PART III

THE MATERIAL UPON WHICH THE HISTORY OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR IS BASED

1. _The Documentary Sources in General_

The sources from which the history of the ecclesiastical year and the festivals of the saints is drawn are first of all official documents, namely service-books, decrees of councils, papal constitutions and bulls; in the second place come the information derived from ecclesiastical writers of various periods and countries which must be used and brought into connection with the official sources.

Among the liturgical books of the Church, the missals and breviaries hold the first place. In earlier times these were differently arranged and had different names from those which they bear at present. The collects and psalms in particular employed at the mass were not included in one volume as they are now, but were taken from a number of books. The essential prayers of the mass were contained in the so-called _Sacramentarium_, in which were also to be found the collects, prefaces, and, in certain cases, even the whole canon. The lections from Holy Scripture, the Epistles and Gospels, were collected together in the Lectionaries, either all together, or the Epistles and Gospels in separate volumes; another name for this kind of book was _Comes_. The psalms and other portions to be sung by the choir were contained in separate books, the Antiphonaries, Graduals, and Hymnaries, etc. It was only in the Middle Ages that for the sake of convenience all the different parts of the mass were contained together in one volume, called a _missale plenarium_, but the separate volumes still continued in use for certain occasions.

In the course of our investigations, we have often had to refer to the so-called sacramentaries, of which the three most ancient belonging to the Roman Church are also the most important. These are:—

1. _Sacramentarium Leonianum._ This is a collection of older formularies which had been already drawn up by an unknown author, some of which may well be the work of Leo the Great; the title, which gives rise to the opinion that Leo was the author of the book, is due to the first editor. The only existing codex is in Verona, and is unfortunately imperfect, being deficient in all that relates to Lent and Easter. Since it contains a prayer for Pope Simplicius († 483), Rome must be regarded as the place where it was drawn up, and where it was used, while the date when it took its present shape was the pontificate of Felix II. (483-492).

2. The _Gelasianum_, so called after Gelasius I. (492-496). This pope did actually compose some liturgical books, but the _volumen sacramentorum_, ascribed to him by Gennadius, cannot have been one of them, since it contains the four festivals of our Lady which were celebrated in Rome only after Gregory the Great. On the other hand it does not contain the stations for the Thursdays in Lent introduced by Gregory II. (715-731); consequently, it represents the liturgical usages of the seventh century, _i.e._ of the period after St Gregory the Great, and bears the name of Gelasius incorrectly. It consists of three books: (1) _De Tempore_, beginning with Christmas; (2) _De Sanctis_, beginning with the 1st January; and (3) masses for the ordinary Sundays, votive masses, and masses for the dead. The number of prefaces contained in the sacramentary amounts to over a hundred. The Stowe Missal, which is independent of the _Gelasianum_, gives the _canon Gelasii Papæ_. This book was drawn up in Rome and was intended for local usage, but we only possess the MSS., which were meant for the churches of France; the most ancient belongs to the end of the seventh century, and was written apparently for the Abbey of St Denys (Cod. Vat. Reg. Sueciæ, 316). The other existing codices only give an edition specially adapted from the original Roman book for use in the Frankish Empire; this is shown by the prayer, “Respice propitius ad Romanum sive Francorum imperium.”

3. _The Gregorianum._ This represents the Roman rite of the period of Pope Adrian I. (772-795) and Charlemagne. It is entirely a compilation of Roman origin belonging to the eighth century, destined originally for the use of the popes but afterwards adapted for general use. The canon stands at the head of the work, which commences with Christmas, but Advent comes at the end of the _Proprium de Tempore_. The _Agnus Dei_, added to the text of the mass by Pope Sergius I., is given here in its place, while it is absent from _Gelasianum_.[739] The earliest mention of this work is in the collection of letters of the popes of the eighth century known as the _Codex Carolinus_, in a letter of Adrian I. to Charlemagne who received a copy of the work from Adrian between 784 and 791,[740] from which date it was introduced into the Frankish Empire, copied, and circulated, and also added to. In his letter Adrian ascribes a personal share in the production of the work to his predecessor Gregory, relying, of course, on the tradition of his Church.[741]

4. This last-named book gradually supplanted the ancient liturgies and service-books of Gaul; of these we possess the _Sacramentarium Gallicanum_, along with its lectionary, the _Missale Gothico-Gallicanum_, and the _Missale Francorum_;[742] the Mozarabic missal and breviary are also very important documents.

The ecclesiastical calendars and martyrologies come next under consideration. As regards the former, the service-books of which we have been speaking were on the whole drawn up in accordance with the local calendar and added both the movable and immovable feasts as best they could. In proportion as the number of feasts increased the calendars were regarded as independent catalogues of festivals, and are found both as separate documents, or bound up with the other liturgical books; in the latter case, they are usually placed at the beginning of the volume.

While the calendars give merely the names of the saints or the date of their feasts, the martyrologies or _Synaxaria_ contain more detailed notices, giving the place, time, and circumstances of the saints’ death, rank, etc., according as the compiler had more or less material at his disposal; in many instances these notices have grown into considerable historical narratives, and on this account, the character of the different martyrologies varies greatly. As to their employment for historical purposes, the shorter the contents the higher the value and trustworthiness of a calendar. The martyrologies were usually compiled by private individuals, even when intended for ecclesiastical use, but the calendars shared in the official character of the liturgical books of which they formed part, since alterations could not be made in them without the knowledge and consent of the authorities of the church or corporation to which they belonged.[743]

Manuscript calendars belonging to earlier centuries exist in large numbers, for all missals and breviaries were provided with them. Their value for historical research depends upon their age, and also upon our knowledge of the locality for which they were drawn up, the best data for discovering this latter point being afforded by the names of local saints contained in the calendar itself. No calendar can be set aside as altogether useless, for in case of need all can throw light upon the history of at least their own locality. For this reason, and for others as well, an increasing amount of attention has been given to them in recent times, and a large number of them have been printed (see sect. 10 of this part). The days marked in the calendars are those of the saints’ deaths (_vid._ _ante_, p. 213); but the days on which their relics were translated to some particular church are also marked as festivals in the calendar of the church in question. When in different calendars different days are given to the same saint, the date in the calendar belonging to the church where he died is usually to be regarded as the day of his death; the others are days on which his relics were translated.[744]

Another class of documents consists of the ordos drawn up for divine service belonging to particular countries, dioceses, or the more important ecclesiastical foundations (ordines, ordinaria; in Greek, typica). These were not originally drawn up for the course of merely one year, like our present ordos, but contained the list of recurring festivals and fasts observed from year to year in some monastery or cathedral, along with detailed directions for the performance of divine service. The most important of these are the thirteen oldest ordos of the Roman Church, collected and published by Mabillon, but other dioceses and monasteries as well as the Church of Rome had similar ordos, some of which have been already printed,[745] while others still await publication.[746]

2. _The Earliest Christian Calendars_

The worship of the saints, especially of the martyrs, asserted itself in various ways in the liturgy of the Church. Among the Latins, it appeared even in the liturgy of the mass, since special masses in honour of the saints were composed at an early date for the commemorations of the most celebrated saints. These were included in the sacramentaries, and, finally, as their number continued to increase, they were placed together in a separate division of the book (_proprium sanctorum_), instead of being distributed, as formerly, over the whole year. Among the Greeks, this was not possible, since they repeat the same mass daily, and employ only two or three mass formularies throughout the entire year.

In the second place, the cultus of the saints gained a footing in the Canonical Hours, the Psalter, both among Latins and Greeks. It was customary among the Latins as early as the sixth century to read a portion of the account of the martyrdom (passiones martyrum), as Aurelian of Arles tells us;[747] this was the commencement of the existing lections of the breviary. Then collections of lives of the saints for the whole year were drawn up on the lines of the calendar, which came to be called martyrologies on account of the character of the larger part of their contents. In course of time, two kinds of martyrologies came into existence, those containing legends of greater length more suited for private reading, and those distinguished by the brevity of their notices intended for employment in the services of the Church. Even these have no immediate connection with the liturgy, although the names of the saints for the day were read at Prime, a custom which possibly the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle of 817 had in view in its sixty-ninth canon.[748] These martyrologies developed out of the diptychs and calendars of particular churches, by way of compilation and expansion; like the calendars, they contain simply the names of the saints, but with the mention of the locality to which the saint belonged, and, in many cases, with an indication of the date at which he lived.

The martyrologies aimed at completeness in other directions. First, it was attempted to unite together the names of all the martyrs who had ever suffered throughout the whole Church, along with the day of their death, and secondly, an attempt was made, but only in later times, to fill up the calendar by allotting every day in the year to at least one saint. This latter attempt was made in the West only in the seventh and eighth centuries, and achieved considerable success. While the first efforts in this direction attained to only relative completeness, since they took into consideration only a part, and not the whole, of the universal Church, as the Arian and Carthaginian martyrologies had done, yet the tendency towards universality appears unmistakably at a later date, especially in the so-called _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_.

With regard to the Greek service-books, menology means the same thing as martyrology—a catalogue of saints arranged in the form of a calendar according to the days of the month, and merely giving the name of the saint against the particular day set apart by the Church in his honour. The lives of the saints arranged according to months and days are called Menæa or Meniæa, and the shorter abstracts from it are called Synaxaria.[749]

The list of calendars opens with two documents, the most ancient of their kind possessed by the Roman Church, _i.e._ the lists of popes and martyrs with the days of their death, which have often been referred to already—the _Depositio Episcoporum_ from Lucius to Julius I., and the _Depositio Martyrum_, a catalogue of the martyrs of the city of Rome, extending only to 304, three martyrs not belonging to Rome being included in this list, Cyprian, Perpetua, and Felicitas. The connection of these two lists to one another is shown in their titles (_item_), and also by the fact that Sixtus, who is placed among the martyrs, is omitted from the list of popes. This latter list comprises the period from Lucius († 255) to Julius († 352) only; either the compiler had no material at hand for the earlier period, or he set it aside as not bearing upon the point he had in view. The list of martyrs contains the names of popes who were also martyrs, such as St Peter, St Clement, St Calixtus, St Pontianus, St Fabian, and St Sixtus; of martyrs, not bishops, we have here the most famous saints of the city of Rome, St Agnes and St Lawrence (but not St Cecilia), as well as many other quite obscure names. In reply to the inquiry what principle was followed in drawing up this list, Mommsen,[750] relying on the title which connects the document with Carthage, replies that it contains “the names of those martyrs and bishops whose commemoration was celebrated annually in the Church.” Both these lists were first published by Ægidius Bucherius (Gilles Boucher), and form a portion of the work on the Calendar of Dionysius Philocalus (see above, p. 136 _seqq._).

Next in order comes a Calendar of the North African Church belonging to the fifth century, and edited by Mabillon from a codex of the seventh century formerly belonging to the Monastery of Cluny. The original must have been completed after 505, for Bishop Eugenius of Carthage is mentioned in it. It contains St John the Baptist, some apostles and martyrs not belonging to North Africa, Sixtus, Gervasius and Protasius, Lawrence, Clement of Rome, Eulalia, Felix of Nola, Agnes, Agatha, Vincent, and the Machabees, who belong to the Churches of Rome and Spain. Unfortunately, the list is not quite perfect owing to the bad state of the MS.

The Calendar of Philocalus for the year 352 contains nothing definitely Christian.[751] On the other hand, the Calendar of Polemius Silvius, Bishop of Sion, drawn up between 435 and 455, is interesting as showing a mixture of Christian and heathen entries. Destination, character, place, and time of the compilation can be learnt from the calendar itself; it was not drawn up for one particular year, at least there is nothing by which to determine the year, for Dominical letters, movable feasts, etc., are all wanting; among heathen festivals we have the _Carmentalia_, _Lupercalia_, _Terminalia_, _Quinquatria_, and _Lavatio Cereris_, all of which recall heathen religious customs. The _Saturnalia_ are included on account of their popular, not on account of their religious significance, and appear as _feriæ servorum_ on the 17th December, as well as _feriæ ancillarum_ on the 7th July. In addition, there are many other popular commemorations, such as the 7th January, 13th September, etc., and a great number of _natales_ of emperors. The number of ecclesiastical feasts is very small, being limited to Epiphany, the 25th and 27th of March as the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, Christmas, and six saints’ days—_Depositio Petri et Pauli_ on the 22nd February instead of the 29th June, Vincent, the Machabees, Lawrence, Hippolytus, and Stephen on their usual days. Besides these we have the _natales_ of authors—Cicero and Virgil, and finally, the days are marked on which the Senate usually held sittings and games were given in the circus. In comparison with the Calendar of Philocalus, the number of such days is much reduced; in the former there are over a hundred, here only fifty-three. The meteorological entries are numerous. The calendar was evidently intended for the provinces of the western half of the empire, and takes into account both the ecclesiastical and civil requirements, although it deals with the former to a limited extent.

3. _The Arian Calendar of the Fourth Century_

(_About 370-380_)

One of the most interesting documents in connection with our subject in virtue of its age, contents, and plan is the Arian martyrology, published by W. Wright in 1865.[752] As is well known, the Arians were an active party who, until about 380, attempted with some success to gain the upper hand in the Church. As a means to this end, it was to their interest to invest their followers as much as possible with the appearance of sanctity, and the Arian historian Philostorgius devoted himself especially to this; he characterises as saints and workers of miracles Agapetus and a certain Theophilus who worked in India, and also Aëtius, Eunomius, and Leontius, the ringleaders of thorough-going Arianism.[753] As a consequence of this the Arians encroached in various ways upon the domain of liturgy also. It goes without saying that they did not wish to figure as heretics, but as forming the true Church, and so they exhibited a corresponding activity in hagiology.

While, generally speaking, the local churches confined themselves each to its own diocese, and the principle of individualism continued to hold its own for a long time throughout the whole Church, the Arians early abandoned this method, and even while they did not completely adopt the principle of universality, yet they did so partially, their position as a minority among Christians giving them an impulse in this direction. Thus we find their martyrology embraces Asia Minor, Egypt, Greece, Mœsia, Illyria; in fact, the entire eastern half of the empire, and even Italy and North Africa are not passed over altogether.

We must first of all turn our attention to the external and historical side of the document. Wright found it in a Syrian MS., belonging to Nitria in Egypt, of the time of Porphyrius, Bishop of Antioch (404-413), and written in the year 411.[754] It consists of two different parts, of which the first is a martyrology drawn up in accordance with the calendar, and originally composed in Greek. Unfortunately, the section from the 1st to the 25th December is missing. This part is the original document, and was early translated into Syriac, although, as we shall see later, it is full of defects. The fact that, nevertheless, it was considered worthy of being translated, and that by an orthodox translator, shows that it was regarded as a remarkable piece of work. What impressed its contemporaries was its universal character, then quite a novelty. At the end, there is a somewhat mutilated appendix consisting of a list of Persian martyrs arranged, not by the date of their death, but according to their rank in the hierarchy, into three groups—bishops, priests, and deacons.

The second part, originally composed in Syriac, was an addition of the Syrian translator. Among the persons named in this part, it is noticeable that there are no Arians, nor even Nestorians, who, when expelled from the Roman Empire by Theodosius II. in 435, made themselves masters of the Persian Church. Of the sixteen bishops mentioned in the first section, at least eight are known to have been orthodox Persian martyrs, all belonging to the period before 400, _e.g._ Simon Bar-Sabai, Bishop of Seleucia-Ctesiphon († 17th April 344), his successor, Schahdust († 346), and Sapor, Bishop of Beth Gormai.[755] Miles (Milles), Simeon, Barbasimas, Joannes, Sapores, Gudiab, Sabinus, Abdos, Paul, and Ebedjesus are mentioned by Sozomen as Persian martyrs of the reign of Sapor I.[756] This very primitive calendar contains only the names of martyrs to the exclusion of other persons who were even regarded as saints, such as Mares, the second bishop of Seleucia († 82).[757] The compiler calls those whom he included in his calendar the Holy Martyrs who had been put to death in the East, while he regards those named in the first part as the Holy Confessors of the West, regarding the Roman Empire as the West in respect to Persia.

The first part, which concerns the West, differs from the second in many respects. It was drawn up by another hand, and was written originally in Greek. The latter is a document entirely historical in character, while the former is liturgical; the one belongs to Persia, the other to the Roman Empire, and probably to Nicomedia. It was then employed in Antioch, where it was enlarged, and finally, as it appears, was translated into Syriac at Edessa. It forms one of the most remarkable documents of ancient Christian literature.

That this Arian martyrology belonged to the Roman Empire, and especially to its eastern part, is proved by the calendar employed therein, _i.e._ the Julian, with the addition of the Chaldean names for the months, the days of the month being given simply without reference to calends and nones and ides. The author is well-informed with regard to the eastern half of the Roman Empire; he knows names and date of death of eight bishops of Antioch, the name Antioch occurs in all twenty-four times, Nicomedia is named thirty-two times, but the name of no bishop of Nicomedia is given, Alexandria is mentioned nineteen times, Constantinople, Rome, and Jerusalem only twice.

The date of this work is fixed by the mention of the celebrated Bishop James of Nisibis on the 15th July. He was alive after 350, when the Persians besieged Nisibis, and flourished, according to the somewhat vague expression of the Chronicle of Samuel of Ani, in the 283rd Olympiad, _i.e._ 353-356.[758] Thus the martyrology was written in the period between 370 and 400, and sometime about 380, when Arianism was the dominant religion in the eastern half of the empire.

The Arian character of the martyrology is shown by the fact that Arius himself is mentioned in it, while none of the adherents of the Nicene faith of that date are included, and the only orthodox bishop whose name appears is James of Nisibis. Since he was orthodox, and since Nisibis belonged to Persia, his name could not have been in the Greek original, which, besides being Arian, was limited to worthies belonging to the Roman Empire, but the insertion of his name is probably due to the orthodox Persian translator.

The compiler drew his information from the works of his predecessors, to which he made additions of his own. One of these sources he names, for he states with regard to the names of eleven personages, that they are taken from the “Number of the Ancient Confessors.” He also used an old list of martyrs, which he does not further describe. To judge by the character of the quotations from this document, it must have dealt with the same part of the Church as the new compilation. Antioch (four times), Synnada, Nicomedia, Pergamus, and Heracleia are named in it, while Alexandria is not mentioned. By the “Ancient Confessors” are to be understood the martyrs before Diocletian, and it is probable that they were taken from the lists of “Depositions” belonging to each city, just as the chronographer has preserved for us those of Rome.[759]

As regards the contents, they resemble those of similar documents of earlier and later date, and are fully described in the superscription, which states that it “contains the names of the Lords, _i.e._ the saints, confessors, and victors, and the days on which they received their crowns.” One would expect to find the place of their death mentioned as well, but many saints are given without any indication of the locality to which they belonged, perhaps on account of imperfect information on the part of the author. The date of death is on the whole correctly given, a remarkable instance to the contrary being the commemoration of SS. Peter and Paul, which is placed on the 28th December. This cannot throw doubt upon the date observed in Rome itself, for the Greeks were, as a rule, very imperfectly informed concerning ecclesiastical events in the Latin portion of the empire. The sources from which the compiler drew his information cannot have been very full, for there is no mention of the famous Western martyrs, Agnes and Lawrence, and, indeed, beyond the mention on the 1st Ab (August) of Aksitus, Bishop of Rome, by which Xystus II. is probably intended (the day of St Xystus’ death was the 6th and not the 1st August), and of SS. Perpetua and Felicitas, correctly given on the 7th March, no Western saints are commemorated.[760]

Among the bishops of Alexandria there are two mentioned whose names do not occur in the official lists, Artemon on the 3rd September, and Hodion (Orion) on the 16th August. Similarly, among the bishops of Antioch, there are two not mentioned elsewhere, Amphimelus (4th March) and Philippus (27th March). Can these have been Arian prelates?

Besides St Peter and St Paul, the only two apostles commemorated are St John and St James, who held the most important place in the eastern half of the empire; they are placed together on the 27th December, on which day the latter especially was formerly commemorated. St Stephen, also called an apostle (schelico), appears on the day still consecrated to his memory (26th December).

The bishops, priests, and deacons appear with their proper titles; all the others have the designation, confessor (mandaya). This designation implies martyrdom, for in the first three centuries _confessor_ means a martyr whose sufferings stop short of death. It is also worthy of notice that some who appear not to have been martyrs have to be content with a mere commemoration (dukrana = _commemoratio_), as, for example, St Xystus, James of Nisibis, Eusebius of Cæsarea, etc. The names, again, of others are merely mentioned without any addition or title.

Finally, there are still some peculiarities in this menology which ought to be mentioned. Some of these may be due to oversight, or to the ignorance of the compiler, others seem to be mistakes made in transcribing the document, and ought not to appear in documents of an official character. Thus Marcianus of Tomi appears twice (on the 5th and on the 10th June), Dius once as confessor and once as presbyter (11th and 12th June). Especially remarkable is the circumstance that three individuals, whose names occur in no other calendar, not even in the _Menologium_ of Constantinople, are given three times, namely, Cosconius, Melanippus, and Zeno, sons of Theodota, once for Nicea on the 19th January, once for Asia on the 23rd February, and once for Nicomedia on the 2nd September. As slips of the pen, we may notice Hadriopolis for Hadrianopolis, Pedinthus for Perinthus, Tunjus (10th June) for Tomi, which is elsewhere spelt correctly, Sindus for Synnada, which once (30th June) has the addition, “in Phrygia,” and once (15th June) is without it. The proper names are frequently wrongly spelt, or so confused as to be unrecognisable.

Of the Church festivals, only Epiphany and Easter are marked. The MS. is, unfortunately, imperfect where we should expect to find the 25th of December. On the Friday after Easter the Commemoration of all the Confessors, _i.e._ Martyrs, is set down.

The relation of the Arian martyrology to Eusebius’ work on the Martyrs of Palestine deserves to be considered. One would expect to find this work often referred to, but it is not so, and the compiler seems to have had no knowledge of it. This is all the more remarkable since Eusebius always gives the dates of the death of the martyrs. The two works have, however, very few points of contact, but they confirm one another in the points where they do coincide. Both place the death of the priest Pamphilus and his eleven companions at Cæsarea on the 16th February; both mention the martyr Romanus at Antioch, Eusebius placing his death on the 17th November, the martyrology on the 18th—a trifling discrepancy which proves their independence of each other. Hermes the Exorcist, Domnion of Salona, James of Nisibis, etc., are given on the dates which they occupy in the calendars of other Churches.

The so-called martyrology of St Jerome has many names in common with this Arian martyrology. St Jerome often assigns to one place and day more martyrs than this Arian Calendar, as, for example, on the 25th March, Dulas, on the 4th, 18th, and 21st April, etc. Sometimes the Arian gives more names than St Jerome, _e.g._ on the 11th March, the 2nd May, etc., while in some places they are in perfect agreement, _e.g._ on the 13th March, Modestus and twenty-one companions—the _Hieronymianum_ gives the names of the whole twenty-one, while here only the number is given—on the 16th April, Leonidas and eight companions in Corinth, etc. We cannot infer from this that the compiler of the _Hieronymianum_ incorporated the work of his Arian predecessor in his own, but he certainly was acquainted with it, and made use either of it or of common sources.

The comparison of the Arian martyrology with that of St Jerome has further led to a curious discovery,[761] _i.e._ that the entries from the 6th (or more correctly from the 8th) to the 30th June are indeed included in the martyrology of St Jerome, but have been bodily transferred to the corresponding dates in July.[762] This latter month has only three entries, and it has been thought that the mistake is due to the Arian compiler or his transcribers, but it is just as likely that the change of date was made by the author of the _Hieronymianum_. How this fact is to be explained must be left to conjecture. Another important point bearing upon the connection between the two documents is the fact that the one mentions Bishop Eusebius of Cæsarea on the 30th May, but the other in more detail on the 21st June, as follows: _In Cæsarea Palæstinæ Dep. Eusebi Epi. Historiographi_. Which is correct? Certainly the Syrian document, which also gives correctly the day of Arius’ death. The entry on the 6th June clearly exhibits the Arian character of the document: “In Alexandria, Arius Presbyter.” The fact that he is merely commemorated, proves that it is incorrect to suppose, as many do, that another Arius, a reputed, but otherwise unknown, martyr of Alexandria is intended. The martyrs in this document are treated to more than a mere commemoration (dukrana). Accordingly he did not regard this particular Arius as a martyr.

From the description which we have given of this highly important document, one is led to expect that it will throw fresh light on certain historical questions, and so, as a matter of fact, it does. For instance, we can fix the death of Arius by its assistance on the 6th June 336. Arius died on a Saturday shortly before sunset. On the following day he was to have been solemnly received into the Church.[763] The only year which can be taken into consideration is 336, for in it the 6th June fell on a Saturday.[764]

The historian Eusebius died about the time when Athanasius returned to Alexandria from his first exile. This was shortly after Constantine’s death († 22nd May 337). Since Eusebius died soon after he had finished the life of Constantine, whom he did not long survive, his death is to be placed on the 30th May 338. This takes for granted that the Bishop of Palestine mentioned on the 30th May is identical with the historian, which can scarcely be called in doubt. Cæsarea was the ecclesiastical metropolis of Palestine, and this accounts for his title, Bishop of Palestine.[765] His successor and heir and biographer was the energetic Acacius.

A more important fact is that the martyrdom of Bishop Babylas of Antioch can now be definitely established. We have in this document reliable evidence that he suffered on the 24th January, which corresponds with the evidence of Chrysostom, who stated that the Festival of SS. Juventinus and Maximin, which was kept on the 4th February, followed closely on that of St Babylas.[766] Moreover, St Babylas was generally commemorated on the 24th January. According to Eusebius,[767] Babylas died in prison under Decius, and, according to Jerome, in the first year of his reign. Decius reigned from October, or, according to other authorities, from August 249 to 27th July 251, and one of his first acts was to inaugurate the persecution against the Christians. Accordingly the death of Babylas must have happened on the 24th January 250. Since all authorities agree in stating that he had been bishop for thirteen years, we are now able to fix the year of the death of Zebinas, his predecessor, _i.e._ 237, and the day of the month is given as 13th January in the Arian martyrology. This document must be regarded as a thoroughly reliable source for the dates of the death of the Antiochene bishops in particular, and we can, therefore, place the death of Maximin, the seventh in the list of bishops, on the 4th February 191, and the death of Serapion on the 14th May 215.

It is scarcely necessary to observe that this calendar, although it is an Arian document, contains not merely the names of Arian worthies, but many which belong to Catholic antiquity. It is chiefly to this that it owes its importance for the history of the Church, and it is also due to this that it was capable of being combined with the catalogue of Persian saints, which is an essentially Catholic document. On the other hand, it is by no means a complete martyrology, and is in itself a liturgical, and not a historical, document intended by its unskilful compiler to serve party ends.

The Goths in Italy had also a menology of their own, of which a fragment was discovered by A. Mai. Unfortunately, it contains only the month of November. It is noteworthy that it mentions the Apostle Andrew, whose name does not occur in the similar martyrology of which we have just been speaking. The fragment, with this exception, contains Gothic names alone. St Clement and St Cecilia do not appear, which proves its freedom from Roman influence, and shows that it was essentially a national production.[768]

4. _The so-called Martyrologium Hieronymianum_

(_Second Half of the Seventh Century_)

Already in the time of St Gregory the Great there existed in Rome a complete and universal list containing merely the names of the martyrs and the place where they suffered, arranged according to the days of the year. Eulogius, the contemporary bishop of Alexandria, besought the pope to send him the complete collection of the acts of the martyrs drawn up by Eusebius in the time of Constantine. He believed these were to be found in Rome. He had doubtless in view the “Collection of Martyrs” (συλλογὴ τῶν μαρτυρίων) just mentioned. St Gregory replied that they had in Rome a collection of the names of all the martyrs in one volume, but no complete collection of their acts.[769]

The work of Eusebius here referred to was not forthcoming in Alexandria either, and was already regarded as lost, but the fact that such a work had once existed was not forgotten. A work of the same kind was also attributed to St Jerome, which is also no longer in existence. The senator Cassiodorus exhorts his monks to read diligently the histories of the martyrs (_passiones martyrum_) who have lived throughout the whole world, in order to stir themselves up to the practice of virtue. These they will find in the letter written by St Jerome to Chromatius and Heliodorus. These last words are somewhat obscure, for it would be impossible to deal with the acts of all the martyrs in one letter.[770] However, so much is plain that Cassiodorus ascribed to St Jerome a work of this kind. Finally, it must be borne in mind that St Jerome had translated some of the historical writings of Eusebius. This may have given rise to the idea that he had also translated his collection of the martyrdoms. It is not impossible that he may have done so, although we have no evidence of the fact. Bede also speaks of a martyrology of St Jerome, but with some uncertainty, for he had never seen it himself, and thought St Jerome may have been only the translator and not the author of the work.[771] In Bede’s day the so-called _Hieronymianum_ was already in existence, as the researches of De Rossi and Duchesne have recently shown. That it was also known to Gregory the Great and Cassiodorus cannot be maintained, especially as the words of the latter are so obscure. It is, however, certain from his words that Cassiodorus believed Jerome to have been the author of a work of this kind. Further evidence for this is, unfortunately, lacking, though the thing is not impossible in itself. Abbot Hilduin, a writer of the ninth century, referred also to this point, and was of opinion that Constantine had collected all the acts of the martyrs from all parts of the empire, and had sent them to Eusebius at Cæsarea.[772] This statement, however, is not of much importance, since it represents a view originating in the interpolated letter of St Jerome already referred to.

However this may be, there have existed since the eighth century numerous MSS. of a collection of the names of the martyrs of all times and countries belonging to the Roman Empire which went by the name of the _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_, and to which was attached two reputed letters of St Jerome to Chromatius, Bishop of Aquileia, and to Heliodorus, Bishop of Altinum. The work corresponds to that mentioned by Cassiodorus.

Upon close examination, it is quite clear that the work, as we have it now, cannot have been composed by St Jerome. It includes the names of many persons who lived at a date subsequent to St Jerome, as, for example, to name one out of many, St Gregory the Great on the 12th March. In other respect the names do not extend beyond the seventh century, as appears upon an inspection of the earliest codices. In later recensions we naturally meet with the names of many persons who lived at a still later date.

As regards the date of composition, the personality of the compiler and kindred questions, we are face to face with an historical and literary problem resembling that of the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals and the Donation of Constantine. Still some light has now been cast upon these difficulties, since we have at last a thoroughly critical text of the document, the investigations of De Rossi and Duchesne having determined which of the existing MSS. is the earliest.[773]

Among the MSS. belonging to the eighth century, is one written for the Monastery of Weissenburg in the diocese of Spires, now preserved in Wolfenbüttel, _Codex Wisseniburgensis_, 23. De Rossi believed it was written shortly before the death of Abbot Wando († 756) of Fontanelle in the diocese of Rouen, because his death has been added by a later hand on _XV. Kal. Mai_. It is certain that the codex was written before 772, because this date is referred to in it. Of about the same period is the Parisian Codex 10 837, belonging to Echternach. It is written in an Anglo-Saxon hand, and is perhaps somewhat later than the former, but is derived from an original MS. certainly older than the Weissenburg Codex. This view which is that of De Rossi gains support from the fact that the two festivals in honour of the Holy Cross are not contained in the codex, while they appear in the Weissenburg and all later codices. Both codices are full of errors of grammar and spelling. The codex from the monastery of Hilariacum originally belonging to Metz and now at Berne, is more correct and better written, but unfortunately only extends to the 21st November. The latest entries made in it by the first hand belong to the year 766 and refer to Bishop Chrodegang. The text dates from the time of Clotaire II. (584-628).

These three most ancient recensions do not differ from one another to any great extent, but the MSS. belonging to later times, when the work was often copied and used, show much greater divergencies, for alterations and additions were continually being made in it corresponding to the requirements of the local churches and monasteries where it was employed.

Since the two learned editors have succeeded in detecting the original matter common to the three recensions, we are in possession of the following result: the martyrology which formed the original source of all later texts as far as they are known to us was written in Auxerre between 592 and 600. The grounds for this conclusion are briefly as follows: the compiler is evidently well informed as to ecclesiastical and secular events in Gaul, in fact far better than with regard to any other country. In naming the cities of Gaul, he gives the provinces in which they are situated, and gives also many unusual details respecting the individuals named, as for example when he gives in the case of bishops, not only the day on which they died, but the date of their ordinations as well; the names are also always given correctly, while in other documents they are often frightfully distorted. A circumstance which especially points to Auxerre as the locality from which the martyrology originated is that this not very important city is mentioned thirty times while the neighbouring and much larger city of Lyons is named only twenty-six times. Moreover, all the bishops of Auxerre, with one solitary exception, are named, while there are many gaps in the lists of the bishops of Lyons and Autun. Thirdly, a _litania_ is enjoined on the first of each month, and this custom was peculiar to the Church of Auxerre, having just been introduced at that time by Bishop Aunarius. Again, the day of the ordination of this not very famous Bishop Aunarius is marked (II. Kal. Aug.), but not as we might have expected the day of his death. The same holds good of Syagrius, Bishop of Autun; the date of his consecration (natale suscepti episcopatus) is given, but not the date of his death which happened in 599 or 600. The last Gallic bishop whose death is noticed is Avitus of Clermont († 592).

On account of these facts, Duchesne arrived at the conclusion that the so-called _Martyrologium Hieronymianum_ originated at Auxerre between 592 and 600. This conclusion is not weakened by the fact that personages belonging to the seventh century are included,[774] such as Desiderius of Vienne († 606-7), Columbanus († 615), Eustasius, Abbot of Luxeuil († 629), and Abbot Attala, the date of whose death is unknown. Desiderius, indeed, appears in the Berne and Weissenburg Codices, and the three others in that of Echternach, but they have been added by the transcribers, and both De Rossi and Duchesne are agreed that none of these codices represent the original text composed at Auxerre.

The editors go yet further, and show that the compiler was also very well informed concerning ecclesiastical matters in Italy, especially in Northern Italy and Milan; while he has comparatively little to say about Spain, Rhætia, Dalmatia, Pannonia, and nothing at all about Scotto-Irish saints. This postulates the existence of a yet older work, used by the compiler of Auxerre, which may have been identical with the work familiar to Cassiodorus.[775] This document, however, has entirely disappeared without leaving behind it any other documents derived from it. If one follows the perspective thus opened out, the connecting links may finally come to light which connect this document with the work of Eusebius, referred to by Eulogius of Alexandria and in the two letters attributed to St Jerome.

However, we shall not follow these interesting suggestions further, but shall content ourselves with the fact that in the _Hieronymianum_, in the earliest form in which it has come down to us, we have a primitive martyrology,[776] with additions and alterations made to it by a Frankish transcriber or compiler between 592-600. In its original form it contained only saints belonging to the Græco-Roman empire, and this accounts for the absence of the Irish saints and those of Mesopotamia. Thus at last the so-called _Hieronymianum_ has been made serviceable for use in historical and liturgical investigations; the learned editors, in giving us as far as possible the original text, have given us for the first time a reliable edition of the document, and the Bollandists have rendered the work still more serviceable by the addition of a reliable alphabetical index, thus considerably lightening the labours of those who use this work. This is no common gain for liturgical study, since the _Hieronymianum_, obtained in the course of time, an increasingly prominent position, more prominent indeed at last than it deserved; moreover it has not been without its influence upon later martyrologies and calendars, and has had an appreciable effect even on the development of the Church’s cycle of festivals.

To know the number and condition of the Christians who had laid down their lives for the faith within the limits of the Roman empire would be of the highest interest now and always; to record the name, date, and locality of each with statistical accuracy would have been a work deserving the thanks of posterity. It might have been done immediately after the cessation of the Diocletian persecution, but only with the assistance of the secular authorities. Eulogius and the writer of the letters ascribed to St Jerome were on the right track in thinking that Eusebius had undertaken to furnish a work of this character with the assistance of the emperor; the latter informs us that Eusebius actually did so, and that the collection contained the names of from five to eight hundred martyrs for every day of the year, thus giving a total of between 182,500 and 292,000 martyrs.

Our Latin compiler indeed has not brought together so many names, and he states in the reputed letter of St Jerome that he only admitted those martyrs whose commemoration was celebrated with special solemnity (qui sunt in amplissima festivitate). However he has brought together in round numbers 6000 names—quite a respectable number when compared with the _Menologium Basilianum_, which belongs to a much later date, and it remains a question how it was possible for a Frankish scholar of the sixth century to get together so many names. Some of them certainly are distorted, others are repeated in a remarkable way, and others again have an unreal sound,[777] but when all deductions have been made, there still remains so much that is historical and unexceptional that the whole work cannot be dismissed as devoid of all authority. With regard to the origin and value of this mass of names, one finds oneself confronted by a question which seems equally insoluble, whether the compiler was a native of Gaul, of North Italy, or of anywhere else. He certainly incorporated into his martyrology the older lists of martyrs existing at his day, many of which are known to us, and the two editors have displayed both industry and insight in making this clear in several cases; yet all these lists of martyrs taken together contain scarcely a thousand names. From what sources has the compiler obtained the rest? This is the question which still awaits an answer. On the other hand the compiler has given expression to an important principle to which is due his influence on the hagiology and liturgy of later ages. The Arian Calendar of which we have spoken, concerned itself with the eastern half alone of the empire, and is composed almost entirely of names belonging thereto, but the author of the _Hieronymianum_ set to work on quite another principle; he had in view the entire Christian world, East and West, Africa and Gaul. His point of view is infinitely wider than that of his predecessors, and even of many of his successors, and he made use of the fruitful principle of universalism, rejecting all particularism in the ecclesiastical sphere.

While there had been calendars in the West containing the names of martyrs belonging to a particular diocese or country, the compiler of the _Hieronymianum_ regarded the Church as a whole—as catholic. The meaning of this will be seen from a glance at the service-books, the sacramentaries especially. In the ninth century and later, the Roman sacramentaries, even those intended for use in other countries such as those of St Gall, Mainz, Cologne, and Essen, contain only Masses for the Roman saints, confining themselves to one or two local saints in the supplement. The principle of universality only very gradually affected the formularies of the Mass, and did not reach its full expression until the sixteenth century, but it came to the fore much earlier in the martyrologies, as early indeed as Ado, Usuardus, Notker, and Rabanus Maurus, chiefly owing to the influence of the _Hieronymianum_.

This document is not without peculiarities of its own. In all recensions of the text, the 25th March is given as the day of Christ’s death, and since James the Lord’s brother, here called also “The Just,” died at Easter, his death is placed also on the 25th March. In the Berne Codex the sacrifice of Isaac is commemorated on the same day. There is a goodly array of Old Testament names, _e.g._ Aggeus, Habacuc, Job, Joel, Aaron, Eliseus, etc. In the Berne Codex, the 28th September is given as the day of Noe’s going out of the ark, the 7th January as the day of the Exodus, and the 1st May as the commencement of our Lord’s preaching.

Now that the date of its composition has been fixed, the _Hieronymianum_ is specially valuable for the information which it gives concerning Frankish hagiography and its gradual development. Whoever will devote himself in the future to investigating St Denys of Paris, St Ursula, etc., must pursue his studies in the various recensions and transcriptions of the _Hieronymianum_. It will well repay the trouble, if someone would investigate how many of the reputed martyrs of Lower Germany are named in this important document. It only knows of two martyrs at Cologne, Asclinius and Pamphilus, in addition to the Moorish martyrs whose numbers, however, vary greatly in the MSS.; their commander is named Gereon. No saints are given for Mainz. For Treves we have Valerius, Paulinus, Maximinus, and a Bishop Militius; Palmatius Thyrsus and his Innumerable Company had not yet been discovered or invented. For Bonn the connection in which Cassius, Florentius, and Mallusius stand to one another on the 10th October is worthy of notice. We find some African martyrs first of all on this day, and then, without indication of Bonn or any other locality, we have: “Et alibi Cassi, Eusebi, Florenti, Victoris, Agrippinæ, Mallusi cum alii trecentos xxx.” (_sic_). The later legends omit Eusebius, and put Mallusius instead, who was buried at Birten and discovered by Bishop Evergisil; the martyr Victor is said to have been also originally buried at Birten.[778]

With regard to the Roman martyrs and the succession of the popes, the _Hieronymianum_ is not altogether independent of the Philocalian list, although it is fuller. The earliest pope mentioned in it is Cornelius, and the last St Leo I., while the Philocalian list begins with Lucius († 254), and ends with Boniface I. († 422). The _Hieronymianum_ gives also the days of the consecration of some of them, _e.g._ Miltiades, Liberius, Innocent I., and Boniface I. On the other hand the earlier martyrs are omitted with the exception of Clement I.

The indications of place are dealt with on various principles. For the most part the city is naturally given where the martyrdom took place; occasionally only the province is given, as, for example, Achaia, Asia, Campania, Sardinia, and Sicily, this being especially the case in regard to the last-named island. Remarkable on account of its vagueness is the phrase _in Africa_ which occurs more than a hundred times without the name of any town being given, but, nevertheless, in the case of many African martyrs the town is given.[779] Often so many personal names follow one another that one suspects that some indications of place have dropped out, a conjecture to which one is all the more inclined as the indefinite expression _et alibi_ is very often employed.

The martyrs themselves are only distinguished by their rank in the hierarchy, when they belonged to the sacred ministry, _i.e._ deacon, presbyter, bishop, but by far the larger number of personages are without any indication of place, date, etc. In many cases it is evident that the same person has been entered twice or oftener,[780] and mutilations, disfigurements and alterations are very numerous, more especially in the later MSS. The transcribers allowed themselves considerable freedom, adding supplements and corrections, apart from the unintentional mistakes they made. A hint of a literary nature is given by the remark, “cujus” or “quorum acta habentur,” indicating the existence of the acts of such and such a martyr. Later transcribers were not satisfied with this, but, when the acts were forthcoming, added larger or shorter notices from them to the text.[781] Had we the work as it came originally from the hands of the compiler of Auxerre, these imperfections would disappear to a considerable extent. A glance at any entry in the three recensions shows how freely the earliest transcribers dealt with the original text; in the new edition the three recensions are printed in parallel columns.[782] All these remarks have an intimate bearing upon the question of the sources and origin of the work. With regard to sources, the Roman _Depositio Martyrum_ has been incorporated bodily, and a great part of the Carthaginian Calendar as well, but the compiler must have had the Arian Martyrology in a better copy than that which has come down to us, or even in its original form; this is shown by the fact that frequently he has quite correctly enlarged some of its indefinite entries.[783] His use of this martyrology is clear from his inserting Eusebius among the saints, in ignorance of his Arianism; he inserted the name in all simplicity, a mistake avoided by the Greek menologies, and the same may possibly have been the case with regard to Arius in the Weissenburg Codex.[784]

This employment of earlier sources coupled with the numerous correct entries in the _Hieronymianum_ entirely excludes the view that the document is a fabrication. Indeed its composition can safely be said to have come about in the following manner:—in the two first centuries the persecutions were on the whole local, and the number of martyrs not very large, although the persecution at Lyons in 177 caused the death of more than forty martyrs, not counting confessors; a change took place in the third century, when persecutions were commanded by the emperors for the whole extent of the empire, and, under Diocletian, the martyrs were to be reckoned, if not by millions, at least by thousands. At the conclusion of the persecutions, it must have occurred to many to ask how many had lost their lives in this troublous period, and the idea of drawing up statistics of the martyrdoms must have sprung up. We have no evidence of anything of this sort actually having been done, but in the sixth century there was a widespread opinion that a work of this kind had been accomplished by Eusebius under Constantine, and the passages quoted from Cassiodorus and Gregory the Great show it was believed a list of the martyrs for the whole year existed in Italy or in Rome. If this work contained merely a list of names and dates, its interest must have been merely statistical and in no wise scientific, since little could be learnt from the names by themselves. In the seventh century, however, either in Auxerre or in North Italy, it seems to have been held in greater esteem; it found a transcriber and reviser, and finally was brought into connection with the liturgy owing to its being read at the choir-offices in monasteries and convents, and by this means, it won its way to a position of widespread importance, which, however, did not have an advantageous effect on the purity of the text.

With regard to the printed editions, there are several published by various scholars who relied upon late MSS. of little value. We may mention the editions of Fiorentini, Lucca 1668 (incomplete), of D’Achery in the _Spicilegium_, ii. 1 (Migne, xxx.), and of Galesinius, Milan, 1577. It used to be disputed which of these editions gave the earliest text, but they are all quite superseded now. There are also many abstracts of the _Hieronymianum_ in mediæval handwriting, as, for example, the _Martyrol. Gallicanum_; Martène, _Ampliss. Coll. VI._, called after Chauvelin (Migne, _Patr. Lat._, xxx. 607); the _Fuldense_; _Anal. Boll. XIII._; the Reichenau martyrology, etc., but they are of small scientific importance.

5. _The Lectionary and Martyrology of Silos_

Since the appointment of special Masses in honour of the saints is a distinguishing feature of the Latin rite, Western liturgical books are in themselves a source from which we can increase our knowledge of the saints’ festivals, the most important in this respect being the sacramentaries, but the other books used at the celebration of Mass, the collections of epistles and gospels especially, also throw light on the subject.

In addition to the books of this kind already named, the _Lectionarius_ of Silos has, in recent times, attracted much attention in this connection.[785] It is of the highest importance both for the history of the development of the ecclesiastical year and for the festivals of the saints, for as it belongs to the period preceding the Carolingian liturgical reform, it represents a very ancient rite of which, until its discovery, all trace had disappeared. This rite is not the same as the southern Spanish rite of the Province of Boetica from which the so-called Mozarabic rite is derived, but belongs to the ancient ecclesiastical province of Toledo. The codex in which it is contained was written before the year 1062, for a later event, _i.e._ the translation of St Isidore’s relics from Seville to Leon, is added by a later hand. This codex, originally belonging to the monastery of St Sebastian at Silos and now in the National library of Paris, contains two distinct documents, a lectionary giving the lections from scripture for the whole of the year, and a martyrology; the latter was compiled between 925 and 1000; but the lectionary much earlier. Its antiquity is proved: (1) By the limited numbers of saints’ days; (2) by the circumstance that the catechumenate is still in force; (3) that the Saturdays in Lent are not fast days, agreeing with the eastern custom; (4) the Sundays after Epiphany and Pentecost do not appear as forming part of the ecclesiastical year, and are not even numbered, but, as in the _Gelasianum_, there are added twenty-four Masses called “dominicæ quotidianæ”; (5) there are five Sundays in Advent; (6) with regard to saints’ days, Anastasius the Persian is not yet placed along with St Vincent on the 21st January, and the Apostle James is also omitted along with all reference to the Spanish legend connected with his name. From this it is plain that St James, at the time when this work was compiled enjoyed no special worship in Spain. On these grounds the first editor, G. Morin, regards the lectionary as certainly belonging to 650.

The book represents a rite hitherto entirely unknown but which can be no other than the ancient rite of Toledo, since in it the Annunciation is placed on the 18th December as is prescribed by the first canon of the tenth council of Toledo. It differs from the Mozarabic rite as to the number of Sundays in Advent, of which the latter reckons six, and also in the eight Masses for the Sundays after Epiphany and Pentecost; another peculiarity is that the Innocents’ Day is omitted on the 27th December, but an “Allisio Infantium” is kept instead in the 8th January. None of the Roman and Byzantine feasts of our Lady are mentioned, and only one feast of the Holy Cross on the 3rd May, omitting the other on the 14th September; all Masses for saints’ days have two epistles.

The martyrology of Silos also is an important document on account of its original character, although it is some three centuries later than the lectionary. It is entitled, _Martyrum Legium_, and it is considerably richer in names of saints than the lectionary, and is quite independent of the _Hieronymianum_, though influenced in a slight degree by the Roman rite. The martyrs in the Moorish persecution, under, Abdurrhaman II., which lasted from 850 to 860, appear in large numbers. The historian of this persecution, the priest Eugenius of Toledo, who was put to death on 11th March 859, is entered, but placed on 1st June, the day of the translation of his relics; St Pelagius of Corduba, who suffered death on 26th June 925 under Abdurrhaman III. is also entered, and this date gives one limit in fixing the date of the work, the other limit being the year 1000. There are five additions by a later hand, _i.e._ on 12th March, _Gregorii Papæ_; on 1st May, _Transitus Philippi Apostoli_, without St James; on 28th April, _Prudentii et Sociorum ejus_; on 21st December, _S. Thomæ Apostoli_, and on 22nd December the _Translatio corporis S. Isidori_. Some personages are entered, who are not called saints, but only _Domnus_, four of whom belong to Toledo, two being bishops: Julian († 6th March 690) and Eugenius II. († 29th May 647); on 14th January, another Julian, and, on 13th March, _Depositio Leandri_. Half of the entire names belong to Spain, the other half to Rome and the East; of the Frankish martyrs, Denys of Paris, Afra of Augsburg, and Boniface of Mainz are commemorated. As regards the feasts of our Lady, besides the ancient Spanish feast on the 18th December, we have only the Assumption on 15th August. Litanies are appointed for 10th September, 7th November, and 15th December, besides a fast on 2nd January. The name of the Apostle St James is absent from the martyrology as well as from the lectionary. Bishop Torquatus and his companions are placed on 1st May, in both documents, but in the martyrology they are not described as disciples of the apostles, which is favourable to their historical existence. The Apostles Simon and Jude are on the 1st July instead of the 28th October, and there is also a _Symon Apostolus_ on 19th October as well. Although traces of later influence appear in this martyrology, it has still preserved the independent character of the early Christian Calendars.

6. _Egyptian (Coptic) Calendars and Synaxaria_

The anglican archeologist, John Selden († 1634), has given us the earliest Egyptian calendars in his work on the Jewish Sanhedrin which was left unfinished when he died. In the third book of this work, Selden intended to deal with the rite for the dedication of Christian churches, although this lay beyond the immediate purpose of his investigations, and he thought that some Arabic Calendars in his possession might have some bearing on the question.[786] Unfortunately, he gave no information concerning the MSS. from which these calendars were taken, and they seem, moreover, when discovered, to have been by no means in a good condition. Ludolf declared himself dissatisfied with these publications, and Wüstenfeld remarked: “The Arabic MSS. employed, must have been faulty, and were made still worse by the faulty reading and transcribing of the editor and the printing is so incorrect that some words would be almost, and others quite unintelligible, were there not other helps to their meaning at hand.”[787] Still, in spite of these well-founded criticisms from specialists, Selden’s work cannot be over-looked. There seem also to have been gaps and undecipherable passages in the MS. itself.

There are three calendars edited by Selden: two short, and one long, the latter being of later date than the others. The two first have a supplement to each month, called _ordo alter_, both appear to have been originally drawn up for the use of monasteries, but are distinguished from one another in important points. We shall designate them by the letters A and B. A is at any rate of Egyptian origin and is monophysite in character, because the heresiarch Severus, who lived in the sixth century, twice appears in it, on 8th February and 29th September. Other peculiarities in the document are: 1. It has two feasts of the Holy Cross, on 6th March _Inventio Crucis_, by which doubtless the recovery of the Cross by Heraclius in 629 is meant, and _festum crucis gloriosæ_ on 14th September. 2. The Nativity of our Lady is on 26th April. 3. The commemorations of the Mother of God in use in Egypt, are given on the 21st of the months January, March, May, July, and October: B omits these feasts. 4. A has the archangel Gabriel on the 18th December, but no festival of the Annunciation, while B places _Evangelismus_ on the 25th March, and no feast on the 18th December pointing onwards to the impending Nativity of our Lord. 5. A has the four living creatures of the Apocalypse on the 4th November who appear also later on in Coptic calendars: B omits them. 6. In A the conquest of Egypt by the Mahometans is seven times mentioned, _e.g._ 26th May, 10th December, etc. 7. A does not mention St Ignatius of Antioch, but B places him on the 20th December. 8. B has the Emperor Theodosius on the 3rd March, St John Chrysostom on the 7th May and 13th November, also Ephrem Syrus on the 9th July, and Dioscorus of Alexandria on the 31st August.

From these entries we see that B is catholic and Syrian, and A monophysite and Egyptian. Both certainly belong to the same period. B was probably also used in Egypt, for the Patriarch Isaac I. of Alexandria is mentioned, who died on the 10th Athyr = 6th November 688 or 689.[788] The Athanasius mentioned on the 6th September must have been Athanasius II. who became patriarch of Antioch in 629.[789] These calendars and the following one as well are contained in the Arabic translation of Abulaibsan Achmed Calcasendi who has prefaced them with a list of Coptic festivals (see above p. 26). Had they come down to us in better condition, they would be of the utmost importance in the investigation of our subject, notwithstanding their heretical character. The third of the calendars published by Selden has fared little better; it certainly belongs to the same period as the others, although somewhat later in date. The latest person mentioned in it seems to be the Patriarch Isaac I., named already in A. It was thought that this was the second monophysite patriarch of that name who died in 954, but it is not so, for this personage is named on the 10th Athyr = 6th November, and the Coptic Synaxarium, translated by Wüstenfeld, which mentions him on the same day, expressly states that he was the immediate successor of John, surnamed Semnudæus from the place of his birth, Sebennytos, who died on the 9th Athyr 686, after having pointed him out as his successor. The predecessor of Isaac II., however, was Sophronius, and his successor was called Job. Accordingly Isaac I. must be intended here, and thus the calendar belongs to the end of the seventh or the beginning of the eighth century.[790]

Its monophysite character is proved from the mention of the heresiarch Severus three times, _i.e._ on the 26th April (_festum Severi_), on the 4th September, and on the 1st December. It has no feast of St Peter and St Paul on the 29th June, but only a _Planctus Pauli_ on the 18th March. The following points are worthy of notice:—25th March is the day of the Crucifixion, the 28th May is kept as the _Inventio ossium S. Lucæ_ and the 6th March as the _Manifestatio Crucis_, where the later calendar adds, _per Heraclium imperatorem_. We have the beginnings of the Egyptian custom of commemorating the Mother of God on the 21st of each month, _i.e._ on the 21st Payni and the 21st Phaophi. The _festum Dominæ_ on the 2nd August is certainly a feast of our Lady, but the _festum Mirjam_ on the 22nd July is probably a festival of St Mary Magdalen. There are many things in this document the meaning of which can only be surmised.

A welcome addition to our knowledge of liturgical matters among the Copts exists in a calendar of the ninth century in the Vatican library; it is found along with a Coptic _Evangeliarium_ in a codex written in 1328. The document is described and translated into Latin by A. Mai in the fourth volume of his _Nova Collectio_.[791] The date is determined by the fact that the Patriarch Amba Zacharias, who is entered as a saint in the later Synaxarium on the 13th Athyr,[792] does not appear in the calendar; he was patriarch, according to Le Quien from 1005 to 1032. The last Jacobite patriarchs mentioned are those who succeeded one another from Alexander to Michael (Chail). Michael was succeeded by John, after a vacancy of ten years, who ruled from 766-799.[793] Accordingly this calendar belongs to the ninth century. A striking peculiarity in it is that the _Manifestatio Crucis_ is on the 17th-19th September instead of the 14th as in all other calendars.

The circumstance that several saints, instead of having one commemoration, have several, may give rise to confusion. St Thecla appears no less than five times, twice with the title martyr (on the 25th February and the 10th September), once as _apostola_ (on the 12th July), on the 6th May and 3rd December she has no title. Although there was a second St Thecla, still this would not altogether explain the entries. Then James the son of Zebedee is mentioned on the 28th and 30th of April, as well as James the Lord’s brother on the 12th July and 23rd October. St Michael the Archangel occurs eight times. Our Lady’s Nativity is celebrated on both the 26th April and the 7th September. No importance is to be attached to these repetitions; they are purely arbitrary, and are due to the desire to provide a name for every day in the calendar, and to fill up vacant places.[794] This appears especially from the circumstance that on the 29th of every Egyptian month, corresponding to the 25th in the Julian Calendar, a commemoration of Christ’s Nativity is given, and on the 21st of each month a feast of our Lady (Commemoratio Dominæ S. Mariæ). The Death and Assumption of our Lady is placed on the 16th January. St Joseph the Carpenter has his commemoration on the 20th July. Fides, Spes, and Charitas appear as three martyrs under Hadrian on the 25th January; they are said to be daughters of a reported Sophia. No St Catherine appears either in this calendar or in the later _Synaxarium_ but the heretic Severus († 539) is twice commemorated: on the 29th September (_Adventus Severi Patrarchæ in Ægyptum_) and on the 8th February, when he died.

Coptic calendars of a later date are still richer in names, but are full of legends and absurdities which show the steady decline of culture among the sect under Mahometan rule. This is especially the case with the _Synaxarium_ or collection of legends compiled from ancient sources by Bishop Amba Michael of Atriba and Malidsch at the end of the fourteenth century.[795] The basis of the collection is an older work of the same kind composed sometime about the year 1090 (see 3rd Athyr).[796] Information concerning the saints who lived in monasteries was taken by Bishop Michael from a so-called “Guide,” used by both the Egyptian Copts and Melchites.[797] A “Guide” of this kind had been written especially for Alexandria by Bishop Amba John of Kift. Michael refers in his work to the years 1382 and 1387 (see 7th Bermahat and 19th Bermuda), and so must have lived in the fourteenth century.

As the work contains much information drawn from the ecclesiastical histories of the Copts and Abyssinians, it has been translated and much used in spite of its faulty character. It affords many useful particulars concerning the traditions and feasts of the Egyptian Church, and on this account Stephen Assemani undertook to make an abstract of the whole work which is printed in the fourth volume of Mai’s _Nova Collectio_. F. Wüstenfeld made a translation of the first part containing the first half of the Egyptian year, from September to February; the second half, from March to August including the intercalary days, is unfortunately still untranslated.

7. _The Menology of Constantinople (Eighth Century)_

The Eastern Church possesses a calendar of Saints belonging to the eighth century, which occupies an intermediate position between a merely Eastern Calendar, and one that is universal. Its title runs, Calendar of the Gospels for Festivals (μηνολόγιον τῶν εὐαγγελίων ἑορταστικῶν), for it gives the passage from the Gospels to be read on each day; it contains a considerable number of saints belonging to the East, though the days are far from being all occupied. March and April have remarkably few feasts; this is owing to the ancient, but even then obsolete injunction of the Trullan Council that the feasts of no martyrs were to be kept in Lent.

Several circumstances prove that Constantinople was the locality where this document originated and was in use. Certain quarters of the city, as for example, Blachernæ and Chalcoprateia, are mentioned; the 11th May is mentioned as the day of the city’s foundation; so too is the earthquake which threw down the city walls on the 24th September 557. A large number of the patriarchs of Constantinople are included, twenty-nine in all, beginning with Metrophanes (4th June 305-325) and ending with Paul who was patriarch from September 686 to the 2nd September 693. The absence of the twenty-one reputed bishops from St Andrew to Metrophanes suggests the thought that when this document was drawn up this invention had not been accepted.

Morcelli maintains that the Paul the younger mentioned on the 2nd September is the Patriarch Paul II., under whom the Trullan Council was held in 692, but he would, however, exonerate him from participation in the schismatic council, since he opposed it at a later date; this, however, contradicts the accepted chronology. No patriarch, not even Germanus, and none of the many martyrs and confessors belonging to the time of the Iconoclastic controversy under Leo the Isaurian and Constantine Copronymus, are mentioned. From this one concludes that the menology was composed immediately after the cessation of the first Iconoclastic controversy, at a date when the judgment on the sanctity of these personages had not yet been concluded, or when people were unwilling to revive the painful recollections which their name evoked.

The martyrs, confessors, and doctors of the Eastern Church are there in long array, at least all the celebrated ones, not only those belonging to all four patriarchates, but also those belonging to other countries, such as Anastasius the Persian († 628, on the 22nd January). The popes and saints of the West are excluded with the exception of the three martyrs Lawrence, Gervasius, and Protasius.

The names of many Old Testament personages are included: Moses, Aaron, Elias, Jeremias, etc., also almost all the apostles and their immediate disciples, but for the most part they occur on different dates from those which they usually occupy in the Roman Calendar. For instance, St John the Evangelist is on the 8th May and the 26th September, St Barnabas on the 11th June, SS. Peter and Paul on the 29th June, St Titus on the 25th August, St Thomas on the 6th October, St Philip on the 14th November, St Andrew on the 30th November. SS. Joachim and Anna appear on the 9th September, the day after our Lady’s Nativity, the Archangel Michael on the 8th November, St Thecla (here entitled proto-martyr) on the 24th September, and the Holy Innocents on the 31st December. For the first time, Constantine and his mother Helena, appear as saints in the calendar; they are commemorated together on the 21st May, a day which falls before that on which Constantine actually died. Justinian and his consort Theodora are commemorated also, but do not appear with the title “saint”; they are placed on the 14th November, the day on which Justinian died, Theodora having preceded him on the 28th June 548. Justinian was called a prince of pious memory by the popes Pelagius II. and Gregory the Great.[798]

From these indications it appears that this martyrology was intended principally if not exclusively for the city and diocese of Constantinople. The safest conclusion to arrive at is to regard it as the martyrology of the patriarchate of Constantinople, since it steers a middle course, as it were, between particularism and universality: it is the most ancient of the Greek menologies known to us. Among the Greeks St John Damascene is regarded as the originator of calendars of this kind,[799] corresponding to Ado in the Latin Church. The menology has been edited with an excellent commentary by Stephen A. Morcelli (Rome, 1788), having previously been published in Latin at Urbino (1727) from the Codex of Cardinal Albani.

8. _The Menology of the Emperor Basil II., and the Syrian Lectionary of the Eleventh Century_

This menology takes its name from Basil II. _Porphyrogenitus_ (976-1025), and was given to the public for the first time in its entirety by Cardinal Albani at Urbino in 1727, from two codices each containing six months. It is distinguished from the menology which we have just described by having a saint on every day of the year, and most of the days have more than one; the saints are drawn from the whole extent of the Eastern Church, and the Western Church, especially Sicily and Rome, is more prominent than in the former document.

As regards Rome, there are a large number of popes given who are entirely absent from the other menology: Silvester, Leo, Agatho, Gregory I., Celestine, etc. With the exception of Gregory I. they are generally placed on different dates from those on which they are commemorated in the West, _e.g._ Silvester on the 2nd January, Leo on the 18th February, and Alexander on the 16th March, etc. It appears as if the sources which the compiler had at his disposal for the West were insufficient, since, for example, he gives St Perpetua, St Felicitas and companions once on the 2nd February, and again on the 14th March, with the addition, “in Rome”; from this it would appear that he thought the saints mentioned on the first date had belonged to some other locality. St Agnes is given on the 5th July.

Not so many patriarchs of Constantinople are given as one would have expected, and many, indeed, are omitted who are included in the menology of which we have spoken in the previous section, as, for example, Nectarius, Paul II., Gennadius, Thomas II., but on the other hand we find some who lived after the composition of the earlier document, especially Germanus, Tarasius, and Antonius II., surnamed Cauleas († 12th February 896).[800]

In other points the _Basilianum_ resembles the former work, except that it is fuller in every respect. The most striking feature is the large number of saints belonging to religious orders contained in it, who for the most part are specially designated; even the patriarch of the Western monks, St Benedict, is not forgotten, and is given on his proper day. Names from the Old Testament occur frequently, and from the New Testament, we have almost all the disciples of the apostles whose names are given, and these are designated as “belonging to the Seventy.” The number of the days of apostles is considerable, though seldom coinciding with the days observed in the Western Church, except in the case of St Mark, St Barnabas, SS. Peter and Paul, and St Andrew. Both the St James are absent, and so are deprived of veneration within the region in which this document was followed,[801] but there is a feast of all the apostles on the 30th June. St Anna appears on the 25th July; St John the Baptist on the 24th June and 29th August. It is to be noticed that the first four general councils have each a special day allotted to them, while in the _Constantinopolitanum_ all are commemorated on the same day—16th July. It is strange to find not only earthquakes, included, but also defeats in the wars with the Persians, Arabs, and Bulgarians, but unfortunately there is nothing to indicate the localities where these events happened (see the 7th and 20th February, the 23rd March, the 24th May, etc.). This exceeds the limits observed in liturgical documents.

As the day of the foundation of Constantinople (the 11th May) is again included in this document, we must conclude that it belongs to this city. Since, too, Goths and Persians find a place in it, it is ahead of its predecessors in its attempts to achieve universality.[802]

While the admission of foreign names is to be welcomed as a step in advance, it may yet, on the other hand, be a source of confusion and give rise to mistakes later on. We find, namely, in this menology, that the names of foreign saints are not always given on the correct date, but are arbitrarily placed on other days than those to which they belonged. Later redactors, when they found the same name on different dates, may have thought that different persons were meant, and this may have been the cause of the repetition of the names of saints. This shows that in admitting names of new saints, and the correct day of whose death had not been transmitted, they acted according to their fancy. This was the case with regard to the majority of the Seventy Disciples, many of whom appear here for the first time. The same must have taken place also with feasts of our Lord, as when the Flight in Egypt is given on the 26th December, and so placed before the Circumcision and the Presentation. The admission of foreign names was left to chance or opinion. Thus, _e.g._ the Western saints Ambrose, Martin of Tours, and Hosius are admitted, but Hilary, Augustine, Jerome, etc., are passed over.

The impression made by the entire document is that the principles which were on the whole followed in its composition were not maintained with sufficient care, but yielded more than was right to opinion and caprice. In many cases, too, the necessary knowledge of history, and a sufficient supply of literary material seems to have been lacking.

A useful document, especially for saints’ days, is a lectionary of the orthodox Syrians contained in the codex xix. of the Vatican Library. It was written in the monastery of Mar Mussa at Antioch in 1030, and contains in the first section the lections for the ecclesiastical year, in the second, those for saints’ days, beginning with the 1st September as New Year’s Day. In it are given the martyrs of the Iconoclastic controversy, several orthodox patriarchs of Constantinople, Nicephorus († 2nd June 828) being the last; then come many names from the old Testament, and many feasts of apostles, the _Catenæ Petri_ on the 16th January being one of them, four feasts of St John the Baptist, and six of our Lady. There are no Roman or Western saints with the exception of St Lawrence. This document has been published by Count F. Miniscalchi-Errizzo under the title _Evangeliarium Hierosolymitanum_ (2 vols. 4to, Verona, 1682).

In using documents of this kind for purposes of historical investigation, as for instance in order to determine the day on which a historical personage died, the appeal must always be to the local sources. In the case of saints belonging to the Western Church no importance must be attached to the fact that the Easterns may have transferred them to a different day, and _vice versâ_, as, for example, in the case of St Ignatius of Antioch. Where the day is given in some local source, otherwise deserving of credit, we can be then certain that it is correct. This must be done with regard to SS. Peter and Paul, for whom the local sources give invariably the 29th June, while foreign calendars give other dates, as we find is the case with Polemius, Silvius, and the Arian martyrology. The compilers of these calendars wished to celebrate the Princes of the Apostles, but, being ignorant of the actual day of their death, placed them on any day that seemed suitable. Finally, at a later date the correct date came to the knowledge of foreign churches, and found its way into their calendars.

9. _The Kalendarium Marmoreum of Naples_

In the ninth century, a time of great activity in matters relating to hagiography, the Church of Naples undertook a revision of its calendar, which exhibits noteworthy peculiarities.

First of all, nearly every day of the year is provided with the name of a saint, which indicates considerable care and study. This result was achieved by following the Eastern custom of admitting Old Testament personages, although not to the same extent. The grounds on which the selection was made cannot be discovered, for we have Abraham on the 9th October, Isaac on the 17th March, Eliseus on the 28th November, Daniel on the 17th December, Zacharias on the 13th May, while other important personages, such as Isaias, etc., are omitted. We are also reminded of eastern usage by the commemoration of the council of Ephesus on the 4th August, and other traces of eastern influence are noticeable in the admission of a few bishops of Constantinople, such as Metrophanes, and also of the names of Constantine (without Helena) on the 21st May, and Theodosius on the 10th November. With regard to Metrophanes, the compiler is guilty of a remarkable oversight; he has placed him once on the right day (the 4th June), without his title, and again on the 4th January with his title, “_Patr. Const._” The confusion between the 4th of June and the 4th of January might easily escape a transcriber, and must have already existed in the source which the compiler used. In order not to omit any name the compiler preferred to enter the same name twice, once with, and once without, its proper title.

This reminds us that St Mark also occurs twice, on the 25th April and the 17th May. St Philip is united to St James on the 1st May (a trace of Roman influence), and is found again alone on the 14th November. St Silvester comes on the 31st December and a _Depositio Silvestri P.P._, on the 2nd January; a _Jacobus Ap._ and Mattheus on unusual dates, the 15th and 16th November, other Apostles are on more usual dates, _e.g._ St Jude is commemorated on the 21st May. St Bartholomew’s day (the 25th August) is given wrongly as _Nat. Pass._, being in reality the day of his translation. The names of Apostles and their disciples are very numerous.

With regard to the worship of the Holy Cross, both days occur (_i.e._ the 3rd May and 14th September), with the title now in use, although formerly, the feast of the 3rd May was alone observed in the West, and that of the 14th September in the East. The reason for this circumstance has been already given in this book. Bishops of Naples naturally appear frequently; _e.g._ Maro (15th June) belongs to the third century, others belong to the period from the sixth to the eighth century, such as Redux on the 27th March († 584), Agnellus on the 9th January († 691), Adeodatus on the 1st October († 671), Fortunatus on the 14th June († 600 circ.), Paulus the elder on the 3rd March († 760). The last to be named is probably Paul the younger on the 17th February († 820).[803] Paul III. of Constantinople cannot be intended here, for his day is the 30th August. We may add that the feast of All Saints had not yet been admitted, a circumstance which throws light on the probable date when this calendar was drawn up. Special importance attaches to this calendar on account of its intermediate position between the calendars of the Eastern and Western Churches.

It was discovered in 1742 in S. Giovanni Maggiore and edited incorrectly, according to Mai, by Marinius, correctly by Mazzochius (Naples, 1744). The most recent edition is by A. Mai himself.[804]

10. _Western Authorities from the Sixth to the Eighth Centuries_

In the West the worship of the saints exerted a much stronger influence on the liturgy than in the East. The Roman and kindred rites provided special Masses for saints’ days, while in the East the worship of saints as far as it effected the liturgy continued to be limited to the canonical hours. At first the lections used at the Psalmody were drawn from the Holy Scriptures alone, but from the sixth century, passages from the _passiones martyrum_ were admitted.[805] In course of time, these became more numerous, and in this way the martyrologies obtained an ever increasing importance. As regards the Mass, in the earliest Gallican Masses published by Mone, we find one for the feast of St Germanus,[806] and several in the _Sacramentarium Leoninum_, and for many centuries the Masses for saints’ days remained considerably less numerous than the Masses _de tempore_. Later on, however, they became so numerous that they were finally indicated in a special calendar bound up with the sacramentary, such as is now prefixed to the massal as one of its integral parts. Equally important with the sacramentaries in this connection are the service-books, containing the epistles and gospels, called lectionaries. We shall examine these first, and then those of the martyrologies specially bearing upon the subject we are investigating, and afterwards we shall utilise whatever we find in the sacramentaries in connection with saints’ days.

The lectionaries of Luxenil and Silos show very plainly that in the seventh century the worship of the saints had as yet very slightly affected the liturgy. The saints’ days are somewhat more numerous in the _Leoninum_ and in the _Missale Gothico-Gallicanum_ edited by Mabillon and belonging to the end of the same century.

In both the other Roman sacramentaries the increase of saints’ days is noticeable. The _Gelasianum_ was originally drawn up especially for the city of Rome, but the recension in which it has come down to us was obviously compiled at the request of some other church; at any rate it contains a number of saints who do not belong to the city of Rome. For instance, on the 7th August we have the Confessor Donatus who belongs to Imola, on the 19th a martyr called Magnus who can only be assigned to Cæsarea in Cappadocia, and on the 27th a martyr Rufus belonging to Capua; the appearance of the legendary family of martyrs Marius, Martha, Audifax, and Ambacum or Habacuc is curious, and in addition to these, there is also a number of saints whose names one would search for in vain in the better and older recensions of the _Gregorianum_, _e.g._ Soter, Vitalis, Felicula, Juliana, Euphemia, Juvenal, Nereus and Achilleus, Cyrinus, Nabor, Nazarius, and Vitus. Of these many were certainly venerated in Rome, yet had hitherto received no recognition in the calendars attached to the service-books.

For the Gregorian Sacramentary, the edition most frequently employed is that of Menard printed in Migne. According to the introduction, it is taken from a _codex S. Eligii_ and a somewhat later _codex Rodradi_, which, in Menard’s opinion, was written about 853, but even the earlier codex has additions belonging to a later period, _e.g._ Projectus (25th January)[807] and Leo (28th June), as a comparison with the Mainz codex of St Alban shows. This codex (_i.e._ of St Eligius) according to the received opinion, was written between 834 and 847, and consists of three different parts, proceeding indeed from the same hand, but clearly distinguished from one another. The first part contains the _Gregorianum_ (fol. 1-129) to which have been added as an appendix the Masses of St Alban, SS. Sergius and Bacchus, All Saints’, and St Augustine, which the transcriber did not find in the original. In the second part (Collectio ii., fol. 165-183) the expressions _contestatio_ and _ad complendum_ are used which show it to be of Frankish origin, and like the first part it contains the ecclesiastical year, beginning with Christmas. The third part (fol. 183-204) contains a few additions consisting of prayers and Masses for special occasions.

It is to be observed that the first part still has the obsolete feast of the 13th May, _Dedicatio S. Mariæ ad Martyrs_, and only the _Natalis S. Cæsarii_ on the 1st November, the Mass for All Saints’ being placed at the end, and not in its proper place (fol. 131). This recalls the circumstance that Gregory IV. (827-844) transferred the feast of the 13th May to the 1st November. This change was also introduced into the Frankish empire in 835. The original document was then certainly written before 835, or indeed earlier, for the _litania minor_, introduced into the Roman rite by Leo III. about 801, is not given; nevertheless the three chief feasts of our Lady are already inserted in their proper places. In the following period until the fifteenth century only a limited number of new saints’ days were added to the Roman Missal. A missal written in 1374—_Ordo Missalis secundum Consuetudinem Romanæ Curiæ_—belonging to the Public Library of Munich, shows an increase of only twenty-five Masses for saints’ days over the _Gregorianum_ after more than five hundred years.

Fronteau, chancellor of the University of Paris, published a lectionary which has important bearings on the study of liturgies; he took it from a codex written in gold characters belonging to the Church of St Geneviève in Paris.[808] The editor correctly described it as appertaining to the city of Rome, because the Roman station churches are given, and the saints mentioned almost all belong to the city of Rome. The omission of the festival of St Petronilla (the 31st May) is of importance in fixing the date of this document, for Gregory III. was the first to add the Church of the _Cœmeterium S. Petronillæ_ to the other station churches.[809] Petronilla had already been regarded as a saint in the city of Rome, but her festival had not made its way into the liturgy because no _statio_ was held in her Church or in her _Cœmeterium_. The _Litania Minor_ on the three days before the Ascension, introduced into the Roman rite by Leo III., is also not to be found here. The editor, however, deduces that the Lectionary of St Geneviève is later than Gregory II. from the fact that the Thursdays in Lent are provided with an _officium_ of their own, an addition introduced first by this pope.[810]

Accordingly this lectionary was composed under Gregory II., between 714 and 731, and it is of great importance for the liturgical student. Its manner of naming the Sundays after Pentecost deserves especially to be noticed, the feasts of our Lady of the 15th August and the 8th September do not fall on these days, but on the 14th August and the 9th September, and the beheading of St John the Baptist on the 30th August. The only Greek saint mentioned is Mennas and the only non-Italian, St Cyprian. The _Cathedra Petri_, _Exaltatio Crucis_ (3rd May), and _Joannes ante Portam Lat._ (6th May), are not yet known, and on the 28th June, where _Leo II. Papa et Confessor_ now stands, we have a _Translatio corporis S. Leonis_. Fronteau points out that this cannot refer to Leo II.[811]

11. _The Martyrologies of Bede, Florus, Wandelbert, and Œngus_[812]

Before the ninth century, the Frankish Church had produced no martyrology of its own, apart from the so-called _Hieronymianum_, but on the other hand the young Anglo-Saxon Church put out a work of this kind in the eighth century, its author being the learned historian of the Anglo-Saxon Church, the Venerable Bede. Whether he undertook the work spontaneously or at the desire of his superiors, whether it was intended merely for his own monastery, or for a wider circle are questions which cannot be answered, for there is no introduction to the work to inform us on these points. The work was used in the Frankish empire as is proved by the MSS. of it found there as well as by the later additions of Florus.

Bede composed his _Martyrologium_ in 731, as he informs us at the conclusion of his history.[813] It was his intention to give in addition to the days of the saints’ deaths, the nature of their deaths, and the names of the judges by whom they were condemned, for by this means the date of their deaths could be determined with certainty. The basis of his work was the existing Roman Calendar while he exceeded its limits in many directions. In the first place, he added to it the saints of England such as were then venerated; these were few in number, Alban, Cuthbert, Augustine, Mellitus, Etheltrud, Victor and Paulinus (10th October), Brigid, etc. Then a comparatively large number of names of Frankish saints were also introduced, _e.g._ Maximin of Treves (31st May), Clodoald (St Cloud), Remigius, Denys, Lambert († 17th September 709), the Theban legion, and a few others. Bede rises still further above the standpoint of national churches and particularism by admitting some names from the Old Testament, _e.g._ Ezechiel (10th April), Jeremias (1st May), Eliseus (14th June), Isaias (6th July), Samuel (20th August), etc.; the dates on which they are commemorated being taken for the most part from Greek menologies.

Bede collected material for his _Martyrologium_ with great diligence, and enriched his subject matter with notes from his own reading, as is shown for instance by his reference to St Cyprian’s treatise _De Lapsis_ in connection with the martyrs Castus and Æmilius (22nd May) who are named in it; other sources upon which he also drew were the _Gesta Pontificum_, the writings of Eusebius, St Gregory’s Dialogues, and especially a number of _Passiones Martyrum_. Bede’s work shows both diligence and originality, and an intelligent employment of the materials which came to hand. Yet, in spite of his diligence, he found material to fill up only a hundred and eighty days, and so the half of the year remains vacant; still his compilation is fuller than the Frankish calendars of the eighth century, and the notes attached to the names of each saint are remarkable for brevity and precision.

Although the value of Bede’s work is incontestable it was soon found insufficient; it was diligently copied, and used, but additions of all sorts were made to it as is proved by the large number of variations in the existing MSS. Perhaps it met with more acceptance abroad than at home, for the thirteenth canon of the second council of Cloveshove which met in 747, only twelve years after Bede’s death, enjoined the use of the Roman martyrology, without even mentioning Bede.

As regards its publication, the martyrology of Bede was printed for the first time in Cologne in 1616, but as in the text thus published, all the days of the year are provided with the names of saints, it is impossible that it represents the original text of Bede, for all old writers agree in stating that in it many days were left vacant. The Bollandist Henschen found first of all a fragment of the genuine Bede among the MSS. of Queen Christina of Sweden, and then, later on, the complete text at Dijon.[814]

Bede’s martyrology was newly worked over and considerably enlarged by a certain Florus; according to Wandelbert of Prüm,[815] this was the subdeacon Florus of Lyons, who, later on, as deacon, wrote against Scotus Erigena in 852, and died in 860; he was a contemporary of Wandelbert’s. Against this must be set down the authority of Trithemius, who considers that this Florus was a Monk of the monastery of St Trudo in the diocese of Liège about 760. Although Trithemius gives no authority for this statement, still writers on the history of literature, especially Fabricius, are in complete agreement with him. Still which ever of the two is correct, one is inclined to ask how it came to pass that so striking an enlargement of the work—each day of the year being provided with the name of a saint—could have appeared so soon after Bede and before the appearance of the great martyrology of Ado.

Wandelbert of Prüm turned Bede’s martyrology into verse in the twenty-fifth year of the Emperor Lothaire I. (848); his version is of no importance for the history and development of this department of liturgical studies, yet it may be consulted for questions connected with local history.[816]

The martyrology of Œngus the Culdee, written in the ancient Irish (Celtic) language certainly belongs to the same period. Nothing further is known of the author except that he was a monk in the Monastery of Conenagh in the ninth century. The martyrology is written in rhymed verse, extends over the entire year, and contains for the most part the names of Irish saints.[817] Certainly later is the similar work of Gorman, Abbot of Louth in Leinster. It was written in unrhymed verse between 1166 and 1174.[818]

12. _The Martyrologies of Ado, Usuardus, Rabanus Maurus, and Notker Balbulus_

The most important document in this department of literature, and one which bears directly upon scientific investigations, is the martyrology of Ado, Bishop of Vienne. Ado was born in northern France about 800, and entered at an early age the Monastery of Ferrières in the diocese of Sens, from whence he was sent to the Monastery of Prüm where he lived for many years under Abbot Markward (829-853). In consequence of some misunderstandings he left Prüm and went to Rome, where he spent five years and then went to Ravenna. He returned to France later and lived for some time as a simple monk in a monastery in the neighbourhood of Lyons. After the death of Bishop Agilmar of Vienne († 7th July 860) he succeeded to the see and died on the 16th December 873.

He compiled the martyrology which bears his name in 858 before he became bishop,[819] the basis of his work being a very ancient martyrology with which he had become acquainted in Ravenna. If his information can be trusted, a bishop of Ravenna, whose name he does not give, received this ancient document from a bishop of Rome who is also nameless. The rest of the material he collected himself, and in particular he made notes of any information concerning martyrs which had come in his way. Many of the sources at his disposal have since been lost, thus rendering his martyrology all the more important for us.

It consists of three parts: 1. A calendar containing the names of one or more saints for each day accompanied by notices naturally brief; in the printed edition it bears incorrectly the title, _Vetus Martyrologium Romanum_, given to it by its first editors, Jacob Mosander and Heribert Rosweyde;[820] 2. _A Libellus de Festivitatibus SS. Apostolorum_;[821] 3. The martyrology itself,[822] consisting of extracts from the acts of the martyrs and other writings.

His preface contains matter which deserves attention.[823] He had often been urged, he says, by holy men, by his superiors, and by Bishop Remigius of Lyons to complete the martyrology; since the martyrology of Bede, which Florus had enlarged, still leaves many days without saints, he had undertaken to fill up these gaps, and for this purpose he had made use of the MSS. describing the sufferings of the martyrs, from which he had made quotations for the benefit of the weaker brethren; the ancient martyrology which came originally from Rome, served him as a foundation upon which to build.

The frank avowal of his intention to fill in the spaces left vacant by his predecessors, might create a prejudice against the trustworthiness and excellence of his work, but a closer inspection will dispel this suspicion, and this would be still more the case had we the original form of the work before us; in the existing editions there are additions of a later date, such as the name Rictiovarus.

From the entries on the 20th April and the 17th November it is plain that the Cologne MS. of this martyrology edited by Rosweyde comes from Stablo, and it may have been that at Stablo the names of some Frankish saints were inserted into it. Ado went much further than Bede in admitting names from the Old Testament. Roseweyde’s conjecture that this calendar, the so-called “Little Ado,” is the Roman martyrology mentioned by Gregory I. in his letter to Eulogius, is devoid of proof and obviously mistaken, for in that document there were no Old Testament names. This “Little Ado” is not a martyrology at all, but a calendar, and displays none of the peculiarities which characterise the calendars of the city of Rome of that date; neither is it an independent work, but only an abstract made by Ado from his own larger work, and a summary of its contents. The preface prefixed to the two other parts is chiefly concerned with the martyrology, and not with this abstract, and it is only the circumstance that this abstract is found in MSS., with some later additions and altogether separate from the larger work, which led the first editor to regard it as a treatise by itself; it is merely the abstract used at Stablo and Malmedy, and not an original Roman work, though it is plain from Ado’s preface that the existing Roman calendar was employed in its composition.[824]

Two or three decades later, Usuardus composed his martyrology after Ado’s example, which he dedicated to Charles the Bald in 875. Usuardus was a monk of St Germain des Près, then outside the gates of Paris, but now surrounded by the city; his work is by no means so full as Ado’s, but is more polished in style, and more uniform in its treatment of the different entries, and on this account is more suited for use in choir. It was accordingly used throughout the entire West, and in all Benedictine monasteries,[825] and even in Rome itself with the exception of the Vatican basilica. At the end of the fifteenth century it was so to speak, the universal martyrology of the Western Church, and indeed no other was known.[826]

The value of these works depends naturally upon the sources employed by the redactor, and also upon his personal qualities, as, for instance, whether he revelled in the miraculous or was inclined to be critical.

Two martyrologies by German authors must now be dealt with—those of Rabanus Maurus and Notker Balbulus.

The former when Archbishop of Mainz completed a martyrology which he had compiled from secondary sources; it is dedicated to Abbot Radleich of Seligenstadt, who died in 853-54, and whose epitaph was composed by Rabanus,[827] but the composition of the martyrology must be dated a few years earlier, about 850, though the exact date cannot be discovered. As sources, he drew upon the Acts of the martyrs which he found ready to hand, and also the _Hieronymianum_, Bede, and Florus; the treatment of the material is very unequal, sometimes a long account being given, sometimes nothing more than the name; legends and historical errors are frequent.

The same is true of the martyrology of Notker Balbulus who was a monk at St Gall from 840 to 912, and composed his work under Pope Formosus (891-896). He knew and used the _Hieronymianum_, as, for example, for the 9th August, _V. Id. Aug._ First class sources were beyond his reach, a loss of which he was himself conscious.[828]

All these martyrologies of which we have spoken, were private compilations without anything of an official character about them. The existence of so many following upon the _Hieronymianum_ shows that it did not satisfy liturgical requirements and was little used. On this account, martyrologies were drawn up at a later date containing full descriptions of the lives and sufferings of the saints for each day of the year, which would serve as edifying and entertaining reading for religious, priests and other pious persons. However even the best of them were no longer practicable in the sixteenth century, and Gregory XIII. conceived the purpose of putting out one better adapted for use in divine service. A further step was taken in 1580 when he commissioned the learned Cardinal Sirleto to compare the martyrology used in Rome with the oldest and best MSS. and to correct the errors which had crept into it in course of time.[829] Sirleto associated ten other learned men with himself among whom were Cæsar Baronius and Aloysius Lilius, the astronomer. Baronius was the soul of the undertaking, and, after three years’ labour, the _Martyrologium Romanum Gregorii XIII._ was completed, and a papal brief of the 14th January 1584, prescribed the exclusive use of this work in choir at the canonical hours. Baronius based his labours on Usuardus, correcting and enlarging his martyrology by means of the materials then forthcoming; could he have used the materials discovered later, or those which we now possess, his work would naturally have been much better; many, too, of the earlier mistakes remain uncorrected. The editors were far from claiming freedom from errors for their work, and made improvements in later editions, beginning with that of 1586. It is not necessary to regard all the individuals named in the Roman martyrology as saints in the liturgical sense of the word, and their admission there, according to the expression of Benedict XIV. is in no wise equal to canonisation.[830] Since the time of Baronius, the official martyrology has indeed remained untouched, but science has not been inactive during this long period; much has been explained and corrected, and, on the whole, it has come to be recognised as a principle which must be followed in investigating the histories of the saints of ancient times, that recourse is to be had to the earliest existing sources of information, and also, where the evidence is contradictory, local official sources, where they exist, are to have the preference.

13. _Important Calendars from the Eighth to the Eleventh Centuries_

While the martyrologies were for the most part the outcome of individual effort, the calendars, on the other hand, are entirely official in their origin. In times when annual calendars, like our present ordos, had not yet appeared, their place was taken by the official calendar, and every one had to make out his ordo for himself with its assistance. From many points of view they are more important for our purpose than the martyrologies.

As complete missals took the place of the sacramentaries they were usually provided with a table, like an index, which gave a list of the saints’ days contained in the missal; these so-called calendars have from then until now formed an integral part of written and printed missals, and even appear by themselves like abbreviated martyrologies. A remarkably large number of calendars of this kind have come down to us from the Middle Ages, and, since they are important for the history of local churches, they have recently been published, as, for example, by Martène-Durand, Misset and Weale, Grotefend, Ulysse Chevalier, Lechler, etc.[831] For our purpose, the following deserve to be noticed:

1. A Roman calendar of the seventh century, discovered by Prof. de Ram, and printed in Binterim, Denkw. vii. 56-67. It begins with Christmas, March is called _mensis primus_, the station churches of Rome are given in Lent, on the 13th May there is the _Dedicatio Mariæ ad Martyres_, All Saints does not appear. The only litany is the so-called _litania major_; the Annunciation and the _Cathedra Petri_ are omitted, in March a _pascha annotina_ is inserted without date, St Athanasius is passed over on the 20th January; there are only faint traces of Advent. This calendar is very ancient and formed part of the codex of the gospels written under Louis the Pious; in the time of Lothaire I., it belonged to the Monastery of Münsterbilsen in the diocese of Liège.

2. A calendar belonging to Bologna. It is found in a codex of the Monastery of Leno, was discovered by Giovanni Mercati in the Ambrosiana, and published in the Révue Bénédictine, 1902 (353-355). It has the _Ordinatio Episcopatus Jacobi Apost._ on the 27th December, and, on the 17th May a _natalis S. Marci Evang._, found nowhere else.

3. The so-called calendar of Charlemagne forms, along with an Easter table, the beginning of an _Evangeliarum_ written in 781 by command of the emperor and his consort by a scribe called Godescale.[832] It is only deserving of notice from the number of names of Frankish saints inserted into a calendar originally Roman, _e.g._ Bishop Maximin of Treves (31st May), Boniface (5th June), Medard (8th June), Martialis (30th June) Kilian (1st August), Mauritius (22nd September), Remigius (1st October), etc. The Apostle Thomas is placed, strange to say, on the 3rd July, and St Petronilla on the 31st May.

4. A calendar is incorporated in a treatise _De Computo_, by an unknown author, written in 810 (published by Muratori, _Analecta_, iii. 108, and also in Migne, _Patr. Lat._, cxxix. 1274). It seems to come from the diocese of Sens on account of _S. Columbæ Virg._ on the 31st December; All Saints is omitted. This calendar is Roman with Frankish additions; for the date see chap. 153, Migne, cxxix., 1364.

5. The last four months of the year are unfortunately missing from the calendar of Alt-Corbie (Corbeiense) given by Martène-Durand, _Thes. Nov. Anced._, iii., 1591, Paris, 1717. The same is the case with a very old calendar of Tours.

6. Codex 83ᴵᴵ. of the cathedral library in Cologne contains an ancient calendar, fol. 72 B-76. This codex contains a large collection of annalistical writings and computation tables and was written under Archbishop Hildebold. The second treatise in the volume is Isidore’s chronicle which concludes with the words: “Seven hundred and eighty-nine years have passed since Christ’s Nativity”; further on, fol. 76 B, was inserted after the death of Charlemagne, and also of Hildebold (818). Thus the codex was written between 798 and 818, and belonged to the old cathedral of Cologne which was dedicated to St Peter. The calendar, however, does not belong to Cologne for the local saints are absent, but there is a number of names of Frankish saints, pointing to the north of France as the locality where it was drawn up; no explanation of the legend of St Ursula can be learnt from it. For a calendar of its early date, it is remarkably full of saints, while the Cologne Calendar, shortly to be referred, to has many vacant days. The codex has been described by Jaffé and Wattenbach, _Ecclesiæ Metrop. Colon. codices manuscripti_, Berlin, 1874, 29 _et seqq._

7. The _Gellonense_ comes from the Monastery of St Guillaume du Désert in the diocese of Lodève, and belongs to the beginning of the ninth century, and has been edited by D’Achery, _Spicilegium_, ii. 25 _et seqq._ It begins with Christmas and is preceded by a _Breviarum Apostolorum_ in thirteen sections containing information concerning the apostles.

8. A _Kalendarium Gothicum_ (ed. Lorenzana) of the seventh century (Migne, lxxxvi. 38 _et seqq._). Besides this, there is the Mozarabic _Sanctorale_ (_ib._ 1031 _et seqq._) and a fragment of a _Kalendarium Gothico-Hispanum_ (Migne, lxxxv. 1050 _et seqq._).

Of later date, but still always useful for historical investigation are:—

9. Two Anglo-Saxon calendars of the tenth century belonging apparently to the diocese of Winchester (Migne, lxxii. 619 _et seqq._).

10. Two from Corbie; in Martène and Durand (_Thes. Nov. Anecd._, iii. 1571-1594).

11. A calendar of Floriac and a martyrology of Auxerre (Migne, cxxxviii. 1186-1258).

12. A calendar of Mantua and two of Vallombrosa (_Ib._ 1258 _et seqq._).

13. A calendar of Besançon of the eleventh century, which goes by the name of _S. Protadii_ (Migne, lxxx. 411), and an old French calendar called after the name of its first owner Chauvellin (Migne, lxxii. 607).

For convenience we separate the most ancient calendars of German origin from the others, and consider them by themselves.

1. The oldest calendar of Mainz belongs to the first half of the ninth century, and was published from a codex in the Vatican by Jostes in the Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum (Schröder and Röthe) for 1896, 148-158. All Saints is absent, and the resurrection of Christ is entered on the 25th March.

2. A _Kalendarium Verdinense_, from the Monastery of Werden on the Ruhr, published by Bandini (_Catal. Bibl. Lauretianæ Suppl._, Migne, cxxxviii. 1203 _et seqq._). It contained All Saints, and the _Dedicatio S. Mariæ s. Turris Vincentii_ on the 13th May as well. Among the special saints of Cologne are given the two Ewalds, Kunibert, Gereon, the Moors, and the eleven thousand virgins, but without Ursula, and designated as simply virgins and not martyrs; it also contains the names of the two first bishops of Halberstadt, Thiatgrim († 840) and Hildegrim († 21st December 888), which indicates the date of its composition, and it has the name of the first abbot of Werden, Hetharicus, and the _Dedicatio Eccl. Majoris_. Unfortunately the months from April to July are missing.

3. The sacramentary in the cathedral library of Cologne (codex 88, fol. 3-9) contains a complete calendar for this cathedral. It is essentially the Roman Calendar of the ninth century, with the addition of the local saints of Cologne, the two Ewalds, Kunibert, Brictius, Quintinus, Severin, Gereon and his 318 companions, the 360 Moors, and the 11,000 virgins without Ursula, and designated simply as virgins. Other names deserving notice are: Briga (Brigida) 1st February, Arealis (?) 28th April, _Marcus episcopus_, Boniface the martyr, Medard, Lambert, and Mauricius with 6666 companions. The calendar belongs to the second half of the ninth century, and is proved to have belonged to the cathedral of Cologne begun by Hildebold and consecrated by Willibert in 873, by the fact that it gives the day of the consecration of the cathedral correctly (23rd September), and is described as belonging to the Church of St Peter, to whom the former cathedral was dedicated. The sacramentary, but not the calendar, has been printed by J. Pamelius in his “Liturgicon Ecclesiæ Latinæ,” tom. ii. (Col. Agr. 1571), but unfortunately with so many arbitrary alterations that it is quite useless as an edition of the text.

4. In the library at Düsseldorf there is a sacramentary, (codex D. I.) written in the lifetime of Bishop Altfrid of Hildesheim († 874), which contains (fol. 217-222) a calendar showing northern French influence. Only the 11,000 virgins are given of the local saints of Cologne, and here again Ursula is not named, and the virgins are not called martyrs. The book belonged to the Convent of Essen on the Ruhr founded by Altfrid. This MS. gives in fol. 64 A the order of the festivals observed within the jurisdiction of the monastery during the ninth century: “Istas præcipuas solemnitates in anno totus populus sabbatizare debet: In die Nat. Domini dies IV., in octabas Domini, in Teophania, in Purificatione Mariæ, in Pascha Domini dies IV., in Ascensione Domini, in Pentecoste dies IV., in Nat. S. Johannis, in Nat. Sanctorum Apostolorum Petri et Pauli, in Assumptione S. Mariæ, in Nat. S. Remedii [Remigii], in Missa Michahelis, in Solemnitate Omnium Sanctorum, in Nat. S. Martini, in Nat. S. Andreæ.”

Binterim published a Cologne calendar, apparently of the ninth century, under the title _Kalendarium Ecclesiæ Germ. Coloniensis Sæculi Noni_ (Cologne, 1824), and Harless attributes it to the second half of the same century (Archiv. f. die Gesch. des Niederrheins, vi. 67). It is, however, much later, for it gives all the feasts of the apostles, and provides them with vigils, and all the days of the year are filled in with the names of saints. For these reasons I should date the calendar as belonging to the eleventh century at the earliest.

5. The _Kalendarium Germanicum Pervetustum Sæc. X._, printed by M. Fr. Beck (Aug. Vind., 1687). Gerbert (_Mon. Lit. Alem._ i. 455 A. I.) correctly regards it as coming from Alsace and probably from Strassburg, because it contains the saints venerated in that city, Arbogast (20th July), Florentius, Ottilia and Aurelia. The basis of this document is again the Roman Calendar, still many Frankish saints have been added, but Gereon alone of the saints of Cologne. The latest date given in it is the _Dormitio S. Uodalrici_ (4th July). It has only one name from the Old Testament, that of the prophet Ezechiel.

6. A calendar of Freising, drawn up under Bishop Abraham, between 893 and 993. The 25th March is marked as _Conceptio Domini_. There is only one feast of St Peter’s Chair. The calendar has been printed by Lechler, “Mittelalterliche Kirchenfeste und Kalendarien in Bayern,” Freiburg, 1891.

7. The so-called _Martyrologium Stabulense_, the calendar of the Monastery of Stablo. The date of the original MS. can be deduced from the fact that on the _vii. Idus Junii_ the coronation of King Henry II., which was performed by Archbishop Willigis at Mainz on the 7th June 1002, is entered by the first hand, while the ordination of Archbishop Tagino of Magdeburg in the 2nd February 1004, has been entered by a second hand. Archbishop Tagino’s death is not entered. The calendar has only Gereon with 319 companions of the local saints of Cologne. St Ulrich of Augsburg, although he died in 997, is entered by the second hand. The calendar has been published by Martène, _Ampl. Coll._, and by Zaccaria, _Antiq. Med. Ævi_ (see Migne, cxxxviii. 1194).

8. Hontheim has published the five most ancient calendars of Treves in the _Prodromus Historiæ Trevirensis_, i. 378-405. According to him, only the first belongs to the tenth century, all the others being later. For a calendar of the tenth century, it is very full of names, many of them being from the old Testament—Ezechial, Daniel, etc.; it mentions neither the legend of the Innumerable Company of Martyrs at Treves on the 4th and 5th October, nor Palmatius, Thyrsus, etc.; neither does it contain All Souls, St Catherine, or St Peter’s Chair, but it has Gereon and his 318 companions. It is only in the fourth and fifth calendars which belong to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that Thyrsus, Palmatius, etc., appear.

When one considers the details presented by calendars, one is bound to acknowledge that the Roman _Depositio Martyrum_ stands at the head of this long line of liturgical documents, and was the model after which they were composed. Like them, the _Depositio Martyrum_ was drawn up according to months, and commenced with Christmas. Like them, it contained the official list of the martyrs who received ecclesiastical veneration in the local church of Rome in the fourth century. Were it not so, it would not have deserved to be incorporated in the Philocalian collection, the _Hemerologium Valentini_, since this comprised only official documents; had it not been official it would not have been worth transcribing.

CONCLUSION

All estates of men in the Church have had their share in the formation of the ecclesiastical year, for the growth of the Church’s festivals has continued without interruption from the beginning until now, and has extended over all the countries of Christendom. Having wended our way through the centuries and arrived at the conclusion of our work, it is a pleasure to render our tribute of thanks and praise to the men who have in the past made this sphere of study their own.

The few writers of the Middle Ages who treated the Church’s year and the festivals of the saints in a comprehensive manner were entirely occupied with contributing to the correct performance of ecclesiastical ceremonies, and with explaining why each ceremony must be done in one way and not in another. They not infrequently brought allegorical and symbolical considerations to bear on the question.

In more modern times, Cornelius Schulting, a native of Steenwijk in North Holland, and afterwards professor of theology at Cologne and canon of St Andrew’s († 1604) undertook a full exposition of the matter; his object was mainly practical, and his work can only be regarded as a first attempt. The keen controversialist, Jacobus Gretser S.J. († 1625), is more occupied with his polemic against the Calvinists than with lucid demonstration. More in harmony with modern requirements, is the French oratorian Louis Thomassin, a native of Aix in Provence, and a partisan of Port Royal, who died in 1695; he wrote a small compendium which may be used with profit at the present day.

The study of the ecclesiastical year was considerably advanced by the labours of Adrien Baillet, born in 1649, in the diocese of Beauvais († 1706), parish priest of a small country living at Baumont and librarian to M. de Lamoignon; he was entirely devoted to the pursuit of knowledge, and scarcely ever allowed himself any relaxation. He composed a great work worthy of ranking alongside the labours of Tillemont, to whom he is closely related in spirit. The course of his historical treatment of the subject is considerably obscured by the superabundance of biographical matter. Two valuable monographs were published by Prosper Lambertini (Pope Benedict XIV.) when bishop of Bologna, which treat in a masterly manner of the feasts of our Lord and of our Lady respectively.

Finally, the learned priest of Bilk, near Düsseldorf, Fr. Ant. Binterim († 1855) dealt with this subject in one volume of his _Denkwürdigkeiten_. He treats in the first place of the observance of Sunday, then of the Sundays of the Church’s year in general, and finally of the movable and immovable feasts. Of these he naturally deals only with the most important, following the order of the calendar, by which arrangement Christmas comes last.

The author of this book commenced his researches by a comparative study of the martyrologies, calendars, annals, and works dealing with the computation of time, and then set to work upon the historical and liturgical material which he had before him from the point of vantage thus obtained. The fortunate circumstance that the most of the works required for this branch of study are contained in Migne’s collection, renders the labour of comparison possible, and frequently brings remarkable parallels to light.

APPENDIX

I

(p. 16)

According to the existing Roman Calendar, feasts are classed as follows:—

DUPLICIA PRIMÆ CLASSIS. _Nativitas Domini, Epiphania, Annunciatio, Pascha cum tribus antecedentibus et duobus sequentibus diebus, Ascensio Domini, Pentecoste cum duobus sequentibus diebus, festum Corporis Christi, festum SS. Cordis Jesu, festum S. Joseph sponsi B.M.V., Nativitas Joannis Bapt., festum SS. App. Petri et Pauli, Assumptio B.M.V., festum Immaculatæ Conceptionis B.M.V., festum Omnium Sanctorum, Dedicatio propriæ ecclesiæ, Patronus vel titulus ecclesiæ._

DUPLICIA SECUNDÆ CLASSIS. _Circumcisio Domini, festum SS. Nominis Jesu, festum SS. Trinitatis, festum Pretiosissimi Sanguinis D. N. J. Chr., Inventio Crucis, Purificatio, Visitatio, Nativitas B.M.V., Sollemnitas S. Rosarii, Dedicatio Michælis Arch., festum Patrocinii S. Joseph sponsi B.M.V., Natales Apostolorum et festa Evangelistarum, festum S. Stephani, Protomartyris, SS. Innocentium, S. Laurentii, S. Annæ matris B.M.V., S. Joachim patris B.M.V._

DUPLICIA MAJORA. _Transfiguratio Domini, Exaltatio S. Crucis, festa VII. dolorum B.M.V., Commemoratio B.M.V. de monte Carmelo, festa Ad Nives, S. Nominis, de Mercede, et Præsentatio, B.M.V., Apparitio S. Michælis Arch., festum SS. Angelorum Custodum, Decollatio S. Joannis Bapt., Cathedra Petri utraque, S. Petri ad vincula, Conversio S. Pauli Ap., Commemoratio S. Pauli Ap., festum S. Joannis ante Portam Latinam, S. Barnabæ Ap., S. Benedicti Abb., S. Dominici Conf., S. Francisci Assis. Conf., festum Patronorum non principalium._

II

(p. 24)

(_A_) A marked increase appears in the statute of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury († 1089). He divides the festivals into three classes. In the first class he reckons five, the three chief festivals of the Christian year, the Assumption, and the feast of the local patron; in the second, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Gregory, the Annunciation, Low Sunday, St Alphege, the Ascension, St Augustine of Canterbury, the Octave of Pentecost, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Translation of the Relics of St Benedict, the Nativity of our Lady, St Michael, All Saints, St Andrew, and the Dedication of the Church; the festivals belonging to the third class were St Vincent, the Conversion of St Paul, SS. Philip and James, the Exaltation of the Cross (3rd May), St James (29th July), St Peter’s Chains, St Lawrence, the Octave of the Assumption, St Bartholomew, St Augustine of Hippo, the Beheading of St John the Baptist, the Invention of the Cross, St Matthew, SS. Simon and Jude, St Martin, and St Thomas.

Lanfranc issued this decree as archbishop, still it was only to hold good for the Benedictine monasteries and the Cathedral.[833]

(p. 25)

(_B_) The festivals of obligation for the archdiocese of Cologne were regulated according to the months by the provincial synod of 1308. January: the Circumcision, Epiphany, St Agnes, the Conversion of St Paul. February: Candlemas, St Peter’s Chair, St Matthias. March: the Annunciation. April: Easter and St George. May: SS. Philip and James, the Invention of the Cross. June: the Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul. July: St Mary Magdalen, St James, St Pantaleon. August: St Peter’s Chains, St Lawrence, the Assumption, St Bartholomew, the Beheading of St John the Baptist. September: the Nativity of our Lady, the Exaltation of the Cross, St Matthew, St Michael. October: St Gereon, the Eleven Thousand Virgins, St Severin, SS. Simon and Jude. November: All Saints, St Martin, St Cunibert, St Cecilia, St Catherine, St Andrew. December: St Nicholas, St Thomas, Christmas, St Stephen, St John the Evangelist, the Holy Innocents. In all, forty-two days.[834] The feasts of Easter and Pentecost extended over three days; the Ascension is omitted. In the city of Cologne were celebrated in addition: the Arrival of the relics of the Three Holy Kings on the 23rd July, the Dedication of the Cathedral, SS. Cosmas and Damian, the Dedication and Patronal feast of each parish church, and, finally, the feast of Corpus Christi was enjoined in addition.

The Synod of 1549 under Adolf III. gives the following list: All Sundays, Easter, Pentecost, Christmas—two days each, the third day _in choro_ only—Circumcision, Epiphany, Ascension, the Holy Trinity, Corpus Christi, these being feasts of our Lord. The feasts of our Lady are: the Purification, the Annunciation, the Visitation, the Assumption, the Nativity, the Presentation, and the Conception. Saints’ days are as follows: all the Apostles, St John the Baptist, St Mary Magdalen, St Lawrence, St Michael, All Saints, St Martin, and the Dedication of the Church; there are also six other saints’ days which were optional for places where they were customary. The feast of the Patron Saint is passed over, and thus a decrease of fifteen festivals is brought about.[835]

(p. 26)

(_C_) The statute of Archbishop Baldwin of Treves, published in 1338, contains fewer festivals, _i.e._ Christmas, Easter with the three following days and Pentecost with two, Corpus Christi, Circumcision, and Epiphany. Our Lady’s feasts were: the Nativity, Annunciation, Purification, and Assumption; a few years later her Conception was added. Then came the festivals of the twelve apostles, St Michael (8th May), the Invention of the Cross, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, St Lawrence, St Martin, St Mary Magdalen, St Catherine, All Saints’, the Holy Innocents, the Dedication of the Church and the feast of the Patron Saint.

III

(p. 35)

THE FESTIVALS OF OBLIGATION AS OBSERVED IN DIFFERENT COUNTRIES

Rome. Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, one day each; Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph (19th March), the Annunciation, Ascension, St Philip Neri (26th May), Corpus Christi, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immac. Conc., St John the Evangelist (27th December). The civil law of the Italian Kingdom recognises the following days as legal holidays: the Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, the feasts of Our Lady on the 15th August, 8th September, and 8th December, Christmas and the patron saint of the city and diocese.

France. In accordance with the concordat of Napoleon four feasts were celebrated: Christmas, Ascension, the Assumption, and All Saints. All other festivals when they fell on a week day were transferred to the following Sunday. Even in Belgium and in the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg, in the part of Limburg belonging to Holland, and in the bailiwick of Meisenheim in the diocese of Treves, this scanty provision of feasts holds good.

Austria. The Cis-and-Transleithan countries observe the same holy days. Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, two days each; the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, the Annunciation, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception. The feasts of the patron saints were transferred by Joseph II. to the following Sunday, but in each of the Crown-lands the local patron is commemorated on his proper day, _i.e._ in Austria above and below the Enns, the feast of St Leopold: in Upper Austria, St Florian: in Moravia, SS. Cyril and Methodius: in Galicia, St Stanislaus and St Michael: in Silesia, St Hedwig: in Bohemia, St Wenceslaus and St John Nepomuk: in Styria, Carinthia, Camiola, the provinces of the Litoral, Salzburg, Tyrol and Vorarlberg, St Joseph: in Sclavonia, St John the Baptist: in Hungary, St Stephen the Confessor: in Croatia, St Elias: in Transilvania, St Ladislaus: in Salzburg, St Rupert: in Dalmatia, St Jerome: in Goritz, St Hermagoras and St Fortunatus.

In the eight old provinces of Prussia, the festivals recognised by the state are: Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, two days each; the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, All Saints, the (Protestant) day of penitence and prayer, the Annunciation and the Immaculate Conception. In the archdiocese of Posen, the Nativity of Our Lady, and the Assumption as well as St Stanislaus are observed, and in Gnesen, St George as patron of the diocese. The new provinces have had also to adopt the Protestant day of penitence.

Hanover, the dioceses of Hildesheim and Osnabrück. Besides the days observed in Prussia, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, the Nativity and Assumption of Our Lady, St Michael, and the local patrons St Bernward and St Martin.

For the countries of the Northern Mission in the diocese of Osnabrück, the following are omitted from the list just given: Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, and all the feasts of Our Lady, thus leaving only Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, each with two days; the Circumcision, the Epiphany, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, All Saints. This applies to Bremen, Hamburg, Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, both the Mecklenburgs and Denmark.

Bavaria. The following festivals are observed: Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, each for two days; the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, the Annunciation, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption and Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception. Each diocese of Bavaria celebrates its own particular patron as well.

The Palatinate, diocese of Spires. Here the effects of the French dominion are still observable, and the only festivals of obligation observed are: the Circumcision, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Assumption, All Saints. Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost are kept each for two days.

The Kingdom of Saxony. The festivals of obligation are: the Circumcision, the Epiphany and Annunciation, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, the Nativity of Our Lady, the Immaculate Conception, All Saints; Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, each for two days.

In the ecclesiastical province of the Upper Rhine there are different regulations in each diocese.

Würtemburg, diocese of Rottenburg. The Circumcision, the Epiphany, Candlemas, the Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption and Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception; Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, each for two days.

Baden, archdiocese of Freiburg. The five chief feasts of Our Lady are kept on the day itself; so too is the feast of St Joseph, and the other festivals are the same as in Würtemburg, with the exception of the 24th June.

Hesse-Nassau: the dioceses of Fulda and Limburg. Christmas, Easter and Pentecost, each for two days; the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption, All Saints; the Prussian day of penitence is observed in November, and in Limburg, the patron saint on his own day.

Hesse-Darmstadt: diocese of Mainz. The same regulations as in the Palatinate.

Alsace-Lorraine. The four French holy days. An edict of 10th October 1887 adds to these Good Friday, Easter Monday, and Whit Monday, as general holidays in the legal sense, and as holidays and days of rest in the sense of the Code de procédure civile.

In Holland, in the archdiocese of Utrecht, and in the diocese of Harlem, the following rank as full holy days on which no work is to be done: the day following the three chief feasts of the year, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Annunciation, and the Assumption. It is of obligation to hear mass only on Candlemas, the Nativity of Our Lady, and the Immaculate Conception. In the dioceses of Breda and Bois-le-Duc, these three festivals are days of full obligation.

For England, Pope Pius VI. appointed the following holy days on the 9th March 1777: Easter and Pentecost, each two days: Christmas, the Circumcision, Epiphany, the Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Annunciation, the Assumption, SS. Peter and Paul, All Saints, and the feast of the patron saint. At the present time are observed, Easter, Pentecost and Christmas, one day each, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Ascension, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, the Assumption, and All Saints. St Andrew’s day is added for Scotland, and St Patrick’s day and the Annunciation for Ireland. The Immaculate Conception is a purely ecclesiastical festival.

Switzerland affords an interesting study owing to the great varieties existing within so small a space. The diocese of Basel-Soleure: Christmas, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Corpus Christi, the Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate Conception. In the canton of Lucerne, St Joseph’s day and the Annunciation are celebrated, the latter also in the canton of Zug. The three chief festivals are kept for day only. The diocese of Coire, comprising the cantons of Grisons, Schwyz, Uri, Unterwalden, Zurich, Glarus, and the principality of Liechtenstein: the three chief festivals, each two days, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas and St Joseph. The last two days do not rank as holy days in the canton of Zurich, nor does the Annunciation in the cantons of Zurich and Schwyz. The Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Nativity of St John the Baptist, and SS. Peter and Paul are not kept in either of these two cantons, but the Assumption and All Saints are kept everywhere. The Nativity of Our Lady is not kept in Zurich and Schwyz, but the Immaculate Conception is kept everywhere except in the canton of Zurich. The following patron saints are kept, St Fridolin (6th March) in the canton of Glarus, Nicholas von der Flu (21st March) in Unterwalden, St Martin with an octave in Schwyz and Uri, St Lucius (3rd Dec.) in Coire. St Gall, comprising the cantons of St Gall and Appenzell, keeps the Epiphany, Candlemas, Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate Conception; the three chief feasts, each for two days, and St Gall’s day (16th Oct.) as patron of the diocese. In the diocese of Geneva-Lausanne, consisting of the four French cantons: the Circumcision, the Epiphany (with the exception of the cantons of Geneva and Vaud), Candlemas, the Annunciation (with the exception of Vaud and Neuchâtel), the Ascension, Corpus Christi, Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate Conception (with the exception of Geneva, Vaud, and Neuchâtel). The three chief feasts are kept for one day each. This is also the case in the canton of Valais, diocese of Sion, but the following days are also kept in this canton: the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption and Nativity of Our Lady and her Immaculate Conception, and St Maurice as Patron Saint (22nd Sept.).

Russian Poland. The three chief feasts, each for two days, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception, St Stanislaus as patron. This last named day is not observed in the schools and law-courts on account of its nationalistic character.

Spain. The Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, Annunciation, Easter, Ascension, Pentecost, Corpus Christi, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception, Christmas. The three chief festivals are kept for only one day each.

Portugal. The three chief festivals for one day each. The Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, St Joseph, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, the Sacred Heart, St Antony of Padua (13th June), SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption, All Saints, the Immaculate Conception. Before the last reduction, the Nativity of Our Lady, and from mid-day on Maundy Thursday to mid-day on Good Friday were also holy days of obligation. Lisbon keeps the feast of St Vincent (22nd January) as patron of the city.

The United States observe only six festivals which may fall on week-days; all the others are transferred to the Sunday. These are Christmas, the Circumcision, Ascension, Assumption, All Saints, and the Immaculate Conception. The three chief festivals are kept for one day only. Since the number of festivals varied originally in the different states, an attempt was made after uniformity, and the council of Baltimore in 1852 desired to retain only four festivals as in France. Rome, however, was not satisfied with this, and, in 1866, the six festivals mentioned above were adopted. The provincial synod of Cincinnati in 1861 agreed to adopt the Epiphany, Annunciation, and Corpus Christi as well.

Brazil. The three chief festivals, each for one day. The Circumcision, Epiphany, Candlemas, Annunciation, Ascension, Corpus Christi, Nativity of St John the Baptist, SS. Peter and Paul, Assumption, Nativity of Our Lady, All Saints and the Immaculate Conception.

Russia. Easter, Pentecost, Christmas, the Circumcision, Epiphany, Ascension, Transfiguration, Candlemas, Annunciation, our Lady’s Presentation and Assumption, and the Exaltation of the Cross (14th Sept). All these are, of course, kept according to the Julian calendar. To these are added the following feasts peculiar to Russia: the three feasts of the Jordan so-called, _i.e._ the Blessing of the Water, and the thirteen so-called Gala-feasts, _i.e._ the commemoration of the reigning dynasty (see _Kirchenlexikon_, X., 2nd ed. 1399). The schismatics in Austria-Hungary keep their festivals according to the Julian calendar, so that where the population is mixed, each feast is as a rule kept twice.

IV

(p. 71)

For many centuries the liturgical vestments were exclusively white, like the ordinary dress of classic times. The writers of the Carolingian period in their desire to find parallels between the enactments of the Old and New Testaments, were the first to remember that different colours were used in the vestments of the Jewish high priest. In addition to the white under garment which he wore in common with the simple priests, he wore an upper garment of blue, and a particoloured shoulder-garment, the ephod, of blue, purple, scarlet, and fine linen, interwoven with gold thread. The repeated references to these vestments gradually led to the adoption of coloured vestments for the mass.[836]

Their introduction was at first tentative. Neither Rupert of Deutz, Honorius of Autun, Beleth, nor Hugh of St Victor mention the liturgical colours in their writings, or, if they do, only with reference to the Old Testament; Sicard of Cremona, a contemporary of Innocent III., clearly alludes to them, although he only mentions two—white and red.[837]

Innocent III. was the first to speak of all the liturgical colours, and to regulate their use in the Roman Church, but always with reference to the regulations of the Old Testament. According to him, white was to be used on the feasts of Confessors, Virgins, and Angels, and on Christmas, Epiphany, Candlemas, Maundy Thursday, and the Ascension; it was used as a matter of course on all other days where it was not otherwise specified, since until then white had been the universal liturgical colour. Red vestments were to be worn on feasts of Apostles and Martyrs. On feasts of the Holy Cross a choice between white and red was allowed. Red was to be used on Pentecost in memory of the fiery tongues, and on the feast of SS. Peter and Paul. On the Conversion of St Paul and on the feast of St Peter’s Chair, white was to be used. White was the colour for the Nativity of St John the Baptist, red for his Beheading. On All Saints many used red vestments, but the Roman Church used white, because it is said in the Apocalypse that the saints stand before the Lamb in white garments, with palms in their hands.

Black vestments are to be worn on days of penitence and abstinence, and also on the Commemorations of the dead. They were also worn during Advent and Lent, except, of course, on festivals falling within those seasons. With regard to the Holy Innocents some decided in favour of black, some in favour of red, but the Roman pontiff decided for violet. For ferias and ordinary days the colour was green. One might, in addition, wear scarlet for red, violet for black, and yellow for green.

In Durandus († 1296) we find the same rule, in parts verbally identical with the above. The only point to notice in regard to what he says is that he says black vestments are to be worn on Rogation days, violet seems to have the preference over black for Advent and Lent, and the use of the former colour is represented as peculiar to the Roman Church.[838]

There is accordingly nothing strange in the circumstance that in the more ancient rituals, only _vestes solleminores_ in general are prescribed for Maunday Thursday, without reference to colour. The Roman use,[839] from the beginning, was to use white on this day, and this superseded the customs observed elsewhere.[840]

V

(p. 79)

THE WORD MASS AS A NAME FOR THE SACRIFICE OF THE ALTAR

The term mass does not owe its position to theology, but became established in the course of centuries by popular usage. The most ancient writers of the church speak frequently, and with all the precision desirable of the holy sacrifice of the altar, but they speak of it by other names which fully indicate its essential character, such as _oblatio_ and _sacrificium_, or even _sacramenta_ and _collecta_. These two last names have a more general significance; _collecta_ is the late Latin abbreviation for _collectio_, and means an assembly of men for some given purpose, in this case for divine service. _Colligere_ appears in the same sense in the Latin translation of Irenæus and in Tertullian; the substantive is found in Jerome and other ancient authors; a survival of this primitive usage appears in the name _collecta_ given to the first prayer of the Mass.[841] It owes its name of _collecta_ to the fact that according to the most ancient ritual it formed the commencement of the Mass. In the service-books, _collecta_ was merely a name which served to distinguish the prayers of the Mass from those which preceded or followed. According to the Roman rite, the Mass began with the prayer of the priest at the altar as soon as the _invitatorium_ sung by the choir was finished, the psalm _Judica me_, the _Confiteor_, the _Kyrie_ and _Gloria_ being later additions. Thus the name _collecta_ became attached to this opening prayer, and is so given to it in most mediæval and Roman missals, until the reform under Pius V., when it was replaced by the name _oratio_ now in use. At the same time the name _postcommunio_ replaced the older title _ad complendum_. Whenever we find in prayer-books and explanations of the Mass, that the prayer was called the Collect because the priest “collected” the petitions of the faithful, we can only regard such an interpretation as silly and unhistorical; the same could be said equally well of all, or, at any rate, of most of the prayers of the Mass.

The term _sacramentum_ or _sacramenta_ served also not unfrequently as a name for the Mass,[842] and so gave rise to the name _sacramentarium_, generally given to the missal in ancient times. In addition to these names, _oblatio_ and _sacrificio_ were especially employed as having the advantage of adequately expressing the essential character of the rite. The former was the particular favourite of Tertullian, the founder of Latin ecclesiastical terminology, and afterwards of St Cyprian, but it may be said to belong to all writers and to all periods.[843] St Augustine, who had already propounded a formal theory of the sacrifice of the Mass, shows a preference for _sacrificium_.[844]

When we turn to the word _missa_, we must not treat it as a participle, even in the _Ite missa est_, for there is nothing with which the feminine participle can agree, and so it must be a substantive. In order to explain the meaning of this substantive, and to show how it acquired its position as the technical term for the most sacred act of the Church’s worship, requires an excursus dealing with the matter from the point of view of etymology, patrology, and liturology. As regards the etymology of the word, attempts have been made from time to time to derive _missa_ from the Hebrew, (‎‏מסּה‎‏ Deut., xvi. 10), in the belief the name must be as old as the thing it signifies, an attempt abandoned as absurd at the present day.[845] A better idea was that of the mediæval liturgists who explained the word as equivalent to _transmissio_ in the sense of the offering up and presentation of the oblation before God. But fortunately there is one man, thoroughly conversant at first hand with primitive usages and terminology, who has left us an explanation of the word and of the origin of its application to the sacrifice of the altar. Bishop Avitus, of Vienne († 518), flourished at the period between the ages of antiquity and the mediæval period, and is, therefore, a reliable witness in this matter. He was asked by his sovereign, King Gundobad of Burgundy, what was the meaning of the word _missa_, and replied that _missam facere_ was the same as _dimittere_, and was used by the Romans at both audiences in the royal palace and sittings of the law courts to intimate to the assembly that the audience or session was at an end and that they were free to depart; it was used in the same way in the churches. Avitus[846] himself uses _missa_ simply for divine service.

It is clear that the explanation given by Avitus is correct. For since the conclusion of every session and assembly must be officially announced with words such as, “The session is at an end,” so in church, where a still greater number of men meet together, it is necessary to make known to them the conclusion of divine service. Such was the custom of the ancient Romans at their sacrifices and religious ceremonies, and the Christians naturally did the same. Tertullian speaks already of a _dimissio plebis_,[847] and we find the same thing in the Greek liturgies, although the formulæ vary in some respects from that in use among the Latins.[848]

It was not, however, the Mass which was first called by this name, but the other services of the ancient Church—the Psalmody, or, in other words, the Canonical Hours. From the striking account given by the so-called Silvia,[849] we can see how important these services were and what a prominent position they occupied in the worship of the Church. “Every day, in the early morning, the doors of the church were opened, and all the monks and nuns, as well as many of the laity, assembled, and until sunrise, sing hymns and psalms, in alternate choirs, along with the antiphons and prayers. About sunrise they begin to say the ‘_matutinas ymnos_.’ The bishop arrives with the clergy and sings the prayer within the chancel. Then he comes forth and blesses the people one by one. _Et sic fit missa_,” _i.e._ so the service ends, which comprised Nocturns, Lauds, and Prime, as they would now be called. The same ceremonies were observed at the Little Hours which followed later. Vespers were performed with more ceremony; at the conclusion the deacon directed the faithful to bow their heads in order to receive the bishop’s blessing. Again the pilgrim ends her description with the words, “_Et sic fit missa_.”

We must notice that the Psalmody took place daily in this way, while the Mass, especially in the East, was not celebrated daily; in Lent, for example, it was celebrated on Saturdays and Sundays only. At each hour there took place a dismissal, _missa_, and thus it was brought about that this word came to be used as a name for each of the canonical hours. The name was far-fetched and unsuitable, but popular usage does not form its nomenclature upon scientific principles, but from what most strikes the popular fancy. Thus the pilgrim, who expresses herself in popular language, speaks of _missa vigiliarum_, for Mattins, and _missa lucernaris_ for Vespers. The word _missa_ in itself means dismissal and nothing more. Once, in her naïve manner, she explains what sort of dismissal she means; it is dismissal out of the church (“_missa de ecclesia_,” c. 37, § 3, line 20). Which of the various dismissals out of the church is intended in a given case is shown by an additional phrase, as in the cases given above, when it is not clear from the context. Of course it may mean the dismissal which took place at the Mass, but not the sacrifice of the Mass itself. How far _missa_ is from being in the pilgrim’s diary the technical term for Mass—which is all we are concerned with here—is sufficiently clear from the circumstance that wherever she lets slip the word _missa_ for Mass, she at once hastens to add that the _missa_ of which she speaks is the _oblatio_.[850] When she wishes to express herself with precision, she always calls the Mass _oblatio_, and in a few cases _sacramentum_ (singular or plural). Of course _missa_, as a general term, may have been used as a name for the Mass, since there are one or more dismissals therein; had it not been so, _missa_ could never have become the name _par excellence_ for the Mass.

The same terminology is found at a somewhat later date in Cassian, to whom we are especially indebted for our intimate knowledge of monastic observances. An important part of these observances were the daily hours of prayer, the canonical hours, and we naturally expect to find the technical terms for them in Cassian’s writings. And so, indeed, we find the names formed with the help of the word _missa_, as in Silvia’s diary; Mattins and Lauds are called _missa nocturna_ or _missa vigiliarum_,[851] while the Mass, on the other hand, is called _oblatio_ or _sacrificium_.

From these passages it appears that _missa_ in its strict sense means “dismissal,” and is a general term capable of receiving a particular significance by the addition of _vigiliarum_, etc. The same thing appears in Pope Innocent I. (_Epist._ 17, c. 12; MIGNE, xx. 535), where he speaks of the priests belonging to the party of Bonosus, and asks if they have celebrated Mass, which he calls _sacramenta conficere_, if they have given Holy Communion (_si populis tribuit_), and if they have performed the customary dismissals (_si missas complevit_). Apart from the fact that in the same passage two different terms cannot well stand for the same thing, the use of the plural shows that it is not the Mass which is meant but the other _missæ_, the hours, the performance of which concerned both the bishop and the priests. There is no doubt as to which term Leo I. used for the Mass, for _oblatio_ and _sacrificium_ occur several times in his writings. When in one passage we find the word _missa_ as well, this can only mean the dismissal, the conclusion of divine service.[852] Thus even in the fifth century _missa_ by itself always meant merely dismissal, never Mass; for Mass, the terms _sacrificium_ and _oblatio_ were employed.

This was the correct use of the terms in question during that period. But since, as we have said, the ceremonial dismissals (_missæ_) at the end of divine service gave rise to the name, and since dismissals of this kind occurred in the Mass,[853] once at the end and once after the sermon at the dismissal of the Catechumens, it is not remarkable that _missa_ came into use as a name for the Mass, and came to be regarded as its special name in proportion as the canonical hours became less services for the laity than of obligation for clergy and religious. There was however an intermediate period before _missa_ became solely and exclusively the popular name for the Mass. This transitional state of affairs extended over the whole of the sixth century, and appears in the writings of St Benedict and St Gregory the Great, who both employ _missa_ without distinction as a name for the Mass and for the canonical hours.[854] The same thing appears in Gregory of Tours and in other writers. The last appearance of _missa_ as a name for both kinds of divine service without distinction appears to be a passage in the life of St Ludgerus by Altfrid.[855]

The terminology employed by the official organs of the Church is naturally of weight in this matter. When the authorities of the Church made use of a term so little expressive of the nature of the thing as _missa_, which had already taken the popular fancy, it was inevitable that it should become the only recognised name for the Mass; and this is just what happened. On glancing through the canons of the ancient Councils of the West, we find all the terms with which we are already familiar—_oblatio_ by the Council of Arles in 314 (Canons 5 and 19), and _sacrificium_ by the Councils of Carthage (that of 390, Canon 8; that of 397, Canon 14), etc. We also find the term _missæ_ applied to the particular parts of the Psalmody,[856] and to the other services composed of Psalmody and Mass together.[857] As a term clearly and unmistakably applied to the Mass by itself, _missa_ appears for the first time in the fourth Synod of Arles in 524 (Canon 4), and then in sundry other Gallic synods of the sixth century.

On the other hand it must be stated once for all that _missa_ in the sense of Mass is not to be found in the fourth century. The one solitary instance which for a long time seemed to countenance such a view is in a letter of St Ambrose,[858] in which he tells his sister of the attempts made by the Arians on Palm Sunday 385 to gain possession of the principal church of Milan. Ambrose was performing divine service, the homily was concluded, and he was just on the point of dismissing the catechumens, when the alarming news arrived that the Arians has seized a basilica situated outside the walls; he did not allow himself to be upset by the news, but remained where he was, dismissed the catechumens, and commenced the Mass, during which he received further information concerning the tumult. The question turns upon the words, “Ego tamen mansi in munere, missam facere cœpi. Dum offero,” etc. Hitherto _missa_ has here been always taken in the sense of Mass, but it has really the sense of dismissal. For on Palm Sunday in Milan, the so-called _traditio symboli_ to the more advanced class of catechumens was performed with much ceremony, something like a first Communion with us; on this day a twofold dismissal of the catechumens was necessary, the first of the lower class of catechumens, because they must not yet learn the creed which was now to be recited by the more advanced, and then followed the dismissal of the more advanced catechumens, the _competentes_, because these, as being still unbaptised, could not yet assist at the Mass.

Against this interpretation it has been urged[859] that _missa_ must mean Mass, because, the act of dismissal being so short, Ambrose could scarcely have said, “Missam facere cœpi,” had he meant only the dismissal of the catechumens. How long an act must continue in order that its beginning, middle, and ending may be observable depends upon circumstances, but the dismissal of the _competentes_ was sometimes far from brief. The Apostolic Constitutions, for instance, give a formula for this act, and the prayers used cover three printed pages (_Constit. Apost._, 8, 5, § 6 to 6, § 4). At the dismissal of the candidates for baptism, three prayers were recited (_ib._ 8, 7, § 2, to c. 7, § 1), one by the deacon, one by the catechumens, and one by the bishop, who then gave his blessing. Then followed an address by the bishop, of which we have two examples, in the 215th and 216th of the sermons of St Augustine. The act lasted long enough to have a beginning, middle, and ending.

From what has been said, we conclude, _missa_ appears in the fourth century as a technical name for the various parts of divine service, especially for the canonical hours. During the sixth and seventh centuries it became a technical term for the Mass, and gradually usurped the place of other names for the Mass. These, however, survived in isolated instances until the ninth century, but disappeared entirely in the Middle Ages.

VI

(p. 142)

ON THE DATE FOR CHRISTMAS IN HIPPOLYTUS

Considering the uncertainty as to the day of our Lord’s birth shown by Clement of Alexandria, and the reserve which Irenæus and Tertullian maintain on the same point, it is surprising to find the most precise data given for its determination by a writer very little posterior to those just mentioned. In the commentary of Hippolytus on Dan. iv. 23 (in Bratke’s ed., 19), we read in the text discovered in 1885; “The first Advent of our Lord in the flesh, when He was born in Bethlehem, happened on the eighth day before the calends of January, on a Wednesday, in the forty-second year of Augustus, in the year 5500, reckoning from Adam. He suffered in His thirty-third year, on the eighth day before the calends of April (25th March), on a Friday, in the eighteenth year of Tiberius, when Rufus and Rubellius were consuls.”[860]

Not merely the astonishing minuteness of the data, but also the circumstance that this passage is to be found in a shorter form in a fragment, long well known to scholars, preserved in the Chigi Library in Rome, coupled with the fact that ancient ecclesiastical writers quote from it the year of world alone,[861] must give rise to doubts concerning the longer form of the passage in itself, as well as concerning the separate data of which it is composed.

If we turn our attention first to these separate data, we find the names of the consuls wrongly given; their names are Fufius and Rubellius, not Rufus and Rubellius. Mistakes in the names of consuls are certainly not rare in Eastern writers, but in the case of a man like Hippolytus, who lived in Rome, such a mistake is very astonishing, since he could easily have found out the right names. Next, according to the authentic Hippolytus, our Lord’s life lasted only thirty-one years, and not thirty-three; this appears from the passage in the so-called _Liber Generationis_ representing in a Latin translation part of the “Chronicle” which, according to the inscription on his statue, Hippolytus had composed.[862] Again, the eighteenth year of Tiberius is also wrong. The forty-second year of Augustus and the two week-days may be correct (see _Comm. Dan._, 4, 9; in Bratke 8), for the latter appear also in the same connection in the inscription on the statue. Wednesday found acceptance as the day of Christ’s birth owing to the Messias being called in Malachy iv. 2, “the Sun of Justice,” from which it was inferred that He must have been born on the same day of the week as that on which the visible sun had been created (Gen. i. 19).

But, moreover, the days of the week have been interpolated into the text, since they do not fit in with the sequence of thought but rather disturb it. The aim of Hippolytus was here to calm the Christians agitated by the persecution of Severus; many went so far as to think that the last day was close at hand, and Hippolytus opposed himself to this alarm by declaring God had created the world in six days, with God a thousand years are as one day (Ps. lxxxix. 4), and thus the world would last six thousand years. Until the birth of Christ only five thousand five hundred years had passed, and so the end of the world was not to be expected yet. In such a train of thought, what place is there for days of the week and consulates? The late origin of the passage is also betrayed by the parallel grouping of the data given, for elaborate attempts of this kind were popular in the Middle Ages, but not in primitive times. Accordingly only the year 5500 of the world, and perhaps also the forty-second year of Augustus, belong to the original form of the passage in Hippolytus, all the rest having being added by a later hand.[863]

VII

(p. 158)

CHRISTMAS IN ENGLAND DURING THE COMMONWEALTH

Christmas was abolished in England in the seventeenth century during the reign of the Puritans, and its prohibition was strictly enforced. In 1644, after the overthrow of the monarchy, when the Puritans came into power, an Act of Parliament forbade all observance of Christmas, for it was held that Christmas was not originally a Christian festival at all, but was of heathen origin. Parliament directed that the 25th December, “which had hitherto been commonly called Christmas Day,” was to be kept as a fast. This law remained in force for sixteen years, and during this period the enactment was repeated and made still more stringent. No church dare be opened, no service of any kind held; the law expressly enacted that on Christmas Day everyone was to go on as usual with his work, and every merchant who shut his shop on this day was brought before the judge and punished. Markets were held on this day which had hitherto been held on other days, merely to make it impossible to keep the day as a festival. Plum-pudding and mince pies were branded as heathenish inventions. The soldiers were charged to break into houses in order to see that no one had food in his home such as used to be eaten at Christmas and when anything of this kind was discovered, the soldiers were to seize it and the people were punished into the bargain. There were naturally some who refused to abstain from the celebration of Christmas in obedience to these directions of the Parliament; many ministers performed service in their churches and several of them were taken before the judge and punished. In different places disturbances broke out, especially owing to the orders of Parliament that markets were to be held on Christmas Day while they were forbidden on other days of the week. In Canterbury, for instance, there was a general riot; the whole town was divided into two parties—those who observed Christmas and their opponents, and the festival of peace ended in a general row; many houses of the town were totally destroyed and some set on fire. Charles II. made it his aim to revoke as quickly as possible the laws passed during the Commonwealth, and so before long Christmas was once more observed as before. The Nonconformists, however, long held by their determination not to celebrate Christmas, and they kept a sharp look-out that at least their ministers should eat no Christmas pudding or mince pies; they called Yuletide Fooltide. In Scotland, Christmas is still regarded as something heathenish; the Presbyterians will have nothing whatever to do with its celebration, and throughout the country no special notice is of it as a religious feast. [This, of course, only refers to the Protestants of Scotland. Trans.]

VIII

(p. 173)

EXCURSUS ON THE THREE HOLY KINGS

Epiphany is a feast of our Lord and not the feast of the Three Holy Kings, although it is popularly called so, and, in the liturgy for the day, they are referred to. In a small number of dioceses, and only at a late date, they have been the object of a cultus, but in the calendars and menologies of the principal Churches they find no place; ancient ecclesiastical literature and tradition has also nothing to relate of them. Only in the twelfth century did they emerge from oblivion when the imperial chancellor, Rainald von Dassel, afterwards Archbishop of Cologne, translated their reputed relics to Cologne, 23rd July 1164, having received them as a gift from Frederick Barbarossa after the destruction of Milan. Until this time they had rested in the little Church of St Eustorgius at Milan, to which they are said to have been brought from Constantinople. The life of St Eustorgius, Bishop of Milan, 315-331, relates how this happened:—there lived in Constantinople a pious man called Eustorgius, a Greek by birth, and a favourite and adviser of the emperor. (The name of the emperor is passed over in silence by the author.) He sent Eustorgius as ambassador—the purpose of the embassy is not disclosed—to the province of Liguria, of which the capital is called Milan—which, however, is a mistake. Eustorgius won the affections of the Milanese to such a degree that they desired to have him as their bishop; after long resistance he consented, and went to the emperor in order to obtain his approval. The emperor rejoiced over the love which his ambassador had inspired, as Gratian had rejoiced over the appointment of St Ambrose, ratified the election, and forthwith remitted all taxes to the Milanese (!). Eustorgius was unwilling to return empty-handed and begged for some relics from the emperor with which to enrich his bishopric. The emperor allowed him to take whatever he liked, and he chose the relics of the Three Holy Kings, which had been sent from the East by Helena. A church was now built in Milan in which the relics were laid, where they attracted a great concourse of pilgrims and devotees.

The author regrets that he is not in a position to give us further information concerning the doings of Bishop Eustorgius, but he merely tells us that he died on the 18th October and was succeeded by Dionysius. This is incorrect for Protasius came first. The author of this document must have lived in Milan, for he gives some correct dates in the ecclesiastical history of Milan; nevertheless, gross blunders against historical truth and other indications show that we are dealing with a thoroughgoing fabrication of the eleventh century based upon events in the life of St Ambrose. The names Gaspar, Melchior, Baltassar make their first appearance here. A still more naïve account is given in a sermon belonging to the end of the twelfth century, Eustorgius being made a contemporary of the Emperor Comnenus; this is printed in Floss.

Contemporaries who had the opportunity of seeing the relics, state that the remains were embalmed and incorrupt; to judge from the face and hair, one of the bodies was that of a boy of about fifteen years; they were in an excellent state of preservation considering their age. The story of their translation to Milan is obviously a romance and the search for their bodies by Helena is formed upon the recognised model according to which Helena steps in to effect what cannot be otherwise explained. And so there is no doubt that we are face to face with a remarkably successful fabrication, such as were, unfortunately, by no means rare in the Middle Ages. In Cologne, the Three Holy Kings—all three of them—were at once set down as martyrs, although it is difficult to see how they would have suffered, granting them to have been kings. The Carmelite John of Hildesheim composed a popular _Vita Trium Regum_, composed in a simple style, which was widely read. See USENER, ii. 7-10, and the instructive treatise of H. J. Floss, “Dreikönigenbuch,” Cologne, 1864. The _Vita Eustorgii_ is only to be found in Mombritius, _Sanctuarium_, i. 166.

IX

(p. 182)

THE GREEK ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR

The Greek ecclesiastical year begins not with Advent but with Easter, or rather with the season preparatory to Easter, _i.e._ according to our phraseology, with Septuagesima Sunday.[864]

Κυριακὴ τοῦ τελώνου καὶ φαρισαίου. The Sunday of the Publican and the Pharisee; so called on account of the Gospel for the day, St Luke xviii. 9-14.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ ἀσώτου or προσφωνήσιμος. The Sunday of the Prodigal Son, the Gospel being St Luke xv. 11-32.

Κυριακὴ ἀπόκρεως,[865] corresponds with Septuagesima Sunday of the Latins, and is called Abstinence Sunday because with it Lent with its abstinence from flesh-meat commences. The week following is called Butter-Week by the Russians, because the use of _lacticinia_ is still permitted. The Gospel, St Matthew xxv. 31-46, refers to Christ’s return at the last judgment. On this account, the Sunday is also called κυριακὴ τῆς παρουσίας.

Κυριακὴ τῆς τυροφάγου. Sunday of Cheese-Eating, because from henceforth the use of _lacticinia_ is also forbidden (Sexagesima of the Latins).

Κυριακὴ πρὼτη τῶν νηστειῶν ἢτοι ὀρθοδοξίας. The first Sunday in Lent, called Orthodox Sunday in memory of the conclusion of the iconoclastic controversy (corresponding to Quinquagesima).

Κυριακὴ δευτέρα, τρίτη, τετάρτη, πέμπτη τῶν νηστειῶν. The second to the fifth Sundays in Lent, corresponding to the first to the fourth of the Latins.

Κυριακὴ τῶν βαΐων: Palm Sunday from βαΐς a palm.

Ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη πέμπτη: Maundy Thursday.

Ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη παρασκευή: Good Friday.

Τὸ ἅγιον καὶ μέγα σάββατον: Holy Saturday.

Ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη κυριακὴ τοῦ πάσχα: Easter Day; ἡ ἕβδομας διακαινήσιμος, _i.e._, the Week of Renewing, Easter Week.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ ἀντιπάσχα καινή: Whitsunday, called also νέα κυριακὴ τοῦ ἁγίου ἀποστόλου Θωμᾶ, as the Gospel relates St Thomas’s unbelief, St John xx. 19 _seqq._ At the end of mass blessed bread is distributed to the people.

Κυριακὴ τῶν ἁγίων μυροφόρων γυναικῶν καὶ Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ δικαίου: the Sunday of the Women who brought incense and Joseph the Just. See St Mark xvi. 1-7; St Luke xxiv. 1-10.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ παραλύτου: the Sunday of the palsied man. See Acts ix. 32 _seqq._

Κυριακὴ τῆς Σαμαρείτιδας or Μεσηπεντηκοστῆς: the Sunday of the Samaritan woman, from the Gospel St John iv. 1-42.

Κυριακὴ τοῦ τυφλοῦ: the Sunday of the man born blind; the Sunday before the Ascension.

Τῇ πεμπτῇ τῆς Ἀναλήψεως with the following week, ἕβδομας άναλήψιμος.

Κυριακὴ τῶν ἁγίων 318 θεοφόρων πατέρων τῶν ἐν Νικαίᾳ συνελθέντων, dedicated to the commemoration of the first general council; the Sunday after Christ’s Ascension.

Κυριακὴ τῆς ἁγίας πεντηκοστῆς, Whitsunday.

Κυριακὴ τῶν ἁγίων πάντων: our Trinity Sunday is among the Greeks kept as the festival of All Saints, and is preceded by a fast. From this onwards until the exaltation of the Holy Cross, the 14th September, the gospels for the Sundays are taken from St Matthew. Hence the sixteen following Sundays are called Matthew-Sundays.

Κυριακὴ δευτέρα to δεκάτη τετάρτη τοῦ Ματθαίου.

Κυριακὴ πρὸ τῆς ὑψώσεως: Sunday before the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (the 15th after Matthew).

Κυριακὴ μετὰ τὴν ὕψωσιν: Sunday after the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (the 16th after Matthew).

Κυριακὴ πρώτη τοῦ Λουκᾶ to κυριακὴ δωδεκάτη τοῦ Λουκᾶ, also called the Sunday of the Holy Patriarchs (τῶν προπατόρων).

Κυριακὴ πρὸ τὴς Χριστοῦ γεννήσεως: the Sunday before Christmas, also called the Sunday of all the Holy Fathers.

Ἡ τοῦ Χριστοῦ γέννησις: Christmas.

Κυριακὴ μετὰ τὴν Χριστοῦ γέννησιν: Sunday after Christmas.

Ἡ τοῦ κυρίου περιτομή: the Circumcision.

Κυριακὴ πρὸ τῶν φώτων: the Sunday of Lights. See above, page 168. The Sunday before Epiphany. Among the Latins a _dominica vacans_.

The remaining four Sundays of the Greek ecclesiastical year serve to fill up the inequality due to Easter falling earlier or later, in the same manner as in the Latin rite. One, two, or all four of them, as occasion requires, are inserted after Epiphany. They are the Sundays (1) κυριακὴ μετὰ τὰ φῶτα, the first after Epiphany, which is pressed into use when Easter falls in March; (2) the twelfth Sunday after St Luke; (3) the fifteenth after St Luke (the two Sundays in the Christmas season are reckoned as the thirteenth and fourteenth after St Luke since their gospels are taken from that evangelist); (4) the seventeenth Sunday after St Matthew. All four are required when Easter falls on the 22-25 April. In this way the gaps between the end of the old ecclesiastical year and the beginning of the new are filled up.

As far as the immovable feasts are concerned, the Greeks divide all feasts, both movable and immovable, into four classes. The first and highest class contains: Christmas, Epiphany (6th January), Candlemas (2nd February, ὑπαπάντη τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν), the Annunciation (ὁ εύαγγελισμός), Easter, Palm Sunday, the Ascension, Pentecost, the Transfiguration, the Assumption (ἡ κοίμησις, 15th August), our Lady’s Nativity (8th September), the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (14th September), and the _Presentatio B.M.V._ (21st November).

Somewhat lower in rank are the _Circumcisio_, _Nativitas S. Joannis Bapt._ (24th June), SS. Peter and Paul (29th June), and the _Decollatio S. Joannis Bapt._ (29th August). It is not necessary here to enumerate the remaining feasts.

X

(p. 248)

ENGLISH WRITERS AND THE FEAST OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

The well known Doctor of the Church, Anselm, was born of a German stock, as his name implies, at Aosta in 1036. In 1053 he entered the Benedictine order at Bec in Normandy where Lanfranc was at that time abbot. In 1078 he was himself elected abbot of the monastery, and in this capacity was brought into relation with William the Conqueror and William Rufus. During an illness of the latter, he was chosen Archbishop of Canterbury at the end of 1093 and his appointment was confirmed by the king. Serious misunderstandings soon arose between them on the questions of investiture and Church property, and Anselm was obliged to go to Rome, where he remained until the king’s death. Further misunderstandings, moreover, soon arose between him and William’s successor, Henry I., which detained him in France, until an agreement was arrived at in 1106, by which he was enabled to return to England and to his bishopric. He died there on the 21st April 1109.

His nephew, Anselm the younger, came from Lombardy, and as a youth had entered the monastery of St Michael at Chiusa, and received his theological training from the Benedictines of Canterbury.[866] After his uncle’s death, he was for a short time abbot of St Saba in Rome. In 1115 he was chosen by the pope to bring the pallium to the newly elected Archbishop of Canterbury, Radulf. As legate, he strongly maintained the rights of the pope in the election of bishops, and consequently fell under King Henry’s displeasure, and had to retire to France until a reconciliation had been effected between the King and Pope Calixtus II. He was then elected abbot of Bury St Edmond’s and confirmed as such in 1121. Here he remained until his death on the 11th January 1148. The attempt of a section of the chapter of St Paul’s in 1136 to make him bishop led to no result, but rather caused him much annoyance.

The Anglo-saxon, Eadmer or Edmer, was a disciple and faithful attendant of the older Anselm. Born in Kent, he entered the monastery at Canterbury and accompanied Anselm in his banishment to Rome. After Anselm’s death, he lived in retirement from which he emerged for a short time in 1120 to be Bishop of St Andrews in Scotland. But after a year he resigned and returned to his monastery, where he died after 1124. He wrote a history of England, a number of lives of English saints, and some theological treatises, two of which were in praise of the Mother of God (_De Excellentia Virg. Mariæ_ and _De Quatuor Virtutibus Mariæ_). It has been recently conclusively proved that he is also the author of a treatise on our Lady’s conception (_De Conceptione S. Mariæ_), hitherto generally attributed to one or other of the two Anselms.[867] In his work on the Excellences of our Lady, in which her share in the work and sufferings of Christ is brought into prominence, Eadmer adopts a neutral position with regard to the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and admits the possibility that she was purified from original sin only at the Annunciation. In the last-named composition, however, which advocates the introduction of the festival, he endeavours to establish the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and defends it warmly, and not unskilfully, against many objections, having, as he says, upon more mature consideration of the matter, recognised its correctness. The circumstance that this is the first treatise which aims especially and avowedly at defending this opinion, endows it with a special interest.

XI

(pp. 243, 347)

EXCURSUS ON THE SO-CALLED TYPICA

The term _Typicum_ is used first of all by Greek liturgists and rubricists to denote those short parts of the liturgy which are composed of verses from the psalms in connection both with the Canonical Hours and with the Mass, there is nothing exactly corresponding in the Western rite. (Leo Allatius, _De Libris Eccl. Græc._, 14, 15. Daniel, _Thes. Lit._, iv. 313, 319). _Typicum_ is also used as a technical term, in the Eastern Church especially during the Byzantine period, in the sense of statute, regulation, etc. It was applied chiefly to two kinds of documents. First, it designated the catalogues of the possessions of ecclesiastical establishments and corporations, especially in so far as they were based upon testamentary donations, along with the duties entailed by them upon the clergy. _Typica_ of this kind were called (κτητορικά), and correspond to the chartularies and “traditiones” of Western monasteries and bishoprics. Secondly, _typicum_ was a term of a liturgical character, and as such must be considered here. _Typica_, in this sense, were the lists of the feasts recurring in the course of the year, of liturgical observances, fasts, etc., such as were to be observed in one of the larger churches or monasteries, along with detailed descriptions of each; they correspond to the _consuetudines_ of Western monasteries and cathedrals.

_Typica_ of this last kind exist in large numbers, although only a few of them have been published, and these not in editions useful for critical purposes. The best known and most important are: (1) the _Typicum S. Sabæ_; (2) that belonging to the monastery of the Studium at Constantinople; and (3) that formerly belonging to the famous Monastery of St Auxentius in Bithynia, now Ka-ish-dagh, dating from the time of Michael Paleologus († 1268).

The _typicum_ of St Sabas is sometimes valuable as a source of liturgical information, and for its references to the festivals of the Church, but it is only to be used with the greatest caution. It derives its name not so much from St Sabas himself as from the monastery called after him near Jerusalem. Leo Allatius gives the following account of its origin from a dialogue of Simeon of Thessalonica; St Sabas drew up an order for the canonical hours and divine service to be observed in his monastery; this “_diatyposis_” was destroyed owing to the ravages of the Saracens, but was re-established by the patriarch Sophronius from memory, and retouched by St John Damascene; later on it was altered yet again to meet the requirements of the time. In the sixteenth century it was printed for practical purposes, as, for example, in Venice in 1545. In this form the _typicum_ contains the order for divine service throughout the year for monasteries following the rule of St Sabas, rubricks for the canonical hours, the fasts and festivals, with information as to the liturgy to be used, the gospels and epistles, the menology, instructions on the canonical hours, etc., also rules of life and statutes for the monks and selected passages from the Greek Fathers. It received its present form apparently from John _Grammaticus_ in Constantinople in the twelfth century, and cannot, of course, be regarded as a work of St Sabas. This cannot be appealed to for evidence concerning ecclesiastical customs in use before the twelfth century.

In the Eastern Church _typica_ are issued from time to time, somewhat corresponding to our directories.

With regard to the literature on this point, it is well to mention: Theodoras Toscanus, _Ad Typica Græcorum Animadversiones_, Romæ, 1864. Pitra in _Spicil. Solem._, iv. 466 _seqq._ Ehrhard, _Röm. Quartalschr._, 1893. Krumbacher, _Byzant. Zeitschr._, ii. 348; iii. 167 _seqq._ Waldemar Nissen, _Die Diataxis des Michael von Attalia von 1077_, Jena, 1894. Meyer in the _Theol. Literaturztg._ of Shürer and Harnack, 1894, 588 _seq._, and 1896, No. 10. Gedeon, Μιχαὴλ τοῦ Παλαιολὸγου τυπικόν, etc., Constantinople, 1895.

FOOTNOTES

[1] The Greek word ἑορτή had become associated with the ideas of paganism and mere enjoyment. Christians called the week-days following on a Sunday _feria secunda_, etc. This use was already established in Tertullian’s time.

[2] J. BARTH, _Babel und das israel. Religionswesen_, Berlin, 1902. See SCHMID, _Die Kirche und die Sonntagsruhe_: Innsbr. Zeitschr. f. Kath. Theol., 1901, 436 _et seq._ LINZER, Theol. Quartalschrift, 1900, 12.

[3] Num. xxviii. 9, 10; Ezec. xlvi. 3, 4.

[4] See the article “Sonnabendfeier,” by KRÜLL, in Kraus’ _Realenzyklopädie_.

[5] Heb. iv. 9; Acts xiii. 27; xviii. 4.

[6] Apoc. i. 10; 1 Cor. xvi. 2.

[7] EUSEB., _De Mart. Pal._ 1; see BAILLET, IX. x.-xiv.

[8] Acts xx. 7 _seq._; 1 Cor. xvi. 2.

[9] _E.g._, “Et facta oblatione fit missa” (c. 38, p. 68).

[10] EUSEB., _De Pasch._, c. 7; see c. 12a. E. MONTFAUCON, _Introduction to Eusebius’ Commentary on the Psalms_, Paris, 1707. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xxiii. 51.

[11] TERT., _De Orat._, 14. SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, 6, 8. DUCHESNE, 218-22.

[12] OVID, _Fasti_, i. 79. LEO M., _Sermo_, 41, 1. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, liv. 272; BINTERIM, v. 134.

[13] BARNABAS, _Epist._, 15. IGNATIUS, _Ad Magn._, 9. JUSTIN, _Apol._, i. 67.

[14] _Peregr. Silviæ_, 102, 71 cod.; ed. Geyer, c. 44, 2.

[15] EUSEB., _Vita Const._, 4, 19, 20.

[16] _Hist. Eccl._, i. 18, towards the end: ἐνομοτέθησε, τῶν δικαστηρίων καὶ τὼν ἂλλων πραγμάτων σχολὴν ἂγειν.

[17] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, _de feriis_ 1. Law of 321.

[18] _Op. cit._, 2, 8, 18; 8, 8, 3; 11, 7, 13. In these laws Sunday is still called “dies solis,” but with the addition, “quem dominicum rite dixere majores.”

[19] _Op. cit._ 15, 5, 5, _de spectaculis_.

[20] _Chron._, _Pasch._, ad a 467.

[21] For instances, see BAILLET, ix. art. 1, c. 5 _et seq._

[22] _Vita Const._, 4, 18.

[23] _Constit. Apost._, 2, 59; 5, 20; 7, 23 and 30; 8, 33. TERT., _De Orat._, 20.

[24] _Laod. can._, 29: εἴγε δύναιντο σχλάζειν. This Council was held between 343 and 381. For further particulars, see BINTERIM, v. 134-52.

[25] EUSEB., _Vita Const._, 4, 19.

[26] _Op. cit._ 4, 23.

[27] _Const. Apost._, 2, 59; 8, 33.

[28] _Op. cit._ 7, 37.

[29] THOMASSIN, i. 2, c. 2, 176 _seqq._

[30] Council of Rouen (650), Can. 15. _Decr. Grat._, Can. 1, dist. 3, de consecr.; Can. 10, _de feriis_, 3, 9. For the variations in the observance of the Sabbath, see ALT., 10 _seqq._

[31] Lev. xxiii. 24.; 3 Kings viii. 65.; 2 Chr. xxix. 17.; xxx. 22.

[32] IDELER, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i., Berlin, 1825, 515.

[33] BÄUMER, 325 _et seq._

[34] _Micrologus_, 43. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cli. 1010. There are, however, still exceptions to this rule, _e.g._, St Cornelius, St Silverius, etc. Moreover, the above regulation only took effect in the city of Rome.

[35] BÄUMER, 314, 354.

[36] _Op. cit._ 325.

[37] _Op. cit._ 499.

[38] Appendix i.

[39] _De Bapt._, 19.

[40] _C. Cels._, 8, 22.

[41] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 1, 19.

[42] _Cod. Justin._, 3, 12, No. 6.

[43] _Op. cit._ 3, 12, No. 7, compared with _Cod. Theod._ 2, 8, 19.

[44] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 20.

[45] _Op. cit._ 15, 5, 2.

[46] _Op. cit._ 2, 8, Nos. 20, 21, 25.

[47] _Op. cit._ 15, 5, No. 5, compared with 2, 8, 24.

[48] _Op. cit._ 2, 8, 23.

[49] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 13-20; compare 8, 13. CHRYS., _Hom. 4 Pentec._ PROCLUS, _Or._ 3, 1. PHILASTRIUS (_De Hær._, 141) enumerates eight festivals, because he adds the Wednesday in Holy Week.

[50] GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. Franc._, 10, 5. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxi. 566.

[51] The 27th or 28th March was frequently regarded in the Gallic Church as the actual date of the resurrection of Christ, and the 25th March as the date of His death.

[52] SONNATIUS, _Statuta_, c. 20. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxx. 446.

[53] HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, i. 73. HARD., iii. 1944. MANSI, xii. 383.

[54] _Conc. Aquisgr._, Can. 19. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvii. 326. BINTERIM, _Conc._ ii. 331.

[55] BINTERIM, _op. cit._ 466. HARD., iv. 1241. MANSI, xiv. 393.

[56] _Capit. Hettonis._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 763. BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 302.

[57] HARTZHEIM, _Conc._, l. 44. See also ii. 612, 692.

[58] _Op. cit._ iii. 221, Can. 6. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxviii. 832.

[59] BURCHARD, _Decreta_, 2, 77. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxl. 640. IVON., _Decret._, 4, 14. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxli. 260.

[60] See Appendix ii. (a).

[61] Can. 1, dist. 3, _de Consecr._, taken from a Council of Lyons.

[62] Can. 5, x., _de Feriis_ 2, 9. The feasts of Our Lady are the same as in _Decretum Grat._

[63] See Appendix ii. (b).

[64] In the diocese of Lyons, for example, in 1577 there were no fewer than ninety-nine days of this kind, including Sundays, Easter and Pentecost being observed each for three days. See MIGNE’S _Handbook_, 347.

[65] BINTERIM, _Conc._, vi. 118 and 524; _Denkw._, v. 1, 303, etc. BINTERIM and MOOREN, _Die Erzdiözese Köln im Mittelalter_, i., Köhn, 1892, 526. HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, v. 106; vi. 498. Further information is contained in the collections of Church Councils. See the Council of Szabolcs in Hungary, 1092 (i. cap. 37 and 38; MANSI, xx. 757); Oxford, 1222, can. 8; Toulouse, 1229, cap. 26; Worcester, 1240; the statutes of Le Mans (MANSI, xxiii. 764); the Councils of Liège, 1287; Würtzburg, 1298; Utrecht, 1347; Prague, 1355 (HARTZHEIM, iii. and iv.), and BAMBERG, 1491 (tit. 36; HARTZHEIM, v. 619), which, with fifty-four holy days of obligation besides Sundays, represents the _non plus ultra_ in this direction.

[66] See Appendix ii. (c).

[67] Printed by SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii., Amstel. 1679, c. 15, 204.

[68] Dist. 3, _de Conscr._, Can. 1 Conquestus, _de Feriis_. See also Matisconense, Can. 10.

[69] THOMASSIN, i. 131 _seqq._

[70] FERRARIS, _Prompta Bibl._, iii., art. Festa, §§ 2 and 3.

[71] _De Novis Festivitatibus non Instituendis._

[72] HOSPINIANUS, 18. THOMASSIN, i. c. 11; _De la diminuation du nombre des fêtes_.

[73] J. FESSLER, Concerning the suppressed Holy Days, in the _Archiv für Kirchenrecht_, v. (1860) 194. SCHÜCH-GRIMMICH, _Handbuch der Pastoraltheol._, 10th ed., 338 _seqq._

[74] _Bull. Rom. Contin._, ix., Romæ, 1846, 120.

[75] These briefs of Clement XIV., Pius XI., and Leo XII., are printed in DUMONT, _Sammlung kirchl. Erlasse für d. Erzd. Köln_, 2nd ed., 199 _seqq._

[76] See Appendix iii.

[77] Alt., 454.

[78] This Calendar contains twenty-six days in addition to the chief feasts. See the table in the Book of Common Prayer.

[79] _Sermo_ 47, in Exod. In omnibus solemnitatibus Christianis non ignoramus paschale sacramentum esse præcipium.

[80] _Sermo_ 48, c. 1.

[81] BEDA, _De rat. Temp._, 1, 5.

[82] Exod. xii. 11; Num. xxviii. 16.

[83] EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 4, 33.

[84] _De Orat._, c. 18.

[85] By Pascha, TERTULLIAN probably understands Holy Week and Easter Week together, as a time during which each day had its liturgical celebration, “collecta,” which was not the case generally. Similarly, Quinquagesima means the period from Easter to Whitsunday.

[86] _Adv. Mar._, 4, 12; _De Jeiun._, 14. _Cf._ _De Bapt._, 19; _De Cor._, 3.

[87] _De Jeiun._, 14.

[88] _Adv. Marc._, 5, 7.

[89] _Philos._, 8, 18.

[90] _Can. Arab._, 22.

[91] MAI, _Nova Coll. Vet. Script._, iv. 208; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._ xxiv. 694.

[92] _Vita Const._, 3, 17, _seqq._

[93] Exod. xii. 42.

[94] Exod. xii. 6-8.

[95] Lev. xxiii. 7, 8.

[96] _Ibid._ ver. 10 _et seqq._

[97] Isa. liii. 7 _et seq._

[98] Exod. xii. 46; St John xix. 36.

[99] 1 Cor. v. 7, 8.

[100] Col. ii. 16.

[101] JUSTIN, _Dial._, c. 40, 111. TERT., _Adv. Marc._, 4, 40; 5, 7.

[102] The Greeks of the province of Asia, for example, voluntarily adopted the Julian Calendar under Augustus, according to an inscription discovered at Priene. _Révue Archéol_, 1900, 357. Mitteil. des kaiserl. archäol. Instits at Athens, 1899.

[103] IDELER, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i. 433.

[104] _Op. cit._ 142.

[105] IDELER, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i. 113, 117, 119.

[106] So IDELER, who is certainly an authority, _Handbuch der Chronol._, i. 570 _et seq._

[107] JOSEPHUS, _Ant._, i. 1, 3: ἐν χρίῳ τοῦ ἡλίου χαθεοτῶτος. IDELER, _op. cit._ 401, 514, 570.

[108] Nilles (p. 286) expressly declares himself opposed to the feast of Easter being fixed on a stated Sunday in April. According to information given in the _Kölnischen Volkszeitung_ for the 22nd May 1894, the Barnabite Cæsar Tondini is said to be at work upon a reform of the Calendar, the chief features of which are the giving a fixed date for Easter and the transferring of the extra day in leap year to the end of the year. He is of opinion that this reform will be acceptable to the Russians also.

[109] St Luke xix. 29 _seqq._; St John xii. 1 _seqq._

[110] Among the Fathers, St Ambrose, more especially, deals with the question of the day of the week and day of the month on which the Last Supper took place. _Cf._ _Epist._ 23, written in 386. He says the Last Supper was held on the 14th Nisan which was a Thursday, on the 15th, Christ was crucified, and, on the 17th, He rose again. The day of His death must be kept in sorrow and fasting. Therefore the two events cannot be commemorated on the same day, and Christ’s death cannot be commemorated on a Sunday. If the 15th Nisan falls on a Sunday, Easter must be postponed to the following week. When Johannes Philoponus, in the treatise _De Paschate_ (ed. C. Walter, Leipzig, 1899) makes our Lord keep the Last Supper on the 13th Nisan and celebrate not the old, but a new mystical passover, and then says: Τῇ πρώτῃ τῶν ἀζύμων (St Mark xxvi. 17) means τῇ πρώτῃ πρὸ τῶν ἀζύμων.

HARNACK and SHÜRER, _Theol. Literaturztg._, 1900, No. 4.

[111] _Etymol._, 6, 17, 10; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxii. 247.

[112] EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 4, 21; 5, 27.

[113] Twenty-first Festal Letter, for the year 349, in Larsow 33.

[114] _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 27.

[115] _Adv. Hær._, 70, c. 12: Μία γὰρ ἡμέρα παρ’ ἐκείνοις ζητεῖται, παρ’ ἡμῖν δὲ οὐ μία ἀλλὰ ἕξ, ἐβδομὰς πληρεστάτη, etc.

[116] _loc. cit._ c. 11.

[117] _Ep. ad Januarium._, 55, c. 1-3.

[118] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 47-51.

[119] _De Ord. Fer._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xc. 607.

[120] For a full account of the ceremonies, etc., belonging to this part of the Church’s year, see _Lent and Holy Week_, by H. THURSTON, S.J., London, 1904. [Trans.]

[121] _Matiscon_, 2, 3.

[122] _Cf._ _Ordo I._, 7. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 954, 994 _et seqq._

[123] HEFELE, _Konciliengesch._, 2nd ed., Freiburg, 1877, iii., 36, 42, 577, 596.

[124] _Peregrinatio Silviæ_, c. 30, ed. Geyer, 67 cod., and CHRYSOST., _Hom. 30 in Gen._, 10 t. 4. fol. 29. BINTERIM (_Denkw._ v. 179) prefers to derive “Karwoche” from “carena,” which in the Romance languages has taken various forms (carême carenzia) and also in the old German is found as Karina, in reference to the strict fast then observed.

[125] Nor in the Antiphonarium Greg., to which BINTERIM (_Denkw._ v. 174) refers.

[126] _Peregr. Silviæ_, c. 30, 31, ed. Geyer, 64 cod. Since the pilgrim, in describing the size and strength of the Euphrates (c. 18, p. 61, 11), recalls the Rhone, it seems certain she belongs to Southern France. I use the expression, “Gallic pilgrim,” as her name may have been either Silvia or Egeria. She travelled in the East between 378 and 394.

[127] Hora decima. _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 35.

[128] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 36-38, p. 67-69 cod.

[129] The name was usual in Spain. MABILLON, _De Lit. Gal._, 32. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 186, quotes for it ISIDOR., _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 28.

[130] According to MIGNE (_Handbuch_, 671) in several dioceses of France it is not even yet the custom.

[131] I have arrived at the conclusion that in the missal in the cathedral library at Cologne (cod. 88), the _benedictio palmarum_ has been added by another hand. In the Essen cod. D.I., it appears in the first part (fol. 45), but in neither of the other parts.

[132] _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 28. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxiii. 763. ISIDORE makes no mention of carrying palm branches in the church, as DUCHESNE (p. 237) implies, but he does speak in this passage of the _traditio symboli_ and of the _capitilavium_ which in Spain were both performed on Palm Sunday.

[133] _De Off. Eccl._, 4, 10. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 1008.

[134] ISIDOR., _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 27.

[135] MABILLON, _Lit. Gall._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 265. _Cf._ Synod of Agde (506), can. 13.

[136] AMBROSIUS, _Epist._, 20, c. 4.

[137] _Sacr. Geb._, 1, 35, 36. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1088.

[138] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 58, c. 11. “Ideo die sabbati”: _Sermo_, 212, c. 1, 2.

[139] Avitus († 518), in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lix. 302, 309, 321-326. Eligius († between 640 and 659), _Hom._, 10. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxvii. 628.

[140] _Kirchenlexikon_, v., 2nd ed., 1309, art. Gründonnerstag by PUNKES.

[141] MARTÈNE, iii., 237, 346, 352. Incipiat cantor cum cappa _viridi_ missam, presbytero, diacono et subdiacono indutis ornamentis _viridibus_, etc. Also WICKHAM LEGG, whose pamphlet on the _History of the Liturgical Colours_ (London, 1882) is only concerned with the last three centuries, shows (p. 21) that green was used in many places, in Mainz among others.

[142] _Cf._ App. iv.

[143] _e.g._ by GREG. of Tours, _Hist. Franc._, 8, 43; festa Dominicæ Cœnæ.

[144] MARTÈNE, _De Ant. Eccl._, iv. 22; ed. Antw. 1727, iii. p. 227 _seqq._, where the prayers over the penitents are given in full.

[145] An offerendum sit mane et rurus post cœnam ... an jeiunandum et post cœnam tantummodo offerendum, an etiam jeiunandum et post oblationem sicut facere solemus cœnandum. AUGUSTIN., _Epist._, 54 _ad Januarium_, c. 4; 11, 302.

[146] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1102.

[147] MURATORI, ii. 55 and _Ordo I._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 951.

[148] _Pseudo-Alcuin._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ci. 1205 _et seq._

[149] Oleum in altari sanctificatum. CYPRIAN, _Epist._, 70, c. 2.

[150] So called from St John xiii. 34: mandatum novum do vobis. The washing of the feet preceded vespers. Each monk had to wash the feet of the poor, and, lastly, the abbot and prior washed the feet of the brethren. _Consuet. Farf._, 49. [Hence the English name for the day. Trans.]

[151] _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 29. _Lit. Mozar._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 406.

[152] ST AUGUSTIN., _Conf._, 8, 5; de loco eminentiori.

[153] _Epist._, 23, c. 12. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 1030.

[154] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 18; ἡμέρα, γάρ εἰσι πένθους ἀλλ’ οὐχ ἑορτῆς.

[155] This is also the custom in the Russian Church. “The priests wear black vestments during the whole service on Good Friday, as a sign of grief for the death of the Redeemer.” (MALTZEW, lxxxiv.) By the law of 2nd Sept. 1899, in Prussia, Good Friday was made a general public holiday.

[156] His dissertation is incorporated in the treatise, _De Divinis Officiis_ of the pseudo-Alcuin (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ci., 1211 _et seqq._). He is also the author of the short treatise _De Computo_ (MIGNE, cxxxvii. 18 _seqq._). Trithemius wrongly locates him in the eleventh century.

[157] _Epist. ad Decentium Eng._, 25, c. 2: Constat apostolos biduo isto in mœrore fuisse et propter metum Judæorum occuluisse. Quod utique non dubium est, in tantum eos jeiunasse biduo memorato, ut traditio ecclesiæ habeat, isto biduo sacramenta penitus non celebrari. Sacramenta here means masses, as well as Sacramentarium Missale. It appears that the two last days of each week in Lent were without a celebration of the liturgy, for the Pope continues: Quæ utique forma per singulas tenenda est hebdomadas, etc.

[158] MALTZEW, lxxxvi. _et seqq._

[159] _Missale Gothico-Gallic._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 267.

[160] AMALARIUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 1, 15; Et inde communicet populus. De qua observatione interrogavi Romanum archidiaconum et ille respondit: In statione ubi apostolicus salutat crucem, nemo ibi communicat. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 1032. _Ordo Rom. I._ (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 954) has the general communion (et communicant omnes cum silentio). RABANUS MAURUS (_De Cleric. Instit._, 2, 37) mentions the other ceremonies (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cvii. 349).

[161] Adnuntial diaconus ut supra. _Sac. Gelas._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1105.

[162] _Liber Sacramentorum_, ed. Menard. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 79, 86 _et seq._

[163] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 57.

[164] _Vide_ Appendix iv.

[165] Among the Greeks it is continued during Lent. MALTZEW, lxxxvi.

[166] It first appears in _Ordo Rom._, xiv. _n._ 94 (13th cent.). MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 1218. BINTERIM, _Denkw._ v. 221.

[167] This view is maintained by THOMASSIN, 330 _seq._ Against this BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 214) rightly defends the opinion that the blessing of the new fire was unknown in Rome in the eighth century. This appears from the answer of Pope Zacharias to the inquiry of St Boniface on the point. It was only introduced at Rome by Leo IV. The ecclesiastical rite seems to have been moulded on the “Osterfeuer” in use among the Germans. The most ancient Roman sacramentaries know nothing of it.

[168] In the life of Zosimus († 418) it only says: “Per parrocia concessa licentia cereum benedici.” It is doubtful if these obscure words refer to the Paschal candle. _Cf._ DUCHESNE, _Lib. Pont._, i. 225.

[169] “Hoc autem die inclinante ad vesperam statuta celebratio noctis Dominicæ in ecclesia incipitur,” etc. (RABANUS MAURUS, _De Cleric. Instit._, 2, 38; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cvii. 350). “Post nonam (3 p.m.) vestiantur omnes qui ad sacram aliquid habuerint legendi,” etc. (_Consuet. Farf._, ed. Albers, 55). The _Constit. Lanfranci_ give the same hour (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._ cl. 466). According to _Ordo Rom._, x. App., No. 16, the ceremonies began at hora sexta (noon). The Greeks and Russians have their Mass after their evening service or Vespers. MALTZEW, xciii.; HEFELE, _Beiträge_, ii. 291.

[170] _Cf._ AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 228 in die paschæ V._: “Post laborem noctis præteritæ ... diu vos tenere sermone non debeo.” In Africa the baptism took place in the night between Saturday and Sunday, _Sermo 214_, c. 1.

[171] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 61-66.

[172] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 364-71.

[173] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 268-77.

[174] MIGNE, lviii. 90. _Ordo Rom. I._ (_ib._ 951 _et seqq._) gives the later ritual directions for the three last days of Holy Week.

[175] BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 247) thinks it was not observed when the anniversary of the previous Easter fell on Lent.

[176] So DURANDUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 6, 88. In the _Consuet. Farf._ (ed. Albers), 58, a solemn procession of the monks in the monastery and in the church is also mentioned.

[177] _Ordo Rom._, xiv. c. 95; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 1219. Some of the customs approached the dramatic, _e.g._, MARTÈNE, iii. 483, 506 _et seq._

[178] THALHOFER, _Liturgik_, ii. 2, 551. For ancient and popular customs, see MIGNE, _Handbuch_, 662 _et seqq._

[179] _Peregr. Silviæ._, ed. Geyer, c. 39 and 40. In many dioceses of France processions were made throughout the entire week (MARTÈNE, iii. 510).

[180] _De Cleric. Instit._, 2, 39; KNÖPFLER, 138.

[181] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 67-75. The designation of the several days of Easter week differs only in form from that now in use. The ferias are called “feriæ in albis,” the Sunday after Easter, “Dominica post albas, scil. depositas.”

[182] This consisted in pouring out at the altar water drawn from the pool of Siloe (WINER, _Bibl. Realw._, ii. 8).

[183] Athanasius, translated by LARSOW, 94, and for the whole subject, Nilles: Innsbr. _Zeitschr. für kath. Theol._, 1895, 169 _seqq._

[184] The history of fasting, abstinence, and kindred subjects is excellently given by BAILLET (ix. 37-130), according to the information at his disposal. Of more recent works, FUNK, _Die Entwicklung des Osterfastens in seinen kirchengeschichtlichen Abhandlungen_, Paderborn, 1897, 241-70.

[185] _Didaché_, c. 8; HERMAS, _Simil._, 5, 1; TERT., _De Jej._, c. 2, 10, 14.

[186] “Jejuno bis in sabbato” (St Luke xviii. 12); DUCHESNE, _Orig._, 218; FUNK, _Anm. zur Didaché_, 8, 1.

[187] _Strom._, 7, 74, ed. Sylburg.

[188] TERTULLIAN, _op. cit._ 2, 13, 14.

[189] EUS., _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 24, 11-18.

[190] Οἱ δὲ τεσσαράκοντα ὥρας ἡμερινάς τε καὶ νυκτερινὰς συμμετροῦσι τὴν ἡμέραν αὐτῶν (EUSEB., _op. cit._). FUNK, _op. cit._ 242 _et seq._, defends the above interpretation of the passage against Probst.

[191] Origen cannot be quoted for the fast of forty days, for the evidence attributed to him is really that of his translator, Rufinus. _Cf._ FUNK, _op. cit._

[192] Ἀπονηστίζεσθαι δεῖ οὗ ἂν ἐμπέσῃ κυριακή. This passage is not quoted in the treatise of Funk already referred to. His conclusions must accordingly be modified.

[193] LARSOW, _Festbriefe deshl. Athanasius_, 62.

[194] _Op. cit._ 69.

[195] _Op. cit._ 127.

[196] LARSOW, _Festbriefe deshl. Athanasius_, 149.

[197] _De Paschate_, c. 4.

[198] _Peregr. Silviæ._, ed. Geyer, c. 27, 28 (60-62 cod.).

[199] _De Elia._, c. 10.

[200] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 13.

[201] _Op. cit._ 5, 18, 19.

[202] _Op. cit._ 5, 15, § 1.

[203] LEO M., _Sermo_ 40, 5.

[204] _Sermo_ 48, 1.

[205] _Sermo_ 44, 2; 47, 1.

[206] _Aurel. I._, A.D. 511, can. 24; _Aurel. IV._, A.D. 541, can. 2.

[207] AUGUSTIN., _Epist. ad Januarium_, c. 4; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ii. 202.

[208] _Trull._, 55.

[209] _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 22. SOZOMEN (7, 19) and CASSIODORUS (_Hist. Misc._, 9, 38) have merely copied Socrates.

[210] TERT., _De Jej._, 2, 10, 13, 14, etc.

[211] _Didaché_, c. 8; CLEMENS ALEX., _Strom._, 7, 12; ORIGEN, _C. Celso._, 8, 21.

[212] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 15, 20; 7, 23; _Can. Apost._, 69 (68).

[213] _Can. Arab._, 20.

[214] _Alt._, 123.

[215] AUGUSTIN., _Epist._, 36, _n._ 8; INNOC. I., _Epist._, 25, 7; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xx. 555; PRUDENT., _Perist._, 6, 52.

[216] RAHMANI, _Test. I. Chr._, 1, 22, 33; 36, 71.

[217] GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. Franc._, 10, 51; AMALARIUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 4, 37; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cv. 1250.

[218] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, ii. 589.

[219] _De Jej._, c. 1, 2, 5, 9, 12, 17.

[220] HIERONYMUS, _Epist. 27 ad Marcellam_.

[221] _Can. Arab._, 22.

[222] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 18.

[223] _Peregr. Silviæ_, c. 28, 4.

[224] _Hom. de Statius_, 3, 4.

[225] _Decr. ad Bulg. Epist._ 97, c. 4; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvii. 980. BINTERIM, _Denkw._ v. 2, 160 _seqq._ Dist. 3, de consecr. de esu carnium. Dist. 5, c. Quia dies.

[226] FERRARI, _Prompta Bibl._, art. Abstinentia, 1, 42.

[227] Since the fasts were very strictly observed in the Middle Ages, it was a custom to have an especially good meal in the day or evening before they began. Hence the German expression “Fastnacht.” Unfortunately the Fastnacht is not limited nowadays to one night, but lasts for three days, and even, where possible, right into Ash-Wednesday.

[228] The rubric, according to which Vespers, from the First Sunday in Lent onwards, are to be said _ante comestionem_, also belongs to the more primitive arrangement.

[229] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1065.

[230] _Hom. I._ 16 _in Evang._, c. 5; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxvi. 1137.

[231] _Sacram. Gelas._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1076 _et seqq._

[232] See, however, fer. iv. after _Lætare_: “Effundam super vos aquam mundam,” and the Saturday before Passion Sunday: “Sitientes venite ad aquas.”

[233] LANFRANC, _Decreta_, sectio 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 453; RUPERT TUIT., _De Div. Off._, 4, 9; HONORIUS AUG., _Gemma_, 3, 46; DURANDUS, _Rationale_, 1, 3 (this last speaks of two such curtains—cortinæ). HEUSER, _Art. Fastentuch_, in _Kirchenlex_., iv., 2nd ed., 1255; SCHRIVER, _Der Dom zu Osnabrück_, etc., 1901; MALTZEW, _Triodion_, vi.

[234] For the Transfiguration, see BAILLET, v. 104; BÄUMER, _Gesch. des Breviers_, 299, 355; MARZOHL U. SCHNELLER, iv. 653 _seqq._

[235] Πανέορτος ἡμέρα: EUSEB., _De Sol. Pasch._, c. 5; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xxiv. 699; SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, 7, 26: πάνδημος ἑορτή. On can. 43 of Elvira, _cf._ p. 110.

[236] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 18.

[237] _Epist. ad Januarium_, 54, c. 1; _Sermo_ 261-65.

[238] CYRILL. HIEROS., _Catech._, 14, c. 23.

[239] _Peregr. Silviæ_, 70 cod., ed. Geyer, c. 42.

[240] ADAMNAN., _De Locis Sanctis._, 1, 22; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxviii. 803.

[241] CHRYSOST., _Sermo in Ascens._, ed. MONTFAUCON, ii. 2, 420.

[242] St Luke xxiv. 60, where εἰς βηθανίαν means, in the direction of Bethania. Acts i. 12; Heb. vi. 14; ix. 24; Eph. iv. 9; Col. iii. 1.

[243] _Cf._ the commentary of Schanz, _in loc._

[244] When CHRYSOSTOM (_Hom. in Acta Apost._, 3, 1) places our Lord’s Ascension on Saturday, it may be that he reckoned the interval after the Resurrection as consisting of forty full days. One is not justified in concluding, as some do, that in Antioch the Ascension was kept on Saturday.

[245] TERT., _De Orat._, c. 23; _De Cor._, 3.

[246] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, b. 41 (69 cod.).

[247] The aim of the forty-third canon of Elvira seems to be the abolition of this custom. A later addition to the canon adds: “post pascha quinquagesima teneatur, non quadragesima.” The date of this addition is unknown. HEFELE-KNÖPFTER, _Konziliengesch._ ii., 2nd ed., 174. Dr HERBST (_ibid._) thought the reference was to the Montanists, but even if there were any Montanists in Spain at that period, their heresy could scarcely be called “Nova.”

[248] _Cf._ MURATORI, ii. 750-58, and 873.

[249] Exod. xxxiv. 22; Deut. xvi. 10.

[250] 2 Mac. xii. 32; Acts ii. 1; Joseph., _Antt._, 3, 10, 6.

[251] LEO M., _Sermo 75 in Pentec._; AUGUSTIN., _Epist. 56_, c. 16 _Ad Disqu. Januarii_, 2, 218.

[252] TERT., _De Cor._, 3, and _De Bapt._, 19, where probably “latissimum spatium,” and not “lætissimum,” is the correct reading.

[253] TERT., _De Bapt._, 19; _De Idol._, 14; CASSIAN., _Coll._, 21, 11, 19; _Bened. Regula_, 15.

[254] TERT., _De Jej._, 14.

[255] TERT., _De Bapt._, 19: “pentecoste qui est proprie dies festus.”

[256] _Can. Arab._, 22.

[257] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 43 [70] cod.; _cf._ 44, 2.

[258] MARTÈNE, _De Ant. Eccl. Rit._, iv. 28, 441-543.

[259] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 272 ad infantes_.

[260] MARTÈNE, iv. 28, 441-543.

[261] According to the _Consuet. Farf._ (ed. Albers, 73), a Mass for the dead was to be celebrated in the forenoon; at mid-day the brethren were to rest, and then about 2 P.M. begin the lesser hours, which were followed by the High Mass. Afterwards came a meal.

[262] _Constit. Apost._, 5, 20, 7: Τὴν πεντεκοστὴν ἐορτάσατε μίαν ἑβδομάδα.

[263] _De Off. Missæ_, c. 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlii. 1062.

[264] _Conc. Mogunt._, A.D. 818, can. 36.

[265] MURATORI, ii. 95: Die dominica vacat; ii. 164: Dominica prima post pentecosten; ii. 321: Dominica octavæ pentecosten (sic). For the _Gelasian Sac._, _cf._ i. 606.

[266] C. 59 and 60; MIGNE, cli, 1019.

[267] Vid. the _Præfatio_ of Froben to Alcuin 11 in MIGNE, cl. 440. Similar votive Masses for each day—Sunday, in honour of the Trinity, and on the week-days in honour of the angels, of the wisdom and of the love of the Holy Ghost, of the Holy Cross, and of our Blessed Lady—are found in the _Liturgia Fontavellanensis_ (MIGNE, cli. 938).

[268] BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 270) rejects the view that Alcuin had anything to do with the matter, and considers that the festival was introduced not through him, but through a certain Catulfus at the court of Charlemagne. The well-meant but rather obscure letter of this Catulfus is printed in MIGNE, xcvi. 1363. Careful consideration of the passage in question shows he is speaking of the honour of the Trinity in general, and not of any festival of the Holy Trinity.

[269] _Cf._ the so-called Mass of Alcuin (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 445). The circumstance that the present preface of the Trinity appears in the Vatican MSS. used by Muratori, and is printed in his _Liturgia Rom. Vetus_ (11, 285, and 321), can easily have given rise to mistakes.

[270] Potho of Prüm (1152) has an interesting remark to which Hospinian draws attention: “Miramur satis, quod visum fuerit hoc tempore quibusdam monasteriis mutare colorem optimum novas quasdam inducendo celebritates.... Quæ igitur ratio hæc festa celebrandi nobis induxcit, festum videlicet s. trinitatis et festum transfigurationis Domini? Additur his a quibusdam, quod magis absurdum videtur, festum conceptionis S. Mariæ” (_De Statu Domus Dei lib._; DE LA BIGNE, _Magna Bibl. Vet. Patrum_, ix. 588). One must make allowances for Potho’s standpoint. He set himself energetically against the monks having the cure of souls or any say in the administration of the Church, as detrimental to their vocation to the contemplative life. On the same grounds, he set himself against all alterations in the rule, and all innovations in the festivals of the Church’s year.

[271] Cap. 2, x. _de feriis_, 2, 9, § 3.

[272] BAILLET (ix. 2, 158) considers this office was then a new one, though based upon one of the three ancient offices. BINTERIM, 265 _seqq._, and BÄUMER, 298 (where, however, a few statements need correcting) take a different view.

[273] _Vita S. Julianæ ab auctore coævo conscr._, 1, c. 2, in Acta SS. Boll., April 1, 473-75, with its _Prolegg._, 442.

[274] The letter of this synod is printed in BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 1, 276 _et seqq._ For the original office so far as it is extant, _cf._ _ibid._ 284.

[275] The bull “Transiturus” is contained in the Constitution of Clement V. in 1311 (_Clementini_, 3, 16). It is also in Labbe’s Councils (xi. 1, 817). _Cf._ Bened. XIV., _Institutiones Constit._, v. 20, for the procession.

[276] BINTERIM has brought forth fresh evidence in favour of the fact, which many have questioned (_op. cit._ 282, and vii. 1, 77).

[277] HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, iii. 699.

[278] LANFRANCI, _Decreta_, sec. 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 456 _et seq._ [_Cf._ GASQUET, _Parish Life in Med. England_, viii. 171.—Trans.]

[279] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, vii. 3, 367 _et seqq._; J. GRETSER, _De Processionibus_, 2, 19; BINTERIM, _Geschichte der Konzilien_, _etc._, v. 368. The synod of Cologne in 1452 forbade the Blessed Sacrament to be carried round the church in a monstrance on other days than Corpus Christi (_op. cit._ vii. 486).

[280] _Acta Vetera Eccl. Rotom._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlvii. 123.

[281] P. JOERRES, _Beiträge zur Gesch. des Fronleichnamsfestes_; _Römische Quartalschrift_, 1902, 170 _et seq._; SDRALEK, _Die Strassburger Diözesansynoden_, _Strassb. theol. Studien_, ii. 1, 121.

[282] HOEYNCK, _Gesch. d. K. Liturgie des Bist. Augsburg_, 229 _et seq._

[283] MAUREL, _Ablässe_, Paderborn, 1874, 238.

[284] HOEYNCK, _op. cit._ 231. For a description of the Roman use, _cf._ MIGNE, _Handbuch_, 304 _et seqq._

[285] The oldest pictorial representation of the Corpus Christi procession is probably that contained in the chronicle of the Council of Constance, by ULRICH of Richental (49 _et seqq._). The original MS. is in the Rosgarten Museum at Constance; it is reproduced in No. 158 of the _Stuttgart Literar. Verein_ of 1882 (Photolitographie by H. Bach). It represents the procession as it took place during the council in the year 1415. The monstrance is carried by two ecclesiastics on a sort of small platform.

[286] _Cf._ BENED. XIV., _Institutiones_, 30, 206, and the article of P. NORBERT, “Ord. Cap.,” in the _Katholik_ for August 1898, 151.

[287] NILLES, _De rationibus festorum SS. Cordis Jesu et Pur. Cordis Mariæ libri quattuor_, 5th ed., Œniponte, 1885; NIX, art. “Herz Jesu und Mariä” in the _Kirchenlexikon_, v., 2nd ed., 1921 _et seqq._; BÄUMER, 525 _et seq._

[288] CASSIAN, _Coll._ 10, c. 2: “Mos antiqua traditione servatus.”

[289] USENER, i. 1, 320, has investigated the circumstances which attended the introduction of Christmas in different countries, and his conclusions have met with entire recognition from HARNACK, _Theol. Literaturztg._, 1889, 199, _et seqq._, and from DOM SUITBERT BÄUMER, _Katholik_, 1890, i. 1-15. Exception was taken to certain points by DUCHESNE, _Bull. Critique_, 1890, No. 3. These circumstances have been already dealt with by BAILLET, viii. 582 _et seqq._

[290] EPIPHANIUS, _Adv. Hær._, 2, 1; _Hær._, 51, c. 16 and 24.

[291] _Cf._ c. 26, ed. Geyer, 60; ed. Gamurrini, 84.

[292] C. 49, ed. Geyer; ed. Gamurrini, 109.

[293] LAMY, _Ephræmi Syri hymni et sermones_, i., Mechl., 1882, 10, on the Benedictus, 2, 415. This hymn is translated into German by Zingerle in the _Kempten Bibl. d. Kirchenväter_, ii. 27.

[294] _Cf._ HEFELE, _History of Councils_, vi., 1st ed., 504, 575, etc.

[295] GREGOR, _Naz. Hom. 38 in Theophania_; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xxxvi.

[296] John, Bishop of Nicea, in COMBEFIS, _Hist. Hær. Monoth._, Paris, 1648, 306. BAUMSTARK (_Oriens Christ._, 1902, 441-446) is in favour of the date 398 to 400.

[297] GREGOR, Nyss., _Or. Fun._; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xlvi. 789. _Cf._ _ib._, 701 and 725. Basil was dead before 1st January 379.

[298] The date 386 depends upon the order of the sermons referred to. Usener, who places them at unnecessary wide intervals, gives 388, Clinton 387, Combefis, Montfaucon, and Tillemont 386. The period from February to December is ample for the above sermons.

[299] CHRYSOST., _Hom. in Nativ. I. Chr._; MONTFAUCON, ii. 352; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, x. 2, 351.

[300] Τὸ ταχέως οὔτω πανταχοῦ περιαγγελθῆναι. Ταχέως does not contradict ἄνωθεν, for Chrysostom distinguishes between the knowledge of the day of Christ’s birth and its solemn celebration. The former had been known for ages in Rome, but the celebration of the festival, on the contrary, had spread rapidly in all directions, and this rapid diffusion of the festival shows in its turn that the 25th December is really the day of Christ’s birth.

[301] _Cod. Justin._, 3, 12, 6.

[302] _Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 27. _Cf._ the law of the year 425, _ib._, 15, 5, 5.

[303] COMBEFIS, _Hist. Hær. Monoth._, 304: Ἐξ ἐκείνου δὲ ἔλαβεν ἀρχὴ ἡ τῶν Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησία τὴν ἡμὲραν τῶν γενεθλίων τοῦ σωτῆρος. Combefis was the first to discuss the question, and his disquisition is excellent, though now forgotten. _Cf._ MIGNE, viii. 964-968. Combefis has also collected all the material for the history of Christmas in his _Bibl. Patrum Conc._, 300 _et seq._

[304] COMBEFIS (_Hist. Hær. Monoth._, 302 and 314, A. 4) considered it suspicious.

[305] RONCALLI, _Chronica Vetustiora_, Introd., xxix.

[306] Bucherius, in its Latinized form.

[307] JOS. STRZYGOWSKI, _Die Kalenderbilder des Chronographen vom Jahre 354_, with 30 plates, Berlin, 1888, published for the Archeological Institute. The rest is to be found in _Mon. Germ. Hist. Auctores Antiquissimi_, t. ix., vol. i., fasc. i., Berol., 1891. The Natales Cæsarum and the Calendar are printed in the _Corp. Inscr. Lat._

[308] MOMMSEN, _Abhandl. der Sächs. Akademie d. Wissensch._, 1850, 1, 618. The figure XIII. signifies the Epact. This proves that the 1st January fell on a Saturday, and that B was the dominical letter.

[309] _L’Art de vérifier les Dates dep. J. Chr._, I. 111.

[310] [This refers to the ancient practice of dating the years of an emperor’s reign, not from the actual date of his accession, but from the New Year’s Day either preceding or following his accession. The years of the emperor’s reign were thus brought into artificial agreement with the calendar year. Numbering the years of the emperor’s reign from the actual date of his accession is, in Mommsen’s phrase, taking them as _effektiv_.—Trans.]

[311] I have attempted to show how this difference is to be explained in an article in the _Innsbr. Zeitschr. für Kath. Theologie_, xv. (1891), 519 _et seqq._

[312] Vid. Appendix vi.

[313] St Luke i. 5, 8.

[314] 1 Esdr. vi. 18.

[315] _Antiq._ vii. 14, 7.

[316] _Antiq._ vii. 11, 7, 1; 12, 6, 4; 7, 6. 1 Mach. i. 57; iv. 18.

[317] So LAMY (_Apparatus Chronol. et Geogr._, 61) referring to the Tractate _Erachin and Taanit_.

[318] JOS., _Bell. Jud._, 4, 8, 5; 4, 5. According to IDELER (i. 400, 433) Josephus employs the Syro-Macedonian names of the months, not with the intention of adjusting them to the Julian Calendar, but merely as Greek names for the Jewish months.

[319] The attempt to fix the time of Christ’s birth by the help of the course of Abia was undertaken by Scaliger, abandoned as useless by Petavius, resumed by B. Lamy. In modern times, it was resumed by SEYFFARTH (_Chronol. Sacra_, Leipsig, 1846, 97 _et seqq._), WEIGL (_Theol. und Chronol. Abhandlungen über das wahre Geburts- und Sterbejahr Christi_, Sulzbach, 1848), and STAVARS (_Tüb. Theol. Quartalschr._, 1866, 201 _et seq._).

[320] HIERON, _Opera_, ed. Migne, xi. 220. It is evident from St Jerome’s commentary on Ezechiel that his views on the subject were not those of the preacher of this sermon. The sermon for the 25th December, published by Morin (_Anecdota Mareds._, iii. 2, 392, _et seqq._), agrees with the sermon quoted above.

[321] CLEMENS ALEX., _Strom._, i., ed. Sylburg, 340.

[322] CYPRIANI, _Opera_, ed. Hartel, ii. 266.

[323] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_ 190, 1; 192, 3; 196, 1.

[324] Luke ix. 13 _seqq._

[325] AMBR., _De Virg._, 3, 1; MIGNE, xvi. 219.

[326] PAULINUS, _Vita Ambr._, c. 4, and his life in the Benedictine edition of his works, c. 7. The chronology of the youthful period of St Ambrose’s life is unfortunately obscure.

[327] _Conc. Cathag._, iii. can. 4; BRUNS, i. 123.

[328] USENER (272 _seqq._) starts with the preconceived opinion that Liberius delivered his address on the 6th Jan. 353, and so is of opinion that Christmas was celebrated for the first time in Rome on the 25th Dec. 353. On the other hand, DUCHESNE (_Bull. Crit._, 1890, No. 3, p. 41 _seq._), having the circumstance in view that the Depositio Episcoporum begins the year with the 27th Dec. and the Depositio Martyrum with the 25th Dec., thinks he has proof for holding that the 27th Dec. for a long time already, indeed even from about 243, had been a marked day in the Church’s Calendar, and, accordingly, that the 25th Dec. had been kept as the Natalis Domini as early as the third century. We leave these points to the reader’s discretion. Christmas was kept in Rome certainly before 353.

[329] MOMMSEN, _Röm. Gesch._, v. 481.

[330] MARQUARDT-MOMMSEN, _Röm. Altert._, vi., 2nd. ed., 588.

[331] Hospinian (fol. iii.) and others held that the 25th December was chosen purposely in order to supplant the Saturnalia. But the Saturnalia did not last over the 25th, although Maximus of Turin seems to think it did.

[332] _De Orat. Dom._, 35.

[333] SERMO, 7, 1, 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvii. 614.

[334] ZENO VER., _Tract._, 2, 9, 2, calls Christ “Sol noster, sol verus.” GREGOR. I., _Hom._, 29 _in Evang._, c. 10: “Quis solis nomine nisi Christus designatur?” PRUD., _Cathem._, 11, 1: “Quid est, quod arctum circulum sol jam recurrens deserit?” GREGOR. NAZ., _Orat. in S. lumina_, calls Christ the sun.

[335] On the Vigil: “Sidus refulget jam novum”; at Lauds: “Orietur sicut sol salvator mundi”: in the Preface: “Per incarnati Verbi mysterium nova mentis nostræ oculis lux tuæ claritatis infulsit”: on the octave: “Tu lumen et splendor Patris”; in the hymn: “In sole posuit tabernaculum suum”; in the antiphons: “Hodie descendit lux magna in terris. In sole posuit tabernaculum suum,” etc.

[336] MAXIMUS TAUR., _Hom._, 103; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lvii. 491.

[337] _Peregr. Silv._, 82 (59 cod.), ed. Geyer, c. 25.

[338] _Peregr. Silv._, 84 (60), ed. Geyer, 77. In c. 49, No. 3, the chief festivals are Easter and Epiphany.

[339] In Ezech. 1, 3; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xxv. 18, written about A.D. 411.

[340] COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES, ed. Galland. Bibl., xi. 461; MIGNE, lxxxviii. 198.

[341] So USENER, who quotes a passage from a sermon of Basil of Seleucia. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 469.

[342] COSMAS, _op. cit._ 462.

[343] _Evangeliarium Hierosol._, 482, 494. See USENER, 323, 327.

[344] COMBEFIS, _Hist. Hær. Monoth._, 314 A, 4.

[345] _Peregr. Silv._, 84 (60), ed. Geyer, 77.

[346] GREGOR TUR., _Microl._, 1, 88; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxi. 783.

[347] COMBEFIS, _op. cit._ 302 E.

[348] _Opera_, ZENONIS VER., ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xi. lib. 2, tract 7-9. Lib. i. tract 13 may be spurious.

[349] _Sermo 10 de sanctis_ according to the old enumeration, _sermo 220 inter suppos._ according to the new.

[350] _Peregr. Silv._, 84 (60).

[351] See Append. vii.

[352] MATISCON. 1, can. 9; TURON., 11, can. 27. _Cf._ GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. Franc._, 10, 31.

[353] _Synaxarium_ of MICHAEL of Atriba, under 15th November.

[354] GREGOR. M., _Hom. in Evang._, 1, 1, 6, 7, and 20. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxvi. 1078 _et seqq._ CABROL (_Révue Bénéd._, 1905, 1, 1), thought he had discovered traces of Advent in the fifth or even in the fourth century. It is best to reserve judgment until clearer evidence is forthcoming.

[355] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, ii. 133-135 and 342-346.

[356] Printed by Gerbert, _Lit. Allem._, 410-416, which also contains the _Evangelarium_ of SPIRES, 8th Cent., 417-444, and _Kalendarium_ of FRONTEAU, 155 _et seq._

[357] AMALARIUS, _De Eccl. Off._, 3, 40; 4, 30. ABBO, _Apolog._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxix. 472.

[358] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 139. BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 167.

[359] Thus the Comes Pamelii in RANKE’S supplement and the old lectionaries of Cologne, Treves, and Münster. See SCHUE, _Die bibl. Lesungen_, etc., Treves, 1861, 129 _et seqq._

[360] Since 1893, the third Sunday after Epiphany has also a special character owing to the Feast of the Holy Family falling on it.

[361] See the critical edition of C. A. WILSON (Oxford, 1894), p. 9.

[362] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 198_, c. 1. “Vos quasi solemniter hodie convenire conspicimus.”

[363] _Turon._, 2, can. 17, 22; _Antissiod._, can. 1.

[364] TOLET., 4 (633), can. 11; _Lex Visigoth._, ii. tit. i. 12, and xii. 3, 6; Mon. Germ. Leges Sect. 1, tom. i. 1, 59 and 434. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxi. 478.

[365] MIGNE, i. 212, col. 70-73 for the text. See HEUSER, _Kirchenlexikon_, iv., 2nd ed., 1395 _seqq._ The so-called Feast of Asses, about which so much has been written, was a harmless affair. It took its name from semi-theatrical performances inspired by passages of Scripture which happen to mention an ass.

[366] In this document it is called “Natale S. Mariæ.”

[367] WIEGAND, 27.

[368] _Tractat._, 1, 13.

[369] LEO I., _Sermo 2 de Epiph._ FULGENTIUS, _Sermo_. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxv. 732.

[370] AMMIANUS MARCELL., 21, 2.

[371] CLEMENS ALEX., _Strom._, i. 21, § 45; ed. Potter, 407; Sylburg, 340.

[372] In the edition of BONWETSCH and ACHELIS, Leipsig, 1897, No. 22, p. 255 _et seq._, ACHELIS and others regard it as spurious but without just reason. It is translated by PROBST, _Lehre und Gebet_, 247. Although not a sermon, it was evidently an address delivered to certain individuals. _Cf._ c. 6 and 9 (ἀγαπητέ and ἄνθρωπε).

[373] _Constit Apost._, 8, 33; _cf._ 5, 13.

[374] SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii. 15, 204, 220.

[375] See GREGOR. NAZ., _Orat._, 39, c. 2.

[376] _Synodus II. S. Patricii._, can. 20.

[377] St Matthew ii. 10 _seq._

[378] St Matthew ii. 1-12.

[379] _Poema_, 27; _Natal_, 9, v. 47 _et seqq._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi. 649.

[380] SEDATUS, _Hom. de Epiph._ MIGNE, lxxii. 773. MAXIMUS TAUR., _Hom. 7 in Epiph._ MIGNE, lvii. 271. “Fuerunt enim hodie ... quid potissimum præsenti hoc factum sit die, noverit ipse, qui fecit.”

[381] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo supposit._, 136, c. 1, and the hymn “Illuminans Altissimus,” in KAYSER, _Hymnen_, 2nd ed., 370. See also the article “Feste” by FUNK and KRIEG in KRAUS’S _Realenzyklopädie_.

[382] This also appears from the fact that some, as PHILASTRIUS (_De Hær._, c. 140) informs us, omitted Epiphany and kept Christmas alone.

[383] _Comm. in Ezech._, i. 1.

[384] CHRYSOST., _Hom. ad Pop. Ant. de Bapt. Chr._, c. 2. _Migne_, _Patr. Gr._, xlix. 363 _et seq._ It appears from this sermon that the Antiochene Christians were in the habit of taking some of the baptismal water home with them, and keeping it for a year without its becoming corrupt.

[385] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo 202_, c. 2.

[386] _Cæsaraug._, A.D. 380, can. 3. AMMIANUS MARC., _op. cit._ Passio S. Philippi Heracleensis in Ruinart, _Acta_, 440, c. 2.

[387] EPIPHANIUS (_Hær._, 51, c. 16 and 24), Ephrem, Cassian, etc. See above, pp. 128 _seqq._

[388] Testam. D. N. Jesu Chr., ed. Rahmani (Mainz, 1899), i. 28; iv. 67, 101. The discussion of the date of this document cannot be entered into here from want of space.

[389] Cod. Theodos., 2, 8, 20, 25; 5, 2; Cod. Justin., 3, 12, 6.

[390] See Appendix No. viii.

[391] _Peregr. Silviæ_, 60, ed. Geyer, c. 26: “Quadragesimæ de Epiphania valde cum summo honore _hic_ celebrantur, etc.”

[392] THEOPHANES, _Chronogr._, ed. Bonn, 345 ad ann. 534.

[393] NICEPHORUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 17, 28: καὶ τὴν τοῦ σωτῆρος ὑπαπάντην ἄρτι πρώτως ἁπανταχοῦ τῆς γῆς ἑορτάζεσθαι τάττει. See MURALT, _Chronogr. Byz._, St Petersburg, 1855, i. 134.

[394] _Sacr. Gelasianum_, 2, 8, among the Natalitia Sanctorum. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxiv. 1158. There is no mention of a procession in the Gregorian sacramentary either.

[395] MORCELLI, i. 86, 288.

[396] The statement was made by BARONIUS (ad ann. 534), repeated by PAGI, and, in recent times, by WISSOWA (_Röm. Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 446) and by USENER (332), but rejected by GRISAR (_Gesch. Roms._, i. 455).

[397] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii.

[398] See Appendix No. ix.

[399] CABROL (_Etude sur la Peregr. Silv._, 167 _et seqq._) gives a survey of the lections then in use.

[400] Printed by BIANCHINI, _Opera Anast._, i. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxvii. 994. DUCHESNE, _Lib. Pont._, I. cxlvi.

[401] BINTERIM’S statement (_Denkw._, v. 2, 133-152) is out of date. The article “Fastenzeiten” by HEUSER in the _Kirchenlexikon_, iv., 2nd ed., must be supplemented by the investigations of Dom G. MORIN in the _Révue Bénédictine_, 1897, 336-347—“L’Origine des Quatre-Temps.”

[402] LEO M., _Sermo_, 19 (18), c. 2.: “Per totius anni circulum distributa sunt (jejunia), ut lex abstinentiæ omnibus sit adscripta temporibus. Siquidem jejunium vernum in quadragesima, æstivum in pentecoste, autumnale in mense septimo, hiemale in hoc qui est decimus celebretur.”

[403] LEO M., _Sermo_, 16 (15), c. 1, 2; _Sermo_, 12 (11), c. 3.

[404] MORIN (_op. cit._ 345) quotes passages from the Leonine and Gelasian sacramentaries. See MIGNE, lv. 153 _et seqq._

[405] Concerning the “feriæ conceptivæ” and “sementivæ” of the Romans, see MARQUARDT-MOMMSEN, _Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 198 _seqq._

[406] _Liber Pont._, _Callistus_: “Hic constituit jejunium die sabbati ter in anno fieri, frumenti, vini et olei secundum prophetiam.” Ed. DUCHESNE, i. 141.

[407] LEO I., _Sermo_, 19, c. 2; _Sacram. Leon._, 101, No. xxvii. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, liv. 186; lv. 105.

[408] _Epist. ad Episc. Luc._, c. 11. MIGNE, lix. 47.

[409] LEO I., _Epist. ad Dioscorum Al._, c. i. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, liv. 626.

[410] MIGNE, cli. 978; c. 24-27.

[411] MORIN, _Révue Bénédictine_, 1897, 338 _seqq._

[412] _Sermo 2 de Jejun. X. mensis_: “Decimi mensis celebrandum esse jejunium, quo pro consummata perceptione omnium frugum dignissime largitori earum Deo continentiæ libamen offertur.”

[413] In MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._, i. 511, 603; ii. 33, 94, 123, 136.

[414] H. MENARD, _Notæ et Observ. in Sacr. Greg._, in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 393.

[415] _Sacr. Gelas._ MIGNE, lxxiv. 1069, 1133, 1178 _seqq._

[416] _Sacr. Gregor._ MIGNE, lxxviii. 59-61, 113-115, 140-142.

[417] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvii. 124: “Ut jejunium quattuor temporum et ipsi sacerdotes observent et plebi denuntient observandum.” This shows that until then it had not been customary in the Frankish empire.

[418] See BINTERIM, _Gesch. d. d. Prov.- u. Diöz.-Konzilien_, ii. 273 _seqq._; iii. 517 _seqq._

[419] The disagreement arose from the fact that the ancient missals (Sacramentorum libri), only mentioned the month without specifying the week when the Ember fasts were to be observed. See BERNO of Reichenau (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlii. 1097), whose small treatise, composed between 1020 and 1031, deals with the question.

[420] _Micrologus_, c. 24.

[421] SERVIUS, Comm. on Virgil., _Bucol. Eccl._, 3, 77.

[422] See examples in USENER, 305 A. 22, 306-345.

[423] OBID., _Fasti_, 4, 905 _seqq._, and _Fasti Prænest._, _Corp. Inser. Lat._ i. 392. For the “Robigaliæ” see MARQUARDT-MOMMSEN, _Staatsverwaltung_, iii. 574.

[424] VIGILII, _Epist. ad Simpl._ i.; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xiii. 550.

[425] AVITUS, _Hom. de Rogat._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lix. 289. GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. Franc_, 2, 34.

[426] This fact is mentioned by both the biographers of Gregory, JOAN. DIAC. i. 41-43, and PAUL. DIAC. c. 10, as well as by AMALARIUS 4, 24, and BELETH c. 122, etc., but all draw their information from GREGOR. TUR., _Hist. France_, 10, 1. See BAILLET ix, 2, 87-103, who also makes use of the designations “Litaniæ Gallicanæ” and “Litaniæ Romanæ.”

[427] These words come from a letter without an address in the appendix to the Register of Gregory the Great. MIGNE, lxxvii. 1329.

[428] _Lib. Pont._ ed., BIANCHINI, ii. 386.

[429] In Spain the litanies were on 10th Sept., 7th Nov., and 15th Dec., according to the lectionary of Silos.

[430] The Martyrium was erected on Golgotha, close to the site of the present Church of the Holy Sepulchre. The Anastasis, built by Constantine, was the larger of the two, and served as the usual place of assembly for the faithful in the fourth century. (_Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 27, 30, 39, 43).

[431] J. P. KIRCH, _Die Christl. Kultusgeände in Altertum_, 34-40.

[432] St Gregory the Great ordered that the Anglo-Saxons should keep the dedication of churches and the _natalitia martyrum_ in the same way as they had previously observed the festivals while they were yet heathen, that is to say by erecting huts of branches and by feasting. (Epist. ii. 76, of the year 601).

[433] For the East, see JOHANNES EUB., _Orat. in Concep. B.M.V._, c. 23. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvi. 1499. For the West, see the Sermons of St Augustine on the “Dedicatio,” _Sermo 336-338_.

[434] Our informants are EUSEB., _Vita Constant_, 4, 6; SOZOMEN, _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 26; 3, 5; SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 6.

[435] EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 10, 3; AMBROSE, _Ad Marcellinam Epist._, 22, 1 (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 1019). PAULINUS of Nola, _Nat. S. Fel._, 9; _Poema_, 27, 402 _seqq._ (MIGNE, lxi. 657); _Peregr. Silviæ_, as above.

[436] _Missale Francorum_ in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 328.

[437] DIONYS, _De Hier. Eccl._, 4, 12. See RAHMANI, _Testam. D.N.I. Chr._, 156.

[438] DURANDUS (_Rationale Div. Off._ 1, 23; 7, 262) expressly follows the model of the Old Testament.

[439] MURATORI, _Lit. Rom. Vet._ i. 308, 609, 613.

[440] _Op. cit._ ii. 467-489 and 186.

[441] GREGOR., ix. c. 5, x. _de feriis_ 2, 9. See Burchard of Worms, _Decr._ 2, 77; Ivo of Chartres, _Decr._, in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clxi. 203.

[442] _Liber Ordin._ of Essen, 62 _et seqq._

[443] BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 1, 303 _et seqq._; _Conc._, v. 91) places this synod in 1308. HARTZHEIM, _Conc. Germ._, iv. 106; vi. 498.

[444] Amongst others, Naogeorgius (Kirchmair aus Straubing) poured contempt on the observance of these feasts and the abuses to which they gave rise. HOSPINIANUS, 175.

[445] DUMONT, _Sammlung Kirchl. Erlasse für d. Erzd. Köhn_, 2nd ed., 165, 167.

[446] Remigius, a monk of St Germain, a diligent exegete who lived at the end of the ninth century, attempted to give an allegorical interpretation to the rites observed at the consecration of a church. The custom of writing the letters of the alphabet in Greek and Latin on the floor of the church seems to have presented difficulties to him. He commences his explanation of this rite by the words: “Quæ res puerilis ludus videretur, nisi ab apostolius viris instituta crederetur.” He interprets it as meaning that the Church instructs the unlearned in the elements of faith. His tractate in seven chapters is in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxi. 846-866. G. Mercati, however (_Studi et Testi_, Roma, 1902, 9) attributes it to Ivo of Chartres.

[447] Literature: Lebrun, _De Martyrum Natalitiis Diss._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi. 519, _seq._ Sollerius, Præf. to the _Mart. Usuardi_. MIGNE, cxxiii. 459, _seqq._ Ruinart, Præf. to the _Acta mart. sincera et genuina_. Le Blant, _Les Actes des Martyrs_, in _Mémoires de l’Institut_, 1888, 57-336.

[448] _Passio S. Pionii et Soc._, c. 2 in Ruinart, 188.

[449] DIGG., 48, tit. 24, No. 3: “Corpora animadversorum quibuslibet petentibus ad sepulturam danda sunt.”

[450] _Lib. Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 52, 128.

[451] _Op. cit._ 65, 148, EUSEB., _Hist. Eccl._, 6, 45, § 11, also refers to the seven deacons and seven subdeacons of Rome in the third century.

[452] _Lib. Pont._, I. xcv. 147.

[453] _Epist._, 12, 2.

[454] _Bullettino d. Comm. Arch. Communale di Roma_, 1894, 240 _seqq._

[455] RUINART, _Acta Sincera_, 630, with his Admonitio.

[456] GREGOR. NYSS., _Vita Greg. Thaum_. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xlvi. 954.

[457] SOZOM., _Hist. Eccl._, 5, 3.

[458] MAXIMUS TAUR., _Hom._ 81. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lvii. 427.

[459] _Lib. Pont._, _Symmachus_, c. 9.

[460] [See _The Legends of the Saints_, Delehaye, translated by Mrs V. M. Crawford (London, 1907), especially chap. iv. Trans.]

[461] BÄUMER, _Gesch. des Breviers_, 456; see also 429, 447.

[462] _Regula ad Monachos_, ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxviii. 396. See also N. PAULUS, _Martyrologium und Brevier als historische Quellen_; Katholik, 1900, i. 355 _seqq._

[463] _De Gloria Martyrum_, c. 48.

[464] _Cf._ _Hist. Eccl._, 8, 13.

[465] MURATORI, in a valuable work, _De Martyrum Natalibus_, shows in opposition to Pagi that “natales martyrum” indicates the actual day of their death. The work is printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi. 819-26; _Dissert._ 19.

[466] _De Anima_, 51.

[467] AUGUSTIN., _Epist._ 288. GREGOR. TUR., _De Gloria Conf._, 104.

[468] See the fourth canon of the Council of Valentia in A.D. 524.

[469] Edited by Baluzius, _Capitul. Reg. Franc._, Appendix. Also in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcix. 633. Other formulæ of the Carolingian period are given in MIGNE, cxxxviii. 885-902.

[470] This branch of hagiography has been carefully dealt with by Baillet. The entire first volume of his great work, _Les Vies des Saints_, is devoted to Old Testament Saints, more than a hundred in number, and to the history of their cultus.

[471] E. A. Kneller, in order to explain the choice of the 24th for the 25th June, draws attention to the way in which the ancient Roman Calendars were written, _i.e._ viii. Kal. Jan. = 25th December; viii. Kal. Jul. = 24th July (_Innsbr. Zeitschr. für kath. Theol._, 1901, 527).

[472] _Agath. Can._ 31, 63.

[473] IVO CARN., _Decretum_, 4, 14. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clxi. 266.

[474] According to St Augustine (_sermo 292_, c. i.) it was “traditione majorum receptum.”

[475] MORCELLI, _Menol. Const._, ii. 13 _seq._ No less than fifteen churches and chapels were dedicated to St John the Baptist in Constantinople.

[476] JOSEPHUS, _Antt._, 18, 5, 2.

[477] TILLEMONT, _Mém._, i. 44; vii. 163.

[478] SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii. 220-47.

[479] Dionysius Exiguus translated this account into Latin (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxvii. 418). See also TILLEMONT, _Mém._, i. 44; vii. 163. MORCELLI, _Menol. Const._, i. 167; ii. 65, 222. BAILLET, iv. 825 _seqq._; vi. 291 _seqq._ DU CANGE, _Traité du Chef de S. J. B._ (Paris, 1665), wrote against the trustworthiness of Marcellus. The chronology of the Paschal Chronicle was corrected by Du Cange and Pagi. See RAUSCHEN, _Jahrbücher d. Theol._, 356 A.

[480] NILLES, i., 2nd ed., 111.

[481] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 120, 394.

[482] Pseudo-Alcuin, _De off. Eccl._, c. 30.

[483] _Ordo Rom. XI._, c. 66. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxviii. 1050. There is not sufficient evidence to support Binterim’s view (_Denkw._, v. 379) that the procession to the Baptistry proves that solemn baptism was administered at Rome on the 24th June.

[484] _Sermo 287-93._ In _Sermo 292_, c. 1, appears the passage quoted on page.... “Hoc majorum traditione suscepimus, etc.”

[485] A town of Gamala was situated on the eastern shore of the Lake Genesareth, on a mountain. Josephus, _Bello Jud._, 4, 1, 1-7; _Antt._, 18, 1, 1, etc. Nothing is known of the village of Gamala near Jerusalem.

[486] For the fullest account of the particulars, see HYDATIUS, _Chron._ (RONCALLI, ii. 99), “Honorio X. et Theodosio VI. Conss.” With this date agrees MARCELLINUS (_op. cit._, ii. 279), but not the _Chron. Breve._ (_op. cit._, ii. 259) or THEOPHANES, _Chrongr._, ed. Bonn, i. 133.

[487] GENNADIUS, _De Script. Eccl._, 46, 47. The writings relating to the “Inventio S. Stephani” are in Latin. The translation is printed in MIGNE, xli., _Opera S. Augustini VII._, 805-54.

[488] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 316, 320-24; _Civ. Dei_, 22, c. 8.

[489] THEOPHANES, _Chrongr._, ad ann. 420.

[490] MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 48.

[491] As, for example, to Antoninus. See GEYER, _Itinera Hierosol._, 176.

[492] CODINUS, ii.

[493] The Syrian list of Abul Barakat gives for the date of St Stephen’s death the 12th Sept. A.D. 37, and for the date of the first discovery of his relics the 27th Dec. A.D. 40. Chr. IV. Caji. BAUMSTARK, _Oriens Christ._, i. 266.

[494] GRISAR, _Gesch. Roms und der Päpste_, i. 194 _seqq._

[495] See the Calendars in SELDENIUS, _op. cit._; also the Synaxaria in MAI, _Bibl. Vet. Patr._, iv.

[496] USENER, _Der hl. Theodosius_, Leipsig, 1890, 38, 144.

[497] JULIAN of Toledo in the _Vita S. Ildephonsi Tol._, c. 6. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcvi. 46.

[498] It is printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxi. 798, from _Pamelius Liturgica Lat._, Col. Agr. 1571, tit. ii. 70. [See also an article in the _Dublin Review_, vol. cxv., on “The Earliest Roman Mass-book,” by Mr Edmund Bishop.—TR.]

[499] _Liber Pont._, SERGIUS, No. 86.

[500] In the calendar of Sonnatius of Reims (quoted on p. 21), dating from ten or twenty years after Gregory the Great, these three feasts are already mentioned.

[501] There are, however, among the sermons of Peter Chrysologus, three (140, 142, and 143) entitled “de annuntiatione,” but of these No. 140 contains no allusion to a festival of our Blessed Lady, and the two others belong to Christmas.

[502] ST THOMASSIN, 409. See MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxv. 406. Fulbert, however, speaks of the feast as of recent institution. _Sermo_, 4. MIGNE, cxli. 320 _seqq._

[503] MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvii. 806 _seqq._

[504] So in the passage from the _Liber Pontificalis_ quoted above and in the _Kalend. Fronteau_. Bede calls it the “Annuntiatio Dominica.” The Greek name for the feast is Εὐαγγελισμός τῆς ἁγίας θεοτόκου.

[505] _Chron. Pasch. Olymp._, 351, ed. Bonn, i. 713.

[506] PETRUS CHRYS., _Sermo_, 140, 142, ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lii. Among the spurious sermons of Leo the Great is one which is believed to be a translation of a discourse of Proclus, _Sermo 15_. See the note of Ballerini in MIGNE, _Patr Lat._, liv. 508. PROCLUS, _Orat. I._ MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, lxv. 679.

[507] RADULFUS GLABER, _Hist._, 3, 3.

[508] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 170, 734.

[509] HOLWECK, 292. When the 25th March falls on one of the three last days in Holy Week or Easter Week, it must be translated. BINTERIM (_Denkw._, v. 356) gives several historical references concerning this.

[510] PROCLUS, _Oratio III._, c. 2. When we find in collections of sermons (_e.g._ COMBEFIS, _Bibl. Conc._), some by the Fathers, such as Origen, St Ambrose, St Athanasius, etc., ascribed to the feasts of our Lady, we must not jump to the conclusion that these feasts were observed at the period when the authors of these sermons lived. These reputed sermons are only homilies on texts which suit the feast in question, and on this account have been inserted into the collection.

[511] EPIPH., _Hær._, 79, c. 11: “I say not she did not die, yet I am not certain that she did die.”

[512] VETTER, _Tüb. Theol. Quartalschr._, 1887, 133 _seqq._ The letter is also given in the treatise by NIRSCHL, _Das Grab der heiligen Jungfrau Maria_, Mainz, 1896, 80 _seqq._

[513] _Transitus Mariæ_ in TISCHENDORF, _Apocal. Apocr._, Lips., 1866, 114.

[514] We have three sermons of John on the Assumption (MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvi.), one of Modestus, patriarch of Jerusalem (MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, lxxxvi. pars 2), three of Andrew of Crete, who, before becoming bishop, was a monk in Palestine (MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvii., oratio 12-14), and three of Germanus (MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcviii. 339-72).

[515] _De Gloria Mart._, i. 4.

[516] NICEPHORUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 17, 28.

[517] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 225. See also MABILLON’S note in the same col., 475.

[518] In the _Martyr. Luccense_ of FIORENTINI, on the 22nd January: “Depositio B. Mariæ Matris D. N. J. C.”

[519] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxx. 446. In HARDUIN (iii. 2946) it is so named.

[520] H. JÜRGENS, _Die kirchl. Uberlieferung von der leibl. Aufnahme Mariens in den Himmel_: Innsbr. _Zeitschr. für kath. Theol._, 1880, 595-650.

[521] WÜSTENFELD, _Synaxarium_ of Bishop Michael of Atriba and Malidsch, 251. MAI, _Script. Vet. Nova Collectio_, iv. 1. 5. SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis_, iii. c. 15, 320 _seqq._

[522] A form for the blessing of the fruits of the field appears in the Ritual of Augsburg, 1487. See RAICH, _Katkolik_, 1901, ii. 144. FRANZ, _Das Ritual von St Florian aus dem 12. Jahrhundert_; Freiburg, 1904.

[523] BAILLET (viii. 434-441) and BENEDICT XIV. (_De festis_, c. 184-210) collected materials for this purpose.

[524] The Emperor Leo VI., the Philosopher (896-903), spread the observance of the feast. Passaglia relied (iii. 1750) on a speech of his preserved in the Sforza library in Rome. It does not appear among the speeches of this Emperor printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, cvii.

[525] Εἰ καὶ μὴ παρὰ τοῖς πᾶσι γνωρίζεται, c. 23. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvi. 1499. Observe the article with πᾶσιν. Οἱ παντες means all collectively, _i.e._ the whole community or church.

[526] For the so-called Typicum S. Sabæ, see Appendix xi.

[527] It is the first among his sermons. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, c. 1353.

[528] The change from the 9th Dec., the date of the festival among the Greeks, to the 8th, is probably to be explained by the fact that in the Roman Calendar vi., Idus Dec. corresponds to the vi. Idus Sept., the date of our Lady’s Nativity, while the 9th Dec. is written v. Idus Dec.

[529] [The feast was, however, observed in England before the Norman Conquest. The evidence for this is given by Mr Edmund Bishop in his tract, _On the Origins of the Feast of the Conception of the Bl. V. M._, London, Burns & Oates, 1904. From this the following is taken: (1) Calendar contained in Cotton MS. Titus D., xxvii., has the entry in the original hand at 8th Dec: “Conceptio sancte Dei genitricis Mariæ.” This MS. was written in the New Minster, Winchester, under Abbot Aelfwin (1034-57). (2) Calendar of the Old Minster, Winchester (Cotton MS., Vitellius E., xviii.), has the same entry. The MS. is attributed by Hicks to or about 1030. (3) Add. MS., 28, 188, a pontifical and benedictional of the eleventh century probably written for Bp. Leofric (1046-72), and “distinctly pre-Norman.” In this, fol. 161, is a “Benedictio in Conceptione Sancte Mariæ.” (4) Harl. MS. 2892, also a pontifical and benedictional written for Canterbury in the first half of the eleventh century (to judge from the handwriting); a similar benediction occurs, ff. 189-90. (5) To these, in a letter to the translator, Mr Bishop adds: I. In the Leofric Missal, among the Masses added to the book by Bp. Leofric, is a Mass for the feast of the Conception (p. 268); II. In a Worcester Calendar of about 1064, and written therefore under St Wulstan and before the conquest, the feast of the Conception is entered at 8th Dec. Trans.]

[530] See Appendix x.

[531] Two accounts of Elsinus are found among the spurious writings of St Anselm (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clix. 319-326). Three others have recently been published by Thurston & Slater, _Eadmeri Mon. Cant. Tractatus de Conceptione S. Mariæ_, 88-98. Another by Lechler, _Mittelalterl. Kirchenfeste_, 92 _et seq._

[532] _E.g._ in the Roman Breviary of 1473 (Univ. Bibl., Freiburg i. Br.), in the Breviary of Sitten of 1493, National Mus., Zurich, and in that of Constance of 1509.

[533] Gerberon in the introduction to Anselm’s works. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clviii. 43 _et seq._

[534] Osbert’s letters were first published along with those of Herbert de Losinga by Robt. Anstruther (Brussels, 1846), unfortunately very imperfectly. Lately they are given by Thurston and Slater, _op. cit._, 53 _et seq._

[535] _Osbert de Clara_ in Thurston and Slater, App. B. 60 _et seq._

[536] [Mr Bishop, _op. cit._, 30, 31, says the Normans probably treated the celebration of this feast by the English with contempt, as “a product of insular simplicity and ignorance.” Its public celebration was discontinued most probably at Winchester and Canterbury, but “it did not die out of the hearts of individuals.”—Trans.]

[537] Osbert, Epist. i. _op. cit._ 55. “Et in hoc regno et in transmarinis partibus a nonnullis episcopis et abbatibus in ecclesiis Dei instituta est illius diei recordatio.” That the feast was introduced “in hoc regno,” _i.e._ England, by abbots but not by bishops, is clear from Osbert’s second letter, and from other evidence; and, therefore, his remark is true only of Normandy. Of the one English bishop whom he names as in favour of the feast, he can only say he was “de his sufficienter instructus” (_op. cit._ 58). Osbert has no knowledge of his having introduced the feast. By “transmarinæ partes,” British chroniclers of that period always mean Normandy and Brittany.

[538] Matthæus Paris. ad ann., 1228, _Chron. maj._ 3, 161.

[539] Wilhelm. Malmsbur., _Gesta Reg. Angl._ 4, 338. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clxxix., 1290. Eadmer., _Hist. Nov._, _Præf._ et passim. MIGNE, clix. 347.

[540] This appears from a decree of Bishop Walter of Rouen in 1207, printed in the collection of Bigot in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccvii. 1179. Walter had withheld certain endowments which his predecessor Rotricus appointed for the metropolitan chapter on certain festivals. These he now restored. Vacandard (_Les origines de la Fête d. C. Imm._: Révue des Questions Hist., 1897, 166) was unacquainted with this decree, else he would have arrived at a different conclusion. Moreover he himself brings forward proof that the feast was celebrated during the twelfth century in Jumièges and St Owen, but not until the thirteenth century at Fécamp.

[541] _Syn. Rotom._ of 1189, can. 1. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccvii. 1180.

[542] HENRICUS A GANDAVO, _Quæst. quodlib._, 15 qu. 13 fol., 584 B.: “Normanni, in quorum territorio dicitur hujusmodi revelatio facta fuisse, præ ceteris populis illam conceptionem praccipue celebrant.” Again, fol. 385 A., it is twice called “festum quod a Normannis celebratur.” It would appear from this that the Normans before 1260 were still the only people who kept the feast.

[543] This legend must have enjoyed a wide circulation, since the Greek Breviary finds it necessary to attack it. See the edition of Constantinople, 1843, 77.

[544] PASSAGLIA (_De Imm. Conc._, iii. 1755 _seqq._) is not at all shaken in his opinion by the fact that Mabillion, as he himself admits, has shown the falsified life was not written by ILDEFONSUS, _Acta Ord. S. Bened._, ii. 521. The title “conceptio S.V.M. Genitricis Domini” refers to Christmas. It is an altogether absurd idea that the Jews in the seventh century joined in the celebration of the 8th December. Unfortunately SCHWANE (_Dogmengesch._, iii. 414) has copied Passaglia’s mistake.

[545] LESLÆUS, _Miss. Mixtum_. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. 933 A.

[546] PASSAGLIA (_op. cit._, iii. 1760) relies on a deed of gift of 1047, in which occurs the expression “Conceptio Immac.,” at that period unknown—a clear proof of falsification. The document comes from Antonio Dragoni, an industrious fabricator. See SICKEL, _Acta Regum, etc._, i. 23.

[547] SICARDUS, _Mitrale_, c. 43. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccxviii.

[548] PETRUS CELL., _ad Nicolaum Mon. Epist._, 2, 171. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccii. 614.

[549] See BELETH, _Rationale Div. Off._, c. 146. SICARDUS, _Mitrale_, c. 43. DURANDUS, _Mim. Rationale_, also does not know of the feast.

[550] BERNARD., _Epist._, 171. Vacandard would like to place this letter before 1128, but this is out of the question.

[551] BERNARD., _Epist._, 184.

[552] MANSI, _Conc._, xxiii. 764. CHEVALIER, _Bibl. Lit._, 7.

[553] WADDING, _Annales Minorum_.

[554] THOMAS, _S. Theol._, 3 q. 27, art. 2.

[555] SCHWANE, _Dogmengesch._, iii. 418.

[556] BINTERIM, _Konzil._, vi. 536, A. I.

[557] SCHATEN, _Annal. Pad._, ad ann. 1343.

[558] PASSAGLIA, _De Imm. Conc._, iii. 1767. BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 1, 302 _seq._

[559] BINTERIM and MOOREN, _Die Erzdiözese Köln I._, Düsseldorf, 1892, 538. WÜRDTWEIN, _Diplomat Magunt._, i., Mainz, 1788, 131, No. 69. _Urkunde des Klosters Jechaburg in Thüringen_, see FALK, _Katholik_, 1903, 1.

[560] The 2nd Canon of this synod of Canterbury runs:—“Venerabilis Anselmi, prædecessoris nostri, qui post alia quædam B.M.V. antiquiora sollemnia Conceptionis festum superaddere dignum duxit, vestigiis inhærentes, statuimus, etc.” On the one hand the synod does not say that Anselm had actually introduced the feast, and, on the other, the words are too plain to allow of us thinking, with some recent writers, that the synod confused the uncle and the nephew. One cannot charge it with ignorance of this kind. See HARDOUIN, _Conc._, vii. 1538; LABBE-COSSART, _Conc._, ix. 2478.

[561] HARDOUIN, _Conc._, viii. 1266. SCHWANE, _Dogmengesch._, iii. 427.

[562] NAT. ALEXANDER., _Hist. Eccl._, 8, 546, ed. Paris, 1627. LABBE-COSSART, _Conc._, viii. 1403.

[563] The feast was kept with special devotion by the Carmelite nuns in their church in Rome. Under Innocent VIII. the order of the Conceptio B.M.V. for women was also instituted in Rome. PASSAGLIA, _De Imm. Conc._, iii. 1776.

[564] PASSAGLIA, _op. cit._, 1777, and, after him, TAPPEHORN, _Predigtentwürfe_, ii. 9, give the date incorrectly as 1476.

[565] FERRARIS, _Prompta Bibl._, 3, 379.

[566] PASSAGLIA, _op. cit._, iii. 1788; Constitution of 10th November 1644: “In his quæ per.”

[567] From 1477-1854 is scarcely four hundred years.

[568] BENEDICT XIV., _De Festis._, 2, 152.

[569] EUSEBIUS, _De Nom. Hebr._ MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xxiii. 789.

[570] See the excellent article by J. B. Kraus in the first ed. of the _Kirchenlexikons_, with the additions of SCHROD in the 2nd ed. For special treatises, see BENEDICT XIV., _Commentarius de Festis B.M.V._, and for a more modern work, HOLWECK, _Fasti Mariani_, Freiburg, 1892.

[571] _Protoevangelium_, 7. _Evang. de Nativitate Mariæ_, 6. See TAPPEHORN, _Ausserbibl. Nachrichten oder die Apokryphen_, 25.

[572] MORCELLI, i. 287. The title runs, τὰ εἰς τὸν ναὸν εἰσοδὶα τῆς Θεομητέρος. J. B. KRAUS (_Kirchenlex._, vi., 1st ed., 884) states it was observed in Constantinople in 730, on the authority of Simeon Metaphrastes, without giving the passages. ALT (p. 52) and others have copied from him, also without citing the passages. The statement is very improbable, for in 725 the Iconoclastic controversy had broken out, rendering its introduction unlikely. It might be considered probable if the homily of TARASIUS, _De Præsentatione B.M.V._, were genuine. MORCELLI (ii. 250) considers it spurious. The feast is also not included in the Menologium of Constantinople.

[573] “Depositio,” κατάθεσις, etc., is the actual name of the feast in the Calendars, and in the older menologies it is called “ἡ σορὸς τῶν βλαχένων Σορός.” Arca or loculus is the wooden coffin in which Mary is said to have been originally placed in Jerusalem, and which was brought to Constantinople under Marcian. MORCELLI, ii. 151. MURALT, _Chronogr. Byz._, i. 83.

[574] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 407.

[575] _Constit. synodica Odonis Episc. Par._ MANSI, _Conc._, xxii. 681, No. 10.

[576] MANSI, _op. cit._, 1108, i. 4. BINTERIM, _Konzilien_, iv. 480; _Denkw._, vii. 1, 98-129. TH. ESSER, _Gesch. des Engl. Grusses_; Histor. Jahrbuch, 1884, 92. [For the use of the Angelic Salutation in England, see FR. BRIDGETT, C. SS. R., “_Our Lady’s Dowry_,” chap. iv. Trans.]

[577] [For questions connected with the history of the rosary, see a series of articles in vols. 96 and 97 of _The Month_, by FR. HERBERT THURSTON, S.J.; also, _Unserer Lieben Frauen Rosenkrantz_, by FR. TH. ESSER, O.P., Paderborn, 1889. Trans.]

[578] HOLZAPFEL, _S. Dominicus und der Rosenkranz_, Munich, 1903.

[579] The originators of this form of prayer were Dominic of Prussia and Adolf of Essen, two monks of the Charterhouse in Treves in the fifteenth century. TH. ESSER, _Beitrag zur Gesch. des Rosenkranzes, Katholik_, 1897, ii. 409 _seqq._, and 1904, ii. 98 _seqq._

[580] There is historical proof for the existence of confraternities of the Holy Rosary in the second half of the fifteenth century. That founded in Cologne in 1474 by Prior Jacob Sprenger, O.P., was celebrated. TH. ESSER, _U.L. Fr. Rosenkranz_, Paderborn, 1889, 289. It was confirmed by Sixtus IV. in 1478. _Kirchenlexikon_, x., 2nd ed. 1281.

[581] _Kirchenlexikon_, viii. 2nd ed. 818; Brev. Rom. Dom i., Oct. lectio 7-9. On the 5th August takes place the local feast of Our Lady of the Snows, “Maria ad Nives,” in the basilica of Sta. Maria Maggiore in Rome. As the office has been incorporated in the Breviary, a short account of it may be justified in this place. Pope Liberius erected a basilica on the Esquiline, on the site of Livia’s market, which was called after him “Liberiana.” In the next century, Sixtus III. restored the church and changed its title, dedicating it to the Mother of God (_Lib. Pont._, Liberius, No. 52, Xystus III., No. 63). From henceforth it was known as “Basilica S. Mariæ,” at the present day, Sta. Maria Maggiore. The miracle of the snow is not mentioned in any of the original documents, but only in mediæval writings. The 5th August may have been the day of the dedication of the basilica. See GRISAR, _Gesch. Roms._, i. 153 A. 1. The legend of the translation of the Holy House of Loreto (10th Dec.) will not stand historical investigation. According to trustworthy accounts, pilgrims to Nazareth already in the eighth century found the holy house there no longer, but only a church on the site where it had stood. ADAMNAN, _De Locis Sanctis_, 2, 26; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxviii. 304. ANTONINUS PLAC., _Itinerarium_, c. 5, in GEYSER, _Itinerarium Hieros._, 161, 197; NICEPHORUS CALL., (_Hist. Eccl._, 8, 30), names Helena as the foundress of the church built on the spot where the house of the Anunnciation had stood. See L. DE FEIS, _La Santa Casa di Loreto ed il Santuario di Nazareth_, Florence, 1904.

[For Our Lady’s feasts as observed in England, see Fr. Bridgett, _op. cit._, chap. vi. For what may be urged in favour of the Holy House of Loreto, see an article by the Rev. G. E. Phillips, S.J., in the _Ushaw Magazine_, March 1908. Trans.]

[582] PFÜLF, _Die Verehrung des hl. Joseph in der Geschichte_, in Stimmen aus Maria-Laach, xxxviii (1890), 117, _et seqq._ _Révue Bénédictine_, xiv. 1897, 106 _seqq._, 145 _seqq._, 203 _seqq._ _Le Développement Hist. du Culte de St Joseph._

[583] _De Syn._, iii. c. 15, 220 _et seqq._

[584] _Script. Vet. Nova Coll._, iv. 15, _et seqq._

[585] “In Antioch. natalis Josephi,” _Codex Epternac._

[586] Printed in the _Analecta Bolland._, i. 19.

[587] _Révue Bénédictine_, xiv. (1897) iii. _seqq._ and 145 _seqq._

[588] _Ib._, 145 _seqq._

[589] PANVINIUS _Vita Sixti IV._, in the continuation to Platina.

[590] GROTEFEND, _Handbuch der Chronol._, ii. _passim_.

[591] PROCOPIUS, _De Ædif._, i. 3.

[592] _De Hær._, 79.

[593] PANVINIUS, _op. cit._

[594] See the article “Anna” by Schegg, and “Joachim” by Jocham in the _Kirchenlexikon_, 2nd ed., i. and vi. Trithemius wrote a tract on the worship of St Anne in 1484.

[595] BAILLET, v. 363.

[596] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxix. 1023; _Sermo de S. Matth._, Acta SS. Boll., 3 Febr. 487.

[597] _Opera S. Leonis I._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lv. 57; lxxiv. 1168 under No. 33.

[598] BELETH, _Rationale Div. Off._ c. 124; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccii. 131.

[599] SOCR., _Hist. Eccl._, i. 16: μνήμη τῶν ἀποστόλων.

[600] EUSEB., _Vita Const._, 4, 71.

[601] Theophanes, Nicephorus, etc. MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 197.

[602] Edited in Greek by Usener in the Bonn _Lektionskatalog_ for 1877.

[603] DUCHESNE, _Origines_, 255.

[604] GREGOR, Nyss. _Opera_; MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xlvi. 725, 787.

[605] AMBROS., _De Virg._ c. 19, No. 124: “Dies factus est Petrus, dies Paulus ideoque hodie natali eorum Spiritus Sanctus increpuit dicens, etc.” MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 299.

[606] _Hom._, 68-73 and _Sermo_, 66-69; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lvii.

[607] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 295, c. 8; 296, c. 1.

[608] See my article “Petrus und Paulus” in the _Katholik_, 1887, i. 11-39.

[609] CHRYSOSTOM, _Opera_, ed. Montfaucon, ii. 1.

[610] PRUDENTIUS, _Perist._, 12, 2: “Romam per omnem cursitant orantque;” v. 52: “Aspice per bifidas plebs Romula funditur plateas,” and especially v. 63: “Transtiberina prius solvit sacra pervigil sacerdos, Mox huc recurrit duplicatque vota.”

[611] _Sermo_, 84, al. 81 of Leo the Great is entitled: In Octavis SS. apostolorum. See AMALARIUS, _De Off. Eccl._, 3, 36.

[612] _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 16, ed. Vales, 518. THEOPHANES, ad an. 492.

[613] Among the Calendars published by Seldenius (_De Synedriis III._, c. 15) one contains it, another on 27th June has “Planctus Pauli” (see p. 212), and the third (p. 241) has another martyr called Basamon. Binterim is mistaken in thinking the feast is absent from no ancient Calendar (_Denkw._, v. 383).

[614] Eudocia lived as a widow at Jerusalem, 450-455, and died there. She had previously visited Jerusalem in 438. MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 47, 68.

[615] A priest of this church, called Philip, was papal legate at the Council of Ephesus.

[616] DE ROSSI, _Inscr. Chr._, ii. 1, 110, 134, 164. GRISAR, _Gesch. Roms._, i. 172, pt. I. Other witnesses for the existence of St Peter’s chain at Rome are ARATOR, _Acta Apost._, i. 1067; JUSTINIAN, _Epist._, in Labbe-Cossart, iv. 1416; GREGOR M., _Epist._, i. 30, ix. 122, xi. 53, etc.

[617] SIGEBERT of Gemblours mentions the event _ad ann._ 969. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clx. 191.

[618] It is not in the Kalendarium Gothicum, the Neapolitan Calendar, nor in that of Charlemagne belonging to 781 (ed. Piper), nor in the Greek menologies of Basil and Constantinople.

[619] _Römische Quartalschrift_, 1901, 244 _seqq._ Ranke is much mistaken in thinking that Bede celebrated the conversion of St Paul “in the ancient manner” on 30th June. See BEDA, _Martyrol._, ed. Migne, _Patr. Lat._, xciv. 962.

[620] HIERON. _De Vir. Ill._, c. 7, _Chron. Pasch._ The FASTI IDAT. and THEOD. LECTOR (_Hist. Eccl._, 2, 61) agree in giving the 3rd March as the date.

[621] Edited by Usener from a Parisian MS. of the ninth to twelfth century, in _Anal. Boll._, xiii. 373-78. See the author’s art., “Zur Gesch. des Aposels Andreas,” in the _Katholik_, 1906, vol. iii.

[622] Printed by Mombritius & Surius in Latin only. C. Chr. Woog (Lips., 1749) published the Greek text. MORCELLI, _Menol. Const._, i. 245, and TISCHENDORF, _Acta Apost. Apocr._, Lips., 1861, 105 _seqq._ The πράξεις τοῦ Ἀνδρέου καὶ Ματθεία (_op. cit._, 432 _seqq._) are full of childish legends.

[623] _Passio S. Artemii auctore Johanne mon._, c. 16. MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, xcvi., 1266. PAULINUS NOL., _Poema_, 19, 33. See also the _Enconium S. Lucæ_, printed for the first time in the August number of the _Jahrbuch für protest. Theologie_ for 1890, by Ph. MEYER, and ABU’L BARAKAT, _Oriens Chr._, Rome, 1902, 337, No. 6. _Tüb. Quartalsch._, 1905, 596 _et seqq._

[624] See the Calendar in SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis Hebr._, and that given by Mai.

[625] VENANTIUS FORT., _Carmina_, 8, 6. See _Kirchenlexikon_, iii., 2nd ed., 774, art. “Compostela,” by Hefele.

[626] NOTKER BALBULUS, ad VIII. Kal. Aug., says: “Iussu Herodis regis decollatus est Hierosolymis.... Hujus ossa ad Hispanias translata.” MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxi. 1125.

[627] Pope Innocent I. flatly denies that any apostle had founded the Church of Spain. _Epist. ad Decentium_, 25, c. 2: “Aut legant, si in his provinciis alius apostolorum invenitur, etc.” MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xx. 552.

[628] Edited by Duchesne in _Acta SS. Nov._, vol. ii., pars. 1, 96.

[629] [And also on the 25th May.—Trans.]

[630] HIERON., _De Vir. Ill._, c. 2.

[631] For the proof of this, see the Author’s art. in the _Katholik_, 1887, i. 23.

[632] MORCELLI, i. 168. He can only produce as evidence the Calendars of Reichenau and Rheinau, but they are sufficient for his purpose.

[633] The _Hieronymianum_ at least says so on the 27th December: “Adsumptio S. Johannis Evangelistæ apud Ephesum et _ordinatio_ episcopatus S. Jacobi fratris Domini qui ab apostolis primus ex Judaeis Hierosolymis episcopus est ordinatus.”

[634] THEODOSIUS (530 _circ._), _De Situ Terræ Sanctæ_, ed. Vindob., 1898, 142, 174. VENANTIUS FORT., _Carmina_, 8, 6.

[635] So the Chronographer of 354. The _Hieronymianum_ in its oldest recension (Weissenburg) has the entry: “In Africa natalis S. Philippi Apostoli, Jacobi, Quintiani, etc.” The recensions of Echternach and Metz have: “Natalis SS. Apostolorum Philippi et Jacobi,” and the incorrect addition in Africa is transferred to another place.

[636] _Liber Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 303, 306, note 2.

[637] MORCELLI, ii. 97, gives more particulars. The name Manna implies that the substance was white—probably the salt which gathers upon walls.

[638] _Op. cit._, i. 167 _et seq._

[639] BAUMSTARK, _Röm. Quartalschrift._, 1899, 314.

[640] There is no explanation of the entry on the 24th June, “VIII. Kal. Jul. Natalis dormitionis S. Joannis Apost. et Evang. in Epheso.” The view of those who ascribed the death of a martyr to St John on the grounds of St Mark x. 39 has never found much support. See SCHANZ, _Kommentar zu Joh._, 332.

[641] _De Præser._, c. 36.

[642] ABDIAS, _De Historia Certaminis Apostolorum Libri X._, GUTSCHMID (_Kleine Schriften_, ii. 364-372), considers the author of the _Acta Simonis_ _et Judæ_ contained in this history is familiar with Persian customs and lived in the ante-Nicene period. Gutschmid adds that both apostles preached in Armenia, A.D. 39-47, which was then subject to Persia, and fancies he can discover allusions to the civil war waged by the two Persian kings, Vardanes and Gotarzes. In the history Vardanes was favourable to Greek customs and had been visited by Apollonius of Tyana.

[643] Suana is mentioned by Claud. Ptolem., 5, 13, § 119, as situated in Greater Armenia. The Suani were a Caucasian tribe. See MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 85, 150, 211, 218, 250.

[644] _Chron. Pasch._, ed. Bonn, 471; see also 432, and _Cal. Calcasendi_ in Seldenius.

[645] Card. RAMPOLLA, _De Authentico Rom. Pontificis Magisterio_, in _La Papauté et les Peuples_, ii., Paris, 1900, 8-48. ANDRIES, _Cathedra Romana, etc._, Mainz, 1872. KELLNER, _Verfassung Lehramt u. Unfehlbarkeit d. Kirche_, Kempten, 1873.

[646] BENEDICT XIV. (_Opera ined. Heiner_, 65-67) deals with the question whether the feast commemorates St Peter’s ordination, or the day of his arrival in Rome, or the foundation of the Roman Church, etc. His history of the feast is based upon antiquated material, and the greater part of the treatise is occupied with the proof that St Peter had visited Rome.

[647] MARQUARDT MOMMSEN, _Röm. Staatsverwaltung_, iii., 2nd ed., 311 _seqq._

[648] Such exclamations as “Bene vos! Bene te patriæ pater, Optime Cæsar!” were common. OVID, _Fasti_, 2, 616-638. VALERIUS MAX., 2, 1, 8. MARTIAL., 9, 54. BONGHI, _Die römischen Feste_, translated by Ruhemunn, Vienna, 1892, 41.

[649] TERTULLIAN., _De Idol._, c. 10.

[650] AUGUSTIN., _Sermo_, 190, 191; _Opera_, v.

[651] See the second Council of Tours, A.D. 567, can. 22.

[652] _Rationale div. off._, c. 83. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccii. 87.

[653] GREG. I., _Epist. ad Mellitum_, 11, 76 al.; 9, 71. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxvii. 1215. Statements to the same effect are found in AUGUSTIN., _Epist._, 47; THEODORET, _De Græc. aff. cur._, 8; SIDONIUS AP., _Epist._, 4, 15.

[654] Edited by Henschen, _Acta SS. Boll. Junii VII._; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xiii.; and recently by Mommsen in the _Corpus Inscr. Lat._, tit. i.

[655] The bishops of Sedunum attended the Councils of Maçon, and belonged, at a later date, to the province of the Tarantaise. WILTSCH, _Kirchl. Geographie u. Statistik_, i. 323, 355.

[656] MABILLON, _De Lit. Gall._, ii. 23. MIGNE, lxxii. 182; see also 472, and DUCHESNE, _Origines du Culte Chrétien_, 266 _et seq._

[657] _Spicilegium_, t. ii.; see _infra_, p. 401.

[658] RANKE, VI. xxx.

[659] According to the edition of DE ROSSI and DUCHESNE in the _Acta SS. Boll._, we find on the 20th Jan., XV. Kal. Febr., in the Weissenburg Codex: “Dedicatio Cathedra (sic) S. Petri Apostoli, qua primo Romæ Petrus Apostolus sedit.” Epternach Codex: “Depositio S. Mariæ et Cathedra Petri in Roma.” The Bern Codex is imperfect here. On the 22nd February, VIII. Kal. Mart., the Weissenburg Codex has: “Natale S. Petri Apostoli Cathedra quam sedit apud Antiochia” (sic). The Epternach has: “Cathedra Petri in Antioc. et Romæ.” The Bern Codex: “Cathedra S. Petri Apostoli quam sedit apud Antiochiam.”

[660] BINTERIM & MOOREN, _Die Erzdiözese Köln im Mittelalter_, i., 2nd ed., 528.

[661] _Bullarium_, ed. Lux., i. 832.

[662] See BÄUMER, 510.

[663] CLEMENTIS ROM., _Recogn_., 10, 70. For a different opinion, see FR. X. KRAUS, in the third appendix to his _Roma Sott._, and MARUCCHI, who wrongly considers the feast of the 22nd February commemorated the Vatican chair of St Peter and that of the 18th January his chair at the Ostrian Cemetery. Unfortunately the latter feast was unknown in Rome before the 16th century.

[664] Concerning this point, see SCHANZ, _Kommentar zu Matthäus_, 504; _Markus_, 417; _Lukas_, 251.

[665] CLEMENTIS ROM., _Recogn._, 3, 68.

[666] According to Duchesne, it is the work of a student of Magdalen College, Oxford, called Rabanus, and belongs to the year 1456. RIETSCH, 10. The work is printed in Migne, _Patr. Gr._, i. 112.

[667] MURALT, _Chron. Byz._, i. 468, 477.

[668] MORCELLI, i. 101, 288 note. Baumstark communicated to the _Röm. Quartalschrift_, 1900, 310, a Syrian text independent of the Byzantine tradition, which mentioned Citium as the place of Lazarus’ burial.

[669] EBNER, _Inter Ital._, Freiburg, 1896, 292, 5, 14, 104, etc.

[670] GREGOR. TUR., _De Gloria Mart._, c. 30. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxi. 731. MODESTUS in _Photius_, _Bibl._, cod. 275; ed. Bekker, § 11. ANONYMUS, in _Vita Willibaldi_, c. 5. MABILLON, _Vitæ SS. Ord. Bened._, iii., 2, 384. TILLEMONT, _Hist. Eccl._, i. 4.

[671] GLYCAS, _Ann._, 4, 198; ed. Bonn, 554. ZONARAS, 16, 12, § 11, _op. cit._

[672] See Sdralek, art. “Translation” in KRAUS’ _Realenzykl_., and ACHELIS, _Die Martyrologien_, 74-76. The editors of the _Monumenta Germaniæ_ are fully alive to the value of incidents of this kind for the history of any period.

[673] JAFFÉ (_Reg. R.P._) is doubtful as to its authenticity.

[674] _Synodus S. Symmacho_, 499. THIEL., _Ep. Rom. Pont._, 653. _Lib. Pontif._, ed. Duchesne, i. 305, 307. VENANTIUS FORT., _Miscellanea_, i. 20; 8, 6.

[675] PASCHALIS I., _Epist._, i. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cii. 1086.

[676] Printed in RUINART, _Acta Mart._, 633. The Calendar of Münsterbilsen in BINTERIM is mentioned further on, page 411.

[677] Pope Symmacus is called “papa urbis” by Avitus in the inscription of one of his letters. THIEL, _Epistolæ Romanorum Pontificum_, 730. In an inscription in the catacombs the pope describes himself as: “Ego, Damasus, urbis Romæ Episcopus.”

[678] GRISAR, art. “Liberius” in the _Kirchenlexikon_, vii., 2nd ed., 1945, and J. WITTIG, _Papst Damasus: Röm. Quartalschrift_, 1902, 77-86.

[679] DESSAU and VON ROHDEN, _Prosographia Imperii Rom._, iii., Berlin, 1897, 349.

[680] See NORIS, _Cenotaphia Pisana_, Venet. 1781, 431 _et seq._, and MURATORI, _Dissertatio_, i. and ii., in the _Opera S. Paulini Nol._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi. 779 _et seqq._

[681] PAULINUS NOL., _Poema_, 21; v. 60-80, 210-215, 285-290, refer to the father; v. 314-324, to the son Turcius Asterius. See MURATORI, _op. cit._

[682] _Cf._ my articles in the _Tüb. Quartalschr._, 1902, 237 _seqq._; 1903, 321 _seqq._; 1905, 258 _seqq._ Fr. Hippolyte Delahaye, in the _Analecta Bollandiana_ (xxii. 1903, 86 _seq._), when reviewing my articles, characterised my statements as “trop ingenieuses” and “fragiles,” without, however, being able to adduce any arguments on the other side. My first opponent, Dr Kirsch, was at least sufficiently fortunate as to ferret out a misprint. The sole attempt to overthrow my conclusions reduces itself to the remark that the “Depositio Martyrum” is not an exhaustive catalogue of all the Roman martyrs who had suffered previously to its compilation. I never said it was. But did it not contain all the _martyres recogniti_ in Rome at the commencement of the fourth century (_cf._ below, page 350, for Mommsen’s remarks on this point), it would be a worthless piece of paper from which nothing could be gathered. Fr. Delahaye seems not to understand that, in dealing with material of this kind, it is of the utmost importance to start with what is actually known of the Roman officials and governments of the period. When he scornfully criticises my work as “trop ingenieux,” I must say that on my part I have found nothing in his obscure ex cathedra assertions to upset the date given above to the martyrdom of St Cecilia. [See LIGHTFOOT, _Apostolic Fathers_, pt. ii. vol. i. 516-522, for a discussion on St Cecilia’s martyrdom.—Trans.]

[683] NILLES (_Kalendarium_), who usually pays no regard to his reader’s desire for information on disputed questions, is entirely silent concerning St Catherine. On the other hand, Kaulen has been satisfied with following the much criticised article by PFÜLF (_Kirchenlexikon_, vii². 335), an imperfect piece of work.

[684] _Carmina_, 22-24, ed. Ughelli, _Ital. S._, 10, 47. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlvii. 1240 _seqq._

[685] See PETRUS DAM., _Epist._, 8, 5. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxliv. 471.

[686] Ἐγκώμιον ἐις τοὺς ἁγίους πάντας ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ μαρτυρήσαντες MIGNE, _Patr. Gr._, l. 706-712.

[687] _Liber Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 317: “Fecit ecclesiam B. Mariæ semper virginis et omnium martyrum.” See BEDE, _Hist. Angl._, 2, 4; PAULUS DIAC., _Hist. Long._, 4, 37; RORBACHER-RUMP, _Kirchengesch._, x. 107 _seqq._

[688] _Liber Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 417.

[689] _Id. op._, i. 419. BIANCHINI, 200.

[690] BELETH, _Rationale_, 127. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccii. PROBST (_Kirchenlexikon_, i., 2nd ed., art. “Allerheiligen”) is incorrect in some of his statements concerning the parts played by Gregory III. and Gregory IV.

[691] ADO, _Martyrol._, Kal. Nov.: “In Galiis monente s. record. Gregorio pontifice piissimus Ludovicus imperator omnibus regni et imperii sui episcopis consentientibus statuit, ut solemniter festivitas omnium sanctorum in prædicta die annuatim perpetuo ageretur.” MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxiii. 387. Sigebert Gembl. gives the year of its introduction: “Monente Gregorio papa et omnibus episcopis assentientibus Ludovicus imp. statuit, ut in Gallia et Germania festivitas omnium sanctorum in Kal. Nov. celebraretur, quam Romani ex institutione Bonifatii papæ celebrant.” _Chron._, ad ann. 835. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clx. 159.

[692] NAT. ALEXANDER, _Hist. Eccl._, 8, 23; ed. Paris, 1699.

[693] See ISIDORI, _Reg. Mon._, c. 24, No. 2. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxiii. 894. A mass for the dead was to be celebrated for all the departed on the day after Pentecost.

[694] Printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlii. 1038, from the _Bibl. Cluniac._, 338.

[695] _Consuet. Farf._; ed. Albers, 124 (where it is enjoined that the masses be applied for all souls). _Consuet. of the Carthusians_, by Guigo († 1137), c. 11. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clii. 655.

[696] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 494.

[697] BINTERIM and MOOREN, _Die Erzdiözese Köln_, i., 2nd ed., 536. The archivium of St Peter’s in Aix-la-Chapelle possesses a martyrology belonging to the monastery of the “Kreuzherren,” formerly existing there. It dates from 1382, and is preceded by a calendar. In this All Souls’ Day does not appear, neither do St Peter’s Chair on the 18th January, nor St Gereon and his companions; the eleven thousand virgins are mentioned, but without St Ursula.

[698] BEROLDUS, 222 _seqq._ (ed. Magistretti). Magistretti is plainly mistaken when he says the Church of Milan was the first to follow the example of St Odilo.

[699] SOZOMENUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 3. THEOPHANES, _Chronogr._, 18, ed. Bonn, 33. PROCOP., _De Acclif._, i. 9. NICEPHORUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 7, 50.

[700] MORCELLI, i. 219, and _Acta SS. Boll._, _loc. cit._, 57.

[701] EPIPHANIUS, _Hær._, 21, and THEODORET on _Col._ ii. 18, speak of the heresy in question. See THOMASSIN, 440.

[702] AMBROSIUS, _Epist._, 21 (11). HILARIUS, _Hom. in Matth._ xxviii., and on _Psalms_ 119 and 137. See BAILLET, vi. 2, 404-413.

[703] _Sacram. Leon._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lv. 103.

[704] This addition is also found in a missal at Padua belonging to the ninth century. See EBNER, _Iter Ital._, 127.

[705] _Lib. Pont._, ed. Duchesne, i. 262: “intra civitatem,” and the note.

[706] _Acta SS. Boll._, Sept. tit. viii. ADO, _Mart._, 29th Sept. It stood, according to Ado, in summitate circi, according to Baronius: circuli molis Hadriani, _i.e._ on the terrace of the Castle of St Angelo.

[707] _Cf._ Lectionary of Silos.

[708] SPELMAN, _Conc._, i. 520.

[709] As, for example, in the ninth century Calendars of Stablo and Cologne. Notker Balbulus is ignorant of the church on the Via Salaria, but gives the story of Monte Gargano on the 29th September. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxi. 1154.

[710] It is the same with the missals of Ivrea and Florence in EBNER, _Iter Ital._, 28 and 52.

[711] See SCHROD., art. “Schutzengelfest” in the _Kirchenlexikon_, x., 2nd ed., 2015. The Spanish calendars printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxxv. and lxxxvi., have not the Festival of the Guardian Angels.

[712] MARZOHL and SCHNELLER, iv. 707 note.

[713] TILLEMONT, _Hist. des Emp._, iv., art. ix. 251 _et seq._ Also 93, art. lxii.

[714] NICEPH. CALL., _Hist. Eccl._, 8, 31. TILLEMONT, _Mém._, vii., art. viii. 8.

[715] THEOPHANES, _Chronogr._, ed. Bonn, i. 37-40.

[716] AMBROSIUS, _De Obitu Theod._, c. 40. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xvi. 1399. PAULINUS NOL., _Epist. ad Severum_. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxi. 326. THEODORET, _Hist. Eccl._, i. 18.

[717] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxiv. 374: “Via Lavicana S. Helenæ, matris Constantini imperatoris.” The place of her first burial was the present Torre Pignattara.

[718] [She appears, however, in the supplement to both the Breviary and Missal. Trans.]

[719] MARUCCHI, _Nuovo Bull. di Arch. Christ._, iv. 163, takes the opposite view.

[720] _Vita Constant._, 3, 25.

[721] _Op. cit._, cc. 26-28.

[722] _Op. cit._, cc. 33-40.

[723] _Op. cit._, cc. 42, 43.

[724] In this he says that wonderful things have taken place at the Lord’s sepulchre during his own life-time. In Constantine’s letter to Macarius also the references are expressed in general terms.

[725] SOCRATES, _Hist. Eccl._, i. 17. SOZOMENUS, 2, 1. THEODORET, i. 18. THEOPHANES, _Chronogr._, i., ad ann. m. 5817, Chr. 317. CHRYSOSTOM., _In Joann._, 84. RUFIN., _Hist. Eccl._, i. 8. SULPICIUS SEV., 2, 34.

[726] _Epist. ad Severum_, 21, 5.

[727] _Excerpta Lat. Barbari_, ed. Frick, 359. THEOPHANES gives a still earlier date, _i.e._ 5817 of the world = 317 A.D. He also places the death of Macarius and Helena in the same year as the discovery of the cross. In the _Excerpta Barbari_ we find the words πρὸ ἡ καλανδῶν Δεκεμβρίων, but this must be an error, for immediately afterwards follows ὅ ἐστι Θώθ ιζ’. THOTH coincides with September, not with December. See SCHOENE, _Euseb. Chron._, i. 234. The _Liber Pontificalis_, “Vita Euseb.,” i. 167, places the finding of the cross on the 3rd May 310; but this is obviously a mistake.

[728] DUCHESNE, _Lib. Pont._, i., preface, cviii.

[729] _Peregr. Silviæ_, c. 48, ed. Geyer, 74 cod.

[730] GEYER, _Itin. Hierosol._, 149.

[731] ARCULF in Adamnanus, _De Locis Sanctis_, 3, 3; _ib._ 287.

[732] MURALT, _Chronogr. Byz._, i., 272, 286. THEOPHANES, ed. Bonn, i. 504, ad ann. 6120. _Chron. Pasch._, ed. Bonn, i. 704, ad ann. 6122, relates only the carrying away of the cross, and then concludes.

[733] The _Menologium Constantinopolitarium_ has an “Adoratio Pretiosæ Crucis” on 31st July, the meaning of which is not stated. MORCELLI, i. 63.

[734] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii. 285, 511.

[735] See the new edition by Wilson.

[736] The text of DE ROSSI and DUCHESNE in _Act. SS._ (54). A better word would have been “recuperatio.”

[737] EBNER, _Quellen und Forschungen zur Gesch. des Missale_, _etc._, Freiburg, 1896, 123. In addition to these two festivals in honour of the Holy Cross, the Egyptians and Abyssinians celebrate one on the 6th March, “Manifestatio S. Crucis per Heraclium Imp.,” instead of the 3rd May. See the _Synaxaria_ in SELDENIUS and MAI.

[738] MAGISTRETTI, _op. cit._, 141.

[739] DUCHESNE, _Origines_, 113-137.

[740] EBNER (_Iter. Italicum_, 381) proves against Probst that the letter deals not with an antiquated rite, but with the rite then actually in use in Rome.

[741] _Epist. Hadr._, 49; _Cod. Carol._, 72. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcviii. 435. The oldest of the numerous existing MSS. is the Codex Ottobonianus 313 (ninth century), originally belonging to Paris. The codex in the library of the seminary at Mainz is of the middle of the ninth century. In the Cathedral Library at Cologne are two codices, No. 137 belonging to the end of the ninth century, and No. 88 somewhat more recent.

[742] Printed together in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxii., from the edition of Mabillon. [See E. Bishop’s art. on the “Earliest Roman Mass-book,” _Dublin Review_, Oct. 1894. Trans.]

[743] BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 18 _et seq._ HONTHEIM, _Prodromus_, i. 358.

[744] See the author’s article in the _Tüb. Quartalschrift_, 1905, 590-608.

[745] _E.g._, the Ordinarium of the diocese of Rouen, etc., in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlvii. 157; the _Consuetudines Avellanenses_, _ib._ cli.

[746] See Appendix xi.

[747] _Regula ad monachos._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxviii. 396.

[748] “Ut ad capitulum primitus martyrologium legatur et dicatur versus, deinde regula aut homilia quælibet legatur, deinde a ‘Tu autem’ dicatur” (HARDOUIN, _Conc._, iv. 1232).

[749] LEO ALLATIUS, _De Libris Eccl. Græcorum_, Romæ, 1645, 78, 82, 91. DANIEL, _Cod. Lit._, iv. 320 _et seq._

[750] With regard to the Chronograph of 354, Leipzig, 1850, 581, the title runs: Hic continentur dies nataliciorum martyrum et depositiones episcoporum, quos ecclesia Carthaginis anniversaria celebrat.

[751] The statement in TEUFFEL (_Gesch. der Röm. Literatur_, iv. 118) that everything savouring of heathen superstition is omitted, is incorrect.

[752] W. WRIGHT, in _Journal of Sacred Literature_, October 1865 and January 1866. A better edition is given by DUCHESNE, _Acta SS. Boll._, Nov. II. 1, lii.-lxv., under the title: Breviarium Syriacum. [It is perhaps only fair to add that all scholars are not agreed upon the Arian character of this document. Trans.]

[753] PHILOSTORGIUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 4, 7, _passim_.

[754] LE QUIEN, _Oriens Christ._, ii. 718.

[755] _Op. cit._, ii. 1107 and 1237.

[756] SOZOMENUS, _Hist. Eccl._, 2, 13, 14.

[757] LE QUIEN, _Oriens Christ._, ii. 1102. NESTLE, _Theol. Literaturztg._, 1894, No. 2, 43.

[758] SAMUEL ANIAN., ed. Mai, 43.

[759] See H. ACHELIS, _Die Martyrologien, ihre Geschichte und ihr Wert_, Berlin, 1900, 61.

[760] The Bononia mentioned on the 30th December is not Bologna, but Bononia in Mœsia, now Widdin, to which, according to other documents, the martyr Hermes also belonged. The town of Tomi, now Kustendsche, was called Constantia at the end of the fourth century, but in this document and in Peutinger’s table it appears under its old name. Constantinople (11th May) and Byzantium (19th May) appear side by side, which marks the date when this document was drawn up. Babiduna is a slip for Noviodunum in Mœsia, now Isaktscha.

[761] See ACHELIS, _op. cit._, 33 _et seq._, for the connection between the Arian martyrology and the _Hieronymianum_.

[762] DUCHESNE, _Acta SS. Boll._, Nov. II., lviii. It is better to say from the 8th to the 30th than from the 6th to the 30th; for Tirinus and his sixteen companions are not to be found in the _Hieronymianum_, and, instead of Arius on 6th June, the Bern Codex has: In Alexandria Arthoci; the Epternach has Artotis; and the Weissenburg, Ari-thoti. It is impossible to say whether these names are intended for Arius or not.

[763] See TILLEMONT, _Mém._, vi. 8, art. xxv.

[764] According to the view of DUCHESNE and ACHELIS, the 6th July was the day of his death. In this case the year would be 335.

[765] The name Eusebius occurs very frequently in this calendar, both with and without distinguishing additions.

[766] CHRYS., _Hom._, i. 291.

[767] _Hist. Eccl._, 6, 39, 4.

[768] It is printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xviii. 878.

[769] Nos autem pæne omnium martyrum distinctis per dies singulos passionibus collecta in uno codice nomina habemus atque cotidianis diebus in eorum veneratione missarum solemnia agimus. Non tamen in eodem volumine quis qualiter sit passus indicatur, sed tantummodo nomen, locus et dies passionis ponitur. Unde fit, ut multi ex diversis terris atque provinciis per dies, ut prædixi, singulos cognoscantur martyrio coronati.—GREG. M., _Registrum_, 8, 29.

[770] The passage is capable of receiving various interpretations. See DUCHESNE, _Prolegg. ad Mart. Hieron. in Acta SS._, Nov. II. xi., xlvii. The words are as follows: “Passiones martyrum legite constanter, quas inter alia in epistola S. Hieronymi ad Chromatium et Heliodorum destinta procul dubio reperietis, qui per totum orbem terrarum floruere, ut sancta invitatio vos provocans ad cœlestia regna perducat.” CASSIODOR., _Instit. Div. Lit._, 32. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxx. 1147.

[771] BEDA, _Liber Retractionis in Acta Ap._, c. i. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcii. 997: Liber martyrologii, qui B. Hieronymi nomine ac præfatione intitulatur, quamvis Hieronymus illius libri non auctor sed interpres, Eusebius autem auctor exstitisse videatur.

[772] HILDUIN., _Epist. ad Ludov. Pium._ MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cvi. 19.

[773] [Since the appearance of the second edition of Dr Kellner’s _Heortologie_, a work of the first importance on the Roman martyrology has been published, _Les martyrologes historiques du moyen âge, par Don. Henri Quentin, bénédictin de Solesmes_, Paris, 1908, Lecoffre. Trans.]

[774] B. KRUSCH (_Neues Archiv für ältere deutsche Gesch._, xx. [1895] 437-440 and xxvi. [1901] 349-389) is in favour of Autun as the place of its origin. But what is gained?

[775] GRISAR (_Gesch. Roms._, 291) thinks it may belong to the time of Xystus III. (433-446).

[776] Aug. Urbain has attempted to reconstruct the original Martyrologium Romanum, as it was at the end of the fifth century from the _Hieronymianum_ HARNACK: _Texte und Unters._, vi. 3, Leipzig, 1901.

[777] Martyrs of the name of Felix, number 118, Saturniuus 86, Januarius 68, Donatus 64, Cajus 40, Alexander 42, Lucian 28, etc. Similarly the common feminine names and Thecla. Afra occurs four times. Strange sounding names are found everywhere: _e.g._ Piperion, Prunimus, Tipecirus, Herifilius, Manira, Itercola, Eunuculus, and Eununculus, Barbalabia, etc. We are, however, ignorant of the names which the wealthy Romans were wont to give to their slaves.

[778] See GREGOR. TURON., _Mirac._, i. 63. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxi. 762.

[779] ACHELIS sees in the phrase “in Africa” a reference to the massacres of Christians by the Vandals. See 101, _seqq._

[780] ACHELIS gives examples, 209, 242, etc.

[781] ACHELIS, 115-118, has collected together 68 instances, which he has analysed critically and historically as far as possible.

[782] The entries respecting St Gereon and his companions may serve as an example. St Ursula and Palmatius with the “innumerabiles trevirenses” have no existence in the _Hieronymianum_. viii. Id. Oct. (8th October):—

BERNE |EPTERNACH |WEISSENBURG | | Nothing. | Agrippin. sct. Gereon | Nothing. |et aliorum cccxcii. mart.| | | vii. Id. Oct. Gereon | Et alibi Cassi, eusebi,| Coloniæ Agrippine cum sociis suis |florenti, jocundi; |nat. sctorum cccxvii. trecentorum decim et |Agrippinæ depos. scor. |quorum nomina Deus vii martirum quorum |mart. mart. maurorum cum |scit. nomina Deus scit. |alis cccxxx. | | | vi. Id. Oct. Et | Nothing. | Et alibi ... Heracli, alibi Cassi, eusebi, | |cassi, eusebi, florenti, victoris, | |florenti, victoris, Agrippinæ mallusi | |Agrippinæ mallus cum aliis trecentos | |cum aliis cccxxx. xxx. | |

[783] ACHELIS, 91 _seqq._

[784] If this be the case, and it is not free from doubt, still the name of Arius was not read out “at the altar,” as ACHELIS states (87 and 98), for the martyrologies were not read at the altar but in the choir, and it would have happened only were the Weissenburg Codex in use, for other codices have different readings. The reading of the martyrology—not of the “Passions” of the martyrs—at the choir office dates back, as far as the evidence exists, to the ninth century. Bishop Gregorius of Corduba, whom ACHELIS (98, note 4) places at a very early period, is not an historical personage; he exists only in the list of bishops contained in the letters ascribed to St Jerome.

[785] In Codex 2171 nov. acqu. of the Nat. Libr., Paris, ed. by G. Morin in _Anecdota Maredsolana_, vol. i. 1893. _Cf._ præf., ii., viii., xiii., etc. [See also _Le Liber ordinum de l’Eglise d’Espagne du Vᵉ au XIᵉ siècle_, published by Dom. M. Férotin, 1904. Trans.]

[786] JOH. SELDENIUS, _De Synedriis et Præf. Jurid. Vet. Ebreorum._, Amstelod., 1679, lib. 3, c. 15, 204-247.

[787] F. WÜSTENFELD, _Synaxarium_, Gotha 1879. Introduction.

[788] LE QUIEN, _Oriens Christ._, ii. 453.

[789] MURALT, _Chronogr. Byz._, i. 286.

[790] LE QUIEN, _op. cit._, 452, 476.

[791] A. MAI, _Nova Collectio Veterum Script._, iv. 15-34.

[792] WÜSTENFELD, _Synaxarium_, 10, Hatur. The Patriarchs mentioned above are also omitted.

[793] LE QUIEN, _op. cit._, ii. 479 and 445-466.

[794] When the name of St John Chrysostom occurs more than once in the Byzantine, Egyptian, and Syrian calendars, it commemorates certain events connected with him besides the day of his death (14th September). Such dates are the 7th May and the 13th November, the 27th January is the day of his return to Constantinople, _i.e._ his translation by Proclus under Theodosius II., in 448, and is celebrated by the Greeks and Syrians. The meaning of the other two days is unknown; See Morcelli, i. 223; ii. 41.

[795] A. MAI, _Nova Collectio Veterum Script._, iv. 92-122.

[796] WÜSTENFELD, _Synaxarium, etc._, 97.

[797] _Op. cit._, 120 _seqq._

[798] MORCELLI, _Calend. Eccl. Const._ i., 227.

[799] MORCELLI (_op. cit._, i. 15), declares it is the oldest, and older than the Menologium Sirleti in particular.

[800] MURALT, _Chronogr. Byz._, i. 475.

[801] Both appear in the Calendar of the Syrian Church: Jacobus Zebedæi on the 30th April, Jacobus Alphæi on the 9th October, and Jacobus frater Domini on the 23rd October and 28th December.

[802] Printed in MORCELLI, i. 69-105.

[803] GAMS, _Series Epp._, 904.

[804] _Nova Collectio Script. Vet._, v., Romæ, 1821, 58-65.

[805] _E.g._ in Aurelian of Arles, † 553 (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxviii., 596): “In martyrum festivitatibus, etc.”

[806] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxviii., 881. MONE, _Lat. und. Griech. Messen aus dem 2-6 Jahrhundert_, Frankfurt, 1850.

[807] Projectus, deacon of Bishop Evasius of Asti, appears to belong to the Lombard period, and his veneration dates from about the time of Luitprand (713-743).

[808] _Calendarium Romanum nongentis annis antiquius_, ed. F. Joh. Fronto, Parisiis, 1652. The title Calendarium is not well chosen.

[809] _Liber Pontif._, ed. Duchesne, i. 420.

[810] _Op. cit._, 402, Vita Gregorii, ii.

[811] _Introduction_, 98.

[812] [Much light has recently been thrown upon these calendars and their relation to one another by Dom. Henri Quentin, _op. cit._ Trans.]

[813] BEDA, _Hist. Eccl._ iii., 24. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcv. 290.

[814] Printed in the _Acta SS. Boll._, March, vol. ii. Both recensions are placed side by side in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xciv. A “Kalendarium Anglicanum” is in the same vol., 1147 _et seqq._ BEDE’S words under the 7th Feb. are remarkable: “Britaniis in Augusta natale Augusti Episcopi et martyris.” The feast of All Saints is given on the 1st Nov. as well as the feast on the 13th May, whose transference to the 1st Nov. only took place later under Gregory IV. (827-844). No explanation has been given of Andrew with 2597 companions on the 19th August.

[815] WANDELBERT, ed. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxi. 577. See also cxix. 10, 11.

[816] And the same is true of the other works mentioned: _e.g._, FLORUS has admitted Gereon and 315 companions on the 10th October, who are omitted by BEDE, but he knows nothing of Ursula. WANDELBERT mentions on the 21st October flocks of virgins amounting to some thousands murdered by the tyrant in Cologne, whose trophies adorn the banks of the Rhine. Gereon has Cassius, Florentius, and Victor as his companions (MIGNE, _Patr., Lat._, xciv. 1067, 1078; cxxi. 614).

[817] Edited with an introduction, English translation, and notes by Whitley Stokes in the _Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy_, i., Dublin, 1880.

[818] Edited by the same under the title, _Felire hui i Gorman: The Martyrology of Gorman_, among the publications of the Bradshaw Society, London, 1895. See also _Analecta Boll._, xiii. 193. BELLESHEIM, _Gesch. der kathol., Kirche in Irland_, i. 239 _seqq._

[819] DÜMMLER (_Das Martyrologium Notkers_, _etc._, in the _Forschungen z. deutsch. Gesch._, xxv. 201), incorrectly dates it from between 860-870.

[820] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxiii. 146-178.

[821] _Ib._, 182-202.

[822] _Ib._, 292-419.

[823] _Ib._, 143, 144. Mosander, before Rosweyde, had edited the larger Ado by itself without the smaller.

[824] “Quod ego diligenti cura _transscriptum_ ... in capite hujus libri ponendum putavi.” _Transscriptum_ cannot be understood of mere copying (describere) but of re-editing. The Roman Calendar makes no mention of Old Testament names, Jeremias, Moses, etc., nor of Alban, Servatius, etc. Accordingly this _Mart. Rom. Parvum_ has not the importance which ACHELIS (p. 112) attributes to it.

[825] BÄUMER, 474.

[826] H. LÆMMER, _De Martyrol. Rom._, 19.

[827] BŒHMER-WILL, _Regesta Archiep. Mogunt._, i. 67, 68. The martyrology of Rabanus is printed in MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cx.

[828] MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxxxi. 1070. See also BINTERIM, _Denkw._, v. 62. “Cujas causæ nos utpote barbari et in extremis mundi climate positi sumus ignari.”

[829] LÆMMER, _op. cit._, 10-17.

[830] BENEDICT, xiv., _De Servorum Die Beatificatione_, i. 43, and iv. 2, 17. N. PAULUS, _Martyrolog. u Brevier als histor. Quellen_, Katholik, 1900, i. 355.

[831] [The reader will find much information bearing upon English heortology in the following works:—_A Menology of England and Wales_, by R. Stanton, 1887, London, Burns & Oates; _Die Heiligen Englands_, by F. Liebermann, 1889, Hannover, Hahn; _The Bosworth Psalter_, ed. by Gasquet and Bishop, 1908, London, Bell & Sons. Trans.]

[832] Edited by Ferd. Piper, Berlin, 1858.

[833] LANFRANC, i. 9. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cl. 472-478.

[834] HARTZHEIM, iv. 106, for A.D. 1307. The correct date, according to Binterim, is 1307. _Conc._, vi. 118, note 1, 1308. JOERRES regards the sixth canon as not authentic, _Röm. Quart. Schr._, 1902.

[835] HARTZHEIM, vi. 498.

[836] J. Braun (_Innsbr. Zeitschr. für Kath. Theol._, 1901, i. 155 _seqq._) contends that white was not the only liturgical colour in antiquity, and rests his contention on some representation (not miniatures) of the fifth to the ninth centuries in which yellow, brown and other colours appear. But “white” is not to be taken as meaning always “snow-white,” and the natural colour of silk and wool would border on yellow. The representations may have grown darker through age, or been painted over at a later date. At any rate the proofs on which he relies are not sufficiently strong to overthrow the received view which is based on many statements in original sources.

[837] SICARDUS, _Mitrale_, 2, 5 (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccxiii. 77): In colore pro qualitate temporis alternatur, albo utimur in resurrectione ... rubeo in pentecoste. The passage in Johannes Abrinc., _De Off. Eccl._ (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, cxlvii., 62) is defective and obscure. It seems only to refer to the high priest of the Old Testament.

[838] DURANDUS, _Rationale Div. Off._, 3, 18. The _Ordo Rom._ xiv., c. 49 _seqq._ of the thirteenth century mentions five colours: white, red, green, violet and black.

[839] INNOCENT III., _De S. Alt. Myst._, i. 65; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, ccxvii., 799-802.

[840] For the history of liturgical vestments, see J. Braun, S.J., _Die Priesterlichen Gewänder des Abendlandes_, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1897, and a larger and more recent work by the same author, _Die Liturgische Gewandlung im Occident u. Orient, etc._, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1907. [Also J. Wilpert, _Die Gewandlung der Christen in den ersten Jahrhunderten_, Cologne, Bachem, 1898. Trans.]

[841] See THALHOFER, _Liturgik_, ii. 82, who points out this meaning in Micrologus.

[842] “Sacramenta” is found, amongst others, in INNOCENT I., _Epist._, 17, c. 5, 12; 25, c. 4.

[843] TERTULL., _De Exhort. Cast._, 11; _Apol._, 2; _Ad uxor._, 2, 8; _De Præscr._, 4; _De Virg. Vel._, 13; _De Corona_, 2; _De Carne Christi_, 2, etc. Tertullian uses “sacrificium,” _De Cultu Fem._, 2, 11, etc. CYPRIAN, _Epist._, 12, 2; 15, 1; _Ad Cæc._, 9 and 17, etc. AMBROSIUS, _De Obitu Valent._, 2, 113; _In Psalm._, 38, c. 25; 118, c. 48; _Epist._, 39, 4.

[844] _De Civ. Dei_, 10, 6-20; _Cont. Faustum_, 20, 18; _Enarr. in Psalm._, 33, c. 6; 106, c. 13; _Epist._, 54, 4; 149, 15; 159; _Sermo_, 137, 8; 310, 30; 311, 18; 345, 4, etc.

[845] BARONIUS, _Annales_, ad an. 34, c. 59.

[846] _Epist. I. ad Gundobadum_, c. i., and _Epist._, 3.

[847] _Test. De Anima_, c. 9.

[848] The formula in question runs: Ἀπολύεσθε ἐν εἰρήνῃ, _i.e._ “Depart in peace,” or, Πορεύεσθε ἐν εἰρήνῃ, or, Ἐν εἰρήνῃ προελθῶμεν. DANIEL, _Cod. Lit._, iv. 79, 131, 370, 449. “Ite missa est” literally means: Go, it is the dismissal.

[849] _Peregr. Silviæ_, ed. Geyer, c. 24 _seqq._

[850] “Missa autem quæ fit ... hoc est oblatio”; the passage seems to have been corrected. The other passage adduced by Professor Funk (_Tüb. Theol. Quartalschr._, 1904, 56) to prove the contrary—“fit oblatio in Anastase maturius, ita ut fiat missa ante solem”—ought to be translated: “the Mass took place earlier, so that its conclusion came before sunrise.” Missa here = the dismissal at the end of Mass.

[851] CASSIAN, _De Cœnobiorum Institutis_, 2, 7, 13 and 15; 3, 7; 11, 15.

[852] See LEO I., _Sermo_, 41, c. 3; _Epist._, 156, c. 5. Once, in _Epist._, 9, c. 8, we find “missa.” But the general employment of the term cannot be inferred from its use in one isolated instance.

[853] “Missa catechumenorum” meant originally not that part of the Mass at which the catechumens assisted, but the dismissal of the catechumens.

[854] For _missæ_ in the sense of the canonical hours, we may cite GREGOR. M., _Epist._, 2, 12; 3, 63; 11, 64; MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, lxxvii. 1187; in the sense of the Mass: _Epist._, 4, 39; _Hom._, 50, 8; as a general term for both, _Epist._, 3, 63; 4, 18, etc. As regards St Benedict’s usage, Fr. Lindenbauer, O.S.B., draws our attention to Mattins. It means dismissal at the hours: _Regula_, c. 17 (MIGNE, lxvi. 460), but Mass, _ib._ c. 35, 60.

[855] _Acta S. Ludgeri_, c. 20. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, xcix. 779.

[856] _Agathense_ 506, can. 30: “missæ vespertinæ.”

[857] _E.g._, _Braccarense_, ii., can. 64; _Agath._, can. 47.

[858] _Epist._, 1, 20, c. 3-5.

[859] As by Prof. Funk, _Tüb. Theol. Quartalschr._, 1904, No. 1.

[860] It was published by B. Georgiades from a MS. discovered in the Monastery of Chalki (Constantinople, 1885-86), then by Bratke, Bonn, 1891, and by BONWETSCH, _Hippolyts Werke_, vol. i., Leipsig, 1897.

[861] In Cyril of Scythopolis, the Arabian bishop, George of Horta (before 724), and Photius, _Bibl. cod._, 222, 163 b, ed. Bekker, and perhaps also in Germanus. The passages are collected in BONWETSCH, _op. cit._, xv. _seqq._, and partially in GALLANDI, _Bibl. Vet. Patr._, II. Such minute indications of time in so ancient a writer were too precious to be passed over.

[862] The _Liber Generationis_ (MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, iii. 651 _seqq._, _Corp. Inscr. Lat._, and FRICK, _Chron. Min._, i. 1-77) is certainly a part of the Chronicle of Hippolytus, as Mommsen has conclusively proved (_Abhandl. der Sächs. Akademie d. Wissensch._, 1850, i. 586 _seqq._).

[863] That interpolations of this kind were formerly made by unskilful hands is shown by the addition to the MS. belonging to Mount Athos, by the Slav translation: Καὶ Γάϊου Καῖσαρος τὸ τέταρτον καὶ Γαίου Κεστίου (instead of Sentii) Σατορνῖνου, the consuls for the year 41 A.D., which Bonwetsch has placed in the text, although within brackets.

[864] LEO ALLATIUS, _De Dominicis et Hebdom. Recent. Græcorum_, Cologne, 1648, 1400 quoted by Daniel, _Cod. Lit._, iv. 212 _seqq._ ALT., 181-221. NILLES, II. xvii.-xxi.

[865] The adjective is formed after the analogy of ἄκερως.

[866] ANSELM speaks of him, _Epist._, 3, 43 and 77; 4, 114. MIGNE, _Patr. Lat._, clviii. EADMER refers to him, _Hist. Novorum._, 5, 492 and 497. MIGNE, clix.

[867] It is found in MSS. among the works of the elder Anselm, to whom it was at first ascribed. Fr. de Buck and others set it down to the nephew, but in the earliest codex at Canterbury, belonging to the twelfth century, it is expressly described as a work of Eadmer’s. See THURSTON ET SLATER, _Eadmeri Mon. Cant. Tractatus de Conceptione S. Mariæ_, Frib. Brisg., 1904.

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE

GIVING THE CHIEF EVENTS RELATING TO THE LITURGY AND FESTIVALS OF THE CHURCH

1st cent. Reference to Easter by St Paul (1 Cor. v. 7 _et seqq._). Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus. Itaque epulemur, non in fermento veteri ... sed in azymis sinceritatis et veritatis.

2nd cent. The 6th Jan. observed as Christ’s birthday in Alexandria by a section of the Christians.

3rd cent. The Festivals of Easter and Pentecost mentioned by Tertullian (_De Bapt._, 19) and Origen (_C. Cels._, 8, 22).

304. Evidence for the Feast of the Epiphany in Thrace.

320. Discovery of the Holy Cross by St Helena. Excerpta lat. Barbari.

321. Constantine the Great, by the law of 3 July, forbids law courts to sit on Sunday (_Cod. Theod._, 2, 8 de feriis i.).

325. The Ascension mentioned by Eusebius.

326. Death of St Helena at the age of 80, foundress of the churches at Bethlehem and on the Mount of Olives.

335. Consecration of the church built by Constantine in Jerusalem on 14th Sept. It was named Martyrium or Anastasis (Euseb., _Vita Constant._, 3, 25, and 35). The same day is also the Feast ὑψώσεως τοῦ τιμίου σταυροῦ.

340. Observance in Egypt of the fast of forty days mentioned by St Athanasius.

337-352. Under Pope Julius I., 25th Dec. kept at Rome as Festival of Christ’s Nativity.

354. In Rome, 22nd Feb. kept as Natale Petri de Cathedra, and 29th June as day of the Apostles’ death.

356. Translation of St Timothy’s relics to Constantinople on 1st July (Fasti Idat., _Hieron. Chron._).

357. 3rd March, translation of relics of St Andrew and St Luke to the basilica of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople (Fasti Idat., _Chron. Pasch. Hieron._, catal. 7).

360. The Festival of the Epiphany in Gaul mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus.

379. 25th Dec. celebrated for the first time as Christmas in Constantinople by St Gregory Naz.

380. Evidence for Epiphany in Spain (_Syn. Sarag._, c. 3). Theodosius the Great publishes a law on 27th March forbidding the sittings of law courts during the forty days of Lent.

385-387 (_circ._). The Presentation of Christ in the Temple mentioned by the pilgrim from Gaul in Jerusalem; also the feast of the 14th Sept.

370-380 (_circ._). Compilation of an Arian Calendar on Martyrology.

386. The Nativity of Christ celebrated for the first time in Antioch on 25th Dec. By a law of 26th Feb., Theodosius forbids unauthorised translations of the bodies of the saints, the dividing into parts of the remains of the martyrs, and all traffic in relics.

386. By the law of 26th Feb., judges of arbitration were forbidden to exercise their functions on Sunday. 20th May games in the circus and theatrical representations were forbidden.

389. Theodosius I. and Valentinian II. publish a law forbidding the law courts to sit for seven days before and seven days after Easter.

394. The relics of the Apostle St Thomas translated to the great church in Edessa (Socrates, _Hist. Eccl._, 4, 18; _Chron. Edess._, ed. Assemani).

395. Christmas definitely established in Constantinople.

398. St John Chrysostom chosen patriarch of Constantinople, 26th Feb.

399. Honorius and Arcadius forbid races on Sunday (_Cod. Theod._, 2, 8, 23).

400. The same emperors forbid games in the circus on Christmas, Epiphany, and during Eastertide.

402. Discovery of the relics of St Stephen, Gamaliel, and Nicodemus by the priest Lucian of Jerusalem at Caphargamala. Some writers date this 5th Dec. 415.

405. The day of the death of SS. Peter and Paul mentioned as an ecclesiastical festival in Rome by Prudentius (_Perist._, 12).

425. Theodosius extends prohibition of games to Whit-week.

431. Bishop Paul of Emesa mentions that Christmas had been introduced in Alexandria.

348. The patriarch Proclus has the relics of St John Chrysostom brought to Constantinople on 27th Jan.

439. The Empress Eudocia translates the relics of St Stephen from Jerusalem to Constantinople and lays them in the basilica of St Lawrence, 21st Sept.

440 (_circ._). St Leo refers to the Ember fasts in Rome.

448 (_circ._). The Calendar of Bishop Polemius Silvius of Sion for Southern Gaul.

452. Discovery of the head of John the Baptist, and its translation to Constantinople on 24th Feb.

470 (_circ._). Rogation procession introduced by Mamertus of Vienne.

491. Perpetuus, Bishop of Tours, orders the Advent fast. The two Festivals of the Nativity and Beheading of the Baptist celebrated in Tours.

492. The Festival of SS. Peter and Paul on 29th June adopted in Constantinople.

492-496. Pope Gelasius appoints the ordination of priests to take place at the Embertides.

500 (_circ._). The monks of Palestine keep the annual commemoration of the Holy Mother of God (μνημὴ τῆς θεοτόκου) in their monasteries.

504. The Emperor Anastasius has the relics of the Apostle Bartholomew brought to the city of Daras, on the borders of Mesopotamia, which he had fortified.

506. The Council of Agde (canon 63) includes the Nativity of St John Baptist among the festivals of obligation.

534. Justinian I. renews the prohibition against the sittings of the law courts on 25th Dec. and 6th Jan.

542. Candlemas celebrated for the first time in Constantinople on 2nd Feb., and ordered to be observed throughout the empire by Justinian. The patriarch Menas translates the relics of SS. Andrew, Luke, and Timothy to the recently completed basilica of the Apostles in Constantinople.

Before 565. Justinian I. builds a church of St Anne in the second region of Constantinople.

582-602. The three Festivals of Our Lady’s Nativity, Annunciation, and Purification said to have been introduced by the Emperor Maurice.

Sixth cent. The Sundays in Advent to the number of five appear in the Gelasianum.

592-600. Composition of the so-called Martyrologium Hieronymianum.

Before 604. Pope Gregory the Great increases the solemnity of the Litania Major in Rome.

609 or 610. The Emperor Phocas grants the Pantheon to Pope Boniface IV., who adapts it as a church, and dedicates it to our Lady and all the Holy Martyrs, on 13th May. Since then it has been called Maria ad Martyres.

629. King Siroes of Persia restores to the Emperor Heraclius the part of the Holy Cross which had been taken from Jerusalem.

650 (_circ._). Evidence for the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross for Spain in the Lectionary of Silos.

687-701. Pope Sergius I. orders processions (litaniæ) in Rome on the Feasts of the Annunciatio Domini, Dormitio, and Nativitas B.V.M.

731. The Ven. Bede composes his martyrologium.

747. The Embertides legally established in England.

769. The same in Germany.

781 (_circ._). The Octava Domini (1st Jan.) appears as the Festum Circumcisionis in the Calendar of Charlemagne.

Between 784 and 791. Under Adrian I., the Sacramentarium Gregorianum sent to the Frankish Empire, and introduced there.

Between 786 and 797. Paul the deacon compiles a Homilarium at the command of Charlemagne.

787. The second Council of Nicæa re-establishes the worship of images.

800 (_circ._). Compilation of the Menologium of Constantinople.

Between 827 and 835. Gregory IV. changes the Feast of All the Martyrs (13th May) into a Feast of All Saints, and places it on the 1st Nov.

835. The Emperor Louis the Pious introduces the Feast of All Saints into the Frankish Empire.

Between 902 and 920. The first Sunday after Pentecost kept as a Festival of the Holy Trinity in Liège by Bishop Stephen.

993. The first papal canonisation—that of St Ulrich by Pope John XV.

998. Abbot Odilo of Cluny introduces the Commemoratio Omnium Fidelium Defunctorum (2nd Nov.) in his Order.

10th cent. The Festum Conceptionis B.V.M (8th Dec.) appears in several calendars (_e.g._ the Neapolitan).

1000-1025. Composition of the Menologium Basilianum.

1068-1071. Adoption of the Roman rite in Aragon under King Sancho Ramirez.

1078. Adoption of the Roman rite in Castile.

1080 (_circ._). Gregory VII. fixes the number of Sundays in Advent at four, and suppresses deviations from the Roman custom of observing Advent.

Between 1093-1109. The Festum Conceptionis B.V.M. introduced into England by St Anselm of Canterbury.

1128-29. The Feast of Our Lady’s Conception introduced into some English monasteries.

1140. The same feast introduced at Lyons.

1166. The Emperor Manuel Comnenus puts out an order concerning festivals.

1198. Innocent III. enjoins the Bishop of Worms to celebrate the Festum Conversionis S. Pauli Ap. in his diocese as it is in Rome (_Reg._, i. 44). In the statutes of the synod held by Bishop Odo of Paris it is enjoined to say the Ave Maria.

Before 1216. Innocent III. regulates the use of liturgical colours.

1247. Corpus Christi celebrated for the first time in Liège.

1260. The Conversion of St Paul adopted in Cologne by Archbishop Conrad von Hochstaden.

1263. The General Chapter of the Franciscans at Pisa enjoins the Feast of Our Lady’s Conception for the whole Order.

1264. The Feast of Our Lady’s Visitation prescribed for the whole Church by Urban IV.

1298. Boniface VIII. raises all festivals of Apostles to the rank of Festa duplicia.

1311. Clement V. at the Synod of Vienne repeats the injunction to celebrate Corpus Christi throughout the Church.

1316. John XXII. repeats and confirms the bull of Urban IV. with regard to Corpus Christi.

1328. The Synod of London appoints the Conceptio B.V.M. as a holy day of obligation for the province.

1334. The Festum SS. Trinitatis enjoined by John XXII. to be kept throughout the Church.

1354. Innocent VI., at the request of the Emperor Charles IV., appoints the Festum Lanceæ et Clavorum.

1371. Gregory XI. institutes the Festum Præsentationis B.V.M.

1389. Urban VI. makes the Festum Visitationis B.V.M. a universal feast for the whole Church.

1408. Chancellor John Gerson finds fault with the number of festivals.

1416. Publication of the book of Nicholas of Clemangis against the increase of holy days.

1423. The Festum VII. Dolorum B.V.M. adopted in Cologne.

1452. The Feast of the Seven Dolors approved by the provincial Synod of Cologne.

1456. Calixtus III., following the precedent of the Greeks, orders the Feast of Our Lord’s Transfiguration to be celebrated on 6th Aug.

1464. The Festival of Our Lady’s Presentation introduced into the Duchy of Saxony, and, in 1468, into the province of Mainz.

1474. Sixtus IV. gives his approval to the public veneration of St Joseph and St Anne.

1477. Sixtus IV. inserts the Conceptio Immaculatæ Virg. Mariæ into the Roman Breviary.

1523. Publication of Luther’s little work on baptism in German.

1536. Cardinal Quiñones, O.S.F., puts out his edition of the Breviary for the use of the secular clergy. It was approved by Clement VII. and Paul III., and widely used, but withdrawn under Pius V. in 1568.

1536-37. The Devotion of the Forty Hours introduced in Milan.

1563. The Council of Trent in its session (xxv.) of 5th Dec. commits to the Pope the final arrangements concerning the details of the Breviary and Missal.

1568. The revised Roman Breviary published.

1570. The revised Roman Missal published.

1582. Reform of the Calendar by Gregory XIII. takes effect on 15th Oct.

1584. Publication by papal bull of 14th Jan. of the official Martyrologium Romanum prepared by Baronius.

1588. Sixtus V. institutes the Congregatio Rituum by the bull Immensa Æterni.

1596. Publication of the Pontificale Romanum.

1602. Clement VIII. takes steps for a revision of the Roman Breviary, and, in 1604, of the Roman Missal.

1608. Paul V. institutes the Feast of the Guardian Angels.

1614. Paul V. publishes the Ritual prepared by the Cardinal of San Severino.

1621. Gregory XV. appoints the 19th March as a Festival of St Joseph for the universal Church.

1631. Urban VIII. proposes a fresh revision of the Breviary.

1634. Revision of the Roman Missal by Urban VIII.

1642. Urban VIII. reduces the number of festivals (in foro) by the bull Universa per orbem.

1644. The Conceptio B.V.M. made a holy day of obligation for Spain.

1666. Archbishop Harduin of Paris suppresses the festivals of three Apostles and St Michael. These feasts were restored by his successor, de Harlay, in 1673.

1668. Publication of Thiers’ book “De Festorum Dierum Imminutione” at Lyons. Commencement of the public worship of the Sacred Heart of Jesus.

1669. Clement IX. institutes the Congregatio Indulgentiarum et SS. Reliquarum.

1683. Innocent XI., at the request of the Emperor Leopold, establishes the Festival of the Name of Mary in commemoration of the relief of Vienna.

1708. The Conceptio B.V.M. appointed a feast in choro of the universal Church.

1721. Pope Innocent XIII., at the request of the Emperor Charles VI., appoints the Feast of the Name of Jesus to be celebrated on the second Sunday after Epiphany.

1727. Benedict XIII. proposes a further reduction of feast days for Spain.

1741-1747. Commission in Rome, under the presidency of Cardinal Gonzaga, for the improvement of the Breviary. The legends were severely criticised, and much valuable material was collected for future use.

1747. Muratori speaks in favour of the reduction of feast days in his work “Della Regolata Divozione de’ Cristiani.”

1765. Clement XIII. appoints the Feast of the Sacred Heart. M. Gerbert writes his “De Dierum Festorum Numero Minuendo, Celebratione Amplianda. S. Blasian.” Benedict XIV. discusses the same subject (_Diss. de Festorum de Præcepto Imminutione._ _Cf._ _De Serv. D. Beatif._, 4, 2).

1772. New regulations for feast days in Prussia.

1788. Decrease of Catholic festivals in Prussia by Pius VI. This arrangement forms the basis of that now in use.

1802. Concordat with France, by which the feasts falling on week days were reduced to four.

1828. Convention of Leo XII. with Prussia concerning feast days.

1854. Definition of the Conceptio Immaculata and extension of the feast to the whole Church.

INDEX

Abbo of Fleury, 160

Abdias [pseudo-Abdias], 298

_Acta, The, of Martyrs_, 208 _seq._

Ado, _see_ Martyrology

Adolf III. (Archbishop of Cologne), 199

⸺ of Essen (Carthusian), 270 n.

Adrian I. (Pope), 344

Agde, Synod of, 68

d’Ailly, Peter, 274

Aix-la-Chapelle, Council of, enumeration of festivals, 22, 188, 194, 348

Alacoque, Marg. Mary, Bl., 126

Alanus de Rupe, 269

Albero II. (Bishop of Liège), 258

Alcuin, 72, 78, 116 _seq._, 222

Alexander II. (Pope), 116, 118

⸺ III. ” on rest from labour, 12

⸺ Severus (Emperor), 317 _seq._

Alfanus (Abbot of Monte Cassino), 322

Altfrid, his use of the word _Missa_, 436

Alvarus Pelagius, 260

Amadeus of Lausanne, 272

Amalarius, 67, 98, 160, 193

_Ambarvalia, The_, 190

Ambrose, St, on the date of Easter, 53 n., 73, 92, 93, 148 _seqq._, 196, 283, 334, 436 _seq._

_Amburbalia, The_, 190

Anastasius (Emperor), 286

Andrew of Crete, 236

Anne, St, festival of the Conception of, 242

Anselm of Canterbury, St, 248 _seqq._, 255, 445

⸺ the younger, 248 _seqq._, 255, 445

Antioch, the Lenten fast at, 99, 108; Christmas at, 131 _seq._

Antony of Grenoble, 125.

Apostles, The, on the date of Easter, 54

_Apostolic Canons, The_, 41, 92, 96 _seq._

⸺ _Constitutions, The_, on observance of Sunday and Saturday, 12; list of feasts in, 20; on fasts, 91, 94 _seq._, 97, 106, 112, 114

_Arabic Canons, The_, 40

Arator, 284

Arcadius (Emperor), forbids races on Sunday, 19, 131, 135

_Arian Martyrology, The_, 282, 294, 349, 360; _see_ Calendars

Arius (heretic), 360 _seq._

Arles, Synods of, 118, 436

Artemius, St (Martyr), 290

Athanasius, St, 55, 92, 149, 220

Augsburg, Corpus Christi procession at, 124

Augustine, St, 57, 72; said to have composed the _Exsultet_, 81, 97, 100, 106, 113, 146, 156, 159, 168, 172, 217 _seq._, 223, 229, 283 _seq._, 303

Aurelian (Bishop of Arles), 210

Austria, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Autpert (Abbot of Monte Cassino), 278

Auxerre, Synods of, 61, 164, 171

Avignon, Synod of (A.D. 1457), 260

Avitus (Bishop of Vienne), 70, 192; on the word _Missa_, 432

⸺ (priest of Braga), 223

Bacchylus of Corinth, 39

Baillet, Adrien, on the Lenten fast, 97, 210, 216 n., 320, 420

Baldwin (Archbishop of Treves), 124, 199; statutes of, 423

Bardenhewer, O., 265

Baronius (Cardinal), _see_ Martyrology

Basel, Council of, 259 _seq._, 267

Basil II. (Emperor), _see_ Menology

_Basilidians, The_, 146, 167

Bäumer, Dom. (O.S.B.), 210

Bavaria, festivals for, 32, 201; _see_ Festivals of obligation: _German States_

Bede, The Ven., on date of Easter, 58 _seq._, 231 n., 289 n., 297; _see_ Calendars; Martyrology

Beleth (liturgist), 256, 280, 304

Belgium, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Belgrade, Victory over the Turks at, 105

Benedict IX. (Pope), 315

⸺ XIII. ” 31, 275

⸺ XIV. ” 32, 287, 302 n., 410, 420

⸺ Canon, the Ordo of, 222

_Benedictines, The_, and the Immaculate Conception, 250 _seq._, 255, 261

Benevento, Council of (A.D. 1091), 102

Bernard, St., 255 _seq._, 272, 274

⸺ (Bishop of St Davids), 250, 255

Bernardine de Bustis, 274

⸺ of Siena, St., 166, 274

Berno of Reichenau, 115, 160, 189 n.

Bethlehem, Christmas at, 153

Binterim, Ant., 62, 327, 420

Bolsena, The miracle of, 122

Bonaventure, St., on the Immaculate Conception, 258

Boniface, St., on festivals, 22, 80 n., 116 _seq._, 160, 164, 188, 238; _see_ Lectionary

⸺ IV. (Pope), 324

⸺ VIII. ” 16, 280

⸺ IX. ” 267

Bonn, The Martyrs of, 373

Borromeo, Charles, St., 186, 327

Boucher [Bucherius] Ægidius (S.J.), 137

Braun, J. (S.J.), 430 n.

Brazil, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Brigid, St. (of Sweden), 274

Burchard of Worms, Canons of, 24

Byzantine Empire, festivals in the, 26 _seqq._

Cecilia, St., 315 _seqq._

Caius (Pope), 206

Cajetan, James (Cardinal), the _Ordo Romanus_ of, 85

Calcasendi, Abulaibsan Achmed, _see_ Calendars

_Calendars_:— Alt-Corbie, 412 Anglo-Saxon (Winchester), 413 Arian, 352 _seq._ Armenian, 283 Bede, 218, 230, 287; _see_ Martyrology Besançon (S. Protadii), 414 Bologna, 411 Calcasendi, 26, 218, 225, 300 n., 331, 383 Carthage, 206, 286, 294, 316, 350 Charlemagne, 165, 282, 292, 300, 306, 412 Cologne, 307, 327, 332 n., 412, 416 Coptic, 168, 211, 218, 224 _seq._, 273, 299 _seq._, 312, 332, 338; description of the, 381 _seq._ English (Church of England), 36 Floriac, 414 Freising, 416 Fronteau (of St Geneviève), 165, 170, 175, 179 _seq._, 293, 300 _seq._, 306; description of the, 400 “Germanicum pervetustum sæc. X.,” 416 Gotho-Gallican, 230, 306, 413 Gregorian, 46, 211, 299 Jewish (Semitic), 15, 44, 46, 47 _seq._, 49, 51 Julian, 45, 46, 50 _seq._, 57 Luxeuil, 230 Mainz, 414 Mantua, 414 Mozarabic, 218, 230, 254 Neapolitan, 218, 245, 275, 282, 290, 293 _seq._, 300, 306; description of the, 394 _seqq._ Nestorian, 283 Philocalian, 136 _seqq._, 151, 217, 350 _seq._; _see_ Chronograph Polemius Silvius, 69, 119, 169, 191, 217, 283, 351 Roman (of the 7th century), 411 ⸺ (Modern), 421 Silos, 218 Stablo, 332 n., 417 Syro-Macedonian, 45, 46, 50, 211, 218 Toledo, 230 Tours, 412; _see_ Perpetuus Treves, 417 Vallombrosa, 414 Werden (Verdinense), 414 _See_ Ideler; Mai; Maimonides; Selden; Sonnatius; Tondini

_Calendars, Early_, 206 _seq._, 316, 345, 347 _seqq._, 410 _seq._

Calixtus I. (Pope), 185

⸺ III. ” 105

_Calvinism_, the festivals retained by, 35, 75

Campeggio (Cardinal-legate), 30

Capistran, John, St, 105

Capocci, Peter (Cardinal), 121

Carthage, fasts of the stations at, 97; dedication of churches at, 195, 206; _see_ Calendars

Cassian, John, 110, 128, 434

Cassiodorus, 141, 364

Catulfus, on the Holy Trinity, 117 n.

_Charistia, The_ (or _Cara Cognatio_), 302 _seq._

Charlemagne, 84; Homilarium of, 165, 179; Capitulary of, 188, 344; _see_ Calendars

Charles II. (King of Spain), 275

Chosroes (King of Persia), 338 _seq._

Chrodegang, Canons of, 100, 188

_Chronograph, The_ (A.D. 354), 140 _seq._, 295 n., 306, 350 n.

Chrysologus, Peter, St, 163, 218, 230, 233, 265, 284

Chrysostom, John, St, 99, 108, 131 _seqq._, 143, 168, 170, 284, 324

Ciofani (Prussian agent in Rome), 33

Clemangiis, Nicholas de, 30

Clement of Alexandria, 39, 89, 141, 167, 437

⸺ I. (Pope), 205

⸺ V. ” 122

⸺ VII. ” 166

⸺ VIII. ” 16, 262, 266

⸺ IX. ” 262, 333

⸺ X. ” 270, 333

⸺ XI. ” 262, 271, 274

⸺ XIII. ” 127

⸺ XIV. ” 32 _seq._, 200

Cloveshove, Council of, 188, 403

Codinus, George, the _de officiis_ of, 27, 224

Cologne, Synod of, 123 n., 199, 258; feasts for archdiocese of, 422; the Three Kings at, 441 _seq._; _see_ Calendars; Lectionary; Sacramentary.

Compostela, relics of St James at, 292

Constance, Council of, 24, 115, 125 n.

Constantine (Emperor), on the observance of Sunday, 9 _seq._, 17, 41, 74, 81, 136, 196, 281, 297, 328, 333

Constantinople, festival of the Ascension at, 108; _see_ Menology

Constantius (Emperor), 149, 196, 281, 290, 318

Copts, festivals observed by the, 26 _seq._, 70; Synaxaria of the, 105, 159, 238, 291; _see_ Calendars

Cosmas Indicopleustes, 153

Cuspinianus, John, 137

Cyprian, St, 40, 72, 138, 146, 151, 206, 431

Cyril, St, of Alexandria, 128

⸺ of Jerusalem, 92, 135, 154 _seq._

Delahaye, Hipp. (S.J.), 320 n.

_Depositio Episcoporum, The_, 137 _seq._, 149 n., 318, 349

⸺ _Martyrum_, 137 _seq._, 149 n., 320 n., 349, 356, 375, 417

De Rossi, J. B., 138, 319, 365

De Waal, 289

Diocletian (Emperor), 205

Dionysius of Alexandria, 91

⸺ the Areopagite, 235

Dominic, St, and the Rosary, 269 _seq._

⸺ of Prussia (Carthusian), 270 n.

_Dominicans, The_, and the Immaculate Conception, 259 _seq._

Duchesne, L., Mgr., 315, 365, 368

Durandus, on Lent, 104; on the Immaculate Conception, 256, 322

Eadmer, 271, 446

_Easter_, the centre of the Church’s year, 3; history of, 37 _seqq._; _see_ Martin; Nilles; Passover

Ebner, 322

Eccard, 137

Eligius of Noyon, 70

Elsinus, _see_ Helsinus

Elvira, Synod of, 110 n.

England, Feasts of the B.V.M. in, 271 n.; Christmas in, 439 _seq._; The Immac. Concept. in, 445 _seq._; _see_ Calendars; Festivals of obligation

Ennodius (Bishop of Pavia), 81

Ephesus, Death of St John at, 297 _seq._

Ephrem Syrus, 129, 197

Epiphanius, 56, 128

Erfurt, Council of, 280

Erwig (Spanish King), 164

Essen, The _Liber Ordinarius_ of, 125; _see_ Sacramentary

Ethelred (King), and the feast of St Michael, 331

Eucherius (Bishop of Lyons), 304

Eudocia (Empress), 224, 287

Eugenius IV. (Pope), 124

Eusebius (Eccl. historian), 9 _seq._; on Easter, 41, 55, 90; on Lent, 92 _seq._, 106, 149, 195 _seq._, 206, 211, 296, 308, 335, 359 _seqq._

Eustorgius (Bishop of Milan), 441

Euthymius, on the Assumption, B.V.M., 236

Eve (recluse at Liège), 120 _seq._

Exeter, Synod of, 252

Fabian, Pope, 205

Felicitas, St (Martyr), 138

Felix (anti-Pope), 149, 318

⸺ II. (Pope), 343

_Feralia_ (concluding day of the _Parentalia_), 302 _seq._

Ferdinand III. (Emperor), 275

_Feriæ_, origin of the name, 2, 7; as distinguished from festivals, 14

_Festivals_, their two chief divisions, 3; Jewish, 5 _seq._; their classification, 13 _seq._; increase in number of, 19; first lists of, 20 _seq._; in Canon law, 24; large number of, 25 _seq._; rights of bishops in respect of, 28 _seq._, 31; their reduction, 31 _seq._; of the Greek eccl. year, 442 _seqq._; _see_ Feriæ; Paleologi

_Festivals of obligation in_:— Austria, 424; Belgium, 424; Brazil, 428; England, 426; France, 424; German States, 424 _seq._; Holland, 426; Italy, 424; Poland, 32, 427; Portugal, 427 _seq._; Prussia, 32 _seqq._, 424; Rome, 423 _seq._; Russia, 428; Spain, 427; Switzerland, 426; United States, 428.

Festus (Senator), 286

Flavian (Bishop of Antioch), 132

_Forty Hours Prayer, The_, _see_ Plantanida

France, alteration in festivals in, 34 _seq._; Holy Saturday in, 83; _see_ Festivals of obligation

Franchi di Cavalieri, 210

Francis of Assisi, St, introduces the Crib, 156

_Franciscans, The_, influence on the Liturgy, 15 _seq._; and the Immac. Conc., 257 _seqq._; and Visit. B.V.M., 267; and cultus of St Joseph, 274

Frederick William II. (King of Prussia), 33

Fronteau, _see_ Calendars

Formosus (Pope), 308

Fulbert (Bishop of Chartres), 231

Fulgentius, 166, 168, 230

Gabriel the Archangel, 332.

_Gallic pilgrim, The_, _see_ Silvia

Gamaliel (Rabbi), on the Jewish Calendar, 49

Gelasius I. (Pope), 175, 343; _see_ Sacramentary

Gellonense, _see_ Martyrology

George (Bishop of Nicomedia), 243

Georgius Hamartolus, 174

Gereon, St (Martyr), 373, 414 _seq._

Germanus (Patr. of Constantinople), 236

Germany, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Gerson, John (the Chancellor), 30, 274

Gertrude, St, 126, 274

Gerunda, Synod of, 61, 193

Glycas, on St Mary Magdalen, 314

Gorman (Abbot), _see_ Martyrology

Grammont, Peter de (Bishop of Besançon), 126

Gratian, decretal of, 24, 100

Gregory the Great (Pope), 76, 96, 102, 151, 159, 179, 192, 229, 343, 363, 407, 435; _see_ Calendars; Sacramentary

⸺ II. (Pope), 343, 400

⸺ III. (Pope), 324 _seq._, 400

⸺ IV. ” 325

⸺ VII. ” 16, 186, 189

⸺ IX. ” decretal of, 24 _seq._, 199

⸺ XI. ” 266

⸺ XII. ” 276

⸺ XIII. ” 270, 276, 409

⸺ XV. ” 275

Gregory of Nazianzus, 130 _seq._, 151

⸺ of Nyssa, 131

⸺ of Tours, 192, 211, 237, 284, 314, 435

⸺ Thaumaturgus, 207

Gretser, Jacobus (S.J.), 419

Guyard (Bishop of Cambrai), 121

Heinrich II. (Archbishop of Cologne), 199

Helena (Empress), 107, 196, 333 _seq._

Helperich (Monk of St Gall), 74

Helsinus (_or_ Elsinus), 248

Henry of Ghent, 253

Henschen (Bollandist), 137, 210, 403

Heraclius (Emperor), 232, 338 _seq._

Hermas, on fasting, 89

Hetto (Bishop of Basel), statute of, 23, 198

Hilduin (Abbot), on the Martyrology, 365

Hippolytus (Bishop of Porto), canons and cycle of, 40 _seq._, 57, 91, 97, 99, 112, 141 _seq._, 146, 167 _seq._; on the date of Christmas, 437 _seq._

Holland, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Honorius (Emperor), forbids races on Sunday, 19, 131

Hugh (Abbot of Reading), and the Immac. Conc., 248

Hugo (Cardinal-legate), approves feast of Corpus Christi, 121

Hunyadi, George, 105

Hydatius, on the date of Christ’s birth, 141

Ibsung, Katharina, her legacy for feast of Corpus Christi, 124

Ideler, on the Jewish Calendar, 49

Ignatius, St (of Antioch), 39, 209, 212

Ildefonsus, St (Bishop of Toledo), 227

Ingelheim, Council of, 24

Innocent I. (Pope), 76, 98, 292 n., 434

⸺ III. ” on liturgical colours, 429

⸺ VIII. ” 261 n.

⸺ IX. ” 272

⸺ X. ” 262

⸺ XI. ” 264

⸺ XIII. ” 166

Irenæus, St, 39, 55, 90 _seq._, 111, 141, 431, 437

Isaias, his prophecy on the Messias, 43

Isidore of Seville, 54, 67, 73, 254

Italy, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Ivo (Bishop of Chartres), Canons of, 24

_Jacobites, The_, 297

James of Landsberg (Carthusian), 126

James of Nisibis (Bishop), 355

James Pantaleon (afterwards Pope Urban IV.), 121

Januarius (Bishop), his inquiries from St Augustine, 57, 72

Jerome, St, 145, 153, 182, 273, 294, 300, 308, 364 _seq._, 431; _see_ Lectionary; Martyrology

Jerusalem, practices observed at, 9, 62 _seq._, 99, 107, 112 _seq._, 152 _seq._, 171, 173 _seqq._, 194 _seq._

Joachim, St, in the Greek Breviary, 246

John, St (Apostle and Evangelist), 43

⸺ Damascene, St, 235 _seq._, 242, 265, 390, 448

⸺ (Bishop of Eubœa), 242, 246

⸺ of Hildesheim (Carmelite), 442

⸺ (Bishop of Jerusalem), 223

⸺ of Lausanne, 121

⸺ (Bishop of Nicea), 131 n., 135 _seq._, 154, 167

⸺ III. (Pope), 296

⸺ XXII. ” 118, 124

⸺ II. (Archbishop of Prague), 268

⸺ (Bishop of Strassburg), 124

Josephus, 143, 145 n., 155

Juliana of Retinne, 120

Julius I. (Pope), 135, 150, 154 _seq._

⸺ II. ” 276

Justin (Emperor), 174

Justin, Martyr, on Easter, 39, 44

Justinian (Emperor), legislation about Sunday, 18, 173 _seq._, 275, 281, 328

Juvenal (Bishop of Jerusalem), 153, 236

_Kings, The Three_, 441 _seq._

Lacordaire, Père (O.P.), 315

Lambeck, 137

Lanfranc (Archbishop of Canterbury), statutes of, 198 _seq._, 421 _seq._, 445

Laodicea, Synod of, decree on celebration of Saturday, 11 _seq._, 73

Launoi, 210

Lazarus, St, 310 _seqq._

⸺ (Bishop of Aix), 314

_Lectionary_:— of St Boniface, 160 of Cologne, 161 n. “Comes Albini,” The, 161 n., 306 of St Jerome, 182 _seq._ of Luxeuil, 67, 159, 180, 232, 238, 281, 397 of Münster, 161 n. of Silos, 67, 101, 159, 166, 175, 340; description of, 378 _seqq._, 397 of Spires, 306 Syrian, The, 225, 291, 294, 299, 331; description of, 393 of Treves, 161 n. of Victor of Capua, 160

Leo I. (Emperor), 267

⸺ VI. ” on the observance of Sunday, 10, 242 n., 312, 314

Leo the Great, St (Pope), 76; on fasting, 94, 97, 100, 103, 106, 151, 159, 166, 183, 185 _seq._, 229, 306, 435; _see_ Sacramentary

⸺ III. (Pope), 193, 275, 400

⸺ IV. ” 80 n., 237

⸺ XII. ” 33

⸺ XIII. ” 263, 276, 333

Leopold I. (Emperor), 275

Leslæus (S.J.), on feast of the Immac. Conc., 254

Liberius (Pope), 142, 147 _seqq._, 191, 207, 271 n., 318

Liège, Synod of, 258

_Liturgy, The_, in time of Tertullian, 9

Loménie, C. F. de (Bishop of Coutances), 126

Loreto, the Holy House of, 271 n.

Louis the Pious (Emperor), 325 _seq._

Lucianus (priest of Jerusalem), 223

Luther, on observance of festivals, 35

Lyons, Second Council of, 193

Mabillon (O.S.B.), 78, 159, 207, 237, 297, 340, 350, 397

Macarius (Bishop of Jerusalem), 335 _seq._

Maçon, Synod of, 21, 61, 158

Mai (Cardinal), Calendars published by, 322, 384, 396

Maimonides, on the Jewish Calendars, 49

Mainz, Council of, directions about festivals, 23, 194, 198, 238, 331; _see_ Calendars

Maizières, Philip de, and feast of Present. B.V.M., 266

Mamertus (Bishop of Vienne), and Rogation processions, 191

_Mandatum, The_, 73

Manuel Comnenus (Emperor), reduces number of holidays, 26, 242, 245, 266, 288, 312, 329

Marcellina (sister of St Ambrose), 148 _seq._

Marcellus, his discovery of head of St John Baptist, 221

“Maria,” explanation of the name, 264

Maria Teresa (Empress), 32

Martène, on the blessing of Palms, 62

Martin (Bishop of Dumio), on date of Easter, 58

⸺ V. (Pope), 124

_Martyrologies_, 214, 273, 292, 297, 345 _seq._

_Martyrology_:— of Ado, 288, 307, 312, 316, 319, 335; description of the, 405 _seq._ of Bede, 293, 307, 312, 335, 341; description of the, 401 _seq._ of Besançon, 327 of Corbie, 57, 306 of Florus, description of the, 401 _seq._ the Gellonense, 57, 413 of Gorman, 404 of St Jerome, 57, 288, 290, 293, 295, 297 _seqq._, 307, 312, 316, 332, 335, 340, 359 _seq._, 363 _seq._ of Notker Balbulus, description of the, 405 _seq._ of Œngus, description of the, 401 _seq._ of Rabanus Maurus, 312, 316; description of the, 405 _seq._ the Roman (of Baronius), 409 of Toledo, 299 of Usuardus, 288, 307, 312 _seq._, 316, 319, 335; description of the, 405 _seq._ of Wandlebert, 306; description of the, 401 _seq._

Mary, the Blessed Virgin, position of her festivals, 3

_Mass_ [Missa], explanation of the word, 430 _seqq._

Maurice (Emperor), 237

⸺ de Sully (Bishop of Paris), 256

Maximinus (Bishop of Aix), 311

Maximus of Turin, 151 n., 169, 207, 218, 230, 283

Melito of Sardis, 39

_Menology_:— of Basil, 156, 218, 242, 273, 291, 296, 299 _seq._, 312, 322, 331, 370, 390 _seqq._ of Constantinople, 105, 218, 225, 273, 300, 322, 338, 339 n., 387 _seqq._

Metaphrastes, Simeon, 266 n., 321, 329

Metrophanes (Bishop of Constantinople), 289

Michael of Atriba, Synaxarium of, 238, 386

_Micrologus, The_, 116 _seq._, 161, 186

_Missa_, _see_ Mass

_Missal_:— Gallican, 197, 232 Gotho-Gallican, 67, 69, 76, 83, 101, 159, 237, 297, 397 Leonine, 114, 397 Roman, 103, 188, 399 Trani, 322 _See_ Sacramentary

_Missals_, The earliest, 214, 343, 345

Modestus (Patr. of Jerusalem), 236, 314

Mommsen, T., 137, 320 n., 350

_Montanists_, Xerophagiæ of the, 99, 110 n.

Monte Gargano, 332

Morcelli, S. A., 298, 390

Morin, G. (O.S.B.), 186

Naogeorgius, 200 n.

Napoleon I. (Emperor), his regulations for holy days, 34 _seq._

Narcissus (Bishop of Jerusalem), 39

Neuching, Synod of, 61

Nicæa, 1st Council of, 92, 106

Nicephorus (historian), 174, 328

Nicolas I. (Pope), 100

Nilles, on the date of Easter, 52 n.

Nisan, the 15th day of, 41; Jewish celebrations on, 42, 53 n.

Nogaroli, Leonardo, composes office of the Immac. Conc., 261

Noris (Cardinal), 137

Normandy, Feast of the Immac. Conc. in, 251 _seqq._

Notker Balbulus, 292, 332 n.; _see_ Martyrology

⸺ of Liège, 327

_Octave_, origin of the, 15

Odilo, St (of Cluny), 233, 326

Odo de Sully (Bishop of Paris), 164, 268

Œngus, _see_ Martyrology

_Ordos_ [Ordinaria, Ordines], description of, 347

Origen, festivals known to, 17, 106, 112, 127, 167, 172, 306, 308

Orleans, Synods of, 95, 98, 101, 171, 192

Orosius, on the date of Christ’s birth, 141

Osbert de Clare (O.S.B.), and the Immac. Conc., 248, 250, 252

Otgar, (Archbishop of Mainz), 165, 180

Otho I. (Emperor), 288

Otricus, (Bishop of Milan), 327

Oxford, Synod of (A.D. 1222), 252

Paleologi, The (Emperors of Constantinople), festivals under, 27

_Palms_, blessing of, 62, 67 _seq._; figures carried in the procession of, 69

Panvinius Onuphrius, 137

_Parentalia, The_ (heathen festival of the dead), 302

Paschal I. (Pope), 316

Passaglia, on the Immac. Conc., 240 _seqq._

_Passiones_, of Martyrs, 209, 317

_Passover, The_, its connection with Easter, 38, 40, 41 _seqq._, 57

Paul, St (the Apostle), on the Passover, 44; in Rome, 138

⸺ (the Deacon), 84, 165

⸺ (Bishop of Emesa), 128

⸺ IV. (Pope), 308

⸺ V. ” 263, 333

Paulinus of Nola, 169, 290, 319, 334

Peckham, John (Archbishop of Canterbury), 118

Pelagius I. (Pope), 296

⸺ II. ” 192

Perpetua, St (Martyr), 138

Perpetuus of Tours, his list of festivals, 20; calendar of, 57; on fasts, 98, 158 _seq._, 218, 286

Peter St (the Apostle), date of arrival and death in Rome, 138

⸺ (Cardinal-legate), 164

⸺ of Celle (Bishop of Chartres), 256

⸺ Damian, St, 322

⸺ (Bishop of Edessa), 62

Philastrius, on Christmas, 169 n.

Philip IV. (King of Spain), 262

Philocalus, Furius, 136; _see_ Calendars

Philogonius (Martyr), 132

Philoponus, Joannes, on the date of Easter, 53 n.

Philostorgius (historian), 290, 352

Phocas (Emperor), 324

Pilate, The spurious Acts of, 57

Pius V. (Pope), 16, 119, 264, 266, 270, 431

⸺ VI. (Pope), 32 _seq._, 200

⸺ IX. ” 239, 262 _seq._, 275

Plantanida, Joseph (O.S.F.C.), and the Forty Hours Prayer, 125

Pliny, letters of, 8

Poland, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Polemius Silvius, 304, 305; _see_ Calendars

Polycrates of Ephesus, 39, 55, 281

Porphyrius (Bishop of Antioch), 353

Portugal, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Potho of Prüm, on feast of the H. Trinity, 118 n.; on the Immac. Conc., 256

Preller, 137

_Processions_, 189 _seqq._

Proclus (Patr. of Constantinople), 233, 234

Prosper (of Aquitaine), on date of Christ’s birth, 141

Protadius (Bishop of Besançon), his Calendar, 327

_Proto-evangelium_ of James, The, 246

Protonika, legend of, and the Holy Cross, 337

Prudentius, 98, 285

Prussia, Good Friday in, 74 n.; _see_ Festivals of obligation

Pulcheria (Empress), 236

_Quartodecimans, The_, 39, 40, 50, 54

Quedlinburg, Council of, 100

Rabanus Maurus, 77, 87, 311; _see_ Martyrology

Rainald of Dassel (Archbishop of Cologne), 441

Raphael, The Archangel, 332

Ravenna, The New Year at, 163

Recceswinth (Spanish King), 164

Reims, Synod of, 30

Remigius (Monk and Bishop of Lyons), 202 n., 406

Richardis (Empress), 315

Rietsch, J., on St Mary Magdalen, 315

Robert de Thorete (Bishop of Liège), 120 _seq._

_Robigalia, The_, 191

Roger II. (of Naples), 244

⸺ (Bishop of Salisbury), 250, 255

Romanesia, Feast of the Ascension at, 108

Rome, method of fixing Easter in, 51, 54; Synod of, 61; _see_ Calendars; Festivals of obligation; Martyrology

Roncalli, on the Calendar, 137

_Rosary, The_, 268 _seqq._; Confraternities of the, 270 n.

Rotricus (Bishop of Rouen), 252

Rouen, Council of (A.D. 650), 164

Rudolph (Bishop of Bourges), 23

Rufinus, 319

Russia, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Sabas, St, _see_ Typicum

_Sabbath, The_, its position in the Church, 6

_Sacramentaries_, description of the, 342 _seqq._

_Sacramentary_:— Cologne, in Cathedral library at, 415 Düsseldorf, in library at, 415 Essen, 84 Gallican, 110 Gelasian, 67 _seq._, 76, 78, 83, 102 _seq._, 114, 116, 156, 160, 163, 169, 175, 178, 180, 184 n., 187, 198, 219, 222, 229, 280, 285, 288, 292, 306, 330, 340; description of, 343, 398 Gregorian, 62, 69, 72, 78, 83, 87, 101 _seqq._, 114, 116 _seq._, 163, 165, 170, 175 n., 178 _seqq._, 187, 198, 222, 228, 288, 292, 299, 306, 330, 340; description of, 344, 398 _seq._ Leonine, 156, 178, 184 n., 198, 219, 222, 280, 285, 330; description of, 343 Mozarabic, 101, 156

Salbarus (Persian General), 339

_Saturday_, its liturgical observance, 12

Saxony, festivals in, 35

Schrader, Clemens (S.J.,), on the Immac. Conc., 240 _seqq._

Schulting, Cornelius, 419

Scotus, Jo. Duns, 259

Sedatus (Bishop of Béziers), 169

Selden, John, Calendars published by, 218, 225, 238, 273, 286 n., 299, 322, 381

Seligenstadt, Synod of, 223

Serapion (Abbot of Thmuis), 92

Sergius I. (Pope), 175, 229, 237, 344

Servilius Paulus (proconsul), 39

Severus, Sulpicius, 141

Sicardus (Bishop of Cremona), 255 _seq._

Siculus Peter, 247

Sidonius Apollinaris, 191

Siena, The _Liber Ordinarius_ of, 322

Silos, _see_ Calendars; Lectionary

Silvia (The Gallic pilgrim), on Christian worship, 8, 62 _seqq._, 86; on Fasts, 93, 99, 107, 112 _seq._, 129, 152, 154 _seq._, 171, 173, 175, 196, 338, 433 _seq._

_Simchah Thorah_, festival of the, 111

Simplicius (Pope), 224

Sirleto (Cardinal), 308, 409

Siroes (King of Persia), 339

Sixtus I. (Pope), 51, 55

⸺ III. ” 271 n.

⸺ IV. ” 261 _seq._, 266, 274, 276, 326

⸺ V. (Pope), 264, 266

Socrates (Eccl. historian), 96, 106, 336

Sonnatius (Bishop of Reims), statutes of, 21; Calendar of, 229 n., 238

Sophronius (Patriarch), 448

Sozomen (Eccl. historian), 9 _seq._, 207, 336

Spain, reduction of festivals in, 31; Advent in, 159; Feasts of B.V.M. in, 227, 254, 262; St James in, 292 _seqq._; _see_ Festivals of obligation

Sprenger, Jacob (O.P.), 270 n.

Stachys (Bishop of Constantinople), 289

Stephen (Bishop of Liège), 116 _seq._

_Sunday_, origin of the name, 7; laws for its observance, 9 _seq._; law-courts cease to sit on, 18; races forbidden on, 19

Switzerland, _see_ Festivals of obligation

Symmachus (Pope), 208, 318 n., 331

_Synagogue, The_, its influence on the Church’s year, 5

_Synaxis_ [Synaxaria], of St John Baptist, 219, 345, 349; _see_ Copts, Michael of Atriba

Szabolcs, Council of, 198

Tarragona, Synod of, 31

_Tenebræ_, The Office of, 71

Tertullian, 5; his enumeration of feasts, 17; on Easter, 40, 44, 56, 89 _seqq._, 99, 106; on Pentecost, 111 _seq._, 127, 141, 172, 184; on Christian burial, 213, 310, 431, 437

Theodore, on Feasts of B.V.M., 227

Theodorus Lector, 286

Theodosius II. (Emperor), his legislation about holy days, 19, 130, 220, 224

Theodulf, on Ember days, 188

Theophanes (historian), 328, 337 n.

Theophilus of Alexandria, 220

Theophilus of Cæsarea, on Easter, 40, 59

Thomas Aquinas, St, 122, 258

Thomassin, Louis, 419

Tillemont (historian), 210, 220, 320, 420

Toledo, 4th Synod of, 74, 80, 100, 164 6th ”, 193 8th ”, 100 10th ”, 232 _See_ Calendars, Martyrology

Tondini, Cæsar (Barnabite), on the Calendar, 52 n.

Tours, festivals celebrated at, 20; second council of, 164, 331; _see_ Calendars

Trani, _see_ Missal

_Translation_, of relics, 220, 267, 281, 292

Trent, Council of, 31, 263

Treves, Synod of, 268; _see_ Calendars, Lectionary

Tribonianus, 134

Trithemius (Abbot), 274, 276 n., 403

Trullan Synod, the, 73, 100, 105, 232, 387

Turcius Almachius (Prefect of Rome), 317 _seqq._

_Typicum, The_, of St Sabas, 243, 447 _seq._

Tyre, Synod at, 195

Uranius (Bishop of Emesa), 221

Urban I. (Pope), 317

⸺ IV. ” _see_ James Pantaleon

⸺ VI. ” 267, 276

Urban VIII. (Pope), his constitution _Universa per orbem_, 29, 30, 200

Usuardus, _see_ Martyrology

Valens (Emperor), 130, 220

Valentia, council of, 213 n.

Valentinian II. (Emperor), law on Sunday rest, 10; regulation of legal vacations, 17 _seq._, 134

Valesius, on the Lenten fast, 97

_Veil_, the Lenten [Hunger Veil], 104

Venantius Fortunatus, 316

_Vestments_, Liturgical, 428 _seqq._

Victor (Bishop of Capua), _see_ Lectionary

⸺ (Pope), 39, 55, 59, 90

Vienne, Council of, 124

Vigilius (Bishop of Trent), 191

Vincent Ferrer, St, 274

Walter (Bishop of Orleans), 23

⸺ (Bishop of Rouen), 252 n.

Wandelbert of Prüm, 57; _see_ Martyrology

Warinus of Worcester, 248

Willibald, St (Bishop of Eichstätt), 314

Worcester, Synod of, 252

Wüstenfeld, F., 381 _seq._

_Xerophagiæ, The_, 99

Zacharias (Patr. of Jerusalem), 339

⸺ (Pope), 80 n., 164

Zeno of Verona, 151, 155, 165

Zosimus (Pope), 81

PRINTED BY TURNBULL AND SPEARS, EDINBURGH