Skip to main content

Full text of "A dictionary of christian antiquities, being a continuation of the "Dictionary of the Bible""

See other formats

Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2007 with funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 




















Eev. Churchill Babington, B.D., F.L.S., 

Disney Professor of Archaeology in the University of 
Camhridge ; late Fellow of St. John's College. 

Eev, Henry Bailey, D.D., 

Warden of St. Augustine's College, Canterbury, and 
Honorary Canon of Canterbury Cathedral ; late Fellow 
of St. John's College, Cambridge. 

Eev. James Barjiby, B.D., 

Principal of Bishop Hatfield's Hall, Durham. 

Eev. Edward White Benson, D.D., 

Chancellor of Lincoln Cathedral ; late Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge. 
Eev, Charles Williaji Boase, M.A., 

Fellow of Exeter College, Oxford. 

Henry Bradshaw, M.A., 

Fellow of King's College, Cambridge ; Librarian of the 
University of Cambridge. 

Eev. William Bright, D.D., 

Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ; Eegius Professor of 
Ecclesiastical History in the University of Oxford. 

The late Eev. Henry Browne, M.A., 

Vicar of Pevensey, and Prebendary of Chichester Cathedral. 


Of Lincoln's Inn ; Chancellor of the Diocese of Ely, 

Thomas Eyburn Buchanan, M.A., 

Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford. 

Eev. Daniel Butler, M.A., 

Eector of Thwing, Yorkshire; late Head Master of the 
Clergy Orphan School, Canterbury. 



J. M. C. Eev, John Moore Capes, M.A., 
of Balliol College, Oxford. 

J. Ct. C. Rev. John Gibson Cazenove, M.A., 

late Principal of Cumbrae College, N.B. 

C. Eev. Samuel Cheetham, M.A., 

Professor of Pastoral Theology in King's College, London, 
and Chaplain of Dulwicli College ; late Fellow of 
Christ's College, Cambridge. 

E. B. C. Edward Byles Cowell, M.A., 

Professor of Sanskrit in the University of Cambridge. 

J. LI. D. Rev. John Llewelyn Davies, M.A., 

Rector of Christchurch, Marylebone ; late Fellow of 
Trinity College, Cambridge. 

C. D. Rev. Cecil Deedes, M.A., 

Vicar of St. Mary Magdalene, Oxford. 

W. P. I). Rev. Willtam P. Dickson, D.D., 

Regius Professor of Biblical Criticism, Glasgow. 

S. J. E. Rev. Samuel John Eales, M.A., 

Head Master of the Grammar School, Halstead, Essex. 

J. E. Rev. John Ellerton, M.A., 

Rector of Hinstock, Salop. 

E. S. Ff. Rev. Edmund S. Ffoulkes, B.D., 

Late Fellow of Jesus College, Oxford. 

A. P. F. The Right Rev. Alexander Penrose Forbes, D.C.L., 
Bishop of Brechin. 

W. H. F. Hon. and Rev. William Henry Fremantle, M.A., 

Rector of St. Mary's, Marylebone ; Chaplain to the Arch- 
bishop of Canterbury. 

J. M. F. Rev. John M. Fuller, M.A., 
Vicar of Bexley. 

C. D. G. Rev. Christian D. Ginsburg, LL.D. 

W. F. G. The late Rev. William Frederick Greenfield, M.A., 
Master of the Lower School, Dulwich College. 

A. W. H. The late Eev. Arthur West Haddan, B.C., 

Rector of Barton-on-the-Heath and Honorary Canon of 
Worcester Cathedral ; formerly Fellow of Trinity 
College, Oxfoid. 

E. H. Rev. Edv/in Hatch, M.A., 

Vice-Principal of St. Mary Hall, Oxford. 



E. C. H. Kev. Edwards Comerford Hawkins, M.A., 

Head Master of St. John's School, Leatherhead. 

L. H. Eev. Lewis Hensley, M.A., 

Vicar of Hitchin, Herts ; late Fellow of Trinity College, 

H. Kev. Fenton John Axthony Hort, M.A., 

Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge ; Chaplain to 
the Bishop of Winchester. 

H. J. H. Rev. Henry John Hotham, M.A., 

Vice-Master of Trinity College, Cambridge. 

J. H. John Hullah, 

Late Professor of Music in King's College, London. 

W. J. Eev. William Jackson, M.A., 

Late Fellow of Worcester College, Oxford ; Bampton 
Lecturer for 1875. 

G. A. J. Eev. George Andrew Jacob, D.D., 

late Head Master of Christ's Hospital, London. 

W. J.J. Eev. William James Josling, M.A., 

Eector of Moulton, Suffolk ; late Fellow of Christ's Cullege, 

L. Eev. Joseph Barber Lightfoot, D.D., 

Canon of St. Paul's ; Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity 
in the University of Cambridge; Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge. 

E. A. L. E. A. Lipsius, 

Professor in Ihe University of Kiel. 

J. M. L. John Malcolm Lddlow, M.A., 
Of Lincoln's Inn. 

J. E. L. Eev. John Egbert Lunn, B.D., 

Vicar of Marton, Yorkshire; late Fellow of St. John's 
College, Cambridge. 

G. F. M. Eev. George Frederick Maclear, D.D., 

Head Master of King's College School, London. 

S. M. Eev. Spencer Mansel, M.A., 

Vicar of Trumpington, Cambridge : Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge. 

W. B. M. The late Eev. Wharton B. Marriott, M.A., 

Of Eton College; formerly Fellow of Exeter College, 

G. M. Eev. George Mead, M.A., 

Cliaplain to the Forces, Dublin. 


F, M. Rev. Frederick Meyrick, M.A., 

Eector of Blickling, Norfolk ; Prebendary of Lincoln 
Cathedral; Chaplain to the Bishop of Lincoln; late 
Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. 

W. M, Rev. William Milligan, D.D., 

Professor of Biblical Criticism in the University of Aber- 

G. H. M. Rev. George Herbert Moberly, M.A., 

Chaplain to the Bishop of Salisbury; Rector of Dunst- 
bourne Rouse, Gloucestershire. 

H. C. G. M. Rev. Handley Carr Glyn Moule, M.A., 

Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 
I. R. M. John Rickards Mozley, M.A., 

late Fellow of King's College, Cambridge. 

A. N. Alexander Nesbitt, F.S.A., 

Oldlands, Uckfield. 

P. 0. Rev. Phipps Onslow, B.A., 

Rector of Upper Sapey, Hereford. 

G. W. P. Rev. Gregory Walton PennethornK, M.A.,, 

Rector of Ferring, Sussex ; late Vice-Principal of the 
Theological College, Chichester. 

W. G.F.P. Walter G. F. Phillimore, B.C.L., 

Lincoln's Inn ; Chancellor of the Diocese of Lincoln. 
E. H. P. Rev. Edward Hayes Plumptre, M.A., 

(sometimes Professor of New Testament Exegesis in King's College, 

P.) London; Prebendary of St. Paul's Cathedral; Vicar of 

Bickley ; formerly Fellow of Brasenose College, Oxford. 

DE Pressense. Rev. E. de Pressense, 

of Paris. 
J. R. Rev. James Raine, M.A., 

Prebendary of York ; Fellow of the University of Durham. 

W. R. Rev. William Reeves, D.D., 

Rector of Tjnan, Armagh. 
G. S. Rev. George Salmon, D.D., 

Regius Professor of Divinity, Trinitv College, Dublin. 
P. S. Rev. Philip Schaff, D.D., 

Professor of Theology in the Union Theological Seminary, 
New York, 

W. E. S. Rev. William Edward Scudamore, M.A., 

Eector of Ditchingham ; late Fellow of St. John's College, 
J. S. Rev. John Sharpe, M.A., 

Fellow of Christ's College, Cambridge. 



B. S. Benjamin Shaw, M.A., 

Of Lincoln's Inn ; late Fellow of Trinity College, Cam- 

E. S. Kev. Egbert Sinker, M.A., 

Librarian of Trinity College, Cambridge. 
I. G. S. Eev. L Gregory Smith, M.A., 

Eector of Great Malvern, and Prebendary of Hereford 
Cathedral ; late Fellow of Brasenose College, Oxford. 
J. S — T. John Stuart, LL.D., 

Of the General Eegister-House, Edinburgh. 
S. Eev. William Stubbs, M.A., 

Eegius Professor of Modern History, in the University of 
Oxford; Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford. 

C. A. S. Eev. Charles Anthony Swainson, D.D., 

Norrisian Professor of Divinity in the University of 
Cambridge, and Canon of Chichester Cathedral; late 
Fellow of Christ's College, Cambridge. 
E. S. T. Eev. Edward Stuart Talbot, M.A., 

Warden of Keble College, Oxford. 
E. St. J. T. Eev. EicHARD St. John Tyrwhitt, M.A., 

Late Student and Ehetoric Lecturer of Christ Church, 

E. V. Eev. Edmund Venables, M.A., 

Canon Eesidentiary and Precentor of Lincoln Cathedral ; 
Chaplain to the Bishop of London. 
W. Eev. Brooke Foss Westcott, D.D., 

(sometimes Canon of PeterboroTigh ; Eegius Professor of Divinity in 
B. F. W.) the University of Cambridge ; late Fellow of Trinity 

College, Cambridge. 
H. W. Eev. Henry Wage, M.A., 

Chaplain of Lincoln's Inn, and Professor of Ecclesiastical 
History, King's College, London. 

G. W. Eev. George Williams, B.D., 

Eector of Eingwood, Hants ; late Fellow of King's College, 

J. W. Eev. John Wordsworth, M.A., 

Prebendary of Lincoln ; Examining Chaplain to the Bishop 
of Lincoln ; late Fellow of Brasenose College, Oxford. 
W. A. W. William Aldis Wright, M.A., 

Trinity College, Cambridge, 
E. M. Y, Eev. Edward Mallet Young, M.A., 

Assistant Master of Harrow School ; Fellow of Trinity 
College, Cambridge. 
H. W. Y. Eev. Henry William Yule, B.C.L., M.A., 

Eector of Shipton-on-Cherwell, and Vicar of Hampton 
Gay, Ox on. 




This Work is intended to furnish, together with the ' Dictionary of 
Christian Biography, Literature, and Doctrines,' which will shortly 
follow, a complete account of the leading Personages, the Institu- 
tions, Art, Social Life, Writings and Controversies of the Christian 
Church from the time of the Apostles to the age of Charlemagne. 
It commences at the period at which the ' Dictionary of the Bible ' 
leaves off, and forms a continuation of it : it ceases at the age of 
Charlemagne, because (as Gibbon has remarked) the reign of this 
monarch forms the important link of ancient and modern, of 
civil and ecclesiastical history. It thus stops short of what we 
commonly call the Middle Ages. The later developement of Eitual 
and of the Monastic Orders, the rise and progress of the great 
Mendicant Orders, the Painting, Sculpture and Architecture, the 
Hagiology and Symbolism, the Canon Law, and the Institutions 
generally of the Middle Ages, furnish more than sufficient matter 
for a separate book. 

The present Work, speaking generally, elucidates and explains 
in relation to the Christian Church the same class of subjects that 
the ' Dictionary of Greek and Eoman Antiquities ' does in reference 
to the public and private life of classical antiquity. It treats of 
the organization of the Church, its officers, legislation, discipline, 
and revenues ; the social life of Christians ; their worship and 
ceremonial, with the accompanying music, vestments, instruments, 
vessels, and insignia ; their sacred places ; their architecture and 
other forms of Art ; their symbolism ; their sacred days and seasons ; 
the graves or Catacombs in which they were laid to rest. 

We can scarcely hope that every portion of this wide and varied 
field. has been treated with equal completeness ; but we may venture 
to assert, that this Dictionary is at least more complete than any 
attempt hitherto made by English or Foreign scholars to treat in 
one work the whole archaeology of the early Church. The great 


work of Bingham, indeed, the foundation of most subsequent. books 
on the subject, must always be spoken of with the utmost respect ; 
but it is beyond the power of one man to treat with the requisite 
degree of fulness and accuracy the whole of so vast a subject ; 
and there is probably no branch of Christian archaeology on which 
much light has not been thrown since Bingham's time by the 
numerous scholars and divines who have devoted their lives to 
special investigations. We trust that we have made accessible 
to all educated persons a great mass of information, hitherto only 
the privilege of students with the command of a large library. 

In treating of subjects like Church Government and Ritual it 
is probably impossible to secure absolute impartiality ; but we are 
confident that no intentional reticence, distortion or exaggeration 
has been practised by the writers in this work. 

It has been thought advisable not to insert in the present work 
an account of the Literature, of the Sects and Heresies, and of 
the Doctrines of the Church, but to treat these subjects in the 
'Dictionary of Christian Biography,' as they are intimately con- 
nected with the lives of the leading persons in Church History, 
and could not with advantage be separated from them. 

It has not been possible to construct the vocabulary on an 
entirely consistent principle. Where a well -recognized English 
term exists for an institution or an object, that term has generally 
been j)referred as the heading of an article. But in many cases 
obsolete customs, offices, or objects have no English name; and 
in many others the English term is not really co-extensive with the 
Latin or Greek term to which it seems at first sight to correspond. 
The word Decanus (for example) has several meanings which are not 
implied in the English Dean. In such cases it was necessary to 
adopt a term from the classic languages. Cross-references are given 
from the synonyms or quasi-synonyms to the word under which any 
subject is treated. The Councils are placed (so far as possible) 
under the modern names of the places at which they were held, a 
cross-reference being given from the ancient name. In the case of 
the Saints' Days, the names of the Western saints have been taken 
from the martyrology of Usuard, as containing probably the most 
complete list of the martyrs and confessors generally recognized in 
the West up to the ninth century ; the occurrence of these names 
in earlier calendars or martyrologies is also noted. In the letters A 
and B, however, the names of Saints are taken principally from the 
' Martyrologium Romanum Vetus,' and from the catalogues which 
bear the names of Jerome and of Bede, without special reference 


to Usuard. In the case of the Eastern Church; we have taken 
from the calendars of Byzantium, of Armenia, and of Ethiopia, 
those names which fall within our chronological period. This 
alphabetical arrangement will virtually constitute an index to the 
principal martyrologies, in addition to supplying the calendar, 
dates of events which are fixed — as is not uncommonly the case in 
ancient records — by reference to some festival. The names of 
persons are inserted in the vocabulary of this Work only with 
reference to their commemoration in martyrologies or their repre- 
sentations in art, their lives, when they are of any importance, 
being given in the Dictionary of Biography, 

Eeferences are given throughout to the original authorities on 
which the several statements rest, as well as to modern writers of 
repute. In citations from the Fathers, where a page is given without 
reference to a particular edition, it refers for the most part to the 
standard pagination — generally that of the Benedictine editions— 
which is retained in Migne's Patrologia. 

At the commencement of this work, the Editorship of that por- 
tion which includes the laws, government, discipline, and revenues of 
the Chur(;h and the Orders within it, was placed in the hands of 
Professor Stubbs ; the education and social life of Christians in those 
of Professor Plumptre ; while the treatment of their worship and 
ceremonial was entrusted to Professor Cheetham; all under the 
general superintendence of Dr. William Smith. As the work pro- 
ceeded, however, a pressure of other engagements rendered it impos- 
sible for Professors Stubbs and Plumptre to continue their editorship 
of the parts which they had undertaken ; and from the end of the 
letter C Professor Cheetham has acted as Editor of the whole 
work, always with the advice and assistance of Dr. William Smith. 

In conclusion, we have to express our regret at the long time 
that has elapsed since the first announcement of the work. This 
delay has been owing partly to our anxious desire to make it as 
accurate as possible, and partly to the loss we have sustained by 
the death of two of our most valued contributors, the Kev. A. W. 
Haddan and the Kev, W. B. Marriott. 






Page 9, Col. 2, 

15, , 

> ^, 

, , 35, , 

, 2, 

,, 78, , 

, 2, 

,, 104, , 

, 1. 

, , 145, , 

, 1, 

,, 153, , 

, 1, 

,, 213, , 

, 1, 

,, 237, 

, 2, 

,, 350, , 

, 1, 

, , 364, , 

, 2, 

,, 396, , 

, 2, 

, , 424, , 

, 1, 

, , 623, 

, 1, 

Line 32 from top, for Confession, Penitence, read Exomologesis. 
, , 8 , , , dele AcTisTETAE [Ctistolatkae]. 
, , 9 , , , for Chronology read Era. 
, , 16 , , , for pressing read preserving. 

9 , , , for Holt Orders read Desertion. 

8 & 9 from top, for Clermont, Council of, read Gallican Councils. 
, , 25 from top, for Orange read Orleans. 
, , 42 , , , for Eucharist read Priest. 
, , 20 , , , for Fkibur read Tribur. 
, , 8 from bottom, for Education read Schools. 

. . 25, 24 , , , for Paschal Ctcle read Indiction : deU Golden Numbers. 

, , 31, 30 , , , for Akvebnense read Gallican Councils. 

, , 31 from top, for Penitence read Penitentiary. 
, , 27, , , , for year -day read year-date. 

diately after the death of Constantine. The 
earliest iustauces are an aureus nummus of Con- 
staatius (Banduri, v. ii. p. 2'J7, Numismata Imp. 
Romanorum, &c.) ; and another golden coin bear- 
ing the effigy of Constantine the Great, with the 
words " Victoria Maxima." Constantine seems 
not to have made great use of Christian em- 
blems on his coin till after the defeat of Lici- 
nius in 323, and e.spocially after the building 
of Constantinople. (See Martigny, s. v. Numis- 

The use of these symbolic letters amounts to 
a quotation of Rev. xxii. 13, and a confession of 
faith in our Lord's own a.ssertion of His infinity 


antiquity at Lucca (Borgia, Be Cruce Veliterna, 
p. 33). For its general use as a part of the 
monogram of Christ, see Monogram. It will be 
found (see Westwood's Palaeographia Sacra) in the 
Psalter of Athelstan, and iu the Bible of Alcuin ; 
both in the British Museum. [R. St. J. T.] 

AARON, the High Priest, commemorated 

» Boldetti: "Quaiitoallelettere Aandu.non v'hadubbio 
che quel primi Cristiani le presero dall' Apocalisse." 
He goes on to say that it is the sigrf of Christian, not 
Arian, burial; and that Arians were driven from Rome, 
and e.xchided frooi the Catacombs. Ariiighi also protests 
that those cemeteries were " baud unqiiam heretico schis- 
maticoque commercio poUutae." 









A apd W. (See Rev. xxii. 13.) Of these 
symbolic letters the o) is always given in the 
minuscular form. The symbol is generally com- 
bined with the monogram of Christ. [Moxo- 
GRAM.] In Boldetti's Ossenazioni sopra i ciiiiiteri, 
&c. Rom. 1720, fol. tav. iii. p. 194, no. 4, it is 
found, with the more ancient decussated mono- 
gram, on a sspulchral cup or vessel. See also 
De Rossi (Liscriptions, No. 776), where the letters 
ai-e suspended from the arms of 
the St. Andrew's Cross. They 
are combined more frequently 
with the upright or Egyptian 
monogram. Aringhi, liom. 
Subt. vol. i. p. 381, gives an 
engraving of a jewelled cross, 
with the letters suspended 
by chains to its horizontal arm, as below. And 
the same form occurs in sepulchral inscriptions 
in De Rossi, Inscr. Chr. Rom. 
t. i. nos. 661, 666. See also 
Boldetti, p. 345, and Bottari, 
tav. xliv. vol. i. 

The letters are found, with 
or without the monogram, in 
almost all works of Christian 
antiquity ; for instance, right 
and left of a great cross, on which is no form or 
even symbolic Lamb, on the ceiling of the apse 
of St. Apollinare in Classe at Ravenna, circ. A.D. 
675. They were worn in rings and sigils, either j 
alone, as in Martigny, s. v. Anneaux, or with 
the monogram, as in Boldetti, ms. 21-31, 30-33. 
On coins they appear to be first used imme- 
diately after the death of Constantine. The 
earliest instances are an aureus nummus of Con- 
stantius (Banduri, v. ii. p. 227, Nmnismata Imp. 
Romanorum, &c.) ; and another golden coin bear- 
ing the effigy of Constantine the Great, with the 
words " Victoria Maxima." Constantine seems 
not to have made great use of Christian em- 
blems on his coin till after the defeat of Lici- 
nius in 323, and especially after the building 
of Constantinople. (See Martiguy, s. v. Numis- 

The use of these symbolic letters amounts to 
a quotation of Rev. xxii. 13, and a confession of 
faith in our Lord's own assertion of His infinity 


and divinity. There is one instance iu Martial 
(^Epig. V. 26) where A, Alpha, is used jocularly 
(as A 1, vulgarly, with ourselves) for " chief" or 
" first." But the whole expression in its solemn 
meaning is derived entirely from the words of 
Rev. xxii. 13. The import to a Christian is 
shewn hj the well-known passage of Prudentius 
(Hymnus Omni Hora, 10, Cathemsrinon, ix. p. 
35, ed. Tiibingen, 45) : — 
"Corde natus ex parentis ante mundi exordium, 
Alpha et fi cognominalus, ipse tons et clausula, 
Omnium quae sunt, fuerunt, quaeque post futura sunt." 

The symbol was no doubt much more frequently 
used after the outbreak of Arianism. But it ap- 
pears to have been used before that date, from its 
occurrence in the inscription on the tomb raised 
by Victorina to her martyred husband Heraclius 
in the cemetery of Priscilla (Aringhi. i. 605). 
It is here enclosed in a triangle, and united with 
the upright monogram. See also another in- 
scription in Fabretti {Inscr. antiq. expUcatio, 
Rom. 1699, fol.), and the cup given iu Boldetti 
from the Callixtine catacomb, tav. iii. no. 4, at 
p. 194. From these it is argued with apparent 
truth that the symbol must have been in use 
before the Nicene Council." No doubt, as a con- 
venient symbolic form of asserting the Lord's 
divinity, it became far more prominent after- 
wards. The Arians certainly avoided its use 
(Giorgi, Be Monogram. Christi, p. 10). It is 
found on the crucifix attributed to Nicodemus 
(Angelo Rocca, Thesatirus I'ontifciarura, vol. i. 
153, woodcut), and on a wooden crucifix of great 
antiquity at Lucca (Borgia, Be Cruce Vcliterna, 
p. 33). For its general use as a part of the 
monogram of Christ, see Monogram. It will be 
found (see Westwood's Palaeographia Sacra) in the 
Psalter of Athelstan, and in the Bible of Alcuin ; 
both in the British Museum. [R. St. J. T.] 

AAEON, the High Priest, commemorated 

» Boldetti: "Quantoalle letiere.\andu), non v'hadubbio 
che quei primi Ciistiani le presero dall' Apocalisse." 
He goes on to say that it is the sigif of Christian, not 
Arian, burial; and that Arians were driven from Rome, 
and excluded from the Catacombs. Aringhi also protests 
that those cemeteries were " baud unqiiam heretico schis- 
maticoque commercio pollutae." 


Miaziah 1 = March 27 (^Cal. Ethiop.). Deposition 
in Mount Hor, July 1 {Mart. Bedae, Hieron.). [C] 

ABACUC. (1) Habakkuk the Prophet, com- 
memorated Jan. 15 (Martyrologium Bom. Vetus, 
Hieron., Bedae). ■ 

(2) Martyr at Rome under Claudius, a.d. 269, 
commemorated Jan. 20 {Martyr. Horn. Vetus). 


ABBA. [Abbat.] 

ABBAT. (Abbas or Abha [-cfw], a^^as, 
a00a, in low Latin sometimes Abas, Ital. Abate, 
Germ. Abt, from the Chaldee and Syriac form of 
the common Semitic word for Father, probably 
adopted in that form either by Syriac monks, 
or through its N. T. use.) A name employed 
occasionally in the East, even so late as the 10th 
century, as a term of respect for any monks 
(Cassian., Collat. i. 1, A.D. 429; Seg. S. Columb. 
vii., A.D. 609 ; Jo. Mosch., Prat. Spir., a.d. 630 ; 
Epiphan. Hagiop., Be Loc. SS., a.d. 956 ; Byzant. 
auth. ap. Du Cange, Lex. Inf. Graec. ; Bulteau, 
Hist. Mon. d'Orient, 819 : and, similarly, aPISd- 
Slov, aPPaSiaKiov, ^evSdfi^as, KXiTrrd^^as, for 
an evil or false monk, Du Gauge, zd.) ; and some- 
times as a distinguishing term for a monk of 
singular piety (Hieron., in Epist. ad Gal. c. 4 ; in 
Matt. lib. iv. in c. 23) ; bat ordinarily restricted 
to the superior of a monastery. Pater or Princeps 
Monasterii, elective, irremoveable, single, abso- 
lute. Replaced commonly among the Greeks 
by 'Apxip-avSpirns [Archimandrita], 'Hyov- 
fjiivos, or more rarely Koivo^idpx'ns ', the first 
of which terms however, apparently by a con- 
fusion respecting its derivation, came occasion- 
ally to stand for the superior of more monas- 
teries than one (Helyot, Hist, des Ordr. Mon. 
i. 65) : — extended upon their institution to the 
superior of a body of canons, more properly 
called Praepositus, Abbas Canonicorum as op- 
posed to Abbas Monachorum (e. g. Cone. Paris. 
a.d. 829, c. 37; Cone. Aquisg. II. a.d. 836. 
canon, c. ii. P. 2, § 1 ; Chron. Leod.) ; but varied 
by many of the later monastic orders, as e. g. by 
Carmelites, Augustinians, Dominicans, Servites, 
into Praepositus or Prior Conventualis, by Fran- 
ciscans into Gustos or Guardianus, by Camaldu- 
lensians into Major, by Jesuits into Hector : — 
distinguished in the original Rule of Pachomius, 
as the superior of a combination of monasteries, 
from the Pater, Princeps, or Oeconomus of each 
and from the Praepositi of the several families of 
each. Enlarged into Abbas Abbatum for the Ab- 
bat of Monte Cassino (Pet. Diac. Chron. Casin. 
iv. 60 ; Leo Ostiens., ib. ii. 54), who was vicar of 
the Pope over Benedictine monastei-ies {Privil. 
Mcol. I. Papae, A.d. 1059, ap. And. a Nuce ad 
Leon. Ostiens. iii. 12), and had precedence over 
all Benedictine abbats {Priml. Paschal. II. Pajyae, 
A.D. 1113, in Ihdl. Casin. ii. 130; Chart. Lothar. 
Imp., A.D. 1137, ib. 157). Similarly a single 
Abbat of Aniana, Benedict, was made by Ludov. 
Pius, A.D. 817, chief of the abbats in the empire 
{Chron. Farf. p. 671 ; Ardo, in V. Bened. c. viii. 
36): and the Hegumenos of St. Dalmatius in 
Constantinople was, from the time of St. Dal- 
matius himself (A.D. 430), &px<^v or iraTvp 
fiovacTTjpiccv, Abbas Univeisalis or KaOo\iKhs, 
Exarchus omnium monasteriorum in urbe regia 
{Cone. Constant, iv., a.d. 536, Act i. ; Cotic. 
Ephes. iii. a.d. 431 ; and see Tillem., Mem. Feci. 
xiv. 322 and Kustath. in T'. EtU>jc/i. n. 18, Jo. 


Cantacuz. i. 50, Theocterictus m V. S. Nicefae, n. 
43, quoted by Du Cange). Transferred im- 
properly sometimes to the Praepositus or Prior, 
the lieutenant (so to say) of a monastery, Abbas 
Secundus or Secundarius {Reg. S. Bened. 65 ; and 
see Sid. Apoll. vii. 17), the proper abbat being 
called by way of distinction Abbas 2Iijor {Cone. 
Aqnisgr. A.D. 817 c. 31). Transferred also, in 
course of tirne, to non-monastic clerical offices,, 
as e. g. to the principal of a body of parochial 
clergy (i. the Abbas, Gustos, or Rector, as distin- 
guished from ii. the Presbyter or Capeilanus, and 
iii. the Sacrista ; Ughelli, Ital. Sac. vii. 506, ap. Du 
Cange) ; and to the chief chaplain of the king or 
emperor in camp under the Carlovingians, Abbas 
Castrensis, and to the Abbas Curiae at Vienne 
(Du Cange) ; and in later times to a particular 
cathedral official at Toledo (Beyerlinck, Magn. 
Theatrum, s. v. Abbas), much as the term car- 
dinal is used at our own St. Paul's ; and to the 
chief of a decad of choristers at Anicia, Abbas 
Clericulorum (Du Cange) ; and later still to the 
abbat of a religious confraternity, as of St. Yvo 
at Paris in 1350 and another 'in 1362 {Id.). 
Adopted also for purely secular and civil officers, 
Abbas Populi at Genoa, and again of the Genoese 
in Galata (Jo. Pachym. xiii. 27), of Guilds at 
Milan and Decurions at Brixia ; and earlier still, 
Palatii, Clocherii, Campanilis, Scholaris, Esclaf- 
fardorum (Du Cange) ; and compare Dante 
{Purgat. xxvi.). Abate del Collegio. Usurped 
in course of time by lay holders of monasteries 
under the system of commendation [COM- 
MENDa]; Abbas Protector, Abbas Zaicus, Arcld- 
abbas, Abba- [or Abhi-^ Comes, denominated by a 
happy equivoque in some papal documents Abbas 
Irreligiosus ; and giving rise in turn to the Abbas 
Legitimus or Monasticus {Serm. de Tumulat. S. 
Quintin., ap. Du Cange), as a name for the abbat 
proper (sometimes it was the Decani, Contin. 
Almoin, c. 42 ; and in Culdee Scotland in the 
parallel case it was a Prior) who took charge ot 
the spiritual duties. Lastly, perverted altogether 
in later days into a mock title, as Abbas Laetitiae, 
Juvenum, Fatuorum, or again Abbas Bejanorum 
(of freshmen, or " Yello-w Beaks," at the univer- 
sity of Paris), or Cornardorum or Conardorum (an 
equally unruly club of older people elsewhere in 
France), until " in vitium libertas excidit et vim 
dignam lege regi," and the mock abbats accord- 
ingly " held their peace " perforce (Du Cange). 

The abbat, properly so called, was elected in 
the beginning by the bishop of the diocese out of 
the monks themselves (with a vague right of 
assent on the part of the people also, according 
to Du Cange); a right confirmed at first by 
Justinian {Novell, v. c. 9, A.D. 534-565); who, 
however, by a subsequent enactment transferred 
it to the monks, the abbat elect to be confirmed 
and formally blessed by the bishop {Norell. cxxiii. 
c. 34). And this became the common law of 
Western monasteries also {Reg. S. Bened., a.d. 
530, c. 64 ; Cone. Carthag,, a.d. 525, in die Ilda ; 
Greg. M., Epist. ii. 41, iii. 23, viii. 15; Theodor., 
Poenit. II. vi. 1 in Wasserschl. p. 207 ; Pseudo- 
Egbert, Poenit. Add. in Thorpe, ii. 235, &c. ; — 
"Fratres eligant sibi abbatem," Aldhelm ap. W. 
Malm., De G. P. v. p. Ill), confirmed in time by 
express enactment {Capit. Car. M. et Lud. Pii, 
1. vi., a.d. 816), — " Quomodo (monachis) ex se 
ipsis sibi eligendi abbates licentiam dederimus;" 
— Urban. Pap. ap. Gratian, cap. Alien, cans. 12. 


qu. 2 ; and so also cap. Quontam Disl. Ixix.— 
enforcing the episcoyial benediction, from Cone, 
Nicaen. ii., a.D. 787, c. 14. So also Counc. of 
Cealchyth, A.D. 785, c. 5 (monks to elect from 
their own monastery, or another, with consent of 
bishop), but Counc. of Becanceld, A.D. 694, and 
of Cealchyth, A.D. 816 (bishop to elect abbat or 
abbess with consent of the " family "). And 
forms occur accordingly, in both Eastern and 
Western Pontificals, for the liem-dictio re- 
spectively of an Hegumenos, or of an Abbas, both 
Jloiiac/iorum and Canonicoruin, and of an Abba- 
tissa (see also Theodor., Poenit, II. iii. 5, in 
Wasserschl. p. 204, &c. ; and a special form for 
the last named, wrongly attributed to Theodore, 
in Collier's Beconls from the Ordo Jiom., and 
with variations, in Gerbert). An abbat of an 
exempt abbey (in later times) could not resign 
without leave of the Pope (c. Si Ahbatem, Bonif. 
VIII. in Sext. Deer. 1. vi. 36) ; and was to be 
confirmed and blessed by him (Matt. Par. in an. 
1257). A qualification made in the Benedictine 
Eule, allowing the choice of a minority if theirs 
were the sanius consilium, necessarily became a 
dead letter from its impracticability. Bishops, 
however, retained their right of institution if not 
nomination in Spain in the 7th century {Cone. 
Tolet., A.D. 63o, c. 50); and the Bishop of 
Chalons-sur-Marne so late as the time of St. 
Bernard {Epist. 58). See, however, Caus. xviii., 
Qu. 2. The nomination by an abbat of his suc- 
cessor, occurring sometimes in special cases (e.g. 
St. Bruno), and allowed under restrictions {Cone. 
CabiUon. ii., A.D. 650, c. 12 ; Theodor., Capit. 
Dachcr. c. 71, in Wasserschl. p. 151), was ex- 
ceptional, and was to be so managed as not to 
interfere with the general right of the monks. 
So also the founder's like exceptional nominations, 
as e. g. those made by Aldhelm or Wilfrid. The 
intei'ference of kings in such elections began as a 
practice with the system of commendation ; but 
in royal foundations, and as suggested and pro- 
moted by feudal ideas, no doubt existed earlier. 
The consent of the bishop is made necessary to 
an abbat's election, " ubi jussio Regis fuerit," 
in A.D. 794 {Cone. Franco/, c. 17). The bishop 
was also to quash an unfit election, under the 
Benedictine rule, and (with the neighbouring 
abbats) to appoint a proper person instead {Beg. 
Ben. 64). 

Once elected, the abbat held office for life, 
unless canonically deprived by the bishop ; but 
the consent of his fellow-presb3'ters and abbats is 
made necessary to such deprivation by the 
Council of Tours {Cone. Turon. ii., a.d. 567, c. 7 ; 
so also Excerpt. Fseudo-Ei/berti, 65, Thorpe ii. 
107). And this, even if incapacitated by sickness 
(Hincmar ad Corbeiens., ap. Flodoard. iii. 7). 
Triennial abbats (and abbesses) were a desperate 
expedient of far later popes. Innocent VIII. 
(A.D. 1484-1492) and Clement VII. (a.d. 1523- 

Like all monks (Hieron., ad Eustic. 95 ; 
Cassian., Collat. v. 26 ; Caus. xvi. qu. 1, c. 40 ; 
Dist. xciii. c. 5), the abbat was originally a lay- 
man (" Abbas potest esse, et non presbyter : 
laicus potest esse abbas ;" io. de Turrecrem., sup. 
Dist. Ixix.) ; and accordingly ranked below all 
orders of clergy, even the Vstiarius (Dist. xciii. 
c. 5). In the East, Archimandrites appear to 
have become either deacons at least, or .com- 
monly priests, before the close of the 5th century 


(inter Epist. Hormisd, Pap., a.d. 514-523, ante 
Ep. xxii.; Cone. Constantin. iv., a.d. 536, Act i.), 
although not without a struggle : St. Sabas, e.g., 
a.d. 484, strictly forbidding any of his monks 
to be priests, while reluctantly forced into the 
presbyterate himself by the Patriarch of Jeru- 
salem (Surius, in Vita, 5 J)ec., cc. xxii. xxv). 
And Archimandrites subscribe Church Councils 
in the East, from time to time, from Gmc. 
Constantin., a.d. 448. The term 'A^PaSoirpeir- 
^vrepos, however, in Komocan. (n. 44, ed. Co- 
teler.), appears to indicate the continued ex- 
istence of abbats not presbyters. In the West, 
laymen commonly held the office until the end 
of the 7th century, and continued to do so to 
some extent or other (even in the proper sense 
of the office) into the 11th. Jealousy of the 
priestly order, counterbalanced by the ' absolute 
need of priestly ministrations, prolonged the 
struggle, in the 6th century, whether Western 
monasteries should even admit priests at all. St. 
Benedict, a.d. 530, hardly allows a single priest ; 
although, if accepted, he is to rank next the 
abbat {Reg. 60). Aurelian of Aries, a.d. 50, 
allows one of each order, priest, deacon, sub- 
deacon {Reg. 46). The Ecgula Magistri (23) 
admits priests as guests only, " ne abbates ut- 
pote laicos excludant." St. Gregory, however, 
A.D. 595, gave a great impulse, as to monastic 
life generally, so in particular, by the nature of 
his English mission, to presbyter (and episcopal) 
abbats. And while Benedict himself, a layman, 
was admitted to a council at Rome, A.D. 531, as 
by a singular privilege (Cave, Hist. Litt. in V. 
Bened.) ; during the next century, abbats occur 
commonly, 1. at Councils of State, or in Councils 
of abbats for monastic purposes, in Saxon England 
and in France ; but 2. in purely Church Councils 
in Spain. Theodore (about A.D. 690) repeats 
the continental canon, inhibiting bishops from 
compelling abbats to come to a council without 
reasonable cause {Poenit. II. ii. 3 ; Wasserschl. 
p. 203). And in one case, both Abbates pres' 
hytcri, and Abbates simply, subscribe a Saxon 
Council or Witenagemot, viz.. that of Oct. 12, 
803 (Kemble, C. D. v. 65), which had for its 
purpose the prohibition of lay commendations ; 
while abbesses occur sometimes as well, e. g. at 
Becanceld, a.d. 694 {Anglo-Sax. Chron.), and 
at London, Aug. 1, a.d. 811 (Kemble, C. D. i. 
242). Lay abbats continued in England a.d. 
696 (Wihtred's Dooms, § 18), a.d. 740 (Egbert's 
Ansuj. 7, 11), A.D. 747 {Counc. of Clovesho, c. 5), 
A.D. 957 (Aelfric's Can. § 18, — abbats not an 
order of clergy). In France, an annual Council 
of abbats was to be summoned by the bishop 
every Nov. 1, the presbyters having their own 
special council separately in May {Cone. Aure- 
lian. i., A.D. 511 ; Cone. Autisiod., a.d. 578 or 
586, c. 7). Abbats, however, sign as represen- 
tatives of bishops at the Councils of Orleans, iv. 
and v., A.D. 541, 549. But in Spain, abbats 
subscribe Church Councils, at first after and then 
before presbyters {Cone. Braear. iii., A.D. 572 ; 
Oscens., A.D. 588; Emerit., a.d. 666; Tolet. xii. 
and xiii., a.d. 681, 683) ; occurring, indeed, in 
all councils from that of Toledo (viii.) a.d. 653. 
From A.D. 565, also, there was an unbroken 
succession of presbyter-abbats at Hy, retaining 
their original missionary jurisdiction over their 
monastic colonies, even after these colonies had 
grown into a church, and both needed and had 
B 2 


bishops, although undiocesan (Baed., H. E., iii. 
4, V. 24). And clerical abbats (episcopal indeed 
first, in Ireland, and afterwards presbyteral — 
see Todd's St. Patrick, pp. 88, 89) seem to have 
been always the rule in Wales, Ireland, and 
Scotland. In Ireland, indeed, abbats were so 
identified with not presbyters only but bishops, 
that the Pope is found designated as "Abbat 
of Rome" (Todd's St. Patrick, 156). Most con- 
tinental abbats, however (and even their Frae- 
positi and Decani) appear to have been pres- 
byters by A.D. 817. These officers may bestow 
the benediction ("quamvis presbyteri non sint"; 
Gmc. Aquisgr., A.D. 817, c. 62). AH were ordered 
to be so, but as yet ineifectually, A.D. 826 {Cone. 
Rom. c. 27). And the order was still needed, 
but was being speedily enforced by custom, A.D. 
1078 (Com. Fictav. c. 7: " Ut abbates et decani 
\_aUter abbates diaconi] qui presbyteri non sunt, 
presbyteri fiant, aut praelationes amittant "). 

A bishop-abbat was forbidden in a particular 
instance by a Council of Toledo (xii., A.D. 681, 
c. 4), but permitted subsequently as (at first) an 
exceptional case at Lobes near Liege, about A.D. 
700, (conjecturally ) for missionary purposes among 
the still heathen Flemish (D'Achery, Spicil. ii. 
730) ; a different thing, it should be noted, from 
bishops resident in abbeys under the abbat's 
jurisdiction (" Episcopi monachi," according to 
a very questionable reading in Baed. //. E. iv. 
5), as in Ireland and Albanian Scotland, and in 
several continental (mostly exempt) abbeys (St. 
Denys, St. Martin of Tours, &c.), and both at this 
and at later periods in exempt abbeys generally 
(DufCange, voc. Episcopi Vagantes: Todd's St. 
Fatrick, 51 sq.) ; although in some of these con- 
tinental cases the two plans seem to have been 
interchanged from time to time, according as the 
abbat happened to be either himself a bishop, or 
merely to have a monk-bishop under him 
(Martene and Durand, Thcs. JVoi: Awed. i. 
Pref. giving a list of Benedictine Abbatial bishops ; 
Todd, ih.). In Wales, and in the Scottish sees 
in Anglo-Saxon England (e.g. Lindisfarne), and 
in a certain sense in the monastic sees of the 
Augustinian English Church, the bishop was also 
an abbat ; but the latter office was here ap- 
pended to the former, not (as in the other cases) the 
former to the latte'-. So, too, " Antistes et abbas," 
in Sidon. Apoll. (xvi. 114), speaking of two abbats 
of Lerins, who were also Bishops of Riez. Pos- 
sibly there were undiocesan bishop-abbats in 
Welsh abbeys of Celtic date (Rees, Welsh SS. 
182, 266). Abbats sometimes acted as chore- 
piscopi in the 9th century : v. Du Cange, voc. 
Chorepiscopus. The abbats also of Catania and of 
Monreale in Sicily at a later period were always 
bishops (diocesan), and the latter shortly an 
archbishop, respectively by privilege of Urban II., 
A.D. 1088-1099, and from A.D. 1176 (Du Cange). 
So also at Fulda and Corbey in Germany. 

We have lastly an abbat who was also ex 
officio a cardinal, in the case of the Abbat of 
Clugny, by privilege of Pope Calixtus II., A.D. 
1119 (Hug. Mon. ad Fontium Abb. Ciun., ap. 
Du Cange). 

The natural rule, that the abbat should be 
chosen from the seniors, and from those of the 
monastery itself {Reg. S. Scrap. 4, in Holsten. 
p. 15), became in time a formal law {Decret. 
Bonif. VIII. in 6 de Elect.— Ahhat to be an 
already professed monk ; Capit. Car. M. et Liid. 


Pii, i. tit. 81, " ex seipsis," &c., as above quoted ; 
ConcH. Rotom., A.D. 1074, c. 10) : although the 
limitation to one above twenty-five years old is 
no earlier than Pope Alexander III. {Cone. La- 
teran. A.D. 1179). In the West, however, the 
rule was, that "Fratres eligant sibi abbatem 
de ipsis si habent, sin autem, de extraneis " 
(Theodor., Capit. Each. e. 72, in Wasserschl. p. 
151 ; and so also St. Greg., Epist. ii. 41, viii. 15) : 
while in the East it seems to be spoken of as a 
privilege, where an abbey, having no fit monk 
of its own, might choose a ^evoKovpirris — one 
tonsured elsewhere (Leunclav. Jus Graeco-Rom. 
p. 222). 

Repeated enactments prove at once the rule of 
one abbat to one monastery, and (as time went 
on) its common violation (Hieron. ad Rustic. 95 ; 
h'eg. S. Scrap. 4, and Regulae passim; Cone. 
Venetic., a.D. 465, c. 8 ; Agath., A.D. 506, cc. 38, 
57 ; Epaon., a.d. 517, cc. 9, 10 ; and so, in the 
East, Justinian, L. I. tit. iii. ; De Episc. 1. 39 : and 
Balsamon ad Nomocan. tit. i. c. 20. — " Si non per- 
mittitur alicui ut sit clericus in duabus ecclesiis. 
nee pr.Tfectus sen abbas duobus monasteriis 
praeerit "). No doubt such a case as that of 
Wilfrid of York, at once founder and Abbat of 
Hexham and Ripon, or that of Aldhelm, Abbat 
at once (for a like reason) of Malmesbury, Frome, 
and Bradford, was not so singular as it was in 
their case both intelligible and excusable. The 
spirit of the rule obviously does not apply, either 
to the early clusters of monasteries under the 
Rule of St. Pflchomius, or to the tens of thou- 
sands of monks subject to the government of 
e. g. St. Macarius or St. Serapion, or to the later 
semi-hierarchical quasi-jurisdiction, possessed as 
already mentioned by the Abbats of St. Dalma- 
tius, of Monte Cassino, or of Clugny, and by 
Benedict of Aniana. Generals of Orders, and 
more compact organization of the whole of an 
Order into a single body, belong to later times. 

The abbat's power was in theory paternal, but 
absolute — " Timeas ut dominum, diligas ut pa- 
trem " {Reg. S. Macar. 7, in Holsten. p. 25 ; and 
Regulae passim). See also St. Jerome. Even to 
act without his order was culpable {Reg. S. 
Basil.}. And to speak for another who hesitated 
to obey was itself disobedience {Reg. passim). 
The relation of monk to abbat is described as 
a libera servitus {Reg. S, Orsies. 19, in Holsten. ' 
p. 73); while no monk (not even if he was a 
bishop, Baed. H. E., iv. 5) could exchange mo- 
nasteries without the abbat's leave {Reg. passim), 
not even (although in that case it was some- 
times allowed) if he sought to quit a laxer for 
a stricter rule {Peg. FF. 14, in Holsten. p. 23 ; 
Gild. ap. MS. S. Gall. 243, pp. 4, 155) ; unless 
indeed he fled from an excommunicated abbat 
(Gild. ih. p. 155, and in D'Ach., Spicil. i. 500). 
In later times, and less civilized regions, it was 
found necessary to prohibit an abbat from blind- 
ing or mutilating his monks {Cone. Franco/. 
A.D. 794, c. 18). The rule, however, and the 
canons of the Church, limited this absolute power. 
And each Benedictine abbat, while bound exactly 
to keep St. Benedict's rule himself (e. g. Cone. 
Avgustod. c. A.D. 670), was enjoined also to make 
his monks learn it word for word by heart {Cone. 
Aquisgr., A.D. 817, cc. 1, 2, 80). ' He was also 
limited practically in the exercise of his authority 
(1) by the system of Fraepositi or Friores, elected 
usually by himself, but " consilio et voluntate fra- 


trwn " (^Beg. Orient. 3, in Holsten. p. 89 ; Heg. S. 
Bened. 65), and. in Spain at one time by the 
bishop {Cone. Tolet. iv. a.d. 633, c. 51); one in a 
Benedictine abbey, but in the East sometimes 
two, one to be at home, the other superintending 
the monks abroad {Reg. Orient. 2, in Holsten. 
p. 89) ; and under the Rule of Pachomius one to 
each subordinate house ; a system in some sense 
revived, though with a very different purpose, in 
the Priores non Conventuales of the dependent 
Obedientiae, Cellae, &c., of a later Western Abbey ; 
and (2) by that of Decani and Centenarii, elected 
by the monks themselves (Hieron. ad Eustoch. 
Epist. xviii. ; Reg. Monach. in Append, ad Hieron. 
0pp. V. ; Reg. passim ; see also Baed. H. E. ii. 2), 
through whom the discipline and the work of the 
monastery were administered. He was limited also 
from without by episcopal jurisdiction, more effi- 
ciently in the East {Gone. Chalc, a.d. 451, cc. 4, 
8, &c. &c. ; and so Balsam, ad Avmoonn. tit. xi., 
"Episcopis raagis subject! monachi quam monas- 
teriorum praefectis "), but in theory, and until 
the 11th century pretty fairly in fact, in the 
West likewise {Reg, S. Bened. ; Cone. Agath., a.d. 
506,0. 38; Aurelian. I, A.D. 511, c. 19; Epaon., 
A.D. 517, c. 19; Herd. a.d. 524, c. 3; Arelat. v., 
A.D. 554, cc. 2, 3, 5 ; and later still, Cone. Tail., 
A.D. 859, c. 9; Rotomag., a.d. 878, c. 10; A^l- 
gxistan., A.D. 952, c. 6; and see also Greg. M. 
Epist., vii. 12 ; x. 14, 33 ; Hincmar, as before 
quoted ; and Cone. Paris, a.d. 615 ; lolet. iv. a.d. 
633 ; Cahillon. i. A.D. 650 ; Herutf. A.D. 673, c. 3, 
in Baed. H. E. iv. 5, among others, putting restric- 
tions upon episcopal interference). The Fi-euch 
canons on this subject are repeated by Pseudo- 
Egbert in England {Excerpt. 63-65, Thorpe, ii. 
106, 107). Cassian, however, in the West, from 
the beginning, bids monks beware above all of 
two sorts of folk, women and bishops {De Instit. 
Coenob. xi. 17). And although exemptions, at first 
merely defining or limiting episcopal power, but 
in time substituting immediate dependence upon 
the Pope for episcopal jurisdiction altogether, did 
not grow into an extensive and crying evil until 
the time of the Councils of Rheims and of Rome, 
respectively A.D. 1119 and 1122, and of the self- 
denying ordinances of the Cistercians {Chart. 
Chirit. in Ann. Cisterc. i. 109) and Premonstra- 
tensians, in the years a.d. 1119, 1120, repudiating 
such privileges but with a sadly short-lived 
virtue, and of the contemporary remonstrances of 
St. Bernard {Lib. 3 De Consid., and Epist. 7, 42, 
179, 180); yet they occur in exceptional cases 
much earlier. As e. g. the adjustment of rights 
between Faustus of Lerins and his diocesan bishop 
at the Council of Aries, c. a.d. 456 (which se- 
cured to the abbat the jurisdiction over his lay 
monks, and a veto against the ordination of any 
of them, leaving all else to the bishop, Mansi, 
vii. 907), a parallel privilege to Agaune (St. 
Maurice in the Valais), at the Council of Chalons 
a.d. 579, and privilegia of Popes, as of Hono- 
Tius I. A.D. 628 to Bobbio, and of John IV. a.d. 
641 to Luxeuil (see Marculf., Formul. lib. I. § 1 ; 
and Mabill., Ann. Bened. xiii. no. 11, and Ap- 
pend, n. 18). Even exempt monasteries in the 
East, i.e. those immediately depending upon a 
patriarch, were subject to the visitatorial powers 
of regular officials called Exarahi Monasteriorum 
(Balsam, in Nomocan. i. 20 ; and a form in Greek 
Pontificals for the ordination of an exarch, Ha- 
bert., Archierat., Pontif. Grace, o'jserv. i. ad Edict. 


pro Archimandrit. pp. 570, 587), exercised some- 
times through Apocrisiarii (as like powers of the 
bishops through the Defensores Ecelesiarum) ; and 
even to visitations by the emperor himself (Justi- 
nian, Novell, cxxxiii., cc. 2, 4, 5). The Rule of 
Pachomius also qualified the abbat's power by a 
council of the Jilajores Monasterii, and by a tri- 
bunal of assessors, viri sancti, 5, 10, or 20, to as- 
sist in administering discipline {Reg. S. Pack. 
167, in Holsten. p. 49). And the Rule of St, Bene- 
dict, likewise, compelled the abbat, while it re- 
served to him the ultimate decision, to take 
counsel with all the brethren (juniors expressly 
included) in greater matters, and with the Seni- 
ores Monasterii in smaller ones {Reg. S. Bened. 2, 
3). The Rule of Columbanus gave him an un- 
qualified autocracy. 

The abbat was likewise limited in his power 
over abbey property, and in secular things, by his 
inability to interfere in person with civil suits ; 
which led to the appointment of an Advocatus, 
Yicedomnus, Occononms, Procurator {Cod. Can. 
Afrie. A.D. 418 (?), c. 97; Justinian, lib. i. Cod. 
tit. 3, legg. 33, 42 ; Cod. Theodos. lib. ix. tit, 45, 
leg. 3 ; St. Greg. Ejnst. iii. 22 ; Cone. Nicaen. ii, 
A.D. 787, c. 11), revived with greater powers 
under the title of Advocatus Ecclesiae, or Monas- 
terii, by Charlemagne {Capit. A.D. 813, c, 14 ; and 
Lothar., Capit. tit. iii, cc. 3, 9, 18, &c.) ; who from 
a co-ordinate, frequently proceeded to usurp an 
exclusive, interest in the monastic revenues. The 
abbat also was required to give account of the 
abbey property to both king and bishop, by the 
Council of Vern (near Paris) A.D. 755 ; while 
neither abbat nor bishop separately could even 
exchange abbey lands in Anglo-Saxon England, 
but only by joint consent (Theodor., Poen. II. viii. 
6, in Wasserschl. p. 208). 

Within the abbey and its pi-ecincts, the abbat 
was to order all work, vestments, services {Reg. 
S. Bened. 47, 57 ; Regulae passim) ; to award all 
punishments, even to excommunication {Reg. S. 
Bened. 24 ; Leidrad., Lugdun. Arch., ad Car. M. 
ap, Galland., xiii. 390, restoring to the Abbat of 
Insula Barbara, " potestatem ligandi et solvendi, 
uti habuerunt praedecessores sui ;" Honorius III. 
cap. Dilecta, tit. de Major, et Obedientia, desiring 
a neighbouring abbat to excommunicate refrac- 
tory nuns, because their abbess could not ; and see 
Bingham), or to the use of the " ferrum abscis- 
sionis " {Reg. S. Bened. 28). He was also to be ad- 
dressed as "Domnuset Abbas" (i6. 63). And while 
in the East he was speciallv commanded to eat with 
the other monks {Reg. PP. 11, in Holsten. p. 23), 
the Rule of Benedict (56) appoints him a separate 
table " cum hospitibus et peregrinis," to which 
he might, in case there was room, invite any monk 
he pleased. The Council of Aix a.d. 817 (c. 27) 
tried to qualify this practice by bidding abbats 
" be content " with the food of the other monks, 
unless "propter hospitem ;" and some monas- 
teries kept up a like protest in the time of Peter 
Damiani and Peter the Venerable ; but it con- 
tinued to be the Western rule. He was ordered 
also to sleep among his monks by the Council 
of Frankfort a.d. 794 (c. 13). The abbat was spe- 
cially not to wear mitre, ring, gloves, or sandals, 
as being episcopal insignia — a practice growing 
up in the West in the loth and 11th centuries, 
and (vainly) then protested against by the Coun- 
cil of Poictiers a.d. 1100, and by St. Bernard 
{Epist. 42) and Peter of Blois {Epist.QQ ; and see 



also Thoiii. Ciintiprat., De Apihus, i. 6 ; Chron. 
C'asiii. iv. 78). But a mitre is said to have been 
granted to the Abbat of Bobbie by Pope Theodo- 
ras I. A.D. 643 (5m//. Casin. I. ii. 2), the next 
alleged case being to the Abbat of St. Savianus 
by Sylvester II. A.d. 1000. A staff, however, but 
of a particular form, and some kind of stockings 
('' baculum et pedules "), were the special insig- 
nia of an abbat in Anglo-Saxon England in the 
time of Theodore A.D. 668-690, being formally 
given to him by the bishop at his benediction 
{Poenit. II. iii. 5, in Wasserschl. p. 204). And the 
staff was so everywhere. He was also to shave his 
beard, and of course to be tonsured (Cone. Bitu- 
ric. A.D. 1031, c. 7). His place of precedence, 
if an ordinary abbat, appears to have been finally 
fixed as immediately after bishops, among prac- 
lati, and before archdeacons (see, however, Decret. 
Greg. IX., lib. ii. tit. 1, cap. Becernimus) ; but 
the list of our English convocations from Arch- 
bishop Kemp's Register A.D. 1452 (Wilk. I. xi. 
sq.), though following no invariable rule, appears 
usually to postpone the abbat and prior to the 
archdeacon. In Saxon England, he shared in like 
manner with the king (as did an abbess also) in 
the '' wer " of a murdered " foreigner " (^Laics of 
Lie, 23; Thorpe, i. 117). The abbat also was 
not named in the canon of the mass (Gavant. in 
I,'u'>r. Miss. P. iii. tit. 8 ; Macr. F.F., Hierolex, in 
Can. Missae), except in the case of the abbat of 
Monte Cassino (Ang. a Nuce, in notis ad Leo. 
Ostiens. ii. 4). But an anniversary was allowed 
to be appointed for him on his death (e. g. Cone. 
Aquisgr. A.D. 817, c. 73). He was forbidden (as 
were all monks, at least in France) to stand 
sponsor for a child (Cone. Autissiod. a.d. 578, c. ' 
25 ; Greg. M., E^ist. iv. 42), with a notable ex- i 
ception, however, in England, in the case of Abbat 
Robert of Mont St. Michel, godfather to King ! 
Henry II.'s daughter Eleanor (Rob. de Monte ad 
an. 1161), or to go to a marriage ( C'o?ic. Autissiod., 
ih.) ; or indeed to go far from his monastery at 
all without the bishop's leave {Cone. Arel. v. 
A.D. 554) ; or to go about with a train of monks 
except to a general synod (Cone. Aquisgr. A.D. 
817, c. 59). He of course could not hold pro- 
perty (although it was needful sometimes to pro- 
hibit his lending money on usury, Pseudo-Egbert. 
Poenit. iii. 7, in Thorpe, ii. 199); neither could 
he dispose of it by will, even if it accrued to him ■ 
by gift or heirship after he became abbat (^Eeg. 
PP. 2, in Holsten. p. 22) ; but if the heirship 
was within the 4th degree, he was exceptionally : 
enabled to will the property to whom he pleased i 
(Justinian, lib. i. Cod. tit. de Episc. ct Cler. c. ! 
33). Further, we find bishops and archdeacons 
prohibited from seizing the goods of deceased 
abbats (Cone. Paris. A.D. 615 ; Cabillon. i. A.D. 
650). And later wills of abbats in the West are 
sometimes mentioned and confirmed, but prin- 
cipally in order to secure to their abbeys pro- 
perty bequeathed to those abbeys (see Thomassin). 
Privileges of coining money, of markets and tolls, 
of secular jurisdiction, began certainly as early 
as Ludov. Pius, or even Pipin (Gieseler, ii. p. 255, 
notes 5, 6, Eng. Tr.). Others, such as of the title 
of prince, of the four Abbates Imperii in Germany 
(viz., of Fulda — also ex officio the empress's 
chancellor — of Weissenberg, Kempten, Murbach), 
of the English mitred baronial abbats, and the 
like, and sumptuary laws limiting the number of I 
their h'jrses and attemlants, kc, belong to later 


times. An abbat, however, might hunt in Eng- 
land (Laics of Cnut, in Thorpe, i. 429). An abbat, 
or an abbess, presiding over a joint house of 
monks and nuns, is noted by Theodore as a pecu- 
liar Anglo-Saxon custom : — " Apud Graecos non 
est consuetudo viris feminas habere monachas, 
neque feminis viros ; tamen consuetudinera istius 
provinciae" (England) '"non destruamus"(Poe«(Y. 
II. vi. 8, in Wasserschl. p. 208). The well-known 
cases of the Abbesses Hilda and Aelbfled of Whitby 
and of Aebba of Coldingham are instances of the 
latter arrangement (Baed. //. E. iv. 23, 24, 25, 
26) ; and the last of them also of its mischievous- 
ness (Id. ib. 25). Tynemouth and Wimbourne 
are other instances. But the practice was a Celtic 
one (e. g. St. Brigid ; see Todd, St. Patrick, 
pp. 11, 12), not simply Anglo-Saxon; and with 
Celtic monastic missions, penetrated also into the 
Continent (e.g. at Remiremont and Poictiers), and 
even into Spain and into Rome itself (so Jlontalem- 
i bert, Monks of West, vol. v. p. 297, Engl. Tr.). 
[ It is, however, remarkable, that while instances 
of abbesses ruling monks abounded, abbats ruling 
' nuns rest for us upon the general assertion of 
Theodore. And the practice, while it died out on 
the Continent, was not restored in England after 
the Danish invasion. In the East there was a 
rigorous separation between monks and nuns. 
And where two such communities were in any 
, way connected, a special enactment prohibited all 
but the two superiors from communication with 
j one another, and placed all possible restrictions 
upon even their necessary interviews (Peg. S. 
I Basil, in Holsten. p. 158). St. Pachomius esta- 
blished the double order, but put the Nile be- 
I tween his monk.i and his nuns (Pallad., Hist. Laus., 
I cc. 30-42). 

Interference by abbats with the ministrations 
of parochial clergy could scarcely exist until ab- 
bats were presbyters themselves, nor did it ever 
(as was naturally the case) reach the extent to 
which it was carried by the friars. We find, 
however, an enactment of Theodore (Poenit. II. vi. 
16, in Wasserschl. p. 209), prohibiting a monas- 
tery from imposing penances on the laity, " quia 
(haec libertas) proprie clericorum est." And a 
much later and more detailed canon, of the 4th 
Lateran Council (a.d. 1123), forbids abbats to 
impose penance, visit the sick, or administer 
unction. They were authorized in the East, it 
presbyters, and with the bishop's leave, to confer 
the tonsure and the order of reader on their own 
monks (Cone. Nicaen. ii. a.d. 787, c. 14). And 
they could everywhere admit their own monks 
("ordinatio monachi" — ^Theodor., Poenit. II. iii. 3, 
in Wasserschl. p. 204). But encroachments upon 
the episcopal office, as well as upon episcopal in- 
signia, gradually arose. Even in A.D. 448 abbats 
were forbidden to give a.-wocTT6KLa.(Conc. Constan- 
tin., — corrected by Du Cange into iTTi(TT6\ia = 
commendatory letters for poor, and see Cone. Au- 
relian. ii. c. 13, and Turon. ii. c. 6). But by a.d. 
1123 it had become necessary to prohibit gene- 
rally their thrusting themselves into episcopal 
offices (Cone. Lateran. iv. c. 17). And we find 
it actually asserted by Sever. Binius (in Canon. 
Apostol. ap. Labh. Cone. i. 54e, on the authority 
of Bellarmine, De Eccles. iv. 8), that two or more 
" abbates iufulati " might by Papal dispensation 
be substituted for bishops in consecrating a 
bishop, provided one bishop were there ; while 
Innocent IV. in 1489 empowered an abbat by 


nimse'f to confer not only the subdiaconate, but 
the diaconate. 

The spiritual abbat was supplanted in Wales 
(Girald. Cambr., Itin. Camh., and repeatedly) and 
in Scotland (Robertson, Early Scotl. i, 329, 339), 
by the end of the 8th and so on to the 12th cen- 
tury, by the Advocatus Ecclesiae (confused 
sometimes with the Oeconomus, who in Welsh 
and Irish monasteries was a diti'erent officer, and 
managed the internal secular affairs, as the other 
did the external), called in Scotland Herenach, in 
Ireland Airchinneac/i, who was originally the lay, 
and gradually became also the hereditary, lessee of 
the Termon (or abbey) lands, being commonly the 
founder or his descendant, or one of the neighbour- 
ing lords ; and who held those lauds, receiving a 
th:'rd part of their value in the first instance, but 
who is found as an hereditary married lay abbat 
during the period named ; e. g. Crinan, the Abbat 
of Dunkeld, who was grandfather of Shakspeare's 
Duncan, and one Dunchad, also Abbat of Dunkeld, 
who died in battle A.D. 961. The case was the 
same at Abernethy and at Applecross. The spi- 
ritual duties devolved upon the bishop and a 
prior. See also Du Cange (voc. Advocatus), for 
a similar process although to a less degree on the 
Continent. In Ireland, the Comarb, or similar 
hereditary abbat (or bishop), retained his spiritual 
character (Todd, St. Patrick, pp. 155 sq.). The 
lay abbats in Northumbria, denounced by Baeda 
(Epist. ad E/bert.), were simply fraudulent imi- 
tations of abbats in the proper sense of the word. 
An entirely like result, however, and to as wide 
an extent during Carlovingian times as in Scot- 
laud, ensued abroad from a different cause, 
viz., from the system of commendation [COM- 
menda]; which began in the time of Charles 
Martel (a.d. 717-741, being approved by Cone. 
Leptin. a.d. 743 ; Co7ic. Suession., a.d. 744 ; and 
see Baron, in an. 889, n. 31), with the plausible 
object of temporarily employing monastic re- 
venues for the pressing needs of warfare with 
Saracens, Saxons, or other heathens, care being 
taken to reserve enough to keep up the monas- 
tery proper. The nobleman, or the king himself, 
who led the troops thus raised, became titular 
abbat. And in Carlovingian times, accordingly, 
most of the great Frank and Burgundian nobles 
and kings, and sometimes even bishops (e. g. 
Hatto of Mainz, A.D. 891-912, who enjoyed the 
reputation of holding twelve abbeys at once), 
were titular abbats of some great monastery, as 
of St. Denys or St. Martin, held for life or even 
by inheritance ; the revenues of which were soon 
diverted to purposes less patriotic than that of 
supplying the king with soldiers (see a short 
list by way of specimen in Gieseler, ii. p. 411, 
note 1, Eng. Tr.). In the East a like system ap- 
pears to have grown up, although hardly from 
the same origin, some centuries later ; John, Pa- 
triarch of Antioch, at the beginning of the 12th 
century, informing us that most monasteries in 
his time were handed over to laymen (x'^P^'^''''''- 
KapioL — beneficiarii), for life or for two or thu- 
descents, by gift of the emperors; while Balsamon 
{ad Cone. Nicaen. c. 13) actually condemns him 
for condemning the practice. Later abuses of the 
kind in the West, as in the time of Francis 
I. of France or of Louis XIV., need here be only 
alluded to. 

(Bingham ; Bulteau, Hist. Mon. d'Orient ; Du 
Cange; Ant. Dadini, Ascetic, seu Origg. Rei Monas- 


tic. ; Ferraris ; Helyot, Hist, des Ordr. Mon. ; Her- 
zog ; Hospinian, De Monach. ; Macri FF., Hiero- 
lexic. ; Martene, De Antiq. Monach. liitibus ; Mar- 
tigny ; Montalembert, Monks of the West ; Tho- 
massin, Be Benefic. ; Van Espen.) [A. W. H.] 

ABBATISSA. [Abbess.] 

ABBESS. (Abbatissa found in inscript. of 
A.D. 569, in Murator. 429. 3, also called Anti- 
stita and Majorissa, the female superior of a body 
of nuns ; among the Greeks, 'Hyou/ieVrj, 'Apx'- 
fxavSp7ris, Archimandritissa, Justinian, Novell., 
'Afi/xa? or mother, Pallad., Hist. Laus., c. 42, in 
the time of Pachomius, Mater monasterii or moni- 
alium, see St. Greg. M., Lial. IV. 13 [where 
" Mater " stands simply for a nun] ; Cone. 
Mogunt. a.d. 813; Aquisgr., a.d. 816, lib. ii.). 
In most points subject to the same laws as ab- 
bats, mutatis mutandis ; — elective, and for life 
(triennial abbesses belonging to years so late as 
A.D. 1565, 1583) ; and solemnly Admitted by the 
bishop — Benedictio Abbatissae (that for an abbess 
monasticam regulam profitentem, eapit. ex Canone 
Theodori Anglorum Episcopi, is in the Ordo Eo- 
manus, p. 164, Hittorp.); and in Fi-ance re- 
stricted to one monastery apiece {Cone. Vern. a.d. 
755) ; and with FraejMsitae, and like subordinates, 
to assist them {Cotic. Aquisgr., a.d. 816, lib. ii. 
cc. 24-26) ; and bound to obey the bishop in all 
things, whether abbesses of Monachae or of Cano- 
iiicae {Cone. Cabillon. ii. a.d. 813, c. 65) ; and sub- 
ject to be deprived for misconduct, but in this 
case upon report of the bishop to the king {Cone, 
Francof. A.D. 794) ; bound also to give account of 
monastic property to both king and bishop {Cone. 
Vern., A.D. 755) ; entitled to absolute obedience 
and possessed of ample powers of discipline, even 
to expulsion, subject however to the bishop {Cone. 
Aquisgr. A.D. 816, lib. ii.) ; and save only that 
while an abbat could, an abbess could not, excom- 
municate (Honorius III., cap. Dilecta, tit. de Ma- 
jor, et Obedientia) ; neither could she give the veil 
or (as some in France appear to have tried to 
do) ordain {Capntul. Car. M. an. 789, c. 74, 
Anseg. 71); present even at Councils in England 
(see Abbat, and compare Lingard, Antiq. i. 
139 ; Kemble, Antiq. ii. 198 ; quoted by Mont- 
alembert, Monks of West, v. 230, Engl. Tr.). 
While, however, a bishop was necessary to 
admit and bless an abbat, Theodore ruled 
in England, although the rule did not become 
permanent, that a presbyter was sufficient in like 
case for an abbess {Foenit. II. iii. 4, in Wasserschl., 
p. 203). The limitation to forty years old at elec- 
tion is as late as the Council of Trent ; Gregory 
the Great speaks of sixty {Epist. iv. 11). An 
I abbess also was not to leave her monastery, in 
France, save once a year if summoned by the 
king with the bishop's consent to the king's 
presence upon monastic business {Cone. Vern. 
a.d. 755 ; Cabillon. ii. a.d. 813, c. 57). Neither 
was she even to speak to any man save upon 
necessary business, and then before witnesses 
and between the first hour of the day and 
evening {Cone. Cabillon. ii. A.D. 813, cc. 55, 
56). For the exceptional cases of Anglo-Saxon, 
Irish, or Continental Irish, abbesses ruling 
over mixed houses of monks and nuns, see 
Abbat. It was noted also as a specially 
Western custom, that widows as well as virgins 
were made abbesses (Theod., Foenit. II. iii. 7, in 
Wasserschl. p. 204). [A. \V. IL] 


ABBEY. [Monastery.] 

ABBUNA, the common appellation of the 
Bishop, Metran, or Metropolitan, of Axum, or 
Abj'ssinia, or Ethiopia, not a patriarch, but, on 
the contrary, appointed and consecrated always 
by the patriarch of Alexandria, and specially 
forbidden to have more than seven suftVagan 
bishops under him, lest he should make himself 
so, twelve bishops being held to be the lowest 
canonical number for the consecration of a patri- 
arch. In a Council, if held in Greece, he occu- 
pied the seventh place, immediately after the 
prelate of Seleucia. (Ludolf, Hist. Ethiop. 
iii. 7.) [A. W. H.] 

ABDELLA, martyr in Persia under Sapor, 
commemorated Apr. 21 (^Martyr. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ABDIANUS, of Africa, commemorated June 
3 (Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

ABDON, Abdo or Abdus, and SENNEN, 
Sennes, or Senxis, Persian princes, martyred at 
Rome under Decius, A.D. 250, are commemorated 
July 30 {Marty rologiutn Bom. Vet.,Bedae, Adonis). 
Proper office in Gregorian Sacramentary, p. 116 ; 
and Antiphon in the Lib. Antiphon. p. 704. 

It is related (Adonis Martyrol. iii. Kal. Aug.) 
that their relics were translated in the time of 
Constantine to the cemetery of Pontianus. There 
Bosio discovered a remarkable fresco, represent- 
ing the Lord, seen from the waist upward emerg- 
ing from a cloud, placing wreaths on the heads 
of SS. Abdon and Sennen (see woodcut). This is 

' iriNr7!,';>infi^''«ii!n''''''^;ii!|pi,,,,^,ji|iini:ii|i, 

Ab.iun and Sennen. (Fiom the cemetery of Pontianus.) 

in front of the vault enclosing the supposed 
remains of the martyrs, which bears the inscrip- 
tion [DEPOSiTipNIS DIE. The painting is, in 
Martigny's opinion, not earlier than the seventh 
century. It is remarkable that the painter has 
evidently made an attempt to represent the Per- 
sian dress. The saints wear pointed caps or 
hoods, similar to those in which the Magi are 
sometimes represented; cloaks fastened with a 
fibula on the breast ; and tunics of skin entirely 
unlike tlie Roman tunic, and resembling that 
given to St. John Baptist in a fresco of the 
Lord's Baptism in the same cemetery of Ponti- 
anus (Bottari, Scultura e Pitture, tav. xliv.). 
Some account of the peculiar dress of Abdon and 
Sennen may be found in Lami's treatise De Eru- 
ditione Apostoloi'wn, pp. 121-166. 

The gesture of the Lord, crowning the martvrs 


for their constancy, is found also on the bottoms 
of early Christian cups [Glass, Christian], 
where He crowns SS. Peter and Paul, and 
other saints (Buonarruoti, Vasi Antichi, tav. 
XV. fig. 1, and elsewhere); and on coins of the 
Lower Empire the Lord is uot unfrequently 
seen crowning two emperors. (Martigny, Did. 
des Antiq. chretiennes.~\ [C] 

ABECEDAEIAN. The term « Hymnus " or 
" Paean Abecedarius" is applied specially to the 
hymn of Sedulius, "A solis ortus cardine." 
[Acrostic] [C] 

ABEECIUS of Jerusalem, i(raTv6(TToKos 
davfiaTovpyhs, commemorated Oct. 22 (Cal. 
Byzant.). [C] 

ABGARUS, King, commemorated Dec. 21 
(Cal. Armen.). [C] 

ABIBAS, martyr of Edessa, commemorated 
Nov. 15 {Cal Byzant.). [C] 

ABIBON, invention of his relics at Jerusa- 
lem, Aug. 3 {Martyrol. Bom. Vet.). [C] 

ABILIUS, bishop of Alexandria (a.d. 86-96), 
commemorated Feb. 22 {Martyrol. Bom. Vet.); 
Maskarram 1 = Aug. 29 {Cal Ethiop.). [C] 

ABJUEATION-denial, disavowal, or re- 
nunciation upon oath. Abjuration, in common 
ecclesiastical language, is restricted to the renun- 
ciation of heresy made by the penitent heretic 
on the occasion of his reconciliation to the Church. 
In some cases the abjuration was the only cere- 
mony required ; but in others it was followed 
up by the imposition of hands and by unction. 
The practice of the ancient Church is described 
by St. Gregory the Great in a letter to Quiricus 
and the bishops of Iberia on the reconciliation 
of the Nestorians. According to this, in cases in 
which the heretical baptism was imperfect, the 
rule was that the penitent should be baptized ; 
but when it was complete, as in the case of the 
Arians, the custom of the Eastern Church was 
to reconcile by the Chrism ; that of the Western, 
by the imposition of hands. As, however, the 
mystery of the Chrism was but the Oriental rite 
of Confirmation, the practice was substantially 
identical. (On the question of Re-baptism, see 
Re-Baptism, Baptism.) Converts from the 
Monophysites were received after simple confes- 
sion, and the previous baptism was supposed to 
take effect " for the remission of sins," at the 
moment at which the Spirit was imparted by 
the imposition of hands ; or the convert was re- 
united to the Church by his profession of faith 
(St. Greg. Ep. 9, 61). A similar rule is laid 
down by the Quinisext Council, canon 95, which 
classes with the Arians, the Macedonians, Nova- 
tians and others, to be received with the Chrism. 
The Paulianists, Montauists, Eunomians, and 
others, are to be re-baptized ; to be received as 
Christians, on th^r profession, the first day, as 
Catechumens the second, and after they have 
been allowed a place in the Church as hearers 
for some time, to be baptized. In all cases, the 
profession of faith must be made by the pre- 
sentation of a libellus, or form of abjuration, in 
which the convert renounced and anathematized 
his former tenets. After declaring his abjura- 
tion not to be made on compulsion, from fear or 
any other unworthy motive, he proceeded to 
nnathematize the sect renounced, by all its 


names ; the neresiarchs, and their successors, past, 
present, and future ; he then enumerated the 
tenets received by them, and, having repudiated 
them singly and generally, he ended with making 
profession of the true faith. (Bandinius, Monu- 
menta ii. 109-111. But for the whole subject see 
Martene and Durand, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Biti- 
hus II. liber iii. ch. 6 ; Mj. de levi et de vehementi, 
later date. See Landon's Eccl. Die.) [D. B.] 

ABLUTION. A term under which various 
kinds of ceremonial washing are included. The 
principal are the following : the washing of the 
head, as a preparation for unction in baptism, 
and the washing of the feet, which in some 
places formed part of the baptismal ceremony 
[Baptism] ; the washing of the feet of the poor 
by exalted persons, which forms part of the cere- 
mony of Maundy Thursday [Feet, washing of]; 
the lustral ceremony which preceded entrance to a 
church [Caxtharus; Holy Water]; and the 
washing of the priest's hands at certain points 
in the celebration of the liturgy [Aquamanile ; 
Hands, washing of]. [C] 

ABORTION. — The crime of procuring abor- 
tion is little, if at all, noticed in the earliest 
laws. It is a crime of civilization : the repre- 
sentative of the principle which in a barbarous 
state of society is infanticide. The oration of 
Lysias which was pronounced on occasion of a 
suit on this subject is lost, so that it cannot be 
decided whether the act was regarded by the 
Athenians as an oflence against society, or merely 
as a private wrong. It is in the latter aspect 
that it is chiefly regarded in the civil law. The 
child unborn represents certain interests, and his 
life or death may be beneficial or injurious to 
individuals : thus, it may have been, that a 
father, by his wife's crime, might lose the jus 
trium Uberomm. The case quoted from Cicero 
pro Clunntio (Dig. xlviii. 19, 39), in which a 
woman was condemned to death for having pro- 
cured abortion, having been bribed by the second 
heir, is clearly exceptional. The only passage 
in the civil law in which the crime is mentioned 
without such connexion, is a sentence of Ulpian, 
in the Pandects (Dig. xlviii. 8, 8, ad legem Cor- 
neliam de Sicariis), where the punishment is 
declared to be banishment. The horrible preva- 
lence of the practice among the Romans of the 
Empire may be learned from Juvenal. 

It was early made a ground of accusation by 
the Christians against the heathen. Tertullian 
denounces the practice as homicidal. " Pre- 
vention of birth is a precipitation of murder," 
Apol. ix. Minucius Felix declares it to be par- 

The Council of Ancyra (a.d. 314) having men- 
tioned that the ancient punishment was penance 
for life, proceeds to limit it to ten years ; and 
the same space of lime is given by St." Basil, who 
condemns the practice in two canons, ii. and viii., 
alleging the character of the crime as committed 
against both the mother and the oi!spring ; and 
declining to accept the distinctions drawn by 
the lawyers between the degrees of criminality 
varying with the time of the gestation. The 
Council of Lerida (324) classes "the crime with 
infenticide, but allows the mother to be received 
to Communion after seven years' penance even 
when her sin is complicated with adultery. The 
Council in Trullo condemns it to the "pfnancr | 


of homicide. Pope Gregory III. in the next 
century reverts to the ten years' penance, al- 
though he differs from St. Basil in modifying the 
sentence to a single year in cases where the 
child has not been formed in the womb ; this is 
based on Exod. xxi., and is countenanced by St. 
Augustine, in Quaestiones Exodi, in a passage in- 
corporated by Gratian. 

There is thus abundant evidence that the crime 
was held in extreme abhorrence, and punished 
with great severity, as pertaining to wilful 
murder, by the canons of the Church. By the 
Visigothic law (lib. VI. tit. iii. c. 1), the person 
who administered a draught for the purpose 
was punished with death. [D. B.] 

ABRAHAM. (1) the patriarch, comme- 
morated Oct. 9 {Martyrol. Bom. Vet.). Also on 
the 23rd of the month Nahasse, equivalent to 
August 16. {Cal. Ethiop. ; Neale, Eastern Church, 
Iiitrod. pp. 805, 815.) 

(2) Patriarch and martyr, commemorated 
Taksas 6 = Dec. 2 {Cal. Ethiop.). [C] 


commemorated by the Ethiopic Church on the 
28th of every month of their Calendar. [C] 

ABRAXAS GEMS. [See Abrasas in 
Dict. of Christ. Biogr.] 

ABREHA, first Christian king of Ethio- 
pia, commemorated Tekemt 4 = Oct. 1 {Cul. 
Ethiop.). ^0.] 

ABSOLUTION (Lat. Ahsolutio). (For Sacra- 
mental Absolution, see Confession, Penitence.) 

1. A short deprecation which follows the 
Psalms of each Nocturn in the ordinary offices 
for the Hours. In this usage, the word '" ahso- 
lutio " perhaps denotes simply " ending " or " com- 
pletion," because the monks, when the Nocturns 
were said at the proper hours of the night, broke 
otF the chant at this point and went to rest 
(Maori Hierolexicon s. v.). In fact, of the " Ab- 
solutiones" in the present Roman Breviary, only 
one (that " in Tertio Nocturne, et pro feria iv. 
et Sabbato ") contains a prayer for absolution, 
in the sense of a setting free from sin. 

2. For the Absolution which follows the intro- 
ductory Confession in most Liturgies and Offices,, 
see Confession. 

3. The prayer for Absolution at the beginning 
of the office is, in Oriental Liturgies, addressed 
to the Son : but many of these liturgies contain 
a second " Oratio Absolutionis," at some point 
between Consecration and Communion, which is 
addressed to the Father. For example, that in 
the Greek St. Basil (Renaudot, JAt. Orient, i. 81), 
addressing God, the Father Almighty (6 06oy, 
6 Uar^p 6 UavTOKparup), and reciting the pro- 
mise of the Keys, pr-nys Him to dismiss, remit 
and pardon our sins i^&ves, &<p€s. (Tvyx'ipv'^oy 
illMv). Compare the Coptic St. Basil (/j. i. 22). 

4. The word " Absolutio " is also applied to 
those prayers said over a corpse or a tomb in 
which remission of the sins of the departed is 
entreated from the Almighty. (Maori Hiero- 
lexicon, s. V.) [C] 

ABSTINENCE. Days of abstinence, as they 
are called, on which persons may take their 
meals at the ordinary hour, and eat and drink 
what they please, in any quantity so that they 



abstain from meat a]one, belong to modern times. 
Anciently, fasting and abstinence went together, 
as a general rule, foi'med parts of the same idea, 
and could not be dissevered. There may have 
been some few, possibly, who ate and drank in- 
discriminately, when they brol^e their fast, as 
Socrates (v. 22, 10) seems to imply ; but in 
general, bayond doubt, abstinence from certain 
Ivinds of food was observed on fasting days wften 
the fast was over, " abstinentes ab iis, quae non 
rejicimus, sed differimus," as Tertullian says 
(Z>e Jejun. 15). Thus it will be more properly 
considered under the head of fasting, to which 
it subserved. [E. S. F.] 

ABUNA. [Abbuna.] 

ABUNDANTIUS, of Alexandria, commemo- 
rated Feb. 26 (Mart. Hicron.). [C] 

ABUNDIUS. (1) Martyr at Rome under 
Decius, commemorated Aug. 26 (Mart. Rom. Vet. 
ct Bedae); Aug. 23 (Mart. Hieronym.). 

(2) The deacon, martyr at Spoleto under Dio- 
cletian, Dec. 10 (Martijrol. Bom. Vet.). [C] 

ACACIUS, martyr, commemorated May 7 
{Cal. Byzant). [C.] 

ACATHISTUS (Gr. a(ca9io-Tos). A hymn of 
the Greeli Church, sung on the eve of the fifth 
Sunday in Lent, in honour of the Blessed Virgin, 
to whose intercession the deliverance of Constan- 
tinople from the barbarians on three several oc- 
casions was attributed. Meursius assigns its 
origin more especially to the deliverance of the 
city from Chosroes, king of the Persians, in the 
reign of the Emperor Heraclius (626). It is 
called oLKadiffTOS, because during the singing of 
it the whole congregation stood, while during 
the singing of other hymns of the same kind 
they occasionally sat. (Suicer's Thesaurus, s. v. ; 
Keale's Eastern Ch. Introd. 747 ; Daniel's Codex 
Liturg. iv. 223.) 

Francis Junius wrongly supposed this use of 
the Acathistus to commemorate the journey of 
Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem. (Macri Hicro- 
Icxicon, s. V.) 

The word Acathistus is also used to designate 
tlie day on which the hymn was used. (Sabae 
Typicum, in Suicer, s. v.) [C] 


the two principal kinds (accentus and concentus) 
of ecclesiastical music. 

1. The consideration of this subject is encum- 
bered by an especial difficulty — the popular, and 
now all but exclusive application of the word 
'■ accent " to emphasis, stress, or ictus. Accent, 
however, claims and admits of a much wider 
application. Ben Jonson " speaks of accent as 
being "with the ancients, a tuning of the voice, 
in lifting it up, or letting it down," — a defini- 
tion not only clear and concise, but thoroughly 
accordant with the derivation of the word 
" accent," from accino, i. e. ad cano, to sing to. 
We are all conscious of and aftected by the 
varieties of accent'' (in this, its etymological 
and primitive acceptation) in foreign languages 
spoken by those to whom they are native, as 
well as in our native language spoken by fo- 
reigners, or (perhaps still more) by residents of 


parts of Great Britain other than our own. The ] 

Scottish, Irish, and various provincial accents, | 

are not so much the result of diflerent vocaliza- ] 

tion (i.e. utterance of vowel sounds) as of the i 

dift'ereut gradations in which the Scotch, Irish, I 

and others, " tune their voices." 

2. The Accentus Ecclesiasticus, called also mo- 
dus choraliter legendi, is the result of successive 
attempts to ensure in Public Worship uniformity 

of delivery consistent with uniformity of matter \ 

delivered ; so as, if not to obliterate, at least to ; 

hide individual peculiarities under the veil of a j 

catholic " use." It presents a sort of mean be- 
tween speech and song, continually inclining to- ' 
wards the latter, never altogether leaving its i 
hold on the former ; it is speech, though always 
attuned speech, in passages of average interest 
and importance ; it is song, though always dis- 
tinct and articulate song, in passages demanding 
more fervid utterance. Though actually musical 
only in concluding or culminating phrases, the 1 
Accentus Ecclesiasticus is always sufficiently iso- i 
chronous to admit of its being expressed in musi- 
cal characters, a process to which no attempt 
(and such attempts have been repeatedly made) 
has ever succeeded in subjecting pure speech. 

3. Accentus is probably the oldest, as it is cer- J 
tainly the simplest, form of Cantus Ecclesiasticus. ' 
Like most art-forms and modes of operation , 
which have subsequently commended themselves 

on their own acco mt to our sense of beauty, it 
grew in all likelihoo-^ out of a physical difficulty. 
The limited capacity of the so-called " natural " 
or speaking voice must have been ascertained at 
a very early period ; indeed its recognition is 
confirmed by th6 well-known practice whether ' 

of the ancient temple, theatre, or forum. The old ] 

rhetoricians, says Forkel, are, without exception, 
of the same way of thinking ; and we may, from 
their extant works, confidently conclude, that : 
neither among the Greeks nor the Romans was i 
poetry ever recited but in a tone analogous to | 
that since known as the ctccentus ecclesiasticus. i 

The Abbe du Bos'* too has demonstrated that ^ 
not only was the theatrical recitation of the 
ancients actually musical — " un veritable chant," 
susceptible of musical notation, and even of in- 
strumental accompaniment — but that all their ] 
public discourses, and even the,ir familiar lan- 
guage, though of course in a lesser degree, pai-- ! 
took of this character. , 

4. The advantages resulting from the employ- 
ment of isochronous sounds (sounds which are 
the result of equal-timed vibrations) would be- 
come apparent on the earliest occasion, when a 
single orator was called upon to fill a large 
auditorium, and to make himself intelligible, or 
even audible, to a large assembly. So, too, for 
simultaneous expression on the part of large num- 
bers, these advantages would at once make them- i 
selves felt. In congregational worship a uniform ] 
(technically, a " unisonous ") utterance might ' 
seem as essential, as conducive to the decency 
and order with which we are enjoined to do "" all ■ 

a English Grammar, 1640, chap. viii. 
I' " Esl in dicendo etiam quidara cantus obscurior." 
Cicero, drat. IS, 57. 

"= " Die alten Spvach- and Declamations-Leliver sind 
samnitlicli eben derselben Meiuung, und wir konnen aus 
Ihren hinterlassenen Werkcn mit dcm hochsten Grad von 
Wahrscheinlichkeit schliesscn, dass sovvohl bei den Grie- 
clien als Rijmern die meisten Gedicbte mit keiner andern 
als mit dieser Art von Gesang gesungen weiden sein."— 
Forkel, Allgem. Gcfchidtti: der Musik, ii, 153. 

"1 lxijlixio)is stir la l-'oesie. &c. 


things," as is that still more essential uniformity 
expressed in the term Common Prayer, without 
which, indeed, congregational worship would seem 
to be impossible. " Accent," says Ornithoparcus, 
" hath great affinity with Coucent, for they be 
Brothers : because jS'otims, or So^md (the King of 
Ecclesiastical Harmony), Js Father to them both, 
and begat one upon Grammar, the other upon 
jMusick," &c. (He) "so divided his kingdome, 
that Concentus might be chief Pailer over all 
things that are to be sung, as Hymnes, Sequences, 
Auti phones, Responsories, lutroitus. Tropes, and 
the like : and Accentus over all things which are 
read ; as Gospels, Lectures, Epistles, Orations, 
Prophecies : For the functions of the Papale 
Kingdome are not duely performed without Con- 
cent," &c. " Hence it was that I, marking how 
many of those Priests (which by the leave of the 
learned I will saye) doe reade those things they 
have to reade so wildly, so monstrously, so 
faultily (that they doe not onely hinder the de- 
votion of the faithful, but also even provoke 
them to laughter and scorning, with their ill 
reading), resolved after the doctrine of Concent 
to explain the rules of Accent ; in as much as it 
belongs to a Musitian, that together with Con- 
cent, Accent might also as true heire in this 
Ecclesiasticall Kingdome be established : Desiring 
that the praise of the highest King, to whom all 
honour and reverence is due, might duely be 
performed." * 

5. The Accentus Ecclesiasticus, or modus cho- 
raliter legendi, must have been perpetuated by 
tradition only, for many ages. That the rules 
for its application have been reduced to writing 
only in comparatively modern times does not in 
the least invalidate its claim to a high antiquity. 
On the contrary, it tends to confirm it. That 
which is extensively known and universally ad- 
mitted has no need of verification. It is only 
when traditions are dying out that they begin to 
be put on record. So long as this kind of reci- 
tation was perfectly familiar to the Greeks and 
Eomans there could be no necessity for " noting " 
it ; not till it began to be less so were " accents " 
(the characters so called) invented for its pre- 
servation, — just as the "vowel-points" were 
introduced into Hebrew writing subsequently to 
the dispersion of the Jews. The force and accu- 
racy of tradition, among those unaccustomed to 
the use of written characters, have been well 
ascertained and must be unhesitatingly admitted ; 
their operation has certainly been as valuable in 
music as in poetry and history. Strains incom- 
parably longer and more intricate than those now 
accepted as the ecclesiastical accents have been 
passed on from voice to voice, with probably but 
trifling alteration, for centuries, among peoples 
who had no other method of preserving and 
transmitting them. 

(3. The authorities for the application of the 
Cantus Ecclesiasticus are, as we have said, com- 
l)aratively modern. Lucas Lossius,f a writer 
frequently quoted by Walther, Kock, and other 
more recent musical theorists, gives six forms of 
cadence or close, i.e., modes of bringing to an 
end a phrase the earlier portion of which had 
been recited in monotone. According to Lossius, 


accent is (1) iinmutahilis when a phrase is con- 
cluded without any change of pitch, i.e., when it 
is monotonous throughout ; (2) it is medius v.'hcn 
on the last syllable the voice falls from the 
reciting note (technically the dominant) a third ; 
(3) gravis, when on the last syllable it falls a 
fifth ; (4) acutus, when the " dominant," after the 
interposition of a few notes at a lower pitch, is 
resumed ; (5) moderatus, when ^e monotone is 
interrupted by an ascent, on the penultimate, of 
a second ; (6) interrogativus, when the voice, 
after a slight descent, rises scale-wise on the last 
syllable. To these six forms other writers add 
one more, probably of more recent adoption ; 
(7) the finalis, when the voice, after rising a 
second above the dominant, falls scale-wise to 
the fourth below it, on which the last syllable is 
sounded. The choice of these accents or cadences 
is regulated by the punctuation (possible, if not 
always actual) of the passage recited ; each par- 
ticular stop had its particular cadence or cadences. 
Thus the comma (distinctio) was indicated and 
accompanied by the accentus immutabilis, acutus, 
or moderatus ; the colon (duo puncta) by the 
medius; and the full stop (punctum quadratum 
ante syUabam capitalem) by the gravis. 

7. The following table, from Lossius, exhibits 
the several accents, in musical notation : — 
(1) Immutabilis. 

Leo - ti - o E - pi's - to • 
(2) Medics. 

lae sane- ti Pau - li. 

et o - pe - ra - tur vir - tu - tes in vo - bis : 
(3) Gravis. 

Be - ne - di- cen-tur in te oni-nes gen-tes. 
(4) AcDTCS. (5) Moderatus. 


Cum spi - ri - tu coe - pe - ri - tis i 


ex op-e-ri-bus le-gis an exau-di-tu 
(7) Finalis. 

ni - ma me 

The examples given by Ornithoparcus are similar 
to the above, with two exceptions — (5), the 31ode- 
ratus, which in ' His Micrologus' appears thus : 

" Andreas Ornitlioparcus, His Microwgu 
hy John Dowland. 1609. P. 69. 
' Krotemala Muskae I'mclicae, 1590. 

Jl - lu - mi - iia - re Je - ru - sa - lem. 

I And the Interrogativus, of which he says : " A 
' speech with an interrogation, whether it have in 
the end a word of one sillable, or of two sillables, 
or more, the accent still falls upon the last sil- 
lable, and must be acuated. Now the signs of 
such a speech are, who, which, what, and those 
which are thus derived, whi/, wherefore, when, 
how, in what sort, wlicthcr, and such like." 


Quanlas ha- be - o In - i -qui- ta-tes etpec-ca-taf 
" To these are joyned verbes of asking ; as, 
laske, I seeke, I require, I searche, Iheare, I see, 
and the like." 

Some variations too fi-om the above, in the 
present Roman use, are noticed by Mendelssohn : K 
e.g. in the Gravis, whei-e thei-e the voice rises a 
tone above the dominant, on the penultimate, 
before fallinEf : — 

changing the cadence from a fifth (compare 5) 
to a sixth ; and in the Interrogativus, where the 
voice falls from the dominant (also on the penul- 
timate) a third :^ 

To the accentus belong the following forms, or 
portions of offices of the Latin Church:'' (1) 
Tonus Collectaruin seu Orationurn, (2) Tonus 
Epistolarum et Evangelii, including the melodies 
to which the Passion is sung in Passion Week. 
(3) Tonus Lectionum solemnis et luguhris ; Pro- 
phetiarum et Martyrologii. (4) Various forms 
of Intonation, Benediction, and Absolution used 
in the Liturgy. (5) Single verses. (6) The 
Exclamations and Admonitions of the assistants at 
the altar. (7) The Prefaces ; the Pater Noster, 
with its Prefaces ; the Benediction, Pax Domini 
sit semper vobiscum. [J. H.] 

ACCESS. 1. The approach of the priest to 
the altar for the celebration of the Eucharist. 
Hence the expression " prayer of access " is used 
as equivalent to the Eux'/ "^vs irapaffrdaeoos, or 
prayer of the priest's presenting himself at the 
altar, in the Greek Liturgy of St. James (Neale's 
Eastern Church, Introduction, i. 360). 

2. But the expression " prayer of access," or 
" prayer of humble access," is more commonly 
used by English liturgical writers to designate 
a confession of unworthiness in the, sight of God, 
occurring at a later point of the service ; gene- 
rally between consecration and communion. So 
that the " prayer of humble access " corresponds 
to the "Prayer of Inclination " or "of bowing 
the neck " in the Greek Litui-gies. Though 
words more expressive of " humble access " 
occur in other places ; for instance, in the Greek 
St. James, where the priest declares : iSoii irpos- 
ijXdov Tw deicf) rovTO! Kal eirovpavlcf fj.vffT7jpi(fi 
ovx ds &^ios inrdpxoiv (Daniel's Codex Lit., iv. 
88); in the Jlozarabic, "Accedam ad Te in 
humilitate spiritus mei " (/6. i. 71) ; or in the 
" Domine et Deus noster, ne aspicias ad multitu- 
dinem peccatorum nostrorum" in the Liturgy of 
Adaeus and Maris (76. i. 176). Compare Con- 
fession, [C] 

ACCLAMATION. 1. A term applied by 
opigraphists to certain short inscriptions, ex- 
pressed in the second person, and containing a 

s Re.isebriefe aus den Jahren 1830 bis 1832, p. 167. 
li Rhau, JUvchiridion, 1538 ; quoted by Arrey von 
Oommer; Koch's Mu&ikaliscUes Lexikon. 


wish or injunction ; as, VIVAS IN DEO (Mura- 
tori, ITiesaurus Vet. Inscrip. 1954, no. 4). By 
far the greater part of these acclamations are 
sepulchral [EpiTAPif], but similar sentences are 
also seen on AMULETS, on the bottoms of cups 
[Glass, Christian] found in the Catacombs, and 
on GEMS. (See the Articles.) 

2. The term acclamation is also sometimes 
applied to the responsive cry or chant of the 
congregation in antiphonal singing. Compare 
Acrostic (§ 5) ; Antiphon. [C] 


— Those who made false accusations against any 
person were visited with severe punishments 
under the canons of several councils. 

In Spain. The Council of lUiberis (a.d. 305 
or 306) refused communion even at the hour ot 
death (" in fine," al. " in finem ") to any person 
who should falsely accuse any bishop, priest, or 
deacon (can. 75). 

In France. By the 14th canon of the 1st 
Council of Aries (a.d. 314) those who falsely 
accuse their brethren were excommunicated for 
life (" usque ad exitum "). This canon was re- 
enacted at the 2nd Council held at the same 
city (a.d. 443), but permission was given for the 
restoration of those who should do penance and 
give satisfaction commensurate with their 
offence (can. 24). See also Calumny. [I. B.] 

ACEPSIMAS, commemorated Nov. 3 {Cal. 
Bt/iant.) ; Nov. 5 (^Cal. Armen.) ; April 22 
(_i¥art. Pom.). [C] 

ACERRA or ACERNA. (The latter is 
possibly the original form, from Acer, maple.) 
Acerra designated, in classical times, either the 
incense-box used in sacrifices ; or a small altar, or 
incense-burner, placed before the dead. (Smith's 
Diet, of Greek and Poman Antiquities, s. v.) And 
in ecclesiastical latinity also it designates either 
an incense-box or an incense-burner ; " Area 
thuris, vel thuribulum, vel thurarium." (Pajjias 
in Ducange's Glossary s. v. ' Acerna.') 

It is used in the rubrics of the Gregorian sa- 
cramentary (Corbey MS.) in the office for the 
consecration of a church (p. 428) ; and in the 
office for the baptism of a bell (p. 438) ; in 
the latter in the form Acerna : " tunc pones in- 
censum in acerna." In both cases it designates 
an incense-burner or Thurible (q. v.). [C] 

of Achaia, in Greece, are recorded : one, A.D. 250, 
against the Valesians, who, like Origen, inter- 
preted St. Matth. xix. 12, literally; the other, in 
359, against the followers of Aetius. [A. W. H.] 

ACHILLEA S (or Achillas), bishop of Alex- 
andria, commemorated Nov. 7 (Martyrol. Pom. 
Vet.). [C] 

ACHILLEUS, the eunuch, martyr at Eome, 
May 12, A.D. 96. (Martyrol. Pom. Vet., Hier. 
Bedae). [C] ' 

ACINDYNUS Q Kk'iv^vvos) and companions, 
martyrs, A.D. 346, commemorated Nov. 2 {Cal. 
Byz.). [C] 

ACEPHALI [Vagi Clerici ; Autoce- 


" Field of the Oak," supposed to be Ayclif5'e, in 
Durham; Raine's Priory of Hexlmm, i. 38, note), 
(i.) A.D. 781 (Flor. Wig. in M. H. B. 545), Inii 


782 (Angl.-Sax. Chr. and H. Hunt., ib. 336, 
731). (ii.) A.D. 787 (Kemble, C. J)., No. 151). 
(iii.) A.D. 788, Sept. 29, in the year and month of 
the murder ofElfwald of Northumbria, Sept. 21, 
788 (Wilk. i. 153 ; Mansi, xiii. 825, 826). (iv.) 
A.D. 789 (^Angl.-Sax. Chr., M. H. B. 337 "a great 
svnod "), in the 6th year of Brihtric, King of 
Wessex (H. Hunt., ih. 732). (v.) A.D. 804 (Kemble, 
C. D., No. 186). (vi.) A.D. 805, Aug. 6 {id. ib., 
Nos. 190, 191). (vii.) A.D. 810 (id. ib., No. 256). 
Nos. ii., v., and vi. probably, and No. vii. cer- 
tainly, were at Ockley, in Surrey ; or, at any 
rate, not in the Northumbrian Ac'lea. Nothing 
more is known of any of these synods, or rather 
Witenagemots, beyond the deeds (grants of lands) 
above referred to, in Kemble. [A. W. H.] 

ACOEMETAE, lit. the " sleepless " or " un- 
resting " (for the theological or moral import of 
the term v. Suicer, Thesaur., Eccl. s.v.), a so-called 
order of monks established in the East about the 
middle, rather than the commencement, of the 
5th century, being altogether unnoticed by 
Socrates and Sozonien, the latter a zealous chro- 
nicler of monks and monasteries, who bring their 
histories down to A.D. 440 ; yet mentioned by 
Evagrius (iii. 19) as a regularly established order 
in 483. Later authorities make their founder to 
have been a certain officer of the i'npei-ial house- 
hold at Constantinople named Alexander, who 
quitted his post to turn monk, and after having 
had to shift his quarters in Syria several times, 
at length returned to Constantinople, to give 
permanence to the system which he had already 
commenced on the Euphrates. The first monas- 
tery which he founded there was situated near 
the church of St. Mennas. It was composed of 
300 monks of different nations, whom he divided 
into six choirs, and arranged so that one of them 
should be always employed in the work of prayer 
and praise day and night without intermission 
all the year round. This was their peculiar cha- 
racteristic — and it has been copied m various 
ways elsewhere since then — that some part of 
" the house," as Wordsworth {Excurs. viii. 185) 
expresses it, " was evermore watching to God." 
Alexander having been calumniated for this 
practice as heretical, he was imprisoned, but 
regained his liberty, and died, say his biographers, 
about A.D. 430 — it might be nearer the mark to 
say 450 — in a new convent of his own founding 
on the Dardanelles. Marcellus, the next head of 
the order but one, brought all the zeal and 
energy to it of a second founder ; and he doubt- 
less found a powerful supporter in Gennadius, 
patriarch of Constantinople, A.D. 458-71, a great 
restorer of discipline and promoter of learning 
amongst the clergy. Then it was that Studius, 
a noble Roman, and in process of time consul, 
emigrated to Constantinople, and converted one 
of the churches there, dedicated to St. John the 
Baptist, into the celebrated monastery bearing 
his name, but which he peopled with the Acoe- 
metae. There was another monastery founded bv 
St. Dius, in the reign of Theodosius the Great, 
that also became theirs sooner or later, to which 
Valesius {Ad. Ewj. iii. 19 and 31) adds a third 
founded by St. Bassianus. It may have been 
owing to their connexion with Studius that they 
were led to correspond with the West. At all 
events, on the acceptance by Acacius, the patri- 
arch succeeding Gennadius, of the Henoticon of 
the emperor Zeno, and communion with the schis- 



matic patriarch of Alexandria, their "hegumen," 
or president, Cyril lost no time in despatching 
complaints of him to Rome ; nor were their 
emissaries slow to accuse the legates of the Pope 
themselves of having, during their stay at Con- 
stantinople, held communion with heretics. The 
ultimate result was, that the two legates, Vitalis 
and Misenus, were deprived of their sees, and 
Acacius himself excommunicated by the Popes 
Simplicius and Felix. Meanwhile one who had 
been expelled from their order, but had learnt 
his trade in their monasteries, Peter the Fuller, 
had become schismatic patriarch of Antioch, and 
he, of course, made common cause with their op- 
ponents. Nor was it long before they laid them- 
selves open to retaliation. For, under Justinian, 
their ardour impelled them to deny the cele- 
brated proposition, advocated so warmly by the 
Scythian monks, hesitated about so long at Rome, 
that one of the Trinity had suffered inthe flesh. 
Their denial of this proposition threw them into 
the arms of the Nestorians, who were much in- 
terested in having it decided in this way. For, 
if it could be denied that one of the Trinity had 
suffered, it could not be maintained, obviouslv, 
that one of the Trinity had become incarnate. 
Hence, on the monks sending two of their body, 
Cyrus and Eulogius, to Rome to defend their 
views, the emperor immediately despatched two 
bishops thither, Hypatius ancl Demetrius, to 
denounce them to the Pope {Pagi ad Baron., 
A.D. 533, n. 2). In short, in a letter, of which 
they were the bearers, to John II., afterwards 
inserted by him in Lib. L Tit. "De summaTrini- 
tate " of his Code, he himself accused them of 
favouring Judaism and the Nestorian heresv. 
The Pope in his reply seems to admit their hete- 
rodoxy, but he entreats the emperor to forgive 
them at his instance, should they be willing to 
abjure their errors and return to the unity of 
the Church. With what success he interceded 
for them we are not told. During the iconoclastic 
controversy they seem to have shai-ed exile with 
the rest of the monks ejected from their monas- 
teries by ConstantineCopronymus(/'agi ad Baron. 
A.D. 798, n. 2) ; but under the empress Irene the 
Studium, at all events, was repeopled with its for- 
mer alumni by the most celebrated of them all, 
Theodore, in whose surname, " Studites," it has 
perhaps achieved a wider celebrity than it ever 
would otherwise have possessed. 

In the West a branch of the order long held 
the abbey of St. Maurice of Agaune in Valais, 
where they were established by Sigismund, king 
of Burgundy, and had their institute confirmed 
by a Council held there A.D. 523. For fuller de- 
tails see Bonanni's Hist, du Clerg. sec. et reg. vol. 
ii. p. 153 et seq. (Amsterdam, 1716); Bulteau's 
Hist. Monast. d' Orient, iii. 33 (Paris, 1680); 
Hospin, De Orig. Monarh. iii. 8 ; Du Fresne, 
Gloss. Lat. s. V. ; and Constant. Christian, iv. 8, 
2; Bingham's Antiq. vii. 11, 10. [E. S. F.] 

ISTS ("AkoAou^oi). One of the minor orders 
peculiar to the Western Church, although the 
name is Greek. In the Apostolic age, the only 
order which existed, in addition to those of 
bishops, priests, and deacons, was that of dea- 
conesses — widows usually at first, who were em- 
ployed in such ministrations towards their own 
sex as were considered unsuitable for men, espe- 
cially in the East. But about the end of the 2iid 



or early in the 3rd century, other new officei-s 
below the order of the deacons were introduced, 
and amongst them this of Acolytes, though only 
in the Latin Church as a distinct order. In the 
rituals of the Greek Church the word occurs only 
as another name for the order of sub-deacon. 

The institution of the minor orders took its 
origin in the greater Churches, such as Rome 
and Carthage, and was owing partly to the sup- 
posed expediency of limiting the number of dea- 
cons to seven, as first appointed by the apostles, 
and partly to the need which was felt of assist- 
ance to the deacons in performing the lower por- 
tions of their office; of which functions, indeed, 
they appear in many cases to have been impa- 
tient, regarding them as unworthy of their im- 
portant position in the Church. Tertullian is the 
earliest writer by whom any of the inferior order 
is mentioned. He speaks of Readers, De Praesci 
c. 41. It is in the epistles of Cyprian that the 
fuller organization of these orders comes before 
us (JEpp. xxix., xxxviii., Ixxv., &c.). It is also 
stated by his contemporary Cornelius, Bishop of 
Rome, that the Church of Rome at that time 
numbered forty-six presbyters, seven deacons 
seven sub-deacons, forty-two acolyths, and fifty- 
two exorcists, readers, and doorkeepers (Ostiarii). 
None of these inferior orders, according to St, 
Basil, were ordained with imposition of hands 
but they were simply appointed by the bishop 
with some appropriate ceremony, to certain sub- 
ordinate functions of the ministry such as any 
Christian layman might be commissioned by 
episcopal authority to perform. The form of 
ordination employed in the case of Acolijtes is 
thus prescribed by a canon of the 4th Council of 
Carthage. " When any Acolythist is ordained, the 
bishop shall inform him how he is to behave him- 
self in his office ; and he shall receive a candlestick 
with a taper in it, from the archdeacon, that he 
may understand that he is appointed to light the 
candles of the church. He shall also receive an 
empty pitcher to furnish wine for the Eucharist 
of the blood of Christ." Hence it appears that 
the Acolyte's office at that period consisted chiefly 
in two things, viz., lighting the candles of the 
church and attending the officiating priest with 
wine for the Eucharis't. 

The Acolyte of the ancient Western Church is 
represented in the later Roman communion by 
the Ceroferarius or taper-bearer, whose office con- 
sists in walking before the deacons or priests with 
a lighted taper in his hand. 

Both in the East and West the minor orders of 
ancient times were afterwards conferred as merely 
introductory to the sacred orders of deacon and 
presbyter, while the duties which had formerly 
belonged to them were performed by laymen. In 
the 7th century the readers and singers in the 
Armenian Church were laymen — in the 8th cen- 
tury the readers, and in the 12th the ostiarii 
and exorcists were laymen in the Greek Church. 
Before the year 1300 the four orders of acolyte, 
exorcist, reader, and ostiarius began to be con- 
ferred at the .same time in the Western Churches. 
Not long afterwards it became customary to re- 
lease the clerks thus ordained from discharging 
the duties of their orders, which were entrusted 
to lay clerks. The Councils of Cologne and Trent 
vainly endeavoured to alter this custom ; and 
,aymen continue generally to perform the offices 
of the ancient orders in the Roman churches to 


the present day. In England the same custom has 
prevailed ; and the minor orders having for some 
centuries become merely titular, were disused in 
the Reformation of our Churches. 

Fuller information on the subject of the minor 
orders may be found in Field's Book of the 
C/ncrch, h. v. c. 25 ; Bingham's Antiquities, b. 
iii. ; Thomassin, Vet. et Nov. Eccl. pars I. lib. ii. 
See also Robertson's History of the Church and 
Palmer's Treatise on the Church of Christ. [D.B.] 
■ ACONTIUS, of Rome, commemorated .Tulv 
25 {Mart. Hicron.). [C.]" 

ACROSTIC. CAKpoffTix'is, aKpoffTixtoy, 
aKp6aTLxov, Acrostichis.) A composition in 
which the first letters of the several lines form 
the name of a person or thing. The invention is 
attributed to Epicharmus. 

We find several applications of the Acrostic 
principle in Christian antiquity. 

1. The word Acrostic is applied to the well- 
known formula Ix^vs. [See IX0TC.] 

2. Verses in honour of the Saviour were fre- 
quently written in the acrostic form ; Pope Da- 
masus, for instance, has left two acrostics on the 
name Jesus {Carm. iv. and v.), the former of 
which runs as follows : 

" In rebus tantis Trina conjunctio mundi 
Erigit humanum sensum laudare venuste : 
Sola salus nobis, et mnndi suninia potestas 
Venit pecoati nodum dissolvere fructu. 
Summa salus cunctis nituit per saecula terris." 

The same pope, to whom so many of the in- 
scriptions in the Catacombs are due, composed 
an acrostic inscription in honour of Constantia, 
the daughter of Constantine. This was origin- 
ally placed in the apse of the basilica of St. 
Agnes in the Via Nomentana, and may be seen in 
Bosio, li'oma Sotteranea, p. 118. And inscrip- 
tions of this kind are frequent. Lest the reader 
should miss the names indicated, an explanation 
of the acrostic principle is sometimes added to 
the inscription itself. For instance, to the epi- 
taph of Licinia, Leontia, Ampelia, and Flavia 
(Muratori, Thesaurus Novus, p. 1903, no. 5) are 
added these verses, which give the key : 
" Nomina sanctarum, lector, si forte requiris. 
Ex omni versu te litera prima docebit." 

So the epitaph of a Christian named Agatha 
(Marini, Fratelli Arvali, p. 828), ends with the 
words, " ejus autem nomen capita ver[suum] ;" 
and another, given by the same authority, ends 
with the words, " Is cujus per capita versorum 
nomen declaratur." Fabretti {fnscnpt. Antiq. iv. 
150) gives a similar one, "Revertere per capita 
versorum et invenies pium nomen." Gazzera 
(Iscrizione del Fiemonte, p. 91) gives the epitaph 
of Eusebius of Vercelli, in which the first letters 
of the lines form the words EVSEBIVS EPIS- 
COPVS ET MARTYR; and another acrostic 
epitaph (p. 114), where the initial letters form 
the words CELSVS EPISCOPVS (Martigny, 
Diet, des Antiq. Chre't. 11). 

We also find acrostic hymns in Greek. Several 
of the hymns of Cosmas of Jerusalem, are of 
this kind ; the first, for instance (Gallandi, Bi- 
bliotheca Fat. siii. 234), is an acrostic forming 
the words, 

XptfjTos /3pOTa>0et? rjv OTrep ©eb? fJ-^i'JJ' 

3. Those poems, in which the lines or stanzas 
ommence with the letters of the alphabet taken 


iu order, form another class of acrostics. Such 
is the well-known hymn of Sedulius, ''A solis 
ortiis cardine," a portion of which is introduced 
in the Roman offices for the Nativity and the Cir- 
cumcision of the Lord ; and that of Venantius 
Fortunatus {Cann. xvi.), which begins with the 
words " Agnoscat omne saeculum." St. Augustine 
composed an Abecedarian Psalm against the Do- 
natists, in imitation of the 119th, with the con- 
stant response, "Omnes qui gaudetis de pace, 
modo verum judicate." 

4. A peculiar use of the acrostic is found in 
the Office-ljooks of the Greek Church. Each 
Canon, or series of Troparta, has its own 
acrostic, which is a metrical line formed of the 
initial letters of the Troparia which compose the 
Crnon. To take the instance given by Dr. Neale 
(Eastern Church, Introd. p. 832); the acrostic 
for the Festival of SS. Proclus and Hilarius is, 

— €77T0ts a^Arjrat? 0"e7rTbf €t9(/)6p(o |Lte'Ao9. 

The meaning of this is, that the first Troparion 
of the Canon begins with 2, the second with E, 
and so on. These lines are generally Iambic, as 
in tlic instance above ; but occasionally Hex- 
ameter, as, 

Thv 'N LKrj<j>6pov ois VLKyi<p6pou acr/xacri. /neATrto. 

They frequently contain a play on the name of 
the Saint of the day, as in the instance just given, 
and in 

Aiopoi' 0eou (re TTa(Xjxd.KCLp Jlaiep (re'jSaj, 

for St. Dorotheus of Tyre. The Trojiaria are 
sometimes, but rarely, arranged so as to form 
an alphabetic acrostic, as on the Eve of the 
Transfiguration (Neale, u. s.). 

5. The word aKpoarixia, in the Apostolical 
Constitutions (ii. 57, § 5) denotes the verses, or 
portions of a verse, which the people were to 
sing responsively to the chanter of the Psalm, 
" 6 Aahs TO, a/fpocTTixia inroipaWeroi." The 
constantly repeated response of the 136th Psalm 
("For His mercy endureth for ever"), or that 
of the ' Benedicite omnia Opera ' (" Praise Him, 
and magnify Him for ever"), are instances of 
what is probably intended in this case. Compare 
AxTiPHON, Psalmody (Bingham's Antiq. xiv. 1, 
§ 12). [C] 

ACROTELEUTIC. [Doxology; Psalmody.] 

ACTIO. A word frequently used to desig- 
nate the canon of the mass. 

The word " agere," as is well known, bears in 
classical writers the special sense of performing 
a sacrificial act ; hence the word " Actio " is ap- 
plied to that which was regarded as the essential 
portion of the Eucharistic sacrifice ; " Actio dici- 
tur ipse canon, quia in eo sacramenta conficiuntur 
Dominica," says Waiafrid Strabo {De Rebm Ecol. 
c. 22, p. 950, Migne). Whatever is included in 
tlie canon is said to be " infra actionem ;" hence, 
when any words are to be added within the 
canon (as is the case at certain great festivals), 
they bear in the liturgies the title or rubric 
" infra actionem ;" and in printed missals these 
woi'ds are frequently placed before the prayer 
"Communicantes." Conqiare Canon. (Bona, 
de Rebus Liturgicis, lib. ii. c. 11; Maori, Hiero- 
lexlcon, s. v. " Actio ".) 

Honorius of Autun supposes this use of the 
word " actio " to be derived from legal termino- 
logy. " Missa quoddam judicium iniitatur ; unde 


et canon Actio vocatur " (lib. i., c. 8) ; and " Canon 
. . . etiam Actio dicitur, quia causa populi in eo 
cum Deo agitur" (c. 103). (In Du Cange's 
Glossary, s. v. •' Actio.") But this deri^Tition, 
though adopted by several mediaeval writers, 
does not appear probable. [C] 

ACTISTETAE. [Dict.of Biogr. s.v."Ctisto- 

fluence of Christianity on social life was seen, 
as in other things, so specially in the horror 
with which the members of the Christian Church 
looked ou the classes of men and women whose 
occupations identified them with evil. Among 
these were Actors and Actresses. It must be re- 
membered that they found the drama tainted by 
the depravity which infected all heathen society, 
and exhibiting it in its worst forms. Even Au- 
gustus sat as a spectator of the "scenica adulteria " 
of the " mimi," whose ■ performances were the 
favourite amusement of Roman nobles and people 
(Ovid, Trist. ii. 497-520). The tragedies of 
Aeschylus or Sophocles, or Seneca," the comedies, 
even of Menander and Terence could not compete 
with plays whose subject was always the " vetiti 
crimen amoris," represented in all its baseness 
and foulness {Unci.). What Ovid wrote of " ob- 
scaena" and " turpia" was there acted. The 
stories of Mars and Venus, the loves of Jupiter 
with Danae, Leda, and Ganymede, were exhibited 
in detail (Cyprian, De Grat. Dei, c. 8). Men's 
minds wei-e corrupted by the very siglit. They 
learnt to imitate their gods. The actors became, 
in the worst sense of the word, effeminate, taught 
"gestus turpes et molles et muliebres exprimere" 
(Cyprian, Ep. 2, ed. Gersdorf. 61, ed. Rigalt). 
The theatre was the " sacrarium Veneris," the 
" consistorium impudicitiae " {Ibi-I. c. 17). Men 
sent their sons and daughters to learn adultery 
(Tatian. Orat. adv. Grace, c. 22 ; TertuU. De 
Spect. c. 10). The debasement which followed 
on such an occupation had been recognized 
even by Roman law. The more active cen- 
sors had pulled down theatres whenever they 
could, and Pompeius, when he built one, placed 
a Temple of Venus over it in order to guard 
against a like destruction {Ibid. c. 10). The 
Greeks, in their admiration of artistic culture, 
had honoured their actors. The Romans looked 
on them, even while they patronised them, witli 
a consciousness of their degradation. They were 
excluded from all civil honours, their names were 
struck out of the register of their tribes ; they 
lost by tlie " minutio capitis" their privileges as 
citizens {Ibid. c. 22 ; Augustin. De Civ. Dei, ii. 
14). Trajan banished them altogether from 
Rome as utterly demoralized. 

It cannot be wondered at that Christian writers 
should almost from the first enter their pro- 
test against a life so debased.'' They saw 
in it part of the "pompae dfaboli," which 
they were called on to renounce. Tertul- 

» Augustine, who in his youth had delighted in the 
higher I'orms of the drama {Confess, iii. 2), draws, after 
his conversion, a distinction between these (" scenicorum 
tolerabiliora ludorum ") and the obscenity of the mimca 
(De Civ. Dei, ii. 8). 

b No specific reference to this form of evil is found, it 
is true, in the N. T. The case had not yet presented 
itself. It would have seemed as impossible for a Christian 
to take part in it as to join in actual idolatry. 



lian wrote the treatise already quoted specially 
against it and its kindred evils of the circus and 
the amphitheatre, and dwells on the inconsis- 
tency of uttering from the same lips the aimm 
of Christian worship, and the praises of the 
gladiator or the mime. The actor seeks, against 
the words of Christ, to add a cubit to his stature 
by the use of the Cothurnus. He breaks the 
Divine law which forbids a man to wear a 
woman's dress (Deut. sxii. 5). Clement of 
Alexandria reckons them among the things 
which the Divine Instructor forbids to all His 
followers (Paedagog. iii. c. 77, p. 298). In course 
of time the question naturally presented itself, 
whether an actor who had become a Christian 
might continue in his calling, and the Christian 
conscience returned an answer in the negative. 
The case which Cyprian deals with {Ep. 2, ut 
supi'ci) implies that on that point there could be 
no doubt whatever, and he extends the prohibition 
to the art of teaching actors. It would be better 
to maintain such a man out of the funds of the 
Church than to allow him to continue in such a 
calling. The more formal acts of the Church spoke 
in the same tone. The Council of Illiberis (c. 62) 
required a "pantomimus" to i-enounce his art 
before he was admitted to baptism. If he re- 
turned to it, he was to be excommunicated. 
The 3rd Council of Carthage (c. 35) seems to 
be moderating the more extreme rigour of some 
teachers, when it orders that " gratia vel recon- 
ciliatio" is not to be denied to them any more 
than to penitent apostates. The Codex Eccles. 
Afric. (c. 63) forbids any one who had been con- 
verted, " ex qualibet ludicra arte," to be tempted 
or coerced to resume his occupation. The Coun- 
cil in TruUo (c. 51) forbids both mimes and their 
theatres, and ras ettI <rKr]vaiv opxvo'fts, under 
pain of deposition for clerical, and excommuni- 
cation for lay, offenders. With one consent the 
moral sense of the new society condemned what 
seemed so incurably evil. When Christianity 
had become the religion of the Empire, it was 
of course, more difficult to maintain the high 
standard which these rules implied, and Chryso- 
stom {Horn. vi. in Matt., Horn. xv. ad Pop. Antioch. 
Hum. X. iu Coloss. ii. p. 403, i. 38, 731, 780), 
complains that theatrical entertainments pre- 
vailed among the Christians of his time with no 
abatement of their evils. At Rome they were 
celebrated on the entrance of a consul upon his 
office (Claudian in Cons. Mall. 313). On the 
triumph of the Emperors Theodosius and Arcadius 
the theatre of Pompeius was opened for perfor- 
mances by actors from all parts of the Empire 
(Symmachus, Epp. x. 2, 29). With a strange 
inversion of the old relations between the old and 
the new societies, the heathen Zosimus reproaches 
the Christian Emperor Constantine with having 
patronised the mimes and their obscenity. The 
pantomimes or ballets in which the mythology 
of Greece furnished the subject-matter (Medea 
and Jason, Perseus and Andromeda, the loves of 
Jupiter), were still kept up. Women as well 
as men performed in them (Chrysost., Horn. vi. 
in Thess.), and at Rome the number of actresses 
was reckoned at 3000. The old infamy adhered 
to the whole class under Christian legislation. 
They might not appear in the forum or basilica, 
or use the public baths. And yet, with a strange 
inconsistency, the civil power kept them in their 
degradation rather than deprive the population 


of the great cities of the empire of the amuse- 
ments to which they were so addicted. If 
the Church sought to rescue them, admitting 
them to baptism, and after baptism claiming 
immunity from their degrading occupation, it 
stepped in to prevent any such conversion, ex- 
cept in extremis (Cod. Theodcs., De Scenicis, xv.). 
Compare Milman's History of Christianity, book 
iv. c. 2 ; Chaste], p. 211. Perhaps the fullest 
collection of every passage in Christian antiquity 
bearing on the subject is to be found in Prynne's > 
Histrv/mastix. . [P.] 

ACUTUS, martyr at Naples, commemorated 
Sept. 19 (Marty rol. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ACUS (accubium, or acuhium, acicula, spina, 
spinula). Pins made of precious metal, and, in 
later mediaeval times, enriched with jewels, for 
attaching the archiepiscopal (or papal) pallium 
to the vestment over which it was worn, i. e. the 
planeta or casula (the chasuble). The earliest 
mention of these known to the present writer is 
in the description given by Joannes Diaconus of 
the pallium of St. Gregory the Great. Writing 
himself in the 9th century, he notes it as a point 
of contrast between the pallium worn by St. Gre- 
gory and that customary in his own time, that 
it was nullis acubus perforatum. Their first 
use, therefore, must probably date between the 
close of the 6th and the beginning of the 9th 
century. For details concerning these ornaments 
at later times, see Bock (Gesch. der liturg, Ge- 
wander, ii. 191). Innocent III. {De Sacra 
Altaris Mysterio, lib. i. cap. 63) assigns to these 
pins, as to every other part of the sacerdotal 
dress, a certain mystical significance. "Tres 
acus quae pallio iniiguntur, ante pectus, super 
humerum, et post tergum, designant compas- 
sionem proximi, administrationem officii, destric- 
tionemque judicii." [W. B. M.] 

ADAM AND EVE are commemorated in 
the Ethiopia Calendar on the 6th day of the 
month Miaziah, equivalent to April 1. The 
Armenian Church commemorates Adam with 
Abel on July 25. (Neale, Eastern Church, Introd., 
pp. 800, 812.) [C] 

at Rome, commemorated Aug. 30 (Marty rol. 
Pom. Vet., Hieron.). Proper collects in Gre- 
gorian Sacramentary (p. 127), and Antiphon in 
Lib. Antiph. p. 709. 

(2) Commemorated Oct. 4 (M. Ilieron.). [C] 

ADDERBOURN, Council near the (Ad- 


River Nodder, or Adderboiirn, in Wiltshire ; of 
English bishops and abbats, where a grant of 
free election of their abbat, after Aldhelm's 
death, made by Bishop Aldhelm to the abbeys 
of Malmesbury, Frome, and Bradford, was con- 
firmed (W. Malm., De Gest. Pont. r. pars iii., p. 
1645, Migne ; Wilk. i. 68). [A. W. H.] 

ADJUTOR, in Africa, commemorated Dec. 
17 (Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

ADMONITION. [Monition.] 

ADRIANUS. (1) Martyred by Galerius in 
Nicomedia, commemorated Sept. 8 (Martyr-ol. 
Horn. Vet., Hieron. Bedae) ; -\ug. 26 (Cal. 
Byzant.) ; Nov. 6 (M. Hieron.). 

(2) Martyr, Natale March 4 (Mart. Bedae) 


(3) July 26 (M. Hieron.). 

(i) August 8 {Cal. Armen.). [C] 

ADULTERY.— We shall attempt to give a 
general account of laws and customs i-elating to 
[his topic, dwelling more fully upon such as 
elucidate the spirit of their several periods, and 
upon the principles involved in disputable points, 
Dur outline breaks naturally into the three fol- 
lowing divivions : — 

1. Antecedents of Christian jurisprudence in 

Church and State on adultery. 

2. Nature and classification of the crime. 

3. Penalties imposed upon it. 

Our quotations from Eastern canonists when 
compared with civilians are made from the older 
Latii. versions ; on occasion the Greek phrases 
are added. In imperial laws the Latin is com- 
monly the most authentic. These are numbered, 
first "the Book of Codex, next Title, then Law; 
but in the Digest, where it is usual to subdivide, 
the Title is distinguished by a RonTan numeral. 

I. Antecedents of Christian Jurisprudence in 
Church and State on Adultery. — Respecting the 
germs of future differences as regards this and 
connected subjects traceable in the Apostolic 
times, Neander has some useful observations 
{Planting of the Christian Church, Bohn's ed. I. 
246-9 and 257, 261). Many circumstances, how- 
ever, kept down these tendencies to opposition. 
In an age of newly awakened faith, and under 
the pressure of persecution, living motive took 
the place of outward law. The revulsion from 
heatlien sins was strong, and filled the souls of 
converts with abhorrence, while the tender sym- 
pathy of their teachers urged men to control 
themselves, succour the tempted, and pity the 
fallen. "I am overwhelmed with sadness," 
writes Polycarp to the Philippians (cap. xi.), 
" on account of Valens who was made presbyter 
amongst you, because he thus knows not the 
place which was given him." This man had 
fallen into adultery (see Jacobson in loco). "I 
grieve exceedingly both for him and for his 
wife, to whom may the Lord grant true repent- i 
ance. Be ye therefore also sober-minded in this 
matter, and count not such persons as your ene- 
mies ; but as suffering and wayward members 
call them back, that you may save the one Body 
of you all. For so doing ye shall establish your 
own selves." 

Clement of Rome, unlike Polycarp, had no 
special example to deal with ; his warnings are 
therefore general. In Up. i. 30 and cap. 6 of 
the 2nd Up., attributed to him, adultery is stig- 
matized among the foulest and most heinous 
sins. His exhortations and promises of forgive- 
ness (i. 7, 8, 9, 50) are likewise general, but 
their tenour leaves no doubt that he intended to 
invite all such sinners to repentance. The same 
declarations of remission to all penitents and 
the loosing of every bond by the grace of Christ, 
occur in Ignat. Ep. ad Philadelph. 8 ; and are 
found in the shorter as well as the longer recen- 
sion (see Cureton, Corp. Ignat. p. 97). In these 
addresses we seem to catch the lingering tones 
of the Apostolic age ; and all of like meaning 
and early date should be noted as valuable testi- 
monies. De I'Aubespine (Bingham, xvi. 11, 2) 
asserted that adulterers were never taken back 
into communion before the time of Cyprian, and, 
though Bishop Pearson refutes this opinion, he 




allows that respecting them, together with mur- 
derers and idolaters, there was much dispute in 
the early Church. Beveridge also {Cod. Can. 
vii. 2) believes that its severity was so great as 
to grant no such sinners reconciliation except 
upon the very hardest terms. 

Of this severe treatment, as well as the differ- 
ence of opinion alluded to by Pearson, we see 
various traces ; yet the prevailing inclination 
was to hold out before the e3'es of men a hope 
mingled with fear. Hermas {Pastor Mandat. 4, 1 
and 3) concedes one, and but one, repentance to 
those who are unchaste after baptism ; for which 
mildness and a reluctant allowance of second 
nuptials, Tertullian {De Pudicit. 10) styles this 
book an Adulterers' Friend. Dionysius of Co- 
rinth, writing to the churches of Pontus on 
marriage and continency, counsels the reception 
of all who repent their transgressions, whatever 
their nature may be (Euseb. iv. 23). Thus also 
Zephyrinus of Rome announced, accoi-ding to 
Tertullian, "ego et moechiae et fornicationis 
delicta, poenitentia functis dimitto ;" and though 
quoted in a spirit of hostility and satire, this 
sentence, which forms a chief reason for the 
treatise {De Pudicit.), probably contains in sub- 
stance an authentic penitential rule. Of Tertul- 
lian's own opinion, since he was at this time a 
Montanist, it is needless to say more than that, 
differing from his former views, not far removed 
from those maintained by Hermas (cf De Peni- 
tent. 7-10), he now held adultery to be one of 
those sins not only excluding for ever from the 
company of believers, but also (cap. 19) abso- 
lutely without hope through our Lord's inter- 
cession. Exclusion from the faithful was, how- 
ever, insisted upon in such cases by some 
Catholic bishops. Cyprian {ad Antonian.), while 
himself on the side of mercy, tells us how cer- 
tain bishops of his province had, in the time of 
his predecessors, shut the door of the Church 
against adulterers, and denied them penitence 
altogether. Others acted on the opposite system ; 
yet we are assured that peace remained un- 
broken — a surprising circumstance, certainly, 
considering the wealth and intelligence of that 
province, and the importance of such decisions 
to a luxurious population. Cyprian hints at no 
lay difficulties, and simply says that every 
bishop is the disposer and director of his own 
act, and must render an account to God (cf also 
Cypr. De Unitate, several Epistles, and Cone. 
Carthag. Proloquium). Hence the determination 
of one bishop had no necessary force in the 
diocese of another. So, too, the acts of a local 
council took effect only within its own locality, 
unless they were accepted elsewhere. But the 
correspondence of bishops and churches set 
bounds to the difficulties which might otherwise 
have arisen, and prepared the way for General 
Cou jcils — see, for instance, the fragment (Euseb. 
v. 25) of the early Synod at Caosarea in Pales- 
tine — its object being the diff'usion of the Syno- 
dical Epistle. United action was also much 
furthered by the kind of compilation called 
Codex Canonum, but the first of these (now 
lost) was formed towards the end of the 4th 
century. See Dion. Exig. np. Justell. I. 101, and 
Bevereg., Pand. Can. Proleg. vii. 

The passages already cited show the strength of 
Christian recoil from heathen sensuality. In his 
instructive reply to Celsus (iii. 51) Origen coin- 



pares the attitude of the Church towards back- 
sliders, especially towards the incontinent, with 
that fueling which prompted the Pythagoreans to 
erect a cenotaph for each disciple who left their 
school. They esteemed him dead, and, in pre- 
cisely the same way. Christians bewail as lost to 
God, and already dead, those who are overcome 
with unclean desire or the like. Should such 
regain their senses, the Church receives them at 
length, as men alive from death, but to a longer 
probation than the one converts underwent at 
tirst, and as no more capable of honour and 
dignity amongst their fellows. Yet Origen goes 
on to state (59-64) the remedial power of Chris- 
tianity. Taken together these sections paint a 
lively picture of the treatment of gross trans- 
gressors within and without the Christian fold. 
On the passage in his De Oratione, which sounds 
like an echo of Tertullian, see foot-note in Dela- 
rue's ed., vol. i. 256. 

Christians might well shrink from what they 
saw around them. Licentious impurities, count- 
less in number and in kind, were the burning 
reproaches, the pollution, and the curse of 
heathendom. It is impossible to quote much on 
these topics, but a carefully drawn sketch of 
them will be found in two short essays by Pro- 
fessor Jowett appended to the first chapter of 
his Conmientary on the Romans. They demon- 
strate how utterly unfounded is the vulgar 
notion that Councils and Fathers meddled un- 
neces^arily with gross and disgusting oftences. 
With these essays may be compared Martial 
and the Satirists, or a single writer such as 
Seneca — unus instar omnium — e.g. " Hinc de- 
centissimum sponsaliorum genus, adulterium," 
&c., i. 9 ; or again, iii. 16, " Nunquid jam ulla 
repudio erubescit postquam illustres quaedam 
ac nobiles foeminae, non consulum numero, 
sed maritorum, annos suos computant ? et 
exeunt matrimonii causa, nubunt repudii ? . . . 
Nunquid jam ullus adultcrii pudor est, postquam 
eo ventum est, ut nulla virum habeat, nisi ut 
adulterum irritet? Argumentum est deformi- 
tatis, pudicitia. Quam iuvenies tam miseram, 
tam sordidam, ut illi satis sit unum adulterorum 
par?" &c. In Valerius Maximus we hear a 
sigh for departed morals — in Christian writers, 
from the Apologists to Salvian, a recital of the 
truth, always reproachful, and sometimes half 
triumphant. Moreover, as usual, sin became the 
punishment of sin — Justin Martyr, in his first 
Apology (c. 27 seq.), points out the horrible con- 
sequences which ensued ft-om a heathen prac- 
tice following upon the licence just mentioned. 
The custom of exposing new-born babes pervaded 
all ranks of society, and was authorized even by 
the philosophers. Almost all those exposed, says 
Justin, both boys and girls, were taken, reared, 
and fed like brute beasts for the vilest purposes 
of sensuality ; so that a man might commit the 
grossest crime unawares with one of his own 
children, and from these wretched beings the 
State derived a shameful impost. Compare Ter- 
tull. Apologet. 9, sub fin. Happy in comparison 
those infants who underwent the prae or post 
Oatal fate, described by Minucius Felix c. 30. To 
Lactantius (^we may remark) are attributed the 
laws of Constantine intended to mitigate the 
allied evils of that later age, cf. Milman {Hist. 
Christ, ii. 394). "We," continues Justin (c. 
29), " expose not our offspring, lest one of them 


should perish and we be murderers; nay, the 
bringing up of children is the vei-y object of our 
marriages." There are passages to the same 
effect in the Ep. ad Diognet. c. 5, and Athenag. 
Zegat. p7-o Christian, (c. 33 al. 28), and thus 
these early apologists adduce a principle laid 
down amongst the ends of matrimony in the 
Anglican marriage - service. They no doubt 
utter the thought of their fellow Christians 
in opposing to the licence of the age the purest 
parental instincts, and " these are perhaps in 
every age the most stringent restraints upon 

The standard of contemporary Jewish practice 
may be divined from the Dial, cum Tryphon, 
cc. 134 and 141. The Rabbis taught the law- 
fulness of marrying four or five wives, — if any 
man were moved by the sight of beauty Jacob's 
example excused him, — if he sinned, the prece- 
dent of David assured his forgiveness. 

Surrounding evils naturally deepened the im- 
pression upon Christians that they were stran- 
gers and pilgrims in the world, that their aim 
must be to keep themselves from being partakers 
in other men's sins ; to suffer not as evil doers, 
but as Christians, and to use the Roman law as 
St. Paul used it, for an appeal on occasion — a 
possible protection, but not a social rule. Hence 
the danger was Quietism ; and they were in fact 
accused of forsaking the duties of citizens and 
soldiers — accusations which the Apologists, par- 
ticularly Tertullian and Origen, answered, 
though with many reserves. The faithful 
thought that their prayers and examples were 
the best of services ; they shunned sitting in 
judgment on cases involving life and death, im- 
prisonment or torture, and (what is more to our 
purpose) questions de pudore. On the admission 
of Christians to magistracy as early as the An- 
tonines, cf. Dig. 50, tit. 2, s. 3, sub fin., withGotho- 
fred's notes. Traces of their aversion from such 
business appear in some few Councils ; e. g. Elib. 
56, excludes Duumvirs from public worship 
during their year of office. Tarracon. 4, forbids 
bishops to decide criminal causes — a rule which 
has left its mark on modern legislation. Natu- 
rally resulting from these influences, was a 
higher and diffused tone of purity. Obeying 
human laws, believers transcended them, Ep. ad 
Diognet. 5, and compare Just. Apxil. I. 17, seq. 
with 15. He speaks emphatically of the in- 
numerable multitude who turned from license 
to Christian self-control. The causeless divorce 
allowed by law led to what Christ forbade as 
digamy and adultery, while the latter sin was 
by Him extended to the eye and the heart. In 
like manner, Athenagoras {Leg. pro Christ. 2) 
asserts that it was impossible to find a Christian 
who had been criminally convicted — and that no 
Christian is an evil-doer except he be a hypocrite 
—32, 33, al. 27, 28, that impurity of heart is 
essentially adultery, and that even a slightly 
unchaste thought may exclude from everlasting 
life. He says, as Justin, that numbers in the 
Church were altogether continent ; numbers, too, 
lived according to the strictest marriage rule. 
Athenagoras goes so far (33 al. 28) as to pro- 
nounce against all second marriages, because he 
who deprives himself of even a deceased wife by 
taking another is an adulterer. Clement of 
Alexandria (Paedag. ii. 6) quaintly observes 
that " Non Moechaberis " is cut up by the roots 


through " non concupisces," and in the same 
spii'it Commodian (^Instruct. 48) writes 

" Escam muscipuli ubi mors est longe vitate : 
Multa sunt Martyria, quae fiunt sine sanguine fuso, 
Alienuni non cupere," &c. 
Compare other passages on adultery of the 
heart, Lactant. Instit. vi. 23, and Epit. 8 ; Greg. 
Nazianz., Horn. 37 al. 31 ; and later on, Photius, 
Ep. 139 — a remarkable composition. 

Another safeguard from licentiousness was 
the high valuation now set upon the true dignity 
of woman not only as the help-meet of man but 
as a partaker in the Diyine Image, sharing the 
same hope, and a fit partner of that moral 
union in which our Lord placed the intention 
and essence of the married state. Clement of 
Alexandria draws a picture of the Christian 
wife and mother (^Paedag. iii. 11, p. 250 Sylb. 
and Potter's Gr. marg.); of the husband and 
father, {Strom, vii. p. 741). Tertullian before 
him, in the last cap. ad Uxorem describes a truly 
Christian mai-riage — the oneness of hope, prayer, 
practice, and pious service ; no need of conceal- 
ment, mutual avoidance, nor mutual vexation ; 
distrust banished, a freeborn confidence, sym- 
pathy, and comfort in each other, presiding over 
every part of their public and private existence. 

This language derives additional strength 
from Tertullian's treatment of mixed marriages. 
Those contracted before conversion fall under 1 
Cor. vii. 10-17 (cf. ad Uxor. ii. 2), yet their 
consequences were most mischievous. He tells 
us (ad Scapulam 3) how Claudius Herminianus, 
whose wife became a convert, revenged himself 
by barbarous usage of the Cappadocian Chris- 
tians. A mixed marriage after conversion is a 
very great sin, forbidden by 1 Cor. vii. 39 and 2 
Cor. vi. 14-16, and Tertullian ad Uxor. ii. 3 
condemns those who contract it as " stupri reos " 
— transgressors of the 7th Commandment. 
Addressing his own wife, he proceeds to describe 
its serious evils to a woman. When she wishes 
to attend worship her husband makes an appoint- 
ment for the baths. Instead of hymns she hears 
songs, and his songs are from the theatre, the 
tavern, and the night cellar. Her fasts are 
hindered by his feasts. He is sure to object 
against nocturnal services, prison visits, the kiss 
of peace, and other customs. She will have a 
difficulty in persuading him that such private 
observances as crossing and exsufflation, ai-e not 
magical rites. To these and other remarks, 
Tertullian adds the sensible arguments, that 
none but the worst heathens would marry 
Christian women, and how then could believing 
wives feel secure in such hands ? Their hus- 
bands kept the secret of their religion as a 
means of enforcing subjection ; or, if dissatisfied, 
nursed it for the day of persecution and legal- 
ized murder. Their own motives were of the 
baser kind — they married for a handsome litter, 
mules, and tall attendants from some foreign 
country ; — luxuries which a faithful man, even 
if wealthy, might not think proper to allow 
them. This being the early experience of the 
Church, we are not surprised to find mixed 
marriages forbidden in after times sub poena 

We cannot here pass over a history told by 
Justin Martyr in his Apol. ii. 2, and repeated 
by Eusebius iv. 17, respecting which the learned 
Bingham has been led into a remarkable mis- 



take, copied and added to by Whiston in a note 
on Antiq. xv. 7, 10. A woman married to a 
very wicked husband, herself as drunken and 
dissolute as the man, became a convert to the 
faith. Thoroughly reformed, she tried to per- 
suade him by the precepts of the Gospel and 
the terrors of eternal fire. Failing in her at- 
tempts, and revolted by the loathsome and un- 
natural compulsion to which her husband sub- 
jected her, she thought repudiation would be 
prefei-able to a life of impious compliances. Her 
friends prevailed upon her to wait and hope for 
the best, but a journey to Alexandria made her 
husband worse than before, and, driven to des- 
pair, she sent him a divorce. Immediately he 
informed against her as a Christian ; a blow 
which she parried by presenting a petition for 
delay to the Emperor Marcus Aurelius, who 
granted her request. Upon this her husband, 
thirsting for revenge, accused her teacher in 
religious truth, and had the satisfliction of seeing 
three lives sacrificed in succession to his ven- 

Bingham (svi. 11, 6) cites the narrative as an 
instance of a wife's being allowed by the Church 
to divorce a husband on the ground of adultery. 
But the valuable writer, led perhaps by Gotho- 
fred {Cod. Theod. vol. i. p. 312) has here erred in 
a matter of fact, for Justin takes some pains to 
show that the woman's grievance was not adul- 
tery at all. Fleury (iii. 49) has apprehended 
the truth with correctness and expressed it with 
delicacy. The like case is discussed by an author 
long called Ambrose in his comment on 1 Cor. vii. 
11 {Amhros. op. ed. Benedict., tom. ii. appendix 
p. 133 E-F), and he determines that, under the 
given circumstances, a woman must separate 
from her husband, but she must not marry again. 
The Imperial law also provided a remedy, Cod. 
Theod. 9, tit. 7, s. 3. It is certainly noteworthy 
that, in telling this brief tragedy, neither Justin 
nor Eusebius says a word against the wife's seek- 
ing relief from the heathen custom of divorce. 
Yet its license was condemned on all sides. The 
founder of the Empire strove to check it ; and, 
had the aggrieved woman lived under the first 
Christian emperor, that resource would have 
been denied her. Clearly, circumstances justi- 
fied the wife, but it would seem natural to have 
mentioned the danger of doing wrong, while 
pleading her justification. We, in modern times, 
should say that such cases are exceptional, and 
the inference from silence is that similar wicked- 
ness was not exceptional in those days, and was 
treated by the Church as a ground of divorce ; 
a mournful conclusion, but one that many facts 
render probable, e.g. the Imperial law above 

From these antecedents our step is brief to 
laws for the repression of incontinency. The 
natural beginning was for each community to 
follow simply the example of St. Paul (1 Cor. 
V. and 2 Cor. ii.), but, as converts multiplied, it 
became necessary to prescribe definite tests of 
repentance which formed also the terms of re- 
conciliation. Such rules had for one object the 
good of the community, and in this light every 
offence was a public wrong, and is so looked 
upon by canon law at this day. But penitence 
had a second object — the soul's health of the 
offender — and thus viewed, the same transgres- 
sion was treated as a moral stain, and censured 
C 2 



according to its intrinsic heinousness, or, in few 
words, the crime became a sin. This idea, no 
doubt, entered into the severe laws of Christian 
princes against adultery, and is an indication of 
ecclesiastical influence upon them. Framers of 
canons had in turn their judgment acted upon 
by the great divines, who were apt to regulate 
public opinion, and to enforce as maxims of life 
their own interpretations of Scripture. Some- 
times the two characters met in the same per- 
son, as in the eminent Gregories, Basil, and 
others ; but where this was not the case, theo- 
logians commonly overlooked many points which 
canonists were bound to consider. 

Church lawgivers must indeed always have 
regard to existing social facts and the ordinary 
moral tone of their own age and nation. They 
must likewise keep State law steadily in mind 
when they deal with offences punishable in civil 
courts. That they did so in reality, we learn 
from the Greek Scholia ; and hence, when divorce 
is connected with adultery (particularly as its 
cause), the Scholiasts trace most canonical 
changes to foregoing alterations in the laws of 
the Empire. The reader should reproduce in his 
mind these two classes of data it he wishes to 
form a judgment on subjects like the present. 
We have called attention to the license which 
tainted prae-Christian Rome. Of the Christian 
world, homilists are the most powerful illustra- 
tors, but the light thrown upon it by canons is 
quite unmistakable. The spirit prevalent at the 
opening of the 4th century may be discerned 
from its Councils, e.g. Gangra ; one object of 
which (can. 4) was to defend married presbyters 
against the attacTis made upon them ; of Elib. 33, 
and Stanley's account of the later 1 Nic. ^{Eastern 
Ch, 196-9). Gangra, 14, forbids wives to desert 
their husbands from abhorrence of married life ; 
9 and 10 combat a like disgust and contempt of 
matrimony displayed by consecrated virgins, 
and 16 is aimed against sons who desert their 
parents under pretext of piety, i.e. to become 
celibates, something after the fashion of " Cor- 
ban." An age, where the springs of home life 
are poisoned, is already passing into a morbid 
condition, and legislative chirurgeons may be 
excused if they commit some errors of severity in 
dealing with its evils. But what can be said of 
the frightful pictures of Roman life drawn, some- 
what later, by Ammian. Marcell. xiv. 6 ; xxvii. 3 ; 
and xxviii. 4 ; or the reduced copies of them in 
Gibbon, chaps. 25 and 31, to which may be added 
the fiery Epistles of Jerome (jxissim), and the 
calm retrospect of Milman (^Hist. of Christ, iii. 
230, seq.)? Can any one who reads help reflect- 
ing with what intensified irony this decrepit 
age might repeat the old line of Ennius — 

Mulierem : quid potius dicam aut verius quam mulierem ? 

Or can we feel surprised with Aaolent efforts at 
coercing those demoralized men and women ? 

Gibbon, in giving an account of the jurispru- 
dence of Justinian, saw that it could not be 
understood, particularly on the topic of our 
article, without some acquaintance with the 
laws and customs of the earliest periods. To 
his sketch we must refer the reader, adding only 
the following remarks : — 

1. His opinion upon the barbarity of marital 
rule has found an echo in Hegel (see Werke, Bd. 
ix. p. 348, seq.). F. von Schlegel, tliough in his 


Concordia highly praising the conjugal purity of 
ancient Rome, had already (Wet-ke, xiii. 261, 2) 
blamed that rigid adherence to letter and for- 
mula which pervades the system. To such cen- 
sures Mommsen is thoroughly opposed. In book 
i. chap. 5, he views the stern simplicity of idea 
on which all household I'ight was founded as true 
to nature and to the requirements of social im- 
provement. In chap. 12 he points out how the 
old Roman religion supplemented law by its 
code of moral maxims. The member of a 
family might commit grievous wrong untouched 
by civil sentence, but the curse of the gods 
lay henceforth heavy on that sacrilegious head. 
Mommsen's remarks on religious terrors agree 
well with the very singular restraints on divorce 
attributed by Plutarch to Romulus. The im- 
pression of ethical hardness is in fiict mainly 
due to the iron logic of Roman lawyers. Father, 
husband, matron, daughter, are treated as real- 
istic universals, and their specific definitions 
worked out into axioms of legal right. Yet in 
application (a fact overlooked by Schlegel) the 
summumjus is often tempered by equitable allow- 
ances, e.g. a wife accused of adultery had the 
power of recrimination. Dig. 48, tit. 5, s. 13, § 5 ; 
and cf August. De Conjug. Adulterin. ii. 7 (viii.) 
for a longer extract, and a comment on the re- 
script. Such facts go far to explain the course 
pursued by Christian lawgivers. 

2. On the vast changes which took place 
after the 2nd Punic war Gibbon should be com- 
pared with Mommsen, b. iii. cap. 13, pp. 884—5, 

But neither of these writers, in dwelling on 
the immoral atmosphere which infected married 
life, point out any specially sufficient cause why 
Roman matrons showed such irrepressible aA^i- 
dity for divorce with all its strainings of law, 
its dissolution of sacred maxims, its connection 
with celibacy in males, and a frightful train of 
unbridled sensualities. Perhaps the only true 
light is to be gained from a comparison with 
ecclesiastical history. We shall see that in 
later ages of the Church there came about an 
entire reversal of earlier opinions on the crimi- 
nal essence and the very definition of adultery, 
and that the ground of complaint at both periods 
(Pagan and Christian) was one and the same ; 
the cause, therefore, may not improbably be one 
also, viz., the inadequate remedy afforded to 
women for wifely wrongs. Some particulars 
will be found in our second division, but the 
question opens a wide field for speculation, out- 
lying our limits, and belonging to the philoso- 
phy of history. 

3. The parallel between Church and State 
ought to be carried further. Imperial Rome, 
looking back upon the Republic, felt the de- 
cadence of her own conjugal and family ties, 
and wrote her displeasure in the laws of the 
first Caesars, So, too, when the nobleness of 
apostolic life ceased to be a substitute for legis- 
lation, it sharpened the edge of canonical cen- 
sure by regretful memories of the better time. 
The same history of morals led to a sameness in 
the history of law, the State repeated itself in 
the Church. 

4. Gibbon has a sneer against Justinian for 
giving permanence to Pagan constitutions. But 
those laws had always been presupposed by 
Christian government, both civil and spiritual. 
The emperors amended or supplemented them, 


and where bishops felt a need, they petitioned 
for an Imperial edict — e.g. the canons of three 
African councils relating to our subject, and 
noted hereafter, in which the synods decide on 
such a petition. Then, too, the opposite experi- 
ment had been tried. The Codex Theodosianus 
began with the laws of Constantine (cf. art. 
Theodosius in Bid. Biograph.); but when Jus- 
tinian strove to give scientific form to his juris- 
prudence he found that completeness could no 
way be attained except by connecting it with 
the old framework ; and, as we have seen, Gibbon 
himself felt a similar necessity for the minor 
purpose of explanation. 

Our plan here will therefore be to use the 
great work of Justinian as our skeleton, and 
clothe it with the bands and sinews of the 
Church. We gain two advantages : his incom- 
parable method ; and a stand-point at an era of 
systematic endeavour to unify Church and State. 
For this endeavour see Novell. 131, c. 1, held by 
canonists to accept all received by Chalcedon, 
can. 1 (comprehending much on our subject), and 
Novell. 83, extending the powers of bishops on 
ecclesiastical oftences. His example was after- 
wards followed by the acceptance of Trull, can. 2, 
adding largely to the list of constitutions upon 
adultery ; cf. Photii Nomocanon, tit. i. cap. 2, with 
Scholia, and for the difficulties Bev. Pand. Can. 
Proleg. viii., ix. For harmonies of spiritual 
and civil law as respects breaches of the 7th 
Commandment see Antiochcni Nomoc, tits. xli. 
and xlii., and Photii Nomoc. tit. ix. 29, and tit. 
xiii. 5 and 6. Both are in Justellus, vol. ii. 

After A.D. 305 the Church was so frequently 
engaged in devising means for upholding the 
sanctity of the marriage tie that every step in 
the reception of canons concerning it forms a 
landmark of moral change. Such an era was 
the reign of Justinian ; it was an age of great 
code makers — of Dionysius Exiguus aird Joannes 
Antiochenus. Numbers of local constitutions 
became transformed into world-wide laws ; the 
fact, therefore, never to be overlooked respecting 
canons on adultery, is the extent of their final 

We now come to Division II., and must con- 
sider at some length the definition of adultery 
strictly so called. On this point a revolution 
took place of no slight significance in the great 
antithesis between East and West. Details are 
therefore necessary. 

II. Nature and Classification of the Crime. — 
Neglecting an occasional employment of the words 
promiscue (on which see first of following refer- 
ences), we find (Dig. 48, tit. 5, s .6, § 1, Papinian), 
"Adulteriura in nupta committitur stuprum 
vero in virginem viduamve." Cf. same tit., 34, 
Modestinus, and Dig. 1, tit. 12, s. 1, § 5, Ulfnan; 
see Diet. Antiq., and Ih-issonius do Verb. Signif. 
1, s. V. for distinctions and Greek equivalents. 

The oflending wife is thus regarded as the real 
criminal ; and her paramour, whether married 
or unmarried, as the mere accomplice of her 
crime. She is essentially the adultera, and he, 
because of his complicity with a married woman, 
becomes an adulter. If the woman is unmarried, 
the condition of the man makes no difference — 
the offence is not adulterium. 

This was also the position of the Mosaic code 
— see Lev. xx. 10, compared with Deut. xxii. 22. 
It is not easy to perceive how the law could 



stand otherwise when polygamy was permitted ; 
cf. Diet, of Bible, in verbo. Espousal by both codes 
(Roman and Jewish) is protected as qinsi wedlock 
(Dig. 48, tit. 5, s. 13, §_ 3, Deut. xxii. 23, 24). 
So likewise by Christian' canons, e.g. Trull. 98. 
" He who marries a woman betrothed to a man 
still living is an adulter." Cf. Basil, can. 37. 

Both in Scripture language and in ordinary 
Roman life the legal acceptation of the crime is 
the current meaning of the word. Hosea (iv. 
13, 14) distinguishes between the sins of Jewish 
daughters and wives ; and the distinction is kept 
in the LXX and Vulgate versions. A like dis- 
tinction forms the point of Horace's " Matronam 
nuUam ego tango ; " cf. Sueton. Get. 67 " adul- 
terare matronas." Instances are sufficiently com- 
mon, but, since (for reasons which will soon 
appear) it is necessary to have an absolutely 
clear understanding of the sense attached to the 
word adulterium { = fi.oixeicC) during the early 
Christian period, we note a few decisive re- 
ferences from common usage. Val. Max. (under 
Tiberius) explains (ii. 1, 3) adulteri as " sub- 
sessores alieni matrimonii." Quintilian (under 
Domitian) defines, Instit. Orat. vii. 3, " Adulte- 
rium est cum aliena uxore donii coire." Juvenal 
may be consulted through the index. Appuleius 
(under the Antonines), in the well known story 
Metamorph. ix., describes the deed, and refers to 
the law de Adulteriis. 

Chi-istian writers seldom explain words un- 
less used out of their curi'ent sense, and when 
they do so, the explanation is of course inci- 
dental. We find an early example in Athena- 
goras, De Jtesur. Mort. 23. al. 17, where in 
treating of bodily appetites occurs a designed 
antithesis. On the one side " legitimus coitus 
quod est matrimonium " — on the other, "incon- 
cessus alienae uxoris appetitus et cum ea consue- 
tude — rovTo yap iffri notxeia." Another early 
instance is in the Shepherd of Hermas, Mandat. 
iv., which thus begins: "Mando, ait, tibi, ut 
castitatem custodias, et non ascendat tibi cogi- 
tatio cordis de alieno matrimonio, aut de forni- 
catione." We have here a twofold division like 
Papinian's above quoted, but instead of opposing 
stuprum to adulterium (implied in alieno Matri- 
monio), he employs " fornicatio," an ecclesiasti- 
cal expression when it has this special meaning. 
Origen (Levit. xx., Homil. xi.), in contrasting 
the punishment of adulterei-s under the Mosaic 
and Christian dispensations, assumes the same 
act to be intended by the laws of both. This 
passage has often been ascribed to Cyril of Alex- 
andria, but Delarue (ii. 179, 180) is clear for 
Origen. Arnobius (under Diocletian) writes, lib. 
iv. (p. 142, Varior. ed.), " Adulteria legibus vin- 
dicant, et capitalibus afficiunt eos poenis, quos in 
aliena comprehenderint foedera genialis se lectuli 
expugnatione jecisse. Subsessoris et adulteri 
persona," &c. 

The canonists, Greek and Latin, use criminal 
terms like ordinary authors without explanation, 
and obviously for the same reason. But on our 
subject the meaning is generally made certain 
by (1) an opposition of words resembling the 
examples before quoted ; (2) by the case of un- 
married women being treated in separate canons ; 
or else (3) by a gradation of penalties imposed 
on the several kinds of sin. 

In the latter half of tlic 4tli century we have 
again exact ecclesiastical definitions. They are 



very valuable, because given by two of the 
greatest canonists the Church ever produced, 
and also because they were accepted by can. ii. 
Trull. Gregory of Nyssa thus distinguishes (ad 
Letoium, resp. 4), " Fornicatio quidem dicatuv 
cupiditatis cujuspiam expletio quae sine alterius 
fit injuria. Adulterium vero, insidiae et injuria 
quae alteri afFertur." This antithesis is substan- 
tially the same with that in the Digest, but 
Gregory so states it because (as his canon tells 
us) he is replying to certain somewhat subtle 
reasoners who argued that these acts of inconti- 
nence are in essence identical — a theory which 
would equalize the offences, and, by consequence, 
their punishments. The arguments are such as 
we should call verbal, cfj. what the law does 
not permit, it forbids — the non proprium must be 
alienum. He answers by giving the specific di- 
vision made by the Fathers (as above), and main- 
tains (1) its adaptation to human infirmity, (2) 
the double sin of adultery, and (3) the propriety 
of a double penitence. With Gregory, therefore, 
the canonist pi-evails over the theologian — he 
refuses to treat the crime merely as a sin. 

In Basil's canon ad Amphiloch. 18 — which is 
concerned with lapsed virgins — who had been 
treated as digamists, and whom Basil would 
punish as adulterous, we find an incidental defi- 
nition : " eum, qui cum aliena muliere cohabitat, 
adulterum nominamus." 

Basil's important 21st canon is summed by 
Aristenus : " Virum, qui fornicatus est, uxor pro- 
pria recipiet. Inquinatam vero adulterio uxorem 
vir dimittet. Fornicator, enim, non adulter est, 
qui uxori junctus cum soluta" (an unmarried 
woman) "rem habuerit." Here, again, is the 
old opposition (as in stuprum and adulterium) 
the logical essence of the crime turning upon 
the state of the woman, whether married or sole. 
But a clause of great value to us is omitted by 
Aristenus. Basil considers the fornicatio of a 
married man heinous and aggravated ; he says, 
" eum poenis amplius gravamus," yet adds ex- 
pressly, " Canouem tamen non habemus qui eum 
adulterii crimini subjiciat si in solutam a Matri- 
monio peccatum commissum sit." This clear 
assertion from a canonist so learned and vera- 
cious as Basil must be allowed to settle the 
matter of fact, that up to his time Church law 
defined adultery exactly in the same manner as 
the civil law. 

It is to be remarked, too, that Basil's answer 
addresses itself to another kind of difficulty 
from Gregory's, that, namely, of injustice in the 
different treatment of unchaste men and women. 
No objection was of older standing. We almost 
start to hear Jerome (^Epitaph. Fahiolae) echoing, 
as it were, the verses of Plautus ; cf. the passage 
(^Mercator, iv. 5) — 

" Ecastor lege dura vivont niulieres, 

Multoque iniquiore miserae, quam viri .... 

.... Utinam lex esset eadem, quae uxori est viro." 

Yet no writer tells more pointedly than Plautus 
the remedy which Roman matrons had adopted 
(^Amphitr. iii. 2) — 

" Valeas : tibl habeas res tuas, reddas meas." 
As to the legal process by which women com- 
passed this object, it was probably similar to 
their way of enlarging their powers respecting 
property and other stich matters, on which see 
Mommscn, book iii. 13. 


V/'e now note among divines a desire to im- i 
press upon the public mind the other, i.e. the. 
purely theological idea that all incontinent, 
persons stand equally condemned. They appear 
to reason under a mixture of influences — 1. A 
feeling of the absolute unity of a married couple,' • 
a healthy bequest from the first age ; 2. Indig- J 
nation at marital license ; 3. Desire to find a | 
remedy for woman's wrong ; 4. The wish to ] 
recommend celibacy by contrast with the " ser- ' 
vitude " of marriage. 

Lactantius (as might be expected from his ' 
date) fixes upon points 1 and 2. He finds fault 
with the Imperial lavv^ in two respects — that 
adultery could not be committed with any but a i 
free woman, and that by its inequality it tended i 
to excuse the severance of the one married bodyj 
Instit. vi. 23. "Non enim, sicut juris publicij 
ratio est; sola mulier adultera est, quae habet ! 
alium ; maritus autem, etiamsi plures habeat, a 
crimine adulterii solutus est. Sed divina lex ita i 
duos in matrimonium, quod est in corpus unum^ i 
pari jure conjungit, ut adulter habeatur, quis-; 
quis compagem corporis in diversa distraxerit." ' 
Of. next page — " Dissociari enim corpus, et dis- 
trahi Deus uoluit." It would seem therefore 
that this Father would really alter the ordinary,; 
meaning of the word aduiterium, and explain the 
offence differently from its civil-law definition. 
He would extend it to every incontinent act of j 
every married person, on the ground that byi 
such an act the marriage unity enforced by our 
Lord is broken. It is true that another view' 
may be taken of the words of Lactantius. They.' 
may be considered as rhetoric rather than logic,* 
both here and in Epitome 8, where the same! 
line of thought is repeated; but this is a ques-:i 
tion of constant recurrence in the Fathers, andi 
reminds us of Selden's celebrated saying. The; 
student will in each case form his own judg-i 
ment ; in this instance he may probably think: 
the statement too precise to be otherwise than" 
literal. ' 

The same must be said of Ambrose, whose 
dictum has been made classical by Gratian. Yet 
it should be observed that he is not always con-:i 
sistent with himself, e.g. {Hexaem. v. 7) he lays 
it down that the married are both in spirit aud< 
in body one, hence adultery is contrary to naturcil 
We expect the same prefatory explanation as 
from Lactantius, but find the old view : " Nolite 
quaerere, viri, alienum thorum, nolite insidiarij 
alienae copulae. Grave est adulterium et naturae 
injuria." So again, in Luc. lib. 2, sub init., he 
attaches this term to the transgression of an 
espoused woman. 

The celebrated passage, one chief support of a 
distinction which has affected the law and lanr. 
guage of modern Europe (quoted by Gratian,' 
JJecret. ii. c. 32, q. 4), occurs in Ambrose's Defence 
of Abraham (Be Mr. Pair. i. 4). We give it aSj 
in Gratian for the sake of a gloss: "Nemo sibil 
blandiatur de legibus hominum " (gloss — quae^ 
dicunt quod adulterium non committitur cum' 
soluta sed cum nupta)"Omne stuprum adulte-f 
rium est : nee viro licet quod mulieri non licet. 
Eadem a viro, quae ab uxore debetur castimonia.l 
Quicquid in ea quae non sit legitima uxor, com- 
missum fuerit, adulterii crimine damnatur.", 
This extract sounds in itself distinct and con-| 
sccutive. But when the Apology is read as a 
whole, exactness seems to vanish. It is divided] 


into three main or defensiones : 1st, Abra- 
ham lived before the law which forbade adultery, 
therefore he could uot have committed it. " Deus 
ia Paradiso licet conjugium laudaverit, non adul- 
terium daranaverat." It is hard to understand 
how such a sentence could have been written in 
the taoe of Matt. xix. 4-9, or how so great an 
authority could forget that the very idea of con- 
jugitim implied the wrong of adulterium. 2ndly, 
Abraham was actuated by the mere desire of 
offspring ; and Sarah herself gave him her hand- 
maiden. Her example (with Leah's and Rachel's) 
is turned into a moral lesson against female 
jealousy, and then men are admonished — " Nemo 
sibi blandiatur," &c., as above quoted. 3rdly. 
Galat. iv. 21-4, is referred to, and the conclusion 
drawn, " Quod ergo putas esse peccatum, adver- 
tis esse mysterium ; " and again " haec quae in 
figuram contingebant, illis crimini non erant." 
We have sketched this chapter of Ambrose be- 
cause of the great place assigned him in the 
controversy of Western against Eastern Church 

Another passage referred to in this Q. " Dicat 
aliquis," is the 9th section of a sermon on John 
the Baptist, formerly numbered 65, now 52 (Ed. 
Bened. App. p. 462), and the work of an Am- 
brosiaster. But here the adulterium (filii testes 
adulterii) is the act of an unmarried man with 
his ancilla (distinguished from a concubina, Be- 
cret: I. Dist. 34, " Concubina autem," seq.), i.e. 
a sort of Contubernium is called by a word 
which brings it within the letter of the 7th 

Perhaps Ambrose and his pseudonym, like 
many others, saw no very great difference be- 
tween the prohibition of sins secundum literam 
and secundum analogiam — as, for example, idola- 
try is adultery. It seems clear that he did not 
with Lactantius foi-m an ideal of marriage and 
then condemn whatever contradicted it. His 
language on wedlock in Paradise forbids this 

Looking eastwards, there is a famous sermon 
(37, al. 31) preached by Gregory Nazianzen, in 
which he blends together the points we have 
numbered 2, 3, and 4. He starts (vi.) from the 
inequality of laws. Why should the woman be 
restrained, the man left free to sin ? The Latin 
version is incorrect ; it so renders KaTairopveveiv 
as to introduce the later notion of adulterium. 
Gregory thinks (inore Acsopi) that the inequality 
came to pass because men were the law-makers ; 
further, that it is contrary to (a) the 5th Com- 
mandment, which honours the mother as well as 
the father ; (b) the equal creation, resurrection, 
and redemption of both sexes ; and (c) the mys- 
tical representation of Christ and His Church. 
A healthy tone is felt in much of what Gre- 
gory says, but (ix.) the good of marriage is de- 
scribed by a definition far inferior in life and 
spirituality to that of the pagan Modestinus, 
and (in x.) naturally follows a preference for the 
far higher good of celibacy. The age was not to 
be trusted on this topic which formed an under- 
lying motive with most of the great divines. 

Chrysostora notices the chief texts in his 
Expository Homilies. For these we cannot afford 
space, and they are easily found. We are more 
concerned with his sermon on the Bill of Divorce 
(ed. Bened. iii. 198-209). " It is commonly called 
adultery," he says in substance, " when a man 



wrongs a mra-ried woman. I, however, affirm it 
of a married man who sins with the unmarried. 
For the essence of the crime depends on the con- 
dition of the injurers as well as the injured. 
Tell me not of outward laws. I will declare to 
thee the law of God." Yet we encounter a 
qualification : the offence of a husband with the 
unmarried is (p. 207) /xoixflas erepoi/ elSus. 
We also find the preacher dwelling with great 
force upon the lifelong servitude (SouAeta) of 
marriage, and we perceive from comparing other 
passages that there is an intentional contrast 
with the noble freedom of celibacy. 

Asterius of Amaseia has a forcible discourse 
(printed by Combefis, and particularly worth 
reading) on the question: "An liceat homini 
dimittere uxorem suam, quacunque ex causa ? " 
The chief part of it belongs to our next division, 
but towards the end, after disposing of insuffi- 
cient causes, he enters on the nature of adul- 
tery. Here (as he says) the preacher stands by 
the husband. "Nam cum duplici fine matrimo- 
nia contrahuntur, benevolentiae ac quaerendorum 
liberorum, neutrum in adulterio continetur. Nee 
enim affectui locus, ubi in alterum animus 
incliuat; ac sobolis omne decus et gratia perit, 
quando liberi confunduntur." Our strong Teu- 
tonic instincts feel the truth of these words. 
Asterius then insists on mutual good faith, and 
passes to the point that the laws of this world 
are lenient to the sins of husbands who excuse 
their own license by the plea of privileged 
harmlessness. He replies that all women are 
the daughters or wives of men. Some man 
must feel each woman's degi-adation. He then 
refers to Scripture, and concludes with precepts 
on domestic virtue and example. The sermon 
of Asterius shows how kindred sms may be 
thoroughly condemned without abolishing esta- 
blished distinctions. But it also shows a gene- 
ral impression that the distinctions of the Forum 
were pressed by apologists of sin iijto their own 
baser service. 

Jerome's celebrated case of Fabiola claims a 
few lines. It was not really a divorce propter 
adulterium, but parallel to the history told by 
Justin Martyr. The points for us are the 
antithesis between Paulus noster and Papini- 
anus ( with Paulus Papiniani understood ) 
and the assertion that the Roman law turned 
upon dignity — i.e. the matrona as distinguished 
from the ancillula. Jerome feels most strongly 
the unity of marriage, and joins with it the 
proposition that the word Man contains Woman. 
He therefore says that 1 Cor. vi. 16, applies 
equally to both sexes. Moreover, the same 
tendency appears, as in Chrysostom, to de- 
press wedlock in fiivour of celibacy. Marriage 
is servitude, and the yoke must be equal, " Eadem 
servitus pari conditione censetur." But the 
word adulterium is employed correctly ; and in 
another place (on Hosea, ii. 2) he expressly 
draws the old distinction — " Fornicaria est, quae 
cum pluribus copulatur. Adultera, quae unum 
virum deserens alteri jungitur." « 

Augustine, like Lactantius, posits an idea of 
marriage (Z>e Genesi, ix. 12 [vii.]). It possesses a 
Good, consisting of three things — fdes, proles, 

» The inmipta who offends cum vivo conjugato Is not 
here made an adulteress ; Jerome's remedy might hiivn 
been a specific constitutiun. 



sacramentum. " In fide attenditur ne praeter vin- 
culum conjugale, cum altera vel altei'o concum- 
batux-." But {Quaest. in Exod. 71) he feels a 
difficulty about words — " Item quaeri solet utrum 
moechiae nomine etiam f'ornicatio teneatur. Hoc 
enim Graecum verbum est, quo jam Scriptura 
utitur pro Latino. Moechos tameu Graeci nonnisi 
adulteros dicunt. Sed utique ista Lex non solis 
viris in populo, verum etiam feminis data est " 
(Jerome, supra, thought of this point); how 
much more by "non moechaberis, uterque sexus 
astringitur, .... Ac per hoc si femina 
moecha est, habens virum, concumbendo cum 
eo qui vir ejus non est, etiamsi ille non habeat 
uxorem ; profecto moechus est et vir habens 
uxorem, concumbendo cum ea quae uxor ejus 
non est, etiamsi ilia non habeat virum." He 
goes on to quote Matt. v. 32, and infers " omuis 
ergo moechia etiam fornicatio in Scripturis 
dicitur — sed utrum etiam omnis fornicatio 
moechia dici possit, in eisdem Scripturis non 
mihi interim occurrit locutionis exemplum." 
His final conclusion is that the greater sin im- 
plies the less — a part the whole. 

Augustine's sermon (ix. al. 96) De decern 
Ghordis is an expansion of the above topics. In 
3 (iii.) occurs the clause quoted Decret. ii. 32, q. 
6. (a quaestio wholly from Augustine) — "JS'on 
moechaberis: id est, non ibis ad aliquam aliam 
praeter uxorem tuam." He adds some particulars 
reminding us of Asterius. On the 7th Com- 
mandment, which Augustine calls his 5th string, 
he says, 11 (ix.), " In ilia video jacere totum pene 
genus humanum ; " and mentions that false 
witness and fraud were held in horror, but (12) 
"si quis volutatur cum ancillis suis, amatur, 
blande accipitur ; convertuntur vulnera in joca." 

We cannot pass by two popes cited by Gra- 
tian. One is Innocent I., whose 4th canon Ad 
Exup. stands at the end of same c. 32, q. 5. " Et 
illud desidei'atum est sciri, cur communicantes 
viri cum adulteris uxoribus non conveniant : 
cum contra uxores in consortio adulterorum 
virorum manere videantur." The gloss explains 
*' communicantes " of husbands who commit a 
like sin with their -wives. But this may or may 
not mean that they sinned cum conjugatis, and 
the words " pari ratione," which follow, to be- 
come decisive must be read with special emphasis. 
The other is the great Gregory, quoted earlier 
in same q. 5. The passage is from Greg. Mag. 
Moralium, lib. 21, in cap. Jobi xxxi. 9; and as 
it is truncated in quotation, we give the main 
line of thought, omitting parentheses : " Quam- 
vis nonnunquam a reatu adulterii nequajuam 
discrepet culpa fornicationis (Matt. v. 28, quoted 
and expounded). Tamen plerumque ex loco vel 
ordine concupiscentis discernitur (instance). In 
personis tamen non dissimilibus idem luxui-iae 
distinguitur reatus in quibus fornicationis culpa, 
quia ab adulterii reatu discernitur, praedicatoris 
egregii lingua testatur (1 Cor. vi. 9)." The dif- 
ference between the two sins is next confirmed 
from Job. It is easy to see that the old juridical 
sense of adulterium. is not taken away by these 
expository distinctions. 

We now come to the event which gives signi- 
ficance and living interest to our recital of 
opinions. The canon law of Rome took ground 
which allied it on this as on other questions 
with what appeared to be the rights of women. 
Its treatment of cases arising out of the 7th 


Commandment widened the separation of East 
and West, and left a mark on those barbarian 
nations which owed their civilization or their 
faith to pontifical Rome. Our business here is 
only with a definition, but canonists followed 
civilians in working their doctrine out to its 
more remote consequences, and some of these 
would form a curious chapter in history. 

The essence of the pontifical definition is not 
that a wife is the adultera, and her paramour 
the adulter, but that the offence be committed 
"cum persona conjugata," whether male or 
female. Hence it comprehends two distinct 
degrees of criminality. It is called simplex in 
two cases, " cum solutus concumbit cum conju- 
gata, vel conjugatus cum soluta." It is called 
duplex " cum conjugatus concumbit cum conju- 
gata." These distinctions are taken from F. L. 
Ferraris, Proynpta Bibliot/wca (ed. 1781), in verbo. 
They rest upon the Decretum as referred to by 
Ferraris, part 2, cause 32, quaest. 4. But the 
extracts we gave from qs. 5 and 6 should not be 

The Decretum, according to C. Butler (Ilorae 
Juridicae Suhsecivae, p. 168), is made up from 
(1) decrees of councils, (2) letters of pontiffs, 
(3) writings of doctors. But on our subject the 
last-named is the real source— q. 4 is from 
the moral and doctrinal writings of Augustine, 
Ambrose, Jerome, and Gregory I. ; q. 6 wholly 
from Augustine. This is a very noteworthy 
fact, since it tends to confirm a conclusion that 
canonists had, previously agreed with the civil 
law so for as concerns its definition of the crime. 
Gratiau would never have contented himself with 
quoting theologians if he could have found 
councils, or canonical writings accepted by coun- 
cils, to support his own decisions. 

Such, then, is one not unimportant antithesis in 
the wide divergence between East and West. It 
would form an interesting line of inquiry (but 
beyond our province) to use this antithesis as a 
clue in those mixed or doubtful -cases of descent 
where the main life of national codes and cus- 
toms is by some held homesprung, by others 
given to old Rome, and by a third party derived 
from Latin Christianity. 

Through all inquiry on this subject the stu- 
dent must bear in mind that a confusion of 
thought has followed the change in law ; e.g. 
Ducange, Glossar., s. v., commences his article 
with a short quotation from Gregory of Nyssa's 
4th can. ad Let. (explained above), but the sen- 
tence cited contains the opinion, not of the 
saint, but of the objector whom he is answering. 
Ducange proceeds to trace the same idea through 
various codes without a suspicion that he has 
begun by applying to one age the tenets of an- 
other. The difficulty of avoiding similar mis- 
takes is greater than at first sight might have 
been anticipated. In the Dictionnaires of Tre- 
voux, Furetiere, Richelet, and Danet, avoutrie 
or adidtere is explained from papal law or Thom. 
Aquin., while the citations mostly give the older 
sense. In Chaucer's Persone's Tale we find the 
same word (^avoutrie') defined after the civilians, 
but soon after he mentions " mo spices " (more 
species) taken from the other acceptation. John- 
son gives to adultery the papal meaning, but his 
sole example is from pagan Rome, and most 
modern English dictionary makers are glad to 
copy Johnson. A still more striking instance 


of confounded explanations occurs in a remark- 
able dialogue between the doctor and his friend, 
vol. iii. 46, of Crolver's Boswell. 

The natural inference is that the above-men- 
tioned authors were not conversant with the 
great change of delinition undergone by the word 
adultery and its equivalents. But when those 
who write on the specialties of church history 
and antiquities quote Fathers, councils, jurists, 
and decretals, they ought in reason to note how 
far the common terms which their catenae link 
together are or are not used in the same sense 
throughout. This precaution has been generally 
neglected as regards the subject of this article, 
— hence endless confusion. 

Immediately upon the nature of the crime (as 
legally defined) followed its Classification. By 
Lex Julia, 48 Dig., i. 1, it was placed among 
public wrongs. But a public wrong does not 
necessarily infer a public right of prosecution ; 
see GoVhofred's note on Cod. Theod. 9, tit. 7, s. 2. 
— "Aliud est publicum crimen; aliud publica 
accusatio." For Publica Judicia, cf. Dig. as 
above and Institut. Justin. 4, 18, sub init. 

Under Augustus the husband was preferred as 
prosecutor, next the wife's father. The hus- 
band was in danger of incurring the guilt of 
procuration (lenociniuni) if he failed to prose- 
cute (48, Dig. V. 2, § 2, and 29, sub init. ; also 
9, Cod. Just. 9, 2). He must open proceedings by 
sending a divorce to his wife (48, Dig. v. 2, § 2 ; 
11, § 10 ; and 29, init.). Thus divorce Avas made 
an essential penalty, though far from being the 
whole punishment. By Nocell. 117, c. 8, pro- 
ceedings might commence before the divorce. 
Such prosecution had 60 days allowed for it, 
and these must be dies utiles. The husband's 
choice of days was large, as his lihellus might 
be presented " de piano," i.e., the judge not sit- 
ting "pro tribunali" (48, Dig. v. 11, § 6; and 
14, § 2). The husband might also accuse for 4 
months further, but not "jure mariti," only " ut 
quivis extraneus" (Goth, on 11, § 6). For ex- 
ample, see Tacit. Ann. ii. 85 ; Labeo called 
to account by the praetor (cf Orell. note), 
for not having accused his wife, pleads that his 
60 days had not elapsed. After this time an 
extraneus might intervene for 4 months of avail- 
able days (tit. of Dig. last quoted, 4, § 1). 
If the divorced wife married before accusation, 
it was necessary to begin with the adulterer (2, 
init. ; 39, § 3). The wife might then escape 
through failure of the plaint against him (17, 
§ 6). He was liable for five continuous years 
even though she were dead (11, § 4; 39, § 2), 
and his death did not shield her (19, init.), but 
that period barred all accusation against both 
oftenders(29, § 5; and 31 ; also 9, Cod. J. 9, 5). 
Under Constantine, a.d. 826 (9, Cod. Theod. 7, 2, 
and 9, Cod. J. 9, 30), the right of public prose- 
cution was taken away. The prosecutors were 
thus arranged : husband ; wife's relations, i.e. 
father, brother, father's brother,mother's brother. 
This order remained unaltered (see Balsam. Scliol. 
in Bevereg. Pandect, i. 408, and Blastaris Syn- 
tagma, p. 185). 

The Mosaic law, like the Roman, made this 
oftence a public wrong, and apparently also a 
matter for public prosecution ; compare Deut. 
xxii. 22, with John viii. 3 and 10. As long as 
tho penalty of death was enforced, the husband 
could not condone. But in later times he might 



content himself with acting under Deut. xxiv. 1- 
4. See Matt, i., 19. [Espousals count as matri- 
mony under Jewish law even more strongly than 
under Roman ; compare Deut. xxii. 23, seq., with 
48, Dig. V, 13, § 3]. See also Hosea, ii. 2, iii. 1, 
and parallel passages. 

By canon law all known sins are scandals, and 
as such public wrongs ; cf. Gothofr. marg. annot. 
on Dig. 48, tit. 1, s. 1 ; Grat. Becret. ii. c.^6, 9, 1 ; 
J. Clarus, Sent. Bee. v. 1, 6; and on Adultery, 
Blackstone, iii. 8, 1, and iv. 4, 11. This offence 
became known to Church authorities in various 
ways; see Basil 34; Innocent ad Bxup. 4; and 
Elib. 76, 78, Greg. Kyss. 4, where confession 
mitigates punishment. A similar allowance for 
self-accusation is found in regard of other crimes, 
e.g. Greg. Thaum. cans. 8 and 9. 

The Church agreed with the State in not 
allowing a husband to condone (Basil, 9 and 
21), and on clerks especially (Neocaesarea, 8). 
Divines who were not canonists difl'ered consi- 
derably. Hermas's Pastor (Mandat. iv.) allowed 
and urged one reconciliation to a penitent wife. 
Augustine changed his mind ; compare Be Adal- 
terin. Conjug. lib. ii. 8 (ix.) with Bctractat. lib. 
i. xix. 6. In the first of these places he hesitates 
between condonation and divorce ; opposes for- 
giveness " per claves regui caelorum " to the pro- 
hibitions of law " secundum terrenae civitatis 
modum," and concludes by advising continence, 
which no law forbids. In the latter passage he 
speaks of divorce as not only allowed but com- 
manded. " Et ubi dixi hoc permissum esse, non 
jussum ; non attendi aliam Scripturam dicentem ; 
Qui tenet adulteram stultus et impius est " 
(Prov. xviii. 22 ; Ixx.). 

A public wrong implied civil rights ; therefore 
this offence was the crime of free persons (Dig. 
48, tit. 5, s. 6 init.). " Inter liberas tantum per- 
sonas adulterium stuprumve passas Lex Julia 
locum habet." Cf. Cod. J. 9, tit. 9, s. 23 init. A 
slave was capable only of Contubernium (see Ser- 
vics and Matrimonium in Diet. Antig.). Servitude 
annulled marriage (Dig. 24, tit. 2, s. 1), or rather 
made it null from the first (Novell. Just. 22. 8, 9, 
10). " Ancillam a toro abjicere " is laudable ac- 
cording to Pope Leo I. (Ad Bustic. 6). That 
Christian princes attempted to benefit slaves 
rather by manumission than by ameliorating the 
servile condition, we see from the above-quoted 
Novell, and from Harmenop. Proch. i. 14 ; the 
slave (sec. 1) is competent to no civil relations, 
and (sec. 6) his state is a quasi-death. 

Concubinage was not adultery (Dig. 25, tit. 7, 
s. 3, § 1); but a concubine might become an adult- 
eress, because, though not an uxor, she ought to 
be a matrona, and could therefore, if unfaithful, be 
accused, not jure niar-iti, but jure extranet. Yor 
legal conditions, see Cod. J. 5, tit. 26 and 27, Jtist. 
Novell. 18, c. 5 ; also 74 and 89. Leo (Nov. 91) 
abolished concubinage on Christian grounds. For 
the way in which the Church regarded it, cf. 
Bals., on Basil, 26, and Cone. Tolet. i. 17 ; also 
August. Qwwst. in Genesim, 90, De Fid. et Op. 
35 (xix.), and Serm. 392, 2. Pope Leo I. (Ad 
Rustic. 4, cf. 6, as given by Mansi) seems to make 
the legal concubine a mere ancilla ; cf. Grat. 
Decret. I. Dist. 34 (ut supra) and Diet. Antiq. s. v. 

We now come to much the gravest conse- 
quence of a classification under public wrongs — 
its eflect on woman's remedy. By Lex Julia, the 
wife has no power of plaint against the husband 



for adulteiy as a public wrong (Cod J. 9. 
tit. 9, s. 1.). Tliis evidently flows from the de- 
finition of the crime, but the glossators' reasons 
are curious. She cannot complain jure inariti 
because she is not a husband, nor jure extranei 
because she is a woman. 

The magistrate was bound by law to inquire 
into the morals of any husband accusing his wife 
(Dig. 48, tit. 5, s. 1 3 § 5). This section is from an 
Antonine rescript quoted at greater length from 
the Cod. Gregorian, by Augustine, De Conjug. 
Adulterin. lib. ii. 7 (viii.). The husband's guilt 
did not act as a compensatio criminis. In Eng- 
land the contrary holds, and a guilty accuser 
shall not prevail in his suit (see Burns, Eccl. 
Law, art. " Marriage."). But the wife's real 
remedy lay in the use of divorce which during 
the two last centuries of the Republic became 
the common resource of women under grievances 
real or fancied, and for purposes of the worst 
kind. There is a graphic picture of this side 
of Roman life in Boissier's Ciceron et ses Amis ; 
and for the literature and laws, see " Divor- 
tiura " in Smith's Diet, of Antiquities. Bris- 
sonius de Funnulis gives a collection of the 
phrases used in divorcing. 

Constantine allowed only three causes on 
either side — on the woman's these were her 
husband's being a homicide, poisoner, or violator 
. of sepulchres (jCod. Theod. 3, tit. 16, s. 1 ; cf. Edict. 
Theodor. 54). This law was too strict to be 
maintained ; the variations of Christian princes 
may be seen in Cod. J. 5. tit. 17. Theodos. and 
Valentin. 1. 8, added to other causes the hus- 
band's aggravated incontinency. Anastasius, 1. 
9, permitted divorce by common consent ; this 
again " nisi castitatis concupiscentia " was taken 
away by Justinian in his Novell. 117, which (cap. 
9) allowed amongst other causes the husband's 
gross unchastity. Justin restored divorce by 
common consent. 

The Church viewed, the general liberty to re- 
pudiate under the civil law, with jealousy ; cf 
Greg. Naziauz. Epp. 144, 5 (al. 176, 181), and 
"Victor Antiochen. on Mark x. 4-12. But it was 
felt that women must have some remedy for 
extreme and continued wrongs, and this lay in 
their using their legal powers, and submitting 
the reasonableness of their motives to the judg- 
ment of the Church. Basil's Can. 35 recognizes 
such a process ; see under our Div. III. Spiritual 
Penalties, No. 2. Still from what has been said, 
it is plain that divorce might become a frequent 
occasion of adultery, since the Church held that 
a married person separated from insufficient 
causes really continued in wedlock. Re-marriage 
was therefore always a serious, sometimes a cri- 
minal step. [Divorce.] 

Marriage after a wife's death was also viewed 
with suspicion. Old Rome highly valued conti- 
nence under such circumstances ; Val. Max. ii. 1, 
§ 3, gives the fact ; the feeling pervades those 
tender lines which contrast so strongly with 
Catullus V. ad Lesbiam — 

" Occldit mea Lux, meumque Sidus ; 

Sed caram sequar ; arbores que ut alta 

Sub tellure sues agunt amoves, 

Et radicibus impUcantur imis : 

Sic nos consociabimur sepulti, 

Et vivis erinius beatiores." 
Similar to Val. Max. is Herm. Mandat. iv. 4. 
Gregory Nazianz. (^Hmn. 37, al. 31) says that 


marriage represents Christ and the Church, 
and there are not two Christs ; the first mar- 
riage is law, a second an indulgence, a third 
swinish. Against marriages beyond two, see 
Neocaes. 3, Basil, 4, and Leo. Novell. 90. Curi- 
ously enough, Leo (cf. Diet. Biog.) was him- 
self excommunicated by the patriarch for marry- 
ing a fourth wife. [Digamy.] 

III. Penalties. — We are here at once met by u 
very singular circumstance. Tribonian attri- 
butes to Constantine and to Augustus two suspi- 
ciously corresponding enactments, both making 
death the penalty of this crime, and both inflict- 
ing that death by the sword. The founder of 
the Empire and the first of Christian emperors 
are thus brought into a closeness of juxtaposi- 
tion which might induce the idea that lawyers, 
like mythical poets, cannot dispense with Kpo- 

The Lex Julia furnishes a title to Cod. Theod. 9, 
tit. 7 ; Dig. 48, tit. ; and Cod. J. 9, tit. 9 ; but in 
none of these places is the text preserved, and we 
only know it from small excerpts. The law of 
Constantine in Cod. Theod. 9, tit. 7, s. 2, contains 
no capital penalty, but in Cod. J. 9, tit. 9, s. 30, 
after fifteen lines upon accusation, six words 
are added — " Sacrileges autem nuptiarum gladio 
puniri oportet." The word " sacrileges " used 
substantively out of its exact meaning is very 
rare (see Facciolati). For the capital clause, 
ascribed to the Lex Julia, see Instit. iv. 18, 4 ; but 
this clause has been since the time of Cujacius 
rejected by most critical jurists and historians, of 
whom some maintain the law of Constantine, 
others suppose a confusion between the great em- 
peror and his sons. Those who charge Tribonian 
with emhlemata generally believe him to have 
acted the harmonizer by authority of Justinian. 
On these two laws there is a summary of the case 
in Selden, Uxor. Ebr. iii. 12, with foot references. 
Another is the comment in Gothofred's ed. oi' Cod. 
Theod. vol. iv. 296, 7. Heineccius is not to be 
blindly trusted, but in Op. vol. III. his Syll. xi. De 
Secta Triboniano-mastigum contains curious mat- 
tei-, and misled Gibbon into the idea of a regular 
school of lawyers answering this description. 
The passages in Cujacius may be traced through 
each volume by its index. See also Hoffmann, 
Ad Leg. Jul. (being Tract iv. in Fellenberg's 
Jurisprudentia Antiqua) ; Lipsii Excurs. in Tacit. 
Ann. iv. ; Orelli, on Tacit. Ann. ii. 50 ; Ortolan, 
Explication des Instituts, iii. p. 791 ; Sandars, 
On the Institutes, p. 605 ; Diet. Antiq., " Adult- 
erium " ; and Diet. Biog., " Justinianus." 

The fact most essential to us is that prae- 
Christian emperors generally substituted their 
own edicts for the provisions of the Lex Julia, 
and that the successors of Constantine were 
equally diligent in altering his laws. Histo- 
rians have frequently assumed the contrary ; 
Valesius' note on Socrates, v. 18, may serve by 
way of example. The Church could not avoid 
adapting her canons to the varied states of civil 
legislation ; cf. Scholia on Can. Apost. 5, and 
Trull. 87, besides many other places. The true 
state of the case will become plainer if we briefly 
mention the different ways in v/hich adultery 
might be legally punished. 

1. The Jus Occidendi, most ancient in its ori- 
gin ; moderated under the Empire ; but not taken 
away by Christian princes. Compare Dig. 48, tit. 
5, s. 20 to 24, 32 and 38, with same 48, tit, 8, 


s. 1, § 5 ; Cod. J. 9, tit. 9, s. 4 ; and Pauli Becept. 
Sentent. ii. 26. This right is commou to most 
nations, but the remarkable point is that Roman 
law gave a greater prerogative of homicide to the 
woman's father than to her husband. For a 
similar custom and feeling, see Lane's Modern 
Egyptians i. 297. The Jus Occidcndi under the 
Old Testament is treated by Selden, De Jure Nat. 
et Gent, juxta Discip. Ebraeor. iv. 3 ; in old and 
modern France, by Ducange and Ragueau ; in 
England, by Blackstone and Wharton. There is 
a provision in Basil's Can. 34- directing that if a 
woman's adultery becomes known to the Church 
authorities either by her own confession or other- 
wise, she shall be subjected to penitence, but not 
placed among the public penitents, lest her hus- 
band, seeing her should surmise what has occurred 
and slay her on the spot (cf. Blastaris Syntagma, 
letter M, cap. 14). This kind of summary venge- 
ance has often been confounded with the penalty 
inflicted by courts of law, e.g. its celebrated as- 
sertion by Cato in A. Gell. x. 23, though his words 
" sine judicio " ought to have prevented the mis- 
take. Examples of it will be found Val. Max. 
vi. 1, 13 ; the chastisement of the historian Sal- 
lust is described A. Gell. xvii. 18 ; many illustra- 
tions are scattered thi'oUgh the satirists, and 
one, M. Ann. Senec, Controv. i. 4, is pai'ticularly 

2. The Household Tribunal, an institution 
better known because of the details in Dion. 
Hal. ii. 25. The remarks of Mommsen (i. 5 and 
12), should be compared with Mr. Hallam's phi- 
losophical maxim {Suppt. to Middle Ages, art. 54) 
that the written laws of free and barbarous 
nations are generally made for the purpose of 
preventing the infliction of arbitrary punish- 
ments. See for the usage Val. Max. ii. 9, 2, and 
A. Gell. X. 23, in which latter place the husband 
is spoken of ts the wife's censor, a thought which 
pervades Origen's remarkable exposition of Matt. 
XIX. 8, 9, compared with v. 32 (tomus xiv. 24). 
The idea itself was likely to be less alien from 
the mind of the Church because of the patri- 
archal power which sentenced Tamar to the 
flames, and the apostolic principle that " the 
Head of the Woman is the Man." It is plain, 
however, that all private administration of jus- 
tice is opposed to the whole tenour of Church 
legislation. But perhaps the most pleasant ex- 
ample of the Roman Household Court best shows 
the strength and extent of its jurisdiction. Pom- 
ponia Graecina (Tacit. Ann. xiii. 32) was so tried 
on the capital charge of foreign superstition, 
and the noble matron, an early convert, as is 
sometimes supposed, to Christianity, owed her 
life to the acquittal of her husband and his 
family assessors. 

3. A far more singular penalty on adultery is 
mentioned. Tacit. Ann. ii. 85, Sueton. Tib. 35, and 
Merivale, v. 197. It consisted in permitting a 
matron to degrade herself by tendering her name 
to the Aediles for insertion in the register of pub- 
lic women. Tacitus speaks of it as "more inter 
veteres recepto," and looks back with evident 
regret upon the ages when such shame was felt 
to be an ample chastisement. His feeling is 
shared by Val. Max. ii. 1. A like custom sub- 
sisted before 1833 among the modern Egyptians, 
(see Lane, i. 176-7), difl'ering only in the fact that 
the degradation was compulsory, a custom curi- 
ously parallel to a narrative of Socrates, v. 18, 


(copied by Nicephorus, xii. 22), who says that 
there remained at Rome, till abolished by the 
Christian Emperor Theodoslus I., places of con- 
finement called Sistra, where women who had 
been caught in breaking the 7th Commandment 
were compelled to acts of incontinency, during 
which the attention of the passers-by was at- 
tracted by the ringing of little. bells in order that 
their ignominy might be known to every one. 
Valesius has a dubious note founded chiefly on 
a mistake, already observed, as to the constancy 
of Roman punishments. They really were most 
variable, and here again Egypt offers a parallel, 
cf. Lane, i. 462-3. Kiebuhr {Lectures on Soman 
Hist. i. 270) thinks the unfixed nature of penal- 
ties for numerous ofi'ences in Greece and Rome a 
better practice than the positive enactments of 
modern times. We now pass to 

4. Judicial Punishments. — Augustine ( Civ. Dei, 
iii. 5) says that the ancient Romans did not in- 
flict death upon adulteresses (cf. Liv. i. 28, x. 
2, XXV. 2, and xxxix. 18 ;) those who read Plautus 
will find divorce described as their usual chas- 
tisement. The critics of Tribonian generally be- 
lieve that Paulus (Sentent. ii. 26, 14) gives the 
text of the Lex Julia. It commences with the 
punishment of the woman, and proceeds to that 
of her paramour on the principle before noticed 
of the adultera being the true criminal, and the 
adulter her accomplice. After Constantine, 
though the civil law maintains this ancient 
position, there is an apparent inclination to punish 
the man as a seducer — a clearly vital alteration, 
and due pi-obably to Christian influences. 

Augustine places the lenity of old Rome to- 
wards adulterous women in contrast with the 
severities exercised on Vestal virgins. His state- 
ment is not necessarily impugned by those who 
rank adultery among capital crimes (e.g. Cod. J. 
9, tit. 9, s. 9), since by some kinds of banishment 
"eximitur caput de civitate," and hence the 
phrase " civil death " (see Dig. 48, tit. 1, s. 2 ; 
tit. 19, s. 2 ; tit. 22, s. 3-7). Emperors varied 
from each other, and from themselves. Augustus 
exceeded his own laws (Tacit. Ann. iii. 24). Ti- 
berius was perverse (ibid. iv. 42). Appuleius, 
under the Antonines, represents the legal penalty 
as actual death, and seems to imply that burn- 
ing the adulteress alive was not an unknown 
thing (3Iet. ix. ut supra). Of Macrinus it is ex- 
pressly stated (Jul. Capit. 12), " Adulterii reos 
semper vivos simul incendit, junctis corporibus." 
Alexander Severus held to a capital penalty (Cod. 
J. 9, tit. 9), as above. Paulus was of his council 
(cf. Ael. Lamprid. 25), a fact favouring the sup- 
position that the section (Becept. Sent. ii. 26, 14) 
which mentions a punishment not capital must 
represent an earlier law. Arnobius, under Dio- 
cletian (see Diet. Bioq.), speaks of adultery as 
capital (iv. p. 142, ed. Var.). With the above 
precedents before him, the reader may feel in- 
clined to distrust the charge of new and Mosaic 
severity brought against Constantine and his 
successors in chap. 44 of Gibbon, vol. v. p. 322, 
ed. Milman and Smith. 

Whether the disputed penal clause of Con- 
stantine be genuine or not, by another law of his 
(Cod. J. 9, tit. 11) a woman offending with a 
slave was capitally punished, and the slave burned. 
Constantius ami Constans (Cod. Theod. 11, tit. 
36, s. 4) enacted " pari similique ratione sacrilcgoa 
nuptiarum, tanquam manifestos parricida.s, in- 



suere culeo vivos, vel exurere, judicautem opor- 
teat." Compare Diet. Antiq. art. Leges Corneliae, 
" Lex Pompeia de Parricidiis," and for burning, 
Pauli Sentent. Eecept. \. 24. Baronius (sub fin. 
Ann. 339) has a note on " Sacrileges," — a word 
which placed the male offender in a deeply criminal 
light. The execution of the sentence was en- 
forced by clear cases of adultery being excepted 
from appeal {Sent. Eecept. ii. 26, 17), and after- 
wards XCod. Theod. 9, tit. 38, s. 3-8), from the 
Easter indulgence, when, in Imperial phrase, the 
Resurrection Moi-ning brought light to the dark- 
ness of the prison, and brolce the bonds of the 
transgressor. Yet we may ask. Was the Con- 
stantian law really maintained? Just thirty 
years later, Ammianus (xxviii. 1) gives an ac- 
count of the decapitation of Cethegus, a senator 
of Rome ; but though the sword was substituted 
for fire, he reckons this act among the outrages 
of Maximin, prefect of the city ; and how easily 
a magistrate might indulge in reckless barbarity 
may be seen by the horrible trial for adultery 
described by Jerome {Ad Innocent.'), in which both 
the accused underwent extreme tortures. Again, 
though the Theodosian code (in force from A.D. 
439) gave apparent life to the Constantian law, 
yet by a rescript of Majorian (a.d. 459) it is 
ordered that the adulterer shall be punished " as 
under former emperors," by banishment from 
Italy, with permission to any one, if he return, 
to kill him on the spot {Novell. Major. 9). That 
death in various times and places was the penalty, 
seems clear from Jerome on Nah. i. 9 ; the Vandal 
customs in Salvian, 7 ; and Can. Wallici, 27. 
Fines appear in later Welsh, as in Salic and 
A. S. codes. For these and other punishments 
among Christianized barbarians, see Ancient Laws 
of Wales; Lindenbrogii Cod. Leg., Wilkins, vol. i., 
Olaus Mag. de Gent. Septent. XIV. ; and Ducange 
s. V. and under Trotari. 

For Justinian's legislation see his 134th Novell. 
Cap. 10 renews the Constantian law against the 
male offender, extends it to all abettors, and in- 
flicts on the female bodily chastisement, with 
other penalties short of death. Cap. 12 contem- 
plates a possible evasion of justice, and further 
oflences, to which are attached further severities. 
Caps. 9 and 13 contain two merciful provisions. 
Leo, in his 32nd Novell, (cited by Harmenop. as 
19th), compares adultery with homicide, and 
punishes both man and woman by the loss of 
their noses and other inflictions. For a final 
summary, cf Harmenop. Proch. vi. 2, and on the 
punishment of incontinent married men, vi. 3. 

Spiritual penalties may be thus arranged — 1. 
Against adultery strictly so called (Can. Apost. 
61 al. 60). A convicted adulter cannot receive 
orders. — Ancyra, 20. Adultera and adulter (so 
Schol., husband with guilty knowledge, Routh 
and Fleury), 7 years' penitence. — Neocaesarea, 1. 
Presbyter so ofl'ending to be fully excommunicated 
and brought to penitence. — Neocaesai'ea, 8. The 
layman whose wife is a convicted adultera can- 
not receive orders. If the husband be already 
ordained, he must put her away under penalty 
of deprivation. — Basil, can. 9. An unchaste wife 
must be divorced. An unchaste husband not so, 
even if adulterous ; this is the rule of Church 
custom. [N.B. — We place Basil here because ac- 
cepted by Trull. 2.]— Basil, 58. The adulter 15 
years' penitence; cf. 59, which gives 7 years to 
simple incontinence, and compare with both can. 


7 and Scholia. — Gregor. Nyss., can. 4, prescribes 
18 years (9 only for simple incontinence). — Basil, 
27, and Trull. 26, forbid a presbyter who has 
ignorantly contracted an unlawful marriage be- 
fore orders to discharge his functions, but do not 
degrade him. — Basil, 39. An adultera living with 
her paramour is guilty of continued crime. This 
forbids her marriage with him, as does also the 
civil law. Cf. on these marriages Triburiense, 40, 
49, and 51. — On intended and incipient sin, com- 
pare Neocaesarea, 4, with Basil, 70 (also Scholia) 
and Blastaris Syntagma, cap. xvi. — The synod of 
Eliberis, though held A.D. 305, was not accepted 
by any Universal Council, but it represents an 
important part of the Western Church, and its 
canons on discipline are strict. The following 
arrangement will be found useful. Eliberis, 19. 
Sin of Clerisy. (Cf. Tarracon. 9.)— 31. Of young 
men. — 7. Sin, if repeated. — 69. Of married men 
and women. — 47. If habitual and with relapse 
after penitence. — 64. Of women continuing with 
their accomplices ; cf. 69. — 65. Wives of clerks. 
— 70. Husbands' connivance (F. Mendoza remarks 
on the antiquity of this sin in Spain). — 78. Of 
married men with Jewesses or Pagans. 

2. Against Adultery as under Sjjiritual hut not 
Civil Law. — Both canonists and divines joined with 
our Saviour's precepts, Pi'ov. xviii. 23 ; Jer. iii. 1 
(both LXX); 1 Cor. vi. 16, and vii. 11-16 and 39. 
They drew two conclusions: (1) Divorce, except 
for adultery, is adultery. Under this fell the 
questions of enforced continence, and of marriage 
after divorce. (2) To retain an adulterous wife 
is also adultery — a point disputed by divines, e.g. 
Augustine, who yielded to the text in Proverbs 
{Retract, i. xix. 6). These divisions should be 
remembered though the points are often blended 
in the canons. 

Can. Apost. 5. No one in higher orders to 
cast out his wife on plea of religion. This is 
altered as regards bishops by Trull. 12, but 
the change (opposed to African feeling) was not 
enough to satisfy Rome. It must be remem- 
bered that, though divorce was restrained by 
Constantine, whose own mother had thus suf- 
fered (see Eutrop. ix. 22), his law was relaxed 
by Theod. and Valentin, and their successors, 
and it was common for a clerk, forced into conti- 
nence, to repudiate his wife. Trull. 13, opposes 
the then Roman practice as concerns priests and 
deacons, and so far maintains, as it says, Can. 
Apost. 5. — The Scholia on these three canons 
should be read. For the Roman view of them 
compare Binius and other commentators with 
Fleury, Hist. Eccl. xl. 50. Cf. Siricius, Ad Himer. 
7; Innocent I. AdExup. 1, Si-ad Ad Max. et Sev. ; 
Leo I. Ad Rustic. 3, and Ad Anastas. 4. See also 
Milman, Lat. Christ, i. 97-100. The feeling of 
Innocent appears most extreme if Jerome's asser- 
tion {Ad Dcmetriad.) of this pope's being his 
predecessor's son is literally meant, as Milman 
and others believe. — Can. Apost. 18, al. 17. 
On marriage with a cast-out wife ; cf. Levit. 
xxi. 7. — 48, al. 47. Against casting out and 
marrying again, or marrying a dismissed woman. 
"Casting out" and "dismissed" are explained 
by the Scholiasts in the sense of unlawful repu- 
diations. Sanchez {De Matrim. lib. x. de Divort. 
Disp. ii. 2) quotes this canon in the opposite sense, 
and brings no other authority to forbid divorce 
before Innocent I.; indeed mDisp. i. 12, he says, 
" Posterior (excusatio) est, indissolubilitatem ma- 


tiiinonii non ita arete in primitiva Ecclesia in- 
tellectam esse, quia liceret ex legitima causa, 
apud Episcopos provinciales probata, libellum 
repudii dare." F. Mendoza makes a like reserve 
on Eliberis, 8. It is to be observed that Latin 
renderings of Greek law terms are apt to be am- 
biguous ; e.g. " Soluta " is sometimes used of 
a dismissed wife, sometimes of an unmarried 
woman. — Basil, Ad Amphiloch. can 9. The dictum 
of our Lord applies naturally to both sexes, but 
it is otherwise ruled by custom [i.e. of the 
Church, see a few lines further, with Scholia ; 
and on unwritten Church custom having the 
force of law cf. Photii Nomoc. i. 3, and refer- 
ences]. In the case of wives that dictum is 
stringently observed according to 1 Cor. vi. 16 ; 
Jer. iii. 1, and Prov. xviii., latter half of 23 
(both in LXX and Vulgate). — If, however, a di- 
vorced husband marries again, the second wife is 
not an adultera, but the first ; cf. Scholia. [Here 
the Latin translator has mistaken the Greek ; he 
renders ovk olSa el Svvarai by " nescio an possit," 
instead of " nescio an non " — so as to give the con- 
trary of Basil's real meaning.] A woman must 
not leave her husband for blows, waste of dower, 
incontinence, nor even disbelief (cf. 1 Cor. vii. 16), 
under penalty of adultery. Lastly, Basil forbids 
second marriage to a husband putting away 
his wife, i.e. unlawfidly according to Aristenus, 
Selden, Ux. Ebr. iii. 31, and Scholia on Trull. 87. 
On like Scripture grounds Can. 26 of 2nd Synod 
attributed to St. Patrick, commands divorce of 
adulteresses, and permits husband to remarry. — 
Basil, 21, assigns extra penitence to what would 
now be called simple adultery (then denied by 
Church custom to be adultery), i.e. the incon- 
tinency of a married man. Divorce is next 
treated as a penalty — an offending wife is an 
adulteress and must be divorced — not so the hus- 
band ; cf. can. 9. Basil, unlike Gregory of Nyssa, 
does not justify in reason the established custom. 
— 35. Alludes to a judgment of the sort men- 
tioned by Sanchez and Mendoza, and referred 
to above. — Can. 48. Separated wife had better 
not re-marry. 

Carthage, 105 ap. Bev. (in Cod. Ecd. Afric. 
102). — Divorced persons (i.e. either rightly or 
wrongly repudiating) to remain unmarried or 
be reconciled, and an alteration of Imperial law 
in this sense to be petitioned for. This breathes 
a Latin rather than an Eastern spirit, and is the 
same with 2 Milevis (Mileum), 17 (repeated Cone. 
Afric. 69), cf. 1 Aries, 10, and Innocent I., Ad 
Exup. 6. The case is differently determined 
under differing conditions by Aug. de Fid. et 
Oper. 2 (i.) compared with 35'(xix.). 

The Scholiasts hold that the Carthaginian 
canon was occasioned by facility of civil divorce, 
but superseded by Trull. 87. Innocent III., with 
a politic regard for useful forgeries, ordained that 
earlier should prevail over later canons (cf 
Justell. i. 311), but the Greek canonists (as here) 
maintain the reverse, which is likewise ably up- 
held and explained by Augustine, De Bapt. II. 4, 
(iii.), and 14 (ix.). 

Trull. 87, is made up of Basil's 9, 21, 35, and 
48. The Scholia should be read — but they do 
not notice that, when it was framed, divorce by 
consent had been restored by Justin, Novell. 2 
(authent. 140). They are silent because neither 
this Novell, nor all Justinian's 117 were insorteil 
in the Basilica then used : his 134 alone repre- 



seuted the law (see Photii Nomoc. XIII. 4, Sch. 3). 
— Trull. 87, is so worded as to express desertion, 
and therefore implies a judicial process, without 
which re-marriage must be held mere adultery 
(see on this point, Blastaris Syntagm. : Gamma, 
13). The " divine " Basil, here highly magnified, 
is elevated still higher in Blastaris, Caus. Matrim. 
ap. Leunclavii Jus Graeco-Boman. p. 514. 

This canon closes the circle of Oecumenical 
law upon adultery, and on divorce, treated partly 
as its penalty and partly as its cause. The 
points of agreement with State law are plain ; 
the divergence is an effect of Church restraint 
upon divorce, which, if uncanonical, easily led to 
digamy, and formed per se a species of adultery. 
According to canonists (Photii Nomoc. I, 2, Schol. 
2), Church law, having a twofold sanction, could 
not be resisted by Imperial constitutions. 

As the ancient mode of thinking on adultery 
is alien from our own, it seems right to refer 
the reader to the vindication of its morality by 
Gregory Nyss. (Ad Let. 4). — Gregory is by no 
means lenient to the incontinency of married or 
unmarried men with single women ; 9 years of 
penitence with all its attendant infamy made up 
no trifling chastisement. But he held that the 
offence of a married woman and her paramour 
involves three additional elements of immorality 
— the treacherous, the specially unjust, and the 
unnatural ; or, to put the case another way, he 
estimated the sin by the strength of the barriers 
overleaped by passion, and by the amount of 
selfishness involved in its gi-atification. So, in 
modern days, we often speak of an adulteress as 
an unnatural mothei-, and visit her seducer with 
proportionate indignation. Thus viewed, spuri- 
ousness of progeny is not a censure by rule of 
expediency, but a legal test of underlying de- 

This section may usefully close with examples 
showing how the ancient position has been over- 
looked as well as resisted. We saw that Car- 
thage, 105, and its parallels forbade marriage 
after divorce, whether just or unjust, and that 
the view of its being adultery had gained ground 
in the West. Now, three earlier Eliberitan canons 
uphold the other principle. Can. 8. Against re- 
marriage of a woman causelessly repudiating. 
9. Against re-marriage of a woman leaving an 
adulterous husband. 10. Against marriage with 
a man guilty of causeless dismissal. From this 
last canon, compared with 8 and 9, it appears 
that the husband divorcing an adulteress may 
marry again, which by 9 an aggrieved wife can- 
not do ; cf. the parallel, Basil, 9, supra. Cote- 
lerius, note 16, 3, to Herm. Fast. Mand. iv., 
quotes cans., 9 and 10 as a support to the pseudo- 
Ambrose on 1 Cor. vii. 10, 11, and construes 
both to mean that the man is favoured above 
the woman under like conditions. He is fol- 
lowed by Bingham, xvi. 11, 6, as far as the so- 
called Ambrose is concerned. But we have suf- 
ciently proved that Church custom did not per- 
mit incontinency to be held a like condition 
n husband apd in wife. The pseudo-Ambrose 
himself misleads his readers — his law agrees 
with the Basilean canon, but not content with 
la3nng down the law, he goes on to reason out 
the topic — the man's being the head of the 
woman, &c. The Western Canon ascribed to St. 
Patrick {supra) seems a remarkable contrast to 
the Latin rule. The fact is equally remarkable 



that at no further distance from Eliberis than 
Aries, and as early as A.D. 314, it was enacted 
by Can. 10 that young men detecting their wives 
iu adultei-y should be counselled against mariy- 
ing others during the lifetime of the adulteresses 
(cf. Kantes 12). Most curious to us are the de- 
crees of Pope Leo I., Ad Nicet. 1, 2, 3, 4, which 
allow the wives of prisoners of war to marry 
others, but compel them to return to their 
husbands under pain of excommunication should 
the captives be released and desire their society. 
Such instances as these and some before cited 
illustrate the various modes of affirming an iron 
bond in marriage, and of resisting the law on 
adultery, and on divorce as the penalty of adul- 
tery (afterwards received in TruUo), ere yet the 
opposition formed an article in the divergence 
01 Greek and Latin Christendom. With them 
should be compared the extracts from divines 
given under Division H. supra, which display in 
its best colours the spirit of the revolution. For 
other particulars, see Divorce. 

3. Constructive Adultery. — The following are 
treated as guilty of the actual crime : — Trull. 98. 
A man marrying a betrothed maiden ; cf Basil, 
37, with Schol.,\and Dig. 48, tit. 5, s. 13, § 3 ; 
also Siricius, Ad Him. 4. — Elib. 14. Girls seduced 
marrying other men than their seducers. — Basil, 
18. Consecrated virgins who sin and their para- 
mours ; cf his 60. These supersede Ancyra, 19, 
bv which the offence was punished as digamy. 
See on same. Trull. 4 ; Elib.l3 ; Siric. Ad Him. 6, 
Innocent, J^ii TVrfr. 12 and 13. Cyprian, ^cZ PoHi- 
jion., pronounced it better they should marry — 
the offender is " Christi Adultera." Jerome, Ad 
Demetriad. sub fin., perplexes the case for irre- 
vocable vows by declaring, " Quibus aperte dicen- 
dum est, ut aut nubant, si se non possunt conti- 
nere, aut contineant, si nolunt nubere." — Laod. 
10 and 31, accepted by Chalced. i. and Trull. 2, 
forbid giving sons and daughters in marriage to 
heretics. Eliberis, 15, 16, 17, enact severe penal- 
ties against parents who marry girls to Jews, 
heretics, and unbelievers, above all to heathen 
priests. 1, Aries, 11, has same prohibition, so too 
Agde, 67. By Cod. Thcod. 16, tit. 8, s. 6 (a.d. 
339), Jews must not take Christian women ; by 
Cod. Theod. 3, tit. 7, s. 2 (a.d. 388), all marriage 
between Jew and Christian is to be treated as 
adultery, a law preserved by Justinian {God. J. 
1, tit. 9, s. 6). Some suppose this phrase simply 
means treated as a capital offence, but Elib. 1,5, 
mentions the risk oi adidterium animae. The pas- 
sage in TertuUian, Ad Ux. ii. 3, "fidcles gentilium 
matrimonia subeuntes stupri reos esse constat," 
&c. (cf. Division L supra) shows how early this 
thought took hold of the Church. Idolatry 
from Old Testament times downward was adul- 
tery ; and divines used the principle 1 Cor. vi. 
15, 16, and parallel texts, to prove that marriage 
with an unclean transgressor involved wife or 
husband in the sinner's guilt. Compare Justin 
Martyr in the history cited Division I., Cyprian, 
Testimon. iii. 62, and Jerome, Epitaph. Fabiolae. 
It would appear therefore that law was thus 
worded to move conscience, and how hard the 
task of law became may be gathered from Chal- 
cedon, 14. This canon (on which see Schol. and 
Routh's note, Opusc. ii. 107) concerns the lower 
clerisy ; but the acceptance of Laodicea by Can. 
1 had already met the case of lay people. See 
further under MarriaCxE. 


The Church was strict against incitements and 
scandals. Professed virgins must not live with 
clerks as sisters. See SuB-iNTRODUCTAE. On 
promiscuous bathing. Trull. 77, Laod. 30 ; the 
custom was strange to early Rome, but practice 
varied at different times (se« Diet. Antiq. Bal- 
neae). On female adornment, Trull. 96, and com- 
pare Commodian's address to matrons, Inst. 59, 
60. — Elib. 35, forbids women's night watching 
in cemeteries, because sin was committed under 
pretext of prayer. Against theatricals, loose 
reading, some kinds of revels, dances, and other 
prohibited things, see Bingham, xvi. 11, 10-17, 
with the references, amongst which those to 
Cyprian deserve particular attention. 

For the general literature on Canon Law see 
that article. Upon civil law there are excellent 
references under Justinianus, Diet. Biogr., with 
additional matter in the notes to Gibbon, chap. 
44, ed. Smith and Milman, and a summarv re- 
specting the Basilica, vol. vii. pp. 44, 45. " We 
may here add that Mommsen is editing a text of 
the Corjms Juris Civilis ; and the whole Russian 
code is now being translated for English publica- 
tion. There is a series of manuals by Ortolan 
deserving attention : Histoire de la Legislation 
romaine, 1842 ; Cows de Legislation penale com- 
paree, 1839-41 ; Explication des Listituts, 1863. 
Gothofredi Mamuxle Juris, and Windscheid's 
Lehrbuch d. Pandektenrechts (2nd ed.) may be 
useful. An ample collection of Councils and Ec- 
clesiastical documents relating to Great Britain 
and Ireland is being published at Oxford. Re- 
ferences on special topics have been fully given 
above, and will serve to indicate the readiest 
sources for further information. Curious readers 
will find interesting matter in Saint Edme, Dic- 
tionnaire de la P^nalite ; Taylor, On Civil Law; 
and Duni, Origine e Progressi del Cittadino e del 
Governo civile di Roma, 1763-1764. [W. J.] 

ADVENT {Adventus, NriTTfia tS>v Xpiarov- 
yevyuv), is the season of preparation for the 
Feast of the Nativity, to which it holds the like 
relation as does Lent to Easter. As no trace of 
an established celebration of the birth of our 
Lord is met with before the 4th century [Na- 
tivity], no earlier origin can be assigned to the 
ecclesiastical institution of Advent; the state- 
ment otDnvamd {Eationale divin. off .vi. 21), which 
makes this an appointment of St. Peter (unless, 
like other statements of the same kind, it means 
only that this was an ordinance of the see of St. 
Peter), may rest, perhaps, on an ancient tradition, 
making Christmas an apostolic institution, but 
is contrary to all historical testimony, and devoid 
of probability. Expressions which have been 
alleged on that behalf from TertuUian, St. Cyprian, 
and other early writers, are evidently meant, not 
of "Advent " as a Church season, but of the 
coming of the Loi-d in the fulness of time. A 
passage of St. Chrysostom (Horn. iii. ad Eph. 
t. xi. 22 B), in which Kaiphs tt)? irpocrShov is 
mentioned in connection with ra 'EirLipavia (t. e. 
the ancient Feast of Nativity and Baptism) and 
with the Lenten Quadragesima, speaks, as the 
context manifestly shows, not of the season of 
Advent, but of the fit time (or rather fitness in 
general) for coming to Holy Communion (comp. 
Menard on Libr. Sacram. S. Gregorii ; 0pp. t. iii. 
col. 446). Setting aside these supposed testi- 
monies, and that of the Sermons de Adventu, 




alleged as St. Augustine's, but certainly not his, 
we have two homilies In (or De) Adcentu Domini, 
de eo quod dictum est, sicut fulijur coruscans, &c., 
et de duobus in lecto uno, by St. Maximus, Bishop 
of Turin, ob. 466. In neither of these sermons 
is there any indication of Advent as a season, 
any allusion to Lessons, Gospels, &c., appro- 
priated to such a season, or to the Feast of 
Nativity as then approaching. And, indeed, the 
lact that the " Sundays in Advent " are unknown 
to the Sacramentary of Pope Leo of the same age 
sufficiently shows that this season was not yet 
established in the time of Maximus. Among 
the Homilies (doubtfully) ascribed to this 
bishop, edited by Mabillon (J/ms. Ital. i. i. pt. 2), 
one, hom. vii., preached on the Sunday before 
Chri-Stmas, simply exhorts to a due observance of 
the feast, and contains no indication of any 
ecclesiastical rule. Even in the Sermons de 
Adventu, formerly ascribed to St. Augustine 
now generally acknowledged to have been 
written by Caesarius, Bishop of Aries, ob. 542 (S. 
Augustini 0pp. t. v. 210,' Ben. Append, n. 115, 
116), there is no distinct recognition of Advent 
as an established observance. In these, the faithful 
are exhorted to prepare themselves, several days 
(ante plures dies), foi the due celebration of the 
Nativity, especially of the Christmas Communion, 
by good works, by guarding against anger and 
hatred, by modest hospitality to the poor, by 
strict continence, &c. Still there is no indi- 
cation of the length of time so to be set apart, 
nor any reference to Lessons, Gospels, or other 
matters of Church usage. The preacher urges 
such preparation, not on the ground of Church 
observance, but as matter of natural fitness : 
" Even as ye would prepare for celebrating the 
birth-day of a great lord by putting your houses 
in order," &c. " Ideo ab omni inquinamento 
ante ejus Natalem multis diebus abstinere de- 
betis. Quotiescumque aut Natalem Domini aut 
reliquas sollemnitates celebrare disponitis, ebrieta- 
tem ante omnia fugite," &c. And so in the 
second sermon : " Et ideo quotiescumque aut dies 
Natalis Domini, aut relUiuae festivitates adveniunt, 
sicut frequenter admonui, ante plures dies non 
solum ab infelici concubinarum consortio, sed 
etiam a propriis uxoribus abstinete : ab omni ira- 
cundia," &c. There is indeed a canon cited by 
Gratian {Decretal, xxxiii. qu. 4) as of the Council 
of Lerida, A.d. 523, prohibiting all marriage /rom 
Advent to Epiphany. But this canon is known 
to be spurious, and does not appear in the 
authentic copies (see Brun's Concilia, t. ii. 20). 
A similar canon of the Council of Macon, (a.d. 
581, ibid. 242) is undisputed. This (can. ix.) 
enjoins that from the Feast of St. Martin 
(Nov. 11) to the Nativity there be fasting 
on Mon<lay, Wednesday, and Friday of each 
week, and that the canons be then read ; also 
that the sacrifices be offered in the quadragesimal 
order. (Subsequent councils, after our period, 
enjoin the observance of this Quadragesima S. 
Martini as the preparation for Christmas, corre- 
sponding to the Lenten Quadragesima before 
Easter.) It does not appear what were the 
canons appointed to be read, relating, of coui-se, 
to the observance of these forty days before 
Christmas; only, it may be infevred that such 
canons were, or were supposed to be, in exist- 
ence, of earlier date than that of Macon (in the 
preface to which council it is said these enact- 

ments are not new : " non tarn nova quam prisca 
patrum statuta sancientes " &c.). In the second 
Council of Tours (a.d. 567), the fast of three 
days in the week is ordered (can. xvii.) for the 
months of September, October, and November, 
and from (1) December to the Nativity, omni 
die. But this is for monks only. St. Gregory, 
Bishop of Tours, in De Vitis Patrum, written 
between 590 and 595, alleges that Perpetuus, 
Bishop of Tours (461-490), ordered "a deposi- 
tione B. Martini usque ad Nat. Dom. terna in 
septimana jejunia." This may have been one 
of the prisca statuta appealed to ; but no trace 
is extant of any such canon, either in the First 
Council of Tours, a.d. 460, or in any other Latin 
council before that of Macon. It seems, from all 
that is certainly known, that Advent took its place 
among Church seasons only in the latter part 
of the 6th century. When the Nativity had 
become established as one of the great festivals, 
it was felt that its dignity demanded a season of 
preparation. The number of days or weeks to be 
so set apart was at first left to the discretion of 
the faithful : "ante plures dies, multis diebus, ' 
as in the above-cited exhortation of Caesarius. 
Later, this was defined by rule, and first, it 
seems, in the Churches of Gaul. Yet not every- 
where the same I'ule: thus the oldest Galilean 
Sacramentary shows three Sundays in Advent, 
the Gothic-Gallican only two (Mabillon, Mus. 
Ital. t. i. pp. 284-288 ; and de Liturg. Oallicana, 
p. 98, sqq.). But the rule that the term of pre- 
paration should be a quadragesima (correspond- 
ing with that which was already established for 
Easter), to commence after the Feast of St. 
Martin, which rule, as has been seen, was not 
enacted, but reinforced by the canon of Macon, 
581, implies six Sundays ; and that this rule ob- 
tained in other Churches appears from the fact 
that the Ambrosian (or Milan) and Mozarabic 
(or Spanish) Ordo show six missae, implying that 
number of Sundays ; and the same rule was ob- 
served (as Martene has shown) in some of the 
Galilean Churches. The Epistola ad Bibinnum 
falsely alleged to be St. Augustine's account of 
" the offices of divine worship throughout the 
year " in his diocese of Hippo (see Bened. Ad- 
monitio at end of 0pp. S. Augustini, t. ii.), 
also attests this for Churches of Gaul, if, as 
Martene surmises, this was the work of some 
Galilean writer. It should be remarked that 
this writer himself makes the ordo adventus 
Domini begin much earlier, at the autumnal 
equinox, Sept. 25, as being the day of the 
conception of St. John the Baptist, and so the 
beginning of the times of the Gospel. "Sed 
quia sunt nonnulli qui adventum Domini a festi- 
vitate B. Martini Turonensis urbis episcopi 
videntur insipienter excolere, nos eos non repre- 
hendamus" &c. This Quadragesima 8. Martini 
seems to have originated in Gaul, in the diocese 
of Tours, to which it was specially recommended 
by the devotion paid to its great saint ; an 
additional distinction was conferred upon his 
festival in that it marked the beginning of the 
solemn preparation for the Nativity. So far, we 
may accept Binterim's conclusion {Denkwiirdig- 
keiten der christ.-kathol. Kirchc, vol. v., pt. i., p. 
166): the rule — not, as he says, of Ad vent, but — of 
this Quadragesima is first met with in the diocese 
of Tours. If, indeed, the Tractatus de Sanctis 
tribus Quadragesimis, " unde eas observari ac- 



cepimus, quodque qui eas transgrediuntur legem 
violent " (ap. Cotelcr, Monum. Eccl. Gr. iii. 425), 
be, as Cave (^Hist. Lit.) represents, the work of 
that Anastasius Sina'ita who was patriarch of 
Autioch, 561, oh. 599 ; this Quadragesima, under 
another name (" Q. S. Philippi," or " Fast of the 
Nativity "), was already observed in the East. 
But the contents make it plain enough that its 
author was another and much later Anastasius 
Sinaita, who wrote after a.d. 787. The ob- 
servance of the "Quadragesima Apostolorum," 
and "Quadragesima S. Philippi" (the Feast of 
St. Philip in the Greek Calendar is November 
14) is enjoined upon monks by Nicejshorus, 
Patriarch of Constantinople, 806. This fast of 
40 days befoi-e Christmas seems to have been 
kept up chiefly by the monastic orders in Gaul, 
Spain, Italy, (Martene De Bit. Ant. Eccl., iii. 
p. 27); it was observed also in England in 
the time of Bede {Hist. iii. 27; iv. 30), and 
much later. It was not until the close of the 
6th century that the Church of Rome under 
St. Gregory received the season of preparation 
as an ecclesiastical rule, restricted, in its proper 
sense, to the four Sundays before the Nativity 
(Amalarius Do Eccl. Off. iii. 40, A.D. 812, and 
Abbot Berno, De quibusdam rebus ad Missam 
pertiiientibus, c. iv. 1014) ; and this became the 
general rule for the Western Church throughout 
the 8th century, and later. And, in fact, four is 
the number of Sundays in Advent in the Sacra- 
mentary of Gregory {Liber Sacrament, de circulo 
anni, ed. Pamelius ; and in the Lecfionarium Bo- 
manura, ed. Thomasius). But other and older 
copies of the Gregorian Sacramentary (ed. Menard, 
1642, reprinted with his notes in the Benedic- 
tine 0pp. S. Gregorii, t. iii.); the Comes, ascribed 
to St. Jerome ; the Sacramentary of Gelasius, ob. 
496 (a very ancient document, but largely in- 
terpolated with later additions); the Antiquum 
Kalend. Sacrae Romanae Eccl. ap. Martene. Thes. 
Anccdot. t. V. (in a portion added by a later hand) ; 
the Pontifical of Egbert, Archbishop of York, ob. 
767 ; a Lectionary written for Charlemagne by 
Paul the Deacon (ap. Mabillon) ; and other MSS. 
cited by Martene (m. s. iv. 80, ff.), all give five 
Sundays. Hence, some writers have been led to 
represent that the practice varied in different 
Churches, some reckoning four, others five Sundays 
in Advent — an erroneous inference, unless it could 
be shown that the first of the five Sundays was 
designated "Dominica Prima Adventus Domini." 
The seeming discrepancy is easily explained. 
The usual ancient names of the four Sundays, 
counted backwards from the Nativity, are : Do- 
minica i., ante Nat. Domini (our 4th Advent), 
Dom. ii.. Dom. iii., Dom. iv. ante Nat. Domini. 
To these the next preceding Sunday was prefixed 
under the style Dom. v. ante Nat. Dom., not as 
itself a Sunday in Advent, but as the preparation 
for Advent. So Amalarius and Berno, u. s., 
and Durandus : "In quinta igitur hebdomada 
ante Nat. D. i)ichoatur praeparatio adventus . . . 
nam ab ilia dominica sunt quinque officia domi- 
nicalia, quinque epistolae et quinque evangelia 
quae adventum Domini aperte praedicant." The 
intention is evident in the Epistle and Gospel 
for this Sunda}', which in the Sarum Missal is 
designated "dominica proxima ante Adventum," 
with the rule (retained by our own order from 
that of Sarum), that these shall always be used 
for the last Sunday before Advent begins. 


After the pattern of the Lenten fast. Advent 
was marked as a season of mourning in the pub- 
lic services of the Church. The custom of 
omitting the Gloria in Excelsis (replaced by the 
Benedicamus Domino}, and also the Te Deum and 
Ite missa est, and of laying aside the dalmatic i 
and subdeacon's vestment (which in the 11th I 
and 12th century appears to have been the j 
established rule, Micrologus De Eccl. Obs. c. 46 ; 
Rupert Abbas Tuit. de Div. Off. iii. c. 2), was 
coming into use during the eighth century. In 
the Mozarabic Missal, a rubric, dating probably 
from the end of the 6th century {i.e. from the i 
refashionment of this ritual by Leander or Isidore j 
of Seville), appoints : " In Adventu non dicitur j 
Gloria in Excelsis dominicis diebus et feriis, sed i 
tantum diebus festis." And Amalarius, o6. 812 ! 
{De Offic. Sacr. iii. c. 40), testifies to this custom 
for times within our period: " Vidi tempore 
prisco Gloria in Excelsis praetermitti in diebus '. 
adventus Domini, et in aliquibus locis dalmaticas " : . 
and iv. c. 30 : " Aliqua de nostro officio reser- ; 
vamus usque ad praesentiam nativitatis Domini, ( 
h. e. Gloria in Excelsis Deo, et clarum vesti- ' 
mentum dalmaticam ; si forte nunc ita agitur \ 
ut vidi actitari in aliquibus locis." The Bene- ! 
dictine monks retained the Te Deiimin Advent as ' 
in Lent, alleging the rule of their founder. The I 
Alleluia also, and the Sequences, as also the j 
hymns, were omitted, but not in all Churches. [ 
In the Gregorian Antiphonary, the Alleluia is 
marked for 1 and 3 Advent and elsewhere. In 
some Churches, the Miserere (Ps. li.) and other ; 

j mournful Psalms were added to or substituted ^ 
for the ordinary Psalms. For lessons, Isaiah ] 
was read all through, beginning on Advent ' 

. Sunday ; when that was finished, the Twelve ' 
Minor Prophets, or readings from the Fathers, | 
especially the Epistles of Pope Leo on the Incar- 1 
nation, and Sermons of St. Augustine, succeeded. j 
The lesson from " the Prophet " ended with the 
form, " Haec dicit Dominus Deus, Convertimini ad ] 

j me, et salvi eritis." ' 

In the Greek Church, the observance of a season . 

I of preparation for the Nativity is of late intro- ; 
duction. No notice of it occurs in the liturgical 
works of Theodorus Studites, ob. 826, though, j 
as was mentioned above, the 40-days' fost of St. 
Philip was enjoined (to monks) by Nicephorus, 
A.D. 806. This TiaaapoLKovraiifj.fpov, beginning 
November 14, is now the rule of the Greek 
Church (Leo Allat. de Consensu iii. 9, 3). Codinus 
{De Off. Eccl. et Curiae Constantinop. c. 7, n. 20) 
speaks of it as a rule which in his time (cir. 
1350) had been long in use. The piece De Tribus 
Quadragesimis above noticed, ascribed to Ana- j 
stasius Sinaita, Patriarch of Antioch, shows that, | 
except in monasteries, the rule of a 40-days' fost j 
before the Nativity was contested in his time j 
(A.D. 1100 at earliest). And Theodore Balsamon, 
A.D. 1200, lays down the rule thus:— "We ac- j 
knowledge but one quadragesima, that before j 
Pascha ; the others (named), as this Fast of the : 
Nativity, are each of seven days only. Those ' 
monks who fast 40 days, viz. from St. Philip ' 
(14 Sept.), are bound to this by their rule. Such 
laics as voluntarily do the like are to be praised 
therefor." Bespons. ad qri. 53 Marci Patriarch. ! 
Alex., and ad interrog. monachorum, app. to • 
Photii Nomocanon. In the calendar formed ! 
from Evangelia Eclogadia of 9th century our 4 
I Advent is marked " Sunday before the Nativity,' 


while the preceding Sundcays are numbered from 
All Saints = our Trinity Sunday. (Asseraanni 
Kalend. Eccl. Univ., t. vi. p. 575.) The term 
"Advent" is not applied to this season: the 
KvptaKT) Tris SeuTf'pas TlapovcTias is our Sexa- 

In the separated Churches of the East, no 
trace appears, within our period, of an Advent 
season ; unless we except the existing Nestorian 
or Chaldean rule, in which the liturgical year 
begins with four Sundays of Annunciation {evay- 
yeKicr/xov), before the Nativity (Assemanui Bi- 
hliotheca Orient, t. iii. pt. 2, p. 380 sqq.). This 
beginning of the Church year is distinguished as 
Risk phenkito, i.e. initium codicis, from the Rish 
.viarmoto, i.e. new-year's day in October. The 
Armenian Church, refusing to accept 25th De- 
cember as the Feast of Nativity, and adhering to 
the more ancient sense of the Feast of Epiphany 
as including the Birth of Christ, prepares for 
this high festival (6th January) by a fast of 50 
days, beginning 17th November. 

The first Sunday in Advent was not always 
the beginning of the liturgical year, or circulus 
totius anni. The Comes and the Sacramentary 
of St. Gregory begin with IX. Kal. Jan., the 
Vigil of the Nativity. So does the most ancient 
Lectionarium Gallicanum ; but the beginning of 
this is lost, and the Vigil is numbered VII., the 
Nativity VIII. Hence Mabillon {Liturg. Gallic. 
p. 98, 101) infers that it began with the fast of 
St. Martin (or with the Sunday after it, Dom. 
VI. ante Nat. Dom.). One text of the Missale 
Amhrosianum begins with the Vigil of St. 
Martin (ed. 1560). The Antiphonarius of St. 
Gregory begins 1 Advent, and the Liber Re- 
sponsalis with its Vigil. But the earlier practice 
was to begin the ecclesiastical year with the 
month of March, as being that in which our 
Lord was crucified (March 25); a trace of this 
remains in the notation of the Quatuor Tem- 
pora as Jejunium primi, quarti, septimi, decimi 
mensis, the last of which is the Advent Ember 

Literature. — De Catholicae Ecclesiae divinis offic. 
ac tninisteriis, Rome, 1590 (a collection of the 
ancient liturgical treatises of St. Isidore, Alcuin, 
Amalai-ius, Micrologus, Petr. Damianus, &c.); 
Martene, De Ritihus Ant. Ecclesiae et Mona- 
chorum, 1699 ; Binterim, Die vorziiglichsten 
Denkwiirdlgkeiten der christ.-katholischen Kirche, 
Mainz, 1829 (founded on the work of Pel- 
licia, De Christ. Eccles. Primae Mediae et No- 
vissirnae Aetatis Politia, Neap. 1777); Augusti, 
DenkwUrdigkeiten aus der christlichen Archdo- 
logie, Leipzig, 1818; Herzog, Real-Encyclopadie 
fiir protestantische Theologie u. Kirche, s. a. Ad- 
ventszeit, 185.'t ; Rheinwald, Kirchliche Archd- 
ologie, 18:i0 ; Alt, Der ChristUche Cultus, Abth. 
ii. Das Kirchenjahr, 1860. [H. B.] 

vocatus, or Defensor, Ecclesiae or Monasterii ; 
l,vvStKos,''EKSiKos : and Advocatio = th(i office, and 
sometimes the fee for discharging it): — an eccle- 
siastical officer, appointed subsequently to the 
recognition of the Church by the State, and in 
consequence (1) of the Church's need of pro- 
tection, (2) of the disability, both legal and re- 
ligious, of clergy or monks (Can. Afost. xx., 
Ixxxi. ; Const it. Apostol. ii. 6 ; Justinian, Novell. 
cxxiii. 6 ; and see Bingham, vi. 4) either to plead 



in a civil court or to intermeddle with worldly 
business. In its original form it was limited to 
the duties thus intimated, and took its origin as a 
distinct and a lay office in Africa {Cod. Can. Eccl. 
Afric. c. 97, A.D. 407, " Defensores," to be taken 
from the ^^ Scholastici ; " Cone. Milevit. ii. c. 16, 
A.D. 416 ; Can. Afric. c. 64, c. A.D. 424) ; but re- 
ceived very soon certain privileges of ready and 
speedy access to the courts from the emperors 
(Cod. Thcod. 2. tit. 4. § 7 ; 16. tit. 2. § 38). 
It became then a lay office (defensores, distin- 
guished in the code from ^^coronati" or tonsured 
persons), but had been previously, it would seem, 
discharged by the oeconomi (Du Cange). And, as 
it naturally came to be reckoned almost a minor 
order, so it was occasionally, it would seem, still 
held by clerics (Morinus, De Ordin. ; Bingham). 
The advocatus was to be sometimes asked from 
the emperors (authorities as above), — as judices 
were given by the Praetors ;— but sometimes was 
elected by the bishop and clergy for themselves 
(Cod. lib. i. tit. iv. constit. 19). The office is 
mentioned by the Council of Chalcedon, cc. 2, 
25, 26, A.D. 451, and is there distinguished both 
from the clergy and from the oeconomus ; by Pope 
Gelasius, Epist. ix. c. 2, A.D. 492-496 ; and by 
Maxentius (Resp. ad Hormisd.) some S'.'ore of 
years later. But it had assumed a much more 
formal shape during this period, both at Con- 
stantinople and at Rome. In the former place, 
as protectors of the Church, under the title of 
'EKK\r]<n4K5iK0i, there were four officers of the 
kind : i. the irpooTiK^iKos, who defended the 
clergy in criminal cases ; ii. one who defended 
them in civil ones; iii. 6 rov B^/iaroy, also called 
the ir^oiTJiroTras ; iv. 6 ttjs 'E/c/cArjo-ias ; increased 
by the time of Heraclius to ten, and designed in 
general for the defence of the Church against 
the rich and powerful (Justinian, Edict, xiii., and 
Novell. Ivi. and lix. c. 1 ; and see the passages 
from Codrinus, Zonaras, Balsamon, &c., in Meur- 
sius, Gloss. Gr'aecobarbarum, voc. "EkSikos, and in 
Suicer), They appear also to have acted as 
judges over ecclesiastical persons in trifling cases 
(Morinus). They were commonly laymen (su 
Cod. Thcod. as above) ; but in one case certainly 
(Cone. Constantin., A.D. 536, act. ii.) an skkXtj- 
(TifKSiKos is mentioned, who was also a pres- 
byter; and presbyters are said to have com- 
monly held the office, while later still it was held 
by deacons (Morinus). In Rome, beginning with 
Innocent I. (a.D. 402-417, Epist. xii. ed. Con- 
stant) and his successor Zosimus (Epist. i. c. 3), 
the Defensores became by the time of Gregory 
the Great a regular order of officers (Defensores 
Romanae Ecclesiae^, whose duties were — i. to de- 
fend Church interests generally ; ii. to take care 
of alms left for the poor ; iii. to be sent to held 
applicants from a distance for Papal protection ; 
iv. to look after outlying estates belonging to 
St. Peter's patrimony (S. Greg. M., Epistt. pas- 
sim). There were also in Rome itself at that 
time seven officers of the kind, called Defensores 
Regionarii (Ordo Roman.), each with his proper 
region, and the first of the seven known as tin? 
Primicerius Defensorum or Primus Defensor (St. 
Greg. Epistt., passim). St. Gregory certainly 
marks them out as usually laymen, yet in some 
cases clerics, and generally as holding a sort of 
ecclesiastical position. And the other Popes who 
allude to them (as quoted above), are led to do 
so while treating the question of the steps and 


delays to be made m admitting laymen to holy 
orders, and feel it necessary to say that such re- 
strictions apply " even " to Defensores. See also 
St. Gregory of Tours, De Vitis Patrum, c. 6. 

The great development of the office, however, 
took place under Charlemagne ; who indeed, and 
Pipiu, were themselves, KaT i^ox^v, '■'■Defensores 
Ecclesiae Romanae." And the German emperors 
became, technically and by title, Advocati et 
Defensores Ecclesiarmn (Charles V. and Henry 
VIII. being coupled together long afterwards as 
respectively eccfesi'ae, and/c?e«, defensores). It was 
then established as a regular office for each church 
or abbey, under the appellations also occasionally 
of Mundiburdi (or -hiirgi), Pastores Laid, and 
sometimes simply causidici or tulores ; to be nomi- 
nated by the emperor [Leo IX., however, as Pope 
appointed (Du Cange)], but then probably for a 
particular emergency only (Car. M. Gapit. v. 31, 
vii. 308); and usually as an office for life, to 
which the bishops and abbats were themselves 
to elect {Cone. Mogunt. c. 50, A.D. 813, — all 
bishops, abbats, and clergy, to choose "vicedo- 
minos, praepositos, advocatos, sive defensores;" 
Cone. Hern. ii. c. 24, A.D. 813, — " Ut praepositi et 
vicedomini secundum regulas vel canones con- 
stituantur;" and see also Cone. Roman, cc. 19, 
20, A.D. 826, and Cone. Duziac. ii. P. iii. c. 5. 
A.D. 871), but "in praesentia comitum " (Legg. 
Longohard. lib. ii. tit. xlvii. § 1, 2, 4, 7), and from 
the landowners in their own neighbourhood (cap. 
xiv. ex Lege Salica, Romana, et Gumbata, — " Et 
ipsi [advocati] habeant in illo comitatu propriam 
haereditatem ; " and in a capitular of A.D. 742, 
we find mention of a " Graphio," i. e. count, " qui 
est defensor," Morinus, De Ordin., P. III. p. 307) ; 
and this, not only to plead in court or take oath 
there (sometimes two advocati, one to plead, the 
other to swear, Legg. Longohard. ii. xlvii. § 8), 
but in course of time to hold courts (placita or 
media) as judges in their own district (Du Cange, 
but A.D. 1020 is the earliest date among his 
authorities), and generally to protect the secular 
interests of their own church or abbey. The 
Advocatus was at this time distinguished from 
the Vicedomnus, sometimes called Major Domus, 
who ruled the lay dependents of the Church ; 
from the Praepositus, who ruled its clerical de- 
pendents ; and from the Oeconomus, who (being 
also commonly a cleric) managed the interior 
economy of its secular affairs ; although all these 
titles are occasionally used interchangeably. He 
was also distinct from the Cancellarius, whether 
in the older sense of that term when it meant 
an inferior officer of the court, or in the later 
when it meant a judge (Bingh. III. xi. 6, 7). 
Two circumstances however gradually changed 
both the relative position of the Advocatus to 
his ecclesiastical clients, and the nature of his 
functions ; the one arising from the mode in 
which he was remunerated, the other from the 
mode of his nomination. 1. He was paid in 
the first instance at this period by sometimes an 
annual salary, with certain small privileges of 
entertainment and the like ; also, by the third 
part of the profits of his judicial office (Tertia 
pars bannorum, emendarum, legum, compositionum, 
sn. " placitorum ad quae ab abbate vocatus fue- 
rit," Chron. Sen. lib. ii. c. 5, in D'Ach. Bpicil. ii. 
C13, ed. 1723 ; tertius denarius) ; but commonly 
and finally by lands held from the church or 
abbey, a third of their value belonging to himself 


as his portion. And the growth of the feudal 
tenure, in addition to other obvious influences, 
gradually converted him through this last cir- 
cumstance from a dependent into a superior, 
from a law officer into a military one, and from 
a beneficiary into an owner, and sometimes into 
an usurper outright. In the Ordo Romanus, is 
an Ordo ad armandum Ecclesiae Defensorem vel 
alium Militem, beginning with a benedictio vexilli, 
lanceae, ensis (p. 178 Hittorp., about the time of 
Charlemagne). His suhadvocatus, let us add (the 
number of whom was limited by various enact- 
ments), was to be paid in one instance by the 
receipt, from each vill of the ecclesiastical pro- 
perty, of one penny, one cock, and one sextarius 
of oats. 2. The nomination to the office, resting 
originally Avith the Church itself or with the em- 
peror, was usurped gradually by the founder, 
and as an hereditary ajipanage of his own estate ; 
whence followed first an usurpation of the Church 
property by the lay ^dlfOca^MS, and next an usurpa- 
tion by the same officer of the right of nomi- 
nating to the church or abbey. And fi-om the 
latter of these has arisen the modern use of the 
word advoti-son, which now means exclusively 
and precisely that right which the original advo- 
catus did not possess ; the jics patronatus no 
doubt being attached to the founder of a church 
from the time of the Council of Orange (c. 10) 
A.D. 441, and of Justinian (Novell. Ivii. c. 2, cxxiii. 
c. 18), A.D. 541, 555 ; but the combination of 
foundership with the office of advocatus being an 
accidental although natural combination, belong- 
ing to the ninth and following centuries. The 
earliest charter quoted by Du Cange, in which 
mention is made of an election (in this case of an 
abbat) " asseusu et consilio advocati," is a " pri- 
vilegium Rudolphi Episc. Halberstad.," A.D. 1147. 
But in Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, the officer 
analogous to the lay advocatus had usurped the 
position and the very name of abbat long pre- 
vious to the 12th century [see Abbat]. And 
instances of similar usurpation abroad may no 
doubt be found of a like earlier date (see Robert- 
son's Early Scotland). The advocatio of a bishopric 
seems to have included, at least in England, the 
custodia (i. e. the profits) of the property of the 
see, sede vacante ; but wss a distinct right from 
that of nomination to the office, the '■' dignitas 
crociae" (as e.g. in the case between the Welsh 
Lords Marchers and the English Crown, the former 
claiming the custodia but not the nomination) : 
although the two became in England combined 
in the Crown. There does not, however, appear 
to be evidence, that this particular usurpation 
was laid to the charge of advocati abroad during 
the Carlovingian period ; although the system of 
lay abbats, commendataries, &c., and the usurpa- 
tion of such offices by kings and nobles, led to 
the same general result of usurpation, there 
also, by the lay, over the ecclesiastical, func- 
tionary. Councils in England put restrictions on 
these usurpations of lay domini, advocati, &c., as 
early as the Council of Beccanceld, A.D. 696 X 716 
and of Clovesho, A.D. 803 (Councils III. 338, 
Haddan and Stubbs ; Wilk. i. 56, 167). Abroad, 
the first canon on the subject is that of Rheims 
(c. 6), A.D. 1148, followed among others by 
the Councils of Salzburg (c. 24), A.D. 1274 and 
(c. 12), A.D. 1281. But a check upon them 
was attempted as early as the 10th century by 
the Capetian dynasty in France. 


The title of Fidei Defensor, attached to the 
Crown of England, and so strangely inverted from 
the special intent of its original Papal donor, may 
be taken as the last existing trace of the ancient 
Advocatus or Defensor Ecclcsiae. Unless (with 
Spelman) we are to give an ancient pedigree to 
churchwardens, and find the old office still in 
them. (Bingham ; Du Cange ; Meursius, Gloss. 
Graecobarbar. ; Morinus, De Ordinat.; Tho- 
massin.) . [A. W. H.] 


— Amongst the laws which imposed restraints 
upon the clei-gy was one which forbad them, 
except in certain specified cases, to act as advo- 
cates before civil tribunals ; since it was con- 
sidered that any such interference with worldly 
matters would be inconsistent with the words 
of St. Paul (2 Tim., ii. 4 " No man that war- 
reth \inilitans Deo"] entangleth himself with the 
affairs of this life : " see St. Ambrose, De Off. 
Minist. 1, 36 ; and Gelasii Papae Epp. 17, sec. 
15). For this reason the 3rd Council of Car- 
thage (a.d. 397) in its 15th canon prohibits all 
clerks from becoming agents or procurators. 
The prohibition is repeated in the 3rd canon of 
the Oecumenical Council of Chalcedon (a.d. 451), 
but with the proviso that secular business may 
be undertaken by the clergy when the bishop 
directs it for the protection of Church property, 
or of orphans and wndows who are without any 
one to defend them. This exception was in Liter 
times extended to the poor and all others who 
came under the designation of " miserabiles 
personae." So likewise were monks forbidden by 
the 11th canon of the Council of Tarragona 
(a.d. 516) to undertake any legal business ex- 
cept for the benefit of the monastery and at the 
command of the abbot. 

In France the above-cited provisions of the 
Council of Chalcedon were repeated by the 16th 
canon of the Council of Verneuil (a.d. 755) and the 
14th canon of the Council of Mayence (a.d. 813). 

There are many other canons which prohibit the 
clergy from mixing themselves up with worldly 
matters, and which therefore forbid, though 
not in express terms, their acting as advocates. 

There are also several imperial constitutions 
to the same effect, as, for instance, one of Theodo- 
sius II. (a.d. 416) which he afterwards repeated 
in the Codex Theodosianus, a.d. 438 (16. tit. 2. 
42), and which was also inserted in the 1st book 
(tit. 3. s. 17) of the Codex Rcpetitae Fraelectionis 
of Justinian (a.d. 534). 

_ Similar provisions are to be found in the 34th 
title of the Liber novellarum of Valentian III. 
(a.d. 452), and in the 6th chapter of the 123rd 
novell. of Justinian (a.d. 541). 

(Thomassinus, ^'etus et nova Ecelesiae Disci- 
plina, De Beneficiis, Pars III. Lib. 3, cap. 17-19 ; 
Bouix, Tractatus de Judiciis Ecclesiastic-is, Pars 
I-, 3, 4-5). [I. B.] 

AEDITUI. [Doorkeeper.] 

AEGATES, Saint, commemorated Oct. 24 
(Mart. Bedae). 

AEITHALAS. (1) Deacon and martyr, com- 
memorated Nov. 3 {Cal. Byzant.). 

(2) Martyr, commemorated Sept. 1 {lb.). [C] 

AEMILIANUS. (1) Saint in Armenia, com- 
memorated Feb. 8 (Martyrol. Bom. Vet., Hieron.). 
(2) Confessor in Africa, Dec. 6 {Mart. R. V.). \ 



(3) Confessor, Jan. 8 {Cal. Byzant.). 

(4) Bishop of Cyzicum, Confessor, Aug. 8 
(^6.). [C.] 

AEMILIUS. (1) Martyr in Africa, comme- 
morated May 22 {Marti/rol. Mom. Vet.). 

(2) Of Sardinia, May 28 (/6.). 

(3) Commemorated June 18 {Mart. Hieron.). 


AER. [Veil.] 

AEEA. [Chronology.] 

AFRA, martyr in Rhaetia, commemorated 
Aug. 5 {Martyrol. Bom. Vet.); Aug. 6 {M. 
Hieron.). ["c.] 

AFFIDATIO {affiance, Spenser; Fr. fiun- 
^ailles), betrothal. It appears doubtful whether 
this term came into use within the first nine cen- 
turies of the Christian era. It seems rather to 
belong to the period of fully developed feudalism. 
The earliest example quoted by Du Cange, from 
the synodal statutes of the Church of Liege in 
ilartene's Thesaurus Kovus Anecdotorum, is in- 
deed of the year 1287. The forms given in 
Martene's work, De Antiquis ecelesiae Bitibus 
(see vol. ii. pp. 136, 137), in which the word 
occurs, from the rituals of Limoges and ot 
Rheims, are palpably more modern yet, to judge 
from the passages in French which are inter- 
mixed in them. [J. M. L.] 

AFFINITY {adfinitas), a relationship by 
marriage. The husband and wife being legally 
considered as one person, those who are related 
to the one by blood are related to the other in 
the same degree by affinity. This relationship 
being the result of a lawful marriage, the per- 
sons between whom it exists are said to be related 
in law ; the father or brother of a man's wife 
being_ called his father-in-law or brother-in-laic. 
The distinction between affinity and consanguinity 
is derived from the Roman law. The kinsfolk 
{cognati) of the husband and wife become re- 
spectively the adfines of the wife and husband. 
We have borrowed the words afiiinity and con- 
sanguinity from the Roman law, but we have no 
term corresponding to adfines. The Romans did 
not reckon degrees of adfinitas as they did of 
consanguinity {cognatio) ; but they had terms to 
express the various kinds of adfinitas, as soccr, 
father-in-law ; socrus, mother-in-law. 

It has resulted from the Christian doctrine of 
marriage that persons related by affinity have 
been always forbidden by the Church to marry 
within the same degrees as those who are related 
by blood. The Council of Agde (506) particu- 
larises the forbidden degrees as follows (Can. 61) : 
— "A man may not marry his brother's widow, 
his own sister, his step-mother or father's wife, 
his cousin-german, any one nearly allied to him 
by consanguinity, or one whom his near kinsman 
had married before, the relict or daughter of his 
uncle by the mother's side, or the daughter of 
his uncle by the father's side, or his daughter- 
in-law, i.e. his wife's daughter by a former 

This canon is repeated almost verbatim in the 
Council of Epone, and again in the second Council 
of Tours (566). The same prohibitions are also 
specified in the Council of Auxerre (578). 

Certain spiritual relations have been also in- 
cluded within the prohibited degrees. This re- 
striction, however, was first mtroduced by 
D 2 



Justinian, who made a law (Cod. Just. lib. 5, 
tit. 4, de Xnptiis, leg. 26) forbidding any min 
to marry a woman for whom he had been god- 
father in baptism, on the ground that nothing 
induces a more paternal affection, and, therefore, 
a juster prohibition of mai-riage, than this tie, 
by which their souls are in a divine manner 
united together. 

The Council of Trullo (Can. 53) extends the 
prohibition to the mother of the godchild : and, 
by the Canon law afterwards, those spiritual 
relations were canned still further, so as to 
exclude from marrying together even the bap- 
tiser and the bajrtised, the catechist and cate- 
chumen, <ind various other degrees of supposed 
.spiritual affinity. Such restrictions, however, of 
course, could not be maintained in practice, and 
the dispensing power of the Pope was accordingly 
extended to meet the necessity. (Bingham ; Gib- 
son's Codex ; Thorndike ; Wheatly, On Common 
Frai/er.) [D. B.] 

AFFUSION. [Baptism.] 

AFRICAN CODE. [African Councils.] 

AFRICAN COUNCILS. Under this head 
we must include whatever Councils were held in 
Africa — no matter at what places, only distinct 
from Egypt — for this simple reason : that so many 
of their canons were so soon thrown together in- 
discriminately and made one code, which, as 
such, afterwards formed part of the code received 
in the East and West. On this African code a 
good deal has been written by Justellus {Cod. Eccl. 
Afric, Paris, 16 14-, 8vo.), who was the first to pub- 
lish it separately, Bishop Beveridge (Synod, vol. 
ii. p. 202, et seq.), De Marca (Diss, de Vet. Coll. 
Can. c. iv.-xi.), and the Ballerini in their learned 
Appendix to the works of St. Leo (torn. iii. De 
Antlq. Col. Diss., pars I. c. 3, 21-9), but a good 
deal also remains unsolved, and perhaps insoluble. 
Several of the canons contained in it have been 
assigned to more Councils than one, and several 
of the Councils differently dated or numbered by 
<iiff"erent editors or collectors. Perhaps the best 
edition of it is that published in Greek and Latin 
by Mansi (tom. iii. pp. 699-843). Not that it 
was originally promulgated in both languages, 
though, as Beveridge suggests, the probability is 
that it had been translated into Greek before the 
Trullan Council of A.D. 683, by the second canon 
of which it became part of the code of the Eastern 
Church. As it stands in Mansi, then, it compre- 
hends, first, the deliberations of the Council of 
('arthage, A.D. 419 ; then the canons of the same 
Synod to the number of 33 ; then " canones di- 
versorura conciliorum ecclesiae Africanae " — in 
the words of their heading, the first of which is 
numbered 34, in continuous series with the pre- 
ceding, and the last 138. However, in reality, 
the canons proper ought to be said to end with 
the one numbered 133, at which point Aurelius, 
Bishop of Carthage, who presided, calls upon the 
Council to subscribe to all that had gone before, 
which is accordingly done ; he signing first, the 
primate of Numidia second, the legate from 
Kome, Faustinus, Bishop of Potenza, third, St. 
Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, fourth; and the other 
bishops — 217 or 229, according to the reading 
selected — in order ; and after them all the two 
presbyter-legates from Rome, who sign last. 

This done, the day following, a letter in the 
name of the whole Synod was addressed to Boni- 


face, bishop of Rome, to be despatched by the three 
legates. This is given at length, and numbered 
134. It acquaints him with their objections to 
the " commonitorium " or instructions received 
by the legates from the late Pope Zosimus, par- 
ticularly to that part of it bearing upon appeals 
to Rome in conformity with some supposed canons 
of Nicaea, which they had not been able to find in 
any Greek or Latin copy of the «cts of that 
Council in their possession, and therefore beg him 
to send for authentic copies of them at once from 
the Churches of Antioch, Alexandria, and Con- 
stantinople. This course they had already taken 
themselves, while recommending it to him ; and 
what follows as canon 135 proves to be a letter 
from St. Cyril of Alexandria to the same bishops, 
telling them that in conformity with their re- 
quest he has sent them, by his presbyter Inno^ 
cent, faithful copies of the authentic Synod of 
Nicaea, which they would also find, if they looked 
for them, in the ecclesiastical history : he does 
not say by whom. 

In the same way canon 136 is a letter from 
Atticus, patriarch of Constantinople, telling them 
that he too sends them the canons as defined by 
Nicene Fathers pure and entire, by their mes- 
senger Marcellus the sub-deacon, as they had re- 
quested. We can hardly suppose the Synod to 
have been sitting all the time that it must have 
taken these messengers to go and return. Next 
a copy of the Nicene Creed follows, and is num- 
bered 137. It had been already recited and ac- 
cepted, together with the Nicene canons, in the. 
previous deliberations of the Council, before the 
resolution to send for authentic copies of both 
had been carried out. Caecilian, who was Bishop 
of Carthage at the time of the Council of Nicaea, 
and had attended it, had brought back with him 
copies of its creed and canons in Latin, which had 
been preserved with great care by his Church 
ever since. What follows in the last place, and 
is numbered 138, cannot have been written 
earlier than A.D. 422, it being a letter addressed 
to Celestine, the successor of Boniface, who died in 
that year, " our beloved lord (Sea-rrSTrt) and most 
honoured brother," as he is styled, in the name 
of Aurelius and others wliose names are given 
(St. Augustine's is not one) and the rest of those 
present in the universal Council of Africa, in 
which they tell him that the canons of which his 
predecessor had spoken were nowhere to be found 
in the authentic copies of the Nicene decrees just 
received from the East ; and, further, that in no 
Council of the Fathers could they find it defined 
that " any should be despatched as it were from 
the side of his Holiness," as had been attempted in 
this instance. If the last, or 20th Council, as it is 
called, under Aurelius, therefore, has been rightly 
assigned to A.D. 421, — and Aurelius opens its pro- 
ceedings by saying that, for reasons well known 
to his audience, it had been suspended for the 
space of two years, thus connecting it with the 
Council of A.D. 419, — either it must have sat the 
year following as well, or there must have been 
a 21st Council under Aurelius the year following 
to indite this episTie, which, as has been observed, 
could not have been done till the accession of 
Celestine had become known in Africa, that is, 
till towards the end of A.D. 422. And with it this 
collection of the canons of the African Church is 
brought to a close. Dionysius Exiguus, in his 
edition, heads them appropriately " the Synod of 


the Africans at Carthage that enacted 138 
canons," meaning of course the Synods of A.D. 
419-22 considered as one, where they were 
passed or confirmed (Migne's Patrol., torn. 67, 
p. 161 ct seq.). Not but there are other collec- 
tions extant containing fewer or more canons 
than are included in this. For instance, the 
Spanish and Isidorian Collections begin with the 
Synod of Carthage under Gratus, A.D. 348, and 
end with the Synod of Milevis, A.D. 402, making 
eight Synods in all, one of Milevis and seven of 
Carthage (Migne's Patrol., torn. 84, pp. 179-236). 
In Beveridge (Synodic, i. p. 365-72) the synodi- 
cal letter of a Council of Carthage as far back as 
A.D. 258 (or 256 according to others) under St. 
Cyprian, is printed in the form of a canon, and 
placed, together with the speeches made there by 
him and others, immediately before the Ancyran 
canons, as though it had been one of the provin- 
cial Councils whose canons had been accepted by 
the whole Church, which it was not. Earlier far 
than either of them is the compendium of eccle- 
siastical canons, African mainly, 232 in all, by 
Fulgentius Ferrandus, deacon of the Church of 
Carthage, seemingly drawn from independent 
sources (Migne's Patrol., tom. 67, p. 949-62). 
Then earlier still than his were the two books 
produced by Boniface, Bishop of Carthage, at the 
Synod held there by him A.D. 525, as having 
been discovered in the archives of that church, 
one volume containing the Nicene canons in part, 
and those which had been passed in Africa 
before the time of Aurelius ; the other volume 
called " the book of the canons of the time of 
Aurelius," in which, according to the Ballerini, 
nine of the Synods of Carthage under Aurelius, 
and some others of Milevis and Hippo, were con- 
tained (Mansi, viii. p. 635-56). Finally, there 
is a " Breviarium canonum Hipponensium " 
printed in Mansi, with the comments of the 
Ballerini upon them, supposed to have been 
passed in the Synod held there A.D. 393, at 
which St. Augustine was present, but as a 
priest ; and afterwards inserted in the Council of 
Carthage, held four years afterwards under 
Aurelian, amongst its own, and evidently con- 
firmed by the 34th canon of the Synod of A.D. 
419, as proposed by one of the bishops named 

The argument drawn by the Ballerini, after 
elaborately comparing these collections, is unfa- 
vourable to the title given by Justellus to the 
.138 canons above mentioned of the African code : 
.still as designating those canons alone which 
have been received generally by the East and 
West, it cannot be called meaningless ; and this 
fact having been made patent by his publication 
of them, it remains as a matter of antiquarian 
interest solely to determine what canons belong 
to what councils. The general account seems to 
be that there are sixteen Councils of Carthage, 
one of Milevis, and one of Hippo, whose canons 
were received and confirmed by the Council of 
A.D. 419 besides its own (.Johnson's Vade Mecnm, 
ii. 171); but it is beset with difficulties. The 
two canons interdictiag appeals beyond the sea — 
28 and 125 according to the Latin numbering, 
and doubtless 23 and 39 were passed with the 
same object — have been attributed to a Synod of 
Hippo by some ; but the 22nd canon of the 
second Synod of Milevis, A.D. 416, to which both 
Aurelius and St. Augustine subscribed, reads 



identical with one of them, and the 34th canon 
of a Council of Carthage two years later with the 
other. It is of more practical importance to 
ascertain whether they steer clear of the Sardican 
canons, as some maintain ; or were framed in 
antagonism to them, as others. The Sardican 
canons, it has been said, allowed bishops to appeal 
to Rome ; the African canons forbade priests and 
all below priests to appeal to Rome. The African 
fathers carefully abstained from laying the same 
embargo upon bishops : nay, they undertook to 
obsei've the canons cited by Zosimus as Nicene, 
till authentic copies of the Nicene canons had 
been obtained from the East. There can be no 
doubt whatever that all this is delusive. In the 
discussion that took place on the canons cited in 
the " Commonitorium," some were for observing 
them, pending the inquiry; St. Augustine among 
the number. But when Aurelius called upon the 
Council to say definitively what it would do, the 
collective reply was: "All things that were en- 
acted in the Nicene Council are acceptable to us 
all." And to no more could they be induced to 
pledge themselves. Then as to the canons, which 
if they did not frame, they confirmed subse- 
quently ; the 28th, according to the Latin num- 
bering, is: "It was likewise agreed that presby- 
ters, deacons, or any of the inferior clergy with 
causes to try, should they have reason to com- 
plain of the judgment of their bishops, might be 
heard by the neighbouring bishops with consent 
of their own ; and such bishops might decide 
between them ; but should they think they ought 
to appeal from them likewise, let them not ap- 
peal to transmarine tribunals, but to the primates 
of their provinces, as has also been frequently en- 
acted in regard of bishops. But in case any should 
think he ought to appeal to places beyond the 
sea, let him be received to communion by nobody 
within Africa." The words "sicut et de episcopis 
saepe constitutum est," are found in all manu- 
scripts of this canon, as it stands here. They are 
wanting in the 125th. And the meaning is 
clearly, that there had been earlier canons in 
abundance passed for regulating episcopal ap- 
peals ; for instance, the 6th canon of the Council 
of Constantinople, where it is said that bishops 
should be brought before the greater Synod of 
the diocese, in case the provincial Synod should 
be unable to decide their case. And nothing had 
occurred to induce them to legislate further for 
bishojvs. The present controversy had originated 
with a simple priest, Apiarius. Accordingly their 
canons were directed to prevent priests and all 
below priests in future from doing as he had 
done. In short, they told Celestine that " the 
canons of the Nicene Council left all, whether 
inferior clergy or bishops themselves, to their 
own metropolitan ; it having been wisely and 
justly considered there that, whatever questions 
might arise, they ought to be terminated in their 
own localities." Which was in effect as much as 
telling him that the genuine Nicene canons were 
in flat contradiction, upon each point to those so 
designated by his predecessor. Canon 125 is 
identical with the preceding, except that it omits 
the clause " sicut et de episcopis," &;c., rtnd men- 
tions the African Councils as another legitimate 
tribunal of appeal besides the primates. Canon 
23, that " bishops should not go beyond the sea 
without leave from their primate," reads verv 
like another outpouring of their sentiments on 



the same subject ; and canon 39, that " no pri- 
mate should be called a prince of priests, or pon- 
tiff," seems almost borrowed from the well- 
known invective of St. Cyprian against Stephen. 
Such, then, is the language of some of the canons 
of the African code, fairly construed, to which 
the assent of Eome as well as Constantinople has 
been pledged. And " it was of very great autho- 
rity," says Mr. Johnson {Vade Mecum, ii. p. 171) 
m the old English Churches; for many of the 
" excerptions " of Egbert were transci'ibed from 

It only remains to set down the different 
African Councils in the order in which they are 
generally supposed to have occurred, with a run- 
ning summary of what was transacted in each ; 
referring generally for all further information to 
Mansi, Cave, Beveridge, Johnson, De Marca, the 
Art de verifier les dates, and the Ballerini. Num- 
bering them would only serve to mislead, at least 
if attempted in any consecutive series. Cave, for 
instance, reckons 9 African between A.D. 401 and 
603, and as many as 35 Carthaginian between 
A.D. 215 and 533 ; but among the latter are in- 
cluded 6 (between A.D. 401 and 410), which he 
had already reckoned among the 9 African. 

Carthage, a.d. 200,217 — Supposed to be one 
and the same, under Agrippinus, in favour 
of rebaptizing heretics. 

A.D. 251 — Under St. Cyprian ; decreed 

that the lapsed should be received to com- 
munion, but not till they had performed 
their full penance. 

A.D. 252 — Against Novatian, who denied 

that the lapsed were ever to be received to 
communion again ; and Felicissimus, who af- 
firmed they were, even before they had 
performed their penance. 

A.D. 254, 255 — Doubtful in which year ; 

under St. Cyprian, in favour of infant bap- 

A.D. 256 — Under St. Cyprian, approving 

the consecration by the Spanish bishops of 
Felix and Sabinus in place of Basil and 
Martial, — two bishops who had purchased 
certificates, or "libels," of havipg sacrificed 
to idols, and declaring that Stephen, Bishop 
of Rome, had interposed in favour of the 
latter unreasonably, from having been 
duped by them. 

A.D. 256 — Another held in the same year 

— or there may have been sevei-al — in fa- 
vour of rebaptizing all who had received 
heretical baptism, when St. Cyprian uttered 
his celebrated invective against Stephen. 
The question was finally ruled in the 7th 
of the Constantinopolitan canons. This is 
the Council whose synodical letter is 
printed by Beveridge in the form of a 
canon, immediately before those of Ancyra. 
It is given in Mansi, i. 922-6 ; but the 
speeches belonging to it follow 951-92, 
under the head of "Concil. Carthag. iii. 
sub Cypriano episcopo ;" what purports to 
have been the second being given p. 925, 
and all three supposed to have been held 
A.D. 256. 

ClRTA, A.D. 305 -To elect a new bishop in 
place of one who had been a " traditor ;" 
that is, had surrendered copies of the Scrip- 
tures to the Pagan authorities, to which all 


present, when they came to be asked, how- 
ever, pleaded equally guilty. 

Carthage, a.d. 312— Of 70 Donatist bishops 
against Caecilian, bishop of that see, 

A.D. 333 — under Donatus, author of the 

schism ; favourable to the " traditores." 

A.D. 348 — under Gratus; its acts are 

comprised in fourteen chapters, of which 
the first is against rebaptizing any that 
have been baptized with water in the name 
of the Trinity. This is probably the Council 
whose canons are invoked in canon 12 of 
the African code. 

Theveste, a.d. 362— Of Donatists quarrelling 
amongst themselves. 

African, a.d. 380— Of Donatists, in condem- 
nation of Tichonius, a Donatist bishop. 

Carthage, a.d. 386— Confirmatory of the 
synodical letter of Siricius, Bishop of Rome. 

Leptes, a.d. 386 — Passed canons on disci- 

Carthage, a.d. 390 — Formerly regarded as 
two sejjarate Councils, under Genethlius, 
Bishop of Carthage; made 13 canons, by 
the second of which bishops, priests, and 
deacons are required to abstain from theii 
wives and observe continence. Mansi prints 
what used to be regarded as a second 
Council of this year twice, iii. pp. 691-8 
and 867-76. 

A.D. 393 — Of Maximian's (Donatist 

bishop of Carthage) supporters against 
Primian (another Donatist bishop of Car- 

Hippo, a.d. 393— At which St. Augustine dis- 
puted " de fide et ■ symbol© " as a pres- 

Cabarussi and of the Caverns, a.d. 394 — Of 
the same on the same subject. 

Bagais, a.d. 394 — Of Primian's supporters, 
against Maximian. 

A.D. 396 — One canon only preserved ; 

against translations of bishops and priests. 

Byzatium, a.d. 397— Confirming all that had 
been decreed in 393 at Hippo. 

Carthage, a.d. 397 — Called the 3rd, either 
reckoning that under Gratus as first, and 
that under Genethlius as 2nd ; or else 
supposing two to have been held under 
Aurelius previously in 394 and 397, and 
making this the 3rd under him ; passed 50 
canons, among which the "Breviarium 
canonum Hipponensium " is said to have 
been inserted (Mansi, iii. 875, and the 

Carthage, a.d. 400 — Called the 5th under 
Aurelius; of 72 bishops; passed 15 canons 
on discipline (Pagi, quoted by Mansi, iii. 
p. 972). Yet, p. 979, Mansi reckons a first 
African Council m 399, and a 2nd and 3rd 
in 401, which he calls 4th, 5th, and 6th 
Councils under Aurelius, in the pontificate 
of Anastasius. 

MiLEVis, a.d. 402 — To decide several points 
artecting bishops. 

Carthage, a.d. 403, 404, 405 — Mansi makes 
3 African Councils of these ; a 1st, 2nd, 
and 3rd, in the Pontificate of Innocent, 
or 8th, 9th, and 10th under Aurelius, for 
bringing back the Donatists to the Church 
(iii. pp. 1155 and 1159). 

a.d. 407, 408, 409— Called bv Mansi 


4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th Africau Councils in 
the pontificate of Innocent, the 5th and 
tith being regarded by him as one, or the 
11th, 12th, and 13th Councils under Aure- 
lius — all incorporated into the African 
code (iii. p. 1163). 

Carthage, a.d. 410 — Against the Donatists — 
probably the 14th under Aurelius. 

A.D. 411 — Great conference between the 

Catholics and the Donatists ; Aurelius and 
St. Augustine both taking part on behalf 
of the former ; 286 bishops said to have 
been present on the Catholic side, and 279 
on the Donatist, yet 313 names are given 
on the latter side. There were three dif- 
ferent stages in the proceedings. (Mansi, 
iv. pp. 269 and 276.) 

A.D. 412 — In which Celestius was ac- 
cused of Pelagianism and appealed to the 
Pope, probably the 15th under Aurelius. 

CiRTA, A.D.412 — In the matter of the Donatists 
— published a synodical letter in the name 
of Aurelius, St. Augustine and others. Sil- 
vanus, primate of Numidia, heads it. 

African, a.d. 414 — Of Donatists. 

Carthage, a.d. 416 — or the 2nd against the 
Pelagians: probably the 16th under Au- 
relius : composed of 67 bishops : addressed 
a synodical letter to Innocent of Rome, 
condemning both Pelagius and Cplestius. 

iVIiLEVis, a.d. 416 — Called the 2nd of Milevis 
against Pelagius and Celestius — composed 
of 60 bishops — published 27 canons on 
discipline — addressed a synodical letter to 
Innocent of Rome, to which was appended 
another in a more familiar tone from 
Aurelius, St. Augustine and three more. 

Tisdra, a.d. 417 — Passed canons on disci- 

Carthage, a.d. 417, 418 — Against the Pela- 
gians — regarded as one, probably the 17th 
under Aurelius. 

Hippo, Suffetula, Macriana, a.d. 418 — 
Passed canons on discipline preserved by 
Ferrandus (Mansi, iv. 439). 

Thenes, a.d. 418 — Published nine canons on 

Carthage, a.d. 419 — Attended by 229, or, 
according to other accounts, 217 bishops ; 
and by Faustinus, Bishop of Potenza, and 
two presbyters as legates from Rome. Its 
proceedings have been anticipated in what 
was said on the African code. It would 
seem as if it really commenced in 418, 
and extended through 419. Pagi supposes 
33 canons to have been passed in the 
former year, and but 6 in the latter 
(Mansi, iv. 419) ; and Mansi seems even to 
make two synods of it, calling one a 5th 
or 6th, and the other a 7th Council of 
Carthage (against tjie Pelagians, he pro- 
bably means), and yet evidently reckoning 
both together as the 18th under Aurelius. 
From 419 it seeme to have been adjourned 
to 421, and then lasted into 422 at least, 
as has been shown above ; this adjourned 
council was therefore in reality the 20th 
under Aurelian, though sometimes headed 
the 18th, as being one with the council of 
which it was but the adjournment. Then 
the 19th under Aurelius is the title given 
iu Mansi (iv. 443) to one held in the 



mterim, a.d. 420, to determine certain 
questions of precedence amongst bishops, 
possibly the missing 6th against Pela- 

Numidia, a.d. 423 — In which Antonius, a 
bishop of that province, was condemned. 

Carthage, a.d. 426— At which Leporius, a 
French presbyter, cleared himself from 

Hippo, a.d. 426 — At which Heraclius was 
elected successor to St. Augustine at his 

A.D. 427 — Said to have passed canons 

29 and 30, in the Latin numbering of the 
African code (Mansi, iv. 539). 

African, a.d. 484 — To render account of their 
faith to King Hunneric, when it appeared 
that of 475 sees, 14 were then vacant : 88 
had been deprived of their bishops by 
death, and most of those who survived 
were in exile (Mansi, vii. pp. 1156-64 
and the notes). 

Byzatium, a.d. 507 — To appoint new bishops 
in place of those who had died or been 

JuNCA, a.d. 523 — under Liberatus : to con- 
demn a bishop of the province of Tripoli 
who had usurped a church not in his 
diocese : St. Fulgentius, Bishop of Ruspe, 
being one of those present. 

Carthage, a.d. 525 — under Boniface ; when 
two volumes of the canons were found, as 
already described (Mansi, viii. 635-56). 

African, a.d. 533— Sent a synodical letter to 
John II. of Rome by Liberatus, deacon of 
the church of Carthage, so well known for 
his writings. 

Byzatium, a.d. 541 — Sent a deputation to 
Justinian, and legislated on discipline. 

African, a.d. 550 — Excommunicated Vigilius 
for condemning the three chapters. 

Suffetula, a.d. 570 — Passed canons on dis- 
cipline, some of which are preserved. 

African, a.d. 594 — Against the Donatists, 
probably for the last time. 

Byzatium, a.d. 602 — To examine certain 
charges made against Clement the pri- 

Numidia, a.d. 603— To examine the case of 
Donadeus, a deacon, who had appealed 
from his bishop to Rome. 

Byzatium, Numidia, Mauritania, Car- 
thage, a.d. 633 — Against Cyrus, Pyrrhus, 
and Sergius, the Monothelite leaders. 

Byzatium, Numidia, Mauritania, Car- 
thage, 646 — Against the Monothelites : 
the councils of Byzatium, Numidia, and 
Mauritania addresse'd a joint synodical 
letter: and the Bishop of Carthage a 
letter in his own name to Theodore, 
Bishop of Rome : all preserved in the acts 
of the Lateran Council under Martin I.. 
A.D. 649. [E. S. F.] 

AGABUS, the prophet (Acts xxi. 10), com- 
memorated Feb. 13 {Martyrol. Jiom. Vet}; April 
8 {Cal. Byzant). [C] 

AGAPAE.— The custom which prevailed in 
the Apostolic Church of meeting at fixed times 
for a common meal, of which all alike partook 
as brothers, has been touched on in the Diet, of 
the Bible [Lord's Supper.] It had a precedent 



in the habits of the Esseue communities in 
Judaea (Joseph. Bell. Jvd. ii. 8), and in the tpavoi 
of Greek guilds or associations ; in the Charisties 
of Roman life (Ovid, Fasti, ii. 616), in the 
<TV(r(TtTta of Crete, in the (peiSiTta of Sparta. 
The name apparently was attached to the meals 
towards the close of the Apostolic age. The 
absence of any reference to it in 1 Cor. xi. or 
xiii., where reference would have been so natural, 
had it been in use, may fairly be taken as nega- 
tive evidence that it was not then current. The 
balance of textual authority inclines in favour of 
aydirais, rather than ctTraTois, in Jude v. 12, 
and perhaps also, though less decidedly, in 2 Pet. 
ii. 13, and we may fairly assume (without enter- 
ing on the discussion of the authorship and date 
of those epistles) that they represent the termi- 
nology of the Church in the period from A.D. 60 
to A.D. 80. The true reading of 1 Pet. v. 14 
(eV <pt\ri/xaTi ayainii) cannot be disjoined from 
the tact that there was a feast known then or 
very soon afterwards by that name, at which 
such a salutation was part of the accustomed 
ceremonials. Soon the name spread widely both 
in the East and West. Ignatius (t;d Svvjrn. c. 8),"* 
for the Asiatic and Syrian Churches, Clement 
for Alexandria {Paedaq. ii. p. 142), TertuUian for 
Western Africa {Apol. c. 39), are witnesses for 
its wide-spread use. 

It is obvious that a meeting of this character 
must have been a very prominent featui'e in the 
life of any community adopting it. The Christians 
of a given town or district came on a fixed 
day, probably the first day of the week (the 
"stato die" of Pliny's letter to Trajan, Epp. x. 
96), in some large room hired for the purpose, 
or placed at their disposal by some wealthy con- 
verts. The materials of the meal varied ac- 
cording to the feeling or wealth of the society. 
Bread and wine were, of course, indispensable, 
both as connected with the more solemn com- 
memorative act which came at some period or 
ether in the service, and as the staple articles of 
food. Meat, poultry, cheese, milk, and honey, 
were probably used with them (August., c. 
Faust. XX. 20). Early paintings in the cata- 
combs of Rome seem to show that fish also 
was used (Aringhi, Roma Suhtcrran. ii. pp. 77, 
83, 119, 123, 185, 199, 267). Both the fact of 
its being so largely the common diet of the poor 
in Syria (Matt. vii. 9, xiv. 17, xvi. 34), and 
the associations of Luke xxiv. 42, John xxi. 
9 (to say nothing of the mystical significance 
attached to the word j'xflus as early as Tertul- 
lian), would naturally lead Christians to use it 
at their " feasts of love." The cost of the meal j 
fell practically on the richer members of the 
Church, whether it was provided out of the 
common funds, or made up of actual contribu- 
tions in kind, meat ov fruit sent for the purpose, 
or brought at the time. At the appointed hour 
they came, waited for each other (1 Cor. xi. 33), 

a There is a suggestive difference, indicating a change 
in language and practice, between the shorter and longer 
texts of the Jgnatian Epistles in tbis passage. Jn the 
former the writer claims for the bishop the sole prero- 
gative of baptizing, or ayi-rrriv woielv. In the latter the 
word Trpo(r</)e'pcii' is interpolated between them. The 
Agape is distinguished, i. e. from the "Supper of the 
Lord," with which it had before been ideiitilled ; and the 
latter, thus separated, is associated with a more sacrificial 
terminology, and placed before the social feast. 


men and women seated at different tables, per- 
haps on opposite sides of the room, till the bishoj> 
or presbyter of the Church pronounced the 
blessing (^ev\oyia). Then they ate and drank. 
Originally, at some time before or after'' the 
rest of the meal, one loaf was specially blessed 
and broken, one cup passed round specially as 
" the cup of blessing." When the meal was over, 
water was brought and they washed their hands. 
Then, if not before, according to the season of the 
year, lamps were placed (as in the upper room at 
Troas, Acts xx. 8) on their stands, and the more 
devotional part of the evening began. Those 
who had special gifts were called on to expound 
Scripture, or to speak a word of exhortation, or to 
sing a hymn to God, or to " Christ as to a God" 
(Plin. 1. c). It was the natural time for intel- 
ligence to be communicated from other Churches, 
for epistles from them or their bishops to be 
read, for strangers who had come with (iriffrSKai 
crva-TaTiKol to be received. Collections were 
made for the relief of distressed churches at a 
distance, or for the poor of the district (1 Cor. 
xvi. 1; Justin. M. Apol. ii. ; TertuUian. ApoL c. 
39). Then came the salutation, the kiss of love 
(1 Pet. V. 14), the " holy kiss" <^ (Rom. xvi. 16), 
which told of brotherhood, the final jn-ayer, the 
quiet and orderly dispersion. In the ideal Agapae, 
the eating and drinking never passed beyond the 
bounds of temperance. In practice, as at 
Corinth, the boundary line may sometimes have 
been transgressed, but the testimony of Pliny in 
his letter to Trajan (1. c), as well as the state- 
ments of the Apologists, must be allowed as 
proving that their general character at first was 
that of a pure simplicity. The monstrous 
slanders of " Thyestean banquets " and " shame- 
less impurity" were but the prurient inventions 
of depi'aved minds, who inferred that all secret 
meetings must be like those of the Bacchanalian 
orgies which had at various periods alarmed the 
Roman Senate with their infinite debasement 
(Liv. xxxix. 13, 14). At Alexandria, indeed, as 
was natural in a wealthy and luxurious city, 
there seems to have been a tendency to make 
the Agape too much of a sumptuous feast, 
like the entertainments of the rich, and to give 
the name to banquets to which only the rich 
were invited. Clement protests with a natural 
indignation against such a misapplication of it 
by those who sought to " purchase the promise 
of God with such feasts" {Paedag. ii. 1, § 4, p. 61). 
It seems probable from his protest against the 
use of flutes at Christian feasts (Paedag. ii. 4, p. 
71) that instrumental music of a secular and 
meretricious character had come to be used instead 
of the " psalms and hymns and spiritual songs" 
(Eph. v. 19, Col. iii. 16) which had been in use, 
without accompaniment, at the original Agapae. 
Clement, however, permits the employment of 
the harp or lyre. 

At first the practice would naturally serve as a 

•> Chrysostom (Bam. 27 and 54, on 1 Cor. xi.), followed 
by Theodoret and Theophylact in loc, and most liturgical 
writers, say " before," but obviously under the influence 
of later practice, and the belief that the Kuchari?t could 
not have been received otherwise than fasting in the time 
of the Apostles. 

"^ We may probably think of some order like that which 
attends the use of a " grace-cup " in college or civic feast ; 
each man kissed by his neighbour ou one side, and kissing 
in turn him who sat on the other. 


witness and bond of the brotherhood of Christians. 
Rich and poor, even master and slave, met together 
on the same footing. What took place but once 
a year in the Roman saturnalia was repeated in 
the Christian society once a week. But in pro- 
portion as the society became larger, and the 
sense of brotherhood less living, the old social 
distinctions would tend to reassert themselves. 
The Agapae would become either mere social 
entertainments for the wealthy, as at Alexan- 
dria, or a mei-e dole of food for the poor, 
as in Western Africa (Augustin. c. Fauslum 
XX. 20), and in either case would lose their 
original significance. Other causes tended also 
tD throw them into the back-ground. When 
Christians came to have special buildings set 
apart for worship, and to look on them with 
something of the same local reverence that the 
Jews had had for the Temple, they shrank from 
sitting down in them to a common meal as an 
act of profanation. The Agapae, therefore, were 
gradually forbidden to be held in churches, as 
bvthe Council of Laodicea (c. 27), and that of 3rd 
Carthage A.D. 391 (c. 30), and that in TruUo 
much later "* (a.d. 692). This, of course, to- 
gether with the rule of the 3rd Council of Carthage 
(c. 29), that the Eucharist should be received 
fasting, and the probable transfer, in consequence 
of that rule, of the time of its "celebration" from 
the evening to the morning, left the "feast of 
love " without the higher companionship with 
which it had been at first associated, and left it 
to take more and more the character of a pauper 
meal. Even the growing tendency to asceticism 
led men who aimed at a devout life to turn aside 
fastidiously from sitting down with men and 
women of all classes, as a religious act. So 
Tertullian, who in his Apology had given so 
beautiful a description of them, after he became 
a Montanist, reproaches the Church at large 
with the luxury of its Agapae, and is not ashamed 
to repeat the heathen slander as to the preva- 
lence in thym even of incestuous licence {De 
Jcjun. c. xvii.). One effort was made, as by the 
Council of Gangra, to restore them to their old 
position. Those who despised and refused to 
come to them were solemnly anathematised (c. 
11). But the current set in strongly, and the 
practice gradually died out. Their close con- 
nexion with the annual commemoration of the 
deaths of martyrs, and the choice of the graves 
of martyrs as the place near which to hold them, 
was, perhaps, an attempt to raise them out of 
the disrepute into which they had fallen. And 
for a time the attempt succeeded. Augustine 
describes his mother Monica as having been in 
the habit of going with a basket full of provi- 
sions to these Agapae, which she just tasted her- 
self, and then distributed (Con/ess. vi. 2). And 
this shows the prevalence of the practice in 
Western Africa. In Northern Italy, however, 
Ambrose had suppressed them on account of the 
disorders which were inseparable, and their re- 
semblance to the old heathen Parentalia, and 
Augustine, when he returned to Africa, urged 
Aurelius, Bishop of Carthage, to follow the 
example {Ejdst. xxii.). The name, indeed, still 
lingered as given to the annual dedication feasts 



<* The significance of the reversal of the prohibition 
at so late a date, is that it shews that the practice still 

of churches at Rome in the sixth century (Greg. 
M., Epp. ii. 76), and the practice left traces of 
itself, in the bread, blest as distinct from conse- 
crated, which, under the title of EuLOaiA, was 
distributed in churches, or taken from them to 
absent members of the congregation, (2) in the 
practice, prohibited by the Apostolic canons (c. 
3), and by the Council in Trullo (c. 28, 57, 99) 
of bringing to the altar honey, milk, grapes, 
poultry, joints of meat, that the priest might 
bless them there before they were eaten at a 
common table. The grapes appear, indeed, to 
have been actually distributed with the ayia, or 
consecrated elements, while the joints of meat 
are mentioned as a special enormity of the 
Armenian Church. (3) Traces of the Agapae 
are to be found lastly in the practice which 
prevailed in Egypt, from the neighbourhood of 
Alexandria to the Thebaid, in the 5th century, 
of meeting on the evening of Saturday for a 
common meal, generally full and varied in its 
materials, after which those who were present 
partook of the " mysteries " (Sozom. H. E. 
vii. 19 ; Socrates, H. 'E. v. 22). The practice, 
then, noticed as an exception to the practice 
of all other Churches (comp. Augustin. Epist. 
ad Jan. i. 5) was probably a relic of the primi- 
tive Church, both as to time and manner, when 
the Lord's Supper had been, like other suppers, 
eaten in the evening, when an evening meeting 
on " the first day of the week" meant, according 
to the Jewish mode of speech, the evening of 
Saturday, when the thought that " fasting" was 
a necessary condition of partaking of the Supper 
of the Lord was not only not present to men's 
minds, but was absolutely excluded by the 
Apostle's rule, that men who could not wait 
patiently when the members of the Church met, 
should satisfy their hunger beforehand in their 
own houses (1 Cor. xi. 34). 

The classification of Agapae, according to the 
occasion on which they were held, as (1) con- 
nected with the anniversaries of martyrdoms 
[comp. Natalitia], (2) as Conmtbkdes [comp. 
Marriage], (3) as accompanying funerals 
[Burial], (4) as at the dedication festivals of 
churches [Dedications], must be looked on as 
an after-growth of the primitive practice of 
weekly meetings. Details will be found under 
the respective headings. 

We have lastly to notice the probable use at the 
Agapae of cups and plates with sacred emblems 
and inscriptions, of which so many have been 
fouud in the Catacombs [Glass, Christian], and 
which almost suggest the idea of toasts to the me- 
mory of the martyrs whose Natalities were cele- 
brated. " Victor Vivas in Nomine Laureti " 
(Buonarrott. Plate xix. fig. ,2), " Semper Refri- 
geris in Nomine Dei" {Ibid. xx. 2), "IIIE 
VAS, BIBAS (for Vivas) IN PACE," are ex- 
amples of the inscriptions thus found. In the 
judgment of the archaeologist just referred to, 
they go back to the third, or even to the second 
century. The mottoes were probably determined 
by the kind of Agape for which they were intended 
(comp. Martigny,art. Fonds de Coupe.). [E.H.P.] 

AGAPE. (1) Virgin of Antioch, commemo- 
rated Feb. 15 and March 10 (Mart. Hieron.). 

(2) Virgin of Thessalonica, commemorated April 
3 {Martijrol. Rom. Vet.). 



(3) Martyr, April 16 (Cal. Bymnt.). 

(4) Daughter of Sophia, Sept. 17 (/6.). 

(5) Virgin, commemorated at Rome Aug. 8 
{M. Hieron.). 

(6) Virgin, commemorated at Heraclea, Nov. 
20 (J/. Hkron.). [C] 

AGAPETI, and AGAPETAE, respectively, 
men who dwelt in the same house with dea- 
conesses, and virgins who dwelt in the same 
house with monks, under a profession of merely 
spiritual love ; the latter of the two akin to 
(TvvfiaaKTOt, and also called a.'5iK<pa\ : denounced 
by St. Gi-eg. Naz. (Carm. III.), by St. Jerome 
{Ad Eustoch. and Ad Oceanian, — " Agapetarum 
pestis "), by St. Chrysostom (Pallad. in V. S. 
Chn/s. p. 45), by Epiphanius (Hacr. Ixiii., Ixxix.), 
and' by Theodoret (/« Ejnst. ad Philem. v. 2) ; 
and forbidden by Justinian (Novell, vi. c. 6), and 
others (see Photius in Nomocan. tit. viii. c. xiv. 
p. 99). (Du Cange, Meursius in Glossar., Suicei-.) 
The Irish Kules and Penitentials severely con- 
demn a like practice : see e. g. Reg. Columban. 
ii. 13. And the " second order of saints," in 
Ireland itself (according to the well-known 
document published by Ussher), " abnegabant 
mulierum administrationem, separantes eas a 
monasteriis," owing apparently to the abuse 
arising from the practice when permitted by 
" tlie first order." See Todd, Life of St. Patrick, 
jip. 90-92. (See avv^iaaKroi..) [A. W. H.] 

morated March 24 {Mart. lUeron., Bedae). 

(2) Of Asia, April 12 {Mart. Hieron.). 

(3) The deacon, martyr at Rome, commemo- 
rated with Felicissimus, Aug. 6 {Mart. Rom. 
Vet., Hieron., Bedae). Proper office in Gregorian 
Sacramentary, p. 118, and Antiphon in Lib. 
Antiph., p. 705. 

(4) Martyr at Praeneste, commemorated Aug. 
18 {Mart. Bom. Vet., Hieron., Bedae). Proper 
ofHce in Gregorian Sacramentary, p. 123, and 
Antiphon in Lib. Antiph. p. 707. [C] 

AGAPIUS. (1) The bishop, martyr in Nu- 
midia, commemorated April 29 {Mart. Bom. Vet.). 

(2) And companions, martyrs at Gaza, March 
15 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

AGATHA or AGATHE. (1) The virgin, 
martyr at Catana, passion commemorated Feb. 5 
{Mart. Bom. Vet., Hieron., Bedae, Cal. Byzant.). 
Another commemoration, July 12 {M. Hieron.). 
One of the saints of the Gregorian Canon. Proper 
office for her Katalis in Gregorian Sacramentary, 
p. 25, and Antiphon in Lib. Antiph. p. 665. 

(2) Commemorated April 2 {Mart. Hieron.). 

AGATHANGELUS, martyr, commemorated 
Jan. 23 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 


AGATHO. (1) Martyr at Alexandria, com- 
memorated Dec. 7 {Mart. Bom. Vet.). 

(2) Deacon, April 4 {Mart. Bedae). 

(3) Commemorated July 5 (76. et Hieron.). [C] 
AGATHONICA of Pergamus, commemo- 
rated April 13 {Mart. Bom. Vet.). [C] 

AGATHONICUS, martyr, commemorated 
Aug. 22 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

AGATHUS, commemorated May 8 {Mart. 
Hieron.). [C] 



CoxciLitJM), April 30, a.d. 515, 516, or 523 ; of ! 

sixty bisiiops and sixty nobles, under Sigismund, ] 
King of the Burgundians ; established the " Laus 
Ferennis " in the monastery of Agaune (or St. 

Maurice in the Valais), then also endowed with ] 

lands and privileges. Maximus, Bishop of Geneva, ] 

heads the signatures ; but Avitus, Archbishop | 

of Vieune, is supposed to have been also present i 
(Mansi, viii. 531-538). [A. W. H.] 

AGDE, COUNCIL OF (Agathense Coxci- 
LIUM), in Narbonne, a.d. 506, Sept. 10 or 11; 
of 35 bishops from the South of France ; in the 
22nd year of Alaric, (Arian) King of the Goths ; 
enacted 73 canons in matters of discipline ; 
among other things, forbidding " bigami " to 
be ordained ; commanding mamed priests and 
deacons to abstain from their wives ; fixing 25 
as the age of a deacon, 30 as that of a priest or 
bishop, &c. It was assembled " ex permissu 
domini nostri gloriosissimi magnificentissimique ■ 

regis," sc. Alaric; without any mention of the ' 

pope (Symmachus), save as mentioning his vear '; 
in the title (Mansi, viii. 319-346). [A. W. H.] • 

AGE, CANONICAL. The age required by i 

the canons for ordination. In the case of bishops, " 

it appears to have been the rule of the Church 
from early times that they should be thirty j 

years old at the time of their ordination. This j 

rule, however, was frequently dispensed with, 
either in cases of necessity or in order to pro- I 

mote persons of extraordinary worth and singular ' 

qualifications. It may be questioned whether ' 

this rule was observed from the days of the 
Apostles, as it is nowhere enjoined in St. Paul's I 

Pastoral Epistles or elsewhere in the New Testa- 
ment. And in the so-called Apostolical Consti- I 
tutions, which may be taken as expressing the j 
system of the Eastern Church as it was es- 
tablished about the end of the third century, 
fifty is the age required of a bishop at his ordi- 
nation, except he be a man of singular merit, ' 
which may compensate for the want of years. ; 

The age of thirty is required by implication ■ 

by the Council of Neocaesarea, A.D. 314, which ! 

forbids to admit any one, however well qualified, i 

to the priesthood, under thirty years of age, 
because the Lord Jesus Christ at that age be- 
gan His ministry. The Council of Agde (Con- 
cilium Agathense) forbids the ordination of 
bishops or priests under thirty years of age. 

By this rule, as enacted by the above-named 
councils, the ordinary practice of the Church 
has been regulated. The deviations, however, 
in special cases have been numerous, and for 
these a warrant may be found in the case of ! 

Timothy, whose early ordination as Bishop of 
Ephesus is inferred from the Apostle's admo- j 

nition, — " Let no man despise thy youth " (1 \ 

Tim. iv. 12). We learn from Eusebius, that 
Gregory Thaumaturgus and his brother Atheno- \ 

dorus were both ordained bishops very young ; ' 

€Tj viovs &fiL(po}. It is probable that Athanasius 
was ordained to the see of Alexandria before he • 

was thirty. Remigius, Bishop of Rheims, as all I 
authors agree, was ordained at the age of twenty- -J 
two, A.D. 471. ^ 

In later times, boys of eleven or twelve years 
of age have been ordained to the episcopate by 
papal dispensation ; but this abuse was unknown 
to the ancient Church. 

Presbyters, like bishops, might not be ordained 


before the age of thirty. Justinian, indeed, 
enacted that none should be a presbyter before 
thirty-five; but the Sixth General Council of Con- 
stantinople reduced it to the old period, appointing 
thirty for a priest and twenty-live for a deacon. 
Which ages were also settled in the Saxon Church, 
as appears by Egbert's Collection of the Canons 
then in force in this country. 

The councils of Agde, 506, of Carthage, 397, 
of Trullo, 692, of Toledo, 633, all prescribe 
twenty-five as the minimum of age for a deacon ; 
and, according to Bingham, this rule was very 
nicely observed, so that we scarce meet with an 
instance of any one that was ordained before this 
age in all the history of the Church. For this the 
Council of Toledo cites the Levitical precedent. 

In the Greek Church the age of thirty is still 
prescribed for a priest, and twenty-five for a 
deacon. In our own Church, the first Prayer- 
book of Edward VI. prescribed twenty-one for 
deacons, twenty-four for priests. The present 
rubric is a provision of Canon 34. 

(Bingham, n. 1, xx. 20 ; Landon's Manual of 
Councils ; Comber's Companion ; Frayerhook in- 
terleaved.) [D. B.] 

AGENDA (from agere in the special sense of 
performing a sacred act). A word used to desig- 
nate both the mass and other portions of Divine 

1. In the plural. — The second Council of Car- 
thage (390) speaks of presbyters who committed 
a breach of discipline, in that " agant agenda " in | 
private houses, without the authority of the 
bishop (Canon 9). Innocent I. {Epistola ad De- 
centium, § 3, p. 552, Migne) speaks of cele- 
brating other agenda, in contrast with the con- 
secration of the mysteries. 

2. The plural form "agenda" came in time, 
like " Biblia," to be considered a singular femi- 
nine. For instance, St. Benedict in his Rule, c. 
13 (p. 291), speaking of the morning and evening 
office, says, " Agenda matutina et vespertina noii 

3. The word "agenda" is not nnfrequently 
used absolutely to denote the office for the dead. 
This may not improbably be the case in the 
canon quoted above by the II. Cone. Carthage ; 
and it is certainly used in this sense by Venerable 
Bede, when, speaking of local commemorations of 
the dead, he says, " Per omne sabbatum a presby- 
tero loci illius Agendae eorum sollenniter cele- 
brantur " (Vita St. Augustini, in Ducange s. v.). 
Compare Menard's note in his edition of Gregro/'i/'s 
Sacrarnentary, p. 482. (Ducange's Glossary, s. v. 
" Agenda "). [C] 

AGNES, or AGNE (ayvi,). (1) The virgin, 
martyr at Rome. Her Natalis, which is an an- 
cient and highly-honoured festival, is celebrated 
Jan. 2\{Mart. Eom. Vet., Hieron., Bedae) ; Octave, 
Jan. 28 (i6.). Proper office for the Natalis in 
the Gregorian Sacrarnentary, p. 23, and Antiphon 
in Lib. Antiph. p. 664. By Theodorus Lector 
(Ecloga ii.) the deposition of her relics is joined 
with the deposition of those of Stephen and 
Laurence (see Greg. Sacram. p. 304, ed. Menard). 
She is one of the saints of the Gregorian Canon, 
where her name appears in the form Agne. 

Tillemont {Me'm. Eccl. iv. 345) conjectures 
that the second festival on Jan. 28 commemorates 
the apparition of St. Agnes to her parents eight 
days after her death. 



Her remains are said to have been buried in a 
praediolum belonging to her family on the Via 
Nomentana. The crypt dug to receive them bo- 
came the nucleus of the famous cemetery of St. 
Agnes. Two churches at Rome are dedicated to 
St. Agnes, one of which is said to be that built 
by Constantine at the request of his daughter 
Constantia, and is certainly one of the most an- 
cient basilicas in Rome. In early times, it was 
customary for the Pope to be present at the fes- 
tival of St. Agnes in this church, in which 
Gregory the Great delivered several of his homi- 
lies {e.g. in Matt. c. xiii., Ho7n. 2); and in this 
church still, on Jan. 21, the lambs are blessed, 
from the wool of which the Pallia destined for 
archbishops are to be made. 

In the illustration, taken from an ancient 
glass vessel, the doves on each side bear the two 
crowns of Chastity and of Martyrdom. This 
representation illustrates the verse of Prudentius 
{Feristeph. xiv. 7), 

" Duplex corona est praestita martyri." 
Representations of St. Agnes are found very fre- 
quently on glass vessels iu the catacombs ; only 
St. Peter and St. Paul are found more often so 
represented. When alone, she is generally placed 
between two trees ; sometimes she is at the side 
of the Virgin Mary ; sometimes between the 
Lord and St. Laurence; between St. Vincent 
and St. Hippolytus ; between St. Peter and St. 

(2) There is another festival of St. Agnes on 
Oct. 18 {Mart. Hieron.). Tillemont (1. c.) con- 
jectures that this was instituted in commemora- 
tion of the dedication of some church in her 
honour. (Martigny, Diet, des Antiq. chre't. p. 
22 ff. ; the Abbe Martigny has also written a 
monograph. Notice historique, liturgique, et arche'o- 
logiquo sur le Culte de Ste. Agnes. Paris et 
Lyons, 1847.) [C] 

AGNITUS, commemorated Aug. 16 {Mart. 
Hieron.). [C.J 

AGNUS DEI. The versicle " Agnus Dei, qui 
toUis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis," is generally 
spoken of as the " Agnus Dei." 

1. A reference to the " Lamb of God, which 
taketh away the sin of the world," was intro- 
duced (as was natural) into some of the liturgies 
at an early period. Thus in the Liturgy of St. 
Chrysostom, during the breaking of the bread, 
the priest says, MtAiferai Koi Siaue/tC^rai 6 



aij.vhs rod &fov (Neale's Tetralogia, 176) ; and m 
that of St. James, after breaking and signing 
with the cross, tlie priest says, 'iSe 6 ajxvhs tov 
@eov, o Tibs TOV Uarphs, 6 aipwu tV afxapTiav 
TOV KOfffiov, (TcpayiaaSels virlp ti)s tov K6ff/j.ov 
Cairis Kal ffcoTTjpi'as (Pj. 179). And in the ancient 
" Morning Hymn " [Gloria in Excelsis] 
adopted both iu Eastern and Western Liturgies, 
the deprecation is found : 'O a/j.vhs tov @eov, 
'O Tlhs TOV IlaTphs, 6 aipwu ras aixaprias tov 
K6(Tfxov, 'EXerjcrov 

2. At the Trullau Council (692) it was decreed, 
among other matters, that the Lord shoukl no 
longer be pictured in cliurchos under the form of a 
lamb, but in human form (Canon 82). The then 
Pope, however, Sergius I., rejected the decrees of 
this Council (though its conclusions had been 
subscribed by the Papal legates), and Anastasius 
the Librarian (in Baron., an. 701, vol. xii. 179) tells 
us that this Pope first ordered that, at the time 
of the breaking of the Lord's body, the " Agnus 
Dei " should be chanted by clerks and people. 
Some think that Sergius ordered it to be said 
thrice, where it had previously been said only 
once ; others, as Krazer (De Liturgiis, p. 545), 
that he ordered it to be said by the whole body 
of the clergy and people, as being a prayer for 
all ; not, as previously, by the choir only. How- 
ever this may be, the evidence of the Ordines 
Eomani I., II., and III. (Mabillon, Museum Itali- 
cum, li. pp. 29, 50, 59), and of Amalarius of 
Metz, shows that in the beginning of the 9th cen- 
tury the choir alone, and not the priest at the 
altar, chanted the " Agnus Dei ;" and this was 
the case also when Innocent III. wrote his trea- 
tise on the " Mystery of the Altar." The Ordines 
Komani do not define the number of repetitions of 
the versicle ; but Martene {De Bitihus Ecdesiae, 
lib. i., c. 4, art. 9) proves from ancient documents 
that the threefold repetition was expressly en- 
joined in some churches — as in that of Tours — • 
before the year 1000 ; and in the 12th century 
this custom prevailed in most churches. Subse- 
quently, probably from about the 14th century, 
the " Aguus Dei " came to be said in a low voice 
by the priest with his deacon and subdeacon. In 
later times, says Innocent III. (^De sacro Altaris 
Mysterio, i. 4, p. 910, Migne), as trouble and ad- 
versity fell upon the Church, the response at the 
third repetition was changed into " Dona nobis 
pacem ;" in the church of St. John Lateran 
only was the older form retained. When 
the substitution of " Dona nobis pacem " 
was made is uncertain ; it is found in no 
MS. older than the year 1000. The reason 
which Innocent gives for the introduction of the 
prayer for peace may perhaps be the real one ; 
but it is not an unreasonable conjecture that it 
had reference to the " pax," or kiss of peace, 
which was to follow. 

3. Gerbert {De Musica Sacra, i. p. 458) men- 
tions among ancient customs the chanting of the 
" Agnus Dei " by the choir during the time that 
the people communicated, before the antiphon 
called "Communio" (Daniel, Codex Liturgicus, 
i. 148). 

4. The " Agnus Dei " was sometimes interpo- 
lated with "tropes;" for instance, the following 
form is quoted by Cardinal Bona from an ancient 
missal, the date of which he does not mention : 
"Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, crimina 
tollis, aspera mollis, Ag7nis honoris, Miserere nobis. 


Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, vuliiera 
sanas, ardua planus, Agnus amoris. Miserere nobis. 
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, sordida 
muiidas, cuncta foecundas, Agnus odoris. Dona 
nobis pacem " {Ve Behus Liturgicis, lib. ii. c. 16, 
p. 473). And Rupert of Deutz has the addition, 
" Qui sedes ad dextram Patris, Miserere nobis " 
(Daniel, Codex Lit. i. 142). 

5. In the Ambrosian rite the " Agnus Dei " 
occurs only in masses for the dead ; where, after 
" Dona nobis pacem," the words are added, " Re- 
quiem sempiternam, et locum indulgentiae cum 
Sanctis tuis in gloria " (Krazer, De Liturgiis, 
p. 637). 

6. A legend preserved by Robert of Jlount St. 
Michael (in Bona, De Eeh. Lit. lib. ii. c. 16) tells 
how, in the year 1183, the Holy Virgin appeared 
to a woodman at work in a forest, and gave him 
a medal bearing her own image and that of her 
Son, with the legend "Agnus Dei, qui tollis pec- 
cata mundi. Dona nobis pacem." This she bade 
him bear to the bishop, and tell him that all who 
wished the peace of the Church should make 
such medals as these, and wear them in token of 
peace. [C] 

AGNUS DEI. A medallion of wax, bearing 
the figure of a lamb. It was an ancient custom 
to distribute to the worshippers, on the first 
Sunday after Easter, particles of wax taken from 
the Paschal taper, which had been solemnly 
blessed on the Easter Eve of the previous year. 
These particles were burned in houses, fields, or 
vineyards, to secure them against evil influences 
or thunder-strokes. 

In Rome itself, however, instead of a Paschal 
taper, the archdeacon was accustomed to pro- 
nounce a benediction over a mixture of oil and 
wax, from which small medallions bearing the 
figure of a lamb were made, to be distributed to 
the people on the first Sunday after Easter, espe- 
cially to the newly baptised. {Ordo Bmnanus I. 
pp. 25, 31 ; Amalarius de Eccl. Off. i. 17, p. 
1033 ; Pseudo-Alcuin, de Div. Off. c. 19, p. 482.) 

In modern times this benediction of the Agiius 
Dei is reserved to the Pope himself, and takes 
place in the first year of each pontificate, and 
every seventh year following. 

The Paschal taper was anciently thought to 
symbolise the pillar of fire which guided the 
Israelites, and the Agnus Dei the Passover Lamb 
(Amalarius, u. s. c. 18 ; compare the Gregorian 
Sacramentary, p. 71; " Deus, cujus antiqua 
miracula in praesenti quoque saeculo coruscare 

A waxen Agnvs Dei is said to have been among 
the presents made by Gregory the Great to 
Theodelinda, queen of the Lombards (Frisi, 
Memorie di Monza, i. 34) ; but nothing of the 
kind is mentioned by the saint himself in the 
letter (Epist. xiv. 12, p. 1270) in which he gives 
a list of his presents. One was found in 1725 in 
the church of San Clemente on the Coelian Hill 
at Rome, in a tomb supposed to be that of 
Flavins Clemens a martyr. This Agnus is sup- 
posed, by De Vitry (in Calogiera's Baccolta, 
xxxiii. 280), to have been placed in the tomb at 
the translation of the relics which he thinks took 
place in the 7th century. 

An Agnus was frequently enclosed m a case or 
reliquary ; and some existing examples of such 
cases are thought to be of the 8th or 9th ccd- 


tuiy. A very remarkable one, said to have 
belonged to Charlemagne, is among the treasures 
of Aix-la-Chapelle ; but the style appears to be 
of a much later age than that of Charlemagne 
(Cahier and Martin, Melanges d'Archeoloqie, 
vol. i. pi. xix. fig. D.). [C.] 

AGRTCIUS, Bishop of Treves and confessor, 
deposition Jan. 13 (JIart. Bedae). [C] 

AGRICOLA. (1) In Africa, martyr, com- 
memorated Nov. 3 (If. Hieron.). 

(2) Martvr at Bologna, commemorated Nov. 
•27 t^Mart Bom. Vet.). 

(3) Saint, Natale Dec. 3 (if. Bedae). 

(4) In Auvergne, Dec. 9 {M. Hieron.). 

(6) At Ravenna, Dec. 16 (if. Hieron.). [C] 
AGRIPPINA, martyr at Rome, commemo- 
rated June 23 {Cal. Byzant). [C] 

logne, COUXCIL OF.] 

AGRIPPINUS, of Alexandria, commemo- 
rated Julv 15 {Mart. Hieron.); Jakatit 5 = Jan. 

oQ (Cal. Ethiop.). 

AINOI. [Lauds.] 
AISLE. [Church.] 

(Aquisgraxexsia Coxcilia) : — i. a.d. 789 ; a 
mixed synod held under Charlemagne in his 
palace, which enacted 82 capitulars respecting 
the Church, IQ ad monachos, 21 on matters of a 
mixed kind (Baluz., Capit. i. 209). — ii. a.d. 797 ; 
also under Charlemagne, and consisting of bishops, 
abbats, and counts ; at which 11 capitulars were 
made respecting matters ecclesiastical and civil, 
and 33 " de partibus Saxoniae." The canons (46) 
of Theodulph, Bishop of Orleans, "ad parochiae 
suae sacerdotes," are appended to this council 
(Baluz., Capit. i. 250 ; Mansi, xiii. 994-1022). — 
iii. A.D. 799; also under Charlemagne, and in 
his palace, of bishops, abbats, and monks, where 
Felix of Urgel was induced by Alcuin to re- 
nounce the heresy of Adoptianism (Mansi, xiii. 
1033-1040, from Alcuin, ad Elipand. i., and the 
Vita Alcuin.).— \y. A.D. 802, October ; also under 
Charlemagne, of bishops, priests, and deacons, 
who then took the oath of allegiance to him 
(Mansi, xiii. 1102). — v. a.d. 809, November; 
also under Charlemagne, upon the question of 
*he Filioque ; which sent messengers to Pope 
.eo III., and was insti-ucted by him to omit the 
^ords from the Creed, although the doctrine 
itself was de fide (Mansi, xiv. 17-28). The later 
Councils of Aix are beyond the period assigned 
to this work. [A. W. H.] 

ALB (alba, tunica alba, tunica talaris, poderis, 
Jinca, supparus, su'mcula, camisia ; see also Sti- 


§ 1. The word and its derivation. — The Latin 
word alba, the fuller expression for which is 
tunica alba, first appears, as the technical de- 
signation of a white tunic, in a passage of Vopis- 
cus, who speaks of an al'm subserica, or tunic 
made of silk interwoven with some other mate- 
rial, sent as a present, circ. 265, a.d., from Gal- 
lienus to Claudius {Hist. August. Script. Tre- 
bellius in Claudio, p. 208). The same expression, 
alba subserica, occurs more than once in a letter 
of the Emperor Valerian. The word survives in 
the Fr. " aube," as in our own " alb." The cor- 



respondmg Italian word "camice" is derived 
from " camisia " (see below, § 3). 

§ 2. Ecclesiastical use of the word, and of the 
vestment. — There are two uses of the term in 
ancient writers, between which it is not always 
easy to distinguish. When used in the singular 
it has generally the technical meaning above no- 
ticed, that of a white ^MHjc. But in the plural 
the phrase in albis, and the like, may either 
mean " in albs," or, more vaguely and compre- 
hensively, " in white garments." Context only 
can determine which is meant. 

The first recorded instance of the technical 
use of the term, as a designation of a vestment 
of Christian ministry, occurs in a canon of the 
African church {Concil. Carthag. iv. can. 41), 
dating from the close of the 4th century. That 
canon prescribes that deacons shall not wear the 
alb except when engaged in Divine service. " Ut 
diaconus tempore oblationis tantum, vel lectionis, 
alba utatur." This probably implies that bishops 
and presbyters, but not deacons, were allowed 
to wear in ordinary life a long white tunic, re- 
sembling that worn in divine service. Other 
early canons, on the subject of ecclesiastical 
habits, show, as does that last quoted, that there 
was a general tendency on the part of the dea- 
cons, and other yet inferior orders, to assume the 
insignia which properly belonged to the higher 
grades of the ministry. "Human nature " had 
found its expression in such and the like ways in 
the early church as in later times. 

This conjecture as to an alb being worn by 
bishops and presbyters even in ordinary lite 
(from the time of" the " Peace of the Church " 
under Coastantine), at least on occasions when 
"full dress" was required, is confirmed by the 
remarkable mosaics in the church of St. George 
at Thessalonica. These date in all probabilitv 
from the 4th century. Among the personages 
represented, all of them in the more stately dress 
of ordinary life, there are two only who are 
ecclesiastics, Philip Bishop of Heraclea, and the 
Presbyter Romanus ; and the dress of each is so 
arranged as to show the white chiton (or tunic), 
though an outer tunic of darker colour is also 
worn. In this respect their dress differs from 
that of the other figures, which are those of lay- 
men. These mosaics are figured in the Byzantine 
Architecture of Texier and PuUan (Lond., 1864). 
That an alb was so worn, more or less generally, 
by presbyters, at least in some parts of the West 
in later centuries, appears clearly from such a 
direction as that of Leo IV. in his Cura Pastor- 
alis: "NuUus in alba qua in suo usu utitur 
praesumat missas cantare." This direction is 
repeated almost verbatim in the Capitula of 
Hincmar of Rheims (1882), and in the Disciplina 
Ecclesiastica of Regino, abbot of Prume, in the 
following century. 

§ 3. Primitive forms of the Alb. — In the earlv 
ages of the church the alb of Christian ministry- 
was of full and flowing shape, and distinguished 
in this respect from the closely-fitted funic of 
Levitical priesthood. St. Jerom'e {Epist. ad Fa- 
biolam) follows Josephus {Antiq. Jud. iii. 7) in 
dwelling particularly on this distinctive charac- 
teristic of the Levitical tunic ; and in order to 
convey to his readers an idea of its general ap- 
pearance, he is obliged to refer them to the linen 
shirts, called camisiae, worn by soldiers when on 
service. More than four centuries later, Amala- 



rius of Metz quotes this passage of St. Jerome, 
in his treatise De Ecdesiasticis Officiis (lib. n. 
cap. 18); and expressly notices the fact that the 
Christian alb differed from the poderis, or fuU- 
leni^th tunic of Levitical ministry, in that, while 
this last was strictum, closely ritted to the body, 
that of the church was largum, full and flowing. 
With this statement the earliest monuments ol 
ministering vestments quite accord. The albs 
(if they be not rather dalmatics) worn by 
Archbishop Maximian and his attendant clergy 
in the Ravenna mosaics (see Vestiarium Chris- 
tiamm, PI. xxviii. ; and under vestments), and 
in a less degree, that assigned to the deacon in 
the fresco representing Ordination in the 
cemetery of St. Hermes at Rome (Aringhi, Soma 
.-u'jt. torn. ii. p. 329); and again those worn 
under a planeta by Pope Cornelius of Rome and 
St. Cyprian of Carthage in frescoes ot (probably) 
the 8th century (De Rossi, Eoma Sott. vol. i. pp. 
298-304) all agree in this respect. In these 
last, particularly, the albs (possibly DALMATICS, 
q. V.) worn under the planeta, have sleeves as 
large as those of a modern surplice. 

But while this was, no doubt, the prevailing 
form, we have pictorial evidence to show, that, 
in the ninth century certainly, and in all proba- 
bility at a considerably earlier time, a difterent 
form of alb was in use side by side with the first. 
Considerations of practical convenience deter- 
mined this, as had been the case, we may well 
believe, in the case of the Levitical priests. If 
these latter, in the discharge of their sacrificial 
duties, would have been not only incommoded 
but endangered by wearing full and flowing linen 
garments, so were there occasions, particularly 
the administration of baptism, when large and 
full sleeves, like those of the ordinary alb or 
dalmatic, would have been inconvenient in the 
highest degree to those engaged in offices of 
Christian ministry. We find accordingly, in an 
illumination dating from the 9th century (see 
woodcut in the article baptism), that the priest 
in baptizing wore a closely fitted alb, girded. 
This is, we have reason to believe, the earliest 
example in Christian art of an alb so shaped ; 
but in later centuries, as the "sacred vest- 
ments" continually increased in number, the 
alb, which was worn underneath the rest, was 
gradually more and more contracted in form ; 
and at the present time the alb, technically so 
called, is a closely-fitting vestment, girded, 
nearly resembling that of the priest in the plate 
just referred to. 

§4. Decoration of the a?6.— Like other vest- 
ments which, in primitive times, were of white 
linen only, the alb was often enriched in later 
times in respect of ornament, material, and 
colour. Details as to this are given by Bock 
{Litnrgische Gewander, ii. 33) and by Dr. Rock 
(C/mrch of our Fathers, vol. i. p. 424 sqq.). The 
most common ornaments of the kind were known 
as parurae (a shorter form of paraturae), which 
were oblong patches, richly coloured and orna- 
mented, attached to the tunic. Hence a distinc- 
tion between cdba parata, an alb with " ap- 
parels " (technically so called), and alba pura, 
this last being the " white alb plain " spoken of 
in the first Prayer-book of Edward VI. These 
nlbae pc.ratae date, according to Professor Weiss, 
from the close of the lOth century (Kostum- 
..... ' of I 


ecclesiastical use. Ornaments like in kind to 
these apparels had long been in use for the richer 
albs worn by persons of high secular rank. They 
were called Paragaudac, from a Syriac word of 
similar import. See Casaubon's note on the pas- 
sage of Trebellius referred to in § 1. [W.B.M.] 

ALBANUS (1) (St. Alban) or Alciniis 
(Mart. Bicron.) and his companions, martyrs in 
Britain, commemorated June 22 (3fart. Horn. 
Vet., Hieron., ct Bedae). 

(2) Saint, commemorated December 1 (M. 
Bedae). [^^0 

ALBINUS. (1) Bishop and confessor, com- 
memorated March 1 {Mart. Hieron., Bedae). 
(2) Martyr, June 21 {M. Bedae). [C] 

ALCESTEE, Council of (Alnense Con- 
cilium), A.D. 709 ; an imaginary council, resting 
_olely on the legendary life of Ecgwin, Bishop 
of Worcester, and founder of Evesham Abbey, by 
Brihtwald of Worcester (or Glastonbury) ; said 
to have been held to confirm the grants made 
to Evesham (Wilk. i. 72, 73; Mansi, xii. 182 - 
189). Wilfrid of York, said to have been at the 
council, died June 23, 709. [A. W. H.] 

ALDEGL^NDIS, virgin, deposition Jan. 30 
{Mart. Bedae). [C-] 

ALDERMANN. [Ealdorman.] 
ALEXANDER, (1) martyr under Decius, 
commemorated Jan. 30 {Mart. Bom. Vet.). 

(2) Commemorated Feb. 9 {Mart. Bedae). 

(3) Son of Claudius, martyr at Ostia 
18 (*.). 

(4) Bi-shop of Alexandria, Feb. 26 {lb.) ; April 
10 {M. Hieron.). 

(5) Of Thessalonica, Feb. 27 {M. Hieron.). 

(6) Of Africa, March 5 {M. Hieron.). 

(7) Of Nicomedia, March 6 {M. Hieron.). 

(8) With Gains, March 10 {Mart. Bedae). 

(9) Bishop of Jerusalem, martyr, March 13 
{Mart. Rom. Vet., Bedae). 

(10) Martyr at Caesarea in Palestine, March 
28 {Mart. Rom. Vet.) ; Mar. 27 {M. Bedae). 

(11) Saint, April 24 {Mart. Bedae) ; April 21 

(12) The Pope, martyr at Rome under Trajan, 
May 3 {Mart. Rom. Vet., Bedae). Named in tlie 
Gregorian Canon, Antiphon in Lib. Antiph. p. 693. 

(13) Martyr at Bergamo, Aug. 26 {Mart. Rom. 

(14) Bishop and confessor, Aug. 28 (Jo.). 

(15) " In Sabinis," Sept. 9 {lb. et Hieron.). 

(16) Commemorated Sept. 10 {M. Hieron.). 

(17) In Capua, Oct. 15 {M. Hieron.). 

(18) Patriarch, Nov. 7 {C'al. Arm£n.) ; Miaziah 
22 = April 17, and Nahasse 18 = Aug. 11 {Cal. 

(19) Bishop and martyr, Nov. 26 {M. R. \ .). 

(20) Martvr at Alexandria, translated Dec. 
12 {lb.). ' [C-] 

SCHOOL OF. The school thus described occu- 
pies an exceptional position in the history of the 



p. 667). But this is true only 

Christian Church. Everywhere, of course, there 
was instruction {Kar-hxv<^i^) of some kind for con- 
verts [Catechumens] ; everywhere, before long, 
there must have been some provision made for 
the education of Christian children. That at Alex- 
andria was the only one which acquired a special 
reputation, and had a succession of illustrious 


teachers, and affected, directly and indirectly, 
the theology of the Church at large. The lives 
of those teachers, and the special characteristics 
of their theological speculations will be treated 
of elsewhere. Here it is proposed to consider 
(1) the outward history of tlie school ; (2) its 
actual mode of working, and general influence on 
the religious life of the Alexandrian Church. 

(1.) The origin of the Alexandrian school * is 
buried in obscurity. Eusebius (//. E., v. 10) 
speaks of it as of long standing (ef apxaiov 
edovs), but the earliest teacher whom he names is 
Pantaenus, circ. A.D. 180. If we wei-e to accept 
the authority of Philip of Sida (Fragm. in Dod- 
well's Dissert, in Iren. Oxf. pp. 488-497), the 
honour of being its founder might be conceded 
to Athenagoras, the writer of the Apologia ; and 
this would carry us a few years further. But the 
authority of Philip is but slight. His list is 
manifestly inaccurate, the name of Clement com- 
ing after Origen, and even after Dionysius, and 
the silence of Eusebius and Jerome must be held 
to outweigh his assertion. Conjecture may look 
to St. Mark (Hieron., Cat. 36), with more proba- 
bility, perhaps, to Apollos, as having been the first 
conspicuous teacher at Alexandria. Pantaenus, 
however, is the first historical name. He taught 
both orally and by his writings, and, though his 
work was interrupted by a mission to India, he 
seems to have returned to Alexandria, and to 
have continued teaching there till his death. 
First working with him, and then succeeding 
him, we have the name of Clement, and find him 
occupying the post of teacher till the persecution 
of Severus, A.d. 202, when he with others fled for 
safety. The vacant place was filled by Origen 
(Euseb. H. E. vi. 3), then only eighteen years of 
age, but already well known as a teacher of 
grammar and rhetoric, and as having studied 
profoundly in the interpretation of the Scriptures. 
It is probable, but not certain, that he himself 
had attended Clement's classes. As it was, seekers 
after truth came to him in such numbers that he 
renounced liis woi'k as an instructor in other 
subjects, and devoted himself to that of the 
school which was thus reopened. Clement may 
possibly have returned to Alexandria, and worked 
with him till his death, circ. A.D. 220. Origen 
himself left soon afterwards, and founded, in some 
sense, a rival school at Caesarea. Of the teachers 
that followed we know little moi-e than the names. 
Philip of Sida (I. c.) gives them as Heraclas, 
Dionysius, Pierius, Theognostus, Serapion, Peter, 
Macarius, Didymus, Rliodon. Eusebius (i/. E. 
vii. 32) names Pierius as a man of philosophical 
attainments at Alexandria, and mentions Achillas 
more distinctly as having been entrusted with 
the SiSacTKaAeTuv there under the episcopate of 
Theonas. He further speaks of the school as 
existing in his own time (circ. a.d. 330). Theo- 
doret (i. 1) names Arius as having at one time been 
the chief teacher there, and Sozomen (H.E. iii. 15) 
and Rufinus (//. E. ii. 7) name Didymus, a teacher 
wiio became blind, as having held that post for a 
long period of years (circ. A.D. 340-395). During 
the later years of his life he was assisted by 
Rhodon as a coadjutor, who, on his death, re- 

* It may be worth while to note the names by which it 
18 described: — (1) to t^? Kar/jxiicrea)?, or to riov lepuiv 
\6yiav StSao-icaAeiov, Huseb., H. E. v. 10, vi. 3, 26 : (2) to 
lepbi/ hi£aaK(x\eiov rwf iepwi' naSruJudToiu, Sozom. iii. 15 : 
(3) Kcclesiastica Sclwla, Hieron., Cat. c. 3H. 



moved to Sida, where he numbered among his 
pupils the Philip from whom we get the list of 
the succession. This seems to have broken up the 
school, and we are unable to trace it further. 

(2.) The pattern upon which the work at Alex- 
andria was based may be found in St. Paul's 
labours at Ephesus. After he ceased to address 
the Jews through his discourses in the synagogue 
he turned to the " school " (o'xoA'J;) of Tyrannus 
(Acts, xix. 9). That " school " was probably a 
lecture-hall (so the word is used by Plutarch, Vit. 
Arati, c. 29), which had been used by some teacher 
of philosophy or rhetoric, and in which the apostle 
now appeared as the instructor of all who came to 
inquire what the " new doctrine " meant. Some- 
thing of the same kind must have been soon 
found necessary at a place like Alexandria. With 
teachers of jjhilosophy of all schools lecturing 
round them, the Christian Society could not but 
feel the need of lecturers of its own. Elsewhere, 
among slaves and artisans it might be enough to 
hand down the simple tradition of the faith, to de- 
velope that teaching as we find it in the Catechises 
of Cyril of Jerusalem. The age of apologists, ap- 
pealing, as they did, to an educated and reading 
class, must have made the demand for such teachers 
more urgent, and the appearance of Pantaenus as 
the first certainly known teacher, indicates that 
he was summonea oy the Church to supply it. 
In a room in his own house, or one hired for the 
purpose, the teacher received the inquirers who 
came to him. It was not a school for boys, but 
for adults. Men and women alike had free access 
to him. The school was open from morning 
to evening. As of old, in the schools of the 
Rabbis, as in those of the better sophists and 
philosophers of Greece, there was no charge for 
admission. If any payment was made it came, in 
the strictest sense of the word, as an honorarium 
from grateful pupils (Euseb. H. E. vi. 4). 
After a time he naturally divided his hearers 
into classes. Those who were on the threshold 
were, it is natural to think, called on, as in the 
Cohortatio ad Graecos of Clement, to turn from 
the obscenities and frivolities of Paganism to the 
living and true God. Then came, as in his Paeda- 
gogiis, the " milk " of Catechesis, teaching them 
to follow the Divine Instructor by doing all 
things, whether they ate or drank, in obedience 
to His will. Then the more advanced were led 
on to the " strong meat " of ^ eiroiniKr) deupia 
(Clem. Alex., Strom, v. p. 686, Pott.). At times 
he would speak, as in a continuous lecture, 
and then would pause, that men might ask the 
questions which were in their hearts (Origen, 
in Matt. Tr. xiv. 16). The treatises which 
remain to us of Clement's, by his own account 
of them, embody his reminiscences of such instruc- 
tion partly as given by others, partly doubtless 
as given by himself. We may fairly look on 
Origen's treatises and expositions as having had 
a like parentage. (Comp. Guerike, De Schold 
Alex.; Hasselbach, De Schola Alex.; Redepen- 
ning's Origenes, i. 57, ii. 10 ; and Art. Alex- 
a.ndrinisches Catecheten Schule, in Herzog's JReal. 
Encyclopadie ; Neander's Church History [Engl. 
Translation], ii. 260, et seq.) [E. H. P.] 

were no councils of Alexandria proportionate to 
its situation as the marine gate of the East, or to 
tiie fame of its catechetical and eclectic schools, 



or to its ecclesiastical position, as having been 
the second see of the world. And the first of 
them was held a.d. 230, under Demetrius, in a 
hasty moment, to pass judgment upon one of 
the most distinguished Alexandrians that ever 
lived, Origen : his chief fault being that he had 
been ordained priest in Palestine, out of the 
diocese. His works were condemned in this, 
and he himself excommunicated and deposed in a 
subsequent council ; but both sentences were 
disregarded by the bishops of Palestine, under 
whose patronage he continued to teach and to 
preach as before. 

A.D. 235 — There was a synod under Heraclas, 
who is said to have appointed 20 bishops ; 
one of whom, Amraonius, having betrayed 
the faith, was reclaimed at this synod. 

A.D. 263 — This was a synod, under Dionysius, 
against the errors of Sabellius ; in another, 
Nepotianus, a bishop of Egypt, and Ce- 
rinthus iell under censure for their views 
on the Millennium. 

A.D. 306 — under Peter ; against Meletius, a 
bishop of Lycopolis, who had sacrificed to 
idols, and was therefore deposed. 

A.D. 821 — Against Arius, who was deposed in 
two svnods this year under Alexander. 

A.D. 324 — Against Arius once more ; but this 
time under Hosius, Bishop of Cordova, who 
haa been despatched to Alexandria to 
make enquiries, hj Constantine. 

A.D. 328 — When St. Athanasius was conse- 
crated bishop. (On the date, see Mansi, 
ii. 1086.) 

A.D. 340 — In favour of St. Athanasius. De- 
puties were sent from the council to Rome 
and Tyre in that sense. Its synodical 
letter is given by St. Athanasius in his 2nd 

A.D. 352 — Called "Egyptian;" in ftivour of 
St. Athanasius again. 

A.D. 362 — under St. Athanasius, on his return 
from exile, concerning those who had 
Arianised. It published a synodical letter. 
On its wise and temperate decisions, see 
Newman's Arians, v. 1. 

A.D. 363 — under St. Athanasius on the death of 
Julian ; published a synodical letter to the 
new emperor Jovian. 

A.D. 371 — Of 90 bishops, under St. Athanasius : 
to protest against Auxentius continuing in 
the see of Milan. This is one of those 
called " Egyptian." 

A.D. 371 — under St. Athanasius tlie same 
vear; to receive a profession of faith from 
Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyi-a, which turned 
out orthodox. 

A.D. 399 — Against the followers of Origen, 
who were condemned. Part of its synodical 
letter is preserved in that of the emperor 
Justinian to Mennas on the same subject 
long afterwards. 

A.D. 430 — under St. Cyril against Nestorius ; 
' where St. Cyril indited his celebrated 
epistle with the twelve anathemas. 

A.D. 457 — under Timothy, surnamed Aelurus, 
or the Cat, at which the Council of Chal- 
cedon was condemned. This was repeated, 
A.D. 477. 

A.D. 482 — At which John Tabenniosites was con- 
secrated bishop ; he was ejected at once by 
the emperor Zeno, when Peter Moggus re- 


turned, and in a subsequent synod tne I 
same year condemned the 4th council, 
having first caused a schism amongst his 
own followers by subscribing to the He- 
uoticon (Evag. iii. 12-16). 
A.D. 485 — under Quintiau, to pronounce Peter 

the Fuller deposed from Antioch. 
A.D. 578 — The last of those called Egyptian ; 
it was composed of Jacobites, to consider i 
the case of the Jacobite patriarch of 
Antioch, Paul. ' 

A.D. 589 — under Eulogius ; against the Sa- 
A.D. 633 — under Cyrus, the Monothelite pa- 
triarch : the acts and synodical letter of 
which are preserved in the 13th action of 
the 6th general council. This is the last i 
on record. 
The interests of the Church History of Alex- 
andria are so great, that a few words may be 
added respecting its patriarchate. 

The patriarchate of Alexandria grew out of thp 
see founded there by St. Mark, " according to the 
constant and unvarying tradition both of the East ^ 
and West " (Neale's Patriarch of Alex. 1. i.) ; to 
which jurisdiction was assigned, as of ancient 
custom appertaining, by the 6th Nicene canon, 
over " Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis." This was, ; 
in eifect, what was already known as the Egyp- 
tian diocese, being one of five placed under tlie 
jurisdiction of the praefect of the East, and com- 
prehending itself six provinces. Of these, Au- '. 
gustanica was subdivided into Augustanica prima, , 
and secunda : the first stretching upon the coast : 
from Rhinocorura on the borders of Palestine to 
Diospolis on the east of the Mendesian mouth of 
the Nile, with the second immediately under it 
inland ; Egypt proper was likewise subdivided ' 
into prima and secunda, of which secunda | 
stretched westwards of the same mouth of the \ 
Nile along the coast, with prima lying imme- j 
diately under it inland. Then Arcadia at Hep- I 
tanomis, forming the 3rd province, lay under i 
Augustanica secunda and Aegyptus prima on \ 
both sides of the Nile ; and south of this Thebais, 
or the 4th province, whose subdivisions, prima 
comprehended all the rest of the country lying , 
north, and secunda all the country lying south 
of Thebes, included in Egypt. Returning to- j 
wards the coast, westwards of Aegyptus secunda, I 
the 5th province, Libya inferior or secunda, was 
also called Marmarica ; and to the west of it 
was the 6th province, Libya Pentapolis, also ; 
called Cyrenaica. The ecclesiastical arrange- 
ments in each of these provinces have yet to be 
given. For this purpose the " Notitia " pub- 
lished by Beveridge (Synod, ii. 143-4) might 
have been transcribed at length ; but as the sites 
of so many of the sees are unknown, their mere 
names, which ai-e often uncouth and of doubtful 
spelling, would be devoid of interest. It may ■ 
suffice to enumerate them, with their metropolis i 
in each case. Thus Augustanica prima con- ' 1 
tained 14 episcopal sees, of which Pelusium wai 5 
the metropolis ; Augustanica secunda 6, at the .' 
head of which was Leonto ; Aegyptus prima 20, 
at the head of which was Alexandria ; Aegyptus 
secunda 12, at the head of which was C.ibasa 
The province of Arcadia contained 6, under the 
metropolitan of Oxyrinchus : but 7 are given 
subse'juently, corresponding to the 7 mouths of 
the Nile, of which Alexandria is placed fii-st. 


There wpve 8 sees in Thebais prima, under the 
metropolitan of Antino ; and twice that number 
in Thebais secunda, under the metropolitan of 
Ptolemais. Libya secunda, or Marmarica, con- 
tained 8, under the metropolitan of Dranicon ; 
and Libya Pentapolis 6, at the head of which 
was Sozuza. Tripoli was a later acquisition, in- 
cluding 3 sees only. They may have been placed 
under Alexandria subsequently to the time of 
the 4th Council, when all to the west of them 
lay in confusion under the Vandals ; and possibly 
may have been intended to compensate for those 
two sees of Berytus and Rabba bordering on 
Palestine, of which Alexandria was then robbed 
to swell the patriarchate of Jerusalem on the 
south-west (Cave, Ch. Govt. iv. 11). The list of 
sees in Le Quien (^Oriens Christianus, vol. ii. p. 
330-640), illustrated by a map of the patriarch- 
ate fi'om D'Anville, agrees with the above in 
most respects, only that it is shorter. 

Alexandria had been synonymous with ortho- 
doxy while St. Athanasius lived ; shortly after 
his death, however, the next place after Rome, 
which it had ever enjoyed from Apostolic times, 
was given by the 2nd General Council to Con- 
stantinople. For this it seemed to have re- 
ceived ample compensation in the humiliation 
of the Constantinopolitan patriarch Nestorius, 
at the 3rd Council under St. Cyril ; when the 
want of tact and perverseness of his successor 
Dioscorus enabled the more orthodox patriarchs 
of Jerusalem and Constantinople to help them- 
selves at its expense, and obtain sanction for 
their proceedings at the 4th Council. For a 
time, it is true, Rome peremptorily refused as- 
senting to them ; and charged their authors with 
having infringed the Nicene canons. But Alex- 
andria lalling into the hands of those by whom 
the doctrinal decisions of the 4th Council were 
called in question and even condemned, Rome 
naturally ceased taking any further steps in its 
favour ; and under Jacobite patriarchs princi- 
pally, and sometimes exclusively, Alexandria 
gradually came to exercise no palpable influence 
whatever, even as 3rd see of the world, on the 
i-est of the Church. Le Quien reckons 48 patri- 
archs in all, down to Eustathius, who was con- 
secrated A.D. 801, but several of them were 
heretical ; and there were num.erous anti-patri- 
archs, both heretical and schismatical, from time 
to time disputing their claims. The ' Art de 
verifier les Dates ' makes this Eustathius the 
66th patriarch. Dr. Neale makes him the 40th. 
and contemporary with Mark II., the 49th Jaco- 
bite patriarch. 

There were several peculiarities connected 
with the see of Alexandria, which have been 
variously explained. One rests upon the autho- 
rity of Eutychius, patriarch of Alexandria in the 
10th century, and of St. Jerome. The words of 
Eutychius are as follows : " St. Mark along with 
Ananias ordained 12 presbyters to remain with 
the patriarch ; so that when the chair should 
become vacant, they might elect one out of the 
12 on whose head the other 11 should lay their 
hands, give him benediction, and constitute him 
patriarch ; and should after this choose some 
other man to supply the place of the promoted 
presbyter, in such sort that the presbytery 
should always consist of 12. This custom con- 
tinued at Alexandria till the time of the patri- 
arch Alexander, one of the 318 (Fathers of 
OimiST. ANT. 



Nicaea) who forbade the presbyters in future to 
ordain their patriarch ; but decreed that on a 
vacancy of the see, the neighbouring bishops 
should convene for the purpose of filling it with 
a proper patriarch, whether elected from those 
12 presbyters or from any others." Eutychius 
adds, " that during the time of the first 10 patri- 
archs, thei-e were no bishops in Egypt ; Deme- 
trius the 11th having been the first to consecrate 
them." (Taken from Neale, p. 9.) This per- 
haps may serve to explain the extreme offence 
taken by r)emetrius at the ordination of Origen 
to the priesthood out of the diocese, if a priest 
in Alexandria was so much more to the bishop 
than a priest elsewhere. It may also serve to 
explain the haste with which Alexander insti- 
tuted proceedings against Arius. The passage 
of St. Jerome seems conclusive as to the inter- 
pretation to be given to that of Eutychius. 
This Father in an epistle to Evagrius, while 
dwelling on the dignity of the priesthood, thus 
expresses himself: "At Alexandria, from the 
time of St. Mark the Evangelist to that of the 
bishops Heraclas and Dionysius (in the middle 
of the 3rd century), it was tlie custom of the 
presbyters to nominate one, elected from among 
themselves, to the higher dignity of the bishopric ; 
just as the army makes an emperor, or the dea- 
cons nominate as archdeacon any man whom they 
know to be of active habits in their own body." 
{Ibid.). St. Jerome would be talking nonsense, 
if the 12 of whom he is speaking had been 
bishops themselves; that is, of the same rank 
as their nominee was to be. Hence the theory 
of an episcopal college, to which Dr. Neale seems 
to incline, falls to the ground at once. On the 
other hand, it seems unquestionable that St. 
Jerome must have meant election, not ordina- 
tion, from the marked emphasis with which he 
lays down elsewhere that presbyters cannot or- 
dain. Otherwise, from the age in which Euty- 
chius lived, and still more the language in which 
he wrote, it would hardly be possible to prove 
that he meant election only, when he certainly 
seems to be describing consecration. But again, 
if there were " no bishops in Egypt during the 
time of the first ten patriarchs," how could epis- 
copal consecration be had, when once the patri- 
arch had ceased to live ? To this no satisfactory 
answer has ever been returned. Eutychius, 
though he lived in the 10th century, may be 
supposed to have known more about the ancient 
customs of his see, in a land like Egypt, than 
those who have decried him. And certainly, 
though we know there wei-e bishops in Egypt 
under Demetrius, for two synods of bishops 
(Phot. Bibl. s. 118 and Huet. Origen. i. 12), we 
are told, met under him to condemn Origen ; it 
would be ditficult to produce any conclusive 
testimony to the fact that there were any epis- 
copal sees there, besides that of Alexandria, be- 
fore then. The vague statement of the Emperor 
Adrian, " Illi qui Serapim coliint Christiani sunt ; 
tit devoti sunt Serapi, qui se Christi episcopos 
dicunt," sjieaking of Egypt, clearly warrants no 
such inference, standing alone ; nor does it ap- 
pear to have ever been suggested that each of 
the first ten patriarchs consecrated his suc- 
cessor during his own life-time. Yet there was 
a strange haste in electing a new patriarch of 
Alexandria, that seems to require some expla- 
nation. The new patriarch, we learn from Libe- 



ratus, always interred his predecessor ; and be- 
fore doing so, placed his dead hand on his own 
head. Can it have been in this way, during 
that early period, extraordinary as it may seem, 
that ejiiscopal consecration was supposed to be 
obtainel, as it were, in one continuous chain 
from St. Mark himself? The position of the 
patriarch after consecration was so exceptional, 
that it would be no wonder at all if his consecra- 
tion dift'ered materially from all others. In 
civil matters his authority was very great ; in 
ecclesiastical matters it was quite despotic. All 
bishops in Egypt were ordained by him as their 
sole metropolitan. If any other bishop ever per- 
formed metropolitan functions, it was as his dele- 
gate. The Egyptian bishops themselves, in the 
4th action of the Council of Chalcedon, professed 
loudly that they were impotent to act but at 
his bidding ; and hence they excused themselves 
from even subscribing to the letter of St. Leo 
while they were without a patriarch, after Dios- 
corus had been deposed ; and that so obstinately,- 
that their subscription was allowed to stand 
over, till the new patriarch had been consecrated. 
The patriarch could moreover ordain presbyters 
and deacons throughout Egypt in any number, 
where he would ; and it is thought profcable 
that the presbyters, his assessors, had power given 
them by him to confirm. All the episcopal sees 
in Egypt seem to have originated with him alone. 
As early as the 3rd century we find him called 
" papa," archbishop in the next, and patriarch 
in the 5th century, but not till after St. Cyril. 
In later times, "judge of the whole world " was 
a title given him, on account of his having for- 
merly fixed Easter. On the liturgies in use in 
the Egyptian diocese. Dr. Neale says (General 
Tntrod. i. 323-4), " The Alexandrine family con- 
tains 4 liturgies : St. Mark, which is the normal 
form. St. Basil, St. Cyril, and St. Gregory. . . . 
St. Mark's was the rite of the orthodox Church 
of Alexandria. . . . The other three are used by 
the Monophysites. St. Basil (i. e. the Copto- 
.Tacobite) is the normal and usual form ; St. 
Gregory is employed in Lent ; St. Cyril on festi- 
vals. . . . Why the first of these liturgies bears 
the name of Basil " is uncertain. " It is not 
possible now to discover its origin, though it 
would appear to have been originally Catholic ; 
to have been translated from the Greek into 
Coptic, and thence after many ages into Arabic. 
The liturgy of St. Cyril is to all intents and 
purposes the same as that of St. Mark . . . . 
and in both that, and in the office of St. Gregory, 
the first part is taken from the normal liturgy 
of St. Basil." Both the proanaphoral and ana- 
phoral parts of the Copto-Jacobite liturgy of St. 
Basil, together with the anaphoral part of that 
of St. Mark are given in parallel columns farther 
on in the same work. And the Copto-Jacobite 
patriarchal church at Alexandria, said to be the 
burial-place of the head of St. Mark, and of 72 
of the patriarchs, is described there likewise, p. 
277. Between the two works of Dr. Neale 
already cited, and the Oriens Christianus of Le 
Quien, everything further that has yet been 
discovered on the subject of this patriarchate 
may be ootaiued. [E. S. F.] 

ALEXIUS, b &v6pa>wos Tov &eov, comme- 
morated March 17 (Cal. Byzant.); July 17 
(Mart. Rom.). [C] 


PERTY. — In treating of a subject like that I 
of the alienation of Church property, the canons 
and other authorities cited as evidence of the 
law concerning it might either be arranged ac- 1 
cording to the various descriptions of property ] 
to which they refer, or else the entire legislation | 
of each church and nation might be exhibited in 
chronological order apart from the rest. The 
latter plan has been here adopted, both as being ] 
more suitable to a general article, and also ; 
because in matters of church order and disci- ' 
pline the canons of councils were not in force 
beyond the limits of the churches in which they ' 
were authoritatively promulgated. 

The alienation — by which is to be understood 

the transference by gift, sale, exchange, or per- ' 

petual emphytiusis » — of Church property [see ' 
Property of tjie Church] was from early times 

restrained by special enactments. i 

It is a much debated question amongst Ca- I 
nonists whether or not alienation, except in ex- 
traordinary cases, was absolutely prohibited in 
the first ages of the Church, by reason of the j 
sacred character impressed upon property given 
for ecclesiastical purposes, and by that act dedi- 
cated to God (see Balsamon in can. 12, Cone. VII. ' 
ap. Beveridge I'and. Can. i. 303). As, however, 
the property of the Church must in those times 
have consisted only of the offerings and oblations ] 
of the faithful, which were placed in the hands \ 
of the bishops,'' it would appear most probable ; 
that they were free to make such use of it as 
they might think would be productive of the , 
greatest benefit to their several dioceses. ; 

The general law of the Church has been well 

epitomised in the Commentary of Balsamon (ap. I 

Beveridge Pand. Can. ii. 177). " Unusquisque j 

nostrorum Episcoporum rationem administi-a- 1 
tionis rerum suae Ecclesiae Deo reddet. Vasa 

enim pretiosa Ecclesiarum, seu sacra, et reliqua ', 

Deo consecrata, et possessiones irnmobiles, non \ 
sunt alienabilia, et Ecclesiae servantur. Eccle- 

siasticorum autem redituum administratio secure ; 

credi audacterque committi debere illis,-qi(i statis i 

temporibus sunt Episcopi." Its history, as it is | 

found in the councils of different churches, has ■ 

now to be traced. " i 

In the East. — The earliest canon which refers I 

to the subject is the 15th canon of the Council ' 

of Ancyra (a.D. 314), which provides that the \ 

Church (on the expression rh KvpiaKhv see Beve- I 

ridge, Adnott. in loc.) may resume possession of ' 
whatever property the presbyters of a diocese 

may have sold during the vacancy of the see ; < 

but this canon does not limit any power which j 

the bishop himself may previously have possessed, ' 

and is simply an application of the well-known ' 

rule " sede vacante nihil innovetur." , 

The Council of Antioch (a.d. 341) has two ^ ' 

canons, the 24th and 25th, bearing upon this : 

" On the nature of this tenure see Smith's Dictionary ,, 
of Greek and Roman Antiquities, sub voce, ' Emphy- | 
teusis.' It may be described in brief as the right to use 
another person's land as one's own, on condition of culti- 
vaiing it, aTid paying a fixed rent at fixed times. 

b 'The oath now taken by bishops consecrated accord- 
ing to the Roman ordinal, contains a clause relating to 
the alienation of Church property. In what words and 
at what time a clause of this nature was first introduced 
into the ordinal is a question which has given rise to 
much controversy. 



question, which are either imitated from the 
39th and 40th Apostolic Canons, or have been 
imitated by the authors of that collection [Apos- 
tolic Canons]. The 24th directs that Church 
pi'operty, which ought to be administered subject 
to the judgment and authority of the bishop, 
should be distinguished in such a way that the 
presbyters and deacons may know of what it 
consists, so that at the bishop's death it may not 
be embezzled, or lost, or mixed up with his private 
property. That part of this canon in which 
reference is made to the duties imposed on pres- 
byters and deacons is not contained in the Apos- 
tolic canon. This omission would seem to point 
to the conclusion that this council is later in 
date than the 39th Apostolic canon ; and Beve- 
ridge {Cod. Can. i. 43) draws the same inference 
as to the date of the 40th Apostolic canon from 
its not making mention of oi rwv aypHv Kapirol, 
words which are to be found in the 25th Canon 
of Antioch. By the 25th canon it is provided that 
the Provincial Synod should have jurisdiction in 
cases where the bishop is accused of converting 
Church property to his own use, which was 
also forbidden by the 37th Apostolic canon, 
or managing it without the consent {/xri /xera 
•yvdifjiris) of the presbyters and deacons, and also 
in cases where the bishop or the presbyters who 
are associated with him are accused of any mis- 
appropriation for their own benefit. Here again 
it will be noted that the eflect of this canon is 
to make provision for the better and more care- 
ful management of Church property, and that it 
does not abridge any right of alienation which 
the bishop may have before possessed. It must, 
however, be observed that the power of the 
bishop to manage (xfipiC^'") Church property (an 
expression which would doubtless include the 
act of alienation) is qualified by the proviso that 
it must be exercised with the consent of his 
presbyters and deacons. 

The 7th and 8th canons of the Council of 
Gangra (the date of this council is uncertain, 
some writers placing it as early as A.D. 324, and 
others as late as a.d. 371 : see Van Espen, 
Dissertatio in Synodum Gangrensem, Op. iii. 120, 
ed. Lovan. 1753, and Beveridge, Adiwtt. in id. 
Cone, who inclines to the opinion that it was 
held a short time before the Council of Antioch, 
A.D. 341), prohibit under pain of anathema all 
persons from alienating {SiSovai e^w ttjs eKKArj- 
ffias) produce belonging to the Church, except 
they first obtain the consent of the bishop or his 
oeconomus, or officer entrusted with the care of 
Church property. 

The enactments contained in the second Coun- 
cil of Nicaea (or as it is generally styled the 7th 
Oecumenical Council) a.d. 787, will be more con- 
veniently considered below. 

The African Church seems to have found it 
necessary to place special restrictions upon the 
power of alienating Chui'ch property possessed 
by bishops under the general law. By the 31st 
canon of the code known as the Statuta Ecclesiae 
Antiqua, promulgated (according to Bruns, Ca- 
nones, i. 140) at the 4th Council of Carthage 
(a.d. 398), the bishop is enjoined to use the pos- 
sessions of the Church as trustee, and not as if 
they were his own property ; and by the next 
canon all gifts, sales, or exchanges of Church 
property made by bishops without the consent in 
writing ("absque conniventia et subscriptione ") 

of their clergy are pronounced invalid. In the 
31st canon there are further provisions against 
the unauthorized alienation of Church property 
by the inferior clergy. If convicted in the 
synod of this offence they are to make restitu- 
tion out of their own property. 

Again by the 26th (ap. Bev. 29th) canon 
of the Codex Ecclesiae Africanae promulgated 
a.d. 419, which repeats the 4th canon of the 
6th Council of Carthage ( a.d. 401 ), it is 
ordained that no one sell the real property be- 
longing to the Church ; but if some very urgent 
reason for doing so should arise, it is to be com- 
municated to the Primate of the Province, who is 
to determine in council with the proper number of 
bishops (i.e. twelve) whether a sale is to be made 
or not ; but if the necessity for action is so great 
that the bishop cannot wait to consult the synod, 
then he is to summon as witnesses the neigh- 
bouring bishops at least, and to be careful after- 
wards to report the matter to the synod. The 
penalty of disobedience to this canon was de- 
position. By the 33rd canon (ap. Bev. 36th) 
presbyters are forbidden to sell any Church pro- 
perty without the consent of their bishops ; and 
in like manner the bishops are forbidden to sell 
any Church lands (praedia) without the privity 
of their Synod or presbyters. (See on these 
canons Van Espen, Op. iii. 299, &c. ; and the 
Scholion of Balsamon ap. Bev. Band. Can. i. 551.) 

Passing from Asia Minor and Africa to Italy, 
the earliest provisions with reference to alienation 
to be found in the councils are in the council held 
at Rome by Pope Symmachus in A.D. 502. The 
circumstances under which the canons of this 
council were passed (and which relate solely to the 
question of alienation) are thus described by Dean 
Milman : "On the vacancy of the see [by the death 
of Pope Simplicius, A.d. 483] occurred a singular 
scene. The clergy were assembled in St. Peter's. 
In the midst of them stood up Basilius, the 
Patrician and Prefect of Eome, acting as Vice- 
gerent of Odoacer the barbarian King. He ap- 
peared by the command of his master, and by 
the admonition of the deceased Simplicius, to 
take care that the peace of the city was not 
disturbed by any sedition or tumult during the 
election. ... He proceeded, as the protector 
of the Church from loss and injury by church- 
men, to proclaim the following edict : ' That no 
one under the penalty of anathema should alie- 
nate any farm, buildings, or ornaments of the 
churches ; that such alienation by any bishop 
present or future was null and void.' So im- 
portant did this precedent appear, so dangerous 
in the hands of these schismatics who would 
even in those days limit the sacerdotal power, 
that nearly twentj' years after, a foi'tunate occa- 
sion was seized by the Pope Symmachus to annul 
this decree. In a Synod of bishops at Eome the 
edict was rehearsed, interrupted by protests of 
the bishops at this presumptuous interference of 
the laity with affairs of ecclesiastical jurisdiction. ^ 
The authenticity of the decree was not called ' 
in question ; it was declai'ed invalid as being" 
contrary to the usages of the Fathers enacted 
on lay authority, and as not being ratified by 
the signature of any Bishop at Rome. The 
same council, however, acknowledged its wisdom 
by re-enacting its oi-dinances against the al'ienn- 
tion of Church property " {History of Latin 
Christianity, vol. i., p. 221, 2nd ed'.). On this 
E 2 




Council Boehmer notes that it has not more 
authority than belongs to it as a Council of 
the Italian Church, and that therefore its decrees 
(which go far beyond any yet promulgated else- 
where) were not binding upon other Churches. 
Previously, however, to this date Pope Leo the 
Great (a.d. 447) had written to the bishops of 
Sicily and forbidden the alienation of Church 
property by the bishops except for the benefit of 
the Church, and with the consent of the whole 
clergy {Ep. 17). Pope Gelasius also (a.d. 492- 
40G), writing to Justinus and Faustus (who were 
acting in the place of their bishop), directed the 
restitution of all property belonging to the 
Church of Volterra which had been alienated up 
to that time ; and in another letter he forbad 
the appropriation of Church lands for the pay- 
ment of anv particular stipend (Fragg. 23 and 24, 
ap. Thiel)." 

In the history of the Gallican C/iurch the 
earliest reference to alienation is to be found 
in a letter from Pope Hilarus (a.d. 462) to the 
bishops of the provinces of Vienne, Lyons, Nar- 
bonne, and the Maritime Alps, in which he pro- 
hibits the alienation of such Church lands as are 
neither waste nor unproductive (" nee deserta 
nee damnosa ") except with the consent of a 
council (Ep. 8 sec. ult.). 

The Council of Agde (a.d. 506) contains seve- 
ral canons on alienation. The 22nd canon, while 
declaring that it is superfluous to define any- 
thing afresh concerning a matter so well known, 
and a practice forbidden by so many ancient 
canons, prohibits the clergy from selling or 
giving away any Church property under pain of 
being excommunicated and having to indemnify 
the Church out of their private resources for 
any loss, the transaction being at the same time 
declared void. The 26th canon inflicts the like 
punishment on those who suppress or conceal or 
give to the unlawful possessor any document by 
which the title of the Church to any property 
is secured. The 48th canon reserves to the 
Church any property left on the death of a 
bishop, which he had received from ecclesiastical 
sources. The 49th canon repeats almost in the 
same words the above cited 31st canon of the 
Statuta Ecdesiae Antiqua ; the 53rd canon pro- 
hibits, and pronounces void, any alienation by 
parish priests ; while by the 56th canon abbots 
are forbidden to sell Church property without 
the bishop's consent, or to manumit slaves, " as 
it would be unjust for monks to be engaged in 
their daily labours in the field while their slaves 
were enjoying the ease of liberty." 

The 1st Council of Orleans (a.d. 511) places 
all the immoveable property of the Church in 
the power of the bishop "that the decrees of the 
ancient canons may be observed" (canons 14 
and 15). 

Pope Symmachus, A.D. 513 (who died A.D. 514), 
in answering certain questions put to him by 
Caesarius, Bishop of Aries, forbids Church pro- 
perty to be alienated under any pretence, but 
he permits a life rent to be enjoyed by clerks 
worthy of reward {Ep. 15). 

By the 5th canon of the 1st Council of Cler- 
mont (a.d. 535) all persons are excommunicated 
who obtain any Church property from kings. 

In the same year Pope Agapetus writing to 
Caesarius, Bishop of Aries, says, that he is "un- 
willingly obliged to refuse the bishop permission 

to alienate some Church lands, " revocant nos 
veneranda Patrum manifestissima constituta, 
quibus specialiter prohibemur praedia juris ec- 
desiae quolibet titulo ad aliena jura transferre " 
{Gone. Gall. i. 240). 

The 12th canon of the 3rd Council of Orleans 
(a.d. 538) allows the recovery of Church pro- 
perty within 30 years, and ordains that if the 
possessor should refuse to obey the judgment of 
the Council ordering him to surrender, he is 

The 23rd canon renews the prohibition against ; 
the alienation of Church property by abbots or j 
other clergy without the written consent of the j 
bishop ; and by the 9th canon of the 4th Council ] 
held at the .same city (a.d. 541) it is provided j 
that Church property which has been alienated > 
or encumbered by the bishop contrary to the 
canons shall, if he has left nothing to the 
Church, be returned to it ; but slaves whom he 
may have manumitted shall retain their freedom, 
though they must remain in the service of the 
Church. The 11th, 18th, 30th, and 34th canons 
contain further provisions on the subject. ' 

The 1st canon of the 3rd Council of Paris 
(a.d. 557) is directed against the alienation of 
Church property, but this canon, as well as those ; 
next mentioned, would appear to refer to seizure 
by foi-ce jather than to possession by any quasi- \ 
legal process. Alienation is forbidden by the 2nd 
canon of the 2nd Council of Lyons (a.d. 567). 

In the 2nd Council of Tours (a.d. 567) there ^ 
are two canons — the 24th and 25th — relating to | 
the recovery of Church property from the hands 
of unlawful possessors. 

In Spain the Council held a.d. 589 at Nar- 
bonue, which in its ecclesiastical relations must 
be considei-ed in Spain (Wiltsch. Gcog. of the 
Church, i. 100), prohibits the alienation of Church 
property by the inferior clergy, without the con- 
sent of the bishop, under pain of suspension for 
two years and perpetual inability to serve in 
the church in which the offence was committed 
(can. 8). 

By the 3rd Council of Toledo (held in the same | 
year), can. 3, bishops are forbidden to alienate i 
Church property, but gifts which, in the judg- [ 
ment of the monks of the diocese, are not detri- ! 
mental to the interests of the Church cannot be ' 
disturbed ; by the next canon bishops may 
assign Church property for the support of a 
monastery established with the consent of his | 

By the 37th canon of the 4th Council of 1 
Toledo (a.d. 633) the bishop is permitted (sub- \ 
ject to the confirmation of a Provincial Council) j 
to redeem any promise of reward made for ser- ; 
vices to the Church. • 

The 9th Council of Toledo (a.d. 655) contains 1 
provisions very similar to the above cited canons ; 
of the 3rd Council held at the same place. ': 

In England, Archbishop Theodore of Canter- •' 
bury (a.d. 668-690) forbids abbots to make ex- '; 
changes without the consent of the bishop and 
their brethren {Poenitcntiale — De Ahhatihus). 

The E.rrerjtiones ascribed erroneously to Arch- . ; 
bishop Egbert of York (who held that metropo- 
litical see from A.D. 732 to 766) declare that 
gifts, sales, or exchanges of Church property by 
bishops without the consent and written per- 
mission of the clergy shall he void (cap. 144). 
The Poonitentiale, also attributed wrongly to the 


same prelate, permits exchanges between mo- 
nasteries with the consent of both communities 
(addit. 25). 

The last Council which passed canons on the 
subject of alienation during the period covered 
by this article, is the 2nd Council of Nicaea (the 
" Seventh Oecumenical Council ") held A.D. 787. 
The 12th canon making mention of the 39th 
Apostolic Canon forbids the alienation or transfer 
of Church lands by bishops and abbots in favour 
of princes or other secular potentates ; and it also, 
like many of the canons hereinbefore cited, pro- 
hibits bishops from appropriating any ecclesias- 
tical property to their own use or to that of 
their relatives. Even when the retention of any 
Church lands is unprofitable they may not be 
sold to magistrates or princes, but to the clergy 
or to farmers ; and these again may not sell them 
to magistrates, and so contravene the spirit of the 
canon. Such deceitful transactions are invalid, 
and the bishop or abbot who is guilty of taking 
part in them is to be deposed. — See the elaborate 
SchoUon of Balsamon on this canon, ap. Bev. 
Fund. Can. i. 303. 

Having now gone through the principal 
canons passed by the ecclesiastical assemblies of 
the first eight centuries, there remain to be consi- 
dered the laws by which the Christian emperors 
limited the power of the Church as regards the 
alienation of its property. 

Constantine the Great had in a decree of the 
year A.D. 323 (sees. 16, 18) assured to the 
Church the safe enjoyment of its property, and 
had commanded the restitution as well by the 
State as by private individuals of all such pro- 
perty as they might have got possession of; but 
it does not appear that there was any imperial 
legislation concerning the alienation of Church 
property until after the promulgation of the 
Codex Theodosianus in a.d. 438. 

The Codex Repetitae Fraelectlonis promulgated 
by Justinian in December a.d. 534 contains in 
the 2nd title of the 1st Book various provisions, 
made by his predecessors and re-enacted by him, 
on the subject of alienation. 

In the 14th section there is a constitution of 
the Emperor Leo (a.d. 470) which prohibits the 
Archbishop of Constantinople, or any of his 
stewards (oeconomi) from alienating in any way 
the land or other immoveable property or the 
coloni or slaves or state allowances ( civiles 
annonae) belonging to his Church, not even if all 
the clergy agreed with the Archbishop and his 
steward as to the propriety of the transaction. 
The reason given for this stringent law is that 
as the Church which is the mother of Religion 
and Faith, is changeless, her property ought to 
be preseiwed also without change. Any trans- 
. actions completed in defiance of this constitution 
were void, and all profits resulting therefrom 
were given to the Church. The stewards who 
were parties to the act were to be dismissed, and 
their property made liable for any damage which 
might arise from this infringement of the law. 
The notaries employed were to be sent into per- 
petual exile, and the judge who ratified the pro- 
ceeding was punished by the loss of his office 
and the confiscation of his property. There 
was, however, an exception made to this rule in 
tlie case of a usufruct, the creation of which 
was permitted for a term of years or for the 
life of the usufructuary. (The editions of the 


Juris Civilis generally contain after this 
section a series of extracts from the Novells on 
the same subject.) 

The 17th section contains a constitution of the 
Emperor Anastasius to which no precise date 
is affixed by the commentators, but which must 
have been promulgated between the years A.D. 
491 and 517 (Haenel, Indices ad Corjnis Legum 
ah Imp. Rom. ante Just, latarum, p. 82, Lipsiae 
1857). This constitution, like the last cited, 
applies solely to the Church of Constantinople, 
and relates to monasteries, orphanages and 
other eleemosynary institutions whose property 
might in cases of necessity be sold, exchanged, 
mortgaged, or leased in perpetual emphyteusis ; 
provided that the transaction be eflected in the 
manner therein prescribed and in the presence 
of the civil authorities and the representatives 
of the particular body whose property is about 
to be dealt with. It is, however, decreed that if 
there be moveable property (the sacred vessels 
excepted) sufficient to meet the sum required, 
the immoveable property shall not be touched. 

In the 21st section is given a constitution of 
Justinian himself (a.d. 529) in which he forbids 
any sale or other alienation of sacred vessels or 
vestments except only with the object of re- 
deeming captives (and, according to some edi- 
tions, relieving famine) ; " quoniam non absur- 
dum est animas hominum quibuscunque vasis 
vel vestimentis praeferri." 

The rule which permitted the sale or melting 
down of Church plate for the redemption of 
captives is one of great antiquity. Its propriety 
is nowhere more eloquently defended than in 
the following passage from the 2nd Book of 
St. Ambrose Be Officiis Ministrorum (cir. A.D. 
391) "Quid enim diceres ? Timui ne templo 
Dei ornatus deesset ? Responderet : Aurum Sa- 
cramenta non quaerunt ; neque auro placent, 
quae auro non emuntur. Ornatus sacramento- 
rum redemptio captivorum est. Yere ilia sunt 
vasa pretiosa, quae redimunt animas a morte. 
lUe verus thesaurus est Domini qui operatur 
quod sanguis Ejus operatus est. . . . Opus 
est ut quis fide sincera et perspicaci providentia 
munus hoc impleat. Sane si in sua aliquis deri- 
vat emolumenta, crimen est ; sin vero pauperibus 
erogat, captivum redimit, misericordia est." He 
concludes by directing that vessels which are 
not consecrated should be taken in preference to 
those which have been consecrated ; and that 
both must be broken up and melted within the 
precinct of the Church (cap. 28). The supreme 
claims of charity over all other considerations are 
insisted upon in the same strain by St. Jerome 
(^Ep. ad ISepotianum, A.D. 394) and St. Chrysostom 
(Hom. 52 in St. Matthaeum), while at the same 
time the proper respect due to the sacred vessels 
is always emphatically enjoined, as, for example, 
by St. Optatus, De Schisnuite Donatistarum vi. 2. 
An example of the precautions taken against the 
abuse of this privilege is to be found in one of 
the letters of Gregory the Great (vii. 13) in 
which writing (a.d. 597) to Fortunatus, Bishoj) 
of Fano, he gives permission for the sale of 
Church plate in order to redeem captives, but 
directs, with the view of avoiding all suspicion, 
that the sale and the payment over of the 
money received therefrom should be made ia 
the presence of the " defensor." 

Passing to the Novells of Justinian — the 71 h 



Novell (a.d. 535) relates to the question of 
alieuatioii of Church property, and professes to 
amend and consolidate the then existing laws, 
and to extend their operation to the whole of 
^he empii'e. In the first chapter the alienation, 
either by sale, gift, exchange, or lease on per- 
petual emphyteusis, of immoveables or quasi- 
immoveables belonging to churches or eleemo- 
synary institutions, was forbidden under the 
peTialties prescribed by the above-cited consti- 
tution of Leo. 

Under the 2nd chapter alienation is permitted 
in favour of the emperor when the proper forms 
are observed and ample compensation made, and 
when the transaction is for the public benefit. 
The reason given for this exception is not with- 
out significance. In the Latin version it is as 
follows : " Nee multum differant ab alterutro j 
sacerdotium et imperium, et res sacrae a com- 
munibus et publicis ; {juando omnis sanctissimis 
ecclesiis abundantia et status ex impei'ialibus [ 
munificentiis perpetuo praebeatur." ] 

The third and four succeeding chapters con- 
tain regulations for the lease of Church estates 
by emphyteusis. Their provisions are too ela- 
borate to be set out at length, but may be | 
briefly stated thus : " The usual conditions of J 
these emphyteuses are for three lives — that 
of the original emphyteuta and of two of his | 
or her heirs, being children or gi'andchildren, j 
or the husband or wife of the emphyteuta if i 
there be a special clause to that efl'ect (though 
about this power there is some doubt) in suc- 
cession. Thus the duration of the lease is in- , 
determinate and contingent. The contract was ' 
invalidated by default in payment of the quit 
rent (canon) for two instead of for three years 
as was the case with lay emphyteuses " (Colqu- 
houn, Roman Civil Law, § 1709). 

The 8th chapter renews the prohibition against 
the sale, pledge, or melting down of Church 
plate, except with the object of redeeming cap- 

The 12th chapter sanctions the abandonment 
of all contracts made on behalf of the Church 
for the acquisition by gift or purchase of un- 
profitable land. 

The 40th Novell (pi-omulgated the following 
year, " a.d. 536) gives to the " Church of the 
Holy Resurrection " at Jerusalem the privilege 
of alienating buildings belonging to it, notwith- 
standing the general prohibition contained in 
the 7th Novell. 

The 46th Novell (a.d. 536 or 537) relaxed the 
law against the alienation of immoveable Church 
property when there was not sufficient moveable 
property to pay debts owing to the State or to 
private creditors. But this step could not be 
taken excejjt after investigation by the clergy, 
the bishop, and the metropolitan, and under a 
decree of the "judex provinciae." 

The 2nd chapter of the 54th Novell (a.d. 
537) permits exchanges between ecclesiastical 
and eleemosynary corporations, but the Church of 
St. Sophia at Constantinople is excepted from 
the operation of this law as it is also from that 
of the 46th Novell. 

The 55th Novell (a.d. 537) forbids alienation 
made ostensibly in favour of the emperor, but 
really for the benefit of private individuals. It 
■ilso permits churches and other religious bodies 
(\\-\i\\ the exception of the ("huvch of St. Sophia) 

to lease their lauds to one another in perpetua; 

The 65th Novell has i-eference to tlie alienation 
of property belonging to the Church of Mysia, 
but being only of local importance it need not 
be further considered. 

In the 67th Novell (a.d. 538) the number 
of persons appointed under the 46th Novell to 
enquire into the propriety of any alienation is 
increased by the addition of two bishops chosen 
by the metropolitan from his Synod. 

The 10th chapter of the 119th Novell (a.d. 
544) permits the alienation by the emperor of 
Church property which had been transfei-red to 

The last of the numerous edicts promulgated 
by Justinian on the alienation of Church pro- 
perty is contained in the 120th Novell (a.d. 
544) in which he again undertakes the task of 
consolidating the law on this subject. 

The first four chapters concern only the 
Church of Constantinople. The alienation of 
immoveables is forbidden, except in favour of the 

The 5th chapter relates to the property of 
other Churches. The provisions thei-ein con- 
tained, and those contained in the previous 
chapters on emphyteusis are thus briefly sum- 
marized by Colquhoun (Soman Civil Lav:, § 
1709): — "The 120th Novell was promulgated 
by Justinian in order to modify the rigour of 
the prohibition against creating perpetual em- 
phyteuses on ecclesiastical property by restrict- 
ing it to the estates of the Church of Constanti- 
nople, leaving the property of other Churches to 
be regulated by the common law. It is, how- 
ever, very doubtful whether or not the emphy- 
teusis on Church property can be perpetual 
without the express stipulation for a term. Nor 
does the prohibition appear to be absolute even 
as regards the Church of Constantinople, which 
had permission to grant perpetual emphyteuses 
in cases where it owned ruined edifices without 
the means of restoring them. The Novell fixes 
the amount at a third of the revenue whicli 
such edifices produced before their then ruined 
state, payable from the date of the emphyteu- 
tical title, or at a half of the revenue which the 
buildings actually produced after their restora- 
tion. What is doubtful with respect to the lay 
is clear with regard to ecclesiastical emphyteusis, 
viz., that they must be reduced to writing. As 
before, the contract was invalidated by default to 
pay the quit rent for two instead of three years, 
as was the case with lay emphyteuses. The 
point open to discvission, in respect to lay emphy- 
teuses, of whether the rent in arrear may be 
recovered and the expulsion of the tenant also 
insisted on, is clear in the case of ecclesiastical 
emphyteuses in the affii-mative. Lastly, the 
Churches enjoyed a right of resumption entirely 
exceptional to the common law when the estate 
accrued ' aut in imperialem domum, aut in sac- 
rum nostrum aerarium, aut in civitatem aliquam. 
aut in curiam, aut in aliquam venerabilem ali- 
am domum.' This right of resumption applied 
equally in the case of all transmission of the 
right, whether inter vivos or mortis causa, with- 
out reference to the title of acquisition, and the 
time for its exercise was two years mstead of 
two months as in lay cases." 

The remaining chapters of this Novell relate 


to the exchange of ecclesiastical property and 
the sale of immoveables and Church plate for 
the redemption of captives. The provisions 
therein contained do not differ in any important 
particular from the previous laws above cited on 
the same subject, and they need not be repeated. 
The provisions of the Civil Law (which have 
now been examined) have been usefully arranged 
by the glossator on the Corpus Juris Civilis, 
Nov. 7 and Nov. 120 (ed. Lugd. 1627). Im- 
moveable property belonging to the Church can- 
not be alienated under any circumstances if it 
fall within the following classes — 1. If it had 
been given by the emperor (Nov. 120, 7). 2. If 
the thing to be alienated is the church or mo- 
nastery itself (i5.). 3. When the proposed trans- 
feree is the oeconomus or other church officer 
((').). 4. When the property was given to the 
Church subject to a condition that it should 
not be alienated (Nov. 120, 9). 5. If the pro- 
posed transferee be a heretic (131, 14). But 
subject to the above restrictions, immoveable 
property may be alienated under the following 
circumstances, Aaz. : — 1. For debt (Nov. 46). 

2. By way of emphyteusis for a term (var.). 

3. In exchange with another church (Nov. 54, 2). 

4. If the transferee be the emperor (Nov. 7, 2). 

5. For the redemption of captives (Nov. 120, 9). 
On the other hand moveable property can be 
freely alienated if it be for the advantage of the 
Church that such a step should be taken. The 
exception to this rule is in the case of Church 
])late, which cannot be alienated except for the 
redemption of captives (Nov. 7, 8 and Nov. 120, 
10), and for the payment of debt when it is not 
necessary for the proper performance of Divine 
Service (Nov. 120, 10). 

The Barbarian Codes contain, as might be 
expected, many laws directed against the forci- 
ble seizure of Church property, but such acts 
can hardly be considered to fall under the head 
of alienation. There are, however, a few pro- 
visions on the subject anterior in date to the 
death of Charlemagne. 

By the 3rd chapter of the 5th Book of the 
Leges Visigothorum (cir. a.d. 700 : see Davoud 
Oghlou, Histoire do la Legislation des Anciens 
Germains, i. 2) if any bishop or clerk alienate 
by sale or gift any Church property without the 
consent of the rest of the clergy, such sale or 
gift is void, unless it be made according to the 
ancient canons. 

Again in the 20th chapter of the Lex Alain- 
manoriiin (which in its present shape was pro- 
bably comfjiled about the beginning of the 8th 
century — see Davoud Oghlou, op. cit. i. 304) the 
inferior clergy are forbidden to sell Church lands 
or slaves except by way of exchange. 

In the collection entitled Capitularia Begum 
Francorum there is a Capitulary of the date a.d. 
814, forbidding all persons whatsoever to ask 
for or receive any Church property under pain of 
excommunication (6, 135). 

There are also two Capitularies v.'hich are 
probably not later in date than the one last 
cited. By the first of these presbyters are for- 
nidden to sell Church property without the con- 
sent of the bishop (7, 27); to which in the 
second is added the consent of other priests of 
good reputation (7, 214). 

(The following authorities may be consulted : 
— Da Rousseaud de la Combe, Hecucil de Juris- 



prudence Canonique [Paris 1755], sub voce Alie- I 

nation ; Boehmer, Jus Ecclesiasticum Froteitan- \ 

tium [Halae Magd. 1738, &c.] in Decretcd. III. 13 ; 
Ferraris, Bibliotheca Canonica [ed. Migne], sub 
voce Alienatio; Sylvester Mazzolini da Prierio 
[Lugd. 1533] sub voce Alienatio ; Redoanus, De 
Rents Ecclesiae non alicnandis [printed in the 2nd 
part of the 15th volume of the Tractatus Uni- 
versi Juris, Venice, 1584]; and the Commenta- 
tors on the above-cited passages from the CorjMs 
Juris Civilis, and on the following passages from 
the Corpus Juris Canonici, Decreti Secunda 
Pars, Causa xii. Quaestio 2 ; and Decretal, lib. 
III. 13). [I. B.] 

ALLELUIA (Greek ' hKK-riXovia). The litur- 
gical form of the Hebrew rT""!??!!, " Sing ye 
praises to Jehovah ;" a formula found in Psalm 
117, and in the headings of several Psalms, espe- 
cially Psalms 113-118, which formed the "Hal- 
lel," or Alleluia Magnum, sung at all the greater ,1 

Jewish feasts. Alleluia and Amen, says the 
Pseudo-Augustine {Ep. 178, ii. 1160, Migne), J 

neither Latin nor barbarian has ventured to 
translate from the sacred tongue into his own ; \ 

in all lands the mystic sound of the Hebrew is 

1. It is thought by some that the early Church 
transferred to the Christian Paschal feast the 
custom of singing Psalms with Alleluia at the j 
Paschal sacrifice ; and this conjecture derives ] 
some probability from the fact, that in the most i 
ancient sacramentaries the Alleluia precedes and 
follows a verse, as in the Jewish usage it precedes 

and follows a Psalm. Yet we can hardly doubt 
that the use of the Alleluia in the Church was 
confirmed, if not originated, by St. John's vision 
{Apoc. 19, 6) of the heavenly choir, who sang 
Alleluia to the Lord God Omnipotent. By the 
4th century it seems to have been well known as 
the Christian shout of joy or victory; for Sozo- 
men {H. E. vii. 15, p. 298) tells of a voice 
heard (an. 389) in the temple of Serapis at 
Alexandria chanting Alleluia, which was taken ' 

for a sign of its coming destruction by the Chris- | 

tians. The victory which the Christian Britons, 
under the guidance ofGermanusof Auxerre, with j 

their loud shout of Alleluia, gained over the J 

pagan Picts and Scots (an. 429) is another instance 
of the use of Alleluia for encouragement and 
triumph (Beda, Historia Ecclesiastica, i. c. 20, 
p. 49); and Sidonius Apollinaris (lib. ii. Ep. 10, 
p. 53) speaks as if he had heard the long lines of 
haulers by the river side, as they towed the 
boats, chanting Alleluia as a "celeusma," to make 
them pull together. These instances are of course 
not altogether tree from suspicion ; but they 
serve to show that in early times the Alleluia 
was regarded as a natural expression of Christian 
exultation or encouragement. 

2. A special use of the Alleluia is found in the 
liturgies both of East and West. In most Eastern 
liturgies, it follows immediately upon the Chk- 
Rumc Hymn, which precedes the greater En- 
TRAXCi; ; as, for instance, in those of St. James, 
St. Mark, and St. Chrysostom (Neale's Tetralogia, 
pp. 54, 55). In the Mozarabic, which has many 
Oriental characteristics, it is sung after the 
Gospel, while the priest is making the, oblation : 
" Interim quod chorus dicit Alleluia, olTerat saccr- 
dos hostiam cum calice " (Nealo's Tetrahigia, 
p. 60). In the West, it follows the GUAiJUAL, 



and so immediately precedes the reading of tha 
Gospel. In eai'ly times it seems to have been 
simply intoned by the cantor who had sung the 
Gradual, standing on the steps of the Ambo, and 
repeated by the choir ; but before the 8th cen- 
tury the custom arose of prolonging the last syl- 
lable of the Alleluia, and singing it to musical 
notes (Ordo Romauus II., in Mabillon's Museum 
ItaUcum, vol. ii. p. 44). This was called jw'jjYa- 
tio. The jubilant sound of the Alleluia, however, 
was felt to be fitting only for seasons of joy ; 
hence its use was in many churches limited .to 
the interval between Easter and Whitsunday. 
Sozomen, indeed (//. E. vii. 19, p. 307) seems to 
say that in the Roman Church it was used only 
on Easter-day ; but we cannot help suspecting 
that he must have misunderstood his informant, 
who may have used the word " Pascha " to de- 
note the whole of the seven weeks foUo'wing 
Easter-day ; for St. Augustine distinctly says 
(£•/;. ad Janarium; Ep. 119 [al. 55] p. 220 
Migne) that the custom of singing Alleluia dur- 
ing those fifty days was universal, though in 
several churches it was used on other days also. 
In the Rule of St. Benedict (c. 15, p. 297) the 
use of Alleluia in the responsories of the mass 
seems to be limited to the season from Easter to 
Whitsunday ; but soon after Benedict's time it 
was probably more common in the West to inter- 
mit its use only from Septuagesima to Easter. 
For at the end of the 6th century, Gregory the 
Great writes to John of Syracuse (^Epist. ix. 12, 
p. 940) that some murmured because he (Gregory) 
was overmuch given to following the customs of 
the Greek Church, and in particular because he 
had ordered the Alleluia to be said at mass 
beyond the Pentecostal season (extra tempora 
Pentecostes) ; so far, he continues, is this from 
being the case, that whereas the Church of Rome 
in the time of Pope Damasus had adopted, 
through Jerome's influence, from the Church of 
Jerusalem the limitation of the Alleluia to the 
season before Pentecost, he had actually inno- 
vated on this Greek custom in ordering the 
Alleluia to be said at other seasons also. This 
seems the most probable sense of this much-con- 
troverted passage, as to the reading and intei-pre- 
tation of which there is much difference of 
opinion. (See Baronius, Ann. 384, n. 27, vol. v., 
p. 578 ; and Mabillon, Museiun ItaUcum, ii. xcvii.). 
The 4th Council of Toledo (canon ll)oi-ders that 
(in accordance with the universal custom of 
Christendom) the Alleluia should not be said in 
the Spanish and Gaulish churches during Lent — 
an injunction which seems to imply that its use 
was permitted during the rest of the year. The 
same canon (in some MSS.) also forbids the Alle- 
luia on the Kalends of Januarj', " quae propter 
errorem gentilium aguntur," but on which Chris- 
tians ought to fast. 

The intermission of Alleluia during a particular 
season is expressed by the phrase " Alleluia clau- 
sum " (Du Cange, s. v.). 

3. We have already seen that St. Benedict 
prescribed the use of the Alleluia in the respon- 
sories of the Mass from Pasch to Pentecost. He 
prescribed it also in the ordinary offices (Eegula, 
c. 12, p. 286). From Pentecost to Ash- Wednes- 
day, however, it was to be said in the nocturnal 
office only with the six last Psalms: "A Pen- 
tecoste autem ad caput quadragesimae omnibus 
aoctibus cum sex posterioribus Psalmis tan- 


tum ad nocturnas dicatur" (^Boguht, c. 15, p. 

In the Roman arrangement of the ordinary 
offices, the Alleluia follows the " Invocation " in 
all the hours ; but from Septuagesima to the 
Thui'sday in Holy Week the verse, " Laus tibi 
Domiue ; Rex aeternae gloriae," is substituted. 

4. We learn from Jerome {Ep. 27 [108], § 19, 
p. 712, ad Eustochium ; cf. 23 [38], § 4, p. 175) 
that the sound of the Alleluia summoned monks 
to say their offices : " Post Alleluia cantatum, quo 
signo vocabantur ad collectam, nuUi residere 
licitum erat." 

5. It was chanted at funerals ; as, for instance, 
at that of Fabiola (Jerome, Ej}. ad Oceanum, 30 
[77], p. 466) ; at that of Pope Agapetus in Con- 
stantinople (Baronius, ann. 536, § 64, vol. ix., 
p. 544). 

This usage is found in the Mozarabic rite, and 
perhaps once existed in the ancient Galilean (Ba- 
ronius, ann. 590, § 39, vol. x. p. 485). 

(Bona, De Divina Psahnodia, c. xvi. § 7 ; J>e 
Rebus Liturgicis, lib. ii., c. 6, § 5 ; Krazer, lie 
Liturgiis, p. 419.) [C] 

ALL SAINTS, Festival of {Omnium Sanc- 
torum Natalis, Fosthntas, Solemnitas). — In tJie 
Eastern Church a particular Sunday, the first 
after Pentecost, was appropriated in ancient 
times to the commemoratiou of all martyrs. 
Chrysostom, in the 'EyK(vfj.iov its rohs ayious 
nduTas Toi/s ev oKcii tw kSvijlw /xapTvpriauvTas., 
says that on the Octave of Pentecost thej- find 
themselves in the m.idst of the band of martyrs ; 
irapeAajSei' rifxas /j-aprvpcov x^P"^ (0pp. ii- 711): 
and there is a similar allusion in Orat. contra 
Judaeos, vi. (0pp. ii. p. 650). This Festival of 
All Martyrs became in later times a Festival of 
All Saints, and the Sunday next after Pentecost 
appears in the Calendar of the Greek Jlenologion 
as KvpiaKT] toiv 'Ayiwv iravTccv. The intention 
in so placing this commemoration probably was 
to crown the ecclesiastical year with a solemnity 
dedicated to the whole glorious baud of saints 
and martj'rs. 

In the West, the institution of this festival 
is intimately connected with the dedication to 
Christian purposes of the Pantheon or Rotunda 
at Rome. This temple, built in honour of the 
victory of Augustus at Actium, was dedicated 
by M. Agrippa to Jupiter Vindcx, and was called 
the Pantheon, probably from the number of 
statues of the gods which it contained, though 
other reasons are assigned for the name. 

Up to the time of St. Gregory the Great, idol- 
temples were generally thrown down, or, if tliey 
were suffered to remain, were thought unworthy 
to be used in the service of God. Gregory 
himself at first maintained this principle, but in 
the latter part of his life, thought it would con- 
duce more to the conversion of the heathen if 
they were allowed to worship in the accustomed 
spot with new rites (see his well-known letter 
to Mellitus, in Bede, Hist. Eccl. ii. 30 ; 0pp. vi. 
p. 79); and from this time, the principle of con- 
verting heathen fanes to Christian uses seems to 
have become familiar. In the beginning of the 
7th century, the Pantheon remained almost the 
solitary monument of the old heathen worshiji 
in Rome. In the year 607 Boniface III. obtained 
from the Emperor Phocas the important re- 
cognition of the supremacy of Rome over all 


other churches ; and in the same year his suc- 
cessor, Boniface IV., having cleansed and restored 
the Pantheon, obtained the emperor's permission 
to dedicate it to the service of God, in the name 
" S. Mariae semper Virginis et omnium Mar- 
tyrum :" {Liber Pontif. in Muratori, Rcr. Ital. 
Scriptores, iii. 1, 135). This dedication is com- 
memorated, and is believed to have taken place, 
on May 13. On this day we find in the old Ro- 
man jiartyrology edited by Eosweyd, " S. Mariae 
ad Martyres dedicationis dies agitur a Bonifacio 
Papa statutus." Baronius tells us, thjat he found 
it recorded in an ancient MS. belonging to the 
Church itself, that it was first dedicated " In 
hoflorem S. Mariae, Dei Genetricis, et omnium 
SS. Martyrum et Confessorum ; " and that at the 
time of dedication the boues of martyrs from 
the various cemeteries of the city were borne in 
a procession of twenty-eight carriages to the 
church. {Martyrol. Horn. p. 204-.) The technical 
use of the word " confessor " seems, however, to 
indicate a somewhat later date than that of the 
dedication ; and Paulus Diaconus (Jlist. Lorvjo- 
bard. iv. 37, p. 570) tells us simply that Phocas 
granted Boniface permission, " Ecclesiam beatae 
semper Virginis Mariae et omnium Martyrum 
fieri, ut ubi quondam omnium non deorum sed 
daemonum cultus erat, ibi deinceps omnium fieret 
memoria sanctorum," and the church bears to 
this day the name of "S. Maria dei Martiri." 
This festival of the 13th May was not wholly 
confined to the city of Rome, yet it seems to have 
been little more than a dedication-festival of the 
Rotunda, corresponding to the dedication-festivals 
of other churches, but of higher celebrity, as the 
commemoration of the final victory of Christianity 
over Paganism. 

The history of the establishment of the 
festival of All Saints on Nov, 1 is somewhat 
obscure. Tlie Marti/rologium Bom. Vet., al- 
ready quoted, gives under " Kal. Kovembr." a 
" Festivitas Sanctorum, quae Celebris et gene- 
ralis agitur Romae." The very terms here used 
show that this " Festivitas Sanctorum " was a 
specially Roman festival, and it was probably 
simply the dedication-feast of an oratory dedi- 
cated by Gregory III. " In honorem Omnium 
Sanctorum." But in the 8th century, the ob- 
servance of the festival was by no means con- 
fined to Rome. Beda's Metrical Martyrology has 

" Multiplicl rutilat gemma ceu in fronte November, 
CuDctorum fulget Sanctorum laude decoris." 

In the ancient Hieronymiaa calendar in 
D'Achery (Spicileg. tom. ii.), it appears under 
Kal. Novemb., but only in the third place ; 
" Natalis St. Caesarii ; St. Andomari Episcopi ; 
sive Omnium Sanctorum." The list of festivals 
in the Penitential of Boniface gives " In solemni- 
tate Omnium Sanctorum ; " but the feast is not 
found in the list given by Chrodogang (an. 762), 
or iu Charlemagne's Capitulary {0pp. Caroli 
Magni, i. 326) on the subject of festivals. It 
appears then to have been observed by some 
chuixhes in Germany, France, and England iu 
the middle of the 8th century, but not univer- 
sally. It was perhaps this diversity of practice 
which induced Gregory IV., in the )'ear 835, to 
! suggest to the Emperor Lewis the Pious, a ge- 
i neral ordinance on the subject. Sigebert, in his 
I Chronicon (in Pistorius, Script. Germ. tom. i.), 
t tells us under that veai", ''Tunc moncutcGre- 



gorio Papa, et omnibus cpiscopis assentiontibus, I 

Ludovicus Imperator statuit, ut in Gallia et 
Germania Festivitas Omnium Sanctorum iu Kal. 
Novemb. celebraretur, quam Romani ex instituto 
Bonifacii Papae celebrant." (Compare Adonis 
Martyrol. ed. Rosweyd, p. 180.) It would seem j 

from this, that the festivals of May 13 and I 

Nov. 1 had already coalesced on the latter day, 
and that the one festival then observed was 
referred to Boniface IV., who, in fact, instituted ' 

that of May 13. The time was perhaps chosen j 

as being, in a large part of Lewis's dominions, i 

the time of leisure after harvest, when men's '■ 

hearts are disposed to thankfulness to the Giver , 

of all good. From this time, All Saints' day be- 
came one of the great festivals of the Church, j 
and its observance general throughout Europe. 

It probably had a Vigil from the first, as be- 
fore the time of its genei-al observance a Vigil 
and Fast preceded the great festivals of the j 

Church, It may, perhaps, have had an octave -j 

from its first institution in Rome itself; but this | 

was not the case in other churches, for an octave i 

of All Saints does not seem to be found in any j 

calendar earlier than the loth century. Proper j 

collects, preface, and benediction for the " Natalis > 

Omnium Sanctorum " are found in some, but not I 

the most ancient, MSS. of the Gregorian Sacra- ' 

mentary (p. 138). 

(Baronius in Martyrologio Bornano, May 13 -; 

and Nov. 1 ; Binterim's Denkwurdigkeiten, vol, 
V. pt. 1, p. 487 tr. ; Alt in Herzog's Beal-Ency- , 

clopddie, i. 247.) [C] ; 

ALL SOULS, Festival of {Omnium fide- 
Hum defunctorum memoria or commemoratio). 
Very ancient traces of the observance of a day ' 

for the commemoration of "the souls of all 
those who have died in the communion of the 1 

body and blood of our Lord " (according to j 

Cyprian) appear in the Fathers of the Church. I 

Tertullian {I>e Corona Militis, c. 3) says, 
" Oblationes pro defunctis annua die facimus." | 

And to the same effect he speaks {De Exhort. 
Castitatis, c. 11, and De Monogmn. c. 10) of 
annual offerings (oblationes) for the souls of the 1 

departed. These were probably made on the an- 
niversary of the death, and were especially the 
business of surviving relatives. So Chrysostom 
{Horn. 29 in Acta Apost.), speaks of those who 
made commemoration of a mother, a wife or a 
child. Similarly Augustine {De Cura pro Mor- 
tiiis, ch. 4). 

It appears from an allusion in Amalarius of | 

Metz (before 837) that in his time a day was j 

specially dedicated to the commemoration of all < 

souls of the departed, and it seems probable that ' 

this was the day following All Saints' Day. 
Amalarius says expressly {De Eccl. Officiis, lib. | 

iii. c. 44) " Anniversaria dies ideo repetitur I 

pro defunctis, quoniam nescimus qualiter eorum i 

causa habeatur in altera vita." And in c. 65, 1 

he says " Post officium Sanctorum inserui of- j 

ficium pro mortuis ; multi enim transierunt de 
praesenti saeculo qui non illico Sanctis conjun- j 

guntur, pro quibus solito more officium agitur." j 

The festival of All Souls is here regarded as a 
kind of supplement to that of All Saints, and | 

may very probably have taken place on the 
morrow of that day. But the earliest definite ' 

injunction for the observance of a commemoration 
of all souls of thn departed on Nov. 2 apjicar.s tn 



be that of Odilo, Abbot of Clugny, in the 10th 
century. A pilgrim returning from Jerusalem, 
says Peter Damiani (Vita Odilonis, 0pp. ii. 410), 
reported to Odilo a woful vision which he had 
had on his journey of the suffering of souls in 
purgatorial fire ; Odilo thereupon instituted in 
the churches under his control a general com- 
memoration of the souls of the faithful departed 
on the day following All Saints' Day : " per 
omnia monasteria sua constituit generale de- 
cretum, ut sicat primo die Mensis Novembris 
juxta universalis Ecclesiae regulam omnium 
Sanctorum solemnitas agitur ; ita sequent! die | 
in psalmis, eleemosynis et praecipue Missarum j 
solemniis, omnium in Christo quiescentium ! 
memoria celebraretur." This order was soon 
adopted, not only by other monastic congrega- 
tions, but by bishops for their dioceses; for 
instance, by the contemporary Bishop Notger of 
Liege {Ghronicon Belgicum, in Pistorius's Scrip- 
tores German, iii. 92). The observance appears, 
in fact, in a short time to have become general, 
without any ordinance of the Church at large on 
the subject. 

But even after the observance of a commemo- 
ration of All Souls on Nov. 2 became common, 
we find {Statutes of Cahors, in Martene, The- 
saurus Anecdot. iv. 766) that in some places the 
morrow of St. Hilary's Day (Jan. 14), and in 
others the morrows of the Octaves of Easter 
and Pentecost were appropriated to the special 
commemoration of the souls of the departed j 
(Binterim's DenkwUrdigkeiten, vol. v. pt. 1, p. 
492 ff.). [C] 

ALMACHIUS, martyr at Rome, commemo- 
rated Jan. 1 (Mart. Rom. Vet., Bedae). [C] 

ALMS ('EXiTifjioawri, non-classical in this 
sense, either word or thing ; although for the 
thing, see Seneca, De Benefic. vi. 3, and Martial, 
Epigr. V. 42 ; and for the word also, Diog. Laert. 
V. 17 : first found in the special meaning of alms in 
LXX., Dan. iv. 24 [27 Heb.], where the original 
reads "righteousness;" so also Tobit xii. 9, xiv. 
11 [and elsewhere], Ecclus. iii. 30, iv. 2, vii. 10, 
xxix. 15, 16, XXXV. 2). Alms i-ecognized as a duty 
throughout the 0. T., but brought into promi- 
nence in the later Jewish period (cf. Buxtorf, 
Floril. Hebr. p. 88; Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. in 
Matt. vi. 2, Luc. ii. 8), when they were formally 
and regularly given in the synagogues ( Vitring. 
De Syn. Vet.) to be distributed by appointed 
officers, as also by putting them into certain 
trumpet-shaped alms-boxes in the temple, called 
■ya^o^vXaKia (Le Moyne, Not. in Var. Sac. ii. 
75 ; Deyling, Observ. Sac. iii. 175 ; distinct from 
the ya(o(pv\a.Ktov or treasury of St. Luke xxi. 1). 
They were regarded also as a work specially 
acceptable to God (Prov. xix. 17, xxii. 9, &c. ; 
Tobit, and Ecclus., passim ; St. Luke xi. 41, Acts 
X. 2). In like manner they became in the Chris- 
tian Church — 

I. A fundamental law of Christian morality 
(St. Matt. X. 42, xix. 21, xxv. 35 ; St. Luke xii. 
33 ; Acts ii. 44, iv. 34-37, xi. 29, 30 ; Rom. xii. 
13, XV. 25 ; 2 Cor. viii. 12, ix. 7 ; Gal. ii. 1, vi. 
10 ; Ephes. iv. 28 ; 1 Tim. vi. 18 ; Hebr. xiii. 
16; 1 Pet. iv. 8, 9; 1 John iii. 17), so tho- 
roughly reoognized as to make it both super- 
llnous and impossible to enumerate patristic 
allusions to it. Special tracts on almsgiving, 
by St. Cyprian, De Opere et Elecnuos. ; St. Greg. 


Nyss., De Pauperibus Amandis Oratt. II. St. 
Greg. Naz., De Pauperum Amore Orat. ; St. Basil 
M., Serm. de Eleemos. inter Seimon. XXIV. ; St. 
Ephraem Syrus, De Aw.ore Pauperum ; St. Leo 
M., Sermones T'J. De CoUectis et Eleemos.; St. 
INIaximus, Ad Joann. Cubic. EpAst. II. {De Elee- 
mos^ ; and among the sermons attributed to St. 
Chrysostom, one De Jejun. et Eleemos., and three 
De Eleemos., &c. (and see a collection of patristic 
citations in Drexelius, De Eleemosyna). Even 
Julian the Apostate, c. a.d. 351, bears testimony 
that the almsgiving of "the Galileans" over- 
flowed beyond their own poor to the heathen 
(Epist. adArsac, Epist. xlix.; and compare Lucian, 
as quoted below); and thinks it expedient to 
boast of his own kindness (Ad Themist.). Com- 
pare also such notable examples as those, e.g., 
of Pope Soter as described by his contemporary 
Dionysius Bishop of Corinth, c. a.d. 160 (ap. 
Euseb. H. E. iv. 23); of Pauiinus of Kola; of 
Deo Gratias Bishop of Carthage towards Gen- 
seric's captives (see Milman, L. C. i. 205, and 
Gibbon); of Johannes " Eleemosynarius," Patri- 
arch of Alexandria, A.D. 606-616: and the oc- 
currence of such expressions as, " Hoc praestat 
eleemosyna quod et Baptisma " (St. Hieron. in 
Ps. cxxxiii.), " Christian! sacrificium est eleemo- 
syna in pauperem " (St. Aug. Serm. xlii., from 
Heb. xiii. 16); or again, that almsgiving is the 
"characteristic mark of a Christian,"— xapa/c- 
T-npiariKhv XpKTTtavoii, and that it is /j-riTvp 
aya.irr]i, (pap/xaKov a/xapTrffidTuiu, KAifxa^ fls rhu 
ovpavhv iarrjpiyij.ivyj (St. Chrys. in Heb, Horn. 
xxxii., and in Tit. Horn, vi.); or again, that 
" res ecclesiae " are " patrimonia pauperum." 

n. An integral part of Christian worship (Acts 
ii. 42, vi. 1 ; 1 Cor. xvi.l ; 1 Tim. v. 3, 16) : alms 
for the poor, to be distributed by the clergy (Acts 
xi. 30), being a regular portion of the otierings 
made in church, among those for the support cf 
the clergy, and oblations in kind for the Church 
services (Justin M., Apol. I. p. 98, Thirlby ; St. 
Greg. Naz., Orat. sx., Opp. !. 351 ; Constit. 
Apostol. iv. 6, 8; St. Chrys., Horn. 1. in S. 
Matth. Opp. vii. 518, Ben. ; Cone. Gangrens., 
circ. A.D. 324, c. 8 ; for the East : — St. Iren., 
Adv. Haer. iv. 18 ; St. Cypr., Da Op. et Elecm., 
203, Fell; Tertuli., Aiol. 39; Arnob., Adv. 
Gent, iv., in fin. ; St. Ambros., Ep. xvii. Ad 
Valent. Opp. ii. 827, Ben. ; Cone. Eliber., a.d. 
304, cc. 28, 29 ; Cone. Carthag. iv., a.d. 398, 
cc. 93, 94 ; Optatus, De Schism. Donat. vi. p. 93, 
Albaspin. ; Cone. Matiscon. !!., a.d. 585, c. 4 ; 
Horn, cclxv. in Append, ad S. Aug. Opp. v. ; 
Pesp. Greg. M. ad Qu. Aug. ap. Baed. H. E.. 
i. 27 ; for the "West : Psalms being sung, at least 
at Carthage, during the collection and distribu- 
tion, St. Aug. Petract. ii. 11); and this as a pri- 
vilege, the names of considerable donors being 
vecited (Constit. Apostol. iii. 4; St. Cj^i:, Epist. 
ix. al. xvii., Ix. al. Ixii. ; St. Hieron., in Jerem. xi. 
lib. ii., in Ezech. xviii. ; St. Chrys., Mom. xviii. 
in Act. : Gest. Caecil. et Felic. ad fin. OpAati p. 95), 
and the offerings of evil-livers, energumeni, ex- 
communicate persons, suicides, and of those at 
enmity with their brethren, being rejected (St. 
Iren., Adv. Haer. iv. 34; TertulL, De Praescrip. 
30 ; Constit. Apost. iv. 5-7 ; St. Athan., Ep. ad 
Solitar., p. 364, ed. 1698 ; Epist. ad Bonifac. in 
App. ad Opp. S. Aug. ii. ; Cone. Herd. a.d. 524, c. 
13; and Aitissiod. i., a.d. 578, c. 17 : tiip Irish 
synods assigned to St. Patrick, c. 12, Wilk. i. 3, 


auii c. 2, ib. 4- ; and St. Ambrose, Optatus, and the 
Councils of Lerida and Carthage, above quoted ; 
or later still, Capit. Hcrard. Archiep. Turon. 
116, in Baluz. Capit. 1. 1294, and repeatedly in 
the Cajiitiilaries). There was also an alms-box 
(ya^o(pv\a.Kiov, corhona, see St. Cypr., De Op. et 
Eleemos., and St. Hieron., Ejnst. 27, c. 14), placed 
in the church for casual alms, to be taken out 
nonthly (TertuU. Apol. 39). And Paulinus 
{Epist. 32) speaks of a table (rnensa) for re- 
ceiving the offerings. Collections for the poor in 
church both on Sundays and on week days are 
mentioned by St. Leo the Great {Serm. de Col- 
lectis). The poor also habitually sat at the 
church door, at least in the East, to receive alms 
(St. Chrys., Horn. xxvi. De Verb. Apost., Horn. i. 
in 2 Tim., Horn. iii. De Poenit.). 

III. An institution having a formal list of re- 
cipients, mainly widows and orphans (St. Ignat., 
ad Pohjcarp. iv. ; Constit. Apost. iv. 4, &c.) ; or, 
upon occasion, martyrs in prison or in the mines, 
or other prisoners, or shipwrecked persons (Dion. 
Corinth, ap. Euseb. ff. E. iv. 23 ; TertulL, De 
Jejun. 13 ; Lucian, De Morte Peregrin. § 11, Op. 
viii. 279, Bipont. ; Liban., A.D. 387, Orat. xvi. 
in Tisamen., Orat. de Vinctis, ii. 258, 445, ed. 
Reiske): and special officers, as for other directly 
ecclesiastical functions, so also for managing the 
Church alms, viz. deacons {Const. Apost. ii. 31, 
32, iii. 19; Dionys. Alex. ap. Euseb. H. E. vii. 
11 ; St. Cypr., E/jist. xli., and xlix. al. Iii., Fell. ; 
St. Hieron., Ad Nepot. Epist. xxxiv.) ; and among 
women, deaconesses, commonly widows of ad- 
vanced age {Constit. Apost. iii. 15 ; St. Hieron., 
Ad Nepot. Epist. xxxiv. ; and Lucian and Libanius 
as above). See also Tertullian {Ad Uxor. ii. 
4 and 8) for the charitable works of married 
Christian matrons. 

IV. These arrangements were supplemented 
when necessary by special collections appointed 
by the bishop (TertulL, De Jejun. 13), after the 
pattern of St. Paul, for extraordinary emer- 
gencies, whether at home or among brethren or 
others elsewhere ; e. g. St. Cyprian's collection 
of " sestertia centum millia nummorurn " for 
the redemption of Numidian captives from the 
barbarians (St. Cj'pr., Epist. Ix.) ; mostly accom- 
panied by fast days (TertulL ib. — and so, long 
after, Theodulph, A.D. 787 {_Capit. 38], enjoins 
almsgiving continually, but specially on fast days), 
but sometimes at the ordinary Church service 
(St. Leo M., De Collectis) : a practice which grew 
sometimes into the abuse which was remedied by 
the Council of Tours (ii. a.d. 567, c. 5), enact- 
ing that each city should provide for its own 
poor, and by Gregory the Great, desiring the 
Bishop of Milan to protect a poor man at Genoa 
from being compelled to contribute to such a 
collection (St. Greg., Epist. ix. 126). See also 
St. Hieron., Adc. Vigilantiuni. 

The a7ci7roi also may be mentioned in this 
connection (1 Cor. xi. 20, Jude 12 ; TertulL, 
Apol. 39 ; Constit. Apost. ii. 28 ; prohibited 
Cone. Laod., a.d. 364, c. 5, and see Cone. Quini- 
sext. A.D. 762, c. 74; and under Agapae). Also 
the leycSi/es or ^ecoSoxe^a (St. Chrys., Horn. xlv. in 
Act. Apostol. ; St. Aug., Tract, xcvii. in Joh. 
§ 4); the ■irrcoxoTpo(pf7a, managed by tlie "kA»j- 
piKol or a.(priyov/j.{voL rwv tttoix^'i-'^v " {Cone. 
Chalced. A.D. 451, c. 8 ; and Pallad., Hist. Lavs. 
v.); the YTjpo/coueia, the yocro/cu^era (Pnllad., V. 
Chrys. p. 19), the opcpavorpocpfla : of which the 



names explain themselves (and see abundant re- 
ferences in Suicer, sub voce., and Justinian also 
enacts laws respecting such institutions and the 
clergy who manage them), and which came into 
being with the Christian Church. E. g., the 
^ao-iAeias of St. Basil at Caesarea stands as a 
notable example of a Christian hospital, at once 
for sick and strangers (St. Basil. M., Epist. 94; 
St. Greg. Naz., Orat. xxvii. and xxx. : Sozom. vi. 
34), with its smaller oilshoots in the neighbour- 
ing country (St. Basil. M., Epist. 142, 143) ; and 
so also the hospital of St. Chrysostom, with his 
advice on the subject to the faithful of Con- 
stantinople (St. Chrys., Horn. xlv. in Act. Apost. 
0pp. ix. 343) ; and the Xenodochium founded 
" in portu Romano " by Pammachius and Fabiola 
(St. Hieron., Ad Ocean. Ep. Ixxxiv.). Add also 
the alms given at marriage and at funerals (St. 
Chrys., Horn, xxxii. in S. Matth.; St. Hieron., 
Ad Pammach. de Obitu Uxor. Ep. liv. ; Pseudo- 
Origen., Comment, in Job. lib. iii. p. 437 ; St. 
Aug., Cont. Faust, xx. 20; and see Bingham). 
Our own Council of Cealchyth, in A.D. 816 (c. 
10), directs the tenth of a bishop's substance 
to be given in alms upon his death. The Mani- 
chaeans appear to have refused alms to needy 
persons not Manichaeans on some recondite prin- 
ciple of their connection with the principle of 
evil, for which they are condemned by St. Aug. 
{De Mor. Manich. ii. 15, 16) and Theodoret 
{Haer. Fab. i. 26). 

There was apparently no specified rule for 
division of ecclesiastical revenues, originally of 
course entirely voluntary offerings, anterior to 
the 5th century ; the bishop being throughout 
their chief administrator, but by the hands of 
the deacons (see e. g. St. Cypr., about Felicis- 
simus, Efjist. xli. ; and Cone. Gangr., c. 8, and 
Epiphan, Haer. xL, condemning the Eustathians 
for withdrawing their alms from the bishop or 
the officer appointed by him). In the Western 
Church in the 5th century (setting aside the 
questionable decree of the Synod of Rome under 
Sylvester in 324) we find a fourfold division of 
them : 1, for the bishop ; 2, for the clergy ; 3, 
for the poor ; 4, for the fabric and sustentation 
of the churches. Or again, for 1. Churches; 
2. Clergy ; 3. Poor ; 4. Strangers. This origin- 
ated with the Popes Simplicius {Ejnst. 3, a.d. 
467) and Gelasius (in Gratian Cans. 12 qu. 2, 
c. Sancimus, a.d. 492) ; is mentioned repeatedly 
by St. Gregory the Great at the end of the 6th 
century {e.g. Ep. iv. 11, v. 44, vii. 8, xiii. 44: 
Resp. ad August., &c. ; — and see also Cone. AureL 
I. c. 5), was varied in Charlemagne's and Lud. 
Pius' Capitularies (i. 80, Baluz. 718), as re- 
garded voluntary offerings, into two-thirds to 
the poor and one-third to the clergy in rich 
places, and half to each in poor ones; but was 
repeated in the old form by the Capd. of Charle- 
magne himtelf respecting tithes (Baluz. i. 350) 
and by the Counc. of Worms, a.d. 8G8, c. 7 ; 
Tribur., A.D. 895, c. 13 ; and Nantes, A. D. 895 (:-■), 
c. 10 (if at least this last is not to be referred 
to the Council of Nantes in 658). 

The special office of Elecmosynarius or Almoner 
occurs in later times, afterwards the name of 
the superintendent of the alms-house or hospital, 
but at first a distributor of alms : both in monas- 
teries (described at length by Du Gauge, fi-om a 
JIS. of St. Victor of Paris), although the office in 
tiie older Egyjitian monasteries belonged to tli<? 



oeconomus, under the special name of SiaKovia 
(Cassian, Collat. xviii. 7, xxi. 9) ; and afterwards, 
in England at least, as an officer attached to 
each bishop {Cone. Oxon., a.D. 1222 ; Lyndw., 
Provinc. i. 13, p. 67) ; and lastly to the king, as 
e.g. in England, and notably to the Kings of 
France (see a list in Du Cange). 

in the history of doctrine, the subject of alms- 
giving is connected — I. With the notions of com- 
munity of goods, voluntary poverty, and the 
difficulty of salvation to the rich ; the current 
voice of fathers, as e.g. Tertull., AjmI. 39, Justin 
M., AjmI. i., Arnob. Adv. Gent. iv. in fin., magni- 
fying the temper indicated by to twu <pi\ei>v 
irdvra Koivd, while others, as St. Clem. Alex. 
(Strom, iii. 6, p. 536, Potter), rejected its literal 
and narrow perversion (see also his tract at 
length, Quis Dices Salvetur) ; which perversion 
indeed the Church condemned in the cases of the 
Apostolici or Afotaotitae (St. Aug., De Haer. xl. 
0pp. viii. 9 ; St. Epiphan., Haer. Ixi.), and of the 
Massalians (St. Epiphan. Haer. Ixx.), and again 
m that of the Pelagians, who maintained that 
rich men must give up their wealth in order to 
be saved (so at least Pseudo-Sixtus III., De 
Divitiis ; and see St. Aug., Epist. cvi. ad Paulin., 
and Cone. DiospoUt. § 6, A.D. 415). Compare 
Slosheim's Diss, de Vera Nat. Commun. Bono- 
rum in Eccl. Hieros. II. With the relation of 
good works to justification; alms and fasting 
standing prominently in the question, i. as com- 
paratively outward and positive acts, ii. as being 
specially urged from early times as parts of 
repentance and charity {e. g. Hermas, Pastor 
X. 4 ; Salvian, Adv. Avarit. ii. p. 205 ; Lactant., 
Div. Instit. vi. 13, torn. i. p. 470 ; Constit. S. 
Clem. vii. 12 ; St. Ambros., De Elia et Jejun. 
XX. ; St. Chrys., Horn. vii. de Poenit. § 6, 0pp. 
ii. 336 C). " Date et dabitur vobis," found its 
answer in the repeated occurrence of the words 
((?. .'/. St. Caesar. Arel., Hom. xv. ; St. Eligius, in 
nia ii. 15, ap. D'Ach., Spicil. ii. 96). "Da, Do- 
mine, quia dedimus ; " but the whole doctrine 
derived its colour in each case from the succes- 
sive phases of the doctrine of merit. III. With 
(in time) the idea of compounding for other sins 
by alms, a feeling strengthened by the imposition 
of alms by way of satisfaction and of commuta- 
tion of penance. The introduction of the practice 
is attributed to Theodore of Canterbury, c. A.D. 
700, but upon the ground only of the Peniten- 
tials hitherto falsely attributed to him ; while the 
abuse of it is severely condemned by the Coun'^il 
of Cloveshoe, A.D. 747 (c. 26), and by Theodulph 
(Capit. 32, A.D. 787). Its grossest instance is 
probably to be found in the ledger-like calcula- 
tion of the payments, by which " powerful men " 
could redeem their penances, in Eadgar's canons, 
in pn. (Thorpe, ii. 286-289), about A.D. 963. 
See also Morinus, Dc Poenit. lib. x. c. 17, who 
treats tlie question at length. IV. With alms 
for the dead. See Cunc. Carth. iv., A.D. 398, c. 
79 ; St. Chrys., as before quoted, and Bingham. 
See also for later times, Car. M., Capit'. v. 364, 
.ip. Baluz. i. 902. 

Plough-alms in England (eleem. carucarum, 
SM-aehwissan), viz., a penny for every plough 
used in tillage, to be paid annually fifteen days 
after Easter (Laws of Eadgar and Guthrun, a.d. 
906, c. 6 ; Eadgar's Laws i. 2, and can. 54, a.d. 
959 and 975; Ethelred's, ix. 12, a.d. 1014: 
Cnut's, 0. 8, c. A.D. 1O30 ; Pectit. -^itig Pers., § de 


Vilkaiis), were rather a church due than alms 
properly so called. As was also St. Peter's 
penny, Elcemos. S. Petri. And Libera Eleemo- 
syna, or Frank-Almoign, is the tenure of most 
Church lands from Saxon times (viz., tenure 
on condition, not of specified religious services, 
but of Divine Service generally), although now 
incapable of being created de novo (Stat. Quia 
Emptores, 18 Edw. I.). See Stephen's Blackstone, 
i., Bk. n. Pt. i. c. 2, in fin. [A. W. H.] 

Council of.] 

ALTAR. — The table or raised surface on 
which the Eucharist is consecrated. 
I. Names of the Altar. 

1. Tpdire^a, a table ; as rpairefa Kvplov, 1 Cor. 
X. 21. This is the term most commonly used by 
the Greek Fathers and in Greek Liturgies ; some- 
times simply, fi TpdireCa, as the Table by pre- 
eminence (Chrysost. in Ephes. Hom. 3), but 
more frequently with epithets expressive of awe 
and reverence ; fivariKii, irvev/xaTiK-fi, cpo^fpa, 
(ppiKTrj, (ppiKuSrjS, PaffLKtKT), aOdvaros, lepd, ayla, 
Oeia, and the like (see Suicer's Thesaurus, s. v.). 
St. Basil in one passage (Ep. 73, 0pp. ii. 870) 
appears to contrast the Tables (rpawe^as) of the 
orthodox with the Altars (Qvffiaarripia) of Basi- 
lides. Sozomen (Eccl. Hist. ix. 2, p. 368) says 
of a slab which covered a tomb that it was 
fashioned as if for a Holy Table (licnnp fls hpav 
elrjcr/feiTO rpdire^av), a passage which seems to 
show that he was familiar with stone tables. 

2. Qvciacrrripiov, the place of Sacrifice ; the 
word usad in the Septuagint for Noah's altar 
(Gen. viii. 20), and both for the Altar of Burnt- 
sacrifice and the Altar of Incense under the 
Levitical law, but not for heathen altars. 

The word Qvcnatrriipwv in Heb. xiii. 10, is 
referred by some commentators to the Lord's 
Table, though it seems to relate rather to the 
heavenly than to the earthly sanctuary (Thomas 
Aquinas). The Ovaiaffrripiov of Ignatius, too 
(ad Philad.4; compare Magn. 7; Trail. 7), 
can scarcely designate the Table used in the 
Eucharist (see Lightfoot on Philippians, p. 263, 
u. 2). But by this word Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. 
X. 4, § 44) describes the altar of the great 
church in Tyre, and again (Panegyr. sub fin.) he 
speaks of altars (Qvcriaffriipia) erected through- 
out the world. Athanasius, or Pseudo-Athana- 
sius (Disp. cont. Arium, 0pp. i. 90), explains 
the word rpdneCa by QvaiaaT-rtpLov. This name 
rarely occurs in the liturgies. @v(na(TT^piov 
not unfrequently designates the enclosure within 
which the altar stood, or Bema (see Mede, On the 
Name Altar or ©vaiacrr-hpiov, Works, p. 382 ff.). 

3. The Copts call the altar 'lAaa-T-fiptov, the 
word applied in the Greek Scriptures to the 
Mercy-Seat, or covering of the Ark [compare 
Arca] ; but in the Coptic liturgy of St. Basil 
they use the ancient Egyptian word Pimaner- 
schoouschi, which in Coptic versions of Scripture 
answers to the Heb. nitD and the Greek Bvffia- 
irTrtpiov (Renaudot, Lit. Orient, i. 181). 

4. The word Bwfios (see Nitzsch on the 
Odyssey, vol. ii. p. 15) is used in Scripture and 
in Christian writers generally for a heathen 
altar. Thus in 1 Maccab. i. 54, we read that in 
the persecution under Antiochus an "abomina- 
tion of desolation" was built on the Temple-altar 


{Qva-iaffT-fipiov), while idol-altars {Bw/xol) were 
set up in the cities of Judah ; and, again (i. 59), 
sacrifices were ottered " iizl tov Bto,u^y hs itv ^irl 
rod @vcria(TTT]plov." The word Boo/xos is, how- 
ever, applied to the Levitical altar in Ecclesias- 
ticus 1. 12, the work of a gentilizing writer. It 
is generally repudiated by early Christian writers, 
except in a figurative sense : thus Clement of 
Alexandria (^Stwm. vii. p. 717) and Origen (c. 
C'lilsum viii. p. 389) declare that the soul is the 
true Christian altar (Bai^os), the latter expressly 
admitting the charge of Celsus, that the Chris- 
tians had no material altars. Yet in later times 
Bcafios was sometimes used for the Christian 
altar; Syuesius, for instance (Karao-Taffis, c. 19, 
p. 303), speaks of flying for refuge to the 
unbloody altar (Bto/xoV). 

5. The expression " Mensa Domini," or " Mensa 
Dominica," is not uncommon in the Latin Fathers, 
especially St. Augustine (e.g._Sermo 21, c. 5, on 
Ps. Ixiii. 11). And an altar raised in honour of 
a martyr frequently bore his name ; as " Mensa 
Cypriani" (Augustine, Sermo 310). The word 
" mensa " is frequently used for the slab which 
formed the top of the altar (v. infra). 

6. Ara, the Vulgate rendering of Bai^ps (1 
Maccab. i. 54 [57], etc.), is frequently applied 
by TertuUian to the Christian altar, though not 
without some qualification ; for instance, " ara 
Dei" (de Oratione, c. 14). Yet ara, like Bcojuos, 
is repudiated by the early Christian apologists 
on account of its heathen associations ; thus 
Minucius Felix (Octavius, c. 32) admits that 
" Delubra et ai-as non habemus ; " compare Arno- 
bius (adv. Gentes vi. 1) and Lactantius {Divin. 
Instit. ii. 2). In rubrics, Ara designates a port- 
able altar or consecrated slab. (Macri Hiero- 
lexicon, s.v. " Altare.") Ara is also used for the 
substruotm-e on which the mensa, or altar proper, 
was placed ; " Altaris aram funditus pessum- 
(lare " (Prudentius, Peristcph. xiv. 49). Compare 
Ardo Smaragdus, quoted below. 

7. But by far the most common name in the 
Latin Fathers and in Liturgical diction is altare, 
a'" high altar," from altus (Isidore, Origines, xv. 
4, p. 1197; compare alveare, collare). This is 
the Vulgate equivalent of 6v<na<rTripiov. Ter- 
tuUian (de Exhort. Castitatis c. 10) speaks of the 
Lord's Table as " altare " simply ; so also Cyprian 
(Epist. 45, § 3, ed. Goldhorn), who, by the 
phrase " altari posito," indicates that the church- 
altar in his time was moveable ; and who, in 
another place (Epist. 59, § 25), contrasts the 
Lord's Altar (" Domini Altare ") with the " ara " 
of' idols. So again (Epist. 65, § 1) he contrasts 
" aras diaboli " with " Altare Dei." So Augus- 
tine (Sermo 159, § 1) speaks of "Altare Dei." 
Yet Cyprian speaks (Ep. 59, § 15) of "diaboli 
altaria," so uncertain was the usage. In the 
Latin liturgies scarcely any other name of the 
altar occurs but altare. The plural altaria is 
also occasionally used by ecclesiastical writers, 
as invariably by classical authors, to designate 
an altar ; thus Caesarius of Aries (Horn. 7) says 
that the elements (creaturae) to be consecrated 
" sacris altaribus imponuntur." (Mone's Griech. 
u. Lat. Messen, p. 6.) 

The singular " altarium " is also used in late 
writers : as in the Canon of the Council of 
Auxerre quoted below, mass is not to be said 
more than once a day, "super uno altario." 
Altarium is also used in a wider sense, like 



0v<Tia(Tr-nf>iov, for the Bema or Sanctuary; so 
also altaria. 

8. In most European languages, not only of 
the Romanesque family, but also of the Teutonic 
and Slavonic, the word used for the Loi-d's Table 
is derived, with but slight change, from altare. 
In Russian, however, another word, prestol, pro- 
perly a throne, is in general use. [C] 

II. Parts composing altars. — Although in strict- 
ness the table or tomb-like structure consti- 
tutes the altar, the steps on which it is placed, 
and the ciborium or canopy which covered it, 
may be considered parts of the altar in a larger 
sense, or, at least, were so closely connected with 
it, as to make it more convenient to treat of 
them under the same head. 

The altar itself was composed of two portions, 
the supports, whether legs or columns, in the 
table form, or slabs in the tomb-like, and the 
"mensa" or slab which formed the top. 

The expression " cornu altaris," horn of the 
altar," often used in rituals (as in the Sacrament. 
Gelasianum 1, c. Ixxxviii.), appears to mean 
merely the corner or angle of the altar, no known 
example showing any protuberance at the angles 
or elsewhere above the general level of the 
mensa, although in some instances (as in that iu 
the church of S. Giovanni Evangelista at Ravenna 
hereafter mentioned) the central part of the sur- 
face of the mensa is slightly hollowed. By the 
Cornu Evangelii is meant the angle to the left of 
the priest celebrating, by Cornu Epistolae that to 
the right. These phrases must, however, it would 
seem, date from a period subsequent to that 
when the Gospel was read from the ambo. 

III. Material and form of altars. — It is admitted 
by all that the earliest altars were tables of 
wood ; in the high altar of the church of S. Gio- 
vanni Latei-ano at Rome is enclosed an altar of 
the tomb-like form, the mensa and sides formed 
of wooden planks, on which St. Peter is asserted 
to have celebrated the Lord's Supper, and at 
Sta. Pudenziana, in the same city, fragments of 
another are preserved to which the same tra- 
dition attaches. [Arca.] 

This shows an ancient belief that altars were 
of wood. And there is abundant proof that in 
Africa at least the Holy Table v.-as commonly of 
wood up to the end of the fourth century. 
Athanasius, speaking of an outrage of the Arians 
in an orthodox church (Ad Monachos, 0pp. i. 
847), says that they burnt the Table (i^vXivrt 
yap ^jv) with other fittings of the church. Op- 
tatus of Mileve, describing the violence of the 
Donatists, mentions their planing afresh, or 
breaking up and using for firewood, the Holy 
Tables in the churches of their rivals (De Schis- 
mate Donatistaruin vi. 1, p. 90 ff.) ; and St. Augus- 
tine (Epist. 185, c. 27) declares that they beat 
the orthodox Bishop Maximinianus with the 
wood of the altar under which he had taken 
refuge. In England, at a much later date, if we 
may trust William of Malmesbury (Vita S. 
Wulstani, in Pe Gestis Pontif. Angl. iii. 14), 
Wulstan, bishop of Worcester (1062-1095), de- 
molished throughout his diocese the wooden 
altars which were still in existence in England 
as in ancient days, " altaria lignea jam inde a 
priscis diebus in Anglia." Martene (De Antiq. 
Eccl. Ritibiis i. 3) and Mabillon (Acta SS. Ber^- 
dict. Saec. vi., pars 2, p. 860) have shown that 
wooden altars were anciently used in Gaul. 



Yet there is distinct evidence of the exist- 
ence of stone altars in the fourth century. 
Gregory of Nyssa {Do Christi Baptismate, 0pp. 
iii. 3G9) speaks of the stone of which the altar 
was made being hallowed by consecration. To 
tlie same eft'ect St. Chrysostom (on 1 Cor. Hom. 
20). And stone became in time the usual canon- 
ical material of an altar. I'he assertion that 
Pope Sylvester (314-335) first decreed that 
altars should be of stone rests upon no ancient 
authority (Bona, De Reh. Lit. i., c. 20, § 1). 
The earliest decree of a council bearing on the 
.subject is one of the provincial council of Epaona 
(Pamiers in France) in 517, the 26th Canon of 
which (Brun's Canones ii. 170) forbids any other 
than stone altars to be consecrated by the appli- 
cation of Chrism. 

As this council was only provincial, its decrees 
were no doubt only partially received. The 
14th chap, of the Capitularies of Charles the 
Great, A.d. 769 (Migne's Patrologia, xcvii. 124), 
orders that priests should not celebrate unless 
"in mensis lapideis ab Episcopis consecratis." 
This seems to mark a period when the use of 
wooden altars, although disapproved of, was by 
no means unknown. In the Eastern churches 
the material of the altar has been deemed a 
m.itter of less importance, and at all times dojvn 
to the present day altars have been made of 
wood, stone, or metal. 

Assemani {Bibl. Orient, iii. 238) cites a Canon 
of a Synod of the Syro-Jacobites, held circa A.D. 
908, which orders the use of fixed altars of stone, 
and the disuse of wood; he adds that in the 
churches of the Maronites and of the Jacobites 
the altars were sometimes of wood, sometimes 
of stone (compare Neale, Eastern Ch. Intr. 181). 
In some instances at the present day pillars of 
stone are used to support a mensa of wood. 

This change of material was in some degree 
occasioned or accompanied by the adoption of a 
different type of form, that of the tomb. Such 
adoption has been usually accounted for by the 
supposition that the tombs in the Roman cata- 
combs known as " arcosolia " were used during 
the period of persecution as altars. These arco- 
solia were forn^ed by cutting in the wall of the 
chamber or oratory, at a height of about three 
feet from the floor, an opening covered by an 
arch. In the wall below this opening an exca- 
vation was made sufficiently large to receive one 
or sometimes two bodies, and this was covered 
by a slab of marble. 

" Such tombs would evidently furnish suffici- 
ently convenient altars, but there appears to be 
some deficiency of proof that they were actually 
so used during the period of persecution, to 
which, indeed, the far greater number are by 
some centuries posterior. Some writers assert 
that up to the time of St. Sylvester the only 
altars in use were wooden chests [compare 
Arca] carried about from place to place where- 
ever the Roman bishop had his habitation. 
Whether this opinion be or be not well-founded, 
it is certain that traces of altars occupying the 
normal position, viz., the centre of the apse, have 
been found in the oratories of the catacombs. 
Bosio and Boldetti state that they had met with 
such, the one in the cemetery of Priscilla, the 
other in that of SS. Mai'cellinus and Peter, and 
Martigny {Diet, des Antiq. Chret. p. 58), adds 
that ho had been shown bv the Cav. de Rossi in 


the cemetery of Calixtus the traces left by the 
four pillars which had supported an altar. The 
date of the altars in question does not, however, 
appear to have been clearly ascertained. 

It was, however, not only in Rome that the 
memorials of martyrs and altai-s were closely 
associated; the 83rd Canon of the Codex Can. 
Ecd. Afric. A.D. 419 (in Brun's Canones, i. 
176) orders that the altaria which had been 
raised everywhere by the roads and in the fields 
as "Memoriae Martyrum," should be overturned 
when there was no proof that a martyr lay 
beneath them ; and blames the practice of erect- 
ing altars in conseauence of dreams and "iuanes 

In the Liber Pontificalis it is stated that Pope 
Felix I. (A.D. 269-274) " constituit supra sepul- 
cra martyrum missas celebrari," but perhaps the 
most ciear proofs of the prevalence of the prac- 
tice of placing altars over the remains of martyrs 
and saints at an 'early period, are furnished by 
passages in Prudentius, particularly that so often 
quoted {Feristeph., Hymn XI. v. 169—174):— 

" Talibus Hippolyti corpus mandatur opertis 
Propter ubi apposita est ara dicata Deo, 

Ilia sacramenti donatrix mensa eademque 
Gustos fida sui martyris apposita, 

Servat ad aeterni spam judicis ossa sepulcro 
Pascit item Sanctis tibricolas dapibus." 

The practice of placing the altar over the re- 
mains of martyrs or saints may probably have 
arisen from a disposition to look upon the suffer- 
ings of those confessors of the faith as analogous 
with that sacrifice which is commemorated in 
the Eucharist ; and the passage in the Reve- 
lation (chap. vi. V. 9), " I saw under the altar 
the souls of them that were slain for the word 
of God," no doubt encouraged or instigated the 
observance. The increasing disposition to vene- 
rate martyrs and their relics fostered this prac- 
tice, by which, as Prudentius says {Peristeph., 
Hymn. III. v. 211)— 

" Sic venerarier ossa libet 
Ossibus altar et impositum." 

And it took firm root in the Western Church ; 
so much so that a rule has long been established 
that every altar must contain a relic or relics, 
among which should be one of the saint in whose 
honour it was consecrated. [Consecration of 
Churches; Relics.] 

This practice, no doubt, conduced to the change 
of material from wood to stone, and also to a 
change of form from that of a table to that of 
a chest or tomb, or to the combination of the 
two. The table-form seems to have been still 
common in Africa in the early part of the 5th 
century : for Synesius (Karao-Toins, c. 19, p. 
303), says that, in the terrors of the Vandal 
invasion, he would cast himself beneath the 
altar, and clasp the columns that supported it. 
The annexed woodcut furnishes an example of 
the combination of the table-form with the 
tomb-form. It was discovered in the ruins of 
the so-called basilica of S. Alessandro on the 
Via Nomentana, about seven miles from Rome, 
and may with all probability be ascribed to the 
fifth century. The mensa is a slab of porphyry, 
the rest is of marble. The small columns were 
not placed as represented in the woodcut at the 
time when the sketch from which it is taken 
was made ; they were, however, found close by 


the altar, and there can be little doubt but that 
they were originally so placed. Beneath the 
altar is a shallow cxcMvatiou lined with marble, 





Altar of S. Alessandro on the Via Notneutaim. 

in which the bones of St. Alexander are believed 
to have been deposited. The square opening in 
the cancellated slab was probably used for the 
purpose of introducing cloths [Brandea], which 
were laid on the tomb of a saint, and afterwards 
preserved as relics. A part of the inscription on 
the front has been lost: what remains reads "et 
Alexandro Delicatus voto posuit dedicante Aepis- 
copo Urs . . " The name wanting at the begin- 
ning is supposed to be that of Eventius, also buried 
in the same cemetery. Ursus is believed to have 
been bishop of Nomentum. 

The altar in the sepulchral chapel at Ravenna, 
known as " SS. Nazzaro e Celso," is an example 
of the simple tomb-lilse form. The chapel was 
built about A.D. 450, and this altar may be of 
about the same date. According to the Rev. B. 
Webb (^Sketches of Continental Ecclesiology, p. 
429) it is composed of three slabs of alabaster 
supporting a mensa ; on the ends are carved 
crosses ; on the front is a cross between two 
sheep ; and on each side of it the device of a 
crown suspended from a wreath. It is shewn 
iu the engraving of the chapel in Gaily Knight's 
Eccl. Arch, of Italy. 

In the somewhat earlier mosaics in the bap- 
tistery of the cathedral of Ravenna, altars are 
represented as tables supported by columns with 
capitals ; the tables are represented red and the 
columns gold, indicating perhaps the use of por- 
phyry and gilt bronze as tlie materials. Nor, 
although the tomb-lilce form eventually became in 
the Western Church the ruling one, was the table- 
form disused, for examples of it of a date even as 
late as the thirteenth century are still extant. 


Alt4ir, from Axiriol 

A variety of the table-form, in which the 
a is supported by only one leg, is shown in 

the accompanying woodcut. This altar was 
found in the neighbourhood of Auriol, in the 
department of the Bouches-du-Rhune, in France, 
and may be attributed to the fifth or sixth 

Martigny {Diet, des Antiq. Chret., p. 59) men- 
tions other examples in which the mensa is sup- 
ported by five columns, one being in the centre. 
One of these found at Avignon is supposed to 
have been erected by S. Agricola (dec. A.D. 580). 
Another, in the Muse'e at Marseilles, he attri- 
butes to the 5th centui-y, and a third he says 
exists in the crypt of the church of St. Martha, 
at Tarascon. 

In the baptistery of the cathedral of Ravenna 
is an altar composed of a mensa with two columns 
in front, and a quadrangular block of marble, in 
which is a recess or ca^•ity now closed by a 
modern brass door ; the front of this block has 
some decoration of an architectural character, a 
small cross, doves, ears of wheat, and bunches of 
grapes. This central block would appear to be 
an altar (or part of one) of the 6th century. A 
very similar block is at Parenzo, in Istria, and is 
engraved in Heider and Eiselberger's Alittelalter- 
liche Kunstdenkmale des Oesterreichischen Kaiser- 
staatcs (i. 109) ; the writer of that work is, 
however, disposed to consider it not an altar but 
a tabernacle. 

Mr. Webb (Sketches of Cont. Ecclesiology, pp. 
430, 440) mentions two altars at Ravenna, one 
in the crypt of S. Giovanni Evangelista, the other 
in the nave of S. Apollinare in Classe, of the same 
form as that of the baptistery of the Cathedral 
described above, and seems to consider this ar- 
rangement as original ; but says of the altar of 
the baptistery that it was the tabernacle of the 
old Cathedral. He remarks that the mensa of 
the altar in S. Giovanni is not level, but slightly 
hollowed so as to leave a rim all round. 

Many notices of altars may be found in the 
Liher Pontificalis (otherwise known as Anastasius 
Bibliothecarius de Vitis Pontijicum) as that Pope 
Hilarus (A.D. 461-467) made at S. Lorenzo f. 
1. m. " altare argenteum pensans libras quadra- 
ginta," that Leo III. (a.d. 795-816) made at S. 
Giovanni Laterano " altare majus mirae mag- 
nitudinis decoratum ex argento purissimo pensans 
libras sexaginta et novem." 

In these and in the numerous like instances it 
is either expressly stated that- the altar was 
decorated with gold or silver, or the quantity of 
the metal employed is evidently quite insufficient 
to furnish the sole material ; but we are not told 
whether the altar was constructed of stone or of 

In a mosaic at S. Vitale, at Ravenna, dating 
from the 6th century (engraved in Webb's Cont. 
Eccles. p. 437), an altar doubtless is represented 
as standing on feet at the angles, and therefore 
of the table form. It has, according to Mr. 
Webb, an ornamental covering of white linen 
with a hanging beneath. 

The annexed woodcut taken from the same 
work (p. 440) shows an altar similarly re- 
presented in a mosaic in S. Apollinare in Classe 
at Ravenna. This church was commenced 
between 534 and 538, and dedicated between 
546 and 552, but much of the mosaic was not 
executed until between 671 and 677 (Hiibsch, 
Altchristlichen Kirchen). 

Paul the Silentiary, in his poetical description 


of St. Sophia at Constantinople, as rebuilt by 
Justinian (between A.D. 532 and A.D. 563), 

describes the altar as of gold, decorated with 
precious stones and supported on golden columns. 
This has of coui-se long since been destroyed, 
but there still exists an altar of almost equal 
splendour, though of the other type, viz., that of 
the tomb, and more recent by three hundred 
years. This is the high altar of S. Ambrogio, at 
Milan, made in a.d. 835, measuring 7 ft. 3 in. in 
length and 4 ft. 1 in. in height, the mensa being 
4 ft. 4 in. wide. The front is of gold, the back 
and sides of silver. It is covered with subjects 
in relief in panels divided by bands of ornament, 
and many small ornaments in cloisonne enamel 
are interspersed. The subjects on the back are 
chiefly incidents in the life of St. Ambrose ; 
those of the front are Christ seated within an 
oval compartment within a cross, in the branches 
of which are the symbols of the Evangelists, 
figures of tlie Apostles being placed above and 
below. On the right and left are subjects from 
the Gospels or the Acts of the Apostles. On the 
ends of the altar are crosses in compartments, 
surrounding which are angels in various attitudes 
( t iloiation It la iepie»ented m the wocdcut 

Altar of S \mbrog o at "Milan 

Two examples of the tomb-like form, of stone 
and of earlier date, may be seen in the lateral 
apses of the basilican church which foi-ms part 
of S. Stetano at Bologna. These perhaps date 
from the 7tli or 8th century. On one are a cross 
and two peacocks, and an inscription in honour 
of S. Vitalis ; on the other, figures of a lion and 
a stag or ox. It is not clear whether these were 
construcljed to serve as altars, or are tombs con- 
verted to that use ; but the first seems the more 
probable suggestion. 

The account given by Ardo Smaragdus, in his 
life of St. Benedict of Aniane (Act. Sanct. Feb. 
vol. ii. die 12, p. 614), of one of the altars con- 
structed by the latter in the church of that place 
(in A.D. 782 ?), is, though somewhat obscure, too 
remarkable to be passed over; the altar was hol- 
low within, having at the back a little door; in 


the cavity boxes (capsae) containing relics were 
preserved on non-festive days. This "altare," 
wliich was the high altar, was so constructed 
(in altari . . . tres aras causavit subponi) as to 
symbolize the Trinity. 

It is difficult to find the date at which it 
became customary to incise crosses, usually five 
in number, on the mensa of an altar; they do 
not appear to exist on the mensa of the wooden 
altar in S. Giovanni Laterano at Rome, which is 
no doubt of an early date, on that of the altar of 
S. Alessandro, near Kome, or on those of the early 
altars at Ravenna, or Auriol, or even on the altar 
of S. Ambrogio. Crosses are however found on 
the portable altar which was buried with St. 
Cuthbert (a.d. 087). The veiy fragmentary 
state of this object makes it impossible to deter- 
mine with certainty how many crosses were on 
it. Two are to be seen on the oaken board to 
which the plating of silver was attached, and 
two on the plating itself, but it is quite possible 
that originally there were five on each. In the 
order for the dedication of a church in the 
Sacramentary of Gregory the Great (p. 148), 
the bishop consecrating is desired to make 
crosses with holy water on the four corners of 
the altar; but nothing is said of incised crosses. 

The practice of making below the mensa a 
cavity to contain relics, and covering this by a 
separate stone let into the mensa, does not appear 
to be of an early date. [Consecration.] 

IV. Structural accessories of the altar. — 
Usually, though not invariably, the altar was 
raised on steps, one, two, or three in number. 
From these steps the bishop sometimes preached ; 
hence SiJonius Apoll., addressing Faustus, Bishop 
of Riez, says (Carm. XVI. v. 124), — 

" Seu te conspicuis gradibiis venerabilis arae 
Concionaturum plehs sedula circumsistit." 

Beneath the steps it became customary, from 
the fourth century at least, at Rome and wherever 
the usages of Rome were followed, to construct 
a-small vault called confessio ; this was originally 
a mere grave or repository for a body, as at S. 
Alessandro near Rome, but gradually expanded 
into a vault, a window or grating below the altar 
allowing the sarcophagus in which the body of 
the saint was placed to be visible. [Confessio.] 

In the Eastern Church a piscina is usually 
found under the altar (Neale, Eastern C/iurc/i 
Introd. 189), called X"'''> X'"'^'*"' '^^' more com- 
monly Q6.\a(raa or 6a\aaai5iov. What the an- 
tiquity of this practice may be does not seem to 
be ascertained, but it may have existed in the 
Western Church, as appears from the Frankish 
missal published by Mabillon (Liturg. Gall. iii. 
§ 12, p. 314), where, in consecrating an altar, 
holy water is to be poured " ad basem." So the 
Gregorian Sao'amentary, p. 149. 

The altar was often enclosed within railings of 
wood or metal, or low walls of marble slabs ; 
these enclosures were often mentioned by early 
writers under the names " ambitus altaris," 
" circuitus altaris ; " the railings were called 
*' cancelli," and the slabs " transennae." Some 
further account of these will be found under the 

Upon these enclosures columns and arches of 
silver were often fixed, and veils or curtains of 
rich stutFs suspended from the arches : they are 
frequently mentioned in the Lib. Pontif., as in 




the instance where Tope Leo III. gave 96 veils, 
some highly ornamented, to be so placed round 
the " ambitus altaris " and the " presbyterium " 
of St. Peter's at Rome. 

V. Ciborium, otherwise umbraculum, Gr. ki- 
^ipiov. Ital. baldachino. — Down to the end of 
the period with which we are now concerned, 
and even later, the altar was usually covered by 
a canopy supported by columns, the ciborium. 
The word is no doubt derived from the Greek 
Ki^cipiov, the primary meaning of which is the 
cup-like seed-vessel of the Egyptian water-lily. 

It does not appear when the ciborium came 
first to be in use, though this was probably at as 
early a date as that in which architectural 
splendour was employed in the construction of 
churches. Augusti quotes Eusebius (^Vit. Const. 
M. lib. iii. c. 38) as using the word KtPiipiov 
when describing the church of the Sepulchre at 
Jerusalem, and connecting it with the word r^fxt- 
(Tcpaipiov ; but in this there seems to be a mistake, 
as neither word occurs in cap. 38, while in cap. 
37 the latter occurs in connection with ice<p- 
a.\atov: by which last it would seem that the 
apse was meant. 

Paulinus of Nola has been thought to allude 
to the ciborium in the verses {Lib. ii. LJpig. 2) : 

" JMvinum veneranda tegunt altaria foedus, 
Compositibque sacra cum cruce martyribus." 



Veils are mentioned by St. Chrysostom {ITom. 
iii. in Ephes.) as w ithdrawn at the consecration 
of the Eucharist, and it is probable that these 
were attached to the ciborium in the fashion 
represented by the accompanying woodcut, 
where a ciborium is shown with the veils con- 
rcaling the altar. This representation, taken 


from Messrs. Texier and Pullau's work on By- 
zantine Architecture, is found in the mosaics 
of St. George at Thessalonica, works certainly 
not later than a.d. 500, and perhaps much 
earlier ; the authors are indeed disposed to refer 
them to the era of Constantine the Great. 

Ciboria are not mentioned in the Liber Pon- 
tificalis in the long catalogue of altars erected in 
and gifts made to churches erected in Rome and 
Naples by Constantine, unless the " fastigium " 
of silver weighing 2025 lbs. in the basilica of St. 
John Lateran was, as some have thought, a 
ciborium. Much doubt, it must be remembered, 
has been thrown on the trustworthiness of this 
part of the Liber Pontificalis, nor does any men- 
tion of one occur until the time of Pope Symma- 
chus (498 — 514), who, it is stated, made at S. 
Silvestro a ciborium of silver weighing 120 lbs. 
Mention is made in the same work of many 
other ciboria ; they are generally described as of 
silver or decorated with silver. The quantity of 
metal varies very much : one at S. Paolo f. 1, m. 
is said to have been decorated with 2015 lbs. of 
silver, that of St. Peter's, of silver-gilt, weighed 
2704 lbs. 3 oz., and that at S. Giovanni Laterano 
only 1227 lbs. All these were erected bv Pope 
Leo in. (795-816). The last is described as 
" cyborium cum columnis suis quatuor ex 
ai-gento purissimo diversis depictum historiis 
cum cancellis et columnellis suis mirae magni- 
tudinis et pulchritudinis decoratum." The 
"cancelli" were, no doubt, railings running from 
column to column and enclosing the altar. The 
ciborium in St. Sophia's, as erected by Justinian, 
is described by Paul the Silentiary as having 
four columns of silver which supported an 
octagonal pyi'amidal dome or blunt spire crownea 
by a globe bearing a cross. From the arches 
hung rich veils woven with figures of Christ, St. 
Paul, St. Peter, &c. 

Ciboria were constructed not only of metal, 
or of wood covered with metal, but of marble ; 
the alabaster columns of the ciborium of the 
high altar of St. Mark's at Venice are said to 
have occupied the same position in the chapel of 
the Greek Emperor at Constantinople. They 
are entirely covered with subjects from Biblical 
history, sculptured in relief, and appear to be of 
as early a date as the fifth century ; but perhaps 
the earliest ciborium now existing is one in the 
church of S. Apollinare in Classe at Ravenna, 
which is shown by the inscription engraved upon 
it to have been erected between a.d. 806 and 
A.D. 810. 

Various ornaments, as vases, crowns, and 
baskets (cophini) of silver, w^ere placed as deco- 
rations upon or suspended from the ciboria;' and, 
as has been already said, veils or curtains were 
attached to them ; these last were withdrawn 
after the consecration but before the elevation of 
the Eucharist. These curtains are mentioned 
repeatedly in the Liber Poritif. as gifts made by 
various popes of the seventh, eighth, and ninth 
centuries, e. g., " Vela alba holoserica rosata 
quae pendent in arcu de cyborio numero qua- 
tuor," given to S. Maria Maggiore by Pope 
Leo III. (A.D. 795-816). 

It does not appear when the use of these veils 
was discontinued in the Western Church ; in the 
Eastern a screen (eiKovoa-Taffis) with doors now 
serves the like purpose. Some of the ciboria at 
Rome, according to Martignv (Art. Colombe 



Eucharistiqiie), having a ring fixed in the centre 
of the vault, from which he conceives a receptacle 
for the host to have been suspended. [Peei- 
STERIUm]. No ciborium now existing at Rome 
seems to be of earlier date than the twelfth 
century, but the practice of suspending such 
receptacles is no doubt much earlier. 

Martigny is of opinion that besides the cibo- 
rium, the columns of which rested on the ground, 
there was sometimes a lesser one, the columns oi 
which rested on the altar, and that these last 
were more properly called ".peristeria," as enclos- 
ing a vessel in the form of a dove, in which the 
host wn« contained. [CiBORiUM, TuRRiS, Pern 

VI. Appendages of the Altar. — In ancient times 
nothing was placed upon the altar but the 
Altar-cloths and the sacred vessels with the 
Elements. A feeling of reverence, says Mar- 
tene (de Antiq. Eccl. Bit. i. 112), permitted not 
the presence of anything on the altar, except the 
things used in the Holy Oblation. Hence there 
were no candlesticks on the altar, nor (unless on 
the columns, arches, and curtains of the ciborium) 
any images or pictures. Even in the ninth cen- 
tury we find Leo IV. (an. 855) limiting the objects 
which might lawfully be placed on the altar to 
the shrine containing relics, or perchance the 
codex of the Gospels, and the pyx or tabernacle 
in which the Lord's body was reserved for the 
viaticum of the sick. (D<? Cum Fastorali, § 8, 
in Migne's Patrologia, cxv. 677.) 

The Book of the Gospels seems anciently to 
have been frequently placed on the altar, even 
when the Liturgy was not being celebrated 
(Neale, Eastern Cli. Introd. 188). An example 
may be seen in the frescoes of the Baptistery at 
Ravenna (Webb's Continental Ecclesiology, 427). 

With regard to the relics of saints, the ancient 
rule was, as St. Ambrose tells us (Ad Marcel- 
linam, Epist. 85) " Ille [Christus] super altare . . 
isti [martyres] sub altari ;" and this was the 
practice not only of the age of St. Ambrose, but 


of much later times, even up to the middle of 
the ninth centuiy, as Mabillon (Acta SS. Be- 
nedict. Saec. iii. Praefatio § 105), assures us ; for 
the anonymous author of the Life of Servatius 
of Tongres says expressly that the relics of this 
saint, when translated by command of Charles 
the Great, were laid before the altar, as men 
did not yet presume to lay anything except the 
sacrifice on the altar, which is the Table of the 
Lord of Hosts. And even later, Odo of Clugny 
tells us (Collationes ii. 28) that when Berno 
(an. 895) laid the relics of St. Walburgis on 
the altar, they ceased to work miracles, resenting 
the being placed " ubi majestas divini Mysterii 
-nlummodo debet celebrari." The passage of 
Lho IV., quoted above, seems in fact the first 
ermission to place a shrine containing relics on 
lie altar, and that permission was evidently not 

I accordance with the general religious feeling 
t that age. 

In the early centuries of the Christian Church, 

he consecrated bread was generally reserved in 

vessel made in the form of a dove and sus- 

II uded from the ciborium [Peristerium], or 
icrhaps in some cases placed on a tower on the 

altar itself (Liber Fontif., Innocent I. c. 67, and 
Hilary, c. 70). Gregory of Tours (De Gloria 
Uiirtyiiiin i. 86) speaks distinctly of the deacon 
t,\kmg the turris from the sacristy and placing 
it on the altar, but this seems to have contained 
till' unconsecrated elements [TuRRis], and to have 

I I en placed on the altar only during celebration ; 
imr does the reservation of the consecrated bread 

III the turris, capsa or pyxis on the altar appear 
t(i be distinctly mentioned by any earlier autho- 
iity than the decree of Leo IV. quoted above 
(Bmterim's Denkwiirdigkeiten, ii. 2. 167 ff.). 

No instance of a Cross placed permanently on 
the mensa of an altar is found in the first eight 
I cnturies, as we should expect from the decree 
(if Leo IV. The vision of Probianus (Sozomen, 
Hist. Eccl. ii. 3. p. 49) shows that crosses were 
seen in the sanctuary (BvffiaffT-fjpiov) in the 
fourth century ; the cross was found on the sum- 
mit of the ciborium, as in the great church of 
St. Sophia at Constantinople (Paul the Silentiary, 
Descrip. S. Sophiae, Til [al. ii. 320]), and, in some 
churches both at Rome and in Gaul, suspended 
from the ciborium over the altar (Gregory of 
Tours, De Gloria Mart. ii. 20), but not on the 
mensa of the altar itself. A cross was, however, 
placed on the altar during celebration. Sec 
jSacrayn. Gelas. i. 41. 

The third Canon of the Second Council of 
Tours (an. 567, Bruns's Canones ii. 226), " ut 
corpus Domini in altari non in imaginario ordine, 
sed sub crucis titulo componatur," which has 
been thought to mean, that the Body of the 
Lord should not be reserved among the images 
in a receptacle on the reredos, but under the 
cross on the altar itself, might possibly refer to 
a suspended cross; but it is probably rightly 
explained by Dr. Neale (Eastern Ch. Introd. 520') 
to mean that the particles consecrated should 
not be arranged according to each man's fancy, 
but in the form of a cross, according to the 

Tapers were not placed on the altar within 
the period which we are considering, though it 
is a very ancient practice to place lights about 
the altar, especially on festivals. [Lights.] 

Flowers appear to have been used for the 


festal decoration of altars au least as early as 
the sixth century ; for Venantius Fortunatus 
(Carmina viii. 9) says, addressing St. Rhadegund, 



■ Texii 

^•ariis altaria festa coronis." 

They appear as decorations of churches as 
early as the fourth century. 

Vil. Number of altars in a C/mrch. — There was 
in primitive times but one altar in a church, and 
the arrangements of the most ancient Basilicas 
testify to the fact. (See Pagi on Baronius, ann. 
313, No. 15.) Eusebius {Hist. Heel. x. 4, § 45), 
in the description of the great church at Tyre, 
mentions only one altar. St. Augustine (on 
1 John, Tract. .3) speaks of the existence of two 
altars in one city (civitate) as a visible sign of 
the Donatist schism. But his words should per- 
haps not be taken in their literal sense ; for in 
the time of St. Basil, there was more than one 
altar in Neo-Caesarea ; for he, speaking (Hom. 19, 
in Gordium) of a persecution of Christians in that 
city, says that " altars (dvcrtaffT^pia) were over- 

The Greek and other oriental churches have 
even now but one altar in each church (Renau- 
dot. Lit. Orient, i. 18'2) ; nor do they consecrate 
the Eucharist more than once on the same day 
in the same place. They have, however, and have 
had for several centuries, minor altars in irapeK- 
KArjfTiai or side-chapels, which are really dis- 
tinct buildings. Such side-chapels are generally 
found where there has been considerable contact 
with the Latin Church (Neale, Eastern Church, 
Introd. 183). 

Some writers, as Martigny (Diet, des Antiq. 
Chre't., art. Autel), rely upon the " arcosolia " 
or altar-tombs in the catacombs as pi'oving the 
early use of many altars : two, three, and more 
such tombs are often found in one crypt, and in 
one case, a crypt in the cemetery of St. Agnes 
near Rome, there are as many as eleven arco- 
solia (Marchi, Man. delle Arti prim. Crist., tav. 
XXXV., xxxvi., xxxvii.), ei^ht of which, according 
to Padre Marchi,' might have been used as altars 
(p. 191); but there seems to be generally a 
deficiency of proof that such tombs were actually 
so used, nor is their date at all a matter of 
certainty in the great majority of cases. 

It would appear probable that the practice of 
considering the tomb of a martyr as a holy place 
fitted for the celebration of the Eucharistic 
sacrifice, and such celebration as an honour and 
consolation to the martyr who lay below, led first 
to the use of several altars in a crypt in the 
catacombs where more than one martyr might 
rest, and then, when the bodies of several martyrs 
had been transferred to one church above ground, 
to the construction of an- altar over each, from 
a wish to leave none unhonoured by the celebra- 
tion of the Eucharist above his remains. Such 
ideas were prevalent as early as the beginning of 
the fifth century, as may be seen in the writings 
of Prudentius (Peristeph. Hymn. XI. v. 169- 
174; Hymn. III. v. 211), Pope Damasus, and St. 
Maximus, Bishop of Turin (Sermo LXIII. De na- 
tali sanctorum; v. Marchi, p. 142 et seq.). At 
that period, and indeed long after, the disturbance 
of the relics of saints was held a daring and 
scarcely allowable act, and was prohibited by 
Theodosius and much disapproved of by Pope 
Gregory the Great ; nor was it until some cen- 
turies later that the increasing eagerness for the 

possession of such memorials was gratified by the 
dismemberment of the holy bodies. 

It has been contended that more than one 
altar existed in the Cathedral of Milan in the 
latter part of the fourth century. That St. 
Ambrose more tlian once uses the plural "al- 
taria" in connection with the church proves 
nothing, for "altaria" frequently means an 
altar; but in describing the restoration of the 
church to the orthodox (an. 385), after the 
attempt of the Arians to occupy it, he has been 
understood to say that the soldiers rushing in 
kissed the altar : hence it is argued that, as they 
could not reach the altar of the Bema or sanc- 
tuary, which was closed to the people, there 
must have been at least one altar in the nave. 
But the words " milites irruentes in Altaria os- 
culis significare pacis signum " (ad Marcellinim, 
Ep. 33) seem rather to imply that the soldiers 
rushing into the Bema signalized by their kisses 
the making of peace. Altaria is used in the 
same sense, as equivalent to " sanctuary," in the 
Theodosian Codex. [Altarium.] However this 
may be, at the end of the sixth century we find 
distinct traces of a plurality of altars in Western 
churches. Gregory of Tours (De Gloria Mar- 
tyrum i. 33) speaks of saying masses on three 
altars in a church at Braisne near Soissons ; and 
Gregory the Great (Epist. v. 50) says that he' 
heard that his correspondent Palladius, bishop 
of Saintonge, had placed in a church thirteen 
altars, of which four remained unconsecrated 
for defect of relics. Now certainly Palladius 
would not have begged of the Pope, as he did, 
relics for his altars, if the plui'ality of altars 
had not been generally allowed. Moreover, tlie 
Council of Auxerre of the year 578 (Can. 10; 
Bruns's Ganones ii. 238) forbade two masses to 
be said on the same day on one altai-, a prohi- 
bition which probably contributed to the multi- 
plication of altars, which was still further acce- 
lerated by the disuse of the ancient custom of 
the priests communicating with the bishop or 
pi'incipal minister of the church, and the intro- 
duction of private masses, more than one of 
which was frequently said by the same priest on 
the same day (Walafrid Strabo, De Beb. Eccl. 
c. 21). Bede (Hist. Eccl. r. 20) mentions that 
Acca, bishop of Hexham (deposed an. 732), col- 
lected for his church many relics of apostles 
and martyrs, and placed altars for their vene- 
ration, " distinctis porticibus ad hoc ipsum intra 
muros ejusdem ecclesiae," placing a separate 
canopy over each altar within the walls of the 
church. There were several altars in the church 
built by St. Benedict at Aniane (Acta Sanctorum, 
Feb. ii. 614). 

In the seventh and eighth centuries the num- 
ber of altars had so increased that Charlemagne, 
in a Capitulary of the years 805-6 at Thionville, 
attempted to restrain their excessive multiplica- 
tion. See Capitula infra Ecclesiam, c. 6 (Migne's 
Patrol. 97, 283). 

This was not very effectual, and in the ninth 
century the multiplication of altars attained a 
high point, as may be seen by the plan of the 
church of St. Gall in Switzerland [Church], 
prepared in the beginning of that century. In 
this are no less than seventeen altars. The 
will of Fortunatus Patriarch of Grado (dec. 
c. A.D. 825) also affords proof of the increase in 
the number of altars then in active progress: in 



one oratory he placed three altars, and five others 
in another {Marin. Com. dei Veneziani, t. i. 
p. 270). 

VIII. Places of Altars in Churches. — From the 
earliest period of which we have any knowledge^ 
the altar was iisually placed, not against the 
wall as in modern times, but on the chord of the 
apse, when, as was almost invariably the case, 
the church ended in an apse ; when the end of 
the church was square, the altar occupied a 
corresponding position. St. Augustine therefore 
says {Seriiio 46, c. 1.) " Mensa Christi est ilia in 
medio posita." The officiating priest stood with 
his back to the apse and thus fliced the congre- 
gation. In St. Peter's at Rome, and a very few 
other churches, the priest still officiates thus 
placed; but though in very many churches, 
particularly in Italy, the altar retains its ancient 
position, it is very rarely that the celebrant 
does so. 

That such was the normal position of the altar 
is shown by many ancient examples, and by the 
constant usage of the Eastern churches. The 
ancient rituals invariably contemplate a detached 
altar as when, in the Sacramentarij of Gregory, 
m the order for the dedication of a church (p. 
148), the bishop is directed to go round the altar 
(vadit in circuitu altaris), or in the Sacramentary 
of Gelasius where the subdeacon (L. 1, cxlvi.) 
is directed, after having placed the Cross on the 
altar, to go behind it (vadis retro altare). 

Exceptions at an early date to the rule that 
the altar should be detached, are of the greatest 
rarity, if we except, the tombs in the catacombs, 
which have been supposed to have been used as 
altars. It is possible, also, that in small chapels 
with rectangular terminations, as the chapel 
of St. John the Evangelist, annexed to the bap- 
tistery of the Lateran, the altar may for con- 
venience have been placed against the wall. 
When, however, it became usual to place many 
altars in a church it was found convenient to 
place one or more against a wall ; this was done 
in the Cathedral of Canterbury [Church], where 
the altar enclosing the body of St. Wilfrid was 
placed against the wall of the eastern apse ; 
another altar, however, in this case occupied the 
normal position in the eastern apse, and the 
original high altar was placed in the same 
manner in the western apse. 

In the plan of the church of St. Gall, prepared 
in the beginning of the ninth century, the places 
of seventeen altars are shown, but of these only 
two are placed against walls. 

In a few instances the altar was placed not on 
the centre of the chord of the arc of the apse but 
more towards the middle of the church ; such 
was the case in S. Paolo f. 1. m. at Rome, if the 
altar occupies the original position. In this in- 
stance it stands in the transept. In some other 
early churches at Rome, the altar occupies a posi- 
tion more or less advanced. The Lib. Pontif. tells 
us that in the time of Pope Gregory IV. (a.d. 827- 
844) the altar at S. Maria in Trastevere stood in 
a low place, almost in the middle of the nave (in 
humili loco paene in media testudine), the Pope 
therefore removed it to the apse, and the altar 
at S. Maria Maggiore seems to have been in the 
time of Pope Hadrian I. (a.d. 772-795), as 
appears from the account in the same book of the 
alterations, effected by that Pope in that church. 
It is thought by some tliat in the large circular 


or octagonal churches of the fourth and fifth 
centuries, as S. Lorenzo Maggiore at Milan, and 
S. Stefano Rotondo at Rome, the altar was placed 
in the centre. 

In the churches of Justinian's period con- 
structed with domes, there is usually, as at St. 
Sophia's Constantinople and S. Vitale, Ravenna, a 
sort of chancel intervening between the central 
dome and the apse ; when such is the case, the 
altar was placed therein. 

I X . Use of Pagan Altars for Christian purposes. 
— Pagan altars, having a very small superficies, 
are evidently ill suited for the celebration of the 
Eucharist ; nor would it appear probable that a 
Christian would be willing to use them for that 
purpose ; nevertheless, traditions allege that in 
some cases pagan altars were so used (v. Mar- 
tigny art. Autel), and in the church of Arilje in 
Servia, a heathen altar sculptured with a figure 
of Atys forms the lower part of the altar. 
(Mittheil. der K K. Central Comm. zur Erfor- 
schung und Erhaltung der Baudenkmale, Vienna, 
18(35, p. 6.) Such altars, or fragments of them, 
were, however, employed as materials (par- 
ticularly in the bases) in the construction of 
Christian altars. Instances are stated by Mar- 
tigny to have been observed in the churches of 
St. Michele in Vaticano and of St. Nicholas de' 
Cesarini at Rome. 

X. Portable Altars (altaria portatiUa, gesta- 
toria, viatica} are probabl}"^ of considerable anti- 
quity ; indeed, it is evident that from the time 
when the opinion prevailed that the Eucharist 
could not be fitly celebrated unless on a conse- 
crated mensa or table, a portable altar became a 
necessity. Constantine the Great (Sozomen, Jlist. 
Eccl. i. 8) carried with him on his campaigns a 
church-tent, the fittings of which no doubt in- 
cluded a portable altar, as the participation of 
the mysteries is especially mentioned. Bede 
{Hist. Eccl. V. 10) tells us that the two Hewalds, 
the English missionaries to the continental 
Saxons (an. 692), took with them sacred vessels 
and a consecrated slab to serve as an altar (tabu- 
lam altai'is vice dedicatam) ; and bishop Wulfram, 
the apostle of Friesland (before 740), was accus- 
tomed to carry with him on his journeys a. port- 
able altar, in the midst and at the four corners 
of which were placed relics of saints (Jonas in 
Surius's Hist. Sanctorum ii. 294). The portable 
altar of St. Willebrord is described by Brower 
{Annal. Trevirens. an. 718, § 112, p. 364); it 
bore the inscription: "Hoc altare Willebrordus 
in honore Domini Salvatoris consecravit, supra 
quod in itinere missarum oblationes Deo offerre 
consuevit, in quo et continetur de ligno crucis 
Christi et de sudario capitis ejus." This, how- 
ever, is probably not a contemporary inscrip- 
tion, and the genuineness of the I'elic may pei- 
haps be doubted. St. Boniface also carried an 
altar with him in his journeys. And the monks 
of St. Denys, when accompanying Charles the 
Great in his campaign against the Saxons, 
carried with them a wooden board, which, covered 
with a linen cloth, served as an altar (Anonym us 
de Mirac. S. Dionysii i. 20, in Mabillon, Acta SS. 
Pen. saec. iii. pt. 2, p. 350). 

These portable altars seem to have been in 
almost all cases of wood. Not until the latter 
part of the eighth century do we find instances 
of such altars being made of any other 
The capitulary of 796 (quoted above) seems to 




enjoin the use of stone tablets for portable as well 
us fixed altars. Hiucmar, bishop of Reims {Ca- 
.pitulare lii. c. 3 ; in Hardouin's Concilia v. 408), 
foi'bids any priest to celebrate mass except on a 
recrular alLar, or on a " tabula ab episcopo conse- 
crata," which table might be " de marmore vel 
nigra petra aut licio honestissimo." If the read- 
ing be correct, the last term certainly seems to 
indicate a consecrated cloth [Antimensium] of 
very rich material ; though some (Binterini's 
Denkiciirdigheiten iv. 1, lOG) connect "licium" 
with "sublicius," and suppose that it means a 
thick piece of wood. An " altare portatile " is 
said to have been given by Charles the Bald to 
the monastery of St. Denys at Paris, square in 
shape, made of porphyry set in gold, and con- 
taining relics of St. James the Less, St. Stephen, 
and St. Vincent {ib. 107). 

A portable altar of wood is preserved in the 
church of S. Maria in Campitelli at Rome, 
which is said to have belonged to St. Gregory 
Nazianzen, but it does not appear to have 'a 
legitimate claim to so high an antiquity. Pro- 
bably no earlier existing example is to be found 
than that which was found with the bones of 
St. Cuthbert (dec. A.D. 687) in the cathedral of 
Durham, and doubtless belonged to him : it is 
now preserved in the chapter library. The an- 
nexed woodcut will render any detailed de- 



Purtable Altar of St C 

scription needless: it measures G inches by 5|, 

and is composed of wood covered with very thin 

silver : on the wood is inscribed in hoxor . . 

S. PETRV . . and two crosses. The sense of the 

letters on the silver has not been satisfactorily 

made out (v. St. Cuthbert, by James Raine, 

p. 200). A similar portable altar is recorded by 

Simeon of Durham {3Ionumenta Hist. Brit. p. 659 

d) to have been found on the breast of St. Acca, 

i Bishop of Hexham (ob. A.D. 740), when his body 

; was exhumed more than 300 years afterwards. 

1 It was of two pieces of wood joined by silver 

j nails, and on it was cut the inscription, " Alme 

' Trinitati agie Sophie Sanctae Mariae." Whether 

I relies were placed in it, the writer adds, is not 

1 known. 

The " taboot " still in us'i in tlie Abyssinian 

churches is a square slab of wood, stone or metal, 
on which the elements are consecrated, in fact, a 
portable altar. [AucA.] 

In the Greek Church the substitute for a port- 
able altar was the Antimensium. 

For the consecration of altars, see Consecra 
TiON OF Churches. 

XI. Literature.— '&QsiA&% the works quoted in 
this article, the following may be mentioned : — 
J. B. Thiers, Dissertation sur les Frincipaux 
Autels, la Cloture du Chceur et les Jube's des 
Eglises : Paris, 1688. J. Fabricius, De Aris Ve- 
terumChristianorum: Helmstadt, 1698. G.Voigt, 
Thysiasteriologia, seu De Altar ibus Veterum Chris- 
tianorum : Ed. J. A. Fabricius ; Hamburg, 1709. 
S. T. Schonland, Histor. Nachricht von Altdren : 
Leipzig, 1716. J. G. Geret, De Veterum Chris- 
tianorum Altaribus : Anspach, 1755. J. T. Trei- 
ber, De Situ Altarium versus Orientem: Jena, 
1668. Kaiser, Dissertatio De Altaribus Porta- 
tilibus : Jena, 1695. Heidelofl", Der Christl. 
Altm-: Nurnberg, 1838. [A. N.] 

ALTAR CLOTHS Qinteamina, pallia or 
palLio altaris. In Greek writers, "Af.i.(j)ia, aficpi- 
aa/xara, iita.jx(\)ia, a,TrXcifji.aTa, evSvrai, and in 
authors " infimae aetatis," rb KardaapKa, and rb 
TpaTTf^ocpopoy). Cloths of different kinds, and of 
various materials (in the earliest ages, probably 
of linen only), must have been used in connection 
with the celebration of Holy Communion from 
the very earliest times. They were needed 
partly for the covering of the holy table, and of 
the oblations, and of the consecrated elements 
[Corporale] ; partly also for the cleansing of 
the saci-ed vessels, and the like [Mappa], The 
first of these uses, of which we have now 
more particularly to speak, is referred to by St. 
Optatus, Bishop of Milevis in Africa (circ. 370 
A.D.) as matter of general notoriety. " Who is 
there," he asks, " among the faithful, who 
knows not that during the celebration of the 
mysteries the wood of the altar is covered with 
a linen cloth ('ipsa ligna linteamine cooperiri,' " 
De Schism. Donat. lib. vi. c. i. p. 92.) With 
this we may compare the allusion made by 
Victor Vitensis {De Persec. Afric. lib. i. cap. 12). 
Writing in the year 487, he says that Genseric, 
the Vandal, some sixty years before, sent Pro- 
culus into Zeugitana, and the latter required 
the vessels used in holy ministry, and the books, 
to be given up; and when these were refused 
they were violently seized by the Vandals, who 
" rapaci manu cuncta depopulabantur, atque de 
palliis altaris proh nefas ! camisias (shirts) sibi 
et femoralia faciebant." In the 6th century 
St. Gregory of Tours speaks of an altar, with 
the oblations upon it, being covered with a silken 
cloth during the celebration of mass. " Cum 
jam altarium cum oblationibus pallio serico 
opertum esset " (Hist. Franc, vii. 22 ; compare 
Mabillori, Liturgia Gallicana, p. 41). A little 
later in the same passage he speaks of one claim- 
ing right of sanctuary in the church, and laying 
hold on the " pallae altaris " for his protection. 
It is remarkable that at Rome no mention is 
found of any pallia altaris among the many do- 
nations to churches recorded by Anastasius, till 
after the close of the 6th century. Writing of 
Vitalianus Papa (sed. 658-672), Anastasius says 
that in his time the Emperor Constans came to 
Rome and went to St. Peter's in state, " funi 




exercitu sue," attended by his guards, the clergy 
coming out to meet him with wax tapers in their 
hands ; and he offered upon the altar " pallium 
auro textile," or, accoi'diug to another reading, 
" pallam auro textilem," after which mass was 
celebrated (Anast. Bihl. 135, 1.15; Migne, P. C. C. 
torn. 128, p. 775). The same writer, speaking 
of Zacharias Papa (^sed. 741-752), says that he 
" fecit vestem super altare beati Petri ex auro 
textam, habentem nativitatem Domini et Salva- 
toris nostri Jesu Christi, ornavitque earn gemmis 
pretiosis." The earliest monument in the west, 
showing an altar (or holy table) set out for the 
celebration of "mass," is of the 10th or 11th 
century (^Vestiarmm Christianum, PI. xliii.), one 
of the frescoes in the hypogene church of S. 
Clemente at Eome. The holy table is there 
covered with a white cloth, which is pendent in 
front, but apparently not so on the two sides. 
A richly ornamented border, several inches in 
breadth, appears on the lower edge of this " lin- 
tcamen " (if such be* intended) as it hangs down 
in front of the altar. 

The allusions in Greek writers of early date 
correspond in character with those above quoted. 
In the collection of Canons Ecclesiastical (Si'i'- 
ray/xa Kavdvcav) formed by Photius o*' Constan- 
tinople, the earliest in date, bearing upon this 
point, is one of the so-called " Canons of the 
Apostles " (Kav. 73) to this efl'ect : " Let no one 
alienate for his own private use any vessel of 
gold or of silver, which has been set apart for 
holy use " (aytaadey), " or any linen " (u66vr]v) ; 
and the inference we naturally draw that the 
'•linen" here spoken of has reference to altar 
linen (perhaps also to ministering vestments) 
is confirmed by the subsequent language of the 
First and Second Councils of Constantinople. In 
Canons 1 and 10, after quoting the " Canon of 
the Apostles" above mentioned, the Council 
identities the 666vr] of that earlier canon with 
71 (Tsfiaafxia t7}s aylas Tpaire^ris eVSurifj, " the 
sacred covering of the holy table." On the other 
hand a passage of Theodoret, which has been 
alleged (Martigny, Diet, des Antiq. Chre'tiennes, 
in voc. ' Autel ') as proving the use of rich cloths 
for the altar early in the 4th century, has pro- 
bably a very different meaning from that attri- 
buted to it. The word Ouaiacrr-rtpioi' in early 
ecclesiastical Greek is more frequently used in 
the sense of the whole space immediately about 
the holy table, the " sanctuary," than of the 
" altar " itself. When therefore Theodoret states 
(Hist. Eccl. lib. i. cap. xxix. al. cap. xxxi.) that 
at the consecration of a church at Jerusalem, in 
the time of Constantine the Great, Siettoo-^erro 
TO &i1ov dv(na<TT7)piov ^aaiAiKo'is re Trapcama- 
(Tfxaaiv Ka\ K€ifj.7i\ioLs XidoKoW-riTOLs xP'^coh, the 
reference is in all probability to rich curtains, or 
" veils," hung about the sanctuary, not to altar- 
cloths properly so called. Much more certainly 
to the purpose is a passage of St. Chrysostom 
(Horn. 1. al. li. in Matt. cap. xiv. 23, 24), part 
of a homily originally delivered at Antioch, in 
which he draws a contrast between the cover- 
ings of silk, often ornamented with gold (xpuco- 
Traa-ra iTnl3\rifj.aTa), bestowed upon the holy 
table, and the scanty covering grudgingly given, 
or altogether refused, to Christ in the person of 
His poor members upon earth. Among the Acts 
of the Council of Constantinople, held in the year 
536, is preserved (Labbe's Concilia, by Mansi, 


torn. ix. pp. 1102, 3) a curious lettei drawn up 
by the clergy of the church of Apamea in Syria 
Secunda. They complain of the iniquitous con- 
duct of Severus, bishop of Antioch, and of their 
own bishop Petrus ; and amid many grave charges 
brought against the latter, one is that owing to 
the gross carelessness (worse than carelessness is 
charged by the letter) with which he celebrated 
the Holy Liturgy, the purple covering of the 
altar was defiled {Karexp^ffe iTTixTixaTi rod ae- 
TTTOv OvffLaffTripiov ti]v aXovpyiSa). In the 7th 
and 8th centuries we find evidence that these 
richer coverings of the altar were in some cases 
adorned with symbolic ornaments and with pic- 
tures of saints (^apaKTrjpes ayiwv), which in- 
curred the condemnation of the Iconoclasts, who 
carried them away together with images and 
pictures of other kinds. So we learn from Ger- 
manus of Constantinople, early in the 8th century 
(Scti. Germani Patriarchae de Sanctis Synodis, &c. 
apud Spicileg. Bom. A. Mai, tom. vii. p. 62). 
On the other hand, in times of grievous public 
calamity, we read, in one instance at least, of the 
altar as well as the person of thebishop and his 
episcopal throne being robed in black. So Theo- 
doras Lector records of Acacius, patriarch ot 
Constantinople : Ka\ iavrdv koI tov Opovov Koi 
TO 6vaiaiTT7]pL0v jj.i\avo7s ivSv/nacriv T)fx(pucFev. 
In the later liturgical offices (see Goar, Euchol. 
Grace, pp. 623, 627, sqq.), and in writers such 
as Symeon of Thessalonica (circ. 1420 A.D.), we 
find mention of an inner covering of linen, known 
as KardaapKa, and of a second and more costly 
covering without. Patriarch Symeon makes 
further mention of four pieces of cloth on each 
of the four corners of the altar. "The holy 
table hath four pieces of woven cloth (reaaapa 
fiepr] ixpoLffixaTos) upon the four corners thereof; 
and that because the fulness of the Church was 
formed out of all the quarters of the world ; and 
on these four pieces are the names of the four 
Evangelists, because it was by their instrtlment- 
ality that the Church was gathered, and the 
Gospel made circuit of the whole compass' of the 
world. But the [inner cover] called KardaapKu, 
has an outer covering (Tpaire^o<p6pov) imme- 
diately above it. For here is at once the tomb, 
and the throne, of Jesus. The first of these cover- 
ings is as it were the linen wherein the dead 
body was wrapped ; but the second is as an outer 
garment (Trepj/SoArj) of glory according to that 
of the psalm, said at the putting on thereof, 
' The Lord is king : he hath put on beauteous 
apparel' " (Symeon of Thessalonica, apud Goar, 
Euchol. Graec. p. 216). Of the two words here and 
elsewhere employed as the technical designation 
of these two altar-cloths, the first, KardaapKa, 
was originally used of an inner chiton, or tunic, 
worn " next the skin " (^aTa aapKo). Thence its 
secondary usage as a compound word (to Kard- 
ffapKo) in speaking of any inner covering, as here 
of an inner covering, of linen, for the holy table. 
The use of the word rpaTreCo(p6puv, as a desig- 
nation for the more costly outer cover, belongs 
in all probability to a comparatively late date. 
The word does occur in eaidiei;, writers, but in a 
wholly different sense, and one more in accord- 
ance with classical analogy. [W. B. M.] 

ALTAEIUM (compare Altar). This word 
is sometimes used to designate not merely an altar, 
but the space within which the altai' stood. For 


instance, Perpetuus, Bishop of Tours, feuilt a | 
basilica in honour of St. Martin, which had I 
" fenestras in altxrio triginta duas, in capso vi- 
ginti ;" " ostia octo, tria in altario, quinque in 
capso" (Gregory of Tours, Hist. Franc, ii. 14-). 
Ruinart remarljs upon the passage that by " alta- 
rium " we are to understand the presbytery, by 
" capsum " the nave. Compare Mabillon, de Lit. 
Gall. i. 8, § 1, p. 69. [Bema.] 

The plural " altaria " is also used in a similar 
sense ; as by St. Ambrose in the passage {Epist. 
33) quoted under Altar ; and in the Theodosian 
Codex, where (Lib. ix. tit. 45, De Spatio Ucclesi- 
astici Asyli) it is provided : " Pateant summi 
Dei templa timentibus ; nee sola altaria," etc. 
The equivalent word in the Greek version is 

The same extended sense is found in some 
modern languages, e.g. in Portuguese " altar 
mdr " (great or high altar) is used in the sense 
of choir or chancel (Burton, Highlands of the 
Brazil, i. 128). [A."N.] 

ALTINO (near Aquileia), Council of (Al- 
TiNENSB CoxciLiUM), A.D. 802; considered as 
fictitious by Mansi (.xiii. 1099-1102); said to 
have been held by the Patriarch of Aquileia to 
appeal to Charlemagne for protection against the 
Doge of Venice. [A. W. H.] 

ALYPIUS, Holy Father, commemorated Nov. 
26 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

A'MA{Amula, Hama, Hamula ; compare Germ. 
Ahm, Ohme). 

" Amae vasa sunt in quibus sacra oblatio con- 

tinetur, ut vinum Amula, vas vinarium. 

Amulae dicuntur quibus ofiertur devotio sive 
oblatio, simile arceolis" (Papias, in Ducauge's 
Glossary, s. v.). The vessel in which wine for 
the celebration of the Eucharist was oflered by 
the worshijjpers. 

The word Ama is used by Columella and other 
classical authors, but the earliest instance of its 
use as a liturgical vessel which has been noticed 
is in the Charta Cornutiana of the year 471 
{Mabillon de Be Dipl. vi. 262), where " hamulae 
oblatoriae " are mentioned. " Amae argenteae " 
are mentioned in the Ordo Bomanus I. (p. 5) 
among the vessels which were to be brought 
from the Church of the Saviour, now known 
as St. John Lateran, for the Pontifical Mass 
on Easter-Day ; and in the directions for the 
Pontifical Mass itself in the same Ordo (p. 10), 
we find that after the Pope had entered the 
senatorium or presbytery, the archdeacon follow- 
ing him received the amulae, and poured the 
wine into the larger chalice (calicem majorem) 
which was held by the subdeacon ; and again 
(c. 14, p. 11) after the altar was decked, the arch- 
deacon took the Pope's amula (compare Araa- 
larius, Ecloga, 554) from the oblationary sub- 
deacon, and poured the wine thi-ough the strainer 
(super colum) into the chalice [Chalice] ; then 
those of the deacons, of the primicerius, and the 
others. Whether the " amae argenteae " are iden- 
tical with the " amulae " may perhaps be doubted ; 
but at any rate the amulae seem to have been 
church-vessels provided for the purpose of the 
olfertory. Among the presents which Pope Ad- 
rian (772-795) made to the church of St. Adrian 
at Rome, the Liber Bontificalis (p. 346) mentions 
"amam unam," and also an "amulani offertoriam " 


of silver which weighed sixty-seven pounds. 
They were, however, often of much smaller size, 
and the small silver vessels (see woodcuts) pre- 
served in the Museo Cristiano in the Vatican 
are deemed to be amulae. They measure only 
about 7 inches in height, and may probably date 
from the 5th or 6th century. Bianchini in his 
edition of the Lib. Pontif. has given an engraving 
of a similar vessel of larger size. On this the 
miracle of Cana is represented in a tolerablv 
good style. Bianchini supposes this to be of 
the fourth century. 

the Vatican Museum. 

The material of these vessels was usually 
silver, but sometimes gold, and they were often 
adorned with gems. Gregory the Great {Epist. 
i. 42, p. 539) mentions " amulae onychinae," 
meaning probably vessels of onyx, or glass imi- 
tating onyx. [A. N.] 

AMACIUS, bishop, deposition of, July 14 
{Mart. Bedae). [C] 

AMANDUS, Bishop and confessor. Katalis, 
Feb. 6 {Mart. Bedae)-, translation, Oct. 26 {Bj.). 
His name is recited in the Canon in one MS. of 
the Gregorian Sacramentary. (See Menard's ed. 
p. 284.) [C.l 

AMANTIUS. (1) Martyr at Rome, com- 
memorated Feb. 10 {Mart. Bom. Yet.). 

(2) Of Nyon, commemorated June 6 {Mart. 
Hicron., Bedae). [C] 

AMATOE, Bishop of Auxerre, commemorated 
Nov. 26 {Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

AMATUS, confessor, commemorated Sept. 13 
{Mart. Bedae). [C] 

AMBITUS, compAss, in music. {Toni dcbi- 
tus ascensus et descensus.) The compass of the 
earliest Church melodies did not in some instances 
reach, in few did it exceed, a fifth. " Principio 
cantilenae adeo simplices fuere apud primores 
Ecclesiae, ut vix diapente ascensu ac descensu 
implerent. Cui consuetudini proxime accessisse 
dicuntur Ambrosiani. Deinde paulatim ad Dia- 
pason deventum, verum omnium Modorum sys- 
tema." (Glareanus, Bodeoachordon, lib. i. cap. 
xiv.) In Gregorian music the octave was the 



limit; the four authentic scales [Authentic] 
moving from the key-note to its 8ve, the four 
plagal [Plagal] from the 4th below the key- 
note to the 5th above it. In later times this 
compass (ambitus) was much extended. A me- 
lody occupying or employing its whole compass 
was called Cantus Perfectus; falling short of it, 
Cantus Irnpcrfectus ; exceeding it, Cantus Plus- 
quamperfectus. Subsequently other interpre- 
tations (such as the course of modulation per- 
mitted in fugue) have been given to the word 
ambitus. With these we are not now concerned. 
(Gerbert, Script. Mus. ; Forkel ; Kock, Mus. 
Lex.) [J. H.] 

AMBITUS ALTAEIS ('UpaTeTov, Renaudot, 
Lit. Orient. 1. 182). This expression is some- 
times used, as apparently by Anastasius (Lib. 
Fontif. in Vita Sergii II.), for the enclosure 
which surrounded the altar. Pope Sergius II. 
(A.D. 844-877), he says, constructed at St. John 
L/iteran an " ambitus altaris " of ampler size 
than that which had before existed. 

It would seem that it was, in some cases and 
perhaps in most, distinct from the presbyterium 
or " chorus cantorum ;" and according to Sarnelli 
(^Antica Basilicographia, p. 84) there was usually 
between the presbyterium and the altar a raised 
space called "solea." Various passages in the 
Lib. Pontif. — e.g. those in which the alterations 
made by Pope Hadrian I. (a.D. 772-795) at 
S. Paolo f. 1. M., and by Pope Gregory IV. (a.D. 
827-844) at Sta. Maria in Trastevere, are de- 
scribed — show that the position of the altar and 
the arrangement of the enclosures were not alike 
in all cases. It seems not improbable but that in 
the lesser churches one enclosure served both to 
fence round the altar and to form the "chorus." 

In the plan prepared for the church of St. 
Gall in the beginning of the 9th century (v. 
woodcut, s. V. Church) an enclosure is marked 
" chorus," and a small space or passage intervenes 
between this and an enclosure shutting off the 
apse, within which stands the altar. This is at 
the west end of the church ; at the east end the 
apse is in like manner enclosed, but the enclosure 
of the " chorvis " is brought up to the steps 
leading to the raised apse without a break. A 
small enclosure is shown round all the altars, 
except those which are within the enclosures of 
the apses. 

It appears not unlikely that the square en- 
closure in the church at Djemla in Algeria 
[Church] may be such an " ambitus ; " Mr. 
Fergusson considers this enclosure a cella or 
choir, and says that it seems to have been enclosed 
up to the roof, but that the building is so ruined 
that this cannot be known for a certainty. A 
choir enclosed by solid walls would be a plan so 
anomalous in a Christian church that very 
strong evidence would be required to prove its 
having existed. The building in question may, 
from the purely classical character of the mosaic 
floor, be safely assigned to an early date, probably 
anterior to the fourth century. 

It is doubtful whether any early example of 
an "Ambitus altaris" now exists. We may learn 
from the Lib. Pontif. that they were usually of 
stone or marble, no doubt arranged in posts or 
uprights alternating with slabs variously sculp- 
tured, and pierced in like manner with the 
presbyterium at S. Clemente in Rome. The Lib. 


Pontif. tells us of the Ambitus which as above 
mentioned Pope Sergius II. constructed at St. 
John Lateran, that he "pulchris columnis cum 
marmoribus desuper in gyro sculptis splendide 
decoravit : " many fragments of marble slabs 
with the plaited and knotted ornament charac- 
teristic of this period are preserved in the 
cloister of that church, and may probably be 
fragments of this " Ambitus." 

In the richer churches silver columns bearing 
arches of the same metal were often erected on 
the marble enclosure, and from these arches hung 
rich cui tains, and frequently vessels or crowns 
of the precious metals ; repeated mention of such 
decorations maybe found in the Lib. Pcmtif., and 
a passage in the will of Fortunatus Patriarch of 
Grado (Hazlitt, Hist, of the Ecpublic of Venice, 
vol. i. App.), who died in the early part of the 9th 
century, describes a like arrangement very clearly 
in the following words: "Post ipsum altare alium 
parietem deauratum et deargentatum similiter 
longitudine pedum xv. et in altitudine pedes iv. et 
super ipso pariete arcus volutiles de argento et 
super ipsos arcus imagines de auro et de argento." 

This expression "ambitus altaris" may per- 
haps also sometimes stand for the apse as sur- 
rounding the altar. [A. N.] 

AMBO (Gr. "A/x^oov, from ava^aiveiv). The 
raised desk in a church from which certain 
parts of the service were read. It has been 
also called irvpyos, pulpitum, sflggestus. By 
Sozomen (Eccks. Hist. ix. 2, p. 367) the ambo 
is explained to be the " /Sfjjua raiv avayvwarSiv " 
— the pulpit of the readers. From it were read, 
or chanted, the gospel, the epistle, the lists of 
names inscribed on the diptychs, edicts of bishops, 
and in general any communications- to be made 
to the congregation by presbyters, deacons, or 
subdeacons ; the bishop in the earlier centuries 
being accustomed to deliver his addresses from 
the cathedra in the centre of the apse, or from a 
chair placed in front of the altar ; St. John Chry- 
sostom was, however, in the habit of preaching 
sitting on the ambo (eirl rod &fx^ojvoSf Socrates 
Eccl. Hist. vi. 5), in order that he might be 
better heard. Full details as to the use of the 
ambo will be found in Sarnelli {Antica Basilico- 
grafia, p. 72), and Ciampini ( Vet. Man., t. i. p. 
21 et seq.); but the examples which they describe 
are probably later by several centuries than the 
period with which we are now concerned, and 
the various refinements of reading the gospel 
from a higher elevation than the epistle, and 
the like, are probably by no means of very early 
introduction. Two and even three ambones some- 
times existed ; one was then used for the gospel, 
one for the epistle, and one for the reading of 
the prophetical or other books of the Old Testa- 
ment (Martigny, Bid. des Antiq. Cliret.). In the 
old church of St. Peter's there was, however, 
but one, which Platner (Bescfu-eibung von Pom) 
thinks was a continuance of the ancient usage. 

Something in the nature of an ambo or desk no 
doubt was in use from a very early period. 
Bunsen (Basiliken des Christlichen Poms, p. 48) 
expresses his opinion that the ambo was origin- 
ally moveable. In the earlier centuries much of 
the church furniture was of wood, and the am- 
bones were probably of the same material. 
Wherever a " presbyterium " or " chorus can- 
torum " (i.e. an enclosed space in front of tlw 


altar reserved for the use of the inferior clergy) 
existed, an anibo was probably connected with it, 
being placed usually on one side of the enclosure. 
Where no " chorus " existed, the ambo was pro- 
bably placed in the centre. 

At St. Sophia's in Constantinople the ambo con- 
structed by Justinian stood nearly in the middle 
of the church, but more towards the east. A full 
account of it is given by Paul the Silentiary in a 
poem in hexameter verse upon it. From this we 
learn that it was ascended by two flights of 
stairs, one from the west, the other from the east; 
and that it was covered by a canopy resting on 
eight columns. It was constructed of the most 
precious marbles, and adorned with gold and 
precious stones. The area at the top of the stairs 
was sufllciently spacious for the coronation of the 
Emperor, and the space below enclosed by rail- 
ings was occupied by the singers. During the 
services the gospels and epistles were no doubt 
read from the raised part. 

Pope Pelagius (555-559) erected an ambo in 
St. Peter's (Lib. I'ontif.), and in the cathedral of 
Ravenna are the remains of one erected by 
Archbishop Agnellus (558-566). This last is 
ornamented with figures of lambs, peacocks, 
doves fishes, &c , within panels, the design and 
execution being pool « nd lude 

Ambo of & ApoUinare Nnovo at Eai 

The ambo represented in the woodcut is in the 
church of S. ApoUinare Nuovo at Ravenna, the 
date of its erection has not been ascertained 
with certainty, but it would seem not impro- 
bable that it formed a part of the original fittings 
of the cliurch built between A.D. 493 and a.d. 
525. The pillars on which it is now elevated 
wei-e doubtless added at some later period, when 
it was arranged in order to be employed as a 


The ambones in S. Clemente at Rome are of 
different periods : the smaller and earlier may 
perhaps be of the same date as the chorus with 
which it is connected (6th century ?), but there 
is some difference in the character of the work. 
The larger dates probably from the 12th centuiy, 
as no doubt does also that in S. Lorenzo f. 1. M. at 
Rome. The circumstance upon which the Abbe 
Martigny {Diet, des Antiq. Chret.) relies as prov- 
ing the high antiquity of this last, viz. that a 
part of its base is formed from a bas-relief relating 
to pagan sacrifices, cannot be considered as having 
much weight, as a part of the superstructure is 
formed from a slab bearing an early Christian 
inscription, and as the whole style and character 
of the work are so evidently those in use at Rome 
during the 12th and 13th centuries. 

The lesser and earlier ambo at S. Clemente has 
two desks — one, the most elevated, looking towards 
the altar, the other in the contrary direction ; 
the later ambo has a semi-hexagonal projection 
on each side, and is ascended by a stair at each 
end. This latter plan seems to have been the 
more usual ; the ambones at Ravenna and those at 
Rome of the 12th and 13th centuries are all thus 

In the plan for the church of St. Gall (c. A.D. 
820), the ambo is placed in the middle of the 
nive but near its eastern end, in front of the 
enclosure marked " chorus," and is within an 
t nclosure. 

A tall ornamented column is often found at- 
tiched to the ambo ; on this the paschal candle 
w as fixed. This usage may have existed from 
m early period, but perhaps the earliest existing 
f xample of such a column is one preserved in the 
museum of the Lateran at Rome, which however 
lb probably not older than the 11th century. It 
lb engraved by Ciampini ( Vet. 2Ion., t. i. pi. xiv.). 

According to Sarnelli (^Ant. Bus. p. S-l), the 
word ambo is the proper expression for the raised 
platform or chorus cantorum ; he however gives 
no authorities for this use of the word. [A. N.] 

AMBROSE. (1) Bishop of Milan, confessor, 
commemorated April 4 (^Mart. Rom. Vet., Hieron., 
bcdae); Dec. 7 {Cal. Byzant.). 

(2) Bishop, commemorated Nov. 30 (ilart. 
Hieron.). [C] 

AMBEOSIAN MUSIC, the earliest music 
^ed in the Christian Church of which we have 
IV account, and so named after Ambrose, bishop 
t' Milan (374-398), who introduced it to his 
ncese about the year 386, during the reign of 

The notions prevailing among musical and 
ther writers respecting the peculiarities of 
\mbrosian music are based rather on conjecture 
than knowledge. It may be considered certain 
that it was more simple and less varied than the 
Gregorian music which, about tv/o centuries 
later, almost everywhere superseded it. Indeed 
it has been doubted whether actual melody at 
all entered into it, and conjectured that it was 
only a kind of musical speech — monotone with 
melodic closes, or AcCE^'TUS Ecclesiasticur, 
a kind of music, or mode of musical utterance, 
which Gregory retained for collects and responses, 
but which he rejected as too simple for psalms 
and hymns. On the other hand, it has been 
argued more phiusibly that, to whatever extent 
the Acccntus or Modus ckomlitcr legendi may 


have been used in Arabrnsian music,- an element 
more distinctly musical entered largely into it ; 
that a decided cautus, as in Gregorian music, was 
used for the psalms ; and that something which 
might even now be called melody was employed 
for (especially metrical) hymns. That this me- 
lody was narrow in compass [Ambitus], and 
little varied in its intervals, is probable or cer- 
tain. The question however is not of quality, 
but of kind. Good melody does not of necessity 
involve many notes ; Rousseau has composed a 
very sweet one on only three (^Consolations des 
Miseres de ma I '«<?, No. 53). 

The probability that this last view of Ambro- 
sian music is the right one is increased by the 
accounts of its effect in performance, given in 
the Benedictine Life of St. Ambrose, drawn from 
his own works, wherein one especial occasion is 
mentioned on which the whole congregation sang 
certain hymns with such fervour and unction 
tliat many could not restrain their tears — an 
incident confirmed by an eye-witness, St. Augus- 
tine. "How did I weep,", he says, "in Thy 
hymns and canticles, touched to the quick by 
the voices of Thy sweet attuned Church ! The 
voices flowed into mine ears, and the truth dis- 
tilled into my heai't, whence the aftections of my 
devotions overflowed, and tears ran down, and 
happy was 1 therein."" It is difficult to attri- 
bute to mere "musical speech," however em- 
ployed, such effects as these, even upon the 
rudest and least instructed people, a fortiori, on 
persons like Augustine, accomplished in all the 
learning and the arts of his time. The hymns 
and canticles must surely have been conjoined, 
and the voices attuned to a sweeter and more 
expressive song. " Dulcis est cantilena," says 
Ambrose {Op. t. i. p. 1052) himself, "quae nou 
corpus effeminat, sed mentem animamque con- 
firmat." Whatever its properties, its usefulness, 
or its dignity, no one would apply the epithet 
dulcis to the Accentus Ecclesiasticus, or speak of 
it, or anything like it, as cantilena. 

That neither Augustine nor any contemporary 
writer has described particularly, or given us 
any technical account of, the music practised by 
the jMilanese congregations of the end of the 4th 
century, however much we may regret it, need 
hardly cause us any surprise. We are very im- 
perfectly informed about many things nearer to 
us in point of time, and practically of more im- 
portance. Augustine has indeed told us in what 
manner the psalms and hymns were sung in the 
church of St. Ambrose, and that this manner was 
exotic and new.^ But of the character of the 
song itself — in what the peculiarity of the Cantus 
Aiiihrosianus consisted — he tells us nothing. Pos- 
sibly there was little to tell ; and the only pecu- 
liaritv consisted in the employment in psalmody 
of more melodious strains than heretofore — 
strains not in themselves new, but never before 

a " Quantum fl^vi in liymnis et canticis tuis, suave 
sonantis !■>. I'-i.i' i !i m VMiilms commotus acriter ! Voces 
illae influclKii-t ui: ilni- m i-~, ot eliquabatur Veritas in cor 
meurn ; et exu' s;iKil>jt indf affectus pietatis, et currebant 
lacrimae, et bene inilii eiat cum eis." — S. Augustini 
Confessionum, lib. ix. cap. vi. c. 14. 

b "Tunc bymni et psalmi ut 'canerentur' secundum 
morem oricntaUum partiuiii, ne populus maeroris taedlo 
contabesceret, institutum est; et ex illo in bodieniura re- 
teiitum, multis jam ac pene omnibus gregibus tuis, et per 
cetera ovbis imitanlibus."— Co?;/., lib. ix. cap. 7-15. 


so employed ; for, " in the first ages of Christi- 
anity," says St. Isidore, "the psalms were re- 
cited in a manner more approaching speech than 
song."'= In this view most writers on Ambrosian 
music have concurred ; that it was veritable 
song, in the proper musical sense of the word, 
not musical speech or "half-song;" and that, 
not only was it based on a scale system or tona- 
lity perfectly well understood, but that its 
rhythmus was subject to recognised laws. S. 
Ubaldo, the author of a work {Disquisitio de 
cantu a D. Ambrosio in Mediolanensem ecclesiam 
introducto, Mediolani, 1695) especially devoted 
to Ambrosian music, says expressly that St. Am- 
brose was not the first to introduce antiphonal 
singing into the West, but that he did introduce 
what the ancients called Cantus Harmonicus, on 
account of its determined tonality and variety of 
intervals, properties not needed in, and indeed 
incongruous with, musical speech. With this 
Cantus Harmonicus was inseparably connected 
the Cantus lihythmicus or Metricus ; so that, by 
the application of harmonic (t. e. in the modern 
sense, melodic) rule, a kind of melody was pro- 
duced in some degree like our own. That Am- 
brosian music was rhythmical is irrefragably at- 
tested by the variety of metres employed by 
Ambrose in his own hymns, and that such was 
held to have been the case for many centuries is 
confirmed by Guido Ai-etinus and John Cotton 
(11th century). 

The first requisite of melody is that the sounds 
composing it be not only in the same " system," 
but also in some particular scale or succession, 
based upon and moving about a given sound. 
The oldest scales consisted at the most of four 
sounds, whence called tetrachords. The influ- 
ence of the tetrachord was of long duration ; it 
is the theoretical basis even of modern tonality. 
Eventually scales extended in practice to penta- 
chords, hexachords, heptachords, and ultimately 
octachords, as with us. . The modern scale 
may be defined as a succession of sounds con- 
necting a given sound with its octave. The 
theory and practice of the octachord were fami- 
liar to the Greeks, from whose system it is 
believed Ambrose took the first four octachords 
or modes, viz. the Phrygian, Dorian, Hypolydian, 
and Hypophrygian, called by the first Christian 
writers on music Protus, Deuterus, Tritus, and 
Tetrardus. Subsequently the Greek provincial 
names got to be misapplied, and the Ambrosian 
system appeared as follows : 
Pectus or Dorian. 

These scales differ essentially fr-om our scales, 

■^ "Ita, ut pronuntianti vicinior esset, quam psalleutl." 
-IM OJnc, cap. vii. 


major or minor, of D, E, F, G, which are virtu- 
ally transpositions of one another, or identical 
scales at a higher or lower pitch, the seats of 
whose t^yo semitones are always in the same 
places, — between the 3rd and 4th and the 7th 
and 8th sounds severally. Whereas the Greek 
and Ambrosian scales above are not only unlike 
one another (the seats of the semitones being in 
all different), but they are also unlike either our 
modern typical major scale of C, which has its 
semitones between the 3rd and 4th and 7th and 
8th sounds, or our typical minor scale of A, 
which has one of its semitones always between 
the '2nd and 3rd sounds, another between the 5th 
and 6th or the 7th and 8th, and in its chromatic 
form between both. 

Modern Typical JIajok Scale. 

Modern Typical Minor Scale.. 

Chromatic Forii. 


The 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Ambrosian scales 
or tones thei'efore are not what we now call 
"kevs," but "modes," diflering from one another 
as the modern major and minor modes differ, in 
the places of their semitones. Melodies there- 
fore in this or that Ambrosian " tone " have a 
variety of character analogous to that which 
distinguishes our major apd minor modes so very 
widely. Thus tenderness is the popular attri- 
bute of the minor mode ; strength and clearness 
are those of the major. In like manner one 
Ambrosian tone was supposed to be characterised 
by dignity, another by languor, and so on. 

The rhythmus of Ambrosian melody is thought 
by some to have consisted only in the adaptation 
to long and short syllables of long and short 
notes. " Of what we call time," says Forkel 
{Gesch. der MusHi, ii. 168), — the proportion 
between the different divisions of the same 
melody, — "the ancients had no conception." 
He does not tell us how they contrived to march 
or to dance to timeless melodies — melodies with 
two beats in one foot and three in another, or 
three feet in one phrase and four in another, nor 
how vast congregations were enabled to sing 
them ; and if anything is certain about Ambrosian 
song it is that it was above all things congrega- 
■ tional. 

Whether Ambrose was acquainted with the 
use of musical characters is uncertain. Probably 
he was. The system he adopted was Greek, and 
he could hardly make himself acquainted with 
Greek music without having acquired some 
knowledge of Greek notation, which, though in- 
tricate in its detail, was simple in its principles. 
But even the invention, were it needed, of cha- 
racters capable of representing the compara- 
tively few sounds of Ambrosian melody could 
have been a matter of no difficulty. Such cha- 
racters needed only to represent the pitch of 
these sounds; their duration was dependent on. 

AMEN 7o 

and sufficiently indicated by, the metre. Copies 
of Ambrosian music-books are preserved in some 
libraries, which present indications of what may 
be, probably are, musical characters. Possibly 
however these are additions by later hands. It 
is certain that, in the time of Charlemagne, Am- 
brosian song was finally superseded, except in 
the Milanese, by Gregorian. The knowledge 
of the Ambrosian musical alphabet, if it ever 
existed, may, in such circumstances, and in such 
an age, have easily been lost, though the melo- 
dies themselves were long preserved tradition- 
ally. [J. H.I 

AMBROSIANUM.— This word in old litur- 
gical writings often denotes a hymn, from S. 
Ambrose having been the first to introduce 
metrical hymns into the service of the Church. 
Originally the word may have indicated that the 
particular hymn was the composition of S. 
Ambrose, and hence it came to signify any hymn. 
Thus S. Benedict, in his directions for Nocturns, 
says, " Post hunc psalmus 94 (Venite) cum anti- 
phona, aut certe decantandus." hide sequatur 
Ambrosianum : Deinde sex psalmi cum anti- 
phonis." Also, S. Isidore de Divin. off. lib. i. 
c. 1, § 2, speaking of hymns, mentions S. 
Ambrose of Milan, whom he calls " a most illus- 
trious Doctor of the Church, and a copious com- 
poser of this kind of poetry. Whence (he adds) 
from his name hymns are called Amhrosians," 
(unde ex ejus nomine hymni Amhrosiani appel- 
lantur). ' [H. J. H.] 

AMEN (Heb. |0X). The formula by which 
one expresses his concurrence in the prayer of 
another, as for instance in Deut. xxvii. 15. 

1. This word, which was used in the services 
of the synagogue, was transferred unchanged in 
the very earliest age of the Church to the 
Christian services [compare Alleluia] ; for the 
Apostle (1 Cor. siv. 16) speaks of the Amen of 
the assembly which followed the evxapicrria, or 
thanksgiving. And the same custom is traced 
in a series of authorities. Justin Martyr (Apol. 
i. c. 65, p. 127) notices that the people present 
say the Amen after prayer and thanksgiving ; 
Dionysius of Alexandria (in L'useb. H. E. vii. 9, p. 
253, Schwegler) speaks of one who had often 
listened to the thanksgiving (^vxapiffTio), and^ 
joined in the. Amen which followed. Cyril of 
Jerusalem {Catechismus Mystag. 5, p. 331) says 
that the Lord's Prayer is seeded with an Amen. 
Jerome, in a well-known passage (Prooemium in 
lib. ii. Comment. Ep. Gal., p. 428) speaks of the 
thundering sound of the Amen of the Roman 

2. The formula of consecration in the Holy 
Eucharist is in most ancient liturgies ordered to 
be said aloud, and the people respond Amen. Pro- 
uably, however, the custom of saying this part 
of the service secrete — afterwards universal in 
the West — had already begun to insinuate itself 
in the time of Justinian ; for that emperor ordered 
(Novella 123, in Migne's Patrol, tom. 72, p. 1026), 
that the consecration-formula should be said 
aloud, expressly on the ground that the people 
might respond Am£n at its termination. [Com- 
pare Canon.] In most Greek liturgies also, 

« This is explained as " omnlno protrahendo et ab uno 
aut a pluiibus morose" or as "in directum sine Anti- 
phoiia." Martmc Oe Ant. Man. rit., Lib. I. cap. ii. 22. 



when the priest in administering says, " awiJia. 
Xpiarov," the receiver answers Amen. So, too, 
m the Clementine Liturgy, after the ascription 
of Glory to God (Apost. Const, viii. 13, p. 215, 
Ultzen). (Bona, l>e Rebus Liturgicis, 1. ii. cc. 5, 
12, 17.) [C] 

AMENESIUS, deacon, commemorated Nor. 
10 {Mart. Bcdae). [C] 

AIMICE (Amictus, Humerale, Superhuinerale 
or Ephod, Anaboladium, Anaholagium, Anagolai- 
uin). § 1. The word Amictus is employed in clas- 
sical writei-s as a general term for any outer 
garment. Thus Virgil employs it {Aen. iii. 405) 
in speaking of the toga, ornamented with purple, 
the end of which was thrown about the head by 
priests and other official persons when engaged 
in acts of sacrifice. (See for example " the 
Emperor sacrificing," from the column of Trajan, 
Vest. Christ, pi. iii.) The same general usage 
may be traced in the earlier ecclesiastical writers, 
as in St. Jerome, and in Gregory of Tours, who 
uses the word in speaking of a bride's veil. St. 
Isidore of Seville (circ. 630 A.D.) nowhere em- 
ploys the word as the designation of any par- 
ticular garment, sacred or otherwise. But in 
defining the meaning of anaboladium (a Greek 
word which at a later time was identified with 
amictus as the name of a sacred vestment), he 
describes it as " amictorium lineum femiuarum 
quo humeri eperiuntur, quod Graeci et Latini 
sindonem vocant." (Origines, xix. 25.) With 
this may be compared St. Jerome on Isaiah, cap. 
iii., where in referring to the dress of Hebrew 
women, he says, " Habent sindones quae vocantur 
amictoria." This usage of " amictorium," and 
its equivalent " anaboladium," in speaking of a 
linen garment worn by women as a covering for 
the shoulders, will prepare us for the first refer- 
ence to the "amictus" as a vestment early in 
the 9th century, when it is compared by Eabanus 
Maurus (such seems to bn his meaning) with the 
"superhumerale" of Levitical use {De Instit. 
Cler. Lib. 1. cap. 15). Eabanus, howevei-, does 
not use the word " amictus," though he seems 
evidently to refer to the vestment elsewhere so 
called. Amalarius of Metz, writing about the 
same time (circ. 825 A.D.), speaks of the " amic- 
tus" as being the first in order of the vestments 
of the Church, " primum vestimentum nostrum 
quo collum undique cingimus." Hence its sym- 
bolism in his eyes as implying " castigatio vocis," 
the due restraint of the voice, whose organs are 
in the throat {De Eccl. Off. ii. 17.). Walafrid 
Strabo writing some few years later (he was a 
pupil of Eabanus), enumerates the eight vest- 
ments of the -Church, but without including in 
tliem the amice {De Reh. Eccl. c. 24.). But in all 
the later liturgical writers the vestment is named 
under some one or other of the various designa- 
tions enumerated at the head of this article. 
As to its use in this country there is no evidence 
till nearly the close of the Saxon period. It is 
not mentioned in the Pontifical of Egbert. In 
a later Anglo-Saxon Pontifical (of the 10th cen- 
tury. Dr. Eock says,) among the vestments 
enumerated occurs mention of the " super- 
humerale sen poderem," an expression which has 
been supposed to point to the amice, though the 
use of " poderis," as an alternative name, seems 
to make this somewliat doubtful. ((Quoted by 


Dr. Eock, Church of our Fathers, vol. i. p. 465 ; 
from the Archaeologia, vol. xxv. p. 28.) 

§ 2. Shape of the Amice, its Material, and orna- 
mentation. The amice was originally a square or 
oblong piece of linen, somewhat such as that 
which forms the background in the accompany- 
ing woodcut, and was probably worn nearly as 
shown in Fig. 1, so as to cover the neck "and 

shoulders. Early in the 10th century (a. D. 925) 
we hear, for the first time, of ornaments of gold 
on the amice. {Testaiuentuin Eeadfi Episcopi in 
Migne's I'atrologia, tom. cxxxii. p. 468, " caligas 
et sandalias paria duo, amictos [_sic'] cum auro 
quattuor.") This ornament was probably an 
"aurifrigium" or " orfrey." From the 11th 
century onwards the richer amices were adorned 
with embroidery, and at times even with pre- 
cious stones. These ornaments were attached to 
a portion only of the amice, a comparatively 
small patch, known as a plaga, or panira («. e., 
paratura) being fastened on (see Fig. 4 in wood- 


pJ5 crucifix" <i>e(i.f! 


Fig. 4. 

cut) so as to appear as a kind of collar above the 
alb (see Fig. 3). An example is given of late 
date, to show the shape of the parura, as, from 
the nature of the material, very early amices 
are not extant. These parurae were known in 
later times as " collaria " or " colleria " (see 
Eock, Ch. of our Fathers, i. 470). 

§ 3. IIoio worn. — All the earlier notices of 
the amice are such as to imply that it was worn 
on the neck and shoulders only. Honorius of 
Autun (writing circ. 1125 A.D.) is the first who 
speaks of it as being placed on the head. " Hu- 
merale quod in Lege Ephot, apud nos Amictus 
dicitur, sibi imponit et illo caput et collum et 
humeros (unde et Humerale dicitur) cooperit, et 
in pectore copulatum duabusvittis ad mammillas 
cingit. Per Humerale quod capiti imponitur 
spes caelestium intelligitur." {Qemma animae, i. 
c. 201.) It appears to have been temporarily 
placed on the head (as shown in Fig. 2 of the 
above woodcut) till the other vestments were 
arranged, after which it was turned down so 
that the parura might appear in its proper 
place. To this position on the head is to be 
referred its later symbolism as a liehnet of 


salvation. " Amictus pro galea caput obnubit." 
Dui-andi Rationale iii. 1. For other symbol- 
isms see lunocent III., De Sacro Altaris Mysterio, 
i. cc. 35 and 50. (The woodcut above is from 
Dr. Bock's Geschichte der Uturgischen Gewdnder, 
B. ii. Taf. ii.) [W. B. M.] 

AMICUS, confessor at Lyons, commemorated 
July 14 (J/ari. Hiercm.). [C] 

AMMON. (1) Commemorated Feb. 7 {Mart. 

(2) Commemorated Feb. 9 (Jf. Hicron., Bedae). 

(3) 'Afi/xovv, the deacon, with the forty women 
his disciples, martyrs, commemorated Sept. 1 
{Cal. Byzant.). 

(4) Commemorated Sept. 10 (J/. Hieron., 

(5) Martyr at Alexandria, Dec. 20 {Mart. 
Rom. Vet, Bedae). [C] 

AMMONARIA, martyr at Alexandria, com- 
memorated Dec. 12 {Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

AMMONIUS. (1) Martyr, Jan. 31 {Mart. 
Hieron., Bedae). 

(2) Infant of Alexandria, commemorated Feb. 
'12 {Mart. Rom. Vet.). 

(3) Commemorated Oct. 6 {M. Hieron.). [C] 

AMOS, the prophet, commemorated June 15 

{Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

AMPELUS of Messana, commemorated Nov. 
20 {Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 


This word appears to be confined to Gallican 
writers. And this fact, coupled with its Greek 
derivation, pointing as this does to a very early 
period for its introduction, is noticeable, as one 
among many instances of diversities of usage 
in minor matters, characteristic of the Gallican 
church, and indicating an origin distinct from 
that of other western churches. 

§ 2. Form of the vestment, and its prevailing 
use. There are three passages to which refer- 
ence may here be made as determining all that 
can with certainty be known with regard to 
the vestment now in question. St. Remigius, 
Archbishop of Aries, dying about 500 A.D., 
left to his successor in the see " Amphibalum 
album pasclialem," a white amphibalus for 
use on Sundays and high festivals. (For 
' paschalis ' see Ducange in voc.) We cannot 
here conclude with absolute certainty that it 
is of a vestment for church use that he is 
speaking, though the context seems to imply 
this. (The quotation is from the Testamentum 
8. Remigii Remensis, ajmd Galland, Bihliothec. 
Pat., tom. X. p. 806.) But in the passages that 
follow this meaning is beyond doubt. In a life 
of S. Bonitus {alias S. Bonus), f circ. 710, a.d. 
written, as it is supposed, by a contemporary 
{Acta Sanctorum Januar., d. xv. p. 1071 sqq.), we 
are told that the saint was much given to weep- 
ing even in church ; so much so, that the upper 
part of his amphibalus, which served as a cover- 
ing for his head, was found to be wet with the 
tears he shed. " Lacrimarum ei gratia in sacro 
non deerat officio ita ut amphibali summitas, qua 
caput tegebatur, ex profusione earum madida 
videretur." This " upper part " of the amphi- 
balus was evidently a kind of liood (like that of 



the casula), separable, m some sort, from the 
rest of the garment. For the saint is repre- 
sented as appearing after death, in a vision, to a 
certain maiden, devoted to God's service, and 
sending through her a message to the " mother " 
of the neighbouring monastery, bidding her keep 
by her (no doubt as a relic) that part of his 
amphibalus which covered his head. " Ut par- 
tem amphibali mei qua caput tegitur, secum re- 

Even in this passage, however, though it is 
evidently spoken of as worn in church, and 
during the " holy office," it does not follow that 
a sacerdotal vestment, distinctively so called, is 
there intended. The mention of the hood (or 
hood-like appendage) as worn over the head 
points rather to use in the choir. But in a 
fragmentary account of the Gallican rite, of un- 
certain date, but probably of the 9th or 10th 
century, the word amphibalus is used as equiva- 
lent to the " casula," then regarded as specially 
belonging to sacerdotal ministry. " The casula, 
known as amphibalus," the writer says, " which 
the priest puts upon him, is united from top to 
bottom . . . it is without sleeves . . . 
joined in front without slit or opening 
' Casula, quam amphibalum vocant, quod sacer- 
dos induetur {sic), tota unita . . , Ideo 
sine manicas {sic) quia sacerdos potius benedicit 
quam ministrat. Ideo unita prinsecus, non scissa, 
non aperta,'" &c. (See Martene, Thesaurus 
Anecdotorum, tom. v.) 

From the above passages we may infer that 
" amphibalus " was a name, in the Gallican 
church of the first eight or nine centuries, for 
the more solemn habit of ecclesiastics, and par- 
ticularly for that which they wore in offices of 
holy ministration. Having regard to its (pro- 
bably) Eastern origin, and to its subsequent iden- 
tification with the casula, we shall probably be 
right in thinking that it resembled in shape the 
white phenolia, in which Eastern bishojjs are re- 
presented in mosaics of the 6th century, in the 
great church (now Mosque) of St. Sophia at 
Constantinople. For these last see the article 
Vestments (Greek), later in this work, and 
Salzenberg's Altchristliche Baudenkmale, plates 
xxviii. and xxix. [W. B. M.] 

AMPHILOCHIUS, bishop of Iconium, com- 
memorated Nov. 23 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

AMPIDIUS, commemorated at Rome Oct. 14 
{Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

AMPLIAS, " Apostle," commemorated Oct. 
31 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

AMPODIUS, commemorated Oct. 11 {Mart'. 
Hieron.). [C] 

AMPULLA (Probably for amh-olla, from its 
swelling out in every direction), a globular ves- 
sel for holding liquid. In ecclesiastical language 
the word denotes — 

1. The flasks or cruets, generally of precious 
metnl, which contain the wine and water used 
at the altar. The word "pollen," used in some 
districts of Germany to designate these vessels 
(Binterim's DenhvurdigJiciten, iv. 1. 183) is pro- 
bably derived from " Ampullae." 

When the custom of making offerings of wiae 
for the Holy Communion ceased, ampullae seem 
to have taken the place of the larger Amai;. 



The notiou of the ampullae themselves having 
been large vessels is probably founded on the 
ancient etymology, "ampulla, quasi vas am- 
plum ;" an etymology which Walafrid Strabo 
{Be Beb. Ecd. c. 24)\idapts to the facts of his 
own time by reversing it, " ampulla quasi parum 
ampla." The first mention of ampullae as altar- 
vessels, appears to be in the Liber Pontificalis 
(c. 110) in the life of John III. (559-573), who 
is said to have ordered that the oratories of the 
martyrs in the city of Rome should be supplied 
with altar-plate, including ampullae [al. amulae] 
from the Lateran church. 

2. More commonly the word ampulla denotes 
a vessel, XrjKvOos, used for holding consecrated 
oil or chrism. In this sense it is used by Optatus 
Milevitanus (contra Lonatistas ii. 19, p. 42), 
when he tells us that an "ampulla chrismatis" 
thrown from a window by the Donatists mira- 
culously remained unbroken. In the Gregorian 
Sacramentary (p. 65), in the directions for the 
benediction of Chrism on the " Feria V. post 
Palmas," or Thursday in Holy Week, " ampullae 
duo cum oleo" are ordered to' be prepared, the 
better of which is to be proi^ented to the Pope. 

By far the most renowned ampulla of this 
kimd is that which was said to have been brought 
by a dove from heaven at the baptism of Clovis, 
and which was used at the coronation of the 
•Frank kings. Hincmar, in the service which he 
drew up for the coronation of Charles the Bald 
(840), speaks of the first Christian king of the 
Franks having been anointed and consecrated 
with the heaven-descended chrism, whence that 
which he himself used was derived ("caelitus 
sumpto chrismate, unde nunc habemus, perunc- 
tus et in regem sacratus"), as if of a thing well 
known. In Flodoard, who wrote in the' first 
half of the 10th century, we find the legend fully 
developed. He tells us {Hist. Eccles. Eemensis, 
1. 13, m Migne's Patrol, vol. 135, p. 52 c.) that 
at the Baptism of Clovis, the clerk who bore the 
chrism was prevented by the crowd from reach- 
ing his proper station; and that when the 
moment for unction arrived, St. Kemi raised his 


eyes to heaven and prayed, when " ecce subito 
columba ceu nix advolat Candida rostro deferens 
ampullam caelestis doni chrismate repletam." 
This sacred ampulla (the " Sainte Ampoulle") 
was preserved in the abbey of St. Eemi, at Reims, 
and used at the coronation of the successive kings 
of F'rance. It was broken in 1793, but even 
then a fragment was said to have been preserved, 
and was used at the coronation of Charles X. 
The ampulla represented in the woodcut, from 
Monza, is said to be of the 7th century. It is 
of a metal resembling tin, and has engraved 
upon it a representation of the Adoration of the 
Magi and of the Shepherds, with the inscription, 
TOnojN, having been used for pressino- Holy 
Oil. [Oil, Holy.] " [c] 

AMULETS. The earliest writer in whom 
the word occurs is Pliny {H. N. xxix. 4, 19 ; .xxx. 
15, 47, et al.), and is used by him in the sense of 
a " charm " against poisons, witchcraft, and the 
like (" veneficiorum amuleta "). A Latin deriva- 
tion has been suggested for it as being that 
" quod malum amolitur." Modern etymologists, 
however, connect both the word as well as 
the thing with the East, and derive it from the 
Arabic hammalet (= a thing suspended). The 
practice which the word implies had been in the 
Christian Church, if not from the first, yet as 
soon as the Paganism and Judaism out of "which 
it had emerged began again to find their wav 
into it as by a process of infiltration, and the 
history of amulets presents a strange picture of 
the ineradicable tendency of mankind to fall back 
into the basest superstitions which seem to belong 
only to the savage bowing before his fetiche. 
Man has a dread of unseen powers around him- — 
demons, spectres, an evil eye — and he believes 
that certain objects have power to preserve him 
from them. That belief fastens sometimes upon 
symbolic forms or solemn words that have once 
served as representatives of higher thoughts, 
sometimes upon associations which seem alto- 
gether arbitrary. When the Israelites left 
Egypt, they came from a people who had car- 
ried this idea to an almost unequalled extent. 
The scarabaeus, the hawk, the serpent, the 
uraeus, or hooded snake, an open eye, outspread 
wings, with or without formulae of prayer, 
deprecating or invoking, are found in countless 
variety in all our museums, and seem to have 
been borne, some on the breast, some suspended 
by a chain round the neck. The law of Moses, 
by ordering the Zizith, or blue fringe on the gar- 
ments which men wore, or the papyrus scrolls 
with texts (Exod. xiii. 2-10, 11-17; Deut. vi. 
4-9, 13-22), which were to be as frontlets on 
their brows, and bound upon their arms, known 
by later Jews as the Tephillim, or when nailed on 
their door posts or the walls of their houses as 
the Mesusa, sought, as by a wise " economy," to 
raise men who had been accustomed to such 
usages to higher thoughts, and to turn what had 
been a superstition into a witness for the truth. 
The old tendency, however, crept in, and it seems 
clear that some at least of the ornaments named 
by Isaiah (iii. 23), especially the D'E^TIp, were of 
the nature of amulets {Bib. Diet. Amulets). And 
the later <pv\aKT-i)pLa of the N. T., though an at- 
tempt has been made by some archaeologists to 
explain the name as tliough they reminded 


meu <pv\a(T(T€iv rhv vofxov (Schottgen) were, 
there can be little doubt, so called as "pre- 
servatives " against demons, magic, and the evil 
eye.'' Through the whole history of Rabbinism, 
the tendency was on the increase, and few Jews 
believed themselves free from evil spirits, unless 
the bed on which they slept was guarded by the 
3Icsicsa. Mystic figures — the sacred tetragram- 
maton, the shield of David, the seal of Solomon — 
witli cabalistic words, AGLA (an acrostic formed 
from the initial letters of the Hebrew words for 
"Thou art mighty for everlasting, Lord";, 
Abracalan, and the like, shot up as a ranis after- 
growth. Greelv, Latin, Eastern Heathenism, in 
like manner, supplied various forms of the same 
usage. Everywhere men lived in the dread of 
the fascination of the " evil eye." Sometimes in- 
dividual men, sometimes whole races (e.g. the 
Thibii of Pontus) were thought to possess the 
power of smiting youth and health, and causing 
them to waste away (Plutarch, Sympos. v. 7). 
And against this, men used remedies of various 
kinds, the 'Ecpeffia ■ypaixixara, the phallus or 
fascinum. The latter was believed to operate as 
diverting the gaze which would otherwise be 
fixed on that which kept it spell-bound (Plu- 
tarch, I. c. ; Varr. de Ling. Lat. vi. 5), but was pro- 
bably connected also with its use as the symbol 
of life as against the evil power that was working 
to destroy life. It is obvious that superstitions 
of this kind would be foreign to Christian life in 
its first purity. The " bonfire " at Ephesus was 
a protest against them and all like usages (Acts 
xix. 19). They crept in, however, probably in 
the first instance through the influence of Juda- 
izing or Orientalizing Gnostics. The followers 
of Basilides had their mystical Abraxas and Jal- 
dabaoth, which they wrote on parchment and 
used as a charm \_Chr. Biogr. art. Basilides]. 
Scarabaei have been found, with inscriptions 
(Jao, Sabaoth, the names of angels, Bellerman, 
Uher die Scarahaeen, i. 10), indicating Christian 
associations of this nature.'' The catacombs of 
Rome have yielded small objects of various kinds 
that were used apparently for the same purpose, 
a bronze fish (connected, of course, with the 
mystic anagram of IXQTfS), with the word 
SriSAIS on it, a hand holding a tablet with 
ZHCE2, medals with the monogram which had 
figured on the laharum of Constantine (Aringhi, 
Romi Subterranea, vi. 23 ; Costadoni, Del Pesce, 
pi. ii., iii., 19 ; Martigny, s. v. Foisson). In the 
East we find the practice of carrying the Gospels 
(j8t;8Aia or fvayy^Xia fxiKpd) round the neck 
as (pu\aKT7)pia (Chrysost. IIoui. Ixxiii. in Matt.) ; 
and Jerome (in Matt. iv. 24) confesses that 
he .had himself done so to guard against disease. 
When the passion for relics set in they too were 
employed, and even Gregory the Great sent to 
Theodelinda two of these (^i/Aa/cr-^pia, one a cross 
containing a fragment of the true cross, the other 
a box containing a copy of the Gospels, each with 
Greek invocations, as a charm against the #s'il 
spirits' or lamiae that beset children (Epp. xii. 7). 
In all these cases we trace some Christian asso- 

» This is distinctly stated in the Jerusalem Gemara 
(Beracli. fol. 2, 4). Comp. the exhaustive article by Leyrcz 
on ' Phylakterien' in Herzog. 

•> The mention of " the horns of the Scarabaeus " as an 
amulet by Pliny (B. iV. xxviii. 4) shews how widely the 
old Egyptian feeling about it had spread in the first 
ci'Utury of the Christian era. 


ciations. » Symbolism passes into superstition. 
In other instances the old heathen leaven was 
more conspicuous. Strange words, trepiepyoi 
XapaKTrjpes (Basil, in Ps. xlv., p. 229 A), names 
of rivers, and the like (Chrysost. Horn. Ixxiii. in 
Matt.), "%a<Mrae" of all kinds (August. Tract vii. 
in Joann.), are spoken of as frequent. Even a 
child's caul (it is curious to note at once the 
antiquity and the persistency of the superstition), 
and the iyKdhiriov evSvfj.a became an kyK6\Tnov 
in another sense, and was used by midwives to 
counteract the " evil eye " and the words of evil 
omen of which men were still afraid (Balsamon, 
in Cone. Trull., c. 61). Even the strange prohibi- 
tion by the Council just referred to of the practice 
of " leading about she bears and other like beasts 
to the delusion (nphs iraiyviov) and injury of the 
simple," has been referred by the same writer 
(ibid.), not to their being a show as in later 
times, but to the fact that those who did so car- 
ried on a trade in the (j>v\aKT7)pia, which they 
made from their hair, and which were in request 
as a cure for sore eyes. 

Christian legislation and teaching had to carry 
on a perpetual warfare against these abuses. 
Constantine indeed, in the transition stage which 
he represented, had allowed " remedia humanis 
quaesita corporibus " (Cod. Theodos. ix. tit. 1(5, 
s. 3), as well as incantations for rain, but the 
Council of Laodicea (c. 36) forbade the clergy 
to make <pvXaKT7ipLa, which were in reality "Secr- 
ficoTTipia for their own souls." Chrysostom fre- 
quently denounces them in all their forms, and 
lays bare the plea that the old women who sold 
them were devout Christians, and that the prac- 
tice therefore could not be so very wrong (Horn. 
viii. in Coloss. p. 1374 ; Horn., vi. c. Jud. ; Horn. 
Ixii. p. 536, in Matt. p. 722). Basil (I. c.) speaks 
in the same tone. Augustine (I. c. and Senn. ccxv. 
De Temp.) warns men against all such " diabolica 
phylacteria." Other names by which such amulets 
were known were irepiairTa. ■KepidfXfx.aTa. We 
may infer from the silence of Clement of Alex- 
andria and Tertullian that the earlier days of the 
Church were comparatively free from these super- 
stitions, and from the tone of the writers just re- 
ferred to that the canon of the Council of Laodicea 
had been so far effectual that the clergy were no 
longer ministering to them. [E. H. P.] 


ANACLETUS, the pope, martyr at Rome, 
commemorated April 26 (Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ANACTORON (^KvaKTopov from avaKToip), 
the dwelling of a king or ruler. In classical 
authors, generally a house of a god, especially 
a temple of the Eleusinian Demeter or of the 
Dioscuri ; also, the innermost recess of a temple, 
in which oracles were given (Lobeck's Aglaopha- 
mus, i. pp. 59, 62). Eusebius (Fanegyr. c. 9) 
applies the word to the church built by Constan- 
tine at Antioch, whether as equivalent to /Sain- 
XiKT), or with reference to the unusual size and 
splendour of the church, or with a reminiscence 
of the classical use of the word, is difficult to say. 
(Bingham's Antiquities, viii. 1. § 5.) [C] 


Tertullian is the earliest writer who mentions 
this office as a distinct order in the Church (De 
Praescr. c. 41). It would seem that, at first, tlie 
public reading of the Scriptures was performed 



mdifierently by presbyters and deacons, and pos- 
sibly at times by a layman specially appointed 
by the bishop. From Tertullian's time, how- 
ever, it was included among the minor oi-ders, 
and as such is frequently referred to by Cyprian 
{Epp. 29, 38, &c.). It is also one of the three 
minor orders mentioned in the so-called Apos- 
tolical Canons, the other two being the viroSid- 
Kovos .and the ^dXTfis. The Scriptures were 
read by the Anagnostes, from the pulpitum or 
tribunal ecclesiae. If any portion of the sacred 
writings was read from the altar, or more pro- 
perly from the bema or tribunal of the sanc- 
tuary, this was done by one of the higher clergy. 
By one of Justinian's Novels it was directed 
that no one should be ordained reader before 
the age of eighteen ; but previously young boys 
were admitted to the office, at the instance 
of their parents, as introductory to the higher 
functions of the sacred ministry (Bingham, 
Thorndike). [D. B.] 

ANANIAS. (1) Of Damascus (Acts ix. 10), 
commemorated Jan. 25 (Mart. Rom. Vet.'); Oct. 
1 {Cal. Byzant.); Oct. 15 (C. Armen.). 

(2) Martyr in Persia, April 21 (Jfar!!.i?om. Vet.). 

(3) Martyr, with Azarias and Misael, Dec. 16 
(Tb.); April 2.3 (Mart. Bedac); Dec. 17 (Cal. 
Byzant.). [C] 

ANAPHOKA. ('Ava(f>opd. The word aua- 
(pipnv acquired in later Greek the sense of 
" lifting up " or " offering : " as aya(pepeiv 0v- 
alas, Heb. vii. 27 ; 1 Pet. ii. 5 ;<p4peiv eii- 
Xapiariav, €vcprifj.iav, So^o\oyiav, Chrysostom in 
Suicer, s. v. 'Avatpopd was also used in a cor- 
responding sense ; in Ps. 1. 21, [LXX], it is the 
equivalent of the Hebrew H^'y, " that which 
goeth up on the altar.") 

1. In the sense of "lifting up" Anaphora 
came to be applied to the celebration of the 
Holy Eucharist ; whether from the " lifting 
up" of the heart which is required in that 
service, or from the " oblation " which takes 
place in it; probably the latter. 

In the liturgical diction of the Copts, which 
has borrowed much from the Greeks, the word 
Anaphora is used, instead of liturgy, to designate 
the whole of the Eucharistic service, and the 
book which contains it ; but more commonly its 
use is restricted to that more solemn part of the 
Eucharistic office which includes the Consecration, 
Oblation, Communion, and Thanksgiving. It be- 
gins with the " Sursum Corda," or rather with 
the benediction which precedes it, and extends 
to the end of the office, thus corresponding with 
the Preface and Canon of Western rituals. 

The general structure of the Anaphorae of 
Oriental liturgies is thus exhibited by Dr. Neale 
(Eastern Church, Introduction, i. 463). 

The Great Eucharistic Prayer — 

1. The Preface. [SnKstnn Corda.] 

2. The Prayer of the Triumphal Hymn. [Pkefaiie.] 

3. The Triumphal Hymn. [Sanctus.] 

4. Commemoration of our Lord's Life. 

5. Commemoration of Institution. 
TliC Consecration — 

6. Words of Institution of the Bread. 

7. Words of Institution of the Wine. 

8. Oblation of the Bodj' and Blood. 

9. Introductory Prayer for the Descent of the 

Holy Ghost. 
10. Prayer for the Change of Elements. 


The Great Intercessor// Prayer — 

11. General Intercession for Quick and Dead. 

12. Prayer before the Lord's Prayer. 

13. The Lord's Prayer. 

14. The Embollsmus. 
77(6 Communion — 

15. The Prayer of Inclination (ra; Ke^a.Xa'; kAi- 

16. Td ayia rots ayi'ois and Elevation of Host. 

17. The Fraction. 

18. The Confession. 

19. The Communion. 

20. The Antidoron ; and Prayers of Thanksgiving. 

This table exhibits the component parts of the 
Anaphorae of all, or nearly all, the Eastern litur- 
gies, in the state in which they have come down 
to us ; but different parts are variously de- 
veloped in different liturgies, and even the order 
is not always preserved ; for instance, in the 
existing Nestoriau liturgies, the general inter- 
cession is placed before the invocation of the 
Holy Ghost, and other minor variations are found. 
The principal of these will be noticed under their 
proper headings. 

It is in the Anaphorae that the characteristics 
are found which distinguish different liturgies 
of the same family ; in the iiitroductory or pro- 
anaphoral portion of the liturgies there is much 
less vai-iety.' "In every liturgical family there 
is one liturgy, or at most two, which supplies 
the former or pro-anaphoral portion to all the 
others, and such liturgies we may call the normal 
offices of that family ; the others, both in MSS. 
and printed editions, commence with the ' Prayer 
of the Kiss of Peace,' the preface to the Ana- 
phora " (Neale, Eastern Church, i. 319). Thus, 
when the liturgy of Gregory Theologus or of 
Cyril is used, the pro-anaphoral portion is taken 
from that of St. Basil ; the Ethiopian Church has 
twelve liturgies, which have the introductory 
portion in common ; the numerous Syro-Jacobite 
liturgies all take the introductory portion from 
that of St. James ; the three Nestorian from 
that of the Apo.stles. Further particulars will 
be found under Canon and Communion. 

2. The word is sometimes used iu 
liturgical writings as equivalent to the a.i]p or 
Chalice-veil ; and has found its way in this sense, 
corrupted in form (Nuphir) into the Syrian 
liturgies. (Renaudot, Lit. Orient, ii. 61.) [C] 

AN ASTASIA. (1) Martyr under Diocletian. 
Her Natalis, an ancient and famous festival, falls 
on Dec. 25 (Mart. Rom. Vet., Hieron., Bedae). 
Her name is recited in the Gregorian Canon. 
The proper office for her festival, in the Gre- 
gorian Sacram. (p. 7), is headed, in Menard's 
text, Missa in Mane prima Nat. Dom., sire S. 
Anastasiae ; and is inserted between the Missa 
In Vigilia Domini in Nocte and the Missa In Die 
Natalis Domini. The titles in the other MSS. 
are equivalent. In the Byzantine Calendar she 
is .commemorated as (papfiaKoXvrpia, dissolver of 
spells on Dec. 22 (see Neale's Eastern Church, 
Introd. 786). 

(2) Of Rome, Scrtofidprvs, commemorated Oct. 
29 (Cal. Byzant.). [C.I 

ANASTASIS.— The Orthodox Greek Church 
commemorates the dedication of the Church of 
the Anastasis by Constantine the Great ('EyKai- 
via Tov NaoO rris aylas tov XpiffTov /cat Qeov 
Tji.i.Sii' ' Avaardaiois) on Sep. 13. (Daniel, Codex 


Liturgicus, W. 2(58.) This festival refers to the 
dedication of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, 
or of the Resurrection of the Lord, at Jerusalem, 
A.D. 335. (Eusebius, Vita Constantini, iii. 26 ff.) 
A similar name was given to the room where 
Gregory of Nazianzus preached at Constantinople, 
afterwards converted into a magnificent church. 
(Gibbon's Eomc, iii. 367, ed. Smith.) [C] 

ANASTASIUS. (1) The monk, martyr in 
Persia, commemorated Jan. 22 (^Cal. Byzant., 
Mart. Bom. Vet., Hieron.). 

(2) Saint, April 1 QIart. Bedae). 

(3) The pope, April 27 {Mart. R. V., Bedae) ; 
Oct. 28 (^Cal. Armen.). 

(4) Saint, May 2 (Jf. Bedae). 

(5) The Cornicularius, martyr, Aug. 21 {Mart. 
B. v.). 

(6) Commemorated Aug. 26 (Jf. Hieron.). 

(7) Bishop, Oct. 13 (if. Bedae, Hieron.). [C] 

ANATHEMA, the greater excommunica- 
tion, answering to Cherem in the Synagogue, 
as the lesser form did to Niddui, i.e. Separation : 
this latter is called a^opi(r/ubs in the Constitutions 
of the Apostles. 

The excision of obstinate offenders from the 
Christian fellowship was grounded upon the 
words of Christ — " If he will not hear the Church, 
let him be as a heathen man and a publican." 
So St. Gregory interprets them — " let him not 
be esteemed for a brother or a Christian " — " vi- 
delicet peccator gravis et scandalosus, notorius 
aut accusatus et convictus " ; being reproved by 
the bishop in the public assemblies of the Church, 
if he will not be humbled but remains incorri- 
gible and perseveres in his scandalous sins — 
" tum anathemate feriendus est et a corpore Ec- 
clesiae separandus" (St. Gregory in Ps. v.), and 
St. Augustine (Trac£ xxvii. in Johan.) vindicates 
this severity of discipline on the Church's part 
in such a case — " quia neque influxum habet a 
capite, neque participat de Spiritu Christi." 

This application of the word Anathema to the 
" greater excommunication " was warranted, in 
the belief of the ancient Church, by St. Paul's 
use of it (Gal. i. 8, 9), and the discipline itself 
being distinctly warranted by our Lord's words, 
as well as by other passages in the New Testa- 
ment, the anathema was regarded as cutting 
a man off from the way of salvation ; so that 
unless he received the grace of repentance he 
would certainly perish. 

A milder sense, however, of the word Ana- 
thema, as used by St. Paul, has not been without 
its defenders, both among our own Divines as 
Hammond and Waterland, and by Grotius. The 
latter wi-iter, commenting on Rom. ix. 3, gives 
the following interpretation : " Hoc dicit : Velim 
non modo carere honore Apostolatus, verum 
etiam contemptissimus esse inter Christianos, 
quales sunt qui excommunicati sunt." 

And as to the effect of the Ecclesiastical Ana- 
thema — it is maintained by Vincentius Lirinen- 
sis that it did not bear the sense of cursing 
among the ancient Christians, as Cherem did 
among the Jews. 

It is certain, however, that the word Ana- 
thema is uniformly employed by the LXX as the 
equivalent of Cherem ; and it can hardly be 
questioned, therefore, that where it occurs in 
the N. T. it must be understood in the deeper 
sense — as relating to the spiritual condifion — 




and not merely to exclusion from Church privi- 
leges, whatever may have been the force subse- 
quently attached to the word, as expressing the 
most solemn form of ecclesiastical excommuni- 
cation. On this point and on the history of the 
woi-d in general, the reader is referred to Light- 
foot on Galatians ; Thorndike, vol. ii. 338 ; Bp. 
Jeremy Taylor (Buctor Luhitantium) ; J. Light- 
foot, Be Anathemate Maranatha. [D. B.] 

ANATOLIA, martyr, commemorated July 9 
{Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ANATOLIUS, bishop, commemorated Julv 3 
{Mart. Bom. Vet.). [C.] 

ANAXARBE (Synods of), a.d. 431, to con- 
firm the deijosition of St. Cyril, and those who 
held with him. Another was held there two 
years later, as at Antioch, to make peace with 
St. Cyril. [E. S. F.] 

ANCHOR (AS Symbol). The anchor is an 
emblem very frequently used, from the earliest 
ages of Christianity, in symbolism. As the anchor 
is the hope and often the sole resource of the 
sailor, the ancients called it sacred; to weigh 
anchor was, " Anchoram sacram solvere." St. 
Paul adopts an obvious symbolism, when he 
says (Heb. vi. 19) that we have hope as " an 
anchor of the soul both sure and stedfast ;" so 
that, in its special Christian sense, the anchor 
would seem to be an emblem of hope. 

By the early Christians we find it used, some- 
times with reference to the stormy ocean of 
human life, but more often to the tempests and 
the fierce blasts of persecution which threatened 
to engulf the ship of the Chui-ch. Thus the 
anchor is one of the most ancient of emblems ; 
and we find it engraved on rings, and depicted 
on monuments and on the walls of cemeteries in 
the Catacombs, as a type of the hope by which 
the Church stood firm in the midst of the storms 
which surrounded it. In this, as in other cases, 
Christianity adopted a symbol from Paganism, 
with merely the change of application. 

The symbols on sepulchral tablets often con- 
tain allusions to the name of the deceased. The 
Chevalier de Rossi {De Monum. IXGTN cxhih. p. 
18) states that he has three times found an 
anchor upon tituli bearing names derived from 
Spes or iXirls ; uj)on the tablet of a certain 
ELPIDIVS (Mai, Collect. Vatican, v. 449), and 
upon two others, hitherto unpublished, in the 
cemetery of Priscilla, of two women, ELPIZVSA 
and Spes. In some cases, above the transverse 
bar of the anchor stands the letter E, which is 
probably the abbreviation of the word 'EAtt^s. 
Further, we find the anchor associated with the 
fish, the symbol of the Saviour [IX0T5]. It is 
clear that the union of the two symbols expresses 
" hope in Jesus Christ," and is equivalent to the 
formula so common on Christian tablets, " Spes 
in Christo," " Spes in Deo," " Spes in Deo 

The transverse bar below the ring gives the 
upper part of the anchor the appearance of a crtix 
ansata [Cross] ; and perhaps this form may have 
had as much influence in determining the choice 
of this symbol by the Christians as the words of 
St. Paul. The anchor appears, as is natural, very 
frequently upon the tombs of martyrs. (See 
Lupi, Sever ae Epitaphium, pp. 136, 137 ; Boldetti, 
Osservazioni, 366, 370, &c.; Fabretti, Inscrip- 



tionum Explic. 568, 569 ; and Martign)-, Diet, 
des Antiq. Chre't. s. v. ' Ancre.') [C] 

ANCYEA. — Two synods of Ancyra are re- 
corded ; the first of which stands at the head of 
those provincial synods whose canons form part 
of the code of the universal Church. It was 
held under Vitalis of Antioch, who signs first ; 
and of the 18 bishops composing it, several 
attended the Nicene Council subsequently. 
Twenty-five canons \yere passed, about half of 
which relate to the lapsed, and the rest to dis- 
cipline generally (v. Beveridge, Synod, ii. ad L). 
The date usually assigned to it is A.D. 314. 
Another synod met there, A.D. 358, composed 
of semi-Arians. They condemned the second 
Synod of Sirmium, accepted the term homoi- 
ousion,, and published 12 anathemas against all 
who rejected it, together with a long synodical 
letter. Another synod of semi-Arians was held 
there, A.D. 375, at which Hipsius, Bishop of 
Parnassus, was deposed. [E. S. F.] 


are commemorated by the Armenian Chiirch on 
June 20, as fellow-martyrs with Theodotion, or 
Theodorus, of Salatia, the first Bishop of Ancyra 
of whom we have an}' account. (Neale, Eastern 
Church, Introd. p. 800.) [C] 

gers, Council of.] 

LOT, Council of.] 

CONCiLiUJi), near Langres ; summoned by Gun- 
tram, King of Orleans (at a meeting to ratify a 
compact, also made at Andelot, between himself 
and Childebert, Nov. 28 or 29, 587), for March 1, 
A.D. 588, but nothing further is recorded of it, and 
possibly it was never held at all (Greg. Turon., 
Hist. Fr. ix. 20; Mansi, ix. 967-970). [A.W.H.] 

ANDOCHIUS or ANDOCIUS, presbyter, 
commemorated Sept. 24 (Mart. Hieron., 
Bedae). [C] 

ANDEEAS. (1) Martyr, commemorated 
Aug. 19 {Mart. Horn: Vet.). 

(2) King, Hedar 16 = Nov. 12 (Cal. Ethiop.). 

(3) The general, with 2953 companion mar- 
tyrs, commemorated Aug. 19 (Cal. Byzant.). 

(4) Of Crete, oawixapTvs, Oct. 17 {Cal. 
Byz.). [C] 

ANDEEW, Saint, Festival of. — As was 
natural, the name of the " brother fisherman " 
of St. Peter was early held in great honour. 
He is invoiced by name as an intercessor in the 
prayer "Libera nos " of the Roman Canon, with 
the Virgin, St. Peter, and St. Paul; and his 
principal festival was anciently placed on the 
same level as that of St. Peter himself (Krazer, 
De Liturgiis. p. 529). His "Dies Natalis," or 
martyrdom, is placed in all the Martyrologies, 
agreeing in this with the apocryphal Acta Andreae, 
on Nov. 30. It is found in the Calendar of Car- 
thage, in whicli no other apostles are specially 
commemorated except St. Peter, St. Paul, and 
St. James the Great ; and in St. Boniface's list 
of Festivals, where no other apostles are named 
except St. Peter and St. Paul (Binterim's Eenk- 
wiirdigkeiten, v. i. 299). The hymn " Nunc An- 
dreae solemnia," for the festival of St. Andrew, 
is attributed to Venerable Bede. Proper offices 


for the Vigil and Festival of St. Andrew are 
found in the Sacramentaries of Leo and Gregory. 
In the latter (p. 144) there is a clear allusion to 
the Acta (sei; Tischondorf's Acta Apost. Apocry- I 
pha, p. 127 ), where it is said that the saint franlily j 
proclaimed tiie truth, " nee pendens taceret in j 
cruce ; " and in the ancient Liber Responsalis, I 
which bears the name of Gregory, is one equally 
clear to the same Acta in the words of St. An- 
drew's prayer, " Ne me patiaris ab inipio judice ] 
deponi, quia virtutem sanctae crucis aguovi " (p. ] 
836). A trace of the influence of these same Acta 
is found again in the Gallo-Gothic Missal (pro- 
bably of the 8th century), jjublished by Mabillon, 
in which the " contestatio," or preface {Liturgia 
Gall. lib. iii. p. 222), sets forth that the Apostle, 
" post iniqua verbera, post carceris saepta, alii- ; 
gatus suspendio se purum sacrificium obtulit. 
. . . Absolvi se non patitur a cruee . . . turba 
. . . laxari postulat justiim, ue ])ereat populus i 
line delicto ; interea fundit martyr spiritum." 1 
The .■\rmenian Church commemorates St. Andrew ' 
with St. Philip on Nov. 16. i 

The relics of the apostle were translated, pro- j 
bably in the reign of Constantius, though some 1 
authorities place the translation in that of Con- | 
stantine (compare Jerome, c. Vigilant ium, c. 6, 
p. 391, who says that Constantius translated the 
relics, with Paulinus, Carm. 26, p. 628), to Con- ! 
stantine's great "Church of the Apostles" at 
Constantinople, where they rested with those of 
St. Lulce ; the church was indeed sometimes 
called, from these two great sunts, the church \ 
of St. Andrew and St. Luke. Justini in built j 
over their remains, to which those of St. Timothy 
had been added, a splendid tomb. i 

The Martyrologiurn Hieronymi places the trans- i 
lation of St. Andrew on Sept. 3, and has a 
" Dedicatio Basilicae S. Andreae " on Nov. 3 ; but ' 
most Martyrologies agree with the Martyro- 
logiurn Romanum in placing the translation on 
May 9. Several Mai'tyrologies have on Feb. 5 '\ 
an " Ordinatio Episcopatus Andreae Apostoli," in j 
commemoration of the saint's consecration to \ 
the see of Patras (Florentinus, in Martyrol. \ 
Hieron. p. 300 ; Baronius, in Martyrol. Romano, \ 
Nov. 30, p. 502 ; Tillemont, Mem. Eccles. i. 320, 
589 ; Binterim's Benkwilrdigkeiten, v. i. 503, fif.). 

As was natural in the case of so distinguished 
a saint as the first-called Apostle, churches were 
dedicated in honour of St. Andrew in early times. 
Pope Simplicius (c. 470) is said to have dedicated '■ 
a basilica at Rome in his honour (Ciampini, Vet. * 
Monum. i. 242) ; and somewhat later (c. 500) ' .' 
Pope Symmachus converted the " Vestiarium ! 
Neronis " into a church, which bore the name ^ 
" S. Andreae ad Crucem." This was not far from ; 
the Vatican (Ciampini, De Sacris Aedif. p. 86). 
Later examples are frequent. 

The representation of St. Andrew with the 
decussate cross (X) as the instrument of his - 
martyrdom belongs to the Middle Ages. In i 
ancient examples he appears, lilie most of the 
other apostles, simply as a dignified figure in 
the ancient Roman dress, sometimes bearing a 
crown, as in a 5th-century Mosaic in the 
church of St. John at Ravenna (Ciampini, Vetera i 
Momimenta, torn. i. tab. Ixx. p. 235), sometimes 
a roll of a book, as in a 9th-century Mosaic 
figured by Ciampini (u. s. torn. ii. tab. liii. 
p. 162), whei'e he is joined with the favoured 
disciples, SS. Peter, and James, and John. [C] 


ANDRONICUS. (1) Saint, April 5 {M. 

(2) May 13 {M. Hieron.). 

(3) " Apostle," with Junia (Rom. xvi. 7), com- 
memorated May 17 {Cal. Byzant.) ; inveution 
of their relics, Feb. 22 (75., Neale). 

(4) Commemorated Sept. 27 (il/. Hieron.). 

(5) "Holy Father," Oct. 9 {Cal. Byzant). 

(6) Martyr, commemorated Oct. 10 {Mart. 
Hieron.'); Oct. 11 (J/. Rom. Vet.); Oct. 12 (Cal. 
Byzant). [C] 

ANESIITS, of Africa, commemorated March 
31 {Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

RiKNSE Concilium.] 

ANGELS and ARCHANGELS, in Ciipjs- 
TiAN Art. The representations of angels in 
Christian art, at various periods, reproduce in 
a remarkable manner the ideas concerning them, 
which from time to time have, prevailed in the 
Church. In one and all, however, we may trace, 
though with various modifications of treatment, 
an embodied commentary upon the brief but ex- 
pressive declaration concerning their nature and 
office which is given in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
(i. 14). Worship or service rendered unto 
God {Xeirovpyia),^ and work of ministration 
(Sio/coj'i'a) done on God's behalf to men, these are 
the two spheres of angelic operation suggested in 
Holy Scripture, and these, under various modifi- 
cations ^ curiously characteristic of the successive 
ages in which they are found, come before us in 
a series of monuments extending from the fourth 
to the close of the 14th centui-y. 

§ 2. First three Centuries. Existing monu- 
ments of early Christian art, illustrative of our 
present subject, are, for the first 500 years, or 
more, almost exclusively of the West, and, with 
one or two doubtful exceptions, all these are of 
[ a date subsequent to the " Peace of the Church," 
' under Constantine the Great, and probably, not 
I earlier than 400 A.D. As a special interest 
attaches to these earliest monuments, it may be 
j well here to enumerate them. The earliest of them 
[ all, if DAgincourt's judgment {Histoire, etc. vol. 
I V. Feinture, PI. vii. No. 3.) may be trusted, is 
j a monument in the cemetery of St. Priscilla," 



* Heb. i. 14. \eiTOvpyiKoL Trfeu/xara aTrotrreWofxeva et9 
SiaKonav. The distinction of the two words noticed 
above is lost in our English version. It is well brought 
out by Origen, cont. Celsum, lib. v. (quoted by Bingham, 
Avtiq., book xiii. cap. lii. J 2, note 2). See this further 
illustrated in the description of woodcut in $ 6 below. 

•> Absent (almost, if not altogether) fur the first four 
centuries (see ^ 2), they subserve purposes of dogma (} 3) 
in the 5th century ; they are Scriptural still, but also in 
one case legendary (} 4) in the 6th. From that time for- 
ward canonical and apocryplial Scripture and mediaeval 
legend are mi.\ed up together. We find them imperial 
• in character, or sacerdotal and liturgical, as the case may 
I be ; while in the later middle ages even feudal notions 
! were characteristically mi.xed up with the traditions con- 
I ceming them derived from Holy Scripture. (For this last 
see Jameson. Sacred and Legendary Art, 3rd edit. vol. i. 
; p. 95, quoting from II Perfetto Legendario.) 
j ' The Abbe' Martigny (^Dictimnaire, &c. in vnc. ' Anges ') 
j speaks with evident doubt of the date assigned to this 
j fresco. D'Agincourt himself in his description gives no 
I particulars a.s to the source from which his drawing was 
I derived. Neither earlier nor later antiquaries know any- 
thing of its history. And this being so, an unsupported 
opinion as to its date, resting on the authority of D'Agin- 

dating, as he thinks, from the second century. 
It is a representation of Tobias and the angel. ! 

(This same subject, suggestive of the " Guardian ^ 

Angel," reappears in .some of the Vetri Autichi, ^ 

of the 4th and 5th century.) Another fresco of 
early but uncertain date in the cemetery of 
St. Priscilla (Aringhi, B. S. ii. p. 297) has been 
generally interpreted as representing the Annun- 
ciation. The angel Gabriel (if such be the inten- ] 
tion of the painter) has a human figure, and the 
dress commonly assigned to Apostles and other | 
Scriptural personages, but is without wings, or , 
any other special designations. With these ,i 
doubtful exceptions, no representations of angels, 
now remaining, are earlier than the fourth cen- | 
tury, and probably not earlier than the fifth. ] 

§ 3. Fourth and ffth Centuries. There was an 
interval of transition from this earlier period, 
the limits of which are indicated by the Council 
of Illiberis,'' A.D. 305, on the one hand, and on 
the other by the Christian mosaics of which we 
first hear ^ at the close of that century, or early 
in the nest. The first representation of angels 
in mosaic work is supposed (by Ciampinus and I 

others) to be that of the Chui-ch of S. Agatha at . J 

Ravenna. These mosaics Ciampinus admits to be J 

of very uncertain date, but he believes ' them to 
be of the beginning of the 5th century. (See his j 

Vetera Monumenta, vol. i. Tab. xlvi.) The first j 

representations of the kind to which a date can j 

with any certainty be assigned, are those in the ij 

Church of S. Maria Major at Rome, put up by j 

Xystus in. between the years 432 and 440 A.D. | 

In those of the Nave of this Church (Ciampini ' 

V. M. tom. i. Pll. 1. to Ixiv.) various subjects from < 

the Old Testament have their place ; and amongst ' 

others the appearance of the three angels to 
Abraham (PL li.) and of the " Captain of the ; 

Lord's Hosts" (by tradition the archangel 
Michael) to Joshua (PL Ixii.). But on the I 

"Arcus Triumphalis"s of this same Church, ( 

there is a series of mosaics, of the greatest pos- 
sible interest to the history of dogmatic theology; 
and in these angels have a prominent part. 
This series was evidently intended to be an em- 

court alone, carries but little weight. The same subject is 
reproduced in the Cemetery of SS. Thraso and Satuminus 
(Perret, vol. iii. pi. .'jxvi.). 

d The 37th canon forbids the painting upon walls the 
objects of religious worship and adoration. " Placuit pic- 
turas in ecclesia esse non debere, ne quod colitur et adoratur 
in parietibus depingatur." Roman writers, for obvious 
reasons, seek to explain away the apparent meaning 
of this prohibition. As to this, see Bingham, C. A., 
book viii. cap. viii. } 6. 

« PauUinus, bishop of Nola, early in the 5th century, 
describes at much length in a letter (Ep. xii.) to his friend 
Severus the decorations with which he had adorned his 
own church. His descriptions accord closely with some 
of the actual monuments (sarcophagi and mosaic pictures) 
of nearly contemporary date, which have been preserved 
to our own time. 

f The form of the Nimbus here assigned to our Lord 
seems to indicate a later date. 

g By the "triumphal arch" of a Roman church is 
meant what will correspond most nearly with the chancel 
arch of our own churches. It was full in view of the 
asspml)led people on entering the church. And for the 
first six centuries (or nearly that time) it was reserved 
exclusively for such subjects as had immediate reference 
to our Lord ; more particularly to His triumph over sin 
and death, and His session as King In heaven. See 
farther on this subject Ciampini, V. M. tom. i. p. 193, sqq. 
G 2 



bodiment in art of the doctrine decreed just 
previously in the Council of Ephesus, A.D. 4H1. 
The angels represented in the scenes of " The 
Annunciation," the Worship of the Magi (see 
woodcut'' annexed), and the Presentation in the 
Temple, are here made to serve to the declaration 
of what had just before been proclaimed, viz. : 
that He who was born of Mary was not a mere 
man in whom the Word of God might afterward 
take up his abode,' but was himself God, as well 
as man, two natures united in one person. The 
angels throughout are represented as ministering 
as it were in homage to a king. Even in the 
Annunciation, not Gabriel only is represented, 
but two other angels are seen standing behind 
the seat on which the Virgin Mary is placed. 
Of these Ciampinus rightly saj's, that they are to 
be regarded as doing homage to the Woi-d then 
become incarnate. " Duo illi .... astant, sive 
Gabrielis asseclae, sive Deiparae custodes, aut 
potius iucaruato tunc Verbo obsequium ex- 
liibentes." They embody, as he observes, the 
thought expressed by St. Augustine. "All 


angels are created beings, doing service uiito 
Christ. Angels could be sent to do Him homage, 
(ad obsequium) could be sent to do Him service, 
but not to bring help (as to one weak or helpless 
in himself) : and so it is written that angels 

I ministered to Him, not as pitying one that needed 

I help, but as subject unto Him who is Almighty." 

I (S. Aug. in Pscil. Ivi.) 

[ § 4. Sixth Century. Between 500 a.d. and 
600 A.D., the following examples may be cited : 

I the triumphal arch of the Church of SS. Cosmas 

j and Damianus at Rome (Ciampini T". M. torn. ii. 
Tab. XV.) circ. 530 A.D., and fifteen years later the 
mosaics of S. Michael the archangel at Ravenna, 
ihid. Tab. xvii.). In the apse of the tribune is 
a representation of Our Lord, holding a lofty 

j cross, with Michael r. and Gabrihel (sic) 1. On 
the wall above, the two archangels are again 

I seen on either side of a throne, and of one seated 
thereon. These two bear long rods or staves, 
but on either side are seven other angels (four r. 
and three 1.) playing upon trumpets. There is 
here an evident allusion to Rev. viii. 2, 6, " I saw 

Worship of the Magi, fixm S. Maria Major at Rome. 

the seven angels, which stand before God, and to 
them were given seven trumpets." Com p. 
Ezek. X. 10, Tobit xii. 15, and Rev. 1. 4; iv. 
5. (Ciampini V. M. ii., xvii., comp. Tab. xix.) 
Michael and Gabriel appear yet again on the 
arch of the Tribune of S. ApoUinaris in Classe 
(ihid. Tab. xxiv.) ; and there are representations 
of the four archangels, as present at the Worship 
of the Magi, in the S. ApoUinaris Kovus (ihid. 
Tab. xxvii.) towards the close of that century. 
To this period also is to be assigned the diptych 
of Milan," which is remarkable as containing an 

t For further particulars as to this see $ 15 below. 

> See Cyril. Alex. Epist. ad Monachos, in which the 
patriarch of Alexandria, the chief opponent of Nestorius, 
represents In these terms the doctrine condemned at 

k Figured and described in Bngatl, Memorie di S. Celso 
Martire, Append. t<ab. i. and ii. The particular group 
above referred to is figured in JIartigny, Dictionnaire, &c., 
under ' Annonciation.' The whole diptych is published 
In facsimile of fictile ivory by the Arundel Society. 

embodiment (probably the first in Christian art) | 
of legends concerning the appearance of Gabriel i 
to the Virgin Mary, derived from the Apocryphal j 

§ 5. From 600 to 800 A.D. Art monu- ; 
ments of this period are but few in number, j 
For examples, bearing upon our present subject, ', 
see Ciampini V. M. vol. ii. Tabb. xxxi. and J 
xxxviii. and D'Agincourt,"" Feinture, tom. v., , 
PI. xvi. and xvii. They contain nothing to call i 
for special remark, save that, in the 8th century .! 
particularly, the wings of angels become more 
and more curtailed in proportion to the body; 
a peculiarity which may serve as an indication of 
date where others are wanting. One such ex- 
ample in sculpture, of Michael and the Dragon, is 
referred to below, § 10. 

§ 6. Eastern and Greek Representations. Early 
monuments of Christian art in the East are un- 

^ See also his pi. x. and xii., containing frescoes of lat? 
but uncertain date from the catacombs. 


fortunately, very rare, the zeal of the Iconoclasts, 
and at a later period of Saracens and Turks, 
having been fatal to many, which might other- 
wise have been preserved. The earliest example 
in (jrreek art is a representation of an angel in 
a MS. of Genesis in the Imperial Library at 
Vienna, believed to be of the 4th or 5th century. 
It is figured by Seroux D'Agincourt, Pcintxire, 
PL xix. It is a human figure, winged, and with- 
out nimbus or other special attributes. The 


tiery sword, etc., spoken of in Gen. iii. is there 
represented not as a sword, in the hand of the 
angel, but as a great wheel ° of fire beside him. 
Next in date to this is an interesting picture of 
the Ascension, in a Syriac MS. of the Gospels, 
written and illuminated in the year 586 a.d. at 
Zagba in Mesopotamia. We have engraved this, 
as embodying those Oriental types of the angel 
form which have been characteristic of Eastern 
and Greek art from that time to this. It 

will be seen that the Saviour is here repre- 
sented in glory. And the various angelic powers 
.appear in three diflerent capacities. Beneath the 
feet of the Saviour, and forming as it were 
a chariot upon which He rises to Heaven, is what 
the Greeks call the Tetramorphon. The head 
and the hand of a man (or rather, according to 
Greek tradition, of an angel), the heads of an 
eagle, a lion, and an ox, are united by wings that 
are full of eyes (comp. Ezekiel i. 18). On either 
side of these again are two pairs of fiery wheels, 
" wheel within wheel," as suggested again by the 
description in Ezek. i. 16. These serve as 

symbolic representations of the order of angels 
known as "thrones" (comp. § 7 below), and of the 
cherubim. Of the six other angels, here repre- 
sented in human form, and winged, four are min- 
istering to Our Lord (^Xiirovpyovvres), either by 
active service, as the two who bear Him up in 

" Compare the mosaic of the S. Vitalis at Ravenna 
(Ciamp. V. M. ii. tab. xix.), in the upper part of whiclj 
two angels are seen upholding a mystic " wheel." Ciam- 
pinus, apparently without understiinding what was the 
symbolism intended, rightly describes it in the words 
(p. 72) " duo angeli .... quandam rotam prae manibus 


their hands, or by adoration, as two others who are 
offering Him crowns of victory {crriipavoi). Two 
others,''lastly, have been sent on work of ministry 
to men (comp. note " above), and are seen, as 
St. Luke's narrative suggests, asking of the 
eleven disciples, "Why stand ye here gazing 
up into heaven?" and the rest. (The central 
fio-ure of the lower group is that of the Virgin 

§ 7. The Celestial Hierarchy of Dionysius. 
The best comment on the picture last described is 
to be found in the 'Celestial Hierarchy' of Diony- 
sius. The whole number of celestial beings are 
to be divided (so he tells us), into three orders, in 
each of which a triple gradation is contained. In 
the first order are contained the "thrones," the 
seraphim and cherubim. And these are con- 
tinually in the immediate presence of God, nearer 
than all others to Him, reflecting, without inter- 
vention of anv other created being, the direct 
effulgence of His glory. Next to these, and of 
the second order, are dominions, authorities, 
powers {Kvpi6T>\Tis, e^ova-iat, Svydfieis), forming 
a link between the first and the third order. To 
these last (principalities [apx"']i archangels, 
and angels) he assigns that more immediate ex- 
ecution of the divine purposes in the sphere of 
creation, and towards mankind, which in the 
belief of religious minds is generally associated 
with the idea of angelic agency. 

This teaching of Dionysius, regarded as it was 
both in East and West as of all but apostolic 
authority, has served as a foundation upon which 
all the later traditions have been built up. And 
this language, with the additional comments 
quoted in the next section, will give the reader 
the key to much that would be otherwise obscure 
in the allusions of Greek fathers, and in the 
forms of Greek art. 

§ 8. Angels in later Greek Art. The language 
of the 'Epfj-riveia Trjs C<^ypa(piKrjs, ° or ' Painter's 
Guide' of Panselinos, a monk of Mount Athos in 
the 11th century, may be regarded [see under 
Apostles] as embodying the unchanging rules of 
Greek religious art from the 8th century to the 
present time. Taking up the division quoted 
above, the writer says, as to the first order, that 
"the thrones are represented as wheels of fire, 
compassed about with wings. Their wings are 
full of eyes, and the whole is so arranged as to 
produce the semblance of a royal throne. The 
cherubim are represented by a head and two 
wings. The seraphim as having six wings, 
whereof two rise upward to the head, and two 
droop to the feet, and two are outspread as if for 
flight. They carry in either hand a hexapteryx, p 
inscribed with the words 'Holy, Holy, Holy.' 
It is thus that they were seen by Isaiah." Then, 
after describing the " Tetramoi-phi," he proceeds 
to speak of angels of the second order." These 
are dominions, virtues, powers. "These," he 
says, "are clothed in white tunics reaching to 
the feet, with golden girdles and green outer 
robes. 1 They hold in the right hand staves of 

" Obtained by M. Didron in MS. at Mount Athos, and 
published by bim in a French translation. 

p The " flabellum" or " fan" of the Greeks was called 
efaTTTe'pvf, as containing the representation of a six- 
winged seraph. The " thrones," represented as wheels 
(with wings of flame), described by Panselinos, may be 
Been in the second of the illustrations of this article. 

1 Outer robes. " Ues Stoles vertes," says M. Didron. 


gold, and in the left a seal formed thus ^ ."' 
Then, of the third order, (principalities, arch- 
angels, angels), he writes thus. "These are 
represented vested as warriors, and with golden 
girdles. They hold in their hands javelins and 
axes; the javelins are tipped with iron, as 

§ 9. Attributes of Angels. There are tv^^o 
sources from which we may infer the attributes 
regarded as proper to angels iu early times ; the 
description given of them in the treatise of 
Dionysius already quoted, and the actual monu- 
ments of early date which have been preserved 
to our times. As to these Dionysius writes tha,t 
angels are represented as of human form in regard 
of the intellectual qualities of man, and of his 
heavenward gaze, and the lordship and dominion 
which are naturally his. He adds that bright 
vesture, and that which is of the colour of fire, 
are symbolical of light and of the divine likeness, 
while sacerdotal vesture serves to denote their 
office in leading to divine and mystical contem- 
plations, and the consecration of their whole life 
unto God. He mentions, also, girdles, staves or 
rods (significant of royal or princely power), 
spears and axes, instruments for measurement or 
of constructive art (ra yeooixiTpLKo. Kal tskto- 
viKo. ffKevT]), among the insignia occasionally 
attributed to angels. If, from the pages of 
Dionysius, we turn to actual monuments, we find 
the exact counterpart of his descriptions. They 
may be enumerated as follows : — 1. The human 
form. In all the earlier monuments (enumerated 
above, §§ 3, 4), angels are represented as men, 
and either with or without wings. In this 
Christian art did but follow the suggestions of 
Holy Scripture. But St. Chrysostom expresses 
what was the prevailing (but not the universal) 
opinion of early Christian writers, when he says 
{De Sacerd. lib. vi. p. 424 D) that although 
ano-els, and even God Himself, have ofttimes 
appeared in the form of man, yet what was then 
manifested was not actual flesh, but a semblance 
. assumed in condescension to the weakness of 
mankind^ (ou (TapKhs a\iideta aWa crvyKaTa,- 
/Bao-is). Both in ancient and in modern art 
examples are occasionally found of angels thus 
represented as men, without any of the special 
attributes enumerated below. 2. Wings. As 
heavenly messengers ascending and descending 
between heaven and earth, angels have, with a 
natural propriety' as well as on Scriptural 

But we suspect that in the original he found o-ToXat, a word 
which Greek writers never use in the technical sense ot 
"Stoles" (the ecclesiastical vestment known as stola in 
the West since the Hth century). 

r This is what was known in mediaeval times as the 
" Signaculum Dei," or Seal of God. Such a seal is repre- 
sented in the hand of Lucifer before his fall, in the Horlvs 
Ddiciarum, a MS. once in the Library of Strasbourg. 

8 With this agrees the language of TertuUian, De Eesur- 
rectione Carnis. cap. Ixii. : " Angeli aliquando tanquam, 
homines fuerunt, edendo et bibendo, et pedes lavacro por- 
rigendo, humanam enim induerunt superficiem, salva 
intus substantia propria. Igitur si angeli, Jacti tanquam 
homines,in eadem substantia spiritiis permanserunt," &c., 
Similar language reappears in other Latin Fathers. 

t Comp. Philo, Quaest. in £xod. xxv. 2n, al tov Oeov 
na<T<xi aui-dneis 7rTcpo<i>vovai. t^? ii'o, wp'o? tov Harepa 
6Sov vX.xoj^^""' " ""'' e<|..e>evac. And very beautifully 
elsewhere he speaks of the angels as going up and down 
between heaven and earth, and conveying (SiayveV' 


authority," been represented in all ages of the 
church as furnished with wings. We may add 
that this mode of expressing the idea of ubiquity 
and power, as superhuman attributes, had pre- 
vailed in heathen art from the earliest times, 
and that in East and West alike. Examples of 
this in Assyrian art are now familiar to us. 
Similar figures are found in Egypt. They were 
less common in classical art. Yet Mercury, as 
the messenger of the gods, had wings upon his 
feet ; and little winged genii were commonly repre- 
sented in decorative work, and thence were trans- 
ferred (probably as mere decorations) into early 
Christian " works of art. As to the number of 
these wings, two only are to be found in all the 
earlier representations. We do not know of any 
example of four, or of six wings, earlier than the 
9th century, though the descriptions given in Holy 
Scripture of the "Living Creatures" with six 
wings, and the four-winged deities of primitive 
Eastern art, might naturally have suggested 
such representations. As to later representations 
of cherubim and seraphim, and the like, see 
below, section IL 3. Vesture. The vesture 
assigned to angels, in various ages of the Church, 
has ever been such as was associated in men's 
minds with the ideas of religious solemnity, and 
in the later centuries, of sacerdotal ministry. In 
Holy Scripture the vesture of angels is described 
as white (Matt, xxviii. 3 ; John xx. 12 ; liev. iv. 
4; XV. 6),y and in mosaics of the 5th and 6th 
centuj-ies, at Rome and Ravenna (where first we 
ean determine questions of colour with any 
accuracy), we find white vestments generally 
assigned to them (long tunic and pallium), ex- 
actly resembling those of apostles. But in 
mosaics, believed to be of the 7th century (St. 
Sophia at Thessalonica)^ angels have coloured 
himatia (outer robes) over the long white tunic, 
and their wings, too, are coloured, red and blue 
being the prevailing tints. And these two 
colours had, long ere that time, been recognised 
as invested with a special significance, red as the 
colour of flame, and symbolical of holy love 
(caritas), blue as significant of heaven, and of 
heavenly contemplation or divine knowledge. 
And in the later traditions of Christian art (from 
the 9th century onwards)" these two colours 
were as a general rule assigned, red more espe- 
cially to the seraphim as the spirits of love, and 
blue to the cherubim as spirits of knowledge or 
of contemplation ; while the two colours com- 
bined, as they often are found, are regarded as 

Xovcrai) the biddings of the Father to His children, and 
the wants uf the children to their Father. 

" See the passages in Fjcodus, Isaiah, and Ezekiel already- 
referred to ; and compare the expression in Rev. xiv. 6, of 
an angel flying (weroixevoi) there. 

^ For examples see Aringhi, /?o?na Subterranea, torn. i. 
pp. 323, 615 ; torn. ii. p. 167. Compare p. 29, where similar 
figures, without wings, are introduced in an ornamental 

y See Ciamplni, V. 31. il. pp. 58 and 64. He speaks of 
" tunicae " and " pallia " as being white ; and of " stoles " 
(really stripes on the tunic), and wings of violet. 

' Texier and PuUan, Byzantine Architecture, pi. xl. 
Compare the curious picture of the Holy Family, a bishop 
(or other ecclesiastic), and two angels, from Urgub, figured 
in plate v., where the robes of the angels are white, their 
wings blue and reddish yellow. 

" " The distinction of hue in the red and blue angels we 
find wholly omitted towards the end of the 15th century " 
(Mrs. Jameson, Sacred and Legendary Art). 


suggesting the union of the two qualities of love 
and knowledge, the perfection of the angelic 
nature. It should be added that the vestments 
of angels have not unfrequently such ornament 
appended to them as was of ordinary usage from 
time to time in ecclesiastical dress, viz., coloured 
stripes on the tunic, in the earlier centuries, 
afterwards oraria or stoles, and even "omophoria," 
the distinctive insignia of episcopal office in the 
East. 4. The Nimbus. In the early Greek MS. 
already noticed, § 6, and in one or two early 
representations in the catacombs at Rome, angels 
are represented without the Nimbus. But from 
the middle of the 5th century onward, this orna- 
ment is almost invariably assigned to them. 
[Nimbus.] 5. The Wand of Power. Only in 
exceptional instances during the first eight cen- 
turies, are angels represented as bearing anything 
in the hand. Three examples may be cited, in 
mosaics,'' of the 6th century, at Ravenna, in 
which angels attendant on our Lord (see § 3) 
hold wands'^ in their hands, which may either 
represent the rod of divine power, or, as some 
have thought, the " golden reed " — the " mea- 
suring reed," assigned to the angel in Rev. xxi. 
15, as in Ezek. xl. 3. The representations of 
archangels, particularly of Michael, as warriors 
with sword, or spear, and girdle, are of later date. 
6. Instruments of Music. One early example 
has been already referred to (§ 4) of a Ravenna 
mosaic, in which the " Seven Angels" are repre- 
sented holding trumpets in their hands. In the 
later traditions of Christian art, representations 
of angels as the " Choristers of Heaven " have 
been tar more common, various instruments of 
music being assigned to them. 

§ 10. Michael. — The archangel Michael is first 
designated by name in mosaics of the 5th cen- 
tury, at Ravenna (Ciampini, vol. ii. pi. xvii. and 
xxiv.). And in other cases where we see two 
angels specially marked out as in attendance on 
our Lord, we may infer that. Michael and Gabriel 
are designated. For the names of these two 
alone are prominent in Holy Scripture. And 
according to a very ancient tradition, traced back 
to Rabbinical belief, perpetuated as many such 
traditions were in the East, and thence handed 
on to Western Christendom, these two arch- 
angels personified respectively"* the judgment 

^ Ciampini, T. M. ii. tab. xvii., xix., and xxiv. Com- 
pare in his plate xlvi. of vol. i. the mosaic at S. Agatha, 
which we believe to be of nearly the same date. 

" Jn the church dedicated in the name of the archangel 
Michael at Ravenna, in the year 545, an indication of 
special honour is given to liim by the small cross upon his 
wand, whith is wanting in that of Gabriel (Ciamp. V. M. 
ii. tab. xvii.). 

d In yet other traditions the mercy of God, and more 
particularly His healing grace, is ministered by Raphael, 
riiere is great variety in the older Jewish traditions. 
According to one (Joma, p. 37, quoted by Biihmer in 
Herzog's Encycl.), when the three angels appeared to 
Abraham, iVIichael, as first in rank, occupied the central 
place, having Gabriel, as second, on his right hand, and 
Raphael, as third in rank, on his left. This place on the 
right hand of God is elsewhere assigned to Gabriel, as 
being the angel of his power (comp. Origen, Trepl apxutv, 
i. 8), and to Raphael that on the lelt (near the heart), as 
being the angel of His mercy. And again in Pliilo (Qtiaest. 
in Gen. iii. 2-1), the two cherubim on either side of ihe 
mercy-seat represent respectively the messengers of the 
Wrath, and of the Mercy, of the Lord (comp. Exod. xxxiv. 


and the mercy of God, and were therefore fitly 
placed, Michael, as the angel of power, on the 
right hand, Gabriel, nearer to the heart, on the 
left hand. For the special traditions concerning 
" St. Michael," his appearances in vision at 
Mount Galgano in Apulia, to St. Gregory the 
Great on the mole of Hadrian, now the castle of 
St. Angela, and to Aubert, Bishop of Avranches 
in 706, A.D., at "Mount St. Michel" in Nor- 
mandy (to this our own St. Michael's Mount 
owes its designation), see Jameson's Sacred and 
Legendary Art, pp. 94 sqq. The oldest ex- 
ample in sculpture of St. Michael treading under 
foot the dragon (see Rev. xii. 7, 8), is on the 
porch of the Cathedral of Catana, believed to be 

of the 7th century. [Figured above.] Later 
pictures often represent St. Michael as the angel 
of judgment, holding scales in his hand, in which 
souls are weighed. 

§ 11. Gabriel (Heb. " Man of God,") as the 
messenger more especially of comfort and of good 
tidings, occupies a prominent place in the New 
Testament, as announcing the birth both of John 
the Baptist to Zacharias and of our Lord to the 
Virgin Mary. (In apocryphal legend he is repre- 
sented as foretelling to Joachim the birth of the 
Virgin Maiy.) In the language of Tasso he is 
" I'Angelo Annunziatore." Though only twice 
(as far as I have observed) designated by name 
in early Christian Art (Ciampini, V. M. ii.. Tab. 
xvii. and xsiv.), j'et in the various pictures of 
the Annunciation, which are many, it is he, of 
course, who is to be understood. By a singular 
tate, having been regarded by Mahomet as his 
immediate inspirer, he is looked upon in many 
parts of the East as the great protecting angel 
of Islamism, and, as such, in direct opposition to 
Michael the protector of Jews and Christians. 

§ 12. Raphael (Heb. the Healer who is from 
God, or "Divine Healer") is mentioned in the 
book of Tobit as " one of the seven holy angels 
which go in and out before the glory of the Holy 
One," cap. xii. 15. Through the influence of 
this beautiful Hebrew story of Tobias and 
Raphael, his name became associated in early 
times with the idea of the guardian angel. As 


such he is twice figured in tlie Roman catacombs, 
and allusions to the same story are frequent 
in the Vetri Antichi. [Glass, Christian.] In 
mediaeval Greek art the three archangels already 
named ai-e sometimes represented together, de- 
signated by their initial letters M, r, and P, 
Michael as a warrior, Gabriel as a prince, and 
Raphael as a priest — the three supporting be- 
tween them a youthful figure of our Lord, him- 
self represented with wings as the "angelus" 
or messenger of the will of God. (Figured iu 
Jameson's S. L. A., p. 93.) 

§ 13. Uriel. (The Fire of God.) The fourth 
archangel, named Uriel in Esdras ii. 4, has be«n 
much less prominent in legend and in art than 
the three already named." He is regarded as 
charged more particularly with the interpreta- 
tion of God's will, of judgments and prophecies 
(with reference, doubtless, to Esdras ii.). These 
"archangels" of Christian tradition are to the 
Jews the first four of those "Seven Angels" who 
see the glory of God (Tobias sxii. 15); the other 
three being Chamuel (he who sees God), Jophiel 
(the beauty of God), and Zadkiel (the righteous- 
ness of God). But these last three names have 
never been generally recognised either in East or 
West. And in the first example of the repre- 
sentation of these Seven Angels in Christian art 
they are distinguished from the two archangels 
Michael and Gabriel, who hold wands, while to 
the seven, as already noticed, § 4, trumpets are 
assigned. (Ciampini, V. M., ii., pi. xvii.) 

§ 14. Seraphim and Cherubim. These two 
names appear, the first in Isaiah vi. 2 (there only), 
and the latter in Exodus xxv. 18, where tuo 
are spoken of, and in Ezekiel i. 4-14, who speaks 
of four (compare the four " living creatures " 
of Rev. iv. 6). They have been perpetuated iu 

Sfcrapliim and Clierubim 

Christian usage, and the descriptions given of 
them in Holy Scripture have been embodied 
(those of the cherubim or four " living creatures," 
first, and somewhat later those of the seraphim) 
in Christian art from the 5th century onwards. 
They were regarded (see above § 9) as the spirits 
of love and of knowledge respectively. For fuller 
details concerning the two in Holy Scripture see 

e From the name ot Uriel being little known, the fourtn 
archangel is designated in some mediaeval : 
(Jiimcsuii, & and L. AH, i). 92) as " St. Cherubin." 


'Dictionary of the Bible.' In art they do not 
appear as Angel forms, with any special modi- 
fication of the ordinary type, as far as we have 
observed, in any earlier representation than that 
of the Syriac MS. already described and figured. 
Later modifications of this oldest type may be 
seen in Jameson, S. and L. Art, p. 42 sqq., 
from which the cut given above is taken ; 
D'Agincourt, Sculpture, pi. xii. 16 (the diptych 
of Eambona, 9th century), Peinture, pi. 1. 3 
(Greek MS. of 12th century). Cherubic repre- 
sentations of the four " Living Creatui-es" will 
be separately treated under Evangelists. 

§ 15. The Illustrations to this Article. Great 
interest attaches to the mosaic of Xystus IIL, 
which forms the first of the illusti-ations to this 
article, from its bearing upon the history of 
doctrine, . and especially of the cultus of the 
Virgin Marv, and as restorations made in the 
time of Benedict XIV. (1740-1758) have pro- 
duced considerable changes in the mosaic here 
figured, it will be well to state the authority 
for the present representation. The only pub- 
lished picture of the mosaic in its older state 
(that here reproduced), is a very rude engraving 
in Ciampini, Vetera Monumenta, i. p. 200, Tab. 
xlix. In some important particulars of archaeo- 
logical detail his engraving varies from the care- 
fully drawn and coloured pictures, from which 
the illustration above given has been taken. But 
in the general arrangement and outline of the 
figures the two are in accord. The coloured 
drawings of which we speak, form part of a col- 
lection (in two large folio volumes) which was 
made by Pope Clement XI. when Cardinal 
Albano. These, with a number of other volumes 
containing classical antiquities of various kinds, 
were purchased at Rome by an agent of George IIL, 
and are now in the Royal Library at Windsor. 

The second of the illustrations (from a Syriac 
MS.) is from a photolithograph, reproducing the 
outline given by Seroux d'Agincourt, Peinture, pi. 
xxvii. That author speaks of it as " caique' sur 
I'original," and from a comparison with an exact 
copy made from the original by Professor West- 
wood, we are able to vouch for the perfect accu- 
racy of the present illustration. [W. B. M.] 


does not appear that the bishops of the Primitive 
Church were commonly spoken of under this 
title, nor indeed did it become in later times the 
ordinary designation of the episcopal office. In- 
stances, however, of this application of it occur 
in the earlier Church historians, as, e. g., in So- 
crates, who so styles Serapion Bishop of Thomais 
(Lib. iv. c. 23). The word Bydel also, which is 
Saxon for angel or messenger, is found to have 
been similarly employed (see Hammond on Rev. 
i. 20). But though no such instances were 
forthcoming, it would prove nothing against the 
received interpretation, as it may be considered, 
of the memorable vision of St. John, recorded in 
the first three chapters of the Apocalypse, in 
which he is charged to convey the heavenly 
message to each of the seven churches through 
its " Angel." It should be remembered that 
the language of this vision, as of the whole 
book to which it belongs, is eminently mystical 
and symbolical; the word "Angel," therefore, 
as being transferred from an heavenly to an 
earthly ministry, though it would very signifi- 



cantly as well as honourably characterize the 
office so designated, could yet scarcely be ex- 
pected to pass into general use as a title of 
individual ministers. By the same Divine voice 
from which the Apostle receives his commission 
the "mystery" of the vision is interpreted. 
" The seven stars," it is declared, " are the 
angels of the seven churches; and the seven 
candlesticks which thou sawest, are the seven 
churches." The symbol of a star is repeatedly 
employed in Scripture to denote lordship and 
pre-eminence (e.g. Num. xxiv. 17). "There shall 
come a star out of Jacob," where it symbolises 
the highest dominion of all. Again, the actual 
birth of Him who is thus foretold by Balaam is 
announced by a star (Matt. ii. 2 ; cf. Is. xiv. 12). 
Faithful teachers are " stars that shall shine for 
ever " (Dan. xii. 3) ; false teachers are " wander- 
ing stars " (Jude 13), or " stars which fall from 
heaven " (Rev. vi. 13, viii. 10, xii. 4). Hence it 
is naturally inferred from the use of this symbol 
in the present instance that the "angels" of the 
seven churches were placed in authority over 
these churches. Moreover, the angel in each 
church is one, and the responsibilities ascribed 
to him correspond remarkably with those which 
are enforced on Timothy and Titus by St. Paul 
in the Pastoral Epistles. Again, this same title is 
given to the chief priest in the Old Testament, 
particularly in Malachi (ii.7), — where he is styled 
the angel or messenger of the Lord of Hosts, 
whose lips therefore were to keep knowledge, 
and from his mouth, as ft-om the oi-acle, the 
people were to " seek the law," to receive know- 
ledge and dii'ection for their duty. To the chief 
minister, therefore, of the New Testament, it may 
be fairly argued, the title is no less fitly applied. 
By some, however, both among ancient and 
modern writers, the word " angel " has been 
understood in its higher sense as denoting God's 
heavenly messengers ; and they have been supposed 
to be the guardian angels of the several churches 
— their angels — to whom these epistles were ad- 
dressed. It is contended that wherever the 
word angel occurs in this book, it is employed 
unquestionably in this sense ; and that if such 
guardianship is exercised over individuals, much 
more the same might be predicated of churches 
(Dan. xii. 1). Among earlier writers this inter- 
pretation is maintained by Origen (Hom. xiii. in 
Luc. and Hom. xx. in Num.) and by Jerome (in 
Mich. vi. 1, 2). Of later commentators, one of 
its most recent and ablest defenders is Dean 
Alfoi-d. But besides the obvious difficulty of 
giving a satisfactory explanation to the word 
" write " as enjoined on these supposed heavenly 
watchers, there remains an objection, not easily 
to be surmounted, in the language of reproof and 
the imputation of unfaithfulness, which on this 
hypothesis would be addressed to holy and sm- 
less beings, — those angels of His who delight to 
" do His pleasure." So is it observed by Au- 
gustine (Ep. 43, § 22) : " ' Sed habeo adversum 
te, quod caritatem primam reliquisti.' Hoc de 
superioribus angelis did non potest, qui per- 
petuam retinent caritatem, unde qui defeceruut 
et lapsi sunt, diabolus est et angeli ejus." 

By presbyterian writers the angel of the 
vision has been variously interpreted : — 1. Of the 
collective presbytery ; 2. Of the presiding pres- 
byter, which office, however, it is contended was 
soon to be discontinued in the Church, because 



of its foreseen corruption. 3. Of the messengers 
sent from the several churches to St. John. It 
hardly falls within the scope of this article to 
discuss these interpretations. To unprejudiced 
readers it will pi'obably be enough to state them, 
to make their weakness manifest. It is difficult 
to account for them, except as the suggestions of 
a foregone conclusion. 

On the other hand, as St. John is believed on 
other grounds to have been pre-eminently the 
organiser of Episcopacy throughout the Church, 
so here in this wonderful vision the holy Apostle 
comes before us, it would seem, very remarkably 
in this special character ; and in the message 
which he delivers, under divine direction, to each 
of the seven churches through its angel, we 
recognize a most important confirmation of the 
evidence on which we claim for episcopal govern- 
ment, the precedent, sanction, and authority of the 
apostolic age. (Bingham, Thorndike, Archbishop 
Trench on Epp. to Heven Churches.') [D. B.] 

ANGERS, COUNCIL OF (Andegavense 
Concilium), a.d. 453, Oct. 4; wherein, after 
consecrating Talasius, Bishop of Angers, there 
were passed 12 canons respecting submission 
of presbyters to bishops, the inability of 
" digami " to be ordained, kc. (Slansi, vii. 899- 
90'2). [A. W. H.] 

canci) ; a designation given to English general 
councils, of which the precise locality is un- 
known ; e.g. A.D. 756, one of bishops, presbyters, 
and abbats, held by Archbishop Cuthbert to 
appoint June 5 to be kej^t in memory of the 
martyrdom of St. Boniface and his companions 
(Cuthb. ad Lullum, intr. Epnst. S. Bonif. 70 ; Wilk. 
i. 144 ; Mansi, xii. 585-590) ; A.d. 797 (Alford), 
798 (Spelman), held by Ethelheard preparatory to 
his journey to Rome to oppose the archbishopric 
of Lichfield (W. Malm. G. P. A. lib. i. ; Pagi ad an. 
796, n. 27 ; Mansi, xiii. 991, 992). [A.^Y. H.] 

ANIANUS. (1) Patriarch, commemorated 
Hedar 20 = Nov. 16 {Gal. Ethiop.). 

(2) Bishop ; translation, June 14 {Mart. Bedae, 
Ificron.) ; deposition at Orleans, Nov. 17 {M. 
Hieron.). [C] 

ANICETUS, martyr, commemoi-ated Aug. 
12 {Gal. Bijzant.). ' [C] 

ANNA, the prophetess, commemorated Sept. 1 
(Ado, De Festiv., Martyrol.) ; Jakatit 8 = Feb. 2 
{Gal. Ethiop.). [C] 

ANNATES ; lit. the revenues or profits of 
one year, and therefore synonymous with first- 
fruits so far ; but being, in their strict auc 
technical sense, a development of the Middle 
Ages, the only explanation that can be given of 
tiiem here is how they arose. Anciently, the 
entire revenues of each diocese were placed in 
the hands of its bishop, as Bingham shews (v. 6. 
1-3), who with the advice and consent of his 
senate of presbyters distributed, and in the 
Western Church usually divided them into 4 
parts. One part went to himself; a 2nd to his 
clergy ; a 3rd to the poor ; a 4th to the mainte- 
nance of the fabric and requirements of the 
diocesan churches. Of these the 3rd and 4th 
were claimants, so to speak, that never died ; 
but in the case of the two former, when offices 
bscame vacant by death or removal, what was 


to be done with the stipend attaching to them, 
till they were filled up ? Naturally, when en- 
dowments became fixed and considerable, and 
promotions, from not having been allowed at all, 
the rule, large sums constantly fell to the dis- 
posal of some one in this way ; of the bishop, 
when any of his clergy died or were removed ; 
and of whom, when the bishop died or was re- \ 

moved, by deposition or by translation, as time 
went on, but of the metropolitan or primate at 
last, though, perhaps, at first of the presbytery ? 
And then came the temptation to keep bishop- 
rics vacant, and appropriate " the annates," or i 
else require them from the bishop elect in return j 
for consecrating him. It was but a step further 
in the same direction for Rome to lay claim to 
what primates and archbishops had enjoyed so ' 
long, when the appointment of both, so far as 
the Church was concerned, became vested in 
Rome. But, on the other hand, it is equally : 
certain, that had the primitive rule, founded as 
it was in strict justice, been maintained intact, 
each parish, or at least each diocese, would have 
preserved its own emoluments, or, which comes ; 
to the same thing, would have seen them applied i 
to its own spiritual exigencies in all cases. The 'i 
34th Apostolical canon, the 15th of Ancyra, and 
the 25th of Antioch, alike testify to the old rule i 
of the Church, and to what abuses it succumbed. i 
Still, De Marca seems hardly justified in ascrib- ; 
ing the origin of annates to direct simonv {De 
Concord. Sac. et Imp. vi. 10). [E. S". F.] 

ANNE {"Avva, HSn). Mother of the Virgin ; 

Mary. July 25 is observed by the Orthodox i 

Greek Church as the commemoration of the '' 

" Dormitio S. Annae," a Festival with abstinence I 

from labour {dpyia). The same day is said to have j 

been anciently dedicated to S. Anne in the West | 

also, and the feast was probably transferred in the j 

Roman Calendar to the 26th (the day on which j 

it is at present held) from a desire to give 
greater prominence to S. Anne than was possible | 

on S. James's Day. In the Greek Calendar, also, i 

Joachim and Anna, " 0f OTrart^pss," have a festival ' 

on Sep. 9, the day following the Nativity of the 
Virgin Mary. Both the Armenian and the Greek 
Calendars have on Dec. 9a" Festival of the Con- I 

ception of the Virgin Mary," or (as it is called 
in the latter) 'H (rvWrji\iis ttjs ayias koX deoirpo- 
fx-OTopos "Awns, i. e. S. Anne's Conception of 
the Virgin, koI yap avr^ 6,TTiKvrj(Ti T'jjr vir\p ; 

Koyov Toy Koyov Kv-ficraaau. In the Ethiopic, , 

" Joachim, avus Christi," has April 7 ; and on ,' 

July 20 is commemorated the " Ingressus Annae 
Matris Mariae in Templum " or " Purificatio '} 

Annae." (Daniel's Codex Liturgicus, . tom. iv. ; | 

Alt's Kirchenjahr.) There is no evidence of any i 

public recognition of S. Anne as a patron saint 
until about the beginning of the 6th century, ; 

when Justinian I. had a temple built in her ' 

honour, which is described by Procopius {De j 

Aedijic. Justin, ch. iii.) as 'upo-n-peir4s re Kal 
ayaarhv oAcos eSos "Avvrj ayia, '' whom," he 
adds, "some believe to be ixrjTepa QeoroKov and 
grandmother of Christ ; " and we are informed 
bv Codinus that Justinian II. founded another in 

Her body was brought from Palestine to Con- 
stantinople in 740, and her " Inventio Corporis " 
was celebrated with all the honour due to a 
saint. [C] j 


rian Liber Eesponsalis, and in some MSS. of the 
Sacramentary, following the Dominica in Alhis 
(First after Easter), we find an office in Pas- 
cha Annotina. That it was not, however, in- 
variably on the day following the Octave of 
Easter is shown by Martene (quoted by Binterim, 
V. i. 246), who found it placed on the Thursday 
before Ascension Day in an ancient ritual of 
Vienne. And it is mentioned in later autho- 
rities as having been celebrated on various days, 
as on the Sahbatum m Albis, the Saturday after 

As to the meaning of the expression there are 
various opinions. Natalis Alexander (^Hist. Feci. 
Diss. ii. qiiaest. 2), with several of the older au- 
thorities, supposed it to be the anniversary of 
the Easter of the preceding year. If this anni- 
versary was specially observed, when it fell in 
the Lent of the actual year it would naturally 
be omitted, or transferred to a period when the 
Fast was over; for the services of the Fascha 
annotinum were of a Paschal character, and con- 
sequently unsuited for a season of mourning. 

Probably, however, the nature of the Fascha 
annotinum is correctly stated by the Micrologus 
(c. 56); Annotine Pascha is a term equivalent 
to anniversary Pascha ; and it is so called because 
in olden time at Rome those who had been bap- 
tized at Easter celebrated the anniversary of 
their baptism in the next year by solemn ser- 
vices. Honorius of Autun, Durand, and Beleth, 
give the same explanation, which is adopted by 
Thomasius, Martene, and Mabillon. To this call- 
ing to mind of baptismal vows the collects of 
the Gregorian Sacramentary (p. 82) refer. The 
words of the Micrologus, that this was observed in 
olden time (antiquitus) seem to imply that even 
at the time , when that treatise was written 
(about 1100), it had become obsolete (Gregorian 
hacram. Ed. Menard, p. 399 ; Binterim's Denk- 
wiirdigkeiten, v. i. 245 ft'.). [C] 

ANNUNCIATION. [Mary the Virgin, 
Festivals of.] 

ANOINTING. [Unction.] 

ANOVIUS, of Alexandria, commemorated 
July 7 {Mart. Hieron.). 

ANSENTIUS. Commemorated August 7 
{2Iart. Ilieron.). [C] 

ANTEMPNUS, bishop, commemorated April 
27 {Mart. Micron.). , [C.] 

ANTEPENDIUiNI (or Antipendium), a veil 
or hanging in ft-ont of an altar. The use of such 
a piece of drapery no doubt began at a period 
when altars, as that at S. Alessandro on the Via 
Nomentana near Rome [Altar], began to be 
constructed with cancellated fronts: the veil 
hanging in front would protect the interior 
from dust and from profane or irreverent curio- 
sity. Ciampini {Vet. Man. t. ii. p. 57) says 
that in a crypt below the church of SS. Cosmo 
e Damiano at Rome there was in his time an 
ancient altar " cum duabus columnis ac epistilio 
et corona; nee non sub i]iso epistilio anuli sunt 
ferrei e quibus vela pendebant." (Compare t. i. 
p. 64.) 

In the 7th and 8th centuries veils of rich and 
costly stuffs are often mentioned in the 
Pontif. as suspended "ante altare," as in the 



case where Pope Leo III. gave to the chu.-ch of 
St. Paul at Rome •' velum rubeum quod pendet 
ante altare habens in medio crucem de chrysoclavo 
et periclysin de chrysoclavo," a red veil which 
hangs before the altar, having in the middle 
a cross of gold embroidery and a border 
of the same. It is possible, however, that in 
this and like cases the veil was not attached to 
the altar, but hung before it from the ciborium 
or from arches or railings raised upon the altar 
enclosure. [A. N.] 

ANTEKOS, the pope, martyr at Rome, 

commemorated Jan. 3 {Mart. Pom. Vet., 
Bedae). [C] 

ANTHEM. [Antiphon.] 

ANTHEMIUS, commemorated Sept. 26 {Cal. 

Armeti.). [C] 

ANTHIA, mother of Eleutherius^ comme- 
morated April 18 {Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ANTHIMUS. (1) Bishop, martyr at Nico- 
media, commemorated April 27 {Mart. Rom. 

(2) Presbyter, martyr at Rome, May 11 (7^6. 
et Bedae). 

(3) Martyr at Aegaea, Sept. 27 {Mart. 
R. v.). [C] 

ANTHOLOGIUM CAvQoUyiov), a compi- 
lation from the Paraclotice, Meuaea, and Horo- 
logium, of such portions of the service as are most 
frequently required by ordinary worshippers. It 
generally contains the olHces fur the Festivals of 
the Lord, of the Virgin Mary, and of the prin- 
cipal saints who have festivals {riov eopra^o- 
fx^vaiv ayioiv) ; and those ordinary offices which 
most constantly recur. (Neale, Eastern Church, 
Introd. 890.) This book, which was intended to 
be a convenient manual, has been so swollen by 
the zeal of successive editors, that it has become, 
says Leo Allatius, a very monster of a book. {De 
Libris Ecclesiasticis Graecorum, p. 89.) [C] 

ANTIGONUS, of Alexandria, commemorated 
Feb. 26 {Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

ANTIMENSIUM, a consecrated altar-cloth, 
"cujus nomiuis ratio haec est, quod ea adhibeant 
loco mensae sive altaris " (Bona, De Lebus Lit. 
I. XX. § 2). This seems the natural derivation, 
especially if, as Suidas says (in Suicer's Thesaurus 
s. V.) the word was a Latin one, meaning a table 
placed before a tribunal {-Kpo SiKaffTT]piou /cei- 
IJ.iv7]). Nevertheless, the Greeks always write 
the word avTijxivaiov, and derive it from /xivcros, 
a canister (Neale, Eastern Church, Introd. p. 186). 

These Antimensia were, and are, consecrated 
only at the consecration of a church (Goar's Eu- 
cho'logion, p. 648), when a piece of cloth large 
enough to form several antimensia was placed on 
the altar, consecrated, and afterwards divided 
and distributed as occasion required. "Relics 
being pounded up with fragrant gum, oil is poured 
over them by the bishop, and, distilling on to the 
corporals, is supposed to convey to them the 
mysterious virtues of the relics themselves. The 
Holy Eucharist must then be celebrated on them 
for seven days, after which they are sent forth 
as they may be wanted " (Neale, u. s. p. 187). 
As to the antiquity of these ceremonies it is 
difficult to speak with certainty. 

Theodore Balsamon (in Suicer, s. v.) says that 
these Antimensia were for use on the Tables o/ 



Oratories (tcSj/ tvKTnpioov), which were probably 
for the most part unconsecrated ; and Manuel 
Charitopulus (in Bona, u. s.) says that they were 
for use in cases where it was doubtful whether the 
altar was consecrated or not. They were required 
to be sufficiently large to cover the spot occupied 
by the paten and chalice at the time of conse- 

The Syrians do not use these cloth antimensia, 
but in their stead consecrate slabs of wood, which 
appear to be used even on altars which are con- 
secrated (compare the Ethiopic Area [Arca]). 
The Syriac Nomocanon quoted by Kenaudot {Lit. 
Orient, i. 182) in the absence of an Antimensium 
of any kind permits consecration of the Eucharist 
on a leaf of the Gospels, or, in the desert and in 
case of urgent necessity, on the hands of the 
deacons. [C] 

only 13 Councils of Antioch between A.D. 252 
and 800, at which date the first vol. of his Hist. 
Litcraria stops : Sir H. Nicolas as many as 33, 
and Mansi nearly the same number. Numbering 
them, however, is unnecessary, as there are no 
first, second, and third Councils of Antioch as of 
Carthage and elsewhere. They may be set 
down briefly in chronological order, only three 
of them requiring any special notice. 

A.D. 252 — under Fabian, against the followers 
of Novatus (Euseb. vi. 46). 

— 264, 269— On their dates see Mansi i. 
1089-91 : both against Paul of Samosata, 
who was also Bishop of Antioch after De- 
metrian (Euseb. vii. 27-9). For details, 
see below. 

— 331 — Of Arians, to depose Eustathius, 
Bishop of Antioch, for alleged Sabellianism 
(Soc. i. 24). 

— 339 — Of Arians, to appoint Pistus to the 
see of Alexandria, to which St. Athanasius 
had just been restored by Coustautine the . 

— younger {TAfe of St. Athanasius by his 
Benedictine editors). 

— 341 — known as the Council of the Dedi- 
cation : the bishops having met ostensibly 
to consecrate the great church of the 
metropolis of Syria, called the " Dominicum 
Aureum," the only council of Antioch 
whose canons have been preserved (Soc. 
ii. 8). For details, see below. 

— 345 — Of Arians : when the creed called 
the " Macrostiche," from its length, was 
put forth (Soc. ii. 18). 

— 348 — Of Arians : at which, however, 
Stephen, Bishop of Antioch, himself an 
Arian, was deposed by order of Constantius 
for the monstrous plot organised by him 
against the deputies from Sardica (New- 
man's Arians, iv. 3, 4). 

— 354 — Of Arians : against St. Athanasius. 

— 358 — under Eudoxius : rejected the words 
Homoousion and Homoiousion equally : 
but "without venturing on the distinct 
Anomoean doctrine " (Newman's Arians, 
iv. 4). 

— 361— To authorise the translation of St. 
Meletius from Sebaste to Antioch. A 
second was held shortly afterwards, by the 
same party, to expel him for having made 
proof of his orthodoxy. 

— 363 — Of semi-Ariaus : addressed a sy- 


nodical letter to the new emperor Jovian, 
as had been done by the orthodox at Alex- 
andria. St. Meletius presided, and signed 
first (Soc. iii. 25). 
A.D. 367— Creed of the Council of the Dedica- 
tion confirmed. 

— 379 — under St. Meletius: condemned Mar- 
cellus, Photinus, and Apollinaris. Ad- 
dressed a dogmatic letter to St. Damasus 
and the bishops of the West, who had sent 
a similar one to St. Paulinas. 

— 380 — For healing the schism thera : when 
it was agreed that whichever survived — 
St. Meletius or St. Paulinus — should be ac- 
cepted by all. Here the tSixos or synodical 
letter of the Westerns was received (at 
least so says De Marca, Explic. Can. V. 
Concil. Const. A.D. 381, among his Dis- 
sertations). St. Meletius signed first of 146 
others. St. Paulinus, apparently, was not 
present at all. A meeting of Arians took 
place there the same year on the death of 
their bishop Euzoius, when Dorotheus was 
elected to succeed him (Soc. iv. 35, and 
V. 3 and 6). 

— 389 — To prevent the sons of Marcellus, 
Bishop of Apamea, trom avenging his 
murder by the barbarians. 

— 391 — Against the Messalians. 

— 424 — or, as Mansi thinks (iv. 475) in 418 : 
at which Pelagius was condemned. 

— 431 — under John of Antioch, condemning 
and deposing St. Cyril and five others 
(Mansi, 5, li47). 

— 432 — under John also ; for making peace 
with St. Cyril : after which he in this, or 
another synod of the same year, condemned 
Nestorius and his opinions. 

— 435— Respecting the works of Theodorus 
of Mopsuestia and Diodorus of Tarsus 
lately translated into Armenian. 

— 440 — On the same subject : occasioned by 
a letter of Proclus, patriarch of Constanti- 

— 445 — under Domnus : in which a Syrian 
bishop named Athanasius was condemned. 

— 448 — under Domnus also : when Ibas, 
Bishop of Edessa, was accused ; but his 
accusers were excommunicated. 

— 471 — At which Peter the Fuller was de- 
posed, and Julian consecrated in his room ; 
then Peter, having been restored by the 
usurper Basilicus in 476, was again ejected 
by a synod in 478 on the restoration of 

— 482 — At which the appointment of Ca- 
leiidio to that see was confirmed ; but he 
in turn was ejected by the emperor Zeno 
in 485, and Peter the Fuller restored, who 
thereupon held a synod there the same 
year, and condemned the 4th Council. 

— 512 — at which Severus was appointed 

— 542 — Against Origen. 

— 560 — under Anastasius: condemning those 
who opposed the 4th Council. 

— 781— under Theodoric : condemning the 

Of these, the two synods A.D. 264 and 269 
against Paul of Samosata were conspicuous both 
from the fact that the accused was bishop of the 
city in which they were held, and from the novel 


character of their proceedings. They came to 
the steru resolution of deposing him, yet had to 
apply to a pagan emperor to enforce their sen- 
tence, who, strange to say, did as they requested. 
No such case had occurred before : it was the 
gravity of their deliberations and the justice of 
their decisions tliat caused them to be respected. 
With the first of them, as we learn from Eu- 
sebius, there were some celebrated names as- 
sociated. Firmilian, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappa- 
docia, the well-known advocate for re-baptising he- 
retics with St. Cyprian, St. Gregory the wonder- 
worker, and Athenodorus his brother, the bishops 
of Tarsus and Jerusalem, and others. Dionysius 
of Alexandria was invited, but sent excuses on 
account of his age ; declaring his sentiments on 
the question in a letter addressed to the whole 
diocese, without so much as naming the accused, 
its bishop. Those who were present exposed his 
errors ; but Paul, promising amendment, man- 
aged to cajole Firmilian, and the bishops sepa- 
rated without passing sentence. At the second 
council, having been convicted by a presbyter 
named Malcliion, occupying the highest position 
in the schools of Autioch as a sophist, he was 
cut off from the communion of the Church ; and 
a synodical letter was addressed in the name of 
those pi'escnt, headed by the bishops of Tarsus 
and Jerusalem — Firmilian had died on his road 
to the council— and of the neighbouring churches, 
to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, and the 
whole Church generally, setting forth all that 
had been done in both synods, as well as all the 
ftilse teaching and all the strange practices — so 
much in harmony with what is attributed to 
the sophists of Athens in Plato — for which Paul 
had been deposed, also that Domnus, son of 
Demetrian, his predecessor in the see, had been 
elected in his place. Still, condemned as he had 
been, Paul held his ground till the emperor 
Aurelian, having been besought to interfei-e, com- 
manded that " the house in which the bishop 
lived should be given up to those with whom 
the bishops of Italy and of the city of Rome com- 
municated as regards dogma." This settled his 
fate once for all. 

The remaining council of Antioch to be spe- 
cially noticed is that of the Dedicatio a.d. S-il. 
It was attended by 90 bishops, says St. Atha- 
nasius, or by 97 as St. Hilary. Of these but 36 
are said to have been Arian : yet they carried 
their point through Constantius so far as to 
substitute Eusebius of Hems for St. Athanasius, 
and, on his hesitating, to get George or Gregory 
of Cappadocia sent out to be put in possession of 
the see of Alexandria without delay. 

Not content with this, they got their 12th 
canon levelled against those who, having been 
deposed in a synod, presume to submit their 
case to the emperor instead of a larger synod, 
averring that they deserved no pardon, and 
ought not ever to be restored again. In this 
way the restoration of St. Athanasius to Alex- 
andria by Constantine the younger was virtually 
declared uncanonical and his see vacant. To 
this canon St. Chrysostom afterwards objected, 
when it was adduced against him, that it was 
framed by the Arians. Lastly, they managed to 
promulgate four different creeds, all intended to 
undermine that of Nicaea. Yet, strange to say, 
the 25 canons passed by tliis council came to be 
among the most respected of any, and at length 



admitted into the code of the Universal Church. 
They are termed by Pope Zacharias " the canons 
of the blessed Fathers;" by Nicholas I, "the 
venerable and holy canons of Antioch ; " and by 
the Council of Chalcedon " the just rules of the 
Fathers." Hence some have supposed two 
councils : one of 50 orthodox bishops, or more, 
who made the canons ; another of 30 or 40 
Arians, who superseded St. Athanasius (Mansi, ii. 
1305, note). But canon 12 plainly was as much 
directed against St. Athanasius as anything else 
that was done there. On the other hand, it laid 
down a true principle no less than the rest ; and 
this doubtless has been the ground on which 
they have been so widely esteemed. Among 
them there are five which cannot be passed over, 
for another reason. The 9th, for distinctly 
proving the high antiquity of one at least of the 
Apostolical canons, by referring to it as "the 
antient canon which was in force in the age of 
our fathers," in connexion with the special 
honour now claimed for metropolitans — on which 
see Bever., Sijnod. ii. ad loc. — canons 4 and 5, for 
having been cited in the 4th action of the Council 
of Chalcedon, or rather read out there by Aetius, 
Archdeacon of Constantinople, from a book as 
"canons 83 and 84 of the holy Fathers ;" and 
likewise canons 16 and 17, for having been read 
out in the 11th action of the same council by 
Leontius, Bishop of Magnesia, from a book as 
" canons 95 and 96 ; " being in each case the 
identical numbers assigned to them in the code of 
the Universal Church, thus proving this code to 
have been in existence and appealed to then, and 
therefore making it extremely probable, to say 
the least, that when the Chalcedonian bishops in 
their first canon " pronounced it to be fit and 
just that the canons of the holy Fathers made in 
every synod to this present time be in full force," 
they gave their authoritative sanction to this 
very collection. Hence a permanent and in- 
trinsic interest has been imparted to this council 
irrespectively of the merits of its own canons in 
themselves, though there are. few councils whose 
enactments are marked throughout by so much 
good sense. [E. S. F.] 

ANTIPAS, Bishop of Pergamus, tradition- 
ally the " angel " of that church addressed in 
the Apocalypse, commemorated April 11 {Cal. 
Byzant.). [C] 

ANTIPHON— (Gr. 'AvTl(t>wvov: Lat. Anti- 
phona : Old English, Antefn, Antem [Chaucer] : 
Modern English, Anthem. For the change of 
Antefn into Antem, compare 0. E. Stefn [prow] 
with modern Stem. French, Antienne.^ "An- 
tiphona ex Graeco interpretatur vox reciproca ; 
duobus scilicet choris alternatim psallentibus 
ordine comniutato." (Isidore, Origines vi. 18.) 

There are two kinds of responsive singing used 
in the Church ; the Responsorial, when one singer 
or reader begins, and the whole choir answers in 
the alternate verses ; the present Anglican prac- 
tice when the Psalms are not chanted ; and the 
Antiphonal (described in Isidore's definition) when 
the choir is divided into two parts or sides, and 
each part or side sings alternate verses. Of 
these forms of ecclesiastical chant we are now 
concerned only with the second, the Antiphonal. 
We shall endeavour, as brietly as may be, to men- 
tion (1) Its origin. (2) The different usages of 
the term " Antiphon." (3) Its application in the 



Missal, and in the Breviary; pointing out as 
they occur any peculiarity or diti'erence of usage 
between the Eastern and the Western Churclies. 

I. Its origin may be found in the Jewish 
Church. For we read (1 Chron. vi. 31 &c.), that 
David divided the Levites into three bands, and 
" set them over the service of song in the house 
of the Lord, after that the ark had rest. And 
they ministered before the dwelling-place of the 
tabernacle of the congregation with singing, 
until Solomon had built the house of the Lord in 
Jerusalem ; and then they waited on their office 
according to their order." It appears further 
that the sons of the Kohathites, under " Heman a 
singer" (v. 33), stood in the centre while the 
Gershomites, led by Asaph, stood on the right 
hand, and the Merarites, led by Ethan (or Jedu- 
thun), on the left. These arrangements, and the 
further details given in 1 Chron. xxv. clearly 
point to some definite assignment of the musical 
parts of the tabernacle and temple worship. 
Some of the psalms, moreover, as the xxiv. and 
the cxxxiv. appear to be composed for antiphonal 
singing by two choirs. 

It appears on the evidence of Philo, that this 
mode of singing was practised by the Essenes. 
Speaking of them he says: "In the first jslace 
two choirs are constituted ; one of men, the other 
of women. They then sing hymns to the praise 
of God, composed in diflerent kinds of metre and 
verse — now with one mouth, now wnth anti- 
phonal hymns and harmonies, leading, and direct- 
lug, and ruling the choir with modulations of 
the hands and gestures of the body ; at one time 
in motion, at another stationary ; turning in one 
direction, and in the reverse, as the case requires. 
Then, when each choir by itself has satisfied 
itself with these delights, they all, as though 
inebriated with divine love, combine from both 
choirs into one." 

Pliny appears to allude to antiphonal chanting 
when, in a well-known passage (JEpist. x. 97), he 
says that the Christians sing a hymn to Christ 
as God, "by turns among themselves" (secum 

The introduction of antiphonal singing among 
the Greeks is ascribed by an ancient tradition to 
Ignatius of Antioch (Socrates, Eccl. Hist. vi. 8), 
who saw a vision of antiphonal chanting in 
heaven. And this tradition probably represents 
the fact, that this manner of singing was early 
introduced into Antioch, and spread thence over 
the Eastern Church. 

We learn from S. Basil that it was general in 
his time. He says (Ep. ccvii. ad Cleric. Neo- 
ciiesar.) prefacing that what he is going to speak 
of are the received institutions in all the churches 
(tol vvy KeKparriKSra iQt] izaaais tats rod ©eoD 
e/f/cA.7)(riais ffvi'ifiSd eVri Kal (rvjx(puva), " that the 
people, resorting by night to the house of prayer 

at length, rising from prayer, betake 

tliemselves to psalmody. And now, divided into 
two parts, they sing alternately to each other 
(5ix?l Siavefx-^QivTis, avTii^dWovffiv a.Wi\\ois . .). 
Afterwards they commit the leading of the 
melody to one, and the rest follow him." 

Theodoret {Hist. Ecclss. ii. 19) ascribes the 
introduction of antiphonal singing to Flavian 
and Diodorus, who, while still laymen, he says, 
were the first to divide the choirs of singers into 
two parts, and teach them to sing the songs of 
David alternately (oSrot irpwroi, Sixfj 5ie\6vres 


Tovs Twv \paW6i>Twv xofovs, in SiaSoxvi' aSeip 
ri]v AaviSiXTji' idiSa^ov fxeXcvSiai/), and then he 
adds that this custom, which thus took its rise at 
Antioch, spread thence in every direction. 

In the Western Church the introduction of 
Antiphonal singing after the manner of the Ori- 
entals (secundum morem Orientalium), is attri- 
buted to S. Ambrose, as S. Augustine says 
(Confess, ix. c. 7, § 15), and he gives as a reason, 
that the people should not become weary. 

A passage, indeed, is adduced from Tertullian 
(ad Uxor, ii.), from which it is argued that the 
practice of alternate singing was in vogue before 
the time of S. Ambrose. It has also been con- 
tended that Pope Damasus, or again Caelestiue, 
was its originator in the Western Cliurch. As 
these opinions do not seem to be generally adopted, 
and as the arguments by which they are sup- 
ported may easily admit of another interpreta- 
tion, it does not appear to be necessary to occupy 
space by discussing them here. 

II. The word Antiphon, however, has been 
used in several diftereut senses. 

1. Sometimes it appears to denote the psalms 
or hymns themselves, which were sung anti- 
phonally. Thus Socrates (Hist. Eccl. vi. 8) calls 
certain hymns which were thus sung "Anti- 
phonas." When the word is used in this sense 
there is generally a contrast expressed or implied 
with a " psalmus directus," or "directaneus." 
" Psallere cum antiphona" is a phrase much 
used in this connexion, to which "psallere in 
directum" is opposed. Thus S. Aurelian in the 
order for psalmody of his rule, " Dicite Matu- 
tinarios, id est primo canticum in antiphona : 
deinde directaneum, Judica me Dcus. ... in 
antiphonS, dicite hymnum, Splendor paternae 
gloriae." It is not quite certain what is meant 
by these two expressions ; tae general opinion is 
that " psallere cum (or in) antiphoniJ," means to 
sing alternately with the two sides of the choir ; 
and "psallere directaneum" to sing either with 
the whole choir united, or else for one chanter to 
sing while the rest listened in silence (this latter 
mode of singing, howevei-, is what is usually 
denoted by " tractus ;") while some think that 
" psallere in " or " cum antiphona" means to sing 
with modulation of the voice ; and that " psallere 
directaneum" denotes plain recitation without 
musical intonation. Thus Cassian (De Instit. 
Coenoh. ii. 2), speaking of psalms to be sung in 
the night office, says, " et hos ipsos antiphonarum 
protelatos melodiis, et adjunctione quarumdam 
modulationum ;" and S. Benedict directs that 
some psalms should be said " in directum," but 
many more "modulatis vocibus." A third 
opinion is that "psallere cum antiphona" means 
to sing psalms with certain sentences inserted 
between the verses, which sentences were called 
antiphons, from their being sung alternately 
with the verses of the psalm itself. Of this 
method of singing we shall speak more fully 
presently. In opposition to this sense, " psallere 
directum" would mean to sing a psalm straight 
through without any antiphon ; and it may be 
remarked that the " psalmus directus," said daily 
at Lauds, in the Ambrosian office, has no Anti- 
phon. The expression " oratio recta " seems also 
to be used in much the same sense. 

2. The word Antiphona » is also used to denote 

» " A distinction is made by liturgical writers betweea 


a sacred composition, or compilation of verses 
from the Psalms, or sometimes from other parts 
of Scripture, or several consecutive verses of the 
same psalm appropriate to a special subject or 
festival. This was suug by one choir, and after 
each verse an unvarying response was made by 
the opposite choir ; whence the name. 

Compilations of this nature are to be found in 
the old office books, e.g., in the Mozarabic office 
for the dead, where, however, they are called "a 
Psalm of David," as being said in the place of 
psalms in the Nocturns ; and they have this pecu- 
liarity, that each verse (with very few excep- 
tions) begins with the same word. Thus the 
verses of one such "psalm" all begin with "Ad 
te ;" those of another with " Miserere ;" of 
another with " Libera ;" of another with " Tu 
itomiue," and so on. They are also found in the 
Ambrosian burial offices, where they are called 
Antiphonae, each verse being considered as a 
separate Antiphon, and are headed Antiph. i. 
Antiph. ii. and so on. The Canticles, which were 
appointed to be said instead of the " Veuite" in 
the English state services, there called "hymns," 
and directed to be said or sung " one verse by 
the Priest, and another by the Clerk and people" 
(j. e. antiphonally), are of this nature. 

3. The word " Antiphona" denotes (and this 
is the sense in which we are most familiar with 
its use), a sentence usually, but by no means 
invariably, taken from the psalm itself, and ori- 
ginally intercalated between each verse of a psalm, 
but which, in process of time, came to be sung, 
wholly or in part, at the beginning and end only. 
We shall speak more at length on this head pre- 

4. The word "Antiphona" came to denote 
such a sentence taken by itself, and sung alone 
without connexion with any psalm. These Anti- 
phons were frequently original compositions. 
(We thus arrive at our common use of the word 
anthem as part of an Anglican choral service.) 
Antiphons of this description are of common 
occurrence in the Greek offices. 

As an example take the following from the 
office for the taking the greater monastic habit 
(toC fj.eyd\ov axhl^oLTOs). In the Liturgy, after 
the entrance of the Gospels, the following Anti- 
phons {^ AvTi(p(ava) are said : — 

Ant. 1 . " Would that I could wipe out with tears the 
handwriting of my offences, Lord : and please Thee by 
repentance fur the remainder of my life : but the enemy 
deceives me, and wars against my soul. Lord, before 1 
finally perish, save me. 

" Who that is tossed by storms, and makes for it, does 
not find safety in this port ? Or who that is tormented 
with pain and falls down before it, does not find a cure in 
this place of healing? thou Creator of all men, and 
physician of the sick, Lord, before 1 finally perish, 
save me. 

" I am a sheep of Thy rational flock ; and I flee to Thee, 
the good Shepherd ; save me the wanderer from Thy fold, 
God. and have mercy on me." 

Then follows " Gloria Patri " and a " Theoto- 
kion,"' which is a short Antiphon or invocation 
addressed to the B.V.M. as "Theotokos." Then 
Antiphon ii., after the model of the first, but in 



antiphona, and antiphonum, the neuter form denoting 
antiphons of the nature here described ; and the feminine 
a sentence or modulation sung as a prefi.x or adjunct to a 
given psalm ' quasi ex opposito respondens.' " — Goar, Euch. 
p. 123. 

two clauses only. So after another " Gloria " 
and " Theotokiou," Antiphon iii. in one clause. 

in. We shall now refer to the principal uses 
of Antiphons in the services of the Church. 

1st. In the Liturg)^, or office of the Mass. 

We will take the Greek offices first. In these 
(and we will confine ourselves to the two Litur- 
gies of SS. Basil and Chrysostom) before the lesser 
entrance {i.e. that of the Gospels) 3 psalms, or 
parts of psalms are sung with a constant re- 
sponse after each verse. These are called re- 
spectively the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Antiphon, and 
each is preceded by a prayer, which is called the 
prayer of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Antiphon respec- 

The Greek liturgical Antiphons consist each of 
four vei-sicles with its response, though occasion- 
ally, as on Christmas Day, the third Antiphon 
has but three ; that " Gloria Patri " is said after 
the first and second Antiphons, but not after the 
third. (This is doubtless because the office passes 
on immediately after the third Antiphon to other 
singing with which we are not now concerned.) 
In the first Antiphon the antiphonal response 
is always the same, and is that given in the 
cases quoted ; in the second it varies with the 
day to the solemnity of which it has reference ; 
it always begins with the words " Save us," and 
ends with " Who sing to Thee, Alleluia " {aomov 
VIJMs . . . ypaAAovrds ffoi 'AAAijAouta); in the 
third it varies likewise with the day, but is not 
of so uniform a type. It is, as a rule, the same 
as the " Apolyticon," an Anthem which is sung 
near the end of the preceding vespers. That 
after the "Gloria" in the second Antiphon, in- 
stead of repeating the proper response of the 
Antiphon "0 only begotten Son and Word of 
God," &c., is sung as a response. (This invoca- 
tion occurs in the office of the " Typics.") 

Other compositions, which are virtually Anti- 
phons, are found in Greek offices, and will be 
spoken of under their proper heads ; see Conta- 


We turn now to the Liturgies of the Western 

The three Antiphons of the Greek Liturgies 
correspond both in structure and position with 
the single Antiphon of the Western Church. 
The chant which the Church uses at the begin- 
ning of the Mass is commonly called " Introitus," 
or " Antiphona ad Introitum," from its being 
sung Antiphonally when the priest enters upon 
the service, or mounts to the altar ; for both ex- 
planations are given [Introit], It still retains 
its name of " Introitus " in the Roman missal ; 
and the word " Introit " is frequently used among 
ourselves at the present day with a similar mean- 

In the Ambrosian Liturgy the corresponding 
Antiphon was called " Ingressa " for the same 
reason ; while in the Mozarabic and Sarum Litur- 
gies it was called "Officium." In the Galilean 
rite it was called " Antiphona " or " Antiphona 
ad praelegendum," or " de praelegere." 

The institution of the Antiphon at the Introit 
is almost universally ascribed to S. Caelestine, 
who was Pope A.D. 422, and who is said to have 
borrowed this kind of singing from S. Ambrose, 
and to have appointed that the cl. psalms of 
David should be sung antiphonally before the 
Sacrifice, which was not done previously, but 
only the Epistles of S. Paul and the Gospel 



were read, and thus the Mass was conducted.** 
In the account given by S. Augustine (de Civ. 
Bel, xxii. 8 sub fin.) of a Mass which he cele- 
brated, A.D. 425, there is no mention of such an 
Introit. After speaking of certain preliminary 
thanksgivings (as we should say occasional) for 
a recent miracle, he says, " I saluted the people " 
when silence was at length established, the 
appointed lections of Holy Scripture w^re read 
as though that was the beginning of the Mass. 

It seems, however, doubtful what we are to 
understand by the singing of Psalms thus insti- 
tuted by Caelestine — whether an entire Psalm, 
varying with the office, was sung, or only cer- 
tain verses taken from the Psalms, and used as 
an Antiphon. The former opinion is held by 
Honorius (Gemma anmae, 87), who says that 
" Caelestine appointed Psalms to be sung at the 
Introit of the Mass, from which (de quibus) 
Gregory the Pope afterwards composed Anti- 
phons for the Introit of the Mass with musical 
notations (modulando composuit.)" Also by 
Priscus in his " Acts of the Popes," and by Cardi- 
nal Bona. 

The latter opinion is held by Micrologus 
(cap. i.), and by Amalarius (De Eccl. Off. in. 
5), who, in explaining this addition of Caeles- 
tine's, says, "Which we understand to mean 
that he selected Antiphons out of all the Psalms, 
to be sung in the office of the Mass. For previ- 
ously the^Mass began with a lection, which cus- 
tom is still retained in the vigils of Easter and 

It has again been argued with much" force that 
it was customary to sing Antiphons taken from 
the Psalms at the Mass before the time of Caeles- 
tine.^ S. Ambrose {de Myst. cap. 8) and the 
writer de Sacr. (iv. 2) speak as though the use 
of the verse " Introibo," &c., at the Introit were 
familiar. So, too, Gregory Nazian. says, When 
lie (the priest) is vested, he comes to the altar 
saying the Antiphon " I will go unto the altar of 
God """(Introibo ad altare Dei). It is also noticeable 
that some of the verses said to have been used as 
Antiphons in early times differ somewhat from 
Jerome's version. This is strong evidence that 
the use of Antiphons at the Introit was anterior 
to the time of Caelestine. However this may 
be, Caelestine may well have so organized or 
altered, or developed the custom, as to be called 
its inventor. And on the whole the more pro- 
bable opinion seems to be that he appointed en- 
tire Psal\iis to be sung before the Mass and that 
afterwards Gregory the Great selected from them 
verses as an Antiphon for the "Introit," and 
others for the " Responsory," ^ " Offertory," and 
" Communion," which he collected into the book 
which he called his Antiphonary. In support of 
this view it may be observed that the Respon- 
sory &c. (which are really Antiphons, though 
the Introit soon monopolized that name) are 
often taken from the same Psalm as the Introit. 
The form of the Antiphon at the Introit was 
as follows. After the Introit, properly so called, 
a psalm was sung, originally entire, but after- 

•> Liber pontijicalis in vita S. Caclestini. See also the 
• Catalogue of the Roman rontiffs, April, vol. i. (Henschen 
and Papebroch). 

c Vide Radulph. Tungrcns. De Can. Obscrv. prop. 23. 
Cassian, Instit. iii. 11. 

d Afterwards known as the "Gradual." In the Anti- 
phonary it is called " Responsorium gradalo." 


wards a single verse with " Gloria Patri." The 
Introit was then repeated, and some churches 
used to sing it three times on the more solemn 

The Introit in the Antiphonary of S. Gregory 
is taken from the Psalms, with a few exceptions, 
which Durandus (Hat. iv. 5) calls " Irregular 
Introits." These Introits, taken from other parts 
of Scripture, are in all cases followed by their 
appointed " Psalmus." There are also a few In- 
troits which are not taken from any part of 
Scripture. Such is that for Trinity Sunday in 
tlie Roman and Sarum missals. 

" Blessed be the Holy Trinity, and the undivided 
Unity ; we will give thanks to It, fur It has dealt merci- 
fully with us." 

And that for All-Saints Day in the same Missal. 
" Let us all rejoice celebrating the festival in honour 
of all the Saints, over whose solemnity the angels rejoice, 
and join in praising the Son of God." 
These non-scriptural Introits, however, are 
mostly, as will be observed, for festivals of later 
date, and are not found in Gregory's Antiphonary. 
A metrical Introit is sometimes found. Thu.s 
in the Roman Missal in Ma.sses, " in Commemora- 
tione B.V.M., a purif. usque ad pasch." the 
Introit is : — 

Salve, sancta Parens, enixa puerpera llegem, 
Qui coelum terramque regit in secula seculoruni.e 
Psalmus. — Virgo Dei genetrix, quem totus non capit orbis 
In tua se clausit viscera factus homo. 
Gloria Patri. 
Here the " Psalmus " is not from the Psalms, 
which is Tery unusual, though this is not a soli- 
tary case. That of Trinity Sunday is another. 
The lines are the beginning of an old hymn to 
the Virgin, which is used in her office in various 

The different Sundays were often popularly 
distinguished by the first word of their " Officium," 
or " Introitus." Thus, the first four Sundays in 
Lent were severally known as, " Invocavit," 
" Reminiscere," " Oculi," " Laetare." Low Sun- 
day as " Quasimodo," and so in other cases. 
So too we find week days designated, i.e. Wednes- 
day in the third week in Lent called in Missals, 
"Feria quarta post Oculi." In rubrical direc- 
tions this nomenclature is very frequent. 

The Ambrosian " Ingressa " consists of one un- 
broken sentence, usually but by no means always, 
taken from Scripture, and not followed by a 
"Psalmus," or the "Gloria Patri." It is often 
the same as the Roman "Officium." It is never 
repeated except in Masses of the Dead, when its 
form approaches very nearly to that of the Ro- 
man " Introitus." 

The form of the Mozarabic " Officium " though 
closely approaching that of the Roman " In- 
troitus" differs somewhat from it. The Anti- 
phon is followed by a " versus," corresponding to 
the Roman " Psalmus," with the " Gloria Patri," 
before and after which the second clause alone of 
the Antiplion is repeated.' 

Durandus (Bat. lib. iv. cap. 5) and Beleth (De 
Dlv. Off. cap. 35) state that in their time a 
Tropus was sung, in some churches, on the more 
solemn days before the Antiphon. 

e The line is thus given in the Roman and Sarum. 
Missals. It was probably read " in secla seclorum." ; 

f This is the Roman manner of repeating the "Ke- 
sponsories'' at Matins. 


We now come to that use of Antiphons with 
which we are probably most familiar — as sung 
as an accompaniment to Psalms and Canticles. 
In general terms an Antiphon in this sense is 
a sentence which precedes a Psalm or Canticle to 
the musical tone of which the whole Psalm or 
Canticle is sung, in alternate verses by the oppo- 
site sides of the choir which at the end unite in 
repeating the Antiphon. This sentence is usually, 
but by no means universally, taken from the 
Psalm itself, and it varies with the day and 
occasion. Originally the Psalm was said by one 
choir, and the Antiphon was intercalated between 
each verse by the opposite choir : whence the 
nime. Ps. 136 (JJonfitemini) and the Canticle 
" Benedicite " are obvious examples of this 
method of singing. Indeed in Ps. 135 (v, 10-12) 
we have very nearly the same words, without 
what we may call the Antiphon ("for His mercy 
endureth for ever"), which occur in Ps. 136 with 
that Antiphon inserted after each clause, and 
the " Benedicite " is often recited without the 
repetition of its Antiphon after every verse.? 
Pss. 42 and 43 (^Quemadmodum and Judica), 80 
(Qui regis Israel), and 107 {Confitemini) will at 
once suggest themselves as containing an Anti- 
phonal verse which is repeated at intervals. 

There are many examples of this earlier use of 
Antiphons in the Greek Services. For instance : 
at Vespers on the " Great Sabbath " (i. e. Easter 
Kve), Ps. 82 {Deus stetit) is said with the last 
verse, "Arise, God, and judge Thou the earth, 
for Thou shalt take all heathen to Thine inheri- 
tance," repeated Avith beautiful application, as an 
Antiphon between each verse. 

Again, in the Office for the Burial of a Priest, 
Pss. 23 (Doniinus regit me), 24 (Domini est 
terra), 84:(Quam dilecta), are said with ''Alleluia, 
Alleluia," •» repeated as an Antiphon between 
each verse. Here the three Psalms are called 
respectively the first, second, and third Anti- 

It appears that in the Roman Church the same 
custom of repeating the Antiphon after each 
verse of the Psalm originally prevailed. In an 
old mass, edited by Menard, in the Appendix to 
the Sacramentary of S. Gregory, we read, " An- 
nuente Episcopo, incipiatur psalmus a Cantore, 
cum Introitu reciprocante." • 

Amalarius, too {De Ordine Antiphonarii, cap. 
iii.), speaking of the Nocturns of weekdays, has 
the words, " Ex senis Antiphonis quas vicissim 
chori per singulos versus repetunt." We have 
evidence that this custom was not obsolete (in 
places at least) as late as the 10th century, in the 
life of Odo, Abbot of Cluny, where we are told 
that the monks of that house, wishing to pro- 
long the office of the Vigils of S. Martin (Nov. 
11), when the Antiphons of the office are short,'' 



e E.g. iu the Lauds of the Ambrosian Breviary, and in 

a still more compressed form in the Mozarabic Lauds ; 

where the word "Benedicite" is omitted from the begin- 
1 liing of each verse after the first.. 

I *> The use of " Alleluia " on this and on similar occa- 

j sions of mourning (e.g. during Lent) is different from the 
: usage of the Western Church. 

I » This seems to point more to the mode of singing the 

Introit than Psalms in the daily office. 
'' The circumstance of their frequent repetition has 

been susrgestcd as a reason why the Antiphons to the 
I I'salms in the daily office are, as a rule, so much shorter 
; than that at the Introit of the Mass. 


and the nights long, till daybreak, used to repeat 
every Antiphon after each verse of the Psalms. 
W^e find also, in a letter by an anonymous author 
to Batheric, who was appointed Bishop of 
Eatisbon, A.D. 814 (quoted by Thomasius), the 
writer complaining that he has in the course of 
his travels found some who, with a view to get 
through the office as rapidly as possible, that 
they may the quicker return to their worldly 
business, recite it " without Antiphons, in a 
perfunctory manner and with all haste" ("sine 
Antiphonis, cursim, et cum omni velocitate " ). 
Theodoret also relates (Hist. Eccl. iii. 10) that 
Christians, in detestation of the impiety of 
Julian, when singing the hymns of David, added 
to each verse the clause, " Confounded be all they 
that worship carved images." 

A familiar instance of this older use of an 
Antiphon is found in the " Reproaches " (" versi- 
culi improperii" or " improperia ") of the 
Roman Missal for Good Friday. 

These are Gregorian : the introductory rubric 
as it stands in the Roman Missal is cited, as it is 
so precise as to the manner of singing them. It 
runs thus : " Versiculi sequentes improperii a 
binis alternatim cantantiir, utrosque choro simul 
repetente post quemlibet versum Popmle, &c." "' 

Sometimes metrical hymns were sung anti- 
phonally after this manner. Thus at the " Salu- 
tation of the Cross" the verse of the hymn 
" Fange lingua," which begins " Crux fidelis," is 
sung in the Sarum rite at the beginning, and 
after every verse of the hymn, the rubric being — 

" Chorus idem repetat post unumquemque versum. 

" Crux fidelis inter omnes," &c. 
(. . . Sacerdotes cantent hunc versum seqiientem.) 

" Pange lingua gloriosi proelium certaminis," &c. 
Chorus—" Crux fidelis," &c. 
And so on. So also before the Benediction of 
the Paschal Candles on Easter Eve, according 
to the Sarum rite, the hymn " Inventor rutili " 
is sung in the same manner, with the first stanza 
repeated antiphonally after each stanza. 

A variation of this form of antiphonal inter- 
polation is when the interpolated clause itself 
varies. The following is a striking example : — 

On the morning of Easter Eve in the Greek 
office, the following Antiphons (rpoirdpta) are 
said with Ps. IIP, "saying" (as the rubric 
directs) "one verse ((rTLxof) from the Psalm 
after each troparium." These are known as to. 

" Blessed art Thou, Lord, teach me Thy statutes. 
Blessed are those that are undefiled in the way, and walk 
in the law of tlie Lord." 

"Thou, Christ, the Life, wast laid low in the 

grave, and the angelic hosts were amazed, glorifying 

Thy condescension " 

" Blessed are they that keep His testimonies, and seek 
Him with their whole heart" 

"0 Life, how is it that Thou dost die? How is it 

that Thou dost dwell in the grave? Thou payest the 

tribute of death, and raiscst the dead out of Hades." 

"For they who do no wickedness walk in His ways." 
"We magnity Thee, Jesu the King, and honour 

Thy burial, and Thy passion, by which Thou hast sav<>(l 

us from destruction." 

And so on throughout the whole Psalm. 

In the same manner at the burial of- monks, 
the blessings at the beginning of the Sermon on 

"> The rubricil directions with respect to the " Tnipro- 
pcria" in the Mozarabic Missal are very full. 




the Mount (oi ixaKapKT/xoC) are recited with a 
varying antiphonal clause after each, beginning 
from the fifth. 

As an example from the Western Church, we 
may refer to the following, which belongs to 
Vespers on Easter Eve. It is given in S. Gre- 
gory's Antiphonary, with the heading Antiph. and 
Ps. to the alternate verses. 

Antiph. " In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn 

towards the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene, 

and the other Mary to see the sepulchre." Alleluia. 

Ps. " My soul doth magnify the Lord." 

Antiph. " And behold, there was a great earthquake, for 

the angel of the Lord descended from heaven." Alleluia. 

Ps. " And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour." 

And so the Magnificat is sung with the suc- 
cessive clauses of the Gospel for the day used as 
Antiphons after each of its verses. 

The missal Litanies which are said in the Am- 
brosian Mass on Sundays in Lent, and the very 
beautiful Preces with which the Mozarabic 
Missal and Breviary abounds, are so far anti- 
phonal that each petition is followed by an un- 
varying response. Their consideration, however 
interesting, .scarcely belongs to our present 

The repetition of the Antiphon after each 
verse was called " Antiphonare." In the old 
Antiphonaries we frequently find such directions 
as "Hoc die Antiphonamus ad Benedictus" or 
simply "Hoc die antiphonamus." The word 
" antiphonare " is explained to mean to repeat 
the Antiphon after each verse of the Canticle. 
The " Greater Antiphons " (i. e. " Sapientia," 
&c.) are directed to be sung at the Benedictus,^ 
with the rubric, "Quas antiphonamus ab In Sanc- 
titate ;" which means that the repetition of the 
Antiphon begins from the verse of which those 
are the first words.** 

At a later period the custom of repeating the 
Antiphon after each verse of the Psalm dropped, 
and its use was gradually limited to the beginning 
and end of the Psalm. A relic of the old usage 
still survives in the manner of singing the 
" Venite " at Nocturns, in which Psalm the 
Antiphon is repeated, either wholly or in part, 
several times during the course of the Psalm. 

It remained a frequent custom, and more par- 
ticularly in the monastic usages, at Lauds and 
Vespers on the greater feasts to sing the Anti- 
phon three times at the end of Benedictus and 
of Magnificat, once before Gloria Patri, once 
before Sicut erat, and once again at the conclu- 
sion of the whole. This seems to have been the 
general use of the Church of Tours; and the 
Church of Rome retained the practice in the 
12th century, at least in certain offices of the 
festivals of the Nativity, the Epiphany, and S. 
Peter. It was called " Antiphonam triumphare," 
which is explained by Martene (^De Ant. EccL 
Bit. iv. 4) as " ter fari." Antiphonam levare,^ or 
imponere, means to begin the Antiphon. 

Other variations in the manner of singing the 
Antiphon are mentioned by other writers. Thus 

n This differs from the later (and the prespnt) -practice, 
according to which these Antiphons are said to the Mag- 
nificat at Vespers. 

o This is the manner in which the " ixcucapitrfiLoC " men- 
tioned above are recited. The first four are followed by 
no antiphonal sentence. 

p Compare our English use of the word to raise. 


we are told i that sometimes the Antiphon was 
said twice before the Psalm ; or at least, if only • 
said once, the first half of it would be sung by ; 
one choir, and the second half by the other. 
This was called " respondere ad Antiphonam." ■" ; 
It appears that this method of singing the j 
Antiphon was confined to the beginning and end I 
of the Psalm or Canticle. When repeated during ] 
the Psalm, the Antiphon was always sung by one 
choir, the other taking the verse. 

The repetition of the Antiphons was in later 
times still further curtailed, and the opening 
words only sung at the beginning of the Psalm I 
or Canticle, the entire Antiphon being recited at 1 
the close. Still later, two or more Psalms were 1 
said under the same Antiphon, itself abbreviated i 
as just stated. This is the present custom of the \ 
Roman Breviary. When the Antiphon was taken 
from the beginning of the Psalm or Canticle, 
after the Antiphon the beginning of the Psalm or , 
Canticle was not repeated, but the recitation was ' 
taken up from the place where the Antiphon i 
ceases. For instance, the opening verses of the 
92nd Psalm are said at Vespers on Saturday in 
the Ambrosian rite in this manner : — 
Ar\t. " Bonuni est." I 

Ps. " El psallere nomini Tuo Altissime," &c. | 

"Gloria Patri," &c. I 

Ant. " Bonum est confiteri Domino Deo nostro." 

Where the recitation of the Psalm begins with 
the verse following the Antiphon, though the ; 
opening words only of the Antiphon are said at 
the beginning. 

On the more important festivals the Anti- , 
phons at Vespers, Matins, and Lauds (but not at -j 
the other hours), were said entire before as well I 
as after the Psalms and Canticles. These feasts j 
were hence called " double ;" those in which the t 
Antiphons were not thus repeated, " simple." j 

There are a few peculiarities in the use of 
Antiphons to the Psalms and Canticles in the ' 
Ambrosian and Mozarabic rites which may be 

1. The Ambrosian Antiphons are divided into 
simple and' double. The simple Antiphons are j 
said in the same manner as the Roman Antiphons j 
on days which are not " double." They are ] 
always so said whatever be the nature of the J 
feast. In Eastertide the Antiphon is said entire 
before the Psalm, and instead of its repetition 
at the end, " Alleluia, Alleluia," is said. ] 

The double Antiphons consist of two clauses, j 
the second being distinguished by a V. (i. e. ■cersiis), \ 
and is said entire both before and after the , 
Psalm. The following is a specimen which is 
said to be one of the Psalms on Good Friday: — I 

Ant. duplex. " Simon, sleepest thou.' Couldest not thou ] 
watch with me one hour ?" | 

Y. " Or do ye see Judas, how he sleeps not, but hastens | 
to deliver Me to the Jews ?" 

These double Antiphons occur occasionally and 
irregularly on days which have proper Psalms, j 

q By Amalarius, De Eccl. Off. iv. 7. 

' In the Vatican Antiphonary we find the follnwing 
direction on the Epiphany:— "Hodie ad omnes Antiphonas 
respondenms," and so in other instances. Jn a MS. of the 
church of Rouen the antiphon before and after the " Mag- 
nificat " at first Vespers of the Assumption is divided into 
four alternate parts between the two sides of the choir, 
and after the "Gloria Patri" is again sung by both sides 


Thus on Wednesday before Easter, out of iiinc 
I'salms, one was a double Antiphon ; on Thurs- 
day, out often, none, and on Good Friday, out of 
eighteen, one ; on Christmas Day, out of twenty- 
one, four ; and on the Epiphany, out of twenty- 
one, six. Festivals are not divided into " double " 
and " simple " as distinguished by the Anti- 

2. The Mozarabic Antiphons are said entire 
before as well as after their Psalm or Canticle. 
Occasionally two Antiphons are given for the 
same Canticle.' They are often divided into two 
clauses, distinguished" by the letter P,' in which 
case at the end of the Psalm the " Gloria " is in- 
tercalated between the two clauses. 

Of the nature of the sentence adopted as an 
Antiphon little is to be said. It is, for the most 
part, a verse, or part of a verse, from the Psalm 
it accompanies, varying with the day and the 
occasion, and often with extreme beauty of ap- 
])lication. Sometimes it is a slight variation of 
the verse ; or it is taken from other parts of 
Scripture ; sometimes it is an original composi- 
tion, occasionally even in verse. E. g. in the 
3rd Nocturn on Sundays between Trinity and 
Advent in the Sarum Breviary : 

To Ps. 19 {Coeli enarrant), 
" Sponsus ut e thalamo pi-ocessit Cbristus in orbem : 
Descendens coelo jure salutifero." 

The Antiphons for the Venite are technically 
called the Invitatorta." 

The corresponding Antiphons of the Eastern 
Church need not detain us, as they are less pro- 
minent and important, and present no special 
features. They are always taken from the Psalm 
itself, and are said after the Psalm only, and are 
prefaced by the words Koi TraKiv (and again), 
and are introduced before the " Gloria Patri." 

Thus Ps. 104- (^Benedic anima mea) is said 
daily at Vespers. It is called the proocmiac 
Psalm ; and the Antiphon at the end is — 
And again. 

" The sun knoweth his going down. Thou makest 
darkness that it may be night. 

" Lord, how manifold are Thy works. In wisdom 
hast Thou made them all." 

"Glory be," &c. " As it was," &c. 

Antiphona Post Evangelium. — An Antiphon 
said, as its name indicates, after the Gospel, in 
the Ambrosian rite. It consists of a simple un- 
broken clause, and is sometimes taken from the 

I Psalms or other parts of Scripture ; sometimes 
it is composed with reference to the day. One 

I example will show its form, that for the C'Am^o- 

I phory or return of Christ out of Egypt (Jan. 7). 

I " Praise the Lord, all ye angels of His ; praise Him all 

His host. Praise Him sun and moon : praise Him all ye 
stars and light." 

There is nothing corresponding in the Roman 
Monastic and Sarum Missals, in which the Gospel 



" We do not feel sure whether in these cases it is in- 
tended that both Antiphons be used at once, or a choice 
given between the two. 

« It does not seem quite clear what this 1'. represents. 
Probably it stands for I'salraus. 

" The Roman is taken rather than any other Breviai-y 
as giving a short form. The Inviiatories of the Sarum 
Breviary are nearly the same for the weekdays. Fur 
ordinary Sundays there is a greater variety, which would 
have made them longer to quote, without adding to the 
v.-.liie of the illustration. 

is immediately followed by the Greed. In the 
Mozarabic office the Lmtda followed the Gospel. 
(The Creed, it will be remembered, is sung after 
the consecration.) 

Antiphona ad Confractioneni Panis. — An Anti- 
phon said in the Mozarabic Mass on certain days 
at the breaking of the consecrated Host.* It 
occurs for the most part during Lent, and in 
votive Masses. Also on Whitsunday and on 
Corpus Christi. It is usually short and said in 
one clause. Thus from the 4th Sunday in Lent 
{Mediante die Festo), up to Maundy Thursday 
{In coend Domini), and also on Corpus Christi, 
it is — 

" Do Thou, Lord, give us our meat in due season. 
Open Thine hand, and fill all things living with plcn- 

In the Ambrosian Missal the Confractorium 
corresponds to the Antiph. ad Confrac. There 
is no Antiphon appointed at the same place in 
the Roman and Sarum Missals. 

Antiphona in Choro. — An Antiphon said in 
the Ambrosian rite at Vespers on certain davs. 
It occurs near the beginning of the office, before 
the Hymn, and is said on Sundays, and at the 
second Vespers of festivals. It is also said at 
the first Vespers of those festivals which have 
the office not solemn 7 (o'fficium non solemne) and 
of some, but not of all, " Solemnities of the Lord." 
It is not said at first Vespers of a Solemn Office. 
This is the general rule, though there are oc- 
casional exceptions. It varies with the days, and 
is usually a verse of Scripture, in most cases from 
the Psalms, and has no Psalm belonging to it. 
Sometimes it is an adaptation of a passage of 
Scripture, or an original composition. Thus, on 
Easter Day, we have — 

Ant. in ch. Hallel. Then believed they His words, 
and sang praise unto Him." Hallel. 

Antiphona ad Crucem. — An Antiphon said in 
the Ambrosian rite at the beginning of Lauds 
after the Benedictus. It is said on Sundays 
(except in Lent), on Festivals which have the 
"Solemn Office" (except they fall on Satur- 
day), in " Solemnities of the Lord " (even 
though they fliU on Saturday), and during 
Octaves. It is usually a verse from Scripture, 
but sometimes an original composition with very 
much of the character of a Greek Tpundptov, au(i 
always ends with Kyr. Kyr. Kyr. (i. e. Kyrie 
eleison, sometimes written K. K. K.). It is said 
five times, the Antiphon itself is repeated three 
times, then follows Gloria Patri, then the Anti- 
phon again, then Sicut erat, and then the Anti- 
phon once more. On Sundays in Advent, except 
the 6th, on Christmas Day, the Circumcision, 
and the Epiphany, it is said seven times, i. e., is 
repeated five times before the Gloria Patri. 

« In the Mozarabic rite the Host after consecration is 
divided, as is well known, into nine parts, which are 
arranged on the paten in a prescribed order, which it 
would be foreign to our present purpose to describe. In 
the Eastern Church the Host is broken into four parts by 
tlie Piicst, who recites an unvarying form of words. But 
this is not an Antiphon, and therefore beyond our pro- 

y Festivals are divided in the Ambrosian rite into i'o- 
Icmnities of the Lord (Solemnitates Domini), and those 
which have the office solemn (oflicinm solemne), or not 
solemn (oflicium non solenme). 

IJ 2 



Thus on Ascension Day — 

Ant. ad cruceni quinquies. " Ye men of Galilee, why 
stand ye gazing up into heaven ? As ye have seen Him 
go into heaven, so shall He come." Hallel. Kyr. Kyr. Kyr. 

" Ye men," &c. 

" Ye men," &c. 

" Glory be," &c. 

" Ye men," &c. 

" As it was," &c. 

" Ye men," &c. 

An Antiphona ad crucem, apparently recited 
once only, often occurs in the Antiphonary of 
Gregory the Great, after the Antiphons of Ves- 
pers or Lauds. The early writers on the offices 
of the Koman Church make no mention of it, so 
that it was probably peculiar to the monastic 
rites, which more readily admitted additions of 
this nature. It has been conjectured that the 
monastic orders derived it from the Church of 

Antiphona ad Accedentes or ad Accedendum. — 
An Antiphon in the Mozarabic Mass, sung after 
the Benediction, and before the Communion of 
the Priest. They do not often change. There 
js one which is said from the Vigil of Pentecost 
to the first day of Lent inclusive, one which is 
said from Easter Eve to the Vigil of Pentecost. 
In Lent they vary with the Sunday, that for 
the first Sunday being said on weekdays up to 
Thursday before Easter exclusive. ' The first of 
these whiclj is said during the greater part of 
the year, is as follows : — 

" taste and see how gracious the Lord is." Allel. 
AUel. AUel. 

V. " 1 will always give thanks unto the Lord. His 
praise shall ever be in my mouth." P. Allel. Allel. Allel. 

V. " The Lord delivereth the souls of His servants ; 
and all they that put their trust in Him shall not be des- 
titute." P. Allel. Allel. Allel. 

V. "Glory and honour be to the Father, aiid to the 
Sou, and to the Holy Ghost, world without end." Amen. 
P. Allel. AUel. AUeL 

In the Apostolical Constitutions, Ps. 24 (Beue- 
dicam), from which this Antiphon is taken, is 
appointed to be said during the Communion, as 
it is in the Armenian Liturgy during the dis- 
tribution of the Azymes.^ (During the com- 
munion of the people another Canticle is sung.) 
S. Ambrose alluded to the practice in the words 
" Unde et Ecclesia videns tantam Gratiam, horta- 
tur, Gustate et videte." 

The second Antiphon, that used between Easter 
and Pentecost, has reference to the Kesurrection. 
It is adapted from the words of the Gospel nar- 
rative, and we need not quote it. 

That for Thursday before Easter is much 
longer, and is broken into many more antiphonal 
clauses, and is an abstract of the Gospel narra- 
tive of the institution of the Sacrament of the 
Lord's Supper. Those in use during Lent are of 
precisely the oi-dinary form. 

There is nothing in the other Western Liturgies 
which exactly corresponds to this Antiphon. 
The Roman and Sarum Communio, and the Am- 
brosian Transitorium, which are the analogous 
parts of those offices, are said after the Recep- 
tion. [H. J. H.] 

ANTIPHONARrUM (also Antiphonale, An- 
tiphonarius, Antiphonarius liber), an office book 
of the Latin Church, containing the Antiphons 

' These corresiwnd to the French ;jain bini. [Kulogiae.] 


and other portions of the Service, which were 
sung antiphonally. 

The name Antiphonarium is applied to such 
books by John the Deacon, in his Life of Gregory 
the Great, who says that that Pontiff" was the 
author of Antiphonaries. The complete collec- 
tion, however, of Antiphons and Responsories, 
known by the general name of Antipihonariurry 
or Eesponsorium, was usually divided into three , 
parts in the Roman Church. i 

Amalarius writes : * "It is to be observed 
that the volume which we call Antiphonarium 
has three names ^ (tria habet nomina) among 
the Romans. That part which we term Gradual 
(Gradale) they term Cantatory (Cantatorium); 
which is still, according to their old custom, in 
some churches bound in a separate volume. The 
following part they divide under two headings 
(in duobus nominibus). The part which contain.^ 
the Responsories is called the Eesponsorial (Re^ 
sponsoriale) ; and the part which contains the 
Antiphons is called the Antiphonary (Antiphon- 

As to the name Cantatorium, we find in the 
" Ordo Romanus I." (§ 10) the direction :— * 
" After he [the Subdeacon] has finished reading 
[the epistle], the singer (Cantor), with the Canta- 
tory, mounts, <= and sings the Response." And 
Amalarius {De Eccl. Off. iii. IG) says: "The 
singer holds the Tablets (Tabulas)," where the 
word Tabulas is thought to mean the same thing 
as Cantatorium, i. e. the book itself. 

The derivation of these words is obvious. The 
book was called Cantatorium from its containing ; 
the parts of the Service which were sung : Oradale, ' 
Gradalis, or Graduale (Gradual or Graile), from j 
their being sung at the steps of the am bo or j 
pulpit ; and Tabulae in all probability from the i 
plates in which the book was contained, and \ 
which appear to have been of bone, or perhaps I 
horn. Amalarius, in the context of the passage i 
quoted, says that the tabulae which the Cantor \ 
holds are usually made of bone (solent fieri de | 
osse). i 

By whatever name this book was known, il | 
contained those portions of the office of the Mass 1 
which were sung antiphonally, and was the first ■ 
of the three divisions above alluded to. The 
second part, the Re sponsoriale, contained the : 
Responsories after the lessons at Nocturus ; and 
the third part, the Antiphonarium, the Antiphons | 
for the Nocturns and diurnal offices. | 

The three parts together make up what is ; 
generally understood by the Antiphonale or An- 
tiphonarium. The book is also sometimes called \ 
the Official Book, or tlie Office Book (Liber ofii- ' 
cialis. A MS. of the Monastery of St. Gall, of! 
part of an Antiphonary and Responsorial of the • 
usual type, is headed " Incipit officialis liber "). 
It seems also to have been occasionally called the -' 
Capitular Book (Capitulare). In a MS. of St. ; 
Gall, of apparently about the beginning of the ' 
llth century, we find the direction, " Respon- : 
soria et Antiphonae sicut in Capitulari habetur ;" 
and though, according to the aid Roman use of 
words, '■^Capitulare" means the Book of Epistles 
and Gospels, the context in this place necessitates i 

« De ord. Antiph., Prologus. 
b I.e. consists of three parts, as the context shows. 
■= i.e. the Ambo or its steps, for the custom would seem 
3 have varied. 


the meaning of Antiphonary. The word occurs, 
moreover, throughout the MS. in the same 

Antiphonaries are sometimes found in old 
MSS. divided into two parts — one beginning 
with Advent, and ending with Wednesday or 
some later day (for the practice is not uniform) 
in the Holy Week, and the other comprising 
the rest of the year. Sometimes, again, they 
were divided into two parts, containing respect- 
ively the services for the daily and the nocturnal 
offices. Among the books of the Monastery of 
Pisa (Muratori, Ann. Ital. iv.) we meet with 
" Antiphonnrios octo, quinque diurnales, tres noc- 
turnales," and in an old inventory of the. church 
of Tarbes " Antiphonariiim de die " and " Anti- 
phonarium de node are mentioned. We have 
thus to distinguish between — 

(1.) The Antiphonarium (properly so called), 
which contained the Antiphons for the Nocturns 
and daily office. 

(2.) The Liber Responsorialis ct Antiphona- 
rius, frequently, and in the Roman Church 
usually, called for brevity Antiphonarium, which 
comprised the contents of the last-mentioned 
hook, together with the Responsories, originally 
divided into two distinct parts, but afterwards 
united into one, and arranged in order of 

(3.) The Antiphonarium, otherwise called Gra- 
dmle, Gradale, or Gradalis, and which contains 
those pqrtions of the missal which are sung anti- 
phonally. This is what is called by some Canta- 

Those which are most frequently met with are 
of classes 2 and 3, 

2. As to the origin of Antiphonaries, — St. 
Gregory the Great is, as we have stated, usually 
considered to have been the author of Antipho- 
naries. It is, however, maintained by some,'' and 
with much reason, that as the use of Antiphons 
and Responsories in the Roman Church was older 
than the time of Gregory, it is likely that books 
of Antiphons and Responsories existed likewise 
previously, and that that Pontiff merely revised 
and rearranged the Antiphonal and Responsorial 
books he found in use, much in the same manner 
as he recast the old Sacranwntary of Gelasius 
into what is now universally known as the Gre- 
gorian Sacramentary. 

It has been also questioned by some whether 
Gregory, the reputed author of Antiphonaries, 
may not be Pope Gregory II. A.D. 715. But as 
the title of the Great was not ascribed to Gregory 
I. till long after his death, ^ the argument founded 
on the absence of that title, which is much relied 
on, does not seem of great force. 

The Roman Antiphonary, substantially, we 
may suppose, as Gregory compiled it, was sent 
by Pope Adrian I. (a.d. 772-795) to Charle- 
magne. The received story is that the Pope 
sent two Antiphonaries to the Emperor by two 
singers (Cantores) of the Roman Church.^ Of 
!these, one fell ill on his journey, and was received 
at the Monastery of St. Gall, to which monastery 



d As by Thomasius, Opera, iv. p. xxxiv. 

» In the writings of Bede, Gregory of Tours, &c. &c., 
he is called B. Grrgorius, or Gregorius Papa, or Gre- 
goritis EccUsiae Doctor, but not Gregorius Magnus. 

f It was after this, according to Thomasius (h'p. i. ad 
Schcnk), that the Antiphonary was divided into the luuls 
above named. 

he left an Antiphonary. The other book reached 
its destination, and was deposited at Metz. This 
Antiphonary was held in high estimation, as we 
learn from St. Bernard, who says that the early 
Cistercians, who could find nothing more authen- 
tic, sent to Metz to transcribe the Antiphonary, 
which was reputed to be Gregorian, for their 
use. It is also said that the clergy of Metz 
excelled the rest of the Gallic clergy in the 
Roman Church song (Romana Cantilena) as much 
as the Roman clergy excelled them. 

A Roman Antiphonary was also sent by Pope 
Gregory IV. (a.d. 827-844) to the then Abbat of 
Corbie, whicli was known as the Corbie Anti- 
phonary ; and as this often varies from that of 
Metz, it is inferred (as is probable) that cei-tain 
changes and variations between different copies 
had by that time crept into the Antiphonary as 
compiled by Gregory, 

After the Gregorian Antiphonary was intro- 
duced into France, it soon underwent many addi- 
tions and modifications. 

Walafrid Strabo, who lived in the 9th century, 
says that the Church of Gaul, which possessed 
both learned men and ample materials for the 
divine offices of its own, intermingled some of 
these with the Roman offices. Hence a great 
variety in the usages of the dift'ereut French 
churches, on which we need not touch. 

3. As examples of the contents of these books, 
we will give a sketch of two. 

(1.) The Antiphonary for the Mass, or Gra- 
dual, attributed to St. Gregory. This is headed 
" In Dei nomine incipit Antiphonarius ordinatus 
a St. Gregorio per circulum anni." 

This title is followed in the St. Gall MS. by 
the well-known lines — 

"Gregorius Praesul meritis et nomine dignns, 
Unde genus ducit Summum conscendit Honorem," etc. 
The book contains the various Antiphons sung 
at the Mass for the course of the ecclesiastical 
year, divided into two parts ; that for the Sun- 
days and moveable feasts, and that for the Saints' 
days. The first part, corresponding to the Tem- 
porale of the Missals, has no special heading. It 
begins with a rule for finding Advent (that it 
must not begin before V. Kal. Dec, or aft^r 
III. Non, Dec), and then proceeds with the 
Sundays and Festivals in their course, beginning 
with the first Sunday in Advent (Dom. 1™» de 
Adventu Domini), giving for each day the Station, 
the Antiphona ad Introitum, with the tone for 
the Psalm ; the Eesponsorium Gradale, the Trac' 
tus, when it occurs ; the Antiphona ad Offerenda, 
and the Antiphona ad Conimunionem,e each with 
its verstis ad repetendum, and the last with its 
psalm also. 

In the arrangement of the year, there is little 
to be noticed. The Sundays during the summer 
are counted from the Octave of Pentecost, and 
are called Dominica prima post Octavos Fente- 
costas ; and so on until the 5th, which is called in 
some MSS. Dominica prima post Natale Aposto- 
lomm}^ the numbering from the Octave of Pente- 
cost being likewise continued till Advent. After 
six of these Sundays post-Natale, &c., comes 

e These are now called respectively the Gradual (Gra- 
dualc, or Gradale), the Offertory (Offertorium;, and the 
Camnamion (Communio), and the last two are shortened 
into a single verse. 

h i.e. SS. I'etcr and I'iuil. 



Dominica prirrui 2Mst St. Laurentii,' and so on for 
six Sundays more, when we come to Dominica 
prima post S. Angeli,^ of which last set of Sun- 
days seven are provided. Trinity Sunday does 
not appear, but the last Sunday before Advent is 
called " de SS. Trinitate, [«/.] Dmn. xxiv. post 
Octav.-Pentec. ; and the Antiphons are those now 
used in the Roman Church on Trinity Sunday, 
i.e., the Octave of Pentecost. The Festival of the 
Circumcision does not appear, the day being called 
Oct. Domini. There is also a second office pro- 
vided for the same day, according to an old prac- 
tice, called variously In Natal. Sanctae Mariae 
t)r De Sancta Maria in Octava D"', or Ad hono- 
rem Sanctae Mariae.'" 

The offices for Good Friday " ad crucem ado- 
randam," and the Reproaches (called here simply 
Ad crucem Antiphond) and that for baptism on 
Easter Eve, as also Various Litanies and other 
occasional additions to the usual office, are found 
in their proper places. 

The second part is headed " De natalitiis 
Sanctorum," and corresponds with the Sanctorale 
of later books. It begins with the festival of St. 
Lucy [Dec. 13], and ends with that of St. Andrew 
[Nov. 30]. This is followed in the St. Gall MS. 
by offices for St. Nicholas, the Octave of St. 
Andrew, St. Damasus [Dec. 11], and the Vigil of 
St. Thomas, and one for the Festival of St. Thomas, 
which differs from that previously given. There 
are also a variety of occasional and votive offices. 

The Festival of All Saints is found in some 
MSS. There is one Festival of the Chair of St. 
Peter in one of the St. Gall copies on Jan. 18,° 
and one in three MSS. on Feb. 22.° There is no 
addition in either ease of the words Romae or 
Antiochiae, and both are not, it seems, found in 
the same MS. 

As a specimen of the arrangement, take the 
first Mass for Christmas Day, that in media nocte 
or in gain cantu. 

"VIII. Kalendas Jamiarii 

Nativltas Domini nostri Jesu Cbristj;; 

Ad Sauctam Mariam. 

Antiphona ad Introitum. ■ 

Doniinus dixit ad me, Filius mens es tu.iEgo Uodie 
geuui te. [Dominus dixit.] '. : 

Ton. ii. oia, euonae. ' ' 
Ps.1. Quare fremuerunt gentes? et populi meditati 

suntinania? [Dominus dixit] [Gloria^' Dominus dixit] 
V' ad repetendum. Postula a me, ef dabo tibi gentes 

haereditatem tiiam, et possessionem tuam terminos terrae. 

[Dominus dixit.]" 

Then follow successively the Eesponsorium 
gradale, the Antiphona ad offerenda, and the 
Antiphona ad Communionem, each with its 
versus, and the last with its psalm and versus ad 
repetendum. All these Antiphons are repeated 
in the manner whicli has been explained in the 
article on Antiphons ; and as they are of the 

' i.e. Aug. 10. 

^ i.e. Michaelmas, as we should say. 

m This has been put forward as an argument for the 
Gregorian authorship of this Antiphonary, as it is said 
that St. Gregory was in the habit of celebrating two 
masses on this day, the second of which was " de Sancta 

" This corresponds with the present festival of the 
Chair of St. Peter at Rtyme. 

» This corresponds with the present festival of the 
Chair of St. Peter at Antivrh. 


ordinary form, it does not seem necessary to set 
them out at length here. 

(2.) As an example of an Antiphonary for the, 
canonical hours, we will take the Antiphonary of 
the Vatican Basilica. It is a MS. with musical 
notation differing from that adopted later. It 
represents the use of the Roman Church in the 
12th century, and may be considered as embody- 
ing the substance of the Gregorian Antiphonary, 
together with some later additions. It is headed 
— " In nomine Domini Jesu Christi incipit Re- 
sponsoriale et Antiphonarium Romanae Ecclesiae 
de circulo anni juxta veterem usum Canonicorum 
Basilicae Vaticanae St. Petri." It begins with a 
calendai;, with the usual couplets of hexameters 
at the head of each month, and then, without 
any further title, proceeds with the Antiphons 
at the first Vespers of the first Sunday in Ad- 
vent, and thence onwards throughout the course 
of the year, giving the Antiphons at Nocturns 
and all the hours; and the Responsories after 
the lessons at Nocturns. These Antiphons and 
Responsories are so nearly the same as those in 
the present Roman Breviary that it is unneces- 
sary to quote more than the following specimen 
of the manner in which they are set out : — 

" Dominica i. de Adventu Domini. 

Statio ad Sanctam Mariam Majorem ad Praesepe. 

Istud Invitatorlum cantamus eo die ad Matutiiiuni 
usque in Vigil. Natal. Domini, exceptis Festivitatibus 

Kegem Tenturum Dominum, venite adoremus. Venite. 
In i. Nocturno. 

Ant. Missus est Gabriel Angelus ad Mariam Virginem 
desponsatam Joseph. I'sal. Beatiis vir. Quare fremu- 
erunt. Domine quid. Domine ne in. 

Ant. Ave Maria, gratia plena, benedicta tu inter muli- 
eres. Psal. Domine Deus meus.i Domine Dominus 
noster. Confitebor. In Domino confido. 

Ant. Ne tinieas Maria, invenisti gratiam apud Domi- 
num; ecce concipies et piuies Filium. AUeluja. Psal. 
Salvum me fac. Usquequo. Dixit insipiens. Domiue 

V. Ostende nobis Domine misericordiam Tuam. 

H. Et salutare Tuum da nobis." 

Then follows a long rubric, directing how the 
Responsories should be sung, and then the three 
well-known Responsories : — 

(1) Aspiciens a longe, &c. 

(2) Aspiciebam in visu noctis, &c. 

(3) Missus est Gabriel, &c. 

The lessons are not indicated ; but the Re- 
sponsories are usually taken from the book which 
is being read in its course. Thus, on the Octave 
of Pentecost the Books of the Kings p were 
begun ; and we have the rubric, " Historia 
Regum cantatur usque ad Kalendas Augusti," 
followed by a series of Responsories taken or 
adapted from those books for use during that 

The Antiphons, &c., for ordinary week days 
(Feriae) are given after the Octave of the Epi- 
phany. On days on which there are nine lessons, 
nine Responsories are given. According to the 
present Roman custom, the ninth is replaced by 
Te Deuni on those days on which it is said. 

There is also an Antiphonary of this description 

p Including what we call the Books of Samuel. 

1 The older Roman custom was to sing in the Octave 
of Pentecost and during the following week Respcjnsories 
from the Psalms (de Psalmista) after that from the Kings. 


attributed to St. Gregory, which exists at St. 
Gall. It is headed by an introduction in verse, 
which begins thus — 

" Hoc quoque Gregorius Patres de more secutus, 
Instauravit opus, auxit et in melius. 
His vigili Olerus mentem conamlne subdat 
Ordinibus, pascens hoc sua corda favo." 
(and so on for 14 lines.) 

The MS. bears the heading — "Incipiunt Re- 
sponsoria et Antiphonae per circulum anni." 
These are in the main identical with those in the 
Antiphonary just mentioned, but are arranged 
with reference to the monastic distribution of 
psalms and lessons. 

Towards the end of the Antiphonary is a large 
number of Antiphons, given for the Benedicite, 
the Benedictus, and the Magnificat respectively. 

In a portion of an Antiphonary (" ex vetus- 
tissimo codice MS. raembranaceo Palatino signato 
num. 487 in Bibliotheca Vaticana, in quo conti- 
neutur vetustiores, germanioresque libelli Ordinis 
Romani "), containing the service for Easter 
week, one or more of the Antiphons to the 
psalms for each day is given in Greek, but 
written in Roman characters, the others remain- 
ing in Latin. Thus at Vespers on Easter Tuesday, 
the Antiphon to Ps. cxii. is thus given — 

" Alleluja. Piosechete laos mu to nomo mu : clinate to 
us liymon is ta rhimata tu stoniatos mu. 

V. Anixo en paiabolaes to stoma mu : phthenxomae 
pioblemata aparches. " ■■ 

Those to the other psalms at the same Vespers 
are in Latin. 

This may suffice to explain the general nature 
of Antiphonaries. The consideration of the many 
points of interest which their details present is 
beyond the scope of this article. [H. J. H.] 

ANTISTES.— This title appears to have 
been common to bishops and presbyters in the 
Early Church. As the name " sacerdos " is com- 
mon to both estates in respect of the offices of 
divine service which were performed by both, 
so in respect of the government of the Church 
in which they were associated, we find them 
designated alike, sometimes as " Presbyters " as 
marking their age and dignity — sometimes in 
respect of their " cure " or charge — as " antis- 
tites," Trpoeo-TtuTcj, praepositi. Thus in the first 
canon of the Council of Antioch, a.d. 341, the 
bishop and presbyter are both expressly classed 
among the irpoiaTwTes, and the corresponding 
title of "Antistites" is evidently extended to 
the second order of the ministry by St. Augus- 
tine QSenn. 351 de Foenitentid), as follows: " Ve- 
niat (peccator) ad antistites, per quos illi in 
ecclesia claves ministrantur, et . . . a praepo- 
sitis sacramentorum accipiat satisfactionis suae 
modum." Here it is plain that "antistites in 
ecclesia " are not the bishop alone, but the bishop 
and the presbyters. This usage of the word 
agrees with that of Archisynagogus in the 
Jewish synagogue, and may have been suggested 
by it. (Thorndike, Priinitive Government of 
Churches, voL i. p. 34.) [D. B.] 

ANTONICUS, saint, commemorated April 19 
{Mart. Bcdac). [C] 

' npoaexfre Aao? ftov Tip voixto /nou ' <cAt'i/aT€ to o8s 
v^lav eU TO, piiftara to? crTOjitaTos ixov. 

avoi^u) iv irapa^oAats to (TTOjaa /xov, 00tyfo,uat irpo- 
^AiijuaTO air' apxfi';. 



ANTONINA, martyr, commemorated June 
10 (Cal. Byzant., Neale). [C] 

ANTONINUS. (1) Abbat, Jan. 17 {M. 

(2) Martyr at Nicomedia, May 4 {M. Hieron.). 

(3) Martyr at Apamea, commemorated Sept. 2 
{Mart. Rom. Vet.) ; Sept. 3 (Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

ANTONIUS. (1) The hermit, Jan. 17 {Mart. 
Bedae, Cal. Byzant., Armen.). 

(2) Martyr at Rome, commemorated Aug. 22 
{Mart. Bom. Vet.). 

(3) In Piacenza, Sept. 30 {M. Hieron.). 

(4) In Caesarea, commemorated Nov. 13 
{Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

ANYSIA, martyr of Thessalonica, commemo- 
rated Dec. 30 {Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

APER, bishop, commemorated Sept. 15 {Mart, 
Bedae, Hieron.). [C] 

APOCREOS {'ATr6Kp€ws).—T:he Sunday in 
the Orthodox Greek Calendar, which corresponds 
to our Sexagesima Sunday, is called KvpiuKrj 
'Air6Kpews, because from it the abstinence from 
flesh begins, though the more strict observance of 
the Lent fast does not commence until the follow- 
ing Sunday. [Lent.] The whole of the preceding 
week is also named from this Sunday, and is a 
kind of carnival. (Daniel, Codex Liiurgicus, iv. 
214 ; Suicer, Thesaurus, s. v. 'A.-K6Kpews.) [C] 

APODOSIS CAtto'Soo-is).— When the com- 
memoration of a Festival is prolonged over several 
days, the last day of this period is called in the 
Greek Calendar the "Apodosis" of the Festival. 
For instance, on the Thursday before Pentecost 
is the Apodosis of the Ascension (aTroSi'Sorat ^ 
'Eoprrj Tijj ' hva\-r]\\/iQis). In this case, and in 
some others (for instance, the Exaltation of the 
Cross and the Transfiguration) the Apodosis 
coincides with the octave ; but this is not always 
the case. Sometimes the period is more than an 
octave ; Easter-day, for instance, has its Apodosis 
on the eve of the Ascension : but generally it is 
less ; the Nativity of the Theotokos (Sept. 8), for 
instance, has its Apodosis Sept. 12. (Neale's 
Eastern Church, Introd. 764 ; Daniel's Codex 
Liturgicus, iv. 230.) fC] 

APOLLINARIS. (1) Bishop, martyr at 
Ravenna, commemorated July 23 {Mart. Rom. 
Vet., Bedae). Antiphon for Natalis Sancti Apol- 
linaris in Liber Antiphon. p. 704. 

(2) Commem6rated Aug. 23 {Mart. Bedae). 

(3) " Avernus," Sept. 26 {M. Hieron.). 

(4) Bishop, Oct. 5 {lb. et Hieron.). [C] 

APOLLINARIUS, martyr, commemorated 
June 5 {Mart. Bedae). [C] 

APOLLONIA, virgin, martyr at Alexandria, 
commemorated Feb. 9 {Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

APOLLON, bishop and martyr, commemo- 
rated Feb. 10 {Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

APOLLONIUS. (1) Commemorated March 
19 {Mart. Bedae). 

(2) Of Egypt, commemorated April 5 {Mart. 
Rom. Vet); Dec. U {Gal. Byzant.). 

(3) Presbyter, of Alexandria, April 10 {Th. et 

(4) Senator, martyr at Rome, April 18 {!h. 
et Bcdac). 



' (5) Commemorated July 7 {Mart. Bcdac et 

(6) Gommcmorated Dec. 23 (if. Micron.). [C] 

■ APOSTASY (airo(7Ta<ria, apostasia, pracvari- 
catid) is of three kinds. 1. Apostasy a fide, or 
perfidiae ; 2. Apostasy a religione ; 3. Apostasy 
ah ordine suscepto. Of these the two last will 
be more appropriately considered under the 
articles MoNASTiciSM and Holy Orders. 

Apostasy a fide is the voluntary and com- 
plete abandonment of the Faith by those who 
have been made members of the Church by 
baptism. It is voluntary, and herein to be dis- 
tinguished from the sin of the lapsed [Lapsi], 
who fall away through compulsion or the fear 
of death ; it is also complete, and consequently a 
graver crime than heresy, which is the denial 
of one or more of the articles of the Faith, but 
not an entire rejection of the Faith itself. Lastly, 
Apostasy is an abandonment of the Faith, and 
therefore an offence which could only be com- 
mitted by members of the Church, by those 
who had in baptism taken the soldier's oath to 
■fight under her standard. For this reason apos- 
tates were accounted to be betrayers of their 
Master's cause, and deserters from the ranks 
in which they had sworn to serve. " Praeva- 
ricatores eos e.\istimamus, qui susceptam fidem 
et cognitionem Dei adeptam relinquunt ; aliud 
pollicitos, et aliud nunc agentes " (St. Hilar. 
Pict. in Fs. 118, vers. 119). 

It would also appear that catechumens were 
by some considered capable of committing the 
sin of apostasy (Cod. Theod., De AjMstat. xvi. 7, 2), 
although their guilt was not so great as that of 
the baptized apostate. 

Apostates a fide were of two classes : those 
who became Jews, and those who became Pagans. 
Of the former class there were those who entirely 
abandoned the Christian Faith, and who there- 
fore were properly called apostates ; and those 
who did not altogether reject it, but mingled to- 
gether Christianity and Judaism, and, as it were, 
made for themselves a new religion. Such were 
the Coelicolae, Cerinthiani, Ebionaei, Nazaraei, 
Elcesaei, and Samsaei. There were others, again, 
who were also called apostates, who, without 
embracing any distinctive Jewish doctrines, ob- 
served parts of the ceremonial law, such as rest- 
ing on the Sabbath, or who kept the Jewish 
feasts and fasts, or consulted Jews with the 
object of procuring charms for the cure of sick- 

And, secondly, there were those who volun- 
tarily abandoned Christianity and returned to 
heathenism. And persons, who without going 
to this length, accepted the office of flamen, or 
who attended sacrifices (except in the discharge 
of duty), or joined as actors, stage players, or 
charioteers in the heathen games, or who sold 
animals or incense for sacrifice, or manufactured 
idols and the like, were considered to have be- 
trayed their faith and to be guilty of a sin almost 
as gi-ave as that of apostasy, and to merit the 
name of apostates (Devoti. Inst. Can. iv. 3; 
Bingham, Antiq. xvi. 6, 4). 

The crime of apostasy was punished in the 
same way as heresy, though it ^yas a graver 
offence. There are also special enactments in re- 
ference to it, both in the qanons of Councils and 
in the constitutions of the Christian emperors. 


By the 11th canon of the Oecumenical Council 
of Nicaea (a.d. 325), those who had voluntarily 
denied Christ, if they gave proof of hearty re- 
pentance, were admitted for three years amongst 
the audientes. For the next seven years they 
were permitted to become substrati, and were 
obliged to leave the church at the same time a? 
the catechumens. After the expiration of this 
term they were allowed to join as consistentes in 
the prayers of the taithful ; but two years had 
still to elapse before they were permitted 
to make oblations, or to partake of the Holy 
Eucharist ; then they were said f\de7i> eiri rb 
TfAfiov (cf. Beveridge, Fund. Can. Annotationes 
in loc, and Bingham, Antiq. viii, 3 ; xviii. 1). 

These provisions were an amelioration of the 
earlier discipline of the Church, as we learn from 
St. Cyprian (a.d. 252). " Apostatae vero et de- 
sertores vel adversarii et hostes et Christi Eccle- 
siam dissipautes, nee, si occisi pro nomine foris 
fuerint, admitti secundum Apostolum possunt 
ad ecclesiae pacem, quando nee Spiritus nee Eccle- 
siae tenuerunt unitatem " (St. Cyprian, Ep. Iv. 
ad fin.). 

By the 63rd (or 64th) of the Canons of the 
Apostles, clerks who went into synagogues to 
pray were deposed and excommunicated ; and if 
laymen committed a like offence they were ex- 
communicated (on the interpretation of this canon 
with regard to the question whether or not clerks 
were to be excommunicated as well as deposed, 
see Beveridge, Fand. Can. Antwtationes, in loc). 
The same punishments were by the 65th (or 
66th) canon inflicted on clerks and laymen who 
fiisted on the Lord's Day, or upon any Sabbath 
Day except the Great Sabbath, Easter Eve ; and 
by the 69th (or 70th) canon, those were included 
who observed Jewish fasts or feasts, or (canon 
70 or 71) who gave oil for consumption in syna- 
gogues or heathen temples. 

By the 11th canon of the "Concilium Quini- 
sextum," or "in Trullo " (a.d. 691 or 692), the 
clergy and laity were forbidden — the former under 
pain of deposition, and the latter under pain of 
excommunication — to eat unleavened bread with 
Jews, or to have any friendly intercourse with 
them, or to consult them in sickness, or even to 
enter the baths in their company. 

In Africa, by the 35th canon of the 3rd 
Council of Carthage (a.d. 397) " Apostaticis con- 
versis vel reversis ad Dominum gratia vel re- 
conciliatio non negetur." 

In the East, by the 29th canon of the Council 
of Laodicea (a.d. 365, according to Beveridge) 
Christians were forbidden to Judaize (lovid'c^nv) 
under the penalty of anathema. By the 37th 
and following canons of the same Council they 
were forbidden to be present at Jewish or Pagan 

In Spain, the Council of f^liberis (a.d. 305 or 
306) contains several provisions for the suppres- 
sion and punishment of apostasy ; for example, 
by the first canon persons of full age, who after 
baptism went to a heathen temple and sacrificed 
to an idol were refused communion, even at the 
hour of death. By the 46th canon of the same 
Council apostates who have not been guilty of 
idolatry are admitted to communion after ten 
years' penance ; by the 49th the blessing of the 
fruits of the earth by Jews is forbidden, and 
those who allow that ceremony to be performed 
are cast out altogether from the Church. Upon 


this canon Hefele (C'o}iciliengeschichte, i. 148) ob- 
serves : " In Spain the Jews had become so nu- 
merous and powerful during the early ages of the 
Christian era that they believed they might ven- 
ture to attempt to convert the whole country. . . 
There is no doubt that at that period many 
Christians in Spain of high standing became con- 
verts to Judaism." 

Again, by the 59th canon of the 4th Council of 
Toledo (a.d. 633), apostate Jews who practise 
circumcision are punished ; but (canon 61) their 
children, if believers, are not excluded from suc- 
cession to their property. The next canon (62) 
forbids any intercourse between converted Jews 
rnd those who remain in their old faith ; and there 
are several other canons which show that apos- 
tasy to Judaism was still a prevalent crime in 
Spain ; as, for instance, the 64th canon, which 
ordains that the evidence of apostate Jews should 
not be received in a court of justice. 

In the French Councils there are several canons 
relating to apostasy. By the 22nd canon of the 1st 
Council of Aries (A.D. 314) it was forbidden to 
give communion to apostates who sought it in 
sicifness, until they were restored to health, and 
had exhibited proper evidence of their repent- 

By the 12th canon of the CouncU ofVennes 
(a.d. 465) the clergy were forbidden to attend 
Jewish banquets or to invite Jews to their own 
tables — a prohibition which was repeated in the 
40th canon of the Coiincil of Agde (a.d. 506), and 
extended to laymen by the 15th canon of the 
Council of Epone (a.d. 517), and also by the 13th 
canon of the 3rd Council of Orleans (a.d. 538), 
and the 15th canon of the 1st Council of Macon 
(A. D. 581). 

In the collections of the Imperial Law — the 
' Codex Theodosianus ' (which was promulgated 
A.D. 438) contains various provisions made by the 
Christian emperors for the punishment of apos- 
tasy. Constantine the Great ordained (a.d. 315) 
that apostates to Judaism should suffer " poenas 
meritas " (CW. Tlieod. xvi. 8, 1), which were de- 
fined by Constantius (a.d. 357) to be the confis- 
cation of the property of the offender {Cod. 
Theod. xvi. 8, 7). They were deprived by Valen- 
tinian the Younger (a.d. 383) of the jus testandi, 
but the action upsetting the will had to be 
brought within five years of the death of the 
testator, and by persons who had not in his 
lifetime known of his offence, and remained 
silent {Cod. Theod. xvi. 7, 3). Apostates to Pa- 
ganism were deprived by Theodosius the Great 
(a.d. 381) of thejMs testandi (Cod. Theod. xvi. 7, 
1); but another constitution ofthe same emperor, 
promulgated A.D. 383, made a distinction be- 
tween the baptized (Christiani ac f deles) and 
catechumens {Christiani et catechumeni), and the 
latter were permitted to execute testamentary 
'lispositions in favour of their sons and brothers 
german. By this constitution it was further pro- 
vided that apostates should not only be unable, 
with the foregoing exceptions, to bequeath pro- 
perty by will, but should also be incapable of 
receiving property under the will of another 
person (Cod. Tlieod. xvi. 7, 2). One day later 
Valentinian the Younger promulgated through- 
out the Western ]£mpire the constitution cited 
above, which applied to all classes of apostates 
alike {Cod. Theod. xvi. 7, 3). By a constil ution 
of the year of I fhs same emperor ordained tliat 



baptized apostates professing Paganism should be 
deprived of the right of bequeathing by will, of 
receiving property under a will, of bearing wit- 
ness in a court of justice, and of succeeding to an 
inheritance. They were also condemned " a con- 
sortio omnium segregari " (on the meaning of 
this expression see the note of Godefroi, in toe), 
and were dismissed from all posts of civil dignity. 
It was also declared that these penalties remained 
in force even though the apostate repented of 
his sin — " perditis, hoc est sanctum Baptismum 
profanantibus, nullo remedio poenitentiae (quae 
solet aliis criminibus prodesse) succurritur " {Cod. 
Theod. xvi. 7, 4-5). Arcadius (a.d. 396) extended 
the power which his father Theodosius the Great 
had given to apostate catechumens to make cer- 
tain testamentary dispositions, and ordained that 
all apostates, whether baj^tized or catechumens, 
should have the power to bequeath property to 
their father and mother, brother and sister, son 
and daughter, and grandson and granddaughter 
{Cod. Theod. xvi. 7, 6). The last constitution 
contained in the Codex Theodosianus under this 
title is a very severe enactment of Valentinian 
the Third (a.d. 426), abrogating the provisions 
ofthe above-cited constitution of Valentinian the 
Younger of the year 323, as tar as it related to 
apostates to Paganism. Under its provisions a 
person could be accused of apostasy at any time, 
although five years may have passed since his 
death, and it was immaterial whether the accuser 
had or had not been privy to the offence. Apo- 
states were also prohibited from disposing of 
their property by will and from alienating it by 
sale or gift {Cod. Theod. xvi. 7 ult.). The " Para- 
titlon " prefixed to this title in the edition of 
Godefroi (Leipsic, 1736, «Sjc.) gives a brief but 
very useful summary of its contents. 

The '• Codex Repetitae Praelectionis " promul- 
gated by Justinian in December A.D. 534 contains 
a title, " De Apostatis " (Lib. i. tit. 7), the first 
four Sections of which relate to this subject, and 
consist of extracts from the " Codex Theodosi- 

The first section re-enacts the constitution of 
Constantius (A.D. 357), by which the property of 
apostate Jews is confiscated {Cod. Theod. xvi. 8, 
7). The second section contains that part of the 
constitution of Valentinian the younger (a.d. 
383), which limits the time in which an accusa- 
tion of apostasy could be brought {Cod. Theod. 
xvi. 7, 3). In the third section the constitution 
of the same emperor (a.d. 391) is re-enactetl, 
which is contained in the Codex Theodosianus (xvi. 
7, 4), and is cited above. The fourth section re- 
peats the enactment of Valentinian the Third 
(a.d. 426), by which very severe penalties were 
inflicted on apostates {Cod. Theod. xvi. 7 ult. 
cited above). It appears, therefore, that the le- 
gislation of Justinian was not more tolerant than 
that of his predecessors in its treatment of this 

Although beyond the limits of this article, it 
may be noted that the title of the Decretals re- 
lating to apostasy is the 9th title of the fiftli 
book ("De Apostatis et Reiterantibus Baptisma "). 
The subject is also considered by St. Thomas 
Aquinas {Summa Theol. 2-2, quaestio 12). [I. B.] 

Al'OSTATE (aTroo-Tarr/s, apostata, praevari- 
cator). See Ai'OSTASr. 

APOSTLE {in IIo,jiolo>jj). The word 'Atto 



(TToXos is used in the Greek Calondaf to designate 
not only those who are called Apostles in the 
New Testament, hut the Seventy Disciples and 
others who were companions of the Apostles, 
strictly so called. It is applied, for instance, to 
Agabus, Rufus, Asyncritus, and others, supposed 
to be of the Seventy (April 8) ; and to Ananias 
of Damascus (Oct. 1). But the Apostles, in the 
naiTower sense, are distinguished from others to 
whom the title is applied by some epithet or 
description. For instance, Nov. 30 is described 
as the Festival tov ayioi/ ivdo^ov koX iTav€v(pi)- 
fjiov 'AttocttoKov 'AvSpeov tuv npaiTOK\-i)Tov, 
K.T.K. ; SS. Peter and Paul are described by 
the terms ■irpojTOKopv(paloi, in addition to the 
epithets applied to St. Andrew. It is noteworthy 
that the Constantinople " Typicum " e.xpressly 
forbids St. Peter to be called the Apostle o/\fiome, 


inasmuch as he was a teacher and eulightener ot 
the whole world ; and it hints that if any place 
is to be connected with his name, it should be 
Antioch (Daniel, Codex Lit. iv. 261). 

The term 'IffawoaToXos, the equal of the 
Apostles, is applied to 

1. Bishops supposed to be consecrated by 
Apostles ; as Abercius of Hierapolis (Oct. 22). 

2. Holy women who were companions of the 
Apostles : as Mary Magdalene, Junia, and Thekla. 

3. Princes who have aided the spread of the 
Faith ; as Constautine and Helena in the Ortho- 
dox Greek Church, and Vladimir in the Russian 

4. The first preachers, or " Apostles," of the 
Faith in any country; as Nina, in the Georgian 
Calendar (Neale, Eastern Church, Introd. p. 
7(31). [C] 

The Twelve Apostles on thrcnes, with Oar Lord in 

In representations of the Twelve, antecedent to j 
the year 1300 a.d. or thereabouts, only slight 
variations of treatment are to be observed, 
whether in Eastern or in Western monuments. 
It will be convenient to speak separately of these 
two classes. 

§ 2. Of the Eastern and Greek Churches. — 
Eastern monuments of an early date are very 
limited in number, owing to the destructive zeal, 
first of the Iconoclasts, and afterwards, in many 
eases, of the Turks. And among these the only 
representations of the Twelve Apostles known to 
the present writer are the following. In an early 
Syriac manuscript of the Gospels written at 
Zagba in Mesopotamia in the year 585 A.D., now 
in the Library of the Medici at Florence, is a 
picture of the Ascension, in which twelve (not 
eleven only) Apostles are represented, the Virgin 
Mary standing in the midst of them (see this 
figured under Angels). Of about the same date 
are some mosaics in the church of St. Sophia at 
Thessalonica, figured by Texier and Pullan in 
their ' Byzantine Architecture,' pi. xl., xli. Se- 
parate representations of many of the Apostles 
will be found among the illuminations of the 
Menologium Graecorum of the emperor Basil. 
These, though of considerably later date (10th or 
11th century), are all but identical in character 

with those above mentioned. Indeed the reli- 
gious art of the Greeke, as everything else per- 
taining to religion, has been stereotyped once for 
all from the close of the 8th century until now. 
" Greek art," says M. Didron, " is wholly inde- 
pendent of time and place. The painter of the 
Morea reproduces at this day art such as it was 
at Venice in the 10th century ; and those Vene- 
tians again reproduce the art of Mount Athos 
four or five centuries before. The costume of 
tlie personages represented is everywhere and 
at all times the same, not only in shape, but 
in colour and drawing, even to the very number 
and size of the folds of a dress." For in the eyes 
of the Greeks, at all times, religious art has been, 
what one of the Fathers of the Seventh General 
Council described it — not a matter to be regu- 
lated by the inventive power of painters, but by 
the prescriptions and tradition of the Church 
(Labbe's Concil. torn. vii. col. 831). 

§ 3. Early Monuments in the West. — Repre- 
sentations of the Apostles in monuments of early 
date, still existing in Italy and in France, are 
very numerous, and of very various kinds ; as, 
for exam jile, in mosaics, frescoes, marble sarco- 
phagi, and even in smaller objects of art, such 
as vessels of glass or ornaments of bronze. The 
principal works in which these are figured or de- 
.scribed are enumerated in § 12 below. 


§ 4. Costunw and Insignia. — lu all the early 
monuments above referred to, whether of the 
East or of the West, in which the Twelve are 
represented, almost exactly the same costume 
and insignia are attributed to them. Only St. 
Peter and St. Paul [see Paul and Pkter below] 
have any special attributes. The dress assigned 
to them is a long tunic reaching to the feet (with 
rare exceptions, which are confined, as far as the 
writer knows, to some of the Roman catacombs) 
and with a pallium {IfxaTiov) as an outer gar- 
ment. The insignia by which they are designated 
are a roll of a book (volumen) generally in the 
left hand, indicative of their office as Preachers 
of the Divine Word, or a chaplet (corona}, also 
held in the hand, significant either of the Mar- 
tyr's crown, or of what is but a slight variation 
of the same idea, the crown of Victory which 
the Lord bestows upon them who contend faith- 
fully unto the end. The scroll above spoken of 
is sometimes replaced by a codex or book of the 
more modern form (this latter is generally the 
distinctive mark of a bishop). In the mosaics of 
St. Sophia at Thessalouica above mentioned (§ 2) 
the roll is assigned to some, the codex to others, 
while others are represented without either. 
[For an example of the codex assigned to an 
apostle in Westei-n Art, see Ciampini, Vet. Mon. 
torn. ii. tab. xliii., a monument of the 9tli cen- 
tury.] They are occasionally represented as seated 
on ' thrones ' or chairs of state (see woodcut, p. 
106) in reference to their delegated authority 
(compai'e Luke xxii. 30) to rule in Christ's name 
over the Church. And in one mosaic, probably 
of the 5th century, in the church of St. John in 
Fonte at Ravenna, all the Twelve wear a kind of 
tiara or peaked cap, suggestive of the thought 
that the office of the Apostles in the Church 
corresponds to that of the High Priest under 
the Law. [See further under Tiara.] This 
monument is engraved by Ciampini, Vet. Hon. 
torn. i. tab. Ixx. 

§ 5. Names of the Apostles in early Monuments. 
— In early representations of the whole number of 
the Twelve the addition of names to each is 
of very exceptional occurrence. The only ex- 
ample known to the present writer is that of a 
mosaic referred to above in the church of St. 
John m Fonte at Ravenna. The arrangement 
there is a circular one, the figures being so dis- 
posed that St. Peter and St. Paul occupy the 
principal position, while the names, and figures, 
of the rest occur in the following order: An- 
dreas — Jacobus — Joannes — Philipus— Bar- 
TOLOMEus — Simon — Judas Thadeus— Jacobus 
MI — Mateus— Thomas. It will be observed that 
the number Twelve is obtained, after insert- 
ing the name of St. Paul, by omitting that of 
Mathias. This last omission is generally made 
in similar enumerations of the Twelve in later 

§ 6. Mode of representation. — In Western mo- 
numents of the first eight centuries (the period 
with which we are here principally concerned) 
tlie Twelve are almost invariably represented as 
standing, or as seated, on either side of our Lord, 
who is either figured in His human person, or 
(much more rarely) symbolically designated. In 
either case He is distinguished from the Apostles 
themselves by conventional designations of higher 
dignity. And in the case of the Apostles them- 
selves symboliciil designations sometimes take the 



jilace of any more direct representation, while in 
other cases, as on many of the sarcophagi, the 
two modes of representation are combined. 

§ 7. Direct representation — In many early mo- 
numents (see under Paul and Peter) there has 
been an evident attempt at portraiture in the 
case of the two " chief'est Apostles." Of the rest, 
some are represented as of youthful appearance, 
and beardless, others as bearded, and of more ad-' 
vanced years. But beyond this no special tradi- 
tionary rules of representation can be traced in 
early monuments. 

§ 8. Symbolical designation. — Of the symbols 
employed to represent the Twelve, the most 
common is that of twelve sheep, adopted (so it 
has been thought) with reference to those words 
of Our Lord, " Behold I send you forth as sheep 
in the midst of wolves." These twelve sheep are 
commonly represented six on either side of Our 
Lord (personally or symbolically represented), 
who is generally seen standing upon a rock, 
whence flow four streams. To such a repre- 
sentation Paulinus refers (in his Epist. xxxii. ad- 
dressed to his friend Severus, bishop of Milevis 
in Africa ; Migue, P. C. C. torn. Ixi. p. 366) in 
speaking of his own church at Nola in Campania. 
He is writing circ. 400 a.d. 

".Petram superstat Ipse petra Ecclesiae, 
De qua sonori quatuor fontes meant, 
Evangelistae, viva Christi flumina." 

The two groups, each of six sheep, are generally 
represented as issuing from two towers repre- 
senting Betnlehem and Jerusalem, the cities of the 
birth and the passion of Our Lord, the beginning 
and the end, as it were, of that Life upon earth, 
of which the Apostles were the chosen witnesses. 
Another symbol, founded also, in all probability 
on words of Our Lord (" Be ye . » . . harmless as 
doves," Watt. x. 16) is that of twelve doves. Pau- 
linus, bishop of Nola, in the letter already quoted, 
speaks of a mosaic picture on the roof of the apse 
of his church, on which was represented, inter 
alia, a Cross surrounded with a 'Corona,' a circle 
of light, to use his own words, and round about 
this Corona the figures of twelve doves, emblem- 
atic of the twelve Apostles. Beneath this picture 
was the following inscription, descriptive of its 
meaning : — 

" Pleno coruscat Tiinitas niysterio : 
Stat Christus agno ; vox Patris caelo tonat ; 
Et per colunibam Spiritus ,-anctus Quit, 
Cruoem corona lucido cingit globe, 
Cui coronae sunt corona Apostoli, 
Quorum figura est in columbarum chore." 

A representation " of the Twelve, nearly an- 
swering to this description, forms the frieze of an 
early sarcophagus preserved in the Museum at 
Marseilles, and figured below (after Millin, Voy- 
ages, etc. plate Ivi. 6). Yet other symbols are 

occasionally used in designation of Apostles, but 
these, as being less capable of definite inter])re- 
tation, are rather accompaniments of personal 

« A. crucifix with twelve doves upon the four portions 
of tlie cross ilsolf, in the apse of the church of Kt. Clcniput 
at Rome, is of the 13th century. So Didroii, in the Jnnales 
Archaeologiniies, torn. xxvi. p. 1 1. This cross is figured by 
.\ilcgranza, Spiegazionc, &c., torn. i. p. 118. 



representations of the Twelve, than substitutes 
for them. Such are palm trees, vines, and other 
trees, to which a mystical reference was given 
iu Christian art as well as in early Christian 
literature. St. Hilary of Poitou, commenting on 
Matt. xiii. (the parable of the ' Sinapis ' or Mus- 
tard Plant), sees in the seed committed to the 
ground, and then springing up therefrom, a type 
of Christ, and in the branches of the tree, put 
forth by the Power of Christ, and embracing the 
whole earth beneath their shade, a type of the 
Apostles, branches to which the Gentiles, like 
birds of the air, should fly from the world's 
troubling storms, and find rest. St. Augustine 
uses nearly similar language in reference to the 
same parable. {Sermo in Festo S. Laiirentii.~) 
And this traditional application aftbrds a pro- 


bable interpretation of the small bush-like trees'" 
which are seen associated iu some early frescoes 
with figures of Our Lord and the Apostles. The 
symbolism of the vine resulted naturally from 
the words addressed to His disciples by Our Lord 
(" I am the vme : ye are the branches," Joh. xv. 
5). The palm-tree, as the recognised symbol of 
victory and of triumph, was suggestive of the 
same thoughts as those indicated by the victor's 
chaplet (corona) which Apostles often bear in 
their hands, or have bestowed upon them by a 
hand from heaven. 

Yet one other symbol may be referred to, 
unique of its kind, adopted, so it has been inge- 
niously suggested,"^ by some poor man who could 
not by any other more elaborate means express the 
Christian faith and hope in which he rested. On 

the walls of the cemetery of St. Callixtus is an 
inscription, in rude characters, much such as 
that here given : — 


The central letters of the inscription are believed 
to represent the A and d, which frequently occur 
in early monuments as symbols of Our Lord ; 
while the twelve letters on either side signify 
the twelve Apostles, who in early monuments, 
and especially on sarcophagi, are frequently re- 
presented, six on either hand. 

§ 9. Later conventional designations of the 
different Apostles. — Christian art ' in the West 
for the last five centuries, or rather more, has 
assigned special attributes to each one of the 
Twelve, most of them having reference to late 
traditions concerning them, unknown to the early 
Church. These traditions, by their late date, 
lie beyond the range properly embraced by the 
present work. But for the sake of comparison 
and contrast with the older representations above 
described, it may be well very briefly to notice 
them. For fuller particulars, the reader should 
consult Didron's Manuel d'Iconographie (see be- 
low § 12) and Jameson's Sacred and Legendary 

§ 10. As Anthers of separate Articles of the 
Creed. — Probably the earliest of these later modes 
(after 1300 A.D.) of designating the several 
Apostles, is that of assigning to each (written on 
a scroll held in the hand) the particular article 
of the Creed of which each was, by tradition, the 
author. (For the tradition as to this authorship, 
see Durandi, Rationale, lib. iv. cap. xxv.) In the 
cathedral church of Albi (Didnm, Manuel d'Ico- 
nographie, p. 304) the Apostles are represented 
in this manner. 

§ 11. Distinguished by special Insignia. — As 
an example of yet another mode of designating 
the Apostles individually, we may refer (with 
M. Didron) to a series of enamels by Leonard 
Limousin in the chuixh of St. Peter at Chartres. 
The Twelve are there represented with the fol- 
lowing insignia : — St. Peter with the Keys ; St; 
Paul with a Sword ; ^ St. Andrew with a Cross, 
saltier-wise;e St. John with a Chalice ;'" St. James 
the Less with a Books and a Club -j^ St. James the 
Elder with a Pilgrim's Staff,'' a broad Hat •> with 
scallop-shells, and a Book;e St. Thomas with an 
Architect's Square;' St. Philip with a small 

b As, for example, in that of our Lord as the giver of 
the Divine Word, with two Apostles on either side, in the 
cemetery of St. Agnes at Rome. Aringhi, R. S. torn. ii. 
p. 329 ; figured also in Testiarium Christianum, pi. xii. 

c Lupi (Antonmaria), i3isse)ta«ione, &c. Faenza, 1785, 
4to. ; torn. i. p. 260. 

d As the instrument by which he was believed to have 
suffered martyrdom : or (so Durandus, Rat. i. cap. iii. 16) 
as a soldier of Christ, armed (so he probably would suggest) 
with " the sword of the Spirit." 

e " En sautoir;" the " crux decussata," shaped like an 
X, and generally known as St. Andrew's Cross. In Greek 
Martyrologies (and in one or two Western examples) 
St. Andrew is depicted as crucified on a cross of the ordi- 
nary form. See the Menologium Graecorum, vol. i. p. 221 
(Nov. 30). 

t Originally perhaps with reference to the words (Matt. 
XX. 23), " Ye shall indeed drink of my cup." For the later 
legendary stories of a poisoned chalice given to him, see 
Jameson, S. and L. Art, vol i. p. 159. 

K Equivalent to the scroll (see $ 4) of primitive 
Christian art. 

h All the insignia here mentioned are assigned to St. 
James (the St. lago of Spanish legend), as the patron of 
pilgrims. The pilgrimage to Compostella, the reputed 
place of St. lago's burial, was a favourite object of medi- 
aeval devotion. 

i In allusion to a beautiful legendary story (Jameson, 
.S'. and L. A. p. 246), in respect of which St. Thomas Is 
recognised as the patron of architects and builders. 



Cross, the staff of which is knotted like a reed ;•' 
St. Matthew with a Pike (or Spear);-" St. Ma- 
thias with an Axe;™ St. Bartholomew with a 
Book° and a Knife ;" St. Simon with a Saw." 

§ 12. Authorities referred to. — In the follow- 
ing section are enumerated the principal works 
in which the monuments above referred to are 
figured or described. For the Syriac MS. re- 
ferred to in § 2, see the Bibliotheca Medicea of 
S. E. Assemanus, Florentiae, fol. 1742. For the 
Greek Monuments, see Texier and Pullan, Byzan- 
tine-Architecture, fol. London, 1864. The Meno- 
logium Graecoi-um referred to in § 2 was published 
at Urbino, 3 vols. fol. 1727. And on the subject 
of the later Greek Religious Art generally, see Di- 
dron, Manuel d'Iconographie Chre'tienne, Grecque, 
et Latine, Paris, 1845. (This is a French trans- 
lation of the 'Y-pfx-qveia rfjs ((iiypa(piKrjS, or 
'Painter's Guide' of Penselinos, a monk of Mount 
Athos in the 11th century, and the recognised 
authority in the school of Greek Art which has 
its centre in the same " holy mountain " to this 
day. It is enriched with very valuable notes by 
the editor. For what relates to the Apostles, 
see p. 299 sqq.) For early monuments at Piome 
and Ravenna — Ciampini, Vetera Monumenta, 
Romae, fol. 1699 ; and for those of the Roman 
Catacombs more particularly — Aringhi, Boma 
Subterrajiea, 2 vols. fol. Romae, 1651, or Bottari, 
Sculture e Fitture sagre, etc., Romae, fol. 1737 ; 
Perret, Catacombes de Borne, 6 vols. fol. Paris, 
1851 (not always to be depended on in matters 
of detail); Alemannus, rfe Barietinis Lateranen- 
sibus, Romae, 4° 1625 ; and for ancient ornaments 
in Glass, chiefly from the Roman Catacombs, 
Garrucci, Vetri ornati, etc. Roma, 1864. For 
monuments at Verona, Maffei, Verona Illustrata, 
fol. 1732 ; and at Milan, AUegranza (Giuseppe), 
Spiegazione e Biflessioni, etc., Milano, 4" 1757. 
For early sarcophagi at Aries, Marseilles, Aix, 
and other towns in France, the chief authority 
is Millin, Voyages dans les De'partemens du Midi 
de la France, 8° and 4° Paris, 1807-1811. One 
monument of special interest, that of the Sancta 
Pudentiana at Rome (the figures of the Twelve, 
ten only of which now remain, are believed with 
good reason to be of the 4th century, though 
the upper part of the mosaic is of the 8th) may 
best be studied in the coloured drawing and 
description given by Labarte, Histoire des Arts 
Industriels, etc., vol. iv. p. 166 sqq., and the 
Album of Flates, vol. ii. pi. cxxi. This mosaic 
is also represented in Gaily Knight, Ecclesias- 
tical Architecture of Italy (London, 1842), vol. i. 
pi. sxiii. [W. B. M.] 


— I. Festivals. — 1. In the Afostolical Consti- 
tutions (viii. 33, § 3) we find abstinence from 
labour enjoined on certain " days of the Apostles" 
(tos fi/xepas raiv qlttocttoKijiv apyetTaxrai'), but 

k " Petite croix de roseaux." So Didron. A leferonce 
to Jameson's S. and L. A. p. 242, and to the drawing tliei e 
given, suggests tbe e.^planation abuve given. The shape 
described is that of a traveller's staff; and tlie emblem 
marks the apostle as a preacher of Christ trucilied to 
distant nations. 

"" See note <■, preceding page. 

» See note S, preceding page. 

o According to Western tradition he was sawn asMider ; 
but in the Greek representation of his martyrdom ho 
is affixed to a cross exactly like that of our Saviour 
(Jameson, vol. i. p. 253). 

what these days were does not appear, though 
the injunction to abstain from labour betokens 
a great festival. 

2. As the services of Easter week, following 
the evangelic narrative of the events after the 
Resurrection, placed a commemoration of the 
solemn sending and consecration of the Apostles 
(St. John XK. 21-23) on the first Sunday after 
Easter, this day appears to have been sometimes 
called " the Sunday of the Apostles." This 
Sunday was one of the highest festivals in the 
Ethiopian Calendar (Alt, Christliche Cultus, ii. 
33, 184). 

3. In the West the commemoration of all the 
Apostles was anciently joined with that of the 
two great Apostles, St. Peter and St. Paul ; and 
this festival appears to have been, at the time of 
its first institution, the only festival in honour 
of the Apostles ; for we find in the Missae for 
that festival in the Leonine Sacramentary 
(Migne's Fatrol. vol. 55, p. 44) an " oratio super 
oblata," which runs, " Omnipotens sempiterne 
Deus, qui nos omnium apostolorum nierita sub 
U1UI tribuisti celebritate venerari." And this 
seems to have been the case also when the 
" Epistola ad Chromatium" quoted by Cas- 
siodorus (in Leonine Sacram. p. 44) was written ; 
for we there read that the Apostles were com- 
memorated on one day, " ut dies varii non 
videantur dividere quos una dignitas Apostolatus 
in coelesti gloria fecit esse sublimes." 

4. It was no doubt from this close connection 
with the Festival of SS. Peter and Paul (June 29) 
that the Festival of the Twelve Apostles CXvva^is 
Twv SciSeKa 'AiroffrSKwv} came to be celebrated in 
the orthodox Greek church on the morrow of 
that festival — June 30 — as it is to this day. 
This is a great festival, with abstinence from 
labour {'Apyia). 

5. In the Armenian calendar, the Satuiday of 
the sixth week after Pentecost is dedicated to the 
Twelve Holy Apostles, and their chiefs, Peter 
and Paul ; and the Tuesday in the fifth week 
after the elevation of the Cross is dedicated to 
Ananias of Damascus, Matthias, Barnabas, Philip, 
Stephen, Silas and Silvanus, and the Twelve 
Apostles. (Alt, Christliche Cultus, ii. 242, 256.) 

6. The Micrologus tells us (c. 55) that on 
May 1, "invenitur in Martyrologiis sive in 
Sacramentariis festivitas SS. Philippi et Jacob; 
et omnium Apostolorum." The existing Mar- 
tyrologies and Sacramentaries, however, men7 
tion no commemoration on May 1, beyond that 
of SS. Philip and James ; but the mention of a 
commemoration of all Apostles may have arisen 
from the " Deposition" of the bodies of SS. Philip 
and James in the "Basilica omnium Apostolo- 
rum." (Binterim's Denkwilrdigkeiten, v. i. 365 ; 
Wetzer and Welte's Kirchenlexicon, xii. 57.) 

7. The 15th of July is in the Roman calendar 
the Feast of the "Division of the Apostles," 
(Divisio SS. Apostolorum). This was probably 
intended to commemorate the traditional event 
related by Rufinus (//. E., i. 9), that the Apostles, 
before leaving Jerusalem to begin their work of 
preaching the Gospel to all nations, determined 
by lot the portions of the world which encli 
should evangelise. By others, however, the 
Feast is supposed to commemorate tlio " Divisio 
ossium Petri et Pauli." The legend to which 
this refers is as follows: — The remains of St. 
Peter and St. Paul were placed together after their 



martyrdom, aud when Pope Sylvester, at the 
consecration of the great church of St. Peter, 
desired to place the sacred remains of the patron 
saint in au altar, it was found impossible to dis- 
tinguish them from those of St. Paul ; but after 
fasting and prayer, a divine voice revealed that 
the larger bones were those of the Preacher, the 
smaller of the Fisherman ; and they were con- 
sequentlv placed in the churches of St. Peter 
and St. Paul respectively. (Ciampini, de Sacris 
Aedificiis, p. 53, quoting Beleth, Explicat. Divin. 
Offic. 0. 138.) 

II. Fasts. — 1. As early as the Apostolical 
Constitutions (v. 20, § 7) we find the week fol- 
lowing the octave of Pentecost marked as a fast. 
The intention of this probably was, as no fast 
was allowable in the joyful season between Pasch 
and Pentecost, that men should endeavour to 
3-ender themselves fit recipients of the gifts of 
the Holy Spirit by subsequent mortification. 
This fast was afterwards extended to the eve of 
the Festival of SS. Peter and Paul, and as it 
now filled the whole space between the " Apostle 
Sunday " and the great commemorations of the 
Apostles on June 29 and June 30, it came to be 
called the "Apostles' Fast," NrjCTeio tojc ayiwu 
'ATToaT&Kav. (Augusti, Handbuch der Christl. 
Archaologie, iii. 481.) 

2. There is a collect for a Fast in the mass 
already referred to in the Leonine Sacramentary. 
This, perhaps, indicates that an extraordinary 
fast, instituted in the time of St. Leo for the 
relief of Rome, or for some other reason, con- 
curred with the Festival of All Apostles. (Note 
in the Leonine Sacram. Migne's Patrol, vol. 55, 
p. 44.) 

III. Dedications. — A church {VlapTvpiov), de- 
dicated to the Twelve Apostles, second in 
splendour only to that of St. Sophia, was built 
at Constantinople by Constantine the Great, who 
intended it for the place of his own sepulture 
(Eusebius, Vita Constantini, lib. iv., cc. 58-60). 
He also dedicated at Capua, in honour of the 
Apostles, a church to which he gave the name of 
Constantinian (Liber Pontif., under ' Sylvester,' 
Muratori Scriptores, iii. 1). The ancient church 
at Rome dedicated to the Apostles, is said to have 
been begun by Pope Pelagius I. (555-560), and 
completed by his successor John III. (560-573). 
(Ciampini, de Sacris Aedif. p. 137.) [C] 

APOSTOLUS, the formal missive of the judge 
of a lower court, whereby a cause was trans- 
ferred to a higher court to which appeal had 
been made from him. See Justinian, Cod. vii. 
62, &c. &c., and under Appeals. [A. W. H.] 

A.D., Dionysius Exiguus, a Roman monk of great 
learning, at the request of Stephen, Bishop of 
Salona, made a collection of Greek canons, trans- 
lating them into Latin. At the head of this 
collection he placed 50 canons, with this title, 
" Incipiunt Regulae Ecclesiasticae sanctorum 
Apostolorum, prolatae per Clementem Ecclesiae 
Romanae Pontificem." At the same time, how- 
ever, Dionysius says in the preface to his work, 
" In principle itaque canones, qui dicuntur Apos- 
tolorum, de Graeco transtulimus, quihus quia 
plurimi consensum non praebuere facilem, hoc 
ipsum vestram noluimus ignorare sanctitatem, 
quamvis postea quaedam constituta pontificum 
ex ipsis canonibus assumpta esse videantur." 


These words obviously point to a difference of 
opinion prevailing in the Church, though it has 
been doubted by some whether the dissentients 
spoken of rejected the canons altogether, or 
merely denied that they were the work of the 
apostles. And with regard to the last clause, it 
is much disputed whether previous popes can be 
shown to have known and cited these canons.* 
Hefele denies that " Pontifices " means Popes, aud 
would understand it of bishops in their synodical 

The subsequent course taken by the Church of 
Rome in relation to these canons is not altogether 
clear. In the last decade of the 5th century 
Pope Gelasius published a decree De Libris non re- 
cipiendis, and in the text of this decree as it now 
stands in the Decretum Gratiani there appears, 
amongst other rejected works, ' Liber cauonum 
Apostolorum apocryphus.' But it is said that 
these words are not found in the most ancient 
MSS. of the deci-ee, and Hincmar of Rheims, in 
speaking of it, expressly says that Gelasius is 
silent as to the Apostolical Canons. Moreover, 
Dionysius, who was by birth a Scythian, does not 
seem to have come to Rome until after the death 
of Gelasius, and consequently his collection cannot 
have appeared at the time of the decree.<= 

Hefele therefore thinks that the words in ques- 
tion were for the first time inserted by Pope Hor- 
misdas (514-523), when he republished the decree 
' De Libris non recipiendis ' (^Conciliengeschichte, i. 
TIO)."* If so, the point is not very material. It 
is clear that Dionysius, in setting forth a later 
collection during the popedom of Hormisdas (of 
which the preface alone is now extant) left out 
these canons. He says : " Canones qui dicuntur 
Apostolorum et Sardicensis concilii atque Afri- 
canae provinciae quos non admisit universitas, ego 
quoque in hoc opere praetermisi, &c." * 

» Bishop Pearson contends that Leo, Innocent, and Ge- 
lasius himself, refer to them ( Vindic. fgnat., part i. cap. 
iv.) ; but this has been as strongly denied. Bickell thinks 
that Dionysius may have had in view expressions of 
Siricius (,Ep. ad Div. Episc, anno 386) and Innocent {Ep. 
ad Victvic, anno 404), which, however, he conceives him 
to have misunderstood (G'esch. des Kirchenrechts, p. 74). 
Von Drey seems to think the canons were not known at 
Rome till the version of Dionysius ; but Hefele observes 
that they might have been known In their Greek form. 
Dionysius in his preface says that he had been exhorted 
to the work of translation by his friend Laurentius, who 
was " confusione priscae translationis offensus." Does this 
point to an existing version of the canons, or is it to be 
understood of the other matters contained in his col- 
lection ? The latter seems most in accordance with the 
received theory. 

b See his ConcHiengeschichte, vol. i. p. 767. But unless 
it can be limited to Eastern bishops, this view would 
equally admit that the canons so quoted or relied en must 
have been known in the Western Church. 

<^ Dionysius says in his preface : " Nos qui eum (Ge- 
lasiuni) praesentia corporal! non vidimus." This in itself 
would not be conclusive as to the decree, though the only 
alternative would be to admit that the canons were known 
at Rome before Dionysius's translation. Bishop Pearson 
seeks to throw donbt on the decree ( Vindic. Ignat., part i. 
cap. iv.) ; but much of his reasoning is not inconsistent 
with the theory of Hefele. 

d So too, apparently, Bickell, vol. i. p. 74. 

^ Cited in Bxkell (i. 75), who also meutions that they 
were omitted from the Spanish collection of canons in the 
7th century, with these words: "Canones autem qui 
dicuntur Apostfilorum, scd quia eosdem nee sedcs apos- 
tolica recipit, nee SS. patres illis consensum praebuerunt. 


At all events it must be taken that the Church 
of Rome at the present day does not accept these 
canons as of apostolic authority. Though the 
citations made by Gratian under the head " De 
auctoritate et numero Canonum Apostolorum," 
are not very consistent v/ith each other, yet the 
latest canonists speak more distinctly. 

" Canoues illi non sunt opus genuinum aposto- 
lorum, nee ah omni naevo immunes ; merito tamen 
reputantur insigne monumentum disciplinae Ec- 
clesiae per priora secula," says M. Icard in his 
Praelectiones Juris Canonici at St. Sulpice (pub- 
lished with the approbation of the authorities of 
the Church) in 18G2, and he then cites the Gela- 
sian decree declaring them apocryphal. 

Nevertheless great attention has been paid to 
them. Extracts were admitted by Gratian into 
the Decretum, and, in the words of Phillips (' Du 
Droit ecclesiastique dans ses Sources,' Paris, 1852) 
'■' ils ont pris rang dans la legislation canonique." 

But we must return to the 6th century. 
About fifty years after the work of Dionysius, 
John of Antioch, otherwise called Johannes Scho- 
lasticus, patriarch of Constantinople, set forth a 
ffvvTayjxa Kav6vtiiv, which contained not 50 but 
85 Canons of the Apostles. And in the year 692 
these were expressly recognized in the decrees of 
the' Quinisextiue Council, not only as binding 
canons, but (it would seem) as of apostolic ori- 
gin. f They are therefore in force in the Greek 

How it came to pass that Dionysius translated 
only 50 does not appear. Some writers have 
supposed that he rejected what was not to be re- 
conciled with the Roman practice, s But, as 
Hefele observes, this could hardly be his motive, 
inasmuch as he retains a canon as to the nullity 
of heretical baptism, which is at variance with 
the view of the Western Church. Hence it has 
been suggested that the MS. used by Dionysius 
was of a different class from that of John of An- 
tioch (for tliey vary in some expressions, and 
have also a difference in the numbering of the 
canons), and that it may have had only the 50 
translated by the former. And an inference has 
also been drawn that the 35 latter canons are of 
later date> Indeed, according to some, they 
are obviously of a different type, and were pos- 
sibly added to the collection at the same time 



pro eo quod ab haereticia sub nomine Apostolorum com- 
positi dignoscuntur, quamvis in eisdem quaedam inve- 
niuntur utilia, auctoritate tamen canonica et apostolica 
eorum gesta constat esse remota et inter apocrypha 

' 'ESofe KoX toCto t^ o.yia ravrr) (TVi'oSo) KaWiiTTa. re 
Kal OTTrovBaioTaTa, uitne fJLei'eiv Koi (xtto tou vvv ^e^aiou; 
Kal acT'^aAets Trpbs i/(uxt«'i' Bepaveiav Kol larpeCav naSuiv 
Tous vTTo Twv TTpo Trjjuuii' ayt'wi' KaX fx(LKapC(jjv vraTepoiv 
SexOevTai; Kai Kvpto^eVra?, aAAo. p.r)V Koi napaSoB^VTa? 
rjiJ.iv ocojLLaTt Ttoi/ aytoiv Kal ivSo^tjv a7ro(r7oA(oi' oySorj- 
KovTo. ireVre Kavova^. Can. II., cited in Ultzen, Pref. 


Beveridge argues that the word ovoij^aTi shews that, 
while their validity as canons of the Church was admitted, 
their apostolical origin was not decided. Contra Hefele, 
Concilievgesch. i. 768. 

The additional 35 canons in the collection of Scho- 
lasticus have not been iti any way recognized by the 
Church of Rome. 

g As, for instance, De Marca; and see AylifTe's Parergon, 
Jntrod., p. iv. 

•• See on this subject, Hefele, i. 768. Scholasticus says 
there were previous collections containing 85. 

that the canons were appended to the Constitu- 

It is time to come to the Canons themselves. 
Both in the collection of John of Antioch and in 
that of Dionysius they are alleged to have been 
drawn up by Clement from the directions of the 
Apostles. In several places the Apostles speak in 
the first person,'' and in the 85th canon Clement 
uses the first person singular of himself. 

Their subjects are briefly as follow: — ' 

I & 2 (I. & II.). Bishop to be ordained by two 
or three bishops ; presbyters and deacons, and the 
rest of the clerical body by one. 

3 & 4 (HI.) relate to what is proper to be of- 
fered at the altar ; mentioning new corn, grapes, 
and oil, and incense at the time of the holy ob- 

5 (IV.). First-fruits of other things are to be 
sent to the clergy at their home, not brought to 
the altar. 

6 (V.). Bishop or presbyter or deacon not to 
put away his wife under pretence of piety. 

7 (VI.). Clergy not to take secular cares on 

8 (VII.). Nor to keep Easter before the vernal 
equinox, according to the Jewish system. 

9 (VIII.). Nor to fail to communicate without 
some good reason. 

10 (IX.). Laity not to be present at the read- 
ing of the Scriptures without remaining for 
prayer and the Communion. 

II (X.). None to join in prayer, even in a 
house, with an excommunicate person. 

12 (XL). Clergy not to join in prayer with a 
deposed man as if he were still a cleric. 

13 (XII. & XIIL). Clergy or lay persons, being 
under excommunication or not admitted to Com- 
munion, going to another city not to be received 
without letters. 

14 (XIV.). Bishop not to leave his own diocese 
and invade another, even on request, except for 
good reasons, as in case he can confer spiritual 
benefit ; nor even then except by the judgment of 
many other bishops, and at pressing request. 

15 (XV.). If clergy leave their own diocese, 
and take up their abode in another without con- 
sent of their own bishop, they are not to perform 
clerical functions there. 

16 (XVI.). Bishop of such diocese not to treat 
them as clergy. 

17 (XVIL). One twice married after baptism, 
or who has taken a concubine, not to be a cleric. 

18 (XVIIL). One who has married a widow or 
divorced woman, or a courtesan or a slave, or 
an actress, not to be admitted into the clerical 

» So Bickell, i. 86 and 235. For the Constitutions, see 
the next article. 

k Beveridge however contends, from the variations and 
omissions in MSS. and versions, that the introduction of 
the first person is a mere interpolation of late date, in 
order to promote the fiction of apostolic origin {Cod. (an. 
in Cotel., vol. ii; p. 73, Appendix). Ses instances in 
Canons XXIX., L., LXXXII., LXXXV. The various read- 
ings may be seen in Ultzen's edition, and in Lagarde's 
Ediq. Jar. Kccles. Antiquiss. 

I The numbering varies. Thus Canon III. of the Greek 
text is divided into two by Dionysius. The Arabic nu- 
merals represent the order in Dionysius ; the Roman that 
in the Greek of .Johannes Scholasticus. Cotelorins, ag.Tiii, 
gives a (lifferwit iiumhering, making the canons only 76 
in all. 



19 (XIX.). Nor one who has married two sis- 
ters or his niece. 
. 20 (XX.). Clergy not to become sureties. 

21 (XXI.). One who has been made a eunuch 
by violence, or in a persecution, or was so born, 
may be a bishop. 

22 (XXII.). But if made so by his own act, 
cannot be cleric. 

23 (XXIII.). A cleric making himself so, to be 

24 (XXIV.). A layman making himself a 
eunuch to be shut out from Communion for three 

25 & 26 (XXV.). Clerics guilty of inconti- 
nence, perjury, or theft, to be deposed, but not 
excommunicated (citing Nah. 1, 9 ovk e/c5i/c?]<re's 
Sis €7r2 rh aiiTb). 

27 (XXVI.). None to marry after entering the 
clerical body, except readers and singers. 

28 (XXVII.). Clergy not to strike offenders. 

29 (XXVIII.). Clergy deposed not to presume 
to act, on pain of being wholly cut off from the 

30 (XXIX.). Bishop, &c. obtaining ordination 
by money to be deposed, and, together with him 
who ordained him, cut off from communion, as 
was Simon Magus by me, Peter. 

31 (XXX.). Bishop obtaining a church by 
means of secular rulers to be deposed, &c. 

32 (XXXI.). Presbyters not to set up a sepa- 
rate congregation and altar in contempt of his 
bishop, when the bishop is just and godly. 

33 (XXXII.). "Presbyter or deacon under sen- 
tence of his own bishop not to be received else- 

34 (XXXIII.). Clergy from a distance not to 
be received without letters of commendation, nor 
unless they be preachers of godliness are they 
to have anything beyond the supply of their 

35 (XXXIV.). The bishops of every nation are 
to know who is chief among them, and to consi- 
der him their head, and do nothing without his 
judgment, except the affaii-s of their own dio- 
ceses, nor must he do anything without their 

36 (XXXV.). Bishop not to ordain out of his 

37 (XXXVI.). Clergy not to neglect to enter 
on the charge to which they are appointed, nor 
the people to refuse to receive them. 

38 (XXXVIL). Synod of bishops to be held 
twice a year to settle controversies. 

39 (XXXVIII.). Bishop to have care of all ec- 
clesiastical aflfairs, but not to appropriate any- 
thing for his own family, except to grant them 
relief if in poverty. 

40 (XXXIX. & XL.). Clergy to do nothing 
without bishop. Bishop to keep his own affairs 
separate from those of the Church, and to provide 
for his family out of his own property. 

41 (XLI.). Bishop to have power over all eccle- 
siastical affairs, and to distribute through the 
presbyters and deacons, and to have a share him- 
self if required. 

42 (XLII.). Cleric not to play dice or take to 

43 (XLIII.). Same as to subdeacon, reader, 
singer, or layman. 

44 (XLIV.). Clergy not to take usury. 

45 (XLV.). Clergy not to pray with heretics, 
still less to allow them to act as clerarv. 


46 (XLVI.). Clergy not to recognize heretical 
baptism or sacrifice. 

47 (XLVIL). Clergy not to rebaptize one truly 
baptized, nor to omit to baptize one polluted by 
the ungodly,™ otherwise he contemns the cross 
and death of the Lord, and does not distinguish 
true priests from false. 

48 (XLVIIL). Layman who has put away his 
wife not to take another, nor to take a divorced 

49 (XLIX.). Baptism to be in name of Father, 
Son, and Holy Ghost, not of three eternals, or 
three sons, or three paracletes. 

50 (L.). Baptism to be performed by three im- 
mersions, making one initiation — not one single 
immersion into the Lord's death. 

LI. Clergy not to hold marriage or the use of 
meat and wine things evil in themselves, or to 
abstain on any other than ascetic grounds. 

LII. Bishop or presbyter to receive, not to re- 
ject penitents. 

LIII. Clergy not to refuse to partake of meat 
and wine on feast days [as if evil, or on other 
than ascetic grounds]. 

LIV. Clerics not to eat in taverns except on a 

LV. Clerics not to insult bishop. 

LVI. Nor presbyter or deacon. 

LVII. Nor to mock the maimed, deaf, dumb, 
blind, or lame, nor must a layman do so, 

LVIII. Bishops and presbyters not to neglect 
their clergy or people. 

LIX. Nor to refuse succour to the needy 

LX. Nor to publish in the church as sacred 
works forged by the ungodly in false names. 

LXI. Those convicted of incontinence or other 
forbidden practices not to be admitted into the 
clerical body. 

LXII. Clerics from fear of Jew or Gentile or 
heretic denying Christ to be excommunicated, or 
if only denying that they are clerics, to be de- 
posed. On repentance, to be admitted as laymen. 

LXIII. Cleric eating blood, or things torn by 
beasts, or dying of themselves, to be deposed, on 
account of the prohibition in the law. Laymen 
doing so to be excommunicated. 

LXIV. Cleric or layman entering synagogue of 
Jews or heretics to pray, to be deposed and ex- 

LXV. Cleric in a struggle striking a single 
blow that proves mortal to be deposed for his 
precipitancy. Laymen to be excommunicated. 

LXVI. Neither cleric nor layman to fast on 
Sunday or on any Saturday but one." 

LXVII. Any one doing violence to an unbe- 
trothed virgin to be excommunicated. He may 
not take another, but must keep her, though 

LXVIII. Clergy not to be ordained a second 
time, unless when ordained by heretics, for those 
baptized or ordained by heretics have not really 
been brought into the number of the faithful or 
of the clergy. 

LXIX. Bishop, presbyter, deacon, reader, or 
singer, not fasting in the holy forty days, or on 
the" fourth and sixth days, to be deposed, unless 

m /. e. baptized by heretics. Heretical baptism is 
styled not an initiation, but a pollution. See Apost. 
Cmist. vi. 15. 

" Namely, that before Easter day. Apost. Const, v. 
IS and 20. 


suffering from bodily weakness. Laymen to be 

LXX. None to keep fast or feast with the 
Jews, or receive their feast-gifts, as unleavened 
bread and so forth. 

LXXI. No Christian to give oil for a heathen 
temple or Jewish synagogue, or to light lamps at 
their feast times. 

LXXII. Nor to purloin wax or oil from the 

LXXIII. Nor to convert to his own use any 
consecrated gold or silver vessel or linen. 

LXXIV. Bishop accused by credible men, to be 
summoned by the bishops ; and if he appear and 
confess the charge, or be proved guilty, to have 
appropriate sentence ; but if he do not obey the 
summons, then to be summoned a second and 
third time by two bishops personally ; and if he 
still be contumacious, then the Synod is to make 
the fit decree against him, that he may not ap- 
pear to gain anything by evading justice. 

LXXV. No heretic, nor less than two wit- 
nesses, even of the faithful, to be received against 
a bishop (Deut. 19, 15). 

LXX VI. Bishop not to ordain relatives bishops 
out of favour or aftection. 

LXXVII. One having an eye injured or lame 
may still be a bishop, if worthy. 

LXXVIIL But not one deaf, dumb, or blind, as 
being practical hindrances. 

LXXIX. One that has a devil not to be a cleric, 
nor even to pray with the faithful, but when 
cleansed he may, if worthy. 

LXXX. A convert from the heathen or from a 
vicious life not forthwith to be made a bishop ; 
for it is not right that while yet untried he 
should be a teacher of others, unless this come 
about in some way by the grace of God." 

LXXXL We declare that a bishop or presbyter 
is not to stoop to public [secular] offices, but to 
give himself to the wants of the Church (Matt. 
6, 24). 

LXXXIL We do not allow slaves to be chosen 
into the clerical body without consent of their 
masters, to the injury of those who possess them, 
for this would subvert households. But if a slave 
seem worthy of ordination, as did our Onesimus, 
and the masters consent and set him free, let him 
be ordained. 

LXXXIII. Clergy not to serve in the army, and 
seek to hold both Roman command and priestly 
duties (Matt. 22, 21). 

LXXXIV. Those who unjustly insult a king or 
ruler to be punished. 

LXXXV. For you, both clergy and laity, let 
there be. as books to be reverenced and held holy, 
in the Old Testament — five of Moses, Genesis, Exo- 
dus, Leviticus. Numbers, Deuteronomy — of Jesus 
the son of Nun, one ; of Judges, one ; Ruth, one ; of 
Kings, four ; of Paraleipomena the book of days, 
two ; of Esdras, two ; of Esther, one ; of Macca- 
bees, three ; of Job, one ; of the Psalter, one ; of 
Solomon, three — Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of 
'Songs ; of the Prophets, thirteen ; of Isaiah, one ; 
of Jeremiah, one ; of Ezekiel, one ; of Daniel, one. 
Over and above is to be mentioned to you that 
your young men study the Wisdom of the learned 
Sirach. But of ours, that is of the New Testa- 
ment, let there be four sospels, Matthew 



/. e. unless he be designated as such in some special 
*ray by the hand of God. Beveridge refers to the case 
of Ambrose. 


Mark's, Luke's, John's ; fourteen epistles of 
Paul ; two epistles of Peter ; three of John ; one 
of James ; one of Jude ; two epistles of Clement ; 
and the regulations addressed to you bishops 
through me, Clement, in eight books,P which it is 
not right to publish before all, on account of the 
mysteries in them ; and the Acts of us, the 

The above is merely the substance of the 
canons in an abridged form. It will not of course 
supersede the necessity of referring to the origi- 
nal in order to form an exact judgment. For the 
sake of brevity the penalties have been in most 
cases omitted. They are usually deposition for 
the clergy, excommunication for laymen. 

Turrianus attempted to maintain that these 
canons really are what they profess to be, the 
genuine work of the apostles. Daille, on the 
other hand, contended that they were a produc- 
tion of the middle or end of the 5th century. 
Against him Bishop Beveridge entered the field ; 
and in two treatises of great learning, acuteness, 
and vigour, 1 sought to show that though not the 
work of the apostles themselves, they were yet 
of great antiqiiity, being in substance the decrees 
of primitive Synods convened in different places 
and at different times during the latter part of the 
2nd, or at latest the earlier part of the 3rd cen- 
tury. And he further thinks that during the 
3rd century they were brought together and 
formed into a collection or Codex Canonum, 
which was recognized, and cited as of authority 
in the Church. ' 

Bishop Pearson also holds the canons in a col- 
lected form to have been in existence prior to the 
Council of Nice ( Vindic. Ignat. part i. caj). iv. 
in Cotel., vol. ii., append, p. 295). ' 

It will be well to endeavour to give some 
samples of the evidence which Beveridge adduces 
to show that the tanons are quoted at all events 
from the first part of the 4th century down- 

George of Cappadocia buys the favour of the 
Praefect of Egypt, and is thrust into the bishopric 
of Alexandria. Athanasius thereupon says, toS- 
ro Tovs iKK\f]ffia(TTiKovs Kav6vas TrapaXvtrer (ad 
ubique orthod. c. 1, p. 945). The reference, it is 
alleged, is to Apost. Can. 30 (xxix.) and 31 (xxx.) 

p Viz. the Apost. Constitutions. See next article. 

1 'Judicium de Apostulicis,' to be found in 
Cotel. I'atres Apost. vd. i. p. 432, edit. 112i ; and ' Codex 
Canonum Ecclesiae Primitivae illustratus. Ibid. vol. ii. 
Appendix, p. i. 

r ' Judic' in Cotel. vol. i. pp. 436-441 ; and see CoJ. 
Can. in Cotel. vol. ii. Append, pp. 8-10, et alibi. lie 
appears to think that in many cases they may represent 
apostolical traditioiis. They wore called "apostolical" 
from this feeling, and also because framed by apostolical 
luen. He allows, however, that they were probably col- 
lected by divers persons, some of whom put together 
more, some fewer. Hence Dionysius found only 50 in 
the Codex from which he translated, while Scolasticus 
found 85. Hincmar of Hheims is cited by Beveridge as 
en his side ; but it would seem that he looked on the 
Apostolical Canons as collections of aposlolical tradi- 
tions mads by pious persons, rather than as decrees of 
synods. He speaks of them as " antcquam episcoi)i concilia 
libere inciporent cclebrare, a devotis quibusque coUectos.' 
See Cod. Can. in Cotol. vol. ii. App. p. 12. 

9 The question of the collection, however, stands on 
veiy different grounds from that of the antiquity of pfr- 
ticular canons, and the two points should be kept separate 
in investigating the subject. 



Basil, in his letters to Amphilochius (which 
hive themselves obtained the authority of 
Canons in the Greek Church) says a deposed 
deacon is not to be excommunicated, St6Ti 
apxoui? eCTi Kauwv tovs airb l3a6fiov TreTTToi/cd- 
Tos, rovTCf) ij.6v(f> rqj Tpoxqi ttjs KoXdcreccs vivo- 
pd\K€ff6ai. Reference alleged to be to Apost. 
Can. 25.' 

Again he says, rohs Siydfiov^ iravre^ws 6 
Kavuiv rys virripeaias a,Tv4K\€i(Tf. Comp. Can. 17. 

Once more he says, the Church must SovXeveiv 
d/cpt/Seiot Kav6va)y, and reject heretical baptism. 
See Apost. Can. 46. 

The Council of Nice, Can. 1, while treating 
self-inflicted mutilation as a bar to orders, says : 
— lia-irep 5e toCto TrpdSijA.oi', Srt trepl raiv eTrjTi]- 
Sev6vTa}V rh Trpay/j.a Kal TuAfxuVToiv iuvrovs 
4KT(fXV€iv iip-qrai' oiirois elf TiJ/es virh ^ap^apwv 
^ Z^ffTzoTWv ivvovxiff^V'^O'V, iiipiaKoivTO 5e aAAcos 
ai,ioi. TOVS ToiovTovs eis K\i]pov TrpocrifTai 6 
Kuviiu. Reference alleged to Can. Apost. 21 
and 22. 

Again Can. 2 says, that things had lately been 
done irapa. tov Kavova rhv iKKKi\(na(TTiK'bv, to 
correct which it enacts that no neophyte is to be 
made a presbyter. The reference is alleged to 
be to Apost. Can. Ixxx. 

Can. 5 says : — KpaTeLToi r) yvwixt] Kara rhv 
Kav6va rhv iiayopivovra tovs vcp' eTepaiv airo- 
^\7\diVTas, ixp" eTfptiiv fji.ii TrpoaUaQai. Comp. 
Can. Apost. 13 (xii. and xiii.) and 33 (xxxii.) 

Again, Can. 9, concerning the ordination of 
known sinners, treats it as irapa KavSva, and 
says, TovTovs 6 Kaviav ou irpocrliTai. See Can. 
Apost. Ixi. 

Can. 10, concerning such as are ordained in 
ignorance of their having lapsed, says : — tovto ov 
TvpoKpivei Tip Kav6vL TCfi iKKKriffLaffTiKw' yvai(T- 
64vTes yap Ka&aipovvTai. Bev. thinks the re- 
ference is to Can. Apost. Ixii., and that the 
Council of Nice found it needful to extend the 
rule to those who had lapsed before ordination. 

Can. 15 and 16 restrain the clergy from 
moving from city to city, a practice which it 
calls (Tvv7]Qeia izapa Thy Ka.v6va, and speaks of 
.such persons as /irjre Thv iKKXriffiacTTLKhv Kavova 
eiSoTis. Comp. Can. Apost. 14 and 15. 

The Synod of C4angra, held in the middle 
of the 4th century against the Eustathians, after 
passing several canons on matters more or less 
similar to those treated in some of the Apost. 
Canons, declares that its object has been to con- 
demn those who bring in novelties, — Trapa Tas 
ypacpas Kal Tovs fKKKriaiaffTiKovs KavSvas. 

The Council ofConstantinople, a.d. 381, speaks 
of a iraXaios Ofafxhs, as well as the Nicene 
Canon, for bishops to ordain in the f-irapxia or 
ecclesiastical province to which they belong. 
Bev. finds in the mention of " provinces," a re- 
ference to the authority of Metropolitans, Can. 
Apost. 35 (xxxiv.). 

Not long afterwards a synod at Ctirthage says : 
— o apxa7os tvttos ^v\ax6i]<T^Tai, 'iva fxr) riTTOves 
Tpiwv Tuv opiadfVTwv els x^V''"'"'''^'' 'ETiff/co- 
irwv apKeaciiffiv. Comp. Can. Apost. i. 

t Daille, and his ally, " Observator" (who seems to have 
been Matt, de la Roque) contend that the context shews 
that Basil cannot have meant to allude to the Apostolical 
Canons. Beveiidge replies at length (^Cod. Can. 38, 39). 
Bickell takes the same view as Daille {Gesch. dcs Kirchen- 
rechts, i. 83, note), but without noticing the arguments of 


The Council of Ephesus, 431 a.d., sent three 
times to suiumon the accused bishop, Nestorius, ■ 
to appear, saying, that it did so in obedience t^ I 
Kavdvi, and afterwards informed the Emperor of j 
the course taken, — rwu Kav6vo3v TrapaKeXevo- 
fxivoiu rf TpiTj) K\ri(rei TrapaKaKeTffdai Thv airei- 

And in like manner at Chalcedon, 451 A.D., , 
upon the third summons sent to Dioscoi-us, the j 
bishops who were the bearers of it say that \ 
the Council sent them to him : — Tp'iT-qv ^5tj '■ 
kXtjctlv Tavri]!/ iroiovfi.ivT) KaTo. tt]v aKoKov- i 
6iav Twv ayiccv Kav6v(iiv. Compare Can. Apost. j 
Ixxiv. -: 

At Ephesus a complaint was made against the ' 
Bishop of Antioch for trying to sii.bject to him-v 
self the island of Cyprus : — " Contrary to the -I 
Apostolic canons and the decrees of the most 'i 
holy Nicene Synod." Comp. Can. Apost. 36:' 

We may now perhaps pause in our extracts,/ 
from Councils and Synods, as we are approaching : 
a period about which there is less dispute : but 
we must go back to the Nicene times in order to. ' 
cite one or two individual testimonies. Alex- i 
ander, bishop of Alexandria, writes that Arius, ! 
though excommunicated there, was received by 
other bishops, which he blames, — rcf fiT^Te tov 
' AtroaToXiKdv KavSva tovto avyxoDpeTv (apud 
Theodoret, Hist. Eccl. i. c. iv.). See Can. Apost. 

About the same time Eusebius, declining to be '■ 
translated from Caesarea to Antioch, Gonstantine 
the Great writes to praise him for observing tos re i 
ivToXas tov 0eoO Kal Thv ' AiroaroAiKdv Kavova, i 
Kal TVS iKKX-ncrlas (Euseb. Vita Const, iii. 61). 
The reference is alleged to be to Can. Apost. 14, j 
while iKKXriaias is said to allude to the 15th •: 
Canon of Nice. 

Again, during the reign of Constantine, Pope " 
Julius, writing of the deposition of Athanasius i' 
and the intrusion of Gregory into his see, declares f 
it to have been done in violation of the Canons i 
of the Apostles. See 2nd Apol. of Athanasius. ;1 
The reference is asserted to be to Can. 36 (xxxv.) i 
and Ixxiv. (Gregory being an untried lay-i| 
man.)" j 

Once more, in a provincial synod at Con- I 
stantinople, 394 a.d., it was determined that the ' 
deposition of a bishop must not be merely by two 
or three bishops, — aWa irXeiovos (rvv6Sov ^'^((x!}, < 
Kal Twv Tr\s ivapxias, KaOiiis Kal ol ' Airoa-ToXiKol 
KavSvfs StwpiffavTo. The allusion is said to be 1 
to Can. Apost. Ixxiv. ^ 

Of late years not much has been done by I 
English scholars in the way of original investiga- 
tion into the subject, but German writers have 
given a good deal of attention to it during the 
present century, and have arrived at I'esults 
widely diflerent from those we have just been ' 
considering. Among these Von Drey and Bickell 
stand conspicuous. The former seems to con- 
sider that the first 50 canons were collected in : 
the early part of the 5th century, partly out of i 
decrees of post-Nicene Councils, partly out of | 
the so-called apostolical constitutions ; and that , 
the other 35 were added subsequently, probably 

« If this could be considered to be proved, it would; 
settle the point that the Canons were known at Rome, 
and refen-ed to by popes before Dionysius's version of 
them. And if the LXXIVth be really intended, it would ; 
show that more than 50 were then recognised. ■' 


at the beginning of the 6th century, when the 
whole 85 were appended to the constitutions." 

Bickell while adopting a similar theory does 
not press it so far. He believes the collection to 
have been made out of like materials to those 
specified by Drey, but to be not later than the 
end of the ^th century ; and holds that the apos- 
tolical canons were quoted at Chalcedon (instead of 
being in part derived from the decrees of that Coun- 
cil as Drey would maintain), and possibly also at 
Ephesus and Constantinople, 448 {Gesch. des Kir- 
chenrechts, vol. i. p. 83 ; see also Hefele Conci- 
liengesch., vol. i. p. 771). Both Von Drey and 
Bickell agree in denying the position of Beve- 
ridge that the collection was made not later 
than the 3rd century^ and was composed out of 
bond fide previous canons then existing. And 
they meet his citations by denying that Kavwv. 
OefffiSs and such like words always imply what 
we call a canon, and by alleging that they are 
used in early times of any generally received 
rule in the Church. Thus Kavtiiv airoarToKiKbs 
might either i-efer to some direction of the Apos- 
tles contained in the New Testament, or to some 
ecclesiastical practice supposed to have been 
ori'jinated by them, and to have their authority. 

Thus Clem. Rom. speaks of rov oipiff^iivov ttjj 
KtLTovpyias avTov Kavova (^Ep. i. 41), and it is 
not to be supposed that he can here allude to 
any synodical decree. Comp. Iren. Ad. Haer. i. 9 ; 
Polycrates, apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. v. 24 ; Clem. 
kl.'Strom. i. 350, vi. 076, vii. 753, 756, 764 (see 
also the instances in De La garde Bel. Jur. Eccl. 
Ant. pref. p. vi.). Accordingly Bickell would 
thus intei'pret (as Daille' had done before him) 
the use of the words Kav^v and KavoviKos vof^os, 
in canon 15 of Neocaesarea, and in canons 13, 15, 
18, of Niec.y So also Cornelius Ad Fahium 



^ The following table gives what he supposes to be the 
original of the various Canons : — 

1., 11., VI., VII., XVII., XVllI., XX., XXVL, XXXIII., 
XLVI., XLVII., XLIX., LI., LII., LIII., LX., LXIV., are 
all taken from the Apostolical Constitutions ; the first 
bix books of which he considers as of latter half of 3rd 

LXXIX. is from the 8th book, which is later, but 
before the year 325. 

XXI.-XXIV., and LXXX., are taken from the Nicene 

VIII.-XVI., and XXVIII., and XXXl.-XLl., from 
those of Antioch. 

XLV., LXX., LXXI., from those of Laodicea. 

LXXV. from those of Constantinople, A D. 381. 

XXVIl. from those of Constantinople, a.d. 394. 

those of Chalcedon. 

XIX. from Neocaesarea. 

XXV. from a canonical letter of Basil. 

LXIX. and LXX., out of the supposed Epistle of 
Ignatius, Ad PhilcuMph. 

About a third of the Canons Drey treats as of unknown 
origin. The subject matter of many of them he considers 
may be more ancient, but not in the form of canons. 

As to tlie distinction .'aid to be apparent between the 
first 50 Canons and the residup, see Bickell, i. 86 and 236. 

y For an examination of these instances from a con- 
trary point of view, see Beveridge iCod. Can. lib. i. cap. 
xi.). But the reader should notice that in Nic. Can. 18, 
he inexactly translates i^anep oiire 6 xaviiiv ovre -q crvv- 
ijflEia Trape'SiuKe by " noc canoiiem ncc coiisuctudinem 
esse," and neglects the words ;rapd Kavova Kal napa tol^lv 
at the end of the Canon. He understands the Canon of 
Neocaesarea, that there must be seven deacons, Kara toc 
(cai/ovo, to allude to Acts vi. (the written law of Scrip- 

(Euseb. vi. 43) Kara rou ttjs iKKK7)a'ias Kavova, 
and Firmilian Ad Cyprian.(ef. 75) and Cone. Are- 
lat. canon 13, " ecclesiastica regula," and comp. 
Euseb. vi. 24. Bickell also thus interprets .the 
letter of Alexander to Meletius, and that of 
Constantine, which as we have seeTi(ante, p. 114) 
Beveridge takes as allusions to the apostolical 

In short Von Drey and Bickell maintain that 
the instances brought forward by Beveridge are 
not really proofs that the set of canons called 
apostolical are there quoted or . referred to, but 
rather that allusion is made to broad and gene- 
rally acknowledged principles of ecclesiastical 
action and practice, whether written or un- 
written (see Bickell, i. p. 2, and p. 81, 82, and 
the notes).^ But they go further and proceed 
to adduce on their side what they consider to be 
a positive and decisive argument. Many canons 
of the Council of Antioch, A.D. 341, correspond 
not only in subject but to a very remarkable 
degree in actual phraseology with the apostolical 
canons. Yet they never quote them, at least eo 

The following table gives the parallel cases : — 
Antioch I. compared with Can. Apost. VII. 

J. (VIII., IX., X., 

" (XI., XII., XIII. 

III. ,, ,, ,, XV., XVL 

IV. ,, ,, ,, XXVIII. 
V. ,, ,, ,, XXXI. 

VL ,, ,, ,, XXXIL 

VJI., VIII. ,, ,, ,, XII., XXXIII 

IX. ,, ,, ,, XXXIV. 

XIIL ,, ,, ,, XXXV. 

™-.} „ ,. .. XXXVL 

XX. ,, ,, ,, xxxvn. 

XXI. ,, ,, ,, XIV. 

xxn. ,, ,, ,, XXXV. 

XXIII. ,, ,, ,, LXXVl. 

XXIV. ,, ,, ,, XL. 
XXV. ,, ,. ,, XLK 

On this state of facts Von Drey and Bickell 
maintain that the apostolical canons ate ob- 
viously borrowed from those of Antioch, while 
Beveridge argues that the converse is the case. 
The argument turns too much on a close com- 
parison of phrases, and of the respective omi.s- 
sions, addition.s, and modifications, to admit of 
being presented in an abridged form. It will be 
found on one side to some extent in Bickell, vol. 
i. p. 79, et seq., and p. 230, et seq. (who gives 

ture). Some might possibly contend that tlie words of 
the Epistle of Alexander (sijpj-a, p. 114) refer to 2nd Epist. 
John 10. He also deals with a Canon of Ancyra (Can. 
21), which mentions that 6 Trporepo; opos refused com- 
munion, except on the death-bed, to unchaste women 
guilty of abortion. This Beveridge argues does not mean a 
" Canon " at all, but rather a decision of Church discipline. 
Hefele, on the other hand, thinks it alludes to a Canon 
of Elvira, refusing the sacrament to such even at death 
{Conciliengesch. i. 208). 

2 To a certain extent, Beveridge discusses this theory 
when put forward by " Observator " (see Cod. Can. lib. i. 
c. ]l,p. 44), and appears to contend that Kaviov is not used 
for unwritten law, at all events by Councils in their de- 
crees. There certainly seems some apparent distinction 
drawn in Nic. Can. 18, oi/re 6 Kaviav ovre 7) avvTi)8iia 

<<■ It will be observed that all the Apostolical Canong 
except one, for which parallels are here found in the 
Antioch decrees, fall within the first 50 : and the parallel 
to the LXXVlth Canon is very far-fetched. 

I 2 


the references to' the corresponding parts of Von 
Drey's work) ; and on tJie other, in- Beveridge's 
■ Codex Canonum, lib. i. cap. iv. and cap. xi., and 
elsewhere in that treatise.'' 

As a general rule the apostolical canons are 
shorter, the Antioch canons fuller and more ex- 
press : a circumstance which leads Bickell to see 
in the former a compendium or abridgment of 
the latter, but which, according to Beveridge, 
proves the former to be the brief originals, of 
which the latter are the subsequent expansion. 

Beveridge observes with some force that 
though the apostolical canons are not quoted by 
name, the canons of Antioch repeatedly profess 
to be in accordance with previous ecclesiastical 
rules, whereas the apostolical canons never men- 
tion any rules previously existing. "= Still the 
same question must arise here as in relation to 
the canons of Nice, viz., whether the allusion 
really is to pre-existing canons of councils, or 
whether the terms used are to be otherwise ex- 
plained. And as regards the silence of the apos- 
tolical canons as to anything older than them- 
selves, it must be recollected that any other 
course would have been self-contradictory. They 
could not pretend to be apostolic and yet rely on 
older authorities. Hence even had such refer- 
ences been found in the materials of which they 
were composed, these must have been struck out 
when they wei-e put together in their present 

The synod of Antioch lying under the re- 
proach of Arianismi, it may seem improbable that 
any decrees should have been borrowed from it. 
To meet this objection Bickell urges that though 
the Antioch clergy were Arian, the Bishop Me- 
letius was not un-orthodox, and was much re- 
spected by the Catholics. And he throws out 
the theory that the apostolical canons, which 
shew traces of Syrian phraseology, may be a 
sort of corpus canonum made at that period in 
Syria, and drawn up in part from the Antioch 
decrees, in part irom the apostolical constitutions 
(which shew like marks of Syrian origin), and 
in part from other sources. ■* This work, it is 
conjectured, Meletius brought with him when 
he came to the Council of Constantinople (where 
he died) in 381 A.D., and introduced it to the 
favourable notice of the clergy : a hypothesis 
which is thought to account for the apostolical 
canons being cited (as Bickell thinks for the first 
time) at the Provincial Synod of Constantinople, 
A.D. 394. 

The opinion of Hefele may be worth stating. 
He thinks that though there is a good deal to be 
said for the theory that many of the apostolical 
canons were borrowed from, those of Antioch, 

b The suggestion is there made that the Council stu- 
diously re-enacted certain ortliodox canons, in order to 
gain a good reputation, while they thrust in here and 
there a canon of their own so framed as to tell against 
Athanasius and the Catholics, See Cod. Can. lib. i. cap. iv. 
ad Jin. 

c However, it is to be observed that the 37-39 Canons 
of Laodicea, which closely resemble the LXX. and LXXI. 
Apostolical Canons, do not in any way refer to them, 
though on Beveridge's theory the A post. Canons must 
have been in the hands of the Fathers of Laodicea. 

■i In Can. XXXVII. the Syro-Macedonian name of a 
month, Hyperberetaeus, occurs in connexion with the 
time for the autumnal synod. Similar nimes of months 
occur in Ap. Const, v. 17, 20, and at viii. 10. Evadius, 
Bishop of Antioch, is prayed for as " our bishop." 


the converse is quite possible, and the point by j 

no means settled. In regard to the Council of 
Nice, it would appear, he thinks, that it refers 
to older canons on the like subjects with those • 
which it was enacting. And it is by no means j 
impossible that the allusion may be to those 
which are now found among the apostolic canons, ; 
and which might have existed in the Church 
before they were incorporated in that collection. 
This view he thinks is supported by a letter from 
certain Egyptian bishops to Meletius at the com- 
mencement of the 4th century ,« in which they I 
complain of his having ordained beyond the ] 
limits of his diocese, which they allege is con-' 
trary to " mos divinus " and to " regula eccle- 
siastica ; " and remind hini that it is the " lex 
patrum et propatrum. ... in alienis paroeciis j 
non licere alicui episcoporum ordinationes cele- ! 
brare." The inference, Hefele thinks, is almost j 
irresistible that this refers to what is now the I 
o6th (xxxv.) Apostolical Canon. And at all i 
events he appears to hold with Bickell that the ■ 
apostolical canons are referred to at Ephesus, 
Constantinople (a.D. 448), and Chalcedon. But : 
such a view falls short of that of Beveridge. 

Coming to the internal evidence, we find great j 
stress to have been laid by Daille^ Von Drey, 
Bickell, and others on the contents of the canons, as • 
distinctly marking their late date. Thus the 8th 
(vii.) (as to Easter) is in harmony with the pre- 
sent interpolated text of the apostolical consti- 
tutions, but is at variance with what Epiphanius | 
read there, and with the Syriac didascalia (see j 
infra, pp. 122, 123). It relates to the settlement of i 
a particular phase of the Easter controversy which ' 
did not, according to Hefele, spring up until : 
the 3rd century (ConciUengcsch. i. 303 and 776).' j 
Moreover, if known and recognized previous to .| 
the Council of Nice, it seems extraordinary that | 
this canon should not have been mentioned in 
Constantine's famous letter to the Nicene Fathers , 
on the Easter Controversy (Euseb. Vita Const, iii. 

Canon 27 (xxvi.) hardly savours of a very j 
early time. On this canon Beveridge (Annot. iri 
Can. Apost., sub Canone xxvi.) cites the Council | 
of Chalcedon (a.D. 451), as saying that in many . 
provinces it was permitted to readers and singers 
to marry ; and understands it of those provinces 
in which the apostolical canons had been put in ' 
force, they having been, he says, originally passed 
iji different localities by provincial synods. (See 
also his Jud. de Can. Apost. § xii. inCotel. vol. i. 
p. 436.) This seems to derogate somewhat from | 
the general reception which he elsewhere appears 
disposed to claim for them. So limited an opera- ] 
tion even in the 5th century is scarcely what was 
to be expected if the whole collection had been 
made, and promulgated a century and a half be- j 

The 31st (xxx.), the Ixxxi., and Ixxxiii., all 
appear to speak of a time when the empire was 
Christian (see Hefele, vol. i. p. 783, 789 ; Bic- 
kell, i. 80.).g 

e Given in Routh, Rel. Sacr. vol. iti. pp. 381, 382 
f If Hifele's view on this subject be accept xi, Beveridge 
must be held to have confused the special point here ruled 
with other questions in dispute in the Easter controversy 
(Coci. Can. lib. 2, c. iii.). 

8 Von Drey, however, points out that it is difficult to 
suppose a council under the empire would set itself so 
openly against the emperor's interference. If so, some 


The 35th (xxxiv.), recognizing a kind of metro- 
politan authority, has also been much insisted 
on by Yon Drey and Bickell, as well as by Daille, 
in 23root' of an origin not earlier than the 4th 
century (see contra, J3ev. Cod. Can. lib. 2, cap. v.).'' 

The 46th suggests the remark that if it were in 
existence at the time of Cyprian, it would surely 
have been cited in the controversy as to heretical 
baptism. It agrees with the doctrine of the apos- 
tolical constitutions vi. 15, and according to some 
has probably been taken thence. Beveridge indeed 
observes that Cyprian {Epist. to Jubajanus) does 
rely on the decree of a synod held under the 
presidency of Agrippinus (see Jud. de Can. Ap. 
§ xi. and Cod. Can. lib. 3, cap. xii.). This de- 
cree he seems to think may be the original of 
canon 46. If so, however, it would seem to shew 
the local and partial character of the apostolical 
canons, for we know that the Roman Church 
held at this very time a contrary view (Comp. 
the admissions of Bev. in Jud. de Can. § xii.). 

Again, other orders besides bishop, priest, and 
deacon appear in the clerical body. We have sub- 
deacons, readers, and singers (canon 43).' Though 
the second of these is found in Tertullian, the 
first and last are not to be traced further back 
than the middle of the third century. 

Not to mention other instances, it may in con- 
clusion be observed that much contest has taken 
place over the list of canonical books in the last 
canon, and as to the reference therein to the con- 
stitutions. Beveridge thinks that the variation 
iu that list from the canon of Scripture as eventu- 
ally settled, is a proof that it was drawn up at 
an early date and before the final settlement 
was made. But at the same time he (somewhat 
inconsistently) is inclined to take refuge in the 
theory that this last canon has been interpolated. 
Here again it would be vain to attempt an 
abridgement of the argument (see Cod. Canon. 
lib. 2, 0. ix. and Jud. de Can. Apost. § xvi. et seq.) 

Before concluding, the opinions of one or two 
other writers must be mentioned. Krabbe thinks 
that at the end of the 4th or early in the 5th 
century, a writer of Arian or Macedonian ten- 
dencies drew up both the 8th book of the consti- 
tutions and the collection of canons, the former 
being composed out of precepts then in circulation 
under the Apostles' names, with many additions of 
his own, the latter out of canons made in different 
placer, during the 2nd and 3rd centuries, with 

sui^port might be hence gained for the theory that these 
canons (iu the present form, at all events) did not really 
emanate from any council. 

•> Beveridge observes that the Apostolical Canon merely 
speaks of tov npioTou kTvidKoirov, whereas the corre- 
sponding Canon of Antioch has to:/ iv rp /liijTpoTroAct 
TrpoeiTToiTa i-nidKonov ; the latter being in conformity 
with the name metropolitan. This name did not arise till 
the 4th century ; and he therefore thinks the Apostolical 
Canon is proved to be the older of the two, and to be 
before that era. Moreover the Canon of Antioch pro- 
fesses its enactment to be Kara toj/ ap^at'oTepoi/ <cpa- 
■n)(Tai'Ta ex ruiv Trarepwi' rnxiav Kavova. It may be worth 
"l'->iving that there is no trace of a primacy, among 
I'i-li' ps in the Apostolical Constitutions, even in 'their 
pivscTit state. 

' Sometimes we find only a general expression, as In 
Can. 9 (.viii.), which runs e'i tis eTri'o-KOJros r} Trpeo-jSuTepo? 
[^ SittKovos ij eK Tov (caraAoyou toO lepaTi/coC ; the latter 
words comprehending the other orders, and being appa- 
rently strictly equivalent to the phrase rj oAws roO Kara- 
'Adyou Tuii/ KAvjpiKwi/ in Can. 15. 


the mterpolation of the 7th and 85th canons 
forged by himself (see Ultzen, p. xvi. pref.). 

Bunsen attaches much importance to the apos- 
tolical canons. He regards them as belonging 
to a class of ordinances which were " the local 
coutumes of the apostolical Church," i. e. if not 
of the Johannean age, at all events of that imme- 
diately succeeding. Yet such "never formed 
any real code of law, much less were they the 
decrees of synods or councils. Their collections 
nowhere had the force of law. Every ancient 
and great church presented modifications of the 
outlines and traditions here put together; but 
the constitutions and practices of all churches 
were built upon this groundwork " (Christ, and 
Mankind, vol. ii. 421). Our apostolical canons 
served this purpose in the Greek Church. The 
fiction which attributes them to the Apostles is 
probably ante-Nicene (vol. vii. p. 373) ; but they 
are now in an interpolated state. 

Internal evidence shews, he thinks, that the 
original collection consisted of three chapters : — 
I. On ordination. 
II. On the oblation and communion. 

III. On acts which deprive of official rights 
or offices. 

These comprise, with some exceptions, rather 
more than a third of the whole. To these, he 
says, were appended, but at an early date — 

IV. On the rights and duties of the bishop ; 
and subsequently when the collection thus ex- 
tended had been formed — 

V. Other grounds of deprivation. 

Canons 6 (v.), 27 (xxvi.), he considers from 
internal evidence to be interpolations. Relying 
on the fact that the Coptic version (to which hs 
attaches much weight, calling it " The Apos- 
tolical Constitutions of Alexandria ") omits 
canons xlvii., xlviii., xlix., 1., he treats these 
also as of later date. Canon 35 (xxxiv.) ho 
appears to consider as a genuine early form of 
what subsequently became the system of metro- 
politan authority. 

Coming then to what he styles " The Second 
Collection, which is not recognized by the Roman 
Church," i, e. to the canons not translated by 
Dionysius, he says they " bear a more decided 
character of a law bogk for the internal dis- 
cipline of the clergy, with penal enactments." 

Canon Ixxxi. is a repetition and confirmation 
of one in the first collection, viz., xx. compared 
with 31 (xxx.). This and canons Ixxxiii., Ixxxiv., 
are post-Nicene. The canon of Scripture also is 
sjjurious, as contradicting in many points the 
authentic traditions and assumptions of the early 
Church. It is wanting in the oldest MS., the 
Codex Barberinus (Christianity and Mankind, 
voj. ii. p. 227). 

Ultzen, though modestly declining to express- 
a positive judgment, evidently leans to the view 
of Bickell that the Autiochene decrees were 
the foundation of many of the canons, and re- 
grets that Bunsen should have brought up again 
the theory of Beveridge, which, he considers, 
"recentiores oinnes hujus rei judices refuta- 
verant " (Pref. p. xvi. note, and p. xxi.). 

There are Oriental versions of the apostolical 
canons. As Bunsen has observed, the Coptic and 
Aethiopic (the former being a very late but 
faithful translation from an old Sahidic version, 
see Tattam's Edition, 1848) omit certain of the 
canons relating to heretical baptism. Except in 



this and in Can. Ixxxv. they do not differ in any- 
important degree ^ Some account of these ver- 
sions, and also of the Syriac, may be seen in Bickell, 
vol. i. append, iv. He considers even the last- 
named to be later than our Greek text, and that 
little assistance is to be derived from them (see 
p. 215); others, however, as Bunsen, rate them 
highlv. The subject deserves further inquiry. 

To attempt to decide, or even to sum up so 
large a controversy, and one on which scholars 
have difiei-ed so widely, would savour of pre- 
sumption. It must suffice to indicate a few 
points on which the decision seems principally 
to turn. The first question is. Can we come to 
Beveridge's conclusion that a corpus canonum 
corresponding to our present collection, and pos- 
sessing a generally recognized authority, really 
existed in the 3i-d century ? If so, much weight 
would deservedly belong to it. 

But if an impartial view of Beveridge's argu- 
ments should be thought to lead merely to the 
conclusion, that a number of canons substanti- 
ally agreeing with certain of those now in our 
collection, are quoted in the 4th century, and 
presumably existed some considerable time pre- 
viously, we find ourselves in a dift'erent position. 

In this case the contents of our present col- 
lection may possibly be nothing more than de- 
crees of synods held at different and unknown 
times,-! and in different and uncertain places, not 
necessarily agreeing with each other, and not 
necessarily acknowledged by the Church at large, 
at all events till a later period.™ 

Again, if our present collection as a whole be 
not shewn to be of the 3rd century, the question 
at once arises when and how it was made, and 
whether any modification or interpolation took 
place in the component materials when they were 
so collected together." 

If it be to be looked upon as a digest of pre- 
existing canons brought together from various 
sources, it is necessary to consider how far the 
fact that any particular canon is authenticated 

I' In Can. LXXXV. the Copiic omits Esther from the 
O. T. and puts Judith and Tobit in place of Maccabees, 
and after mentioning the 16 Prophets, it goes on : " These 
also let your young persons learn. And out of the Wis- 
dom of Solomon and Kstber, the three Books of Maccabees, 
and the AVisdom of the Son of Sirach, there is much in- 
struction." In N. T. it adds the Apocalypse, between 
Jude and the Kpistles of Clement, and says 'nothing what- 
ever about the eight books of ■> eg ulat ions. "The Acts" 
are merely mentioned by that name, and follow the 
Gospels in the list. 

' Some may, no doubt, be of an early date : thus Von 
Drey admits the probable antiquity of Can. 1, Can. 10 (ix.), 
Can. 11 (x.), and others. See notes to the Canons in 
Hefele's Conciliengeschichte, vol. i. Append. ; and comp. 
Bickell, vol. i. pp. 80, 81. 

™ Beveridge speaks of the Apostolical Canons as the 
work " not of one but of many synods, and those held in 
divers places" {Cod. Can. lib. 1, cap. ii.). He thinks 
that the name of the month Hyperberetaeus in Can. 
XXXVII. shews that Canon to be oi Easta-n origin; 
wliile he argues that the rule as to Easter in Can. VII. 
proves that Canon to belong to the Western Church, 
inasmuch as the rule in question does not agree with the 
Oriental practice {Jiid. de Can. s. 12 ; and see s. 27). 

n As to admissions of interpolations, see Bev. Jud. de 
Can. ad finein, and Cod. Can. in Cotel. vol. ii. Append, 
pp. 10, 73, 114. Nor can it be forgotten that, in the only 
^;happs in which ve Icnow of their having been collected, 
they are introduced by the untrue pretext of being the 
words of the Apostles dictated to Clement. 


by being cited at Nice or elsewhere, in an; 
degree authenticates any other canon not s 
cited. For unless some bond of connexion cm 
be shewn, two canons standing in juxtaposition 
may be of quite different age and origin. 

These considerations have been principall; 
framed with reference to the ai-guments of Beve 
ridge. Of course if the views of Von Drey b 
adopted, any importance to be attached to tl! 
canons is materially diminished. Up to a certaii 
point Beveridge certainly argues not only witi 
ingenuity but force, and his reasoning does no 
seem to have received its fair share of attentioi 
from Von Drey and Bickell." Still, after allow 
ing all just weight to what he advances, a carefu 
consideration of the points just suggested, ma; 
perhaps tend to shew that it is not difficult t 
see why controversialists of modern times hav 
not ventured to lay much stress on the apos 
tolical canons. 

But there is another reason for this. N 
Western church can consistently proclaim thei 
authority as they now stand. Protestant churche 
will hardly agree, for instance, to the rule tha 
one who was ordained unmarrjed, may not after 
wards marry, nor will they recognize the Mac 
cabees as a canonical book ; while the canon 
which require a trine immersion in baptism, am 
the repetition of baptism when performed b; 
heretics, will not be accepted by either Protest 
ant or Roman Catholic.P 

It may be proper to add that the canons her 
discussed are not the only series extant whic^ 
claim apostolical authority. 

Thus, for instance, besides the AiaTa|eis rai 
ayiwv aTro(TT6\cov irepl x^^poToviatu, Sia 'Itt 
troXvTuv and Ai Siarayal ai Sia KATj^eVroj kc 
KavSviS €KKK7]0iaaTiKo\ Tciv ayiwv airoiTToXai 
(both of which will he treated of in conuexio 
with the Apost. Constitutions), we have certai 
pretended canons of an apostolic council at An 
tioch (the title being rov ayiov Upofidprvpo 
nafi(t>i\ov €K TrjS fv 'AvTiox^'^f 't^v aTro(n6Aai 

ffVVoSoV, TOVr' kffTlV iK TOIV (TWo'SlKUlV avTU} 

Kav6vaJi' fiipos twv vtt' aurov evpedevrwi' ets t^ 
'Hptyevovs Pi^\io6r}K7]v). They are in Bickel 
i. 138, and Lagarde, Ji'elig. Juris Eccles. p. 18. 

We also find another set of apostolic canon 
(opos KavoviKhs Tuiv ayiwv airo(TT6Kwv^ als 
published by Bickell, i. 133, and Lagarde, p. 3 
(and of which the latter critic says that it i 
" nondum theologis satis consideratum ") ; 'an 
yet again a curious series of alleged apostoli 
ordinances (many of which resemble parts c 
the apostolical constitutions), in three ancien 
Syriac MSS., one translated into Greek by Lagard 
(Bel. Jur. Eccl. p. 89), and two into English, wit 
notes, by Cureton, in ' Ancient Syriac Documenti 

o Yet it is certainly remarkable that, when we fin 
hear of these Canons, the question seems to be whethe 
they are apostolic or apocryphal. The view that the 
are an autlientic collection of post-apostolic synodic; 
decrees does not seem to have then suggested itself. 

P Refined distinctions have indeed been drawn to quo 
lify the apparent sense of some of tliese Canons (see Be> 
Cod. Can. in Cotel. vol. ii. Append, p. 100, and p. 130) 
but the difficulty attending them has probably had il 
share in preventing their full recognition. Hefele speak 
of the Canon on Hereticiil Baptism as contrary to tli 
Roman rule. Can. LXVI. is also contrary to the disc 
plinc of Rome; but not being in the first 50, it is hel 



relating to the earliest establishment of Christi- 
anity in Edessa,' &c., with preface by W. Wright, 
Lond. 18G4-. It appears that in Cod. Add. 14,173, 
fo). 37, in Brit, Mus. this document is quoted as 
" Canons of the Apostles." 

It is not perhaps a wholly unreasonable hope 
that further researches into the ecclesiastical 
MSS. of Syria may be the means of throwing 
more light on the perplexing questions which 
surround alike the apostolic canons and the apos- 
tolic constitutions, both of them, in all proba- 
bility, closely connected in their origin with that 
Church and couutry.i 

Authorities. — Ceiduriatores Magdeburg, ii. c. 7, 
p. 544, &c. Fr. Turrianus, Pro Canon. Apost. et 
Epp. Decret. Pontif. Apost. Adversus Magd. Centur. 
Defensio (Flor. 1572, Lutetiae 1573), lib. i. P. de 
Marca, Cone. Sacerd., iii. 2. J. Dallaeus, DePseud- 
epigraphis Apost., lib. iii. Pearsoni Vindic. 
/gnat, (in Cotelerius, Patr. Apost., vol. ii. app. 
p. 251), part i. cap. 4. Matt. Larroquanus in 
App. Obs. ad Pearsonianas Ignatii Vindic. (Rotho- 
mag. 1674). Beveregii Judicium de Can. Apost. 
(in Cotel., Patr. Apost., edit. 1724, vol. i. p. 432). 
Beveregii Adnotationes ad Can. Apost. (Ibid. p. 
455). Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Universalis Vin- 
dicatus a Gul. Beveregio (Ibid. vol. ii. app. p. 1, 
and Oxford 1848.) Brunonis Judicium de Auctore 
Canonum et Const itutionum Apostolicor'um (Cotel. 
vol. ii. app. p. 177). Proleg. in Ignatium Jac. 
Usserii (Ibid. vol. ii. app. p. 199), see cap. vi. 
Regenbrecht, Diss, de Can. Ap. et Cod. Ecc. 
Hisp., Ratisb. 1828. Krabbe, De Cod. Can. qui 
Apost. dicuntur, Eitt. 1829. Von Drey, Neue 
Untcrsuch. iiber die Konstit. und Kanones der 
Apost., Tubingen 1832. Bickell, Geschichte des 
Kirchenrechts, Giessen 1843, vol. i. Hefele, Con- 
ciliengeschichte, Freiburg 1855, vol. i. append. 
Bunsen, Christianity aiid Mankirui-, Lcndon 1854. 
Ultzen, Constitutiones Apost., Suerini 1853, pre- 
face § 2. De Lagarde, Reliquiae Juris Ecclesi- 
astici Antiquissinuw, 1856. [B. S.] 


.npostolical constitutions consist of eight books. 
Their genei\al scope is the discussion and regula- 
tion (not in the way of concise rules, but in 
diffuse and hortatory language) of ecclesiastical 
affairs. In some places they enter upon the 
private behaviour proper for Christians; in 
other parts, in connexion with the services of 
the Church, they furnish liturgical forms at 
considerable length." A large share of the 
whole is taken up with the subjects of the sac- 
raments, and of the powers and duties of the 

At the end of the eighth book, as now com- 
monly edited, are to be found the apostolical 
canons. These we have already treated of in the 
previous article. 

The constitutions, extant in MSS. in various 
libraries,** appear during the middle ages to have 
been practically unknown. When in 1546, 

9 Bickell, however, warns us that the fruits of such 
researches must be used with caution, on account of the 
uncritical way in which various pieces are put to- 
gether in these MSS. (vol. i. p. 218). 

» These belong especially to the question of Liturgies, 
and will not therefore be considered at length hero. 

•> An account of the MSS. is given in (jltzen's edition, 
and by Lagarde in Bunsen's Vhriit. and Man., vol. vi. 
p. 35. 

Carolus Capellus, a Venetian, printed an epitome 
of them in Latin translated from a MS. found in 
Crete, Bishop Jewell spoke of it as a work " in 
these countries never heard of nor seen bel'ore." 
(Park. Soc, Jew., i. 111.) In 1563 Bovius pub- 
lished a complete Latin version, and in the same 
year Turrianus edited the Greek text. It is not 
expedient here to pursue at any length the 
question of subsequent editions, but it may be 
as well to mention the standard one of Cote- 
lerius in the Patres Apostolici and the useful and 
portable modern one of Ultzen (Suerin, 1853). 
There is also one by Lagarde, Lipsiae, 1862. 

The constitutions profess on the face of them 
to be the words of the Apostles themselves 
written down by the hand of Clement of Rome. 

Book 1 prescribes in great detail the manners 
and habits of the faithful laity. 

Book 2 is concerned chiefly with the duties of 
the episcopal office, and with assemblies for 
divine worship. 

Book 3 relates partly to widows, partly to the 
clergy, and to the administration of 

Book 4 treats of sustentation of the poor, of 
domestic life, and of virgins. 

Book 5 has mainly to do with the subjects of 
martyrs and martyrdom, and with the rules for 
feasts and fasts. 

Book 6 speaks of schismatics and heretics, and 
enters upon the question of the Jewish law, and 
of the apostolic discipline substituted for it, and 
refers incidentally to certain customs and tradi- 
tions both Jewish and Gentile. 

Book 7 describes the two paths, the one of 
life, the other of spiritual death, and follows out 
this idea into several points of daily Christian 
life. Then follow rules for the teaching and 
baptism of catechumens, and liturgical pre- 
cedents of prayer and praise, together with a list 
of bishops said to have been appointed by the 
Apostles themselves. 

Book 8 discusses the diversity of spiritual 
gifts, and gives the forms of public prayer and 
administration of the commitnion, the election 
and ordinations of bishops, and other orders in 
the Church, and adds various ecclesiastical regu- 

This enumeration of the contents of the books 
is by no means exhaustive — the style being 
diffuse, and many other matters being incident- 
ally touched upon — but is merely intended to give 
the reader some general notion of the nature of 
the work. 

From the ("ime when they were brought again 
to light down to the present moment, great 
differences of opinion have existed as to the date 
and authorship of the coastitutions. 

Turrianus and Bovius held them to be a 
genuine apostolical work, and were followed in 
this opinion by some subsequent theologians, and 
notably by the learned and eccentric Whiston, 
who maintained that (with the exception of a 
few gross interpolations) they were a record of 
what our Saviour himself delivered to his 
Apostles in the forty days after his resurrection, 
and that they were committed to writing and 
were sent to the churches by two apostolic 
councils held at Jerusalem, A.D, 64 and a.d. 67, 
and by a third held soon after the destruction 
of the city. 

On the other hand Baronius, Bellarmine and 
I'etavius declined to attach weight to the Con- 



stitutious, while Daille and Blondel fiercely at- 
tacked their genuineness and authority. 

Whiston's main argument was that the early 
Fathers constantly speak of SiSac-KaXia ano- 
(TToKiKi], 5tari|ei$, ZinTayai, Ziard.yiJ'-o.Ta rSiv 
o.Troar6Kwv., km'iiiv ttjs XeiTovpyias, Kavwv ttjs 
aXriOeias, and so forth, which is true ; but he 
has not proved that these expressions are neces- 
sarily used of a definite book or books, and far 
less, that they relate to what we now have as 
the so-called Apostolical Constitutions. 

It will be well to look at some of the chief of 
these passages from the Fathers. 

We may begin with the words of Ireuaeus in 
the fragment first printed by Pfafl'iu 1715. oi 
To'is SevTepais tuiv aTroffToAoov Siara^ecTi iraprj- 
KoAovdriKOTes XcraaL top Kvpiov nav iTpoiT(popav 
h> -rf] Kaivij Sia8r]Kri KadearTiKevai Kark to 
MaAox'ou K. T. A. 

Professor Lightfoot is disposed to see here a 
reference to the apostolical constitutions, but 
does not recognise the Pfaflian fragments as 
genuine.'^ (Lightfoot On Epist. to Fhilipjnans, 
London, 1868, pp. 201, 202.) But if the genu- 
ineness be admitted, the reference is surely in 
the highest degree vague and uncertain. There 
is no evidence that the ordinances spoken of 
(whatever they were) were to be found in any 
one particular book— still less is there anything 
to identify what is spoken of with the apostolical 
constitutions either as we now have them, or 
under any earlier and simpler form. Moreover, 
it appears singular that if the CDnstitutions were 
really what the writer was relying on, he should 
not quote some passage from them. Instead of 
this, he goes on to cite the Revelation, the Epistle 
to the Romans, and the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
almost as if these contained the 5ioTa|6is in 
question. What is meant by the word Sevrepai 
it seems very difficult to say with certainty. 

Origen speaking of fiisting (in his 10th Homily 
on Leviticus) says, " Sed est et alia adhuc re- 
ligiosa [jejunandi ratio], cujus laus quorundam 
apostolorum Uteris praedicatur. Invenimus enim 
iu quodam libello ab apostolis dictum, Beatus 
est qui etiam jejunat prae eo ut alat pauperem. 
Hujus jejunium valde acceptum est apud Deum 
et revera digne satis : imitatur euirn Ilium qui 
animam suam posuit pro fratribus suis." 

The terms in which Origen introduces this 
citation do not seem very appropriate to such a 
work as the Constitutions, nor in point of fact 
do the words (which seem meant as an exact 
quotation) occur in it. There is indeed (Book 
V. 1) a general exhortation to fast iu order to 
give the food to the saints, but the passage has a 
primary reference (at all events) to raints im- 
prisoned on account of the faith. There is, there- 
fore, a considerable divergence between the words 
in Origen and those in the Constitutions; and 
we are hardly justified in seeing any reference to 
the latter in the former.* 

« Hilgenfeld appears to take a lilce vipw, both as to the 
Apostolical Constitutions being inteudeu, and as to the 
passage not being genuine. {Nov. Test, extra Canon, recept. 
Fascic. iv. pp. 83, 84.) Bunsen thinks the Fragment ge- 
nuine, and that it refers to some early " Ordinances," not 
necessarily the same as we now have : Christ, and Man., 
vol. ii. p. 39?, et seq. 

<• Prima iiicie. too, " literae quorvndam, aiiostoloiuni " is 
not an apt designation of a work professuig to njucsent 
the joiut decrees of all. 

A later treatise entitled ' De Aleatoribus,' of 
unknown date and authorship, erroneously as- 
cribed to Cyprian, refers to a passage " in doc- 
trinis apostolorum," relating to Church discipline 
upon oft'enders. Here again no effort has suc- 
ceeded in tracing the words of the citation either 
iu the constitutions or in any known work. 
There is, indeed, a passage of a similar effect 
(Book ii. c. 39), but the actual language is not 
the same ; and a similarity of general tenor is 
not much to be relied upon, inasmuch as the 
subject in hand is a very common one. 

We come now to Eusebius. In his list of 
books, after naming those generally allowed, and 
those which are avTiXi-y6fj.ivoi, he goes on, — " We 
must rank as spurious (yodoi) the account of the 
' Acts of Paul,' the book called ' The Shepherd,' 
and the ' Revelation of Peter,' and besides these, 
the epistle circulated under the name of ' Bar- 
nabas,' and what are called the 'Teachings of 
the Apostles' (Twj' d7ro(rT(SA.coi/ o.l \ey6fievat Si- 
Sa)(al}, and moreover, as I said, the ' Apocalypse 
of John,' if such an opinion seem correct, which 
some as I said reject, wdiile others reckon it 
among the books generally received. We may 
add that some have reckoned in this division the 
Gospel according to the Hebrews, to which those 
Hebrews who have received [Jesus as] the Christ 
are especially attached. All these then will be- 
long to the class of controverted books." (Euseb. 
Hist. Ecd. iii. 25.) 

The place here given to the SiSctxot (even 
supposing them to be the constitutions) is in- 
consistent with their being held a genuine work 
of the Apostles. It speaks of them, however, as 
forming a well-known book, and from the con- 
text of the passage, they seem to be recognised 
as orthodox ; but there is nothing to identify 
them directly with our present collection. 

Athanasius, among books not canonical, but 
directed to be read by proselytes for instruction 
in godliness, enumerates the Wisdom of Solomon, 
the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobias, 
and what he styles ^i^axv KaKovfi.ev7) tcov airo- 
aroXav. The same remarks obviously apply to 
this Father as to Eusebius (Op. S. Athan. i. 963, 
Ed. Bened.). 

The language of neither of them indicates that 
the work in question was looked upon as an au- 
thoritative collection of Church laws. Lagarde 
denies that either of them is to be considered 
as quoting any book of our constitutions, laying 
much stress on the distinction between 5i5axai 
and 5iaTa|6iy or ^laTayai airoaroKojv. (Bunsen, 
Christ, and Man., vol. vi. p. 41.") Bunsen, how- 
ever, himself is inclined to see here a real refer- 
ence to a primitive form of the constitutions. 
{Tbid. vol. ii. p. 405.) 

We now come to Epiphanius, who, writing at 
the close of the 4th century, has numerous 
explicit references to the Siaralis of the Apostles, 
meaning thereby apparently some book of a 
similar kind to that which we now have. His 
view of its character and authority is to be found 
in the following passage : — 

"For this purpose the Audiani themselves 
[a body of heretics] allege the Constitution of 
the Apostles, a work deputed indeed with the 

e In this work Lagarde writes under the name of 
Boetticher, which he has since changLd lor family reasons 
Iu L;,irarde. 



majority [of Christians] yet uot worthy of re- 
jectiou.f For all canonical order is contained 
therein, and no point of the faith is falsified, nor 
yet of the confession, nor yet of the adminis- 
trative system and rule and faith of the Church." 
{Hacr. 70, No. 10 ; comp. also Ibid, No. 11, 12 ; 
75, No. 6 ; 80, No. 7.) 

But when we examine his citations, we find 
that none of them agree exactly with our present 
text, while some of them vary from it so widely, 
that they can be connected with it only by the 
supposition that they were meant to be made ad 
seusum not ad literam. Even this resource fails 
m a famous passage, immediately following that 
just cited, where Epiphanius quotes the consti- 
tutions as directing Easter to be observed ac- 
cording to the Jewish reckoning,^ whereas in our 
present copies they expressly enjoin the other 
system. (See Book v. 17.) 

lu a work known as the ' opus imperfectum in 
Matthaeum,' once ascribed to Chrysostom, but 
now considered to have been the production of 
an unknown writer in the 5th century, there is 
a distinct reference to "the 8th book of the 
apostolic canons." And words to the efi'ect of 
tliose quoted are found in the second chapter. 
Another citation, however, in the same writer 
cannot be verified at all. 

It is not necessary to pursue the list further. 
From this time forwards references are found 
which can be verified with more or less exactness, 
and in the year 692 the council of Constantinoijle, 
known as Quinisextum, or the Trullan council, 
Ijad the work under their consideration, but came 
to a formal decision, refusing to acknowledge it 
as authoritative on account of the extent to which 
it had been interpolated by the heterodox. 

It appears then that we must conclude that 
there is no sufficient evidence that the Church 
generally received as of undoubted authority any 
collection of constitutions professing to have 
come from the Aim^tlr^ fluiusL'lves, or at least 
to be a trustworthy iJiiuiiti\o record of their 
decisions. Even Epipliauius bases his approbation 
of the work of which he' speaks on subjective 
grounds. He refers to it, because he thinks it 
orthodox, but admits that it was not received as 
a binding authority. Yet had such a work 
existed, it should seem that from its practical 
character it must have been widely known, per- 
petually cited, and generally acted upon. 

Indeed that the so-called apostolic constitu- 
tions, as they now stand, are not the production 
of the Apostles or of apostolical men, will be 
clear to most readers from their scheme and con- 
tents. " Apostles," says the author of an article 
on the subject in the ' Christian Remembrancer ' 
in 1854, " are brought together who never could 
have been together in this life : St. James, the 
greater (after he was beheaded), is made to sit 
in council with St. Paul (Lib. vi. c. 14), though 
elsewhere he is spoken of as dead (Lib. v. c. 7). 
Thus assembled, they condemn heresies and 
heretics by name who did not arise till after 

' Tr\v TuiV anoiTToXtov Sidra^LV, oixrai^ fi^v T0t5 ttoA- 
, Aois ec aix^LKiKTif, a\A' oiiK aSoKt/iOi'. 

B 'Opifoucri -yap iu Trj aVTrj iiarajei ol a7ro(rToAot int- 
Y^eis fir] {p-q(j)L(^riT<;, oAAa woniTe orau ol aSeA(|)0(. iip.ui' oi 
e(C T^s TrepiTOfi^s- huer' aiiTiov a/j.a iroulTe. And lie adds : 
Hapa Tot5 ctTTocTToAot? fie TO pr^TOf fit' 6/xdt'OLaf ezi t(|>t:'peTat , 
uis CTrifiapTupoOtri Ae'yoi'TCS ore Kaf re TrAarijflioO'i, iJi-rfii 
va-lv fieAeVu. 

their death (Lib. vi. c. 8) ; they appoint the 
observance of the days of their death (Lib. viii. 
c. 33), nay, once they are even made to say 
' These are the names of tiie bishops whom we 
ordained in our lifetime ' (Lib. viii. c. 47)." 

Most persons will also be of opinion that there 
is a tone about the constitutions themselves 
which is by no means in harmony with what we 
know of apostolic times. Thus for instance, the 
honour given to the episcopate is excessive and 

ovTos [i. e. 6 eTTicTKOTros] vfxaiu PaffiXevs Kul 
Svudarris- ovtos vjxSiv iTTLy^ios ©eos fjnTO. @€6u, 
OS 6<peiAei TTJs Trap' ii/xoiv tl/xTis arroAai^eii' (citing 
Ps. Ixxxii. 6 and Exod. xxii.-xxvJii. in LXX.). 
'O yap iwiaKOTTOs irpoKad^^iadco v/j.wv oos @€ov 
d|ia riTiiJ.rifJ.evos, rj Kparel rov K\T]pov Kal rov 
Xaov irauTOS apx'ei (Book ii. 26 ; comp. also 
Book ii. 33). 

And in Book vi. 2 we read : — 
64 yap 6 fiaaiXevaiv ineyeipSixiVOS KoXaireais 
a^ios, K&t' vios fi, Kav (piXos- Trdacp fnaWov u 
Upevcriv iiravKndfxivos ; "Otroi yap iepcoawii 
/SamAe/as d/xeivaiv, ivepl xpvxv^ ex"'^"'" '''^'' 
aySiva, roffovTw ku] ^apvripav exei rrjc npno- 
piav 6 ravTT) To\fir]ffas avrofXfj.aTi7v, fjirep 6 rfj 

A system, too, of orders and classes in the 
Churcli stands out prominently, especially in the 
8th book, of which there is no trace in the ear- 
liest days (see Bickell, vol. i. p. 62). Thus we 
have subdeacons, readers, &c., with minute direc- 
tions for their aj^pointment. Ceremonies also are 
multiplied. The use of oil and myrrh in baptism 
is enjoined (Book vii. 22), and the marriage of 
the clergy after ordination is forbidden (vi. 17). 
We must therefore feel at once that we have 
passed into a different atmosphere from that of 
Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, and that 
the connection of Clement's name with the work 
must be a fiction, no less than the assertion that 
he wrote its contents at the mouth of the apos- 
tles. Even those who think that they trace 
something like the origin of such a system in the 
letters of Ignatius must allow that it is here 
represented in a state of develojjment which 
must have required a considerable period of time 
to bring about. 

The questions, however, still remain : — 
To what date are we to assign the work in the 
form in which it now exists ? 

Can we show that it was in any degree formed 
out of pre-existing materials ? 

Bishop Pearson"' and Archbishop Usher regard 
the variations between the citations of Epipha- 
nius, and what we read in our present copies of 
the constitutions, as conclusive evidence that 
there have been alterations and interpolations on 
a large scale since the time of that Father, and 
the latter of these writers thinks that the same 
falsifier has been at work here, who expanded the 
shorter epistles of Ignatius into the so-called 
longer epistles, J 

1' CoDip. U.sber, in Cotel. J'atr. Apost. vol. ii. p. 220, 
edit. 1724. 

i Vind. Ignat. Part i. c. 4 pmpe fin. And scp tlie 
opinion oF Hpvi'vidm-, Cod. Can. lib. 2, cap. i.x. 

j Cdl.!. I'<:ii-. .1/1, \wl. li. Append, p. 22S. Biclccll lias 

colic, i-'l M' i:i>i iiiirs <ii CMrrespondencc in phraseology 

Ijctuccr llir l',iM>t!i'S and the Oonstitulions as 
tiny htaiid, wliich the reader may refer to in order to 
e.\aniine the piobuljility of the latter theory {lUidi. dcs 



According to Pearson, we should probably 
attribute the work in its existing form to about 
the middle of the 5th century, while Usher re- 
fuses to place it higher than the 6th century. If, 
on the other hand, we could suppose that Epipha- 
nius quoted loosely, and that the book which he 
had may, with occasional exceptions, have re- 
sembled in substance what we now have, ^ we 
should be able to put its antiquity somewhat 
higher. But whatever conclusion may be come 
to on this point, there is no satisfactory evidence 
to warrant its being assigned to any period suffi- 
ciently early to make it, as it stands, an authority 
as to apostolic usage. 

But the question still remains. Can we trace 
its composition, and in any degree identify the 
materials out of which it has been put together ? 

That the work was a pure and simple forgery 
is improbable. Such was not the course which 
matters took in early days ; nor would the mea- 
sure of acceptance which it obtained be easily ac- 
counted for on this theory. 

Moreover it contains passages which seem 
manifestly to belong to an early age. Thus in 
case of quarrels the Christian is recommended 
to seek reconciliation even at a loss to himself, 
Kal ytt^ ipxfcrd(>> firl KpiTTjpLov iOviKov (book ii. 
c. 45) — words which at all events savour of a 
time before the empire was Christian. So again, 
the secular judges are said to be idviKol Kal ov 
yivdxTKovTts dedrrira. So also martyrdom and 
persecution ou account of Christianity are spoken 
of as by no means exclusively belonging to the 
past (see Lib. 5, init. et alibi). 

And to mention but one more point, the charge 
of Arianism, which was at one time freely brought 
against the constitutions, and used to prove that 
they had been corrupted, if not forged, by here- 
tics,' has in later days been sometimes made the 
ground of an opposite inference. It is thought by 
some modern writers merely to show that the 
phrases excepted against date from a time before 
the conti'oversy arose, and when therefore men 
spoke with less of dogmatic exactness. ™ 

Perhaps it is possible to go even a step further, 
at all events, by way of not unreasonable conjec- 
ture. We have seen that Whiston relied on a 
number of places in which the early Fathers 
speak of SiSaxai, SiSacr/caAiai, 5iaTa|ets rtSi' ano- 
(tt6\q>v, and some years before Whiston wrote. 
Bishop Pearson (in his Vindiciae Ignatianae) 
had suggested the idea that, so far as such ex- 
pressions really referred to any specific woi-ks at 
all, they were to be understood of smaller, more 
ancient, and more fragmentary treatises, of a 
kind not rare in the Primitive Church, professing 
to contain the words of the apostles or of aposto- 
lical men on matters of doctrine and Church 
order. Some of these were the production of here- 
tics, some were of an orthodox character. Those 
which related to doctrine were called didascaliae. 

Kirchenrechts, vol. i. p. 58, note). Pearson takes a some- 
what different view, Vind. Ignat. ubi supra. 

k Comp. Bickell, i. pp. SV, 58, note. Epiphanius, how- 
ever, never quotes from the 7th or 8th books, which on 
any theory are doubtless of later date. 

1 See fur instance Le Clerc, in Cotel. Patr. Apnst. vol. ii. 
App. p. 492, ct seq.; and Bruno, ibid. p. 177, et seq. 
Indeed Photius and the TruUan Council had insinuated 
the same accusation {RibUoth. Can. ivz, 113). 

■" See Bickell, p. 58, note, p. 61, and p. 69, note. Cuuip. 
BuU, Oef. Fid. A'ic. lib. 2, c. 3, ij 6 

those which gave rules of ritual or discipline, 
Stard^eis or Constitutiones. These woi-ks, written 
at different times and in different parts of the 
Church, furnished (as Pear.son supposes) the mate- 
rials to the compiler, who, with many altei-ations 
and interpolations formed out of them our present 
constitutions ( Vindic. Ignat., Part i. c. 4). 

Other critics have spoken in terms which seem 
rather to point to a gradual accretion, added to 
from time to time to express the Church system 
as developed, and modified at the periods when 
such additions wore respectively made. Thus 
Lagarde says, " Communis virorum doctorum fere 
omnium nunc invaluit opinio, eas[Con.stitutiones] 
saccule tertio clam succrevisse et quum sex ali- 
quando libris absolutae fuissent, septimo et octavo . 
auctas esse postea " (^lieliq. Juris Eccles. Antiq. 

That the work as we have it is a composite 
one is indeed manifest enough " from the general 
want of internal unity, method, or connexion ; 
the difference of style in the various portions, and 
sometimes statements almost contradictory ; the 
same topics being treated over and over again in 
different places ; besides a formal conclusion of 
the end of the sixth book, and other indications 
of their being distinct works joined together " 
(^Christ. Rememhr. ubi supra). 

In the Paris Library is a Syriac MS. called the 
Didascalia or Catholic doctrine of the 12 Apos- 
tles and holy disciples of our Saviour. It con- 
tains in a shorter form much of the substance of 
the first six books of the constitutions, but with 
very great omissions, and with some variations 
and transpositions. 

Its contents were printed in Syriac by De La- 
garde (without his name) in 1854: and the same . 
critic, in the 6th vol. of Bunsen's Christianity and 
Mankind, has published, 1st, our present text, 
with what he states to be the variations of the 
Syriac ; and 2nd, a shorter Greek text or ' Didas- 
calia Purior,' founded on the Syriac." 

Bickell, who, however, when he wrote had 
only seen extracts, thought this Syriac MS. 'a 
mere abridgement of the larger work, and there- 
fore posterior in date to it, and adding little to 
our knowledge. 

But Bunsen {Christianity and Mankind, vol i. p. 
X.), Lagarde {Eel. Jur. Eccl. Ant. pref., p. iv.), and 
the author of the article in the Christian liemem- 
hrancer 1854, all agree that we have here an 
older and more primitive, if not the original 
work. Hilgenfeld says, " Equidem et ipse Syria- 
cam Didascaliam ad hujus operis primitivam 
formam propius accedere existimo, sed eandem 
nunquam mutatam continere valde dubito."" He 
concludes, on the whole, " tertio demum saeculo 
didascalia apostolica in eam fei'e formam redacta 
esse videtur, quam Eusebius et Athanasius nove- 
rant, quam recensionem a nostris constitutionibus 
apostolicis valde diversam fuisse antiquissima 
decent testimonia, praecipue Epiphanii. Ea autem 

° It does not seem, however, that this literal'y repre- 
sents the Syriac. For one of the passages given by Hil- 
genfeld (see infra), which undoubtedly e.xists in the Syriac, 
is not to be found in the 'Didascalia Purior.' It is much 
to be regretted that neither Lagarde nor any other Oriental 
scholar has published a literal translation of the Syriac 
text. , 

o His own view is that the Apostolical Constilutions 
sprang from an Ebionite source, allied to that which jiro- 
duced the Clementine Recognitions. 



etiara a Syriaca didascalia quamvis cognata 
saeplus discedunt." He thinks that the Syriac 
appears not to bo very consistent on the subject 
of the calculation of Easter. It seems, however 
(from the translations which he gives), that it 
contains a passage agreeing in substance with what 
Epiphanius quotes as to keeping Easter by the 
Jewish method(ante p. 121) : "Ihr sollt aber begin- 
nen dann, wenn cure Briider aus dem Volk [Israel] 
das Pascha halten, weil, als unser Herr und Lehrer 
mit uns das Pascha ass, er nach dieser Stunde von 
Judas verrathen wurde. Und um dieselbe Zeit 
haben wir angefangen, bedriickt zu wei'den, weil 
er von uns genommen war. Nach der Zahl des 
Mondes, wie wir ziihlen nach der Zahl der gliiu- 
bigen Hebraer, am zehnten im Monat, am Montag 
haben sich die Priester und Aeltesten des Volks 
versammelt " u. s. w., and subsequently — " Wie 
also der vierzehnte des Pascha fallt, so sollt ihr 
ihn halten. Denn nicht stimmt der Monat, und 
auch nicht der Tag in jedem Jahre mit dieser 
Zeit, sondern er ist verschieden." p 

Tliis is worthy of serious attention, as an argu- 
ment for the antiquity of this Syriac work. 

It would seem that it must at all events be ad- 
mitted that the original work from which the 
Syriac was taken consisted of six books only. 
The 7th and 8th books, as they now stand, formed 
no part of it. 

The same is the case with an Aethiopic version 
translated by Mr. Piatt. This also, though said 
to be very loose and of little value as a guide to 
the original text, is a witness to the fact that 
there were but six books when it was made. The 
like is true of the Arabic versions, of which some 
account was first given by Grabe, and of which 
two MSS. are in the Bodleian, i 

Not only do these facts tend to isolate the first 
six books from the 7th and 8th ; but the formal 
conclusion which occurs at the end of the 6th 
even in our present Greek, and the style of the 
contents itself, furnish internal evidence in the 
same direction. 

It has therefore been contended that the 
kernel out of which, to a great extent, the first 
six books sprang was a shorter book called 
SiSacr/caA-ia riv airoarSXaiv, of which the Sj-riac 
version furnishes a fair idea, if not a really pure 

And as none of Epiphanius's citations are made 
from the two last books, it is suggested that we 
may have here something like a key to the work 
as it was in his time, the 7th and 8th books hav- 
ing been added since. " 

Coming to the 7th book, we must notice that 
its first thirteen chapters or thereabouts exhibit 
:i :,'reat similarity, both in matter and expression, 
to the first part of an ancient tract printed by 
I'-ickell from a Vienna MS., and entitled Al Sia- 
Tuyai al 5ia K\r]fxevTos Kal KavSves iKK\r](TLa<TTi- 

I' SeeHilgenfeld, Xovum Test, extra Can. recept. Fasci- 
iilu:; iv. p. 79, et seq. (Lipsiae, 1866.) 
'I I'here are in the Arabic five chapters not in the 

' The fact that there is no Oriental version of the eight 
I . reck books as a whole, has been reUed on to shew that 
I hey had not been united together in one work up to 
I he year 451, when the Egyptian, Aethiopic, and Syriac 
I liurches were severed from the communion of the Greeks 
aid Latins (Christ. Remembr., 1854, p. liVs). The same 
a\ilhority is inclined to date the Didascaly in the latter 
iurt of the 3rd centmy. 

Kol rSiV ayiujv airo(rT6\a>v, ' This tract professes 
to contain short and weighty utterances by the 
apostles (who ai-e introduced as speaking success- 
ively) on Christian morals, and on the ministers 
of the Church.' An Aethiopic version (for it is 
extant in Coptic, Aethiopic, and Arabic) calls it 
" canons of the apostles which they have made 
for the ordering of the Christian Church." " It 
is the piece which Bickell and others after him 
have called " Apostolische Kirchenordnung." 
It is assigned by him to the beginning of the 
3rd century.* The same date is given in the 
article on the subject in Ilerzog's Encyclopddie. 
where it is treated as a document independent of 
the constitutions. Bunsen, removing the dra- 
matic form and presenting only the substance of 
the piece, considers it to be in fact a collection of 
rules of the Alexandrian Church. This view, 
however, is warmly disputed by the writer in the 
Christian Eemembrancer (1854, p. 293), who 
contends that its whole garb, style, and lan- 
guage show that it was not an authoritative 
work, but was the production of a pious writer, 
who arrayed in a somewhat fictitious dress what 
he sought to inculcate. It is more remarkable for 
piety than knowledge ; for though the number of 
twelve apostles is made out, it is by introducing 
Cephas as a distinct person from Peter, and by 
making him and Nathanael occupy the places of 
James the Less and of Matthias. St. Paul does 
not appear at all — a fact, perhaps, not without 
its bearing on conjectures as to its origin. 

It should be observed that the language of the 
first part of this tract, and of the 7th Book of the 
Constitutions, coincides to a great extent with the 
latter part of the Epistle of Barnabas, leaving it 
doubtful whether it was taken thence or whether 
the transcribers of that epistle subsequently in- 
corporated therewith a portion of this treatise. 
Borrowing and interpolation must, it would 
seem, have taken place on one hand or on the 
other, and, as in other cases, it is difiicult to de- 
cide the question of originality. 

Upon this state of facts the writer in the 
Christ. Rem. argues that this tract furnished 
materials for the first part of the 7th Book of 
the Constitutions. He also thinks that it is it- 
self the work refei-red to by Eusebius and Atha- 
nasius under the name of SiSax^ tcoi' airo- 
(tt6\wv. We have seen already that the title 
in the Greek varies from that in the Aethiopic, 
and it is urged that (considering the subject) 
there seems no reason why it may not also be 
suitably designated 'Teaching of the Apostles.' 
Now in an old stichometry appended to Niceph- 
orus' chronography,>' but perhaps of earlier date 
than that work, the number of lines contained 
in certain works is given, and from this it would 
appear that the 'Doctrina Apostolorum' was 

8 Bickell, vol. i. A pp. I. It will also be found vi 
Lagarde's Rel. Juris Eccl. Ant, p 74. 

<■ It is the former of these points alone in which the 
likeness appears between this work and the 7th Book of 
the Constitutions. 

" See Bickell ubi supra; and i. p. 88. 

« It mentions only "Readers" in addition to the three 
orders of the ministry; and as 'rerlnlliaii does the same 
{De Praescr. Ilaer., c. 41), this is thouglit a ground for 
attributing it to his epoch (Bickell, vol. i. p. 92). See 
also Hilgcnfcld, A'ou. Test, extra Can. rec, Fasciculus iv. 
lip. 93, 9 1. 

y A production of the 9th century. 



shorter than the Book of Canticles, and that a 
book called the ' Teaching of Clement,' was as 
long as the Gospel of Luke. Hence, if the ' Doc- 
trina ' of this list be the same as that of Euse- 
bius, it must have been a book very much 
shorter than our present constitutions, and one 
not far differing in length from the tract of 
which we have been speaking; while the 'Teach- 
ing of Clement ' (a larger work) may be a desig- 
nation of the earlier form of our present first 
six books — in short, of the Didascalia. Euffinus, 
in a list otherwise very similar to those of 
Eusebius and Athanasius, omits the 'Teaching 
of the Apostles,' and inserts instead ' The two 
ways, or the Judgment of Peter.' Assuming 
that the ' Doctrina ' is the tract we have been 
discussing, reasons are urged for supposing that 
it reappears here under a different title. We 
have already seen that the Greek and Aethiopic 
give it two different names, and its contents 
might perhaps render the designation in Euf- 
finus not less appropriate. For St. John, who 
speaks first, is introduced as beginning his ad- 
dress with the words, "There arc two ways, 
one of life and one of death ;" and St. Peter in- 
tervenes repeatedly in the course of it, and at 
the close sums up the whole by an earnest ex- 
nortation to the brethren to keep the foregoing 
injunctions. Such is the hypothesis of the 
learned writer in the Christ. Rem. 

Hilgenfeld, it may be mentioned, has independ- 
ently arrived at a conclusion in part accordant 
with the above. He argues strongly that the 
treatise published by Bickell is that spoken of by 
RuflSnus under the name of ' Duae viae vel Judi- 
cium Petri,' but does not apparently identify it 
with the ' Doctrina Apostolorum ' of Athanasius. 
He thinks the book was known in some form to 
Clemens Alesandrinus, and agrees that great part 
of it passed intii the 7th Book of the Constitu- 
tions (see Hilgenfeld's Novum Test, extra Canonem 
Receptum, Lipsiae 1866 ; Fasciculus iv. p. 93). 

We now come to the 8th Book. Extant in 
several Greek MSS. (one being at Oxford) are 
large portions of the matter of the earlier part 
of this book, not however connected together 
throughout, but appearing in two distinct and 
apparently separate pieces. The first of them 
is entitled ' Teaching of the Holy Apostles con- 
cerning gifts ' (xapi(r,uaT&)r), the second 'Eegu- 
lations (Siarafeis) of the same Holy Apostles 
concerning ordination [given] through Hippo- 
lytus ' (irepi x^ 'po'^'oi'twi' ^la 'IttttoAutov). The 
two together, as just observed, comprise a very 
large proportion of the 8th Book, but are not 
without some omissions and several variations 
from it. In that book as we have it, the two 
portions represented respectively by these sepa- 
rate treatises stand connected by a short chapter, 
containing nothing of importance, and seeming 
to serve only as a link. 

Hence it has been suggested that we have in 
the treatises in question an older and purer form 
of the 8th Book, or rather the materials used in 
its composition. The ' Regulations ' are also in 
existence in Coptic (indeed there are two Coptic 
forms differing from each other and from the 
Gi-eek by additions and omissions and probably 
in age), in Syriac, Arabic, and Aethiopic, the 
text being in many cases a good deal modified.^ 

8 Tlie Syriac and Coptic form part of the coUectious 

Bunsen ti-eated these as a collection of AleX' 
audrian Church rules, and Mewed tlie por- 
tions common to them and to the 8th Book of 
the Constitutions as in a great degree derived 
from a lost work of Hippolytus Trepi x'*/""^/""' 
Ta-r^ {Christ, and Man., vol. ii., p. 412). 

On the other hand Bickell argues that the 
tracts in question are nothing more than ex- 
tracts from the constitutions, more or less 
abridged and modified. He relies, for example, 
on the fact that in one of these treatises no less 
than in the text of our 8th Book, St. Paul (who 
is introduced as a speaker) is made to command 
Christian masters to be kind to their servants, 
" as we have also ordained in ichat has preceded, 
and have taught in our epistles." This he con- 
siders to be a clear reference to what has been 
before said in the constitutions on the same sub- 
ject (Book vii. c. 13). 

Lagarde expresses a similar view, and draws 

mentioned infra, p. 125. See also Christ. Semembr.,p. 2i0, 
as to anotlier Syriac MS., and comp. p. 283. 

^ The inscription on the statue of Hippolytus at Eome 
mentions among his works nepl xapttr/ixdrtor aTrocTToAtKtj 
jrapdSoats. It is not clear whether the Trepl \ap. was 
one treatise and ourotrT. napaS. another, or whether tlie 
whole is the title of one work. See Bickell, p. 60, note.- 
As resrards the -n-epl ;^ei,poToi'iioc, Bunsen considers it to 
li r ' I' ■ II til" subject of much interpolation, and regards 
in: ill ; spcct to have been like that of the Consti- 
1 1 1 1 i>. I I : . s, the composition of which he describes 
ill w ui di w uiili quoting in relation to the general subject : 
" Here we sue the very origin of these Constitutions. 
Towards the end of the ante-Nicene period they made 
the old simple collections of customs and regulations into 
a book, by introducing different sets of ' coutumes,' by a 
literary composition either of their own making, or by 
transcribing or extracting a corresponding treatise of some 
ancient father. Thus the man who compiled our Vth book 
has, as everybody now knows, extracted two chapters of 
the ancient epistle which bears the name of Barnabas. 
The compiler of the 8th book, or a predecessor in this sort 
of compilation, has apparently done the same with the 
work of Hippolytus on the Charismata" {Christianity 
and Mankind, vol. li. 416). Elsewhere, in the same work, 
he expresses an opinion that the old collections of customs 
here spoken of were themselves made at a much earlier 
time — perhaps in the 2nd century — and express the prac- 
tice of various great churches ; and that the consciousness 
of apostolicity in that primitive age justifies, or at least 
excuses, the fiction by which they were attributed to 
Apostles, — a fiction which deceived no on", and was only 
meant to express an undoubted fact, viz., the apostolicity 
of the injunctions as to their substance (vol. ii. 399). 
Ascending still a step higher, he believes that the mate- 
rials employed in these old collections were of all but 
apostolic times. The oldest horizon to which we look 
back as reflected in them is perhaps the age immediately 
posterior to Clement of Home, who himself represents the 
end of the Johannean age, or first century (see vol. ii. 
p. 402). To Bunsen's mind, full of faith in the power 
and tact of subjective criticism, this means more 
than to the mind of theologians of the English school. 
He believed in the possibility of applying the cri- 
tical magnet to draw forth the true fragments of steel 
from the mass in which to our eyes they seem inex- 
tricably buried. He thus speaks of the subjective 
process by which he makes the first step upwards: — 
" As soon as we get rid of all that belongs to the bad 
taste of the fiction, some ethic introductions, and all occa- 
sional moralising conclusions, and generally everything 
manifestly re-written with literary pretension ; and lastly, 
as soon as we expunge some interpolations of the 4th and 
5th centuries, which are easily discernible, we find our- 
selves unmistakeably in the midst of the life of the Church 
of the 2nd and 3rd centuries " (vol. ii. p. 405 >. 



attention to the circumstance that in one part of 
the Munich MS. of the -jrepl x^^poroviSiv, there 
is a note which expressly speaks of what follows 
as taken out of the apostolical constitutions.'' 

In conclusion, it may be remarked that all 
such researches as those we have been consider- 
ing as to one piece being the basis or original of 
another, are beset with much difficulty, because 
certain statements or maxims often recur in 
several tracts which (in their present state at 
all events) are distinct from each other, though 
sometimes bearing similar names. Lagarde points 
out {Bel. Jur. Eccl. Ant., preface p. xvii., and 
Bunsen's Christianity and Mankind, vol. vi. p. 38, 
39) that there once was a Syriac collection in 
eight books equally professing to be the work of 
Clement, yet far from being identical -with our 
present Greek constitutions, though here and 
there embracing similar pieces. Passages which 
Lagarde deems to be extracts from the 2nd and 
3rd Books have been edited by him in Syriac 
from fragments found in the same Paris MS. 
(Sangerm. 38) which contains the Syriac Didas- 
calia"^ (see his Eel. Jur. Eccl. Ant. Syrian. 1856). 
He has also translated them into Greek (see his 
Bel. Jur. Eccl. Ant. Graece, p. 80, and Pref. 
p. xvii.).<i Then again, there is an Egyptian col- 
lection,^ also in eight books, the relation of which 
to the abovementioned Syrian Octateuch is dis- 
cussed by Lagarde {Bel. Jur. Eccl. Ant. preface, 
and Bunsen's Christ, and Mankind, vol. vi. p. 39). 

We have thus endeavoured to present a sketch 
of some of the leading theories which have been 
put forward as to the apostolical constitutions. 
Did space pei-mit it would not be difficult to add 
others. Krabbe appears to have thought that 
Eusebius, Athanasius, and Epiphanius knew the 
first seven books, and that they were composed 
in the East not long after the time of Cyprian 
(the seventh being a kind of appendix to the 
others), and probably by one author, whose object 
was to model the Church on a Levitical pattern, 
and who perhaps described not so much what 
existed as what he desired to see. At a later 
period (end of 4th or beginning of 5th century) 
the 8th Book was added, embracing divers pre- 
cepts which were commonly supposed to be apos- 
tolical, together with much from the writer him- 

b Lagarde, Eel. Juris Eccl. Ant., Preface, p. viii. ; and 
see also, ibidem, a theory as to the name of Hippolytus, 
as connected with the treatise. 

<> 'I'his must not be confonnded with the Syriac Didas- 
calia previously mentioned, from which it is quite 

d Matter closely agreeing with these fragments, though 
not in quite the same order, and connected with nmch 
that Is additional, is also found in a MS. of the 12th cent, 
in the Cambridge Univ. Library. This MS. (brought by 
Buchanan from Southern India) contained eight books of 
Clementine Constitutions placed at the end of a Syriac 
Bible ; but it is now in a dilapidated state. It may be 
that the Paris fragments are extracts from it, or, on the 
other hand, this MS. (as the later of the two in date) may 
possibly contain a subsequent development. It may be 
hoped that further attention will be paid to it by Oriental 
scholars. Its existence seems to have been unknown to 

« Of this Egyptian collection, the first two books arc 
printed in a Greek version by Lagarde in Bunsen's CIn-ist. 
and Mavlcind, vi. 451 ; and see Bunsen's analysis of the 
collection, ibid. vii. 372. Another Coptic MS. was trans- 
ited by Dr. Tattam in 1848. There is a. notice of it in 
tlie Vhriit. Rcmembr. for 1854, p. 2S2. 

self, probably an Arian or Macedonian. Thi:T 
second writer probably is responsible for many 
intei'polations in the previous books.' 

Von Drey again, who spent much labour on 
the subject, advocated the view that the treatises 
of four distinct writers are combined in our pre- 
sent work. The first six books, he thought, 
were written after the middle of the 3rd century, 
to teach practical religion, and were adapted for 
catechumens. The seventh is probably of the 
date of A.D. 300, and treats of the mysteries for 
the use of the faithful alone. The 8th Book is 
a kind of pontifical of some Eastern Church, being 
full of liturgies for the use of the clergy. It 
dates perhaps from the 3rd century, but has 
been altered and adapted to the state of things 
in the middle of the 4th. Athanasius, who 
speaks of the StSaxv KaXovjxivrj rHv a-KoffToXwv 
as fit for recent converts desirous of instruction, 
is to be taken as referring to tl]e six first books.e 
But before the time of Epiphanius the eight 
books were joined as one work. 

Interesting as such inquiries are, they cannot 
at present be considered as having removed the 
question of the origin and date of the apostolical 
constitutions out of the class of unsolved problems.'' 
The majority of scholars will perhaps decline to 
say with confidence more than that the precise 
age and composition of the work is unknown, 
but that it is probably of Eastern authorship,' 
and comprises within itself fragments of very 
different dates, which we have no certain mean* 
for discriminating from one another, and which 
have undergone great modifications when in- 
corporated with the rest. The consequence is 
that, as it stands, the work cannot be deemed to 
reflect a state of things in the Church much, if 
at all, prior to the Nicene age."* 

Nor can it be said ever to have possessed, so 
far as we know, any distinct ecclesiastical au- 
thority. We are in the dark as to its author- 
ship, and there is no such proof of its general 
and public reception at any period as would 
seem needful to establish its validity as an autho- 
ritative document. There are indeed signs of a 
common nucleus of which various churches seem 
to have availed themselves, but in adopting it into 
their respective systems they modified it in re- 
lation to their respective needs, with a freedom 
hardly consistent with the idea that it was en- 
titled to very great veneration. 

Authorities. — F. Turrianus, Proocm. in Lihr. 

f When, however, a very late date is attempted to be 
assigned, it should be remembered e contra that, as ob- 
served by Bickell, metropolitan authority does not appear ; 
and if we hear of asceticism (in book viii.), there is no 
metition of monasticism. 

g While, on the other hand, the 85th of the Apostolical 
Canons perhaps refers to the 7th and »th when it speaks 
of the Apostolical Constitutions as &MTaya\ a? ov XPV 
Sjjfxocroeueti/ cttI Trai'Twt' fita to. er aurat? fj.v<JTiKa.. 

h See the words of Lagarde in Bunsen, Christ, and 
Manic., vol. vi. p. 40. 

' See Bickell, vol. i. p. 63, who assigns several grounds 
for this conclusion. It is worth notice that throughout 
the Constitutions the Church of Eome never occupies any 
position of priority or pre-eminence. 

•' The age of the Syriac Didascalia is of course another 
question. It demands fuller consideration, which it can 
hardly receive from scholars in general until it has been 
literally translated. According to the ' Didascalia Purior' 
in Bunsen, it is not free from very hyperbolical language 
in relation to the clergy. 



dementis Rom. dc Const. Apost., kc. Antv. 1578. 
Joh. Dallaeus, De I'seudepigraphis Apost., lib. 
iii. Harderv. 1653. Jac. Usserii, Diss, de 
Ignat. Epist. (in Cotel. Patr. Ap., vol. ii. app. 
p. 199, &c. Edit. 1724). Pearsoni, Vindic. Ignat. 
(in Cotel. Patr. Ap., vol. ii. app. p. 251). Part I. 
chap. 4. Brunonis, Judicium (Ibid. p. 177). 
Cotelerii, Judic. de Const. Apost. (Cotel. vol. i. 
p. 195). J. E. Grabe, Spicileg. Patr. Oxen. 
1711. J. E. Grabe, Essay upon tico Arabic MSS. 
Loud. 1711. W. Whistoa, Primitive^ Christianity 
Recived. Loud. 1711. Krabbe, JJber den Ur- 
sprung und den Inluilt der Ap. Const. Hamb. 
1829. Von Drey, Neue Untersuchungen iiber 
die Const, &c. Tubingen 1832. Rothe, Anfdnge 
der Christl. Kirche. Bickell, Geschifhte der Kir- 
chcnreclds, vol. i. Giessen 1843. Ultzen, Const. 
Apost. Sueriui 1853. Bunsen's Cliristianity and 
Mankind, London 1854. Christian Remembrancer 
for 1854. De Lagarde, Reliquiae Juris Ecclesi- 
astici Antiquissimae, 1856. Idem, Si/riace 1856. 
Hilgenfeld, Novum Testamentum extra Canonem 
receptum. Lipsiae 1866 ; Fascic. IV. The Ethiopnc 
Didascalia ; or, the Ethiopia version of the Apos- 
tolical Constitutions, received in the Church of 
Abyssinia. With an English translation. Edited 
and translated by Thomas Pell Piatt, F.A.S. 
Loudon, printed for the Oriental Translation 
Fund, 1834. The Apost. Constitutions ; or, the 
Canons of the Apostles in Coptic, with an English 
Translation by Henry Tattam, LL.D., «S:c. ; printed 
for the Oriental Translation Fund, 1848. [B. S.] 

APOSTOLICUS, a title once common to all 
bishops (the earliest instance produced by Du 
Cauge is from Venantius Fortunatus, 6th century, 
addressing Gregory of Tours, Prolog, to V. S. 
Martini and elsewhere ; but none of his quota- 
tions use the word absolutely and by itself, but 
rather as an epithet); but from about the 9th 
century restricted to the Pope, and used of him 
in course of time as a technical name of office. 
It is so used, e.g., by Rupertus Tuitiensis, 12th 
century (Z>e Divin, Offic. i. 27) ; but had been 
formally assigned to the Pope still earlier, m 
the Council of Rheims A.D. 1049, — "quod solus 
Romanae sedis Pontifex universalis Ecclesiae pri- 
mas esset, et Apostolicus," — and an Archbishop 
of Compostella was excommunicated at the same 
council for assuming to himself " culmen Apo- 
stolic! nominis " (so that, in the middle ages, 
Apostolicus, or, in Norman French, VApostole or 
I'Apostoile, which = Apostolicus, not Apostolus, 
became the current name for the Pope of the 
time being). Claudius Taurinensis, in the 9th 
century, recognizes the name as already then 
appropriated to the Pope, by ridiculing his 
being called " not Apostolus, but Apostolicus," as 
though the latter term meant Apostoli cUstos : 
for which Claudius's Irish opponent Dungal 
takes him to task. (Du Cange ; Raynaud, Contin. 
Baronii.) [A. W. H.] 

APOSTOLIUM ('A7roo-ToA.€:oy), a church 
dedicated in the name of one or more of the 
Apostles. Thus Sozomen {Hist. E-rl. i\. lit, p. 
376) speaks of the Basilica of St. Vvtw at Koine 
as TO Ylirpov airo'cnoKiiov; and the saiiic wi'iti'r, 
speaking of the church which Kufinus built at 
the Oak (a suburb of Chalcedon) in honour of 
SS. Peter and Paul, says that he called it 'Airo- 
aToX€Lov from them {Hist. Eccl.xiu. 17, p. 347). 
[Martyrium, Propheteum.] [C] 


APOTAXAMENI (o7roTo|ci^€i'oO— renun- 
ciantes, renouncers, a name by which the monks 
of the ancient Church were soriietimes designated, 
as denoting their renunciation of the world and 
a secular life, e.g. in Palladius Hist. Lausiac, 
c. 15, and Cassian, who entitles one of his books, 
De Institutis Renunciantium. (Bingham, book vii. 
c. 2.) [D. B.] 

APPEAL {Appellatio in reference to the 
court appealed to, Provocatio in reference to the 
opponent ; ecptais in classical Greek, verb in 
N. T. iTriKa\f7crdat), a complaint preferred before 
a superior court or judge in order to obtain due 
I'emedy for a judgment of a court or judge of an 
inferior rank, whereby the complainant alleges 
that he has suffered or will suffer wrong. We 
are concerned here with ecclesiastical appeals 
only. And they will be most conveniently dis- 
cussed if — distinguishing between 1, appeals 
fi'om an ecclesiastical tribunal to another also 
ecclesiastical, and 2, appeals from an eccle- 
siastical to a lay tribunal, or vice versa ; 
and further, as regards persons, between (a) 
bishops and clei-gy, to whom in some rela- 
tions must be added monks and nuns, and (;8) 
laity — we treat successively, as regards subject 
matter, of I. Spiritual Discipline properly so 
called, II. Civil Causes, and III. Criminal ones. 
It will be convenient also to include under the 
term Appeal, both appeals properly so called, 
where the superior tribunal itself retries the 
case ; and that which is not properly either 
revision or rehearing, where the jurisdiction of 
the superior tribunal is confined to the ordering, 
upon complaint and enquiry, of a new trial by 
the original, or by an enlarged or otherwise 
altei'ed, body of judges ; and that again which 
is properly a mere revision, where the case is 
revised by a higher tribunal but without sus- 
pending sentence meanwhile ; and, lastly, the 
transference also of a cause from one kind of 
tribunal to another not co-ordinate with it, as 
e.g. from lay to spiritual or vice versa, which, if 
the first court have completed its sentence, 
practically constitutes the second into a court of 
appeal to its predecessor. It is necessary also 
to bear in mind the difference between a friendly 
interference, such as brotherly love requires on 
the part of all bishops if any fall into heresy 
or sin, but which implies no formal authority 
of the adviser over the advised ; and an arbitra- 
tion, where the arbiter, who may be any one, 
derives his authority from the mutual and free 
consent of (properly) both parties, but (as will 
be seen) in certain cases sometimes from the sole 
action of one ; and an appeal, where some defi- 
nite superior tribunal may be set in motion by 
either party, but has in that case exclusive as 
well as compulsory jurisdiction ; and the yet 
further step, where (like the intercossio of the 
Tribuni Plcbis) the superior court or magistrate 
has the power of calling up the case for revision, 
and of suspending sentence meanwhile, suo motu. 
An appeal, however, of whatever kind, implies 
the legality in the abstract, and assumes the 
fact, of the jurisdiction of the court appealed 
from as a primary court. And it becomes need- 
ful, therefore, here to assume, although it is 
no business of this article either to detail or 
to prove, the extent and limits of ecclesiastical 
jurisdiction in the first instance; in order clearly 



to set forth the various checks in the way of 
appeal placed in such case upon that original 
jurisdiction. On the other hand, the limitation 
of the subject to the period antecedent to 
Charlemagne, excludes from consideration the 
whole of the elaborate fabric built up by the 
Canon Law of later times, mainly upon the basis 
of the False Decretals. And we have nothing 
to do, accordingly, with that grand innovation, 
whereby, in the West, the entire system of purely 
ecclesiastical appeals (and, indeed, of justice) was 
in effect perverted and frustrated, viz., the right 
gradually allowed of appealing immediately from 
any ecclesiastical tribunal, high or low, upon 
any subject great or small, to the Pope at once ; 
nor yet with the elaborate disputes upon the 
nature and limits of majores causae (the phrase, 
however, dating from Innocent I.); nor with 
the encroachments of the highest or of other 
ecclesiastical tribunals upon those of the State ; 
nor with the celebrated Ap2xl comme d'Abus in 
medieval and later France ; nor with such 
questions as the legitimate effect of the clause 
ajjpcllatione remota or postposita in a Papal 
brief; nor with the appeal from the Pope to a 
General Council, present or future ; or from the 
Pope ill-informed, to the Pope well-informed : 
nor again, on another side of the subject, with 
distinctions between appeals judicial or extra- 
judicial, or from sentences definitive or inter- 
locutory ; nor with the system, at least as sub- 
sequently elaborated, of Apostoli (certainly not 
derived from j^ost appellationeni) or letters di- 
missory, whether reverential, refutatory, repo- 
sitory, testimonial, or conventional, whereby 
the under court formally transferred the cause 
to the upper one ; nor with the fatalia appel- 
latlonum, scil., the fixed times wilihin which an 
appeal must be laid, carried to the upper court 
by means o{ Apostoli. prosecuted, and concluded; 
nor, in a word, with any other of the elaborate 
details of the later Canon Law upon the subject. 
Our attention must be confined to the system 
so far as it was worked out under the Koman 
Empire, and renewed or modified under that of 

L 1. Spiritual jurisdiction in matters of dis- 
cipline over clergy and laity alike, rested in the 
beginning both by Scriptural sanction and by 
primitive practice with the bishop, acting, how- 
ever, rather with paternal authority and in the 
spirit of mutual love, through moral influence 
on the one side met by willing obedience on the 
other, than according to the hard outlines of a 
(ixed Church law laid down in canons ; although 
such canons gradually grew into existence and 
into fulness, and the ultimatum of excommuni- 
cation must have existed all along as the punish- 
ment of obstinate or repeated transgression. The 
Apostolic canons, however (xxxvii. and Ixxiv.), 
recognize as the then Church law, and the Nicene 
Council (a.d. 325) formally establishes, the au- 
thority of the synod of each province as a court 
of (revision rather than) appeal from a single 
bishop : enacting, that " excommunicate clerks 
and laymen shall abide by the sentence of their 
bishop," but that, " to prevent injustice, synods 
of the bishops of a province (eTrapx'") shall be 
held twice a year, in order that questions arising 
on such subjects may be enquired into by the 
community of the bishops ; a sentence of excom- 
munication, if confirmed by them, to hold good 



until a like synod should reverse it" (Cone. Nic. 
can. 5) : such right of appeal being apparently 
the common law of the Church, and the Council 
interfering only to secure it by requiring synods 
to be held with sufficient frequency. And this 
right, as respects presbyters and all below pres- 
byters, was recognised and confirmed by Cone. 
CartL, A.D. 390 can. 8, and A.D. 398 can. 29, 
66, Cone. Milev. a.d. 416 c. 22, for Africa ; by 
Cone. Vasens. a.d. 442* can. 5, and Cone. Venet. 
A.D. 465 can. 9 (" Episcoporum audientiam, non 
secularium potestatum," in this last instance), 
for Gaul and Armorica; by Cone. Hispal. a.d. 
590 cc. 5, 9, for Spain; and by Cone. Antioch. 
cc. 6, 11, A.D. 341, directed both against the Pope 
and against appeals to the Emperor (adopted into 
the canons of the Church Catholic), and by the 
Council of Constantinople in 381, cc. 2, 3, 6, for 
the East. The last-named Council also in effect 
limited the right of appeal from above as well 
as below, by forbidding all bishops rals virepopiois 
iKKXrjffiats eirievai, and by establishing each pro- 
vince in an independent jurisdiction (Cone. Con- 
stantinop. c. 2). 

a. Confining ourselves first to the case of clergy, 
the right of the bishop to judge his brethren or 
his clerks, was further limited, in that part of 
the Church where Church law was earliest and 
most formally developed, viz., Africa, by the 
requirement of twelve bishops to judge a bishop, 
of six to judge a presbyter, of three to judge a 
deacon (Cone. Carth. A.D. 348 can. 11, a.d. 390 
can. 10, A.D. 397 can. 8). And a dispute be- 
tween two bishops was still later referred by the 
(African) Council of Mileum a.d. 416 (can. 21), 
to bishops appointed by the metropolitan. In 
the East, and generally, bishops (and presbyters) 
would seem to have been left by the Nicene 
canon merely to the natural resort of an appeal 
from one synod to another and a larger one, viz. 
to the metropolitan and bishops of the next pro- 
vince ; which is the express rule laid down in 
Cone. Antioch. a.d. 341, cc. 11, 12, 14, 15, and 
in Cone. Constaiitinop. A.D. 381, can. 6. So also 
canon 13 of the collection of Martin of Braga. 
But between the Nicene and Constantinopolitan 
Councils and that of Chalcedon in 451, a further 
modification took place in accordance with the 
settlement of the several Patriarchates, whereby 
the appeal was made to lie from the bishop to 
the metropolitan with his synod, and then from 
him to the Patriarch ; with the further claim 
gradually emerging on the part of the Bishop of 
Rome to a right of supreme judicial authority' 
over the entire Church. (But whether the sen- 
tence was to remain in force pending the appeal 
seems to have been a doubtful question, variously 
settled at diffei-ent times and places ; see Bal- 
samon in Can. Afric. 32.) The first step was 
that, in the West, of the Council of Sardica, A.D. 
347, intended to be oecumenical but in result only 
Western, and not accepted as authoritative either 
by the Eastern or even by the African Churches : 
which attempted to make the system work more 
fairly, and perhaps to escape reference to an Arian 
Emperor, by giving presbyter or deacon an ap- 
peal to the metropolitan and the comprovincial 
bishops (can. 14 Lat.), and by enacting with re- 
spect to bishops, in the way of revision rather 
than appeal, that, whereas ordinarily they should 
be judged by the bishops of their own province, 
if a bishop thought himself aggrieved, either the 



bishops who tried him or those of the neighbour- 
ing province should consult the Bishop of Rome , 
and if he judged it right, then the comprovincial 
or the neighbouring bishops should by his ap- 
pointment retry the case, with the addition (if 
the complainant requested it, and the Bishop of 
Rome complied with his request) of presbyters 
representing the Bishop of Rome, who were to 
taka their place in that capacity among the 
judges (can. 4, 5, 7) : no successor to be appointed 
to the deposed bishop pending such new trial. The 
choice of the Bishop of Rome as referee (to decide, 
however, not the case itself, but whether there 
ought to be a new trial) has some appearance of 
having been personal to Julius the then Pope (as 
was the subsequent grant of Gratian to Pope 
Damasus), to whom the right is granted by name 
in the Greek version of the canons (so Richerius 
and De Marca) ; but certainly it was determined 
to the see of Rome, not through previous prece- 
dent, or as by inherent right, but as in honour 
of the one Apostolical see of the West, — " in 
honour of the memory of St. Peter." It was in 
fact giving to the Pope the right previously 
possessed exclusively by the Emperor, save that 
the latter would refer causes to a Council. Prior 
to 347, the case of Fortunatus and Felicissimus 
A.D. 252 (striving to obtain the support of Pope 
Cornelius against their own primate St. Cyprian, 
and eliciting from the latter an express assertion of 
tlie sufficiency and finality of the sentence passed 
upon them by their own comprovincial African 
bishops, St. Cypr. Epist. 59, Fell)— and that of 
Marcian, Bishop of Aries A.D. 254 (whom the 
bishops of Gaul are exhorted to depose for Nova- 
tianism, St. Cyprian interfering on the sole 
ground of brotherly episcopal duty to urge them 
to the step, and asking Pope Stephen to inter- 
fere also, but solely on the like ground. Id. Epist. 
68),' — and those of Basileides and of Martial, 
Bishops respectively of Leon with Astorga and of 
Merida, also A.D. 254 (deposed by the Spanish 
bishops as having lapsed, and of whom Basileides, 
having deceived Pope Stephen into re-admitting 
him to communion, and into "canvassing" for his 
restoration, was rejected nevertheless by the 
Spanish, seconded by the African bishops. Id. Epist. 
67) — sufficiently shew that while the Nicene 
canons only confirmed and regulated the ju'e- 
viously established and natural principle of the 
final authority of the provincial synod, that of 
Sardica introduced a new provision, although one 
rather opening the way for further extensive 
*changes than actually enacting them. In 341, 
also, the Council of Antioch, representing the 
East, repudiated the same Pope Julius's in- 
terference on behalf of St. Athanasius (Spzom. 
iii. 8 ; Socrat. ii. 15) and passed a canon 
against the return of a deposed bishop to his see 
unless by decree of a synod larger than that 
which had deposed him (can. 12); as well as 
against appeals of deposed bishops to emperors, 
unsanctioned by the comprovincial bishops: canons 
adopted into the code of the whole Church. In 
the West, however, the Sardican canon became 
the starting point of a distinctly marked ad- 
vance in the claims of the Bishop of Rome, 
although not without opposition on the part of 
the Church, nor, on the other hand, without 
political suppoi-t from the Emperors. In 367 a 
Council of Tyana restored Eustathius of Sebastea 
to his see, among other grounds, on the strength 


of a letter of Pope Liberius ; but tlie proceed- 
ing was condemned in strong terms by St. 
Basil the Great {EpAst. 263 § 3). In 378, the 
Emperor Gratian added State sanction — at least 
during the Popedom of Damasus, and in reference 
to the schism of the antipope Ursicinus — to the 
judicial. authority of the Bishop of Rome, but in 
conjunction with six or seven other bishops if 
the accused were a bishop himself, and with an 
alternative of fifteen comprovincial bishops in the 
case of a metropolitan, the attendance of the 
accused bishop at Rome to be compelled by the 
civil power {Cone. Horn., Epist. ad Gratian. et 
Valentin. Lnpp. a.d. 378, in Mansi, iii. 624, and 
the Rescript appended to it of the same Em- 
perors ad Aquilimim Vicarium). In 381, how- 
ever, the epistle of the Italian bishops (including 
St. Ambrose) to Theodosius, claims no more re- 
specting Eastern bishops in the case of Maximus 
(deposed by the Council of Constantinople), than 
that the voice " of Rome, of Italy, and of all the 
West," ought to have been regarded in the matter. 
But in some year between 381 and 398 (see 
Tillemont, Mem. EccL), although Theodoret (v. 
23) seems to place it under Innocent I. in 402, 
Flavian, accepted by the East, but rejected by 
Egypt and by Rome and the West, as Bishop of 
Antioch, was summoned by the Emperor to go 
to Rome to be judged there by the Bishop of 
Rome, but refused to submit; and was finally 
accepted by the Pope, to whom he sent a depu- 
tation of bishops, at the intercession of St. 
Chrysostom, but without any pretence of trial. 
In 404-406, Innocent's interference to procure 
St. Chrysostom's own restoration to his see, even 
to the extent of withdrawing communion from 
St. Chrysostom's opponents, proved as great a 
failure as Pope Julius's like attempt on behalf 
of St. Athanasius (Sozom. ■N'iii. 26-28. and the 
letters of St. Chrysostom and Pope Innocent in 
Mansi, iii. 1081-1118); although the mean pro- 
posed was not a trial by the Pope but a general 
Council. While St. Chrysostom himself at the 
same period affirms the old principle, that causes 
must not vtrepopiovs (AKicrOat, dAA' ev Ta7s fwap- 
Xi'ais TO, Twv iirapx^iv yv^va^iadai (in Mansi, i/>.). 
But even in the Western Church at the same 
period the Roman claim was admitted with diffi- 
culty, and only gradually and by continual strug- 
gles. Innocent I. indeed declared that, "si majorcs 
causae in medium fuerint devolutae, ad seder.i 
Apostolicam, sicut syuodus statuit" (meaning, of 
course, but exaggerating, the Sardican canons) 
" et vetus sive inveterata consuetudo exigit, post 
judicium episccpale referantur " (Epist. 2 ad 
Victric). But in actual fact, 1. in Africa, A.D. 
417-425, the appeal to Pope Zosimus of the pres- 
byter Apiarius, condemned by his own Bishop, 
Urbanus of Sicca, whom the Pope summoned to 
Rome to be judged, and on refusal sent legates to 
successive Carthaginian Councils to enforce his 
claims, was in the first instance provisionally com- 
promised, by a temporary admission of the Papal 
authority (Ejiist. Cone. Afric. ad Bonifac. Papain 
A.D. 419, in Mansi, iv. 511), on the ground of the 
canons of Sardica, alleged by the Popes (Zosimus, 
Boniface, Celestine) to be Nicene; but on the 
production of the genuine canons of Nicaea from 
Constantinople and Alexandria, was absolutely 
rejected {Epist. Cone. Afric. ad Caelestinum a.d. 
425, in Mansi, iv. 515): whilst the canon (22) 
of Mileum, a.d. 416, which is repeated byCarth- 


Rginian Councils down to a.d. 525 (Mansi, viii. 
644), assigns presbyters and all below them to 
appeal, *' non ad transmarina judicia sed ad 
primates suarixm provinciarum ; ad transmarina 
autem qui putavei-it appellandum, a uullo intra 
Africam ad commuuionem suscipiatur ;" and the 
Cod. Can. Afric. 18 Gr. 31 (a.d. 419), adds to this 
— "sicut et de Episcopis saepe constitutum est," 
the genuineness of which last clause is suppoi'ted 
by Tillemont, De Marca, and Beveridge, although 
denied by Baronius. It seems certainly to have 
been inserted in the canon by some African coun- 
cil of this period. At the same time, while the 
gloss of Gratian on the word " transmarina " — 
'• nisi forte ad Romanam sedem appellarerit " — 
is plainly of the kind that as exactly as possible 
contradicts its text; it is evident by St. Augustin's 
letter to Pope Celestine in 424 (Epist. 209), that 
applications from Africa in a friendly spirit to 
Rome in disputes respectiag bishops, both to 
judge and to confirm others' judgments, and this 
not only during the provisional admission of^he 
Papal claim (as in the case of the Bishop of 
Fussala), but before it, had been frequent. It is 
hard to believe, in the face of the precisely con- 
temporary and unmistakeable language of the 
assembled African bishops at the close of the 
controversy respecting Apiarius, that such ap- 
plications could have been in the nature of formal 
appeals ; although the case of Pope Leo I. and Lu- 
picinus, A.D. 446, shows the Papal claim to have 
been still kept up (St. Leo, Epist. xii. al. i. § 12). 
2. In lUyria, — whereas, in 421, the Emperor 
Theodosius had decreed that doubtful cases should 
be determined by a council, "non absque scientia" 
of the Bishop of Constantinople {Cod. Tlicod. 
xvi. tit. 2. s. 45), — in 444, Pojje Leo I., insisting 
upon the canons apparently of Sardica, and as 
part of the Papal measures for securing the 
whole of lUyria to the Roman Patriarchate, 
commanded appeals ("caussae graviores vel appel- 
lationes ") from Illyria to be brought to Rome 
(St. Leo, Epist. X. § 6). And 3. in Gaul, in 445, 
the same Pope, overthrowing tlie decree of Pope 
Zosimus in 418, which had constituted Aries 
the metropolitan see of the province, insisted on 
rehearing at Rome in a synod the causes of 
Bishop Projectus and of Celidonius Bishop either 
of Vesontio or of Vienne, whom Hilary of Aries 
had deposed, and carried the point, although with 
strong opposition from Hilary (St. Leo, Epiist. 
X.). Pope Hilary, however, 461-462, Epist. xi., 
respecting the Metropolitan of Vienne and Aries, 
refers his authority as Bishop of Rome to the 
"decreta principum." And undoubtedly a decree 
of the Emperor Valentinian III., in the year 445, 
•definitely assigned to the Pope, not simply an ap- 
pellate jurisdiction, but the right of evoking causes 
to Rome smo motu, by enacting that " omnibus pro 
lege sit quidquid sanxit vel sanxerit Apostolicae 
sedis auctoritas, ita ut quisquis Episcoporum ad 
judicium Romaui autistitis evocatus venire neg- 
le.xerit, per moderatorem ejusdem provinciae 
adesse cogatur" (Cod. Tlicod. NovcU. tit. xxiv., 
Suppl. p. 12). An ultimate appellate jurisdiction 
teas also given at the same period, but by Church 
atithority, viz., by the general council of Chalce- 
don in 451, to the Bishop of Constantinople : the 
I order of appeal being there fixed from bishop to 
metropolitan and synod, and from tlie latter to 
I the particular Patriarch or to the Bishop of Con- 
stantinople (Cone. Chalc. c. 9). 




The Eastern rule appears to have henceforward 
remained the same ; except that Justinian a.d. 
533, confirming the canon of Chalcedon in other 
respects, dropped all special mention of the 
Bishop of Constantinople, but enacted in general 
that an appeal should lie from bishop to metro- 
politan, and from metropolitan alone to me- 
tropolitan with synod, but that from the synod 
each Patriarch should be the final court of 
appeal in his own Patriarchate, as final as was in 
civil cases the Praefcctus Practorio (Justin. Cod. 
vii. tit. 62. s. 19) ; although no cause was to come 
to him at once unless in the form of a request 
that he would delegate it to the bishop, who was 
the proper primary tribunal (Id. i. tit. 4. s. 29 , 
7. tit. 62. s. 19 ; l^ovell. cxxiii. 22). A law of Leo 
and Constantius in 838 (Leunclav. Jus Gr. Pujin. II. 
99) likewise declares the patriarch to be the apx'? 
of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, whose decision, there- 
fore, is final, unless indeed he chooses to review it 
himself And so also, apparently, the 8th General 
Council of Constantinople A.D. 870 (Act 10, cc. 
17, 26). It is to be added, however, that in the 
case of any one under the degree of bishop, 
and in cases not ecclesiastical, the bishop was 
the primary judge, but from him the case might 
be taken to the civil judge, the Emperor deciding 
if they differed ; but in the case of a bishop, the 
right of appeal to the patriarch enacted by 
Justinian is final (Justin., Novell. Ixxxiii. 12. 
cxxiii. 21, 22). 

In the West, the changes in the matter relate 
to two points, to the fruitless attemjjts of the Popes 
to obtain appellate jurisdiction over the I^ast, 
and to their more successful efforts to secure their 
Western claim of the like kind under the altered 
laws and policy of the new Barbarian rulers of 
Europe ; efforts which may be said to have 
finally secured success under the Carlovingians, 
in the popedom of Nicliolas I. about 858. and as 
confirmed by the false Decretals, first used by 
Nicholas in 864 (Gieseler). For the former, in 
449, Flavian no doubt ajjpealed from Dioscorus 
and the Ephesine Latrocinium nominally to the 
Pope, but Leo's own lettei to Theodosius in con- 
sequence (St. Leo, Epist. 43 al. 34, and 44 al. 40 ; 
Liberat. lircv. 12, in Mansi, ix. 379), shows that 
the tribunal of appeal contemplated by even the 
Pope himself, was a general council (see Quesnel 
and Van Espen). In 484, however, Felix II. in a 
synod at Rome, as the issue of a long dispute, 
during which, among other steps, he had sum- 
moned Acacius of Constantinople to be tried at 
Rome upon the strength of the canons of Sardica, 
misnamed Nicene, made an open schism with the 
East, which lasted 40 years, by excommunicating 
and deposing Acacius (Mansi, vii. 1054); a sen- 
tence wliich, it need not be said, was disregarded. 
In 587, Pelagius II. seems to have confirmed the 
sentence of acquittal passed by a tribunal at 
Constantinople, summoned by the Emperor, in 
the case of Bishop Gregory of Antioch, while 
protesting against the title of universal bishop 
applied by the same authority to the Bishop of 
Constantinople (St. Greg. M., Epist. v. 18; Eva- 
grius, vi. 7) ; a protest renewed, as every one 
knows, by Gregory himself But this implied 
no formal superiority over Eastern bishops. 
And the claim unhesitatingly advanced by Gre- 
gory — "De Constantinopolitana ecclesia quis earn 
dubitet Apostolicae sedi esse subjectam" (St. Greg. 
M., Epist. ix. 12) — was assuredly not admitted by 



the Church of Constantinople itself. Further 
on, the Council in Trullo in 691, repeated uot 
only the 3rd canon of Constantinople in 381, 
but the 28th of Chalcedon in 451, which latter 
equals Constantinople to Eome (Cone. Quinisext. 
can. 36) ; and also the 17th of the same Council 
of Chalcedon (/'>. 38), which involves the 9th of 
the same council, viz., that which (as above said), 
so regulates the course of appeals as to put the 
patr'arch of a province with an alternative of 
the Bishop of Constantinople as the ultimate 
tribunal. The dispute which a century after 
issued in the great schism, cut short the narrowev, 
by absorbing it in the broader, controversy. For 
the West, however, matters proceeded more suc- 
cessfully. Gelasius (492-496), while allowing 
ihe subordination of the Pope to a general 
council approved by the Church, asserts posi- 
tively (^Epist. 13), that the see of St. Peter " de 
omni ecclesia jus habeat judicandi, neque cui- 
quam de ejus liceat judicare judicio," and that 
" ad illam de qualibet mundi parte canones ap- 
pellari voluerint, ab ilia autem aemo sit appellare 
permissus." In 503, although the Arian Theodoric 
appointed a commission of bishops, under the presi- 
dency of a single bishop (of Altino), to judge of the 
disputed election of Symmachus to the Popedom, 
ami although Symmachus in the first instance 
admitted their jurisdiction, and both parties 
appealed to the judgment of Theodoric himself; 
yet 1. a Roman synod {Synodus Palmar is) both 
sanctioned Symmachus's election without pre- 
suming to make enquiry, and declared the inter- 
ference of laity in Church elections or property 
to be against the canons (Mansi, vlii. 201, sq. ; 
Anastas. Lib. Pontif. in v.Sjjmmachi); and 2. Enno- 
dius of Ticinum, in 511, formally asserted in an 
elaborate document the absoluteness of the Papal 
power, and especially that the Pope is himself 
the final court of appeal, whom none other may 
judge (Mansi, viii. 282-284). And at the end 
of the century Gregory the Great assumes as 
indisputable that every bishop accused is subject 
to the judgment of the see of Rome (Epist. ix. 
59). During the following period, however, — 
while the sutlering African Church, retaining her 
privilege untouched, but as a privilege, under Gre- 
gory the Great, yet practically gave up her an- 
cient opposition a few years later (Epist. Episc. 
Afric. ad Papam Theodorum, in Act. Cone. Lat- 
eran. A.D. 649, Mansi, x. 919), — the European 
Churches were practically under the government 
of the kings, although the theoretical claims of 
the Popes remained undiminished. The Irish 
Ciiurches, indeed, were still independent of the 
Pope, the end of the seventh century being the 
close of the Celtic schism, except in Wales. In 
Saxon England, the proceedings of both kings and 
synods in the appeals of Wilfrid (678-705),when 
the Pope reversed the judgments of English 
synods on Wilfrid's complaint, showed on the one 
hand a feeling of reverence for the Pope (e.g. the 
Council of Nidd, A.D. 705 [Eddius 58] did- not 
repudiate the Pope's decree, but the testimony of 
Papal letters, which might be forged, as against 
the viva voce evidence of Archbishop Theodore) ; 
but on the other, disregarded such decree in 
practice, by enforcing that precise severance of 
Wilfrid's diocese against which he had appealed. 
And the Council of Cloveshoo, A.D. 747, pointedly 
limits appeals to the provincial council, and no 
f\irther (can. 25). In Spain, although Gregory 


the Great interfered by a legate authnri^ 
tatively in tavour of deposed bishops, viz., 
Stephanus and Januarius, on the ground, first, 
of Justinian's law as being their Patriarch, and 
if that was refused, then by the right of the see 
of Rome as head of the Church (Epist. xiii. 45), 
yet in 701 or 704, King Witiza, in a Council of 
Toledo, expressly forbade appeals to any foreign 
bishop (Cone. Tolct. xviii.). And a little earlier, 
admission into Church communion was declared 
dependent on the will of the Prince (Cone. Tolef. 
A.D. 681 c. 3, and 683, c. 9). The Kings in effect 
were in Spain supreme judges of bishops ( Cenni, 
De. Antiq, Eecl. IJisp. ii. 153, quoted by 
Gieseler). In Gaul, the cases of Salonius, 
Bishop of Embrun, and Sagittarius, Bishop ot 
Gap, deposed in 577 by a synod of Lyons, re- 
stored by Pope John III. on appeal, but by per- 
mission and power of King Guntram, and then 
again finally deposed in 579 by a Council of 
Chalons (Greg. Turon., Hist. Franc, v. 21-28), 
leave the Papal claim iu a similar state of half 
recognition to that iu which it stood in England. 
And in the ensuing century the Royal authority 
here also practically superseded the Papal. In 
615, the administration of ecclesiastical disci- 
pline is made subservient to the king's interces- 
sion (Cone. Parif. c. 3, as confirmed by Chlotarius 
II.). And many instances of depositions of bishops 
occur without appeal to the Pope, beginning 
with that of Saffaric of Paris, deposed by a 
second synod there, to which he had appealed 
from a former one, under King Chilperic, a.d. 
555. Gregory the Great, indeed, renewed the 
ingenious expedient of appointing the Bishop of 
Aries his vicar to decide such causes in Gaul, in 
conjunction with twelve bishops ; and yet even 
so, most of such causes were decided without 
eveu the presence of the Papal vicar (De Marca, 
vii. 19). The Capitula of Hadrian I., sent to 
Ingilram of Metz in 785, introduced the first 
great innovation upon preceding rules, by enact- 
ing (c. 3) that no bishop should be condemned 
unless in a synod called " Apostolica aucto- 
ritate ;" and again, that, if a deposed bishop, 
whose primary tribunal was the comprovincial 
synod, appealed from it to Rome, "id observandum 
esset quod (Papa) ipse censuerit" (c. 20, 23, and 
Epitome Capit. A.D. 773). But they contained 
also the African prohibition of appeals ad trans- 
marina judicia (see Gieseler). And while the Ca- 
pitulary of Aix in 789, repeated more expressly 
by the Council of Aix in 816 (cc. 73, 74), repeats 
the Nicene and Antiochene (341) canons without 
the addition of those of Sardica, the Capitularies 
as collected by Benedict Levita contain also the 
Sardican canons. For bishops, then, Charlemagne 
allowed the appeal to Rome for a new trial, 
the comprovincial synod being still held to be 
the proper tribunal for such cases : and an appeal 
being also allowed to more numerous episcopal 
judges if dissatisfaction were felt with those 
originally appointed by the metropolitan, and, 
again, from them to a synod (Capit. vii. 413), 
or again, from a suspected judge to another (ib. 
vii. 240, and Add. iii. 25, iv. 18, sq.) : — see 
aipit. V. 401, 410, vi. 300, vii. 102, 103, 314, 
315, 412, Add. iii. 105 :— but left the ordinary 
and direct right of a proper appeal to the Pope, 
and the condition of his prior consent to the trial 
of an accused bishop, sufficiently unsettled to lead 
to the great disputes of the fo!lowin.<j period, of 


which tlie case of Hincmar and Bishop Rothad 
is the primary case. The Carlovingian Princes, 
indeed, deposed bishops in synods, just as they 
elected them, without any reference to the 
Pope. But the Papal power gradually in- 
creased. And while Gregory IV., in 835, and 
Leo IV., about 850, expressly claim a proper 
appellate jurisdiction, Pope Nicholas I., 85^-807, 
on the strength of the False Decretals, may 
i)e said to have finally established the claim 
in its fulness. Even in 791, however, the synod 
of Friuli asserted for the Patriarch of Aquileia 
the right, that even no presbyter, deacon, or 
archimandrite be deposed, in his Patriarchate, 
without consulting him (can. 27) : the same right 
which Hadrian claimed universally for the Bishop 
of Rome. As regards all below bishops, the 
Council of Frankfort in 794, can. 6, re-enacts the 
order of appeal from bishop to metropolitan, i.e., 
to the provincial synod, but no further ; and, in 
addition, orders the civil magistrate (Comes) to 
act as assessor, and to refer to the Emperor all 
cases too hard for the metropolitan. And Capit. 
iii. 1, A.D. 812, includes bishops also among those 
who are to bring their disputes to the Emperor 
for settlement. 

In sum, appeal from a bishop or bishops to his 
neighbouring brethren, under their metropolitan, 
i.e., fi'om one or few bishops to many, was 
the Church's common law; the appeal termi- 
nating there, until the law of Valentinian in 
445 for the Bishop of Rome, the canon of Chal- 
cedon in 451 for the Bishop of Constantinople 
and patriarchs generally, and the law of Jus- 
tinian in 533 for all patriarchs without dis- 
tinction, allowed further appeal from bishops to 
their patriarchs : the Bishop of Rome, however, 
alleging also for his right the nari'ow and in- 
sufficient basis of the canons of Sardica, and cus- 
tom, and in time also the broader and sentimental 
ground of the privilege of St. Peter. The False 
Decretals first established in the West, in its full 
meaning, the absolute both appellate and imme- 
diate jurisdiction of the Popes as of Divine right, in 
the 9th century, during the Papacy of Nicholas I. 
It remains to add, that the Cyprian, the Armenian, 
the Georgian, the Bulgarian, and the Ravennate, 
claims, to be autocephalous, were simply rem- 
nants of the older condition of things before the 
existence of patriarchates, ditfering from each 
other only in the fact that the Cyprian right 
was actually tried and confirmed by a general 

p. The above canons for the most part leave 
laymen to their original right of appeal to a 
provincial synod, according to the canon of Nice. 
And this was plainly their right, generally 
speaking, throughout ; and is confirmed (as above 
said) by the Council of Frankfort in 794. In 
Africa, however, where the right of appeal was 
more jealously guarded than elsewhere, it was 
enacted at one time {Cone. Carth. A.D. 397 can. 

18, and A.D. 398 can. 22, 23) that the bishop of 
the place " agnoscat et finiat" the causes of all 
below presbyters, although in no case " absque 
lir;ieseutia clericorum suorum." Hincmar, in the 
:*tli century, limits the same class of appeals to 
tlio provincial synod, protesting only against any 
furtlier right of appeal in such cases to the Pope. 
I. 2. The interference of lay tribunals in causes 
■'liiritual, after the Emperoi-s became Christian, 
bulungs properly to other articles. Questions of 



faith and such as were purely ecclesiastical, as it 
is sufficient here to state upon the unqualified 
testimony of Gothofred (^Comment, in Cod. TlieoL 
16. tit. 2. s. 23, quoted by Bingham), were left 
ordinarily to bishops and synods, by laws reach- 
ing from Constantius to Justinian (e. g. Novell. 
Ixxxiii., cxxiii. 21). And the law of Honorius 
in 399 {Cod. Tlwud. 16. tit. 11. s. 1), among others, 
which expressly denies any proper right of 
Church courts to civil jurisdiction, affirms also 
that causes of religion as properly belong to 
them. When, however, either questions of faith 
or private causes became of political importance, 
a qualified and occasional practice of appeal to 
the Emperors from spiritual tribunals naturally 
grew up. Our business is with the latter, i.e. 
with judicial cases. And here it may be said in 
brief, tliat the Emperors throughout claimed and 
exercised a right of ordering a new trial by 
spiritual judges ; the choice of whom so far 
rested with themselves, that they took them if it 
seemed good from another province than that of 
the parties accused or accusing. So Constantino 
dealt with Caecilianus in the Donatist contro- 
versy, appointing fii-st Melchiades of Rome and 
three Gallic bishops to judge the case at Rome, 
and then, upon the dissatisfaction of the Doua- 
tists, commanding a synod to rehear it at Aries 
(without the Pope at all) in 314. The precise 
question, however, was one of discipline more 
than of belief. And Constantino disclaimed all 
right of appeal from the episcopal tribunal to 
himself. So also Bassianus of Ephesus, and 
Eusebius of Dorylaeum, asked letters from the 
Emperor Marcian, that the Council of Chalcedon 
in 451 might judge their appeals. And at a 
somewhat earlier period Theodosius in a like 
case transferred causes from one province to 
another (De Marca, De Cone. Sac. <t Imp. iv. 
3). So also Theodoric appointed bishops to de- 
cide the case of Pope Symmachus c. A.D. 500, 
although, after commencing the case, they ulti- 
mately refused to judge the Bishop of Rome, 
save by a merely formal judgment. And the 
Council of Mileum in 416, while condemning to 
deprivation any appellant to a civil tribunal, 
excepts the case of those who ask from the 
Emperor " episcirpale judicium." On both sides, 
however, this middle course was occasionally 
transgressed. Bishops sometimes asked the 
Emperors themselves to decide their appeals : 
e.g., even St. Athanasius, while in his Apol. 
ii. expressly repudiating the Emperor's power 
to decide such a cause, yet, after the Coun- 
cil of Tyre had deposed him, requested the 
Emperor nevertheless, not only to assemble a 
" lawful" council of bishops to i-ehear the case, 
but as an alternative, ■^ Kal ahrhv Se^aadai 
rriv airoXoyiav (Socrat. i. 33). And the Council 
of Antioch accordingly, in 341, took occasion (as 
above said) to prohibit all applications to the 
Emperor except such as were backed by letters 
of metropolitan and provincial bishojis, and to 
insist upon the restriction of fresh trials to " a 
lai-ger synod ;" canons repeated down to the 
days of Charlemagne, and adopted by the Church 
at large, although repudiated as Arian by 
St. Chrysostom and by Pope Innocent I., wlien 
quoted against the former. And about a.d. 380, 
Suljjicius Sevcrus, again, affirms that he himself 
and his fellow bishops had done wrong in allow- 
in" Priscillian to appeal to the Emperor, and 
K 2 



lays it down tliat he ought to have appealed to 
other bishops. Yet both Pope Symmaclius and his 
opponent Laurentius requested the Arian Lom- 
bard Theodoric to decide between them. On 
the other side, when mentioning a very late 
case, where the Emperor transferred a cause of 
a spiritual kind from the Patriarch Luke of Con- 
stantinople, A.D. 1156-1169, to a civil court, 
Bnlsamon (in can. 15 Syn. Carthag.), while 
alfirming this to be against the canons, yet ad- 
mits that a lay co-judge might rightly be asked 
of the Emperor. And Justinian (AortV/. cxsiii. 
21) reserves indeed a right upon appeal of as- 
signing judges, from whom an appeal lay "se- 
cundum legum ordinem," i.e. ultimately to the 
rracfectus Prcwtorio and Quaestor Palatii (Cod. 
7. tit. 62. s. 32); but ecclesiastical causes are 
expressly excepted from such appeal. On the 
other hand, Arcadius and Honorius expressly 
prohibit appeals from councils to themselves ; 
unless, indeed, this refers only to civil and 
criminal causes. The Carlovingian Emperors 
(as we have seen above) reserved an appeal to 
themselves in difficult cases from the metro- 
politan, in causes of presbyters and all below 
them ; besides appointing the civil magistrate 
as assessor to the metropolitan in the first in- 
stance. And in the case of Leo IIP a.d. 800, 
when Charlemagne convened a synod at Rome to 
investigate accusations against that Pope, the 
bishops appointed declined to act, on the ground 
that it was the Pope's right to judge them, and 
not theirs to judge the Pope (Anastas., in V. 
Leon. IIP). 

II. We pass next to civil causes : and the 
jurisdiction of bishops in these, whether lay or 
clerical, is of course, as a coercive jurisdiction, 
purely a creation of municipal law. As founded 
upon 1 Cor. vi. 4, it could not have been until 
the time of Constantine more than a voluntarily 
conceded power of arbitration, whereby both 
plaintiff and defendant, being Christians, agreed 
to be bound (see Estius, adloc.y But upon prin- 
ciples of Christian love and of avoiding scandal, 
the decision of such cases became the common 
and often the inconveniently troublesome busi- 
ness of bishops : e.g., of Paphnutius (see Euffi- 
nus), Gregory Thaumaturgus (St. Greg. Nyss. in 
Vita), St. Basil the Great (St. Greg. Naz. Orat. 
20), St. Ambrose (Epist. 34), St. Augustine (Pos- 
sid. in Vita), St. Martin of Tours (Snip.' Sev. ' 
Dial, li.): and is recognized as their work by 
St. Chrysostom {De Sac. iii. 18). The Apost. 
Constit. ii. 45-47 regulate the process. St. 
Cyprian (Adv. Judaeos iii. 44), speaking of resort 
to the bishop and not to the secular court as the 
duty of Christians, may serve as a specimen of 
the feeling upon which the practice rested. And 
while Socrates (vii. 37) speaks of Bishop Syl- 
vanus of Troas as declining it either for himself 
or his clergy, it is recognized even by the Council 
of Tarragona in 516 (c. 4) as extending to pres- 
byters and deacons also. The practice was 
changed from a precarious to a recognized and 
legal institution by Constantine. Either party 
to a suit was allowed by him, not in form to 
appeal from magistrate to bishop, but to do so 
in effect ; in that he gave to either the power to 
choose the bishop's court in preference to the 
magistrate's, the bishop's sentence to stand as 
good in law as if it were the Emperor's (Euseb., 
De V. Constantini, iv. 27 ; Sozom. i. 9) ; and if 


the law at the end of the Theodosian code Is 
(as Seldeu, and, among later writers, Haenel 
and Walter [see Robertson's BccJtet, p. 80] think, 
but Gothofred denies) his, then took the still 
further step of empowering either, without the 
other's consent, and whether the cause were 
actually pending or even already decided by the 
civil court, to claim a rehearing in the court of 
the bishop (Extrav, de Elect. Judic. Episc. Cod. 
Theod. vi. 303). 

o. This power was enlarged in the case of the 
clergy into a compulsory jurisdiction, the Church 
forbidding clergy to take civil cases in which 
they were concerned before any other tribunal 
than the bishop's {Cone. Carth. a.d. 397 c. 9, 
Cone. Milevit. a.d. 416 c. 19, Cone. Chalc. a.d. 
451 c. 2, Cone. Venetic. A.D. 465 c. 9, Cmic. 
Cabillon. i. A.D. 470 c. 11, Cone. Matiscon. a.d. 
582 c. 8), while the Empei-ors permitted and 
ratified episcopal jurisdiction between clergy in 
civil cases, and where both parties agreed to the 
tribunal (Valentin. III., Novell, de Episc. Judieio, 
xii. Gothofr.). And Justinian in 539 gave civil 
jurisdiction outright to the bishops over the 
clergy, the monks, and the nuns, subject to an 
appeal to the Emperor in case the civil judge 
decided differently to the bishop (Novell. Ixxix., 
Ixxxiii., cxxiii. c. 21). The law also of Constan- 
tius, in a.d. 355, refers all complaints against 
bishops without distinction, and therefore civil 
as well as criminal, to an episcopal tribunal 
(Cod. Theod. 16. tit. 2. s. 12); which Justinian 
specifies into a regular chain of appeal to metro- 
politan and patriarch, unless in one exceptional 
case, where either the Praefectus Praetorio per 
Orientem, or "judges appointed by the Emperor," 
are to decide (Novell, cxxiii. cc. 22, 24). If a 
layman, however, were a party to the suit, it 
rested with him to choose the tribunal. 

/8. With respect to laymen, indeed, generally, 
the law of Constantine, if it ever did go to the 
length of allowing a transfer of the cause at the 
will of either party, and at any stage of the suit, 
was soon limited. Arcadius and Honorius A.D. 
408 require the consent of both parties (Cod. 
Justin. 1. tit. 4. s. 7, 8). And both they, and 
Valentinian III. A.D. 452, expressly allow a lay- 
man to go if he chooses to the civil court, and in 
all cases and persons require the " vinculum com- 
promissi," and the "voluntas jurgantium," as a 
prior condition to any episcopal (coercive) juris- 
diction at all ; expressly laying down also that 
bishops and presbyters " forum non habere nee de 
aliis causis pi'aeter religionem posse cognoscere " 
(Cod. Theod. 16. tit. 11. s. 1 ; and Valentin. IIL, 
as before cited). Justinian, however, appears to 
have gone further. 1. He granted to the clergy 
of Constantinople a right to have all their pe- 
cuniary causes, even if a layman were con- 
cerned, tried in the first instance by the bishop ; 
and only if the nature of the case hindered him 
from deciding it, then, but not otherwise, before 
the civil court (Novell. Ixxxiii.); and 2. he ap- 
pointed the bishop generally co-judge with the 
civil magistrate, and with an appeal from the 
latter to the former (Novell. Ixxxvi.). And both 
in Cone. Carthag. A.D. 399 c. 1 (Cod. Can. Afric. 
5), and in Justin. Novell, cxxiii. § 7, Cod. 1. tit. 
3. s. 7, and Cod. Theod. 11. tit. 39. s. 8, provi- 
sion is made to pi-otect a bishop or clergyman, 
who had thus acted as judge, from being subse- 
quently molested by a discontented party to the 


suit, who should summon him to give account 
of his judgment before a secular tribunal. 

The law of Constantine in its widest form, and 
as applying to laity as well as clergy, is alleged 
to have been revived by Charlemagne {Capit. vi. 
•281), expressly as a renewal of the (extreme) 
Theodosian enactment, but very serious doubts 
are thrown on the genuineness of the re-enact- 
meut : viz., that "Quicuuque litem habeat, sive 
])ossessor sive petitor fuerit, vel in initio litis vel 
decursis temporum curriculis, sive cum negotium 
peroratur sive cum jam coeperit promi sententia, 
si judicium elegerit sacrosanctae legis Antistitis, 
illico sine aliqua dubitatione, etiam si alia pars 
refragatur, ad Episcoporum judicium cum ser- 
moue litigantium dirigatur : . . . omues itaque 
causae, quae vel praetorio jure vel civili tractan- 
tur, Episcoporum senteutiis terminatae, perpe- 
tuo stabilitatis jure firmentur : nee liceat ulterius 
retractari negotium, quod Episcoporum senten- 
tia deciderit :" — thus interposing an absolute 
right of appeal in civil causes for either party, 
whether lay or clerical,, at every stage of the 
civil suit, from the civil judge to the bishop, and 
forbidding appeal from the latter (see also Capit. 
vii. 306, and Gratian, Becrci. P. II., c. xi. qu. 1 
cc. 35-37; and Hallam, Middle Ajes, ii. 146, 
11th ed.). At the same time it is obvious, by 
Cone. Franco/. A.v. 794 c. 6, above referred 
to, that an appeal to the Emperor himself was 
allowed, even from the metropolitan, in all civil 
cases. The joint jurisdiction of bishops and 
aldermen in Saxon England belongs to a different 

III. In criminal cases, this article is not con- 
cerned to define the limits and nature of the 
exemptions or privileges of clergy, beyond the 
brief statement that, 1. Clergy, and in particu- 
lar bishops, were exempted from civil tribunals 
by the Emperors in criminal cases, provided that 
first the delicta were Icvia, and next the con- 
sent of the plaintiff' if a layman were obtained ; 
and 2. Episcopal intercession for criminals, all 
along looked upon as a duty and regarded with 
favour, received a civil sanction at the liands of 
Justinian; while Heraclius a.d. 6'28 formally 
committed jurisdiction over the criminal offences 
of clergy to the bishops, to be judged " Kara 
rovs Bfiovs Kav6vas" (Leunclav. Jus Graeco- 
Jtom. i. 73). In relation to appeals, we have 
only to mention, that Justinian, in criminal 
cases of clerks, appoints the bishop and civil 
judges to act together, with an appeal to the 
Emperor {Novell, cxxiii. c. 21); the civil judge 
to try the case, but within two months, and 
the bishop then (if the accused is condemned) 
to deprive {Novell. Ixxxiii.) ; and that in the law 
of Heraclius, just mentioned, occurs the well- 
known phrase — that if the case were beyond 
canonical punishment, then the bishop should 
be directed, "T^y towvtov toIs ttoAj- 
i| TiKols & p xov (T I IT ap aS tS 6 (T 6 a I, ras 
\ ToTy TjixeTepois Siajpifffievas v6/j.0is rifxcopias 
, uiroo-XTjcro'/^ecoj'." And in such cases, therefore, 
the cause was thenceforth transferred from the 
spiritual to the lay tribunal. So also Justinian 
{Xnvell. Ixxxiii.) requires the convicted criminal 
ilcrk to be first deposed by the bishop, and then, 
lint not before, virh ras raiv vSfxoiv yiveaOai 
X^^pas. Under the Carlovingian empire, the 
I A/Kicrisiaritis or Archicaprllanus acted as the 
1-mperor's deputy in the final decision of clerical 



causes of all kinds, the Emperor being the ulti- 
mate judge in these as in secular ones {Cone. 
Francof. a.d. 749 c. 6 ; and see for Cappelkmi 
under the Franks, Walafr. Strab., De Beh. Eccl. 
c. 31). 

(Besides the works of De Marca, Richerius, 
Quesnel, Thomassin, Van Espen, and Church 
Historians, such as Fleury, Neander, Gieseler: 
and Beveridge, Bingham, &c. among ourselves, 
the works of Allies and of Hussey, on the Papal 
Supremacy, and Greenwood's Cathedra Petri, 
Lond., 1856, sq., may be referred to ; also, He- 
benstreit, Hist. Jurisd. Eccl. ex legg. utriusque 
Cod. illustrata, (Lips. 1773), Schilling, De Origine 
Jurisd. Eccles. in Gausis Civilibus (Lips. 1825), 
and Jungk, De Originibus et Progressu Episcop. 
Judicii in Causis Civilibus Laicorum usque ad 
Justinianum, Berlin 1832-8, referred to by 
Gieseler.) [A. W. H.] 

SHip OF Books.] 

A*PRONIANUS, martyr at Rome, comme- 
morated Feb. 2 {Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

APSE, the niche or recess which terminates 
a church at the end near which the high altar 
is placed. This feature existed in the basilicas 
or halls of justice constructed by the Romans, 
the tribunal for the presiding magistrate having 
been placed in the centre of the arc forming the 

In the earlier centuries the apse was almost 
invariably semicircular, in some churches and 
particularly in those which would appear to 
date from the third or eaidy part of the fourth 
century the apse is internal, so that the building 
has a rectangular termination. Sta. Croce in 
Gerusalemme, at Rome, has this plan, though it 
is doubtful whether this was the plan adopted 
when it first became a church ; but in Italy it is 
very rarely found ; in Africa and in Asia it seems 
to have prevailed, pai'ticularly in the earlier 
jjcriod : the basilica of Reparatus at Orleansville, 
in Algeria, believed to date from a.d. 252 ; the 
churches at Deyr Abu-Faneh near Hermopolis 
Magna, at Hermouthis (Erment) in Egypt, at 
Ibrihm in Nubia, at Pergamus, and Ephesus, are 
all thus planned. [Ciiukch.] 

In the basilica of St. Reparatus there is a se- 
cond apse, also internal, at the other end of the 
building ; this is believed to have been added 
about the year 403. 

In the churches built in the fifth century in 
the East three apses are often found, the aisles 
as well as the central nave being so terminated ; 
in the following century this j)lan, the so-called 
parallel triapsal, was introduced into Italy and 
churches at Ravenna, as St. ApoUinare in Classe, 
built A.D. 538-549, (though with a peculiar mo- 
dification), and the Duomo at Parenzo (a.d. 542), 
exhibit it. In the eighth and ninth centuries it 
appears at Rome, as in St. Maria in Cosmedin (a.d. 
772-795), and a few other churches. 

The transverse-triapsal plan, that in which 
there are three apses, one projecting from the 
end, and one from each side of the building, is 
rarely found in churches of the usual basilican 
plan, or in any anterior to the sixth century. It 
occurs (with some modification) in St. Sophia's, 
Constantinople, and in other churches for which 
tiiat building served in some degree as a moilel, 
and in the eleventh and twelfth centuries is com- 



mon in Germany. It is, however, found at Rome 
in oratories, even in the fifth century, as in that 
of St. John the Baptist opening from tlie bap- 
tistery of the Lateran, built by Pope Hihirus, 
cir. A.D. 461, and that of Sta. Croce, built by the 
same pope, but now destroyed. 

About the year 800 churches in Germany were 
constructed with an apse at each end : the greater 
church at Reichenau, in the Lake of Constance, 
begun in 816, has a semicircular apse at one 
end and a square recess at the other ; the jilan 
jirepared for the church of St. Gall in the begin- 
ning of the ninth century shows a semicircular 
apse at each end. 

The altar was usually placed in the chord of 
the arc of the apse, the cathedra or chair for the 
bishop in the centre of the arc against the wall, 
while a stone bench, or a series of such, one 
above the other, afforded places for the clergy. 
At Torcello, near Venice, there are six such 
ranges. Apses so fitted appear to have l)een 
called "apsides gradatae." [Church.] [A. N.] 

APTONIUS, commemorated May 23 (^Mart. 
Hieron.'). [C.] 

APULEIUS, disciple of Peter, martyr at 
Rome, commemorated Oct. 7 {Mart. Rom. Vet., 
Hedae) ; in Rheims MS. of the Gregorian Sacra- 
nientary (see Menard's ed. p. 418). 

AQUAMANILE (other forms, Aquamanl- 
lium, Aquanianiis, Gr. Xtpyi^ov), the bason 
used for the washing of the hands of the cele- 
brant in the liturgy. The aquamanile with the 
urceus are the bason and ewer of the sacred 

In the Statuta Antiqua called the " Canons of 
the Fourth Council of Carthage " {Canon V.), it 
is laid down that a subdeacon should receive at 
Ills ordination from the hands of the archdeacon 
an aquamanile (corruptly written " aqua et man- 
tile") as one of the emblems of his office. Com- 
pare Isidore, De Eccl. Off. ii. 10. And these di- 
rections are repeated verbatim in the office for 
the ordination of a subdeacon in the Gregorian 
Sacramentary (p. 221). In the Greek office, the 
subdeacon receives x^pvi^ui^icnov koX fj.avSv\iov, 
where the word x^P^'/Soleo-Toi/ perhaps includes 
Itoth urceus and aquamanile (Daniel's Codex Lit. 
iv. 550). 

In the Vrdo Romanus I. (p. 5), the acolytes 
are directed to carry an aquamanus (among other 
things) after the Pope in the great procession of 

Aquamanilia of great splendour are frequently 
mentioned in ancient records. Desiderius of Aux- 
erre is said to have given to his church " aqua- 
manile pensans libras ii. et uncias x. ; habet in 
medio rotam liliatam et in cauda caput homi- 
nis;" and Brunhilda, queen of the Franks, offered 
through the same Desiderius to the church of 
St. Germanus " aquamanilium pensans libras iii. 
et uncias ix. ; habet in medio Neptunum cum tri- 
dente " (Krazer, De Liturgiis, p. 210). Compare 
LTkcicus. [C] 

AQUILA. (1) Wife of Severiauus, martyr, 
commemorated Jan. 23 {Mart. Rom. Vet.'). 

(2) Husband of Priscilla, July 8 (76.) ; July 
U{Cal. Byzant.). 

(3) Martvr in Aralna, Aug. 1 {Mart. Rom. 
Vet.). ' [C] 

Concilium). I., iV.n. jHI, provincial, although 


the Easterns were invited, St. Ambrose being the 
most imjiortant bishop prcL^cut ; summoned by 
the Emperor Gratian, to try the cases of Bishop 
Palladius and Secundianus, who were there con- 
demned for Arianism (Mansi, iii. 599-632). 

II. A.D. 553, Western or rather provincial, on 
behalf of the three chapters. It rejected the 
Oecumenical Council of Constantinople of A.D. 
550, and thereby severed the Aquileian Church 
from the Church Catholic for over 100 yeai's 
(Baed., De VI. Aetat. ; Mansi, ix. 659). III. 
A.D. 698, a like Synod for a like purpose (Baed., 
ib. ; Paul. Diac, v.- 14 ; Sigebert in an. ; Mansi, 
xii. 115). [A. W. H.] 

AQUILINA, martyr, commemorated June 13 
{Cal. liyzant.). [C] 

AQUILINUS. (1) Martyr in Africa, Jan. 4 
{Mart. Hieron., Bedae). 

(2) Commemorated Feb. 4 {M. Hieron.). 

(3) Of Isauria, commemorated May 16 {Mart. 
Rom. Vet., Hieron., Bedae). 

(4) Presbyter, May 27 {M. Hieron.). 

(5) Saint, July 16 {lb.); July 17 {M. 
Hkron.). [C] 

was held, A.D. 247, in Arabia against those who 
maintained that the soul died with the body. 
Origen went to it, and is said to have reclaimed 
them from their error (Euseb. vi. 37). [E. S. F.] 
ARATOR, commemorated April 21 {Mart. 
Hieron.). [C] 

ARCA, ARCULA. 1. A chest intended to 
receive pecuniary offerings for the service of the 
church or for the poor (Tertullian, Apologeticus, 
c. 39). Of this kind was probably the " area 
pecuniae," which Pope Stephen (an. 260) is said 
to have handed over, with the sacred vessels, to 
his archdeacon when he was imprisoned {Liber 
Pontif. c. 24); and such that which Paulinus 
Petricordius says (in Vita S. Martini, lib. iv. ap. 
Ducauge) was committed to the charge of a 
deacon chosen for the purpose. The box from 
which priests received their portions is described 
as " arcula sancta " by Marcellus ( Vita S. Felicts, 
c. 3). 

2. It is used of a box or casket in which the 
Eucharist was reserved : thus Cyprian {De Lapsis, 
c. 26, p. 486) speaks of an " area in qua Domini 
sacramentum fuit," from which fire issued, to 
the great terror of a woman who attempted to 
open it with unholy hands. In this case, the 
casket appears to have been in the house, and 
perhaps contained the reserved Eucharist for the 

3. Among the prayers which precede the Ethi- 
opic Canon (Renaudot, Lit. Orient, i. 501) is 
one " Super arcam sive discum majorem." The 
prayer itself suggests that this area was used 
for precisely the same purpose as the paten, 
inasmuch as in both cases the petition is that 
in or upon it may be perfected (perficiatur) the 
Body of the Lord. Renaudot (p. 525) seems to 
think that it may have served the purpose of an 
Antimensium (q. v.). 

It does not appear, however, that its use was 
limited to the case of unconsccrated altars ; and 
wliou we remember that the Copts applied the 
term iKaarriptov to the (.'hristiau altar (Kenau- 


dot, i. 182) it does not seem improbable that 
this area was an actual chest or ark, on the lid 
of which, the Mercy-Seat, consecration took place. 
It is worth noticing that chests are said to have 
been anciently used as altars in Rome [Altar]. 
Dr. Neale (Eastern Church, Introd. p. 186) says 
that the tabout or ark of the Ethiopic Church _ is 
used for the reservation of the Sacrament. Major 
Harris's informant {Highlands of Ethiopia, iii. 
i:i8) declared that it contains nothing except a 
]tarchment inscribed with the date of the dedi- 
cation of the building. [C] 

AECADIUS. (1) Martyr, commemorated 
Jan. 12 {Mart. Bom. Vet.X 

(2) Martyr in Africa, Nov. 12 (75.). [C] 



AECHANERIS, commemorated at Rome 
Aug. 10 {Mart. Hieron.). [C] 

ARGIIBISIIOP.— The earliest use of this 
title was probably the same as that with which 
we are familiar in the Modern Church, viz., as 
designating a metropolitan or chief bishop of a 
])roviuce. Afterwards, however, as the hierar- 
chical system of the Church was further extended 
to correspond with the civil divisions of the 
Roman empire, it became appropriated to the 
higlier dignity of patriarch. Thus, according to 
Bingham (ii. 17), Liberatus {Breviar., c. 17) gives 
all ithe patriarchs this title of archbishops, and, 
he adds, so does the Council of Chalced'on fre- 
quently, speaking of the patriarchs of Rome and 
Constantinople under the name of archbishops 
also. About the time of Constantine the empire 
was divided into dioceses, each of which contained 
many provinces. This division, like the earlier 
one of provinces, was also adopted by the Church ; 
and as the State had an exarch or vicar in the 
capital city of each civil diocese, so the Church, 
in process of time, came to have her exarchs or 
patriarchs in many, if not all, the capital cities 
of the empire. These patriarchs were originally 
called archbishops, which title had therefore a 
much more extensive signification than it has at 
j)resent. The principal privileges of the arch- 
bishops of that period were — 1. To ordain all the 
metropolitans of the diocese, their own ordination 
being received from a Diocesan Synod ; 2. To con- 
vene Diocesan Synods and to preside in them ; 
3. To receive appeals from metropolitans and from 
Metropolitan Synods ; 4. To censure metropoli- 
tans, and also their suffragans when metropolitans 
were remiss in censuring them. The Patriarch or 
Archbishop of Alexandria had from very early 
times some peculiar privileges within his diocese, 
but originally all patriarchs were co-ordinate, as 
well as mutually independent as regards actual 
power, though some had a precedence of honour, 
as those of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, and 
Jerusalem, to whom the canons gave precedence 
of all others. 

For " Archbishop " in its later and present sig- 
nification, see Metropolitan. [D. B.] 

AECHUEACON. — 'ApxiS^dKouos, 'Apx«- 
SiaKoov, 'Apxi^evirTjs (Catal. Patriarch. Constant. 
10:506, aj). Mai Script. Vet. iii. 243, though per- 
haps somewhat late), Archidiaconus, Archidia- 
con, Levita Septimus {Joannes Sccundus, Vit. Grcjj. 
Max. 1. i. c. 25). 
! 1. Oriijin of Name and OjHicc— That tiicro was 



from the first a primacy among deacons, as there 
appears to have been among presbyters, and as 
there was aftei-wards among bishops, is more a 
matter of conjecture than of historical certainty. 
It is reasonable to suppose that some one deacon, 
either the senior in oilice or the most eminent in 
ability, took the lead of the rest, as St. Stephen 
appears to have taken the lead of the seven tirst 
deacons (whence the Menologium gives him the 
title 'Apx'SiaKocos) ; but it is uncertain when 
this became a part of the regular ecclesiastical 
order. The name is sometimes given by later 
writei's to prominent deacons of the first four 
centuries ; for example, St. Lawrence, who had 
evidently some precedence over his brother 
deacons, is called archdeacon by St. Augustine 
{Serm. de Biversis, cxi. ca]). 9 ; Sanctus Baurentlus 
archidiaconus fuit) ; and Caecilian of Carthage is 
called archdeacon by Optatus (1. i. p. 18, ed. 
Paris, 1679). But other writers describe the 
office by a periphrasis ; for example, Theodoret 
{H. E. i. 26) uses the phrase 6 tov xopov rSiv 
iiaKovwv Tiyovfjievos to describe the position — 
which was evidently equivalent to that of an 
archdeacon — of Athanasius at Alexandria ; and 
there is the negative evidence that neither the 
name nor the office is mentioned in the Aposto- 
lical Constitutions (although some have supposed 
the phrase 6 Trapeffruis T(fi apxtepel Slolkovos, in 
ii. 57, to refer to it), and that Cornelius {ap. 
Euseb. H. E. vi. 43) omits the archdeacon from 
his list of Church officers at Rome. The first 
contemporary use of the title is, in the Eastern 
Church, in the old version of the acts of the 
Council of Ephesus (Labbe, Supplem. Concil. p. 
505), and, in the Western Church, in St. Je- 
rome {e.g. Ep. xcv. ad Rusticum). After that 
period it is in constant use. 

In both East and West the title appears to 
have been restricted to the secular clergy ; the 
first in rank of the deacons of a monastery 
seems to have had, in the East, the title of 
■KpooToZicLKovos (but not univei-sally, for Joannes 
Climacus, Seal. Barad. p. 58, also uses the title 
cipx'Sici/ca!!/ of a monk) ; a deacon in a similar 
position in the West seems to have had, at least 
in early times, no special designation. 

II. Mode of Appointment. — The mode of ap- 
pointment varied with particular times and 
places. At first, and in some places perma- 
nently, the deacon who was senior in date of 
ordination appears to have held the office, with- 
out any special appointment, by right of his 
seniority. That this was the usual practice at 
Constantinople is clear from the answer of Ana- 
tolius to Leo the Great in the case of Andrew 
and Aetius. Leo, probably having the use of 
the Roman Church in his mind, assumes in his 
letter of remonstrance to Anatolius that the 
latter had appointed {constituisse) Andrew arch- 
deacon. Anatolius replies that, on the ordina- 
tion of Aetius as presbyter, Andrew had suc- 
ceeded him as archdeacon in regular order {noii 
provectus a nobis sed gradu faciente Archidiaconi 
dignitate honoratus — S. Leon. Mag. Op. vol. i, p. 
653, ed. Paris, 1675). But, on the other hand, 
Sozomen speaks of Serapion as having, been ap- 
pointed by Chrysostom (Sf apxi^i-aKovov avrov 
Kareffrria-e — //. E. viii. 9), and Theodoret notices 
that Athanasius was at the head of the deacons, 
tiiough young in years {vtos t^v 7)\LKiav), which 
could hardly have been the case in so large a 



church as that of Alexandria if the rule of 
seniority had been followed. St. Jerome has 
indeed been sometimes quoted to show that the 
practice at Alexandria was for the deacons to 
fleet their archdeacon, but the hypothetical 
form of the sentence (" quomodo si ... . 
diaconi eligant de se quem industrium noverint 
et Archidiaconum vocent ") makes it difficult to 
use the passage as an assertion of an existing 
tact. In the West there appears to have been a 
similar diversity of practice. The phrases which 
are sometimes used (e.g. by Joannes Secundus, 
17^. S. Greg. Max. i. 25, " levitam septimum 
ad suum adjutorium coustituit ") seem to show, 
what might also be expected from the nature of 
tlie case, that when the archdeacon became not 
so much the first in rank of the minor officers 
of the Church as the bishop's secretary and dele- 
gate, the bishop had at least a voice in his ap- 
pointment. But there is a canon of a Gallic 
council in A.D. 506 {Cone. .Agath. can. xxiii., 
Mansi, viii. 328) which strongly asserts the rule 
of seniority, and enacts that even in cases in 
which the senior deacon, propter simpliciorem 
iiaturam, was unfit for the office, he was to have 
the title {loci sui nomen teneat), although the 
burden of the duty devolved upon another. In 
later times, howevei-, it is clear that the right of 
appointment rested absolutely with the bishop. 

III. Number, and Duration of Office. — It is clear, 
both from the statement of St. Jerome {Ep. xcv. 
ad Susticum, " singuli ecclesiarum episcopi, sin- 
guli archipresbyteri, singuli archidiaconi ") and 
from the invariable use of the singular number 
in the canons of the councils which refer to the 
office, that for several centuries there was but 
one archdeacon in each diocese. When the 
number was increased is not altogether clear. 
The increase seems to have been a result partly 
of the increase in the number of rural parishes, 
partly of the difficulty of dividing dioceses 
which were coextensive with civil divisions. 
The fact of the Council of Merida (a.d. 666) 
having directly prohibited the appointment of 
more than one archdeacon in each diocese seems 
to indicate that such a practice had been con- 
templated, if not actually adopted {Cone. Emerit. 
can. X., Mansi, si. 81) ; but the first actual re- 
cord of a plurality of archdeacons occurs a 
century later in the diocese of Strasburg. In 
774, Bishop Heddo divided that diocese into 
three archdeaconries {archidiaconatus rurales), 
and from that time there appears to have been 
throughout the West — except in Italy, where the 
dioceses were small — a general practice of re- 
lieving bishops of the difficulties of the admi- 
nistration of overgrown dioceses by appointing 
archdeacons for separate divisions, and giving 
them a delegatio (ultimately a delegatio perpetua) 
as to the visitation of parishes. Thence grew 
up the distinction between the " Archidiaconus 
magnus" of the Cathedral Church and the 
" Archidiaconi rurales." The former was at the 
head of the cathedral clergy, whence in much 
later times he was known as the provost (prae- 
positus) of the cathedral, ranking as such before 
the archpresbyter or dean. The latter had a 
corresponding status in their several districts ; 
they were usually at the head of the chapter of 
a provincial town, and they had precedence, and 
perhaps jurisdiction, over the " Archipresbyteri 
rurales," who were at the head of subdivisions 


of the archdeaconries, and corresponded to modern 
" rural deans." There was this further diti'er- 
ence between the two classes, that the rural 
archdeacons were usually priests, whereas the 
cathedral archdeacon, even so late as the 12th 
century, was usually a deacon. 

Originally, the office was limited to deacons ; 
an archdeacon who received priest's orders 
ceased thereby to be an archdeacon. Proofs and 
examples of this are numerous. St. Jerome 
says (in Ezech. c. xlviii.) that an archdeacon 
" injuriam putat si presbyter ordinetur." Anato- 
lius made his archdeacon Aetius a presbyter in 
order to get rid of him, of which proceeding 
Leo the Great, in a formal complaint to the 
Emperor Marcian on the subject, says " dejec- 
tionem inuoceutis per speciem provectionis im- 
ple\it " (S. Leon. Magn. Epist. 57, al. 84) ; and 
Sidonius Apollinaris speaks of an archdeacon 
John who was so good an archdeacon that he was 
kept from the presbyterate in consequence (" diu 
dignitate non potuit augeri ne potestate posset 
absolvi" — lib. iv. ep. 24). It is not certain at 
what date presbyters were allowed to hold office 
as archdeacons ; probably the earliest certain 
evidence on the point is that which is afforded 
by Hincmar of Rheims, who (A.D. 874) addresses 
his archdeacons as " archidiaconibus-presbyteris " 
(Mansi, xv. 497). 

IV. Functions. — At first an archdeacon dif- 
fered only from other deacons in respect of pre- 
cedence. In the churches of the East he was 
probably never much more. Individual arch- 
deacons attained to eminence, but not by virtue 
of their office. Their office gave them such 
privileges as the right of reading the Gospel in 
the cathedral {e.g. at Alexandria ; Sozomen, vn. 
19), and of receiving the sacred elements before 
the other deacons (Joannes Citri, Eesp. ad Cabasil. 
ap. Meursius, 67. Gracco-Barh. s. v.); but they 
appear to have had no administrative functions, 
and at Constantinople, so unimportant did the 
office become, from an ecclesiastical point of view, 
that at last the archdeacon became only an officer 
of the Imperial court (Codinus, De Off. Constant. 
c. xvii. 38). 

It was different in the West. Partly from the 
fact that the deacons, and especially, therefore, 
the senior deacon, wei-e the administrative offi- 
cers of the Church ; partly from the fact that 
the senior deacon had been from early times es- 
pecially attached to the bishop, the office, which, 
even in the time of St. Leo, was called the " offi- 
ciorum primatus" (S. Leon. Magn. Ep. 106, al. 
71), assumed an importance which at one period 
was hardly inferior to that of the episcopate 

The functions of the office may conveniently 
be distributed under two heads, according as they 
grew out of the original functions of the diaco- 
nate, or out of the special reLation of the arch- 
deacon to the bishop. 

(1) The archdeacon seems to have had charge 
of the funds of the Church ; e.g. both St. Am- 
brose and St. Augustine, in speaking of St. Law- 
rence, speak of him as having the " opes ecclesiae" 
in his custody (S. Aug. Serm. de Divers, cxi. 
c. 9); and St. Leo describes the appointment of 
an ai-chdeacon by the phrase " quem ecclesias- 
ticis negotiis praeposuit " (S. Leon. Magn. Ep. 
85, al. 58). 

This involved the distribution of the funds to 


the pool-; St. Jerome speaks of the archdeacon 
as " mensarum et viduarura minister " (S. Hie- 
ron. in Ezech. cxlviii.), and the 4th Council of 
Carthage prohibits a bishop from attending to 
the " gubernationem viduarum et peregrinarum " 
himself, but orders him to do so "per archi- 
presbyterum aut per archidiaconum " (IV. Cone. 
Garth, can. xvii. ; Mansi, iii. 952). 

Aftevv/ards, if we are to trust the letter of 
Isidore of Seville to the Bishop of Cordova, 
he appears to have distributed to the clergy of 
the several orders the money which was oHered 
for their support at the communion (Isid. Hisp. 
Ep. ad Luidifr., Op. ed. Paris, 1601, p. 615). 

(2) The archdeacon had the " ordinatio eccle- 
siae," that Is, the superintendence of the arrange- 
ments of the cathedral chui-ch and of divine 
service. He was " master of the ceremonies." 
As such he had (a) to keep note of the calendar, 
and to announce the fasts and festivals (Isid. 
Hisp. ibid. ; cf. the phrase " concionatur in po- 
pulos " of Jerome in Ezech. c. xlviii.). (/8) He 
had to correct oflences against ecclesiastical order 
during divine service ; for example, at Carthage 
a woman who kissed the relics of an unrecog- 
nized martyr was reproved (correpia) by Caeci- 
lian (Optat. i. p. 18). Probably this was a duty 
of the archdeacon in the East as well as in the 
West ; at least it is difUcult to account for the 
origin of the unseemly scuflle between Meletius 
and his archdeacon at Antioch (Sozom. H. E. iv. 
28) unless we suppose that the latter was exer- 
cising a supijosed right. (7) He had to see that 
the arrangements of the Church for divine ser- 
vice were properly made, and that the ritual 
was properly observed. Isidore of Seville {ibid.') 
assigns to him in detail, " cura vestiendi 
altaris a levitis, cura incensi, et sacrificii 
necessaria sollicitudo, quis levitarum Aposto- 
lum et Evangelium legat, quis preces dicat." 
(5) The same authority, or qnasi-authority, may 
be quoted for his having also charge of the 
fabric of the cathedral church : " pro repa- 
randis diocesanis basilicis ipse suggerit sacerdoti " 

(3) The archdeacon had to superintend and to 
exercise discipline over the deacons and other 
inferior clergy. This was common to both East 
and West ; and as early as the Council of Chal- 
cedon we find it stated that a deacon (Maras of 
Edessa) had been excommunicated by his arch- 
deacon {h.K0ivd>v7]r6s kcTTi Tif ISicfi apxiStaKovctj : 
but the bishop, Ibas, who is speaking, goes on to say, 
oiiSe ifiol icTTiv aKoiuwvrjTos, which seems to im- 
ply that the bishop and the archdeacon had co- 
ordinate jurisdiction over deacons : Mansi, vii. 
232). A curious instance of the extent of their 
authority is afforded by a canon of the Council 
of Agde, in Gaul, which enacts that " Clerici qni 
comam nutriunt ab archidiacono etiamsi nolu- 
erint inviti detondeantur " {Cone. Agath. can. xx. ; 
Mansi, viii. 328). This ordinary jurisdiction of 
an archdeacon over the inferior clergy must bo 
distinguished from the delegated jurisdiction 
which he possessed in later times. The canon 
of the Council of Toledo which is cited in the 
Decretals as giving him an ordinary jurisdiction 
over presbyters is confessedly spurious (Mansi, 
iii. 1008). 

(4) This power of exercising discipline was 
combined with the duty of instructing the in- 
ferior clergy in the duties of their office. The 



4th Council of Carthage enacts that the ostia- 
rius before ordination is to be instructed by 
the archdeacon. Gregory of Tours identifies the 
archdeacon with the " praeceptor " {H. F. lib. 
vi. c. 36), and speaks of himself as living at the 
head of the community of deacons {Vit. Pair. c. 
9). The house of this community appears to 
have been called the " diaconium " (" lector in 
diaconio Caeciliani " — 02}tat. lib. i. c. 21), and is 
probably referred to by Paulinus when he says 
that he lived " sub cura " of the deacon Castus 
(Paulin. Vit. Ambros. c. 42). 

(5) As a corollary from these relations of an 
archdeacon to the inferior clergy, it was his office 
to enquire into their character before ordination, 
and sometimes to take part in the ceremony 
itself. Even in the East it is possible that he 
had some kind of control over ordinations, for 
Ibas is said to have been prevented by his arch- 
deacon from ordaining an unworthy person as 
bishop (/f&)Au9els TTopa ToC TTiuiKavra apxiSia- 
k6vov aiiTov — Cone. Chale. act x., as quoted by 
Labb^, iv. 647, e., but Mansi substitutes Trpcc- 
fivTfpo V — vii. 224). In the African Church the 
archdeacon was directed to take part in the 
ordination of the subdeacons, acolytus, and 
ostiarius (IV. Cone. Garthag.; Mansi, iii. 951). 
Throughout the West his testimony to charac- 
ter appears to have been required. At Rome 
this was the case even at the ordination of pres- 
byters ; but Jerome speaks of it as " unius urbis 
consuetudinem " (S. Hieron. Ep. ci. al. Ixxxv. ad 
Evang.). In later times the archdeacon enquired 
into the literary as well as into the moral quali- 
fications of candidates for ordination ; but there 
is no distinct authority for supposing this to 
have been the case during the first nine cen- 
turies ; the earliest is that of Hincmar of Eheims, 
in 874, who directed his archdeacon-presbyters 
to enquire diligently into both the "vita jet 
seientia " of those whom they presented for ordi- 
nation (Mansi, xv. 497). In one other point they 
appear in some places to have conformed to later 
practice, for Isidore of Pelusium {Ej}. i. 29) re- 
proves his archdeacon for making money from 
ordination /ees {airh TifjiTJs x^'POTovLooy). 

2. The second class of an archdeacon's func- 
tions were those which grew out of his close 
connection with the bishop. The closeness of 
this connection is shown as early as the 4th 
century by St. Jerome, who says of the " primus 
ministeriorum," i.e. the archdeacon, that he 
never leaves the bishop's side (" a pontificis 
latere non recedit " — Hieron. in Ezech. c. xlviii.). 
This expression has, without any corroborative 
evidence except the indefinite phrase of the 
Apostolical Constitutions (quoted above), been in- 
terpreted exclusively of his attendance upon tlu; 
bishop at the altar. It is probable that this is 
included in the expi-ession, but it is improbable 
that nothing else is meant by it. The mass of 
evidence goes to show that while the arch-pres- 
byter was the bishop's assistant chiefiy in spi- 
ritual matters, the archdeacon was his assistant 
chiefly in secular matters. 

(1) He was attached to the bishop, probably 
in the capacity of a modern chaplain or secre- 
tary. He transacted the greater part of the 
business of the diocese ; for example, St. Leo 
speaks of the office as involving "dispensationem 
totius causae et curae ccclesiasticae " {Ep. Ixxxiv. 
al. Ivii.). He conveyed the bishop's orders to the 



clergy ; for example, wheu John of Jerusalem 
prohibited Epiphanius from preaohiiig, he did 
so "per archidiaconum" (S. Hieron. Ep. xxxviii. 
al. Ixi.). He acted as the bishop's substitute at 
synods ; for example, Photinus at the Council of 
Chalcedon (Mansi, vi. 567). Compare the canon 
of the Council of Trullo, in 692 (Mansi, xi. 943), 
which forbids a deacon from havang precedence 
over a presbyter, except when acting as substi- 
tute for a bishop, and the canon of the Council 
of Merida, in 666 (Mansi, xi. 79), which expressly 
disapproves of the practice. Ordinary deacons 
were sometimes called the " bishop's eyes," 
whence Isidore of Pelusium, writing to his arch- 
deacon, says that he ought to be " all eye " 
(oAos b(p6a\^hs ocpiiKds vwdpxetv — Isid. Pel. 
Up. i. 29). 

(2) In somewhat later times he was dele- 
gated by the bishop to ^^sit parishes, and to 
exercise jurisdiction over all orders of the clergy. 
There is no trace of this in the East. It grew 
up in the West with the growth of large dio- 
ceses, with the prevalence of the practice of ap- 
pointing bishops for other than ecclesiastical 
merits, and with the rise of the principle of the 
immanity of ecclesiastical persons and things 
from the jurisdiction of the secular power. But 
it is difficult to determine the date at which 
such delegations became common. The earliest 
evidence upon which reliance can be placed is 
that of the Council of Auxerre in 578, which 
enacted that, in certain cases, a parish priest 
who was detained by infirmity should send "ad 
archidiaconum srmm," implying a certain official 
relation between them. More definite testimony 
is atlbrded by the Council of Chalons in 650, 
which expressly recognises his right of visiting 
private chapels (" oratoria per \'illas potentum " 
— /. Cone. Cabill. can. 14 ; Mansi, x. 1192). A simi- 
lar enactment was made at the second Council 
of Chalons, in 813, which, however, censures the 
exacting of fees for visitations (" ne census exi- 
gant" — //. Cotic. Cabill. c. 15). In later times 
this " delegatio " became a " delegatio perpetua," 
not revocable at the pleasure of the bishop who 
had conferred it ; but that such was not the case 
during the first nine centuries is clear from the 
letter of Hincniar to his archdeacons (quoted 
above), and also from tlie fact that Isidore of 
Seville, whose authorit)'', or quasi-authority, 
was so frequently quoted to confirm the later 
[iretensions of the archdeacons, only speaks of 
their visiting parishes " cum jussione episcopi." 

The rise of the separate jurisdiction of the 
archdeacon is still more obscure. In the 6th 
century we find him named as the bishop's as- 
sessor in certain cases (I. Coiic. Matisc. can. 8, 
Mansi, ix. 933; II. Cone. Matisc. can. 12; Mansi, ix. 
954) ; but there is no trustworthy evidence in 
favour of the existence of an "archdeacon's 
court " within the period of which the present 
work takes cognizance. 

(3) In the East, during the vacancy of a see, 
the archdeacon appears to have been its guardian 
or co-guardian. Chrysostom writes to Innocent 
of Rome, complaining that Theophilus of Alex- 
andria had written to his archdeacon "as though 
the church were already widowed, and had no 
bishop "(uJo-Trep ^5rj xvpovffrjs rrjs eKKXtjaias Ka) 
ovK fX'>'^<^VS iiriffKo-Koi' — Mansi, iii. 1085) ; and in 
the letter which the Council of Chalcedon wrote 
to the clergy of Alexandria to inform them of the | 


deposition of their bishop Dioscorus, the arch- 
deacon and the oeconomus are specially named. 
In the West it is not clear that this was the case ; 
but sometimes the archdeacon was regarded as 
having a right of succession. Eulogius (ap. Phot. 
Bibl. 182) says that it was a law at Rome for the 
archdeacon to succeed ; but the instance which 
he gives, that of Cornelius making his arch- 
deacon a presbyter, to cut off his right of suc- 
cession, is very questionable, the date being 
earlier than the existence of the office. No 
doubt, many archdeacons were chosen to succeed, 
but the most striking instances which are some- 
times quoted to confirm the statement of Eulogius, 
those of St. Leo and St, Gregory, were probably 
both exceptional. 

(An amusing blunder identified the archdeacon, 
who was sometimes called not only " oculus epis- 
copi," but '■'■ cor episcopi " with the chorepiscopus 
or suffragan bishop ; the blunder, which has been 
not unfrequently repeated, seems to be traceable 
in the first instance to Joannes Abbas de trans- 
kdione reliquiarum S. Glodesindis, quoted in H. 
Vales. Adnot. ad Thcodoret, i. 26.) [E. H.] 

memorated Aug. 23 {3fart. Bom. Vet). [C] 

ARCHIMANDRITE i&pxo^" ^^s fidvSpas, 

praefectus coenobii), lit. ruler of " the fold " 
— the spiritual fold that is — a favourite me- 
taphor for designating monasteries in the East, 
and very soon applied. As early as A.D. 376 
we find St. Epiphanius commencing his work 
against heresies in consequence of a letter ad- 
dressed to him by Acacius and Paul, styling 
themselves " presbytei's and archimandrites," 
that is, fathers of the monasteries in the parts of 
Carchedon and Beroea in Coele-Syria. Possibly 
St. Epiphanius omits to style them " archiman- 
drites " in his reply, because the tei'm was not 
yet in general use. " But at the time of the 
Council of Ephesus the Emperors Theodosius and 
Valentiniau received a petition from "a deacon 
and archimandrite," named Basil (Mansi, tom. iv. 
p. 1101). At the Council of Constantinople, A.D. 
448, under Flavian, 23 archimandrites affixed 
their signatures to the condemnation of Eutyches, 
himself an archimandrite. Sometimes the same 
person was styled archimandrite and hegumen 
indifferently ; but, in general, the archimandrite 
presided over several monasteries, and the hegu- 
men over but one. The latter was therefore sub- 
ject to the former, as a bishop to a metropolitan 
or archbishop. Again, there was an exarch, or 
visitor of monasteries, by some thought to have 
been inferior to the archimandrite, by some supe- 
rior, and by some different only from him in 
name. But if it is a fact that archimandrites 
were admitted to their office by the patriarch 
alone, though he, of course may have sometimes 
admitted the others as well, it would seem to 
suggest that they occupied the highest rank in 
the monastic hierarchy, analogous to that of pa- 
triarch amongst bishops. According to Goar 
{Euchol. p. 240) archimandrites had the privilege 
of ordaining readers, which the ordinary hegumen 
had not ; but he has omitted to point out where 
this privilege is conferred in the form of admis- 
sion given by him further on (p. 492). King 
(p. 367), in his history of the Greek Church, re- 

° Both letters are prefixed to bis work. 


gards archimandrite as the equivalent for abbot, 
and hegumen for prior, in the Western monas- 
teries ; but he can only mean that the offices in 
riach case were analogous. Rarely, but occasion- 
ally, bishops and archbishops themselves were 
designated archimandrites in the West and East. 
For fuller details, see Suicer, Thescmr. Eccl. s. v. ; 
Du Fresne, Gloss. Grace, s. v., /j.dvSpa ; Habert's 
Pontifical. Eccl. Graec. p. 570, et seq. [E. S. F.] 

ARCHINIMUS, confessor, commemorated 
March 29 {3fart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

vi(JTT!)s), a principal officer of the Roman 
" Schola Cantorum," [Cantor] called also 
'• Quartus Scholae." It belonged to his office to 
name the chanters who wei'e to sing the several 
parts of the service in a Pontifical Mass {Ordo 
Iloinanus, I. c. 7 ; III. c. 7) ; to go before the pope, 
and place for him a prayer-desk before the altar 
{(). H. I. c. 8); and to bring to the sub-deacon 
the water for use in tlie celebration of mass 
(6>. R. I. c. 14). [C] 

ARCHIPPUS, the fellow-labourer of St. Paul 
commemorated March 20 (^fart. Rom. Vet.) ; as 
" Apostle," Feb. 19 (^Cal. Byzant.). [C] 

AROHISUBDIACONUS.— This is a word 
which occurs in the canons of the synod of Aux- 
erre {Synod. Autissiodor. can. 6 ; Mansi, ix. 912), 
but apparently not elsewhere. If the reading be 
genuine, it would appear that in some dioceses 
the subdeacons as well as the deacons had their 
primate ; but it is pi-obable that the reading 
should be subarchidiaconum, which may have 
been another name for the officer known to the 
Greeks as 6 Sevrepevocv, and to some Western 
dioceses as secundarius. [E. H.J 

ARCH PRESBYTER. (apxnrpecPirfpos, 
Sozom. H. E. viii. 12 ; but the ordinary Greek 
term was irpwToirpecr^vTepos, which is found ap- 
plied to the same person in the corresponding 
passage of Socrates, H. E. vi. 9 ; cf. also Phot. 
Bibl. 59, in the account of the irregular synod 
against Chrysostom, and Mansi, vii. 252, from 
which it appears that the word was found iu 
some versions of the acts of the Council of Chal- 
cedon ; in later times = wpojToirdiras, Codin. De 
Off. Eccl. Const, c. i. ; arcMpresbyter, S. Hieron. 
Ep. scv. ad Rustic.) 

The origin of the office is not clear ; after the 
permanent establishment of the distinction be- 
tween the episcopate and presbyterate it appears 
that the senior presbyter had certain recognized 
rights in virtue of his seniority ; but there is no 
evidence of his having had a distinct name until 
the close of the 4th century, when we find it, as 
quoted above, in Socrates. 

For some time the name, when given at all, 
seems to have been given as a matter of course 
to the presbyter who was senior in date of ordi- 
nation. But the assertion of Gregory Nazianzen 
(Orat. xliii. 39) that he refused riju twv irpca- 
Purepaiv irpoTifj-riaiv, which Basil offered him, 
and the phrase of Liberatus {Brcv. c. xiv.) "qui 
[see Diet, of Chr. Biogr. art. DioscORUS OF 
Alkxandria] et eum [Diet, of Chr. Biogr. art. 
Protj:rius] archipresbyterum fecerat " seem to 
show that in some places in the East the bishop 
had the power of making a special appointment. 
In the West, however, this was regarded as a vio- 
lation of the regular order, for St. Leo (^Ep. v. 
al. xvii.) finds great fault with Dorus of Beue- 



ventum for giving precedence (he does not use 
the word archpresbyter) to a newly ordained 
presbyter over his seniors. 

At first there appears to have been only one 
archpresbyter in a diocese (cf. S. Hieron. Ep. xcv. 
ad Rustic, " singuli ecclesiarum episcopi, singuli 
archipresbyteri, singuli archidiaconi"). He took 
rank next after the bishop, all of whose functions 
he performed during the vacancy of a see, and 
some of them, e.g. baptism, during the bishop's 
temporary absence. It has been held that he 
had also a right of succession, but this is hardly 
proved. With the increase in the population in 
the large dioceses of the West and the growing 
difficulty of subdividing them, on account of their 
identification with civil divisions, began the sys- 
tem of placing an archpresbyter (arch, ruralis') 
in each of the larger towns, who stood in the 
same relation to the clergy of the surrounding 
disti-ict as -the archpresbyter of the cathedral to 
the rest of the clergy of the cathedral. The 
first mention of these rural archpresbyters is in 
Gregory of Tours {Mirac. i. 78, ii. 22). Their 
duties may be gathered from various canons of 
Gallican and Sjianish councils. The Council of 
Tours, in 567, enacted that subpresbyters were to 
be liable to penance if they neglected to compel 
the presbyters and other clergy of their re- 
spective districts to live chastely (Mansi, i.x. 797). 
The Council of Auxerre, in 578, inflicted a similar 
but heavier penalty on them if they neglected 
to inform the bishop or the archdeacon (the first 
instance of such a subordination of rank) of 
clerical delinquencies ; and also enacted that 
" saeculares " who neglected to submit to the 
" institutionem et admoniticncm archipresbyteri 
sui " were to be not only suspended from ecclesi- 
astical privileges but also to be fined at the king's 
discretion (Mansi, ix. 797). From Can. 19 of the 
Council of Rheims, in 630, it would appear that 
certain feudal rights of seigniority had begun to 
attach to the archpresbytei's, in consequence of 
which the office was being held by laymen 
(Mansi, x. 597). The Council of Chalons, in 650, 
enacted that lay judges were not to visit monas- 
teries or parishes, except on the invitation in the 
one case of the abbot, in the other of the 
archpresbyter (Mansi, x. 1191). 

The name dccanus, which was given to the 
archpresbyter of the cathedi-al, and decanus ru- 
ralis, which was given to the archpresbyter of a 
country district, as also the struggle for pre- 
cedence between the archpresbyters and the 
archdeacons, in which the latter were ultimately 
victorious, belong to a later period. [E. H.] 

ARCHIVES. [Registers.] 

ARCOSOLIUM. This word is derived by 
Martigny {Diet, des Antiq. Chre't.) from " arcus, 
an arch, and " solium," which according to him 
is sometimes used in the sense of sarcophagus. 
Some inscriptions, and particularly one now in 
the cortile of the Palazzo Borghese (Marchi, 
Mon. delle Arti Christ, priniit. p. 85), which runs 
thus, " Domus eternalis Aur. Celsi et Aur. Ilari- 
tatis compari mees [leg. comparavimus] fecimus 
nobis et nostris et amicis arcosolio cum parieti- 
culo suo in pacem," make mention of it, and it 
has been supposed to denote those tombs hewn 
in the living rock of the catacomb.s at Rome (and 
elsewhere), in which there is an arched ojiening 
above the jjortiou reserved for the deposition of 



the body to be inteiTed, the grave being dug 
from above downwards into the reserved portion 
below the arch. 

There seems, however, some reason for doubt- 
ing whether the attribution of the word is 
correct, and whether we ought not rather to 
understand by it the sepulchral chambers or cu- 
bicula in which the great majority of these 
tombs are found. 

It is difficult to understand how one tomb of the 
kind could contain moi'e than about five bodies, 
even if two were placed in the grave below, and 
three in loculi cut in the wall under the arch ; 
while the inscription quoted above would seem 
to imply that a much larger number were to be 
placed in the arcosolium made by Aurelius Cel- 
sus; but it maybe that these persons were all men- 
tioned in order that the right of interment of rela- 
tions or friends might not be disputed if claimed. 

It is not clear how or where the parieticulum 
or partition could be placed. Martigny says 
that the arcosolia were divided into several com- 
partments by these walls, but does not explain 
in what way. If the word mean merely the 
tomb, parieticulum would probably mean the 
wall included under the arch. 

The word may really be derived from " area," 
a sarcophagus, and " solium," which among other 
meanings has that of a piscina or reser\ oir in a 
bath, and in mediaeval Latin of a chambei Tgne- 
rally ; it may thus denote a vault contxmmg 

■ In the tombs of this kind the receptacle foi fl 
corpse was sometimes covered by a slab of m u I 
or sometimes a marble sarcophagus is msei t 
In a few cases the sarcophagus, projects toiw u I 
into the chamber, and the sides of the iich ai 
continued to the ground beyond the sarcoph igu 

Such slabs or sarcophagi have been suppos< i 
to have served as altars during the period of ] c 
secution, as being the resting-places of samts i 
martyrs, and in some instances this m\j h\.\ 
been the case ; but the far greater numbei of the 
tombs are no doubt of later date, and simply tii 
monuments used by the wealthier class I h 
bishops and martyrs of the 3rd century -weie 
may be seen in the cemetery of Callixtus (on th 
Via Appia near Rome), placed, not in these ' ii 
cosolia " or " monumenta arcuata," but in smij 1 
" loctili," excavations in the wall just Hi 
enough to receive a body placed lengthwi e (\ 
De Rossi, Roma Sott. Crist, t. ii. tav. i ii in ) 
It seems hardly probable that, when such illu 
trious martyrs were interred in so humble \ 
manner, more obscure sufferers should be moie 
highly honoured ; this consideration seems to 
aflbrd ground for the supposition that, where a 
saint or martyr of the first three centuries has 
been placed in a decorated tomb, such a memorial 
IS to be attributed not to the period of the ori- 
ginal interment, but to the piety of a later time. 
In the 4th and 5th centuries the humble "locu- 
lus" was altered into the decorated "monu- 
mentum arcuatum," and the whole sepulchral 
chamber in many cases richly adorned with in- 
crustations of marble, with stucco, and with 
])aintings. An excellent example of this is afforded 
by the chamber in the cemetery of Callixtus, in 
which the remains of the Popes Eusebius (309- 
311) and Miltiades (or Melchiades, 311-314) 
were placed, a part of which is represented in 
the annexed woodcut. 


In the walls of this chamber are three large 
"arcosolia," in front of one of which was a 
marble slab, with an inscription by Pope Damasus 
commemorating Pope Eusebius (v. De Rossi, t. 
ii. tav. iii. iv.-and viii.). The whole chamber 
has been richly decorated with marble incrusta- 
tions, paintings, and mosaics. These decorations 
it would seem reasonable to assign to Pope Da- 
masus, who undoubtedly set up the inscription. 
Another inscription by Pope Damasus, found in 
the crypt of St. Sixtus in the same cemetery, tes- 
tifies the desire then felt to lie in death near the 
remains of holy personages, and at the same 
time the awe and respect felt for them in these 
words — 

" Hie fateor volui Damasus mea condere membra 
Sed cineres timui sanctos vexare piorum." 

This pious awe gradually diminished, and loculi 
are found excavated above, below, before, at the 
side of the sepultures of confessors and martyrs. 
Hence the formulae "ad sanctos," "ad martyres," 
" supra sanctos," "retro sanctos," "ante sanctos," 
often found in inscriptions in the catacombs. A 
good instance of this practice may be sefj. over 
the tomb of Pope Eusebius, where a painting re- 
presenting the Good Shepherd has been cut 
thiough in oidei to foim \ loculus 

the Ceraet ry of Calliitus. 

Loculi so excavated within the arch of the " ar- 
cosolia " are, however, too common to be always 
accounted for in this manner, and in many in- 
stances were no doubt intended for the children 
or near relatives of those who lay below. 

In the year 1859, in the cemetery of St. Cal- 
lixtus, an unviolated "arcosolium" was disco- 
vered : in this a marble sarcophagus was found, 
in which lay a body swathed in numerous bands 
of linen exactly in the manner shown in the early 
representations of the raising of Lazarus. 

These "arcosolia" were often decorated with 
paintings, either on the front of the sarcophagus 
or on the wall above it. Examples may be found 
in Perret's work on the 'Catacombs,' vol. i. 
pi. Ivii.-lxx. One of the most remarkable in- 


stances is the tomb of St. Hermes in the cata- 
combs neai" Rome called by his name. 

Tiie tombs of this class are more usually found 
in the " cubicula," or small chambers, than in 
the galleries of the catacombs: in the former, two, 
three, or more are often found. Martigny seeks 
to draw a distinction between those found in the 
" cubicula," which he thinks may often or gene- 
i-ally be those of wealtliy individu.ils made at 
their own cost, and those in the so-called chapels 
or larger excavations, which he thinks were con- 
structed at the general charge of the Christian 
community. In one such chapel in the cemetery 
of St. Agnes near Eome there are eleven such 
tombs. Kostell (^Beschreibung von Bom, by Bunsen 
and others, vol. i. p. 408) gives it as his opinion 
that such chapels, specially connected with the 
veneration of martyrs, do not usually date from 
an earlier period than the 4th or 5th century. 
The work of the Cav. de' Rossi on the catacombs 
(Roma Crist. Solterranea) will no doubt when 
completed throw great light on all these ques- 
tions, which cannot be satisfactorily solved except 
by that union of the most careful and minute in- 
vestigation, and candid and impartial criticism, 
which that learned archaeologist will bring to 
bear upon them. 

Examples of tombs of the same form may be 
found in structures above ground at a much later 
date : two such are in the walls of the entrance 
to the baptistery at Albenga, between Nice and 
Genoa, a building probably not later than the 
7th century. One tomb is quite plain, the other 
decorated with plaited ornaments in the style 
prevalent circa 800. [A. N.] 

AREA. I. A space within which monuments 
stood, which was protected by the Roman law 
from the acts of ownership to wliich other lands 
were liable. Such areae are freijuent by the 
side of most of the great roads leading into Rome, 
and letters on the monument describe how many 
feet of frontage, and how many in depth, belong to 

it. The formula is, IN-FR-P IN-AG'P. . . . 

i.e., "In fronte pedes — ": "In agro pedes — ." 
The size of these areae varied much ; some were 
16 feet square, some 24 feet by 13 ; a square nf 
about 125 feet each way seems to have been 
common; the example in Hoi-ace (Sat. i. 8, 12) 
gives us 1000 feet by 300 ; and some appear to 
have been even larger than this ; one of Gruter's 
Inscriptiones, for instance, (i. 2, p. cccxcix. 1), 
runs, " Huic monumento cedunt agri pui-i jugera 
decern." So large a space was required, not for the 
mausoleum which was to be erected, but in some 
cases for the reception of many tombs, in others 
for the performance of sacra, which were often 
numerously attended (Northcote and Brownlow's 
Roma Sotterranea, pp. 47 f.). 

On a monument or a boundary stone of the 
area was engraved a formula indicating that this 
plot was not to pass to the heirs of him who set 
it apart for sepulture. This was generally 
H'M-H-N-S. i.e., "Hoc monumentum haeredes non 
sequitur " (Orelli's Inscriptiones, No. 4379). The 
Cvjrresponding Greek form was, "to7s K\7]pov6- 
iioii aov ovK iiraKoXovdriffei rovro rh fivT^fielov " 
(Bockh's Corjyiis Inscriptionum, No. 3270). 

In the Roman catacombs care has evidently 
been taken lest the subterranean excavations 
should transgress the limits of the area on the 
surtace (Northcote, u.s. 48). 



This reverence of the Roman law for burial- 
places enabled the early Christians, except ill 
times of persecution or popular tumult, to 
preserve their sepulchres inviolate. The areas 
about the tombs of martyrs were especially so 
preserved, where meetings for worship were held, 
and churches frequently built. Tertullian (Ad 
Scapul. 3) tells us that when Hilarianus, a perse- 
cutor, had issued an edict against the formation of 
such areae, the result was that the areae (thresh- 
ing-floors) of the heathen lacked corn the follow- 
ing year. So the Acta Proconsularia of the trial 
of Felix (in Baronius, ann. 314 § 24) speak of the 
areae," where you Christians make prayers "(ubi 
orationes facitis). These areae were frequently 
named from some well-known person buried 
there; thus St. Cyprian is said to have been 
buried "in area Candidi Procuratoris" (Acta 
Mart. S. Cypriani in Ducange's Glossary s. v.). In 
the Gesta Purgationis Caeciliani (Ihid.'), certain 
citizens are said to have been shut up " in area 
martyrum," where, perhaps, a church is intended. 
Compare Cemetery, Martyrium. 

II. The court in front of a church [Atrium.] 
(Bingham's Antiquities, viii. 3 § 5.) [C] 

ARETHAS and companions, martyrs, com- 
memorated Oct. 24 (Gal. Byzant.). [C] 

ARGEUS, martvr, commemorated Jan. 2 
(Mart. Rom. Vet.). ' [C] 

ARICION, of Nicomedia, commemorated 
June 23 (Mart. Ilieron.). [C] 

ARISTARCHUS, disciple of Apostles, com- 
memorated Aug. 4 (Mart. Rom. Vet.); "Apostle," 
April 15 [14, Neale], (Gal. Byzant.). [C] 

ARISTIDES, of Athens, commemorated Aug. 
31 (3lart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ARISTION, one of the Seventy Disciples of 
Christ, commemorated Oct. 17 (Mart. Rom. 
Vet.). [C] 

ARISTOBULUS, "Apostle," commemorated 
Oct. 31 (Gal. Byzant.). [C] 

ARISTON, and others, martyrs, comme- 
morated July 2 (Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ARISTONICUS, martyr, commemorated 
April 19 (Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

ARISTONIPPUS, commemorated Sept. 3 
(Mart. Ilieron.). [C] 

ARISTUS, commemorated Sept. 3 (Mart. 
Bedac). [C] 

ARLES, COUNCILS OF (Arelatensia 
Concilia). — I. a. d. 314, summoned by the 
Emperor Constantine to try afresh the cause 
of the Donatists against Caecilian, Bishop of 
Carthage, — a cause " de Sancti Coelestisque 
Numinis cultu et fide Catholica ;" because 
the former complained that the judgment given 
at Rome in 313 by the Pope and certain Gallic 
bishops (whom Constantine had appointed to try 
the case there), was an unfair one. The emperor 
accordingly summoned other bishops, from Sicily, 
Italy (not the Bishop of Rome, he having been 
one of the former judges), the Gauls (which 
include Britain), and Africa itself, to the number 
of 200 according to St. Augustin, to come to 
Aries by August 1 to retry the case. The sum- 



mous to Clirestus of Syracuse (Mansi, li. 4C6, 
467, from Euseb. x.) desires him to bring two 
presbyters and three servants with him at the 
public expense. And the letter of Constantine 
to the Vicarius Africae (ib. 463-465) claims it 
as the emperor's duty to see that such conten- 
tions are put an end to. The sentence of the 
Council, adverse to the Donatists, is likewise 
to be enforced by the civil power {Rescript. 
Constant, post Synodum, ib. 477, 478). But Con- 
stantine in the same letter expressly disclaims all 
appeal to himself from the " judicium sacerdotum" 
(ib. 478). The Synod also announces its judg- 
ment and its canons to Pope Sylvester, in order 
that " per te potissimum omnibus insinuari," re- 
gretting also the absence of their " frater dilectis- 
simus," who probably would have passed a 
severer sentence. The canons begin with one 
enacting that the observance of Easter shall be 
" uno die et tempore," the Bishop of Rome " juxta 
cousuetudinem " to make the day known. They 
include also among other regulations a prohibi- 
tion of the rebaptizing of heretics if they had 
been baptized in the name of the Holy Trinity ; 
an exhortation (" consilium ") to those whose 
wives had been guilty of adultery, not to marry 
another " vivcntibus uxoribus;" a requirement 
to the consecration of a bishop of eight bishops, 
if possible, but of three at the least ; and a con- 
demnation of those " sacerdotes et Levitae," who 
do not abstain from their wives. The Council 
was purely a Western one, and of the emperor's 
selection, although St. Augustine {De Baft. cont. 
Bonat., ii. 9, and elsewhere) calls it "universal." 
Among the signatures to it, according to the 
most authentic list, are the well-known ones of, 
" Eborius Episcopus de civitate Eboracensi pro- 
vincia Britannia; Restitutus Episcopus de civi- 
tate Londinensi provincia suprascripta ; Adelfius 
Episcopus de civitate Colonia Londinensium " («. e. 
probably. Col. Legionensium i.e. Caerleon on Usk); 
" exinde Sacerdos presbyter, Arminius diaconus " 
(Mansi, ib. 476, 477). There were present, ac- 
cording to this list, 33 bishops, 13 presbyters, 23 
deacons, 2 readers, 7 exorcists, besides 2 presby- 
ters and 2 deacons to represent Poj^jc Sylvester. 

J I. A.D. 353, of the Gallic bishops, summoned 
by the Emperor Constans to condemn the person 
of St. Athanasius (but without discussing doc- 
trine) under penalty of exile if they refused, 
Paulinas, Bishop of Treves, being actually exiled 
for refusing (Sulp. Sever., ii. ; Hilar., Libell. ad 
Constant.; and Mansi, iii. 231, 232). 

JII. A.D. 452, called the second, which com- 
jiiled and reissued 56 canons of other recent Gallic 
Councils respecting discipline (Mansi, vii. 875). 
I'ossibly there had been another in 451 (Id. ib. 

IV. A.D. 455, commonly called the third, pro- 
vincial, determined the dispute between Bishop 
Theodorus and Faustus abbat of Lerins, by de- 
creeing that the right of ordination, and of 
giving the chrism, kc, pertain to the bishop, 
but the jurisdiction over laj-men in the monas- 
tery to the abbat (Mansi, vii. 907). 

V. A.D. 463, provincial, convened by Leontius, 
Archbishop of Aries, to o])j)ose Maniertinus, 
Archbishop of Vienne, who had encroached upon 
the province of Aries (Mansi, vii. 951, from St. 
Hilary's Epist.). 

Vi. A.D. 475, provincial, under the same Leon- 
tius, to condemn the error of "predestination." 


The books of Faustus, De Gratia Dei, &c., were 
written to express the sense of the Council, and 
the Augustinians condemned it as semi-Pelagian 
(Mansi, vii. 1007). 

VII. A.D. 524, commonly called the fourth, 
provincial, among other canons on discipline, ap- 
pointed 25 as the age for deacons' orders, and 30 
for priests' (Mansi, viii. 625). 

VIII. A.D. 554, commonly called the fifth, pro- 
vincial, chiefly to reduce monasteries to obedience 
to their bishop (Mansi, ix. 702). 

IX. A.D. 813, under Charlemagne, enacted 26 
canons respecting discipline, and among others, 
that the Bishop " circumeat parochiam suam 
semel in anno"(c. 17), and that "Comites,judices, 
seu reliquus populus, obedientes sint Episcopo, et 
invicem consentiant ad justitias taciendas " (c. 
13 ; Mansi, xiv. 55). [A. W. H.] 

ARMARIUS, in monastic establishments, the 
precentor and keeper of the church books. Ar- 
marius is continually used by Bernard (in Ordine 
Cluniaccnsi, &c.) for Cantor and Magister Cere- 
moniarum.a [J. H.] 

was held in Armenia, simultaneously with an- 
other at Antioch, A.V. 435, condemning the 
works of Theodorus of Mopsuestia, and Diodorus 
of Tarsus, lately translated into the language 
of Armenia and circulated there (Mansi, v. 
1179). [E. S. F.] 

ARMOGASTES, confessor, commemorated 
March 29 (Mart. Mom. Vet.). [C] 

ARMORICA, COUNCIL IN, a.d. 555, to 
excommunicate Maclou, Bishop of Vannes, who 
had renounced tonsure and celibacy on the death 
of his brother Chanao, Count of Brittany (Greg. 
Tur., Hist. iv. 4 ; Mansi, ix. 742). [A. W. H.] 

ARNULPHUS, confessor, Aug. 16 {Mart. 
Bedae) ; July 18 (if. Hieron.). [C] 

ARONTIUS, commemorated Aug. 27 {Mart. 
Hieron.). [C] 

ARRIANUS, martyr, commemorated Dec. 14 
{Cal. Byzant.). [C] 


also Arrhaho, Arraho, earnest money on be- 
trothal. The practice of giving earnest money 
on betrothal, of which ti-aces are to be found in 
all parts of the world, has its root evidently in 
the view, common yet to many savage races, of 
marriage as the mere sale of a wife, to which 
betrothal stands iu the relation of contract to 

Among the Jews, as will be seen from Selden's 
treatise, De Uxore llehraica (Book ii. cc. 1, 2, 
3, 4), betrothal was strictly a contract of pur- 
chase for money or money's worth (although 
two other forms were also admitted) ; the coin 
used being, however, the smallest that could be 
had. The earnest was given either to the wife 
herself, or to her parents. It could not be of 
forbidden things or things consecrated to priestly 
use, or things unl.awfuUy owned, unless such as 
might have been taken from the woman herself; 
but a lawfully given earnest was sufficient to . 
constitute betrothal without words spoken. In 

■> Pi-aecentuv et Avmarius : Armarii nompii ohtirmit, eo 
quod in ejus manu solet esse liibliol'neca, q\iae tt in alio 
nomine Aimarium appellatur.— iiHcarioe. 


strict cousisteucy with the view of marriage as a 
purchase by the man, it was held that the giving 
of earnest by the woman was void. And when, 
at a hiter period, the use of the ring as a symbol 
of the earnest crept into Jewish betrothals from 
Gentile practice, so carefully was the old view 
preserved that a previous formal inquiry had to 
be made of two witnesses, whether the ring 
oflered was of equal value with a coin. 

The first legal reference among the Romans 
to the arrha on betrothal, and the only one in 
the Digest, belongs to the 3rd century, — i.e. to a 
period when the Roman world was already to a 
great extent permeated by foi'eign influences, — 
at this time chiefly Oriental. It occurs in a 
passage ■ from Paul us, who flourished under 
Alexander Severus, 223-235 {Dig. 23. tit. 2. 
s. 38). The jurist lays it down that a public 
functionary in a province cannot marry a woman 
from that province, but may become betrothed 
to her ; and that if, after he has given up his 
office, the woman refuses to marry him, she is 
only bound to repay any earnest-money she has 
received, — a text which, it will be observed, 
applies in strictness only to provincial function- 
aries, and may thus merely indicate the ex- 
istence of the practice among subject nations. 
Certain it is that the chapter of the Digest on 
betrothals {De Sfonsalibus, 23. tit. 1) says not a 
word of the arrha ; Ulpian in it expressly states 
that " bare consent suffices to constitute be- 
trothal," a legal position on which the stage 
betrothals in Plautus supply an admirable com- 

About eighty years later, however — at a time 
when the northern barbarians had already given 
emperors to Rome — the arrha appears in full 
development. Julius Capitolinus — who wrote 
under Constantiue — in his life of Maximinus 
the younger (killed 313), says that he had 
been betrothed to Junia Fadella, who was 
afterwards married to Toxotius, " but there 
remained with her royal arrhae, which were 
these, as Junius Cordus relates from the testi- 
mony of those who are said to have examined 
into these things, a necklace of nine pearls, a net 
of eleven emeralds, a bracelet with a clasp of 
four jacinths, besides golden and all regal vest- 
ments, and other insignia of betrothal." » Am- 
brose indeed (346-397) speaks only of the 
symbolical ring in relating the story of St. Agnes, 
whom he represents as replying to the Governor 
of Rome, who wished to marry her to his son, 
that she stands engaged to another lover, who 
has offered her far better adornments, and given 
her for earnest the ring of his affiance (et 
aunulo fidei suae subarrhavit me, Ep. 34). To 
a contemporary of Ambrose, Pope Julius I. (336- 
352) is ascribed a decree that if any shall have 
espoused a wife or given her earnest (si quis 
desponsaverit uxorem vel subarrhaverit) his 
brother or other near kinsman may not marry 
her (Labbe and Mansi, Concil. ii. 1266). About 
a century later, the word arrha is used figura- 
tively in reference to the Annunciation, considered 
as a betrothal, by Peter Chrysologus, Archbishop 
of Ravenna in 433, as quoted by Du Cange, in 

In the days of Justinian, we see from the Code 



» A few words of the above passage have greatly 
clsed commentators. 

that the earnest-money was a regular element in 
Byzantine betrothal. It was given to the in- 
tended bride or those who acted for her, and 
was to be repaid in the event of the death of 
either party (Cud. 5. tit. 1. s. 3, Law of Gra- 
tian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, A.D. 380), 
or of breach of promise by the woman ; in 
the latter case, indeed, the woman sui juris, or 
the father, mother, grandfather or great-grand- 
father of one under age having to pay an equal 
additional sum by way of penalty ; though a 
woman under age was only bound to simple re- 
payment, as was also the case in the event of 
any unlawful marriage, or of the occurrence 
of some cause unknown at the time of betrothal 
which might dispense the woman from fulfilling 
her promise. The fourfold penalty of the earlier 
law was still, by the one now quoted, made 
exigible by special contract {Ibid. 5, Law of Leo 
and Anthemius, A.D. 469). Simple restitution 
was sufficient in case, after betrothal, either party 
chose to embrace a religious life (1. tit. 3. s. 
56 ; Nov. 123, c. xxxix.) ; or in case of diversity 
of religious faith between the betrothed, if dis- 
covered or occurring after betrothal, but not 
otherwise {Code, 1. tit. 4. s. 16, law of Leo and 
Anthemius, A.D. 469). 

It is difficult not to seek for the reason of this 
development of the arrha within the Roman or 
Byzantine world of the 6th century in some 
foreign influence. Accordingly, if we turn to 
the barbarian races which overran the empire 
from the end of the 4th century, we find almost 
everywhere the prevalence of that idea of wife- 
buying, which is the foundation of the betrothal 
earnest ; see for instance in Canciani, Leges Bar- 
barorum Antiquae, vol. ii. 85, the (reputed) older 
text of the Salic law, tit. 47, as to the purchase of 
a widow for three solidi and a denari^cs, vol. iii. 
17, 18, 22 ; the Burguudian Law, titles xii. 1 
and 3, xiv. 3, and xxxiv. 2 ; vol. v. 49, 50 ; 
the Saxon Law, titles vi. 1, 2, 3, xii. xviii. 1, 2, 
&c., or (in the volume of the Becord Commission) 
our own Laws of Ethelbcrt, 11, 83; Ine, 31. 
And in the regions overspread by the Prankish 
tribes in particular, the arrha, as a money 
payment, is visible as a legal element in be- 
trothal. Gregory of Tours (544-595) repeatedly 
refers to it (i. 42 ; iv. 47 ; x. 16). 

In the earlier writers there is nothing to 
connect the betrothal earnest with a religious 
ceremony. Nor need we be surprised at this, 
when we recollect that, in the early ages of 
Christianity, marriage itself was held by the 
Roman world as a purely civil contract ; so that 
Tertullian, enumerating those ceremonies of 
heathen society which a Christian might inno- 
cently attend, writes that " neither the virile 
robe, nor the ring, nor the marriage-bond (neque 
annulus, aut conjunctio maritalis) flows from 
any honour done to an idol " {De idoloL, c. 16). 
And indeed the opinion has been strongly held, 
as Augusti points out, whilst disclaiming it, that 
church betrothals did not obtain before the 9th 
century. The earliest mention of a priestly 
benediction upon the sponsi appears to occur in 
the 10th canon of the Synod of Reggio, a.d. 850 
(see Labbe and Mansi, Concil. xiv. p. 934) ; and 
it is not impossible that that confusion between 
the sp07isus and maritus, the sponsa and uxor, 
was then already creeping into middle age Latin, 
which has absolutely prevailed in French, where 



^poux, spouse, are synonymous with mari and 
feinrne in the sense of uxor. In a contemporary 
document, the reply of Pope Nicolas I. (858- 
867) to the consultation of the Bulgjarians, the 
question whether betrothal was a civil or reli- 
gious ceremony remains undecided ; but as he 
pi-ofesses to exhibit to them " a custom which 
the holy Roman Church has received of old, and 
still holds in such unions," his testimony, though 
half a century later than the death of Charle- 
magne, deserves to be here recorded, bearing wit- 
ness as it does expressly to the betrothal earnest. 
" After betrothal," he says, " which is the 
promised bond of future marriage, and which 
is celebrated by the consent of those who enter 
into this, and of those in whose authority they 
are, and after the betrother hath betrothed to 
himself the betrothed with earnest by marking 
her finger with the ring of affiance, and the be- 
trother hath handed over to her a dower satisfac- 
tory to both, with a writing containing such con- 
tract, before persons invited by both parties, 
either at once or at a fitting time (to wit, in 
order that nothing of the kind be done before the 
time prescribed by law) both proceed to enter 
into the marriage bond. And first, indeed, they 
are placed in the Church of the Lord with the 
oblations which they ought to offer to God by the 
hand of the priest, and thus finally they receive 
the benediction and the heavenly garment." 

It will be seen from the above passage that 
whilst Pope Nicolas recognises distinctly the 
practice of betrothal by arrha, symbolized 
through the ring, yet the only benediction 
which he expressly mentions is the nuptial, not 
tlie spousal one. 

It has been doubted in like manner whether 
clitirch betrothals were practised at this period 
in the Greek Church, and whether the form of 
betrothal in the Greek Euchologium is not of 
iaie insertion. Tiiat at the date of the last quoted 
authority, or say in the middle of the 9th cen- 
tury, the Greek ceremonies appertaining to mar- 
riage differed already from the Roman appears 
from the text of Pope Nicolas himself; his very 
object being to set forth the custom of the Roman 
Church in contrast to that of the Greek (consue- 
tudinem quam Graecos in nuptialibus contuberniis 
habere dicitis). Now tlie striking fact in refer- 
ence to the form of the Euchologium is that in it 
the earnest or appa^wv is not a mere element in 
betrothal, but, as with the Jews, actually consti- 
tutes it — a practice so characteristic that it can 
hardly be supposed to flow otherwise than from 
ancient usage. Here, in fact, the words appa^wv, 
appa^wuL^eaOat, can only be translated " be- 
trothal," " betrothing." The formula, repeated 
alternately by the man and the woman, runs : 
'■ So and so, the servant of God, betroths to him- 
self (apfia^ooyi^frai) this handmaid of God in the 
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the 
Holy Ghost, now and ever, and world without 
end. Amen." The prayer is in like manner : 
" Look upon this Tliy servant and this thine 
handmaid, and confirm their betrothal {(TT7]p7^ov 
Tov appa^wva avroov) in faith and concoi'd, and 
truth, and love. For thou, Lord, didst show us 
to give the earnest and thereby to confirm all 
things." And the heading— wliich may indeed 
well be more modern — is " service for betrothal, 
otherwise of the earnest." 

The most therefore that can be concluded on 


this still doubtful subject seems to be this 

1st. That the earnest-money on betrothal, sym- 
bolizing as it clearly does the barbarous custom 
of wife-buying, must essentially have been every- 
where in the first instance a civil, not a religious 
act. 2. That the practice was unknown to an- 
cient Greek and Roman civilization, and was 
especially foreign to the spirit of the older 
Roman law. 3. That it was nevertheless firmly 
rooted in Jewish custom, and may not impro- 
bably have passed from thence into the ritual 
of the Eastern Church, where, as with the Jews, 
the giving of earnest constitutes the betrothal. 
4. That it was very generally prevalent among 
the barbarian tribes which overran the Roman 
empire, and seems from them to have passed into 
its customs and its laws, making its appearance 
in the course of the 3rd century, and becoming 
prominent by the 6th century in Justinian's 
Code, at the same time when we also find its 
prevalence most distinctly marked in Gaul, and 
as a Prankish usage. 5. That no distinct trace 
of it in the cei-emonies of the Church can how- 
ever be pointed out till the later middle age, 
although it may very likely have prevailed in 
the Eastern Church from a much earlier period. 

It follows, however, from what has been said 
above that whatever may have lingered in later 
times of the betrothal m-rha must be ascribed 
to very ancient usage ; as in the formula quoted 
by Seiden from the Parochial of Ernest, Arch- 
bishop of Cologne and Bishop of Liege, which 
includes the use, not only of the ring, but also, 
if possible, of red purses with three pieces ot 
silver, " loco arrhae sponso dandae." Our own 
Sarum ordinal says in reference to betrothal : 
" men call arrae the rings or money or other 
things to be given to the betrothed by the be- 
trother, which gift is called suharratio, particu- 
larly however when it is made by gift of a ring." 
And the two forms of Sarum and York respec- 
tively run as follows : (Sarum) " With this ring 
I thee wed, and this gold and silver I thee give ;" 
(York) " With this ring I wed thee, and with 
this gold and silver I honour thee, and with 
this gift I honour thee." The latter formula 
indeed recalls a direction given in one of the two 
oldest rituals relating to marriage given by Mar- 
tene, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, vol. ii. p. 127 
(extracted from a Rennes missal, to which he 
ascribes about 700 years of antiquity, or say, of 
the 11th century), entitled, " Ordo ad sponsum 
et sponsam benedicendam," which says that 
" after the blessing of the ring in the name of 
the Holy Trinity .... the betrother shall hon- 
our her (the betrothed) with gold or silver ac- 
cording to his means " (honorare auro vel argento 
prout poterit sponsus). 

As respects the use of the ring in betrothal, 
see further under Ring, and also Betrothal. 

(Augusti, Denkioiirdigkeiten, vol. ix. 295, and 
foil, may be consulted, but is far from satis- 
factory. Bingham, Antiquities, book xxii. ch. 
iii., confounds together everything that can be 
confounded. Sehlen, Uxor Hehraica, book ii., 
remains by far the best single source of re- 
ference.) [J. M. L.] 

ARSENIUS. (1) 6 iJiiyas, May 8 {Cal By- 

(2) Confessor, July 19 (Mart. Bedae). 

(3) Martyr, commemorated Dec. 14 (Mart. 
Rom. Vet.X [C] 


ARTEMIUS. (1) Husband of Candida, 
martyr, at Rome, commemorated June 6 (^Mart. 
limn. Vet.). 

(2) MeyaAo/xapTvp of Antioch, Oct. 20 (Cal. 
Byzant). [C] 

ARTEMON, commemorated Oct. 24 (Cal. 
Armen.). [C] 

mont, COUKCIL OF.] 

ASCENSION DAY: (Asccnsio and Ascensa 
Domini ; dies festus Ascensionis : eopTTi rris 
ava\ri\f/ea)s ; v ovaATjiJ/is and T]fj.epa avaX-n^pifMOs). 
This festival, assigned, in virtue of Acts i. 3, to the 
fortieth day after Easter-day, is not one of those 
which from the earliest times wore generally ob- 
served. No mention of it occurs before the 4th 
century, unless an earlier date can be made good 
for the "Apostolic Constitutions," or for the pas- 
sages in which mention is made of this festival — 
Lib. V. 19 : " From the first day (Easter-day) num- 
ber ye forty days to the fifth day (Thursday), and 
celebrate the Feast of the afaX-qipis tov Kvpiov, 
Ka9' ^v Tr\7}pu(ras Tracrav o'lKovofiiav Koi didra^iv 
a.vri\6f, K. T. A.." : viii. 33, "On what days serv- 
ants are to rest from work : r^v avaK-nipiv apyei- 
rcucrav Sta rh ir4pas ttjs kotoi Xpttrrhv oIkovo- 
fxias." Origen (c. Cels. viii. 362), names as holy- 
days generally observed, besides the Lord's Day, 
only Parasceue (Good Friday), Pascha (Easter- 
day), and Pentecost. No others than these are 
mentioned by Tertullian. Of sermons preached 
on this festival, the oldest seems to be one extant 
only in a Latin version, ap. Sirmondi 0pp. Va)-ia, 
t. i. p. 39, which he and Valesius, on insufficient 
grounds, assign to Eusebius the Church historian; 
Cave, and later writers, to Eusebius of Emesa. 
Its title is de Besurrcctione et Ascensione Domini, 
and the preacher dwells chiefly on the Resurrec- 
tion ; but the opening words show that it was 
preached on Ascension Day : " Laetantur quidem 
coeli de festivitate praesenti, in qua Dominum 
suscepere victorem." Next, perhaps, in point of 
antiquity, is one by Epiphanius (t. ii. 285, ed. 
Petav.). In the opening, he complains that the 
greatness of this festival is not duly appreciated, 
though it is, to the others, what the head is to the 
body, the crown and completion. First, he says, 
is the Feast of Incarnation ; second, the Theopha- 
nia ; third, the Passion and Resurrection. " But 
even this festival brought not the fulness of joy, 
because it still left the risen Lord fettered to this 
earth. The Pentecost, also, on which the Holy 
Ghost was communicated, contains a great, un- 
speakable joy. But to-day, the day of the 
Ascension, all is filled with joy supreme. Christ, 
opening highest heavens, &c." It is, of course, 
only with a rhetorical purpose that Pentecost is 
here named before Ascension. There were in- 
deed heretics, Valentinians and Ophites (Iren. 
i. 1, 5, and 34 ad fin.), and other Gnostics (repre- 
sented by the Ascensio Esaiae, Aethiop.), who 
assigned a period of eighteen months to our 
Lord's sojourn on earth after the Resurrection ; 
and besides, there are traces of a belief among 
the orthodox that the bodily presence of the 
risen Lord with his disciples, from time to time, 
was continued during three years and six 
months (Eus. Dem. E%\ viii. 400 B. ; Browne's 
Ordo Saeclorum, p. 82 f.) ; but certainly the day on 
which the Ascension was celebrated was, in all 
the churches, the fortieth after Easter-day. Of 




about the same time, is a sermon by St. Gregory 
of Nyssa, remarkable for its title : Eis rrfu 
XeyofjLfvrjv t<£ intxaipiv tcvv KaTnraSdKwv tdd, 
'ETrio-aifojueVTji', tJtis (cttlv 7] a.vd\ri\l/is tov K. 
■>]/j.u!V '1. X. Bingham, Augusti, Rheinwald, Alt, 
and others, explain this as eoprr] rrjs €7ri(ra>fo- 
fievris cpvffews avOpoDwivr]? (or iwl (Tw^ofiivrj cpvcrei 
dvOpanrivp), with reference to the crowning work 
of redemption in the glorification of the Manhood. 
The name, marked by Gregory as local to Cap- 
padocia, is not retained in the Greek calendai", 
but it occurs in the title of St. Chrysostom's 
19th sermon on the Statues (ad pop. Antioch., t, 
ii. 188 Ben.), tt? KvpiaK^ ttjs 'E.Tr i(7w(oiJi.ivns, al. 
'SooCofj.tvTis. Leo Allatius (de Domm. et Ilebdoni. 
Graecorum, § 28), who evidently knows the 
designation only from these two places, says that 
the Sunday is the fifth- after Easter, the Sunday 
of Ascension week. Tillemont (see the Bene- 
dictine Praefat. t. ii. p. xi. .sqq.) infers from the 
place of this sermon in the series between S. 18, 
preached after mid-Lent, and S. 20, preached 
at the end of the Quadragesima, that it was 
delivered on Passion Sunday, 5 Lent. But 
Chrysostom's own recital in the first sermon de 
Anna (t. iv. 701 A.) clearly shows that the 19th 
sermon is later by " many days " than the 
21st, preached on Easter-day : see the Bene- 
dictine Monitum, prefixed to the sermons on 
Anna, and also (for Montfaucon's final conclusion) 
Vit. Chrysost. t. xiii. 128 sqq. ed. Par. Ben. 2. 
Hence it appears that the Sunday 'Eiriaw^o- 
fj.4vr\s cannot be, as Savile (t. viii. 809) supposes, 
the octave of Easter, dominica in alhis, and it 
seems most probable that Leo Allatius is right in 
making it the Sunday of Ascension week. In 
this case, the term 'ETrio-co^OyueVrj belongs to the 
Feast of Ascension. Baumgarten (Erliiut. des 
Christl. Alterthums, p. 299 ap. Augusti) takes 
it to mean any day specially retained for solemn 
celebration over and above the great festivals ; 
in this sense, or rather, perhaps, in that of "a 
holiday gained or secured in addition," it will be 
suitable to the Feast of Ascension as one of recent 
introduction, regarded as a welcome boon espe- 
cially to servants and labourers. On the Feast 
itself, Chrysostom has one sermon (t. ii. 447), of 
uncertain date. The celebration was held e|co rrts 
TTiiXeous : this, which was the established rule fw 
Good Friday (Serm. de Coemet. et de Cruce, t. ii. 
397), was here done on a special occasion, in 
honour of the martyrs whose remains the bishop 
Flavian had rescued from impure contact, and 
translated to the martyrium called Romanesia 
outside the walls. It does not follow that an 
extramural celebration or procession was the 
established practice at Antioch on Ascension-day, 
as some writers have inferred from this passage. 
In the sermon de b. Philogonio, preached 
20th Dec. 386, St. Chrysostom (t. i., 497 C), 
extolling the dignity of the approaching Feast of 
Nativity (then of recent introduction), says : 
" From this the Theophania and the sacred 
Pascha, and the Ascension, and the Pentecost 
have their origin. For had not Christ been born 
after the flesh. He had not been baptised, which 
is the Theophania; not crucified, which is the 
Pascha ; had not sent the Spirit, which is the 
Pentecost." Here the words koI ij avdXrjypts are 
clearly an interpolation. The three ancient 
festivals, he would say, are Theophania, Pas- 
cha, Pentecost: they require Nativity as their 



ground. So in Serm. 1 de Pcntccoste (t. i. 458) 
— also of anknown date — ^he enumerates as the 
three leading festivals, Epiphany, Pascha, Pen- 
tecost, with no mention of Nativity or of 
Ascension, although p. 461 he refers to the As- 
cension as an event : " for, ten days since, our 
nature ascended to the royal throne," &c. But 
in another, the second de Pentecoste (ib. 469), he 
says : " Not long since we celebrated the Cross 
and Passion, the Resurrection, after this, the 
Ascension into heaven of our Lord Jesus Christ." 

On the whole, it would seem that, so far as 
Dur sources of information go, the institution of 
this festival, in the East, dates at earliest from 
the middle of the 4th century. 

Nor do we find it earlier in the Western 
Church : there is no mention of it in Tertullian, 
SS. Cyprian, Ambrose, Hilary, or in the canons 
of the early councils. In St. Augustine's time, 
indeed, the iisage was so well-established that he 
speaks of it as universal, therefore of Apostolic 
institution. In the Epistle to Januarius, liv. [rd. 
cxviii.] (t. ii. 123, sqq. Ben.), he ranks it with 
Pascha and Pentecost. "Ilia autem quae non 
scripta sed tradita custodimus, quae quidem toto 
terrarum orbe servantur, datur intelligi vel ab 
ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis conciliis. . . com- 
niendata atque statuta retineri, sicuti quod 
Domini passio et resurrectio et ascensio in caelum, 
et adventus de caelo Sp. sancti, anniversaria 
solemnitate celebrantur," &c. (He does not 
name the Nativity, this was well understood to 
be of recent institution.) Beverege, Cod. Can. 
Vindic. c. ix. puts the argument thus : — " What- 
ever is universal in the Church must be either 
Apostolic or ordained by general councils ; but 
no general council did ordain these festivals, 
therefore they come to us from the Apostles 
themselves." On the authority of this passage 
of St. Augustine, liturgical writers, Martene and 
others, have not hesitated to conclude that the 
Feast of Ascension is as old as Pascha and Pente- 
cost. In the silence of the first three centuries, 
we can, at most, accept the passage as testimony 
to matter of fact, that at the end of the 4th 
century Ascension-day was generally kept; as in 
the second of his five Ascension-sermons (261- 
265, t. V. 1065 sqq. Ben.), St. Augustine says, § 3, 
" Ecce celebratur hodiernus dies toto oi'be ter- 
rarum." From this time, certainly, the observ- 
ance of the day was general in East and West. 
But it does not appear to have ranked with the 
highest festivals, which were Nativity, Easter, 
and Pentecost (Concil. Agathense, a. 506. can. 63, 
and Aurelianense 1, a. 511, can. 25). As a feast 
of r jcondary order, it ranked, in the Latin Church 
with Epiphany and St. John Baptist's-day (comp. 
Concil. Agath. can. 21). In the Eastern Church 
it was celebrated with solemn extra-mural pro- 
cessions — possibly as early as St. Chrysostom's 
time at Antioch, though, as before observed, 
this is not necessarily implied in the passage 
cited ; in Jerusalem, to the Mount Olivet, on 
which the Empress Helena had erected a church. 
Bede says that the celebration there was almost 
as solemn as that of Easter; it began at mid- 
night, and with the multitude of tapers and 
torches the mountain and the subjacent land- 
scape were all ablaze (de loc. sacr. c. 7). . Else- 
where, the procession was to the nearest hill or 
rising ground, from which at the same time a 
benediction was pronounced on the fields and 


fruits of the earth. In the Western Church this 
procession and benediction were transferred to 
the Rogation-days ; and when Gregory of Tours, 
ob. 595 {Hist. Franc, v. 11), speaks of the 
solemn processions with which Ascension-day 
was everywhere celebrated, perhaps he means 
only processions into the churches. Martene 
describes one such as held at Vieune, in France. 
The archbishop, with deacon and subdeacon, 
headed it : on their return to the church, they are 
received by all standing in the nave ; two canons 
advance towards the cantors: Cant. Quern quae- 
ritis'l Canon. Jesum qui resurrexit. Cant. 
Jnm ascendit, sicut dixit. Canon. Alleluia. 
Then all proceed into the choir, and mass is cele- 
brated. There was also, on this day, in some 
churches (in others reserved for Pentecost) a 
service of benediction over loaves provided for 
the poor, and also over the new fruits of the 

The vigil of Ascension was kept by some as a 
fost, as an exception to the ancient rule, rigidly 
maintained by the Greeks, and long contended 
for by many of the Latins. "Hoc [paschal i] 
tempoi-e nullius festi vigiliam jejunare vel 
observare jubemur, nisi Ascensionis et Pente- 
costes." (Micrologus, de Eccl. Observat. c. 55.) 
Isidore of Seville (610) (de Eccles. Off. c. 37) 
acknowledges no fast whatever between Easter 
and Ascension-day : he holds that all fifty days 
to Pentecost are days of rejoicing only ; but some, 
he says, on the ground of our Lord's words, St. 
Matt. ix. 15, "Can the children of the bride- 
chamber mourn," &c., kept fast on the eight 
days from Ascensiin to Pentecost. The extended 
fast of three days before Ascension, which 
Amalarius (de Eccl. Off. iv. 37) calls triduannm 
vigiliae Ascens. jejunium (apologising, as do other 
early liturgical wi-iters, for that institution as 
an innovation upon the known ancient rule of 
East and West) came but slowly into general 
observance in the Western Church. Especially 
was this the case in Spain. " Hispani, propter 
hoc quod scriptum est," says Walafrid Strabo 
(823) (de rebus Eccl. c. 28), "" ' Non possunt filii 
sponsi lugere quamdiu cum illis est sponsus,' infra 
quinquagesimam Paschae recusantes jejunare, 
litanias suas post Pentecosten posuerunt, quinta, 
sexta et septima feriis ejusdem hebdomadis eas 
fiicientes." Accordingly, in the Spanish collection 
of the Canons, the wording of those relating to the 
Rogation fast is altered. In Cone. Aurelian. i. can. 
27, the title, "De Litaniis ante asc. Domini cele- 
brandis," is made, " Ut Litaniae post Dom. asc. 
celebrentur ;" and in the body of the Canon, 
for " Rogationes, i.e., Litanias ante asc. Dom. ab 
omnibus ecclesiis placuit celebrari ita ut prae- 
missum triduanum jejunium in Dom. ascensionis 
festivitate solvatur," the Spanish codex has, 
" Rog., i.e., lit. post Asc. Dom. placuit celebrari, 
ita ut praem. trid. jej. post Dom. asc. solemni- 
tatem solvatur ;" and the next canon which 
pronounces censui-e " de clericis qui ad litanias 
venire contempserint," is made to affect only 
clerics who refuse to come ad officium, ad opus 
sacrum generally. 

The Mosarabic Order does not even recognise 
a vigil of Ascension, though it has one for 

Thei-e was no octave of Ascension; the fol- 
lowing Sunday is simply Dominica post Ascen' 



(Binterim, Die vorziiglichsien Denhp. der Christ- 
Kathol. Kirche, B. v. th. i. 253-256. Augusti, 
Denkw. der Christl. Archaologie, B. ii. 351 sqq. 
Rheinwald, Die Kirchliche Archaologie, 204 sq. 
Horn, Ueher das Alter des Himmelfahrtsfestes, in 
JAturg. Joiirnnl, v. J. H. Wagnitz, 1806.) [H. B.] 

ASCETICISM. The difficulty of tracing the 
liistory of asceticism in the early ages of Christi- 
anity arises in part from scantiness of materials, 
but chiefly from the circumstance that this and 
the cognate terms have been used in two senses, 
one genera], one more specific. These two signi- 
fications, and this enhances the difficulty, cannot 
be strictly assigned to different periods, being 
not infrequently synchronous; nor is it always 
easy to distinguish one from the other merely by 
the context. The neglect of this important dis- 
tinction and the vehemence of partisanship have 
complicated the controversy on the origin and 
growth of asceticism ; some writers contending 
that Ascetics as an order are coeval with 
Christianity, some denying their existence alto- 
gether till the 4th century. Neither statement 
can be accepted without sdme qualification. The 
following attempt at an historical sketch of 
asceticism among Christians, in its earlier phases, 
is based on a collation of the principal ))rissages 
in early Christian writers bearing on the suliject. 

The principle of asceticism, and this is allowed 
on all sides, was in force before Christianity. 
The Essenes, for instance, among the Jews, owed 
their existence as a sect to this principle. It was 
dominant in the oriental systems of antagonism 
between mind and matter. It asserted itself 
even among the more sensuous philosophers of 
Oreece with their larger sympathy for the plea- 
.sui-able development of man's physical energies. 
But the fuller and more systematic development 
of the ascetic life among Christians is contem- 
poraneous with Christianity coming into con- 
tact with the Alexandrine school of thought, 
and exhibits itself first in a country subject 
to the combined influences of Judaism and of 
the Platonic philosophy. Indeed, the groat and 
fundamental ]irinciple on which asceticism, in its 
narrower meaning rests, of a two-fold morality, 
one expressed in " Precepts " of universal obliga- 
tion for the multitude, and one expressed in 
" Counsels of Perfection " intended only for those 
more advanced in holiness, with its doctrine that 
the passions are to be extirjintcd rather than 
controlled (Orig. J^p. ad Horn. Lib. iii. ; Tertull. 
de Pallio, 7, 8 ; Clem. Alex. ,Strom. iv. 529, vi. 
775) is very closely akin to the Platonic or Py- 
thagorean distinction between the life according 
to nature and the life above nature, as well as to 
their doctrine of the supremacy of the contem- 
plative above the practical life, and is more 
naturally deducible from this source than from 
any other (Porphyr. de Abstinent. ; Eus. //. E. 
ii.'l7). In fact the ascetics of the 3rd and 4th 
centuries loved the designation of philosophers 
(Rosw. Vitae Pair. pass. ; cf. Greg. Nyss. Orat. 
Oatech. 18 ; Soz. H. E. i. 13). At the same time 
it must be noted that the Church uttered its 
protests from time to time against the idea of 
there being anything essentially unholy in matter, 
and its cautions against excessive abstinence. 
Thus Origen insists that the Christian reason for 
abstinence is not that of Pythagoras (c. Celsum 
V. 264); and the so called "Apostolic Canons " 
(51, 53) while approving asceticism as a useful 



discipline condemn the abhorrence of things in 
themselves innocent as if they involved any 
contamination (cf. Eus. //. E. v. 3). 

During the 1st century and a half of Chris- 
tianity there are no indications of ascetics as a 
distinct class. While the first fervour of conver- 
sions lasted, and while the Church, as a small and 
compact community, was struggling for existence 
against opposing forces on every side, the pro- 
fession of Christianity was itself a profession of 
the ascetic spirit ; in other words, of endurance, 
of hardihood, of constant self-denial (cf. Acts ii. 
44; iv. 34, 35). Thus, even at a rather later 
date, Clemens of Alexandria represents Chris- 
tianity as an &ffK7)(Tis (Strom, iv. 22 ; cf. Minuc. 
Fel. Oct. cc. 12, 31, 36). Similarly the term Ls 
applied to any conspicuous example of fortitude 
or patience. Eusebius so designates certain 
martyrs in Palestine (de Mart. Pal. 10), a region 
into which monks, strictly so called, were not 
introduced till the middle of the 4th century 
(Hicnm. Vit. Jfilar. 14), and Clemens of Alex- 
andria, calls the patriarch Jacob an aincTjT^j 
(Paedagog. i. 7). This more vague and more 
general use of tlie wor<l appears again and again 
even after the formal institution of monachism. 
Athanasius, or whoever is the author, speaking 
of the sufferings of the martyr Lucian, in prison, 
calls him "a great ascetic " (Synops. Scr. iSacr.). 
Cyril, of Jerusalem, calls those who, like Anna 
the prophetess, are frequent and earnest in 
prayer "ascetics" (Catcch. i. 19). Jerome ap- 
plies the word to Picrius for his self-chosen 
poverty, and to Serapion, Bishop of Antioch 
(Scr. Ecc. 76. 41) ; and Epiphanius to Marcion 
because, pi-ior to liis lapse into heresy, h« had ab- 
stained, though without any vow, from marriage 
{H'lrr. xlii.). Cyril of Alexandria uses &ffKr]ais 
.-IS (M|ni\;ilfnt to self-denial (in Joan. xiii. 35) in 
till' -^iinic way as Chrysostom speaks of virtue as 
a disci]ilinfi (Horn, in Inscr. Act. Ajnsfol. ii. )3). 
So far there is nothing to prove the existence of 
an ascetic class or order bound by I'ulcs not 
common to all Christians. 

For about a century subsequent to 150 A.n. 
there begin to be traces of an asceticism more 
sharply defined and occupying a more distinct 
position ; but not as yet requiring its votaries to 
separate themselves entirely from the rest of their 
community. Athenagoras speaks of persons 
habitually abstaining from matrimony ( 
Chr. xxviii. 129 ; cf. Irenaeus ap. Eus. //. E. v. 
241 ; cf. Dionys. Alexandr.). Eusebius mentions 
devout persons, ascetics, but not an order, wlio 
ministered to the poor (de Mart. Pal. cc. 10, 11), 
and calls Narcissus, Bishop of Jerusalem, an 
"ascetic" (H. E. vi. 9). Tertullian uses the 
term " exercitati " or disciplined, (de Ptiecr. 14), 
but, apparently in reference to students of Holy 
Scripture. Clemens of Alexandria styles the 
ascetics iK\fKTu>v eKKeKTOTffioi " more elect than 
the elect " (Horn. " Quis Dives 1 " 36 ; cf. Strom. 
viii. 15) ; and Epiphanius in a later century 
speaks of monks as oi ffirovSaioi or " the earn- 
est " (Expos. Fid. 22; cf. Eus. H. E. vi. 11). 
just as the word "religious" came in the mid- 
dle ages to be restricted to those wlio devoted 
themselves to a life of more than ordinary strict- 
ness. This increasing reverence for austerities 
as such is seen in most of the sects,, which were 
prominent in the 2nd century ; only with the 
exaggeration whit'h usually characterises move- 
L 2 



ments of the kiml. The Montanists prescribed 
a rigorous asceticism, not for their more zealous 
disciples only, but for all indiscriminately. The 
Syrian Gnostics, the followers of Saturuinus and 
Basilides, the Encratitae, the disciples of Cerdo 
and Marcion in Asia Minor and Italy, all car- 
ried the notion of there being an inherent pollu- 
tion in the material world, and of it being the 
positive duty of Christians to shun all contact 
with it, to an extent which left even the Church 
doctrine of asceticism far behind (Ii-en. adv. Haer. 
i. 24 ; Epiphan. Haer. 23). How far their prac- 
tice corresponded with theory is doubtful. The 
proneness of human nature to a reaction into 
excessive laxity after excessive austerities hardly 
admits of exception, and gives probability to the 
allegations made by the orthodox writers of 
flagrant licentiousness in some cases. 

The middle of the 3rd century marks an era in 
the development of Christian asceticism. Antony, 
Paul, Ammon, and other Egyptian Christians not 
content, as the ascetics before them, to lead a life 
of exti-aordinary strictness and severity in towns 
and villages, aspired to a more thorough estrange- 
ment of themselves from all earthly ties ; and 
by their teaching and example led very many 
to the wilderness, there to live and die in almost 
utter seclusion from their fellows. The Great 
Decian persecution was probably the imme- 
diate occasion of this exodus from the cities 
into the desert ; not only by driving many to 
take refuge in the desert, but by exciting a spirit 
which longed to emulate the self-renunciation of 
the martyrs and confessors. But it was probably 
the influence of the Alexandrine teaching, as has 
been already suggested, which had fostered the 
longing to escape altogether from the contamina- 
tions and persecutions of an evil world. It was 
no longer, as in earlier days, only or chiefly from 
external enemies that a devout Christian felt 
himself in danger. As Christianity widened the 
circle of its oj)erations, it became inevitably less 
discriminating as to the character of those who 
were admitted into the community ; and the 
gradual intrusion of a more secular spirit, among 
Christians, first forced those who Avere more 
thoroughly in earnest to aim at a stricter life in 
the world, and then thrust them out of the world 
altogether. Eusebius bears witness to this 
Alexandrine influence on Christian asceticism in 
a remarkable comparison of the ascetics of his 
own creed with the Therapeutae in Egypt (H.E. 
ii. 17 ; Soz. H. E. i. 13). There seems to have 
been something in the climate and associations of 
Egypt (as in Syria) which predisposed men thus 
to abdicate the duties and responsibilities be- 
longing to active life. The exact position which 
these Therapeutae occupied is uncertain. Pro- 
bably they were in existence prior to Christianity ; 
are not to be confounded with the Essenes ; but 
were chiefly, though not exclusively, Jews. 
From Philo's account (de Vita Contempl. pp. 
892-4) it 'seems clear, at any rate, that this 
manner of life resembled in many respects that 
of the Christian ascetics in the desert. They 
dwelt in separate cells not far from one another ; 
renounced their possessions ; practised fastings 
and other austerities; and devoted themselves 
partly to contemplation, and in part to study. In 
this last point their example was not imitated by 
their Christian anti-types in Egypt. They seem 
to have been imbued with the mystical spirit of 


Alexandria. Their name signifies that they gave 
themselves either to serve God, or, more proba- 
bly, to cultivate their own souls and those of 
their disciples. (Eus. H. E. ii. 17.) 

Hitherto Christian asceticism has been in- 
dividualistic in its character. About the middle 
of the 4th century it begins to assume a corporate 
character. Naturally, as the number of recluses 
increased, the need was felt of organisation. 
Pachomius is generally regarded as the first to 
form a "Coenobium," that is an association of 
ascetics dwelling together under one supreme 
authority (Hieron. Heg. Pack. ; cf. Graveson Hist. 
Eccl. i. 116). A fixed rule of conduct and a 
promise to observe the rule were the natural 
consequences of forming a society. But the 
exaction of an irrevocable and lifelong vow be- 
longs to a later phase of asceticism. James of 
Nisibis speaks of ascetics practising a rigid celi- 
bacy {Senn. 6tus). The term ascetic begins now 
to be nearly equivalent to monastic. The so- 
called " Apostolical Constitutions," which are 
generally assigned to this period, enumerate 
" ascetic's," but not " monks " among orders of 
Christians (13). The Koyos affK7)TiKhs of Basil 
of Caesaraea is on the monastic life. So &(TK-q(ns 
is used by Palladius (^Hist. Laus. Proem, c. 46, 
&c.) ; in canons of the Council of Gangra against 
excessive asceticism (12, 13), and by Athanasius 
in his life of Antony. Athanasius calls the 
two disciples who waited on Antony acTKOvnevoi, 
" learning to be ascetics." 'Actktjttjpi'oj' in So- 
crates (i/. E. iv. 23) means what is now called a 
monastery ; dtrKijTijcr) KaXv^r], a monastic cell 
(Theodoret, //. E. iv. 25). At that time fj-ovaa- 
T-qpiov was, as the word literally expresses, .t 
separate cell ; affKriTtiplov a common dwelling- 
place under the rule of a superior, in which those 
who desired, according to the idea of the age, a 
yet higher stage of perfection, might be trained 
and disciplined for absolute seclusion (Greg. 
Naz. Or. XX. 359). In the middle ages the word 
" asceterium " was altered into " arclsterium 
or " archisterium " (Du dingo, s. voce). 

In the beginning of the 6th century the widow* 
and virgins who were oflScially recognised as such, 
are designated affKrjTpiai (Justinian, Nocell. cxxiii., 
43). At a later period the word means a nun : 
and is the Greek equivalent for " sanctimoni'alis," 
or " monialis " (Phot. Nomocan. Tit. ix. 1 p. 207). 
'A(TKr}TpioT is a later form for a.aK-r\Tris. 

The history of asceticism, after the institution 
of monastic societies belongs to the history of 
MOXASTiciSM. There it will be seen with what 
marvellous rapidity this development of Christian 
asceticism spread far and wide from the deserts 
of the Thebaid and Lower Egypt ; how Basil, 
Jerome, Athanasius, Augustine, Ambrose, were 
foremost among its earliest advocates and propa- 
gators, and how Cassian, Columbanus, Benedict 
and others crowned the labours of their prede- 
cessors by a more elaborate organisation. It is 
enough here to endeavour to trace the gradual 
and almost imperceptible process by which as- 
ceticism, from being the common attribute of 
Christianity, became in course of time the dis- 
tinctive speciality of a class within the Christian 

(Besides the writers quoted already, see Bing- 
ham, Origiiies, bk. vii. Paleotimo, Summa Anti- 
quitatum, lib. vii. Gluck's Attescrrae Urigines^ 
Eei Monasticae. Mamachi, Costumi del primitivi 


Christiani. Disscrtatio de Ascetis praef. S. Jac. 
jVis. Serm. vi. Claudii Salmasii Kotae in Tertull. 
de PalUo.) [I. G. S.] 

cil was held, a.d. 76.5, at Ascheini, under Tas- 
silo II., Duke of Bavaria, that jjassed 15 decrees 
on discipline. [E. S. F.] 

ASCLEPIADES, bishop and martyr, com- 
memorated Oct. 18 {Mart. Eom. Vet.). [C] 
was held, a.d. '21:5, in Asia Minor against Noetus, 
but at what place is uncertain. [E. S. F.] 

ASINARII (Tertull. Apol. c. svi.), a term 
of reproach against the early Christians. That 
the Jews worshipped an ass, or the head of an 
ass, was a current belief in many parts of the 
Gentile world. Tacitus {Hist. v. 4) sa^-s that 
there was a consecrated image of an ass in the 
temple, the reason for this special honour being 
that a herd of wild asses had been the means of 
guiding the Jews, when they were in the desert, 
to springs of water. Plutarch {Sympos. iv. 5, 2) 
tells virtually the same story. Diodorus Siculus 
says (lib. xxxiv. Frag.) that Antiochus Epiphanes 
found in the temple a stone image representing 
a man sitting upon an ass; but on the other 
hand Joseph us (c. Ajjion. ii. c. 7) adduces the 
fact that no such image had been found in the 
temple by any conqueror as an argument for the 
groundlessness of the calumny. 

The same belief appears to have prevailed in 
reference to the early Christians. It is men- 
tioned by both Tertulfian {Ad Nat. i. 14 ; Apol. 
xvi.) and Minucius Felix {Octav. 9 and 28), but, 
though referred to in later times, appears to 
have died out in the course of the 3rd century. 
(The fact mentioned by Servetus, De Trin. Error. 
C. 16, that he heard the same reproach made by 
the Turks against the Christians in Africa is 
probably to be connected with the mediaeval 
"Festival of the Ass" rather than with the 
earlier calumny.) 

• The origin of the reproach has been a subject 
of various speculations : — (1) It has been con- 
sidered to have arisen somewhere in the Gentile 
world, and to have been applied to the Jews 
before the Christian era. On this hypothesis 
various explanations of it have been given. 
Morinus {De Capite Asinino Deo Christiano,-Dord- 
recht, 1620) thought that there was a confusion 
between the two words Chomer {~\dh), which is 
used (?) for the "pot" of manna in the temple, 
and Chamor ("llDri), which means a " wild ass," 
and that this confusion was confirmed by the 
appearance of the pot of manna with its two large 
ears. Hasaeus {De Onolatria olim Judaeis et Chrts- 
tianis impacta, Erfurt, 1716) thought that the 
use among the Jews (? more probably late Sama- 
ritans) of the word "Ashinia" ( = "name") for 
the more sacred word "Jehovah " may have sug- 
gested the perversion "asinus" to the Roman 
soldiers; and Heinsius {De Laudc Asini, p. 186, 
ed. 1629) thought that the ovpavds which the 
Jews were reputed to worship (" nil praeter nubes 
et coeli numen adorant," Juv. Sat. xiv. 97) was 
corrupted into oVos. (2) It has been considered 
to have arisen in Egypt, and on this hypothesis 
two explanations have been given. Tanaquil 
Faber {Ujnst. i. 6) thought that it was a corrup- 


tion from the name of Onias, who built a Jewls-i 
temple at Heliopolis; and Bochart {Hierozoic. i. 
2. c. 18) thought that the Egyptians wilfully per- 
verted the expression "Pi iao" ( = " mouth of 
God ") into " Pieo," which in an Egyptian voca- 
bulary edited by Kircher signifies "ass." (3) It 
has been viewed as a calumny of the Jews against 
the Christians, which was reflected back upon the 
Jews themselves. In favour of this view it is 
urged that Tertullian distinctly speaks of it as a 
Jewish calumny; and against it is the prevalence 
of the story in writers whom a Jewish calumny, 
however industriously spread, would hardly 
reach. (4) It has been regarded as having 
originated from the use of the ass as a symbol 
by some Gnostic sects. That the ass was thus 
used is clear from the statement of Epiphanius 
(c. Haeres. 26, 10 ; see also Origeu, c. Gels. vi. 9). 
Between these various hypotheses it is hardly 
possible, in the absence of' further evidence, to 
make a choice ; the question must be left un- 
decided. A slight additional interest has been 
given to it by the discovery at Rome, in 1856, on 
a wall under the western angle of the Palatine, 
of a graffito, which forcibly recalls the story 
mentioned by Tertullian. The apologist's words 
are {Ad. Nat. i. 14) — " nuper quidam perditissi- 
mus in ista civitate, etiam suae religionis de- 
sertor, solo detrimento cutis Judaeus °. . . pic- 
turam in nos proposuit sub ista proscriptione 
ONOCOETES. Is erat auribus canteriorum et 
in toga, cum libro, altero pede ungulate, Et 
credidit vulgus infami Judaeo." The graffito in 
question represents an almost similar caricature, 
evidently directed against some Christian con- 
vert of the 2nd century. Upon a cross is a 
figure with a human body wearing an interula, 
but with an ass's head. 'On one side is another 
figure lifting up his head, possibly in the attitude 
of prayer. Underneath is written AAEHAMENOs 
SEBETE ©EON ("Alexamenos is worshipping 
God "). The form of the letters points to the 
graffito hnwing been written towards the end of 
the 2nd century, about the very time at which 
Tertullian wrote (see P. Garrucci's article, with 
a copy of the graffito, in the Civilta CattoUca, 
serie 3, vol. iv. p. 529). This graffito is now 
preserved in the library of the Collegio Romano 
in Rome. r£_ |£ -i 

ASPERGILLUM. The brush or twig used 
for sprinkling Holy Water [HoLY Water]. It 
anciently was, or was said to be, of hyssop, a 
plant supposed to possess cleansing virtues, from 
its use in the Mosaic law, and the well-known 
reference to it in the 51st Psalm. Thus, in the 
Gregorian Sacramentary (p. 148) the bishop in 
the consecration of a church, sprinkles the altar 
seven times with hyssop. The modern French 
name Goupil indicates that a fox's brush was 
some time used as an aspergillum. {Goupil for 
Vulpicula, Ducange's Glossary, s. v.). [C] 

ASPERSION. [Baptism.] 

ASS, WORSHIP OF THE. [Asixahii ] 

MARY. [Mary the Virgin, Festivals of.] 

ASTERISCUS (sometimes called Stellula by 
Latin writers). To prevent the veil from dis- 
turbmg the particles arranged on the discus or 
].aten, in preparation for the celebration of the 
hucharist, St. Chrysostom is sai.l tohnvo invented 
two siuall arches to support it. Tlios,., when 



placed so as to cross each other, resembled a star, 
and hence were called hffT^p or affT-npttrKos, the 
star ; hence the priest, placing it over the paten, 
is directed to say, " And the star came and stood 
over where the young child was." In modern 
times the arches are riveted together at the point 
of intersection, but so loosely as to admit of one 
arch being turned within the other for con- 
venience of carriage. See woodcut. (Neale, 
Eastern Church, Introd. 350 ; Daniel, Codex 
Liturgicus, iv. 336, 390.) [C] 

ASTEEIUS, martyr, commemorated March 3 
{Mart. Rom. Vet.). [C] 

Concilium), a.d. 446, condemned certain Mani- 
chees, or Priscillianists (Cave ; Mansi, vi. 490 ; 
but omitted by Labbe). [A. W. H.] 

ASTKOLOGEES. No element of heathenism 
was more difficult to eradicate than the belief 
that the stars in their courses influenced the 
lives of men, and that the destinies