vicar-general. This election was not canonical, and was not approved by the pope. Steenhoven nevertheless had the audacity to get himself consecrated by Varlet, a former missionary bishop and coadjutor Bishop of Babylon, who was at that time suspended, interdicted, and excommunicated. He thus consummated the schism, interdicted likewise and excommunicated, he died in 1725. Those who had elected him transferred their support to Barchman Wuitiers, who had recourse to the same consecrator. The unhappy Varlet lived long enough to administer the episcopal unction to two successors of Barchman, van der Croon and Meindarts. The sole survivor of this sorry line, Meindarts, ran the risk of seeing his dignity become extinct with himself. To prevent this, the Dioceses of Haarlem (1742) and Deventer (1757) were created, and became suffragans of Utrecht. But Rome always refused to ratify these outrageously irregular acts, invariably replying to the notification of each election with a declaration of nullification and a sentence of excommunication against those elected and their adherents. Yet, in spite of everything, the schismatical community of Utrecht has prolonged its existence until modern times. At present it numbers about 6000 members in the three united dioceses. It would scarcely be noticed if it had not, in the last century, made itself heard by protesting against Pius IX's re-establishment of the Catholic hierarchy in Holland (1853), by declaring itself against the dogmas of the Immaculate Conception (1854) and Papal Infallibility (1870), and lastly, after the Vatican Council, in allying itself with the "Old Catholics", whose first so-called bishop it consecrated.

VIII. DECLINE AND END OF JANSENISM

During the second half of the eighteenth century the influence of Jansenism was prolonged by taking on various forms and ramifications, and extending to countries other than those in which we have hitherto followed it. In France the Parlements continued to pronounce judgments, to inflict fines and confiscations, to suppress episcopal ordinances, and even to address remonstrances to the king in defence of the pretended right of the appellants to absolution and the reception of the last sacraments. In 1756 they rejected a very moderate decree of Benedict XIV regulating the matter. A royal declaration confirming the Roman decision did not find favour in their eyes, and it required all the remaining strength of the monarchy to compel them to register it. The sectaries seemed by degrees to detach themselves from the primitive heresy, but they retained unabated the spirit of insubordination and schism, the spirit of opposition to Rome, and above all a mortal hatred of the Jesuits. They had vowed the ruin of that order, which they always found blocking their way, and in order to attain their end they successively induced Catholic princes and ministers in Portugal, France, Spain, Naples, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies the Duchy of Parma, and elsewhere to join hands with the worst leaders of impiety and philosophism. The same tendency was displayed in the work of Febronius, condemned (1764) by Clement XIII; and, instilled into Joseph II by his councillor Godefried van Swieten, a disciple of the revolted church of Utrecht, it became the principle of the innovations and ecclesiastical upheavals decreed by the sacristan-emperor (see FEBRONIANISM). It raged in similar fashion in Tuscany under the government of the Grand Duke Leopold, brother of Joseph II; and found another manifestation in the famous Synod of Pistoia (1786), the decrees of which, at once the quintessence of Gallicanism and of the heresy of Jansenism, were reproved by the Bull of Pius VI, "Auctorem fidei" (1794). On French soil the remains of Jansenism were not completely extinguished by the French Revolution, but survived in some remarkable personalities, such as the constitutional Bishop Grégoire, and in some religious congregations, as the Sisters of St. Martha, who did not return in a body to Catholic truth and unity until 1847. But its spirit lived on, especially in the rigorism which for a long time dominated the practice of the administration of the sacraments and the teaching of moral theology. In a great number of French seminaries, Bailly's "Théologie", which was impregnated with this rigorism, remained the standard textbook until Rome in 1852 put it on the Index "donec corrigatur". Among those who even prior to that had worked energetically against it, chiefly by offering in opposition the doctrines of St. Alphonsus, two names are deserving Of special mention: Gousset, whose "Théologie morale" (1844) had been preceded by his "Justification de la theologie morale du bienheureux Alphonse-Marie Liguori" (2nd ed., 1832); Jean-Pierre Berman, professor at the seminary of Nancy for twenty-five years (1828-1853), and author of a "Theologia moralis ex S. Ligorio" (7 vols., 1855).

Such is, in outline, the historical account of Jansenism, its origin, its phases, and its decline. It is evident that, besides its attachment to the "Augustinus" and its rigorism in morals, it is distinguished among heresies for crafty proceedings, chicane and lack of frankness on the part of its adherents, especially their pretence of remaining Catholics without renouncing their errors, of staying in the Church despite the Church itself, by skilfully eluding or braving with impunity the decisions of the supreme authority. Such conduct is beyond doubt without a parallel in the annals of Christianity previous to the outbreak of Jansenism in fact, it would be incredible if we did not in our own day find in certain groups of Modernists examples of this astonishing and absurd duplicity. The deplorable consequences, both theoretical and practical, of the Jansenist system, and of the polemics to which it gave rise, may readily be gathered from what has been said, and from the history of the last few centuries.

J. FORGET

Abraham Janssens

Flemish painter, b. at Antwerp about 1573; d. probably in the same place about 1631. He is also known as Janssens Van Nuyssen, and several of his pictures are signed with this name, which it is believed he adopted from his mother's family with the object of distinguishing himself from other members of the Janssens family, contemporary artists. He was a pupil of Jan Snellinck in 1585, according to some writers, but it is believed that this date is a little too early, as, according to the accepted tradition, Janssens would then have been only twelve years old. The first date that we know for certain respecting him is that of his admission as a teaching master into the Guild of St. Luke, which was in 1601, and in the following year he married, and eventually had a family. One of his daughters, Anna, married Jan Breughel the younger, the son of "Velvet" Breughel, and the second of his sons, named Abraham like his father, became a painter, and was admitted a member of the Guild of Painters in 1636.

A story was started by Houbraken to the effect that Janssens was a bitter opponent of Rubens, but Houbraken's work is the only authority for this legend, and the author appears to have had a spite against Janssens, and to have said everything that was possible to injure his character. Janssens was a contemporary of Rubens, and a man who appears to have been very much respected in Antwerp, spoken of in terms of friendship and affection by other artists, and recognized as a man of great genius, taking a high position in the very first rank. It seems to be most unlikely that Houbraken's story is a truthful one, especially as there is no evidence whatever in other works to support it. The best of Janssens' pictures are to be seen at Antwerp, especially in the churches of the Carmelites and St. Charles, and in the cathedral, the painting of "The Entombment" in the Carmelite church being one of his very finest productions. There are three important paintings by him in the Antwerp Museum, two in the cathedral at Ghent, one in the cathedral at Bruges, a remarkable mythological scene representing Venus and Jupiter in Brunswick, and a fine picture of St. Cecilia at Cologne. Other galleries containing works by this important artist are those of Berlin, Brussels, Cassel, and Vienna. In at least two of his pictures he worked in collaboration with Snyders, the flowers and fruit in his picture of Pomona at Berlin, and the animals in his representation of Atalanta in the same gallery, having been painted by his friend. In splendour of colouring and in vigour of composition he was surpassed in his day only by Rubens, and was recognized in Antwerp as a man of profound talent and great skill. Many of his pictures were engraved.

HOUBRAKEN, De Groote Schouburgh der Nederlantsche (Amsterdam, 1718); KRAMM, De Lerens en Werken der Hollandsche (Amsterdam, 1857); ROMBOUTS, Le Liggeren et autres Archives, etc. (Paris, 1864).

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Johann Hermann Janssens

Catholic theologian, b. at Maeseyck, Belgium, 7 Dec., 1783; d. at Engis, 23 May, 1853. After completing his theological studies in Rome he was appointed professor in the College of Fribourg, Switzerland, in 1809. While in this position, which he held until 1816, he composed his "Hermeneutica," which, however, was not published until 1818, after he had been appointed professor of Scripture and dogmatic theology in the ecclesiastical seminary of Liège. His teaching in this institution was taxed with heterodoxy, and in 1823 he was removed and made pastor of Engis. Shortly afterward, and against the will of his ecclesiastical superiors, he accepted the chair of anthropology and metaphysics in the philosophical college of Louvain. He retained this position until the Revolution of 1830, when the college was suppressed. He then retired to Engis, where he composed a history of the Netherlands (3 vols., Liège, 1840), written from the Protestant standpoint. Outside of Belgium he is chiefly known through his first publication, "Hermeneutica Sacra seu Introductio in omnes et singulos libros sacros Veteris et Novi Foederis." A French translation of this work, the original of which had reached its nineteenth edition in 1897, was published by Pacaud as early as 1828. A fifth edition of this translation, edited by Glaire and Sionnet, was published in Paris in 1855.

VIGOUROUX, Dictionnaire de la Bible, s.v.; Biographie Nationale, X (Brussels, 1888-1889), p. 145.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

St. Januarius

Martyr, Bishop of Beneventum.

St. Januarius is believed to have suffered in the persecution of Diocletian, c. 305. With regard to the history of his life and martyrdom, we know next to nothing. The various collections of "Acts", though numerous (cf. Bibliotheca Hagiographica Latina, n. 4115-4140), are all extremely late and untrustworthy. Bede (c. 733) in his "Martyrologium" has epitomized the so-called "Acta Bononiensia" (see Quentin, "Les Martyrologes historiques", 76). To this source we may trace the following entry in the present Roman Martyrology, though the reference to the miracle of the liquefaction is an addition of much later date. "At Pozzuoli in Campania [the memory] of the holy martyrs Januarius, Bishop of Desiderius of Cahors, Saint
Beneventum, Festus his deacon, and Desiderius lector, together with Socius deacon of the church of Misenas, Proculus deacon of Pozzuoli, Eutyches and Acutius, who after chains and imprisonment were beheaded under the Emperor Diocletian. The body of St. Januarius was brought to Naples, and there honourably interred in the church, where his holy blood is kept unto this day in a phial of glass, which being set near his head becomes liquid and bubbles up as though it were fresh."

In the Breviary a longer account is given. There we are told that "Timotheus, President of Campania," was the official who condemned the martyrs, that Januarius was thrown into a fiery furnace, but that the flames would not touch him, and that the saint and his companions were afterwards exposed in the amphitheatre to wild beasts without any effect. Timotheus declaring that this was due to magic, and ordering the martyrs to be beheaded, the persecutor was smitten with blindness, but Januarius cured him, and five thousand persons were converted to Christ before the martyrs were decapitated. Then, as the Breviary lesson continues, "the cities of these coasts strove to obtain their bodies for honourable burial, so as to make sure of having them advocates with God. By God's will, the relics of Januarius were taken to Naples at last, after having been carried from Pozzuoli to Beneventum and from Beneventum to Monte Vergine. When they were brought thence to Naples they were laid in the chief church there and have been there famous on account of many miracles. Among these is remarkable the stopping of eruptions of Mount Vesuvius, whereby both that neighbourhood and places afar off have been like to be destroyed. It is also well known and is the plain fact, seen even unto this day, that when the blood of St. Januarius, kept dried up in a small glass phial, is put in sight of the head of the same martyr, it is wont to melt and bubble in a very strange way, as though it had but freshly been shed."

It is especially this miracle of the liquefaction which has given celebrity to the name of Januarius, and to this we turn our attention. Let it at once be said that the supposition of any trick or deliberate imposture is out of the question, as candid opponents are now willing to admit. For more than four hundred years this liquefaction has taken place at frequent intervals. If it were a trick it would be necessary to admit that all the archbishops of Naples, and that countless ecclesiastics eminent for their learning and often for their great sanctity, were accomplices in the fraud, as also a number of secular officials; for the relic is so guarded that its exposition requires the concurrence of both civil and ecclesiastical authority. Further, in all these four hundred years, no one of the many who, upon the supposition of such a trick, must necessarily have been in the secret, has made any revelation or disclosed how the apparent miracle is worked. Strong indirect testimony to this truth is borne by the fact that even at the present time the rationalistic opponents of a supernatural explanation are entirely disagreed as to how the phenomenon is to be accounted for.

What actually takes place may be thus briefly described: in a silver reliquary, which in form and size somewhat suggests a small carriage lamp, two phials are enclosed. The lesser of these contains only traces of blood and need not concern us here. The larger, which is a little flagon-shaped flask four inches in height and about two and a quarter inches in diameter, is normally rather more than half full of a dark and solid mass, absolutely opaque when held up to the light, and showing no displacment when the reliquary is turned upside down. Both flasks seem to be so fixed in the lantern cavity of the reliquary by means of some hard gummy substance that they are hermetically sealed. Moreover, owing to the fact that the dark mass in the flask is protected by two thicknesses of glass it is presumably but little affected by the temperature of the surrounding air. Eighteen times in each year, i.e. (1) on the Saturday before the first Sunday in May and the eight following days, (2) on the feast of St. Januarius (19 Sept.) and during the octave, and (3) on 16 December, a silver bust believed to contain the head of St. Januarius is exposed upon the altar, and the reliquary just described is brought out and held by the officiant in view of the assembly. Prayers are said by the people, begging that the miracle may take place, while a group of poor women, known as the "zie di San Gennaro" (aunts of St. Januarius), make themselves specially conspicuous by the fervour, and sometimes, when the miracle is delayed, by the extravagance, of their supplications.

The officiant usually holds the reliquary by its extremities, without touching the glass, and from time to time turns it upside down to note whether any movement is perceptible in the dark mass enclosed in the phial. After an interval of varying duration, usually not less than two minutes or more than an hour, the mass is gradually seen to detach itself from the sides of the phial, to become liquid and of a more or less ruby tint, and in some instances to froth and bubble up, increasing in volume. The officiant then announces, "Il miracolo é fatto", a Te Deum is sung, and the reliquary containing the liquefied blood is brought to the altar rail that the faithful may venerate it by kissing the containing vessel. Rarely has the liquefaction failed to take place in the expositions of May or September, but in that of 16 December the mass remains solid more frequently than not.

It is of course natural that those who are reluctant to admit the supernatural character of the phenomenon should regard the liquefaction as simply due to the effects of heat. There are, they urge, certain substances (e.g. a mixture of spermaceti and ether) which have a very low boiling point. The heat produced by the hands of the officiant, the pressing throng of spectators, the lights on the altar, and in particular the candle formerly held close to the reliquary to enable the people to see that the mass is opaque, combine to raise the temperature of the air sufficiently to melt the substance in the phial--a substance which is assumed to be blood, but which no one has ever analysed. Further, ever since the early years of the eighteenth century, sceptical scientists, by using certain chemical preparations, have reconstructed the miracle with more or less of success; that is to say, they have been able to exhibit some red substance which, though at first apparently solid, melted after an interval without any direct application of heat. None the less, it may be said with absolute confidence that the theory of heat affords no adequate explanation of the phenomena observed.

For more than a century careful observations of the temperature of the air in the neighbourhood of the relic have been made on these occasions and the records have been kept. It is certain from the scientific memoirs of Professors Fergola, Punzo, and Sperindeo that there is no direct relation between the temperature, and the time and manner of the liquefaction. Often when the thermometer has stood at 77° Fahrenheit or even higher, liquefaction has been delayed for as much as twenty or even forty minutes, while on the other hand the contents of the phial have sometimes liquefied in considerably less time than this when the thermometer remained as low as 60 or 65 degrees. Moreover, the heat theory by no means accounts for another more remarkable fact observed for quite two hundred years past. The mass in melting commonly increased in volume, but when it solidifies again it does not necessarily return to its original bulk. Sometimes the whole phial is seen to be occupied, at other times hardly more than half. This has led a Neapolitan scientist of modern times, Professor Albini, to suggest a new physical theory derived from observing the behaviour of a viscous fluid such as partly congealed honey. He conjectures that the unknown substance in the phial consists of some highly divided solid matter which is partly held in suspension by a disproportionately small quantity of liquid. When at rest, the liquid sinks to the bottom of the phial, while the solid particles form a sort of crust not easily displaced when the vessel is turned upside down. This cohesion is however overcome by repeated movements, such as those that the reliquary experiences when the moment of liquefaction is impatiently waited for. Further, such a viscous fluid easily cakes upon the walls of the containing vessel, and admits large air bubbles which cause the deceptive appearance of a change of volume.

Professor Albini claims to have reproduced all the phenomena with a compound made of powdered chocolate and the serum of milk. On the other hand, those who have studied closely the process of liquefaction of the contents of the phial declare that such an explanation is absolutely impossible. Moreover, there seem to be well-attested instances of liquefaction taking place both in the case of this and other similar relics of blood, when the reliquary has been standing by itself without any movement whatsoever.

Accordingly, the suggestion has also been made (see Di Pace, "Ipotesi scientifica sulla Liquefazione", etc., Naples, 1905) that the phenomenon is due to some form of psychic force. The concentration of thought and will of the expectant crowd and specially of the "aunts of St. Januarius" are held to be capable of producing a physical effect. Against this, however, must be set the fact that the liquefaction has sometimes taken place quite unexpectedly and in the presence of very few spectators.

Probably the most serious difficulty against the miraculous character of the phenomenon is derived from the circumstance that the same liquefaction takes place in the case of other relics, nearly all preserved in the neighbourhood of Naples, or of Neapolitan origin. These include relics which are affirmed to be the blood of St. John the Baptist, of St. Stephen the first martyr, of St. Pantaleone, of St. Patricia, of St. Nicholas of Tolentino, of St. Aloysius Gonzaga, and others. In the case of the alleged liquefaction of the so-called "Milk of Our Lady" (see Putignani, S.J., "De Redivivi Sanguine S. Januarii", Naples, 1723, I, 90) or of the fat of St. Thomas Aquinas (see Magnoni Valenti, "Discorso istorico" 1772, 47) we have probably a pure fiction, but the phials traditionally associated with the names of St. John the Baptist, St. Stephen, and St. Pantaleone undoubtedly still exhibit on the respective feast days of these saints phenomena exactly analogous to those shown in the case of the more famous relic of St. Januarius. Further, it is asserted by eyewitnesses of scientific credit and high respectability that a block of basalt at Pozzuoli, reputed to bear traces of the blood of St. Januarius, grows vividly red for a short time in May and September at the hour when the miracle of the liquefaction takes place in Naples (se Cavène, "Célèbre Miracle de S. Janvier", 1909, 277-300).

Three other points attested by recent investigators seem worthy of special note.

• It now appears that the first certain record of the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius dates from 1389 (see de Blasiis, "Chronicon Siculum incerti auctoris", Naples, 1887, 85), and not from 1456, as formerly supposed.
• In 1902 Professor Sperindeo was allowed to pass a ray of light through the upper part of the phial during liquefaction and examine this beam spectroscopically. The experiment yielded the distinctive lines of the spectrum of blood. This, however, only proves that there are at any rate traces of blood in the contents of the phial (see Cavène, "Le Célèbre Miracle", 262-275).
• Most remarkable of all, the apparent variation in the volume of the relic led in 1902 and 1904 to a series of experiments in the course of which the whole reliquary was weighed in a very accurate balance. It was found that the weight was not constant any more than the volume, and that the weight of the reliquary when the blood filled the whole cavity of the phial exceeded, by 26 grammes, the weight when the phial seemed but half full. This very large difference renders it impossible to believe that such a substantial variation in weight can be merely due to an error of observation.

We are forced to accept the fact that, contrary to all known laws, a change goes on in the contents of this hermetically sealed vessel which makes them heavier and lighter in a ratio roughly, but not exactly, proportional to their apparent bulk (Cavène, 333-39). The reality of the miracle of St. Januarius has repeatedly been made the subject of controversy. It has had much to do with many conversions to Catholicism, notably with that of the elder Herder. Unfortunately, however, allegations have often been made as to the favourable verdict expressed by scientific men of note, which are not always verifiable. The supposed testimony of the great chemist, Sir Humphry Davy, who is declared to have expressed his belief in the genuineness of the miracle, seems to be a case in point.

Though in many respects uncritical, the best account of the miracle of St. Januarius is that given by CAVENE, Le Célèbre Miracle de S. Janvier (Paris, 1909). From the historical side fuller details may be found in TAGLIALATELA, Memorie Storicocritiche del Culto e del Sangue di S. Gennaro (Naples, 1896). Among recent works may be mentioned: JANUARIO, Il Sangue di S. Gennaro (Naples, 1902); two articles by SILVA and SPERINDEO in the Ommagio della Rivista di Scienze e Lettere, published for the centenary of 1905; also SPERINDEO, Il Miracolo di S. Gennaro (3rd ed., Naples, 1908); THURSTON in the Tablet, 22 and 29 May, 1909, followed by a correspondence in the same journal.
Of earlier date are PUNZO, La Teca di S. Gennaro (Naples, 1880); IDEM, Indagini ed osservazioni sulla Teca (Naples, 1890); ALBINI in Rendiconti dell' Accademia delle Scienze fisiche e matematiche (Società Reale di Napoli), series II, vol. IV (1890), 24-27; Acta SS., 19 Sept. There is also an excellent article by LECANU in MIGNE, Dictionnaire des Prophéties et des Miracles (1852), 1010-1016. The older books, such as those of PUTIGNANI, TUTINI, FALCONE, etc., are too numerous to mention, and they are for the most part very uncritical. The various "Acts" of St. Januarius have been edited by SCHERILLO in Atti Accad. Archeol. Napoli, VIII (1876), pt. I, 147-330. For further bibliography, see CHEVALIER, Bio-Bibl.

HERBERT THURSTON

Japan

AREA AND POPULATION

Japan, called in the language of the country Nihon or Nippon (Land of the Rising Sun), and Dai Nihon or Dai Nippon (Great Japan), is situated north-west of the Pacific Ocean and east of the Asiatic Continent. It lies between 199°20' and 156°32' E. long. (meridian of Greenwich) and between 21°62' and 50°56' N. lat. It consists of six large islands, Honshiu or Hondo, Kinsui, Shikoku, Hokkaido (Yezo), Taiwan or Formosa, and the southern part of Karafu (Sakhalin). There are besides about six hundred small islands, among which Sado, Oki, Tsushima, Iki, Awaji, and the four archipelagos of the Pescadores, Chishima (Kuriles), Ogasawara, Shima (Bonin), and Okinawa (Riu-kin) deserve mention. The word Japan is the collective name of the whole territory, exclusive of Formosa and Karafuto. The total area amounts to 162,655 sq. miles.

On 31 March, 1908, the total population of Japan was 49,092,000 inhabitants; that of Formosa 3,155,005; and that of the Ainus (aborigines) 17,632. The population is divided according to castes into the Kwazoku (nobles), heads of families, 902; members of families, about 4600; Shizoku (former knights or Samurai), heads of families 439,194; members of families 1,728,650; Heimin (private citizens), heads of families, 8,285,448; members of families 47,358,760. The number of the population increases rapidly. In 1876 it was 34,338,000; in 1886, 38,507,000; in 1896, 42,708,000; in 1907, 49,092,000, of which 24,839,000 were men, and 24,252,000 were women. The density is 415 to the sq. mile, exclusive of Hokkaido, where it is twenty-three to the square mile. Number of married persons, 16,458,308; births in the year 1907, 1,599,231; children born living, 1,457,039; children born dead, 142,092; illegitimate births: boys, 60,445, girls, 60,702. Number of marriages, 361,260; divorces, 60,179; deaths, 1,012,855. Recipients of passports to foreign countries, 43,627; Japanese resident abroad, the civil condition of whom is registered at the consulate, 234,134; in China, 34,006; in Corea, 81,754; in the United States, 20,080; in Hawaii and the Philippines, 73,974; in Europe, 694; the remainder in various countries. Number of foreigners resident in Japan, 18,908; Chinese, 12,273; Coreans, 459; Englishmen, 2293; Americans from the United States, 1624; Germans 664; French, 498; Russians, 194; Portuguese, 197; the remainder belong to various nationalities.

PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY

Seas and Straits

The seas which surround Japan are the Pacific Ocean on the east, the Sea of Okhotsk on the North, the Sea of Japan on the west, and the China Sea on the south. The straits separating the principal islands are the Strait of Soya, or La Pérouse between Hokkaido and the Sakhalin, the strait of Tsugaru between the Great Island Honshiu and Hokkaido, and the Strait of Shimonoseki between Honshiu and Kiusiu.

Coasts, Gulfs, and Bays

The coasts are very irregular, the gulfs and bays are very numerous. On the Pacific Ocean are the gulfs of Sagami and Tosa, the bays of Tokio, Suruga, Ise, Omi, Tsuchiura, Seto, etc; on the Sea of Japan, the Bay of Fukuoaka, Wakasa, Kagoshima. Yatsushiro, Amagusa, Shimabara, etc.

Lakes

The largest lake is Biwa, which is about 180 miles in circumference, 36 1/2 miles long, and 12 1/2 miles wide. According to tradition Lake Biwa was formed by an earthquake in 286 B.C. Renowned for the beauty of its scenery, its praises have often been sung by poets. After Lake Biwa, the best known are Lake Suwa in Shinano, Lake Hakone, on the summit of the mountain of the same name, Lake Chiusenji in Shimotsuke, west of Nikko, 15 1/2 miles in circumference, 4375 feet above sea-level. The cascade of Kegon, one of the most beautiful and renowned of Japan, is on this lake.

Rivers

The slopes of the mountains being so close to the sea, the watercourse are not very long. They are for the most part only torrents, few of them capable of carrying boats, but they are utilized for rafting and thus supplement the roads. Only 15 are 40 ri or more long, the longest being 110 ri in length. (The ri is almost equal to 2 1/2 miles).

Mountains

In Japan the mountains cover two-thirds of the surface of the soil. The country is traversed by two chains of mountains, one a part of Sakhalin Island, the other south-east of China crossing Formosa. These two chains meet in the middle of the Great Island (Honshiu), dividing it into two parts which present striking contrasts as much from the political as from the geographical point of view. The highest peaks are situated at the intersection of these two chains, about the thirty-fifth parallel, which has caused tourists to give them the name of the Japanese Alps. The highest are Niitake in Formosa (12,850 feet), and Fuji (12,395 feet) in Honshiu. This last mountain must have been formed by the same earthquake which hollowed out Lake Biwa (286 B.C.). It is a volcano subject at times to terrible eruptions. On account of its regular outline and its majestic beauty it has furnished an inexhaustible source of inspiration to Japanese artists, poets, painters, etc.

Valleys

Although very mountainous the country is not devoid of valleys, the principal ones being those of Etchigo, Sendai, and Quanto, with Tokio and Yokohama, and a population of 6,000,000 souls, of Mino and Awari (1,150,000 souls), of Kinai, with Kyoto, Osaka, and Kobe (2,600,000 souls), of Tsukusi in Kiusiu. The oil mines of this valley furnish 67% of the total production of the mines of Japan.

Volcanoes

Three chains of volcanoes exist in Japan. The Kuriles, Fuji, and Kirishima contain 200 volcanoes, of which 100 are still active. The principal ones are Tarumi, Noboribetsu, Komagatake, Agatsuma, Bandai, Kausatsu, Kaimon, Sakaurajima, Fuji, Kirishima, Asama, and Aso. This last, situated north-east of Higo, numbers five peaks, the highest of which reaches an altitude of nearly one mile. It is perhaps the largest volcano in the world, its craters having an extent of 15 miles from north to south, 10 miles from east to west. It was in eruption in 1884, 1889, and 1896.

Earthquakes

Their number is proportionate to that of volcanoes. From 1883 to 1897 there were 17,750, that is 1365 per year, nearly 3 1/2 per day. From 1596 to 1877 Japan was visited by 100 more or less disastrous earthquakes. According to minute researchers made by a commission of scholars, the number of earthquakes and volcanic eruptions which have caused more or less damage from the beginning of historic times to the present day must equal 2006. One of the most terrible was that of 1855 at Tokio, in which more than 100,000 persons perished and the greater part of the city was destroyed.

Mineral Springs

As compensation for the damage caused by the volcanoes Japan has a large number of mineral springs. There are at least 100 which, because of ease of access and their medicinal qualities, are much frequented.

Climate, Typhoons

During the cold season, which begins in October and ends in April, Japan is visited by the north and the west wind, the atmospheric pressure being lower on the Pacific Ocean than on the continent. The contrary is true from May to October, because the wind then comes from the south and east. This difference in atmospheric pressure gives rise to numerous typhoons, which often cause great disasters. To mention only that of 1902, the number of persons killed equalled 3639, vessels lost 3244, houses destroyed or damaged, 695,062. Total loss, 29,742,081 yen.

Rain, Snow

Japan is one of the most rainy countries in the world. The average yearly rainfall is about 61 inches. The average number of rainy or snowy days per year is 150. There are 89 meteorological stations, where six observations are made daily, at two, six, and ten o'clock, morning and evening (135° E. of Greenwich time).

IMPERIAL HOUSE

Dynasty (Teishitshu)

The form of the Japanese Government is an hereditary and constitutional monarchy. A single dynasty has reigned in Japan since the foundation of the empire. The present emperor is the one hundred and twenty-second descendant of Jimmu Tenno, first emperor of Japan. His own name is Mitsuhito; he has no family name since he is supposed to be descended directly from the race of gods. Born 3 November, 1852, he succeeded his father, Komei Tenno, 13 Feb., 1867, and was crowned 12 Oct., 1868. On 28 December the same year he married the Princess Haruko, third daughter of Kuge Ichijo Tadaka, a noble of the first rank, b. 28 May, 1850. Yoshihito Hiyu no miya, son of the emperor, b. 31 August, 1879, was proclaimed heir apparent on 31 August, 1887. On 10 May, 1900, he married Sadako, fourth daughter of Duke Kujo, by whom he has three sons.

Branches of the Imperial Family (Kozuko)

There are fourteen branches of the imperial family: Fushimi, Arisugawa, Jan-in, Higashi-Fushimi, Kwacho, Yamashina, Kaya, Kuni, Nashimoto, Kita-Shirakawa, Komatsu, Takeda, Asaka, Higashi-Kuni. The first four families have the title of Shinno (princes of the blood), and constitute the four branches from whom must be chosen the heir to the throne, if the emperor die without issue. The others have the title O (princes). The first, when they are of age, have by right a seat in the house of Peers. The others may only sit there by order of the emperor. These last may also succeed a nobleman or be adopted by him. All are by right a portion of the imperial household. They may be neither arrested nor summoned before a court without the command of the emperor, nor marry without his permission, nor ally themselves with any save the family designated by him. If they commit an act unworthy of their rank the emperor has the right to punish them, and even deprive them of their title of prince. If they are wasteful of their property, they may be interdicted and forced to submit to the appointment of an administrator of their property.

Estates of the Crown

According to the present data the crown possesses 12,135 acres of built land, representing a value of 62,090,830 yen; 5, 272,745 acres of forest valued at 123,809,642 yen; 300,770 acres of diverse territory estimated at 2,319,808 yen. Its bonds and stocks represent a gross sum of 30,000,000 yen, while the amount of its treasure is unknown.

Crown Laws

In the Constitution is inserted a collection of laws known as the Code of the Imperial House (Koshitsu Tempan), in twelve chapters, which govern the Crown. This code regulates the succession to the throne, and the coronation ceremonies, fixes the majority of the emperor, the prince imperial, and the various members of the imperial family. It contains laws concerning the regency, the family council, the governor to be assigned to an emperor in his minority, the expenses of the court, possible disputes between members of the emperor's family, the disciplinary measures to be taken against delinquents.

Ministry of the Imperial Household

The reform of Kaikwa has created a Kunaikwan (government of the palace), which in 1702 was changed into the Kunaisho (ministry of the palace). The minister had the title of Kunaikyo and was charged with the collection of imposts (in the provinces), with the possession of the Crown, etc. He had eight ministers under his jurisdiction. After the Restoration, the Kunaisho was retained, but underwent two modifications, one in 1870, the other in 1889. To-day the Kunaisho is charged with the affairs of the emperor's household. A minister is at the head charged with the general administration and all the employés of the ministry are under his immediate jurisdiction. He has control of the nobility, regulates the civil and religious ceremonies, distributes the favours, presents, or rewards of the emperor, notifies those interested of the decrees raising them to a dignity or an office, and is the executor of all the regulations of the imperial household. He is assisted by a vice-minister and fifteen councillors, all chosen by the emperor. The chief of these are the chamberlain, the keeper of the seal, the empress's steward, the master of ceremonies, the director of the bureau of domains, and the director of the bureau of nobility. The number of employés of the imperial household is 2534; salaries, 1,003,805 yen.

Decorations

In Japan there are six orders of decoration conferred as award of merit: (1) Order of the Chrysanthemum (Kikuwasho), created in 1876, reserved to sovereigns and members of princely families; (2) Order of Paulownia (Tokwasho), created in 1876, granted to princes and very exalted personages; (3) Order of the Rising Sun (Kyokujitsusho), created in 1875, created for civil and military services; (4) Order of the Sacred Treasure (Zuihosho), created in 1888 to reward civil and military services; 8 classes; (5) Order of the Crown (Hokwonsho), created in 1888, reserved to women; 8 classes; (6) Order of the Golden Kite (Kinshisho), created in 1890, rewards extraordinary military feats, and entitles to a pension. In recognition of meritorious deeds which, however, do not deserve a decoration, the Government awards certificates, medals, and cups of gold, silver, or wood. The number of Japanese thus decorated or rewarded reaches into the millions. On 31 March, 1908, the number of persons decorated and entitled to a pension was 70,822. Pensions furnished by the government, 9,0630,000 yen. Number of decorations distributed in 1903, 3914; in 1905, 36,357; in 1907, 37,602, not counting the decoration of the Golden Kite. Decorations of the Golden Kite in 1904, 2316; in 1905, 27,649; in 1906, 73,810; in 1907, 1,305,018. This shower of decorations was caused by the war with Russia. The number of foreigners decorated by the Japanese was, on 31 March, 1907, 417, and that of Japanese decorated by foreign governments, 542.

Titles of Nobility

The class of nobles (Kwasoku) comprises the ancient nobles of the court (Kuge), the ancient lords of the provinces (Daimio), and those who have been ennobled since the Restoration, or the new nobility (Shin-Kwasoku). Graduated titles were created in 1884 for these nobles of various degrees, in Japanese, Ko, Ko, Haku, Shi, and Dan, corresponding to duke, marquess, count, viscount, and baron. Nobility is hereditary, and on 31 March, 1908, this class consisted of 15 dukes (Ko), 36 marquesses (Ko), 100 counts (Haku), 375 viscounts (Shi), and 376 barons (Dan), that is, 902 families comprising 4600 members, which form the Japanese aristocracy.

Rank at Court

Besides the titles of nobility there are purely honorary dignities, forming a sort of court hierarchy. This hierarchy was established in Japan in the reign of the Empress Suiko (A.D. 603). In 682 the number of degrees was raised to forty-eight; in 702 it was fixed at thirty. At the Restoration this hierarchy was retained but very much simplified. At present there are eight degrees each, except for the first, being divided into two, which gives a total of fifteen. These titles or dignities (I-Kai or Kurai) are awarded to nobles, to functionaries of high rank, or to citizens who, while not belonging to these classes, have rendered signal service to the nation. These dignities carry with them certain rights, e.g., that of assisting at the emperor's reception on a certain day of the year. They are conferred only on Japanese. The number of persons honoured with these titles was, in 1907, 50,906, among them 113 women.

Grades of Civil Functionaries and Military Officials

The former are called Bunkwan and the latter Bukwan. Both are divided into four classes, Shinnin, Chokunin, Sonin, and Hannin. The Shinnin, who form the highest class, receive their investiture from the hand of the emperor himself. The decree of promotion bears the seal of the empire and is countersigned by the president of the council. The Chokunin are appointed by a decree of the emperor, bearing the seal of the empire. The Sonin are appointed by the cabinet upon presentation by the ministers. The Hannin are appointed by their respective ministers. Civil and military officials of the rank of Shinnin, 46; civil officials of the rank of Chokunin, 307; Sonin, 7015; Hannin, 51,952. Army and navy: all the generals and admirals have the rank of Chokunin, all the other officers have that of Sonin, and all non-commissioned officers that of Hannin. For the number see subtitles Army; Navy. The Shinnin number 46 civil or military officials. The statistics for the Shinnin make no distinction between civil and military officials for this exalted degree only.

CONSTITUTION OF THE EMPIRE

On his succession to the throne the emperor promised to establish a national Assembly for the purpose of discussing the affairs of the country. Although proceeding from the free will of the sovereign, the project of a Constitution, before being put into execution, encountered many obstacles and provoked violent conflicts between the Government and the democratic party. The various phases of these conflicts may be summarized as follows: In 1873 Itagaki and his followers addressed a petition to the Government in which they called upon it to carry out the sovereign's wishes, and in 1880 a campaign was organized throughout the country for the promotion of the rights of the people. In 1881 Itagaki and his followers organized the Liberal Party and vigorously urged forward the movement in favour of the establishment of a parliament. In the same year the emperor promised to promulgate the Constitution within ten years. Finally on 11 February, 1889, the constitution was promulgated and the Diet was convoked in November of the next year.

Prerogatives of the Emperor

The chief rights accorded to the emperor in the Constitution are: to convoke, open, close, and suspend the Parliament; to dissolve the Chamber of Deputies; to issue ordinances which have the force of law, in urgent circumstances when the diet is not sitting and on condition that they be submitted to it in the next session, to give orders for the execution of the laws, to maintain peace and promote the welfare of the people, to assume command of the forces of sea and land and to regulate the organization of both these services, to declare war, make peace, conclude treaties, proclaim a state of siege, to grant titles of nobility, rank at court, decorations, and other honorary titles, to declare amnesty, to commute penalties, and to rehabilitate.

Rights of the People

The rights granted to the people are as follows: Every Japanese subject without distinction of class may be promoted to any civil or military rank or public office. No Japanese subject may be arrested, held, or punished except according to law. Except in cases provided for by law, every Japanese dwelling is inviolable and is not subject to any domiciliary visit. Secrecy of mailed letters and rights of property are inviolable. The Constitution further grants liberty of religious belief in all that is not prejudicial to peace and order and the duties of a subject, freedom of speech, of the press, of public assembly, of association, and the right to present petitions in a respectful manner.

Government

For the management of state affairs the emperor employs several ministers, at the present time nine in number, viz., ministers of foreign affairs, of the interior, of justice, of finance, of war, of the navy, of public instruction, of agriculture and commerce, and of communications.

Privy Council (Sumitsu-in)

The emperor is also assisted by a privy council created in 1888 and composed of a president, vice-president, and fifteen members chosen from among the highest functionaries of at least forty years of age. The president of the cabinet and all the members are councillors ex officio. The privy council gives its opinions concerning questions submitted by the emperor, but is not entitled to make proposals, to decide as last resort, nor to exercise executive power. It gives advice with regard to treaties to be concluded with other powers, in urgent cases, in quarrels which may arise between the Government and the Chambers, in fine in all circumstances in which the supreme power is expected to intervene.

Parliament

The emperor shares legislative power with two large political bodies, the Chamber of Peers and the Chamber of Deputies. The chamber of Peers enjoys certain privileges. The emperor may suspend but not dissolve it. The duration of the commission of peers is seven years, that of deputies four years. The peers, being appointed by the emperor or by right of birth, are such for life. All the deputies must be re-elected every four years. The chambers discuss and vote on selected laws, the budget, taxes, etc., but their decisions do not go into effect until they have received the sanction of the emperor.

The Chamber of Peers is composed of the members of the imperial family, of all dukes and marquesses over twenty-five, of a certain number of counts, viscounts, and barons who have attained their twenty-fifth year and who are elected by their peers, of members aged at least thirty appointed for life by the emperor because of their services or learning, and lastly of forty-five members aged at least thirty, elected from among the fifteen most influential citizens of each district which returns them. Their election must be confirmed by the emperor. The number of these two categories must not exceed that of the members of the nobility. In 1908 the Chamber of Peers was composed as follows: members of the imperial family, 13; dukes, 10; marquesses 28; counts 17; viscounts, 69; barons, 55; appointed for life by the emperor, 124; chosen from amongst the citizens paying the largest taxes, 45. Total, 361. In the upper chamber there is no political party properly so called; the peers are merely divided into groups, generally composed of members of the same class.

The Chamber of Deputies is composed of two kinds of members, the first returned by the cities having at least 30,000 inhabitants, the others by the districts. Each city and department forms an independent district. To be an elector it is necessary to have attained the age of twenty-five and to pay a minimum of ten yen in direct contribution. One may be a deputy without paying the contribution but it is necessary to have attained at least thirty. Those who are neither eligible or electors are outlaws, bankrupts, those whose property has been confiscated, those who have lost civil rights or who have been sentenced to prison, soldiers in active service, pupils in the public or private schools, professors in the primary schools, ministers of any religion whatever, contractors of government work, officials charged with intervening in the elections, the employés of the ministry of the imperial household, judges, attorneys, collectors, police employés, and general councillors. At present the deputies are divided into four parties: (1) the Government Party (Seiyukwai), which in 1900 replaced the old Liberal Party of Itagaki (1881); (2) the Progressive Party (Shimpoto), or opposition (1882), more or less divided in sentiment; (3), the United Party, formed of old imperialists, opportunists, and deserters from the Progressive Party; (4) the New Association (Yushinkwai) or Advanced Party, among whom there are a number of Socialists. The number of deputies (end of March, 1908), 379; number of electors, 1,583,676; number who cast their votes, 1,353,301; unable to write the candidate's name 3338. Number of deputies in Governmental Party, 167; Progressives, 94; United Party, 68; New Association, 36; nobles (former Samurai), commoners, 273.

Diplomatic Corps in Foreign Lands

Embassies, 7, viz. to England, the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Austria, and Russia. Legations, 8; to Spain, Belgium, Holland, Sweden, China, Siam, Mexico, Brazil. Staff, 90.

Consulates

Consuls general, 11; consuls and vice-consuls, 31; staff, 365. Civil officials and employees of the Government, 152,159; annual salaries, 44,787,112 yen; government engineers, 9492; employés under their supervision, 17,941, total 27,458; salaries, 9,638,546 yen. Tax bureaus, 18; staff, 8443; annual salaries 2,122,561 yen.

Pensions and Grants

Pensions and grants to retired officials, widows, or orphans; persons assisted or pensioned, 206,860. Total amount: 15,847,280 yen.

POLITICAL GEOGRAPHY AND LOCAL ADMINISTRATION

Japan is divided into ten large regions comprising eighty-eight provinces. There are: (1) Kinai (or Go Kinai) 5 provinces; (2) Tokaido, 15 provinces; (3) Tosando, 13 provinces; (4) San-indo, 8 provinces; (5) Hokurokudo, 7 provinces; (6) Sanyodo, 8 provinces; (7) Nankaido, 6 provinces; (8) Saikaido, 8 provinces; (9) Hokkaido, 10 provinces; (10) Taiwan, 3 provinces.

Before the Restoration Japan was divided into fiefs (han) administered by daimios. The han established by degrees in the course of the twelfth century were regularly organized by Yoritomo (1192-99). Under the Ashikaga it was no longer the will of the emperor or the shogun but the force of arms which designated the rulers. Tokugawa Ieyasu estimated the number of han at more than 300. They were divided into three classes, according to the importance of their revenues, the Dai-han (large fiefs) being worth upwards of 400,000 koku of rice, the Chu-han (medium fiefs), from 100,000 to 400,000 koku, and the Sho-han (small fiefs), upwards of 100,000 koku.

After the Restoration Japan was divided into departments (ken) and prefectures (fu). The number of these varied several times. To-day for the convenience of the administration the country is divided into three fu, 43 ken, and two special governments (cho), those of Hokkaido and Formosa, comprising altogether 660 districts (gun or kori), 63 municipalities (shi), 1138 towns (cho or machi), and 11,801 villages (son or mura). The three fu (prefectures) are Tokio. Osaka, and Kyoto. Among the municipalities sixteen have more than 50,000 inhabitants and less than 100,000, three more than 100,000 and less than 200,000, and six a population exceeding 200,000. These six cities are Tokio, 1,811,655 inhabitants, Osaka, 995,945, Kyoto, 380,568, Yokohama, 326,065, Nagoya, 288,369, and Kobe, 285,002.

At the head of each department is a prefect assisted by a council of prefecture, which represents the central government, while the general council represents the rights and interests of the people. The general council exercises over the finances of the department a control similar to that which the parliament exercises over the finances of the State. They regulate the distribution of taxes and vote on the needs of the departments. All the citizens residing in a department and who pay a direct yearly tax of three yen have the right to vote for the election of councillors. Payment of a tax of ten yen is necessary for eligibility. The term of office is four years. At the head of each district is a sub-prefect, at the head of each village or town is a mayor assisted by a council. The departments, districts, towns, and villages have a special budget administered by the general council, the district council, the municipal council, and increased by local revenues independent of the taxes raised by the Government. These departments, districts, towns, villages may contract loans with the authorization of the minister of finance. For loans payable in less than three years they are not obliged to secure this authorization. For the financial year 1907-08 the total of the budgets for the department and municipalities were as follows: receipts, 173,004,523 yen; expenditures, 166,614,817 yen; fund for public relief, 34,884,370; total amount of debt, 89,266, 115 yen. Ten years earlier (1897) the receipts amounted to 100,588,000 yen; expenses, 88,817,000 yen; debt, 16,350,000 yen.

LEGISLATION

For many years Japan had no legal code, the moral law and local custom taking its place. In 604, in the reign of the Empress Suiko, Shotoku Taishi promulgated a code of law in seventeen chapters borrowed from China. This is the earliest code of which mention is made in history. Later the Emperor Mamu (696-707) appointed a commission of scholars to draw up a new code, and the work was completed and promulgated in 701. It is called the code of the era of Taiho (Taiho-ryo), and save for some modifications was in force until the Restoration. At this time intercourse with foreigners and the study of laws used in European countries brought home to the Japanese the necessity of a new code, more in harmony with their new situation. With the aid of foreign legists, they undertook this work of codification, which they brought to a successful issue at the end of twenty years. The collection of laws thus drawn up form six codes: the Constitution, the civil code, the criminal code, the commercial code, and the codes of civil and criminal procedure.

For the application of this new legislation a judiciary organization was created very similar to that which exists in France. It comprises tribunals of justices of the peace (Ku-Saibasho), lower courts (Chiho-Saibasho), courts of appeals (Koso-in), and a court of cassation (Taishin-in). The Constitution published February, 1889, established the irremovability of the magistrates, who can only be suspended by special law. The tribunals number 358; courts of cassation, 1; courts of appeal, 7 (Tokio, Osaka, Nagoya, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Miyaga, and Hakodate); lower courts (district courts), 49 (at least one to a department); courts of justices of the peace (sub-district courts), 301. Staff of the tribunals, 11,826; judges, 1278; attorneys, 426; registrars, 4140; wardens, 1727; lower employés and agents, 4257; bailiffs, 520; barristers, 2037. The courts of justices of the peace alone have had to judge 133,186 cases; the lower courts, 24,465; the courts of appeal, 3684; and the supreme court, 659.

Marriage

The law exacts the completion of seventeen years for a man and fifteen for a woman. The consent of the parents is required for males under thirty, and for females under twenty-five. Minors must secure the consent of a guardian and of a family. No person who already had a spouse may remarry, and the penalty for so doing is two years in prison. An adulterer is forbidden to marry the partner in the sin. Marriage between blood relations is forbidden within all degrees of the direct line, and in the collateral line within the third degree inclusive. Marriage between relations (affinities) is forbidden, within all degrees in the direct line, even after divorce, but in collateral line there is no impediment. All marriages contracted through mistaken identity, fraud, or violence can be annulled with three months following their celebration. The woman may not marry till six months after the dissolution or annulment of the first marriage. Husband and wife must live together, the law not admitting separation of body. The fact of the marriage should be inscribed on the register of the civil Government, and in default of this formality the marriage does not exist before the law, and is without effect. Formerly women could not possess property but now they are accorded this right. The law regulates the conjugal partnership of goods, but husband and wife are at liberty to make a contract. The husband is obliged to provide for the support of the family and to defray the expenses of the children's education. He has the right to administer the property of his wife and to collect the profits, but he is not entitled either to sell it or to give it as security, or to lend it without consent. In Japan, marriage is always arranged by an intermediary. The law stipulates nothing with regard to the ceremony, which is left to the choice of those concerned. The peasants follow the customs of the country, the chief of which involves the exchange of cups of wine by the betrothed pair. The Buddhist or Shintoist priests (bonzes or Kamushi) have no share in the celebration of marriage. The Christians marry according to the rites of their religion. Politeness demands that the newly wedded pair pay a visit in the course of a month to all who assisted at the ceremony.

Divorce

The Japanese law allows divorce, and this divorce annuls all the effects of marriage except the impediment of affinity. Divorce may be granted in to ways, privately, or by court sentence. The chief causes for divorce are: (1) bigamy; (2) adultery (for a woman); (3) notorious adultery for a man; (4) crimes of forgery, petty larceny, robbery with violence, fraudulent possession, receiving a bribe, obscene acts, and all crimes involving a prison sentence of three years; (5) ill-treatment or grievous injury of the other party or of his father or mother; (6) ill-treatment or grievous injury received from the relations of the other party; (7) abandonment of one of the parties by the other with evil intent; (8) ignorance for three years of whether the other party is living or dead.

Wills

Every one may dispose of his possessions by will, provide the will is submitted to certain conditions. Those only are incapacitated of making a will who are of unsound mind or who have not attained the age of fifteen. Japanese law recognizes natural heirs and every clause injurious to their rights is null. As to form, Japanese law recognizes three kinds of wills, olographic, authentic, and secret. An olographic will (Jihitsu-shosho) is one which the testator writes, dates, and signs with his own hand, and to which he affixes his seal. An authentic will (Kosei-shosho) is dictated by the testator with formalities prescribed by law in the presence of at least two witnesses, written by a notary (Kosho-nin), who reads the will to the testator and the witnesses. If it is approved the testator and the witnesses should then sign it and affix their seal. The secret will (Himitsu-shosho) is signed and sealed by a testator and presented by him to a notary in the presence of at least two witnesses. The testator declares that it is his will and gives the name and address of him who drew it up. The notary records on the envelope the report of this presentation, whereupon the testator, the witnesses, and the notary sign and affix their seals. Besides these wills Japanese law recognizes other which have only a temporary existence and cease with the circumstances that gave rise to them, e.g., military wills, naval wills, wills made in a time of contagious disease or at the point of death, if the sick person recovers. To make an act legal every Japanese must affix his seal (jitsun-in) to that act. A copy (in-kan) should be deposited at the surrogate's office. For foreigners the signature is sufficient. The will goes into effect immediately on the death of the testator; if it is conditional, as soon as the conditions are realized. But to put it into execution, the executor must have it signed by the court. The testator may always revoke his will in whole or in part. When the same person has made two wills the second prevails. Anyone is free to reject a will made in his favour. The share reserved to the natural heirs in the direct line is one-half of the property, that of the other heirs, one-third.

Prisons (Kangoku)

In the present penal system, prisons are divided into two chief classes, civil and military. Civil prisons comprise six categories: (1) criminal or convict prisons for those sentenced to deportation or banishment (three); (2) temporary prisons in which are confined those sentenced to deportation or banishment until such a time as they shall be transferred to their final destination (three); (3) departmental prisons for those sentenced to simple detention and compulsory labour (at least one for each department); (4) detentive prisons, destined to receive prisoners who have been indicted and accused persons until the law has decided their case; (5) houses of correction reserved for minors under twenty and for deaf-mutes; (6) jails, for those sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment by police magistrates. These jails are annexed to the police station. The prisons are under the jurisdiction of the minister of justice, who appoints the general inspectors and all the employés. Number of civil prisons in the year 1908, 56; bridewells, 92; general inspectors, 56; wardens, 620; engineers and interpreters, 29; physicians, 198; chaplains and instructors, 232; pharmacists, 42; keepers of the first class 7907; of the second class, 300; women servants, 383; employés of various kinds, 230. Total, 9997. Inmates of the penitentiary establishments at the end of 1907: detentive prisons, men, 4008; women, 203; houses of detention, men, 46,175; women, 2550; houses of correction, men, 738. women, 69. Total, 53,743. the total number of persons sentenced in 1907, men, 114,236; women, 16,748.

Police (Kaisatsu)

The police service as it exists to-day was organized at the beginning of the present reign according to the English system. It is divided into two main sections, the administrative police (Gyosie Kaisatsu), and the judiciary police (Shiho Kaisatsu). In the department it is subject to the prefect, at Tokio to the prefecture of police (Keishicho). It has its courts, which have the power to judge offenses for which the penalty does not exceed thirty days' imprisonment. On 31 March, 1908, the police department numbered: chief police stations or bureaus, 713; branch stations, 618; city station houses, 1841; rural station houses, 12,648; inspectors or superintendents (Keibu), 1861; police agents (Junsa) 33,885. Crimes, offenses, and cases in which the police have had to intervene in 1907: robberies accompanied by violence, 1239; without violence 267,030; swindlings, 28,876; total number of robberies, 297, 145. Violent deaths: suicides, 8906; murders, 1236; sudden deaths, 1387; victims of accidents and others, 14,015. Total, 25,544. Fires, involuntary, 12,462; incendiary, 858; caused by lightning or by unknown causes, 2174. Total, 15,494. Number of houses burned, 36,669. Public reunions, indoors, 587; numbers of orators, 1863; in the open air, 87; orators, 55. Total numbers of arrests made by police for crimes, offenses, or infractions of the law, 707,261.

Hygiene

The organization of the hygienic service dates from 1872. It began with the organization of a medical bureau, which was suspended in 1875 and replaced by a bureau of health. In 1879 a central board and local boards of public health were established and the service was extended to all the departments. In 1899 it was extended to all towns and villages and private committees were formed. The chief regulations relative to hygiene are: the cleaning of houses and drains, which should be done twice yearly under police supervision; the building and improvement of hospitals, prisons, schools, and all public institutions; the locations of cemeteries; burial; vaccination, etc. The hygiene service is within the jurisdiction of the police who are charged with enforcing its regulations.

Hospitals and Medical Bodies

Before the Restoration Japan had five hospitals located at Nagasaki, Saga, Fukui, Kanazawa, and Osaka. The first in point of time was Nagasaki, founded in 1861. On 31 March, 1908, the number of hospitals was 870, 5 founded by the government, 205 by the departments, and 660 by private citizens. To all these hospitals, private as well as public, is attached a force of women-nurses, who must be at least eighteen years of age and provided with a diploma. Throughout the empire there are: doctors, 38,776; midwives, 26,387; druggists, 29,318; chemists, 2370. In 1907 the number of persons inflicted with contagious disease was 71,532; typhus, 27,988; dysentery, 24,942; deaths from contagious diseases, 19,536.

PUBLIC INSTRUCTION

Until the Shogunate of the Tokugawa education was left entirely to the Buddhist priests. Under the Tokugawa (1603-1868) it was confided to lay teachers and during this period of 265 years the Chinese classics were the basis of instruction. But in this aristocratic country knowledge was a privilege together with nobility, and there were no public schools save for the sons of the Samurai. However, the lower classes were no wholly abandoned to ignorance. Farmers, mechanics, and merchants received an education befitting their condition in the schools connected with the temples, known as Teragoya, and in private schools. To-day freedom to learn is granted in Japan to all degrees of the social scale. Instruction is compulsory for six to twelve years, and non-religious. At the head of public instruction is a minister assisted by a board and corps of inspectors. Schools are divided into primary schools in which classes are included the infant schools and the schools for deaf-mutes and the blind, secondary schools, high schools, universities, ordinary normal schools, higher normal schools, special schools, technical schools, and various.

Primary Schools

Primary schools are divided into two classes, common and high schools. The duration of the first is six years, and as the instruction is compulsory, attendance at this school is required from six to twelve years. The certificate of completion of this term secures admittance into the secondary schools. The higher course lasts two years and is optional. Number of primary schools, 27,269; teachers, 116,070; pupils, 6,601,620; average number of children receiving instruction, 96.5%. Private schools, only 249. Infant schools, 361. Women attendants, 984; children, 32,885. Deaf-mute and blind institutions, 31; teachers, 168; pupils, 1532. The secondary schools for boys were founded as a preparation for the high schools. Graduates of these schools are qualified to obtain position under the Government, according to their abilities, without passing a preliminary examination. The duration of the course is six years. Number of schools, 281; founded by the Government and the municipalities, 228; private, 58; teachers 5336; pupils, 108,531.

Secondary Schools for Girls

The duration of the course is from four to five years at choice. To the regular courses may be added special courses for the study of foreign languages or some womanly art, and supplementary courses for pupils desiring to perfect themselves in a particular branch. These courses should not exceed two or three years. Number of schools, 114; public, 98; private, 16; teachers, 1770; pupils, 35,876.

The higher schools are a preparation for the university. The course lasts three years and is divided into three classes which differ among themselves. the instruction in each class corresponds to the career to which the pupil is destined. Number of schools, 7, all founded by the government and under its supervision. They are located at Tokio, Sendai, Kyoto, Kanazawa, Okayama. Kumamoto, and Kagoshima; teachers, 272; pupils 4888.

Imperial Universities

There are two of these, one at Tokio, and one at Kyoto. The University of Tokio comprises besides the University Hall the faculties of law, medicine, literature, science, agriculture and engineering. Japanese professors, 166; foreigners, 15; Japanese students, 5050; foreigners, 39. The University of Kyoto comprises besides the University Hall, the faculties of law, medicine, literature, science and engineering. Japanese professors, 166; foreign professors, 4; students, 1507. Besides these universities there are about forty public or private schools which assume the name of universities, but for entrance to which it is not necessary to have a diploma from the higher schools. The two most important are the university of Waseda, from 5000 to 6000 students, and that of Kei-o-gijiku, 1100 students. The former was founded by Okuma in 1882, and the second by Fukuzawa in 1865.

Normal Schools

Each department is obliged to have at least one normal school. The course is four years for boys, and three for girls. Preparatory courses and courses of pedagogy may be added according to circumstances to the regular courses. The expenses of education are defrayed by the departments, but graduates are obliged to teach for eight years. Number of normal schools, 67; teaching staff, 1112 (men, 980, women, 132); students 18,928 (boys, 14,176, girls 4752). higher normal schools: for boys, 2; teachers 212; students 2456; for girls 1; teachers, 95; students, 858.

Special Schools

Medicine and pharmacy, 10; statistics, law, political economy, 12; literature and religion, 26; other schools, 2. Total: schools, 50; professors 1537; students, 27,573.

Technical Schools, and Schools Preparatory thereto

Schools of agriculture, 142; professors, 1151; students, 17,390; preparatory schools, 3785; professors, 1162; students, 149,225. Fishery schools, 11; professors, 64; students, 811; preparatory schools, 103; professors, 48; students, 3344. Schools of arts and crafts, 35; professors 599; students, 6398; supplementary schools, 155; professors, 240; students, 8365. Schools of commerce, 70; professors, 1087; students, 20,685; supplementaries, 167; professors, 225; students, 10,541. Merchant marine, 9; professors, 127; students, 2008; supplementaries, 1; professor, 1; students, 27. Schools of apprenticeship or of foremen, 326; professors, 3402; students, 51,929. Total: schools, 4804; professors, 8106; students 270,723. In 1899 the number of technical schools was 227; professors, 1245; students, 23,095. miscellaneous schools, 2092; professors, 7619; students 142,695.

Establishments Founded and Maintained by the Government

Under the jurisdiction of the minister of public instruction are: the two universities of Tokio and Kyoto, the seven high schools, the two higher normal schools for boys, and that for girls. There are besides one high school of agriculture and aboriculture (professors, 32; students, 244); five high schools of arts and crafts (professors, 139; students, 1502); four high schools of commerce (professors, 109; students, 2477); five high schools of medicine (professors 116, students, 2693); one school of foreign languages in which are taught English, French, German, Russian, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, Corean, Hindustani, Malayan, and Mongolian (Japanese professors, 32; foreign, 12; students, 648); 1 school of fine arts (professors, 52; students 440); 1 school of music (Japanese professors, 49; foreign, 9; pupils, 540); 1 school for deaf mutes and the blind (professors, 20; students, 320); 4 schools of pedagogy (professors, 15; students, 87).

Under the Jurisdiction of the Imperial Household

Schools for the nobility, 1 for boys (professors, 86, students, 531); 1 for girls (professors, 60; students, 618). Dependent on the minister of communications, 1 naval school of commerce (professors, 48; students, 495). Dependent on the ministry of war: 1 high school of war; one school of practical artillery and engineering; one military school; one central military public school at Tokio; five other public schools outside of Tokio; school for scouts; cavalry school; school of sharpshooting; commissariat school; school of military music (professors, 624; students, 4111). Dependent on the ministry of marine: high school of marine; naval school; school of mechanics; medical school; school of accountants; school of naval construction, etc. (professors, 213; students, 902). Total number of professors in schools under Government supervision, 2748; students, 32,879. In 1907 the expenditure for schools under the supervision of the departments and districts reached 44,855,568 yen. The receipts equalled 9,888, 543 yen. Deficit, 35,080,543 yen. The property of the public schools (grounds, buildings, books, instruments, etc) represent a sum of 122,563,491 yen; special funds a sum of 21,516,652 yen. The number of libraries (1907) equalled 127, containing 1,464,717 volumes. Number of visitors, 949,798. Books issued within the year, 28,319; journals and reviews, 1988. An academy (Gakushi-kwai-in) was founded at Tokio by imperial decree in 1890. Placed under the jurisdiction of the minister of public instruction, it is composed of forty members, chosen from among the most learned of the country. Fifteen are appointed by the emperor, the remaining twenty-five by the minister at the nomination of the former. They discuss the questions proposed by the minister of public instruction and give their advice. They meet once a month and treat scientific questions. The hall is open to the public.

ARMY

From the beginning of the feudal system until its abolition (1192-1868), that is, for a period of nearly 700 years, military service was the exclusive privilege of the Samurai. This privilege was abolished after the Restoration. To-day every Japanese without distinction of caste is liable to be called upon to bear arms. Japan has adopted the European system for its armies. Conscription was inaugurated in 1872. The drawing of lots takes place at the age of twenty. The average annual number of recruits is 120,000 men; infantry, 68,000; cavalry 3900; artillery, 7500; siege artillery, 3000; field artillery, 600 (divisions and imperial guard). Sappers and miners, 2600; commissariat, 2000; railroad and telegraph corps, 700; train, 20,000. Adding to this those who are assigned to special services, we reach the figure of 120,000 men.

Exemptions

A son whose father is sixty years of age is exempt from service, if the latter has no means of support. A reprieve is granted to students who have a diploma from the secondary schools and to students who reside in a foreign country (except those who are in the Asiatic countries near Japan). The term of service may be shortened by a year of voluntary service, and for this it is necessary to be provided with a diploma from the secondary schools. After their year of service the volunteers are passed into the reserves with the grade of non-commissioned officer. They are obliged to defray all the expenses of the barracks. Professors in the primary schools are bound only to six month's service, at the expiration of which they are passed into the territorial forces.

Organization

The army is divided into active army, army of reserve, and territorial army. The duration of service in the active army is two years; in the reserve, four and a half years; in the territorial army, ten years. The two years' service, inaugurated in 1908, necessitated a supplementary expenditure of 170,000,000 yen, to be assessed in ten years. The number of divisions during the Russo-Japanese war was raised from twelve to sixteen. At present there are eighteen, not counting the division of the imperial guard. In time of war Japan can put in the field an army of 1,000,000 men. Officers and officials affiliated with the active army: generals, 16; general of divisions, 33; brigadier-generals, 96; colonels, 233; lieutenant-colonels, 353; commandants, 1008; captains, 3426; lieutenants, 3976; sub-lieutenants, 3208; affiliated officers, 1710; total, 14,085; salaries, 9,402,576 yen. Councils of war are established in the army to judge the soldiers. Where a state of siege has been proclaimed their jurisdiction extends to all citizens without exception. There are eighteen of these, one to a division. Cases judged in 1907, 1993. To each division are attached a prison and a hospital. Soldiers committed to prison (1907), 2311; released, 2269. Sick persons cared for in the hospitals, 78,599; deaths, 357. In 1877 the constabulary (gendarmerie) was created according to the French system. It constitutes the police force of the armies of land and sea, and shares the duties of the administrative and judicial police. The constables wear a military uniform and carry a sword and a pistol. The constabulary forms eighteen companies, attached to the eighteen divisions of the army, and commanded by a brigadier-general. It numbers only 2500 men. In 1907 it intervened in 2082 cases, and assisted 66 sick or wounded persons.

NAVY

Under the government of the Tokugawa the lack of stimulation and the complete rupture of relations with the outside world caused the navy to be completely neglected. In 1871 a vessel presented by the King of Holland and some ships purchased abroad by the Government of the shogun and the daimios of Tosa and Satsuma constituted the imperial fleet. Of all the services organized under the present reign none has undergone such rapid development as that of the navy, as is shown by the following table:

• 1871 — 17 ships, 6,000 tons
• 1894 — 33 ships, 61,000 tons
• 1904 — 76 ships, 258,251 tons, 518,040 horsepower
• 1907 — 126 ships, 506,093 tongs, 1,045,383 horsepower

This list does not include the 77 torpedoes weighing 7258 tons. This prodigious development of the Japanese navy in recent years is due to three projects of expansion voted successively by the Chambers, the first (1903) requiring an extraordinary expenditure of 115,000,000 yen; the second (1905) 175,000,000 yen; the third (1907), 76,000,000 yen. There are five maritime prefectures: Yoko-Suka, Kure, Sassebo, Maizuru, and Port Arthur; three naval stations, Takeshiki, the Pescadores, and Aminato. The fleet is divided into three squadrons. On 31 March, 1908, it was composed as follows: armoured battleships, 15, tonnage varying from 10,960 to 19,900 tons; armoured cruisers of the first class, 13, from 7700 to 14,600 tons; armoured cruisers of the second class, 10, from 3700 to 6630 tons; armoured cruisers of the third class, 8, from 2439 to 3420 tons; armoured coast-defense boats, 12; armoured gunboats, 6; torpedo gunboats, 2; dispatch boats, 5; destroyers, 55, from 350 to 381 tons; torpedoes, 77; total tonnage 7258 tons. The navy is recruited by conscription and volunteer services, more than half the naval forces being volunteers. The number of recruits varies greatly each year. In 1902 there were 4130; 1905, 9583; 1906, 5839; 1907, 8682.

There were more than 780 students; in all, 63,733 men. But in 1895 the force was 17,140; in 1899, 28,710; in 1904, 45,999. In 1907 the courts-martial judged 756 cases. Seamen committed to prison, 730; released, 562. Marine hospitals, 5; sick persons cared for during the year, 191.

JAPANESE RELIGIONS

Shintoism

Shintoism [literally, "way of the gods" (Kami)] is properly the religion of Japan, born on the very soil and without foreign admixture. It has neither dogmas, nor moral codes, nor sacred books, and is summed up in a rather confused mixture of nature-worship and veneration of ancestors. Philosophical analysis discovers a basis of pantheism. Shintoist mythology first speaks of five gods called Koto-Amatsu-Kami. The first three are the creators of heaven and earth, and they are Ame-no-minaka-nushi, who existed immobile at the time of the creation; Takami-misubi, and Kami-busubi, agents in the Creation. The other two, Umashi-ashrabi-Hikoji and Ami-no-Tokotachi, have no clearly determined rôle. After them come seven generations of heavenly spirits (Tenjin shichi-dai), namely, Kuni-Tokotachi, Kuni-Satsuchi, Toyokunnu; then the four couples, Uijini and Suijini, Otonoji and Otomabe, Omotaru and Kashikone; finally Izanagi and Izanami, the special creators of Japan and of a number of gods, the gods of water, wind, trees, mountains, rivers, roads, thunder, rain, etc. Of Izanagi and Izanami were born Amaterasu, Tsukiyomi, and Susano-o. Amaterasu became the god of the sun, Tsukiyomi that of the moon, and Susano-o, the god of the earth. Amaterasu sent her grandson, Ninigi-no-mikoto, to reign over Japan, and he was the great-grandfather of Jimmu Tenno, the first emperor. From Amaterasu to Jimmu Tenno there are five generations called terrestrial spirits (Chijui-go-dai), who succeeded the seven generations of heavenly spirits.

Hence, according to Shintoist mythology, the emperor is not only the high priest, he is the representative and direct descendant of divinity, and as such the duty devolves upon him of celebrating the worship of the gods who are his ancestors and of offering to heaven as supreme mediator the prayers and sacrifices of the subjects whom he governs. At first the only temple was the palace of the emperor, and the ceremonies consisted chiefly of ablutions and purifications. The temple of Ise was the first erected outside the palace, and an imperial princess was charged with the sacred treasures there contained. The treasures, which were transmitted by Amaterasu to her descendants, were the Mirror, the Sword, and the precious Stone.

Shintoism remained in this state of simplicity until the introduction of Buddhism in 552. It was soon supplanted by the new religion, which brought with it more profound metaphysics, a more exalted moral code, and more solemn ceremonies. A few conservatives attempted to resist, but the bonzes won the day by what they called Rio-bu-Shinto, a system according to which Shintoism and Buddhism should form one and the same religion. Thenceforth, save for a few private ceremonies at the palace and the grand temples of Ise and Izumo, the two religions were but one. This state of things lasted until the eighteenth century, when the works of Kamo Mabuchi and several others brought about a reaction in favour of the national religion against Buddhism and Confucianism, both foreign importations. The Restoration completed what had begun, and since 1868 Shintoism and Buddhism have been entirely separate from each other.

Together with the gods of its mythology Shintoism adores several of the emperor and famous men of Japan. It also pays honour to the spirits of soldiers who died for the imperial cause. In several towns temples called Shokon-sha (temples where souls are invoked) are erected in their honour. Shintoism is divided into ten branches which differ only in their ceremonial details, the moral code of all being reduced to the single principle: follow the inspiration of your own heart and obey the emperor. Number of temples (miya or jinja) 190,436; staff: administrative heads of sects, 12; heads or rectors of temples, 16,365; priests (preachers) 74,347; priestesses, 4428; seminary students (March, 1908) 259; boys, 250, girls, 9. Japanese especially professing Shintoism, about 19,000,000.

National Feasts

(1) Shihohai, a ceremony celebrated in the palace on the first day of the year, from 3 to 5 A. M. The emperor turns successively to each of the cardinal points, venerates the tomb of his ancestors and prays for the prosperity of his reign and preservation from every calamity during the year. (2) Genshi-sai. — On 3 January the emperor himself makes offerings to heaven and his ancestors, and adores in the three sanctuaries of the palace: Kashi-kodoko, in which is venerated the sacred mirror, one of the three emblems of the imperial dignity; Koreiden, in which are honoured the names of the emperor's ancestors; Shinden, in which the gods are adored. (3) Komei-tenno-sai, a feast celebrated in the palace on 31 January in honour of the names of the father of the reigning emperor. (4) Kigensetsu, 11 Feb., in memory of the enthronization of Jimmu Tenno, founder of the empire (660 B.C.). (5) Jimmu-tenno-sai (13 April), anniversary of the death of Jimmu Tenno. (6 and 7) Shunki-korei-si and Shuki-korei-si, equinoctial feats, celebrated in the palace in honour of the names of the emperors, the first on 22 March, the second on 24 September. (8) Kanname-sai (17 Oct.) offering of the new rice to the ancestors of the imperial family (feast of the palace). (9) Niiname-sai (23 Nov.), on which the emperor offers new rice to the gods, and afterwards eats it himself. (10) Tencho-setsu, the emperor's birthday. These ten feasts are observed throughout the country, and the Japanese subjects are commanded to display the national flag.

Buddhism

Buddhism was introduced into Japan in A.D. 552. The King of Kudara (Corea) sent Buddhist statutes and books as a present to the Emperor Kimmei. Two years later Tonei and Doshin, the two first bonzes Japan had seen, came from the same country. They found a powerful protector in Soga-no-Iname, who built in his own residence the first temple (Mukuhara or Kogen-ji), but they also encountered determined adversaries who claimed that the introduction of a new religion would be an injury to the gods of Shinto, who were the fathers and protectors of the country. Thenceforth there were two parties, the strife between whom lasted thirty-five years to end in 587 with the triumph of Buddhism. Upheld by Prince Shotoku Taishi (572-621), the new doctrine made rapid progress. Shortly after his death various sects arose in succession, viz: Jojitsu and Sauron (625), Hosso (653), Gusha (660), Kegon (739), and Ritsu (754). These are the six sects of the era of Nara. They were followed by the three sects of the era of Hei-ankyo (Kyoto): Tendai (806), Singon (806), and Yuzei-nembutsu (1124). Finally the period of Kamakura witnessed the rise of five others: Jodo (1174), Zen (1192), Shin or Montoshu (1224), Nichiren or Hokkeishu (1253), and Ji (1275). Three of these sects, Jojitsu, Sauron, and Gusha, no longer exist. The others are divided into several branches. There are at present twelve principle sects and thirty-nine branches. Owing to the cleverness of the bonzes and the spread of the doctrines of Rio-bu-Shinto, the Buddhist and Shintoist religions existed in harmony for centuries and the ministers of both religions officiated alternately in the same temples. But at the restoration, Buddhism, having ceased to be recognized as the national religion, was obliged to restore the Shintoist temples in its possession. Thenceforth the two religion, although more or less confused in practice, became officially strangers to each other, and Buddhism, despite efforts that have been made to restore its philosophical and theological teachings, is decadent in Japan. In 1908 there were in the whole empire 109,740 temples (tera); administrative heads of temples, 52; superiors of temples, 53,120; bonzes (preachers) 70,755; bonzesses, 1199. Various employés: men, 45,554; women, 3404; seminary students, boys, 9269; girls, 449. Japanese especially professing Buddhism, about 29,000,000.

Rio-bu-Shinto or Sinbutsu-kongo (fusion of Shintoism and Buddhism) practically ceasing to exist in 1868, this theory has also ceased to be believed. It consisted as follows; about the beginning of the ninth century, Buddhism had made great progress in Japan; nevertheless the people resigned themselves with difficulty to the worship of other gods than those of Shintoism, the gods of the country. Then the bonzes evolved the theory that the tutelary deities of Japan were but temporary manifestations (gongen), of the Buddhist divinities, whose fatherland (honchi) was India, but who had appeared in Japan, leaving there traces (suijaku) of their passage. The result of this theory was the fusion of the two religions.

Buddhist Feasts and Customs

Among all the sects are observed 8 April, the birthday of Shaka, the founder of Buddhism; 8 February, the day of his death; and the feasts of the two equinoxes. Among the Motoshu: in November, Ho-on Ko, the feast of thanksgiving, and the death of Shinran Shonin, founder of the sect. Among the Hokkeishu, E-shi-ki, the death of Nichiren, founder of the sect. In every Japanese house is a domestic altar, called by the Buddhists Butsudan, by the Shintoist, Kamidana. Many wealthy houses have a special room or a small temple built apart within the enclosure. In the Butsudan is placed by the Montoshu the statue of Amida, by the Jodoshu that of Shaka, by the Hokkeishu, that of Nichiren, by the Shingonshu, that of Fudo (the Immovable). In the Kamidana, the Shintoists place the statue of Amiterasu, to which they offer sacred wine (Miki) on the first, fifteenth, and eighteenth of each month. As flowers, the Buddhists use the water-lily, the Shintoists the branches of a pale-leaved tree called Sasaki. There are also in every house the I-hai, wooden tablets or shelves on which are written the posthumous names of the parents and ancestors of the family. A lamp is lit every day before this domestic altar, at least in the evening, frequently also in the morning. At Buddhist funerals is burned a sacred word (shikimi), a foreign tree brought from India with this custom, and whose flower is a violent poison. On returning from the cemetery, salt is sprinkled on the garments of those who took part in the ceremony, in order to purify them.

Confucianism

Introduced into Japan in 285, Confucianism was received without opposition owing to its resemblance to Shintoism, then the only religion practiced. But after the introduction of Buddhism it fell into disfavour and did not recover until the seventeenth century when Ieyasu caused the Chinese classics to be printed for the first time. Henceforth, being taught by learned masters such as Fujiwara Seikwa, Hayashi Doshun, etc., it became the code of the Samurai and exercised a profound influence in Japan during the shogunate of the Tokugawa. After the Restoration the European system of public instruction was adopted, Confucianism was again abandoned, as well as the Chinese classics which had been the basis of teaching for 250 years. But it cannot be denied that the origin of a number of ideas still in favour among the upper classes may be traced to Confucianism.

Bushido (Way of the Samurai, Knighthood)

The principles of loyalty and honour which the Samurai are obliged to obey are called Bushido. This code has borrowed from Buddhism stoical endurance, scorn of danger and death, from Shintoism the religious veneration of fatherland and sovereign, from Confucianism a certain literary and artistic culture and the social culture called "the five relations of men among themselves" (go rin). From this compound results the code of the perfect knight, which may be summed up in three sayings: the Samurai has not two words, he serves not two masters; he gives his blood for duty. The Bushido was born with the nation, it developed by degrees as the warrior class grew in influence, and it reached the most complete expansion at the beginning of the Shogunate of the Tokugawa. Then a change took place: hitherto illiterate and even glorifying in his ignorance, the Samurai turned to literary culture and neglected the military calling; decadence followed, and at the Restoration he had lost his ancient prestige. To-day the Samurai no longer form a class apart, but the spirit and influence of the Bushido are more or less preserved among the people.

CEMETERIES

There are two kinds of cemeteries, those connected with the temples and the public cemeteries, those which belong to the municipalities. In the first, the "parishioners" of the temples have the right to be interred, in the second, all persons without distinction of class or religion. The local administration grants permission to establish new cemeteries, to abolish or to change the old, etc., but their inspection and control belong to the police. Every cemetery must have a superintendent (Kanrisha), without whose permission no burial may take place. It is forbidden to bury the dead anywhere save in the cemeteries. Formerly it was necessary to enlist the services of a Shintoist or Buddhist priest (bonze or kannushi) for every burial, but this law was abolished in 1884, and the presence of a priest is no longer necessary. If he is summoned he should perform the ceremony according to the right of his religion. The formalities to be fulfilled are: the obtaining of a physician's certificate proving the death, the presentation of this certificate to the civil official, and the securing from the police authorization for burial. Internment may only take place twenty-four hours after the death; the grave must be six feet deep. Those who neglect to bury a dead person or who profane a tomb are liable to fine and imprisonment. Cemeteries are exempt from taxation.

Cremation is permitted in Japan, It takes place in a special oven called a Kwasoba. Persons dying of a contagious disease must be cremated, others being left free. As regards cemeteries and burials, the Christian communities are subject to the same laws and enjoy the same advantages as the pagan sects. They are allowed to have a separate cemetery, which most of them have. As to foreigners, according to Article ii of the treaty concluded with the different powers, "European persons dying in Japan enjoy the right to be buried according to their religious customs in conveniently located cemeteries, which should be established in case they do not exist, and carefully maintained".

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE

Regulations concerning public relief were promulgated in 1899. They stipulated that each department should organize a minimum fund of 560,000 yen for relief in case of accidents (floods, typhoons, earthquakes, etc.). The Government in turn pledged itself to give yearly for ten years a sum proportionate to that collected in the departments. Besides this a sum is reserved each year to assist the poor and foundlings. At the end of March, 1908, the accident fund equalled a sum of 34,844,370 yen. Numbers of persons assisted in 1907, 13,894; number of children helped, 2086; cost, 47,016 yen.

BENEVOLENT ORGANIZATIONS

The chief of these are: (1) the Tokio yoiku-in (asylum for the infirm and orphans) an establishment founded in 1872; number of infirm and orphans sheltered in 1907, 3376; receipts 121,875 yen; expenses, 122,227 yen; funds remaining at end of year, 378,908 yen; (2) the Tokio Sugamo byo-in (insane asylum), founded in 1879; physicians, 9; keepers, 145; inmates, 634; receipts, 30,700 yen; expenses, 78,830 yen; (3) the Tokio jikei byo-in (charity hospital) founded in 1182 [sic]; sick persons received at the hospital in 1907, 768; sick persons treated outside by the hospital; (4) Fukuden-kai Ikuji-in (orphanage), a private establishment; orphans assisted, 150; (5) Tokio Kankwai-in (house of correction) private establishment, founded in 1885; children received, 69. To these establishments, the only ones mentioned in the official statistics, must be added about 100 other charitable organizations (orphanages, asylums, leper hospitals, infant asylums, houses of refuge for those discharged from prison, etc.), founded by private citizens, the Buddhist sects, Catholic and Protestant missions. The Catholic and Protestant missionaries have been the promoters of these benevolent works in Japan, the Buddhist having merely followed their example. The last-named have founded in all 15 orphanages, 3 schools, and 8 asylums or hospitals. The Shintoists have not a single benevolent work to their credit.

RED CROSS SOCIETY

In 1877 during the civil war of Satsuma, a society was founded in Japan on the model of the Red Cross under the name of Hakuaisha (philanthropic society). In 1886, Japan having given its adhesion to the convention of Geneva, the philanthropic society changed its name to that of the Red Cross of Japan (Nihon sekijujisha). The Red Cross Society is under the patronage of the royal household which gives to the work an annual contribution of 20,000 yen. Besides this the empress gives 5000 yen to the Red Cross hospital. The Society built two hospital ships for use in time of war. Every Japanese or foreigner who gives yearly from three to twelve yen, or twenty-five yen at a time, is an ordinary member of the Red Cross; anyone who gives 200 yen is a special member, and anyone who gives 1000 yen is an honorary member. Number of ordinary members, 1257; special members, 10,139; honorary members, 42; correspondents, 8090. At the beginning of 1908 the Red Cross was composed as follows: staff managers 5; physicians, 291; dispensers, 16; employés, 90; head nurses 262; nurses, 2071; pupil-nurses, 691; litter-bearers, 132; funds, 9,755,417 yen.

CHRISTIANITY IN JAPAN

Catholicism

On 15 August, 1549, St. Francis Xavier arrived in Japan, at the port of Kagoshima in Kiusiu, with two companions and three neophytes. By the boldness of his preaching, his sanctity, and his miracles, he renewed the marvels of the Apostolic age. He preached at Hirado, Yamaguchi, Bungo, and Funai, but he was unable to see the emperor or enter Miako (Kyoto). He set out for China on 20 November, 1551. In Japan there were then 3000 faithful, the feudal regime being favourable to evangelization. Ordinarily, when a prince was converted a portion of his subjects followed him. The celebrated Nobunaga (1565), the terrible enemy of the bonzes, was kindly disposed towards the Christians and a friend of the missionaries. When he died (1582) there were 200,000 faithful and 250 churches. The three Christian princes of Bunga, Arima, and Omura sent an embassy to Europe, which was sent out, on 20 Feb., 1582, reached Lisbon on 10 May, 1584, and Rome 23 March, 1585. The ambassadors witnessed the coronation of Sixtus V and were created knights and patricians. Hideyoshi, the successor of Nobunaga, at first favoured the Christians, but being prejudiced by the bonzes, he later believed that the missionaries were spies and proscribed the Christian religion, but refrained from slaying the Christians (1587). The missionaries hid themselves and remained, and within ten years they baptized 65,000 persons (1587-97), making a total of 300,000 faithful, and 134 religious. In 1593 three Spanish Franciscans having been sent as ambassadors by the king of Spain, they were well-received by Hideyoshi. A Spanish vessel, the "San Felipe", having run aground within the province of Tosa, the captain was foolish enough to say that the missionaries had been sent to prepare for the conquest of the country. Thereupon Hideyoshi became afraid and angry, and on 9 December, 1596, nine religious were arrested and orders were given to draw up a list of Japanese Christians. All gladly made ready for death. On 5 February, 1597, twenty-six were crucified at Nagasaki, and died preaching and singing to the end. After the death of Hideyoshi in 1598 peace reigned for fifteen years. Christians multiplied and the Faith manifested itself in all manner of good works; 130 Jesuits, some secular priests, and about 30 religious of the orders of St. Francis, St. Dominic, and St. Augustine worked side by side. In 1609 and 1613 Dutch and English Protestants arrived who were envious of the Spanish and Portuguese Catholics. In 1613 persecution recommenced. In that year the prince of Sendai, Date Masamune, sent Asahura Roku-yemon on an embassy to Pope Paul V and the King of Spain, the Franciscan Sotelo accompanying him. In the following year (1614) the edict of destruction was published by the new master of the empire Ieyasu Tokugawa, the first shogun of that name. It was decreed that Catholicism be abolished, and this edict was renewed by Hidetada in 1616, the successor of Ieyasu. The result was horrible. In 1622 took place what was called the "great martyrdom", fifty-two chosen Christians being martyred on the same day (2 Sept.) at Nagasaki, twenty-seven being decapitated, and the remainder being burned alive. In the following year, under Iemitsu, the persecution waxed still more furious and extended throughout the empire. The cruelty and refinement of the tortures are unparalleled even in the early history of the Church. The exact number of the victims is unknown. In 1637 the province of Azima, 37,000 Christians, driven to extremities, revolted, shut themselves up within the fortress of Shimbara, and were slain to the last one. In 1640 four Portuguese ambassadors who had gone from Macao to Nagasaki were called upon to apostatize, and when they refused they were put to death without further trial. Thirteen of their followers were sent back to Macao with this warning: "While the sun warms the earth let no Christian be so bold as to enter into Japan. Let this be known to all men. Though it were the King of Spain in person or the God of the Christians or Shaka himself [Buddha], whosoever will disobey this prohibition will pay for it with his head." Thus Japan was closed, and remained so for two centuries, during which time the persecution did not cease. A price was set on the head of foreign and native Christians. Each year every Japanese was called upon to trample the cross under foot. Some Dutch merchants consented to separate themselves from the Christian population and allow themselves to be confined as prisoners in Nagasaki on the Island of Deshima, in order to carry on business with the Japanese. In 1642 five Jesuits embarked by stealth for Japan where they died after frightful tortures. They were followed in 1643 by five others who met the same fate, and an attempt on the part of the Dominicans of the Philippines (1647) was not more fortunate. If other attempts were made to enter this tomb it is not known. The last known is the Abbé Sidotti, an Italian missionary who in 1708, at the age of forty, landed unaccompanied on the Japanese coast. Delivered to the governor of Nagasaki by the Prince of Natsuma, he was first examined in that town, and then, at the command of the Shogun, conducted to Yedo and condemned to perpetual imprisonment in a place which is still called "Chirishitan Zaka" (Hill of the Christians). While there he baptized his two jailers and died after five years of captivity (1715). The learned Arai Hakuseki, government interpreter in the examination of Sidotti, wrote his history ("Sei yo Kibun", European history), which was reprinted in the "Missions Catholiques", 1884.

However, in spite of persecution some vague and infrequent signs seemed to indicate that all the Christians of Japan had not perished. The Corean missionaries several times attempted to assure themselves of this, but without success, for since 1838 it had been impossible to enter "the mysterious empire" from any side. Interest in the Japanese mission, however continued to increase, and in April, 1844, Père Forcade was sent to Japan as a missionary. He stayed at Okinawa in the Riu-kiu islands with the Chinese catechist Ko as a companion. He was followed by Pères Leturdu, Adnet, Furet, Murmet, Gerard and Mounicou of the Société des Missions Etrangères of Paris. They waited for fourteen years, on the Riu-kiu or at Hong-Kong, seeking by every means to gain entry into Japan. During fourteen years of labour and sufferings they baptized two Japanese. Finally a treaty was signed between France and Japan, 8 October, 1858, and ratified 22 September, 1859. The missionaries were free to reside in open ports, and have there a church for the service of foreigners. Père Girard was provisionally named superior of the mission, and for the ratification of the treaty he went as interpreter to Yedo with the Consul-general, de Bellecourt. The three ports of Hakodate, Kanagawa-Yokahama, and Nagasaki were soon occupied. The labour in these places was difficult and the sojourn there dangerous, for prejudice against foreigners and Christians had not disappeared. Père Mermet built a house and a church at Hakodate and Père Furet did the same at Nagasaki. At first they taught French in order to make friends and prepare for the future. In the new church at Nagasaki on 17 March, 1865, occurred an ever-memorable event, when fifteen Christians made themselves known to Père Petitjean, assuring him that there were a great many others, about 50,000 in all being known. It is easy to imagine the joy which greeted this discovery after more than two centuries of waiting and patience. There were three marks by which these descendants of martyrs recognized these new missionaries as the successors of their ancient fathers: the authority of the Pope of Rome, the veneration of the Blessed Virgin, and the celibacy of the clergy. In the following year (1866) Père Petitjean was named Vicar Apostolic of Japan.

The extreme ardour of the Christians attracted attention and aroused the old hatred. In July, 1867, persecution recommenced; 40,000 faithful of Urakami near Nagasaki were exiled to various provinces. The same proscription was extended to other towns; everywhere the choice was apostasy or exile, and the greater number courageously expressed their faith. There was no bloodshed, but the trials were severe. About a third of the exiles died or did not return. During this time they continued to labour in the seaports. In March, 1873, while the Japanese embassy was travelling through Europe, the exiles were restored to their homes, prosecution ceased in Japan, and the regime of tolerance began. Henceforth the Government was silent regarding religion and disturbed no one provided public order was not troubled. In May, 1876, Japan was divided into two vicariates Apostolic, South and North; Mgr. Petitjean was made Vicar Apostolic of the South, Mgr. Osouf, of the North. About 1878 the missionaries were permitted by means of an official passport to travel more than ten leagues from the port into the interior of the country. Then a certain number of them became itinerant, and by their means the Gospel was preached with admirable success in nearly all the towns and villages in the space of fifteen years. Prejudices diminished, conversions multiplied, and opinions inclined toward liberty. On 11 August, 1884, an official decree proclaimed that there was no longer a state religion. On 12 Sept., 1885, a letter written from Leo XIII to the Emperor of Japan was received with great honour, and on 18 December of the same year, a representative of the emperor assisted respectfully at the ceremony of the funeral service for Alphonso XII, King of Spain. In March, 1888, the Vicariate Apostolic of central Japan was created, with Mgr. Midon as Vicar Apostolic. Finally on 11 Feb., 1889, came the promulgation of the new Constitution of the empire and authentic recognition of religious liberty. In the following year (1890), on the twenty-fifth anniversary of the discovery of the Christians, the first synod of the bishops of Japan was held at Nagasaki. During six weeks occurred the incomparable festivals by which the Church of Japan celebrated in transports of joy and gratitude the miracle of her resurrection. In April, 1891, the vicariate Apostolic of Hakodate was created with Mgr. Berlioz as vicar Apostolic. On 15 June the same year the ecclesiastical hierarchy was established with an Archbishop of Tokio and three suffragans, namely, namely the bishops of Nagasaki, Osaka, and Hakodate.

With liberty the zeal of the Japanese for religion decreased and conversions became less frequent. However, Catholic education, benevolent, and journalistic works developed and grew unmolested, and moreover, the numerical progress has never been interrupted. In 1860 there were two missionaries in Japan; in 1870, one vicar Apostolic, 40 missionaries, 27 religious (nuns), and 23,000 Christians; in 1890, 79 missionaries, 15 native priests, 27 Marianists, 59 nuns, and 42,387 Christians; in 1900, 1 archbishop and 3 bishops, 115 missionaries, 32 native priests, 62,694 Christians, 93 religious men, and 389 religious women (foreigners and natives).

Writing has joined to preaching by word of mouth. A Catholic review, "Kyoto Bambo", founded in 1881, continued under various names until the present time, explains religion, solves current objections, and gives news of interest to the Christians. Nearly everything relevant to Christian life, education, philosophy and theology has been treated in more than a hundred works. Several lesser works and two large dictionaries for the study of the Japanese language have also been issued by the missionaries (a French-Japanese dictionary by M. Raguet; a Japanese-French by Lemaréchal; a Japanese grammar by M. Balet. The "Mélanges", another review founded in 1904 and written in French, studies Japanese matters and gives a quarterly summary of the press. Two noteworthy benevolent works have also been established by the missionaries, the leper hospital of Gotemba, founded by M. Testewaide and that of Kumamoto by M. Corre. The missionaries were soon joined by numerous and valuable assistants. In 1873 came the Dames de St-Maur. They first founded an orphanage at Yokohama, and another at Tokyo in 1875; as many as 700 persons were assisted here at one time. At present they have an orphanage and three schools, one of them at Shizuoka, for the middle classes, and a course in foreign languages and arts for the higher classes, with 180 pupils. In 1877 came the Sisters of the Infant Jesus of Chauffailles. They have orphanages and private schools at Osaka, Kobe, Kyoto, Nagasaki, and Okayama. The Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres came in 1878; they have primary or boarding schools at Hakodate, Tokio, Sendai, Morioka, and Yatsushiro, with more than 800 pupils.

In 1888 the Marianist Fathers established themselves at Tokio. Their progress was slow and laborious, but uninterrupted. They have at present primary and secondary school with 802 pupils, of whom 71 are Catholic and 29 catechumens; and a foreign language course for adults with 100 pupils. Of these 802 pupils, 140 are sons of generals, admirals, superior officers, ambassadors, ministers, consuls, deputies, senators. There are 19 European teachers and 26 Japanese. Five Marianist fathers conducted courses at the university, the school for nobles, the school for man=CFvres, the school of cadets, and that of the military intendance. They have besides at Nagasaki a commercial school (1892) with 380 pupils; at Osaka (1898) a commercial school with 498 pupils; at Yokohama (1902) a higher primary school with commercial courses for foreigners or Eurasians of all nationalities, with 120 pupils. In all these schools student and graduate societies for piety, zeal, friendship, sport, etc. are flourishing. The native religious are recruited chiefly from among the ancient Christians of Kiusiu; a house for this purpose was opened in April, 1910, at Urakami.

In 1896 Trappists of four different nationalities came to Hokkaido. Within twelve years, despite difficulties of all sorts, of a total of about 1000 acres, comprising mountains and ravines, they had cleared and made valuable about 620 acres and formed a Christian colony of more than a hundred persons.

The Trappistines came from France in 1898. Their start was painful. But they now have no difficulty in securing recruits from among the ancient Christians of Nagasaki. They are engaged in the cheese industry, and development, at first despaired of, has been rapid.

In 1905 the whole of the Island of Shikoku was given to the Spanish Dominicans. This is the fifth ecclesiastical division of Japan, with 300 Christians.

The Franciscans returned in 1906. They are at Sapporo and Hakodate, and are 9 in number, 5 Germans, 2 Canadians, an Englishman, and a Frenchmen, engaged in teaching languages and in the ministry.

The Fathers of the Divine Word of Steyl came in 1907. They consisted of seven Germans and one Austrian. They teach German, English, French, and Chinese, and preach the Gospel.

On 1 January, 1908, the religious of the Scared Heart, 12 in number, English, Belgian, and French, opened a house for higher education at Tokio; on 1 July the servants of the Holy Ghost, five in number, from Germany and Austria came to Akita, where they have a kindergarten, boarding school, school of dress-making, and one of French and German languages. On 1 September 7 Franciscan sisters from France, Mexico, and Italy came to Sapporo, where they established sewing and embroidery classes, a school of housekeeping, and a dispensary. Sisters of the same congregation care for the lepers at Kumamoto. Finally on 17 October three Jesuit Fathers, English, German, and French, established themselves at Tokio for higher education and journalism. Thus the Catholic Church, one in faith, with its religious bodies of every country and name, has in Japan a truly universal character.

Protestantism

Protestantism appeared in Japan in 1859 at the opening of the country. The first arrivals were the American Episcopalians, the best known of whom was Channing Moore Williams. Shortly afterwards came the Presbyterians: James Curtis Hepburn followed by Mr. Werbeck (1861) and Mr. Thompson (1863). They halted first at Yokohama. Their religious reunions were called "prayer-meetings" (Kito-kwai). The first Japanese baptism took place in 1864. Protestant missionaries were also at Nagasaki prior to discovery of the old Christians (1865) and to them the Christians of Urakami addressed themselves before going to the Catholic Church. The first Japanese Protestant church was organized in 1872, after the last persecution, and inaugurated in 1875. Until that time only ten baptisms had been administered. During these early years the work of evangelization was almost impossible, and the time of the missionaries was chiefly employed in the translation of the Holy Scriptures. That of the New Testament was completed in 1880, and that of the Old Testament in 1887. A number of them were also employed in teaching either in schools founded by themselves or as professors in the Japanese schools. Their aim was to attack the pagan error at its very root by means of instruction, and also to have a right to live in the interior of the country, which was hitherto forbidden to foreigners. In 1876 a kind of university called Dashisha was founded at Kyoto, the ceded funds being founded by several American missions. The intention was to form Christians who would be solidly instructed in their religion and men capable of embracing any career. This celebrated school was very prosperous under the rector, Nijima Jo; it had as many as 1500 students, but having been declared independent several years since, has lost much of its importance.

An event of considerable importance in 1877 was the union of the hitherto divided forces of the American and Scotch Presbyterians; the Dutch Reformed Mission, the Presbyterian Mission, and the Scotch Presbyterian Mission. Their association formed the United Church of Christ in Japan (Nippon Cristo Ichi Kyokwai). They were afterwards joined by the German Reformed Mission (1886), the South Presbyterian Mission (1887), and the Cumberland Presbyterian Mission (1890). In a General Assembly held at Tokio in 1891 the Articles of Faith and the constitution of a new church were drawn up. Its new name was the Nihon Cristo Kyokwai (Church of Christ in Japan). The chief Protestant College in Tokio belongs to this United Church, and instruction is here given according to the spirit of Protestant Christian religion and morality.

During the period of religious tolerance the missionaries flocked to Japan and baptisms multiplied rapidly. The desire to learn English attracted to them many young Japanese. In December, 1889, the total number of Japanese converted to Protestantism was 31,181; foreign missionaries, 527; native ordained ministers, 135. There were 274 churches, more than half of which were self-supporting. The contributions for Japanese Christians for 1889 amounted to 53,503 yen. Several religious organizations, especially that of Christian Youth, were flourishing.

In the above number are included the Episcopalian church of America, governed for more than thirty years by Bishop Williams, and the Established Church of England, whose first bishop in Japan was Dr. Poole (1883). These two churches have agreed to work in concert and the constitution uniting them was drawn up in February, 1888. This was the foundation of a new church under the name Nihon-Sei-Ko-Kwai (The Holy Catholic Church of Japan). Hierarchically constituted, it has divided all of Japan, including Formosa, into six districts; it number 13,384 baptized Christians; 228 foreign missionaries, clerics, or laymen or women; and 295 Japanese assistants.

These are the chief denominations. The total number of missionaries given by Protestant statistics for 1908 is 789 foreigners, including women, and 1303 Japanese, ordained or not, men or women. The number of practical church members is 57,830; not practical, 10,554; churches, 408; young men in the schools, 3604; young women, 5226; Sunday schools, 1066, with 84,160 children; publishing houses, 7; volumes issued during the year, 1,974,881. The property of the different mission, schools, churches etc. is valued at 3,536,315 yen. Contributions of Christians for 1907 equalled 274,608 yen, and expenditures for the Japanese churches and the work of evangelization amounted to 448,878 yen, not including the salaries of the missionaries and their expenses. In the above are not included the Unitarians, who mingle with all denominations; the Independent Christians who are not attached to any church; the Methodist Episcopalians, who have a Japanese bishop, the Rev. Honda; several Japanese neo-Christian sects who are wholly independent either in government or in doctrine. They are eclectics who aim to adopt Christianity to the ideas and spirit of Japan, and thus to found a new and special Japanese religion. Up to the present time Protestantism in Japan has been chiefly American, but now it seems about to become Japanese. According as the Japanese churches become self-supporting, their tendency is to free themselves from the authority of foreigners. There is an evolution of religious ideas; many Christian works have been imitated by them, but faith in even the fundamental dogmas seems to disappear.

Russian Missions

The Russian Mission, or Orthodox Church of Russia in Japan, dates from 1861. A hospital had been previously built at Hakodate for Russians and Japanese. A Basilian monk, the Rev. Nicolai, was attached to it as chaplain with a church near the hospital. The hospital having been destroyed by fire, the church remained, and the Rev. Nicolai stayed as a missionary, at Hakodate, where he baptized a number of Japanese; this was the beginning. In 1870 the Russian minister to Japan obtained from the Japanese the grant of a special territory as a branch of the Russian legation, which territory was at Surugadai at the very centre of Tokio and one of the most advantageous sites in the capital. Here Fr. Nicolai established his residence and the centre of the Orthodox Church. He began by training well-instructed men and native assistants, for which purpose he had an ordinary college and a school of philosophy and theology; later on he also had a special school for young women. He preached his religion by means of carefully trained catechists and priests. Since 1881 he has also had a religious review, published twice monthly, and a publication committee installed at his house has published all the most necessary books. In 1886 Fr. Nicolai was consecrated bishop in Russia, and in 1890 he completed the erection of his cathedral, a truly magnificent monument, one of the sights of the capital.

Bishop Nicolai enjoys a great personal esteem; for the most part alone, he has founded and governed by himself everything pertaining to his mission. During the Russo-Japanese war the situation was very delicate, but the Christians, at least the greater number of them, did not abandon him. Even during this time he continued all his undertakings unmolested, his house being guarded without by Japanese soldiers. Previously he received from the Holy Synod 95,000 yen yearly, but since the Russo-Japanese War, these and other resources from Russia have greatly diminished, while on the other hand the price of everything in Japan has increased. The bishop was compelled to diminish also his expenses, to dismiss a part of his staff, and to exhort the Christians to contribute more generously to support their church.

But after the victories of the Japanese over the Russian armies it is not easy to conceive of even the Japanese, though Christians, as members of a church hitherto supported by the Russian Government. That is why the leaders among these Christians, after having agreed among themselves, declared to "Archbishop" Nicolai their intention of being supported entirely by themselves and being independent of Russia. And as Russia has its national church they wished to have also their Japanese National Church (June, 1909). Little has been written concerning the work of the Russians in Japan; even in Russia almost nothing has been published. According to one Protestant reckoning, the Orthodox church numbers 30,166 baptized Christians; according to another only 13,000 (the last figure denotes perhaps those who are practical). There are 37 native priests and 139 catechists. Expenses for church and evangelization in 1907 amounted to 55,279 yen; contributions of Christians, 10,711 yen; Churches or places of preaching, 265. Among the Russians, as among Protestants, and in fact everywhere throughout Japan, the tendency of mind is toward independence.

Laws Concerning Religion and Schools

(1) According to the constitution of the empire, every Japanese is free to believe and to profess the religion he prefers, provided he does not disturb the public order, and that he observes the other laws of the country. Religious manifestations and assemblies, ordinary and extraordinary are permitted, provided the police are informed and all disorder be avoided. In national ceremonies where Christians and pagans mingle, practical difficulties sometimes arise which are inevitable because of the mixture of religions. Local differences also occur, though somewhat rarely, owing to popular prejudice or the dispositions of a few, but in principle and before the law all religions are equal.

(2) Any Japanese or foreigner is free to found a school, provided he observes the laws and regulations laid down by the Japanese Board of Education concerning hygiene, qualifications of teachers, matters to be taught, etc. There are official schools for popular education, such as the primary and middle or high schools for boys and girls (shogakko, chugakko, and Koto-jogakko), and non-official or private schools, which may also be primary or others at choice. But the diplomas issued at private schools have no official value, at least no value equal to that of the schools which are formally recognized by the ministers of public instruction. A school for which this recognition is desired must conforms to the same regulations and control as the government schools and be in no way inferior to them. Public inspection regularly takes place only in official or recognized schools.

(3) In the so-called schools of "popular education" which are official or recognized, no religion is taught during hours of class. All religions are free, none is imposed. In private unrecognized schools religious instruction is permitted during hours of class. Each school may profess its own. However, popular instruction in Japan is not atheistic; it gives as the basis for private or social morality primitive history or Japanese mythology, which assigns the origin of all things to the gods or ancestors of the country. But higher education in general inclines strongly towards materialism.

(4) For the possession and administration of their goods, churches and schools may, if they so desire, cause themselves to be recognized as juridical persons, and as such possess movable and immovable property. On this point Christian communities or establishments are subject to the same laws as the others. Each juridical person is represented by a responsible council who sends the Government an inventory of the goods, the annual accounts of administration, the amount of purchases or sales, the condition of the staff, if it be a mission, the number of priests and faithful, if a school, that of masters and students, the precise location of churches and residences, the names of the titulars and their charges if any. Churches, benevolent foundations, etc are dependent on the ministry of the interior; schools, on the ministry of public instruction. The aim of this legislation with these regulations is to place the juridical persons under the protection of the law.

Taxes

Schools pay no taxes. churches and all houses serving as residents for those attached to these churches (priest's house, that of the catechists, that of the servants, etc.) are also exempt from taxation. These enjoy all the privileges granted to the pagan temples; houses of revenue, if there are any, are subject to the common law and pay the tax.

Days of Rest

Schools, government employés, and bank employés are free from Saturday (noon) until Monday. This custom has been introduced since the coming of the foreigners, but has not yet been adopted among the people. Labourers work on Sunday, their days of rest being the first and fifteenth of the month.

HISTORY

Ethnology

Much obscurity surrounds the origin of the Japanese people. The primitive population, besides being very sparse, appears to have belonged wholly to the people called Ainos. Beyond a doubt these came from the Asiatic continent by way of the North. They were conquered by other immigrants more powerful than themselves who came from the South. The best of these Ainos seemed to have accepted the civilization of their masters and became united with them,. and from the fusion of these two races are descended the Japanese of to-day. The most refractory tribes were driven farther and farther north, and in the end abandoned the Great Island, confining themselves in Yezo (Hokkaido) and Sakhalin, where they show a tendency to decrease and disappear. They are small and strong, with long hair and beards. Their language is quite different from that of the Japanese. Their garments, which are shorter than that of the Japanese, are made of the bark of trees. In general they are mild-natured and simple-manners. They live by the chase and fishing, making use of the harpoon to catch seals, and slaying bears with stakes and poison arrows. They adore the god of the mountain and the bear, whom they believe to be his son. Each year they sacrifice a bear with great solemnity. They believe also in good and evil geniuses and worship several of the divinities and personages of Japan.

General Division

The history of Japan is divided naturally into three chief periods. The first (autocratic period) which extends from the beginning to the shogunate of Kamakura, embraces eighteen centuries (660 B.C. - A.D. 1192), during which time the authority was in the hands of the emperors. The second begins with the shogunate of Minamoto (1192), and ends with that of the Tokugawa (1968). Lastly, the third, beginning with the imperial Restoration, witnessed Japan's complete modification of her secular institutions, the Europeanization of her administration, and saw the country take her place among the great nations of the world.

Autocratic Period (600 B.C.-A.D. 1192)

According to Japanese tradition, in the seventh century B.C., a tribe, probably of Malayan origin, which had landed and established itself at Kiusiu, advanced towards the north and after some years of warfare chose the region of Yamato as a place to settle. Hasamu-no-mikoto, the chief of these adventurers, became the first Emperor of Japan (Jimmu Tenno). His enthronization, assigned to 660 B.C., is considered as the foundation of the empire, and the beginning of a dynasty which was to reign for twenty-five centuries.

After a gap of 500 years in the national annals we find a rough sort of civilization during the reign of Sujin (97-30 B.C.) and Suinin (29 B.C. - 70 A.D.). Then comes the famous legend of the hero Yamatokakeru (131-190). His son merely ascended the throne (192-200). His widow, the Empress Jingo, ruled after him. The Japanese chronicles attribute to her the conquest of three small kingdoms which lay south of Corea. She was succeeded by her fourth son, Ojin (201-310). During his reign, two Corean scholars, Ajiki and Wani, came to Japan, bringing with them Chinese literature and Confucianism (285). Ojin's son, Nintoku, governed for eighty-seven years (313-399). During the whole of his reign the country was at peace, but after him bloody scenes were multiplied in the imperial family until direct descendants were wiped out. A branch laterally descended for Ojin ascended the throne. Under the fourth sovereign of this branch (Kimmei, 552) Buddhism was brought to Japan by bonzes from Corea. The introduction of Buddhism brought about radical changes in ideas and customs. Prince Shotoku (573-621) favoured its progress, but it was the Emperor Kotoku (645-54), who by his famous reform of the Taikwa era, accomplished the great political and religious revolution which transformed Japan. Everything was then modelled on the Chinese form of government, and save for a few modifications this system remained in force until the restoration (1868). In the following century the Empress Gemmei (708-14) transferred the capital to Nara, where it remained for seventy-five years (708-785). The fiftieth emperor, Kwammu (782-805), built the city of Kyoto (794), which was the residence of the court until the imperial Restoration. The Fujiwara then became powerful. They exercised the regency (sessho) during the minority of the sovereign, then, under the title Kwampaku, continued to govern even after he had attained his majority. However, the effeminate nobles of the palace neglected the career of arms and gave themselves up to frivolous pastimes. Because of this decadence of the imperial authority, frequent revolts took place which the court was powerless to repress, and for this purpose, called on military clans. Their power became more and more formidable, two families especially, the Taira and the Minamoto, acquiring great influence. Both wished to secure the preponderance of power, and for thirty-five years their rivalry filled the country with bloodshed. Finally the Minamoto overcame and completed annihilated their adversaries (1185). The victorious Minamoto, Yoritomo, then raised to the throne a four-year-old child and assumes the title of Sei-i Taishogun. A new era had begun in the history of Japan; feudalism was inaugurated.

Age of Feudalism

It is subdivided into three parts: the Kamakura period (1192-1338); the Ashikaga period (1338-1573); and the Tokugawa period (1603-1868).

Kamakura Period (1192-1338)

Having been named Shogun, Yoritomo installed himself at Kamakura, which he made his capital. After this he undertook the administrative reorganization, which was to concentrate all authority in his hands. Unfortunately for his plans, he died before this was accomplished (1199). His two sons, Yorii and Sanetomo, allowed the power to pass to their mother's clan, that of Hojo. These last, who were descended from the Taira, dared not assume the shogunal dignity, but they succeeded under the title of Shukken (regents) in retaining the power for a century which was the most prosperous in the history of Japan. About this time, the only invasion with which Japan had been threatened, that of the Mongols, was frustrated through the energy of Hojo Tokimune, and by a providential storm which destroyed the enemy's fleet (1281). However, decadence manifested itself among the Hojo, family dissensions increased, weakening the usurped authority and preparing the way for a restoration of the imperial power. The Emperor Go Daigo (1319-1339) was the instrument of this work of restoration. Assisted by faithful followers he began the struggle, and in less than two years the supremacy of Kamakura was at an end (1333). But rivalries arose among the generals. The clan of Ashihaga, descended from Minamoto, rose in revolt, its head, Takauji, assumed the title of shogun, raised to the throne an emperor of his own choosing, and thus founded a new dynasty of shoguns which retained its power for more than two centuries.

Ashikaga Period (1338-1573)

The dethroned emperor defended himself courageously. His son and grandsons continued the struggle, and for more than fifty-six years was seen the singular phenomenon of two emperors at one time. In 1392 a compromise was effected between the rival powers which put an end to the schism. The first Ashikaga shoguns knew how to restrain within reasonable limits their warlike spirit, developed by many years of war, but their weaker successors passed all bounds. From the civil war of the era of Onin (1467) the troubles never ceased, and for a century the empire was a prey to the horrors of intestinal strife. the shogun were henceforth no more than toys in the hands of their chief feudatories. When the shogunate of the Ashikagas was on the verge of ruin, a petty daimio of the province of Owari profited by the anarchy to increase his dominion. At his death (1549) his fifteen-year-old son, Oda Nobunaga, came into possession of his inheritance. It was about this time, during the reign of Go-Nara-tenno (1527-1557), that Europeans appeared for the first time in Japan. The honour of being the first to penetrate into the country was reserved for a Portuguese named Fern=8Bo Mendes Pinto (1542). Seven years later, 15 August, 1549, St. Francis Xavier landed at the port of Kagoshima.

Man of genius that he was, Nobunaga conceived his project of concentrating into the hands of a single master the power which the daimio disputed to the injury of the nation. Having defeated the most turbulent and subjugated the others to his will, he deposed the last Ashikaga shogun and seized the reins of government, but he was treacherously slain by a vassal who owed everything to him, and died leaving his work uncompleted. The succession fell to a soldier of fortune named Hideyoshi, who succeeded in removing the sons of his former master. Being incapable of aspiring to the dignity of a shogun, he assumed the highest of the titles of the civil hierarchy, that of Kwampaku. Later, in 1592, he took the title of Taiko (Sovereign Lord) under which name he is known in history. Blinded by ambition, he conceived the project of taking possession of Corea, but despite some successes, this campaign ended in disaster. Hideyoshi did not long survive his failure; he died in 1598. Before his death he had charged five chief daimios with the guardianship of his son, Hideyori, who was still a child. Among the five was one who could not be content with second rank. This was Tokugawa Ieyasu (1543-1616), a descendant of the Minamoto. After the death of Hideyoshi he withdrew from his colleagues and made war against them. The famous victory which he won in the plain of Sekigahara assured him a supremacy which his family retained for two centuries and a half. Three years after his triumph, Ieyasu received the title of shogun (1603).

Tokugawa Period (1603-1868)

Two years after this Ieyasu transmitted the shogunate to his son, withdrew to Sumpu (Shizuoka), and before his death, witnessed the annihilation at Osaka (1615) of the descendants of Hideyoshi. After a period of great troubles, Ieyasu inaugurated a powerful feudal regime, and gave to Japan a political and social constitution which was upheld almost till 1868. According to this constitution, the emperor was nominally master of all the territory, even the shogun asking investiture of him. But this investiture was a mere fiction. The office of the shogun being hereditary, the titular possessed effective power, and disposed at will of land and even of the posts of the emperor's court. Socially Japan was divided into eight hereditary and closed classes: kuge (court nobles), daimio, hatamoto, samurai, labourers, artisans, merchants, eta (a kind of pariah). Only the first four, the so-called privileged classes, had the right to bear arms. Before dying Ieyasu had assured the power of his family. His immediate successors, Hidetada (1605-22), and Iemitsu (1623-51), continued his work and made still heavier the iron yoke which he had imposed on his country. Hidetada forbade every Japanese under most severe penalties to leave his native land, and it was he who discontinued all intercourse with foreigners, except the Dutch, the Chinese, and the Corean. Iemitsu completely closed the country to foreign commerce, forbade the construction of boats which would allow of long trips (1636), caused to be put to death ambassadors who came to Macao to request liberty of travel (1640), restricted to the Island of Deshima (Nagasaki) the Dutch who were authorized to maintain relations with Japanese, and passed the law which required the daimio to reside part of the time at Yedo, and part on their estates, when they were to leave their wives and children at the capital as hostages. Ietsugu, Tsunayoshi, Ienobu, Ietsugu, Yoshimune, Ieshige, Iehara (1651-1786) merely continued the policies of their predecessors, namely the breaking off of all intercourse with the outside world, ferocious prosecution of Christians, strict watch of the slightest proceedings of the daimio and Samurai, skillful spying of the Court of Kyoto, Draconian laws concerning the press, teaching, Confucianism, etc., such were the principles of the shogun government. Nevertheless under the administration of Ienara (1786-1837) the foreign powers began to endeavour to enter into communication with Japan; but all their advances were repulsed, and the country remained more strictly closed than ever. At the age of forty-five Ieyoshi succeeded his father (1837-1858). Each year foreign vessels appeared in greater number ion sight of Japan, but order was given to fire on those which approached the shore. Ii Noasuke, who was then minister, confided the defense of the country to Tokugawa Nari-aki, Prince of Meto (1852), and the emperor ordered public prayers in the Buddhist and Shintoist temples. Finally on 8 July, 1853, a fleet from the United States cast anchor in the Bay of Uraga. Commodore Perry, who commanded it, delivered to the shogun (14 July) a message from President Fillmore, proposing friendly relations and a treaty of commerce with Japan. He returned 12 February, 1854, and after long conferences the Bakufu (government of the shogun) signed a provision treaty which opened the ports of Shimoda and Hakodate to United States vessels (31 March, 1854). Mr. Townsend Harris, who was sent as minister plenipotentiary arrived at Shimoda in August, 1856, and concluded a definitive treaty (28 July, 1858) with the shogun Iesada (1853-58), who died shortly afterwards. His successor, Iemoshi (1958-66), signed similar treaties with Holland (Donker Curtius, 19 August, 1858), Russia (Poutiatiine, 20 August), England (Lord Elgin, 27 August), and France (Baron Gros, 9 October). These treaties opened to foreign commerce the ports of Hakodate, Yokohama, Nagasaki, Niigata, and Kobe, and the cities of Yedo and Osaka. However, the news that the shogun had concluded these treaties with the Powers caused a profound sensation at the court of Kyoto. Public opinion also showed itself much opposed to the opening up of the country. The prime minister of the shogun, Ii Noasuke Kamon no Kami, was assassinated (21 March, 1860) and plots against the foreigners multiplied. The Bakufu determined to send an embassy to the Powers to beg them to suspend their treaties (2 January, 1862). Meanwhile the emperor had confided the protection of Kyoto to the daimio of Tosa at Satsuma and had forbidden the shogun to come to the capital. The shogun pledged himself to take the field against the foreigners within a month. On a day fixed by the emperor, Mori Motonori, daimio of Chosa, opened fire on an American vessel which passed through the strait of Shimonoseki, and within a few days some French and Dutch ships met with the same treatment. The French squadron, under the command of Admiral Jaurès, bombarded the forts of Shimonoseki (15 July, 1863), and England sent Admiral Kuper to bombard the town of Kagoshima (15 August 1863). The following year (7 September, 1864), the combined fleets of France, England, and Holland took and destroyed all the forts and military magazines of Shimonoseki. The power of the shogun was on the decline. Nagato and Satsuma joined forces against him. In July, 1866, he commenced hostilities, but his forces were defeated. Shortly afterwards he died suddenly at Osaka. His death was followed almost immediately by that of Emperor Komei (13 Feb., 1867). Hitotsubashi succeeded Iemochi, and took the name of Keiki. He was the fifteenth and last Tokugawa shogun. Dismayed by the task which confronted him, Keiki gave in his resignation, 15 October, 1867, and the shogunate was suppressed, 5 January, 1868. The partisans of the shogun revolted and wished to restore his authority, but their troops were constantly defeated by those of the imperial army. After a brilliant defence Enomoto capitulated at Hakodate, 27 July, 1869. This was the end of the civil war. The imperial restoration was an accomplished fact.

Imperial Restoration

On his ascension to the throne, the emperor transferred the seat of his government to Yedo, which received the name Tokio (capital of the East) and became the capital of the empire. The whole government system was completely changed. Even as formerly the Japanese had copied china, so now they set themselves to imitate Europe. Foreign specialists, engineers, soldiers, seamen, professors, priests, business men, bankers, etc. were summoned, and thanks to their co-operation all branches of services received an organization similar to that established among the European nations. The chief events of this period may be summarized as follows: In 1868, abolition of the shogunate and restoration of the imperial authority; 1869, Yedo became the capital of the Empire under the name Tokio; end of the resistance of the partisans of the shogun; 1871, abolition of the fiefs of the daimio and division of Japan into departments; 1872, law establishing conscription; first national exposition at Tokio; 1873, adoption of the Gregorian calendar; abolition of the edicts of persecution against Christianity; creation of primary schools; 1974, insurrection of Saga; Formosa expedition; 1875, Japan cedes to Russia its rights over the Island of Sakhalin (Karafuto) in exchange for the Kurile or Kourile Islands (Chishima); 1876, treaty with Corea; Samurai forbidden to carry two swords; riots of Kumamoto (Higo) and at Hagi (Nagato); 1877, insurrection of Satsuma; Japan's entrance into the Universal Postal Union; 1879, annexation of Riu-kiu Islands; adhesion of Japan to International Telegraphic Union; 1880, creation of provisional assemblies; 1881, promise of a constitution for 1890; organization of political parties; 1883, first tramways; creation of an official journal (Kwampo); 1884, creation of the five titles of nobility. viz., Ko, Ko, Haku, Shi, Dan (duke, marquess, count, viscount, baron); 1885, establishment of the council of ministers (Naikaku); foundation of the navigation company, Yusen Kwaisha; Treaty of Tien-tsin with China; 1888, creation of privy council (sumit-suin); 1889, promulgation of the Constitution; prohibition of dueling; 1890, first session of Parliament; foundation of an academy (Tokio Gakushikwai-in); 1891, plot of Tsuda Sanzo against the Csarevitch Nicholas III; 1894, war with China; 1895, treaty of Shimonoseki, 18 April, ratified at Che-fu, 8 May; intervention of Russia, France, Germany; withdraw from Liao-tung peninsula; China cedes Formosa and the Pescadores, pays an indemnity of 200,000,000 taels, and opens several ports to Japanese commerce; 1896, civil and commercial codes put into operation; 1897, adoption of the gold standard; 1899, treaties concluded with the Powers carried into effect; suppression of the consular jurisdiction; liberty granted for foreigners to traverse and settle in the country, but the right of possessing private estates was denied to them; 1900, promulgation of the law concerning co-operative societies; co-operation of Japan in the suppression of the Boxers; 1902, treaty of alliance with England (12 August); 1904, war with Russia (8 Feb.); 1905, new treaty of alliance with England (12 August); Peace of Portsmouth, trouble in Tokio on this occasion, burning of police stations and of ten Christian churches; by Treaty of Portsmouth, Russia ceded to Japan the southern part of the Sakhalin and the adjacent islands; the lease of Port Arthur, Talien Wan, and the adjacent territory, and the railroad between Chang-chun and Port Arthur, with all its branches. It is recognized at the same time by anticipation the protection of Japan over Corea; treaty with China; 1907, treaty with France (June); deposition of the King of Corea (8 July); Corea placed under the protection of Japan; a president general sent by the Japanese government administers the affairs of the country; agreement with Russia (30 July); trouble with the United States; 1908, United States squadron visits Japan.

LITERATURE AND ARTS

Literature

Archaic Period, previous to A.D. 700

The only work composed during this period is the "Kyujiki" (Annals of Antiquity), which has been lost.

Nara Period (710-784)

The chief works which appeared during this period are: the "Kojiki" (712), record of ancient matters; "Nihonki" (Chronicles of Japan) stories and legends of the early times; "Manyoshu" (collection of a myriad leaves), a collection of ancient poems, composed about 750; it contains more than 4000 pieces, the greater number being tanka (poems of 31 syllables); held in great esteem by connoisseurs, it constitutes at present a valuable source of philological, historical, and archeological information.

Classic Period (Hei-an, 800-1186)

This period is the golden age of Japanese literature. A remarkable fact is that the two greatest works were written by women; they were "Genji monogatari", composed in the tenth century by Murasaki Shikibu, maid of honour at the court, and "Makura No Soshi" (Tales of a Vigil), a classical work in twelve volumes, composed by Sei Shonagon, a lady of the imperial court. After these two works the most celebrated are "Kokinshu" (a collection of ancient and modern poems); "Tosa nikki", an account of a journey; "Taketori monogatari", tales of a bamboo-gatherer; "Ise monogatari", Story of Ise. The period of Hei-an witnessed important progress in the art of writing, the invention of phonetic writing called kana, and the alphabet as it is at present, in forty-eight syllables.

Kamakura Period (1192-1338)

Principal works: "Gempei seisui ki" (history of the grandeur and decline of the Minamoto and the Taira); "Heiki monogatari" (account of the Taira family); "Hogen monogatari" (history relating the war of Hogen), a classic work, and may other less important books. This epoch produced an anthology entitled "Hyakunin isshu" (the hundred-bodied head); this is a collection of a hundred tanka (poems of 31 syllables) by a hundred different men, and was very popular. The time between 1332 and 1603 was singularly barren of literary productions. Three principal works belong to this period: "Jinkoshoto-ki" (history of the true succession of the divine emperors) "Taihei-ki" (tale of peace); "Tsurezure kusa", a collection of sketches and anecdotes, a classic work composed in the fourteenth century, which occupies a very high place in Japanese literature. To this period belong the No, lyrical dramas, and the Kyogen, comedies. In ancient times the only public representations were the sacred dances called the kagura, at the gate of the temples, in honour of the gods. To these in the fourteenth century was added a spoken dialogue which was the origin of the No. The Kyogen was a sort of comic piece performed between the No.

Yedo or Tokugawa Period

This period embraces a greater number of subjects than the others. One of the earliest works of the time is the "Taiko-ki" (History of Taiko Hideyoshi), 1625. The study of Chinese books was then given the place of honour. The chief promoter of this movement was Fujiwara Seikwa, who founded a school of Confucianism, and left a number of disciples, the most famous of whom is Hayashi Razan, also called Doshun (1583-1657). Arai Hakuseki (1656-1725) is also numbered among the most learned in Chinese (Kangakusha). Then came Ibara Seikwaku, founder of a school of popular literature; Chikamatsu Monzaemeon, Japan's most famous dramatic writer, who composed ninety-seven joruri (dramas); Basho (1644-94); and Keuchu (1640-1701); Kado Azumamaro (1669-1736) opened at Kyoto a school in which he combatted the Chinese ideas then in favour; the most distinguished of his disciples was Mabuchi, who left numerous works which are now indispensable to those who study the ancient Japanese language; Motoori Norinaga (1730-1801), the greatest of the Wagakusha (scholars of Japanese literature) and one of the most remarkable men Japan has produced; he published fifty-five works in more than 180 volumes; Hirata Atsutane, one of the most learned writers of Japan (1776-1843). Kyokutei, Bakin, Tanehiko, Jippensha, Ikku, and Tmenaga Shusui are renowned as romance writers. Rai Sanyo (1780-1832) is distinguished as a historian, his two chief works being the "Nihongwai-shi" and the "Nihon seiki" which are of great value for the study of Japanese history. Another important work of the Yedo period is the "Dainihonshi", a great history in 243 volumes, written by a commission of scholars.

Restoration Period (1868-1909)

During this period a veritable passion for European learning took possession of the nation. Many young men went to Europe and America to study. Soon a group of writers gave translations and original works in response to a general demand for ideas concerning European learning, customs, law, and institutions. The most distinguished of these authors was Fukuzawa Yukichi, founder of the School of Keio-gijiku. The most noteworthy works are: "Kaikoku shimatsu" (1888) by Shimada Saburo, a collection of documents treating of the opening of the country; "Shorai no Nihon" (Japan of the Future) by Tokutomi Ichiro; commentary on the constitution by the Marquis Ito; the "Kyoikkugaku" (The Science of Education), by Nose Ei. The best known novelists are: Tsubuchi Yuzo, Sudo Nansui, Osaka Tokutaro, and, the most celebrated of all, Koda Nariyuki. Among poetic works is the "Shintaishiho", or reform of Japanese versification, in imitation of European poetry, published by Toyama Masakatsu, in collaboration with Yatabe Ryokichi and Inoue Tetsujiro.

Painting

Among the arts painting has always held the first place in Japan. In the beginning, when relations with Corea and China were not yet established, the fine arts were wholly in a state of infancy. During the reign of Kimmei Tenno (A.D. 540) the Chinese arts were introduced. Painting and sculpture entered Japan with Buddhism and Confucianism, and the cultivation of the fine arts began. The oldest extant picture was made during the reign of the Empress Suiko (593-628) and is preserved in the temple of Horyuji, near Nara. Several pictures of the Nara period (710-784) are in the temples of Yakushiji and at Nara. The most celebrated painters of the Hei-an period (800-1186) are: Kudara no Kwanari (853) of Corean descent; the bonze Kukai of Kobo daishi a religious painter; Kose Kanoaka (885-897), founder of the most ancient Japanese school. Koseryu (Kose genre), also called the primitive or Buddhist school; Fujiwara Motomitsu (1097) founder of the Yamatoru School (Japanese genre); Toba Sojo (1053-1114), a bonze, author of the humorous genre which is called after him Toba-e.

During the Kamakura Period (1192-1338), in the thirteenth century, appeared a celebrated painter, a descendant of the powerful family of Fujiwara, Fujiwara Tsunetaka, who founded the Tosa School, derived from the Japanese Yamatoryu School, of which it became the principal branch. This school avoided Chinese influence, and applied itself to representing the scenes of the legends and history of Japan. In the beginning of the fifteenth century (Ashakaga Period, 1332-1603) Josetsu founded a school of painting according to the Chinese principles. Among his pupils were Sesshu, Shubun, and Kano Masanobu. Sesshu (1420-1503) is regarded as one of the greatest painters of the Chinese school. Kano Masanobu (1453-1490) gave his name to the school of Kanoryu, which proceeded from the Chinese school of Josetsu, and is subdivided into several branches. Kano Masanobu is the most famous representative of this school. At the end of the fifteenth century all Japanese painting belonged more or less to these two artistic sources, Tosa and Kano. The Tosu school represents Japanese art almost without foreign admixture; that of Kano belongs to Chinese influence.

Yedo Period (1603-1868)

Ogata Korin (1661-1716) created a manner a painting which was, so to speak, intermediary between the two schools of Kano and Tosa, uniting the decorative principles of both. The school which he founded is called by his name, Korin-ha. It was the first to employ gold and silver powder in painting. Sakai Hoitsu is the best known representative of the Korin School. Maruyama Okyo, founder of the school of this name, rejected the hitherto received principles and undertook a reform based on the observation of nature. With him idealism tended to disappear, and realism began. His principal disciples were Sosen, Rasetsu, Genki and Sojun. About the middle of the seventeenth century, Iwasa Matabei inaugurated a new style of painting. He aimed above all at reproducing the scenes of ordinary life. It is called the popular and realistic school (Ukiyo-e). The most celebrated painter of this school was Hokusai (1760-1849), who marks the end of the evolution of Japanese independence of every school, system, and convention. Except for Kikuchi Yosai (1788-1878), who completes the list of great stylists, everything centres around Hokusai, everything is inspired by his manner and his genius. At his death an irreparable decadence began. Japan imitated, it no longer created. To-day it is in a period of transition in art as in all other things. The classic school is disappearing by degrees, and popular art is without character or brilliancy. The struggle continues between Japanese and European art. In the interest of the arts and with a view to promoting them there are three societies and five special reviews.

Ceramics

Japanese pottery dates from the remotest antiquity, but the progress of ceramics compared with the other arts was very slow. The primitive pottery of Japan had for many centuries an embryonic and barbaric character. In the thirteen century, Karo Shirozaemon, known by the name of Toshiro, introduced the processes used in China, and introduced the first Seto workshops. The productions of Seto dominated the industry until the seventeenth century. Then appeared Ninsei, an artist of genius who was the real creator of national ceramics, and who even to-day is regarded as the greatest ceramist Japan ever produced. Through him the Chinese, Corean, and Japanese elements were blended, and from their mixture emerged a national art. In recent years the making of porcelain has undergone considerable development owing to the demand from abroad. The chief species of porcelain are: Seto (Owari), 4300 workmen, annual output 1,300,000 yen; Mino, 3800 workmen, annual output 1,000,000 yen; Arita (Saga), workmen 2000; Kutani (Kaga), 1200 workmen, output 220,000 yen; Kyomizu (Kyoto) one of the most important manufactories of Japan; Tokonami (Owari), output 320,000 yen; Tobi (Iyo), output 150,000 yen; Fujina or Izumo, output 120,000 yen; Hasami (Nagasaki), output 100,000 yen; Satsuma, output 40,000 yen, much esteemed by foreigners.

The history of the arts of Japan would fill a large volume. Sculpture, engraving, carving, bronze, lacquer-work, enamels, metal-work, alloy, are the principle branches in which the Japanese have excelled and produced truly remarkable work.

FINANCES

From the earliest times large storehouses (okura) were built to receive the objects sent as presents or taxes to the court. At the reform of Taikwa (645) a ministry was constituted having at its head an Okura-kyo (minister of finance). He was charged with the collection of duties, the distribution of pensions, the verification of measurements, etc. In 1885 the name Okura-sho was given to the ministry of finance. The minister of finance is charged with the resources of the State. He has under his jurisdiction three bureaus, that of accounts (Shukeikyoku), that of taxes (Shuzeikyoku), and that of administration of finances (Rizaiktoku). The budget of receipts and expenses is drawn up yearly. Each minister prepares his own according to the needs of his department. These private budgets are arranged by the minister of finance, while at the same time means are devised to meet the expenses. This project is discussed at a council of the ministers, afterwards submitted to the Chamber of Deputies, who discuss it and give a decision, then to the Chamber of Peers who reject or approve it. If the new budget is rejected, that of the previous year is adhered to. Lastly, the budget must always be submitted to the sanction of the emperor.

The annual average of the ordinary and extraordinary expenses of the Japanese army and navy in 1894-95, and during the years which followed the Treaty of Shomonoseki, was 104,524,000 yen; in 1908-09 they rose to 188,537,365 yen.

Public Debt

The amount of the public debt on 31 December, 1907, was 2,276,346,452 yen; interior debt, 1,110,645,228 yen; foreign debt 1,165,701,224 yen. The annual interest of the interior debt is 5%, that of the foreign debt 4%, 4 1/2%, and 5%.

Money and Bank Bills

The ingots of gold, silver, and brass received at the treasury since the foundation in 1870 equal the sum of 1,058,550,262 yen. Money put in circulation since that time, 707,810,261 yen. Amount of money in country, 31 December, 1907, 167,551,001 yen; amount of paper money, 369,984,111 yen.

Banks

Before the Restoration in 1868 there did not exist a single Japanese bank properly so called. The new Government soon grasped the importance of this institution for the development of commerce and industry. Commissions were sent sent abroad to study the various banking systems in use and to adopt that best suited to the country. Consequently a law of November,1872, inaugurated in Japan the system of the plurality of banks of issue. But the results obtained having been purely negative, the system was modified in a more liberal sense (August,1897 [sic; 1879?]). A large number of new banks were then founded, but this time there resulted such a fever of speculation, such a decline in paper money and government revenues, that the banks of issue had to be radically changed. In 1882 it was decided that in the future there should be no more banks of issue and that a central bank, the Bank of Japan, should alone have the privilege. The Bank of Japan was then charged with withdrawing from circulation by degrees the notes issue by the State and the 143 national banks in existence in 1882. The latter were transformed by degrees into ordinary banks, and in 1889 only one national bank remained, that of Japan, which to-day centralizes all Japanese fiduciary circulation. Founded in 1882 with a capital of 10,000,000 yen, it has increased this to 30,000,000 and has a reserve fund of 21,500,000 yen. It is authorized to issue notes whose value it holds in reserve in gold and silver money and in ingots; moreover, it has the privilege of putting into circulation as much as 120,000,000 yen.

Japanese fiduciary circulation by decennial periods: 1879, 55,500,000; 1880, 159,366,000; 1890, 162,015,000; 1900, 228,570,000; 1907, 369,884,000 yen. The number of special banks, ordinary banks, and savings banks at present equals 2194, with 2367 branches. Together they have paid-up capital of 444,204,000 yen; reserve funds, 139,630,000 yen; net benefits, 86,712,000; dividends, 34,893 yen. The most important ordinary banks are Mitsui, Mitsubishi, the Third, the Fifteenth, and the One Hundredth bank. In 1893 there were in Japan only 732 establishments of credit, possessing a paid-up capital of 84,512,848 yen. In the space of fourteen years the number of these establishments has increased by 1432, and their paid-up capital equals 2,601,392,000 yen. In 1907 deposits alone reached 80,484,648,000 yen, and sums withdrawn, 80,555,844,000 yen. In fourteen years business has increased 39 times. Finally, in the course of 1907, the amount of sums deposited in banks, by the State and private individuals, equalled 27,237,717,000 yen.

Bank Interest

In 1900 the interest on fixed deposits varied from 5% to 6%. For ten years it has oscillated between 5% and 7%. Banks lend only at 12%. The discount is 3%.

BUSINESS CORPORATIONS

Until 1892 there was no law regulating the establishment and workings of companies collective in action and name. In 1893 the chapter of the new business code concerning companies was rendered obligatory. In consequence every business association had to secure from the Government the necessary authorization to form and commence operations. The code having been modified in 1899, necessary authorization was suppressed and companies might be freely formed under condition of conformity with the revised code. At the end of 1894 the nominal capital of all the companies formed since 1875 did not exceed 245,251,624 yen. Immediately after the war with China, and in the single year of 1896, 1178 new companies were formed representing a capital of 334,421,463 yen.

On 31 Dec., 1907, the reserve funds of all these companies equalled 254,992,738 yen. In fourteen years the number of companies has doubled, and their capital has been trebled.

Insurance Companies

In 1881 there was not a single insurance company in Japan constituted after the European model. An attempt at maritime insurance in 1881 was without success, as there was no law regulating this sort of enterprise. But the publication of a new code definitively fixed the legislation in this respect. Since that time (1893) the insurance companies have greatly developed.

Electric Light Companies (31 Dec., 1907)

Number of Companies, 84; stockholders, 14,105; length of lines, 1016 ri (2468 miles); length of wires, 3750 ri; private houses lighted with electricity, 207,587; electric lamps, 836,640; public lamps in cities, 18,650; receipts, 8,308,061 yen; expenses, 4,928,383 yen; net profit, 3,894,200 yen. In 1897 there were 41 companies; 29,701 private houses lighted; public lamps, 2335; net profit, 614,999 yen.

Clearing-houses

In 1896 there were two clearing-houses organized according to the principles operating in the United States, one at Tokio, the other at Osaka. During that year (1896) the two establishments liquidated 647,239 notes, representing a value of 538,834,000 yen. In 1907, four new clearing-houses were in operation at Kyoto, Yokohama, Kobe, and Nagasaki. The liquidation operations dealt with 6,948,485 notes, representing a value of 7,124,059,761 yen. On 31 March, 1908, the number of exchanges, 50; stockholders, 8448; brokers, 971; authorized capital, 12,851,456 yen; paid-up capital, 10,291,000 yen. Receipts 7,015,388 yen; expenses, 4,448,531 yen. Net profit, 2,566,857 yen.

COMMERCE

Foreign

In 1907 the foreign commerce of Japan was twenty times greater than in 1875, and since the Russo-Japanese war, three years ago, it has increased one-third. Average per person: 1875, 1.43 yen; in 1907, 18 yen.

Japan also maintains commercial relations with the following countries: the French colonies of India, the Russian colonies of Asia, Siam, Switzerland, Russia, Austria-Hungary, Dutch Indies, Sweden, Norway, Spain, Turkey, Denmark, Portugal, Mexico, Peru, Egypt, the Philippines, Hawaii, etc.

The greatest amount of Japanese merchandise has been exported to China and the United States, while British India, England, and Germany have profited most by the new order of things in Japan. Within thirty-four years, that is since 1873, Japan's export trade has increased 23 times.

Chief Exports and Imports with Their Value in Yen

Exports: raw silk, silk waste, handkerchiefs, pongees, 158,876,000 yen; cottons, cloths, napkins, 48,986,000 yen; chemical matches, 9,446,000 yen; fancy floor mattings, 5,743,000 yen; porcelains and crockery, 7,216,000 yen; lacquered articles, 1,643,000 yen; plaited work, 5,001,000 yen; umbrellas (European shape), 1,613,000 yen; cigarettes, 2,055,000 yen; tea, 12,618,000 yen; rice, 3,664,000 yen; dried cuttle fish, 2,401,000 yen; sea-weed, 709,000 yen; fish oil, 2,975,000 yen; camphor, 5,026,000 yen; crude and refined copper, 29,262,000 yen; oil, 19,052,000 yen; vegetable wax, 1,070,000 yen. Imports: raw and spun cotton, prints, velvets, 131,718,000 yen; woolens, muslin, cloth, 24,878,000 yen; hemp, 3,569,000 yen; machines, 27,699,000 yen; locomotives and wagons, 29,933,000 yen; iron bars, 26,445,000 yen; rails, 3,828,000 yen; iron nails, iron, and steel, 11,172,000 yen; dry indigo, 5.876,000 yen; paper, 7,436,000 yen; sole leather, 3,933,000 yen; brown and white sugar, 19,864,000 yen; rice, 30,931,000 yen; beans, lentils, 10,405,000 yen; meal, 6,212,000 yen; petroleum, 14,324,000 yen; tortoise shell, 21,042,000 yen.

The chief markets for silk are the United States, France, and Italy; for cotton and copper, China. In 1907 there entered the Japanese ports 10,932 steam ships, tonnage, 19,801,425 tons; Japanese steamships, 6734 (8,770,491 tons); Chinese steamers, 52 (57,659 tins); English steamers, 2269 (6,267,638 tons); German steamers, 673 (1,840,000 tons); United States steamers, 377 (1,618,462 tons); Norwegian steamers, 348 (386,311 tons); Russian steamers, 172 (324,050 tons); Austrian steamers, 140 (154,425 tons); Danish steamers, 24 (64,753 tons); other nationalities, 143 (317,636 tons).

Domestic Commerce

Museums. Japan possesses eleven commercial museums, two of which (those of the Government and the industrial association) are at Tokio; the others are at Sapporo, Osaka, Kobe, Nagasaki, Miye, Nagoya, Gifu, Kanazawa, and Toyama. At the end of March, 1906, the Government Museum at Tokio contained 61,670 specimens, 31,674 of which were of foreign origin.Visitors in 1907, 57,111, of whom 1625 were foreigners.

Chambers of Commerce

On 31 March, 1908, there were 386 chambers of commerce. Ordinary councillors, 1589; special councillors, 250; number of matters regulated during the year, 11,651; expenses 231,200 yen. Two commercial agencies have been founded, one at Tokio in 1896, the other at Osaka in 1901. The number of adherents (banks, firms, etc.) is 1395 for the first; 1308 for the second. There are also four large merchandise warehouses, two at Tokio, one at Osaka, and one at Yokohama. Number of invention patents issued in 1907, 3155; number of designs patented, 614; competitions, 262; objects exhibited, 310,362; contestants, 261,396; awards 55,741; expenses 149,924 yen.

COMMUNICATIONS

Roads

Under the Tokugawa there were four chief roads (go-kaido); they went from Nihon-bashi (Bridge of Japan) to Yedo, and linked all the provonces with the capital of the shogun. These ancient roads are still in existence, but since the Restoration, the roads have been divided into national, departmental, and parochial. The State defrays the expense of the construction and maintenance of a national road, the departments that of the departmental roads, and the departments and towns that of the parochial roads. All the chief towns of the prefectures, the cities, and the villages are connected by roads, generally in good condition, and suitable for carriages.

Rivers, Canals

The rivers are numerous, but for the most part are only torrents, little suited for navigation; they are used chiefly for rafting. Numerous irrigation canals have been dug, some of which are reserved for the transportation of merchandise. The amount of the expenses for means of communication, roads, rivers, canals, highways of all kinds, construction or repair of bridges, harbours, bays, piers, damns, ponds, viaducts, in 1907 was 28,872,333 yen; 3,231,791 yen being borne by the state, the rest, 25,640,542 yen, by the local bodies. Damage caused by floods, 21,473,359; by typhoons, 303,622; by tidal waves, 80,867 yen.

Railroads

In 1872, the first railroad line was begun by the government, between Tokio and Yokohama, a distance of eighteen miles; in 1882, the length of the lines established was 114 miles. As early as 1883, companies were founded to exploit this industry; in 1906 the government lines had been extended by 1531 miles, those of the companies, 3253 miles. In the same year (1906) the Government decreed national ownership of the railways, since which time the lines of eighteen large private companies have been purchased, while twenty smaller companies have gone out of existence. On 31 March, 1909, the total length of the Government lines was 4712 miles; that of independent companies, 446 miles. Lines at present in course of construction, 1037 miles. The railways have cost the State: old lines, 168,250,000 yen; purchased lines, 476,318,800 yen; lines building, 18,500,000 yen; in all, 663,068,800 yen. Receipts, 81,995,171 yen; expenses 45,262,927 yen; net profit, 36,732,244 yen. Locomotives, 2074; passenger carriages, 5780; number of travellers, 143,260,792; tons of merchandise, 24,092,066. railways accidents, dead, 1664; injured 2321. In 1883 the net railway profit equalled 943,846; in 1893, 5,073,929 yen.

Electric Car Companies

Electric tramways appeared in Japan in 1895. On 31 March, 1908, there were eighteen companies. Two of these have not made public their accounts. The statements of the sixteen others are as follows: authorized capital, 77,824,673; net profit, 4,130,593 yen. Vehicles drawn by men, for passengers (jinricksha), 161,858; for merchandise, 1,488,494. Total of all vehicles in the country, 1,951,892. The chief transportation company (Naikaku Tsuun Kwaisha) in the interior of the country has transported 208,447,901 kwan; receipts, 6,181,277 yen.

Postal Service, Telegraph, and Telephone

Postal Service

There was a postal service under the shogun, but it was defective, costly, and slow. In 1872 the government adopted the system in use in the United States. At first established between Tokio, Osaka, Kyoto, and Yokohama, the next year it was extended throughout the country. The tax varied according to the distance, but later it was made uniform. However, England maintained its three stations at Yokohama, Nagasaki, and Kobe until 1879. Since then both foreign and domestic postal service is carried on by Japanese. In 1908 there were 670 post-office stations; 55,197 post-boxes; postal employés, 35,409; postal articles received and distributed within the country, 1,377,635,468; sent abroad, 25,792,382; received from a broad, 24,552,407. International money orders sent, 15,517; value, 563,215 yen. International money orders received, 148,742; value, 11,615,851 yen.

Telegraph

As early as 1869 the government planned to adopt the telegraph. In did so in 1872. In 1879 Japan joined the International Telegraphic Union. At present a telegraphic network extends throughout the country and submarine cables connect Japan with all the great centres of the world. As early as 1900 experiments were made with a view to installing wireless telegraphy on all warships, and at present all the ships are so provided. Communications have been established between Nagasaki and Kelun (Formosa). On 31 March, 1908 the length of telegraph lines was 8692 ri; length of wires, 38,249 ri; public stations, 2815; telegraphs sent with the country, 26,113,174; abroad, 707,598; received from abroad, 873,639.

Telephone

The telephone was brought to Japan in 1887, and in the same year all the government offices were thus connected. The telephone went into general use in 1896. At present 66 towns are provided with telephone connexions; 26 have an interurban connection. Public stations, 421; length of telephone lines, 2100 ri; length of wires, 27,270 ri; subscribers, 75,229. The Government has the monopoly of telephones, and bears the expense of constructing and extending all the lines.

Merchant Marine and Navigation

While the country was closed to foreigners, no Japanese could build or own a vessel capable of sailing the high seas. There was then no navigation except along the coast, and on the waters in the interior of the country. In 1868 liberty was granted to the Japanese to have vessels and navigate as they pleased. The formation of the three companies: the Mitsubishi Kison Kwaisha (steam navigation) in 1877; the Kyodo Unyu Kwaisha (united transports) and the Osaka Shosen Kwaisha (commercial navigation) in 1882, marks the beginning of the Japanese merchant service of Japan. In 1885, after a distressing occurrence, the Mitsubishi and the Kyodo Kaisha united to form one company, Nipon Yusen Kwaisha (Japanese Mail Packet Company), and started a new era in the merchant service. In the beginning of 1896 the Government decided to grant privileges for the construction and navigation of vessels. Twenty yen per ton capacity and five yen per horsepower unit are allowed to each ship of 700 tons and upward, built in Japanese yards and constructed of native materials. The navigation premiums vary according to the life and capacity of the vessels. The total value of grants and subsidies paid annually by the treasury to the companies and native ship owners is not less than 12,000,000 yen. At the end of 1903 there were 205 ship-yards and 32 docks. On 31 March, 1908, there were 216 ship-yards docks, building small war vessels and large merchant ships. During the war with Russia the com[anies furnished the Government 71 ships weighing 250,000 tons. Japan being a maritime country, it is natural that its merchant service and international trade should develop simultaneously and in proportion; nevertheless, the rapidity and importance of the progress made in the last fifteen years are truly extraordinary.

Japan has a great many important navigation companies. The Nippon Yushen Kwaisha has had regular service since 1896 for Europe, America, Australia, and the chief ports on the Sea of Japan. The Osaka Shosen serves the ports of China and Corea. The Toyo Kisen has a rapid service between Japan and San Francisco, the Oya Shosen between Tsuruga and Vladivostok. The chief docks and coaling stations are those of Hakodate, Uraga, Yokohama, Osaka, Kobe, and Nagasaki. Not including Formosa, there are twenty-eight ports of commerce, of which the most important are Yokohama, Osaka, Kobe, Moji, Nagasaki, Yokkaichi, Shimonoseki, Otura, Kuchinotsu, Wakamatsu, and Hakodate. For Yokohama and Kobe, the two chief ports of Japan, the maritime trade for 1895 equalled 242,293,844 yen; in 1907, 652,713,183 yen. Lighthouses, 140; signal lights, 19; buoys, 406; post indicators, 77; bell buoys, 4; boats, 624,728. Lawsuits, 433; ships lost, 196; salvages, 728; persons shipwrecked, 461; died at sea, 277; disappeared, 154.

ECONOMICS

Agriculture

The total area of Japan (not including Formosa and Sakhalin) is 38,555,229 cho, divided as follows: (1) land belonging to the Crown, the State, the commons, etc., 21,394,805 cho; (2) to private owners, 14,272,339 cho; (3) main roads, parks, swamps, etc, 2,888,085 cho. The total area of arable land is only 6,120,519 cho, classified as follows: rice fields, 2,748,575; drained lands, 2,296,698 cho; various crops, 1,075,246 cho; in all 15.7% of the total area of the country. The area of taxed land is 13,981,687 cho, estimated on survey as worth 1,406,267,827 yen. But at present their real value is far in excess of this estimate. According to the most recent census the total number of families is 8,725,544. Of these 3,776,416 are occupied solely with agriculture; 1,638,216 families join agriculture with other work. The nature of the soil is unfavourable for tillage, but the Japanese have improved it by careful cultivation. In the valleys there is not a grain of earth which has not been made use of, and even the mountain sides have, by the exercise of patience, been cleared, often to a great height.

Rice, which is the basis of Japanese diet, naturally holds the first place, but that produced by the country does not supply the demand, and even when the crop has been good it is necessary to import it. The wheat crop is also far from being sufficient. Tea is an important article of commerce; however, from 1897 to 1907 the area devoted to its cultivation decreased from 58,892 cho to 50,548, and the yield from 8,471,956 kwan to 7,047,193. Sugar cane has not found favourable soil in Japan, and each year this commodity has also to be purchased abroad for large sums. By a law of March, 1904, the Government reserves to itself the monopoly of tobacco. According to this law the peasant continues to cultivate the plant as formerly. The Government buys the leaves from the cultivator, and distributes them for preparation among the state manufacturers. The products of the soil are numerous and varied; nonetheless the processes of cultivation are still primitive. That is why the Government endeavours to popularize throughout the country the scientific principles in force in the agricultural countries in Europe and America, and with this object also it has founded a school of agriculture and institutions which award premiums for success in agriculture.

Live Stock

While labouring for the development of agriculture, the Government also encourages cattle breeding. With a view to improving the breeds of cows and horses it has established state pastures in which cows and bulls are raised and placed at the disposal of breeders. Number of bullocks and cows (31 March, 1908) 1,190,373; horses and mares, 1,465,466; goats, 78,251; swine, 284,708; sheep, 2769. Number of slaughter-houses, 1111; animals slaughtered: cows, 167,458; horses, 69,268; pigs, 138,858. Number of veterinary surgeons, 4500. Value of slaughtered animals: cows, 9,901,613 yen; horses, 1,531,000 yen; pigs, 1,875,000 yen. Quantity of milk, 173,540 koku; value, 5,080,471 yen.

Forests

Japan is rich in forests. They cover an area of 22,000,000 cho, that is six-tenths of the territory of the empire. Hitherto cultivation of the forests did not make great progress, ideas on this subject being very backward, but the Government carefully elaborated a plan of reform in the forest administration. According to a law passed in 1907 the Government may use its authority to prevent the destruction and to secure the re-wooding of forests belonging to the State, to private individuals, to the Shintoist and Buddhist temples. The law also supervises and regulates the periodic felling of trees. Forests are divided into four classes: forests belonging to the State, 7,222,518 cho; to the Crown, 2,109,098. cho; to the temples, 7,991,796 cho; to private owners 4,676,688 cho. Forest products in 1907: building wood 32,236,114 yen; firewood, 24,392,836 yen. The average annual of forest products varied for the past ten years between 50,000,000 and 60,000,000 yen.

INDUSTRIES

Fishing

From the earliest times the fishing industry has been in a flourishing condition in Japan. Formerly fish was the sole gift made. Together with rice it forms the basis of Japanese diet, for which reason the Japanese Government has not ceased to encourage the industry of deep-sea fishing. Fishery schools have been founded, and prizes granted for fishing on the high seas; laws for the protection of fish have been for some time in force.

In 1907, 3,200,000 persons (15% of the population) were engaged in fishing or some trade connected therewith. Number of fishing boats 420,000, of which a number did not exceed 30 feet in length. It is only recently that Japan had sought a market for its fish, salt, smoked, or preserved in oil. The Japanese prepare, chiefly from herrings and sardines, a fish oil, from which the exportation in 1907 had reached a figure of 2,975,235 yen. 20,727 fish ponds in which fish are fed produced the sum of 2,805,590 yen.

Salt Pits

The area occupied by salt-works equals 8,295 cho; 16,184 boilers are used in the manufacture of salt. Product in 1907, 5,578,142 koku, valued at about 10,000,000 yen for the jobbers. A law reserves to the Government the monopoly of the sale of salt. Salt is manufactured by private citizens, the Government purchases it, and sells it again to the merchants, all at a fixed rate. 122,132 persons labour at the manufacture of salt.

Mines

Before 1868 the working of the mines was in a most rudimentary condition and their output was very mediocre. In order to improve and develop this branch of industry the Government sent for foreign engineers and utilized the mineral resources. Later on most of these miners were sold to private owners. In 1890 a law was published regarding the regimen of mines, which was replaced by another law in July, 1905. According to this new legislation those who desire to work mines are obliged to have a permit either of investigation or of exploitation to be issued by the minister of agriculture and commerce. For the administration of mines the country is divided into five large districts, each having a bureau for the inspection of mines. Japanese subjects and every civilian may acquire mining privileges. Foreigners may be admitted as members or stockholders in mining companies.

From this it will be seen that within eleven years the extent of mines with a view to exploitation has more than trebled.

The total product of the mines has more than trebled within eleven years. From 1805 to 1907 the copper output increased from 5,000,000 to 29,000,000 yen, and that of oil from 5,000,000 to 19,000,000 yen. Number of mine workers, 1898, was 132,731; in 1906, 187,922; accidents (1907): fatal, 765; serious, 426; slight, 6092.

Manufactures

Very early Japan had its industries and the traditions on this point have not been lost. Artistic bronzes, lacquers, porcelains, and paper are still among the riches and glories of this country. Nevertheless, subsequent to 1868 a transformation took place, and a new era began for Japanese industry. Formerly the work had been done by hand in the family, but now began the reign of the factory and the machine. In order to encourage private workers to use machinery, the Government itself built model workshop and manufactories. Besides, to hasten the development of the industry, the Government has often organized national expositions in the important cities of the empire, it has always taken part in foreign expositions, has instituted a bureau of industrial experiments, founded technical schools, encouraged the formation of industrial associations and sent students abroad to learn the operation of factories. It has also made special laws for the efficacious protection of industrial property.

Workshops, Factories, and Arsenals Founded by the State

Royal printing establishments, with typographical workshops and paper-mill; a mint with a branch; 5 tobacco factories; military arsenals at Tokio and Osaka; naval arsenals at Yokosuka, Kure, Sasebo, and Maizuru; marine arsenal at Tokio; powder factory at Shimose; marine preparatory schools at Takshiki, Ominato, and Mako; 1 steel foundry; two factories for the manufacture of material for telegraphs and lighthouses; 13 railroad workshops, etc. Number of machines for all Government manufactories, 1075; horse and steam power, 118,353; workers, men and women, 130,545 (men, 107,776; women, 22,769). Besides these, 62,324 day labourers are also employed; average daily wages: men, 55 sen. Japanese industry began to soar at the time of the war with China. The Japanese decided to add to their characteristic of being a warlike people that of being an industrial people.

The most properous inductries are those of silk and cotton. In 1907 the number of silk mills was 4758; besides, 392,581 families occupied with this industry. Thr quanmtity of silk thus obtained (insluding waste) equals 2,299,688 kwan. In1895 it amounted to 2,299,688 kwan. Silk is the chief article of export from Japan. The following is the progress within five years. In 1901, silk tissues smanufactuired in japan reprtesented a value of 68,988,381 yen; in 1906 they rose to 88,994,617. And within eleven years the export figures have risen from 48,000,000 to 158,000,000 yen.

Cotton Industry

This also has made notable progress. From 1894 to 1906, thenumber of spinning mills rose from 45 to 83, with an increase of capital of 27,304,500 yen (the capital rose from 13,001,000 yen to 40,000,000 yen). The average number of spindles rose from 476,123 to 1,441,934 yen. At the samew time the output of spun cotton rose from 14,000,000 yen to 53,000,000 yen; and that of woven cotton from 49,000,000 yen to 84,000,000 yen. In 1907 all the materials manufactured in Japan. silk cotton, hemp, and woollens represented a value of 222,549,995 yen.

The manufacture of sake (rice wine) equalled 4,405,860 koku; beer, 201,144 koku; shoyu (fish sauce), 2,074,008 koku.

Metallurgy

In this branch, despite all the efforts of the Government, the results have not fulfilled expectations. However the increase in iron and steel imports which have risen from 7,695,000 yen (1895) to 32,269,000 yen (1906) is a proof of development.

Handiwork

In 1906 the daily salary of handworkers was, for men, maximum, 96 sen; minimum sen; average 68 sen; for women, the average is 25 sen.

On the history of Japan and the situation of the country:--GRIFFIS, The Mikado's Empire (New Tork, 1890); IMPERIAL JAPANESE COMMISSION, History of the Empire of Japan (Chicago, 1893); Japan Year Book (Tokio, 1907); BOSQUET, Le Japon de nos jours (Paris, 1877); DE LA MAZELIâRE, Essai sur l'histoire du Japon; PAPINOT, Dict. d'Histoire et de Géographie du Japon (Yokohama, 1906); ASTON, Littérature Japonaise (Paris, 1902); GONSE, L'Art Japonaise (Paris, 1885); TEISAN, Notes sur L'Art Japopnaise (Paris, 1906); Japanese Code (Tokio, 1908); THâRY, La situation économique et financière du Japon (Paris, 1907); SHIMODA, Nihon Katei hyakkwa (Japanese Enclyclopedia) (Tokio, 1906); HANABUSA, Nihon Teikoku nenkan (General Statistics of the Empire of Japan) (Tokio, 31 Dec., 1908); MINISTRY OF FINANCES. Financial and economic yearbook of Japan (Tokio, 1908).

On Catholicism, Protestantism, and the Russian Schism:-- The Christian Movement in Japan (Tokio, 1908); DELPLACE, Le Catholicisme au Japon 1540-93 (Mechlin, 1908); CHARLEVOIX, Histoire du Japon (Paris, 1704); PAGâS, Histoire de la Religion chrétienne au Japon 1598-1651 (Paris, 1869); MARNAS, Le religion de Jésus ressuscitée au Japon (Lyons, 1896); Report of the Society of Foreign Missions (Paris, 1909); TAKAMATRU, Shukyo Horei (Ordinances concerning religion) (Tokio, 1895).

JUSTIN BALETTE/FRANÇOIS LIGNEUL

Karl Ernst Jarcke

Born 10 November, 1801, at Danzig, Prussia; died 27 December, 1852, at Vienna. He belonged to a Protestant merchant family. He took up the study of jurisprudence, and became at an early age professor of criminal law at Bonn and later in Berlin. His scholarly attachments were especially revealed in his "Handbuch des gemeinen deutschen Strafrechts" (3 vols., 1827-30). Longing for faith and overcome by the conclusively and immensity of Catholic dogma, as he found it disclosed in the decrees of the Council of Trent, he embraced the Catholic Faith at Cologne in 1824. After the outbreak of the Revolution of July in Paris, he wrote an anonymous political brochure, "Die franzosische Revolution von 1830". It met the emphatic approval of the circle of friends of the then Crown Prince (later King Frederick William IV), which was composed of men of anti-revolutionary views, influenced by Romanticism and by Haller. Jarcke assumed the editorship of the periodical "Politische Wochenblatt", founded by these men in 1831 to promote their ideas. In 1832 Metternich called him to the State Chancery in Vienna to succeed the late Friedrich Gentz. He accepted the call, but continued an active collaborator of the weekly journal. The residence in Vienna did not satisfy him. In 1837 he broke with his Berlin friends on the subject of the "Cologne Occurrence" -- the imprisonment of the Archbishop of Cologne -- of which they approved but which he condemned. In 1838 he founded with Phillips the "Historisch-politische Blatter" to support Catholic interests in Germany. When Metternich was overthrown in 1848 Jarcke left Vienna, but returned there when order was restored, and died shortly after. His ideal was the "Germanic State" of the Middle Ages; at its head an hereditary monarch, all claims of the princes on their subjects to be regulated by treaties, the state to be occupied only with the defence in war and the administration of justice; in domestic affairs entirely unrestricted opportunities for development within the confederacy. Of "political necessities", "measures for the welfare of the state", and of a "constitution" Jarcke wished to know nothing, except perhaps of a restriction of the royal prerogative by an advisory popular assembly, which however must be representative of the professions and the interests at stake, not merely founded on a general or property qualification franchise. In his articles on the relations between Church and State he combated especially the Protestant and Liberal views. In seeming contradiction to his anti-revolutionary year of 1848, and he took a willing part in the Catholic movement which began at that time.

MARTIN SPAHN

Pauline-Marie Jaricot

Foundress of the Society of the Propagation of the Faith and the Association of the Living Rosary, born at Lyons, 22 July, 1799; died there, 9 January, 1862.

At the age of seventeen she began to lead a life of unusual abnegation and self-sacrifice, and on Christmas Day, 1816, took a vow perpetual virginity. In order to repair the sins of neglect and ingratitude committed against the Sacred Heart of Jesus, she established a union of prayer among pious servant girls, the members of which were known as the " Réparatrices du Sacré-Coeur de Jésus-Christ". During an extended visit to her married sister at Saint-Vallier (Drôme), she succeeded in effecting a complete transformation in the licentious lives of the numerous girls employed by her brother-in-law. It was among them and the "Réparatrices" that she first solicited offerings for the foreign missions. Her systematic organization of such collections dates back to 1819 when she asked each of her intimate friends to act as a promoter by finding ten associates willing to contribute one cent of a week to the propagation of the Faith. One out of every ten promoters gathered the collections of their fellow-promoters; through a logical extention of this system, all the offerings were ultimately remitted to one central treasurer. The Society for the Propagation of Faith at its official foundation (3 May, 1822) adopted this method, and easily triumphed over the opposition which had sought from the very start to thwart the realization of Pauline Jaricot's plans. In 1826 she founded the Association of the Living Rosary. The fifteen decades of the Rosary were divided among fifteen associates, each of whom had to recite daily only one determined decade. A second object of the new foundation was the spread of good books and articles of piety. An undertaking of Pauline's in the interest of social reform, though begun with prudence, involved her in considerable financial difficulties and ended in failure. The cause of her beatification and canonization has been introduced at Rome.

N. A. WEBER

St. Jarlath

Patron of the Archdiocese of Tuam, born in Connaught about 445; died 26 December, (al., 11 Feb.), about 540. Having studied under St. Benen (Benignus), he founded a college at Cloonfush, near Tuam, which soon attracted scholars from all parts of Ireland. The fame of Cloonfush is sufficiently attested by two of its pupils, St. Brendan of Ardfert, and St. Colman of Cloyne. But, great teacher as he was, he went, through humility, to avail himself of the instruction of St. Enda at Arran about 495. He removed to Tuam about the second decade of sixth century. St. Jarlath is included in the second order of Irish saints, and on that account he must have lived to the year 540. The "Felire" of Aengus tells us that he was noted for his fasting, watching, and mortification. Three hundred times by day and three hundred times by night did this saint bend the knee in prayer, and he was also endowed with the gift of prophecy. His feast is kept on 6 June, being the date of the translation of his relics to a church specially built in his honour, adjoining the cathedral of Tuam. His remains were encased in a silver shrine, whence the church--built in the thirteenth century--was called Teampul na scrín, that is the church of the shrine, a perpetual vicarage united to the prebend of Kilmainemore in 1415.

W. H. GRATTAN-FLOOD

Jaro

Diocese in the Philippine Islands, formerly a part of the Diocese of Cebú, was made a separate diocese on 27 May, 1865. It comprises the islands of Panay and Negros; the Romblon, Palawan, and Jolo groups, and in the island of Mindanao the Provinces of Zamboanga, Cottabato, and Davao. The Catholic population is over a million. Here and there throughout the diocese are some Aglipayan schismatics, and in Mindanao and the Jolo group a large number of Mohammedans and some pagans. In 1909 there were forty-five native priests, about forty friars (Augustinians and Recollects), twenty Mill Hill missioners, and about ten Jesuits. In Jaro itself there is a diocesan seminary in charge of the Lazarists. Eighty of its students are preparing for the priesthood and the rest for secular careers. In the city of Iloilo the Augustinians conduct a college for lay students. In the towns of Jaro, Iloilo, Zamboanga, and Dumaguete are academies for young ladies, conducted respectively by Spanish and native Sisters of Charity, native Sisters of the Holy House of Mary, and French Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres. The leper settlement of Culion, under government control, is attended by Jesuit priests and brothers, and by the Sisters of St. Paul of Chartres. The churches and parochial residences are generally large, solidly constructed stone buildings, Spanish in architecture. Many of them are very beautiful. Owing to the withdrawal of the Spanish friars at the outbreak of the revolution against Spain (1898), and the present scarcity of priests, some parishes are still vacant. The native language, spoken throughout the greater part of the diocese, is Visayan. But in the island of Mindanao the language spoken is a mixture of Spanish and several native dialects. The educated classes, besides speaking their native dialect, also speak Spanish. Since the American occupation the school children are being taught English. The diocese is the centre of the sugar-growing industry, and the planters have always had a predilection for education and culture. Many of the most prominent Filipinos in professional, commercial, and political life are from these parts. Formerly the bishops were Spaniards.

Since 1898 an American bishop presides over the diocese. The first was the Rt. Rev. Frederick Zadok Rooker, consecrated on 14 July, 1903, at Rome; d. in 1907. Bishop Rooker was born in New York, 19 Sept., 1861, and made his first studies at Albany and at Union College; later he entered the American College at Rome, and obtained in the College of Propaganda the degrees of Doctor of Philosophy and Doctor of Theology. He was ordained to the priesthood in 1888, and acted as vice-rector of the American College from 1889 to 1894. In 1895 he became secretary of the Apostolic Delegation then recently established at Washington, and held that office until his consecration as Bishop of Jaro.

JAMES P. MCCLOSKEY

Pierre de Jarric

Missionary writer, born at Toulouse in 1566; d. at Saintes, 2 March, 1617. He entered the Society of Jesus, 8 December, 1582. For many years he was professor of philosophy and moral theology at Bordeaux. As his desire to belong to the missionaries of the order was not fulfilled, he wished at least to use his pen for the good of the missions. The result was a very important production for that time, "Histoire des choses plus memorables advenues tant ez Indes orientales, que autres païs de la descouverte des Portugois", etc. The second part appeared about 1610, the third in 1614. The work is still a useful one, gives a comprehensive picture of the missionary enterprises of the Jesuits up to 1610, chiefly within the sphere of Portuguese interests, and contains numerous valuable data on colonial history, geography, and ethnography, gathering from Spanish and Portuguese reports, and from the works of Father Luis de Guzman ("Hist. de las Missiones que han hecho los religiosos de la Compañia de Jesús", Alcalá, 1601, reprinted at Bilboa, 1892), and of Father Ferdinand Guerreiro (Relação Annal das cousas que fizeram os Padres da companhia de Jesus na India e Japão, Brazil, Angola, Cabo Verde, Guiné", Evora, 1603, and Lisbon, 1605-07). By the dedication of the second part to Louis XIII Jarric wished to call royal attention to the colonizing and Apostolic achievements of Spain and Portugal, and thus incite the French king to similar efforts. This work was frequently reprinted and widely circulated, particularly in a Latin translation by Martino Martinez III (Cologne, 1615-16).

Sommervogel, Biblioth. de la C. de J.; Hurter, Nomenclator.

A. HUONDER

Jason

A Greek name adopted by many Jews whose Hebrew designation was Joshua (Jesus). In the Old Testament, it is applied to three or four persons connected with the period of the Machabees.

I. JASON, THE SON OF ELEAZAR

In 161 B.C., he was sent to Rome by Judas Machabeus to secure an alliance offensive and defensive (I Mach., viii, 177 sqq.).

II. JASON

The father of the Antipater who was one of the ambassadors sent by Jonathan, in 144 B.C. to renew the former treaty with the Roman (I Mach., xiv, 22). This Jason is perhaps to be identified with Jason, the son of Eleazar.

III. JASON OF CYRENE

A Jewish historian who lived in the second century B.C., and whose work is made know to us by the Second Book of Machabees, which professes to be its direct "Epitome" (II Mach., ii, 24, 27, 32). Jason's work, divided into five books, dealt, apparently in great detail, with the history of the Machabees and the wars of the Jews against Antiochus Epiphanes, and his son Eupator (II Mach., ii, 20 sqq.). In the "Epitome" five parts may still be distinguished, corresponding probably to the five books of Jason, and ending respectively with iii, 40; vii, 42; x, 9; xiii, 26; xv, 37. Jason composed his work in Greek, not long after 160 B.C., at which date the Second Book of the Machabees closes its narrative. He was thus contemporary with the events which he chronicled.

IV. JASON, THE HIGH-PRIEST

This unworthy son of Simon the Just purchased at great price from Antiochus Epiphanes the deposition of his brother Onias III from the high-priesthood. During the three years of his own pontificate, he did all in his power to corrupt the faith and morals of the youth of Jerusalem (II Mach., iv, 7-17). On the occasion of the games celebrated at Tyre, in honour of Hercules, he sent a Jewish deputation with a large sum of money which he intended to be spent on pagan sacrifices; at the request of his envoys, however, it was devoted to building galleys. He was finally supplanted by Menelaus, his own envoy to Antichus, took refuge among the Ammonites (II Mach., iv, 23-26), captured Jerusalem next year, but had to soon flee again among the Ammonites, wandered in different places, and ultimately died miserably at Sparta.

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Jassus

A titular see of Caria, and suffragan of Aphrodisias. The city was founded by colonists from Argos at an unknown date, and was re-established after a war with the natives of Caria by the people of Miletus. It is situated at the inner end of a gulf, on an islet now connected with the continent by a narrow strip of land; according to Polybius its walls were ten stadia in circumference. Its fisheries (Strabo, XIX, ii, 21) are yet famous. During the Peloponnesian War Jassus was taken by the Lacedaemonians, and later it was captured by Philip of Macedon, who was compelled by the Romans to return it to King Ptolemy of Egypt. Numerous Greek inscriptions found among its ruins aid in the reconstruction of its domestic history. Four of its bishops are known: Themistius in 421, Flacillus in 451, David in 787, and Gregory in 878 (Lequien, "Oriens Christianus", I, 913). The see is mentioned in the "Nova Tactica", tenth century (Gelzer, "Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis romani", nos. 340, 1464), and more recently in the "Notitiae Espiscopatuum". It is now called Asin-Kaleh, and is a small town in the sanjak of Mentéché and the Turkish province of Smyrna. In 1835 Texier visited it and found it completely ruined and deserted, its walls of white marble, also theatres, several burial sites, and mausolea still standing; since then the Turks have carried away most of the material for building purposes.

Spon and Wheler, Voyages, I (Amsterdam, 1679), 1273; Chandler, Travels in Asia Minor, 226; Smith, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, II (London, 1878), 5; Waddington, Inscriptions d'Asie mineure, n. 251-312; Texier, Asie mineure (Paris, 1862), 632-37; Bulletin de correspondance hellenique, V, 491-506; VIII, 454-58; XI, 213-18; XIII, 23-37; XIV, 614; XV, 545-48.

S. VAILHÉ

Jassy

(Jassiensis).

Diocese in Rumania. The town of Jassy stands in a very fertile plain on the River Bahluiu, a tributary of the Pruth, and has 80,000 inhabitants. Among its most remarkable monuments are the church of the Three Saints and the monastery of the Three Hierarchs. Although the more or less independent principality of Moldavia was established about 1348, Jassy did not become its capital until the sixteenth century, but subsequently remained such until 1859, when Wallachia was united with Moldavia to constitute the Kingdom of Rumania. Its name Jassy (Ruman, Iasi, pronounced Yash) seems to be derived from the Slavonic Askytorg, found for the first time in a Russian geography of the fourteenth century (Xénopol, "Histoire des Roumains de la Dacie trajane", I, 236, note). Often occupied by the Russians, Poles, and Austrians, it is principally celebrated for the religious conferences held there in 1642 between the Greek and the Russian Church, and for the treaty of 1792 concluded between Porte and Russia.

The Latin Diocese of Jassy dates from 27 June, 1884. Thanks to the labours of the Franciscan and Dominican friars, Urban V was able to establish in 1370 at Sereth the seat of the diocese, transferred to Bacau at the beginning of the fifteenth century. Abandoned in 1497 on account of the Moslem persecutions, the See of Bacau was re-established in 1611, and had a succession of twenty prelates until 1789, when it was suppressed. The Catholics of Moldavia were then placed under the spiritual direction of Apostolic prefects, generally chosen from the Conventuals in charge of the mission. In 1884 Leo XIII raised to a diocese the Apostolic Vicariate of Moldavia, with Jassy as residence. This see has about 90,000 Catholics, of which a few hundred are Uniats (Rumanians, Ruthenians, and even Armenians). There are 50 priests, 11 of which number are secular, and 39 regular (Conventuals and Jesuits); 28 parishes with as many churches, and 94 chapels without resident priests; 11 chapels for male or female religious; a theological seminary at Jassy and two preparatory seminaries at Jassy and at Halaucesti; several day-schools for boys and girls; two boarding-schools for girls directed at Jassy and Galatz by Sisters of Notre Dame of Sion, 143 in number. The Orthodox metropolitan see, whose bishop sometimes recognized the jurisdiction of the Bulgarian patriarchs of Achrida and sometimes that of the Greek patriarchs of Constantinople, was established about 1392. Since the proclamation of Rumanian ecclesiastical autonomy the Orthodox Bishop of Jassy depends on the metropolitan primate at Bucharest.

Jorga, Hist. de l'Eglise roumaine, II (Bucharest, 1909), 324, 335-7, in Romanic; Xenopol, Hist. des Roumains de la Dacie trajane (Paris, 1896); Echos d'Orient (Paris). VI. 46-50; VII, 321-8; VIII, 5-12, 72-7, 129-37; Missiones Catholicoe (Rome, 1907), 121-3.

S. VAILHÉ

Juan de Jáuregui

A Spanish painter and poet, born at Seville c. 1570, or, according to some, as late as 1583; died at Madrid c. 1640-1. His family, a northern one, was apparently of noble rank, and he was early enrolled as a knight in the Order of Calatrava. He made a sojourn in Rome, and there, judging by what he says in his "Discourse on Painting", he studied the old masters and formed his own pictorial methods. At all events, report has it that he became distinguished as a portrait painter. A current interpretation of a passage in the prologue to the "Novelas ejemplares" of Cervantes makes him out to have painted a likeness of the famous novelist. As a poet, Jáuregui began as a disciple of the Sevillian bard, Herrera. In point of fact, he adheres in many of his compositions too closely to the manner of his model, and hence a lack of originality in them. Notable among his poetic endeavors in his versions in blank verse of Tasso's "Aminta". It is deemed one of the best foreign renderings of that eminent pastoral play. First published in Italy, in 1607, it was included in the collected "Rimas" of Jáuregui put forth at Seville in 1618. In the same volume appeared various poetical pieces, among them a specimen of a translation of Lucas, and certain religious lyrics. In the earlier stages of his career, Jáuregui was a stern opponent of Gongorism and its stylistic excesses, as he clearly shows in his "Discurso poético contra el hablar culto y estilo obscuro", but he later succumbed to the influence of this noxious manner, amply illustrating its peculiarities in his poem "Orfeo" (Madrid, 1624) and even defending it in a special dissertation. Of the "Pharsalia" of Lucas, already attempted by him in his youth, he made, late in life, a complete version, which, however, was not published until 1684, and is over free in its rendering of the original.

J.D.M. FORD

Venerable Anne-Marie Javouhey

Foundress of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Cluny, born at Chamblanc, Diocese of Dijon, 11 November, 1779; died 15 July, 1851.

In 1819 the scope of the new congregation, which had been founded for the alleviation of the miseries consequent on the Revolution, was extended to embrace foreign mission work, and in 1822 Mother Javouhey herself established a house of the sisters at Goree, in West Africa. After two years in Senegal and vicinity, she passed to the British colony of St. Mary's, Gambia, devoting herself without stint to the victims of a pestilence then raging. On her return to Senegal she received the co-operation of the French Government in her first project for evangelizing negroes, by which a certain number were to be educated in Europe and sent back as missionaries to their people. The meagre results, due chiefly to the number of deaths caused by the difficulty of acclimatization, showed the plan to be impracticable, and it was abandoned. French Guiana, however, was to be the scene of Mother Javouhey's most important missionary work. The French Government, after unsuccessful attempts at colonizing the rich interior of this country, appealed to the foundress of the Sisters of the St. Joseph, who were already established there. Having submitted her plans for approval and received full authoruty, Mother Javouhey set out for Guiana in 1828, with 36 sisters and 50 emigrants, and soon had organized a self-supporting colony, in which all the useful arts were practised. In 1835, two years after her return to France, again at the request of the Government, she once more went to Guiana to take charge of 520 African negroes, formerly in government service at Cayenne, whom the authorities wished reclaimed for civilization and Christianity before being granted their freedom. Harassed as she was by opposition, and even calumny, her success with the negro colony, due largely to her personal influence with the colonists, was so great that when emancipation was granted there were no such scenes of disorder as marked similar occassions in other colonies. The majority of the blacks had become Christians and had learned the ways of civilization and the value of manual labour.

Long before this Mother Javouhey had established a leper colony on the banks of the Accarouary. Even the Indians came within the sphere of her influence; whole tribes were instructed in the Faith and asked for baptism. On her return to France, in 1843, Mother javouhey found fresh trials awaiting her, including, ecclesiastical opposition. Nevertheless she continued to direct the establishment of new mission houses of her order in all parts of the world, in addition to over thirty foundations in the various dioceses of France. When the news of the death of "the mother of the blacks" reached French Guiana, there was general grief, and most of the inhabitants of her colonies went into mourning as for a personal bereavement. The cause of Mother Javouhey's beatification was introduced 11 February, 1908.

F. M. RUDGE

Jealousy

Jealousy is here taken to be synonymous with envy. It is defined to be a sorrow which one entertains at another's well-being because of a view that one's own excellence is in consequence lessened. Its distinctive malice comes from the opposition it implies to the supreme virtue of charity. The law of love constrains us to rejoice rather than to be distressed at the good fortune of our neighbour. Besides, such an attitude is a direct contradiction of the spirit of solidarity which ought to characterize the human race and, especially, the members of the Christian community. The envious man tortures himself without cause, morbidly holding as he does, the success of another to constitute an evil for himself. The sin, in so far as it defies the great precept of charity, is in general grievous, although on account of the trifling matter involved, as well as because of the lack of deliberation, it is often reputed to be venial. Jealousy is most evil when one repines at another's spiritual good. It is then said to be a sin against the Holy Ghost. It is likewise called a capital sin because of the other vices it begets. Among its progeny St. Thomas (II-II:36) enumerates hatred, detraction, rejoicing over the misfortunes of one's fellow, and whispering. Regret at another's success is not always jealousy. The motive has to be scrutinized. If, for instance, I feel sorrow at the news of another's promotion or rise to wealth, either because I know that he does not deserve his accession of good fortune, or because I have founded reason to fear he will use it to injure me or others, my attitude, provided that there is no excess in my sentiment, is entirely rational. Then, too, it may happen that I do not, properly speaking, begrudge my neighbour his happier codition, but simply am grieved that I have not imitated him. Thus if the subject-matter be praiseworthy, I shall be not jealous but rather laudably emulous.

JOSEPH F. DELANY

St. Jean-Baptiste-Marie Vianney

Curé of Ars, born at Dardilly, near Lyons, France, on 8 May, 1786; died at Ars, 4 August, 1859; son of Matthieu Vianney and Marie Beluze.

In 1806, the curé at Ecully, M. Balley, opened a school for ecclesiastical students, and Jean-Marie was sent to him. Though he was of average intelligence and his masters never seem to have doubted his vocation, his knowledge was extremely limited, being confined to a little arithmetic, history, and geography, and he found learning, especially the study of Latin, excessively difficult. One of his fellow-students, Matthias Loras, afterwards first Bishop of Dubuque, assisted him with his Latin lessons.

But now another obstacle presented itself. Young Vianney was drawn in the conscription, the war with Spain and the urgent need of recruits having caused Napoleon to withdraw the exemption enjoyed by the ecclesiastical students in the diocese of his uncle, Cardinal Fesch. Matthieu Vianney tried unsuccessfully to procure a substitute, so his son was obliged to go. His regiment soon received marching orders. The morning of departure, Jean-Baptiste went to church to pray, and on his return to the barracks found that his comrades had already left. He was threatened with arrest, but the recruiting captain believed his story and sent him after the troops. At nightfall he met a young man who volunteered to guide him to his fellow-soldiers, but led him to Noes, where some deserters had gathered. The mayor persuaded him to remain there, under an assumed name, as schoolmaster. After fourteen months, he was able to communicate with his family. His father was vexed to know that he was a deserter and ordered him to surrender but the matter was settled by his younger brother offering to serve in his stead and being accepted.

Jean-Baptiste now resumed his studies at Ecully. In 1812, he was sent to the seminary at Verrieres; he was so deficient in Latin as to be obliged to follow the philosophy course in French. He failed to pass the examinations for entrance to the seminary proper, but on re-examination three months later succeeded. On 13 August, 1815, he was ordained priest by Mgr. Simon, Bishop of Grenoble. His difficulties in making the preparatory studies seem to have been due to a lack of mental suppleness in dealing with theory as distinct from practice -- a lack accounted for by the meagreness of his early schooling, the advanced age at which he began to study, the fact that he was not of more than average intelligence, and that he was far advanced in spiritual science and in the practice of virtue long before he came to study it in the abstract. He was sent to Ecully as assistant to M. Balley, who had first recognized and encouraged his vocation, who urged him to persevere when the obstacles in his way seemed insurmountable, who interceded with the examiners when he failed to pass for the higher seminary, and who was his model as well as his preceptor and patron. In 1818, after the death of M. Balley, M. Vianney was made parish priest of Ars, a village not very far from Lyons. It was in the exercise of the functions of the parish priest in this remote French hamlet that as the "curé d'Ars" he became known throughout France and the Christian world. A few years after he went to Ars, he founded a sort of orphanage for destitute girls. It was called "The Providence" and was the model of similar institutions established later all over France. M. Vianney himself instructed the children of "The Providence" in the catechism, and these catechetical instructions came to be so popular that at last they were given every day in the church to large crowds. "The Providence" was the favourite work of the "curé d'Ars", but, although it was successful, it was closed in 1847, because the holy curé thought that he was not justified in maintaining it in the face of the opposition of many good people. Its closing was a very heavy trial to him.

But the chief labour of the Curé d'Ars was the direction of souls. He had not been long at Ars when people began coming to him from other parishes, then from distant places, then from all parts of France, and finally from other countries. As early as 1835, his bishop forbade him to attend the annual retreats of the diocesan clergy because of "the souls awaiting him yonder". During the last ten years of his life, he spent from sixteen to eighteen hours a day in the confessional. His advice was sought by bishops, priests, religious, young men and women in doubt as to their vocation, sinners, persons in all sorts of difficulties and the sick. In 1855, the number of pilgrims had reached twenty thousand a year. The most distinguished persons visited Ars for the purpose of seeing the holy curé and hearing his daily instruction. The Venerable Father Colin was ordained deacon at the same time, and was his life-long friend, while Mother Marie de la Providence founded the Helpers of the Holy Souls on his advice and with his constant encouragement. His direction was characterized by common sense, remarkable insight, and supernatural knowledge. He would sometimes divine sins withheld in an imperfect confession. His instructions were simple in language, full of imagery drawn from daily life and country scenes, but breathing faith and that love of God which was his life principle and which he infused into his audience as much by his manner and appearance as by his words, for, at the last, his voice was almost inaudible.

The miracles recorded by his biographers are of three classes:

• first, the obtaining of money for his charities and food for his orphans;
• secondly, supernatural knowledge of the past and future;
• thirdly, healing the sick, especially children.

The greatest miracle of all was his life. He practised mortification from his early youth. and for forty years his food and sleep were insufficient, humanly speaking, to sustain life. And yet he laboured incessantly, with unfailing humility, gentleness, patience, and cheerfulness, until he was more than seventy-three years old.

On 3 October, 1874 Jean-Baptiste-Marie Vianney was proclaimed Venerable by Pius IX and on 8 January, 1905, he was enrolled among the Blessed. Pope Pius X proposed him as a model to the parochial clergy.

[ Note: In 1925, Pope Pius XI canonized him. His feast is kept on 4 August.]

SUSAN T. OTTEN

St. Jean-Gabriel Perboyre

Missionary and martyr, born at Puech, Diocese of Cahors, France, 6 January, 1802; martyred at Ou-Tchang-Fou, China, 11 September, 1840.

Jean-Gabriel was one of eight children born to Pierre Perboyre and Marie Rigal. By reason of his piety, he was the model of his companions during his childhood. While acting as companion to his younger brother, in the preparatory seminary of Moutauban, he felt the Divine call to the priesthood, and after obtaining the consent of his father to take the step, he entered the noviciate of the Congregation of the Mission, in the seminary of Montauban, December, 1818. On the feast of the Holy Innocents, 1820, he made the four vows of the Vincentians. He was raised to the priesthood, 23 September, 1825, in the chapel of the Sisters of Charity, by Bishop Dubourg, of New Orleans, and on the following day he said his first Mass. Shortly after, he was sent to the seminary of Saint-Flour to teach dogmatic theology, and two years later, he was appointed superior of the preparatory seminary of Saint-Flour. His great sanctity and marvellous success induced his superiors, in 1832, to appoint him subdirector of the novitiate in Paris. He continued in this office until 1835, when he had sought and begged and prayed for, permission to go to China, there to preach, to suffer, and to die. He left Havre on 21 March, and on 29 August, 1835, arrived at Macao, where he spent some time studying the Chinese language. On 21 December, 1835, he began his journey to Ho-Nan, the mission assigned him. In January, 1838, he was transferred to the mission of Hou-Pé, in which, as in that of Ho-Nan, he laboured zealously and with great success. In September, 1839, the persecutions against Christians broke out in Hou-Pé, and Jean-Gabriel was one of the first victims. The events leading to his death bear a striking resemblance to the Passion and Death of Christ. A neophyte, like another Judas, betrayed Jean-Gabriel for thirty ounces of silver. He was stripped of his garments and clothed with rags, bound, and dragged from tribunal to tribunal. At each trial, he was treated inhumanly, tortured both in body and in soul. Finally, he was taken to Ou-Tchang-Fou, and after unparalleled tortures, was condemned to death. The sentence was ratified by an imperial edict, and on 11 September, 1840, Jean-Gabriel was led to death with seven criminals. The holy priest was strangled to death on a cross.

[Jean-Gabriel was declared Venerable by Gregory XVI in July, 1843, beatified by Leo XIII on 9 November, 1889, and canonized by John Paul II on 2 June, 1996. His feast is celebrated on 11 September. -- Ed.]

JOSEPH S. GLASS

St. Jeanne de Valois

Queen and foundress of the Order of the Annonciades, b. 1464; d. at Bourges, 4 Feb., 1505. Daughter of one king and wife of another, there are perhaps few saints in the calendar who suffered greater or more bitter humiliations than did Madame Jéhanne de France, the heroic woman usually known in English as St. Jane of Valois. A daughter of Louis XI by his second wife, Charlotte of Savoy, she was hated from birth by her father, partly because of her sex and partly on account of her being sickly and deformed. Sent away to be brought up by guardians in a lonely country château, and deprived not only of every advantage due to her rank, but even of common comforts and almost of necessities, it was the intense solitude and abjectness of her life that first made Jeanne turn to God for consolation, and that gave her very early a tender and practical devotion to the Blessed Virgin. She is said to have had a supernatural promise that some day she would be allowed to found a religious family in honour of Our Lady. The mysteries of the Annunciation and Incarnation, as set forth in the Angelus, were her great delight.

For political purposes of his own, Louis XI compelled Jeanne to marry Louis, Duke of Orleans, his second cousin, and heir presumptive to the throne. After her marriage, the princess suffered even more than before, for the duke hated the wife imposed upon him, and even publicly insulted her in every possible way. She, imagining virtues in her husband that did not exist, loved him tenderly, and when he got into disgrace and was imprisoned exerted herself to mitigate his sufferings and to get him freed. No sooner, however, was the duke, on the death of Charles VIII, raised to the throne of France as Louis XII, than he got his marriage with Jeanne annulled at Rome, on the ground that it was invalid, from lack of consent, and from the fact that it had never been consummated (see ALEXANDER VI); and the saint's humiliations reached their climax when she found herself, in the face of all France, an unjustly repudiated wife and queen.

But the two special virtues in which Jeanne had resolved to imitate the Blessed Virgin were silence and humility; hence, though she bravely contested the matter while it was of any use, she accepted the verdict, when it came, without a complaint, merely thanking God that it left her free to serve His Mother as she had always hoped to do, by founding an order for her service. She was made Duchess of Berry, and given that province to govern. Going to live at Bourges, its capital, she fulfilled all her duties as ruler with strict conscientiousness and tender care for her subjects' welfare. In 1500, in conjunction with her Franciscan director, Gilbert Nicolas, Jeanne founded the Order of the Annonciades, an order for prayer and penance, whose chief rule was to imitate the virtues of Mary, as shown in the Gospels. The rejected queen found happiness at last in devoting herself to this work; and towards the end of her life, she took the vows herself, gave up her wedding ring, which she had hitherto worn, and wore the habit under her clothes. In spite of bad health and constant suffering, she had done much bodily penance all her life, besides giving many hours to prayer. Up to her death she prayed incessantly for her heartless husband, and left as a legacy to her order the duty of constant prayer for his soul as well as her father's and brother's.

Jeanne died as she had lived, and was lamented by her spiritual daughters and all her people. Many miracles, especially of healing, followed her death. In 1514, Leo X allowed the Annonciades to honour her by a special office. Benedict XIV pronounced her Blessed, and extended her cult throughout France; but, though the process of canonization had been introduced in 1614, owing to various delays and hindrances, she has never been actually canonized, though universally known as a saint.

FLAVIGNY, Une Fille de France; la Bienheuruse Jé (Paris, 1896); BUCHBERGER, Kirchliches Handlexicon, s.v. Johanna v. Valois; CHEVALIER, Bio-Bibl., s.v.

F.M. CAPES

Edmond Jeaurat

(EDME JEAURAT)

French engraver, b. at Vermenton, near Auxerre, 1688; d. at Paris, 1738. He was the elder brother of Etienne Jeaurat, the painter, and the son of an engraver or worker in metal, who on a visit to Paris took his eldest boy with him, and apprenticed him to Bernard Picart. Here Edmond spent many years, and when he left his master's studio he wandered away to Holland, and for a few years studied the art of the Dutch painters, earning his living by engraving a few plates after the chief paintings in Amsterdam and The Hague. On returning to Paris he came into contact with his younger brother whom he had not seen for many years, and employed himself in engraving Etienne's paintings, quickly acquiring celerity in execution and a considerable notoriety for accurate and delightful work. He was employed by Monsieur de Crozat to engrave the pictures for his famous collection. In Paris he married the sister of the artist Le Clerc, and many of his engravings represented the religious pictures painted by his brother-in-law, La Clerc the younger. He had two sons, one Nicholas Henry, a painter, usually known as Jeaurat de Bertry or Berty, the other SÈbastien, who devoted himself to science. There is a fine collection of his engravings in the British Museum, London, and they can also be studied in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris. His finest work is probably "Achilles discovered among the Daughters of Lycomedes", dated 1713, and there are also engravings by him from works by Poussin, Veronese, and Watteau.

Descamps, La Vie des Peintres (Paris, 1753); Le Carpentier, Galerie des Peintres CÈlèbres (Rouen, 1815); De Crozat, Receuil d'Etampes (Paris, 1736); Mariette, Abecedario (Paris, 1746); Dussieux, Les Artistes français à l'Etranger (Paris, 1856).

GEORGE CHARLES WILLIAMSON

Jedburgh

(Eighty-two different spellings of the name are given in the "Origines Parochiales Scotiæ").

Augustinian abbey, in the town of the same name (capital of Roxburghshire, Scotland), established as a priory by David I, King of Scots, in 1118, and colonized by Canons Regular of St. Augustine from the Abbey of St-Quentin, at Beauvais, France. Fordun gives 1147 as the year of foundation, but this seems to have been the date of the erection of the priory into an abbey, when prior Osbert (styled in the Melrose chronicle "primus abbas de Geddeworth") was raised to the abbatial dignity. Jedburgh soon became one of the greatest Scottish monasteries, deriving importance from its proximity to the castle (now entirely destroyed), which was the favourite residence of many of the Scottish kings. Lands, churches, houses, and valuable fisheries, on both sides of the border, were bestowed on the abbey by David I, Malcolm IV, William the Lion, and other royal and noble benefactors; and Alexander III chose to be married in the abbey church to Yolande de Dreux in 1285, by which year the monastic buildings, including the great church, were probably complete.

An opulent abbey so near the English border as Jedburgh was sure to suffer much in the constant wars between England and Scotland. About 1300 the monastery became uninhabitable, owing to repeated attacks made on it, and the community was dispersed. Later on it recovered its prosperity for a time, but in the century and a half preceding the Reformation it was devastated, plundered, and occasionally set on fire, at least four times by the invading English. In 1559 (John Horne being abbot) the abbey was suppressed, and its possessions confiscated by the Crown. A Protestant church was afterwards constructed within the nave and used until 1875, when a new church was built by the Marquess of Lothian, whose family has possessed the lordship of Jedburgh continuously since 1622. Practically the whole of the domestic buildings of Jedburgh Abbey have disappeared; but the magnificent church is still wonderfully entire. The oldest part is the early Norman choir, of which the two western bays remain; and the nave, 129 feet long, is a very stately and impressive example of Early English work. The decorated north transept (fourteenth century) is the burial-place of the Kers of Fernihurst, now represented by the Marquess of Lothian. The massive central tower is still quite perfect. The total length of the church (inside) is 218 feet.

Origines Parochiales Scotiæ, I (Edinburgh, 1850), 366-386; Watson, Jedburgh Abbey (Edinburgh, 1894); Saturday Review, LIV. 437-440; Wordsworth, Tour in Scotland, ed. Shairp (1874); Gordon, Monasticon, I (Glasgow, 1868), 249-258; Morton, Monastic Annals of Teviotdale (Edinburgh, 1832); Jeffrey, History and Antiquities of Roxburghshire (4 vols., 1857-64); Wyntoun, Orygynale Cronykil of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1872-79).

D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR

Jehovah (Yahweh)

The proper name of God in the Old Testament; hence the Jews called it the name by excellence, the great name, the only name, the glorious and terrible name, the hidden and mysterious name, the name of the substance, the proper name, and most frequently shem hammephorash, i.e. the explicit or the separated name, though the precise meaning of this last expression is a matter of discussion (cf. Buxtorf, "Lexicon", Basle, 1639, col. 2432 sqq.).

Jehovah occurs more frequently than any other Divine name. The Concordances of Furst ("Vet. Test. Concordantiae", Leipzig, 1840) and Mandelkern ("Vet. Test. Concordantiae", Leipzig, 1896) do not exactly agree as to the number of its occurrences; but in round numbers it is found in the Old Testament 6000 times, either alone or in conjunction with another Divine name. The Septuagint and the Vulgate render the name generally by "Lord" (Kyrios, Dominus), a translation of Adonai—usually substituted for Jehovah in reading.

I. PRONUNCIATION OF JEHOVAH

The Fathers and the Rabbinic writers agree in representing Jehovah as an ineffable name. As to the Fathers, we only need draw attention to the following expressions: onoma arreton, aphraston, alekton, aphthegkton, anekphoneton, aporreton kai hrethenai me dynamenon, mystikon. Leusden could not induce a certain Jew, in spite of his poverty, to pronounce the real name of God, though he held out the most alluring promises. The Jew's compliance with Leusden's wishes would not indeed have been of any real advantage to the latter; for the modern Jews are as uncertain of the real pronunciation of the Sacred name as their Christian contemporaries. According to a Rabbinic tradition the real pronunciation of Jehovah ceased to be used at the time of Simeon the Just, who was, according to Maimonides, a contemporary of Alexander the Great. At any rate, it appears that the name was no longer pronounced after the destruction of the Temple. The Mishna refers to our question more than once: Berachoth, ix, 5, allows the use of the Divine name by way of salutation; in Sanhedrin, x, 1, Abba Shaul refuses any share in the future world to those who pronounce it as it is written; according to Thamid, vii, 2, the priests in the Temple (or perhaps in Jerusalem) might employ the true Divine name, while the priests in the country (outside Jerusalem) had to be contented with the name Adonai; according to Maimonides ("More Neb.", i, 61, and "Yad chasaka", xiv, 10) the true Divine name was used only by the priests in the sanctuary who imparted the blessing, and by the high-priest on the Day of Atonement. Phil ["De mut. nom.", n. 2 (ed. Marg., i, 580); "Vita Mos.", iii, 25 (ii, 166)] seems to maintain that even on these occasions the priests had to speak in a low voice. Thus far we have followed the post-Christian Jewish tradition concerning the attitude of the Jews before Simeon the Just.

As to the earlier tradition, Josephus (Antiq., II, xii, 4) declares that he is not allowed to treat of the Divine name; in another place (Antiq., XII, v, 5) he says that the Samaritans erected on Mt. Garizim an anonymon ieron. This extreme veneration for the Divine name must have generally prevailed at the time when the Septuagint version was made, for the translators always substitute Kyrios (Lord) for Jehovah. Ecclus., xxiii, 10, appears to prohibit only a wanton use of the Divine name, though it cannot be denied that Jehovah is not employed as frequently in the more recent canonical books of the Old Testament as in the older books. It would be hard to determine at what time this reverence for the Divine name originated among the Hebrews. Rabbinic writers derive the prohibition of pronouncing the Tetragrammaton, as the name of Jehovah is called, from Lev., xxiv, 16: "And he that blasphemeth the name of the Lord, dying let him die". The Hebrew participle noqedh, here rendered "blasphemeth", is translated honomazon in the Septuagint, and appears to have the meaning "to determine", "to denote" (by means of its proper vowels) in Gen., xxx, 28; Num., i, 17; Is., lxii, 2. Still, the context of Lev., xxiv, 16 (cf. verses 11 and 15), favours the meaning "to blaspheme". Rabbinic exegetes derive the prohibition also from Ex., iii, 15; but this argument cannot stand the test of the laws of sober hermeneutics (cf. Drusius, "Tetragrammaton", 8-10, in "Critici Sacri", Amsterdam, 1698, I, p. ii, col. 339-42; "De nomine divino", ibid., 512-16; Drach, "Harmonic entre l'Eglise et la Synagogue", I, Paris, 1844, pp. 350-53, and Note 30, pp. 512-16). What has been said explains the so-called qeri perpetuum, according to which the consonants of Jehovah are always accompanied in the Hebrew text by the vowels of Adonai except in the cases in which Adonai stands in apposition to Jehovah: in these cases the vowels of Elohim are substituted. The use of a simple shewa in the first syllable of Jehovah, instead of the compound shewa in the corresponding syllable of Adonai and Elohim, is required by the rules of Hebrew grammar governing the use of shewa. Hence the question: What are the true vowels of the word Jehovah?

It has been maintained by some recent scholars that the word Jehovah dates only from the year 1520 (cf. Hastings, "Dictionary of the Bible", II, 1899, p. 199: Gesenius-Buhl, "Handwörterbuch", 13th ed., 1899, p. 311). Drusius (loc. cit., 344) represents Peter Galatinus as the inventor of the word Jehovah, and Fagius as it propagator in the world of scholars and commentators. But the writers of the sixteenth century, Catholic and Protestant (e.g. Cajetan and Théodore de Bèze), are perfectly familiar with the word. Galatinus himself ("Areana cathol. veritatis", I, Bari, 1516, a, p. 77) represents the form as known and received in his time. Besides, Drusius (loc. cit., 351) discovered it in Porchetus, a theologian of the fourteenth century. Finally, the word is found even in the "Pugio fidei" of Raymund Martin, a work written about 1270 (ed. Paris, 1651, pt. III, dist. ii, cap. iii, p. 448, and Note, p. 745). Probably the introduction of the name Jehovah antedates even R. Martin.

No wonder then that this form has been regarded as the true pronunciation of the Divine name by such scholars as Michaelis ("Supplementa ad lexica hebraica", I, 1792, p. 524), Drach (loc. cit., I, 469-98), Stier (Lehrgebäude der hebr. Sprache, 327), and others.

• Jehovah is composed of the abbreviated forms of the imperfect, the participle, and the perfect of the Hebrew verb "to be" (ye=yehi; ho=howeh; wa=hawah). According to this explanation, the meaning of Jehovah would be "he who will be, is, and has been". But such a word-formation has no analogy in the Hebrew language.
• The abbreviated form Jeho supposes the full form Jehovah. But the form Jehovah cannot account for the abbreviations Jahu and Jah, while the abbreviation Jeho may be derived from another word.
• The Divine name is said to be paraphrased in Apoc., i, 4, and iv, 8, by the expression ho on kai ho en kai ho erchomenos, in which ho erchomenos is regard as equivalent to ho eromenos, "the one that will be"; but it really means "the coming one", so that after the coming of the Lord, Apoc., xi, 17, retains only ho on kai ho en.
• the comparison of Jehovah with the Latin Jupiter, Jovis. But it wholly neglects the fuller forms of the Latin names Diespiter, Diovis. Any connection of Jehovah with the Egyptian Divine name consisting of the seven Greek vowels has been rejected by Hengstenberg (Beitrage zur Einleiung ins Alte Testament, II, 204 sqq.) and Tholuck (Vermischte Schriften, I, 349 sqq.).

To take up the ancient writers:

• Diodorus Siculus writes Jao (I, 94);
• Irenaeus ("Adv. Haer.", II, xxxv, 3, in P. G., VII, col. 840), Jaoth;
• the Valentinian heretics (Ir., "Adv. Haer.", I, iv, 1, in P.G., VII, col. 481), Jao;
• Clement of Alexandria ("Strom.", V, 6, in P.G., IX, col. 60), Jaou;
• Origin ("in Joh.", II, 1, in P.G., XIV, col. 105), Jao;
• Porphyry (Eus., "Praep. evang", I, ix, in P.G., XXI, col. 72), Jeuo;
• Epiphanius ("Adv. Haer.", I, iii, 40, in P.G., XLI, col. 685), Ja or Jabe;
• Pseudo-Jerome ("Breviarium in Pss.", in P.L., XXVI, 828), Jaho;
• the Samaritans (Theodoret, in "Ex. quaest.", xv, in P. G., LXXX, col. 244), Jabe;
• James of Edessa (cf.. Lamy, "La science catholique", 1891, p. 196), Jehjeh;
• Jerome ("Ep. xxv ad Marcell.", in P. L., XXII, col. 429) speaks of certain ignorant Greek writers who transcribed the Hebrew Divine name II I II I.

The judicious reader will peceive that the Samaritan pronunciation Jabe probably approaches the real sound of the Divine name closest; the other early writers transmit only abbreviations or corruptions of the sacred name. Inserting the vowels of Jabe into the original Hebrew consonant text, we obtain the form Jahveh (Yahweh), which has been generally accepted by modern scholars as the true pronunciation of the Divine name. It is not merely closely connected with the pronunciation of the ancient synagogue by means of the Samaritan tradition, but it also allows the legitimate derivation of all the abbreviations of the sacred name in the Old Testament.

II. MEANING OF THE DIVINE NAME

Jahveh (Yahweh) is one of the archaic Hebrew nouns, such as Jacob, Joseph, Israel, etc. (cf. Ewald, "Lehrbuch der hebr. Sprache", 7th ed., 1863, p. 664), derived from the third person imperfect in such a way as to attribute to a person or a thing the action of the quality expressed by the verb after the manner of a verbal adjective or a participle. Furst has collected most of these nouns, and calls the form forma participialis imperfectiva. As the Divine name is an imperfect form of the archaic Hebrew verb "to be", Jahveh means "He Who is", Whose characteristic note consists in being, or The Being simply.

Here we are confronted with the question, whether Jahveh is the imperfect hiphil or the imperfect qal. Calmet and Le Clere believe that the Divine name is a hiphil form; hence it signifies, according to Schrader (Die Keilinschriften und das Alte Testament, 2nd ed., p. 25), He Who brings into existence, the Creator; and according to Lagarde (Psalterium Hieronymi, 153), He Who causes to arrive, Who realizes His promises, the God of Providence. But this opinion is not in keeping with Ex., iii, 14, nor is there any trace in Hebrew of a hiphil form of the verb meaning "to be"; moreover, this hiphil form is supplied in the cognate languages by the pi'el form, except in Syriac where the hiphil is rare and of late occurrence.

On the other hand, Jehveh may be an imperfect qal from a grammatical point of view, and the traditional exegesis of Ex., iii, 6-16, seems to necessitate the form Jahveh. Moses asks God: "If they should say to me: What is his [God's] name? What shall I say to them?" In reply, God returns three several times to the determination of His name. First, He uses the first person imperfect of the Hebrew verb "to be"; here the Vulgate, the Septuagint, Aquila, Theodotion, and the Arabic version suppose that God uses the imperfect qal; only the Targums of Jonathan and of Jerusalem imply the imperfect hiphil. Hence we have the renderings: "I am who am" (Vulg.), "I am who is" (Sept.), "I shall be {who] shall be" (Aquila, Theodotion), "the Eternal who does not cease" (Ar.); only the above-mentioned Targums see any reference to the creation of the world. The second time, God uses again the first person imperfect of the Hebrew verb "to be"; here the Syriac, the Sumaritan, the Persian versions, and the Targums of Onkelos and Jerusalem retain the Hebrew word, so that one cannot tell whether they regard the imperfect as a qal or a hiphil form; the Arabic version omits the whole clause; but the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Targum of Jonathan suppose here the imperfect qal: "He Who Is, hath sent me to you" instead of "I Am, hath sent me to you: (Vulg.); " ho on sent me to you" (Sept.); "I am who am, and who shall be, hath sent me to you" (Targ. Jon.). Finally, the third time, God uses the third person of the imperfect, or the form of the sacred name itself; here the Samaritan version and the Targum of Onkelos retain the Hebrew form; the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and the Syriac version render "Lord", though, according to the analogy of the former two passages, they should have translated, "He Is, the God of your fathers, . . . hath sent me to you"; the Arabic version substitutes "God". Classical exegesis, therefore, regards Jahveh as the imperfect qal of the Hebrew verb "to be".

Here another question presents itself: Is the being predicated of God in His name, the metaphysical being denoting nothing but existence itself, or is it an historical being, a passing manifestation of God in time? Most Protestant writers regard the being implied in the name Jahveh as an historical one, though some do not wholly exclude such metaphysical ideas as God's independence, absolute constancy, and fidelity to His promises, and immutability in His plans (cf. Driver, "Hebrew Tenses", 1892, p. 17). The following are the reasons alleged for the historical meaning of the "being" implied in the Divine name:

• The metaphysical sense of being was too abstruse a concept for the primitive times. Still, some of the Egyptian speculations of the early times are almost as abstruse; besides, it was not necessary that the Jews of the time of Moses should fully understand the meaning implied in God's name. The scientific development of its sense might be left to the future Christian theologians.
• The Hebrew verb hayah means rather "to become" than "to be" permanently. But good authorities deny that the Hebrew verb denotes being in motion rather than being in a permanent condition. It is true that the participle would have expressed a permanent state more clearly; but then, the participle of the verb hayah is found only in Ex., ix, 3, and few proper names in Hebrew are derived from the participle.
• The imperfect mainly expresses the action of one who enters anew on the scene. But this is not always the case; the Hebrew imperfect is a true aorist, prescinding from time and, therefore, best adapted for general principles (Driver, p. 38).
• "I am who am" appears to refer to "I will be with thee" of v. 12; both texts seems to be alluded to in Os., i, 9, "I will not be yours". But if this be true, "I am who am" must be considered as an ellipse: "I am who am with you", or "I am who am faithful to my promises". This is harsh enough; but it becomes quite inadmissible in the clause, "I am who am, hath sent me".

Since then the Hebrew imperfect is admittedly not to be considered as a future, and since the nature of the language does not force us to see in it the expression of transition or of becoming, and since, moreover, early tradition is quite fixed and the absolute character of the verb hayah has induced even the most ardent patrons of its historical sense to admit in the texts a description of God's nature, the rules of hermeneutics urge us to take the expressions in Ex., iii, 13-15, for what they are worth. Jahveh is He Who Is, i.e., His nature is best characterized by Being, if indeed it must be designated by a personal proper name distinct from the term God (Revue biblique, 1893, p. 338). The scholastic theories as to the depth of meaning latent in Yahveh (Yahweh) rest, therefore, on a solid foundation. Finite beings are defined by their essence: God can be defined only be being, pure and simple, nothing less and nothing more; not be abstract being common to everything, and characteristic of nothing in particular, but by concrete being, absolute being, the ocean of all substantial being, independent of any cause, incapable of change, exceeding all duration, because He is infinite: "Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, . . . who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty" (Apoc., i, 8). Cf. St. Thomas, I, qu. xiii, a. 14; Franzelin, "De Deo Uno" (3rd ed., 1883, thesis XXIII, pp. 279-86.

III. ORIGIN OF THE NAME JAHVEH (YAHWEH)

The opinion that the name Jahveh was adopted by the Jews from the Chanaanites, has been defended by von Bohlen (Genesis, 1835, p. civ), Von der Alm (Theol. Briefe, I, 1862, pp. 524-27), Colenso (The Pentateuch, V, 1865, pp. 269-84), Goldziher (Der Mythus bei den Hebräern, 1867, p. 327), but has been rejected by Kuenen ("De Godsdienst van Israel", I, Haarlem, 1869, pp. 379-401) and Baudissin (Studien, I, pp. 213-18). It is antecedently improbable that Jahveh, the irreconcilable enemy of the Chanaanites, should be originally a Chanaanite god.

It has been said by Vatke (Die Religion des Alten Test., 1835, p. 672) and J.G. Müller (Die Semiten in ihrem Verhältniss zu Chamiten und Japhetiten, 1872, p. 163) that the name Jahveh is of Indo-European origin. But the transition of the Sanscrit root, div—the Latin Jupiter-Jovis (Diovis), the Greek Zeus-Dios, the Indo-European Dyaus into the Hebrew form Jahveh has never been satisfactorily explained. Hitzig's contention (Vorlesungen über bibl. Theol., p. 38) that the Indo-Europeans furnished at least the idea contained in the name Jahveh, even if they did not originate the name itself, is without any value.

The theory that Jahveh is of Egyptian origin may have a certain amount of a priori probability, as Moses was educated in Egypt. Still, the proofs are not convincing:

• Röth (Die Aegypt. und die Zoroastr. Glaubenslehre, 1846, p. 175) derives the Hebrew name from the ancient moon-god Ih or Ioh. But there is no connection between the Hebrew Jahveh and the moon (cf. Pierret, "Vocabul. Hiérogl.", 1875, p. 44).
• Plutarch (De Iside, 9) tells us that a statue of Athene (Neith) in Sais bore the inscription: "I am all that has been, is, and will be". But Tholuck (op. cit., 1867, pp. 189-205) shows that the meaning of this inscription is wholly different from that of the name Jahveh.
• The patrons of the Egyptian origin of the sacred name appeal to the common. Egyptian formula, Nuk pu nuk but though its literal signification is "I am I", its real meaning is "It is I who" (cf. Le Page Renouf, "Hibbert Lectures for 1879", p. 244).

As to the theory that Jahveh has a Chaldean or an Accadian origin, its foundation is not very solid:

• Jahveh is said to be a merely artificial form introduced to put meaning into the name of the national god (Delitzsch, "Wo lag das Paradies", 1881, pp. 158-64); the common and popular name of God is said to have been Yahu or Yah, the letter I being the essential Divine element in the name. The contention, if true, does not prove the Chaldean or Accadian origin of the Hebrew Divine name; besides the form Yah is rare and exclusively poetic; Yahu never appears in the Bible, while the ordinary full form of the Divine name is found even in the inscription of Mesa (line 18) dating from the ninth century B.C.
• Yahu and Yah were known outside Israel; the forms enter into the composition of foreign proper names; besides, the variation of the name of a certain King of Hammath shows that Ilu is equivalent to Yau, and that Yau is the name of a god (Schrader, "Bibl. Bl.", II, p. 42, 56; Sargon, "Cylinder", xxv; Keil, "Fastes", I. 33). But foreign proper names containing Yah or Yahu are extremely rare and doubtful, and may be explained without admitting gods in foreign nations, bearing the sacred name. Again, the Babylonian pantheon is fairly well known at present, but the god Yau does not appear in it.
• Among the pre-Semitic Babylonians, I is a synonym of Ilu, the supreme god; now I with the Assyrian nominative ending added becomes Yau (cf. Delitzsch, "Lesestücke", 3rd ed., 1885, p. 42, Syllab. A, col. I, 13-16). Hommel (Altisrael. Ueberlieferung, 1897, pp. 144, 225) feels sure that he has discovered this Chaldean god Yau. It is the god who is represented ideographically (ilu) A-a, but ordinarily pronounced Malik, though the expression should be read Ai or Ia (Ya). The patriarchal family employed this name, and Moses borrowed and transformed it. But Lagrange points out that the Jews did not believe that they offered their children to Jahveh, when they sacrificed them to Malik (Religion semitique, 1905, pp. 100 sqq.). Jer., xxxii, 35, and Soph., i, 5, distinguish between Malik and the Hebrew God.

Cheyne (Traditions and Beliefs of Ancient Israel, 1907, pp. 63 sqq.) connects the origin of Jahveh with his Yerahme'el theory; but even the most advanced critics regard Cheyne's theory as a discredit to modern criticism. Other singular opinions as to the origin of the sacred name may be safely omitted. The view that Jahveh is of Hebrew origin is the most satisfactory. Arguing from Ex., vi, 2-8, such commentators as Nicholas of Lyra, Tostatus, Cajetan, Bonfrère, etc., maintain that the name was revealed for the first time to Moses on Mount Horeb. God declares in this vision that he "appeared to Abraham . . . by the name of God Almighty; and my name Adonai [Jahveh] I did not shew them". But the phrase "to appear by a name" does not necessarily imply the first revelation of that name; it rather signifies the explanation of the name, or a manner of acting conformable to the meaning of the name (cf. Robion in "la Science cathol.", 1888, pp. 618-24; Delattre, ibid., 1892, pp. 673-87; van Kasteren, ibid., 1894, pp. 296-315; Robert in "Revue biblique", 1894, pp. 161-81). On Mt. Horeb God told Moses that He had not acted with the Patriarchs as the God of the Covenant, Jahveh, but as God Almighty.

Perhaps it is preferable to say that the sacred name, though perhaps in a somewhat modified form, had been in use in the patriarchal family before the time of Moses. On Mt. Horeb God revealed and explained the accurate form of His name, Jahveh.

• The sacred name occurs in Genesis about 156 times; this frequent occurrence can hardly be a mere prolepsis.
• Gen., iv, 26, states that Enos "began to call upon the name of the Lord [Jahveh]", or as the Hebrew text suggests, "began to call himself after the name of Jahveh".
• Jochabed, the mother of Moses, has in her name an abbreviated form Jo (Yo) of Jahveh. The pre-Mosaic existence of the Divine name among the Hebrews accounts for this fact more easily than the supposition that the Divine element was introduced after the revelation of the name.
• Among the 163 proper names which bear an element of the sacred name in their composition, 48 have yeho or yo at the beginning, and 115 have yahu or yah and the end, while the form Jahveh never occurs in any such composition. Perhaps it might be assumed that these shortened forms yeho, yo, yahu, yah, represent the Divine name as it existed among the Isralites before the full name Jahveh was revealed on Mt. Horeb. On the other hand, Driver (Studia biblica, I, 5) has shown that these short forms are the regular abbreviations of the full name. At any rate, while it is not certain that God revealed His sacred name to Moses for the first time, He surely revealed on Mt. Horeb that Jahveh is His incommunicable name, and explained its meaning.

Besides the works referred to in the text, the reader may consult: RELAND, Deeds Excreitationum (Utrecht, 1707); SCHRADER in SCHENKEL'S Bibel Lexicon, s. v. Jahve; PHAT, Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Jehovah; ROBERTSON SMITH in Brit. and Foreign Evan. Review (January, 1876), gives a summary of recent discussion of the subject; OEHLER, Real-Encyclopadie, S.V. Jehova.

A.J. MAAS

Jehu

The derivation of the name is uncertain. By some it is translated "Yahweh is he".

I. Jehu (Sept. 'Ioú), a prophet, described in III Kings, xvi, 1, as the son of Hanani, and as prophesying against Baasa, the then reigning King of Israel. Hanani is probably to be identified with the prophet of that name mentioned in II Par., xvi, 7. It is uncertain whether Jehu belonged to the Southern or Northern Kingdom, but, at all events, his ministry seems to have been exercised chiefly in the latter. He appears later in the reign of Josaphat, King of Juda, whom he reproaches for his alliance with Achab (cf. II Par., xix, 2-3). He outlived Josaphat, and wrote the history of his reign (II Par., xx, 34).

II. Jehu,, the tenth King of Israel, 884 to 856, or 865 to 828, son of Josaphat, son of Namsi; his tribe is not mentioned. According to Josephus (Antiq., IX, vi, 1) he was chief commandant of the army of Joram, his predecessor. For his sudden elevation to the royal power and his bloody reign see IV Kings, ix, x. The Prophet Elias had previously received a command from the Lord to anoint Jehu king over Israel (III Kings, xix, 16), but the order was only carried out by Eliseus, his successor. While Joram, King of Israel, was still convalescing in Jezrahel from a wound, Eliseus sent "one of the sons of the prophets" to Jehu's head­quarters in Ramoth Galaad with orders to anoint him king and announce to him his mission of Divine vengeance against the wicked house of Achab. Jehu was immediately acclaimed king by his brother officers, and he forthwith set out in his chariot with his followers for Jezrahel, where Ozochias, King of Juda, was visiting his ally Joram. They fled, but Joram was killed by an arrow from the bow of Jehu, and Ozochias, being mortally wounded, died shortly after in Mageddo. Entering the town of Jezrahel, Jehu perceived the Queen Jezabel at a window of her palace, and he bade her attendants to cast her down headlong and she was trampled under the hoofs of the horses (III Kings, xxi, 23). Consistently with his programme of vengeance, Jehu caused the seventy sons of Achab who resided in Samaria to be put to death, and likewise all of the chief men and friends and priests of the house of Achab, as well as forty-two men of the brethren of Ozochias. He abolished the worship of Baal and slew its priests and followers, but he maintained the worship of the golden calves erected by Jeroboam. He was commended by Yahweh for his conduct towards the house of Achab, but nevertheless he is counted among the unfaithful rulers. Brief allusion is made to his defence of Israel against the incursions of the Syrians. On the occasion of Salmanasar's invasion in 842, Jehu sent a delegation to meet the Assyrian conqueror, with rich presents. This fact is recorded in one of the cuneiform inscriptions of Salmanasar, where Jehu is called the son of Amri (Humrii), doubtless through a mistake on the part of the Assyrian annalist, who naturally considered Jehu as a lineal descendant of Amri, the founder of Samaria, since he occupied the throne of that dynasty. The same event is pictorially set forth on the Nimrod obelisk.

III. Jehu (Sept. 'Ieoú), son of Obed, of the tribe of Juda (I Par., ii, 38).

IV. Jehu, son of Josabia, of the tribe of Simeon (I Par., iv, 35).

V. Jehu, (Sept. 'Ieoúl), one of David's heroes, of the tribe of Benjamin, native of Anathoth (I Par., xii, 3).

Vigoroux, Dict. de la Bible, s. v.; Hastings, Dict of the Bible, s. v.; Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, IX, vi, 1.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

Jemez Pueblo

An Indian pueblo situated upon the north bank of the river of the same name about twenty miles north-west of Bernalillo, New Mexico. Its inhabitants, of Tanoan Shoshonean stock, are all that remain of an important tribe occupying some ten villages in the same region when first known to the Spaniards in 1541. The name comes from their Keran neighbours. They themselves call their town Walatoa, "Bear Village". The Jemez country was first entered by Coronado in 1541, and was visited later by Espejo (1583) and Oñate (1598). Through the efforts of the Franciscan Father Martín de Arvide the tribe was induced, about 1618, to concentrate in two villages, in each of which a mission was established. Somewhat later one of these was abandoned for a new station, San Juan (de los Jemez). Twice the Jemez, in connection with some other Indians, conspired against the Spaniards, but the risings were speedily suppressed, until the outbreak of the general Pueblo rebellion in 1680, when the Jemez rose in both villages, killing one of the missionaries. At last, in 1694, General Vargas stormed their pueblo, killing nearly 100 of the inhabitants and carrying off nearly 400 prisoners. The village was also destroyed, reducing the tribe to the single pueblo of San Diego. In 1696 they again revolted, killing the resident Franciscan missionary, and fled west to the Navaho. After some years of exile they returned and built the pueblo in which they now reside. In 1728 and 1780-1 they suffered heavily from smallpox. They number now about 500, including the remnant of the kindred Pecos tribe. Both a government and a Franciscan day-school are kept among them. In culture and general characteristics the Jemez resemble the other Pueblos.

Bancroft, Hist. Arizona and New Mexico; Bandelier, Archeol. Inst. Papers; Hodge, Handbook; Winship, Coronado Expedition in Fourteenth Rpt. Bur. Am. Ethnol., for which see Indians, American.

JAMES MOONEY

Ven. Philipp Jeningen

Born at Eichstätt, Bavaria, 5 January, 1642;d, at Ellwangen, 8 February, 1704. Entering the Society of Jesus, 19 January, 1663, he became a most successful popular missionary at the shrine of Our Lady of Schönenberg, near Ellwangen in Swabia, made famous by the Jesuits, and to which Jeningen, through the renown of his holiness, drew pilgrims from near and far. For many years he went forth on missions in the entire neighbouring country, his burning zeal achieving wonderful results. He is yet remembered as the "Apostle of the Ries".

Pergmayer, Vita . . . Philippi Jeningen . . . (Ingolstadt and Munich, 1763); Hausen, Leben . . . Philipp Jeningen . . . (Dillingen, 1766; Ratisbon, 1873); Piscalar, Aus dem Lebendes ehrw. Philipp Jeningen . . . (Paderborn, 1859); Der ehrw. P. Philipp Jeningen . . . von einem Priesterder Dioz. von Rottenburg (Ellwangen, 1908); Beschreibung der laueretanischen Kapelle und Kirche auf dem Schönenberg (Ellwangen, 1870); a life in MS. at the Jesuit College at Feldkirch; a collection of letters in the archives of the German province.

ANTHONY HUONDER

Silvester Jenks

Theologian, born in Shropshire, c. 1656; died in December, 1714. He was educated at Douai College, where he was professor of philosophy from 1680 to 1686. He was later a preacher in ordinary to James II. At the Revolution of 1688 he fled to Flanders. On his return to England he laboured as a missionary in or near London and was appointed by the chapter Archdeacon of Surrey and Kent. In 1711 he was elected by Propaganda Vicar Apostolic of the Northern District (13 August, 1713), but died of paralysis before his consecration. Among his works are: "A Contrite and Humble Heart" (Paris, 1692); "Practical Discourses on the Morality of the Gospel" (1699); "The Blind Obedience of a Humble Penitent the Best Cure for Scruples" (1699, republished, London, 1872); "The Whole Duty of a Christian" (1707); "A Short Review of the Book of Jansenius" (1710). A portrait engraved by le Pouter in 1694 is prefixed to a Paris edition of "A Contrite and Humble Heart".

Dodd, Church History, III (Brussels, 1739-42); Bowen, introduction to God's Safe Way of Obedience (London, 1872); Brady, Annals of the Catholic Hierarchy (London, 1877); Gillow, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s.v.; Cooper in Dict. Nat. Biog., s.v.

EDWIN BURTON

Sir Patrick Alfred Jennings

An Australian statesman, b. at Newry, Ireland, 1831; d. July, 1897. He received his education, which included a training in engineering and surveying, in his native town, went to Victoria in 1852, and settled in the St. Arnaud district, where he filled various public offices. In 1863 he went to New South Wales, and engaged in pastoral pursuits in the Riverina district. Four years later he was appointed to the Legislative Council of New South Wales from which he resigned in 1869 and stood as a candidate for the Legislative Assembly, to which he was elected. In 1874 he was honoured by Pius IX with the Order of St. Gregory the Great, and in 1876 was made a Knight Commander of the Order of Pius IX and St. Gregory the Great. In 1876 he represented New South Wales and other states at the Philadelphia Exhibition. He was created C.M.G. in 1879, and in the following year K.C.M.G. For a few months in 1883 he was Vice-President of the Executive Council and colonial treasurer for a short period in 1885. In the following February Sir Patrick became premier and colonial treasurer, but resigned these offices in 1887. On revisiting Ireland in 1887 he was made an honorary LL.D. of Dublin University. In the same year he went to Rome, and received the Grand Cross of Pius IX from Leo XIII. He was called to the Legislative Council in 1890, was a member of the Senate of Sydney University a Fellow of St. John's (Catholic) College, and trustee of the Sydney Art Gallery. From 1891 until his death he led a somewhat retired life, but took a keen interest in benevolent and social movements.

HEATON, Australion Dictionary of Dates (Sydney, 1879); MENNELL, Dictionary of Australasian Biography (London, 1892); Men of the Time (13th ed., London, 1891).

JOHN W. KENNEDY

Jephte

One of the judges of Israel. The story of Jephte is narrated in chapters xi and xii of the Book of Judges. He was a warrior of Galaad and the son of a harlot. His father's name was Galaad, who having a wife and other children, these latter thrust out Jephte from the family and he fled to the land of Tob in Eastern Syria. Here he became the leader of a band of "needy men" and robbers who followed him as their prince. At this juncture the Israelitish territory east of the Jordan was invaded by the Ammonites, and the elders of Galaad, being in sore need of a leader to conduct the defence, saw themselves forced to go to Tob and ask Jephte to return and be their prince. After expressing surprise that they should make him such an offer, considering the treatment he had received in his native city, he yielded to their entreaties, but insisted on the condition that, should he be victorious over the Ammonites, his own countrymen would remain faithful to their word and recognize him as their prince. The elders made a solemn promise, and Jephte returned with them to the land of Galaad, where he was made chief by popular acclamation. Before beginning his campaign, Jephte made a vow to the Lord, saying: "If thou wilt deliver the children of Ammon into my hands, whosoever shall first come forth out of the doors of my house, and shall meet me when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, the same will I offer a holocaust to the Lord." After a rather long negotiation with the King of the Ammonites as to Israel's right of possession of the land of Galaad, Jephte led his forces against the invaders and "smote them from Aroer till you come to Mennith, twenty cities, and as far as Abel, which is set with vineyards, with a very great slaughter: and the children of Ammon were humbled by the children of Israel" (Judges, xi, 33).

On his triumphant return to his home in Maspha, the first person to come forth to meet him is his only daughter, accompanied by a chorus of women. On beholding her he is stricken with alarm and dismay, remembering his rash vow, but he declares that he has opened his mouth to the Lord and cannot do otherwise than fulfil it. The daughter expresses a noble and generous resignation to her fate, but asks a respite of two months that she may "bewail her virginity" in the mountains with her companions. At the expiration of the two months "she returned to her father and he did to her as he had vowed." Whence arose a custom that from year to year the daughters of Israel used to assemble together and lament during four days the daughter of Jephte the Galaadite.

The obvious import of the narrative is that the daughter of Jephte was offered up as a human sacrifice, and in fact, such has been the unanimous interpretation of it in Jewish, as well as in early Christian, tradition. Some modern apologists, however, shocked by the idea that a judge upon whom came "the spirit of the Lord" (xi, 29) could commit so barbarous an act, have endeavoured to prove that the words of Jephte's vow should not be taken literally, but as referring to perpetual celibacy to which his daughter was to be condemned. The arguments to this effect, which are far from convincing, may be found in Vigouroux, "Dictionnaire de la Bible", s.v. They ignore the barbarous ethical condition of the Israelites at that relatively remote epoch–a condition which is evident from other narratives in the same Book of Judges (v.g. that of ch. xix). That human sacrifice was expressly forbidden by the Mosaic Law does not help the argument, for, even granting that the Law then existed at all otherwise than in embryo, which is at least very doubtful, it is plain from the historical books referring to this and subsequent periods that its prescriptions were constantly ignored by the Jewish people. That such rash vows with their dire consequences, and even human sacrifices, were not things unheard of in that stage of Israel's history, may be gathered from such passages as I Kings, xiv, 24 sqq.; II Kings, xxi, 6-9; IV Kings, xvi, 3; etc.

After the conquest of the Ammonites Jephte became involved in a severe conflict with the neighbouring tribesmen of Ephraim who arrogantly complained that they had not been invited to take part in the expedition. Jephte retorted that they had been called upon to assist him but had declined, and the result was a fierce struggle between Ephraim and the men of Galaad in which the latter were victorious. They obtained strategic control of the fords of the Jordan by which the fleeing Ephraimites were obliged to return homeward, and when the fugitives appeared, each one was asked to pronounce the word "shibboleth" (an ear of corn), and if according to the Ephraimitic dialect it was pronounced "sibboleth" the man was immediately put to death. That forty-two thousand Ephraimites were slain on that occasion may be an exaggeration or possibly a change of the text. After a judgeship of six years Jephte died and was buried in his city of Galaad.

Palis in Vigoroux, Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Jephté; Cooke in Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, s.v. Jephthah.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

Jeremias

[Hebrew Irmeyah; often in the paragogic form Irmeyahu, especially in the Book of Jeremias–meaning, possibly, "whom Jehovah appoints" (see Gesenius, "Lexicon", s.v.); Sept. Ieremias], the name of seven or eight men, besides the prophet, mentioned in the Old Testament:–

(1) Jeremias of lobna (A.V. Libnah, II Kings, xxiii, 31), of the tribe of Juda. he was the father of Amital, or Hamutal, one of the wives of Josias and mother of Kings Joachaz (IV Kings, xxiii, 31) and Sedecias (IV Kings, xxiv, 18). Cf. Jer., lii, 1–Gr. text.

(2) Jeremias, Jeremia [D.V., I Par., v, 24 (A.V. Jeremiah, Chron.); Sept. Ieremia], a chief of the half tribe of Manasses east of the Jordan, about the time of the Assyrian deportation under Thelgathphalnasar (A.V. Tiglath-pileser).

(3) Jeremias, one of the Benjamite bowmen and slingers who repaired to David's assistance at Siceleg (A.V. Ziklag) during the persecution by Saul (I Par., xii, 4).

(4) Jeremias (A.V. and R.V. Jeremiah), a valiant warrior of the tribe of Gad, fifth in rank of those who went over to David when he had withdrawn into the desert of Juda to escape capture at the hands of Saul (I Par., xii, 10).

(5) Jeremias, the tenth in reputation of the Gadite braves who threw in their lot with David's small army when he lay hid in the wilderness (I Par., xii, 13).

(6) Jeremias, son of Habsanias (R.V. Habazziniah), and father of Jezonias (A.V. and R.V. Jaazaniah). The last-mentioned seems to have been the head of the Rechabites (Jer., xxxv, 3) in the time of th prophet.

(7) Jeremias, a priest who returned with Zorobabel and Josue to Jerusalem [II Esd. (A.V. Nehem.), xii, 1] after the Babylonian Captivity–about 536 b.c.. His name was given to one of the twenty-two courses [II Esd., xii, 1-7–Vig., op. cit. below, here reckons only twenty-one; cf. Gr. text (Neemias), where the name is written Ieremia. Hattus is omitted in v. 2, and a lacuna occurs after the Sechenias of v. 3 as far as v. 7], into which were divided the four families of priests (I Esd., ii, 36-9).

(8) Jeremias, head of one of the priestly families, who, together with the other leaders of the people, subscribed to the sacred covenant renewed in the time of Nehemias (about 444 b.c.). A comparison of the priestly list given in II Esd., x, 2-8, with the enumeration of xii, 1 sq., will show the name of Jeremias (Ieremia) placed in close juxtaposition to that of Saraias (Saraia), and both are mentioned, in either case, amongst the first three. For these and similar reasons some have been led, despite the seeming difficulties, chiefly chronological, to identify that Jeremias who "went up with Zorobabel" and the homonymous priest who swore on behalf of his brethren that "they would walk in the law of God".

ERMONI in VIG., Dict. de la Bible, s.v. Jérémie; MOSS in HAST., Dict. of the Bible, s.v. Jeremiah.

P.J. MACAULEY

Jeremias

( the Prophet.)

Jeremias lived at the close of the seventh and in the first part of the sixth century before Christ; a contemporary of Draco and Solon of Athens. In the year 627, during the reign of Josias, he was called at a youthful age to be a prophet, and for nearly half a century, at least from 627 to 585, he bore the burden of the prophetic office. He belonged to a priestly (not a high-priestly) family of Anathoth, a small country town northeast of Jerusalem now called Anatâ; but he seems never to have performed priestly duties at the temple. The scenes of his prophetic activity were, for a short time, his native town, for the greater part of his life, the metropolis Jerusalem, and, for a time after the fall of Jerusalem, Masphath (Jer., xl, 6) and the Jewish colonies of the Dispersion in Egypt (Jer., xliii, 6 sqq.). His name has received varying etymological interpretations ("Lofty is Jahwah" or "Jahweh founds"); it appears also as the name of other persons in the Old Testament. Sources for the history of his life and times are, first, the book of prophecies bearing his name, and, second, the Books of Kings and of Paralipomenon (Chronicles). It is only when taken in connection with the history of his times that the external course of his life, the individuality of his nature, and the ruling theme of his discourses can be understood.

I. PERIOD OF JEREMIAS

The last years of the seventh century and the first decades of the sixth brought with them a series of political catastrophes which completely changed national conditions in Western Asia. The overthrow of the Assyrian Empire, which was completed in 606 by the conquest of Ninive, induced Nechao II of Egypt to attempt, with the aid of a large army, to strike a crushing blow at the ancient enemy on the Euphrates. Palestine was in the direct route between the great powers of the world of that era on the Euphrates and the Nile, and the Jewish nation was roused to action by the march of the Egyptian army through its territory. Josias, the last descendent of David, had begun in Jerusalem a moral and religious reformation "in the ways of David", the carrying out of which, however, was frustrated by the lethargy of the people and the foreign policy of the king. The attempt of Josias to check the advance of the Egyptians cost him his life at the battle of Mageddo, 608. Four years later, Nechao, the conqueror at Mageddo, was slain by Nabuchodonosor at Carchemish on the Euphrates. From that time Nabuchodonosor's eyes were fixed on Jerusalem. The last, shadowy kings upon the throne of David, the three sons of Josias–Joachaz, Joakim, and Sedecias–hastened the destruction of the kingdom by their unsuccessful foreign policy and their anti-religious or, at least, weak internal policy. Both Joakim and Sedecias, in spite of the warnings of the prophet Jeremias, allowed themselves to be misled by the war party in the nation into refusing to pay the tribute to the King of Babylon. The king's revenge followed quickly upon the rebellion. In the second great expedition Jerusalem was conquered (586) and destroyed after a siege of eighteen months, which was only interrupted by the battle with the Egyptian army of relief. The Lord cast aside his footstool in the day of his wrath and sent Juda into the Babylonian Captivity.

This is the historical background to the lifework of the Prophet Jeremias: in foreign policy an era of lost battles and other events preparatory to the great catastrophe; in the inner life of the people an era of unsuccessful attempts at reformation, and the appearance of fanatical parties such as generally accompany the last days of a declining kingdom. While the kings from the Nile and the Euphrates alternately laid the sword on the neck of the Daughter of Sion, the leaders of the nation, the kings and priests, became more and more involved in party schemes; a Sion party, led by false prophets, deluded itself by the superstitious belief that the temple of Jahweh was the unfailing talisman of the capital; a fanatically foolhardy war party wanted to organize a resistance to the utmost against the great powers of the world; a Nile party looked to the Egyptians for the salvation of the country, and incited opposition to the Babylonian lordship. Carried away by human politics, the people of Sion forgot its religion, the national trust in God, and wished to fix the day and hour of its redemption according to its own will. Over all these factions the cup of the wine of wrath gradually grew full, to be finally poured from seven vessels during the Babylonian Exile laid upon the nation of the Prophets.

II. MISSION OF JEREMIAS

In the midst of the confusion of a godless policy of despair at the approach of destruction, the prophet of Anathoth stood as "a pillar of iron, and a wall of brass". The prophet of the eleventh hour, he had the hard mission, on the eve of the great catastrophe of Sion, of proclaiming the decree of God that in the near future the city and temple should be overthrown. From the time of his first calling in vision to the prohetic office, he saw the rod of correction in the hand of God, he heard the word that the Lord would watch over the execution of His decree (i, 11 sq.). That Jerusalem would be destroyed was the constant assertion, the ceterum censeo of the Cato of Anathoth. He appeared before the people with chains about his neck (cf. xxvii, xxviii) in order to give a drastic illustration of the captivity and chains which he foretold. The false prophets preached only of freedom and victory, but the Lord said: "A liberty for you to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the famine" (xxxiv, 17). It was so clear to him that the next generation would be involved in the overthrow of the kingdom that he renounced marriage and the founding of a family for himself (xvi, 104), because he did not wish to have children who would surely be the victims of the sword or become the slaves of the Babylonians. His celibacy was consequently a declaration of his faith in the revelation granted him of the destruction of the city. Jeremias is thus the Biblical and historical counterpart of Cassandra in the Homeric poems, who foresaw the fall of Troy, but found no credence in her own house, yet was so strong in her conviction that she renounced marriage and all the joys of life.

Along with this first task, to prove the certainty of the catastrophe of 586, Jeremias had the second commission to declare that this catastrophe was a moral necessity, to proclaim it in the ears of the people as the inevitable result of the moral guilt since the days of Manasses (IV Kings, xxi, 10-15); in a word, to set forth the Babylonian Captivity as a moral, not merely a historical, fact. It was only because the stubborn nation had thrown off the yoke of the Lord (Jer., ii, 20) that it must bow its neck under the yoke of the Babylonians. In order to arouse the nation from its moral lethargy, and to make moral preparation for the day of the Lord, the sermons of the preacher of repentance of Anathoth emphasized this causal connection between punishment and guilt, until it became monotonous. Although he failed to convert the people, and thus to turn aside entirely the calamity from Jerusalem, nevertheless the word of the Lord in his mouth became, for some, a hammer that broke their stony hearts to repentance (xxiii, 29). Thus, Jeremias had not only "to root up, and to pull down", he had also in the positive work of salvation "to build, and to plant" (i, 10). These latter aims of the penitential discourses of Jeremias make plain why the religious and moral conditions of the time are all painted in the same dark tone: the priests do not inquire after Jahweh; the leaders of the people themselves wander in strange paths; the prohets prophesy in the name of Baal; Juda has become the meeting-place of strange gods; the people have forsaken the fountain of living water and have provoked the Lord to anger by idolatry and the worship of high places, by the sacrifice of children, desecration of the Sabbath, and by false weights. This severity in the discourses of Jeremias makes them the most striking type of prophetic declamation against sin. One well-known hypothesis ascribes to Jeremias also the authorship of the Books of Kings. In reality the thought forming the philosophical basis of the Books of Kings and the conception underlying the speeches of Jeremias complement each other, inasmuch as the fall of the kingdom is traced back in the one to the guilt of the kings, and in the other to the people's participation in this guilt.

III. LIFE OF JEREMIAS

A far more exact picture of the life of Jeremias has been preserved than of the life of any other seer of Sion. It was an unbroken chain of steadily growing outward and inward difficulties, a genuine "Jeremiad". On account of the prophecies, his life was no longer safe among his fellow-citizens of Anathoth (xi, 21 sqq.), and of no teacher did the saying prove truer that "a prophet hath no honour in his own country". When he transferred his residence from Anathoth to Jerusalem his troubles increased, and in the capital of the kingdom he was doomed to learn by corporal suffering that veritas parit odium (truth draws hatred upon itself). King Joakim could never forgive the prophet for threatening him with punishment on account of his unscrupulous mania for building and for his judicial murders: "He shall be buried with the burial of an ass" (xxii, 13-19). When the prophecies of Jeremias were read before the king, he fell into such a rage that he threw the roll into the fire and commanded the arrest of the prophet (xxxvi, 21-26). Then the word of the Lord came to Jerermias to let Baruch the scribe write again his words (xxxvi, 27-32). More than once the prophet was in prison and in chains without the word of the Lord being silenced (xxxvi, 5 sqq.); more than once he seemed, in human judgment, doomed to death, but, like a wall of brass, the word of the Almighty was the protection of his life: "Be not afraid . . . they shall not prevail: for I am with thee, saith the Lord, to deliver thee" (i, 17-19). The religious opinion he maintained, that only by a moral change could a catastrophe in outward conditions prepare the way for improvement, brought him into bitter conflict with the political parties of the nation. The Sion party, with its superstitious condfidence in the temple (vii, 4), incited the people to open revolt against Jeremias, because, at the gate and in the outer court of the temple, he prophesied the fate of the holy place in Silo for the house of the Lord; and the prophet was in great danger of violent death at the hands of the Sionists (xxvi; cf. vii). The party friendly to Egypt cursed him because he condemned the coalition with Egypt, and presented to the King of Egypt also the cup of the wine of wrath (xxv, 17-19); they also hated him because, during the siege of Jerusalem, he declared, before the event, that the hopes placed on an Egyptian army of relief were delusive (xxxvi, 5-9). The party of noisy patriots calumniated Jeremias as a morose pessimist (cf. xxvii, xxviii), because they had allowed themselves to be deceived as to the seriousness of the crisis by the flattering words of Hananias of Gabaon and his companions, and dreamed of freedom and peace while exile and war were already approaching the gates of the city. The exhortation of the prophet to accept the inevitable, and to choose voluntary submission as a lesser evil than a hopeless struggle, was interpreted by the war party as a lack of patriotism. Even at the present day, some commentators wish to regard Jeremias as a traitor to his country–Jeremias, who was the best friend of his brethren and of the people of Israel (II Mach. xv, 14), so deeply did he feel the weal and woe of his native land. Thus was Jeremias loaded with the curses of all parties as the scapegoat of the blinded nation. During the siege of Jerusalem he was once more condemned to death and thrown into a miry dungeon; this time a foreigner rescued him from certain death (xxxvii-xxxix).

Still more violent than these outward battles were the conflicts in the soul of the prophet. Being in full sympathy with the national sentiment, he felt that his own fate was bound up with that of the nation; hence the hard mission of announcing to the people the sentence of death affected him deeply; hence his opposition to accepting this commission (i, 6). With all the resources of prophetic rhetoric he sought to bring back the people to "the old paths" (vi, 16), but in this endeavour he felt as though he were trying to effect that "the Ethopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots" (xiii, 23). He heard the sins of his people crying to heaven for vengeance, and forcibly expresses his approval of the judgment pronounced upon the blood-stained city (cf. vi). The next moment, however, he prays the Lord to let the cup pass from Jerusalem, and wrestles like Jacob with God for a blessing upon Sion. The grandeur of soul of the great sufferer appears most plainly in the fervid prayers for his people (cf. especially xiv, 7-9, 19-22), which were often offered directly after a fiery declaration of coming punishment. He knows that with the fall of Jerusalem the place that was the scene of revelation and salvation will be destroyed. Nevertheless, at the grave of the religious hopes of Israel, he still has the expectation that the Lord, notwithstanding all that has happened, will bring His promises to pass for the sake of His name. The Lord thinks "thoughts of peace, and not of affliction", and will let Himself be found of those who seek (xxix, 10-14). As He watched to destroy, so will He likewise watch to build up (xxxi, 28). The prophetic gift does not appear with equal clearness in the life of any other prophet as alike a psychological problem and a personal task. His bitter outward and inward experiences give the speeches of Jeremias a strongly personal tone. More than once this man of iron seems in danger of losing his spiritual balance. He calls down punishment from heaven upon his enemies (cf. xii, 3; xviii, 23). Like a Job among the prophets, he curses the day of his birth (xv, 10; xx, 14-18); he would like to arise, go hence, and preach instead to the stones in the wilderness: "Who will give me in the wilderness a lodging place . . . and I will leave my people, and depart from them?" (ix, 2; Heb. text, ix, 1). It is not improbable that the mourning prophet of Anathoth was the author of many of the Psalms that are full of bitter reproach.

After the destruction of Jerusalem, Jeremias was not carried away into the Babylonian exile. He remained behind in Chanaan, in the wasted vineyard of Jahweh, that he might continue his prophetic office. It was indeed a life of martyrdom among the dregs of the nation that had been left in the land. At a later date, he was dragged to Egypt by emigrating Jews (xi-xliv). According to a tradition first mentioned by Tertullian (Scorp., viii), Jeremias was stoned to death in Egypt by his own countrymen on account of his discourses threatening the coming punishment of God (cf. Heb., xi, 37), thus crowning with martyrdom a life of steadily increasing trials and sorrows. Jeremias would not have died as Jeremias had he not died a martyr. The Roman Martyrology assigns his name to 1 May. Posterity sought to atone for the sins his contemporaries had committed against him. Even during the Babylonian Captivity his prophecies seem to have been the favourite reading of the exiles (II Par., xxxvi, 21; I Esd., i, 1; Dan., ix, 2). In the later books compare Ecclus., xlix, 8 sq.; II Mach., ii, 1-8; xv. 12-16; Matt., xvi, 14.

IV. CHARACTERISTIC QUALITIES OF JEREMIAS

The delineation in II and III of the life and task of Jeremias has already made plain the peculiarity of his character. Jeremias is the prophet of mourning and of symbolical suffering. This distinguishes his personality from that of Isaias, the prophet of ecstasy and the Messianic future, of Ezechiel, the prophet of mystical (not typical) suffering, and of Daniel, the cosmopolitan revealer of apocalyptic visions of the Old Covenant. No prophet belonged so entirely to his age and his immediate surroundings, and no prophet was so seldom transported by the Spirit of God from a dreary present into a brighter future than the mourning prophet of Anathoth. Consequently, the life of no other prophet reflects the history of his times so vividly as the life of Jeremias reflects the time immediately preceeding the Babylonian Captivity. A sombre, depressed spirit overshadows his life, just as a gloomy light overhangs the grotto of Jeremias in the northern part of Jerusalem. In Michelangelo's frescoes on the ceilings of the Sistine chapel there is a masterly delineation of Jeremias as the prophet of myrrh, perhaps the most expressive and eloquent figure among the prophets depicted by the great master. He is represented bent over like a tottering pillar of the temple, the head supported by the right hand, the disordered beard expressive of a time of intense sorrow, and the forehead scored with wrinkles, the entire exterior a contrast to the pure soul within. His eyes seem to see blood and ruins, and his lips appear to murmur a lament. The whole picture strikingly portrays a man who never in his life laughed, and who turned aside from scenes of joy, because the Spirit told him that soon the voice of mirth should be silenced (xvi, 8 sq.).

Equally characteristic and idiosyncratic is the literary style of Jeremias. He does not use the classically elegant language of a Deutero-Isaias or an Amos, nor does he possess the imagination shown in the symbolism and elaborate detail of Ezechiel, neither does he follow the lofty thought of a Daniel in his apocalyptic vision of the history of the world. The style of Jeremias is simple, without ornament and but little polished. Jerome speaks of him as "in verbis simplex et facilis, in majestate sensuum profundissimus" (simple and easy in words, most profound in majesty of thought). Jeremias often speaks in jerky, disjointed sentences, as if grief and excitement of spirit had stifled his voice. Nor did he follow strictly the laws of poetic rhythm in the use of the Kînah, or elegiac, verse, which had, moreover, an anacoluthic measure of its own. Like these anacoluthæ so are also the many, at times even monotonous, repetitions for which he has been blamed, the only individual expressions of the mournful feeling of his soul that are correct in style. Sorrow inclines to repetition, in the manner of the prayers on the Mount of Olives. Just as grief in the East is expressed in the neglect of the outward appearance, so the great representative of elegiac verse of the Bible had neither time nor desire to adorn his thoughts with a carefully chosen diction.

Jeremias also stands by himself among the prophets by his manner of carrying on and developing the Messianic idea. He was far from attaining the fullness and clearness of the Messianic gospel of the Book of Isaias; he does not contribute as much as the Book of Daniel to the terminology of the gospel. Above all the other great prophets, Jeremias was sent to his age, and only in very isolated instances does he throw a prophetic light in verbal prophecy on the fullness of time, as in his celebrated discourse of the Good Shepherd of the House of David (xxiii, 1-5), or when he most beautifully, in chapters xxx-xxxiii, proclaims the deliverance from the Babylonian Captivity as the type and pledge of the Messianic deliverance. This lack of actual Messianic prophecies by Jeremias has its compensation; for his entire life became a living personal prophecy of the suffering Messias, a living illustration of the predictions of suffering made by the other prophets. The suffering Lamb of God in the Book of Isaias (liii, 7) becomes in Jeremias a human being: "I was as a meek lamb, that is carried to be a victim" (Jer., xi, 19). The other seers were Messianic prophets; Jeremias was a Messianic prophecy embodied in flesh and blood. It is, therefore, fortunate that the story of his life has been more exactly preserved than that of the other prophets, because his life had a prophetic significance. The various parallels between the life of Jeremias and of the Messias are known: both one and the other had at the eleventh hour to proclaim the overthrow of Jerusalem and its temple by the Babylonians or Romans; both wept over the city which stoned the prophets and did not recognize what was for its peace; the love of both was repaid with hatred and ingratitude. Jeremias deepened the conception of the Messias in another regard. From the time the prophet of Anathoth, a man beloved of God, was obliged to live a life of suffering in spite of his guiltlessness and holiness from birth, Israel was no longer justified in judging its Messias by a mechanical theory of retribution and doubting his sinlessness and acceptableness to God because of his outward sorrows. Thus the life of Jeremias, a life as bitter as myrrh, was gradually to accustom the eye of the people to the suffering figure of Christ, and to make clear in advance the bitterness of the Cross. Therefore it is with a profound right that the Offices of the Passion in the Liturgy of the Church often use the language of Jeremias in an applied sense.

V. THE BOOK OF THE PROPHECIES OF JEREMIAS

A. Analysis of Contents

The book in its present form has two main divisions: chapters i-xiv, discourses threatening punishment which are aimed directly against Juda and are intermingled with narratives of personal and national events, and chapters xlvi-li, discourses containing threats against nine heathen nations and intended to warn Juda indirectly against the polytheism and policy of these peoples.

In chapter i is related the calling of the prophet, in order to prove to his suspicious countrymen that he was the ambassador of God. Not he himself had assumed the office of prophet, but Jahweh had conferred it upon him notwithstanding his reluctance. Chapters ii-vi contain rhetorical and weighty complaints and threats of judgment on account of the nation's idolatry and foreign policy. The very first speech in ii-iii may be said to present the scheme of the Jeremianic discourse. Here also appears at once the conception of Osee which is typical as well of Jeremias: Israel, the bride of the Lord, has degraded herself into becoming the paramour of strange nations. Even the temple and sacrifice (vii-x), without inward conversion on the part of the people, cannot bring salvation; while other warnings are united like mosaics with the main ones. The "words of the covenant" in the Thorah recently found under Josias contain threatenings of judgment; the enmity of the citizens of Anathoth against the herald of this Thorah reveals the infatuation of the nation (xi-xii). Jeremias is commanded to hide a linen girdle, a symbol of the priestly nation of Sion, by the Euphrates and to let it rot there, to typify the downfall of the nation in exile on the Euphrates (xiii). The same stern symbolism is expressed later by the earthen bottle which is broken on the rocks before the Earthen Gate (xix, 1-11). According to the custom of the prophets (III Kings, xi, 29-31; Is., viii, 1-4; Ezech. v, 1-12), his warnings are accompanied by forcible pantomimic action. Prayers at the time of a great drought, statements which are of much value for the understanding of the psychological condition of the prophet in his spiritual struggles, follow (xiv-xv). The troubles of the times demand from the prophet an unmarried and joyless life (xvi-xvii). The creator can treat those he has created with the same supreme authority that the potter has over clay and earthen vessels. Jeremias is ill-treated (xviii-xx). A condemnation of the political and ecclesiastical leaders of the people and, in connection with this, the promise of a better shepherd are uttered (xxi-xxiii). The vision of the two baskets of figs is narrated in chapter xxiv. The repeated declaration (ceterum censeo) that the land will become a desolation follows (xxv). Struggles with the false prophets, who take wooden chains off the people and lead them instead with iron ones, are detailed. Both in a letter to the exiles in Babylon, and by word of mouth, Jeremias exhorts the captives to conform to the decrees of Jahweh (xxvi-xxix). Compare with this letter the "epistle of Jeremias" in Baruch, vi. A prophecy of consolation and salvation in the style of a Deutero-Isaias, concerning the return of God's favour to Israel and of the new, eternal covenant, is then given (xxx-xxxiii). The chapters following are taken up largely with narratives of the last days of the siege of Jerusalem and of the period after the conquest with numerous biographical details concerning Jeremias (xxxiv-xlv).

B. Literary Criticism of the Book

Much light is thrown on the production and genuineness of the book by the testimony of chapter xxxvi; Jeremias is directed to write down, either personally or by his scribe Baruch, the discourses he had given up to the fourth year of Joakim (604 b.c.). In order to strengthen the impression made by the prophecies as a whole, the individual predictions are to be united into a book, thereby preserving documentary proof of these discourses until the time in which the disasters threatened in them should actually come to pass. This first authentic recension of the prophecies forms the basis of the present Book of Jeremias. According to a law of literary transmission to which the Biblical books are also subject– habent sua fata libelli (books have their vicissitudes)–the first transcript was enlarged by various insertions and additions from the pen of Baruch or of a later prophet. The attempts of commentators to separate these secondary and tertiary additions in different cases from the original Jeremianic subject-matter have not always led to as convincing proof as in chapter lii. This chapter should be regarded as an addition of the post-Jeremianic period based on IV Kings, xxiv, 18-xxv, 30, on account of the concluding statement of li: "Thus far are the words of Jeremias." Cautious literary criticism is obliged to observe the principle of chronological arrangement which is perceptible in the present composition of the book, notwithstanding the additions: chapters i-vi belong apparently to the reign of King Josias (cf. the date in iii, 6); vii-xx belong, at least largely, to the reign of Joakim; xxi-xxxiii partly to the reign of Sedecias (cf. xxi, 1; xxvii, 1; xxviii, 1; xxxii, 1), although other portions are expressly assigned to the reigns of other kings: xxxiv-xxxix to the period of the siege of Jerusalem; xl-xlv to the period after the destruction of that city. Consequently, the chronology must have been considered in the arrangement of the material. Modern critical analysis of the book distinguishes between the portions narrated in the first person, regarded as directly attributable to Jeremias, and those portions which speak of Jeremias in the third person. According to Scholz, the book is arranged in "decades", and each larger train of thought or series of speeches is closed with a song or prayer. It is true that in the book parts classically perfect and highly poetic in character are often suddenly followed by the most commonplace prose, and matters given in the barest outline are not seldom succeeded by prolix and monotonous details. After what has been said above concerning elegiac verse, this difference in style can only be used with the greatest caution as a criterion for literary criticism. In the same way, investigation, of late very popular, as to whether a passage exhibits a Jeremianic spirit or not, leads to vague subjective results. Since the discovery (1904) of the Assuan texts, which strikingly confirm Jer., xliv, 1, has proved that Aramaic, as the koine (common dialect) of the Jewish colony in Egypt, was spoken as early as the fifth and sixth centuries b.c., the Aramaic expressions in the Book of Jeremias can no longer be quoted as proof of a later origin of such passages. Also, the agreement, verbal or conceptual, of texts in Jeremias with earlier books, perhaps with Deuteronomy, is not in itself a conclusive argument against the genuineness of these passages, for the prophet does not claim absolute originality.

Notwithstanding the repetition of earlier passages in Jeremias, chapters l-li are fundamentally genuine, although their genuineness has been strongly doubted, because, in the series of discourses threatening punishment to the heathen nations, it is impossible that there should not be a prophecy against Babylon, then the most powerful representative of paganism. These chapters are, indeed, filled with the Deutero-Isaian spirit of consolation, somewhat after the manner of Is., xlvii, but they do not therefore, as a matter of course, lack genuineness, as the same spirit of consolation also inspires xxx-xxxiii.

C. Textual Conditions of the Book

The arrangement of the text in the Septuagint varies from that of the Hebrew text and the Vulgate; the discourses against the heathen nations, in the Hebrew text, xlvi-li, are, in the Septuagint, inserted after xxv, 13, and partly in different order. Great differences exist also as to the extent of the text of the Book of Jeremias. The text of the Hebrew and Latin Bibles is about one-eighth larger than that of the Septuagint. The question as to which text has preserved the original form cannot be answered according to the theory of Streane and Scholz, who declare at the outset that every addition of the Hebrew version is a later enlargement of the original text in the Septuagint. Just as little can the difficulty be settled by avowing, with Kaulen, an a priori preference for the Masoretic text. In most cases the Alexandrian translation has retained the better and original reading; consequently, in most cases the Hebrew text is glossed. In a book as much read as Jeremias the large number of glosses cannot appear strange. But in other cases the shorter recension of the Septuagint, amounting to about 100 words, which can be opposed to its large lacunæ, as compared with the Masorah, are sufficient proof that considerable liberty was taken in its preparation. Consequently, it was not made by an Aquila, and it received textual changes in the literary transmission. The dogmatic content of the discourses of Jeremias is not affected by these variations in the text.

VI. LAMENTATIONS

In the Greek and Latin Bibles there are five songs of lament bearing the name of Jeremias, which follow the Book of the Prophecy of Jeremias. In the Hebrew these are entitled Kinôth. from their elegaic character, or the 'Ekhah songs after the first word of the first, second, and fourth elegies; in Greek they are called Threnoi, in Latin they are known as Lamentationes.

A. Position and Genuineness of Lamentations

The superscription to Lamentations in the Septuagint and other versions throws light on the historical occasion of their production and on the author: "And it came to pass, after Israel was carried into captivity, and Jerusalem was desolate, that Jeremias the prophet sat weeping, and mourned with this lamentation over Jerusalem, and with a sorrowful mind, sighing and moaning, he said". The inscription was not written by the author of Lamentations, one proof of this being that it does not belong to the alphabetical form of the elegies. It expresses, however, briefly, the tradition of ancient times which is also confirmed both by the Targum and the Talmud. To a man like Jeremias, the day on which Jerusalem became a heap of ruins was not only a day of national misfortune, as was the day of the fall of Troy to the Trojan, or that of the destruction of Carthage to the Carthaginian, it was also a day of religious inanition. For, in a religious sense, Jerusalem had a peculiar importance in the history of salvation, as the footstool of Jahweh and as the scene of the revelation of God and of the Messias. Consequently, the grief of Jeremias was personal, not merely a sympathetic emotion over the sorrow of others, for he had sought to prevent the disaster by his labours as a prophet in the streets of the city. All the fibres of his heart were bound up with Jerusalem; he was now himself crushed and desolate. Thus Jeremias more than any other man was plainly called–it may be said, driven by an inner force–to lament the ruined city as threnodist of the great penitential period of the Old Covenant. He was already prepared by his lament upon the death of King Josias (II Par., xxxv, 25) and by the elegiac songs in the book of his prophecies (cf. xiii, 20-27, a lament over Jerusalem). The lack of variety in the word-forms and in the construction of the sentences, which, it is claimed, does not accord with the character of the style of Jeremias, may be explained as a poetic peculiarity of this poetic book. Descriptions such as those in i, 13-15, or iv, 10, seem to point to an eye witness of the catastrophe, and the literary impression made by the whole continually recalls Jeremias. To this conduce the elegiac tone of the Lamentations, which is only occasionally interrupted by intermediate tones of hope; the complaints against false prophets and against the striving after the favour of foreign nations; the verbal agreements with the Book of Prophecy of Jeremias; finally the predilection for closing a series of thoughts with a prayer warm from the heart–cf. iii, 19-21, 64-66, and chapter v, which, like a Miserere Psalm of Jeremias, forms a close to the five lamentations. The fact that in the Hebrew Bible the Kinôth was removed, as a poetic work, from the collection of prophetic books and placed among the Kethúhîm, or Hagiographa, cannot be quoted as a decisive argument against its Jeremiac origin, as the testimony of the Septuagint, the most important witness in the forum of Biblical criticism, must in a hundred other cases correct the decision of the Masorah. Moreover, the superscription of the Septuagint seems to presuppose a Hebrew original.

B. Technical Form of the Poetry of Lamentations

(1) In the first four laments the Kînah measure is used in the construction of the lines. In this measure each line is divided into two unequal members having respectively three and two stresses, as for example in the introductory first three lines of the book.

(2) In all five elegies the construction of the verses follows an alphabetical arrangement. The first, second, fourth, and fifth laments are each composed of twenty-two verses, to correspond with the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet; the third lament is made up of three times twenty-two verses. In the first, second, and fourth elegies each verse begins with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet, the letters following in order, as the first verse begins with Aleph, the second with Beth, etc.; in the third elegy every fourth verse begins with a letter of the alphabet in due order. Thus, with a few exceptions and changes (Pê, the seventeenth, precedes Ayin the sixteenth letter), the Hebrew alphabet is formed from the initial letters of the separate verses. How easily this alphabetical method can curb the spirit and logic of a poem is most clearly shown in the third lament, which, besides, had probably in the beginning the same structure as the others, a different initial letter to each of the original verses; it was not until later that a less careful writer developed each verse into three by means of ideas taken from Job and other writers.

(3) As to the structure of the strophe, it is certain that the principle followed in some cases is the change of the person of the subject as speaker or one addressed. The first elegy is divided into a lament over Sion in the third person (verses 1-11), and a lament of Sion over itself (verses 12-22). In the first strophe Sion is the object, in the second, a strophe of equal length, the subject of the elegy. In 11 ^c, according to the Septuagint, the third person should be used. In the second elegy, also, the intention seems to be, with the change of strophe, to change from the third person to the second, and from the second to the first person. In verses 1-8 there are twenty-four members in the third person; in 13-19 twenty-one in the second person, while in 20-22, a strophe in the first person, the lament closes in a monologue. In the third lament, as well, the speech of a single subject in the first person alternates with the speech of several persons represented by "we" and with colloquy; verses 40-47 are clearly distinguished by their subject "we" from the preceeding strophe, in which the subject is one individual, and from the following strophe in the first person singular in verses 48-54, while the verses 55-66 represent a colloquy with Jahweh. The theory of the writer, that in the structure of Hebrew poetry the alternation of persons and subjects is a fixed principle in forming strophes, finds in Lamentations its strongest confirmation.

(4) In the structure of the five elegies regarded as a whole, Zenner has shown that they rise in a steady and exactly measured progression to a climax. In the first elegy there are two monologues from two different speakers. In the second elegy the monologue develops into an animated dialogue. In the third and fourth elegies the cry of lamentation is louder still, as more have joined in the lament, and the solitary voice has been replaced by a choir of voices. In the firth lament a third choir is added. Literary criticism finds in the dramatic construction of the book a strong argument for the literary unity of Lamentations.

C. Liturgical Use of Lamentations

The Lamentations have received a peculiar distinction in the Liturgy of the Church in the Office of Passion Week. If Christ Himself designated His death as the destruction of a temple, "he spoke of the temple of his body" (John, ii, 19-21), then the Church surely has a right to pour out her grief over His death in those Lamentations which were sung over the ruins of the temple destroyed by the sins of the nation.

For a general introduction to Jeremias and Lamentations see the Biblical Introduction of Cornely, Vigouroux, Girot, Driver, Cornill, Strack. For special questions of introduction: Cheyne, Jeremiah (1888); Martz, Der Prophet Jeremias von Anatot (1889); Erbt, Jeremia und seine Zeit (Göttingen, 1902); Gillies, Jeremiah, the Man and His Message (London, 1907); Ramsay, Studies in Jeremiah (London, 1907); Workman, The Text of Jeremiah (Edinburgh, 1889); Streane, The Double Text of Jeremiah (Cambridge, 1896); Scholz, Der masoretische Text und die Septuagintaübersetzung des B. Jeremias (Ratisbon, 1875); Frankl, Studien über die LXX und Peschito zu Jeremia (1873); Neteler, Gliederung der B. Jeremias (Münster, 1870). Commentaries on Jeremias issued in the last decades.–Catholic: Scholz (Würzburg, 1880); Trochon (Paris, 1883); Knabenbauer (Paris, 1889); Schneedorfer (Vienna, 1903). Protestant: Payne Smith in the Speaker's Commentary (London, 1875); Cheyne in Spence, Commentary (London, 1883-85); Ball (New York, 1890); Giesebrecht in Nowack, Handkommentar (Göttingen, 1894); Duhm in Marti, Kurzer Hand-Commentar (Tübingen and Leipzig, 1901); Douglas (London, 1903); Orelli (Munich, 1905). Commentaries on Lamentations:–Catholic: Seissenberger (Ratisbon, 1872); Trochon (Paris, 1878); SchÖnfelder (Munich, 1887); Knabenbauer (Paris, 1891); Minocchi (Rome, 1897); Schneedorfer (Vienna, 1903); Zenner, Beiträge zur Erklärung der Klagelieder (Freiburg im Br., 1905). Protestant: Raabe (Leipzig, 1880); Oettli (Nördlingen, 1889); LÖhr (Göttingen, 1891); Idem in Nowack, Handkommentar (Göttingen, 1893); Budde in Marti Kurzer Hand-Commentar (Freiburg im Br., 1898). For monographs see the latest commentaries and the bibliographies in the Biblical periodicals.

M. FAULHABER

Jericho

Three cities of this name have successively occupied sites in the same neighbourhood.

I. A city of Canaan taken and destroyed by Josue after the passage of the Jordan (Jos., vi). The establishment of the Israelites in the industries of the "City of Palm Trees" gave birth to the Jericho of Benjamin (Jos., xviii, 21), which was for some time dominated by Eglon, King of Moab (Judges, iii, 12), and in which David's emissaries hid themselves when they had been outraged by Hanon, King of the Ammonites (II Kings, X, 5). But when, under Achab, the Canaanite Jericho had been restored by Hiel the Bethelite (III Kings, xvi, 34), the Israelites installed themselves there. They were visited by Eliseus, who purified the waters of the spring (IV Kings, ii, 18-22). Three hundred and forty-five men of Jericho, returning from captivity, repopulated their native city (I Esd., ii, 34; 11 Esd., vii, 36). Having fallen into the hands of the Syrians, it was fortified by Bacchides, to protect Judea on the eastern side (I Mach., ix, 50). This Jericho was situated at Tell-es-Sulthàn, near the Fountain of Eliseus ('Ain-es-Sultàn), which flows at a distance of about two miles north-west of ez-Ribà, the modern Jericho. Excavations made in this tell in 1907-08 brought to light a rampart measuring some 840 yards in circuit, a citadel with double wall of the Canaanite period, Israelitish dwellings of the time of the Kings, and some post-exilic Jewish pottery (Mitteil. der deutschen Orient. Gesellschaft zu Berlin, December, 1908, no. 39; "Revue Biblique", 1909, 270-79).

II. The ancient Jericho, near the spring, had entirely disappeared when Herod founded a new Jericho towards the point where the brook of the Kelt and the Jerusalem road emerge from the mountains. Protected by the fort of Cypros, it possessed royal palaces, vast reservoirs, a hippodrome, and an amphitheatre (Josephus, "Bell. Jud.", I, xxi, 14; xxxiii, 6, 8; "Antiq. Jud.", XVI, v, 2). Herod died there: his son Archelaus further embellished the palaces and caused new aqueducts to be built to bring water to the palm gardens (Antiq. Jud., XVII, xiii, 1). It was at the gates of this Jericho that Christ cured two blind men (Matt., xx, 29-34), only one--Bartimeus--according to Mark (x, 46) and Luke (xviii, 35), and saw the publican Zacheus (Luke, xix, 1-5). The Khìrbet Qaqûn, the Birket Mûsâ, a few artificial mounds, are the visible remains of the second Jericho, which, before being entirely destroyed, served for some days as a Roman camp (Bell. Jud., viii, 2; ix, 13).

III. A third Jericho then came into existence in the gardens which the Fountain of Eliseus watered, and where, besides the palm, grew the henna, balm, myrrh (Bell. Jud., IV, viii, 3), the sycamore, banana, etc. According to the map of the Mâdabâ, it was an important city and a see suffragan to Cæsarea Maritima. Its known bishops are Januarius (325), Macer (381), Eleutherius (415), Joannes (518), Gregorius (536), Basilius (800) (Lequien, "Oriens Christianus", III, 646-50). Justinian set up here a great caravanserai (Procopius, "De Ædif.", v, 9). During the Crusades Jericho was a benefice attached to the Holy Sepulchre. The Byzantine city was succeeded by the present Ribà, which consists of a few hostelries for pilgrims and tourists, and some fifteen wattle huts inhabited by Ghawarneh Arabs. There is also a Greek church (called "the Sanctuary of Zacheus") served by two Orthodox monks, a Latin chapel, and a mosque.

GEYER, Itinera Hierosolymitana (Vienna, 1898); CONDER AND KITCHENER, Survey of West Palestine, Mem., III (London, 1883); GuéRIN, Samarie, I (Paris, 1874): ROBINSON, Biblical Researches in Palestine, I (Boston, 1856); RELAND, Palæstina (Utrecht, 1714).

F.M. ABEL

Jeroboam

(Sept. `Ieroboám), name of two Israelitish kings.

(1) Jeroboam I was the first ruler of the Northern Kingdom after the schism of the Ten Tribes. He was a son of Nathan an Ephraimite, and his mother's name was Sarua. While still a young man he was placed by King Solomon over the tributes of Ephraim and Manasses (III Kings, xi, 28). In that capacity he superintended the labours of his tribesmen in the building of the fortress Mello in Jerusalem and of other public works, and he naturally became conversant with the widespread discontent caused by the extravagances which marked the reign of Solomon. Before the end of the latter's reign, Jeroboam received from the Prophet Abias an intimation that he was destined to be king over ten of the tribes which in punishment of the idolatry of Solomon were about to sever their allegiance to him and his house. At the same time it was promised that if Jeroboam were faithful to the Lord his house would be confirmed in authority over Israel (III Kings, xi, 38). Not satisfied to await the death of the king, the time set by the prophet for the fulfillment of the promise, Jeroboam instigated a revolt which was unsuccessful, and he was obliged to flee, taking refuge with King Sesac in Egypt, where he remained until the death of Solomon in 975 b.c. (or 938 according to the Assyrian chronology). After this event he returned to Palestine, and he was made leader of the delegation sent by dissatisfied element of the population to ask the new king Roboam to lighten the burdens which his father had placed upon them. No sooner had Roboam imprudently and harshly rejected their petition than ten of the tribes withdrew their allegiance to the house of David and proclaimed Jeroboam their king, only the tribes of Juda and Benjamin remaining faithful to Roboam. Jeroboam established his headquarters at Sichem, and soon added to the political also a religious schism. Fearing lest the pilgrimages to the temple in Jerusalem prescribed by the Law might be an occasion for the people of the Northern Kingdom to go back to their old allegiance, he determined to provide for them places of worship within their own boundaries, and for this purpose he set up two golden calves to be worshipped, one in Bethel and the other in Dan. He also built temples in the high places and had them served by priests drawn from the lowest of the people (III Kings, xii). The prophet Abias announced the Divine vengeance that was to come upon the house of Jeroboam because of these evil deeds (III Kings, xiv), and in the sequel of Israelitish history the worst doings of the kings are always referred to as like unto the wickedness of Jeroboam, the son of Nabat, who caused Israel to sin. He died in 954 (or in 917) after a reign of twenty-two years.

(2) Jeroboam II was the twelfth successor of the preceeding and the fourth king of the dynasty of Jehu. He succeeded his father Joas in 824 (or 783) and reigned forty-one years. In 802 Rammanirar III, King of Assyria, undertook a campaign into the "West lands", and the Kingdom of Israel (Land of Amri), together with Syria and Phoenicia, was placed under a heavy tribute. Jeroboam, however, taking advantage of the weakened condition of Syria, re­established toward the north and in other directions the ancient boundaries of Israel (IV Kings, xiv, 25). The military and patriotic successes of Jeroboam had been foretold by Jonas, son of Amathi (ibid.), and the Sacred Writer adds that the Lord saved the Israelites by the hand of Jeroboam, son of Joas. From the political standpoint, Jeroboam was an intelligent and energetic ruler, but with regard to his religious activities, his reign is resumed in these words: "He did that which was evil before the Lord. He departed not from all the sins of Jeroboam, son of Nabai who made Israel to sin" (IV Kings, xiv, 24). Evidences of the religious decay during his otherwise prosperous reign are found in the writings of the prophets Amos and Osee, his contemporaries, who frequently inveigh against idolatry and its many concomitant evils and moral degradation. Jeroboam II died in 783 (or 743).

See LesÉtre in Vigouroux Dict. de la Bible, s. v.; Cooke in Hastings, Dict. Of the Bible, s.v.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

St. Jerome

Born at Stridon, a town on the confines of Dalmatia and Pannonia, about the year 340-2; died at Bethlehem, 30 September, 420.

He went to Rome, probably about 360, where he was baptized, and became interested in ecclesiastical matters. From Rome he went to Trier, famous for its schools, and there began his theological studies. Later he went to Aquileia, and towards 373 he set out on a journey to the East. He settled first in Antioch, where he heard Apollinaris of Laodicea, one of the first exegetes of that time and not yet separated from the Church. From 374-9 Jerome led an ascetical life in the desert of Chalcis, south-west of Antioch. Ordained priest at Antioch, he went to Constantinople (380-81), where a friendship sprang up between him and St. Gregory of Nazianzus. From 382 to August 385 he made another sojourn in Rome, not far from Pope Damasus. When the latter died (11 December, 384) his position became a very difficult one. His harsh criticisms had made him bitter enemies, who tried to ruin him. After a few months he was compelled to leave Rome. By way of Antioch and Alexandria he reached Bethlehem, in 386. He settled there in a monastery near a convent founded by two Roman ladies, Paula and Eustochium, who followed him to Palestine. Henceforth he led a life of asceticism and study; but even then he was troubled by controversies which will be mentioned later, one with Rufinus and the other with the Pelagians.

CHRONOLOGY

The literary activity of St. Jerome, although very prolific, may be summed up under a few principal heads: works on the Bible; theological controversies; historical works; various letters; translations. But perhaps the chronology of his more important writings will enable us to follow more easily the development of his studies.

A first period extends to his sojourn in Rome (382), a period of preparation. From this period we have the translation of the homilies of Origen on Jeremias, Ezechiel, and Isaias (379-81), and about the same time the translation of the Chronicle of Eusebius; then the "Vita S. Pauli, prima eremitae" (374-379).

A second period extends from his sojourn in Rome to the beginning of the translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew (382-390). During this period the exegetical vocation of St. Jerome asserted itself under the influence of Pope Damasus, and took definite shape when the opposition of the ecclesiastics of Rome compelled the caustic Dalmatian to renounce ecclesiastical advancement and retire to Bethlehem. In 384 we have the correction of the Latin version of the Four Gospels; in 385, the Epistles of St. Paul; in 384, a first revision of the Latin Psalms according to the accepted text of the Septuagint (Roman Psalter); in 384, the revision of the Latin version of the Book of Job, after the accepted version of the Septuagint; between 386 and 391 a second revision of the Latin Psalter, this time according to the text of the "Hexapla" of Origen (Gallican Psalter, embodied in the Vulgate). It is doubtful whether he revised the entire version of the Old Testament according to the Greek of the Septuagint. In 382-383 "Altercatio Luciferiani et Orthodoxi" and "De perpetua Virginitate B. Mariae; adversus Helvidium". In 387-388, commentaries on the Epistles to Philemon, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to Titus; and in 389-390, on Ecclesiastes.

Between 390 and 405, St. Jerome gave all his attention to the translation of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew, but this work alternated with many others. Between 390-394 he translated the Books of Samuel and of Kings, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Esdras, and Paralipomena. In 390 he translated the treatise "De Spiritu Sancto" of Didymus of Alexandria; in 389-90, he drew up his "Quaestiones hebraicae in Genesim" and "De interpretatione nominum hebraicorum." In 391-92 he wrote the "Vita S. Hilarionis", the "Vita Malchi, monachi captivi", and commentaries on Nahum, Micheas, Sophonias, Aggeus, Habacuc. In 392-93, "De viris illustribus", and "Adversus Jovinianum"; in 395, commentaries on Jonas and Abdias; in 398, revision of the remainder of the Latin version of the New Testament, and about that time commentaries on chapters xiii-xxiii of Isaias; in 398, an unfinished work "Contra Joannem Hierosolymitanum"; in 401, "Apologeticum adversus Rufinum"; between 403-406, "Contra Vigilantium"; finally from 398 to 405, completion of the version of the Old Testament according to the Hebrew.

In the last period of his life, from 405 to 420, St. Jerome took up the series of his commentaries interrupted for seven years. In 406, he commented on Osee, Joel, Amos, Zacharias, Malachias; in 408, on Daniel; from 408 to 410, on the remainder of Isaias; from 410 to 415, on Ezechiel; from 415-420, on Jeremias. From 401 to 410 date what is left of his sermons; treatises on St. Mark, homilies on the Psalms, on various subjects, and on the Gospels; in 415, "Dialogi contra Pelagianos".

CHARACTERISTICS OF ST. JEROME'S WORK

St. Jerome owes his place in the history of exegetical studies chiefly to his revisions and translations of the Bible. Until about 391-2, he considered the Septuagint translation as inspired. But the progress of his Hebraistic studies and his intercourse with the rabbis made him give up that idea, and he recognized as inspired the original text only. It was about this period that he undertook the translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew. But he went too far in his reaction against the ideas of his time, and is open to reproach for not having sufficiently appreciated the Septuagint. This latter version was made from a much older, and at times much purer, Hebrew text than the one in use at the end of the fourth century. Hence the necessity of taking the Septuagint into consideration in any attempt to restore the text of the Old Testament. With this exception we must admit the excellence of the translation made by St. Jerome. His commentaries represent a vast amount of work but of very unequal value. Very often he worked exceedingly rapidly; besides, he considered a commentary a work of compilation, and his chief care was to accumulate the interpretations of his predecessors, rather than to pass judgment on them. The "Quaestiones hebraicae in Genesim" is one of his best works. It is a philological inquiry concerning the original text. It is to be regretted that he was unable to continue, as had been his intention, a style of work entirely new at the time. Although he often asserted his desire to avoid excessive allegory, his efforts in that respect were far from successful, and in later years he was ashamed of some of his earlier allegorical explanations. He himself says that he had recourse to the allegorical meaning only when unable to discover the literal meaning. His treatise, "De Interpretatione nominum hebraicorum", is but a collection of mystical and symbolical meanings. Excepting the "Commenta rius in ep. ad Galatas", which is one of his best, his explanations of the New Testament have no great value. Among his commentaries on the Old Testament must be mentioned those on Amos, Isaias, and Jeremias. There are some that are frankly bad, for instance those on Zacharias, Osee, and Joel. To sum up, the Biblical knowledge of St. Jerome makes him rank first among ancient exegetes. In the first place, he was very careful as to the sources of his information. He required of the exegete a very extensive knowledge of sacred and profane history, and also of the linguistics and geography of Palestine. He never either categorically acknowledged or rejected the deuterocanonical books as part of the Canon of Scripture, and he repeatedly made use of them. On the inspiration, the existence of a spiritual meaning, and the freedom of the Bible from error, he holds the traditional doctrine. Possibly he has insisted more than others on the share which belongs to the sacred writer in his collaboration in the inspired work. His criticism is not without originality. The controversy with the Jews and with the Pagans had long since called the attention of the Christians to certain difficulties in the Bible. St. Jerome answers in various ways. Not to mention his answers to this or that difficulty, he appeals above all to the principle, that the original text of the Scriptures is the only one inspired and free from error. Therefore one must determine if the text, in which the difficulties arise, has not been altered by the copyist. Moreover, when the writers of the New Testament quoted the Old Testament, they did so not according to the letter but according to the spirit. There are many subtleties and even contradictions in the explanations Jerome offers, but we must bear in mind his evident sincerity. He does not try to cloak over his ignorance; he admits that there are many difficulties in the Bible; at times he seems quite embarrassed. Finally, he proclaims a principle, which, if recognized as legitimate, might serve to adjust the insufficiencies of his criticism. He asserts that in the Bible there is no material error due to the ignorance or the heedlessness of the sacred writer, but he adds: "It is usual for the sacred historian to conform himself to the generally accepted opinion of the masses in his time" (P.L., XXVI, 98; XXIV, 855). Among the historical works of St. Jerome must be noted the translation and the continuation of the "Chronicon Eusebii Caesariensis", as the continuation written by him, which extends from 325 to 378, served as a model for the annals of the chroniclers of the Middle Ages; hence the defects in such works: dryness, superabundance of data of every description, lack of proportion and of historical sense. The "Vita S. Pauli Eremitae" is not a very reliable document. The "Vita Malchi, monachi" is a eulogy of chastity woven through a number of legendary episodes. As to the "Vita S. Hilarionis", it has suffered from contact with the preceding ones. It has been asserted that the journeys of St. Hilarion are a plagiarism of some old tales of travel. But these objections are altogether misplaced, as it is really a reliable work. The treatise "De Viris illustribus" is a very excellent literary history. It was written as an apologetic work to prove that the Church had produced learned men. For the first three centuries Jerome depends to a great extent on Eusebius, whose statements he borrows, often distorting them, owing to the rapidity with which he worked. His accounts of the authors of the fourth century however are of great value. The oratorical consist of about one hundred homilies or short treatises, and in these the Solitary of Bethlehem appears in a new light. He is a monk addressing monks, not without making very obvious allusions to contemporary events. The orator is lengthy and apologizes for it. He displays a wonderful knowledge of the versions and contents of the Bible. His allegory is excessive at times, and his teaching on grace is Semipelagian. A censorious spirit against authority, sympathy for the poor which reaches the point of hostility against the rich, lack of good taste, inferiority of style, and misquotation, such are the most glaring defects of these sermons. Evidently they are notes taken down by his hearers, and it is a question whether they were reviewed by the preacher. The correspondence of St. Jerome is one of the best known parts of his literary output. It comprises about one hundred and twenty letters from him, and several from his correspondents. Many of these letters were written with a view to publication, and some of them the author even edited himself; hence they show evidence of great care and skill in their composition, and in them St. Jerome reveals himself a master of style. These letters, which had already met with great success with his contemporaries, have been, with the "Confessions" of St. Augustine, one of the works most appreciated by the humanists of the Renaissance. Aside from their literary interest they have great historical value. Relating to a period covering half a century they touch upon most varied subjects; hence their division into letters dealing with theology, polemics, criticism, conduct, and biography. In spite of their turgid diction they are full of the man's personality. It is in this correspondence that the temperament of St. Jerome is most clearly seen: his waywardness, his love of extremes, his exceeding sensitiveness; how he was in turn exquisitely dainty and bitterly satirical, unsparingly outspoken concerning others and equally frank about himself. The theological writings of St. Jerome are mainly controversial works, one might almost say composed for the occasion. He missed being a theologian, by not applying himself in a consecutive and personal manner to doctrinal questions. In his controversies he was simply the interpreter of the accepted ecclesiastical doctrine. Compared with St. Augustine his inferiority in breadth and originality of view is most evident. His "Dialogue" against the Luciferians deals with a schismatic sect whose founder was Lucifer, Bishop of Cagliari in Sardinia. The Luciferians refused to approve of the measure of clemency by which the Church, since the Council of Alexandria, in 362, had allowed bishops, who had adhered to Arianism, to continue to discharge their duties on condition of professing the Nicene Creed. This rigorist sect had adherents almost everywhere, and even in Rome it was very troublesome. Against it Jerome wrote his "Dialogue", scathing in sarcasm, but not always accurate in doctrine, particularly as to the Sacrament of Confirmation. The book "Adversus Helvidium" belongs to about the same period. Helvidius held the two following tenets:

• Mary bore children to Joseph after the virginal birth of Jesus Christ;
• from a religious viewpoint, the married state is not inferior to celibacy.

Earnest entreaty decided Jerome to answer. In doing so he discusses the various texts of the Gospel which, it was claimed, contained the objections to the perpetual virginity of Mary. If he did not find positive answers on all points, his work, nevertheless, holds a very creditable place in the history of Catholic exegesis upon these questions. The relative dignity of virginity and marriage, discussed in the book against Helvidius, was taken up again in the book "Adversus Jovinianum" written about ten years later. Jerome recognizes the legitimacy of marriage, but he uses concerning it certain disparaging expressions which were criticized by contemporaries and for which he has given no satisfactory explanation. Jovinian was more dangerous than Helvidius. Although he did not exactly teach salvation by faith alone, and the uselessness of good works, he made far too easy the road to salvation and slighted a life of asceticism. Every one of these points St. Jerome took up. The "Apologetici adversus Rufinum" dealt with the Origenistic controversies. St. Jerome was involved in one of the most violent episodes of that struggle, which agitated the Church from Origen's lifetime until the Fifth Ecumenical Council (553). The question at issue was to determine if certain doctrines professed by Origen and others taught by certain pagan followers of Origen could be accepted. In the present case the doctrinal difficulties were embittered by personalities between St. Jerome and his former friend, Rufinus. To understand St. Jerome's position we must remember that the works of Origen were by far the most complete exegetical collection then in existence, and the one most accessible to students. Hence a very natural tendency to make use of them, and it is evident that St. Jerome did so, as well as many others. But we must carefully distinguish between writers who made use of Origen and those who adhered to his doctrines. This distinction is particularly necessary with St. Jerome, whose method of work was very rapid, and consisted in transcribing the interpretations of former exegetes without passing criticism on them. Nevertheless, it is certain that St. Jerome greatly praised and made use of Origen, that he even transcribed some erroneous passages without due reservation. But it is also evident that he never adhered thinkingly and systematically to the Origenistic doctrines. Under these circumstances it came about that when Rufinus, who was a genuine Origenist, called on him to justify his use of Origen, the explanations he gave were not free from embarrassment. At this distance of time it would require a very subtle and detailed study of the question to decide the real basis of the quarrel. However that may be, Jerome may be accused of imprudence of language and blamed for a too hasty method of work. With a temperament such as his, and confident of his undoubted orthodoxy in the matter of Origenism, he must naturally have been tempted to justify anything. This brought about a most bitter controversy with his wily adversary, Rufinus. But on the whole Jerome's position is by far the stronger of the two, even in the eyes of his contemporaries. It is generally conceded that in this controversy Rufinus was to blame. It was he who brought about the conflict in which he proved himself to be narrow-minded, perplexed, ambitious, even timorous. St. Jerome, whose attitude is not always above reproach, is far superior to him. Vigilantius, the Gascon priest against whom Jerome wrote a treatise, quarrelled with ecclesiastical usages rather than matters of doctrine. What he principally rejected was the monastic life and the veneration of saints and of relics. In short, Helvidius, Jovinian, and Vigilantius were the mouthpieces of a reaction against asceticism which had developed so largely in the fourth century. Perhaps the influence of that same reaction is to be seen in the doctrine of the monk Pelagius, who gave his name to the principal heresy on grace: Pelagianism. On this subject Jerome wrote his "Dialogi contra Pelagianos". Accurate as to the doctrine of original sin, the author is much less so when he determines the part of God and of man in the act of justification. In the main his ideas are Semipelagian: man merits first grace: a formula which endangers the absolute freedom of the gift of grace. The book "De situ et nominibus locorum hebraicorum" is a translation of the "Onomasticon" of Eusebius, to which the translator has joined additions and corrections. The translations of the "Homilies" of Origen vary in character according to the time in which they were written. As time went on, Jerome became more expert in the art of translating, and he outgrew the tendency to palliate, as he came across them, certain errors of Origen. We must make special mention of the translation of the homilies "In Canticum Canticorum", the Greek original of which has been lost.

St. Jerome's complete works can be found in P.L., XXII-XXX.

LOUIS SALTET

St. Jerome Emiliani

Founder of the Order of Somascha; b. at Venice, 1481; d. at Somascha, 8 Feb., 1537; feast, 20 July; son of Angelo Emiliani (popularly called Miani) and of Eleonore Mauroceni, joined the army, and in 1508 defended Castelnuovo against the League of Cambray. Taken prisoner and miraculously liberated, he made a pilgrimage to the shrine of Our Lady of Treviso, in fulfillment of a vow. He was then appointed podestà of Castelnuovo, but after a short time returned to Venice to supervise the education of his nephews. All his spare time was devoted to the study of theology and to works of charity. After his ordination to the priesthood in 1518, the hospitals and the hovels of the poor were his favourite resorts. In the year of plague and famine (1528), he seemed to be everywhere, and showed his zeal especially for the orphans, whose number had so greatly increased. He rented a house for them near the church of St. Rose and, with the assistance of some pious laymen, ministered to their wants. To his charge was also committed the hospital for incurables, founded by St. Cajetan. In 1531 he went to Verona and induced the citizens to build a hospital; at Brescia he erected an orphanage, at Bergamo one for boys and another for girls. Here also he founded the first home for fallen women who wished to do penance. Two priests, Alessandro Besuzio and Agostino Bariso, now joined him in his labours of charity, and in 1532 Jerome founded a religious society, placing the motherhouse at Somascha, a secluded hamlet between Milan and Bergamo. In the rule, Jerome puts down as the principal work of the community the care of orphans, poor, and sick, and demands that dwellings, food and clothing shall bear the mark of religious poverty. Jerome fell a martyr to his zeal; contracting a disease at Bergamo, he died at Somascha. He was beautified by Benedict XIV in 1747, and canonized by Clement XIII in 1767. The Office and Mass in his honour were approved eight years later. His biography was first written by Scipio Albani (1600); another by Andreas Stella (1605). The best was written by Aug. Tortora (Milan, 1620; in "Acta SS.", Feb., II, 217 sq.).

After the death of Jerome his community was about to disband, but was kept together by Gambarana, who had been chosen superior. He obtained the approval (1540) of Paul III. In 1547 the members vainly sought affiliation with the Society of Jesus; then in 1547-1555 they were united with the Theatines. Pius IV (1563) approved the institution, and St. Pius V raised it to the dignity of a religious order, according to the Rule of St. Augustine, with solemn vows, the privileges of the mendicants, and exemption. In 1569 the first six members made their profession, and Gambarana was made first superior general. Great favour was shown to the order by St. Charles Borromeo, and he gave it the church of St. Mayeul at Pavia, from which church the order takes its official name "Clerici regulares S. Majoli Papiae congregationis Somaschae". Later the education of youth was put into the programme of the order, and the colleges at Rome and Pavia became renowned. It spread into Austria and Switzerland, and before the great Revolution it had 119 houses in the four provinces of Rome, Lombardy, Venice, and France. At present the order has ten houses in Italy two of which are in Rome. The general resides in Rome at S. Girolamo della Carita.

HEIMBUCHER, Orden u. Kongregationen (Paderborn, 1908), III, 275; KIENLE in Kirchenlex., s.v. Somasker; Holsten-Brockie, Cod. Regul., III, 199 sqq.; HUBERT, Der hl. Hieronymus Aemiliani (Mainz, 1895).

FRANCIS MERSHMAN

Jerusalem (Before A.D. 71)

This article treats of the "City of God", the political and religious centre of the People of Israel, with its destruction by the Romans after it had become the scene of the Redemption. This part of the subject will be divided as follows:

• Names
• Topography
• History
• Development of the City and its Chief Monuments

I. NAMES

According to Jewish tradition (Josephus, "Antiq. Jud.", I, x, 1; Targum Onkelos, Gen., xiv, 18), Jerusalem was originally called Salem (Peace), and was the capital of King Melchisedech (Gen., xiv, 18). This tradition is confirmed by the cuneiform tablets discovered in 1888 at Tell Amarna, in Egypt (see below, under III. History). Five of these letters, written at Jerusalem about the year 1400 B.C., inform us that the city was then called U-ru-sa-lim. It figures in Assyrian inscriptions under the name of Ur-sa-li-im-mu. According to the Assyrian syllabaries, uru and ur signify "city" (Hebrew ir). In several of the Tell Armana Tablets the word salim is used in the sense of "peace". Ursalim, therefore, means "City of Peace". The Psalmist, too, connects Salem with Sion: "He hath his tabernacle in Salem, and his abode upon the mountain of Sion" [Ps. lxxv (lxxvi), 3]. When the Israelites came into the Land of Promise, Jerusalem was in the power of the Jebusites, and bore the name of Jebus. The Hebrews, however, were not ignorant of its ancient name; they often called it Jerusalem (Jos., x, 1; Judges, xix, 10; II Kings, v, 6, etc.). In other passages of the Bible it is called Jerusalem (I Par., iii, 5; Jer., xxvi, 18; Esther, ii, 6, etc.). The Septuagint. writes its name Ierousalem. Under the hellenizing influences which invaded Palestine, Salem became Solyma (Antiq. Jud., I, x, 2), and Jerusalem ta Ierosolyma (The Holy Solyma) (I Mach., i, 14, 20; II Mach., i, 10; Bell. Jud., VI, x, etc.). The New Testament employs sometimes the Septuagint form and sometimes that of Machabees, which the Vulgate renders by Jerusalem and Jerosolyma. The Syriac Version gives Uris lem, a form more nearly approaching the Assyrian. When the Emperor Hadrian rebuilt the city, A.D. 136, he gave it the name of AElia Capitolina. From the Mohammedan conquest of Palestine, in the seventh century, until our own times, the Arabs have called it El Quds, "The Holy" --the ir haq qodes, or "Holy City", of II Esd., xi, 18 (cf. Matt., iv, 5, etc). Among all other people the name Jerusalem has continued in use until now.

II. TOPOGRAPHY

A. Geographical Position

Jerusalem is situated in latitude 31° 46' 45" N. and longitude 35° 13' 25" E. of Greenwich, about 32 English miles in a straight line from the Mediterranean on the west, and 13 from the Dead Sea on the east. It stands on the crest of a chain of mountains which traverses Palestine from north to south, and the highest point of which, at the northwest corner of the city, is 2577 feet above the level of the Mediterranean, and 3865 above that of the Dead Sea. Owing to this difference of level the western slope of these mountains, towards the Plain of Sephela, which extends to the Mediterranean, is gentle, while that to the east is very steep. A girdle of high hills surrounds the city, forming a sort of natural rampart. On the north is Mt. Scopus (2705 feet), next to it, on the east, the Mount of Olives (2665 feet), beyond which again is the Mount of Offence (2410 feet) (III Kings, xi, 7; IV Kings, xxiii, 13). To the south is the Mount of Evil Counsel (2549 feet), which forms the eastern boundary of the Plain of Raphaim, and next, on the southwest, comes a hill (2557 feet) to which no name has been given. Towards the northwest the city is more exposed; at some distance in that direction it is dominated by the Nebi Samwil, the ancient Maspha, which has an altitude of 2935 feet. Notwithstanding the difficulty of access in its natural situation, Jerusalem is the centre of a network of ancient roads which connect it, on the east, with Jericho and the Jordan; on the south, with Hebron and Gaza; on the west, with Jaffa and Caesarea; on the north, with Samaria and Galilee. It was, however, situated beyond the great military and commercial highways between Egypt and Assyria.

B. Site; Hills and Valleys

The ancient city occupied the same position as the present, except that its southern extremity has remained outside of the walls since the reign of Hadrian (A.D. 136). Thanks, however, to systematic operations undertaken by English, American, and German engineers, much of the old southern wall has been brought to light. While, in many places, masses of ruins have changed the appearance of the ground, excavations and vertical borings, made within the last fifty years, have, nevertheless, enabled the explorers to construct sufficiently-exact maps of the primitive configuration. The ground on which Jerusalem stands, within this ring of surrounding mountains, is by no means uniform in character: on three sides-the east, south, and west-it stands upon terraced heights bordered by deep valleys which give it the appearance of a promontory jutting out to the south. The city itself is furrowed with ravines which cut it up into a number of little hills. The longest of these valleys measures scarcely two miles and a half; they have all been formed by erosion, due to torrential rainfall, in the quaternary period. To the north of the city they take the shape of mere depressions in the soil, then, as they descend, sinking rapidly in the calcareous rock of which the mountains are formed, they soon become deep gorges, all coming together at the southeast angle of the city, at a depth of about 600 feet below their starting-point. The two principal hills rise on the southwest and the east respectively. The former of these hills is called Mount Sion because, according to Josephus (Antiq. Jud., XVI, vii, 1), Eusebius, and all the authors, Jewish and Christian, who have followed them, the city of Jebus, or Sion-the City of David-stood there. This view, however, is contested by certain modern Palestinologists, who would locate Sion upon the northern declivity of the second of these hills, Mount Moria (II Par., iii, 1), where stood the Temple of Jehovah.

(a) Mount Sion is bounded on the west by a valley which begins near the old pool called Birket Mamilla (see below, under D), about 1000 feet to the northwest of the hill itself. This valley, following a southeasterly direction as far as the Jaffa Gate, the ancient gate of the gardens (Gennath) (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2), then turns to the south and forms a great reservoir of water called the Birket es Sultan, by means of a massive dam, which was rebuilt in the twelfth and the sixteenth centuries. This is the Fountain of the Dragon (tannin) which Nehemias came to when he went out of the city by the western gate (D.V., "dragon fountain ", II Esd., ii, 13). Josephus calls it the Pool of the Serpent (Bell. Jud., V, iii, 2); the Hebrew word tannin simplifies both "dragon" and "serpent". This valley is called by the natives Wadi Rababi; in the Bible it goes by the name of Ge Hinnom, or Ge Ben Hinnom, "Valley of Ennom" (in A.V., Hinnom) or "of the son of Ennom"-an unknown personage (Jos., xv, 8; xviii, 16; II Esd., xi, 30; Jer., xix, 2). Below the Birket es Sultan, it turns to the east, passes below Halcedama (q.v.), and connects with the Valley of Cedron. At the junction of the two valleys are the rich plantation forming "the king's garden" (or, in D.V., "the king's guard") mentioned in IV Kings, xxv, 4; Jer., xxxix, 4; II Esd., iii, 15. Also at the mouth of the Valley of Hinnom is situated Topheth, the high place where Achaz and Manasses set up the worship of Baal-Moloch (II Par., xxviii, 3; xxxiii, 6). The good King Josias defiled this execrable place, scattering human bones over it (II Par., xxxiv, 3-5), in spite of which Joakim restored there the infamous worship of Moloch. From the unholy fires which were kept burning there for nearly a century and a half-those fires through which the apostate Jews caused their children to pass, in order to consecrate, or immolate, them to Moloch-Ge Hinnom (in Aramaic, Gehenanm) received the name of Geenna tou pyros, "Gehenna of the Fire", and became the emblem of hell (in Greek text, Matt., v, 22, 29, 30; Mark, ix, 43, 45). The Valley of Cedron, from Hinnom as far as the Dead Sea, is still called Wadi en Nar, "Valley of Fire".

On the north, Mount Sion is bounded by a valley, now largely filled in, which goes down in a straight line from the Jaffa Gate eastward to the foot of Mount Moria. On the slope of this valley is a large reservoir called in Arabic Birket Hammam el Batrak, "Pool of the Baths of the Patriarch", and in the itineraries of the pilgrims "Pool of Ezechias". Josephus calls it Amygdalon, a name which, according, to Conder, may with good reason be derived from ham migdalon, "facing the great tower", since the pool faces the Tower of Phasael. This valley, like all those which pass through the city, has no proper name in the Bible; neither has it in Arabic; it is conventionally known as the Transverse Valley. A third valley begins outside the Damascus Gate (Bab el Amoud) and descends southward, with a slight deflection to the east, dividing the city in two; until it joins the Valley of Hinnom. After passing the opening of the Transverse Valley, it forms a gorge of some depth separating Mount Sion from Mount Moria. Its rocky bed has found by the English engineers 69 feet below the actual surface of the ground near the Wailing Place, and 85 feet from the southwest angle of the Temple. It encloses, towards its extremity, the Pool of Siloe, which receives through a subterranean channel the waters of the Virgin's Fountain that flow through the hollow of Cedron. A little farther on, the valley has been dammed with a wall 233 feet in length, which, retaining the whole rainfall of the valley, formed the reservoir called by Nehemias "the king's pool" (in D.V., "the king's aqueduct", II Esd., ii, 14). In Scripture this valley figures under the name of Nahal, "ravine", or "torrent of winter" (II Esd., ii, 15). Josephus in one place designates it "the wide valley" (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 1), and the Arabs call it simply El Wad, "the valley". In works on the Holy Land it also bears the designation of "the central valley ".

Surrounded on all sides by these deep ravines, Mount Sion presents a quadrilateral surface measuring about 2600 feet from north to south and 2000 feet from east to west. It is the largest of the hills of Jerusalem, the highest, and the only one completely isolated. Its highest point reaches an altitude of 2558 feet, and rises 531 feet above its base at the southeastern angle. Its surface is considerably varied, being, indeed, divided by a small depression which branches off from the middle of the Transverse Valley and descends obliquely to the Pool of Siloe. Mount Sion thus consists of two lofty connected plateaux, one (the lower) stretching westward, the other (the shorter) to the northwest. The former is fairly uniform and measures 2300 feet in length from north to south, and 920 feet in breadth. After sinking about 100 feet towards the northwest, the ground rises about 20 feet and forms a rounded eminence opposite to the Temple, terminating in a precipice 195 feet above the former bed of EI Wad.

(b) Mount Moria, or the Eastern Hill, is a narrow promontory connected with Mount Bezetha, the highest point of which is the Hill of Jeremias, with an altitude of 2556 feet. This tongue of land terminates on the south in a point near the Pool of Siloe; El Wad encloses it on its western side, and the Valley of Cedron on its eastern. Upon its highest crest (2443 feet) was the domain of Ornan (Areuna), the Jebusite, where Solomon built the Temple and his palaces. This is the summit called Moria; south of the royal quarter, the hill (2300 to 2050 feet) bears the name of Ophel (II Par., xxvii. 3). Cedron, which, since the third century after Christ, has also been called the Valley of Josaphat begins near the so-called Tombs of the Judges, and descends, under the name of Wadi ed Djoz (Valley of Walnuts), southeast to the foot of Scopus, thence south, becoming a deep gorge separating Mount Moria from the Mount of Olives and the Mount of Offence. At a point 1300 feet beyond the northeast angle of the city, it is crossed by a bridge which has replaced one of the Jewish period. This older Jewish bridge gave access, on the right, to a staircase cut in the rock and leading up to the north side of the Temple, and, on the left, to a similar staircase leading up to the Mount of Olives. To the left of the bridge is the Garden of Gethsemani (see GETHSEMANE), with the Tomb of the Blessed Virgin, from which the Arabs call this part of Cedron Wadi sitti Mariam, or "Valley of the Lady Mary". Next come, on the same side, two fine monuments of the Graeco-Roman-Judaic style (second to first century B.C.) excavated in the rock. The first of these has been called, since the fourth century after Christ, the Tomb of Absalom; the second, the Tomb of the Prophet Zacharias. Between the two is a grandiose Jewish tomb of the same period, belonging to the family of Beni Hezir. A little farther on, upon the side of the Mount of Offence, is to be seen a rock-hewn tomb of Egyptian architecture. Upon the same slope is perched the village of Silwan, the houses built against long rows of sepulchres, most of them cut in a vast bank of calcareous rock, popularly known as Ez Zehwele. Opposite, at the foot of Ophel, a flight of thirty-two steps descends to a grotto, in which is a spring of slightly brackish water. This spring presents the phenomenon of a natural (subterranean) syphon producing an intermittent flow; only at intervals-from three to six times a day-does the water rush down, with a strange humming noise, from a cleft in the rock. The water of this spring is conveyed to the Pool of Siloe by a winding tunnel. The Arabs call the fountain Ain Sitti Mariam, in honour of the Blessed Virgin, and also Ain Oumm Daradj, "Fountain of the Mother of the Stairs"; its Biblical name is, according to some, En Rogel; according to others, the Upper Gihon (see below, under D). Cedron now begins to widen, and is covered with rich gardens, the "king's gardens" mentioned in the Bible. It receives the Hinnom, together with EI Wad and the little valley which descends obliquely from Mount Sion. Its descent in a course of about two and a half miles is 550 feet, but in the latter half of this distance it is encumbered with fifteen to fifty feet of rubbish.

To the north of Mount Moria one more valley begins outside the Gate of Herod (Bab Zahira), passes to the south-southeast, under the northeastern angle of the platform of the Temple, and ends at the bridge of Cedron. The numerous pools in this depression, near St. Anne's church, the traditional birthplace of the Blessed Virgin, have been excavated. Here should be located the Probatic Pool, or Pool of Bethsaida (A.V. Bethesda), with the five porches (John, v, 2). The locality of the Birket Israil, a reservoir 359 feet long by 126 feet wide, has also been determined, to the north, against the outer wall of the Temple.

(c) Mount Gareb (in D.V., "the hill Gareb"-Jer., xxxi, 39) stretches between the Transverse Valley, on the south, and the upper course of El Wad, on the east. It rises somewhat abruptly towards the northwest but offers no particularly prominent height except the rock of Calvary (2518 feet). In A.D. 70, Gareb was still covered, outside the walls, with gardens watered by springs (Bell. Jud., V, ii, 2).

There is still discussion as to whether Sion, the City of David, occupied the traditional Mount Sion or Ophel; but all admit that before the reign of Ezechias (727 B.C.) the city of Jerusalem extended over both hills, within the limits of "the first walls."

III. HISTORY

The history of Jerusalem is to a certain degree indistinguishable from that of Israel. It will suffice here to call attention to the most memorable occurrences in the city.

A. From its Origin to its Conquest by David

As seen above, Jerusalem is the ancient Salem, the capital of Melchisedech, king and priest of the Most High. Learning of the return of Abraham (then called Abram), who had been victorious over Chodorlahomor and his allies, Melchisedech came before the patriarch (Heb., vii, 1)" in the vale of Save, which is the king's vale" (Gen., xiv, 17). The king's vale is the Valley of Cedron, which begins to the north of the city (II Kings, xviii, 18; Antiq. Jud., I, x, 2.-Cf. IV Kings, xxv, 4; Jer., xxxix, 4). Like all the land of Chanaan, Jerusalem had been for many centuries in subjection to Chaldea; after Abraham's time it passed under the domination of Egypt. About the year 1400, while Israel was dreaming of liberation from the Egyptian yoke, certain Cossean peoples, called Khabiri, invaded Palestine, probably at the instigation of the Chaldeans or the Hethites, and took possession of the strongholds. Abd Hiba, king of U-ru-sa-lim, seeing his capital menaced, dispatched six letters in succession to his suzerain, Amenophis III, imploring succour. But in vain; Egypt herself was then undergoing a crisis. It was probably at this period that Jerusalem fell into the power of the Jebusites, who called it Jebus.

When the Hebrews came into the Land of Promise, the King of Jebus was Adonisedec (Lord of Justice)--a name which, both in form and sense, recalls Melchisedech (King of Justice). Although Adonisedec perished in the coalition of the five kings of Chanaan against Isra el (Jos., x, 26; xii, 10), Jerusalem, thanks to its strong position, long maintained its independence. In the distribution of the land among the children of Israel, it was assigned to the descendents of Benjamin. The boundary between this tribe and that of Juda run from En Schems, on the Jericho road, to En Rogel, in the Valley of Cedron, then, following "the valley of the son of Ennom" (Jos., xv, 7, 8) or "of the children of Ennom" (Jos., xviii, 15, 16) of the Judges, Juda and Benjamin had tried to gain possession of it, but in vain, although they put its inhabitants to the sword and gave the city to the flames (Judges, i, 8); the city here spoken of is, as Josephus remarks (Antiq. Jud., v, ii, 2), only the lower city or suburbs. Jerusalem remained (Judges, xix, l2) independent of Israel until the reign of David.

B. From David to the Babylonian Captivity

Having become king over the Twelve Tribes of Israel, David contemplated making Jerusalem the political and religious centre of God's people. He assembled all the forces of the nation at Hebron, and advanced against Jebus. After long and painful efforts, "David took the castle of Sion" and "dwelt in the castle, and called it, the city of David: and built round about from Mello and inwards" (II Kings, v, 7, 9). This was about the year lO58 B.C. The king then caused cedar wood to be brought from Lebanon, and workmen from Tyre, to build him a palace. Soon after, the Ark of the Covenant was solemnly brought into the city of David and placed in a tabernacle. The king one day beheld the destroying angel soaring above Mount Moria, ready to strike the Holy City. The Lord stayed his arm, and David, in thanksgiving, bought the threshing-floor which was upon the summit of the hill, the property of Areuna (A.V. Araunah), or Ornan, the Jebusite, and there built an altar, upon which he offered holocausts (II Kings, xxiv; I Par., xxi). Thenceforward Mount Moria was destined to receive the temple of the Most High. David prepared the material and left the execution of the project to his son.

In the fourth year of his reign, Solomon began the building of the Temple, under the direction of artificers sent by Hiram. King of Tyre. Hiram also supplied cedar wood and cypress wood; 70,000 men were employed in transporting wood from Joppe (Jaffa) to Jerusalem and 80,000 more in quarrying stone in the neighbourhood and shaping it. The splendid monument was completed, as to its essential details, in seven years and a half, and with great pomp the Ark of the Covenant was brought from the City of David to the new sanctuary (II Kings, vi). The buildings were erected upon a great platform, constructed by means of immense containing walls. To the west rose the Holy of Holies, surrounded by a series of chambers in several tiers, in front of which, to the east, was a monumental facade, or pylon, formed by two lofty connected towers. Opposite to this entrance rose two great columns of bronze, like obelisks. Towards the east was the great court of the priests, square, surrounded with porches, and enclosing the altar of holocausts, the "sea of brass", and other utensils for sacrifices. This court was surrounded by others which were also enriched with galleries and superb buildings (see TEMPLE OF JERUSALEM). Solomon next devoted thirteen years to erecting, south of the Temple, "the house of the Forest of Lebanon", his royal palace, with that of his queen, Pharaoh's daughter, as well as the buildings destined for his numerous family, for his guard, and for his slaves. He then connected the Temple and the new royal quarter with the City of David by a wall of enclosure, fortified the Millo (in D.V., Mello--III Kings, ix, 15), and "filled up the gulf of the City of David" (III Kings, xi, 27). The people began to murmur under taxation and forced labour.

Insurrection broke out when the proud Roboam, son of Solomon, began his reign (981-65). Ten tribes revolted from him to form the Kingdom of the North, or of Israel, and Jerusalem ceased to be anything more than the capital of the tribes of Benjamin and Juda. At the invitation of Jeroboam, who was elected sovereign of the new kingdom, Sesac (Seshonq, in Juda (976), took Jerusalem, and plundered the immense treasures of the Temple and the royal palace (III Kings, xiv, 25, 26). Asa (961-21) and Josaphat (920-894) enriched the Temple after their numerous victories over the neighbouring peoples. Under Joram (893-888) the Philistines, in alliance with the Arabs of the South, in their turn pillaged the Temple and slew or carried off all the sons of the king except the youngest, Ochozias, or Joachaz, the child of Athalia (II Par., xxi, 16, 17). On his murder, Athalia had her grandsons put to death, and seized the power. Joas alone, a child of one year, was saved from the massacre by the High-Priest Joiada and secretly reared in the Temple. At the age of six he was proclaimed king by the people, and Athalia was stoned to death. Joas (886-41) restored the Temple and abolished the worship of Baal; but later on, he allowed himself to be perverted, and caused the Prophet Zacharias, the son of Joiada, his preserver, to be put to death. He himself perished by the hands of his servants (IV Kings, xii; II Par., xxii). Under Amasias the Israelites of the North vanquished those of the South. attacked Jerusalem, and "broke down the wall of Jerusalem from the gate of Ephraim to the gate of the corner, four hundred cubits". The treasures of the Temple and of the royal palace were carried away to Samaria (IV Kings, xiv, 13, 14). Ozias, or Azarias (811-760), repaired the breech and fortified the wall with strong towers (II Par., xxvi, 9). His son Joatham (759-44), a wise and good king, strengthened the city by building "the high gate of the house of the Lord, and on the wall of Ophel he worked much"--south of the royal quarter (II Par., xxvii, 3; IV Kings, xv, 35).

While the Kings of Syria and Israel were marching against Jerusalem, God sent the Prophet Isaias to King Achaz (743-27), who was at "the conduit of the upper pool". There the Prophet foretold to him the repulse of the enemy and at the same time announced to him that the Messias Emmanuel, should be born of a virgin (Is., vii, 3-14). Achaz used the wealth of the Temple to pay tribute to Theglathphalasar, King of Assyria, whose protection he had sought against the Kings of Israel and Syria; he was impious enough to substitute the worship of Baal-Moloch for that of Jehovah.

Ezechias (727-696) hastened to abolish the worship of idols. Alarmed by the fall of the Kingdom of Israel (721), he erected a second wall to protect the suburbs which had come into existence to the north of Mount Sion and the Temple. He made an alliance with Egypt and with Merodach Baladan, King of Babylon, and refused to pay tribute to Assyria. Upon this, Sennacherib, King of Nineve, who was at war with Egypt, invaded Palestine from the south, and sent his chief officers from Lachis to Jerusalem, with a numerous army, to summon the king to surrender at discretion. But, upon the advice of Isaias, the king refused to surrender. To cut off the enemy's water, he dammed the spring of the Upper Gihon and brought the stream to the west of the City of David (II Par., xxxii, 3, 4, and 30). An Assyrian tablet (Taylor's Prism, col. 3) reports that Sennacherib, after vanquishing the Egyptians at Altaka and taking forty-six cities of Judea, shut up Ezechias in Jerusalem "like a bird in a cage" (Cuneiform Inscriptions of W. Asia, I, PI. 39). This agrees with the Bible narrative; just as he was about to assault Jerusalem, Sennacherib waa informed that Tharaca, King of Ethiopia, was advancing against him, and forthwith, leaving the Holy City, he set out for Egypt; but his army was miraculously destroyed by pestilence (IV Kings, xviii, 13; xix, 35-37; II Par., xxxii. 9-22; Is., xxxvi and xxxvii). Sennacherib organized another army at Nineve and vanquished Merodach Baladan of Babylon, Ezechias's suzerain. Thus it was that, according to the Assyrian inscriptions, Manasses, son of Ezechias (695-45) found himself a tributary of Assaradon and of Assurbanipal, Kings of Ninive (Prism of Assaradon, op. cit., III, p. 16; G. Smith, "History of Assurbanipal", p. 30). Manasses afterwards tried to shake off the Ninivite yoke. In 666 Assurbanipal's generals came to Jerusalem, put the king in chains, and carried him to Babylon, which was in vassalage to Ninive (II Par., xxxiii, (9-11). Manasses, however, soon obtained his liberty and returned to Jerusalem, where he repaired the evils he had caused. He also restored the city walls built by his father (II Par., xxxiii, 12-16).

Amon, one of the worst kings of Juda, was assassinated after a reign of two years. Josias, his son (641-08), guided by the Prophet Jeremias, destroyed the idolatrous altars and restored the Temple (621). Upon this occasion the High Priest Helcias found in a hall of the sanctuary an old copy of the Law of Jehovah given by Moses (IV Kings, xxii, 8-14; II Par., xxxiv, 14-21). ln 608 the Pharaoh, Nechao II, marched against Assyria. Actuated by a scruple of conscience, the good king attempted to bar the way against his suzerain's adversary, and met his death at the battle of Mageddo (IV Kings, xxiii, 29, 30). Joachas, or Sellum, his successor, after reigning three months, was deposed by Nechao, and sent as a captive to Egypt, while Eliacim, to whom the conqueror gave the name of Jehoiakim (D.V. Joakim), was put in his place (607-600). In 601 Nabuchodonosor (Nebuchadnezzar) entered Judea to consolidate his father's power. He carried away as captives to Babylon certain notables of Jerusalem, together with the young Prophet Daniel. Joakim revolted against the Babylonian yoke, but his son Joachin (Jehoiachin), surrendered to Nabuchodonosor. The city was given over to pillage and 10,000 inhabitants, including the king, were carried off to Babylon (IV Kings, xxiiv, 1-16; cf. also II Par., xxxvi, 1-10). Sedecias, third son of Josias, succeeded his nephew (596-587). Urged by the Egyptian party, he, too, rebelled against his suzerain. Nabuchodonosor returned to Syria and sent his general, Nabuzardan, against Jerusalem with a formidable army. The city surrendered after a siege of more than eighteen months. The Temple, the royal palaces, and other principal buildings were given to the flames, and the city was dismantled. The sacred vessels, with everything else of value, were carried away to Babylon; the Ark of the Covenant alone could be hidden by the Jews. Sedecias, who, at the last moment, had fled with his army by the southern gate, was overtaken in the plain of Jordan, and his eyes were put out. The high priest, the chief military officers, and the notables of the land were massacred, and the remainder of the inhabitants were transported to Babylon with their blind king. Only husbandmen and the poor were left in the country, with a Jewish governor named Godolias (Gedaliah), who took up his residence at Maspha (IV Kings, xxiv, 18-20; xxv; II Par., xxxvi, 11-21).

C. From the Return out of Captivity to the Roman Domination

In 536 B.C. Cyrus, King of Persia, authorized the Jews to return to Palestine and rebuild the Temple of the Lord (I Esd., i, 1-4). The first convoy, consisting of 42,000 Jews, was dispatched under the leadership of Zorobabel, a prince of Juda. They hastened to restore the altar of holocausts, and in the second year the foundations were laid for another temple, which, however, owing to the difficulties raised by the Samaritans and other neighbouring peoples, was not completed until the sixth year of the reign of Darius (514). The old men could not restrain their tears when they saw the unpretentious character of the new building. In 458, under Artaxerxes I, Esdras came to Jerusalem with 1500 Jews as governor of Judea and completed the political and religious restoration of Israel. Thirteen years later Nehemias, with the authorization of Artaxerxes, completely restored the Holy City.

By the victory of Issus and the capture of Tyre, Alexander the Great, King of Macedon, became master of Western Asia. In 332 he marched against Jerusalem, which had remained faithful to Darius III. The High-Priest Jaddus, believing that resistance would be useless, went out to meet the great conqueror, and induced him to spare the Jews (Antiq. Jud., XI, viii, 3-6). After Alexander, Jerusalem suffered much from the long struggle between the Seleucids of Syria and the Ptolemies of Egypt. Palestine fell to Seleucus Nicanor; but in 305 Ptolemy Soter gained entrance into Jerusalem on a Sabbath Day by stratagem, and carried away a number of Jews to Egypt (Antiq. Jud., XII, i, 1). A century later (203) Antiochus the Great again tore the Holy City from the grasp of Egypt. When, in 199, it fell once more into the power of Scopas, a general of Ptolemy Epiphanes, the Jews helped the troops of Antiochus, who had just defeated Scopas's army, to definitively drive the Egyptian garrison out of the citadel of Jerusalem (Antiq. Jud., XII, iii, 3). The Seleucids conceived the unfortunate idea of introducing hellenistic-that is, pagan-notions and manners among the Jewish people, especially the sacerdotal and civil aristocracy. The high-priesthood had become a venal office; Jason was supplanted by Menelaus, and Menelaus by Lysimachus. These unworthy priests at last took up arms against each other, and blood flowed freely on several occasions in the streets of Jerusalem (II Mach., iv). Under pretence of stifling these turmoils, Antiochus Epiphanes in 170 entered the Holy City, stormed the fortifications of the Temple, plundered it of its most sacred vessels, massacred 40,000 persons, and carried off as many more into bondage (I Mach., i, 17-25; II Mach., v, 11-23). Two years later he sent his general Apollonius to suppress the Jewish religion by force and replace it at Jerusalem with Greek paganism. The city was dismantled, and the Acra, the citadel which commanded the Temple and served as a garrison for the Syrians and an asylum for renegade Jews, was reinforced. The statue of the Olympian Jupiter was set up in the Temple of the Most High, while a cruel and bloody persecution everywhere broke out against those Jews who were faithful to their traditions (I Mach., i, 30-64; II Mach,, v, 25, 26; vi, 1-11).

The priest Mathathias of Hasmon and his five sons known as the Machabees, organized an heroic resistance. Judas, succeeding on the death of his father (166), gained four victories over the Syrian armies, occupied Jerusalem (164), purified the Temple, strengthened the fortifications, and erected a new altar of holocausts. He also repaired the walls of the city. but could not gain possession of the citadel (Acra) which was held by a Syrian garrison. After various repulses and victories he made an alliance with the Roman Empire (I Mach., viii). Jonathas succeeded and maintained the struggle with no less heroism and success. He built a wall between the upper city and the Acra, as a barrier against the Syrians. Simon took the place of his brother when Jonathas fell by treachery (142). Three years later, he drove out the Syrian garrison of Acra, razed the fortress, and even levelled the hill on which it had stood-a gigantic undertaking which occupied the entire population for three years (Antiq. Jud., XVIII, vi, 6; Bell. Jud., V, iv, 1). Demetrius II and after him Antiochus Sidetes finally recognized the independence of the Jewish people. Simon, with two of his sons, was assassinated by his son-in-law, and his third son, John Hyrcanus I (135-06), succeeded him on the throne. Antiochus Sidetes, with a formidable army, came to besiege Jerusalem, but consented to withdraw for a ransom of 500 talents, and Hyrcanus took that sum from the treasures of the royal sepulchre (Antiq. Jud., XIII, viii, 24; Bell. Jud., I, ii, 5). Hyrcanus I was succeeded by his son Aristobulus I, who combined the title of pontiff with that of king, reigning however only one year. His brother and successor, Alexander Jannaeus (105-78), considerably enlarged the boundaries of the kingdom by his many brilliant victories. Upon his death Alexandra, his widow, took the reins of government into her hands for nine years, after which she entrusted the high-priesthood and the kingship to her son Hyrcanus II (69), but his brother Aristobulus took up arms to dispute the possession of the throne. By virtue of the alliance with Rome which Simon had entered into, Pompey, the Roman general, came from Damascus to Jerusalem, in 65 B.C., to put an end to the civil war. The partisans of Hyrcanus opened the gates of the city to the Romans, but those of Aristobulus entrenched themselves within the fortifications of the Temple, and could not be dislodged until after a siege of three months. Their resistance was at last overcome on a Sabbath Day; as many as 12,000 Jews were massacred, and Aristobulus was driven into exile. Pompey restored Hyrcanus to the high-priesthood, with the title of ethnarch, and declared Jerusalem a tributary of Rome (Antiq. Jud., XIV, iv, 1-4; Bell. Jud., I, vii, 1).

D. Under the Roman Domination; until A.D. 70

Caesar authorized Hyrcanus to rebuild the walls that had been demolished by Pompey; but in 48 B.C. he appointed Antipater, the Idumean, governor of Palestine, and the latter, four years afterwards, obtained the appointment of his eldest son, Phasael, as prefect of Jerusalem, and of his youngest son, Herod, as governor of Galilee. When Antipater died (43), Antigonus, the son of Aristobulus II, seized the throne, sent Hyrcanus II into exile among his allies, the Parthians and imprisoned Phasael, who killed himself in despair (Antiq. Jud., XIV, xiii, 5-10; Bell. Jud., I, xiii, 1-10). Herod fled to Rome, where the Senate proclaimed him King of the Jews (40). But it was three years before he wrested Jerusalem from Antigonus, and only after bringing conflagration and bloodshed upon the city. Antigonus, the last of the Hasmonean dynasty, was condemned to death (Antiq. Jud., XIV, xiv, 4; xvi, 1; Bell. Jud., I, xiv, 4; XVIII) In 24 B.C., Herod the Great built himself a splendid castle upon the site of the Tower of Baris, or of Birah (II Esd., ii, 8), named it Antonia, in honour of Mark Antony, and took up his residence there (Bell. Jud., V, v, 8; Antiq. Jud., XV, xi, 5). He also built a theatre and an amphitheatre for gladiatorial combats. In 19 B.C. the king, whose origin as well as his cruelty rendered him odious to the Jews, thought to win their goodwill by reconstructing tbe Temple of Zorobabel, little by little, until it should be as splendid as that of Solomon. He also enlarged the sanctuary by extending the galleries to the fortress of Antonia, on the north, and connecting it, on the south, with the site of Solomon's palace, so as to erect there a superb stoa, or basilica. The opening of the new Temple took place in the year 10 B.C. (Antiq. Jud., XV, xi, 3-6), but thousands of workmen laboured at it until A.D. 64 (Antiq. Jud., XX, ix, 7). He built a second strong castle at the northwest angle of Mount Sion, and flanked it with three superb towers--Hippicus, Phasael, and Mariamne. He also opened the tomb of the kings of Juda, in quest of treasure, after which, to allay the popular indignation aroused by his sacrilege, he erected a monument of white marble at the entrance of the tomb (Anti. Jud., VII., xv, 3; XVI, vii, 1) Herod was nearing the end of his reign of nearly forty-one years when Jesus, the Divine Saviour, was born at Bethlehem. A few months after the visit of the three Wise Men of the East, and the massacre of the Innocents he died of a hideous malady, hated by all his people (4 B.C.).

Archelaus, his son, took the title of king, but in the course of the same year Rome left him with only the title of Ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea. Ten years later, he was deposed, and Judea was reduced to the status of a Roman province. Coponius, Marcus Ambivius, Annius Rufus, Valerius Gratus (A.D. 14) and Pontius Pilate (26) were successively appointed procurators of the country. Pilate occasioned several seditions, which he stifled with extreme brutality. Under the administration of Pontius Pilate, Jesus Christ was arrested and put to death. The Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension of the Divine Saviour have rendered Jerusalem -- which was already glorious -- the most celebrated city in all the world. The enthusiasm with which, after the Day of Pentecost, thousands of Jews declared themselves disciples of Jesus Christ provoked a violent persecution of Christians, in which the deacon Stephen was the first martyr (Acts, vi, 8-15). Pontius Pilate having one day seized the funds of the Corban to pay for the construction of an aqueduct, a violent uprising of the Jews was thus occasioned (35). Summoned to Rome to give an account of his conduct, he was banished by Caligula (Antiq. Jud., XVIII, iii, 2). Two years later, the emperor made Herod Agrippa I, grandson of Herod, tetrarch of the countries beyond Jordan; in 41 Claudius made him king of Judea. Agrippa undertook the construction of the third wall, to the north of the city (Antiq. Jud., XIX, vii, 2; Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2). To please the Jews, he caused St. James the Greater to be beheaded, and intended the same lot for St. Peter, when an angel came and delivered the Prince of the Apostles from his chains (Acts, xii, 1-19). Soon afterwards, early in 44, the king died miserably at Caesarea (Acts, xii, 23; Antiq. Jud., XIX, viii, 2).

At this epoch there came to Jerusalem Saddan, who was called among the Greeks Helen, Queen of Adiabene, a country situated on the Adiabas, which is an eastern tributary of the Tigris. Converted to Judaism, together with her numerous family, she comforted the poor with her bounty during a terrible famine (cf. Acts, xi, 28). It was she who caused to be excavated, for herself and her family, to the north of the city, the imposing sepulchre known as the Tomb of the Kings (Antiq. Jud., XX, ii, 6; iv, 3). At this time the Blessed Virgin died, and was buried at Gethsemani. St. Peter returned from Antioch to preside at the First Ecumenical Council (Acts, xv, 1-3). (See JUDAIZERS, sub-title Council of Jerusalem.) The King of Judea was replaced by a procurator, and Agrippa II, son of the preceding Agrippa, was made Prince of Chalcis and Perea, and charged with the care of the Temple of Jerusalem (Antiq. Jud., XX, ix, 7). He finished the third wall, which had been commenced by his father, and brought the work upon the sanctuary to a termination in A.D. 64. Cuspius Fadus, Tiberius Alexander, and Cumanus were successively procurators, from 44 to 52. Then came Felix, Festus, and Albinus, from 52 to 66. With the last four, disorders and massacres occurred incessantly. Gessius Florus (66) surpassed the wickedness of his predecessors, and drove the people to revolt against the Roman domination; Agrippa and his party advocated patience, and appealed to Rome against the procurator; but after several days of civil war, the insurgent party triumphed over the pacific, massacred the Roman garrison, and set fire to the palaces. Cestius Gallus, President of Syria, arrived on 30 October, 66, with the Twelfth Legion, but only met with repulses, and had to retire (Antiq. Jud., XX, xxi; Bell. Jud., II, xvii, 6; xix, 1-9). The Christians, recalling Christ's prophecies (Luke, xix, 43, 44), withdrew beyond the Jordan into Agrippa's territory, led by their bishop, St. Simeon (St. Epiphanius, "De mensuris", xiv, xv). Nero commanded his general, Vespasian, to suppress the insurrection, and Vespasian, accompanied by his son Titus, invaded Galilee, in A.D. 67, with an army of 60,000 men. Most of the strong places had been captured, when the death of the emperor occasioned a suspension of hostilities. After the ephemeral reigns of three emperors, aggregating eighteen months, Vespasian was raised to the throne in November, 69.

Titus received from his father the command of the Army of the East, and in the following year, at the season when the Holy City was crowded with those who had come to the Feast of the Passover, he began to lay siege to it. On the 14th day of Kanthic (Bell. Jud., V, xiii, 7), or of the Hebrew month Abib--the day of the Passover, corresponding to 31 March-Titus took up his position on Mount Scopus with the Fifth, Seventh, and Fifteenth Legions, while the Tenth Legion occupied the Mount of Olives. On the other side, John of Giscala held the Temple, the Antonia, and the new town at Bezetha, with 11,000 men, and Simon, the son of Giora, held the upper and lower city, on the southwestern hill, with 10,000 men. Attacking the third wall, on 9 April, the legions captured that line of defences after fifteen days' fighting. Once master of the new town, Titus took up a position to the west, on the ground known as "the Camp of the Assyrians" (Bell. Jud., V, vii, 2). An attack upon the second wall immediately followed. Five days later, the Romans gained entrance by a breach, but were repulsed, and mastered it only after five days of fierce and incessant fighting. Titus could then approach the Antonia, which offered the only way of access to the Temple, and the citadel of Herod, which covered the first wall to the north of Mount Sion. After three days given to repose, the causeways and movable towers were made ready against the Hippicus tower and the Antonia. But on 17 May the works raised against the Antonia were ruined and destroyed by the soldiers of John of Giscala, and two days later the movable towers which threatened the Hippicus were set on fire by Simon's men, while a heroic struggle was being maintained on both sides. The Roman general then employed his whole army for three days in surrounding the city with an earthwork of circumvallation, designed to cut off all communication with the city, and so to reduce the place by famine. This soon produced terrible results (Bell. Jud., XII, v, 2).

After three weeks of fresh preparations, the battering-rams effected a breach in the wall connecting the Antonia with the Temple, near the Pool of Struthius, but in vain. Two days later, the wall crumbled to pieces above a mine prepared by John of Giscala, and a handful of Roman soldiers gained entrance to the Antonia by surprise, at three o'clock in the morning of 20 June (Bell. Jud., VI, i, 1-7). Titus at once had the fortress demolished, in order to use the materials in constructing mounds against the Temple. For three weeks the Jews desperately defended first the outer porticoes and then the inner, which the Romans entered only at the cost of enormous sacrifices. At last on 23 July, a Roman soldier flung a blazing torch into one of the halls adjoining the Holy of Holies. In the midst of frightful carnage the fire spread to the neighbouring buildings, and soon the whole platform was one horrible mass of corpses and ruins (Bell. Jud., VI, ii, 1-9; iii, 1, 2; iv, 1-5). The Romans then set fire to the palace in the hollow of El Wad, and to the Ophel; next day they drove the Jews out of the Acra and burned the lower city as far as the Pool of Siloe (Bell. Jud., VI, vi, 3-4). There still remained the third rampart, the formidable stronghold of the upper city, where the defenders of the Acra, laden with booty, had joined Simon's men. Eighteen days were devoted to the preparation of the aggeres (mounds) to the northwest and northeast of the fortress, but scarcely had the battering-rams breached the walls when John and Simon fled secretly with their troops. On the eighth day of Elul (1 August) the city was definitively in the power of the Romans, after a siege of 143 days. To those who congratulated him Titus replied: "It is not I who have conquered. God, in His wrath against the Jews, has made use of my arm" (Bell. Jud., VIII, v, 2).

The walls of the Temple and those of the city were demolished. But Titus wished to preserve the fortress of the upper city, with the three magnificent towers of Herod's palace. Besides, the upper city was needed as a fortified station for the Tenth Legion, which was left to garrison Jerusalem. During this siege -- one of the most sanguinary recorded in history -- 600,000 Jews, according to Tacitus (Hist., V, xiii), or, according to Josephus, more than a million, perished by the sword, disease, or famine. The survivors died in gladiatorial combats or were sold into slavery.

IV. DEVELOPMENT OF THE CITY AND ITS CHIEF MONUMENTS

A. Sion, or the City of David, according to Tradition

"David took the castle of Sion" and "dwelt in the castle, and called it, the city of David: and built round about from Mello and inwards" (II Kings, v, 7, 9). When Solomon had completed the Temple and the House of the Forest of Lebanon, 100 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high, with a porch 30 cubits by 50, he erected the palaces and other buildings. Lower down, towards the south, in the locality which figures in the post-Exilic texts as the Ophel, we find the Gabaonites (Jos., ix, 22) and other Nathinites -foreign races placed at the service of the Levites to furnish wood and water for the sacrifices (I Esd., ii, 58; vii, 2f; viii, 20; II Esd., iii, 26; xi, 21).

Did Sion, the City of David, occupy the eastern hill or that situated to the southwest? Before the exile, the Jews could not have been ignorant of the location, for the boundary wall of Sion enclosed the sepulchres of the prophet-king and fourteen of his successors; the last two Books of Kings repeat this thirteen times (III Kings, ii, 10; xi, 43; xiv, 9, 24, etc.; IV Kings, viii, 24, etc.), and Paralipomenon bears similar witness. On their return from exile, the old men (I Esd., iii, 12) must have remembered in what quarter of the city the burial-places of David and his descendants were situated; in point of fact, Nehemias does not hesitate to use them as a landmark (II Esd., iii, 16). Hyrcanus I and Herod the Great even opened these tombs of the kings to find treasure in them (Antiq. Jud., VII, xv, 3; XIII, vii, 4; Bell. Jud., 1, ii, 5). The white marble monument erected by the latter seems to have remained standing until A.D. 133 (Dion Cassius, "Hist. of Rome", LXIX, iv). At any rate the tomb of David was well known among the Jews and the disciples of Christ in the time of St. Peter (Acts, ii, 29). Now Josephus, an eyewitness, says that the Jebusite city, which became the City of David, occupied the high western plateau of the southwestern hill, which is now known as Mount Sion. In his time it was called "the upper city" (Antiq. Jud., XVI, vii, 1, etc.), and again the upper agora, or market (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 1. Cf. I Mach., xii, 36; xiv, 36). The word Millo (in D.V. Mello) is always translated Acra in the Septuagint and Josephus, and, according to the latter, the Millo, or Mello, occupied the high plateau on the northeast side of the same hill, and was in his time called Acra, "lower city" and "lower market" (Antiq. Jud., XVI, vii, 1; Bell. Jud., V, iv, 1; I Mach., i, 38). It was this hill, commanding the Temple, that was levelled by the Hasmoneans (Antiq.Jud., XIII, vi, 6; Bell. Jud., I, ii, 2). The Talmudists agree with the Jewish historian as to the position of the two markets (Neubauer, "La Geographie du Talmud", p. 138). Eusebius of Caesarea (Onomasticon, s. v. "Golgotha"), St. Jerome (Ep. cviii, "Ad Eustoch."), St. Epiphanius ("De mens.", xiv), and all later writers, Jewish and Christian, locate Sion, the City of David, upon the southwestern hill, which has never borne any other name than that of Mount Sion.

B. Sion on Ophel

During the last fifty years many writers have rejected tradition and sought information from the Bible alone, giving some twenty different topographical theories. The theory which places Sion upon Ophel is the only one which (apart from certain discrepancies as to the sites of the Mello, the Acra, the palaces of Solomon, etc.) is worth a moment's consideration. The partisans of this theory, base it upon the following passage: "This same Ezechias was he that stopped the source of waters of Gihon, and tied them away underneath toward the west of the city of David " (II Par., xxxii, 30). They maintain that Sion was at Ophel for the following reasons:

The following objections are made:

(a) The Bir Eyub, that is to say, the Well of Job, is neither a spring nor a fountain (en or ain), but a well (bir), 125 feet deep, in its present condition, and is supplied only by rain-drainage and infiltration. In the sixth century, Cyril of Scythopolis (Vita S. Sabae, lxii), and then Eutychius of Alexandria (Annals), and Moudjir ed Din ("Hist. de Jerus.", ed. Sauvaire, p. 188) tell us that, after a great drought which lasted five years (509-14), in the twenty-third year of Anastasius, John, Patriarch of Jerusalem, caused a well to be dug to a depth, according to Cyril, of about 255 feet, or according to the Arab historian, of 10 cubits (about 82 feet), but without finding any water. The Bir Eyub, therefore, is no Chanaanean fountain, and the En Rogel must necessarily be the Fountain of the Virgin, the natural peculiarities of which must have made it famous in the country and fitted it to serve as a boundary mark between the tribes of Benjamin and Juda. The grotto of this spring, too, would have afforded a good place of concealment to David's two spies, who hid at En Rogel (II Kings, xvii, 17).

(b) In the time of Ezechias there were many springs of running water in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem, and the king stopped them all (II Par., xxxii, 2-5). Josephus relates that when Titus was besieging Jerusalem many springs flowed so abundantly that they sufficed, not only to give drinking water to the Romans but to irrigate the gardens (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2). West of the city the ground was covered with gardens (Bell. Jud., VI, ii, 2; vii, 2) and this is why the western gate bore the name of Gennath, "Gate of the Gardens". Here Titus pitched his camp and here the officers of Sennacherib halted (IV Kings, xviii, 17. Cf, Is., vii, 3). Among the living waters of Jerusalem the Babylonian Talmud commemorates the "Beth Mamila" (Neubauer, op. cit., p. 146), that is, the Birket Mamilla. Cyril of Scythopolis (loc. cit.) relates that in the great five-years' drought "the waters of Siloe and of the Lucillians ceased to flow". Lastly Josephus says that a conduit under the Gate of Gennath brought water to the Tower of Hippicus (Bell. Jud., V, vii, 3). Several fragments of ancient aqueducts have been discovered under the Jaffa Gate and about the Hammana el Batrak, commonly called the Pool of Ezechias.

(c) Adonias, the first-born son of David the king, secretly assembled his numerous partisans upon "the stone of Zoheleth, which was near the fountain Rogel", where he offered rams and bulls, and was to have been proclaimed king at the end of the banquet. But David, apprised of the plot by the Prophet Nathan, sent Solomon, with the Prophet and the royal guard to Gihon, there to receive the sacred unction without Adonias's knowledge, and to be proclaimed king to the sound of trumpets (III Kings, i, 5-9, 33-45). On the Bank of the Mount of Offence opposite to the Fountain of the Virgin, is an immense rocky ledge called Ez Zahweile. This has been identified by Clermont-Ganneau with the stone of Zoheleth ("Quart. Stat." 1810, p. 251). Wilson and Warren are of the same opinion (The Recovery of Jerus., p. 305). Conder supports the identification upheld "by the common opinion of the learned" ("Quart. 5tat.", 1884, p. 242, n. 1). If the City of David had been on Ophel, would Adonias have held his treasonable banquet under the windows of the royal palace? Would David have been ignorant of this large and noisy gathering until Nathan's arrival? Would he have sent Solomon into the Valley of Cedron, at the foot of Zoheleth? Would not the partisans of Adonias have heard the sound of trumpets and the shouts of the people before the royal procession had returned to Sion (III Kings, i, 41)? The fact appears to be that, while Adonias had withdrawn to a spot in the Valley of Cedron near En Rogel, Solomon was sent from the opposite side, where was the source of Gihon.

(d) There is no document which in any way attributes the construction of the tunnel of Siloe to Ezechias. On the other hand, Isaias, in the reign of Achaz, the father of Ezechias, speaks (viii, 6) of "the waters of Siloe" (a word which means "sent."-John, ix, 7) "that go with silence". The Hebrew inscription found in 1881 on the wall of the tunnel is, according to Sayce ("Fresh Light", London, 1883, p. 116), earlier than Ezechias, and may even date from the time of Solomon. Conder, Maspero, Stade, Renan, and others hold that it antedates the time of Ezechias.

(e) There is now no question of the fact that the pool of Siloe was always without the walls of the city (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2; ix, 4). Now Ezechias brought the waters of Gihon to a cistern within the city (IV Kings, xx, 20; Ecclus., xlviii, 19, fragment of the Hebrew text). Isaias (xxii, 11) says, "You made a ditch between the two walls"-i.e., between the old wall and that of Ezechias, northwest of Mount Sion. The Hebrews never divided the cardinal points of the compass.

(f) In the historical books Sion is applied to the city of Jebus, which, with the Mello, became the City of David. But in the poetic books Sion becomes, by metaphor, a synonym for the Temple (Ps. lxxvii, 68), or for Jerusalem (Ps. cxxxii, 3; lxxxvi, 5). Sion sometimes designates the people of Israel (Is., x, 32; Soph., iii, 14), or Judea (Lam., iv, 22), and even the Jewish community in the dispersion (Jer., xxxi, 12; Zach., ii, 7). In the days of the Machabees the City of David, to the west of the Temple, has become the resort of infidels (I Mach., i, 35 sqq.). Symbolically, the name of Sion was transferred to the Temple and its fortress, which had become the only remaining stronghold of Israel's faith. But Ophel was always excluded from this symbolical Sion (Mach., xii, 36, 37). The text of the Bible, studied and interpreted on the spot, indicates the same hill for the locality of the holy Sion, the City of David, as does tradition. Archaeology, too, positively confirms tradition.

C. Sion the Upper City

The sides of the traditional Mount Sion contain a great many dwelling-places wholly or partly excavated in the rock. These were, according to the common opinion, the houses of the aboriginal inhabitants. While constructing the Gobat School and the Protestant cemetery, in 1874-75, to the south of the western plateau of Sion, Maudslay discovered the line of an ancient fortress. Its base is a scarp cut vertically in the rock, about 600 feet in length, and 40-50 feet in height. To the west and east of this colossal scarp are salients hewn out of the rock, their sides measuring 40-50 feet. These are the rock bases of flanking towers. The first is 20 feet in height, and rests upon a plateau of rock rudely shaped into a talus. Along the scarp runs a ditch, which is also dug out of the living rock, having a depth of from 5 to 10 feet and an average width of 18 feet (Conder, "The Rock Scarp of Zion" in "Quart. Stat." 1875, pp. 81 sq.) In 1894 Bliss took up and continued the work of exploration. From the eastern tower the scarp turns toward the northeast, following the outlines of the high plateau, and the ditch follows uninterruptedly in the same direction. On account of some houses which are grouped about the Holy Cenacle, the exploration has only been carried on to a length of 185 feet. The scarp was once crowned by a wall (some of the stones of which, cut and bevelled, were found in situ), rises to a height of 240 feet above the bed of the Ennom (Hinnom) (see Bliss). This fortress, which was originally isolated, and was constructed with marvellous art, and which was so solid as to defy every attack, occupied the high city indicated by Josephus, "upon much the highest hill, straight along its length, which, by reason of its strong position, had been named by David the citadel" (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 1). It was about 2300 feet in length and 800 in breadth. To the north, where it was protected by valley of no great depth, Herod caused a strong castle to be built, which made the position almost impregnable, even against the Roman legions. Thanks to the dimensions and other indications supplied by Josephus, it is thought that the Tower of Phasael may be recognized in the first courses of masonry of the actual Tower of David, and that of Hippicus in the tower to the northwest of the city citadel; that of Mariamne ought to flank the western wall. On the same side the Gate of the Valley formerly opened (II Par., xxvi, 9; II Esd., ii, 13, 15; iii, 13), and at the northwest angle rose the Tower of the Furnaces (II Esd., iii, 11; xii, 37), which defended the Gate of the Corner before the Herodian structure existed (IV Kings, xiv, 13; II Par., xxv, 23). The high city, which, according to Josephus, was the aristocratic quarter, contained the Cenacle, according to tradition, on the south, next, the palace of Caiaphas, farther on, that of Annas, and, at the southeast angle of Herod's palace, the prison where St. James the Greater was beheaded.

From the Tower of Phasael the wall descended, from west to east, upon the southern slope of Mount Sion, and ended at the enclosure of the Temple. An important fragment of this rampart has been discovered to the east of the Tower of David, and, farther on, another piece, 290 feet long, flanked by two towers, the stone facing of which, on the side towards the valley, remains intact to a height of 39 feet (Warren, "Quart. Stat.", 1884, pl. III). This wall was pierced by the ancient Gate of Ephraim (IV Kings, xv, 13; II Par., xxv, 23). According to tradition, St. Peter was cast into prison in the suburb of Ezechias; after being delivered by the Angel, he made his way to the city proper, where he found the iron gate open (Acts, xii; 3-11). As early as the sixth century a church marked the site of the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark, fifty paces south of this wall (Acts, xii, 12-17). The southern wall of Mount Sion probably formed part of the wall by which David joined the City of Jebus and the Mello (the Acra of the Septuagint). This hill, according to Josephus, is the lower city, the Akron of the Syrians, which was levelled by the Hasmoneans (Antiq. Jud., XIII, vi, 6). It contained the palace of the Hasmoneans and that of Helen of Adiabene (Bell. Jud., VI, vi, 3).

To return to the south of the primitive fortress, a wall of later construction descends from the outer angle, southeast of the eastern tower, towards the pool of Siloe. It is a work of the kings of Juda, if not of Solomon, but, as Bliss has remarked, it has been restored again and again--on the last occasion, by the Empress Eudocia (A.D. 450-60). At a point 130 feet from the beginning of the wall, exploration has brought to light the remains of a gate with three superimposed floorings of successive periods. It opens upon a street under which passes a drain leading to Ennom. This is the Dung Gate (II Esd., ii, 13), which Jeremias (xix, 2) calls the Earthen Gate; Josephus calls it the Gate of Essenians, and indicates its position in the quarter of Bethso (from the Hebrew Bethzoa, "a dunghill") (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2). Here Mount Sion is crossed by two ancient aqueducts of different heights, which bring water from south of Bethlehem (Bliss, op. cit., pp. 17-82). About 2000 feet from this gate, Guthe, in 1881, and, later, Bliss, have proved the existence of another gate, also containing three floors and protected by a tower. This is the Gate of the Fountain (II Esd., ii, 14; iii, 15; "water gate", xii, 36) and, probably, also "the gate that is between two walls, and leadeth to the king's garden" by which Sedecias escaped (Jer., lii, 7; IV Kings, xxv, 4). Starting from the tower, the wall takes a northwesterly direction and then turns abruptly to the north, leaving the Pool of Siloe outside the city, in accordance with what we are told by Josephus (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2; ix, 4). To the south of the Pool of Siloe the valley is crossed by a great dam, 233 feet long, a vast rain-water reservoir. The dam is 20 feet thick and is finished off, at about half its height, by a wall 10 feet thick, flanked by seven buttresses of equal strength. In spite, however, of successive reinforcements, it was unequal to resisting the pressure of the water. The Empress Eudocia had a second dam built, fifty feet to the north of the former one. This is "the king's aqueduct" (or pool) of II Esd. ii, 14.

Bliss followed the eastern wall of Mount Sion for only 650 feet, that is, as far as 150 feet north of the Pool of Siloe. According to Nehemias (II Esd., iii, 16-19), the wall passed in front of the street of stairs which went down to the sepulchre of David, then by the reservoir which Josephus calls the Pool of Solomon (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2), and, lastly, by the House of the Heroes--all places as yet unidentified. The wall then formed an angle and then a re-entrant angle (II Esd., iii, 24) but we are ignorant as to the point where it crossed the valley to ascend Ophel. On the eastern flank of Ophel it has ascertained that a small fragment of a wall exists, running from southwest to northeast and, 100 feet farther on, a remarkable hydraulic structure anterior in date to the tunnel of Siloe. The latter is a gallery, hewn in the rock, leading to a wall which goes down to the surface level of the Fountain of the Virgin, whence water could be drawn by means of buckets and ropes (Wilson and Warren, op. cit., pp. 248 sq.). Beyond doubt, "the water gate" and "the tower that stood out" (II Esd., iii, 26; xii, 36) must be located hereabouts. The wall has been found again at a distance of 700 feet in the same direction; it then turns to the north for a length of 70 feet and runs into the southeast angle of the Temple enclosure. At the elbow formed by this wall, there rose a tower, the "great tower that standeth out" (II Esd., iii. 27), intended as a defence for the royal palace. In course of time the kings of Juda prolonged the wall of Ophel so as to protect the eastern enclosure of the Temple. This line was pierced by numerous gates: "the horse gate" (II Par., xxiii, 15; IV Kings, xi, 16; II Esd., iii, 28), discovered in l902, by the English engineers, facing the southeast angle of the Haram, which is called "Solomon's Stables"; the eastern gate (of the Temple), corresponding to "the Golden Gate"; the Mephkad, or "judgment gate" (II Esd., iii, 30) opposite to the Golden Gate; the Prison Gate (D.V. "watch gate") (II Esd., xii, 38); the Gate of Sur (IV Kings, xi, 6); "the gate of the shieldbearers" (D.V.), or "of the guard" (A.V.) (IV Kings xi, 19); the Gate of Benjamin (Jer., xxxvii, l2; xxxviii, 7) are names of different gates which existed previously or protected suburbs that stretched north of the Temple from the time of Ezechias to Herod. Lastly, there is the Sheep Gate (D. V. "flock gate") (II Esd., iii, 1; xii, 38) near the Probatic Pool.

Of the ancient Temple nothing is now to be seen but the holy rock and a number of cisterns. The Harami esh Sherif is four-sided, and has right angles on the southwest and northeast. The southern wall measures 922 feet and is pierced by three entrances: the Double Gate, the Triple Gate, and the Single Gate--remarkable works of the type of the Golden Gate and, like it restored in the sixth century of our era. The eastern and the northern walls are each 1042 feet in length; the western l601. The stones are carefully shaped and bevelled, 3 and a half feet in height, the longest of them 20 to 39 feet long, while on the south there is one course, 600 feet long, in which the stones are 7 feet high. At the southwest angle this colossal wall goes down to a depth of 85 feet below the present surface of the soil. Forty feet to the north of this angle may be seen three rows of stones, forming a vault 51 feet in width, called "Robinson's Arch", after the explorer who first recognized in these remains the fragments of a viaduct. The English engineers have as a matter of fact discovered, 54 feet to the west of this fragment of vaulting, and 55 feet below the actual level of the soil, three courses of the corresponding upright supporting wall. At the foot of Mount Sion, 246 feet from Robinson's Arch, more remains have been found of the same viaduct, of which, indeed, Josephus clearly makes mention (Antiq. Jud. XIV, iv, 2; Bell. Jud., I, vii, 2; VI, vi, 2). The supporting wall rests upon a paved foundation, which in its turn is supported by a bed of earth 23 feed in thickness. In this mass of earth, in which no traces of masonry are found, there lie vaulting-stones of from 3 to 3 1/2 feet in height and width, and 7 feet in length--the remains of a much older bridge. Authorities have attributed the first viaduct to Herod and the second to the Kings of Juda, or even to Solomon. At the very bottom of the valley there is a channel cut into the rock and vaulted in the Phoenician manner; this is an aqueduct which was later used as a drain (Wilson and Warren, op. cit., pp. 76-111; Perrot and Chipiez, "Hist. de l'art", II, 168. Cf. III Kings, xi, 27).

The second entrance to the Temple, called "Barclay's Gate", opens 180 feet farther north; then, beyond the Wailing Place, comes a third gate called "Wilson's Arch". This is a viaduct arch 42 feet along the axis and 39 feet in span, built of blocks from 6 to 12 feet in length. In the bottom of the valley, round about the viaduct. Wilson has discovered some very ancient habitations and pieces of handiwork which seem to be of Phoenician origin. The viaduct, which is supposed to date from the time of Herod, was reconstructed in the Byzantine period. It both connected the Temple with Mount Sion and served as an aqueduct for the canal that runs from Bethlehem. Near Wilson's Arch there is an ancient vaulted pool, Birket el Bouraq, to which an aqueduct leads down from the citadel. Josephus places the Xystus, the gymnasium constructed by the High Priest Jason, between the two viaducts. Beyond Wilson's Arch the first city wall joined the Temple enclosure (Wilson and Warren, op. cit., pp. 76 sq.).

D. The Second Wall

"The second wall", says Josephus, "began at the gate that is called Gennath, which belongs to the first city wall. Enclosing only the southern district, it continued as far as the Antonia" (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 2). It is the work of Ezechias and of Manasses. In 1881, in the course of excavations for the foundations of a house, 20 feet to the north of the ditch of the citadel, a wall was brought to light, constructed of large stones, extending east and west to a distance of about 100 feet. At its western extremity it forms a somewhat obtuse angle with a stronger and still better constructed wall which runs north (Selah Merill, "Quart. Stat.", 1886, pp. 21 sq.; 1887, p. 217; I888, p. 21). In 1900 a Greek high school was built 180 feet farther on, and it was found that the rock is almost on a level with the ground to the west, while it forms a counterscarp to the east. In the accumulated fillings of the hollow remains of medieval structures were discovered; but the explorations on this spot were not followed up. Many Palestinologists, however, see here marked indications of a ditch. At the northeast angle of the Greek school, C. Schick ("Quart. Stat.", 1897, p. 219; 1883, p. 19) had already ascertained that the wall turns once more at an angle eastwards. Up to this point the city wall skirts the Pool of Ezechias at a distance of 180 feet to the west and 65 feet to the north. In building the great Greek bazaars south of the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, the workmen came upon a scarp which had once been crowned with a thick wall, some fine blocks of which were found still in situ; the wall sloped back from the face of the rock (Schick, "Quart. Stat.", 1888, p. 571; 1894, p. 146). Next, in 1893, while building the German Protestant church which took the place of the church of St. Mary the Latin, the engineers found that the latter edifice had stood upon filled ground. Digging down 30 feet below the actual level of the ground, they came to the rock, and then, under the great nave of the old church, they found a strong wall to the east and the west, though in bad preservation. It keeps, however, some of its facing in the shape of carefully dressed slabs. Guthe (in "Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palaestinavereins", XVII, p. 128) and Schick (in "Quart. Stat.", 1894, p. 146), with many others, regard this as a part of the second wall.

In the time of Christ, Calvary was thus shut out from the perimeter of the second city enclosure. Indeed, the existence of the Jewish hypogea-the Holy Sepulchre, another one 30 feet to the west, and a third to the northeast-leaves no room for doubt on this point; for only the kings enjoyed the privilege of sepulture within the city. Some thirty years ago English engineers asserted that the wall of Ezechias must necessarily enclose Golgotha, because this zigzag city wall would, otherwise, have been built contrary to all the rules of military art. But since then the exploration of ancient Jewish and Chanaanitish cities has revealed irregularities of the same kind. While, upon the line indicated, the haphazard diggings made on various structures have all brought to light fragments of braces of a homogeneous wall, the religious communities in the Christian quarter to the northwest of Golgotha have in recent times executed important building operations without finding any traces of ditch or of rampart.

At the angle where the wall turned northwards should be found the new Gate of Ephraim (II Esd., xii, 38). But the course of the wall from this point is less easy to follow. It was, very probably, replaced in the time of Hadrian by the colonnaded street which led, almost in a straight line, from Mount Sion to the Gate of Damascus, and which was founded upon rock throughout. Following this street, we pass, on the left, the first courses of the facade of Constantine's Basilica, which was completely discovered in 1907 and, on the right, 230 feet from this structure, the Khan ez Zeit, which is built in a Jewish cistern partly hewn out of the rock. To the east of this cistern, on the slope of El Wad, the rock appears, cut obliquely. Farther on, the Old Gate (II Esd., iii, 6; xii, 38) may be placed. Where the Street of the Columns was crossed by another, coming from the west a tetrapylon marked the intersection; one superb marble column of it still remains in situ, 23 feet high, leaning against a fine wall of Roman construction. Investigation has demonstrated the existence, at a point 200 feet west of this column, of a counterscarp and a deep ditch, running from south to north (Schick, "Quart. Stat.", 1887, p. 154). It was by this gate that, according to tradition, Jesus went out from the city to the place of His crucifixion. North of the column and slightly to the east, at a distance of 100 feet, is to be seen a rocky scarp which extends about 250 feet towards the north. Near here the wall descended toward into El Wad, where it came to the Fish Gate (II Par., xxxiii, 14; II Esd., iii, 3; xii, 38). This gate opened on the road by which the Tyrian fishermen came from Jaffa (cf. II Esd., xiii, 16). The wall then crossed Mount Bezetha, and the Tower of Hananeel (Jer., xxxi, 38; II Esd., iii, 1; xii, 38) must be located on the ridge which descended from the Hill of Jeremias to Mount Moria, and which was the vulnerable point of the Holy City. On this same ridge there was another tower, or stronghold, as early as the period of the kings of Juda; Nehemias, who restored it, named it Birah, an Aramaic word derived from the Assyrian biratu, "palace", or "fortress of the temple" (in D.V., "tower of the house"; II Esd., ii, 8). This tower (see I Mach., xiii, 53; etc.) bore, in the time of Josephus, the hellenized name of Baris. Under the Hasmonean dynasty, the whole rock on which this tower stood was removed on all sides, to a depth of 30 feet on the south, and of 15 feet on the north, the length of the excavation being 350 feet from east to west. On the north, where there is a deep cistern, the mountain was levelled away to a distance of 160 feet (cf. I Mach., xiii, 53). Herod caused the reservoir to be vaulted over, and built the fortress of Antonia on the rock of Baris and on the southern esplanade (Bell. Jud.. V, v, 8). It was in this building that Pontius Pilate had his praetorium, where Jesus was condemned to death. In saying that the second wall "went up to the Antonia", Josephus does not indicate where it ended, but only its direction. He himself does not place the Antonia at the end of the wall of Ezechias; on the contrary, he says that the Romans could approach it only after they had become masters of the city as far as the first wall (Bell. Jud., V, ix). From the Tower of Hananeel the wall was prolonged to the Sheep (or Flock) Gate (II Esd., iii, 1, 31; xii, 38), near the Probatic Pool, with the five porches, and the other great reservoirs, necessarily, within the walls.

E. The Third Wall

From A.D. 41 to 44 Herod Agrippa I undertook to build the third wall, which also began at the Tower of Hippicus and crossed the Camp of the Assyrians to the north, as far as the octagonal Tower of Psephinus (Antiq. Jud., XIX, vii, 2; Bell. Jud., V, iv, 3). Traces of this tower were found at the northwest corner of the city, at the place where the Qasr Djaloud, or Tower of Goliath, was erected in the twelfth century. Thence Agrippa's wall took an easterly direction, towards the Towers of the Women, opposite the sepulchre of Helen of Adiabene, which is situated 2000 feet to the north. The Towers of the Women, some traces of which have been found, protected the gate which corresponded to the Fish Gate. It still stands, as to a considerable part of its height, though sunken into the ground, below the actual Gate of Damascus, or Bab el Amoud. Thence the wall passed over the royal grottoes (Bell. Jud., V, iv, 3) to cross the ridge of Bezetha. The stone of this lofty hill is of excellent quality, and could be transported in immense blocks as far as the Temple by means of inclined planes. This is why, as early as the time of Solomon, the hill was used as a quarry, as is shown by the figure of a Phoenician cherub cut in the wall of one of the royal grottoes. Already perforated with numerous caverns, the hill was cut in two under Agrippa I and the cut served as a ditch for the new city wall. Thus it was that the summit became a separate hill, called, since the sixteenth century, the Hill of Jeremias. It again served as a quarry in the period of the Crusades and its present aspect has been taken on since the time of Christ. From the royal grottoes, the wall continued eastwards as far as the height above Cedron, and then turned south to rejoin the second city wall. The line of the third wall has with slight modifications been kept in that of the actual city.

BARNABAS MEISTERMANN

Jerusalem (A.D. 71-1099)

I. TO THE TIME OF CONSTANTINE (71-312)

When Titus took Jerusalem (April-September, A.D. 70) he ordered his soldiers to destroy the city (Josephus, "De bello Jud.", VI, ix). They spared only the three great towers at the north of Herod's palace (Hippicus, Phasael, Mariamne) and the western wall. Few Jews remained. The Roman Tenth Legion held the upper town and Herod's castle as a fortress; Josephus says that Titus handed the fields around to his soldiers ("Vita", 76). The presence of these heathens would naturally repel Jews, though in this period there was no law against their presence in Jerusalem. The Jewish Rabbis gathered together at Jabne (or Jamnia, now Jebna) in the plain, northwest of the city, two hours from Ramleh.

Meanwhile the Christian community had fled to Pella in Paraea, east of the Jordan (southeast of Jenin), before the beginning of the siege. The Christians were still almost entirely converts from Judaism (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", IV, v). After the destruction they came back and congregated in the house of John Mark and his mother Mary, where they had met before (Acts, xii, 12 sq.). It was apparently in this house that was the Upper Room, the scene of the Last Supper and of the assembly on Pentecost. Epiphanius (d. 403) says that when the Emperor Hadrian came to Jerusalem in 130 he found the Temple and the whole city destroyed save for a few houses, among them the one where the Apostles had received the Holy Ghost. This house, says Epiphanius, is "in that part of Sion which was spared when the city was destroyed" -- therefore in the "upper part ("De mens. et pond.", cap. xiv). From the time of Cyril of Jerusalem, who speaks of "the upper Church of the Apostles, where the Holy Ghost came down upon them" (Catech., ii, 6; P. G., XXXIII), there are abundant witnesses of the place. A great basilica was built over the spot in the fourth century; the crusaders built another church when the older one had been destroyed by Hakim in 1010. It is the famous Coenaculum or Cenacle -- now a Moslem shrine -- near the Gate of David, and supposed to be David's tomb (Nebi Daud).

During the first Christian centuries the church at this place was the centre of Christianity in Jerusalem, "Holy and glorious Sion, mother of all churches" (Intercession in "St. James' Liturgy", ed. Brightman, p. 54). Certainly no spot in Christendom can be more venerable than the place of the Last Supper, which became the first Christian church. The constant use of the name Sion for the Coenaculum has led to considerable discussion as to the topography of Jerusalem. Many writers conclude that it is on Mount Sion, which would therefore be the southwest hill of the city (Meistermann, "Nouveau Guide de Terre Sainte", Paris, 1907, p. 121, plan). Others (Baedeker, "Palaestina u. Syrien", 6th ed., 1904, p. 27) oppose this tradition on the strength of the passages in the Old Testament that clearly distinguish Sion from Jerusalem and state that the Lord dwells in Sion and that the king's palace is there (Is., x, 12; viii, 18; Joel, iii, 21; etc.). So Sion would be the hill on the west, the place of the Temple and David's palace. It was that later the name Sion began to be used for all Jerusalem. Josephus never uses it at all; already in the Old Testament the way was prepared for this extended use. Jerusalem is the "daughter of Sion" (Jer., vi, 2, etc.). All its inhabitants without distinction are "Sion" (Zach, ii, 7, etc.). In early Christian times Sion seems to have lost its spell, meaning as one definite hill, and to have become merely another name for Jerusalem. Naturally then they called their centre there by the name of the city, although it did not stand on the original Mount Sion. The pilgrim Etheria (Silvia) at the turn of the fourth century, always speaks of the Coenaculum as Sion, just as the Holy Sepulchre is always Anastasis.

From this Coenaculum the first Christian bishops ruled the Church of Jerusalem. They were all converts from Judaism, as were their flocks. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., IV, v) gives the list of these bishops. According to a universal tradition the first was the Apostle St. James the Less, the "brother of the Lord". His predominant place and residence in the city are implied by Gal., i, 19. Eusebius says he was appointed bishop by Peter, James (the Greater), and John (II, i). Naturally the other Apostles when they were at Jerusalem shared the government with him (Acts, xv, 6, etc.; Eus., "Hist. Eccl.,", II, xxiii). He was thrown from a rock, then stoned to death by the Jews about the year 63 (Eus., ib.; Josephus, "Antiq. Jud.", XX, ix, 1; ed. cit., p. 786). After his death the surviving Apostles and other disciples who were at Jerusalem chose Simeon, son of Cleophas (also called Our Lord's brother, Matt., xiii. 55), to succeed him. He was bishop at the time of the destruction (70) and probably then went to Pella with the others. About the year 106 or 107 he was crucified under Trajan (Eus., "Hist. Eccl.", III, xxxii). The line of bishops of Jerusalem was then continued as follows:

• Judas (Justus), 107-113;
• Zachaeus or Zacharias;
• Tobias;
• Benjamin;
• John;
• Matthias (d. 120);
• Philip (died c. 124);
• Seneca;
• Justus;
• Levi;
• Ephraim;
• Joseph;
• Judas Quiriacus (d. between 134-148).

All these were Jews (Eus., "Hist., Eccl.", IV, v). It was during the episcopate of Judas Quiriacus that the second great calamity, the revolt of Bar-Kochba and final destruction of the city, took place. Goaded by the tyranny of the Romans, by the re-erection of Jerusalem as a Roman colony and the establishment of an altar to Jupiter on the site of the Temple, the Jews broke out into a hopeless rebellion under the famous false Messias Bar-Kochba about the year 132. During his rebellion he persecuted the Jewish Christians, who naturally refused to acknowledge him (Eus., "Chron.", for the seventeenth year of Hadrian). The Emperor Hadrian put down this rebellion, after a siege that lasted a year, in 135. As a result of this last war the whole neighbourhood of the city became a desert. On the ruins of Jerusalem a new Roman city was built, called Ælia Capitolina (Ælia was Hadrian's family nomen), and a temple to Jupiter Capitolinus was built on Mount Moria. No Jew (therefore no Jewish Christian) was allowed under pain of death inside the town. This brought about a complete change in the circumstances of the Church of Jerusalem. The old Jewish Christian community came to an end. In its place a Church of Gentile Christians, with Gentile bishops, was formed, who depended much less on the sacred memories of the city. Hence the Church of Jerusalem did not for some centuries take the place in the hierarchy of sees that we should expect. Ælia was a town of no importance in the empire; the governor of the province resided at Caesarea in Palestine. The use of the name Ælia among Christians of this time marks the insignificance of the little Gentile church, as the restoration of the old name Jerusalem later marks the revival of its dignity.

Even as late as 325 (Nicaea I, can. vii) the city is still called only Ælia. The name lasted on among the Arabs in the form Iliya till late in the Middle Ages. As the rank of the various sees among themselves was gradually arranged according to the divisions of the empire, Caesarea became the metropolitan see; the Bishop of Ælia was merely one of its suffragans.

The bishops from the siege under Hadrian (135) to Constantine (312) were:

• Mark (the first Gentile bishop, d. 156);
• Cassian;
• Publius;
• Maximus;
• Julian;
• Caius;
• Symmachus;
• Caius II;
• Julian II (ordained 168);
• Capito (d. 185);
• Maximus II;
• Antonius;
• Valens;
• Dolichianus (d. 185);
• Narcissus (Eus., "Hist. Eccl.", V, xii). Narcissus was a man famous for his virtues and miracles, but hated by certain vicious people in the city who feared his severity. They accused him of various crimes and he, for the sake of peace, retired to an unknown solitude (Eus., "Hist. Eccl.", VI, ix). The neighbouring bishops, hearing nothing more of him, proceeded to elect and consecrate Dios as his successor. Dios was succeeded by Germanion and Gordios. Then suddenly Narcissus reappeared, an old man of 110 years. The other bishops persuaded him to resume his place as bishop. Too old to do anything but pray for his flock, he made a Cappadocian bishop, Alexander, who came on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, his coadjutor.
• Alexander thus became a practically diocesan bishop even before the death of Narcissus in 212. Alexander was a friend of Origen and founded a library that Eusebius used for his "History" (VI, x). He died in prison in the Decian persecution (25O). Then followed
• Mazabanes or Megabezes (d. 266);
• Hymenaeus (d. 298);
• Zabdas;
• Hermon (d. 311);
• Macarius (d. 333).

II. CONSTANTINE AND THE HOLY PLACES (312-337)

During the episcopate of Macarius a great change came to the whole empire that incidentally affected the See of Jerusalem profoundly. The Christian Faith was acknowledged as a religio licita and the Church became a recognized society (Edict of Milan, Jan., 313). At Constantine's death (337) Christianity had become the religion of the Court and Government. As a natural result the Faith spread very rapidly everywhere. The same generation that had seen Diocletian's persecution now saw Christianity the dominant religion and the old paganism gradually reduced to country villages and out-of-the-way towns. There was then a great movement of organization among Christians; churches were built everywhere. A further result of the freedom and the dominance of Christianity was a revival of enthusiasm for the holy places where the new religion had been born, where the events that everyone now read about or heard of in sermons had taken place. Already in the fourth century, there began those great waves of pilgrimage to the Holy Land that have gone on ever since. It was in the fourth century that the Bordeaux pilgrim and Etheria made their famous journey thither (Peregrinatio Silviae). St. Jerome (d. 420) says that in his time pilgrims came there from every part of the world, even from distant Britain (Ep. xliv ad Paulam; lxxxiv, ad Oceanum). A great number of monks from Egypt and Libya also came and established themselves in the desert by the Jordan. This led to an increased respect for the bishop who ruled over the very places where Christ had lived and died. These pilgrims on their arrival found themselves under his jurisdiction; they took part in the sacrifices of his church and eagerly watched the rites that were carried out at the Mount of Olives, the Coenaculum, and the Holy Sepulchre. Etheria's careful account of all she saw in the churches of Jerusalem at Eastertide is typical of this interest. When the pilgrims returned home they remembered and told their friends about the services they had seen in the most sacred places of Christendom; and they began to imitate them in their own churches. Thus a great number of our well-known ceremonies (the Palm Sunday procession, later the Stations of the Cross, etc.) were originally imitations of local rites of Jerusalem. All this could not fail to bring about an advancement of rank for the local bishop. From the freedom of the Church the development was inevitable that changed the Bishop of Ælia, mere suffragan of Caesarea, into the great "Patriarch of the Holy City Jerusalem and of the whole Land of Promise".

Meanwhile another result of these pilgrimages was the discovery of the Holy Places. Naturally the pilgrims when they arrived wanted to see the actual spots where the events they had read of in the Gospels had happened. Naturally too, each such place when it was known or conjectured became a shrine with a church built over it. Of these shrines the most famous are those built by Constantine and his mother St. Helena. St. Helena in her eightieth year (326-327) came on a pilgrimage and caused churches to be built at Bethlehem, and on the Mount of Olives. Constantine built the famous church of the Holy Sepulchre (Anastasis). Eusebius (Vita Constantine, III, xxvi) says that the place of Calvary in about 326 was covered with dirt and rubbish; over it was a temple of Venus. Emperor Hadrian had built a great terrace round the place enclosed in a wall, on this he had planted a grove to Jupiter and Venus (St. Jerome. Ep. 58). When St. Helena came and was shown the place she determined to restore it as a Christian shrine. By order of the emperor all the soldiers of the garrison were employed to clear away the temple, grove, and terrace. Underneath they found Golgotha and the tomb of our Lord. Constantine wrote to Bishop Macarius saying: "I have nothing more at heart than to adorn with due splendour that sacred place", etc. (Vita Const., III, xxx). Two great buildings were erected near each other on this spot. To the west the rock containing the tomb was carved away, leaving it as a little shrine or chapel standing above ground. Over it was built a round church covered by a dome. This is the Anastasis, which still has the form of a rotunda with a dome, containing the Holy Sepulchre in the middle. Quite near, to the east, was a great basilica with an apse towards the Anastasis, a long nave, and four aisles separated by rows of columns. Above the aisles were galleries; the whole was covered by a gable roof. Around the apse were twelve columns crowned with silver, at the east were a narthex, three doors, and a colonnade in front of the entrance. This basilica was the Martyrium; it covered the ground now occupied by part of the Katholikon and St. Helena's chapel. Etheria speaks of it as "the great church which is called the Martyrium" (Per. Silv., ed. cit., p. 38). Underneath it was the crypt of the Invention of the Cross. The Mount of Calvary was not enclosed in the basilica. It stood just at the southeast side of the apse. Etheria always distinguishes three shrines, Anastasis, Crux, Martyrium. The place of the Cross (Calvary) was in her time open to the sky and surrounded by a silver balustrade (op. cit., p. 43). People went up to it by steps (Eus., "Vita Const.", III, xxi-xl). Later in the fifth century St. Melania the younger (439), a Roman lady who came with her husband Pinianus to Jerusalem where they both entered religious houses, built a small chapel over the place of the Crucifixion. These buildings were destroyed by the Persians in 614.

It is not possible to enter here upon the endless discussion that still takes place as to the authenticity of this shrine. The first question that occurs is as to the place of the wall of Jerusalem in Christ's time. It is certain that He was crucified outside the city wall. No executions took place within the city (Matt., xxvii, 33; John xix, 17; Hebr. xiii, 12, etc.). If then it could be shown that the traditional site was within the wall (the second wall built by Nehemias) it would be proved to be false. It is, however, quite certain that all attempts to prove this have failed. On the contrary, Conder found other contemporary tombs near the traditional Holy Sepulchre, which show that it was without the city, since Jews never buried within their towns. Supposing then its possibility, we have this chain of evidence: if Hadrian really built his temple of Venus purposely on the site, the authenticity is proved. Constantine's basilica stood where that temple was; that the present church stands on the place of Constantine's basilica is not doubted by any one. A number of writers (as Eusebius, op. cit.) of the fourth century describe the temple as built on the site of Calvary in order to put a stop to its veneration by Christians, just as the temple of Jupiter was built purposely where the Jewish Temple had been. We have seen that an unchanging Christian community lived at Jerusalem down to Hadrian's time (Bar-Kochba's revolt). It would be strange if they had not remembered the site of the Crucifixion and had not reverenced it. The analogy of Hadrian's profanation of the Temple leaves no difficulty as to a similar deliberate profanation of the Christian sanctuary. The theory of Fergusson who thought that the cave under the Qubbet-es-Sachra, on the site of the Temple, was the Holy Sepulchre of Constantine's time, and Conder and Gordon's site outside the Damascus gate (Conder, "The City of Jerusalem", London, 1909, pp. 151-158) hardly deserve mention. With the finding of the Holy Sepulchre and the building of the Anastasis and Martyrion is connected the story of the Invention of the Holy Cross. It is told by Rufinus (Hist. Eccl. X, viii, P. L. XXI, 477--about the year 402), Paulinus of Nola (Ep. xxi, v; P. L. LXI, 329; A.D. 403) and others. When the soldiers were removing the old balustrade and digging out the Holy Sepulchre they found to the east of the tomb three crosses with the inscription separated from them. Bishop Macarius discovered which was our Lord's Cross by applying each in turn to a sick woman. The third Cross healed her miraculously (see the lessons of the second nocturn for the feast, 3 May). Paulinus (op. cit.) adds that a dead man was raised to life by the Cross of Christ.

The fame of the great shrines, Anastasis and Martyrion, then began to eclipse that of the Coenaculum. From this time the Bishop of Jerusalem celebrated the more solemn functions in the Martyrion. But Constantine had a new "Church of the Apostles" built over the Coenaculum. Other shrines that go back at least to his time are the place of the Ascension on the top of the Mount of Olives, where he built a church, and the still extant magnificent basilica at Bethlehem.

III. THE PATRIARCHATE (325-451)

From the time of Constantine then begins the advancement of the See of Jerusalem. The first General Council (Nicaea I, 325) meant to recognize the unique dignity of the Holy City without disturbing its canonical dependence on the metropolis, Caesarea. So the seventh canon declares: "Since custom and ancient tradition have obtained that the bishop in Ælia be honored, let him have the succession of honour (echeto ten akolouthian tes times) saving however the domestic right of the metropolis (te metropolei sozomenou tou oikeiou axiomatos)." The canon is in the "Decretum" of Gratian, dist. 65, vii. The "succession of honour" means a special place of honour, an honorary precedence immediately after the Patriarchs (of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch); but this is not to interfere with the metropolitan rights of Caesarea in Palestine. The situation of a suffragan bishop who had Precedence over his metropolitan was an anomalous one that obviously could not last. The successors of Macarius were: Maximus II (333-349); St. Cyril of Jerusalem (350-386); Eutychius intruded 357-359; Irenaeus intruded 360-361; Hilarion intruded 367-378); John II (386-417); Praylios (4l7-421); Juvenal (421-458). Already in the time of St. Cyril difficulties arose about his relation to his metropolitan. While he was defending the Faith against the Arians, Acacius of Caesarea, an extreme Arian, summoned a Synod (358) to try Cyril for various offences, of which the first was that he had disobeyed or behaved with insubordination towards Acacius, his superior. It is difficult to be sure exactly what the accusation was. Sozomen (IV, xxv) says it was that he had disobeyed and had refused to acknowledge Caesarea as his metropolis; Theodoret says it was only about his quite lawful claim to precedence. The case shows how difficult the position was. Cyril refused to attend the synod and was deposed in his absence. His refusal again opens a question as to his position. Did he refuse merely because he knew what Acacius was a determined Arian and would certainly condemn him, or was it because he thought that his exceptional "succession of honour" exempted him from the jurisdiction of any but a patriarchal synod? The three usurpers, Eutychius, Irenaeus, Hilarion, were Arians intruded into his see by their party during his three exiles.

It was Juvenal of Jerusalem (420-458) who at last succeeded in changing the anomalous position of his see into a real patriarchate. From the beginning of his reign he assumed an attitude that was quite incompatible with his canonical position as suffragan of Caesarea. About the year 425 a certain tribe of Arabs was converted to Christianity. These people set up their camp in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem. Juvenal then proceeded to found a bishopric for them. He ordained one Peter as "Bishop of the Camp" (episkopos parembolon). This Peter (apparently the sheikh of the tribe) signed at Ephesus in 425 with that title. Juvenal's action may perhaps be explained as merely the ordination of an Arabic-speaking coadjutor for these people whose language he himself did not know; but Peter's title and presence at Ephesus certainly suggest that he considered himself a diocesan bishop. Juvenal had no sort of right to set up a new diocese nor to ordain a suffragan to his own see. The "See of the Parembolai" disappeared again in the sixth century. From the Acts of Ephesus it appears that Juvenal had ordained other bishops in Palestine and Arabia. A number of bishops of the Antiochene patriarchate wrote a letter to the Emperor Theodosius II in which they appear to have some doubts as to the regularity of their position since, as they say, they have "been ordained formerly by the most pious Juvenal" (Mansi, IV, 1402). Now the right of ordaining a bishop always meant in the East jurisdiction over him. We see an instance of this in the Acts of the Council. Saidas, Bishop of Phaino in Palestine, describes Juvenal as "our bishop" (ho episkopos meon = "our metropolitan", apparently). Clearly then even before the council Juvenal had been making tentative efforts to assume at least metropolitical rights. At the council he made a stroke whose boldness is amazing. He tried to get his see recognized not merely as independent of and equal to Caesarea, but superior to the great Patriarchate of Antioch. Antioch, he pretended, must submit to the see that canonically (in spite of its honorary position) was the suffragan of Antioch. His attempt failed altogether. He might perhaps have shaken off the authority of Caesarea; but this was too startling. Nevertheless the opportunity was a splendid one for him. We see Juvenal's cleverness in seizing it. At Ephesus he was the second bishop present. Celestine of Rome was represented by his legates; Cyril of Alexandria was resident, but was already having trouble with Candidian the Imperial Commissioner; John of Antioch arrived late and then set up a rival council in favour of the heretics, Nestorius of Constantinople was the accused. Juvenal's own metropolitan (of Caesarea) was not present. The schismatical attitude of John of Antioch especially gave Juvenal his chance. Surely Cyril's council would not support John. Juvenal then, under colour of supporting Cyril and the pope, tried to get the council to acknowledge no less than his own jurisdiction over Antioch. In a speech he explained to the Fathers that John of Antioch ought to have appeared at the council to give the oecumenical synod an explanation of what had happened (his late arrival and the anti-council he was setting up) and to show obedience and reverence to the Apostolic See of Rome and the Holy Church of God at Jerusalem. "For it was especially the custom according to Apostolic order and tradition that the See of Antioch be corrected and judged by that of Jerusalem. Instead of that John with his usual insolence had despised the council" (Mansi, IV, 1312). To mix up his own impudent claim with the just grievance of the other Fathers was a master-stroke. But Cyril would have none of him. The pretence was too wildly absurd. Leo the Great, writing afterwards to Maximus of Antioch, says that Juvenal had tried to confirm his insolent attempt by forged documents; but Cyril had warned him not to urge such law-less claims (Ep. 119, ad Max.). So this first attempt did not succeed. For the next twenty years matters remained as they had been. Juvenal still went on acting on his claim and behaving as the chief authority of Palestine. After the Counsel he ordained a Bishop of Jamnia ("Vita S. Euthymii", P. G., CXIV, c. 57).

When the Monophysite heresy began Juvenal was at first on the side of the heretics. He was present at the Robber synod of 449, on the side of Dioscurus, and joined in the deposition of Flavian of Constantinople. That fact should have ruined his chance of getting any advantage from Chalcedon (451). Yet he was clever enough to turn even this position to his advantage. Chalcedon at last gave him a great part of what he wanted. At first he appeared at the council with the other Monophysites as an accused. But he saw at once which way the tide had turned, threw off his former friends, turned completely round and signed Pope Leo's dogmatic letter to Flavian. The orthodox fathers were delighted. In a general council the titular rank given to Jerusalem by Nicaea would naturally make itself felt. The adherence of so venerable a see was received with delight, the illustrious convert deserved some reward. Juvenal then explained that he had at first come to a friendly understanding with Maximus of Antioch, by which the long dispute between their sees should be ended. Antioch was of course to keep her precedence over Jerusalem and the greater part of her patriarchate. But she would sacrifice a small territory, Palestine in the strict sense (the three Roman provinces so called), and apparently Arabia, to make up a little patriarchate for Jerusalem. The emperor (Theodosius II) had already interfered in the quarrel and had pretended to cut a much larger territory away from Antioch for the benefit of Jerusalem. So this arrangement appeared as a sort of compromise. The council in the seventh and eighth sessions accepted Juvenal's proposal (Maximus's correspondence with Leo the Great shows that he was still not quite satisfied) and made Jerusalem a patriarchate with this small territory. From this time then Jerusalem becomes a patriarchal see, the last (fifth) in order and the smallest. So was the number, afterwards so sacred, of five patriarchates established. The Quinisext Council (692) admits this order. It enumerates the patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and adds: "After these he of the city of Jerusalem" (can. xxxvi). Such too is the order proclaimed by the Fourth Council of Constantinople (869) in Canon xxi and incorporated in our canon law (C.I.C., dist. 22, c. 7). Since Chalcedon no one has disputed the place of Jerusalem in the hierarchy of patriarchates. But it will be noticed how late its rank was given, how unedifying the conduct of the bishop who obtained it. Like the other comparatively modern Patriarchate of Constantinople (made finally by the same council, can. xxviii) it represents a later concession that upset the much older, more venerable ideal of three patriarchates only -- Rome, Alexandria, Antioch. Jerusalem owes its place not to St. James, the brother of the Lord, but to the astute and unscrupulous Juvenal. Nothing, then, could show a greater ignorance of the whole situation than the naive proposal of Anglicans at various times (e.g. the Non-Jurors in their letter to the patriarchs, 1720) that everyone should admit Jerusalem "mother of all Churches" as the first see of all.

The frontiers of this new patriarchate, as established by Chalcedon, are to the north the Lebanon, to the west the Mediterranean, to the south Sinai (Mount Sinai was certainly originally included in its boundaries), to the east Arabia and the desert. Under the patriarch were these metropolitans:

• Caesarea in Palestine (who now had to obey her former subject), Metropolis of Palaestina I, with twenty-nine suffragans;
• Scythopolis (in the Vulgate Bethsan, Jos. xvii, 11; Judges i, 27; now Besan, seven hours south of Tiberias), Metropolis of Palaestina II (Samaria), with fourteen suffragans;
• Petra (Sela' in the Hebrew, II Kings, xvi, 7, Is. xvi, 1 in the Wadi Musa, half-way between the Dead Sea and the Red Sea), Metropolis of Palaestina III with thirteen suffragans.

IV. FROM JUVENAL TO THE SARACEN CONQUEST (458-636)

The patriarchs of this time were: Theodosius (Monophysite usurper, 452); Anastasius (458-478); Martyrius (479-486); Salustius (486-494); Elias (494-513): see ELIAS OF JERUSALEM); John III (513-524); Peter (524-544); Macarius (544-574); (Eustachius, Origenist, intruded -563); John IV (574-593); Neamus (593-601); Isaac (601-609); Zacharius (609-631); Moderatus (631-634); Sophronius (634-638 or 644). An important event for the city was the residence there of the Empress Eudocia, wife of Theodosius II. She arrived first in 438 and then settled at Jerusalem from 444 to her death about the year 460 (see EUDOCIA). She spent this last part of her life in ardent devotion at the Holy Places, in beautifying the city and building churches. She rebuilt the walls along the south so as to include the Coenaculum within the city. On the north she built the church of St. Stephen at the traditional place of his martyrdom (now the famous Dominican convent and Ecole biblique). Justinian I (527-565) also added to the beauty of the city by many splendid buildings. Of these the most famous was a great basilica dedicated to the Blessed Virgin with a house for pilgrims attached. It stood in the middle of the city, but has now completely disappeared. He also built another great church of the Blessed Virgin at the southern end of the old Temple area (now the Al-aqsa Mosque). The famous mosaic map of Jerusalem discovered at Madaba (Guthe and Palmer, "Die Mosaikkarte von Madeba", 1906) gives an idea of the state of the city in Justinian's time. During this period the See of Jerusalem, like those of Alexandria and Antioch, was troubled continually by the Monophysite schism. Under Juvenal the great crowd of monks who had settled in Palestine broke out into a regular revolution against the government and against the patriarch, whose change of front at Chalcedon they bitterly resented. They set up one of their own number, Theodosius as anti-patriarch. For a short time (in 452) Juvenal had to give way to this person. So also in the other sees of the patriarchate orthodox bishops were expelled and Monophysites (such as Peter the Iberian at Majuma-Gaza) were set up in their place. The Empress Eudocia was at first an avowed Monophysite and helped that party nearly all the time she was in the city. Juvenal fled to Constantinople and implored the help of the emperor (Marcian, 450-457). He returned with a body of soldiers who reinstated him, killed a great number of the monks, and finally took Theodosius, who had fled, prisoner. Theodosius was then kept in prison at Constantinople almost till his death. The disturbance was not finally put down till 453. Eventually the orthodox Abbot Euthymius converted Eudocia, who died in the communion of the Church (c. 460).

The further Monophysite disturbances affected Jerusalem, of course, too. Martyrius accepted the Henoticon (see his letter to Peter Monogus of Alexandria in Zacharias Scholasticus: "Syriac Chronicle", ed. Ahrens and Krueger, Leipzig, 1899, VI, i, pp. 86, 18-20) with the bishops of his patriarchate. Elias of Jerusalem supported Flavian of Antioch in resisting the Emperor Anastasius' (491-518) condemnation of Chalcedon. He was then banished and John, Bishop of Sebaste, intruded in his place (513) (see ELIAS OF JERUSALEM). But John became orthodox, too, and broke his engagement with the Monophysite emperor as soon as he had possession of the see (Theophanes Confessor, "Chronographia", ed. de Boors, Leipzig, 1883-1885, I, 156). Meanwhile St. Sabas (d. 531) from his monastery by the Dead Sea was a mighty support to the orthodox. John III of Jerusalem accepted the decrees of the orthodox Synod of Constantinople in 518 and the formula of Pope Hormisdas (514-523). John III's successor, Peter, held a synod in September, 536, in which he proclaimed his adherence to Chalcedon and Orthodoxy by agreeing to the deposition of the Monophysite Anthimus of Constantinople (deposed in that year; the Acts of this synod are in Mansi, VIII, 1163-1176). From this time the patriarchs seem to have been all orthodox; though the Monophysites had a strong party in Palestine and eventually set up Monophysite bishops in communion with the (Jacobite) patriarchs of Antioch of the line of Sergius of Tella (since 539) even at Jerusalem itself. The first of these Jacobite bishops (they did not take the title patriarch) of Jerusalem was Severus in 597. From him descends the present Jacobite line. In the year 614 a great calamity befell the city; it was taken by the Persians. In 602 the Roman Emperor Maurice had been barbarously murdered by order of Phocas (602-610), who usurped his place. Chosroes (Khusru) II, King of Persia, had found protection from his enemies at home with Maurice, who had even sent an army to restore him (591). The Persian king, furious at the murder of his friend and benefactor, then declared war against Phocas and invaded Syria (604). The war with Persia continued under Phocas's successor, Heraclius (610-642). In 611 the Persians took Antioch, then Caesarea in Cappadocia and Damascus. In 614 they stormed Jerusalem. Chosroes's son-in-law Shaharbarz besieged the city; in his camp were 26,000 Jews eager to destroy Christian sovereignty in their holy city. It is said that no less than 90,000 Christians perished when Jerusalem fell. The Patriarch Zacharius was taken captive to Persia. The Anastasis, Martyrion and other Christian sanctuaries were burned or razed to the ground. St. Helena's great relic of the Holy Cross was taken off to Persia in triumph. The Jews as a reward for their help were allowed to do as they liked in the city. But their triumph did not last long. In 622 Heraclius marched across Asia Minor, driving back the Persians. In 627 he invaded Persia; Chosroes fled, was deposed, and murdered in 628 by his son Siroes. In the same year the Persians had to submit to a peace which deprived them of all their conquests. The Persian soldiers evacuated the cities of Syria and Egypt which they had conquered, the relic of the True Cross was given back. In 629 Heraclius himself came to Jerusalem to venerate the Cross. This is the origin of the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (14 September: see the lessons of the second nocturn on that day). The emperor as a punishment for the treason of the Jews renewed the old law of Hadrian forbidding them to enter the city.

After the Persian assault on the town, even before the Romans reconquered it, Modestus, Abbot of the monastery of St. Theodosius in the desert to the south, acting apparently as vicar for the captured patriarch, had already begun to restore the shrines. It was impossible under Persian rule to restore the splendour of Constantine's great Martyrion. Modestus therefore had to be content with a more modest group of buildings at the Holy Sepulchre. He restored the round Anastasis, much as it had been before, except that a conical roof replaced the old cupola. The custom of orientating churches had now become universal; so a new apse was made at the east (where the entrance had been) for the altar. Doors were pierced in the round wall north and south of this apse. The Anastasis, formerly a shrine subsidiary to the great basilica, now became the chief building. Modestus restored the little chapel of the Crucifixion, originally built by Melania, but did not attempt to rebuild any part of the basilica (Martyrion) except the crypt of the Invention of the Holy Cross. The whole esplanade around these buildings was enclosed by a wall and so made into a great atrium. During the next centuries a great number of chapels were built here to contain various relics of the Passion. Heraclius when he reconquered the city rebuilt the walls and restored many more of the ruined shrines. From his time to the Arab conquest Christian Jerusalem enjoyed a short period of peace and prosperity. St. Sophronius (634-638) or (644), who saw that conquest, was one of the more famous patriarchs of Jerusalem. In his time Monothelism had arisen as one more of the many hopeless attempts to conciliate the Monophysites. Sophronius distinguished himself as an opponent of this new heresy. He was born in Damascus and had been a monk of the monastery of St. Theodosius. In defence of the Faith against the Monothelites he had travelled through Syria and Egypt and had visited Constantinople. As patriarch in 634 he wrote a synodal letter in defence of the two wills in Christ that is one of the most important documents of this controversy (Mansi XI, 461 sq.). In 636 he had to give up his city to the Moslems.

V. FROM THE ARAB CONQUEST TO THE FIRST CRUSADE (636-1099)

The Moslems in the first zeal of their new faith proceeded to invade Syria. Caliph Abu-bakr (632-634) gave the command of the army to Abu-'Ubaidah, one of the original Ashab (companions of Mohammed in his flight, 622). They first took Bosra. In July, 633, they defeated Heraclius's army at Ajnadain near Emesa; in 634 they stormed Damascus and again defeated the Romans at Yarmuk. Emesa fell in 636. The Moslems then consulted Caliph Omar (634-644) as to whether they should march on Jerusalem or Caesarea. By 'Ali's advice they received orders to take the Holy City. First they sent to Mo'awiya Ibn-Abu-Sufyan with 5000 Arabs to surprise the city; soon afterwards it was invested by the whole army of Abu-'Ubaidah. It was defended by a large force composed of refugees from all parts of Syria, soldiers who had escaped from Yarmuk and a strong garrison. For four months the siege continued, every day there was a fierce assault. At last, when all further resistance was hopeless, the Patriarch Sophronius (who acted throughout as the head of the Christian defenders) appeared on the walls and demanded a conference with Abu-'Ubaidah. He then proposed to capitulate on fair and honourable terms; the Christians were to keep their churches and sanctuaries, no one was to be forced to accept Islam. Sophronius further insisted that these terms should be ratified by the caliph in person. Omar, then at Medina, agreed to these terms and came with a single camel to the walls of Jerusalem. He signed the capitulation, then entered the city with Sophronius "and courteously discoursed with the patriarch concerning its religious antiquities" (Gibbon, ci, ed. Bury, London, 1898, V, 436). It is said that when the hour for his prayer came he was in the Anastasis, but refused to say it there, lest in future times the Moslems should make that an excuse for breaking the treaty and confiscating the church. The Mosque of Omar (Jami 'Saidna 'Omar), opposite the doors of the Anastasis, with the tall minaret, is shown as the place to which he retired for his prayer. Under the Moslems the Christian population of Jerusalem in the first period enjoyed the usual toleration given to non-Moslem theists. The pilgrimages went on as before. The new government did not make Jerusalem the political centre of Palestine. This was fixed at Lydda till the year 716, then at Ar-Ramla (Ramleh). But in the Moslem view, too, Jerusalem, the city of David and Christ, to which Mohammed was taken miraculously in one night (Koran, Sura. XVII), which had been the first Qibla of their religion, was a very holy place, third only after Mecca and Medina. They call it Beit al-mukaddas, Beit al-makdis (now generally Al-Kuds).

In the reign of Caliph 'Abd-al-malik (684-705, the fifth Ommaid caliph, at Damascus) the people of Iraq revolted and got possession of the Hijaz. In order to give his followers a substitute for the haraman (Mecca and Medina), which they were prevented from visiting, he resolved to make Jerusalem a centre of pilgrimage. He, therefore, set about to adorn the place of the Temple with a splendid mosque. It appears that the Christians had left the place where the Temple had once stood untouched. Omar visited it and found it filled up with refuse. In his time a large square building with no architectural pretension was put up to shelter the True Believers who went there to pray. In 691 'Abd-al-malik replaced this by the exquisite "Dome of the Rock" (Qubbet-es-Sachra), built by Byzantine architects, that still stands in the middle of the Temple area. This is the building long known as the Mosque of Omar, falsely attributed to him. It is an eight-sided building crowned with a dome, covered outside with marble and most beautiful many-coloured tiles, certainly one of the most splendid monuments of architecture in the world. It stands over a great flat rock, probably the place of the old altar of holocausts. 'Abd-allah al-Iman al-Mamun (Caliph, 813-833) restored it. The dome fell in an earthquake and was rebuilt in 1022. The Crusaders (who turned it into a church) thought this was the original Jewish Temple; hence the many round temple-churches built in imitation of it. Raphael in his "Espousal of the Blessed Virgin" has painted it, as well as he could from descriptions, in the background as the Temple. The whole of the Temple area became to Moslems the "illustrious Sanctuary" (Haram-ash-sherif) and was gradually covered with colonnades, minbars (pulpits), and smaller domes. At the south end Justinian's basilica became the "most remote Mosque" (Al-Masjid-al-aqsa, Sura XVII, 1). The description of Arculf, a Frankish bishop who went on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in the seventh century, written down from his account by Adamnan, monk of Iona (d. 704): "De locis terrae sanctae", lib. III (P. L., LXXXVIIl, 725 sq.), gives us a not unpleasant picture of the conditions of Christians in Palestine in the first period of Moslem rule. The caliphs of Damascus (661-75O) were enlightened and tolerant princes, on quite good terms with their Christian subjects. Many Christians (e.g. St. John Damascene, d. c. 754) held important offices at their court. The Abbaside caliphs at Bagdad (753-1242), as long as they ruled Syria, were also just and tolerant to the Christians. The famous Harun Abu-Ja-'afar (Haroun al-Raschid, 786-809) sent the keys of the Holy Sepulchre to Charlemagne who built a hospice for Latin pilgrims near the shrine. Revolutions and rival dynasties that tore the union of Islam to pieces then made Syria the battleground of the Moslem world; the Christians under new masters began to suffer the oppression that eventually led to the Crusades.

In 891 the sect of the Karamita (Carmathians) under Abu-Said al-jannabi arose in the neighbourhood of Kufa. They defeated the troops of the Caliph Al-Mutazid (Ahmed Abu'l Abbas), entered Syria (903-904) and devastated the province. They seized Mecca and prevented the pilgrims from going there from 929 to 950, when they were finally destroyed. During this time Moslems again began to go in pilgrimage to Jerusalem instead of to the Hijaz. The religious importance that the city thus gained for them was the beginning of intolerance towards the Christians there. It is the invariable result in Islam; the more sacred a place is to Moslems the less they are disposed to tolerate unbelievers in it. The Fatimide dynasty now arose in Africa (908). About the year 967 they got possession of Egypt. Meanwhile a frontier war with the empire went on always. The Romans took advantage of the dismemberment of the Moslem world to invade their former provinces. Already in 901, in the reign of Leo VI (886-911), the Roman armies had advanced into Syria as far as Aleppo and had carried off a great number of prisoners. In 962 Nicephorus Phocas with 100,000 men again came as far as Aleppo and devastated the country. In 968 and 969 the Romans reconquered Antioch. It was inevitable that the Christians of Jerusalem should try to help their fellow-countrymen to reconquer the land that had been Roman and Christian; inevitable, too, that the Moslems should punish such attempts as high treason. In 969 the patriarch, John VII, was put to death for treasonable correspondence with the Romans; many other Christians suffered the same fate, and a number of churches were destroyed. Meanwhile the first wave of the great Turkish race (the Seljuks) was pouring over the caliph's empire. In 934 a Turk, Ikshid, revolted and his successors held Palestine for a few years. In 969 Mu-'ezz-li-Din-Allah, the fourth Fatimide Caliph in Egypt, conquered Jerusalem. A Moslem pilgrim, Al-Muqaddasi, wrote a description of the city, especially of the Haram ash-sharif, at this time (quoted by Le Strange, "Palestine under the Moslems," 1890). The infamous Hakim (Al-Hakim bi-amr-Allah, the sixth Egyptian Caliph, 996-1021, who became the god of the Druses) determined to destroy the Holy Sepulchre. This was really only one incident in his persecution of Christians: his excuse was that the miracle of the holy fire (already practised in his time) was a scandalous imposture. In 1010 the buildings erected by Modestus were burned to the ground. The news of their destruction, brought back by pilgrims, caused a wave of indignation throughout Europe. It was one of the causes of the feeling that eventually brought about the First Crusade. Meanwhile funds were collected to rebuild the sanctuary. The Emperor Constantine IX (1042-1054) persuaded the Caliph Al-Mustansir-bi-llah (1036-1094) to allow the rebuilding on condition of releasing 5000 Moslem prisoners and of allowing prayer for Al-Mustansir in the mosques in the empire. Byzantine arhitects were sent to Jerusalem. The rebuilding was finished in 1048. The work of Modestus was restored with a few additions hurriedly and not well. The Holy Sepulchre remained in this state till the crusaders replaced it by the present group of buildings (1140-1149).

In 1030 merchants of Amalfi were able to establish themselves permanently in Jerusalem. They had leave to trade fully with the people of Palestine, built a church (S. Maria Latina), a Benedictine monastery, and a hospice for pilgrims. In 1077 the Seljuk Turks became masters of Palestine. From this time the condition of the Christians became unbearable. The Turks forbade Christian services, devastated churches, murdered pilgrims. It was the news of these outrages that provoked the Council of Clermont (1095) and brought the crusaders in 1099. The patriarchal succession after Sophronius was: (The see vacant from Sophronius's death to 7O5. Meanwhile Stephen of Dora acted as papal vicar for Palestine); John V (7O5-735); John VI (735-760), possibly the same person as John V); Theodore (760-c. 770); Eusebius (772); Elias II (driven out in 784, died c. 800); (meanwhile for a time Theodore occupied the see); George of Sergius (800-807); Thomas (807-821); Basil (821-842); Sergius (842- c. 859); Solomon (c. 859-c. 864); Theodosius (c. 864- c. 879); Elias III (c. 879-907); Sergius II (907-911); Leo or Leontius (911-928; Anastasius or Athanasius; Nicholas; Christopher of Christodorus (died 937); Agatho; John VII (murdered 969); Christopher II; Thomas II; Joseph II; Alexander; Agapius (986-?): Jeremias or Orestes (banished and murdered c. 1012; Theophilus; Arsenius (c. 1024); Jordanus; Nicephorus; Sophronius II; Mark II; Euthymius II (died 1099).

ADRIAN FORTESCUE

Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem (1099-1291)

The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem was founded as a result of the First Crusade, in 1099. Destroyed a first time by Saladin in 1187, it was re-established around Saint-Jean d'Acre and maintained until the capture of that city in 1291. During these two centuries it was for Western Europe a genuine centre of colonization. As the common property of Christendom it retained its international character to the end, although the French element predominated among the feudal lords and the government officials, and the Italians acquired the economic preponderance in the cities.

(1) Kings and Succession to the Throne

The succession of kings is as follows:

• Godfrey of Bouillon, elected Lord of Jerusalem, 22 July, 1099, did not assume the royal crown and died 18 July, 1100, having strengthened the new conquest by his victory over the Egyptians at Ascalon (12 August, 1099).
• After his death the barons invited his brother Baldwin, Count of Edessa, to assume the lordship of Jerusalem. Baldwin accepted and had himself crowned King of Jerusalem by the Patriarch Daimbert in the basilica of Bethlehem (25 December, 1100). Baldwin I (1100-1118) was the real founder of the kingdom. With the aid of new crusaders, and more especially the help afforded by the Genoese, Pisan, and Venetian fleets he took possession of the principal cities on the coast of Syria. Besides, the Countship of Tripoli and the Principality of Edessa became fiefs of the new kingdom, but the Principality of Antioch preserved its independence. Baldwin I attacked even the Caliphate of Egypt but died at El-Arish (1118) in the course of this expedition.
• His cousin, Baldwin du Bourg, Count of Edessa, was chosen by the barons to succeed him. Baldwin II (1118-1131), who had followed Godfrey of Bouillon to the crusade, was a valiant knight and, in 1124, took possession of Tyre. In 1129 he married his daughter Mélisende to Fulc, Count of Anjou, who was the father of Geoffrey Plantagenet and already sixty years of age.
• Fulc (1131-1141) succeeded his father-in-law.
• Under his son, Baldwin III (1144-1162), who married Theodora Comnena, the kingdom attained its greatest dimensions after the capture of Ascalon (1153), but the principality of Edessa was wrested from it in 1144.
• Amaury I (1162-1174), brother of Baldwin III, succeeded to the throne on the latter's death, being only twenty-seven years of age. He was one of Jerusalem's most brilliant sovereigns, and thought to profit by the anarchy that prevailed in Egypt in order to acquire possession of that country, reaching Cairo twice (1167 and 1168); and, for the moment, having Egypt under his protectorate. But the formation of Saladin's power soon placed the kingdom in peril.
• Amaury died prematurely in 1174, leaving as his successor his son Baldwin IV (1174-1185), a very gifted young man, who had been the pupil of William of Tyre, but who was attacked with leprosy and rendered incapable of taking charge of affairs. He at first reigned under the guardianship of Milon de Planci and, assisted by Renaud de Châtillon, inflicted a defeat upon Saladin at Ramleh (1177).
• By 1182 the dreadful disease had gained such headway that the unfortunate Baldwin "the Leprous" ("le Mesel") had the son of his sister Sibylla by the Count of Montferrat crowned under the name of Baldwin V. He also had Sibylla take as her second husband Guy of Lusignan, who had put himself at Baldwin's service and had been appointed by him regent of the kingdom. However, as Guy seemed incompetent, the barons took the regency away from him and confided it to Raymond, Count of Tripoli. Baldwin IV died in 1185, at the age of twenty-five, without having married, and left the kingdom a prey to discord and exposed to the attacks of Saladin.
• The young Baldwin V, his nephew, died in 1186, supposedly of poisoning.
• It was largely due to the instrumentality of Renaud de Châtillon that the barons elected Guy of Lusignan, (1186-1192) and Sibylla sovereigns of Jerusalem. Incapable of defending his kingdom against Saladin, Guy was made prisoner at the battle of Tiberias (4 July, 1187), which was followed by the capture of Jerusalem (2 October), and purchased his liberty by yielding Ascalon to Saladin. The Kingdom of Jerusalem was destroyed. Then took place the Crusade of Saint-Jean d'Acre, of which Guy commenced the siege in 1188. However, Queen Sibylla died in 1190 and Conrad of Montferrat, who had married Isabella, Sibylla's sister, disputed the title of king with Guy of Lusignan, and this rivalry lasted throughout the siege of Saint-Jean d'Acre, which city capitulated 11 July, 1191. On 28 July, Richard Coeur de Lion, King of England, imposed his arbitration upon the two rivals and decided that Guy should be king during his lifetime and have Conrad for his successor, the latter to receive Beirut, Tyre, and Sidon as guarantees; but on 29 April, 1192, Conrad was assassinated by emissaries of the "Old Man of the Mountain". Guy, on his side, renounced the title of king (May, 1192) and purchased the Island of Cyprus from the Templars.
• He died in 1194 and his widow named Henry I, Count of Champagne (1194-1197), who was elected king, but in 1197 Henry died from an accident.
• Isabella married a fourth husband, Amaury of Lusignan (1197-1205), brother of Guy and already King of Cyprus. The turning of the course of the crusade to Constantinople obliged him to conclude a truce with the Moslems. Amaury died in 1205.
• He left an only daughter Mélisende who married Bohemond IV, Prince of Antioch. However, it was to Mary, daughter of Isabella and Conrad of Montferrat, that the barons gave the preference, and they requested the King of France to provide her with a husband.
• Philip Augustus accordingly selected John of Brienne (1210-1225), who hesitated for a long time before accepting and did not arrive in Palestine until 1210, having first obtained from the pope a considerable loan of money. He directed the Crusade of Egypt in 1218 and, after his defeat, came to the West to solicit help. Hermann von Salza, the Grand Master of the Teutonic Knights, advised him to give his only daughter Isabella (Yolande) in marriage to the Emperor Frederick II.
• In 1225, Henry of Malta, Admiral of Sicily, came to seek the young princess at Saint-Jean d'Acre, and on 9 November she married Frederick II at Brindisi. Immediately after the ceremony the emperor declared that his father-in-law must renounce the title of King of Jerusalem, and he himself adopted it in all his acts. After the death of Isabella, by whom he had a son Conrad, Frederick II attempted to take possession of his kingdom and to fulfill his crusader's vow, the execution of which he had so long deferred, and landed at Saint-Jean d'Acre (September, 1228), excommunicated by the pope and in disfavour with his new subjects. By a treaty concluded with the Sultan of Egypt, Frederick regained Jerusalem, and on 18 March, 1229, without any religious ceremony whatever, assumed the royal crown in the church of the Holy Sepulchre. Having confided the regency to Balian d'Ibelin, Lord of Sidon, he returned to Europe. To strengthen his power in the East he sent to Saint-Jean d'Acre Richard Filangieri, Marshal of the Empire, whom he named baile (guardian) of the kingdom. The new regent combated the influence of the Ibelins and tried to secure possession of the Island of Cyprus, but was conquered and had to content himself with placing an imperial garrison at Tyre (1232).
• In 1243 Conrad, son of Frederick II, having attained his majority, the court of barons declared that the regency of the emperor must cease, and invited the legitimate king to come in person and exercise his rights. Alix of Champagne, Queen of Cyprus and daughter of King Henry I, claimed the regency on the ground of being Isabella of Brienne's nearest relative; and it was conferred upon her and her second husband Ralph, Count of Soissons, the imperial garrison, besieged in Tyre, being forced to capitulate.
• On the death of Alix (1244) her son Henry of Lusignan, King of Cyprus, assumed the regency but, in the month of September, 1244, a troop of Kharizmians seized Jerusalem, whilst the Mongols threatened Antioch. After his Crusade of Egypt, St. Louis landed at Saint-Jean d'Acre (1250) and remained four years in Palestine, putting the fortresses of the kingdom in a state of defence and endeavouring to reconcile the factious barons. However, just at the time that the Christian states were menaced by the Mongols and the Mamelukes of Egypt, interior strife was at its height.
• In 1257, Henry of Lusignan having died, some of the barons acknowledged Queen Plaisance regent in the name of her son Hugh II, whereas others would give their allegiance to none other than Conradin, grandson of Frederick II. Moreover, civil war broke out at Acre between the Genoese and the Venetians, between the Hospitallers and the Templars, and on 31 July, 1258, the Venetians destroyed the Genoese fleet before Acre. The Mameluke Sultan Bibars, "the Cross-bowman" (El-Bundukdáree), recommenced the conquest of Syria without meeting any resistance and, in 1268, the last Christian cities, Tripoli, Sidon, and Acre, were cut off from one another.
• King Hugh II of Lusignan had died in 1267, and his succession was disputed by his nephew, Hugh III, already King of Cyprus, and Mary of Antioch whose maternal grandfather was Amaury of Lusignan. In 1269 the barons acknowledged Hugh III, but the new king, unable to cope with the lack of discipline among his subjects, retired to Cyprus after naming Balian d'Ibelin regent of the kingdom (1276). But, in 1277, Mary of Antioch sold her rights to Charles of Anjou, King of Naples, who, thinking to subdue the East, sent a garrison under command of Roger of San Severino to occupy Acre.
• After the Sicilian Vespers (1282), which ruined the projects of Charles of Anjou, the inhabitants of Acre expelled his seneschal and proclaimed Henry II of Cyprus (15 August, 1286) their king. But at this time the remnants of the Christian possessions were hard pressed by the Mamelukes. On 5 April, 1291, the Sultan Malek-Aschraf appeared before Saint-Jean d'Acre and, despite the courage of its defenders, the city was taken by storm on 28 May. The Kingdom of Jerusalem no longer existed, and none of the expeditions of the fourteenth century succeeded in re-establishing it.

The title of King of Jerusalem continued to be borne in a spirit of rivalry: by the Kings of Cyprus belonging to the House of Lusignan; and by the two Houses of Anjou which claimed to hold their rights from Mary of Antioch. In 1459 Charlotte, daughter of John III, King of Cyprus, married Louis of Savoy, Count of Geneva, and in 1485 ceded her rights to Jerusalem to her nephew Charles of Savoy; hence, from that time up to 1870, the title of King of Jerusalem was borne by the princes of the House of Savoy.

(2) Institutions and Civilization

Towards the middle of the twelfth century, when the Kingdom of Jerusalem had attained its greatest dimensions, it comprised the entire coast of Syria from Beirut on the north to Raphia on the south. On the northeast its territory, bounded by the Lebanon district, which separated it from the Moslem principality of Damascus, was hardly more than a few leagues in breadth; on the southeast it extended beyond the Dead Sea and the Jordan as far as the Arabian Desert and even included the port of Aïla on the Red Sea. In the north the Countship of Tripoli was under the suzerainty of the King of Jerusalem. But in the very interior of the kingdom the power of the king was checked by numerous obstacles, and the sovereignty belonged less to the king than to the body of feudatories whose power was centered in the High Court, composed of vassals and rear-vassals. Its authority governed even the succession to the throne, in event of dispute between two members of the royal family; it alone was empowered to make laws or "assizes", and to its initiative was due the compilation of the "Assizes of Jerusalem", erroneously ascribed to Godfrey of Bouillon. The king took an oath in presence of this court and had no right to confiscate a fief unless in accordance with the regular judgment of that assembly. Moreover, if the king were to violate his oaths, the assizes formally proclaimed the right of the lieges to resist. The High Court, presided over by the constable or marshal, assembled only when convoked by the king; in judicial matters it constituted the supreme tribunal and its judgments were without appeal: "Nulle chose faite par court n'en doit estre desfaite" (Assizes, I, clxxvii). A "Court of the Burgesses", organized in the twelfth century, had analogous jurisdiction over the burgesses and could sentence to exile or even condemn to death. In the great fiefs mixed courts of knights and burgesses had similar control independently of the liege. Even within these limits the king was incapable of compelling vassals to fulfill their feudal obligations. Domiciled in impregnable castles, the architecture of which had been perfected after Moslem models, the nobles led an almost independent life. A fief like that of Montréal with its four castles of Crac, Crac de Montréal, Ahamant, and Vau de Moïse, situated between the Dead and Red Seas, formed a really independent state. Renaud de Châtillon, who became Lord of Montréal in 1174, himself waged war against the Moslems, whom he terrified by his cruise in the Red Sea, and his individual policy was counter to that of King Baldwin VI, who was powerless to prevent him from waging war against Saladin.

The Church, at this period, was also a power independent of the kings, and, with the exception of the king, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was the most important personage in the realm. After the First Crusade a very powerful Latin Church was established in Palestine; numerous monasteries were founded and received large donations of landed property in Palestine as well as in Europe. Some patriarchs, especially Daimbert, who was at enmity with Baldwin I, even endeavoured to found a power thoroughly independent of royalty; nevertheless, both of these powers generally lived in harmony. The Patriarch of Jerusalem, who was elected by the clergy and acclaimed by the people, had his powers confirmed by the pope, who continued to exercise great authority in Palestine. Moreover, the orders of religious knighthood, the Hospitallers of St. John, organized in 1313, the Templars founded by Hugh of Payens in 1128, and the Teutonic Knights created in 1143, formed regular powers, equally independent of Church and State. Most lavishly endowed, they soon owned an incalculable number of fiefs and castles in Palestine and in Europe. In spiritual matters they were directly subject to the pope; but the king could not interfere in their temporal affairs, and each of the three orders had its own army and exercised the right of concluding treaties with the Moslems.

Although royal authority was restricted to rather narrow limits by these various powers, it nevertheless succeeded in having at its disposal resources adequate to the defence of the Christian states. Its financial revenues were more considerable than those of the majority of the European princes of the twelfth century, amongst the most profitable sources of income being the customs duties enforced at all the ports and of which the register was kept by natives who wrote in Arabic. The king also levied toll upon caravans, had the monopoly of certain industries, and the exclusive right to coin money. At times he obtained from the court of barons authority to levy extraordinary taxes; and in 1182, in order to meet the invasion of Saladin all revenues, even those of the Church were subjected to a tax of 2 per cent. Although the kings of the twelfth century were surrounded by high officials, and kept a sufficiently grand court, at which Byzantine etiquette ruled, they devoted most of their income to the defence of their kingdom. Their vassals owed military service, unlimited as to time, unlike the prevailing Western customs, but in exchange they received pay. Moreover, the king enlisted natives or foreigners, settling on them a life-annuity- or fief de soudée; a light cavalry of Turcopoles mounted and equipped in Saracenic style, Maronite archers from the Lebanon, and Armenian and Syrian foot-soldiers completed the list of this cosmopolitan army of which the effective force was hardly over 20,000 men, some few hundreds of them being knights. To these regular resources already mentioned we must add the bands of crusaders constantly arriving from Europe, but whose turbulence and lack of discipline often rendered them more of an encumbrance than a help; besides, many considered that, having once engaged in combat with the Moslems, they had accomplished their vows and therefore returned to Europe, thus making continuous warfare well nigh impossible. This explains why with the well-organized Moslem states arrayed against it, the Kingdom of Jerusalem could only dispute the ground foot by foot for two centuries.

Nevertheless, despite its imperfect organization, the economic prosperity of the Latin kingdom attained an extraordinary height of development in the twelfth century. In order to repopulate the country, Baldwin I held out inducements to the Christian communities dwelling beyond the Jordan; in 1182 the Maronites of the Lebanon abjured their Monothelite heresy. Most of the natives did likewise, and constituted the influential middle class or burgesses of the various cities, having the right to own land and an autonomous administration under magistrates called reis. In the ports, the Italian cities of Genoa, Venice, and Pisa, and the French cities of Marseilles, Narbonne, etc., received grants of houses and even of districts independently administered by their own consuls. Each of these colonies had lands or casaux on the outskirts of the city, where cotton and sugar-cane were cultivated; the colonial merchants had the monopoly of commerce between Europe and the East, and freighted their out-going ships with costly merchandise, spices, China silk, precious stones, etc., which the caravans brought from the interior of Asia. Industries peculiar to Syria, the manufacture of silk and cotton materials, the dye-works and glass factories of Tyre, etc., all helped to feed this commerce, as did also the agricultural products of the land. In exchange, the Western ships brought to Palestine such European products as were necessary to the colonists; two flotillas sailed yearly from Western ports, at Easter and about the feast of St. John, thus ensuring communication between Palestine and Europe. Thanks to this commerce, during the twelfth century the Kingdom of Jerusalem became one of the most prosperous states in Christendom. In the castles, as in the cities, the Western knights loved to surround themselves with gorgeous equipments and choice furniture, the latter often of Arabian workmanship. In Palestine there was a marked development along artistic lines, and churches were erected in the towns according to the rules of Roman architecture. Even now, the cathedral of St. John at Beirut, built about 1130-1140 and transformed into a mosque, shows us the style of edifice reared by Western architects, its structure recalling that of the monuments of Limousin and Languedoe. The specimen of ivory used as a binding for the Psalter of Mélisende, daughter of Baldwin II, and preserved in the British Museum, displays a curious decoration in which are combined designs of Byzantine and Arabian art. But it was military architecture that reached the greatest development and probably furnished models to the West; even today the ruins of the Crac of the Knights, built by the Hospitallers, astonish the beholder by their double gallery, their massive towers, and elegant halls. The Kingdom of Jerusalem, established as a result of the First Crusade, was thus one of the first attempts made by Europeans at colonization.

LOUIS BRÉHIER

Jerusalem (After 1291)

(1) Political History

The Latin dominion over Jerusalem really came to an end on 2 October, 1187, when the city opened its gates to Saladin (Yusuf ibn Ayyub, Salah-ed-din, Emir of Egypt, 1169-93); although fragments of the Latin kingdom in Palestine lasted into another century. Frederick II acquired a short possession of Jerusalem itself by treaty later, and the title "King of Jerusalem" added an empty splendour to the styles of various European sovereigns almost to our own time. Nevertheless after 1187 the episode of Christian and Latin rule over the Holy City is closed. From that time it falls back again into its former state of a city under Moslem government, in which Christian pilgrims are at best only tolerated.

As soon as Saladin's army entered the city they set and to destroy all traces of the Christian rule. They tore the great gilt cross from the Dome of the Rock, broke up the bells, plundered churches and convents, restored all the buildings that had been mosques (notably the Dome of the Rock and the El-Aqsa mosque), turned other churches into stables or granaries, founded Moslem schools, hospitals, and all the pious institutions that go by the general name of waqf. While Europe was thunderstruck at the loss of the Holy City, and was preparing a new crusade to recapture it, letters were sent to all parts of the Moslem world announcing the glad tidings that El-Quds was now purified and restored to the true believers. But -- true to the promise made by Omar (see above) -- Saladin left the Holy Sepulchre, as well as a few other churches, to the Christians (the Orthodox). For the use of these they had to pay a heavy tribute. The church of the Knights of St. John was turned into a hospital (at the place still called Muristan, where the German Protestant church now stands). Saladin further strengthened the walls of the city when the Third Crusade (with King Richard of England) approached and threatened it (1191). In 1219 the Sultan Malik-el-Mu'azzam (d. 1227, viceroy at Damascus for El-Mansur) ordered these walls to be destroyed, lest they should become a protection for the Franks. In 1229 another short interlude began. Emperor Frederick II (1212-5O) came on his (the Fifth) Crusade. He obtained by treaty with the Sultan of Egypt, El-Kamil (1219-38), possession of Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Nazareth, and the pilgrim roads from Jaffa and 'Akka for ten years and a half. The city was not to be fortified, and the Haram esh-sherif (the Temple area) was to remain in exclusive possession of the Moslems. In 1239 the Emir of Kerak, En-nasir Daud, conquered Jerusalem again and destroyed the Tower of David. But in 1243 he made over the city to the Latins without any stipulations. This led to the final loss of the city. For Essalih Ayyub, Caliph of Egypt (1238-49), then called on the savage Khwarizmian tribes from Mesopotamia to recapture it. They poured over Syria plundering and murdering, and in September, 1244, stormed Jerusalem. In the massacre that followed 7000 Christians perished; Jerusalem was restored once more, and finally, to the Empire of the Caliph. From this time the remaining Latin possessions in Palestine were lost one by one in quick succession. The last town, 'Akka (Saint-Jean d'Acre), fell in 1291.

The title "King of Jerusalem" went from Guy of Lusignan (King of Jerusalem and Cyprus, 1186-92) to Henry of Champagne (1192-7), to whom it was already only a title of pretence since the Moslems ruled in the city. Amaury (Amalric) of Lusignan (brother of Guy), King of Cyprus (1194-1205), was elected king by the crusading army at Tyre, and married Isabel, daughter of Amaury I of Jerusalem (1162-73). He then added the title of Jerusalem to that of Cyprus (Amaury II). From his time the Lusignan kings of Cyprus used the title of Jerusalem and quartered its arms (argent, a cross potent between four crosslets or) with their paternal coat (barry of ten azure and argent, a lion rampant or, crowned gules. See the arms of "die conine von cipers" in Gelre's Wapenboeck, 1334-72). The Lusignan "Kingdom of Jerusalem and Cyprus" came to an end in 1474, when Catherine Cornaro, widow of the last king (James III) abdicated in favour of the Republic of Venice. Whatever rights they may be supposed to have had to the title of Jerusalem passed to the House of Savoy. Meanwhile, at the death of Amaury II (1205), John of Brienne who married Mary, daughter of the same Isabel and Conrad of Montferrat, began a rival line of titular Kings of Jerusalem. His daughter Isabel (Iolanthe), married Emperor Frederick II, who then assumed the title, and (as we have seen) for a short time actually reigned in Jerusalem. He crowned himself in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre on l7 March, 1229. After him the title was borne by his descendants to Conradin (d. 1268). Then Hugh III, prince of Antioch (1267-80) and regent of the scattered Latin possessions in Palestine for the absent kings of this line, began another series of titular Kings of Jerusalem. He was crowned at Tyre in 1269. His claim was maintained by his son Henry at 'Akka. But Mary of Antioch, also descended from Isabel, set up a claim to this visionary crown, and then sold it to her grand-nephew, Charles of Anjou, King of Sicily (l285-l309), who had already obtained another claim by marrying Margaret, grand-daughter of John of Brienne. While the Moslems were gaining ground and driving back the thin remnant of the Latin kingdom every year, the Sicilians and the party of Hugh of Antioch were fighting for the empty title. Eventually the kings of Sicily added it to their style, and "Jerusalem and the two Sicilies" existed as a "royal title down to the Italian revolution (1860). Lastly, the House of Habsburg also added this shadowy royalty to its long list of titles. Iolanthe-daughter of Rene the Good (d. 1480), titular King of Jerusalem and Naples-married Duke Frederick of Lorraine; from her the title came to the Dukes of Lorraine, and so, through Maria Theresa's marriage with Francis of Lorraine (1736), to the House of Austria. The arms of Jerusalem formed one of the fifty-eight quarterings of the Imperial Arms of Austria; and "Koenig von Jerusalem" was one of the emperor's long string of titles, till Ferdinand I (1835-48) had the good sense to reduce both quarterings and titles to those that had a real meaning. The story of this title of Jerusalem forms a curious bypath in history, and is a typical example of the pretence that medieval heralds loved. Meanwhile, the Moslem ruled again over the Holy City. The crusading idea lingered on in the West for centuries. Pope Pius II (1458-64) still hoped to renew the work of Urban II; but nothing ever came of these attempts. Jerusalem was lost to Christendom in 1187; it is lost still.

Till the sixteenth century Syria belonged to the caliphs in Egypt; but it was constantly overrun for short periods by their various enemies. In the thirteenth century the Mongols, who had destroyed the line of caliphs at Baghdad, poured over Syria plundering and destroying under their chief Hulagu (capture of Aleppo, 1260). Kutuz (1259-60) sent his famous general, Beibars el-bundukdari, by whom the Mongols were driven out. Beibars then had Kutuz murdered and reigned as caliph in his stead (1260-77). He succeeded in driving the Crusaders nearly back to their last stronghold, 'Akka, crushed the "Assassins" (Hashishiye)-fanatical Isma'ilis who had been the terror of Syria for nearly two centuries-and conquered a great part of Asia Minor. The name of Beibars (Es sultan el-malik ez-zahir, rukn-ed-dunga wa-din, "The sultan, the manifest king, prop of the world and the faith") may be seen on many monuments in Jerusalem. Kala'un (1279-90) deposed Beibars' son, made himself caliph, further harassed the Crusaders, and built splendid monuments all over Syria. In 1400 the Mongols under Timur again devastated the land.

Meanwhile the Osmanli Turks were becoming the dominant race in Islam. In 1516 under Sultan Selim I (1512-20), after they had crushed the Persians (1514), they turned southward towards Syria. On 14 August, 1516, Selim routed the Egyptian army and killed the Caliph Kansuh el-Ghuri. On 22 January, 1517, Selim entered Cairo in triumph. Mutawekkil, the last Egyptian caliph, died a captive of the Turks in 1538, bequeathing his title to the conquering House of Osman. It is on the strength of this (quite illegal) legacy that the Turkish sultan still calls himself Caliph of Islam. From this time the Turk has been master of Jerusalem. In 1799 Napoleon I invaded Syria and reached Nazareth. In 1831 the Egyptian army under Ibrahim Pasha defeated the Turks near Homs (Emessa), and kept possession of Syria and Jerusalem till England and Austria conquered them back for the Turks in 1840. During the nineteenth century Syria has had her share of various Turkish reforms. Jerusalem and the holy places especially, as being the most interesting parts of the empire to Christians and the scene of continual Christian pilgrimages, were the places where the Turkish government was most anxious to show that its reforms were really meant. The great number of Christian institutions of various sects and the large Christian population of Jerusalem have almost taken from it the appearance of an Eastern town. The latest development is the enormous increase of Jews who, in spite of repeated attempts on the part of the government to keep them out, form large colonies in and around the city. They and the European Christians are now the predominant element. There are no cities of the Turkish Empire where (in 1913) Moslems were so little in evidence as in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Nazareth.

(2) The Holy Sepulchre

The Crusaders found the group of buildings as they had been left by Constantine IX's restoration (1048; see above). From 1140 to 1149 they made a complete restoration of the whole under their architect Master Jordan. The effect of this was a great French-Romanesque cathedral. At the east of the round building over the Anastasis a transept, and beyond it a choir and an apse were built; an aisle surrounded the choir and apse. At the junction with the round building they put a triumphal arch. All the various chapels opened into the central church. From the apse steps led down to the chapel of St. Helena. The entrance was at the south. In this way the Holy Sepulchre became one great building. From the choir one could see into the Anastasis and into all the chapels. This Crusaders' Church is the one that still stands: the beautiful Romanesque doors, at the south especially, still give it a Western appearance. Slight restorations were made in 1244, 1310, 1400 and 1719. In 1808 the round building was burnt down. The Orthodox persuaded the Turkish government to allow them alone to restore it. Their architect closed up the triumphal arch, thus again destroying the unity of the whole, and replaced the old columns of the rotunda by clumsy pillars. He also enclosed the tomb in the present marble covering. The choir of the Crusaders' Church became the present Orthodox Katholikon. The arches between it and its aisles were walled up; the aisles became dark passages. The cupola they built over the rotunda threatened to fall in 1869. France and Russia together had it restored by the iron dome that still exists. It was the dispute between Catholics and Orthodox as to the keys of the Holy Sepulchre that immediately caused the Crimean War (1853). All the parts of the church now needed repairs which were not executed, because no religion would allow the other to undertake them for fear of disturbing their various rights. The inside of the cupola over the Anastasis especially was rotting daily. But the reparation of the roof was the most dangerous of all, since by Turkish law the right to repair implied possession and the possession of a roof meant possession of all it covers. In the present building, walled up and divided into a complex mass of dark passages and chapels laden with tawdry ornament, it is still possible to trace the plan of the great Crusaders' Church. For the rights of the various religions see below.

(3) The Orthodox Patriarchate

Through all the political changes, under Saracens, Egyptians, and Turks, the old line of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem (who followed the Church of Constantinople into schism in the eleventh century) goes on. But there is little to tell of their history. The line was often broken, and there have been many disputed successions. For the list of these patriarchs since Sophronius see Le Quien, "Oriens Christianus", III, 498-516. When the Crusaders took Jerusalem (1099), the Orthodox patriarch (Simon II) fled to Cyprus. As long as the former held the city, it was impossible for the schismatical rival of their Latin patriarchs to live in it. In 1142 the Orthodox continued their line by electing Arsenius II: he resided at Constantinople. After the Moslems had recaptured the city, the Orthodox patriarchs came back and lived in or near it. The only event of any importance in the later history of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem is the Synod of Jerusalem (often wrongly called the Synod of Bethlehem) in 1672. This synod represents the climax of the Orthodox reaction against the heresies of Cyril Lucaris (d. 1638). Cyril was Patriarch of Constantinople (Cyril I) at five separate intervals (1620-3, 1623-30, 1630-4, 1634-5, 1637-8); he had imbibed Protestant ideas from his friends in Germany and England. As patriarch he organized -- or tried to organize -- a reforming party, and he wrote in 1629 a famous "Confession" (Eastern Confession of the Christian Faith), which was full of pure Calvinism. Eventually Lucaris was accused of treason against the sultan, and strangled by the janizaries in 1638. He left a certain number of Protestantizing disciples, but the enormous majority of the Orthodox abhorred his new doctrines. In the years following his death four synods were held -- at Constantinople (1639), Yassy in Moldavia (1643), Jerusalem (1672), and Constantinople again (1672) in which the Orthodox faith was asserted against Protestantism in the most uncompromising terms. Of these synods that of Jerusalem was by far the most important. It is indeed one of the most important, as it is the last, of the official pronouncements of the Orthodox Church, and may be compared to our Council of Trent. Dositheus, Patriarch of Jerusalem (1669-1707), who summoned the synod, was certainly the most distinguished bishop of that line during this Iater period. He was one of the most important and learned of all modern Orthodox theologians. As patriarch he desuade the Turkish Government to expel Latins and Armenians from the holy places, and reorganized the monasteries of his patriarchate on a stricter basis. As a theologian he wrote works against Catholics, and collected evidences from former writers about the various questions that were being discussed in his time -- the eternal questions of the papacy and the procession of the Holy Ghost, the Hesychast controversy, etc., and then, most of all, the new questions raised by Lucaris and his friends. His chief works are Tomos katallages (1692), Tomos agapes (1699), Tomos charas (1705). In the first of these he publishes the acts of a pretended Synod of Constantinople against the Latins in 1540. No such synod was held; the acts are a palpable forgery. Dositheus also wrote a "History of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem", published after his death (Bukarest, 1715). This work contains more than is promised by its title. It almost amounts to a general history of the Church from the Orthodox side with vehement polemics against other Churches.

But Dositheus's chief work was the Synod of Jerusalem. He summoned it on the occasion of consecrating a church at Bethlehem in 1672 (hence the common name "Synod of Bethlehem"). It met in the same year at Jerusalem. The acts are signed by Dositheus, his predecessor the ex-patriarch Nectarius, six metropolitans and bishops, the Archimandrite of the Holy Sepulchre, Josaphat, and a great number of other archimandrites, priests, monks, and theologians. There are sixty-eight signatures in all. The Church of Russia was represented by a monk, Timothy. The acts are dated 20 March, 1672; they bear the title: "Christ guides. A shield of the Orthodox Faith, or the Apology composed by the Synod of Jerusalem under the Patriarch of Jerusalem Dositheus against the Calvinist heretics, who falsely say that the Eastern Church thinks heretically about God and Divine things as they do." The first part begins by quoting the text: "There is a time to speak and a time to be silent," which text is explained and enlarged upon at length. It tells the story of the summoning of the synod, and vehemently denies that the Orthodox Eastern Church ever held the opinions attributed to Lucaris. To show this the relations between the Lutherans and Jeremias II of Constantinople are quoted as well as the acts of former synods (Constantinople and Yassy). An elaborate attempt is then made to prove that Lucaris did not really write the famous "Confession". To do this the "Confession" is compared clause by clause with other statements made by him in sermons and in other works. This denial, it should be noted, is a palpable piece of bad faith on the part of the synod. There is no doubt at all as to the authenticity of Lucaris's "Confession". That he used other language on other occasions, especially in preaching, is well-known and very natural. In chapter ii the synod declares that in any case Lucaris showed the "Confession" to no one (this is also quite false), and tries to find further reasons for doubting his authorship. Chapter iii maintains that, even if he had written it, it would not thereby become a confession of the Faith of the Orthodox Church, but would remain merely the private opinion of a heretic: here the Fathers are on safe ground. Chapter iv defends -- no longer Cyril but -- the Orthodox Church by quoting her formularies, and contains a list of anathemas against the heresies of the "Confessions". Chapter v again tries to defend Cyril by quoting various deeds and sayings of his and transcribes the whole decree of the synod of Constantinople in 1639, and then that of Yassy (Giasion) in 1641. Chapter vi gives the decrees of this synod in the form of a "Confession of Dositheus". It has eighteen decrees (horoi), then four "questions" (eroteseis) with long answers. In these all the points denied by Lucaris's "Confession" (Church and Bible, predestination, cult. of saints, sacraments, the Real Presence, the liturgy, a real sacrifice, etc.) are maintained at great length and in the most uncompromising way. A short epilogue closes the acts. Then follow the date, signatures, and seals.

Because of its determined anti-Protestantism (Protestants are described as being patently heretics and airetikon koryphaiotatoi), Protestant writers have described this synod as a work of the Jesuits, of the French ambassador at that time, Olivier de Nointel, and of other Catholics who were undermining the Eastern Church. It is true that the Synod of Jerusalem represents a strongly Catholic reaction after Lucaris's troubles (it accepts and defends the word transubstantiation -- metousiosis -- for instance). It is all the more remarkable that its decrees have been accepted unreservedly by the whole Orthodox Church. They were at once approved by the other patriarchs, the Church of Russia, etc.; they are always printed in full among the symbolic books of the Orthodox Church, and form an official creed or declaration in the strictest sense, which every Orthodox Christian is bound to accept.

An affair that concerned the Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem was that of the independence of the great monastery of Mount Sinai. This monastery, one of the richest and most famous of Eastern Christendom, was undoubtedly at one time subject to the jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Jerusalem. In 1782, after a great struggle, the Abbot of Mount Sinai succeeded in asserting his independence of any patriarch. As Archbishop of Sinai the abbot now reigns over the smallest autocephalous Church of their communion. But he is still ordained in Jerusalem, and the patriarchs have constantly tried to assert some kind of authority over their independent daughter-church. The last great quarrel was in 1866, when the archbishop (Cyril Byzantius) had a dispute with his monks. Instead of applying to Jerusalem he wrote to Constantinople for help. Sophronius III of Constantinople (1863-67) at once took up his cause against the monks. The Patriarch of Jerusalem then summoned a synod (1867), in which he protested hotly against the interference of Constantinople. Less for the sake of Jerusalem's shadowy rights over Sinai than because of the ever-welcome chance of opposing the arrogant interference of Constantinople, the other Orthodox Churches all supported Jerusalem, so that Byzantius was deposed and the Patriarch of Constantinople had to resign. But that is the last attempt made by Jerusalem to interfere in the affairs of what is now universally recognized as the autocephalous Church of Sinai.

During these centuries the patriarchate, never very rich, suffered from steadily increasing poverty. Dositheus complained bitterly of this. He says that pilgrimages are rarer, and that the pilgrims who do come bring little money; he himself is obliged to travel constantly for the sake of collecting alms to Constantinople, Russia, Moldavia, etc. A result of the Turkish conquest was that since 1517 the Patriarchs of Jerusalem have been subject to their brothers of Constantinople in civil matters, as far as the government is concerned. The Turks made the ecumenical Patriarch civil head of all the "Roman nation" (rum millet), that is the Orthodox Church. The other patriarchs can approach the Porte only through him. This civil authority must not be confused with ecclesiastical jurisdiction. In Orthodox canon law the Church of Jerusalem is autocephalous, having no superior authority but that of Christ and the Seven Councils. Jerusalem, like the other free branches of their communion, has always indignantly withstood the many attempts of Constantinople to assert a kind of papal authority, and has always upheld the axiom that that ecumenical bishop has no ecclesiastical jurisdiction outside his patriarchate. Nevertheless, during these centuries till quite modern times, the independence of Jerusalem was only theoretical. The patriarchs were all Greeks. Originally, under the Egyptian rule, they had been Arabs, taken naturally from the native clergy of Palestine. But in 1534 Germanus, a Greek of the Peloponnesus, succeeded in being elected and from that time to this his successors have all been Greeks. Germanus further succeeded in hellenizing all the administration of his patriarchate: the monks of the Holy Sepulchre, the bishops, archimandrites, and officials of the patriarchal court are all Greeks. It became a recognized principle that no native Arab should ever be appointed to any office in the patriarchate. The result of this is that for over three centuries the patriarchal curia of Jerusalem has been and remains a foreign colony in the land, utterly separate from the native Arab lower clergy and the people. But this state of things will soon come to an end. Following the triumphant example of Antioch there is at this moment a great agitation among the Orthodox Arabs to assert their place in their own patriarchate. And as they are supported by Russia they will succeed. The reigning patriarch, Damianus, though of course a Greek, is not unfriendly to the Arab agitators. On the other hand the monks, the "Fraternity of the Holy Sepulchre", stand out as a bulwark of Orthodoxy for the present state of things, and treat the Arabs as schismatical revolutionaries. Everyone has heard of the scandalous riots that took place in 1908, and culminated in the pretended deposition of the patriarch. Till quite lately, moreover, most of these Greek patriarchs did not even take the trouble to reside in their titular city. Mere servants of the oecumenical bishop, having no interest in their Arab flock, they were content to fritter away their lives in Constantinople, useless ornaments of the Phanar. Since the accession of Cyril II (1845-72), this abuse has been removed and the patriarchs live near the Monastery of the Holy Sepulchre.

Meanwhile the sees of the patriarchate have almost entirely disappeared. In Juvenal's time (420-58) fifty-nine bishops in the three Palestines obeyed the new patriarch. The Moslem conquest, the Crusades, and the other troubles of the Orthodox Church in Syria gradually reduced this number, till there are now only a handful of titular bishops who reside at Jerusalem instead of in their dioceses, and a few sees whose titles are registered but are always vacant. In 1913 only one bishop (the Metropolitan of 'Akka) lived in his diocese (see the list below). The full list of patriarchs of Jerusalem during this period will be found in Le Quien, "Oriens Christianus", III; for the later ones see Williams, "Holy City", I, pp. 487-8. The patriarchs in the nineteenth century are: Anthimus, 1787-1808; Polycarp, 1808-27; Athanasius V, 1827-45; Cyril II, 1845-72. The last-mentioned refused to sign the excommunication of the Bulgars in 1872, and was deposed the same year. Procopius was intruded while Cyril still claimed to be patriarch. Russia and the native Arabs acknowledged Cyril, the Phanar and nearly all the rest of the Orthodox world Procopius. Russia deposed Procopius in 1875, and Cyril died. Russia then appointed Hierotheus, who, however, to everyone's surprise took the side of the Phanar in the Bulgarian quarrel. So Russia fell foul of him, and took the opportunity of confiscating the property of the Holy Sepulchre in Bessarabia. Hierotheus died in 1882. There were then three candidates for the vacant see, Nicodemus, Gerasimus and Photius. Photius (always a determined enemy of Russia) was elected canonically. But the Russians made the sultan refuse him the berat, and give it to Nicodemus instead. Gerasimus became Patriarch of Antioch in 1885. Photius went back to his monastery at Sinai. Nicodemus reigned from 1883 to 1890. In 1890 the Phanar persuaded the sultan to depose Nicodemus, and give the berat to Photius. Nicodemus retired to Halki. But the Russians absolutely refused to allow Photius to become patriarch. So the third original candidate, Gerasimus, was persuaded to leave Antioch and come to Jerusalem. He reigned from 1891 to 1897. Photius became Metropolitan of Nazareth, and in 1899 Patriarch of Alexandria. Gerasimus died in 1897 and the Russians tried to have their candidate Euthymius, Archimandrite of the Holy Sepulehre, appointed. But the candidate of the Phanar, Damianus, Metropolitan of Philadelphia, was appointed in 1897. For further information about the Orthodox patriarchate see below.

(4) The Catholic Church in Jerusalem

The organization of the Catholics in Palestine dates from the time of the Crusades. As soon as Godfrey of Bouillon became King of Jerusalem in 1099, a Latin patriarchate was set up. Arnulf, chaplain of the Normans, was made administrator of this patriarchate by the synod held in Jerusalem at Christmas, 1099. But he was soon set aside because of his immoral life, and Dagobert, Archbishop of Pisa, elected patriarch. The line of Latin patriarchs is: Dagobert of Pisa, 1099-1107 (Ehremar, anti-patriarch set up by Baldwin I while Dagobert was travelling to Rome to answer the king's complaints); Ghibellin of Arles, 1107-11; Arnulf (the original administrator), 1111-8; Guarimund, 1118-28; Stephen, 1128-30; William, 1130-45; Fulcher, 1146-57; Amalric, 1157-80; Heraclius, 1180-91. -- During the episcopate of Heraclius the Saracens took Jerusalem (1187), and the Orthodox patriarch returned. From this time the Latin patriarchs resided at the court of the Latin kings; when that court was at 'Akka (during the last period of the kingdom) the patriarchate was united to the bishopric of that town (Ptolemais in Latin). -- Michael; Bl. Albert of Parma (d. 1214); Gerald or Girold, 1214-27; Robert, 1227-54; James Pantaleon (afterwards Pope Urban IV), 1254-61; William, 1261-; Thomas; John, 1270-8; Nicholas, 1278-94.

Since 'Akka fell in 1291, the Latin line was continued by merely titular patriarchs, living at Rome and using the basilica of St. Laurence without the Walls as their patriarchal church, till Pius III restored the real patriarchate at Jerusalem in 1847. The patriarchs of the crusading time were in most cases not very edifying persons. Much of the history of the Latin Kingdom is taken up with their quarrels with the kings, intrigues, and generally scandalous adventures. An amusing, if hostile account of these intrigues will be found in Besant and Palmer's "Jerusalem" (throughout the book). The patriarchate extended to the limits of the Crusaders' territory; as they conquered new cities, so were new Latin sees established. There were four provinces: Palaestina I (metropolis, Caesarea; two suffragan sees, Sebaste and Saba), Palaestina II (Nazareth with one suffragan, Tiberias), Palaestina III (metropolis Petra, suffragan Sinai), Phoenicia (metropolis Tyre; suffragans, St. Jean d'Acre, Sidon, Beirut, Paneas). Bethlehem and Ascalon (joined), Hebron and Lydda (Diospolis) were immediately subject to the patriarch. But the number of sees fluctuated with the fortunes of the crusaders; there are various lists given by contemporary authors representing different circumstances. There were many abbeys besides the priory of the Holy Sepulchre (following the Augustinian rule); for these see Le Quien, III, 1279 sqq., and the "Gesta Dei per Francos" (Hanover, 1611), 1077.

From the thirteenth century, when this hierarchy disappeared, down to our own time, the Catholic cause was upheld almost solely by the Franciscan Order. The friars were first sent to Palestine by St. Francis himself in 1219. The order has a special province, the "Custodia Terræ Sanctæ", which includes Lower Egypt, Cyprus, and Armenia. The head of this province, and till 1847 the supreme authority for Catholics in Palestine, is the Franciscan provincial who bears the title "Custos Terrae Sanctae". He had episcopal jurisdiction (but not orders), and the Turkish government granted him many privileges as civil head of the "Latin nation" in Palestine. This province (commonly called by the Italian form "Terra Santa", which has passed into Arabic and Turkish) is recruited from all the other Franciscan provinces. Its official language is Italian. During the long centuries since the fall of the Latin kingdom the heroic friars have guarded the interests of the Catholic Church around the Holy Places. Always exposed to the jealousy of the Orthodox and other sects, continually persecuted by the Turks, they have kept their place till today, and with it our rights in the Holy Land, constantly at the price of their blood. It was in their hospices (the case nuove, which they have built all over Palestine) that the Catholic pilgrim found shelter. They have kept the Latin altars in repair, and have never ceased offering the Latin Mass on them for six centuries when no one else cared for them. The "Reverendissimus Custos Terrae Sanctae" now fills a much less important place in the Catholic Church of Palestine; but no changes can ever make one forget what we owe to the friars for defending our cause during those dark years.

In the nineteenth century it was felt that a state of things of which the result was practically Franciscan monopoly in Palestine had become an anomaly. The Turkish government had become tolerant, the number of Catholic pilgrims increased enormously, many other religious orders had built houses at Jerusalem and other cities, there were Arab Catholics who wished to become priests and to serve their own people, but who had not necessarily a vocation for the Franciscan Order. So the old conditions that reserved practically all cure of souls to Franciscans and submitted every one to the jurisdiction of the custos -- natural enough when there had been no one else to undertake the work -- were no longer reasonable now. There was no reason why the Catholics of Palestine should not be governed by an episcopal hierarchy in the normal way. Moved by these considerations Pius IX decided to change the titular Latin patriarchate at Rome into a real see again at Jerusalem. The titular patriarch, Augustus Foscolo (1830-47), was requested to resign. In his place Joseph Valerga was made patriarch in 1847, and ordered to take up his residence in the Holy City (Brief of 23 July 1847). He was consecrated by the pope himself on 10 October, 1847, and arrived in his patriarchate in January, 1848. He found 4200 Latin Catholics there; at his death in 1872 he had doubled the number. The succession of these restored Latin patriarchs is: Joseph Valerga, 1847-72; Vincent Bracco, 1873-89; Louis Piavi, 1889-1905. Mgr. Piavi died on 24 January, 1905. After some delay, the present patriarch, Mgr. Philip Camassei, formerly Latin Bishop of Syra, was promoted in November, 1906, and entered Jerusalem just before Easter, 1907.

(5) Present Condition of the City

Jerusalem (El Quds) is the capital of a sanjak and the seat of a mutasarrif directly dependent on the Sublime Porte. In the administration of the sanjak the mutasarrif is assisted by a council called majlis ida ra; the city has a municipal government (majlis baladiye) presided over by a mayor. The total population is estimated at 66,000. The Turkish census of 1905, which counts only Ottoman subjects, gives these figures: Jews, 45,000; Moslems, 8,000; Orthodox Christians, 6000; Latins, 2500; Armenians, 950; Protestants, 800; Melkites, 250; Copts, 150; Abyssinians, 100; Jacobites, 100; Catholic Syrians, 50. During the nineteenth century large suburbs to the north and east have grown up, chiefly for the use of the Jewish colony. These suburbs contain nearly half the present population.

The Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem has jurisdiction over all Latins of Palestine, extending to Egypt on the south, the Latin Delegacy of Syria (seat at Beirut) on the north, and including Cyprus. He is appointed by the Roman Curia (libera collatio S. Pont.), and is personally exempt from Turkish authority (still nominally under the protectorate of France). He is represented in the majlis. The patriarchate has no suffragan sees. The Custos Terræ Sanctæ retains the use of episcopal insignia and certain rights of admission to the holy places; otherwise, he must now be counted only as the Provincial of the Franciscans. Appointments to the "Order of the Holy Sepulchre" (a military order of knighthood which began with the crusades and continues as a small dignity given to deserving Catholics), formerly made by the custos, are now in the hands of the patriarch. The patriarchal church in theory is the Holy Sepulchre. But since Catholics have only alternative rights there with the Orthodox and Armenians, Foscolo built a pro-cathedral near the Jaffa Gate (to the north): the patriarch's house and a seminary adjoin this church. But the patriarch celebrates the functions of Holy Week and others at the Holy Sepulchre according to the rights conceded to Catholics, which are carefully drawn up and enforced by the Government. The Franciscan custos lives at the Convent of St. Saviour to the north of the Muristan. This convent is the Franciscan head-quarters at Jerusalem. It was originally a Georgian monastery, and was acquired by the friars in 1551. Next to it is the large parish church of St. Saviour, finished in 1885 at the expense of the Austrian Emperor Francis Joseph I; the Casa Nuova (hospice for pilgrims) is close at hand. Then there are an orphanage, a school, a library, printing press, etc., all in charge of the friars, clustered around the convent. The Franciscans have also the little convent of the Holy Sepulchre with the "Chapel of the Apparition," that forms the northern part of the group of buildings at the Anastasis. This has been Franciscan property since the thirteenth century (P. Barnabe Meistermann's "Nouveau Guide" contains an excellent plan of the Anastasis, coloured according to the possessions of the various religions). Six or seven priests and as many lay-brothers are sent from the convent of St. Saviour to reside here for periods of three months in turn. These are the "Fathers of the Holy Sepulchre" who are always on guard to celebrate the Latin Offices, receive pilgrims, and maintain our traditional rights. They have a hard time while they are on duty. There is no way out of the convent except by the door to the whole complex on the south. This door is locked by the Turkish guardians at night, so the friars are locked in. Their food is brought to them from St. Saviour, and passed through a wicket in the great door every day. Formerly the residence in the narrow damp convent shut in among the other buildings, which they do not leave during their time of office, was very injurious to their health. But in 1869 Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria, when he made his pilgrimage to Jerusalem, obtained from the Turkish government some improvement in the ventilation of the convent and leave to build a terrace and a belfry behind it. In 1875 the friars rang their bells to summon Catholics to their services for the first time at this place since centuries (the Orthodox do not use bells but clappers -- symantra; bells are an abomination to Moslems). The third Franciscan convent in Jerusalem is by the Chapel of the Scourging in the Tariq Bab Sitti Miriam, opposite the Antonia castle. This property belonged to them from the time of the Crusades till 1618. It was then taken away by the Pasha and turned into a stable. It was given back in 1838, and restored at the expense of King Maximilian of Bavaria.

Other Latin properties in Jerusalem are the College of St. Ann for Melkite clergy governed (since 1878) by Cardinal Lavigerie's Pres blancs near the Bab Sitti Miriam (Gate of the Lady Mary), the Dominican convent and Ecole biblique at St. Stephen outside the Damascus Gate (1884), the great French Hospice "Notre Dame de France", directed by the Augustinians of the Assumption outside the walls to the northwest near the Bab 'Abdu-I'hamid (1887), the Benedictine monastery with a seminary for Syrian Catholics on the Mount of Olives (1899), the new German Benedictine monastery at the "Dormitio B.M.V." on Mount Sion, given by the German Emperor in 1906, the German and Austrian hospices, the French Passionists and Lazarists, the Italian Salesians, and French Peres de Sion and Christian Brothers. There are convents of the French Carmelite nuns (on the Mount of Olives, since 1873), Poor Clares, Franciscan nuns, "Dames de Sion", Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, Benedictine nuns, Sisters of the Rosary of St. Joseph and of Marie-Reparatrice". Of all these Latin institutions the older colonies (e.g. the Franciscans) have on the whole an Italian character, by far the greatest number are French, but the Germans (especially since the troubles about the protectorate) are now getting considerable influence. As throughout the Turkish Empire early in the twentieth century, French was the European language most spoken at Jerusalem.

Most of the Eastern Catholic Churches have establishments in the Holy City. The Melkite Patriarch of Antioch also bears the titles of Alexandria and Jerusalem. He has a church (St. Veronica) in the Khan-ez-zeit just behind St. Saviour where the Melkite patriarchal vicar (who generally resides at Jaffa) and the patriarch himself (when present) officiate; near it is a hospice for Melkites. There is also a Melkite monastery near the New Bazaar (Es-suk el-jedid). The Maronites have a parish church served by their patriarchal vicar; that of the Catholic Armenians (Notre Dame du Spasme) is in the Via Dolorosa opposite the Austrian hospice. The Armenians had an Archbishop of Jerusalem (Michael Alessandrius) from 1855 to 1867. No successor has been appointed to him. The Syrian Catholics have also a small church where their patriarchal vicar officiates. The Syrian Catholic Patriarch of Antioch is considered as administrator of an Archdiocese of Jerusalem; but he does not use the title. A hardship felt by all these Eastern Catholics is that they cannot celebrate their Offices at the Holy Sepulchre. Among Catholics the Turk recognizes only the rights of Latins there.

The Orthodox Church naturally also fills a large place among the Christian communities of Jerusalem. The patriarch bears the title "the most blessed and holy Patriarch of the holy city Jerusalem and all Palestine, of Syria, Arabia beyond the Jordan, Cana of Galilee and Holy Sion". It should be noticed that of all the persons who bear the title "Patriarch of Jerusalem", this one alone represents historic continuity from the original line. His patriarchate extends to the Lebanon on the north and the Red Sea on the south (except the autocephalous convent on Sinai). East and west it is bounded by the Syrian desert and the sea. The patriarch resides by the "Great Laura" in the Haret deir-er-rum not far from the Anastasis; he has also properties in the country at Katamon near Jerusalem (where they say St. Simeon lived) and near Deir Aban (between Jerusalem and Jaffa). The sees of the Patriarchate are Cæsarea, Scythopolis (Beisan), Petra, Ptolemais ('Akka), Nazareth, Bethlehem, Lydda, Gaza, Nablus, Sebaste, Tabor, the Jordan, Tiberias, Philadelphia, Pella, Kerak, Diocaesarea (Sepphoris), Madaba. The only resident bishop is the Metropolitan of 'Akka; those of Lydda, Gaza, Nablus, Sebaste, the Jordan, Philadelphia, Kerak and Madaba live at Jerusalem and form the Patriarch's Court. The other sees are left vacant. In the administration of his Church the patriarch is assisted by a synod consisting of ten bishops and ten archimandrites. Near the patriarchate is the large Orthodox monastery (St. Constantine) with a printing press and hospice for pilgrims. In the Holy Sepulchre the Orthodox possess the central part (the "Katholikon") and various chapels. They have a monastery built against it (to the west). The actual Anastasis under its cupola is too precious to be given to any one religion; so it is common property, used in turn by all. There are sixteen other Orthodox monasteries in and around the city and various hospices, hospitals and schools. For the education of their clergy they have the "Monastery of the Holy Cross" (Deir el-musallebe) about one and a half miles west of the city. This monastery (said to be at the place where the tree grew from which the cross was made) was originally Georgian. Inscriptions in that language may be seen in the church. It was sold to the Greeks, opened as a theological college in 1855, since then several times closed and re-opened. Many students do not belong to the patriarchate, but come from Asia Minor, Cyprus, Greece, etc., to study here. There are hardly any Arabs. The only language used in the college is Greek. The Greek element has hitherto had exclusive possession of the older Orthodox establishments in Jerusalem.

We have alluded to the troubles now raging through the attempt of the Arabs to break this monopoly. It is considerably broken, though not in favour of the Arabs, by the Russian establishments. The autocephalous Russian Church is represented in Palestine by a great number of large colonies and institutions altogether separate from those of the Patriarchate. The first Russian archimandrite arrived in 1844; the consulate dates from 1858. The Russian Palestine Society builds churches, in which the liturgy is celebrated in Slavonic, and hospices for Russian pilgrims all over the country to the great annoyance of the Greek patriarchal element. It is because Russia has taken up the cause of the native Arabs that they can no longer be ignored as obscure revolutionaries of the lower classes. On the contrary, the Greek influence is already doomed; when Lord Damianus dies or is successfully deposed, we may expect to hear of an Arab patriarch as his successor. It remains to be it made at Antioch by excommunicating him. The chief Russian establishments at Jerusalem are the enormous group of buildings outside the city on the Jaffa road. These contain a large and very handsome church where the Russian archimandrite officiates, huge hospices for pilgrims, a hospital and other buildings, all close to the Russian consulate. Then they have a gorgeous church in Gethsemane, and another one with a high tower, a convent of nuns, and other buildings on the top of the Mount of Olives (the place of the Ascension in their tradition). There are also another Russian hospice in the Muristan, a lunatic asylum, and schools. But the Russians have no rights at the Holy Sepulchre. Each time they want to have a service there they must ask leave of the patriarch. About 8000 Russian pilgrims visit the Holy Places every year.

The Gregorian Armenians have a Patriarchate of Jerusalem as one of their two minor patriarchates. In the seventeenth century the Katholikos of Echmiadzin gave the Armenian Bishop of Jerusalem the right to consecrate chrism; thereupon the bishop assumed the title patriarch and began ordaining bishops. The title is now acknowledged by the Armenian Church. The jurisdiction of the Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem extends throughout the Pashaliks of Damascus, 'Akka, Tarabulus (Tripoli), and Cyprus. Under him are seven archbishops and bishops who live with him and form his synod, and fourteen suffragans. The patriarchate is at the great Armenian monastery of St. James to the southwest of the city, near the Bab Nebi Daud. This was formerly a Georgian monastery; the Armenians possess it since the thirteenth century. Besides the patriarch and bishops about a hundred vartabeds live here. There are also a seminary and schools and a hospice for pilgrims adjoining the great church. They also have a monastery just outside the same gate (the reputed house of Caiphas), a convent of nuns (Deir-ez-zeituni) near the patriarchate, and land outside the city opposite the great Russian colony. The whole southwest of Jerusalem around their patriarchate is the "Armenian quarter". At the Holy Sepulchre they possess the Chapels of St. Helena, of St. John, of the "Division of Garments", of St. James (behind the Anastasis), and the "Stone of the Holy Women" (cf. Meistermann's plan). The Armenians have further rights of walking in procession about the Anastasis, and take their turn to celebrate their offices at it.

The Jacobite Syrians have a little church (claimed as the house of John Mark) in the Haret-en-nebi Daud, with a monastery where the vicar of their maphrian (who now unites with this dignity that of Metropolitan of Jerusalem) resides, and the central chapel behind the Anastasis. The Copts have a large monastery (Deir-es-sultan) close to the Holy Sepulchre to the north, at the ninth Station of the Cross, with a hospice. Another Coptic church is at their Khan north of the Birket Hammam-el-batrak (Pool of Hezekiah), and they have several chapels in the Holy Sepulchre itself. The Copts have had a Bishop of Jerusalem since the eleventh century. He now resides at Cairo with the title Bishop of the East (Sharkiye), or of the Anastasis (Kayame), or Jerusalem (El Quds), and ranks immediately after the Abuna of Abyssinia. The Abyssinians possess a large round church outside the city to the northwest (beyond the Russian buildings) and a monastery touching the Holy Sepulchre and the Coptic monastery. They have no special place in the great church itself; but share with the Copts (with whom, of course, they are in communion). The Nestorians had a Metropolitan of Jerusalem from the ninth to the thirteenth century. Since 1282 the title seems to have disappeared (Le Quien, II, 1299).

Lastly, English, German and American Protestants of all sects have a great number of establishments, churches, hospitals, and hospices in Jerusalem. The most important of these are the German Evangelical Erl serkirche in the Muristan (built in 1898 on land given by the German Emperor) with a school, the Johanniterhospiz, Hospital of the Kaiserwerth Deaconesses, the Leper-house kept by the Moravians, and the Syrian Protestant orphanage. In 1841, by arrangement between the Prussian and English governments, an Anglo-Lutheran "Bishopric of St. James" at Jerusalem was founded. The bishops were to be appointed alternately by the two governments and to have jurisdiction over all Anglicans and Lutherans in Syria, Chaldea, Egypt and Abyssinia. This is the famous "Jerusalem bishopric" that gave so great scandal to the leaders of the Oxford Movement. The bishops were: Michael Samuel Alexander (appointed by England), 1842-5; Samuel Gobat von Cremines (by Prussia), 1845-79; Joseph Barclay (by England), 1879-81. Already during Gobat's time the two elements had drifted apart; when Barclay died, the arrangement fell through.

The Anglicans have now a bishopric "in" Jerusalem of quite a different type (since 1887). Bishop Blyth and his archdeacons are conciliatory to all the Eastern Churches and on excellent terms with the Orthodox patriarch. The Anglican Collegiate Church of St. George (with a college) is the seat of the bishop in Jerusalem. It is situated outside the city to the north, beyond the Dominican convent. St. Paul's Church belongs to the Church Missionary Society (outside, northwest); there is a large Anglican school (founded by Bishop Gobat) at the southwest corner of the walls. The London Jews' Society has a church, two hospitals and several schools.

The following persons use the title of Jerusalem in some form:

• Catholics: the Latin Patriarch, residing in the city; the Melkite Patriarch of Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem and all the East, residing at Alexandria or Damascus; the Melkite Patriarchal Vicar of Jerusalem residing at Jaffa; the Maronite Patriarchal Vicar of Jerusalem residing in the city;
• Non-Catholics: the Orthodox Patriarch residing in the city; the Armenian Patriarch residing in the city; the Jacobite Maphrian (Metropolitan of Jerusalem) residing with his Patriarch (of Antioch) in the Zapharan monastery near Mardin; the Jacobite Vicar of Jerusalem (for the Maphrian) residing in the city; the Coptic Bishop of Jerusalem (or the East or the Anastasis) residing at Cairo; the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem.

ADRIAN FORTESCUE

Liturgy of Jerusalem

The Rite of Jerusalem is that of Antioch. That is to say, the Liturgy that became famous as the use of the patriarchical church of Antioch, that through the influence of that Church spread throughout Syria and Asia Minor, and was the starting point of the development of the Byzantine rite, is itself originally the local liturgy, not of Antioch, but of Jerusalem. It is no other than the famous liturgy of St. James. That it was actually composed by St. James the Less, as first Bishop of Jerusalem, is not now believed by any one; but two forms in it show that it was originally used as local rite of the city of Jerusalem. There is a reference to the Cross among the prayers for catechumens--"Lift up the horn of the Christians by the power of the venerable and life-giving cross"--that is always supposed to be a reference to St. Helena's invention of the True Cross at Jerusalem in the early fourth century. If so, this would also give an approximate date, at any rate for that prayer. A much clearer local allusion is in the Intercession, after the Epiklesis: "We offer to thee, O Lord, for thy holy places which thou hast glorified by the divine appearance of thy Christ and by the coming of thy Holy Spirit" (these are the various sanctuaries of Palestine) "especially for holy and glorious Sion, mother of all Churches" (Sion, in Christian language, is always the local Church of Jerusalem. See JERUSALEM II) "and for thy holy Catholic and Apostolic Church throughout the whole world" (kata pasan ten oikoumenen, which always may mean, "throughout the whole Empire"). This reference, then, the only one to any local Church in the whole liturgy -- the fact that the Intercession, in which they pray for every kind of person and cause, begins with a prayer for the Church of Jerusalem, is a sure index of the place of origin.

We have further evidence in the catechetical discourses of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. These were held about the year 347 or 348 in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre; it is obvious that they describe the liturgy known to his hearers there. Probst has examined the discourses from this point of view ("Liturgie des IV Jahrhunderts", Muster, 1893, 82-106) and describes the liturgy that can be deduced from them. Allowing for certain reticences, especially in the earlier instructions given to catechumens (the disciplina arcani), and for certain slight differences, such as time always brings about in a living rite, it is evident that Cyril's liturgy is the one we know as that of St. James. As an obvious example one may quote Cyril's description of the beginning of the Anaphora (corresponding to our Preface). He mentions the celebrant's versicle, "Let us give thanks to the Lord", and the answer of the people, "Meet and just". He then continues : "After this we remember the sky, the earth and the sea, the sun and the moon, the stars and all creation both rational and irrational, the angels, archangels, powers, mights, dominations, principalities, thrones, the many-eyed Cherubim who also say those words of David: Praise the Lord with me. We remember also the Seraphim, whom Isaias saw in spirit standing around the throne of God, who with two wings cover their faces, with two their feet and with two fly; who say: Holy, holy, holy Lord of Sabaoth. We also say these divine words of the Seraphim, so as to take part in the hymns of the heavenly host" ("Catech. Myst.", V, 6). This is an exact description of the beginning of the Anaphora in the Liturgy of St. James.

We have, then, certain evidence that our St. James's Liturgy is the original local rite of Jerusalem. A further question as to its origin leads to that of its relation to the famous liturgy in the eighth book of the Apostolic Constitutions. That the two are related is obvious. (The question is discussed in ANTIOCHENE LITURGY.) It seems also obvious that the Apostolic Constitution rite is the older; St. James must be considered a later, enlarged, and expanded form of it. But the liturgy of the Apostolic Constitutions is not Palestinan, but Antiochene. The compiler was an Antiochene Syrian; he describes the rite he knew in the north, at Antioch. (This, too, is shown in the same article.) The St. James's Rite, then, is an a adaptation of the other (not necessarily of the very one we have in the Apostolic Constitutions, but of the old Syrian rite, of which the Apostolic Constitutions give us one version) made for local use at Jerusalem. Then it spread throughout the patriarcate. It must always be remembered that, till the Council of Ephesus (431), Jerusalem belonged to the Patriarchate of Antioch. So this liturgy came to Antioch and there displaced the older rite of the Apostolic Constitutions. Adopted unchanged at Antioch (the local allusion to "holy and glorious Sion" was left unaltered), it imposed itself with new authority as the use of the patriarchical Church. The earliest notices of an Antiochene Rite that we possess show that it is this one of St. James. There is no external evidence that the Apostolic Constitution rite was ever used anywhere; it is only from the work itself that we deduce that it is Syrian and Antiochene. Under its new name of Liturgy of Antioch, St. James's Rite was used throughout Syria, Palestine, and Asia Minor. When Jerusalem became a patriarchate it kept the same use.

The Liturgy of St. James exists in Greek and Syriac. It was probably at first used indifferently in either language, in Greek in the Hellenized cities, in Syriac in the country. Of the relation of these two versions we can say with certainty that the present Greek form is the older. The existing Syriac liturgy is a translation from the Greek. There is good reason to suppose that at Jerusalem, as everywhere else, the primitive liturgical language was Greek. The schismatical Monophysite Churches formed in the fifth and sixth centuries in Syria kept St. James's Rite in Syriac. The Orthodox used it in Greek till it was supplanted by the daughter-rite of Constantinople about the twelfth century. At present the old Rite of Jerusalem is used, in Syriac, by the Jacobites and Uniat Syrians, also in a modified form in Syriac by the Maronites. The Greek version has been restored among the Orthodox at Jerusalem for one day in the year -- 31 December.

ADRIAN FORTESCUE

Jesi

(ÆSINA)

Diocese in the Province of Ancona, Italy, immediately subject to the Holy See. The city is situated on a pleasant eminence, and was anciently known as Æsis, the name likewise of the River Esino, which flows near the city and forms the boundary between Umbria and Piceno. Little or nothing remains of the ancient buildings, temples, baths, etc., still preserved in the fourteenth century. After the Lombard invasion Jesi formed part of the Pentapolis, afterwards called the March of Ancona. In the conflicts between pope and emperor for the possession of the Marches, Jesi was Ghibelline. Frederick II, who was born there, used the city as the base of his operations. Saint Septimius, martyred in 307, is venerated as the first Bishop of Jesi. Saint Florianus, who was cast into the Esino in the Diocletian persecution, is also venerated (perhaps he is confounded with Saint Florianus who was cast into the Enus or Anisus). Other holy bishops of antiquity were Saints Martianus (c. 500), Calumniosus (c. 647), Honestus. The relics of these three were discovered in 1623. In 1245 Innocent IV deposed the intruder Armannus and placed in his stead the Franciscan Gualtiero, an Englishman and a friend of John of Parma, general of the order and patron of the "Spirituals", spoken of by Salimbene as "bonus cantor, bonus prædicator, bonus dictator". Bishop Severinus in 1237 laid the foundations of the new cathedral, a magnificent structure; the old one, now San Nicola, was outside the city, and in the eighteenth century had fallen into ruin. Gabriele del Monte (1554) introduced the reforms of the Council of Trent, which he had attended; he founded the seminary, and distinguished himself by his charity, especially during the plague of 1583. His successors were Cardinal Camillo Borghese (1597), afterwards Pope Paul V; Cardinals Tiberio Cenci (1621) and Alderano Cibò (1656), noted for their benefactions to churches, monasteries, and the seminary; Antonio Fonseca (1724), who restored the cathedral and founded a hospital. Cardinal Caprara (afterwards Archbishop of Milan), who concluded the Concordat with Napoleon, was Bishop of Jesi (1800-02). He was succeeded by Antonio M. Odescalchi, deported to Milan by the French in 1809. The diocese has twenty-six parishes with 54,000 souls; six religious houses of men and thirteen of women; two schools for boys and six for girls.

Cappelletti, Le Chiese d'Italia, VII (Venice, 1857); Baldassini, Notizie historiche della regia città di Jesi (1703).

U. BENIGNI

Jesuit's Bark

( China Bark; Cinchona; Cortex ChinÆ; Peruvian Bark).

Jesuit's Bark, on account of its alkaloids, is the most celebrated specific remedy for all forms of malaria. It is obtained from several species of the genus cinchona, of the order Rubiaceæ, that have been discovered at different times and are indigenous in the Western Andes of South America. Formerly the bark itself, prepared in different forms, was used as a drug, while to­day immense quantities form the base of the production of cinchona alkaloids. This industry is carried on principally in Germany, and the Dutch and English cinchona plantations in Java, Ceylon, and Farther India are the chief sources whence the raw material is supplied. The history of cinchona bark, which dates back two hundred and eighty years, has greatly influenced that of pharmacy, botany, medicine, trade, theoretical and practical chemistry, and tropical agriculture. Two hundred and fifty years ago the physician Bado declared that this bark had proved more precious to mankind than all the gold and silver which the Spaniards obtained from South America, and the world confirms his opinion to­day. Two hundred years ago the Italian professor of medicine Ramazzini said that the introduction of Peruvian bark would be of the same importance to medicine that the discovery of gunpowder was to the art of war, an opinion endorsed by contemporary writers on the history of medicine. Whoever has searched the annals of cinchona will recognize the truth of the following observations of Weddel (d. 1877): "Few subjects in natural history have excited general interest in a higher degree than cinchona; none perhaps have hitherto merited the attention of a greater number of distinguished men."

This explains the fact that the above-named branches of science all possess an extensive literature on cinchona, which is accessible for purposes of comparison to those who care to study the subject in detail. Limited space here permits merely a sketch of the relation between the Jesuits and cinchona bark, with an elucidation of the terms "Jesuit's bark", "Jesuit's Tree", "Jesuit's Powder", "Pulvis Patrum", etc., necessitating a glance into the earliest literature on cinchona, where, however, many difficulties arise. For a just appreciation of these difficulties, the following quotation from Alexander von Humboldt, which sufficiently accounts for them, should be borne in mind: "It almost goes without saying that among Protestant physicians hatred of the Jesuits and religious intolerance lie at the bottom of the long conflict over the good or harm effected by Peruvian Bark." Many tales which were formerly widespread have proved fabulous; others are to be modified in detail; to which must be added modern discoveries of unquestioned genuineness. Scientific proof is found partly in the work of the present writer.

The Spanish Jesuit missionaries in Peru were taught the healing power of the bark by natives, between 1620 and 1630, when a Jesuit at Loxa was indebted to its use for his cure from an attack of malaria (Loxa Bark). It was used at the recommendation of the Jesuits in 1630, when Countess Chinchon (Cinchon; the derivative is Cinchona, the appellation selected by Linnæus in 1742 -- Markham prefers Chinchona), wife of the new viceroy, who had just arrived from Europe, was taken ill with malaria at Lima. The countess was saved from death, and in thanksgiving caused large quantities of the bark to be collected, which she distributed to malaria sufferers, partly in person and partly through the Jesuits of St. Paul's College at Lima (pulvis comitissæ). She did not return to Europe and was not the first to bring the bark there or to spread its use through Spain and the rest of the Continent, as stated by Markham. For the earliest transportation of the bark we must thank the Jesuit Barnabé de Cobo (1582-1657; the Cobæa plant), who rendered important services in the exploration of Mexico and Peru. In his capacity of procurator of the Peruvian province of his order, he brought the bark from Lima to Spain, and afterwards to Rome and other parts of Italy, in 1632. In the meanwhile its merits must have been ascertained both in Lima and in various parts of Europe, as Count Chinchon and his physician de Vega brought it back with them in 1640.

Count Chinchon, however, troubled himself little about the use or sale of the bark. A greater distribution resulted from the large quantity brought over by the Jesuit Bartolomé Tafur, who, like Cobo, came to Spain in 1643 while procurator of the Peruvian province of his order, proceeded through France (there is an alleged cure of the young Louis XIV, when still dauphin, effected by Father Tafur by means of Peruvian bark), and thence to Italy as far as Rome. Tafur had frequent intercourse with the celebrated Jesuit theologian de Lugo, who became a cardinal in 1643. From him de Lugo heard of the cinchona, and remained from 1643 until his death in 1660 its faithful advocate, zealous defender, and generous, disinterested dispenser in Italy and the rest of Europe, for which he was honoured in the appellation of pulvis cardinalis, pulvis Lugonis, and by having several portraits painted of him. De Lugo had the bark analysed by the pope's physician in ordinary, Gabriele Fonseca, who reported on it very favourably. Its distribution among the sick in Rome took place only on the advice and with the consent of the Roman doctors. The cardinal had more bark brought from America over the trade routes through Spain. Almost all the other patrons of the drug in those times appear to have been directly influenced by de Lugo; as, for instance, the lay brother Pietro Paolo Pucciarini, S. J. (1600-1661), apothecary in the Jesuit college at Rome, who undoubtedly deserves the greatest credit after de Lugo for distributing the genuine unadulterated article, and to whom are attributed the Roman directions for its use (schedula Romana), the earliest dating at least from 1651. In his friend Honoré Fabri, a French Jesuit, who stayed for a time in Rome, de Lugo won a determined defender of the bark against the first anti­cinchona pamphlet written by the Brussels doctor Jean­Jacques Chifflet. Under the pseudonym of Antimus Conygius, Fabri wrote in 1655 the first paper on cinchona published in Italy, as well as the first of the long list of brochures defending its use and the only independent article on this bark which has been issued by a Jesuit. The two Genoese, Girolamo Bardi, a priest, and Sebastiano Ba(l)do, a physician, who were among the pioneer advocates of the plant, were intimate with the cardinal, and Ba(l)do prefixed to his principal work a letter from de Lugo, dated 1659, on cinchona, which shows that the cardinal even when seventy-seven years old was still active in its behalf.

Circumstances created a suitable opportunity for disseminating the bark from Rome throughout Europe by means of the Jesuits. In 1646, 1650, and 1652 the delegates to the eighth, ninth, and tenth general councils of the order (three from each province) returned to their homes, taking it with them, and at the same time there is evidence of its use in the Jesuit colleges at Genoa, Lyons, Louvain, Ratisbon, etc. The remedy -- connected with the name of Jesuit -- very soon reached England. The English weekly "Mercurius Politicus" in 1658 contains in four numbers the announcement that: "The excellent powder known by the name of "Jesuit's powder" may be obtained from several London chemists." It remains to recall the fact that even in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the bark kept in the Jesuit pharmacies or in their colleges was considered particularly efficacious because they were better able to provide a genuine unadulterated supply. Further, that in those two centuries Jesuit missionaries took the remedy to the malaria regions of foreign countries, even reaching the court of Peking, where they cured the emperor by its means; that in Peru during the eighteenth century they urged American collectors to lay out new plantations; and in the nineteenth century they were the first to plant cinchona outside of South America.

      Rompel, Kritische Studien zur ältesten Geschichte der Chinarinde (Feldkirch, 1905); Herbermann, in Historical Records and Studies, IV, (New York, 1906); as a very important historical reference see Badus, Anastasis Corticis Peruvia (Genoa, 1663); Backer in Medical Transactions, III (London, 1785); da Bergen, Versuch einer Monographie der China (Hamburg, 1826); Weddel, Histoire Naturelle des Quinquinas (Paris, 1849); Markham, A memoir of the Lady Ana de Osorio (London, 1874); Idem, Peruvian Bark (London, 1880); FlÜckiger, Die Chinarinde (Berlin, 1883); Idem, Pharmakognosie (Berlin, 1891).

Joseph Rompel

Daughters of Jesus

Founded at Kermaria, in the Diocese of Vannes, France, in 1834, for the care of the sick poor, and the education of girls. The congregation received government authorization 31 October, 1842. In 1893 a provincial house for Canada was founded at Three Rivers. The sisters in Canada number (1910) 267, choir and lay, in charge of 25 schools, chiefly model and elementary, in addition to 9 boarding schools, a hospital, and an orphanage; they also have the domestic care of 2 religious houses. In the United States they conduct an academy and hospital at Lewiston, Montana, and the school connected with the French parish at Waltham, Massachusetts. The congregation has over 200 convents throughout the world.

Heimbucher, Orden und Kongregationen (Paderborn, 1908); Le Canada ecclesiastique (1910).

F.M. RUDGE

Sisters of the Holy Childhood of Jesus and Mary

(1) A congregation founded in 1835 in the Diocese of Fréjus, for the education of girls and the care of the sick, with mother-house at Draguignan; government authorization was granted in 1853.

(2) A congregation established at Sens, in 1838, for the work of teaching and the care of the sick in their own homes, the direction of asylums, boarding-schools, etc.; it received state authorization in 1853. Under the mother-house at St-Colombe-les-Sens are over 36 filial establishments.

(3) Sisters of the Holy Childhood of Jesus and Mary of Ste-Chrétienne, known also as Sisters of Ste-Chrétienne, founded in 1807 by Mme Anne-Victoire Méjanes, née Tailleux, for the education of girls and the care of the sick poor. At the invitation of Bishop Jauffret of Metz, Mme Méjanes and her community went from Argancy to Metz and took up their abode in the Abbey of St. Glossinde, where, on 20 April, 1807, they bound themselves by vow to follow the statutes drawn up for them by the bishop. Their numbers soon increased until now (1910) there are about 1400 sisters in over 809 houses. The religious are divided into choir and lay sisters, the latter occupied with the domestic care of their various institutions, the former engaged in the works peculiar to higher schools, industrial schools, and orphanages. The vows are made annually for ten years, after which final vows are taken. The congregation received the approval of the Holy See in 1888, and in 1899 its statutes were granted papal approbation. The sisters have houses in Lorraine, France, Austria, Belgium, England, and the United States. In the United States about 90 sisters have charge of 5 schools in the Archdiocese of Boston, with a total attendance of 2400. There is a novitiate of the congregation in Salem, Massachusetts.

Heimbucher, Orden und Kongregationen (Paderborn, 1908); The Official Catholic Directory (1910).

F.M. RUDGE

Jesus Christ

Origin of the Name of Jesus
In this article, we shall consider the two words -- "Jesus" and "Christ" -- which compose the Sacred Name.

The Holy Name of Jesus
We give honour to the Name of Jesus, because it reminds us of all the blessings we receive through our Holy Redeemer.

Early Historical Documents Concerning Jesus Christ
In this article, we discuss the ancient historical documents -- pagan, Jewish, and Christian -- referring to Christ's life and work.

Chronology of the Life of Christ
In this article, we shall endeavour to establish the absolute and relative chronology of our Lord's life.

The Character of Jesus Christ
Here we consider the character of Jesus as manifested first in His relation to men, then in His relation to God.

The Mystery of the Incarnation
The Incarnation is the mystery and dogma of the Word made Flesh.

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ
Resurrection is the rising again from the dead, the resumption of life. In this article, we shall treat of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, including its characteristics and importance.

Devotion to the Sacred Heart of Jesus
Devotion to the Sacred Heart is but a special form of devotion to Jesus.

Christology Christology is that part of theology which deals with Our Lord Jesus Christ. In its full extent it comprises the doctrines concerning both the person of Christ and His works; but in the present article we shall limit ourselves to a consideration of the person of Christ.

Origin of the Name of Jesus Christ

In this article, we shall consider the two words which compose the Sacred Name.

JESUS

The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah is salvation." Though the name in one form or another occurs frequently in the Old Testament, it was not borne by a person of prominence between the time of Josue, the son of Nun and Josue, the high priest in the days of Zorobabel. It was also the name of the author of Ecclesiaticus of one of Christ's ancestors mentioned in the genealogy, found in the Third Gospel (Luke 3:29), and one of the St. Paul's companions (Colossians 4:11). During the Hellenizing period, Jason, a purely Greek analogon of Jesus, appears to have been adopted by many (I Machabees 8:17; 12:16; 14:22; II Machabees 1:7; 2:24; 4:7-26; 5:5-10; Acts 17:5-9; Romans 16:21). The Greek name is connected with verb iasthai, to heal; it is therefore, not surprising that some of the Greek Fathers allied the word Jesus with same root (Eusebius, "Dem. Ev.", IV; cf. Acts 9:34; 10:38). Though about the time of Christ the name Jesus appears to have been fairly common (Josephus, "Ant.", XV, ix, 2; XVII, xiii, 1; XX, ix, 1; "Bel. Jud.", III, ix, 7; IV, iii, 9; VI, v, 5; "Vit.", 22) it was imposed on our Lord by God's express order (Luke 1:31; Matthew 1:21), to foreshow that the Child was destined to "save his people from their sins." Philo ("De Mutt. Nom.", 21) is therefore, right when he explains Iesous as meaning soteria kyrion; Eusebius (Dem., Ev., IV, ad fin.; P.G., XXII, 333) gives the meaning Theou soterion; while St. Cyril of Jerusalem interprets the word as equivalent to soter (Cat., x, 13; P.G., XXXIII, 677). This last writer, however, appears to agree with Clement of Alexandria in considering the word Iesous as of Greek origin (Paedag., III, xii; P.G., VIII, 677); St. Chrysostom emphasizes again the Hebrew derivation of the word and its meaning soter (Hom., ii, 2), thus agreeing with the exegesis of the angel speaking to St. Joseph (Matthew 1:21).

CHRIST

The word Christ, Christos, the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Messias, means "anointed." According to the Old Law, priests (Exodus 29:29; Leviticus 4:3), kings (I Kings 10:1; 24:7), and prophets (Isaias 61:1) were supposed to be anointed for their respective offices; now, the Christ, or the Messias, combined this threefold dignity in His Person. It is not surprising, therefore, that for centuries the Jews had referred to their expected Deliverer as "the Anointed"; perhaps this designation alludes to Isaias 61:1, and Daniel 9:24-26, or even to Psalms 2:2; 19:7; 44:8. Thus the term Christ or Messias was a title rather than a proper name: "Non proprium nomen est, sed nuncupatio potestatis et regni", says Lactantius (Inst. Div., IV, vii). The Evangelists recognize the same truth; excepting Matthew 1:1, 18; Mark 1:1; John 1:17; 17:3; 9:22; Mark 9:40; Luke 2:11; 22:2, the word Christ is always preceded by the article. Only after the Resurrection did the title gradually pass into a proper name, and the expression Jesus Christ or Christ Jesus became only one designation. But at this stage the Greeks and Romans understood little or nothing about the import of the word anointed; to them it did not convey any sacred conception. Hence they substituted Chrestus, or "excellent", for Christians or "anointed", and Chrestians instead of "Christians." There may be an allusion to this practice in I Peter 2:3; hoti chrestos ho kyrios, which is rendered "that the Lord is sweet." Justin Martyr (Apol., I, 4), Clement of Alexandria (Strom., II, iv, 18), Tertullian (Adv. Gentes, II), and Lactantius (Int. Div., IV, vii, 5), as well as St. Jerome (In Gal., V, 22), are acquainted with the pagan substitution of Chrestes for Christus, and are careful to explain the new term in a favourable sense. The pagans made little or no effort to learn anything accurate about Christ and the Christians; Suetonius, for instance, ascribes the expulsion of the Jews from Rome under Claudius to the constant instigation of sedition by Chrestus, whom he conceives as acting in Rome the part of a leader of insurgents.

The use of the definite article before the word Christ and its gradual development into a proper name show the Christians identified the bearer with the promised Messias of the Jews. He combined in His person the offices of prophet (John 6:14; Matthew 13:57; Luke 13:33; 24:19) of king (Luke 23:2; Acts 17:7; I Corinthians 15:24; Apocalypse 15:3), and of priest (Hebrew 2:17; etc.); he fulfilled all the Messianic predictions in a fuller and a higher sense than had been given them by the teachers of the Synagogue.

A. J. MAAS

Early Historical Documents on Jesus Christ

The historical documents referring to Christ's life and work may be divided into three classes: pagan sources, Jewish sources, and Christian sources. We shall study the three in succession.

I. PAGAN SOURCES

The non-Christian sources for the historical truth of the Gospels are both few and polluted by hatred and prejudice. A number of reasons have been advanced for this condition of the pagan sources:

• The field of the Gospel history was remote Galilee;
• the Jews were noted as a superstitious race, if we believe Horace (Credat Judoeus Apella, I, Sat., v, 100);
• the God of the Jews was unknown and unintelligible to most pagans of that period;
• the Jews in whose midst Christianity had taken its origin were dispersed among, and hated by, all the pagan nations;
• the Christian religion itself was often confounded with one of the many sects that had sprung up in Judaism, and which could not excite the interest of the pagan spectator.

It is at least certain that neither Jews nor Gentiles suspected in the least the paramount importance of the religion, the rise of which they witnessed among them. These considerations will account for the rarity and the asperity with which Christian events are mentioned by pagan authors. But though Gentile writers do not give us any information about Christ and the early stages of Christianity which we do not possess in the Gospels, and though their statements are made with unconcealed hatred and contempt, still they unwittingly prove the historical value of the facts related by the Evangelists.

We need not delay over a writing entitled the "Acts of Pilate", which must have existed in the second century (Justin, "Apol"., I, 35), and must have been used in the pagan schools to warn boys against the belief of Christians (Euseb., "Hist. Eccl.", I, ix; IX, v); nor need we inquire into the question whether there existed any authentic census tables of Quirinius.

A. Tacitus

We possess at least the testimony of Tacitus (A.D. 54-119) for the statements that the Founder of the Christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the Romans, had been put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius; that His religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout Judea where it had originated, but even in Rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickness and shamelessness; furthermore, that Nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of Rome by charging the Christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy. Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which Nero subjected the Christians (Ann., XV, xliv). The Roman writer confounds the Christians with the Jews, considering them as a especially abject Jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the Jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he Hebrew people (Hist., V, iii, iv).

B. Suetonius

Another Roman writer who shows his acquaintance with Christ and the Christians is Suetonius (A.D. 75-160). It has been noted that Suetonius considered Christ (Chrestus) as a Roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54): "Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes (Claudius) Roma expulit" (Clau., xxv). In his life of Nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the Christians: "Multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . afflicti Christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (Nero, xvi). The Roman writer does not understand that the Jewish troubles arose from the Jewish antagonism to the Messianic character of Jesus Christ and to the rights of the Christian Church.

C. Pliny the Younger

Of greater importance is the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan (about A.D. 61-115), in which the Governor of Bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the Christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their Christian belief, which appeared to the Roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the Christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to Christ, Whom they celebrated as their God in their early morning meetings (Ep., X, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius; Pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the Christians, admires their constancy in the Faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of Christ (carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere).

D. Other pagan writers

The remaining pagan witnesses are of less importance: In the second century Lucian sneered at Christ and the Christians, as he scoffed at the pagan gods. He alludes to Christ's death on the Cross, to His miracles, to the mutual love prevailing among the Christians ("Philopseudes", nn. 13, 16; "De Morte Pereg"). There are also alleged allusions to Christ in Numenius (Origen, "Contra Cels", IV, 51), to His parables in Galerius, to the earthquake at the Crucifixion in Phlegon (Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 14). Before the end of the second century, the logos alethes of Celsus, as quoted by Origen (Contra Cels., passim), testifies that at that time the facts related in the Gospels were generally accepted as historically true. However scanty the pagan sources of the life of Christ may be, they bear at least testimony to His existence, to His miracles, His parables, His claim to Divine worship, His death on the Cross, and to the more striking characteristics of His religion.

II. JEWISH SOURCES

A. Philo

Philo, who dies after A.D. 40, is mainly important for the light he throws on certain modes of thought and phraseology found again in some of the Apostles. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., II, iv) indeed preserves a legend that Philo had met St. Peter in Rome during his mission to the Emperor Caius; moreover, that in his work on the contemplative life he describes the life of the Christian Church in Alexandria founded by St. Mark, rather than that of the Essenes and Therapeutae. But it is hardly probable that Philo had heard enough of Christ and His followers to give an historical foundation to the foregoing legends.

B. Josephus

The earlist non-Christian writer who refers Christ is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus; born A.D. 37, he was a contemporary of the Apostles, and died in Rome A.D. 94. Two passages in his "Antiquities" which confirm two facts of the inspired Christian records are not disputed. In the one he reports the murder of "John called Baptist" by Herod (Ant., XVIII, v, 2), describing also John's character and work; in the other (Ant., XX, ix, 1) he disappoves of the sentence pronounced by the high priest Ananus against "James, brother of Jesus Who was called Christ." It is antecedently probable that a writer so well informed as Josephus, must have been well acquainted too with the doctrine and the history of Jesus Christ. Seeing, also, that he records events of minor importance in the history of the Jews, it would be surprising if he were to keep silence about Jesus Christ. Consideration for the priests and Pharisees did not prevent him from mentioning the judicial murders of John the Baptist and the Apostle James; his endeavour to find the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies in Vespasian did not induce him to pass in silence over several Jewish sects, though their tenets appear to be inconsistent with the Vespasian claims. One naturally expects, therefore, a notice about Jesus Christ in Josephus. Antiquities XVIII, iii, 3, seems to satisfy this expectation:

About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed it is right to call Him man; for He was a worker of astonishing deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and He drew to Himself many Jews (many also of Greeks. This was the Christ.) And when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him (for He appeared to them alive again on the third day, the holy prophets having foretold this and countless other marvels about Him.) The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day.

A testimony so important as the foregoing could not escape the work of the critics. Their conclusions may be reduced to three headings: those who consider the passage wholly spurious; those who consider it to be wholly authentic; and those who consider it to be a little of each.

Those who regard the passage as spurious

First, there are those who consider the whole passage as spurious. The principal reasons for this view appear to be the following:

• Josephus could not represent Jesus Christ as a simple moralist, and on the other hand he could not emphasize the Messianic prophecies and expectations without offending the Roman susceptibilities;
• the above cited passage from Josephus is said to be unknown to Origen and the earlier patristic writers;
• its very place in the Josephan text is uncertain, since Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., II, vi) must have found it before the notices concerning Pilate, while it now stands after them.

But the spuriousness of the disputed Josephan passage does not imply the historian's ignorance of the facts connected with Jesus Christ. Josephus's report of his own juvenile precocity before the Jewish teachers (Vit., 2) reminds one of the story of Christ's stay in the Temple at the age of twelve; the description of his shipwreck on his journey to Rome (Vit., 3) recalls St. Paul's shipwreck as told in the Acts; finally his arbitrary introduction of a deceit practised by the priests of Isis on a Roman lady, after the chapter containing his supposed allusion to Jesus, shows a disposition to explain away the virgin birth of Jesus and to prepare the falsehoods embodied in the later Jewish writings.

Those who regard the passage as authentic, with some spurious additions

A second class of critics do not regard the whole of Josephus's testimony concerning Christ as spurious but they maintain the interpolation of parts included above in parenthesis. The reasons assigned for this opinion may be reduced to the following two:

• Josephus must have mentioned Jesus, but he cannot have recognized Him as the Christ; hence part of our present Josephan text must be genuine, part must be interpolated.
• Again, the same conclusion follows from the fact that Origen knew a Josephan text about Jesus, but was not acquainted with our present reading; for, according to the great Alexandrian doctor, Josephus did not believe that Jesus was the Messias ("In Matth.", xiii, 55; "Contra Cels.", I, 47).

Whatever force these two arguments have is lost by the fact that Josephus did not write for the Jews but for the Romans; consequently, when he says, "This was the Christ", he does not necessarily imply that Jesus was the Christ considered by the Romans as the founder of the Christian religion.

Those who consider it to be completely genuine

The third class of scholars believe that the whole passage concerning Jesus, as it is found today in Josephus, is genuine. The main arguments for the genuineness of the Josephan passage are the following:

• First, all codices or manuscripts of Josephus's work contain the text in question; to maintain the spuriousness of the text, we must suppose that all the copies of Josephus were in the hands of Christians, and were changed in the same way.
• Second, it is true that neither Tertullian nor St. Justin makes use of Josephus's passage concerning Jesus; but this silence is probably due to the contempt with which the contemporary Jews regarded Josephus, and to the relatively little authority he had among the Roman readers. Writers of the age of Tertullian and Justin could appeal to living witnesses of the Apostolic tradition.
• Third, Eusebius ("Hist. Eccl"., I, xi; cf. "Dem. Ev.", III, v) Sozomen (Hist. Eccl., I, i), Niceph. (Hist. Eccl., I, 39), Isidore of Pelusium (Ep. IV, 225), St. Jerome (catal.script. eccles. xiii), Ambrose, Cassiodorus, etc., appeal to the testimony of Josephus; there must have been no doubt as to its authenticity at the time of these illustrious writers.
• Fourth, the complete silence of Josephus as to Jesus would have been a more eloquent testimony than we possess in his present text; this latter contains no statement incompatible with its Josephan authorship: the Roman reader needed the information that Jesus was the Christ, or the founder of the Christian religion; the wonderful works of Jesus and His Resurrection from the dead were so incessantly urged by the Christians that without these attributes the Josephan Jesus would hardly have been acknowledged as the founder of Christianity.

All this does not necessarily imply that Josephus regarded Jesus as the Jewish Messias; but, even if he had been convinced of His Messiahship, it does not follow that he would have become a Christian. A number of posssible subterfuges might have supplied the Jewish historian with apparently sufficient reasons for not embracing Christianity.

C. Other Jewish Sources

The historical character of Jesus Christ is also attested by the hostile Jewish literature of the subsequent centuries. His birth is ascribed to an illicit ("Acta Pilati" in Thilo, "Codex apocryph. N.T., I, 526; cf. Justin, "Apol.", I, 35), or even an adulterous, union of His parents (Origen, "Contra Cels.," I, 28, 32). The father's name is Panthera, a common soldier (Gemara "Sanhedrin", viii; "Schabbath", xii, cf. Eisenmenger, "Entdecktes Judenthum", I, 109; Schottgen, "Horae Hebraicae", II, 696; Buxtorf, "Lex. Chald.", Basle, 1639, 1459, Huldreich, "Sepher toledhoth yeshua hannaceri", Leyden, 1705). The last work in its final edition did not appear before the thirteenth century, so that it could give the Panthera myth in its most advanced form. Rosch is of opinion that the myth did not begin before the end of the first century.

The later Jewish writings show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the Holy Innocents (Wagenseil, "Confut. Libr.Toldoth", 15; Eisenmenger op. cit., I, 116; Schottgen, op. cit., II, 667), with the flight into Egypt (cf. Josephus, "Ant." XIII, xiii), with the stay of Jesus in the Temple at the age of twelve (Schottgen, op. cit., II, 696), with the call of the disciples ("Sanhedrin", 43a; Wagenseil, op. cit., 17; Schottgen, loc. cit., 713), with His miracles (Origen, "Contra Cels", II, 48; Wagenseil, op. cit., 150; Gemara "Sanhedrin" fol. 17); "Schabbath", fol. 104b; Wagenseil, op.cit., 6, 7, 17), with His claim to be God (Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. cit., I, 152; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699) with His betrayal by Judas and His death (Origen, "Contra cels.", II, 9, 45, 68, 70; Buxtorf, op. cit., 1458; Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; Eisenmenger, loc. cit., 185; Schottgen, loc. cit.,699 700; cf."Sanhedrin", vi, vii). Celsus (Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 55) tries to throw doubt on the Resurrection, while Toldoth (cf. Wagenseil, 19) repeats the Jewish fiction that the body of Jesus had been stolen from the sepulchre.

III. CHRISTIAN SOURCES

Among the Christian sources of the life of Jesus we need hardly mention the so called Agrapha and Apocrypha. For whether the Agrapha contain Logia of Jesus, or refer to incidents in His life, they are either highly uncertain or present only variations of the Gospel story. The chief value of the Apocrypha consists in their showing the infinite superiority of the Inspired Writings by contrasting the coarse and erroneous productions of the human mind with the simple and sublime truths written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.

Among the Sacred Books of the New Testament, it is especially the four Gospels and the four great Epistles of St. Paul that are of the highest importance for the construction of the life of Jesus.

The four great Pauline Epistles (Romans, Galatians, and First and Second Corinthinas) can hardly be overestimated by the student of Christ's life; they have at times been called the "fifth gospel"; their authenticity has never been assailed by serious critics; their testimony is also earlier than that of the Gospels, at least most of the Gospels; it is the more valuable because it is incidental and undesigned; it is the testimony of a highly intellectual and cultured writer, who had been the greatest enemy of Jesus, who writes within twenty-five years of the events which he relates. At the same time, these four great Epistles bear witness to all the most important facts in the life of Christ: His Davidic dscent, His poverty, His Messiahship, His moral teaching, His preaching of the kingdom of God, His calling of the apostles, His miraculous power, His claims to be God, His betrayal, His institution of the Holy Eucharist, His passion, crucifixion, burial, resurrection, His repeated appearances (Romans 1:3-4; 5:11; 8:2-3; 8:32; 9:5; 15:8; Galatians 2:17; 3:13; 4:4; 5:21; First Corinthians 6:9; 13:4; etc.). However important the four great Epistles may be, the gospels are still more so. Not that any one of them offers a complete biography of Jesus, but they account for the origin of Christianity by the life of its Founder. Questions like the authenticity of the Gospels, the relation between the Synoptic Gospels, and the Fourth, the Synoptic problem, must be studied in the articles referring to these respective subjects.

A.J. MAAS

Chronology of the Life of Jesus Christ

In the following paragraphs we shall endeavour to establish the absolute and relative chronology of our Lord's life, i.e. we shall show first how certain facts connected with the history of Jesus Christ fit in with the course of universal history, and secondly how the rest of the life of Jesus must be arranged according to the inter-relation of its single elements.

I. ABSOLUTE CHRONOLOGY

The incidents whose absolute chronology may be determined with more or less probability are the year of Christ's nativity, of the beginning of His public life, and of His death. As we cannot fully examine the data entering into these several problems, the reader ought to compare what has been said on these points in the article Biblical Chronology.

A. The Nativity

St. Matthew (2:1) tells us that Jesus was born "in the days of King Herod". Josephus (Ant., XVII, viii, 1) informs us that Herod died after ruling thirty four years de facto, thirty seven years de jure. Now Herod was made rightful king of Judea a.d. 714, while he began his actual rule after taking Jerusalem a.d. 717. As the Jews reckoned their years from Nisan to Nisan, and counted fractional parts as an entire year, the above data will place the death of Herod in a.d. 749, 750, 751. Again, Josephus tells us from that an eclipse of the moon occurred not long before Herod's death; such an eclipse occurred from 12 to 13 March, a.d. 750, so that Herod must have died before the Passover of that year which fell on 12 April (Josephus, "Ant"., iv, 4; viii, 4). As Herod killed the children up to two years old, in order to destroy the new born King of the Jews, we are led to believe that Jesus may have been born a.d. 747, 748, 749. The enrollment under Cyrinus mentioned by St. Luke in connection with the nativity of Jesus Christ, and the remarkable astronomical conjunction of Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn in Pisces, in the spring of a.d. 748, will not lead us to any more definite result.

B. Beginning of the Public Ministry

The date of the beginning of Christ's ministry may be calculated from three different data found respectively in Luke 3:23; Josephus, "Bel. Jud." I, xxi, 1; or "Ant.", XV, ii, 1; and Luke 3:1.

The first of these passages reads: "And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty years". The phrase "was beginning" does not qualify the following expression "about the age of thirty years", but rather indicates the commencement of the public life. As we have found that the birth of Jesus falls within the period 747-749 a.d., His public life must begin about 777-779 a.d.

Second, when, shortly before the first Pasch of His public life, Jesus had cast the buyers and sellers out of the Temple, the Jews said: "Six and forty years was this temple in building" (John 2:20). Now, according to the testimony of Josephus (loc. cit.), the building of the Temple began in the fifteenth year of Herod's actual reign or in the eighteenth of his reign de jure, i.e. 732 a.d.; hence, adding the forty six years of actual building, the Pasch of Christ's first year of public life must have fallen in 778 a.d.

Third, the Gospel of St. Luke (3:1) assigns the beginning of St. John the Baptist's mission to the "fifteenth year of the Tiberius Caesar". Augustus, the predecessor of Tiberius, died 19 August, 767 a.d., so that the fifteenth year of Tiberius's independent reign is 782 a.d.; but then Tiberius began to be associate of Augustus in a.d. 764, so that the fifteenth year reckoned from this date falls in a.d. 778. Jesus Christ's public life began a few months later, i.e. about a.d. 779.

C. The Year of the Death of Christ

According to the Evangelists, Jesus suffered under the high priest Caiphas (a.d. 772-90, or A.D. 18-36), during the governorship of Pontius Pilate a.d. 780-90). But this leaves the time rather indefinite. Tradition, the patristic testimonies for which have been collected by Patrizi (De Evangeliis), places the death of Jesus in the fifteenth (or sixteenth) year of Tiberius, in the consulship of the Gemini, forty-two years before the destruction of Jerusalem, and twelve years before the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles. We have already seen that the fifteenth year of Tiberius is either 778 or 782, according to its computation from the beginning of Tiberius's associate or sole reign; the consulship of the Gemini (Fufius and Rubellius) fell in a.d. 782; the forty second year before the destruction of Jerusalem is A.D. 29, or a.d. 782, twelve years before the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles brings us to the same year, A.D. 29 or a.d. 782, since the conversion of Cornelius, which marks the opening of the Gentile missions, fell probably in A.D. 40 or 41.

D. The Day of the Death of Christ

Jesus died on Friday, the fifteenth day of Nisan. That He died on Friday is clearly stated by Mark (xv, 42), Luke (xxiii, 54), and John (xix, 31). The few writers who assign another day for Christ's death are practically lost in the multitude of authorities who place it on Friday. What is more, they do not even agree among themselves: Epiphanius, e.g., places the Crucifixion on Tuesday; Lactantius, on Saturday; Westcott, on Thursday; Cassiodorus and Gregory of Tours, not on Friday. The first three Evangelists are equally clear about the date of the Crucifixion. They place the Last Supper on the fourteenth day of Nisan, as may be seen from Matt., xxvi, 17, 20; Mark, xiv, 12 17; Luke, xxii, 7 14. Nor can there be any doubt about St. John's agreement with the Synoptic Evangelists on the question of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion. The supper was held "before the festival day of the Pasch" (John, xiii, 1), i. e. on 14 Nisan, as may be seen from Matt., xxii, 7-14. Nor can there be any doubt about St. John's agreement with the Synoptic Evangelists on the question of the Last Supper and the Crucifixion. The Supper was held "before the festival day of the pasch" (John, xiii, 1), i.e. on 14 Nisan, since the sacrificial day was computed according to the Roman method (Jovino, 123 sqq., 139 sqq.). Again, some disciples thought that Judas left the supper table because Jesus had said to him: "Buy those things which we have need of for the festival day: or that he should give something to the poor" (John, xiii, 29). If the Supper had been held on 13 Nisan this belief of the disciples can hardly be understood, since Judas might have made his purchases and distributed his alms on 14 Nisan; there would have been no need for his rushing into the city in the middle of the night. On the day of Christ's Crucifixion the Jews "went not into the hall, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the pasch" (John, xviii, 28). The pasch which the Jews wished to eat could not have been the paschal lamb, which was eaten on 14 Nisan, for the pollution contracted by entering the hall would have ceased at sundown, so that it would not have prevented them from sharing in the paschal supper. The pasch which the Jews had in view must have been the sacrificial offerings (Chagighah), which were called also pasch and were eaten on 15 Nisan. Hence this passage places the death of Jesus Christ on the fifteenth day of Nisan. Again, Jesus is said to have suffered and died on the "parasceve of the pasch", or simply on the "parasceve" (John, xix, 14, 31); as "parasceve" meant Friday, the expression "parasceve" denotes Friday on which the pasch happened to fall, not the before the pasch. Finally, the day following the parasceve on which Jesus died is called "a great sabbath day" (John, xix, 31), either to denote its occurrence in the paschal week or to distinguish it from the preceding pasch, or day of minor rest.

II. RELATIVE CHRONOLOGY

No student of the life of Jesus will question the chronological order of its principal divisions: infancy, hidden life, public life, passion, glory. But the order of events in the single divisions is not always clear beyond dispute.

A. The Infancy of Jesus

The history of the infancy, for instance, is recorded only in the First Gospel and in the Third. Each Evangelist contents himself with five pictures:

• St. Matthew describes the birth of Jesus, the adoration of the Magi, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the Holy Innocents, and the return to Nazareth.
• St. Luke gives a sketch of the birth, of the adoration of the shepherds, of the circumcision, of the purification of the Virgin, and of the return to Nazareth.

The two Evangelists agree in the first and the last of these two series of incidents (moreover, all scholars place the birth, adoration of the shepherds, and the circumcision before the Magi), but how are we to arrange the intervening three events related by St. Matthew with the order of St. Luke? We indicate a few of the many ways in which the chronogical sequence of these facts has been arranged.

1. The birth, the adoration of the shepherds, the circumcision, the adoration of the Magi, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the Innocents, the purification, the return to Nazareth. This order implies that either the purification was delayed beyond the fortieth day, which seems to contradict Luke, ii, 22 sqq., or that Jesus was born shortly before Herod's death. so that the Holy Family could return from Egypt within forty days after the birth of Jesus. Tradition does not seem to favour this speedy return.

2. The birth, the adoration of the shepherds, the circumcision, the adoration of the Magi, the purification, the flight into Egypt, the slaughter of the Innocents, the return to Nazareth. According to this order the Magi either arrived a few days before the purification or they came on 6 January; but in neither case can we understand why the Holy Family should have offered the sacrifice of the poor, after receiving the offeings of the Magi. Moreover, the firsr Evangelist intimates that the angel appeared to St. Joseph soon after the departure of the Magi, and it is not at all probable that Herod should have waited long before inquiring concerning the whereabouts of the new born king. The difficulties are not overcome by placing the adoration of the Magi on the day before the purification; it would be more unlikely in that case that the Holy Family should offer the sacrifice of the poor.

3. As Luke 2:39 appears to exclude the possibility of placing the adoration of the Magi between the presentation and return to Nazareth, there are interpreters who have located the advent of the wise men, the flight to Egypt, the slaughter of the Innocents, and the return from Egypt after the events as told in St. Luke. They agree in the opinion that the Holy Family returned to Nazareth after the purification, and then left Nazareth in order to make their home in Bethlehem. Eusebius, Epiphanius, and some other ancient writers are willing to place the adoration of the Magi about two years after Christ's birth; Paperbroch and his followers allow about a year and thirteen days between the birth and the advent of the Magi; while Patrizi agrees with those who fix the advent of the Magi at about two weeks after the purification . The text of Matt., ii, 1, 2, hardly permits an interval of more than a year between the purification and the coming of the wise men; Patrizi's opinion appears to satisfy all the data furnished by the gospels, while it does not contradict the particulars added by tradition.

B. The Hidden Life of Jesus

It was in the seclusion of Nazareth that Jesus spent the greatest part of His earthly life. The inspired records are very reticent about this period: Luke, 2:40-52; Mark 6:3; John 6:42; 7:15, are about the only passages which refer to the hidden life. Some of them give us a general view of Christ's life: "The child grew, and grew in strength and wisdom; and the grace of God was in him" is the brief summary of the years following the return of the Holy Family after the ceremonial purification in the Temple. "Jesus advanced in wisdom, and age, and grace with God and men", and He "was subject to them" form the inspired outline of Christ's life in Nazareth after He had attained the age of twelve. "When he was twelve years old" Jesus accompanied His parents to Jerusalem, 'according to the custom of the feast'; When they returned, the child Jesus remained in Jerusalem; and his parents knew it not." After three days, they found him in the Temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, hearing them, and asking them questions." It was on this occasion that Jesus spoke the only words that have come down from the period of His hidden life: "How is it that you sought me? Did you not know, that I must be about my Father's business [or, "in my father's house"]?" The Jews tell us that Jesus had not passed through the training of he Rabbinic schools: "How doth this man know letters, having never learned?". The same question is asked by the people of Nazareth, who add, "Is not this the carpenter?" St. Justin is authority for the statement that Jesus specially made "ploughs and yokes' (Contra Tryph., 88). Though it is not certain that at the time of Jesus elementary schools existed in the Jewish villlages, it may be inferred from the Gospels that Jesus knew how to read (Luke 4:16) and write (John 8:6). At an early age He must have learned the so called Shema (Deut. 6:4), and the Hallel, or Psalms 113-118 (Hebr.); He must have been familiar with the other parts of the Scriptures too, especially the Psalms and the Prophetic Books, as He constantly refers to them in His public life. It is also asserted that Palestine at the time of Jesus Christ was practically bilingual, so that Christ must have spoken Aramaic and Greek; the indications that He was acquainted with Hebrew and Latin are rather slight. The public teaching of Jesus shows that He was a close observer of the sights and sounds of nature, and of the habits of all classes of men. For these are the usual sources of His illustrations. To conclude the hidden life of Jesus extending through thirty years is far different from what one should have expected in the case of a Person Who is adored by His followers as their God and revered as their Saviour; this is an indirect proof for the credibility of the Gospel story.

C. The Public Life of Jesus: Its Duration

The chronology of the public life offers a number of problems to the interpreter; we shall touch upon only two, the duration of the public life, and the successive journeys it contains.

There are two extreme views as to the length of the ministry of Jesus: St. Irenaeus (Contra Haer., II, xxii, 3-6) appears to suggest a period of fifteen years; the prophetic phrases, "the year of recompenses", "the year of my redemption" (Is., xxxiv, 8; lxiii, 4), appear to have induced Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Philastrius, Hilarion, and two or three other patristic writers to allow only one year for the public life. This latter opinion has found advocates among certain recent students: von Soden, for instance, defends it in Cheyne's "Encyclopaedia Biblica". But the text of the Gospels demands a more extensive duration. St. John's Gospel distinctly mentions three distinct paschs in the history of Christ's ministry (ii, 13; vi, 4; xi, 55). The first of the three occurs shortly after the baptism of Jesus, the last coincides with His Passion, so that at least two years must have intervened between the two events to give us the necessary room for the passover mentioned in vi, 4. Westcott and Hort omit the expression "the pasch" in vi, 4 to compress the ministry of Jesus within the space of one year; but all the manuscripts, the versions, and nearly all the Fathers testify for the reading "En de eggysto pascha heeorteton Ioudaion": "Now the pasch, the festival day of the Jews, was near at hand". Thus far then everything tends to favour the view of those writers and more recent commentators who extend the period of Christ's ministry a little over two years.

But a comparison of St. John's Gospel with the Synoptic Evangelists seems to introduce another pasch, indicated in the Fourth Gospel, into Christ's public life. John, iv, 45, relates the return of Jesus into Galilee after the first pasch of His public life in Jerusalem, and the same event is told by Mark, i, 14, and Luke iv, 14. Again the pasch mentioned in John, vi, 4 has its parallel in the "green grass" of Mark, vi, 39, and in the multiplication of loaves as told in Luke, ix, 12 sqq. But the plucking of ears mentioned in Mark, ii, 23, and Luke, vi, 1, implies another paschal season intervening between those expressly mentioned in John, ii, 13, and vi, 4. This shows that the public life of Jesus must have extended over four paschs, so that it must have lasted three years and a few months. Though the Fourth Gospel does not indicate this fourth pasch as clearly as the other three, it is not wholly silent on the question. The "festival day of the Jews" mentioned in John, v, 1, has been identified with the Feast of Pentecost, the Feast of Tabernacles, the Feast of Expiation, the Feast of the New Moon, the Feast of Purim, the Feast of Dedication, by various commentators; others openly confess that they cannot determine to which of the Jewish feasts this festival day refers. Nearly all difficulties will disappear if the festival day be regarded as the pasch, as both the text (heorte) and John, iv, 35 seem to demand (cf. Dublin Review, XXIII, 351 sqq.).

D. The Public Life of Jesus: His Journeys

The journeys made during His public life may be grouped under nine heads: the first six were mainly performed in Galilee and had Capharnaum for their central point; the last three bring Jesus into Judea without any pronounced central point. We cannot enter into the disputed questions connected with the single incidents of the various groups.

1. First Journey.
December, a.d. 778 - Spring, 779. (Cf. John, i, ii; Matthew, iii, iv; Mark, i; Luke, iii, iv.)
Jesus abandons His hidden life in Nazareth, and goes to Bethania across the Jordan, where He is baptized by John and receives the Baptist's first testimony to His Divine mission. He then withdraws into the desert of Judea, where He fasts for forty days and is tempted by the devil. After this He dwells in the neighbourhood of the Baptist's ministry, and receives the latter's second and third testimony; here too He wins His first disciples, with whom He journeys to the wedding feast at Cana in Galilee, where He performs His first miracle. Finally He transfers His residence, so far as there can be question of a residence in His public life, to Capharnaum, one of the principal thoroughfares of commerce and travel in Galilee.

2. Second Journey.
Passover, a.d. 779 - about Pentecost, 780. (Cf. John, ii-v; Mark, i-iii; Luke, iv-vii; Matt., iv-ix.)
Jesus goes from Capharnaum to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover; here he expels the buyers and sellers from the Temple, and is questioned by the Jewish authorities. Many believed in Jesus, and Nicodemus came to converse with Him during the night. After the festival days He remained in Judea till about the following December, during which period He received the fourth testimony from John who was baptizing at Ennon (A.V. Aenon). When the Baptist had been imprisoned in Machaerus, Jesus returned to Galilee by way of Samaria where He met the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well near Sichar; He delayed two days in this place, and many believed in Him. Soon after His return into Galilee we find Jesus again in Cana, where He heard the prayer who pleaded for the recovery of his dying son in Capharnaum. The rejection of Jesus by the people of Nazareth, whether at this time as, St. Luke intimates, or at a later period, as St. Mark seems to demand, or again both now and about eight months later, is an exegetical problem we cannot solve here. At any rate, shortly afterwards Jesus is mostly actively engaged in Capharnaum in teaching and healing the sick, restoring among others Peter's mother-in-law and a demoniac. On this occasion He called Peter and Andrew, James and John. Then followed a missionary tour through Galilee during which Jesus cured a leper; soon he again taught in Capharnaum, and was surrounded by such a multitude that a man sick of the palsy had to be let down through the roof in order to reach the Sacred Presence. After calling Matthew to the Apostleship, He went to Jerusalem for the second pasch occurring during His public life, it was on this occasion that He healed the man who been sick for thirty-eight years near the pool at Jerusalem. The charge of violating the Sabbath and Christ's answer were the natural effects of the miracle. The same charge is repeated shortly after the pasch; Jesus had returned to Galilee, and the disciples plucked some ripe ears in the corn fields. The question became more acute in the immediate future; Jesus had returned to Capharnaum, and there healed on the Sabbath day a man who had a withered hand. The Pharisees now make common cause with the Herodians in order to "destroy him". Jesus withdraws first to the Sea of Galilee, where He teaches and performs numerous miracles; then retires to the Mountain of Beatitudes, where He prays during the night, chooses His Twelve Apostles in the morning, and preaches the Sermon on the Mount. He is brought back to Capharnaum by the prayers of the centurion who asks and obtains the of his servant.

3. Third Journey.
About Pentecost, a.d. 780- Autumn, 780. (Cf. Luke, vii, viii; Mark, iii, iv; Matt., iv, viii, ix, xii, xiii.)
Jesus makes another missionary tour through Galilee; He resuscitates the son of the widow at Naim, and shortly afterwards receives the messengers sent by John from his prison in Machaerus. Then follows the scene of the merciful reception of the sinful woman who anoints the feet of the Lord while He rests at table in Magdala or perhaps in Capharnaum; for the rest of His missionary tour Jesus is followed by a band of pious women who minister to the wants of the Apostles. After returning to Capharnaum, Jesus expels the mute devil, is charged by the Pharisees with casting out devils by the prince of devils, and encounters the remonstrances of His kinsmen. Withdrawing to the sea, He preaches what may be called the "Lake Sermon", consisting of seven parables.

4. Fourth Journey.
Autumn, a.d. 780- about Passover, 781. (Cf. Luke, viii, ix; Mark, iv-vi; Matt., viii, ix, x, xiii, xiv.)
After a laborious day of ministry in the city of Capharnaum and on the lake, Jesus with His Apostles crosses the waters. As a great storm overtakes them, the frightened Apostles awaken their sleeping Master, Who commands the winds and the waves. Towards morning they meet in the country of the Gerasens, on the east of the lake, two demoniacs. Jesus expels the evil spirits, but allows them to enter into a herd of swine. The beasts destroy themselves in the waters of the lake, and frightened inhabitants beg Jesus not to remain among them. After returning to Capharnaum he heals the woman who had touched the hem of His garment, resuscitates the daughter of Jairus, and gives sight to two blind men. The second Gospel places here Christ's last visit to and rejection by the people of Nazareth. Then follows the ministry of the Apostles who are sent two by two, while Jesus Himself makes another missionary tour through Galilee. It seems to have been the martyrdom of John the Baptist that occasioned the return of the Apostles and their gathering around the Master in Capharnaum. But, however depressing this event may have been, it did not damp the enthusiasm of the Apostles over their success.

5. Fifth Journey.
Spring, a.d. 781. (Cf. John, vi; Luke, ix; Mark, vi; and Matt., xiv.)
Jesus invites the Apostles, tired out from their missionary labours, to rest awhile. They cross the northern part of the Sea of Galilee, but, instead of finding the desired solitude, they are met by multitudes of people who had preceded them by land or by boat, and who were eager for instruction. Jesus taught them throughout the day, and towards evening did not wish to dismiss them hungry. On the other hand, there were only five loaves and two fishes at the disposal of Jesus; after His blessing, these scanty supplies satisfied the hunger of five thousand men, besides women and children, and remnants filled twelve baskets of fragments. Jesus sent the Apostles back to their boats, and escaped from the enthusiastic multitudes, who wished to make Him king, into the mountain where He prayed till far into the night. Meanwhile the Apostles were facing a contrary wind till the fourth watch in the morning, when they saw Jesus walking upon the waters. The Apostles first fear, and then recognize Jesus; Peter walks upon the water as long as his confidence lasts; the storm ceases when Jesus has entered the boat. The next day brings Jesus and His Apostles to Capharnaum, where He speaks to the assembly about the Bread of Life and promises the Holy Eucharist, with the result that some of His followers leave Him, while the faith of His true disciples is strenghened.

6. Sixth Journey.
About May, a.d. 781- Sept., 781. (Cf. Lk., ix; Mk., vii-ix; Matt., xiv- xviii; John, vii.)
It may be owing to the enmity stirred up against Jesus by His Eucharistic discourse in Capharnaum that He began now a more extensive missionary tour than He had made in the preceding years of His life. Passing through the country of Genesar, He expressed His disapproval of the Pharisaic practices of legal purity. Within the boarders of Tyre and Sidon He exorcized the daughter of the Syrophenician woman. From here Jesus travelled first towards the north, then towards the east, then south-eastward through the northern part of Decapolis, probably along the foot of the Labanon, till He came to the eastern part of Galilee. While in Decapolis Jesus healed a deaf-mute, employing a ceremonial more elaborate than He had used at any of His previous miracles; in the eastern part of Galilee, probably not far from Dalmanutha and Magedan, He fed four thousand men, besides children and women, with seven loaves and a few little fishes, the remaining fragments filling seven baskets. The multitudes had listened for three days to the teaching of Jesus, previously to the miracle. In spite of the many cures performed by Jesus, during this journey, on the blind, the dumb, the lame, the maimed, and on many others, the Pharisees and Sadduces asked Him for a sign from heaven, tempting Him. He promised them the sign of Jonas the Prophet. After Jesus and the Apostles had crossed the lake, He warned them to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees; then they passed through Bethsaida Julias where Jesus gave sight to a blind man. Next we find Jesus in the confines of Caesarea Philippi, where Peter professes his faith in Christ, the Son of the living God, and in his turn receives from Jesus the promise of the power of the keys. Jesus here predicts His passion, and about a week later is transfigured before Peter, James, and John, probably on the top of Mt. Thabor. On descending from the mountain, Jesus exorcizes the mute devil whom His disciples had not been able to expel. Bending his way towards Capharnaum, Jesus predicts His Passion for the second time, and in the city pays the tribute-money for Himself and Peter. This occasions the discussion as to the greater in the kingdom of heaven, and the allied discourses. Finally, Jesus refuses His brethren's invitation to go publicly to the Feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem.

7. Seventh Journey.
Sept., a.d. 781- December, 781. (Cf. Luke, ix-xiii; Mark, x; Matt., vi, vii, viii, x, xi, xii, xxiv; John, vii-x.)
Jesus now "steadfastly set His face to go Jerusalem", and as the Samaritans refused Him hospitality, He had to take the east of the Jordan. While still in Galilee, He refused the discipleship of several half-hearted candidates, and about the same time He sent other seventy-two, two by two, before His face into every city and place whither He Himself was to come. Probably in the lower part of Peraea, the seventy-two returned with joy, rejoicing in the miraculous power that had been exercised by them. It must have been in the vicinity of Jericho that Jesus answered the lawer's question, "Who is my neighbour?" by the parable of the Good Samaritan. Next Jesus was received in the hospitable home of Mary and Martha, where He declares Mary to have chosen the better part. From Bethania went to Jerusalem for the Feast of Tabernacles, where he became involved in discussions with the Jews. The Scribes and Pharisees endeavoured to catch Him in the sentence which they asked Him to pronounce in the case of the woman taken in adultary. When Jesus had avoided this snare, He continued His discussions with the hostile Jews. Their enmity was intensified because Jesus restored sight to a blind man on the Sabbath day. Jesus appears to have His stay in Jerusalem with the beautiful discourse on the Good Shepherd. A little later He teaches His Apostles the Our Father, probably somewhere on Mt. Olivet. On a subsequent missionary tour through Judea and Peraea He defends Himself against the charges of Pharisees, and reproves their hypocrisy. On the same journey Jesus warned against hypocrisy, covetousness, worldly care; He exhorted to watchfulness, patience under contradictions, and to penance. About this time, too, He healed the woman who had the spirit of infirmity

8. Eighth Journey.
December, a.d. 781-February, 782. (Cf. Luke, xiii-xvii; John, x, xi.)
The Feast of Dedication brought Jesus again to Jerusalem, and occasioned another discussion with the Jews. This is followed by another missionary tour through Peraea, during which Jesus explained a number of important points of doctrine: the number of the elect, the choice of one's place at table, the guests to be invited, the parable of the great supper, resoluteness in the service of God, the parables of the hundred sheep, the lost groat, and the prodigal son, of the unjust steward, of Dives and Lazarus, of the unmerciful servant, besides the duty of fraternal correction, and the efficacy of faith. During this period, too, the Pharisees attempted to frighten Jesus with the menance of Herod's persecution; on his part, Jesus healed a man who had drospy, on a Sabbath day, while at table in the house of a certain prince of the Pharisees. Finally Mary and Martha send messengers to Jesus, asking Him to come and cure their brother Lazarus; Jesus went after two days, and resuscitated His friend who had been several days in the grave. The Jews are exasperated over this miracle, and they decree Jesus must die for the people. Hence He withdrew "into a country near the desert, unto a city that is called Ephrem".

9. Ninth Journey.
February, a.d. 782- Passover, 782. (Cf. Luke, xvii-xxii; Mark., x, xiv; Matt., xix-xxvi; John, xi, xii.)
This last journey took Jesus from Ephrem northward through Samaria, then eastward along the border of Galilee into Peraea, then southward through Peraea, westward across the Jordan, through Jericho, Bethania on Mt. Olivet, Bethphage, and finally to Jerusalem. While in the most northern part of the journey, He cured ten lepers; a little later, He answered the questions raised by the Pharisees concerning the kingdom of God. Then He urged the need of incessant prayer by proposing the parable of the unjust judge; here too belong the parable of the Pharisee and Publican, the discourse on marriage, on the attitude of the Church towards the children, on the right use of riches as illustrated by the story of the rich young ruler, and the parable of the labourers in the vineyard. After beginning His route towards Jerusalem, He predicted His Passion for the third time; James and John betray their ambition, but they are taught the true standard of greatness in the Church. At Jericho Jesus heals two blind men, and receives the repentance of Zacheus the publican; here He proposed also the parable of the pounds entrusted to the servants by the master. Six days before the pasch we find Jesus at Bethania on Mt. Olivet, as the guest of Simon the leper; Mary anoints His feet, and the disciples at the instigation of Judas are indignant at this seeming waste of ointment. A great multitude assembles at Bethania, not to see Jesus only but also Lazarus; hence the chief priests think of killing Lazarus too. On the following day Jesus solemnly entered Jerusalem and was received by the Hosanna cries of all classes of people. In the afternoon He met a delegation of Gentiles in the court of the Temple. On Monday Jesus curses the barren fig tree, and during the morning He drives the buyers and sellers from the Temple. On Tuesday the wonder of the disciples at the sudden withering of the fig tree provokes their Master's instruction on the efficacy of faith. Jesus answers the enemies' questions as to His authority; then He proposes the parable of the two sons, of the wicked husbandmen, and of the marriage feast. Next follows a triple snare: the politicians ask whether it is lawful to pay tribute to Caesar; the scoffers inquire whose wife a woman, who has had several husbands, will be after ressurection; the Jewish theologians propose the question: Which is the first commandment, the great commandment of the law? Then Jesus proposes His last question to the Jews: "What think you of Christ? whose son is he?" This is followed by the eightfold woe against the Scribes and Pharisees, and by the denunciation of Jerusalem. The last words of Christ in the Temple were expressions of praise for the poor widow who had made an offering of two mites in spite of her poverty. Jesus ended this day by uttering the prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem, His second coming, and the future judgement; these predictions are interrupted by the parable of the ten virgins and the talents. On Wednesday Jesus again predicted His Passion; probably it was on the same day that Judas made his agreement with the Jews to betray Jesus.

E. The Passion of Jesus: Its Preparation

The history of Christ's Passion comprises three parts: the preparation for the Passion, the trial of Jesus, and His death.

Jesus prepares His disciples for the Passion, He prepares Himself for the ordeal and His enemies prepare themselves for the destruction of Jesus.

1. Preparation of the Apostles. Jesus prepares His Apostles for the Passion by the eating of the paschal lamb, the institution of the Holy Eucharist, the concomitant ceremonies, and His lengthy discourses held during and after the Last Supper. Special mention should be made of the prediction of the Passion, and of the betrayal one of the Apostles and the denial by another. Peter, james, and John are prepared in a more particular manner by witnessing the sorrow of Jesus on Mt. Olivet.

2. Preparation of Jesus. Jesus must have found an indirect preparation in all He did and said to strengthen His Apostles. But the preparation that was pecularly His own consisted in His prayer in the grotto of His Agony where the angel came to strengthen Him. The sleep of His favoured Apostles during the hours of His bitter struggle must have prepared Him too for the complete abandonment He was soon to experience.

3. Preparation of the Enemies. Judas leaves the Master during the Last Supper. The chief priests and Pharisees hastily collect a detachment of the Roman cohort stationed in the castle of Antonia, of the Jewish temple-watch, and of the officials of the Temple. To these are added a number of the servants and dependents of the high-priest, and a miscellaneous multitude of fanatics with lanterns and torches, with swords and clubs, who were to follow the leadership of Judas. They took Christ, bound Him, and led Him to the high-priest's house.

F. The Passion of Jesus: The Trial

Jesus was tried first before an ecclesiastical and then before a civil tribunal.

1. Before Ecclesiastical Court. The ecclesiastical trial includes Christ's appearance before Annas, before Caiphas, and again before Caiphas, who appears to have acted in each case as head of the Sanhedrin. The Jewish court found Jesus guilty of blasphemy, and condemned Him to death, though its proceedings were illegal from more than one point of view. During the trial took place Peter's triple denial of Jesus; Jesus is insulted and mocked, especially between the second and third session; and after His final condemnation Judas despaired and met his tragic death.

2. Before the Civil Court. The civil trial, too, comprised three sessions, the first before Pilate, the second before Herod, the third again before Pilate. Jesus is not charged with blasphemy before the court of Pilate, but with stirring up the people, forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, and claiming to be Christ the king. Pilate ignores the first two charges; the third he finds harmless when he sees that Jesus does not claim royalty in the Roman sense of the word. But in order not to incur the odium of the Jewish leaders, the Roman governor sends his prisoner to Herod. As Jesus did not humour the curiosity of Herod, He was mocked and set at naught by the Tetrarch of Galilee and his court, and sent back to Pilate. The Roman procurator declares the prisoner innocent for the second time, but, instead of setting Him free, gives the people the alternative to choose either Jesus or Barabbas for their paschal freedman. Pilate pronounced Jesus innocent for the third time with the more solemn ceremony of washing his hands; he had recourse to a third scheme of ridding himself of the burden of pronouncing an unjust sentence against his prisoner. He had the prisoner scourged, thus annihilating, as far as human means could do so, any hope that Jesus could ever attain to the royal dignity. But even this device miscarried, and Pilate allowed his political ambition to prevail over his sense of evident justice; he condemned Jesus to be crucified.

G. The Passion of Jesus: His Death

Jesus carried His Cross to the place of execution. Simon of Cyrene is forced to assist Him in bearing the heavy burden. On the way Jesus addresses his last words to the weeping women who sympathized with His suffering. He is nailed to the Cross, his garments are divided, and an inscription is placed over His head. While His enemies mock Him, He pronounces the well-known "Seven Words". Of the two robbers crucified with Jesus, one was converted, and the other died impenitent. The sun was darkened, and Jesus surrendered His soul into the hands of His Father. The veil of the Temple was rent into two, the earth quaked, the rocks were riven, and many bodies of the saints that had slept arose and appeared to many. The Roman centurion testified that Jesus was indeed the Son of God. The Heart of Jesus was pierced so as to make sure of His death. The Sacred Body was taken from the Cross by Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus, and was buried in the new sepulchre of Joseph, and the Sabbath drew near.

H. The Glory of Jesus

After the burial of Jesus, the Holy women returned and prepared spices and ointments. The next day, the chief priests and Pharisees made the sepulchre secure with guards, sealing the stone. When the Sabbath was passed, the Holy women brought sweet spices that they might anoint Jesus. But Jesus rose early the first day of the week, and there was a great earthquake, and an angel descended from heaven, and rolled back the stone. The guards were struck with terror, and became as dead men. On arriving at the sepulchre the holy women found the grave empty; Mary Magdalen ran to tell the Apostles Peter and John, while the other women were told by an angel that the Lord had arisen from the dead. Peter and John hasten to the sepulchre, and find everything as Magdalen has reported. Magdalen too returns, and, while weeping at the sepulchre, is approached by the arisen Saviour Who appears to her and speaks with her. On the same day Jesus appeared to the other Holy Women, to Peter, to the two disciples on their way to Emmaus, and to all the Apostles excepting Thomas. A week later He appeared to all the Apostles, Thomas included; later still He appeared in Galilee near the Lake of Genesareth to seven disciples, on a mountain in Galilee to a multitude of disciples, to James, and finally to His disciples on the Mount Olivet whence He ascended into heaven. But these apparitions do not exhaust the record of the Gospels, according to which Jesus showed Himself alive after His Passion by many proofs, for forty days appearing to the disciples and speaking of the kingdom of God.

A.J. MAAS

The Character of Jesus Christ

The surpassing eminence of the character of Jesus has been acknowledged by men of the most varied type:

• Kant testifies to His ideal perfection;
• Hegel sees in Him the union of the human and the Divine;
• the most advanced sceptics do Him homage;
• Spinoza speaks of Him as the truest symbol of heavenly wisdom;
• the beauty and grandeur of His life overawe Voltaire;
• Napoleon I, at St. Helena, felt convinced that "Between him [Jesus] and whoever else in the world there is no possible term of comparison" (Montholon, "Récit de la Captivité de l'Empereur Napoléon").
• Rousseau testifies: "If the life and death of Socrates are those of a sage, the life and death of Jesus are those of a god."
• Strauss acknowledges: "He is the highest object we can possibly imagine with respect to religion, the being without whose presence in the mind perfect piety is impossible".
• To Renan "The Christ of the Gospels is the most beautiful incarnation of God in the most beautiful of forms. His beauty is eternal; his reign will never end."
• John Stuart Mill spoke of Jesus as "a man charged with a special, express, and unique commission from God to lead mankind to truth and virtue".

Not that the views of the foregoing witnesses are of any great importance for the theological student of the life of Jesus; but they show at least the impression made on the most different classes of men by the history of Christ. In the following paragraphs we shall consider the character of Jesus as manifested first in His relation to men, then in His relation to God.

A. JESUS IN HIS RELATION TO MEN

In His relation to men Jesus manifested certain qualities which were perceived by all, being subject to the light of reason; but other qualities were reserved for those who viewed Him in the light of faith. Both deserve a brief study.

(1) In the Light of Reason

There is no trustworthy tradition concerning the bodily appearance of Jesus, but this is not needed in order to obtain a picture of His character. It is true that at first sight the conduct of Jesus is so many-sided that His character seems to elude all description. Command and sympathy, power and charm, authority and affection, cheerfulness and gravity, are the some of the qualities that make the analysis impossible. The make-up of the Gospels does not facilitate the work. At first they appear to us a bewildering forest of dogmatic statements and moral principles; there is no system, no method, everything is occassional, everything fragmentary. The Gospels are neither a manual of dogma nor a treatise on casuistry, though they are the fountain of both. No wonder then the various investgators have arrived at entirely different conclusion at the study of Jesus. Some call Him a fanatic, others make Him a socialist, others again an anarchist, while many call Him a dreamer, a mystic, an Essene. But in this variety of views there are two main concepts under which the others may be summarized: Some consider Jesus an ascetic, others an aesthete; some emphasize His suffering, others His joyfulness; some identify Him with ecclesiasticism, others with humanism; some recognize in Him the prophetic picture of the Old Testament and the monastic of the New, others see in Him only gladness and poetry. There may be solid ground for both views; but they do not exhaust the character of Jesus. Both are only by-products which really existed in Jesus, but were not primarily intended; they are only enjoyed and suffered in passing, while Jesus strove to attain an end wholly different from either joy or sorrow.

(a) Strength

Considering the life of Jesus in the light of reason, His strength, His poise, and His grace are His most characteristic qualities. His strength shows itself in His manner of life, His decision, His authority. In His rugged, nomadic, homeless life there is no room for weakness or sentimentality. Indecision is rejected by Jesus on several occasions: "No man can serve two masters"; "He that is not with me, is against me"; Seek first the kingdom of God", these are some of the statements expressing Christ's attitude to indecision of will. Of Himself He said: "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me"; "I seek not my own will, but the will of him that sent me." The authority of the Master does not allow its power to be questioned; He calls to men in their boats, in their tax-booths, on their homes, "Follow me", and they look up into His face and obey. St. Mathew testifies, "The multitude...glorified God that gave such power to men"; St. Mark adds, "the kingdom of God comes to power"; St. Luke says, "Thou hast given him power over all flesh"; the Book of the Acts reads, "God anointed him...with power"; St. Paul too is impressed with "the power of our Lord Jesus". In His teaching Jesus does not argue, or prove, or threaten, like the Phrarisees, but He speaks like one having authority. Nowhere is Jesus merely a long-faced ascetic or a joyous comrade, we find Him everywhere to be leader of men, whose principles are built on a rock.

(b) Poise

It may be said that the strength of Christ's character gives rise to another quality which we may call poise. Reason is like the sails of the boat, the will is its rudder, and the feelings are the waves thrown upon either side of the ship as it passes through the waters. The will-power of Jesus is strong enough to keep a perfect equilibrium between His feelings and His reason; His body is the perfect instrument in the performance of His duty; His emotions are wholly subservient to the Will of His Father; it is the call of complying with His higher duties that prevents His austerity from becoming excessive. There is therefore a perfect balance or equilibrium in Jesus between the life of His body, of His mind, and of His emotions. His character is so rounded off that, at first sight, there remains nothing which could make it characteristic. This poise in the character of Jesus produces a simplicity which pervades every one of His actions. As the old Roman roads led stright ahead in spite of mountains and valleys, ascents and declivities, so does the life of Jesus flow quietly onward in accordance with the call of duty, in spite of pleasure or pain, honour or ignominy. Another trait in Jesus which may be considered as flowing from the poise of His character is His unalterable peace, a peace which may be ruffled but cannot be destroyed either by His inward feelings or outward encounters. And these personal qualities in Jesus are reflected in his teaching. He establishes an equilibrium between the rightousness of the Old Testament and the justice of the New, between the love and life of the former and those of the latter. He lops off indeed the Pharisaic conventionalism and externalism, but they were merely degenerated outgrowths; He urges the law of love, but shows that it embraces the whole Law and the Prophets; He promises life, but it consists not so much in our possession as in our capacity to use our possession. Nor can it be urged that the poise of Christ's teaching is destroyed by His three paradoxes of self-reliance, of service, and of idealism. The law of self-sacrifice inculcates that we shall find life by losing it; but the law of biological organisms, of physiological tissues, of intellectual achivements, and of economic processes shows that self-sacrifice is self-realization in the end. The second paradox is that of service: "Whosoever will be the greater among you, let him be your minister: and he that will be first among you, shall be your servant." But in the industrial and artistic world, too, the greatest men are those who have done most service. Thirdly, the idealism of Jesus is expressed in such words as "The life is more than the meat", and "Not in bread alone doth man live, but in every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God." But even our realistic age must grant that the reality of the law is its ideals, and again, that the world of the idealist is impossible only for the weak, while the strong character creates the world after which he strives. The character of Jesus therefore is the embodiment of both strength and poise. It thus verifies the definition given by such an involved writer as Emerson: "Character is centrality, the impossibility of being displaced or overset...The natural measure of this power is the resistence of circumstances."

(c) Grace

But if there were not a third essential element entering into the character of Jesus, it might not be attractive after all. Even saints are at times bad neighbours; we may like them, but sometimes we like them only at a distance. The character of Christ carries with it the trait of grace, doing away with all harshness and want of amiability. Grace is the unconstrained expression of the self-forgetting and kindly mind. It is a beautiful way of doing the right thing, in the right way, at the right time, therefore opens all hearts to its possessor. Sympathy is the widst channel through which grace flows, and the abundance of the stream testifies to the reserve of grace. Now Jesus sympathizes with all classes, with the rich and the poor, the learned and the ignorant, the happy and the sad; He moves with the same sense of familiarity among all classes of society. For the self-righteous Pharisees He has only the words, "Woe to you, hypocrites"; he disciples, "Unless you become as little children, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Plato and Aristotle are utterly unlike Jesus; they may speak of natural virtue, but we never find children in their arms. Jesus treats the publicans as His friends; He encourages the most tentative beginnings of moral growth. He chooses common fishermen for the corner -stones of His kingdom, and by His kindliness trains them to become the light of the world and the salt of the earth; He bends down to St. Peter whose character was a heap of sand rather than a solid "foundation, but He graciously forms Peter into the rock upon which to build his Church. After two of the Apostles had fallen, Jesus was gracious to both, though He saved only one, while the other destroyed himself. Women in need are not excluded from the general graciousness of Jesus; He receives the homage of the sinful woman, He consolves the sorrowing sisters Martha and Mary, He cures the mother-in -law of St. Peter and restores the health of numerous other women of Galilee, He has words of sympathy for the women of Jerusalem who bewailed His sufferings, He was subject to His mother till He reached man's estate, and when dying on the Cross commanded her to the care of His beloved disciple. The grace of the Master is also evident in the form of His teaching: He lays under contribution the simple phases of nature, the hen with her chickens, the gnat in the cup, the camel in the narrow street, the fig tree and its fruit, the fishermen sorting the catch. He meets with the lightest touch, approaching sometimes the play of humour and sometimes the thrust of irony, the simple doubts of His disciples, the selfish questions of His hearers, and the subtlest snares of his enemies. He feels no need of thrift in His benefits on the few as abundantly as the vastest multitudes. He flings out His parables into the world that those who have ears may hear. There is a prodigality in this manifestation of Christ's grace that can only be symbolized, but not equalled, by the waste of seed in the realm of nature.

(2) In the Light of Faith

In the light of faith the life of Jesus is an uninterrupted series of acts of love for man. It was love that impelled the Son of God to take on human nature, though He did so with the full consent of His Father: "For God so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son" (John, iii, 16). For thirty years Jesus shows His love by a life of poverty, labour, and hardship in the fulfillment of the duties of a common trademan. When His public ministry began, He simply spent Himself for the good of His neighbour, "doing good, and healing all that were oppressed by the devil" (Acts, x, 38). He shows a boundless compassion for all the infirmities of the body; He uses His miraculous power to heal the sick, to free the possessed, to resuscitate the dead. The moral weaknesses of man move His heart still more effectively; the woman at Jacob's well, Mathew the publican, Mary Magdalen the public sinner, Zacheus the unjust administrator, are only a few instances of sinners who received encouragement from the lips of Jesus. He is ready with forgiveness for all; the parable of the Prodigal Son illustrates His love for the sinner. In His work of teaching He is at the service of the poorest outcast of Galilee as well as of the theological celebrities of Jerusalem. His bitterest enemies are not excluded from the manifestations of His love; even while He is being crucified He prays for their pardon. The Scribes and Pharisees are treated severely, only because they stand in the way of His love. "Come to me, all you that labour, and are burdened, and I will refresh you" (Matt., xi, 28) is the message of His heart to poor suffering humanity. After laying down the rule, "Greater love than this no man hath, that a man lay down his life for his friends" (John, xv, 13), He surpasses as it were His own standard by dying for His enemies. Fulfilling the unconscious prophecy of the godless high-priest, "It is expedient for you that one man should die for the people" (John, xi, 50), He freely meets His sufferings which He could have easily avoided (Matt., xxvi, 53), undergoes the greatest insults and ignominies, passes through the most severe bodily pains, and sheds His blood for men "unto remission of sins" (Matt., xxvi, 28). But the love of Jesus embraced not only the spiritual welfare of men, it extended also to their temporal happiness: "Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt., vi, 33).

B. JESUS IN HIS RELATION TO GOD

Prescinding from the theological discussions which are usually treated in the theses "De Verbo Incarnato", we may consider the relations of Jesus to God under the headings of His sanctity and His Divinity.

(1) Sanctity of Jesus

From a nagative point of view, the sanctity of Jesus consists in His unspotted sinlessness. He can defy His enemies by asking, "Which of you shall convince me of sin?" (John, viii, 46). Even the evil spirits are forced to acknowledge Him as the Holy One of God (Mark, i, 24; Luke, iv, 34). His enemies charge Him with being a Samaritan, and having a devil (John, viii, 48), with being a sinner (John, ix, 24), a blasphemer (Matt., xxvi, 65), a violator of the Sabbath (John, ix, 16), a malefactor (John, xviii, 30), a disturber of the peace (Luke, xxiii, 5), a seducer (Matt., xxvii, 63). But pilate finds and declares Jesus innocent, and, when pressed by the enemies of Jesus to condemn Him, he washes his hands and exclaims before the assembled people, "I am innocent of the blood of this just man" (Matt., xxvii, 24). The Jewish authorities practically admit that they cannot prove any wrong against Jesus; they only insist, "We have a law; and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God" (John, xix, 7). The final charge urged against Christ by His bitterest enemies was His claim to be the Son of God.

The positive side of the sanctity of Jesus is well attested by His constant zeal in the service of God. At the age of twelve He asks His mother, "Did you not know, that I must be about my father's business?". He urges on His hearers the true adoration in spirit and in truth (John, iv, 23) required by His Father. Repeatedly He declares His entire dependence on His Father (John, v, 20, 30; etc.); He is faithful to the Will of His Father (John, viii, 29); He tells His disciples, "My meat is to do the will of him that sent me" (John, iv, 34). Even the hardest sacrifices do not prevent Jesus from complying with His Father's Will: "My Father, if this chalice may not pass away, but I must drink it, thy will be done" (Matt., xxvi, 42). Jesus honours His Father (John, ii, 17), and proclaims at the end of His life, "I have glorified thee on the earth" (John, xvii, 4). He prays almost incessantly to His Father (Mark, i, 35; vi, 46; etc.), and teaches His Apostles the Our Father (Matt., vi, 9). He always thanks His Father for His bounties (Matt., xi, 25; etc.), and in brief behaves throughout as only a most loving son can behave towards his beloved father. During His Passion one of His most intense sorrows is His feeling of abandonment by His Father (Mark, xv, 34), and at the point of death He joyfully surrenders His Soul into the hands of His Father (Luke, xxiii, 46).

(2) Divinity of Jesus

The Divinity of Jesus is proved by some writers by an appeal to prophecy and miracle. But, though Jesus fulfilled the prophecies of the Old Testament to the letter, He Himself appears to appeal to them mainly in proof of His Divine mission; He shows the Jews that He fulfills in His Person and His work all that had been foretold of the Messias. The prophecies uttered by Jesus Himself differ from the predictions of the Old Testament in that Jesus does not speak in the name of the Lord, like the seers of old, but in His own name. If it could be strictly proved that they were made in virtue of His own knowledge of the future, and of His own power to dispose of the current of events, the prophecies would prove His Divinity; as it is they prove at least that Jesus is a messenger of God, a friend of God, inspired by God. This is not the place to discuss the historical and philosophical truth of the miracles of Jesus, but we know that Jesus appeals to His works as bearing witness to the general truth of His mission (John, x, 25, 33, 38), and also for the verity of some particulr claims (Matt., ix, 6; Mark, ii, 10, 11; etc.) They show, therefore, at least that Jesus is a Divine legate and that His teaching is infallibly true.

Did Jesus teach that He is God? He certainly claimed to be the Messias (John, iv, 26), to fulfill the Messianic descriptions of the Old Testament (Matt., xi, 3-5; Luke, vii, 22-23; iv, 18-21), to be denoted by the current Messianic names, "king of israel" (Luke, xix, 38; etc), "Son of David" (Matt., ix, 27; etc), "Son of man" (passim), "he that cometh in the name of the Lord" (Matt., xxi, 9.etc). Moreover, Jesus claims to be greater than Abraham (John, viii, 53, 56), than Moses (Matt., xix, 8-9), than Solomon and Jonas (Matt., xii, 41-42); He habitually claims to be sent by God (John, v, 36, 37, 43; etc), calls God His Father (Luke, ii, 49; etc), and He willingly accepts the titles "Master" and "Lord" (John, xiii, 13, 14). He forgives sin in answer to the observation that God alone can forgive sin (Mark, ii, 7, 10; Luke, v, 21, 24; etc). He acts as the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt., xii, 8; etc), and tells St. Peter that as "Son" He is free from the duty of paying temple-tribute (Matt., xvii, 24, 25). From the beginning of His ministry he allows Nathanael to call Him "Son of God" (John, i, 49); the Apostles (Matt., xiv, 33) and Martha (John, xi, 27) give Him the same title. Twice He approves of Peter who calls Him "the Christ, the Son of God" (John, vi, 70), "Christ, the Son of the living God" (Matt., xvi, 16). Four distinct times does He proclaim Himself the Son of God; to the man born blind (John, x, 30, 36); before the two assemblies of the Jewish Sanhedrin on the night before His death (Matt., xxvi, 63-64; Mark, xiv, 61-62; Luke, xxii, 70). He does not manifest His Divine Sonship before Satan (Matt., iv, 3, 6) or before the Jews who are deriding Him (Matt., xxvii, 40). Jesus does not wish to teach the evil spirit the mystery of His Divinity; to the Jews He gives a greater sign than they are asking for. Jesus, therefore, applies to Himself, and allows others to apply to Him, the title "Son of God" in its full meaning. If there had been a misunderstanding He would have corrected it, even as Paul and Barnabas corrected those who took them for gods (Acts, xiv, 12-14).

Nor can it be said that the title "Son of God" denotes a merely adoptive sonship. The foregoing texts do not admit of such an interpretation. St. Peter, for instance, places his master above John the Baptist, Elias, and the Prophets (Matt., xvi, 13-17). Again, the Angel Gabriel declares that the Child to be born will be "the Son of the most High" and "Son of God" (Luke, i, 32, 35), in such a way that He will be without an earthly father. Mere adoption presupposes the existence of the child to be adopted; but St. Joseph is warned that "That which is conceived in her [Mary], is of the Holy Ghost" (Matt., i, 20); now one's being conceived by the operation of another implies one's natural relation of sonship to him. Moreover, the Divine Sonship claimed by Jesus is such that he and the Father are one (John, x, 30, 36); a merely adopted sonship does not constitute a physical unity between the son and his adoptive father. Finally if Jesus had claimed only an adoptive sonship, He would have deceived His judges; they could not have condemned Him for claiming a prerogative common to all pious Israelites. Harnack (Wesen des Christentums, 81) contends that the Divine Sonship claimed by Jesus is an intellectual relation to the Father, springing from special knowledge of God. This knowledge constitutes "the sphere of the Divine Sonship", and is implied in the words of Matt., xi, 27: "No one knoweth the Son, but the Father: neither doth any one know the Father, but the Son, and he to whom it shall please the Son to reveal him". But if the Divine Sonship of Christ is a mere intellectual relation, and if Christ is God in a most figurative sense, the Paternity of the Father and the Divinity of the Son will be reduced to a figure of speech. (See CHRISTOLOGY.)

A.J. MAAS

Religious of Jesus Mary

The Congregation of the Religious of Jesus Mary was founded at Lyons, France, in October, 1818, by Claudine Thevenet, in religion, Mother St. Ignatius. The constitutions were approved by Pius IX, 31 December, 1847. The object of this congregation is to give to young ladies a Christian education conformable to their social position; For this purpose the religious have boarding-schools and academies, and, in large cities, residences for ladies of the literary profession. Their establishments of various kinds are numerous: in France, before the expulsion of 1901, they were at Lyons, the birthplace of the congregation, at Le Puy, Rodes, and Remiremont. Owing to the religious persecution, the mother-house was transferred to Rome in September, 1901. Besides the mother-house on the Via Flaminia, the religious have opened a college, the Stella Viae, to give to young ladies the means of culture which a residence in Rome and the study of the fine arts, modern languages, European literature, and history afford. The Stella Viae is situated on the Via Nomentana, near the Porta Pia. In 1842 Lyons sent a colony to India, where twelve houses now exist. The most important of these are at Bombay, Poonah, Lahore, Simla, and Agra. In 1850 the first house in Spain was founded at Tarragona; then followed other foundations, Valencia, Barcelona, Orihuela, S. Gervas, Alicante, and Murcia. In 1902 Spain sent a colony to found houses in the city of Mexico and at Merida, Yucatan.

The first house of the congregation in America was founded at St. Joseph, Levis, Canada, in 1858. In 1876 Sillery (Quebec) became the provincial house of America. Canada has four other houses, at St-Gervais, St-Michel, Trois-Pistoles, and Beauceville. In 1876 several sisters left Sillery to open houses in the Unites States. The first foundation was that at Fall River, Mass., where the sisters now conduct a boarding-school and a parochial school attended by twelve hundred children. The house at Manchester, New Hampshire, was founded in 1881; then, at Woonsocket, R.I., a boarding-school and two parochial schools, attended by fourteen hundred children. At Providence, R.I., the religious have a convent and two parochial schools. In 1902 several nuns left the mother-house in Rome, to found an establishment in New York. The religious of Jesus Mary now possess a house on Fourteenth Street and an academy at Kingsbridge. They also have the supervision of a day-school for poor Italian children. The establishment on Fourteenth Street, called "Our Lady of Peace", is a residence for ladies in the literary profession.

MOTHER STE. EUPHEMIE

History of the Jews

( Yehúd`m; Ioudaismos).

Of the two terms, Jews and Judaism, the former denotes usually the Israelites or descendants of Jacob (Israel) in contrast to Gentile races; the latter, the creed and worship of the Jews in contrast to Christianity, Mohammedanism, etc. In a separate article we will treat of Judaism as a religious communion with its special system of faith, rites, customs, etc. (See JUDAISM.) Here, we shall cover the history of the Jews since the return from the Babylonian Exile, from which time the Israelites received the name of Jews (for their earlier history, see ISRAELITES).

This history may be divided into various periods in accordance with the leading phases which may be distinguished in the existence of the Jewish race since the Return in 538 B.C.

(1)Persian Suzerainty (538-333 B.C.)

In October, 538 B.C., Babylon opened its gates to the Persian army, and a few weeks later the great conqueror of Babylonia, Cyrus, made his triumphal entry into the fallen city. One of the official acts of the new ruler in Babylon was to give to the exiled Jews full liberty to return to Juda (see I Esdras, i). The substance of Cyrus's decree in their favour is in striking harmony with other known decrees of that monarch, with his general policy of clemency and toleration towards the conquered races of his empire, and with his natural desire to have on the Egyptian border a commonwealth as large as possible, bound to Persia by the strongest ties of gratitude. A comparatively large number of Jewish exiles (50,000 according to I Esdras, ii, 64, 65) availed themselves of Cyrus's permission. Their official leader was Zorobabel, a descendant of the royal family of Juda, whom the Persian monarch had invested with the governorship of the sub-province of Juda, and entrusted with the precious vessels which had belonged to Yahweh's House. There appeared also by his side the priest "Josue, the son of Josedec", probably as the religious head of the returning community. The returned exiles, who mostly belonged to the tribes of Benjamin and Juda, settled chiefly in the neighborhood of Jerusalem. They at once organized a council of twelve elders, and this council, which was naturally presided over by Zorobabel, controlled and guided the internal affairs of the community, under the suzerainty of Persia. Without delay, too, they set up a new altar, and had it ready to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles in 537 B.C. Henceforth, the ritual system was religiously carried out. The foundation of the second Temple was laid in the second month of the second year after the Return, but no further headway was made for fifteen or sixteen years, owing to the active interference and positive misrepresentations to the Persian kings by the Samaritans to whom the Jews had denied a share in the work of rebuilding the House of the Lord. Meantime, the Jews themselves lost much of their interest in the reconstruction of the Temple; and it is only in 520 B.C. that the Prophets Aggæus and Zacharias succeeded in rousing them from their supineness. Pecuniary help came too from the Jewish community in Babylon, and also, a little later, from the Persian king. Thus encouraged, they made rapid progress and on 3 March, 515 B.C., the new Temple was solemnly dedicated. The Jewish leaders next started on the rebuilding of the walls of Jerusalem, and here again met with the hostility of the Samaritans, whose complaints at the Court of Persia were most successful under Artaxerxes I "Longimanus" (464-124 B.C.), who issued orders strictly forbidding the Jews to proceed with the work.

The special mission of Esdras and Nehemias in behalf of the struggling Palestinian community and their strenuous efforts to lift up its moral tone need not to be dwelt upon here (see ESDRAS; NEHEMIAS). Suffice it to say that, to whatever precise time their labours should be assigned (see CAPTIVITIES), the scribe Esdras and the satrap Nehemias left their permanent impress on their fellow-Jews. After Esdras's death, which probably occurred not long before the end of the Persian rule over in Juda in 333 B.C., little is distinctly known of the history of the Palestinian Jews. It seems, however, that under the satraps of Coele-Syria, the action of the high-priest had a very considerable influence upon their religious and civil matters alike (cfr. Josephus, "Antiq. Of the Jews", XI, vii), and that their community enjoyed a steadily increasing prosperity, hardly marred by the deportation of a certain number of Jews to distant regions like Hyrcania, which probably occurred under Artaxerxes III (358-337 B.C.). During the Persian period, the Jews who had preferred to stay in Babylonia remained constantly in touch with the returned exiles, sending them, at times, material help, and formed a flourishing community deeply attached to the faith and to the traditions of their race. Within the same period falls the formation of the Jewish colony at Elaphantine (Upper Egypt), which was for a while supplied with a temple of its own, and the faithfulness of which to Persia is witness by Judeo-Aramean papyri recently discovered. Lastly, the institutions of Judaism which seem to have more particularly developed during the Persian domination are the Synagogues, with their educational and religious features, and the Scribes with their peculiar skill in the law.

(2) Greek Period (333-168 B.C.)

A new period in the history of the Jews opens with the defeat of Darius III (335-330 B.C.) by Alexander the Great at Issus, in Cilicia. This victory of the young conqueror of Persia undoubtedly brought the Palestinian Jews into direct contact with Greek civilization, whatever may be thought of the exact historical value of what Josephus relates (Antiq. of the Jews, XI, viii, 3-5) concerning Alexander's personal visit to Jerusalem. Alexander allowed them the free enjoyment of their religious and civil liberties, and rewarded those of them who went to war with him against Egypt and settled in Alexandria, a city of his foundation, by granting them equal civic rights with the Macedonians. Again, when the Samaritans rebelled against him, he added a part of Samaria to Judea (331 B.C.). After Alexander's untimely death (323 B.C.), Palestine had an ample share of the troubles which arose out of the partition of his vast empire among his captains. Placed between Syria and Egypt, it became the bone of contention between their respective rulers. At first, as a part of Coele-Syria, it passed naturally into the possession of Laomedon of Mytiline. But as early as 320 B.C., it was seized by the Egyptian Ptolemy I (323-285 B.C.) who, on a Sabbath-day took Jerusalem, and carried away many Samaritans and Jews into Egypt A few years later (315 B.C.), it fell into the power of Syria; but after the battle of Ipsus in Phrygia (301 B.C.), it was annexed to Egypt and remained so practically a whole century(301-202 B.C.). Seleucus I, who founded Antioch about 300 B.C., attracted the Jews to his new capital by granting them equal rights with his Greek subjects; and thence they gradually extended into the principal cities of Asia Minor. The rule of the first three Ptolemies was even more popular with the Jews than that of the Seleucids. Ptolemy I (Soter) settled many of them in Alexandria and Cyrene, whence they gradually spread over the whole country, and attained to eminence in science, art, and even literature, as is proved by the numerous Judeo-Greek fragments which have survived. Under Ptolemy II (Philadelphus), the Hebrew Pentateuch was first rendered into Greek; and this, in turn, led in the course of time to the complete translation of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint. His successor, Euergetes (247-222 B.C.), is particularly credited, after a successful campaign in Syria, with having offered rich presents at the Temple in Jerusalem. Again, the annual tribute demanded by the early Ptolemies was apparently light; and as long as it was paid regularly, the Palestinian Jews were left free to manage their own affairs under their high-priests at whose side stood the Gerusia of Jerusalem, as a council of state, including the priestly aristocracy. In this wise, things went well under the high-priesthood of Simon the Just (310-291 B.C.), and that of his two brothers, Eleazar II (291-276 B.C.) and Manasses (276-250 B.C.).

Matters proved less satisfactory under Onias II (250-226 B.C.), who withheld the tribute for several years from his Egyptian suzerain. Under Onias's son and successor, Simon II (226-298 B.C.), whose godly rule is highly praised in Ecclesiasticus (chap. iv), the condition of Palestine became precarious owing to the renewed conflicts between Egypt and Syria for the possession of Coele-Syria and Judea. In the end, however, the Syrian king, Antiochus II, remained master of Palestine and did his utmost to secure the loyalty of the Jews not only of Judea, but also of Mesopotamia and Babylon. Seleucus IV (187-175 B.C.) pursued at first the conciliatory policy of his father, and the Judean Jews prospered during the opening years of Onias III (198-175). Soon, however, intestine strife disturbed the pontiff's wise rule, and Seleucus, misled by Simon, the governor of the Temple, sent his treasurer, Heliodorus, to seize the Temple funds. The failure of Heliodorus's mission led eventually to Onias's imprisonment and deposition from the high-priesthood. This deposition purchased from the new king, Antiochus IV (Epiphanes), by Jason, an unworthy brother of Onias, was the real triumph of Hellenism in Jerusalem. The man who, in turn, supplanted Jason was Menelaus, another hellenizing leader, whom craft and gold maintained in office, despite the complaints of the Jews to the Syrian monarch. At length, a popular revolt occurred against Menelaus, which Antiochus put down with great barbarity, and which resulted in his leaving Menelaus in charge of the high-priesthood, while two foreign officers became Governors of Jerusalem and Samaria respectively (170).

(3) The Machabean Age (168-63 B.C.)

The whole period which has just been described, was marked by the steady growth and widespread influence of hellenistic culture. Towards its end, the Jewish high-priests themselves not only assumed Greek names and adopted Greek manners, but became the ardent champions of Hellenism. In fact, Antiochus IV thought that the time had now come to unify the various races of his dominions by thoroughly hellenizing them. His general edict for that purpose met probably with unexpected opposition on the part of most Palestinian Jews. Hence, by special letters he ordered the utter destruction of Yahweh's worship in Jerusalem and in all towns of Judea: under the penalty of death everything distinctly Jewish was prohibited, and Greek idolatry prescribed (168 B.C.). The Holy City had recently been dismantled, and a part of it (Acra) transformed into a Syrian citadel. Now its Temple was dedicated to Zeus, to whom sacrifices were offered upon an idol-altar erected over Yahweh's altar. In like manner, in all the townships of Juda altars were set up and heathen sacrifices offered. In the dire persecution which ensued, all resistance seemed impossible. In the little town of Modin, however, an aged priest, Mattathias, boldly raised the standard of revolt. At his death (167 B.C.), he appointed his son Judas, surnamed Machabeus, to head the forces which had gradually gathered around him. Under Judas's able leadership, the Machabean troops won several victories, and in December, 165 B.C., Jerusalem was re-entered, the Temple cleansed, and Divine worship renewed.

The struggle was a hard one against the numerous armies of Antiochus V and Demetrius I, the next Syrian kings; yet it was heroically maintained, with varying success, by Judas until his death on the battlefield (161 B.C.). One of his brothers, Jonathan, became his successor in command for the next eighteen years (161-143 B.C.). The new leader was not only able to re-enter and fortify Jerusalem, but was also recognized as high-priest of the Jews by the Syrian Crown, and as an ally by Rome and Sparta. It was not given him, however to restore his country to complete independence: he was treacherously captured and soon afterwards put to death by the Syrian general, Tryphon. Another brother of Judas, Simon (143-135 B.C.), then assumed the leadership, and under him the Jews attained to a high degree of happiness and prosperity. He repaired the fortresses of Judea, took and destroyed the citadel of Acra (142 B.C.), and renewed the treaties with Rome and Lacedæmon. In 141 B.C., he was proclaimed by a national assembly "prince and high-priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet". He exercised the right of coinage and may be considered as the founder of the Asmonean, or last Jewish, dynasty. The rule of John Hyrcanus I, Simon's successor, lasted 30 years. His career was marked by a series of conquests, notably by the reduction of Samaria and the forcible conversion of Idumea. He sided with the aristocratic Sadducees against the more rigid defenders of the Theocracy, the Pharisees, the successors of the Assideans. The oldest parts of the "Sibylline Oracles" and of the "Book of Enoch" are probably remainders of the literature of his day. He was succeeded by his eldest son, Aristobulus I (Heb. name, Judas), who was the first Machabean ruler to assume the title of king. He reigned but one year, conquered and proselytized a part of Galilee. His brother Alexander Jannæus (Heb. name Jonathan) occupied the throne twenty-six years (104-78 B.C.). During the civil war which broke out between him and his subjects he was long unsuccessful; but he finally got the better of his opponents, and wreaked frightful vengeance upon them. He also succeeded at a later date in conquering and Judaizing the whole country east of the Jordan.

On acceding to the kingdom, his widow Alexandra (Heb. name, Salome) practically surrendered the rule to the Pharisees. But this did not secure the peace of the realm, for Alexandra's death alone prevented her being involved in a new civil war. The strife which soon arose after her death (69 B.C.), between her two sons Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II, who were favoured by the Pharisees and the Sadducees respectively, was skilfully kept up by Antipater, the ambitious Governor of Idumea and father of Herod the Great. It gradually led both brothers to submit to the arbitration of Pompey, then commanding the Roman forces in the East. The wary imperator finally decided in favour of Hyrcanus, marched on Jerusalem, and stormed the temple, whereupon a carnage ensued. This brought to an end the short era of independence which the Machabees had secured for the country (63 B.C.). It was during the Machabean Age that occurred the building of a Jewish temple at Leontopolis in the Delta, and the transformation of the Jewish Gerusia into the Jerusalem Sanhedrin. Among the literary products of the same period are to reckoned the deuterocanonical Books of the Machabees, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus; and the apocryphal "Psalms of Solomon", "Book of Jubilees", and "Assumption of Moses"; to which many scholars add the Book of Daniel and several sacred hymns embodied in our Psalter.

(4) Early Roman Supremacy (63 B.C.-A.D. 70)

The fall of Jerusalem in 63 B.C. marks the beginning of Judea's vassalage to Rome. Pompey, its conqueror, dismantled the Holy City, recognized Hyrcanus II as high-priest and ethnarch, but withdrew from his jurisdiction all territory outside of Judea proper, and strictly forbade him all further conquests. Then he proceeded homewards carrying with him numerous captives, who greatly increased, if indeed they did not begin, the Jewish community in Rome. Soon Judea became a prey to several discords, in the midst of which the weak Hyrcanus lost more and more of his authority, and his virtual master, the Idumean Antipater, grew proportionately in favour with the suzerains of the land. Upon the final defeat of Pompey at Pharsalus (48 B.C.) by Julius Cæsar, Antipater promptly sided with the victor, and rendered him signal services in Egypt. His reward was the full recognition of Hyrcanus as high-priest and ethnarch; and for himself the rights of Roman citizenship and the office of procurator over the whole of Palestine. He next proceeded to rebuild the walls of the Holy City, and to appoint two of his sons, Phasael and Herod, Governors of Jerusalem and Galilee respectively. From this time forth Herod's fortune grew rapidly, until in the Roman capital, whither he had fled from the wrath of the Nationalist party, he reached the goal of his ambition. The Idumean Herod ascended the Throne of David, and his long reign (37-4 B.C.) forms in several respects a glorious epoch in the history of the Jews (see HEROD THE GREAT). Upon the whole, however, it was disastrous for the Jews of Palestine. Its first part (37-25 B.C.) was chiefly spent in getting rid of the surviving Asmoneans. By their death he, indeed, made the throne more secure for himself, but also alienated the mass of his subjects who were deeply attached to the Machabean family. To this grievance he gradually added others no less hateful to the national party. The people hated him as a bloody tyrant bent on destroying the worship of God, and hated still more the Romans who maintained him on the throne, and whose suzerainty was to be thrown off at the first opportunity. It was a short time before the death of Herod that Jesus, the true King of the Jews, was born, and the Holy Innocents were massacred.

Herod's death was the signal for an insurrection which spread gradually and was finally put down by Varus, the Governor of Syria. Next followed the practical ratification of the last will of Herod by Augustus. The principal heir was Archelaus, who was appointed ethnarch of Idumean, Judea, and Samaria, with the promise of the royal title on condition that he should rule to the emperor's satisfaction. For his mis-rule, Augustus deposed him (A.D. 6), and put in his stead a Roman procurator. Henceforward, Judea continued as a part of the province of Syria, except for a brief interval (A.D. 41-44), during which Herod Agrippa I held sway over all the dominions of Herod the Great. The Roman procurators of Judea resided in Cæsaria, and went to Jerusalem only on special occasions. They were subalterns of the Syrian governors, commanded the military, maintained peace and took care of the revenue. They generally abstained from meddling with the religious affairs, especially for fear of arousing the violence of the Zealots of the time, who regarded as unlawful the payment of tribute to Cæsar. The local government was largely left in the hands of the Sadducean priestly aristocracy, and the Sanhedrin was the supreme court of justice, deprived, however (about A.D. 30), of the power of carrying a sentence of death. It was under Pontius Pilate (A.D. 26-36), one of the procurators appointed by Tiberius, that Jesus was crucified.

Up to the reign of Caligula (37-44), the Jews enjoyed, without any serious interruption, the universal toleration which Roman policy permitted to the religion of the subject states. But when that emperor ordered that Divine honours should be paid to him, they generally refused to submit. Petronius, the Roman Governor of Syria, received peremptory orders to use violence, if necessary, to set up Caligula's statue in the Temple at Jerusalem. At Alexandria a fearful massacre took place, and it looked as if all the Jews of Palestine were doomed to perish. Petronius, however, delayed the execution of the decree, and in fact, escaped punishment only through the murder of Caligula in A.D. 41. The Jews were saved, and with the accession of Claudius, who owed the imperial dignity chiefly to the efforts of Herod Agrippa, a brighter day dawned for them. Through gratitude, Claudius conferred upon Agrippa the whole kingdom of Herod the Great, and upon the Jews at home and abroad valuable privileges. Agrippa's careful government made itself felt throughout the entire community, and the Sanhedrin, now under the presidency of Gamaliel I, St. Paul's teacher, had more authority than ever before. Yet the national party remained in an almost constant state of mutiny, while the Christians were persecuted by Agrippa. Upon Agrippa's death (A.D. 44), the country was again subjected to Roman procurators, and this was the prelude to the destruction of Jerusalem and the Jewish people. Nearly all the seven procurators who ruled Judea from A.D. 44 to 66 acted as though they sought to drive its population to despair and revolt. Gradually, the confusion became so great and so general as manifestly to presage the dissolution of the commonwealth. At length, in A.D. 66, in spite of the precautionary efforts of Agrippa II, the party of the Zealots burst into an open rebellion, which was terminated (A.D. 70) by the capture of Jerusalem by Titus, the destruction of the Temple, and the massacre and the banishment of hundreds of thousands of the unhappy people, who were scattered among their brethren in all parts of the world. According to Eusebius, the Christians of Jerusalem, forewarned by their Master, escaped the horrors of the last siege, by removing in due time to Pella, east of the Jordan. Prominent among the Jewish writers of the first century of our era are Philo, who pleaded the Jewish cause at Rome before Caligula, and Josephus, who acted as Jewish Governor of Galilee during the final revolt against Rome, and described its vicissitudes and horrors in a thrilling, and probably also in an exaggerated, manner.

(5) Last Days of Pagan Rome (A.D. 70-320)

Rome exulted over fallen Jerusalem, and struck coins commemorative of the hard won victory. The chief leaders of the defence, a long train of heavily chained captives, the vessels of the Temple, the seven-branched candlestick, the golden table, and a roll of the Law, graced Titus's triumph in the imperial city. And yet three strong fortresses in Palestine still held out against the Romans: Herodium, Machærus, and Masada. The first two fell in A.D. 71, and the third, the following year, which thus witnessed the complete conquest of Judea. For a while longer, certain fugitive Judean Zealots strove to foment a rebellion in Egypt and in Cyrenaica. But their efforts soon came to naught, and Vespasian availed himself of the Egyptian commotion to close for ever the temple of Onias in Heliopolis. At this juncture, it looked as though the distinct groups of Jewish families were henceforth destined to drift separately, finally to be absorbed by the various nations in the midst of which they chanced to live. This danger was, however, averted by the rapid concentration of the surviving Jews in two great communities, mostly independent of each other, and corresponding to the two great divisions of the world at the time. The first naturally comprised all the Jews who lived this side of the Euphrates. Not long after the fall of Jerusalem and its subsequent misfortunes, they gradually acknowledged the authority of a new Sanhedrin, which, in whatever way it arose, was actually constituted at Jamnia (Jabne), under the presidency of Rabbi Jochanan ben Zaccai. Together with the Sanhedrin [now the supreme Court (Bêth Din) of the Western communities], there was at Jamnia a school in which Jochanan inculcated the oral Law (specifically the Halacha) handed down by the fathers, and delivered expository lectures (Hagada) on the other Hebrew Scriptures distinct from the written Law (Pentateuch). Jochanan's successor as the head of the Sanhedrin (A.D. 80) was Rabbi Gamaliel II, who took the title of Nasi ("prince": among the Romans, "patriarch"). He also lived at Jamnia, and presided over its school, on the model of which other schools were gradually formed in the neighbourhood. He finally transmitted (A.D. 118) to his successors, the "patriarchs of the West", a religious authority to which obedience and reverence were henceforth paid, even after the seat of this authority was shifted first to Sephoris, and finally to Tiberias.

The supremacy of "Rabbinism", thus firmly established among the Western Jews, prevailed likewise in the other great community which comprised all the Jewish families east of the Euphrates. The chief of this Babylonian community assumed the title of Resh-Galutha (prince of the Captivity), and was a powerful feudatory of the Parthian Empire. He was the supreme judge of the minor communities, both in civil and in criminal matters, and exercised in many other ways a wellnigh absolute authority over them. The principal districts under his jurisdiction were those of Nares, Sora, Pumbeditha, Nahardea, Nahar-Paked, and Machuzza, whose rabbinical schools were destined to enjoy the greatest fame and influence. The patriarchs of the West possessed much less temporal authority than the princes of the Captivity; and this was only natural in view of the suspicious watchfulness which Vespasian and Titus exercised over the Jews of the Empire. A garrison of 800 men occupied the ruins of Jerusalem to prevent its reconstruction by the religious zeal of its former inhabitants, and in order to do away with all possible pretenders to the Jewish Throne or to the Messianic dignity as strict search was made for all who claimed descent from the royal House of David. Under Domitian (A.D. 81-96), the Fiscus Judaicus, or tax of two drachmas established by Vespasian for the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, was exacted from the Jews with the utmost rigour, and they were involved in the persecutions which this tyrant carried on against Christians. The reign of Nerva (A.D. 96-98) gave a brief interval of peace to the Jews; but in that of Trajan (98-117), while the Roman legions had been withdrawn from Africa to fight against Parthia, the Jewish population of Egypt and Cyrene took up arms against the Greeks of those districts, and on both sides dreadful atrocities were committed. Thence the flame spread to Cyprus where the Jews massacred, we are told, 240,000 of their fellow-citizens. Hadrian sent forces to suppress the uprising in that island, and forbade any Jew to set his foot on its soil. Next, the revolt in Egypt and Cyrene was put down. Meanwhile the Jews of Mesopotamia, dissatisfied with the Romans who had just conquered the Parthians, endeavoured to get rid of the Fiscus Judaicus now imposed upon them. Their insurrection was soon suppressed by Lucius Quintus, who was then appointed to the government of Judea, where it is probable that disturbances were feared.

The next year (A.D. 117), Hadrian became emperor. This was a fortunate occurrence for the Jews of Babylonia, for as the new Cæsar gave up Trajan's conquests beyond the Euphrates, they came again under the milder rule of their ancient sovereigns. But it proved most unfortunate for the Jewish population of the Roman world. Hadrian issued an edict forbidding circumcision, the reading of the Law, and the observance of the Sabbath. He next made known his intention to establish a Roman colony in Jerusalem, and to erect a fane to Jupiter on the site of Yahweh's fallen Temple. At this juncture, it was announced that the Messia had just appeared. His name, Bar-Cochba, "Son of the Star", seemed to fulfil the ancient prophecy: "a star shall rise out of Jacob" (Numbers, xxiv,17). Rabbi Aqiba, the most learned and venerated of the Sanhedrists of the day, distinctly acknowledged the claims of the new Messia. Jewish warriors of all countries flocked around Bar-Cochba, and he maintained his cause against Hadrian for two years. But Roman tactics and discipline gradually prevailed. The Jewish strongholds fell one after another before Julius Severus, the Roman general; Jerusalem was taken; and at length (A.D. 135), the fortress of Bither, the last refuge of the rebels, was captured and razed to the ground. Bar-Cochba had been slain; and sometime later, Rabbi Aqiba was seized and executed, but his seven leading pupils fortunately escaped to Nisibis and Nahardea. Dreadful massacres followed the suppression of the revolt; of the fugitives who escaped death many fled to Arabia, whence that country obtained its Jewish population; and the rest were sold into slavery. To annihilate for ever all hopes of the restoration of a Jewish kingdom, a new city was founded on the site of Jerusalem and peopled by a colony of foreigners. The city received the name of Ælia Capitolina, and no Jew was allowed to reside in it or even approach its environs. The Christians, now fully distinguished from the Jews, were permitted to establish themselves within the walls, and Ælia became the seat of a flourishing bishopric.

Under Antoninus Pius (138-161), Hadrian's laws were repealed, and the active persecution against the Jews came to an end. Aqiba's disciples then returned to Palestine and reorganized the Sanhedrin at Usha, in Galilee (140), under the presidency of Simon II, the son of Gamaliel II. Simon's patriarchate was not free from the petty oppression of the Roman officials, which the Palestinian Jews particularly felt and resented. On the occasion, therefore, of the warlike preparations of the Parthians against Rome, a fresh revolt broke out in Judea during the last year of Antoninus's reign. It was speedily suppressed under the next emperor, Marcus Aurelius (161-180), and followed by a re-enactment of Hadrian's extreme measures which, however, were soon annulled or never carried out. In 165, Rabbi Juda I succeeded Simon II as president of the Sanhedrin and patriarch of the West. The most important of his acts is the completion of the Mishna oral Law (about 189), which, concurrently with the Bible, became the principal source of rabbinical study, and a kind of constitution which even now holds together the scattered members of the Jewish race. As Rabbi Juda was in office for over thirty years, he was the last Jewish patriarch who had to complain of the vexations of the pagan rulers of Rome. Under Caracalla (211-217), the Jews received the rights of citizenship; and under his successors the various disabilities by which they had been affected were gradually removed. Even such rabid persecutors of the Christians as Decius (249-251), Valerian (253-260), and Diocletian (284-305) left the Jews unmolested. During this period of peace, the patriarchs of the West frequently sent their legates to the various synagogues to ascertain their actual condition and collect the tax from which Juda III and his successors drew their income. In Babylonia, the Jewish communities and schools were flourishing under the princes of the Captivity, and except for a short space of time immediately after the conquest of the Parthians by the neo-Persians, and during the ephemeral rule of Odenathus at Palmyra, they enjoyed quiet and independence. The condition of the Jews in Arabia and China, at this time, is not known with any degree of certainty.

(6) Christian Emperors and Barbarian Kings (320-628)

The accession of Christianity to the throne of the Cæsars by the conversion of Constantine, opens a new era in the history of the Jews. The equality of rights to which the pagan emperors had admitted them was gradually restricted by the head of the Christian State. Under Constantine (306-337), the restrictions were few in number, and due to his interest in the welfare of his Christian subjects and in the promotion of the true religion. He made the passage from Christianity to Judaism a penal offence; prohibited the Jews from circumcising their Christian slaves; protected converts from Judaism against the fiery vengeance of their former coreligionists; but never deprived them of their citizenship, and never went beyond constraining them -- with the exception of their rabbis -- to take upon themselves certain public offices which had become particularly burdensome. These laws were re-enacted and made more severe by his son Constans I (337-350), who attached the death penalty to marriages between Jews and Christians. The severity of these and other laws of Constans was but too fully justified by the dreadful excesses of the Jews in Alexandria, and by their temporary revolt in Judea. The accession of Julian the Apostate, in 361, made a new diversion in their favour. This emperor decreed the rebuilding of the Temple on Mt. Moria and the full restoration of Jewish worship, apparently with a view to secure the influence of the Mesopotamian Jews in his expedition against the Persians. The Jews were triumphant, but their triumph was short-lived; sudden flames burst forth from Mr. Moria and rendered impossible the rebuilding of the Temple; Julian perished in his Persian War, and his successor, Jovian (363-364), reverted to Constans' policy. The next emperors, Valens and Valentinian, reinstated the Jews in their former rights, except, however, the exemption from the public services. Under Gratian, Theodosius I, and Arcadius, they likewise enjoyed the protection of the Throne; but under Theodosius II (402-450), emboldened by their long immunity from persecution, they manifested a spirit of intolerance and crime which let to violent tumults between them and the Christians in various parts of the Eastern Roman Empire, and apparently also to the prohibition of building new synagogues and from discharging any state employment. It was under Theodosius II that the patriarchate of the West, then held by Gamaliel VI, came to an end (425). Some time before (c. 375), the Jerusalem Talmud was finished, a work which, however important for Judaism, is less complete, in regard to both its Mishna and its Gemara, than the Babylonian Talmud, the compilation of which was terminated by the heads of the Babylonian schools about 499, despite the violent persecutions of the Persian kings, Jezdijird III (440-457) and Firuz (457-484). The immediate result of Firuz's persecution was the emigration of Jewish colonists in the south as far as Arabia, and in the east as far as India where they founded a little Jewish state on the coast of Malabar which lasted till 1520. Under Qubad I, Firuz's son and successor, the prince of the Captivity, Mar-Zutra II, managed to maintain for seven years an independent Jewish state in Babylonia; but in 518, the Byzantine successors of Theodosius II enforced his anti-Jewish laws with great rigour, and, as a result, the intellectual life and former jurisdiction of the Judean Jews became virtually extinct.

In the West the Jews fared decidedly better during the fifth century than in the East. They of course suffered many evils during the invasions of the northern barbarians who flooded the Western Empire after its permanent separation in 395 from the Eastern Empire of Constantinople. In the midst of the political convulsions naturally entailed by these invasions, the Jews gradually became the masters of the commerce, which the conquerors of the Western Empire, addicted to the arts of war, had neither time nor inclination to pursue. In the various states which soon arose out of that dismembered empire, the numerous Jewish colonies do not seem for a long time to have been subjected to restrictive measures, except in connection with their slave trade. The Vandals left them free to exercise their religion. They were justly treated in Italy, by the kings of the Ostrogoths, and by the Roman pontiffs; in Gaul, by the early Merovingians generally; and in Spain, by the Visigoths down to the conversion of King Recared to Catholicism (589), or rather down to the accession of Sisebut (612), who, deploring the fact that Recared's anti-Jewish laws had been little more than a dead letter, resolved at once to enforce them, and in fact added to them first the injunction that the Jews should release the slaves in their possession, and next, that they should choose between baptism and banishment. Anti-Jewish legislation was framed at a much earlier date in the Frankish dominions. Hostility towards the Jews showed itself first in Burgundy, under King Sigismund (517), and thence it spread over the Frankish countries. In 554, Childebert I of Paris forbade them to appear on the street at Eastertide; in 581, Chilperic compelled them to receive baptism; in 613, Clotaire II sanctioned new decrees against them; and in 629, Dagobert bade them choose between baptism and expulsion. Thus the laws against the Jews both in Spain and in France reached gradually a degree of severity unknown even to such Eastern persecutors of Judaism as Justinian I (527-5650 and Heraclius (610-641). Yet, the edicts of these Byzantine emperors were vexatious enough. In fact, Justinian's decrees so exasperated the Palestinian Jews that despite the persecutions of their Mesopotamian fellow-Jews by the Persian kings, Jusrau I (531-579), Hormizdas IV (579-591), and Kusrau II (590-628), they seized the first opportunity to avenge themselves by siding with Kusrau II in his war against Heraclius. During the Persian invasion and occupation of Palestine, they committed dreadful excesses against the Christians, which finally met with a merited punishment in the persecution which Heraclius, again master of Judea, started against them.

(7) The Mohammedan Ascendancy (628-1038)

The rise of Mohammedanism, with whose power the Arabian Jews cane in contact when it was yet in its infancy, marks the beginning of a new period in Jewish history. Several centuries before Mohammed's birth (c. 570), the Jews had effected important settlements in Arabia, and in the course of time, they had acquired a considerable influence upon the heathen population. In fact, it is certain that at one time, there existed in Southern Arabia (Yemen), an Arab-Jewish kingdom which was brought to an end in 530 by a Christian king of Abyssinia. But although they had lost their royal estate, the Arabian Jews were still numerous and powerful, in the Hedjaz, north of Yemen. There was indeed but a small Jewish population in Mecca, Mohammed's birthplace; yet it is probable that contact with the Jews of that city was one of the means by which the founder of Islam became acquainted with Judaism, its beliefs, and it Patriarchs. This acquaintance became naturally closer after the Hegira (Flight) of Mohammed (622) to Medina, the chief centre of the Arabian Jews. To win the Israelites to his cause, the "prophet" made various concessions to their religion and adopted some of their customs. As this was useless, and as the Jews were a constant menace to his cause, he resolved to get rid of their tribes one after another. He first put an end to the Jews in the vicinity of Medina, and next (628) subjected those of the district of Khaibar and of Wadi al-Kura to an annual tribute of half the produce of the soil. After Mohammed's death (A.D. 632), Caliph Abu-Bekr tolerated the Jewish remnant in Khaibar and al-Kura; but this toleration ceased under Omar, the prophet's second successor. During Omar's short caliphate (634-644), Syria, Ph nicia, Persia, Egypt, and Jerusalem fell under the sway of Islam. The Jews were fairly well treated by their new masters. Omar's so-called "Covenant" (640) imposed indeed restrictions upon Jews in the whole Mohammedan world, but these restrictions do not seem to have been carried out during his lifetime.

In return for the valuable assistance of the Babylonian Jews in Omar's campaigns against Persia, this caliph granted them several privileges, among which may be mentioned the recognition of their exilarch Bostanaï (642). Under Islam's fourth caliph, Ali (656-661), the Jewish community of Irak (Babylonia) became more fully organized and assumed the appearance of an independent state, in which the Talmudic schools of Sora and Pumbeditha flourished again. The exilarch and the head of the school of Sora, with his new name of Gaon (658), were of equal rank. The former's office was political, the latter's distinctly religious. The exilarch, both in bearing and in mode of life, was a prince. Thus it came to pass that the Jews scattered through the Mohammedan world persuaded themselves that in Abraham's own country there survived a prince of the Captivity who had regained the sceptre of David. For them, the heads of the Babylonian schools were the representatives of the ideal times of the Talmud. The farther the dominion of the Ommiads (661-750) was extended, the more adherents were gained for the Jewish Babylonian chiefs. The great liberty which the Jews enjoyed under Islam's rule allowed them to cultivate Paitanism or neo-Hebraic poetry and to begin their Massoretic labours (see Massora).

Meantime, their fellow-Jews were less fortunate in Spain, where most rulers of the seventh century enacted severe laws against Judaism. Towards the end of that century, Egica forbade them to own lands and houses, to repair to or trade with North Africa, and even to transact business with Christians. Having next discovered a plot of the Jews with the Moors to overthrow the Visigothic rule, he sentenced to slavery all the Jews of his states and ordered that their children of seven years and upwards be given to Christians to be educated. This condition of things came to an end under Roderic, Egica's second successor and last Visigothic King of Spain. With numerous Jews in their army, the Mohammedans crossed from Africa into Andalusia, defeated and slew Roderic (July, 711); Spain was gradually conquered; and in 720, the Saracens occupied Septimania, north of the Pyrenees, a dependency of the Gothic Kingdom. In Mohammedan Spain, the Jews, to whose help the conquerors largely owed their victories, obtained their liberty. In fact, it was now given to the Jews at large to enjoy a long period of nearly unbroken peace and security. Apart from the persecutions started in 720 by the Caliph of Damascus, Omar II, and in 723 by the Byzantine emperor, Leo III, they prospered everywhere till about the middle of the ninth century. It was during this period that the great Kingdom of the Chazars, which was situated west of the Caspian Sea, and had caused the Persians to tremble, embraced Judaism (c. 745); its rulers remained exclusively Jewish above two centuries and a half. After the caliphs of the Ommiad dynasty, one of whom had a Jew as his mint-master, those of the Abassides, till after Harun al-Rashid (d. 809), do not seem to have seriously disturbed their Jewish subjects; during that time, the Babylonian Talmudic schools were crowded with hearers, and had it not been for their internal dissension, religious (Karaites) and political (contests for the dignity of exilarch), the Jews of Babylon would have been as happy as they were renowned for their learning. In Mohammedan Spain (with its separate Caliphate of Cordova since A.D. 756), the Jews were undoubtedly prosperous during the century now under review, although details concerning their condition during that time are actually wanting. In France, the Jewish population was not submitted to any serious restrictions under either Pepin (752-768) or Charlemagne (764-814), while under Louis I (814-840) it even enjoyed special favours and privileges, the king having for his confidential adviser his Jewish physician name Zedekiah, and actively protecting Jewish interests against powerful opponents.

Thus, with the exception of a passing persecution under the two sons of Harun al-Rashid, the Jews were left unmolested for about 100 years. But with the middle of the ninth century, and nearly everywhere, this ceases to be the case. In the East, Jewish persecutions were resumed by the Byzantine emperors of the Macedonian dynasty (842-1056), and by the Abasside Caliph al-Motawakel, who, in 853, re-enacted the Covenant of Omar, and under whose successors in the Caliphate of Bagdad, the Jewish community of Irak lost more and more of its prestige and was supplanted in this respect by that of Spain: the exilarchate gradually ceased to be an office of the State and finally perished (c. 940), owing chiefly to the dissensions between the Gaons of Sora and Pumbeditha; and the Gaonate itself, for a while made famous by Saadiah, ultimately disappeared through the oppression of the weak caliphate (c. 1038). Under the Fatimite dynasty of caliphs (909-1171), whose rule extended over North Africa, Egypt, and Syria, the Jews were worse off still. About the middle of the tenth century, the Jewish Kingdom of the Chazars was destroyed by the Russians. In the West, the lot of the Jews was also that of a despised and persecuted race. Charles the Bald (840-877) protected them effectively, it is true, but his weak Carlovingian successors and the early Capetians lacked sufficient authority for doing so. In Italy, as early as 855, Louis II ordered the banishment of all Italian Jews, and his order failed to have the intended effect only because of the distracted condition of the realm at the time. In Germany, where "Jew" was synonymous with "merchant", the emperors were long satisfied with exacting a special tax from their Jewish subjects; but finally Henry II (1002-1024) expelled from Mainz the Jews who refused to be baptized, and it is probable that his decree was applied to other communities.

Spain (Navarre, Castile, and Leon) also persecuted the Jews, although towards the end of the tenth century, its rulers placed them in many respects on an equality with the rest of the population. In Mohammedan Spain, however, the Jewish race was politically and religiously free. Under such patrons of science and art as the Ommiad caliphs, Abd-er-Rhamman III (d. 961), Al-Hakem (d. 976), and the regent Al-Mansur (d. 1002), the Jews greatly increased in Moorish Spain, and became famous for learning as well as for commercial and industrial activity. The Talmudic schools of Cordova, Lucena, and Granada took the place of those of Sora and Pumbeditha, under the high patronage of the Jewish statesmen Hasdai, Jacob Ibn-Jau, and Samuel Halevi. During this period, an Arabic translation of the Mishna was made in Spain by Ibn-Abitur, and the first commentaries on the Talmud were composed at Mainz by Gershom ben Juda (d. 1028).

(8) Era of the Crusades (1023-1300)

In many respects, Mohammedan Spain owed a great deal to its Jewish population; yet, in 1066, the Jews were expelled from the Kingdom of Granada. In many ways, too, the young kingdoms of Christian Spain were indebted to their Jewish inhabitants; nevertheless, Ferdinand the Great subjected them to vexatious measures and was only prevented from drawing the sword against them by the intervention of the Spanish clergy. These, however, were but passing storms; for Alfonso VI (1071-1109) soon freely used Jews in his diplomatic and military operations, while in the Mohammedan states distinct from Granada, Jewish culture reached the zenith of its splendour. The era of Jewish persecutions really began with the First Crusade (1096-1099). The crusaders enacted in May-July, 1096, bloody scenes against the Jews of Trier, Worms, Mainz, Cologne, and other Rhenish towns, and repeated them as they went along in the cities on the Main and the Danube, even as far as Hungary, bishops and princes being mostly on the side of the victims, but proving, for various reasons, powerless to protect them effectively. On the capture of Jerusalem, 15 July, 1099, the crusaders wreaked a frightful vengeance on the Jews of the fallen city.

The interval between the First and the Second Crusade was a time of respite and recuperation for the Jewish race. In England, in Germany, and even in Palestine, they were left unmolested; while in Spain and in France, they attained to a high degree of prosperity and influence, and actively pursued literary and Talmudic studies under the guidance of Juda Halevi and the sons of Rashi. Yet, in 1146, on the eve of the Second Crusade, there began against them the violent persecution of the Almohades in Northern Africa and Southern Spain which brought about the speedy ruin of the Jewish synagogues and schools and would have resulted in the practical annihilation of the Jews of Mohammedan Spain had not most of them found a refuge in the Christian dominions of Alfonso VIII (d. 1157). Then came the Second Crusade (1147-1149) with its atrocities against the Jews in Cologne, Mainz, Worms, Speyer, and Strasburg, despite the protestations of St. Bernard and of Eugenius III, and the efforts of the German prelates and the Emperor Conrad III in their behalf; and with its most deplorable result, namely the greater enslavement of the German Jews to the Crown. The next fifty years were, on the whole, for the Jewish race a period of peace and prosperity; in Spain, where Juda Ibn-Ezra was steward of the palace to Alfonso VIII; in Mesopotamia, where Mohammed Almuktafi revived the dignity of exilarch; in the Two Sicilies, where the Jews had equal rights with the rest of the population; in Italy, where Pope Alexander II was favourable to them, and the Third Lateran Council (1179) passed decrees protecting their religious liberty; in England and its French provinces, where the Jews were very flourishing under Henry Plantagenet (c. 1189); in France itself, where under the kind rule of Louis VI and Louis VII (1108-1180) they greatly prospered in every direction. And yet, in some of these countries there was a deep-seated hatred of the Jewish race and its religion. It manifested itself in 1171 when the Jews of Blois were burned on the charge of having used Christian blood in their Passover, and it allowed Philip Augustus in the year of his accession (1180) to decree the confiscation of all the unmovable goods of his Jewish subjects and their banishment from his domains.

This feeling showed itself particularly on the occasion of the Third Crusade (1189-1192). The Jews were massacred on the day of the coronation of Richard I (3 Sept, 1189) and soon afterwards in several English towns (1190). About the same time, crusaders murdered them at different places from the district of the Rhine to Vienna. When again in 1198 a new crusade (1202-1204) was preached, many barons of northern France got released from their debts to Jewish creditors, and then drove them out of their dominions. Philip Augustus received indeed the exiles in his own territory, but he was chiefly actuated by covetousness. The Jews appealed to Innocent III to curb the violence of the crusaders; and in answer, the pontiff issued a Constitution which rigorously forbade mob violence and forced baptism, but which apparently had little or no effect.

The year 1204, in which closed the Fourth Crusade, marked the beginning of still heavier misfortunes for the Jews. That very year witnessed the death of Maimonides, the greatest Jewish authority of the twelfth century, and the first of the many efforts of Innocent III to prevent Christian princes from showing favour to their Jewish subjects. Soon afterwards, the Jews of southern France suffered grievously during the war against the Albigenses which ended only in 1228. In 1210, those of England were ill-treated by King John Lackland and their wealth confiscated to the Exchequer. Next, the Jews of Toledo were put to death by crusaders (1212). The conciliar legislation of the time was generally unfavourable to the Jews, and it culminated in the anti-Jewish measures of the Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215), among which may be mentioned the exclusion of Jews from all public offices, and the decree that they should wear a Jew badge. Besides being thus legislated against, the Jews were divided amongst themselves with regard to the orthodoxy of the writings of Maimonides. Gradually, the Lateran decrees against them were enforced wherever this was possible, and active persecutions from kings and crusaders were started, the rulers of England being particularly conspicuous for their extortions of money from their Jewish subjects.

In many places, the severity of the Lateran decrees was outdone, so that in 1235 Gregory IX felt called upon to confirm the Constitution of Innocent III, and in 1247 Innocent IV issued a Bull reprobating the false accusations and various excesses of the time against the Jews. Writing to the bishops of France and of Germany the latter pontiff says:

Certain of the clergy, and princes, nobles and great lords of your cities and dioceses have falsely devised certain godless plans against the Jews, unjustly depriving them by force of their property, and appropriating it themselves; . . . they falsely charge them with dividing up among themselves on the Passover the heart of a murdered boy. . . . In their malice, they ascribe every murder, wherever it chance to occur, to the Jews. And on the ground of these and other fabrications, they are filled with rage against them, rob them of their possessions without any formal accusation, without confession, and without legal trial and conviction, contrary to the privileges granted to them by the Apostolic See. . . . They oppress the Jews by starvation, imprisonment, and by tortures and sufferings; they afflict them with all kinds of punishments, and sometimes even condemn them to death, so the Jews, although living under Christian princes, are in a worse plight than were their ancestors in the land of the Pharaohs. They are driven to leave in despair the land in which their fathers have dwelt since the memory of man. . . . Since it is our pleasure that they shall not be disturbed, . . . we ordain that ye behave towards them in a friendly and kind manner. Whenever any unjust attacks upon them come under your notice, redress their injuries, and do not suffer them to be visited in the future by similar tribulations.

The protestations of the Roman pontiffs do not seem to have been much heeded in the Christian states generally. In 1254, nearly all the French Jews were banished by St. Louis from the king's domains. Between 1257 and 1266, Alfonso X of Castile compiled a code of laws which contained several clauses against the Jews and countenanced the blood accusation which had been contradicted by Innocent IV. During the last years of Henry III (d. 1272), the Jews of England fared worse and worse. About this time, Pope Gregory X issued a Bull ordaining that no injury be inflicted upon their persons or their property (1273); but the popular hatred against them on the charge of usury, use of Christian blood at their Passover, etc., could not be restrained; and the thirteenth century which had witnessed their persecution in all parts of Christendom, except Austria, Portugal, and Italy, closed with their total expulsion from England in 1200, under Edward I, and their carnage in Germany in 1283 and 1298. During the same period, public disputations had been resorted to but with little success for the conversion of the Jews. Further light on the severity of measures enacted by popes or councils concerning the Jews, as well on the motives of popular prejudice and hatred, will be found below, under section JUDAISM: (4) Judaism and Church Legislation.

(9) Last Part of the Middle Ages (1300-1500)

At the beginning of the fourteenth century, Jewish rabbis were divided concerning the value of the Zohar, the sacred book of the Kabalists (see KABBALA), which Moses of Leon had recently published. A still deeper division prevailed among them with regard to the cultivation of Aristotle's philosophy and the humanistic sciences and literature, and it resulted in 1305 in a public ban on the part of several Jewish leaders against the study of science. The next year (1306), Philip IV plundered and expelled all the French Jews, some of whom travelled as far as Palestine to enjoy there freedom under the rule of the mameluke sultan, Nassir Mohammed (d. 1341), while most remained on the border of France, thinking that the royal avarice which had caused their banishment would bring about their early return. Meantime, their coreligionists of Castile narrowly escaped the carrying out of stringent measures against their own rights and privileges (1313). The banished French Jews were actually recalled in 1315 by Louis X, and admitted for twelve years. But as early as 1320, there arose against them the bloody persecution of some 40,000 pastoureaux who pretended to be on their way to the recovery of the Holy Sepulchre. In 1321, the Jews were accused by the lepers of having poisoned the wells and rivers, whereupon a new persecution ensued. The same year, owing to intrigues against them, the Jews of Rome, then very flourishing in society and literature, would have been expelled from Roman territory by John XXII who resided in Avignon, had it not been for the timely intervention of Robert of Anjou, Vicar-General of the Papal States. In Castile, where the Jews possessed great influence with Alfonso XI (1312-1350), the various plans against them actually failed, and the king showed himself favourable to them till the day of his death. Their enemies were more successful in Navarre on the occasion of the war of independence which this province waged against France. As the Jews were apparently in the way of the secession, they were subjected to a violent persecution during the course of the war (1328), and to oppressive measures after Navarre had become a separate kingdom.

In Germany, they fared still worse during the riots and the civil wars under Louis IV (1314-1347). For two consecutive years (1336, 1337), the Armleder, or peasants wearing a piece of leather wound around arm, inflicted untold sufferings upon the Jewish inhabitants of Alsace and the Rhineland as far as Swabia. In 1337, also, on the charge of having profaned a consecrated Host, the Jews of Bavaria were subjected to a slaughter which soon extended to those of Bohemia, Moravia, and Austria, although Benedict XII had issued a Bull promising an inquiry into the matter. Besides, Louis IV, who always treated his Jewish subjects as mere slaves, subjected them (c. 1342) to a new and most onerous poll-tax. Greater Jewish massacres occurred in 1348-1349 while the fearful scourge, known as the "Black Death", desolated Europe. The report that the Jews had caused the scourge by poisoning the wells used by Christians, spread rapidly and was believed in most towns of Central Europe, despite the Bulls issued by Clement VI in July and September, 1348, declaring their falsity. Despite the fact, too, that the same pontiff had solemnly ordered that Jews be not forced into baptism, that their sabbaths, festivals, synagogues, and cemeteries be respected, that no new exactions be imposed on them, they were plundered and murdered in many countries of Central and Northern Europe. The next years were, on the whole, a period of respite from persecution for the Jewish race. In Castile, the Jews attained to a great influence under Don Pedro (1360-1369), and the misfortunes which then befell them arose partly from the prevalent view that they availed themselves of their power to lap up the people's possessions with their tax-farming, and partly from their constant loyalty to Don Pedro's cause, during the civil war which broke out between him and Don Henry. The latter, after reaching the throne, showed himself friendly to the Jews, and agree only reluctantly to some of the restrictive measures urged by the Cortes in 1371. In Germany, they were readmitted as early as 1355 into the very towns which had sworn that for 100 or 200 years no Jew should dwell within their walls.

In France, they were granted special privileges by King John (1361), which they enjoyed to the full extent under his successor, Charles V (1364-1380). But the last twenty years of the fourteenth century were again disastrous for the European Jews. In France, scarcely was Charles V dead, when popular riots were started against them because of their extortionate usury and encouragement to baptized Jews to recant, and finally brought about the permanent exile of the Jewish population (1394). In Spain, the reign of John I (d. 1390) witnessed a great curtailing of the Jews' power and privileges; and that of Henry III (d. 1406) was marked by bloody assaults in many cities of Castile and Aragon and even in the island of Majorca, on account of which numerous Jews embraced Christianity. In Germany (1384), and in Bohemia (1389, 1399), the Jews were likewise persecuted. Boniface IX had protested, but in vain, against such outrages and slaughters (1389); and it is only in his states, in Italy, and in Portugal, that the Jewish race had any measure of peace during these years of carnage.

At the beginning of the fifteenth century, the Jews enjoyed some manner of respite in nearly al the countries where they had been allowed to stay or whither they had fled from persecuting France and Spain. But these peaceful days did not last long. As early as 1408, there appeared in the name of the infant King of Castile, John II, an edict which revived the dormant anti-Jewish statutes of Alfonso X; and soon afterwards (1412), a severer edict was issued, intended to isolate the Jews from the Christians lest intercourse should injure the true Faith, and calculated to induce them to give up their religion. In fact, degraded in every way, parked in "Juderias", and deprived of practically every means of subsistence, many Jews surrendered to the exhortations of St. Vincent Ferrer, and received baptism, while the others persevered in Judaism and saw their misery somewhat alleviated by the royal edict of 1414. The persecution gradually extended to all the provinces of Spain, where St. Vincent also effected many conversions. At length, brighter days dawned for the Spanish Jews upon the death of Ferdinand, King of Aragon (1416) and of Catherine, Regent of Castile (1419), and upon the publication of the following solemn declaration of Martin V (1419), in their behalf: "Whereas the Jews are made to the image of God, and a remnant of them will one day be saved, and whereas they have besought our protection: following in the footsteps of our predecessors we command that they be not molested in their synagogues; that their laws, rights, and customs be not assailed; that they be not baptized by force, constrained to observe Christian festivals, nor to wear any new badges, and they be not hindered in their business relations with Christians." But then began new persecutions against the Jewish population of Central Europe. In their distress, the Austrian and the German Jews appealed to the same pontiff who, in 1420, also raised his voice in their favour, and who, in 1422, confirmed the ancient privileges of their race. Nevertheless, the Jews of Cologne were expelled in 1426, and those of several towns of southern Germany burned on the old blood accusation (1431). To add to their misfortune, the Council of Basle renewed the old and devised new restrictive measures against the Jews (1434); the unfavourable Archduke of Austria, Albert, became Emperor of Germany (1437-1439); and the new pope, Eugenius IV (1431-1447), at first well-disposed towards them, showed himself by this time less friendly to them.

Meantime, the Jewish communities of Castile prospered under John II, who promoted several Jews to public offices, and who in 1432 confirmed the statute of the Jewish Synod of Avila prescribing the establishment of separate schools. In the course of time, however, Spanish Christians complained to the pope of the arrogance of the Castilian Jews, and, in consequence, Eugenius IV issued an unfavourable Bull (1442) which greatly reduced Jewish prosperity and influence in Spain, and which was practically repeated in 1451 by Nicholas V (1447-1455). This pontiff was distinctly opposed to mob violence against the Jews, and he enjoined upon the Inquisitors of the Faith not only to refrain from exciting the popular hatred against them, but even to see that they should not be forcibly baptized or otherwise molested. And yet, under Nicholas V, severe persecutions befell the Jews of Central Europe, and their fugitives found a friendly refuge almost exclusively in the new Turkish Empire started by Mohammed II, the conqueror of Constantinople in 1453. The German emperor, Frederick III, was weak and vacillating, so that practically down to the end of his reign (1493), the Jews remaining in Central Europe were repeatedly subjected to miseries and humiliations. The Jews of Italy fared better during the same period, owing to the fact that the flourishing republics of Venice, Florence, Genoa, and Pisa appreciated and needed them as capitalists and diplomatists; and it is worthy of notice that the Italian Jews were very prompt in availing themselves of the newly invented art of typography. In Spain, also, the Jewish population lived in comparative peace and comfort under Henry IV of Castile (1454-1474) and John II of Aragon (1458-1479), for, apart from a few popular riots directed against the Jews, the persecution then prevailing in Spain fell upon the "Maranos", or forcibly converted Jews, for whose ambition or weakness Christianity was but a mask. Even after Ferdinand II and Isabella had united Castile and Leon under one sceptre (1479), the Jews remained undisturbed -- except in Andelusia -- until the fall of Granada, protected as they were by Isaac Abrabanel, the ruler's Jewish minister of finance. But the conquest of the rich Kingdom of Granada apparently led Ferdinand and Isabella to regard the Spanish Jews as no longer indispensable, as in fact out of place in their estates, which they wished altogether Christian. Without the approval of Innocent VII, the decree appeared (1492) banishing all Jews from Spain, and it was carried out despite Abrabanel's supplication and offer of an immense sum of money.

Great indeed were the misfortunes which befell the impoverished Jewish exiles. In Navarre, they had ultimately to choose between expulsion and baptism. In the African seaports, when allowed to land, they were decimated by plague and starvation. On the Genoese ships, they were submitted to the most brutal treatment, and those who landed near Genoa reduced to starve or give up Judaism. In Rome, their fellow-Jews offered 1000 ducats to Alexander VI to prevent their admission, an offer which was indignantly refused. In Naples, they were compassionately received by Ferdinand I, but also carried off in numbers by the pestilence which broke out among them. In Portugal, John II tolerated them only eight months, after which all remaining were made slaves. It is true that John's successor, Emmanuel (1495-1521), at first freed those enslaved Jews; but he finally signed in December, 1496, the decree expelling from Portugal all Jews who would refuse to be baptized, and in 1497 had it carried out. The country where the Spanish refugees were most hospitably received was Turkey, then ruled over by Bajazet II.

(10) Modern Period (1500-1700)

These expulsions of the Jews gave rise in the sixteenth century to the important division of the European Jews into "Sephardim" (Spanish and Portuguese Jews) and "Askenazim" (German and Polish Jews), thus called from two Biblical words connected by medieval rabbis with Spain and Germany respectively. Wherever they settled, the Sephardim preserved their peculiar ritual and also their native refinement of dictions, manners, dress, etc., which stood in striking contrast with those of the Askenazim and secured for them an influence which the latter did not exercise despite their closer acquaintance with the Talmud and greater faithfulness to ancestral virtues and traditions. Thus were formed two deep currents of Judaism requiring to be treated separately during the modern period of Jewish history. In Italy, the Sephardim found a refuge chiefly in Rome, Naples, Florence, and Ferrara, where they were soon rejoined by numerous Maranos of Spain and Portugal who again professed Judaism. In Naples, they enjoyed the high protection of Samuel Abrabanel, a wealthy Jew who apparently administered the finances of the viceroy, Don Pedro of Toledo. In Ferrara and Florence, Jews and Maranos were well treated by the respective rulers of these cities; and even in Venice, which considered the expediency of their expulsion lest their presence should injure the interest of native merchants, they were simply confined to the first Italian Ghetto (1516). The early Roman pontiffs of the sixteenth century had Jewish physicians and were favourable to the Jews and the Maranos of their states. Time soon came, however, when the Sephardic Jews of Italy fared differently. As early as 1532, the accusation of child murder nearly entailed the extermination of the Jews of Rome. In 1555, Paul IV revived the ancient canons against the Jews which forbade them the practice of medicine, the pursuit of high commerce, and the ownership of real estate. He also consigned them to a Ghetto, and compelled them to wear a Jew badge. In 1569, Pius IV expelled all the Jews from the Pontifical States, except Rome and Ancona. Sixtus V (1585-1590) recalled them; but, soon after him, Clement VIII (1592-1605) banished them again partially, at the very moment when the Maranos of Italy lost their last place of refuge in Ferrara. Similar misfortunes befell the Jewish race in other states of Italy as the Spanish domination extended there: Naples banished the Jews in 1541; Genoa, in 1550; Milan, in 1597. Henceforward, most Sephardic fugitives simply passed through Italy when on their way to the Turkish Empire.

During the whole present period, Turkey was, in fact, a haven of rest for the Sephardim. Bajazet II (d. 1512) and his immediate successors fully realized the services which the Jewish exiles could render to the new Mohammedan empire of Constantinople, and hence welcomed them in their states. Under Selim II (1566-1574), the Marano Joseph Nassi, become Duke of Naxos and the virtual ruler of Turkey, used his immense power and wealth for the benefit of his coreligionists, at home and abroad. After Nassi's death, his influence passed partially to Aschkenazi, and also to the Jewess Esther Kiera who played a most important role under the Sultans Amurath III, Mohammed III, and Achmet I. During the remainder of the period, the Jews of Turkey were generally prosperous under the guidance of their rabbis. Their communities were spread throughout the Ottoman Empire, their most important centres being Constantinople and Salonica in European Turkey, and Jerusalem and Safed in Palestine. It is true that the Turkish Jews of the period were repeatedly disturbed by the appearance of such false Messiases as David Rubeni, Solomon Molcho, Lurya Levi, and Sabbatai Zevi; but the public authorities of Turkey took no steps to punish the Jews who shared in such Messianic agitations. The country in which, next to Turkey, the Sephardim fared best, was Holland. The origin of their settlements in the Netherlands is chiefly due to the immigration of Portuguese Maranos who, under Emmanuel's successors, were repeatedly subjected to the terrors of the Inquisition despite the laudable efforts of several popes in their behalf, and who, after the conquest of Portugal by Philip II of Spain, in 1580, reached Holland, now in full revolt against the Spanish domination. Their first congregations of 1593 and 1598 in Amsterdam were acceptable to the city authorities who saw in the new-comers a means of extending Dutch commerce, and who, in 1619, allowed the public exercise of Jewish worship under liberal conditions. During the seventeenth century, the Amsterdam Jews contributed actively to the home and foreign prosperity of their adopted country. They greatly increased in numbers by new accessions of Portuguese Maranos, and established communities in Hamburg, in Guiana, and in Brazil. It was also in Amsterdam that the movement originated for a legal re-establishment of the Jews in England from which Jews had been strictly excluded since 1290. Oliver Cromwell, protector of the realm (1653-1658), was personally in favour of the movement, and he actively seconded the skilful pleadings of Manasses ben Israel, the leading rabbi of Amsterdam, for that purpose. Cromwell, however, did not dare openly to bring about a change generally hateful to the English clergy and nation. Under Charles II (d. 1685), the Jews stole insensibly into the kingdom, where they have ever since maintained their footing. The chief difficulties of the Sephardim in Holland were of an internal order: their rabbis used rather freely the power of excommunication, one of the victims of which was the celebrated Spinoza (1656); and the majority of the Jewish population of Amsterdam was more or less seriously disturbed, about this time, by the Messianic pretensions of Sabbatai Zevi.

During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the Askenazim or German Jews were less fortunate than their Sephardic contemporaries. Their general condition remained much the same as during the preceding period. It is often, but wrongly, asserted that the invention of printing, the revival of learning, and the Protestant Reformation were beneficial to the Jews. When, early in the sixteenth, century, the German Jews began to use the printing press for their own literature, sacred or otherwise, the Emperor Maximilian (d. 1519) was urged to order all Hebrew books to be burned, and but for the strenuous exertions of Reuchlin, the burning of the Talmud would have taken place. "That the Reformation itself had nothing to do with the subsequent ameliorations in the conditions of the Jews, is plain from the fact that in many parts of Germany, Protestant as well as Catholic, their lot became actually harder than before" ("The New Inter. Cyclop.", vol. X, New York, 1903). Luther himself, towards the end of his life, was their greatest opponent.

He poisoned the Protestant world for a long time to come, with his Jew-hating testament. Protestants became even more bitter against Jews that Catholics had been. The leaders of Catholicism demanded absolute submission to canonical law; but on that condition granted them permission to remain in Catholic countries; Luther, on the other hand, required their absolute expulsion. . . . It was reserved for him to place Jews on a level with Gypsies. . . . He was the cause of their being expelled by Protestant princes. (Grätz)

In general, the emperors of the period acted with equity towards their Jewish subjects. At times, however, they expelled them from their crown lands, or connived at their banishment from other places. During the Thirty Years' War, Ferdinand II (d. 1638) treated the Jews with great consideration, and required his generals to spare them from the hardships of the war. Under him and under his son, the Jewish community of Vienna was particularly flourishing; but this prosperity ended abruptly under Leopold I (1657-1705), and although about 1685 some Jews succeeded in stealing into Vienna, Leopold's decree of exclusion was formally repealed only much later. The chief place of refuge for the Askenazim of Germany, Austria, and Bohemia was at this time the Kingdom of Poland, where the Jewish population was remarkably free and prosperous up to the middle of the seventeenth century. In 1648, the Polish Jews began themselves to be persecuted by the Cossacks of the Ukraine who invaded Poland and were victorious in three successive campaigns. They were next subjected to the disastrous invasions of the Russians and the Swedes. It is estimated that within ten years (1648-1658), more than 200,000 Jews were slaughtered in the Polish dominions. In consequence, the surviving Jews of Poland were reduced to a condition of extreme poverty and abjection from which the Polish kings of the second part of the seventeenth century earnestly strove to extricate them. During the period just sketched, Christian scholars began to cultivate Hebrew under the guidance of Jewish grammarians; Hebrew studies were introduced into German and French universities; and Richard Simon made the learned world acquainted with rabbinical literature.

(11) Recent Times (since 1700)

In dealing with this last period, it will be convenient to narrate briefly the events relative, first to the Jews of the Old world, and next to those of the New. The internal condition of the Jews in the Old World during the first half of the eighteenth century was that of a general demoralization which made them appear all the more disreputable because the recent works of Christian scholars, such for instance, as the history of the Jews by Basnage, had forcibly directed the attention of the learned world towards them. They were not indeed subjected to the wholesale massacres of former days, but they remained in the eyes of all a despised race liable to all kinds of disabilities. In Sweden, they were allowed (1718) to enter the kingdom under unfavourable conditions; in France, new restrictions were imposed on their settlements (1718) at Metz and Bordeaux; in Prussia, the laws of Frederick William I (1714, 1730) breathed a spirit of great intolerance against them; at Naples, the concessions made to the Jews by Charles III, in 1740, were soon revoked; in Austria, charges that they were in league with the country's enemies during the War of the Austrian Succession were readily believed, led to bloody riots against them, wellnigh entailed (1745) under Maria Theresa their perpetual expulsion from Bohemia and Moravia, and caused the Jews of Prague to be placed under the most severe restrictions; in Russia, Catherine I (1727) took active measures against the Ukraine Jews and banished the Jewish population from Russia. Anna Ivanowa (1739) decreed their expulsion from Little Russia, and Elizabeth (1741-1762) harshly enforced anti-Jewish measures; and finally, in England, the Jews were simply tolerated as aliens, and a naturalization act, which was passed by both Houses and ratified by George II (1753), was actually repealed (1754) owing to the nation's opposition to it.

Gradually, however, a number of circumstances lessened this spirit of hostility against the Jews. Among these circumstances may be particularly mentioned: (a) the vast influence exercised by Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786), who, by his literary attainments and his strong personality, proved to the world that his race could produce men worthy of admittance into the highest society, and showed to his fellow-Jews the way to remove prejudices against them; and (b) the vigorous defence of the Jews by the Christian writer Dohm, who, in his work "Upon the Amelioration of the Condition of the Jews", suggested many practical measures which Joseph II of Austria partly accepted in 1781, when he abolished the Jewish poll-tax and granted civil liberties to the Jews. Under these, and other such circumstances, a more liberal spirit toward the Jews prevailed in Prussia and in France, where William II and Louis XVI, respectively, abolished the Jewish body tax. It made itself felt also in Russia where Catherine II (1762-1796) even decreed the civil and religious liberty of the Jews, but under whose rule the Russian Senate managed to organize the "Pale of Settlement" or portion of Russia in which Jews are allowed to reside, and to enforce other anti-Jewish measure. It culminated in the decrees of the French Revolution which actually opened the era of Jewish emancipation: in 1790, the French National Assembly granted citizenship to the Sephardic Jews, and, in 1791, it extended full civil rights to all the Jews of the country. With French victories and influence, Jewish liberty naturally followed, and, in 1796, the Batavian National Assembly decreed citizenship for the Jews. Napoleon I summoned in 1806 an assembly of Jewish notables which succeeded in calming his prejudices against the Jews, and in 1807 a Great Sanhedrin, which proved to his satisfaction that the Jewish race may be faithful both to its religion and to the State. Then followed, not without difficulties, yet in rapid succession, the emancipation of the Jews of Westphalia and of Baden (1808), of Hamburg (1811), of Mecklenburg, and of Prussia (1812).

The fall of Napoleon and the consequent period of European reorganization gave a setback to Jewish liberty, especially in Germany, which was for a while the scene of bloody riots against the Jews; but gradually, and nearly everywhere in the Old World, Jewish liberty prevailed. In France, the Jewish rabbis were put, under Louis Philippe (1831), on the same footing with regard to salary as the curês of the Catholic Church; in 1846, the oath "More Judaico" was abolished as unconstitutional; and since the wave of anti-Semitism which culminated in the well-known case of Alfred Dreyfus, the Jewish population of the country and of Algiers has not been molested. In England, it was not before 1858 that Parliament was freely opened to the Jews by the suppression of the clause "On the true faith of a Christian" from the oath of office, and not before 1870, that all restrictions for every position (except that of sovereign) in the British Empire were abolished. In northern Germany, the various states allowed civil liberty to their Jewish population in 1848, and after 1870, all restrictions disappeared, although since that time, owing to anti-Semitism, minor disabilities have been publicly enacted or quietly enforced in some parts of the Empire. Denmark enfranchised the Jews in 1849, whereas Sweden and Norway still subject them to certain disabilities. In 1867, the Jews of Austria were emancipated, and in 1895, those of Hungary obtained, moreover, that Judaism be considered as "a legally recognized religion". In Switzerland, after a long and bitter struggle, the Federal Constitution of 1874 granted to the Jews full liberty. In Italy, the Jewish disabilities, revived on the fall of Napoleon I, and the application of which occasioned in 1858 the celebrated Mortara Case, have all been gradually abolished, and Rome, the last Italian place where the Jews were emancipated, elected a Jew, Ernesto Nathan, for its mayor, 10 October, 1908. Spain and Portugal have not yet recognized officially their small Jewish population. The Danubian provinces of Servia, Bulgaria, and Montenegro, have, in accordance with the Treaty of Berlin of 1878, allowed civil and religious liberty to their Jewish settlers, whereas the province of Rumania, in defiance of the same treaty, has refused it and carried out persecutions which have entailed a very large emigration of Rumanian Jews. Turkish Jews were granted citizenship in 1839; yet, in various parts of the Turkish Empire, there repeatedly occur accusations of ritual and child-murder, which inflame the populace and lead to anti-Jewish riots.

In Palestine, their number is rapidly increasing (there are now 78,000) despite the sultan's restrictions (1888, 1895) concerning the accession of Jewish immigrants in numbers; and agricultural colonies are established in various parts of the land. In Fez and chiefly in Morocco, Jews have still much to fear from the fanaticism of Mohammedans. In Persia, they are at times oppressed, despite the ruler's general goodwill towards them. Their fate has been, and still is, deplorable in Russia where lives nearly one-half of the total Jewish population of the globe. The liberty of trade and commerce granted to them by Alexander I (1801-1825) was replaced, under Nicholas I (1825-1855), by a legislation calculated to diminish their number, to deprive them of their religious and national character, and to render them morally and commercially harmless to Christians. Alexander II (1855-1881)was very favourable to the Jews; but the reaction against them under Alexander III (1881-1894) was of the most intolerant kind. From the promulgation of the Ignatieff law of 1882, the most restrictive measures have been piled up against the Jews, and since 1891 they have been applied with such severity that Russian Jews have emigrated in hundreds of thousands, mostly to the United States. Under the present emperor, Nicholas II, new restrictions have been devised; riots against the Jews occurred in 1896, 1897, 1899, and culminated in the massacres of Kishineff, Homel, etc., from 1903 to 1906, helped in various ways by Russian officials and soldiers; during the year 1909, the persecution took the form of orders of expulsion, and the trials prescribed by the Duma against the organizers and perpetrators of the massacres of some years ago are apparently a farce.

Jews at an early date settled in South America, exiled from Spain and Portugal, or taking part in the Dutch and English commercial enterprises in the New World. Brazil was their main centre. Those found there in the sixteenth century were Maranos who had been sent in company with convicts. They acquired wealth and became very numerous at the beginning of the seventeenth century. They helped the Dutch in wresting Brazil from Portugal (1624), and were joined in 1642 by many Portuguese Jews from Amsterdam. At the end of the Dutch rule over Brazil (1654), most Jewish settlers returned to Holland; some emigrated to French settlements -- Guadaloupe, Martinique, and Cayenne; others took refuge in Curaçao, a Dutch possession; and finally, a small band reached New Amsterdam (New York). After a very few years, those who had settled on the French islands were compelled to turn to friendly Dutch possessions, and to other places of refuge, notably to Surinam (then belonging to England) where they became increasingly prosperous. The other early settlements of Jews in Mexico, Peru, and the West Indies do not require more than a passing mention. Of much greater importance were those effected chiefly by Sephardim in North America. There were Jews in New Amsterdam as early as 1652; others came from Brazil in 1654. As these were not received in a friendly manner by the governor, Peter Stuyvesant, some of them betook themselves to the Colony of Rhode Island, where they were reinforced in the course of time by contingents from Curaçao (1690) and from Lisbon (1755). The condition of those who had remained at New Amsterdam was, on the whole, fair, for they sere sustained by the Dutch home Government; and it remained substantially so after 1664, at which date the British captured New Amsterdam and changed its name to New York. At the end of the seventeenth century there were some Jews in Maryland. The next places of settlement were Pennsylvania (with a large percentage of Askenazim), Georgia, and the Carolinas.

During the War of the American Revolution, the Jews generally took the colonial side; some fought bravely for it; and Haydn Solomon aided the Continental Congress with his money. Following the Declaration of Independence (July, 1776) most of the states of the Union placed all citizens upon an equality, the only notable exception Maryland, in which state all disabilities were removed only in 1826. During the nineteenth century, the Jews spread over all the United States and recently into their possessions, after the Spanish American War (1898), in which some 2000 Jewish soldiers took part. Important congregations have also grown up in the larger cities of Canada, where the Jews possess full civil rights since 1831. From 1830 to 1870, the immigration into the United States came largely from the Rhine Provinces, South Germany, and Hungary. Since 1882, the riots and persecutions in Russia have let to an immense emigration, a small portion of which was directed by Baron von Hirsch to the Argentine Republic, or went to Canada, but the great bulk of which came to the United States. To these have been added numerous Jews from Galicia and Rumania. The total Jewish immigration to the United States through the three chief ports of entry (New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore) from 1882 to 30 June 1909, was 1,397,423, out of which upwards of 54,000 reached the country between 1 July, 1908, and 30 June, 1909. In consequence, the United States have the third largest Jewish population in the world, the latest estimates being 5,215,805 for Russia, 2,084,591 for Austria-Hungary, and 1,777,185 for the United States. For the immigrants who, for the most part, have settled in large business centres, day and night schools to teach them English, together with trade schools to enable them to earn a livelihood, have been organized or enlarged. For those whom it has been possible to divert elsewhere, agricultural colonies have been attempted in several states, but have been little successful. In nearly every other line (educational, philanthropic, literary, financial, etc.) the development of Jewish activity during the last twenty-five years has been both rapid and successful. Differently from the Jews of Jamaica and Canada those of the United States are altogether independent of the jurisdiction of any European authority.

The Jewish statistics in the table below are taken from the "American Jewish Year Book" for the year 5670 (16 September, 1909, to 3 October, 1910).

United States -- 1,777,185
Italy -- 52,115
British Empire -- 380,809
Luxemburg -- 1,200
Abyssinia -- 3,000
Mexico -- 8,972
Argentina -- 30,000
Morocco -- 109,712
Austria-Hungary 2,084,591
Norway -- 642
Belgium -- 12,000
Persia -- 49,500
Brazil -- 3,000
Peru -- 498
Bulgaria -- 36,455
Rumania -- 250,000
China and Japan 2,000
Russia -- 5,215,805
Costa Rica -- 43
Servia -- 5,729
Cuba -- 4,000
Spain -- 2,500
Denmark -- 3,476
Sweden -- 3,912
France -- 95,000
Switzerland -- 12,264
Algeria -- 63,000
Turkey -- 463,686
Tunis -- 62,540
Egypt -- 38,635
Germany -- 607,862
Tripoli -- 18,660
Greece -- 8,350
Crete -- 1,150
Holland -- 105,988
Turkestan & Afghanistan -- 14,000
Curaçao -- 1,000
Venezuela -- 411
Surinam -- 1,158
Total -- 11,530,848

HAMBURGER, Realencyclopädie des Judenthums (Leipzig, 1896); The Jewish Encyclopedia (New York, 1901-1906); the handy vols. Of the American Jewish Year Book (Philadelphia, 1899-1909); KREUTZWALD in Kirchenlex., s.v. Juden; VON HANEBERG, ibid, s.v. Judenthum; SCHöLEIN in BUCHBERGER, Kirchliches Handlex., s. v. Juden and Judentum. In addition the following works may be mentioned as more important or more accessible:

General Jewish History. BASNAGE, Histoire des Juifs depuis Jésus-Christ (Rotterdam, 1706); ADAMS, History of the Jews from the Destruction of Jerusalem to the Present Time (Boston, 1812); JOST, Hist of the Jews from the Maccabees to Our Day, tr. (New York, 1848); IDEM, Geschicte d. Judenthums u. s. Secten (Leipzig, 1857-59); MILMAN, The History of the Jews (London, 1863); PALMER, A History of the Jewish Nation (London, 1874); REINACH, Hist. Des Israélites depuis l'epoque de leur dispersion jusqu'á nos jours (Paris, 1884); MAGNUS, Outlines of Jewish History (Philadelphia, 1884); BECK, Gesch. D. jüdischen Volkes u. s. Iiteratur vom babylonischen Exile bis auf die Gegenwart(Lissa, 1894); GRéTZ, Hist. Of the Jews, tr. (Philadelphia, 1891-98); KARPELES, Sketch of Jewish Hist. (Philadelphia, 1898); DUBNOW, Jewish Hist., tr. (Philadelphia, 1903); GEIGER, Das Judenthum u. s. Geschichte (2nd ed., Breslau, 1909.

Special Jewish History. SCHLATTER, Israels Geschichte von Alexander d. Grossen bis Hadrian (Carlovitz, 1901); CONDER, Judas Maccabæus (London, 1894); VON SCHöRER, A Hist. Of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ. tr. (New York, 1891); MORRISON, The Jews under Roman Rule (New York, 1893); BEUGNOT, Les Juifs d'Occident (Paris, 1824); DEPPING, Les Juifs dans le Moyen-Age (Paris, 1834); BÉDARRIDE, Les Juifs en France, en Italie, et en Espagne (Paris, 1861); HARRIS, History of the Mediæval Jews (New York, 1907); MARKENS, The Hebrews in America (New York, 1888); WOLF, The American Jew as Patriot, Soldier, and Citizen (Philadelphia, 1895); DALY, The Settlement of the Jews in North America (New York, 1893); TOVEY, Anglia Judaica (Oxford, 1788); PICCIOTO, Sketches of Anglo-Jewish Hist. (London, 1875); GOLDSCHMIDT, Gesch. d. Juden in England (Berlin, 1886); HALLEZ, Les Juifs en France (Paris, 1845); KOENEN, Geschiedenis d. Juden in Nederland (Utrecht, 1843); DA COSTA, Israel en de Volken (Utrecht, 1876); STEINBERG, Studien zur Gesch. D. Juden in der Schweiz während des Mittelalters (Zurich, 1902); VOGELSTEIN AND RIEGER, Gesch. D. Juden in Rom (Berlin, 1895-96); LAGUMINA, Codice diplomatico dei Giudei di Sicilia (Palermo, 1885); LINDO, The History of the Jews of Spain and Portugal (London, 1848); AMADOR DE LOS RIOS, Historia social, politica, y religiosa de los Judios de España y Portugal (Madrid, 1875-76); KAYSERLING, Gesch. Der Juden in Spanien und Portugal (Berlin, 1861-67); STOBBE, Die Juden in Deutschland während des Mittelalters (Brunswick, 1866); FöRST, Urkunden zur Gesch. Der Juden (Leipzig, 1844); Quellen zur Gesch. d. Juden in Deutschland (Berlin, 1888); WERTHEIMER, Die Juden in Oesterrich (Leipzig, 1842; WOLF, Judentaufen in Oesterrich (Vienna, 1863; BERGL, Gesch. Der ungarischen Juden (Leipzig, 1879); MöLLER, Urkundliche Beiträge zur Gesch. Der märischen Judenschaft im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (Olmütz, 1903); PODIEGRAD AND FOGES, Alterthümer d. Prager Josefstadt (Prague, 1870); VERAN, La Roumanie et les Juifs (Bukarest, 1903); ELK, Die jüd. Kolonien in Russland (Frankfort, 1886; ERRERA, The Russian Jews, tr. (New York, 1894); STERNBERG, Gesch. D. Juden in Polen (Leipzig, 1878); BERSHADSKI, Litovskie Yevrei (St. Petersburg, 1883); Russko-Yevreiski Arkiv (St. Petersburg, 1882); CAZES, Essai sur l'histoire des Israilites de Tunisie (Paris, 1888); FREGIER, Les Juifs Algeriens (Paris, 1865).

Literary History. FöRST, Bibliotheca Judaica (Leipzig, 1849-63); WINTER AND WöNSCHE, Die Jüdische Literatur (Trier, 1891-96); KARPELES, Jewish Literature and Other Essays (Philadelphia, 1895); LIPPE, Bibliog. Lexicon (Vienna, 1899); WIENER, The History of Yiddish Literature in the 19tth Century, tr. (New York, 1903); CASSEL, Manual of Jewish History and Literature, (New York, 1903); SLOUSCH, Renaissance de la littérature hébraïque (Paris, 1903); BRODY AND ALBRECHT, The New School of Poets of the Spanish-American Epoch (London, 1906); ABRAHAMS, A Short History of Jewish Literature (New York, 1906).

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Judaism

At the present day, the term designates the religious communion which survived the destruction of the Jewish nation by the Assyrians and the Babylonians. A brief account of Judaism thus understood may be given under the following heads:

(1) Judaism before the Christian Era;
(2) Judaism and Early Christianity;
(3) Judaism since A.D. 70;
(4) Judaism and Church Legislation.

I. JUDAISM BEFORE THE CHRISTIAN ERA

Upon the return from Babylon (538 B.C.), Juda was conscious of having inherited the religion of pre-Exile Israel. It was that religion which had prompted the exiles to return to the land promised by Yahweh to their ancestors, and they were now determined to maintain it in its purity. From the Captivity they had learned that in His justice, God had punished their sins by delivering them into the power of pagan nations, as the Prophets of old had repeatedly announced; and that in His love for the people of His choice, the same God had brought them back, as Isaias (40-46) had particularly foretold. Thence they naturally drew the conclusion that, cost what it may, they must prove faithful to Yahweh, so as to avert a like punishment in the future. The same conclusion was also brought home to them, when some time after the completion of the Temple, Esdras solemnly read the Law in their hearing. This reading placed distinctly before their minds the unique position of their race among the nations of the world. The Creator of heaven and earth, in His mercy towards fallen man (Genesis 1-3), had made a covenant with their father Abraham, in virtue of which his seed, and in his seed all the peoples of the earth, should be blessed (Genesis 12, 18; II Esdras 9). From that time forth, He had watched over them with jealous care. The other nations, once fallen into idolatry, He had allowed to grovel amid their impure rites; but He had dealt differently with the Israelites whom he wished to be unto Him "a priestly kingdom and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6). Their repeated falls into idolatry He had not left unpunished, but He kept alive among them the revealed religion which ever represented God as the true and adequate object of their devotion, trust, gratitude, of their obedience and service.

All the past misfortunes of their race were thus distinctly seen as so many chastisements intended by God to recall His ungrateful people to the observance of the Law, whereby they would secure the holiness necessary for the blameless discharge of their priestly mission to the rest of the world. They, therefore, pledged renewed faithfulness to the Law, leaving it to God to bring about the glorious day when all the earth, with Jerusalem as its centre, would recognize and worship Yahweh; they broke every tie with the surrounding nationalities, and formed a community wholly sacred unto the Lord, chiefly concerned with the preservation of His faith and worship by a strict compliance with all the ritual prescriptions of the Law. On the one hand, this religious attitude of the Judean Jews secured the preservation of Monotheism among them. History proves that the Persians and the Macedonians respected their religious freedom and even to some extent favoured the worship of Yahweh. It remains true, however, that in the time of the Machabees, the children of Israel escaped being throughly hellenized only through their attachment to the Law. Owing to this attachment, the fierce persecutions which they then underwent, confirmed instead of rooting out their belief in the true God. On the other hand, the rigour with which the letter of the Law became enforced gave rise to a narrow "legalism". The mere external compliance with ritual observances gradually superseded the higher claims of conscience; the Prophet was replaced by the "scribe", the casuistic interpreter of the Law; and Israel, in its sacred isolation, looked down upon the rest of mankind. A similarly narrow spirit animated the Babylonian Jews, for it was from Babylon that Esdras, "a ready scribe in the Law of Moses", had come to revive the Law in Jerusalem, and their existence in the midst of heathen populations made it all the more imperative for them to cling tenaciously to the creed and worship of Yahweh.

Apparently, things went on smoothly with the priestly community of Juda as long as the Persian supremacy lasted. It was the policy of ancient Asiatic empires to grant to each province its autonomy, and the Judean Jews availed themselves of this to live up to the requirements of the Mosaic Law under the headship of their high-priests and the guidance of their scribes. The sacred ordinances of the Law were no burden to them, and gladly did they even increase the weight by additional interpretations of its text. Nor was this happy condition materially interfered with under Alexander the Great and his immediate successors in Syria and in Egypt. In fact, the first contact of the Judean Jews with hellenistic civilization seemed to open to them a wider field for their theocratic influence, by giving rise to a Western Dispersion with Alexandria and Antioch as its chief local centres and Jerusalem as its metropolis. However much the Jews living among the Greeks mingled with the latter for business pursuits, learned the Greek language, or even became acquainted with hellenistic philosophy, they remained Jews to the core. The Law as read and explained in their local synagogues regulated their every act, kept them from all defilement with idolatrous worship, and maintained intact their religious traditions. With regard to creed, worship, and morality, the Jews felt themselves far superior to their pagan fellow-citizens, and the works of their leading writers of the time were in the main those of apologists bent on convincing pagans of this superiority and on attracting them to the service of the sole living God. In fact, through this intercourse between Judaism and Hellenism in the Græco-Roman world, the Jewish religion won the allegiance of a certain number of Gentile men and women, while the Jewish beliefs themselves gained in clearness and precision through the efforts then made to render them acceptable to Western minds.

Much less happy results followed on the contact of Jewish Monotheism with Greek Polytheism on Palestinian soil. There, worldly and ambitious high-priests not only accepted, but even promoted, Greek culture and heathenism in Jerusalem itself; and, as already stated, the Greek rulers of the early Machabean Age proved violent persecutors of Yahweh worship. The chief question confronting the Palestinian Jews was not, therefore, the extension of Judaism among the nations, but its very preservation among the children of Israel. No wonder then that Judaism assumed there an attitude of direct antagonism to everything hellenistic, that the Mosaic observances were gradually enforced with extreme rigour, and that the oral Law, or rulings of the Elders relative to such observances appeared in the eyes of pious Judean Jews of no less importance than the Mosaic Law itself. No wonder, too, that in opposition to the lukewarmness for the oral Law evinced by the priestly aristocracy -- the Sadducees as they were called -- there arose in Juda a powerful party resolved to maintain at any cost the Jewish separation -- hence their name of Pharisees -- from the contamination of the Gentiles by the most scrupulous compliance, not only with the Law of Moses, but also with the "Traditions of the Elders". The former of these leading parties was pre-eminently concerned with the maintenance of the status quo in politics, and in the main sceptical with regard to such prominent beliefs or expectations of the time as the existence of angels, the resurrection of the dead, the reference of the oral Law to Moses, and the future Redemption of Israel. The latter party strenuously maintained these positions. Its extreme wing was made up of Zealots always ready to welcome any false Messias who promised deliverance from the hated foreign yoke; while its rank and file earnestly prepared by the "works of the Law" for the Messianic Age variously described by the Prophets of old, the apocalyptic writings and the apocryphal Psalms of the time, and generally expected as an era of earthly felicity and legal righteousness in the Kingdom of God. The rise of the Essenes is also ascribed to this period.

II. JUDAISM AND EARLY CHRISTIANITY

At the beginning of our era, Judaism was in external appearance thoroughly prepared for the advent of the Kingdom of God. Its great centre was Jerusalem, the "Holy City", whither repaired in hundreds of thousands Jews of every part of the world, anxious to celebrate the yearly festivals in the "City of the Great King". The Temple was in the eyes of them all the worthy House of the Lord, both by the magnificence of its structure and by the wonderful appointment of its service. The Jewish priesthood was not only numerous, but also most exact in the offering of the daily, weekly, monthly, and other, sacrifices, which it was its privilege to perform before Yahweh. The high-priest, a person most sacred, stood at the head of the hierarchy, and acted as final arbiter of all religious controversies. The Sanhedrin of Jerusalem, or supreme tribunal of Judaism, watched zealously over the strict fulfilment of the Law and issued decrees readily obeyed by the Jews dispersed throughout the world. In the Holy Land, and far and wide beyond its boundaries, besides local Sanhedrins, there were synagogues supplying the ordinary religious and educational needs of the people, and wielding the power of excommunication against breakers of the Law, oral and written. A learned class, that of the Scribes, not only read and interpreted the text of the Law in the synagogue meetings, but sedulously proclaimed the "Traditions of the Elders", the collection of which formed a "fence to the Law", because whoever observed them was sure not to trespass in any way against the Law itself. Legal righteousness was the watchword of Judaism, and its attainment by separation from Gentiles and sinners, by purifications, fasts, almsgiving, etc., in a word by the fulfilment of traditional enactments which applied the Law to each and every walk of life and to all imaginable circumstances, was the one concern of pious Jews wherever found. Plainly, the Pharisees and the scribes who belonged to their party had generally won the day. In Palestine, in particular, the people blindly followed their leadership, confident that the present rule of pagan Rome would speedily come to an end at the appearance of the Messias, expected as a mighty deliverer of the faithful "children of the kingdom'. Meantime, it behooved the sons of Abraham to emulate the "righteousness of the Scribes and the Pharisees" whereby they would secure admittance into the Messianic world-wide empire, of which Jerusalem would be the capital, and of which every Jewish member would be superior in things temporal as well as spiritual to the rest of the world then rallied to the worship of the one true God.

In reality, the Jews were far from prepared for the fulfilment of the promises which the almighty had repeatedly made to their race. This was first shown to them, when a voice, that of John, the son of Zachary and the herald of the Messias, was heard in the wilderness of Juda. It summoned, but with little success, all the Jews to a genuine sorrow for sin, which was indeed foreign to their hearts, but which could alone, despite their title of "children of Abraham", fit them for the kingdom near at hand. This was next shown to them by Jesus, the Messias Himself, Who, at the very beginning of His public life, repeated John's summons to repentance (Mark 1:15), and Who, throughout His ministry, endeavoured to correct the errors of Judaism of the day concerning the kingdom which He had come to found among men. With authority truly Divine He bade His hearers not to be satisfied with the outward righteousness of the scribes and the Pharisees if they wished to enter into that kingdom, but to aim at the inner perfection which alone could lift up men's moral nature and render them worthy worshipers of their heavenly Father. The Kingdom of God, He plainly declared, had come upon His contemporaries, since Satan, God's enemy and man's, was under their eyes cast out by Himself and by His chosen disciples (Mark 12:20; Luke 10:18). The kingdom which the Jews should expect is the Kingdom of God in its modest, secret, and as it were, insignificant origin. It is subject to the laws of organic growth as all living things are, and hence its planting and early developments do not attract much attenti0on; but it is not so with its further extension, destined as it is to pervade and transform the world.

This kingdom is indeed rejected by those who had the first claim to its possession and seemingly were the best qualified for entering into it; but all those, both Jews and Gentiles, who earnestly avail themselves of the invitation of the Gospel will be admitted. This is really a new Kingdom of God to be transferred to a new nation and governed by a new set of rulers, although it is no less truly the continuation of the Kingdom of God under the Old Covenant. Once this kingdom is organized upon earth, its king, the true son and lord of David, goes to a far country, relying upon His representatives to be more faithful than the rulers of the old kingdom. Upon the king's return, this kingdom of grace will be transferred into a kingdom of glory. The duration of the kingdom on earth will outlive the ruin of the Holy City and of its Temple; it will be coextensive with the preaching of the Gospel to all nations, and this, when accomplished, will be the sign of the near approach of the kingdom of glory. In thus describing God's kingdom, Jesus justly treated as vain the hopes of His Jewish contemporaries that they should become masters of the world in the event of a conflict with Rome; He also set aside the fabric of legalism which their leaders regarded as to be perpetuated in the Messianic kingdom, but which in reality they should have considered as either useless or positively harmful now that the time had come to extend "salvation out of the Jews" to the nations at large; plainly, the legal sacrifices and ordinances had no longer any reason of being, since they had been instituted to prevent Israel from forsaking the true God, and since Monotheism was now firmly established in Israel; plainly, too, the "traditions of the Elders" should not be tolerated any longer, since they had gradually led the Jews to disregard some of the most essential precepts of the moral law embodied in the decalogue.

Jesus did not come to destroy the Law or the Prophets, that is those sacred writings which He, no less than His Jewish contemporaries, distinctly recognized as inspired by the Holy Spirit; His mission, on the contrary, was to secure their fulfilment. Indeed, He would have destroyed the Law, if He had sided with the Scribes and the Pharisees who had raised a fence to the Law, which actually encroached upon the sacred territory of the Law itself; but He fulfilled it by proclaiming the new Law of perfect love of God and man, whereby all the precepts of the Old Law were brought to completion. Again, He would have destroyed the Prophets, if like the same Scribes and Pharisees, He had pictured an image of God's kingdom and God's Messias solely by means of the glorious features contained in the prophetical writings; but He fulfilled them by drawing a picture which took into account both glorious and inglorious delineations of the Prophets of old, setting both in their right order and perspective. The Kingdom of God as described and founded by Jesus has an historical name. It is the Christian Church, which was able silently to leaven the Roman Empire, which has outlived the ruin of the Jewish Temple and its worship, and which, in the course of centuries, has extended to the confines of the world the knowledge and the worship of the God of Abraham, while Judaism has remained the barren fig-tree which Jesus condemned during His mortal life.

The death and resurrection of Jesus fulfilled the ancient types and prophecies concerning Him (cf. Luke, xxiv, 26, 27), and the visible bestowal of the Holy Ghost upon His assembled followers on Pentecost Day gave them the light to realize this fulfilment (Acts, iii, 15) and the courage to proclaim it even in the hearing of those Jewish authorities who thought that they had by the stigma of the Cross put an end forever to the Messianic claims of the Nazarene. From this moment the Church which Jesus had silently organized during His mortal life with Peter as its head and the other Apostles as his fellow-rulers, took the independent attitude which it has maintained ever since. Conscious of their Divine mission, its leaders boldly charged the Jewish rulers with the death of Jesus, and freely "taught and preached Christ Jesus", disregarding the threats and injunctions of men whom they considered as in mad revolt against God and His Christ (Acts, iv). They solemnly proclaimed the necessity of faith in Christ for justification and salvation, and that of baptism for membership in the religious community which grew rapidly under their guidance, and which recognized the risen Son of God as its Divinely constituted "Lord and Christ", "Prince and Saviour", in a real, although invisible, manner, during the present order of things. According to them, these are plainly Messianic times as proved by the realization of Joel's prophecy concerning the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon all flesh, so that the Jews "first" and next the Gentiles are now called to receive the Divine blessing so long promised in Abraham's Seed for all nations. Much as in these early days the infant Church was Jewish in external appearance, it even then caused Judaism to feel threatened in its whole system of civil and religious life (Acts 6:13-14). Hence followed a severe persecution against the Christians, in which Saul (Paul) took and active part, and in the course of which he was converted miraculously.

At his conversion Paul found the Church spread far and wide by the very persecution meant to annihilate it, and officially pursuing its differentiation from Judaism by the reception into its fold of Samaritans who rejected the Temple worship in Jerusalem, of the Ethiopian eunuch, that is, of a class of men distinctly excluded from the Judaic community by the Deuteronomic Law, and especially of the uncircumcised Cornelius and his Gentile household with whom Peter himself broke bread in direct opposition to legal traditions. When, therefore, Paul, now become an ardent Apostle of Christ, openly maintained the freedom of Gentile converts from the Law as understood and enforced by the Jews and even by certain Judeo-Christians, he was in thorough agreement with the official leaders of the Church at Jerusalem, and it is well known that the same official leaders positively approved his course of action in this regard (Acts 15; Galatians 2). The real difference between him and them consisted in his fearlessness in preaching Christian freedom and in vindicating by his Epistles the necessity and efficiency of faith in Christ for justification and salvation independently of the "works of the Law", that is, the great principles acknowledged and acted upon before him in this Christian Church. The result of his polemics was the sharp setting forth of the relation existing between Judaism and Christianity; in Christ's kingdom, only believing Jews and Gentiles recline with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (cf. Matthew 8:11); they are coheirs of the promise made to the father of all the faithful when he was as yet uncircumcised; the Law and the Prophets are fulfilled in Christ and His body, the Church; the Gospel must be preached to all nations, and then the consummation shall come. The result of his consuming zeal for the salvation of souls redeemed by the blood of Christ was the formation of religious communities bound together by the same faith, hope, and charity as the churches of Palestine, sharing in the same sacred mysteries, governed by pastors likewise vested with Christ's authority, and forming a vast Church organism vivified by the same Holy Spirit and clearly distinct from Judaism. Thus the small mustard seed planted by Jesus in Judea had grown into a great tree fully able to near the storms of persecution and heresy (see Epistle to the Colossians; Ebionites; Gnosticism).

III. JUDAISM SINCE A.D. 70

While Christianity thus asserted itself as the new Kingdom of God, the Jewish theocracy, guided by leaders unable "to know the signs of the times", was hastening to its total destruction. The Romans came, and in A.D. 70 put an end forever to the Jewish Temple, priesthood, sacrifices, and nation, whereby it should have become clear to the Jews that their national worship was rejected of God. In point of fact, Judaism, shorn of these its essential features, soon

"assumed an entirely new aspect. All the parties and sects of a former generation vanished; Pharisees and Sadducees ceased to quarrel with each other; the Temple was supplanted by the synagogue, sacrifices by the prayer, the priest by any one who was able to read, teach, and interpret both the written and the oral law. The Sanhedrin lost its juridical qualification, and became a consistory to advise people in regard to the religious duties. Judaism became a science, a philosophy, and ceased to be a political institution" (Schindler, "Dissolving Views in the History of Judaism").

This new system, treated at first as simply provisional because of the surviving hope of restoring the Jewish commonwealth, had soon to be accepted as definitive through the crushing of Bar-Cochba's revolt by Hadrian. Then it was that Rabbinical or Talmudical Judaism fully asserted its authority over the two great groups of Jewish families east and west of the Euphrates respectively. For several centuries, under either the "Patriarchs of the West" or the "Princes of the Captivity", the Mishna "Oral Teaching" completed by Rabbi Juda I, committed ultimately to writing in the form of the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, and expounded by generations of teachers in the schools of Palestine and Babylonia, held undisputed sway over the minds and consciences of the Jews.

In fact, this long acceptation of the Talmud by the Jewish race, before its centre was shifted from the East to the West, so impressed this Second Law (Mishna) upon the hearts of the Jews that down to the present day Judaism has remained essentially Talmudical both in its theory and in its practice. It is indeed true that as early as the eighth century of our era the authority of the Talmud was denied in favour of Biblical supremacy by the sect of the Karaites, and that it has oftentimes since been questioned by other Jewish sects such as Judghanits, Kabbalist, Sabbatians, Chassidim (old and new), Frankist, etc. Nevertheless, these sects have all but disappeared and the supremacy of the Talmud is generally recognized. The most important religious division of Judaism at the present day is that between "Orthodox" and "Reform" Jews, with many subdivisions to which these names are more or less loosely applied. Orthodox Judaism included the greater part of the Jewish race. It distinctly admits the absolutely binding force of the oral Law as finally fixed in the "Shulhan Aruk" by Joseph Caro (sixteenth century). Its beliefs are set forth in the following thirteen articles, first compiled by Maimonides in the eleventh century:

• I believe with a true and perfect faith that God is the creator (whose name be blessed), governor, and maker of all creatures; and that he has wrought all things, worketh, and shall work forever.
• I believe with perfect faith that the creator (whose name be blessed) is one; that there is no unity like unto his in any way; and that he alone was, is, and will be our God.
• I believe with a perfect faith that the creator (whose name be blessed) is incorporeal, that he has not any corporeal qualities, and that nothing can be compared unto him.
• I believe with a perfect faith that the creator (whose name be blessed) was the first, and will be the last.
• I believe with a perfect faith that the creator (whose name be blessed) is to be worshipped and none else.
• I believe with perfect faith that all the words of the prophets are true.
• I believe with perfect faith that the prophecies of Moses our master (may he rest in peace) were true; that he was the father and chief of all prophets, both of those before him and those after him.
• I believe with perfect faith that the Law, at present in our hands, is the same that was given to our master Moses (peace be with him).
• I believe with perfect faith that this Law will not be changed, and that no other Law will be revealed by the creator (blessed be his name).
• I believe with a perfect faith that God (whose name be blessed) knows all the deeds of the sons of men and all their thoughts; as it is said: "He who hath formed their hearts altogether, he knoweth all their deeds".
• I believe with a perfect faith that God (whose name be blessed) rewards those who keep his commandments, and punishes those who transgress them.
• I believe with a perfect faith that the Messias will come; and although he tarries I wait nevertheless every fay for his coming.
• I believe with a perfect faith that there will be a resurrection of the dead, at the time when it shall please the creator (blessed be his name).

With regard to the future life, Orthodox Jews believe, like the Universalists, in the ultimate salvation of all men; and like the Catholics, in the offering up of prayers for the souls of their departed friends. Their Divine worship does not admit of sacrifices; it consists in the reading of the Scriptures and in prayer. While they do not insist on attendance at the synagogue, they enjoin all to say their prayers at home or in any place they chance to be, three times a day; they repeat also blessings and particular praises to God at meals and on other occasions. In their morning devotions they use their phylacteries and a praying scarf (talith), except on Saturdays, when they use the talith only. The following are their principal festivals:

• Passover, on 14 Nisan, and lasting eight days. On the evening before the feast, the first-born of every family observes a fast in remembrance of God's kindness to the nation. During the feast unleavened bread is exclusively used; the first two and last days are observed as strict holidays. Since the paschal lamb has ceased, it is customary after the paschal meal to break and partake as Aphikomon, or after-dish, of half of an unleavened bread cake which has been broken and put aside at the beginning of the supper.
• Pentecost, or the feast of Weeks, falling seven weeks after the Passover and kept, at present, for two days only.
• Trumpets, on 1 and 2 Tishri, of which the first is called New Years's feast. On the second day they blow the horn and pray that God will bring them to Jerusalem.
• Tabernacles, on 15 Tishri, lasting nine days, the first and last two days being observed as feast days. On the first day they carry branches around the altar or pulpit singing psalms; on the seventh day, they carry copies of the Torah out of the ark to the altar, all the congregation joining in the procession seven times around the altar and singing Ps. xxix. On the ninth day they repeat several prayers in honour of the Law, bless God for having given them His servant Moses, and read the section of the Scriptures which records his death.
• Purim, on 14 and 15 Adar (Feb.-March), in commemoration of the deliverance recorded in the Book of Esther; the whole Book of Esther is read several times during the celebration.
• Dedication, a feast commemorative of the victory over Antiochus Epiphanes and lasting eight days.
• Atonement Day, celebrated on 10 Tishri, although the Jews have neither Temple nor priesthood. They observe a strict fast for twenty-four hours, and strive in various ways to evince the sincerity of their repentance (see Jewish Calendar).

Reform Judaism, which traces back its origin to Mendelssohn's time, is chiefly prevalent in Germany and the United States. It has very lax views of biblical inspiration and bends Jewish beliefs and practices so as to adapt them to environment. It is a sort of Unitarianism coupled with some Jewish peculiarities. It disregards the belief of the coming of a personal Messias, the obligatory character of circumcision, ancient Oriental customs in synagogue services, the dietary laws which but few reform Jews observe out of custom or veneration for the past, the second days of the holy days, all minor feasts and fast-days of the year (except Hanukha and Purim), while it uses sermons in the vernacular and adds in some places Sunday services to those held on the historical Sabbath Day, etc. Nominally, for all, the Sabbath is the day of rest; but only a small number even of the Orthodox Jews keep their places of business closed on that day, owing to the commercial demands of modern life and the police regulations usually enforced in Christian lands concerning the ordinary Sunday rest. Intermarriage with non-Jews is generally discountenanced even by Reform Jewish rabbis, and as a fact, has never been frequent, except of late in Australia. Of late, the use of Hebrew has been revived particularly in Palestine Jewish colonies, and a number of Jewish journals and reviews are published in that tongue in the East and in certain countries of Europe. Yiddish, or Judeo-German, is by far more prevalent, and is used in the large cities of Europe and North America for weekly and daily papers.

The Yeshibas, or high schools of Talmudic learning, where the time was exclusively devoted to the study of rabbinical jurisprudence and Talmudic law, have been partly replaced by seminaries with a more modern curriculum of studies. In 1893 Gratz College, thus named from its founder, was started in Philadelphia for training religious school-teachers. Young Men's's Hebrew Associations, begun in 1874, now exist in nearly all the large cities of the United States. Of wider import still is the development of the Sabbath schools which are generally attached to Jewish congregations in the same country. The recent Zionist movement claims a passing notice. Since 1896 the scheme for securing in Palestine a legal home for the oppressed Hebrews has rapidly taken a firm hold of the Jewish race. To many, Zionism appears as calculated to bring about the realization of the old Jewish hope of restoration to Palestine. To others, it seems to be the only means of obviating the impossibility felt by various peoples of assimilating their Jewish population and at the same time of allowing it the amount of freedom which the Jews consider necessary for the preservation of their individual character. By others again, it is regarded as the practical answer to the anti-Semitic agitation which has prevailed intensely through Western Europe since 1880, and to the lack of social equality, which Jews repeatedly find denied them, even in countries where they possess civil rights and attain to high political and professional positions. Since 1897 Zionism holds annual international congresses, counts numerous societies and clubs, and since 1898 has a Jewish Colonial Trust. There is no Jewish Church as such, and each congregation is a law to itself. Owing to this, the ancient distinction between the Sephardim and the Askenazim continues among the Jews. As of yore, the Sephardim, or descendants of Spanish and Portuguese Jews, readily organize themselves into separate congregations. Even now, they are easily distinguished from the Askenazim (German or Polish Jews) by their names, their more Oriental pronunciation of Hebrew, and their peculiarities in synagogue services.

IV. JUDAISM AND CHURCH LEGISLATION

The principal items of Church legislation relative to Judaism have been set forth in connection with the history of the Jews. There remains only to add a few remarks which will explain the apparent severity of certain measures enacted by either popes or councils concerning the Jews, or account for the fact that popular hatred of them so often defeated the beneficent efforts of the Roman pontiffs in their regard.

Church legislation against Jewish holding of Christian slaves can be easily understood: as members of Christ, the children of the Church should evidently not be subjected to the power of His enemies, and thereby incur a special danger for their faith; but more particularly, as stated by a recent Jewish writer:

"There was good reason for the solicitude of the Church and for its desire to prevent Jews from retaining Christian slaves in their houses. The Talmud and all later Jewish codes forbade a Jew from retaining in his home a slave who was uncircumcised" (Abrahams, "Jewish Life in the Middle Ages").

The obligation of wearing a distinguishing badge was of course obnoxious to the Jews. At the same time, Church authorities deemed its injunction necessary to prevent effectively moral offences between Jews and Christian women. The decrees forbidding the Jews from appearing in public at Eastertide may be justified on the ground that some of them mocked at the Christian processions at that time; those against baptized Jews retaining distinctly Jewish customs find their ready explanation in the necessity for the Church to maintain the purity of the Faith in its members, while those forbidding the Jews from molesting converts to Christianity are no less naturally explained by the desire of doing away with a manifest obstacle to future conversions.

It was for the laudable reason of protecting social morality and securing the maintenance of the Christian Faith, that canonical decrees were framed and repeatedly enforced against free and constant intercourse between Christians and Jews, against, for instance, bathing, living, etc., with Jews. To some extent, likewise, these were the reasons for the institution of the Ghetto or confinement of the Jews to a special quarter, for the prohibition of the Jews from exercising medicine, or other professions. The inhibition of intermarriage between Jews and Christians, which is yet in vigour, is clearly justified by reason of the obvious danger for the faith of the Christian party and for the spiritual welfare of the children born of such alliances. With regard to the special legislation against printing, circulating, etc., the Talmud, there was the particular grievance that the Talmud contained at the time scurrilous attacks upon Jesus and the Christians (cf. Pick, "The Personality of Jesus in the Talmud" in the "Monist", Jan., 1910), and the permanent reason that

"that extraordinary compilation, with much that is grave and noble, contains also so many puerilities, immoral precepts, and anti-social maxims, that Christian courts may well have deemed it right to resort to stringent measures to prevent Christians from being seduced into adhesion to a system so preposterous" (Catholic Dictionary, 484).

History proves indeed that Church authorities exercised at times considerable pressure upon the Jews to promote their conversion; but it also proves that the same authorities generally deprecated the use of violence for the purpose. It bears witness, in particular, to the untiring and energetic efforts of the Roman pontiffs in behalf of the Jews especially when, threatened or actually pressed by persecution they appealed to the Holy See for protection. It chronicles the numerous protestations of the popes against mob violence against the Jewish race, and thus directs the attention of the student of history to the real cause of the Jewish persecutions, viz., the popular hatred against the children of Israel. Nay more, it discloses the principal causes of that hatred, among which the following may be mentioned:

• The deep and wide racial difference between Jews and Christians which was, moreover, emphasized by the ritual and dietary laws of Talmudic Judaism;
• the mutual religious antipathy which prompted the Jewish masses to look upon the Christians as idolaters, and the Christians to regard the Jews as the murderers of the Divine Saviour of mankind, and to believe readily the accusation of the use of Christian blood in the celebration of the Jewish Passover, the desecration of the Holy Eucharist, etc.;
• the trade rivalry which caused Christians to accuse the Jews of sharp practice, and to resent their clipping of the coinage, their usury, etc.;
• the patriotic susceptibilities of the particular nations in the midst of which the Jews have usually formed a foreign element, and to the respective interests of which their devotion has not always been beyond suspicion.

In view of these and other more or less local, more or less justified, reasons, one can readily understand how the popular hatred of the Jews has too often defeated the beneficent efforts of the Church, and notably of its supreme pontiffs, in regard to them.

Jewish Religion. NATHAN, Religion, Natural and Revealed (New York, 1875); TROY, Judaism and Christianity (Boston, 1890); MENDELSSOn, Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence of the Talmud (Baltimore, 1891); LEVIN, Die Reform des Judenthums (Berlin, 1895); HIRSCH, Nineteen Letters, tr. (New York, 1899); FRIEDLANDER, The Jewish Religion (2nd ed., New York, 1900); LAZARUS, Ethics of Judaism, tr. (Philadelphia, 1901); MORRIS JOSEPH, Judaism as Creed and Life (New York, 1903); SCHREINER, Die jüngsten Urtheile über das Judenthum (Berlin, 1902); MONTEFIORE, Liberal Judaism (New York, 1903); LEVY, La Famille dans l'Antiquité (Paris, 1905); SCHECHTER, Studies in Judaism (New York, 1896); IDEM, Some Aspects of Rabbinic Theology (New York, 1909).

FRANCIS E. GIGOT

Jezabel

(Sept., 'Iezabél,).

Wife of Achab, King of Israel. She was the daughter of Ethbaal I, King of the Sidonians, who was also grand pontiff of the goddess Astarte (the Ishtar of the Assyrians) worshipped by that people. It is probable that the marriage of this princess with Achab was brought about in order to strengthen the house of Amri (father of Achab) against the Syrians. She introduced into Samaria various forms of Phoenician luxury hitherto unknown in that capital of the Northern Kingdom, and also prevailed upon Achab to establish there the worship of the Phoenician gods and goddesses of which she was a fanatical devotee (III Kings, xvi, 31, 32). She maintined 450 priests for the worship of Baal and 400 for that of Astarte (III Kings, xviii, 19). Consistently she persecuted and slew the prophets (III Kings, xviii, 4), but to prevent their complete extermination Abdias, governor of the king's house, caused a hundred of them to hide themselves in caves where they were secretly sustained. After the slaying of the 450 priests of Baal by Elias on Mount Carmel (III Kings, xviii, 40), Jezabel sought the life of the prophet, and he fled to the kingdom of Juda (III Kings, xix, 1-3). How she brought about the death of Naboth in order to confiscate a vineyard which he had refused to sell to Achab is related in III Kings, xxi. Elias again appears on the scene and declares the Divine retribution which is to fall upon the perpetrators of the crime. The blood of Achab shall be licked by the dogs in the very field where they licked the blood of Naboth, and the dogs shall eat Jezabel in the field of Jezrahel. After the death of Achab, Jezabel continued to exercise a strong and baneful influence over her two sons Ochozias and Joram who reigned successively in his place, and through her daughter Athalia who married Joram, King of Juda, the same evil influence was extended even to the Southern Kingdom. At last the Divine vengeance came upon Jezabel, and the predictions of Elias and Eliseus were literally fulfilled at the beginning of the reign of Jehu, as related in IV Kings, ix, 30-37.

See LesÊtre in Vigouroux, Dictionnaire de la Bible, s. v.; Selbie in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible, s. v. Jezebel.

JAMES F. DRISCOLL

Jíbaro Indians

Jíbaro (Spanish orthography) "forest man", i.e. native.

An important tribal group of Ecuador, comprising a great number of small subtribes speaking a common language with dialectic variants, and together constituting a distinct linguistic stock, holding the extensive forests between the Santiago and Pastaza rivers and southward to the Amazon. Owing to similarity of name — also written Xebaro, Zibaro — they have been frequently confounded with their eastern neighbours, the Zaparo, and the confusion is increased by the fact that in earlier times the name Jíbaro was often loosely used to designate any of the wild Indians of eastern Ecuador. More than any other tribe of the upper Amazon region, the Jíbaro are notable for their determined and successful resistance to all efforts at conquest or Christianization, and notwithstanding more than three centuries of more or less intimate Spanish contact they still retain their primitive manners to a remarkable degree. They have no villages, the houses of each small community being scattered about in the forest within easy communicating distance, and always close to a stream. The houses are communal, from fifty to eighty feet in length, with a door at each end, one exclusively for the men and the other for the women. Near the women's door are the fire-places for cooking, one for each family, while outside the men's door is the tunduli, or great wooden drum, made from a hollow log, the sound of which can be heard for a distance of ten miles through the forest, and by means of which, according to a well-understood code, the Jíbaro can signal to his farthest acquaintance.

War is their normal condition, the favourite weapons being the lance, the javelin with throwing stick, the blow-gun with poisoned arrows, and the shield for defence. The heads of enemies are smoked by an ingenious process which in a measure preserves the features. The women are expert potters. The Jíbaro are agricultural, cultivating corn, beans, bananas, yuca, and cotton. Besides dogs, parrots, and monkeys, they have chickens and hogs, which were introduced among them by the whites. They use no salt, but like many other tribes of the Amazon and Orinoco are addicted to eating a certain saltpetrous clay. Their favourite drink is chicha, a mild intoxicant fermented from the yuca, banana or some other native plant. They wear a cotton dress below the waist, flowing hair, paint, feather ornaments, ear pendants, and — among women — labrets. They are robust and comparatively handsome, although not tall. They are very fond of music, visiting, and ceremonial dances. Polygamy exists, as also, according to some travellers, the curious custom of the couvade. The dead are usually laid away in small shelter structures in the woods or in hollow tree-trunks placed in the house where the death occurs, the house being then abandoned. There is apparently no tribal organization or chiefly authority, the only bond among families being their habitual attendance at common festivals. In each family group one man has the duty of reciting a long historical and didactic discourse each morning while the women are preparing breakfast. Very little is known of their religious or mythologic beliefs, but witchcraft flourishes, and almost every death is attributed to this cause.

Sheltered by their forests, the Jíbaro successfully withstood the efforts of the Peruvian Incas to subjugate them. The first Spanish entrance into their country was made by Vergara in 1541, and in 1559, under order from Governor Salinas, five towns were established in the Jíbaro country, first and chief of which was Logrono. Under enforced labour in the mines, and other oppressions, at the hands of their Spanish taskmasters, the Indians rapidly withered away or saved themselves by retreating deeper into the forests. In 1599 a fresh tribute goaded the Jíbaro into rebellion, and under the leadership of Anirula a force estimated by many at 20,000 warriors stormed Logrono in a night attack, killing every inhabitant to the number of 12,000, excepting the young women, and burning the city to the ground. The governor was killed by pouring molten gold down his throat "in order that he might have his fill of gold". The inhabitants of the other towns took refuge in Sevilla del Oro, which was next attacked, but resisted so stoutly that the Indians finally retired after having killed nearly 14,000 of the besieged. The young women were carried off as wives to the savages, and it is said that the admixture of blood is still evident in the clearer skin and more abundant beard of many of the tribe. Successive expeditions failed to reduce the Jíbaro, until it was resolved to call in the help of the missionaries. In 1645 two Franciscan fathers, Laureano de la Cruz and Andrés Fernández, with a small military escort, entered the territory from the west, and in 1656 Commander Agureo with a detachment of troops and a company of mission Indians under the Jesuit Father Raimundo Santa Cruz, attempted a settlement at the mouth of the Pastaza, but the attempt was a failure through the bad conduct of the soldiers. Other unsuccessful missionary attempts were made in 1690, and in 1692 a combined force of Spanish troops and mission Indians, the latter under the superior of the Jesuit missions, Father Viva, began a series of manhunts in the Jíbaro country, but with so little result that in five months only three hundred and seventy-two Indians were captured, most of whom escaped later. In these raids the Indian mothers frequently slew their children with their own hands to prevent their falling into the hands of the Spaniards.

In 1767 the Jesuit Father Andrés Camacho made another effort, with some fair promise of success, when the decree of expulsion banished the Jesuits from their missions, which were then turned over to Franciscans and secular priests and speedily fell into decay. This may be considered the end of any systematic attempt at Christianizing the Jíbaro. As far back as 1581 the Dominicans of Quito had undertaken a similar work at Camelos on the Pindo, but after more than two centuries the only result was three small villages containing two hundred and forty baptized Indians, and about half that number in 1814. Several Franciscans also entered the territory from time to time, notably Father Antonio Prieto in 1816, who discovered some important pre-Columbian ruins. In 1869, the restored Jesuits began work again at three stations, but were driven out a few years later by an Indian rising. In 1886 the Dominicans and in 1893 the Franciscans re-entered the field and have now mission stations at Macas (D) Canelos (D) and Zamora (F), while the Jesuits are at work on the Napo. In 1893 the Salesians were authorized to enter the territory, which had been newly erected into the Vicariate Apostolic of Mendez and Gualaquiza. Intestine feuds, smallpox visitations, alcohol, and other causes have steadily reduced the number of the Jíbaro until, for the 20,000 warriors who sacked Logrono three centuries ago, the whole nation to-day does not count more than as many souls, and experienced missionaries think they do not exceed 10,000 or 12,000 of whom only about 1400 are rated as Christians.

RIVET, Les Indiens Jíbaros in L'Anthropologie, XVIII-XIX (1907-08), has valuable bibliographic notes; MARKHAM, Tribes of the Amazon; HERNDON, The Amazon; RECLUS, South America: The Andes Regions. See INDIANS, AMERICAN, bibliography.

JAMES MOONEY

St. Joachim

Joachim (whose name means Yahweh prepares), was the father of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

If we were to obey the warning of St. Peter Damian, we should consider it a blameable and needless curiosity to inquire about those things that the Evangelists did not deem it advisable to relate, and, in particular, about the parents of the Blessed Virgin (Serm. iii de Nativ. B.M.V.). Tradition nevertheless, grounded on very old testimonies, very early hailed Saints Joachim and Anne as the father and mother of the Mother of God. True, this tradition seems to rest ultimately on the so-called "Gospel of James", the "Gospel of the Nativity of the Blessed Mary", and the Pseudo-Matthew, or "Book of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of the Childhood of the Saviour"; and this origin is likely to rouse well-founded suspicions. It should be borne in mind, however, that the apocryphal character of these writings, that is to say, their rejection from the canon, and their ungenuineness do not imply that no heed whatever should be taken of some of their assertions; side by side, indeed, with unwarranted and legendary facts, they contain some historical data borrowed from reliable traditions or documents; and difficult though it is to distinguish in them the wheat from the tares, it would be unwise and uncritical indiscriminately to reject the whole. Some commentators, who believe that the genealogy given by St. Luke is that of the Blessed Virgin, find the mention of Joachim in Heli (Luke, iii, 23; Eliachim, i.e. Jeho-achim), and explain that Joseph had, in the eyes of the law, become by his marriage the son of Joachim. That such is the purpose and the meaning of the Evangelist is very doubtful, and so is the identification proposed between the two names Heli and Joachim. Neither can it be asserted with certainty, in spite of the authority of the Bollandists, that Joachim was Heli's son and Joseph's brother; nor, as is sometimes affirmed, from sources of very doubtful value, that he had large possessions in herds and flocks. Much more interesting are the beautiful lines in which the "Gospel of James" describes how, in their old age, Joachim and Anne received the reward of their prayers to obtain issue. Tradition has it that the parents of the Blessed Virgin, who, apparently, first lived in Galilee, came later on to settle in Jerusalem; there the Blessed Virgin was born and reared; there also they died and were buried. A church, known at various epochs as St. Mary, St. Mary ubi nata est, St. Mary in Probatica, Holy Probatica, St. Anne, was built during the fourth century, possibly by St. Helena, on the site of the house of St. Joachim and St. Anne, and their tombs were there honoured until the close of the ninth century, when the church was converted into a Moslem school. The crypt which formerly contained the holy tombs was rediscovered on 18 March, 1889.

St. Joachim was honoured very early by the Greeks, who celebrate his feast on the day following the Blessed Virgin's birthday; the Latins were slow to admit it to their calendar, where it found place sometimes on 16 Sept. and sometimes on 9 Dec. Assigned by Julius II to 20 March, the solemnity was suppressed some fifty years later, restored by Gregory XV (1622), fixed by Clement XII (1738) on the Sunday after the Assumption, and finally raised to the rank of double of the second class by Leo XIII (1 Aug., 1879).

CHARLES L. SOUVAY

Joachim of Flora

Cistercian abbot and mystic; b. at Celico, near Cosenza, Italy, c. 1132; d. at San Giovanni in Fiore, in Calabria, 30 March, 1202.

His father, Maurus de Celico (whose family name is said to have been Tabellione), a notary holding high office under the Norman kings of Sicily, placed him at an early age in the royal Court. While on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land, Joachim was converted from the world by the sight of some great calamity (perhaps an outbreak of pestilence). He passed the whole of Lent in contemplation on Mount Thabor, where he is said to have received celestial illumination for the work of his life. Returning to Italy, he retired to the Cistercian Abbey of Sambucina, probably in 1159, and for some years devoted himself to lay preaching, without taking the religious habit or receiving any orders. The ecclesiastical authorities raising objections to his mode of life, he took the Cistercian habit in the Abbey of Corazzo, and was ordained priest, apparently in 1168. He now applied himself entirely to Biblical study, with a special view to the interpretation of the hidden meaning of the Scriptures. A few years later, much against his will, he was elected abbot. Finding the duties of his office an intolerable hindrance to what he deemed his higher calling, he appealed, in 1182, to Pope Lucius III, who relieved him of the temporal care of his abbey, and warmly approved of his work, bidding him continue it in whatever monastery he thought best. He spent the following year and a half at the Abbey of Casamari, engaged upon his three great books, and there a young monk, Lucas (afterwards Archbishop of Cosenza), who acted as his secretary, tells us of his amazement at seeing so famous and eloquent a man wearing such rags, and of the wonderful devotion with which he preached and said Mass.

The papal approbation was confirmed by Urban III, in 1185, and again, more conditionally, by Clement III, in 1187, the latter exhorting him to make no delay in completing his work and submitting it to the judgment of the Holy See. Joachim now retired to the hermitage of Pietralata, and finally founded the Abbey of Fiore (or Flora) among the Calabrian mountains, which became the center of a new and stricter branch of the Cistercian Order approved by Celestine III in 1198. In 1200 Joachim publicly submitted all his writings to the examination of Innocent III, but died before any judgment was passed. It was held to be in answer to his prayers that he died on Holy Saturday, "the Saturday on which Sitivit is sung, attaining the true Sabbath, even as the hart panteth after the fountains of waters." The holiness of his life is unquestionable; miracles were said to have been wrought at his tomb, and, though never officially beatified, he is still venerated as a beatus on 29 May.

Dante voiced the general opinion of his age in declaring Joachim one "endowed with prophetic spirit." But he himself always disclaimed the title of prophet. The interpretation of Scriptural prophecy, with reference to the history and the future of the Church, is the main theme of his three chief works: "Liber Concordiae Novi ac Veteris Testamenti," "Expositio in Apocalipsim," and "Psalterium Decem Cordarum." The mystical basis of his teaching is the doctrine of the "Eternal Gospel," founded on a strained interpretation of the text in the Apocalypse (xiv, 6). There are three states of the world, corresponding to the three Persons of the Blessed Trinity. In the first age the Father ruled, representing power and inspiring fear, to which the Old Testament dispensation corresponds; then the wisdom hidden through the ages was revealed in the Son, and we have the Catholic Church of the New Testament; a third period will come, the Kingdom of the Holy Spirit, a new dispensation of universal love, which will proceed from the Gospel of Christ, but transcend the letter of it, and in which there will be no need for disciplinary institutions. Joachim held that the second period was drawing to a close, and that the third epoch (already in part anticipated by St. Benedict) would actually begin after some great cataclysm which he tentatively calculated would befall in 1260. After this Latins and Greeks would be united in the new spiritual kingdom, freed alike from the fetters of the letter; the Jews would be converted, and the "Eternal Gospel" abide until the end of the world.

Although certain doctrines of Joachim concerning the Blessed Trinity were condemned by the Lateran Council in 1215, his main teaching does not seem to have excited suspicion until the middle of the century. Many works had meanwhile come into being which were wrongly attributed to Joachim. Among these the "De Oneribus Prophetarum," the "Expositio Sybillae et Merlini," and the commentaries on Jeremias and Isaias are the most famous. The sect of the "Joachists" or "Joachimists" arose among the "spiritual" party among the Franciscans, many of whom saw Antichrist already in the world in the person of Frederick II, nor was their faith shaken by his death in 1250. One of their number, Fra Gherardo of Borgo San Donnino, wrote a treatise entitled "Introductorium in Evangelium Aeternum", of which the contents are now known only from the extracts made by the commission of three cardinals who examined it in 1255. From these it is clear that the Joachists went far beyond what the abbot himself had taught. They held that, about the year 1200, the spirit of life had gone out of the two Testaments and that Joachim's three books themselves constituted this "Eternal Gospel," which was not simply to transcend but to supersede, the Gospel of Christ. The Catholic priesthood and the whole teaching of the New Testament was to be rendered void in a few years.

This work was solemnly condemned by Alexander IV, in 1256, and the condemnation involved the teaching of Joachim himself. His central doctrine was confuted by St. Thomas in the Summa Theologica (I-II, Q. cvi, a. 4), and its Franciscan exponents were sternly repressed by St. Bonaventure. Another blow was given to the movement when the fatal year 1260 came, and nothing happened. "After Frederick II died who was Emperor," writes Fra Salimbene of Parma, "and the year 1260 passed, I entirely laid aside this doctrine, and I am disposed henceforth to believe nothing save what I see." It was revived in a modified form by the later leader of the spiritual Franciscans, Pier Giovanni Olivi (d. 1297), and his follower, Ubertino da Casale, who left the order in 1317. We hear a last echo of these theories in the letters of Blessed Giovanni dalle Celle and the prophecies of Telesphorus of Cosenza during the Great Schism, but they were no longer taken seriously.

Divini vatis Abbatis Joachim Liber Concordiae novi ac veteris Testatmenti (Venice, 1519); Expositio magni prophetae Abbatis Joachim in Apocalipsim: Eiusdem Psalterium Decem Cordarum opus prope divinum (Venice, 1527); REUTER, Geschichte der religiösen Aufklärung im Mittelalter, II (Berlin, 1877); TOCCO, L'Eresia nel Medio Evo (Florence, 1884); DENIFLE, Das Evangelium aeternum und die Commission zu Anagni in Archiv fur Litteratur- und Kirchen-Geschichte, I (Berlin, 1885): HOLDER-EGGER, Cronica Fratris Salimbene de Adam Ordinis Minorum (Hanover, 1905-08); WICKSTEED, The Everlasting Gospel in The Inquirer (London, 1909); FOURNIER, Etudes sur Joachim de Flore et ses doctrines (Paris, 1909). The only contemporary account is the sketch, Virtutum B. Joachimi synopsis, by LUCAS OF COSENZA, his secretary: but the fuller Vita by JACOBUS GRAECUS SYLLANAEUS, written in 1612, is professedly drawn from an ancient manuscript then preserved at Fiore. Both are printed by the Bollandists, Acta SS., May, VII.

EDMUND G. GARDNER

Popess Joan