St. Basil the Great : a study in monasticism

Father John B. O'Reilly

ST BASIL THE GREAT

A STUDY IN MONASTICISM

BY

W. K. LOWTHER CLARKE

FORMERLY FELLOW OF JESUS COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
RECTOR OF CAVENDISH, SUFFOLK

REGIS

BIBL. MAT,

COLLEGE

Cambridge :

at the University Press
1913

Camfcrtfogc :

PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A.
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

m caorv

FILIOLO MEO BASILIC

PREFACE

THE early history of monasticism has attracted much
attention in recent years, and the labours of such
scholars as Butler, Ladeuze, Preuschen and others have
thrown a flood of new light on the subject. This is especially
true of Egypt, which was for a whole century the Holy Land
of organised asceticism, and has claimed quite properly the
first attention of scholars. But there remain fields of import
ance which are as yet comparatively unworked, foremost
among which may be mentioned the movement inaugurated
in Cappadocia and Pontus by St Basil. So far as I am aware,
there exists no account of the ascetic writings of the great
archbishop of Caesarea, that discusses their contents and
problems with any fulness of detail. And yet St Basil forms
an important link in the history of monasticism, and deserves
more consideration than he has received hitherto. I trust that
the present study may do something to fill the gap.

My main purpose has been to make a careful examination
of St Basil's Ascetica. I have not however confined myself to
this ; it is difficult to understand any subject in isolation, and
so, at the risk of going once more over ground already well
trodden, I have tried to put my account of the literature into
a historical framework, and, in particular, to compare Cappa-
docian monachism with the systems that existed in Egypt in
the first half of the fourth century, and the subsequent
institutions of both East and West. The conclusions reached
with reference to the literature cannot claim to be anything
more than provisional, in the absence of a proper critical
edition of the Basilian Rules. The general lines of the picture
are not however affected by the uncertainty of the textual

viii Preface

problems, and the main result of the book — that the spiritual
sons of St Basil are to be found in the Western rather than
the Eastern Church — agrees with the verdict of most recent
writers on the subject.

I have derived little help from the modern Lives of
St Basil, and have formed my conclusions in the main from
an independent study of the ascetic writings. The Benedictine
edition, by Gamier and Maran, has been constantly at my
side; although nearly 200 years old, it is still a treasury of
learning and critical insight ; while Maran's Life of St Basil,
prefixed to the third volume, is almost equally valuable.
I have used the 1839 edition, which is better printed and more
convenient to handle than Migne's later edition. The fullest
account of the Rules seems to be that of H. Leclercq in
his article "Cenobitisme" in the Dictionnaire d Archeologie
chretienne. A book by A. Kranich, Die Ascetik in ihrer
dogmatischen Grundlage bei Basilius dem Grossen, is, as its
title indicates, concerned with the doctrinal rather than the
practical side of the question, and does not attempt to institute
comparisons with other types of asceticism. The footnotes
and Bibliography should show with sufficient clearness what
books have been consulted. In common with other workers
in this field, I owe much to the writings of Dom E. C. Butler,
and in particular to his chapter on Monasticism in the first
volume of The Cambridge Medieval History, with its full and
discriminating bibliography. Two books on special points have
proved more than ordinarily suggestive — Loofs' Eustathius
von Sebaste and Roll's Enthusiasmus iind Bussgewalt. For
the later history of Greek monasticism Ph. Meyer's Die
Hanpturkunden fur die Geschichte der Athoskloster is still the
most valuable guide. Wherever possible, standard translations
have been used, especially those of the Nicene and post- Nicene
Fathers series, the original being given in a note if demanded
by the importance of the point at issue.

I have to express my gratitude to Mr H. G. Wood, late
fellow of Jesus College, Cambridge, for reading my manuscript
and suggesting some improvements and corrections ; also to
the Professors of Divinity at Cambridge University, who have

Preface ix

been good enough to accept my dissertation as a sufficient
exercise for the degree of Bachelor of Divinity.

Since writing the above Mr E. F. Morison's book on
St Basil has come into my hands (St Basil and his Rule>
Oxford, 1912). It is a curious coincidence that two students
should have been at work independently upon a subject
hitherto untouched by English scholars. On most points
I find myself in complete agreement with Mr Morison. In
the few cases where we differ an examination of his views has
not led me to alter my own conclusions, and I have therefore
contented myself with giving references to the relevant pages
in his book.

W. K. LOWTHER CLARKE.

June 14, 1913.

[Feast of St Basil— Western Church.]

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

PREFACE vii

I. ASCETICISM IN THE EARLY CHURCH .... i

II. THE CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH OF ST BASIL 16

III. EGYPTIAN MONASTICISM 26

IV. ST BASIL AS MONK AND BISHOP 43

V. ST BASIL'S ASCETIC WRITINGS 63

VI. ST BASIL'S ASCETIC WRITINGS (continued'] ... 80

ADDITIONAL NOTE A. PERMANENT Vows . . 107

ADDITIONAL NOTE B. ST BASIL AND THE SOLI
TARY LIFE 109

VII. ST BASIL'S ASCETIC IDEALS 114

VIII. SUBSEQUENT INFLUENCE IN THE EAST . . . .127

IX. SUBSEQUENT INFLUENCE IN THE WEST .... 144

X. EPILOGUE 155

APPENDIX

A EUSTATHIUS OF SEBASTE 159

B RUFINUS' EDITION OF BASIL'S RULES .... 162

C A TABLE OF DATES 168

D BIBLIOGRAPHY 169

GENERAL INDEX 171

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS 172

INDEX OF PASSAGES OF ANCIENT AUTHORS . . . -173

CHAPTER I

ASCETICISM IN THE EARLY CHURCH

FEW movements in the religious sphere have received
such unsympathetic treatment in the past at the hands of
English writers as those ascetic tendencies of the early
Church which found their expression in monastic institutions.
The late Mr Lecky described the movement in these words:
" There is, perhaps, no phase in the moral history of mankind
of a deeper or more painful interest than this ascetic epidemic.
A hideous, sordid, and emaciated maniac, without knowledge,
without patriotism, without natural affection, passing his life
in a long routine of useless and atrocious self-torture, and
quailing before the ghastly phantoms of his delirious brain,
had become the ideal of the nations which had known the
writings of Plato and Cicero and the lives of Socrates and
Cato1." Dr Inge, speaking of the development of the Church,
can represent " the ascetic and monastic movement " as " the
strangest aberration in its history2." Of late, however, partly
owing to the wide influence of Dr Harnack's writings3, a
more sympathetic spirit has prevailed. It is now generally
recognised that an ideal which has enlisted in its service so
many of the best of humanity, and played so important a
part in the forming of the nations of modern Europe, deserves
more respectful treatment.

In the fourth century A.D., there lived a number of great
personalities, whose careers have a permanent attraction for
the student of history. Prominent among these is St Basil
of Caesarea ; even during his life-time his reputation was

1 History of European Morals (ed. 1911), II. 107.

2 Truth and Falsehood in Religion, p. 163.

3 Monasticism (Eng. tr. 1901), and What is Christianity 1 pp. 242 ff.

L. C. T

2 Asceticism in the Early Church

wide-spread, and after his death he ranked as one of the
greatest saints and doctors of the Eastern Church. He was
conspicuous as a preacher and skilful administrator, his
theological writings were an important factor in the eventual
triumph of Nicene orthodoxy ; yet his main title to fame is
his work as a founder of monastic institutions. As such he is
a figure of considerable importance. He is revered to-day as
the originator of the monasticism of the Eastern Church. If
we reflect on the vast resources of the Russian Empire, the
contributions which it has already made to the world's
culture in the fields of music and literature, and the part that
it will probably play in the history of the near future, we
shall be led to pay serious attention to Eastern monachism,
as one of the dominating forces in the Russian Church. The
fact that Russian bishops are chosen from the monastic
clergy is sufficient in itself to show the significance of monas
ticism. Recent events have reminded us that the Greeks
and the minor Slavonic nations are in the full flush of a
renascence in which the various national Churches will be
called upon to take their part.

But St Basil and his work come nearer home to us than
this. During the early Middle Ages the Benedictine monks
were one of the greatest spiritual and civilising influences of
Western Europe, and through St Benedict St Basil has
touched the West. According to Dom Butler, " St Benedict
owed more of the ground-ideas of his Rule to St Basil than
to any other monastic legislator1." St Basil is therefore one
of the outstanding figures in the history of monasticism, and
in the following pages we shall try to estimate the value and
permanence of his work.

Before attacking this special problem it will be well to
put one or two questions with reference to the general
subject. What, we may ask, is meant by asceticism ? Was
it of Jewish or pagan origin ? Did Christ inculcate or even
countenance it in His teaching? How came it to permeate
the Church so completely? After briefly discussing these

1 Enc. Brit, (nth ed.), art. "Basilian Monks" (all subsequent references are
to this latest edition).

Asceticism in the Early Church 3

points and sketching the development of the ascetic ideal
during the first three Christian centuries, we shall be in a
better position to appreciate the mental presuppositions of
an educated Christian in the fourth century.

The word " asceticism," like many other words, is used in
both good and bad senses. It is sometimes interpreted as
connoting a rigorous maltreatment of the body, arising from
a Manichean conception of the evil of material things. But
we have not disposed of a thing by calling it Manichean.
The Manichean position is after all but an exaggeration of
an essentially religious attitude. It is no doubt truer to
place the root of evil in the will, but for practical purposes
the average man finds his flesh the greatest obstacle to the
attainment of virtue, and all the higher religions have made
energetic provision for the curbing of the flesh1. However,
the best exponents of Christian asceticism would not allow
that material things are evil in themselves, for, as St Basil
says, God would not have made them, had this been the case.
They would only claim that the man who would be holy
must attain a mastery over the material, and that he will do
this rather by despising than by using it.

It is fairer to frame a definition that does not beg the
question. The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines an ascetic
as " one who practises severe self-discipline." If we add a
proviso that asceticism is severe self-discipline undertaken for
religious ends, and that the discipline will be exercised with
reference both to the natural desires of the body and the
distractions of the outer world, we have a definition that will
suit our purpose2. No reasonable man will quarrel with this
principle of discipline. Self-expression and self-restraint are
two equally essential elements of religious life. In order to

1 It is worthy of notice that the modern view of sin, which finds its essence in
the survival of animal instincts which were once natural but now conflict with
man's higher life, has considerable affinities with the ascetic position.

2 Heimbucher's definition may be cited as a specimen of a Roman Catholic
view: "cine planmassig geordnete und beharrlich fortgesetzte fromme Lebens-
weise, verbunden mit freiwilliger Entsagung von dem, was nach dem christlichen
Sittengesetze zwar nicht verboten ist, aber dessen Enthaltung durch die evange-
lischen Rate als besonders gottgefalliges Werk bezeichnet wird." Die Orden und
Kongregationen der katholischen Kirche (1896), p. 31.

4 Asceticism in the Early Church

live in the world at all, it is necessary to use the world ; but
anyone who attempts to use it to the full must expect
spiritual deterioration. But when we proceed to ask how far
asceticism is a necessary constituent of religion, or to what
extent the severity should be carried, we find ourselves on
debatable ground, where there is room for legitimate differ
ences of opinion. In particular there are a number of
practices which have existed in non-Christian societies, but
have been presented to the European observer mainly through
the agency of Christian monasticism. Chief among these
may be mentioned abstinence from marriage on religious
grounds, renunciation of private property, and, less essentially
characteristic, the rendering of absolute obedience to the will
of another1. It may be argued that these practices have
proved disastrous to the higher life of Churches and nations,
or that the ideals enshrined in them have been exaggerated
out of all proportion, but no one could say that they are in
themselves other than a legitimate exercise of individual
liberty. Even in renouncing his own will the monk has not
on the face of it done more than the soldier to whom he is
often compared by the fourth century Fathers2.

Assuming then that asceticism is best defined in neutral
terms, we now ask how this tendency came to be so sharply
emphasised in the Catholic Church of the fourth century.
How, for instance, was it possible for a writer like Jerome to
indite that terrible letter to Eustochium on Virginity, in
which he describes motherhood in the most repulsive terms,
and can only find one palliative of marriage, that without it
virgins cannot be produced3?

To obtain an answer to this question we must go back to
the beginnings of Christianity. Christianity was of course
far more than the mingling of the streams of Hebraism and
Hellenism — otherwise Philo might have founded the Church.

1 The threefold vow of Poverty, Chastity and Obedience is not however
primitive. In the rule of St Benedict there is a threefold promise of stabilitas,
conversio (moruni), obedienlia (c. 58).

2 St Basil works out the comparison in detail in his Praevia Institutio Ascetica.
See p. 74.

3 Ep. 22.

Asceticism in the Early Church 5

But it seems true to say that the human personality of Jesus
Christ, the Founder of Christianity, was the finest flowering
of the genius of the Jewish race, and that the particular form
assumed by the Catholic Church was conditioned by the
current Graeco-Roman civilisation of Mediterranean lands1.
To which of these two elements, the Jewish or the pagan, is
asceticism to be ascribed ?

There need be little hesitation in affirming that the
Jewish spirit as a whole was not ascetic. In early times it
was believed that prosperity was an outward sign of the
Divine favour. The experiences of the Exile shattered this
simple faith, and the book of Job is the classical treatment in
Jewish literature of the perplexities that ensued. But even
after the Exile asceticism never found an entry in any true
sense. It is surprising how little trace there is of it in the
last three centuries B.C., especially when we consider that
Persian dualism has left a distinct mark on the later books of
the Old Testament ; the practical conclusions that might
have followed from a dualistic theology were apparently not
drawn. Generally speaking, the Jew continued to have a
keen relish for the good things of life, and accepted them
gladly as God's gifts. Marriage was and always has been
the duty of the adult Jew. The astonishing numbers of the
Jews in the early Christian centuries must be attributed partly
to the fact that the race honoured and practised matrimony
in a world that was growing weary of it2. Nor was the Jew
attracted by poverty ; on the contrary, he was always alive to
the possibilities of worldly advancement.

To this general statement of the case certain exceptions
must be made. In the legal codes of the Old Testament

1 Cf. Harnack's definition of Catholicism, "It is the Christian preaching
influenced by the Old Testament, lifted out of its original environment and plunged
into Hellenic modes of thought, i.e. into the syncretism of the age and the ideal
istic philosophy." Constitution and Law of the Church, p. 254.

2 Of course only partly. Cf. Schlirer, Hastings' D.B. v. 91, "It was not
only to migrations and natural reproduction, but also to numerous conversions
during the Greek period, that Judaism owed its wide diffusion over the whole
world." Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, I. 10, lays stress on the conversions
from kindred Semite races.

6 Asceticism in the Early Ckurck

there are some ascetic injunctions, which may however be
plausibly explained as survivals of primitive taboos. Of more
importance is the quasi-ascetic life lived by individuals and
families during many centuries of Hebrew history. Its
purpose was to revert to the traditional simple life of the
desert, as a protest against the temptations to apostasy
arising from the Canaanite customs which were connected
with agriculture. The Nazirites and Rechabites are the chief
representatives of this tendency, but many of the prophets
shared the same views. Elijah and Amos especially were
prophets of the desert type. In New Testament times there
are some few indications of an ascetic tendency among the
Jews. The Essenes and Therapeutae are generally quoted
in this connexion. But they seem to have been syncretistic
sects, influenced by Hellenistic ideas, and have little bearing
on Judaism properly so-called. Dr Schweitzer has warned
us1 of the false impression that we get of Jewish eschatology
in the first century A.D., when we leave out the two most
significant figures, Jesus Christ and John the Baptist. Simi
larly in the present connexion, these two are the most
important witnesses for first century Jewish asceticism. We
shall return presently to the witness of our Lord, but the
Baptist deserves a word here. He was, apparently, unmarried
and lived an ascetic life in the wilderness. Clad in the
traditional garb of the prophets of old, he preached to the
crowds who sought him in his retreat, and urged a faithful
performance of everyday duty. Besides these hearers he
had a number of disciples in a special sense of whom very
little is known. It is clear then that the Baptist is a charac
teristically Jewish figure, standing in the line of the prophetic
tradition, which has little in common with the later Christian
conception of asceticism. After the fall of Jerusalem great
changes took place in Judaism, which now provided more
congenial soil for the growth of the ascetic spirit. " The
destruction of the Holy City — " says Mr Box, " and above all
of the Temple — in 70 A.D., gave rise to a widespread ascetic

1 Quest of the Historical Jesus, p. 366.

Asceticism in the Early Church 7

movement among the Jewish people who survived, especially
in Palestine1."

If asceticism, as displayed in the Catholic Church, is not
a product of Judaism, where it was only a late appearance of
secondary importance, is it to be traced to the Gentile
environment which modified the primitive Christian com
munity so profoundly? There is much in favour of this view
at first sight. The Greeks and Romans had not been
ascetically inclined in their best days. But in the early
years of the Empire nearly all earnest religious strivings
assumed an ascetic form. The old national faiths proved
inadequate amid the changed conditions, and men's eyes
turned eastward. With the mixing of nationalities came a
mixing of religions, and the Oriental cults with their promise
of purification met the needs of a world in which moral
earnestness had awakened to new life. The priests of Isis
and Serapis, Cybele and Attis, were to be found in all the
big cities, celibates of both sexes abounded, and, apart from
the official priesthoods, wandering devotees, proclaiming each
his own way of salvation, penetrated into the remotest
districts2. Now these Eastern religions were definitely ascetic
in their aims and methods. It is an obvious deduction that
Catholic asceticism was a Gentile perversion of the original
pure deposit of Christianity. And yet such a conclusion
would be in the highest degree superficial. It is singularly
difficult to substantiate any actual borrowing from pagan
sources, and the true solution would seem to be on quite
different lines.

We are driven therefore to seek an origin for Christian
asceticism in the original deposit of Christianity. Asceticism
seems to be present potentially in all religions, and makes its
appearance in the higher religions, as soon as the child-like
simplicity of primitive races has been replaced by some
measure of introspection. In some nations, the Jews for
instance, it plays little part ; amongst others, such as the

1 The Ezra- Apocalypse, p. 209. Note the emphasis on fasting (ix. 24) and
chastity (vi. 32).

2 Reitzenstein, Die helknistischen Mysterienreligionen, p. u. Cumont, Les
religions orientales dans le paganisme remain (2nd ed.), p. 34 and passim.

Asceticism in the Early Chiirch

higher races of India, it is almost identical with religion
itself. The specific forms which asceticism assumed in the
Church during the first four centuries after Christ may well
have been conditioned by the existing state of society, but
the thing itself was inherent in Christianity from the begin
ning. It could hardly have been otherwise, seeing that the
Church was composed of men and women of a certain stage
of civilisation, who were obviously children of their own time.
Let us now attempt to trace the primitive Church conception
of asceticism.

We have grown accustomed to a certain clearly-defined
picture of Jesus Christ, such as is presented to us in modern
literature and art. We see Him moving about in the towns
and villages of Galilee, sharing the life and joys of common
people, looking at the world with fresh, unspoiled interest, as
if it had come straight from the Father's hand, loving birds,
flowers, mountain-tops and little children, seeing, both in the
operations of Nature and the social relationships of human
life, analogies to the dealings of God with souls. The correct
ness of part, at least, of this impression is guaranteed by the
fact that contemporary observers dubbed Him "gluttonous
and a wine-bibber." And so we find it difficult to sympathise
with the Church Fathers, when they see in Christ the typical
ascetic. And yet there is much in the Gospel presentment of
Christ's teaching and example that accords with this inter
pretation. Our Lord lived a virgin life in a land and among
a people where marriage was well-nigh universal. His
example was reinforced by direct teaching, as when he speaks
of men becoming eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of
Heaven1, or of the call to hate wife and family for His sake2,
or when He describes the angelic life as one in which there is
no marriage3. It would be a mistake to underrate the social

1 Mt. xix. 21. It is not necessary to investigate the meaning of this and
other passages as originally spoken. It is sufficient for our purpose to show that
the ascetically minded could appeal to the recorded life and teaching of Christ in
support of their position.

a Lk. xiv. 26, xviii. 29. In Mk x. 29, Mt. xix. 29 "wife" is absent from the
best texts. See Burkitt, Early Eastern Christianity, pp. 119, 120.

3 Mk xii. 25, cf. Lk. xx. 34, 35, where the heightening is marked.

Asceticism in the Early Church 9

rank of Jesus and His disciples, yet it is clear that they were
poor during the travels of the Ministry. The Son of Man
had not where to lay His head. The utmost simplicity of
food and clothing was enjoined on the disciples. The rich
young man was bidden to part with all his possessions and
follow Christ, and, according to St Matthew, this was repre
sented as being, for him at least, the perfect way1. In fact
Western Christianity has never really faced the full implica
tions of Christ's teaching on poverty and riches. Jesus is
represented as having fasted Himself, and having contem
plated the continuance of the practice by His followers2.
And, generally speaking, the precepts about cutting off the
hand or foot and plucking out the eye readily lent themselves
to an ascetic interpretation.

The above is sufficient evidence of the existence of ascetic
traits in the earliest strata of Christianity. But the question
as to the real meaning of Christ's teaching is of such interest
that a few words must be given to its consideration.

What has been said above with reference to John the
Baptist is also applicable here. Our Lord stands, as regards
the external conditions of His ministry, in the line of the
prophetic tradition. During the greater part of His public
career His work was to proclaim the nearness of the coming
Kingdom and the necessity of repentance as a preparation
for it. In the opening verses of St Mark we find Him taking
up and reinforcing the Baptist's message3. It was only to be
expected that His own life, in certain aspects, should recall
the desert type of prophet. In so far as the disciples shared
His life, it was necessary to prescribe for them a similar
detachment from worldly ties. The practical necessities of
evangelism will thus have dictated the ascetic precepts of the
gospels4.

True as this argument no doubt is, it seems, to the writer
at any rate, not strong enough to bear the full weight of the

1 Mt. xix. 21, Mk x. 21, Lk. xviii. 22.

2 Mt. iv. 2, vi. 16, ix. 15, Mk ii. 20. 3 Mk i. 14, 15.

4 Cf. Didache, u, where the apostles and prophets seem to be classed together
as travelling evangelists.

io Asceticism in the Early Church

evidence. There is more in Christ's words than these con
siderations can explain. An alternative solution of the
problem is offered by what has been called Interimsetkik.

According to this theory1, the key to the teaching of
Jesus, especially in the Sermon on the Mount, lies in the fact
that it was never intended for a permanent rule of life, but
only for the brief period that was expected to end presently
in the passing of the existing world-order. If this be granted,
the ascetic precepts become intelligible at once, and form an
integral part of an " anti-family and anti-social " teaching2.

The strength of the arguments in favour of the eschato-
logical view is not to be ignored, but it is difficult to imagine
that such an interpretation is much better than a caricature
of Christ's ethical demands. "The theory gives a low and
unworthy colouring to the teaching of Jesus, since it repre
sents Him as laying the whole stress on the self-centred
desire of the individual for his own salvation, and as caring
little or nothing for the effect of good actions on others and
the world as a whole3." Besides, there are a number of
passages which support a different conclusion and indicate
that Jesus looked forward to a prolonged absence4. They
are an integral part of the Synoptic tradition5, and are in fact
so opposed to the general Church sentiment of the first
decades that their authenticity is indubitable. We conclude
that the ascetic precepts are no Interimsethik, but are part of
a body of teaching adapted to the needs of Christ's followers
during a period of indefinite prolongation.

Jesus then recognised a life of asceticism as necessary for
some of His followers, in view of the requirements of the
Gospel preaching or the needs of individual souls. There is
no evidence that He required it from all, or that He made it

1 Expounded by J. Weiss, Die Predigt fesu vow. Reiche Gottes, and Schweitzer,
The Quest.

2 Felix d'Alviella, Evolution du Dogme Catholiqiie^ p. 33 (quoted by Emmet,
"Is the teaching of Jesus an Interimsethik?" Expos. Nov. 1912).

3 Emmet, loc. cit.

4 Mt. xxv. 5, Lk. xii. 45, xix. n ff. Cf. also the parables of the Wheat and
Tares, Mustard Seed, and Leaven, which contemplate a period of slow growth.

5 See the index references to the above passages in Oxford Studies in the
Synoptic Problem.

Asceticism in the Early Church 1 1

a general condition of perfection. But if individuals in later
times have heard an inward voice calling them to a life of
celibacy and hardship, they have not misinterpreted the
Gospel story by recognising in it the Spirit of Jesus.

It may be objected that the world-renouncing side of
Christ's teaching is a secondary and quite subordinate element.
This may be the case ; we are not claiming that the conclu
sions of the early Church were valid for all time, only that
the interpretation, so far as it went, was legitimate. It seems
impossible for any one age to appreciate the totality of
Christ's message ; it must suffice if it carry away such lessons
as it can assimilate.

Asceticism is represented in other writings of the New
Testament besides the gospels, but it is entirely practical in
its aims. It may be summed up in the words " No soldier on
service entangleth himself in the affairs of this life1." The
writers are convinced it is the last hour ; the world and its
lusts are passing away2. It is only common-sense that
Christians should desire to go through life as far as possible
without impedimenta. Moreover, idolatry permeated every
department of pagan society, and the command " Keep
yourselves from idols3 " was equivalent in practice to " Re
nounce the world." St Paul in places goes further than this,
for instance in his teaching about marriage in I Corinthians.
" I cannot see how it is possible to deny," says Professor
Lake, "that the general teaching of the Christian Church
from St Paul to the Reformation is that the life of the
celibate is higher qua tails than that of the married Christian4."
That is to say, the Catholic view of marriage was no innova
tion, but a logical if one-sided development of a point of view
that is firmly entrenched in the New Testament. The early
Church in its idealisation of the unmarried state, and its
resolve to flee from the world rather than realise itself in the'
world, could appeal to its canonical documents5.

1 2 Tim. ii. 4.

2 i Jn ii. 17, 1 8. 3 i Jn v. 21. 4 Earlier Epistles of St Paul, p. 191.

5 The "virgins" in Rev. xiv. 4 are most significant; some commentators how
ever give them a symbolical sense.

12 Asceticism in the Early Church

It is outside our scope to discuss the development of
ascetic ideals in the ante-Nicene Church ; all that is really
germane to the subject will be introduced more fitly in
Chapter III under the head of the origin of Egyptian
Monasticism. It will be sufficient at this point to give a
summary statement of the facts. In the third century certain
precursors of the later monks make their appearance. They
are not however of much significance and, with the exception
of the philosophical schools of Alexandria, do not seem to
have had any organic connexion with the movement inaugu
rated by St Antony1. More important for our purpose is
the custom, practised by devotees of both sexes, of leading an
ascetic life at home without separation from other Christians.
This was described as bearing "the whole yoke of the Lord2."
" No doubt now existed in the Churches that abstinence from
marriage, from wine and flesh, and from possessions, was the
perfect fulfilling of the law of Christ3." The extreme ascetic
position was however condemned as heretical, and the fact
that asceticism was most fully developed in the Gnostic and
Catharist sects might well have rendered it suspect in the
eyes of the adherents of the great Church, had not its
presuppositions been common ground to all professing Chris
tians.

Can we account for the strength of this conviction that
the ascetic is the true Christian ? We have seen that the first
generation of believers looked for a speedy return of Christ,
an expectation which, coupled with the necessities of the
missionary propaganda, led many of them naturally to set

1 The following may be mentioned : (a) Origenistic ascetic schools, e.g. those
of Pierius and Hierakas; (b] the wandering ascetics of the pseudo-Clementine
epistles on Virginity; (c) the "monks" referred to in Eusebius, Mart. Pal. 5. 10,
Comm. on Ps. 67 (68) ; ("The first order of those who are pre-eminent in Christ
is that of the monks; but they are few") 83 (84); (d] the "sons of the cove
nant" found in Aphraates, Horn. vi. xvm. See Zockler, Askese und Monchtum,
pp. 174—182.

2 Didache, 6.

3 Harnack, History of Dogma, i. 238. See i Clem. 38, Ign. ad Polyc. 5.
("In these ascetics of early Christianity the first step was taken towards
monasticism," Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, i. 272). Just. Apol. i. 15.
Clem. Al. Strom, vn. 12. Tert. de Virg. vel. 10. Apol. 9. Cypr. de hab. virg.
3 ff . ; cf. Herm. Mand. iv. 4, Sim. v. 3.

Asceticism in the Early Church 13

small store by earthly relationships. As years passed by and
the second Advent was still unrealised, the expectation was
perforce weakened. The best spirits of the Church did not
however settle down to make the best of the present world.
The political and social conditions of the time were not
favourable to such a development. The persecutions alone
were enough to keep alive the original feeling towards the
world. And so the asceticism of the apostolic days, begun
on practical grounds, was continued for the same reasons.
Now it frequently happens that men are led by the force of
circumstances to adopt a certain course of action, and only
after they have pursued it for some time do they seek a
theoretical justification for their behaviour. Such seems to
have been the case here. The Church writers found asceti
cism an established fact in their midst and sought to explain
it as a necessary deduction from Holy Scripture. In so
doing they emphasised certain elements of New Testament
Christianity out of all proportion and destroyed the balance
preserved in the apostolic writings. But their explanations
are after-thoughts and only to a very limited extent corre
spond to the facts of history.

No single cause is sufficient to account for the great pro
portions assumed by the ascetic movement in the fourth
century. The ideal had been present in the Church from the
beginning in germ, and a desire to imitate the life of Christ
literally, and obey his precepts, continued to be a factor in
the situation. But fourth century monasticism on the scale
on which we know it was only made possible by a number of
causes which combined to foster the ascetic ideal. The three
cardinal virtues of monachism — virginity, poverty, and obedi
ence to a spiritual guide or a written rule — presented few
difficulties to the men of the time. Marriage was not attrac
tive. The natural human desire for a wife and family has
seldom been so weakened as at this epoch. The decline of
the population cannot be attributed merely to a vicious fiscal
system. Racial decay was undoubtedly present, while slavery
had produced its inevitable crop of moral and physical
deterioration. Nor did poverty possess much terror for the

14 Asceticism in the Early Church

better class of citizens. There were few or no openings for a
young man in political life, and the exactions of the Exchequer
made existence almost intolerable to many citizens. Rarely
have the charms of the simplified life and freedom from the
burden of responsibilities proved so alluring. Again, the last
thing that the Empire wished to encourage in its sons was
independence or initiative. The spiritual fatigue of the time
made it no hardship for the average monk to transfer the
control of his actions to some masterful abbot such as
Pachomius or Schnoudi.

Many circumstances thus prepared the way for monasti-
cism, but it would be a mistake to lay too much stress on
social influences. In any great religious movement, as M.
Cumont points out1, we come in the last resort to a series of
individual conversions, for which moral causes must be sought.
The moral factor here is not far to seek, namely, the changed
conditions that ensued on the cessation of persecutions and
founding of the Christian Empire2. A flood of new members
swept into the Church and swamped the old landmarks, the
standard of Church life deteriorated sensibly, and earnest
spirits craved for new opportunities of holiness. These they
sought in the cell and cloister ; there was no longer any call
to withstand the forces of the pagan Empire, but in the desert
the martyr-spirit found a new expression, and there was scope
for any amount of moral enthusiasm in spiritual conflicts with
the powers of darkness. Monasticism then in one of its
aspects was a protest against the growing secularisation of
the Church, which had ceased to be a community of saints
and was now a school for righteousness with many reluctant
pupils. With the monks enthusiasm revived, and the pioneers
at least were conscious of possessing supernatural gifts and
powers. The monks may even be called Puritans, and it is

1 Les religions orientates, p. 41, " Une grande conquete religieuse...ne s'explique
que par des causes morales. Quelque part qu'il faille y faire, comme dans tout
phenomene social, a 1'instinct d'imitation et a la contagion de 1'exemple, on
aboutit toujours en definitive a une serie de conversions individuelles."

2 The great development of monachism coincided with the Christian ILmpire,
though its beginnings were of course earlier.

Asceticism in the Early Church 15

one of the surprises of history that they were preserved in
communion with the world-Church.

Even now we have not accounted for the phenomena of
the fourth century. Much is explained, but not the irresis
tible impulse, almost madness, which swept over great tracts
of country and drove so large a proportion of the population
to a life of incredible austerities. But it is just in this that
the fascination of history lies ; the student feels himself
confronted by forces too mighty to be measured by any
instruments at his disposal.

CHAPTER II

THE CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH OF ST BASIL1

IT is usual to begin the biography of a great man with
some account of the family from which he sprung and the
surroundings of his childhood. Such preliminaries must not
be omitted here, for in Basil's case both heredity and environ
ment played a clearly-defined part.

His native land Cappadocia2 is an upland plain occupying
the central part of Eastern Asia Minor. Several mountains
rise up from the plain, the most important being Mt Argaeus
(now Erjish Dagh). The climate is of a continental character,
being subject to great extremes of temperature. Sozomen
remarks on "the severity of the winter, which is always a
natural feature of that country3," and Basil mentions it several
times in his correspondence. The soil is naturally poor, but
generations of working peasants had brought it to moderate
fertility at a time before historical records begin4. This
district had once been the seat of the Hittite empire, and it is
probable that the Hittite racial type persisted in Basil's time.
" With the decline of the Syro-Cappadocians after their defeat
by Croesus, Cappadocia was left in the power of a sort of
feudal aristocracy, dwelling in strong castles and keeping the
peasants in a servile condition, which later made them apt for

1 Excellent Lives of Basil are given by Venables in Did. Chr. Biog. and
Jackson in his translation of Basil in the Nicene Fathers series. Maran's Life in
the Benedictine edition is the fullest. Allard's Saint Basile (5th ed. 1903) is
delightful from a literary standpoint, but superficial. There are also popular
works by Fialon (1861) and R. T. Smith (1879). Tillemont's Memoires are still
useful.

2 See art. "Cappadocia" in Enc. Brit, (nth ed.).

8 H.E. VI. 34. Cappadocia was noted for furs, Camb. Med. Hist. I. 548.
4 Sir W. M. Ramsay, Luke the Physician, p. 179.

The Childhood and Youth of St Basil 17

foreign slavery1." The national reputation was bad, and
Cappadocians ranked with Cretans and Cilicians as an un
satisfactory trio2. Gregory of Nyssa tells us that the Cappa
docians were poor in almost everything and especially in men
able to write3. Amid these peasants were a number of
" farmsteadings of quadrilateral shape, having at the four
corners, towers, which were connected by walls and inner
chambers, enclosing an open quadrangle.... In those big forti
fied homesteads lived the large patriarchal households of the
landholders, representatives of the conquering caste in a
subjugated land.... From those landed families came some of
the leading figures in early Church history, such as Basil of
Caesarea4." The main lines of these " Tetrapyrgia " are
followed in the still existing Seljuk Khans5.

In striking contrast to the backwardness of the imperfectly
Hellenised country folk stood the brilliant civilisation of
Caesarea. According to Strabo only Mazaca (Caesarea) and
Tyana among Cappadocian towns deserved the name of
city6. In 260 A.D. Caesarea was said to contain 400,000
people7. It rose to wealth and importance as the manufac
turing and business centre of a large province almost destitute
of towns8. There is no reason to think that Gregory is using
language of indiscriminate patriotism when he speaks of the
literary distinction of Caesarea, and calls it " this illustrious
city of ours... the metropolis of letters, no less than of the
cities which she excels and reigns over9." Caesarea then was

1 Enc. Brit. art. " Cappadocia."

2 Kcur7rci§o/fes Kp^res KOu/ces rpta Kcnnra KaKtara. 3 Ep. 12.

4 Ramsay, Luke the Physician, p. 187; cf. Cumont, Les religions orientales,
p. 213, "Sous la domination des Achemenides, 1'est de 1'Asie Mineure fut colonise
par les Parses. Le plateau d' Anatolic se rapprochait, par ses cultures et son
climat, de celui de 1'Iran et se pretait notamment a 1'eleve des chevaux. La
noblesse, qui possedait le sol, appartenait en Cappadoce et meme dans le Pont,
comme en Armenie, a la nation conquerante."

5 For a photograph see Ramsay, op. cit. p. 192. Cf. Greg. Nyss. Ep. 15, for a
description of a country mansion.

6 Enc. Brit. art. "Cappadocia." 7 Enc. Brit. art. "Caesarea."

8 Soz. H. E. v. 4. For Caesarea as a centre of the road-system see the maps of
Asia Minor in Ramsay's books and Hastings' D.B. v., also Miss Skeel, Travel in
the First Century, pp. 1 24 f.

9 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 13.

L. C. 2

1 8 The Childhood and Youth of St Basil

a centre of Greek influences in a district where the old native
ways of life still predominated. The final process of Helleni-
sation was carried out by the Church rather than the State,
and Basil and others like him, who were equally at home in
city life and on their country estates, were important agents
in the process. Pontus, the other province with which Basil's
family was associated, was a land of high mountains, deep
valleys and rushing streams, with a winter climate even more
severe than that of Cappadocia.

Christianity had taken root in Cappadocia from early
days. The Jews who abounded here, as elsewhere in Asia
Minor, formed a nucleus for the Church1. Asia Minor, so
Dr Harnack reminds us, was "the Christian country /car
efo^T?!/ during the pre-Constantine era2," and Cappadocia did
not fall short of its neighbours. After making due allowance
for patriotic rhetoric, we may still regard Gregory of Nyssa's
words as remarkable: " If it is really possible to infer God's
presence from visible symbols, one might more justly con
sider that He dwelt in the Cappadocian nation than in any
of the spots outside it. For how many altars are there, on
which the name of the Lord is glorified ! One could hardly
count so many altars in all the rest of the world3." Gregory's
testimony is corroborated by the fact that Julian found
Cappadocia a stronghold of Christianity ; nor are there any
but faint traces of heathenism in Basil's writings. This part
of Asia had great Christian traditions. One of the most
noteworthy of third century bishops, Firmilian the friend and
correspondent of Cyprian4, had been associated with Caesarea,
and an even greater figure, Gregory Thaumaturgus, had been
bishop of Neo-Caesarea in Pontus5. Cappadocia, unlike its
western neighbour Phrygia, had been comparatively free from
heretical tendencies, and this added prestige to the metro
politan church of the province. The archbishop of Caesarea
was of course head of the Cappadocian Church ; his position

1 i Mace. xv. 12 (see Schiirer, The Jewish People, n. ii. 221), Acts ii. 9,
i Pet. i. i. In the two latter Pontus is mentioned with Cappadocia.

2 Expansion of Christianity, n. 326; cf. 338 — 353 for Cappadocia.
* Bp. 2. 4 Cypr. Ep. 75.

8 See Harnack, Expansion, n. 349 — 352, for the significance of Gregory.

The Childhood and Youth of St Basil 19

was the stronger in that the bishops of the province were few
in number and the towns over which they presided, with the
exception of Tyana, of little importance1. He claimed metro
politan rights over Pontus and Lesser Armenia, and the great
personal influence of Basil enhanced the already high reputa
tion of his see.

Basil came of a family that had won honourable distinction
for its steadfast devotion to the faith. His paternal grand
father was a landed proprietor near Neo-Caesarea, who had
fled with his wife Macrina into the wilds of Pontus to escape
from the persecution of Maximinus2. His father Basil, an
eminent member of the Bar at Caesarea and a teacher of
rhetoric, married Emmelia, a woman of great force of character
and deep religious fervour. Both father and mother came
of illustrious families which had given a long line of officials
to the State8. In all their children there appears an ease of
bearing and power of administration, which stamp them as
belonging to the aristocracy of the district4. Gregory remarks
of Basil's paternal grand -parents how great a trial their exile
was to them, since they were " accustomed to the attendance
and honour of a numerous retinue5." Basil pere and Emmelia
showed much generosity in their extensive charities, and dedi
cated to God a fixed proportion of their property, which was
still large in spite of losses during the persecutions6. They
had ten children, of whom four sons and five daughters
survived. Macrina the eldest lived to become one of the most
remarkable women of the century, and her Life by her brother
Gregory is a fascinating record that deserves to be better
known. The other four daughters were all happily married.
Basil was the eldest son ; next to him came Naucratius, who

1 Cf. Duchesne, Histoire ancienne de rtglise (1907), n. 378. The institution of
village -bishops (xw/>e7ri<rK07rot) on the contrary was highly developed.

2 Greg. Na^.j2.tJu43*-&===&' — ~ 3 ib. 3.

r"RufinusT H.E. n. 9, describes Gregory Naz. and Basil as "ambo nobiles" ;
cf. Allard, Saint Basile, p. 2, who draws attention to their love of nature : " ce
sentiment de la nature, cet amour de la campagne, qui est, a sa maniere, une note
d'aristocratie, et ne se rencontre guere chez des hommes nouveaux, n'ayant point
de racines dans le sol."

5 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 3. 6 ib. 9.

2 2

2O The Childhood and Youth of St Basil

was killed on a hunting expedition in Pontus. Gregory and
Peter, the two youngest sons, became eventually bishops of
Nyssa and Sebaste.

Basil was born about the year 329, apparently at Caesarea1.
His health as an infant was frail, and he was put out to be
nursed with a family in the neighbourhood, who were paid by
the gift of the usufruct of some slaves2. When he was strong
enough, he was sent to his grandmother Macrina to be
brought up on the family estate at Annesi, near Neo-Caesarea.
Macrina gave him his first lessons in religion ; she was in
touch with the traditions of the time o_f persecution, and could
repeat to the intelligent boy the very words used by the great
Gregory Thaumaturgus 3. Thus early in his lifetime did
Basil come under the influence of the Origenistic tradition.
His father seems to have been teaching at Neo-Caesarea
about this time, for Gregory relates, " In his earliest years
he was swathed and fashioned... under his great father, ac
knowledged in those days by Pontus as its common teacher
in virtue4." This training under his father may have been
contemporaneous with that received at the hands of Macrina.
" He was trained in general education, and practised in the
worship of God, and, to speak concisely, led on by elementary
instruction to future perfection5." It was to his father that
Basil owed the foundations of his liberal education and wide
culture. His sister Macrina had been educated very differ
ently and debarred from pagan literature, while on the death
of their father she herself undertook the education of the
youngest brother Peter, which she conducted on severely
ascetic lines6. The time now came for Basil to leave home.
"When sufficiently trained at home... he set out for the city
of Caesarea, to take his place in the schools there7." We
have already mentioned the literary distinction of Caesarea,
and Basil would have received there as good an education as

1 See Greg. Naz. Ep. 2; Bas. Epp. 51, 74, 76, 87, 96, all of which refer to
Cappadocia or Caesarea as his native place. There is however no direct state
ment.

2 Bas. Ep. 37; cf. Greg. Nyss. in laud. Bas. 3 Bas. Epp. 204, 210, 223.
4 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 12. 5 ib.

6 Greg. Nyss. Vit. Macr. (P. G. XLVI. 961 ff.). 7 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 13.

The Childhood and Youth of St Basil 21

a provincial city could give1. He made rapid progress, and
won a reputation by his prowess in philosophy and rhetoric2.
It is possible that he met Julian and Gallus during this period,
for about this time they were confined in the palace of Ma-
cellum not far from Caesarea. The correspondence between
Basil and Julian is however of doubtful authenticity. The
famous friendship between Basil and Gregory must have
started at Caesarea. "Athens... brought me to know Basil
more perfectly," says Gregory, "though he had not been
unknown to me before3." After finishing his course at
Caesarea, Basil went to Constantinople, where he met the
famous champion of an expiring paganism, the rhetorician
Libanius, and profited by his instructions4. Constantinople
"was distinguished by the eminence of its rhetorical and
philosophic teachers, whose most valuable lessons he soon
assimilated5."

From Constantinople Basil proceeded in 351 to Athens.
He found that his friend Gregory had reached the University
city a little before him, after travels in search of education
that had extended as far as Palestine and Alexandria6.
Perhaps this example led Basil eventually to visit the same
countries in search of a different kind of knowledge. Basil
found his early days at Athens far from happy. The rough
horse-play of the students, the " ragging " practised on fresh
men and the rivalries of different nationalities caused great
annoyance to his sensitive nature, although he was spared
much by his friend's influence. However, the fascination of
studying under the best teachers of the age7 soon out-balanced

1 See Bas. Ep. 76 ; cf. Eus. Vit. Const, iv. 43, where the Cappadocian bishops
are described as "distinguished above all for learning and eloquence."

2 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 13. 3 ib. 14.

4 Libanius was in Constantinople about this time. The Libanius- Basil corre
spondence, Epp. 335 — 359, if not genuine, may have been inspired by a true
tradition of their intercourse. The statement of Socrates, iv. 26, and Sozomen, VI.
17, that they met at Antioch is no doubt due to a confusion with Chrysostom's
friend, Basil of Antioch. Libanius went to Antioch about 353. Cf. Seeck, Die
Brief e des Libanius (1906) ; Maas, Der Briefwechsel zwischen Basileios und Libanios
(1912).

5 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 14. 6 ib. 7, 6.
7 Himerius and Prohaeresius (Socr. H.E. IV. 26).

22 The Childhood and Youth of St Basil

such inconveniences, and he became very happy. The two
friends found no time for anything but their religious duties
and their studies. " Two ways were known to us, the first of
greater value, the second of smaller consequence ; the one
leading to our sacred buildings and the teachers there, the
other to secular instructors." Athens was a stronghold of the
old religions, but, unlike Julian, Basil does not seem to have
felt their attraction. He and Gregory led a life of devotion
and purity, and had no youthful sins with which to reproach
themselves, though no doubt their development up to this
time was one-sided and unduly academic. In spite of their
seclusion, Basil's qualities as a leader were manifested, and a
group of like-minded students gathered round the two friends.
When the time for parting arrived, about the end of 355, the
wrench was painful on both sides1.

How had it fared meanwhile with the family that Basil
had left behind ? About the time of his departure from
Caesarea his father died, and the responsibility for the younger
children and the scattered and extensive family property
devolved on Emmelia. The burden was however to a very
large extent borne by the eldest daughter Macrina, who had
vowed herself to life-long virginity on the death of her
affianced husband, which took place when she was twelve
years old. Gregory of Nyssa gives a full description of his
sister's life during these years, but leaves the chronology
obscure. He himself was still devoted to secular pursuits,
while Emmelia, Macrina and the youngest child Peter were
on the family estate at Annesi, living as ascetic a life as was
possible in view of their responsibilities2. About 352, so it
seems, Naucratius the remaining son began his remarkable
career of asceticism. He retired into the wilds of Pontus
some three days' journey from home, accompanied by a faith
ful domestic Chrysapius3. They found a retreat on the banks
of the Iris, and spent their days mostly in hunting and fishing.
Being highly skilled in the chase, Naucratius succeeded in

1 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 14 — 24 is our authority for the years at Athens. Cf.
Capes, University Life in Ancient Athens.

2 Greg. Nyss. Vit. Macr. (P. G. XLVI. 965 ff.).

3 ib. 968, ?r/)os TOV fj-ovriprj Kol dKTrj/j.ova filov a.Trrj\d€v.

The Childhood and Youth of St Basil 23

getting more than was required for their own subsistence.
He gave the surplus to the aged and sick men of the neigh
bourhood, to whose necessities he also ministered with his
own hands. After five years spent in this " philosophic " life,
the two died suddenly as the result of a hunting accident.
Emmelia was prostrate with grief, and Macrina succeeded in
persuading her mother to adopt a life of greater asceticism.
This happened about 357, when Basil either had started, or
was just about to start, on his travels in the East. The dates
are not quite certain, but one would like to think that the
tragic death of Naucratius was not unconnected with his
resolve to forswear worldly ambitions. By this time the
other four sisters were all married, and the family possessions
distributed among the children1.

Basil returned to Caesarea at the beginning of 356. His
fame had preceded him, and the city " took possession of him
as a second founder and patron," and claimed him as a teacher
of rhetoric2. The citizens of Neo-Caesarea looked on him as
one of themselves and, taking advantage of Basil's visit to his
mother at Annesi, sent a deputation to invite him to become
a teacher in their city3. But other influences were now at
work. Macrina was alarmed at the developments in her
brother's character. Though Gregory, the friend, denies it4,
Gregory, the brother, declares expressly that Basil's head was
completely turned by his success5. But no doubt a desire for
an ascetic life had been in his mind for a long while, though
perhaps obscured of late by his brilliant achievements6. His

1 Greg. Nyss. Vit. Macr. (P. G. XLVI. 969).

2 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 25. Rufin. H.E. n. 9; cf. Bas. Ep. 358 (Libanius to
Basil— of doubtful authenticity).

3 Bas. Ep. 210. The Diet. Chr. Biog. article speaks of two attempts to get
him. But Basil must have visited his mother and sister (see Vit. Macr.), and in
Ep. 210 he says to the Neo-Caesareans, "you were not able to keep me," so that
Annesi is the natural background for this deputation. "Afterwards, when you
all crowded round me, what were you not ready to give?" refers more naturally
to the informal proceedings at the close of the deputation than to a second depu
tation.

4 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 25, "after a slight indulgence to the world and the
stage, sufficient to gratify the general desire, not from any inclination to theatrical
display." 5 Greg. Nyss. Vit. Macr. (P. G. XLVI. 965).

6 Greg. Naz. Ep. i speaks of a promise made by the two students at Athens

24 The Childhood and Youth of St Basil

morals had always been irreproachable, and, as we saw in
Chapter I, Catholic piety had manifested itself for generations
past in ascetic forms. The visit to his old home would awaken
dormant memories, and the sight of its quiet and disciplined
life stir him to new and higher ideals. Besides this, Macrina
made a direct attack on him, and the words of his revered
sister went far to effect his conversion1. In Epistle 223 Basil
gives us his own account of the change. It was sudden, like
a man awaking from sleep. He wept over his wasted life, and
the years spent in acquiring worldly wisdom. He prayed for
light, and found it in the words of the Gospel which bid men
sell their goods and renounce the world. And then he needed
a guide, one who had already espoused the perfect way of life.
" And many did I find in Alexandria, and many in the rest
of Egypt, and others in Palestine, and in Coele Syria, and in
Mesopotamia."

A little further on in the same letter he relates how he
found men living the same life in his own country, clearly
referring to Eustathius of Sebaste. But in spite of this, which
may be taken to mean that only after his return from the East
did he receive instruction from Eustathius, it seems more
likely that they met before his departure. Eustathius had
become bishop of Sebaste by 3572, Sebaste was not far from
Neo-Caesarea, Basil's family was connected with Sebaste,
perhaps having property there3, Eustathius had himself
visited Egypt and Palestine — what is more probable than
that Eustathius advised Basil to travel and learn the ascetic
way for himself from a first-hand acquaintance with its ex
ponents4. We recollect that Gregory of Nazianzus had visited

to join one another later on in a life of "philosophy." For the different meanings
of 0i\o<ro0ia in Christian writers see Boulenger's note, Gregoire de Nazianze, dis-
coursfunebres, pp. Ivi, Ivii. This writer's suggestion that Basil led a life "quelque
peu dissipee " is not warranted by the evidence.

1 Vit. Macr. 973. - See Diet. Chr. Biog. art. "Eustathius."

3 Greg. Nyss. Or. in XL Mart, speaks of Sebaste as the Trarpk of his fore
fathers.

4 Cf. Duchesne, Histoirc ancienne de riglise (1907), n. 384, "C'est sans doute
sur les conseils de 1'eveque de Sebaste qu'il entreprit un grand voyage en Egypt,
en Syrie et en Mesopotamie, pour visiter, lui aussi, les solitaires les plus
renommes."

The Childhood and Youth of St Basil 25

the same lands, and so may have been an influence in the
same direction.

Basil now returned to Caesarea1, and put his worldly
affairs in order, though his renunciation of his possessions
cannot have taken place until after his travels, which must
have been costly. Somewhere about this time he was bap
tised by Dianius, bishop of Caesarea, and ordained to the
office of Reader2.

We have singularly little information about Basil's
journeys. He cannot have been gone much over a year,
for we find him back at Caesarea in 358. He reached Egypt,
his main objective, by way of Syria. After a halt at Alex
andria, apparently occasioned by sickness3, he traversed " the
rest of Egypt4." He did not succeed in meeting the great
Athanasius5, and he avoided the company of heretics6. After
Egypt he went to Palestine and Mesopotamia, and thus home
to Cappadocia. This is his description of the effect produced
on his mind by what he saw : " I admired their continence in
living, and their endurance in toil ; I was amazed at their
persistence in prayer and at their triumphing over sleep ;
subdued by no natural necessity, ever keeping their soul's
purpose high and free, in hunger, in thirst, in cold, in naked
ness, they never yielded to the body; they were never willing
to waste attention on it ; always, as though living in a flesh
that was not theirs, they showed in very deed what it is to
sojourn for a while in this life, and what it is to have one's
citizenship and home in heaven. All this moved my admira
tion. I called these men's lives blessed, in that they did
indeed show that they ' bear about in their body the dying of
Jesus.' And I prayed that I, too, as far as in me lay, might
imitate them7."

What precisely was this life that Basil saw and determined
to imitate ? To answer this question will be the task of the
following chapter.

1 This is nowhere stated, but seems highly probable.

2 Bas. de Spir. Sane. 29; Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 27.

3 Bas. Ep. i. He declares here that his real object was to meet his correspon
dent, Eustathius the philosopher, but this is mere epistolary politeness. Cf. Reg.
brev. tract. 254. 4 Ep. 223. 5 ib. 80. 6 ib. 204. 7 ib. 223.

CHAPTER III

EGYPTIAN MONASTICISM

THAT Basil should visit Egypt was only to be expected.
Few countries have exercised so powerful an influence on the
religious ideals of mankind as the lands which lie at the south
eastern corner of the Mediterranean. But Palestine was now
politically extinct, and its importance for Christian circles
in the following century was due to an antiquarian revival.
Arabia's contribution to religious thought was still in the
future. In Egypt however the intellectual side of later
paganism had reached its highest development, and the
Christian Church, stimulated perhaps by the vigour of its
rival, had become famous both for orthodoxy and asceticism.
Basil therefore devoted most of the time at his disposal to an
investigation of Egyptian Monasticism1.

In the earlier Egyptian documents there is no trace of the
ascetic ideal. It is only in the sixth century B.C. that we begin
to detect its presence. Its origin is a disputed question, but
Professor Petrie thinks that Indian influences must have
reached Egypt about this time, when north-west India was
an important province of the Persian Empire, and that later
on, when the Persian boundaries shrunk, such communications
would have been interrupted2. Philo gives us a description,
perhaps somewhat idealised, of the life led by ascetically-

1 Cf. Duchesne, Histoire andenne, n. 486, " L'ltgypte etait le sanctuaire de
1'orthodoxie, la terre classique des confesseurs de la foi....Le pays ou vivaient ces
saints gens (les moines), ou fleurissaient les institutions emanees d'eux, devint
bientot une seconde Terre-Sainte."

2 Petrie, Personal Religion in Egypt before Christianity, p. 57 ; cf. Zockler,
Askese und Monchtum, pp. 94 — 97 ; Wiedemann, Religion of Egypt (Hastings'
D.B. v. i77ff.).

Egyptian Monasticism 27

minded Hellenistic Jews of both sexes in the first century A.D.1
There are indications that similar tendencies prevailed in
heathen circles during the first three centuries A.D. Certainly
there were many devotees of the heathen gods ; there is how
ever no trace of anything resembling a monastic community.
The data are at the best slight and obscure, and an elaborate
superstructure has been built on an insecure foundation. It
has been frequently stated that colonies of recluses living a
severe monastic life were attached to the temples of Serapis,
and especially to the Serapeum at Memphis. Dr Preuschen
describes the whole theory as a " castle in the air " ; he con
siders that " recluse " is a wrong translation of /caro^o?,
"possessed" being the correct rendering. The people in
question visited the sanctuary in order to sleep on the spot
inhabited by the god. They were, so it was believed, possessed
by the god during sleep and received either a cure of their
sickness, or a dream-oracle revealing the means of health.
Various motives, such as poverty, or desire of notoriety, may
have caused the stay to be prolonged in some cases. In the
vast complex of buildings attached to the Serapeum there
were many occupations by which a living could be earned.
There are however no signs of any " cells," nor is there reason
to suppose that the temple was ever visited from motives of
penitence. It would seem then that Christian monasticism
was not, as far as our present knowledge goes, a copy of pagan
institutions2.

1 See Conybeare, De Vit. Cont., for a defence of the genuineness of the
treatise, and parallels from undoubted works of Philo.

2 Preuschen, Monchtttm und Sarapiskult (1903). See a full discussion by
Reitzenstein (Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, pp. 72 — 81), who rejects
Preuschen's interpretation and gives evidence to show that the /cdroxoi were
prisoners of Serapis, that is, novices, who waited for years, sometimes all their
life, for initiation. He concludes however with Preuschen that there was nothing
resembling monasticism. " Mit dem Monchtum hat diese Art Clausur...nur
insofern etwas zu tun, als sie eine Art Askese bedeutet." This idea among others
may have had an influence (mitwirkeri) in some monastic circles ; "der ursprung-
liche Sinn beider Institutionen ist dennoch verschieden " (80, 81). Even though
his words are only put in question form, it is most misleading if Professor Gwatkin
asks "whether some of the earliest Christian monasteries may not have been
heathen monasteries converted wholesale to Christianity, but continuing their old
rule of life with little or no change " (Early Church History (1909), I. 246). For

28 Egyptian Monasticism

In Chapter I we have discussed the general conditions
which facilitated the rise of Monasticism. But why did it
make its historical appearance in Egypt rather than some
other country? If the attempt to find an answer in the
arrangements of the Serapeum at Memphis has failed, there
remains a more promising field of search in the Christian
and heathen philosophical schools of Alexandria. In spite
of confusion in the evidence it seems clear that the Neo-
Platonists and Christian Platonists were closely connected.
Ammonius Saccas, the founder of the Neo-Platonist School,
is said to have been originally a Christian1. Origen was one
of his pupils2, and on becoming a teacher himself attempted
a synthesis on a grand scale between the Gospel and philo
sophy3. His rash act of exaggerated self-discipline is well
known ; nearly all the leading ideas of later asceticism may
be found in his writings4. His influence was potent in the
later Church, and Basil and Gregory especially owed much
to him. So when we find the Gregories, in common with
other contemporary writers, calling monks philosophers and
asceticism the (true) philosophy, without comment or expla
nation, we naturally conclude that Origen's reconciliation of
the Church and philosophy was mainly responsible for the
conception. Here if anywhere, in the Christian philosophy
of Alexandria, must we look for the influence of heathen

the absence of the penitential element in native Egyptian religion see Budge, The
Paradise of the Fathers, I. xli ; Enc. of Rel. and Ethics, ill. 8270; Petrie, Religion
of Ancient Egypt, p. 89. The conclusion reached above does not debar us from
supposing that details of ascetic practice were borrowed, consciously or uncon
sciously, from heathen sources.

1 By Porphyry, quoted in Diet. Chr. Biog. art. "Ammonius Saccas."

2 Eus. H.E. VI. 19.

3 Cf. Bardenhewer, Patrologie (1910), p. 133, "In lauterstem Interesse um
der falschen Gnosis die wahre gegenliberzustellen und die gebildete Welt fiir die
Kirche zu gewinnen, unternahm es Origenes, die hellenische Philosophic mit dem
Glauben der Kirche zu verschmelzen. Aber sein vermeintlich christliches und
kirchliches Lehrsystem ist neuplatonisch und gnostisch gestimmt und getont."

4 This subject has been worked out by Bornemann, In investiganda Mona-
chatus origine quibus de causis ratio habenda sit Origenis. See p. 8, "Ilia
monastica disciplina, quam Basilius instituit, vix quicquam habuit, quod iam
saeculo tertio in ecclesia partum aut praeparatum non esset." He shows that
Origen emphasises the need of poverty, chastity, contemplation, retirement (of the
soul), and ascetic exercises (pp. 18 — 38).

Egyptian Monasticism 29

ideas on the origin of monasticism. It is however better, as
we have already seen, to regard asceticism as belonging to
the stock of ideas common to all religions of the time, and so
inherent in Christianity from the first

The Origenistic tradition was continued by the successive
heads of the catechetical school at Alexandria. Finally we
come to Hieracas, who lived at Leontopolis about the year
300. He carried some of Origen's tenets to an extreme and
heretical point, and collected round him a body of ascetics of
both sexes, who were probably out of communion with the
Church1. Dr Harnack says of him : " Hieracas is for us the
connecting link between Origen and the Coptic monks ; the
union of ascetics founded by him may mark the transition
from the learned schools of the theologians to the society of
monks. But in his proposition that, as regards practice, the
suppression of the sexual impulse was the decisive, and
original, demand of the Logos Christ, Hieracas set up the
great theme of the Church of the fourth and following
century2." It is wiser perhaps not to attach much importance
to this sect, which is mainly known to us from one passage
of Epiphanius3 ; for by this time the true historical beginning
of monasticism had been already made, not amid the intel
lectual surroundings of Alexandria, but by unlettered Coptic
peasants.

The monks fall into two great divisions — the anchorites,
eremites or solitaries, whose names explain themselves, and
the cenobites, that is, followers of a "common life." In
describing the first class all three words will be used, but
only for the sake of variety ; no difference in meaning is
intended. Where the mode of life borrows some features
from the cenobium, but is still essentially eremitic, it may be
termed semi-eremitic.

It was the general belief in the later Church that the
original form of monachism was cenobitic4. It was supposed

1 Athan. de Syn. 16, seems to class Hieracas as a heretic.

2 History of Dogma, III. 98, 99.

3 Haer. 67, abridged by later authorities; cf. Butler, Latisiac History, II. 195.

4 Cf. Cass. Coll. XVIII. 5.

30 Egyptian Monasticism

to date back to the first generation of Christians at Jerusalem,
who had all things in common. The Therapeutae, described
by Philo in his De Vita Contemplativa, were thought to be
Christian monks leading a common life. Such ideas were
historically incorrect ; the only ground on which it would be
possible now to uphold the priority of cenobitism is the
apparent existence of communities of women in the third
century. In the Life of Antony we are told that the saint put
his sister in a nunnery (TrapOevoov) before retiring from the
world1. But this was not a cenobium in the later sense. As
Professor Watson says : " In the days of St Athanasius there
were in Alexandria houses of virgins, though we must regard
these as substitutes for the home life and places where the
home life was lived. In fact the monastic life for women
was first suggested by its proved success in the case of
men2."

If the solitaries were the first monks, the Decian perse
cution may have caused the adoption of the solitary life, as
tradition asserts. Dionysius of Alexandria declares that a
number of Christians fled to the desert to escape from their
persecutors3, and according to later writers some stayed there
when the persecution was over4. Paul of Thebes is said to
have been the first anchorite, but Jerome's Life of him is not
a good authority and must be regarded more or less as a
romance5. It is quite clear that there were ascetics before
Antony, for an old man living near his place of retirement
taught him the way of asceticism, and even in the early part
of his career he had sympathising companions6, But in spite
of all we may continue to call Antony the first monk. To go
behind him in our search darkens the problem. From the
days of Clement the ideal of a perfect Gnostic had existed,
but the important thing is not the existence of an ideal, but
its translation into life7. As Bornemann says with justice, the

1 Athan. Vit. Ant. 3, 2 Ch. Quart. Rev. Apr. 1907.

3 Eus. H.E. vi. 42. 4 Jer. Vit. Paul.; Soz. H.E. i. 12.

5 The Vita Antonii is silent on the subject of Paul.

6 Athan. Vit. Ant. 3, 4, 8, 11, 12.

7 Cf. Holl, Enthusiasmus und Bussgeivalt beim griechischen Monchtum,
pp. 138. 139-

Egyptian Monasticism 31

author of monasticism was not the first monk, but the first
who had many imitators1.

The Life of Antony accordingly assumes great importance
as the record of a man who was an innovator, and the true
founder of monasticism. We shall not appreciate monasticism
properly until we realise that it was a new and startling
development. " It came into existence at an ascertained
point in the third century, and its novelty no doubt had
much to do with the enthusiasm that greeted it2." The
impression which it made on Augustine was almost over
whelming. " We listened with amazement to the tale of Thy
Wonders, so freshly wrought, almost in our own life-time, so
well attested, springing from the true faith and the bosom of
the Catholic Church3."

Antony was born about 250, and was the son of a peasant
proprietor of moderate means. Though brought up in com
parative comfort, he remained illiterate and always refused to
learn to read or write. When he was some twenty years old,
his parents being now dead, he heard read in church the
passage of the Gospel which contains our Lord's words to the
rich ruler. Applying them to himself4, he sold his land and
distributed the proceeds, and then, after placing his sister in
a house of virgins, devoted himself to the ascetic life. This
he practised for fifteen years on the outskirts of his native
village, taking counsel of other solitaries in the same district
and giving himself up to prayer and labour5. He now began
to realise the seriousness of his undertaking, and the fact that
he had to strive with more than flesh and blood. A longing
for solitude seized him, and he retired to the desert. After
twenty years of this life, spent in prayer and conflicts with
the powers of evil, the solitary was a solitary no longer. His
abode was surrounded by seekers after God, who kept implor
ing him to come out and instruct them in the ascetic life.
He complied, and began to organise Christian monachism,

1 Op. cit. p. 12. 2 E. W. Watson, loc. cit.

3 Conf. vni. 6 (Bigg's translation).

4 As did Basil on a later occasion, see p. 24.

5 Vit. Ant. 2, 3.

32 Egyptian Monasticism

somewhere about the year 305 l. Later on he retired to the
upper Thebaid into solitude once more, feeling that the press
of disciples was too great for his soul's health2. He is said
to have lived to be over a hundred years old and to have
died about 356.

There is no longer any necessity to discuss the authenticity
of Athanasius' Life of Antony, our main authority for the
career of the saint, since recent writers are unanimous in its
favour3. The following characteristics of the monastic ideal
as displayed in its pages may be noted4, (i) Asceticism is
cultivated, not for its own sake, but as a means to an end,
namely, the complete freeing of the soul, the purification
of the whole personality, (ii) " Enthusiasm " reappears in
the Church with the monks. By the side of the official
ministry is found a ministry of grace, (iii) Antony sets the
example, followed by so many ascetics in after years, of wide
spread pastoral activities. "It was as if a physician had been
given by God to Egypt5." (iv) Miracles and revelations play
an important part. These are apt to deter the modern reader
and make him fail to appreciate the nobler side of the Life.
They must not however be neglected ; it is a fact of deep
significance that these early monks were conscious of being
able to see and do supernatural things.

The type of monasticism that prevailed in Lower Egypt
at the time of Basil's visit may be conveniently termed
Antonian, though it is doubtful how far its characteristics
are due to Antony and how far they are of independent
growth. We have full descriptions of the life of the great
monasteries in the pages of Rufinus, Palladius, Sozomen,
Jerome and Cassian. Basil visited them when they were
at an earlier and less developed stage, but their main features

1 irporfKdev o 'Aj'rwi'ios uxnrep £K TWOS ddvrov p.e^vffra.y(ayf)^vo^ KCU Oeofiopov-
fj.€vos. Vit. Ant. 14.

2 Vit. Ant. 49.

15 See especially Butler, Lausiac History, \. 215 ff. and Robertson, Athanasius,
pp. 1 88 ff. Some would suppose that Athanasius was only partially responsible
for its contents.

4 Cf. Holl, Enthusiasmus, pp. 141 — 155, from which the following sentences
are in the main derived.

5 Vit. Ant. 87.

Egyptian Monasticism 33

must have been the same as those described by the later
writers.

In Alexandria itself, or rather on the outskirts of the city1,
there were a number of monasteries, but the settlements at a
distance from the haunts of men, such as Nitria and Scete in
the desert south of Alexandria, enjoyed the greatest reputation.
Amoun (Ammonius), a contemporary, but not apparently a
disciple, of Antony2, was the founder of Nitria, which at the
time of Palladius' visit contained no fewer than 5000 monks.
In later times this monastery was famous for its attachment
to Origen's doctrines, and the " Four Tall Brothers " came
from Nitria. Many of these monks were of Alexandrian
origin and distinctly superior in education to the native
Coptic-speaking monks. We are told that guests of good
education were given a book to read instead of being obliged
to do their share of manual labour3. The monks of Scete
considered Macarius the Egyptian their founder, so-called to
mark his native Egyptian origin and distinguish him from
Macarius the Alexandrian4.

Antony had been a solitary who collected disciples around
him in spite of himself. But in " Antonian " monasticism the
purely eremitic life tended to die out and be replaced by the
semi-eremitic. There was generally a central church to which
the occupants of the cells resorted on Saturdays and Sundays.
Various trades were carried on, to preserve the ascetics from
idleness and provide the scanty necessaries of life. There
was little organisation and no fixed rule of life. " The elders
exercised an authority ; but it was mainly personal, and was
but a supremacy of greater spiritual wisdom. The society
appears to have been a sort of spiritual democracy, ruled by
the personal influence of the leading ascetics.... A young man
would put himself under the guidance of a senior and obey

1 Palladius spent three years in the monasteries round Alexandria, which con
tained some 2000 monks (Hist. Laus. vn. i. Lucot's edition, 1912; subsequent
references to Palladius will be made to this cheap and scholarly edition).

2 Cf. Vit. Ant. 60.

3 Hist. Laus. vn. 4 ; cf. xin. i (auncrjans ypafiK-fi) and the account of Piterus
in Socr. HE. iv. 23.

4 Hist. Laus. xvn. i.

L. C. i

34 Egyptian Monasticism

him in all things ; but the bonds between them were wholly
voluntary1." If the obedience to authority was voluntary, so
also was the amount of asceticism practised. But the public
opinion of the monastery demanded that it should be consider
able, and the monks vied with one another in their feats of
physical endurance. Their spirit was quite that of the modern
athlete, and in fact "athlete" was an actual term used to
describe a distinguished monk2.

As these monasteries were so near Alexandria, where Basil
stopped some little while, it is highly probable that he paid
them a visit, but there is no sign that they influenced him
in any way. On the other hand, he derived many features
of his system from the monks of the Pachomian obedience,
and so it is necessary to treat the other type of Egyptian
monachism in more detail3.

Pachomius4 was born about 290 in the neighbourhood of
Thebes, and came of heathen parents. After a brief period
of soldiering the charitable behaviour of the Christians at
Esneh attracted him to Christianity, and he spent some time
in a ruined temple of Serapis, leading an eremitic life in
common with a number of others5. This was near Schenesit
and he was about twenty years old at the time. The Christians
of the district recognised his piety, and presently he sought
the grace of baptism. Attracted by the fame of a hermit
named Palaemon he left his associates and sought the master's
cell. A number of ascetics were already under Palaemon's

1 Butler, Lausiac History, i. 234. 2 As it had been used of the Martyrs.

3 Basil visited, besides Alexandria, "the rest of Egypt." The analogies
between Basilian and Pachomian institutions are close enough to necessitate a
personal visit to Tabennisi and its neighbours on Basil's part. At a later date
visitors such as Jerome could get their idea of cenobitism from the Pachomian
monastery at Canopus, but this apparently did not exist so early as 358.

4 The best book is Ladeuze, Etude sur le ctnobitisme pakhomien (Lou vain,
1898). It is unfortunately out of print, and I have not been able to see a copy.
I rely for my knowledge of it on citations in later books and especially on the full
abstract given by Leclercq in his article " Cenobitisme " (Diet. cParch. chret.}.
See also Amelineau, Etude historique sur saint Pakhome\ Zockler, Askese und
Monchtum, pp. 192 — 211; Butler, Lausiac History, I. 155 — 158, 234 — 237. The
following account of Pachomius' life is drawn from Amelineau, and that of the
rules and institutions of his monasteries from Ladeuze (indirectly) and Zockler.

5 The supposition that he was a priest or devotee of Serapis is groundless.

Egyptian Monasticism 35

direction ; the discipline was very severe, long fasts and depri
vation of sleep being practised, and the prescribed number
of prayers reaching the total of sixty by day and fifty by
night. The austerities were practised individually, and there
was no common life. After some years spent in this manner
Pachomius was called by an angelic vision to found a com
munity of his own and legislate for the young monks. Re
tiring to Tabennisi, near Denderah on the Nile, he lived at
first by himself in a cell, but the advent of disciples made
it necessary to organise a proper monastery and draw up
a code of rules. As we shall see presently, his legislation
was remarkably original and bears the impress of a master
mind. There was a natural tendency for the anchorites to
draw more closely together, but this in itself would not have
produced cenobitism, the credit of which must be ascribed to
Pachomius. It is not surprising that so epoch-making a
development was ascribed to divine intervention and the Rule
believed to have been brought by an angel. Pachomius died
about 346, by which time there were ten monasteries in all
under his rule, nine of men and one of women, and the total
number of ascetics reached 3000.

The Rule of Pachomius has come down to us in several
different versions and recensions. While it is impossible to
recover with certainty the first form of the Rule, the version
given by Palladius is marked by such primitive simplicity that
it cannot be far removed from the original1.

The Rule is very short and does not attempt to cover the
ground. It was only intended for the weaker brethren, the
stronger not being thought to need a rule. It is chiefly con
cerned with prayer, meals and clothing. Prayers are to be
said to the extent of twelve during the day, twelve at twilight,
twelve at night, three at the ninth hour, with a psalm at each
meal. Communion is ordered for Saturday and Sunday. The
monks are to eat their meals all together in one place. The
amount of food is to be proportioned to the needs of the
individual, no hindrance being offered to his eating or fasting

1 See Hist. Laus. xxxn. Ladeuze, op, cit. p. 272, says Jerome's version is
the best and Palladius has less authority.

3—2

36 Egyptian Monasticism

as he pleases ; but the more he eats, the more work must he
do. Clothing is to consist of a Lebiton, a sleeveless linen
under-garment, a Melotes, a garment made of white sheep
skin, a girdle, and a Cucullium or hood. The monks are to
sleep three in a cell, in a sitting, not recumbent, position.
A three years' probation, during which the postulant under
goes most laborious tasks, is ordered before admission to the
community. Monks from other convents with a different rule
are not to be admitted, though strangers may be entertained.
The brethren are to be divided into twenty-four sections
(rdyfjLara), called by the names of the twenty-four letters of
the alphabet. The abbot in addressing the monks is to use
the letter of their section, and the letters are meant to corre
spond with the characters of the monks in a mystical manner
only intelligible to the initiated1. Such is the substance of
the Rule which the angel is said to have brought. " Its clear-
cut style, its quick advance from point to point, its freedom
from casuistic detail, make us recognise its originality2."

However this is but a scanty description of the life of
these important monasteries, and in order to compare them
with Basil's institutions a fuller account must be given. It
will be remembered that certain features of the later accounts
may not have been developed at the time of Basil's visit in
358. Palladius, for example, did not come to Egypt till 388.
But the close correspondence of Basil's Rules with the Pacho-
mian system goes to show that the life of the Tabennisian
monasteries at the earlier date was identical in all essentials
with that depicted in the later documents. In any case the
later developments of the Pachomian ideal at the hands of
Schnoudi may be neglected as outside our range3. In giving
a description of the monasteries it will be convenient to arrange

1 Zockler, Askese und Monchtum, p. 207, compares the 24 sections into which
at a later date the Akoimetai were divided for liturgical purposes. Ladeuze,
p. 264, doubts this classification. Cf. however Butler, Lausiac History, u. 206.

2 Zockler, p. 203.

3 Cf. Butler, Lausiac History, I. 236. "The aim of Bgoul and Schnoudi in
their great monastery at Athribis was to combine with the cenobitical life the
austerities of Nitria." Schnoudi made his monks take a formal vow of obedience,
which was not exacted at Tabennisi. See Leipoldt, Schemite von Atripe.

Egyptian Monasticism 37

the material under the same heads as those which we shall use
for analysing the Basilian Rules in Chapter VI.

I. Joining the monastery.

(a) Renunciation of possessions.

The monk had no further need of his possessions, which
he ceded to the monastery1.

(b) Admission to the community.

None were refused unless they had led bad lives hitherto,
and were such as would require constant watching. Slaves
were not accepted because they had not control over their own
persons. No formal vows existed in the original Pachomian
monasteries2.

II. Life in the monastery.

(a) Prayer.

Frequent prayers were insisted on, but it is not quite
clear what were the exact hours of prayer. Punctuality
was enforced. The whole body of monks assembled in
church only for the greater services, probably four times
a day3.

(b) Meals.

There were two meals a day ; flesh and wine were for-
Uyden, but otherwise no special abstinence was enjoined.
The mid-day meal was taken in sections, in order that work
might be interrupted as little as possible. The general
community fasts were twice a week. Special food was
allowed for invalids4.

1 Leclercq (summarising Ladeuze), col. 3117 ; cf. Basil, B. 85, 92, 304, 305.
lln the notes throughout the book Basil's Regulae fusius tractatae will for brevity
be denoted by F., and the Regulae brevius tractatae by B.). References to Basil's
Rules will only be given when the resemblances are more or less close. For the
precepts of the angelic " Rule," which are not repeated here, see above.

2 Leclercq, 3115, 3116; Basil, F. 10, n.

3 See Butler, Lausiac History, II. 208.

4 Leclercq, 3122 (but Ladeuze, pp. 58, 298, doubts this movable meal);
Zockler, pp. 203, 204; Basil, F. 19, 21.

38 Egyptian Monasticism

(c) Clothing.

The new-comer quitted his secular clothes and assumed
the religious habit1.

(d) Work.

Mat-making and basket-making ranked with agriculture
as the most important trades. Work was done under the
direction of a foreman, and another officer, the steward, was
responsible for the sale of products. A monk had no claim
to anything that he had made. Intellectual labour was also
demanded. The illiterate had to learn to read, and the study
of Scripture was compulsory2.

III. Order and discipline.
The officers.

The Superior had great authority ; he could nominate the
heads of the daughter monasteries, and Pachomius designated
his successor. Twice every year, at Easter and on August I3th,
a general chapter of the whole community was held. Under
the Superior all were equal ; all had to render unquestioning
obedience to the Superior, or his deputy. Within the com
munity monks could be transferred from one monastery to
another at the discretion of the authorities3.

IV. Various other points.

(a) Earthly relationships.

It was not permitted to see relations without the consent
of the Superior and the presence of other brethren4.

(b) Journeys.

These were forbidden at first, but the rule was afterwards
relaxed. As the community developed, they became necessary
in order to sell produce. A deputation was sent to Alexandria
from time to time5.

1 Leclercq, 3116; Basil, F. 22, B. 90. See above, p. 36.

2 Leclercq, 3117, 3120, 3121 ; Basil, F. 38, B. 96, 141, 142, 235.

3 Leclercq, 3097, 3117, 3118; Basil, F. 28, 49, B. 112. There were however
stewards and other officers including a second-in-command (6 Seure/seuwi/, Hist.
Latts. XXXII. 8) ; cf. Basil, F. 45.

4 Leclercq, 3117; Basil, F. 32. 6 Leclercq, 3120, 3122; Basil, F. 44.

Egyptian Monasticism 39

V. Relations with outside world.

(a) The official Church.

Pachomius was at first viewed with suspicion by the
Church authorities and was condemned at a synod of bishops.
However, he showed great deference to the bishops both in
doctrine and practical matters, and the visit of Athanasius in
330 set the seal of official approval on his work1.

(b) Neighbouring monasteries.

Considerable opposition was experienced from the non-
Pachomian monks. This is not surprising in view of the
innovations that Pachomius introduced into the ascetic life
as hitherto understood. It was not until the rule of his
successor Orsisius that friendly relations were established
with Antony ; till then the two branches of monasticism had
no connexion with one another2.

(c) Convents of women.

About the same time that Pachomius settled at Tabennisi,
his sister Mary went to the opposite bank of the Nile and
began to gather disciples around her. This soon became
a proper nunnery ; it was completely under the control of the
Superior of the monks, who delegated elderly men to care for
its discipline. Within a few years of Pachomius' death two
other sisterhoods were formed. Elaborate precautions were
taken to prevent the monks and nuns from meeting. When
a nun died, her companions brought her body to the river
bank and then retired ; presently the monks fetched away
the corpse in a boat and carried out the funeral ceremonies3.

The general lines of Pachomian monachism are clearly
defined, alike in earlier and later accounts. The community

1 Leclercq, 3096; Zockler, p. 199. '- Leclercq, 3097; Zockler, p. aoo.

3 Leclercq, 3095, 3118; Zockler, p. 208. We are reminded of Basil's monas
tery on one side of the Iris and Macrina's on the other. Palladius gives an
interesting account of the nunneries. The men and women were economically
inter-dependent, the men providing food and doing rough work for the women
(Hist. Laus. xxxil. 9, xxxm. 2), while the women made clothes for the men.
(See Ladeuze, p. 303). Clerical monks went to celebrate the Communion,
apparently on Sunday only (xxxm. 2). The "presbyter" was responsible for
discipline (xxxm. 4, cf. xxxiv. 4). See pp. 104, 105.

4<D Egyptian Monasticism

was a model of skilful organisation. The great numbers
of the monks necessitated an iron discipline and a military
rather than family system. Work and prayer were the two
master ideas of Pachomius, though no doubt in the eyes of
some contemporaries work would have appeared to predomi
nate unduly, and the true spirit of asceticism to evaporate.
The austerities prescribed seem burdensome to a European,
but they were conceived in a spirit of moderation. " The
fundamental idea of St Pachomius' rule was to establish
a moderate level of observance which might be obligatory
upon all ; and then to leave it open to each — and to indeed
encourage each — to go beyond the fixed minimum, according
as he was prompted by his strength, his courage and his
skill1." Such is Dom Butler's summing up, and he points
out that even in Pachomius the spirit of Egyptian monachism
remains strongly individualistic, and alien to the true ideal of
the common life. Certainly there is no proof that Pachomius
considered community life the higher form of monachism or
disputed the right of the individual to live by himself if he
could. Much as Basil derived from Pachomius, his eloquent
vindication of the superiority of the common life was not a
product of his Egyptian visit2.

After his visit to Egypt, Basil proceeded to Palestine,
Coele-Syria and Mesopotamia3. He had come to Egypt by
way of Syria without, apparently, making any lengthy stop
on the way4. On his return journey he went to Palestine,
perhaps making a short stay at Jerusalem5; then northwards
to Syria, and finally to Mesopotamia. Edessa, in the north
west angle of Mesopotamia, is as far as we need imagine him

1 Butler, Lausiac History ', I. 236.

2 See p. 85. Egypt was of course full of monks. The two most character
istic systems have been discussed, but there were many varieties of ascetic life of
an unorganised type.

3 Ep. 223. 4 ib. i.

5 In Ep. 45 Basil writes to a lapsed monk with whom he had once lived at
Jerusalem. As Basil cannot have stayed more than a few weeks in that city,
Maran considers the letter spurious. Jackson suggests that we should take
Jerusalem " in a figurative sense for the companionship of the saints." This is
possible, but the letter does not imply a prolonged stay. But the authenticity of
the letter is doubtful on other grounds, see pp. 108, in.

Egyptian Monasticism 41

to have gone1. The natural route home would be by Samo-
sata and Melitene. Owing to the mountains that intervened
between the Euphrates and Cappadocia the last part of the
journey must have been completed in the summer months,
probably those of 35 82. It is interesting to think of Basil,
after seeing the Coptic-speaking monks, visiting Edessa, the
historic centre of the Syriac-speaking Church. Ephraem the
Syrian did not make his home at Edessa until after the fall
of Nisibis in 363, so Basil and he can hardly have met. If
however, as seems likely, Basil passed through Samosata, the
foundations of his friendship with Eusebius of Samosata may
have been laid on this occasion3.

The state of monasticism in these lands at the time of
Basil's visit need not detain us long ; there is no sign that he
was in any way influenced by what he saw, unless perhaps by
way of reaction. The monastic life had been introduced into
Palestine early in the fourth century by Hilarion, one of
Antony's disciples. The original impulse to the eremitic life
survived, and the cenobitic ideal made little headway in
Palestine either now or later. In Syria and Mesopotamia
asceticism was, so to speak, indigenous. Whether or not
influences from the Far East are to be postulated, it is clear
that Christianity had from an early date assumed a distinc
tively ascetic form. There existed certain " Sons of the
Covenant," about whom much discussion has arisen. They
were celibates and practised asceticism in other ways, but
were not exactly monks. Professor Burkitt has maintained
that they were simply the baptised laity of the Syriac Church,
who were bound to a life of continence and freedom from

1 The time at our disposal — about a year — compels us to cut down his travels
as far as possible. The available time is shortened by his illness at Alexandria.

2 In Ep. i Basil writes from Alexandria and refers to his ailments. Unless
he recovers, he will be unable to meet his correspondent, even in the coming
winter. But this throws little light on the chronology for (i) we do not know
where he expected to meet his correspondent, (2) the letter is highly rhetorical.
Ramsay refers to the cessation of travel during the winter (Hastings' D.B. v.
377 ; cf. Bas. Epp. 20, 27, 191, 198). But he is not justified in taking Basil as
"a fair specimen of ancient views," as his health was notoriously frail.

3 We learn of Eusebius as bishop of Samosata first in 361.

42 Egyptian Monasticism

worldly cares1. In any case the seeds of monasticism found
congenial soil in these districts and a luxuriant crop resulted.
Mar Awgin (Eugenius) is said to have introduced cenobitism
into Mesopotamia, after a sojourn in Pachomius' monastery.
During the fourth century monks after the Egyptian pattern
existed by the side of ascetics like Aphraates, who has been
termed un moi-ne de Fancien regime'2-. But the eremitic type
predominated ; cenobitism was valued only as a preparation
for the higher solitary life. The most extravagant mortifica
tions were practised, and an element of the Indian Fakir was
undoubtedly present To the Syrian monks must be ascribed
a considerable part of the discredit which has attached to the
idea of asceticism in modern times3.

1 Early Eastern Christianity,^. 125 — 142; cf. Connolly's criticisms in Journ.
Theo. Stud. July, 1905.

2 Leclercq, op. cit. col. 3140.

3 Cf. Soz. HE. vi. 32—34; Theodoret, HE. iv. 23—25 and Hist. Rel.

CHAPTER IV

ST BASIL AS MONK AND BISHOP

AFTER a year or more spent in visiting the monasteries
of the East, Basil could claim a first-hand acquaintance with
the methods of the greatest exponents of asceticism. He had
returned home full of admiration for what he had seen. But
it was hardly to be expected that a man of aristocratic family,
fresh from a brilliant University career, and conversant with
the ideals of European civilisation and culture, should wish to
set up in his native land an exact reproduction of the life led
by Egyptian peasants. Basil had both genius and originality,
and he was responsible for important changes in the theory
and practice of monasticism as hitherto understood. In order
to appreciate these changes we must now study Basil's life
from the ascetic point of view. The present chapter will first
re-tell the famous story of the retreat in Pontus, and then
describe Basil's later activities in the monastic field, especially
during his episcopate; the other sides of his life will only be
mentioned incidentally. The two following chapters will be
devoted to an examination of the ascetic writings attributed
to Basil and a discussion of their contents. This method will
entail a certain amount of repetition, and in some respects is
inferior to the alternative plan of making a composite picture
from all the available data. But since the genuineness of the
Ascetica has been frequently disputed, the method adopted
seems the only scientific way of treating the subject.

With the help of Basil's own letters and the writings of
the two Gregories it is possible to get a clearly-defined picture
of the early life in Pontus ; but in later years the importance

44 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

of the doctrinal controversies in which Basil was involved over
shadows the ascetic side of his life, both in his own writings
and those of his contemporaries. In consequence our informa
tion with respect to the later period is meagre, and interesting
problems must often be left unsolved. Basil's letters, where
available, are by far the best authority. The orations of the
two Gregories contain some genuine history, but are rhetorical
and laudatory in the highest degree1.

In the summer of 358, so it seems, Basil returned to
Caesarea. Some writers have assigned his return to the
previous year, in order presumably to allow more time for
the first stay in Pontus, which was abruptly closed by the
summons to the Council of Constantinople (360). But this
only makes it very difficult to fit in the events that occurred
before his travels in the East. The years 356 — 360 must
have been in any case very crowded, and the restless energy
of Basil's spirit enabled him to defy his physical frailty and
accomplish a great deal in a brief space of time.

Basil now resolved to embrace a life of asceticism, and
called upon Gregory to join him and thus fulfil a promise
made in student days at Athens. Tiberina was suggested
as a possible locality; its vicinity to Gregory's home recom
mended it to the latter, and for a time perhaps Basil thought
seriously of the proposal. But the charm of a spot in Pontus
near Annesi, the home of his boyhood, led him to propose it
as an alternative. The two friends had a lively passage of
arms over the merits of the rival places, and taunting refer
ences were made to the mud of Tiberina and the Cimmerian
darkness of Pontus. This part of the correspondence was
written in jest and need not be taken seriously. Gregory
however had some cause to be annoyed with his friend. He
had pointed out that he could not desert his parents com
pletely, and had made the perfectly fair proposal that they
should live together, spending half of the time near his home
and the other half where Basil chose. Basil rejected Tiberina

1 Boulenger in his Grtgoire de Nazianze, Disconrs funlbres, pp. xxix — xxxii,
shows how the whole structure of Or. 43 is modelled on the existing rules of
rhetoric.

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 45

and chose a spot in the neighbourhood of his own home, and
then expected Gregory to acquiesce in his decision. Gregory
was somewhat offended, and refused on this occasion to pay
more than a brief visit to his imperious friend1.

About this time must be placed Basil's renunciation of his
possessions. It could not have been before his travels, which
must have cost a considerable sum of money. The words of
Gregory and his own letters prove that Basil did make a
definite act of renunciation2. But he cannot have given all
away. His brother betrays this when he describes Basil as
" the man who ungrudgingly spent upon the poor his patri
mony even before he was a priest, and most of all in the
time of the famine... and afterwards did not hoard even what
remained to him 3." Maran explains Gregory's words by
supposing that about the time of the famine Basil came in
for some property by the death of his mother Emmelia4.
But the passage as a whole gives a different impression, and
so do certain allusions in Basil's writings. He probably sold
his personal possessions and gave the proceeds to the poor;
but to dispose of his share in the family property was less
easy. It seems likely that he dedicated to God his income
from this source and spent it as occasion required. This
conclusion is supported by the somewhat ambiguous answers
given by Basil in the Rules on the subject of worldly
possessions 5.

Basil's personality has impressed itself so deeply on later
monasticism that we naturally think of him as the pioneer of
the movement in Asia Minor. Strictly speaking, this was not
the case. Communications between the different parts of the
Empire were frequent and easy, and the great ascetic move
ment in Egypt and Syria must have had echoes beyond the
Taurus before Basil retired to Pontus. Just as Antony found

1 Greg. Naz. Epp. i, 2, 4, 5, 6; Bas. Ep. 14.

2 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 60 ; Bas. Ep. 223.

3 Greg. Nyss. In Eunom. I. 10. 4 Vit. Bas. iv. 2.

5 See pp. 8 1 — 83. Cf. Ep. 3, where he complains of an attack made on his
property, which disturbs his tranquillity; also Ep. 37, from which we learn that
Basil retained certain rights in a property made over to his foster-parents by his
parents. For a later tradition cf. Cassian, Jnst. VII. 19.

46 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

ascetics on the outskirts of his village ready to instruct him1,
so it was here. No sooner do the lives of the great Cappa-
docians light up the prevailing darkness than we discern in
the background a multitude of persons already pledged to
the ascetic life. Gregory of Nazianzus relates how he hesi
tated which of the two methods of asceticism to choose,
whether to be a solitary, or to live a celibate life in the world,
devoted to prayer and active benevolence2. These two modes
of asceticism were therefore already well known. Basil's
great contribution to Church life consisted in the fact that,
as Gregory tells us, he instituted a middle way between
the two extremes, combining the excellences of both3. The
presence of such ascetics is presupposed in the story of Basil's
life, for disciples came to him in large numbers as soon as he
settled in Pontus. The ascetic life was there already; Basil's
task was to organise it, and provide it with institutions suited
to the needs of the country and people. And further, the
great army of ascetics, both male and female, to whom we
find references in Basil's letters, cannot all have owed their
inspiration to his teaching and. example. Time will not admit
of so rapid a development. We know the name of one of
these precursors of Basil, the famous Eustathius of Sebaste,
about whom a few words must now be said4.

We have already seen that Eustathius' advice may have
led Basil to visit Egypt and Syria5. In any case he came
under the influence of the bishop of Sebaste on his return.
" So when I beheld certain men in my own country striving
to copy their ways, I felt that I had found a help to my own
salvation. ...Though many were for withdrawing me from
their society, I would not allow it, because I saw that they
put a life of endurance before a life of pleasure ; and, because

1 See p. 30.

2 Carm. xi. 300 ff. ; cf. I. 65 ff. lie calls the two classes afvyoi and fJuydSes.
The above interpretation seems the most probable. See Additional Note B.

3 Or. 43, 62.

4 See Appendix A for a discussion of the significance of Eustathius.

5 p. 24. Possibly he had known and admired Eustathius at an even earlier
date. In Ep. 244 he writes: "You have been, as it were, amazed and astounded,
at the idea of the change in the notorious Basil. Why, ever since he was a boy
he did such and such service to such a one (i.e. Eustathius)."

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 47

of the extraordinary excellence of their lives, I became an
eager supporter of them1/' Sozomen tells us that Eustathius
" founded a society of monks in Armenia, Paphlagonia and
Pontus, and became the author of a zealous discipline," and
elsewhere describes him as " a leader of the best monks2."
It seems then that Eustathius had already founded monasteries
in Pontus, and that Basil received at his hands the last and
most fruitful of the lessons he took in asceticism. Friendly
relations continued, and Eustathius was a frequent visitor at
Annesi. " How often," asks Basil, " did you visit me in my
monastery on the Iris?... How many days did we spend in
the opposite village, at my mother's, living as friend with
friend, and discoursing together night and day3?" Into the
subsequent breach of the friendship and Basil's recriminations
we need not enter. There must have been two sides to the
question, and Eustathius' case has to go by default. It is
quite certain that Basil owed much to his early teacher. In
spite of personal and doctrinal disagreements he never finds
fault with his asceticism. It has been supposed by some that
Basil's cenobitic institutions at least were his own, but even of
this we cannot be certain. If the Basilian Rules could be
ascribed to Eustathius without manifest absurdity, it seems
probable that their ideas were to a large extent those of the
bishop of Sebaste4.

The spot which had so commended itself to Basil by its
natural beauty and adaptability to monastic purposes was on
the banks of the Iris ; Annesi, where his mother and sister
were living, was on the opposite bank of the river. The

1 Ep. 223. 2 HE. in. 14, vin. 27.

s Ep. 223.

4 See Sozomen, HE. in. 14. It is significant that Basil calls Eustathius'
monastery "the brotherhood" (Ep. 223), the special word he uses of his own
foundations. On the whole subject see Loofs, Eustathius von Sebaste. Maran
(Vit. Bas. VI. 2) considers that the disciples of Eustathius were monks living two
or three together, i.e. " Sarabaites," such as abbot Piamun found in large
numbers in Pontus and Armenia (Cassian, Coll. xvm. 7). Sozomen (HE. VI. 34)
says that the severity of the climate prevented the solitary life. It is clear
that here, as in Egypt, another form of monachism existed by the side of the
cenobitic. There is however no reason to ascribe it to Eustathius. On the
contrary, the fact that Basil was originally Eustathius' disciple and never apparently
broke away from his ascetic ideals, points to an opposite conclusion.

48 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

district was close to Neo-Caesarea, but was under the ecclesi
astical jurisdiction of Ibora1. The description, says Sir W. M.
Ramsay, " can hardly refer to any other part of the river than
the rocky glen below Turkhal2." This is marked in modern
maps some 30 miles S.E. of Amasia. Basil's glowing words
have been often quoted. " There is a lofty mountain covered
with thick woods, watered toward the north with cool and
transparent streams. A plain lies beneath, enriched by the
waters which are ever draining off from it ; and skirted by
a spontaneous profusion of trees almost thick enough to be a
fence ; so as even to surpass Calypso's island, which Homer
seems to have considered the most beautiful spot on the earth.
Indeed it is like an island, enclosed as it is on all sides ; for
deep hollows cut off two sides of it ; the river, which has
lately fallen down a precipice, runs all along the front, and is
impassable as a wall ; while the mountain extending itself
behind, and meeting the hollows in a crescent, stops up the
path at its roots. There is but one pass, and I am master of
it. Behind my abode there is another gorge, rising into a
ledge above, so as to command the extent of the plains and
the stream which bounds 4t, which is not less beautiful, to my
taste, than the Strymon as seen from Amphipolis.... Shooting
down from the rocks, and eddying in a deep pool, it (the
stream) forms a most pleasant scene for myself or anyone
else : and is an inexhaustible source to the country people,
in the countless fish which its depths contain. What need
to tell of the exhalations from the earth, or the breezes
from the river? Another might admire the multitude of
flowers, and singing birds ; but leisure I have none for such
thoughts3."

Such was Basil's description of the place to his friend
Gregory, who seems to have paid a brief visit, and then to
have left, only to find the attraction of a monastic life with

1 Greg. Nyss. In XL Mart. (P.O. XLVI. 784.)

2 Hist. Geog. of Asia Minor^ p. 326. The name is variously spelt in the
maps.

3 Ep. 14. I have not seen the suggestion made, but was not this part of
the family estate?

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 49

Basil irresistible and return for a more permanent stay1.
Perhaps Basil thought of the place in fine weather, while
Gregory remembered cold and wet days, for, half in jest,
half in earnest, he gives quite a different account. The place
was shut in by mountains, so that the sun was rarely seen.
The ground was encumbered by thorn-bushes, and was too
precipitous for safe walking. The roar of the river drowned
the voice of psalmody. He shuddered at the recollection
of the biting winds, the cheerlessness of their hut, their fruit
less labours in the so-called garden, and the poverty of their
meals. Their teeth could make no impression on the solid
hunks of bread, and speedy starvation would have been their
fate had it not been for the opportune assistance of Basil's
mother2. There is a good deal of humorous exaggeration in
this, yet the hardships endured by Basil and his companions,
especially during the first winter, that of 358 — 359, must have
been considerable.

In his fifth letter Gregory alludes to the presence of Basil's
mother, who lived on the opposite bank of the river. Yield
ing to her daughter's entreaties, Emmelia had renounced the
world in company with Macrina and Peter, as soon as the
business affairs of the family were sufficiently settled to make
such a course possible3. A short account of the later years
of Basil's mother and sister will not be out of place here.
Our chief authority is the beautiful Life of Macrina, of which
Dr Harnack says : "We obtain perhaps the clearest and truest
impression of the piety of the Greek Church from reading the
biography of sister Macrina, by Gregory of Nyssa4."

About the time of Basil's return from Athens, but before

1 The editors of Gregory in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers assign letters
4 — 6, written obviously about the same time, to the year 361. But Basil's four
teenth letter, to which Gregory's fourth is an answer, belongs to c. 358, at the
beginning of the Pontic retreat. These letters must therefore be transferred to 358
or 359, in which case Gregory's testimony in 6 becomes important. The cenobium
was properly organised from the first, with "written Rules and Canons."

2 Greg. Naz. Epp. 4—6. * See p. 23.

4 History of Dogma, in. 180. I cannot see the justice of Schafer's remark:
" Freilich ist schon vieles stark idealisiert und ins Wunderbare gezogen, so dass
man bei der Verwendung vorsichtig sein muss." Basilius des Grossen Bezie-
hungen zum AbendlanJe^ p. n.

L. C. 4

50 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

the death of Naucratius, Macrina persuaded her mother to
give up the comforts and privileges of her rank, and live a life
similar to that of her serving-women. After the tragic end of
Naucratius, Macrina was able to lead her mother to a further
stage of virtue. Most of the family property was by this time
divided among the children, so that the step towards a more
rigid asceticism was easy to take. Class distinctions were
now so far obliterated in the household that the two ladies
shared one table with the maidservants and slept in the same
kind of bed. It was an ideal life; no pride or disputing
marred the harmony; prayer and psalmody went on without
interruption. The household of women had the enthusiastic
support of Peter, the youngest child, who had been brought
up entirely by Macrina. He lived with them and helped
them in every way, " cooperating with them in their efforts
after the angelic life1." The periodical visits of Basil must
also have been a great encouragement and inspiration. The
picture is one of rare beauty. We look in vain for any parallel
to this life of devotion, shared by men and women, master
and servant, until we come to Nicholas Ferrar's household at
Little Gidding in the seventeenth century. The combination
of earnest asceticism with the life of a well-ordered household,
and simple and natural relations between the sexes, is as
unusual as it is pleasing.

When Emmelia died in the arms of her children, Basil
had become bishop of Caesarea. The household, to which
women had been drawn as disciples for some time past, seems
now to have become more definitely a monastery. Gregory
describes his visit to his sister in her last illness. The nuns
had a church of their own, in which they were chanting
vespers at the time of his arrival, and Macrina bade him join
them. After her death he consulted with Vestiana, a nun of
noble birth, about the funeral arrangements. Macrina had
given instructions that nothing but the commonest materials
should be used. In preparing her body for the funeral,
Vestiana found that she had worn an iron cross and a ring
of the same material next to her skin. She bade Gregory

1 Vit. Macr. (P.G. XLVI. 965—972).

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 51

and the nuns come and observe these marks of Macrina's
sanctity. Anyone who is familiar with fourth century litera
ture will realise how unpleasant this incident might have been
made in the hands of Christian writers ; but Gregory treats it
with simplicity and delicacy. The funeral drew a vast crowd
of mourners, and Araxius, the local bishop, gave the address1.
As Basil is revered in the Eastern Church as the traditional
father of the monastic life for men, so Macrina ranks as the
founder of women's convent life. There are few women in
Church History whose influence, direct and indirect, has been
so great, or who have so well deserved the title of " Saint."

Let us now re-cross the river and return to Basil. It is
clear that he began his monastery on a definite system from
the outset. With Gregory's help on his first visit he sketched
rules for the cenobium, and began the round of prayer, labour
and study. Building, agriculture, the study of Scripture, vigils,
prayers and psalmody are all referred to in Gregory's letter
recalling this visit2. We need not ask where the brethren
came from. The impulse to an ascetic life had already been
given, and when a man like Basil, who possessed personal as
well as family prestige, joined the movement, he was bound to
attract followers. By the end of 359 things were in such good
order that Basil could leave his work to attend the Council of
Constantinople in 360.

The length of Basil's stay in Pontus has been exaggerated.
Rufinus records a tradition that Basil and Gregory spent
thirteen years in retirement3. If we could assume that all
the time between 358 and 370, the date of Basil's elevation to
the episcopate, was spent in Pontus, the reckoning would be
approximately correct ; but as a matter of fact he was only
there for a small portion of the time. In 360 he went to
Constantinople, after which he returned to Caesarea. In 361 we
find him at Nazianzus in company with Gregory. In 362 he

1 Vit. Macr. 972 — 993. For Basil's regulations for nuns see pp. 104, 105.

2 Greg. Naz. Ep. 6.

3 It is no more than a tradition. " Ibique per annos (ut aiunt) tredecim,
omnibus Graecorum saecularium libris remotis, solis divinae Scripturae volumi-
nibus operam dabant." Ruf. H.E. II. 9.

4—2

52 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

was present at the deathbed of Dianius, bishop of Caesarea1.
Basil seems also to have had a good deal to do with the
election of Eusebius as Dianius' successor and was himself
ordained priest about this time2. The prominent position
taken by Basil in the Church of the metropolis roused the
jealousy of Eusebius; the monks of Caesarea championed
Basil and there was some danger of a schism. " Whereupon,"
says Gregory, " with my advice and earnest encouragement on
the point, he set out from the place with me into Pontus, and
presided over the abodes of contemplation (i.e. monasteries)
there. He himself too founded one worthy of mention3."
This was towards the end of 362 or at the beginning of 363.
In 365 the trouble that threatened the Church of Caesarea
through the approach of Valens drew Basil back to the post
of danger4. The task of directing the practical activities of
the Church occupied the remaining years of his life. He
cannot then have spent more than three or four years in
Pontus, while Gregory's time was even less5.

Basil's life in Pontus may therefore be divided into two
parts, the first lasting a little over a year (358 — 359) and
ending with his departure to Constantinople, the second part
(362 — 365) beginning with his flight from Caesarea to avoid a
strife with Eusebius and ending with his return at the time of
Valens' visit. Such a division does not exclude the possibility
of several short visits between 360 and 362, and after 365 6. It

1 Bas. Ep. 51.

2 Maran and others put his ordination in 364, but the view has not found many
supporters. See Schafer, Basilius ties Grossen Beziehungen zum Abendlande,
p. 50, for the reasons that support the date 362.

3 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 29. Cf. Soz. H.E. vi. 15. According to Gregory a
number of monasteries already existed. Basil's monastery referred to must be
the one he founded in 358.

4 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 30; Soz. ib.

5 Pargoire's conclusion (Diet. cTArchtol. chret. art. "Basile") would seem an
over-estimate. " Ainsi Basile ne sejourna guere en tout que cinq ou six ans dans
sa fondation d'Annesi." Morison, St Basil and his Rule, pp. xii, 7, allows three
years for the stay in Pontus, 358 — 361, and overlooks the second visit.

6 See Bas. Ep. 210, written from Annesi about 375. Looking back on his life
he says : " Hither have I often retreated, and here have I spent many years, when
endeavouring to escape from the hubbub of public affairs." Strictly speaking,
parts of many years rather than many whole years were spent at Annesi after his
childhood.

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 53

is reasonable to suppose that the first period, 358 — 359, was
occupied with the organisation of his monastery at Annesi,
and that his widespread propaganda, presently to be men
tioned, fell within the second period.

Two among Basil's letters describe the life of the cenobia,
the second, sent to Gregory in 358 or 359, and the twenty-
second, On the perfection of the life of solitaries, addressed to
an unknown destination at a later time. A summary of these
must now be given, because the correspondence between the
picture which they present and that which appears in the
Basilian Rules is a strong argument for the authenticity of
the latter. The second epistle has been justly described as
a first sketch of the Rules.

There is only one way, says Basil in this letter, of escaping
from the daily round of anxieties which weigh down the soul,
and that is separation from the world — not only bodily separa
tion, but severance of the soul from the world. This is the
indispensable preliminary. For this purpose solitude, and
such a retired place as we have here, are necessary1. We
soothe the mind with exercises of piety, beginning the day
with prayer and song, and then betake ourselves to our daily
labour, seasoning it throughout with devotion2. " Thus the
mind, saved from dissipation from without, and not through
the senses thrown upon the world, falls back upon itself, and
thereby ascends to the contemplation of God," The chief
method of learning our duty is the study of Scripture, and the
imitation of the examples contained therein3. " Prayers, too,
after reading, find the soul fresher, and more vigorously stirred
by love towards God." Restraint in conversation is of the
utmost importance, and the cultivation of a " middle tone of
voice." Outward appearance should be neglected and rough,
to correspond with the inner humility of the soul. The one
aim of dress is to give sufficient warmth ; a girdle is to be
worn4, and bright colours or soft materials must be avoided.
" The shoes should be cheap but serviceable5." As for food,

1 See p. 8 1 ; cf. F. (regulae fusius traclatae) 6.

2 pp. 86—88; F. 37. 3 pp. 91, 95; B. (brevius} 235.
4 p. 89; F. 23. 5 p. 89; F. 22.

54 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

bread, water and vegetables will suffice, if a man is in good
health1. Grace should be said before and after eating. " Let
there be one fixed hour for taking food, always the same in
regular course, that of all the four and twenty hours of the
day and night barely this one may be spent upon the body2."
Sleep is to be light and purposely broken for meditation.
Especially at midnight is the ascetic's soul alone with God, and
wrapt in earnest prayer3.

If this letter represents the ideals which animated Basil
in his early days at Annesi, the twenty-second letter shows
the cenobia at a more developed stage. Some monks have
asked his advice about doubtful points in the ascetic life. He
writes a brief tract in reply, in which he claims that his
injunctions are founded on a study of the inspired Scripture,
and announces his intention of leaving behind him definite
information in an easily intelligible form, for the benefit of
future students. Leaving out a number of precepts which
concern the life of all Christians rather than the special needs
of monks, to which, however, numerous parallels from the
Rules might be adduced, we notice the following points.

Silence is to be observed as far as possible. Strangers
who enter are not to speak to the brethren without the leave
of the overseers4. Wine and flesh meat must be eschewed5.
Whatever " the Christian " possesses is given him to be used
and not hoarded up ; he must take care of everything as the
Lord's property6. He must never murmur at scarcity of food
or excess of labour7 ; " the responsibility in these matters lies
with such as have authority in them." The voice should be
properly modulated and the eye under restraint. Ostentation
in clothing or food is forbidden. All must work, even those
engaged in more directly spiritual activities. " The Christian
ought not to change over from one work to another without
the approval of those who are appointed for the arrangement

1 p. 89; F. 19, where however fish is allowed.

2 p. 88; F. 21 ; B. 136. Apparently there was only one meal at first, and
Basil in the Rules modified this early austerity.

3 p. 87; F. 37. 4 p. 90; B. 141.

8 p. 89; F. 19. 6 p. 90; F. 41; B. 143, 144.

7 pp. 89, 90; F. 18, 29; B. 71, 121, 131—134.

•SV Basil as Monk and Bishop 55

of such matters.... Every one ought to remain in his appointed
post, not to go beyond his own bounds and intrude into what
is not commanded him, unless the responsible authorities judge
anyone to be in need of aid. No one ought to be found going
from one workshop to another1." If a man offends, he is to
be admonished, and if he then fails to amend himself, he must
be brought before the Superior (r&> Trpoeo-rwri,). If he is
obstinate, he is to be cut off, as a limb from the body2.
Immoderate toil is to be avoided3, just as much as unnecessary
abundance of food or raiment.

The parallels between these two letters and the Rules are
close, as will be seen from the footnotes. But if the Rules
are compared with the earlier letter and the rest of the
Basil-Gregory correspondence, it will be seen that they are
conceived in a spirit of moderation, and that Basil did not
recommend the average monk to imitate the privations of
his own early monastic days4. In this respect he resembles
Pachomius and Benedict, both of whom when legislating for
disciples modified the severity of their original ideals.

Busy as Gregory and Basil must have been in their
monastery with the claims of devotion and manual labour,
they were nevertheless able to accomplish some important
literary work. The compilation of choice passages from
Origen, under the title of the Philocalia, was a product of
their scanty leisure; it is still extant, and of great value to
the student of Origen5. Besides this, the two friends drew
up some rules for the monastic life6.

Sozomen, Socrates and Rufinus give brief accounts of the

1 p. 90; B. 117, 119, 142.

2 p. 96; F. 28. d Trpoeorws is the usual word in the Rules for the Superior,
the various periphrases for the other officers are also characteristic, and are natural
at an early stage of the institutions before a hierarchy of officials was established.
See pp. 92 ff.

3 B. 125.

4 See Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 61 ; Greg. Nyss. In laud. Bas. In F. 19, 21 two
meals a day are allowed and also a better quality of food. According to Boulenger
(Gregoire de Nazianze, Discours funtbres, p. civ) Gregory's description of Basil's
dress and regime in Or. 43, 61 is borrowed from similar descriptions of Cynic-
Stoic philosophers.

5 Greg. Naz. Ep. 115. Gregory sent a copy in 382 to Theodore of Tyana.

6 ib. 6.

56 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

work of Gregory and Basil outside their own monastery.
Sozomen, who is a good authority for the monachism of Asia
Minor, relates how they championed the Nicene doctrines
and refuted Arianism. They divided the country between them
'• either by mutual agreement, or, as I have been informed, by
lot. The cities in the neighbourhood of Pontus fell to Basil ;
and here he founded numerous monasteries, and, by teaching
the people, he persuaded them to hold like views with him
self1." Socrates gives a similar, if somewhat confused, version2.
Rufinus tells us that they set out by different ways to the same
task. Basil went through the cities and rural districts of
Pontus, and stirred up the sluggish and indifferent minds of
the inhabitants ; he taught them to put away worldly things,
to build monasteries, to find time for prayers and sacred
music, to attend to the needs of the poor and provide them
with proper houses and the necessaries of life, and to furnish
recruits to the virgin life. " In a short space of time the face
of the whole province was so changed, that it seemed as if an
abundant crop and a joyful vineyard had sprung up in an
arid and neglected countryside3." Probably Sozomen's account
is the most accurate ; he mentions Basil's work in the cities of
Pontus, and is silent about the country districts. This agrees
best with Basil's well-known policy of bringing the monasteries
into connexion with the bishops and " village-bishops " (%o>,o-
67rtV/«f07roi)4,and Cassian's testimony that Piamun found cenobia
only in the towns of Pontus5.

This activity for some reason or other aroused considerable
opposition, especially among the citizens of Neo-Caesarea.

1 H.E. vi. 17. 2 H.E. iv. 26.

3 Rufin. H.E. II. 9, "Verum cum iam ipsi sufficienter instruct! divina dis-
pensatione ad imbuendos populos vocarentur, et alius alio itinere, ad idem tamen
opus uterque traheretur, Basilius Ponti urbes et rura circumiens, desides gentis
illius animos et parum de spe futura sollicitos stimulate verbis, et praedicatione
succendere, callumque ab his longae neglegentiae caepit abolere, subegitque,
abiectis inanium rerum et saecularium curis, suimet notitiam recipere, in unum
coire, monasteria construere, psalmis et hymnis et orationibus docuit vacate,
pauperum curam gerere, eisque habitacula honesta, et quae ad victum necessaria
sunt, praebere, virgines mstituere, pudicam castamque vitam omnibus pene
desiderabilem facere. Ita brevi permutata est totius provinciae fades, ut in arido
et squalenti campo videretur seges foecunda, ac laeta vinea surrexisse."

4 See p. 19. 5 Cass. Coll. xvin. 7.

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 57

We find the opposition reflected in a letter of Basil to the
clergy of that city1. One accusation against him was that
he had introduced methods of chanting which were unknown
in the days of Gregory Thaumaturgus. The other and more
serious charge concerned the ascetics who looked up to Basil
as their leader. He defends them against calumnies, but
admits that in comparison with the great achievements of
the ascetics in Egypt, Palestine and Mesopotamia, things in
Pontus are still in an undeveloped stage. His next words
are significant : "If any charges of disorder are brought
against the life of our women, I do not undertake to defend
them." It looks as if the movement in Pontus had been
accompanied by ebullitions of fanaticism which had earned
the conscientious disapproval of many citizens of Neo-
Caesarea. But Basil was no more responsible for the
excesses of his followers than was Eustathius for most of
the excesses condemned by the Council of Gangra.

The final period of Basil's career may be treated more
briefly. It is full of colour and incident, but does not add
much to the conclusions already reached. In 365 reports
reached Caesarea that the Emperor Valens was on his way
to the city, determined to wreak vengeance on its recalcitrant
inhabitants. Eusebius the archbishop yielded to popular
clamour and recalled Basil, the only man who seemed capable
of dealing with such a crisis. With the aid of Gregory of
Nazianzus a complete reconciliation was effected between the
bishop and the priest. As it turned out, Valens' purpose was
frustrated by the necessity of quelling the revolt of Procopius,
and Basil was able to spend five years in Caesarea as Eusebius'
subordinate, loyally upholding his authority and increasing the
powers of the see considerably.

The outstanding event during this period was the great
famine of 368, of which Basil gives an account in his homily
On the Famine and Drought. He did all in his power both
by example and precept to relieve the distress ; he sold his
own possessions and bought provisions with the proceeds2,

1 Ep. 207 ; cf. 210.

2 Greg. Nyss. In laud. Bas. ; In Eunom. I. 10 ; cf. p. 45.

58 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

and also made eloquent and successful appeals to the rich
citizens to follow his lead.

In 370 Eusebius died. Basil had been the power behind
the throne for some years, and now felt, not without justifica
tion, that the interests of the Church demanded his succession
to the vacant see. With the help of some scheming he gained
his ends, and his remarkable career as archbishop of Caesarea
began. The most famous incidents of his episcopate are the
blow which Valens struck at Caesarea in 371 by the division
of Cappadocia and creation of a new province of Cappadocia
Secunda with its civil and ecclesiastical centre at Tyana ; the
visit of the Emperor Valens to Caesarea in 371 and 372 ;
Basil's quarrel with his old friend Gregory ; his irreconcilable
feud with Eustathius ; and his unsuccessful efforts to induce
the Western Church to interest itself in the troubles of the
East. On January ist, 379 Basil died1. Though only
50 years old, he was prematurely aged by his austerities
and incessant activities, to which his physique, always frail,
was quite unequal. The funeral was an occasion for a great
display of popular affection and respect, and the honours of
sainthood were given him at once2.

In Pontus Basil had organised a monasticism that was
already in existence. The same holds good of Cappadocia
and Caesarea. Gregory's words make it quite plain that
monasticism was well known in Nazianzus ; besides the
traditional life of asceticism lived in the world, the eremitic
life was also practised. He would have adopted the solitary
life himself, had it not necessitated the giving up of sacred
study3. The monks of Caesarea were a powerful body in 362 ;
Gregory calls them " the Nazarites of our day," and says they
were enraged at the manner in which "their chief" Basil was
insulted, and would have caused a schism had not Basil retired
to Pontus4. Basil's letters are full of references to the monks
and ascetics of both sexes that abounded in Cappadocia and
the neighbouring provinces. These would seem to have been

1 See Schafer, op. cit. pp. 30, 31, for a vindication of the traditional date.

2 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 80. 8 Greg. Naz. Carm. I. 65 ff., xi. 300— 337.
4 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 28.

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 59

exponents of the two modes of asceticism described by Gregory,
or perhaps solitaries in a modified sense, such as were called
Sarabaites at a later period. It is possible that a form of
cenobitism had already developed at Caesarea, either sponta
neously, or in imitation of the institutions of Eustathius and
Basil in Pontus. Basil may have taken some preliminary steps
in 361 towards the foundation of his famous cenobium at
Caesarea, but on the whole his personal prestige is sufficient
to account for his acknowledged leadership of the Caesarean
monks at this early date1.

Sometime during the years 365 — 370 the foundations of
the great cenobium and hospital must have been laid, because
by 372 the work had attained such proportions as to alarm
Elias, the governor of the province2. In a letter assigned to
the same year the institution appears fully organised, for
Basil describes one of his priests as a man of "continence
and ascetic discipline... a man of poverty, with no resources
in this world, so that he is not even provided with bare
bread, but by the labour of his hands gets a living with
the brethren who dwell with him3." Basil's voluminous
correspondence contains many letters on the subject of the
ascetic life. The impression gathered from them agrees in
all essentials with the accounts given by his contemporaries,
and also with the evidence of the Rules. These letters reveal
a ceaseless activity in furthering the cause of monasticism and
maintaining a high standard of religion among the ascetics.
Where Basil cannot visit the monks in person he sends
deputies4. Even so distant a land as Palestine is not outside
his range, for in a letter to Epiphanius he mentions that he
has written to the monks of the Mount of Olives5. He inter
cedes with the assessors of taxes and asks that favourable
consideration may be given to the monks, from whom pay
ment can hardly be expected6. In one letter he urges the

1 Maran ( Vit. Bas. vi. 2) says that Basil during his presbyterate sent a postu
lant to Pontus for instruction, which shows that he was not satisfied with the
facilities for asceticism provided in Caesarea. But Ep, 23, from which this is
deduced, says nothing about Pontus.

2 Bas. Ep. 94.

3 Ep. 81. ' * ib. 226. 5 ib. 258. 6 ib. 284.

60 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

adoption of the common life, and refers to a visit he has
lately paid in person in order to enforce this lesson. " Great
is my desire to see you all united in one body, and to hear
that you are not content to live a life without witness ; but
have undertaken to be both watchful of each other's diligence,
and witnesses of each other's success1." Much interesting
information is given in the "canonical" letters to Amphi-
lochius (188, 199, 217), especially on the subject of the
monastic profession. It is a debated question whether or
not Basil recognised permanent vows, but certainly in the
case of women the profession was irrevocable2.

One of Basil's chief aims was to organise the monastic
life. He ordains that the profession of men is not to be
recognised unless they have " enrolled themselves in the order
of monks," and that a careful examination must precede their
profession3. However, from the way in which he phrases his
recommendations (" I do not recognise," " I think it becom
ing ") it may be deduced that he is speaking only for himself
and that other methods existed. He evidently intended his
organisation to be a step forward ; stricter discipline was pos
sible now, " since by God's grace the Church grows mightier
as she advances, and the order of virgins is becoming more
numerous4." Basil condemns private vows, such as that of
abstinence from swine's flesh, as unnecessary and ridiculous5.
The supreme importance of orthodoxy in his estimation may
be seen in his decision that vows made by heretics are not
binding, and may be broken without sin6.

In conclusion, Basil's famous philanthropic institutions
deserve a brief notice. Charity was far from unknown in
the pagan Empire ; besides the public distributions of corn
to poorer citizens there were various methods of relieving
distress by public and private benevolence7. But the Christian
Church practised it with far more zeal and thoroughness, so

1 Ep. 295 ; cf. Ep. 23. 2 See Additional Note A.

3 Ep. 199, Can. xix.

4 ib. Can. xvni. But Cappadocia and Pontus were backward in comparison
with the lands of the East. (Ep. 207.)

5 Ep. 199, Can. xxvin. 6 ib. Can. xx.

7 Cf. Lecky, History of European Morals (ed. 1911), II. 75 ff.

St Basil as Monk and Bishop 61

that Julian recognised in this one of the chief sources of its
strength1. In the fourth century the need for charity had
increased. The resources of the State were less, and the
proportion of the free proletariat to the whole population
was greater, now that the supply of fresh slaves had dried
up and many of the existing ones had been emancipated.
The Church of Alexandria had won honourable distinction
for the extent of its charities, and Basil had doubtless learned
much from his visit to Egypt2. But in this as in other respects
he improved on his teachers, and his foundation at Caesarea
both struck the imagination of his contemporaries and served
as a model for similar institutions in other centres. Eustathius'
foundation at Sebaste for strangers and invalids, presided over
by Aerius, probably served to some extent as a pattern3. In
372 Basil wrote to the governor of the province, to whom he
had been denounced, a letter on the subject4, from which we
learn that there was a magnificent church, with houses
attached for the bishop and clergy. Around it was a com
plex of buildings for benevolent purposes, including apartments
for travellers and wards for the sick. Gregory in a rhetorical
description of the place states that it was outside the city and
of sufficient importance to be called the New City5. In the
collection of Basil's letters occurs one from Heraclidas to
Amphilochius. Heraclidas had been in Caesarea and, not
wanting to stay in the city, had gone to live in the neigh
bouring hospital ; there he had come under the influence of
Basil, who instructed him on apostolic poverty. He urges
Amphilochius to join him6. The hospital then was a place
where the ascetic life could be lived, and, though there is no
definite statement to this effect, it seems clear that Basil's
cenobium was also part of the same pile of buildings. This
conclusion is supported by what Sozomen says of Prapidius,

1 Cf. Harnack, Expansion of Christianity ', I. 181 — 249.

2 See Palladius, Hist. Laus. VI., for a description of the hospital at Alexandria;
the men's ward was on the ground floor, the women's ward above.

3 Cf. Epiphanius, Haer. 75.

4 Ep. 94-

5 Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 63. Queen Helena erected a Church at the Holy
Sepulchre outside Jerusalem which she called New Jerusalem, Socr. H.E. I. 17.

6 Ep. 150.

62 St Basil as Monk and Bishop

one of the most celebrated of Cappadocian monks. He
" performed the episcopal functions in several villages (i.e. was
a chorepiscopus). He also presided over the Basileias, the
most celebrated hospice for the poor. It was established by
Basil, bishop of Caesarea, from whom it received its name in
the beginning, and retains it until to-day1." In fact one of
Basil's main objects must have been to provide an outlet for
the practical activities of his monks of the Common Life. It
is to be noted how the tradition of Basil is continued in
Prapidius, who is at once monk, bishop and philanthropist
Basil set up a working alliance between the official Church
and monasticism, a fact which proved of great importance
for the later history of the Eastern Church.

The example of the capital was followed throughout the
province, and the chorepiscopi under Basil's direction estab
lished similar hospitals in their own districts2. Altogether
the prestige of the Church must have been enhanced con
siderably by these measures. Some interesting remarks of
Sir W. M. Ramsay will form a fitting conclusion to this
chapter. " Such establishments constituted centres from
which the irresistible influence of the Church permeated the
whole district, as, centuries before, the cities founded by the
Greek Kings had been centres from which the Greek influence
had slowly permeated the country round3." And again : " such
a Christian ecclesiastical establishment took the place of the
ancient Anatolian hieron as the centre of social and municipal
life. The Greek conception of a free people governing itself
without priestly interference was dying out, and the Asiatic
conception of a religion governing in theocratic fashion the
entire life and conduct of men was reviving4."

1 H.E. vi. 34-

2 Bas. Epp. 142, 143. 3 Church in the Roman Empire (sth ed.), p. 461.

4 Luke the Physician, p. 153. Cf. Ch. in Rom. Empire, p. 464 n. "The
' New City ' of Basil seems to have caused the gradual concentration of the entire
population of Caesarea round the ecclesiastical centre, and the abandonment of
the old city. Modern Kaisari is situated between one and two miles from the
site of the Graeco-Roman city." See also Enc. Brit. art. " Caesarea," " A
portion of Basil's new city was surrounded with strong walls and turned into
a fortress by Justinian ; and within the walls, rebuilt in the I3th and i6th centuries,
lies the greater part of Kaisarieh."

CHAPTER V

ST BASIL'S ASCETIC WRITINGS1

BASIL'S Rules are a source of considerable importance to the
student of fourth century Church life, but very little use has
been made of them hitherto by historians. Their fate has
been unfortunate ; as Holl has pointed out, the fact of their
being Rules at all has given them a bad reputation, and mis
leading analogies, such as the history of the Franciscan Rules,
have had a disturbing effect on modern criticism2. Even when
authors have made use of them, they have generally felt it
necessary to sound a note of caution in view of the probable
presence of later elements. So great an authority on the
history of monachism as Zockler declares that none of the
Rules in their present form go back to Basil3. Perhaps
therefore the writer of a widely-used text- book on Church
History is not to be blamed if he gives such a seriously
misleading note as the following : " None of the ' Rules '
ascribed to names of the fourth century (they are collected

1 Garnier's discussion in the Benedictine edition is the foundation of all subse
quent work. See also Ceillier, Histoire Gtntrale, vi. 161 — 195. A (brief discussion
by E. F. Morison in Ch. Quart. Rev. Oct. 1912, repeated in his book St Basil
and his Rule (191 2), pp. 15 — 19, is of some importance because the writer's
conclusions are based on a study of the ascetic writings from a lexical point of
view, undertaken for the purpose of the forthcoming Lexicon of Patristic Greek.
A book entitled Saint Basile-U- Grand, ses ceuvres oratoires et asctiiques, by Vasson
(Paris, no date), might be passed over in silence but that its title might prove
attractive. It is wholly uncritical and in spite of its 752 pages contains nothing of
value.

2 Holl, Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt, p. 157.

3 Askese und Monchtum, p. 286. He adds however that they are " ihrem
wesentlichen Inhalte nach basilianisch." Meyer, Die Haupturkunden fur die
Geschichte der Athoskloster, p. 7, assumes amplifications by later hands in the
shorter Rules. Moeller however says, "The shorter Rule may with greater
confidence be regarded as his work " (History of the Christian Church,
Eng. tr. I. 360).

64 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

by Holstenius, Codex Regularuni) are in their original form.
They are believed to have been modified under the influence of
later experience. Two bear the name of Pachomius and two
that of Basil of Caesarea. The shorter of the latter, o/oo? KCLT
eTTiTo/jirjv, is regarded as nearly representing Basil's own work1."
But it is obviously improper to put Basil's Rules, which can
be shown to have existed in their present form within twenty
years of his death, in the same category as those of Pachomius.
We hope to be able to show, not only that they are essentially
Basilian, as indeed is generally acknowledged at the present
time, but also that any editing they may have received was
as honest a piece of workmanship as that which is carried out
in modern times by the literary executors of a dead author.

Few literary works of antiquity have better external
attestation than Basil's Ascetica. In Ep. 22 (On the Perfection
of the Life of Solitaries] Basil refers to a writing that he will
be able to leave behind dealing with questions raised by the
monks and based upon a study of Scripture. " I have only
deemed it necessary to speak by way of brief reminder con
cerning the questions which have been recently stirred among
you, so far as I have learned from the study of the inspired
Scripture itself. I shall thus leave behind me detailed evidence,
easy of apprehension, for the information of industrious
students, who in their turn will be able to inform others2."
The description will suit either the Morals or the Longer
Rules — the Shorter are not based on Scripture to the same
extent as the Longer. Gregory of Nazianzus recalls the
"written Rules and Canons" over which Basil and he had
collaborated3; he praises Basil's " legislation written and
unwritten for the monastic life4"; also his care for the convents,
and the " written regulations " by which he subdued every

1 Rainy, The Ancient Catholic Church, p. 295. The two sets of Basil's Rules
are not in Holsten's collection, only Rufinus' conflation and condensation of them.
fy>os is presumably a misprint for tipoi.

2 At an earlier period (Ep. 9) Basil was determined not to publish his
views.

3 Ep, 6, OpOLS ypCLTTTOlS KCU KCLVOffl.

4 Or. 43, 34, vo/noBeffiai p.ovaffru>v %yypa<pol re Kal &ypa<f>oi ; cf. 43, 29,

S/ Basil's Ascetic Writings 65

sense and regulated every member1. Jerome writing in 392
states that Basil composed a work " On Asceticism2." Rufinus,
who had been Jerome's companion, returned to Italy from the
East in 397 and translated "this work" (hoc opus) of Basil
into Latin for Urseius, abbot of Pinetum. The work referred
to by Rufinus, and probably by Jerome also, is the Longer
and Shorter Rules of Basil, which Rufinus abbreviated and
adapted so as to form one composite work3. A few years
later we have Cassian's description of the Rules : " Basil
and Jerome... the former of whom, when the brethren asked
about various rules and questions, replied in language which
was not only eloquent but rich in testimonies from Holy
Scripture4." Sozomen mentions the existence of an ascetic
book inscribed with Basil's name, adding indeed that some
attributed it to Eustathius of Sebaste5. After such an amount
of early testimony it seems needless to enlarge on the later
allusions, or do more than mention the evidence of Justinian6
and Benedict7. That of Photius is however most important
and must receive some attention.

It will have been noticed that the above references attest
either an undefined body of ascetic writings, or else definitely
the Rules. It is clear then that the Longer and Shorter Rules
are the best authenticated of the ascetic writings. A fuller
discussion is necessary before the external evidence valid in
their case can be transferred to other documents.

The chief witness for the textual history is Photius,
patriarch of Constantinople in the latter half of the ninth
century. He was quite the best-read man of his time and
had an extensive acquaintance with both Christian and Pagan
literature. These are his words on the subject of this chapter.
"We read also the Ascetica^ or counsels on ascetic behaviour;
anyone who directs his life according to these will dwell in
the heavenly kingdom." " We read the so-called Ascetica of

1 Or. 43, 62, TO, tyypa<f>a dLardy^aTa.

2 To &<rKr)T<.Kov, De vir. illust. 116.

3 Rufin. Praef. (in Holsten, Codex Regularuni) ; cf. H.E. II. 9, " Basilii
instituta monachorum." See Appendix B.

4 Inst. Praef. 5 H.E. ill. 14. See Appendix A.
6 P. G. LXXXVI. 977. 7 Reg. Ben. 73.

L. C. 5

66 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

St Basil, Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, in two books....
Now his first book describes what is the cause of the great
discord and dissension in the Churches of God and in the
relations of each man with his neighbour, and with what
danger it is fraught ; secondly (it shows) that transgression of
every commandment of God receives a great and terrible
punishment — with proof from the Scriptures; thirdly it
describes our pious faith, or rather our pure and sincere
confession of the Most Holy Trinity. While the second book
expresses as it were the character of a Christian in different
sections and concisely, and again by the side of this the
character of the leaders of the Word. Next it expounds
some ascetic rules, put in the form of question and answer, to
the number of 55, and again, in more concise form, other
rules, 313 in number1."

Basil's Ascetica therefore, at the time of Photius, existed
in two volumes, the first a very small one containing the two
sermons known as De Indicia Dei and De Fide*, and the
second a bulky volume, since it included the Moralia and
both Longer and Shorter Rules. Besides these we have in
our present editions the three opening writings of the Ascetica,
(i) Praevia Institutio Ascetica, (2) Sermo Asceticus, De Remm-
tiatione Saeculi, (3) Sermo de Ascetica Disciplines, two treatises,
both entitled Sermo Asceticus, which come between the Morals
and the Longer Rules ; and finally the Poenae in Monachos
Delinquentes and the Constitutions Monasticae. The absence
from Photius of this latter group of documents is, so far as it

1 Photius, Cod. 144 (Migne, CHI. 422), 'Aveyvwdrj /cat rd 'Ao-^rt/ca, ijyovv
dffKrjTiKrjs TToXtrefas {tirodTJKou, Kad as rts /Stoi/s rrjv ovpavi.ov oiK'ria'ei fiacrtXelav.
Also Cod. 191 (cm. 634), 'Aveyvu<r6/r) TOV £v dylois BacriXetou, eTTKr/ttSTrou Kattrape/as
KaTnraSo^ias, TO. \ey6fj.eva 'Acr/CTjrt/cd £v dvffl \6yois... 6 /J,£v ovv TT/JWTOS ai)ry X6*yos
5ie£^pxeTai rts T) am'a /cat 6 KtvSvvos TTJS TO<ravTr)s ruv 'EKKXfja-iuv TOV 6eou «ai
£KO.<TTOV irpbs TOV Zrepov dicujjuvias re /cat 5ia<rrd(rews. kevrepov on iratnjs tvToXijs
0eoO irapdpaffts (70o5pws Kal (po/Sepus t/c5t/cetrat. /cat r) aTroSet^ts ^/c TUV Tpa<j>uv.
Tpirov Trepi 7-17$ evffefiovs Tricrrews rjfMwv, TJTOL TTJS efy rrjv vwepayiav T/3id5a KaQapas
ijfjLUV /cat dXiKptvovs 6/uLO\oyLa.s. 6 5t Seivrepoj olov xaPaKrVPa Xpiariaj'ov /ce^aXatwS?;
Kal G^VTO^QV Trapar^erat, /cat xaPaKT^Pa ffdXiv TrapatrX'^a'tov TUV irpoeffrwruv TOV
\6yov. etra olov opovs Tivas dcncrjTiKovs, ws 4v 4puTr]<r€i /cat airoicplffei irporjy/jifrovs,
e/CT/^erat, TOV apiO/jJov ve ', /cat TrdXip (rvvTO/jt-UTepov eT^pous 6'pouj Tiy'.

2 Photius' first point is found in the opening words of De ludicio Dei, his
"secondly" in the main part of the same, while his "thirdly" describes De Fide.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 67

goes, unfavourable to their authenticity. This concludes our
survey of the external evidence; let us now proceed to the
internal. It will be convenient to use the following arrange
ment of the writings.

A. Certainly genuine. Photius' first volume,
(i) De ludicio Dei.

(ii) De Fide.

B. Certainly genuine. Photius' second volume.
(i) M or alia.

(ii) Regnlae Fusius Tractatae.
(iii) Regnlae Brevius Tractatae.

C. Probably genuine, but to be used with caution.
(i) Praevia Institutio Ascetica.

(ii) Sermo Asceticus, De Renuntiatione Saeculi.
(iii) Sermo de Ascetica Disciplina.

D. Probably spurious.

2 Sermones Ascetici (placed after Moralia).

E. Certainly spurious.

(i) Poenae in Monachos Delinquentes.
(ii) Constitutiones Monasticae.

A. (i) De ludicio Dei.

This sermon or treatise " On the Judgment of God " may
have been originally included in the Ascetica in virtue of some
tradition of its having been originally addressed to monks,
but more probably because, the Moralia having become
associated with the Rules, this treatise with its companion De
Fide, referring as they do to the Moralia, formed a fitting
preface to the composite volume. The style is clearly that of
Basil, and the biographical references at the beginning put
the matter beyond doubt. The writer refers to his Christian
upbringing, his travels and education, and proceeds to describe
the state of the Church, which was as if "there was no king in
Israel." He then reaches his main subject, the judgment of
God on sin, which he works out in characteristic fashion with
a wealth of Scriptural proof. His closing words are: "I have
deemed it fitting and necessary first to set forth the sound

5—2

68 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

faith and pious doctrine in regard to the Father and the Son
and the Holy Spirit, and then to add the Morals1."

(ii) De Fide.

This is the promised doctrinal treatise ; like the last, it
throws no light on the special subjects of our inquiry. Basil's
purpose is to lay a firm doctrinal foundation before proceeding
to practical questions. He expounds the true doctrine of the
Trinity, and then sketches the method of procedure to be
adopted in the Moralia. His "brethren in Christ" have been
claiming the fulfilment of his promise to write something. He
informs them that he has already been active in the matter,
and has written out rules of conduct, with illustrations from
the Bible; he has used the New Testament primarily, and the
Old Testament where it agrees with the New. There is
nothing to show whether the " brethren in Christ " are monks
or Christians living in the world, or to fix the date of this
group of writings with any accuracy. Maran gives 361 as the
date, and this is probably approximately correct, but his
arguments are not very cogent2.

B. (i) Moralia.

These " Morals " (T« TjQiicd) begin at once without further
preface, showing their close organic connection with the two
preceding tracts. They consist of 80 rules, some of which are
broken up into many different heads. Thus Rule 70, dealing
with the duties of the clergy, has 37 sub-divisions. The treatise
as a whole is concerned with the duties of Christians at large,
and clergy living in the world, while the " Rules " proper have
in mind the special needs of monks3. Basil's method is to
enunciate a proposition and then to buttress it with proof-texts

1 Basil contrasts the Church distracted by its divisions with a swarm of bees he
once saw "following their own king in good order." The idea of a bee-hive may
well have been in his mind in working out the details of his cenobia. Cf. the
Cappadocian Elpidius who lived with the brethren " like a little king in the midst
of the bees " (Hist. Laus. XLVIII. 2). See Ramsay in Hastings' D.B. v. n6b for
the part played by the bee in Anatolian religion.

- Vit. Bas. vn. 3. Ceillier, Histoire G<?n<?rale, vi. 171.

3 The same word (Spot) is used for the regulations in each case.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 69

from the Scriptures. He deals with the material in the
same manner as in the " Rules," and displays a deep know
ledge of both the letter and spirit of the Bible. There is little
that bears on the subject of monasticism ; the few passages
that refer to the organised ascetic life agree closely with the
evidence of Basil's other writings. Thus, money assigned to
those who are consecrated to God is not to be spent on
others1. Married people may not separate unless one has
been taken in adultery, or the union has proved a hindrance
to godliness2. There are some interesting passages on the
necessity of pastoral care and visitation3.

(ii) Regulae Fusius Tractatae.

These Longer Rules (opoi Kara TrXaro?) consist of 55
sections or chapters, mostly concerned with specially monastic
problems. The answers are nearly always supported by proof-
texts from Scripture4. The opening words of the preface
throw light on the circumstances under which the book
originated. " Since by God's grace we are assembled together
in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ — we who have set before
ourselves one and the same object of the life of godliness ;
and you are plainly eager to hear somewhat of the things
pertaining to salvation, while I am bound to declare the
judgments of God... and since the present time is most
suitable and this place provides quiet and complete freedom

from all external distractions, let us join in prayer together "

The place seems then to have been a monastery. The hearers,
whose eagerness is thus described, are referred to again on
several occasions in the headings to the chapters. For instance,
at the head of the seventh chapter we read : " since your
words have convinced us that a life in company with those
who despise the commandments of the Lord is fraught with
danger, we should consequently like to know whether...5."
The heading is usually in the form of a question, direct or

1 Mor. 31 ; cf. B. 187 (see p. 82). 2 Mor. 73; cf. F. 12 (see p. 84).

3 Mor. 70, cap. 12 and 18.

4 The exceptions are F. 13, 26, 27, 38, 39, 49, 51, 53, 54.

5 The heading assumes a similar personal form in F. i, 2, 3, 24, 38, 43.

yo 5/ Basil's Ascetic Writings

indirect, but titles such as Concerning Slaves ( 1 1 ) or Concerning
the Girdle (23) are also found. The style is thoroughly
Basilian, if not quite up to Basil's usual level of excellence1.

We have already seen that the external attestation of both
sets of Rules is very strong. A still further testimony to the
originality and early date of the Longer Rules is provided by
the references in the Shorter, where on three occasions Basil
refuses to discuss questions because answers have been already
given in the Longer Rules2. It may be inferred that the
Longer Rules were already in circulation and accessible to
Basil's hearers by this time. When we add that both style
and contents are thoroughly consistent with the evidence of
Basil's undisputed works, the case for the authenticity of these
Longer Rules becomes overwhelming3.

It is not difficult to fix their date within a year or two.
Everything points to some monastery in Pontus as the scene
of their delivery. The references in the Shorter Rules demand
an interval of time between the two publications, long enough
to enable the first set of Rules to be copied and circulated.
It is tempting to identify the Longer Rules with the "written
rules" which Gregory and Basil drew up in concert. But
Gregory's sixth letter, which speaks of these, is describing his
first stay in Pontus4, and the Longer Rules can hardly be
assigned to the opening months of Basil's monastic life; they
presuppose a later stage of development5. Besides, they are
not Rules at all, strictly speaking, but rather " conferences "
or instructions on the ascetic life6. It is better to suppose

1 For proof see Gamier, Vol. n. xi. 6. Cf. Ceillier, Histoire Gtntrak, vi. 178,
"Ces Regies sont ecrites d'un stile un peu different des autres ouvrages de saint
Basile. II y a moins d'ele'gance, moins d'elevation ; mais c'est que la simplicite
convenoit a un ouvrage de ce genre."

2 Thus B. 74 refers to F. 7, B. 103 to F. 27, B. 220 to F. 33 (cf. also B. 2 and
F. 8). The answer in B. 103 is Trept rovriav eiprjrai <rcc0u>s fv r

3 See Chapter VI. for a description of their contents. 4 See p. 49.

5 E.g., in the regulation that there must not be more than one monastery in
any one HUM (F. 35). Even if, as seems almost certain, Basil organised an
already existing monasticism (see p. 46), his reputation during his first retirement
would not have been developed sufficiently to allow him to speak with such
authority.

6 Pargoire calls them «' lectures spirituelles " or "conferences" (art. "Basile"

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 71

that Basil made a draft of Rules in 358 — 359 with Gregory's
help, which formed the basis of these later instructions ; the
date of their delivery will then have been some time during
the years 362—365. A later date is improbable ; there is
nothing to suggest that Basil was a bishop at the time, or
even that he was a priest, practically governing the Church of
Caesarea in the name of Eusebius.

If the arguments in favour of these Rules are so weighty,
how have they come to be viewed with suspicion ? Possibly
owing to a wrong interpretation of the evidence of Rufinus,
who makes no use of any after the 24th. But his copy can
hardly have stopped short at this point, for up to this its
order was identical with that of our modern editions, and
various causes may be suggested to account for his neglect of
the later Rules1. The copy presupposed by Basil in the
Shorter Rules refers on two occasions to the part of the
Longer Rules unused by Rufinus2.

In the time of Photius however copies existed in which
the Rules were distributed differently. In the passage quoted
above3, the number is given as 55. But the 5 is not apparently
original and has been added in the MS by a later hand4. As
Tillemont says, the division of the great Rules as we have it
in our edition does not surely come from the author, but from
some unintelligent person, who out of a single one has often
made several5. To investigate the question thoroughly would

in Diet, d' ' Archtol. ch'tt.}. The " conference" is a specially French institution, for
which there is no English word. Bodley, France (ed. 1902), p. 452, describes it as
"a lucid exposition adorned with happy illustration, and moulded in conversa
tional form." Zockler calls them : " Katechismen monchischer Tugend- und
Pflichtlehre " ; Morison (in Ch. Quart. Rev. Oct. 1912) speaking primarily of
the Shorter Rules says : " They have no more order than a series of ' Answers to
Correspondents ' in a modern newspaper."

1 See Appendix B.

2 B. 103 refers to F. 27, B. 220 to F. 33.

3 p. 66. 4 See Gamier, Vol. n. xxxvi.

5 Memoires, IX. Art. xxn. Both Tillemont and Ceillier (Histoire Genfrale,
vi. 177), apparently referring to the same fact as Gamier, say that before Photius
MSS existed in which there were only 40 articles. Gamier in his Monitum at the
head of the Ascetica says : " Regulae in aliis codicibus alio ordine disponuntur.. . . Ad
Regulas quidem quod attinet, eas eodem ordine quo iam vulgatae sunt in editione
Parisiensi, edendas curabimus." I cannot find that he gives any further informa
tion as to the extent of variation in the order, or whether both Longer and Shorter

72 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

require a study of the manuscript evidence that has been
impossible to me ; but on a general view all that seems to be
demonstrated by this is a certain amount of later editing
which indeed is probable on other grounds. The Longer
Rules read like extempore discourses, and they were probably
taken down in shorthand and subjected to some revision,
perhaps by the author himself, perhaps by a literary executor.
If the latter hypothesis is correct, the personality of such an
executor is not far to seek. Gregory of Nazianzus had him
self assisted in the drafting of sketch rules, he acted as Basil's
literary executor in the case of the Hexaemeron, and, if the
reports of his friend's discourses were incomplete, there were
traditions of his "unwritten" regulations upon which to draw1.
But there is no evidence to show that any elements of im
portance were added after Basil's death.

(iii) Regulae Brevius Tractatae.

In his preface to the Shorter Rules2 (opoi /car ITTLTO^V}
Basil refers to the circumstances of their delivery. He begins
by mentioning the " gift of teaching " and " ministry of the
word " with which he has been entrusted. In fulfilment of
this it is his duty not only to preach publicly in Church, but
also to give facilities in private, so that individuals can con
sult him about their difficulties. "If then," he proceeds, "God
has gathered us together here, and we have complete quiet
from external distractions, let us not apply ourselves to any
other business, nor give our bodies up to sleep again, but let
us spend the remaining part of the night in careful examina
tion of necessary things." We gather that Basil was now
bishop of Caesarea and was holding a congress of monks,

Rules are equally subject to it. F. 53 is found in B. in one codex, and is absent
altogether in another, see Gamier in loc.

1 Shorthand writers were widely employed in antiquity, e.g. by Origen (Eus.
If.E. VI. 23). Eustathius of Sebaste had a number of them, whom he placed at
Basil's disposal on one occasion (Taxvypafiot, Bas. Ep. 223). Basil's Hexaemeron
were apparently delivered extempore (see end of Horn, vin) and put into shape
after his death by Gregory (Socr. H.E. IV. 26).

2 While the answers are much shorter than in the Longer Rules, the book
itself is considerably longer, occupying nearly twice as much space in Gamier
(ed. 1839); pp. 457 — 562 are devoted to F., 563 — 753 to B.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 73

perhaps in the cenobium at Caesarea. I put forward the
suggestion that this was a kind of General Chapter of the
Superiors of monasteries, who were responsible not only for
their own monks but also for the discipline of the attached
sisterhoods. It is difficult to imagine that the abbesses were
present on an equal footing with the abbots — this would have
involved an amount of travelling and mixing with men such
as were quite alien to the spirit of fourth century asceticism.
So a question such as " If a sister will not sing psalms, ought
she to be compelled to do so1?" must have been asked by
a monk. Now Basil had already ordered that periodical
meetings of Superiors should be held2. Was not this one of
these Chapters?

What has been said above about shorthand reports applies
here with equal force. Only in this case there was no editing;
the notes have been transcribed and made into a book with
out the slightest attempt after order or arrangement. If Basil's
death supervened soon afterwards, it would account for the
fact that the report was not submitted to the author for
revision. Zockler characterises the present order as " almost
incredible3." It is certainly surprising. Thus 280 — 282 deal
respectively with the meaning of " pure in heart," the problem
of a sister who will not sing, and the meaning of " We have
eaten and drunk before Thee." But this very lack of order is
a strong proof that we have before us a bona fide record of
real answers to real questions. The Longer Rules are only
answers to questions to a limited extent, but the practical,
often trivial, nature of the questions in the Shorter Rules
guarantees their originality. After Basil's death copyists
would have shrunk from affixing the name of the saint to
such a medley, unless in so doing they had the support of a
strong tradition.

As in the case of the Longer Rules, so here the style is
thoroughly Basilian, and there can be no doubt that the two
are by the same author4. The last 27 Rules are absent in

1 B. 281. 2 F. 54; see p. 103.

3 Askese und Monchtum, p. -287.
/ * See Gamier for the linguistic proofs, Vol. II. pp. xlv — Ixviii.

74 St Basir$ Ascetic Writings

some MSS, but the omission is of little consequence, as the
missing portion is already represented in Rufinus1. A large
percentage of the questions have nothing to do with the
ascetic life, but are concerned with Scriptural difficulties, for
instance, What is Raca? (51), Who is "the meek?" (191),
What is, Charity doth not behave itself unseemly? (246). The
contents are quite as valuable for our knowledge of the life of
the monasteries as those of the Longer Rules ; the next
chapter will contain an account of their evidence.

C.

The three short tracts now to be considered do not seem
to be attested by any ancient author, nor were they in the
edition that lay before Photius. As external evidence is
wanting, we are thrown back upon the internal character of
the writings. The style, at any rate of the second and third
tracts, agrees with that of Basil's acknowledged works3, and
the fact that they have never been attributed to any other
author is of some weight. The picture of the monastic life
given here corresponds in all essentials with the evidence of
the Rules, but adds nothing of importance to our knowledge,
so that it may be safely disregarded in summing up Basil's
conception of monasticism.

(i) Praevia Institutio Ascetica

This sermon, for such it is, is dominated by one thought
only, that the monk is the true soldier of Christ. The preacher
begins by describing the soldier's life of hardship, at the beck
and call of his officers, ready to march in any direction,
deprived of worldly joys and family life. The lot of the
ascetic is similar. He must shun physical marriage and be
content with spiritual marriage and the begetting of spiritual
children. For him, as for the soldier, a crown of victory is
waiting. In this army women are not rejected for their bodily

1 See Appendix B.

2 " Legi et relegi has lucubratiunculas, in quibus nihil omnino inveni, quod
indignum esset nostro Basilic." Gamier.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 75

weakness : indeed some virgins have even surpassed men in
the struggle and won greater fame. Holl is inclined to sus
pect this tract because it harps continually on one thought,
whereas Basil's style is generally marked by a rich profusion
of images1. But it would be unreasonable to expect a preacher
to be always at his best.

(ii) Sermo Asceticus, De Renuntiatione Saeculi*.

This is a longer document, and of some importance. Its
agreement with the Rules is striking and leaves little doubt
that both are the work of the same author.

Basil urges his hearers to come to the cross-bearing life
of the monks, divesting themselves of their riches by giving to
the poor3, and of their sins by confession4. But those who
wish to come must first prove themselves and count the cost,
lest by a subsequent apostasy they bring scandal on the
Church. God has divided men into two classes, virgins and
married, that those who cannot endure the struggle of virginity
may live with their wives. But holiness must be practised in
the married state, love of God and one's neighbour being
required from all. But, he proceeds, thou who lovest the
angelic life must join the monks, disregarding the protests of
relations and bestowing all thy goods on the poor. This is
victory in the first round. Now it is important to find a man
equipped with all the necessary virtues to be thy guide in the
new life; having found him, cast out all self-will and put
thyself wholly in his hands. But in the second round of the
contest the devil will tempt thee to leave the ascetic life and
thy strict master. Resist the temptation, a lenient guide is
worse than useless. Remember that by the rules of the

1 Enthiisiasmus und Bussgewalt, p. 158. Morison (St Basil and his Rule,
p. 15), while accepting the two next writings, says this " can hardly be attributed
to Basil." I see no reason why it should not be, but the data are not sufficient to
warrant a definite decision.

2 Batiffol (La literature grecque, p. 256) evidently confuses this and the next
discourse with the spurious ones that follow. In his list of the non-Photian works
he omits the two latter and describes the two present ones wrongly as " 2 \6yoi
dffK-rjTiKol, 1'un sur la renoncement au monde, 1'autre sur la discipline ascetique,
tous deux suspects, et que rien ne rattache au reste de la collection."

3 B. 85, 92; see p. 81. 4 F. 26; see p. 96.

76 S/ Basil's Ascetic Writings

contest thou wilt not be crowned unless thou hast striven
"lawfully." Therefore obey thy master; to do things apart
from him is theft and sacrilege, even if they seem to thee
good in themselves1. Seek no amelioration of hardship, either
in bedding or clothing or food. Be as silent as possible.
Imitate those who have made progress in virtue. Do not
judge the faults of others, but attend to thine own. Shrink
from observation. " Hast thou gone out from thy cell? Thou
hast deserted continence." But, if compelled by necessity to
go into the world, go clad with the armour of God, and return,
like the dove to the ark, the moment the business is com
pleted2. If thou art young, shun the company of other young
monks whether at table or in the dormitory; even at prayers,
when a young man is opposite thee, do not look up at him3.
Beware of gluttony4. Other faults are curable, but I have
never known a man cured who was gluttonous or ate in
secret. Do not sit down before an elder5. Reply when
spoken to, at other times be silent. Do not cross thy legs.
Eat with the right hand, and use the left only to assist the
right. Take care to sing at the divine office, and do not
depart before the end. Tame thy body and make it subser
vient to the soul. The devil will tempt thee with bodily pain.
Do not say " Alas my head ! " or " Alas my stomach ! " and
use the pain to excuse absence from prayers. When it is thy
turn to serve, join words of exhortation to thy care for the
body, and treat the patient as if he were Christ6. Beware of
thinking that all who live in a cell will be saved. Many come
to this holy life, but few really bear its yoke. If thou hast
the rank of a cleric7, let it not elate but rather humble thee ;
and still more so if thou art raised to the priesthood. Practise
daily self-examination. Be prepared to stay in thy cell not
only for days and months but for many years.

1 F. 28; B. 303 ; see p. 93. 2 F. 44; B. 311 ; see p. 99.

3 Cf. Zockler, Askese und Monchtum, p. 205, for similar regulations in
Pachomian monasteries.

4 F. 18; B. 71, 131, 132, 134. 5 F. 21.

6 This refers to works of mercy in the adjoining hospital ; cf. B. 155, 286 ; see
p. 100.

7 B. 231 ; see p. 102.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 77

(iii) Sermo de Ascetica Disciplina, Quomodo
Monachum Ornari OporteaP.

This is a short address, recounting the notes of a monastic
life in a number of short sentences quite devoid of any
literary style. Some are epigrammatic and vigorous, such as
" to keep his eyes down and his soul up." Among the recom
mendations may be noted the following — to wait on invalids,
to wash the feet of the saints, to practise hospitality and
brotherly love, to read orthodox but to shun heretical books,
to avoid meeting women or using wine.

D. 2 Sermones Ascetici.

The style of these is somewhat different from that of the
foregoing ; in the case of technical monastic words there is a
serious divergence from the language of Basil's genuine works2.
The precepts for the monastic life are with one or two excep
tions thoroughly in agreement with the Rules, even more so
than the tracts just mentioned. The resemblance is often so
close, that one is tempted to regard these two sermons as
having been written at a later period on the basis of the Rules.
The general tendency is to give instructions on points of detail
where the Rules lay down a general principle, or else leave
the matter in the hands of the Superior. The first sermon
contains two important details : the monastery is not to have
less than ten monks, and the hours of prayer are to be seven
in number. Only six are prescribed, but the mid-day prayer
is divided into two parts with dinner in between, so that the
canonical seven hours may be attained and David's words,
" Seven times a day do I praise Thee," fulfilled. It is con
ceivable that Basil might have relaxed his earlier rule of eight
times of prayer3, but in the light of differences of style it is

1 The Revue Benedictine (1910), p. 226 ff., contains a critical text of a Latin
version of this treatise.

2 The gathering of the brethren is called <rvvo5ia, <rv<ricr)via, TrX^pw/ta (none of
which titles are used in Basil's genuine works); the Superior is KadrjyotifjLevos,
irpoiyyoijfjievos, TrpoKa.6f]yo6/jL€vos. ijyov/j.fvos, the usual word for the abbot in later
times (common in the Constitutiones Monasticae), does not occur in the Rules.

3 See pp. 86, 87.

78 S/ Basil's Ascetic Writings

preferable to suppose that these tracts were composed at a
somewhat later date, perhaps in monasteries living after the
Basilian model.

E. (i) Poenae in Monachos Delinquentes.

These are plainly spurious, since they contain a number
of later technical terms that are not in the genuine Basil, such
as Archihebdomarius, Hesychast and others. Besides, Basil's
method in the Rules is to leave doubtful points of discipline
to the discretion of the Superior, contenting himself with broad
principles. In this list of penalties each offence has its definite
punishment.

(ii) Constitution's Asceticae.

The voice of modern criticism has been uniformly un
favourable to the Constitutions. They consist of 34 sections,
some of considerable length. They are quite unworthy of
Basil in style, and are often very verbose and involved.
Gamier gives a list of examples in which the language differs
from that of the Rules, the different words used for the
Superior being the most striking instance1. The tone is also
different in some important particulars. While the Rules are
whole-hearted in their recommendation of a common life2, the
author of the Constitutions evidently lived at a time when the
common and solitary life existed side by side, and considered
them equally legitimate types of monachism. Another mark
of a later date is the relaxation of the rules about journeys3.
The monk may now go out to visit other brethren, to do them
good, or even to dissipate tedium. The Constitutions clearly
belong to a later stage of monasticism ; their author must
remain anonymous.

Gamier has attempted to show that they were composed
by Eustathius of Sebaste4. His main argument is that, accord
ing to Sozomen, there was a tradition that Eustathius " was

1 6 iTyoi^epos and compounds in Constitutions, 6 7r/>oe<rrw'j and 6 irpefffivrepos
in Rules.

3 See p. 92. 3 See p. 99.

4 So Zockler (op. cit. p. 287), " wahrscheinlich von Eustathius v. Sebaste."

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 79

the author of the ascetic treatises commonly attributed to
Basil of Cappadocia1"; the Rules can be proved to be by
Basil ; the Constitutions are clearly not Basil's work ; there
fore they must be ascribed to Eustathius. But a far more
natural conclusion is that Sozomen refers to the Rules, which
were so widely known in the fifth and following centuries and
so influential, not to the obscure Constitutions2. His other
argument is that Sozomen's description of Eustathius' ascetic
work is an accurate delineation of the Constitutions : " He
became the author of a zealous discipline, both as to what
meats were to be partaken of or to be avoided, what garments
were to be worn and what customs and exact course of
conduct were to be adopted V But the description is couched
in general terms, and bears no more resemblance to the Con
stitutions than to any other ascetic treatise.

1 H.E. in. 14. 2 See Appendix A for a fuller discussion.

3 H.E. m. 14.

CHAPTER VI

ST BASIL'S ASCETIC WRITINGS (CONTINUED)

THE Rules as a whole, in spite of some textual difficulties
and the possibility of editorial revision, may be accepted as
substantially Basil's work — such was the conclusion reached
in the last chapter. The present chapter will be devoted to a
description of their contents, and owing to the wealth of
relevant material will have to be somewhat lengthy. The
data may be arranged under the following heads1.

I. Joining the monastery.

(a) Withdrawal from the world.

(b) Renunciation of possessions.

(c) Admission to the community.

II. Life in the monastery.

(a) The principle of the common life.

(b) Prayer.

(c) Meals.

(d) Clothing.

(e) Work.

III. Order and Discipline.

(a) The officers.

(b) The senior brethren.

(c) Leaving the monastery.

(d) Confession.

1 For practical purposes the two sets of Rules may be taken as one authority.
Nothing is gained by giving them separate treatment. I have been unable to
detect any substantial development in Basil's teaching in the later (shorter) Rules.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 81

IV. Various other points.

(a) Earthly relationships.

(b) Journeys.

(c) Charitable work.

(d) Educational work.

V. Relations with outside world.

(a) The official Church.

(b) Neighbouring monasteries.

(c) Convents of women.

VI. The Biblical foundation.

I. Joining the monastery,
(a) Withdrawal from the world.

God's commandment is the one supremely important thing.
If He calls us, everything else, even love of parents, must be
renounced1. Spiritual retirement is essential, but this will be
found impossible apart from physical retirement, since the
sights and sounds of the world are bound to distract one from
prayer, nor can sufficient leisure be obtained for devotional
duties. Besides, contact with sinners injures the soul ; their
company makes us familiar with a low standard of life and
complacent with our own moderate attainment of virtue2.

(b) Renunciation of possessions.

If we may judge from the attention which Basil gives to
the question of property, it would seem that many of his
disciples were men of good position, so that it was necessary
to give definite instructions as to the disposal of worldly pos
sessions. The postulant must part with his goods on joining
the monastery, for no private property is allowed3. Not that
earthly things are bad in themselves — if they were, they could

1 F. 8.

2 F. 6. The preceding sentences are an abstract of this answer. This is the
case in the references throughout the chapter, except in the places, which should
be clear enough, where comments of the writer are inserted.

3 B. 85.

L. C. 6

82 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

not be God's creation — but they distract the soul from the
service of God1. Goods must be disposed of, therefore, but
with great care. They are consecrated to the Lord and must
not be treated negligently. The ascetic will give them to the
poor himself, if he has the requisite experience ; if not, he will
enlist the services of trustworthy friends2.

Such was the ideal, but it is clear that it was interpreted
in practice with great freedom, for :

(i) Basil's own renunciation was only relative. He
enjoyed the income of at least part of his estate during his
lifetime3.

(ii) The possibility of property being retained is con
templated in the Rules. Relations are bidden to give the
monk his income and deduct nothing, lest they incur the guilt
of sacrilege. The monk is warned not to spend the money
before the eyes of his brethren, for that would be invidious.
But the bishop of the diocese in which the monastery lies, if
he can be trusted, is to be asked to dispense the goods at his
discretion4. It sometimes happened that a monk was able to
contribute to the expenses of the brotherhood. Basil repu
diates with scorn the idea that by doing so he makes himself
entitled to preferential treatment5.

(iii) In Epistle 284 Basil writes to the assessor of taxes,
submitting to him the proposition that men who have "neither
money to spend nor bodily service to render in the interests
of the common weal, should be exempted from taxation. For
if their lives are consistent with their profession, they possess
neither money nor bodies ; for the former is spent in com
municating to the needy...." This shows that the absence of
money was not absolute. The monks had money, but spent
it on the poor ; and there were cases perhaps where they did
not live up to their profession of poverty6.

The business connected with the renunciation of property
sometimes produced family quarrels. It was doubtful who

1 B. 92. 2 F. 9.

3 Ep. 37 ; see p. 45. 4 B. 187; cf. B. 94 ; F. 9.

5 B. 308 (TOVTO o\ov TO ^purrj/ma avdp&invov).

6 The individual monks are in Basil's mind. It would seem an anachronism
to think of the taxation of a monastery as a corporate body at this early period.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 83

was responsible for paying the taxes, and the relations were
hard pressed by the Exchequer officials. Basil sanctions no
evasions. Caesar must have his due. The matter should be
quite simple ; if the monk has retained his property, he must
pay. If he has left it to his relations, clearly it is their duty1.
If such disputes arise, the monk must not resort to secular
tribunals in order to get his rights, nor on the other hand may
he resist, if he is cited to appear in court2. It is within the
province of the Superior to accept voluntary gifts from relations
on behalf of individual monks, though Basil had rather he did
not, for the practice is apt to cause trouble3. Generally speak
ing, Basil deprecates the reception of anyone whose attention
will be occupied by the claims either of relations or the tax-
gatherer ; it is not safe for a man who has once entered the
convent to have the care of external affairs4. We conclude
then that where the family was favourable to the step and took
responsibility for meeting the demands of the State, there was
no reason why an allowance should not be made to a monk.
But Basil wishes to exclude the interference of the outside
world within the walls of the cloister, and forbids any enjoy
ment of property that infringes this principle. In this matter
then he speaks with two voices. There is a great difference
between this result and the position with which we started,
that no private property is permissible. The divergence be
tween the ideal and the real will be a sufficient explanation,
and besides here, as elsewhere, we must remember that we are
dealing with answers to particular problems, rather than
Rules in the proper sense of the word5.

(c) Admission to the community.

As a general rule applicants are to be accepted, but only
after a careful investigation into their character and past life.
Suitable exercises of probation must be imposed, and special
care exercised where the previous life has been bad, or the

1 B. 94. * F. 9. 3 R 304> 305> 4 B. I07.

5 In any case, it was assumed that the monk only retained his property for
charitable purposes. We can imagine cases where a man enjoyed a share of the
family estate which it was impossible to realise on joining a convent.

6—2

84 •S'/ Basil's Ascetic Writings

applicant of high rank1. The whole community is to be cog
nisant of the admission of a new member2. Extra precautions
should be taken if a man applies to be admitted for a limited
period ; he may be genuine, but is perhaps a spy3. At what
age, it is asked, may applicants be admitted ? At any age, if
orphans, or if parents bring them ; though in the latter case
there must be many witnesses of the transaction. But the
profession of virginity is to be delayed till years of discretion.
This will be the opportunity for sending back those who do
not care for the things of the Lord. To strengthen the resolve
of the newly enrolled, and to avoid subsequent reproaches if
they fall away, the church authorities are to be present as
witnesses when the profession is made4. Special regulations
are given for the cases of married people and slaves. If a
married person comes, it must be asked whether consent is
mutual. If so, the person may be received before a number
of witnesses. Even if one party dissents, the maxim " In
peace hath God called us" may perhaps justify separation5.
Slaves who apply must be sent back to their masters, unless
indeed a wicked master has forced his servant to act contrary
to God's law, in which case we must either encourage the
slave to bear the sufferings that will be his lot for obeying

1 F. TO; cf. F. 15. No time limit is prescribed for this noviciate.

2 B. 112.

3 B. 97. The word used for reception (irpocrdtxeffBcu) is the same as in
B. 112. In such a case the thought of permanent vows is excluded, see
Additional Note A.

4 F. 15. In Ep. 199 (Can. xvin.) 16 or 17 is given as the age of discretion.
At the Trullan Council (697) the age was reduced to 10 (Can. 40).

6 F. 12. The ambiguity of the original (i Cor. vii. 15) is reproduced in the
answer. The general drift is strongly in favour of the view that one party could be
received even if the other was unwilling. Basil concludes however by saying that
he has noticed many cases where the unwillingness was overcome by means
of fasting and prayer. Most writers, e.g. Gamier (in loc.) and Ceillier (Histoire
G^n^rale, VI. 180) interpret this to mean that the reception was only provisional
and was annulled if the prayer was unavailing. Such an interpretation is unlikely
for (a) the answer in itself reads differently; (b] the decrees of Gangra, directed
against Eustathius, show that such cases of separation existed and caused great
scandal (Basil owed much of his ascetic teaching to Eustathius) ; (c) in Mor. 73
Basil says married people are not to separate unless one is taken in adultery,
or hindered in godliness', (d) F. n allows the reception of slaves in a similar
case.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 85

God rather than man, or else receive him and endure the
troubles entailed by such a course1.

Very little is said about the discipline to which novices
were subjected. Silence is mentioned as especially suitable
for them, in order that they may, by uttering nothing except
in the Church services, learn the manner of speech proper to
the religious life and forget old bad habits2. They are to
make a point of learning passages of Scripture by heart3.

II. Life in the monastery,
(a) The principle of the common life.

The cenobitic form of monasticism was deliberately adopted
by Basil in preference to the eremitic or quasi-eremitic. He
justifies his choice in language which deserves high praise for
its eloquence and clear insight into the spirit of Scripture.
Man is a social animal, he declares, and we are all dependent
one upon another. Love of our neighbour is implanted
naturally in our hearts. Christ teaches us the identity of our
neighbour with Himself, and the love of Christ and of our
neighbour pass and re-pass into one another4. The cenobite
is better than the anchorite for the following reasons.

(i) We are none of us self-sufficient in the matter of
providing for our bodily needs.

(ii) Solitude is antagonistic to the law of love, since
the solitary is bound to serve his own interests.

(iii) It is harmful to the soul, when we have no one to
rebuke us for our faults.

1 F. ii. It is generally said (e.g. by Nissen, Die Regelung des Klosterwesens,
p. 1 8) that Basil ordered slaves to be sent back to their masters. But though Basil
quotes the case of Onesimus, his main point lies in the concluding sentence. If his
advice was followed it must have caused great friction. The question was dealt
with at Gangra (Can. 3), and the Council of Chalcedon forbade the reception
of a slave into a monastery without the master's leave (Can. 4). Cf. Greg. Naz.
Ep. 79 ; Jer. Ep. 82, 6.

2 F. 13- 3 B. 95.

4 F. 3. rts ovv OVK oWev, OTL y/nepov /cat KOIVUVIKOV faov 6 dvdp&Tros, nai ov^l
/movaffTtKov, ov5£ aypLov ; Cf. Epict. Diss. II. 10, who speaks of man as $ov rj^epov
Kol KowuviKdv. Basil introduces the phrase as a well-known saying. Note his
significant description of man as " not a monastic animal."

86 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

(iv) Certain specific Christian duties, such as feeding
the hungry and clothing the naked, are impossible for the
true solitary.

(v) We are all members one of another and Christ is
our Head. If we separate from our brethren, how can we
keep our relation to Christ intact ?

(vi) We have different spiritual gifts. The solitary
buries his one gift, but in a cenobium each shares in the gifts
of the brethren1.

(vii) Most important of all, the solitary is in danger of
self-pleasing, and thinking he has already attained perfection.
In the nature of things he cannot practise humility, pity or
long-suffering2.

The cenobitic being the perfect form, it is also the final
form. There is no place for any return to the eremitic life.
If a man wishes to secede from the community and lead a
solitary, or even a quasi-solitary, life with a few others, Scrip
ture justifies the brethren in excluding him from their number.
Every such act of self-pleasing is alien to the true spirit of
piety3.

(b) Prayer4".

In the religious life there is a time for work and also for
prayer. It is true every time is suitable for prayer, yet a man
must not be allowed to shirk labour under the pretext of
devotion5. The morning, on waking from sleep6, is to be the
first hour of prayer, in order that the first movements of the
soul may be consecrated to God. At the third hour the
brethren, who will have dispersed to their various tasks, are
summoned together; they recall the gift of the Holy Spirit at
this hour and pray for His help. If any are too far away to

1 It is important to notice Basil's conception of his monasteries as possessing
charismatic gifts.

2 F. 7. Basil does not see that his arguments prove too much, and can
applied equally well to a Christian life in the world.

3 B. 74. There is another possible interpretation, see Additional Note B.

4 See Morison, St Basil and his Rule, pp. 58 — 71.

F. 37-

One monk was set apart for the task of waking the others, see B. 43, 44.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 87

come, they must say their offices wherever they find themselves.
Mid-day is the next time according to the tradition of the
saints1. Psalm xc. (xci.) will be recited, as a protection against
the special temptations of the noonday. Next comes the ninth
hour, the apostles' time of prayer2. At the close of day we
thank God for the blessings of the day and seek pardon for
sins committed. As night comes on we ask God for a rest
" without offence and free from phantasies," and repeat Psalm
xc. (xci.) once more3. The example of Paul and Silas and the
words of the Psalm4 teach us that midnight is a necessary
time of prayer. Again, in accordance with the same psalm5,
we rise before dawn to pray. None of these times may be
neglected ; the ever-varying course of psalmody and prayer
helps to destroy evil desires and keep the attention alert6.

Such is the daily scheme of prayer. The interesting
feature in it is the presence of two night offices, midnight and
early morning. The latter is clearly not to be identified with
the first of the series, for one comes before, the other after the
final sleep. Basil then prescribes eight canonical hours. This
conclusion is borne out by what we read elsewhere of his
broken sleep7, and also by the way in which he avoids quoting
the obvious verse " Seven times a day do I praise Thee8." In
keeping with this spirit of prayer the utmost gravity of
demeanour must be preserved. Quiet smiles are permitted,
but no laughter, for Christ is never recorded as having
laughed9.

Frequent communion was no doubt the rule. Basil's own
practice was four times a week, and oftener if a saint's day

1 Ps. liv. (lv.) 17. 2 Acts iii. i.

3 In the Compline of the Western Church the same psalm is used. Cf. the
thought of the office hymn, Procul recedant somnia et noctium phantasmata,
hostemque nostrum comprime, ne polluantur corpora.

4 cxviii. (cxix.) 62. 5 cxviii. (cxix.) 148.

6 F. 37-

7 Epp. 2, 207 ; Greg. Naz. Or. 43, 61 ; Greg. Nyss. In laud. Bas.

8 It is actually quoted in Serm. Asc. 322 A, where however only six offices are
given. In order to make up the requisite number of seven, Sext is divided into
two halves, before and after the mid -day meal. The authenticity of this tract is
doubtful, see p. 77.

9 F. 17; B. 31.

88 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

occurred1; while the usual Egyptian custom was to partake
on Saturday and Sunday. Besides the references to priests in
the monastery2, which presuppose the exercise of priestly
functions, there are a few passages which show that regular
communion was the practice. Instructions are given how to
prepare the soul for reception3. The Lord's supper is not to
be celebrated except in a church, unless under very excep
tional circumstances4. As a general rule therefore each
monastery had its own church5.

(c) Meals.

Basil's aim was to avoid any extremes of asceticism. On
his first retirement to Pontus he had practised great austerities,
and the Rules show a distinct reaction from his original
standpoint. In the same way did Benedict, after spending
three years as a young man in the severest self-mortification,
prescribe for his followers a studiously moderate rule of life.
One passage would lead us to suppose that the mid-day meal
(TO apiarov) was the only one during the day, since the penalty
for being late without good cause is to go hungry till next
day6. But elsewhere supper (TO Seljrvov) is mentioned by the
side of the other meal7. Probably, as in the Benedictine Rule8,
the evening meal was of such modest dimensions that it in no
way made up for the loss of the mid-day meal. There is to
be a fixed order at meal times and one is to be responsible for
the seating9. A book is to be read, and the brethren are to
think more of what they hear than of what they eat10. Food

1 See Ep. 93, where he approves of daily communion. The custom of the
solitaries, he says, was to take the sacrament into the desert with them and partake
of it when they so desired.

2 B. 64, 231, 265. 3 B. 172.

4 B. 310; cf. B. 309, and perhaps B. 122, where however "the blessing" of
which the monk is deprived for a penance is probably not the Eucharist. See
Lucot's note on Hist. Laus. xxv. 3, " benedictionem, liberalite, aumone ; Onom.
p. 443, eulogia : cibaria benedictionis gratia transmissa, signum communionis et
charitatis. "

5 This applies also to the convents of women; certainly Macrina's convent had
a church, see p. 50.

6 B. 136. In Serin. Asc. (322 A) the meal is fixed definitely at the sixth hour.

7 F. 21. 8 C. 39. 9 F. 21. 10 B. 180.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 89

must be simple, cheap and easily prepared, such as is in com
mon use in the district. Thus bread and fish are appropriate,
since with these our Lord fed the multitude. Nothing beyond
water is to be drunk, unless it be a little wine for health's sake1.
The monks must not be dainty or greedy, but must eat what
is set before them3. If a monk wants more food, or food of
better quality, owing to hard work, a journey or sickness, the
authorities at their discretion may give it him3; he must not
ask for it himself on the ground of fatigue4.

We find here a general standard of moderate asceticism
prescribed for all the monks. Basil sets his face against indi
vidual austerities and condemns anything that makes a monk
unable to eat the ordinary food5. Self-imposed fasts are
forbidden. To fast or watch more than the rest is self-will
and vain-glory. No extra austerities may be attempted
unless good reasons for doing so have been given to the
authorities and their sanction obtained6.

(d) Clothing.

As soldiers and senators wear a uniform, so it is fitting
that monks should dress alike. Useful garments are to be
worn that will serve for night as well as day. A separate night
garment is not as a rule allowed, though hair-cloth may be
worn for purposes of mortification7. Biblical examples point
to the necessity of a girdle8. Shoes are to be chosen for their
plainness, cheapness arid serviceableness9. It is sinful to treat
either clothes or shoes in such a way that they wear out pre
maturely10. All articles of apparel are obtained from the
authorities of the monastery and must be accepted with
humility. If they are too coarse or too old, the monk will
reflect that they are more than he deserves. But if they do
not fit, he may modestly point out the defect11.

I F. 19. ^ Kl8; R 7I> I3I_I34.

a F. 19. ^ B. 135. -5 B. 129. 6 B. 137, 138.

7 F. 22; B. 90. 8 F. 23. 9 F. 22. 10 B. 70.

II B. 1 68.

9O St Basil's Ascetic Writings

(e) Work.

Basil's regulations on this subject are characteristic and
interesting. Work, he says, is ordered by Scripture. It keeps
the body under control and provides necessaries for the weaker
brethren. The life of the monastery is to be regarded as one
continual round of work, not only with the hands, but also
with the heart and tongue in the daily offices1. The spirit in
which work is performed is most important. The monk must
bear in mind that he is working to satisfy, not his own needs,
but those of others2. Thus, in advocating the claims of work,
Basil is careful not to weaken the true ascetic spirit. For
himself the monk has no anxiety as to food or clothing, but
trusts in God. So necessary is a right intention that the
products of a man's labour are to be rejected, if his work is
done in a rebellious or murmuring spirit3. When a novice
joins the community, the Superior is to decide his work and
what trade, if any, he is to learn4. A monk cannot decide
such matters for himself, but falls in with whatever the
authorities judge best for him5. He is to do just what he is
told and not shirk heavy tasks6. Nor may he do more of his
proper work than is commanded ; this is self-will, and the
man may be punished by having his work taken from him7.
Tools must be kept carefully and regarded as dedicated to
God8. The work is done for the most part in workshops
under the direction of a foreman ; strangers are rigidly ex
cluded, and even members of the community whose work lies
elsewhere9.

Basil is asked to define the trades that are fitting for a
convent. He declares that the answer will depend to a large
extent on local circumstances, but as a general rule the trades
should be such as suit a quiet life, have a ready market for
their wares, do not require meetings of men and women, and
minister to necessity rather than luxury or vice. Weaving,
shoemaking, building, carpentering and metal-working satisfy

i F. 37. 2 p. 42< 3 F. 29.

4 B. 105. 6 F. 41 ; B. 117, 119. 6 B. 121.

7 B. 125. 8 F. 41 ; B. 143, 144. 9 B. 141.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 91

these requirements, but the best of all is agriculture, since it
ties down the labourers to one place1. In the case of agri
culture it was no doubt easy to dispose of the produce in
supplying the needs of the community or in gifts to the poor2.
But in the case of the workshop it was often necessary to
seek a market for the wares. Basil directs that goods are to
be sold near at hand, whenever possible, even though this
entails accepting a low price3. For journeys are contrary to
the spirit of monastic life and ought to be avoided. If however
a journey becomes inevitable, carefully chosen men are to be
sent, who will keep one another up to the mark and observe
the hours of prayer on their travels4. But in choosing markets
care must be taken to avoid the fairs which take place at
" synods." Such meetings ought to be for prayer and praise
only. The cleansing of the temple by our Lord teaches the
wrongfulness of the commercial element on such occasions5.

The more educated among the monks may be set apart
for intellectual work, especially the study of the Scriptures.
They form a privileged class among the brethren, and it is their
duty to know as much as possible. The Superior decides who
is to take up this line of work6.

1 F. 38. 2 Or in supplying the neighbouring convent of women, see p. 105.

3 F. 39. Cf. Reg. Ben. c. 57, which orders that goods are to be sold at a
lower price than that demanded by secular workmen — a well-meant principle
which has led to much trade jealousy in later times.

4 F. 39-

5 F. 40. Cf. Epp. 169 — 1 7 1 , which describe the conduct of Glycerins the deacon
(and monk), who led a band of young women in procession to the feast at Venasa.
Ramsay, Church in Roman Empire (sth ed.), pp. 443 ff., has a most interesting
chapter on this episode. He shows that in pagan times there was a great synodos
of Zeus at Venasa, the priest of which shrine was second in importance in all
Cappadocia only to the priest of Komana. He does not mention the description
of the synodos in F. 40, where Basil tells us that it was a religious meeting at a
Martyr's shrine, to which a commercial element was attached, a feature to which
he objected strongly. This tells in favour of Ramsay's position. The synodos
then was an old pagan festival to which a fair was attached. When the country
became Christian, the Catholic custom of celebrations at martyrs' tombs was
grafted on to the old observance. The commercial element persisted ; Basil tried
to break it down, but vested interests were too strong for him. Venasa is still a
great sanctuary, where the Moslems venerate the founder of the Dervish order
(Enc. Brit. art. "Cappadocia").

6 B. 96, 105, 235, 236. Basil and Gregory compiled the Philocalia in their
Pontic retreat, see p. 55.

92 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

III. Order and Discipline,
(a) The officers.

Basil applies the illustration of the body to his communities.
Each member has his place, and it causes trouble and con
fusion if any one neglects his own work or usurps the function
of another1. A number of officers are needed for the govern
ment of the monastery.

(i) The Superior*.

As in all religious communities the Superior's position is
one of great importance. There are checks on his power, as
we shall presently see, but on the whole it is greater than at a
subsequent period. For in later times the Rule itself becomes
supreme ; it represents the voice of the founder or reorganiser
and the Superior is as much bound by it as the humblest of
the brethren. But before the Rule is fixed, much must be
left to the discretion of the Superior. So here we find that
Basil frequently lays down general principles rather than
exact rules, and in several instances leaves the question open
for the Superior to decide in accordance with local needs3.

A new Superior is to be elected to his office by the heads
of the neighbouring monasteries4, and after a time of probation
accepted by the brethren5. He ought to rule by example
rather than word, to be merciful, and to lead men on to imitate

1 F. 24.

2 The Superior is designated in several different ways. I have counted the
following occurrences of the various titles. In F. 6 Tr/joecrrcis 30 times, and
6 <:0e<rra>s, 6 7rpo/ca0e0"ru>s, 6 irpotytav, 6 irpoia-rdfjievos occasionally. Phrases such
as 6 £TriT€Tayfj,£vos (TTJ d§eX06r?7Ti) and 6 TTJV KOIVTJV <f>povTL8a TreTrtcrreu/tei'os also
occur. In Y. 43 the office is called ^ irpo(TTa<ria. In B. 6 7rpoe<rTt6s occurs 17
times, 6 TrpeafivTepos 5 times (with the corresponding titles for the head of a
sisterhood r? irpowT&ffa. 2, ^ irpefffivrtpa 4 times), while various periphrases are
also used. 6 ^oiVevos, the usual word in later Greek monasticism, does not
occur. It is frequent in Const. Mon. See Besse, Les Moines d"1 Orient, pp. 167, 168,
for other titles.

3 E.g. F. 32; B. 105, 1 06.

4 F. 43, eyKpiQtvra r&v tv rats aXXais dd€\<f>6Tij<n TrpofX^VTa}V-

5 F. 43, ovTOi...$OKip,atf<rduffav irpurov, eTra SiaKOvelrcaa-av cWy/cXTjroi o
Cf. B. 303, /j.€Ta TroXX^s 5oKifj.a<rias.

S/ Basil's Ascetic Writings 93

Christ1. He must watch for the souls of his brethren, remem
bering that he will be called to account for any negligence2.
Special watchfulness is needed when he suspects a brother of
sin3. It is his place to define the punishments to be laid on
erring monks4, and to assign work to the brethren, setting
some to manual labour, others to literary tasks5. The monk
has made a solemn promise to obey the Superior, and he
ought to interpret it literally, even though obedience should
entail death6. It is obvious that such powers might lead to
grave abuses in the hands of an unscrupulous or wrong-
headed Superior. Provision is therefore made for certain
checks on his power. The senior brethren, those who are
first in age and understanding, are to admonish him if he
goes astray7. Not only so, but even the rank and file of the
monks must not obey him if his orders are contrary to God's
commandments ; they must " prove all things8." This is a
remarkable instance of individualism in the Rules and a clear
proof of their early date. No provision is made for the dead
lock that would occur if the Superior refused to accept the
admonition of the elder brethren, or for a state of affairs in
which the monks were disobeying their Superior's commands.
In practice such problems would hardly have arisen in Basil's
life-time, for, at any rate during his episcopate, he would soon
have settled with an unsatisfactory abbot.

(ii) The second in command.

Next to the Superior comes an officer who holds the
second place. His task is to take charge during the absence
of the Superior, lest " a democratic state of things " should
arise, and, in particular, to represent him whenever necessary
in the reception of guests9.

i F. 43. 2 F. 25. s B. I9.

4 B. 106. 5 B. 96, 105. 6 F. 28; B. 303. .

? F. 27, Tols 7rpo^%oi><ri TT\V re r/XtKiav /cat rr)V fftiveaw.

8 B. 114, 303.

9 F. 45 ; cf. Hist. Laus. xxxii. 8 for the "second in command" at Tabennisi.

94 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

(iii) Other officials.

The steward has charge of the commissariat, and must
take special care to treat all alike and have no favourites1.
Similarly the cellarer must divide to each according to his
need2. If a man discharges his duty well in any office, he is
not to be superseded, but he must always have someone in
training to carry on his work if he is suddenly removed3.
Reference is also made to the overseer of the workrooms4.

The whole community takes part on occasion in the work
of government; thus the whole body of the brethren has a
right to be consulted about the reception or expulsion of a
member and in certain matters of dispute6. But even where
the brotherhood as a whole is mentioned as the final authority,
it is suggested as an alternative that the matter should be left
in the hands of the Superior6.

(b) The senior brethren.

More important and interesting than this assembly of the
whole community is a council of senior brethren. The rank
and file of the brethren are told to attend to their work and
not scrutinise the behaviour of the Superior. But this does
not apply to the seniors, with whom the Superior is to take
counsel7. They form a kind of governing body, charged with
specific duties, for it is their place, being " first among the
brethren in age and intelligence," to admonish the Superior if
he does wrong8. Again, if a monk has a genuine grievance
in connection with his tasks, he is encouraged to appeal to the
seniors (rot? TrpoecrTwcrt). The usual meaning of the word is
the head of the monastery, but as in this case the appellant
monk is in the singular and those to whom he appeals in the
plural, it is natural to conclude that a class of seniors or

1 F. 34; B. 149, 150. 2 B. 148. 3 B. 156.

4 B. 141, 142. 5 F. 14, 49; B. 112; cf. 104.

e F. 49. The difference between the two methods seems great, and shows how
far removed this is from a set of formal Rules.

7 F. 48, {KTOS TUIV tyyvrtpuv TOV Trpoeo-rwros, KCU /3a0/x£ Kal <rvvt<rei. Cf.
B. 104 — the Superior must do everything /uera (3ov\i)s.

8 F. 27.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 95

superiors within the monastery is in view1. The inferiors are
bidden to confess their sins either to the Superior, or else to
those who are charged with the pastoral care of weak souls2.
The monks in question are not necessarily priests, but the
possessors of the requisite charismatic gifts3. It is tempting
to identify them with the "seniors," for these, though generally
the oldest, were not universally so4. There is further evidence
of the existence of a higher and lower grade within the
monastic life. The question is raised whether it is expedient
to learn much Scripture by heart. Basil replies that there are
two classes (rdy^ara) in the monastery — teachers and taught.
The first, who have supremacy (irpoo-Taa-la5) over their bre
thren and the care of their souls, should know as much as
possible ; the others, who possess different gifts, must learn
to obey and do their own duty, faithful performance of
which will fit them for a call to higher work6. It is quite
clear that this refers to two grades among the monks, not to
a distinction between novices and monks. Had social dis
tinctions anything to do with this difference of grades in
Basil's monasteries ? Men of education and good family, such
as Basil, would find in the study of Scripture and other books7
a work suited to their capacities. But the monastery might
contain all sorts, even slaves8. A slave woman could even
accompany her mistress to the ascetic life and continue her
service9. The manual labour would naturally fall to the lot
of such recruits It was possible to rise from one grade to the
other10, but the higher grade may well have consisted in
practice mainly of the upper class11.

1 B. 119, et 5^ Tiva \6yov ^x€lv vonlfci TTJS Tra/xuTtycrews rov Zpyov,

TOVTOV rots TrpotffrCjffi, /cat KaraXifMirav^Td) rrj ^Ketvuv doKL/Jiafflq.. Another interpre
tation, of an appeal to a council of abbots of different monasteries, is improbable.

2 F. 26, rots TreTri<rTevfj,frois...€V(r7r\dyxi'us Kai av/juradus ^7ri/te\et<r#cu r&v

3 Seep. 97. 4 F. 27; B. 169.

5 The same word is used in F. 43 of the position of the Superior.

6 B. 235. 7 B. 96, 235. 8 F. n.

9 Greg. Nyss. Vit. Macr. (P. G. XLVI. 968). Cf. the relations of Naucratius
and Chrysapius (see p. 22).

10 B. 235.

11 I am aware that the above account raises more difficulties than it solves.
The distinction between elders and juniors in a monastery was general and natural

96 S/ Basil's Ascetic Writings

(c) Leaving the monastery.

The monk has promised to obey, and his obedience must
be absolute. If he persists in disobedience, in the last resort
he must be expelled, the whole community sharing the
responsibility of this1. The profession is permanent, having
been made with all solemnity before God. To break it is to
sin against God and commit sacrilege. To such a renegade
the doors are not to be opened, not even if he is passing that
way and begs shelter2. There are circumstances however
under which a monk may leave the community without
apostasy. If he has genuine grievances for which he cannot
get redress, then he may leave the brotherhood, for they are
no longer brothers, but strangers, whom he is leaving3.

(d) Confession.

For maintaining the discipline of the community Basil
relies chiefly on the practice of frequent confession. The
Rules are preoccupied with problems of sin and penitence to
an extent quite unusual in Eastern Christendom ; here as in
some other respects Basil's ideas are rather such as are
generally associated witrTthe West. All sins, so he declares,
must be disclosed to the Superior or senior brethren4. Mention

(see Cass. Coll. xvm. 3). But this seems to go far beyond the ordinary practice.
The difficulty is that, after giving such great authority to the Superior, Basil pro
ceeds to coordinate the powers of the senior brethren with his. The Superior and
seniors are designated by the same titles, as is also their office (6 TrpoecTrws,
6 7r/3e0-/3irre/>os, 77 TrpoffTaaia). And yet Basil is afraid of any "democratic"
developments (p. 93). The clue probably lies in conditions surrounding the early
Cappadocian monastic movement of which we are ignorant (p. 46). The resem
blance to the later distinction between the Great and Little Habit is only
superficial. (See p. 135 for proof; the abbot belonged to the Little Habit.) A
truer analogy may be found in the college of elders that made its appearance in the
fourteenth century in the idiorrhythmic monasteries of Mount Athos (see Meyer,
Die Haupturkrinden, p. 2).

1 F. 28. 2 F. 14. 3 F. 36 ; cf. B. 102.

4 F. 26, 46. In 26 the heading has ry Trpoecrrum, but the answer speaks of
each of the subordinate monks (%Ka<rTov TUV vTroTfra.yfji.ti'&v — note the singular)
making confession to a class of brethren charged with this duty (TOIJ

K.T.X.).

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 97

is made of the confession of children1, and also on the part of
those who have returned to the convent after a journey2.

To whom are sins to be confessed ? There were priests
in the monastery, who celebrated the Eucharist, but a careful
reading of the Rules and a glance at the later history of Greek
monachism lead us to the conclusion that the duty of hearing
confessions was not assigned to the monk-priests as such.
Basil says that, just as confession was made to John the
Baptist and to the apostles, so now we confess to those " who
are entrusted with the stewardship of God's mysteries3." The
mention of the " mysteries4" might seem to point to the
priesthood, but the form of the question (" Ought one to make
confession to any and everyone, or to whom5?") implies that
no such restriction was in common use, while the reference to
John the Baptist, the typical ascetic, implies that the thought
here, as in other answers, is of spiritual fitness rather than
official rank. So Basil orders confession to be made to those
who have the care of weak souls6, that is, probably, the senior
brethren or at least some of them. The nuns have to confess
to the Superior (or senior Brother) but the Mother-Superior
(or senior sister) must be present7. Basil insists on the analogy
of the physician. We do not reveal diseases to anyone, but
only to those who are skilled in healing disease. Similarly
we confess our sins to those who know how to heal, the strong
who can bear the infirmities of the weak8, that is, to the mem
bers of that charismatic ministry which was so striking a
feature of Greek monasticism9.

2 F. 44; cf. Serm. Asc. 323 c, D, where confession is ordered to be made every
night if necessary.

3 B. 288 ; cf. 229.

4 " Stewardship of the mysteries " is a natural quotation from i Cor. iv. t, and
need not be pressed.

5 el TTcunj' ^OyUoAcryetcr^ai 60etAet Kai rots TV^ovaiv 77 rlaiv ;

6 F. 26; see p. 95.

7 B. no. (As 6 7r/>e<r/3irre/>os, ^ Trpeo-fivrtpa are the words used, the transla
tion "priest" for 7rpe<r/3yrepos seems to be excluded.)

8 B. 229.

9 On the whole subject see Holl, Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt beim griechi-
schen Monchtum. On p. 262 he points to a passage in the Life of Pachomius about
confession of sin, but shows that there was no formal rule on the subject. The

L. C. 7

98 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

IV. Various other points.

There are a number of points which do not come under
any of the heads treated so far and may be introduced at this
place.

(a) Earthly relationships.

The Superior must not as a rule allow the monks to visit
their relations, for such visits are fraught with danger to the
soul. Sometimes a monk's desire to visit his kinsfolk is
prompted by anxiety to help them in their affairs, but he
must not be allowed to implicate himself in worldly business.
Whether a monk may see his relations when they visit the
convent depends on circumstances. If they are engaged in
profane life they have nothing in common with us ; but if
pious, they should be considered kinsmen of the whole

introduction of the duty of confession by Basil was a change of epoch-making
importance, and was prompted by the same motives that led him to put the
cenobitic life in the place of the eremitic. See also pp. 267, 268; confession
is based on the conviction that man (i) sins constantly, at least in thought;
(2) needs the help of others. The ideas are radically different from those of the
official Church, and go back to Origen. He concludes that here at least the feeling
is to be found that official acts are not enough to quiet the conscience, and that
personal authority is needed, really to get into touch with the needs of another.
The whole of Roll's fine book should be read by those who are interested.
He traces the history down to Simeon the New Theologian in the eleventh
century, who composed a treatise on the lawfulness of confession to non-ordained
monks. The monks as "friends of God" were regarded as the successors of
the prophets and martyrs. Of course not all the monks were resorted to by the
Christian public for this purpose, but only such as showed by their lives that they
possessed the requisite power. Simeon's opponents would have said that the
power rested with the monastic priesthood.

Roman Catholic scholars have been puzzled by this phenomenon. Some
have denied its existence. Marin however acknowledges it in a somewhat mis
leading way. " Parfois. il est vrai, il arriva que les abbes non revetus du sacerdoce
confesserent leurs religieux ; des abbesses meme usurperent ce pouvoir ; mais leur
conduite fut souvent blamee par les conciles " (Les Moines de Constantinople,
p. 96).

Morison (op. cit. pp. 74 — 76) opposes Holl's view. He acknowledges the
existence of confession to laymen in Clement of Alexandria and in later Greek
monasticism, but denies it in Basil; "the monks would be most unwilling to
incur a reputation for irregularity in their administration of the sacrament of
penance."

For confession in primitive Anatolian religion see Ramsay, Hastings' D.B. v.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 99

community and received, if they come for spiritual edification,
brethren with the gift of utterance being deputed to interview
them1. Sometimes visitors will invite us to return home with
them ; if this is likely to result in the building up of their
faith, it may perhaps be allowed2. To receive the visitors,
who need not necessarily be kinsfolk, one of the brethren is
set apart as guest-master. If another monk is addressed, he
will remain silent and point to the guest-master. It is no
more fitting for anyone to apply the healing words than for
anyone to be a doctor3. The presence of guests is not to
cause any interruption of the common routine4, nor is any
special food to be provided on such occasions5. It seems
clear that the monasteries were generally recognised as homes
of devotion in which spiritual gifts abounded ; the visitors
came primarily for spiritual edification6.

(b) Journeys.

As we have just seen, journeys are considered contrary to
the spirit of monastic life. Special leave from the Superior is
necessary before undertaking them, and they are not to be
permitted merely for friendship's sake7. But sometimes a
journey becomes unavoidable, in order to supply the neces
sities of the convent or to sell the products of the workshop.
It is most important to find monks who can travel without
peril to their souls — better starvation than that. If no suitable
men can be found in the monastery, perhaps some brethren
from a neighbouring convent may be deputed. On their
return the monks must give an account of what they have
done, and the Superior award praise or blame. To be obliged
thus to describe all that occurs on the journey will prove a
safeguard to the travellers8.

(c) Charitable work.

We have already seen that almsgiving is expected both at
the outset of the monastic life, and, in some cases, afterwards9.

1 F. 32; cf. B. 1 88. 2 B. 189.

3 F. 45- 4 B. 189. 5 F. 45.

6 Cf. Mor. 38. Hex. vm. 5 for Basil's insistence on hospitality.

7 F. 44; B. 189, 311. 8 F. 44; cf. 39, 40. 9 See pp. 81—83.

7—2

TOO St Basil's Ascetic Writings

But the duty belongs to the whole brotherhood, not to the
individual monk, who may not even give away his old clothes
or shoes. It is not his duty to give at all, a special officer is
appointed for the task1. This officer is described in general
terms2, but in one place he is apparently identified with the
steward and bidden to take counsel with the seniors who
come next to him in rank8. The almoner is to decide who
are to be the recipients of the bounty of the community, but
Basil lays down the guiding principle that what is destined
for one set of recipients must not be diverted to another. The
charity of the monastery is intended for those who are dedi
cated to God, but still, just as dogs eat of the crumbs that fall
from the table, so there may be something left over for casual
beggars4.

There are surprisingly few allusions to the charitable
institutions which, so we learn from other sources5, were con
nected with Basil's monasteries. What is to be done, ask
Basil's interlocutors, if a brother falls ill ? Is he to be taken
to the hospital (fei>oSo%e£oi/), or, the alternative presumably is,
nursed in the convent ? The reply is that it must depend on
local circumstances6. An interesting side-light is thrown on
the working of these institutions by another question. When
we wait upon the sick in the hospital, we are commanded to
treat them as if they were the Lord's brethren. But, if their
moral character makes the designation plainly inappropriate,
what sentiments should we cherish towards them ? Basil
answers that the Superior must exhort and admonish the
sinner, but, if his efforts are fruitless, in the last resort the man
must be expelled7. So the hospital was not like a modern
philanthropic institution, but was intended primarily to
strengthen the influence and power of the Church, and
therefore spiritual discipline had at all costs to be preserved.

1 B. 87, 91. 2 B. 87, 91, 100, lor.

a B. 302, fv rrj roD ollCOf6/M)V avaKeiffdu 5oKi/u.ao'tq. /j.era KOWIJS r&v fjier O.VTOV

4 B. 101, 302. The reference seems to be to a class of pious poor who expected
the charitable ministrations of the convent.

6 See pp. 60—62. 6 B. 286. 7 B. 155.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings 101

(d) Educational work.

Boys (and girls1) are received into the monastery to be
brought up in a godly manner. If orphans, they are to be
regarded as the children of the whole community ; if brought
by parents, they may be accepted, but great care must be
exercised. (In the case of girls especially there was a ten
dency on the part of parents or guardians to bring them in
order to get them off their hands2.) The education is to be
different from that received in secular schools. A merely
secular school is neither pleasing to God nor consonant with
our profession3. The school is to be separate from the monk's
apartments for the sake of both parties. The boys will not
respect their elders if they see too much of them, and especially
if they see them undergoing punishment. Also it is better
for the monks, lest they should be troubled by hearing the
sound of the boys' education. The boys are to have separate
treatment in the matter of sleep and meals, but may join in
the common prayers. Their master is to be a man of some
age with a reputation for leniency. Punishments must be
carefully chosen to fit the crime. The Scriptures are to be
the main subject of instruction, so that they may learn about
noble deeds rather than myths. Rewards are to be given to
encourage the children. They are to be frequently questioned
as to their thoughts ; their simple minds will tell the truth,
and they will avoid thinking of foolish things, lest they be

1 The same directions apply, mutatis mutandis, to girls. In F. 15 we read
that the apartments of the boys and girls are to be separate from those of the
monks and, presumably, from one another (d0w/>iV0cu 82 Kal of/cous KO.L diairav
rots re ap<recri TU>I> iraiduv, /cat rats ^Xet'atj, K.r.X.). Butler, Camb. Med, Hist. I.
528, says: "orphanages were established, separate from the monasteries but
close at hand and under the care of the monks, in wrhich apparently children
of both sexes were received." Nissen, Die Regelung des Klosterwesens, p. 16,
writes, " Hier werden mehrere Gebaude vorausgesetzt, da die ins Kloster auf-
genommenen Kinder, nach den Geschlechtern geschieden, von denen der
Altesten getrennte Hauser bewohnen sollen." Cf. Miss Bateson, Transactions
of the Royal Hist. Sac., Vol. in. (1899). None of these writers mention the
nuns in this connexion. It is surely inconceivable that men looked after girls.
The girls must have been attached to the female side of the double monastery.

2 Ep. 199, Can. xvni.

3 B. 292, didaa'KaKe'iQV (v.l. 5i8d(rxa.\ov) Traidiuv ^IUTLKUV (cf. I Cor. vi. 4).

IO2 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

detected in their folly1. Cases of discipline that the master
cannot deal with himself must be referred to the Superior2.
While the boys thus share in much of the convent life, they
are not to make a profession until they reach the age of
discretion. This will be an opportunity to send back those
who do not care for the things of the Lord3.

V. Relations with outside world.

Our survey of the internal arrangements of the monastery
as revealed in the Rules is now complete. It only remains
to see how the individual monasteries were related to (a) the
official Church, (b) neighbouring monasteries, (c) convents of
women.

(a) The official Church.

There is very scanty evidence on this point. The references
to Communion imply the presence of priests in the monastery4.
In one place it is asked what must be done " if a brother, or
even sometimes a priest, behaves badly towards me and
shows himself hostile5,'' from which it may be gathered that
the monks were usually laymen. The authority of the bishop
is recognised when Basil ordains that the profession is to be
made in the presence of the Church authorities6, and advises
putting the disposal of the monk's property in the hands of
the bishop, if he is a fit person7.

1 F. 15. 2 rbv £(f>opov rrjs KOLVTJS drroj-lcu, F. 53.

3 P\ 15. Were these schools meant to give a general education or to train
boys as embryo monks? The latter must have been the chief aim, if we may judge
from Basil's answer. Where he deals with general education, as in the famous
Horn. 22 (On the study of pagan literature, cf. also Horn. 12), he gives very
different advice. But many must have returned to the world after their training
was finished, and so indirectly the monasteries furthered the general cause of
education.

4 See p. 88.

5 B. 231. Cf. De Ren. Saec. 10 (211 B) ; and Ep. 188, Can. x. , which shows
the aversion to ordination in certain circles.

6 F. 15, rot's 7r/>oe<rrcDras rdv eKK\T)triwv.

7 B. 187, 6 TTJJ/ tfrpovrida TUV Kara rbirov eKK\i]<T(.u>i> ireiriffTevfu.ti'os. The
word "bishop" is avoided; perhaps the uncertainty of Church affairs made Basil
chary of using it.

St Basil's Ascetic Writings

(U) Neighbouring monasteries.

The different communities form a kind of loose federation.
There is no question of an " order " in the later sense, but the
requirements that the Superiors should hold conferences with
fixed times and places of meeting1, and that a new Superior
should be nominated by the heads of "the other brother
hoods2,'' show that the monastery was not quite an indepen
dent unit. Basil deprecates the continued existence of small
communities3, and will not allow more than one in a single
parish (KCO/JLTJ). Special qualities are needed in a Superior, and
there are not likely to be two or three men with the requisite
gifts in one and the same place. Besides, there is the danger
of rivalry between the neighbours. If then there are monas
teries side by side, let them be amalgamated. It will prove
cheaper, for one lamp and one fire will suffice. With larger
numbers the monastery becomes self-contained and there is
less going out. It is a splendid opportunity for the Superiors
of the suppressed convents to set an example of humility.
Not only in one place, but even in larger areas, Basil would
like to see the monasteries thus amalgamated4. The relations
of the communities were not apparently all that could be
desired. Basil declares it to be an intolerable state of things
when one convent is poor and its prosperous neighbour does
not come to its help; if one community is in distress, it should
have no hesitation in applying to the others5. It is very
doubtful whether buying or selling among brethren ought to
be allowed, but, if it is done, generous terms must be given,
and the buyer should be even more careful than the seller that
the price is not too low6.

1 F. 54- 2 F. 43-

3 It is sometimes said that Basil instituted a system of small monasteries.
This is only true if his cenobia are compared with some of the great Egyptian
monasteries.

4 F. 35. The quondam Superiors hold a place of some authority by the side
of the Superior of the one monastery. Does not this help to explain the unique
position of the senior brethren? See pp. 94, 95.

5 B. 284. 6 B. 285.

IO4 St Basil's Ascetic Writings

(c) Convents of women.

It is natural to trace the system of double monasteries
found in the Rules to the special circumstances of Basil's early
ascetic life, and to suppose that the arrangement by which
Basil and Macrina directed men and women ascetics on
opposite banks of the Iris formed a pattern for later develop
ments. But the system may have arisen quite independently ;
it suited the needs of married people who renounced the world
together, and provided protection for the women in a rough age.

In any case we have here a regular system of double
monasteries, linked by economic as well as spiritual ties.
Some of the rules deal with points of discipline arising in the
sisterhoods1, and elsewhere Basil shows that he has the
needs of the women in mind2. He is apparently addressing
an audience that consists of Superiors, and perhaps senior
brethren, but not of inferior brethren, who had no part in the
government of the monasteries3. Occasionally an awkward
problem arises with reference to sisters, from which we gather
that the Superiors were to some extent responsible for their
discipline and government. The answers make this certain.
The Superior must not speak to a sister unless the Mother-
Superior is present4, and even to her he speaks as little as
possible5. Nor may a sister confess to a Superior (or senior
brother) unless the Mother-Superior (or senior sister) is
present. Penances must not be imposed without her know
ledge6. They must be varied according to the age of the
offender, for young women and old have different tempta
tions7. Specific problems are raised with reference to the
sister who refuses to sing8, and the stewardess who has charge
of the wool9. The necessary conversations between the two

1 E.g., B. 82, in, 153, 281. 2 B. 104, and the reference to girls in F. 15.

3 See pp. 72, 73, for the circumstances under which the Shorter Rules were
delivered.

4 B. 108. 5 B. 109.

6 B. no, in. In 108, 109 the words 6 7r/>oe<rrws, 77 7r/>oe<rTw<ra are used. In
no, in they change to 6 7rpe<r/3irre/>os, ^ 7rpe<r/3t;T^/)a. The general supervision of
the sisterhood rests with the Superior, but the power of hearing confessions with
any of the senior brethren. I think however that ^ irpefffivrtpa means the Mother-
Superior, but is altered to correspond with 6 wpeo-fivTepos.

7 B. 82. 8 B. 281. 9 B. 153.

•S1/ Basil's Ascetic Writings 105

sides of the monastery will be conducted by representative
senior members. Solitary interviews are forbidden, and not
less than two or more than three are to be present on
either side. But if others want to send or receive messages,
let them do it through the agency of these senior brothers or
sisters1.

The visits of priests to the sisterhood were of course neces
sary for the purpose of celebrating the Eucharist ; but a Rule
which has been taken to refer to this is of doubtful meaning,
and may be better interpreted of economic interdependence.
In question 154 of the Shorter Rules it is asked, If in a double
monastery the sisters are more numerous than the brothers,
and the brothers have to separate for the purposes of work, is
the situation free from danger2? The answer is, If they are
unanimous in heart, they may be present spiritually, though
not in body. Question and answer are alike obscure, but seem
to refer to a division of labour. The men would do field work
and provide food for the women, while the latter would make
the men's clothes3. If the number of monks fell short of the
normal, in order to provide for the needs of the sisterhood,
they would have to be scattered at a distance from one another
as they worked and the hours of prayer could not be observed
properly. This is opposed to the ideals of the common life ; it
need not however, says Basil, break the monks' spiritual unity4.

Double monasteries were suppressed by Justinian, and the
prohibition needed to be repeated by later legislators, They
were a special feature of Irish monachism, and were brought
to England by the Celtic missionaries. They seem possible

1 F. 33 ; cf. B. 220.

2 A free paraphrase. The Greek is £a.v (rv/j-py 6\Lyovs ovras doeX0ous, /ecu
ir\eLoffiv d5eX0cus e^vir'rjpfTovfj.evovs, et's avdyifrjv k^Triirr^iv rov duffraffdac CITF'
aXX^Xwy, §iafji,epi£o^i'ovs -rrpbs rot, Zpya, el aKivdwov TO TOIOUTOJ'.

3 Cf. B. 112 where wool is mentioned.

4 This seems to be Nissen's view. See Die Regelung des Klosterwesens,
p. 10, where he speaks of a common " wirtschaftliche Grundlage." I interpret
B. 154 in the light of F. 33, which speaks of conferences between the two sides
over the needs of the body. But the passage is difficult and Miss Bateson's
explanation may be right (Transactions of the Royal Hist. Soc. (Vol. in.) 1899).
" The contingency is contemplated in which the number of brethren may be
so small that they must serve the nuns singly " (i.e. when they visit them to
conduct services). But can dia/ji,epi£o/j.tvovs wpbs ra tpya mean this?

io6 5V Basil's Ascetic Writings

only at times of pure and fervent enthusiasm, and tend to be
superseded by lower but more practicable ideals.

VI. The Biblical foundation.

The Rules as a whole are steeped in Scripture and most
of the details of the ascetic life are regulated by Biblical texts.
In nearly all the Longer Rules Basil appeals to proof texts to
support his teaching, and the same is true of many of the
Shorter1. In some places his interpretation is slavishly literal,
as when he allows the brother who waits upon others to raise
his voice, because "Jesus cried2." Monks, he says, on their
return from a journey must give an account of all that they
have done, for so did the saints in the Acts3. They have
promised to obey the Superior, and must do so even unto
death, for Christ was " obedient unto death4." The cenobium
is definitely modelled on the pattern of the earliest Christian
community, which had all things in common5.

But more frequently the answer is faithful to the spirit as
well as the letter of Scripture. A good example is seen in
the arguments for the superiority of the common life. How
is it possible to gird oneself, and wash the feet of the saints,
in solitude? As we have diverse spiritual gifts, we shall be
spiritually destitute ourselves unless we share in the gifts of
others. How can we properly sustain our relation to Christ
the Head, unless we are in union with our brethren, all living
as members one of another6?

An even better example is found in Basil's teaching with
reference to the reception of recruits to the monastic life.
They are to be bidden to renounce all, as did St James, St
John and St Matthew. It is perilous to reject any applicants,
for Christ bade all to come. But as He tested the young man,
so we must not accept anyone without probation7. These are
but a few instances ; many more might be found. The Rules
as a whole are worthy of the great Bible student who com
posed them.

1 Cf. B. r, where Basil discusses the authority of Scripture.

2 B. 151 ; Jn xii. 43.

3 F. 44. < F. 28. 5 B. 85. 6 F. 7. 7 F. 8, 10.

ADDITIONAL NOTE A

PERMANENT VOWS

The question has often been discussed whether Basil insisted on
permanent and irrevocable vows in the modern sense of the term, or
whether he regarded the monastic profession only as a very solemn and
binding obligation laid on the individual by public opinion and his own
conscience. Jackson in his translation of Basil {Nicene and post- Nicene
Fathers, p. lii) has a learned note on the subject, and quotes de Broglie,
Bulteau and Montalembert in favour of the first view ; he himself questions
"whether St Basil's Rule included formal vows of perpetual obligation in
the more modern sense." E. F. Morison (Ck. Quart. Rev. Oct. 1912),
considers "there would always be a difficulty in making such vows legally
binding, but so far as the monastery was concerned they were to be
considered irrevocable." One of the greatest living authorities on mon-
asticism, Dom E. C. Butler, states that "a profession of virginity was
made, but no monastic vows were taken.... But though there were no
vows, St Basil's monks were considered to be under a strict obligation
of persevering in the monastic life" (Camb. Med. Hist. l. 528). He cites
Palladius as his authority for this statement. Let us now consider the
evidence, beginning with Palladius.

(1) Palladius, writing in 420, praises Lausus for his good sense in
not having bound himself by a vow or oath, and thus exposed himself to
the danger of perjury. (p-^T€ 6pp.f} TIVL KOI TrpoXrj^ei aAdyo> a

op/ceo TreS^aas TTJV rr poai'peo-w, naOois nfrrovdacriv Tivfs <pi\ov€iKa>s
TOV H,TJ (payelv 77 irielv dovAaxrai/res' TO avTe^oixriov rfj avaynrj TOV opccou, «a!
TOTrecrovTes oiKTpws (piXo£coia K.a.1 a/c/;8ta KOI f)8ovfj ryv firiopKiav
s. Hist. Laus. prol. 9, ed. Lucot.) The primary reference is to rash
vows of abstinence from food and drink, such as Basil condemns in
unsparing terms ( Exfij/o ye fj,rjv y€\olov p,oi <aT€(pdvr), TO ev£ao~6ai TWO. velcov
cnrf^ecrdai Kpe&v. o><rre Kara^ioxroi/ 8i8d<TKfiv CIVTOVS, raw a7rai§evra>i> 7rpo<r-
evx&v /cat fTrayy(\iO)v aTre'^eo-^at. Ep. 199, Can. XXVIII.). But while VOWS
of virginity do not seem to be in Palladius3 mind at this point, it may be
gathered from the general tenor of the passage that he disapproves of
them. Now the Lausiac History aims at giving a faithful picture of con
temporary monachism ; the author's verdict here must reflect a point of
view that was generally prevalent.

(2) Basil's Rules. In F. 14 one who has been received into the brother
hood and then breaks his profession (TTJV 6/zoAoyi'ai/ aBfT^a-avTa) is to be
treated as a sinner against God ; he is guilty of sacrilege, having stolen
what belongs to God (6 yap ava&c\s cavTOv r<u Oew, etra irpbs a\\ov /3tor/

io8 Permanent Vows

S) ifp6crv\os ytyoi/ey, avrbs eavrov Sia/cXe'v^as', KOI d(pe\6p.evos TOV
O dvd0T)p.a). The monastery doors are to be closed to such a one
and not even opened when he begs for shelter. F. 15 treats of the pro
fession of virginity, which is not to be exacted from children, but must
be deferred till years of discretion (rdrt /cat rrjv 6p.o\oyiav TTJS irap8evias
7rpoo~ieo~6ai §el, a>s f/dr) /3e/3a/ai/, Kai dirb yvcapr/s oiKeias KOL
The Church authorities are to be present as witnesses (Mdprvpas

TOV dyiao-fjibv TOV orw/iaro? wcnrcp TL avaS^a rat Qfa> Ka6ifpovo-0ai, KOI /3e/3atG><7ii>
( Ivm rov yivofjitvov did rrjs p-aprvpias). Cf. B. 2. Short-term vows were
however allowed under exceptional circumstances (p. 84).

(3) The "canonical" letters to Amphilochius. Basil, Ep. 199, Can.
xviii., says that the old rule was that virgins who fell after professing
virginity and thereby annulled their agreements (dOfTovo-Sav rds eavrwv
o-vvd^Kas) should be excommunicated for a year. But as the Church
advances it is possible to make stricter rules. "It is my judgment (e'/uoi
de cWa) that careful consideration should be given to the act as it appears
upon consideration, and to the mind of Scripture." The virgin is the
bride of Christ, and so for her to break her profession is to be guilty of
adultery. Professions may be made at full age, that is, 16 or 17. The
girl may then be ranked among the virgins, her profession ratified and its
violation Sternly punished (rore eyKaraXeyfo-dai XPV TOIS TrapOevois, *a\ rr]v
6p,o\oyiav rr/s ToiavTrjs KVpovv, KCU TTJV d&€Tr)o~iv avTrjs aTrapair^roK KoXa^etv).

The next Canon (xix.) goes on to discuss the case of men. "We do not
recognise (OVK. eyvtop-ev} the professions of men, except in the case of those
who have enrolled themselves in the order of monks (ro> ray/^an T&V
pova^ovrwv) and seem to have secretly adopted the celibate life. Yet in
their case I think it becoming (r/yo€/zai...7rpoo-77Kai>) that there should be
a previous examination, and that a distinct profession should be received
from them, so that whenever they may revert to the life of the pleasures
of the flesh, they may be subjected to the punishment of fornicators."
Ep. 217, Can. LX., reads thus: "The woman who has professed virginity
and broken her promise (TTJS eVayyeX/a?) will complete the time appointed
in the case of adultery in her continence. The same rule will be observed
in the case of men who have professed a solitary life and who lapse."

(4) Basil, Epp. 44, 45. These are of doubtful authenticity. Ep. 42,
to Chilo, is attributed to Nilus, see Garnier in loc. (In Codice Regio
2895 haec leguntur: rives rbv Xoyoi/ rovrov TOV ayiov Nei'Xov fivai Xcyov<rur).
Epp. 42 — 46 form a unity, and stand or fall together. In Ep. 44, to a
lapsed monk, the writer speaks of agreements with God (crvvdi]<as) made
before many witnesses. In Ep. 45 a lapsed monk is condemned for
adultery, which need not mean more than marriage. The sinner has
incurred the guilt of perjury, having inculcated vows, whereas to say
more than Yea or Nay is attributed to the evil one (ras TG> 0e<a 7rpoo-0v-
yovo-as ijsvxas (ppiKrots 6p<ois Kart'^Xeio-as1, oTrore 7rapar€TTjprjp,ev(os rov val

Permanent Vows 109

fcai TOV ov TO irfpirrbv rat 8ta/3oA<u Trpo(TvfV€^.r]rai}. The point of view agrees
with that of Palladius rather than with Basil's opinions as found in his
undisputed writings.

The most important points of the evidence have now been given ; other
regulations concerning admission to the Basilian community may be found
on pp. 83 — 85. The testimony of Epp. 44, 45 can be ruled out; from
what remains the following conclusions may be drawn.

(a) The profession was an exceedingly solemn occasion, led up to by
careful preparation ; it took place in the presence of witnesses and, if
possible, before the bishop of the diocese. The professed monk was bound
by Church law, public opinion and his own conscience. He incurred the
guilt of sacrilege if he went back on his promise.

(<£) In Basil's estimation the monk and nun were on a somewhat
different footing. The virgin was reckoned as the bride of Christ in a
sense that was inapplicable to the male ascetic. Her guilt was accordingly
greater if she went back to the world. For her to marry was equivalent
to adultery (cf. Nissen, Die Regelung des Klosterwesens, pp. 26, 27 ; see
also Reitzenstein, Die hellenistischen Mysterie7ireligionen, pp. 21 — 23, for
heathen parallels to this idea).

(c) Basil is conscious of being an innovator. He is introducing
a new discipline which is only possible because of the development of
ascetic principles. His mode of expression betrays the fact that his views
were not generally accepted ("it is my judgment," "we do not recognise,"
"I think it becoming").

I infer therefore that the new principle introduced by Basil was the
irrevocable nature of the profession, at least in the case of virgins.
Whether or not the vow was of such a character that to violate it
incurred the guilt of perjury is a minor question ; it contained all the
essentials of the vow as understood in later times. The practice of per
manent vows may therefore be traced back to Basil ; it had not however
won general acceptance at the time Palladius wrote his History.

ADDITIONAL NOTE B

ST BASIL AND THE SOLITARY LIFE

The problem to be discussed is this ; Basil put forward the claims of
cenobitism in vigorous and uncompromising fashion (see pp. 85, 86),
out was he consistent in his teaching and practice? In Chapter VIII. it
will be shown that the Eastern Church in the following centuries valued
cenobitism mainly as a preparatory stage, a kind of school in which the
aspirant might learn the ascetic life, in order to practise it as a solitary as
soon as he was able to stand alone. Was this position a contradiction of
Basil's ideal, or merely a development of certain elements that were

no St Basil and the Solitary Life

present, if not conspicuous, in his teaching? The relevant passages are
as follows :

(i) Basil, F. 7. Dealing with the comparative merits of the solitary
and common life, Basil decides in favour of the latter on every count.
(See pp. 85, 86 for an exposition of his teaching.) One of his points is
that a solitary has no one to correct him for his faults. "(Such a spiritual
guide) it is very difficult to find in solitude, if not previously united in the
life; and so in his case the saying of Scripture comes true, Woe to
the solitary man, because if he fall, there is none to raise him up."

(*Oi> eTTi TTJS /uovoxreoos' evpflv airopov, prj Trpoevwdevra Kara rov (Biov • uxrre
(TVfJiftaivciv ai»r&> TO elprjuevov eKclvo. Oval ra> evt, ort eav necrrj, ov< eamv
6 fyfipuv avrov}. Garnier's rendering of the difficult words /zj) TrpoevatOevra
KOTO TOV /3tov is an interpretation rather than a translation — Siprius in vitae
societatem adiunctus non fuerit. If this rendering holds good, Basil is
pointing out the difficulties which beset a solitary life, but allows that,
where the solitary has previously belonged to a cenobium, this particular
difficulty is obviated; the spiritual relations begun in the cenobium may
be continued in solitude. Such an interpretation is flatly opposed to the
rest of this answer, but it is hard to suggest a better rendering. It must
be acknowledged that the vigour and passion of Basil's language go
to show that his teaching on this point did not meet with general
acceptance ; it is possible that in practice he found himself compelled to
make concessions.

(2) F. 36 treats of those who leave the brotherhood. If a monk is
suffering spiritual harm and cannot get redress, then he is justified in
departing. But if he leaves the convent (rfjs o-wcxpeias ra>v d8e\(p£)v) in
a spirit of levity, he is not to be received by the other brotherhoods
(aTrpoo-dcKTos eVrco rais d8f\(poTT]o-iv). No other causes of separation are
to be recognised. Nothing is said about leaving the cenobium in order
to seek a solitary's cell, but Basil's language seems to exclude such a
course.

(3) B. 74. So far the evidence has been indirect ; here the question
is definitely raised whether it is permissible to pass from the common to
the solitary or quasi-solitary life. "We ask to be taught from Scripture
whether one ought to cut off those who go out from the brotherhood, and
wish to live a solitary life, or else to pursue the same end of piety in
company with a few others." (Tovs €%(pxop>fvovs eK TTJS aSeXcpor^ros-, *at
j3ov\op.fvovs p.ovrjpr) /StW £j?J>, rj /xera oArya>i> rw aura) etrfo'dai VKOTTW TTJS
ev&fftdas, fl %pr) dfpopi^eiv, didaxdrjvai OTTO TTJS Tpafprjs deop-fda), Basil in
reply stigmatises all self-will as impious, and refers to his fuller treatment
of the subject in the Longer Rules. The reference must be to F. 7,
which is one long panegyric of the common life. Zockler, Askese und
Monchtum, p. 288, paraphrases B. 74 thus: "Will ein Bruder gern zum
einsiedlerischen Leben iibergehen, so darf er dies nicht eigenmachtig,
sondern nur mit Genehmigung des Vorgesetzten thun." There is no

St Basil and the Solitary Life 1 1 1

mention of the Superior, though Basil's interrogators are probably
Superiors (p. 73). Nor is there any hint that consent might be given ;
d<popi£eiv implies an unfriendly act, and Basil's answer, though ambiguous,
does not remove the impression left by this word.

(4) Ep. 42. This is a letter to Chilo, a solitary, living perhaps in
Palestine. The writer bids Chilo persevere in his mode of life, and resist
as a temptation of the devil the thoughts of the world that allure him
back. "You'5 says the Evil One "are sitting here in a wild state like the
beasts. You see round you a wide desert with scarcely a fellow-creature
in it, lack of all instruction, estrangement from your brothers, and your
spirit inactive in carrying out the commandments of God." It seems
psychologically impossible that this letter could have come from the man
who composed F. 7, and it is probably a letter of Nilus incorporated by
accident into the collection of Basil's Letters1.

It is only necessary for our purpose to consider the passages where
there is a contrast, implied or expressed, between the two modes of the
ascetic life. Basil mentions the solitaries or monks in a number of
places in his epistles, without however betraying whether he is using the
terms in a general or special sense. The evidence so far is inconclusive,
but on the whole the impression left by the answer of F. 7 (apart from
the words discussed above) is not seriously weakened.

We turn now to Gregory of Nazianzus, the companion of Basil in the
Pontic monastery and his collaborator in devising Rules for its govern
ment. Unfortunately, his testimony is given in so rhetorical a form that
its meaning is far from clear.

(5) The chief passage is Or. 43, 62. Tov roivvv eprjptKOv fiiov «ai TOV
piyddos p.axop.€va>v Trpos d\\r)\ovs cos TO. TroXXa KOL diicrTap.cv(ov, /cat ouSere'pou
TrdvTcas fj TO <a\ov rj TO <pav\ov aveirifuitTOV ('XOVTOS- aXXa rov p,ev ^(rv^iov
fjiev OVTOS /u,aAXoi> <a\ Kadfo~Tr) KOTOS <al 0ea> o~vvdyovTOS) oi'K drv0ou Se fita
ro Trjs dpfTijs d(3ao-dvio~TOV KOI dcrvyKpiTov' TOV Se TrpciKTiKGOTepov pev fj.d\\ov
KOL xp^o-t/zoore'pov, ro Se 6opv^co8fS ov (pevyovTos, <al TOVTOVS apiaTa K(iTrj\-
\a£ev dXX^Xots1 Kal avveKepaaev • do~K.rjTT]pia KOI p.ovao~TT)pia dfifj.dp.6vos /-teV,

OV TTOppd) 6e TWV KOiVtoVlKOtV K.O.I [JiiyddcdV, Ovdf &O~7Tfp rei^lO) TLvl p.€O~(O TdVTO.

SiaXa/Scov /cat OTT' aXXj}Xcov ^copiVas, aXXa rrXrjcriov o~vvd"^ras KOI dia^evj-as '
Iva p.r/T€ TO (pi\6cro(pov duoivwvrjTov y WTe T° TrpaK.TiK.ov d<pi\oo~o(pov (ed.
Boulenger). Browne and Swallow (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers
series) translate thus: "Moreover he reconciled most excellently and
united the solitary and the community life. These had been in many
respects at variance and dissension, while neither of them was in absolute
and unalloyed possession of good or evil : the one being more calm and
settled, tending to union with God, yet not free from pride, inasmuch as
its virtue lies beyond the means of testing or comparison; the other,
which is of more practical service, being not free from the tendency to

1 See p. 108. Nilus was a Palestinian ascetic who died in 430; for his works
see Bardenhewer, Patrologie (1910), p. 317.

ii2 ,5V Basil and the Solitary Life

turbulence. He founded cells for ascetics and hermits, but at no great
distance from his cenobitic communities, and, instead of distinguishing
and separating the one from the other, as if by some intervening wall, he
brought them together and united them, in order that the contemplative
spirit might not be cut off from society, nor the active life be uninfluenced
by the contemplative." This version is open to grave objection. To
begin with, it is most improbable that Gregory spoke in this manner of
Basil's achievement. Basil's great contribution to monasticism was the
establishment of community life. Could his bosom friend, in an oration
almost fulsome in praise, have dismissed one of the great works of his
life with a few depreciatory remarks, and then gone on to find his true
significance in the fact that he instituted some hermits' cells in the vicinity
of his cenobia? The antecedent improbability of this interpretation is
supported by the absence of any corroboration in Basil's ascetic writings.

The key to the understanding of the passage lies in the recognition of
the fact that Basil is represented as instituting a tertium quid by the
side of two existing forms of asceticism. The first is clearly the solitary
life; what is the second? Leclercq (Diet. d'Archeol. chret. art. " Ceno-
bitisme," col. 3149), supposes that Basil made a middle form between the
anchorite life and that of the great Egyptian monasteries. But, so far
from doing this, he developed to the full the tendency to a common life
already present in Egypt. It is true /juyds has been given the meaning
"cenobite" by many good scholars (e.g. Ducange, s.v., and Cle"mencet)
but the rendering cannot be upheld. It must refer to the ascetic life
lived in the world (see pp. 12, 46: cf. Boulenger, Gregoire de Nazianze,
Discours funcbres, pp. cv, cvi). We now get an admirable sense for
Xpj/o-i^corepou and 0opv/3<wSes-, the latter of which would be a most curious
description of Basil's cenobia. The third thing that Basil made was of
course the monastery of the common life; with this interpretation the
passage yields admirable sense. I offer the following paraphrase of the
concluding words. He founded monasteries (da-Krjrrjpia and ^.ovacrrr^pia
are two names for the same thing — do-KrjTrjptov is used in Hist. Laits.
xvm. 12 of Tabennisi), not far removed in spirit1 from those who were
living the "community'; life (i.e., as previously understood — KOIVODVIKWV
and piyddw are two names again for the same thing, natural in a funeral
oration). Nor did he separate the two modes of life as if by a wall, but
combined in his own institutions the advantages of both2.

It remains now to see whether Gregory's use of piyds elsewhere
supports this explanation3.

1 I take Trbppu metaphorically, since reix/y and irXricnov are also figurative ;
but it may be literal, and mean "not far away — like the hermits' cells."

2 Boulenger by taking KOIVWVIKWV = cenobites seems to me to destroy the sense
of the passage.

3 (j.iyds is used of pell-mell confusion in the classical period, and, at least
in one passage, of the mixing of two opposites. See Eur. Bacch. 17 — 19, 'Acriav
re irda-af, 17 Trap oKftvpav a\a /cemu, fj.iydcrii> "EXXijai /3ap/3dpots 6' 6/uoO Tr\ripeis

St Basil and the Solitary Life 113

(a) Or. 43, 66. Gregory asks what pleasure is left after Basil's
death for the monks (/iovao-r&ji/ ^ /iryaoW). Two classes are referred
to. fjLovaa-Toiv is a general word, and is used of the cenobites in Pontus
(vo/j.odfo~iai /jovcurreov, (yypcXpoi re /cat ciypcxpoi 43? 34)- The Other class
must therefore be the unorganised ascetics living in the world.

(b) Carm. XI. 310. Gregory describes his own choice of the ascetic
life as a middle way between two extremes. (p.eo-r)v TIV* fotiov d&ywv KOI
fjnyd8<ovy T&V /ueV TO vvvvovv, TO>V §e TO XP^O-TOV $e'pa>i/.) He gives the sons
of Jonadab and John the Baptist as examples of afuyoc, and describes
the piydfifs as TrpanTiKoi. The parallel to Or. 43, 62 is very close1.

(c) Or. 2, 29. Among the unmarried there is a great difference
between the solitaries and the /uyades-. (K.Q.V eri d«pt/3coy e^eracrfls1, oaov TO
jueVoi/ TWV eV <rv{vyicus irpbs TOVS dydpovs, KCLV TOVTOIS rrdXiv, ra>i> TTJS eprjp-ias
npos TOVS KoivtoviKovs KOI fuyddas.) Here again KOIVWVIKOI and /j,Lyddfs
have the same meaning. Gregory speaks of the two extreme types, not
of cenobitism, which is considered a via media.

(d) Or. 21, 19. Athanasius, like Basil, reconciled the two modes of
life. There were solitaries in Egypt, also monks who "cherished the law
of love in community life, being at once solitaries and /itya'Ses." (ol /zei/ TOV
irdvTT) povadiKov re KOL apiKTov 8iad\ovvTes /3tW, eauroti povois TrpoerXa-
\OVVTCS KOI ra> ©fw, KOI TOVTO JJLOVOV K.6o~fj,ov etSo'rey, oo~ov eV TTJ fpTjp.ia
yv<t>pi£ovcriv ol 8e vop.ov dydrrrjs TTJ Koivaviq orepyoi/res", epr)p,iKoi re o/ioO
<at piyddfs}. This passage is of special importance, as throwing light on
the similar passage in Or. 43, 62. I imagine that the reference is to
the visit of Athanasius to Tabennisi in 330. Relations between the two
branches of monachism had been strained, but Athanasius now set the
seal of official approval on Pachomius' work (see p. 39).

This note has run to considerable length, but it seemed desirable to
discuss the question fully. We have found nothing in Gregory's words to
upset the conclusions arrived at from a study of Basil. It seems that
Basil was whole-hearted and consistent in his championship of cenobitism.
In the monasteries under his control there is no sign that he allowed any
passing over to a solitary life. When he became a bishop and was
responsible for every department of Church life, he may have found it
necessary to tolerate, and perhaps even further, varieties of monachism
of which in the abstract he disapproved2. But the common life as
described in his Rules was unaffected by this, and was handed down to
later generations of Greek monks as the consistent working-out of a
splendid, if unattainable, ideal.

KaiXXurvpyurovs iroXeis, Cf. Andr. 1143. So far as it goes, this supports
the interpreting of fMyds in Gregory of the mingling of two opposites, i.e. the
ascetic life and the world.

1 On this and the following passages see Maran, Vit. Bas. IV. 4.

2 Hist. Laus. XLV. 3, tells us how Basil was charmed with the austerity of
Philoromus, who once shut himself up in a tomb for six years. Cf. Bas. Ep. 295.

L. C. 8

CHAPTER VII

ST BASIL'S ASCETIC IDEALS

IF the reader has had the patience to work through the
material collected in the last chapter, he will have noticed
the richness and variety of thought with which Basil presents
his ascetic ideals, and the wide field over which his interests
range. Later legislators may have raised or lowered his
standards, or expressed with definiteness ideas that are only
implicit in his writings, but all the guiding principles of later
developments are already present in Basil, at least in germ1.
The obligations have not often been expressed ; the fact that
Basil composed no rule in the technical sense of the word has
detracted from his fame in the later Church. The average
monk during the ensuing centuries needed a set of definite clear-
cut rules, and Basil's instructions were not put in an attractive
or helpful form2. Their length was a serious drawback, and
it was not possible in practice to leave so much discretion
to the individual abbot as Basil had recommended. But, as

1 Cf. Kranich, who ends his monograph with these words: " Nach Basilios
sind neue Ordensstifter aufgetreten, grosse, heilige Manner, deren Ruhm in alle
Welt gedrungen ist. Auch sie haben Anleitung zur Ascese gegeben, sie haben
Ordensregeln verfasst. Aber haben sie etwas wesentlich Neues, etwas wesent-
lich Anderes als Basilios ausgesprochen? Sie haben es nicht gethan, sie konnten
es nicht, sie durften es nicht." (Die Ascetik in ihrer dogmatischen Grundlage bei
Basilios dem Grossen, p. 97.)

2 Cf. Meyer, Die Haupturkunden, p. 9, " Basilios... in seinen Anhangern mit
Leuten zu thun hatte, die von der ersten Begeisterung getragen, weniger eines
peinlichen Gesetzes als des weisen seelsorgerischen Raths bedurften, aber er
bildet auch den Grund, warum die Regeln des Basilios nicht die alleinige Grund-
lage fiir die Verfassung des griechischen Monchtums werden konnten. Es
bedurfte vielmehr anderen Personlichkeiten, die den Idealen des grossen Kirchen-
vaters statutarische und disciplinelle Form gaben."

St Basil's Ascetic Ideals 115

we shall presently see, his main principles passed into the
common stock of monastic literature, both in East and West.
The East revered him as the Father of its monasticism,
though its actual guides have been other legislators who
have not always been faithful to his ideals, while in the West
his influence, mediated through the Benedictine Rule, has
been wide-spread and lasting.

We have already sketched Basil's life as revealed in his
letters and the orations of the two Gregories, and made a
careful examination of his ascetic writings. It now remains
to sum up the results of our investigation. The originality
of the two sets of Rules, strongly attested by both external
and internal evidence, seems quite indisputable to one who
has studied the problem in all its bearings ; so many are the
coincidences between the Rules and Letters, and so strong
is the general impression of an artistic unity. Had the Rules
been composed even shortly after Basil's death, it would have
been comparatively easy to detect signs of later date. The
end of the fourth and beginning of the fifth century was a
time of rapid change, and external events must inevitably
have left their mark on the phraseology of documents1.

We may accordingly assume the validity of the results
already attained, and attempt to draw together the scattered
threads of the investigation by sketching the broad outlines
of Basil's work2. These may be considered under four heads.

I. The organisation of asceticism.

II. The moderation of existing austerities and en

thusiasm.

III. The introduction of the common life.

IV. The bringing of monasticism into the service of

the Church.

1 The one serious objection to this statement of the unity of the picture is dis
cussed in Additional Note B.

2 I have confined my attention in the main to the practical aspects of the
matter. The dogmatic presuppositions of Basil's asceticism have been worked out
in admirable fashion by Kranich.

8—2

n6 St Basil's Ascetic Ideals

I. The organisation of asceticism.

Basil found the ascetic life firmly entrenched in Cappa-
docia and Pontus. It took two forms. First, the eremitic
life lived in a cell by an individual ; as in Egypt, so here
in all probability this tended to pass into the semi-eremitic
life, a number of ascetics living in more or less close neigh
bourhood and rendering voluntary deference to a senior.
And, secondly, there was the later1 development of the tra
ditional ascetic life in the world. A number of persons —
generally only two or three — lived a common life in one
house ; they were pledged to virginity, and devoted them
selves to good works in the service of the Church. But the
ties thus formed were wholly voluntary and could be severed
at any time. The individual might feel himself bound by
his own promise of virginity, but he was not obliged to
maintain his relations with his fellow-ascetics. Both the
theory and practice of asceticism were unorganised1.

Basil met the needs of the time with a clearly thought
out system. His views on marriage, judged by fourth century
standards, were moderate, and he recognised its compatibility
with goodness in the case of dwellers in the world2. But he
made it perfectly plain that life in the world is lower per se
than the life of asceticism. The monk was in his eyes the
Christian par excellence*. And so we find him urging the
general adoption of the ascetic life.

Much of Basil's system was evidently of Egyptian origin.
He had probably visited both Nitria and Tabennisi and
witnessed the working of two different types of monasticism.
He chose the Pachomian system as the model of his own
institutions, but not without important alterations. On re
turning to his native land, he was able to utilise the rising

1 See pp. 45, 46.

2 Gregory of Nyssa shows how it was possible to combine asceticism with
sane views on marriage. "Our view of marriage is this; that while the pursuit
of heavenly things should be a man's first care, yet if he can use the advantages of
marriage with sobriety and moderation, he need not despise this way of serving the
State." De Virg. 8.

3 See F. 17.

Si Basil's A see fie Ideals 117

enthusiasm for the ascetic life, and to found new monasteries,
besides modifying the character of existing institutions. One
of his objects was to have convents of moderate size, in
contrast to the great numbers of monks found under the
Pachomian regime. The Superior had many duties towards
the individual monks which could only be discharged in a
fairly small community. We read of "one lamp" and "one
fire" sufficing for the whole brotherhood1. On the other
hand, there is a tendency to exaggerate Basil's work in this
direction and represent him as inaugurating a system of quite
small monasteries. Everything points to the conclusion that
his monasteries were of fair size, with perhaps 30 to 40
members. He advises the amalgamation of small com
munities in order to make one strong body, and the Rules
depict a busy, self-centred community, large enough to supply
its own wants, and requiring a number of officers.

The needs of women were not forgotten, but special care
had to be exercised in their case, if the spread of monachism
was not to result in scandal. The example of the Pachomian
communities and Basil's own early experience showed the
desirability of linking the two sexes. There were certain
services that women could render to men, and they needed
the help of the men for the administration of the Sacraments,
the hearing of confessions, and general advice on the problems
of government. Basil accordingly inaugurated a system of
double monasteries, in which the abbot and abbess were in
especially close connexion. The abbot ruled over the whole
establishment, but his authority over the women was exer
cised through their head.

The different monasteries were joined in a kind of loose
confederation. Periodical meetings of the Superiors were
held, and the conflicting claims of the individual monastery
and the confederation were met by a regulation that a new
Superior was to be chosen by the Superiors of neighbouring
monasteries, but the local monks must test and approve
the choice. The general chapter of the Pachomian order
was not reproduced, nor did anyone fill the place of the

1 F. 35-

n8 St Basil's Ascetic Ideals

Superior-General in that system. During Basil's life-time his
own personal ascendancy made such a device unnecessary.

We see then that Basil took over the general framework
of the Pachomian organisation, but modified it in the direction
of less strictness, leaving more scope for the voluntary action
of individuals.

II. The moderation of existing austerities and enthusiasm.

Sulpitius Severus1 uses some striking language on the
difference between the Gauls and the Egyptians. A diet
that meant severe self-denial to the former seemed gluttony
to the latter. The inhabitants of the high central plateau of
Asia Minor and the mountaineers of Pontus had constitutions
of the European rather than Egyptian type, and a modifi
cation of physical austerities was desirable, if monasticism
was really to suit their needs. Perhaps Basil had learned
a lesson from the effects of his own early privations. At all
events, he fixed what he considered a reasonable standard of
austerity, and sternly forbade his monks to pass this limit.
No private fasts were allowed without the Superior's per
mission, and self-will was to be suppressed as much in this
as in any other direction. Nothing corresponding to the
Egyptian custom of monks vying with one another in making
records in austerities was allowed in Basil's cenobia2.

Basil's attitude towards "enthusiasm3" must be carefully
noted. On the whole he limited it to small proportions. The
general tone of the Basilian Ascetica comes as a surprise to a
student who is familiar with the Egyptian documents. There
is a complete absence of the tales of miracles, clairvoyance,
spiritual healings, visions, and conflicts with demons, which

1 Dial. I. 4, 8.

2 Basil's moderation on this point must be judged, not by modern standards,
but by those of his own time. See F. 17 for the thinness and paleness of the
Christian athlete. The credit for the change of tone on this point must be
ascribed to Basil ; moderation in fasting and penances was not a deduction drawn
of necessity by dwellers in an inclement climate, for the Irish hermits rivalled even
the Syrians in their austerities. See Camb. Med. Hist. I. 534.

3 I take the word from Roll's book Enthusiasmus etc. Similarly in English
there is the technical (i8th century) sense, of a consciousness of possessing special
gifts of the Spirit, such as aroused Bishop Butler's dislike.

St Basil's Ascetic Ideals 119

play so large a part in the latter. The gifts of the Spirit for
Basil mean moral and spiritual gifts rather than the power
to see and do supernormal things. The last of the Longer
Rules is most significant in this connexion ; it deals at great
length with the question of doctors and medicine, and vindi
cates their right to a place in the economy of the convent1.
The modern reader will be inclined to give Basil considerable
credit for this side of his work ; it must be attributed in part
to his common sense and his education, which had given him
a thoroughly Greek sense of proportion. But the main cause
was his diligent study of the New Testament and the extent
to which he had appreciated the spirit of St Paul. He never
attacks the conception of the miraculous which the revival
of enthusiasm in Egypt had fostered, but he knows how to
discriminate between the primary and secondary elements
of religion2.

Yet in one respect Basil adopted the new ideas, or rather
revived ideas that had always been present in the Church,
so that through him they obtained a permanent footing in
Eastern monasticism. Although he was a bishop and mag
nified his office, he recognised that official rank does not
always fit a man for the cure of souls ; a special charisma
of the Spirit was needed, which might be given in conjunction
with the priesthood, but could also be possessed by a layman.
There is nothing to show that a layman might not have held
the highest offices in the monastery, and confession could be
made to him, if he had the requisite spiritual gifts, as legiti
mately as to a priest.

III. TJu introduction of the common life.

Of all the services rendered by Basil to the cause of
monasticism, this is the one by which he most deserves to

1 F. 55-

2 Besse devotes Ch. xxui. of Les Moines <F Orient to " Le merveilleux dans la
vie des moines orientaux"; it contains no reference to Basil. Holl compares the
relation of Basil to the Egyptian monks with that of St Paul to the popular con
ceptions of the early Church : " Basil had learned enough from Jesus and Paul to
know what are in truth the highest gifts." In the Palestinian literature of the
fifth century the miraculous reappears. Op. cti. pp. 166, 179 — 184.

I2O St Basil's Ascetic Ideals

be remembered. As we have already seen, the Pachomian
monasteries were cenobitic only in outward appearance ;
their inner essence was individualist1. Basil made cenobitism
a reality. Man was made for the common life, he declares,
and not for the "monastic" life. The law of love, carried
out in all its implications, forbids a solitary existence. This
is the guiding principle of all Basil's regulations. The in
culcation of a moderate standard of asceticism attainable by
all was a natural deduction. So also was the practice of
confession ; since no man can live to himself, we need the
help of one another in combating our sins. So also was the
organisation of philanthropy, for the monastery must be so
arranged as to give a practical outlet for the love of our
neighbour2.

IV. The bringing of monasticism into the service of the

Church.

If the introduction of the common life was the most
important step taken by Basil in the strictly religious field,
from the point of view of Church history it was even more
significant that he welded into one the official Catholic Church
and the new religious communities that were arising by its
side and threatening to dissipate their energies in the desert.
Basil is the first example of a man who was at once a great
monk and a great bishop. The reconciliation took place first
in his own person, and then through him in the Church at
large. In his Rules he recognises here and there, if in a
rather half-hearted way, the right of the bishop to be con
sulted in the affairs of the cloister, and in his own capacity
as bishop he exercised a general superintendence over the
monasteries of a wide area. He thus enlisted the services
of monasticism to strengthen the Church, and, in so far as
the Church of that day really served the State, monasticism
also aided the State, instead of being, as is often supposed,
its foe. In pursuance of his policy of bringing the monks

1 p. 40.

2 Basil did not advocate works of benevolence as an end in themselves, but as
a necessary corollary of the love of God.

St Basil's Ascetic Ideals 121

into relation with the episcopate Basil established cenobia
in the towns instead of the desert. No longer was the monk
to flee from his fellow-men, but by remaining in their midst
to set them an example of a true Christian life1.

The Basilian monasteries also served a useful purpose in
providing education for children of both sexes. The primary
aim was so to train the children that at a later age they
might choose the monastic life as their own career. But no
pressure was put upon them. The utmost care was to be
taken to avoid unworthy professions ; and the result must
have been that many entered secular life after a training in
the convent schools. If many men of the mental calibre of
Basil were to be found in the monasteries, it was not sur
prising that parents left their children there to be educated.
The curriculum was one-sided, worldly studies being excluded,
but it may have been at least as good a training for life as
the artificial " rhetoric " in vogue at the secular schools.

After this general sketch of the way in which Basil worked
out his ascetic scheme, we may proceed to inquire what was
the extent of his own contribution to monasticism. How
much of his system was original, and how much derivative ?

Now it is clear that Gregory helped his friend. But
Gregory with all his genius was not a ruler of men, and the
Rules with their breadth and sympathy evidently come from
a man who was endowed to a marked degree with the gift of
government; Gregory cannot have played more than a minor
part in the composition of the Rules. To what extent the
credit of Basil's work is really to be ascribed to Eustathius
of Sebaste is an apparently insoluble problem, which need

1 In spite of F. 6, which orders a remote situation for the monasteries, the
above conclusion may be considered correct; Soz. H.E. VI. 17 and Cass. Coll.
xvm. 7 state clearly that Basil's monasteries were in the cities, and his later
letters point the same way; probably the policy was not consciously adopted
till his episcopate. Antony held that the desert was the monk's true home ;
out of it he perished, like a fish on dryland (Athan. Vit. Ant. 85 ; Soz. H.E. I. 13).
Antony deferred even to a deacon (Vit. Ant. 67) but a different feeling towards
Church officials was common in Egypt (Cass. Inst. xi. 17, omnimodis monachum
fugere debere mulieres et episcopos). See Chrys. de Sacerd. vi. 6 — 8, for the
inadequacy of the monastery as a school for bishops; cf. also Harnack, History of
Dogma, in. 129.

122 St Basil's Ascetic Ideals

only be alluded to here1. But the relation of Basil to
Pachomius is a question of considerable importance. Was
Basil really the "loyal disciple" of Pachomius, as he has
been styled2? It is clear that he made considerable use of
Pachomian ideas, but does the centre of gravity in his system
lie in those parts that were borrowed from Pachomius or in
his own original features ?

An analysis of the sources of Basil's monastic system will
help us to an answer. They were three in number :

I. The unorganised ascetic life which was found in Cap-
padocia and Pontus during Basil's childhood and youth, of
which such striking examples had existed in his own family
circle.

II. The Rule of life practised in the Pachomian monas
teries at the time of Basil's visit to Egypt in 358.

III. The innovations which commended themselves to
his mature judgment as desirable in view of the needs of
the Church and the character of his fellow countrymen.

I. The importance of this is twofold. In the first place,
the soil was already prepared when Basil began his work.
Everything was ready for a great religious revival, which,
as we saw in Chapter I, would necessarily take an ascetic
form. While it is best to be very cautious in assuming any
heathen influence upon Christianity, it is safe to assert that
the presuppositions of the native Anatolian religion had
produced a state of mind in the inhabitants of Cappadocia
that was favourable to the growth of monasticism3. And,
secondly, the influences which had played on Basil during
his childhood and youth had predisposed him in favour of
asceticism. After studying the attractive picture of the as
cetic family life at Annesi, we shall not be disposed to think
it a mere coincidence that Basil's communities, unlike those of
Pachomius, were modelled on a family rather than a military
system.

1 See Appendix A. 2 By E. W. Watson, in Ch. Quart. Rev. Apr. 1907.

3 See Ramsay in Hastings' D.B. V., art. "Religion of Greece and Asia
Minor." There seems to have been none of that genuine moral and intellectual
antipathy to asceticism which prevailed in the West in certain circles at a little
later period.

S/ Basil's Ascetic Ideals 123

II. There is no sign that Basil drew any essential features
of his system from Nitria or Scete, Palestine or Syria, or
indeed from any foreign source except Tabennisi and its
daughter houses. The resemblance between the Pachomian
and Basilian Rules is very close in places, and descends at
times even to minute details. For instance, the sections
relating to the reception of slaves, the wearing of a girdle
and of a distinct religious habit, the methods of manual
work, the sale of the products of the workshops, the study
of Scripture, the reception of visitors, and the relations
between the two sides of the double monastery are very
similar in the two Rules and sometimes almost verbally
identical.

III. A number of points remain in which Basil is ap
parently under no obligations to Pachomius. He must be
regarded as a pioneer in working out the ideal of the common
life. Pachomius had the outward framework of a cenobium,
but with Basil it became a living organism. The full impli
cations of cenobitism were now realised for the first time.
It was not to be a mere physical neighbourhood, a number
of people obeying the same head, doing the same work and
using the same church and refectory, but rather an idea
bearing fruit in every department of life and spirit. Hence
we have the cenobium depicted as the perfect mode of
monachism ; to leave it for the anchorite's cell is a retro
gression. In keeping with this ideal private fasts and
penances are forbidden, as mere ebullitions of self-will, and
confession to a spiritual guide is inculcated as a religious
necessity. Besides this fundamental principle of cenobitism
there are other traits that show Basil's originality. The
Superior is no military chief endowed with absolute power,
but is subjected to certain limitations and checks. The
elder brethren at least have the responsibility of judging
his commands and testing them by the standard of the divine
law. The monastery is not an imperium in imperio, a
separate system by the side of or opposed to the official
Church ; it now becomes part of the Church, and recognises
episcopal authority. Work was an important feature in the

124 ^ Basil's Ascetic Ideals

economy of Tabennisi, and so its place of honour in the
Basilian monasteries need excite no remark. But the way
in which the principle was worked out in Cappadocia was
a novel and fruitful departure. The traditional philanthropy
of the Church and the new monastic institutions now joined
forces, and the latter became the agency through which the
former worked. The great houses of charity and the convent
schools for boys and girls are therefore another mark of
Basil's originality. The Pachomian monastery was a busy
hive of industry in which no drones were tolerated. The
Basilian monastery was this and something more. Its energies
were not confined within its own walls, but were consciously
directed towards the alleviation of the sufferings of the
outside world and the edification of the Church at large1.
Finally, the Basilian system was based on Scripture. " It
was possible," says Dr Harnack, " and in fact the danger was
imminent, for the ascetic ideal to lose any assured connexion
with Jesus Christ2." Such a criticism could hardly be levelled
against Basil. No other monastic legislator has so wide a
knowledge of the letter of the New Testament, or, in spite
of some curiosities of interpretation, of its spirit as well.
Christ's life of renunciation, His example and teaching, form
the pattern after which Basil seeks to model his own in
structions.

Thus Basilian monachism was composed of three strands,
the first of comparatively slight importance. Of the two
latter it is not difficult to see which was the more funda
mental. Great as was the debt he owed to Pachomius, Basil's
own contribution to monasticism was of greater weight and
his ideas more potent. Dom Butler well remarks of the
changes made by Basil : " The modifications are the result
of the contact of the primitive ideas of monachism, as they
existed in Egypt and the East, with European culture and
modes of thought3."

Let us in conclusion try to expand these words. Up to

1 Cf. Fialon, £tude sur saint Basile, p. 53, " II fut le precurseur des Frai^ois
de Sales et des Vincent de Paul."

2 History of Dogma, in. 131. 3 Lausiac History, I. 244.

St Basil's Ascetic Ideals 125

this point the development of monasticism had been in the
hands mainly of Egyptian peasants ; it was now directed by
a man of high birth, a member of a family that had given a
long line of officials to the government service. Basil was
endued to the full with the spirit of the Empire ; the Graeco-
Roman power of organisation won in his monasteries yet
another of its triumphs. Hitherto the leading monks had
been either entirely ignorant, or else possessed of an education
that compared unfavourably with that of many of their con
temporaries outside the cloister. But " Basil was, as his
name indicates, a true king among the spirits of his time1."
In him the world saw with surprise the spectacle of one of
the finest intellects of the age, educated at a great University
and steeped in classical culture, offering his great attainments
on the altar of the ascetic life2. The prestige that accrued
to monachism must have been considerable, and the modifi
cations of existing institutions made by a mind thus trained
would be sure to make them more acceptable to Greek modes
of thought. In Basil, too, monasticism and orthodoxy were
identified. He and his followers were able to appreciate the
bearings of abstruse theological controversies in a way that
was impossible for their Egyptian predecessors, who were
mentally less well equipped. And again; hitherto monas
ticism and the official Church had been, if not opposing,
yet uncoordinated forces. In Basil the latent antagonism
vanished, and the monks before long became the chief bul
wark of the Byzantine Church.

Our next two chapters will show how far Basil's ideals
were realised in later times. Some seem to have been too
lofty, and perhaps not practical enough, to be generally
comprehended. But if it is once granted that monasticism
has a right to exist at all, no higher wish could be uttered
on its behalf than that it should exemplify these three great

1 Schafer, Basilius des Grossen Beziehungen zum Abendlande, p. 205.

2 According to Gregory of Nyssa Basil was the modern Moses, skilled in the
wisdom of Egypt. De Vit. Moy. P. G. XLIV. 360. Cf. Puech, St Jean
Chrysostome, p. 250 (quoted by Marin, Les Moines de Constantinople, p. 109),
" L'ascetisme recrutait alors 1'elite de la societe chretienne, comme dans les
siecles precedents le christianisme avait recrute 1'elite de la societe paienne."

126 St Basil's Ascetic Ideals

ideals that were Basil's contribution to its development — the
earnest and consistent working out of the principle of the
common life in all its implications, the offering up in its
service of the highest secular culture of the time, and, as a
logical consequence of its practice of the love of God, the
manifestation of the love of man, especially in the alleviation
of suffering and the education of the young.

CHAPTER VIII

SUBSEQUENT INFLUENCE IN THE EAST

OUR study of Basil from the point of view of monasticism
is now complete. After trying in the opening chapters to
investigate the sources of Basil's ideals, we proceeded to
describe his activities in this field both before and during his
episcopate, and discuss the problems connected with his
ascetic writings. Before leaving the subject it will be well
to indicate briefly what influence his conception of rnonachism
has exercised upon the later Church. The natural division
of the subject is into East and West, though, as will be
seen in the next chapter, the existence of Greek monasteries
in South Italy prevents the lines of demarcation from being
quite clear.

What precisely is Basil's position to-day in the monastic
traditions of the East? One answer frequently given is
curiously far from the facts. The monks of the East, so it
is said, belong to the Basilian Order1. The error is twofold.
The Eastern monks are not Basilians, nor do they form an
" Order " in the Western sense of the word. This is the
conclusion of the best-informed among recent writers. Thus
Dom Butler expresses himself in guarded terms : " To this

1 Thus A. H. Hore, Eighteen Centuries of the Orthodox Greek Church (1899)
speaks of the monasteries "following the Rule of St Basil" (p. 8) and of "the
ancient unity of the Order of St Basil, which has subsisted ever since his time
with its original simplicity" (p. no). I. G. Smith, Christian Monasticism^
p. 59, says "The Eastern monks preserved from the first with characteristic
tenacity the Rule of Basil." Even Bardenhewer, Patrologie (1910), p. 245, says,
"Die Basilianer sind der eine grosse Orden des Orients"; cf. Schneemann,
Kirchenlexicon, art. " Basilianer," who describes them as "der grosse Orden der
orientalischen Kirche."

128 Subsequent Influence in the East

day his (Basil's) reconstruction of the monastic life is the
basis of the monasticism of the Greek and Slavonic Churches,
though the monks do not call themselves Basilian1." A
French writer who has travelled in the East is more un
compromising. The East, he says, has always shrunk from
the idea of a grouping of monasteries into an Order. Rather
does each individual convent form a distinct Order ; only on
Mount Athos do the peculiar local conditions present an
approximation to an Order. Nor must the Byzantine monks
be called Basilians. Eastern authors never use the term ;
they may speak of Akoimetes, Abrahamites, Studites, but
never of Basilians. He has visited Saint-Sabbas, he con
tinues, and found the monks most astonished that anyone
should believe them related to Saint Basil ; and the same
sentiment was found prevailing on Mount Athos2.

To check such a description would be impossible without
a personal acquaintance with Eastern Church life. It is a
simpler and perhaps more profitable task to ascertain how
far the spirit of Basil has maintained itself in the East. Are
his ideals still cherished in Oriental convents? If not, how
and at what date did they lose their power ? In order to
answer these questions it will be necessary to give a brief
summary of the post-Basilian development of Greek mona-
chism ; we shall then be in a better position to trace the
persistence or disappearance of individual ideals.

The post-Basilian history may be divided for our purpose
into four periods, each of which, owing to the presence of a
great personality or for geographical reasons, has a unity of
its own ; from the point of time they overlap to some extent,
(i) The Palestinian period, during which the cenobitic
and eremitic forms of monachism exist side by side.

1 Enc. Brit. art. ''Basilian Monks."

2 Pargoire (in Diet. cTarchtol. chrtt. art. " Basile," col. 507, 508) puts the
question, "Ya-t-il un ordre Basilien?" and answers it as above. Exception must
however be taken to the following statement: " D'ailleurs, a part les congregations
egyptiennes des IVe et Ve siecles, 1'Orient grec a toujours repugne a cette idee
d'un groupement religieux qui reunirait ensemble plusieurs monasteres." As
shown above (p. 103) there are distinct traces in Basil's Rules of a grouping some
what after the Pachomian model.

Subsequent Influence in the East 129

(ii) The early Constantinopolitan period, marked by
the triumph of cenobitism, and the bringing of the monasteries
under State control, a process which culminates in the legis
lation of Justinian.

(iii) The later Constantinopolitan period, characterised
by the revival of cenobitism after a time of decay, the activity
of Theodore, and the gradual acceptance of the Studium as
reorganised by him as the normal type of monastery.

(iv) The later medieval and modern period, for which
Mount Athos may be taken as typical.

(i) Basil's reputation was enhanced considerably by the
triumph of Nicene orthodoxy at the Council of Constantinople
in 381, but his monastic ideals spread but slowly. Sozomen
ends his account of monasticism with a short paragraph on
the monks of Cappadocia and the neighbouring provinces, in
which he speaks as if their manner of life was peculiar to
those countries1. Cenobitism naturally made most headway
in the Churches under the influence of Caesarea, especially
Pontus and Lesser Armenia'2. The constant stream of
pilgrims to the Holy Places brought Cappadocian ascetics
to Palestine, and these helped to disseminate Basilian ideals.
During the fifth and sixth centuries Palestine took the place
in the history of monasticism that had been previously held
by Egypt. Both forms of monasticism flourished on its soil,
owing perhaps to its geographical situation between Cappa
docia and Egypt, and the fact that it was a common meeting
ground for different nationalities. Some of the more famous
ascetics were Theodosius, Sabbas, Theognis, Euthymius and
John the Silentiary, the first three of whom were Cappa-
docians3. A noticeable feature of the period is the way in
which the adherents of the two systems lived side by side
and cultivated the most friendly relations with one another.
Theodosius was the head of the cenobites, and was styled
* H.E. vi. 34.

2 Also in independent Armenia under the auspices of Narses. See Leclercq
(Diet. cTArchtol. chrtt. art. " Cenobitisme," col. 3142, 3).

3 The main authority for this period is Cyril of Scythopolis, who wrote lives of
the Palestinian monks. Our account is based on Holl, Enthusiasmus, pp. 171 —
191, and Meyer, Die Hauptiirkunden, pp. 10, u.

L. C. 9

130 Subsequent Influence in the East

Archimandrite (or Exarch) ; the same title was also applied
to Sabbas, the director of the eremites. Both classes of
monks were subject to the authority of the patriarch of
Jerusalem, and there were even times when all the ascetics
had one and the same head1. It was not unknown for a
laura (a complex of anchorites' cells) to become a cenobium.
Thus Euthymius had a dream bidding him form his monks
into a cenobium, since that mode was more pleasing to God2.
But the general tendency was the other way. The cenobium
was regarded in the light of a school in which a monk could
prepare himself for complete retirement. So for a young
man at least the cenobium was the right place3, and it was
not safe to contend against the evil spirits which attacked
the solitary without a careful preliminary training4. But
solitude was considered the higher life ; to leave the cloister
for the cell was to go "from glory to glory6." Sabbas the
head of the anchorites once said to Theodosius the head of
the cenobites : " My lord abbot, you are a Superior of children,
but I am a Superior of Superiors, for each of those under me
is independent and therefore Superior of his own cell," and
Theodosius received the pleasantry with approval6.

All this is very far removed from Basil's ideal of the
common life. The stronger spirits aimed at an unbroken
communion with God, and the petty details of convent life
distracted them from their purpose. Roll pertinently asks7
whether Basil could have lived in one of his own cenobia ;
he points out also that there were special difficulties in
Palestine to prevent the realisation of the cenobitic ideal,
in that it was the duty of the monasteries to offer hospitality
to the pilgrims who came in such numbers. But Basil's con
ception was undoubtedly the higher, at least from a modern

1 Holl, P. 173.

2 Vita Euthymii, pp. 30, 80, 88 ; cf. Holl, p. 174.

3 Vita Euthymii, p. 68 ; Holl, p. 175.

4 Theod. vita Theodosii, p. 12 ; Holl, ib.

5 Vita Theodosii, p. 14 ; Holl, ib.

6 Vita Sabbae, p. 332 C ; Holl, ib. See also Meyer, p. 10 ; the celliote is to
be dtdaKTtKdv, ov xPV^OVTa

? p. 176.

Subsequent Influence in the East 131

standpoint, and Palestinian monachism represented a de
clension from his ideal. With the Arabian invasions the
importance of Palestine waned, but the miseries of the time
made men more than ever inclined to embrace a life of
asceticism. Under such circumstances it was natural that
the less organised form should prove more attractive, and
indeed it was better fitted to survive.

(ii) Constantinople, the new capital of the Empire, soon
became the main centre of Greek monachism, with important
consequences for the future of the movement1. For at the
capital the State was naturally all-powerful, and it proved
impossible for monasticism to resist the determination of the
Byzantine Emperors to bring every department of life under
their control ; for a time at least it fell a victim to their
centralising policy. Out-knowledge of Byzantine monachism
is imperfect and the background to the ascetic literature
remains obscure2. It seems best therefore to take one
central figure as typifying the tendencies of a whole period,
and ignore secondary persons and movements. For the early
Constantinopolitan period Justinian is clearly the dominant
influence.

The convent life of the capital in its early stages re
sembled that of other localities, except in so far as imperial
influence played a part from the first3. A new and unwelcome
feature of ascetic life was displayed in the city during the
great doctrinal controversies, when large numbers of monks
flocked thither from the provinces, rousing general resentment
by their turbulent lawlessness. The Council of Chalcedon
tried to check these vagrants by putting all monasteries
under the control of the bishop of the diocese, and forbidding
the occupants to leave the cloister or take part in external

1 For this section see Holl and Meyer as before ; also Marin, Les Moines de
Constantinople, who gives an exhaustive account, but is apt to draw a composite
picture without distinguishing sufficiently the sources from which the details are
derived.

2 So Ehrhard in Krumbacher's Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur, C. 139.
" Unsere Kenntnis von den konkreten Zustanden in der byzantischen Klosterwelt
1st nun leider noch zu liickenhaft, um den historischen Hintergrund, von dem sich
die ganze Litteraturgattung abhebt, genau erkennen zu konnen."

3 See Marin, Les Moines de Constantinople, pp. 4, 44.

9—2

132 Subsequent Influence in the East

affairs without his permission1. Monastic discipline was
sharpened still further by Justinian. Like other Byzantine
ecclesiastical legislators, he did not consider himself an
innovator, but claimed to follow the tradition of "the holy
fathers," and codify existing regulations. In his legislation
he insisted on a common life, making it the one legal form
of monachism, and forbidding any monk to have his private
dwelling or " cell " (TO \a\ovpevov ice\\iov). This rule how
ever allowed of some exceptions. Those who wished to live
a life of contemplation might have anchorites' cells, but inside
the cenobium ; the number of such was to be strictly limited2.
Either this legislation was only intended for the cenobia
— the anchorites being omitted as relatively unimportant — or
else it proved abortive, for in the next period we find
solitaries clustered round a famous ascetic, just as they had
done from the beginning3.

Justinian also strengthened the power of the bishop, who
was to preside over the founding of a monastery by fixing
a cross4, conduct the election of a new abbot by the monks,
and exercise a general legal as well as ecclesiastical juris
diction over them5. A probation of three years was fixed,
during which secular clothing was worn. After this the
monk was professed and received the religious habit (o-%?}yi6a)6.
Several of the older monks were to be ordained in order to
take the services, but if there was no church in the monastery,
the monks went to the nearest church, returning immediately
after the service7. They were tied down to their monastery,
and could only go out with the abbot's consent8. Double
monasteries were forbidden9.

1 Can. 4 ; cf. 8.

2 Nov. 5, 3; 133, praef. i.

3 See Meyer, pp. n — 14 and Holl's criticism, pp. 193 — 6. The latter says,
" Meiner Meinung nach ist also von den freien Anachoreten und von Lauren
in der ganzen Gesetzgebung Justinian's iiberhaupt nicht die Rede. Justinian
kummert sich nur um die Koivd^ia und will, dass dort der Kowbs filos wirklich
durchgefuhrt werde." On p. 197 he gives instances of the old type of laura in the
following centuries.

4 ffTavpoirrjyia. A wooden cross was buried behind the high altar.

5 Nov. 5, i ; 131, 7; 133, 4. 6 ib. 123, 35.
7 ib. 133* 2- 8 ib- !33» i. 9 ib. 123, 36.

Subsequent Influence in the East 133

The general tendency of this is clear. Organised monasti-
cism as found in the cenobia was to be subject to the bishops,
and through them to the State. Unorganised asceticism was
of less importance and could be left out of view. To outward
appearance Basil's cenobitic system conquered, but the inner
spirit evaporated. The anchorite ideal gained a firm footing
within the cenobia, and under the circumstances it was easy
and natural to regard it as the higher mode of life.

(iii) The Byzantine State Church continued to exercise
a controlling influence over the internal affairs of monasticism.
The Trullan Council in 692 forbade any monk to become an
eremite without a three years' probation in a cenobium1. A
desire was felt by many monasteries to get rid of the control
of the diocesan bishop and come directly under the patriarch.
Germanus (715 — 730) furthered this movement, which was
prompted by the same motives as the similar tendency in
the West, by ordering that all monasteries at whose foundation
the patriarchal cross had been used should remain within the
patriarch's jurisdiction2. By this time the ideas of the so-
called Dionysius the Areopagite had become a force in Greek
monachism, and the priestly and monastic ranks were ac
cordingly thought of as " mysteries," deserving of equal honour
and corresponding to the vocations of Martha and Mary
respectively3.

We now reach Theodore of Studium, the greatest figure,
after Basil, in the history of Greek-speaking monachism4.
About 463 Studius, an ex-consul, had founded a church at
Constantinople which was called the Studium after its founder.
Though not intended originally for their use, it was occupied
before long by the Akoimetai (" Sleepless Ones "), a body of
monks founded by Alexander (died c. 430). Their dis
tinguishing characteristic was the maintenance of an unceasing
round of prayer and praise. The monastery reached a great
size, and the members were divided into "choruses" for the
purposes of devotion. Towards the end of the eighth century

1 Can. 41. 2 Zockler, Askese und Monchtum, p. 294.

3 Zockler, p. 29-2.

4 To the authorities already cited add Miss A. Gardner, Theodore of Studium.

134 Subsequent Influence in the East

this monastery had fallen from its high estate, and its numbers
had dwindled to ten1. Theodore was the means of its revival
and reorganisation. Born of a noble family in 759, he had
renounced the world in company with other members of his
family, and had received his early lessons in asceticism from
his uncle Paul, the abbot of Saccudio. Paul formed the
highest opinion of his nephew and promoted him to be abbot
in his place. As Theodore would not let his uncle retire, the
two ruled for a while as joint-abbots, first at Saccudio, and
then at Studium (789). The time was ripe for a revival in
monasticism, which had fallen on evil days, partly perhaps
because its free spirit had been crushed by an excess of State
regulation. But the Church now came to realise that it was
more than a mere department of State, and put forth its
whole strength in the struggle against the iconoclast Emperors.
Monasticism had to bear the brunt of the battle ; while the
parish priests submitted to the imperial orders, the convents
resisted and had in consequence to endure cruel persecutions.
But, when the final victory was won, monasticism enjoyed a
renewed life and increased prestige.

Theodore's main inspiration came from a study of the
monastic fathers, and especially the ascetic works of Basil2.
He revived the common life, and insisted on the carrying out
of the obligations of brotherhood even to the minutest details,
such as a common stock of clothes. The abbot's powers
were increased, and under him was placed a row of other
officials who were obliged to report to him everything that
happened. Constant instruction of the brethren in the prin
ciples of asceticism and their application to community life
was made a special feature of the system. Provision was
made for education and the care of the sick, but " the sick, as
the young, seem to have been members of the community."
A certain amount of philanthropic work, such as doles to the
poor, visiting of invalids and prisoners, and performing of
funeral rites, was also undertaken by the monks3.

1 Gardner, p. 67.

2 Cf. Ehrhard (in Krumbacher), p. 147, " Massgebende Autoritat fiir das
geistliche Leben ist fiir ihn Basilios, nicht der Pseudoareopagite."

3 Gardner, pp. 71 — 79.

Subsequent Influence in the East 135

A point of some interest may be mentioned here.
Theodore deprecates the custom of giving two different
habits, the Little and the Great : " Do not give what they
call the little habit, and then, some time later, another as the
larger. For there is one habit, as there is one baptism, and
this is the practice of the Holy Fathers. Depart not from the
rules and canons of the Fathers, especially of the holy Father
Basil1." The purpose of the arrangement was to set some of
the brethren free for the contemplative life. To the monks
of the Little Habit fell the practical work of the monastery,
such as the entertainment of visitors ; the abbot, as the business
head of the community, was chosen from their number2. The
origin of the distinction is obscure, but it was clearly con
nected with the custom, provided for in Justinian's Laws, of
allowing some of the monks to pass from the cenobitic to the
eremitic or higher stage. In protesting against it Theodore
proved himself a true son of Basil.

The reformed convent of Studium became a centre from
which influences streamed out to all parts of the Greek world.
Many parts of Theodore's Rules were adopted on Mount Athos,
which in its turn became the headquarters of monasticism.
Moreover, the monastery of Kief in South Russia drew its
inspiration from Studium, and so through Kief Studium has
affected the whole of the later ecclesiastical history of Russia3.

The later Constantinopolitan period is marked therefore
by a revival of Basilian ideas. In so far as Basil only adum
brated principles which were not thoroughly worked out till
Theodore's time, the latter may be called the true legislator
of Greek cenobitism. But we must remember that the
monasteries were not all Studite, even after Theodore's
influence had spread far and wide. Lauras of semi-eremitic

1 Gardner, p. 73 (Migne, P. G. xcix. 1820 C). This is the earliest mention of
the distinction, TO tuxpbv crx^a and TO fj.tya <TX??/UCI.

2 Holl, pp. 200 — 202. Butler (Enc. Brit. art. "Basilian Monks") compares
the distinction in the West between choir-monks and lay-brothers. But the
practice of choosing the abbot from the possessors of the Little Habit seems
to make the comparison of little value. Both grades were of course and still are
quite independent of sacerdotal rank.

3 Meyer, p. 19.

136 Subsequent Influence in the East

monks, such as we found in early times and shall meet again
in the next period, did not cease to exist. And certain
changes had been made in the common life as understood
by Basil, for a custom had grown up, so Theodore tells us,
of allowing some of the monks to withdraw from the common
life and apply themselves exclusively to contemplation ; they
wore a distinctive robe and without doubt enjoyed a higher
estimation.

(iv) For the latest period of Greek monachism we are
justified in confining ourselves to Mount Athos1, which in
this respect is a microcosm of the Eastern Church. "The
Holy Mountain " has been the chief sanctuary of Eastern
asceticism for nearly a thousand years. " He who knows the
history of the convents of the Holy Mountain, knows the
history of Greek monasticism in its completest form2."

The beginnings of the movement followed the same course
as elsewhere. First of all, in the ninth century, there were
solitaries ; Peter the Athonite landed on the peninsula about
840, and is said to have lived in a cave for fifty years, while
Euthymius of Thessalonica, another famous pioneer, arrived
in 8593. Then came a loose grouping of solitaries, and
finally the fully developed monasteries. The chief law-giver
during these early days was Athanasius, who lived in the
latter half of the tenth century. His leading ideas were
derived from the Studium, and so ultimately from Basil.
He allowed five anchorites within the cenobium or laura4,
but, a somewhat unusual trait, considered theirs a lower
vocation than that of those who remained in the common
life5. These early convents belonged to a class which had
grown up during the preceding period, but of whose origin
there is no clear trace ; they were independent, and outside
the jurisdiction of the Church authorities. However, in 1312
the reigning Emperor rectified this anomaly by putting the

1 Besides Meyer, Lake, The Early Days of Monasticism on Mount Athos and
Riley, Athos > or The Mountain of the Monks are useful. Cf. Curzon, Visits to
Monasteries of the Levant.

2 Meyer, p. 4. 3 Lake, pp. 12, 41 — 52.

4 We now find laura used in this new sense, as equivalent to cenobium.
6 Meyer, p. 28. These anchorites are now called Celliotes.

Subsequent Influence in the East 137

Protos (general superintendent of the Holy Mountain) under
the patriarch of Constantinople and ordering him to receive
his consecration from the latter1.

In the later middle ages a new and surprising develop
ment took place, namely, the rise of the idiorrhythmic system.
Under this arrangement the monks retained their private
property, the Protos disappeared, and the organisation of the
community assumed a loosely democratic form. The first
trace of the new system appears in 1374, but the time of its
greatest prosperity, both in Athos and elsewhere, was the
sixteenth century. It must not be taken as implying a return
to the eremitic ideal, for the eremitic system continued to
have its place by the side of the idiorrhythmic monasteries,
but rather as superseding the cenobia2. The sixteenth
century was marked by a decay of zeal, to which both the
political situation and the idiorrhythmic system contributed.
From that time onward a steady improvement has been
witnessed. In the eighteenth century a reaction in favour
of cenobitism set in, and has continued. The Skitae also
received their constitution at this time, though they had
existed since the sixteenth century. These are anchorites
living at a distance from a monastery, but reckoned as
members of it. They lead a life of considerable austerity,
and most of the Great Habit monks are now found among
their number. They are to be distinguished carefully from
the modern Celliotai, on whom no special ascetic obligation
is laid, and who are really solitary monkish peasants3.

At the present time all three types of monachism — the
eremitic, cenobitic and idiorrhythmic — are represented on
Mount Athos and in the Eastern Church generally. The
official Church however has remained true to early ideals
and mistrusts the idiorrhythmic type as a secularised form of
monasticism. But, if we may judge from Mr A. Riley's words,

1 Meyer, pp. 25, 54.

2 Meyer, pp. 57 ff. Cf. p. 2 for the ultimate significance of the movement,
" Mit dem Eigenthum findet auch die Cultur ihren Weg in das Kloster. Luxus
und Weltleben sind eingedrungen, aber auch Interesse fiir Bildung und Wissen-
schaft, flir die Aufgaben der Cultur, fiir die Nationalitat."

3 Meyer, pp. 71, 83 — 86.

138 Subsequent Influence in the East

the system is in closer touch with modern ideas than its rivals.
" In an idiorrhythmic monastery each monk lives as he
pleases ; if rich he has a suite of apartments, if poor he shares
a cell with a brother. Discipline is kept up by public opinion
rather than by authority... .We were much surprised at hearing
that the idiorrhythmic system was the more economical
of the two (i.e. the idiorrhythmic and cenobitic). The monks
explained that in this case each inmate cultivated his own
little garden, and we were led to infer that when they worked
for themselves individually they accomplished more than when
they laboured for the common weal1." Meyer also points out
that this type has been more in touch with the reviving spirit
of Nationalism than the others, and may well have an im
portant part to play in the future2. The cenobitic type
persists ; these monks are still governed by an abbot
(hegoumenos] and preserve the distinction of novices, the
Little Habit, and the Great Habit. Of the latter it is re
ported that " very few enter this, the highest monastic grade,
which entails almost complete withdrawal from earthly things
and a life entirely devoted to religious exercises. The great
majority of the Athos monks belong to the second grade, of
the Little Habit, though many assume the Great Habit on
their death-beds3." The common life, that is to say, survives,
but to withdraw from it as far as possible is the monk's
highest ideal. And, finally, just as eremitism was the earliest
form of monachism, so in a sense it is the latest, for through
out the East this type still exists in much of its pristine
vigour.

The national jealousies which have been the bane of
Eastern Christendom are reproduced in the monasteries,
which keep closely to the lines of nationality4. In other
respects as well the Western observer will find material for

1 Athos, pp. 66, 378, 379. 2 pp. 2, 3, 60.

8 Riley, Athos, p. 68.

4 Meyer, p. 89, "Das russische Monchtum ist ein anderes als das griechische,
das rumanische ein anderes als das bulgarische oder serbische. Russen, Griechen,
Rumanen konnten heute nur mit gewalt in einem und demselben Kloster
dauernd zusammengehalten werden. Ein gemeinsames Leben in Frieden und
Liebe gabe das nicht."

Subsequent Influence in the East 139

unfavourable criticism in the monasteries of the East. It
would be surprising if they did not show scars of conflict
from the secular struggle with the Turk. But, much as
Greek-speaking monachism has suffered from this cause, it
is doubtful whether the course of development would have
been much different, even if the Byzantine Empire had stood
to this day. Russia is the true heir to the spiritual kingdom
of Constantinople, and Russian monasticism in all essentials
is one with that of the Greek-speaking Church.

The foregoing sketch of 1500 years of Greek monastic
life, in spite of its inadequacy, may perhaps serve a purpose
in providing a historical framework for our account of Basil's
influence on the later Church. Let us now inquire how far
first his actual Rules, then the ideals enshrined in them, have
maintained their position in Eastern monasticism.

Basil's Rules have always held a high place in the theory
of the Eastern Church. During the Palestinian period they
formed a subject of instruction in the convents1. When
Justinian and other legislators spoke of "the holy fathers,"
they had Basil chiefly in mind. Theodore of Studium em
bodied much of their contents in his own Constitutions.
Studium had, so to speak, daughter-houses at Kief and on
Mount Athos, and Athanasius specially recommended the
study of Basil's works to the monks of Athos2. But there
must always have been many who were ready to cry with the
twelfth century abbot, What need have we of such writings3?
At the present time, so Mr Riley says, " Oriental monks are
not governed by any code of laws laid down by any
particular saint or founder, but are bound by the Canons •,
i.e. the monastic disciplinary enactments of the Oecumenical
Councils of the Catholic Church, especially of that part of
the Sixth Council known as the Concilium in Trullo4."
Dom Butler puts the matter rather differently : " To this
day the Rules of Basil and the Constitutions of Theodore the

1 Holl, p. 173. 2 See Meyer, p. 18.

3 Referring to Gregory of Nazianzus. Euthymius of Thessalonica reports
the incident, see Ehrhard in Krumbacher, Geschichte tier byzantinischen Litteratur,
C. 140.

4 Athos, p. 65.

140 Subsequent Influence in the East

Studite, along with the Canons of the Councils, constitute
the chief part of Greek and Russian monastic law1." There
is an apparent difference of opinion between the two writers,
but only on the surface. The monasteries, so it seems, have
a general body of disciplinary regulations which are held in
theoretical honour and among which the Rules of Basil are
the oldest and perhaps most famous, but each convent is
more or less a law to itself, and its own tradition and public
opinion are far more important than would be the case in the
West. In actual practice the Basilian Rules are very little
known or studied.

But have not the monks of the East perhaps remained
faithful to the tradition of Basil, even while they have known
little of his Rules ? To go through the Rules in detail and
show to what extent they were repeated in later Canons and
Constitutions would be a formidable task and quite outside
the limits of the present study2. It may be readily granted
that some of Basil's regulations have been repeated by later
legislators and have passed into the common stock of Eastern
Church custom. But when we look below the surface it will
be seen that the distinctive principles of Basil's ascetic work
have not been the dominating influences in Greek monasti-
cism. It has been shown above3 that Basil's main contribution
to monasticism lay in his advocacy of the common life as the
highest type of asceticism, from which he drew certain logical
consequences, such as the observance of a moderate standard
of austerity attainable by all, and the necessity of frequent
confession. Hardly less important than this was the extent
to which he brought the monasteries into close relations with
the official Church as represented by the episcopate, and the
practical activities by which the monks were to serve the
Church and humanity at large. A service less conspicuous,
but not to be left out of consideration, was his consecration
of the highest culture of the day on the altar of the ascetic
life.

1 Enc. Brit. art. " Basilian Monks."

2 A good deal 'of material will be found in Marin, Les Moines de Constanti
nople.

3 See pp. 123 — 126.

Subsequent Influence in the East 141

It may be said at once without fear of contradiction that
on the most crucial point of all the later Church has never
assimilated Basil's teaching. Cenobitism has endured through
the centuries as a possible mode of monachism. For much of
the time it has shared the field with the eremitic system ;
during the last 500 years, since the rise of idiorrhythmic
monasteries, it has been only one out of three possible
systems. Not only has Basil's cenobitism failed to establish
itself as the prevailing method, but even within the cenobium
itself the common life as understood by him has received a
fatal blow in the intrusion of the solitary life. Even Justinian,
who attempted to make the cenobitic the normal form of
monachism, by allowing solitaries within the cenobium made
it clear that he regarded the eremitic life as the higher. The
tendency finally crystallised into the institution of the Great
Habit, the possessors of which are considered by public
opinion to have chosen the better part1. The austerities of
later Greek monachism have not as a rule been excessive ;
but it would be better to attribute this to a natural declension
from the rigour of early ideals than to any consistent working-
out of the consequences of the common life, such as is found
in Basil's Rules.

The alliance between the secular Church and monasticism
inaugurated by Basil has proved permanent2. It has even
become an organic union, since it is the common custom for
the episcopate to be recruited from the monasteries, while the
married parish priests are debarred from the highest order of
the Church. This has probably operated in two ways ; it has
certainly caused asceticism to be recognised as the highest
form of Christianity, but the chief officers of the Church, as
might be expected from their training, have been on the
whole markedly deficient in knowledge of affairs and powers
of leadership. Except in the case of convents under the
influence of Studium, Eastern monachism has not in the later
centuries preserved the Basilian traditions in the matter of

1 Justinian (Nov. 5, c. 3) describes those who lived in the cells as TT}S KOIVOTIJTOS
tiri r6 KpeirTov d^rjprjfjifrovs.

2 Athos has been in some respects an exception to the rule.

142 Subsequent Infliience in the East

the care of the sick and the education of the young. The
neglect of practical activities in favour of an exclusive effort
after the contemplation of God is a natural consequence of the
weakening of the cenobitic ideal.

In the intellectual field Byzantine monachism rendered no
mean service in the early middle ages by its literary labours1.
But at the present time the Eastern monks, with a few honour
able exceptions, are quite out of touch with the intellectual
movements of the age, and their neglect of the literary
treasures of which they are custodians is the despair of
European savants.

It would seem then that the characteristically Basilian
features of monasticism have made but little appeal to the
mind of the later Greek Church. Nor is the case otherwise
if we consider certain principles which Basil did not originate,
but took over from Pachomius and recommended for general
adoption, such as manual labour, the grouping of monasteries
into a kind of order or federation, and the close association
of the two sexes. The element of continuous hard work as
an essential factor in monastic life has been practically
eliminated from the Eastern monasteries of to-day. Basil
wished the monks of higher education to apply themselves
mainly to mental labour and sacred studyj but the putting of
manual labour into the background has not been accompanied
by any compensating emphasis on theological studies. Eastern
monachism has always remained to a great extent formless.
The maxim " Union is Strength " has never been appreciated,
and Basil's plans for linking the monasteries of a district, and
calling periodical conferences of abbots, have never been
properly carried out2. And again, the institution of double
monasteries belonged to a time of primitive enthusiasm.

1 See Ehrhard in Krumbacher, op. cit. p. 140, "Die byzantischen Monche
stehen nicht nur in der ersten Reihe der theologischen Schriftsteller ; ohne sie
wiirde auch die Zahl der profanen Litteraten nicht unwesentlich zusammen-
schrumpfen ; namentlich wenn man beachtet dass viele derselben erst dann Zeit
und Lust zu litterarischen Schaffen fanden, als sie sich in ein Kloster zuriickgezogen
hatten."

2 There was however some such organisation in Constantinople and its
neighbourhood, where the term Archimandrite was used for the Superior of a
group of monasteries.

Subsequent Influence in the East 143

It proved unworkable and was definitely forbidden by
Justinian. One can sympathise with the reaction from pagan
license which caused so strong a movement towards personal
purity and made even Basil's double monasteries an object
of suspicion, in spite of the numerous safeguards which he
devised. But ordinances such as that which excludes even
female animals from the precincts of a convent of men cannot
but strike the observer as ridiculous.

In writing the above we have not wished to disparage the
medieval and modern developments of Greek monachism — to
seek God by a process of abstraction from phenomena is as
legitimate as the method, more popular in modern times, of
seeking Him in phenomena — only to point out that, as a
matter of history, Basil's ideals have not been realised in the
East. He was in many ways of a thoroughly Western
temperament, active, restless, and full of organising and ruling
ability. It is not surprising if the East, while revering his
name, has misunderstood his spirit1.

These then are the results of our investigation. Basil's
Rules form part of the traditional authorities on which the
monks of the East rely. Some of their details have passed
into the common stock of tradition, and are still practised
to-day. But there is no Basilian Order ; the modern monks
do not call themselves by Basil's name. Nor should it be
applied to them by outsiders, for in many important respects
they observe neither the letter nor the spirit of his ascetic
writings.

1 In the political and economic spheres the Christian nations of the Near East
have now entered into the family of European nations. But in ecclesiastical
matters the traditional distinction between the spirit of the West and that of the
East seems still valid.

CHAPTER IX

SUBSEQUENT INFLUENCE IN THE WEST

BEFORE deciding to what extent Basil's influence in the
East was permanent, we found it necessary to sketch the
fortunes of Greek monachism down to the present day. The
question of his influence in the West is not less important,
but in this case the inquiry can be confined within narrower
limits and need not extend beyond Benedict. Any influence
that the Rules of Basil may have had on the later Western
Church has been indirect, and mediated through the Bene
dictine Rule.

There is a subsidiary question that should be discussed
before attacking the main problem, namely, the Greek
monasteries of South Italy and Sicily. These form an in
teresting by-path of Church History, but are of no real
significance for the history of monasticism, though they form
a link of some importance in the development of European
culture. They were in reality a piece of Eastern Church
life transplanted to the West, which gradually yielded to
the influences of its environment and became thoroughly
Westernised. Here at last we shall find what we failed to
find in the East, a " Basilian Order" in a true sense1.

The southernmost provinces of Italy, Calabria and Apulia,
after suffering severely in the Lombard invasions, became
almost completely Hellenised in the following centuries, and
remained part of the Byzantine Empire until they were

1 The following account is drawn mainly from some valuable articles by
Prof. Lake in the Journal of Theological Studies (1902, 1903), with help from
Schneemann (art. " Basilianer " in Kirchenlexicori), Pargoire (art. " Basile" in
Diet. cTArchtol. chrgt.} and Heimbucher, Die Orden, pp. 46, 47.

Subsequent Influence in the West 145

conquered by the Normans in the middle of the eleventh
century. Sicily was conquered from the Greeks by the
Saracens at an earlier period (827 — 902). The political
situation was reflected in the ecclesiastical world, and for a
long period the Church in Sicily and South Italy was an
integral part of the patriarchate of Constantinople. During
the seventh century a stream of settlers came from the East
to these Western provinces, many of them fleeing from the
troubles which were devastating the Levant. A large number
of monks came with the settlers, some of whom went to
Rome and other Latin centres, where, though preserving for
a while the Greek language and manner of life, they were
soon assimilated in all essentials to the neighbouring Latin
monasteries. Others went to Sicily and kept their Greek
character. South Italy was almost a desert at this time, and
may be left out of consideration. Its importance began in
the ninth century, when the Greeks fled across the straits of
Messina to escape from the Saracen invasions of Sicily.
The beginnings of monachism here followed the same course
of development as elsewhere among the Greeks — first solitary
ascetics, then a period of lauras, then true cenobitic con
vents. There is no trace of the existence of any Basilian1
monasteries in Calabria before 850 or thereabouts. Owing
to the Saracen raids, which exercised a continuous pressure
from the south, there was a tendency to move northwards.
Before long the monks showed signs of greater union among
themselves, and a desire to cultivate literary studies. When
the Normans came, they found a great number of Basilian
monasteries, using the Greek language and strongly opposed
to Rome. In pursuance of their policy of reducing ec
clesiastical affairs to order, they Latinised many of the
monasteries, which now passed under the Benedictine Rule.
But in purely Greek districts the Basilian convents were
allowed to remain ; in fact new ones were founded and the

1 The word is convenient, though in their origin these monasteries were no
more Basilian than the corresponding ones of the East. They became Basilian in
course of time ; the existence of neighbouring convents owning Benedict as a
spiritual father probably led them to emphasise their relation to the father of
Greek monachism.

L. C. 10

146 Subsequent Influence in the West

old monasteries placed under their control, a method which
was found better suited to the requirements of the feudal
system. But the tendency to Latinisation proved irresistible,
and set in strongly during the thirteenth century, when the
Greeks were practically Romanised. In the fifteenth century
the individuality of these convents was temporarily revived.
They now became a fully-developed Order in the Western
sense. There was great enthusiasm at the time for Hellenic
studies, and hopes of a reunion between East and West
were entertained. In 1446 a general council of the Order
of St Basil was held, and Bessarion was appointed General of
the Order ; he made a resume of the Basilian Rules, which was
to be the formal Rule of the Order. He was also a great col
lector of manuscripts, and it is important to notice that, when
the revival of interest in Greek literature began in Italy, there
was a number of traditional Greek centres near to hand in
these monasteries, many of which had valuable libraries.

This intensification of the Greek side of the Basilian
convents was only temporary, and before long they became
completely absorbed in the Roman Church. A brief sketch
of their subsequent history may be not without interest.

In 1573 Gregory XIII instituted a further reform, making
them into a centralised congregation, in which certain Spanish
Basilians were included. At the present time very few traces
of the Order remain in the West. The famous monastery of
Grotta Ferrata (founded in 1002 by St Nilus) still exists, and
is treated by the Italian Government as a historical monu
ment ; the Greek rite is still used within its walls. There is
another in Toronto, the daughter-house of a small French
convent at Annay. A number of monasteries are to be
found among the Ruthenians, who were united to the Roman
Church in 1596, mainly through the influence of the Basilians.
Pius VII in 1822 described them as "the great support of
the true faith among the Ruthenians." There are also a few
Basilian monasteries among the Uniat bodies of the East,
and in this way the Basilians have returned to their original
home, having assumed at last, thanks to the organising spirit
of the West, the form of a true " Order."

Subsequent Influence in the West 147

We must now return to the main stream of Church life
and trace the influence of Basil's Rules on Latin-speaking
monachism1. An unorganised ascetic life had been known
in Italy from an early date, though it had not been practised
so widely as in the East. But the monastic life proper was
introduced in the West at a definite time, and struck the
imagination of the Italians as something novel2. The visit
of Athanasius to Rome in 339 accompanied by two Eastern
monks may be considered the historical origin of Western
monachism. Through him, either now or a little later, the
story of Antony's life was introduced to the knowledge of
the West and became the recognised model for monks.
Monasteries of the Antonian type were rapidly organised,
amongst which the most famous are Ambrose's foundation
at Milan, and the convent at Aquileia where Rufinus and
Jerome received their training in the ascetic life. In France
the first great popular figure in the records of monachism
was the famous Martin of Tours, whose monastery outside
the city " was a simple reproduction of the Antonian mo
nachism of Egypt3." These early Western monks were felt
to be no whit inferior to the Easterns, and the fame of
Martin spread all over the East soon after his death4.
Monasticism throughout the world was conscious of a funda
mental spiritual unity.

At the end of the fourth century other influences began
to assert themselves. In 397 Rufinus returned to Aquileia
after his travels in the East, and at the request of Urseius,
abbot of Pinetum, translated the Rules of Basil into Latin.
He interpreted his task with some freedom, and out of the
original 55 Longer and 313 Shorter Rules made a new
edition of 203 Rules5. This version was the channel through

1 Spreitzenhofer, Die Ent-wicklung des alten Monchtums in Italien is the
fullest description of the pre-Benedictine period.

2 Seep. 31.

3 Butler, Lausiac History, I. 245. Jerome, Ep. 58, shows how the Egyptian
anchorites were the recognised model : "Romani duces imitentur Camillos, etc....
Nos autem habeamus propositi nostri principes Paulos et Antonios, Julianos,
Hilariones, Macarios."

4 Sulp. Sev. Dial i. 23—26. 5 See Appendix B.

10 2

148 Subsequent Influence in the West

which the Basilian system reached the West. Rufinus shows
in his preface that he anticipated its use in many convents.
But pre-Benedictine Western monasticism was eclectic in
its methods and there is no sign that any community adopted
the Basilian Rules just as they stood. They were only one
among many forces that influenced the West, fso doubt the
reputation of Ambrose had something to do with their
favourable reception. Ambrose was a great admirer of Basil,
and in compiling his Hexaemeron made considerable use of
Basil's work on the same subject. Dionysius, Ambrose's
(orthodox) predecessor in the see of Milan, had been exiled
to Cappadocia, where he died in 374 ; with Basil's assistance
his body was brought back to Milan.

Other Eastern Rules, such as Jerome's translation of the
Rule of Pachomius, also reached the West. But none of
these were regarded as providing the fixed type of monachism;
very much was left to the discretion of the abbot, whose
position was of much more importance than in later times1.
Dom Butler describes the situation thus : " I do not know
of any evidence that would lead us to suppose that the life
of any monastery in Italy (or Western Europe) was organised
on the lines of either system " — i.e. Basilian or Pachomian.
" Italian monachism in the fifth century seems to have been
eclectic in character, and to have freely borrowed ideas and
regulations from these two Rules, and from other documents
of Egyptian origin — from Cassian, the Historia Monackorum,
the Apophthegmata, the Regula Orientalis, the Regula Sera-
pionis, the Regula Macarii, the Regula SS. Patrum. St Bene
dict shows familiarity with all these documents ; and this
goes to prove that they were all in current use in the
monasteries of Central Italy at the end of the fifth century2."

Cassian, who has been mentioned above, deserves a brief
notice, since he was undoubtedly the most considerable
figure in Western monasticism before Benedict3. After

1 Cf. Spreitzenhofer, op. cit. p. 39, "In jedem Kloster der Wille des Abtes
die oberste und ofter auch alleinige Regel darstellte."

2 Lausiac History ', I. 249.

3 See Bp Gibson's prolegomena to his translation of Cassian in the Nicene and
post-Nicene Fathers.

Subsequent Influence in the West 149

long-continued travels in the East he returned to Gaul and
founded a monastery at Marseilles in the year 410, at the
same time that Honoratus was organising his famous convent
at Lerins. In his Institutes and Conferences Cassian gave
the West a great storehouse of information on the customs
of the Eastern monks. He was perhaps the first who really
appreciated the difference between the physical constitutions
of Eastern and Western men, and to a certain extent he
followed Basil's lead in recommending to the latter a miti
gation of austerities. At the end of the preface to the
Institutes he says : " I shall however venture to exercise this
discretion in my work — that where I find anything in the
rule of the Egyptians which, either because of the severity
of the climate, or owing to some difficulty or diversity of
habits, is impossible in these countries, or hard or difficult,
I shall to some extent balance it by the customs of the
monasteries which are found throughout Pontus and Meso
potamia1." But he seems to have owed comparatively little
to his study of the Basilian Rules. While there are many
parallelisms in the thoughts of the two writers, cases of
literary dependence of Cassian on the older writer are very
few2.

If Cassian saw that monasticism must be adapted to
Western needs, the credit of taking the necessary steps in
this direction must be ascribed to the famous Benedict of
Nursia. Benedict was born about 480 and belonged to a
noble family, like so many of his spiritual sons in later
times. He was sent to Rome for his education, but some
time about 500 he left the capital, disgusted with the vices
of city life, and resolved to become a monk. He is said

1 Pontus must refer to the Basilian monasteries. The austerities of Mesopo-
tamian monachism, however, were if anything more severe than those practised in
Egypt. See p. 42.

2 The following seem to be clear cases: Cass., Inst. I. i = Basil, F. 23 (the
girdle); Inst. I. 2 = F. 11 (the monk's dress); Inst. I. 6 = F. 22 (sheep-skin and
goat-skin); Inst. iv. 17 = B. 180 (reading aloud at meals). In the last passage
Cassian says expressly that it is a Cappadocian, not Egyptian, custom. B. 180 is
not in Rufinus' version of Basil's Rules, so perhaps this is an exception to the
statement that Basil's Rules were only known in the West through Rufinus. But
the report may have reached Cassian orally.

150 Subsequent Influence in the West

to have spent three years of complete solitude in a cave,
after which he came out and organised the disciples that had
gathered round him into a monastery. Before long it became
necessary to found a number of other monasteries in the
neighbourhood. Benedict finally returned to Monte Cassino,
where he presided over the foundation most closely connected
with his name.

The revival of Western monachism that dated from
Benedict was most opportune. A new impulse was sorely
needed ; while its general spirit was, as we have seen, thoroughly
eclectic, yet it was generally understood that the lives of the
Egyptian monks were suitable models for general imitation.
But it had proved impossible for Western men to practise
the austerities associated with their ideal, and so the general
feeling was one of " discouragement and demoralisation con
sequent on an abiding sense of failure1." To meet the needs
of the situation Benedict composed his famous Rule2, which
aimed at enforcing a moderate rule of life that would be
practicable for all. Its leading features were the insistence
on a common life, the elimination of individual austerities, the
requiring of manual labour and study of Scripture, the careful
regulation of the real Work of the community, namely the
continual round of devotion, the forbidding of a monk to
leave the monastery where he had been professed, and the
definition of the abbot's position and powers — he was to be
elected by the monks and had to consult with them, but the
Rule was to guide him instead of, as heretofore, his own
discretion. It is important to notice Benedict's attitude
towards the eremitic life. He legislated only for cenobites,
though he recognised the existence of the other ideal. His
Rule is but "a little Rule for beginners" (minima inchoationis
regula)\ but his own monks were precluded by their vow of
stabilitas from passing over to a hermit life. He made no

1 Butler, Lausiac History p, I. 251.

2 Dom Butler's edition (Freiburg, 1912), supersedes former editions. The
English reader will find Dom Hunter-Blair's edition still useful (2nd ed. London,
1906). Miss Hodgson gives a most attractive account in Ch. Quart. Rev.
Jan. 1912.

Subsequent Influence in the West 151

provision for any federation of monasteries. Each house was
to be independent and self-sufficing.

The literary sources of the Benedictine Rule have been
given by Dom Butler in his new edition. In a number of
places Benedict has borrowed from Basil's Rules1, but as
regards details Cassian was by far the most important of his
authorities. Cassian was nearer to him in point of time and
had written for Western men; it was therefore only to be
expected that Benedict should make more use of his writings.
But he recommended for further study by his monks not
only the books of the Bible, but the writings of the holy
Catholic Fathers, the Conferences and Institutes (i.e. of Cas
sian) and "the Rule of our holy father Basil2." Basil is the
only Father expressly named, and the fundamental principles
of his monastic system were, in the main, reproduced by
Benedict3.

Let us look first at the similarities between the two Rules.
Dr Dudden, in an admirable sketch of the Benedictine
Rule, sees in it three main principles — absolute obedience,
simplicity of living, and constant occupation4. This would
serve equally well for a description of the Basilian Rule,
though it would fail to express its special characteristics. If
we go a little further in our inquiry, we find that both Rules
inculcate unconditional obedience to the Superior, active
work, and the practising of silence and humility ; the regula
tions for the reception of new-comers into the community are

1 The following parallels are extracted from Butler's notes. The Basilian
Rules are referred to in Rufinus' version, through which they were known in the
West (see Appendix B). Benedict, 2, lines 8— io = Bas. Reg. 15; Ben. 2, 68 =
Bas. 98; Ben. 7, 91 — 96 = Bas. 12; Ben. 7, i57 = Bas. 62; Ben. 20, i ff. = Bas.
108; Ben. 31, 19— 2o = Bas. 103, cf. 104 (tools, etc., are consecrated to God);
Ben. 33, title = Bas. 29, title (should monks have private property?); Ben. 36,
i — 5 = Bas. 36; Ben. 40, 17 — Bas. 9; Ben. 48, i = Bas. 192 (et Salomon : Otiositas
inimica est animae, not in Greek text, see p. 166); Ben. 50, i — 5 = Bas. 107;
Ben. 55, 13— i4 = Bas. 9; Ben. 55, 42 — 45 = Bas. 94; Ben. 58, 14— i6 = Bas. 6;
Ben. 58, 62 = Bas. 106 ; Ben. 59, 22 = Bas. 7; Ben. 61, i7 = Bas. 192; Ben. 68,
4 — 8=^ Bas. 69.

2 C. 73.

3 So Butler, Enc. Brit. art. " Basilian Monks" : " St Benedict owed more
of the ground-ideas of his Rule to St Basil than to any other monastic legislator."

4 Gregory the Great, I. 109 — 114.

152 Subsequent Influence in the West

essentially the same in both. Both allow boys within the
monastery, and forbid the holding of property by individuals.
In each Rule great disciplinary powers are given to the abbot,
and exclusion from the community is ordained as the punish
ment of a contumacious monk1.

The main differences between the two Rules are these.
Basil is primarily a preacher, Benedict a legislator. Basil lays
down general principles and leaves their application to the
Superior, Benedict gives precise directions. Thus Benedict
has definite regulations for the clothes of the monks, the
hours of meals, the quality and amount of food, the number
of fasts, and the titles of the various officers, all of which are
left undefined in Basil2. In some respects Benedict is actually
opposed to Basil. Basil's convents are directly responsible
for philanthropic work and so must be in the neighbourhood
of towns ; visits to relations and friends are allowed under
due safeguards ; short term vows are contemplated in certain
cases ; a monk once excluded is never to be readmitted ; wine
is forbidden under normal circumstances. Benedict on the
contrary requires complete separation from the world, and a
permanent vow of stabilitas ; a lapsed monk may be re
admitted as many as three times before his final exclusion ;
wine is allowed as part of a much milder regime than had
hitherto been approved by any monastic legislator.

It is clear that the resemblances between the two Rules
are more important than the differences. Benedict owed
much to Basil. He adopted his main ideas, modifying them
however in the direction of " greater isolation from the world
and a milder regime of convent life3." There is little that is
original in Benedict's Rule, unless a talent for selection and
adaptation to local needs is a sign of originality. But the

1 This paragraph and the next are taken from Griitzmacher, Die Bedeutung
Benedikts von Nursid und seiner Regel in der Geschichte des Monchturns, pp. 40 ff.
On some points the statements (in respect of Basil's Rules) need qualification, see
p. 93 of this book for checks on the Superior's power, and p. 82 for the holding of
property.

2 Griitzmacher's remark on p. 42 is an over-statement, " Das Verhaltnis des
Kloster zum Diocesanbischof findet sich an keiner Stelle bei Basilius beriihrt."
See p. 102.

3 Griitzmacher, op. cit. p. 44.

Subsequent Influence in the West 153

Benedictine Rule, if less original than the Basilian, is superior
to it in every direction as a practical guide for the monastic
life. By its intrinsic merits it won a unique position in the
West, and remained for many centuries the dominating
influence in monasticism.

In Ireland, however, a different form of monachism pre
vailed, marked by enthusiastic missionary fervour and rigorous
austerities. One peculiar feature of Irish asceticism was the
existence of double monasteries. It is conceivable that
Rufinus' version of Basil's Rules, with its description of the
similar system in Cappadocia, had reached the far West. But
it is much more likely that the phenomenon appeared inde
pendently in two places, under analogous conditions of
primitive enthusiasm1.

In conclusion, one final question may be asked. What
was the fate in the West of those ideals which were Basil's
own special contribution to monasticism ? These were, so we
have seen above2, the establishment of cenobitism as the
highest and, apparently, the sole legitimate form of monachism,
the bringing into its service of the best culture of the time,
and the employment of the monks in works of practical use
fulness, such as the education of the young and the relief of
physical suffering.

In regard to the first of these, Benedict's definition of the
solitaries, or second class of monks, makes it plain that he
shared the prevailing view, that the cenobium was a kind of
school in which the monk could learn the rudiments of
asceticism, after which he could proceed to the higher stage
of solitude3. However, he did not allow his own monks to
pass over to the solitary life, and thus he agreed with Basil in
practice, if not in theory. In the second place, Benedict, like
Basil, was of noble family and good education, and many of

1 Cf. p. 105. 2 pp. 123 — 126.

3 " Deinde secundum genus est anachoritarum, id est heremitarum, horum qui
non conversationis fervore novicio sed monasterii probatione diuturna, qui didi-
cerunt contra diabolum multorum solacio iam docti pugnare ; et bene extructi
fraterna ex acie ad singularem pugnam heremi securi iam sine consolatione alterius,
sola manu vel brachio contra vitia carnis vel cogitationum Deo auxiliante pugnare
sufficiunt." Reg- Ben. i.

154 Subsequent Influence in the West

his followers resembled him in this particular. In his Rule
the daily study of Scripture and the Fathers was enjoined,
and the great services rendered to humanity in later centuries
by the literary labours of the Benedictines have their root
ultimately in this regulation of their founder. But the third
of Basil's ideals was not realised in the legislation of Benedict.
Whilst there are many references to boys in the Benedictine
Rule, which presuppose their presence in the monastery, there
is no express mention of a school such as we find in Basil.
And again, Benedict gives regulations for the reception of
guests, but these are apparently visitors who have come for
edification ; the remoteness of the monasteries from the out
side world prevented the monks from undertaking such works
of mercy as Basil had prescribed to his followers.

If Basil's ideals were only partially realised in Benedict,
they have been triumphantly vindicated by the course of later
Church history ; the most fruitful developments of Western
monasticism have been on the lines laid down by him.
Cenobitism under various forms has become the one recog
nised type of Western asceticism, and the solitary life has
practically ceased to exist. New Orders, such as the Jesuits
and Christian Brothers, have arisen, which have put the edu
cation of the young in the forefront of their policy ; while the
teaching sisterhoods have played an important part in the
education of girls in most Western countries. And, finally,
the work done by women ascetics in hospitals and orphanages
and in the poorest parts of big towns has won the admiration
of the outside world. " Sisters of Mercy " are honoured and
loved in quarters where there is little or no appreciation of the
ideals of the ascetic life.

We do not pretend that Basil had anything to do with
these later developments, but there is a striking resemblance
between his ideals and those of modern times. In some
respects he was in advance of his age ; certainly he was the
most modern among the pioneers of monasticism, and for this
reason, if for none other, his work has a permanent interest
for the student of asceticism.

CHAPTER X

EPILOGUE

OUR study of St Basil and his influence on the later
Church is now complete. However, in view of certain wide
spread misconceptions on the subject, it seems well to add a
few words on the real meaning of asceticism, and the value of
its ideals for the modern world.

In the foregoing pages we have dwelt almost entirely on
the external side of Basil's monastic work, and laid con
siderable stress on the practical activities which he required
from his monks. This was natural, seeing that the special
interest of the subject lies in this direction. But it must
not be thought that Basil was inspired by motives different
from those which have actuated other leaders of asceticism.
All alike have had one primary object, the love of God.
The love of man has followed from this in most cases as a
necessary deduction. In some writers — Basil for example —
it has been insisted on with more emphasis than in others ;
but it has always remained a secondary object. What Dom
Butler says of Benedict and his monks is equally true of
Basil: "His idea simply was to make them good: and if a
man is good, he will do good1." The fundamental idea of
monasticism has always been that the attainment of the
knowledge and love of God is a matter of such importance
as to demand the dedication of the whole life. The progress
of the great world outside, the triumphs of secular civilisation,
even the noble task which lies before the Church as a whole,
of consecrating to the service of God the treasures of art,

1 Camb. Med. Hist. i. 540.

156 Epilogue

science and literature — all these are not primarily for the
monk objects of interest. His concern is with the unseen
and eternal world. If activities beneficial to the Church and
world grow out of his life, so much the better. But he does
not set out with the conscious intention of improving the
world.

It is clear that such an ideal is strongly opposed to the
prevailing spirit of the age. " Other-worldly " is frequently
used as a term of reproach, and even devout Christians often
condemn the monk's life for its " uselessness1." And yet the
modern world speaks with two voices in this matter. There
are some to whom the idea of a monastery appeals with
irresistible force ; there rises in their mind the vision of a
haunt of ancient peace, and a desire to flee away and be at
rest. Who can deny the beauty of Cardinal Newman's
words2?

" To the monk heaven was next door ; he formed no
plans, he had no cares ; the ravens of his father Benedict
were ever at his side. He * went forth ' in his youth ' to his
work and to his labour ' until the evening of life ; if he lived
a day longer, he did a day's work more; whether he lived
many days or few, he laboured on to the end of them. He
had no wish to see further in advance of his journey than
where he was to make his next stage. He ploughed and
sowed, he prayed, he meditated, he studied, he wrote, he
taught, and then he died and went to heaven."

But let us put aside sentimental considerations and ask
what value the ideals of ascetism have for our own age and
country. Our remarks will have reference only to the Church
of England. The problem hardly arises in the English and
Scotch Protestant bodies ; whilst it would be obviously im
pertinent for one who is not a member of the Roman Catholic
Church to discuss modern Roman monasticism, unless he

1 The reproach sometimes levelled against monasticism, that its teaching on
marriage is anti-social, comes with an ill grace from a society in which perhaps a
hundred remain permanently unmarried from economic motives for every one that
is a celibate on religious grounds.

2 Historical Sketches, II. 426, quoted by Miss Hodgson in Ch. Quart. Rev.
Jan. 1912.

Epilogue 157

had a very intimate acquaintance with the subject. If
monasticism is indigenous, so to speak, in the Roman Church,
in the Anglican it is perhaps still an exotic. The average
Churchman considers it a sort of resuscitated medievalism,
and quietly disapproves, or perhaps tolerates it as a convenient
method of getting cheap clergy, teachers or nurses. It is
seldom that he reflects on the underlying principles of the
monastic life.

A clear distinction must be drawn between asceticism and
monasticism. Asceticism is a necessary element in all the
higher religions, and implies severe self-discipline exercised
for religious ends in regard to the natural desires of the body
and the attractions of the outside world. Monasticism is the
special form which, owing to a variety of causes, the ascetic
spirit assumed in the fourth century A.D.1 Now the particular
phase of thought in which Christianity and asceticism were
practically interchangeable terms has long passed away.
But the ascetic ideal has not ceased to be an element in
Christianity, and at the present day its importance is con
siderable. If the Church is to remain loyal to its Founder,
it must not neglect the other-worldly element in His teaching.
It can best ensure that a proper emphasis is laid on this, if it
has in its midst numbers of men and women pledged to a
preoccupation with the unseen world. There is no fear that
we shall have too many ascetics. But this is an age of
specialisation, and the monk has as legitimate a place as the
philosopher or professor. His very existence bears witness
to an unseen world.

But it does not necessarily follow that the traditional
monastic system is the method of practising asceticism best
suited to modern Europeans. In the realm of dogmatics, the
decrees of Chalcedon are of great value to the student, and
are regarded by some minds as permanently valid conclusions.
But there remain many who feel the need of modern categories
of thought to express their convictions about God and Christ.
Similarly in the case of asceticism. In the Roman Catholic
Church the stream will continue to flow in the channel cut

1 See Chapter I.

158 Epilogue

deep by the tradition of centuries. But is it necessary for the
Anglican Church to revive customs and methods which are
frequently unsuited to the constitutions and mental habits of
twentieth century Englishmen ?

While appreciating to the full the benefits bestowed on
the Church by existing communities, one would rather see
arising in the future societies of men and women, not bound
by the Western monastic tradition, but allowing themselves
the fullest freedom both in adapting old rules, and experi
menting in new directions. There is much in the Basilian
literature that might provide hints for such a development.
The spirit of the English race is akin in many ways to that
of Greece rather than Rome, and a study of St Basil, the
father of Greek monasticism, may be not unprofitable for
the English Church of to-day.

APPENDIX A

EUSTATHIUS OF SEBASTE

IN the body of the book mention has been made of Eustathius on
several occasions (pp. 24, 46, 47), but it seemed advisable to defer any
connected account of him to an appendix.

He was much older than Basil, having been born about the beginning
of the fourth century. In his youth he studied at Alexandria under Arius.
After some rebuffs on account of his heretical antecedents, he succeeded
at length in getting ordained. By 357 he had become bishop of Sebaste.
His death occurred in 379, shortly after Basil's.

His career has a double interest, doctrinal and ascetic; in both
respects it was closely interwoven with the life of Basil, and in fact apart
from Basil's letters our knowledge of him is scanty. The traditional
presentation of Eustathius has charged him with a fundamental lack of
principle, and depicted him as a kind of doctrinal chameleon, ready to
change his colours on the slightest provocation and sign any and every
doctrinal formula.

Such an interpretation, popular as it has been, is difficult to reconcile
with certain other facts. Epiphanius records the admiration which many
felt for his manner of life (rbv ftiov avrov <al rrjv TroAireiai/ OVK. 6\iyoi
avdpfs 6avp.d£ov<nv, Haer. 75, 2), while Philostorgius, the Arian historian,
puts Eustathius in the front rank of the anti-Arian champions (ran/ ro
op.oovcn.ov do£a£6vT(0v...~Evo-Td6io$, yrjpatbs dvrjp <al r<u TT\r)6ei aldolos re KCU
Tritfai/oy, Migne, P. G. LXV. 568). Is the traditional verdict on Eustathius,
drawn from Basil's statements, consistent with the high reputation which
he undoubtedly enjoyed, and the genuine religious influence which he
exercised over large numbers of disciples ?

The problem has been treated by Loofs in his fine monograph,
Eustathius von Sebaste und die Chronologic der Basilius- Brief e (Halle,
1898), in which he points out that historians have judged Eustathius
by what Basil wrote in the heat of a bitter controversy, and have failed to
make allowances for Basil's partisanship. So he makes a fresh investi
gation into the causes of the quarrel between the two men, with the
following results.

160 Eustathius of Se baste

The breach took place in 372. Before this date Basil had been friendly
and even enthusiastic towards Eustathius. If his subsequent reproaches
were justified, his conduct towards Eustathius before 372 deserved con
demnation, for he must have condoned wrong-doing. The exact occasion
of the quarrel is obscure, but the cause clear enough. Eustathius remained
faithful to the middle party of Homoiousians (rrjs fieo-or^roy ou8ei> atr&>
•yeyove Trport^iorepoi/, Bas. Ep. 128). He had moved a long way from his
original Arian position, and come finally to interpret Homoiousios in the
sense of Homoousios, so far as the Son was concerned. But when Basil
and the "young-Nicene" party went on to predicate Homoousios of the
Spirit, he could not follow them. The immediate occasion of the quarrel
may have been either friction over metropolitan rights, or the question of
Meletius, or perhaps both combined. Sebaste, as metropolis of Roman
Armenia, had rights over Nicopolis, and Basil had been interfering in the
affairs of Nicopolis ; while again the feud between Eustathius and
Meletius was of long standing and might easily cause trouble. Meletius
had once taken Eustathius' place as bishop of Sebaste, but could not
retain his position. The exigencies of ecclesiastical controversy and
Basil's relations with the West forced him to propitiate Antiochian public
opinion. Having to choose between Eustathius and Meletius, he pre
ferred the latter, and thus sacrificed an old friendship to the necessities
of Church politics.

Such is Loofs' interpretation of the events. Duchesne makes the
obvious remark: "A certains endroits 1'auteur depasse un peu la mesure,
entraine par son ardeur de rehabilitation" (Histoire ancienne, n. 381),
and Schafer (JBasilius des Grossen Beziehungen zum Abendlande} criti
cises his results in a few details ; but the main conclusions of the book
do not seem to have been refuted. All the same, Eustathius must have
been a most annoying person to anyone who was endowed with a clear
intellectual vision and could see what was really involved in the settle
ment of the doctrinal controversies. Perhaps the best defence of him is
that he was eminently a practical man. "His life belonged to the ascetic
ideal," and his interest in doctrine was only secondary.

The ascetic side of his life is of more importance for our purposes,
and now requires consideration. We have already described the part
played by Eustathius in the development of Basil's monastic ideals
(pp. 46, 47). It is clear that Basil owed much to his teacher, but pre
cisely how much it is difficult to say. Two points remain for a brief
discussion here, (a] the bearing of Sozomen's evidence on the authenticity
of Basil's Ascetica, and (b] the Synod of Gangra.

(a) Sozomen, H. E. in. 14, reports that some considered Eustathius
to be the author of the ascetic book (darKijriKrifiijfros) commonly attributed
to Basil. This is an important piece of evidence and may be accepted as
quite trustworthy. An orthodox fifth century historian would not have
reported a mere idle rumour assigning the works of a great Doctor of the

Eustathius of Sebaste 161

Church to his heretical opponent. What then did the tradition assert ?
It refers to the corpus asceticum of Basil, and not to one particular book.
The ascetic book (ro ao-KT/riKoi/) of Basil as known to Jerome and
Rufinus consisted of the Longer and Shorter Rules. When Photius
wrote, the Ascetica of Basil were in two volumes, or rather, one volume
with a short introduction ; it contained the Rules, Morals and some tracts
(see pp. 65, 66). The extent of Sozomen's ao-K^rt/cj) /3t'/3Aos must remain
uncertain. Gamier5 s attempt to make it refer to the Constitutiones Monas-
ticae was quite unsuccessful (p. 79). Sozomen asserts therefore that an
undefined body of ascetic writings inscribed with Basil's name was attri
buted by some to Eustathius. Such an opinion was of course erroneous ;
but it contained an important element of truth. Basil owed much to
Eustathius, and the teaching and practices of the latter must have been
to some extent represented in Basil's Ascetica ; so much so that those
who recalled Eustathius' teaching and championed his memory could
say that the ideas were really his. It was but a short step to take when
they or others went on to ascribe the actual writing to him. Just how
much is Eustathian it is impossible to say, but it is safe to assert with
Loofs : "in Basilius' corpus asceticum ein gut Teil geistigen Eigentums
des Eustathius steckt " (op. cit. p. 97).

(b] The date of the Council of Gangra has been a vexed question,
but c. 340 seems to be generally accepted at the present time. The
bishops dealt with certain excesses of asceticism, practised by the fol
lowers of Eustathius. If it could be shown that the Eustathian tenets, as
described in the synodical letter and accompanying Canons, are radically
different from the positions taken up by Basil, the result reached above
with reference to the Eustathian element in Basil's Ascetica would be
seriously shaken. But the following considerations make such a con
clusion improbable.

(i) There is no need to ascribe all the eccentricities condemned at
Gangra to Eustathius personally, for

(a) Soz. H. E. in. 14, expressly says that some considered Eusta
thius to be free from blame.

(b) The synodical letter of the Council makes it plain that the
followers of Eustathius, not the master himself, were responsible for the

excesses (evpLcrnev TroXXa a^eVjUco? yivoficva VTTO rovrav avrooi/ rwv rrept
Eva-rddtovj Mansi, II. 1097).

(ii) Basil supported Eustathius when accusations of heresy were
brought against him (see Epp. 223, 3; 244, i). Notice also Basil's
silence on the subject of this condemnation at Gangra.

(iii) Complaints of encouraging disorder by his monastic innova
tions were made against Basil (see Bas. Ep. 207 ; cf. Greg. Nyss. in
Eiin. i. 10).

L. c. ii

1 62 Eustathius of Sebaste

(iv) Basil's own teaching with reference to the reception of married
persons and slaves in the convent is very similar to the positions con
demned by the Council of Gangra (see pp. 84, 85).

The conclusion therefore is fully justified, that the ascetic teaching of
Eustathius and Basil may be for practical purposes regarded as identical.

APPENDIX B

RUFINUS' EDITION OF BASIL'S RULES

Tyrannius Rufinus was born about 345 in the neighbourhood of
Aquileia. He received his early ascetic education in a monastery of that
town. In 371 he went to the East and remained there till 397, when he
returned to Italy. On his return Urseius, abbot of Pinetum near Ravenna,
asked for information about the monasteries of the East. Rufinus told
him of Basil's answers to the questions of his monks. (Ad quae ego ne
quid tibi minus digne, non dico quam geritur, sed quam geri debet,
exponerem, S. Basilii Cappadociae episcopi, viri fide et operibus et omni
sanctitate satis clari, institute monachorum, quae interrogantibus se ?non-
achis velut sancti cuiusdem iuris responsa statuit, protuli.} Urseius was
much interested in what he heard, and Rufinus accordingly translated
the work into Latin, assuring Urseius that the practice of the Rules in
the monasteries of the West (per universa occiduae partis monasterid]
would be beneficial. He bids Urseius have copies made and sent to other
monasteries, in order that all the monasteries may live according to the
same rules, and follow the lead of Cappadocia. (Tui sane sit officium
etiam aliis monasteriis exemplaria praebere: ut secundum ins tar Cap
padociae omnia monasteries eisdem et non diversis vel institutis vel
observationibus vivant.}

This translation is not given in the editions of Rufinus, and must be
looked for in Lucas Holstenius' Codex Regularum (Paris, 1663), or in
Brockie's later edition of 1759. It is also printed in Migne, P.L. cm.
485 — 554. Rufinus refers elsewhere (H.E. n. 9) to his translation of
Basil's Rules, and expresses a hope that he may be able to translate more
of his works. (Extant quoque utriusque — i.e., Basil and Gregory —
monumenta magnifica tractatuum, quos ex tempore in ecclesiis declamabant:
ex quibus nos denas ferme singulorum oratitmculas transfudimus in
Latinam; Basilii praetere a instituta monachorum: optantes, si poterimus
et dei favor adiuverit, eornm plura transferred) This translation is a
conflation of the 55 Longer and 313 Shorter Rules to make one book
of 203 Rules1.

1 Zockler, Askese und Monchtum, p. 286, says wrongly that Rufinus i — 15
correspond to Basil's Longer Rules, 16 — 203 to the Shorter.

Rufinus Edition of Basil's Rules 163

The following tables will show how Rufinus treated his materials :

I. The Rules of Rufinus with the corresponding Rules of Basil

(¥.—-fusms tractatae^ *&. = brevius tractatae}.

Rufinus Basil

Preface =PefaCetoR(all)

(Preface to F. (conclusion)1

i F. i

10

ii

12
13
14
15
16

17
18

19

20
21

22
23

io

(14

us*

19

21

B.

H46

157

1847

3

4

5
2878

6

288

289

99

Rufinus

Basil

24 =

B. 158

25

159

26

7

2?

8

28

9

29

85

30

86

31

187

32

1 88

33

189

34

21

35

22

36

160

37

161

38

162

39

163

40

23

4i

24

42

25

43

26

44

27

45

28

46

29

47

191

48

126

49

30

50

192

5i

193

52

194

53

3i

54

88

55

32

56

195

1 The portion of F. used is nearly equal in length to the whole of B. The two
parts are neatly joined. 2 Much shortened. 3 Shortened.

4 Rufinus uses the question and part of the answer of F. 15, with the con
cluding words of F. 14.

5 Rufinus concludes with the opening words (a biblical quotation) of F. 24.

6 The quotation at the end of Ruf. 12 begins the question in B. 114.

7 Rufinus adapts and improves with great freedom.

8 The question in B. 287 repeats the second half of the question in B. 5.

II - 2

164 Rufinus Edition of Basil's Rules

Rufinus Basil Rufinus Basil

57 = B. 196 101 = B. 141

58 J97 102 142

59 33 103 143

60 34 104 144

61 35 105 145

62 198 106 146

63 36 107 147

64 115 108 201

65 116 109 202

66 37 1 10 279

67 ii? in 148

68 118 112 149

69 119 113 150

70 38 114 203

71 39 H5 i?o

72 40 116 171

73 4i H7 10

74 42 118 89

75 43 119 45

76 44 120 283

77 164 121 46

78 165 122 47

79 127 123 16

80 120 124 204

81 96 125 205

82 121 126 206

83 199 127 207

84 166 128 17

85 167 129 90

86 200 130 151

87 97 131 152
128 132 153

89 129 133 I22

9° J3o 134 172

91 131 135 239

92 132 136 208

93 133 137 173

94 135 138 209

95 1 68 139 240

96 134 140 241

97 136 141 48

98 ioo 142 49

99 87 143 210
ioo 169 144 50

Rufinus* Edition of Basil ' s Rules

165

Rufinus

Basil

145 =

B. 51

146

52

147

53

148

280

149

n

150

174

151

211

152

212

153

213

154

54

155

175

156

176

157

243

I58

244

159

55

1 60

215

161

216

162

245

163

217

164

56

165

246

1 66

247

167

218

168

248

169

219

170

249

171

250

172

251

173

252

174

220

Rufinus

Basil

I75 =

B. 57

176

123

177

177

178

178

179

221

1 80

222

181

137

182

58

183

59

184

60

185

101

1 86

91

187

179

1 88

62

189

67

190

68

191

182

192

105*

193

73

194

106

195

75

196

94

197

108

198

109

199

no

200

229

201

in1

202

275

203

274

II. Rules of Basil omitted altogether by Rufinus.
Longer Rules (F.) n — 13, 18, 20, 25 — 55.

Shorter Rules (B.) 2, 12—15, 18—20, 61, 63—66, 69—72, 74, 76—84
92, 93> 95>98, 102—104, 107, 112, 113, 124, 125, 138—140, 154—156, 180,
181, 183, 185, 186, 190, 214, 223—228, 230—238, 242, 253—273, 276—278,
281, 282, 284 — 286, 290 — 313.

III. Totals.

Basil's Rules Longer Shorter

Represented in Rufinus 19 192

Omitted by Rufinus 36 121

55 3U

1 Rufinus expands considerably.

1 66 Rufinus Edition of Basil's Rules

In the course of studying Rufinus' translation with the view of throw
ing some light on the textual history of the Basilian Rules, I made the
foregoing tables for my own use. I have inserted them at this point,
because, so far as I am aware, the information contained in them does
not exist elsewhere in print. The following conclusions seem to be justified
by a study of the evidence.

Rufinus apparently had the two sets of Rules before him in one book,
which he calls hoc opus in the Preface. His general principle was to
abbreviate ; the Shorter Rules suited his purpose best, and he was able to
use these almost as they stood, sometimes even expanding them. But
the Longer Rules were subjected to a drastic revision and condensation ;
Rufinus' second Rule, for example, represents F. 2 — 6. Throughout his
version, but especially in his treatment of F., Rufinus paraphrases and
adapts with considerable freedom, and even introduces a certain amount
of matter of his own. The changes, however, are of little importance ;
one of the chief is the occasional introduction of a different text from
Scripture to support Basil's thesis.

Since the order of Ruf. i — n is practically identical with that of
F. i — 24, it seems clear that F. lay before Rufinus in the same order as
that of our modern editions. This agrees with the conclusion reached in
Chapter V1, with regard to the textual history, namely, that F. was put into
literary form either by Basil himself, or more probably by a literary
executor soon after Basil's death. But why did Rufinus stop short at the
beginning of F. 24, and not revert to the Longer Rules again? It is con
ceivable that his MS stopped short at this point, but there are no other
considerations to favour such a hypothesis. There is nothing in the
style of the second half of F. to support the conclusion that it was added
by a later hand. Nor need any importance be attached to the fact that
a break occurs in the text at the point where Rufinus leaves off. The
personal element has been absent for some time from the questions, but
the question in F. 24 runs as follows : " Now that these things have been
sufficiently explained to us, our next task should be to learn the character
of our life with one another" (rovrcov tKavws TJ/JUV 7rapa8fdo/ji€i>a>v, duoXovtiov
av fir] p,adelv f)[J.as Trepi rot) rpoirov rrjs p,€r' aXX^Xooi/ diayayrjs). But as similar
expressions occur in F. 38 and 43, it would not be right to lay stress on
the one in F. 24. Besides, Rufinus evidently had F. 24 before him, since
in his nth Rule, founded on F. 21, he has a biblical quotation (i Cor.
xiv. 40) drawn from F. 24. We conclude that the presence of a mark
of transition just where Rufinus breaks off is a mere coincidence.

Rufinus followed the Longer Rules for a while, and then, owing to
reasons unknown to us, passed on to the Shorter. It is possible however
to hazard a plausible guess as to his motives. He has already omitted
F. ii and 12, concerned with the reception into the convent of slaves
and married people, perhaps because they were not applicable to the

Rufinus Edition of Basil's Rules 167

local circumstances of North Italy. After F. 24, where he finally deserts
the Longer Rules, follow seven consecutive answers all dealing with the
position and duties of the Superior (25 — 31). A number of subsequent
answers are concerned, directly or indirectly, with the same topic
(43 — 51, 54). Up to this point there have been only indirect references
to the Superior. As Rufinus was writing for the abbot of Pinetum, he
may have thought it unwise to translate a number of regulations about
the abbot, some of which might have been sufficiently opposed to Urseius'
practice as to cause him embarrassment.

The textual problems connected with Rufinus' use of the Shorter
Rules are insoluble without an amount of study that I have been unable
to give. I can only record my impressions. These Rules in their present
form are quite devoid of any plan or arrangement. This need not affect
our judgment of their authenticity, for their condition agrees with the
presumed circumstances of their origin J. Rufinus omits many of the later
Rules, very few of the earlier. B. 287 — 313 are absent from one manuscript2,
and their originality might therefore be suspected ; but as they are repre
sented in Rufinus it follows that he had the whole of B. before him.
Where he omits material, it is either of little importance, or else of great
interest for our knowledge of Cappadocian cenobitism, but for that very
reason inapplicable to Western conditions. I see no grounds for thinking
that the order of the Shorter Rules in Rufinus' MS was materially different
from that of Garnier's edition. The evidence of the tables seems rather
to point to the conclusion that he had the same order, and made a some
what half-hearted and hasty attempt to arrange the material better. For
example, Rufinus' Rules 16 — 28 are all concerned with penitence and the
correction of offences, a subject of perennial interest to the Western
Church, while there is a distinct effort to group the explanations of
Scriptural passages. But Rufinus does not succeed in modifying to any
great extent the motley nature of the work.

To conclude ; Rufinus' translation is our oldest authority for the text
of Basil's Rules. His evidence is not so full as we should like, since he
only aims at giving extracts. But, so far as it goes, it proves that the
Rules existed in their present form and were ascribed to Basil a few
years after his death 3.

1 See p. 73. 2 See Gamier, in loc.

3 Zockler, op. cit. p. 290, states that the admissibility of double monasteries
can be derived from Basil's regulations, and that the step was actually taken
by Rufinus in his translation. But Basil describes an organised system which
already existed (cf. p. 104). There is no advance whatever in Rufinus, who
follows him closely on this point.

It is interesting to notice Rufinus' rendering of the question in B. 199 (ei XP^I
^o/x.oXo'youjuei'Tjs d5eX0^s ry Trpfafivrtpui KO.L TTJV irp€<r&vr£pa.v irapeTvai). Gamier
translates rightly, " An sorore seniori confitente, adesse oporteat etiam ipsam
seniorem." From Rufinus' version (" Si oportet, cum aliqua soror confitetur quod-
cunque delictum suum presbytero. etiam matrem monasterii adesse?") no con
ception could be gained of the peculiar position of the senior members of the
Basilian convent (see pp. 946°.).

i68

A Table of Dates

APPENDIX C

A TABLE OF DATES

[The dates which mark the history of Egyptian Monasticism are
taken, by kind permission of Dom E. C. Butler, from the second
volume of his Lausiac History ; the others from many different sources.
Mr Johnston's edition of Basil's De Spiritu Sancto (Oxford, 1892) con
tains a very full table of dates for the doctrinal history of the fourth
century.]

c. 250 Egyptian Christians flee to desert during Decian persecution.

270 Antony adopts ascetic life

305 Antony comes out from his cave and instructs disciples in

monasticism.

c. 310 Hilarion after a visit to Antony inaugurates Palestinian
monasticism.

314 Pachomius becomes a monk.

c. 318 Pachomius founds first Christian monastery at Tabennisi.

c. 325 Mar Awgin founds monastery at Nisibis; beginning of
Syriac monachism.

320 — 330. Amoun inaugurates Nitrian monachism.

c. 329 Basil born.

340 Athanasius propagates monastic idea in Italy.

346 Death of Pachomius.

351 Basil goes to Athens.

355> 35° Basil returns to Caesarea.

357, 358 Basil visits Egypt.

358 Basil's first retirement to Pontus.

360 Basil at Council of Constantinople.

c. 361 Basil writes Moralia.

362 Death of Dianius, bishop of Caesarea. Succession of
Eusebius. Basil ordained priest (?).

363 — 365 Basil's second retirement in Pontus. Organises monasti
cism. Gives Longer Rules.

365 Basil returns to Caesarea.

365 — 370 Basil founds famous hospital at Caesarea.

370 Basil bishop of Caesarea.

c. 375 Basil gives Shorter Rules.

379 Death of Basil.

381 Council of Constantinople. Triumph of Nicene orthodoxy.

397 Rufinus returns to Italy and translates Basil's Rules.

463 Foundation of the Studium.

c. 500 Benedict becomes a monk.

527 Accession of Justinian,

c. 650 Extensive Greek immigration into Sicily and Italy.

789 Theodore becomes abbot of Studium.

A Table of Dates 169

c. 850 Beginnings of Basilian monachism in Calabria.

850 — 900 Beginnings of monachism on Mount Athos.

1002 Foundation of Grotta Ferrata.

c. 1374 Beginnings of idiorrhythmic movement on Mount Athos.

1446 Bessarion General of Basilian Order.

1573 Gregory XIII reforms Basilian Order.

APPENDIX D

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[The most important of the books consulted in the preparation of the
foregoing chapters are given in the following lists. One or two are of
a popular character, but have proved useful in pointing the way to larger
or more detailed works.]

The General History of Monasticism.
Besse, J. M. Les Moines d1 Orient. Paris, 1900.
Butler, E. C. Article " Monasticism" in Camb. Medieval History (vol. I.

c. 18). Cambridge, 1911.
Duchesne, L. Histoire ancienne de VEglise (vol. II. c. 14, Les Moines

d1 Orient}. Paris, 1907.
Hannay, J. O. The Spirit and Origin of Christian Monasticism.

London, 1903.

Harnack, A. Monasticism, Eng. Tr. London, 1901.
Heimbucher, M. Die Or den und Kongregationen der katholischen

Kirche (2nd ed.). Paderborn, 1907.
Leclercq, H. Article " Ce*nobitisme" in Dictiormaire d^ Archtologie chreti-

enne. Paris, 1910.
Smith, I. G. Christian Monasticism from the Fourth to the Ninth

Centuries. London, 1892.
Zockler, O. Askese und Monchtum. Frankfurt a. M., 1897.

Egyptian Monasticism.

Amelineau, E. Etude historique sur saint Pachome. 1887.
Bornemann. In investiganda Monachatus origine quibus de causis ratio

habenda sit Origenis. Gottingen, 1885.

Butler, E. C. The Lausiac History of Palladius. Cambridge, 1904.
Ladeuze, P. Etude sur le Ctnobitisme pakhomien. Lou vain, 1898.
Lucot, A. Palladius ; Histoire Lausiaque. Paris, 1912.
Preuschen, E. Monchtum und Sarapiskult. Giessen, 1903.
Robertson (Bp), A. Athanasius' Life of Antony in Nicene Fathers'

Library. Oxford, 1892.
Watson, E. W. "Palladius and Egyptian Monasticism" (Church

Quarterly Revieiv). April, 1907.

1 70 Bibliography

St Basil.

Allard, P. Saint Basile (5th ed.). Paris, 1903.

Boulenger, F. Grtgoire Nazianze, Discours funebres. Paris, 1908.

Ceillier. Hisloire Generate (vi. 161 — 195). Paris, 1729 — 1763.

Fialon, E. Etude sur Saint Basile (2nd ed.). Paris, 1869.

Gamier. Opera Basilii. Paris, 1721 — 1730. The 3rd vol. is edited by

Maran. Reprinted 1839; also in Migne, P.G. XXIX.— XXXII. Paris,

1857.
Holl, R. Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt beim griechischen Monchtum

(pp. 156—170). Leipzig, 1898.
Holsten, L. Codex Regularum. Paris, 1663.
Jackson, B. Translation of Basil's letters and some other works in

Nicene Fathers' Library, with Prolegomena. Oxford, 1895.
Kranich, A. Die Ascetik in ihrer dogmatischen Grundlage bei Basilius

dem Grossen, Paderborn, 1896.
Loofs, F. Eustathius von Sebaste. Halle, 1898.
Maran. Vita Basilii, prefixed to third vol. of Opera.
Morison, E. F. "St Basil and Monasticism" (Church Quarterly Review).

Oct. 1912.

Morison, E. F. St Basil and his Rule. Oxford, 1912.
Pargoire, J. Article "Basile" in Dictionnaire d'1 Arche"ologie chretienne.
Schafer, J. Basilius des Grossen Beziehungen zum Abendlande. Miinster,

1909.

Tillemont. Mhnoires IX (2nd ed.). Paris, 1701 — 1712.
Venables, E. Article "Basil" in Diet. Chr. Biog.

Later Greek Monasticism.

Butler, E. C. Article "Basilian Monks" in Enc. Brit, (nth ed.).
Ehrhard, A. In Krumbacher's Geschichte der byzantinischen Litter atur.

Munich, 1897.

Gardner, Miss A. Theodore of Studitim. London, 1905.
Holl, R. Enthusiasmus und Bussgewalt. Leipzig, 1898.
Lake, K. Early Days of Monasticism on Mount Athos. Oxford, 1909.
Marin, E. Les Moines de Constantinople. Paris, 1898.
Meyer, Ph. Die Hatipturkunden filr die Geschichte der Athoskloster.

Leipzig, 1894.
Riley, A. Athos. London, 1887.

Western Monasticism.

Butler, E. C. Sancti Benedicti Regula Monachorum. Freiburg i.B., 1912.

Dudden, F. H. Gregory the Great. London. 1905.

Griitzmacher, G. Die Bedeutung Bencdikts von Nursia und seiner Regel

in der Geschichte des Monchtums. Berlin, 1892.
Spreitzenhofer, E. Die Entwicklung des alien Monchtums in Italien.

Vienna, 1894.

GENERAL INDEX

Aerius 61

Alexandria 21, 24, 25, 28 ff., 33, 34, 61

Ammonius Saccas 28

Amoun 33

Annesi 20, 22, 23, 44, 47, 53, 54

Antony, St 12, 21, 30 ff., 41, 45

Aquileia 147, 162

Araxius 51

Asceticism, definition of 3 ; in early
Church 1 2 ff. ; heathen 7 ; in
Jesus Christ 8ff., 124; Jewish
5 ff. ; meaning of iff., i55ff.

Athanasius of Athos 136, 139

Athanasius, St 25, 147, 113

Athens 21 ff., 44

Benedict, St 2, 55, 148 ff.
Bessarion 146

Canopus 34
Celibacy, see Marriage
Chrysapius 22
Communion 35, 87, 88, 97
Confession 95 ff. , 1 20
Covenant, sons of 41

Dianius 25, 52

Dionysius the Areopagite 133
Double monasteries 39, 73, 97, 104 ff.,
117, 123, 132, 142

Edessa 40, 41

Educational work 101, 102, 121, 124,

134, 142, 154

Emmelia 19, 22, 45, 49, 50
Enthusiasm 32, 118, 119
Eusebius of Samosata 41
Eustathius of Sebaste 24, 46, 47, 57,

58, 61, 78, 79, 121, 159^
Euthymius 129, 130

Fasts 34, 35, 37, 89, 118
Federations of monasteries 38, 73, 103,

117, 128
Firmilian 18
Food and drink 35, 37, 54, 76, 88, 89

Glycerius 91

Gregory Thaumaturgus 18, 20, 57

Grotta Ferrata 146
Guests 30, 98, 99, 154

Habit, monastic 36, 38, 53, 89, 123,

132, 135, 138, 141
Hieracas 12, 29
Hilarion 41
Hospitals 59, 61, 62, 100

Idiorrhythmic monasteries 137, 138
" Interimsethik " 10
Italy, South 144!?.

John the Baptist, St 6
Journeys 38, 98, 99
Julian 18, 21, 22

Labour, manual 33, 38, 54, 90, 91,

123, 142
Libanius 21

Macarius 33

Macrina, St 19, 20, 22 ff., 49 ff., 104

Marriage and celibacy 4, 5, 8, n, 13,

74, 75, 84, 108, 109, 116, 156,

161

Meletius 160
Mesopotamia 24, 25, 40 ff., 57, 123,

149

Naucratius 19, 22, 23, 50

Nicopolis 1 60

Nilus 108

Nilus of Italy 146

Nitria 33, 116, 123

Novices 36, 8 1 ff., 132

Origen 28, 29, 33, 55
Orthodoxy 2, 77, 125

Pachomius 34 ff, 55, 64, 113, 122, 123,

I29ff.

Palaemon 34

Palestine 24 ff., 40, 41, 57, 59, in, 123,

I29ff.

Paul of Thebes 30

Peter of Sebaste 20, 22, 49, 50

Prapidius 61, 62

Prayer 35, 37, 53, 54, 77, 86, 87

172

General Index

Profession 60 84, 107 ff.
Property 37, 45, 81 ff., 152

Reading 33, 38, 53, 91, 142, 154
Relations 38, 82, 83, 98, 99
Russian Church 2, 128, 139

Sabbas 129, 130

Sarabaites 59

Second in command, the 38, 93

Senior brethren 93 ff.

Serapeum 27, 28

Sicily 144 ff.

Simeon the New Theologian 98

Slaves 84, 161

Superior, the 38, 55, 78, 92 ff., 103, 104,

151. 167
Synods 91

Tabennisi 34 ff., 39, 112, 113, 116, 123,

124

Theodore of Studium 133 ff., 137, 139
Theodosius 129, 130
Therapeutae o, 30
Tyana 17, 19, 58

Urseius 147, 162

Valens 52, 57, 58
Vestiana 50

INDEX OF MODERN AUTHORS

Allard, P. 16, 19
d'Alviella, F. 10
Amelineau, E. 34

Bardenhewer, O. 28, in, 127

Bateson, Miss M. 101, 105

Batiffol, P. 75

Besse, J. M. 92, 119

Bodley, J. 71

Bornemann 28, 30

Boulenger, F. 24, 44, 55, 112

Box, G. H. 6

Browne, C. G. in

Budge, W. 28

Burkitt, F. C. 8, 41

Butler, E. C. viii, 2, 29 ff., 101, 107 .

124, 127, 135, 139, 147 ff., 155,

1 68

Capes, W. W. 22

Ceillier, R. 63, 68, 70, 71, 84

Connolly, R. H. 42

Conybeare, F. C. 27

Curzon, R. 136

Cumont, F. 7, 14, 17

Duchesne, L. 19, 24, 26, 160
Dudden, F. H. 151

Ehrhard, A. 131, 134, 139, 142
Emmet, C. W. 10

Fialon, E. 16, 124
Gardner, Miss A. x 33 ff.

Gamier viii, 63, 70 ff., 84, 108, no,

161, 167

Gibson, (Bp) E. 148
Griitzmacher, G. 152
Gwatkin, H. M. 27

Harnack, A. i, 5, 12, 18, 29, 49, 61,

121, 124

Heimbucher, M. 3, 144
Hodgson, Miss G. 150, 156
Holl, R. viii, 30, 32, 63, 75, 97, 118,

119, i29ff.

Holsten, L. 64, 65, 162
Hore, A. H. 127
Hunter-Blair, D. O. 150

Inge, W. R. i
Jackson, B. 16, 40, 107
Kranich, A. viii, 114, 115

Ladeuze, P. 34 ff.

Lake, K. 11, 136, 144

Lecky, W. E. H. i, 60

Leclercq, H. viii, 34, 37 ff., 42, 112,

129

Leipoldt, J. 36
Loofs, F. viii, 47, 159 ff.
Lucot, A. 33, 88

Maas 21

Maran viii, 16, 40, 45, 47, 52, 59, 68,

"3
Marin, E. 98, 125, 131, 140

Index of Modern Authors

173

Meyer, Ph. viii, 63, 96, 114, 129 ff. Schneemann 127, 144
Moeller, W. 63 Schurer, E. 5, 18

Morison, E. F. ix, 52, 63, 71, 75, 86, Schweitzer, A. 6, 10

98, 107

Newman, J. H. 156
Nissen 85, 101, 105, 109

Pargoire, J. 52, 70, 128, 144
Petrie, F. 26, 28
Preuschen, £.27
Puech, A. 125

Rainy, R. 64

Ramsay, Sir W. M. 16, 17, 27, 41, 48,

62, 68, 91, 98, 122
Reitzenstein, R. 7, 27, 109
Riley, A. 136 ff.
Robertson, (Bp) A. 32

Schafer, J. 49, 52, 58, 125, 160

Seeck 21
Skeel, Miss 17
Smith, I. G. 127
Smith, R. T. 16
Spreitzenhofer, E. 147, 148
Swallow, J. E. in

Tillemont 16, 71

Vasson 63
Venables, E. 16

Watson, E. W. 30, 31, 122
Weiss, J. 10
Wiedemann, K. A. 26

Zockler, O. 12, 26, 34, 36 ff, 63, 71,
73» 76, 78, no, 133, 162, 167

INDEX OF PASSAGES OF ANCIENT
AUTHORS

PAGE
.. 87
.. 87
.. 87

Ps. liv. (Iv.) 17

xc. (xci.)

cxviii. (cxix.) 62, 148 ...
Ezra-Apoc. vi. 32

ix. 24

i Mace. xv. 22

Mt. iv. 2

vi. 16

ix. 15

xix. 21

xix. 29

xxv. 5

Mk i. 14, 15

ii. 20

x. 21

x. 29

xii. 25

Lk xii. 45 10

xiv. 26 8

xviii. 22 9

xviii. 29 8

xix. ii 10

xx. 34, 35 8

Jn xii. 43 106

Acts ii. 9 18

iii. i 87

i Cor. iv. i 97

PAGE

. 101

84

1 Cor. vi. 4

vii. 15

2 Tim. ii. 4 ii

i Pet. i. i

i Jn ii. 17, 18

v. 21 ..

12

Rev.

Aphraates, Horn. 6, 18

Athanasius, de Syn. 16 29

Vit. Ant. 2, 3 30, 31

4, 8, n, 12 30

J4> 49 32

60 33

67, 85 121

87 32

Aug. Conf. vin. 6 31

Basil, Epist. i 25, 40, 41

2

3
9

14

20

22
23

'7

37

53. 54, 87

45

64

45, 48, 49

.-53ff, 64
59, 60

20, 45, 82

42 108, in

174 Index of Passages of Ancient Authors

PAGE PAGE

Basil, Epist. 43 108 Basil, Reg. brev. tract. 100 ... 100

44 108, 109 101 100

45 40, 108, 109 102 96

51 20, 52 103 70, 71

74 20 104 94, 104

76 20, 2i 105 9off.

80 25 106 92, 93

81 59 107 83

87 20 108 104

93 88 109 104

94 59» 6r II0 97» I04

96 20 ui 104

128 160 112 38, 84, 94, 105

i42» J43 62 114 93

150 61 117 55, 90

169-171 91 119 55, 90, 95

188 60, 102 121 54, 90

191 41, 91 122 88

198 41 125 55. 9°

199 60, 84, 101, 107, 108 129 89

204 20, 25 131 54, 76, 89

207 57, 60, 87, 161 132 54, 76, 89

210 20, 23, 52, 57 133 ... 54, 89

217 60, 108 134 54, 76, 89

223 ...20, 25, 40, 45 ff., 72, 161 135 89

226 59 136 54, 88

244 46, 161 137 89

258 59 138 89

284 59, 82 141 38, 54, 90, 94

295 60, 113 142 38, 55, 94

335-359 21, 23 143 54, 90

Hexaem. 8 72, 99 144 54, 90

Horn. 12 102 148 94

22 102 149 94

Mor. 31 69 150 94

38 99 151 106

70 69 153 104

73 69, 84 154 105

Reg. brev. tract, i 106 155 76, 100

2 70, 108 156 ... 94

19 93 168 89

3i 87 169 95

43 86 172 88

44 86 180 88, 149

51 74 187 69, 82, 102

64 88 188 99

70 89 189 99

71 54, 76, 89 191 74

74 70, 86, no 199 167

82 104 220 70, 71, 105

85 37. 75. 81, 106 229 97

87 100 231 76, 88, 102

90 38, 89 235 38, 53, 91, 95

91 100 236 91

92 37. 75. 82 246 74

94 82, 83 254 25

95 85 265 88

96 38, 91* 93. 95 , 280 73

97 84 281 73, 104

Index of Passages of Ancient Authors 175

PAGE

PAGE

Basil, Reg.

brev. tract. 282 ... 73

Basil, Reg, fus. tract. 55 ...

... 119

284 ...

103

Serm. asc. 87

, 88, 97

285 ...

103

de ren. saec

75, 102

286
288 ...

76, 100
97

de spir. sanct. 29
Cassian, Coll. xvm. 3

:•: 3

292

IOI

xviii. 5

... 29

302 ...

IOO

,, 7 47,

56, 121

303 •••
304 ...

76, 92, 93
37, 83

I. I, 2, 6

-. 65
... 149

305 •••

37, 83

iv. 17

... 149

308 ...

82

vii. 19

••• 45

309 . . .

88

xi. 17

... 121

310 ...

88

Chrysos. de Sac. VI. 6-8 ...

... 121

311 ...

76, 99

i Clem. 38

... 12

Reg. fus

. tract, i 69

Clem. Alex. Strom, vn. 12

12

2

69

Cone. Chalc. 4

85, IS^

3

69, 85

8

... 132

6

53, 81, 121

Cone. Gangr. 3

-. 85

7

...70, 86, 106, no, in

40

8

70, 81, 106

Cone. Trull. 41

••• 133

9

10

82, 83
37, 84, 106

Cypr. de hab. virg. 3
Ep- 75

12

... 18

ii

37, 70, 84, 85, 95

Dtdache 6

... 12

12

69

ii

9

13

69, 85

Epict. ii. 10

... 85

14

94, 96» I07

Epiph. Haer. 67

... 29

15 ..-

?4, 97, loi, 102, 104, 108

75

01, 159

17

87, 116, 118

Eur. Bacch. 17-19

... 112

18

54, 76, 89

Andr. 1143

... 113

19

37, 54, 55, 89

Eus. Comm. Ps. 67

12

21

37, 54, 55, 76, 88

Comm. Ps. 83

12

22

38, 53, 89, 149

H.E. vi. 19

... 28

23 ...

53, 70, 89, 149

vi. 23

... 72

69, 92, 166

„ 42

... 30

25 .-.

93

Mart. Pal. 5, 10

12

26 ...

69, 75, 95 ff.

Vit. Const. IV. 43

... 21

27 ...

69ff., 93ff.

Greg. Naz. Carm. I. 65 fF. ...

46, 58

28 ...

38, 55, 76, 93, 96, 106

xi. scoff. 46,

58, H3

29 ...

54, 9°

Ep. i

23, 45

38, 92, 99

2

20, 45

33 •••

70, 71, 105

3

••• 45

34 •••

94

4, 5

45, 49

35 •••

70, 103, 117

6 ••• 45, 49» 5i, 55

, 64, 70

36 ...

96, no

79

... 85

37 -.

53, 54, 86, 87, 90

H5

••• 55

38 ...

38, 69, 91

Or. II. 29

... 113

39 ».

69, 91, 99

VII. 6

... 21

40 ...

91, 99

xxi. 19

... 113

41

54, 90

XLIII. 3

... 19

42 ...

9<>

, 5-9

19

43 •••
44

••• 69, 92, 93, 95, 103
... 38, 76, 97, 99, 106

, 12
, 13 17

... 2O
, 20, 21

45

38, 93, 99

H-24

... 22

46

96

... 23

48 ...

94

27

49 •••

S8, 69, 94

, 28

... 58

51

69

, 29

... 52

53 •••

69, 72, IO2

, 3°

54 ..-

69, 73, 103

' 34

64, H3

176 Index of Passages of Ancient Authors

PAGE

Greg. Naz. Or. XLIII. 60 45

» 61 55, 87

,, 62 46, 65, in

„ 63 61

» 66 113

„ 80 58

Greg. Nyss. Ep. 2 18

12, 15 17

in Eunom, i. 10 ... 45, 57, 161
*« /««</. jifar. ... 20, 55, 57, 87

ate virg. 116

FzY. A^v 125

Vit. Macr. ...20-24, 5°» 51* 95

w JfZ. Mart 24, 48

Herm. Mand. iv. 4 12

Sim. v. 3 12

Ign. Polyc. 5 12

Ep. 58

4
'47

„ 82

85

de vir. illust. 116

65

Vit. Paul.

30

Just. Apol. i. 15
Justinian, Nov. 5, i

12
132

Nov. 5, 3 132,

I4I

„ 123, 35

132

,, 131, 7

132

,, 133, i ff-

132

Palladius, Hist. Laus. Prol. 9 ..

107

VI

61

VII. i, 4

33

XIII. I

33

XVII. I

33

XVIII. 12 112

xxv. 3 88

xxxii.' 35

PAGE

Palladius, Hist. Laus. xxxn. 8 38, 93

xxxii. 9 39

XXXIIL 2, 4 39

xxxiv. 4 39

XLV. 3 113

XLVIII. 2 68

Philostorgius 159

Photius, Cod. 144, 191 66

Reg. Bened. i 153

2, 7, 20, 31, 33, 36 151

39 88

4o, 48, 50, 55 151

57 91

58 4> I51

59> 6l> 68 151

73 65, 151

Rufin. H. E. ii. 9

i9» 23> 5i> 56» 65, 162

.tf^. Bas. praef. 65, 162

Socr. ff.E. I. 17 6r

1V- 23 • 33

»» 26 21, 56, 72

Sozom. H. E. \. w 30

i. 13 121

in. 14 ... 47, 65, 79, t6o, 161

v. 4 17

vi. 15 52

,, 17 21, 56, 121

„ 34 ... 16, 42, 47, 62, 129

vili. 27 47

Snip. Sev. Dial. I. 4, 8 118

I- 23-26 147

Tert. Apol. 9 12

de virg. vel. 10 12

Theodoret /£ .£". iv. 23-25 ... 42

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M. A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS