book ii, chap. vii, describes the tonsure as indicative of the

priesthood and the regal nature of the church, the shaven part of the head representing the hemispherical cap of the Jewish priests, and the circlet of hair representing the coronet of kings. It is true that he is not speaking definitely of bishops, but the fact that he is absolutely silent respecting a crown of any kind other than the crown of hair—for which he expressly uses the word _corona_—is at least presumptive evidence that the crown of gold was not worn in his day. The prophecy of King Laoghairé's druids affords a very curious corroboration of this; see _post_, p. 128.

The earliest representation that Dr Rock can adduce of an ecclesiastic wearing this circlet is a figure in the Benedictional of St Aethelwold, an MS. of the tenth century at Chatsworth. Here we have a figure, the brows of which are certainly encircled with a gold band set with precious stones. As Marriott points out, however, this is probably more of a secular than an ecclesiastical nature, and may indicate the royal rank to which bishops at that time frequently laid claim.

Menard, after a careful study of ancient liturgies, came to the conclusion that the mitre was not in use in the church prior to the year 1000. Contemporary art bears out this statement. Probably the earliest genuine representation of a bishop wearing a head-dress to which any importance can be attached from a liturgical point of view is an illumination of St Dunstan[69] in an MS. (Claud. A 3) in the British Museum. This is of the early years of the eleventh century. It shows us a simple cap, low and hemispherical in shape, without the least trace of the cleft now invariably associated with the episcopal headgear.

The fashion seems to have changed with considerable rapidity, and the cleft very soon began to make its appearance. Its first beginning was a very shallow, blunt depression between two low, blunt, rounded points, one over each ear—in fact, a depression such as would naturally be made in a soft cloth cap by passing the outstretched hand gently across the crown. This change was not long in giving place to another and more important modification. The mitre was turned so that the horns appeared one in front, one behind, and they were raised a little higher than before, and, instead of being rounded, were made of a triangular form. The mitre in this shape is that universally represented in MSS. of the twelfth century.

Little difference in shape is traceable in the mitres of the thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth or sixteenth centuries. During these four hundred years the mitre increased considerably in size, but it was reserved for the seventeenth century to stereotype the final modification in form. Hitherto the two horns of the mitre had as a general rule been in the shape of plain triangles, bent round so as to adapt themselves to the outline of the head; the mitre was thus cylindrical in outline. By the seventeenth century, however, the triangles had been made spherical, so that the mitre assumed the form of a pair of parentheses, or of a barrel, which it still possesses.[70] By this time it had grown to a considerable height—some eighteen inches.

When the mitre was a plain cloth cap it was kept in position by two ribbons, which were knotted at the back of the head. The end of these ribbons are well shown in the figure of St Dunstan. But the ribbons very early lost their usefulness and became simple ornaments, and the ubiquitous embroiderer was not long in seizing on these _infulae_, or lappets, and enriching them with needlework to the best of her ability.

The mitre was originally made of plain white linen, and until about the twelfth century continued to be so; it was occasionally, though by no means always, elaborately decorated with needlework. Such simplicity, however, was not consistent with the spirit of the age which followed, and we find that in the thirteenth century the mitre was made of silk, and invariably overlaid either with embroidery or pearls and other jewels. To such a length was this enrichment carried at last in England, that we read that Henry VIII removed from Fountains Abbey, among other treasures, a silver-gilt mitre set with pearl and stone—weight seventy ounces!

Although properly belonging to the seventh chapter, in which the ritual uses of the various vestments which we have been describing will be discussed, it is necessary here to detail the three classes into which mitres are divided. Unlike other vestments, which are classified according to the particular liturgical _colour_ which predominates in their embroidery, mitres are classified according to the _manner_ in which they are ornamented. The background, when it can be seen at all, is white. A mitre which is simply made of white linen or silk, with little or no enrichment, is called a _mitra simplex_; one ornamented richly with embroidery, but without precious metals or stones, is called a _mitra aurifrigiata_; and one in which precious metals and stones are employed in its decoration is called a _mitra pretiosa_. The different times at which these different kinds of mitres are worn will be noted in their proper place in Chapter VII.

The papal tiara may be briefly described in this place. It first appears about the eleventh century as a conical cap, encircled with a single crown at the brow; assumed about the time of the growth of the earthly power of the papacy, it may well be regarded as symbolical of spiritual and temporal rule. The subsequent modifications through which it passed were few in number, though considerable in character: they consisted in the addition of a second crown by Boniface VIII (1300 A.D.), of a third by Urban V (1362-70), and the swelling out of the body of the head-dress into a bulging form about the sixteenth century, much about the time when the mitre assumed the same shape.

XIV. _The Episcopal Gloves._—These undoubtedly owe their invention to the coldness and cheerlessness of the early churches, and were invented simply to keep the hands of the wearer warm. But about the ninth century they, with so many similar vestments, assumed a more sacred character, and a prayer was prescribed for putting them on, as was the case with the other and better established vestments. They do not appear to be formally mentioned as vestments till the time of Honorius of Autun, who draws moral lessons from them.

Throughout the middle ages the gloves were richly embroidered and jewelled; often a large stone is to be seen on the back of each hand.

The gloves (_chirothecae_, or _manicae_) must be carefully distinguished from the _manicae_ or _brachialia_, the sleeves of coarse cloth which the bishop used to draw over his arm to protect the apparels of his alb from the water when administering baptism by immersion.

As the hands are sometimes covered with gloves and sometimes bare, so good deeds should be sometimes hidden to prevent self-sufficiency, and sometimes revealed as an edifying example to those near us. So says Honorius of Autun; perhaps this is as satisfactory an exegesis as has ever been given of the gloves or any other vestment.

XV. _The Episcopal Ring._—Although, as we have seen, the ring was recognised as one of the special marks of a bishop at the time of the fourth council of Toledo, and was regarded by St Isidore of Seville as a special article used in the investiture of a bishop, none of the liturgical writers of the earliest years of the mediaeval period notices it; not till we come to Honorius of Autun is any mention of it to be found. The reason of this is not far to seek, and has been given by Marriott. Rabanus, Amalarius, Ivo, and the rest, occupied themselves more or less with the supposed connexion between the liturgical and the Jewish vestments, and therefore, as they were not writing treatises dealing solely with Christian vestments, they omitted all mention of ornaments which had no direct bearing on the questions with which they were engaged. Hence, both the ring and pastoral staff suffered, as the most ingenious torturing could not extract anything in the Levitical rites analogous to these important insignia.

The evidence of the monuments is conclusive on two points. First, that the episcopal ring proper was only one of a large number of rings worn by the bishop, the others being probably purely ornamental and secular; second, that it was worn on the third finger of the right hand, and _above_ the second joint of that finger, not being passed, as rings are now, down to the knuckle. It was usually kept in place with a plain guard ring.

The ring was always a circlet with a precious stone, never engraved, and it was large enough to pass over the gloved finger. The stone was usually a sapphire, sometimes an emerald or a ruby.

Although the ring is distinguishable, by its position on the right hand as well as by other circumstances, from the wedding-ring, Honorius of Autun (after referring to the ring placed on the finger of the Prodigal Son and the wedding ring of iron with an adamantine stone forged by 'a certain wise man called Prometheus') has been trapped into saying that the bishop wears a ring that he may declare himself the bridegroom of the church and may lay down his life for it, should necessity arise, as did Christ.

XVI. _The Pastoral Staff._—We have briefly sketched the probable origin of the pastoral staff in the preceding chapter, and come now to discuss the forms it presented and the connexions in which it was used during the middle ages. As there is no department of the study of Ecclesiastical Vestments about which so much popular misconception exists, it will be necessary to enter into these details at considerable length.

As utterly unfounded as the common notions concerning 'low-side windows' and crossed-legged effigies is the idea that the differences in the positions of pastoral staves as represented in sculptured monuments have any meaning whatsoever, secret or personal. A pastoral staff remains a pastoral staff, and nothing more, whether it is on the right side of the bearer or on the left, and whether its crook is turned inwards or outwards.

Synonymous with 'pastoral staff' is the word _crozier_ or _crosier_; but it is frequently ignorantly applied to a totally different object—the cross-staff borne before an archbishop. The statements which we so often see in works professing to treat on ecclesiological subjects as to the pastoral staff being crook-headed and borne by bishops, the crozier cross-headed, and borne (instead of the pastoral staff) _by_ archbishops, are derived from a misunderstanding of the evidence of mediaeval monuments.[71] The truth is, that the pastoral staff, with which the crozier is identical, is borne by bishops and archbishops alike; but archbishops are distinguished from bishops by having a staff, with a cross or crucifix in its head, borne _before_ them in addition. In many monuments, it is true, archbishops are represented as carrying the cross-staff, as, for instance, the brass of Archbishop Cranley in New College, Oxford; but it was obviously impossible in a monument of this kind to represent a cross-bearer preceding the archbishop, and the slight inaccuracy was, therefore, perpetrated of making the archbishop bear his own cross, thereby substantiating the evidence of the _pall_, that the person represented was of higher rank than that of a bishop. It was better managed at Mayence, where, in the monument of Albrecht von Brandenburg, 1545, figured above (p. 101), the figure is represented as bearing both the crozier and the cross-staff, one in each hand; and at Bamberg, in the cathedral of which city is a brass to Bishop Lambert von Brunn[72] (1399), wherein he is represented holding the crozier in his left hand, the cross-staff in his right.

In the earliest representations of a staff of office there is a considerable variety in the shape of the head; knobs, crooks, and even Y-shapes, all meet us. The shape probably depended on the shape of the branch of the tree from which the staff was cut, much as does the shape of an ordinary walking-stick. By St Isidore's time, however, the crook-head had become stereotyped; the number of exceptional forms which we find after that date is small. There is a considerable number of staves of about the eleventh century, either represented on monuments or actually existing, of which the heads are tau-shaped; these possibly betray Eastern influence. A few effigies or pictures of bishops remain with a knob-headed staff; an example is to be seen in a ninth-century Anglo-Saxon pontifical at Rouen.

The crook-headed staff is, however, by far the commonest, and after the eleventh century the only, form in which the bishop's crozier is found. Some variety is discoverable in the extent to which the staff is crooked. In some—notably in Irish specimens—the head is shaped like an inverted U, the form of the whole staff being that represented in the annexed diagram; but in the great majority of instances the head is recurved into a spiral or volute.

In the Irish form of crozier the front is flat, and shaped like an oval shield. This is often moveable, disclosing a hollow behind it, which was almost certainly used as a reliquary.[73]

The materials of which the pastoral staff was made were very diverse. The stick was of wood, usually some precious wood, such as cedar, cypress, or ebony. This wood was often gilt or overlaid with silver plates. In the twelfth century the staff was shod with iron and surmounted with a knob of crystal, above which the crook proper was attached. The crook-head of the Irish crozier was of bronze; that of the other form generally of carved ivory. When the process of elaboration was felt in this as in all the other sacerdotal ornaments, the stick as well as the head was often carved from ivory, and either gilt or silvered heavily, and set with precious stones. Beneath the crook were often niches or shrines, containing figures of saints.

The bronze Irish crozier was decorated with the marvellous interlacing knots and bands which are the special glory of early Irish Christian art. On the flat front is often to be seen a plain cross, at the centre of which is a setting for a precious stone, and in each quarter an interlacing band. In the volute form of crozier a different style of ornamentation was adopted; the surface was not ornamented, but the head was carved into solid forms; in the centre of the volute was usually represented some sacred person or scene, real or legendary, or else some symbolical device or conventional patterns. It is hard to say which of these two forms of crozier is the better from an aesthetic point of view. The graceful curve of the volute certainly compares favourably with the somewhat stiff outline of the Irish crozier; but the feebleness of even the best mediaeval attempts at representing the human figure in miniature considerably detracts from the artistic value of the volute crozier when a human figure is introduced; while, on the other hand, the incomparable excellence of the Irish metal-workers transformed the U-shaped crozier into an object of great beauty. The lines of the knots are always faultlessly executed, and the ornamentation is invariably in good taste.[74]

The following copy of the Lincoln Inventory of pastoral staves (1536) illustrates some of the points already noticed. It also indicates that the head and staff of the crozier were separable, and, when stored in the vestry, kept apart from one another:

'In primis a hede of one busshopes staffe of sylver and gylte wᵗ one knop and perles & other stones havyng a Image of owʳ savyowʳ of the one syde and a Image of sent John Baptiste of the other syde wanting xxj stones & perles wᵗ one bose [boss] and one sokett weyng xviij unces.

'Item one other hede of a staffe copoʳ & gylte.

'Item a staffe ordend for one of the seyd hedes the wyche ys ornate wᵗ stones sylver and gylte and iij circles, a boute the staffe sylver and gylte wantyng vij stones.

'Item a staffe of horn and wod for the hede of copoʳ.

'Item j staff covered wᵗ silver wᵗʰout heeid.'

In the corresponding inventory of Winchester Cathedral we find entered three pastoral staves silver-gilt, one pastoral staff of a 'unicorn's' (presumably a narwhal's) horn and four pastoral staves of plates of silver.

Suspended to the top of the staff was a streamer or napkin, which, like the lappet of the mitre, was called the _infula_. This was originally introduced to keep the moisture of the hand from tarnishing the metal of the staff. The symbolists think it is a 'banner' of some sort or other.

It will be convenient, before proceeding to the discussion of the next vestment on our list, to give a few particulars regarding the archbishop's cross. This is necessary owing to the confusion already noticed, which exists between the crozier and the cross; but as the cross cannot strictly be included in a catalogue of ecclesiastical vestments, we shall make our notes as brief as possible.

The custom of preceding an archbishop with a cross was introduced throughout the Western Church about the beginning of the twelfth century. It was carried by one of the archbishop's chaplains, who in this country received the name of 'croyser,' or cross-bearer, for that reason. The cross was usually richly ornamented with metalwork and jewels, and often, if not always, bore a figure of Our Lord on each face, so that the eyes of the archbishop were fixed on the one, those of the people on the other.

The circumstance of highest importance connected with the archbishop's cross, so far as it concerns our present purpose, is this: the prelate _never_ bore the cross himself, except on the one occasion of his investiture. He then received the cross into his own hands, but immediately passed it on to his cross-bearer.

The Pope is often in mediaeval monuments and illustrations represented as preceded by a cross with three transoms of different length, the uppermost being the shortest, the lowermost the longest. This is simply the result of a desire on the part of the artist to improve upon the patriarch's cross of the Eastern Church, which _appears_ to have two transoms, the upper transom being in point of fact a representation of the board on which the superscription on the cross was written.

One more staff may be worth a passing mention—the staff borne as an emblem of authority by the ruler of the choir, who looked after the singing and behaviour of the boys. This was of silver, with a cross-head.

The false conceptions about the crozier have probably arisen from an inaccurate etymological analogy with the word _cross_. The true derivation connects it with such words as our _crotchet_ and _crook_.

The symbolism of the shepherd's staff is naturally the leading thought in the minds of the mystics. It was probably, however, considered too obvious, and they cast about to find yet further secret meanings. Thus, Honorius notices that the Lord commanded the apostles to 'take nothing save a staff only' when they were going out to preach, and then says that 'the staff which sustains the feeble signifies the authority of teaching,' and much more to the same effect. Innocent III says that the point is sharp, the middle straight, the top curved, to indicate that the priest should spur on the idle, rule the weak, collect the wandering. He further explains the fact that the Pope does not bear the pastoral staff by telling us that 'the blessed St Peter sent his staff to Eucharius, the first bishop of Trèves, whom he had sent, together with Valerius and Maternus, to preach the Gospel among the Germans. Maternus succeeded him in the bishopric; he had been raised from the dead by the staff of St Peter. And this staff is preserved with great reverence in the church of Trèves.' St Thomas Aquinas supplements this piece of information by telling us that for this reason the Pope carries the pastoral staff when pontificating in Trèves.[75]

The episcopal staff is alleged to have borne the following inscriptions: round the crook, 'Cum iratus fueris misericordiae recordaberis'; on the ball below the crook, 'Homo'; on the spike at the bottom, 'Parce.' By these inscriptions the bishop was warned that he was but a man himself; that in wrath he should remember mercy; and that he should spare, even when administering discipline. Whether these warnings were invariably effective is a matter into which we will not inquire.

XVII. _The Tunicle._—This was simply a small variety of the dalmatic, appropriated to the use of subdeacons and bishops.

It differed from the dalmatic merely in being somewhat smaller. It was made of silk or of wool, and first appears about the year 820 as a subdeacon's vestment; but it is considerably later than this that it appears as a bishop's garment. In the ninth century bishops appear with but one vestment—the alba—under the chasuble; between the ninth and eleventh centuries the dalmatic makes its appearance; and it is not till about 1200 that we find the tunicle illustrated in paintings or effigies of bishops. A reference to the table given in the early part of the present chapter will show that the literary evidence points in the same direction.

The tunicle did not escape the common fate of all the vestments of the mediaeval church, and it, too, became overlaid with needlework, first in a strip across the breast of the subdeacon, then (as this would not show under the vestments of the bishop) on the rest of the surface. The tunicle on Bishop Goodrick's brass at Ely Cathedral—one of the latest representations of this vestment in England—is as richly embroidered as the dalmatic.

In a few episcopal effigies of the thirteenth century the dalmatic alone appears. The tunicle being worn beneath the dalmatic, and being naturally smaller, was hidden. This difficulty was, however, very soon surmounted by the simple process of shortening the dalmatic.

Properly, the dalmatic only is fringed; the tunicle of the subdeacon seldom, if ever, shows this manner of ornamentation. But in the later episcopal effigies it is by no means uncommon.

XVIII. _The Orale_, or, as it is now called, the _Fanon_, is described by Dr Rock as 'an oblong piece of white silk gauze of some length, striped across its width with narrow bars, alternately gold, blue, and red.... It is cast upon the head of the Pope like a hood, and its two ends are wrapped one over the right, the other over the left shoulder, and thus kept until the holy father is clad in the chasuble, when the fanon is thrown back and made to hang smoothly and gracefully above and all around the shoulders of that vestment, like a tippet.'

From the orale being supposed to represent the ephod, as well as from the manner of its being put on, it is probable that it was an evolution from the amice. It is not mentioned by liturgical writers before Innocent III, and does not appear in paintings or monuments of much older date; it therefore seems to have been assumed about the twelfth or thirteenth century.

XIX. _The Pectoral Cross._—We must not omit to mention this important episcopal ornament. As an official ornament it is of comparatively late introduction; it first appears in the pages of Innocent III and Durandus, and from the references which these liturgiologists make to it, it was evidently regarded by them as exclusively confined to the Pope's use. Thus, Innocent says: 'Romanus autem pontifex post albam et cingulum assumit orale, quod circa caput involvit et replicat super humeros' for certain symbolic reasons; 'et quia signo crucis auri lamina cessit pro lamina quam pontifex ille [Judaeus] gerebat in fronte, pontifex iste crucem gerit in pectore.' Dr Rock has been unable to find any trace of the pectoral cross appearing on the breast of an ordinary bishop before the sixteenth century. Even by the Popes it appears before this time to have been covered by the chasuble. Probably the cross was originally a reliquary.

On p. 29 we referred to a MS. of uncertain date in the monastery of St Martin at Autun, which details the vestments worn in the Gallican church in (probably) the tenth century. This gives a somewhat different catalogue from the lists of the rest of the Western Church, and displays some Eastern influence. The _pallium_, _casula_, _alba_, and _stola_ are described so that they appear identical with the corresponding vestments elsewhere; the maniple also appears, under the name _vestimentum parvolum_; and we have in addition the _manualia_ or _manicae_, which do not appear in any other Western lists; they are said in the MS. to have been regularly worn 'like bracelets,' and to have covered the arms of 'kings and priests.' This points to vestments after the style of the =epimanikia= of the Greeks, which will be noticed in their proper place in Chapter V.

We have now described the vestments worn by the priests of the Western Church at the Eucharistic service, and are thus in a position to give a satisfactory answer to the question, 'Were they adaptations of the Jewish, or natural evolutions of the Roman costume?' We have seen that the jeweller, the goldsmith, and the embroiderer conspired to make the vestments of the middle ages as gorgeous as possible, and that therein, and in some few other particulars, they resembled the Mosaic costume; but as we go back nearer and nearer to the first ages of Christianity all the glitter drops off, vestment after vestment disappears, till we reach the three plain white vestments of the fourth century, from which it is but a step to the ordinary costume of a Roman citizen of good position during the second or third century of our era. We have also seen that all attempts at drawing hidden meanings from the vestments fail; the results, when not far-fetched, are contradictory and unconvincing.

[49] Vest. Christ., p. lxxviii.

[50] Vestes etiam sacerdotales per incrementa ad eum qui nunc habetur auctae sunt ornatum. Nam primis temporibus communi indumento vestiti missas agebant, sicut et hactenus quidam Orientalium facere perhibentur.—Walafrid Strabo De Reb. Eccl., cap. xxiv (Migne cxiv 952).

[51] Very often—perhaps more often than not—the lower hem was ornamented with a narrow edging of embroidery running all round. In some albs as represented on Continental monuments there is a considerable distance between the apparel and the hem.

[52] The late brass of Bishop Goodrich, in Ely Cathedral, represents the stole between the tunicle and dalmatic. This is exceptional, and probably an engraver's error.

[53] One of these exceptions is presented by a small brass of a priest (Thomas Westeley, 1535) at Wyvenhoe, near Colchester.

[54] There is a remarkable statuette of alabaster in the Cambridge Museum of Archaeology, which originally formed part of a retable in Whittlesford Church, Cambridgeshire. In this figure, which is clad in Eucharistic vestments, the maniple is absent, and its place seems to be supplied by a _chain_ suspended over the _right_ wrist. This may, however, represent some such saint as St Leonard, whose emblem is a chain and manacles: in which case it is just possible that the sculptor omitted the maniple to avoid the inartistic symmetry which would result from its insertion.

[55] This description is given on the authority of Bloxam, companion volume, p. 64.

[56] So Mariott. The original word is _calcaneum_.

[57] We give a figure of an effigy in Mayence Cathedral to the memory of Albrecht von Brandenburg, who died in 1545. This effigy is remarkable, and probably unique, in representing the archbishop as wearing two palls. Although this is a convenient method of informing the world of the fact that the person commemorated held two archbishoprics (Mayence and Magdeburg), it is, of course, a solecism, as the pall of the one could not legally be worn within the precincts of the other, and _vice versâ_. This monument is especially valuable, as it clearly distinguishes between the cross-staff and the pastoral staff, which are often confused. See the account of the pastoral staff later on in the present chapter.

[58] It is well known that ecclesiastics were buried in their Eucharistic vestments, with a chalice and paten, the former often filled with wine. Much nonsense is talked nowadays of the piety of the mediaeval builders and undertakers, who put their best work where no human eye could see it. Unfortunately for this theory, the chalice and paten were usually cheap base metal (Canterbury affords one notable exception), and the vestments were often an inferior or worn-out set. Economy was considered then, as now.

[59] A not uncommon comparison for the loop of the pall.

[60] A survival of the old method of wearing it.

[61] Liturgia Rom. Pont., vol. iii, p. 556; _cit. ap._ Rock, Church of Our Fathers.

[62] Rationale, III 4.

[63] Printed in Mabillon, Musei Ital., ii, p. 212.

[64] Were it not for this, we might infer from the other passages quoted that the succintorium was simply hung on the ordinary girdle.

[65] Ap. Eusebius, Hist. Eccl., v 24; Migne, Patrol. Graec., xx 493.

[66] Contra Haer., I xxix 4; Migne, Patrol. Graec., xli 396.

[67] In Smith and Cheetham's 'Dictionary of Christian Antiquities,' s.v. _mitre_.

[68] 'De Corona Militis,' cap. ix. Migne, ii 88.

[69] See fig. 12, p. 97.

[70] Traces of a slight 'bulge' are discernible in a few examples of even so early a date as the fifteenth century. It is well developed in von Brandenburg's effigy, figured on p. 101.

[71] This blunder has even crept into the ninth edition of the 'Encyclopaedia Britannica.'

[72] The bishops of Bamberg had a right to wear the archiepiscopal pontificalia. See p. 102, _ante_.

[73] The ordinary form of crozier was not unknown in Ireland; the well-known crozier of Cashel is a beautiful specimen. The crook form was, however, earlier.

[74] This form of crozier is no doubt contemplated in the prophecy attributed to the druids of Laoghairé, King of Ireland, as cited in the law-tract known as the _Senchus Mór_—

'Tiucfaid Tailginn tar muir meirginn A croinn cromcinn, a cinn tollcinn A miasa in airthiur atighe,' etc.—

that is, 'the Tonsured ones shall come through the stormy sea, their staves crook-headed, their heads tonsured, their tables in the east of their houses,' etc. It is worth noting, apropos of what was said on p. 115 respecting the bishop's _corona_, that the words 'a cinn tollcinn'—'their heads tonsured,' are thus glossed in the MS.—'.i. a coirne ina cennaib'—'_i.e._, their _crowns_ on their heads.'

[75] Sentent. IV, dist. 24, quaest. 3, art. 3, _ad fin._ ed. Parmae (1873), vol. vii, p. 913.