The rise of the mediaeval church and its influence on the civilisation of Western Europe from the first to the thirteenth century

Front matter

| 3 0090 00002888

270 F621r The rise of the mediaeval church and its

HIGHLINE COLLEGE LIBRARY —

Preface

HE educational value of any subject depends primarily upon its own intrinsic value. The ‘teaching of Church history for ten years as a

regular course in liberal arts, side by side with the “‘orthodox’’ courses in history, has demonstrated beyond question that this subject can be’ made at once very popular and very valuable. It has proved its right to exist as a cultural subject. Yet the lack of intelligent information, even among educated people, concerning the history of the Christian Church, both in early and modern days, is simply appalling.

The comparatively recent revival of interest in Church history has given birth to many general Church histories from English and American scholars. Numerous translations of discriminating and painstaking German authors are also available. A large number of intensive monographs has likewise appeared. But all these texts are written for classes in theological schools. Not a single Church history suitable either for regular college work, or for popular reading, is available; and yet all the standard courses in history are provided with up-to-date texts and illustrative material.

This work is intended to meet the need I have felt in my own classes, and have heard expressed from fellow teachers and laymen, for a simple account of v vi Preface the evolution of the old Church minus all theological and dogmatic discussions. The purpose has been to show the origin of the Christian Church, its development in organisation, the forces which produced the Papacy, and the marvellous, formative influence of the Roman Church upon the civilisation of Western Europe. To that end the principal lines of development are emphasised at every point, while the subordinate influences have been minimised. Causes and results, continuity and differentiation, and unity have been constantly kept in mind.

The subject-matter of this volume was worked out during a prolonged residence in Europe. Most of that time was spent in Germany under the inspiration of the foremost authorities in Church history, among whom may be mentioned Professor Nippold of Jena, Professor Loofs of Halle, Professor Hauck of Leipzig, and particularly Professor Harnack of Berlin. The work of the lecture-room and seminar was supplemented by investigation in the Royal Library of Berlin, the Vatican Library at Rome, the National Library at Paris, and the Library of the British Museum. The materials thus gathered were further organised and elaborated in a course of lectures on Church history given in Syracuse University.

The references in the text and the bibliographies at the end of chapters are given, so far as possible, to English sources. It is believed that the exclusion of a pedantic list of foreign works will make the work more useful. It is hoped that the student will be induced to go to the library, the laboratory of the historian, and there by extensive and intensive reading supplement the text.

Preface Vii

Should this volume prove to be of service, it will be followed by two companion volumes—one on the Reformation and another on the modern Church. It is further planned to publish a source-book on Church history to supplement the texts.

My indebtedness to books and men is so great that it would be impossible to enumerate them here. While all sources have been laid under tribute, special obligation is felt to many monographs and intensive studies.

ALEXANDER C. FLICK.

SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY.

CHAPTER I THE StuDyY oF CuyuRcH History

OvuTLINnE: I.—Present status of history in college work. II.—Ecclesiastical history excluded since the Reformation by political history. III—New view of the Medieval Church and its influence. IV.—Renaissance of interest in Church history. V.—Pedaogical value and treatment of Church history. VI.—

ources.

CHAPTER VI THE RomMan GOVERNMENT’S TREATMENT OF THE CHRISTIANS s P

OutLinE: I.—Religious persecutions before the Christian era. II.—Christians first persecuted by the Jews. III.—Causes and motives of persecution by the Roman government. 1V.—Number and general character of as persecutions. V.—Results of persecutions. WI.—

uurces.

Chapter VII Transition Of The Church Under Constantine

OutTLinE: I.—Condition of the Empire in 300. II.— How Constantine became Emperor. III.—Constantine’s conversion to Christianity. IV.—Constantine’s favours to Christianity. V.—Constantine’s character. VI.—Constantine’s historical significance. VII.— Sources.

CHAPTER VIII Tue Councit or Nic#A AND ITS RESULTS

Out.ineE: I.—Diversion of Christian thought in the early Church. II.—The Arian controversy. III.— The Council of Nicea and its actions. 1V.—Later history of Arianism. V.—Sources.

Chapter IX

Out.inE: I.—Favourable conditions when the Christian era began. I1I.—Forces at work up to 313. III.—Description of the Roman Church in 313. IV.— Growth of the Papacy from 313 to 604. V.—Condition a the Papacy at the close of this period, 604. VI.—

urces.

PAGE gi

Contents

Chapter X

RIsE OF THE Papacy (Continued) . : é ;

Chapter XI

Out.ine: I.—Importance of the institution of monasticism. II.—Antecedents and analogies. III.— Causes of the origin of Christian monasticism. IV.— Evolution of Christian monasticism. V.—Spread of

oup monasticism from the East to the West. VI.—

evelopment of monasticjsm in Western Europe. VII. —Opposition to monasticism. VIII.—Results and influences of monasticism. IX.—Sources.

Chapter XII Spread Of The Christian Church Over Europe

OvutT.inE: I.—Extent of Christianity under Gregory the Great. II.—Character of missionary work from the sixth to the tenth century. III.—Conversion of the British Isles. IV.—Conversion of the Franks. V. —Conversion of the Germans. VI.—Conversion of Scandinavia. VII.—Planting of the Church among the Slavs. VIII.—Efforts to convert the Mohammedans. IX.—Sources.

Chapter XIII Separation Of The Roman And Greek Churches

OuTLinE: I.—Relation of the Greek and Roman Churches before 325. II.—Effect of the Arian Controversy on the situation. III.—The history of image worship. IV.—Character and results of the Iconoclastic Controversy. V.—Final separation. VI.—Resemblances and differences between the two churches. VII.—Sources.

CHAPTER XIV RELATION OF THE CHURCH AND STATE UP TO THE Dis

SOLUTION OF THE CAROLINGIAN EMPIRE

Out.tne: I.—Church and state before Constantine. II.—Church and state from Constantine to 476. III.— Period of the Ostrogothic rule (476-552). IV.—Reunion of Italy with the Eastern Empire. V.—Alliance between the Papacy and the Franks. VI.—Restoration of the Empire in the West in 800. VII.—Effect of the rise of national states on the Church. VIII.— Sources.

PAGB xii Contents

Chapter XV

Tue Psgeupo-IstporRIAN DECRETALS AND THE PAPAL CONSTITUTION . . 3 ; : é 4

Out.ine: I.—What were the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals? II.—Condition of Europe when the Decretals appeared. JII.—Purpose of the forgery. IV.—Character and composition. V.—Time, place, and personality of authorship. VI.—Significance and results. VII. Nicholas I. and papal supremacy. VIII.—Decline of spirituality in the Church. IX.—Sources.

Chapter XVI

ORGANISATION, LIFE, AND INSTITUTIONS OF THE Cuurcu, SIXTH TO NINTH CENTURY

Out.ine: I.—Organisation of the papal hierarchy. II.—Moral condition of the clergy and laity. III.— Great activity and wide influence of the Church. IV.— The ordeals and the Church. V.—Church discipline : excommunication and interdict, and penance. IL— Worship; the mass; preaching; hymns. VII.—The sacraments. VIII.—Relics and saints. IX.—Sources.

CHAPTER XVII THE Hoty RoMAN EMPIRE AND THE PAPACY

OvutT.inE: I.—Decline of the Empire under the later Carolingians. II.—Preparations to restore the Empire on a German basis. III.—Otto the Great creates the Holy Roman Empire. IV.—Holy Roman Empire attains its height under Henry III. V.—Results of the creation of the Holy Roman Empire. VI.— Sources.

Chapter XVIII

PREPARATIONS FOR THE HILDEBRANDINE REFORMA- TION : . . 5 . ° .

OvutT.inE: I.—Decline of the Papacy after Nicholas I. (858-867). II.—Reform efforts before the time of Hildebrand. III.—The youth and education of Hildebrand. IV.—The Hildebrandine Popes. V.—Sources.

PAGE

Contents

CHAPTER XIX Grecory VII. anp His WorK

Ourt.ineE: I.—Condition of the Churchin 1073. II.— Election of Hildebrand as Pope. III.—Gregory VII.’s matured papal theory and team ideas. IV.—His efforts to realise his ideals. V.—The investiture strife. VI.—Conclusions. VII.—Sources. .

Chapter XX

OutT.LtinE: I.—The rise and spread of Mohammedanism. II.—Positive and negative causes of the Crusades. III.—Character and description of the Crusades. IV.— Results and influences of the Crusades. V.—Sources.

Chapter XXI Rise Of The Mendicant Orders In The Church

Out ine: I.—Monasticism before the Crusades. II. —Effect of the Crusades on monasticism. IJIII.—Origin of the begging orders. IV.—Rise and influence of the Dominicans. V.—Origin and power of the Franciscans. VI.—Wide-spread results of medieval monasticism. ViI.—Sources.

CHAPTER XXII InNocENT III. anp THE CHURCH AT ITS HEIGHT

Out.ineE: I.—Antecedent preparation for this period. IIl.—Career of Innocent III. up to1198. III.—Innocent III.’s plans and ideals as Pope. IV.—Condition of Europe at the close of the twelfth century. V.—Innocent III. makes himself the political head of Europe. VI. —Innocent III.’s efforts to root out heresy and reform the Church. VII.—Innocent III.’s character and the general results of his pontificate. VIII.—Sources.

Chapter XXIII The Mediazval Church At Its Height

Outing: I.—Characteristics of the thirteenth century. II.—Territorial extent and wealth of the Church. III'—Organisation of the papal hierarchy completed. IV.—The legal system of the Church. V.—The official language and ritual of the Church. VI.—The sacramental system. VII.—The employment of art. VIII. —The Church moulded the civilisation of Europe. IX. —Sources.

INDEX 5 3 ‘ - A 5 A E

, ty a = _ i i fey ri Beaye? r ous TLL Peesownd “3 ae ae ’ rx 70 ° ~ « #% ba C t ' ’ ae 7 = Pi : i} > ‘) “nus ie » . - ' - = Ps i _ r it is -

THE RISE OF THE MEDIAVAL CHURCH

Chapter I The Study Of Church History!

OuTLINE: I.—Present status of history in college work. II.— Ecclesiastical history excluded since the Reformation by political history. III.—New view of the medieval Church and its influence. IV.—Renaissance of interest in Church history. V.— Pedagogical value and treatment of Church history. VI.—Sources

ALF a century ago a prominent educator observed: ‘‘There is something remarkable in the actual condition of the study of Church

history. While it seems to be receiving more and more cultivation from a few of us, it fails to command the attention of the educated public in the same proportion. We are strongly of the opinion that beyond the requisitions of academical and professional examination there is very little reading of Church history in any way.’’? Only twenty-five years ago Professor Emerton, upon taking the chair of ecclesiastical history in Harvard University, could say with truth: ‘‘There

1 Reprinted from The Methodist Review, Jan., 1905.

2 Bib. Rep., vol. xxvi.

I are to-day not more than half a dozen colleges in the country where any adequate provision for an independent department of history has been made.” ! At the present time, happily, the condition so much deplored in the last quotation has been remedied to a very large degree. Every great university in America has a well-organised faculty of history and allied subjects, while a large majority of the smaller institutions of higher education have regularly organised departments of history with instructors, well-trained at home or abroad, who devote all their time to the subject.

But, notwithstanding these facts, the statement made about Church history still remains essentially true. The political, industrial, educational, and social sides of history have been emphasised by the creation of new departments with new courses of study, and by the writing of many text-books, monographs, and general treatises. Professorships of sociology, political economy, political science, constitutional law, education, and literature have been created in unprecedented numbers. Ecclesiastical history, on the contrary, has been all but ignored. Even in Germany, where the greatest strides have been made in the subject, it is still relegated to the theological faculty, though the number of philosophical students selecting it often exceeds that of the theological—a very significant fact. In America it would be difficult to point out more than a very few universities or colleges where a chair in Church history is put on an equality with chairs of other branches of history or of correlated subjects. Its proper place, in both scholastic and popular estimation, is in the theological seminary,

1 Unit. Rev., vol. xix.

and there it has always remained as a ‘‘professional’”’ study. Even in this restricted sense, however, its intrinsic worth has placed it among the most important courses in the curriculum, and has given it a standing beyond ‘‘professional’’ circles. Some of America’s greatest scholars have contributed powerfully, through the class-room, lectures, and books, to give Church history its rightful place both as a ‘‘professional”’ and as a “‘liberal”’ branch of learning.

Until Luther led the great reformatory schism in the sixteenth century, all historians, crude and unscientific though much of their work was, recognised the necessary union of political and ecclesiastical history. The Venerable Bede began his celebrated history not with the coming of Abbot Augustine and his monks, but with the landing of Cesar and his Roman cohorts. As modern civilisation crept over western Europe and crossed the mighty deep to Columbia’s shores, carrying with it the revolutionising Teutonic conception of the national state with its new duties and relationships, the tendency was to magnify the political and social sides of history at the expense of the religious. The hatreds and misunderstandings of the Reformation, though doing something to rectify the ‘‘orthodox”’ history of the old Church, really put members of the old organisation wholly on the defensive, and checked for centuries anything like a genuinely sympathetic and scientific study of the old Church by Protestant historians. With Neander, that sympathetic Christian of Jewish descent, and the scholarly Gieseler, a new era opened. The growing doctrine of the separation of Church and state accentuated the breach between political and religious history. The early crude conception of specialisation also separated sacred from profane history, and turned the former over wholly to the theologian. Secular historians took the position of Napoleon when invited to enter the Holy City: ‘‘Jerusalem does not enter into the line of my operations.”

At last the Church historian and the civic historian have joined hands, and look each other in the face. They see that their aim is essentially common: to know the truth about the past. This search for truth for its own sake is purely modern—almost contemporaneous. Formerly, history was written to justify or disprove some theory of political or ecclesiastical polity, or to glorify some dynasty, sect, party, or hero, or to vindicate some hypothesis or set of ideas. The historian was not a searcher for truth, but a lawyer with a cause to plead. It is generally realised now that the historian, whether he deals with the state, the Church, society, education, or industry, is working an important part of the field of general history. A knowledge of each one of these institutions is necessary to supplement and explain any or all of the others.

This institutional interdependence seems to be generally recognised: now. “The web of history,” said Professor Hatch in beginning his great work at Oxford, “is woven of one piece; it reflects the unity of human life, of which it is the record. We cannot isolate any group of facts and consider that no links of causation connect them with their predecessors or their contemporaries. Just as Professor Freeman insists on the continuity of history, so I wish to insist on its solidarity.”’! The mutual labours of scholars in cor-

1 Hatch, An Introductory Lecture on the Study of Ecclesiastical History, London, 1885. Comp. Gwatkin, The Meaning of Ecclesiastical History, Cambridge, 1891.

relating fields have revolutionised our historical knowledge of the early and later Middle Ages. A multitude of controverted points have vanished like ghosts. We see the old Church now as we never saw it before. The Catholic Church and the medieval papacy were the greatest of the creations of the first fifteen centuries of the Christian era. The medieval Church was not exclusively a religious organisation. It was more of an ecclesiastical state. It had laws, lawyers, courts, and prisons. If not born into it, all the people of western Europe were at least baptised into it. It levied taxes on its subjects. Standards of patriotism and treason were more sharply defined than in the modern state.!_ The evolution of this great organisation is the central fact of the first thirteen centuries after Christ. It aimed to control the whole life of its subjects here and to determine their destiny hereafter. Well may our greatest American Church historian, Henry C. Lea, ask: ‘‘What would have been the condition of the world if that organisation had not succeeded in bearing the ark of Christianity through the wilderness of the first fifteen centuries?’’?

The history of Europe, then, after the Roman period must be looked at through the eyes of the Church. The character and works of that great institution must first be studied, not pathologically but sympathetically. The historian, if honest, dare not show a ‘‘lack of appreciation of the service rendered to humanity by the organisation which in all ages has assumed for itself the monopoly of the heritage of Christ.”"> He must recognise the fact that ‘‘ecclesiastical history is simply

1Maitland, Canon Law in the Church of England, London,

1898, 100, Io1. 2 Lea, Studies in Church Hi istory, p. iii. 3 [bid.

the spiritual side of universal history.”"! ‘‘The value of a science depends on its own intrinsic merits,’’ says Alzog.2, When the great Teacher commanded from the Mount of Olives, ‘‘Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel,’”’ that mount became the pivot on which the whole world’s history has turned.

If the Christian religion be a matter, not of mint, anise, and cummin, but of justice, mercy, and truth; if the Christian religion be not a priestly caste, or a monastic order, or a little sect, or a handful of opinions, but the whole congregation of faithful men dispersed throughout the world; if the very word which of old represented the chosen ‘‘people’’ is now to be found in the ‘‘laity’’; if the biblical usage of the phrase ‘‘ecclesia’”’ literally justifies Tertullian’s definition: Ubi tres sunt laict, ibi est ecclesia; then the range of the history of the Church is as wide as the range of the world which it was designed to penetrate. 3

The great difficulty with the study of Church history in the past has been that teachers treated it wholly from a theological standpoint. That may have been proper when the subject was viewed as a narrow ‘‘professional” study only. A new and better conception of the subject, however, as a part of the pregnant history of humanity, has brought with it a higher estimation of its value as a cultural study. All that can be claimed for historical studies in general can be claimed for it: mental discipline, broad culture, a view of practical life, enlarged sympathies and lessened prejudices, a truer conception of duty, and a saner estimate of the significance of current events. In addition it may be ventured that no subject can be of greater

' Gwatkin, The Meaning of Ecclesiastical History, 8.

1 Alzog, Universal Church History, i., § 13. + Stanley, Eastern Church, Introduction, 25.

vital importance to the student for the very reason that it deals with the most important of all subjects. In order to do the most good as a liberal branch of learning, Church history must be taught not as theology or dogma, but as a powerful civilising institution like the state or the school. Then it will be true that “‘neither can the profane historian, the jurist, the statesman, the man of letters, the artist, nor the philosopher safely neglect the study of Church history.’’! For each one of these persons, as well as the minister, needs that ‘‘pragmatic view” of all the changes and developments of the Christian Church and the influence it has exerted on all other human relations. ?

Within the last few years, however, there has been a noticeable awakening of interest in Church history both within and without college walls. The indefatigable labours of a few men like Henry C. Lea, who has given us a series of invaluable monographs on the history of the old Church, have had much to do with the new status of Church history. Universities are already recognising courses in Church history offered by divinity schools as ‘‘liberal arts’’ electives for undergraduate and postgraduate study. The writers of recent text-books on general history, as well as in particular fields, recognise the revolution and try to make amends for the sin of omission by giving the Church a prominence never recognised before by secular historians. Publishers have felt the popular pulse and, consequently, ‘‘Studies” and ‘*Epochs”

2 Gieseler, Ecclestastical History, sec. 3 and 7.

3 Examine recently published texts like Emerton, Medieval

Europe; Robinson, History of Western Europe; Munro, A History of the Middle Ages, etc.

covering the whole range of Church history have appeared in cheap and popular form from the pen of scholar and compiler. Foreign works have been translated. Journals devoted to the study of Church history have been established. Lectureships have been created and endowed. Societies have been organised to further the work. Convenient editions of the ‘‘sources’’ are appearing. Everywhere there seems to be a reaction in favour of this misunderstood and neglected subject. An army of scholars is at work digging valuable material out of old monasteries, royal archives, private libraries, cemeteries and churches, catacombs, and every conceivable place of concealment. These labours are being rewarded by rich discoveries of valuable materials, which are immediately critically edited by competent hands and printed in translations suitable for all students. Huge collections of these sources are appearing in most of the European countries. !

The most significant evidence of reaction, however, lies in the fact that the most recent courses offered on the Middle Ages in our leading universities are essentially courses in Church history. The name matters little so long as students approach the instructive history of western Europe from the right standpoint. Thus, at length, has come the fulfilment of the prophecy of Professor Koethe (d. 1850), made many years ago: ‘‘It is reserved to future ages, and in a special sense to the institutions of learning, to give to Church history its proper place in the curriculum of studies. When its nature and importance come to be fully known and appreciated it will be no longer limited to one faculty.”

1The Monumenta in Germany, the Rolls Series in England, etc.

The best pedagogical methods must be applied to Church history in order to obtain the best results. To that end these practical suggestions are offered:

1. Emphasis ought to be laid on ideas back of events rather than on the events themselves.

2. The important ought to be distinguished from the unimportant at every step. Athanasius and Augustine are worthier subjects of study than Flavian and Optatus. The invasion and conversion of the Teutons are more important than disputes over Easter or the shape of the tonsure.

3. Original sources ought to be used so far as possible. History should be studied ‘‘from the sources of friend and foe, in the spirit of truth and love, sine ira et studio.’ 1

4. Both Protestant and Catholic secondary authorities ought to be read on every important controverted point.

5. Origins ought to be studied with special care.

6. Transition periods rather than crises ought to be given the most time.

7. Biographies of epoch-making men like Constantine, Gregory the Great, Charlemagne, Hildebrand, St. Francis, Innocent III., etc., ought to be carefully considered.

8. Causes and results ought to be closely worked out and classified. ?

g. The continuity of the Church as a great force in the world ought to be ever kept in mind.3

10. Differentiation ought to be thoughtfully noted through the ages.

1 Schaff, Church History, preface.

2 Mace, Method in History, 27-39. 3 Freeman, Methods of Historical Study, Lond. and N. Y., 1886.

11. The unity of history—the influence of the Church upon every other institution—ought to be followed from one transitional period to another.

12. The sympathetic attitude ought to be taken at all times in judging men and movements. The student ought to stand in the centre of the circle so that he may see all points of the circumference —all persons, all events, all parties, all creeds, all sects, all shades of opinion—and see their true historical relations.

1.—Bright, W., The Study of Church History. In Waymarks of Church History. N. Y., 1894. 2.—Cave, A., Introduction to the Study of Theology. Edinb.,

3-—Collins, W. E., The Study of Ecclesiastical History. NiGY:,810903%

4.—Coxe, A. C., Institutes of Christian History. Chicago, 1887.

5-—De Witt, J., Church History as a Science, as a Theological Discipline, and as a Mode of the Gospel. Cinc., 1883.

6.—Foster, F. H., The Seminary Method of Original Study tn the Historical Sciences. N. Y., 1888.

7.—Gwatkin, H. M., The Meaning of Ecclesiastical History. Camb., .1891.

8.—Hatch, E., An Introductory Lecture on the Study of Ecclesiastical History. Lond., 1885.

g.—Hitchcock, R. D. The True Idea and Uses of Church History. N. Y., 1856.

1o.—Jortin, J., The Use and Importance of Ecclesiastical History. Works, vii., 405-454. Lond., 1772.

11.—Lea, H. C., Studies in Church History. Introd. Phil., 1869.

12.—McGiffert, A. C., ‘‘The Historical Study of Christianity.”” Bibliotheca Sacra, Jan., 1893, 150-171.

13.—Robinson, J. H., Sacred and Profane History. In An. Rep. Am. Hist. Assn. 1899, i., 527.

14.—Smith, H. B., ‘‘ Nature and Worth of the Science of

The Study of Church History II

Church History.” Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. vii., 1851, 412. See Faith and Philosophy, Edinb. and N.Y., 1877, 49-86. 15.—Smyth, E. C., Value of the Study of Church History in Ministerial Education. Andover, 1874. 16.—Stanley, A. P., Three Introductory Lectures on the Study of Ecclesiastical History. In History of the Eastern Church. Lond. and N. Y., 1884, 17-76.

See the introductions of the Church histories of Schaff, Gieseler, Alzog, Moeller, Kurtz, Hase, Dollinger, and Hergenrother.

CHAPTERSIL

GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY ON CHURCH HISTORY

OuTLinE: I.—Primary materials. JII.—Secondary materials. III.—Sketch of the writing of Church history. IV.—Most important collections of primary sources. V.—Most important general Church histories. VI.—Dictionaries and encyolopedias. VII.— Atlases and chronologies. VIII.—Text-books. IX.—Sources.

LL our information about the origin, life, and A growth of the Christian Church comes from the revelation of evidence which is termed sources. These sources are partly original, or primary, and partly secondary. For the student of history both kinds of sources have a definite character and value, and are, therefore, of peculiar interest. Some knowledge about the scope and nature of the sources is necessary for an intelligent view of any field of history. At the same time it is clear that any person presuming to pose as an authority on a given phase of history must not only be thoroughly acquainted with the varied contributions of all secondary works, but must also be a master of the character and worth of all firsthand materials.

The primary sources are simply the records and remains left by the people who lived at any given time. Such materials, it will be readily seen, give the nearest and truest account of the ideas, feelings, motives, and beliefs, as well as of the deeds and actions, of man. An original source is, therefore, merely a source back

12 :

of which one cannot go for historical information. It is apparent, consequently, that the primary sources are the more important because they are the very foundations of history. ‘‘No documents, no _ history,” tersely declared Langlois. The primary sources put us in vital connection with the thoughts, doings, and institutions of past times. In them one sees reflected the spirit of the age. Every line, every word, is a revelation. The student is led to feel history, to actually know men and women of the past, and thus to comprehend our own civilisation in the earlier periods of its evolution. The primary sources cannot be accepted and assigned their true value, however, until their authenticity and genuineness are determined, and the element of personal equation is taken into account. Even then final judgment can never be absolute.

For the sake of giving a clear conception of the range of the primary sources the following classification may be of assistance:

A.—Written sources of the subjoined kind: I.—Public official documents: 1. Acts of councils and synods. 2. Letters, bulls, briefs, rescripts, and regests of popes, patriarchs, and bishops.

Confessions of faith.

Liturgies, hymns, etc.

Church canons and laws, and monastic rules. Decrees and letters of kings,nobles, and civic assemblies. 7. Laws of states.

II.—Private writings of personal actors and observers:

ONTGY TS 19

1. The Apostles.

2. Church fathers.

3. Heretics and reformers.

4. Heathen.

5. Chroniclers and historians. 6. Missionaries.

. Clergy and laity.

IlI.—Inscriptions on churches, public buildings, tombs, monuments, coins, seals, etc. B.—Unwritten sources of the following character: I.—Buildings: 1. Churches and baptisteries. 2. Tombs and monuments. 3. Civic edifices. 4. Private dwellings.

II.—Art: 1. Sculpture—images and emblems. 2. Painting and fresco. 3. Mosaics. 4. Ecclesiastical vestments and ornaments. 5. Church furniture and vessels.

I1].—Rites and ceremonies.

IV.—Oral traditions.

The secondary sources are those that are compiled from a study of the original sources, or from other secondary works, or from both, as is more likely to be the case. This class of material is very abundant, and varies greatly in character and value because of the striking difference in authorship, style, and purpose. It is always necessary, therefore, carefully to discriminate the wheat from the chaff and to be able easily to recognise the ‘‘earmarks” of a reliable authority. Many of the works produced by modern scientific scholarship are excellent in every respect, and, in many fields of historical study, absolutely indispensable. Secondary sources may be divided as follows:

A.—Written works: I.—History: 1. General treatises based upon either primary sources, or secondary materials, or both. 2. Encyclopedias and dictionaries. 3. Monographs, essays, and articles.

II.—Fiction:

1. Novels.

Bows OCLLY. 3. Drama.

B.—Unwritten: I.—Oral traditions and reports.

I].—Transmitted rites and ceremonies. I1Il.—Works of art copied from originals

The earliest account of the history of the Christian Church extant isthe New Testament. The ‘‘Memoirs”’ of Hegesippus, a converted Jew of the second century, is the first known effort to record the growth of the Church, but all his books are lost.! Eusebius, the Greek bishop, called the ‘‘Father of Church history,” wrote a comprehensive Ecclesiastical History to 324. Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, each after his own ideal, continued the narrative of Eusebius. Rufinus translated the work of Eusebius into Latin and continued it to 395, while Epiphanius translated Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret into Latin and brought the record to 518. Theodorus and Evagrius were also continuators of these early works. Sul-

1Extracts in Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History and in Ante-Nic. Ch. Fathers (Chr. Lit. ed.), viti., 762.

picius Severus, a Gallic monk of noble birth, penned a fabulous chronicle of little worth.