CHAPTER XVI

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RITE

There remains to be considered the meaning of the rite of the consecration or coronation of a king. We have seen that an exalted idea of kingship was more or less universal before the times of Christianity. In pre-Christian times the king was regarded as far above ordinary men by virtue of his office, which embraced priestly functions, and was looked upon as being the vice-gerent of God. In the Roman Empire from the time of Julius and Augustus the Emperor was also Pontifex Maximus, the spiritual as well as the civil head of the Empire; his effigy was sacred; temples were erected to him or to his Genius; during his lifetime he received semi-divine honours, and on his death he was solemnly enrolled among the company of the gods. The autocrat of the world was the representative of God on earth. The Roman Empire itself was mysterious, sacred, and eternal. The Christians also accepted this theory and followed St Paul’s teaching that ‘the powers that be are ordained by God,’ equally with their non-Christian fellow-citizens regarding Caesar in some sense at least as the representative of divine law and order in the natural world, and as being therefore the vice-gerent of God[170]. When the Emperors became Christian the Church naturally found herself able to accept this doctrine with enthusiasm and without restriction, and the Emperor was acknowledged as spiritual as well as civil ruler. Thus we find that the Council of Nicea had no hesitation in admitting the right of the Emperor to control the Church, and Constantine claiming to be a sort of _Episcopus episcoporum_ appointed by God[171]. This conception of the Emperor has never been lost by the Eastern Church.

We have seen that there was a ceremonial in pre-Christian times on the accession of an Emperor. The Church very naturally transformed this inauguration ceremony into a Christian rite in much the same way as the civil marriage ceremony was made religious by the addition to it of the benediction of the Church. The accession of an Emperor was by the will of God. The Church gave him her solemn benediction at the outset of his career. It is the idea of a benediction rather than a consecration that the earliest Eastern rites, and even the earlier Western rites, seem to contemplate. At the same time the Church by her benediction proclaimed the new Emperor as the chosen of God, thereby affording a certain stability to his throne and in some degree offering some assurance of peace to Empire and Church. The idea of a consecration gradually evolved itself, and rapidly developed when the use of an unction was introduced. We have seen that there is some uncertainty as to the date of this introduction. St Gregory the Great not only speaks of the anointing of rulers as a well-known fact, but certainly regards it as being in some sort sacramental, just as St Augustine had long before asserted that the Jewish unction conferred grace on its recipients[172]. Photius evidently regarded the Emperor as being in some way set apart and solemnly consecrated by the inauguration rite. But there still remained the practical idea of obtaining general recognition as Emperor by the performance of the ceremony, for the Emperors were crowned immediately on their accession. This idea is just as manifest in the West as in the East. There we see that Pippin in his anxiety to obtain a definite recognition and acceptance of his dynasty when the Merovingian _fainéants_ were set aside, was anointed or consecrated on two different occasions, by St Boniface, and secondly by the Pope himself, who came across the Alps for the purpose. In the same way we find Richard I of England being crowned a second time on his return from his captivity, this second coronation being apparently regarded as necessary in view of the fact that his brother John had acted at least as king _de facto_. Henry II was crowned no less than three times. Henry III was crowned twice. All these cases of repeated coronations were intended to procure the firm establishment of the king upon his throne rather than for any other reason. Or again a king might be held to have forfeited his throne by some grievous crime, as in the case of Lothair II of Lotharingia, but on amendment might be confirmed upon his throne by a reconsecration, as was Lothair by Archbishop Hincmar.

But in process of time in the two oldest monarchical states, England and France, a theory came to be held that the consecration of a king was a consecration proper, and was to be ranked with the Sacrament of Order as conferring character, and that after his consecration the king was no longer a layman but at least a _Mixta Persona_. This view, popular though it was in England and France, was never accepted by authority, and Lyndwood mentions it as being taught only ‘secundum quosdam’; while St Thomas lays down that only the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and Order confer character, thus excluding the consecration of a king. On the other hand, in the rite of Navarre the unction is spoken of as ‘the Sacrament of unction.’

We find an excellent example of the popular belief in the effect of the consecration in the French and English rite of the Healing. In France the power of the king to heal by his touch was certainly generally attributed to the fact that he had been anointed. Though this theory was also largely held in England, there was also the counter and perhaps more general view held, that the power of healing was possessed in virtue of rightful succession from the Confessor; on the other hand the kings of England blessed cramp rings by rubbing them in their anointed hands, with a prayer for their consecration.

Three facts may be regarded as contributing towards this common belief in England and France that the consecration of a king was a sort of ordination; the fact that he was anointed ‘as prophets, priests and kings were anointed,’ according to the language of the form in most of the orders; the fact that the regal vestments were very like those of a bishop; and the fact that there is considerable similarity between the rite of the consecration of a king and that of the consecration of a bishop. The king was anointed ‘as prophets, priests and kings were anointed.’ Unction was used in the Sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation and Order, all of which conferred character. It was difficult to explain what was the meaning of the unction of a king. Grosseteste[173] held that it bestowed grace, the sevenfold gift of the Holy Spirit. So far as there was any official doctrine on the subject, it seems that it was that the unction of a king was a Sacramental, a means by which grace might be obtained. The Roman Church seems to have always discouraged the theory that it was in any way an ordination. The fact that in the East the Emperor took part in the procession as a Deputatus proves very little, and the fact that the Western Emperors sometimes read the Epistle at their coronation if anything goes against the theory of ordination, for if the Emperor was to be regarded as in any way ‘in Orders,’ surely his Orders would have ranked above the sub-diaconate.

We have already seen that the royal and sacerdotal vestments are closely related in their origin, and many of them more or less identical both in form and name, and therefore it is not surprising that men should have thought that this must mean that the king was in some way a minister of the Church. For example, a French order describes the Tunic, Dalmatic, and Pallium (Royal Mantle) of a king as ‘celuy qui représente le soubsdiacre, celuy qui représente le diacre, et le manteau royal représentant la chasuble.’ Again an English king is described by a lay witness as being arrayed at the time of his coronation like a bishop vested for Mass.

There is certainly a general similarity between the rite of the consecration of a bishop, and the rite of the consecration of a king. It was undoubtedly this similarity that was the chief ground for the doctrine that an anointed king was a ‘mixta persona,’ a view that is still maintained by some. The closeness of the structure of the two rites is seen at a glance.

_Consecration of a bishop._ _Consecration of a king._

Oath of canonical Oath to maintain Church obedience. and justice.

Litany. Litany.

Laying on of hands.

Veni Creator. Veni Creator.

Collect. Collects.

Preface and Consecration Preface and Consecration prayer. prayer.

Anointing. Anointing.

Delivery of Crozier, Ring, Delivery of Sword, Pallium, Mitre, and Gospel-book. Crown, Ring, Sceptre and Rod.

Mass. Mass.

It will be seen that the similarity in the structure of the rites is striking, and the closeness in the forms of the two rites is equally noticeable.

The bishop, after the consecration prayer, is anointed on the head with chrism. The king, after the consecration prayer, is anointed on head, breast, etc., with chrism according to the English and French rites, with oil according to the Roman use. The Roman form used at the anointing of a bishop is _Ungatur et consecretur caput tuum caelesti benedictione, ordine pontificali, in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti_; a Roman form at the anointing of a king runs _Ungo te in regem de oleo sanctificato in nomine_, etc. The hands of a bishop are anointed with the form _Ungantur manus istae de oleo sanctificato et chrismate sanctificationis sicut unxit Samuel David Regem et Prophetam, ita ungantur et consecrentur_; in the case of a king the general form runs _Ungantur manus istae de oleo sanctificato unde uncti fuerunt reges et prophetae et sicut unxit David in regem_, etc. The Ring is delivered to a bishop with the words _Accipe anulum discretionis et honoris fidei signum_, etc.; to a king with the words _Accipe regiae dignitatis anulum et per hunc in te catholicae fidei cognosce signaculum_, etc. The Pastoral staff is delivered to a bishop with the words _Accipe baculum regiminis signum, ut imbecilles consolides, titubantes confirmes, pravos corrigas, rectos dirigas_, etc.; compare with this the form with which the Verge or Rod is delivered to the king, _Accipe virgam virtutis atque aequitatis, qua intelligas mulcere pios et terrere reprobos_, etc. Finally the bishop is seated ‘in capite sedium episcoporum’ and the king is enthroned.

These instances are sufficient to shew unmistakably that one rite influenced the other. But the stage at which the similarity is so noticeable is a late stage in the history of both rites, and at an earlier date when both were more simple, much of the later parallelism is not to be found. In the process of the great liturgical developements of the middle ages there was naturally an assimilation in the case of the consecration of persons, and there seems to have been a good deal of experimenting in the case of the rite of the consecration of a king, many pontificals containing orders with various peculiarities, which certainly were never used. But on the other hand there is also to be noticed a careful differentiation between the two rites, and this especially in the Roman orders. The Roman rite was never elaborate and in process of time tended to a greater simplicity. Thus the investiture of a king with the Ring does not appear in it except for a very short time, and then from outside sources; in the same rite the unctions are only two in number, and there is a difference in the parts anointed in the case of a king, he being anointed only between the shoulders and on the wrist. If, as is most likely, kings in the West were anointed on the head, this differentiation between the anointing of a bishop and a king seems deliberate on the part of the Roman Church. Moreover, while it is true that in England and France chrism was used for the unction of a king as for a bishop, in the Roman rite chrism was never so used in the case of a king, but only the ‘oleum catechumenorum.’

Officially then the Church denied the name of Sacrament to the royal consecration, allowing it the rank of a Sacramental only. In practice the repetition of the rite which so often occurred, and in the case of the Roman Emperor was normally performed three times, proves sufficiently that it was not an ordination conferring character.

Historically considered the rite proves itself to be in origin a special benediction elaborated and developed almost out of recognition as such. A careful examination of the construction of the rite shews that in it there are three well marked divisions.

1. The election of the king.

2. The oath taken by the king to rule in accordance with law and justice.

3. The benediction superadded to the covenant so made between king and people.

Of the election the Recognition is the surviving trace. It may be noted that the idea of the election of the king is retained till quite late in the developement of the rite. Until the time of the fourth English recension, these words still appeared, _Quem in huius regni regem pariter eligimus_. In the fourth English recension _eligimus_ was changed to _consecramus_, but in the French rite this change was never made and the word _eligimus_ was used without alteration.

The oath was at first quite simple, short, and direct. It developed into an interrogatory form, the king swearing in answer to questions put to him by the consecrating prelate. In England and France the oath covered the king’s duties to Church and State and People, but elsewhere it frequently included a promise of subjection to the See of Rome.

The benediction of the Church was subjected to the greatest developement. An unction was introduced, and the porrection of the royal ornaments, Sword, Crown, Ring, Sceptres, and Verge, which naturally lent themselves to spectacular effect, tended to become more and more elaborate. Thus in process of time each ornament was delivered with its own form and prayer. Added to this, the conflation of prayers, originally alternative, has increased this portion of the rite until it comprises the greater part of the whole ceremonial. It appealed to sentiment, and the Church was always ready to make use of sentiment.

If it is desired to make a comparison between this and any other rite of the Church, it is the marriage rite which is really the closest to it. So King Charles I felt, of whom we are told that ‘His Majesty on that day was cloathed in white contrary to the custom of his predecessors who were on that day clad in purple. And this he did ... at his own choice only, to declare that Virgin Purity with which he came to be espoused unto his Kingdom[174].’ In marriage a covenant is made with vows between the two contracting parties. To the covenant so made the Church adds her benediction. In the giving of her benediction she makes use of emblems, a Crown and Ring, investing the contracting parties with insignia, as it were, which are highly significant of the covenant betwixt them made. Of these the nuptial Crown, still used throughout Eastern Christendom, has long been dispensed with in the West, the Ring alone remaining.

The rite of the coronation of a queen consort is not really in the same category with the consecration of a king. It is merely complimentary. As we have seen it had no place in the earliest English order, nor yet in the corresponding rite of Milan, and perhaps the same is true of the oldest Frankish forms. The second English recension gives a form for the coronation of the queen with the preliminary explanation that the office is performed out of consideration for her honourable position as consort of the king. This is borne out by the earlier forms at her unction, ‘Let the anointing with this oil increase thine honour.’

In the earlier Frankish orders there is a noticeable similarity to the nuptial rite, and the general idea underlying the benediction of the queen is that she may be worthy of her high dignity and bear a numerous royal progeny. This last idea has in recent times, temporarily at least, disappeared. The comparative unimportance of the coronation of the queen consort is shewn by the fact that many were not crowned at all, among others being Henrietta Maria, Catherine of Braganza, and Mary of Modena. It is true that these three belonged to the Roman communion, but notwithstanding this same circumstance, it was necessary for the king regnant James II to submit to the rite.

In France the coronation of the queen, since the time of Marie de Médicis, was dispensed with altogether, until Josephine was crowned as Empress with the Emperor Napoleon.

FOOTNOTES

[1] _Od._ IV. 691.

[2] _Il._ II. 101.

ἔστη σκῆπτρον ἔχων τὸ μὲν Ἥφαιστος κάμε τεύχον. Ἥφαιστος μὴν δῶκε Διὶ Κρονίωνι ἄνακτι, Αὐτὰρ ἄρα Ζεὺς δῶκε διακτόρῳ Ἀργειφόντῃ; Ἑρμείας δὲ ἄναξ δῶκεν Πέλοπι πληξίππῳ Αὐτὰρ ὁ αὖτε Πέλοψ δῶκ’ Ἀτρέι ποιμένι λαῶν; Ἀτρεὺς δὲ θνήσκων ἔλιπεν πολύαρνι Θυέστῃ, Αὐτὰρ ὁ αὖτε Θυέστ’ Ἀγαμέμνονι λεῖπε φορῆναι.

Cf. l. 205, and Soph. _Phil._, 137-140.

τέχνα γὰρ τέχνας ἑτέρας προὔχει καὶ γνώμα, παρ’ ὅτῳ τὸ θεῖον Διὸς σκῆπτρον ἀνάσσετια.

[3] Winckler, _The Tel-el-Amarna letters_, p. 99.

[4] Wellhausen’s emendation ‎‏האצעדה‏‎ ‘the bracelet’ for ‎‏העדה‏‎ ‘the testimony’ is very tempting. If ‘testimony’ stands, it probably refers to some document containing the laws and customs of the kingdom.

[5] Agathias, _Hist._, IV. 25.

[6] In 1 Sam. xviii. 10, where the A.V. reads ‘there was a javelin in Saul’s hand,’ ‘a javelin’ should be ‘the spear,’ which seems to imply that the spear in question was a special weapon. The word used here ‎‏חנית‏‎ is the same as in 1 Sam. xxvi. 7, 22, is translated ‘spear.’

[7] Vopiscus, _Tacitus_, 3-9.

[8] Herodian, _Hist._, II. 3.

[9] Ammianus Marcellinus, XX. 4. 17, and XXI. 1. 4.

[10] Tacitus, _Hist._, IV. 15.

[11] _De caerim._, I. 91.

[12] Nicephorus, _H. E._, XV. 15, Theodorus Lector, _H. E._, II. 65, Theophanes, _Chronographia_, I. 170 (ed. Bonn, 1839).

[13] Constant. Porphyr., _de caerimoniis_, I. 92. These accounts of early inaugurations are probably taken by Constantine from contemporary accounts.

[14] Theophanes, _Chron._, I. p. 210.

[15] _De caerim._ I. 94, pp. 431 ff.

[16] _J. Th. St._, II. p. 375.

[17] Theoph., _Chronograph._, I. 695 f.

[18] _De caerimoniis_, I. 38.

[19] Goar, _Euchologion_ (1647), pp. 924 ff. The text given is that of the Grotta Ferrata codex, showing the variations between it and the Barberini text.

[20] _De caerimoniis_, I. 39.

[21] Goar, _Euchologion_ (1647), pp. 924 ff.

[22] _J. Th. St._, II. p. 383 and n. 2.

[23] _De officiis Constantinopolitanis_, c. xvii. (Bonn, 1839).

[24] The Thomaite triclinium was a part of the imperial palace adjoining St Sophia.

[25] It is to be noticed that some of the imperial insignia have changed their names. The διάδημα was once equivalent to the στέμμα; it is now synonymous with the ζώνη.

[26] Probably the badge of his office as Deputatus.

[27] See Maltzew ‘Die heilige Krönung’ in _Bitt-Dank- und Weihe-Gottesdienste der orthodox-katholischen Kirche des Morgenlandes_ (Berlin 1897) pp. 1-60; E. Metallinos, _Imperial and Royal Coronation_ (London 1902).

[28] _Voyage historique d’Abissinie du R. P. Jerome Lobo, traduite du Portugais, continuée et augmentée de plusieurs dissertations, etc. par M. Le Grand_ (Paris MDCCXXVIII) p. 252 f.; _The travels of the Jesuits in Ethiopia_, by F. Balthasar Tellez (London 1710), pp. 49 f., 184. The former of these writers has made use of the latter, and so the two authorities are not independent.

[29] I am using here the account given by Tellez of two different coronations.

[30] _c._ 4 (_P. L._ XCVI. 766).

[31] _Reginonis Chron._, s.a. 749. Pertz, _M. G. Hist. Script._, I. 556.

[32] Ibid. s. a. 753. Dom Cabrol, _DACL_, ‘Bretagne (grande-),’ col. 1238, thinks that it was from England that the custom of unction passed into France, and that it was imported there by Boniface, himself an Englishman. But this is a very precarious theory in view of the scanty evidence for English coronations during this period. See pp. 58-60.

[33] _Regin. Chron._, s.a. 752. (Pertz, _l.c._)

[34] See p. 58 f.

[35] Gildas, _de excidio Britanniae_, c. XIX.

[36] Adamnan, _Vit. S. Columbani_, III. 5.

[37] _Chron. Moiss._, s.a. 801 (for 800), Pertz, _M. G. H. Script._, I. 305.

[38] Duchesne, _Lib. Pontificalis_, II. p. 7.

[39] ‘Plures sanctos invocantes,’ i.e. the Laudes spoken of in the _Chron. of Moissac_. “Les ‘Laudes’ sont une série d’acclamations dans lesquelles on invoque le Christ, les anges, et les saints pour la personne qui est l’objet de la cérémonie.” Duchesne, _op. cit._ II. 37, n. 33. The Laudes were not exclusively a feature of the coronation rite, but had a place in any public function of which any great personage was the centre. Laudes in very much the same form as usual here had been used on a previous occasion in honour of Charles as King of the Franks and Roman Patrician. See Dom Leclercq, _DACL_, ‘Charlemagne,’ col. 786. An example of the Laudes will be found on p. 43.

[40] Einhard, _Vita Caroli_, c. XXVIII.

[41] Poeta Saxo, _de gestis Caroli_.

Post laudes igitur dictas et summus eundem Praesul adoravit, sicut mos debitus olim Principibus fuit antiquis.

[42] _Regin. Chron._, s.a. 801, ‘Leo Papa coronam capiti imposuit; et a cuncto Romanorum populo ter acclamatum est,’ etc. (Pertz, _l.c._ 562.)

[43] _Chronographia_, I. p. 733.

[44] _Compend. Chron._, _P. G._ CXXVII. 389.

[45] _De antiquis rit. ecclesiae_, II. p. 207. (Ed. 1763.)

[46] See p. 38, n. 2.

[47] See below, p. 114.

[48] Melchior Hittorp, _De divinis cath. eccles. officiis_ (Paris 1610), p. 153. Cp. the Ordo I of A. Diemand, _Das Ceremoniell der Kaiserkrönungen von Otto I bis Friedrich II_, pp. 124, 125. Almost identical with this is the _Ordo ad benedicendum imperatorem quando coronam accipit_, of _O. R._ XII., _P. L._ LXXVII. coll. 1101, 1102.

[49] Martène’s Ordo VI, _op. cit._ II. p. 211.

[50] Martène’s Ordo VII, ibid. p. 212; Pertz, _M. G. Legg._, II. 97. Diemand (_op. cit._ p. 30) thinks that the title of this order ‘Incipit Ordo qualiter rex _Teutonicus_’ etc. shews that this order is not official. But the ‘Exercitus Teutonicus’ is prayed for in the Laudes of the Gemunden Codex. See above.

[51] G. Waitz, _Die Formeln der Deutschen Königs- und der Römischen Kaiser-Krönung_ (Göttingen, 1872), pp. 67, 68.

[52] Diemand (_op. cit._) divides the whole period from Otto I (962)—Frederick II (1220) into three recensions only, in the first of which he classes all those orders in which the anointing takes place before the ‘Confessio’ of St Peter.

[53] Hopf, _Chroniques_, p. 73 f.

[54] Pertz, _M. G. Legg._ II. 187 ff.

[55] So Pertz, _l.c._, but Diemand (_op. cit._ p. 35) takes it to be the Order used in the coronation of Henry III by Pope Clement II. This is without doubt an official Order.

[56] In nomine domini nostri Jesu Christi. Ego N. rex, et futurus imperator Romanorom, promitto, spondeo, polliceor, atque per haec evangelia iuro coram Deo et beato Petro apostolo, tibi N. beati Petri apostoli vicario fidelitatem, tuisque successoribus canonice intrantibus; meque amodo protectorem ac defensorem fore huius sanctae Romanae ecclesiae, et vestrae personae, vestrorumque successorum in omnibus utilitatibus, in quantum divino fultus fuero adiutorio, secundum scire meum ac posse, sine fraude et malo ingenio. Sic me Deus adiuvet et haec sancta Dei evangelia.

[57] There is no mention of the place where the Emperor is anointed, but as he is invested before the altar of St Maurice it seems probable that here too he was anointed by the Bishop of Ostia as in the last recension. Diemand seems not to have noticed where the investitures took place, and assumes that the unction was made before the Confessio of St Peter.

[58] Pertz, _M. G. Legg._ pp. 528 ff.

[59] _P. L._ LXXVIII. coll. 1238 ff. Almost identical is Muratori’s Order. See _Lit. Rom. Vetus_, Vol. II. p. 455.

[60] _Pontificale Romanum_ (1520). De coronatione Romani Imperatoris.

[61] _Rex Teutonicorum_ occurs often in the tenth and eleventh centuries. _Rex Germanicorum_ occurs once or twice in early times. Maximilian I first added the title _Rex Germaniae_. Bryce says that there is reason to think that in later times _Erwählter_ began to acquire the meaning of ‘elective’ in the place of ‘elect.’ See _Roman Empire_, p. 531, note _b_. (Ed. 1910.)

[62] The first reference to the consecration of a Saxon king is found in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle under the year 785, when Ecgferth was associated as king by his father Offa.

[63] _DACL_, art. Bretagne (grande-), col. 1238.

[64] Dom Cabrol, _loc. cit._, giving the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle as his authority, most unjustifiably states that Ecgferth was ‘couronné et oint.’ In the case of Ecgferth the A.-S. Chronicle account goes back to the compiler of the Winchester Annals drawn up under Alfred. What his sources were we do not know. In the case of Eardwulf of Northumbria we have the contemporary Northumbrian Annals embedded in Simeon of Durham and known through him and certain passages common to him and the A.-S. Chronicle, extending from the death of Bede to 802.

[65] Rich. de Cirencestria, _Speculum Historiale_ (Rolls Series), II. p. 27. We have the evidence of a charter of Burgred and Aethelswyth to show that crowns were among the regalia of the Mercian kings in the ninth century, but this does not necessarily imply any religious ceremony of coronation. J. M. Kemble, _Codex Diplom._, II. 94.

[66] See Stubbs’ Introd. to William of Malmesbury, _Gesta Regum_ (Rolls Series), II. p. xlii, n. 4. ‘Filium vestrum Erfred quem hoc in tempore ad sanctorum apostolorum limina destinare curastis, benigne suscepimus et quasi spiritalem filium consulatus cingulo, honore, vestimentisque, ut mos est Romanis consulibus, decoravimus, eo quod in nostris se tradidit manibus.’

[67] Henderson, _Pontificale of Egbert_ (Surtees Soc., Vol. XXVII.), pp. 100 ff. Another text of the same Order is printed from the _Pontificale Lanalatense_ by L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_, Westminster, 1901, pp. 3 ff., who also gives the unimportant variations of the text of the Order as it appears in the Leoffric Missal.

[68] Reference is made in this rite to seven prayers used, and _In diebus_ is therefore evidently regarded as an alternative. Sometimes it is very uncertain whether Alia means ‘or,’ or ‘also.’

[69] This detail follows the text of the Leoffric Missal. In the other two texts it is apparently stated that the people kiss the king, but the rubric is in all three texts confused and probably corrupt.

[70] ‘For the nation of the West-Saxons does not allow a queen to sit beside the king, nor to be called a queen, but only the king’s wife.’ Asser, _De rebus gestis Aelfredi_, s.a. 856 (Petrie, _Mon. Hist. Brit._ p. 471). The _Annales Bertiniani_, which s.a. 856 recount the coronation of Judith in France, definitely state that the coronation of a queen was not practised among the Saxons. See Pertz, _M.G.H. Script._ I. 450. For the position accorded to the consorts of Anglo-Saxon kings, see Liebermann, _Gesetze der Angelsachsen_, II. s.v. ‘Königin.’

[71] _Haec tria populo Christiano et mihi subdito in Christi promitto nomine. In primis ut ecclesia Dei et omnia populus Christianus veram pacem nostro arbitrio in omni tempore servet. Aliud ut rapacitates et omnes iniquitates omnibus gradibus interdicam. Tertium ut omnibus iudiciis aequitatem et misericordiam praecipiam, ut mihi et vobis indulgeat suam misericordiam clemens et misericors deus. Qui vivit._

[72] In the text of this recension given in Dr Wickham Legg’s _Three Coronation Orders_ (H. B. S. 1900), p. 59, the form with which the verge is delivered is followed by a prayer, _Ineffabilem misericordiam tuam_; and then the pallium is given with the form, _Accipe nunc vestem summi honoris_, and a prayer, _Omn. Deus cuncti honoris iustus dispositor_. None of these forms appear elsewhere.

[73] In this prayer occur the words, _quae per manus nostrae impositionem hodie regina instituitur_. These words have been regarded by some as evidence, lingering on only in the forms for the crowning of a queen, that originally there was a laying on of hands at the consecration of a king. The ‘ordinatio’ of King Aidan by St Columba is adduced as further evidence, and the expression of Photius χειροθεσία βασιλείας might also be adduced. Both, if they have any other than a general meaning, doubtless refer to the laying on of hands always anciently observed in blessing. But in this particular passage the words evidently refer simply to the setting of the crown on the queen’s head.

[74] See L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_, pp. 30 ff.

[75] L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_, pp. 81 ff. For other forms of this fourth recension cp. J. Wickham Legg, _Missale Westmonasteriense_ (H. B. S.), II. coll. 673 ff., and Maskell, _Monumenta Ritualia_, III. pp. 1-81.

[76] In this recension the words ‘quem in huius regni regem pariter eligimus’ in this prayer are altered to ‘quem ... consecramus.’ The change was never made in the same prayer in the French rite.

[77] J. Wickham Legg, _The Order of the Coronation of King James I_ (Russell Press, London, 1902).

[78] The miraculous chrism first appears in the fourteenth century. It was given by the Virgin to St Thomas Becket. Probably the miraculous chrism of England owes its existence to the desire of the English not to be outdone by the French who possessed a chrism supplied by an angel for the coronation of Clovis.

[79] Chr. Wordsworth, _Coronation of King Charles I_, 1626, pp. xix, xx.

[80] _Faciendo signum crucis_ is struck out, but the queen is anointed ‘in the manner of a cross.’

[81] The MS. copy of the order which the king himself used is now in the library of St John’s College, Cambridge. Prynne (_Canterburie’s Doome_, p. 70) accuses Abp Laud of having inserted divers prayers into the order from the Roman Pontifical, an assertion due to either his ignorance or his malice, for the examples which he gives are all in the old English rite. Heylin (_Cyprianus Anglicus_, ed. 1668, p. 142) states that there was used at the coronation of Charles I a prayer ‘which had been intermitted since Henry VI and was that that followeth: “Let him obtain favour for the people like Aaron in the tabernacle, Elisha in the waters, Zacharias in the temple; give him Peter’s key of discipline and Paul’s doctrine,” which clause had been omitted in times of Popery, as intimating more ecclesiastical jurisdiction to be given to our kings than the Popes allowed of.’ But this prayer does not occur in any of the extant copies of Charles’ rite, nor does it occur in any English order whatsoever, but it does occur in the Roman rite. Heylin seems to have confused this prayer with some other actually in the order.

[82] See Chr. Wordsworth, _Coronation of King Charles I_, 1626 (H. B. S. 1892), pp. lx ff., 18 ff.

[83] L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_, pp. 240, 241.

[84] Sir Harris Nicolas, _Chronology of History_ (London, 1833), pp. 272 f.

[85] Chr. Wordsworth, _op. cit._, p. 36, n. 5.

[86] L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_, pp. 287 ff.

[87] L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_, pp. 317 ff.; J. Wickham Legg, _Three Coronation Orders_, pp. 3 ff.

[88] _P. L._ CXXXVIII. coll. 737-742.

[89] _P. L._ CXXXVIII. coll. 783 ff.

[90] Martène’s Ordo III; II. p. 216.

[91] _P. L._ CXXXVIII. coll. 639-642.

[92] Ibid., coll. 727-731.

[93] _P. L._ LXXVIII. coll. 255 ff.

[94] II. pp. 622-634.

[95] The word ‘tria’ is omitted because with the addition there are now four promises.

[96] It will be remembered that Louis, then the Dauphin, was offered the English Crown and then driven out of England on John’s death. He always afterwards claimed to be King of England.

[97] _De ant. rit._ II. 219 ff.

[98] Godefroy, _Le cérém. François_, I. 13 (1649). Professor Hans Schreuer thinks that this order was never actually used. See _Über altfranzösische Krönungsordnungen_ (Weimar, 1909), pp. 2 ff.

[99] The conflation of three distinct forms of unction is self-evident. They can hardly have all been used, but here as elsewhere the meaning of _Alia_ is not clear.

[100] _De ant. rit._, II. pp. 227-229.

[101] _The Coronation Book of Charles V of France_, by E. S. Dewick, M.A., F.S.A. (H.B.S.)

[102] The English kings however only communicated in one kind previous to the Reformation.

[103] _Procès-verbal de la Cérémonie du sacre et du couronnement de LL. MM. L’Empereur Napoléon et l’Impératrice Joséphine._ Paris, An XIII, 1805. F. Masson, _Le sacre et le couronnement de Napoléon_, Paris, 1908.

[104] M. Hittorp, _De divinis ecclesiae officiis_, etc., in Biblioth. Vet. Patrum, x (Paris, 1610), pp. 147-152.

[105] See below p. 114.

[106] G. Waitz, _Die Formeln der deutschen Königs- und der römischen Kaiser-Krönung_ (Göttingen, 1872), pp. 87 ff. The order is from a Munich MS. of 1409.

[107] The rubric of the Pontifical of 1520 says ‘etiam dicunt omnes pontifices ... dicunt etiam alias benedictiones.’

[108] A rubric in the Rite contained in _O.R._ XIV takes into consideration national sentiment by allowing also the anointing of hands, breasts, shoulders, and bends of arm.

[109] Waitz only gives the beginning and end of this prayer, but it is evidently this prayer that he indicates.

[110] M. Magistretti, _Pontificale in usum ecclesiae Mediolanensis necnon Ordines Ambrosiani_ (Milan, 1897), pp. 62-64.

[111] Whether there was any anointing or not in this rite depends on whether Charlemagne was anointed or not. If he was, then an unction, though not mentioned, certainly had a place in the Gemunden Order, and in this. See pp. 30 ff.

[112] M. Magistretti, _op. cit._, pp. 112 ff.

[113] Pertz, _M. G. Legg._, II. pp. 503 ff.

[114] Magistretti, _op. cit._, pp. 121 ff.

[115] _Res gestae Saxonicae_ in Pertz, _M.G.H. Script._ III. 437-438.

[116] Possibly this means the ‘Laudes.’

[117] Pertz, _M.G.H., Legg._ II. pp. 384 ff.

[118] The _Ita_ is almost certainly a scribal error for _Sta_. But error or not this form is found also in the orders by which Maximilian I and Charles V were crowned, though subsequently _Sta et retine_ is restored in German Rites.

[119] See Panvinius and Beuther, _Inauguratio, coronatio, etc._, pp. 8 ff., 81 ff., 180 ff. The ‘Order’ of the coronation of Maximilian II (1562), pp. 102 ff., is simply an account of the rite written down from memory.

[120] The form however of enthronisation at the Coronation of Matthias II begins _Sta et retine_.

[121] Comte de Bray, _Mémoires_ (Paris, 1911), pp. 97-117

[122] II pp. 234 ff. _Ritus benedicendi et coronandi reges Hungariae qui obtinuit dum Albertus V Dux Austriae in regem Hungariae coronaretur._

[123] _Op. cit._, pp. 154 ff.

[124] _Lib. de Hist. Gall._, _P.L._ XCVI. coll. 765-766.

[125] _Liber Ordinum_. Ed. M. Férotin (Paris, 1904). App. III. pp. 499 ff.

[126] de Blancas, _Coronaçiones_, pp. 117 ff. (Çaragoça, 1641.)

[127] de Blancas states that Dom Pedro swore fidelity to the Pope (p. 5), but this does not appear in the oath in the coronation order of Dom Pedro.

[128] Cf. Constantine Porphyr. _de caer_. I. 91 (coronation of Leo the Great), ‘He was adored by all and held the spear and shield.’

[129] José Maria Yanguas y Miranda, _Cronica de los Reyes de Navarra_ (Pamplona, 1843), pp. 192-199; Martène, II. pp. 236 ff.

[130] Geronymo Çurita, _Los cinco libros primeros de la segunda parte de los anales de la corona de Aragon_. (Çaragoça, MDCX.) Tomo tercero, Libr. XIII. c. li. pp. 185, 186.

[131] J. Cooper, _Four Scottish Coronations_. (Aberdeen, 1902.)

[132] John Marquess of Bute, _Scottish Coronations_, pp. 140 ff.

[133] _Actus Coronationis seren. Dn. Frederici Com. Pal. Rheni ... et Dom. Elisabethae ... in regem et reginam Bohemiae._ (Prague, 1619.) _Acta Bohemica_ ([Prague], 1620), pp. 139 ff. The two documents do not always agree in detail.

[134] The _Actus Coronationis_ does not mention _Veni Creator_, but the _Acta Bohemica_ definitely state that the hymn was sung.

[135] The Ring is not mentioned in the _Acta Bohemica_.

[136] This benediction is not mentioned in _A.B._

[137] In the _Actus Coronationis_ the benediction is spoken of as following _Te Deum_, but it is evidently out of place. The _A.B._ (which omit all reference to the Queen) state that the _Te Deum_ was sung at the close of the ceremony.

[138] _An account of the anointing of the First King of Prussia in 1701._ J. Wickham Legg, F.R.C.P., F.S.A. _Archaeol. Jour._ LVI. pp. 123 ff.

[139] _Regis Friderici Coronatio descripta carmine ab Hieronymo Hosio_, in _Schiardius Redivivus sive Rerum Germanarum scriptores varii_, T. III. pp. 65 ff.

[140] The metre requires that the hymn should be paraphrased and it is not clear which of the two is meant. Though _Veni Creator_ is used in most orders, the other is found in the later Danish and Swedish orders.

[141]

Turba Deum interea solemni musica cantu Laudat....

Probably this means that _Te Deum_ is sung.

[142] _Allernaadigst approberet Ceremoniel ved Deres Majestæter Kong Christian den Ottendes og Dronning Caroline Amalias forestaaende, höie Kronings-og Salvings-Act paa Frederiksborg Slot_, etc. A. Seidelin, Copenhagen [1840].

[143] _Kurtze Beschreibung wie Ihr. Königl. Majest. zu Schweden Carolus XI zu Upsahl ist gekrönet worden. Aus dem Schwedischen verdeutschet_, 1676. Unfortunately none of the forms are given in this account.

[144] _Ordning vid Deras Majestäter Konung Carl den Femtondes och Drottning Wilhelmina Frederika Alexandra Anna Lovisas Kröning och Konungens Hyllning vid Riksdagen i Stockholm_, 1860.

[145] _Ceremoniel ved deres Majestæter Kong Haakon den Syvende’s og Dronning Maud’s Kroning i Trondhjem’s Domkirke Aar_ 1906. Steen’ske Bogtrykkeri, Kr. A., 1906.

[146] I. p. 390.

[147] _P.L._ cxxx. 250.

[148] _P.L._ LXXVIII. 1006, 1007.

[149] The description is not clear, but the above probably represents its meaning. The text is ‘et tenent evangelium super caput vel cervicem ipsius. Et accedit unus episcopus et dat orationem super eum et recedit, et alter similiter. Accedit tertius et consecrat illum.’ The word ‘consecrat’ is curious, but these are evidently the three special prayers said for the Pope, of which the text is given in the later descriptions.

[150] _P.L._ LXXVIII. pp. 1098, 1099.

[151] _P.L._ LXXVIII. pp. 1127 ff.

[152] The _Caerimoniale Romanum_ adds that this prayer is from the Order of the Consecration of a Bishop.

[153] _Sacrarum caerimoniarum sive rituum ecclesiasticorum S. Rom. Ecclesiae Libri tres_ (Venetiis, MDLXXXII). Various details are given more fully here than in the older accounts. For the Rite as used at the present day see Grissell, _Sede Vacante_, Parker, 1903.

[154] It is quite possible that the Laudes at the Papal Coronation may originally have been the development of the ceremonial reception of a new Bishop, such as obtained in France in early times—see Martène, II. p. 29. If so, the forms have been assimilated to the Imperial ‘Laudes.’

[155] _Reginonis Chronicon_, _s.a._ 750. (Pertz, _M. G. H. Script._ I. 556.)

[156] _Reginonis Chronicon_, _s.a._ 752. (Pertz, _l.c._)

[157] _J.Th.S._ II. pp. 383 ff.

[158] _Chronicon Anonymum_ in Guidi, _Chronica Minora_, p. 21.

[159] _In I Reg. Expos._ iv. 5 (_P. L._ LXXIX. 278).

[160] St Gregory’s expression ‘qui in culmine ponitur’ is somewhat unusual, and it may be noted that a similar expression is found in Can. 1 of the 12th Council of Toledo (681) ‘etenim sub qua pace vel ordine serenissimus Ervigius princeps regni conscenderit culmen regnandique per sacrosanctam unctionem susceperit potestatem,’ etc.

[161] Photius, _Epp._ I. 16.

[162] Brightman considers that the language of Photius is metaphorical only and gives later instances of the figurative use of such words as χρίσμα and χρίειν. _Loc. cit._, pp. 384, 385.

[163] Brightman, _Byzantine Imp. Coronation_, in _J. Th. St._ II. pp. 391 f. and _The Coronation Order and the Regal Vestments_, in _The Pilot_, VI. p. 136.

[164] See the various English orders, most of which are given in L. G. Wickham Legg, _English Coronation Records_.

[165] See below, p. 187.

[166] Bock, _Die Kleinodien des heil. römischen Reiches deutsch. Nation_. In the plate of the Emperor Charles V the Dalmatic has been omitted. Also it is to be doubted whether the Emperor wore the Armill crosswise like a stole as there represented.

[167] Dewick, _The Coronation Book of Charles V of France_.

[168] de Blancas, _Coronaçiones_.

[169] It is usually held that the Orb is another form of the Sceptre. In rites in which it is referred to it is generally given without any accompanying form. It is variously named the Orb, Pome, Apfel or Reichsapfel.

[170] Tertull., _Apol._ XXXII.; _Ad Scap._ II.

[171] Eusebius, _Vit. Constant._, IV. xxiv.

[172] Cf. the statement of Aphraates (c. 350) who holds that the unction of Saul and David imparted the Holy Spirit. (_Demonstr._ VI. 16.)

[173] _Roberti Grosseteste episcopi quondam Lincolniensis Epistolae_, (Rolls Series, 1861), p. 350.

[174] Heylin, _Cyprianus Anglicus_, p. 145. 1668.

I. GENERAL INDEX

[_See also Table of Contents_]

Abyssinian Rite, 30, 180

Aidan, King, ‘Ordination’ of, 36, 65 n. 2

Akakia, 185

Alba camisia, 183

Alfred, King, 59 f., 171

Anastasius I, Emperor, 12 f.

Anglo-Saxon Coronations, 58 ff.

Antidoron, 27, 29

Antiminsion, 17

Aphraates, quoted, 190 n.

Armills, 183, 187

Aurelian, Emperor, 10

ἀνατείλατε, 27

Baldwin I, 27, 48

_Benedictio super arma regis_, 131

Berengar of Friuli, 170

Bishop, consecration of, compared with that of a king, 193 f.

Boniface, St, 34, 167, 180

Bracelets, 4 n.

Burgred, King, charter of, 59 n. 1, 63

Buskins, 181 ff.

βασιλεύς, used of Anglo-Saxon kings, 62

Camelaucus, 159 f.

Camisa, 130, 184

Charlemagne, 32 ff., 37 ff., 168; unction of, 40 f., 169

Charles I of England, 197

Charles V, Emperor, 55, 125

Charles V of France, 102

Chlamys, 13, 19, 23, 173, 182; prayer over, 19, 22, 179

Chrism, 194; English, 73, 80 f.; French, 103

Codinus Curopalates, quoted, 24

Colobium sindonis, 182

Confessio of St Peter, Emperor anointed before, 45, 48

Constantia, Empress, 49

Constantine VI, 17

Constantine Porphyrogenitus, quoted, 11, 12, 15, 18, 21, 133

Coronation, repetition of, in case of certain kings, 190

χειροθεσία, 66 n., 179

χιτών, 181

Dalmatic, 183 ff., 187

Deputatus, 26

Diadem, 10, 11, 16; diadema, 25, 182

Dibetesion, 12, 16, 18, 25, 181

Donative, 9, 15

διάδημα, 16, 25 n.

Eardwulf, King, 59

Ecgferth, King, 56 n., 58

Ectene or Litany, 22

Edgar, King, 63, 172

Egbert, Pontifical of, 57 f., 60

Einhard, quoted, 39

Epistle, read by Emperor at coronation, 192

Frankish kings, coronation of, 91

Galeus, 62, 185. (See also Helmet)

Goar, _Euchologion_, quoted, 18, 22

Gregory I, Pope, on unction of kings, 178; ‘Apostle of the English’, 98

Grosseteste, quoted, 192

Hazael, 4

Healing, by kings, 191

Helmet, 133, 136

Henry VI, Emperor, 49

Henry VII, Emperor, 52, 116

Heylin, quoted, 77 n., 197 f.

James II, 85 ff.

Jehoiada, 4

Julian, Bishop of Toledo, quoted, 33, 128

Julian, Emperor, 10

Justin II, Emperor, 16

Key, delivered to king, 154

Knights, created at coronation, 125

καμπάγια, 16

Laud, Abp, 77 f., 79 f.

_Laudes_, 19, 38 n. 2, 42 f., 47, 51, 53, 125 n., 160, 161, 163, 164

Laying on of hands, in coronation, 36, 65 n. 2

Leo I, Emperor, 10 f.

Leo II, Emperor, 15

Liber Regalis, 58, 69

Litany, in English rite, 67

Loros. (See Diadema, Pallium)

Louis II, King, 45

Louis the Pious, 41

Lyndwood, quoted, 191

Manasses, Constantine, quoted, 40

Mandyas, 26

Maniakis, 11

Marriage rite, compared with that of coronation, 197

Mary, St, in Turri, Emperor canon of, 54

Maurice, St, altar of, Emperor anointed before, 47, 48, 50, 52

Mixta Persona, 191

Modiolon, 15

Napoleon, 106

Oath, at coronation, 197; English, 63, 67, 70, 73, 78 f., 82; French, 96, 99, 100, 102, 106; Imperial, 45, 46, 49, 52; Roman, 109, 111; Spanish, 33, 134, 165

Obligatory oath of the people, 81, 141

Orb, 185

Pall (Pallium) 183, 187; papal, 160, 161

Pertinax, Emperor, 8

Photius, quoted, 179

Pippin, 34, 166 ff., 190

Presanctified, liturgy of, 24

Prynne, 77 n.

πολυχρόνιον, 29

Queen, coronation of, 198 f.; Anglo-Saxon, 62, 95, 198

Recognition, 73, 127, 140, 196

Regnum. (See Tiara)

Reichsapfel, 143, 185

Ring, investiture with, 51, 64, 174, 195

Sacrament or Sacramental, 191, 196

Sagion, 18

Sakkos, 25, 26, 181, 184

Sancroft, Abp, 81, 84

Sapor, 5

Saul, 3

Shield and Spear, 5, 11, 133

Shield, elevation on, 10, 13, 16, 25, 135, 136

Spurs, 185

Stemma, 19, 63, 185

Sub-deacon, Emperor acts as, 53, 54

Tacitus, Emperor, 7 f.

Tel-el-Amarna, 2

Theophanes, quoted, 11, 12, 17, 40

Tiara (papal) 160, 163

Torque, 10, 13, 16

Tunica talaris, 183, 184

Tunicle. (See Dalmatic)

Tzitzakion, 18

τουβία, 16

Unction, in Abyssinia, 30 f., 180; at Constantinople, 177 f.; of Czar of Russia, 29; among the Franks, 34 f., 166 f., 180; in Imperial rite, 40, 45, 47, 50, 52; in Spain, 33 f., 165 f., 180 (See also Charlemagne, Unction of)

Verge, 185

Vestments, coronation, 181 ff.; derivation of, 186; resemblance to sacerdotal, 193

Wamba, King, 33 f., 128

Widukind, 120

ζώνη, ζωνάριον, 16

II. INDEX OF FORMS

_(Pap) means a Papal Form; the other letters refer to the Protestant rites: (B) Bohemian, (D) Danish, (N) Norwegian, (P) Prussian, (S) Scottish, (Sw) Swedish. The number of the page in brackets in the case of a Latin form gives the reference to the English version; and the Latin in brackets after an English form is the original of the form._

A vobis perdonari, 70, 74, 92, 95, 99, 116

Accingere gladio tuo, 47, 53, 112

Accipe anulum signaculum s. Trinitatis, 66, 117; anulum vid. signaculum s. fidei, 51, 64, (76), 96, 104, 105; armillas sinceritatis, 68, (75); coronam a domino deo, 44, 45, 114; coronam gloriae, 66, (76), 117, 133; coronam regalis excellentiae, 51; (igitur) coronam regni, 101, 107, 110, 115, 117, 124, 132; inquam coronam, 104; dignitatis pomum, 132; (ensem) gladium (imperialem) ad vindictam, 47, 52, 103, 104, 117, 131; gladium per manus (nostras) episcoporum, 42, 68, (75), 103, 110, 115, 118, 123; gladium rex electe (B), 143; hunc gladium cum dei benedictione, 51, 64, 120; nunc vestem summi honoris, 65 n. 1; pallium, 68, (75); pallium plenitudinem (Pap), 161; pomum aureum, 117; regiae dignitatis anulum, 68, (75), 110, 115, 123, 194; sceptrum regiae potestatis, 51, 64, 68, (75), 93, 117; sceptrum regni virgam, 47; signum gloriae, 45, 47, 51, 52, 117, 132; virgam virtutis, 54, 65, (75), 101, 105, 110, 115, 124, 132, 133, 195

Actiones nostras, 130

Adesto domine supplicationibus, 98, 100, 105

Almighty and Everlasting God, Creator of all things (Omn. semp. Deus creator omnium), 74, 80, 82

(O) Almighty and Everlasting God, we beseech thee (Omn. semp. Deus affluentem), 76, 90

Almighty Everlasting God, pour out (Sw), 154

Almighty God give thee (Omn. Deus det tibi), 76

And the same good Lord, 83

Be strong (Confortare), 75, 83, 90

Be this head anointed (Unguantur caput istud, etc.), 82

Behold O God, our defender, 86

Benedic domine et sanctifica anulum, 72, (75); fortitudinem, 61, 65, 72, (76), 97; hunc principem, 53, 61, 103; hunc regem, 71, (74), 101, 110, 123, 131, 132

Benedicat tibi deus (75), 104, 110

Bless O Lord and sanctify (Benedic deus), 75; the virtuous carriage (Benedic dne fortitudinem), 76

Bless we beseech thee, O Lord, these thy gifts (Munera dne quaes. oblata), 77, 87

Blessed art thou, O Lord, 85

By the eternal almighty God (S), 141

By whom kings reign and princes rule, 88

Clerum ac populum, 92, 104, 110

Come thou Holy Spirit, come (S), 154

Confortare et esto vir, 72, (75), 103

Coronet te deus (i), 47, 64, 68, (75), 92, 93

Coronet te deus (ii), 92, 104, 107

Coronet te dominus gloria, 95

Creator omnium Imperator (see Omn. semp. Deus creator ac gubernator)

Desiderium animae, 111, 124, 132

Det tibi dominus velle et posse, 92

Deum time, 68

Deus caelestium terrestriumque, 72, (75), 98, 109, 112, 116, 122, 131

Deus cuius est omnis potestas (queen), 66, 69, (76), 105; dei filius, 47, 50, 52, 64, 68, 71, (74), 96, 99, 101, 103, 107, 112, 115, 117, 118, 123, 127, 132; electorum fortitudo, 61, 64, 71, (74), (89), 94, 96, 103, 115; honorum (bonorum) cunctorum, 113, 133; humilium visitator, 70, 73, (82); ineffabilis auctor, 67, 71, (74), 123; inenarrabilis auctor, 45, 46, 50, 94, 99, 101, 103, 108, 110, 112, 127; in cuius manu, 45, 46, 49, 118, 131; pater aeternae gloriae, 44, 45, 53, 103, 105, 107, 113, 114, 132, 133; perpetuitatis auctor, 61, 64, 68, (75), 104, 115, 117

Deus qui, ad defendendum, 133; adesse (Pap), 162; apostolum tuum (Pap), 162; corda fidelium, 106, 150; es iustorum gloria, 47, 68, 71, (74), 99, 101, 110, 123, 132; populis tuis, 61, 64, 71, (74), 91, 92, 103, 116; providentia tua, 64, 96, 101, 103, 117; scis humanam genus, 98, 109, 122, 131; solus habes immortalitatem, 50, 53, 69, (76), 105, 111, 116, 117, 132; victrices Moysi, 101, 104, 108, 112, 127

Deus regnorum omnium, 44, 51, 52, 60, 112, 118, 127; rex regum, 71, (74); tuorum corona, 68, (75), (76)

Dilexisti iustitiam, 116, 118

(Domine) Deus omn. cuius est omnia potestas (king), 45, 47, 50, 51, 52, 64, 72, (75), 93, 96, 104, 117, 118, 132

Domnus Leo papa (Pap), 160

Ecce mitto angelum, 49, 109, 122

Elegit te dominus, 160

Emitte spiritum, 106

Emitte spiritum (D), 150

Exaudi domine preces nostras, 42, 71, (75), 114

Fear God (P), 146

Firmetur manus, 63, 67, 70, 73, (85), 104, 108, 112, 127

Gentem Francorum inclitam, 103

Gloria et honore coronet, 94

God crown thee (coronet te deus), 75, 77, 83, 87, 89

God the Almighty (Sw), 155

God the exalter of the humble (Deus visitator humilium), 73, 82, 86 (see O God which visitest)

God the Son of God (Deus dei filius), 74, 80, 82, 86

God the strength of thy chosen (Deus electorum fortitudo), 74, 77

God the unspeakable author (Deus ineffabilis), 74, 77

God to whom belongeth all power (Dne Deus cuius est omnis potestas), 76

God which art the glory (Deus qui es iustorum gloria), 74

(O) God which providest (Deus qui populis tuis), 74, 82, 86, 88

(O) God which only hast immortality (Deus qui solus habes immortalitatem), 76

Haec domine salutaris, 133

Haec tria populo Christiano, 63 n., 96, 99, 102

Hear our prayers (exaudi quaesumus), 75, 87

I was glad, 85

In diebus eius oriatur, 64, (83), 96, 103, 115, 116

In nomine Christi promitto, 45, 67

In nomine Patris, 65, 69, (76), 105, 117

In the name of the Father (In nomine Patris), 76

In thy days (In diebus eius), 83

Ita retine, 124. (See Sta et retine)

Let my prayer come, 88

Let these hands be anointed (Unguantur manus istae), 74

Let thy hand be strengthened (Firmetur manus), 85

Let your royal Majesty (P), 145; (queen, P), 145

Look down Almighty God (Prospice omnipotens), 74

Munera, Domine, quaesumus oblata, 77

O Almighty and Everlasting God, the fountain (Omn. semp. Deus fons et origo), 76, 84; Creator of all things (Omn. semp. Deus, creator omnium), 74, 80, 82

O Almighty God, we beseech thee that this thy servant (Quaesumus omn. Deus ut famulus), 76

O God of eternity (O Eternal God, Deus perpetuitatis), 75, 77, 83; the Creator (Deus caelestium), 75, 80; the crown of the faithful (Deus tuorum), 75, 76, 83, 87, 89; the King of kings (Deus rex regum), 74, 80; to whom belongeth (Deus cuius est omnis potestas), 75, 83; which visitest (Deus visitator humilium), 73 (see also God the exalter of the humble); who dwellest (Deus visitator humilium), 82, 86, 88; who providest, 82, 86, 88

O Lord Holy Father who by anointing, 89 (see God the strength); our God King of kings, 22, 28; the fountain of all good things (Omnium domine fons bonorum), 75, 76, 84; the giver of all perfection, 90; thou that governest (Benedic domine), 74, 80

Officio nostrae indignitatis, 53, 69, 72, (76), 111, 113, 117, 133

Omn. aeterne deus creator omnium (see Omn. semp. Deus creator ac gubernator); fons et origo, 50, 53, 69, (76), 105, 111, 116, 117, 132

Omnipotens det tibi deus de rore, 61, 65, 72, (76), 97

Omnipotens Deus cuncti honoris, 65 n. 1

Omnipotens semp. Deus affluentem spiritum, 65, 69, (76), 105, 117; caelestium terrestriumque (see Deus caelestium); creator ac gubernator, 64, 67, 71, (74), 92, 96, 99, 101, 103, 106, 110, 112, 115, 116, 123, 126, 131; hanc famulam, 105, 133

Omnipotens semp. Deus qui famulum, 109, 122, 131; Hazael, 107, 112, 132; te populi sui, 133

Omnium domine fons bonorum, 51, 65, 66, 68, 69, 93, 104, 105, 117

Pater sancte sic transit, 163

Petre amas me, 50

Praetende quaesumus domine, 132

Praise the Lord O Jerusalem, 87

Profiteor coram deo, 101, 106, 112, 124, 126, 131

Promitto (et perdono) vobis, 92, 96

Prosperity to the king (P), 146

Prospice omn. Deus serenis obtutibus, 42, 53, 68, 71, (74), 99, 103, 110, 114, 123, 132

Quaesumus omn. deus ut famulus, 76

Quatenus divinis monitis, 104, 111

Receive the armill (Accipe armillas), 75; the crown of glory (Accipe coronam gloriae), 76, 84; the ring of kingly dignity (Accipe regiae dignitatis anulum), 75; the rod (Accipe virgam), 75; the sceptre (Accipe sceptrum), 75; this kingly sword (Accipe gladium), 75, 87; this pall (Accipe pallium), 75; this ring (Accipe anulum), 76

Rectitudo regis est noviter ordinati, 62, 97, 115, 117

Remember him of whom, 87

Sanctus, 88

Seeing you are by our ministry (Officio indignitatis), 76, 84

Si leges et consuetudines, 70

Si tali principi, 67, 99

Sir, receive this kingly sword (S), 141

Sir, receive this sceptre (S), 141

Spiritum sanctificationis, 94

Spiritus Sci gratia humilitatis, 51, 53, 69, 105, 111, 117, 123, 132, 133

Sta et retine, 65, 68, (75), 97, 100, 101, 107, 111, 112, 127, 132

Stand and hold fast, 75, 87

Stand and hold fast (S), 141

Supplicationibus omn. deus (Pap), 162

Te deum, 29, 63, 72, 75, 83, 87, 90, 96, 99, 100, 103, 107, 111, 112, 117, 118, 121, 124, 125, 127, 133, 135, 144, 146, 148, 150, 157

Te invocamus, 61, 64, 71, (74), 94, 96, 103, 115, 116

The almighty everlasting God (Sw), 154

The King shall rejoice (Deus in virtute), 75, 83, 88

The Lord bless thee (Benedicat tibi), 75, 83; give you a fruitful country, 90; give thee of the dew (Omn. deus det tibi), 83; preserve thy life, 83

Thus saith the Lord, 87

To put you in mind, 87

To thee alone, 23

Tu es Petrus, 108

Ungo te in regem, 110, 123, 194

Unguantur caput istud, pectus, 68; manus istae, 68, 71, (74), 99, 104, 110, 123, 194

Unxerunt Salamonem, 61, 71, (74), 96, 99, 103, 107, 116

Veni Creator, 71, 74, 82, 86, 102, 106, 142, 145, 147

Veni Sancte Spiritus, 147, 150, 154

Vis sanctam fidem, 109, 131

Vis sanctissimo in Christo patri, 122

We beseech thee, O Lord (Te invocamus), 74, 82

We swear, 81

Zadok the priest, 74, 82, 86

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

BY THE SAME AUTHOR

THE LITURGY OF THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH

Crown 8vo. pp. viii + 182. Price 5s net.

“We hail it as the contribution of a new and very promising writer. While we do not accept all Mr Woolley’s conclusions, we must speak most highly of his method, and thank him for several new lights which he has cast upon the earliest forms of the Liturgy.”—_Church Quarterly Review_

“An interesting, concise and learned study of the history of the development of the form of worship among the early Christians, it has a general value of an excellent introduction to the study of liturgiology and a special interest for Anglicans who advocate the revision of the liturgy of the Church of England.”—_Scotsman_

THE CAMBRIDGE HANDBOOKS OF LITURGICAL STUDY

General Editors: H. B. SWETE, D.D., and J. H. SRAWLEY, D.D.

The Ancient Church Orders. By ARTHUR JOHN MACLEAN, D.D., Hon. D.D. (Glasgow), Bishop of Moray, Ross and Caithness. Small crown 8vo. 4s net.

The Church Year and Kalendar. By JOHN DOWDEN, D.D., Hon. LL.D. (Edinburgh), late Bishop of Edinburgh. Small crown 8vo. 4s net.

The Early History of the Liturgy. By J. H. SRAWLEY, D.D., Examining Chaplain to the Bishop of Lichfield. Small crown 8vo. 6s net.

The Offices of Baptism and Confirmation. By T. THOMPSON, M.A. Small crown 8vo. 6s net.

LITURGIOLOGY

The Use of Sarum. The original Texts edited from the MSS. with an introduction and Index by WALTER HOWARD FRERE, D.D. Demy 8vo.

Vol. I. The Sarum Customs as set forth in the Consuetudinary and Customary. 12s net.

Vol. II. The Ordinal and Tonal. 12s net.

The Sufficiency and Defects of the English Communion Office. By A. G. WALPOLE SAYER, B.D. Crown 8vo. 3s net.

The Prayer Book of Aedeluald the Bishop commonly called the Book of Cerne. Edited from the MS. in the University Library, Cambridge, with Introduction and Notes. By Dom A. B. KUYPERS, Benedictine of Downside Abbey. Demy 4to. Buckram, gilt top. With two facsimile plates. 21s net.

Early Latin Hymnaries. An index of Hymns in Hymnaries before 1100. With an appendix from later sources. By JAMES MEARNS, M.A., Vicar of Rushden, Buntingford. Demy 8vo. With a frontispiece. 5s net.

The Canticles of the Christian Church Eastern and Western in Early and Medieval Times. By the same author. Demy 8vo. With 3 plates. 6s net.

A Historical Companion to Hymns Ancient and Modern: containing the Greek and Latin; the German, Italian, French, Danish and Welsh Hymns; the first lines of the English Hymns; the names of all authors and translators; notes and dates. Edited by the Rev. ROBERT MAUDE MOORSOM, M.A. Second edition. Pott 8vo. 5s net.

Renderings of Church Hymns from Eastern and Western Office Books. By the Rev. ROBERT MAUDE MOORSOM. Music by the Rev. G. W. GRIFFITH and Mr W. S. DE WINTON. Crown 8vo. 5s net.

The Paragraph Psalter, arranged for the use of Choirs, by the Right Rev. BROOKE FOSS WESTCOTT, D.D. Revised and edited by A. H. MANN, M.A., Mus.D. (Oxon.). Demy 8vo. 5s. Pott 8vo. Cloth, 1s. Leather, 1s 6d.

Cambridge University Press C. F. Clay, Manager: Fetter Lane, London

End of Project Gutenberg's Coronation Rites, by Reginald Maxwell Woolley