!l S\ 
 
 m 
 
Prefented to 
 The Cornell University, 1869, 
 
 BY 
 
 Goldwin Smith, M. A. Oxon., 
 
 Regius Profeffor of Hiftoiy in the 
 Univerfity of Oxford. 
 
BX324.3W"'*'"^"^ 
 Chiistendom's divisions. Part I. Greeks 
 
 iiiiiiiiiiiin 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 029 362 849 
 
/^3 
 
CHEISTENDOM'S DIVISIONS. 
 
 PART II. 
 GREEKS AND LATINS. 
 
LOS" DOS 
 
 PHISyED BY SPOTTIBWOOUE AND CO. 
 
 SlSW-STnEET SQUARE 
 
CHEISTENDOM'S DIVISIONS. 
 
 PAET II. 
 GEEEKS AND LATINS. 
 
 A FULL AND CONNECTED HISTOEY OF THEIR DISSENSIONS 
 
 AND OVEKTUEES FOE PEACE DOWN TO 
 
 THE EEFOEMATION. 
 
 V 
 EDMUND SfFFOULKES 
 
 FORMKIUiY FELLOW AND TUTOR OF JESUS COLLEGE, OXFORD. 
 
 * Christiauus sum : Christiani nihil a me alienum puto.' 
 
 CUllEMES HENATUS. 
 
 LONDON : 
 
 LONGMANS, GKEEN, AND CO. 
 
 1867. 
 
UNlVERSiTVl 
 
 \^ 
 
 IBRAP^' 
 
 « i 
 
 ^ 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 iE publication of this volume has been delayed paitly from 
 
 -health, partly from my having varied its subject-matter. 
 
 was to have been an exhaustive history of projected 
 
 anions and nothing else : it will be found to be a history 
 
 projected reunions ending with the council of Florence, 
 
 d of the schism till then which they were designed to heal, 
 
 ;i overtures for reunion, from whatsoever quarter, subse- 
 
 lently to the Reformation, being reserved for a third 
 
 olume, D. V. 
 
 Two reasons induced me to deviate to that extent from 
 my original plan : the first, that the projected reunions 
 etween the Greeks and Latins down to the council of 
 j'lorence proved to be too numerous and too marked in 
 character to be described in a few words, or to bear grouping 
 with others of a later age ; and, secondly, when in examining 
 them I was thrown back upon the schism that occasioned 
 them, I found not only that most of the causes usually 
 assigned for it were delusive, but that, in fact, its real history 
 had never been written. Whether all the circumstances 
 connected with it were generally known or not, nobody had 
 ever taken the trouble to put them together and submit 
 them to the judgment of public opinion in their entirety. 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 Meanwhile the process of attempting to do this elicited 
 several facts that were new to me — one of which, studiously 
 kept out of sight, or unaccountably passed over, in all books 
 professing to treat of the schism hitherto, may turn out to 
 be the key-stone of the whole series. Should I shrink from 
 owning that they have tended to modify some of my former 
 impressions on the Greek question ? On the contrary, let 
 me state here explicitly, that I have never aspired to draw 
 any inferences apart from facts, so that any new array of 
 facts of which I was previously ignorant must always have 
 the effect, when relevant, of qualifying or even unsettling, 
 where they fail to confirm, my position. What can you do 
 when you cannot get at both sides of a correspondence? 
 As Mr. Froude has shown very conclusively in one of his 
 late volumes that Sir John Hawkins proved a considerable 
 benefactor to his country and to his own pocket at the 
 expense of Philip II. of Spain, whereas Spanish historians 
 who drew their inferences solely from his correspondence 
 with Philip, and had no notion of the letters that were 
 passing simultaneously between him and Cecil, had repre- 
 sented him as the man that would have betrayed his country 
 to them if he could. 
 
 Who can say what view posterity might form of the Greek 
 question were all the documents connected with it, not 
 which ever existed, but which are merely known to be still 
 extant, to be published shortly ? To judge from the contents 
 of the forty-three volumes extracted by the late Cardinal 
 Mai from the recesses of the Vatican, one of his principal 
 achievements in life seems to have been that of having 
 commenced the process of rehabilitating the Greeks in their 
 controversy with the Latins, and in particular of doing justice 
 to Photius. Certain it is that his late eminence inaugurated 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 a new way of speaking of him very different from what had 
 ever been heard in Rome before, since the schism. Fresh 
 from the task of preparing for the press for the first time 
 two of the most consummate, but long-lost, treatises of his: 
 ' I am amazed,' he exclaims, ' to think how Photius, suddenly 
 elevated to the episcopate from being a la; incessantly 
 
 distracted with secular cares and avocati , jould have 
 
 acquired so profound a knowledge of the holy Scriptures, 
 and of theology of the highest kind.'' ' He might well say 
 so ; for the whole violence of the controversy which ensued 
 on the deepest of subjects has for the last 1,000 years been 
 spent upon Photius, without adding a word in reality to 
 what he said on it the instant it came before him officially : 
 
 & S4 tuv pea TtiKKe Koi otos. 
 
 Then what a world of bitterness is proved against his oppo- 
 nents by his distinguished editor in establishing so irre- 
 fragably that the fable of pope Joan must have been a 
 contemporary fiction originating in the hatred of the Latin 
 party for the memory of John VIII., not because his theology 
 was defective, or his life imndoral, or his rule arbitrary, but 
 solely because he had the courage, the manliness, to appre- 
 ciate the abilities and desire to cultivate the friendship of 
 the great patriarch, his brother. 
 
 Lastly, what a mine of wealth is disclosed by the late 
 librarian of the Vatican, in attempting to disprove the 
 genuineness of the celebrated letter of John to Photius on 
 the procession, because he could discover no copy of it in 
 the secret correspondence of a pope who succeeded to office 
 
 * See M. Bonetti's iiseful tract, Paris unci publislied by Cardinal Mai. xlrt. 
 1850, Tradition CrtiAo^iyac, which con- 'Photius.' 
 tains a list of all tlio works discornrod 
 
Vm PREFACE. 
 
 995 years ago. His eminence seems not to have been aware 
 that the copy published of it in Greek by Beveridge was 
 taken from a collection inscribed with the name of a pa- 
 triarch of Constantinople, dear to the Latins, probably the 
 very volume brought by the Greeks with them to Florencej 
 and since become the property of the Bodleian library. 
 Still, what is the only corollary to be drawn from the argu- 
 ment which he seeks to build on his researches in the 
 Vatican ? That, to the best of his belief, the regests or au- 
 thentic collections in manuscript of all the letters ever 
 written by every pope in his official capacity, for the last 
 1,000 years at least, are preserved entire in the Vatican. 
 We may judge of their intrinsic importance by those which 
 came by some lucky accident into the hands of Baluzius, 
 and were published by him as far as they went, of the great 
 pope of the middle ages, Innocent III. We may judge of 
 their proportions by the tantalising references in the annals 
 of Eaynaldus to books three, four, or five, as the case may be, 
 of the epistles of some pope, to which nobody else can have 
 access, and from which he treats us too often by far to some 
 miserably brief or .clumsily selected extract. Even the car- 
 dinal was not so fortunate as to have lived long enough to 
 print all he would, and in two or three cases he has certainly, 
 for some reason or other, abstained from printing all he 
 could. It is hard to know that there are materials for so 
 much increased information within reach, yet not to have 
 access to them : it seems doubly hard to believe that any of 
 the fugitive manuscripts that flocked to the Vatican in such 
 shoals from Constantinople, when their old home was de- 
 stroyed, and had such magnificent quarters assigned them 
 for their new domicile, were intended to be kept close 
 prisoners. 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 .It is probably not too much to say that there is no nation 
 in Europe whose history would not have to be rewritten 
 from the many missing links to be supplied, from the many 
 different readings of events to be obtained, were men of 
 letters allowed the same access, for the same objects, and 
 under the same restrictions, to the Vatican library that they 
 are now, without the smallest distinction either of creed or 
 persons, to the British Museum, to the libraries of Oxfoid 
 and Cambridge in this country, and to several of the most 
 important collections abroad. All put together, however, 
 are not the Vatican. Would it not be well worth while 
 sending a deputation of the literary men of all nations to 
 Eome to petition for its opening in due course ? When Dr. 
 Lingard wrote, it should be remembered, even the British 
 Museum was, by comparison, a closed book. Our own 
 humanities have been achieved slowly. But if any republic 
 at all is to be set up at Eome,. let it, in the interest of 
 mankind generally, be the republic of letters first, and there 
 will be no room for any other for some time to come;- its 
 researches may have the effect of awakening a new interest 
 throughout Europe for Eome : its labours would in any case 
 be eminently conservative and anti-destructive ; and all 
 nations would be interested in guaranteeing the archives of 
 their common history from harm. So would Eome be in- 
 sured, humanly speaking, against the fate of Constantinople, 
 and society against a second conflagration of its records of 
 the past, that, if lost now, would be lost for ever. It only 
 remains for me to state in conclusion, that my chapters are 
 so arranged that chapter i. dovetails into chapter viii., and 
 chapter viii. into chapter x., and can be read separately from 
 the rest. In these three chapters the reader will find the 
 merits of the general question resumed and .analysed. The 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 other seven comprise what may be called a narrative ^f 
 events making for union or disunion, war or peace, between 
 the commencement of the crusades and the Florentine 
 council, translated in most cases literally, perhaps in some 
 cases wearily, from contemporary sources. 
 
 86 Sloane Stkbet, S.W. 
 Candlemas, 1867. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 HISTORY OP THE SCHISM. 
 
 Case of Photius — Act of Leo th'i Isaurian —Embassy from Bui- paob 
 
 garia — Excitement at Constantinople — Encyclic of Photius — 
 Revolution in Calabria — Conduct of Ignatius — Restoration of 
 Photius — Letter of Stylianus — Affairs in Calabria — Embassy 
 of Luitprand — Argyrus Duke of Apulia — Letters of Leo IX. — 
 Cardinal Humbert and his Colleagues — Review of the facts — 
 True question at issue — Characters of the principal actors — 
 Alleged Grounds for Separation — Letter of Adrian I. to 
 Charlemagne — Conduct of Leo III. — Letter of John VIII. — 
 Hostilities siispended 1 — 77 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 Resumption of Intercourse — Theory of the Crusades — Norman 
 Practice — Application of Indulgences — Mixed Motives — 
 Practice of the Crusaders — Extinction of the Normans . . 78 — 126 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BT THE LATINS. 
 
 Feelings Westwards of the Capital — Gradual Estrangement — 
 Venetians and Genoese— True Character of the Fourth Cru- 
 sade — Conflicting Views of Innocent III. — ^Parallel in Modern 
 Times 127—188 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 Parallel in Pagan Times — Principles on which Innocent acted — The 
 
 Greek Church Regenerated 189 — 227 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 PROJECTS FOR REUNION, TO THE SECOND COUNCIL OF LYONS INCLUSIVE. 
 
 Aflairs under Honorius III. — ^Negotiations under Gregory IX. — 
 Excellent Plan of Innocent IV. — Urban IV. and Michael 
 Palaeologus — Clement IV. and Gregory X. on the Schism — 
 Creed of Clement IV. — Second Council of Lyons — Michael 
 PaliEologus Excommunicated 228 — 279 
 
XU CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 PROJECTS FOE EEITNION, TO THE COUNCIL OF BASLE. 
 
 Individual Conversions — Last Acts of the Crusaders — Bulls of page 
 Boniface VIII. — Letters of John XXII. — Abhot Barlaam and 
 Benedict XII. — John Palsologus and Clement VII. — John 
 Palseologns and Innocent VI. — John Palseologus and Urban V. 
 — John Palseologus and Gregory XI. — Manuel Palffiologus and 
 Martin V. — John Palseologus II. and Eugenius IV. — Negotia- 
 tions at Basil 280-331 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 PROJECTS FOR REUNION, THE COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 Scandalous Preliminaries — Collision with the Basle Fathers — Euge- 
 nius on the Greek Question — Ferrara, why chosen first, why 
 abandoned — Action of the Greek Emperor — Form of Sub- 
 scriptions — Florentine Definition — Conduct of Eugenius — 
 Results among the Greeks — Constantinople imder the Turks — 
 - Remorse among the Latins . . ... 332 — 391 
 
 CHAPTER Vin. 
 
 POPES, WRITERS, AND COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM, COMPARED 
 
 AND CRITICISED. 
 
 Adrian I. and Charlemagne — Leo III. and Charlemagne — Nicholas 
 I. and the French Bisljops — Urban 11. and S. Anselm, Rome 
 passive on the Procession — Charlemagne on the Procession — 
 Alcuin supplements Charlemagne — Photius refutes Charle- 
 magne — Latin replies to Photius — Spurious Works used by the 
 Latins — Humbert the Dominican— S. Antoninus of Florence — 
 Moderation on both sides — Pachymeres on the Second Council 
 of Lyons — Proceedings at Florence — Rulings at Lyons and 
 Florence compared — Papal Prerogatives defined at Florence . 392 — 491 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 DEALINGS WITH THE CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 Nestorians and Eutychians — ^Preference shown for the Armenians — 
 Photius Corresponds with the Armenians — Embassies of 
 Theorian — Conversion of the Maronites— Dealings between 
 Rome and Armenia — Negotiations under Gregory IX. ; under 
 Innocent IV. ; under John XXII. ; under Benedict XII. ; 
 under Clement VI. ; at Florence \ 492 544 
 
 CHAPTER X. 
 
 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 Division of the Empire under Charlemagne — Abnormal Position of 
 
 the Pope - The Greeks atrociously Treated .... 545—601 
 
CHEISTMDOM'S DIYISIONS. 
 
 PAET II. 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 HISTOET OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 » 
 
 The commencement of what is usually called the Greek 
 schism has been variously assigned. S. Antoninus, arch- 
 bishop of Florence, who was present at the celebrated council 
 held there for putting an end to it, connects it with the es- 
 tablishment of the Constantinopolitan patriarchate, and is for 
 subdividing it into twelve different epochs, commencing how- 
 ever with the council of Antioch, a.d. 341, at which time 
 Constantinople was not reckoned a patriarchate at all. Fla- 
 vins Blondus, his contemporary, and secretary to the president 
 of the council of Florence, Eugenius IV., reckons fourteen 
 different reconciliations, and therefore fifteen schisms, includ- 
 ing the last, as still in force. Fleury, amongst moderns, the 
 index to whose history, prepared with extraordinary care, 
 contains the only full and connected summary that perhaps 
 exists of its course from first to last,' is content to distinguish 
 four periods, the last dating from the renunciation of the 
 council of Florence by the Greeks, the third from the renun- 
 ciation of the second council of Lyons by Andronicus Palae- 
 ologus, the son of Michael, the second from the excommuni- 
 cation of Michael Cerularius patriarch of Constantinople by 
 the legates of Leo IX., and the first from the elevation of 
 Photius to the same patriarchate 200 years before.'' Then, 
 
 ' Leo Allat. De Eocl. Or. et Oc. with equal diBingenuousness(c. 15) two 
 
 Consens., full as it is of curious de- chapters on, from any direct notice of 
 
 tails, must not he supposed to be this the 2nd council of Lyons, 
 
 by any means. To give two speci- ' See his last vol. under the head of 
 
 mens: 1. He passes OTer in silence ' Schism of the East.' Comp. S. Anton, 
 
 (lib. ii. 13) the sack of his country's Chron. p. iii. tit. xxii. § 13, Be 
 
 metrc^olis by the Latins, and their Eccl. Bom. et Constant., with the edi- 
 
 miserable rule there. 2. He shrinks tor's long note. 
 
 B 
 
2 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 as introductory to them, he throws together all the difFerent 
 events which, in his opinion, had served to pave the way for 
 •them, but leaving out, as will be shown, the principal one; 
 and placing at their head, curiously enough, the council of 
 Sardica, A.d. 347, the only Western council, as it happens, 
 whose rulings have been incorporated into the canon law of 
 the East. Other writers on the same side concur in re- 
 garding Photius in the ninth or Michael Cerularius in the 
 eleventh century, as the persons with whom the schism 
 originated, and who are therefore responsible for it; in 
 other words, the Jeroboams, ' who made Israel to sin.' And 
 others, wishing to combine accuracy with succinctness, have 
 got into the habit of dating it summarily from the eleventh 
 century, on the supposition that there has never been any 
 peace since ; and in consequence seem prone to exaggerate 
 what actually took place then. As the bishop of Ely 
 says, in his recent exposition of the XXXIX Articles, 
 widely circulated among candidates for holy orders in the 
 Church of England, embellishing Mosheim to whom he 
 refers: 'Leo therefore summoned a council at Rome, and 
 excommunicated the Greek Churches.'^ Or, as the renowned 
 Mabillon, from an opposite point of view, above 200 years 
 ago : ' Raised to the patriarchal eminence as a neophyte, 
 Michael commenced undermining the prerogatives of thepatri- 
 archs of Antioch and Alexandria, and at length turned round 
 upon the Roman pontiff, and the whole Latin Church ; osten- 
 sibly, for the purpose of patching up communion with that 
 pontiff and that Church ; but in reality for the purpose of 
 getting and dressing up pretexts for insulting both.''* 
 
 Mabillon is here merely repeating a story that was several 
 hundred years old when Michael became patriarch. Mosheim 
 is attributing to S. Leo what never really took place at all. 
 These are fair specimens of the popular version on both sides. 
 In a general history of the Church the Greek schism only 
 turns up now and then at long intervals, and the continuity 
 belonging to the successive stages of it having been dis- 
 severed, inaccuracies in recording them are unheeded, or else 
 their importance is underrated. Even when events are set 
 down correctly, but disconnected from each other by length- 
 
 » On Art. v. p. 116 Mosheim is * Act. Ord. Bened. torn. ix. pref. 
 translated as having said merely ' the p. i. ssee. vi. 
 Greeks.' Cent. si. part ii. e. iii. § 9. 
 
CASE OF PHOTIUS. 3 
 
 ened digressions, and the intermediate space filled with other 
 matter of equal or more absorbing interest, the mind is apt 
 to forget that the chain uniting them is a living one, every 
 link of which is invaluable to those which precede and to 
 those which follow. 
 
 It is indispensable for our purpose to get at the real 
 facts as they occurred, and then view them in the aggre- 
 gate. It is hardly less indispensable to dive below their 
 surface from time to time for the causes that underlie them. 
 People constantly fall out for some reason which they are 
 ashamed to own, or else deem not so politic to put forward as 
 others, the justice or popularity of which is more patent, and 
 which they can allege with more or less truth as really exist- 
 ing, and entering into the dispute. When has any nation ever 
 gone to war for the avowed object of self-aggrandisement, or 
 when have two individuals ever quarrelled, and both acknow- 
 ledged their bone of contention to consist in some object of 
 attraction or inward motive, for which each would have the 
 best cause to disparage and despise the other ? 
 
 That there were points on which educated minds in the 
 east and west thought and expressed themselves differently, 
 involving, or supposed to involve, momentous issues to the 
 religion which they held in common, and regarded on both 
 sides as a sacred trust: that they were the nominal grounds 
 put forward to justify jealousies and complaints of each 
 other : to habituate Christians in each case to the idea that 
 the breach between them was a solemn one in the sight of 
 God, and therefore imposed upon them the obligation to be- 
 have towards each other as foes, by those who had interests 
 to serve in promoting strife, is not denied. But the most 
 ordinary attention to events, and to dates especially, will suf- 
 fice to show that there had been differences on doctrine be- 
 tween them for some time, without producing any schism at 
 all, that other causes were in operation when the schism com- 
 menced, and that it was concurrently with the growth of 
 these causes that it advanced to consummation, leaving those 
 doctrinal differences, notwithstanding the warmth with which 
 they had been discussed on both sides, exactly where they 
 were when it began. 
 
 If therefore we begin with Photius, it will be necessary 
 to premise, that we do so, not because there was any fresh 
 theological controversy discussed between him and the pope, 
 
 B 2 
 
4 HISTOET OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 which it will be proved to demonstration in the course of this 
 volume there was not : nor, again, because the schism really 
 commenced with him, but merely because it is one of the most 
 convenient points to start from, as it is likewise the commonest, 
 and for geographical as well as ecclesiastical reasons, one of the 
 best keys to what followed. Bulgaria and Trani, the first to 
 the N.W. of Constantinople, the second to the S.E. of Rome ; 
 let us keep these two places uppermost in our minds while we 
 review the events that passed over them in chronological 
 order ; the patriarch of the west trespassing in the grounds 
 of him whose see ranked ' next after Eome,' the patriarch of 
 Constantinople trespassing on the shores of the west. And 
 let us begin with Bulgaria, starting however from the coasts 
 of Italy. It was in a.d. 858 that Photius was made patriarch 
 of Constantinople ; it was not till A.D. 867, or nine years sub- 
 sequently," that his far-famed encyclic appeared with its long 
 list of charges against the Latins. Up to that time there 
 had not been a word breathed respecting any one of those 
 charges in the voluminous correspondence between him and 
 Nicholas I. of Eome, and between Nicholas, the emperor 
 Michael III., and others, angry and argiimentative as it was 
 by turns. Photius, indeed, in one of his letters, actually 
 dwells on the great diversity of usages in east and west, for 
 the purpose of showing that where no doctrine was at stake, 
 nor any decree of the Catholic world violated, people would do 
 very wrong to condemn others for the non-observance of any 
 customs which they had not received;* a position which, as far 
 as the principle of the thing was concerned, was never denied 
 
 ' Baronius assigned it to a.d. 863, oi SitairePiTs ixeivot toO NiKoXciov airrf- 
 
 from the passage § 37 : Kol yh.p 5^ koI trroXoi eis Bov\yapiav a^tif6^evoL avimo- 
 
 airh ray TTJs ^IraKias fiepuv, ffvvoSiK'tj (Tt6\ws &\\a re KareSpaaivovTo^ &c. 
 
 ris ivtffTo\^ irpbs Ti/ias cLva^olTTiicey, Among them ■were bishops Paul and 
 
 which he supposed to have been written Formosus ; and the date of their de- 
 
 by the archbishops of Treves and Co- parture ' menee Augusto, indict, xiv.' 
 
 logne— Gunther and Thietgand — who (or a.d. 866). Vit. Mchol. ap. Mansi, 
 
 had been deposed by Nicholas in a torn. xv. p. 156 et seq. 
 
 Eoman synod of that year. Of this ' Ap. Baron, a.d. 861, n. 44. 'Ita 
 
 there seem tobe no proofs at all. Itmay ubi nulla est prEevaricatio fidei, nee 
 
 well hare been got up by the partisans communis et eatholioi decreti eversio, 
 
 of Gregory of Syracuse (t. Montacut. cum alii apud alios mores et leges 
 
 ad 1.). § 24, on the other hand, of the custodiantur, nee custodes injuste 
 
 encyclie seems conclusive as to its own agere, nee eos, qui non aceeperunt, 
 
 date. In the words of its recent contra legem facere, is, qui reotejudioare 
 
 editor (Phot. Ep. London, 1864, p. 166 norit, defiuiat.' 
 note), ViypanTai 5e h erei 867, 8t6 
 
CASE OP PHOTIUS. 5 
 
 by Nicholas/ but which had not as yet been affected in any 
 way by the general point under discussion between them. 
 It had all turned upon his elevation, which was irregular, but 
 unpremeditated. Ignatius, the Constantinopolitan patriarch, 
 had offended the emperor Michael, had been turned out by 
 him, and supplanted by Photius. As he protested against the 
 unjust treatment to which he had been subjected, Michael and 
 Photius appealed to Rome,' and Nicholas, in perfect conform- 
 ity with the course prescribed in the Sardican canons, des- 
 patched the bishops of Porto and Anagni as his legates to Con- 
 stantinople to try the cause there. Had they fulfilled their 
 task honestly no more might have come of it, but the sinister 
 rumours which reached Nicholas obliged him to enquire into 
 the case more narrowly, and the result was that he condemned 
 his own legates as well as Photius. There were many grounds 
 on which Photius ought never to have been countenanced by 
 them in his usurped position. Ignatius was alive, without a 
 stain of any kind on his conduct and character, and insisting on 
 his rights. Had he resigned, or incurred canonical deprivation, 
 the promotion of Photius might not have been more irregular 
 than that of his own great-uncle ' Tarasius, which had been 
 objected to, but at length accepted by Adrian I. They were 
 both laymen, and in fact both discharging the same civil 
 office, that of secretary to the emperor,'" at the time of their 
 appointment. But besides unlawfully supplanting Ignatius, 
 Photius had been consecrated by a deposed prelate, and this 
 alone, in the opinion of Nicholas, would have disqualified 
 him for office." Here it is that the action for trespass 
 really begins. Gregory, the consecrator of Photius, had 
 been archbishop of Syracuse, and was in Constantinople in 
 A.D. 846,'^ when Ignatius was consecrated. Owing to some 
 
 ' Ap. Mansi, torn. xv. p. 177. 'De tharius,' or ' Captain of the Guards,' 
 
 consuetudinibus, quas nobis opponere as Gibbon baa it, u. be. But see this 
 
 visi estis, scribentes per diversas ec- and the other precedents of Neetarius 
 
 clesias, diversas esse consuetudines, si andS. Ambrose, discussed by Nicholas, 
 
 illis canonica non obsistit auctoritas, Ep. vi. ap. Mansi, torn. xv. p. 176. 
 pro qu& iis obviare debeamus, nil judi- " ' Gregorius ergo, qui canonici ac 
 
 camus vel iis resistiraus.' synodic^ depositus et anathematizatus 
 
 ' ' The emperor Michael and Photius erat, quemadmodum posset quemquam 
 
 applied at once by letters to pope provehere, vel benedicere, ratio nulla 
 
 Nicholas I.,' &c. — Neander, Church docet.' — Ap. Mansi, torn. xv. p. 225. 
 Hist, vol vi. p. 388, Torrey's tr. ''' His see being then in the hands 
 
 " ' Tarasium nostrum proavuncu- of the Saracens. See a long note in 
 
 ]„ni.' — Ap. Baron, a.d. 861, n. 47. his defence, ProUg. Episi. Phot. (ed. 
 
 '» Photius was likewise 'Protospa- Baletta, London, 1864) p. 29. 
 
6 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 charges that had been hrought against him, however, h« had 
 been expressly prohibited from assisting in that ceremony. 
 Afterwards he had been deposed in a synod over which 
 Ignatius presided, and Benedict III. the predecessor of 
 Nicholas had all but assented '^ to his removal. Grregory 
 therefore had not merely retorted upon Ignatius, but had 
 insulted Eome likewise by consecrating Photius, and Nicholas 
 was all the more disposed to be indignant with him, because 
 Syracuse happened to be one of those sees over which Eome 
 still claimed jurisdiction, though long since deprived of its 
 exercise.'^ Accordingly he begins his correspondence with 
 the emperor by begging that all the antient prerogatives or 
 emoluments belonging to his see might be restored — rights 
 that had been exercised through the metropolitan see of 
 Thessalonica, over Illyria, Dacia, and Moesia, on the north '; 
 patrimony that had been been acquired in Calabria and Sicily 
 on the south-east — among them more particularly that the 
 archbishop of Syracuse should receive consecration from 
 Eome, that the tradition ordained by the Apostles might be 
 preserved inviolate.'^ Into the origin and extent of these 
 privileges, we need go no further than our subject warrants.'" 
 
 '■' Vide Mansi, torn. xv. pp. 180 and payment, as stated in the text. It is 
 
 247. It was Nicholas himself who Adrian I., in his letter to Charle- 
 
 really confirmed that sentence. mague, who speaks of bishoprics and 
 
 " Hence Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 854, archbishoprics in addition, that were 
 
 n. iv. : ' Gregorii. . . depositio ab lost to Eome from that time. Vide 
 
 episcopatu, sehismatis Grraecorum origo Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 730, n. xi. who 
 
 fnit. . Porro episcopos Sieilise pa- thereupon remarks: 'Leo imperator 
 
 triarchseConstantinopolitanoa tempore adeo exarsit, ut in odium vindicatarum 
 
 Leonis Isanri subjectos fuisse supra pontifice imaginum, patrimonia ecele- 
 
 ostendimus.' sise Roman se in Calabria et Sicilia sita 
 
 " ' Inter ista . . ut consecratio Syra- in fiscum redegerit, et diceceses lUyri- 
 
 cusano archiepiscopo nostrS, a sede im- canas, Calabriam, Siciliam, et reliquas 
 
 pendatur : ut traditio ab Apostolis provincias usque Thraciam, a Eomano 
 
 instituta nullatenus nostris tempori- patriarchatii per summam tyrannidem 
 
 bus violetur.' — Ap. Mansi, torn. xv. distraxerit.' And hence Leo Al- 
 
 p. 167. latius, commenting upon these trans- 
 
 '* ' Calabritanura patrimonium et actions, in a passage that cuts both 
 
 Siculum . . . ' says Nicholas (ibid.), ways : ' TJt Graeei intelligant, schisma 
 
 ' quoniam irrationabile est ut eeclesi- sub Leone Isauro, quod fer& omnes 
 
 astica possessio unde luminaria, et Orientis ecclesias a sue capita' (i.e. 
 
 concinnatores ecdesiae Dei fieri debent, Eome) ' avulsit, non ex aligua kisresi 
 
 terr^nAqu&vis potestate subtrahentnr.' (licet id, ut vidimus, invasores praeten- 
 
 This would not be very intelligible, did derent, ut speeioso aliquo titulo seces- 
 
 we not learn from Sigonius (De Begno sionem suam cohonestarent) sed ex 
 
 j?i«/. lib. iii. A.D. 732, ed. Muratori), contentione ob diaeceses male ■usurpatas, 
 
 who merely repeats Thoophanes and exortum est.' — De Ferpct. Consens. 
 
 Cadrenus, that it consisted in a yearly lib. ii. e. 3, § 7. 
 
ACT OF LEO THK ISAURIAN. 7 
 
 The emperor Leo III., surnamed the Isaurian, had, in re- 
 venge for the part taken against him by the Roman pontiffs, 
 Gregory II. and III., in the affairs of Italy, sent a force to 
 the Adriatic a.d. 732. A heavy tribute was imposed upon 
 the inhabitants of Calabria and Sicily, yearly payments to 
 the amount of 3^ talents, or 7001. in round numbers, that 
 had been made to Eome from thence under the name of pa- 
 trimony of the Holy Apostles, were confiscated ; bishoprics 
 and archbishoprics in Sicily and Calabria, in Illyria and the 
 provinces adjacent to it, hitherto dependent upon Rome, were 
 subjected to the first see of the east. 
 
 The consequences of that act were widely different from 
 what was intended by it. Leo III. has been called by his 
 admirers the second founder of the Byzantine empire. He 
 was likewise, though undesignedly, the founder of western 
 independence. Constantino and his successors abandoned 
 Rome to the popes, while they retained their allegiance. 
 Leo, by this act, alienated them from the empire for ever, 
 and placed them at the head of the west, struggling to be 
 free and quit of the east. From henceforth, no emperor of 
 the east was solicited to confirm their election. In Italy 
 they directed the movements of the national party, by turns 
 availing themselves of the services of the Lombards, Franks, 
 and Normans : creating a western empire, but without sur- 
 rendering their own prerogatives, inherent or acquired ; erect- 
 ing or sanctioning the erection of independent kingdoms, yet 
 exacting tribute from them in some form or other as their 
 spiritual head. All this followed sooner or later on their 
 ceasing to be subjects of that empire over which Leo ruled ; 
 but the origin of their separation was purely political, and 
 arose out of no quarrel or divergence of doctrine whatever 
 between the Churches of the East and West. So far from it, 
 that there never had been perhaps closer union or more 
 sympathy between their respective hierarchies, than there 
 was then. They were both undergoing persecution at the 
 hands of the civil power for what they agreed in considering 
 as of vital importance to the service of the sanctuary ; they 
 might either of them have stolen a victory over the other by 
 siding with the iconoclastic emperors, but they stood firm to 
 each other ; at the second Nicene council, as we shall see, the 
 very point of all others over which they wrangled subse- 
 quently to their political estrangement and antagonism, was 
 
8 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 expressly declared, on both sides, to be no obstacle to their 
 entire agreement. Their doctrinal differences only made 
 their appearance, when a national party had been formed in 
 both, each owning a separate master, and rival interests, and 
 distinct citizenship. Leo, beyond doubt, consolidated his 
 empire for centuries in the east by his vigorous measures ; 
 but in the revenge which he seemed to be taking upon Eome, 
 he laid the foundation of more momentous issues for Eome 
 and for Christendom generally, than even the popes them- 
 selves could foresee. 
 
 To the immediate effects of that blow, indeed, they were 
 keenly aUve. More than 100 years from its infliction they 
 had far from forgotten it. Adrian I. complained of it to 
 Charlemagne ; he had been unable to obtain any redress from 
 the Grreek emperor Constantine, son of Irene, to whom he had 
 appealed previously.'' To Nicholas, who had been assert- 
 ing his jurisdiction over the powerful archbishops of Eheims, 
 Treves, and Cologne, with so much success, it must have been 
 beyond measure galling to have the archbishop of a small 
 see so near him as Syracuse, flying in his teeth. This was a 
 question, however, it cannot be too often repeated, affecting 
 not his primacy, but his patriarchate. To his request on 
 that head, Michael never seems to have returned any reply 
 at all, as might have been anticipated. On other points he 
 negotiated, but without yielding ; and when he found that 
 Nicholas had been holding a synod in a.d. 863 and excom- 
 municating his own legates for the part played by them in 
 the Constantinopolitan synod of a.d. 861, where they had 
 truckled to Photius, and annulling their acts, he despatched 
 a violent letter to the pope by his captain of the guards and 
 name-sake, demanding with vehemence that the pope should 
 give way and accede to his wishes. Nicholas replied '* without 
 
 " Ap. Mansi, torn. xiii. p. 808. In annorum spatia abstracta. . . Unde et 
 
 another letter lie had said previously, plures donationes in saero nostro scri- 
 
 ^peaking of Consta,ntine the Great and nio Lateranenei reconditas habemus.' 
 
 others: 'Per ejus largitatem sancta — Ep. ad Gar. M. ap. Mansi, torn. xii. 
 
 Dei catholica et apostoliea Eomana p. 820 et seq. 
 
 ecdesia elevata atque exaltata est : et " • Michaelem protospatharium cum 
 
 potestatem in bis Hesperise partibns epistoU injuriis plen& ad nos direxit, 
 
 largiri dignatus est. . . Sed et cuncta et ut sententiam nostram ad votum 
 
 alia, qu* per diversos imperatores. . . ipsius commutaremiis,v6hementer hor- 
 
 Eomanae ecolesiae eoncessa sunt, et per tatus est.' — Ep. ad Hincmar ap. 
 
 nefandam gentem Langobardoruni per Baron, a.d. 867, n. 66. 
 
EMBASSY FKOM BULGARIA. 9 
 
 hesitation by the same messenger in a.d. 866." He would 
 consent to no trifling with the prerogatives of his see. He 
 insisted that the cause should be brought to Eome, and sub- 
 mitted to him, as that of S. Athanasius had been submitted 
 to his predecessor Julius 500 years before, and according to 
 the unimpeachable testimony of a Greek historian and Greek 
 prelate, ' in strict accordance with the law of the Church.''" 
 Here Nicholas took his stand upon authentic precedent and 
 acknowledged law, to which the canons of Sardica themselves 
 were due; the consequence not of the extent of his patri- 
 archate, but of the rights of Ms primacy. 
 
 Gregory, Photiusi Ignatius, and even the emperor, were 
 invited to send fit and proper persons to represent them there. 
 To give more weight to his injunctions, Nicholas confirmed 
 them subsequently by a formal decree in a synod of bishops, 
 after which he wrote again to Michael,, and at the same time 
 to the clergy of Constantinople, to Photius, Bardas, Ignatius, 
 to the mother and wife of the emperor, and to the senate — 
 eight letters in all ^^ — which he waited to send by a safe hand. 
 And now it was that a bright gleam of consolation unex- 
 pectedly shot across his path. ' Just as we were feeling 
 ourselves encompassed on all sides by these anxieties, and 
 placed in immense straits,' he says, ' lo ! suddenly news is 
 brought to us of the arrival of ambassadors, from Bulgaria. 
 
 " ' Per indiotionem quartam de6i- 240-77. But here I must observe that 
 
 mam.' — Ibid. all these letters of Nicholas on Photius 
 
 ''"Ap. Mansi, torn. XV. p. 210-11. The require revision, both as to titles and 
 
 words of Theodoret are correctly given, as to dates. E.g. Ep. i. is assigned by 
 
 They occur lib. ii. 4 : Kai yhp T^'Pd/jiris Mansi to a.d. 866, whereas it mentions 
 
 iirurKdiTif . . ot irepl Evo'^/Sioi' rets Korib no events later than the return of the 
 
 'ASavcuriou cruineBelffas ffuKotpai/Tias ambassador Leo, subsequently to the 
 
 i^dneiiffrnv 6 5e Tqf t^s ^Kit\7)(r(os eicif- Eoman synod of a.d. 863. Ep. vii. is 
 
 fi€i/of to/iif, Kol avToiis KoraKafie^v riji/ headed ' ad Michaelem imperatorem,' 
 
 'P<iliriviKe\cvare,KalTiiveuoi''A6ai'iirioii- but it is addressed throughout to the 
 
 els rii» Slmjv ixdKeae. The parallel faithful. The eightletters above-men- 
 
 passages in Socrates are lib. ii. 8 and tioned are dated the ISth Indiction : 
 
 17; in Sozomen iii. 8 and 10. The whereas Nicholas in his letter to Hinc- 
 
 last of these is the clearest: elvaiy&p mar (ap. Baron. A.D. 867, n. 46), 
 
 v6iiOV UpaTiKhv, &Kvpa iTo<j>aii'fiv ri expressly says that he sent off his 
 
 iropi yv^/itiv irpaTTd/ifva toB 'Pu^uaiW messengers, who were the bearers of 
 
 iTTurKdrrou- v. Vales, ad Soc. ii. 8. them,, in the 14th Indiction. It is 
 
 Christendom's Divisions, parti. § 9, and from this last letter that the tnie chro- 
 
 notes 41-3. It is not a, but the law^ nologicai order of events is obtained, 
 
 thatis.thecommon— law of the Church and the 'excursus' in Mansi (ib. 
 
 that is meant, as is seen from Theodoret. p. 463-70) proved! faulty. 
 
 " All given in Mansi, torn. xv. p. 
 
10 HISTORY OP THE SCHISM. 
 
 Who can express with what joy and gladness we were filled? 
 first, to hear that they had been converted by the grace of 
 God; secondly, that they had sought the doctrine of the 
 blessed apostle Peter, and of his see ; thirdly, that we had 
 the means now of sending our messengers to Constantinople 
 by land through their territory.' '* 
 
 Nicholas acted with his usual promptitude. First of all, 
 he gave the Bulgarian ambassadors a warm and honorable 
 reception. Then, he selected Donatus bishop of Ostia, Leo 
 presbyter, and Marinus deacon of the Eoraan Church, and 
 afterwards pope, to be the bearers of his letters for Constan- 
 tinople ; Paul bishop of Porto Barato, and Formosus bishop 
 of Porto — another future pope — to preach the gospel in 
 Bulgaria. Nor was this all. He sent back by the hands of 
 the ambassadors a long lebter containing answers to no less 
 than 106 points, which had been submitted to him from 
 that country; and in a dozen instances at least, reflecting on, 
 or criticising, the teaching which it had already received from 
 the Grreeks.^^ 
 
 On the subject of the creed he is asked nothing, and is ac- 
 cordingly silent. On other points their queries are trivial.^'' 
 At length they ask in what light married presbyters are to 
 be regarded ? on which he answers unequivocally that they 
 are highly reprehensible, though he would not have them 
 deposed ; still less judged by the laity. ^' Again, till his 
 legates have reported on their condition, the Bulgarians can- 
 not be allowed a patriarch. He has sent them a bishop ; and 
 when Christianity has spread among them, and they have 
 several bishops, one among them may be consecrated arch- 
 bishop, receiving his privileges, however, and his pall from 
 Eome ; as all archbishops of France, Germany, and elsewhere, 
 are found to do.^^ In reply to the question, how many 
 patriarchates there are, he reckons three: namely, Rome, 
 Alexandria, and Antioch, as of apostolic origin, and founded 
 by S. Peter or S. Mark. The^prelates of Constantinople 
 and Jerusalem ' are called patriarchs ; but they are not of as 
 great authority as the preceding . . , the Church of Con- 
 
 ^^ Ibid. n. 47. Here again Leo of Photiue, c. 5, 1. 
 
 Allat. De Consens. lib. ii. 4, is cul- ^s ^p jijjngj^ ^^ ^y p 401.34 
 
 pably reticent. He says nothing of " Noe. 3, 14, 54, 55, 57, 66. 
 
 this Bulgarian mission of Nicholas, '^ No. 70. 
 
 and only cursorily names the encydie ^' Nos. 72-3. 
 
EXCITEMENT AT CONSTANTINOPLE. II 
 
 Stan tin op] e indeed, as it was not founded by any apostle, so 
 neither was it named in any way by the Nicene, that greatest 
 and most venerable of all councils ; but only because Con- 
 stantinople is new Eome, its pontiff is more through royal 
 favour, than with any reason, styled patriarch.' Finally, in 
 reply to the question, which of the patriarchs ranks second 
 after the Eoman, he adds that ' according as the holy Roman 
 Church holds, and as the Nicene canons insinuate; as the 
 holy Roman pontiifs maintain, and as reason itself points 
 out, the patriarch of Alexandria ranks next after the pope of 
 Rome.' ^ Nicholas was here straining a point against a rival, 
 and arguing as one patriarch against another. It is easy to 
 see with what a burst of indignation these declarations would 
 be received at Constantinople, where they must, from the 
 nature of the case, have immediately become known. They 
 attacked Ignatius as well as Photius ; the clergy of Constan- 
 tinople, one and all, as well as the emperor : canons passed by 
 the councils of Constantinople, Chalcedon, and the Quini-sext ; 
 the order and precedence to which the whole east had been 
 pledged deliberately for nearly 500 years ; and to which the 
 west had in practice for some time subscribed. It aggravated 
 the insult contained in them immensely, that they should 
 have been addressed to the Bulgarians. The embassy of the 
 Bulgarians to Rome had been reported to the emperor, and 
 was resented at once. The messengers of Nicholas had no 
 sooner attempted to cross over into Greek territory, than 
 they were met by the guard of the passes, warned off, and 
 roughly handled,^* Within forty days they were on their road 
 back to Rome with their mission unaccomplished. Not so, 
 those who had been sent to preach to the natives. •' So en- 
 chanted was their monarch with the counsels of the holy 
 father, and so confirmed his faith, that expelling all foreigners 
 from his dominions' (among them, doubtless, all Grreek 
 missionaries; ' and attending exclusively to the preaching of 
 the apostolic envoys, he determined to seek edification in 
 those heavenly pastures which had been provided for him.' 
 So despatching another embassy to Rome, he petitioned that 
 a supply of more presbyters might be sent to him, and For- 
 mosus consecrated as his archbishop.''' 
 
 " Nos. 92-3. " Vit. Nichol. ap. Mansi, torn. xr. p. 157. " Ibid. 
 
12 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 Tidings had meanwhile reached Nicholas, through his own 
 messengers, of the effect produced in Constantinople by the 
 news of that mission. His own letters could not have had 
 anything to do with it, as they had never been delivered.'" 
 That mission alone, and the spirit which he had infused into 
 it, had created the ferment. It threatened to detach Bulgaria 
 from Constantinople. Politically as well as ecclesiastically, 
 this was a contingency which all Constantinople would be 
 sure to unite as one man to avert. It affected their security 
 as well as their pride ; their temporal as well as their spiritual 
 ascendency. There had been wars between Bulgaria and the 
 empire for a length of time, and with alternate success. 
 Many Greeks had been made prisoners in the first campaigns ; 
 and they had carried Christianity with them into the land of 
 their captors. A sister of the king of Bulgaria had, more 
 recently, been seized and carried to Constantinople, educated 
 there in the faith, and at length sent home in exchange for 
 a mank, who had long preached Christianity to the Bulga- 
 rians. On her return, she added her influence in her own 
 rank of life, to the effects of his teaching ; and hence the war 
 which broke out between her brother and the empire in 
 A.D. S61 resulted very naturally first in his own conversion, 
 and afterwards that of his people. Bogaris and his prin- 
 cipal officers of state were baptised at Constantinople with 
 great pomp,'' Photius in all probability performing the cere- 
 mony; and the emperor certainly standing' sponsor for the 
 king, who thenceforward assumed his name. This remark- 
 able event, according to Mansi, took place in a.d. 864,'^ and 
 must have created immense sensation in the imperial city. 
 Photius afterwards addressed' a long letter or treatise to his 
 neophyte, king Michael, ' on the duties of a prince,' '' com- 
 posed in a very different spirit from that of Machiavelli,' 
 and full of excellent Christian, counsel. In it he calls him 
 ' his illustrious and beloved son,.' '*...' glorious fruit of his 
 labours,"^ . . . 'the true genuiiie offspring of his spiritual 
 pangs,"^ language which must in^ply that he had baptised him. 
 
 It begins with a recital of the Constantinopolitan creed, in 
 
 '" One was read at the synod of '" Rigiad'Earon. i.D. 867, n. v. 
 
 Constantinople of a.d. 869 (8th gene- " Ad Baron, a.d. 866, n. 1. 
 
 ral) Act. vii. (Mansi, torn. xvi. p. 101, " Ep^i. ed. Montac. 
 
 et seq.) apparently as news even then. '* § 1. " § 5. " § 119. 
 
ENCYCLIC OF PHOTIUS. 13 
 
 which, of course, those ■words ' Filioque ' do not occur. A 
 brief account of the seven general councils follows, in some 
 respects inaccurate, but neither there, nor elsewhere through- 
 out the treatise, is there a trace of sarcasm or denunciation, 
 as against the Church of the West. Nicholas, had he been 
 shown it, might have been jealous of it ; he could have found 
 nothing in it to provoke retort. It must have been from 
 political apprehensions of his godfather, rather than from any 
 distrust of his spiritual guide, that Michael, only two years 
 afterwards,'^ had recourse to Eome. ' The Bulgarian monarch,' 
 says Mr. Finlay,'' ' fearing lest the influence of the Byzantine 
 clergy on his Christian subjects might render him in some 
 degree dependent on^the emperor, opened communications 
 with pope Nicholas for the purpose of balancing the power of 
 the Greek clergy, by placing the ecclesiastical affairs of his 
 kingdom under control of the Latins.' 
 
 The celebrated encyclic which these negotiations evoked 
 was, in reality, a political manifesto, and the spiritual charges 
 put forward in it were studiously confined to what had been 
 done in that country, though hints are dropped that similar 
 measures had been attempted elsewhere. There is reason for 
 thinking that bishops Paul and Formosus went beyond their 
 instructions, delivered the creed in its interpolated form to 
 the Bulgarians, and schemed for the wholesale expulsion of 
 the Greek clergy.'^ The conduct of Formosus, after he had 
 become pope, was such as to draw down upon him one of the 
 fiercest and most savage retaliations upon record at the hands 
 of those over whom he had ruled. One of the first effects of 
 his present mission, as we have heard already, was that the 
 Bulgarian monarch determined to expel all foreigners, and 
 to have Formosus, if possible, for his archbishop — a request, 
 curiously enough, which Nicholas refused to grant.^" On the 
 
 " OSTta , . , ixeivov tov ^BvovSf ouS* 5^ /xer' avrav ffvvahiav KKtjp^Kai/, els 
 
 tii 5uo iviavTois, riir opdiiv rav Xpi- Bou\7op(oi' 07ro<rTeA\ei, koI toiStois 
 
 arianav tijiui/tos SpijffKeiay. — F7iot. Ep. ^n-ereTOKTO ri, re iK\a t^s Sutik^s 
 
 ii. § 4, ed. Montac. ixxXnclas IBtiia, iaa ii Kae6Xov 4KK\7iirla, 
 
 " Hist, of the Hyz. Emp. from is opTi<()u5 iv Tf Kodap^ ttjs opBoSo^las 
 
 DCCXVI. to MLVii. p. 218. The policy \iittp fifiwo, oi irapeSex^To, elaaydyeiv 
 
 of the Greek emperors in these eccle- iKei, nai rh TcdvTtev Affe^SeVraToi', r^v iv 
 
 siastical negotiations is excellently Tip ffvii.^6K(p iratxiBiffudi' irpoaiiiKiti', Kol 
 
 described, p. 278. «« tov tlov. Comp. Ep. iv. and the 
 
 " Phot. Ep. (ed. Baletta, London, note to it, p. 166. 
 
 1864.) Prol. § \i)'. p. 49. NiicdXoos " Vit. Nicol. as before, p. 157. Is 
 
 S^ . . . ixib nkyififficdTrovs . . . ttoAAV not the reason given, when Formosus 
 
14 HTSTOET OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 other hand, the principal charge brought against these mis- 
 sionary bishops ia the encyclic, is their interpolation of the 
 creed,'" and this charge Nicholas, probably with the encyclic 
 in his hands, attempts to meet, not by denial, but by mis- 
 representation. His words are,''^ 'Whilst our ambassadors 
 were staying with the king of Bulgaria, and endeavouring to 
 get to Constantinople, the said emperors (Michael and Basil) 
 transmitted their letter to the Bulgarian monarch, on receipt 
 of which he piously resolved that it should be brought to us 
 by our own legates. Now, as soon as we had taken and read 
 the said letter, and other writings with it, nothing could be 
 plainer to us than that the said princes, in dictating it, had 
 dipped their pen in the waters of blasphemy, and used the 
 slime of error for their ink ; for they endeavour to impute, 
 not merely to our Church in particular, but to every one 
 generally, in which Latin is used, that we fast on Saturdays ; 
 that we confess the Holy Spirit not to proceed from the 
 Father.'^ Can it be any other than the encyclic, which 
 Nicholas is here criticising? The two charges which he has 
 mentioned are first and last as they stand there, the three 
 next enumerated by him make up exactly the five charges of 
 tbe encyclic,'''' neither more nor less ; and for the remaining 
 charges he expressly refers no longer to that one letter, but 
 to ' their other writings.'''* 
 
 Now, if it be the encyclic of which he is speaking, it clearly 
 was not, in his opinion, so much the work of Photius as of 
 Michael and Basil,*^ to whom he unhesitatingly assigns it. 
 
 •was afterwards excommunicated by fasting in Lent observed in the west- 
 John VIII.? ' Formosum Porluensem 2. The objection of the Latins to mar- 
 episcopiim, qui a beatse memorise ried priests, and 3. To the signing 
 domino prsedecessore nostro pap4 Nico- with chrism by priests, 
 lao in Bulgarorum patriam destinatus, " ' Siciit per alia ipsorum scripta 
 noviter in Christo regenerati regis ani- indicatur^ — Ibid. It is from not 
 raos adeo suis calliditatibus vitiavit, having observed this that the nnmber 
 ut,' &o. — Epist. Joan. viii. ap. Mansi, of charges in the encyclic has been so 
 torn. xvii. p.237, 'Ad universes Gallos variously stated by modems, 
 et Germanos.' For the actual sentence ■" Similarly the work of Eatramn is 
 see further on, p. 349. headed ' Opposita quibus Michael et 
 
 " § 10. Basilius Grsecorum Imperatores Eoma- 
 
 " Ap. Baron, a.d. 867, u. 49. nam ecclesiam infamare conantur,' &c. 
 
 "' With evident reference to the Ap. Dacher. SpioU. vol. i. p. 61, ed. 
 
 argt. in § 21 of the encyclic. On the de la Barre. The connexion between 
 
 later reading introduced into the text the encyclic and the Caroline books 
 
 here, see below. will be discussed in c. viii. 
 
 " They are: 1. The lax rule of 
 
REVOLUTION IN CALABRIA. 15 
 
 They 'dictated,' though tlieir suhordinate may have penned it ; 
 but, in reality, there was no accusation contained in it against 
 any one, save those bishops who had been tampering with 
 the faith of the Bulgarian people, ' to the intolerable grief and 
 confusion of those from whom it had received Christianity.' ■'^ 
 Photius always represents his doctrinal differences as having 
 been with a party, not with Rome, which is strictly true.''* 
 And as for the story told by Nicetas David," of his bribing 
 the king and queen of France, and offering to proclaim them 
 emperors of Constantinople on their assisting him to expel 
 Nicholas from Rome, it is simply ludicrous. There is indeed 
 one passage in the encyclic in which complaints are stated to 
 have reached Constantinople from some that inhabited Italy 
 to the prejudice of 'tleir bishop;"" but his name is not given,, 
 and it was, in fact, only the Bulgarian question in another 
 shape. Calabria, doubtless, was the Italy from whence these 
 complaints came. It had been subject to the jurisdiction of 
 the patriarch of Constantinople since a.d. 732, as we have 
 seen already; but simultaneously with the despatch of the 
 missionaries into Bulgaria by Nicholas, it was set fermenting 
 by a revolution, particulars of which will be given further on. 
 And Photius, as will be shown, had his eyes upon what was 
 going on there as well as Nicholas. Thus, the struggle which 
 is represented by Bulgaria, and the struggle represented by 
 Trani, commenced at the same time in point of fact. Still 
 it could only be by exaggerating the expressions of the 
 encyclic in each case that Nicholas bade the French bishops 
 regard it in the light of a general attack upon the west.^' 
 The ' other writings ' which accompanied it, but which have 
 not been preserved, may have been more aggressive in tone. 
 Its own tone, though indignant, is defensive, little more than 
 a sharp protest against the missionaries of Nicholas, and 
 his own answers to the Bulgarians. Its title of encyclic — it 
 
 " Fltot. Ep. lib. i. 13, §24, ed. ut ad alios archiepiscopos, qui in regno 
 
 Migne. filii nostri Caroli, gloriosi regie, eon- 
 
 "Ep.ii. 24, §25-6;andMystag. §75- sistunt, deferatur, ac id suramoper^ 
 
 90, ed. Migne in each case. studeat, nt de his singnli in suis dioe- 
 
 *' Ap. Baron, a.d. 867, n. 84-6. cesibus una cum sui&aganeis suis. . . 
 
 " g ,37. convenientfer traetare, et nobis quae 
 
 " His object in writing to Hinc- evenerint, suggerere eurent, eos inci- 
 
 mar is stated at the end of his letter, tare non negligat.' — Ap. Baron. a.d. 
 
 ' Tua, frater Hiuemare, pietas ciim 867, n. 62. 
 banc epistolam legerit, maximA curet, 
 
16 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 may have come out with a different heading at first — its 
 address to the ' archiepiscopal thrones of the east,' only shows 
 that it was intended to acquaint the whole east with the 
 insult shown to its principal see. Nor, considering the part 
 which all Constantinople had taken in the conversion of the 
 Bulgarians, is it surprising that its patriarch should have 
 assented to the publication of it in that form. Again, when 
 it is remembered that Photius is expressly stated, by one of 
 his unfavorable critics,^^ to have deprecated any condemna- 
 tion of Nicholas in the synod which ensued/' and of which 
 the acts are said to have been burnt,^* it seems extremely 
 probable that not he, but the emperor Michael, was the 
 prime instigator, as of the encyclic, so of the synod, though 
 Photius consented in each case to be made his tool : the plain 
 point at issue being, in the opinion of both sides, whether 
 Bulgaria should continue to depend in Church and State 
 upon Constantinople. 
 
 Let anyone, who may be of another opinion still, only turn to 
 the remarks of Anastasius, the librarian, addressed to Adrian 
 II., and prefixed to his copy of the acts of the fourth Con- 
 stantinopolitan, or eighth general council, as it is called, 
 A.D. 869, at which he had been assisting. The representa- 
 tives of the holy see, he says, had been robbed on their way 
 home ; and their copy of its acts stolen from them. His own 
 copy, which was a transcript of theirs, having reached Rome, 
 it was of the utmost importance that it should be kept in 
 safety. Why so ? lest the faith should be corrupted ? by no 
 means ; but on account of the Bulgarian business, on which 
 there had been a fresh discussion, of which he was afraid 
 the Greeks might circulate garbled or untrue versions.** 
 Everything else had gone off swimmingly there. Ignatius 
 had been put in possession of his see : Photius ejected, and 
 
 ^ See the quotation from Metro- a tetter judgment of the part really 
 
 phanes, archbishop of Smyrna, in Pagi played by Photius on that occasion, 
 
 ad Baron, a.d. 867, n. xii. 'Atque had they been preserved. All the 
 
 ipse quidem fictA erga papam pietate extant aecoxints are by hostile pens, 
 
 respondebat, non esse absentem judir Anastasius, Pref. ad Syn. viii. (Patrol, 
 
 oandum,' &c. tom. cxxix. p. \o), says it was by 
 
 *' Its summons is contained in § 36- order of Adrian II. 
 
 7 of the encyclic. " Ap. Mansi, tom. xvi. u. 10 et 
 
 " Coneil. Constantinop. iv. act. viii. seq. 'Cur autem ista prsemiserim ' 
 
 ap. Mansi, tom. xvi. p. 136-6. It (i.e. p.9) 'brevitjr annotabo: siquidem 
 
 ■would have enabled posterity to form cim rex Bulgarorum,' &e. 
 
CONDUCT OF IGNATIUS. 17 
 
 disgraced : the memory of Nicholas triumphantly vindicated. 
 Notwithstanding all which, there was a hitch still about Bul- 
 garia. That territory, it was said, had all been dependent 
 upon Kome in former days : then it had been usurped by 
 Constantinople : then it had been wrested from both by the 
 Bulgarians, and become pagan again. At length, on their 
 conversion, it had come to be under Eome once more. But 
 the Greeks coveted, and were bent on appropriating it. Its 
 king had stood firm as a column hitherto against their 
 machinations ; but the Greeks had persuaded him to send am- 
 bassadors to Constantinople, and let the cause be argued in 
 presence of the papal legates and of Ignatius, whether that 
 country should obey spiritually Constantinople or Eome. 
 On the conversion of the Bulgarians, the Greeks argued, its 
 ecclesiastical state should revert to what it had been before 
 their coming ; and the Bulgarians acknowledged to finding 
 Greek, not Latin, priests there when they conquered it. By 
 ■ the Roman representatives it was argued that it had originally 
 been subject to Eome.'* The debate was carried on with ani- 
 mation on both sides. At length the legates, finding them- 
 selves overborne, made a passionate appeal to Ignatius. ' We 
 adjure you, patriarch, by the authority of the holy 
 apostles reigning before God and His angels ; and we con- 
 jure you by all here present, according to this epistle of 
 your holy restorer lord Adrian, supreme pontiff, which we 
 here present to you, that you take diligent heed to abstain 
 from ordaining in any part of Bulgaria, and from sending 
 any of your clergy thither : lest the holy apostolic see, 
 which restored you to your own, should seem dispossessed of 
 its own through you : or, in any case, if, contrary to our 
 belief, you think you have just cause for complaint, do not 
 hesitate to submit it to that holy Roman Church which has 
 rehabilitated you.' 
 
 Thus appealed to, we are told, Ignatius received the apo- 
 stolic letter, and having, in spite of all their entreaties, de- 
 ferred reading it, answered diplomatically : ' Far be it from 
 me to be implicated in these presumptions against the honor 
 of the apostolic see: who am neither in my nonage that 
 anything should be taken from me by stealth, nor yet in my 
 
 " Thus far from Anastasius himself. (Mansi, torn. xt. p. 814 et seq.) the 
 Mansi, torn. xv. p. 11 et seq. For real biographer of Adrian. (Ibid, 
 what follows, see his continuator p. 819.) 
 
 C 
 
18 HISTOBT OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 dotage that I should plead guilty to what I should blame iu 
 others.' And so the conference terminated abruptly. Not 
 so the matter in hand. Two years had scarce elapsed, before 
 we find Adrian telling the emperors Basil, Constantine, and 
 Leo,^^ how astounded he had been to hear that 'his .own 
 brother and colleague Ignatius had presumed by their favour 
 to consecrate a bishop in Bulgarian territory;' and adds 
 ' that it must end in his excommunication, unless he desists.' 
 Ignatius, with all his orthodoxy, and in spite of all that he 
 has undergone, will incur aijathema, if he lays hands on Bul- 
 garia. But, according to the biographer of Adrian, the Bul- 
 garians themselves, shortly afterwards, persuaded by gifts 
 and promises from Constantinople, recalled the Grreeks, and 
 ejected the Latin missionaries; bishop Grrimoaldus, one of 
 their number, returning to Eome, without leave from the 
 pope, but with his pockets well filled, and bringing with him 
 a voluminous epistle for the pope in excuse of his conduct, 
 which he attributed to the decision arrived at by the presi- 
 dents of the council.** Thus Bulgaria was lost to Eome once 
 more. It is to no purpose that John VIII. in a.d. 878 sends 
 bishops Paul and Eugenius to the monarch of that country 
 with pathetic remonstrances,*" entreating him ' not to follow 
 the Greeks, who have never been free from heresy at any 
 period of their existence, and will be sure to contaminate 
 him.^° . . . ' Where should he seek the true faith but at Eome ; 
 where, planted by S. Peter, it had taken root.' ^' . . - ' thither 
 let the most Christian king return, as a hart to the 
 water-springs.' ^^ ' You have been twice warned,' he tells 
 Ignatius : ' you are hereby warned for the third time, that, 
 unless, within thirty days, all the clergy whom you or your 
 bishops have consecrated, shall have quitted Bulgaria, you 
 are, two months from the receipt of this, interdicted from the 
 holy Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, . . . and should 
 you persevere in your obstinacy, you are deprived of that 
 patriarchate which you owe to our favour, and stripped of 
 every privilege belonging to it.'" . . .' But if, in obedience to 
 
 »' See his letter dated Nov. Indict, v. qua hseresi aliquandd liberos exti- 
 
 or A.D. 872, Mansi, torn. xvi. p. 206 tisee' . . (rather strong language!) 
 
 fit eeq. ' noli ergo sequi Grsecos, fill carissime.' 
 
 " Mansi, torn. xv. p. 818. Ibid. 
 
 5» April 16, Indict, xi. or a.d. 878, «) Ibid, ad Pet. Com. p. 65 
 Mansi, torn. xvii. p. 62. «= Ibid, ad Mich. Eegem, p. 66. 
 
 " ' Cim non inveneritis eos ab ali- " Ibid. p. 67. 
 
RESTORATION OF PHOTIUS. 19 
 
 our orders,' he tells the Greek clergy/* ' there shall be any oub 
 among you, who shall quit the Bulgarian diocese, he is re- 
 stored to that see in Greek territory -which he held before, 
 or is promoted to a vacant one, provided only that there be 
 no canonical objection to them personally.' Ignatius was 
 never acquainted with the contents of these letters, as he 
 died before they were sent.^* Photius, with all his faults, 
 may be patriarch again, but not unless he refrains from med- 
 dling with Bulgaria. 
 
 ' We absolve the patriarch,' says John, ' with all the bishops, 
 presbyters, and the rest of the clergy and laity, on whom any 
 censure has fallen, f^om all ban of ecclesiastical sentence, and 
 we adjudge him to resume his seat in the holy Constautino- 
 politan Church as pastor of the flock of Christ, but it must 
 be on express condition that the patriarch shall never from 
 henceforth presume to advance claims to jurisdiction of any 
 sort over the diocese of Bulgaria, or ordain there to any office 
 or dignity : as priests and bishops have been ordained there 
 before irregularly ; still less ever send the sacred pall or 
 humeral,*^ worn by prelates in their ministrations, to the 
 archbishop or bishop of that country.' *^ The synod of A.d. 
 879-80 met — it lasted from November to March — and was 
 attended by his legates. It restored Photius, and annulled 
 all that had been done against him previously.^' With the 
 consent of the legates, it decreed that the old form of the 
 creed should be maintained intact, and pronounced depriva- 
 tion against those of the clergy, and excommunication against 
 those of the laity, who should presume to tamper with its 
 integrity, by adding to or subtracting from it.^' On the 
 Bulgarian question it begged to be excused entering, and 
 referred it to the emperor. John writing about the synod 
 
 " Ibid. p. 68. of the part taken by John in restoring 
 
 " He died Oct. 23, a.d. 877, says Photius says : ' Id autem Joannem 
 
 Pagi (ad Baron. a.d. 878, n. xi. et fecisse ex consensu aliorum patriar- 
 
 seq.), whereas these letters were sent charum, germana Johannis epistola 
 
 off in April, A.D. 878. testatur, quod in epistoli corrupt4 a 
 
 " ''n.iu>(p6piov. . . humerale; orna- Photio non est ! ' — Lib. ii. 4, 5. 
 
 mentum non arohiepisoopis mod6, sed " Bever. Synod, torn. ii. p. 273-307, 
 
 et omnibus episcopis Grsecis peculi- particularly pp. 292, 301, 305. Comp. 
 
 are." — DuFresne, Glossar. Med. et Inf. Mansi, torn. xvi. p. 474 et seq. in 
 
 Gmcit. torn. v. Append, ad Cone. Const. a.d. 869, the 
 
 " Ap.Mansi.tom. xvi. p.481-4, which work of some Greek after the Council 
 
 is what is called his ' genuine' letter. of Florence. 
 
 " Leo AUat. de Consens. speaking 
 
 C 2 
 
20 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 six montlis afterwards,'''' accepts unhesitatingly all that it had 
 done 'for the restitution of the most reverend patriarch 
 Photius ; ' but should his legates have consented to anything 
 there contrary to their instructions, he declares it to be null 
 and void. What his reserves were may be gathered from 
 his own acts. In a letter to Photius, to be quoted hereafter, 
 he condemns those who had interpolated the creed : '' by a sub- 
 sequent act he is said to have anathematised Photius,^* for 
 having played fast and loose by him with Bulgaria. 
 
 In conclusion, as Photius disappeared from the scene, it 
 was not his heterodoxy, nor his charges against the Latins, 
 but his irregular consecration by the deposed archbishop of 
 Syracuse — one of the metropolitan sees filched from Eome 
 — that we hear reverberated in the expiring echoes of his 
 name, as they die away. On the death of Basil I., in a.d. 
 886, his eldest son Leo VL, or the Wise, succeeded to the 
 empire, and his third son Stephen, promoted by his brother 
 Leo, to the patriarchate from which Photius had been ejected 
 once more. Stephen had been ordained deacon by Photius, 
 who had in fact acted as tutor to him and educated him from 
 first to last. In order, therefore, that no objection might be 
 raised against him on that score by Eome, the new emperor 
 wrote a letter himself, and got Stylianus, metropolitan of 
 Neocaesarea, to write another in his own name, and the names 
 of the bishops and clergy of the partriarchate generally, to 
 Stephen V. of Rome, to beg for a dispensation in his behalf. 
 The letter of Stylianus has been preserved, and contains a 
 valuable summary of the quarrel between Eome and Photius, 
 though evidently penned by one who had been opposed to 
 Photius throughout. But its heading is peculiar, and even 
 amusing. He gives the pope the title which his predecessors 
 
 " Dated Id. August. Indict, xiii. Baron, a.d. 880, n. 11-13, at least 
 
 that is, A.D. 880 ; as the Indictions if the SwoS. i.Troip. Rari ^arlov is 
 
 commenced in September. Hence the trastworthy. What may hare given rise 
 
 remarks of Binius are misplaced to the story is the statement of For- 
 
 (Mansi, tom. xvii. p. 187 adEp. Joan, mosus, who would have every reason 
 
 viii. ad Imp. August, and p. 366), as for misrepresenting, and little means 
 
 John must have known all that had ofknowing, what John did. 'Johannes 
 
 passed, in it. What had KOi reached anathemate Photiura damnavit,quando 
 
 him, was the decision of the emperor ille seduxit Eugenium et ejus socios, 
 
 about Bulgaria. — Mansi, ibid. pp. 419 qui pro rebus Bulgarise veneraut.'—.^! 
 
 -20 and 487-8. ad Stylian. ap. Leon. AUat. de Consens. 
 
 " Below, p. 101 B. ii. 4, 5. 
 
 " Mansi, tom. xvi. p. 449, and 
 
LETTKR OF STYLIANUS. 21 
 
 had BO often denounced the patriarchs of Constantinople for 
 assuming, and, with mock gravity, appropriates the papal 
 style as his own. ' Sanctissimo et beatissimo Stephano do- 
 mino, ac cecumenico papse, Stylianus episcopus Neoca3sare£e 
 . . . servus servorum Dei, et qui mecum sunt episcopi.' 
 Stephen evidently does not quite know what to make of the 
 compliment. He can only reply that the letters of the 
 emperor and of the bishops are not consistent ; from that of 
 the former it appeared that Photius had resigned voluntarily, 
 while Stylianus and his friends affirmed that he had been 
 ejected by Leo, which the pope would have liked best. ' We 
 cannot, therefore, deliver our judgment one way or other 
 without more dilligent enquiry.' ^' However, the new patri- 
 arch was not removed. Afterwards another letter seems to 
 have reached Eome from Stylianus, but too late to find 
 Stephen alive. At all events we have Formosus, in a.d. 891,'^ 
 writing in reply to Stylianus, and saying that he had de- 
 spatched three bishops ''^ as legates to Constantinople to confer 
 with him on the subject of those who had been ordained by 
 Photius, whom, under the most favourable circumstances, he 
 seems only willing to admit to lay-communion."" As if 
 Gregory, the consecrator of Photius, had not been a true 
 • bishop, though no longer archbishop of Syracuse ; and as if 
 Photius had never been recognised at one time by John VIII. 
 as patrialrch. Possibly this may have been his least recom- 
 mendation in the eyes of Formosus, who had a history of his 
 own, as well as Photius. He had been despatched by Nicholas 
 I. as missionary bishop into Bulgaria. He had been expressly 
 excommunicated by John VIII. for improper conduct while 
 there." He is said to be the first instance on record of a 
 bishop translated from one see to another in the west ; for 
 which cause he was declared to have been no pope at all by 
 one of his own successors, and all his ordinations pronounced 
 null and void.'* If it was a pope in synod who cleared his 
 
 " Baron, a.d. 886, n. 15-27. " V. sup. p. 13 note. 
 
 " Ibid. A.D. 891, n. 5 et seq. '" Mabillon, Mm. Ital. torn. i. p. ii, 
 
 "Designated as ' Laudenulphum, p. 86, has publishedfrom MSS. ' Con- 
 
 Capuanum, et Romanum ; ' probably cilium Eomanum, quo actaStephani VI. 
 
 the text is corrupt. contra Formosum habita, rescinduntur 
 
 '" ' Ita enim et a nobis, et a reveren- a.d. 904, tempore Johannis IX.' Comp. 
 
 t\k tufl, in communionem fidelium re- Christendom's Divisions, '^'Ai.notB&^. 
 
 ceptis, ut laicis, scandalum. delebitur.' The same thing had happened before 
 
 Leo Allat. de Consens. has a long dis- in a.d. 769 when the orders conferred 
 
 quiaition on this, lib. ii. 6, 10-19. by Constantine as Pope had all to bo 
 
22 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 memory, it was a pope in synod who condemned him and his 
 ordinations.; and death happened to him and Photius in the 
 same year. "With them was closed the list of angry dis- 
 putants on both sides; and for a period of 150 years and 
 upwards— from the death of Photius in a.d. 891,'^ to the 
 accession of Michael in A.d. 1043 — about seventeen patri- 
 archs of Constantinople lived and died in full communion 
 with about double that number of popes. Even during the 
 lifetime of Photius, we find Elias patriarch of Jerusalem 
 writing to Charles the younger, the bishops, princes, and 
 nobles of France, for contributions towards decorating and 
 furnishing with sacred vessels and vestments the churches of 
 that city, which the piety of a native prince, a convert from 
 Mohammedanism had rebuilt.^" Within thirty years of his 
 death, we find one of his successors in the Constantinopolitan 
 see, Nicholas Mysticus, informing the Bulgarians that there 
 was then such perfect harmony subsisting between the 
 Churches of Rome and Constantinople, that they might com- 
 municate freely with either. 'Thus far,' he tells Simeon 
 their king, to whom John X. had despatched ambassadors, ' 
 ' of the Roman embassy ... by whose coming have been 
 terminated all those scandals which had thrown us into such 
 confusion about fourth marriages ' — the fourth marriage, that 
 is, of Leo the philosopher, which had caused a breach be- 
 tween church and state in Constantinople — ' peace has been 
 restored to the clergy; the holy mysteries are celebrated 
 amongst us with unanimity, breathed into our hearts by God. 
 In a word, the Roman and Constantinopolitan Churches have 
 become so entirely of one mind and agreement, that there is 
 not the slightest obstacle to your enjoyment of their edifying 
 and ever to be desired communion.'^' 
 
 Simeon, who was the son of Bogaris or Michael, and had 
 been educated at Constantinople, must have laughed in his 
 sleeve at this attempt of its patriarch to obtain a hearing for 
 Rome. He preferred having a patriarch of his own to either. 
 Accordingly, one of the stipulations of the treaty concluded 
 
 rehabilitated. Eohrbacher, vol. xi. =° Dacher. SpicU. ed. de la Barre, 
 
 P- 170. ^ torn. iii. p. 363, dated a.u. 881, Ind! 
 
 ™ ' Obiit Photius, cum esset eccle- xir. 
 
 siariim imitas, quae post ilium per xvii. " Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 917 n. 2-4. 
 
 patriarchas duravit.'— Man. Calec. c. The Greek and Latin versions of the 
 
 Griscos, V. Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 1043, letter vary slightly. 
 
AFFAIRS IN CALABRIA. 23 
 
 between him and Eomanus I., was the official acknowledg- 
 ment of the archbishop of Dorostylon as primate of his do- 
 minions."^ When the capital was removed, about sixty years 
 afterwards, by another Bulgarian king, Samuel, to Achrida,^^ 
 that see became the metropolitan one : and such it continued 
 to be when Bulgaria had been once more subjugated in 
 church and state to Constantinople by Basil II., the hero of 
 those sanguinary campaigns, which procured for him the 
 surname of Bulgarian slayer.*'' 
 
 Now it was the metropolitan of this very see of Achrida, 
 which, in a.d. 1053, made common cause with the patriarch 
 of Constantinople against the Latinisers in Apulia; and here, 
 in reality, lay the w^ole sting of their letter to the bishop of 
 Trani.*'' Eome had been trespassing again in Greek terri- 
 tory, and was reminded in the same breath that she had 
 failed in Bulgaria. But what had the bishop of Trani been 
 doing to be so warned at that particular time ? Let us call 
 to mind what had been going on there and in its vicinity 
 since the days of Photius, 
 
 Gregory, his consecrator, we are told, had been obliged to 
 quit Syracuse for fear of the Saraceris. Almost all the towns ■ 
 on the south coast of Italy had fallen into their hands, when 
 the ninth century dawned. But in a.d. 866, the very year in 
 which Nicholas despatched missionaries into Bulgaria, the 
 Greeks, by a singular coincidence, were invited to recover 
 some of their lost influence on the Italian coast, a locality still 
 dear to them as having once been known as ' Magna Graecia.' 
 In that year Louis II. of Germany marched against the 
 Saracens, and took several towns from them ; but to reduce 
 Bari, one of the most important seaports of the Adriatic, he 
 was obliged to get help from Constantinople : and when it was 
 taken the Greeks retained it in virtue of their naval ascend- 
 ency. The prince of Salerno was soon afterwards induced to 
 sweai- allegiance to the Greek emperor. Profiting by the 
 
 " Finlay, Byz. Emp. toI. i. p. 369 stored the Churches of Apulia to the 
 
 note. jurisdiction of Rome, the departing 
 
 " Ibid. p. 438. flock was warned by a petulant epistle 
 
 " Between a.d. 981 and a.d. 1018, of the Greek patriarch, to avoid and 
 
 Finla/s Byz. Emp. vol. i. p. 436-51, abhor the error of the Latins.' c. 60. 
 
 where they are most graphicaUy de- But he forgets that this letterpurported 
 
 scribed. to he in the name of Leo archbishop 
 
 " ' When the Norman sword,' says of Achrida as well. 
 Gibbon with unerring instinct, ' re- 
 
24 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 confusion which reigned in the west on the death of Louis, 
 and by the superiority which their ships gave them, the 
 Greeks not only pushed forward their conquests by sea, but 
 expelled the Saracens from one town after another inland, 
 and made Calabria their own once more. Then arose the 
 ritualistic conflict, to which allusion has been already made, 
 between the native populations over whom Eome had of late 
 years been gradually contriving to reassert some sway, and 
 the Greeks from Constantinople, who were received with open 
 arms by their almost extinct sympathisers. Appositely 
 enough, a letter was recovered within memory by the late 
 cardinal Mai,*^ from Photius to Leo, archbishop of Calabria, 
 containing ' canonical answers ' to questions submitted to him 
 by the archbishop in council, relative to the proper mode of 
 dealing with those Christians who were living in a state of 
 bondage to the Saracens. His eminence owns, with some 
 reluctance, that it is clear from these answers that Leo re- 
 ferred to Photius as subject to his jurisdiction as patriarch of 
 Constantinople. This explains at once the petulant tone in 
 which Nicholas talked of the ' Calabrian patrimony ' that 
 had been lost to his see in corresponding with Michael, and 
 accounts in the most natural way for the synodical letter that 
 had reached Photius from Italy, mentioned in the encyclic.'' 
 Instead of intriguing in Italy against a rival, as he has been 
 hitherto represented, it shows him to have been only corres- 
 ponding once more with his dependant suffragans ; while the 
 complaints which had been brought over to him previously 
 from thence by Basil, Zosimus, Metrophanes, and others with 
 them, suffering from episcopal tyranny, as they averred, 
 attest the course which things had been taking in those parts 
 but a short time before the return of the Greeks in force. 
 Otho I. when he came to the throne, looked upon them and 
 the Saracens alike as foes and intruders, and aspired to 
 expel both from Italy. Ultimately he was induced by policy 
 or by necessity to negotiate with the former. Having received 
 the imperial crown from the pope in a.d. 961, by confirming 
 whose antient rights he gained support for his own, he con- 
 templated adding to their security some years afterwards by 
 obtaining the hand of Theophania, daughter of Eomanus the 
 
 >"^ Ep. lib. i. 18, ed. Migne, with " Encycl. § 37, 
 his observations reprinted there. 
 
EMBASSY OF LUITPEAND. 25 
 
 younger, for his son Otho. Luitprand, bishop of Cremona, 
 was despatched in a.d. 968 on this errand to the court of 
 Nicephorus Phocas, who had married the widow of Eomanus, 
 and succeeded him. The account of his embassy is so inva- 
 luable for the insight which it affords to the feelings of 
 G-reeks and Latins towards each other, not as defenders of 
 orthodoxy, but as opposed factions struggling for ascend- 
 ency, that I connot resist extracting from it at some length. 
 The bishop is in dudgeon at his reception to begin with. It 
 was some time before Nicephorus would admit him to audi- 
 ence, and when invited to dinner he was placed fifteenth 
 from the emperor, and, as we should say, below the salt.*' 
 Some amusing anecdotes occur of the various entertainments 
 at which he was present. During the last of them, appa- 
 rently to preclude the possibility of indiscreet speeches, a 
 homily of S. John Chrysostom on the Acts of the Apostles was 
 read out. Whether Luitprand could speak Greek, or the 
 emperor Latin, is not clear. Interpreters are mentioned on 
 both sides — Luitprand calls his own ' Grsecolonum,' probably 
 because speaking both languages.*' At one time he was for- 
 bidden by the authorities to go out and cater for his master ; 
 so the cook who did not know a word of Greek was egregi- 
 ously taken in.'" The discussions between Luitprand and 
 the emperor, or in his absence, his courtiers, show with what 
 jealousy both parties regarded each other. Leo, brother of 
 Nicephorus, who received Luitprand on his arrival, styled 
 Otho king, not emperor, using the Latin equivalent, to mark 
 his indignation ; nor would he receive the letters brought by 
 Luitprand, but through his interpreter." ' You are not 
 Eomans, but Lombards,' said the emperor '* to Luitprand. 
 'We Lombards,' rejoined the bishop, 'disdain that name: 
 so much so that " Roman " is the bitterest term of re- 
 proach that we can apply to our enemies : under the word 
 " Eoman " we comprehend all that is ignoble, craven, miserly, 
 degenerate, false, vicious.' '^ Nicephorus had been told pre- 
 viously that he and his predecessors had lost Italy from their 
 
 " Lit. ' without a napkin,' ' absque '" ST. torn. viii. ' Tantique nummia 
 
 gausape.' Ap. Baron. x.z>. 968, n. xxi. emebat quatuor, quanti Grascolouus 
 
 as reprinted by Migne, Patrol C. C. obsonium uno.' 
 torn, exxxvi among the works of " N. xiii. 
 Luitprand. " N. xxiii. 
 
 »» Du Fresne, torn. v. »3 Ibid. 
 
26 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 utter neglect of its interests. Upon another occasion, his 
 brother Leo having insisted that Kome should be left free : 
 'What are you clamouring about, you that want Eome to be 
 left free?' quoth Luitprand. 'Whose slave is it now? to 
 whom does it pay tribute ? was it not formerly the slave of 
 harlots? and while you were asleep, or rather able to do 
 nothing for it, was it not by my lord, emperor and Augustus, 
 emancipated from that vile bondage ? Constantine, emperor 
 and Augustus, who built this city, and called it by his own 
 name, as he was master of the universe, so he bestowed many 
 donatives upon the Holy Apostolic Eoman Church, not merely 
 in Italy, but in almost all western kingdoms, besides eastern 
 and southern ; in Greece, for example, Judaea, Mesopotamia, 
 Babylonia, ^gypt, Libya, as his charters '* testify that are in 
 our possession. Assuredly, whatever there may be in Italy, 
 Saxony, Bavaria, or any of the dominions of my lord, apper- 
 taining to the Church of the blessed apostles, he has bestowed 
 upon their vicar. But if it be so, that my lord holds any of 
 these cities or towns, soldiers or servants, as his own, let me 
 be looked upon as one that has denied Grod. Why does not 
 the emperor act similarly, and restore all that is in his domi- 
 nions so belonging to the church of the apostles ; that what 
 by his exertions and munificence my master has been made 
 rich and free, he may make richer and more free still ? '^^ 
 
 Here we see that copies of the donation of Constantine, in 
 its most exaggerated form, were preserved in the imperial as 
 well as the papal archives ; and that the master of Luitprand 
 had a purpose to serve by it as well as the pope ; so far, that 
 is, as it could be used against the east. What did the Grreeks 
 care for Charlemagne, or any grants or conquests that he 
 might have made ? But when donations began to be ascribed 
 to the generosity of Constantine, founder of their metropolis 
 and empire, which they could not disprove, they were per- 
 plexed, and felt the ground cut from under them. Accord- 
 ingly the donation of Constantine gradually found its way 
 into the oanon-law of the east f^ while the popes availed 
 themselves of it to the profit of their deliverers in the west, 
 
 '* ' Privilegia.' The same word that '' N. xxvii. 
 
 occurs in the long letter of Leo IX., " See, for instance, Bajsamon in 
 
 ■which is usually considered the first Phot. tit. viii. de Paroehiis, quoted hy 
 
 clear notice of the donation of Con- Rohrhaeher, Hist. torn. xvii. p. 130 
 
 stantine. v. Gieseler, E. H. Per. iii. et seq. 
 Div. ii. § 20, n. 20. Davidson's tr. 
 
EMBASSY OF LUITPRAND. 27 
 
 as well as their own ; deducing temporal as well as ecclesias- 
 tical rights from it. The territory which John XII. affected 
 to bestow upon Otho I. was bestowed afterwards, as we shall 
 see, by Leo IX. and Nicholas II. upon Eoger Guiscard and 
 his adherents, as of right in each case. Luckily for them, 
 the distance between Rome and Constantinople was consider- 
 able. _ ' The messengers of your king Otho,' said Nicephorus 
 to Luitprand, when they met at tl;ie Fountains — ' who pre- 
 ceded you last year, made oath to me, and their oaths are 
 registered, that he would never in any way offend our empire. 
 What greater offence could he be guilty of, than in styling 
 himself emperor, and usurping our provinces as his own? 
 Both acts are insupportable ; but if so, how can it be borne 
 or listened to for a moment, that he should call himself 
 emperor?'" A third grievance related to what Otho had 
 done by the princes of Capua and Beneventum.'' 'Your 
 lord has taken my liegemen under his protection, let him 
 dismiss them, and return them to the condition in which 
 they were before, or we cannot be friends.' But the climax 
 occurred after Nicephorus had left for Syria i^^ ' on the feast 
 of the Assumption ... as my ill-luck would have it, came 
 messengers from John, apostolic and universal pope, with 
 letters, in which he petitions Nicephorus, emperor of the 
 Greeks, to contract alliance and close friendship with his be- 
 loved and spiritual son Otho, emperor of the Eomans and 
 Augustus.' 
 
 That summary distribution of titles caused a perfect storm 
 in the capital when known. The Greeks ' raved at the waves, 
 cursed the sea, and professed themselves utterly astounded 
 that the deep had not swallowed up a ship freighted with so 
 much outrage.' The messengers of the pope were thrown 
 into prison. Luitprand was not permitted to leave. At length 
 he succeeded in obtaining explanations from one of the 
 eunuchs.'"" 'We beg you will not be indignant with the 
 emperor or with us,' said that functionary. ' We will explain 
 why your departure has been delayed. The pope of Rome, if 
 pope he is to be called, who communicated and ministered 
 with the sacrilegious, adulterous, and apostate son of'Alberic, 
 has been writing in a characteristic, but most unbecoming 
 way to our holy emperor ; calling him emperor of the Greeks, 
 
 " N. XXXV. " N. xxsvii. " N. Ix. "» N. Ixiv. 
 
28 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 not of the Eomans ; and who can doubt, but by advice of 
 your lord ? . . . The infatuate pontiff is not aware that 
 Constantino of blessed memory brought over hither the im- 
 perial sceptre, the collective senate, and the entire Eoman 
 army. He left in Eome but the lowest of the low ; fisher- 
 men, fowlers, victuallers, a base-born, ignoble, servile 
 lot.' Luitprand must have laughed inwardly at his own 
 apology. ' We know full well that Constantine took in his 
 train all who were capable of serving in the Eoman army, 
 and came and built this city, which is called after him ; but 
 because you have laid aside the language, manners, and 
 dress which you then had, the most holy pope was of opinion 
 that the name of Eomans had become as odious to you as 
 their dress.' That Constantinople was not slow to retaliate, 
 we may gather from what he tells Otho on his return,"" 
 ' Nicephorus, with his habitual sacrilege towards all churches 
 alike, and for the envy which he bears you, ordered the 
 patriarch of Constantinople to raise the church of Otranto to 
 archiepiscopal rank, and to take care that divine service should 
 not be celebrated any longer in Latin, but in Greek only, 
 throughout Apulia and Calabria. He accuses the late popes 
 of having been merchants, who made traffic of the Holy 
 
 Grhost, the Eevivifier and Disposer of all things 
 
 Accordingly Polyeuctus, for so the patriarch is called, wrote 
 to the bishop of Otranto, conferring on him that title, and 
 giving him the right of consecrating the bishops of Agri, 
 Tursi, Grravina, Matera, Tricarico, who seem properly depend- 
 ent for consecration on the apostolic see.' 
 
 Luitprand here speaks hesitatingly ; for according to his 
 own statement, which I have elsewhere extracted, Constanti- 
 nople had just before purchased the right of conferring palls 
 from Eome.'"^ He proceeds — 
 
 ' My advice therefore is, that a holy synod should be con- 
 vened, and Polyeuctus summoned to it ; or should he refuse to 
 come, and amend his errors in a canonical way, then that what 
 the holy canons have prescribed should be carried out in his 
 
 case Eome is not to be accounted vile by the Greeks 
 
 because the emperor Constantine abandoned it ; on the 
 contrary, it is to be venerated and honored all the more, 
 
 '»' N. Ixxxiv.-vi. p. 27 note. The story is here in- 
 
 '". Christendom's Bivisions, part i. serted in a kind of parenthesis. 
 
EMBASSY OF LUITPRAND. 29 
 
 because the apostles and holy doctors Peter and Paul came 
 to it,' 
 
 In conclusion, he inveighs against the Greek bishops gene- 
 rally for their want of hospitality, ascribing it to their 
 covetousness and love of money. 
 
 « But may God spare them for it. I suspect they act so 
 because their churches are tributary. The bishop of Leucate 
 declared on oath to me, that his church had to pay 100 pieces 
 of gold'"' to Nicephorus every year ; and that the others paid 
 more or less according to their ability.' 
 
 Thus we see plainly what it was that Nicephorus and 
 Otho, the east and the west, were quarrelling about at that 
 date, where the scene' of their quarrel lay, and to what extent 
 religion entered into it. The Latin rite was interdicted in 
 Apulia and Calabria, not for any demerits or defects of its 
 own, but in revenge for a political outrage. The object of 
 its suppression was to retort upon Otho, who had been en- 
 deavouring to appropriate what belonged to the Greeks in 
 southern Italy, and upon the pope, who by crowning him, 
 and by styling him by a title which belonged to the Greek 
 emperor, had become a party to his usurpations. Other 
 questions there were none then, or at least they were never 
 brought forward, of a religious character. The west had been 
 attacking, and the east defending with more success, its juris- 
 diction, ecclesiastical and temporal, in those parts in which it 
 had been assailed. Church and state were leagued and fought 
 together on both sides ; but the contest was a territorial or 
 financial one, and the results the same, or nearly so, whichever 
 side was victorious. The churches subject to Constantinople 
 were all taxed heavily for the support of the empire. The 
 churches subject to Eome were taxed heavily by Eome for its 
 own support. Within fifty years of the protest of the bishop 
 of Leucate against imperial rapacity, we have Canute the 
 Great solemnly making complaint of the enormous sums 
 filched from his church and people by Eome, before the 
 pope.'"* 
 
 Otho I. died in the midst of his designs upon Italy. Otho II. 
 pursued the same policy to his cost, and was overthrown by 
 a combined army of Greeks and Saracens, near Basentello, a 
 
 '" 'Aorei.' The ' aureus ' was worth '" Christendom's Divisions, part i. 
 about a ' Napoleon ' of the French p. 44. 
 empire. 
 
30 HISTOEY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 small seaport of Calabria, in A.D. 982. He narrowly escaped 
 falling into the hands of his rivals ; and for some time after- 
 wards the Greeks were left masters of all that territory, which 
 they added to the number of their themes or provinces, and 
 governed by means of a resident officer at Bari, bearing the 
 title of catapan.'"* Bulgaria was about the same time reduced 
 to a state of more complete dependence upon Constantinople 
 than it had ever been previously ; '"^ and Greek influence 
 seemed to be paramount again everywhere eastwards of the 
 patrimony conferred upon Eome by Pepin and Charlemagne. 
 Still, in every town, there was a national, that is a Latin, 
 party both in church and state, that did not willingly submit 
 to their government. Of that number was Melo, a rich citizen 
 of Bari, whom one of their catapans had exiled. At the 
 court of Guaimar, prince of Salerno, he met a Norman 
 knight of the name of Drengot, then in the service of that 
 prince, and with his assistance, and that of some more of his 
 countrymen, he commenced waging war against the Greeks. 
 He was defeated, and died soon afterwards ; not, however, 
 before he had enlisted the sympathies of Henry II. emperor 
 of Germany, and Benedict VIII. in his cause, which he 
 affitmed to be the national one. Their immediate efforts 
 were not destined to be more successful. At length the Nor- 
 mans came in force, overran the greater part of Calabria, 
 and established themselves there. They had been hired 
 originally by Maniakes, the Greek general sent out by 
 Michael IV. to assist in expelling the Saracens from Sicily. 
 They afterwards were conveyed over in Greek ships into 
 Italy. Once there, they quarrelled with and turned upon 
 their allies, defeated them in three successive battles, and 
 resolved upon their expulsion. Among those who sided with 
 them was Argyrus, the son of Melo, who lent them the bene- 
 fit of all his influence in Apulia, especially with the anti- 
 Greek party that there still was in every city, formed by his 
 father. In a.d. 1042 Apulia was parcelled out into twelve 
 townships under their leaders ; but before long their cruelties 
 and brigandages had united all parties in the country against 
 them. Tidings of the accession of Constantine Monomachus, 
 contributed about the same time still more powerfully to the 
 break up of existing factions, and the formation of new. 
 
 ">' Sismondi, Elp. Ital. c. iv. '»« Baron, a.d. 886, n. viii. 
 
ARGYRUS DUKE OF APULIA. 31 
 
 Maniakes, whose return to Italy had been the signal for Greek 
 interests to revive, rose in revolt ; Argyrus, their implacable 
 opponent, joined the new emperor ; in return for his services 
 against the insurgent general, he was confirmed in his titles 
 of prince of Bari and duke of Apulia conferred on him by the 
 national party.'"' To that party he was pledged ; and for 
 the interests of that party he alternately fought or negotiated. 
 As leader of that party, he laid siege to Trani, where oppo- 
 site influences were predominant ;'"' but was repulsed. In 
 the interests of that party he went, in a.d. 1046, to Constan- 
 tinople to confer with the emperor.'"" While he was there, Con- 
 stantine was threatened with the loss of his throne, by the 
 rebellion of his own' relative, Leo Tornicius ; and on that 
 occasion, Argyrus, we are expressly told, advised him for the 
 best."" He must have remained, therefore, some time in the 
 imperial city.'" Was he ever brought into collision then 
 with Michael Cerularius, who had been engaged in plotting"' 
 against the government six years before, but was now 
 patriarch -j"^ and did he then, or subsequently, display that 
 contempt for the ceremonies of the Greek Church, for which 
 he was so often excommunicated"'' by its incensed head? 
 Forced as they had been upon his country, it was only natural 
 that he should have come to dislike them thoroughly ; but, 
 surely, the inference to be drawn from his excommunication 
 is, that till then, though a Latin, he had been in the habit of 
 communicating in the churches of the Greeks. Eeturning 
 with his instructions from Constantinople, then, Argyrus 
 
 "" ' Constantino IX,' says Mr. Fin- "» Cedrenus, vol. ii. p. 698, ed. 
 
 lay, ' favored Argyrus because lie had Xylaud. This was in a.d. 1047. 
 
 opposed Maniakes; and that chief '" Not perhaps as longasA.D. 1051, 
 
 rendered himself virtually independent when his return is apparently placed 
 
 and assumed the title of prince of by the Chronicle of Lupus. 
 
 Bari and duke of Apulia.' Vol. i. '" 'Einlay's Bt/z.Emp. vol. i. p. iS5. 
 
 p. 518. The two Chronicles of Bari '" Baron, a.d. 1043, n. iv. On th" 
 
 (one in Murat. Ant. Ital. vol. i. p. 32 death of Alexius that year, 
 
 et seq., the other in Murat. Script. "* See the letters between Michael 
 
 It. vol. v. p. 37 et seq.) have to be and Peter of Antioch in Cotel. 
 
 reconciled in somS such way. The Ecd. Gr. Monum. vol. ii. pp. 139 and 
 
 best account of Argyrus is in Du 145. And this is doubtless what Leo 
 
 Eresne, FamU. Aug. Byzant. § xxv. refers to {Ep. ad Constant, ap. Mansi, 
 
 '™ ' Dum Tranenses non acquiesce- xix. p. 669) when saying of Michael : . 
 
 rent Baresanis malum ingerere,' says ' Jamdudum pervenisse ad aures nos- 
 
 the anonymous Chronicle, a.d. 1042. tras, qualitJr etiam apertd persecutione 
 
 "" 'A.D. 1046. Perrexit Argyrus in Latinam ecolesiam exardescens, ana- 
 
 Patricius Constantinopolim,' says the thematizare non timuit omnes, qui 
 
 Chronicle of Lupus. sacramenta attrectant ex azymis.' 
 
32 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 treated and fought by turns with the Normans without any- 
 decisive issue. At length he induced the pope to join in a 
 league against them, and to persuade the emperor of Grer- 
 many, Henry III. to do the same.^'^ The results of that 
 campaign are well known. Shortly before the feast of S. 
 John Baptist, A.d. 1053, the forces of both were overthrown 
 by the Normans, near Civitella, and the pope was made 
 prisoner."^ No victory could have served the interest of the 
 Latin party so well. He obtained his release by according 
 to the Normans, in the name of S. Peter, the investiture 
 of all the territory which they had conquered or might con- 
 quer in Apulia, Calabria, or Sicily, to be held by them as a 
 fief of the holy see."' By this masterly stroke of policy, 
 Greek influence was annihilated in Italy for ever. 
 
 Argyrus had to make known the news of his defeat, and 
 its unlocked for issues, as best he might ; and he went off in 
 all haste to Constantinople for that purpose."* To the em- 
 peror he would naturally put on a grave diplomatic face, and 
 assure him that there had been in reality no harm done, 
 stiU less any wanton sacrifice made of his interests. The 
 Normans had been in the pay of the Greeks before, and 
 might be hired again ; and it was the pope, his own ally, 
 who had negotiated peace with them so successfully. But to 
 the authorities of the Greek Church it is highly probable that 
 he may have not taken sufficient pains to disguise his joy at 
 the improved prospects of the Latin, or national party. He 
 returned personally disgraced with Constantine, who employed 
 another official to be the bearer of his letter of sympathy to 
 the pope,'" to whom Michael addressed a friendly and concili- 
 
 "" See the lines of GuiU. Apul. in citnmpro jnstitiAdefendend&misisset.' 
 
 the Sibl. Hist. Beg. Sicil. of Carusius, — Ap. Max. Bihl. Pat. torn. xx. p. 1732. 
 
 torn. i. p. lOi. Leo's own words are, '" Sismondi, Sep. Ital. c. iT. Gibbon 
 
 ' Sufiiiltus ergo comitatu, qualem tem- Decline and Fall, c. Ivi. Freccia, de 
 
 poris brevitas, et imminens neeessitas Subfeudis, lib. i. fol. 55, p. 69. Why is 
 
 permisit, gloriosi duoia et magistri Baron, a.d. 1053 n. is. 2, silent on fiiis 
 
 Argyri, fidelissimi tui, colloquium et point ? 
 
 consilium expetendum eensui.' — Up. ad "' Guill. Apul. as before, p. 108 : 
 
 Const. Monom. ap. Mansi, tom. xix. ' Hoc meditans Bari dimissA trans- 
 
 p. 668. fretat urbe : 
 
 "■ Baronius takes S. Peter Damian Ad dominum redit, populi responsa 
 
 to task for censuring this expedition ferocis 
 
 of Leo ; but another saint, S. Bruno Ordine cunota refert, et belli gesta 
 
 of Asti, and biographer of Leo, says of recentis 
 
 him likewise: 'Zelum quidem Dei ContraTeutoniooa ; jam Constantinus 
 
 habens, sed non fortasse secundum amare 
 
 Bcientiam. Utinam non ipse per se Desinit Argiroum.' 
 
 illucivisset: sed solummodo illuo exer- "» Mich. £p. ad Pet. § iii. 
 
ARGTEUS DUKE OF APULIA. 33 
 
 atory letter by the same hand. And now, if ever, it must 
 have been that Michael and the archbishop of Achrlda de- 
 spatched their joint letter to the bishop of Trani, a prelate tn 
 whose zealous co-operation they could rely, and who, in fact, 
 for his Greek leanings was afterwards driven from his see by 
 Nicholas II. — warning him against the strange customs so 
 full of Judaism, in reality so full of peril to the Greek rite 
 throughout Calabria. It would have been nothing wonderful 
 for Michael to be writing in one strain to the pope, and in 
 another to a partisan on his own side ; '^'' but it was so ob- 
 viously for the interests of Argyrus and his party that the 
 pope and patriarch should not be good friends, that we may 
 well imagine him to'have been on the watch to discover on 
 what terms they were corresponding, and to embroil their 
 relations. Michael tells us expressly, and there seems no 
 reason to doubt his statement, that both letfers for the pope 
 were handed over by the official entrusted with them to 
 Argyrus,'^' on his arrival in Italy; and we know from other 
 sources that what purports to be his letter to the bishop of 
 Trani was placed in the hands of cardinal Humbert,'^' who 
 had accompanied Leo on his expedition in all probability,"^' 
 and was then staying there. 
 
 Thus, by a coincidence of intrigues, the same thing hap- 
 pened over again by that letter, which had happened to the 
 ' letters of Michael and Basil to the Bulgarians. The letters 
 which had been intended for their exclusive perusal, were 
 placed by them in the hands of the ambassadors of Nicholas I. 
 for his perusal; the letter addressed exclusively to John, 
 bishop of Trani, the friend of the Greeks, fell into the hands 
 of Argyrus ''* and cardinal Humbert, their determined foes. 
 The results were strangely similar in each case. One of 
 them was that both Nicholas and Leo died almost imme- 
 diately after receipt of the tidings, without having had time to 
 do more than acknowledge them. Nicholas apprised Hincmar 
 
 "" On the deprivation of the bishop '^' He and the other two legates 
 
 of Trani, v. Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 1053, were assembled in synod with Leo 
 
 n. xii. Cardinal Humbert pretends just before he set out. Baron, a.d. 
 
 that John was not so much of a Greek 1053, n. v. He had previously been 
 
 after all. Canis. Thes. vol. iii. p. 307, employed in Sicily. Vit. Leon IX. ap. 
 
 ed. Basnage. Mansi, torn. xix. p. 633. 
 
 "' Ep. ad Pet. as before, § iii.-v. '-' See below, p. 34. 
 
 '" Pagi, ibid. 
 
 D 
 
34 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 and the bishops of France of the letters of Michael and Basil. 
 Leo replied to the letters of Michael and Constantine, and 
 possibly to the Trani manifesto. But neither Nicholas lived 
 to hear that Photius had excommunicated him, nor Leo to 
 hear that his legates had excommunicated Michael. And, 
 as in the former case, there is no trustworthy record extant 
 to show that Photius really went so far as to excommunicate 
 the pope ; so, in the latter case, it is next to impossible to 
 believe that Leo really instructed his legates to excommuni- 
 cate the patriarch. The ignorant coarse document, at all 
 events, produced by them in inflicting that sentence, could 
 not have even claimed to be in his name, as will be shown 
 presently, for he had been dead three months before it was 
 used.'^^ Let us understand precisely what preceded its de- 
 livery. First, Michael expressly asserts that Argyrus had 
 opened his letter to the pope, acquainted himself with its con- 
 tents, and forged a reply to it ; acting throughout in concert 
 with those who afterwards appeared as legates. '^^ Secondly, 
 he never mentions having written to the bishop of Trani at 
 all. Could that letter, therefore, have been likewise forged 
 by Argyrus ? It was the bishop of Trani, he says, who after- 
 wards informed him of all the intrigues of which Argyrus had 
 been the soul.'*' However, admitting the letter itself to have 
 been genuine, and the translation of it made for the pope to 
 have been a faithful one,'^^ which is a further point, what do 
 we find in it ? Not a word against adding to the creed ; or 
 against celibate priests ; or the exclusive use of the chrism 
 by bishops. Of all the charges in the encyclic, the only one 
 that reappears is the keeping of Saturdays as fasts. The use 
 of unleavened bread in the Eucharist — azymes, as it is called 
 — is a new one of which Nicholas had never heard: non- 
 abstinence from things strangled, non-employment of the 
 word 'alleluia,' during Lent, are charges adduced equally 
 for the first time. Yet there is nothing offensive in the 
 general tone of the letter ; and to whom is remonstrance 
 directed to be made principally, but to 'the most reverend 
 the pope ? ' '^^ Was it a letter of that kind, which Leo would 
 be likely to threaten with excommunication ? and does not 
 
 '^' Porty-seven days was a fair pas- '" Ibid. § viii. 
 
 sage from Constantinople to Venice. '^' Pagi ad Baron; a.d. 1053, n. xii. 
 
 Below, p. 41 note. '™ Ap. Canis. Thesaur. torn. iii. 
 
 '■" Ep. ad Pet. § v. p. 281, ed. Basnage, but only in Latin. 
 
LETIEKS OF LEO IX. 35 
 
 the answer purporting to be from him to it — long as it is, 
 and often overbearing and objurgatory — terminate with as- 
 surances of his paternal affection and good will ? ''° Who 
 wrote the answer to it is another question. There was a 
 ' sealed letter ' which Michael says he received from the 
 hands of the legates ; and which on opening he found to 
 abound with internal evidence of having been inspired by 
 Argyrus, and a mere repetition of all that the duke had said 
 over and over again during his residence in Constantinople, 
 to the patriarch — especially on the subject of azymes — and 
 for which he had been already three or four times excom- 
 municated.'^' The probabilitj', therefore, is that it was com- 
 posed by one of th#legates, though it possibly may have been 
 submitted to Leo, and allowed by him. It is addressed to 
 the two prelates Michael and Leo conjointly, not jUichael 
 alone, and bears no date. It contrasts in many ways with 
 what the pope had written to Michael in January a.d. 1054, 
 thanking him for his friendly exhortation to peace and con- 
 cord, calling him his ' honorable brother,' and ending in these 
 conciliatory terms : 
 
 ' Let heresies, therefore, and schisms cease, and there will 
 be no scandal, but, on the contrary, much peace to those who 
 love the law of God. Let everyone who glories in the name 
 of Christian, cease to speak evil of, or inveigh against the 
 Holy and Apostolic Church of Eome; for he honors the 
 father of a family to little purpose who dishonors his spouse. 
 But we are confident that by the Divine mercy you will either 
 be found innocent by these,'^^ or changed for the better: 
 or at all events that you will become changed speedily on 
 
 admonition Wherefore, go on labouring with us 
 
 as you have begun, that these two great realms may be 
 joined together, as is our desire, in peace. JMay the blessed 
 Trinity for ever preserve you, honorable brother, praying 
 for us.' 
 
 Interspersed, indeed, are some few passages of a different 
 cast ; but they have nothing to do with Michael personally, 
 and are but the ' refrain ' of a tale thrice told. First, he is re- 
 buTied — but only as Tarasius had been rebuked by Adrian I. 
 
 "» Ap. Mansi, torn. xix. p. 635-56. '" ' Legates ' probably, as in his let 
 
 '" Comp. §5 vii. and v. Ep. ad Pet. ter to Constantiue. 
 an before. 
 
 v2 
 
36 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 nearly three hundred years before, and John the Faster by 
 Pelagius and S. Gregory nearly five hundred years before — 
 for having assumed the style of oecumenical or universal 
 patriarch, a style long since attributed to the popes themselves 
 by their admirers in the east and west."^ Next, for haying 
 sought to undermine the privileges of his brethren of Antioch 
 and Alexandria — a design of which Peter of Antioch was 
 plainly ignorant when he wrote to Leo,'^^ and to which he 
 plainly could have attached no credit when he replied to 
 Michael.'^* What was it, in fact, but the old objection, 
 started by S. Leo I., six hundred years before, when it was 
 originally proposed that 'Constantinople should rank next 
 after Eome.' '^* Thirdly, for some clandestine overtures, 
 which, it is hinted, had come from him, that Eome and Con- 
 stantinople should divide the ecclesiastical world between 
 them on equal terms, which is once more the old story re- 
 vived of the negotiations between Eustathius and John XIX., 
 in A.D. 1024. '^^ The one overt act charged upon Michael of 
 which there is any plausible evidence, is the letter to the 
 bishop of Trani — we now know the circumstances under 
 which it was written — and to this Leo, naturally enough, 
 refers emphatically, as presumptuous, and based upon error. 
 But would anybody gather from what he sa}'s, that he had 
 written another long letter in refutation of it ? 
 
 In his reply to Constantine, which is without date, but which 
 was probably written in the same month, he repeats the same 
 things of Michael, and while with consummate tact he carefully 
 conceals the terms on which he had, six months previously, 
 procured his own release by the Normans, he appeals to the 
 emperor earnestly to aid in recovering for the Roman Church 
 all the patrimony and all the privileges belonging to it in his 
 dominions. By his title of Monomachus — that is to say, ' the 
 invincible ' — let him make restitution.*'^ 
 
 In commending his legates to the emperor, Leo does not 
 
 "' Quite recently Luitprand, in the "' Otherwise Leo would not have 
 
 account of his embassy "before quoted, reported it to him in his answer as 
 
 § Ix. ' Venerunt domini apostolici news. , 
 
 et universalis papse Joannis nuntii.' "' For, on the whole, his letter is of 
 
 S. Leo was addressed, as far back as the most friendly character. 
 A.D. 451, as ' cecumenieal archbishop ''" See note to p. 52. 
 and patriarch of great Rome.' Vide "' See below, p. 62. 
 Cave, Church Government, o. vi. § ii. '" See both letters in Mansi t six 
 
 et seq. p. 663-70. 
 
LETTERS OF LEO IX. 37 
 
 actually state that he sends his letter by them, and it may 
 have gone in advance of them with the one to Michael. But 
 the curious recommendation which it contains of the arch- 
 bishop of Amalfi is not to be passed over, as illustrating how 
 high party-spirit ran then : 
 
 ' Let no suspicion cross your mind on account of the arch- 
 bishop of Amalfi, for he is a thorough Roman, and has left 
 Amalfi and been living on intimate terms with us for more 
 than a year.' '^^ Amalfi had been for some time more or less 
 dependent upon the Lombards.^'"' But did Leo really mean 
 by the term ' Roman,' what Constantine would understand 
 by it?"' Michael and Constantine may be supposed to have 
 been in possession of these letters — one of which at least was 
 written in January — when the legates entered Constantinople 
 on the feast of S. John Baptist,'^^ on June 24, the day, ap- 
 parently, on which Leo had negotiated so skilfully with the 
 Normans a year back. They first proceeded to the monastery 
 of the Studium, where Nicetas — surnamed Pectoratus — one 
 of its monks, at their bidding, anathematised in the presence 
 of the emperor and his court, a tract which he had previously 
 written against the Latins on three of the points under dis- 
 pute. '^^ It was then burnt, at their request, by order of the 
 emperor. The following day, Nicetas, on anathematising, 
 of his own accord, all that had ever been said or attempted 
 against the Latins, was received by them into full communion, 
 and became their intimate friend. Afterwards, proceeds their 
 narrative, the replies of the legates themselves to the various 
 calumnies of the Greeks, particularly to the writings of theCon- 
 stantinopolitan patriarch and metropolitan of Achrida, and of 
 the monk Nicetas, were translated into Greek and deposited in 
 the imperial archives. From that time till July 16, accord- 
 ing to their statement, they made frequent attempts to meet 
 and discuss matters with the patriarch, but always failed. 
 And so far the patriarch himself bears them out.''*'' But it is 
 just here that he lets us into two or three facts which they 
 
 "° Ibid. just what Italians now were not. 
 
 '*» That is, pn Salerno, ' la derniJre '" ' Brevis Commemoratio,' ap. 
 
 des principautSs Lombardes.' — Sis- Canis. Thes. torn. iii. p. 32.5, ed. 
 
 mondi, Ital. Rep. c. iv., conquered by Basnage. 
 Guiscard, A.D. 1077. "' ' Do azymis, et sabbatorum jeju- 
 
 '" Viz. a Greek, or loyal subject of nils, et nuptiis sacerdotum.' 
 the Greek empire, as we have seen '" Ep. ii. ad Pet. § 3, ap. Cotel. 
 
 from Luitprand. This was, however, Eccl. Gr. Man. vol. ii. p. 164. .^ 
 
38 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 have suppressed. They had visited him but against his will, and 
 only to mock at, and proclaim their contempt for him. Then, 
 without so much as deigning him a word or a bow, they had 
 delivered into his hands a sealed letter, and retired."* The 
 sealed letter had a false seal attached to it, to begin with."^ 
 And is it credible for a moment, that all mention of its 
 delivery would have been suppressed in the narrative of the 
 legates, had it been genuine ? It was the offensive style of 
 that letter, and the still more offensive mode of its delivery, 
 clearly, that made Michael decline all further intercourse 
 with its bearers ; and certainly with the previous letter of the 
 pope to him in January to compare with the letter delivered 
 to him as from the pope in July, both for style and matter, 
 he could scarce have inferred otherwise than that there had 
 been foul play somewhere, and he seems to have had good 
 reason for fixing it upon Argyrus. 
 
 Whether Argyrus, duke of Apulia, was really capable of 
 writing a lengthy letter of that kind, diplomatist as he was, 
 is not so much the question. He could act upon those who 
 were ; and anyone who will take the trouble of comparing 
 it with the extant replies of cardinal Humbert to the monk 
 Nicetas, and to the alleged letter "^ to the bishop of Trani, 
 will be at no loss for its probable author, and may possibly 
 come to the conclusion that even the letter to the bishop of 
 Trani proceeded from the same pen that answered it. At all 
 events, it was just the letter that was needed — Argyrus had 
 left Constantinople in disgrace, and with his natural anti- 
 pathies vehemently enhanced against that party, the betrayal 
 of whose interests had occasioned his fall. He must have 
 been thirsting for revenge, when a lucky accident placed the 
 letters from Michael and Constantine to the pope in his 
 hands. Their tone was far too conciliatory to suit his temper 
 or his purpose. They might lead to a thorough reconciliation 
 between Greeks and Latins ; in which case there would be no 
 chance of efifecting the expulsion of the former from Italy by 
 
 "' Ep. i. ad Pet. § Ti.-Tii. ibid. p.l39. namely that toth belong to his Ponti- 
 
 "° The fact that it appears as first of ficate. The second must have been 
 
 the epistles of Leo in Mansi (torn. xix. -written after his decease ; even the 
 
 p. 635 et seq.) need imply no more first ma^ hare been. 
 
 than the appearance of the 'Brevis '" Both in Canis. T/ies. Yol. iii. 
 
 Commemoratio' among his Epistles p. 283-324, ed. Basnage. 
 
 farther on (ibid. p. 676 et seq.) : 
 
LETTERS OF LEO IX. 39 
 
 means of the Normans or otherwise, ^hich had been the one 
 object of his intrigues through life. Their effect must be 
 counteracted at once. The letter to the bishop of Trani 
 could not have turned up more opportunely for that purpose, 
 had it dropped from the clouds; and there was no person on 
 earth into whose hands it could have fallen more appositely 
 than those of cardinal Humbert, then by far the ablest and 
 most uncompromising champion of the Latin party. In 
 short, without enquiring hypercritically which of these pieces 
 were forgeries, or interpolated in part, or who forged them, 
 we may rest satisfied with the results of the formal investi- 
 gation instituted bjr Constantino, with all the facts before 
 him ; that ' the root of the whole evil lay with Argyrus and 
 his faction, aided by the interpreters ; ' "' and may consider 
 the imprisonment of the son-in-law and grandson of Argyrus, 
 with which the curtain drops, '''^ as condign justice due to 
 their more illustrious sire. From the time that he gained 
 the ears of Constantine and Leo,'*" he became the inspirer of 
 both, and swayed them alternately for the interests of the 
 one or the other, but always for his own. His own were 
 comprised in what had been his life-long policy, and that 
 of his father before him — Italy for the Italians: and a 
 plague on the Greeks. We may admire him for his pa- 
 triotism, even while we regard him as the arch-conspirator of 
 the internecine division which he lived to see'*' accomplished 
 
 '" Seethe Greek version of events dem opem et vires suas impendit: 
 
 contained in the TltTrdKiov, given at cujiis quidem Pontificis ita partes am- 
 
 length by Leo AUatius, de Lib. Eccl. plexatiis est, ut lati in Michaelem Ceru- 
 
 diss. ii. IleplTov iTuij.ffdvTos,Ti PaiTt\ela lariumaLeoneanathematis(hiB\egAtes, 
 
 liov iptw^aaaa, etpe rijv ^(fov toS xaxov that is) auctorem fuisse, ac incento- 
 
 ytvof/.evnv &irb r&v ipiit^vevTuv, koX toO rem pradpuum, ei exprobdrint Grteci! 
 
 ft6(iousToS'Ap7i}pou,p. 170,fromaletter "' He died in exile apparently : 
 
 ofConstantine to Michael there quoted. ' Exilium passus, longo post tempore 
 
 '■"' Ibid. The Brev. Commem. can- vitam 
 
 not deny this fact; but, suppressing Degit inserumnis, et corporisanxietate 
 
 their relationship to Argyrus, calls Vexatus, miserfe vit^m flnisse refertur.' 
 
 them merely the ' Latin interpreters.' — Guil. Apul. ap. Bibl. Hist. Sic. Ca- 
 
 "° Leo speaks of him to Constantine rusii. vol. i. p. 108. 
 
 thus, in A.D. 1054: ' Suffultus ergi But his exile must have been decreed 
 
 comitatu, qualem temporis brevitas et subsequently to his doings in Italy, on 
 
 imminens necessitas permisit, gloriosi his last return from Constantinople, 
 
 duois et magistri Argyri fidelissimi tui "WhenDesiderius found him at Bari in 
 
 colloquium et consilium expetendum a.d. 1058, he was plain ' master of the 
 
 censui.'— Ap. Mansi, torn. xix. p. 668. Barians,' Roger Guisoard being then 
 
 Du Fresne writes of him on all this lord paramount. Chron. Mon. Casin, 
 
 (FamU. Aug. Byz. § xxv.) : ' Sed et (ap. Muratori, Rer. It. Script, vol. iv. 
 
 Leoui IX. P.P. contra Normannos eos- p. 418) lib. iii. c. 9. 
 
40 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 between eastern and western Christendom, and which even 
 the nineteenth century may not see healed. 
 
 Less excuse can be made on that score for cardinal 
 Humbert. He was, to judge from the writings which he has 
 left behind him, a thorough partisan, as great a foreigner in 
 Italy as the Greeks themselves, violent and overbearing in 
 word and deed. His abilities, which were considerable, added 
 to his high office, gave him the means of doing infinite harm. 
 He wielded religion less as an olive-branch than as a weapon 
 for smiting down his foes, and for aggravating instead of 
 assuaging animosities. In other respects his style is not 
 without point, nor his career without interest. He can quote 
 Persius and Horace : '^^ his history takes us from France to 
 Italy, from Italy to Sicily, and Constantinople ; and we find 
 him honorably mentioned by one of our own archbishops of 
 Canterbury. But Lanfranc may be thought to sing his praises 
 as a native of France, his own adopted country, and as op- 
 posed to Berengarius, his own sworn foe. Lanfranc knew 
 nothing of him as ambassador to Constantinople. And when 
 we come to compare the profession drawn up by him for 
 Berengarius to sign a.d. 1058 — the year in which Cerula- 
 rius died — with the anathema pronounced against the Greek 
 patriarch a.d. 1054, we may perhaps feel that even Lan- 
 franc might have written differently of Humbert, had he 
 seen both. Berengarius was not long in recanting his sub- 
 scription to the harsh, overdrawn formula which had been 
 imposed on him ; nor was he ever required to subscribe to it 
 again — though twice had up subsequently for his opinions — 
 nor has anyone been since.'^^ The Latin profession is the 
 best commentary, then, upon the Greek anathema ; and the 
 best commentary on the reputation which the three legates 
 brought back with them from Constantinople, is to be found 
 in the account given by the bishop of Ostia and S. Bruno of 
 the election of Victur II., which took place the year after 
 
 "' Ap. Canis. nt sup. pp. 293 and esse, et sensualiUr, non solim in sa- 
 
 302. cramento, sed in veritate, manibus 
 
 '" Contrast the hymn of S. Thomas sacerdotumtractari, frangi, etfidelium 
 
 for Corpus Christi Day, ' Nulla Rei dentibus atteri.' On which see 
 
 fit scissuxa, Signi tantim fit fractura,' Mabillon, Act. Ord. Bened. tom. ix. 
 
 &c. with 'Panem et vinum quae in prsef. pp. 12-14. And for the account 
 
 altari ponuntur post eonsecrationera of it all by Berengarius himself v. 
 
 non solum sacramentum, sed etiam Martene and Durand. Anecd. tom. iv. 
 
 verum Corpus et Sangninem D. N. J. C. p. 103 et seq. 
 
CARDINAL HUMBERT AND HIS COLLEAGUES. 41 
 
 their return from thence. ' People prayed for his nomination 
 by the emperor, because in the Eoman Church ' there was 
 nobody to be found qualified for that high office.''^^ All were 
 venal or simoniacal. 
 
 Plainly their own doings in the imperial city, to which we 
 are coming, had not qualified them for it in the eyes of their 
 countrymen. After some weeks spent in insulting or in- 
 veighing against the patriarch and clergy of the metropolis 
 in which they were residing, and having, as a natural conse- 
 quence, had all the churches there closed to them,'^' they pro- 
 ceeded, on July 16 — not in the name of the pope, for he had 
 been dead since April 18,''^ and Mabillon"' thinks that it was 
 the news of his death that was taking them home — but in 
 the name of the apostolic see, which, however, remained 
 without an occupant for nine months longer, to excommu- 
 nicate the first of Christian bishops then living, at the high 
 altar in his own church, and before his own clergy and 
 people. The nature of their act is signally revealed in the 
 form which they employed, preserved as it has been in Greek 
 and Latin for a witness against them to the end of time.'** 
 Never were more disastrous consequences entailed by a more 
 worthless or more shameless document. It was promul- 
 gated three months after the death of one pope, nine months 
 before the accession of another ; it was never ratified by him 
 or any other pope from that day to this. It is a standing 
 monument to the disgrace of all parties concerned in it, yet 
 it has been made the standing pretext in all ages by the rival 
 hierarchies of east and west for the continuance of their un- 
 christian attitude towards each other, made law to their re- 
 spective flocks. That it must have been drawn up by the 
 legates themselves, and within a few days of its promulgation, 
 is clear from his own statements. ' They had come down,' in 
 their presumptuous language, like in Jehovah visiting Sodom 
 and Gromorrah, to see whether the sin of Constantinople had 
 
 '" See the twopassages quoted from nuntio accepto, legati Eomani reditum 
 
 them in the note to p. 42. parant.' — Act. Ord. Bened. torn. ix. 
 
 >" This, in the long answer attri- pref. p. 3, saec. vi. The deputies from 
 
 buted to Leo, is, of course, stated to Basle were forty-seven days getting 
 
 hare been done previously to their fromVenice to Constantinople. Below, 
 
 arrival. § 29, Mansi, torn. xix. p. 652. u. vi. 
 
 '=' ' xiv. Kal. Maii.' Fisi. ap. Mansi, '*' In the HiTTciKiov as well as the 
 
 ibid. p. 635. 'Brevis CcMnmemoratio ,•' see above. 
 
 '" ' Interim moritur Leo papa, quo 
 
42 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 been as great as had iDeeii reported ; and here is their verdict — 
 First, they declare positively, ' that as far as their imperial 
 majesties are concerned, their officials, and the principal men 
 of the city, there is no place more Christian and orthodox 
 than Constantinople.' We shall see presently that they had 
 special reasons for what they said. After this candid avowal 
 they proceed to speak of the patriarch of the orthodox capital 
 and his subordinates somewhat differently. He and his are 
 followers of Simon Magus, Valesians, Arians, Donatists, 
 Nicolaitans, Severians, fighters against the Holy Ghost and 
 against Grod, as having taken out of the creed procession of the 
 Holy G-host from the Son ! They are Manicheans, Nazarenes, 
 Judaisers ; nourishing beards and long hair themselves, they 
 refuse communion to all who cut their hair and shave 
 their beards, in confoiirnity tvith the regulations of the 
 
 Church of Rome For all which causes "'^ they are 
 
 to be anathema maranatha three times over, with all heretics, 
 and with the devil and his angels, unless they repent ' — a sen- 
 tence which, in conclusion, is asserted to have been authorised 
 by Leo, who died in April, and had addressed Michael in 
 January as his honored brother, and requested his prayers. 
 
 Why they excepted Coijstantine and his court from hetero- 
 dox imputations so signally, came out afterwards. They left 
 Constantinople loaded with gifts for themselves, and for 
 blessed Peter, whose representatives they no longer repre-- 
 sented. It is added that they were robbed on their road 
 home. Chancellor Frederick, however, was discovered to 
 have a sufficient sum about him on his return to be charged 
 with bribery; a charge which he met by turning monk.'^" 
 
 '" Well may Gibbon exclaim, ' Shall aliquis inveniretur, qui Tel simoniacus 
 
 I mention in a serious history^ the non asset, vel a sinioniacis ordinatus 
 
 furious reproaches that were urged non esset.' People said in conse- 
 
 against the Latins ; who, for a long quence that the priesthood had come 
 
 while, remained on the defensive,' &c. to an end in the Church, v. Max. Bibl. 
 
 c. 60. They were making up for it now Fat. tom. xx. p. 1734. Similarly when 
 
 in Idnd handsomely. Victor II. was elected, it was said : 
 
 "" Baron, a.d. 1054, n. 45, from Leo ' Ab imperatore eum presentari volue- 
 
 Ostiensis. He afterwards became pope runt : quoniam in ecdesid Bomand, ut 
 
 as Stephen IX. The biographer of inqmtljeoOstieTisis, persona ad tantum 
 
 Leo IX., 6. Bruno of Asti, has a short officium idonea reperiri non poterat.^ — 
 
 treatise with a very significant title : (Mansi, tom. xix. p. 833, in Vit.) A 
 
 ' Cur corruptus tunc temporis ecclesise pretty reflection this, as I said before, 
 
 status,' whjch he explains : ' diximus xipon cardinal Humbert and his col- 
 
 enim jam nunc a temporibus B. Leonis leagues, just returned from their mis- 
 
 sic ecclesiam fuisse corruptam, ut vix sion ! 
 
CARDINAL HUMBEET AND HIS COLLEAGUES. 43 
 
 Not a word more was breathed of their mission. They were 
 the third set of legates who had been sent to Constantinople, 
 since these disputes commenced, to negotiate between Eome 
 and Constantinople, between the Latin and Greek parties, 
 and had come back bribed. The great Nicholas had not 
 hesitated to disown and punish his own faithless emissaries in 
 the face of the world ; John VIII. must have been equally 
 convinced of the fickleness of his, but had condoned it. And 
 there was no pope to make enquiries, nor were enquiries 
 ever instituted, into the conduct of cardinal Humbert and 
 his colleagues, who had done more mischief than all the rest 
 put together. 
 
 The circulars of INCchael to the other patriarchs have been 
 lost ; but two letters from him to Peter of Antioch, referring 
 to them, contain his account of it,'*' which is likewise that of the 
 ' tablet,' or Greek version of the facts,'^^ cited by Leo AUatius, 
 and as trustworthy doubtless as the Latin narrative. And Peter, 
 whose letters are full of candour and charity throughout, 
 after exposing one or two gross historical errors into which 
 Michael had fallen, and reproving him for his narrow- 
 mindedness and hasty conduct, and even defending the 
 Latins on some points, accepts his general statement without 
 difficulty, and speaks of the infamy that cannot fail to attach 
 to Argyrus for his performances.""' It only remains to notice 
 the double dealing of the emperor to complete the picture. 
 First, he allowed the legates to excommunicate Michael, and 
 screened them from retaliation as long as they remained in 
 the city. But as soon as they were departed out of hearing, 
 he empowered Michael to convene a synod and excommuni- 
 cate his excommunicators and their adherents. With one 
 hand he lavished gifts upon the legates as they took leave ; 
 with the other he seized and punished their accomplices, and 
 ordered the paper containing their anathema to be burnt, 
 when they were gone. With equal inconsistency he let 
 Michael subsequently disobey his own orders, and deposit it 
 in the Constantinopolitan archives, that each patriarch in 
 succession might be reminded of the insult offered to his see 
 by the Latins to the latest age. 
 
 We have now, therefore, the facts before us of both rup- 
 
 '" Ap. Cotel. as before. rov Spanaro<t>opii94irros airoliretr0M. § 1 
 
 "« See above. Ep. Pet. ad Mich. ap. Cotel. EccL. Gr. 
 
 '" i^ Sv ovSiv eiUeAXe ir\V aurx^'^s Mon. vol. ii. p. 146. 
 
44 HISTOEY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 tures at full length, of the first and second periods of the 
 schism according to Fleury, and may proceed to comment on 
 them. As I trust to have passed over nothing of importance 
 connected with either, so, perhaps, there may be some details 
 here brought into prominence for the first time, calculated to 
 give a new colour to the whole. Of the shame and blame of 
 the proceedings, indeed, it is not easy to determine which 
 side should have most, and positively there is nothing else to 
 award. 
 
 Quidquid delirant reges, plectuntur AcMvi : 
 Seditione, dolis, soelere, atque libidine, et ir4 
 Iliacos extra muros pecoatur, et intra! ''* 
 
 It is a tale throughout of legates bribed, of documents forged 
 or interpolated, of synods shammed. Of the four synods of 
 Constantinople, held within twenty years of each other, that 
 of A.D. 861 was approved by the legates of Nicholas, who were 
 sent thither on a solemn mission, but it was stigmatised by 
 him as an ' assembly of robbers.' ""^ According to the Latins, 
 the synod of A.d. 867, held by Photius,was composed of arabble 
 of the most worthless description, counterfeiting bishops ! But 
 the synod of a.d. 869, the eighth general council, according to 
 the Latins, which exposed and burnt its acts,'^^ was almost as 
 immediately disowned by the Greeks ; and the synod of a.d. 
 879, to which they transferred the title of eighth general 
 council, and at which, as at the first, papal legates were present 
 and subscribed, has since been denounced by the Latins as no 
 synod at all, and its acts as forgeries.'^' The conduct of John 
 VIII. inreferenceto that synod, and the transactions that took 
 place in it, is said to have suggested the fable of Pope Joan.'^' 
 Several of his letters are asserted to be spurious, on no other 
 ground apparently, but that of saving his character.^^' But for 
 the intrigues of Argyrus, I think it may safely be said, there 
 would never have been any such embassy despatched to Con- 
 stantinople as that of cardinal Humbert and his colleao-ues. 
 In short, as Mr. Finlay j ustly remarks : ' If either of the churches 
 
 '*' Hot. Ep. I. ii. 14. eo feminae qtiam viro similiorem esse, 
 
 '"=' ' Latroeinale illud concilium.' adversarii sint calumniati.' — Annot, 
 
 Ep. ix. ap. Mansi, torn. sv. p. 223. ad Can. ap. Mansi, torn. xvi. p. 550 ; 
 
 "' See above, p. 16. and Baron, a.d. 879, n. 5. Also be- 
 
 "" See above, p. 19. low, e. viii. 
 
 ™ Celebrata fuit a..d. 879,_ tempore "' Particularly the one ' de proces- 
 
 .Johannis Papse VIII. : qui in hftc sione Spiritus S.' Mansi, torn. xvii. 
 
 synodo tantd facilitate usus. . . ut ex p. 239, and more below. 
 
BEVIEW OF THE FACTS. 45 
 
 committed a tithe of the iniquities with which they charge one 
 another, we must allow that Christianity exercised very little in- 
 fluence on the priestly character ' during those centuries.'^" 
 
 Again, what do facts show that the whole controversy 
 really turned upon ? the primacy, by divine right, of the see 
 of Rome over all churches in the world ? Nothing of the 
 kind. That primacy was, on the contrary, never once dis- 
 puted when party-spirit was at its highest, and when Rome 
 was, territorially speaking, at its lowest. Nicholas I., indeed, 
 asserts the contrary, but he is contradicted by what took 
 place in his own pontificate. '^' Would Ignatius have appealed 
 to Rome to confirm the sentence passed by him in full synod 
 on the archbishop of<»Syracuse ; would he have accepted his 
 own restitution at the hands of the legates of Nicholas, 
 A.D. 869 ; would Photius, with Michael, of all emperors, have 
 appealed to Nicholas to confirm his appointment in the room 
 of Ignatius, had there been a doubt in the minds of either 
 party, that Rome was really their supreme court of appeal, as 
 well as of the whole west ? 
 
 But two questions were mixed up in this unhappy 
 controversy from the first on either side, that were, and 
 should have been kept distinct : 1. the primacy of the 
 pope by the law of Christ: and, 2. his jurisdiction, as 
 patriarch, by human appointment. Both rights centred in 
 Nicholas : he was reminded of both rights in his dispute with 
 Photius, as it went on. The pity is that he should not have 
 distinguished them accurately, derived as they were from 
 such different sources, or contended for one, while enforcing 
 the other. His jurisdiction as patriarch was neither identi- 
 cal with, nor essential to, his jurisdiction as pope. The ex- 
 tent of the last was no rule or measure of the extent of the 
 first ; as long as the question turned on those powers which 
 had come to him by divine right, he had the Greeks on his 
 side, and his position was unassailable ; appeal having been 
 made to him, he had the suit tried on the spot in exact con- 
 formity with the Sardican canons. His legates having been 
 corrupted, and a decision obtained from them which was 
 notoriously the reverse of what it ought to have been, he fell 
 
 "» Bys. Emp. vol. i. p. 278. nam ecclesiam tmnsmigrasse, et cum 
 
 '" ■ Gloriantiir. . . . quando de Eo- dignitatibus regiis etiam pcclesiae 
 
 mana urbe Imperatores Constantino- Eomaua? privilegia translata fuisse.'— 
 
 polim sunt translati, tunc et primatum Ep. ad Hincm. ap. Mansi, torn. xt. 
 
 Eomanse sedis ad Constantinopolita- p. 358. 
 
46 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 back upon the well-known precedent of Julius, to wHch no 
 exception could be made by the Greeks on their own show- 
 ing. According to the express statement of Theodoret,'" it 
 rested not upon any one canon, but upon the common law of 
 the church, Socrates and Sbzomen could have meant this 
 only when they spoke of a law or canon ; for law or canon 
 there certainly was not any producible to the effect alleged by 
 them at the time of which they were speaking : namely, that 
 of the council of Antioch, a.d. 341. That was their recogni- 
 tion of the inherent and inalienable rights of the primacy ; 
 and it is in its way the earliest, most explicit, and most 
 authentic upon record. The canons of Sardica, passed by the 
 west seven years afterwards, testify to the recognition of them 
 by the west in different — it may be more diffident — terms. 
 So far, therefore, west and east were agreed, and had been 
 agreed always. Eusebius and his friends in appealing to 
 Julius, and Photius and his friends in appealing to Nicholas, 
 had unequivocally set their seal to it."^ But Nicholas, in 
 declaiming against Grregory, the consecrator of Photius, imper- 
 ceptibly slid away from his subject, and raised different issues, 
 accidentally, but not essentially connected with it ; questions 
 relating to his patriarchate, not his primacy. How had his 
 patriarchal jurisdiction come to him ? He has pointed out 
 one fact relating to it with great force and accuracy : namely, 
 that it existed in vigour before the Nicene Council, and was 
 made a model or precedent for the jurisdiction confirmed by 
 the sixth canon of that council to the sees of Antioch and 
 Alexandria. His words are, ' Let the enactments of the 
 Nicene council be carefully examined, and it will be found 
 that they bestowed no increase whatever on the Eoman 
 church ; but, on the contrary, that they took example from 
 it in what they assigned to the Alexandrine church."* And 
 the words of the sixth canon are, ' Let antient customs pre- 
 vail — those in Egypt, and Libya, and Pentapolis, in particular 
 — so that the bishop of Alexandria should have power over all 
 these : as this is also customary for the bishop in Eome the 
 metropolis.''^ In Antioch similarly, and in other provinces : 
 that the churches be maintained in their privileges. This, 
 
 '" See note to p. 9. "* Ep. viii. ad Mich. (Mansi, torn. xv. 
 
 '" Vide Christendom!! Divisions, p. 206). 
 
 part i. § 9, ■tnd the passages quoted in '" So I would interpret the article : 
 
 notes 41-43. ex t jj 'Pii/ip. 
 
TRUE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 47 
 
 too, is manifest in all cases, that if anyone should become 
 bishop without the consent of his metropolitan, the great 
 council has decided, that no such person ought to be bishop.' 
 The bishop of Alexandria was to have power over Egypt, 
 Libya, and Pentapolis, because the bishop of Rome was 
 possessed of power of the same kind by custom, and oh the 
 same ground the churches of Antioch and elsewhere were 
 to be maintained in their privileges. Their privileges were 
 confirmed to them, not his to him. Now, what were his pri- 
 vileges ? As far as the primacy was concerned, Eome stood 
 alone ; and there could be no comparison so far between its 
 power and that of any other see.'™ The point of comparison 
 between it, Antiocb, and Alexandria, therefore, must have 
 been as metropolita,n, or, as they were afterwards called, 
 patriarchal sees ; but while the jurisdiction of the bishops of 
 Antioch and Alexandria was limited as well as confirmed 
 by the council, the jurisdiction of the bishop of Eome was 
 instanced, not confirmed, limited, or enlarged. It was not 
 even defined ; it was stated as a fact, without explaining how 
 it arose. There seems but one account to give of it, that it 
 had come to him as bishop of ' Eome the metropolis,' and 
 been confirmed to him by Constantine, and was commensu- 
 rate with the temporal jurisdiction of the prefect or vicar of 
 that city. As S. Bernard tells Eugenius of his temporalities : 
 'In his successisti non Petro,sed Constantino."^' It was not 
 confirmed to him by the council, having been already con- 
 firmed to him by the emperor. Hence posterity spoke of it 
 as ' the privilege ' of Constantine;"' and expanded it and 
 other acts of his munificence into legendary form which it 
 at length assumed in the spurious donation ascribed to him."' 
 Nicholas appealed to Michael to restore those rites and patri- 
 monies of which his see had been deprived, naming them 
 expressly. Adrian is no less explicit in stating who the donors 
 
 '" ■ II ne traite pas de la primautA, devohns eontulit Eomano Pontifici, 
 
 qui, d'ailleurs, n'avait pas besoin de la scilicet in toto orbe sacerdotes ita 
 
 reconnaissance du concile.' — Droit hune caput habeant, sicut omnes judi- 
 
 Ecd. par Georges Phillips, Crouzet's ces Regem.' Then follows the dona- 
 
 tr, vol. ii. p. 30 (§ 69). tion § 13-14. 'Ecce tarn palatium 
 
 '" De Consid. iv. 3. nostrum. . . quam Eomanam urbem, et 
 
 '" E. g. Luitprand. See above, p. 26. omnes Italise, seu oceidentalium regio- 
 
 "° Seethe long letter of Leo IX. § 10. num, provincias. . . . patri nostro Sil- 
 
 ' Inviolabiliter et inconcussi sibi con- vestro universali papse contradentes, 
 
 Bervato illo privUegio, quod idem sanctae Komarse ecclesise concedimus 
 
 Princeps quarto baptismatis sui die, permansura.' — Mansi, t. xix. p. fi41-5. 
 
48 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 of them had been. ' Through his ' (Constantine's) ' bounty 
 was the holy catholic and apostolic Eoman church elevated 
 and exalted. Power in these western parts he deigned to 
 bestow on it.' Then he speaks of ' all the other conces- 
 sions made by different emperors afterwards to the Eoman 
 church, that had been abstracted in the course of time by the 
 wicked Lombards,' and concludes: 'hence we have very 
 many donations preserved amongst our sacred records at the 
 Lateran.' ^^° The question is rather in what it commenced, 
 than how it grew. The earliest authentic allusion to it in 
 any distinct shape occurs in the epistle to Julius of the Sar- 
 dican fathers."" ' It belongs to you of your high prudence 
 to arrange, that our brethren in Italy, Sardinia, and Sicily, be 
 informed through your writings of what has been defined and 
 done.' Euffinus, the ecclesiastical historian, must have been 
 in his teens when the Sardican fathers met, and the chief 
 town of his native province, Aquileia, lay on the high road 
 along which communications must have passed from Sardica 
 to Eome by land. The substance of their letter, therefore, 
 may have been among his earliest reminiscences ; and if so, 
 why not the foundation of his celebrated paraphrase of the 
 sixth Nicene canon, ' that antient customs be maintained at 
 Alexandria, and in the city of Eome as well : so that one 
 should have charge of Egypt : the other of the suburbicary 
 churches ' ? There have been volumes of controversy ex- 
 pended on that expression of his. The difficulty that under- 
 lies it is, that the jurisdiction of the patriarch of the west was 
 never stationary, but always changing ; sometimes receding, 
 but more generally advancing ; advancing westwards ; but, of 
 the two, receding eastwards ; occasionally contested, but more 
 generally, for the distinction and protection which it bore 
 with it, embraced with open arms.'*^ Its boundaries might 
 perhaps have been more fixed, had it been defined and regu- 
 lated by councils, as the other patriarchates were ; but for some 
 good reason or other, the bishop of Eome was marked out as 
 an exception, even in that respect ; his rights, even as patri- 
 arch, were not to depend on his subordinates, as theirs on 
 
 "» See above note to p. 8. Soz. iii. ; De Maroa, De Concord. Sac. 
 
 "' Vide Mausi, torn. iii. p. -il. et Imp. i. 3 ; Leo Allat. Be Consens. 
 
 "* Vide Bever. in Synod, ad Can. i. 12; Morin. firerei!;. i. 29 ; Salmas. 
 
 Mc. 6 ; Spanheim, Dissert, ad Can. et Sirmond. de Beg. Svhurbio. 
 Is'ic. 6 ; Vales. Observ. eccl. in Soc, et 
 
TRUE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 49 
 
 their brethren and on him. A benefactor to the head of the 
 church appeared in the head of the state. It was by Con- 
 stantine and his successors that territorial jurisdiction was 
 partly given, partly confirmed to the pope; and by Pepin 
 and his successors, territory. 'The popes early assumed,' 
 says Mr. Finlay, ' that Constantine had conferred on the bishop 
 of Eome a supreme ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the three 
 European divisions of his dominions, when he divided the 
 empire into four prefectures. There were, indeed, many 
 facts which tended to support this claim. Africa, in so far 
 as it belonged to the jurisdiction of the European prefectuies 
 acKnowledged the authority of the bishop of Eome ; and even 
 after the final division of the empire, Dacia, Macedonia, 
 Thessaly, Epirus, and Greece, though they were separated 
 from the prefecture of Illyricum, and formed a new province 
 of the eastern empire, continued to be dependent on the 
 ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the pope."** But, as he bad 
 observed previously, 'the ecclesiastical divisions of the 
 empire underwent frequent modifications,' .... and, ' after 
 the provinces of Epirus, Greece, and Sicily were withdrawn 
 from the jurisdiction of the pope, and placed under that of 
 the patriarch' of Constantinople by Leo III., that patriarchate 
 embraced the whole Byzantine empire.' "^ 
 
 From that time forth, as we have seen, the territorial ques- 
 tion between Eome and Constantinople absorbed, or rather 
 it lay at the bottom of, all others, and was contested with all 
 the eagerness, unscrupulous means, and violence which is sure 
 to be thrown into controversies of that kind, where the loss 
 or gain of power, the accession or infringement of temporal 
 interests are paramount considerations ; where annates, patri- 
 mony, patronage, fees for palls, and so forth, are staked upon 
 the issues of success or failure. One emperor had abstracted 
 part of what another emperor had bestowed, and the patri- 
 archate of Constantinople had been aggrandised at the ex- 
 pense of that of Eome so far. This was the extent, but it 
 was likewise the sting of the grievance. Eome had been a 
 loser, and the patriarch of Constantinople, to the same ex- 
 tent, a gainer. Otherwise it was the mere result of a quarrel 
 between the predecessors of Nicholas and the predecessors of 
 Michael — not of Photius or Ignatius — a hundred years or 
 
 '" Byz. Emjp. vol. i. p. 212. '" Ibid. p. 15. 
 
 E 
 
50 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 more back, and it had not hitherto produced any breach be- 
 tween the two patriarchs. Adrian was on the best of terms 
 with Tarasius, all the time that he was complaining of the 
 confiscation of his rights by the emperors. Ignatius, in de- 
 posing the archbishop of Syracuse, had applied to have that 
 sentence confirmed by Eome. Photius and Michael were 
 endeavouring to justify themselves before Nicholas, the one 
 as having superseded Ignatius, the other as having been put 
 in possession of his see. The rights of his primacy had 
 clearly not suffered in practice from the abridgment of the 
 boundaries of his patriarchate. Why did he digress at all on 
 that question in condemning Photius ? He was delivering 
 judgmeijit against Photius as head of the Church, and calling, 
 upon Michael to give effect to it. Was it the best time for 
 expostulating with Michael on questions of disputed territory 
 dating so far back, and ripping up all the old sores con- 
 nected with it ? Was it wise to array Michael against him as 
 patriarch, as well as Photius against him as pope ? Photius 
 could not have stood alone for a moment, as was afterwards 
 shown, but Michael supported him, and he kept his ground. 
 Their joint opposition must have been a sore trouble to 
 Nicholas, as he honestly admits. Still, even so, there was a 
 powerful party grateful to him for his exertioni! in behalf of 
 Ignatius, and seconding them as opportunity offered ; and he 
 had right on his side. There had never been any misunder- 
 standings previously between him and Ignatius, nor any 
 quarrel between the Churches of Eome and Constantinople 
 during his pontificate. He had literally no foes in the east 
 to retaliate upon but Photius and his supporters. But the 
 opportunity presented to him by the embassy from Bulgaria 
 was as tempting as it was unexpected, and he yielded to the 
 allurement. In his own answers to the Bulgairians, in the 
 conduct of the missionaries despatched by him into their 
 country, war was declared openly; and a general attack 
 made upon Constantinople, in church as well as in state, by 
 Eome for the first time in history. No such line had been 
 adopted on either side previously. The Greek rite was im- 
 peached ; the ministrations of the Greek clergy depreciated ; 
 the patriarchate of Constantinople contemptuously let down 
 in comparison with those of Antioch, Alexandria, and Eome. 
 It cannot be too often repeated that it is the Eoman patri- 
 archate, and not the primacy, that is so compared ; otherwise no 
 
TRUE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 51 
 
 comparison could have been instituted, even between it and 
 the other two, let alone Constantinople. Nicholas, in all proba- 
 bility, was influenced in what he said on that head by the pseudo- 
 decretal '*' of S. Anacletus, orelse the decrees of the synod pur- 
 porting to have been held in a.d 494 or 496 under Gelasius,"^ 
 which, till it can be vindicated from the objections that have 
 been made to it,'*' ought not to be considered more authentic; 
 or the long letter of Gelasius to the bishops of Servia or Darda- 
 nia, which is open to grave doubts liiiewise."'* Party-spirit had 
 forged or interpolated documents that would have been entitled 
 to the utmost deference had they been genuine, and there was 
 enough truth in them to make them pass as such. At that 
 time they were beginning to be actively circulated and attract 
 notice; and it is abundantly plain that Nicholas had studied 
 them, and shaped his opinions in some cases from them.'*'' 
 What he says of the patriarchate of Constantinople is not 
 untrue absolutely, but untrue by suppression. It was not in 
 existence at the time of the Nicene council ; it could never 
 have come into existence at all had ' antient customs ' been 
 ' maintained inviolate.' The evidence for its origin from S. 
 Andrew consisted in later and more obscure traditions than 
 could be quoted for that of Antioch from S. Peter, or of 
 Alexandria from S. Mark. Its prerogatives had been 
 created, not merely confirmed, as theirs had been, by general 
 councils; and to the canons bestowing upon it precedence 
 over them, Rome had declined acceding, when they were 
 
 "'Anacl.Ep. 'Deordineepiscoporum "» ' Nicolaum relataa epistolas a 
 
 vel primatum.' Fol. xvii. ed. Merlin, Mercatore non iraprobare, iion duhium 
 
 or in torn. 130 of AbWMigne's Patrol, est.'— Blase. Be collect. Can. Isid. 
 
 p. 77. Merc. c. i, ap. Galknd. De Vet. Can. 
 
 "« Can. 2 ap. Mansi, torn. viii. Collect, p. 366. Gieseler E. H. § 20. 
 
 p. 147. In reality, this canon is only note 10 (Cunningham's tr.) thinks 
 
 ranking the sees believed to have been that Nicholas appealed to them for the 
 
 founded by S. Peter in their proper first time in a.d. 865 ; but m the letter 
 
 order. to Photius of March 18, 861, we have : 
 
 '«' E. g. by Cave, Hist. Lit. s. v. ' Decretalia, quse a Sanctis pontificibus 
 
 Gelasius. primse sedis Bomanae ecclesise sunt 
 
 "« Mansi, torn. viii. p. 50, with his instituta, cujus auctoritate omnes 
 
 observations. In it we read ' Si oerte synodi et sancta concilia roborantur, et 
 
 de dignitate agitur civitatum, secundae stabilitatem sumunt:' which evidently 
 
 sedis et terti* major est dignitas sacer- means more than had been said in the 
 
 dotum, quam ejus civitatis quffi non letter of Sept. 25, 860 (Mansi, torn. xv. 
 
 soliim inter sedes minimi numeratur, pp. 168 and 176). Comp. what, is said 
 
 Bed nee inter metropolitanorum jura likewise in the letter to Michael 
 
 oensetur.' . . . There are two forms of (p. 196 ibid.), to which I shaU agam 
 
 this letter, a long and a short one. allude. 
 
52 HISTORY OP THE SCHISM. 
 
 passed. Eome had, in fact, protested against them as a 
 diminution of the rights of those sees,''" and a violation of 
 the order laid down by the Nicene fathers. All this was 
 true, but not the whole truth. Neither Alexandria, nor 
 Antioch, had any divine, or inalienable rights like Kome, and 
 the patriarch of Constantinople claimed nothing but what 
 had come to him by human appointment. For part of his 
 prerogatives he was indebted to councils, as authoritative 
 surely for creal.ing them as for confirming them, and yielding 
 nothing in dignity to that of Nicsea. The patriarchs of Antioch 
 and Jerusalem had themselves sat and voted for his prece- 
 dence,''' and in practice, from the first council of Constanti- 
 nople downwards, Rome had acquiesced in it. ' But for the 
 authority of the holy see,' wrote Adrian, a.d. 787, of 
 Tarasius, ' he had never succeeded in getting his name into 
 the second place,' which rank,'"^ in spite of what Nicholas had 
 written to the Bulgarians two years before, was once more 
 assigned to the Constantinopolitan patriarch by the eighth 
 general council that restored Ignatius A.d. 869,'^^ and is 
 therefore reckoned among the ' antient privileges ' that were 
 renewed in the fourth Lateran ''■* and Florentine ''' councils. 
 Eome turned round, in short, and claimed to have conferred 
 it, when further opposition to it became nugatory, and bade 
 the patriarch remember his obligations to the apostolic see. 
 For the remainder of his prerogatives he was indebted to the 
 emperors, like Bome.'^^ Their absence from Eome and their 
 proximity to him had changed the flow of their benefactions 
 in his favour. In his city they resided, in his church they 
 worshipped, for the interests of his see they legislated. In 
 process of time his jurisdiction extended over the whole east, 
 
 "° ' Non convellantuT,' -wrote S. Leo Manai, torn. vii. p. 429, and they sign 
 
 to AnatoliusinA.D. 451, ' proTincialium after Anatolius, after which follow the 
 
 jura primatum, nee privilegiis anti- signatures of aU the other bishops, 
 
 quit-is institutis metropolitani frau- Then in the reply to the objections of 
 
 dentur antistites. Nihil Alexandrinse Lucentius, one of the papal legates, all 
 
 sedi . . . pereat dignitatis . . . Antio- cried out, oiSels ^varjKi.is%n. (Ibid, 
 
 chena quoqne eeclesia . . . inpaternas p. 441.) 
 
 constitutionis ordine perseveret, et in "" Mansi, torn. xxi. p. 1071. 
 
 gradu tertio coUooata, nnnquam se fiat "' Can. xxi. Mansi, torn. x-vi. p. 174. 
 
 inferior.'— Ep. 106, ed. Ballerin. Ep. ■" Can. v. Manai, torn. xxii. p! 99o! 
 
 101 is from Anat. to Leo. Other '»= Def. Coneil. Flor. Mansi, torn, 
 
 epistles on the same subject are 104, xxxi. p. 1031. 
 
 105, 107, 114, 119. ■« E. g. Cod. Theod. lib. xyi. Tit. ii. 
 
 '" See their subscriptions in the 1. 45. 
 16th action of the council of Chalcedon. 
 
TRUE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 53 
 
 as that of Rome over the whole west, and the east submitted 
 to him at least as willingly, as the west to Rome. 
 
 True, as he was frequently reminded by Rome, there were 
 no such prerogatives assigned him in the decrees of the 
 Nicene fathers ; but the preference shown for the Nicene 
 council by Rome arose from the fact that it was held when 
 Rome was the »ole metropolis of the east and west, and 
 neither Constantinople nor its patriarch existed as powers 
 in the world or church. Still there had been no invasion of 
 the divine rights of the primacy by him at any time. The 
 highest privilege to which his see had ever attained by the 
 canons was that it^ should rank ' next after ' — not before 
 — Rome ; and even that distinction was expressly conceded 
 to it as the imperial city, or New Rome. Rome was made 
 its model in that sense, having served as a model in another 
 sense for Antioch and Alexandria formerly. Rome had been 
 — what Constantinople was now — the seat of empire. Con- 
 stantinople never attempted to be compared with Rome in 
 any other sense. The title of ' oecumenical,' which more 
 than anything else offended Rome when assumed by the 
 Constantinopolitan patriarch, was never intended to signify 
 more than his sway in the east."' Constantinople, therefore, 
 never really clashed with Rome but as a patriarchate ; 
 though, as a patriarchate, there was a wide field for mischief 
 between them. The two sees were rivals, first as dividing 
 imperial favours ; secondly, as privileged above all others 
 in the east and west ; thirdly, as always bordering, and some- 
 times encroaching, upon each other ; fourthly, as presiding 
 ecclesiastically over two rival races, of different language, 
 customs, and sympathies. 
 
 That was the antagonism localised hitherto, or developed 
 only by fits and starts, which the mission of Nicholas to the 
 Bulgarians nationalised once for all. He threw down the 
 challenge ; and it was picked up by Photius in his encyclic. 
 Not only the two sees, but the two churches, or rather the 
 two nations represented by them, pronounced for war. It 
 no longer mattered whether Ignatius or Photius was patri- 
 arch : all Constantinople was of one mind on the Bulgarian 
 
 '" As was explained by the Greeks orbis teneat prsesulatiim : sed quod 
 
 themselves to the papal librarian cuidam parti orbis, quae a Christianis 
 
 Anastasius. ' Non ide6 oecumenioum inbabitatur.' — Vraf. ad Joan. VIII. in 
 
 dicerent patriarcham, quid universi Sept. S^m. Patrol, torn, cxxix. p. 197. 
 
54 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 question, and to that question both the encyclic and the 
 Constantinopolitan synod of a.d. 867 were public answers. 
 The letters of Nicholas rebuking Michael, and anathema- 
 tising Photius, could have had nothing to do with either, as 
 we have seen ; for they had not been delivered. It was the 
 news of his doings, or rather of the doings of his emissaries 
 in Bulgaria, that provoked both, as their dates testify. - As 
 the claim of Rome,' says Mr. Finlay, 'to supremacy over 
 Bulgaria, rested on the antient subjection of the Danubian 
 provinces to the archbishopric of Thessalonica, in the times 
 when that archbishopric was immediately dependent on the 
 papal see, the establishment of papal authority in Bulgaria 
 would have afforded good ground for commencing a struggle 
 for withdrawing Thessalonica itself from the jurisdiction of 
 the patriarch of Constantinople, and placing it under the 
 control of the pope of Eome.' "' Thus it was that the con- 
 troversy passed into a new phase, and began to be overlaid 
 with doctrinal questions : not because there was any doctrine 
 really that was imperilled or argued against by either, but 
 because both parties were ashamed to own, and strove to 
 disguise from themselves, from each other, and from the 
 world generally, for what it was that they were contending. 
 Photius could not, for shame, have come forward with no 
 more specious or creditable grounds for warning his neo- 
 phyte flock in Bulgaria against the shepherds from Eome, 
 than that they were merely trespassing on his grounds. 
 Accordingly, passing over that fact altogether, he inveighs 
 against them as disseminators of unsound doctrine and unholy 
 customs ; confirming those who had been already confirmed 
 according to the rites of the Grreek Church, holding up to 
 contempt the married clergy whom they had found minis- 
 tering there, adding to the creed in defiance of so many 
 general councils. 
 
 The Latin missionaries attacked the rites of the Greek 
 Church, as having come, purposely, to supplant it. Nicholas, 
 in his rejoinder to the encyclic is as silent as Photius on that 
 one subject of contested jurisdiction. In his letter to Hinc- 
 mar he speaks of the part which he had taken against Pho- 
 tius, and of Bulgaria as having been evangelised in the first 
 instance from Eome, and then filched from Eome by Con- 
 
 "' Byz. Emp. vol. i. p. 278. 
 
TRUE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 55 
 
 stantinople. But it might be shown from his own answers to 
 the Bulgarians, that he knew well enough that they had been 
 till then under Greek instructors. He tells how Photius had 
 aspersed the Latins; he refrains from mentioning how his 
 own emissaries had aspersed the Greeks. It is the honor, 
 the faith, the discipline of the whole Latin Church, according 
 to him, which is in danger, and for which help is sought. 
 The French bishops are not invited in any way to join in the 
 issue whether Rome or Constantinople shall have the upper 
 hand in Bulgaria. What Ratramn, ^neas of Paris, and 
 others, are called upon to do is to occupy themselves ex- 
 clusively in refuting a number of charges, said to have been 
 made by the Greek emperors Michael and Basil, against the 
 Latin Church.'"' That was the task assigned to them in so 
 many words, and more they were not told. They were not 
 supplied with a single Greek treatise containing those charges ; 
 they could not even name Photius as having originated them. 
 That letter of Nicholas alone contained the text on which they 
 had to Write ; it was their only evidence that such charges 
 had been made at all, or directed against the Latin, or even 
 the Eoman Church. It stated indeed expressly, that the 
 Greek emperors, not the patriarch or his clergy, had concocted 
 them ; still it was as the work of the Greeks generally that 
 they were to be refuted. All which is parodied in the con- 
 troversy to which the letter to the bishop of Trani gave rise. 
 As we have seen, there had been comparative peace between 
 Rome and Constantinople ecclesiastically from the death of 
 Photius to the accession of Michael Cerularius a.d. 1043. 
 About that time we find Peter of Antioch announcing his 
 election to Leo IX., and Leo writing back to him in approval 
 of it, though Peter condemned adding those words ' Filioque ' 
 to the creed more heartily ^°'' than Leo received them.*"' Peter 
 
 '"" Both in vol. i. of the Spicil. ed. ™' See his letter and profession of 
 
 de la Barre, p. 61-150. One of Ea- faith in Mansi — in which the double 
 
 tramn's first positions is, ' De sacris procession is twice expressed (torn, 
 
 dogmatibus, de ecolesiastico ritu, non xix. p. 660-3). ' Hanc fidem sancta 
 
 imperatorum, sed episcoporum, fuerat Eomanaet apostolica sedes corde credit 
 
 disputare ;' c. 2, and he never quits it et pro ejus defensione . . mori parata 
 
 throughout. The work of jEneas is est. Guam in te, frater carissime, 
 
 much more vague, showing that he perfectam cognoscimus ;' that is, in 
 
 scarce knew what, or whom, he was consequence of the profession of faith 
 
 writing against. received from Peter : which he calls 
 
 ^° Ep. ad Mich. §11. Ko/tbi/ Si, elsewhere (p. 662), ' sanam, etcatholi- 
 
 itol KaKav KdKiarov, rj 4v t^ ayf^ (Tvfi- cam, atque orthodoxam per omnia,' 
 
 $6\tp irpoo-fl^Krj. — Ap. Cotel. Eccl. Gr. though certainly without those words, 
 
 Mon. vol. ii. p. 152. icaX rot TioD. 
 
56 HISTOEY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 of Antioch tells Michael that to his certain knowledge both 
 at Antioch in the days of the patriarch John, his predecessor, 
 and at Constantinople in the days of the patriarch Sergius, 
 when he visited it forty-five years previously, the name of 
 the pope — John XVII. or XVIII. — was commemorated, ac- 
 cording to custom, with the other patriarchs in the sacred 
 diptychs.^"^ And Leo himself can write in January, A.D. 1054, 
 to Michael — ' archbishop of Constantinople,' for so he styles 
 him — as his ' honored brother.' ^"^ 
 
 That one letter to the bishop of Trani changed all. It 
 played the part of the encyclic over again. It was dictated 
 by the same fears, the substitution of the Latin for the Greek 
 rite, where the Greek rite was still in force. It created the 
 same ferment. Dominic, the new-made patriarch of Aquileia, 
 caught eagerly at the opportunity which it gave him of writ- 
 ing a pompous epistle to Peter of Antioch, in defence of 
 azymes ; Peter's answer to which is a rare specimen of polished 
 irony.'"* Cardinal Humbert appeared against the archbishops 
 of Achrida and Constantinople, and against the monk Nicetas, 
 in hot haste.^"^ A long letter was delivered to Michael as from 
 Leo. Azymes, or the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist, 
 was the ostensible point selected for attack or defence. It 
 was the principal point in which the Latin rite differed from 
 the Greek, and it was discussed on both sides with ritualistic 
 ardour. But the question was not which rite was best, but 
 which rite should prevail ; in other words, whether Apulia, 
 of which Trani was a principal town, should for the future be 
 dependent upon the patriarchs of Kome or Constantinople. 
 The question was a national one to the same extent, as when 
 Photius fulminated his encyclic. The encyclic originated in 
 the earliest attempts of Eome to obtain jurisdiction in Bul- 
 garia; the letter to the bishop of Trani originated in the 
 expiring efforts of Constantinople to retain jurisdiction in 
 
 ^°' Ep. ad Mich. § 5. Forty-five ter sedes fuisse.' — Ap. Pagi ad Baron, 
 
 years back from the date of his letter a.d. 1019 n. 6, which M. Kou 
 
 would be A.D. 1009. John died in July (Hist. vol. iv. p. 213, ed. Vienna 1830) 
 
 of that year — Sergius lived on till has magnified into e^iiKei(l>ev airb to 
 
 A.D. 1019. Against this express state- Slirrvxa rh ovo/ia toC Tldira, tos Ss^ttii4vou 
 
 ment of Peter, the rumour mentioned ri]v f is rh ai)j.^a\ov vpoaBiiKriv' 
 
 by Nicetas Nicoenus, whose age is nn- '"^ Mansi, tom. xix. p. 663. 
 
 known, can have no weight: 'Sub '" See both in Cotel. £fcc/. GV. ilfora. 
 
 Sergio . . . dicitur rursus schisma vol. ii. p. 108-35. 
 
 exortum fuisse . . . sed quam ob cau- ^"'^ Ap. Canis. Thesaur. ed. Basnage, 
 
 sam, ipse ignoro : videtur tatnen prop- vol. iii. p. 281-324. 
 
TRUE QUESTION AT ISSUE. 57 
 
 Apulia and Calabria. Nicholas and Humbert, Photius and 
 Michael, repeat each other throughout, the questions of 
 azymes and of the creed excepted. 
 
 On each occasion, the whole west was appealed to by the 
 one, and the whole east by the other, as having some com- 
 mon and vital interests at stake, in what was, in reality, the 
 mere bone of contention between their respective heads. 
 ' It is most highly fitting,' wrote Nicholas to the bishops of 
 France, that you should put aside all other subjects to bestir 
 yourselves in this one the more. For these are common re- 
 proaches, heaped upon the whole Church, or that part of it, 
 at any rate, which i^ known to use the Latin tongue. It is 
 a cause in which you must all fight — you that are invested 
 with the Divine priesthood,' ^"^ . . . ' You shut your eyes to 
 yourselves, and all that belongs to you,' says cardinal Hum- 
 bert in his reply to the letter written in the names of the 
 prelates of Achrida and Constantinople, ' and proclaim the 
 holy Eomah, and the whole western Church polluted with 
 heresy and Judaism, and avoid them as a pest. . . . It is 
 not merely the Eoman or the Frank priesthood, but the 
 whole Latin church, from the mountain of the House of the 
 Lord, that cries out against you.' '"' . . . Photius and 
 Michael on their side are no less diligent in warning the 
 entire east against those ' pseudo-bishops,' those * abominable 
 men,' who ' emerging from darkness, that is from the western 
 hemisphere ' — it is the identical expression of the 'encyclic ' of 
 Photius, and the ' tablet ' of Michael — ' have presumed to 
 invade the fountain-heads of orthodoxy, and trouble the 
 streams issuing forth from thence to the whole world. ' ^"^ 
 But not a word had sped from Constantinople against Latin 
 errors, till Latin missionaries had invaded Bulgaria. Not a 
 word had sped from Italy against the errors of Michael and 
 his party, till the coasts of Italy had been warned against 
 falling off from Constantinople. As the first letter addi-essed 
 by Nicholas to the emperor Michael turns upon the restitu- 
 tion of the prerogatives of his see over Illyria, Calabria, and 
 Sicily, concurrently with the case of Photius,^"' so the last 
 letter of Leo IX. to Constantine renews the same plea, con- 
 
 »" Baron, a.d. 867, n. 61. Ktov, p. 162, with §§ 2-4 of the en- 
 
 '"" Canis. Thesaur. vol. iii. p. 284, cyclic, 
 
 ed. Brtsnage. ''" Mansi, torn. xr. p. 167. 
 ■'" Comp. the passage of the Xlnri- 
 
58 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 currently with the case of the patriarch Michael.^'" On either 
 side there is a Latin and a Greek party formed out of collec- 
 tive Christendom, which responds to their leaders, and it is 
 drawn into their strife, now three centuries old. For up- 
 wards of three centuries the ordinances of Leo the Isaurian 
 continued in force, more or less, as against Eome on the 
 east.* For this act of aggression ,there was compensation 
 going on in the west all that time. Kome was engaged in 
 ' conferring upon the sovereigns of modern Europe their 
 principles of prorogative, their attributes of majesty .... 
 pope and clergy, bishops and abbots, Franks and Romans, 
 advising as they best might with the people and communi- 
 ties of the west, acknowledged the son of Pepin as the 
 Csesar, and invested him with the imperial authority, be- 
 stowed by the Church, consecrated by the Church, but yet 
 antagonistic to the Church of which the emperor was the 
 defender.' ^'^ Rome conferred the titles of Csesar and Augustus 
 upon the new emperors : and how was Rome benefitted in re- 
 turn by them ? The patriarch of the west became, through 
 their instrumentality, one of themselves — a temporal prince. 
 The patrimony which they assured to him,^'^ as it was nearer 
 home, so it was much more considerable than what he had 
 been robbed of ; besides, they reasserted his rights over a 
 good deal that he had been robbed of as well. While these 
 good offices were interchanging between the heads of church 
 and state in the west, their respective partisans, civil and 
 ecclesiastical, were not idle. The bearings of the pseudo-de- 
 cretals and pseudo-donation upon the questions in church 
 and state that were disputed between Rome and Constanti- 
 nople, have never been sifted thoroughly ; but it was pre- 
 cisely during the stirring of those questions that they were 
 framed and circulated. Is it not a significant fact that they 
 emanated in all probability from those same parts of the 
 west — Spain or France — to which the interpolation of the 
 creed was due? That interpolation, as we shall see pre- 
 sently, was first brought under public notice from its adoption 
 
 '"> Mansi, torn. xix. p. 669. to S. Peter the city and duchy of Bome, 
 
 '" Palgrave's Normandt/, vol. i. Carsica and Sardinia, and very many 
 
 p. 30-1 . other territori es in Campania, Calabria, 
 
 "' Ibid. p. 262. ' In addition to the Apulia, and elsewhere. . . The docu- 
 
 various donations made by the pa- ment exists in the form of a grant ad- 
 
 trieian Pepin and the emperor Charle- dressed to pope Pascal.' 
 
 magne, Louis, their successor, confirms 
 
TRUK QUESTION AT ISSUE. 59 
 
 in the private chapel of Charlemagne. Rome was positively 
 the last to adopt it of all the west. Before Charlemagne 
 neither of the pseudo-decretals nor the pseudo-donation had 
 been heard of. Contemporaneously with Charlemagne, 
 and in direct reference to his own losses in the east, Adrian 
 refers to donations of Constantine and his successors preserved 
 in the Lateran.'^'^ Luitprand arguing upon them in his in- 
 terview with Nicephorus, appeals to the charters containing 
 them in the safe keeping of his master Otho.^'^ In the long 
 letter ascribed to Leo IX., the pseudo-donation is cited at 
 length as a crushing rejoinder to the claims of Constantinople 
 upon Trani f^^ and jt must have been from a conviction of its 
 authenticity, surely, that Leo felt empowered to bestow terri- 
 tory that had never really vested in him or his predecessors 
 upon the Normans. To Riculphus, archbishop of jNIayence, 
 and friend of Charlemagne, is assigned by Hincmar, arch- 
 bishop of Eheims, the credit of having introduced the pseudo- 
 decretals into France.^'^ Who the forger of them was, and 
 whether in Spain or France, has been much disputed, and 
 most likely will never be known.^'' But it seems unques- 
 tionable that they were compiled in the Latin, as opposed to 
 the Greek interest. Their bearings upon the canon-law of 
 the east will be more conveniently discussed at greater length 
 in a future chapter. For the present it may suffice to re- 
 mark that the ■ positions advanced out of them by Nicholas 
 were new to Photius.^'^ The pseudo-decretals were opposed 
 to the canon-law of the east ; the pseudo-donation to that of 
 its empire ; the interpolation of the creed to its existing 
 creed. The same locaKty — almost the same age — produced 
 them all. 
 
 Nicholas and Leo, beyond all doubt, are the two characters 
 
 '" Above, p. 48. concilia roborantur et stabilitatem 
 
 "* P. 26. summit, cur vos non habere vel obser- 
 
 "' Above, p. 47 note. vare dicitis, nisi quia vestry ordina- 
 
 «'« Fleury E. H. Liv. xliv. §22, and tioni contradieunt ? . Quod si ea 
 
 the Dissertations of the Ballerini in non habetis, de neglectn atqne ineuria 
 
 their appendix to the works of S. Leo. estis arguendi : si habetis et non ob- 
 
 2" Grieseler Div. ii. § 20, notes 1 1 and servatis, de temeritate estis eorripiendi 
 
 12, Davidson's tr., where the passage et increpandi,' says Nicholas to Pho- 
 
 from Hincmar is cited. rius (Ep. vi. ap. Mansi, torn. xv. 
 
 "" ' Decretalia autem, quffi a Sanctis p. 176), in reply to the letter from him 
 
 pontiflcibus primse sedis Eomanse ec- quoted above, p. 4. Nicholas was not 
 
 dfisi^ sunt instituta, cujus auctoritate aware that the decrees of which Pho- 
 
 atque sanctione omnes synodi et sancta tins pleaded ignorance were forgeries. 
 
60 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 of all others, in their' respective generations, whose integrity 
 cannot be shaken by criticism, and whose moral superiority 
 comes out immeasurably by contrast both with those to whom 
 they were opposed, and with those who acted under them in 
 each case. The great archbishop of Eheims excepted, there 
 is no contemporary that can compare with Nicholas ; nor, 
 Peter of Antioch excepted, with S. Leo. Michael III. was 
 only conspicuous as a savage despot ; Constantine Mono- 
 machus as a worthless profligate. Michael, the patriarch, 
 after making every allowance for the provocation which he 
 received from Argyrus and from the Latins generally, we 
 cannot exempt from the charges of petulance, narrow-minded- 
 ness, and dense ignorance. 
 
 Photius, like Bacon in modern days, had two characters. 
 Brilliant and accomplished as a writer, though not free from 
 inaccuracies, the indefatigable chronicler of 279 different 
 authors whose works he had read and analysed for posterity no 
 less than for his own profit, he can never cease to command 
 respect in the world of letters ; and some day, possibly, his 
 reputation as a theologian will be much more generally 
 allowed. On his encyclic and two more works supplementary 
 to it of his, we shall find a more convenient opportunity to 
 digress some chapters on.^'' More need not be said of it here, 
 than that it was the veritable Tract 90 of the controversy 
 between the Greeks and Latins, and has a history of its own 
 belonging to it in common with most works of real genius as 
 their due. 
 
 As a man, as bishop of the second see in the world, his 
 character was by no means free from blemish, if half the 
 stories told of him are true.^^" His elevation to the patri- 
 archate, and his subsequent intrigues to retain possession of 
 it through life, prove him to have been signally wanting in 
 principle, or else subservient in a lamentable degree to those 
 in power. It is true that he lived in a court where incom- 
 pliance might have cost him his life. Eomanus Argyrus was 
 told by the empress Zoe to choose between blindness or 
 death, in the event of his declining her hand. And there 
 was a party both in east and west, refractory subjects of 
 Nicholas and of Ignatius respectively, clamouring for his 
 
 -'" C. Vlll. 
 
 '^ Ohri-itendom' s Divisions, part i. p. 41. 
 
CHARACTERS OF THE PRINCirAL ACTORS. 61 
 
 advancement. But in explaining or excusing his conduct, 
 we do not get a step nearer to its justification. He must be 
 set down as one of those who violated principle with his eyes 
 open, and stooped to the expedients of corruption and in- 
 trigue in furtherance of his own private ends.^^' 
 
 The character of Nicholas is full of grandeur throughout, and 
 is never once tarnished by sordid or unworthy aims. He never 
 acts but upon high public grounds ; he never falters in uphold- 
 ing the interests of justice with inflexible resolution alike 
 against friend or foe. He supports Ignatius, though it was Pho- 
 tius who had appealed to him ; cashiers his own legates publicly 
 for their venality ; risks a rupture with Hincmar in behalf of 
 oue of his injured suffragans ; is firm against all entreaties, in 
 deposing two of the most powerful archbishops of the west 
 for their complicity with the crimes of a profligate king. 
 Does he insist upon the privileges of his see, it is because 
 be regards them in the light of a sacred trust. It is plain 
 that he would have scorned the idea of adding to them by 
 purchase, or of promoting his own personal advancement by 
 sacrificing them. In the fine language of Thucydides, speak- 
 ing of Pericles, it may be said of him that he was ' trans- 
 parently most incorruptible.' "' 
 
 Leo was of a milder but not less upright spirit. With his 
 accession commenced a new era for Rome. That they quoted 
 the pseudo-decretals, or the pseudo-donation was plainly no 
 fault of theirs. They had no hand in fabricating them, but 
 used them with perfect honesty, without discovering the 
 fraud that lay at their root. It was not the first, and it has 
 not been the last time, that the heads of church or state 
 have been compromised by their subordinates. As if they 
 had not been sufficiently misrepresented by corrupt legates, 
 
 »' A good account, incorrect however (Bevereg. Synod, vol. ii. part i. ad f.) 
 in some respects, is given of Photius illustrating what has been already 
 in Smith's bict. of Greek and Roman remarked on the sameness of the pieces 
 Biography and Mythol. vol. iii. p. 347 in both controversies. No piece can 
 et seq. A list of his writings fol- be more relevant to modern controversy- 
 lows. One piece, more particularly than this one of Photius, especially as 
 directed against Rome, occurs vol. i. illustrated by Fontana, for which he 
 ad f Nov. Erud. Delic. with notes by is called to account by cardinal Mai. 
 ■Pontana, preceded by a preliminary Comp. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. x. p. 670- 
 Diss. on Phot, and his writings. The 776 and xi. 1-37. 
 end of this piece seems quoted as a =^" Xpviiira" SiaitimSs aSupdraros 
 letter of Leo of Aohrida on azymes in 7e>'<i;te<'oj,— Lib. ii. c. 65. 
 the Synojasis of Alexius Aristeas 
 
62 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 they are found, to their misfortune, producing false title- 
 deeds, forged in their interest, though without their privity, 
 and drawing conclusions from them to their own advantage, 
 in the manner contemplated by those who forged them. For 
 a time the success of those false decretals seemed complete ; 
 but from no one publication can the moral influence of the 
 Holy See be said to have suffered more disastrously in the 
 long run; even, as in the present day, there is no step con- 
 ceivable by which it would regain more than by disowning 
 them. After all, it was the cause that was most in fault. 
 In the struggle for aggrandisement between Eome and Con- 
 stantinople, arguments were sure to be adopted on both sides 
 to serve the purposes of the moment, and policy, rather than 
 high Christian principle, to be made the rule of action. 
 Nicholas had the best of cases against Photius, and must 
 have succeeded in getting Ignatius reinstated, could behave 
 refrained from meddling with Bulgaria. From the moment 
 of his despatching missionaries into that country, the great 
 champion of injured innocence lowers his tone, sinks to the 
 level of a party-leader, and is not more formidable than 
 Samson with his locks shorn. 
 
 When hostilities were resumed under Leo IX., Calabria, 
 not Bulgaria, was made the battle-ground, where the Greeks 
 were intruders. And even in the dark period which inter- 
 vened between Nicholas and Leo, on which I have .dwelt 
 elsewhere,^^^ when Eome and Constantinople were both alike 
 incapable of the effort that it would have cost them to quarrel, 
 no obscure testimony is afforded to the real character of the 
 strife between them. a.d. 934, Theophylact, patriarch of 
 Constantinople, purchased from Eome the privilege of wear- 
 ing the pall in his own right, and of conferring it on all 
 bishops and archbishops in his jurisdiction. a.d. 1024, 
 Eustathius, another patriarch of Constantinople, attempted 
 to purchase his absolute independence of the pope, which 
 John XIX. was on the point of conceding, when the negotia- 
 tions got wind, and had to be broken off.^^"* In both cases 
 the rights of the primacy were presupposed, while the battle 
 of the patriarchates slept. It was degraded, but never dis- 
 puted, in their fiercest conflicts. 
 
 '^^ Christendom's Divisions, part i. '''' Ibid. p. 27, note 60. Conip. Leo 
 p. 40-5. Allat. de Cons. lib. ii. 8, 4. 
 
ALLEGED GROUNDS FOE SEPAKATIOK. 63 
 
 Eead by the light of the events which have been recorded, 
 we may hope to estimate the nominal grounds of the quarrel 
 at their proper value ; to distinguish, between the theological 
 dress in which they have been wrapped up, and the flesh and 
 blood which peeps out now and then unmistakeably from 
 beneath, and betrays the real actor ; to judge how far people 
 were deceiving themselves and others in appealing to them 
 at all. They will be examined as far as possible with ex- 
 clusive reference to the period through which we have just 
 passed, and not in any more extended or exhaustive sense, 
 and more light will be thrown upon them from time to time' 
 as we proceed. To begin with the last of them — azymes, or 
 the use of unleaveeed bread in the Eucharist by the Latins. 
 It has been far too hastily assumed that this custom could 
 not have obtained in the days of Photius, otherwise that it 
 would have been attacked in the encyclic.^^* It might rather 
 have been inferred from its nonappearance there, that 
 Photius was too well aware of its antiquity and scriptural 
 authority to question it. Michael and his party stigmatised 
 it as a relic of Judaism, not as a recent innovation. ^^^ And 
 how was the charge met ? First, by a distinct acknowledge- 
 ment on the part of the Latins, that bread leavened or un- 
 leavened, might be used indifferently for all essential purposes 
 in the sacrament of the altar ;^^' and secondly, that unleavened 
 bread had been always their custom. The Greeks had been 
 aware of their practice for centuries,^^' and might therefore as 
 
 '" Sinnond. op. torn. iv. p. 315-30, Nicei. (ap. Canis, p. 318) tells the fol- 
 ' Se ant/mis,' was the first to start this lowing anecdote : ' This is the sixth 
 idea. He was followed by Bona and general council celebrated at Con- 
 others. Vide Bingham, Antiq. b. xv. stantinople, and written in Greelt, 
 c. i. § 6. in the time of pope Agatho, at the in- 
 
 '"'.... communicatis Judaeie,' stance of the most pious prince Con- 
 says the Trani letter : ' etenim azyma stantine, resident in his palace, and 
 et sabbata ipsi eustodire a Moyse jussi with him the legates of the apostolic 
 sunt.' — Ap. Canis. Thes. ed. Basnage, see. . . . The most pious prince . . . 
 vol. iii. p. 281. then asked them, what order was ob- 
 
 ^'" 'In omnibus Scripturisinvenimus served by the Eoman Church in cele- 
 
 panem indifferenter dici, sive fuerit brating the sacrifice of the body and 
 
 azymus, sive fuerit ferraentatus.' — blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. They 
 
 Humbert c. Grac. p. 287, ibid, and replied : " In the chalice of the Lord 
 
 ' Salvft, ut dignum est, reverently not only wine ought to be offered, but 
 
 Corporis Domini Nostri Jesu Christi, wine mixed with water. . . . Then 
 
 et in fermentato, et in azymo.' — Ibid, as to the oblation, which is made for 
 
 p. 292. the sacrifice of the altar, it should be 
 
 ^' On this, V. Neale's Eastern Ch. without any admixture or taint of 
 
 ToL ii. p. 1051 et seq. Humbert, c. leaven : just as the blessed Virgin 
 
64 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 well have quarrelled with them for having their liturgies in 
 the Latin language, or for being a church at all. Fasting on 
 Saturdays was stigmatised as another relic of Judaism. It had 
 also been customary, from a very early period, in the church 
 of Rome — S. Augustine had dwelt upon it, as peculiar to the 
 west, at great length.^^^ Signing on the forehead with chrism, 
 the rite of confimation, as we should call it, had been reserved 
 to the episcopal office exclusively in the west from times 
 equally remote,^^" and clerical celibacy had been established 
 as a law there within four years of the second general 
 council.^'' Had the Church of Constantinople any privi- 
 leges, that were really of older date, belonging to it ? In 
 round numbers, therefore, all these usages would seem to 
 have been current in the west as many as five hundred 
 years before Photius, and seven hundred before Michael. 
 Could Photius or Michael have been serious in denouncing 
 them as errors, either making separation imperative, or ex- 
 cusing it? What had their predecessors — several of them 
 saints and doctors of the whole Church — been doing all that 
 time to have put up with them, to have fraternised with the 
 west that practised them ? Opposite customs had prevailed 
 in the east from time immemorial : yet what pope in time 
 past had ever objected to them, or threatened to break off 
 communion with the east unless they were changed ? How 
 often had the east and west met together in council during 
 
 Mary conceived and brought forth by birth) and Siricius (a Eoman), in 
 Christ without taint of any kind. . . . which the oblation is ordered in cer- 
 So the oblation ought to be pure of tain cases to be made with leavened 
 leaven ; according to what we find bread ; and he speaks of the multi- 
 enjoined in the pontifical acts by tudes of Greeks who inhabited Rome, 
 blessed Silvester. This tradition of and of the popes who were themselves 
 the apostolic see was then approved of Greeks, in former times, to show that 
 by the most pious prince Constantine.' there could have been no dispute whe- 
 Purther on (p. 221) he says : 'Mark ther leavened or unleavened bread 
 well what you are propounding, and should be used then. — Lib. iii. c. 13 
 whence you get them : for up to this (ap. Daeher. 8picil. tom. i. p. 162 et 
 time the Eoman Church has never seq. ed. de la Barre). Gallandius, Bibl. 
 heard of them. Nor can it be credited Pat. tom. viii. p. 588 note, shows 
 that the Roman pontiff, after the lapse that Innocent I. (Ep. xxv. § 8 ) by ' fer- 
 of so many years, should have pro- mentum' means the Eucharist: though 
 mulgated any observances connected he will not allow that Innocent used 
 with the mass to the Greeks.' In the leavened bread for it. 
 discussion between Anselm, bishop of ^'" See the passages quoted by Bing- 
 Havelberg, and Nechites, archbishop ham, Antiq. b. xx. c. 3 §§ 1-6. 
 of Nicomedia, the latter produced two '™ Ibid. b. xii. c. 2 § 3. 
 constitutions of Melchiades (an African ^' By decree of Siricius, a-d. 385. 
 
ALLEGED GROUNDS FOE SEPABATION. 65 
 
 that long interval for the purpose of condemning heresy, ani 
 while they were defining articles of faith in concert, was it 
 possible that they should have never talked over their re- 
 spective customs and peculiar discipline, or that one should 
 have consented to wink at error in the other ? The truth is 
 that both sides had their own usages, and were conscious, but 
 not intolerant, of the diversity of those of their neighbours, 
 till those of their neighbours began to be forced upon them 
 arbitrarily as badges of jurisdiction, and in derogation of 
 their own. The true ' gravamen ' of the encyclic is not that 
 the Latin bishops confirmed, but that they treated all pre- 
 vious confirmations by the Greeks as null: not that the 
 Latins kept Satufday as a fast themselves, but that they 
 obliged the Bulgarians to abandon the G-reek custom of 
 observing it with festivities : not that the Latin priests brought 
 no wives with them, but that they stigmatised as carnal and 
 unholy the ministry of the G-reek priests who were married : 
 not that the westerns had interpolated their own Latin 
 versions of the creed, but that they had introduced their 
 interpolated form into Bulgaria in disparagement of the 
 purer and older form, in which the Bulgarians had been 
 taught from Constantinople to profess their faith. 
 
 Again, the letter to the bishop of Trani was but a signifi- 
 cant hint to that prelate that the ordinance of Nicephorus, 
 forbidding the Latin, and enjoining the use of the Greek 
 rite exclusively in Apulia and Calabria, was in danger. 
 Argyrus and his party had long chafed under it ; and now 
 was their time for getting it reversed in their favour. He is 
 therefore warned against ' azymes,' or unleavened bread, as 
 symbolising the Latin rite ; and for the purpose of dis- 
 crediting its introduction upon public grounds, it is stigma- 
 tised as a relic of Judaism. Such exaggerations are common 
 in every controversy, and not only where rival rites are 
 concerned, or in the 11th century, and should not mislead 
 us. The merits of the case are transparent. As it had been 
 a wanton act of the Latins to foster prejudices in Bulgaria 
 against the Greek rite, so it had been a still more wanton 
 act in Nicephorus to forbid the Latin rite in southern Italy. 
 There, though there may have been many mixed races 
 existing in proximity, Latin and not Greek must have been 
 the language most widely spoken and understood, and the 
 Latin rite the national one. If they cared at all about their 
 
 F 
 
66 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 religion, how annoying it must have been to the native 
 populations to be condemned all their lives to the loss of 
 their own familiar liturgy and well-known ceremonies. It 
 would be for no intrinsic defects of the Greek ritual that 
 they detested it — for they could not have understood a word 
 -of it — nor for any superior orthodoxy of the Latin, that they 
 longed for their own back. Conscious of the weakness of 
 their cause, the Grreek archbishops trumped up a charge of 
 Judaism against the Latin ritual. Even then its flimsiness 
 was acknowledged by sober thinkers on their own side ; 
 but it is not often in church history that contests on 
 ritualism are carried on for their own sake, or mean only 
 ritualism. Two years ago, when I was in Paris, the struggle 
 for monopoly between the Eoman and Gallican rituals was 
 at its highest. The offices for Holy Week used in the prin- 
 cipal churches were GalHcan ; but the only office-books to be 
 had in the shops for money were Eoman. Each priest was 
 left free to say his mass from Eoman or Galilean missals, as 
 he preferred. Sometimes two priests followed each other in 
 the same church as rivals, one celebrating Eoman-wibe, the 
 other Gallican. And there was rivalry in their hearts, as 
 well as in their ministrations, unless they belied themselves. 
 The only ground that I heard put forward in behalf of the 
 change, was, that some hymns tainted with Jansenism had 
 been foisted into the Lyons office-books some time back, 
 though they had been in use ever since. And as if the 
 Lyons ritual was the only Gallican one sought to be super- 
 seded, or as if it had not been a far easier and less costly 
 task to have weeded out a few hymns from the old office- 
 books than introduce a new ritual altogether, involving end- 
 less changes not of books only, but expensive vestments and 
 time-honored ceremonies. The object, of course, was to 
 assimilate the Gallican Church more completely to the 
 Eoman. The more concentrated are the attacks made on 
 the Church, the closer its members are apt to be drawn to 
 each other in self-defence. Anglican ritualists, on this side 
 of the water, are not afraid of avowing openly that their 
 object is to effect a return to the liturgies of Sarum and 
 York, with their attendant vestments and rubrics. Yet I 
 suppose that a mere return to these liturgies is not all that 
 is wanted, apart from the doctrine which they symbolise 
 apart from the hope which they inspire of returning through 
 
ALLEGED GBOUNDS FOB SEPABATION. 67 
 
 them to communion with the rest of Christendom once more, 
 and beholding Christendom reunited as one man. Power 
 and emolument are happily no longer involved in the substi- 
 tution of one rite for another ; still, rituals seem as subordi- 
 nate to purposes beyond them on all sides as ever. 
 
 It may be urged, in conclusion, that the interpolation of 
 the creed, and the doctrine involved in it, were fundamental 
 points. Again, I repeat, that had the Latins confined their in- 
 terpolation to themselves, and never carried it with them into 
 the east, it would never have been attacked. When the 
 bishops and clergy converted from Arianism in Spain were 
 called upon to anathematise those who would not believe 
 that the Holy Ghest proceeds from the Father and the Son, 
 and is coeternal and coequal with them, in the third synod of 
 Toledo A.D. 589, which is the earliest explicit declaration on 
 record of that doctrine, there was no protest from the east. 
 When S. Maximus, a.d. 650 or thereabouts, if his letter is 
 genuine, felt called upon to get explanations of the Latin 
 doctrine of the double procession from the Romans to send 
 to his countrymen, it was because a synodical letter contain- 
 ing it had arrived in the east from Rome.''' The letter of 
 Agatho to the sixth council contains no statement of it, nor 
 those of Adrian I. to the seventh or second Nicene council, 
 though by that time it had been received in France. Where 
 did it excite controversy first, but at Jerusalem ? I shall re- 
 late how and when presently, but let me begin by pointing 
 out that the west and east had already come to a formal un- 
 derstanding on the subject in question, which can only be set 
 aside by pronouncing the council that accepted it uncecume- 
 nical, and the pope who set his seal to it in error. There is 
 a letter from Adrian I. to Charlemagne,'^' of which the Greeks 
 who attended the council of Florence were not aware, whether 
 it was concealed from them or not, but at all events it must 
 have reversed a great deal that was done there had it been in 
 tlieir hands. It is a formal defence by the pope of the second 
 Nicene council, to whose decrees he had given his official 
 sanction against a work called the Caroline Books, on which 
 we shall have to dwell hereafter at some length, published to 
 invalidate their authority by order of the great king. His 
 
 "' There will be more said on this telow, e. vii. and viii. 
 '" Mansi, torn. xiii. p. 760. 
 
 F 2 
 
68 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 vindication of the third action or session is very remarkable, 
 and shall be given in his own words. Proceedings had been 
 commenced^'* by reading out a profession of faith sent in the 
 form of a synodical epistle bvTarasius to the patriarchs of Alex- 
 andria, Antioch, and Jerusalem, after which it was pronounced 
 orthodox. It contained these Vords : ' Who proceedeth from 
 the Father through or by the Son.' As soon as it had been 
 read through, the two Peters who represented 'the most 
 blessed pope Adrian of elder Eome,' said : ' Our most holy 
 pope, having likewise received a letter of the same import, 
 sent us on that account with a duplicate copy in our hands of 
 what has just been read.' Tarasius had despatched his 
 profession of faith to Eome by Leo, one of his presbyters, 
 and the reply made by Adrian in high approval of its ortho- 
 doxy had been read at full length in the preceding action. 
 The identity therefore between the profession sent to Adrian 
 and that sent to the eastern patriarchs was established. So 
 the pope and patriarch having testified their approval of it 
 previously, it was confirmed by the council. The next thing 
 considered was the profession of Theodore, patriarch of 
 Jerusalem, expressed, as before, in a synodical letter. It 
 spoke of the Holy Ghost as ' eternally proceeding from the 
 Father.' After it had been read through, the two Peters 
 representing Adrian, said : ' We are content because, in ac- 
 cordance with the orthodox profession of Tarasius, patriarch 
 of Constantinople, both our apostolic pope received it, and 
 his holy synod all acquiesced in it, and embraced communion 
 in his profession.' Then they added: ' Anathema to those who 
 profess otherwise, from the 318 fathers formerly assembled 
 here.' Immediately afterwards the council said, ' Amen, 
 amen, amen,' solemnly ; and individual bishops, one after 
 another, pledged themselves to the doctrine contained in the 
 synodical letters of the two patriarchs. 
 
 All this was known to the Greeks who attended the council of 
 Florence, and they did not fail to draw attention to it, though 
 they certainly might have made more of it than they did. 
 For it is certain that the council received and endorsed both 
 professions, and in them both versions, or explanations, of the 
 clause relating to the Holy Ghost in the Constantinopolitan 
 creed, as of equal orthodoxy : that of Theodore, ' Who pro- 
 
 "' Mansi, torn. xii. p. 1120-28. 
 
LETTER OF ADRIAN I. TO CHAKLEMAGNE. 69 
 
 ceedeth from the Father eternally,' and that of Tarasius, 
 ' Who proceedeth from the Father through the Son,' And it 
 is as certain that Adrian approved of all that had been done 
 by the council. May it be urged in reply that the procession 
 of the Holy G-host came before it incidentally, and not as 
 part of its formal deliberations ? But no such plea can be 
 set up for the pope, who upheld its authority deliberately 
 when its decisions on that very point were impugned. Of 
 this the Greeks who sat and voted at Florence were not aware. 
 Charlemagne took special exception to the profession of 
 Tarasius, as follows : ^'* 
 
 ' Tarasius is unbound in his opinion, as he does not, in re- 
 citing his belief, make the Holy Ghost proceed from the 
 Father and the Son, according to the profession of the Nicene 
 Creed,'^" but from the Father through the Son.' 
 
 Adrian answers as explicitly — 
 
 'This dogma Tarasius has not explained absolutely, but 
 professed according to the teaching of the holy fathers, 
 passages from whom, for the love which we bear to your high 
 royal dignity, protected by Heaven, we extract condensed.' 
 Then follows a number of citations from the fathers in sup- 
 port of the explanation of Tarasius. 
 
 Charlemagne finds the statement of Theodore still more 
 difficult. 
 
 'How can the opinion of Theodore, archbishop of Jeru- 
 salem be sound? who, after saying that he holds the Father 
 to be entirely without beginning and everlasting, professes, 
 amid great confusion of terms, to regard the Son as no other 
 principle than the Father, and as having His subsistence from 
 Him.' 237 
 
 The obscurity of the passage is not denied ; but Adrian 
 understands what the objection means perfectly* 
 
 'This very Theodore, patriarch of Jerusalem, with the 
 other principal patriarchs, viz. Cosmas of Alexandria, and 
 another Theodore of Antioch, sent their orthodox professions 
 in synodical form to my predecessor Paul, of holy memory, 
 some time back. . . . For which cause the said archbishop 
 
 "» Mansi.'tom. xiii. p. 760-3. It »» fiie reading of the Caroline Books 
 
 forms the heading of c. 3, lib. iii. of themselves is here different. See 
 
 the Caroline Books, whioh are given in below, c. viii. 
 
 vol. xcviii. of abbA Migne's Patrol. 2" Lib. Carol, iii. 4. 
 
70 HISTOEY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 Theodore has made his profession in those terms, following 
 the doctrine of the holy fathers,^ 
 
 Numerous passages from the fathers, as before, follow in 
 support of his statement ; ending with one from Sophronius, 
 a well-known predecessor of Theodore, quoted in the sixth 
 council. 
 
 ' I believe in the Holy Ghost . . . W,ho proceedeth eter- 
 nally from the Father.' '^' 
 
 Adrian, therefore, defends the council in spite of those 
 professions which it had accepted ; and he defends those 
 professions, in spite of their difference from his own, as 
 authorised by the teaching of the fathers. The easterns 
 explained the article of the creed relating to the Holy Ghost 
 in two ways, and he, unless he differed from his western 
 brethren, in a third — for the defence of the Latin interpola- 
 tion was, that it was merely explanatory. All three were 
 adjudged equally orthodox by the council, or by him. And 
 when his own party demurred to the eastern explanations, 
 he wrote in defence of them, and confirmed them from the 
 fathers. What his own profession would have been, we may 
 perhaps infer from what he there says. His letters that were 
 read before the council contain none : and he has left none 
 that I can discover. The letter sent in his name to the 
 bishops of Spain from Frankfort is that of a believer in the 
 double procession,'^^' though he was about to justify Tarasius 
 and Theodore who had expressed themselves differently ; and 
 had approved of the council in whose creed, promulgated to- 
 wards its close, only the single procession is affirmed. So it 
 stands, at least, in the Greek original now, as it always has 
 stood. ^^^ To be sure, the framers of the work of Charlemagne 
 must have had some version of the acts of the council before 
 them, or they could not have criticised it. And cardinal 
 Julian is said to have ^"^ exhibited a Latin version — whether 
 theirs or not — to the council of Florence in which the words 
 ' Filioque ' occurred. Were they, then, introduced surrepti- 
 tiously by the Latins of the time of the second Nicene coun- 
 
 ''^ Mansi, torn. xiii. p. 764-6. ' Vulgata editio ' (in Latin) is shown 
 
 '" Ibid. p. 871. I shall return to in a foot-note to have been the work 
 
 this again, c. viii. of Gybertus Longolius, and published 
 
 ^'^'' Aet.vii. Mansi, ibid. p. 376. It by him in a.d. 1540, and of no greater 
 
 is noticed in a marginal note, that it is antiquity. (Ibid. p. 498.) 
 
 the same with one of the Latin ver- ^^^ Mansi, ibid. p. 376. Also below, 
 
 sions. Further on, what is called the c. viii. 
 
LETTER OF ADEIAN I. TO CHARLEMAGNE. 71 
 
 cil, or were the Greeks indifferent to their appearance in the 
 Latin version of the creed which it published ? If they were 
 introduced surreptiously, they would prove nothing of course; 
 but, if by consent of the Greeks, then they would supply 
 proof positive that the fathers of that council, and the pope 
 with them, besides sanctioning both explanations of the doc- 
 trine, sanctioned both forms of the creed. If it cannot be 
 proved that they did this, the pope must have given his 
 sanction to the Greek form of the creed, which is clearly that 
 of the Greek version. Afterwards, of his own accord, he came 
 forward to prove the Greek explanations of it orthodox. 
 
 How any of the^ points could have been again mooted in 
 a subsequent age, consistently with any belief in the infalli- 
 bility of that pope, or the oecumenical character of that council, 
 I am unable to explain, except on the hypothesis that I shall 
 introduce further on. The only question really left open on 
 the Latin side, was, whether the Greeks could be forced to 
 use the creed with the Latin explanation for ever appended 
 to it, in other words, permanently interpolated. This, we 
 shall and must see, was the real struggle, though with what 
 equity, with what theological correctness, it would be hard to 
 say. All the rest was mere pretence and moonshine. The 
 Greeks never sought to impose their explanations of the pro- 
 cession of the Holy Ghost upon the Latin world, though 
 Eome had accepted them. And when Rome was overborne 
 by public opinion in the west to impose the creed, as inter- 
 polated, upon the Greeks, it will be seen that she acted in 
 open contradiction to her previous moderate and large-hearted 
 policy. 
 
 It was at Jerusalem — the city of peace — as I have before 
 stated, that the first sparks of controversy seem to have been 
 elicited by the shock of the two forms of the creed encoun- 
 tering in rude collision. Some monks of a Frank convent or 
 congregation, on Mount Olives — possibly the one frequented 
 or founded there by Eufinus of Aquileia — wrote to Leo III.''^^ 
 to say that one John of the monastery of S. Saba had accused 
 them of heresy, and tried to get them put out of the church 
 of the Nativity at Bethlehem on Christmas-day in conse- 
 quence. Then the priests and the people assembled on the 
 Sunday following over against the Holy Sepulchre — that is, 
 
 "' Ap. Baluz. Miscell. lib. vii. p. U, or vol. ii. p. 84, ed. Mansi. 
 
72 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 in the space between it and Calvary — and questioned them 
 of their faith and creed. They replied that their faith was 
 that of the Eoman Church, but that they knew that in their 
 mode of saying the doxology, the hymn ' Glory to Grod,' and 
 the Lord's Prayer, they used expressions which were not found 
 in the Grreek. And that in the creed they spoke of the Holy 
 Ghost as proceeding from the Father and the Son, which was 
 the reason why John had called them heretics. This ex- 
 planation of theirs had not given satisfaction, or at, least had 
 failed to allay the excitement. They defended themselves to 
 the pope by saying, that one of their number, Leo, before 
 leaving the west had heard the creed so sung in the imperial 
 chapel, and that Charlemagne had even made them presents 
 of a homily of S. Gregory, and the rule of S. Benedict, where 
 the same expressions occurred ; and that it was so likewise in 
 the creed of S. Athanasius. They acknowledge that it was 
 not so in the Greek, and therefore they beg his holiness to 
 communicate with the emperor, and then instruct them how 
 to act for the future. 
 
 Leo forwarded their letter to Charlemagne forthwith, en- 
 closed in a short one of his own, in which he mentions having 
 heard subsequently from Thomas patriarch of Jerusalem, 
 advising that he should commend them to the emperor. 
 ' We have sent them,' he says, ' a profession of the orthodox 
 faith, which should be held stedfast and inviolate by all 
 members of our holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. And 
 we forwarded the same likewise to your majesty for perusal. 
 Be pleased to give orders that they may receive kind treat- 
 ment.' His profession of faith ^^^ which is a long one, is 
 stated to be that of the holy Eoman Catholic and Apostolic 
 Church, and is addressed to all the churches of the east. It 
 speaks of the Holy Ghost as proceeding from the Father and 
 the Son in one place ; as proceeding equally from them in 
 another; and at the end of the whole we read: 'Him that 
 believes not according to this faith, the Holy Catholic and 
 Apostolic Church condemns.' This was the strongest and 
 most explicit declaration that had emanated from any pope 
 hitherto, in favour of the views prevalent in the west on the 
 procession. We may postpone enquiring into the circum- 
 stances under which it was drawn from him for the present ; 
 and whether it ever reached the east we are not told. On 
 '" On ■which see more, u. viii. 
 
, CONDUCT OF LEO III. 73 
 
 the other hand, the minutes of his celebrated conference *" 
 \vith the deputies from Aix-la-Chapelle, who came to confer 
 ■with him on the subject by order of Charlemagne, have been 
 preserved equally ; and in them we find him as emphatically 
 declaring against the smallest alteration of the creed used in 
 church. Subsequent reflection decided him to go further 
 still. ' Leo,' says Pagi, ' to show his extreme adherence to 
 antiquity, and in order not to alienate the Greeks, had two 
 silver plates made and affixed to the confession or shrine of 
 S. Peter in the basilica of that name ; on one of which the 
 creed was engraven in Greek, on the other in Latin, and in 
 each case without those words, " and from the Son." He did 
 not approve of that addition to the creed'^^^ — that is, as used 
 in church. The Greeks never forgot that act of Leo during 
 the controversy which ensued. Photius, almost his contem- 
 porary, was among the first to appeal to it, in writing to the 
 metropolitan, of Aquileia.^*® ' I don't know,' said Veccus,*'" 
 patriarch of Constantinople in the thirteenth century, 'what 
 gain this could be to Photius for any schismatical purpose. 
 For the Romans are not unmindful of what Leo designed by 
 those plates or shields. On the contrary, they keep them 
 there hanging up still, and on certain occasions they do not 
 object to read the creed in Greek. Why do they do this 
 unless to show that their orthodoxy consists not in words 
 but in ideas ? If it were not so, they would have probably 
 not hesitated to make the same addition to the text of the 
 Gospel, that they have made to the creed. Whereas they 
 have never ventured upon any such rash act. But when 
 asked, they explain that they so speak of the Spirit pro- 
 ceeding from the Father and the Son, that it should make no 
 difference to say at one time that He proceeds from the 
 Father, and at another from the Father and the Son.' In 
 other words, according to him, they confess that it is a quarrel 
 about nothing after all. But Veccus represented the Latins 
 too amiable by half. Eatramn had a more specious defence to 
 make for them, and it remained literally their stock-argument 
 for the next 600 years. ' The Nicene council .... when 
 it came to the Holy Ghost, said thus : " We believe likewise 
 in the Holy Ghost," ordaining nothing absolutely, more or 
 
 "' Translated by Dr. Neale, Eastern "" § 4. 
 Ch. Introd. toI. ii. p. 1163-7. "' Allat. Greec. Orthod., Tol. i. 
 
 "» Ad Baron. *.t>. 809, n. 7. p. 173. 
 
74 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 less, in reference to His substance or procession. If, there- 
 fore, following the authority of the Nicene council, you are 
 against making any additions at all, remove the clause, " Who 
 proceedeth from the Father, " as it is not contained in the 
 creed of the Nicene council, and then perhaps it may be 
 lawful to remove what the Latins have added, " and from 
 the Son." ' ^*^ But even this, assuming Eatramn to have been 
 acquainted with the facts of. the case, is simple sophistry. 
 The difference was that the words ' who proceedeth from the 
 Father,' are the words of our Lord; and they had been added 
 to the creed by the authority of one general council, and 
 confirmed by another — in each case ratified by the pope. 
 The words ' and from the Son,' were no words at all of our 
 Lord or His Apostles ; and if the truth must be told, were 
 first added to the creed by a secular prince making profession 
 of his faith on his conversion from Arianism.'*^ 
 
 Veccus himself, with all his partiality for the Latins, has 
 preserved a letter of John VIII. of Eome to Photius ; in 
 which the authors of that interpolation in the creed of the 
 Church are denounced as severely as the Greeks themselves 
 have ever been since for rejecting it. At the council of 
 Florence the Greeks certified that they had brought with 
 them a volume containing the acts of the council of Con- 
 stantinople restoring Photius A.D. 879, and the letters of John 
 in his behalf. It was shown the Latins, who could find 
 nothing to say against it ; and, as described, it seems likely 
 to have been the very one brought over to England, from 
 which Beveridge got at the acts of that council in Greek 
 and this epistle.^'" 
 
 ' Your fraternity knows,' said John, ' how the messenger 
 despatched from you to us, who consulted us on the holy 
 creed, found us in the preservation of it intact, as it had 
 been delivered to us from the beginning, without anything 
 added to it, or taken from it ; for we rightly know that heavy 
 condemnation awaits those who presume to do such things. 
 
 '*' Dacher. SpicU. toI. i. p. 63 et Angli j' and another, ' Confictam a. 
 
 seq. ed. de laBarre, lib. ii. 2. Grseculo aliquo Johannis papae nomins 
 
 "" Above p. 67, and below c. vij. hanu epigtolam esse omnino censet.' 
 
 '''° Colet. Cowca. torn, xviii. p. 87-90. Baron. a.d. 859, n. 54 et seq. But 
 
 Mansi prints this letter at tbe end of Beveridge [Synod, ii. ad f.) reprinted 
 
 the Paeudo-synodws Fhotiana, vol. xvii. it ' from the book of John Veccus,' who 
 
 p. 523, having one marginal note: was a convert to the Latin side, and 
 
 ' Grseea sunt ex editione Beyeregii wrote against Photius and his opinions. 
 
LETTEK OF JOHN VIII, 73 
 
 Wherefore we signify once more to your reverence, that con- 
 cerning this addition to the creed— I mean " from the Son " — 
 we give you satisfaction, as we not only do not say it ourselves, 
 but we likewise condemn those who, in their folly, first dared 
 to say it, as transgressors of the Word of Grod, overthrowers 
 of the theology of Christ our Lord and of the holy fathers, 
 who in synod assembled handed down to us the holy creed; and 
 we place them in company with Judas, because they have not 
 been afraid to do the same deeds as he : not, indeed, because 
 they delivered our Lord to death bodily, but because they 
 have rent with schism the faithful people of God, who are 
 His members, and torn them asunder. Wherefore we con- 
 sign them to the doom of eternal fire ; or rather, like Judas, 
 they have pronounced their own doom.' By stipulating 
 expressly, towards the end of his letter, that those who were 
 using the interpolated form of the creed at that time should 
 not be treated harshly, but only convinced, in mildness, of 
 their error, he shows that its author was no partisan or 
 hypocrite, but the same John who summoned to Eome the 
 apostles of the Slavonians, SS. Cyril and Methodius, accused 
 as heretics by some German bishops, for refusing the inter- 
 polation and condemning the doctrine which it embodied; 
 and then acquitted them on the ground that Eome had not 
 yet herself adopted the interpolation which she tolerated in 
 others.^^' At that date, ' the whole Gallican Church,' says 
 ^neas, bishop of Paris, ' chanted the creed at mass every 
 
 Sunday ' with the article relating to the Holy Ghost inter- 
 polated.2»2 
 
 After this there was no more said on the addition to the 
 creed, or the doctrine involved in it, for above 150 years, 
 as I have before shown ; nor, in fact, had there been any 
 disputes about either till the creed as interpolated had been 
 recited in public at Jerusalem, where the jurisdiction of the 
 Greek patriarch of Jerusalem was uncontested and supreme, 
 or in Bulgaria, where the jurisdiction of the patriarch of 
 Constantinople was sought to be undermined. Leo III. had 
 soon quieted the first of these outbursts by his extreme can- 
 dour and moderation. Nicholas I., justly incensed with 
 Photius upon other grounds, had, in a hasty moment, made 
 the second of them more formidable by misrepresenting it ; 
 
 "' Palmer's Dissert, on the Orthod. "" Ap. Dacher, ibid. c. 93. 
 Com. p. 16. 
 
76 HISTORY OF THE SCHISM. 
 
 for he had told the bishops of France that the Greek empe- 
 rors accused the Latins of denying that the Holy Grhost 
 proceeds from the Father.^^a Writers in France were called 
 upon, accordingly, to refute what had never really been 
 written, and which, as soon as the Bulgarian difficulty had 
 been tided over, was forgotten even on the Latin side. Leo 
 IX. — as Leo IIL — maintained the double procession in 
 making any profession of his own faith -^^^ but he received, as 
 of equal orthodoxy, that of Peter of Antioch,255 j^ ^i^ich only 
 the single procession could have been affirmed. Not a word 
 on that head occurred in the letter of the archbishops of 
 Achrida and Constantinople to the bishop of Trani, or in the 
 reply to it by cardinal Humbert, or in his other work against 
 the monk Nicetas. Michael revived it ; but not till he and 
 his clergy had been anathematised by the three legates 
 vaguely as 'figjiters against the Holy Ghost,' on a false 
 charge of having tampered with the creed ; and even then, 
 what he lays most stress upon is, their interpolation of the 
 Creed,^*'' embodied as it had been by that time in the ritual 
 which was supplanting that of the Greek Church in southern 
 Italy— his true ground for remonstrance. And Peter of 
 Antioch, in reply, defending the Latins against all other 
 charges brought against them by his colleague, but that one ; 
 and that one, he adds, may have been due originally to the 
 carelessness of their transcribers or interpreters. '''^ Finally, 
 Theophylact, the celebrated patriarch of Bulgaria, and com- 
 mentator, who wrote between that period and the first 
 crusade, and occupied what was then, in reality, neutral 
 territory (fieraixiJ-iov), was quite content to have the double 
 procession spoken and written about freely, so long as there 
 was no addition to the public creed.^'* 
 
 Here, then, I have done with the divisions of the east 
 and west up to the excommunication of Cerularius by the 
 
 ''' Above p. 14 as in the yersion of thought it should have been, instead of 
 
 Baron, -whieh he says (ibid.n. i2) was giving it as it stood. Nicholas clearly 
 
 supplied him from Paris by Nicholas had his eye on § 21 of the Encyclic. 
 Paber. ' Apud Frodoardum,' he adds, "* Mansi, torn. xix. p. 662. 
 ' qui ista reeenset ita legitur " Quod ^^ Above, p. 55. 
 Spiritum S. a Patri et Ulio procedere "" Ep. ad Pet. Antioch. in Cotel. 
 dieimus.' And so Bertinian, quoted ^" Ap. Cotel. Ecd. Gr. Monum. 
 
 by Pagi, n. 2. But Baron, adheres to vol. ii. p. 161, § 22. 
 to his own reading (n. 64). And the "' Cited by Teocua, ap. Allat. Grac. 
 
 fact is that these annalists corrected Orth. vol. i. p. 218. 
 the text of this letter into what they 
 
HOSTILITIES SUSPENDED. 77 
 
 legates from Rome, and of the legates by him ; and with the 
 causes of them, real or alleged. And the most important of 
 the alleged causes — the only one really that was revived 
 afterwards — ^has been shown to have been virtually surren- 
 dered on both sides, so that by good rights it never ought to 
 have produced any further dispute. For either Adrian I. 
 and the second Nicene council, confirmed and defended by 
 him, were in error, or the Latins accepted the Greek expla- 
 nations of the procession of the Holy Ghost as of equal 
 orthodoxy with their own, once for all. ' And either Leo III. 
 and John VIII. were in error, or any addition to the public 
 creed of the Church was in the one case disallowed, in the 
 other visited with anathema, by Rome. Further, the real 
 causes, which have been pointed out, had disappeared, though 
 they may have left ruffled feelings behind them — in the one 
 case, with the extinction of Latin influence in Bulgaria; 
 in the other, with the extinction of Greek influence in Italy. 
 Both results had been achieved by force of arms and right 
 of conquest, in the tenth century by Basil II., in the ele- 
 venth century by the Normans under Guiscard. Positively 
 there was not a breath of discord stirring for forty years sub- 
 sequently to the return of the legates of Leo IX. from 
 Constantinople sufficient to set a leaf in motion between the 
 rival hierarchies. Old feuds were gradually subsiding into 
 oblivion of themselves, and milder feelings taking their 
 place, when a fresh storm collected, to the ravages of which, 
 in reality, the incurable breach lasting down to our own 
 times is to be ascribed almost exclusively, as will be shown 
 in the ensuing chapter. 
 
78 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 'The schism of the Greeks is not so ancient as is com- 
 monly believed,' says Fleury.*'' The most that can be made 
 even of the anathema pronounced by cardinal Humbert 
 and his colleagues, is that it affected Michael and his party ; 
 for the rest of the citizens, the court, and the emperor, it ex- 
 pressly exempted from its own sentence, and declared ortho- 
 dox. Subsequently to the return of the legates, intercourse 
 between the east and west seems to have been suspended 
 for four years ; but at the end of that time it was resumed, 
 but not as though it had ever been officially broken off, by 
 one of those very legates on his becoming pope — chancellor 
 Frederic, then Stephen IX. Eetirement and meditation in 
 the cloister of Monte Cassino, where through the good offices 
 of his friend and associate, cardinal Humbert,'^" he rose to be 
 abbot, had probably filled him with misgivings of his former 
 conduct, or at least disposed him to counteract its effects. Ac- 
 cordingly, without taking into account that Cerularius had 
 never been deposed, or made any recantation of his opinions, 
 and was still alive, Stephen IX. caused it to be one of the first 
 acts of his pontificate *^' to despatch abbot Desiderius — the 
 future Victor III. — to Constantinople, as apocrisiarius or 
 envoy of the Eoman see with a letter for the emperor, in- 
 troducing him as superior elect of that well-known monas- 
 tery.^^^ Desiderius was to have embarked at Bari, and 
 
 2S9 
 
 44mE Desc. § 8, prefixed to book ing. Cerularius was deposed on the 
 
 Ixxv. of his History. feast of ' the Archangels ' of tliat year. 
 
 '■^ Baron, a.d. 1057, n. 7 et seq. '^'^ Baron. a.d. 1058, n. 1. Chron. S. 
 
 '" He was elected Aug. 2, a.d. 1057, Monas. Casin. (ap. Murat. Ser. Ital. 
 
 and died March 29 of the year follow- Script, vol. iv. p. 418) lib. iii- c. 9 
 
BKSUMPTION OP INTERCOURSE. 79 
 
 Argyrus, whom he found there, would have taken ship with 
 him, had he sailed ; but stress of weather prevented their de- 
 parture ; and meanwhile the pope died. On the news of his 
 death, Desiderius returned in all haste to his convent. About 
 the same time Michael was turned out of his patriarchate 
 by Isaac Comnenus, and ended his days in disgrace soon 
 afterwards.'^' 
 
 Nicholas II., the successor of Stephen, had too much on 
 his hands in Italy, and was too deeply implicated in the poli- 
 tics of the other side, as I shall show presently, to negotiate 
 with Constantinople directly ; but during the first years of 
 the next pontificate a great event came oflp, described by one 
 of our own countrymen, and demonstrating in the most prac- 
 tical manner possible, the feelings with which the clergy and 
 laity in east and west at that date must have regarded each 
 other. 
 
 ' It having been reported through Normandy,' says In- 
 gulphus — the well-known abbotofCroyland^'^*—' that several 
 archbishops of the empire with other earthly potentates were 
 intending, for the good of their souls, to go to Jerusalem in 
 the garb of pilgrims : accordingly, from the household of the 
 count my master, many both of soldiers and clerics, among 
 whom first and foremost was I, with the consent and good- 
 will of the count my master, prepared for the journey ; and 
 passing into Germany, about 30 horsemen or more in number, 
 betook ourselves to my lord of Mayence. Then, being all 
 equipped for travelling, the bishops our lords included, about 
 7,000 in number, after traversing successfully a number of 
 countries, at length we reached Constantinople. There we 
 'performed our reverence to Alexius, its emperor, saw S. 
 
 According to Du Cange (Gloss, i. -v.) nomina legantur, qui post Photium 
 
 the term 'apocrisiarius'=legatus, nun- floruere.' This is a vast admission, 
 
 tins : whose mission was apt to be a but I shall hope to show that even 
 
 lengthened one ; and hence a residence, Michael cannot be styled author of the 
 
 'domus Placidise' was especially set permanent schism. 
 
 apart for him in the imperial city. '"• The account of Lambert ap. Ser. 
 
 *" Baron, ibid. n. 17. Pagi ad 1. Germ. Script, ed. Struve, vol. i. p. 332 
 
 says of him." 'Is sohismatis auctor, et seq. is of course less authentic, 
 
 quod post tot ssecula permansit. Neque He had been at Jerusalem in a.d. 1059, 
 
 enim Photius, vir in rebus theologicis but did not accompany this pilgrim- 
 
 versatus, Grsecse et Latinse ecclesiarum age. He tells only of the fights that 
 
 Bcissurai auctor dici potest : cAm took place between Christians and 
 
 Johannis VIII. indnlgentiA ecclesiae Saracens on the road, and says nothing 
 
 Romanae rcconciliatus fuerit, et in of the pilgrims after their arrival 
 
 Romanis tabulis variorum Grteoorum there. 
 
80 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 Sophia, and kissed numerous other sanctuaries 
 
 At last we arrived at the much longed-for city of Jerusalem, 
 where we were received by its' then patriarch Sophronius, a 
 most honorable man, hoary with age, and most holy in 
 character, with immense thunder of cymbals, and a vast dis- 
 play of lights ; and conducted to the most divine church of 
 the most holy sepulchre in solemn procession, as well of the 
 Syrians as of the Latins. What prayers we made there ; 
 how many tears we shed there ; how many, sighs we poured 
 forth there, Jesus Christ only knows Who is there en- 
 shrined. Afterwards, quitting the most glorious sepulchre of 
 Christ, we were taken to see the other sanctuaries of the city, 
 and beheld with tearful eyes the vast number of churches 
 and oratories in ruins, that sultan Achan had long since 
 destroyed. ' Then and there this enthusiastic company 
 subscribed a sum of money for their restoration. Afterwards, 
 being unable to visit Jordan and its vicinity, through fear of 
 the Arabs, they returned home by way of Apulia and of 
 Eome. This was in a.d. 1064. The behaviour of Sophron- 
 ius to the pilgrims, and their description of him, is surely 
 irreconcileable with the idea that either side regarded the 
 other as aliens or schismatics. The Norman pilgrims re- 
 sponded to the appeal of Sophronius with no more misgiv- 
 ings than the estates of France to the appeal of Elias, a 
 predecessor of Sophronius, and coeval with Photius, for a 
 similar purpose.^^* Alexander II. succeeded Nicholas A.d. 
 1061. Ten years afterwards, Peter bishop of Anagni went 
 as his ' apocrisiarius ' to Constantinople, on the accession 
 of Michael VII., to express his congratulations.''"^ The 
 biographer of Peter calls him in so many words ' apostolic 
 legate,' while the only fact preserved of his embassy is, that 
 he restored the emperor to health by his prayers, and was 
 presented by him in return with costly offerings for his new 
 cathedral.^"' Alexander himself, writing about the same time 
 to another Peter, archbishop of Dalmatia and Sclavonia, after 
 
 2«5 Vide sup. p. 22. praise that he may have bestowed 
 
 -"^ ' Quo quidem officio,' says Baio- upon Cerularius, had been instrumen- 
 
 nius, ' signiflcari videtur eundem im- tal in the deposition of that prelate, as 
 
 peratorem cum Eoman4 ecclesi^ fuisse Pagi had already shown, a.d. 1058, 
 
 conimmiione conjunctum.' a.d. 1071, n. 11. 
 
 n. 23. Pagi thinks otherwise, on the '" Life of Peter, by S. Bruno 
 
 ground of his friendship for Michael of Asti. Max. Bibl. Pat. vol. xix. 
 
 Psellius. ButPsellius, in spite ofany p. 1738. 
 
BESUMPTION OF INTERCOURSE. 81 
 
 enumerating the churches that had heen placed under him, 
 adds : ' The monasteries, as well of the Latins as of the 
 Greeks or Sclavocians, you will likewise overlook ; that you 
 may know that all these form one church, and that you, as 
 bishop, have jurisdiction over all the foregoing places.' ^^^ 
 His complimentary message to Michael VII. produced a simi- 
 lar message from Michael, on the accession of the next pope, 
 Gregory VII., whose grand and comprehensive spirit ex- 
 panded, as if by instinct, to the occasion. His heart bounded 
 within him at the prospect of such moral leverage for his 
 schemes of reform, of such resistless agency for good in all 
 the world, as would be supplied by the energies of a recon- 
 solidated and united Christendom. The hackneyed contro- 
 versies that had disturbed it, were indescribably trifling and 
 insignificant, compared with the blessings of union, in his 
 eyes. As if to impress others with his own sense of their 
 littleness, he selected Dominic patriarch of Venice, who had 
 already figured in them,''^^ to be the bearer of his friendly 
 reply, headed with ' health aud apostolic benediction,' to the 
 Greek emperor.^'" He begins by speaking in high praise of 
 the reverence expressed by Michael for the holy see. He 
 will send his answer by the patriarch instead of confiding it 
 to the monks despatched by Michael — ' in order that he may 
 learn distinctly from your majesty, whether you persevere in 
 the same intentions which you expressed in your letter, and 
 more confidentially through them by word of mouth, and are 
 really desirous of giving effect to what is stated in your 
 message. We, on our part, are not only minded to renew 
 the ancient amity, that existed by Divine ordinance between 
 the Roman church and that of Constantinople its daughter, 
 but, if possible, as far as lies in us, to be at peace with all men. 
 You well know the powerful patronage that the concord of 
 our and your ancestors was to the holy and apostolic see, and 
 to the empire; and no less the damage, which the mutual 
 loss of love on both sides has entailed.' 
 
 Dominic could have hardly reached Constantinople, before 
 Gregory was despatching couriers westwards one after another 
 on the same subject. 'We hope,' he says in his letter to 
 
 '"' Ap. Mansi, torn. xix. p. 994. by this time. 
 
 '«» At least so saj-s Cave, Hist. Lit. ™ Baron, a.d. 1073, n. 50, -wlio says 
 s.T. ; but the correspondent of Peter of that the result of this embassy is un- 
 Antioch must hare been an old man known. We shall see. 
 
 G 
 
82 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 William count of Burgundy, ' that another advantage may 
 arise from hence : namely, that peace having been made with 
 the Normans, we may pass over to Constantinople for the 
 purpose of assisting those Christians, who reduced to extre- 
 mities as they are by incessant attacks of the Saracens, 
 eagerly demand of «s assistance from you. ' ^'^^ His encyclic of 
 the same year addressed to all Christians is still more urgent.''" 
 
 ' "We wish to make known to you, that the bearer of these 
 presents, lately returned from countries beyond the sea, ' 
 arrived at the door of the apostles, and was admitted to 
 audience by us. From him, as from numerous others, we 
 learnt that the pagans had risen in force against the Christian 
 empire, and with fell cruelty laid waste the whole country 
 up to the very walls of Constantinople ; establishing them- 
 selves in it with lawless violence, and slaying Christians by 
 thousands, as so much cattle. Over all which, when we con- 
 sider the magnitude both of the calamity which has befallen 
 the empire, and of the slaughter that has been made of 
 Christians, if we love Grod, and own ourselves Christians, we 
 must deeply mourn ; and not mourn only, but, as the example 
 of our Saviour, and the bond of brotherly love requires of 
 us, be ready to lay down our lives to deliver our brethren : 
 for as He laid down His life for us, so we ought to lay down 
 our lives for them.' 
 
 Emphatic, and unequivocal as these words are, his second 
 encyclic of the year immediately following, is still more out- 
 spoken. 
 
 ' We believe that you have heard already what our will is, 
 and what we have said, as from S. Peter himself, respecting 
 succour to be sent to our brethren, inhabitants of the Con- 
 stantinopolitan empire, on the other side of the water, whom 
 the devil is, by his own instrumentality, trying to turn from 
 the Catholic faith, and by his agents slaughtering daily with 
 cruelty like cattle.' 
 
 ' Christians,' ' our brethren,' for whom ' we ought to lay 
 down our lives,' whom attempts were making ' to turn from 
 the Catholic faith,' should he be content with merely calling 
 upon others to succour them, or rather, should he not go to 
 
 "' Ep. lib. i. 46 (ap. Mansi, torn. xx. =" Ep. lib. ji. 37, written A.n. 
 p. 98), ■written a.d. 1074 probably. 1074 likewise. 
 
RESUMPTION OF INTEKCOUKSE. 83 
 
 their assistance in person ? As he wrote to Henry, king of the 
 Eomans.^'^ 
 
 ' God, I think, or rather I am quite ready to assert, has 
 inspired the Italians, and those who live on the other side of 
 the mountains, to lend a willing ear to my exhortations ; and 
 now upwards of 50,000 men are preparing themselves to set 
 out, if they can, under me as their leader and chief, to fight 
 with the enemies of Grod in battle array, and force their way 
 to the sepulchre of the Lord, guided by Him whose it is. I 
 am the more disposed for it myself, because the church of 
 Constantinople, differing with us on the matter of the Holy 
 Ghost, expects concord of the apostolic see. Almost all the 
 Armenians are goife astray from the Catholic faith ; almost 
 all easterns are waiting to know what the faith of the apostle 
 Peter will decide on the various opinions entertained by them. 
 .... And because our predecessors, whose steps, unworthy 
 though we are, we are desirous of following, have frequently 
 visited those parts for the purpose of confirming the Catho- 
 lic faith, so we, aided by the prayers of the faithful, if 
 Christ permit .... hold ourselves constrained to set out 
 thither for the sake of the same faith, and of protecting 
 Christians. But inasmuch it is a matter requiring great 
 counsel and aid from those who have both to give, should God 
 permit of my commencing it, I seek counsel, and if you 
 choose, aid of you besides ; for should I, by the blessing of 
 God, actually go thither, to you, under God, I leave the 
 Eoman church, that you may both have the guardianship of 
 her, as of a holy mother, and defend her honor.' 
 
 So wrote Hildebrand to Henry IV. a.d. 1075, at which 
 time church and state were on the best of terms. And 
 Gregory, full of his purpose of visiting Constantinople, ad- 
 dressed another characteristic letter to the archbishop of the 
 Armenians in Phrygia, by way of prelude to further and more 
 extended negotiations. He begins by giving him his full title 
 of archbishop of Synnada, calls him his brother in Christ, and 
 sends him health and apostolic benediction. The errors of 
 the Armenian body supply matter for gentle expostulation ; 
 but their use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist is highly 
 commended. 
 
 ' Knowing as we do that oblations are made with unleavened 
 
 "' Ep. lib. ii. 31, written a.d. 1075. 
 G 2 
 
84 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 bread in your church,^'* and that it is, on this account, branded 
 with heresy, but only by those G reeks who are uneducated, ^'-^ 
 we are quite willing that you should express astonishment at 
 their silly talk ; but do not by any means abandon your cus- 
 tom. For, as you are aware, you are not the only persons 
 calumniated on that score; but upon the same grounds, 
 though with more injustice, they go on inveighing against 
 
 the holy Eoman Church And so to justify their use 
 
 of leaven, they are perpetually sneering and making jests 
 at us. But we, whose practice is proved to be in strict keep- 
 ing with the precedent of our Lord, neither censure nor revile 
 theirs: saying with the apostle that "to the pure all things 
 are pure." And now we have said enough to expose, and to 
 warn you against, Grreek temerity .'^"^ 
 
 What Gregory would have effected, had he visited Con- 
 stantinople, had he never quarrelled with Henry, it may be 
 idle to conjecture ; but as there seems every probability that 
 he would have demeaned himself differently from Vigilius, 
 sojourning there at the time of the fifth council, but astounding 
 and perplexing everybody by his tergiversations, so there is 
 equal reason for supposing he would have negotiated with 
 the Greeks very differently from cardinal Humbert and his 
 colleagues. Everywhere he speaks of them as Christians, as 
 brethren, as holding the Catholic faith, as differing in opinion, 
 but waiting to be brought into agreement with him, as not to 
 be made responsible in a body for the calumnies which igno- 
 rant persons among them circulated, as cruelly treated, and 
 as having the strongest claims upon their western brethren 
 for aid and sympathy. That his relations with Michael were 
 of the most amicable description is proved by the readiness 
 with which he excommunicated the usurper who displaced 
 him A.D. 1078, and the letter which he afterwards ad- 
 dressed to the bishops of Apulia and Calabria in his favour; 
 but unfortunately by that time Gregory had far too much on 
 his hands in the west to be able to attend more to the east. 
 Hence, even the steps which he took in behalf of Michael 
 were based upon erroneous information. His successor Victor 
 III. sat barely four months, or he might possibly have made 
 
 "» According to M.Pitzipios.S.Gre- ™ 'Ob hoe a Gracis duntaxat 
 
 gory, bishop of Armenia towards the imperitis quasi de hseresi reprebendi.' 
 end of the third centmy, introduced ""^ Ep. lib. viii. 1, ■vpritteu probably 
 
 the custom there. Part i. p. 125. the same year. 
 
BESUMPTION OF INTEKCOURSE, 85 
 
 up for the loss of his own embassy. Urban II. had not been 
 elected a month, before his attention was drawn to the east ; 
 and as it is only to be found in a curious passage of histoiy 
 not generally known, I shall transcribe the story as it stands. 
 Urban's election took place on March 12, a.d. 1088. In the 
 course of the April following, he suddenly quitted Terracina, 
 where he was staying, and arrived at Traina in Sicily, for 
 the purpose of conferring with count Eoger, then besieging 
 Butera, but who came off as promptly to meet the pope. 
 Their interview is described by the historian of count Eoger, 
 and of his brother Robert, as follows : 
 
 ' On the morrow at early dawn they came together to talk 
 over the matter that had brought his holiness thither. The 
 pope had sent some time previously,'^' through Nicholas, 
 Greek abbot of Crypta Ferrata, and one deacon Eoger, a 
 paternal expostulation to Alexius, emperor of Constantinople, 
 in consequence of his having obliged the Latin Christians re- 
 sident in his territory'*''* — those parts of it probably which had 
 been won back from the Normans after the death of Gruiscard, 
 and departure of Bohemond — 'to abstain from celebrating 
 with unleavened bread, and use leavened in their oblations, 
 like the Greeks — a practice quite alien from our rite.' The 
 emperor had received his remonstrance in all humility, and 
 invited him by the same messengers, in letters on sheets of 
 gold, to come to Constantinople, accompanied by learned and 
 catholic men on the Latin side, and hold a council there ; to 
 the end that after discussion between the Greeks and Latins, 
 some common agreement might be established for doing away 
 with that anomaly in the church, of Greeks offering with 
 leavened bread, and Latins with unleavened ; and for secur- 
 ing uniformity of practice in the one Church of God. He 
 himself, he added, was all for a catholic discussion; and 
 whatever might be deficient as agreed upon in the joint pre- 
 sence of Greeks and Latins, by authentic suffrage — whether 
 to celebrate with leaven or without it — he would be ready to 
 observe from that time forth. He further proposed a year 
 and a half as the term within which the pope should arrive. 
 The count, on the other hand, counselled his going, that a 
 
 »" ' Ante paucos dies,' probably the of Ostia, between the death cf Victor 
 
 reason why this transaction is referred III. and his own election, 
 
 by Pagi to a.d. 1089 (ad Baron, ibid. "' Vide inf. p. 129. 
 n. 9). But he may have sent as bishop 
 
86 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 schism in the Church of that magnitude might be terminated. 
 But obstacles were raised by the adversaries of the holy 
 church of God, who held Eome, and persisted in their hos- 
 tility to him, that prevented his journey.' ^'^ 
 
 We turn over another page, and find the horizon covered 
 with streaks of the dawn of the real schism. Yet, as in the 
 physical world, our senses are sorely puzzled to define the 
 exact point where light ends and shade begins, so here it 
 would require the most subtle analysis possible to determine 
 when or how friendship dissolved into aversion, and pity was 
 transformed into bitter hate. In one word, they quarrelled 
 mainly because they professed to love, and in endeavouring 
 to make proof of their amity they became foes. It is with 
 the Church as with the world. The regenerate man, not- 
 withstanding the Divine principle within him, is man all 
 over. Time shows what has been, and what has not been 
 attempted upon right principles ; and motives, however con- 
 cealed or unknown, are brought to light by the issues of 
 events, on which they have acted as unseen causes. That the 
 author of the Imitation of Christ was animated by no mere 
 spirit of writing for fame, is the irresistible influence sug- 
 gested by the undying popularity that has attached to his 
 work. The permanence of the religious families of S. 
 Dominic, S. Francis, and S. Benedict, is the noblest testi- 
 mony to the presence of pure unsullied intentions in the 
 hearts of their founders. The miserable failure of one of the 
 grandest and outwardly most imposing movements recorded 
 in history, shows, that underneath its chivalry, devotion, and 
 zeal, were concealed some of the worst passions and motives 
 that disgrace man, and that these worked strongest in both 
 shaping its destinies and bringing about its results. It is 
 easy to see that I am now speaking of the Crusades ; but the 
 point which I am most anxious to bring out in connexion 
 with them, is that their character at the outset was deter- 
 mined by Norman influence, and that they were carried out 
 upon Norman principles. 
 
 Viewed in themselves and in their popular acceptation and 
 intention, they were a passionate outburst of overflowing 
 sympathy from one part of Christendom for another, exactly 
 answering to those feelings which sway loyal inhabitants of 
 
 "" Gaufred. Malat. Hist. iv. c. 13. ap. Cams. toI. i. p. 23-t. 
 
THEORY OP THE CRUSADES. 87 
 
 any country to come to the rescue, when their countrymen — 
 no matter how far ofiF — are attacked, or trampled under foot, 
 by strangers. The east had now and then assisted the west 
 before under similar circumstances, and had Jerusalem been 
 situated in the west, and the west, instead of the east, been 
 overrun with Saracens, there is every reason to think that 
 the east would not have looked on in indifference, possessed 
 of the means of succouring and avenging its distressed bre- 
 thren. But it was just for that reason, because the feeling 
 was a passionate one, that it required to be placed under the 
 strictest control, and to be kept isolated and distinct from 
 others. It was quite strong enough in itself for all practical 
 purposes ; it wanted no other to be mixed up with it to aug- 
 ment its force. Now, there were two moot points pending at the 
 same time between east and west. The first was the settle- 
 ment of some real or supposed differences of doctrine and 
 discipline, which had been twice made the excuse for dis- 
 turbing their peace ; but had never on either side been fairly 
 discussed. The second was the cry for assistance, originating 
 in present emergencies. The first, as it was the oldest, 
 claimed and should have had precedence. The peaceful 
 arrival in the imperial city of the magnanimous Hildebrand, 
 or of Urban II., attended by distinguished theologians of the 
 stamp of Lanfranc or S. Anselm, might, and probably would, 
 have settled once for all and for ever those disputed points, 
 of no grea,t consequence in themselves, which had supplied 
 unctuous matter for so long, ready to be thrown upon the 
 flames, whenever kindled or resuscitated by other causes. 
 Both pontiffs had received, and had only been prevented by 
 untoward circumstances from accepting, invitations for that 
 pvirpose. But while Eome delayed visiting Constantinople, 
 the preaching of Peter the Hermit supervened ; and instead 
 of a Christian pontiff at the head of a few grave prelates, 
 there defiled before the walls of that city host after host, in 
 rapid succession, of armed masses, as lawless in conduct as 
 unstable of purpose, resembling each other principally, by 
 the confusion of tongues and of ideas that reigned among 
 them all, and their utter want of subordination to any com- 
 mon head. Harmony of doctrine in church, and help against 
 the foe in state, was to be measured out to the Greek empire 
 through their instrumentality, and no other. The pope had 
 empowered and encouraged them to supply the one — it was 
 
88 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 his only alternative between giving or withholding it alto- 
 gether — and they decided the other bit by bit in their own 
 time and in their own way. They never proceeded — they 
 never had any idea of proceeding — according to the canons; 
 but went to work in true Norman fashion. What that fashion 
 was, we need not go beyond our own history to ascertain. 
 One of the first acts of William the Conqueror in England 
 was to depose Stigand, archbishop of Canterbury, and every 
 other ecclesiastic of high or low degree, that was obnoxious 
 to his rule; and supply their places from among his own 
 people. It was his way of acting throughout in church and 
 state. Neither their orthodoxy nor their canonical rights 
 were of the smallest weight in his eyes, as Hoveden^*" remarks. 
 The synod of Winchester, held by the legates of Alexander II. 
 in A.D. 1070, had, in reality, no voice in the matter, except 
 in giving effect to his behests. Had the legates demurred, 
 they would have been packed off out of the kingdom forth- 
 with. Even Hildebrand received a reply from William, 
 which showed that the haughty Conqueror of England would 
 not allow of the smallest trifling with his view of his own 
 prerogatives.^*' Pass over to Italy and Sicily, and we have 
 scattered hints of the same thing doing ; but go to the east, 
 and from the earliest commencement of their rule to their 
 final expulsion, we find it acted upon there by the crusaders, 
 one and all, as a rule without exception. 
 
 The true key, then, to the actual history of the Crusades 
 lies embedded in that of our Norman forefathers. They 
 were overrunning Italy on the south, as they had overrun 
 France and Flanders on the north ; and they aspired to 
 conquer Constantinople, and the east generally, as they had 
 conquered England. They had themselves been conquered 
 by Christianity, but they never allowed it the same mastery 
 over their own spirits, that they insisted upon exercising over 
 all others whom they had themselves subjugated. To the 
 supreme head of the Church they could be, and were fre- 
 quently, respectful allies or dangerous foes. And their alli- 
 ance was never otherwise durable, than as it left wide scope 
 for freedom of action on their part towards the rest of the 
 world. At one time they were his saviours and protectors : 
 
 ^ Vide note 110 to Christendom's ^" Given at length by Collier, £. fl! 
 Divisions, part i. p. 50. Becords, No. 12. 
 
NOKMAN PRACTICE. 89 
 
 at another time he excommunicated them ; at another time 
 they compromised him hy acts, which he could not in con- 
 science uphold, or in safety cancel. 
 
 To resume their history, where we left off. From the days 
 of their triumph over the mercenaries of Leo IX., and of 
 their peace with him, their sway became paramount in 
 southern Italy, to the discomfiture both of the Greeks and 
 of Argyrus and his following. It was no longer to him but 
 to Eobert Gruiscard, that the abbot of Monte Cassino applied 
 for safe conduct, to get back from Bari, in a.d. 1058.^'^ The 
 year afterwards Nicholas II. confirmed Kichard, prince of 
 Capua, and Eobert Guiscard, duke of Apulia, Calabria, and 
 Sicily; having received from each of them previously an oath 
 of fealty to the Eoman Church, and covenanted with both for 
 a yearly payment of twelve pence for every yoke of oxen in 
 their dominions.^*' That same year Nicholas deposed John, 
 bishop of Trani, or Trajanopolis, in Apulia, the correspon- 
 dent of Michael Cerularius and Leo, as much probably for his 
 Norman antipathies, as for his Greek leanings. And there, 
 or in its vicinity, was held the earlier synod of that year 
 against clerical marriages, which of course abounded there, 
 from the priests being of the Greek Church, evidently for the 
 purpose of effecting a clearance of them. 
 
 Hilo regione palam se conjugio sociabant 
 Kamque sacerdotee, Levitse, clericus omnis, 
 
 says the national poet,^^^ notably leaving out bishops. Then 
 he adds significantly, 
 
 Finita synodo, muttorum papa rogatu 
 Eobertum donat Nicolaus honore ducali. 
 
 Bari was now the only town in Apulia left under Greek rule. 
 
 "2 Vide sup. p. 107. componit, eosque Tectigales EomaBte 
 
 '" Baron, ajj. 1059, n. 71, and sedi redditos de Capuano Prineipatu, 
 
 Chron. S. Mon. Cos. lib. iii. 16. The et Dueatu ApuHee . . legitime titulo (!) 
 
 oath made this singular distinction : investivit, cim usque adhuc jure tan- 
 
 ' Ego Eobertus, Doi gratis et sancti tixm belli possedissent : et _ jdcirc6 
 
 Petri, dux Apulite et Calabrise ; et, auctor noster ait " confirmavit," hoe 
 
 utroque subveniente, futwws Sicilies, est, utcunque qnseeita iis firmavit.' 
 
 ab h4c hor4 et deinceps ero fidelis Here again the pope gave away what 
 
 sanctffi Romanse ecelesise, et tibi do- had never really belonged to him or 
 
 mino meo Nicolao papse.' Muratori his predecessors, 
 says on it : ' Pertaesus bellorum Pon- ^'* Guil. Apul. ap. Cams. torn. i. 
 
 tifex, quae Nortmanni cum ecdesifi, p. 110. 
 gerebant, pacem tandem cum illis 
 
90 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 It was invested A.d. 1068 by these zealous vassals of the 
 holy see, and its garrison, after resisting them bravely for 
 three years, at length capitulated to Eobert Gruiscard ' on the 
 15th of April, a.d. 1071, abandoning for ever the last relics 
 of the authority of Eoman empire of the east in Italy.'^^^ 
 With the fall of Bari coincided, in point of time, the em- 
 bassy from Alexander 11. to the youthful emperor Michael 
 VII., designed possibly to moderate any resentment and 
 counteract the idea of any reprisals for its loss in imperial 
 circles; Later, as we shall see, it became the head-quarters 
 of .Urban II., who, joining Canosa to it, raised it to the 
 dignity of an archiepiscopal see,*'^ consecrated there with his 
 own hands, at the request of Eoger and Bohemond, sons of 
 • Gruiscard, its first archbishop, who was a friend of theirs, 
 held there finally the first council, at which the Latin and 
 Grreek views on the procession of the Holy Grhost were once 
 more sought to be harmonised, and in which our great arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury, S. Anselm, bore such distinguished 
 part. According to his express testimony it had not even 
 then unlearnt its bias in favour of the Grreek view.^*' Gregory 
 VII. had no great faith in the Normans, as he has now and 
 then testified in tiis letters, though they often proved his best 
 friends. He began by excommunicating Guiscard A.d. 
 1074,^^^ but on that prince taking a fresh oath of fealty to 
 him three years afterwards, in return for the stipulations of 
 annual payments and eternal allegiance contained in it, he 
 confirmed him in the possession of Amalfi, Salerno, and 
 part of the march of Fermo,^*^ the efiect of which was to 
 make the Normans masters of southern Italy from sea to sea. 
 The next year Nicephorus was excommunicated by Gregory 
 for having dethroned Michael,^" and one consequence of that 
 act was that the vassals of the pontiff had their thoughts 
 turned towards the east. It was not long before they had 
 concocted a plausible excuse for intervening in its affairs. 
 A.D. 1080, a fugitive monk appeared in Calabria, professing to 
 be the deposed emperor Michael, and imploring assistance 
 
 '^^ Finlay, Bt/z. Emp. toI. ii. p. 45. faventem, in Barensi civitate sens! 
 
 Comp. Pagi ad. Baron, a.d. 1068, n. 9. nolle sentire.' 
 
 ■■"" Baron, a.d. 1089, n. 5. Comp. "' In a Eoman synod. Mansi, torn. 
 
 Eohrbacker, E. H. B. Ixvi. vol. xiv. xx. p. 402. 
 
 p. 412. 289 Ibid. p. 313. 
 
 2" De Process. Sp. S. c. 5. ' Quod »» Vide snp. p. 117. 
 quentam episcopum, Graecis forsitan 
 
KOKMAN PRACTICE. 91 
 
 from Gruiscard as well as Gregory.^'' Gregory, taken in by 
 him, as Pagi says, or more probably too much occupied with 
 other matters to enquire into his case, wrote to the bishops 
 of Apulia and Calabria in his behalf, and there left him. 
 Guiscard, who had in all probability instigated the imposture, 
 prepared for war. His daughter Helena had been engaged 
 to Constantine, the son of Michael, so that he had a private 
 besides a public wrong to avenge. ' Mighty was the arma- 
 ment gathered at Otranto,' says Sir F. Palgrave, ' and Peter 
 the Frenchman, the hermit of a later day, is mentioned with 
 considerable emphasis as having been most useful to the 
 illustrious Guiscard^ *^^ The results of that campaign are well 
 known. Guiscard, carrying the impostor about with him, 
 reduced the towns of Epirus, one after another, by assault, 
 till he was brought to bay before Durazzo. There he at 
 length encountered and defeated the forces of Alexius Com- 
 nenus, who had displaced Nicephorus, and by his victory 
 decided the fall of that city, Feb. 8, 1082. He had scarcely 
 got possession of it before he had to hurry back to Italy in 
 defence of the 'great pontiff,' his master, 'the hero,' as he 
 has been most fittingly called by one well competent to sit in 
 judgment upon character, ' of Latin Christendom,' ^^^ threat- 
 ened by Henry, who had previously become the friend of 
 Alexius. Leaving his son Bohemond behind him to complete 
 what he had commenced in the east, Guiscard accomplished, 
 with little ado, the rescue of the pope, the retreat of Henry, 
 and the sack of Eome, which, in the words of Mr. P^inlay, 
 ' he plundered like another Genseric' ''* Thus, in less time 
 than three years, the son of Tancred of Hauteville, en- 
 joyed the glory of delivering the pope, and of compelling 
 the two emperors of the east and west to fly before his vic- 
 torious arms.^^^ Death overtook him a.d. 1085, after de- 
 feating the Venetian fleet before Corfu, on his way back to 
 the east, where Bohemond had not been so successful as to 
 have secured a footing there independently of his father, nor 
 yet so unsuccessful as to be deterred from .any future schemes 
 of aggression on his own account. He had, in fact, just seen 
 
 "' Mansi, torn. xx. p. 319 Ep. Greg. p. 477. 
 
 VII. lib. viji. 6. Comp. Pagi ad Baron. =■" Ibid. p. 480. 
 
 A.D. 1081, n. 6-7 and ibid. a.d. 1080, ™ Byz. Emp. vol. ii. p. 89-100. 
 
 n. 6. "^ Gibbon, o. Ivi. 
 
 -'- England and Normandy, vol. iv. 
 
92 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 enough of the east to covet more, and on returning to Italy 
 he found that his father had actually reserved no part of his 
 dominions in Italy for him. By a subsequent arrangement, 
 indeed, with his brother Eoger, he became prince of Tarento ; 
 but ' Tarento was the advanced post towards Grreece.' ^'^ 
 
 Urban II. succeeded to the tiara within three years of the 
 death of Gruiscard. He 'was a Champennois either from 
 Eheims or Chatillon-sur-Marne, his father being Eucher, 
 seigneur of Langry.' ^^' Thus he was of the same country 
 with Ebles, count of Eoncy in Champagne, who had married 
 Sybilla, daughter of Guiscard and sister of Bohemond, and 
 to whose family Anna, wife of Peter afterwards called the 
 Hermit, belonged. Naturally enough, therefore, on his elec- 
 tion he found all the Norman brotherhood, Eoger Bursa 
 duke of Calabria, Bohemond duke of Bari and Tarento, 
 and Eoger, their uncle, count of Sicily, his friends.^'* He be- 
 came umpire of their disputes amongst themselves, and pro- 
 moter of their joint interests, and they were disposed to unite 
 cordially for the furtherance of any cause which he espoused. 
 For a time their cares were to people Italy and Sicily in 
 church and state with their kin, as the Conqueror had 
 peopled England. Urban waived etiquette *^' to come to Bari 
 and consecrate Elias, ci-devant monk of La Cava, near 
 Salerno, their friend, its first archbishop. He had already 
 summoned S. Bruno from the Grande Chartreuse in France 
 to his own assistance on becoming pope, and this countryman 
 of his and of theirs was pressed to accept the archbishopric 
 of Eeggio, and then on refusing it, settled in the adjacent 
 diocese of Squillace, as head of the monastery of de la 
 Torre, which he founded there.^"" Eobert de Grantmenil, 
 abbot of S. Evroul in Normandy, being exiled by his sove- 
 reign because successively abbot of Venusia, abbot of S. 
 Euphemia, and at length, on the extinction of the Greek suc- 
 cession there, bishop or archbishop of Palermo.^"' Guitmond, 
 
 ^' England and Normandy, vol. iv. ™ Butler's ijwas of the Saints, Oct.6. 
 
 p. 480. '"1 England and Normandy, vol. iv. 
 
 "" Ibid. p. 489. p.. SOU).. ' S. Euphemia, the celebrated 
 
 ^°' ' In Apulii omnes Nortbmanni conveat of that name in Calabria, not 
 
 Catholico papse concorditfer favebant : 20 miles from Cosenza, the very spot 
 
 varum inter se tniculentir dissidebant,' of the detention, though not the death, 
 
 says Orderio Vital, ap. Pagi ad Baron, of Tracy, is thus, as it would appear, 
 
 i.D. 1088, n. 4. justly placed by the old story.' — Me- 
 
 ^" Vide sup. p. 90, and Eohrbaoker morials of Canterbury, murder of 
 
 as referred to there. Becket, p. 112, 4th edition. 
 
NORMAN PEACTICE. 93 
 
 another immigrant and compatriot, was named by Urban 
 bishop of Aversa.""' Sometimes, indeed, it happened that 
 they bore with the natives through policy. Duke Eoger, on 
 one occasion, coming to Eossano in Calabria, found the citi- 
 zens in arms againt him. The year before, contrary to the 
 wishes of its Greek inhabitants who constituted the majority, 
 and had the chief power there, he had, on the death of the 
 Greek archbishop, nominated a Latin successor to that 
 office. On finding that he had never taken the oaths or been 
 consecrated, Roger now disappointed the Latins, and by giv- 
 ing the Greeks leave to elect another archbishop of their 
 own, obtained the surrender of the town.'"^ But it was in 
 Sicily that they dRstinguished themselves most by their 
 ' church-restorations,'' as abbe Rohrbacker calls them.'"* There 
 Eoger, its illustrious count, made ample provision for himself 
 and friends, high and low. Robert bishop of Traina and 
 Messina, Gerlandus bishop of Agrigentum or Girgenti, and 
 Stephen bishop of Mazzara, were his near relations. Beren- 
 ger monk of S. Evroul and Ansger prior of S. Euphemia, 
 became bishops of Venusia and Catana respectively, and 
 Eoger, dean of the church of Traina, bishop of Syracuse. 
 Monasteries grew up in great abundance, due to Norman 
 beneficence, on either side of the straits. But the ' chef 
 d'ceuvre ' of the new creations was reserved for Roger and his 
 descendants in perpetuity. How, indeed, could Urban have 
 refused him anything ? Accordingly, July 5, a.d. 1098, came 
 forth the celebrated bull,'"' creating him and his lawful heirs 
 by a privilege that can only be called Norman, and by a pre- 
 cedent that has never been copied, legates in Sicily for ever 
 of the apostolic see ; binding its author never to employ any 
 other against their will, and to transact all that he should 
 ever require to do through a legate, through them. A me- 
 morable instance, indeed, of what Normans could extort from 
 a pope, and destined to act as an incubus upon many a pope 
 afterwards, yet so vigorously maintained as an heir-loom, that 
 it could prevent the greatest of ecclesiastical historians, car- 
 
 '" Ibid. 500, and Gauf. Malat. as below, 
 
 "" Gaufred. Makt. lib. iv. c. 22, ap. u. 4. 
 
 Cams. vol. i. '°* Gaufred Malat. (ap. Carus, Tol. i.) 
 
 "'* E. H. vol. xiv. p. 408-11. Comp. lib. iv. u. 29. Its authenticity is no 
 
 England and Xormandy,vol. iv. p. 498- longer questioned. 
 
94 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 dinal Baronius, from becoming pope 500 years afterwards, 
 for disputing its title.^"" 
 
 In the full spirit of that Sicilian monarchy, Bohemond and 
 his hosts embarked for Jerusalem. Their church-restorations 
 in Syria, in Palestine, and the metropolis of the east even- 
 tually, were carried out as they had been in England, Italy, 
 and Sicily, to the utter subversion of all ecclesiastical law, 
 and yet they went on unchecked. To say the truth, there 
 was as little means of resisting them, as ambition to refute 
 them. Their principles were in complete accordance with 
 feudal maxims, and all Europe, sooner or later, came to be a 
 consenting party to them. The Crusades themselves, so far, 
 were the joint-offspring of feudalism and Mohammedanism, 
 and passed only by adoption into the Christian family. They 
 had no countenance from the Old, and still less if possible, 
 from the New Testament. The wars between the Israelites 
 and Canaanites were not waged for making proselytes, or 
 for extending the worship of the true Grod. The abomi- 
 nations of the Canaanites drew down vengeance upon them 
 from heaven ; and to the Israelites was assigned the task of 
 punishing them, together with the right of succession as 
 lords of the soil, from whence the others were to be cleared 
 off. But there was no general commission given to the seed 
 of Abraham to exterminate idolaters elsewhere, or to make 
 proselytes beyond their ovm border. They were not even 
 commanded to compel the adoption of their religion by those 
 who survived, in one way or another, the carnage of its antient 
 inhabitants. It was, in reality, the Koran that supplied 
 medieval preachers with the text on which the Crusades were 
 preached, and Mohammed whose sermon and whose style 
 was copied. 
 
 ' I, the last of the prophets, am sent with the sword ! Let 
 those who promulgate my faith enter into no argument nor 
 discussion, but slay all who refuse obedience to the law. 
 Whoever fights for the true faith, whether he fall or conquer, 
 will assuredly receive a glorious reward.' And ao-ain : ' The 
 sword is the key of heaven and hell ; all who draw it in the 
 cause of faith will be rewarded vnth temporal advantages; 
 every drop shed of their blood, every peril and hardship 
 
 '" See his arguments on the Sicilian monarchy. They are given a.d. 1097 
 n. 18 et seq. 
 
NOKMAN PBACTICE. 
 
 95 
 
 endured by them, -will be registered on high as more merito- 
 rious than even fasting or praying. If they fall in battle, 
 their sins ivill at once be blotted out, and they will be trans- 
 ported to paradise, there to revel in eternal pleasures in the 
 arms of black-eyed houris.'^" These were the doctrines 
 which pilgrims to the east brought back with them, as much 
 as the pointed arch, as arabesque decorations common to 
 church and mosque, to be first inculcated in the romance of 
 Charlemagne, and his twelve peers,'"' and at length and un- 
 awares parodied in the indulgences of the Church.'"^ It is a 
 
 '"' Life, ty Irving, c. xvi. 
 
 "" ' CompOBed about thi» time,' says 
 Palgrave. — England and Normandy, 
 vol. iv. p. 496. 
 
 SOD ■ Pj-q stipendio orat indulgentia 
 peceatoi'um proposita ' is the comment 
 upon Urban's speecli in Mansi, torn. 
 XX. p. 827. Can. ii. of the council of 
 Clermont (ib. p. 816) is ' Quicunque 
 pro sol4 devotione, non pro honoris 
 vel pecuniae adeptione, ad liberandam 
 ecclesiam Dei Jerusalem profcctus 
 fuerit, iter illud pro omui poenitentift 
 reputetur.' This is moderate, and on 
 the head of penance it is but fair to 
 remember -what the 6th canon of the 
 Boman synod imder Gregory VII. in 
 A.D. 1078, and renewed apparently by 
 the council of Placentia (Mansi, ibid. 
 p. 510 and p. 814) says of false pe- 
 nance : ' Falsas pconitentias dicimus, 
 quae non secundum auctoritatem sanc- 
 torum Patrum pro qualitate crirainura 
 imponuntur. IdeAque quicunque miles, 
 vel negotiator, vel alicui officio dedi- 
 tus, quod sine peccato exerceri non 
 possit, (si) culpis gravioribus irretitus 
 ad poenitentiam venerit, vel qui bona 
 alterius iiyusti detinet, vel qui odium 
 in corde gerit, (et) recognoscat se 
 veram pcenitentiam non posse peragere, 
 per quam ad teternam vitam valeat 
 pervenire, nisi (al. etsi) arma deponat, 
 ulteriusque non ferat, nisi consilio 
 religiosorum episcoporum pro defeu- 
 dendft justitiA, vel negotium derelin- 
 quat, vel officium deserat, et odium 
 ex corde dimittat, bonaque quae injusti 
 abstulit, restituat. Ne (al. nee) tamen 
 desperet : interim quicquid boni facere 
 poterit, hortamur ut faciat, ut omni- 
 
 potens Deus eor illius illustret ad 
 poenitentiam.' This is certainly not 
 due to the Koran. But, then, what 
 are the comments on canon 2 of the 
 council of Clermont, suj^lied by 
 Mansi ? ' Canonis 2. sententiam his 
 verbis Ordericus Vitalis expressit, post 
 relatam Urban! orationem, qu4 fideles 
 ad transmarinam expeditionem excita- 
 bat. " Providus vero papa omnes, 
 qui congrui arma ferre poterant, ad 
 helium contra inimicos Dei excivit, ot 
 poenitentes cunctos ex UlA hard, qu4 
 crucem Domini sumerent, ex auctori- 
 tate Dei, ab omnibus peccatis suis 
 absolvit, et ab omni gravedine, quae sit 
 in jejuniis, aliisque macerationibus 
 carnis pii relaxavit. Consideravit 
 enim perspicacit&r vir prudens et benig- 
 nus archiater' (la-rpds, i.e. 'chirurgue,' 
 Du Cange) ' quod hi, qui peregri pro- 
 flscerentur, in via multis diutinisque 
 discriminibus saepissimj vexarentur, 
 et multimodis casibus laetis sen tristi- 
 bus quotidii augerentur, pro quibus 
 benevoli vemiJae Christi a cunctis 
 culparum sordibus expiarentur." . . . 
 Hanc tuitionem eonfirmavit, adjectA 
 quoque peccatorum remissione, Late- 
 ranense concilium sub Callisto II., 
 A.D. 1122, cap, 2: lis, qui Hierosoly- 
 mam proficiscuntur, et ad Chrietianam 
 gentem defendendam et tyrannidem 
 infidelium debellandam efficacitjr prse- 
 buerint, suorum peccatomm remis- 
 sionem concedimus : et domos et fami- 
 lias atque omnia bona eorum in beati 
 Petri et Komanae ecclesiss protectione, 
 sicut a domino nostro pap4 Urbano 
 statutum fiiit, suscipimus. Quicunque 
 ergo ea distrahere vel auferre, quamdiu 
 
96 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 glorious fact notwithstanding, that while martyrs, or those 
 who voluntarily endured dea,th for Christ's sake, were the 
 first to be canonised, or regarded as saints, and among canon- 
 ised saints have ever since occupied the highest rank, no 
 Crusader, in the popular sense, has ever been admitted to 
 canonisation, as such, or had his sanctity measured by the 
 number of those whom his sword slew. So far, Grod be 
 praised, we have never ceased to be proof against the preach- 
 ing of Mohammed ; and it was only gradually, and from their 
 accordance with feudalism — with Norman usages, and Nor- 
 mau temperaments — that such doctrines ever amalgamated, or 
 rather were held in mechanical combination with those of the 
 Grospel. Exigencies of the times ; the spirit of commerce and 
 of adventure ; the plausibility of a war undertaken in defence 
 of others — objects of pity, as having been cruelly used and 
 trampled upon ; objects of love, as connected intimately by 
 ties of blood, religion, or civilisation, with their avengers — 
 all these constituted so many motives for the adoption of prin- 
 ciples, that had already been acted upon with such terrible 
 success elsewhere, as possibly to deserve that their original 
 inventors and disseminators should be paid back retributively 
 in their own coin. Last, and not least of these mixed 
 motives, was the consideration which prompted S. Bernard, 
 and other examplary characters of that date, to encourage 
 the Crusades openly, as a cure for still worse evils. When 
 we reflect that synods with metropolitans, and general 
 councils with the pope at their head, denounced excommuni- 
 cation in vain against those, who, notwithstanding that they 
 had three left for quarrelling, could not keep the peace four 
 days in the week with their neighbours — inhabitants of the 
 same country, frequenters of the same church and sacra- 
 ments — can we wonder that S. Bernard should have preached 
 up the defence of the Holy Land as a nobler aim, and urged 
 upon his countrymen, if they fought at all, to fight for the 
 interests of Christianity, rather than for the gratification of 
 their own covetous or revengeful passions. ' Arm yourselves,' 
 is the tenor of his stirring appeal to them, ' out of godly 
 zeal for the Christian name. Thus would you put a stop to 
 your evil mode of making war upon each other, as ye are 
 
 in vi^ jlU morantur, prsesumpserint, (Ibid. p. 890 et seq.) Not a -word ia 
 excommuuicationis ultione plectantur.' said here of their good dispositions. 
 
APPLICATION OF INDULGENCES. 97 
 
 Wont, whereby ye consume one another. To peril soul and 
 body in such a manner, is no true courage, but fool-hai-diness 
 and frenzy. Here, brave warriors, ye may fight without dan- 
 ger ; for here to die is gain, and to conquer is glory.''^" As 
 it certainly was by comparison with what they were dying for 
 all round him. Not that it followed by any means, that he 
 would not have preferred their staying at home, and living as 
 Christians. Not that by slaughtering infidels they would be- 
 come martyrs. To suffer and die for religion is to bear the 
 cross after Christ ; to kill and slaughter for religion is to bear 
 the crescent after Mohammed. Christians who die fighting 
 for the cross, with arms in their hands, are not dying for Christ 
 as He died for thetn. 
 
 The penitential discipline of the Church here came in, on 
 which there had been vast changes of late years. Canonical 
 penances had long ceased to be literally discharged on account 
 of their great le-^gth. The 'indulgence ' of the bishops, to 
 whose discretion it had been left to administer them, allowed 
 people to satisfy what the canons enjoined by other means. 
 They were commuted for alms, for pilgrimages, for any de- 
 scription of works tending to the edification of the penitent, 
 or else to the good of the public. ' The ecclesiastical laws of 
 king Edgar mention the building of churches, and endowing 
 them, the making of bridges, and mending the public roads,' 
 as ways of commuting for penance which were then al- 
 lowed.^'^ Urban, therefore, in concluding his celebrated dis- 
 course before the council of Clermont, was not exceeding the 
 theory respecting indulgences, with which his hearers were 
 familiar, when he said : ' We,''^ confident in the mercy of Grod, 
 and in the authority of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, 
 
 "» Life, byNeander. Tr. by M. »" 'M.a.vs.h&a's PenU. Oiscipl. t^. 185. 
 
 Wrench, p. 222. The sentiment indeed '" There are several reports of this 
 
 may have been borrowed from Lucan. speech, unless they are reports of 
 
 Civ. Bell. i. 8 : several speeches of his on that occa- 
 
 ' Quis furor, cives, quse tanta licentia sion, with considerable variations. 
 
 ferri, The following is that of William of 
 
 Gentibus invisis Latium prsebere Tyre, but as quoted by Baronius, a.d. 
 
 cruorem? 1095 n. 41. Curiously enough, even 
 
 Cumque superba foret Babylon spoli- Mansi fails to notice that the report 
 
 anda trophseis given us from a Vatican MSS. (torn. xx. 
 
 Ausoniis, umbrAque erraret Crassus p. 824) is simply that of Baldric, 
 
 inultA, archbishop of Dole. (Ap. Gesta Dei 
 
 Bella geri placuit, nuUos habituia tri- per Francos, p. 86.) 
 
 umphos ? ' 
 
98 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 remit to faithful Christians, taking up arms against them,' 
 the Turks, ' and undertaking the burden of this pilgrimage, 
 all the penances due to their sins ;^'^ and let none doubt, who 
 die truly penitent, that they will obtain pardon of their sins 
 and the reward of eternal life.' ^" 
 
 The novelty lay in its application. Penances were re- 
 mitted in this life, and pardon of sins assured in the next, 
 for what ? for fighting in battle against unbelievers, as such, 
 and shedding their blood. Those who were slain in the act 
 themselves were certain of their reward. Here was a new 
 species of good works, eulogised, not in the Gospel, but ia the 
 Koran; yet the transition to them from road or bridge- 
 making was not remote. Further on, in the same speech, 
 there are privileges attached to their performance, beyond 
 any description of good works known. 
 
 ' Meanwhile, those, who in the ardor of their faith under- 
 take this toil for overthrowing them, we receive, as true 
 obedient sons, under the protection of blessed Peter and Paul, 
 and decree that they shall remain exempt from all kind of 
 molestation, whether in respect of the affairs of others, or of 
 their own. But should anyone be so rash as to molest them in 
 any way, let him be visited with excommunication by the 
 bishop of the diocese : and treated by all as under that 
 sentence, till he has made restitution, and given ample satis- 
 faction for the harm done.' "Was there ever a more memor- 
 
 '" ' Immensas ' is the reading in in vik, sive in piign4, pro Christo 
 
 Baronius, and in Mansi, torn. xx. moriretur, in numero martyrum atso- 
 
 p. 823. In William of Tyre it is lutus ab omnibus peccatis euis compu- 
 
 ' injimotas sibi.' taretnr. Et dnm totus mundus post 
 
 '" What construction was put upon eum cuireret, avidus remissionem pec- 
 these words in the very nest genera- catorum aecipere, et in numero sanc- 
 tion, will appear from Chron. Causaur. torum martyrum esse, contigit, ut hoc 
 lib. T. A.D, 1097 (written as Muratori pnsdicans prsedietus summus Pontifex, 
 Bcr. Ital. Script, torn. ii. part ii. p. 697 devenerit Thyetum,' &c. So William 
 et seq. shows about A.p. 1182), where of Tyre, on occasion of the death of 
 it is said of Urban : ' Hie dolens quia Stephen, count of Chartres, in battle : 
 Saraceni occupaverant sanctam civita- — ' Cui Dominus veterem infamise 
 tem Jerusalem et Sepulchrum Domini, notam, quam ab expeditione fugiens 
 Tolens earn eripere de manibus impio- Antiochiam miserabilitto contraxerat, 
 lum, et reddere pristinse liheitati, optimo fine abolere concessit. . . Nam 
 prsedicarit remissionem peccatorum, et qui pro Christi nomine deeertautes 
 vice sibi tradit^ a Deo, omnibus dedit, in acie fidelium et Christian^, militid 
 quicunqne Jerusalem tenderent, et dicuntur occumbere, non solim infa- 
 civitatem et terram transmarinam, quae mise, veriim et peccaminum et delicto- 
 a Saracenis possidebatur, liberarent. rum omnimodam credimus abolitionem 
 Adjiciens etiam hoc, ut si quisquam promereri.' 
 
APPLICATIOIir OF INDULGENCES. 99 
 
 able distinction awarded to a performance more questionable ? 
 People never went to worship in their parish church more 
 jealously screened from harm. 
 
 There were therefore some strange inducements held out. 
 and some strange means employed, but unless the principal 
 actors were insincere, it was a great cause that they advocated, 
 and one of the holiest wars ever undertaken in self-defence. 
 Self-defence is one of our most sacred and inalienable rights : 
 nor are we supposed to be under the obligation of renouncing 
 it on becoming Christians. Every nation in every age, 
 whether Christian or not, has and may exercise the right of 
 defending itself when attacked either collectively or in any 
 part of it, whether fey fraud or force. Our mode of exercising 
 it will depend for the most part on the nature of the attack 
 made on us. We are bound not to be wantonly cruel or un- 
 relenting, yet reprisals may have to be sanguinary, though 
 we who make them are Christians. But for the crusades to 
 be vindicated as a war undertaken in self-defence, it is abso- 
 lutely necessary that Christendom should be considered as 
 one community, whose common interests were threatened 
 when one part of it was assailed. This was certainly the 
 idea put forward at the time by those who advocated them : 
 the way in which it was carried out is another question 
 altogether. Men have often proved unequal to their con- 
 ceptions both before and since; in this case they ended by 
 acting not as Christians but as Normans. For all that, it 
 would be most unreasonable to suppose that their early pro- 
 fessions were not sincere. Christian brotherhood had been 
 up to that time a living principle, professed in rough hearts 
 it may be but proved in acts : and east and west, though 
 severed and at cross purposes, had not forgotten that the 
 most prosperous part of their history had been when they 
 formed one empire. 
 
 That empire had been broken up, and of the various 
 interests previously combined under it in harmony, many had 
 arrayed themselves since under rival banners, and were con- 
 tending with more or less overt hostility for pre-eminence. 
 But Christendom felt conscious that it had been one family 
 before its partnership with the empire commenced, that the 
 ties uniting it ^ere not of earth, and that on their outward 
 expression, that of the sacraments, there had been no posi- 
 tive divorce as yet. It could argue therefore with perfect 
 
100 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 sincerity that it was one stUl. And this idea, had it only been 
 acted upon consistently and adhered to loyally throughout 
 by those who assumed the cross, would have drawn down a 
 blessing upon their undertaking, and stamped it with perma- 
 nent success. There would have been no grander page in 
 history, had the crusaders contented themselves with expel- 
 ling the Turk from Christian soil, and after reinstating their 
 oppressed brethren of the east in their own once more, re- 
 turned to Europe, and disbanding as soldiers that had done 
 their duty, resumed their peaceful employment and home 
 pursuits. Even now we can sympathise with them while 
 under the highminded influence of that principle of Christian 
 brotherhood. Up to the moment of their conquest of Jeru- 
 salem we can wish them Godspeed. But let the contrary 
 supposition be maintained, and we must read every word 
 backwards that was ever urged in their behalf, and look upon 
 them as a compound of double dealing and hypocrisy seldom 
 before or since realised. Let it be supposed that the Greeks 
 regarded the pope as antichrist, or he them as heretics, out of 
 the pale of the Church, under anathema, and what effrontery 
 is conveyed in their appeals to him for help, what mockery in 
 his ardent espousal of their cause as one of the holiest. Either 
 he must have regarded the anathema of cardinal Humbert as 
 null and void, or he could not have spoken, as the archbishop 
 of Dole has made him speak, to the assembled west ! '>' 
 
 ' We have heard, most beloved brethren, and you have heard, 
 what we cannot dwell upon without deep emotion, how dread- 
 ful are the calamities, the distresses, the sufferings, which in 
 Jerusalem, in Antioch, in all other quarters of the east, have 
 stricken, have prostrated, and lacerated our Christian brethren, 
 members of Christ, your true near of kin, comrades, neigh- 
 bours, sons of the same Christ and of the same God that 
 you are yourselves. In their own hereditary homes they are 
 bought or sold by foreign lords : some are driven out : some 
 are mendicants among you : some, what i§ still worse, de- 
 tained at home on their own property to be sold into distant 
 lands, or there ill-used. ... As you value your souls . , . 
 rush quickly to the defence of the eastern Church. It is 
 from her the glad tidings of your entire salvation emanated : 
 she dropped into your mouths the heavenly milk upon which 
 
 '" Vide sup. note to p. 97. 
 
MIXED MOTIVES. 101 
 
 you fed : she passed on the inestimable dogmas of the Gospels 
 for you to imbibe.' 
 
 These are sentiments, but in their obvious and natural 
 acceptation only, which will elicit sympathy from every 
 Christian heart to the end of time. And these, till Norman 
 policy came to be engrafted on them, and the principles on 
 which the Turks and Saracens themselves acted interwoven 
 with them, formed originally the exclusive motives to which 
 easterns appealed, and by which westerns were actuated in 
 responding to their cry for help. But, like most ideas, that 
 of the crusades underwent many modifications before it could 
 take effect upon the masses or bring forth events. We should 
 remember that it wis not with Urban and his contemporaries 
 that it originated ; nor, imbibing it as they must have done 
 from their earliest years, could they have helped associating 
 with it in their minds other ideas that had been gradually 
 gathering round it, and come to be mixed up with it. Its 
 origin was oriental like that of the pointed arch. For 200 
 years the east had been calling upon the west for assistance 
 in some form or other. Elias, patriarch of Jerusalem, had 
 appealed for pecuniary aid a.d. 881.^'^ The brother of 
 Aligernus, abbot of Monte Cassino, had returned from Jeru- 
 salem A.D. 999, and inspired the letter of Silvester II. to 
 the whole Church, as from Jerusalem personified and in ruins. 
 But it was addressed principally to the Pisans, and the Pisans 
 were merchants.^'^ They probably saw in it a grand opening 
 for traffic. Then came the great Norman pilgrimage of A.D. 
 1064, that fraternised with their Christian brethren of the 
 holy city, saw their distress, and subscribed to relieve their 
 needs. Of course it must have occurred to Ingulphus and 
 his companions that Norman pilgrimages had before then 
 opened the way to fair climes and new conquests, as in Italy.^'* 
 Eeports are next wafted over from the east to Gregory, with 
 which he acquaints Europe in his encyclics, and dwells on in 
 
 '" Vide sup. p. 22. gernus {Annal. Ord. Bened. t. iv. 
 
 '" 'Ex person^ Jerusalem deyas- p. 39). 
 
 tatffi, universali ecolesiae," is its head- '" ' The Norman pilgrims to Monte 
 
 ing. —Eecueil des Hist, de la France, Gargano had been the forerunners of 
 
 vol. i. p. 426. ' Sicque,' says the the Norman conquerors of Sicily and 
 
 editor, ' ut Silvester II. primus belli Apulia, and towering amidst the 
 
 sacri prjeco extitisse censendus est, Crusaders is Bohemond, Guiscard's 
 
 Pisani erucesignatorum antesignani son, the claimant of the Byzantine 
 
 dicendi sunt.' It is Mabillon who ^Em-pire.'^England and Normandy, 
 
 connects it with the return of Ali- vol. iv.jp. 595. 
 
102 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 impassioned strains of indignation and pity. The lull is 
 broken, and sympathy is for a time diverted by the wars of 
 Guiscard and Bohemond against Alexius. Ten years later, 
 Alexius himself is writing letters to Eobert, count of Flan- 
 ders,^'' their kinsman, and Urban,^^" their suzerain, for armed 
 succour against his foes. The Normans had often come to 
 the rescue before, both of the Greeks and of the Latins ; 
 had served both for hire previously, or neither, as it suited 
 their interests. Now they were asked to fight neither for 
 pay nor for conquest precisely, but for religion. Christendom 
 was represented to them as overborne by the infidel. What 
 they had, therefore, to learn or be taught in addition was, to 
 take up the sword in behalf of the cross, as Mohammedans 
 had done from the first, and with such marked success for the 
 crescent. And this was, as has been said, a higher principle, 
 though it was not a sound one, than any that had guided 
 them in their wars hitherto, and which it would be therefore, 
 so far, lifting them above themselves to embrace. The ques- 
 tion has been asked. Were they or Urban the real promoters 
 of the first crusade ? It can hardly matter much which way 
 it is decided. Urban, whether he had Norman blood in his 
 veins or not, was Norman by connexion and country — ' Papa 
 primus ex Francis,' as Guibert emphatically calls him^^' — and 
 still more by association and alliance. His idiosyncrasies 
 were strongly Norman, though his ofiice was that of a Chris- 
 tian bishop. Articles of faith excepted, he interpreted all 
 questions of the day from a Norman point of view. Hilde- 
 brand, the grand, had already conceived the project of heading 
 50,000 warriors to the east, but his principal motive for 
 embarking in it, as he says himself, would have been that of 
 promoting or effecting agreement in doctrine and discipline 
 between the east and west. Urban had been invited by 
 Alexius to Constantinople for that purpose, before the petition 
 came to him for armed aid. Unable in his own person to 
 accept the one, he well knew that he could depend upon his 
 
 ^" Who, according to Guibert, seems majorem jam regni sui partem difiusis 
 
 to have visited Constantinople pre- non paucas epistolas Urbano papse 
 
 Tiously, and been acquainted with direxit, quibus in defensionem orien- 
 
 Alexius. Hist. Hieros. i. 4, ap. Gesta talium ecdesiarum se non sufficere 
 
 D. per Francos, p. 475. I can discover deploravit, obtestans totum, si fieri 
 
 nothing in it that reads like forgery. posset, occidentem sibi in adjutorium 
 
 '™ Conrad. Ursperg. Chron. a.d. advocari.' 
 1099. ' Prsedictus Alexius imperator. . ^2' Lib. ii. 1. 
 super iisdem barbaris prsedonibue per 
 
MIXED MOTIVES. 103 
 
 compatriots and allies to supply the other. And to this 
 course his own chivalrous instincts would not demur. These 
 considerations, added to that of his own safety, we may well 
 believe, decided his conduct. 
 
 From no quarter could he calculate upon more potent aid 
 against his enemies in Rome than from the Normans. They 
 alone could befriend him as they had befriended Hildebrand 
 against two emperors, if necessary. How far there may have 
 been any secret understanding between him and Bohemond 
 previously to his departure for Clermont, is fair conjecture ; 
 but to paint him at the head of that council, as Sir F. Pal- 
 grave has done, with Peter the Hermit and Bohemond on 
 either side for his two supporters,'^^ is, in the absence of any 
 direct evidence for so grouping them, pure romance. Bohe- 
 mond, in point of fact, was engaged ^^' far away from the din 
 of the first crusade, as it set out, deep in affairs nearer home. 
 Far from being one of the first, he was the last to join it. 
 We are set on the track of Peter the Hermit with more suc- 
 cess. On his return from Palestine, the bearer of a moving 
 epistle for the pope from Simeon the care-worn patriarch of 
 Jerusalem and his afflicted flock, Peter landed at Bari in 
 Apulia, where he may or may not have conferred with Bohe- 
 mond, and so passed on to Eome.'^'' From thence he set 
 out, authorised by the pope, northwards and westwards, on his 
 preaching mission. Urban followed in the same direction, 
 at each step apparently going further from Bohemond. Still, 
 at Placentia, it is but fair to remember that the wife of Henry 
 IV., whose cause was heard there, was sister of Godfrey de 
 Bouillon,^^' the hero of the first crusade, who, ' by ties of 
 acquaintance, consanguinity, and sympathy,' was connected 
 with Bohemond ; '^^ and that Clermont, at the time of the 
 council, was ruled over by "William, who, descended though 
 he might be from the ancient house of Toulouse, was married 
 to a Norman daughter from Sicily .^^ Even Gibbon says ^^^ 
 
 '" England and Normandy, vol. iv. lib. iv. 24. 
 
 p. 446-9. '-' Albert. Aq. Hist Hwros. i. 6. 
 
 '2s 'Cum esset in expeditione un4 Chd. Tyr. lib. i. c. 12. 
 
 cnm patruo suo, comite Eogerio, in '" Eohrbaeker, E. H. toI. siv. 
 
 partes Campanise' is the express Ian- p. 527. 
 
 guage of Chron. S. Monas. Casin. lib. '^° Palgrave, vol. iv. p. 493. 
 
 iv. c. ii. ap. Murat. Ber. Ital. Scnpt. »'" Ibid. p. 429. 
 
 vol. iv. p. 498. So Gnibert, Hist. '^s q_ i^jj. 
 Hieros. lib. iii. 1, and Gaufred. Mai. 
 
104 LATm KINGDOM IK PALESTINE. 
 
 of Bohemond, ' his conduct may justify a belief that he had 
 secretly directed the design of the pope, which he affected to 
 second with astonishment and zeal.' And, what is more to 
 the point, the Norman historian of our own country, his con- 
 temporary,^^' remarks on it all : ' That more recondite pur- 
 pose was not so generally divulged, which, as contrived by 
 Bohemond, had the effect of inciting almost all Europe to 
 the oriental expedition, to the end that amid so much com- 
 motion in all lands, and such command of armed auxiliaries, 
 Urban might get to Eome, and Bohemond to lUyria and 
 Macedonia. For those districts, and all between Durazzo and 
 Thessalonica, which Gruiscard his father had won from Alexius, 
 Bohemond was constantly claiming as appertaining to him by 
 right, inasmuch as he had no inheritance in Apulia, which 
 had been all left by Gruiscard to his 3'^ounger son Roger.' 
 
 It is not, indeed, necessary to suppose that the embassy 
 which came to Placentia, as from Alexius, was got up by 
 Bohemond; for Alexius had made a previous appeal by letter 
 to Robert, count of Flanders,^'" and had addressed several 
 epistles to Urban himself on the same subject. At the same 
 time we must not forget the monk, who, by instigation of the 
 father of Bohemond, personated Michael VII. That embassy 
 may have been the old trick under another form. But nobody 
 who has studied the intermarriages which took place between 
 the Normans and Flemings, the houses of Lorraine and 
 Hainan] t, in the pages of Sir F. Palgrave, can demur to the 
 force of his statement of their subsequent influence upon 
 facts. 
 
 ' The Lorraine and Hainault interests, amalgamating with 
 the Flemish interest properly so called, as well as with the 
 Norman interest, long continued predominant in the great 
 oriental colony. Hence the very close connection between 
 the east and the Belgic provinces of Graul. All the kings of 
 Jerusalem belonged to the Lorraine, Hainault, or Flemish 
 interests, either by descent or marriage ; and Baldwin, sixth 
 
 329 William of Malmestury, reign of acquainted -with Alexius. 'Wliy should 
 
 William II. lib. iv. 0. 2. not Alexius therefore write to him ? In 
 
 "" Given by Guibert, Hist. Hkros. the same way, as we have seen, com- 
 
 i. 4 (ap. Gesta Dei per Francos, munications had commenced on Urban's 
 
 p. 475), but only in part; and 'verbis elevation between him and Alexius, 
 
 vestita meis ' as he candidly says : Why therefore should we doubt Conrad 
 
 Eobert had been to Constantinople Ursperg. Chronicon a.d 1099, as quoted 
 
 and was, in aU probability, personally two pages hack ? 
 
PRACTICE OF THE CRUSADERS. 105 
 
 of Hainault and ninth of Flanders, was the first emperor of 
 Constantinople.'*'' 
 
 Leaving Constantinople on one side for the present, let us 
 accompany the first crusade to Jerusalem. It was composed 
 of Normans, of their near of kin, or their near neighbours, 
 as we have seen.'*^ We have but to follow their footsteps in 
 the pages of William of Tyre and his contemporaries, to find 
 that in all their dealings they conducted themselves as 
 became genuine Normans. 
 
 Perhaps the first thing that would occur to us — but it is 
 a point on which it would not do to digress here — is that the 
 condition of the native Christians of the Holy Land under 
 Turkish rule was not so intolerable as is apt to be repre- 
 sented. ' Tarsus,' says William of Tyre, ' like the rest of the 
 entire country, had its Christian inhabitants — namely, Greeks 
 and Armenians.' *'* Bohemond, says Orderic Vitalis, when he 
 took possession of Tarsus, Mamistra, Albara, and Marra, 
 'treated with honor the Greeks, Armenians, and Syrians, 
 whom he found leading a conventual life in monasteries 
 according to their respective customs ; and loyally granted 
 back to them all that they formerly possessed.' Luckily for 
 the new comers — I shall justify that innuendo farther on — 
 there were 'some monasteries which the cruel Turks had 
 pillaged, driving away the religious inhabiting them ; these 
 the indefatigable hero assigned to Latin monks or clergy, 
 liberally attaching to them ample endowments, that they 
 might abound in all good things for the service of God, and 
 celebrate divine service according to the Latin rite.' ^^* 
 
 Edessa was still better off than Tarsus, and its orthodoxy 
 as intact as ever. Its citizens, ' persevering in that sincere 
 profession of faith which they had received from the begin- 
 ning and from apostolic times, were so far sufferers under 
 the yoke of the infidel that they were compelled to pay 
 tribute and taxes annually ; yet no one presumed to reside 
 within the walls who was not a Christian.' '^^ Maresia was 
 one and Calchis was another ^^^ of the ' suffragan cities ' that 
 had not ceased to be in the relation of subjection to the 
 
 "' England and ISormandy, vol. ir. crusaders.' — Ibid. p. 562. 
 p_ 549_ ™ sdl. Sac. lib. iii. 19. 
 
 ■ 332 .'of pure German chieftains very "' E. H. lib. x. a.d. 1099. 
 few indeed can be discerned. They '== Sell. Sac. lib. iv. 2. 
 were amongst the worst rabble of the "" Ibid. c. 7. 
 
106 LATIN' KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 patriarchal throne of Antioch, when the Turks evacuated 
 that city. In Antioch itself, when the crusaders arrived, 
 ' almost all the inhabitants were Christians, though they had 
 no power there. Merchants, or mechanics, or artisans, they 
 might be ; only the Turks and infidels could serve as soldiers, 
 or discharge the higher dignities of the city. Christians 
 were not allowed to carry arms, or embrace the military pro- 
 fession.''^^ In the north part of the city, says James of 
 Vitry,'^* ' there was a hill commonly called " Black Moun- 
 tain," in which lived numerous hermits of every race and 
 country, and numerous monasteries both of Greeks and 
 Latins.' This may, or may not, have been its state before 
 the Turks were driven out ; Latin convents had been in 
 existence at Jerusalem long before Peter the Hermit visited 
 it. I pass over all other exploits, high and low, honorable 
 and abominable, that are reported of the crusaders in their 
 onward march, and confine myself rigidly to what belongs to 
 my own subject-matter. Ademar, bishop of Puy and legate 
 of Urban, was alive, and with them in the discharge of 
 his office, when they reached Antioch. Of his steadfast and 
 high-principled conduct there can be no greater proof than 
 the change of conduct on the part of his subordinates when 
 he was no more.^'^ One of their first acts under his guidance 
 was a bitter censure upon almost all that they did afterwards 
 of that nature. 
 
 * The lord patriarch,'*" John by name, who from the time 
 of our arrival had, as a true confessor of Christ, endured 
 infinite tortures at the hands of the infidels, they installed 
 in his own chair with much honor ; appointing bishops ' — 
 it is not explained with, or without, his consent — ' in the neigh- 
 bouring towns that had hitherto ranked as cathedral. But a 
 Latin patriarch, during the lifetime of him who had been 
 previously ordained there, they did not presume to elect or 
 consecrate, lest there should wpfear to he two occupants of 
 one and the same throne, which is known to be manifestly 
 
 =" Sell. Sac. lib. v. c. ii. himself at the head of the crusade, 
 
 ='« Hist. Sieros. lib. i. 32. tinder Urban II ; wore by turns the 
 
 '*' Not by any means that I would prelate's mitre and the knight's casque, 
 
 endorse the following: 'The eharac- and proved the model, the consoler, 
 
 ter of the Church as a ruler and leader and the stay of the sacred expedition.' 
 
 was never borne in upon the minds of — Dublin Review for April 1866, 
 
 men with greater force than when p. 308. 
 
 Adhemar, the apostolic legate, put ^" Bell. Sac. lib. vi. 23. 
 
PRACTICE OF THE CEUSADEES. 107 
 
 contrary to the sacred canons and constitutions of the holy- 
 fathers.' That salutary maxim was about to die, within a 
 few months, for ever in the Holy Land with Ademar. Was 
 it ever more dead than now ? 
 
 ' Hardly two years afterwards,' proceeds the historian,^"" 
 ' he, seeing that, as a Greek, he failed to preside over the 
 Latins with profit, quitted the city and retired to Constanti- 
 nople. On his departure, the clergy and people of the city 
 meeting 'together, chose the bishop of Artois, Bernard by 
 name, a native of Valence, who had accompanied the lord 
 bishop of Puy in the expedition as chaplain, and made him 
 their patriarch.' 
 
 But William of Tyre glosses over, for shame, certain details 
 which the Norman historian shows no such care to dis- 
 guise. 
 
 ' A certain Greek' — that 'confessor of Christ, as William 
 of Tyre ; that ' most illustrious and most Christian man,' as 
 the canon of Aix ^^^ calls him — ' was patriarch of Antioch in 
 time of the Turks, but proved intractable to the Normans on 
 their conquest of it. For they, as soon as they had made 
 themselves masters of the principality, decreed the adoption 
 by the clergy and people of the Latin rite, which the Greeks, 
 following their ancient customs, in a rash hour deemed too 
 incongruous. So when Bohemond was taken prisoner ' — as 
 he was soon afterwards by the Turks — ' there was a rumour 
 started that the patriarch was preparing to betray the city to 
 the emperor ' — its liege lord already — ' which provoked him 
 to anger greatly when he heard of it . . . then, under the 
 impulse of fear, he abandoned his see and withdrew into the 
 desert.'^** Well he might, if the letter despatched by Bohe- 
 mond, prince of Antioch, and his companions in arms, to 
 Urban, is genuine. After informing him of their success, and 
 of the death of the bishop of Puy his legate, they entreat him 
 to come over to them in person. ' For, as for the Turks,' say 
 they, * and pagans, we have overcome them ; but the heretical 
 Greeks and Armenians, Syrians and Jacobites, we cannot 
 overcome. Only come over to us, and complete that which 
 you have commenced with us, and the whole world will obey 
 you.'^" 
 
 '" Ibid. '■" Eccl Kist. lib. x. a.d. 1101. 
 
 '« Albert. Aquens. Hist. Hkros. lib. "' Balus. ilisccU. lib. i. p. 415, or 
 v. 1. vol. iii. p. 60, ed. Mansi. 
 
108 LATIX KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 Later, the shock of an earthquake restored them to some 
 degree of harmony while it lasted. ' All, with one consent — 
 Latins, Greeks, Syrians, Armenians, pilgrims, and sojourners 
 — confessed that it had been brought about by their sins. 
 Without loss of time, and with the most praiseworthy inten- 
 tions, they hasten to the church of the blessed apostle Peter, 
 seeking the patronage of his perpetual protection . . . and 
 at the same time renouncing their past and present follies. 
 To lord Bernard, the first Latin patriarch, they bind them- 
 selves solemnly to amend their ways ; and it was by his faith, 
 added to the prayers made by him and his clergy, and the 
 rest of the faithful, humbly before God, as we sincerely 
 believe, that God spared the residue of the city.' ^^^ 
 
 Thus we see that they could, and did, all worship together 
 at times, as yet — and that for two years Antioch under the 
 Latins retained its Greek patriarch. We quit Antioch for' 
 Albara, but two days' journey from it, and while the rest 
 were staying there, taken by the count of Toulouse. ' As soon 
 as he had taken it, he selected as its bishop Peter, a native 
 of Narbonne — one of his own train . . . giving thanks to 
 G-od, that by his zeal and instrumentality the east possessed 
 a Latin bishop ! '^^^ It was indeed an event not to be for- 
 gotten — the first of its kind in history. Even the see in 
 which it occurred deserved promotion. Accordingly, no 
 sooner was Bernard set over Antioch, than it was raised to be 
 an archbishopric. Marra was placed under its jurisdiction, 
 or rather made over to it.'*^ Still its bishop did not reside, 
 but went on with the army.'*' Most of his brother, bishops, 
 as we shall see, did the same. 
 
 Lydda was the next see pounced upon by the placemen of 
 the invading host. Eobert was the bishop appointed to it — 
 ' a Norman by birth, of the diocese of Eouen ; and to it were 
 attached in perpetuity the towns of Lydda and Eamula, with 
 their adjacent suburbs ; dedicated as a pious offering of the 
 first fruits of their labours to the distinguished martyr, S. 
 George,' ^*^ in whose honor Justinian had built a church 
 there, recently destroyed. The patriarch of Jerusalem^'" had 
 been forced to quit that city, before they arrived there, and 
 go to Cyprus to beg alms for his flock, on account of the heavy 
 
 '" Gauter. i?eS. Antioch. Frol. It '" Ibid. c. 11. '" Ibid. c. 22. 
 
 happened A.D. 1115. sjs jbid. c. 20. ^^ Ibid c 23 
 
 "" Bdl. Sac. lib. vii. c. 1. 
 
PRACTICE OF THE CRUSADERS. 109 
 
 exactions imposed on it by the sultan of Egypt, on the ap- 
 proach of the crusaders. Their approach had already caused 
 the patriarch of Antioch to be tortured, as we have seen ; and 
 now the same candid historian attests, that the exile of the 
 patriarch of Jerusalem had been in consequence of it as well. 
 As they drew nearer, Geraldus, president of the hospice of the 
 Amalfians, underwent similar torture. It had been once 
 determined to kill all the faithful in the city, and throw down 
 the churches of the Eesurrection and Holy Sepulchre ; but 
 that scheme was abandoned, lest the Christians should be 
 driven to desperation, says the archbishop of Tyre.'*' Their 
 numbers, therefore, must have been considerable. In fact, 
 at that time, a fourth part of the city — that is to say all the 
 north-western quarter, from the gate of Jaffa to the gate of 
 Damascus, actually belonged to the Christian population, in 
 virtue of a convention e7_tered into between Constantine 
 Monomachus and the sultan long since.'*^ And according to 
 the Norman historian, a multitude of 'Armenians, Grreeks, and 
 Syrians, who had inhabited the city while under Turkish rule, 
 and had under great pressure served Christ there as best they 
 could, as soon as they beheld the Christian host violently 
 bursting into it, betook themselves in all haste to the church 
 of the Holy Sepulchre, and there awaited the issue, vocifera- 
 ting with great earnestness the " Kyrie eleison," and other 
 suitable litanies.' There they were found by Tancred, 'who, 
 by a special providence, happened to come thither, and in- 
 stantly knew them to be Christians by their prayers and reli- 
 gious gestures. " These are Christians," said he to his fol- 
 lowers ; " let none of you hurt them, therefore, in any way ; 
 they are our brethren, and faithful friends that have been up 
 to this time proved in much tribulation as gold in the fur- 
 nace."''' They had a lucky escape indeed ! It would be im- 
 possible to credit the atrocities perpetrated, or countenanced 
 
 '" Ibid. cognominatur "de LatinA;'' domum 
 
 '" A.D. 1063. Constantine having etiam patriarchalem, et eanonieorum 
 
 engaged to supply a sum of money for Dominioi Sepulchri claustrum cum 
 
 rebuilding that portion of the walls on suis pertinentiis.' All this quarter 
 
 those terms.— Bell. 8ac. lib. ix. o. 16. was regarded as the property of the 
 
 ' Contihet autem inter se Yenerabilem Greek patriarch, till the crusaders 
 
 locum Dominicas Passionis et Kesur- took possession of the city, 
 
 rectionis, domum Hospitalis, utrum- ''' Ord. Vital. E. H. lib. ix. a.d. 
 
 que monasterinm, virorum yidelicAt 1098. 
 et sanctimonialium, quorum utrumque 
 
110 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 in their perpetration, upon all those who were not Christians, 
 on that awful day— the day on which Christ died for man- 
 about the hour of His crucifixion^" — by one, of the spotless 
 integrity of whose heart chivalry sings : ^^* 
 
 E pien di ft, di zelo, ogni mortale 
 Gloria, imperio, tesor, mette in non cale : 
 
 did not his own letter,'^^ or one written in his name and that 
 of a Christian archbishop to all Christians, attest their enor- 
 mity to all ages. Let us only hope that the words are not 
 his. 
 
 ' Should you desire to learn what has been done with the 
 enemy that was found there, know that in the porch of Solo- 
 mon, and in his temple, our knights rode up to the knees 
 of their horses in the blood of the Saracens.' 
 
 Let us pause here for a moment, as we are bound in 
 justice, to contrast these bloodthirsty words with the account 
 given of the conduct of Saladin not by a Saracen, but by the 
 abbot of Cogglesdale in Essex, who witnessed it, at a time 
 when ' the pagan ' might have exacted full vengeance. When 
 terms were first proposed to him, his reply was — ' I have 
 often heard from our wise men of Fez, that Jerusalem 
 could not be cleansed otherwise than by the blood of 
 Christians.' Then 100,000 bezants were offered on the part 
 of the besieged in vain. Another deputation came to him, 
 ' earnestly petitioning that he should name what convention he 
 would ; and if it could be executed, it should be : if not, 
 they would await their fate. After having taken counsel 
 again, he arranged the following scale of payments by the 
 besieged : for every male of ten years and upwards, ten 
 bezants ; for every child of seven and under, one ; and for 
 every woman five, were to be given in ransom. On pay- 
 ment of those sums, everyone might depart where he would, 
 
 with all that belonged to him, in perfect security 
 
 The patriarch, and those who had money, accepted these 
 terms gladly.' The French continuator of William of Tyre, 
 
 '^^ C'^tait le Tendredi, jour consacri '" Gerusal. Cant. i. s. viii. 
 
 a la Passion du Sanveur : c'itait vers ^^' Thesaur. Anecd. by Martene and 
 
 trois heures, moment oii le Sanveur Durandus, vol. i. p. 281. It appears 
 
 s'etait &ri6 sur la c;roix,' &c. — Eohr in the form of an encyelie from Daim- 
 
 backer, E. H. vol. xiv. p. 602. I am bert, archbishop of Pisa, Godfrey de 
 
 sorry to see so little heed of that fact B. and Raymond, 
 in his description. 
 
PRACTICE OF THE CBUSADERS. Ill 
 
 besides other anecdotes of the kindness of Saladin to them 
 all, adds that he set free thousands who were too poor to 
 ransom themselves.'" This was his retaliation, therefore, that 
 not a drop of blood was shed, when his ' pagans ' re-entered Je- 
 salem a.d. 1187 ! What excuse can we devise for our Chris- 
 tian forefathers, when they captured it eighty years before ? 
 
 Had Tancred found every Christian horribly massacred, 
 instead of singing litanies, in the church of the Sepulchre, 
 what worse retaliation would there have been left for 
 him to inflict? In short, against all these abominations 
 almost the only object that stands out in real relief is the 
 solitary figure of Godfrey, as we behold him laying aside his 
 arms, and making a jWlgrimage on foot, and with bare feet, 
 to the church of the Sepulchre ; or, again, refusing to wear a 
 crown, or assume the title of king, in the city in which his 
 Saviour had been crowned with thorns."'* 
 
 In all other respects, though the picture may have, on the 
 whole, its touches of light and shade, it is easily seen which 
 predominates. Peter the Hermit was recognised by the 
 native Christians, and received their warm thanks and 
 acknowledgments.''^ The Christians of Bethlehem had pre- 
 viously sent some of their body to compliment Grodfrey."''' 
 But no news of their victory — no invitation to return to 
 his see — sped from the crusaders to the exiled patriarch."'' 
 Fortunately for himself, and for them, he seems to have 
 departed to a better world just as his room was wanted ; but 
 long before his death could have been known to them for 
 certain, his throne had been made a contest of intrigue and 
 violence between its ardent deliverers. The church of 
 
 '" Chron. Sadidphi, c. 30. Ap. "» Bell. Sac. lib. viii. 23. 
 Martene and Durand. Vet. Script, et '™ Ibid. vii. 24. 
 Monum. torn. v. p. 544 et seq. The "" Had lie written against the Latins 
 
 French account ia in the same vol. ' on azymes ? ' There is a treatise of 
 
 p. 581 et seq. (lib. xxiii. 23-29). There that kind extant, supposed to have 
 
 is not a hint in Radulph that Jerusa- been written about a.d. 1090 by a 
 
 lem was not completely at his mercy : patriarch of Jerusalem of his name, 
 
 but neither of these authorities seem (y.'Leo Aiia.t.De Simeon. JDiat. -p. ISO.) 
 
 to have been known to Gibbon, i;. lix. It begins, 'hviyvainev, <J ipiXoxpufTira- 
 
 "" He himself is sometimes repre- toi AarEiyoi, th avirTaTiKbv ypa/ifiurfiov 
 sented as wearing a crown of thorns tjjj ofii^ou Svirias V"" (? v/iSv), &e. 
 over his helmet ; e.g. the bronze statue Anything but unfriendly in tone. It 
 of him in the Hof Kirehe at lunspruck : speaks of a letter addressed to a- Latin 
 being one of twenty-eight of the wor- priest resident at Constantinople by 
 thies of Europe round the tomb of Silvester III. or IV. on the same sub- 
 Maximilian I. ject. 
 
112 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 Bethlehem, then under a prior,^^^ was the first to succumb. 
 ' It was seized upon by the bishop of Martorano in Cala- 
 bria, under covenant with Arnulphus ' — then chaplain of our 
 countryman Eobert, duke of Normandy— ' that should the 
 chaplain be advanced to the patriarchal dignity through his 
 good oflaces, he should be allowed to retain it without ques- 
 tion or disturbance. '^'=3 On this, their first ecclesiastical act in 
 taking possession of Jerusalem, their archiepiscopal chronicler 
 exclaims : ' Eeligion and honesty were certainly powerless 
 amongst the clergy, who fell away on all sides, dissolute, and 
 without distinction, into illicit practices, now that lord 
 Ademar, legate of the apostolic see was no more.'^^* The plot 
 succeeded, and Arnulphus was, in reliance of support from 
 the Normans, installed in the patriarchal chair. It is added 
 indeed,^** 'the infatuate people voting as they were asked;' 
 but what real voice could they have had in the matter? 
 Other influences prevailing, Arnulphus was deposed soon 
 afterwards; and the bishop, his ally, perished in some un- 
 known way. The see of Jerusalem remained vacant for five 
 months.^^^ At the end of that time, Daimbert, archbishop of 
 Pisa, who appears to have been sent out in the place of 
 Ademar,^^^ and in that capacity to have composed the trucu- 
 lent encyclic already commented upon, was unanimously 
 made patriarch. ' This was no sooner done,' says the his- 
 torian,'^' ' than he was put into possession of all that had from 
 the days of the Greeks, in pagan times, belonged to the Greek 
 patriarch ; and some further emoluments were even added, 
 in order that he might have wherewith to keep up his 
 house respectably.' But Daimbert was not one to be con- 
 tented with a bare sufficiency. He immediately embarked in 
 a dispute with Godfrey, which was only compromised by 
 making over to him a fourth part of the city of Joppa, and a 
 rent-charge on the revenues of the metropolis itself. 'We 
 marvel,' says the archbishop of Tyre, ' what reasons could 
 have induced the patriarch to agitate this question as against 
 the duke ; for we never have read anywhere, or heard on any 
 trustworthy testimony, that the kingdom was bestowed on 
 our lord duke by the victorious chieftains, on condition 
 
 "2 Bell, Sac. lib. xx. 3. see q ig_ 
 
 =«' Ibid. ix. c. 1. S67 Guibert, Hist Hkros. vii. 13, but 
 
 ^°* Ibid. by Urban more probably. 
 
 =" C. 4.. 3t8 x»e Bell. Sac. is. 15. 
 
PRACTICE OF THE CRUSADERS. 113 
 
 of his assenting to consider himself bound to pay a sum of 
 money annually, or in perpetuity, to any person whatsoever.' 
 On the death of Godfrey, the patriarch despatched a charac- 
 teristic epistle to Bohemond, requesting assistance in main- 
 taining his ill-gotten spoils against Baldwin, whom he was 
 called upon to crown king.'^*"' Unluckily for him, Bohemond 
 happened to have been made prisoner by the Turks just 
 before •,^'"' and in the end Daimbert had to succumb to the 
 arts of the ex-patriarch Arnulph, now archdeacon of Jerusa- 
 lem, being forced to fly to Antioch ; and Baldwin, taking ad- 
 vantage of his absence, appointed a priest of the name of 
 Ebremar in his room.''' Thus Jerusalem had now about as 
 many Latin patriarchs living, as it had been years in the 
 hands of the Latins. 
 
 A remarkable incident is recorded on the accession of 
 Baldwin, showing that, in spite of the violent appropriation 
 of so many sees by the Latins, it was not, as yet, unusual for 
 Grreeks and Latins to attend the same services, and proving 
 therefore that neither could have considered the other hereti- 
 cal or under anathema. Peter, we are told, remained some 
 time in Jerusalem, ' engaged -with Greek and Latin ecclesias- 
 tics alike, in ordering processions, chanting litanies,''^ and 
 so forth. But the greatest of all these gatherings was on the 
 Easter-eve following the arrival of Baldwin as king. The 
 miracle of the holy fire was performed in his honor, and is 
 described with great minuteness, as well as interest, by the 
 Latin historians, in strange contrast to the scornful remarks 
 that are now made upon it by those who stand in their shoes. 
 As it did not take place us soon as usual, supplications were 
 redoubled : and ' Greeks and Syrians, Armenians and Latins, 
 in their own language respectively, called upon God and 
 His saints to speed it.' ^''^ Fulcher of Chartres, who was one 
 ot the worshippers himself, and attests the concourse of 
 Greeks, Latins, and Syrians, by which he was surrounded, 
 explains the order of Divine service on that occasion. ^'^ 
 ' About the third hour the patriarch gave the signal for the 
 diurnal office to be commenced by the canons. Then the 
 lections followed alternately ; first one of them in Latin, by 
 
 '«» On Christmas day, and at Bethle- "' Ibid. c. 26. 
 
 hem in the church of the Nativity. "= Guibert, Hist. Hicros. vii. 14. 
 
 Ibid'. X. c. 9. '" Ihid. c. 27-28. 
 
 "» Bell. Sac. X. u. 4-5. "' Gest.pereg. Franc, e. 24. 
 
 I 
 
114 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 a Latin ; then the same read over again in Greek, by a Greek, 
 from the pulpit. After the whole office had been gone 
 through thus, a little before the ninth hour, one of the Greeks 
 from one side of the monastery,' adjoining the church of the 
 Sepulchre, ' according to ancient custom, began vociferating 
 in a loud voice, "Kyrie eleison;" to which all who were 
 present made immediate response in the same strain.' 
 
 Nothing, surely, could supply stronger proof of their 
 unanimity of faith and practice than their joint celebration 
 of this service, so bitterly derided by the Latins of the present 
 day. In the same spirit of fraternisation we find a letter 
 addressed in the name of 'the patriarch of Jerusalem, of 
 the bishops of the Holy Land, both Greek and Latin, and 
 the whole host of the Lord,' to all western Christians, in- 
 viting them thither.*" 
 
 Unfortunately, scandals followed too thick upon each 
 other not to bring about a revolution of some kind. Daim- 
 bert, unable to get back to Jerusalem, employs his time in 
 attending Baldwin count of Edessa, Tancred, and Bohe- 
 mond, who had regained his liberty, to the wars. In their 
 camp are likewise Bernard patriarch of Antioch, and Bene- 
 dict archbishop of Edessa ; and the three lords, accompanied 
 by the three prelates, cross the Euphrates and besiege 
 Carran.^'° When the campaign was over, but not be- 
 fore, Daimbert sets off for Eome, pleads his cause there, 
 and after some delay is restored by Paschal II.'" He is 
 taken ill, however, at Messina, in his way back, and dies 
 there. Then Gibelinus, archbishop of Aries, is sent over to 
 the Holy Land as papal legate ; and Ebremar having been 
 removed by him to the see of Csesarea, is chosen patriarch 
 himself.^^' Death carries him off speedily ; and once more 
 the star of Arnulph is in the ascendant. '^^ In vain his evil 
 deeds are reported to Eome, in vain the bishop of Orange, 
 sent out as legate to take cognisance of them, decreed his 
 deposition. Arnulph was off in all haste to Eome ; and ' by 
 fair words and by a profusion of presents,' says William of 
 Tyre, ' procured his return through favour of the apostolic see ; 
 regaining the see of Jerusalem by the same licentious con- 
 
 "= Vol. i.p. 271, Thesaur. Anecd. ty " Ibid. xi. 1. "» Ibid. c. 4. 
 Martene and Durand. "' Ibid. c. 15. 
 
 s'" Bell. Sac. x. 29. 
 
PRACTICE OF THE CKUSADEBS. 115 
 
 duct, that had formerly caused his deposition.''*" More 
 privileges are now sought and obtained for the church of 
 Jerusalem from Paschal. The jealousy of the patriarch of 
 Antioch is roused, and only pacified by the receipt of letters 
 from Eome, confirmatory of all the privileges and rights of 
 his see.'" But there was a grand dispute between the two 
 patriarchs not long afterwards, when Fulcher of Aquitaine, 
 was elected archbishop of Tyre, and on receiving his pall 
 from Innocent II., was made dependant upon Jerusalem, 
 instead of Antioch, but with the same rank.'*'' Tyre, while 
 under Antioch, had been styled ' Protothronos,' a title of 
 which its prelates were far too proud to be willing to part 
 with. Yet neither was Antioch willing to abandon one of its 
 most distinguished suffragans to its younger sister ; Antioch, 
 about whose antient prerogatives Leo IX. had been so jealous, 
 when the patriarch of Constantinople had been delated to 
 him, as having invaded them.'^' However, Jerusalem carried 
 the day now, though it was fiercely contended ; provoking 
 this bitter innuendo from a future prelate of the transferred 
 see. ' The cause of all this evil we attribute, not unde- 
 servedly, to the Koman church, which, in ordering us to be 
 subject to the church of Jerusalem, allows us unjustly to be 
 severed from that of Antioch."'^ Amidst all these disputes 
 and intrigues amongst the Latins, one is tempted to enquire 
 what had become of all the Greek bishops ? Had they been 
 expelled their sees, or allowed the titles of them without the 
 revenues, or were they still in actual possession of any not 
 important enough to be coveted by the Latins ? If they 
 were still possessed of any, they must have been very quiet, 
 and occasioned nobody any trouble, or none, at least, worth 
 recording, or we should have heard of them. a.d. 1120 
 there was a great council for the correction of manners, held 
 at Nablous,'«5 and a list of the prelates, abbots, and priors, 
 attending it has been preserved ; but it does not include a 
 single Greek or Syrian name, though there was at least one 
 Greek convent, that of S. Elias on Mount Tabor, of great size 
 and consequence, within call.''^ On the other hand, even the 
 archbishop of Mamistra,'*' or Mopsuestia, in Cilicia, was a 
 
 '8» Bell. Sac. e. 26. "" Sell. Sac. c. 14. 
 
 »«' Ibid. c. 28. "" Ibid. xii. 13. 
 
 '»2 Ibid. xiv. 12. "^ Ibid. xxii. 26. 
 
 '^ Above, p. 36. "' Ibid. xiv. 10. 
 
 I 2 
 
IIR LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 Norman. 'Many towns,' we are told, 'that had bishops 
 attached to them, either Grreek or Syrian, before the Norman 
 occupation, had been deprived of them by the Latins, as in- 
 adequate to their proper support and maintena,nce.'^** Their 
 revenues were wanted, in reality, for the larger sees. And 
 •Brocard,^^^ one of the first itinerants of the order of S. Domi- 
 nic, visiting the Holy Land as late as a.d. 1230, candidly 
 says : ' Among the G-reeks all the prelates are monks, remark- 
 able for their abstinence ; and are had in great honor and 
 reverence by the common people.' And even of the other 
 sects that he found there, ' many belonging to them are 
 persons of the greatest simplicity, and without any know- 
 ledge of heresies ; devoted to Christ, attenuating the flesh 
 with fastings, wearing the plainest garments ; in a word, far 
 surpassing the regulars of the church of Eome.' If they were 
 really such as he describes them — and what reason have we 
 for doubting it ? — how inexpressible must have been their 
 horror and indignation at what they saw around thein ; at 
 the profligate prelates in particular, who had said to their pre- 
 lates, ' Give place, we are more orthodox than you.' 
 
 We quit Jerusalem for Antioch. Eadulph, the Norman, was 
 irregularly translated to it, on the death of Bernard^, from 
 Mopsuestia.^'" He is delated to Rome for his crimes; he goes 
 thither,and gains his cause; but on returning,is refused admis- 
 sion into his diocese. Peter, archbishop of Lyons, is sent' out 
 as legate by the pope, to try and arrange matters ; he is met 
 at Acre, and there poisoned, apparently by the partisans of 
 the ejected patriarch. Then Alberic, bishop of Ostia, comes 
 out as legate, and holds a synod at which Eadulph is de- 
 posed. Eadulph is off again to Eome, and succeeds once more ; 
 but on his road back, he, in turn, is met, and drugged to 
 death.'^' As a general rule, the accused prelates who go to 
 Eome, are acquitted and sent back to their sees ; but when a 
 legate ,is sent out to try them, they are deposed, and often 
 replaced by the legate, a.d. 1159, opinions were divided 
 about receiving a legate at all from Alexander IIL his title 
 to the papacy being disputed.^'^ 
 
 We turn to the Knights of S. John, who inhabited the 
 Latin monastery ' within a stone's throw ' of the church of 
 
 =*' Epit. Bell. Sac. ap. Canis. Thes. s™ Bdl. Sac. xiv. 10. 
 
 Tol. iv. p. 436. 3" Ibid. XV. 12-17. " 
 
 '" Ibid. p. 24. 3»2 Ibid. xTiii. 28. 
 
PSACTICE OF THE CRUSADERS. 117 
 
 the Sepulchre, founded by the merchants of Amalfi for the 
 relief of distressed pilgrims, long before the crusaders came. 
 Under Eaymond du Puy, the successor of Gerard, it had be- 
 come a military establishment as well, and had thriven im- 
 mensely in that capacity. But it had scarce come of age in 
 its new existence before it degenerated into a public nuisance, 
 and as it had procured its exemption from episcopal surveil- 
 lance, there was no redress to be had against it anywhere 
 short of Eome.*'* One of the most scandalous scenes in the 
 pages of William of Tyre, is where they take to insulting the 
 patriarch in his own church by ringings of bells outside, and 
 shootings of arrows inside, till they force him, aged as he was 
 then, to concert wit?h his suffragans against them in self- 
 defence. Six bishops accompanied him to Rome, as in a 
 common cause, but when he got there he found the pope 
 indisposed even to grant him an audience, owing, it was be- 
 lieved, to the bribes of his adversaries who had arrived there 
 first.'^'' Alas ! that the pope who then sat should have been 
 a native of England,'"' the only Englishman, in fact, who has 
 ever been pope. ' The original source of all this evil,' says 
 William of Tyre once more, ' seems to have been introduced, 
 though perhaps unconsciously, by the Roman church, when 
 it unduly emancipated that establishment from the jurisdic- 
 tion of the lord patriarch, to whom it had been long and de- 
 servedly subject.' The Knights Templars, instead of confin- 
 ing themselves to the admirable service traced out for them 
 by their chivalrous founders, Hugh and Godfrey, behaved 
 
 '"' Bell. Sac. c. 3. my lord pope Adrian IV., who had 
 '" ' Dicebant quidam dominum pa- admitted me to very great iutimacy. . . 
 pam, ut eum taedioaffioeret, etgravaret In the course of conversation ... ho 
 sumptibus, eum studiosi deelinare : aslced me frankly and earnestly what 
 nam muneribus inflnitis cormptus, in men thought of him' and of the church 
 partem Hospitalariorum dicebatur- se of Rome. In reply, I told him very 
 dedisse proclivem, qui ad eum multii candidly and explicitly what evil things 
 ante prsevenerant.' — Ibid. u. 7. A re- had come to my ears in the provinces, 
 port which is quite borne out by the For, as was said by many, the Roman 
 details which follow (c. 8), if correct, church, which is the mother of all 
 of his interview with Adrian, and the churches, exhibits herself to the rest 
 sequel to it. rather in the light of a step-mother 
 ^Yetthere were Englishmen then, than of a mother. . . As for the pope 
 as now, who could be, when truth re- he is a universal oppressor and well- 
 quired it, plain-spoken — for the honor nigh past endurance.' — DeNug. Curial. 
 -of old England let it be said. 'I lib. vi. 23. A-p. Magn.Biil. Pat. yoI.:kv. 
 remember once,' says John of Salis- p. 427, ed. (}e la Eigne., 
 bury, ' going as far as Apulia, to see 
 
118 lATIX KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 similarly. ' "Withdrawing themselves from the lord patriarch, 
 from whom they had received iastitution, and likewise their 
 first benefices, they denied him that obedience which had 
 been accorded to him by their predecessors, and made them- 
 selves exceedingly troublesome to the churches of God, as 
 well by filching from them tithes and first-fruits, as by dis- 
 turbing their possessions unduly.' ^'^ 
 
 In conclusion, and in general, how do we find bishops and 
 archbishops usually occupied in the Holy Land ? In their 
 respective sees, reclaiming the Greeks from heresy, or the 
 people from sin and ignorance ? Quite the reverse. Minis- 
 tering, if at all, in camps, and at least as often playing 
 soldiers there. One prelate has been already noticed as not 
 even stopping to be installed in his see, but going on with 
 the army. Two patriarchs and one archbishop accompany 
 Bohemond across Euphrates to attack Carran. Gormund, 
 patriarch of Jerusalem, is carried off suddenly by illness 
 while besieging a fort near Lydda.^^' When Edessa was re- 
 taken by the Turks, its loss was ascribed to the avarice of 
 Hugh, its archbishop, who appropriated the money that should 
 have paid the soldiers.''^ At the siege of Ascalon,''' the patri- 
 arch no less than the king, and his suffragan bishops no less 
 than the great men of the realm, are spoken of as pitching 
 their tents before the city and laying siege to it. With such 
 ardour was the siege pressed, that when a bishop of Sidon 
 had to be consecrated, he was ordained by the archbishop of 
 Tyre in the neighbouring church of Lydda, ' because nobody ' 
 — not even a bishop to ordain, therefore — ' was allowed to re- 
 move further from the scene of action. The assault is then 
 made in conformity with the plan, not of the king but of the 
 patriarch, and when, after great slaut^hter, the city capitulates, 
 a religious procession is formed, and the chieftains, ecclesias- 
 tical and temporal, enter chanting hymns and bearing the 
 true cross aloft, that it might be identified with their bloody 
 victory. As there lacked a suitable church for its reception, the 
 patriarch consecrates one, appoints 100 canons to it, and or- 
 dains Absalom as its first bishop. But he had hardly com- 
 pleted his arrangements before Gerard, bishop of Bethlehem, 
 appealed to Rome, got Absalom set aside, and the church of 
 Ascalon transferred in perpetuity, with all its possessions, to 
 
 =»« Bell. Sac. xii. 7. =»= Itid. xvi. 5. 
 
 =»' Ibid. xii. 25. s" Ibid. xvii. 23-30. 
 
PEACTICE OF THE CBUSADEES. 119 
 
 himself and his own church. Later, Amah-ic, king of Jeru- 
 salem, is found taking the field against Saladin and making 
 Ascalon his head-quarters.*"" In his company were the patri- 
 arch of Jerusalem with the true cross, Eadulph bishop of 
 Bethlehem — he was an Englishman''"' and a friend of the Eng- 
 lish pope, Adrian IV., hence he had got transferred to it, en- 
 dowed, as it now was, from the see of Tyre — and Bernard 
 bishop of Acre. Of the temporal lords, it is expressly said 
 very few indeed were present, as though it were to be inferred 
 how much more warlike and true to the camp were the 
 bishops. 
 
 Two saints of the church, S. Bruno of Asti, and S. Peter 
 Damian, were scandalised, and expressed their disapproba- 
 tion, as we have seen, strongly, when Leo IX. accompanied the 
 army which he had organised in self-defence against the Nor- 
 mans. What would they have said, had they lived on into 
 these later scenes ? And fifty years earlier than either of 
 them, the renowned Fulbert bishop of Chartres had denounced 
 unequivocally, and in the most formal terms, the notion of 
 bishops going at all to^ the wars.''"* 
 
 * You ask me wha.t I think of bishops who, despising the 
 blessings of ecclesiastical peace, go in quest of disturbances 
 and attend upon wars. To say the truth, I can by no means 
 venture to call them bishops at all, lest I should wi-ong the 
 very name of religion. I will call them rather tyrants, who, 
 occupied by warlike matters and having a train of soldiers for 
 their escort, hire mercenaries for pay ; so that I know of no 
 temporal monarchs or potentates so well versed in the laws of 
 war, whether in equipping soldiers for battle, or in moving 
 large masses and setting them in array, to disturb the peace 
 of the church and shed the blood of Christians, although 
 opposed to them ; ' and much more to the same effect. It 
 is a grand letter throughout. Only chaplains by profession 
 should, in his opinion, be allowed to accompany any army,*"' 
 and it would be doing him great dishonor to suppose that be- 
 cause the foe was not Christian, but infidel, in the Holy Land, 
 he would have relaxed his rule, or, because later ages were 
 
 "° Ibid. xx. 20. 1010-lS. Ap. Anecd. toI. i. p. 130 et 
 
 "' Ibid. xvi. 17. seq. by Martene and Durand. 
 
 "" Ep. Fulbert. Camot. 'Deepisco- *" And so S. Thomas ii. ii. Quisst. 
 
 pis ad bella procedentibus,' cir. a.d. xl. Art. ii. Eesp. ad 2. 
 
120 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 seduced into that fallacy, that his rule should be thought to 
 have lost its force. 
 
 With these facts before us, is it possible to conceive the 
 ecclesiastical affairs of any nation in a worse state than they 
 were in the Holy Land under Latin rule ? They were admin- 
 istered, in fact, by a board rather of feudal barons or war- 
 riors, than bishops. ' Holders of dioceses in Europe came out, 
 one after another, for the sole purpose of bettering them- 
 selves in the east, where intrigue or violence procured them 
 sees. These they held, but frequently without residing on 
 them, and provided only that they were satisfied with their 
 emoluments or could add to them. Otherwise they soon got 
 translated to some richer see by fair means or foul, arch- 
 bishops even condescending to become bishops again, when 
 they could do so with profit. Episcopal translations, which 
 till A.D. 891, or the pontificate of Formosus, are said to have 
 been unknown in the west, became the rule among those 
 western bishops who moved to the east ; and it was a rule 
 which they loved too well to fail to communicate to the west 
 on their return home. Half their time was spent in the 
 camp, on preparations for offensive or defensive warfare. 
 ' The general ignorance of the Latin clergy,' says Mr. Finlay, 
 ' raised feelings of contempt, which were changed into abhor- 
 rence, when the Greeks beheld men calling themselves bishops, 
 clad in coats of mail, riding through the streets on fiery 
 chargers, and returning from battle covered with blood.' ^"^ It 
 is needless to add that the Latins despised the Greek bishops 
 in return, as animated by a different spirit. No persons are 
 so odious as those whose rights we have invaded, on whose 
 liberties we have trampled, and to whom our misdeeds are 
 no secret. ' In matters of religion,' says Sir F. Palgrave,''"* 
 ' the Latins were even more intolerant than the Mussulmen 
 had become,for theMahometans now left the native Christians 
 alone, whereas the Latins subverted, as far as they could, the 
 oriental establishment, by erecting Latin sees in the provinces 
 which they occupied, directly contrary to the main principle 
 
 "• Byz. Emp. vol. ii. p. 130. The girded on the sword, and led their 
 
 anther of ' Eome the civiliser ' in the warriors to the charge against the 
 
 Dublin Review for April 1866, has not Moslem host.' — P. 307. 
 
 the least objection to see the popes "^ England and IJiormandy, vol. iv. 
 
 themselves so employed, when resist- p. 531. 
 ing Islamism. ' More than once they 
 
PKACTICE OF THE CRUSADERS. ]-21 
 
 of the canon law, that there cannot be two bishops in one 
 see. The greater portion also of the Latin clergy were men 
 of shameful conduct ; so completely did the Latin domina- 
 tion crush the oriental Christians, that we discover no token 
 of their existence except in the oppressions they sustained. 
 We never hear their voice otherwise than in their groans.' 
 ■ As may be supposed, what they had to endure from the 
 tnights and barons far exceeded what they had to endure 
 from the clergy ; but of secular outrages one or two instances 
 must suffice. 
 
 ' Wherever the crusaders colonised,' says Palgrave once 
 more, 'they followed the Turkish precedents, insulting the 
 native Christians, humiliating them, keeping them out of 
 their possessions. In every city where the Latins obtained 
 the mastery, they took possession of the houses, and drove 
 the Orientals — Greeks, Syrians, Armenians, Nestorians, who- 
 ever they might be, into the Black Town. The " Assizes of 
 Jerusalem," the colonial code of the Latin kingdom, do not 
 recognise any burgesses except Latins. We are in great 
 obscurity respecting the rural population. As far as we can 
 judge from the hints that reach us, the services heretofore 
 rendered were aggravated by tha new lords of the soil. 
 Hugh de S. Omer, baron of Tiberias, had less affinity with 
 his Syrian rayahs than Turk or Tartar ; his Flemish bailiff 
 hit as heavily as the reis, and increased the rent besides.' ^"^ 
 This was their normal condition. Now and then, here and 
 there, they would be exposed to some act of pure brigandage. 
 William of Tyre — no Greek heretic, but a Latin prelate — 
 has described what he calls 'the abominable invasion' of 
 Cyprus byEeynold, prince of Antioch, A.D. 1154 or 1155. It 
 was wholly unprovoked by the islanders, and never exceeded 
 by any of the deeds of the pagan Danes in England. They 
 had, in fact, ' been forewarned of it^' says the archbishop,'"'' 
 'by some of our people. . Accordingly, they collected their 
 whole force, such as it was, from all parts of the island ; but 
 Eeynold defeated their army at the first onset. . . . And 
 from that time forth, going through the whole island where 
 he would, he overthrew cities, destroyed towns, broke open 
 convents, male and female, wantonly : exposing to insult the 
 holy women and tender virgins. So for some days they 
 
 '»= Ibid. p. 530. "' Bell. Sac. xviii. 10. 
 
122 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 raged about the entire couatry, without finding any to oppose 
 them, sparing neither age nor sex, and subjecting all alike to 
 the same treatment. At length, having got together their 
 spoils from all quarters, infinite both in kind and quantity, 
 they betake themselves to the coast ; and having got their 
 ships ready, cross over to Antiochian territory, squandering 
 away, within a short space of time, their ill-gotten gains, 
 according to the proverb — 
 
 Non habet eventus sordida prseda bonos.' 
 
 Eeynold, on his return, commenced plundering Aimeric, his 
 own patriarch,"' and almost the only Latin patriarch in those 
 days of whom any good is recorded, to compensate for what 
 he had gambled away. Manuel I., at the head of a large 
 force, stopped his proceedings, and received his abject sub- 
 mission ; but no redress was demanded or obtained of him 
 for the poor Cypriots. Soon afterwards, Manuel was himself 
 the cause of another savage onslaught on his unoffending 
 subjects. Left a widower, he demanded a relative of Bald- 
 win III. in marriage. Baldwin fixed on Melisenda, sister of 
 Eaymond, count of Tripoli, for that honor. A magnificent 
 outfit was prepared for her approaching nuptials. But after 
 keeping her in suspense for a whole year, Manuel declined 
 her hand, and married another. Eaymond, furious with dis- 
 appointment, but despairing of doing the emperor any injury 
 in the field, extemporised a scheme of foul revenge by sea. 
 ' He ordered the galleys, which he had designed for the 
 transport of his sister, to be furnished with arms, and deli- 
 vered them into the hands of a number of pirates and 
 desperate ruffians whom he had summoned, engaging them 
 to coast along the imperial territory, and spare neither age 
 nor sex, but treat all alike. Particularly they were to make 
 indiscriminate havoc of all monasteries and churches, burn- 
 
 ''°' BelUSac. xviii. c. i. wbicli is out of ill-treated, and snbsequemtly promised 
 
 place, and where he i» not mentioned by to treat well. But Cinnamus {Hist. iv. 
 
 name; but his name is-given c. 22'. He 18) expressly speaks of him, as'' their 
 
 was again ill-used by the profligate so-called patriarch.' And what Eeynold 
 
 Bohemond II. a.d. 1181 (lib. xxii. 7), undertook to do, in future, was, to get 
 
 just as he had effected the reooncilia- his patriarch from Constantinople, 
 
 tion of the Maronites with Rome (c. 8). apx'fpia 4k BvCavrlov els 'Avrioxelac 
 
 Mr. Finlay has therefore fallen into kotA ?eos ireixrrecrBai rh irdkaiov, a 
 
 a curious mistake here, supposing it to promise, which of course, he never 
 
 have been the Greek patriarch whom he fulfilled. 
 
PEACTICE OF THE CRUSADERS. 123 
 
 ing, pillaging, and murdering, everywhere without restraint 
 —making might right. So they set out, and doing as they 
 were told, took ship, and visited all the islands and seaports 
 belonging to the emperor, putting a wide interpretation on 
 the words of the count as they went. They robbed, they set 
 on fire, they massacred, on every side. They desecrated 
 churches, invaded monasteries, made no account of the 
 sanctity of any spots. They plundered pilgrims returning 
 from the Holy Land of their garments, and sent them away 
 naked either to die or to live by begging. Merchants 
 engaged in commerce for the support of their wives and 
 families were denuded by them of all that they had, and 
 went home deprived 6f their earnings and property.' '"'^ 
 
 I have purposely selected these descriptions from the his- 
 torian of the holy war, because of their similarity. At first 
 sight they might appear to be mere verbal repetitions- 
 stereotyped expressions of his own. But the historian is 
 only tautological because his facts are identical. He could 
 not have described them otherwise — Norman raids all ran 
 the same course, and ended in so many repeated enactments 
 of the same horrors. They were the performances of a race 
 characterised by their utter lawlessness and love of gain, by 
 their wanton ferocity, and by their intense depravity. They 
 might sometimes exceed, but they rarely fell short of the 
 description which is here given of them in each case. 
 
 Thebes and Corintb had been cruelly sacked in the war 
 between Manuel and the Sicilian king Roger ; but the sack 
 of Thessalonica by William the grandson of Roger, a.d. 1185, 
 was attended by such" extraordinary barbarities,^'" that, 
 from that time forth, the Greeks everywhere throughout the 
 empire regarded the Latins as their worst enemies, and the 
 schism between them became general and irremediable. 
 • Although almost all others,' says Nicetas, commenting upon 
 that event, ' on worsting their adversaries in war, are -apt to 
 use them ill and treat them despitefully, and do by them 
 whatever pride elevated by success may dictate, still the 
 Latin, when he has subdued his foe, and reduced him to 
 
 "• Bdl. Sac. xriii. 33. chanted their service in the nasal 
 
 *" 'Insultwasaddedtocntelty ; the melody prevalent in the east, the 
 
 altars of the Greek churches were de- Normans howled out a chorus in imi- 
 
 filed ; the ceremonies of the Greeks tation of beaten hounds.' — Finlay, vol. 
 
 were ridiculed ; and when the priests ii. p. 266. 
 
124 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 submission, is a most intolerable evil, far beyond description. 
 Should it chance to be a Eoman '—that is, a Greek—' that 
 is captured, unacquainted with the Latin language, and so 
 far removed in nationality from them as to have but little 
 fellowship with them in dress, he is pronounced hated of 
 G-od, and doomed to drink the cup of the Lord's fury un- 
 mixed .... What poisonous viper, or herd-destroying 
 lion . . . was ever so savage, as Latin inhumanity to its 
 captives ? The lands which it is ours to inhabit, and to eat 
 the fruits of, are compared to paradise by the cursed Latins ; 
 and because they covet the good things which belong to us, 
 they are ever hostile to our people. Plotters they are con- 
 tinually of mischief; and feigning friendship, the better to 
 secure their opportunity, they hate us as sworn foes. .... 
 In short, a chasm, one of the deepest, separates between us 
 and them ; we are irreconcilable in sentiment — we are dia- 
 metrically opposed in every way — although we may be joined 
 in body, and be found inhabiting the same house.' ^'^ Eusta- 
 thius, the great commentator upon Homer, and no less a 
 master in the school of theology, was archbishop of Thessa- 
 lonica, when it was taken, and has left us a full account of all 
 the miseries to which his flock and diocese were then sub- 
 jected, including the indignities endured by himself.""^ But 
 the sack of Thessalonica, as it was the worst, so it was the 
 last exploit of the Normans. In twenty years more their 
 name had been blotted out for ever as a distinct nationality 
 from under heaven. By a singular fatality, Jerusalem was 
 lost to Christianity, and with it the capital of that kingdom, 
 to which they, above all others, had contributed, just as the 
 legitimate male offspring of Tancred of Hauteville became, 
 by the death of William II., extinct in Sicily. Urban II. 
 died without having his heart gladdened by tidings of the 
 capture of Jerusalem by Grodfrey ; and Urban III. died of a 
 broken heart, on receiving the sad tidings of its recapture by 
 Saladin a.d. 1187. Then, within sixteen years of that date 
 — in the very year of the capture of Constantinople by the 
 Venetians — ' the French monarche annexed to their crown the 
 Duchy of Normandy ; the sceptre of her ancient dukes had 
 
 "' Meet. Chron. Anna!. Andronicus Bekker. On his merits as a theologian 
 
 Comnenus, lib. i. 8. ' see cardinal Mai, quoted by Eohr- 
 
 <'■- ' J>e Thessal. a Latinis captA,' v. backer, vol. xvi. p. 77. 
 p. 462 et seq. part xxx. Hist.- Byz. ed. 
 
EXTINCTION OF THE XORMANS. 125 
 
 been transmitted, by a granddaughter of William the Con- 
 queror to the house of Plantagenet ; and the adventurous 
 Normans who had raised so many trophies in France, Eng- 
 land, and Ireland, in Apulia, Sicily, and the east, were lost, 
 eitherin victory or servitude, among the vanquished nations.' ^'^ 
 The chapter of coincidences would not be complete without 
 some reference to the story told of the murder of the his- 
 torian, in whose track we have been following; a striking 
 commentary, if it be true, upon the events described in his 
 pages. It is found in a continuation of his work in French, 
 written at Rome a.d. 1275.'"'' There are chronological diffi- 
 culties involved in the manner of telling it, but the upshot of it 
 is, that he was poisofled at the instigation of Heraclius, the 
 last patriarch of Jerusalem under Latin rule, whose enmity 
 he bad incurred — more probably by contending for his depo- 
 sition, than, as this writer has it, by opposing his election. 
 Had it been his election, the archbishop would scarcely have 
 recorded it, as he does, without a word of protest, in his own 
 history.'"^ But could he, as suffragan of Jerusalem, as arch- 
 bishop of Tyre, have remained passive subsequently ? This 
 Heraclius of ill-omened name — it was observed of him that 
 he was namesake of the emperor, in whose reign Jerusalem 
 had been sacked by Chosroes, king of Persia, and the true 
 cross seized — yet not without interest for Englishmen, for 
 he it was who came over to England a.d. 1185 with the 
 keys of Jerusalem, to place them in the hands of Henry II., 
 and request his acceptance of the crown likewise ; and who 
 consecrated the church of the Templars during his stay in 
 London :'"^ exceeded all others that had preceded him in ill- 
 fame. He had a numerous illegitimate family by the wife of 
 a low merchant of Nablous, whom on the death of her husband 
 he brought to Jerusalem, and lodged in one of the chief 
 houses of the city. She appeared constantly with him in 
 public, and went by the name of the patriarchess. ' Such was 
 the life,' says the honest annalist, 'of the patriarch ; such the 
 example which he set to others, in a city where, through the 
 
 *" Gibbon, ending of c. Ivi. general trustworthiness of this work, 
 
 *" Monit. ap. Migne, Patrol, vol. cei. which Pagi was disposed to hold cheap. 
 
 p. 891, and for the remarks of Bongars, "' Lib. xxii. 4. 
 
 ibid. p. 203-6. Martene and Durand, *'" Addison's Kniglds Templars, end 
 
 Vet. Script. Monum. torn. v. p. 581 et of c. ii. and the references. 
 
 seq. quite bear out Bongars as to the 
 
126 LATIN KINGDOM IN PALESTINE. 
 
 vices of the monks and clergy, female chastLty had become 
 
 well-nigh impossible Jesus Christ could not put up 
 
 with it any longer.' ^'' Or, as he says again, ' Our Lord Jesus 
 Christ would not listen to any prayer that they made : for 
 the filth, the luxury, and the adultery, which prevailed in 
 the city, did not suffer prayer or supplication to ascend 
 before. Grod.''"' In short, it would be impossible to con- 
 ceive William of Tyre Tiot denouncing his unworthy superior, 
 on coming over with tidings of the fall of Jerusalem, to the 
 pope ; ^'^ and his own death may have occurred on his way 
 back through Italy, after taking part a.d. 1188, at Grisors, 
 in the conference between the kings of England and France.*^" 
 
 "' Contin.Se^i. <Sae. lib.xxiii.e. 11. ■"" Chron. SadnlpM, c. 33. Ap. 
 
 ■"' Ibid. c. 23. Addison, ibid. e. 4, Martene and Durand. Vet. Script, et 
 
 seems to attribute these words to the Monum. torn. v. p. 544 et seq. 
 English ehronicler, from whom he had "° Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 1188, u, 2 
 
 quoted previously. et seq. 
 
127 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 SACK or- CONSTANTINOPLE BY THK LATINS. 
 
 The schism inaugurated by the Normans was consum- 
 mated by their successors in adventure — and to a great extent 
 in crime — the Venetians. After the facts which have been 
 adduced, can it be doubted that the real breach between east 
 and west commenced, not so much with Photius in the 9th 
 nor with Michael Cerularius in the 11th, as with the Normans 
 in the 12th century? The schism was, so to speak, precipi- 
 tated by the turn of events that should have made for peace 
 — that should have restored a better understanding in church 
 and state between their respective chiefs — and promoted 
 closer amity and intercourse between Christians of all ranks. 
 The causes of it were not theological, but historical. There 
 had been some estrangement, but it had never been general. 
 There had been questions of jurisdiction between the patri- 
 archs of Eome and Constantinople ; questions of theology 
 between a sprinkling of Grreek and Latin doctors ; questions of 
 ritual between those of the Latin and Greek clergy who were 
 brought into close contact or proximity with each other. 
 But both the questions of jurisdiction and of ritual had been 
 essentially /roTiiier questions, and had seldom extended any 
 further than the boundaries, natural or political, separating 
 between the east and west, nor any longer than while the limits 
 of those boundaries themselves were contested. As soon as 
 the sword, or eventualities stronger than tlie sword, had 
 settled what belonged to each, every question relating to 
 ritual or jurisdiction was set at rest for the time being, and 
 only renewed when political arrangements were disturbed 
 again. There were numerous churches belonging to the 
 Latins in Constantinople, enjoying the free use of their own 
 rite, till the Greek rite was threatened in southern Italy. 
 
128 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 And perhaps if the Greek rite had never been imposed in 
 southern Italy, the Latin rite would never have crossed over 
 to the eastern shores of the Adriatic. The Greek churches 
 in Eome at all events remained open at a time when the 
 Latin churches in Constantinople were closed. As to theo- 
 logical questions, the Greek explanations of the procession 
 of the Holy Ghost had been accepted by the second Nicene 
 council, defended and confirmed by Adrian I. ; and the 
 Latins had never in any case subsequently to their attempt 
 upon Bulgaria sought to impose their version of the creed 
 upon the Greeks. In short, none of these questions had 
 done more than create temporary misunderstandings between 
 the chiefs of the hierarchy ; and though they had been re- 
 vived again and again for centuries, they had never pene- 
 trated to the masses, or caused any real alienation among 
 themselves between Christians of the east and west. Every- 
 where there was as much intercommunion, as perhaps there 
 ever had been since the division of the empire ; and so far as 
 they could understand each other, which they were beginning 
 to do less and less every day, they constantly worshipped to- 
 gether, unmindful of the differences in their respective rituals. 
 Witness the religious processions of the Greeks and Latins, 
 and their joint celebration of litanies in the Holy Land. 
 Witness the reunions of both communions at Antioch under 
 the Greek patriarch, which short-lived as it was, was only 
 terminated on the death of the papal legate. Witness the 
 fellow-feeling exhibited by Tancred for the native Christians, 
 and by the native Christians of Jerusalem for Peter the 
 
 Hermit. 
 
 Even at head-quarters there was, by no means, the settled 
 or pointed antagonism that we should have pictured to our- 
 selves between the defenders of orthodoxy and the abettors 
 of heresy supposing them to have been such respectively, and 
 even granting them to have been guilty of dissimulation on 
 both sides to some extent. Baronius ^" is of opinion that 
 Alexius died in communion with Eome. But a short time 
 before his death he burnt a monk of the name of Basil for 
 holdino' opinions, which the Inquisition was afterwards em- 
 ployed to suppress in the west.^^^ Four councils met at 
 Constantinople within seven years, in the reigns of his son 
 
 «: See his reasons, a.d. 1 1 18, n. 23. «^ Finlay's Bye. Emp. vol. ii. p. 84-5. 
 
FEELINGS WESTWARDS OF THE CAPITAL. 129 
 
 and grandson, to put down the same heresy ; «' and at one 
 of them Cosmas, patriarch of that city, was deposed for con- 
 niving at it in the monk Nipho. Orthodoxy was again vin- 
 dicated A.D. 1156, when Soteric, patriarch elect of Antioch, 
 was degraded from the priesthood for asserting that what is 
 offered in the Holy Eucharist was not offered to the Son as 
 well as the Father and Holy Ghost.''" Then at a sixth coun- 
 cil in A.D. 1166, presided over by patriarch Luke Chrysoberge, 
 wonderful to relate, four Greek prelates — of Corcyra, Sidra, 
 Lampis, and Bulgaria — were suspended, not for any errors of 
 their own, but because they had calumniated the Germans as 
 being unsound in their theology.^'^ 
 
 Friendly conferences took place between theologians of the 
 Latin and Greek schools under the same emperors ; and 
 communications betokening friendly dispositions on both 
 sides often passed between them and the west. Chrysolanus, 
 archbishop of Milan, visited Constantinople a.d. 1110 and re- 
 mained there two years. During that time he appears to 
 have done his best to convince Alexius *^^ of the untenable- 
 ness of the objections that had been urged against the double 
 procession ; not by any means, however, charging his oppo- 
 nents with heresy. Peter, the far-famed abbot of Cluni, 
 wrote to John, the next emperor, a.d. 1119,^^' soliciting the 
 restitution of some monastery belonging to his order there. 
 Another epistle of his is inscribed, 'to the venerable and 
 great high-priest of God, the patriarch of Constantinople ; ' 
 and throughout he pleads for the rights of his monastery in 
 much the same language that he would have used in addres- 
 sing any prelate of the same rank in the west. ' Although 
 distance of place and division of tongues prevent our meeting 
 face to face and enjoying converse with each other, still one 
 Lord, one faith, one baptism, one charity ought occasionally 
 to join those who are separated, and unite them in affection, 
 
 "' Mansi, torn. xxi. pp. 553, 585, Pagi, ibid. n. 5, shows that he was there 
 
 598, and 702. from a.d. 1 1 10 to 1 1 12, but denies that 
 
 "* Ibid. p. 834. he had gone on any embassy. His 
 
 "' Ibid. torn. xxii. p. 1. Oomp. tract is certainly couched in the form 
 
 Leo Allat. de Cons. lib. ii. 1 2, 2, accor- of a speech (and comp. JBaron. a.d. 1118 
 
 ding to whom the name of one of these n. 23, on the embassy), and Eustratius, 
 
 Greek bishops, Irenicus, is held up to archbishop of Nicsea is said to have 
 
 perpetual anathema in the Triodion. replied to him. Gieseler, E. H. Per. iii. 
 
 On which v. Neale, Gen. Inirod. vol. ii. D. iii. § 96, note 2, HuU's tr. 
 p. 867-75. *" Baron, ibid. n. 19. 
 
 *«• Ap. Baron, a.d. 1116, n. 8 et seq. 
 
 K 
 
130 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 and make them communicate. . . . Could I but come to 
 Constantinople, and venerate the saints who lie buried there 
 ... I should behold your eVer-to-be-desired countenance, 
 and in you venerate the blessed pontiffs of your city.' 
 Thirty years later, indeed, we have Peter writing in a very 
 different strain to Eoger, king of Sicily; but it was not 
 prompted by any false tenets that had come to his know- 
 ledge of the Greek church. Eeports had reached him of the 
 treachery of Manuel, and he believed them. What he lays 
 to his charge is not heterodoxy, but ' the iniquitous, unpre- 
 cedented, and lamentable betrayal of the host of the living 
 Grod ' — he means the second crusade — ' by the Greeks and 
 their wicked king.' "^^ "We have not yet come to the parti- 
 culars of that disaster ; or finished with the reign of John. 
 About midway in it there was a religious conference held of 
 unusual interest by leave of the emperor, of which we have 
 the fullest and most faithful report drawn up by one who was 
 a principal actor in it, Anselm, bishop of Havelburg in Saxony. 
 He had come to Constantinople, he tells us, as ambassador 
 from Lothair 11.''^* and it ' had been the wish of the patriarch, 
 a religious man, that a public meeting shoiild be held, and a 
 day fixed, on which might be brought forward in the hearing 
 of all what could be said on either side.' The subjects chosen 
 for debate were the procession, the primacy, and the use of 
 leavened or unleavened bread in the eucharist. Other points 
 were touched upon incidentally. We need not enquire what 
 was argued in each case or who got the best of it on the 
 whole. Numbers of Greeks and Latins assembled to heai' 
 them discussed. One Moses, of Italian origin, but a native 
 of Pergamo, interpreted for both. The earlier conferences 
 were held in the church S. Irene ; the latest in the great 
 church or S. Sophia. The disputant on the part of the 
 Greeks was Neckites, archbishop of Nicomedia, ' a venerable 
 and most learned man ' — such is the honorable witness of his 
 opponent — 'chief among the twelve masters, who according 
 to the wise custom of the Greeks regulate the studies both of 
 the liberal arts and of Holy Writ ; imder whose cognisance 
 all the most abstruse questions are brought ; and whose deci- 
 sions on them are forthwith accepted without hesitation, and 
 
 «' Ap. Baron, a.d. 1160, n. 5. to books i. and ii. (ap. Daeh. SpicU. 
 
 «» For these details see his preface torn. i. p. 162 et seij. ed. de la Barre). 
 
FEELINGS WESTWARDS OF THE CAPITAL. 131 
 
 registered as authoritative.' Anselm speaks as honorably and 
 ungrudgingly of the many religious establishments which he 
 then visited. • In the eastern church, too, there are religious 
 orders of all sorts, amongst the Greeks, Armenians, and 
 Syrians, professing one and the same catholic faith, but dif- 
 fering not a little from each other in their customs, rule, 
 habit, diet, and use of the psalter. While I was resident in 
 
 the imperial city as ambassador and prosecuting my 
 
 researches with keen interest, I saw many Christian orders 
 there living under rule. In a monastery dedicated to the 
 " All-Mighty," I saw as many as 700 monks observing the 
 rule of S. Antony ; in another dedicated to the " Lover of Man," 
 I saw no less than 500 observing the rule of S. Pachomius. 
 Numbers of other congregations whom I saw were observing 
 the rule of S. Basil the great, of most learned fame.' *^'' As 
 in the letters of Peter the Venerable we are unexpectedly 
 made aware of the existence of- a branch of Cluni in the 
 Greek capital, so the existence of two Greek convents in 
 Rome comes out incidentally in one of the replies of the 
 archbishop, which is still more surprising. 'Hence there 
 exists to this day within the walls of the vast city of Rome, 
 hard by the church of S. Caesarius, a congregation of Greek 
 monks : without the walls too, on the Latin way, in Roman 
 territory, at the place called " Crypta Ferrea,"''" there is 
 another congregation of Greek monks similarly, who still, as 
 I know for a certainty, make their oblations with leavened 
 bread ; and that without causing any offence to the Roman 
 pontiff, or even to those Latins among whom they dwell, 
 whom they admit to communion, and by whom they are ad- 
 mitted to communion themselves.* ^^^ The^re were many 
 doubtless in that audience who could have refuted Neckites 
 on the spot from personal experience, had he stated what was 
 not fact. And what he says of ' Crypta Ferrea,' we may still 
 any day verify for ourselves. The last scene in those con- 
 ferences is worth transcribing in full. 
 
 'Anselm, bishop of Havelburg, said: I thank God who 
 hath removed from me this cause of offence, this disgrace to 
 the Christian name, which hitherto I had suspected of the 
 most wise race of the Greeks.' 
 
 *" Lib. Dial. i. c. 10. there now as then. 
 
 "' Now ' Grotta Ferrata,' with the "' Lib. iii. c. 13. 
 same Greek convent and Greek services 
 
 X 2 
 
132 SACK OF CONSTANTIKOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 ' Neckites, archbishop of Nicomedia, said : If our faith and 
 our rites, which we have in the law of God, are approved of 
 by you in your prudence, we are heartily glad. But since 
 we appear to differ to some extent in trifles, and not on 
 points of importance, which though not injurious to the in- 
 terests of souls, still do not promote love, we ought, as I said, 
 to labour with all our might that a general council be held 
 at a convenient time and place, where all things that separate 
 you and us from the same rite should be harmonised and re- 
 duced to one form, that both Grreeks and Latins should be- 
 come one people under one Lord Jesus Christ in one faith 
 and one baptism and one rite of the sacraments.' 
 
 ' Anselm, bishop of Havelburg, said : It belongs to heretics 
 to seek corners and subterfuges. It appears that you in desir- 
 ing a general council only aim at what is catholic. Wherefore 
 I too wish that a general council may meet, in which your 
 wisdom, eloquence, sanctity, maturity, discretion, mildness, 
 meekness, devotion, constancy, piety, perfection, may shine 
 forth before the whole church to the edification and profit of 
 all. This in my humiUty, mediocrity, insignificance, zeal, 
 affection, and desire, I shall never cease to pray for. Where- 
 upon all exclaimed and said, Griory to God, glory to God, 
 glory to God ; it has been a good dialogue on both sides ; 
 let it be transcribed entire ; let it be transcribed entire.' *^^ 
 
 So ended those conferences which, not content with having 
 reported so faithfully, bishop Anselm enhanced in value by 
 dedicating them, with permission, to Eugenius III. the friend 
 and pupil of S. Bernard. ' The obstinacy of the Greeks,' as S. 
 Bernard puts it, ' who are with us, and yet not with us — who 
 are united to us in faith, but divided in peace ; though they 
 have swerved even in faith before now from the right 
 paths,'"** had given way. One might have supposed that 
 there were no knotty points left for Greeks and Latins to 
 wrangle over, or make difficulties about, in future ; they had 
 been discussed so threadbare. Political heart-burnings in- 
 deed were revived by the second crusade; still even they 
 were counterbalanced by the negotiations which went on un- 
 interruptedly between Eome and Constantinople, and might . 
 never have become general, had they not been aggravated by 
 other events of the same kind that occurred latter ; on several 
 
 *" Lib. iii. 22. ■"* Be Condd. lib. iii. 1. 
 
PEELINGS WESTWARDS OF THE CAPITAL. 133 
 
 of which it has been necessary to dwell in advance. What 
 was the reply of Basil, archbishop of Thessalonica, for in- 
 stance, to Adrian IV. thirty years before the cruel sack of 
 that city ? Adrian was sending a message to Manuel, who 
 • had invaded Apulia with his consent.' "' The Anglo-Saxon 
 pope was of opinion that the Grreeks were more to be trusted 
 than the conquerors of his country, the Normans. Accordingly 
 he wrote, commending his messengers, as they passed, to the 
 good offices of the Greek archbishop, as follows : 
 
 'Adrian, bishop, servant of the servants of God, to our 
 venerable brother the archbishop of Thessalonica, salutation 
 and apostolical benediqfion : 
 
 ' Since the day that through the enmity of the old foe, the 
 throne of Constantinople separated itself from the holy Eo- 
 man and apostolic church — we can scarce mention it without 
 tears . . . our predecessors, successors of the blessed Peter, 
 have used much zeal and labour, to the end that schism 
 should be removed from between us, and those who have 
 separated themselves from it should be brought back to the 
 unity of the church. .... Wherefore we admonish you, 
 brother in Christ, of your charity by these letters that you 
 would take earnest heed of these things i since there is but 
 one church and one ark alone of sanctification, in which it 
 behoves every one of the faithful to take refuge from the 
 deluge to be saved. . . . How the holy fathers, illumined by 
 the Holy Spirit, bade the hallowed and holy Eoman church 
 have the primacy absolutely over all the church e?, and de- 
 fined that the judgment of all things should be referred to 
 its sentence, in order to the removal of division, and for the 
 unity of the church, and for the joining together of the wall 
 of partition, do you, for the love of God, and for the saving 
 of your soul, and for the attainment of eternal life, take pains 
 to note.' Adrian had been brought into notice by his 
 predecessor Eugenius III., whose legAte he became, soon 
 after the dialogues of Anselm had appeared, dedicated to his 
 patron. If he had read them, he may have anticipated a 
 friendly reply to his letter ; yet it must have been an agree- 
 able surprise to him to find the archbishop of Thessalonica 
 
 *" William of Tyre, b. xviii. c. 7.— the war that ensued between Manuel 
 ' Imperator Constantinopolitanus, con- and Eoger, see Bi/z. Emp. vol. ii. 
 scntiente pap4, Apuham invadit.' For p. 196-200. or Gibbon, c. Ivi. 
 
15'4 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 confirming so unequivocally what had been said by the arch- 
 bishop of Mcomedia some fifteen years before.'"® 
 
 ' We hare read your letter most holy pope . . . and we 
 recognise your voice speaking by letters to our ears and heart. 
 We hear you speaking as a father, as a shepherd, or rather 
 as a chief shepherd. . . . We have heard you calling us to 
 you ; and we have turned about at your voice. Surely, had 
 we considered ourselves alien sons of your holiness, or pre- 
 ferred withdrawing ourselves from your care, we should not 
 have recognised your voice, as that of a father, or turned 
 about at your instance. . . . What has the parable of the 
 lost sheep to do with us, holy father, or the lost drachma 
 either? for we deny that we have ever fallen from your 
 bosom, or abjured either our sonship or your pastoral care, 
 so as to deserve that reproach. By the grace of God we 
 stand fixedly and securely upon the confession of blessed 
 Peter, and whom he confessed and preached, we confess and 
 preach too ... no other foundation than that which is laid, 
 are we acquainted with. I myself, and all who belong to the 
 great and apostolic throne of Constantinople, teach and preach 
 exactly what you do; the word of faith spoken by both 
 churches is one. ... If on some small point-s which have 
 been thrown in among us, we have parted and become many, 
 who are of one and the same spirit, it belongs to your holi- 
 ness, looking out as Christ from heaven, to take them out of 
 the way . . . and of your ability and good will to bring to- 
 gether, and unite those that are parted. . . . Your exalted 
 character, personally, and in respect of your throne . . . 
 is fully competent to remove any existing scandals that 
 breed divisions, and to restore to the churches permanent 
 unity.' 
 
 It was not the papal but the patriarchal jurisdiction of 
 the pope in the east to which the Greeks objected ;' nor the 
 doctrine of the double procession, when properly explained, 
 and not thrust into their creed against their will ; nor the 
 Latin rite, when not introduced among them forcibly to the 
 suppression of their own rite. And when they petitioned the 
 pope for a general council, as they so often had done, where 
 
 "' Mansi (torn. xxi. p. 795 et seq. Anselm's embassy could not hare coin- 
 where both letters are giren) assigns menced later ; though the ' Dialogues ' 
 the date of the letter as a.d. 1153. containing his account of it only came 
 Lothair II. having died a.d. 1137, out a.d. 1145. 
 
FEELINGS WESTWARDS OF THE CAPITAL. 135 
 
 their cause might be heard, it was not because their request 
 was pronounced schismatic or unreasonable that it aa often 
 fell through. 
 
 Alexander III. having been disowned by the emperor Bar- 
 barossa, it may have been good policy in Manuel to declare for 
 him. Yet what other motive but policy could have impelled 
 Frederic ? Manuel, as we have seen, had treated previously 
 with Adrian IV., and he was related by marriage to the king of 
 France, to whose good offices his recognition of Alexander was 
 mainly due.^^^ But Manuel was a theologian as well as a poli- 
 tician; and simultaneously with the embassy that arrived at his 
 court from Alexandej, there came to him, at his own invita- 
 tion, a learned master, named Hugh Eterian, whom he re- 
 quested to prove, in his presence, the doctrine of the double 
 procession, from the Greek fathers. 'When I came before him,' 
 says Hugh,''^* ' I produced passages from SS. Basil, Athanasius, 
 and Cyril, to that efifect; and when I saw that his majesty 
 took the matter in hand seriously, and explored the mean- 
 ings of each word with care, and showed a thorough compe- 
 tency for mastering such involved and weighty subjects, I 
 became exceedingly ambitious of composing a treatise upon 
 that lofty theme.' This work, though it treats exclusively 
 of the procession, is in three books, like that of Anselm, to 
 which it often refers, but of which it has neither the interest 
 nor the standard character, and is dedicated to Alexander III. 
 A copy of it was sent by its author to the patriarch of Antioch, 
 Aimeric, who received the Maronites into communion with 
 Eome,^'' and who in his reply calls it ' a buttress of great 
 strength in behalf of the whole Latin world, to which Greece, 
 with all her learning, will not be able to offer any sophistical 
 objections in reply.' Alexander, in his letter of thanks to 
 the author, seems to hope more from his personal intercourse 
 with the emperor, than from his book. 'We beg of and 
 earnestly admonish you in your discretion, that, as you have 
 composed your work out of devotion to the church and for 
 God, so you would by loving counsel and exhortation incline 
 our dear son in Christ, the illustrious and glorious emperor, 
 to be willing to show his devotion and reverence for the hal- 
 
 "' See the letter of Manuel to and Aimeric may be seen likewise. 
 
 Louis VII. in Mansi, torn. xxi. p. 974. "' Vide Pagi ad Baron, a.d. 1182, 
 
 «• Vref. ap. Migne. Patrol, torn. ccii. n. 10-14. 
 p. 227, where the letters of Alexander 
 
136 SACK OP CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 lowed church of Eome, and for the unity of the one church, 
 that so there may he, as there ought to be, but one fold and 
 one shepherd,' 
 
 Church and state, it is true, were negotiating in the same 
 breath on both sides. If Alexander would accept Manuel as 
 emperor in the west, Manuel would accept the pope as patri- 
 arch in the east ; and that consummation, apparently, was 
 seriously contemplated by both at one time. a.d. 1166 
 Manuel sent Jordan, son of Robert prince of Capua, and 
 dignified by the title of ' sebastos ' in his own empire, with 
 presents for the pope, and an assurance by word of mouth 
 ' that the emperor desired to unite his church as it had been 
 of old in better days, with the very mother of all churches, 
 the hallowed church of Rome ; so that in their one observance 
 of the law of God, and under one head of the church, both 
 Latins and Greeks, clergy and laity, might subsist in unity 
 for ever. It was his request no less, that, whenever the 
 proper time and favourable moment arrived, the crown of 
 the Roman empire should be restored to him by the apostolic 
 see ; for this, he averred, belonged to him of right, and not 
 to the German Frederic.'*'"' Alexander had excommunicated 
 and deposed Frederic some years back ; and Frederic, in 
 revenge, was pressing him just now more hardly than ever. 
 Still Alexander hesitated what reply to make to the rival 
 emperor, but sent the bishop of Ostia and cardinal of 
 SS. Peter and Paul back with Jordan to Constantinople to 
 ' confer with him. It was during their stay there that Manuel 
 was instructed by Hugh on the double procession, as we have 
 seen ; and it was during their stay there likewise that Frede- 
 ric occupied Eome in overwhelming force with his antipope. 
 Alexander was expelled and retired to Benevento. But his 
 rival died within the year at the Vatican ; and Frederic, who 
 had been obliged by a pestilence to quit Rome, was soon 
 afterwards sent flying from Italy by the Lombard league. 
 Therefore, when, a.d. 1168,**' a second embassy arrived in 
 Italy from Manuel, with the same message as before, and a 
 large sum of money, Alexander could be much more decided 
 in his reply. The money was declined with thanks ; and the 
 ambassador was told that, 'as to the demands which bis 
 
 **° Baron. a.d. 1166, from the acts of "' According to Pagi. Baron, has 
 Alexander III.— Comp. Mansi (Vit. it a.d. 1170, n. 64. 
 Alex. Ill) torn. xxi. p. 867. 
 
FEELINGS WESTWARDS OP THE CAPITAL. 137 
 
 master had made on the empire, they involved questions of 
 the highest, most delicate, and perplexed order, to which, 
 owing to their intrinsic difficulty and the statutes of the holy 
 fathers that lay in their way, we are precluded from assenting 
 under conventions of that kind; nor, in fact, ought we to do 
 so, on whom, in virtue of the office confided to us by God, it 
 is incumbent to be foremost in promoting and maintaining 
 peace.' 
 
 Manuel received another rebuff about the same time, nearer 
 home, that was still more disheartening. It appears from a 
 dialogue of Michael of Anchiali, the presiding patriarch, that 
 ' a number of ecclesiastics subject to the pope, both bishops 
 and monks, had arrfved in Constantinople ' — Master Hugh, 
 of course, being one of them — 'with the object of bring- 
 ing about a union of the churches ; and requiring nothing 
 more from the Greeks than (1) the acknowledgment of the 
 primacy, and (2) right of appeals, in the pope; and (3) 
 the commemoration of his name in the liturgy.' A council 
 was held a.d. 1168, apparently between the despatch and 
 return of the second embassy, to receive their proposals ; 
 ' and when, after having said and heard many things,' says 
 another writer,"^ ' as chance would have it, they were for 
 making no concessions, but insisted that everybody should 
 give way to them unreservedly, and adopt their customs, 
 all hope being gone, the emperor, the council, and the whole 
 senate, gave their vote in favour of a total separation from 
 the pope and those who thought with him, and referred it 
 all to the judgment of God. However, it was not thought 
 proper to consign them, a great and distinguished nation 
 as they were, to a formal anathema, like other heresies, 
 even while repudiating union and communion with them.' 
 This was the first ebullition of wrath on the part of the 
 church of Constantinople since the crusades commenced ; 
 but, as long as Manuel lived, it went no further. George, 
 archbishop of Corcyra, was despatched by him to the third 
 Lateran council a.d. 1179, who, falling sick on the road, 
 deputed Nectarius, a Greek abbot, to supply his place, which 
 he seems to have done.*'"' And a.d. 1180 we find Manuel 
 writing once more to Alexander to request that in the event 
 of another crusade passing through his territory, a cardi- 
 
 *« Maoarius of Ancyra— both quoted *" Baron, a.d. 1178, n. 12 et seq. 
 by Leo AUat. Oe Coneens. lib. ii. c. 12. where letters from both are given. 
 
138 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 nal legate might be sent with it to enforce order and pre- 
 vent mischief."* This was one of the last letters that he 
 ever wrote. And even after his decease, that vote for total 
 separation, come to by the latest of the Constantinopolitan 
 synods held in his reign, was not accepted by any means 
 for long afterwards by the Greek prelates westwards of the 
 capital, except such as had actually been sufferers from 
 Norman outrage. Theodore Balsamon was consulted, towards 
 the end of the century, by Mark, patriarch of Alexandria, on 
 the propriety of admitting the Latin captives in Egypt to 
 communion who applied to him with that object. Balsamon, 
 whom the Latins were keeping out of his see of Antioch, 
 advised him, as might have been expected, peremptorily to 
 refuse them communion. West of Constantinople that deci- 
 sion was objected to for its harshness many years afterwards; 
 and in Egypt itself a far milder course obtained under the 
 next patriarch. Constantino, archbishop of Durazzo, sub- 
 mitted a number of cases to Demetrius archbishop of 
 Bulgaria, and John bishop of Citra, bearing upon that one 
 point.*" 'Ought the unleavened oblations of the Latins 
 to be regarded as holy or profane?' Demetrius is asked. 
 In the course of his reply, Theophylact, his great prede- 
 cessor, is quoted as blaming those who adhered to the 
 Latins indiscriminately, as well as those who rejected their 
 communion absolutely. 'Wherefore,' says Demetrius, 'it 
 will not be in our judgment to consider either the unlea- 
 vened oblations consecrated by the Latins, or the vessels 
 receiving them, or otherwise used in their ministry, or their 
 sacred stoles, or anything of that kind, contaminated or 
 unclean.' In another question he is asked, ' whether there 
 can be any prejudice to a prelate entering and worshipping 
 in churches of the Latins, when invited to do so by them ; 
 and whether he may communicate them,**^ when assisting 
 
 *** Baron, a.d. 1180, n. 22. cim in sanct4 et catholic4 ecclesii 
 
 *" Vide Leundav. Jar. Grisc. Bom. sacro ministerio interfuerint.' Mr. 
 
 lib. T. Eesp. ii. and iii. Dr. Neale Palmer (ibid. p. 30) translates this, 
 
 (.4?exaM<J!m, vol. ii. p. 273) has noticed 'the antidorou' or 'blessed bread.' 
 
 other points in the coiTespondenoe But surely the answer, as translated 
 
 between Mark and Balsamon, but not by himself (p. 30), ' The very fact of 
 
 this. Mr. Palmer {Dissert, on the the Latins coming to us, and seeking 
 
 Orthodox Communion, p. 25) has trans- to communicate at our hands of the 
 
 lated the answers of Demetrius in full, hol^ oblation, which is made with 
 
 but goes no further. leavened bread,' &e. means more than 
 
 "' 'An iis fraotionem distribuat, this? 
 
FEELINGS WESTWARDS OF THE CAPITAL. 139 
 
 in the holy catholic church at the solemn celebration.' 
 Demetrius answers that he can see no objection at all in 
 either case. On the first point he adds, ' tha* the custom of 
 so doing would be likely to have the effect of winning them 
 over to our holy customs and doctrine. Italy is full of 
 churches dedicated to the holy apostles and martyrs. Among 
 them the renowned church of Peter, the coryphaeus of the 
 apostles, at Eome, stands pre-eminent. Into all of them 
 our people are in the habit of entering, "clergy as well as 
 laity, and making their petitions to God, and paying due 
 honor and reverence to the saints venerated in tbem.' 
 Can any testimony Jje more decisive than this, on the points 
 on which it speaks ? On the second point he remarks, in 
 substance : ' We well remember the answer made many years 
 since by Theodore Balsamon to Mark patriarch of Alexandria. 
 There were many excellent men, however, at the time, who 
 disapproved of it, arguing that the Latins had never been 
 synodically condemned as heretics ; and adding that the 
 Latins, in approaching us, and asking to receive at our 
 hands the holy oblation which we celebrate with leavened 
 bread, prove clearly that unless they made leavened 
 bread of little or no importance as a fixed rule, they would 
 never approach the mystery of the holy sacrifice as cele- 
 brated by us. And in these views we entirely concur.' 
 John bishop of Citra, besides recording his dissent from 
 Balsamon in equally plain terms, ventures upon some further 
 decisions. According to him there are but two points of 
 difference between the Greeks and Latins ; and of these one 
 only— ^the procession of the Holy Ghost — is important. ' As 
 for the reading of the Scriptures, whether of the Old or New 
 Testament, prayers and singing of hymns, consecrated build- 
 ings, reverence for the holy cross and images of the saints 
 — we have all these in common with them. It is not incon- 
 gruous, therefore, or incompatible in any way with true 
 piety for Latins to be buried in Greek churches, or for the 
 dead of Greeks and Latins to be commemorated by Latin 
 and Greek priests celebrating with harmonious unanimity in 
 their behalf.' Finally, when Nicholas, after Mark, presided 
 over the see of Alexandria, such was his' concern for the 
 Latin captives that he corresponded with Innocent III. of 
 Eome on their account, and ordained a deacon with his con- 
 currence to assist the old Latin priest whom they had with 
 
140 SACK OF CONSTAJfTINOPLE Br THE LATINS. 
 
 them, in ministering to their needs.**^ Nicholas, as we shall 
 see, received a pressing invitation from Innocent to the 
 fourth Lateran I council a.d. 1215, and was actually repre- 
 sented there by Germanus his deacon.**' 
 
 In short, wherever the Latins had not conquered, Greeks 
 and Latins remained on tolerably good terms, in spite of 
 occasional altercations on their diversities of rites still. In 
 those parts they discussed their theological differences of 
 opinion with moderation, and corresponded as Christians; 
 Latin monasteries flourished in Constantinople, and Greek 
 monasteries with equal freedom in Eome. They worshipped 
 in the same churches, honored in them the same saints, 
 sought and received communion from each other, buried in 
 the same cemeteries, commemorated the departed of both 
 nations in the holy sacrifice at their respective altars, down 
 to the last years of the twelfth century, and perhaps longer. 
 Alexandria, as it was the last place to have experience of the 
 crusaders, so it was the last of the eastern patriarchates to 
 break off amicable relations with Eome. We must, there- 
 fore, not only transport ourselves back to Constantinople, 
 but we must set our faces steadily eastwards, to be conscious 
 of the strong current of influences by which that vote in 
 favour of a total separation was obtained in the metropolis, 
 and from what quarter it set in. Wherever the Latins con- 
 quered, it swept all before it. Their occupation in the east 
 it was that changed all, and inspired the native populations 
 with feelings of deep hate towards those who, affecting to 
 have come to them as deliverers, turned out their most 
 unscrupulous oppressors. Laity or clergy, to the Greeks 
 they behaved the same. Everywhere the Greek rite was 
 abolished by force, and supplanted by a rite that was not 
 understood. Everywhere the Greek bishops were turned 
 out of their sees, or deprived of their revenues. We may 
 well imagine what a page it might have furnished in our 
 own history had the Normans been Greeks — had they, be- 
 sides ejecting all the Saxon prelates and abbots whom they 
 could not manage or chose to spite, forced the Greek ritual 
 
 "' Innoc. Ep. xiT. 146, which seems rainisteriis eruditum in diaconum pro- 
 explicit enough. Dr. Keale {Macan- moyeres,' and this is what Innocent 
 Aria, vol. ii. p. 280) while citing, it, assented to. Dr. N. says nothing of 
 speaks of a Latin deacon elevated by the old priest. 
 
 him to the priesthood. The proposal "» Ibid. Ep. xvi. 3i. Comp. Mansi, 
 
 was, 'ut unnm ex ipsis in ecelesiasticis vol. xxii. p. 1079. 
 
GRADUAL ESTRANGEMENT. 141, 
 
 upon our unwilling ancestors. Out of the Holy Land — 
 between the Holy Land and Constantinople — the whole 
 country was subjected to a succession of ravages of the most 
 barbarous and exterminatory description by men calling 
 themselves Christians— by armed hosts calling themselves 
 soldiers of the cross — till the name of Latin was execrated 
 in every town and village, and by all classes of the empire, 
 as a compound of violence and hypocrisy without parallel. 
 And this it literally must appear to be, whenever the deeds 
 of three successive generations are combined in one, and not 
 regarded in their separate stages of reaction — the first, a 
 declension from first principles ; the second, their entire per- 
 version. * 
 
 The first generation, according to their own testimony, 
 rushed to the assistance of the Christians in the east, as 
 brethren. This was clearly the view taken of them by Urban 
 IL and by his magnanimous exemplar and predecessor 
 Gregory VIL Had Urban considered the Greeks heretics, is 
 it credible that be would have exerted himself so warmly in 
 their behalf? Or, if he considered them heretics, while 
 pleading for them before the assembled west as brethren, 
 where is the character for double-dealing that will compare 
 with his? Christian brotherhood it was that .operated upon 
 Europe as the animating principle of the first crusade. The 
 second generation, according to their own testimony, regarded, 
 but failed to act by the easterns as brethren. They installed 
 themselves in the territory which their predecessors had 
 snatched from the Turks, and appropriated it entirely for 
 their own advantage ; insulting or ill using the native Chris- 
 tians as a conquered race, and imposing the observance of 
 their own customs in church and state upon all of them. So 
 when the native Christians on their side, bitterly disappointed 
 in their deliverers, and feeling themselves more crushed than 
 ever, began to make no secret of their feelings ; and when 
 they saw the profligate lives of the dominant clergy, whose 
 ritual had supplanted their own, ended by loathing them and 
 their ceremonies, is it surprising that oppressors and op- 
 pressed should have unlearnt whatever good-will they might 
 have entertained for each other in time past, and come to 
 judge of each other solely from their existing relations ? 
 New feelings naturally took the place of old feelings on 
 either side year by year ; resistance to tyranny serving only 
 
142 SACK OP COySTANXmOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 to make tyranny still more vindictive. At length, in the 
 third generation, the Latins, partly to give colour to their 
 own enormities, of which they could not have helped some- 
 times feeling ashamed, and partly to avenge themselves on 
 the antipathy with which their brethren of the east, as they 
 had been once called, now regarded them, declared with vehe- 
 mence that the Grreeks were heretics, and that the principal 
 part of their mission from the beginning had been to punish 
 them as such. 
 
 That idea was based upon old scores revived and exag- 
 gerated. It was no sooner started than it became a popular 
 one — few indeed could have been more convenient — and took 
 deep root ; but it will not bear contrasting with the original 
 programme of even the second and still more the first cru- 
 sade. The pretext for exterminating the Turks had been 
 that the Grreeks were brethren and not heretics ; the pretext 
 for oppressing the Grreeks, when the Turks had been exter- 
 minated, was that they were heretics and not brethren. The 
 two theories could not have stood together for a moment ; 
 and, in point of fact, one died out before the other came in. 
 Nobody would gather from the pages of William of Tyre 
 that the native Christians of Syria and Palestine were con- 
 sidered under anathema by the Latins ; though we may well 
 gather from his latest books, particularly when the scene is 
 neither Syria nor Palestine, that the idea of any brotherhood 
 between them was on the wane. The change of theory was, 
 in reality, determined by change of place. The Grreeks were 
 brethren so long as the Holy Land was in view ; they became 
 heretics when, the possession of the Holy Land having become 
 hopeless, another object was proposed, which western hearts 
 bad long coveted in secret, and many that had been crusaders 
 would have willingly stopped short of the Holy Sepulchre all 
 their lives to appropriate — Constantinople. ' All wished to 
 enter Constantinople,' says Mr. Finlay,**^ ' and none wished 
 to quit it when they had entered.' On what pretext could 
 they with any justice venture to lay hands upon it? The 
 Grreeks were not infidels, therefore they were to be made out 
 heretics ! It helped forward this theory wonderfully that the 
 heretics were so much more wealthy, and less warlike, and 
 nearer home than the infidels. Still, even so, the scheme 
 
 "' Byz. Emp. vol. ii. p. 124. 
 
GRADUAL ESTRANGEMENT. 143 
 
 was one that occasioned misgivings, and was for a time as 
 often abandoned as conceived. It was too wicked a thought 
 to be permitted at first ; it was shaken off as a forbidden and 
 unholy lust ; it waited for some plausible justification, some 
 favourable combination of circumstances, or convenient op- 
 portunity. Bohemond had inherited the idea from his father 
 Guiscard, and it never left him through life ; but it came to 
 him in the light of a simple conquest. If the first crusade 
 was preached at all at his instigation, it — and not the re- 
 demption of Jerusalem — was his secret purpose. Alexius 
 divined his intentions; and Bohemond divined his having 
 been seen through equally. But public opinion proved too 
 strong for him in 'spite of all his artifice. His colleagues 
 could not be induced to join or countenance him in attacking 
 Constantinople. He was forced to march on with the rest. 
 Antioch, when he became its prince, was only held in reality 
 by him in dependance upon the Gi-eek emperor. Still he 
 brooded over his darling scheme. Alexius was always 
 threatening, and he always conspiring. At length he re- 
 turned to Europe for further aid ; visited France with the 
 concurrence of Pascal II. ; obtained the hand of Constance, 
 daughter of Philip I., in marriage ; and collected fresh troops 
 for his enterprise, with which he sailed.^'" Checked at 
 Durazzo,''^' as his father had been before him, he was com- 
 pelled once more to retire, and swear to be at peace with the 
 emperor.'''^ He died in Apulia, whither he had retreated 
 A.D. 1111;^*' and his favourite idea was taken up and laid 
 down frequently, before it was carried out. Alexius irritated 
 the Latins by eluding or outwitting them. Following in their 
 wake, he regained almost all Asia Minor from the Turks. 
 His son John the Handsome inspired them with real alarm 
 by his military prowess and success in war. It was not that 
 he merely claimed allegiance from the Latins, but that he 
 threatened their possessions. Europe shared their appre- 
 hensions ; and but for his untimely death a.d. 1 143, it is 
 not so certain that the second crusade, had it started at all, 
 would not have been actually directed against Constantinople. 
 As it was, the cause assigned for it was the fall of Edessa, 
 
 "• Suger in Vit. Ludov. c. 9, ap. *" Ibid. a.d. 1108, n. iv. 
 
 Pagi adBaron. a.d. 1106, n. vii. ^'^ Baron. a.d. 1111, n. it. and ilv. 
 
 "' Fulcher, Met. Hieros. lib. ii. ap. and Pagi. n. viii. 
 Pagi, ad Baron, a.d. 1107, n. x. ^ 
 
144 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLi; BY THE LATIKS. 
 
 and it had for its general object, no less than the first, 'the 
 liberation of the eastern church.' This is emphatically the 
 language both of Eugenius III.'*'* and of S. Bernard,*-'^ its 
 originators. No other motive is put forward by them. 
 Edessa was certainly the seat of a Latin archbishop at that 
 time ; and he, with a good many of his clergy, was slain by 
 the Turks in recovering it. Nevertheless, Eugenius is careful 
 to impress upon the French monarch, that it was the one 
 town that had never ceased to be Christian in Mohammedan 
 times ; and it is quite certain that the bulk of its population 
 must have been easterns, not westerns, still. Yet no ex- 
 pression occurs in the letters of Eugenius or of S. Bernard 
 attributing to the Latins orthodoxy, and to the Greeks heresy. 
 And even Grodfrey, bishop of Langres, in advocating the 
 second crusade at Bourges, a.d. 1146, expatiated upon the 
 sack of Edessa, the sufiferings of the Christians, and the in- 
 solence of the pagans, so exclusively, before Eugenius had 
 been heard from, that it would be doing him injustice to 
 suppose that he could have entertained that counsel at heart 
 then, which he is afterwards described as urging with so much 
 vehemence. His whole speech implied that what they were 
 called upon to do was to succour Christians ; and he argued, 
 as Urban had done fifty years before, that to succour Chris- 
 tians was to succour Christ. Previously to the next meet- 
 ing on the subject, however, communications had passed be- 
 tween the French monarch and Eoger II. king of Sicily, 
 first cousin to Bohemond, and inheritor of his mantle. 
 Ambassadors appeared from him at the synod of Etampes, 
 A.D. 1147, to defame the Greeks and proclaim their perfi- 
 diousness. Odo, the chaplain of Louis, and historian of the 
 expedition, laments that more attention had not been paid 
 to those who spoke from experience. But it is quite plain 
 that their words were not thrown away upoil some that went, 
 and that Norman influences were at work in the camp ever 
 
 "* Eugen. Ep. ad Ludov. ™. ap *" Ep. cclvi. ad Eugen. (ed. Migne) : 
 
 Mansi, torn. xxi. p. 626 : 'Pro libera- ' Tempus et opus esse existimo ambos 
 
 tione orientalis eeclesise.' Of Edessa (gladios) eduei in defensionem orienta- 
 
 lie says : ' Quae, ut fertur, cim quondam lis eoolesiae.' — Ep. ecclxiv. ad Pet. Fen. 
 
 in oriente tota terra a paganis detine- ' Gravem nimis ac miserabilem orienta- 
 
 retur, ipsa sola sub Christianorum po- lis eeclesise gemitum ad aures vestras, 
 
 testate Domino serviebat ' — exactly imo etiam ad ipsa etiam penetralia 
 
 what "William of Tyre had observed cordis arbitror pervenisse.' Comp. 
 
 of it. Bell. Sac. xvi. 18. 
 
GRADUAL ESTRANGEMEXT. 145 
 
 afterwards. William of Tyre mentions in a general way 
 only, that they experienced a friendly reception, as they 
 passed by Constantinople. From Odo, their own historian, 
 we learn a good deal to their discredit. The German troops, 
 in particular, were guilty of a number of gross outrages, 
 which, he expressly says, were unprovoked.^^® For instance, 
 ' they destroyed many of the splendid villas round Constan- 
 tinople, and thereby ruined one of the greatest ornaments 
 of that capital.' *" They insulted the French as well as the 
 Greeks, and then embroiled them with each other. Disturb- 
 ances ensued, in the course of which the bishop of Langres 
 and some of his party got roughly handled. A consultation 
 was held some tim% later in the French camp, where the 
 bishop of Langres spoke his mind freely, and withal so re- 
 markably, that I shall transcribe the whole passage. 'There 
 were some on that occasion,' says Odo, • who counselled the 
 king to march back and take possession of all that wealthy 
 territory with its fortified places and towns, and meanwhile 
 write to king Roger, who was then particularly hostile to 
 the emperor, in order, with the help of his ships, to be able 
 to storm Constantinople itself. Alas ! for us, and for all the 
 subjects of the apostle Peter, that their voices did not pre- 
 vail.' *'' Such is the ejaculation of the historian, a priest 
 by profession. The speech of the bishop is enhanced by the 
 consideration that it was delivered just after the feast of S. 
 Denis had been celebrated with great pomp by Manuel to 
 do honor to the French monarch, and his hearers were but 
 fresh from the ceremonies. * The bishop of Langres impro- 
 bated their faith, and despised their obsequious service ; then, 
 predicting the evils which afterwards befel us, advised our 
 taking the city. The walls, he showed, were weak — part 
 having, in fact, given way before our soldiers — the people 
 indolent. The supply of water could without delay or diffi- 
 culty be cut off by breaking down the conduits. He said in 
 his discretion, and sacred character, that it would not be 
 necessary to attack other cities, provided that one were 
 secured, as they would pay all obedience gratis to him that 
 was master of their metropolis. He added, that it had the 
 name, without the substance, of Christianity ; and that the 
 emperor, though bound to assist Christians and not molest 
 
 «• Itin. lib. iii. p. 28-32, ap. Migne, *" Finlay, vol. ii. p. 203. 
 Patrol, torn. cIxsxt. p. 1207 et seq. "» Itin. lib. iii. p. 34. 
 
 L 
 
146 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 them, had only a few years before attempted to lay violent 
 hands upon the prince of Antioch. He had first subdued 
 Tarsus and Mopsuestia, and other castles and districts very 
 many; then he had besieged Antioch, expelling Catholic 
 bishops from their sees, and substituting heretics for them. 
 And when it was his duty, with Christian forces for his allies, 
 to drive out all pagans from their vicinity, he had, with the 
 assistance of pagans, endeavoured to exterminate the Chris- 
 tians. But (xod who knows, and judges, and avenges all 
 these things, permitted him to puncture himself with a 
 poisoned arrow, and by a slight wound end his life. His 
 successor, who now reigns, heir of his gains and crimes, as he 
 retains possession of the rights of the churches, and other 
 things seized upon by his father, so he opens his mouth wide 
 for everything else that his heart covets, has now extorted 
 homage from our princes, and erecting altar against altar, in 
 contempt of the patriarch of S. Peter, has appointed in the 
 city one of his own. To your judgment be it left, whether 
 you should spare him, through whose whole reign there can 
 be no safety to the cross and sepulchre of Christ, but on whose 
 removal there will be nothing adverse to either.' ■"* 
 
 Seldom has any one speech contained a greater tissue of 
 falsehoods or perversions of facts. Manuel had interfered 
 with no prerogatives belonging to Rome in the appointment 
 of patriarchs, whether Constantinopolitan or others. The 
 Latins had usurped every see belonging to the Greeks in 
 Syria and Palestine ; aiid the emperors John and Manuel had 
 made several efforts, though without any real success, to in- 
 troduce Greek bishops, into those sees again. ' Hinc illce 
 lacrimce.' The first part of the speech, his plan for taking 
 the city, powerfully recalls the burst of an old bishop of 
 Chartres already quoted. ' Bishops I cannot call them. . . . 
 I know of no temporal monarchs so well versed in the laws 
 of war, in equipping soldiers for battle, in moving large 
 masses, and setting them in array, to disturb the peace of the 
 church, and shed the blood of Christians opposed to them.'*^" 
 There must have been then working in Godfrey a large por- 
 tion of the Norman leaven. And what a crushing reproof 
 
 "» Itin. lib. iv. p. 41. dericis, quod nee su4 auctoritate, nee 
 
 '" Even Gratian Was as strongly op- auctoritate Bomani ponHficis, arm a 
 
 posed to it. C. xxiii. q. viii. he says : ampere valeant, fadlA probatur.' 
 
 ' De episeopis vero, yel quibuslibet 
 
GRADUAL ESTEANQEMENT. 147 
 
 ■was administered to him by his bluff companions in arms ; 
 though it is shocking enough to hear them talking, in cool 
 language, of what they had been told to do, to get rid of 
 their sins. 
 
 'When the bishop had finished,' proceeds Odo, 'some 
 agreed to what he had said. But the majority, who did not 
 agree to it, replied as follows : " Of the faith »f this people 
 •we cannot judge, being unskilled in the law. That the 
 emperor besieged Antioeh, was bad ; but he might have had 
 reasons to justify him that we are not aware of. It is certain 
 that the king has recently conferred with the pope ; and 
 never received any precept or counsel from him on this head. 
 We and he have coine to visit the aepidchre of the Lm^d, and 
 cancel our evil deeds, at the command of the sovereign 
 pontiff, by the slaughter or conversion of pagans. We have 
 it in our power now to capture the wealthiest of Christian 
 cities, and enrich ourselves ; but we must slay and be slain to 
 do so. If the slaughter of Christians can take away sins, 
 let us fight it out, or if ambition will not be any detriment 
 to those that are slain ; if it will do as well to die for the get- 
 ting of money on the road, as to be faithful to our obedience 
 to the sovereign pontiff, and to our vow, we are quite willing 
 to become rich; let us, without fear of death, make the 
 venture." Thus they disputed ; each with good reason 
 maintaining his own opinion. I think the bishop would have 
 carried the day, had not the Greeks prevailed over us by artifice 
 rather than by strength . . . and got us to cross the straits.' 
 
 Carried the day was already, notwithstanding, though 
 they were unconscious of it, in principle It was the last 
 struggle, the last convulsive effort, of conscience personified 
 in these plain-spoken soldiers, to resist temptation and turn 
 away from crime. Since sins could be blotted out by the 
 slaughter of infidels, the inference was inevitable 'a fortiori,' *^^ 
 that they could be blotted out by the slaughter of heretics. The 
 major premise was affirmed thirty years afterwards, hesita- 
 tingly perhaps, but in formal terms by the last canon of the 
 third Lateran, or eleventh general council ajd. 1179, but it 
 was then, in fact, a foregone conclusion ; the minor premise 
 
 "' S. Thom. ii. ii. qusest. x. art. viii. . . sicut haeretici et quicimque apostatse 
 
 ' Gentilps et Judaei . . nullo modo sunt . . sunt etiam corporalitfer compellendi, 
 
 ad fidem compellendi, ut ipsi eredeint, ut jmpleant quod promiserunt, et 
 
 quia credere Toluntatis est . . alii rero teneant quod semel susceperont.' 
 
 h 2 
 
148 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 that the Greeks were heretics, even that council would have 
 shrunk from affirming, but it was a position that was gradually 
 working itself into shape now. That third Lateran council 
 was attended by William archbishop of Tyre, Heraclius then 
 archbishop of Csesarea, the bishops of Bethlehem, Acre, Tripoli, 
 and Samaria, the prior of the church of the Sepulchre, and 
 the abbot of. the church of Mount Sion."^ All these had 
 been summoned to it, and all were present, when the cele- 
 brated twenty-seventh canon, ' concerning heretics,' was dis- 
 cussed and passed. First they heard its preamble, which 
 says : 'Although, as blessed Leo states, ecclesiastical discipline, 
 satisfied with the priestly tribunal, refrains from executing 
 bloody revenge, still it is assisted by the constitutions of Catho- 
 lic princes, whereby men are the more disposed to have re- 
 course to that remedy for their souls, when the dread of 
 incurring corporal punishment is before them.' Then they 
 heard its application to the heretics in and about Toulouse ; 
 afterwards in Brabant, Arragon, and Navarre ; a description 
 of whose lawless deeds served to put them on a level with the 
 Saracens very naturally. Then they listened to the formal 
 extension of the privileges hitherto confined to those who 
 had rescued or were guarding Jerusalem from pagans, in 
 language with the full import of which they had long been 
 familiar. ' We enjoin all the faithful, for remission of sins, 
 to oppose themselves, as men, to these desolating invasions ; 
 and to protect the people of Christ against their perpetrators. 
 Those who die, while so engaged, in true penance, may be 
 certain of having their sins forgiven, and an eternal reward 
 assured to them hereafter. ... To the faithful who take up 
 arms against them, we remit two years of their canonical 
 penance . . . leaving it to the bishops at their discretion to 
 remit more.' Finally, those who draw the sword in this cause 
 are admitted to the same privileges as crusaders proper ; 
 those who refuse to do so are to be denied holy communion.''^' 
 At the request of the fathers who were present, William 
 of Tyre drew up a transcript of the statutes that had been 
 passed, and of the names and titles of the bishops attend- 
 ing the council ; a copy of all which he deposited afterwards 
 in the archives of his own church of Tyre.*^'' We can well 
 imagine him, and those who accompanied him from Palestine, 
 
 *'' Sell. Sac. lib. xxi. c. 26. «"' Mansi, torn. xxii. p. 231. 
 
 «' Bell. Sac. ixi. 26. 
 
GRADUAL ESTRANGEMENT. 149 
 
 talking over and referring to the last canon on their way 
 home. ■ Could they, or could any who then perused it^ have 
 failed to remark that it might be thought to say : ' Let the 
 people be proved heretics whose lands you covet, and you are 
 tree, nay, you will be bound, under pain of being refused 
 communion, to draw the sword against them, till you have 
 exterminated them.' 
 
 This, therefore, the major premise, was published in the 
 east no sooner than it had been affirmed in the west. Within 
 thirty years or more it had become the rule of action in 
 both ;^^' and the heretics to whom it was applicable were no 
 secret. The bishop jf Langres could not carry his point, a.d. 
 1148, because neither premise had as yet been established. 
 His companions in arms rejoined that they were not certain 
 that the Greeks were heretics ; and they had still to learn that 
 ' the slaughter of Christians could take away sins.' Odo is 
 silent on the latter point, as well he might; but on the 
 former, or minor premise, he is more outspoken than any 
 that had preceded him. Though he had stated expressly, 
 but a few sentences before, that 'the Greek clergy, with 
 their congregations, had on all occasions come out of their 
 cities, bearing the images of their saints in procession, and 
 with all their accustomed ceremonial, to do honor to the 
 French army wherever it went;' though he begins his un- 
 favourable criticism of them by admitting expressly, that 
 'for any injuries his friends had received, it might be said 
 that they had deserved them for those which they had in- 
 flicted, still there is one point which he considers intolerable 
 in the Greeks, and on which he expatiates : namely, their 
 
 *" Can. III. of the fourth Lateran between eleven and twelve years in the 
 
 council A.D. 1215, says : ' Catholici, hands of the Latins on that score, and 
 
 qui crucis assumpto eharaotere ad it was about half that time since the 
 
 hareticorwm extermimum se accinxe- first crusade bad issued against the 
 
 rint, iM gandeant indulgentid, illoque Albigenses. ' Hkc tempestate,' says 
 
 sancto privilegio sint muniti, quod an old chronicler, a.d. 1212, ' multi 
 
 accedentibus in Terrse Sanctse eubsi- Francorum archiepiscopi, et episcopi, 
 
 dium conceditur.' The title of this abbates et alii multi, contra hsereticos 
 
 canon likewise is 'De hsereticis:' and, provinciales vadunt. . . Episcopus do 
 
 as it specifies none in particular, it ex- Francii — Leodiensis Hugo — et de 
 
 tends the enactments of the third propriis militibus et amicis . . fer4 
 
 Lateran to all alike. Canon IV. can duo millia et quingentos milites cum 
 
 only be understood as confirming the innumerabiliturb^congregat.'.— C^to«. 
 
 light in which the Greeks and Latins Lambert, a Eeineo, contin. ap. Martene 
 
 now regarded each other. But, in point et Durand. Vet. Script, et Monum. t. v. 
 
 of fact, Constantinople had then been p. 1 et seq. 
 
150 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 'blasphemy.'"^ In his own words, 'Did any of our priests 
 ever celebrate mass at their altars, they washed and purified 
 them afterwards, as having been profaned. Eich chapels, 
 indeed, they had of their own, adorned all of them with 
 pictures, mosaics, and lights ; so that anyone entering them 
 would say, "Lord, I have loved the habitation of Thy 
 house:" did but the lamp of orthodox faith illumine them! 
 Alas ! still more for the wickedness that we have heard 
 of them— it should be punished with death — when any of 
 our people intermarry with them, before allowing them to 
 come together, the one that has been baptised according 
 to the Eoman rite they rebaptise. Of their other heresies 
 we are not ignorant, their form of oblation, and on the pro- 
 cession of the Holy Grhost. For these causes they have in- 
 curred the hatred of our side ; for their errors have gone forth 
 even to the laity. On this account they are judged not to 
 be Christians ; and the slaughter of them goes for nothing 
 amongst our people, who can with diflSculty be restrained 
 from plundering and pillaging them.'*" Trumpery charges, 
 indeed, to have been made at that dat« ! Odo, perhaps, was 
 not aware that the Greek views on the procession of the Holy 
 Grhost had been accepted and defended by a predecessor of 
 the reigning pope 400 years back, and that not even cardinal 
 Humbert had contended that the use of leavened bread by the 
 Greeks vitiated their celebrations in any way ; but he must 
 have been aware that the Greeks had so thought and so cele- 
 brated long before either the first or the second crusade was 
 preached : and that his immediate predecessors had decided 
 to go to assist them as brethren and fellow-Christians not- 
 withstanding. He must have known, assuredly, how many 
 Greek bishops had been deprived of their sees by the Latins : 
 he must have heard, and may have seen, something of the 
 lives of numbers from the west, who ministered at the altar 
 
 «86 Giiibert {Hist. Hieros. i. 2), abtot in ApostolicEe sedis subjeetione pseni 
 
 of Nogent in the diocese of Leon, who quicquam illis commime nobiseum sit. 
 
 had been dead about twenty years — Sed si illud, quod de panibus fermenta- 
 
 only speaking from hearsay, as he had tis saeramenta conflciunt, convenient! 
 
 never been in the east (iv. c. 1), and aut verosimili ratione defenditur . . . 
 
 full, probably, of the revival of the quid deSpirituSanetodicturi sunt? . . 
 
 subject by S. Anselm, says : ' Unde dum quidam nostratum hAc GrEecorum 
 
 hsec ipsoTum, et in aotu sseculari et in altercatione eitati, olariesimos de S. 
 
 Christiani professione nugacitas, ad hoe Spirittis Processione ediderunt libros.' 
 usque tempus . in tantum viguit, ut "' Itin. lib. iii. p. 34. 
 neque inEucharistise confeetione, neque 
 
GRADUAL ESTRANGEMENT. 151 
 
 in the east. What, in fact, could the Greeks do but purify 
 their unfortunate altars, after they had been used by prelates 
 of the stamp of the first and last patriarchs of Jerusalem 
 under Latin rule ? — prelates imposed upon them to the in- 
 discriminate ejection of their own bishops, and against whose 
 crimes they well knew it would be vain for them to remon- 
 strate, when the better of the Latins themselves appealed 
 against them so often to their own cost. What would have 
 been the feelings, once more, of our Saxon ancestors, had 
 they been doomed to the maintenance of a G-reek hierarchy, 
 with Arnulphus and Heraclius, instead of Lanfranc and S. 
 Anselm, for their bishops ? The same feelings which led 
 the Greeks to wash Cheir altars after a Latin service, probably 
 made them require that any Latins intermarrying with them 
 should undergo some corresponding purification, magnified 
 by report into rebaptism. ' If the Latins only knew the Greek 
 ceremonies thoroughly,' said the archbishop of Nicomedia 
 to the bishop of Havelberg in answer to it,*'' 'they would 
 not be so ready to calumniate us, or be scandalised at them. 
 No wonder that they should have formed a wrong judgment 
 in this matter ; though it be right, which they know not of. 
 Far be it from the orthodox faith of the Greeks to think 
 that any Christian baptised in the name of the Holy Trinity 
 should be baptised anew ; for to do this, or preach in favour 
 of it, is to be a heretic. But we have certain purifications 
 and anointings of holy oil; and when extraneous persons, 
 men or women, come to us, and desire to pass over to our 
 rite and fellowship, we anoint them with consecrated oil, as 
 not knowing whether they have received the sacrament of 
 unction or not. But we never rebaptise those whom we 
 know to have been baptised before, nor anoint those either 
 whom we doubt not to have been anointed previously, and 
 , sanctified by the chrism through imposition of hands, and 
 made perfect in their Christian profession. That which is 
 not known to have been ever done we cannot call renewed.' 
 The generality of the Greeks were perhaps not so scrupulous. 
 They were beginning to look upon the Latins generally as a 
 polluted race, in consequence of all that they had suffered, 
 or were suffering from them, to which the confessions or ad- 
 missions of the Latins themselves testify. But it was not, as 
 Odo says, because his countrymen judged the Greeks not to 
 "' Lib. iii, 21, as above. 
 
152 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 be Christians (which his own pages acknowledge they had 
 not, as yet, learned to do) that they could not he restrained 
 from plundering and pillaging them upon all occasions ; but 
 because they could not be restrained from plundering and 
 pillaging them in spite of their Christianity, some more 
 scrupulous than the rest, like Odo, to save their consciences, 
 invented the theory that they were not Christians. 
 
 For arguments in support of it Odo relied much more on 
 their ' blasphemy ' than their heresies ; that is to say, he was 
 not so certain of their errors as of their abhorrence of and 
 repugnance to those usages which the west called upon them 
 to adopt instead of their own. And later writers, as we 
 shall see, testify that their blasphemy grew more frightful 
 as the pressure put upon them grew more and more iniquit- 
 ous. Who can wonder that the Latins when they behaved 
 as demons were not regarded as angels ? But Odo says no- 
 thing of the old political grudge that was resuscitated in the 
 second crusade, and renewed in the third in tenfold intensity, 
 by being brought home to them, and deposited, as it were, 
 by way of challenge, at their doors. Alexius had no bigger 
 men to deal with' than dukes or counts, and he made tbem 
 all do homage to him as they presented themselves and 
 passed on. But at the head of the second and third crusade 
 was the western emperor, and 200 years previously, as we 
 heard from Luitprand, the mere arrival of a letter when the 
 Greek emperor was absent from home, in which Otho was 
 said to be styled ' emperor of the Romans and Augustus,' 
 drove Constantinople wild.^^ This time it is the Latin side 
 that is frantic, and in each case there are the loudest com- 
 plaints uttered against the perfidiousness of the Greek em- 
 perors as having on both occasions allied themselves with the 
 Turks against the Latins, against one of them as having 
 achieved the ruin of the Latin army by fraud, and the other 
 as doing it all the mischief possible, short of destroying it. 
 Without enquiring into the truth or falsehood of those 
 charges, it is only fair to observe that if the first crusade 
 started on the invitation of Alexius, it was not Manuel who 
 invited the second or Isaac the third. Neither the one nor 
 the other would have willingly permitted the passage of 
 another crusading host of any description through their terri- 
 
 "" Vide sup. p. 27. 
 
GRADUAL ESTRANGEMENT. 153 
 
 tory, could they have helped it : still less one headed by the 
 potentate claiming to be their rival. Conrad was the first 
 German emperor to set foot in Constantinopolitan territory, 
 and Barbarossa, by his own confession, from the first moment 
 of entering it, seems to have been looking about in quest of 
 some excuse for staying there. Few modern governments, 
 strong enough to decline with safety, would consent to be 
 exposed to the same risks that the Greeks were then. "WTiat 
 are the accounts given by the Latins themselves in each case? 
 Odo is not to be supposed great on politics ; he says ' he did 
 not know, or care to know, the name of the Greek emperor, 
 as it was not written in the book of life.'*™ And, beyond all 
 doubt, Manuel was bne of the most profligate monarchs that 
 ever ruled/ but it is no less true that his sympathies were with 
 the Latins. He loved their fellowship ; by both his wives he 
 was connected intimately with their reigning houses, and he 
 was willing to accord them any favour and every license, 
 when not scheming against his sovereignty.*'' From the 
 testimony of William of Tyre, we see plainly that it was 
 the revival of the old political grudge, stronger and older 
 than Manuel, and which he could not have overlooked there- 
 fore, more than anything else that got Conrad into trouble. 
 ' The Greeks,' says the archbishop, ' with their innate malice, 
 and accustomed hatred, either by command of their master, 
 or else bribed by our foes, began deliberately to conduct our 
 troops through intricate passes, where every facility would be 
 given to the enemy of intercepting and destroying them un- 
 awares It was said publicly, nor is it far from pro- 
 bable, that these insidious schemes were countenanced, or 
 even ordered by the emperor, jealous of our successes . . . 
 for indeed it is no small annoyance to the Greeks that the 
 German prince should call himself emperor of the Eomans, 
 thereby infringing upon the prerogatives of him whom they 
 style monarch or lord of all, alone and sole emperor of the 
 Eomans.'*''^ On the other hand, Manuel had far less cause 
 for apprehension in Conrad, than Isaac in Barbarossa. Ma- 
 nuel was as warlike as Isaac was effeminate, and Barbarossa 
 'found Constantinople reduced to the most prostrate condition 
 that it had ever yet known by the crimes of Andronicus. 
 Again Barbarossa threatened Constantinople, as we learn 
 
 "• Lib. i. c. 13. "' Sell. Sac. lib, xxii. 10. *" Ibid. Ub. xvi. 21-2. 
 
144 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 from his own words, in a way in which it had never been 
 really threatened before. ' The first thing that I have to 
 tell you,' he says in a letter to his son Henry, ' is, that as 
 soon as we reached the territory of our brother, the Constan- 
 tinopolitan emperor, we sustained no soiall damage, by pil- 
 lage of our eifects and slaughter of our men, brought about, 
 as is known for certain, by no less a personage than the 
 emperor.' One hundred of his men in all had been slain, 
 his ambassadors had been imprisoned, and impediments 
 had been placed in his road. ' Since, therefore, our crossing 
 the straits of S. George is impossible, till either we obtain 
 hostages of the highest distinction and most unexceptionable 
 character from the emperor of Constantinople, or else take 
 the whole of Eoumania into our own keeping, we beg your 
 royal highness, of your discretion, to despatch fit persons as 
 your ambassadors to Genoa, Venice, Antioch, Pisa, and other 
 places, in ships under proper escort., to the end that, joining 
 us at Constantinople in the month of March, they may attack 
 the city by sea, and we by land. . . • And be careful to 
 write and acquaint pope Alexander of all this, that he may 
 commission monks to go round to the different countries and 
 stir up the people of God against the enemies of the cross, 
 especially against the Greeks, in whose presence and that of 
 our own ambassadors, the bishop of Munster and his col- 
 leagues, the Constantinopolitan patriarch only the other day 
 preached publicly in the church of S. Sophia, that any Greek 
 slaughtering 100 strangers or pilgrims, though he had the 
 guilt of ten Greeks upon his conscience, would obtain pardon 
 from God.' "^3 
 
 Whether the ambassadors of Frederic would be likely to 
 understand a Greek sermon preached in a church of the size of 
 S. Sophia, amid great excitement on the part of the audience 
 as well as the preacher, is perhaps doubtful ; but if they 
 understood and reported it faithfully, there can be no doubt 
 whatever that it could not have been the doctrine of the 
 patriarch, but its application, which offended them ; for sub- 
 
 *" Ap. Martene et Durand, Vet. principal officers of the empire should 
 
 Script a Monvm. torn. i. p. 909. It publicly take an oath to fulfil the arti- 
 
 is headed : ' De negotio Terrae Sanetse, cles of the treaty to his ambassadors in 
 
 et quanta passus sit ab imperatore the church of S. Sophia, and in the pre- 
 
 Constantinopolitano.' Mj. Pinlay adds sence of the patriarch, and to this the 
 
 (toL ii. p. 289) : ' Frederic also insisted Byzantine emperor was compelled to 
 
 that the emperor Isaac and 600 of the submit.' 
 
GRADUAL ESTEANGEMENT. 155 
 
 stitute the word ' Latin ' for ' Greek,' and ' Turk' for ' pil- 
 grim,' and it may well have been the preaching of the bishop 
 of Munster himself before Frederic in behalf of the third 
 crusade. Other complaints reached Europe from other quar- 
 ters against the Greeks about the same time. When Jeru- 
 salem was lost to the Latins, the native Christians were put 
 in possession of the church of the Eesurrection and of the 
 holy Sepulchre, and other hallowed sites, for which they paid 
 tribute.*''* This wa8,4n effect, to restore the ascendancy of 
 the Greek church there. ' Jerusalem is gone,' wrote Con- 
 rad, the valiant but unscrupulous defender of Tyre, to 
 Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury, a.d. 1188,*" 'and owing 
 to the remissness 6t Christians, is foully handled by the 
 Saracens. They are profaning the holy Sepulchre, destroy- 
 ing the rite of Calvary, insulting the nativity of Christ: 
 eradicating all traces of the tomb of the Blessed Virgin. 
 The see of Constantinople exhibits no reverence for the see 
 of Eome, and that of Antioch is known to be at its last gasp. 
 It is all the supineness of Christians that has done this.' 
 ' Aye,' chimes in the historian, ' and by way of making ini- 
 quity more iniquitouB, and completing the desolation and the 
 reproach of Christendom, intimate relations are in full force 
 between Saladin and the Constantinopolitan emperor. Sala- 
 din has made over to him all the churches in the land of 
 promise, that the Greek rite may be reintroduced in them, 
 and he has sent his idol to Constantinople, by leave of the 
 emperor, to, be worshipped there. Luckily, it fell into the 
 hands of the Geonese, as it was going by sea, and was brought 
 to Tyre with the ship containing it. Still more recently, a 
 numerous army was collected before Antioch, and the em- 
 peror promised to assist Saladin with 100 galleys. Saladin 
 has, in short, bestowed on him the whole land of promise, 
 on the understanding that he will stop Christians on their 
 road, especially Franks hastening to the succour of the Holy 
 Land. Anyone assuming the cross at Constantinople is im- 
 mediately siezed and incarcerated.' A charming story this 
 of a Mohammedan idol on its way to Constantinople, to be 
 worshipped there by leave of the emperor. Presently, we 
 shall hear tell of Isaac erecting a mosque in his capital 
 
 *" Math. Paris, a.d. 1188, Henry II. venerabilibus, quibusdam Syrianis pro 
 ' Eccleaiam sancts Besurrectionis, et oerto constituit tributo.' 
 Bepulchrum Dominicum, cum aliis locis *" Ibid. 
 
156 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 expressly to please Saladin.'"^ It so happens that there had 
 been a mosque standing there since a.d. 719, built by the 
 greatest of the iconoclastic emperors/'^ But the tale of the 
 Grenoese was not ill-conceived, as it -was certainly for their in- 
 terest to prevent any future expedition to the Holy Land from 
 the west going by land. It was their turn to finesSe, as it had 
 been the turn of the Normans formerly : the Normans had 
 intrigued long enough for conquest by land ; the maritime 
 powers were beginning to intrigue for cbnquest by sea. Bar- 
 barossa had indeed summoned them formally, but they had 
 been for a long while on the look out to take advantage of 
 the very first opening. One of the first exploits by sea was 
 the conquest, in true Norman fashion, of the rich island of 
 Cyprus, which the prince of Antioch had ravaged so cruelly 
 thirty years before, by Eichard of England. There were as 
 many as fourteen cities provided with bishops when he ar- 
 rived there. Within twenty-four years the Greek bishops 
 there were reduced to four ; their churches and revenues had 
 beeii seized by the Latins, and they had nothing to live upon 
 but what the Latins allowed them.^'' Constantinople had 
 Resisted two formidable sieges by land in the seventh cen- 
 tury from the Saracens : '"^ it had been menaced by sea several 
 times by the Eussians,'"" more recently by the Normans from 
 Sicily,^*' but it was one of their last exploits : as it was one of 
 the last efforts of the Grreek navy likewise to maintain its as- 
 cendancy. If it was still impregnable by land, it lay for the 
 future defenceless against assa\ilt by sea. Here, therefore, 
 we are brought to a new phase in the crusades, far more im- 
 portant in its effects upon Christendom than any earlier one, 
 though possibly the one contemplated or foreseen by those 
 who commenced them. In any case it dawned with the loss 
 of Jerusalem, with the disappearance of the Normans from 
 history, with the abandonment of expeditions to the east by 
 land. Fleets, not armies, in future do the work ; heretics, 
 
 "' 'Isaohius imperator ob gratiam Alexius, brother of Isaac Angelus 
 
 Saladini fieri fecit in urbe Constantino- (Nicet. lib. iii. 6) ; and 2, having been 
 
 politand meskitam,' says Innocent, set fire to by some Flemings. — Ibid, 
 
 speaking, of course, from hearsay. Isaac Ang. et Alex. p. 356. 
 
 Ep. xiii. 184. '" Finlay, vol. ii. p. 369, comp. 
 
 '" By Leo the Isaurian, in virtue of Mansi. tom. ixii. p. 1076. 
 
 a covenant between hi m and Moslemar. "' Gibbon, c. Iii. 
 
 Constant. Porph. De adminst. Imp. ■'™ Ibid. c. Iv. 
 
 c. 21, and Baudurin ad I. It was "' Ibid. c. Ivi. 
 twice destroyed: 1, in the reign of 
 
VENETIANS AND GENOESE. 157 
 
 not infidels, are to be punished ; civilisation, not barbarism, 
 is overthrown. Venice became the instrument, but only the 
 instrument, of that unrighteous consummation. All Europe 
 was longing for it, and intriguing to bring it about with both 
 hands and on both elements, in church as well as in state, by 
 land as well as by sea. Though the Greeks had not ceased 
 to be Christians, were brethren as much as ever, it hated 
 them, because it owed them a deep debt, had been guilty 
 towards them of the grossest injustice, and was hated by them 
 as cordially for the same reason. Therefore, sooner than 
 not extinguish them, it would emperil in their fall the very 
 civilisation, the very religion, which it had derived from 
 them. History is ftiU of such suicidal enterprises by man, 
 indifferent to the degradation of his species, where the ima- 
 ginary, never the real, interests of self are concerned. We 
 are as suicidal as ever in the nineteenth century. The dream 
 of the United States is the humiliation, and if need be, the 
 destruction of England with all its civilisation ; the study of 
 European diplomatists is the propping up and prolongation 
 of the Turkish empire with all its barbarism. It is not 
 enough that our ancestors let the Turks into Constantinople : 
 we insist on keeping them in there and the Greeks out. 
 Catholics or Protestants, we have not ceased to be Latins in 
 the anti-Greek, may it not be added, in the anti-Christian 
 
 sense 
 
 V 
 
 Times had altered immensely since the days of Otho the 
 Great and of Argyrus. Then, for any seaport in Italy to be 
 secure from the Saracens, it was necessary to seek assistance 
 from Constantinople, as there was no other naval power able 
 to cope with them but that of the Greek emperor. As the 
 Normans commenced their career against the Saracens in his 
 pay by land, so the Venetians commenced their career by sea, 
 whether as traders or belligerents, under his patronage. They 
 played the part of the serpent, when Alexius took and lodged 
 them in his capital, which afterwards they were the first to 
 sack. His own daughter is witness to the privileges which 
 he accorded to them. 
 
 ' A whole street of warehouses was given to the Venetians 
 in the capital. The Amalfitan shop-keepers were com- 
 pelled to pay them tribute. Their merchandise was exempt 
 from custom duties ; and they were permitted to trade over 
 the whole extent of the empire, as far as Constantinople and 
 
158 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 the entrance of the Black Sea, with some special privileges. 
 It is difficult to fix the precise nature of the advantages which 
 they acquired by this treaty over the native merchant ; but 
 there is no doubt that it marks the commencement of a sys- 
 tem of a commercial policy on the part of the Byzantine 
 government, to which we must attribute the ruin of Greek 
 commerce in the Mediterranean, and the estrangement of 
 the Greeks from the imperial administration.' ''^^ Gradually, 
 the Venetians 'found that their interests were more closely 
 connected with the Syrian trade than with Constantinople. 
 They joined the kings of Jerusalem in extending their con- 
 quests, and obtained considerable establishments in all the 
 maritime cities of the kingdom. From having been the 
 customers and allies of the Greeks, they became their rivals 
 and enemies.' *^^ 
 
 Manuel I. made treaties with, and secured the services of, 
 the Pisans and Genoese; playing them off, possibly to his 
 own cost, against the Venetians.*'^ The result was that a 
 large population of Latins inhabited Constantinople, had 
 churches and bishops of their own, independent of the na- 
 tional church,''*' and amassed property there. Foreigners 
 were advanced to posts of honor and emolument, and 
 whether they quarrelled amongst themselves, or combined 
 together against the Greeks, the internal peace of the city 
 was equally threatened by their presence. ' During the 
 reign of Manuel,' says William of Tyre — whose personal ob- 
 ligations to him must be remembered in connection with 
 what follows- — * who was so pleasing to God, the Latins had, 
 thanks to their faith and energy, got into such high favour 
 with him, that, to the neglect of his own Greeks as soft and 
 effeminate, he with his innate magnanimity and incomparable 
 energy, was in the habit of entrusting all affairs of moment 
 exclusively to the Latins, of whose faith and capacities he had 
 formed so correct an estimate The Greeks, in conse- 
 quence, particularly his own relatives, but at length the entire 
 people, conceived the most violent hatred for our side ; which 
 was aggravated in bitterness, and supplied with matter for 
 increased vehemence, by the difference between us and them 
 on the sacraments. In their arrogance, which exceeds all 
 
 *=^ Finky, vol. ii. p. 187. ■"• Ibid. p. 190-225. 
 
 *"' Ibid. p. 171. "' Below, a few pages on. 
 
VENETIANS AND GENOESE. 159 
 
 bounds, not content with having separated from the Roman 
 church themselves, they call everyone heretic who is not a 
 follower of their own vain traditions ; whereas they have 
 made the name of heretic nauch more applicable to them- 
 selves, by devising or embracing new and pestilent opinions, 
 in opposition to the Roman church.' *^^ This is not in the 
 strain of his earlier books ; though it is the essence of mode- 
 ration, compared with some that come after him. Like Odo, 
 he candidly puts the cause first and the effects afterwards : 
 the wrongs to which the Greeks had been subjected before 
 the extreme point to which they had pushed their retaliation. 
 They had separated from the church of Rome, in that they 
 had resented the silppression of their oriental rite, and their 
 own forcible subjection to a foreign hierarchy. They were 
 indignant to see the highest offices of state bestowed upon 
 foreigners, and a rival commerce supplanting their own 
 under cover of patronage from their own government. Their 
 ' blasphemy ' against the Latins, amidst all these provocations, 
 is made the measure of their own orthodoxy. 
 
 On the accession of Andronicus — who was not inferior to 
 Manuel in crime, but no such admirer of the Latins— 'the 
 people rose in arms ; from the Asiatic shore the tyrant de- 
 spatched his troops and galleys to assist the national revenge ; 
 and the hopeless resistance of the strangers served only to 
 justify the rage, and sharpen the daggers of the assassins. 
 Neither age, nor sex, nor the ties of friendship or kindred, 
 could save the victims of national hatred, and avarice, and 
 religious zeal ; the Latins were slaughtered in their houses, 
 and in the streets ; their quarter was reduced to ashes; the 
 clergy were burnt in their churches, and the sick in their 
 hospitals ; and some estimate may be formed of the slain from 
 the clemency which sold above 4,000 in perpetual slavery to 
 the Turks. The priests and monks were the loudest and most 
 active in the destruction of the schismatics ; and they chanted 
 a thanksgiving to the Lord, when the head of a Roman car- 
 dinal,**' the pope's legate, was severed from his body, fastened 
 to the tail of a dog, and dragged, with savage mockery, through 
 the city.' *'* But the ejaculation of the Latin historian, 
 
 *" Bell. Sao. xxii. 10. quem pro negotiis ecdesise dominus 
 
 487 W'illiam of Tyre's words are ' Vi- papa illuc direxerat.' 
 
 rum' venerabilem, Joannem nomine, *" Gibbon, c. Ls. It happened a.d. 
 
 sanctee Bomanie ecclesise subdiaconum, 1183. 
 
160 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 which Gibbon omits, should be restored here. ' Such was 
 the recompense made by the impious Greeks to their guests, 
 who had deserved, and who feared no such treatment from 
 them ; to whom they had given their daughters, their nieces, 
 and sisters in marriage ; and with whom, from living together 
 so long, they had made great friends.' **' Not quite the terms 
 on which the archbishop would have allowed his countrymen 
 to live with the Greeks, surely, had the Greeks been heretics. 
 As might have been expected, the Latins had their revenge 
 before long, and took it out in kind, without distinguishing 
 between the innocent and the guilty. 
 
 ' The more diligent of the strangers had retreated on the 
 first alarm to their vessels, and escaped through the Helles- 
 pont from the scene of blood. In their flight, they burnt and 
 ravaged 200 miles of the sea-coast; inflicted a severe revenge 
 on the guiltless subjects of the empire ; marked the priests 
 and monks as their peculiar enemies ; and compensated by 
 the accumulation of plunder the loss of their property and 
 friends. On their return, they exposed to Italy and Europe 
 the wealth and weakness, the perfidy and malice, of the 
 Greeks, whose vices were painted as the genuine characters 
 of heresy and schism. The scruples of the first crusaders 
 had neglected the fairest opportunities of securing, by posses- 
 sion of Constantinople, the way to the Holy Land ; a domes- 
 tic revolution invited, almost compelled, the French and 
 Venetians to achieve the conquest of the Eoman empire of 
 the east.' *'^'' Let it not be forgotten that the Latins inhabit- 
 ing Constantinople at that date, belonged almost exclusively 
 to the maritime republics of Genoa, Pisa, and Venice. They 
 lived in daily contemplation of those objects of attraction 
 there that had so dazzled Bohemond. Between these events 
 indeed and their final issue, there was a gap of just twenty 
 years ; but all that occurred in the interim only served to 
 make that issue doubly certain. The loss of Jerusalem was 
 mourned over in the west as a domestic sorrow ; the Greeks 
 were suspected of having connived at it ; at least there was a 
 general opinion that they might have prevented it. There 
 was a growing feeling in Europe that the Greeks were at the 
 bottom of all its misfortunes in the east. Some one was evi- 
 dently in fault ; surely not its own side ; why not the Greeks ? 
 
 "" BeU. Sac. ibid. c. 12. «« Gibbon, ibid. 
 
VENETIANS AND GENOESE. 161 
 
 Was there a nation that had not been wronged by them in 
 some way or other ? The failure of the second crusade was 
 remembered against them by the French and Germans. The 
 third crusade felt that it had been driven to get to the Holy 
 Land by sea. The Venetians, Pisans, and Genoese remem- 
 bered the summons which they had received from Barbarossa, 
 and what had led to it, though it had fallen through for the 
 moment. It reminded them of their increasing importance ; 
 it put ideas into their heads of what might be accomplished 
 some day by sea when they were stronger. When therefore 
 the fourth crusade decided to start from Venice, the Venetians 
 forthwith decided that they had the game in their own hands, 
 and threw themselves into it with the same tenacity of pur- 
 pose that had characterised the Normans formerly. Not one 
 inch would they yield. If they embarked in it all, it should 
 be carried out in their own way, and for their own ends. 
 They would listen to the pope, they would conform to the 
 canons, as far as it suited them, but no further. To their 
 own scheme they would be faithful to death. Sentences of 
 excommunication could be taken off as well as imposed. 
 They would bring Europe — they would bring the pope — 
 over to their way of thinking at last. Even he could not 
 long avoid recognising accomplished facts. All which came 
 to pass as they had planned it. The issues of the fourth 
 crusade were brought about by no chapter of accidents, 
 though they took most of the original promoters of it by 
 surprise ; they were due to the deliberate action of a strong 
 inflexible will converting the rest one by one to what it had 
 proposed to itself from the first, and compelling their assent 
 to it in spite of themselves, in provoking contrast to their 
 former principles. Again and again they hesitated, remon- 
 strated, and even turned back ; it never paused till it had 
 effected all. In the histories that have come down to us of 
 the fourth crusade from first to last, we have perhaps the 
 most complete picture of any distant event of that magnitude 
 extant, covering, as it does, not merely the actual occurrences 
 in all their fulness, but extending to the feelings and motives 
 of the principal actors concerned in it on both sides in all their 
 vicissitudes. 'In this great revolution,' says Gibbon, 'we 
 enjoy the singular felicity of comparing the narratives of Ville- 
 hardouin and Nicetas, the opposite feelings of the marshal 
 
 M 
 
162 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 of Champagne, and the Byzantine senator.'^" Of far more 
 importance to our subject is it that we possess, and can 
 compare, two contemporary, but independent, narratives on 
 the Latin side — both likely, therefore, to supplement each 
 other in some respects ; one that of the chaplain who accom- 
 panied the expedition; ^'2 the other, the life of that pope,^^^ 
 who, though he watched over it from a distance, must have 
 judged of it from the official accounts that reached him. 
 
 The best preface to the former narrative will be found in a 
 celebrated sermon'*'* that was once preached upon the cha- 
 racter of Balaam — one of two upon self-deceit — in which 
 the author says of him, ' He wanted to do what he knew to 
 be very wicked. . . . He had inward checks and restraints, 
 which he could not entirely get over ; he therefore casts 
 about for ways to reconcile this wickedness with his duty.' 
 Or, again, ' He seeks indulgences for plain wickedness ; which 
 not being able to obtain, he glosses over that same wicked- 
 ness, dresses it up in a new form, in order to make it pass 
 over more easily with himself.' As we proceed with the nar- 
 rative, we shall see these lineaments of the prophet repro- 
 duced in it to the life. 
 
 The chiefs of the fourth crusade, then, accordin,g to their 
 chaplain, made Venice their rendezvous ; intending to pro- 
 ceed from thence by sea to Alexandria, and there commence 
 operations. The Venetians agreed to provide them with 
 shipping, but on condition of being assisted previously to 
 reduce Zara, one of the principal seaports of Dalraatia, and 
 then belonging to the king of Hungary. Zara, Martin omits 
 to tell us, had once belonged to them ; and its archbishop 
 had, out of compliment to them, been placed by Adridn IV."'^ 
 in subjection to the patriarch of Grrado, whose ecclesiastical 
 importance they were counselled to lose no opportunity of 
 advancing, and the boundaries of whose jurisdiction to do all 
 in their power to extend. About the same time powers of 
 the most extraordinary description were conferred on that 
 patriarch by the pope in council : ' We have come to the 
 resolution of granting to you and to your successors, by 
 
 *"' C. Ix. near the end. Fatrol. vol. cexiii. or ed. Baluz. 
 
 "^ Grimther's Hist. Const, (composed "' Butler's Works, vol. ii. serm. vii. 
 at the dictation of Abhot Martin, the *^^ See his four letters on the subject, 
 
 real chaplain) ap. Canis. Tkesaur. ed. written about a.d. 1167 (Mansi torn. 
 
 '^ age, vol. iv. p. v.-xxii. xxi. p. 821 et seq.), Ep. 36-40. 
 Gest. Innoceniii III. ap. Migne, 
 
TRUE CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 163 
 
 apostolic authority, license to ordain, and without gainsaying 
 from any quarter, consecrate a bishop in the city of Constan- 
 tinople, and in all other towns situated within the Constan- 
 tinopolitan empire where churches belonging to the Venetians, 
 and constantly attended by them in any numbers, exist.' Few 
 measures ever made less noise in the ecclesiastical world, that 
 were authorised in defiance of so many canons. Not a word 
 is said about any previous understanding with the Greek 
 bishops whose dioceses were to be so invaded, and on whose 
 jurisdiction the Venetians must have considered themselves 
 encouraged to encroach in other ways. It may be doubted, 
 in short, whether the Venetians were not following out the 
 policy recommendecf to them by Adrian, when they took steps 
 for recovering Zara. On the other hand, as its present pos- 
 sessor had assumed the cross, he had thereby placed his terri- 
 tories under protection of the holy see, and excommunication 
 was incurred by any that attacked them. Even then the 
 crusaders recoiled in horror from the notion of soldiers, who 
 had assumed the cross, taking up arms against Christians, 
 and subjecting them to the miseries experienced by besieged 
 cities. The consequence was that some quitted the expedi- 
 tion, and others obtained leave from the pope to defer joining 
 in it for the present. A cardinal legate, Peter of Capua, 
 now came from Eome to arbitrate between them, but in vain. 
 The Venetians would hear of no compromise. It was resolved 
 by the majority, therefore, that sooner than abandon the vow 
 to which they were pledged as crusaders, ' it would be more 
 venial in them, and less censurable, to make up for the 
 smaller evil by the greater good ' *^^ — in other words, better 
 to get to Alexandria by storming Zara, than not at all. 
 Honest Martin could not, he avers, view it in that light. 
 He entreated the cardinal to be allowed to return in peace 
 to his monastery. The cardinal, in the name of the pope, 
 bade him stay, and by way of making the order more impera- 
 tive, placed all the Germans who should accompany the 
 expedition under his care ; enjoining him and all other 
 regulars attached to the camp, ' to see that it abstained, as 
 much as possible, from slaughtering Christians.' ^'^ Could 
 the cardinal have doubted for one moment what was to 
 follow ? ' Zara was threatened,' says Martin, ' for three days, 
 
 «« C. 6. *»' Ibid. 
 
 M S 
 
1C4 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 rather than actually attacked ; and surrendered without 
 bloodshed.' What became of the unfortunate inhabitants we 
 are not told; but 'the Venetians, inexorable in their malignity, 
 lost no time in rasing it from the foundations.'*'* What was 
 to be done now? The crusaders had manifestly incurred 
 excommunication with their eyes open ! Martin was sent, in 
 company with the bishop of Soissons and John from Paris, 
 of persuasive tongue, to Eome to plead for them. They had 
 committed a crime against Christians, indeed, but it had 
 been forced upon them in their zeal for the honor of Christ ; 
 would not the pope remit their sentence ? The matter having 
 been gone into fully before him, it was decided accordingly ; 
 but before the deputies could leave Eome, another incident 
 was reported there. Alexius, son of Isaac, emperor of Con- 
 stantinople, who had been deposed by his brother, was stated 
 to be in the camp, accompanied by ambassadors from Ger- 
 many, supplicating the crusaders to assist in procuring his 
 restoration and that of his father. As the sister of Alexius 
 was married to Philip, king of the Germans, he could claim 
 affinity with some of the chiefs ; and he promised not only 
 that all pilgrims should have fj:ee passage through his 
 dominions, but that he would pay down 300,000 marks in 
 silver to the expedition, on its restoring him. The pope, his 
 clergy, and the deputies, one and all, evinced great anxiety 
 on receipt of these tidings, fearing that the safety of the 
 whole army might be imperilled, or the crusade impeded. 
 ' The pope *^' certainly hated that city, no less than his pre- 
 decessors for some time past, because it had long been rebel- 
 lious to the Roman church, and because, on some points, as 
 the procession of the Holy Ghost, on which the Greeks deny 
 procession from the Son, and their oblations, which are made 
 with leavened bread, they differ from the Catholic faith. 
 Hence they once seized upon a cardinal, whom the pope had 
 sent to admonish and instruct them, and suspended him by 
 the feet with his head downwards till he died. The pope 
 hated that city, therefore, and wished that, if it could he 
 done without blood, it might be taken by the Catholics ; but 
 the loss of our army was what he dreaded. He had no hopes, 
 he said, of our army succeeding, as that city possessed more 
 fishing-boats than we had ships .... and he was anxious 
 
 "« C. 7. 
 
 ™ 0. 8. jffiartiu must have learnt all this at 'Rome, where he now -was. 
 
TKUE CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 163 
 
 that our people should make straight for Alexandria. He 
 allowed them, however, to levy supplies in moderation for 
 six months on all the maritime parts of Roumania with- 
 out payment.' Martin omits to tell us to whom those mari- 
 time parts belonged then — to the Greeks or to the Latins. 
 Be that as it may, there was a good deal in all this that 
 filled Martin with scruples : he returned to the camp with 
 his two companions, bringing letters from the pope absolving 
 the army ; but immediately afterwards he sought and obtained 
 leave to start for the Holy Land by himself. There he re- 
 mained some time occupied in works much more congenial 
 to his simple mind, Sent back from thence to the west, in 
 quest of succours, he once more went after the expedition ; 
 but found it at length engaged in hostilities before Constan- 
 tinople, not Alexandria. ' So God had ordained it,' he would 
 fain believe, ' that a city of that magnitude and power, which 
 had rebelled against the Roman see for so long, should, by 
 the valor of our host, and a most unlooked-for victory, be 
 restored to the unity of the church.^"" That was one special 
 motive which had weighed with the crusaders ; next, the 
 prayers and promises of the young Alexius ; last, and not 
 least, the Venetians would have it so, not merely because 
 they coveted the sum of money stipulated upon, but because, 
 trusting to the multitude of their ships, they arrogated for 
 themselves supremacy in all that sea.'°' And, indeed, it 
 seemed fitting that a people who would not be corrected 
 otherwise, should be punished by the slaughter of some few 
 of its citizens and the loss of its possessions, in which it 
 trusted, to the end that a pilgrim nation should be enriched 
 with the spoils of the proud, and the whole land pass under 
 our dominion, and the western church be for ever made glad, 
 and illumined by those relics of which their existing pos- 
 sessors liad proved unworthy. Should Constantinople pass 
 into faithful hands, its vicinity would make the defence of 
 the Holy Land much more easy : should infidels ever obtain 
 possession of it, its loss would be sure to involve that of the 
 Holy Land. It was a most signal providence, therefore, that 
 its own internal disturbances should have had the effect of 
 diverting our army to it from Alexandria just then.'*"^ So 
 reasoned poor Martin, in the hopelessness of escaping from 
 
 "° C. 10, "' C. 11. "■ C. 12-13. 
 
1C6 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 his position, as lie resumed his narrative. After a short 
 conflict the usurper was put to flight ; half the money was 
 paid down faithfully by Alexius on being reinstated in his 
 hereditary palace ; but while he was deliberating whether he 
 should pay or withhold the rest, he was strangled by a second 
 usurper ; nor did his father survive much longer. ' What was 
 to be done now by our people- — a handful against so many ? 
 Should they return without payment in full, having come so 
 far out of their way for it ? ' It was decided to exact ven- 
 geance for the murder of the monarch whom they had set 
 up ; so the siege commenced in earnest. ' They were fully' 
 prepared for either alternative — to retire, should they be 
 able to do so with honor ; to slaughter and be slaughtered, 
 should the foe venture to come out to attack them.°°' After 
 a fierce — but, of course, not a bloody — struggle, the ships of 
 Venice carried the day ; by their help the walls facing the sea 
 were scaled in safety, and Palm Sunday saw our people in 
 possession of it, Grod having so ordained it,' he would fain 
 think, ' that the host of Christ should burst into that per- 
 fidious city in triumph on that day, on which Christ .entered 
 Jerusalem as a conqueror, in anticipation of His passion. 
 Though they terrified the enemy with darts, swords, cross- 
 bows, arrows, and all kinds of weapons, and seemed tc 
 threaten them with death, yet had they no intention of 
 shedding blood ; though they had such opportunities for 
 slaughter as they never could have calculated upon, stiV 
 there were but few slain. The regulars who were with then, 
 were indefatigable in reminding them that, as far as possible, 
 they should keep their hands from shedding blood. If there 
 were 2,000 or so slain, they were slain, not by our soldiers, 
 but by the Latin inhabitants of the city, who had been ex- 
 pelled when the siege commenced, and who showed their 
 resentment for that act of injustice. Only one soldier on 
 our side perished. In short, the enemy having been driven 
 out of the city very considerately, then, and not before, was 
 attention directed to the spoils, which turned out so vast as 
 literally to make every man in the army a wealthy citizen 
 for life. Meanwhile, about one-third of the city was con- 
 sumed by fire, which there were no spare hands to put out.' 
 They were too well employed. 
 
 S03 Q 14_ 
 
TRUE CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 167 
 
 The only pillage that had charms for Martin '"^ was that of 
 relics ; and of these, with the help of a Greek priest, whom 
 he menaced with death in Latin, while the aged presbyter 
 pleaded for mercy in Koumaic, he was able to amass a vast 
 store. Baldwin count of Flanders was elected king; dis- 
 tribution was made of the conquered territory, to be governed, 
 with some changes, according to its existing laws ; and Martin 
 was offered a see there, but he was only too glad to be off. 
 He saw there was no chance of the crusade reverting to its 
 original destination for some time at least. He therefore 
 completed his own mission to the Holy Land in all speed, and 
 reached Basle, wheje his convent was, in safety with his relics 
 — the only bright incident to him of the whole expedition ; 
 the only part of its history on which he can dilate without 
 misgivings, or record at all without excuses and ill-concealed 
 abhorrence. 
 
 For a true insight into the sentiments of a distant age, 
 there is nothing like transcribing, as near 'as possible, the 
 exact expressions of some trustworthy contemporary supposed 
 to be capable of representing them. There have been many 
 military chaplains before and since Martin who have accom- 
 panied expeditions, just or unjust, against their will ; and did 
 Martin only record his own private judgment on the character 
 of that one to which he was attached, his narrative would be 
 deprived of half its interest. But it is evident that in his 
 unvarnished tale facts occupy the first place ; and that in a 
 great measure they determined opinions, including his own. 
 Among them pre-eminently we may note the following : 1. 
 that the Venetians had all along Constantinople, not Alex- 
 andria, in view, their object being to make themselves 
 supreme by sea ; 2. that excommunication had no effect in 
 deterring them from their purpose; 3. that the rest had 
 scruples in conscience against their scheme at first, but that 
 afterwards, when it had been crowned with success, it was 
 accepted and justified, as a special providence by all. One 
 question remains : was the pope — was Innocent III. — a party 
 to the design, or was he overborne like the rest ; and did it 
 ever meet with his entire sanction or retrospective approval ? 
 Of all public characters that ever lived, there are perhaps 
 none more open to public inspection still, than his ; his own 
 
 "* ' Indignum ducens sacrilegium, nisi in re sacri, committere.' — C. 19. 
 
1G8 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 published letters are still a witness to his inmost thoughts on 
 most of the many transactions in which he moved ; and it 
 was from ^he internal evidence supplied by those letters, as 
 much as anything else, that a recent historian ^"^ in Grermany 
 of undoubted eminence, became thoroughly convinced that 
 Christ had ruled by him upon earth, and therefore recog- 
 nised in his existing successor those unearthly prerogatives, 
 that had been so worthily upheld by him. 
 
 In diving into the acts of his pontificate, we shall get at 
 some occurrences of importance, of which Martin in all pro- 
 bability had never heard. Martin, indeed, speaks for his 
 party throughout ; not for the pope. On the accession of 
 Innocent a.d. 1198, an event occurred, which, though po- 
 licy was at the bottom of it, recalls old days. Alexius III. 
 who, by having dethroned his brother Isaac three years before, 
 was the reigning emperor, sent ambassadors to him from 
 Constantinople with costly presents, requesting that he would 
 despatch a legate thither to represent him.^°^ Innocent sent 
 Albert a subdeacon and Albertine a notary without loss of 
 time for that purpose, and they were bearers of a letter *'"' 
 from him bidding the emperor resist the Saracens courage- 
 ously, and make the Greek church return to the Latin as to 
 a mother. ' There is yet another point,' he says, ' on which 
 the people of Christ has a complaint to make, not merely 
 against you, but against the Eoman church that has so 
 long dissembled and passed it over . . . whereas the tunic 
 worn by Christ was without seam and indivisible; and 
 the express words of the creed are ' I believe one holy and 
 apostolic church ; ' the Greek nation withdrawing from the 
 unity of the apostolic see, and of the Eoman church, which 
 by divine ordinance is mother and mistress of all the faithful, 
 has set up for itself another church, if church it can be 
 called, which is distinct from the one church.' He addressed 
 at the same time, and to the same effect, another letter to 
 the patriarch of Constantinople,*"' in which the emperor is 
 spoken of as ' our dearest son in Christ,' and the patri- 
 arch as brother; though the headings in each case have 
 disappeared. 
 
 Alexius replied at some length to the pope,*"' both on the 
 
 '"" Hurler, his modem biographer. '"' Ibid. 35i. 
 
 "= Gest. § Ix. M" Ep. ii. 210. 
 
 '»' Ep. i. 363. 
 
TEUE CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 1G9 
 
 loss of Jerusalem and on the subject of unity. Jerusalem 
 he considers lost as a punishment for sin ; but ' union, in the 
 opinion of my empiie, is a very easy matter, if, putting 
 human wills on one side, we admit the will of God exclusively 
 for our mediator. Let the prelates of churches lay aside all 
 their worldly wisdom, and trust only to the Holy Spirit for 
 the task of investigating abstruse dogma, and it will be im- 
 possible for doubtful points not to be easily solved, or things 
 parted asunder brought together, or things disputed amicably 
 arranged. Should people have separated, on the contrary, of 
 their own free will, the operation of a contrai-y spirit will be 
 manifest, making each rent incorrigible and each division 
 past healing. , . It remains therefore for your holiness, in 
 conformity with the precedents observed in former councils, 
 to arrange that a council may be held for discussing the 
 doctrines in question, which if your holiness will be pleased 
 to do, the holy church in our dominions will not delay to 
 come to it.' 
 
 There were some caustic reflexions in the first part of the 
 letter on pride, but there was so much good sense and good will 
 apparent in what followed, that Innocent wrote off immedi- 
 ately '"' to bind him to his engagement. On the subject of 
 the Holy Land he tells him that all baptised Christians 
 should deem it their duty to combine for its recovery ; on 
 the union of the church he is glad to notice so much alacrity, 
 coupled with so much willingness to carry out the instruc- 
 tions contained in his letter on the part of the emperor. 
 Then he becomes more explicit. 'Although, as I have written 
 to our venerable brother, the patriarch of Constantinople, 
 the apostolic see is not so much by synodical as by divine 
 appointment head and mother of all churches, for the better 
 understanding of which I enclose you a copy of my let- 
 ter to him, and therefore the said patriarch should never 
 carry his opinions on disparity of rites or differences of 
 doctrine so far as is incompatible with affectionate devotion 
 and obedience, according to antient and canonical usage, to 
 us his head, for it never can be that what is certain should 
 be abandoned for what is questionable : nevertheless, in con- 
 sequence of the many needs of the church, we have deter- 
 mined, by the grace of God, to convoke a general council or 
 
 "• Ep. ii. 211. 
 
170 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BT THE LATINS. 
 
 synodical assembly, to -wHch. should he, on receiving his sum- 
 mons from us, fulfil his promise and come, since these are the 
 doctrines insisted upon by us in our epistles, that he should 
 return as a member to its head, as a daughter to her mother, 
 prepared to exhibit due reverence and obedience to the 
 Roman church,, we will receive him as our dearest brother, 
 and gladly and joyfully admit him as chief member of the 
 church, determining all other points that are necessary by 
 authority of the apostolic see, and approval of the holy 
 council, in conjunction with his own, and that of our other 
 brethren. Otherwise, as we are bound not to tolerate that 
 which is a scandal to the church any longer, whose duty it is 
 to keep the Lord's garner clear of tares and chaff, we cannot 
 but say openly that we shall be obliged to proceed in this 
 matter as our brethren in council may advise, should we be 
 permitted to hold one.' He trusts, therefore, in conclu- 
 sion, that the emperor will not be backward in requiring the 
 patriarch to come to the council on receiving his summons, 
 ' otherwise, should the contrary come to pass, which we can- 
 not believe, we may be obliged to proceed against you, who 
 have the power of effecting what we enjoin, if you please, 
 quite as much as against him and the church of the Greeks. 
 From the emperor we pass to the patriarch. He, on receiv- 
 ing the first letter addressed to him, replied in a very suitable 
 tone, requesting further elucidation on some points which the 
 pope had urged.*" The beginning of his letter is remarkable 
 both for the moderation with which his own dignity is set 
 forth, and the warmth of greeting conveyed to the pope. 
 ' To Innocent, the most holy Roman pope, and our beloved 
 brother in Christ our Lord, John, by divine grace archbishop 
 of Constantinople, patriarch of new Rome, love and peace in 
 the Lord.' What his queries were we shall see from the 
 letter which they elicited from Innocent in reply to them.*^^ 
 Again we have to notice the want of a heading to it, but the 
 patriarch is addressed in it all through as brother. First, he 
 tells him, ' the church is called universal for two reasons . . . 
 in one case as consisting of all churches, the equivalent for 
 which in Grreek is ' catholic' And in this sense of the term 
 the Roman church is not the universal church, but a part of 
 the same, the chief and principal, that is, as the head in the 
 
 »" Ep. ii. 208. "' Ep. ii. 209. 
 
TRUE CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 171 
 
 body. ... In the other case, that church alone is called uni- 
 versal which contains all churches under it. And, according 
 to this acceptation of the term, only the Eoman church is 
 styled universal, as being in truth alone by privilege of singu- 
 lar dignity preferred to them all.' Secondly, to compare 
 Eome with Jerusalem. ' Our brother should distinguish ac- 
 cording to the different senses of the word, between the 
 churches of Eome and Jerusalem, one being called mother of 
 the faith, as from her the mysteries of the faith proceeded ; 
 the other, mother of the faithful, as she that by privilege of 
 dignity, has been placed over all the faithful.' At the end, 
 exactly the same words are repeated that were addressed to 
 the emperor, congratulating the patriarch in turn on the de- 
 sire expressed by him for union, and bidding him come, 
 when summoned, to the council that it was his own intention 
 to convoke. 
 
 Here the correspondence would seem to have broken off 
 abruptly. The biographer of the pope, indeed, represents 
 the patriarch and emperor as thrown into great perplexity by 
 his replies, and as though his line of argument had quite con- 
 founded them. ' The emperor, therefore,' so say the Acts,'" 
 'after much deliberation with the Greeks, replied at last, 
 that if the pope would cause a council to be convened in 
 G-reece, where the four councils of antiquity had been held, 
 the church of the Greeks would send her representatives 
 thither; and so quitted the subject.' 
 
 If any such reply ever came from the emperor it has been 
 lost. The latest editor of the letters of Innocent admits that 
 it is not forthcoming, and that the supposed rejoinder of the 
 pope is anything but a reply to it on that head. But had 
 such a proposal emanated from the emperor, what then? 
 Could Innocent have taken exception to it ? Had not the 
 greatest and grandest of his predecessors answered for him 
 by anticipation, and in the affirmative ? ' Because our pre- 
 decessors, whose steps, unworthy though we are, we are desir- 
 ous of following, have frequently visited those parts for the 
 purpose of confirming the catholic faith, so we, aided by the 
 prayers of the faithful, if Christ permit . . . hold ourselves 
 constrained to set out thither for the sake of the same faith, 
 and of protecting Christians.' '" Had not Urban consulted 
 
 »'« § Ixii. »" Greg. VII. ep. iL 31, v. sup. p. 8S 
 
172 SACK OF CONSTAKTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 count Eoger on the same point/'^ and been only deterred 
 from going by circumstances that barred his way till it was 
 too late to act ? As little can it be denied that it was the 
 first crusade which decided the question of visiting Constan- 
 tinople for Urban, as that it was the fourth crusadq which 
 settled that question for Innocent, whether he liked it or not. 
 Some people may fancy that the consideration uppermost in 
 the mind of Innocent was that of extending his prerogatives. 
 On scrutinising his words more carefully, we shall not fail to 
 perceive that he is continually making allusions to something 
 else at his back. Public opinion, though it may not have borne 
 that name yet, was as powerful a lever then as now ; in some 
 cases there was no resisting it. The Latin world was resolved 
 upon making the Greek world bow to it, sooner or later ; it had 
 once been subject, it would now be despot. Let the pope 
 lead, and it would follow him, but lead he must. There were 
 some prerogatives which, by the admission of all, the pope 
 had over the east by divine right. Those prerogatives must 
 be pushed to excess in the national cause. They were the 
 only semblance of right of any kind — and in their special de- 
 partment a fair semblance — that the west had ; and the west 
 was determined on making the most of them. Almost the 
 first words of Innocent to the emperor, after the usual com- 
 pliments, are : ' There is yet another point oa which the, 
 people of Christ has to complain, not merely against you, 
 but against the Eoman church that has so long dissembled 
 and passed it over.' ^'^ Who were the people of Christ that 
 complained of the conduct of the church of Rome on that 
 score ? Not, surely, the whole of Christendom ; not, surely, so 
 much as a town in the east ; not, probably, the whole west, 
 so much as its partisans and men of action. Almost his last 
 words to the emperor allude pointedly to the same necessity 
 that was laid on him from without : ' we are bound not to 
 tolerate that which is a scandal to the church ' — to churchmen 
 in the west — ' any longer.' *" The west affected to be scan- 
 dalised that he was not patriarch as well as pope over the 
 whole east, as he had always been patriarch as well as pope 
 over the whole west, and it resolved he should be. That 
 principle which its hosts had carried with them to Syria and 
 Palestine should be established in Constantinople before they 
 
 ='= Sup. p. 118-19. "» Sup. p. 223. 
 
 =" Sup. p. 226. 
 
TRUE CHARACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 173 
 
 had done. Innocent could anticipate, if any man ever could, 
 that wliich was on the lips of his age ; and how it must have 
 seemed to him like the beginning of the end, when, all of a 
 sudden, in the midst of his correspondence with Constanti- 
 nople, when he scarce knew whether to be harsh or mild, 
 Bulgaria, the original cause of their quarrel, opened its arms 
 wide to the west. 
 
 Et jam, jamque tnagis cunctantem flectere eenno 
 Cceperat, infelix humero cum apparuit alto 
 Balteus, et notis fulserunt cingula bidlis 1 '" 
 
 Can it have been for any other reason, indeed, that he 
 ceased all at once corresponding with the patriarch and 
 emperor? A.d. 1199, John, king of Bulgaria, or Calojohan- 
 nes, as he is called more generally, threw off his allegiance 
 to the Greek empire, and declared his independence.*" 
 Innocent seems to have lost no time in wishing him joy of 
 his success.'^" The answer was not immediate, but when it 
 did come, it said : ' our government has one request to make 
 of the apostolic see, that we may be filially dependent on 
 the Eoman church, as a daughter on her mother. Above 
 all things, we ask of the Eoman church, our mother, as her 
 beloved child, a crown and its accompaniments, according to 
 what our monarchs in time past have enjoyed.'*^' That re- 
 quest set Innocent upon his researches, for he was fond of 
 acting upon precedent where he could ; and in prosecuting 
 them he came upon the minutes of a well-nigh forgotten con- 
 troversy that must have filled him with interest. Here they are 
 in his own words. ' We have caused our regests,' he tells the 
 king of Bulgaria, ' to be read over carefully ; and from them 
 it appears that many kings have been crowned in the land over 
 which you rule. Moreover, it was contained in them that 
 in the days of our predecessor of excellent memory, pope 
 Nicholas, the king of the Bulgarians, whose consultations he 
 was always answering, together with that whole people, was 
 baptised at his preaching, and demanded of him an arch- 
 bishop. Ambassadors likewise from Michael, king of Bul- 
 garia, presented themselves before pope Adrian, our predeces- 
 vsor, with royal gifts, and letters from the king, demanding of 
 him that he would designate one of his cardinals to be chosen 
 as their archbishop, to be consecrated afterwards by himself 
 
 «" Virg. Xn. xii. 940. "» Ep. ii. 266. 
 
 »'" Baron, a.d. 1199, u. 58. «' Gest. §lxv. Ep. v. Hi. 
 
174 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE Bf THE LATINS. 
 
 on their approval of him. However, after Adrian had taken 
 the trouble of sending them a subdeacon in company with 
 two bishops, for that purpose, the Bulgarians, circumvented 
 by the promises and bribes of the Greeks, admitted Grreek 
 priests, ejecting the Eoman,'^^^ and so forth. Innocent says, 
 that in the face of so much fickleness on the part of the Bul- 
 garians, he cannot possibly send one of his cardinals thither ; 
 but he sends John, his friend and favourite chaplain, as legate 
 to correct and settle whatever was wanted, and convey the 
 pall to the Bulgarian archbishop. If any bishops were 
 needed, his legate was to see that none were consecrated, nor 
 any clergy ordained, but by catholic bishops, the nearest that 
 could be had. About the crown, the legate was to make 
 search for precedents in the Bulgarian state paper offices and 
 elsewhere. Before he returned, John, at the request of the 
 king, appointed two more metropolitans for Bulgaria,^^' and 
 the king on his part bound himself and his realm under alle- 
 giance to the Eoman church.*^'' One of the newly appointed 
 metropolitans accompanied John on his return, with pre- 
 sents for Innocent, and a letter ^^^ in which he is styled 
 ' most holy ruler and universal pope.' Whereupon Innocent, 
 ' after due consideration, appointed him king of the Dacians 
 and Bulgarians ; and despatched to him Leo, cardinal-pres- 
 byter of the title of holy cross, as legate of the apostolic see, 
 with sceptre and diadem, to crown and anoint him in behalf 
 of the pope as king ; and with letters apostolic of his new 
 dignity to be laid up in their archives.'^^^ Afterwards the pope 
 sent him a banner ; constituted the archbishop of Ternova 
 primate of Bulgaria ; and ordered that all bishops and pres- 
 byters of that kingdom should be anointed with chrism, 
 ' according to the custom of the Latins,' which they had not 
 been previously, but which for the future they were always 
 to be without fail.*^' The cardinal-legate, as he passed 
 through Hungary, was at first treated with every honor ; but 
 when about to quit Hungary for Bulgaria, he was detained. 
 The king of Hungary had no wish evidently for another 
 king so near him. The pope remonstrated,*'*^ and at first 
 with mildness; the letter of excuse from the king is not 
 extant apparently ; but from the second letter of the pope,*^^ 
 
 === Ep. T. 116. =» Ep. vii. 6. 5" Gest. § Ixxiv. 
 
 "' Gest. § Ixx. "6 Qgst_ i^^ gp_ S28 Ep. vii. 126. 
 
 «4 Ep. fii. 4. vii. 1. ^'"> Ibid. 127. 
 
TRUE CIIAHACTER OF THE FOURTH CRUSADE. 175 
 
 it would appear that the king had made a counter-remon- 
 strance, greatly to our purpose ; as it represents the king of 
 Hungary as complaining, that he had never yet received any 
 compensation for the loss of Zara two years back. Innocept 
 threatens, notwithstanding, to put obstacles in the way of 
 crowning the son of the king of Hungary, should the king of 
 Hungary continue to impede the coronation of the king of 
 Bulgaria. There was no love lost, therefore, between Inno- 
 cent and the king of Hungary ; nor had Emmeric ever dis- 
 charged any part of his vow in assuming the cross. Still 
 Innocent never forgave, though he was unable to punish, the 
 Venetians for that sack of Zara ; in this, as in Constantino- 
 politan affairs, he bad practically no alternative. We have 
 seen that, on his accession, letters had passed between him 
 and the ' de facto ' emperor of a friendly nature. What pre- 
 ferential claims could young Alexius have brought with him 
 three years afterwards ? His sister was married to Philip of 
 Swabia, whom Innocent had but lately decided against 
 recognising, as hostile to the church ; his own promises to 
 the crusaders, as far as concerned the pope, were vague and 
 guarded. • He engaged to pay that reverence to the pope, 
 which former pontiffs had in time past received from his 
 catholic predecessors in the empire ; and he would use his 
 best endeavours to incline the eastern church to do the 
 same."'" He had visited Innocent in person before appealing 
 to the crusaders; and Innocent had heard from his uncle 
 subsequently, and was, of the two, inclined to favour the 
 uncle most. 'But,' says his biographer, 'there were many 
 who said that he should favour the nephew, as the Greek 
 church showed so little devotion and obedience to the aposto- 
 lic see,' and their voices prevailed.*^' The pope could not 
 see the relevancy of that argument for supporting the 
 nephew, but the crusaders did : all along it is the one pretext 
 alleged by them for taking up his cause. Innocent knew 
 well enough what their real design was, and he would be no 
 
 "° As contained in the letter of the tianitatis ecclesiarum caput, Eomanum 
 
 crusaders among those of Innocent. — videlicet pontificem, apostolorum prin- 
 
 Ep. TJ. 21 1. He says in his own letter cipis Petri catholieum successorem nos 
 
 tolnnocent(ap. Baron. A.D.I 203, n. 18), humiliter agnituros, et ad hoc ipsam 
 
 ' Hsec fateor causa potissimiim ad sub- orientalem ecclesiam pro viribus in- 
 
 sidium nostrum peregrinorum animos duoturos,' but when he comes to the 
 
 inclinavit, quod promissione spontanea actual oath sworn by him, he gives it 
 
 sub jurisjurandi religions, Christian^, word for word as the crusaders do. 
 
 sumus devotione polliciti, totius Chris- "' Gest, § Ixxii. 
 
176 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 party to it. It was with mixed feelings that he watched their 
 progress. The recovery of the holy land was his earnest 
 prayer, his first thought night and day ; so far he wished 
 them godspeed with all his heart. But he mistrusted the 
 compact made between the French and Venetians as soon as 
 he heard of it ; and it was only sanctioned by him on the 
 express understanding that they would engage not to harm 
 any Christians, except those who maliciously impeded their 
 journey, or in case of some contingency arising that could not 
 be foreseen, of which only his own legate was to be judge. 
 But the Venetians, proceeds his biographer, expressly refused 
 his sanction on these terms; and hence it may be conjectured 
 for certain what their intention had been all through, as 
 the sequel proved. Innocent, on the contrary, never once 
 swerved from the objects expressed in his encyclic. *^^ His 
 legate left them, when he discovered what their aims were, 
 and reported them to the pope ; who thereupon wrote letters 
 to the whole body, still more rigorously prohibiting them 
 from injuring any Christian territory, and mentioning Zara 
 by name ; besides warning them more than once of the ex- 
 communication that hung over them, should they become 
 parties to any such enterprise.'^' So he threatened, and so 
 he wrote; but did they pause? When news of the fall of 
 Zara reached him, he wrote again, blaming them in the 
 strongest terms, and telling them he knew well enough with 
 what slaughter it had been effected.'^'' Poor Martin had 
 tried to smooth it all over in vain. ' The Venetians had, in 
 their sight, levelled the walls of the city, plundered the 
 churches, destoyed the public edifices; and they had divided 
 the spoils with them.' It was only on their entire and sincere 
 repentance, on full restitution of all that they had taken, and 
 promise never to do the like again, that the sentence of ex- 
 communication incurred by them would be taken off. 
 
 On these terms the Franks and some others were absolved. 
 ' But the Venetians, as those who glory in what they havQ 
 done amiss, and exult all the more the worse they have done, 
 would neither submit to any penance, nor stoop to petition 
 for any pardon.' *'* Yet on they went with the rest, and the 
 rest with them — absolved and excommunicated in full com- 
 munion with each other, as if nothing had happened — and to 
 
 '=2 Gest. § lixxiii.-iv. s" Ep. v. 161. 
 
 ==» Ibid. § Ixxxv. 5M Gest. § Ixxxvii. 
 
CONFLICTING VIEWS OF INNOCENT III. 177 
 
 the perpetration of a still greater crime than the first. All 
 that Innocent could do, to testify to his sense of their con- 
 duct, was to -withdraw Zara from the jurisdiction of the patri- 
 arch of Grado, still belonging to Venice,''*^ and to refuse assent 
 to the election of the first Latin patriarch of Constantinople 
 as their nominee, while making choice of him, notwithstand- 
 ing, on his own merits.''' So that, in point of fact, this was 
 the position of the fourth crusade, when it arrived before 
 Constantinople — where it was destined to take vengeance 
 upon heretics. The Venetians being under excommunication, 
 all Jihe rest associating with them must have incurred the 
 same penalty once more ; and they were once more attacking 
 Christian territory^ not on account of any obstacles that had 
 been placed between them and Alexandria, their destined 
 road to the Holy Land, but on the contrary going off delibe- 
 rately themselves in the exact opposite direction from Alex- 
 andria to do so. What did Innocent himself say, when he 
 heard that Alexius had been restored by them ? Is his in- 
 dignation assumed ; or can he have wished them to infer 
 from his words : ' You have my leave for attacking heretics 
 notwithstanding ' ? Undoubtedly he means what he says : 
 ' We grieve for our own sakes, and for yours, and that of the 
 entire people of Christ ... for the people of Christ we 
 grieve, because it has received a blow from that quarter 
 from which it looked for honor. . . . Let none of you be so 
 rash as to presume to spoil or occupy Greek territory, on the 
 ground that it is not subject to the apostolic see : or because 
 the existing emperor had deposed his brother. Let the em- 
 peror and his people have transgressed ever so much, it does 
 not belong to you to judge of their faults ; it was for no such 
 purpose that you assumed the cross.' '*' The crusaders had 
 expected to be rebuked ; and were ready with their replies ; 
 iij each case they congratulated themselves on the providence 
 that had carried them through. Their first letter recounts 
 the payments in money, and promises in favour of the pope, 
 which they had received from Alexius on his restoration ; *^^ 
 their second the capture of the city, and the election of Bald- 
 win as emperor.'^" What Alexius promised we have already 
 seen ; in the letter from Baldwin — for it runs in his name, 
 
 "'• Vide Ep. vii. 127. "° Ep. ti. 201. 
 
 >" Ep. viii. 204. "° Ep. vii. 152. 
 
 «" Ep. vi. 101. 
 
178 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 • by the grace of God emperor of Constantinople and ,ever 
 Augustus,' whether the pope likes it or not — all that Alexius 
 promised, and far more, is dwelt upon as having been ac- 
 tually gained for the pope and for the Latin church, while 
 for wealth, there was enough for the whole Latin race to be 
 sharers. Most adroitly, towards the end of the letter, the 
 pope is reminded that he had some time back announced to 
 the rebel Greeks his intention of holding a council, for the 
 healing of their schism and other important ends. Now was 
 the time for restoring peace to the church. Let the pope 
 come and hold his council in the imperial tsity, and join old 
 and new Kome together once more in indissoluble bonds.'** 
 The covenants entered into between Baldwin and his col- 
 leagues show plainly that they contemplated administering 
 affairs there both in church and state for their own exclusive 
 interest, after the precedent of their ancestors in the Holy 
 Land. 
 
 Innocent, according to his biographer, was sorely per- 
 plexed at the course which affairs had taken ; it was not till 
 he had consulted diligently with his cardinals and other 
 learned men about him, that he could resolve at all how to 
 act ; and there is every reason to think that it was their judg- 
 ment, not his own, that he followed eventually.'*' 'The 
 loud talkers ' in his day, as well as our own, ' carried all be- 
 fore them ; ' and there was no alternative, even for one who 
 was pope and master-mind of his age, but to give way. His 
 own letters attest the struggle which it cost him to do so. 
 His letter to the marquis of Montferrat was probably written, 
 when only news of the capture had reached him, and while 
 his mind was horror-struck at the atrocities which had dis- 
 graced it. ' You had been forbidden under pain of excom- 
 munication to meddle with any territory belonging to Chris- 
 tians . . . and you, apparently, without having the smallest 
 power or jurisdiction of any kind over the Greeks,, have de- 
 parted from the integrity of your vows, and waged war not 
 against Saracens but Christians. Instead of recovering Jeru- 
 salem you have seized on Constantinople. It enhances your 
 crime that some of you have spared neither religion, age, nor 
 sex; but have committed adultery, fornication, and incest 
 in the eyes of all ; and made not only married women and 
 
 "' Ep. vii. 152. "2 (jest_ §xeii.-iii. coinp.Ep.vii.205. 
 
CONFLICTING VIEWS OF INNOCENT III. 179 
 
 widows, but virgins consecrated to God, victims of your lust. 
 As though it had not been enough to rifle the imperial 
 treasury, and pillage the goods of great and small, you have 
 laid hands on the ornaments of the church and its posses- 
 sions, tearing from the altar its tablets of silver, and carrying 
 off from its shrines crosses, images, and relics. Hence it is 
 that the church of the Greeks, notwithstanding its persecu- 
 tions, mocks at the notion of returning to its obedience to 
 the apostolic see ; and forasmuch as in the Latins it is only 
 conversant with examples of treachery and works of dark- 
 ness, it on that account abhors them deservedly as dogs.' 
 It is a most perplexing business altogether, he continues : 
 let them endeavour at all events to use what providence has 
 thrown in their way for the good of mankind, for the interests 
 of justice and religion, and as a means of recovering the Holy 
 Land.'^' He groans over their crime still, although he is 
 now for accepting its consequences ; had he repudiated them, 
 he felt doubtless that he must have stood alone in Europe. 
 What decided him most appears to have been their selection 
 of Baldwin as emperor. The Venetians had calculated that 
 they could wring approval out of him at that price. Baldwin 
 was young and chivalrous, his connexions were of the first 
 order, and his own character was so spotless as to have in- 
 spired with genuine admiration of him even those who had 
 been among the greatest sufferers by his success. It is ac- 
 tually by the Greek historian whom he had driven out of 
 house and home, that the following life-like portrait of him 
 has been handed down. Of his election he had said pre- 
 viously,'^* * The lot for sovereignty fell upon Baldwin count 
 of Flanders ; but, as was well known to all, by strategem and 
 contrivance of Dandolo doge of Venice ; for he being incapa- 
 citated himself by blindness . . . wished to have one installed 
 in that office, who was supremely genial in disposition, and 
 not over ambitious in thought.' Of the man he adds: 'He 
 was in all other respects reported to be a God-fearing person, 
 and temperate in his mode of living. In the absence of his 
 own wife, he never allowed his eyes to rest upon a woman; 
 and much of his leisure was spent in praising God. Those 
 who were in need of any kind he was ever ready to assist 
 >vith counsel ; and those who spoke in opposition to him, to 
 
 "' Ep.viii. 133. '" Nicetaa, Urls Capta, u. 6. 
 
 M 3 
 
180 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 * 
 
 hear with patience. The most remarkable trait about him o: 
 all was, that he caused proclamation to be made in his palace 
 twice a week towards evening that no one should pass the 
 night in it who had been guilty of immorality.' ^*^ Bald- 
 win was but thirty-two years old when he was elected em- 
 peror. It was the receipt of a letter from him — unmistake- 
 ably written to order — which decided Innocent. It gave a 
 new turn to the proceedings ; the Venetians were no longer 
 masters of the situation ; on the contrary, there was one at 
 the head of affairs now whom he could thoroughly trust, and 
 under whose guidance he could anticipate better things from 
 the expedition than had as yet been realised. Besides, what 
 a flattering prospect it was that was held out in that epistle ! 
 With Bulgaria regained, and bright hopes of the recovery of 
 all that had been lost in Palestine revived, how was it possible 
 for him to have dived into the memoirs of Nicholas I. so 
 recently, and not exult that Constantinople, the occasion of 
 so much annoyance and trouble to his predecessors, should 
 have come into the hands of one so pious and devoted to his 
 interests as Baldwin ? Under the circumstances, it might 
 have been hardly natural for him as man — as chief of a great 
 party — not to have felt elate. In his next letter, which is 
 addressed to the bishops and archbishops of the west, he goes 
 so far in his excitement as to bless Grod for it all.'''* 
 
 ' A certain man from Eamah had two wives, Hannah and 
 Peninnah ; but she that was first blessed with children, was, 
 for despising her that rejoiced afterwards in the Lord who 
 had opened her womb, deservedly punished. . . Now blessed 
 be the Grod and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ . . . who, 
 willing to comfort Fis church and cause that Ephraim should 
 return to Judah, and Samaria to Jerusalem, has condescended 
 to exalt His standard over the same people marvellously, as 
 on a darksome mountain, and introduced a holy race within 
 their gates ; transferring their empire from the proud to the 
 humble, from the superstitious to the religious, from schis- 
 matics to catholics, from the disobedient to the devoted. . . . 
 Their wickedness, like. that of the Amorites, having become 
 full, the right hand of the Lord has done wondrously ; the 
 Christian host has been exalted, while they have been smitten 
 with deserved vengeance; and have lost their land to it . . . 
 
 "' Nicetas, Vrbs Capta. "« j;p_ yjy gg. 
 
CONFLICTINa VIEWS OF INNOCENT III. 181 
 
 abounding in all good things. . . . He who has been raised 
 thus unexpectedly to the throne, has petitioned us, in his 
 humility, to deign to invite the devoted clergy and laity of 
 the holy see, noble or ignoble, of whatever sex or grade, to 
 betake themselves to his empire, where they will have wealth 
 meted out to them according to their deserts and quality. 
 Wherefore, considering how this change of empire may be 
 thought to bespeak a change in the right hand of the Majesty 
 on high, and is in fact His work who alters seasons and 
 transfers kingdoms ; and seeing that succours for the Holy 
 Land will much more profitably speed from thence, so that 
 its recovery may be expected to be accomplished with much 
 more ease ; we admonish you as brethren, and exhort you in 
 the Lord, and command you by this our apostolic letter, that 
 you stir up effectually both the laity and clergy to go and 
 receive those spiritual and temporal boons at his hands ; who, 
 that I may use his own words, being possessed of abundance 
 for all comers, influenced by zeal for the religion of Christ, 
 is both anxious and ready to promote each one of them in 
 honors and emoluments suitably to their estate and rank. 
 That so the Constantinopolitan empire being strengthened, 
 and the church there confirmed in devotion to the apostolic 
 see, its new emperor may proceed with strong hand and out- 
 stretched arm to expel the barbarians, whom sin has put in 
 possession of that country where God our heavenly King 
 worked out our salvation ; hoping in Christ Jesus that what 
 He has commenced so marvellously He will still more mar- 
 vellously complete, to the praise of His name. To those, 
 therefore, who will join him there, and contribute with him 
 to the recovery of the Holy Land, we extend the same in- 
 dulgences that have been granted to all other crusaders by 
 the apostolic see.' 
 
 Innocent adopted the phraseology of the Latin party, 
 and was understood accordingly. The effects of his own 
 letter were such as to make him recoil in anger from his 
 new position. As might have been expected, Palestine was 
 emptied in a trice ; all flocked to Constautinople to share the 
 spoils and gain the indulgence ofiered to them so much 
 nearer home ; those who were there already were absolved 
 without difficulty by the cardinal-legate from the necessity of 
 proceeding any further. From the narrative of Martin 
 alone we could not have anticipated better things of that 
 
182 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 functionary, but Innocent, we may be certain, had no better 
 to choose from, or he would have removed him. 'We con- 
 fess,' he tells him, 'with shame and sorrow, that we have 
 gone back to the point from whence we seemed to have ad- 
 vanced, and have become straightened through those very 
 means by which we believed ourselves to have been most 
 enlarged.' Then almost in the same terms that he had em- 
 ployed before, when writing to the marquis of Montferrat, 
 he indignantly dwells on the enormities committed by the 
 Latins, asking his legate, as he had asked the marquis, hmo 
 it can possibly be expected that the Greek church should ever 
 return to unity,whenitw(i,s so foully treated bytheLatins,that 
 it had with good reason come to abominate them like dogs f **' 
 Do what they would, he would never forget the part played 
 by the Venetians. ' You ask favours of me,' he wrote back to 
 them on a later occasion, and I rebuked your messengers . . 
 to say nothing of the iniquitous deeds perpetrated at Con- 
 stantinople by you, plundering churches of their treasures, 
 seizing upon th^jr possessions ... do not suppose that you 
 have committed no sin, because, here and there, a city has 
 fallen into your hands by the punishment of God, rather 
 than by the power of man. . . . People are constantly 
 scourged in His good pleasure, while their scourge is His 
 abomination, as is plain from the books of the Old and New 
 Testament.' '■" There were two ways, in his estimate, of re- 
 garding the sack of Constantinople : as a crime, or as a punish- 
 ment : and he alternately laid stress on the one or the other. 
 At first he regarded it in the light of a crime wholly, with- 
 out distinction of persons ; afterwards he regarded it in that 
 light only, where the Venetians were concerned, whom he 
 knew to have been the principal promoters of it. Then, gra- 
 dually, where the rest were concerned, he commenced look- 
 ing upon it as a punishment due to the sins of the Greeks, 
 and in that point of view he assented to the measures de- 
 manded of him for its completion. He could not iindo what 
 had been done : that was certain; but might he not succeed 
 in obtaining that the best should be made of it that could 
 be? 
 
 It was when the election of Thomas Morosini was an- 
 nounced to him A.D. 1204 as their patriarch of Constan- 
 tinople — John Camater, the Greek patriarch, his old corre- 
 
 "' Gest.xcT. Ep. viii. 126. '« Ep. is. 139. 
 
CONFLICTING VIEWS OP INNOCENT III. 183 
 
 spondent, having been driven out, but not reported as dead 
 — that he must have felt the full force of the crisis. Should 
 he hesitate, as the legate of one of his predecessors had hesi- 
 tated, when the crusaders first entered Antioch ? ' A Latin 
 patriarch, during the lifetime of him who had been pre- 
 viously ordained there, they did not presume to elect or con- 
 secrate, lest there should appear to be two occupants of one 
 and the same throne, which is known to be manifestly contrary 
 to the sacred canons and constitutions of the holy fathers.' "^ 
 'App^aZa 76 . . . Kal rerrlrfwv avafieara, **" would have 
 been the answer made to Bishop Ademar, had he lived then. 
 It was the first and last time that there had been any hesita- 
 tion of that kind amongst crusaders. It was morally certain 
 — it had been expressly intimated to him — that a patriarch 
 of their own they were bent upon having, by fair means or 
 foul. Did the opportunity admit of turning to account in 
 any way, was the practical point for him. What actually 
 took place we learn from his own words : '*' ' The Latins, 
 having chosen a French emperor .... agreed that a fit 
 and proper person should be chosen from among the Vene- 
 tians, and made patriarch of the church of Constantinople. 
 Their choice fell upon Thomas, one of our own sub- 
 deacons ; but in petitioning for his confirmation, our assent 
 was requested as well to the articles of agreement made 
 between the French and Venetians. . . . When, therefore, 
 their election was submitted to us, though, from his long 
 residence amongst us, we and our brethren had ample ex- 
 perience of the person elect, knowing him to be well born, 
 well conducted, prudent, and of competent learning, still, on 
 subjecting the mode of his election to the customary examina- 
 tion, we ascertained that it was not free from canonical 
 objections, and that it had even been appealed against, 
 though the appeal was dropped. . . . Accordingly, we caused 
 it to be annulled in public consistory, with consent of our 
 brethren. Still, as the fault of individuals ought not to 
 prejudice the interests of churches, and as our subdeacon 
 had done no wrong himself, having been elected while 
 
 "" William of Tyre. See above, ' Worn-out, notions, musty fancies, re- 
 
 p. 106. dolent of church and king; 
 
 "» ATiBtoph.JVM4.v.971,or,as excel- Public conscience, state religion, that 
 
 lently parodied not many years since old-fashioned sort of thing.' 
 
 at Oxford : "' Ep. viii. 204. 
 
184 SACK OF 'CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 f 
 
 absent, and without any solicitation on his part, in deference 
 to the prayers of the emperor, which seem to represent it as 
 a thing not merely expedient, but necessary ; in our own de- 
 sire to provide for that same church whose ordering especially 
 appertains to ourselves ; in the hope, likewise, of exciting 
 the Venetians by this condescendance to the more effectual 
 defence of the Holy Land; we, in the plenitude of the 
 power conferred on us, have chosen our said subdeacon as 
 member of the apostolic see, and confirmed him as patriarch 
 of that church.' The rest we are told by his biographer : 
 ' The said elect of Constantinople was ordained deacon by 
 Innocent on Ember Saturday in Lent, priest on Saturday in 
 the week called mid-Lent, bishop on the Sunday following 
 in the church of S. Peter at Eome, when he was solemnly 
 invested with the pall, and took the oath of obedience an,d 
 fidelity to the pope, in the form administered to primates 
 and archbishops on that occasion.' ^^^ And this was ' the 
 privilege ' which the pope forthwith attached to his see. 
 
 ' The prerogative of love and favour which the apostolic see 
 exhibited to the Byzantine church when it constituted it a 
 patriarchal see, manifestly attests the plenitude of ecclesiasti- 
 cal power, which Grod, not man — or, more truly, Grod made 
 man — granted in blessed Peter to the Eoman church, and 
 shows the Eoman pontiff to be His vicar who makes the 
 first last and the last first. Forasmuch, then, as the said 
 church, formerly called of Byzantium, but now of Constan- 
 tinople, had neither name nor place amongst the patriarchal 
 sees, the apostolic see has made for it a great name, like 
 other names that are great upon earth, and raised it from 
 the dust to that eminence as in point of dignity to render it 
 superior to the churches of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jeru- 
 salem, and exalt it above all others next after itself. Hence, 
 though many are the daughters that have been made rich, it 
 alone, by special favour of its mother, has gone beyond them 
 all. And whereas the said church had in former time de- 
 clined, from its obedience to the apostolic see, yet now, by 
 the grace of God, as it has returned thither in all humility, 
 yielding to your prayers, who, by the instrumentality of 
 Divine providence, have been set over it, we receive it again 
 under our protection and that of blessed Peter, as our pre- 
 sent letter attests and confirms.' ^^^ Other privileges and 
 
 "■^^ Gest. § xcviii. "= Ep. viii. 19. 
 
CONFLICTING VIEWS OF INNOCENT III. 185 
 
 indulgences follow, associating it indissolubly and for ever 
 with its new destinies.'''''^ Its old man — its past history — 
 nine centuries of church history, with all their accompani- 
 ments — are consigned to oblivion, and it is born again ; bom, 
 as its first patriarch had been created under the new order of 
 things, at the simple fiat of the reigning pope. The logical 
 position of the crusaders required it, and it was done ; the 
 church of the Greeks, as far as it could be effected by a 
 stroke of the pen, had ceased to exist. According to the 
 laws of the Normans and Venetians — which were so far 
 identical, and never changed — it had to be subjugated to be 
 united, annihilated to be incorporated, assimilated to be 
 made of one flesh ftnd blood with the west. Innocent had 
 acted on their bill of indictment, and their bill of indictment 
 had been, in the words of Baldwin, in whose name it ran : 
 ' This is the city which, with abominable rites, after the 
 manner of pagans, and draughts of blood on both sides, has 
 been continually making covenant with infidels, and feeding 
 them with its inexhaustible resources, and pandering to their 
 pride by supplies of arms, ships, and provisions. What it 
 has done for pilgrims, on the contrary, let facts, not words, 
 known to the whole Latin world, attest. This is the city, 
 which, for the hatred which it bears to the apostolic see, can 
 scarce endure to hear the name of the prince of the apostles 
 mentioned ; nor will it yield any one of the churches of the 
 east to that church to which principality was given by Christ 
 our Lord over all churches. This it is which has only learnt 
 to honor Christ as yet with pictures ; and among other 
 wicked customs, which, despising the authority of the Holy 
 Scriptures, it has devised, has often presumed to cast a slur 
 upon holy baptism by reiterating it. This it is which 
 regards all Latins as worthy of the name of dogs and not 
 men, the shedding of whose blood is accounted meritorious, 
 and in the opinion of its lay monks, in whose hands, in con- 
 tempt of the priesthood, the whole tribunal of penance has 
 been vested by them, needs no satisfaction at all.' *** 
 
 Exaggerated statements like these could not have deceived 
 Innocent. He had of course been told of the emperor Isaac 
 erecting a mosque to please Saladin;**^ of the Mohammedan 
 idol that fell into the hands of the Genoese on its way 
 
 "♦ Ep. viii. 20-25. '" Ep. vii. 152. 
 
 "• See note to p. 156, 
 
186 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 thither ; of the Greeks rebaptising the Latins who came over 
 to them ; and of the treachery of various emperors towards 
 unofifending crusaders. For all that, he had, repeatedly told 
 his party, that the Greeks ' with good reason abhorred them 
 as dogs.' But now, he must either break with his party, or 
 accede to their requirements. And he replied to their sum- 
 mons, not by deposing the Greek patriarch, but by ignoring 
 bis existence; by reconstituting his see, as if it had never 
 had any prerogatives of its own previously, and presenting it 
 with a new patriarch of his own choice. 
 
 The introductory remarks of abbe Rohrbacker to that act 
 of the pope deserve to be quoted. ' Although the crusaders 
 had conquered the Greek church by force of arrns, and ef- 
 fected its submission to the holy see. Innocent would not hear 
 of the Latins arrogating to themselves more rights over that 
 church than princes and potentates had over the local church 
 in each state of the west. In his estimate, wherever the 
 church existed, justice required that it should be exalted in- 
 all tJie splendour of its liberty ; and the power, possessed of 
 the means of protecting or contributing to its development, 
 was not justified in arrogating to itself any rights over it. 
 Animated with these sentiments. Innocent testified to all the 
 bishops and clergy of Constantinople, his joy at the return 
 of the Greek church to the obedience of the holy see. He 
 had hopes even of beholding with his own eyes the conversion 
 of the Jews and idolators, as well as the re-establishment of 
 the patriarchal sees of Jerusalem and Alexandria.' *''' 
 
 This is his exposition, in the age in which we live, of that 
 act of the pope. What the Greeks thought of it themselves 
 — for by the bishops and clergy of Constantinople are not 
 meant the ejected hierarchy — he will not be at the pains of 
 enquiring ; and by what acts it had been preceded on the 
 part of the Latins, he would fain suppress. 'In the lugubri- 
 ous picture drawn by Nicetas ' — ^the truthful panegyrist of 
 Baldwin, be it remembered — 'of the pillage of Constantinople, 
 what do we find, but the disorders that are almost always 
 inevitable when a city taken by assault is afterwards given 
 over to plunder ? ' ^'' Even here Mr. Hallam meets him with 
 a correction. ' The tale of pillage and murder is always uni- 
 form ; but the calamities of ancient capitals, like those of the 
 
 "' Vol. xrii. p. 209. «« Ibid. p. 196. 
 
PAHALLEL IN MODERN TIMES. 187 
 
 great, impress us more forcibly.' '^^ And one act of sacrilege 
 there certainly was in their case, so far from ordinary, that 
 we may doubt whether any parallel to it is to be found in 
 history, but that one which abbe Rohrbacker is compelled to 
 be as plain-spoken as Nicetas in recording of his own church 
 and age. For their striking similarity, and for the commen- 
 tary which they may be well thought to supply to each other, 
 they deserve to be placed side by side. We may head them 
 thus : 
 
 Western Christiunity at Cfonstantmople Western infidelity at Paris in the 
 
 in the thirteenth century. eighteenth century. 
 
 ' The impieties perpetrated in the great ' On the 1 0th of Norember, in memory 
 
 church'(S.Sophia)'are not ^ for honest of the apostacy of the constitutional 
 
 ears. A woman of infamous character, clergy, a festival was held in the 
 
 a priestess of Satan, to insult Christ, metropolitan church ' (Notre Dame) 
 
 was caused to sit in the patriarchal ' transformed into a temple of Beason. 
 
 throne, where she was employed in Thisgoddesswaspersonified byanaked 
 
 singing immoral songs, and dancing prostitute, seated on the high altar, 
 
 and pirouetting with her feet. . . Thus She there receiyed the adorations of 
 
 have we seen the abomination of deso- the members of the municipality and of 
 
 lation standing in the holy place, utter- the convention. . . There were the same 
 
 ing words of fornication, and other impieties, profanations, and depreda- 
 
 things the exact opposite of what are tions committed in the provinces, espe- 
 
 revered and of good report among cially that of NiAvre, where the ex-ora- 
 
 Christians.' '"'' toriau Fouchi was found as one of the 
 
 popular representatives.' °"' 
 
 Crusaders and infidels — the sack of Constantinople, and the 
 reign of Terror — they have many strange points of resem- 
 blance ! Their excesses were similar ; the justification that was, 
 or that might have been, set up for them in either case the 
 same in principle. For the Latins who sacked Constantinople 
 excused themselves on the ground of the theological heresies 
 that had been bred in the east ; and the infidels who dese- 
 crated Paris might have excused themselves on the ground of 
 the anthropological or sacramental heresies that had been 
 bred in the west. In both eases it was Christianity that was 
 outraged; and crime that won a short-lived triumph. But 
 in one case Christians were setting a precedent to be turned 
 against themselves hereafter ; in the other, infidels behaved 
 no worse than Christians. 
 
 There is no denying it, there was a portentous difference 
 between the Greek version of the Gospels which the west in 
 
 "• Middle Ages, vol. ii. c. 6. . The complete description of it is in 
 
 "• WKetaSyAlexitis Ducaa Mwrz.cZ. Lamartine, Girond. Mv. lii. 21 et seq. 
 »•' Eohrbackor, vol. xxvii. p. 644. (vol. iii. p. 301, Bohn's Eng. ed.) 
 
188 SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. 
 
 apostolic times received from the east, and the Latin version 
 of the Gospels with which the crusaders had been, presenting 
 the east in return. Who can doubt that had the earliest of 
 Christian fathers extant of Grreek extraction, who for so many- 
 years edified the west by his writings, and France by his life 
 — S. Irenseus — been alive to witness the ruin of the Christian 
 metropolis of the east and of his own native land, achieved 
 in such a manner and by such hands, he would have been 
 much less diflSdent of his interpretation of the number of the 
 Beast in the Apocalypse than he was, when he wrote :^^^ 'The 
 word Aarstvos contains likewise this number of 666,*^^ and 
 it is highly probable, inasmuch as it is the name of the last 
 empire ; for they who now reign are Latins ; nevertheless 
 in this will we not boast ' ? 
 
 =«2 Adv. Ecsr. lib. t. p. 329. fot ed. I = 10 
 
 ''^ That is, regarding the letters N = 50 
 
 composing it as Greek numerals : — O = 70 
 
 L = 30 S = 200 
 
 A = 1 
 
 T = 300 666 
 E = 5 
 
189 
 
 CHAPTEE IV. 
 
 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOITHTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 The crusades fell away gradually from their original purpose, 
 till they had achieved its opposite. They were organised to 
 repel infidels, and had attacked Christians ; to recover Jeru- 
 salem, and had sacked Constantinople ; to conciliate the 
 church of the east by saving it, and by either subjugating or 
 annihilating it had inspired all that remained of it with im- 
 placable enmity. One short century witnessed their organi- 
 sation, their backslidings, and ignominious perversion. The 
 result might not have surprised Bohemond and been hailed 
 by Dandolo ; but I should be sorry to suppose for a moment 
 that it would not have broken the hearts of the magnanimous 
 Hildebrand or of S. Bernard, could they have foreseen it. 
 Civilisation — let alone Christianity — received one of the 
 rudest and most wanton shocks ever inflicted on it in the 
 conquest of Constantinople by the Latins. They — not the 
 misrule, the effeminacy, the degradation of the Greek em- 
 perors, the heresies or schismatical acts of the Greek clergy — 
 let the Turks in as surely as it has been the policy of modem 
 Europe for some time past to maintain them there. Bar- 
 barians that they were, they conspired against the social en- 
 lightenment that outshone their own, and then when they had 
 taken all the life out of the system which they could neither 
 uphold nor improve, they left it in wreck and in ruin to the 
 very foes from whom they had vowed solemnly to protect it, 
 and by whom assuredly, since it came into their hands, it has 
 not been worse used. The city which they sacked had a 
 population ' certainly far beyond the united capitals of all 
 European kingdoms in that age,' says Mr. Hallam.'^* Its 
 churches and convents were counted by hundreds as well as 
 
 M* Middle Ages, c. vi. 
 
190 INJNTOCENT III. AND THE FOUETH LATEEAN COUNCII/. 
 
 its palaces, and like them, remarkable for their size and 
 splendour.*^^ In it were collected all the finest libraries, all 
 the noblest specimens of classical art, all the earliest and 
 most authentic records of primitive Christianity. Had the 
 Latins merely laid hands upon all that they found there, the 
 injury might have been confined to the Greeks of that age ; 
 but their own boastings of the deeds of blood perpetrated 
 by them on taking Jerusalem are far eclipsed by their own 
 admissions of the savage destruction of property caused or 
 occasioned by them in taking Constantinople. At least one 
 third of the city was consumed by fire, before they stopped 
 pillaging it.^^^ In one case the conflagration lasted eight 
 days, and extended above three miles, from the harbour to 
 the Propontis, one of the thickest and most populous 
 quarters. In another, it consumed in a few hours the 
 measure of three of the largest cities in France.^^' By the 
 time that the Latins were expelled, a.d. 1261, Constantinople 
 ' could hardly bear comparison with Genoa and Venice.'*^' 
 
 How much comment is bestowed on all these atrocities by 
 one who pretends to hold the balance between his country- 
 men, from whom he affected to have separated on principle, 
 and the court that he would have posterity think he was 
 serving for love ? ' The empire having been overthrown,' 
 says Leo Allatius,*^^ ' after so much injury and misery re- 
 ceived from the Latins, the Greeks were not so alienated 
 from them after all, as not at times to relent from their en- 
 mity, hold intercourse,' and, as he proceeds to show, ' inter- 
 marry with them.' This is all the notice taken by a convert 
 Greek of the ruin of his country, in a work professing to 
 show on which side the fault of the schism lay ! 
 
 Poor Greece ! she got no better treatment from Christian 
 than from pagan Eome, no more respect for her churches 
 than for her temples ; no better thanks for her services to 
 
 565 Du Freane, Constant. Christian : ries ; of palaces, urban and suburban, 
 
 ' Benj. Tudel. in Itin. p. 29 (primse ed.) he mentions 144, besides public build- 
 
 "tot templa in urbe, quot anni dies ;" ings. 
 
 Alberic, in Chron. a.d. 1202 : "infra '=« See above, p. 166. 
 
 muros urbis quingentes cireiter abba- '=' Gibbon, o. Ix. from Villehardouin 
 
 tias Tel ecclesias conventuales," exti- and Nicetas. 
 
 tisse soribunt. Cert& plusquam quad- 568 pinJay, "Byz. TUnvp. toI. ii. p. 433. 
 
 ringentarum nomina hie recensemus.' 569 ^g Consens, lib. ii. 14. A little 
 
 T— Lib. iii. 1. The numbers actually more occurs c. 16, 1, but only by the' 
 
 given by him are 382 churches, 37 way, 
 hospitals, and 47 suburban monaste- 
 
PARALLEL IN PAGAN TIMES. 191 
 
 Christian theology, than for her services to ai't, science, civi- 
 lisation, and polite literature. The Christian robber was as 
 rude and ruthless as the pagan robber when it came to the 
 point : of her two historians who were eyewitnesses of the 
 wanton ruin inflicted upon her in either case, it may be said 
 that their descriptions might be interchanged with each other 
 literally without any departure from truth ; so that the sack 
 of Corinth and the sack of Constantinople stand related, in the 
 strictest sense of the word, as type and anti-type. 
 
 ' Polybius,' says Strabo,*^" ' relating what took place in the 
 destruction of Corinth, commemorates, amongst other things, 
 the contempt manifested by the soldiery for the works of art, 
 and offerings to the*gods. For he says that he saw with his 
 own eyes pictures cast upon the ground, and soldiers using 
 
 them as dice boards to play upon In short, of all the 
 
 votive treasures that are at Eome, the most and best came 
 from Corinth; and many of them became the property of 
 the cities round Rome. For Mummius being more addicted 
 to liberality than to the liberal arts, gave them away, as they 
 were asked for, indiscriminately ; ' or rather, as Velleius 
 Paterculus "" says, ' he was so ignorant and uneducated that 
 on the capture of Corinth, when contracting for the carriage 
 into Italy of pictures and sculptures by the first of artists, he 
 ordered a clause to be inserted into the agreement that if any 
 were lost, the contractors should supply new in their place.' 
 
 Word for word almost, in some respects, is the picture 
 drawn by Nicetas of the wild deeds of the Latins ; their 
 wholesale destruction of the works of art; their profane 
 treatment of the pictures of Christ and the saints.'" In 
 one respect, indeed, the mischief achieved by them was far 
 more irreparable. 
 
 P'or it was not merely the metropolis but the empire which 
 they destroyed, having nothing of their own, as pagan Rome 
 had, to substitute for it, and be a change for the better. 
 'Amidst all the crimes and revolutions of the Byzantine 
 government,' says Mr. Hallam, * and its history is but a series 
 of crimes and revolutions, it was never dismembered by 
 intestine war ; a sedition in the army, a tumult in the 
 theatre, a conspiracy in the palace, precipitated a monarch 
 from the throne ; but the allegiance of Constantinople was 
 
 »"' Geog. viii. 6. "' Hist. i. 13. 
 
 »" Most easily studied in Gibbon, end of c. Ix. 
 
192 INNOCENT III. AND THE TOUETH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 instantly transferred to his successors, and the provinces im- 
 plicitly obeyed the voice of the capital. . . . But the Latins 
 were a promiscuous multitude, and .... in their selfish 
 schemes of aggrandisement, they tore in pieces the Grreek 
 empire. ... It never recovered the blow it received at the 
 hands of the Latins. '*'^ 
 
 What else can be said of its Christianity? As far as 
 depended on them, it was reduced to serfdom, where not 
 extiQguished, or else to chaos. All its ancient land-marks 
 were removed by force. Of the smaller sees numbers had 
 been suppressed or deprived of their revenues ; of the larger 
 sees numbers had been appropriated by bishops already pro- 
 vided with sees in the west. Where it was possible, the 
 native clergy and laity remained pledged to their own bishops, 
 and elected successors to them as they died off, irrespectively 
 of the Latins. In some sees, therefore, there were two or 
 more bishops ; and some bishops had two or more sees. For 
 upwards of a century, when Constantinople was taken, there 
 had been a regular succession of patriarchs of Antioch and 
 Jerusalem resident there, claiming and exercising their rights 
 as such, but never having set foot in their sees. Theodore 
 Balsam on, for instance, was patriarch of Antioch*'* after 
 Simeon, the correspondent of George of Corcyra,*'* whom 
 Manuel despatched to the third Lateran council a.d. 1179. 
 After the coaquest of Jerusalem by Saladin, Heraclius, on 
 the part of the Latins, was added to the list of non-resident 
 patriarchs ; only his exile was due not to Christians, but in- 
 fidels. Constantinople, as it was the first in precedence, so 
 it was the last see to be degraded, of those to which the 
 crusaders had access; and its humiliation as it was the 
 crowning, so it was the most flagrant act of aggression com- 
 mitted by them on the church of the east. When Antioch 
 was taken, its patriarch was respected and obeyed till he 
 withdrew. When Jerusalem was taken, its patriarch was in 
 exile, and never returned. But John Camater was driven 
 out of Constantinople with marked ignominy by the soldiers 
 of the cross themselves. Speaking of his own flight from 
 the city, the Greek historian Nicetas stops to dwell on a 
 
 "' Middle Ages, c. vi. vol. ii. pp. 178, as having been translated from Jeru- 
 
 185, and 187, ed. 1837. salem to Constantinople. 
 
 °" Nicet. /Mac./i«je&s, lit.ii. p. 260, "' Baron. a.d. 1078, n. 14. 
 where Dositheus is likewise mentioned 
 
PRmCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 193 
 
 piteous spectacle in advance of him ; ' before us went the 
 cecumenical arch-shepherd, without staff or sandals, having a 
 single garment thrown over him . , , the image of Christ, as 
 sitting on a poor ass be departed from the modern Sion.' '^' 
 He was the very prelate whom Innocent had addressed 
 amicably by letter some years back, designated as his own 
 venerable brother, and as patriarch, complimented on his 
 desire for union, and bade be ready to attend the council 
 which he proposed summoning, but had never summoned. 
 It is in the teeth of such facts as these that Leo AUatius has 
 the face to say : °'' ' the Latins, who became possessed of the 
 eastern empire, never ejected any that were orthodox.' 
 
 What had John @amater done to be turned out of his see? 
 He was never impeached for any past, nor tried and deposed 
 for any subsequent offence. Were his canonical rights held 
 to be cancelled by the rights of conquest ? or were the 
 precedents of Antioch and Jerusalem invoked to justify the 
 appointment of a Latin patriarch for Constantinople ? To 
 both questions but one answer could have been returned at 
 that date. Innocent acted apparently without knowing 
 whether John Camater was dead or alive. We have already 
 seen that he had enough to do to preserve his own preroga- 
 tives intact amidst the demands that were made upon him 
 by his own unprincipled and unruly people. The Vene- 
 tians had never received absolution for their crime in at- 
 tacking Zara : they had involved the whole force in a second 
 excommunication for attacking Constantinople. The Greeks, 
 who had never been excommunicated, were ejected as heretics: 
 and Constantinople was to be regenerated in church and state 
 by those who had twice braved excommunication. When 
 they had made their arrangements, they corresponded with 
 Innocent, and not before. They informed him that they 
 had elected Baldwin to be their emperor, and Morosini their 
 patriarch. It was only the latter appointment that he could 
 at all control, and his way of doing so shows how purely 
 nominal he felt his control to be. He annulled their nomi- 
 nation, but accepted, and with his own hands consecrated, 
 their nominee. That act of his, interpreted by the code of 
 the universal church,*"' reads, at first sight, as startling 
 as any committed by the Venetians themselves. There are 
 
 "" Urbs Capia, e. 5. "' I extend this phrase so as to in- 
 
 "' De Consens. lib. ii. 13, 2. elude all the canons received in east 
 
194 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 some twenty canons or more of that code, which it apparently 
 scatters to the winds. John Camater was alive, unimpeached 
 and unconderaned, when another was appointed in his place. 
 By that act all the canons directing how bishops are to be 
 tried were infringed."' His suffragans by the same act were 
 told to violate all the .canons which bound them to their 
 metropolitan.'^" Morosini had not been constituted by all 
 the bishops belonging to his province. Here was a fresh 
 breach of primitive order. °^' The privileges of the church 
 of Constantinople had been infringed, and with it one of 
 the most celebrated of the Nicene canons.'*^ Innocent had 
 ordained in a province that was not his, without invitation 
 from the bishops of that province,'*' and deposition is the 
 canonical sentence pronounced against those who do so.'** 
 
 These canons were all of them in full force still in the 
 east. The Trullan canons, the canons of the second Nicene 
 council, and others which the east had received since, con- 
 tained a good deal that was in keeping, and nothing that was 
 incompatible, with their due observance. That they had been 
 constantly broken in practice, particularly since the disorders 
 commenced by the Saracens had been enhanced by the 
 Latins, is true enough : still their principle remained intact. 
 
 In the west, where they had been received equally, they 
 were no longer possessed of their pristine vigour. Not that 
 the decretal epistles of those pontiffs beginning with Siricius, 
 which Dionysius Exiguus inserted in his collection a.d. 530, 
 affected them in any degree : for any new regulations con- 
 tained in them were addressed to bishops within the limits 
 of the western patriarchate, and were considered obligatory 
 no further. The decretal of Siricius on the celibacy of the 
 clergy, for instance, was no law for the east; but the west 
 had been holding synods of its own in great numbers sub- 
 sequently, and all canons passed in them presupposed the 
 subjection of its entire episcopate to a single head. Some of 
 its archiepiscopal sees, as Canterbury and Mayence, had been 
 founded by him : the archbishops of others, as Aries and 
 
 and west. In its ordinary sense it ^'' Can. 6. I designedly omit Con- 
 would end with the Ohalcedonian stant. 3, Chalced. 28, and others on 
 canons. that head, as having been excepted to 
 
 ™ Apost. 66, Constant. 6, Sard. 3, by Rome. 
 
 4, 5, Afrie. 8, 12, 19, 28, 125. ='= Autioch. 13,Constant. 2,Ephes. ^ 
 
 =«» Apost. 27, Antioch. 9. ss* Apost. 28, Antioch. 22. 
 
 =" Nio. i, Antioch. 19. 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 1D5 
 
 Thessalonica, had acknowleged themselves his legates from 
 time immemorial: to all of them he was their immediate 
 superior as patriarch, and their ultimate appeal as pope. 
 They were bound to him, therefore, in both capacities, which 
 the east was not ; and because both powers centred in him, 
 iis far as they were concerned, there was no need of dis- 
 tinguishing them. Had there been a second patriarch in 
 the west, it might have been otherwise. As there was not, 
 the prerogatives of the patriarch were rapidly merged in 
 those of the pope. 
 
 It was in this spirit that the pseudo-decretals and other 
 pieces of the same kind were composed : and no wonder, as 
 they were composed in the west. The wonder would have 
 been, had they put forward other views. It has been often 
 pleaded in their defence that they neither advocated nor pro- 
 duced any changes in the existing discipline*** — a remark 
 which is perfectly true of the western discipline in that age. 
 The real opposition lay between them and the primitive code, 
 which had been brought from the east, where it had been for 
 the most part framed, and was in force still. Till the pseudo- 
 decretals appeared, its superior antiquity was irresistible, 
 when there was any appeal to the canons. It was precisely 
 by producing forged authorities of a higher antiquity that 
 the westerns superseded it, where it was opposed to the spirit 
 of their canons. Then, in order that it might not appear to 
 have been set aside altogether, it was glossed upon or inter- 
 polated to be brought into harmony with their general prin- 
 ciples. This is the true charge against them, admitted by 
 those excellent commentators on them,*'* the Ballerini them- 
 selves, that they antedated the discipline which they set forth, 
 and attributed it to the decrees of the earliest pontiffs, and 
 represented it asMniversally prevalent in the primitive church. 
 Current maxims of the age, possessed of some truth, but of no 
 authority, were magnified by them into oracular responses of 
 
 "° Hence the conolnsion of Denzin- dies coaluisse ; ac pseudo-Isidoricam 
 
 ger : ' Pseudo-Isidorum disciplinse mu- coUectionem ingenuis ecclesiastic! 
 
 tationera non effecisse : sed factam juris fontibus indebitj annumerari.' — 
 
 expressisse, et propugnasse ; incipien- Ibid. p. xxi. The latest edition of the 
 
 temque concomitatum fuisse.' — P. xvi. Pseudo-Decretals is that of Hinschius, 
 
 vol. cxsji. of Migne's Patrol. On the Tauchnitz, Leipsic, 1863, 8to. It 
 
 other hand, Prof. PhiUips : ' Ex quo came to hand too late to examine, but 
 
 coUigitur. ecclesise institutum _atque it seems ably done, 
 disciplinam null4 pseudo-Isidori ope, '»" Diss, part iii. c. vi. § II. 
 sed divino annixam, fundamento in 
 
 o 2 
 
196 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 some martyred pope.°*^ Till they appeared, there was no au- 
 thority so commanding or venerable as that of the Nicene coun- 
 cil. But what were the Nicene decrees themselves but a late 
 and modern collection, in comparison with the fifty-nine decrees 
 of thirty pontiffs, which is what the pseudo-decretals affect 
 to be, ranging over three whole centuries from apostolic times 
 — from S. Clement to Melchiades incjlusively, the immediate 
 predecessor of Silvester, whose legates attended that council ? 
 If S. Clement had really written to S. James, the brother 
 of our Lord, as he is supposed to have written in the first 
 epistle of that collection, to lay upon him the commands of 
 S. Peter, and teach him how ecclesiastical causes were to be 
 conducted — beginning with bishops ; ascending from bishops 
 to metropolitans, from metropolitans to primates or arch- 
 bishops, from them to patriarchs, and from patriarchs, as is 
 hinted rather than expressed, to the writer — ' Quoniam nee 
 inter ipsos apostolos par institutio fuit, sed unus omnibus prae- 
 fuit ; ' ^^' or again : ' Majores a minoribus nee accusari, nee 
 judicari,ullatenus posse dicebat'^*' — how insignificant, by com- 
 parison, was the order laid down in the sixth Nicene canon, 
 on which so much stress had been laid hitherto. If S. Ana- 
 cletus had really told the faithful, in an entyclic addressed to 
 them generally — ' Should more difficult questions arise, or 
 should the case be one of high importance, or concern bishops 
 of high standing, let them be referred, should appeal have 
 been made, to the apostolic see ; for this the apostles ap- 
 pointed, by command of our Lord, that all greater and 
 arduous questions should be brought before the apostolic see, 
 on which Christ founded His universal Church' ^^° — how in- 
 effably small and vague by comparison were the Sardican 
 
 °" E.g. ' Major a minore judicari non Pseudo-Decretals (Migne, Patrol, vol. 
 
 debet.' S. Clem. Ep. i. oxxx.) and turned to account by Gra- 
 
 ' Summorum pontificum ejectionem tian as is the last also, part. ii. c. ix. 2, 
 
 sibi Dominus reservavit.' S. Anacl. 3, where it is attributed wrongly to In- 
 
 Ep. ii. nocent (see the note to it in Migne, 
 
 ' Quicquid contra disciplinam Eo- Patrol, vol. clxxxvii.). Binius says of 
 
 manae ecclesise actum fuerit, ratum it: ' Hunc oanonem Nicolaus . . citasse 
 
 haberi ratio nulla permittit.' S.Calixt. visus est . . . cim . . . temeritatem 
 
 Ep. i. Michaelis imperatoris redarguit.' — 
 
 ' Aliud quam Eomana ecclesia neque Migne, Patrol, vol. viii. p. 840 note, 
 
 sentire, neque docere permittitur.' S. Coustans shows when it was forged 
 
 Marcell. Ep. i. Ibid. p. 845. 
 
 ' Prima sedes nullius judicio subja- "' Patrol, vol. cxxx, p. 30, 
 
 eet' S. Silvest. can. 3 and 20. =" Ibid. p. 31. 
 
 AU these, but the last, are from the »"> Ibid. p. 67. 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 197 
 
 canons. If, as he says further on, the division of provinces, 
 with the rights appertaining to thena, was due to S. Clement 
 and the apostles,*' ' how vain had been the canons of Nicaea 
 and Constantinople, Ephesus and Chalcedon, assuming to 
 circumscribe or enlarge them. And it would be easy to mul- 
 tiply examples to the same effect. Glosses were imperatively 
 demanded to conciliate one code with the other. As I have 
 said, the Nicene canons had enjoyed authority above all others 
 in the west. At one time the Sardican canons were joined 
 with them so as to form one collection, and were quoted as 
 such.***^ Latin versions of them commenced the sixth canon 
 with a gloss declar^ory of the rights of the primacy : and 
 what is still more remarkable, it was quoted in that shape to 
 the Chalcedonian fathers by the legates of S. Leo.^^^ So im- 
 portant was it thought, at that time, for both the primacy 
 and its right of appeals to seem to have been recognised by 
 the Nicene council. Innocent I., writing to Victricius, bishop 
 of Eouen, a.d. 404, professedly to set forth what the rule 
 of the church of Rome was, is never tired of referring to the 
 authority on which it was based — ' Hoc enim et in synodo 
 Nicsena constitutum est atque definitum.' From this autho- 
 rity he would derive the right of appeal to it likewise, where 
 he says, ' Should any greater causes come on, they should be 
 referred, after episcopal judgment, as the synod has deter- 
 mined and blessed custom requires, to the apostolic see.'^^'' 
 
 And Zosimus a.d. 418 : 'Added to all which is the autho- 
 rity of the apostolic see, to which in honor of blessed Peter, 
 the decrees of the fathers have ordained special reverence.'*'* 
 And again : ' To make changes or concessions contrary to the 
 statutes of the fathers, is beyond even the authonty of this 
 see. For antiquity lives here with roots immovable, to which 
 the decrees of the fathers have ordained reverence.'*'^ 
 
 And Boniface I. a.d. 422 : ' This we cannot allow, as it 
 
 •" Ibid. p. 72. '"' 'H iKK\Ti(rla 'Piifiris ■nivTors eo-xe 
 **2 ' Ita enim dixerunt in concilio ret irpwreTa was the G-reek version used 
 Nicseno, ctai de episcoporum appeUa- by Paschasinus, Act. xvi. ap. Mansi, 
 tione decernerent,' says Zosimus (ep. t. vii. p. 441-61. This is one more 
 xiv. Commonit. ad legatos suos), quo- proof that Constantinople never con- 
 ting the seventh Sardican canon. Hence templated invading the rights of the 
 GaUandiuB {BM. Fat. tom. ix. p. 18 primacy. 
 
 note) : ' Hanc confusionem antiquam '** Ep. ii. §§ 1 & 6. ap. Migne, Patrol. 
 
 esse, iste Zosimi locus argumento est.' tom. xx. 
 See more in the Ballerini Diss. part. ii. '"° Ep. ii. § i. ibid, 
 c. i. i 19. "' Ep. T. ibid. 
 
198 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOUETH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 behoves us to be diligent guardians of the decrees of the 
 fathers. Nobody can be ignorant of that constitution of the 
 Nicene council, which enjoins as follows.'*" He is speaking 
 of the rights of metropolitans. And S. Leo to the same effect, 
 throughout his whole correspondence in opposition to the 
 precedence bestowed on the see of Constantinople by the 
 Chalcedonian fathers ^98 a.d. 451. Finally, Gelasius, in his 
 epistle to Faustus, his legate at Constantinople, on the Aca- 
 cian controversy — ' They oppose to us the canons, not know- 
 ing what they are talking about. Why, they are the very 
 canons which have willed that appeals from the whole church 
 should be brought under cognisance of this see. These reli- 
 gious and perfect men, forsooth, want to snatch awa,y the 
 power conceded, according to the canons, to the apostolic see, 
 and usurp it for themselves contrary to the canons."^^ 
 
 It was clearly a new view, therefore, which was put for- 
 ward by Nicholas I. in the course of his correspondence with 
 Michael. On his own accurate rendering of the sixth Nicene 
 canon I have dwelt already.^"" But what he says by way of 
 preface to it is less exact, and in fact not his own. ' It is to 
 be observed, then, that neither the Nicene nor any other 
 synod ever conferred any privilege on the Eoman church; 
 conscious of its having inherited in Peter plenary rights to 
 every power, and received the government of the whole flock 
 of Christ.' There can be very little doubt to what class of 
 authorities the origin of that statement belongs. Nicholas 
 indeed adds, ' as blessed Boniface has testified ' — quoting 
 from a letter purporting to have been addressed*"^ A.d. 
 422 to the bishops of Thessaly by Boniface I. — ^but it does 
 not occur in that letter ; rather he is seeking countenance 
 from that letter for having improved upon it. For, in its 
 original form, the statement is not that the Eoman church 
 had never received any privilege from councils, but that it 
 
 ''" Ep. xii. ibid. been lield under Boniface II. on a 
 
 '" See aboTO p. 52, note. matter of contested jurisdiction in 
 
 ^™ Ep. iv. ap. Migne, Patrol. toI. lix. Tliessaly between Home and Constan- 
 
 "" Above, p. 45. tinople. This letter of Boniface I. was 
 
 *°' The genuineness of this letter produced for the first time then — ^that 
 
 ■seems to have been too hastily as- is, A.i>. 531 or632 — with others; but the 
 
 sumed. Lucas Holstenius, librarian acts of that synod are open themselves 
 
 of the Vatican, published a.d. 1662 to criticism; almost, if not quite, as 
 
 from manuscripts in the Barberini col- much as the older synod of a.d. 494 
 
 lection, the acts of a Eoman synod, under Gelasius. 
 
 of uncertain date, purporting to have 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 199 
 
 was not indebted to them for its precedence. And though, 
 as Nicholas observed afterwards with great force, no privilege 
 was bestowed on it by the sixth canon of Nicsea, the language 
 of Innocent I., Zosimus, and Grelasius is positive to the effect 
 that appeals were referred to it in conformity with the Sardi- 
 can canons. But in the preface to the Nicene council by the 
 author of the pseudo-decretals we read : ' It should be known 
 of a truth by all catholics that the holy Eoman church owes 
 its precedence to no synodical decrees, but obtained the 
 primacy from those words of our Lord and Saviour in the 
 Grospel, spoken to S. Peter.' '"^ It is true that the same 
 statement word for word is attributed to the synod reported 
 to have been held'under Grelasius a.d. 494 ; ""^ but of that 
 synod, as Cave shows,^"'' nothing had been heard previously 
 to the age of the pseudo-decretals, among which it occurs. 
 As time went on, that statement was elevated by the Latin 
 party into the dignity of a genuine ordinance of the Nicene 
 fathers. As such, it is quoted by Anselm, bishop of Havel- 
 burg, in his otherwise most straightforward conference with 
 the archbishop of Nicomedia. ' So we read ordained con- 
 cerning it ' — that is, the primacy — ' by the 318 fathers in the 
 first Nicene council ' — and then the preface from the pseudo- 
 decretals is cited once more, word for word.^"^ Neckites, 
 taken aback by the amount of truth really contained in it, 
 never thought of disputing its genuineness. ' We have,' he 
 says in his reply, ' the ancient regests of the Eoman pontiffs, 
 and acts of councils, in the archives of this church of S. 
 Sophia ; and in them we find all that you have stated on 
 the authority of the Roman church. It would, therefore, be 
 no small shame to us if we denied what our fathers have 
 written, and we ourselves have before our eyes in our own 
 keeping.' ^'"' So Innocent III., in conclusion, tells Alexius 
 A.D. 1199, 'The apostolic see is head and mother of all 
 churches, not so nnuch by synodical, as by Divine, appoint- 
 ment.' ^"^ Why does Innocent speak more difiBdently, while he 
 acts so much more independently, than Nicholas ? Is it not 
 because in this the third and last stage of the contest between 
 the patriarchates of Eome and Constantinople, Grratian was 
 
 «" Ap. Migne, Patrol, vol. cxxx. «« Lib. iii. o. 5, ap. Dacher. (ed. do la 
 p. 251. Barre) SpicU. torn. i. 
 
 »" Ibid. p. 984. '°» Ibid. c. 12. 
 
 "" Hist. Lit. o. v. ' Gelasius.' '" Ep. ii. 211. 
 
200 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 his text-book, in which both the pseudo-decretals and the 
 pseudo-donation are set down as authorities side by side? 
 It is quite true that the copies which have come down to us 
 of the pseudo-decretals comprise the pseudo-donation like- 
 wise ; but at one time they would seem to have been cir- 
 culated separately. Nicholas, at all events, refers to the 
 former, but not the latter ; Leo IX. to the latter, but not the 
 former.^"* Innocent, the student of Grratian — his 'corpus 
 decretorum,' ^"^ as he calls it — must have been familiar with 
 both. 
 
 Now, in the Decretum, or compilation of Grratian, is con- 
 tained the sum of all those principles which had been grow- 
 ing and expanding in the west from the reign of Charlemagne 
 to the pontificate of Innocent, or from the beginning of the 
 9th to the beginning of the 13th century. And it is by re- 
 ference to them alone that we should seek to judge of that 
 act of his in consecrating Morosini. For Innocent was no 
 lawless invader of the rights of others, but rather he was one 
 of the most eminent and exact canonists that ever adorned 
 the chair of S. Peter ; and if he took the loftiest views of the 
 prerogatives of his see, it was because he believed them to be 
 thoroughly consonant with law and equity. 
 
 Let us suppose him, therefore, with Gratian in his hand 
 when that case was submitted to him. In one part of it he 
 would read a number of passages exalting the prerogatives 
 of his see to the highest pitch, and ascribed to the honorec 
 names of SS. Clement, Anacletus, Eleutherius, or Anterus; ^" 
 elsewhere, passages to the same effect from others who were 
 merely repeating them. Towards the end of the first part 
 he would read in the pseudo-donation of Constantine : ' We 
 decree and ordain that it' — the Eoman see — 'should have 
 dominion*" as well over the four principal sees of Alex- 
 
 BOB 'Which is the more remarkable et non ab alio est constituta ;' et eicut 
 as the Pseudo-Decretals had been so cardine ostium regitur, sic hujus sane- 
 long extant. The only approach to tae sedis dispositione omnes ecclesise, 
 them in his long letter is § 32, where Domino disponente, reguntur.' S.Anacl. 
 the maxim' Summa sedes a nemine Ep. iii. Comp.Disi. xciii. c. 1. of parti, 
 judicatur,' is adduced ; but not as a and of part ii. c. ii. q. 6, c. 6 ; e. iii. 
 qiiotation. q. 6. c. 7 ; c. vii. q. 1, c 34, where 
 
 "' Fabric, in Notit. Gratiani, pre- the Pseudo-Decretal itself has been in- 
 fixed to Migne's Patrol, vol. obtxxviii. terpolated. 
 
 "" I cite a single^ specimen, Dist. "> 'Principalitatem,' Disi. xcvi- 
 
 xxii. c. 2. ' Apostolica sedes cardo et c. 14. This extract occurs in the long 
 
 caput omnium ecclesiarum a Domino, letter of Leo IX, 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 201 
 
 andria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Constantinople, as over all 
 the churches of God in the whole earth besides ; and that its 
 pontiff for the time being should be superior and prince of 
 all the world, and all things necessary to be ordained for the 
 worship of God, or the faith of Christians be regulated by 
 bis judgment.' What was this in effect but to extend the patri- 
 archate of Eome over the whole east ? The pseudo-donation 
 had already been adduced against the Greeks in argument by 
 Leo IX. and they had not only not denied, but were on the point 
 of accepting, it as authentic. Innocent, therefore, would read 
 it in Gratian as a document admitted on both sides. After 
 this, how can we be surprised to find him calling, as several of 
 his predecessors had*done before him, the church of Constan- 
 tinople daughter of the church of Eome; for it is obvious 
 that this constitution of the first Christian emperor, believed 
 by him to be genuine, must have antedated those canons of 
 Constantinople and Chalcedon which gave rank to the Con- 
 stantinopolitan church, and established prior and immediate 
 claims over it on the part of Eome, which those councils 
 would never have presumed to set aside. Innocent can 
 hardly be denied to allude to the pseudo-donation in his 
 letter to the Greek patriarch,^'^ explaining on what grounds 
 the chiirch of Eome came to be styled mother ; and saying 
 that it was ' by privilege of dignity ' — privilegium being a 
 common synonyme for the pseudo-donation. Then, when he 
 came to the end of the second part of the Decretum, he 
 would find Gratian arguing indeed in one place that 'the 
 ordinances of the holy canons nobody was more bound to 
 maintain than the pope : ' ^'^ but at the end of that very 
 chapter he would find Gratian acknowledging that 'there 
 were those who held that the holy Eoman church imparts 
 force and authority to the sacred canons, but is not bound by 
 them. It has the right of framing canons, as being head 
 and hinge of all churches, from whose rule none may dissent. 
 As, therefore, it lends authority to the canons, so it abstains 
 from subjecting itself to them.' 
 
 Next he would find the precedent of our Lord alleged 
 and examined ; on which the commentator says : 
 
 ' It behoves the chief see, then, to observe those things, 
 which it has decreed and enjoined, not for the necessity of 
 
 •" Above, p. 171. «" C. xzv. q. 1. 
 
202 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 obeying them, but for the authority which it imparta to 
 them . . . although if the intention of its decrees be care- 
 fully examined, it -will not be found allowing anything con- 
 trary to the authority of the sacred canons. For in reality 
 no matter what the sacred canons enjoin, they reserve the 
 authority of interpreting 'it to the holy Roman church. Since 
 they alone have- the power of interpreting the canons who 
 have the right of framing them-. Hence, in some ordinances 
 of councils, when anything is decreed to be observed, it is 
 immediately qualified : " unless the authority of the Eoman 
 church should have commanded otherwise ; " or, " the right 
 of the holy Eoman church being reserved in all cases ; " or, 
 " without any prejudice to the authority of the Apostolic 
 see." ' 
 
 And this is, in fact, his preface to what follows in the next 
 chapter on the privileges of churches and of their rulers. 
 From his point of view the same qualification must have 
 extended to them equally. There was a salvo to the pope, 
 necessarily, to be understood from first to last. For their 
 maintenance they depended, one and all, on his good pleasure. 
 He might dispense with them, or annul them, remodel or 
 continae them, in his discretion as supreme arbiter of the 
 general interests of the church of Christ upon earth. 
 
 This, then, was the gloss of Grratian upon the canons. And 
 as applied to canons received by the west only it was true 
 enough ; or as applied to the code of the universal church, 
 read by their light, and that of the pseudo-decretals. But, 
 as applied to the collection of canons constituting the code 
 of the universal church in their pristine integrity, it involved 
 a considerable misrepresentation of facts. It was quite true 
 that for any canons to have become law to the whole church 
 the pope must have approved of them ; but it was not true 
 that any one of them had been made by him, or that there 
 is the least hint dropped in any one of them of a salvo to 
 his authority ; or that they had been received in any part of 
 the church originally, on the iinderstanding that he was not 
 bound by them in his own person, or could dispense with 
 their observance by others. Grratian then infused a meaning 
 into them unknown to their framers. As they stood in the 
 Greek code still, his gloss was perfectly inadmissible. As 
 they stood in his own collection, it was the western theory, 
 propounded indeed in moderation, and looked upon as the 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 203 
 
 theory of the apostles themselves by those who believed in 
 the genuineness of the pseudo-decretals. 
 
 On that theory, therefore. Innocent acted, and could act 
 with the best of consciences, in consecrating Morosini to the 
 see of Constantinople, and renewing or recasting its privileges. 
 As one of his predecessors — Victor II. — had said in recon- 
 stituting the archiepiscopal diocese of Embrun in France :*'* 
 ' The Lord of all things estabUshed the pontificate of the holy 
 Eoman and apostolical see over all nations and kingdoms in 
 Peter, the prince of his apostles, on purpose that it might 
 pluck up and cast down, plant and build in His name. To 
 the end that as long as His holy church dispersed throughout 
 the world should remain subject to change from time to time, 
 and be continually fluctuating between the vicissitudes of 
 advance and reaction, as the moon in her courses, there might 
 ever be discovered in it, without fail, all that a diligent hus- 
 bandman would pluck up or plant, or a wise architect take 
 down and build up.' 
 
 What was Constantinople to Innocent more than Embrun 
 to Victor ? Had not Constantine, unless his donation was false, 
 conferred upon the pope the same dominion over the four 
 principal sees of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Con- 
 stantinople, that he had over all other churches in the world 
 besides ? Or was Constantinople the see whose privileges 
 Innocent was bound to respect most, considering its origin, 
 and the circumstances to which its advancement was due ? 
 It had come into the hands of the Latins by conquest, like 
 Antioch and Jerusalem ; and over those patriarchates Rome 
 had been exercising supreme jurisdiction for the last hundred 
 years. Providence, a favourite argument with Innocent, 
 seemed to have declared signally for the western theory. The 
 course of events had, in short, brought about a consummation 
 that might only have been expected from the tenor of the 
 canons themselves. They had paved the way for it, if they 
 
 "" Ap. Migne, Patrol, vol. cxliii. nemine judicatur.' Op. vol. iv. p. 657 
 
 p. 835. Comp. the weU-known sermons et seq. ed. Migne, p. 665, we read : 
 
 of Innocent himself, citing the same 'Propter eausamfomicationis, ecclesia 
 
 words of tlie prophet. In consec. Eomana posset dimittere Eomanum 
 
 Pont. Max. ii. and iii. Nobody can pontificem ; fomicationem non dico 
 
 deny the beauty of their composition, carnalem, sed spiritualem ... id est 
 
 or their acquaintance with Scripture, propter infidelitatis errorem. . . Ego 
 
 Of course, axioms like the foEowing tamen faeilfe non crediderim, ut Deus 
 
 occur in them : ' Minor Deo ; major permitteret Eomanum pontificem con- 
 
 homine ; qui de omnibus judicat, et a tra fidem errare.' 
 
204 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOUETH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 had not sanctioned it. From the principle that metropoli- 
 tans were'bishops of bishops, and patriarchs metropolitans of 
 metropolitans, the step to a patriarch of patriarchs was short 
 and easy. Now, the patriarch of Constantinople had been for 
 some time playing the part of a patriarch of patriarchs in the 
 east to the great annoyance of Eome. At length his turn to 
 give way had come, that the pope might be patriarch of 
 patriarchs in all the world. By a singular coincidence the 
 Eoman patriarchate had been the only one of the whole five 
 whose boundaries had never been fixed by the canons. It 
 might have been inferred from that circumstance that Provi- 
 dence had designed them to be illimitable. These were 
 general grounds over and above Grratian and his authorities. 
 The only defect in the argument was that it put an interpre- 
 tation upon the canons that required confirmation, being in 
 advance of their letter. All previous developments had re- 
 ceived their express sanction in so many words. Metro- 
 politans and patriarchs had been created by them, and 
 endowed liberally with restrictions as well as privileges. 
 Even the see of Constantinople had never claimed any privi- 
 leges not conceded to it in the canons. For any further 
 developments, on the same principle, the consent of the whole 
 church in council was necessary; but the crusaders had 
 carried their theory with them into the e^st, and imposed it 
 by force. The time for its application to the see of Constan- 
 tinople had at last arrived. 
 
 Innocent, therefore, had in reality no option left him but 
 to act as he did. He was at the head of a vast system in the 
 west which he had not created and could not alter, but which 
 it seemed his duty to uphold. He could go with Europe, but 
 not against it. The crusaders had decided many questions past 
 and present beyond his control, and prejudiced the ruling of 
 others for the future. Accomplished facts became precedents, 
 and precedents became law in their eyes, and in the eyes of 
 their contemporaries and well wishers- — councils themselves 
 oould not have undone what they had done, though they 
 might have prevented it, had they been held in time. Was it 
 the effect of circumstances or of policy that they had not been 
 held as often as they had been proposed or promised ? Had 
 Bulgaria proved the temptation to Innocent that it had 
 been to Nicholas ? Had the council that was to have been 
 held, when the first crusade was preached, or even when his 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 205 
 
 own pontificate commenced, ever met, it is quite possible 
 that the whole position of affairs might have been changed. 
 There might have never been any aggression at all on the 
 sees of the east, had east and west met previously, and agreed 
 upon the exact pattern of doctrine and discipline to be 
 observed by both. Or could a council have been held only 
 before the fourth crusade left Venice, its issues might have 
 been averted. As it was, the crusaders ruled all question?, 
 wherever they went, sword in hand, too glad of any excuse 
 for their acts of Violence, and the law laid down by them in 
 all cases was that of unqualified submission. Under the cir- 
 cumstances, no doubt, it might have been good policy in the 
 Greeks to have accepted without hesitation the western 
 theory, and placed themselves under the pope. In all human 
 probability they would have found him their best friend. 
 Dififerent 'terms he could not have possibly conceded to them 
 from what he was in the habit of exacting from his vassals in 
 the west. Acknowledging his suzerainty, they would have 
 secured whatever protection his power could have aflbrded, 
 and become part and parcel of the European family. He 
 could have upheld their rites, had they submitted to his 
 jurisdiction, equally with those of Spain or France; and they 
 would have been at least not more subject, if not more in- 
 dependent than others. From the Turks they might or 
 might not have been more safe than before; but the pope 
 would not have allowed the nations of Europe to combine 
 for their ruin. This they thought it more dignified to risk 
 than to submit to him ; the consequence was that they 
 deprived the pope of the power of protecting them. It is 
 true that they disputed his jurisdiction only so far as it was 
 pressed upon them in excess of the canons. To his primacy, 
 according to the canons, they never demurred. And the 
 letter of the canons — the genuine canons that had been 
 received by the whole church — we now see to have been on 
 their side; but it appeared otherwise then: and the west 
 resented their opposition to that authority, of whose Divine 
 origin and unlimited claims it had become convinced. How- 
 ever, policy is one thing and principle another. When the 
 high-souled Hildebrand was driven out a fugitive from Eome 
 and retired to Salerno, he did not hold that conquest had 
 deprived him of any of his spiritual rights, or conferred upon 
 the anti-pope Clement III. a lawful title, though it was 
 
206 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 backed by the arms of Henry. The grand pope sank to his 
 rest, with the immortal sentence ' Dilexi justitiam et odi ini- 
 quitatem : idcircb morior in terra externa ' on his lips, in full 
 faith that right in the end would prevail over might. On 
 the same principle, we must allow, and no other : unequal, 
 it may well be, in their way of upholding it, the Greek 
 hierarchy followed John Camater into exile, and remained 
 faithful to their ancient traditions and established laws. The 
 western theory they would not accept at any price, particu- 
 larly when it was sought to be imposed on them by violence. 
 There was a great deal to be said for the course taken by 
 Innocent then : there is much more to be said for the course 
 taken by them now. When the Greeks were conquered as a 
 nation, and not till then, the church among them was ad- 
 judged to be no church at all, and it continued to be regarded 
 in that light consequently when they had expelled -their con- 
 querors. Yet no council had ever sat upon it, or pronounced 
 it in error or schism ; and even Innocent was not executing 
 any solemn sentence of his own, or of collective Christendom 
 against it, in permitting its bishops to be ejected, and ad- 
 mitting a new episcopate of his own selection, during their 
 lifetime into its sees. 
 
 He was, in short, merely legalising the results of the rough 
 work of the crusaders ; and ecclesiastically there were no 
 precedents in eastern history for what he was now doing 
 anterior to their conquests. The crusaders and the false 
 decretals — force and forgery together — created the right, as 
 against the east ; at least it had never been heard of in his- 
 tory previously to their appearance. That he acted for the 
 best in his high judgment, we may well believe ; that he had 
 authorities on his side, copious, apposite, and passing for 
 genuine then, is as certain as it is now that he was mis- 
 informed of their intrinsic value.^'° Judge of his act up- 
 
 "" ' No disparagement to them if cretum, how could he speak of the 
 
 they were deceived .where reference to papal authority hut as he has spoken ? 
 
 the elder records of the church could Had he known that the authorities 
 
 no longer be made ; no undutifulness • there quoted were forgeries : had he 
 
 in us, if we, with the documents before had before him the canons and decrees 
 
 us, which they had not, deny a claim .of the seven (Ecumenical councils, how 
 
 which they in ignorance maintained, could he have come to any other con- 
 
 We but act, as they under like circum- elusion than that which forces itself on 
 
 stances would have acted. If S. Tho- every mind at liberty to judge, which 
 
 mas believed the genuineness of the evidently has been the conclusion of 
 
 documents contained in Gratian's de- great modern writers in the Eoman 
 
PRINCIPLES ON WHICH INNOCENT ACTED. 207 
 
 wards from our own age, and it seems impossible to deny 
 that the reasons which influenced him were mistaken and 
 short-lived enough. The east gradually passed by recon- 
 quest out of European hands ; all the decretal epistles of the 
 popes before Siricius are now known to be forgeries ; the 
 donation of Constantine, and a number of other authorities 
 to the same effect cited by Gratian, or regarded as genuine 
 by his contemporaries in the west, are known to be forgeries. 
 Sweep away all these and what remains ? the inherent rights 
 of the primacy ? Were they, then, endangered or infringed 
 upon, as long as the rights of the eastern patriarchates were 
 safe ? 
 
 Is anyone disposed to deny the extent to which Innocent 
 was indebted to the crusaders for the power which he exer- 
 cised over the eastern patriarchates ? Why, judging from the 
 effects achieved by them, and still surviving, the crusades 
 could not be more appropriately described than as a series 
 of expeditions undertaken against eastern Christendom, in 
 revenge for the encroachments of Leo the Isaurian upon the 
 western patriarchate. This, it will be remembered, had been 
 the beginning of the rupture between Rome and Constan- 
 tinople ; and the sequel to it, as we now see, was the sub- 
 jugation of Constantinople to Rome. In this they succeeded, 
 in whatever else they failed, though it formed no part of 
 their original programme ; and of their conquests what more 
 remains ? A ruined church near Emmaus, dedicated to S. 
 George, recals them to the traveller on his way from Jaffa to 
 Jerusalem; a ruined fort as he quits the shores of Genne- 
 saret to go northwards ; in Jerusalem, at Bethlehem, and at 
 Nazareth, he is reminded of them by churches which bear 
 their traces only to tell what ages of ruthless havoc have in- 
 tervened since their glory departed. The title of king of 
 Jerusalem is the same ghost-like apanage to the crowned 
 
 church herself, who from their position knowing that they were suppositious 
 
 could only speak half their thought? documents.' — Allies' Church of Eng- 
 
 Nay, the Pore Tranquille says : The land cleared, ^c. p. 489. The fallacy 
 
 popes who claimed that authority only of this book lay in its application to 
 
 did it because they believed those the church of England, that had for 
 
 decretals were true ; and that their so many centuries formed a willing 
 
 predecessors had enjoyed, from the part and parcel of the western patri- 
 
 beginning of the church, the rights archate. As an argument for the east, 
 
 which they saw that these decretals at the period of which we are treating, 
 
 assigned to them. But in that they it is whoUy unanswerable, 
 were deceired by an error of fact, not 
 
208 INlfOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 head in Europe who claims it, as that of France used to be, 
 till recently, to the British sovereign. But' ecclesiaetical dis- 
 cipline has never been extricated from the tangle into which 
 the rude hands of the crusaders twisted it ; and in the long 
 line of Latin patriarchs of Greek dioceses, we have their most 
 enduring — certainly their most living — memorial, because it 
 is one in which practice has outlived theory — the right 
 founded on their conquests has never been allowed to lapse. 
 For this, therefore, looking backwards, we might suppose 
 them to have fought. The supremacy of Eome was es- 
 tablished forcibly throughout the east through their in- 
 strumentality. The patriarchs of Constantinople, Jerusalem, 
 Antiocb, and Alexandria, as we shall see presently, were 
 made dependant upon Innocent to the same extent as 
 the archbishops of Milan, Aries, Mayence, or Canterbury. 
 Thanks to their arms, and in virtue of their conquests, 
 Christendom was one again, or at least supposed to be 
 one ; and Eome was all in all. This was the first reunion 
 or extinction of schism upon a large scale that the world had 
 seen — the regeneration, according to Innocent, of the church 
 of the Greeks ; its introduction to a state of perfection that 
 it had never known before. "What other measures he took 
 for its reorganisation, and what success he met with in en- 
 deavouring to give effect to them, may occupy us profitably 
 to the end of the chapter. It was a crisis of the utmost im- 
 portance ; but he was buoyant to the last and full of hope. 
 In one of his latest letters we still find him saying : ' The 
 seamless coat of our Lord fell by lot to one person, in order 
 that unity might be preserved intact in His church. From 
 this unity the church of the Greeks, estranged in time past, 
 . . . has, to its profit, been brought under the governorship 
 of Peter once more ; and as it has been, as it were, born 
 again into new childhood, so, that it may receive all possible 
 nourishment, are we labouring for its reformation by all the 
 means in our power.' ^'° 
 
 How the church of Constantinople was to be reconstituted, 
 he informs the new patriarch in a long letter in answer to 
 his queries,^'^ that may compare with those of the Bulgarians 
 to Nicholas, or of S. Augustine, the first archbishop of Can- 
 
 "" Ep. xvi. 105. The preceding and foUowing letters 'are both on the same 
 subject. 817 Ep. ix. 140. 
 
THE GREEK CHURCH REGENERATED. 209 
 
 terbury, to S. Gregory. Morosini, for instance, petitions to 
 have jurisdiction given him over those churches in Constan- 
 tinople which, previously to its capture by the Latins, had 
 not been subject to the Constantinopolitan patriarch. That 
 there were any such might surprise us, did we not remember 
 the power given by our couutryman Adrian IV. to the patri- 
 arch of Grado, to consecrate Latin bishops there, and in all other 
 towns of the Greek empire, for the Venetians, where they 
 were wanted.^'' Henceforward, it was quite possible that 
 these churches might prove a thorn in the side of the Latin 
 patriarch, himself a Venetian, for Innocent will not listen to 
 his request on that head.*'^ Morosini then requests that the. 
 bishops of the rich island of Cyprus might be put under him. 
 The patriarch of Antioch had long since been inhibited by 
 the Ephesine fathers from intruding there."'"' On that head 
 Innocent defers judgment. In reply to a third question he 
 tells him : ' You should ordain Greek bishops for those 
 churches, of which the congregations are exclusively Greek, 
 if you can find any faithful and devoted to you and to our- 
 selves, and willing to receive consecration from you in all 
 humility and sincerity. Where there is a mixture of Greeks 
 and Latins, on the other hand, you should appoint Latins, 
 giving them preference over the Greeks.' On a fourth point 
 his answer is : ' You have asked for instruction of the apos- 
 tolic see, respecting the eucharistic rite, and that of the other 
 sacraments ; whether you should allow the Greeks to cele- 
 brate them in their own way, or compel them to adopt that of 
 the Latins — to which we reply briefly, that if you cannot get 
 them to change, you may tolerate them in their own rite, till 
 the apostolic see shall have decreed otherwise on more mature 
 deliberation.' On one point alone — confirmation — he seems 
 to have been peremptory. He orders his legate to stop 
 priests from administering it on any pretence, as it was a 
 sacrament to be conferred only by bishops."^' That some 
 Greek bishops joined Morosini we ai-e given to understand 
 elsewhere. Two years later a further question was raised in 
 connection with them. ' It has been laid before us on your 
 part,' says Innocent to him again, ' that certain Greek bishops 
 returning to your obedience, have taken corporally their oath 
 
 «" Above, p. 162. 
 
 '-° Can. 8. 
 
 "' For the actual trouble caused by 
 
 «" Ep. ii. 212. 
 
 them, see Ep. ix. 19-20. 
 
 P 
 
 
210 I5N0CENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 of allegiance to you, and promised submission to us, but they 
 decline being anointed according to the Latin form ... in 
 reply to which enquiry we say, that if those who have been 
 already consecrated cannot be induced to receive unction, you 
 may, in this new state of things, dissemble and pass it over 
 . . . but all those requiring consecration, you must refuse to 
 Consecrate, unless they will consent to be consecrated in the 
 Latin way ; for we ourselves only consecrate Greeks in con- 
 formity with our accustomed usage.' ^^^ So the bishop of 
 Larissa was told about the same time :^'' ' Those whom you 
 find blessed or consecrated, you may continue in their par- 
 ticular grade.' So the Grreek bishop of Kodosto, on his com- 
 ing over, was told : *"* ' Since you have returned to the 
 obedience of the holy Eoman church . . . you may enjoy 
 the same liberty which the Latin bishops of Eoumania have, 
 and assume the same jurisdiction over those subject to you, 
 which they possess in their dioceses.' In the next letter he 
 is exhorted to use his utmost influence to secure the ' return ' 
 of his brethren. The word ' return,' is a vox solennis on all 
 these occasions ; and is to be regarded like the pseudo-decre- 
 tals, as fiction founded upon fact. It is perfectly true that 
 there was a return made by those Greeks who re-entered 
 into communion with the holy see, after having been estranged 
 from it, to the rights of whose primacy they had sub- 
 mitted, when in communion with it before. But they had 
 assuredly never before submitted to its immediate jurisdic- 
 tion over them, as they were made to do now ; therefore, so 
 far, it was no return at all, but a new condition of things 
 altogether, on which they entered, wholly unknown to the 
 east, till the crusaders conquered there. Yet, the term could 
 be used honestly by those who believed in the genuineness 
 of the pseudo-decretals. 
 
 Our crusaders had been making progress in Greece west- 
 wards, after taking Constantinople. They had abandoned 
 all further thought of the Holy Land, and of the Turks. 
 Athens, where S. Paul had taught, and made a convert of one, 
 whom a namesake bishop of Corinth in the second century^^* 
 records to have been its first bishop, Dionysius the Areopagite 
 was destined to be a model ia its way of church restorations! 
 When it fell into the hands of Boniface, marquis of Mont- 
 
 •« Ep. xi. 23. «» Ibid. 155. •" Ep. XT. 134. «« Euseb. E.S. iii. 4. 
 
THE GREEK CHURCH REGENERATED. 211 
 
 ferrat, it had an archbishop of its own, of illustrious birth 
 and excellent character, Michael Chroniates, brother of Nicetas 
 the historian, but he was ejected ; and Berard, from the far 
 west, appointed in his room. To him Innocent grants ' all 
 the jurisdiction over the churches and clergy of the province 
 of Athens, possessed in reason by the Greek archbishop ; ' ^^^ 
 and in addition, at his particular request, this singular favour, 
 •that the church of Athens should be regulated according to 
 the customs of the church of Paris.'^^' He, in conjunction 
 with the bishops of Sidon and Thermopylae, was directed, sub- 
 sequently, to bring the church of Corinth over to the Latin 
 rite.*^* To compile the picture, the bishop of Soissons — 
 brother to the second emperor of Constantinople, Henry — 
 was appointed to the see of Thessalonica, with leave to hold 
 Soissons as well, ' and be its proper bishop as before, until the 
 state of the Constantinopolitan empire was confirmed,' *^' 
 
 We have seen a patriarch of Constantinople for the first 
 time referring on every question relating to the affairs of his 
 diocese for instructions from Eome. But in the very com- 
 mencement of his pontificate we find Innocent suspending 
 Eadulph, patriarch of Antioch, ' for the same cause ' for 
 which he had suspended the archbishops of Tours and Rouen 
 previously,^'" or for having translated one of his suffragans 
 from one see to another — from Apamea to Tripoli — without 
 leave from him. Later, we find him reminding the patriarchs 
 of both Antioch and Jerusalem of their canonical obligations 
 to present themselves before him in Eome within the pre- 
 ecribed seasons.*^' With Grratian before him, the duty was 
 plain enough ;^*^ from the code of the universal church it 
 could not have been ascertained so readily. Further on the 
 patriarch of Jerusalem is constituted his legate, and sent in 
 that capacity to Antioch to regulate the election of a successor 
 to the patriarch of that see, who had died of ill-usage from 
 the count of Tripoli.^'' Just before his actual death, there 
 had been this further trouble.*'* ' It has come to our hear- 
 ing, as you know, that with the will and assent of his lordship, 
 
 "* Ep. ix. 194. "" ' Propter eandemcausam.' — Getta, 
 
 '" Ep. xd. 113. The formal con- § 43, comp. Ep. i. 50. 
 
 flrmation of hia privileges is ibid. «»' Ep. ix. 52, 63. 
 
 266. "' Dist. xciii. c. 4. 
 
 «» Ep. xiii. 6. "' Ep. xi. 110. 
 
 «» Ep. ix. 200. '" Ibid. 9. 
 
 P2 
 
212 INNOCENT III. AND .THE FOUETH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 the count of Tripoli, and of certain of the citizens of An- 
 tioch, the people and a section of the Greek clergy, setting 
 aside the fear of God, have presumed to intrude a Greek 
 patriarch, with whom the Greek clergy, who had taken the 
 oath of allegiance to our venerable brother the patriarch of 
 Antioch, and received their dignities and preferments at his 
 hands, now siding contrary to their oath, refuse to observe the 
 interdict of their rightful patriarch, and admit to communion 
 those Latins whom he had excommunicated, and laid under 
 ^terdict.' The patriarch of Jerusalem is therefore ordered 
 to threaten the count, and the magistrates of Antioch, with 
 excommunication on his own part, in the event of their pre- 
 suming to maintain the intruder or the Greek clergy in their 
 rebellion. 
 
 The affairs of the church of Alexandria require some little 
 explanation, to make the correspondence between Innocent 
 and the patriarch of that see, slightly touched upon in the 
 preceding chapter, intelligible.^'* The Jacobites, a branch 
 of the Eutychians or Monophysites, condemned by the fourth 
 general council, were placed, a.d. 644, in possession of that 
 see by Amrou, the lieutenant of Omar, and conqueror of 
 Egypt. From that time forth the orthodox succession was 
 often interrupted, or else there were two patriarchs, a Melchite 
 — which was the name given to the orthodox by their oppo- 
 nents — and a Jacobite, together. Church discipline was 
 therefore, and had long been, at a low ebb there. But Mark 
 the existing patriarch had, as we have seen, been making 
 great efforts for its restoration. The reader may remember 
 the answers of Theodore Balsamon to his enquirers on that 
 head. And he is said to have afterwards visited Constanti- 
 nople himself, for the purpose of remodelling the offices of 
 his church according to the type which he found there. ' From 
 this intercourse we may learn,' says Dr. Neale,'''^ ' how com- 
 pletely Constantinople, with rites less primitive than any 
 other of the patriarchal churches, gradually remodelled their 
 traditions, and regulated their offices by its own ; and thus 
 imitated the example of, or left a pattern to, Rome.' 
 
 A crusade which has slipped out of memory, the precursor 
 of others in the same direction, and the siege of Damietta by 
 John De Brienne, brought Alexandria once more into commu- 
 
 "' P. 139 and the preceding one. ™'' Alexandria, vol. ii. p. 274. 
 
THE GEEEK CHURCH EEQENEKATED. 213 
 
 nication with the west, as is well pointed out by Dr. Neale.*" 
 Soon afterwards, we hav^e Nicholas, the successor of Mark in 
 that see, corresponding with Innocent on behalf of some 
 Christian captives who had fallen into the hands of the Sara- 
 cens on that occasion. His letters have been lost apparently, 
 but Innocent in answering them, compliments him ' as a lily 
 that has retained its odour of devotion among thorns, for that 
 he is seeking consolation at the breast of the holy Eoman 
 church, his mother.' ^'' Nicholas was too delicate to perform 
 any function for the Latins without leave from Innocent. 
 With his consent he ordained one of their number deacon ; 
 and for the rest, the patriarch of Jerusalem was employed 
 once more in his'legatine capacity. Innocent afterwards 
 pressed the patriarch of Alexandria to attend the fourth La- 
 teran council, though Nicholas must have been in full com- 
 munion with the ejected patriarch of Constantinople, the 
 ejected archbishop of Athens and others, and averse to the 
 Latin way of thinking on the creed. However, Innocent tells 
 him that his letters attest a special devotion to the Eoman 
 church and to himself personally,^'' and according to Latin 
 authorities, a deacon of the name of Grermanus actually re- 
 presented him at the council.^^" 
 
 ' To find the patriarch of Jerusalem acting on a general 
 legatine commission,' says Dr. Neale, ' and the patriarch of 
 Alexandria commended for his filial devotion to Kome, would 
 indeed have astonished the popes and patriarchs of an earlier 
 age' ^*' — earlier than the crusades and the pseudo-decretals, 
 that is. Even in England, whose metropolitan sees had been 
 created by Rome, Eadmer, the friend and biographer of S. 
 Anselm, could write without misgivings to the following effect 
 in reference to what he records of a.d. 1100: 'This year 
 Gruido, archbishop of Vienne, arrived in England, to act, as 
 he said, as legate for all Britain, by order and authority of 
 
 ™' Ibid. p. 278. The capture of we may infer what hie previous letters 
 
 Damietta was not effected by him till had been. Very much what the letters 
 
 A.O. 1218, whereas this siege took of Alexius had been to Urban 11. to bo 
 
 place A.D. 1209, either immediately followed by the transfer of the cru- 
 
 bofore or after his coronation as king sades to Egypt. 
 
 of Jerusalem. ''' Ep. xti. 34. 
 
 <"» Ep. xii. 12. Comp. Ep. xiv. 146, "° Mansi, torn. xxii. p. 1079. A 
 
 for the rest. From the extant letter letter from him to Houorius III. in 
 
 of Nicholas to the successor of Innocent, a.d. 1223, is given, Eohrbacker, vol. 
 
 Honorius III. (Eaynald. a.d. 1223, xvii. p. 651. It is a fresh cry for help, 
 
 n. 9), for fresh succours a.d. 1221, "' As before, p. 280. 
 
,214 INNOCENT III. AND THE POUETH LATEBAN COUNCIL. 
 
 the apostolic see. Which news, as soon as it had got abroad, 
 filled all with astonishment, as all knew it to be a thing un- 
 heard of, that any person should assume that ofiSce over them, 
 except only the archbishop of Canterbury. As he came, 
 therefore, so he returned, having been received as legate by 
 nobody, nor exercised any legative powers at all.'*''^ 
 
 Look at the legates of Innocent in the east but a hundred 
 years from that time. First, one who had been bishop of 
 a remote town in Italy — Vercelli — is suddenly translated to 
 be patriarch of Jerusalem, and gifted at the same time with 
 a commission as legate in Palestine for four years, with power 
 to absolve all, by whomsoever, and in whatsoever manner, 
 excommunicated in that country.^*' He was not only to be 
 supreme in his own see, but over the patriarchs of Antioch 
 and Alexandria as well, and he was often directed to interfere 
 in their dioceses. In point of personal character, Albert well 
 merited the confidence that was reposed in him : unhapr 
 pily, it was the man who was exceptional, and not the office. 
 Secondly, turn to Constantinople. There, no bishop was ever 
 more dependent upon his metropolitan, than the patriarch 
 of his own choice was upon Innocent. Yet how often during 
 his lifetime do we find some cardinal-legate, who had been 
 sent to Constantinople, superseding his authority. Not by 
 any means that Constantinople, now that it was in the hands 
 of the Latins, wanted no looking after. In truth, and there 
 is no disguising it, there has seldom been any measure that 
 turned out so ill. Failure, and worse than failure, was in- 
 scribed upon it from the first moment of its achievement. For 
 destructive purposes it had done splendidly; much more 
 than any previous crusade ; but how much for edification ? 
 The authority to which Innocent was so fond of appealing — 
 Providence — read it by that light only : the verdict of Heaven 
 which has been affixed to it, and of which the letters of In- 
 nocent themselves supply pregnant hints for divining the true 
 nature. Hear from his own lips what success crowned his 
 poHcy. First, of the kings of his own appointing or approving. 
 In reporting the bad news Henry, the brother of Baldwin, is 
 careful to lay all the blame he can on the Grreeks ; but the 
 long and short of it is, that Baldwin had been taken prisoner 
 
 ^^^ Hist. Nov. lib. iii. a.d. 1100. vol. xvii. pp.378, 379 for other auihori- 
 S. Anselm had just returned. ties. 
 
 «" Ep. viii. 102, and Eohrhacker, 
 
THE QHEEK CHURCH EEGENEHATED. 215 
 
 by Johannitius, king of the Bulgarians, with whom the Greeks 
 were allied against their conquerors.^''* Innocent wrote off 
 immediately to command Henry to make peace with that 
 'dear sou' of his,^** and to Johannitius to conjure him to 
 make peace with the Latins and release Baldwin.^*^ But Jo- 
 hannitius turned round upon his patron and his foes in the 
 same breath. The Latins had already spurned his alliance, 
 and set up a king of their own : he, on the other hand, had 
 .been made king by the pope, so that if there was to be any 
 emperor at all, he, not Baldwin, he averred, ought to be con- 
 sidered the rightful one. Eelease Baldwin he could not, as 
 he had died in prison : that is to say, after having been kept 
 a close prisoner for some time, he was at length brought out 
 to have his feet cut off at the knees, and his hands at the 
 arms, to be thrown into a ditch near Tirnova, to die of hun- 
 ggP_647 This letter of Johannitius has not been preserved ; ^** 
 but we learn from the biographer of Innocent what it con- 
 tained ; and his remark, by way of preface to it,"'''' is that the 
 Latins deserved no better fate, prosperity having turned 
 their heads, and drawn down the wrath of Heaven upon them 
 for their many sins. 
 
 We turn from the emperor to the patriarch. Fresh from 
 the hands of Innocent, he was induced to swear at Venice, on 
 his road home,*^" that he would appoint no one to a canonry 
 in the church of S. Sophia, who was not a Venetian by birth, 
 and that he would do all he could to provide that nobody 
 should in future be appointed patriarch but a Venetian. 
 Innocent annulled the compact as soon as ever he heard of 
 it ; but he did not hear of it in the first instance from the 
 patriarch. On the arrival of Morosini, the French refused to 
 own him, alleging that his promotion had been obtained by 
 suppression of facts or through false statements. The patri- 
 ai'ch excommunicated them, but the cardinal-legate, who was 
 still on the spot, allowed their appeal. Another cardinal- 
 legate had to be sent out, before any compromise could be 
 effected.^^' One of the first objects of the new patriarch, on 
 assuming office, was to extend his jurisdiction, in which he 
 
 '" Ep. Tiii. 131. '" Editor's note to Gest. § cviii. 
 
 «« Ibid. 132. "• § CT. 
 
 '" Ibid. 129. ™ Gest. § xcix. Ep. ix. 130. 
 
 "' Baron, a.d. 1205, n. 24, from •" Gest. §§ o. ci. Ep. is. 142. 
 Kicetas and others. 
 
216 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOUHTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 was opposed to Innocent as we have seen. He had not been 
 long in oflBce, when his character displayed itself in more 
 overt acts. The title of a letter addressed to him by Inno- 
 cent/^2 and it is only one of a series of letters on that head/^* 
 is, ' He is rebuked for many excesses'— and a long list indeed 
 it is. We have no proof that he ever discontinued his evil 
 practices, and before he had actually breathed his last, the 
 Venetians are found recommencing theirs once mpre.^^* They 
 endeavoured to forestall the election, and secure the choice of 
 one of themselves, as soon as the vacancy occurred, by force. 
 ' With loud shouts, they threatened to kill or mutilate the 
 persons of any that resisted them.' And they succeeded so 
 far as to make the difficulties of electing to the vacancy 
 for some years insuperable. It was in vain that Innocent 
 corresponded with the chapter of S. Sophia, and drew up 
 instructions for conducting the election in the new way pre- 
 scribed by him, and sent them over by a notary who was to 
 see them observed.^^' The penalty for breaking through the 
 traditions of nine hundred years was that it became im- 
 possible to get any rule at all enforced in their places. At 
 the end of five years, when the church of Constantinople 
 should have been represented at the fourth Lateran council 
 in all its regenerate splendour, it was still headless, and not 
 only so, but the object of unseemly strife between two rivals, 
 each of whom claimed to have been elected canonically, but 
 neither of whom could make good his case. For the second 
 time, therefore — and this time in the eyes of assembled 
 Christendom — Innocent nominated to the most considerable 
 see in the world after his own, and undeterred by the ex- 
 ample of Morosini, again nominated a foreigner — Grervasius 
 or Everard, a native of Tuscany — of whose qualifications, for 
 want of better information, we are left to judge by his acts. 
 As it turned out, the second appointment would have read 
 Innocent a lesson equally with the first had he lived long 
 enough. It may be illustrated by a quaint anecdote which 
 William of Tyre tells of Eadulph, the Norman, on his 
 irregular translation from the see of Mopsuestia to that of 
 Antioch, mentioned in a former chapter. Eadulph argued 
 that as S. Peter had founded the see of Antioch before that 
 
 ®^ Ep. xi. 76. and 44. And the next year lie died. 
 
 <'»= Ep.xii. 115-17, and 140-5; and «"Ep.xiv. 97. This was a.d. 1211. 
 for the following year, Ep. xiii. 18, 19, «" Ep. xv. 153-6. 
 
THE GREEK CHURCH EEGENEEATED. 217 
 
 of Rome, Antioch was entitled to the rights of the first-born, 
 and its bishops dispensed from the necessity of sending to 
 Rome for their palls. Accordingly, when about to be in- 
 stalled himself, he had one deposited on the altar of S. Peter 
 in his own church, and when the time came, took it from 
 thence with his own hands. Afterwards, when he went to 
 Rome to answer the charges that had been made against him, 
 it was with the utmost difficulty that he could be persuaded 
 to receive another in exchange for it.*^^ Everard, the new 
 patriarch of Constantinople, was a congenial spirit, and seems 
 to have adopted precisely the same line. ' We have heard,' 
 says Honorius III.,""^ in a letter addressed to him, ' that 
 you have been trying to stretch out your wings a long way 
 beyond you, and sending your legates about with caps and 
 sleeves, in all the fulness of power with which legates of the 
 apostolic see are wont to be sent. Throughout the limits of 
 your patriarchate, they thus presume to claim for themselves 
 the hearing of those causes, in which no appeal is made 
 either to you or to them : and without any reference to the 
 bishops excommunicate those subjects to their jurisdiction, 
 or absolve those whom they have excommunicated. Bishops 
 they raise above archbishops, to whom as metropolitans they 
 are bound to submit: and when appeals are interposed to 
 the apostolic see, they show no deference for them; they 
 grant the benefit of absolution to those who have laid violent 
 hands on bishops, though such cases are reserved, by special 
 privilege, to the Roman pontiff; they confer ecclesiastical 
 benefices without waiting for the power of conferring them to 
 devolve upon you regularly, in conformity with the Lateran 
 
 council Now, if all this be so, you would seem 
 
 certainly, by usurping what is specially reserved to the Ro- 
 man pontiff, and invading the rights of others, in many ways 
 oppressed by you, not so much to have succeeded to the 
 cares of the pastoral office, as to the throne of pride and the 
 chair of pestilence. Know, therefore, that no matter how 
 high you stand, you are subject to us, and that it is full time 
 for us to pass judgment: for however much we may be 
 
 «« Bell. Sac. xv. 13. ahhi Migne's series. At the end of 
 
 «" Baron, a.d. 1218, n. 21. Comp. this chapter there ,is a section headed 
 
 art. ' Patriarchi,' § xv. in vol. ii. of the ' Justification de I'Eglise Latine,' which 
 
 Diet, de Discipl. Eccl. (founded on the had better have been left alone, 
 work of Father Thomassin) in the 
 
218 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 willing to defer to you, we neither can, nor ought to, pass 
 'over such things before Grod. 
 
 What benefits can have ensued to Eome from direct ap- 
 pointments like these it is not easy to see : with what benefits 
 they were fraught to the church, that Innocent in his en- 
 thusiasm aspired to regenerate, is but too plain. Constanti- 
 nople was ouly now undergoing what the Holy Land had 
 undergone long since at the hands of the Latins. ' Soli- 
 tudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.' The reunion was one of 
 church revenues, not of churches or Christians. Neither 
 Morosini nor Everard — as might have been expected — ^any 
 more than the Eadulphs or Arnulphs of by-gone notoriety, 
 proved effective missionaries. Besides, the programme, as 
 proposed originally to be carried out in the new settlement, 
 was a harsh one. We have seen that Innocent contemplated 
 at first only tolerating the Greek rite, where change was, as 
 yet, out of the question, till it could be changed for the 
 Latin. In most cases he left his nominees free to abolish it 
 at their discretion : in some cases, as at Athens, he sanctioned 
 the complete substitution of not even a Eoman, but a Gralli- 
 can, ritual in its place. Two years before the Lateran council 
 he sent Pelagius, cardinal-bishop of Albano, to Constantinople 
 with legatine powers, no successor to the late patriarch having 
 as yet been elected. Whether Innocent gave him the full 
 leave to try the experiment of abolishing the Greek rite by 
 force, which he seems to have taken, may admit of some 
 doubt ; but his own words in describing his purpose in send- 
 ing him are, 'Whom we have commissioned to act in our 
 stead, that according to the saying of the prophet, he may 
 pluck up and destroy, build up and plant whatever, after 
 God, he may have judged right to pluck up and destroy, 
 build up or plant.' ^*' In any case the experiment was fully 
 tried, and failed so completely that it was never again re- 
 peated; but, in fact, decided the rule the other way, as we 
 shall see. The results are indeed given by a Greek historian, 
 but as he joined the Latins himself ultimately he can scarce 
 be thought to exaggerate. 
 
 ' During the reign of Henry, the successor of Baldwin,' 
 says George *'' the grand logothete, or chancellor of Michael 
 
 ==^ Ep. XTi. 104 and 105-6 are on ™ Sm-named Aoropolita.— ^)i«aZ. 
 the same subject. c. 17, ed. Bekker. 
 
THE GREEK CHURCH REGENEEATED. 219 
 
 •Palseologus, ' a prelate was sent by the pope to the queen of 
 cities, named Pelagius — ^legate they called him — possessed of 
 all the prerogatives of the pope himself. He had red slippers, 
 and a red dress — the saddle and bridle of his horse was also 
 of the same colour. He was a person of rough manners, and 
 showed great arrogance, and was guilty of many harsh acts to 
 the inhabitants of Constantinople. His pretext was plausible 
 enough, as he was for compelling all to bow submission to 
 elder Eome. Hence monks were imprisoned, priests bound 
 with chains, and every church closed. One of two things 
 was necessary. To admit the primacy of the pope, and com- 
 memorate him in the liturgy, or else submit to the penalty 
 of death on refusing to do so. This course caused great 
 indignation to the Constantinopolitans, especially those who 
 were persons of consequence. Accordingly, they waited on 
 the emperor Henry and said : " We who are of another race, 
 and have a pontiff of our own, have submitted to your rule 
 with our bodies but not with our souls and spirits. We are 
 obliged to fight for you in battle, but it is wholly impossible 
 for us to give up our rites and ceremonies. Either, therefore, 
 save us from the oppression now being put upon us, or let us 
 go in peace among our own kin." Having heard them say 
 this, the emperor, unwilling to lose so many good and illus- 
 trious men, had the churches opened in spite of the legate, 
 released all the priests and monks who were in prison, and 
 stayed the tempest thus far, according to his ability. Many 
 monks, notwithstanding, departing from Constantinople, went 
 over to Theodore, who assigned them monasteries to inhabit ; 
 and of the presbyters who betook themselves to Nicaea, some 
 were added to the patriarchal staff, and others provided with 
 chapelries elsewhere, where they could live in peace.' 
 
 Innocent had received many letters of remonstrance from 
 Theodore Lascaris, the Greek emperor, or despot as he was at 
 first, on the treatment of his countrymen, if not his subjects, 
 by the Latins, which have not been preserved ; but from the 
 one reply which he returned to them all, it is abundantly 
 plain that he felt their force, and hardly knew what answer 
 to make, condemning as much as ever in his own mind 
 the Latin aggression, yet having accepted it in his oflScial 
 character as an accomplished fact. 
 
 ' First of all,' he tells him, ' you charge the Latins in Con- 
 stantinople with apostacy, because having assumed the cross 
 
220 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 under pretence of going to the succour of the Holy Land 
 against barbarians, they turned aside to use their swords 
 against Christians in attacking the city and empire of Con- 
 stantinople ; then you accuse them of treachery and sacrilege, 
 because when they had captured the imperial city they spared 
 not its churches, massacred its Christian population, and 
 violated the persons of unmarried and married women alike. 
 . . . Far from excusing them ourselves, we have again and 
 
 again upbraided them for their excesses However, 
 
 without considering them blameless by any means, we believe 
 the Grreeks to have been punished through their instrumen- 
 tality, by the righteous judgment of Grod, for having en- 
 deavoured to rend the seamless coat of Jesus Christ.''*" 
 But five years had elapsed since this letter was written, and 
 events had not been idle meanwhile. All the wealth, worth, 
 and talents that remained of the Grreek empire were fast 
 deserting Constantinople **' and flocking to Mcsea, the capital 
 of Theodore, whom Autorianus, successor to John Camater 
 the Grreek patriarch, had just before crowned emperor.**^ The 
 experiment now made by Pelagius swelled the exodus to that 
 extent, especially amongst the clergy, that the emperor Henry 
 was obliged to step in and stay proceedings on the part of the 
 legate. Whatever else might be imposed on the conquered 
 race, the retention of their own rite was inevitable. So far, 
 therefore, Innocent gave way. When the Lateran council 
 met two years afterwards to consecrate the new order of 
 things, and legislate, or profess to legislate, for reunited Chris- 
 tendom — for, with a single exception at most, the represen- 
 tatives of the east were simply Latins in Grreek costume — 
 the canons affecting the Grreek question were four in number ; 
 and of these the last is as remarkable for what it concedes, 
 as the other three for what they enact or assert. 
 
 Canon 1, ' on the Catholic faith,' ihust have been a surprise, 
 making no reference whatever to any former creeds or pro- 
 fessions, and afi&rming the procession of the Holy Grhost from 
 the Son as well as the Father, without a hint that it had ever 
 stood otherwise in the creed of the church, and without a 
 breath of condemnation against those who refused to admit 
 
 «"» Ep. xi. 47. c. bri. 
 
 '" ' A single patrician is marked by 'i^^ a.d. 1206, at Nicsea. The let- 
 
 tlie ambiguous praise of attaohment ter of Innocent was written a.d. 1208. 
 
 and loyalty to the Franks.' — Grihbon, — ^Finlay, Bi/z. Emp. vol. ii. p. 358. 
 
THE GREEK CHURCH REGEJSTERATED. 221 
 
 it there still. All which is the more noteworthy, as the very 
 next canon condemns in the strongest terms a book lately 
 written on ' The Substance of the Trinity,' by the renowned 
 abbot of Flora, in Calabria — Joachim — whose discourses on 
 antichrist, and the Apocalypse generally, Kichard I. of Eng- 
 land listened to with so much interest in his way to the Holy 
 Land.*®* 
 
 Canon 4 may have been intended by way of preface, 
 apologetic or explanatory, to the next canon. The reader 
 will not forget that Innocent had told the Latins himself ten 
 years previously, that it was all owing to their atrocious con- 
 duct ' that the church of the Greeks, notwithstanding its per- 
 secutions, mocked at the notion of returning to its obedience 
 to the apostolic see ; and forasmuch as in the Latins it had 
 been only conversant with examples of treachery and works 
 of darkness, abhorred them deservedly as dogs.'*** If the 
 marked contrast, therefore, between the statement of his 
 letter and that of the canon is to be explained at all, its ex- 
 planation must be sought in what had taken place since then. 
 At all events the canon says : ' Although it is our wish to 
 cherish and honor the Greeks who in our days return to the 
 obedience of the apostolic see, by supporting their usages and 
 rites as far as we can in the Lord ; still in those things which 
 occasion peril of soul or breach of ecclesiastical honesty, 
 we neither can nor will defer to them. For after that the 
 church of the Greeks by the intrigues and contrivances of 
 some of its own members withdrew itself from the obedience 
 of the apostolic see, the Greeks began to abominate the Latins 
 to that degree, that among other things which they did to 
 show their spite, they refused ministering at the altars where 
 Latin priests had celebrated in their churches, till they had 
 been washed as having been defiled. The Greeks likewise in 
 their temerity rebaptised those who had received baptism 
 from the Latins, and, as we have heard, still presume to do so 
 in some cases. Wherefore, desirous of putting an end to so 
 great a scandal in the church of God, at the suggestion of the 
 holy council, we strictly enjoin that they venture upon no 
 Buch practices in future ; but conform themselves as children 
 obediently to the holy Eoman church their mother, that there 
 
 "' Collier, E. H. vol. ii. p. 387, ed. Messina. 
 Straker. ■ Tlie interview took place at »" Above, pp. 178, 179. 
 
222 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEEAN COUNCIL. 
 
 be but one fold and one shepherd. Anyone presuming to do 
 any such thing again is hereby excommunicated, and sentenced 
 to be deprived of every office or benefice that he may hold.' 
 
 All these charges, it will be remembered, were bandied about 
 as far back as the second crusade, when the idea was first 
 started of attacking Constantinople.^^^ They were reiterated 
 by Baldwin I. in defence of its capture ;^^^ they are reiterated 
 here with marked reference to the canon which follows, * on 
 the dignity of the patriarchs ; ' that is, since brought under 
 European rule. 
 
 ' Eenewing the antient privileges of the patriarchal seats,, 
 with the approval of the holy universal synod, we enact that 
 after the Roman church, which by Divine ordinance has a 
 princedom of ordinary power over all others, as mother and 
 mistress of all faithful Christians, that of Constantinople 
 shall havfe the first place, that of Alexandria the second, that 
 of Antioch the third, that of Jerusalem the fourth ; each pre- 
 serving the dignity which belongs to it ; so that after their 
 prelates shall have received their pall from the Roman pontiff 
 — the badge of the fulness of the pontifical office — and taken- 
 their oath of obedience and fidelity to him, they may at their 
 discretion bestow palls on their suffragans, receiving from 
 them the profession according to the canons due to themselves, 
 and a pledge of obedience from them to the Roman church. 
 They may cause the cross to be borne before them everywhere 
 except at Rome, or where the pope is present himself in 
 person, or his legate using the insignia of the apostolic office. 
 And in all provinces subject to their jurisdiction, appeal may 
 be made to them, when necessary ; saving only where appeals 
 to the apostolic see should intervene, to which all must 
 humbly defer.' ''" 
 
 The privileges that are renewed as antient form one pa^t 
 of the canon ; and the conditions attached to them as new, 
 another ; so that it would be contrary to the tenor of the 
 canon itself to confuse them. Then, lastly, follows the at- 
 tribute of mercy personified in the ninth canon, as that of 
 judgment had been in the fourth. 
 
 ' Since in many parts, within the same state and diocese, 
 people of different languages are mixed up together, having 
 different rites and usages under the same faith, we enjoin 
 
 "s AViove, pp. 150, 161. ««' Mansi, torn. xxii. p. 982-90», 
 
 "" Above, pp. 185, 186. 
 
THE GKEEK CHURCH REGENERATED. 223 
 
 strictly that the prelates of such states or dioceses should appoint 
 proper persons, who should, according to the differences of 
 those rites and tongues, celebrate Divine service for them and 
 administer the sacraments of the church, teaching them both 
 by word and example. But we forbid altogether that any one 
 state or diocese should have different prelates, which would 
 be altogether the same monstrosity as different heads on one 
 body. But if for these causes which have been given, urgent 
 necessity should demand it, the prelate of the place may, 
 after diligent consultation, appoint a catholic vicar to act for 
 him in the above respects, and preside over those nations con- 
 formably, yet subject to him in all things. Any person in- 
 truding in any other way is hereby excommunicated ; and on 
 persisting is to be suspended from all ministerial functions, 
 and if necessary handed over to the secular arm as well, for 
 the stopping of all such insubordination.'^*' 
 
 Now, the true interpretation of these canons, as we must 
 have perceived long since, can only be that they confirm and 
 legalise the state of things which had been brought about by 
 the conquests of the crusaders, and were designed to put it 
 into definite shape and syste^. The antient privileges of 
 the patriarchs are not to be confounded with the new law of 
 their immediate dependence upon Eome, which is made the 
 condition of renewing them under existing circumstances. 
 There had never been any permission needed for the use of 
 the Greek ritual — it seems a mere truism to say so — till the 
 Latins commenced introducing their own in its place as mas- 
 ters of the soil. There never had been any conflict of juris- 
 diction between Latin and Greek bishops in the east properly 
 so called till the crusaders conquered there. Their conquest 
 undoubtedly, so far as eastern affairs are concerned, inaugu- 
 rated the new era, the results of which are incorporated into 
 those Lateran canons, expressing politically that the Latin 
 had triumphed over the Greek, and ecclesiastically, that the 
 boundaries of the western patriarchate had been extended 
 over the whole east. In this, as in other matters, the pope 
 was by no means the independent autocratic lawgiver that he 
 is often supposed. He had no more choice in accepting the 
 conquest of the east by the west than he had in accepting the 
 western interpolation of the eastern creed. He was, in point 
 
 «» Ibid. p. 998. 
 
224 IMTOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATEBAIf COUiSrCIL. 
 
 of fact, the last person in Europe to accept either. We have 
 seen how peremptorily the interpolation of the creed was at 
 first negatived by Leo III. and John VIII. ; but public opinion 
 in the west at length proved more peremptory, and Eome was 
 compelled to take the lead in its favour. We have seen how 
 thoroughly the Latin attack upon Constantinople was forbid- 
 den and condemned by Innocent, and denounced by him ever 
 afterwards as a wicked act ; yet he it was who was compelled 
 to carry out the ecclesiastical arrangements which the trans- 
 formation of the Greek into a Latin empire made necessary. 
 Latium was as jealous of Greece, and as bent upon enslaving 
 it, notwithstanding its Christianity, as in olden time, notwith- 
 standing its civilisation. Again and again he would have 
 paused, but ' his cardinals and other learned men about him'®*' 
 bade hiim move on. It is in deference to their wishes — ' at 
 the . suggestion of the holy council,' that is — that the old biU 
 of inditement against the Greeks is revived in the fourth La- 
 teran canon. As head of the church, it was his duty to con- 
 sult the interests and the rights of all : as patriarch of the 
 west he could not be indifferent to the verdict of public opi- 
 nion among his more immediate subjects. The Greeks had 
 certainly not been faultless ; aii& in his opinion they merited 
 their punishment, though it came with ill grace from the 
 Latins. He may have thought too that he could protect them 
 better by making their churches more dependent on him than 
 they had been formerly. Or he may have thought Greeks 
 and Latins capable of the same amalgamation that had already 
 taken place between the different races inhabiting Europe, 
 and now forming one family, the Latins themselves. In any 
 case, the fourth Lateran council is the monument on which 
 the culminating act of the crusaders is inscribed and perpe- 
 tuated. It was their last achievement of importance — the 
 last at all events in which we are interested — and with its 
 consequences extending into present time. More will be said 
 on the council hereafter in a separate chapter, where we shall 
 have an opportunity of comparing one with another all the 
 councils held on the Greek question. 
 
 The fourth Lateran council was one of the last acts, and 
 by far the most momentous, in the pontificate of Innocent ; 
 and he evidently broke down under it, as he died, in the 
 
 '" Above, p. 178. 
 
THE GREEK CHUECH EEGENERATED. 225 
 
 prime of life, the year following. The work of the whole 
 world was upon him, as may be seen from his letters ; not 
 one of which exhibits the impress of any other mind than his 
 own. But when he acted, he was compelled to act through 
 his ministers in most cases ; and, like Nicholas, he was certain 
 to be compromised by his legates whenever he had dealings 
 with the east. Of the many legates whom he employed there, 
 Albert, patriarch of Jerusalem, was about the only one who 
 never proved unequal to the confidence reposed in him ; and 
 he was assassinated just before the Lateran council, where 
 his experience would have been invaluable. The legates 
 despatched by him to Constantinople from time to time, 
 behaved in general no better than the two patriarchs ap- 
 pointed by him ; and their reports as often deceived him, as 
 their acts, when discovered, had to be cancelled. In short, 
 between subordinates who misinformed him of facts, and 
 authorities that misdirected him on church law; between past 
 events which he could not unmake, and headlong impulses 
 of an age teeming with energy which he could not stem, yet 
 was forced to direct, legislating for a country and a people 
 that he could only know from hearsay, it cannot be said that 
 he ever acted without the most untiring forethought ; and 
 the best apology for his policy will be found in the fact that 
 it marks an era — an era most glorious, and full of hope for 
 the west, if not for the east — an era, the revivifying influences 
 of which must have been secured to the east but for two 
 causes — the first, the natural decay incident to nations as well 
 as individuals in advanced age — the second, the barbarous 
 notion of which neither Christianity nor civilisation have as 
 yet succeeded in disabusing nations — and even individuals 
 how rarely — that their well-being can ever be promoted 
 by destroying others, or degrading them to a level below 
 themselves — a principle which is at the bottom of all those 
 suicidal wars, by which the improvements of centuries are 
 swept away, and the elevation and advancement of mankind 
 thrown back for centuries — a principle, which, thanks to the 
 teaching of political economy of late years, is now generally 
 admitted to be at variance with our material interests ; 
 therefore so much the more shame to us, if we retain it in 
 our dealings with each other as Christians ; converts, better 
 late than never, to the opposite maxim — ^which is of the 
 essence of Christianity — that the best security for our own 
 
 Q 
 
226 INNOCENT III. AND THE FOURTH LATERAN COUNCIL. 
 
 well-being and advancement in the concerns, whether of 
 earth or heaven, consists in the equal well-being and ad- 
 vancement, as far as may be, of the whole human family. 
 Crusaders or not, it is always a public calamity, when either 
 nations, or parts of nations, are tempted to act towards each 
 other on any other hypothesis. 
 
 Before quitting the subject, I must not shrink from avow- 
 ing, that it seems to me to be far easier to comprehend and 
 justify the conduct of Innocent as patriarch of the west, as 
 chief of the Latin party, than as head of the church. As head 
 of the church, beyond doubt he would have acted more con- 
 sistently had he never deviated from his own original idea, 
 never countenanced the sack of Constantinople in any way, 
 never taken the sentence of excommunication off the crusaders 
 for attacking it, till they had given it back to the Greeks, 
 done penance for breaking their vow, and made restitution 
 for their crime. He might have gained over the Greeks to a 
 man by such paternal conduct; he would have certainly 
 gained a moral victory over violence and injustice, for which 
 posterity would have blessed his memory. As it is, after all 
 the apologies that can be made for him, he remains asso- 
 ciated with one of the foulest acts ever perpetrated under the 
 garb of religion in Christian times ; a sorry connection un- 
 questionably for one of his high position and commanding 
 abilities. Gregory, the unsullied, the noble-minded Hilde- 
 brand, we may feel sure from his writings would have acted 
 very differently by the east, could he and Innocent have 
 changed places. Nothing would ever have induced him to 
 have countenanced any persons, high or low, for or against 
 him, that were in the wrong. It made just the difference 
 between him and Innocent, that one was sometimes tempted 
 to act as head of a party ; the other is never found acting 
 but as head of the church. And the church, with unerring 
 instinct, has recognised a difference between them, great as 
 they were both ; for she has canonised him who died over- 
 borne by the hand of violence in exile ; she has not canon- 
 ised him who, small thanks to the hand of violence, died 
 suzerain of the Greek churches. 
 
 It may be as well to point out, in conclusion, that accord- 
 ing to the teaching of Innocent, and therefore of the age in 
 which he lived, the Eoman church was not held to be the 
 universal church in the sense in which universal stands for 
 
THE GREEK CHURCH REGENERATED. 227 
 
 catholic ; but only the chief or principal part of it, as the 
 head of the body. When called universal, therefore, it was 
 understood by him to be so called, as having all other churches 
 under it, in the sense of ranking above them by special 
 privilege.^'" Innocent at one time doubted whether the 
 church of the Greeks — as the phrase was then — being out of 
 communion with Rome — could be called a church at all ; ^" 
 but it is designatecl by that name notwithstanding in the 
 fourth Lateran canon. 
 
 "" Ep. ii. 208, as quoted in the preceding chapter. 
 «" Ep. i. 353. 
 
 q2 
 
S28 
 
 CHAPTEE V. 
 
 PROJECTS FOR REUNION. — TO THE SECOND COUNCIL OF 
 LYONS INCLUSIVE. 
 
 This and the two following chapters will contain accounts of the 
 different overtures for peace negotiated between Eome and 
 Constantinople from the pontificate of Honorius III. to that 
 of Eugenius IV. inclusive ; to the council of Florence from the 
 fourth Lateran. Many of them are tedious enough to wade 
 through, and tautological to relate ; but it would be impos- 
 sible for anybody to form a fair estimate of them all without 
 comparing them one by one with each other. I have pre- 
 ferred translating official documents as far as possible literally, 
 to epitomising them, in order that the reader may be able to 
 judge for himself in each case, instead of having to take my 
 version of them throughout on trust. 
 
 Of such negotiations, this first chapter will include a double 
 set : one while the head of the Greek church was in exile, 
 and the Latins in possession of his see ; the other after he 
 had been restored to his see. Political circumstances reduced 
 the difference for both periods. Theodore Lascaris and John 
 Vataces were doubly worth conciliating, while Frederic II. 
 ruled in Germany. The return of Michael Palseologus to 
 Constantinople would have more than doubled his importance, 
 had it not been counterbalanced by the extinction of the 
 Hohenstaufens, and the presence in Italy of Charles of Anjou. 
 When the first council of Lyons tnet. Innocent IV. proclaimed 
 solemnly, that either he or the western emperor must suc- 
 cumb, by deposing him ; when the second council of Lyons 
 met, Gregory X. was looking forward to a loyal supporter in 
 Eodolph of Hapsburg, and was assured of the friendship of 
 the son of S. Louis, and of the English king Edward, his 
 
AFFAIRS UNDER HONORroS III. 229 
 
 fellow-pilgrim. In examining the different negotiations that 
 took place during these two periods, we must by no means 
 forget the political exigencies of the various pontifiFs who 
 bore part in them, as contributing in no small degree to 
 determine their conduct. 
 
 I. Houorius III. succeeded Innocent III. a.d. 1216. On 
 first thoughts, we might have expected to find him acting 
 with a high hand in the east, and enforcing obedience to the 
 Lateran canons — unqualified adhesion to the western creed, 
 as laid down in the first; unconditional submission to the 
 pope, as laid down in the fifth of them — and declaring the 
 Greeks heretics or schismatics in case they refused either. 
 But how enforce them, except in Latin territory, and upon 
 those who had been parties to their promulgation ? To the 
 Greeks in Greek territory, they were no more than the decrees 
 of a synod of Constantinople would have been to the Latins 
 in time past, which they had not attended. And there was 
 no disguising it, the Greeks were not conquered yet, and 
 perhaps never would be ; at all events the affairs of the Latins 
 were not prospering. In place of the Greek empire, which 
 had been overthrown, what was there? a crowd of petty 
 potentates, of whom the Latin emperor was but one ; sorely 
 put to it to hold his own between them all. There were the 
 despots of Epirus and Nicaea — the last now an emperor in 
 more than name — the kings of Bulgaria and Saloniki, the 
 duke of Trebizond, another emperor in prospect, besides the 
 emperor of Constantinople. Innocent, it will be remembered, 
 bestowed upon the Bulgarian king his crown ; and that one 
 of his first acts was to turn against the Latins, and put their 
 first emperor, Baldwin, to a cruel death. Honorius crowned 
 the third emperor, Peter of Courtenay, count of Auxerre, 
 with his own hands ; but before he could get to his dominions, 
 he fell a victim to the arts of Theodore Angelus, despot of 
 Epirus, who, with great tact, had been cultivating friendly 
 relations with the pope to conceal his own designs against 
 the Latins.^'" Even now, by releasing the cardinal-legate, 
 
 '" As Honorius tells him : ' Pru- ten to demand the release of his legate, 
 
 dentJr quidem egisses si conservasses it is remarkable that there is not a 
 
 tibifavoremsedisapostolicaespecialem, word said about Peter of Courtenay, 
 
 cujus aliquando patrocinium clarae whereas the letter to the king of 
 
 memorise Michael frater tuus pro te, Hungary, further on (n. 15), is full of 
 
 sicut pro seipso, per solennes nuntios him, and shows Honorius to have been 
 
 specialitAr invocavit.' — ^Ap. Eaynald, susp.cious of the part played by Theo- 
 
 i.D, 1217, n. 13. In this letter, writ- dore. 
 
230 PEOJECTS FOE EEUNION. 
 
 ■who had accompanied Peter and been captured with him, 
 Theodore managed to regain his confidence for some time 
 longer, and it was not till he had wrested the kingdom of 
 Saloniki from the son of Boniface, marquis of Montferrat, its 
 founder, and got crowned by the patriarch of Bulgaria em- 
 peror of it instead, a.d. 1222, that Honorius discovered the 
 true import of his pretended orthodoxy.^'* 
 
 No less unfortunate were the issues of that Egyptian 
 crusade, from which the pope had hoped so much. It was 
 in vain that Damietta was gallantly captured by John de 
 Brienne, king of Jerusalem, a.d. 1219. The conduct of 
 his own legate, Pelagius bishop of Albano, caused a division 
 in the camp,^'^ and Damietta was retaken by the Saracens 
 before two years were over. This was not the first time 
 that the violent overbearing action of Pelagius had prejudiced 
 the Latin cause, nor was it the last.^'* If there was one 
 spot in the east where it might have been supposed possible 
 for the Lateran decrees to have become law peacefully, that 
 spot was Cyprus : Cyprus that had been repeopled from 
 Syria by Guy of Lusignan, on whom Eichard I. of England, 
 had bestowed it, with*'^ '350 knights and barons of the 
 kingdom of Jerusalem, whose lands had been occupied by 
 the troops of Saladin .... and 2,000 sergeants at arms, 
 besides a number of burgesses established in the fortified 
 towns : ' shut out by the sea from any foreign influences of a 
 hostile description, and to its own inhabitants ministering all 
 the motives for contentment in its rich harvests of corn, 
 wine, and oil. Up to the time of the Lateran council, too, 
 the Greek clergy there seem not to have been subjected to 
 any formal aggression: and when queen Eloise, in the 
 absence of her husband, applied to that coimcil for a Latin 
 archbishop, it was expressly declared to be for the Latins 
 only.' *" So far from his appointment creating any jealousy 
 
 '" Finlay, B^z. Emp. vol. ii. p. 375. pret pour iin demier assaut . . . le 
 
 ■"' Eaynald, A.D. 1218,n. 11. Comp. ligat gwi commandait I' attaque, se mit 
 
 Eohrtacher, E. H. vol. xvii. p. 473. aussit&t a chanter le cantique de la vic- 
 
 'Le continuateur francais de Guillaume toire, " Te Deum laudamus." ' — Ibid, 
 
 de Tyr . . . caractinse d'lm seul mot p. 474. '" Above, p. 218. 
 
 la conduite de Ptiage, et les suites "» Finlay, Medieval Greece, p. 93. 
 
 qu'eUe devait avoir, en disant : " Alors *" ' Qui Latinis tantim praeesset : 
 
 mourut le cardinal Pierre, et PMage ciii et Graeci ipsi paruerunt, eublato e 
 
 v&ut, dont ce fat grand dommage.' vivisGr8ecoarehiepiscopoSinione,'Bays 
 
 For his courage in battle by all means Stephen Lusign. quoted by Mansi, 
 
 let him have fall credit : ' Tout itant torn. xxii. p. 1084, comp. p. 1076. 
 
AFFAIRS UNDEB HONOMUS III. 231 
 
 among the Greeks, we are told that, on the death of their 
 own archbishop, they put themselves under him of their own 
 accord. So matters remained till the death of king Hugh, 
 A.D. 1218, when the meddlesome bishop of Albano was 
 ordered to take charge of the island, by way of protecting the 
 interests of the widowed queen and her infant son, after- 
 wards king as Henry I.^'* Under cover of enforcing the pro- 
 visions of the ninth Lateran canon, Pelagius, at one fell swoop, 
 reduced the number of Greek bishops from fourteen to four ; 
 deprived them of their tithes and emoluments which he 
 handed over to the Latin archbishop and four suffragans, 
 making the Greeks dependant on a fixed pension, and re- 
 quiring them to dS homage to the Latins as their superiors.*^' 
 Till tlien, the Greek clergy of Cyprus had been little or no 
 trouble to the pope or king. They were never quiet from 
 that time forth, as we shall see : and the probability is 
 that, had Hugh been alive, he would have interposed, like 
 the emperor Henry, between his subjects and the legate. 
 All that the unprotected queen-mother could do was to 
 prefer a pressing request to Honorius — of whose ear Pelagius 
 was in close possession — that ' the Greek bishops in the island 
 might be allowed to remain as they were.' Honorius pleads, 
 in reply, that he has no alternative but to enforce the 
 canon.^*" Yet the Lateran council itself, from which that 
 canon proceeded, had assented to the appointment of a Latin 
 archbishop there, with jxirisdiction over the Latins only, by 
 request of the queen. Bowed down by oppression at home, 
 the native clergy retorted by swelling the chorus of discontent 
 abroad. Like the clergy of Constantinople, they betook 
 themselves to Nicsea, where the Greek patriarch Germanus 
 
 '" Eaynald, a.d. 1218, n. 18. rius, confirming the act of his legate, 
 
 "" Finlay, Bye. Emp. vol. ii. p. 369. could not have heen acted on ; but if 
 
 That Pelagius was the actor in all this, so, what were the Greeks complaining 
 
 is seen from the constitution of Alezan- to Germanus about ? and why did 
 
 der IV. to which allusion will be made Innocent IV. set aside that act, as we 
 
 further on. ' Non obstante constitu- see, to the extent he did ? His letter 
 
 tione generalis concilii, Tel bonae me- to Otto, bishop of Frascati, then legate 
 
 morise Petri ' (so P. is inadvertently for Cyprus, is in Eaynald, a.d. 1250, 
 
 rendered by Mansi for Pelagii) ' Al- n. 41. And that same year there was 
 
 banensis episcopi olim in his partibua a Peter, bishop of Albano, acting as 
 
 apostolicse sedis legati.' — ^Mansi, tom. legate for him at Li^e (Mansi, tom. 
 
 xxiii. p. 1038, and still more clearly, xxiii. p. 781); hence probably the 
 
 p. 1040. Mansi thinks (ad Eaynald, error of names above noticed in Mansi, 
 A.D. 1222, n. 8) that the letter of Hono- ™'' Eaynald, a.d.1222, n. 8. 
 
232 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION', 
 
 was resident, and exposed to him all they had suffered, 
 and all that their persecutors insisted on exacting of them. 
 A synod was summoned a.d. 1223, to consider their case,«*' 
 but it was soon seen how completely the usage which they 
 had recorded indisposed them for moderate counsels. The 
 act of homage, he vainly tries to persuade them, was the 
 usual token of submission in the west, and might be per- 
 formed without disgrace. Their consciences would not allow 
 them to place their hands kneeling between those of the 
 dominant clergy their superiors, in feudal style. Germanus 
 was ultimately obliged to take sterner ground, and condemn 
 those who had. For the rest, his counsel was generally that 
 * where there was no infraction of the canons, traditions, 
 customs, or faith, if any bishops of Cyprus could, by acting 
 diplomatically and without scandal to the church of Christ, 
 obtain any real support for their churches by making a show 
 of yielding, and free themsekes from the intolerable pressure 
 put upon them, such economy or dissembling was allowable, 
 and might be justified from the precedent of the apostle 
 . Paul.' There were two other specific points on which he was 
 consulted: 1. On the demand of the Latins, that no one 
 amongst them should be appointed to any ecclesiastical office 
 without letting the Latins know ; and 2. Whether the Grreeks 
 might ever appeal to the Latins in case they failed to get 
 justice done them by their countrymen. In both cases he 
 counsels compliance, where the Latins press for it, lest 
 worse treatment should ensue. Pelagius could not have 
 served the interests of the Greek patriarch better if he had 
 tried. And there was another personage who was returning 
 Honorius evil for good, equally just now. We may re- 
 member the second appointment made to the see of Con- 
 stantinople by Innocent, and how it had turned out, like the 
 first. Fortunately for Honorius, it was not destined to be 
 long-lived, and he had the satisfaction of appointing to the 
 next vacancy himself. But Mathew was a Venetian by birth, 
 and proved a Venetian in character, a.d. 1222, we find 
 Honorius writing to him exactly in the same strain in which 
 he had written to Everard, the late patriarch, but four years 
 before. 
 
 ™' This date is given by Mansi on Germanus, ConcU. torn. xxii. p. 1081 
 Eaynald as above. The answers of et seq. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER GREGORY IX. 233 
 
 • We are afraid that we may have to say of you, it re- 
 penteth us to have made this man. . . . You are playing 
 the hireling not the shepherd : intent upon getting milk and 
 wool out of yom- flock, instead of bringing back stragglers to 
 the fold. . . . Preaching you have dropped altogether . . . 
 the solemnity of the mass you very rarely celebrate : with the 
 excommunicate you do not shrink from keeping company. 
 You have entered into illicit compacts against all other 
 nations with the Venetians,'^'^ and much more to the same 
 effect. Such was the third Latin patriarch sent to Constanti- 
 nople from Eome : direct from the pope. Who can be 
 surprised, after all this, at the Lateran canons remaining, up 
 to the death of H(?norius a.d. 1227, as far as the Greeks 
 were concerned, a dead letter? Grregory IX. had not long 
 succeeded, when the accidental arrival of five Franciscans at 
 Nicsea, just escaped from a Turkish prison, gave the Greek 
 patriarch an opportunity of communicating with him officially, 
 as the diplomatic world would say. The good monks, touched 
 by the hospitality with which they were received, brought on 
 the subject of the schism in conversation, and promised to do 
 their best to work for peace. Germanus on this addressed 
 one letter to the pope, and another to the cardinals, which 
 they undertook to deliver, setting forth what it was that had 
 really alienated the Greeks from Rome with great plainness, 
 and, it must be confessed, with some truth. To the pope he 
 
 ' To come to the naked truth, there would be many both 
 noble and powerful who would obey you, did they not dread 
 the iniquitous oppressions, and lawless exactions, and undue 
 slavery, which you extort from those who are your subjects. 
 Hence it is that cruel wars abound on both sides : cities 
 are depopulated, churches closed, schisms excited between 
 brothers, priestly functions intermitted, till God is no longer 
 worshipped in Greek countries as He should be. One thing 
 alone, which we believe nevertheless had long since been pre- 
 determined by heaven in the case of the Greeks, was wanting 
 
 till now — I mean the hour of martyrdom Illustrious 
 
 Cyprus well knows what I mean, and with good reason. It 
 both knows of it, and has made new martyrs, and has seen 
 the soldiers of Christ first passing through water, then washed 
 with tears and perspiration amid their long and wearisome 
 =»2 Raynald, a.d. 1222,. n. 22. 
 
234 PROJECTS FOE EEUNIOK'. 
 
 confessions, at last passing even through fire: till God, 
 arbiter of their contests, brought them forth into a place of 
 refuge. Are these things well, pope— most holy successor 
 of the apostle Peter ? Are they what Peter, the mild and 
 humble disciple, enjoins ?'^'' 
 
 The reader will remember what had happened in Cyprus, 
 after it had been consigned to the tender mercies of the 
 legate Pelagius, To the cardinals he says : ' That our unity 
 has been destroyed, is all owing to the tyrannical nature of 
 your oppression, and of the exactions of the church of Eome : 
 she that was once a mother has become a stepmother, and 
 like birds of prey that expel their young, alienated her own 
 children that she once brought up.' 
 
 The most remarkable point about these letters is that 
 they are quoted by Mathew Paris for the express purpose of 
 illustrating and giving weight to his own observations on 
 what he saw around him, as though what had led to schism 
 between the east and west might one day bring about the 
 same fatal consequences in the west itself.^** He inserts, by 
 way of preface to them, the letter of a papal legate — whose 
 name is suppressed that his revelations may not recoil upon 
 his own head — and then he proceeds : ' The result of such 
 a spectacle of wickedness and oppression was a rising of the 
 
 ^*' Math. Paris, Hen. III. a.d. 1237. Against these exactions protests are 
 
 But as the council of Nymphseum took given : 1, from the whole people of 
 
 place in A.D. 1234, it must have been England; 2, from the abbots and 
 
 written years before. Mansi,tom.xxiii. priors; 3, from the earls and barons ; 
 
 p. 47-62 gives them in Greek and 4, from the king. — A..i>. 1245. The 
 
 Latin and assigns them to a.d. 1228. proctors from England had laid 
 
 The Greek is not quite so full as the the same ' gravamina ' before Innocent 
 
 Latin, but all cited from the words at the first council of Lyons in that 
 
 ' Hence it is,' &c. is in both. year. a.d. 1252, ' Grosset^te,' bishop 
 
 ''* For instance, Hen. III. a.d. 1241 : of Lincoln, ' had a calculation made of 
 
 ' Eodem tempore, permittente vel pro- the revenues of foreigners in England, 
 
 cnrante Gregorio, adeo invaluit Eo- Paris's words are : " It was found that 
 
 manse ecclesise inaatiabilis cupiditas, the present pope — ^Innocent IV. — ^had 
 
 confundens fas nefasque, quod deposito impoverished the universal church 
 
 rubore, velut meretrix vulgaris et more than all his predecessors had 
 
 eflfrons, omnibus venalis et exposita, done, from the time of the estabHsh- 
 
 usuram pro parvo, simoniam pro nuUo ment of the papacy ; and the incomes 
 
 inconvenientereputavit, itaut alias afB.- of the foreign clerks appointed by him 
 
 nes provincias, immo etiam puritatem in England, whom the church of Eome 
 
 Anglis6,su^contagion6maculavit.'Then had enriched, amounted to more than 
 
 foUow endless instances. Of all the 'ex- 70,000 marks." The clear revenue of 
 
 actors'sentintoEngland, Peter Eubens, the king did not amount to one third 
 
 Peter de Supino, and Master Martin — of this.' — Luard's Pref. to Grosset^te's 
 
 A.D. 1241 and 1244 — proved the worst, letters, p. Ixxix. 
 
NEGOTUTIONS UNDER GEEGOET IX. 235 
 
 Greek church against the Eoman, by expelling its emperor, 
 and paying obedience to its archbishop of Constantinople, by 
 name Grermanus, alone.' He speaks almost as though he 
 thought with another writer, to be quoted presently,*'^ that 
 the murder of Peter of Courtenay by the despot of Epirus had 
 caused the schism ; and that the errors of the Greeks in most 
 cases were modern and originated with Germanus. Altogether 
 his comments on it are most curious, especially those which 
 follow upon the two letters of Gregory IX, in reply, which 
 for the moment we may pass over. 'In spite of these 
 salutary counsels the Greeks would not subject themselves to 
 the Eoman church, either, perchance, dreading its avarice 
 and tyranny, or else acting in a spirit of contumacy — as in 
 the passage of the Gospel where the persons invited to the 
 Kupper would not con^fi, but sent excuses. On this the pope, 
 taking counsel dilig(^ntly with his cardinals, made proposals 
 for an army of crusaders from all parts to act against them. 
 The crusade having been preached, some assumed the cross 
 to march against /the Greeks, especially those of Constanti- 
 nople.^'^ One way in which this schism and division between 
 the Eoman and Greek church was propagated was as follows: 
 A certain archbishop, canonically elected or postulated for a 
 noble archbishopric in Greece, went to Eome to be con- 
 firmed, and could Inot get listened to, but on condition of a 
 vast sum of money for speeding his suit. Horror-struck at 
 the simony of the depraved court, he went away leaving his 
 business unfinished, and told the story to all the Greek 
 nobles. Others lil^ewise who had been to Eome reported 
 other things as bad or worse. So the result was that all gave 
 up being subject to the Eoman church in the time of the 
 said Gregory.' 
 
 Such was the practical view taken of the Greek schism by 
 our national historian of the thirteenth century : yet Mathew 
 Paris was despatched on a mission into Norway by the next 
 pope. Innocent IV., for reforming the monasteries ; and Inno- 
 cent, we know, sat and listened to a sermon preached at the 
 first council of Lyons, by another of our countrymen, Grosse- 
 t§te, bishop of Lincoln, in which the innuendos of the Greek 
 
 "• Humbert de EomaniB, ap. Mansi, would probably mean here the crusade 
 
 torn. xxiv. p. 129. led by Andrew, king of Hungary, whom 
 
 '*' If, above, by ' expelling its empe- Honorius stirred ui/ against the despot 
 
 ror,' he meant Peter of Courtenay, he of Epirus on that occasion. 
 
236 PEOJECTS FOR EEUNION. 
 
 patriarch, that 'the ultimate source and origin, the root and 
 fountain of all the evils ' enumerated by him, lay with ' the 
 Eoman court,' are brought out and dwelt upon at great length, 
 without any collusion, but with tenfold vehemence.^" The 
 truth is, the crusades had thoroughly demoralised the Latin 
 clergy, particularly the higher orders, in their views and prac- 
 tice ; and what the unfortunate easterns had been groaning 
 under for the last century was beginning to recoil upon the 
 west, as the Latins had to retire westwards. They could not 
 shake off their corruptions as they fell back homewards, so 
 they transplanted them ; and no nightshade ever throve more 
 luxuriantly. 
 
 What G-regory IX. says in reply to Grermanus is about as 
 remarkable as what the patriarch had said to him, but upon 
 opposite grounds. He puts the schism in the only light which 
 explains it thoroughly^ — ^the foreshadowing of it, which is 
 found in Scripture, and which has a meaning for the west as 
 well as the east. His letter is headed: 'Gregory ... to 
 our venerable brother Grermanus, archbishop of the Grreeks, 
 health and apostolical benediction.' As respectfully and amic- 
 ably as any letter from a pope to a patriarch had ever been 
 in olden time. Then after the usual reference to the prero- 
 gatives of S. Peter and the seamless coat, he proceeds : 
 
 ' Let us see who rent it. When the church of the Grreeks 
 withdrew from union with the Eoman see, it immediately 
 forfeited the privilege of ecclesiastical independence, and from 
 
 °" The sermon is given at length, in office, hut of indignation at his nn- 
 Brown's Fascic. Append, p. 251. Mr. righteous demands, which he meets by 
 Luard, in his admirable preface to the a blunt refusal. Innocent would have 
 letters of Grossetfete (London, 1861), excommunicated him on the spot, but 
 says that it ' was delivered May 1 3 by the cardinals about him, especially 
 him to the pope and three of the cardi- Giles of Spain, said : ' My lord, it wifi. 
 nals. . . It was read out before the never do to decree anything harsh 
 pope by one of the cardinals to whom against the bishop : what he says is 
 Grossetfete gave copies . . . though quite true ; we cannot but confess it. 
 called a sermon, it is rather a political Condemn him we cannot. He is a 
 pamphlet on the points in question.' — catholic-minded and most holy man — 
 p. Ixxiii. Mathew Paris's character more religious, holy, and upright in 
 of him is giVen p. Irxrvii. ; on which conduct than any one of us ; so much 
 Mr. L. says, ' this is the testimony . . so, that among prelates he is said to 
 of one who disliked him as a persecu- have no match, much less a superior, 
 tor of the monks, and who is always The clergy of England and Prance to 
 carping at him and trying to find fault.' a man know it to be so ; and our con- 
 But even this sermon is capped by the tradiction wiU be of no sort of use.' — 
 letter written by Grosset^te to Inno- Math. Paris, ibid. More in Luard. 
 cent A.D. 1252, full of duty for his 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER GREGORY IX. 237 
 
 having been once free, became the slave of the civil power, 
 that by the just judgment of God it might be compelled to 
 put up with the demands of the temporal magistrate, for 
 objecting to recognise the divine primacy that is in Peter. 
 Just what Samaria prefigures, in revolting from the temple 
 of the Lord, and from Judah, and from a confession of the 
 true faith, and becoming idolatrous ; ever afterwards a prey 
 to all the miseries of war, and bowed down by weight of her 
 sins. And for all that Elijah and Elisha shone there as great 
 luminaries in a dark place, still she was abandoned to the 
 nations and cast out abroad, in punishment for the fornication 
 and idolatry by which she had separated herself from the Lord.' 
 Or as he pursues the same train of thought in a subsequent 
 letter still more dogmatically : 
 
 ' As He who is Truth itself has told us that ignorance of 
 the Scriptures is the occasion of error, it behoves us all to 
 read or listen to them ; because whatever things Divine 
 inspiration caused to be written there for instructing the 
 ensuing generation, it intended equally to act as a warning 
 to all others. And certainly the presumptuous division of 
 tribes under Jeroboam, who, as it is written, made Israel to 
 sin, is in patent resemblance to the Greek schism, and the 
 multitude of the abominations of Samaria to the different 
 heresies of the multitude separated from the worship of the 
 true temple — that is, of the Eoman church.' 
 
 Gregory presses his parallel with all the closeness of a 
 lawyer, as became the arch -collector of decretals. His argu- 
 ment on ecclesiastical independence is worth noticing. It 
 may have sounded strange to the Greeks then ; it may have 
 sounded stranger to our own forefathers of the thirteenth 
 century, whose complaints of the iniquitous exactions and 
 oppression to which they were subject in consequence of 
 their dependance upon Rome, were so loud and frequent ; 
 still, in one sense it has been proved by experience, to what- 
 ever cause those results are due. Churches in communion with 
 Eome have remained in communion with each other and 
 formed one corporate body, and their independence of the 
 civil power has been in exact proportion to their dependance 
 on the pope ; churches out of communion with Rome, on the 
 other hand, have never been united with each other — never 
 otherwise than subject, for any length of time, to the civil 
 power; never otherwise than peculiar and isolated in their 
 
23S PROJECTS FOR EEUNIOIf. 
 
 faith. So it has been in practice, ever since the church took 
 possession of the world, for some reason or other. The alter- 
 native has lain practically between dependance upon one or 
 other of two central powers — the temporal sovereign, be he 
 one or many, or the pope. Churches independent of the 
 pope, may, however, have their true prophets, Elijah and 
 Elisha, as Gregory calls them in attributing them to the 
 Greeks, and in allowing the Greeks to occupy the position 
 under the Gospel of the ten tribes under the Law. Unfor- 
 tunately, facts will not justify the assertion, either that 
 churches united under the pope are guaranteed against op- 
 pression or wickedness on the part of their ecclesiastical 
 rulers, or that their lay members are sure to be the best edu- 
 cated or the best behaved. We cannot read the history of 
 our own country, when it was written exclusively by church- 
 men, and deny this ; and it was just as Gregory IX. was 
 taunting the Greek church for being the slave of the state, 
 that they were loudest in proclaiming their dependance on 
 the pope to be so full of evil in practice. 
 
 Gregory assures Germanus, in conclusion, that ' should his 
 sympathies lead him, in the spirit of a true Israelite, to have 
 recourse to the primacy of the apostolic see, and grieve for 
 the afflictions of Joseph arising out of the rent of the seam- 
 less coat, he will meet with a full measure of sympathy from 
 him in return ; that his own prayers are that God would open 
 the heart of the Greek church as well as his, and bring them 
 back to the one fold under one shepherd before long.' 
 
 Two Dominicans, Hugh and Peter, and two Franciscans, 
 Eadulph and Haimo, were despatched by the pope with these 
 letters ; and with them he trusts Germanus will be able to talk 
 over matters, and make terms. They kept a diary of their 
 proceedings, which is extant,^*' and not without cleverness ; 
 and though, of course, it is one-sided in some respects, it 
 affords a genuine picture of the manners of those days, and 
 of the feelings of the Greeks and Latins for each otheri not 
 often surpassed. As ' they told the Greeks, they were not 
 legates, but envoys or messengers — it might have offended 
 the Latin emperor, had legates been sent to one of his rivals 
 — and as their coming at all had been brought about by the 
 letters of the patriarch, they were particularly instructed to 
 
 *" Mansi, torn, xxiii. p. 280 et seq. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER GREGORY IX. 239 
 
 say that their mission was to him, not a council. But it was 
 John Yataces, son-in-law and successor of Theodore Lascaris 
 as Greek emperor from a.d. 1222, in reality, who had inspired 
 the patriarch ; hoping thereby to get the ear of the pope — as 
 the despot of Epirus had done previously — to the bane of the 
 Latins. His policy it was that caused the monkB to be so 
 well received, and treated with a distinction quite out of pro- 
 portion to their importance. They arrived in January 1233, 
 and were received first by the messengers of the patriarch, 
 and afterwards by the canons of his church at some distance 
 from Nicsea, with every demonstration of joy and respect. 
 When they asked for a church to say their prayers in, they 
 were taken to the church in which had been held the first 
 general council, and where they were shown frescoes depicting 
 the holy fathers who attended it, still fresh and uninjured on 
 the walls. Yet Nicsea had at one time been the residence of 
 a Turkish sultan, who ' for his propagation of the Moslem 
 faith bad deserved the name of Gazi, or holy champion,' 
 when ' the Divinity of Christ was denied and derided in the 
 same temple in which it had been pronounced by the first 
 general synod of the catholics.'''' It was in pleasing contrast 
 to his surname, therefore, but in perfect harmony with the 
 noble conduct of Omar by the church of Jerusalem, that he 
 should have left the holy building intact. As the patriarch 
 received the letters of the pope from his messengers, he kissed 
 the seal of them, and turning to his clergy, pronounced the 
 the words 'Peter — Paul,' as he did so.*'" The third day 
 after their arrival, the monks had a church close to their 
 residence assigned them for their own exclusive use. Next 
 morning, when they celebrated mass there, numbers of Latins 
 — French, English, and others — came to assist at it. Shortly 
 after it was over, one of the Latins came to them in tears, 
 saying that his ' papa,' or Greek priest, had placed him under 
 a ban for having been present at it. On their complaining 
 of the circumstance to the patriai-ch, the offender was brought 
 to them, after some demur, by his fellow-priests ; stripped of 
 his sacerdotal dress, and paraded in that plight through the 
 
 "" Gibbon, c. Ivii. speaking of Soli- equal compartments by a cross ; in tha 
 
 man, the conqueror of Anatolia, A..D. two upper of which were the names 
 
 1074-84. ' S. Petrus ' and ' S. Paulus ' respee- 
 
 «e» The seal used by Eugenius IV. at tively, and in the two lower his own 
 
 the council of Florence may explain name and title, 
 this. It was a circle divided into foiir 
 
40 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION. 
 
 town to the house of the patriarch, till they interceded for 
 him. Latin Christians with Grreek priests for their directors 
 at that date, French and English residents at Mcsea — where 
 the Grreek emperor held his court — living in peace ! "Who 
 would have thought it ? From their discussions on the creed, 
 it might almost appear that they were not aware that the 
 subject had ever been discussed, before. 'Talk of additions 
 to the creed,' said the monks, ' how comes it that you Greeks 
 use the creed of Constantinople now, instead of that of the 
 Mcene fathers in its original purity ? ' They were so charmed 
 with their own acuteness, that they quite forgot to state that 
 the same argument had been started by Eatramn 400 years 
 before ; ^'' and over and over again met by the Grreeks since 
 then. The real question was approached only just as they 
 parted : ' Under what form could the patriarch of the Greeks 
 be reconciled to the Eoman church ? ' The monks answered : 
 'By believing and preaching what the Roman church believed.' 
 As to chanting the creed with or without the addition, they 
 thought the Roman church would not be peremptory, pro- 
 vided the same obedience was paid to it in all things, that 
 had been paid before the schism. ' But if the patriarch con- 
 sents to obey the pope,' said the emperor with apparent dis- 
 interestedness, ' will the pope give him back his jurisdiction?' 
 ' If the patriarch will pay all that obedience which is due to 
 his mother, we believe that he will obtain greater mercy from 
 the pope and all the Roman church than he has any idea of,' 
 replied the monks with equal tact. And with that they left 
 for Constantinople, straining a point in their instructions to 
 give the patriarch, as he had asked, time to consult with his 
 brethren of Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria, and convene 
 a council. When they returned, it was not at Nicsea, but 
 NymphsBum, a place some way to the north-east, on the 
 coast *^^ — and therefore nearer and more easy of access to 
 those who were coming from Constantinople — that they found 
 it sitting. The principal question this time was the employ- 
 ment of ' azymes ' or unleavened bread in the eucharist. 
 Again the mohks repeated the thrice-told tale. ' You think 
 evil of our practice, as appears, first, from your writings, 
 
 "" Above p. 73. Smyrna.' But there were several 
 
 ""- So marked at least in Butler's Nymphaeiims, ' taths ' or ' spas,' as we 
 
 atlas. Gibbon, u. Ixii. speaks of ' the should caU them. 
 
 palace and gardens of Nymphaeum near 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER GREGORY IX. 341 
 
 which are full of this heresy ; secondly, because when ques- 
 tioned on that head, you abstain from answering, lest your 
 heresy should appear; thirdly, your deeds prove it, as you 
 wash your altars after a Latin has celebrated at them ; fourthly, 
 any Latins approaching your sacraments you oblige to apos- 
 tatise, and abjure the sacraments of the Eoman church ; 
 fifthly, you have erased the name of his holiness the pope 
 from your diptychs, and as we know that you never eject any 
 but as heretics or excommunicate, it must be in one of these 
 lights that you regard him ; sixthly, you excommunicate him 
 once a year, as we have been told by those who have heard 
 you.' What can one possibly infer from these charges, but 
 that even then the' subject of complaint was, not that the 
 Greeks were in any formal heresy themselves, but that they 
 insulted the Latin communion, partly by exacting uncharit- 
 able terms of their Latin communicants, and partly by not 
 commemorating the pope in their liturgies. Hear, too, 
 what the keeper of the records *'' urged in reply to them. 
 ' It is false what you say, that we excommunicate his holi- 
 ness the pope .... for the rest, we ai-e not surprised at 
 all. For when your Latins took Constantinople, they broke 
 into churches, threw down altars, stole the gold and silver 
 from off them ; threw the relics of the saints into the sea, 
 trampled the holy images under foot ; turned churches into 
 so many pens for cattle.' The patriarch added : ' If you 
 wonder why we erased the name of the pope from our 
 diptychs, I ask why has he erased mine from his ? ' ' How 
 erased yours ? ' was the reply ; ' as it was never there at all. 
 But if you are talking about your predecessors, please enquire 
 whether he erased theirs first, or they his ? As to your other 
 counter-charges, the Eoman church is in no way responsible 
 for them. If done at all, they were the acts of wicked and 
 excommunicate persons, without command or leave of the 
 church. But what you do, is the work first of your patriarchs 
 and archbishops, then of your bishops and inferior clergy, as 
 you confess yourselves.' As if no Latin archbishops and 
 patriarchs were at that moment fattening upon Greek sees. 
 
 The emperor affected to be much displeased when he heard 
 that so much warmth had been exhibited on both sides in his 
 absence. But he remarked that a schism full 300 years old 
 
 «=' ' phartophylax.' 
 R 
 
2'42 PEOJECTS FOB EEUMON. 
 
 could not be healed in a moment. Afterwards the Greeks 
 presented the monks with a sorry paper drawn up by them, 
 condemning ' azymes ; ' and the monks, in return, handed the 
 Greeks a paper on the double procession, with their signa- 
 tures attached to it/^^ scarcely more full. Then, after some 
 criticism by the monks of the contents of the Greek paper, 
 they separated. A few days later, the emperor sent for the 
 monks and said : ' There are two points between us, of which 
 you must waive one. We engage, on our part, to treat your 
 eucharist with all due reverence ; you must accommodate 
 your creed to us.' The monks replied : ' Neither the pope 
 nor the church of Eome will ever abandon one jot of its faith, 
 or any part of its creed. On the subject of the eucharist you 
 must hold and teach that for a valid consecration, it matters 
 not whether the bread be leavened or unleavened ; and burn 
 all books that argue differently— on the procession : that the 
 Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son as well as the Father. 
 But the pope will not compel you to chant the creed with 
 that clause added to it, unless you please, provided you burn 
 all books opposed to it.' ' This is no form of peace,' rejoined 
 the emperor. And with that the conference was adjourned 
 on Thursday evening ; it was resumed on Friday, but only to 
 call each other heretics before parting. And early on Satur- 
 day morning the monks left without, as they were reproached 
 afterwards, having saluted the patriarch and other bishops, 
 or asked their blessing. They said they were sure the patri- 
 arch would appreciate their reasons for acting as they had. 
 After they had set out, they were overtaken, and given back 
 their own paper, and asked to return that of the Greeks. In 
 place of it they had consigned to them letters from the patri- 
 arch to the pope, and a long profession of faith in the name 
 of the council, and of the patriarchs of Antioch and Constan- 
 tinople, signed by the chartophylax. At first they declined 
 parting with the Greek paper, and there was warm wrangling 
 on both sides; however, they dined together. Then the char- 
 tophylax appeared, and threatened their attendants with ex- 
 communication, if they did not quit them at once, unless 
 they produced the paper. Thereupon the guides deposited 
 a heavy lot of books on the ground, and went off; and the 
 monks, taking what books they could carry with them, left the 
 
 "" Mansi, ibid. p. 61-6. It will be noticed again in c. viii. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDEE GREGOEY IX. 24S- 
 
 rest in charge of a soldier of the emperor, who had joined them 
 previously, and set out on foot alone. It wanted at least six 
 leeigues to the sea, and the road was rough and lonely. When 
 they had proceeded some six or seven miles, the same soldier 
 overtook them, and with every mark of respect begged that 
 they would return to their former halting-place, where the 
 chartophylax met them and examined their books. When 
 he had found the paper he wanted, he merely said, ' I have 
 got it ; ' and so dismissed them. But the wily monks, ac- 
 cording to their own account, had translated it into Latin 
 previously, and bore away their translation in triumph to be 
 inserted in their diary, where it still figures in memorial of 
 their own bad scholarship, and the crude reasoning of their 
 opponents. John Vataces took excellent care that if he could 
 get nothing out of the monks in the way of concessions, they 
 should at all events go away in good humour and charmed 
 with his hospitality. 
 
 Greek interests were reviving under his able administra- 
 tion, and events were seconding it. When the first council of 
 Lyons met a.d. 1245, what a different prospect of affairs it 
 was from what it had been, when the fourth Lateran council 
 was summoned by the third Innocent. In the west Frederic 
 II. of Germany, then his ward, but since then twice excom- 
 municated by Gregory IX., was about to be solemnly deposed 
 by his namesake Innocent IV. in full council. At that 
 council the east was represented by Baldwin II., not as bring- 
 ing support to the pope, but as proclaiming the ruin of his 
 own empire ; and by one individual, who appeared as patri- 
 arch of both Antioch and Constantinople. Mathew Paris has 
 preserved a characteristic sketch of his speech, which Grosse- 
 tSte, who was present, as we have seen, may have transmitted 
 to his friends in England. ' The patriarch of Constantinople,' 
 he says, ' who was patriarch of Antioch as well . . . enlarged 
 on the state and necessities of his chiirch, declaring that he 
 used to have upwards of thirty suffragans under him, of whom 
 scarce three now remained. He added that the Greeks and 
 other enemies of the Eoman church' — Bulgaria among the 
 number — ' had taken forcible possession of the whole of 
 Roumania up to the very walls of Constantinople ; and so far 
 from owning any kind of allegiance for the .Roman church, 
 they detested it and were opposed to it from hostile motives. 
 Hence there was gi-ief and confusion in store for all Chris- 
 
 B 2 
 
244 PROJECTS FOE EBUNIOK 
 
 tians ; the more so, as his church had been the first to be 
 privileged, and deserved to be honored above all others ; for 
 there it was in the olden time that blessed Peter had sat first : 
 at Antiochjthat is — a city become Greek territory — and thence 
 it was that he put to flight Simon Magus and other heretics in 
 confusion.' Not the first time that a Latin patriarch had 
 hinted, and this time to the pope's face, that Eome by good 
 rights should rank after Antioch.^'^ 'Ad quod,' says Paris 
 with inimitable brevity, ' papa tacuit.'^'^ He was silent for 
 the moment, for he had other things on hand that were more 
 pressing, but afterwards, on coming to the Greek question, he 
 spoke out as one bent on inaugurating a new policy. The 
 commission given by him to his penitentiary Laurence, of 
 the order of S. Francis, A.D. 1247, can only be described as 
 the earnest of a firm resolve on his part to protect the 
 Greeks from the Latins. 
 
 ' It is from the full confidence that we have in the Lord of 
 your circumspection, that we have thought fit to send you be- 
 yond the seas as an angel of peace, with full legatine powers for 
 Armenia, Iconium, Turkey, Greece, Babylonia; overall Greeks 
 dwelling in the patriarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem, or in 
 the island of Cyprus ; and over all Jacobites, Maronites, and 
 Nestorians, as well; that according to the prudence which' 
 you have from God, you may pluck up and scatter, build and 
 plant; on which account, too, we enjoin you to protect the 
 Greeks in those parts, of whatsoever denomination, by the 
 apostolic authority which you derive from us, not allowing 
 them to be vexed or troubled in any way ; causing any mo- 
 lestation or injuries which they may have received from the 
 Latins to be redressed tenfold ; and bidding the Latins them- 
 selves at their peril abstain wholly from any such acts for the 
 time to come.' ^^' 
 
 Those eastern bishops, he tells him^'* in a subsequent letter, 
 who may have taken previous oaths to the Latin patriarchs 
 out there, are not to be released from them ; but any that 
 have never been subject to them, may on their submission be 
 placed in immediate dependence on the pope, yet without 
 prejudice to any existing rights. The Greek patriarchs simi- 
 
 "' Above, p. 216. Bented two sees ; which others also pass 
 
 ™" Hen. III. A.D. 1245, quoted also over, 
 
 hy Mansi, torn, xxiii. p. 634, but with- «»' Ap. Eaynald. a.d. 1247, n. 30. It 
 
 out noticing that the patriarch repre- is dated Lyons. ™* Ibid. n. 31. 
 
EXCELLENT PLAN OP INNOCENT IV. 243 
 
 laxly,^'' unless previously pledged, together with their suf- 
 fragans possessing the same liberty, may be assm^ed that in 
 subjecting themselves to the pope, they wiU have nobody 
 between them and him. 
 
 So Innocent, in other words, decided on interpreting the 
 enactment of the ninth Lateran canon, that there should not 
 be two bishops independent of each othe^ in one diocese ; for 
 as long as both were subject to him, and protected impar- 
 tially by him in their own rights and usages, neither of them 
 could interfere with the other, and their mere juxtaposition 
 would be no more matter of inconvenience than the co- 
 existence of two hpuses of Franciscans and Dominicans in 
 the same neighbourhood. It was a wise, just, and farsighted 
 arrangement that was shadowed forth in this decision of his, 
 unquestionably the best that had yet been attempted. Had 
 it originated 150 years earlier, or with Urban II., and been 
 enforced rigidly during the whole period of the Latin occu- 
 pation in the east, there can be little doubt of the effect that 
 it would have produced on the Greeks, to whom dependence 
 on the holy see had hitherto been presented in no other light, 
 than that of a symbol of conquest, entailing upon them the 
 loss of their revenues, the annihilation of their liberties, and 
 the substitution of a foreign rite for their own. It so happens 
 that we can point to a spot where both policies were 
 carried out within thirty years of each other, and in each 
 case, precisely with the results that might have been ap- 
 prehended. We need go no further back than the com- 
 mencement of this chapter, to see what had been the conduct 
 of the legate Pelagius in Cyprus, under pretence of putting 
 in force the ninth Lateran canon, and what had been its 
 effects.'"" It had occasioned a forcible appeal to Gregory IX. 
 from Germanus the Greek patriarch, and had led to the 
 correspondence between them, a.d. 1228, already noticed."' 
 Later, either the decision of the synod of Nymphaeum rankled 
 in the mind of Gregory, or else he allowed the representa- 
 tions of the Latin archbishop of Nicosia to weigh with him 
 undul}' : for he ended by authorising him to impose stringent 
 
 ™ In the Latin, it is ' the patriarch he must have meant the patriarch of 
 
 of the Greeks ;' but as his mission did the Greeks in each one of tnese. 
 not include Nicsea, but only the pa- "" Above, p. 231. 
 triarchates of Antioch and Jerusalem, "" P. 233. 
 
■246 PEOJECTS FOB EEUNION. 
 
 tests upon the Greek bishops and presbyters ; ostensibly to 
 secure their orthodoxy, but in reality to get rid of them.'"^ 
 The result was, that they fled from the island as before, or 
 were repelled, or ill-treated as recusants. Laurence, the 
 Franciscan, acting as legate for Innocent, A.D. 1247, as we 
 have seen, induced some of them to return,"' and a few 
 years afterwards, when Otto bishop of Frascati came to 
 Cyprus as legate, one of them, a namesake of the Greek 
 patriarch, Germanus, met him with a profession of obedience 
 to the Eoman church; on which the legate seems to have 
 permitted him to be consecrated by his suffragans archbishop 
 of the Greeks in Cyprus, receiving from him after conse- 
 cration, and from his suffragans, a promise of obedience, in 
 the name of the Eoman church, and exacting a promise of 
 canonical obedience from the suffragans to their archbishop ; 
 but without stipulating for any obedience from either, to 
 the Latin archbishop.'"* Afterwards, he wrote to Innocent 
 for further instructions. Innocent in his reply'"* speaks of 
 Germanus as his brother archbishop, thereby conveying his 
 approval of the act of Otto in appointing him. Not only so, 
 but he directs Otto to enquire what reasons there were 
 against the Greeks having their fourteen sees as before, with 
 independent revenues, and a metropolitan of their own, in- 
 dependent of the Latins, ' notwithstanding what Pelagius, 
 bishop of Albano had ruled.' That is, he was empowered to 
 set aside, not the Lateran canon'"* by any means, but the harsh 
 interpretation of it enforced by Pelagius, in defiance of the 
 very settlement allowed by that council.'"' Otto has full 
 leave given him to do what he judged best for the interests of 
 the island. Unfortunately, when he left there was nobody to 
 keep the Latin archbishop in check, and the Greeks lay at his 
 
 "^ Ap. Eaynald. a.d. 1240, n. 45. cause the constitution of Alexander 
 
 "" Ibid. A..D. 1250, n. 41. seems to imply that Innocent had set 
 
 ™' So we learn from the constitution aside the Lateran canon itself. ' Non 
 
 of Alexander IV. ap. Mansi, torn, xxiii. obstante constitutione generalis concilii 
 
 p. 1038 et seq. Otherwise it might vel bonse memorise (?) Albanensis epis- 
 
 have been inferred from the letter of copi olim in his partibus apostolicse 
 
 Innocent to Otto that Germanus had sedis legati.' — See above, note to p. 230. 
 
 been archbishop at the time of his "Wliereas the letter of Innocent just 
 
 expulsion. The fact is, his being of quoted refers expressly to the ruling of 
 
 the same name with the Greek arch- Pelagius alone. This is not the only 
 
 ' bishop or patriarch at Nicaea, has pro- indication that Alexander was in the 
 
 bably led to some confusion. hands of another party. 
 
 ^" Ap. Eaynald. a.d. 1250, n. 41. '»' Above, p. 231. 
 '°° It is necessary to note this, be- 
 
EXCELLENT PLAN OF INNOCENT IV. 247 
 
 mercy once more. It was this circumstance which rendered 
 the arrangement practically inoperative, as we shall see ; 
 but for the moment it caused a vast reaction in the minds 
 of the Greek clergy, of which, when Innocent heard, he 
 endeavoured to take advantage by a number of other well- 
 timed concessions of the same kind, without departing from 
 principle ; yet evidently to counteract the previous action of 
 the Latin archbishop. 
 
 ' that the dayspring from on high would visit tlte 
 easterns I ' he wrote to his legate a.d. 1 254, * and bring 
 them back illumined by it to catholic unity ; that congre- 
 gated with the rest^of the orthodox in the bosom of one fold, 
 they might be fed with streams of salutary doctrine from the 
 
 breast of the church their mother Nevertheless, as 
 
 some of the Greeks have returned to their duty to the 
 Apostolic see, and been for some time past heeding and 
 obeying it reverently, it is both lawful and expedient, by 
 tolerating their rites and customs, as far as we can be- 
 fore God, to retain them in their obedience to the same; 
 though on any points detrimental to the interests of souls, 
 or where we cannot do so with honesty, we neither ought, 
 nor mean to defer to them in any way.' Innocent could 
 not go too far without scandalising the Latin party; but 
 there was no flinching at all, as far as he goes. In ad- 
 ministering the chrism at baptism, he tells his legate, the 
 Eoman rite is to be enforced; in all other respects the 
 Greeks may have their own way. Confirmation is to be 
 administered only by a bishop. Extreme unction may be 
 given by priests to the sick. The eucharist is not to be 
 reserved from one Maundy Thursday to another, whatever 
 the Greeks may say. The Greeks may use their own office, 
 but not celebrate before their matins are over, nor later 
 than the ninth hour. The Greeks may fast or not on Satur- 
 days in Lent as they please ; but they are to be exhorted 
 to fast all through Lent. Married priests may hear con- 
 fessions, and impose penances. The Greeks must admit the 
 seven orders, and ordain accordingly : the three minor orders 
 having been hitherto neglected by them. Still their former 
 ordinations are to hold good ; and though they must allow 
 third or fourth marriages, no presbyter is to be required to 
 bless second marriages. These are the principal of his in- 
 junctions ; there are twenty-six in all : nothing is said of the 
 
548 PROJECTS FOE EEUMON< 
 
 creed or of ^ azymes,' either way. Innocent ends by bidding 
 bis legate 'enjoin the archbishop of Nicosia and his Latin suf- 
 fragans, as from him, that the Greeks are not to be molested 
 or troubled in any way on the above points, in opposition to 
 what he has laid down and ruled.' "* 
 
 Sis years afterwards, or so, we have Grermanus appearing 
 in person, as plaintiff, and the Latin archbishop, by bis 
 proctors, as defendant in Eome, before Alexander IV. The 
 pope seems to have had no difficulty at all in coming to the 
 conclusion that the Latin archbishop had been grossly to 
 blame,. and Grermanus in order throughout: still he finds it 
 impossible to maintain the line taken by Innocent, and is com- 
 pelled to fall back upon almost the same unfairnesses which 
 his predecessor had- corrected. For the future, there are to- 
 be but four Greek bishops in the island, and no Greek arch- 
 bishop at all, as Pelagius had ruled ; all of them subject to 
 the Latin bishops in whose dioceses they were, as well as to 
 the Latin archbishop as their common chief; only they 
 cannot for the future be deposed, translated, or made to re- 
 sign, except by the pope. And the Greek rite is to be 
 maintained. Germanus, in consideration of the entire 
 regularity of his appointment, and his unexceptionable 
 conduct since then, is to retain his archiepiscopal title for 
 life; but as bishop of an obscure town called Solia, the 
 birth-place of solecisms. So that the Greek metropolitan 
 was to be sacrificed, in spite of his good conduct, to party- 
 spirit. Alexander ends his constitution^"' with a pious hope, 
 that by dint of these arrangements, which he calls upon both, 
 parties to observe faithfully, without encroaching upon each 
 other, they might henceforth be knit together in the bond of 
 peace, and as members one of another in Christ. In other 
 words — as we learn from his own diplomatic instructions on 
 another occasion, to which we are coming — that the state of 
 dependence to which he had reduced the Greeks would not 
 exceed their endurance. Luckily for the Greeks, there were 
 material interests in the island that were found occasionally 
 siding with them' against their oppressors. Thus, from a 
 letter of Urban IV. a.d. 1264, we learn that the powers 
 conferred upon the Latin archbishop of Nicosia by this con- 
 stitution were unpalateable to the Latin authorities them- 
 
 "' Mansi, torn, xsiii, p. 578-82, ™ Mansi (as tofore), p.l046. 
 
EXCELLENT PLAN OF INNOCENT IV. 249 
 
 selves, for they are there charged with having supported the 
 Greeks in resisting him.''"' It was, doubtless, owing to the 
 influences brought to bear upon him by that prelate, that 
 Alexander was induced the alter the fairer and more popular 
 settlement of his predecessor. 
 
 Innocent, as we have seen, had made conciliation the 
 watchword of his legates in dealing with the east ; first iu 
 his instructions to Laurence the Franciscan, and afterwards 
 to the bishop of Frascati or Otto. A third envoy of his, who 
 met with more success than either of them, was John of 
 Parma, the well-known general of the Franciscans — after- 
 wards delated for heterodoxy by his laxer brethren to Alex- 
 ander IV. — at whose bidding he resigned oflSce. On the 
 recommendation of Laurence, he was sent by Innocent on 
 a mission to John Vataces, the Greek emperor, a.d. 1249. 
 His saintliness went home to the hearts of the Greeks at 
 once, and won their confidence.'" The patriarch Manuel 
 Caritopulus, a prelate who seems to have deserved his sur- 
 name, was as much interested iu him as the emperor. Ambas- 
 sadors from both were sent off to Innocent, and the common 
 account is that they were robbed on the road and forced to 
 return. But it is undeniable that ambassadors — two of them 
 archbishops, and two lay dignitaries — from Nicsea reached 
 Innocent with definite proposals in some way or other, and 
 that he accepted them ; though his death, and that of the 
 emperor, and of the patriarch as well, happened most unfor- 
 tunately to break off the negotiations, just as, from the 
 sincerity displayed on both sides, they seemed likely to be 
 crowned with success. So much at least is attested by the 
 instructions given by Alexander IV. to the bishop of Orvieto "''^ 
 — sent by him a.d. 1256, as legate to Theodore Lascaris II. 
 son and successor of the deceased emperor — and possibly 
 more is implied ; for it is quite clear that Alexander was as 
 little disposed in his own mind to approve of the terms ac- 
 cepted by his predecessor, where he could help it, as of the 
 policy pursued by him in Cyprus, of which afterwards, as has 
 been stated, he reversed so much. Innocent then, according 
 to his successor, received as many as nine proposals, declara- 
 tions, or demands, from the Greek emperor and patriarch 
 which are these : — 
 
 "» Eaynald. a.d. 1264, u. 66. '« Ap. Eaynald. A-d. 1256, n. 48 et 
 
 "' Fleuiy, E. H. liv. Ixxxiii. 13. seq. 
 
250 PKOJECTS FOK EEUNIOIf, 
 
 1. The Roman see and its pontiff to be recognised as 
 supreme before "' the other patriarchal sees ; and ita princi- 
 pality in the catholic church to be professed. 2. Canonical 
 obedience to be professed to Innocent and those who succeed 
 him canonically. 3. Privilege to be allowed of appealing to 
 the Eoman church should any of the Greek clergy be ag- 
 grieved by their superiors. 4. Free recourse to the Eoman 
 church to be allowed on any points disputed amongst the 
 clergy. 5. Obedience to be paid to any sentences, not adverse 
 to the canons, promulgated by the pope. 6. The first seat in 
 councils, and the first place in subscribing to their decrees, 
 to belong to the pope. 7. In questions of faith, the pope to 
 give his opinion, as he may see fit, before all others ; to be 
 received by all others obediently, provided it contains nothing 
 contrary to the institutions of the gospels or of the canons. 
 8. In all other ecclesiastical matters, or causes relating to 
 persons, whatever the Eoman pontiff decrees to be accepted 
 by all, provided it is not opposed to the decrees of the holy 
 councils. Lastly, the empire of Constantinople to be restored 
 to John Vataces, and the patriarcbates to the Greek patri- 
 archs — the Latin patriarchs to be removed in each case except 
 the patriarch of Antioch, who may retain office for life. 
 
 'Innocent, with the consent of his brethren,' proceeds 
 Alexander, ' expressed to us, then in a subordinate situation, 
 his approval of the foregoing proposals and professions in 
 general . . . hoping that the church which made them, in 
 returning by divine grace to the peace of a mother's embrace, 
 would be led to enlarge both by the free impulse of increased 
 love.' He objected, however, to the qualifications introduced 
 into the seventh of them, which it was plain referred to the 
 addition made to the creed ; the envoys themselves having 
 stated that the Greek church would never assent to any defi- 
 nition by him in council, that could not be proved satisfac- 
 torily from revelation, or the witness of authentic scrijpture. 
 Now, was it reasonable that the Greeks should admit the 
 power of the pope to define matters of faith in other cases, 
 but make exception to it in this one ? ' However,' he adds, 
 ' in order that no impediment or obstacle to the reconciliation 
 of the church might arise from hence, our predecessor con- 
 ceded that in the council about to be held the tenor of the' 
 
 '" ' Prss ' not ' super.' 
 
EXCELLENT PLAN OF INNOCENT IV. 251 
 
 creed should not be changed by any addition — ^unless agreed 
 upon in common, a consummation confidently anticipated by 
 us from restored harmony — but continue to be used by the 
 Greek church in that form in which the council promulgated 
 it, provided always that on the doctrine of the holy Trinity 
 the Greek church is entirely in catholic accord with the 
 Eoman.' 
 
 On the subject of the empire, Innocent undertook to treat 
 of the claims of Vataces with every desire to do him full 
 justice ; but more he could not promise till the Latin emperor 
 had been communicated with and heard. The question of 
 the patriarchates, too, must stand over practically till the 
 meeting of the intended council. Still, in regard of the 
 Greek patriarch of Constantinople, ' Innocent,' says Alexander, 
 ' was willing that he might be esteemed the true patriarch 
 even now ; and that afterwards, in case the city came back 
 into Greek bands, he might resume possession of his chair, 
 and all the jurisdiction belonging to it.' Innocent having 
 committed himself so far to the Greek envoys, it was im- 
 possible for Alexander not to profess willingness to be bound 
 as far; still in his heart he was not one with his predecessor, 
 and before he has done with his legate, he proclaims that his 
 own policy consisted in the simple rule of getting all that he 
 could out of the Greeks and ofifering them in return no more 
 than he was absolutely obliged. ' If you can manage to get 
 the Greeks to assent to other terms, more advantageous and 
 honorable to the Eoman church — more adapted to the work 
 of reconciliation — do not be in too great a hurry to propose 
 the foregoing, still less to accept them. But if you find that 
 you cannot possibly do better, then accept them discreetly, as 
 you may judge expedient, in our name and that of the Eoman 
 church.' Should unforeseen difficulties arise, he may admit 
 any Greeks to make their profession of obedience to the 
 pope by way of instalment ; or if they suggest other points 
 for discussion, which he thinks may be discussed with ad- 
 vantage, he may encourage them to send proper ambassadors 
 to Eome for that purpose. Lastly, should the business seem 
 likely to be concluded on the foregoing terms, he may confer 
 with them on the summoning of a council in those parts by 
 the pope as soon as their distance from Eome, and the bad- 
 ness of the times will permit. Alexander, unfortunately, 
 reckoned without his host ; for if the pope had changed, so 
 
252 PKOJECTS FOB EEUJS'IOJT, 
 
 had the emperor. The bishop and his suite never got further 
 eastward than Bersea in Macedonia; there they were met by- 
 George Acropolita, then governing that province, and by 
 him, in the name of his new master, courteously bowed back 
 out of Greece. 
 
 II. A new and very differently marked period of negotia- 
 tions opens with the return of the Greek emperor to Con- 
 stantinople. 
 
 *It was in the second year of his reign,' says Gibbon, 
 ' while he resided in the palace and gardens of Nymphseum''^''' 
 — wherever that was ; but undoubtedly where the envoys of 
 Gregory IX. exchanged professions of faith with the Greeks 
 sitting in council under Germanus, thirty years before — ' that 
 the first messenger arrived, at the dead of night, and the 
 stupendous intelHgence was conveyed to Michael (Palseologus) 
 after he had been gently waked by the tender precaution 
 of his sister Eulogia.' A thrill of excitement shot through 
 the Greek mind as the news was confirmed. ' So eager was 
 the impatience of the prince and people that Michael made 
 his triumphal entry into Constantinople August 14, A.d. 1261, 
 only twenty days after the expulsion of the Latins. The 
 golden gate was thrown open at his approach. . . . But after 
 the first transport of devotion and pride, he sighed at the 
 dreary prospect of solitude and ruin. The palace was defiled 
 with smoke and dirt, and the gross intemperance of the 
 Franks ; whole streets had been consumed by fire, or were 
 decayed by the injuries of time ; the sacred and profane 
 edifices were stripped of their ornaments ; and, as if they 
 were conscious of their approaching exile, the industry of the 
 Latins had been confined to the work of pillage and destruc- 
 tion.' In the words of Mr. Finlay : Before leaving it, ' they 
 had stripped the copper roofs from the public buildings, 
 melted down every ornament of bronze that remained to be 
 coined into money : rifled the churches of the precious 
 metals : pledged or sold the relics of the saints. '^^^ Such, let 
 it be said in shame and sorrow, had been the regeneratioii 
 of Constantinople in state — we have noticed again and again 
 what it had been in church — by the Latins, How Greek 
 blood, if it had any particle of patriotism or Christianity left 
 in it, must have boiled at the sight of their vandalisms, at 
 
 "* C. Ixii. "5 Byz. Emp. vol. ii. p. 386. 
 
URBAN IV. AND MICHAEL PAL^EOLOGUS. 253 
 
 the memorials of their devotion to the cross of Christ, in the 
 miseries entailed by them on the noblest of Christian cities. 
 Yet, strange to relate, one of the first acts of Michael was to 
 encourage the Pisans,'Venetians, and Genoese, to remain in his 
 capital, and confirm them in their privileges and immunities, 
 in return for their oaths of allegiance to his person. His 
 policy led him to secure their friendship, before risking the 
 antipathies of his own people. The Greek empire, which he 
 had merited so much praise for restoring, had no charms for 
 him, but as enabling him to become the head of a new 
 dynasty, to be perpetuated in his own family. His eagerness 
 to treat with the pope was part and parcel of the same scheme, 
 which must therefoi*fe never be lost sight of in estimating the 
 negotiations that passed between them. As soon as he felt 
 strong enough to be able to do so with impunity, he threw 
 off the mask, and on Christmas Day a.d. 1261, put out the 
 eyes of John Lascaris, his youthful colleague, or more properly 
 rightful sovereign, as son of the deceased emperor, and 
 immured him in the remote fort of Dakybinza for the rest of 
 his reign. For this act he was excommunicated with great 
 justice by his patriarch Arsenius, and refused absolution till 
 he should abdicate. Then it was — we have his own words for 
 it,"^ and to spite the patriarch — that he commenced corre- 
 sponding with Urban IV. Strange that there should have been 
 a pope Urban, as the Greeks recaptured Constantinople : as 
 there had been when the Turks recaptured Jerusalem : as 
 there had been when the first crusade was preached ! Stranger 
 still, that Urban IV., with whom Michael corresponded, 
 should have been patriarch of Jerusalem previously. So the 
 excommunicated emperor, or rather usurper, sends off two 
 monks to the pope, who had only"'' just before been agitating 
 for a regular crusade against him, only just before excom- 
 municated the Genoese for joining him, with letters, which 
 are received with joy because of the professions which 
 they contain — nay, 'the whole Eoman church hastens to 
 thank God for having illumined the heart of so great a 
 prince, to discover the road to catholic truth, by the return 
 
 "» Pachym. iv. 1. "AAA" €i /tjj itap' negotiating for his submission. This 
 
 vixtv ficTavoias BeiTfioi, hWaxoO rStv ix- was A.D. 1262. The first letter from 
 
 K\ri<rio)y eiV£, Kol TrpoffSpa/xoOixaiTairats, Urban in reply to him is dated March 
 
 Kcl nap' iKeimav BtpairevB'fiffOiuti. But A.I>. 1263. 
 Rome never noticed his crime at all, in '" Raynald. a.d. 1262, n. 34 et seq. 
 
254 PROJECTS FOK BEUNION. 
 
 of the daughter to the mother, of the part to the whole, of 
 the member to the head.' What Michael had really dis- 
 covered was, that the pope might prove useful to him in 
 frightening his own clergy into connivance at his wickedness, 
 and preventing the Latins from combining against him in 
 Greece, where they were still powerful. All which the pope 
 most certainly knew full well ; however, he had his own ends 
 as well as Michael, to serve by negotiating ; apd what in 
 reality could he have desired more than to commit Michael 
 irretrievably to the views advanced by Mm ? ' It is in fact 
 what the Eoman church has never ceased to desire, and 
 always strove to obtain ; that the Greek church should be 
 revivified by the milk of her maternal sweetness and ali- 
 mented by the superabundance of her charity ; so that the 
 flock of the Lord, under the government of one shepherd, 
 should receive suitable nourishment, and call upon the name 
 of the Lord with more profit and effect under one orthodox 
 profession.' 
 
 Urban is as diffuse in pointing out the spiritual advant- 
 ages of that unity, which is secured by the subordination of 
 all local churches to their spiritual centre,, the holy see, as 
 Gregory IX. had been to the Greek patriarch some years 
 back ; '" yet stronger testimony to the practical inconve- 
 niences arising from it, than anything to be found in the 
 pages of our own national historians, was afforded five years 
 afterwards by the passing of the pragmatic sanction — one of 
 the severest rebukes ever administered to the court of Eome 
 — by a monarch so pious and high -principled as S. Louis.''* 
 And there were plenty of Franks resident in the capital of 
 Michael, to talk to the Greeks in plain terms of that cele- 
 brated ordinance, and of the innumerable evils which it was 
 designed to check, even if they had never had any experience 
 of them themselves, which Mathew Paris asserts they had, 
 alleging it to have been the one i eason why they had broken 
 with Eome.'^" But Urban had a much more effectual argu- 
 ment in store for Michael, well calculated to make the other 
 go down. ' "We will soon make you see how useful the power 
 
 ™ Above, p. 236.^ _ tir I'^glise nationale de France contre 
 
 "" 'Par laquelle il voulut a la fois I'abiis des impots itablis paries papes, 
 
 garantir la liberie des Elections eccU- et confirmer les privileges obtenus 
 
 siastiques, et arreter la vente des hiv-^-' jusqu'alors.' — Alzog. E. H. 8 223. 
 
 fiees, dont I'usage avait reparu, garaa- "° Above, p. 234. 
 
UKBAN IV. AND MICHAEL PALiEOLOGUS. 255 
 
 of the apostolic see is to princes who are in its communion 
 and good graces. Should any war or disturbance break out 
 among them, the Roman church like a good mother throws 
 herself between them, disarms them, and by her authority 
 compels them to make peace. ... If, then, you will enter into 
 her bosom, she will procure you for the support of your 
 throne, not merely succour from the Grenoese and other 
 Latins, but, if necessary, the forces of all the catholic kings 
 and princes in the world. On the other hand, as long as you 
 do not obey the Roman church and have no devotion to the 
 apostolic see, we cannot permit in conscience either the 
 Genoese or any other Latins to afford aid to you — for your 
 disobedience would iti that case be rendered only the more 
 obstinate ; and the purity of our devoted children might be 
 spoiled by your intercourse with them.' Michael had dwelt 
 upon the innumerable evils entailed on Christendom by the 
 Latin conquests in, the east. Urban retorts that the fault lay 
 with the Greeks who had been disobedient to the pope — that 
 is, they had refused to obey him, as the westerns obeyed him, 
 or as their patriarch. This had been the extent of their 
 delinquency. Urban certainly makes the most of it. Dis- 
 obedience to authority, he shows from the Old Testament, is 
 as the crime of idolatry ; and disobedience to the chiu-ch of 
 Rome had been the origin of all the scandals that had taken 
 place between the Greeks and Latins. ' For if at different 
 times the Latins have attacked the Greeks, they have cer- 
 tainly not done so^ for the sole object of aggrandising and 
 enriching themselves at their expense, but in order to make 
 them understand by suffering the duty which they were un- 
 willing to be taught in other ways. Let religious unity, 
 therefore, be re-established and political peace will follow.' 
 Yet all this time there was war raging in all parts of Italy 
 between Urban and Manfred, one of his own spiritual vassals, 
 whom he was bent on driving from Sicily ; nor had his pre- 
 decessors Innocent IV. and Gregory IX. been at peace for a 
 moment all their lives with the temporal head of the Latin 
 communion, Frederic II. 
 
 Urban seems to have been full of schemes, or fond of 
 paradoxes. As in the previous year he had instructed the 
 provincial of the Franciscans to preach a crusade against 
 Michael with the same indulgences attached to it as against 
 the Turks themselves, so now he sends four ambassadors, all 
 
256 PROJECTS FOE EBUNIOK, 
 
 of them Franciscans, with Simon of Auvergne at their head, 
 to compliment him on his orthodox tendencies, and make 
 spiritual peace with him. In their way they were to bid 
 Villehardouin, prince of Achaia, and the Latins who were 
 with him, abstain from hostilities against Michael in the 
 name of the pope; and when they arrived in his dominions 
 they were empowered to absolve all Grreeks who should sub- 
 mit themselves,^" and allow them to remain among their 
 own people, and communicate with them as before; while 
 clergy submitting themselves were to enjoy the full privileges 
 of the clergy. Could Michael by any means have managed 
 to compare the letter from Urban already described which he 
 received from them, with the letter in fierce denunciation of 
 him to their provincial the year before,'^^ he must have en- 
 joyed the contrast between them as a decisive proof of the 
 success of his policy. They certainly must be read side by 
 side to understand either aright. Michael was not slow to 
 improve on his advantage. Whether owing to remonstrances 
 from the lord of Achaia, or otherwise, we find Urban, A.D. 
 1264, empowering the bishop of Maestricht to preach a quiet 
 little crusade against the Grreeks, who were re-establishing 
 themselves in that priucipality ; ^^^ which he had no sooner 
 done than he got another letter from Michael,"^ addressed to 
 him as ' Father of fathers,' ' lord of our empire,' ' supreme 
 pontiff,' ' blessed pope of ancient Eome,' and informing 
 him that the emperor having been instructed thoroughly in 
 the Latin faith by the bishop of Cortona, a Grreek by birth 
 and education, whom he had summoned from Italy for that 
 purpose some months back, had discovered to his surprise 
 that it was not different, but almost word for word with his 
 own, and in entire conformity with the teaching of the 
 Greek as well as the Latin fathers. Overjoyed at the result 
 of his researches, he has sent the bishop to Eome forthwith 
 to confer with the pope, requesting that the pope will show 
 equal despatch in sending him back to Constantinople with 
 full instructions relative to the work of reuniting the church, 
 as befits him who is the successor of blessed Peter — for whom, 
 and for the cardinals, the emperor has been pouring forth 
 prayers incessantly, that Grod would give them grace to suc- 
 
 '-' ' Inter suos agere, etcumiis com- "'^ Ibid. a.d. 1262, n. 34 et se{j. 
 munieare pennitterent.' — ^Eaynald.A.D. "' Raynald. a.d. 1264, n. 56. 
 1263, n. 37, '" Ibid. n. 60. 
 
URBAN IV, AND MICHAEL PAL^OLOGUS. 257 
 
 ceed in it ; and with whom he will be ready to co-operate by 
 all the means in his power for subjecting all nations, the 
 patriarchates of his own empire included, to the church. 
 Urban could not fail to be touched by such demonstrative 
 language as this, in spite of one or two expressions that he 
 could not have thought perfect ; his reply is dated June 22, 
 of the same year, and the bearer of it was the bishop of 
 Cortona, accompanied by two Franciscans, as additional 
 envoys from him. In it he thanks Michael in his own 
 name and that of his cardinals for the prayers which had 
 been made for them ; congratulates him on the success of his 
 studies under the bishop of Cortona, and praises him for the 
 firm resolution wMch he had expressed in his letter, and 
 orally through the bishop as well, of forwarding the proposed 
 union. But Urban died in about three months from the 
 despatch of his letter; and for any further messages on re- 
 union from Constantinople we have to wait till the conquest 
 of Sicily by Charles, brother of S. Louis, and count of Anjou, 
 A.D. 1266 — crowned king of it and of Naples as he had 
 been at Eome the year before — alarmed Michael for the 
 safety of his dominions again. And now it is that one of 
 the best specimens of the manceuvrings on both sides occurs. 
 Michael must have despatched his ambassadors to Clement 
 IV. soon after tidings of the decisive victory gained by 
 Charles over Manfred at Benevento, February 26, a.d. 1266, 
 reached him ; as the letter of Clement in reply was written 
 Jlarch 4, a.d. 1267. But in addition, it is dated ' Viterbo ; ' 
 at which same place, on the 27th of May following,'^' in the 
 private apartments of the pope, a treaty was concluded be- 
 tween Baldwin II., the Latin emperor displaced by Michael, 
 Charles, king of the two Sicilies, and William, prince of 
 Aehaia, by which Charles on his part engaged to furnish 
 Baldwin with a force of 2,000 knights and their followers, to 
 enable him to invade the Greek empire. 
 
 It is easy to see that this treaty was in contemplation when 
 Clement composed his reply to Michael ; and admirably ex- 
 plains his high-handed rejection of a set of terms accepted 
 by the envoys of Urban in their simplicity, and the inexorably 
 stifif tone of his own. Instead of the disciples of S. Francis, he 
 sends Dominicans this time, telling their general in his instrue- 
 
 '» Finlay, Byz. Hist. vol. ii. p. 449 ; Eohrbacker, E. H. toI. xl^-iii. p. 664. 
 
 S 
 
258 PEOJECTS FOE EEUNION. 
 
 tions,^^^ that he understood from letters and ambassadors that 
 had come to him, that the Greeks were really desirous of re- 
 union ; and hence with a view to try them, he had sent over 
 a profession of faith to be signed by them, which he believed 
 and maintained with the whole Latin church. In that part 
 of his letter to Michael, which Eaynaldus ™ has, for some 
 discreet reason or other, thought fit to suppress, he labors to 
 explain more fully what had led him to do so — still more 
 studiously keeping out of sight what had emboldened him, 
 in plain language, to put the screw on. ' Simon of Auvergne 
 and his three companions ' — he tells Michael — ' who had been 
 sent to Constantinople by Urban, as they could not get all 
 they wished, yet wished to get all they could, came to an 
 agreement at last with you, as it is said, in favour of a docu- 
 ment comprising several articles, which they promised your 
 highness, in all sincerity, they would use all their influence 
 with the apostolic see to get accepted by it.' Had Michael 
 been in earnest, he would have taken care that they should 
 be as good as their words without delay. As it was, three 
 years had elapsed since then ; and it is only when his do- 
 minions are threatened, that his ambassadors are instructed 
 to press for the ratification of those terms by the pope. They 
 had found Clement quite prepared with his reply. First, he 
 asks why Michael had not applied sooner for it. Secondly, 
 whether, if ratified by him, it could be ratified by the am- 
 bassadors, there and then, on the part of the emperor. Then 
 — when they shrank from asserting that their powers ex- 
 tended so far — thirdly, he retorts upon them with great 
 force, that the envoys of Urban had not been accredited with 
 any greater powers than they themselves. ' They had been 
 sent to discuss matters, not conclude them.' Hence, fourthly, 
 he tells the emperor : ' To the petition made to us by your 
 ambassadors for the ratification of the document in question, 
 having examined the tenor of it, and adjudged some things 
 contained it to be neither serviceable nor adapted, but rather 
 injurious and prejudicial, to a matter of that character and 
 importance, we have decided, with the advice of our brethren, 
 after carefully considering the business to which it relates, 
 
 ™ Eaynald, a.d. 1267, n. 72. _ all 6. Vide Martene et Durand, Vet. 
 
 "' Veiled under the words ' et infra.' Script, et Nov. Ampl. Coll. toI. vii. ■ 
 
 A.D. 1267, n. 73 ad f. The sections p. 200 et seq. 
 omitted by him are 4, 5, and almost 
 
CLEMEXT IV. AND GREGORY X. OX THE SCHISM. 259 
 
 not to accede.' By the death of Conradin, the last of the 
 Hohenstaufens, the formidable house of Swabia was ex- 
 tinguished. Italy lay at the feet of a French prince, for 
 ■whom the pope both as a countryman, and as archbishop of 
 Narbonne subsequently by promotion, must have enter- 
 tained unwonted confidence ; hopes of recovering Greece 
 through his adventurous genius were not wanting. Michael 
 had let his opportunity slip ; and could not expect to be let 
 off as easily as he might have been three years back. How- 
 ever, as the terms allowed by the Franciscans have not been 
 preserved, it is useless to conjecture what were the points in 
 them which Clement judged insufficient. Of much more 
 consequence is it, that before examining the profession sub- 
 stituted for them by him, we should bestow some attention 
 on his extraordinary statement in reopening negotiations. 
 
 ' The tenor of your letters addressed to us,' he tells the 
 Greek patriarch, ' reveals the earnestness of your longings 
 for the commendable union of the churches — the Latin and 
 the Greek to wit — undoubtedly so much the more acceptable, 
 as we ourselves are thoroughly in favour of it. . . . This it is 
 for which we supplicate with many prayers, in all the ardour 
 of sincere affection, that the great Corner-stone, who made 
 His holy catholic and universal church one, would deign to 
 assist it rent and divided with schisms, in mercy causing it 
 to unite throughout the world in one orthodox faith.' '^* 
 
 Or again, in writing to the emperor :'^^ ' This it is which 
 we desire with all our heart, and incessantly ask of our Lord, 
 as often as we celebrate mass, that He would vouchsafe to 
 unite His church in all the world. This is what we long so 
 intensely to see, that He would fill in its ruins, repair its rents, 
 build up its walls, encompass it with the protection of His 
 holy angels. Well known to us are the evils that have been 
 for so long entailed on Christendom, by the old and odious 
 quarrel of the Latin and Greek races, exposing themselves 
 divided, and constantly weakened by internecine strife with 
 each other, to the assaults of their common foe, who would 
 never have been able to harm them had they never ceased to 
 be cemented together in love.' 
 
 Or, as his sentiments were afterwards expanded and in- 
 terpreted by Gregory X. : ' We ''^° . . . not without extreme 
 
 "» Martene et Durand, Vet. Script, et Monum. vol. vii. p. 199. 
 "•Ibid. ™ Ibid. p. 217. 
 
 e2 
 
260 PROJECTS FOE KEUNION. 
 
 bitterness beholdingi' the rent of the universal church fore- 
 shadowed in the net of Peter the fisherman, that brake for the 
 multitude of fishes which it enclosed ; we do not say divided 
 as regards its faith — for which He prayed that it might never 
 fail . . ; but notoriously and lamentably divided as regards its 
 faithful members ; the result of whose schism and consequent 
 prostration is that it has been dangerously shattered and shaken 
 to its foundations ; assuredly we cannot labour too earnestly 
 that by His grace who is the Corner-stone, making both one, 
 some good and salutary arrangement may be devised, by the 
 execution of which the church our mother may, in the words 
 of the prophet, enlarge her borders ; having her rents drawn 
 together, her ruins filled in ; her awry parts reformed ; the 
 multitude of her dissentient members joined together in unity 
 of faith, and the bonds of love. . . . This it is for which 
 we pour forth our tears as we pray, that He on whose unity 
 all unity of faith is founded, . . . would both unite His holy 
 catholic church by renewing it, and renew by uniting it ; 
 specially joining together in its bosom the entire Latin and 
 Greek races by sound faith, and solid hope, and genuine love.' 
 If words are to have any meaning at all, it seems impossible to' 
 deny that two propositions are laid down here authoritatively. 
 1. That the Latin and Grreek churches, or, in other words, the 
 races composing them, were divided, and had been for some 
 time divided, to the incalculable harm of both. 2. That the 
 entire church of which the Latin and Greek churches were 
 integral parts — in other words, as far as the materials com- 
 posing it were concerned — was divided, and rent by schism, so 
 as to need reuniting. Formally, as regards its faith, accord- 
 ing to Clement and Gregory, the church is one, and can never 
 be otherwise ; materially, as regards its members, it may be, 
 and has been divided, by its members remaining estranged 
 from each other for ages, without ceasing to be parts of it. 
 
 Nothing had ever been so pointedly laid down before on 
 the dogmatic view of the question. Innocent III. had ex- 
 pressed doubts whether the church of the Greeks was to be 
 considered a church at all ; and certainly the crusaders had 
 not treated it as such in practice ; nor was it easy to under- 
 stand how belief in the dogma of one catholic and apostolic 
 church was reconcileable with the phenomena exhibited to the 
 senses of two churches independent of and estranged from 
 each other. That difficulty was not practically felt before the 
 
CLEMENT IV, AND GREGOEY X. ON THE SCUISII. 261 
 
 crusades ; and it was dissembled for some time longer, till not 
 only the last links of intercommunion were broken off, but 
 all Lopes of reducing the Greeks to submission by force had 
 failed. And then it required to be met openly ; and the alter- 
 native lay between denouncing the Greeks as aliens or con- 
 tinuing to regard them as brethren ; cut off from the church 
 or still members of it, in spite of their feuds with the Latins. 
 To Clement IV. belongs the credit of having unravelled that 
 knot for all ages as well as his own ; and brought the ideal 
 into accord with the actual by insisting on the old and obvious 
 distinction of the formal and material cause ; according to 
 which the chur^ is said to be undivided and indivisible in 
 one sense ; divisible and divided in another. Gregory X., as 
 we have seen, appositely refers to the net of S. Peter that 
 brake, in illustration of the material disruption of the church 
 which the second council of Lyons was held to heal ; and we 
 shall find the same views expressed by Eugenius IV, in the 
 council of Florence.'" Why they have been forgotten, or 
 out of favour since then, is a question into which it would be 
 premature to digress now ; it cannot be because they have 
 ceased to have weight, or become less true. 
 
 Clement IV. was of French extraction. What Gratian 
 and the canonists of Bologna had been to Innocent III. Peter 
 Lombard and the schoolmen of Paris were to him. The 
 theology of the schools is at the bottom of the creed which 
 he sent over by the Dominican general to be accepted by 
 Michael, to which the Greek ambassadors afterwards pledged 
 themselves at the second council of Lyons in the name of the 
 emperor and of his clergy. In one sense indeed it may be 
 called the creed of Charles of Valois, for it was offered at the 
 point of his sword. 'Very remarkable indeed is the solemnity 
 with which Clement insists to Michael on its unalterable 
 character. 
 
 ' The truth of the faith prescribed as orthodox and evan- 
 gelical — most pure, most certain, and most sound — handed 
 down by the holy fathers, defined by the Koman pontiffs 
 in their synods, we have no wish — indeed it would not be 
 proper — to contravene, or allow doubts to be cast upon un- 
 lawfully ; and therefore, though the assembling of a council 
 has been spoken of, and though you have written requiring 
 
 '" Below, c. viii. 
 
262 PEOJECTS FOB KEUNION. 
 
 that a council should be held in your dominions, it is not for 
 discussing or defining in any such sense that we propose 
 holding a council. Not that we are afraid of meeting any 
 one, or have any dread of seeing the holy Koman church 
 outwitted by the sagacity of the Greeks ; but because it would 
 be as indecent as it is wrong and inexpedient to call in 
 question a sound orthodox profession, like the foregoing, con- 
 firmed as it is by so many testimonies from holy Scripture, 
 the writings of the saints, and the sure definitions of so many 
 Eoman pontiffs — for the defence of which, if necessary, we 
 should be ready to undergo martyrdom, not even shrinking 
 fi-om death itself Hence, for the present, we abstain from 
 producing authorities in support of it, though we have as 
 many as we could desire within reach ; but we prefer sending 
 it to you without comment, in its own impressive simplicity, 
 as it has been exhibited to your messengers.' '^^ 
 
 It was but fifty years from the fourth Lateran council, yet 
 the creed contained in ita first canon would not suffice to 
 bind Michael and the Greeks now ; if that creed is proposed 
 to him, it is in a revised form ; and we find additional 
 articles appended to it to be pressed on his acceptance equally. 
 On the relative merits of the two creeds it will be more con- 
 venient to dwell elsewhere. The additional articles, insisted 
 on by Clement, are : 1. That persons sinning after baptism 
 are not to be rebaptised, but may by performing true penance 
 obtain pardon.''^ 2. That there is a purgatory for such as 
 die without completing their full penance; and that prayers, 
 alms, and masses are as profitable for them as for the living. 
 
 3. That such as having been baptised have passed through 
 purgatory, or finished their full penance before dying, are 
 admitted to heaven ; or again, dying in mortal or original sin 
 are sent to hell — not that all will be punished there equally. 
 
 4. That all alike will have to appear with their bodies before 
 the judgment-seat of Christ to give account of their deeds. 
 
 5. That there are seven ecclesiastical sacraments ; of these 
 confirmation is conferred by a bishop. For the eucharistic 
 oblation unleavened bread is used by the church of Eome, 
 whose tenet and teaching it is that in that sacrament the 
 bread is truly transubstantiated into the Body, and the wine 
 into the Blood of our Lord.'^* As regards matrimony, no 
 
 "' Ibid. p. 206. 4tli Lateran canon. 
 
 '" Probably; with reference to the "' As in the 1st Lateran canon. 
 
CREED OF CLEMENT IV. 263 
 
 man or woman may have more than one consort at a time '; 
 but each one on the death of the other is free, bo far, to be 
 married again and again without sin. 6. Finally, that the 
 holy Roman church in virtue of the supreme and plenary 
 primacy and princedom enjoyed by it over the whole catholic 
 church — which in all truth and humility it is conscious of 
 having received — together with the fulness of power, from 
 Christ Himself in blessed Peter, prince or chief of the apostles, 
 whose successor the Roman pontiff is — as it has the credit of 
 having upheld the true faith above all others, so when any 
 questions are raised on doctrine, it ought to define them. 
 All persons aggriev«d in matters cognisable by the church 
 are free to appeal to its judgment. To it all churches are 
 subject and their prelates owe reverence and obedience. To 
 it fulness of power so belongs, that it admits other churches 
 to participate in its cares and solicitudes ; in particular those 
 patriarchal and parochial churches, which it has honored in 
 many cases with special privileges, yet without ever aban- 
 doning its own prerogative, whether in general councils or in 
 any other matters whatsoever.' 
 
 Never had the assent of the east been required previously 
 to such a creed as this ; a good part of it relating to subjects 
 on which there had never been any question at all between 
 the east and west hitherto. On the double procession which 
 came first — on the power of the pope, which came last in it — 
 they had often interchanged views before, and been unable to 
 agree ; but on the nature of penance including purgatory, on 
 the seven sacraments including transubstantiation, when had 
 they ever corresponded or contended for adverse positions ? 
 The sacramental system had been discussed in the west 
 recently with great vigour, but as yet there were many points 
 in it on which there had been no formal dogmatism, on 
 which the schools of SS. Dominic and Francis, in fact, 
 maintained opposite conclusions. ' A new creed twice in fifty 
 years,' we may imagine the Grreeks saying, ' the last never 
 submitted to any council, and including a body of doctrine 
 to which no general council had ever assented, or any pope 
 demanded our adhesion before, surely should have the effect 
 of confirming us in clinging, more obstinately than ever, 
 to our old creed without alteration or addition. The west, it 
 is true, received that creed from us, assented to it, and 
 adopted it ; but it was drawn up in councils which the west 
 
264 PROJECTS FOE REUNION. 
 
 either attended, or has received as general. The creed pre- 
 sented to us in the name of the west has some dogmatic 
 statements appended to it on the sacraments which may be 
 sound enough ; but in what council of the west were they 
 defined, or what were former popes doing, that they never 
 put them forward before ? As to the last clause about the 
 pope, it seems to require us to own him for patriarch as well 
 as pope, which our canons forbid — whatever western canons 
 may say — and to ascribe the power and extent of jurisdiction, 
 which general councils of all the bishops in Christendom, with 
 the bishop of Eome at their head, conferred upon our patri- 
 archs, to him alone.' ^'^ These were the sentiments un- 
 questionably with which the creed of Clement was received 
 in the east. There never was a thought of subscribing to it 
 on the part of the Greeks. As far as they were concerned, 
 the whole negotiation was a simple farce, tolerated by thein 
 under pressure, and upon public grounds, to be played out 
 by Michael as long as it contributed to the safety of the em- 
 pire, without compromising them in any way ; but no longer. 
 He was always appealing to the precedent of John Vataces 
 and the patriarch Manuel, and assuring them that by dint 
 of diplomatising he should get Eome to accept the same 
 terms from him that it had signified its readiness to agree to 
 thetn.'^* Unfortunately for the parallel, Michael was no 
 Vataces, and behind Innocent IV. there was no Charles of 
 Anjou. Still he went on never ceasing to negotiate, never 
 venturing to close with Clement, till the death of the latter 
 A.D. 1268. During the long vacancy which ensued, he was 
 by no means idle. All Latins visiting Constantinople, par- 
 ticularly the clergy, were entertained by him with great 
 kindness: any Franciscans who presented themselves, he sent 
 to the patriarch and his suffragans to be taken to church and 
 join there with them in the chants and other service, and re- 
 ceive the blest bread, the antidoron, at their hands. Only 
 communion was not given them, nor were they petitioners for 
 it."^ John Veccus keeper of the records, and Meliteniotes 
 archdeacon of his domestic clergy, were despatched by him 
 to Tunis after S. Louis, at whose instance the bishop of 
 
 "* Compare the expression of his "' Pachym. Mich.'Pal. v. 10-12, and 
 own sentiments by Pachym. Mich. Pal. see ahove, p. 249. 
 V. 10, ad f. ed. Eekker. "' Pachym.ilfM.Pa?.T.8,ed.Bekker. 
 
CEEED OV CLEMEXT IV. 265 
 
 Albano had already been accredited to Michael by the sacred 
 college, with instructions to resume negotiations on the basis 
 laid down by Clement."' By the death of the king, and of 
 the legate in a.d. 1270, he was allowed a short respite. But 
 Gregory X. insisted on taking the matter up where they had 
 left it, shortly after his election in a.d. 1271, and in reply to 
 a letter of congratulations from Michael, sent over four 
 Franciscans, Eaymond Berenger and Bonaventure of Mugel, 
 Bonagratia of S. John, and Jerome of Ascoli, afterwards 
 Nicholas IV., calling upon him energetically to make good his 
 words, and accept the terms which he had been hesitating about 
 so long. The shortest and best plan would be, to profess his 
 adhesion to the creecl that had been sent him in their pre- 
 sence, and then attend the council afterwards that was about 
 to meet, like any other catholic prince. Should it not be 
 possible for him to do this, another plan would be for him to 
 send ambassadors, either before or during the council, to the 
 holy see, with full power to profess the creed in his name, and 
 that of his clergy and people, and with letters from them, in 
 each case, attesting their willingness to renew the professions 
 that had been made for them in their own persons, when 
 called upon. He would wish to be informed for certain, 
 some time before the council, whether his terms had been 
 accepted ; therefore the sooner his envoys were sent back with 
 a definitive answer the better. Should their return be de- 
 layed, and no reply be made to his propositions meanwhile, 
 he will be obliged to act for the best in his own way.'^* 
 
 Gregory addressed another letter, '•'* simultaneously, to ' his 
 beloved brother in Christ, the patriarch of Constantinople,' to 
 apprise him of the negotiations that were going on, and beg 
 bim to speed them. Should the first plan be accepted, he 
 tells him, it would then be proper for both him and all his 
 suffragans to attend the council about to be held, in con- 
 formity with antient custom, and assist at its deliberations. 
 In his letter of instructions to his four envoys,'^' on the con- 
 trary, he dAvells upon the second plan exclusively, describing 
 to them in what form the letters coming from Michael and 
 his clergy were to be drawn. And drawn they were, when the 
 
 "'MarteneetDurand,Tol.Tii.p.208. 1272. Dated Eome, Oct. 24, a.d. 1272. 
 
 Their letter to S. Louis follows p. 214. . "" Mansi, ibid. p. 49. Martene et 
 
 "» Ibid. p. 223-6. Also Mansi, Diirand, p. 226, without heading, 
 
 torn. xxiv. p. 42-9, and Baynald, a.d, "' Ibid. p. 227. 
 
266 PHOJBCTS FOK KEIINION. 
 
 time came, conformably with his direction s.^^'' He wrote 
 several letters in the same breath to the king of Sicily, to 
 enjoin him to make peace with Michael for the time being, 
 and not to molest his ambassadors on their road, coming or 
 going. '« To save time, he had likewise given his own envoys 
 full power to supply them with passports.'*^ 
 
 Michael had therefore drifted into a position from which 
 there was no receding — no receding at least without offending 
 Grregory, whose friendship was all the more valuable to him, 
 as it carried with it a distrust of his rival Charles. Grregory 
 was courted by Charles, but not enamoured of him, or 
 unable to do without him. A native of Italy, he had been 
 thoroughly trained in the schools of Paris, had visited the 
 Holy Land in company with Edward I. of England, had 
 contributed by his good-will to the election of Eodolph 
 count of Hapsburg, as king of the Romans. As he had not 
 quitted the Holy Land when he was elected pope, so one of 
 the first acts of his pontificate had been to convene a general 
 council to deliberate on the affairs of the east. Michael was 
 well aware that the season for temporising had passed away. 
 He replied to the letter of the pope with warm acknowledg- 
 ments, expatiating on the haste and exertions that he was 
 making on his side,'*' and sending back with it two of the 
 envoys, Berenger and Bonaventure, to testify to the truth of 
 what he asserted. The other two should follow with his own 
 ambassadors as soon as ever his arrangements were complete, 
 which he hoped would be soon. Grregory, reassured by 
 their arrival, and the news which they brought, set out for 
 France, complimenting Michael, when he next wrote,'*^ for 
 his forwardness ; and telling him that ' his last letter had given 
 infinite satisfaction, and stopped the mouths of several per- 
 sonages of distinction in those parts, who, to say the truthj 
 affirmed that all these negotiations meant nothing but artifice 
 and evasion on the part of the Grreeks, and were never des- 
 tined to come off; that, in consequence of the detention of his 
 ambassadors he had frequently been urged to adopt another 
 
 '« Particularly the letter from Mi- '« Eaynald, a.d. 1273, n. 44-9, and 
 
 chael received at Lyons. Mansi, ibid. Mansi, ibid. p. 51 et seq. without date, 
 
 p. 67-74. but Eaynald, n. 47, omits a long pas- 
 
 '« Martene et Duraud, ibid. p. 229- sage supplied by Mansi, p. 52-4. 
 
 33. ™ Eaynald. ibid. n. 50. Martene et 
 
 '" Ibid. p. 233. Durand, ibid. p. 233-5. .-) 
 
SECOKD COUNCIL OP LYONS, 267 
 
 and apparently much more easy course, to which he had 
 refused to listen hitherto, but yet is disposed to allude, that 
 there may be the more inducement for speed on their side. 
 He tells Michael, in conclusion, that the persons of his am- 
 bassadors will be respected on their passage through the 
 territory of his rival. 
 
 This letter is dated Lyons, November 21, in the second 
 year of his pontificate, or a.d. 1273. Within six months of 
 that time, or May 7, a.d. 1274, the second of the general 
 councils held there was opened for business. On the 28th 
 instant, letters were received by Gregory from Jerome of 
 Ascoli and Bonagratia, the two Franciscans who had been 
 detained at Constantinople, that caused him infinite satisfac- 
 tion ; but their contents are not given. And on June 24 
 following, the Greek ambassadors arrived, bearers of letters 
 ,from the emperor, with his seal of gold afiixed to them, and 
 from the Greek bishops. Presented to the pope, they declared 
 that they had come to pay all manner of obedience to the 
 holy Eoman church, to acknowledge the faith professed by 
 it, and his own primacy. Several points relating to their 
 identity, the reception accorded them, and the part taken by 
 them in the council, it will be more convenient to reserve for 
 discussion in a future chapter. According to the Latin 
 narrative ''" of what passed there, the creed in its interpolated 
 form was twice chanted in Latin and Greek after their 
 arrival, and when chanted in Greek the 'Filioque' clause 
 was repeated thrice in one case, and twice in the other. 
 Then in the fourth session, on the octave of SS. Peter 
 and Paul, the pope delivered a short address, in which he 
 affirmed that, contrary to the opinion almost universally 
 prevalent, the Greeks had come thither of their own accord, 
 to make the declaration which they were about to do, and 
 not in quest of any temporal considerations. ' De quo raul^ 
 turn dubitahatur,^ adds his holiness, or the narrator. And 
 Nicephorus Gregory, the Greek historian, asserts in express 
 terms that the one condition that lay at the bottom of this 
 whole treaty for union, was 'that the pope should prevent 
 Charles from making war upon the empire.' '^^ The letters 
 brought by the Greek ambassadors, of course, contained no 
 
 '*' The ' brevis nota ' in Manei, torn, "' Ei n6vov iimoSliv rg ^KtrTpare/f 
 xxiT. p. 61 et seq. yeyoiro tov KopovAov,— Lib. T. c. 1. 
 
268 PROJECTS FOE EEUNIOK. 
 
 such Stipulation; their contents had been prescribed by 
 Gregory beforehand in general; and after these had been 
 translated into Latin and read Out to the council, that of the 
 emperor alone reciting and accepting the creed of Clement 
 in full, one of the ambassadors, the logothete, came forward 
 and made oath as follows : 
 
 ' I, George Acropolita,'" chancellor and imperial delegate 
 .... having been entrusted with sufficient powers for the 
 same, do hereby abjure every schism, and in the name of my 
 master do recognise for the catholic and orthodox faith, the 
 profession of doctrine, fully read out and faithfully translated 
 as it has been, to which I have subscribed. With my heart 
 I accept it, with my mouth I profess it ; as held, taught, and 
 preached in the holy Eomah church, I engage never to 
 deviate from it. . . . Also, in the name of my master, as well 
 as my own, and of my own accord, I allow, recognise, admit, 
 and willingly receive the primacy of the said holy Eoman 
 church as contained in the foregoing profession, for obedience 
 to the sajne. All which I promise and solemnly engage to 
 observe, swearing by his life as well as my own, on the holy 
 gospels now touched by me, so help me God.' 
 
 The Greek prelates — for reasons of their own — designate 
 themselves in their letter by the titles of their metropolitan 
 or archiepiscopal sees, thirty-seven in all, but keep back 
 their names ; and while they make no secret of the opposition 
 of their patriarch to the step which they are taking, or of 
 the hopelessness of their succeeding in it without deposing 
 him, they as explicitly limit their own submission to the non- 
 denial of those prerogatives which in times preceding the 
 schism their predecessors were in the habit of attributing to 
 the holy see.'^" No mention of the creed of Clement occurs 
 in their letter ; nobody is mentioned in the Latin narrative 
 of proceedings as having sworn to it in their name. A 
 duplicate of the oath taken by the chancellor is afterwards 
 given, which is headed ' Oath of the Greeks,' and ends with 
 
 ™ Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 73. But on Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 77. The reply of 
 
 what authority this name is appended Gregory contains hut the faintest air 
 
 to it nowhere appears. — See below, lusion to the first, and none to the last 
 
 p. 729. point. — Ibid p. 79. It is preceded by 
 
 750 . jsrihil eorum denegamuB, quae a reply to Andronicus, son of the em- 
 ante schisma prsestabant patres nostri peror, who is there said to have written 
 his, qui apost«licam regebant sedem, to the pope in the same sense as his 
 sed'Btatim et nos attribuimus.' — ^Ap. father; buthis letter is nowhere given-. 
 
SECOND COUNCIL OF LYONS. 269 
 
 the name of 'John the Eeader;' but it reads more like a 
 profane burlesque than anything else,'*' as he swears not in 
 his own name or that of the bishops or emperor, but in the 
 name of ' God our Lord.' Even Michael cannot end his 
 own letter without adding : 
 
 ' While we confess, approve, accept, and promise to observe 
 all that has been recited, we entreat your grandeur that our 
 church may say the creed in that form in which it was said 
 before the schism, and is so still ; and that we may not be 
 disturbed in the use of our rites that we had before the, 
 schism, which certainly are not contrary to the foregoing 
 profession, to the commands of God, to the Old or New 
 Testament, to the docfi:ine of the holy general councils, or of 
 the holy fathers received by those councils, that have been 
 celebrated under the spiritual domination of the church of 
 Eome. This is no troublesome or unusual request to make to 
 your holiness ; to us it is a matter of great perplexity, on 
 account of the vast number of our subjects.' In the first 
 canon passed by the council we have the only real answer 
 ever vouchsafed to his pe,tition.'''^ 
 
 ' We profess, faithfully and devoutly, that the Holy Spirit 
 proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, not as from 
 two principles, but as from one; not by two, but by one 
 ppiration. This the holy Roman church, mother and mis- 
 tress of all the faithful, holds, preaches and professes stead- 
 fastly, as it has ever done. This is the true and unchangeable 
 teaching of the learned orthodox fathers — Latin and Greek 
 alike. But because some have, through ignorance of the 
 above irrefragable verity, fallen into divers errors, we, for the 
 correcting of those errors, with the approbation of this holy 
 council, condemn and reprobate all who have the audacity to 
 deny that the Holy Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father 
 and the Son, or the temerity to assert that the Holy Spirit 
 proceeds from the Father and the Son as from two, and not as 
 from one principle.' Gregory like Clement had not been edu- 
 
 "' Ibid. p. 77, with Cossart's note, council. The reply of Gregory to 
 
 It is just possible that for ' Dei ' should Michael (ibid. p. 78), ' his dearest son 
 
 be read ' Andronici,' making it the oath in Christ,' &c. is all in a high-flown 
 
 of the emperor's son. More on it be- strain of exultation, and makes no 
 
 low, c. viii. allusion whatever to his urgent request. 
 
 "- Ibid. p. 81. They are rather It is painful to caU to mind the cha- 
 
 ' constitutions of Gregory' — and in fact racter that Michael was, to whom 
 
 beaded as such — than canons of the Gregory so wrote. 
 
270 PROJECTS FOR RKUNlDlSr. 
 
 cated in the schools of Paris for nothing. He was evidently well 
 versed in the commentaries of SS. Thomas and Bonaventure 
 upon the four books of the Sentences of Peter Lombard, and 
 in their own theological Sums as well, and he has accurately, 
 imported their subtle language into his canon. Unfortunately^ 
 it points to a marked contrast in their spirit. Nothing can 
 be more tender or temperate than the tone of the master of 
 the Sentences,''^ and of the angelic doctor,"* in stating the 
 precise points at issue between the Greeks and Latins on the 
 procession of the Holy Grhost ; it is even laid down lovingly 
 by the former, and not among those articles of his to which ex- 
 ception has been made either,''* 'Quod Grseci sensu nobiscum 
 conveniunt, etsi verbis differunt.' 
 
 It is to S. Bonaventure, the seraphic doctor, solely, won- 
 derful to say, that we owe those coals of fire which are heaped 
 on the heads of all those who dissent from the Latin doctrine, 
 pure and simple. S. Thomas died on his way to the council ; 
 and his work against the Greeks, of which more hereafter, 
 was written ten or twelve years earlier. S. Bonaventure was 
 one of the lights of the council; and we are told in the life 
 prefixed to his works that he framfed some of the canons for 
 Gregory, though he must have died before any of them were 
 promulgated, as his death occurred the day before the last 
 session. Whether the many envoys of his order that were 
 sent to Constantinople may have prejudiced him against the 
 Greeks or not, he certainly shows much more temper in argu- 
 ing against them in his commentaries on the Sentences than 
 his great contemporary, and ends by denouncing them as 
 heretics and schismatics, with the barest endurance of the 
 doctrine attributed to them of procession through the Son.'"" 
 In the same way this canon, without noticing that distinction 
 at all, unless glancing at it in what is condemned, is the first 
 
 ™ Lib. i. Disi. xi. enough to be true. ' Turn etiamponti- 
 
 "* Sum. Theol. q. xxxvi. art. 2 and 3. fici operam navavit, permultis deeretis 
 
 "= Usually printed at the end of his conscribendis, quse in eo concilio sapi- 
 
 word, and headed: ' Articuli in quibus entir atque utilitfer edita, deinde in 
 
 magister sententiarum non . tenetur eextum librum decretalium ordino re- 
 
 communitte ab omnibus.' lata sunt.' Now, lib. i. tit. i. c. ' Fideli ' 
 
 _ «« Op. torn. iv. p. 96, on b. i. Dist. of that collection contains 'the first 
 
 xi. of the Sentences, q. i. ad f. on which canon of this council. ' Goncedm- 
 
 more wiU be said further on. His life dum, quod mediante Filio",' is language 
 
 by Peter Galesinus is full of errors ; of his Summa, q. xxxvi. art. 6. 
 
 but what it says on this head is likely 
 
SECOND COUNCIL OF LYONS. 271 
 
 as well as the last upon record to have a damnatory clause 
 attached to it on the question of the procession ; and there 
 will be more strong points of contrast to bring out hereafter, 
 as well as of resemblance, between it and those of the fourth 
 Lateran council which preceded, and of Florence which fol- 
 lowed it. Whether this canon was ever translated or gene- 
 rally made known to the Greeks, we are not told. The account 
 brought home by the G-reeks themselves seems to have been, 
 that the conditions on which they had been admitted to com- 
 munion were threefold. First, that the pope should be com- 
 memorated with the other four patriarchs in the liturgy; 
 second, that it should be lawful for any of the Greeks to 
 appeal to Eome, as fee a higher and more august tribunal ; 
 third, that the primacy of the pope should be universally 
 recognised. ' As regards the addition made by the Latins to 
 the creed,' proceeds the Greek historian,"" ' or any other topic 
 under discussion, there was neither coercion nor dispute, but 
 very great quiet and moderation prevailed so far on the sub- 
 jects between them.' Still, even so, what took place on their 
 return shows what a complete job it had all been on the part 
 of Michael and the few who sided with him. Arsenius, as we 
 have seen, had ceased to be patriarch on account of refusing 
 him absolution for the crime by which he had gained the 
 throne. Germanus, bishop of Adrianople, succeeded to that 
 dignity June 5, a.d. 1267, but only till December of the same 
 year, when he was turned out to make room for Joseph, abbot 
 of Galesion, and confessor of the emperor, whose absolution 
 it was thought would carry more weight with it : and Joseph 
 it was who was patriarch when the ambassadors left for the 
 council. Having absolved the emperor he had large claims 
 upon him, and every attempt was made by Michael to bring 
 him over to his scheme. Palseologus was in the habit of sum- 
 moning his clergy to confer upon it in his presence, hoping 
 to talk them over by degrees. On one occasion his arch- 
 deacpn, Meliteniotes, and Veccus, keeper of the records, who, 
 had both been charged with his last embassy to S. Louis, as 
 the reader will remember, took opposite sides, when Veccus 
 drew the ever memorable distinction, ' Some persons there 
 
 "' Kiceph. Greg. lib. v. c. 2, § 1. And ness of union with Eome : primacy, ap- 
 80 Michael himself averred. ' There peals, aiid commemoration.' — ^Pachym. 
 were but three points in all this busi- Mich. Pal. v. 18. 
 
272 PROJECTS FOB BEUXION. 
 
 are who are both called and are heretics ; some again who are 
 neither one or the other ; and others lastly who are not called 
 hut are, in which class I rank the Italians ; for in heresy they 
 are, though not said to be.'"' Veccus was, for his pains, 
 thrown into prison, but supplied with books advocating the 
 Latin doctrine, and came out a moderate convert. His de- 
 clared opinion of the Latins, however, had touched a chord 
 in the public mind that went on vibrating long after and in 
 spite of his own change. The patriarch Joseph was power- 
 fully strengthened by it at the time in his own views, and by 
 advice of a monk named Job he issued a circular to all his 
 suffragans,'" binding himself by oath never to relax in them 
 — a decision in which the majority concurred. After the 
 departure of the ambassadors, it was agreed between him 
 and the emperor that he should retire provisionally till the 
 council was over, and on their return resign office should the 
 union have been eifected on terms to which he could not 
 assent.'^" During their absence, Michael did all he could to 
 make his scheme popular; but with what success may be 
 gathered from the remonstrance of his high steward, Xiphi- 
 linus, a person of great age and character, who fell at his 
 knees and said: 'Take care, your majesty, lest in endeavour- 
 ing to divert from us a foreign war, you involve us in one at 
 home ; for, even if we assent to your plan of union, it is quite 
 certain that all will not.' '" On their return, in virtue of the 
 engagement entered into by them, as they understood it, the 
 patriarch had to be supplanted and the pope commemorated 
 in the liturgy, both of which measures were carried out. 
 Winter was setting in when they returned. From January 9, 
 A.D. 1275, the name of Joseph ceased to be mentioned in 
 church, and he himself quitted the patriarchal residence. On 
 January 16, Nicholas, bishop of Chalcedon, officiated in the 
 chapel of the palace, when the epistle and gospel were both 
 read in Greek and Latin by the presbyters of the household, 
 and the name of Gregory was given out by the deacon in the 
 proper place as ' supreme pontiff of the apostolic church and 
 oecumenical pope.'^^^ On the 26th of May following, Veccus 
 was installed patriarch.''^' Still neither could he nor any- 
 one else of his party venture to associate themselves in their 
 
 ™ Pachym. v. 12. Comp. the his- "' Ibid. c. 16. "» Ibid, c. 17. 
 
 torical synopsis of the Greet coimcils '" Ibid. e. 18. '"' Ibid, c 23, 
 
 of this date in Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 450 "= Ibid. c. 24 
 et eec[. 
 
SECOND COUNCIL OP LYONS. 273 
 
 ministrations in any way with the papal clergy. Once only 
 it happened, on occasion of an ordination of some of their 
 body, that some Franciscans were allowed to celebrate Divine 
 service in the church of Blachernse,'^* where the palace 
 was. 
 
 Veccus, indeed, in A.D. 1277, ' assembled a synod, and ex- 
 communicated those members of the Grreek clergy, who 
 refused to recognise the pope as the head of the church 
 of Christ;' but 'Nicephorus, despot of Epirus, and his 
 brother John Ducas, prince of Walla,chia, protected the or- 
 thodox,' '^' ' Under their protection the fugitive monks 
 and bishops assembled in synod, and retorted the name of 
 heretic, with the galling addition of apostate: the prince 
 of Trebizond was tempted to assume the forfeit title of em- 
 peror ; and even the Latins of Negropont, Thebes, Athens, 
 and the Morea, forgot the merits of the convert, to join with 
 open or clandestine aid the enemies of Palaeologus.'^*" As 
 his sagacious minister had warned him, so it turned out. 
 Church and state threatened to be broken up in the east 
 by his policy, whatever else came of it. Ecclesiastics were 
 ranged under the three separate names of Arsenius, Grerma- 
 nuB, and Joseph, who had been patriarchs — though the first 
 of them had died A.D. 1273 — besides the fourth party, led by 
 Veccus, who were but a handful, and only kept together by 
 dint of pressure from Michael. It was in vain that he him- 
 self solemnly reiterated the oath taken by proxy for him at 
 the council of Lyons in the presence of the bishops of Turin 
 and Ferentino, envoys from John XXI., and wrote back word 
 by his own envoys that his clergy were ready to subscribe to 
 it as well.''" It was in vain that John received a synodical 
 letter about the same time from Veccus, professing his adhe- 
 sion to the creed of Clement, while he petitioned upon some 
 points for tolerance.^^' In it Veccus admits the double pro- 
 cession, but in rather involved language ; the seven sacra- 
 ments ; purgatory, including prayers for the dead ; transub- 
 stantiation, accompanied with a plea for leavened bread; 
 
 "' Niceph. Greg. v. 2. This cele- synod seems misplaced, 
 brated church had been burnt down '" Gibbon, c. liii. 
 A.D. 1069; and was again in A.D. 1434. '" Eaynald. a.d. 1277, n. 27-29. 
 
 Finlay, vol. ii. p. 36, note. His letter to the pope precedes n. 21 
 
 '" Finlay, ibid. p. 461. Comp. Eay- et seq. and one from Andronicus fol- 
 
 nald. A.D. 1277, n. 40-42, and Mansi, lows n. 29 et seq. 
 tom. xxiv. p. 189, where, however, the ™' Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 183 et seq. 
 
274 PEOJECTS FOE REUNION. 
 
 confirmation as among the Latins, by a bishop ; but with a 
 plea for its administration among the Greeks, as heretofore, by 
 a priest. And he ends his letter with this expressive declara- 
 tion : 'while believing all that the Eoman church teaches, we 
 ought to abide, nevertheless, in our own rit«s unchangeably, 
 that have obtained in our church from the commencement.' 
 Without some such concessions, it was obvious even to Veceus, 
 that there was no hope of getting the Grreeks as a body to 
 assent to it. Michael had intimated the same to the council 
 of Lyons, in the letter contatoing his own adhesion to it. , At 
 home, he stood pledged to his clergy and people,'"' that he 
 would sooner risk a war with the west, than allow the creed 
 with the 'Filioque' clause appended to it, to be imposed on 
 them. On this point, and that of the Greek rite, it would be 
 unfair to say that there had been any equivocation or want of 
 straightforwardness on his part. He had stood out for both 
 all along. Clement IV. and those who followed him were 
 equally bent on refusing them. Innocent V. who succeeded 
 Gregory X., a.d. 1276, and had as cardinal-bishop of Ostia 
 — or still more as one who had been archbishop of Lyons 
 previously — borne prominent part in the council of Lyons; 
 found time, notwithstanding the phortness of his pontificate, 
 to write several letters to Michael, to his son, and to the Greek 
 prelates ;"" and to draw up three different papers of instruc- 
 tions '^^ for the four Franciscan envoys who were to take them 
 on that head. And his orders are imperative, that the 'Filio- 
 que ' clause is not to be omitted on any account in chanting 
 the creed. On rites he seems disposed to be more tolerant ; on 
 other points he bids his envoys get all they can without risk- 
 ing a rupture. But Michael, it must be remembered, had not 
 reiterated his oath as yet ; and when he did so, the year fol-^ 
 lowing, to John XXL, he destroyed his best chance of getting 
 any modifications authorised to the terms embodied in it. 
 After accepting it in his own person, how indeed could he 
 with any face plead for it to be made less stringent ? Hence 
 Nicholas III., after laying him under fresh obligations a.d. 
 1278, by ' chaining the sword of Charles in the scabbard ' once 
 more in the very presence of his ambassadors "^ informs him 
 
 "» Paehym. vi. 16. '" ' The Greek ambassadors beheld 
 
 "° Martene et Durand, as before, him, in the pope's antechamber, biting 
 
 p. 244-52. his ivory sceptre in a transport of fury, 
 
 '" Ibid. p. 253-8. and deeply resenting the refusal to en- 
 
SECOND COUNCIL OF LYONS. 275 
 
 in a letter addressed to him that same year, that he camiot 
 recede one iota from what had been the decision of Innocent 
 two years back. Accordingly, he tells his envoys'" that 'ia 
 respect of what the emperor had asked, that the Grreeks might 
 say the creed, and remain in their rites, as before the schism, 
 his answer is, that unity of faith cannot consist with diversity 
 in those who profess it, whether they recite, chant, or publish 
 it in any other way. Chanting of the creed, in particular, 
 / ought to exhibit a marked uniformity, being so much used in 
 church : and therefore the wish of the Eoman church, after 
 mature deliberation, is that it should be sung uiiiforml)', with 
 the additional clause, by the Grreeks as well as the Latins. 
 As to the other Grreek rites, it will be enough to reply, that 
 the Eoman church intends to deal favourably with the G-reeks, 
 as far as its duty to Grod will permit, and accede to their re- 
 quest in the matter of those rites which it can feel satisfied 
 are not prejudicial to the integrity of the Catholic faith, or 
 derogatory to the canons.' Swear to their engagements they 
 must all of them — patriarch, bishops, and clergy — whether 
 they have been in the habit of swearing before, or not ; no 
 excuse can be admitted from them on that score. 
 
 But before Nicholas could get at Michael, Michael had been 
 worked upon by the adverse party, so far as to withdraw his 
 favour from Veccus f* and it was only to compliment the en- 
 voys on their arrival that he was restored.''^ Veccus in full 
 council retorted upon his opponents by accusing them of 
 having tampered with passages of the Grreek fathers favourable 
 to the Latin doctrine ;''^ and they, in revenge, assured the 
 envoys that the union was a delusion and a mockery, as far 
 as the bulk of the Grreek nation was concerned ; and that 
 only the emperor, the patriarch, and a few more were in favour 
 of it. All which would naturally be reported to Rome by the 
 envoys ; but of that numbers in Rome were convinced long 
 before, as we learnt from Grregory."' Of Michael himself 
 they could report no flinching. And one result of their 
 mission actually was that a.d. 1280 his son Andronicus wrote 
 
 franchise and consecrate his arms.' ™ Ibid. c. 17. Comp. Possin. Observ. 
 
 Gibbon, i;. Ldi. : only he omits to state ad Pacht/m. lib. iii. p. 762-3. 
 
 that it was on this occasion. '" Ibid. vi. 23. Comp. Mansi, torn. 
 
 "' Martene et Durand, as before, xxiv. p. 366-74. 
 
 p. 258-76. "' Paehym. vi. 15 and also 30. And 
 
 "* Paohym. vi. 10. see above, p. 267. 
 
 T 2 
 
276 PROJECTS FOR REUNION. 
 
 to the pope reiterating the oath made in his name at the 
 council ; while Michael furnished them with fresh copies of 
 his own act to the same effect. Still no reply came to the 
 pope from the Grreek prelates or clergy ; nor was any notice 
 taken by them of his order apparently, for chanting the creed 
 as the Latins.''* 
 
 At last the plot of the drama transpired. Martin IV. who 
 succeeded Nicholas a.d. 1281 was a Frenchman by birth ; and 
 one of the very first acts of his pontificate was to excommu- 
 nicate Michael ' the soi-disant emperor '—on ike petition of 
 Charles of Anjou''''^ — as ' a favourer of heretics and schis- 
 matics,' "° whom his predecessors Nicholas, Innocent, and 
 Gregory had been in the habit of designating as their ' dearest 
 son in Christ' — who had certainly risked a revolution to come 
 into their hard terms — and with whom, except in slighting 
 the bishops of Heraclea and Nicaea'*' who had been sent from 
 Constantinople to compliment him on his accession, he had 
 not, as far as appears, held any previous communication 
 himself.'*^ A French pope traced out, and a French pope 
 tore up into shreds the treaty for union ; and at the back 
 of each of them was Charles of Anjou. Michael had some 
 cause to complain, and his adversaries to speak disdainfully 
 of the ways of Rome. Bad as he was, he had been more true 
 to Eome than to his own people ; and as it turned out, he 
 punished Eome, rather than Eome him. Stung though he 
 was by the act of the pope, he kept his temper. He merely 
 ordered his deacon to leave off commemorating the pope in 
 the public service.''^ But while Charles and Martin were 
 negotiating at Orvieto for his overthrow, he plotted with more 
 success with John of Procida for the expulsion of the French 
 from Sicily ; which, whether at his instigation or not, was 
 affected at last by the tragedy of the Sicilian Vespers, A.d. 
 1282. 
 
 So ends this long chapter of negotiations for peace be- 
 tween Rome and Constantinople. It would be difficult, after 
 perusing its history, to look back upon them with any satis 
 
 ™ Eaynald. a.d. 1280, n. 19-22. "^ 'Edictum, quo Palseologus ante- 
 
 "» 'Ad instantiam regis Caroli.' — quam ceneuris percelleretur, officii ad- 
 Jordan, ap. Eaynald. a.d. 1281, u. 26. monitus est, non reperimiis.'— Eaynald. 
 
 "° See the form in Mansi, torn. xxiv. as above. 
 
 P- 104. "» Pachym. ibid. 
 
 "> Pachym. vi. 30. 
 
MICHAEL PALuEOLOGUS EXCOMMUNICATED. 277 
 
 faction, or what must be considered their finale without 
 horror. For who can fail to detect the family-likeness that 
 there is between it and the massacre of S. Bartholomew and 
 the Grunpowder Plot, alas ! of a more enlightened age ? 
 Political intrigues have before and since underlain ardent 
 professions of zeal for the spread of the truth and the peace 
 of the church, and made dupes of many whose disinterested- 
 ness and sincerity saw nothing in them but a holy purpose, 
 and became, by co-operating, the means of improving their 
 character, to some extent, in fact as well as appearance. But 
 Michael could have made a dupe of nobody, high or low, at 
 whatever stage of the proceedings. His motives were trans- 
 parent and never varied. His character and conduct were of 
 a piece throughout, so that he never acted but as might 
 have been anticipated beforehand. He was only pursuing 
 the same policy when he was excommunicated, that he had 
 been pursuing all along, when he had saluted the pope as 
 'lord of his empire,' and the pope him as 'dearest son in 
 Christ.' If he ever deserved excommunication, he deserved 
 it but once, and least of all when it was passed upon him. 
 To hear hvm addressed by the head of the church in language 
 that could not have been exceeded in addressing S. Louis is 
 unreal enough ; to find Aim of all men associated in the first 
 serious negotiation for the reunion of Christendom with its 
 spiritual head is perplexing enough. Theological differences 
 to be reconciled or explained away — ages of heart-burnings 
 between Christians to be healed — in deference to the hopes 
 and fears of a cringing usurper ! For him to have meddled 
 in it at all, whether by invitation or otherwise, is enough to 
 account for its ill-success. And what was it, in effect, that 
 was attempted ? In return for protection against a formidable 
 adversary — more formidable, perhaps, to Michael than to the 
 empire — the Greek clergy were to be got to swear to stricter 
 terms than any that had been propounded to them hitherto, 
 and embracing subjects on which there had been no previous 
 controversy ; and made more and more stringent as the danger 
 became more imminent. In other words, the profession of 
 faith required from them grew with the political exigencies 
 of a crowned adventurer, and beyond what even he could 
 find it in his conscience to insist on their accepting. De- 
 graded as they were, the old Greek spirit was not extinct in 
 them ; and it burst forth the moment it was allowed free 
 
278 PROJECTS FOE EEDNIOIf. 
 
 vent. Triumphant over his foes in the west, Michael died in 
 his bed, December 11, a.d. 1282, in peace. But his spirit 
 had scarce departed, before public opinion rose in judgment 
 upon his acts, and his own son was called upon to give ex- 
 pression to it. ' Andronicus,' says Mr. Finlay, ' eager ^ to 
 efface the stain of his own sinful compliance with the union 
 of the churches, allowed the body of his father to be deprived 
 of the usual funeral honors and public prayers. The empress, 
 Michael's widow, was compelled to abjure the union, and to 
 approve of the indignities offered to his memory, before her 
 own name was inserted in the public prayers for the imperial 
 family. The patriarch Veccus was forced to resign and his 
 predecessor Joseph was reinstated on the patriarchal throne.''** 
 Such were the decrees actually passed in two Constantinopoli- 
 tan synods, either at the end of a.d. 1282 or beginning of the 
 year following: '*' one of them presided over by Athanasius, 
 patriarch of Alexandria; the other by George of Cyprus, 
 afterwards patriarch in the room of Joseph. So intense 
 and instinctive was the reaction, that on January 2, a 
 solemn reconciliation took place of the church of S. Sophia. 
 Holy water was sprinkled on the porticoes and arcades, the 
 galleries and columns outside, and on the images of the 
 saints within. Even the spectators asked to be purified on 
 their part as well. All the laity who had adhered to the 
 union were sent to the monks for their penance. Those 
 who had participated only so far as to attend the offices, or 
 received blessed bread, were treated with indulgence; but 
 those who had gone so far as to communicate, with some 
 rigour. Unionist bishops and clergy were handed over to 
 the patriarch for theirs. And a decree was read publicly in 
 his name, ordaining that all ecclesiastics should be suspended 
 from office for three months ; and all laymen have penance 
 imposed on them according to the measure of their concur- 
 rence. The two archdeacons, Meliteniotes and Metochites, 
 who had as priests gone to Eome from the late emperor, and 
 there assisted at the mass of the pope,'*^ though the Fran- 
 ciscans in Constantinople had attended the mass of the patri- 
 
 J" JBys. Emp. vol. ii. p. 465. to whom they were sent — John XXI. 
 
 '*' Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 494-500 and — ^was dead when they arrived. They 
 
 p. 501-4 respectively. And on their were bearers of the letter of Michael 
 
 exact date more in Mausi ad Eaynald. given by Eaynaldus, a.d. 1277, n. 21 
 
 A.D. 1284, n. 44. et seq. See above, note to p. 273. 
 
 ™ But, as matter of fact, the pope 
 
MICHAEL PALiEOLOGUS EXCOMMUNICATED, 279 
 
 arch Joseph equally, were to be deposed for ever. With equal 
 inconsistency, three days after, on the eve of the Epiphany, 
 ■when there was a solemn benediction of the fonts, and dis- 
 tribution of candles at S. Sophia, it was remarked that blest 
 tapers were given to the Latins, as well as the Greeks, attend- 
 ing that ceremony. ' The emperor,' adds the historian,"^ 'was 
 quite indifferent to what they did, as long as it stopped their 
 quarrelling amongst themselves.' 
 
 "' Pachym. Andrcm. i. 6. 
 
280 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 PROJECTS FOE KEUNION. — TO THE COUNCIL OF BASLE. 
 
 This chapter, like the preceding one, will be made more in- 
 telligible by subdividing it into two periods : one, terminating 
 with the return of Gregory XI. from Avignon, where the popes 
 had been residing for seventy years ; the other, with the cove- 
 nants entered into with the Grreek ambassadors by the Basle 
 fathers, out of which the council of Florence grew. 
 
 I. During the first period, as might have been expected, a . 
 great stagnation succeeded to a great reaction, in the inter- 
 course between Eome and Constantinople. Before time had 
 calmed their excitement, or circumstances drawn them to- 
 gether again, the distance that separated them was increased, 
 and communications rendered more and more unfrequent on 
 that account, began in addition to be of a more formal cha- 
 racter, in proportion as their practical importance to each 
 other diminished. Still they were so far not barren, as to be 
 accompanied by a new phenomena, which no former age had 
 witnessed, and of which, therefore, some sort of notice is 
 necessary : that of individual conversions of some Greeks of 
 high parts and character to the Latin doctrine. Of these 
 Veccus, if he is not the first, is at least the most conspicuous 
 instance. His conversion, it cannot be denied, took place 
 under some pressure, and had the effect of procuring his dis- 
 charge from prison, and his elevation, after the council of 
 Lyons, to the patriarchate. On the accession of Andronicus, 
 however, when opposite views became popular, he proved his 
 sincerity. He was first deposed, then exiled for his opinions : "' 
 at length, for a bitter attack upon those who differed with 
 
 "' Pachym. Andron. i. 11. 
 
INDIVIDUAL COISTEESIONS. 281 
 
 him,^'' he was imprisoned in the fort of S. Gregory, where 
 he remained till his death, a.d 1298, after- spending fourteen 
 years there in close confinement. According to his own 
 statement, his conversion was due to the writings of Nice- 
 phorus Blemmides, a theologian of some merit, and high- 
 minded enough to have declined the patriarchate, flatteringly 
 offered to him by Theodore Lascaris II. in a.d. 1255. But 
 the work of Blemmides''" was occupied solely with the 
 question of the procession ; and, according to him, the true 
 doctrine was, 'procession through the Son.' To speak of 
 procession from the Father and the Son was, from his point 
 of view, allowable ; ^ut, properly explained, it meant no more. 
 Veccus himself adhered rigidly to that opinion. It was the 
 extent of his conversion. He never seems to have com- 
 municated with the Latins, or to have given in to their com- 
 mands about the creed. What he said, when put on his 
 defence with archdeacons Meliteniotes and Metochites in 
 the banqueting hall of Alexius, before the emperor and his 
 court, as exactly represents his own opinions, and the opinions 
 of those who held with him, as it is full of truth. 
 
 ' If you want to know the absolute theology of the case, and 
 what doctrine it is which we believe with the heart and pro- 
 fess with the mouth, that it is, I reply, which every theologfian 
 holds, and in which we ourselves will abide to our last gasp ' 
 — meaning, of course, that of the eastern creed. ' But if you 
 wish to know that of the fathers as well, which we say is not 
 contrary to the creed or summary of the faith, but rather a 
 development and elucidation of the articles contained in it, 
 we find the Holy Spirit spoken of in their writings as sup- 
 plied, bestowed, sent, come forth, from the Father through 
 the Son ; or, as in some passages, proceeding from Him.' '" 
 And none of the Greek converts ever advanced really further. 
 To what, then, was their conversion, so far as it went, owing ? 
 In part, doubtless, to the fanaticism of their countrymen, 
 whose coarse narrow reprisals must have disgusted every re- 
 fined mind thoroughly on all occasions ; but in part, also, to 
 the influence of the Latin schoolmen. To be sure no nation 
 ever had more cause for hating another cordially than the 
 
 '»• Pivchym. Andron. c. 35. emperor. They are priDted in Eay- 
 
 "» In two books — one dedicated to naldus after the events of a.d. 1256. 
 
 Jacob, archbishop of Bulgaria, the "' Pachym. Andron. i. 36. 
 
 other to Theodore Lascaris II., the 
 
282 PEOJECTS FOE EEUNION. 
 
 Greeks the Latins ; and yet there were numbers always on 
 both sides that must have remained good friends. They were 
 intermarried, were trading, were living in hourly intercourse 
 and close proximity with each other ; and as fellow-Christians 
 all must have felt themselves equally threatened by a common 
 foe. Then the more educated they were — and, as a body, 
 the Greeks had never ceased to be superior to the Latins in 
 that respect — the more they learnt to regard their quarrel as 
 a common calamity, due to faults on both sides, that wanted 
 healing therefore, not exaggerating. The love of truth is a 
 powerfiil antidote, happily, to the desire of revenge, even 
 where the injury has been more' than personal. We cannot 
 help admiring men who have distinguished themselves in 
 any way by their discoveries in science, or services to their 
 fellow-creatures in general, even though we ourselves may 
 have been slighted or ill-used by them. In the same way, 
 for those Greeks who were intellectually inclined, and in- 
 terested in the progress of science and literature, it must 
 have been morally impossible not to have felt drawn to the 
 west, where there was so much mental activity, and mag- 
 nificent speculation, and competition in every department of 
 knowledge — almost extinct elsewhere — going on. And there 
 was this further charm for the Greeks in the method of the 
 schools : that they saw their own works immortalised and 
 completed in it — 
 
 Graecia capta feriim victorem cepit, et artes 
 Intulit agresti Latio. 
 
 G-reece was for the second time moulding the mind of Eome — 
 
 Vos exemplaria Grseea 
 NocturnA versate manu, versate dining — 
 
 was the cry of the Christian, as it had been of the pagan, 
 schools of the eternal city. What Paneetius had been to 
 Cicero for his books of the Offices, that S. John Damascene 
 had been to Peter Lombard for his books of the Sentences ; 
 and now it was on Peter Lombard that the subtle and 
 seraphic, angelic and irrefragable doctors were spending their 
 whole lives in commenting, side by side with the works of 
 Aristotle — ' the philosopher ' as he was to them, beyond any- 
 one else. What learned Greeks were there that could look 
 on without emotion, or without haviag their family pride 
 
INDIVIDUAL CONVEKSIONS. 283 
 
 touched ? Far from obscuring it, controversy tended to raise 
 their estimation, if anything, in their own eyes. If ever 
 they looked into the work of S. Thomas against themselves 
 their national pride would he flattered still more by finding 
 that so far from undervaluing the conclusions of their revered 
 fathers, his aim is to prove the Latin doctrine solely from 
 Greek authorities. If they looked into Dun Scotus, they 
 would find him saying, that to accuse S. John Damascene, 
 SS, Basil, Gregory of Nazianzen or Nyssen, or Cyril, of heresy, 
 would he as audacious as to accuse SS. Jerome, Augustine, 
 Ambrose, Hilary, and others of the same stamp amongst the 
 Latins. Or, lastly, if the paper drawn up by Humbert de 
 Eomanis, another learned Dominican, by order of Gregory X. 
 for the use of the council of Lyons, ever came into their 
 hands, they would read eloquent outpourings in it of a larger 
 and more comprehensive spirit than either, which, had it been 
 acted upon on both sides honestly, could not have failed to 
 have achieved a holier and more lasting peace by far than 
 had ever yet been negotiated — valid for all future ages alike. 
 But to this topic we shall have to recur again. There is one 
 more reason which may be given for individual conversions ; 
 which is, that neither Greeks nor Latins were capable of any 
 more collective efforts for some time, as we shall see. An- 
 dronicus II., the son of Michael, was occupied during the 
 whole of his long reign in healing the breaches which the 
 conduct of his father had caused amongst the Greeks them- 
 selves, degrading and unsettling their ecclesiastical organisa- 
 tion to the last degree, in which work he was not likely to be 
 let alone by the west. If he was never excommunicated, in 
 point of fact, by any pope, his dominions were threatened by 
 more popes than one. The marriage of Charles of Valois, 
 brother of the French king Philip IV., to Catherine of Cour- 
 tenay created pretensions on his part to the empire of Con- 
 stantinople, which were warmly supported by Boniface VIII.''* 
 Benedict XI. so far favoured them, that he wrote to tell 
 Charles a. d. 1304, that regard for the faith alone should 
 induce the apostolic see to assent to the project of a special 
 crusade for enforcing them with unusual alacrity ; but, for 
 the present, he would defer preaching it."* Clement V. 
 advocated it with equal eagerness a.d. 1306; still it never 
 
 '« Finlay, voL ii. p. 484. '" EaynaW: a.d. 1304, n. 28. 
 
284 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION'. 
 
 came off."^ Eetribution for the Sicilian Vespers indeed, so far 
 as Michael may be supposed to have been concerned in them, 
 fell heavily upon Constantinople. Their ultimate result was 
 to divide the kingdom of the two Sicilies for several genera- 
 tions, and leaving Naples in the hands of the House of Anjou, 
 to subject Sicily to that of Arragon. But in the twenty 
 years' war that followed them, a body of troops— principally 
 Spaniards— was formed in Sicily, whose presence, when peace 
 was re-established a.d. 1302 between the two kings, in- 
 spired even the monarch for whom they had been fighting 
 hitherto, with alarm. Frederic therefore sought employ- 
 ment for them in the east; and under the name of the 
 Catalan grand company, they passed over to Constantinople, 
 with Eoger de Flor as their leader, to fight for the empire 
 against the Turks. Their conduct, as might have been ex- 
 pected, was such as to well entitle them to be called the 
 Spanish crusade. They behaved exactly as the Normans and 
 Germans, French and Venetians had done before them. They 
 first made proof of their bravery by expelling the Turks from 
 the western provinces of Asia Minor ; and then of their law- 
 lessness, by plundering and enslaving its Christian inhabi- 
 tants. For twelve years there was war between them and 
 the Greek empire which they had come to assist, and ended 
 by ruining more hopelessly — because there was so little life 
 left in it — than any former crusade. All Europe had now 
 taken part in undoing the Greek; and from the Latins of 
 the farthest west literally came the finishing stroke. Twelve 
 years before the arrival of the Catalans in the eastern metro- 
 polis, the fall of Acre extinguished the dominion in Palestine 
 of the crusaders proper. Antioch, as it had been the first to 
 be created, so it was the last of the Latin principalities to 
 fall. Its metropolis, indeed, lapsed to the Saracens A.D. 1268. 
 There had been a week of crusades in general; and there 
 had been a week of Bohemonds at Antioch in particular. 
 The seventh succeeded his father May 11 A.d. 1275, as a 
 minor ; and the bishops of Tortosa and Tripoli disputed for 
 the honor of his guardianship. It ended in the young 
 prince ejecting the bishop of Tripoli from his own cathedral, 
 confiscating all that belonged to him, and at length attack- 
 ing him in his own house at Tripoli with a combined force 
 
 ™ Eaynaia. a.d. 1306, n. 2. 
 
LAST ACTS OP THE CRUSADEES. 285 
 
 of Christians and Saracens. In return, he was of course ex- 
 communicated by the bishop, and had a severe rebuke ad- 
 ministered to him by the pope — Nicholas III. — who threatened 
 to despatch all the military orders against him.'^^ Yet 
 Bohemond reigned in Tripoli till his death, a.d. 1287. Two 
 years afterwards his capital was rased to the ground by the 
 sultan of Egypt, whose son, profiting by the treaty concluded 
 A.D. 1290 between his father and the kings of Arragon and 
 Sicily,"^ was enabled to do the same by Acre the year follow- 
 ing. Acre, when it fell, is represented to have been a de- 
 plorable sink of abominations. All the dregs of the crusaders 
 were collected there from all quarters, with very few redeem- 
 ing exceptions ; and i* was frankly confessed by contempo- 
 raries, as Kaynaldus has it,'^' that ' it was better for the land 
 moistened and consecrated by the blood of Christ, to fall into 
 the hands of the Saracens, than be disgraced any longer by 
 the crimes of His worshippers.' Humbert, the Dominican 
 general, in the first part of the work written by him for the 
 edification of the second council of Lyons,''* not twenty 
 years before, sought in vain to stem the reaction that had set 
 in against holy wars. Numbers objected against them, he 
 admits, as alien from the spirit of the Gospel of Christ, and 
 for other reasons, more particularly because such wars seemed 
 contrary to the will of God, owing to the disasters that befel 
 them by His permission.'^'' 
 
 True to their acquired antipathies, even in death, the 
 crusaders could not resist expending their last gasp, as it were, 
 in attacking the Greeks. The conquest of Ehodes by the 
 knights hospitallers of S. John of Jerusalem was one of the 
 principal events of a.d. 1310. 'They had settled at Cyprus,' 
 in the words of Mr. Finlay,'"" ' after they had been expelled 
 from Acre, but were soon discontented to remain vassals of 
 the king of Cyprus. . . . They therefore solicited permission 
 from the pope to turn their arms against the Greeks. His 
 holiness applauded their Christian zeal, and bestowed on 
 them innumerable blessings and indulgences, besides 9,000 
 ducats to aid their enterprise.' As Clement could not de- 
 spatch a fresh crusade against the Greek empire from Europe, 
 
 '"^ Eaynald, a.d. 1279, n. 49, et seq. '" a. d. 1291, n. 5. 
 
 '"" ' Ce myst&re d'iniquitA a &ti long- ™' Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 109, et seq. 
 
 t«mpsinconnu: mais I'aete authentique '" P. i. c. 11-17. 
 
 en a it& mis au grand jour de noa ""> £ffz. Emp. vol. ii. p. 509. 
 temps.' Eohrbacker, vol. xix. p. 313. 
 
286 PROJECTS FOE KEUNIOK. 
 
 he may have rejoiced all the more to find any remnants of 
 the old crusaders willing to attempt the conquest of any part 
 of it in their way home ; but it may have been well, as it 
 turned out, for the knights hospitallers equally to have found 
 a secure resting-place for themselves so far off, just as the 
 council of Vienne met under the same Clement two years 
 afterwards, to sit in judgment upon their brethren the knights 
 templars. They were the victims expiatory of the crimes of 
 the crusaders ; and with Clement V.,»<" who passed sentence 
 on them, commenced the captivity, that is, the self-inflicted 
 banishment to Avignon, for seventy long years, of the papacy. 
 Clement bore a name, like that of the Urbans,^''^ destined to 
 be associated with events of a very marked character. It 
 was a Clement who insisted on forcing a creed upon the 
 Greeks, which may be said to have stereotyped the breach 
 between them and the west from that day to this. It was a 
 Clement who carried Eome captive to Avignon, and sup- 
 pressed the templars. It was a Clement under whom Pro- 
 testantism assumed at Spires its distinctive name, and at 
 Augsburg its distinctive creed : and it was a Clement, finally, 
 who suppressed the Jesuits. In the same way, it was the 
 first Nicholas who commenced agitating in the west against 
 Constantinople a.d. 867 f°^ and the fifth and last Nicholas 
 who beheld it lost to Christendom a.d. 1453, as it is still. 
 The conduct of the emissaries of Leo IX. towards Michael 
 Cerularius, and the conduct of the emissaries of Leo X. 
 towards Luther, led in one case to what is called the Grreek 
 schism, in the other to the reformation ! Strictly speaking", 
 
 ™' On his coronation, -whicli took enasfomicationeaodi'biles, Romiiliiirlje 
 
 place at Lyons, accompanied by all relict^, ATenionem confagit, ubi qiianto 
 
 manner of ill-omened incidents — ' Le liberius, tanto apertius et impudentius 
 
 pape renversi de cheval, la couronne vias suae simonise et prostitutionis ex- 
 
 d^tachie de la t^te, &o.' — Kobrbaeker, posuit,peregrinosqueetperversos mores 
 
 vol. xix. p. 500. Moroni, Diz. Eccl. calamitatum inductores in nosti'am 
 
 vol. iii. p. 171, saysL ' In questo modo GaUiam invexit; rectisque nsque ad 
 
 fa trasferita neUa Gallia, in grazia del ilia tempora moribus fragalibus dis- 
 
 re Filippo IV, la residenza de' Romani eiplin4 instante, nunc vero luxu pro- 
 
 ponteflci, con estremo stupors di tutto digioso, usque adeo solutam ut merito 
 
 r orbe cattolico, con grave indignazione ambigere possis utrim res ipsa auditu 
 
 dell' Italia, che nelle altre calamita mirabilior sit, an visii miserabilior.' — 
 
 deUa ehiesa vedeva nuove tempests Nichol. de Clemang, quoted by Baluz, 
 
 apparecchiarsi.' This may serve for the Frsf. ad Vii. Pap Aoen. p, 5. 
 
 Italian view of it, and for the French ™^ See above p. 253. 
 
 view : ' Ex illo plant suam eladem im- '"' Above, note to p. 15. 
 minere prsenosse debuit, ex quo, propter 
 
LAST ACTS OF THE CRUSADEBS. 287 
 
 there was no ecclesiastical intercourse between Rome and 
 Constantinople from the , death of Michael to the death of 
 Clement. It was one of those breaks in which, as we should 
 say, diplomatic relations were suspended, but war was never 
 actually declared. 
 
 Both sides recoiled violently to as great a distance from 
 each other as they were before; but they were too much 
 occupied at home with their own aSairs to have time for 
 anathematising or otherwise attacking each other. From 
 Nicholas IV., who had visited Constantinople as Jerome of 
 AscoU, and was often occupied with eastern affairs in other 
 quarters as pope, not a word, strange to say, seems to have 
 dropped on the conduct of the Grreeks. Two bulls of Boni- 
 face VIII. may be thought to touch the question between them 
 and the Latins directly — as, perhaps, they were designed to 
 do — but practically they never made the least difference in 
 the views with which negotiations were conducted in future, 
 when it was convenient to resume them. The first was the 
 celebrated one, so well known as beginning with the words 
 ' Unam sanctam,' which was levelled against the pretensions 
 of Philip the Fair, king of France ; and asserts the inherent 
 right of the spiritual power to appoint and sit in judg- 
 ment on the temporal power, without depending on it in the 
 smallest degree. This, as abbe Eohrbacker has observed, is 
 all that is formally defined in the bull. In the course of the 
 argument, reference is made to the position of the Grreeks — 
 that is, on the hypothesis that they really held what is at- 
 tributed to them — 'That there is one holy catholic and 
 apostoHc church we are compelled, as being a matter of 
 faith, to believe and maintain. . . . This is that tunic of the 
 Lord without seam, which was not divided, but obtained by 
 lot. Of this one only church therefore, both the body is one, 
 and the head one ; for two heads would be a monstrosity — 
 Christ and the vicar of Christ to wit ; Peter and the succes- 
 sor of Peter. . . . Whether they be Greeks, therefore, or any 
 others, who deny their having been entrusted to Peter and 
 his successors, they must admit of necessity that they are not 
 of the flock of Christ, according to the words of our Lord in 
 S. John, who says that there is one fold and one only shep- 
 herd.' «»* 
 
 "'Published Oct. 30, i.D. 1302 — for the remark of Eohrbacker, rol. xi^. 
 vide Eaynald. a.d. 1302 n. 13 ; and p. 473. 
 
288 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION. 
 
 Our Lord, of course, the Greeks could have replied, spoke 
 not in the present, but in the future tense ; '"^ and that garment 
 of His— the tunic — was not an outer but an under garment ; 
 and to the primacy of the see of S. Peter they had never 
 really demurred. Besides, had not some predecessors _ of 
 Boniface instanced the net of Peter that brake, in illustration 
 of the division between themselves and the Greeks ? *"' 
 
 The other bull, erroneously attributed to his successor 
 Benedict XI. '" is more remarkable for the facts which it 
 discloses than for any new principle wliich it enunciates 
 —for what was new in the days of Innocent III. was old 
 now — runs as follows : 
 
 ' The holy Eoman church — which by Divine appointment 
 has a princedom of ordinary power over all others from God, 
 as mother and mistress of all the faithful people of Christ — 
 has instituted four patriarchal sees, of which, after the Eoman 
 church itself, it willed that of Constantinople to have the 
 first, that of Alexandria the second, that of Antioch the third, 
 and that of Jerusalem to have the fourth place ; and has 
 decorated them with many prerogatives, honors, and privi- 
 leges ; whence it is by so much the more necessary to make 
 carefal provision in the event of any vacancies occurring in 
 them, on account of their exalted dignity, as it would be 
 dangerous were such provisions defective.' 
 This is the exordium : these are the facts — 
 ' Hence, after mature deliberation with our brethren, it has 
 occurred to our consideration, amongst other things, that all 
 the cities of those patriarchal sees have either been destroyed, 
 or occupied by infidels, or are held by schismatics ; and their 
 chapters or cathedral bodies and canons are dispersed either 
 outside such cities, or in other countries, or places remote 
 from such cities ; whence it happened, as experience has re- 
 cently taught us, that when the church of Constantinople 
 was vacant by the death of Peter, its patriarch of happy 
 memory, the election there of a new pastor was celebrated by 
 a single canon only : the other canons being all absent in 
 distant lands; but the elect, however, willingly and spon- 
 taneously resigned into our hands any right that he had 
 
 "" Kc^yevSiacTaiidaTroliuriiifhTioiivliv. elect. It is dated the seventh year of 
 
 S. John X. 16. his pontificate, whereas Benedict XL 
 
 "'' Ahoye, p. 260. only sat one year. 
 "" Extrav. Commim. lib. i. c. 3. De 
 
BULLS OF BONIFACE VIII. 289 
 
 acquired by the said election.' Nobody can dispute that such 
 a state of things was peculiar. * Wherefore, by advice of our 
 said brethren, and in the fulness of our apostolic authority, 
 we ordain, that as long as these cities are or shall be subject 
 to the dominion of schismatics or infidels, or shall be held 
 by them, the canons of those patriarchal sees, wlienever any 
 one of them shall be vacant, may in no way proceed to elect 
 .... a patriarch, till it shall have been brought under 
 cognisance of the apostoKc see, all privileges and constitu- 
 tions to the contrary notwithstanding.' In other words, the 
 appointment to them from henceforth was reserved to Rome^ 
 
 Pantaleon Justiniani, a noble Venetian, was Latin patriarch 
 of Constantinople -when the city became Greek again. He 
 was the last to exercise any functions as such, and he died 
 in Italy.*"* The Peter of whom mention is. here made was 
 appointed by Honorius IV. On his death, Leonard, rector of. 
 the church of S. Bartholomew at Venice, was nominated' 
 by Boniface, and given the archbishopric of Candia for his 
 support and residence. After him came Nicholas, who got 
 the see of Negropont from Clement V. for the same purpose, 
 and transmitted it in perpetuity to his successors.^"' In the 
 long list of Latin patriarchs of Constantinople, there is not 
 one name, till we come to Bessarion, of which we can hear 
 any good. 
 
 In addition to those two bulls of his own, it must be re- 
 membered that the compilation called the sixth book of the 
 Decretals was due to Boniface ; and that at the head of it is 
 placed the first canon of the second council of Lyons, as of 
 the essence of the catholic faith. 
 
 It seems strange to pass from Boniface to the crusades 
 again. But there was one man in Europe, and a Venetian 
 too by birth, at length aHve to the madness that had been 
 committed in taking the life out of the Greeks, and who was 
 full of a scheme for getting them to join the Latins in a 
 commercial and military crusade against the common foe. 
 It was embodied in a work of curious research, and large 
 views, and mysterious title — Seer eta Fidelium. Grvxyls — of 
 which a splendid analysis has been given by the late Sir 
 
 ™ Art de Vknfier Us Dates, vol. iv. refer to Du Cange, Hist. Constant.. 
 p. 109 (ed. Paris 1818, 8to). Hence lib. vii. n. 11. 
 the editors end their list with him. "" Fleury, liv. xcii. o. 9, 
 For the mere titular patriarchs they 
 
 U 
 
290 PEOJECTS FOK EEUNIOK. 
 
 F. Palgrave''" — and was referred by the pope to whom he. 
 confided it — John XII.— to a select commission. But the 
 opportunity had passed away, or rather it had been misused, 
 for Eome as well as Constantinople. They had crippled 
 themselves in assailing each other — one was fast crumbling 
 to pieces at home, the other experiencing its first shock in 
 exile. Marino Sanuto proved the means of reopening com- 
 munications between them, and that was all. In a letter 
 addresed by him to Andronicus, he says he had been at the 
 courts of Eome and France about his plan, and had learnt 
 from some religious coming from Constantinople, particularly 
 the bishop of Kaffa, the favour with which it had been re- 
 ceived by the Greek emperor. 'Hence I offer myself,' he 
 adds, ' to labour to the best of my ability for this union of the 
 churches, and peace and concord, with the holy Eoman 
 church, with Charles of Valois, and with any other persons 
 whom you may think proper. I have explained myself on 
 this head still more fully to his lordship brother Jerome, 
 bishop of Kafifa, who will report all to your majesty by word 
 of mouth.' '" Kaffa was conveniently situated for messages 
 between Eome and Constantinople, as being a sea-port in 
 the Crimea to the south-east; its prelate would naturally 
 pass through Constantinople to pay his visit of ceremony to 
 the pope ; and there were other Latin bishops in the Crimea 
 from time to time similarly employed, as we shall see. 
 Sanuto tells Andronicus in a subsequent letter, that he had 
 left no ston§ unturned to induce the Latin princes to lay 
 aside their animosity for the Greeks, and join with them 
 heartily for the common good. And John XXII. corresponded 
 with Eobert king of Naples on the same subject,*'^ telling 
 him that ambassadors were said to have reached the French 
 king from Andronicus, testifying the desire of the latter to 
 come to terms with the west. But the west was sick to 
 death of crusades, and not sufficiently advanced to appreciate 
 the real merits of the scheme which Sanuto proposed under 
 that name. It fell through, therefore, for want of backers. 
 John, however, despatched envoys all the same to Constanti- 
 nople, while to the emperor of Trebizond — a potentate of 
 whom we have not heard much hitherto— he wrote soon 
 afterwards in a strain of rapture. 
 
 «'° England and Narimndy, vol. iv. s" Eaynald. a.d. 1324, n. 40. 
 p. 455 et seci. sia j^id. a.d. 1326, n. 26. 
 
LETTERS OF JOHN XXII. 291 
 
 ' This it is that we are always revolving in the depths of 
 our mind ; for this we thirst ardently ; for this we supplicate 
 fervently, lovingly, continually, in our prayers, that among 
 all those who have been regenerated by the waters of baptism' 
 — a very remarkable way of putting it at that date, to say 
 the least — ' there should be an end of schism and division, 
 an end of error and mystification . . . and that the one holy 
 catholic and universal church in the unity of the true faith, 
 under one shepherd, and in the union of one sure irreproach- 
 able fold, should increase in fruitfulness, having attained to 
 the excellence of that happy state.'*'* Hence he is entreated 
 to do all that he can to bring over his people to communion 
 with the church of "Rome. John addressed other letters of 
 the same import to all the other potentates of the east in 
 those parts, including even the emperor of Tartary, and 
 proposing the creed of Clement gravely for his acceptance, 
 just as Clement had proposed it to Michael."* 
 
 The pope could hardly have reckoned on making much 
 progress with Andronicus the elder, who must in fact liave 
 abdicated before his envoys could have arrived. But Andro- 
 nicus the younger was married to Anne, sister of the duke 
 of Savoy, and therefore born and bred in the Latin com- 
 munion. To him, then, on the death of his father a.d. 1332, 
 he despatched a letter, telling him that he had already heard 
 of his good disposition from two prelates of the Crimea, 
 the archbishop of Kertche or Vospero, and the bishop of 
 Kherson, both Dominicans, and the latter of them an English- 
 man, who had lately arrived from the east, and bidding him 
 consider ' what great blessings would be sure to ensue to 
 him, his subjects, and the Christian world generally, were the 
 church of the Greeks once more restored to sound member- 
 ship with the holy Eoman church in the bonds of love and 
 union of the faith.' '" Then in another letter addressed to 
 ' his beloved in Christ the patriarch his brother, the emperor, 
 and the Greek people,"'* after telling them 'that the work 
 of uniting the catholic church dispersed throughout the 
 whole world, in the bond of love and peace, the cement of 
 affection and oneness of spirit, as well as that of feeding the 
 flock of Christ through the watchings of His vicar upon 
 earth in right faith and true doctrine, belonged to him ; ' he 
 
 8" Eaynald. a.d. 1329, n. 95. »'* Itid. a.d. 1333, n. 17. 
 
 «" Ibid. 98. "" Ibid. n. 18. 
 
 v2 
 
292 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION". 
 
 bewails the evils that had befallen them since the schism ; 
 and congratulating them on their present good dispositions, 
 he ' indulges in the hope that the time of their own return 
 to the true faith, and of the union of the church universal, 
 had arrived. Such good intentions on their part he will do 
 his best to second by his apostolical exhortations, that they 
 may be brought to effect without delay.' In another letter 
 addressed to John of Pisa, a counsellor of the emperor, he 
 speaks of having heard that the monks of S. Basil and 
 S. Demetrius at Constantinople were disposed to favour the 
 union. Finally, the prelates from the Crimea were sent back 
 as his envoys, and in their instructions *" they are told that 
 the object of their mission was particularly, that 'the church 
 of the Greeks, having been so long and lamentably mutilated 
 from the body of the universal church, might, by favour of 
 the Lord, be led to corporate reunion with it once more, as 
 a great and noble member of the same, with the seed-plot of 
 their old schism wholly extirpated.' The envoys are further 
 instructed ' to remind the Greeks of all that they had endured, 
 in the hope that it might bring them to their senses ; and to 
 press upon them how much they might still improve their 
 condition by accepting the primacy, and professing the faith 
 of the Eoman church.' The Greeks had certainly not for- 
 gotten the crusades, or the calamities entailed on their 
 country by them, as yet; and they were perfectly well aware 
 what it was that had brought the pope to Avignon, as we 
 shall see. When the envoys arrived, they found John of 
 Apri patriarch ; and there were some Constantinopolitans 
 who strongly pressed for a conference between them and 
 him. But 'not being practised in speaking himself, and 
 knowing most of the bishops about him to be very deficient 
 in learning,' he took counsel of the historian, Nicephorus 
 Gregoras, who tells the story,*'* and by his advice declined 
 holding one, so that their mission fell through, and they 
 probably passed on to their dioceses. 
 
 'About this time,' says Fleury,*'^ the pope issued two 
 bulls to the Dominicans employed in the east : one, allowing 
 them all to baptise conditionally; the other, allowing also 
 the bishops of their order to ordain conditionally,' where they 
 
 '" Eaynald. a.d. 1333, n. 19. saying that these envoys were sent by 
 
 "» Hist. Byz. X. 8 et seq. Art de Benedict XII. 
 Verifier, &c. Tol. iv. p. 117, is -wrong in »" Liy, xciv. 31, 
 
LETTERS OF JOHN XXII, 293 
 
 had missions. The learned abbe refers to a decretal of 
 Alexander III. as the earliest extant authority for conditional 
 baptism; but of conferring orders conditionally, he has 
 omitted, or else is unable, to furnish his readers -with any 
 precedent. 
 
 It was now the turn of the Greeks to negotiate, and to put 
 what they had been told by John to the test. ' Help us firsts 
 is their persistent cry from this time forth to the end of the 
 chapter — ' give us practical proofs of the benefits to be de- 
 rived from submitting to you, first, and we will submit.' 
 
 John was by no means the first pope who had addressed 
 them in that strain; but their circumstances were getting 
 more and more trymg, just as the ability of the pope to help 
 them became more and more doubtful. One or two popes 
 had temporised with Michael, and got him to accept a creed 
 of their own composing, as the price of his indemnity from 
 Charles of Anjou. But when, in consequence, his own sub- 
 jects rose in revolt, with whom were the vassals of the pope 
 found siding ? Had any pope assisted him to put down that 
 insurrection ? and had he not been excommunicated without 
 warning by the pope at last for anything but any fault of his 
 own? Now they would reverse the process, and secure 
 material assistance from the pope, before subscribing to 
 his creed. If he could do so little for Michael at Rome, 
 what was to be hoped of him from Avignon ? It was on this 
 understanding in future that all overtures for peace pro- 
 ceeded from Constantinople, and were received by the pope. 
 And it is from this their determining motive, that we must 
 estimate their intrinsic value. Ecclesiastical unity was not 
 the primary but the secondary consideration, on one side at 
 least ; so much was openly avowed ; and yet the other side 
 negotiated as if it had been. Can we wonder that they were 
 not blessed with any success ? What would be said if the 
 same thing were attempted in our own days ? We must 
 begin by assuming — what it would be reading history back- 
 wards to doubt — that the Greeks were as thoroughly persuaded 
 of the rightfulness of their position, as we Eoman catholics 
 in England are of our own. What then would be our feel- 
 ings, were the- British government, in the event of the pope 
 having to quit Kome, or having a civil governor put over 
 his head there, to offer him the island of Malta with a suit- 
 able revenue, and the protection of England, on condition of 
 
'294 PROJECTS FOE EEDNIOJT. 
 
 his either subscrihing to the Thirty-nine Articles of the 
 church of England, or declaring them in harmony with the 
 Tridentine decrees? Should we be able to find words to 
 express our horror at the disloyal and insidious conduct of 
 the British government, and would not those catholic-minded 
 Anglicans themselves, who are so praiseworthily, though 
 as some think ineffectually, labouring to prove that the 
 symbolical formularies of their church were not framed 
 in overt antagonism to the decrees of the last great gathering 
 of western bishops, recoil in their inmost souls indignantly 
 from any such attempt to bias the free judgment of the 
 primate of Christendom ? Who, indeed, would wish to see 
 the Thirty-nine Articles themselves abandoned for the pro- 
 mise of a dole of bread ? Yet such is the idea uppermost in 
 the negotiations between Eome and Constantinople through- 
 out the stage on which we have entered, as will appear as we 
 proceed.*^* 
 
 The mission of the abbot Barlaam, as it was probably the 
 first to reach Avignon from Constantinople, so it derives 
 additional interest from the circumstance that our account of 
 it is drawn from the private correspondence of the pope, to 
 whom it was addressed — Benedict XII.*^' It is remarkable 
 for more reasons than one. Barlaam was a native of Calabria, 
 but a Greek monk, abbot of the monastery of S. Saviour at 
 Constantinople, of the order of S. Basil; one of those two orders 
 reported to John XXII. as inclined for union with the Latins. 
 The reader will remember a branch of that order mentioned in 
 a former chapter as established at Grrotta Ferrata near Eome, 
 long since. Barlaam at this time spoke and reasoned as a 
 Greek ; but afterwards having engaged in controversy with 
 the mystics of Mount Athos, and with Gregory Palamas, 
 archbishop of Thessalonica, who defended them — ^^judgment 
 having been given in their favour by a synod of Constanti- 
 nople A.D. 1341*^'' — he quitted the east, and wrote several 
 works in defence of the Latins, pointing out their immense 
 superiority both in ecclesiastical organisation and social ad- 
 
 '" ' Quant aux avances,' says abbA '-' Given in Eaynaldns, a.d. 1339, 
 
 Eohrbacker, 'que firent les Grees de n. 19 et seq. as feom torn. v. of the 
 
 temps en temps pour so r&mir k Secret Correspondence of Benedict XII, 
 
 I'iglise Eomaine, ce n'Atait g^n&ale- '^^ Eaynald. a.d. 1341, n. 72. But, 
 
 ment que dans la vue d'obtenir dee 'ma.Tigrile^a.tiiaiche.'^ArtdeVirifier, 
 
 Eecours contre les Turcs.' — Vol. xx. &c. vol. iv. p. 117. 
 p. 399. ' 
 
ABBOT BAELAASI AND BENEDICT XII. 295 
 
 -vancement over the Greeks.'^' But one of the inferences 
 which he has dravm from it amounts to no more than this : 
 namely, that as the Latins cannot be proved heretics, the 
 Greeks cannot reasonably decline their communion.*''* 
 
 The immediate cause of his mission a.d, 1339 was the 
 conquest of Bithynia by the Turks under Orchan the son of 
 Othman. Then only was Andronicus the younger reniinded 
 of the letters which he had received on the death of his 
 father from John XXII. seven years before. There were 
 four cities in particular whose loss afflicted him ; and on their 
 recovery for him from the Turks by the Latins, Barlaam was 
 instructed to tell the pope the Greeks would be ready to 
 meet the Latins in a general council, to be convened by him, 
 for discussing the question of the procession, with a view to 
 their final agreement. 
 
 With Barlaam was associated Stephen of Dandolo, a noble 
 layman. On presenting themselves to Benedict, he requested 
 them to state what powers they had, ' as the Roman church 
 had been taken in already by John a former patriarch, and 
 Michael a former governor of Constantinople, who had pro- 
 fessed the catholic faith at the council of Lyons, and after- 
 wards gone back from it.' Benedict, apparently, was not 
 aware that John the patriai'ch had died in prison for his ad- 
 herence to it ; and Michael the governor — or, as all former 
 popes had been in the habit of designating him, emperor *^^ — 
 had never abjured it, even when smarting under excommuni- 
 cation. The style of Benedict further on is still more note- 
 worthy. He speaks of Andronicus ' as governor of the Greeks 
 that now is ; ' and of the eastern patriarchs as ' those who 
 call themselves patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, 
 and Constantinople.' Fleury would apologise for it, by saying 
 that it was to avoid prejudicing the rights of Catherine of 
 Courtenay and of the Latin patriarchs.*'* But if so, was not 
 John XXII., only seven years before, to blame for addressing 
 ■Andronicus as emperor, and the head of the church of Con- 
 stantinople as patriarch and brother in Christ ? Barlaam and 
 
 »" Given in de la Bigne's Bibl. Max. GraeciA,' ibid. p. 6. His other iu- 
 
 Fat. torn, xxvi ferences will be considered hereafter. 
 ' 8" 'Ex his igitur et hujusmodi ra- '^ Even to Martin IV., -who ex- 
 
 tionibus non possum sestimare, quid communicated him as ' qui Grseeomm 
 
 Latinis in hseresi non fexisteiitibus, imperator nominatur.' Eaynald. a.i». 
 
 rationabilitir hi illorum devitant com- 1281, n. 25. 
 muaionem.' Ep. ' ad amicos sues in ''"' Liv. xcv. 2. 
 
296 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION'. 
 
 his companion having explained that they had come on a 
 secret mission from the emperor, and without any official 
 character, the pope assented to hear them in that capacity. 
 And Barlaam commenced : 
 
 'Most holy father,^" the emperor is not less desirous than 
 yourself of a union between the two churches ; but in this 
 delicate transaction he is obliged to respect his own dignity, 
 and the prejudices of his subjects. The ways of union are 
 twofold: force and persuasion. Of force the inefficacy has 
 been already tried, since the Latins have subdued the empire, 
 without subduing the minds, of the Greeks. The method of 
 persuasion, though slow, is sure and permanent. A deputa- 
 tion of thirty or forty of our doctors would probably agree 
 with those of the Vatican in the love of truth, and the unity 
 of belief; but on their return, what would be the use, the 
 recompense of such agreement ? The scorn of their brethren, 
 and the reproaches of a blind and obstinate nation. Yet 
 that nation is accustomed to reverence the general councils 
 which have fixed the articles of our faith. Let one such now 
 he held on the -points on which the Latins and Greeks differ ; 
 and let us he ahle to present its decisions to our countrymen 
 as those of a general council, and they will be received uni- 
 versally : nor will there be a soul among us who will dis- 
 pute them ; and so both union and unanimity will he secured 
 forthwith. Should anybody make answer, that these points 
 have been already settled in the council of Lyons, which the 
 Greeks likewise attended, let him know that the Greek nation 
 is not going to submit to the humiliation of receiving that 
 council, unless supplemented hy another. Why sof Be- 
 cause the Greeks who were at that council were neither sent 
 by the four patriarchs governing the eastern church, nor 
 by the people, hut solely by the emperor, whose attempt it 
 was to effect union with you, not voluntarily, but perforce?''* 
 For this salutary end, it will be expedient, and even neces- 
 sary, that a well-chosen legate should be sent into Greece, to 
 convene the patriarchs of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, 
 and Jerusalem ; and with their aid to prepare a free and 
 universal synod. But at this moment,' continued the subtle 
 agent, ' the empire is assaulted and endangered by the Turks, 
 
 '" I give this speech as paraphrased '™ Translated literally from Eay- 
 ty Gibbon throiaghout, except -where naldus, a.d. 1339, n. 21. 
 italicised, c. Ixvi. 
 
ABBOT BABLAAM AND BENEDICT XII. 297 
 
 who have occupied four of the greatest cities in Anatolia. 
 The Christian inhabitants have expressed a wish of returning 
 to their allegiance and religion ; but the forces and revenues 
 of the emperor are insufficient for their deliverance ; and the 
 Eoman legate must be accompanied, or preceded, by an army 
 of Franks, to expel the infidels, and open a way to the holy 
 sepulchre. If the suspicious Latins should require some 
 pledge, some previous effect of the sincerity of the Greeks, the 
 answers of Barlaam were perspicuous and rational. 1. A 
 general synod can alone consummate the union of the 
 churches; nor can such a synod be held till the three 
 oriental patriarchs and a great number of bishops are enfran- 
 chised from the Mohammedan yoke. 2. The Greeks are 
 alienated by a long series of oppression and injury ; they must 
 be reconciled by some act of brotherly love, some effectual 
 succour, which may fortify the authority and the arguments 
 of the emperor, and the friends of the union.' 
 
 Benedict concealed his inability to assist the emperor 
 under cover of a most extraordinary declaration. Barlaam 
 had represented the council of Lyons in its true colomrs as 
 far as the Greeks were concerned, and was imanswerable on 
 that score. But what is the council of Lyons to Benedict, 
 except as the last of a long series ? Hence, ' since it had 
 been defined and determined in a catholic manner by the 
 holy fathers and orthodox men forming the Ephesine council 
 in the parts of Greece — being one of the four principal 
 councils — and likewise at the councils of Toledo and Lyons, 
 and many others duly celebrated by Eoman pontiffs and the 
 church of Eome, or by their authority, in different parts of 
 the world both in east and west, that the Holy Spirit pro- 
 ceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, as from one 
 principle and one spiration, and since every contrary 
 opinion has been reprobated and condemned, it would be 
 neither proper nor expedient for his holiness, or the holy 
 church of God, and assembly of the faithful, to call in 
 question in any way an article of the faith so clearly laid 
 down, which the Greeks themselves, as far back as the age 
 when Hormisdas was pope of Eome, and John patriarch of 
 Constantinople, and Justin emperor, expressly professed ; and 
 which subsequently, after a long interval of time, John patri- 
 arch of Constantinople, and Michael governor of the Greeks, 
 after a synod held by the former, sent a solemn letter about 
 
298 PEOJECTS FOE REUNION. 
 
 to John XXI., then pope. Nor is it in accordance with the 
 provident action of the holy see to allow discussions on 
 catholic truths needlessly, particularly at the request of 
 heretics or schismatics ; in a word, for it to allow any such 
 course with respect to the article in question, would be to 
 imply that it entertained doubts on that article.' ^^^ How 
 much of all this is historically correct ? There is a letter of 
 Hormisdas to Justin that has been interpolated ; and there 
 is a passage in the acts of the council of Ephesus which has 
 been mistranslated into Latin ; '^^ but neither of these, were 
 they ever so correct, are to the point. No council in all 
 church history, but that of Lyons, had ruled that 'the Holy 
 Spirit proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son as from 
 one principle and one spiration ; ' or, ' reprobated every con- 
 trary opinion.' «»i And what was it that 'the G-reeks,*^^ as 
 far back as the age when Hormisdas was pope, had expressly 
 professed ? ' Hormisdas certainly proposed, and John patri- 
 arch of Constantinople accepted, a formulary despatched to 
 him from Kome, condemnatory of the heresies condemned 
 by the third and fourth general councils, and declaratory of 
 his hearty approval of the writings of S. Leo the Great. And 
 by way of preface to it, he likewise added, of his own accord, 
 — almost prophetically — ' I assent to all the acts of the four 
 holy councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chal- 
 cedon, touching the confirmation of the faith and the state of 
 the church; and I am opposed to unsettling no matter 
 what it is that has been well decided ; nay, more — those who 
 have tried or are trying to disturb it in any one point, I am 
 persuaded that they have cesised to belong to the holy catholic 
 and apostoKc church of G-od.' *'' The letter of the patriarch 
 containing this statement was, together with one from the 
 emperor Justin, read out in church at Kome publicly, where 
 it caused a perfect ovation ; or, in the words of Hormisdas 
 himself, the whole church burst forth into rapture, best ex- 
 pressed by the divine hymn, ' Gloria in excelsis.' *'* If any- 
 
 "" Eaynald. a.d. 1339, n. 25 et seq. may or may not have thought himself 
 
 ''" Both ■will be dieicussed further on the procession, but what the Greets 
 
 on. professed, and what he accepted £rom 
 
 °" This is the real point in this them as orthodox, in his official ea- 
 
 part of the statement ; hence Fleur/s pacity. 
 
 explanations are q^uite irrelevant. Liv. "' See the whole letter. Baron. A.D. 
 
 xcv. 2. 519, n. 48 et seq. 
 
 "' Here, again, Fleury is quite out. °" Ibid, u, 71-3. 
 •The question is not what Hormisdas 
 
ABBOT BAKLAAM AND BENEDICT XII. 299 
 
 thir^, therefore, the entire church of that date condemned 
 adding to the creed by anticipation. It is quite true — and 
 this is really the only correct statement of the whole — that 
 John the patriarch of fifty years back, or John Veccus, had 
 joined Michael his patron and ' de facto ' sovereign in accept- 
 ing the creed of Clement, and had addressed a synodical 
 letter to John XXI. to that effect ; *'' but how had Veccus 
 been made patriarch, and what had been the opinions of the 
 patriarch whom he displaced ? Barlaam, as abbot of a Greek 
 convent in Constantinople, was able to set the pope right in 
 his estimate of the reception of the second council of Lyons 
 by the Greeks ; but ip the history of past times it is abun- 
 dantly clear from his own writings that he was no bettet 
 informed than the pope. His chief argument in behalf of 
 the primacy in one of his controversial epistles is founded 
 on the pseudo-decretal of S. Clement to S. James ;'3^ but 
 he no sooner attempts fathoming authentic history than he 
 is at sea. Hence he took it for granted that numerous 
 councils in the east and west, beginning with the council of 
 Ephesus A.D 431, had laid down the doctrine of the double 
 procession in terms identical with those of the second council 
 of Lyons, and held his peace. Meanwhile, there is a parallel 
 even to that extraordinary declaration of Benedict in the 
 words of a later pope. When a council was proposed to 
 Urban VI. as the best means of arbitrating between him and 
 Clement VII. — elected at Fondi a.d 1378 — he is reported to 
 have made answer: 'that he was unwilling to assent to a 
 council, because his rival at Avignon would not assent to one 
 either . . . besides, there was no sort of use in holding a 
 council ; for at the time when the Greek schism commenced 
 there was both a council assembled, and in it great diversity 
 of opinion maintained between the Latins and Greeks, till 
 at last the Greeks fell back upon their former position still 
 more obstinately than before, and he appealed to the tri- 
 partite history.' *" If the council referred to by Urban was 
 no other than the second council of Lyons, then his statement 
 is remarkable, as dating the commencement of the Greek 
 schism from that council ; but if he based his statement upon 
 the tripartite history — that is, the Latin digest*^* of the 
 
 »" See above, p. 273. "' Sahtz. ad Vit. Pap. Avm. p. 1 109. 
 
 "" Ep. ii. in de la Eigne, as before, "' Made in the 6th century,- and 
 voL zxvi. p. 8. known undef that name. 
 
300 PROJECTS FOE EEUNIOK. 
 
 histories of Socrates, Sozomen, and Theodoret, by Cassiodorus 
 or Epiphanius Scholasticus — then his statement is still more 
 remarkable, as dating the commencement of the Greek schism 
 from the council of Ephesus with which that history ends. 
 One might almost imagine that instead of the tripartite 
 history, he had been dipping into the secret correspondence 
 of Benedict XII. as we have it, this appeal on the part of 
 Barlaam forty years back or so for a council. The re- 
 mainder of the discussion may be condensed — it is far too 
 rambling to be given at length — in a few words. Barlaam 
 asked whether a reunion might not take place, leaving the 
 Greeks free to profess their own belief, and the Latins theirs, 
 on that one point.*^' He was told that a twofold faith was 
 out of the question in the catholic church. A counter 
 suggestion was made by the pope and cardinals, that the 
 soi-disant eastern authorities in church and state shotdd 
 depute a certain number of wise men with adequate powers 
 to the west, to receive instruction from an equal number of 
 wise men selected by the pope.^^" Barlaam rejoined**' that 
 enquiry was indispensable, as the Latin doctrine was not 
 clear to the Greeks. If examination in a general council 
 was refused, the Greeks would say that the Latins shrank 
 from it through fear. He thought that as both sides believed 
 in three divine persons and one substance, they might agree 
 to differ on the procession ; and that the Greeks might assent 
 to render to the Eoman church all the honor that their 
 forefathers had been in the habit of rendering to it before 
 the schism, as defined in the canons and imperial constitutions; 
 and that the Latins should assent to do the same by the 
 churches of the east, particularly that of Constantinople. 
 The pope returned that the Greeks had played false before, 
 and might do so again, were such terms entertained. They 
 must come determined to obey thoroughly to do any good.'*' 
 Barlaam once more returned to the difficulties that beset the 
 subject, and after promising to do all he could to simplify 
 them, took his leave.**' The real hitch was, that Benedict 
 had no means of helping the emperor to regain the cities of 
 which he had been deprived by the Turks, but shrank from 
 owning it. His letter to the king of France alone shows 
 
 »'» Eaynald. A..D. 1339, n. 26. »« Ibid. n. 30. 
 
 '" Ibid. n. 27. «« Ibid. n. 31. 
 
 "' Ibid. u. 28-9. 
 
JOHN PAL^OLOGUS AND CLEMENT VI. 301 
 
 the utter hopelessness to which he was reduced on that score.'^^ 
 His replies to Barlaam show him to have been a man of no 
 learning, and, as Gibbon says, ' perplexed with scruples.' But 
 for the other statements of Gribbon about his character, out 
 of the eight lives of him published by Baluzius, only two, the 
 seventh and eighth,'*'' give colour to them; and the last 
 accounts for them by mentioning his antipathy to all his 
 cardinals, and to the mendicant orders. According to all 
 his biographers, he was close, and averse to giving away pre- 
 ferments when they became vacant, but desirous of reform- 
 ing the monks and clergy. Clement VI., who succeeded a.d. 
 1342, was a very different character.^*^ He had no such 
 scruples against boldifJg a council, when it was proposed to 
 him, as his lately-deceased predecessor. Without waiting to 
 be asked, he wrote the year following to the youthful emperor, 
 John Palaeologus V., and even to the nobility and clergy of 
 Constantinople,'*' proffering them all the help in his power 
 against the Turks, if they would only consent to abjure their 
 schism, and return to the unity of the church, There is not 
 a word of allusion in these letters to the council of Lyons, 
 or their rejection of it. If he refers to the past at all, it is to 
 recall the glories that were once theirs when they formed one 
 body with the church of Eome, and were dutifully attached 
 to the pope. The heading of his letter to the Greek clergy 
 is : 'To our beloved brethren in Christ, the patriarch and all 
 the archbishops and bishops of the Greeks, the spirit of saving 
 grace.' The year following, in organising an expedition 
 against the Turks, he expressly bids the Latin patriarch of 
 Constantinople, whom he had appointed his legate for that 
 purpose, to abstain from attacking the Greeks.'" Later, in 
 A.D. 1348, he received ambassadors from John Cantacuzene, 
 jointly reigning with John Palaeologus, with much distinction ; 
 and two years afterwards he sent William, bishop of Kisamos 
 
 '" Ibid. a. 33 et seq. It dwells "" 'Eximio virtutum fulgori,' says 
 
 rather more fully on the conduct of the Mansi (adEaynald. a.d. 1 352), ' maeulse 
 
 Greeks after the council of Lyons ; quaedam non defuerunt.' Among these 
 
 otherwise it merely recapitulates the nepotism was the moat conspicuous, 
 
 conference already described. And : ' Magnam partem thesauri ec- 
 
 "' ' Potator vini maximus ab omni- clesise distribuit amicia sids.' He was 
 
 *!« c«WaWiJM dicebatur, ade6 ut versum too liberal by half to all who ap- 
 
 Sit id proverbium consuetum dici " bi- proached him. 
 bamus papaliter." '— Ti^. Pap. Awn. '" Eaynald. a.d. 1343, n. 11-19. 
 vol. i. p. 242. '" Ibid. a.d. 1344, n. 2. 
 
302 PROJECTS FOE EEUNIOK. 
 
 in Candia, and Graspar bishop of Ceneda in the march of 
 Treviso, with letters for the emperor, for the Greek patriarch, 
 and for Assan, captain-general of the imperial forces as 
 well, requesting him to receive his envoys kindly, and to 
 confer with them.'''^ What passed is related by Cantacuzene 
 himself.8'*'' 'I am delighted,' said he to them, 'with the 
 project of our holy war, which must redound to my personal 
 glory, as well as to the public benefit of Christendom. My 
 dominions will give a free passage to the armies of France ; 
 my troops, my galleys, my treasures, shall be consecrated to 
 the common cause ; and happy would be my fate could I 
 deserve and obtain the crown of martyrdom. Words are in- 
 sufficient to express the ardour with which I sigh for the 
 reunion of the scattered members of Christ. If my death 
 could avail, I would gladly present my sword and my neck. 
 If the spiritual phcenix could arise from my ashes, I would 
 erect the pile, and kindle the flame with my own hands.' 
 Yet the G-reek emperor presumed to observe, that the articles 
 of faith which divided the two churches had been introduced, 
 by the pride and precipitation of the Latins ; he disclaimed 
 the servile and arbitrary steps of the first Palseologus ; and 
 firmly declared that he would never submit his conscience 
 unless to the decrees of a free and imiversal synod. 'The 
 situation of the times,' continued he, ' will not allow the pope 
 and myself to meet either at Eome or Constantinople; but 
 some maritime city may be chosen on the verge of the two 
 empires, to unite the bishops and to instruct the faithful of 
 the east and west.' So was developed the scheme which, 
 having been accepted by Clement, was carried out at last by 
 Eugenius IV.*^' in spite of the 'non possumus,' when it was 
 first mooted, of Benedict XII. Yet to entertain it was to 
 admit the full force of the objections alleged against the 
 second council of Lyons on the matter of the Greek question. 
 ' The' envoys,*^^ content with the answer which had been 
 given them, and having received presents from the emperor to 
 take back with them, returned home. They gave the pope an 
 account of their travels, and showed him the journal which 
 they had kept. The pope returned for answer to the emperor 
 
 '" Eaynald. a,d. 1350, n. 28-30. a.d. 1350, n. 32. 
 
 »™ Here I again adopt Gibbon's <^' This part of the story I translate 
 
 paraphrase, e. Ixvi. from Fleury, liv. xcv. 60. 
 "" Frankly admitted by Eaynaldus, 
 
JOHN PALiEOLOGUS AND INNOCENT VI. 303 
 
 at once that he thought the proposal of holding a council 
 excellent; but that he must assemble the bishops depending 
 on him to agree on the time and place. Shortly afterwards, he 
 wrote again to the emperor, begging him not to attribute the 
 delay of holding a council to negligence on his part. ' I desire 
 nothing more,' said he, ' than the union of the churches ; but 
 the princes of Italy, and our greatest sovereigns, are just 
 now at war . . . and it is my duty to try and make peace 
 between them as their common father ; after which I shall 
 have nothing at heart so much as what relates to the council 
 and the peace of the churches.' On this the emperor de- 
 spatched John, a Dominican monk of Galata near Constanti- 
 nople, to thank the f)ope for his friendly dispositions, and 
 beg him to continue in them. But the death of Clement, 
 A.D. 1352, put an end to the project of a council for the 
 present. His correspondence with the Armenians, when we 
 come to it, will throw great light upon the tenor of his over- 
 tures to the Greek emperor. It is highly characteristic, and 
 far eclipses that of Benedict XII. for originality. He carried 
 out one of the fond wishes of his predecessor, moreover,*'^ 
 in sending the catholics a copy of the decretum and of the 
 decretals, to be studied throughout Armenia for the advance- 
 ment of orthodoxy, and two bishops to expound their contents 
 and enforce their doctrine. Innocent VI. on his accession 
 addressed friendly letters to Cantacuzene, reminding him of 
 his correspondence with Clement, and apparently received 
 friendly letters from him in return, though they are nowhere 
 given.^"* Even the citizens of Philadelphia ventured to write 
 to the pope, but it was for temporal, not spiritual, aid.*^* 
 Meanwhile John Palaeologus had quarrelled with his father- 
 in-law Cantacuzene, been expelled from Constantinople, and 
 effected his return by foreign aid^that of a noble Genoese, 
 who supplied him with ships and soldiers — a.d. 1354. Yet 
 ' in the first year of his deliverance and restoration, the Turks 
 were still masters of the Hellespont ; the son of Cantacuzene ' 
 — Mathew — 'was in arms at Adrianople; and Palseologus 
 could depend neither on himself nor on his people. By his mo- 
 ther's — Anne of Savoy's — ' advice, and in the hope of foreign 
 aid, he abjured the rights both of the church and state,' *^^ 
 by swearing on the Holy Gospels, before Paul, archbishop of 
 
 «" Eaynald. a.d. 1346, n. 67 et seq. '" Ibid. n. 20. 
 »* Ibid. A.D. 1353, n. 22-24. «" Gibbon, c. Levi. 
 
304 PROJECTS FOR RBUNIOIf. 
 
 Smyrna and papal legate, to the following engagement'" 
 with Innocent VI., the successor of Clement. 
 
 1. I will be faithful and obedient, reverent and devout to 
 my most holy lord and father Innocent, lord of the holy 
 Koman and universal church, and by Divine grace, worthily, 
 sovereign pontiff; and likewise to his successors. And I will 
 observe and pay due reverence and obedience to my holy 
 lord the pope and his successors, and receive his legates and 
 envoys with all respect and devotion. 
 
 2. He swears that he will do all in his power to bring his 
 people over to the same obedience. For this purpose he has 
 arranged with the archbishop of Smyrna, and one of his own 
 principal officers of state, that on their returning to Con- 
 stantinople with three galleys from the pope, he will place 
 his son Manuel on board one, and send him as a hostage 
 to the pope, keeping the other two to defend his own dO" 
 minions. 
 
 3. The pope shall with all speed, on receiving the young 
 prince as hostage, despatch to his aid fifteen transports, five 
 galleys, 500 horse, and 1,000 foot-soldiers, to serve at his 
 bidding for six months against the Turks and his Grreek op- 
 ponents ; during which time the papal legate shall appoint to 
 any vacant posts or benefices such Greeks as shall of their 
 own accord return to the union and obedience of the church. 
 But should, within six months of the arrival of the arma- 
 ment, the Greeks still refuse to return to the obedience of 
 the church, then he himself will take counsel with the legate 
 for making them do so by compulsion. 
 
 4. He engages to assign a large palace for the legate to 
 inhabit ; and to belong to all future legates in perpetuity ; 
 and likewise a church for him, and for all coming from the 
 pope, to use for their offices and administration of the sacra- 
 ments. Also three hospices to be converted into Latin' 
 schools. His eldest son shall have a Latin master, and study 
 the language ; and he will try and persuade his nobility to 
 learn Latin as well. 
 
 5. In case he should fail in any one of his promises, he 
 will resign the empire to his son, and empower the pope to 
 act as guardian for him till he comes of age. 
 
 6. In case he should not send his son as hostage, he 
 
 *" Eaynald. a.d. 1365, u. 34-38. 
 
JOHN PALiEOLOGUS AND URBAN V. 305 
 
 engages to pay 4,000 florins for every galley that the pope may 
 send him ; but in case he should prove as good as his word 
 in all respects, then it is his desire that his lord the pope 
 should assist him against all his enemies — especially the 
 infidels — with a powerful army, and a multitude of Christian 
 auxiliaries sufficient to beat back the multitude of unbe- 
 lievers and expel them from Christian territory, which they 
 have so unjustly and violently appropriated. 
 
 7. The pope will be good enough to provide pay for some 
 part of the forces, as just now the empire cannot afford the 
 expense. He begs, on his part, to be considered captain- 
 general of his holy mother the church, with full power over 
 the army sent to act m her behalf. His son is to be released 
 should he fulfil his compact honorably. But should he fail 
 through sheer inability, and go personally to the pope after- 
 wards, the pope would in that case engage to help him to 
 recover his empire. 
 
 This instrument was ordered to be secured with a bull — 
 a seal of gold — to have the golden bull or seal of the empire 
 appended to it — and was subscribed by him, according to 
 custom, in red letters, dated Blachernje, December 15, 
 A.D. 1355. 
 
 No galleys were despatched from the west in reply, but 
 only letters ; *°' no reconciliation of the Greeks took place ; but 
 what was inserted in the last clause as a remote contingency, 
 came to pass surely enough instead. Before we expatiate on 
 the degradation of the Greek empire under such a sovereign, 
 let us recall the precedent of king John of England, whose 
 dominions were never at any time similarly threatened by 
 the Turks. Urban V. succeeded Innocent a.d. 1362. To 
 him John renewed his applications each time that he thought 
 he saw any chance of obtaining succours from him. Once it 
 was when a western crusade was reported to be in progress 
 against the Turks under the leadership of John II. king of 
 France, through whose death, in fact, it was adjourned. 
 Urban received his application with favour, and wrote back 
 assuring him, in one letter, that strict orders would be given 
 to the expedition not to attack Greek territory ; *'' and in 
 
 '" Eaynald. A.D. 1356, n. 33-35. pope wonders no letter should have 
 One to John, another to the Greek come by the ambassadors from John, 
 patriarch Callistus, from whom the '"^ Raynald. a.d. 1364, n. 27. 
 
 X 
 
306 PEQJECTS FOR BEDNIOK. 
 
 another, ipviting him and ]j.is people to join it.'^" But as, 
 even then^ there were numbers in the west who would have 
 preferred attacking the Greeks to the Ti-irks, Urban wrote 
 A.D. 1366 8" to counsel his accelerating the return of the 
 Greek nation to the communion of the church of Borne, as 
 their best safeguard ; and even delayed the departure of the 
 expedition, now confided to the auspices of the king of 
 Hungary, for another year, in order that the reconciliation 
 of the Greeks might take place first. Accordingly the pope 
 called upon John to lose no time in declaring his acceptance 
 of the creed of Clement IV. as formerly required from 
 Michael Palaeologus, and of the oath taken by proxy for 
 Michael at the council of Lyons,. Urban here calls MichaeP^^ 
 — the excommunicated of Martia IV. — the 'nominal go- 
 vernor ' of Benedict XII. — ' clarse memorise Michaelem, im- 
 peratorem Grsecorum, prsedecessorem tuum.' He was writing 
 from Avignon in July, and the next year was to see him at 
 Eome. John replied, not by professing the creed, nor by 
 taking the oath at once, but by employing the services of his 
 former confidant, Paul archbishop of Smyrna, since trans- 
 formed into Latin patriarch of Constantinople, to head 'a 
 splendid embassy from him to the pope,*^^ from whose re- 
 turn to Eome he doubtless expected great things, the year 
 following. The pope was on the point of leaving Viterbo 
 for Eome when it arrived, about the end of September. It 
 respectfully bade him expect John there in person, accom- 
 panied by a deputation of his nobles and clergy, during the 
 ensuing May, to consummate his own return and that of his 
 people to the communion and obedience of the church of 
 Eome, which they greatly desired ; at least so the pope told 
 the queen of Sicily, in writing to secure a free passage for 
 them.*^* And in this persuasion he despatched letters to the 
 Greek empress Helen, to John Cantacuzene — who had turned 
 monk some years back on the restoratiop. of his son-in-law^ 
 to the archimandrites and calogers,'^* or senior monks, of the 
 Greek clergy, and to those ' three prudent men, Philotheus, 
 Niphon, and Lazarus, ruling, after the Tnann^r of the 
 Greeks, the patriarchal churches of Constantinople, Alex- 
 
 ««» Eavnald. a.d. 1365, n. 22. »" IHd. n. 7. 
 
 *" Ibid. n. 1-8. «" Calogeri = • monachi prsesertim 
 
 '"^ Ibid. n. 7. genio et aetata venerandi.WDu Gauge, 
 
 «" Ibid. AD. 1367, n. 6-7. s. v. 
 
JOHN PAL^OLOGUS AND URBAN V. 307 
 
 andria, and Jerusalem,' as having had letters delivered to 
 him from them by the Latin patriarch of Constantinople and 
 his colleagues, favourable to the proposed union. Here was 
 a singular phase indeed of the Greek question, if there was 
 no trickery at the bottom of it — ^three out of the four Greek 
 patriarchs corresponding with the pope on their desire to 
 submit to him through the Latin patriarch of Constantinople 
 who was standing in the shoes of one of them, and must have 
 been extinguished had they submitted. The pope eagerly 
 bids them accompany John to Eome, where, he goes bound 
 for it, they will be received with all due honor.**' It is the 
 last we hear of them. John indeed arrived at Eome in the 
 month of Oetober aId. 1369 — the third and last year of the 
 pope's stay there — and had a magnificent reception accorded 
 to him. In the cfhuroh of the Holy Ghost — that of the well- 
 known hospital, in what used to be the Saxon quarter — in 
 the presence of four cardinals, he recited the creed of 
 Clement IV. at full length, a^nd professed his adhesion to it 
 solemnly by oath, as Michael had done in his own person 
 after the council of Lyons. Then he caused to be trans- 
 cribed a copy of his declaration and oath in Greek and Latin, 
 and after sealing it with his seal of gold, handed it over to 
 the pope to be deposited in the archives of the church in 
 which it was made.*'^ On the Sunday following, October 21, 
 he was 'introduced to a public audience in the church of 
 S. Peter ; Urban, in the midst of his cardinals, was seated on 
 his throne ; the Greek monarch, after three genuflexions, 
 devoutly kissed the feet, the hands, and at length the mouth, 
 of the holy father, who celebrated high mass in his presence, 
 allowed him to lead the bridle of his mule, and treated him 
 with a sumptuous banquet in the Vatican.' '*' The pope had 
 gone through a similar ceremony the previous year in re- 
 ceiving the western emperor Charles IV. ; the principal 
 difference being that the successor of Charlemagne was 
 privileged to serve the pope's mass as deacon, with the book 
 and corporal, and on Christmas day even to the reading of 
 the Gospel. To no such distinctions was the successor of 
 Constantino entitled or admitted. Meanwhile, during the 
 whole period of his visit, he, apparently, was the only Greek 
 who made his submission. There is no mention of those 
 
 «•« Eaynald. ibid. n. 10. «" Ibid. a.d. 1369, n. 1-3. 
 
 8«* Gibbon from Fleury, liv. xovii. 
 
 X 2 
 
308 PROJECTS FOE KEUNION. 
 
 'prudent men ruling the patriarchal churches in Greek 
 fashion,' or indeed of any other whatever, as having kept him 
 in countenance. Urban, in the encyclic which he published on 
 the occasion, can report no other ;*^^ only he can afford to be 
 sanguine that the conversion of the Greeks will follow that 
 of their emperor. His letter to the doge of Venice, bespeak- 
 ing every consideration for the royal convert, is to the same 
 effect."™ John, indeed, left nothing undone to dissipate 
 doubts of his own good faith. By a fresh declaration made 
 by him in the month of January, A.D. 1370, while yet at 
 Eome, he explained that by the Eoman church, he under- 
 stood that over which Utban presided.'^' The pope, to 
 reward his honesty, gave him a portable altar to take back 
 with him, on which mass might always be celebrated, though 
 only by a Latin priest, in his presence.*'^ He likewise wrote 
 a glowing letter to the Greek clergy, full of praise of the 
 emperor, urging them to follow his example, and not stand 
 out for the synod, about which there had been so much talk 
 of late, to which like Benedict — for reasons of the same kind 
 alleged by him — he was unwilling to accede.*'^ He went so 
 far even as to specify'"'' that they might all be received, 
 then and there, on pledging themselves to the profession and 
 oath made by the emperor. All in vain. Even the services 
 of the celebrated soldier of fortune — Sir John Hawkwood — 
 our countryman, who died general of the Florentines, and 
 was buried in their city with such distinguished honors, 
 were solicited to no purpose by John, though backed by the 
 pope.^'^ Urban himself ' only supplied him with two galleys, 
 300 soldiers, and a few thousand ducats; and on his way 
 back to Constantinople, he was arrested for debt at Venice. 
 . . . When the sultan saw the Greek emperor return to his 
 capital as weak as ever, and far more unpopular with his 
 orthodox subjects, hostilities were renewed. John, unable to 
 form a generous resolution, consented to become the vassal 
 of the sultan, as he had already consented to become a ser- 
 vant of the pope.' *'^ It is only fair to him to add that the 
 imperial monk, John Cantacuzene, had already married his 
 daughter Theodora to Orchan the son of Othman, and con- 
 
 ''^' Eaynald. a.d. 1369, n. i. »" Ibid. n. 2. 
 
 "» Ibid. n. 5. »" Ibid. n. 4, 
 
 s" Ibid. A.D. 1370, n. 1. »" G-ibbon, c. Ixvi. 
 
 8™ Ibid. n. 4 "' Finlay, £i/z. Emp. vol. ii. p. 679. 
 
JOHN PAL^OLOGUS AND GKEGOET XI. 309 
 
 sented to her becoming one of his harem at Brusa."' Gre- 
 gory XI. seems to have taken very little heed of the conduct 
 of either in that respect, a.d, 1372 we find him writing to 
 John to join his forces to those of the Latins against the 
 Turks, and announcing that ambassadors would arrive from 
 him at Thebes in Greece with full powers to treat with those 
 prelates and nobles who might be desiroiis of returning to 
 communion with the Roman church."' All that John can 
 do is to renew his appeal for help ; *^^ all that Gregory can 
 recommend, as the most likely means of obtaining it, is, that 
 the Greek people should abjure their schism.'"* Two years 
 afterwards we have, the pope sending envoys unasked to 
 Constantinople, for the express purpose of receiving any 
 laity, and of rehabilitating any clergy,'" who might wish to 
 come over, on condition of their subscribing to the creed of 
 Clement; but on their arrival they found John bound by 
 treaty once more to the Turkish sultan."^ He sent indeed 
 to the pope to excuse his act; and the pope wrote not so 
 much to condemn, as to condole with him on it ; "' assuring 
 him that a sincere union of the Greeks and Latins would be 
 much more likely to conduce to his safety in the end, if it 
 could be accomplished. Dire confusion was fast setting in 
 On all sides. One of the sons of John was at war with his 
 father; the other, fighting by consent of his father in the 
 ranks of the Turks. The few Greeks who from time to time 
 joined the Latin church were persecuted by their country- 
 men, nor could the pope assist them in any way. In vain he 
 wrote to John Cantacuzene, of whose favourable dispositions 
 towards Rome he had been made aware, to use his influence 
 in their favour."* In vain he called upon John,"^ the 
 reigning emperor, as in duty bound to protect them. In 
 vain he appealed to the king of Hungary"' to fulfil his 
 promises of assistance to John, in order that the return of 
 the Greeks to the church might not be delayed any longer. 
 West and east were powerless to succour themselves, let alone 
 
 "' Finlay, Bye. Emp. vol. ii. p. 563. and Mary. See the -well-kno-wn letter 
 
 *" Ibid. A.D. 1372, n. 29. of Sir W. Coventry to bishop Burnet. 
 
 "» Ibid. A.D. 1373, n. 1. «*" Mansi ad Eaynald. ibid. 
 
 ««» Ibid. n. 2. »*' Ibid. a.d. 1374, n. 4. 
 
 »" Ibid. A.D. 1374, n. 1-3. The »" Ibid. a.d. 1375, n. 2. 
 singiUar instrument conferring these '*" Ibid. n. 4. 
 powers is by no means unlike that of "*" Ibid. n. 6, 
 cardinal Pole for England under Philip 
 
310 PEOJECTS FOE EEUKIOIT. 
 
 each otter; and from henceforth, till his death a.d. 1391, 
 John seems to have passed out of mind, or been unheeded in 
 the return of the pope to Eome, and the commencement of 
 the great schism of the west that ensued. His personal cha- 
 racter— which was of the most profligate description, and too 
 notorious surely to have been unknown to the French popes, 
 who corresponded with him and received him into their 
 communion — would have been alone sufficient to make those 
 of his countrymen in whom there was any sense of decency 
 left recoil from imitating him in anything that he did ; and 
 it is a remarkable fact, certainly, to have to connect with the 
 creed of Clement IV., whatever its intrinsic merits as a 
 theological composition may be, that the only Grreeks ever 
 known to have subscribed to it in dile form, during the 100 
 years or more in which it was pressed upon them, should 
 have been two such characters as Michael and John Palaeo- 
 logus. 
 
 We must not forget — it is apt to be far too generally over- 
 looked — that all this time the G-reeks had crushing evidence 
 before their eyes of the contingent consequences of absolute 
 subjection to the pope and Latin rule. The spiritual tyranny 
 which the Latin archbishop of Nicosia contrived to wield over 
 the island of Cyprus, has been already mentioned, and it 
 went on increasing, a.d. 1340 the creed of Clement was 
 imposed upon all resident there without distinction, by a 
 council composed of EUas the Latin archbishop and his 
 suffragans,'*^ in which a host of previous ecclesiastical con- 
 stitutions relating to that island, and framed in the same 
 spirit, were decreed anew. It was pretended that the Grreeks, 
 one and all, had signified their voluntary acceptance of them. 
 The island of Crete or Candia was another instance in point. 
 The Venetians obtained possession of it a.d. 1204, after 
 the sack of Constantinople ; and had remained lords of the 
 soil ever since. Were Grreek ecclesiastics in Candia better 
 or worse off than in Cyprus? In the very year in which 
 Urban V. despatched the creed of Clement to John Palseo- 
 logus, and was sending all manner of amiable messages 
 through him to his people — or a.d. 1368**' — we find him 
 
 '" Mansi, torn. xxvi. p. 371-76. to the superseding of all former ones 
 
 What precede, and are there called of a milder description. 
 ' Nicosian constitutions,' are simply "' Kaynald. ihid. u. 20. 
 those revived by Elias,and apparently 
 
JOHN PAL^OLOGUS AND GEEGORT XI. 311 
 
 writing to the Latin archbishop of the island, and telling 
 him, that ' it was reported-^-indeed it was likely en^jugh — 
 that some priests and calogers, or elderly monks, of the con- 
 demned Greek schism, had been preventing several persons 
 of influence there from joining the Latin church.' The 
 archbishop is therefore directed to call in the aid of the 
 secular arm for the extirpation of that schism throughout 
 the island in the befit way that it may be done ; and he is to 
 take particular care that no Greek is ordained or admitted 
 to any spiritual function except by a Latin bishop, or some 
 Greek who had made his submission; that no Greeks ad- 
 mitted in this way to the priesthood use any biit the Latin 
 ritual ; and that an/ Greek monks or priests convicted of not 
 using it are stopped from ever hearing confessions and preach- 
 ing to the people. Here, even the prescriptions of the 9th 
 Lateran canon themselves are overridden. As the Greeks, 
 notwithstanding, continued to get ordained by their own 
 bishops, either by going over themselves to the main land, or by 
 getting some Greek bishop to cross over in disguise from the 
 main land to them — exactly what our Eoman catholic fore- 
 fathers in England held it to be their duty to do at the risk, 
 and often at the cost, of their lives, under Queen Elizabeth — 
 the doge of Venice was ' entreated and exhorted ' by Gre- 
 gory XL*'* to put the penal laws in force that had been 
 already decreed against all such offenders ; and if they were 
 not sufficient, by redoubling their stringency, to compel the 
 Greeks to become more loyal in their allegiance. • Mutatis 
 mutandis,' one might suppose that letter to have been ad- 
 dressed by archbishop Whitgift to his royal mistress. ' Docuit 
 experientia saluberrimum fuisse Gregorii consilium,' says 
 Eaynaldils. It is lucky, perhaps, for ourselves, that modern 
 experience, at least in the eyes of out countrymen, points all 
 the other way. 
 
 II. Manuel, the son and successor of John Palseologus, 
 may be taken as a bridge from the third to the fourth of our 
 periods of the Greek question. The defeat of the flower of 
 Europe under the king of Hungary by Bajazet, the grandson 
 of Orchan, on the banks of the Danube, before Nikopoli, 
 A.D. 1396, came like a thnnderclap on the west, and the 
 madness of having contributed to the ruin of the Greek 
 
 »»• Baynald. A.D. 1373, n. 18. 
 
312 PROJECTS FOE BEUNIOIf. 
 
 empire began at length to strike Eome. It is no longer a 
 question of subscribing to any fine-drawn foimula between 
 Manuel and the pope. In his encyclic of a.d. 1398, Boni- 
 face IX. says : ' We compassionate from our heart the distress 
 of the illustrious prince Manuel, emperor of Constantinople, 
 and his people, who, though they were not constant to the 
 full measure of their obedience and devotion to ourselves, or 
 of the faith and fellowship of the Roman church, nevertheless 
 call upon the saving name of Christ, and are in danger of 
 extermination from the Turks."^" 'Bajazet,' he tells the 
 bishop of Chalcedon, ' boasting of the discord that has armed 
 Christians against each other, threatens to seize not merely 
 Constantinople, with all the territory belonging to it, but the 
 kingdoms, in addition, of Hungary and Wallachia — all lands, 
 in short, where Christ is preached. The emperor may be 
 suffering from the delusions of former days, and wanting in 
 his duties to the holy see ; still, as the name of Christ is in- 
 voked by him and his, it is to be hoped that he may return 
 to them in process of time, if only the help that he needs so 
 much can be supplied.'*'' 
 
 Alas ! the mischief had been done. Had such salutary 
 counsels prevailed, and been acted upon, during the last 200 
 years, the Turks might have been forced back to their native 
 mountains in the heart of Asia long since, and Eome and 
 Constantinople good friends. Now the enemy was at the 
 gates of both ; and they, worn out with internecine strife, 
 were ashamed to confess their impotence to help each other. 
 By advice of the brave Marshal Boucicault, whom the French 
 monarch had sent to his assistance with a force wholly inade- 
 quate to be of any permanent service, Manuel left his capital 
 in the hands of his blind cousin John, and visited in person 
 the principal cities of Europe successively : Venice, Padua, 
 Pavia, Paris, and at last London ; where he arrived in De- 
 cember, A.D. 1400, and was entertained for some time, as 
 became the emperor of the east, at the cost of the king of 
 •England.*''' Among the royal and historical letters lately 
 published under the direction of the Master of the EoUs, 
 there is an acknowledgment on the part of Manuel, dated 
 London, February 3, a.d. 1401, of a present of 3,000 marks 
 
 Eaynald. a.d. 1398, n. 40. »> Ibid. a.d. 1399, n. 2-5. 
 
 '" Walsingham, Senry IK, a.d. 1400. 
 
MANUEL PAL^OLOGUS AND MARTIN V. 313 
 
 from Henry IV.,'^' who, singularly enough, was often corre- 
 sponding with the east,*'* and who, two years subsequently, 
 received a letter from John, the cousin of Manuel,'^* pressing 
 earnestly for a further supply of men and money, and praising 
 the valour of some English nobility, resident in his capital, 
 and fighting under his banners. The only two courts which 
 Manuel avoided in his travels were Rome and Avignon.''® As 
 he could not have hoped to please both, he at least sought to 
 offend neither — for as yet the issue was doubtful between 
 them — and it was only when the schism was healed that we 
 find him accosting Rome again. But during the ten or 
 twelve years that intervened, the power of the Turks having 
 been crippled by Tiiftour or Tamerlane the Tartar, in the 
 words of Gibbon,'^' ' as long as the sons of Bajazet solicited 
 his friendship and spared his dominions, he was satisfied with 
 the national religion ; and his leisure was employed in com- 
 posing twenty theological dialogues for its defence.' But 
 when Gibbon adds : ' The appearance of the Byzantine am- 
 bassadors at the council of Constance announces the restora- 
 tion of the Turkish power, as well as of the Latin church,' 
 he is importing from Fleury, Lenfant, and others, what is 
 pure romance. 'On the 19th of February,' says Pleury, 
 ' there arrived at the council of Constance, a.d. 1419, a solemn 
 embassy from Manuel emperor, and Joseph patriarch, of 
 Constantinople, to make proposals to the council for reunion. 
 At the head of the embassy was George, archbishop of Kiow. 
 He was accompanied by several Tartar princes and nineteen 
 Greek bishops. They were received with great pomp and 
 honor. The emperor Sigismond, the princes, and all the 
 clergy, walked in state before them. As long as they re- 
 mained at Constance, they had entire liberty of celebrating 
 divine service according to their own ritual, and in their own 
 way."^' The sensation which their appearance created at 
 Constance was unquestionably prodigious. How they pre- 
 
 ™» Letters, &c. edited by the Eev. «»» Liv. civ. 108. Lenfant, Hist, du 
 
 F. 0. Hingeston, vol. i. p. 66. C. de Constance, toI. ii. p. 205, adds : 
 
 "* Ibid. app. i. p. 419 et seq. 'Dacher, qui itait present, timoigne 
 
 ""Ibid. p. 101. Dated Constan- dans son histoire, qui est encore manu- 
 
 tinople, June 1 a.d. 1402. scrite . . . que tout le monde Atait per- 
 
 ™" Gibbon, c. IxTi. After the graphic suadi au eoncile, que cette reunion 
 
 description there given of his travels, aurait pu r^ussir, si les Grecs avaient 
 
 it would be idle to attempt one. trouvA les choses dispos^es a une bonne 
 
 "" Ibid. rtformation de I'^glise.' 
 
314 PEOJECfS FOR BEUNlON, 
 
 pared their altai* for mass, and assisted while their archbishop 
 celebrated in his own peculiar fashion, how he gave and 
 they received his blessing after mass, formed prolific subjects 
 for elaborate wood-cuts, adorning the earliest printed histories 
 of that Council in the vernacular, or Grerfnan.'^' But the 
 arms of ' Herr Grregorius,' which are emblazoned there like- 
 wise, proclaim his true character. They describe him coming 
 ' with thirty,' as ' archbishop of Kiow in Eussia, and of the 
 Grreek faith ; ' but, ' -Under Poland and Lithuania.' So far 
 from representing Manuel, or the church of ConstantiUOple, 
 we learn froin Mouravieff that he had actually been refused 
 consecration there just before, as having been appointed un- 
 canonicallyi Vitolf, prince of Lithuania, was a convert to 
 the Latin church, and he it was who had forced GrregOry to 
 undertake the see of Kiow against his own will, and that of 
 his suffralgansi He it was, simikrly, who had despatched 
 both him and them to Constance to do honor to the new 
 pope.^"" The eMperor and patriarch of Constantinople were 
 not in the smallest degree concerned with their mission. 
 Manuel's aspirations, if any, were of a more material cast. 
 There is no proof of any mission arriving from him just then, 
 unless it be that the six sons of the emperor were informed 
 that same year by Martin V. that he was willing to assent to 
 mixed marriages in their case, and that they might therefore 
 intermarry with atfy fainiUes of the Latin commimion they 
 pleased, on condition of their wives adhering to the faith in 
 which they had been brought up.'°' And in a Subsequent 
 . letter '"^ he tells Manuel — ' his dearest son in Christ,' as he 
 calls him — that the knights of S. John from Ehodes, besides 
 a fleet froni Venice, were under orders to assist him, and the 
 Grenoese to withdraw from the service of his enemies the 
 Turks. ' duly that yoii may be the better secured against 
 such dangers in future,' says the pope, ' do not appear any- 
 longer in the light of a meinber cut off from the church, but 
 be joined to us, not as bearing the name of Christian only, 
 
 ^ See fo'l. ixlx. Ixxi. and Ixxx. '" Eaynald. a.d. 1418, n. 17. It 
 
 of Das CaticiUfitmbuch, geachehm zu would appear from Syropulus (Jlist. 
 
 Costenci, Von Ulricli Ton Eeichenthal, Condi. Flor. ed. Creygllton', § ii. c. 5 
 
 Augsbiipg, 1483, in the Camb. Univ. et seq.), that Endseinon Join was oon- 
 
 Lib*ary. Kindly pointed out to me by cemed in negotiating these marriages ; 
 
 H. Bradshaw Esq. but it does not aj)pear that Manuel had 
 
 ™° Hist, of the Eussian Ch. Black- sent him to the pope for that purpose, 
 
 more's tr. p. 73-4. m^ Ibid. a.d. 1422, n. 3 et Beq'. 
 
MANUEL PAL^OLOSUS AND MABTIN V. 316 
 
 but in worship and faith, religious observance, and doctrine. 
 For without going into any deeper disquisition of your ex- 
 isting creed here, but merely taking a practical view of the 
 case, who can doubt how much more formidable your enemies 
 will regard you, linked to the great body of Christendom — 
 that will attack them if they attack you — than they regard 
 you now, looking upon your empire as the vilest and most 
 abject portion of it, vexed and harassed on all sides, as though 
 abandoned to their attacks. In plain language — for there is 
 no disguising it — the Latins say that they object to be at 
 any trouble to assist schismatics. But they would rush to 
 your aid willingly weje you true brothers. Only see, besides 
 the eternal rewards that would be in store for you, what sup- 
 port and renown you would secure for your empire, could 
 you be brought by Divine grace to agree with us in our view 
 of th^ Christian religion, and obey the one catholic church. 
 Whet'efore, dearest son, delay no longer ; as soon as ever we 
 have news of your willingness, it will be our care to despatch 
 envoys to you, versed in the knowledge of the law of God, 
 and with full powers : that nothing may be wanting, as far as 
 in us lies, to bring you and yours over to the truth, and 
 behold you no more latighed to scorn by the Turks, but an 
 emperor reigning in glory.' Martin has sketched the bright 
 side of the picture; but, at that very moment, there were 
 thousands of his own spiritual children in the pay of the 
 Turks, actively besieging Constantinople, undeterred by his 
 excommunications, though levelled at them in the extremest 
 form.*"' In what mind -would the envoys be likely to find 
 Manuel on his part ? In point of fact, their arrival seems to 
 have cost him a stroke of paralysis, from which he never re- 
 covered. But it so happens, in the words of Gibbon once 
 more, * that we have an opportunity of unfolding his most 
 secret intentions, as he explained them in a private conver- 
 satioli without artifice or disguise. . . . One day, in the pre- 
 sence only of the historian Phranza, his favourite chamber- 
 lain, he opened to his colleague and successor ' — his eldest 
 son, John — ' the true principle of his negotiations with the 
 pope. " Our last resource," said Manuel, " against, the Turks 
 is their fear of our union with the Latins, of the warlike 
 nations of the west, who may arm for our relief and for their 
 
 «"" Eaynald. i..D. 1422, n. 4. 
 
316 PROJECTS FOE BEUXIOX. 
 
 destruction. As often as you are threatened by the mis- 
 creants, present this danger before their eyes. Propose a 
 council; consult on the means; but ever delay and avoid 
 the convocation of an assembly, which cannot tend either to 
 our spiritual or temporal emolument. The Latins are proud ; 
 the Greeks are obstinate ; neither party will recede or re- 
 tract; and the attempt of a perfect union will confirm the 
 schism, alienate the churches, and leave us, without hope or 
 defence, at the mercy of the barbarians." Impatient of this 
 salutary lesson, the royal youth arose from his seat, and de- 
 parted in silence.'""* Manuel was a true prophet, as the 
 event showed ; and John ' departed in silence,' apparently, 
 because he had been negotiating in secret for the very pur- 
 pose deprecated by his father, before these words were uttered. 
 It may have been the discovery of what he had been doing 
 under the rose that caused Manuel his stroke of paralysis. 
 The narrative of what passed, at all events, explains his views, 
 in contradistinction to those of his father, in the clearest 
 light. At the head of the envoys despatched by Martin was 
 a minorite friar and professor of theology, named Antony 
 Messano, who arrived at Constantinople Sept. 10, a.d. 1422 — 
 it was long since any regularly accredited envoy from the 
 pope had been seen there — and took up his quarters in a 
 convent belonging to his own order at Pera in the suburbs. 
 After some delay, he was to have been received by Manuel 
 and the patriarch ; but on the very day fixed for his audience 
 — October 3 — Manuel was seized with paralysis, from which 
 he never rallied. In due time Antony was admitted to see 
 John in private : afterwards, October 20, he delivered before 
 the patriarch, metropolitans, calogers, and a large attendance 
 both of Greeks and Latins, in the church of S. Stephen, the 
 declaration which he had been instructed to make by Martin, 
 under nine heads. 
 
 1. He enlarged upon the desire of the pope for union. 
 ' There was nothing,' he said, ' after God, that his master de- 
 sired more ardently than to live to see the Latin and Greek 
 churches united; and it was the wish of all the cardinals 
 no less.' 2. He dwelt upon the miseries entailed by their 
 disunion. 'What could be more pitiable than to hear the 
 Greeks speaking of the Latins — Franks, as they called them 
 
 °°* 0. Ixvi. from Phranza, lib. ii. c. 13. 
 
MANUEL PALiEOLOGUS AND MARTIN V. 317 
 
 — ■with the utmost abhorrence, as dogs; both having been 
 equally baptised in the same laver of regeneration, and made 
 children of the same Father, heirs and brethren ... or to 
 contemplate the danger with which the Greeks themselves 
 are threatened of becoming slaves to the Turks. 3. All the 
 pope wanted them to do, was to be as good as their word. 
 Theodore, bishop of Oleno in Achaia, and Nicholas Endaemon 
 John, a person of distinction, had come into the west and 
 assured Martin that the honest wish of both the emperor and 
 the patriarch was to effect a junction of the church of the 
 Greeks with the Latin, by consenting to believe what the 
 church of Kome believed, and engaging to be obedient to it. 
 
 4. The pope, he was to say, had, in consequence of these 
 representations, actually gone so far as to appoint Peter 
 Fonseca, cardinal of S. Angelo, his legate, with the inten- 
 tion of sending him from Florence, where his holiness then 
 was, to Constantinople, to negotiate about a council; it 
 having been represented to him that a council was indispen- 
 sable. What had prevented the cardinal from starting was 
 in part his illness, which was of course no fault of the pope. 
 
 5. Another cause was, that letters had been received since 
 from the bishop of Oleno and others, through a friar named 
 Macarius, to the effect that no preparation was making for a 
 council on the part of the Greeks ; nor indeed could there 
 be, till peace was made with the Turks. 6. Accordingly the 
 pope had despatched him, he averred, to get a general council 
 of the Greeks held first, in order that there might be no 
 recurrence of the difficulties experienced after the second 
 council of Lyons, the Greeks having refused, after all had 
 been apparently settled there, to be bound by it, on the 
 ground that their general assent to it had not been obtained 
 previously. Let them say where they would have the 
 council, which of their prelates would attend it, and for what 
 purposes it would meet. To dispute about the faith was out 
 of the question ; but for Latin and Greek doctors to confer 
 together, with a view to their final agreement, was quite 
 right and honorable. 7. Once more, was it not true what 
 bishop Theodore and Endaemon John had expressed to the 
 pope and his legate at Florence, on the part of the emperor 
 and patriarch, without including, of course, those who were 
 not subjects of the Greek empire? 8. The cardinal of 
 S. Angelo would go bound for it, that as soon as ever the 
 
318 PKOJECTS I'OK BEUNIOlSr. 
 
 proposed union was effected, the aid of tke king of Arragon 
 and other western potentates would be forthcoming. ' Still 
 it was not by acting under compulsion that they would 
 plea,se Grod, for He loveth 9, cheerful giyer.' 9. The pope 
 on hi§ part engaged th^t, should the empepor and patriarch 
 accede to the proposed jinion, he would send his legate and 
 bishops on the shortest notice to the council after he had 
 been 8,dvertised where, when, g,nd for whiat objects it would 
 be held. 
 
 John bad evidently been in correspondence with Martin at 
 Florence, the very place wMch he was afterwards destined to 
 visit in person, unknown to his father ; and his emissaries-^ 
 for we shall hear him admit that they were his^h,ad pro- 
 cured him credit for more than he really meant; and Antony 
 Messano had let it all out^ true or false. Naturally enough, 
 he took some time to reply. It was not till November 4, 
 th,at Messano was favoured wjjth any communication from 
 him or the patriarch. When it arrived, it was found to be 
 couched in the form of a letter from John to the pope ; and 
 Messano, satisfied that it had been written in .good faith, 
 returned with it in that belief to his master.^"^ John com- 
 menced by energetically repudiating the communication said 
 to have been made in his name to the pope by the bishop of 
 Oleno and Endaemon John. He never said or intended to say . 
 any such thing. What he had written in his letters — and his 
 ambassadors were not instructed to do more than repeat it — 
 was, that he wished a general council held, after the manner 
 of tlie seven ceoumenical councils of old, to confirm and ratify 
 whatever the Holy Spirit should ena,ble them to agree upon 
 then and there. Constantinople was the proper — in fact the 
 only — place, where it could be held ; nor was j.t necessary that 
 all the patriarchs or all the bishops in his dominions should 
 be present at it. The cost of holding councils had hitherto 
 been defrayed by the empire; but under existing circum- 
 stances it must be defrayed by the pope. For the moment, 
 as Antony would attest, it could not be held for the war. As 
 soon as peace was re-established, he ;wonld send and let the 
 pope know ; and by that time his holiness would, he hoped, 
 be prepared with the necessary funds. The pope might ex- 
 pedite matters by excommunicating all those who refused 
 
 •»5 This letter of his to the council is given in Mansi, torn. xxx. p. 874. 
 
JOHN PAL.EOLOGUS II. AND EUGENIUS IV. 319 
 
 sending succours to Constantinople, or who supplied ships to 
 the Turks. The very day his legate arrived with powers to 
 do so, negotiations for union might commence; and what- 
 ever was ruled by such a council as he had named would be 
 accepted in all the world ; nor would union effected in this 
 vay ever be dissolved again. 
 
 This official narrative of Messano was read out at full 
 length before the council of Sienna,^"^ which he found sitting 
 on his return; and the letter of the Greek emperor — the 
 acts of that council erroneously say ' patriarch ' — in Grreek 
 and Latin, authenticated by its seal of gold, exhibited to the 
 assembled fathers, whose resolve it was, that the subject was 
 not one that could be 4aken in hand at that season with any 
 profit. As Eaynaldus explains it: 'the idea of a general 
 council to be held in Constantinople, where the schismatics 
 mustered in such force, for the discussion of dogma, was 
 viewed with apprehension by some, as fraught with peril to 
 Catholicism, So the pope sent neither legate nor bishops 
 thither.' 
 
 Eugenius, as we shall see, made no sort of difficulty about 
 Constantinople, \yhen it was a race between him and the 
 Basle fathers. At present, it was the idea not of the council, 
 but of the place, to which objection was made. Matters had 
 advanced that far since the d9,ys of Benedict XII. After the 
 dissolution of the coupcil of Sienna, various embassies passed 
 to and fro without result ; but in one of them John, on his 
 part, seems to have insisted on Constantinople once more, 
 and the pope to have returned answer, that, as he had sum- 
 moned a council of the west to meet at Basle, seven years 
 from the dissolution of that of Sienna, it would be better for 
 the Greeks to send representatives thither, and that he would 
 engage to pay their travelling expenses.'"' But before that 
 council could meet Martin had died, and Eugenius IV. was 
 pope. It met nevertheless in June or July a-d- 1431, under 
 
 SM Hence found in Mansi, torn, to distinguish between private and 
 
 Xiviii. p. 1062-70; as well as Eaynald. official communications. Scattered 
 
 A..D. 1422, n. 6-16, but with many notice? are to be found in Eaynald. 
 
 corrupt passages in both. A.D. 1426, n. 22 ; a.d. 1432, n. 8 ; and 
 
 »»' Fleury, liv. ev. 80, comp. 100. a.d. 1432, n. 12. What the last refers 
 
 Du Pin, Ec'ol. Hist. Cent. XV. c. iii. pp. to is not very intelligible— -it may be 
 
 21, 22, Wotton's tr. vol. iii. fol. ed., mere exaggeration — Eugenius is not 
 
 borrowing solely from Syropulus, as explicit, 
 above, without naming him, seems not 
 
320 PEOJEOTS FOE EEUXION. 
 
 his authority ; and cardinal Julian, who had been named as 
 president of it by Martin, was confirmed in that office by 
 him. Among the objects which it was designed to effect, 
 that of reconciling the Greeks is not mentioned.^"* But it 
 was, in point of fact, this very business, as much as anything 
 else, that made shipwreck of the council, and it gave rise to 
 one of the earliest of the disputes between Eugenius and the 
 assembled fathers. Before they had held their first sessioUj^"' 
 he wrote to tell their president that he had just received a 
 message from the Greek emperor, begging that he would 
 ratify the agreement made with his predecessor for holding ' 
 a council in the west on the Greek question, and paying the 
 expenses of the Greeks there and back ; which he felt dis- 
 posed to do. Bologna had been already named, as one of the 
 places in Italy that would suit the emperor best, if it was not 
 to be Constantinople, and thither he proposed transferring 
 the council of Basle, to avoid having two councils sitting at 
 the same time.''" By a subsequent letter, dated December 1 8, 
 he gave effect to his intentions. He decreed the dissolution' 
 of the council of Basle from the date of his letter, to meet 
 again at Bologna within a year and six months afterwards, 
 and be succeeded by another at Avignon ten years later. He 
 wrote the same day to the emperor Sigismund, to inform 
 him of what had been done, and to beg him to do his best to 
 get the Greek emperor to send deputies to Bologna without 
 fail.^" But the Basle fathers refused to be dissolved, and 
 the emperor Sigismund on the whole sided with them ; and 
 it was not till the sixteenth of their sessions, or April, a.d. 1434, 
 that the dispute was terminated"^ by the pope cancelling 
 their translation, and assenting to their going on with the 
 council as before, under fresh presidents appointed by him. 
 So far the Greeks had brought the pope into collision with 
 the council to his disadvantage. They made ample amends 
 for it in the sequel. He and the council were no sooner 
 reconciled, than the Greek question again interfered with the 
 progress of their good understanding. During their estrange- 
 ment they had each been despatching independent embassies 
 
 "" Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 14. »i° Eaynald. a.d. 1431, u. 21. 
 
 =»' His letter is dated Nov. 12. »■' Ibid. n. 25-6. 
 
 Their first session was held Dec. 7. '" See the epitome given by Mansi 
 
 Martene and Durand, Vet. Script, et on Eaynald. a.d. 1432, n. 1; a.d. 1433, 
 
 Mon. torn. viii. prsef. p 4-6. u. 1 ; and a.d. 1434, n. 1. 
 
JOHN PAL^OLOQUS II. AND EUGENIUS IV. 321 
 
 to the Greeks, and advocating differcDt plans. The pope had 
 sent his secretary Christopher Garatorius, and the council 
 Albert de Crispis and the bishop of Stralsund in Pomerania, 
 the year before; both had succeeded in their respective 
 missions, but unfortunately with conflicting results. The 
 arrangement proposed to his secretary, Eugenius told the 
 council, and -which he had just sent him back to Constanti- 
 nople with authority to complete, was, that his master should 
 send a legate to Constantinople, with a sufficient number of 
 prelates and learned men of the Latin communion, to confer 
 with a similar array of bishops and others of the Greek 
 church assembled under the patriarch and emperor. It was 
 hoped that by discussing matters amicably together, as had 
 been done in the sixth council, each of the churches might 
 be able to unite, and come to terms with the other. This 
 was his plan, and it was still in progress.''^ Meanwhile what 
 had the ambassadors of the council achieved ? 
 
 At first it appeared a grand success. For the Greeks were 
 well aware that one of the main objects contemplated by the 
 Basle fathers, in addition to the correction of abuses gene- 
 rally, was the contracting and circumscribing of the power of 
 the pope and of his court.'''' And their ambassadors ex- 
 plained how vastly superior the council was to the pope, and 
 how much more able to forward the treaty for union. The 
 argument that weighed most with John, we may be sure, was 
 that his imperial brother in the west, Sigismund, had de- 
 clared for the council ; and as the patriarch still hesitated, 
 he saw there was no time to be lost. Accordingly, without 
 waiting to hear more from Eugenius, he despatched Demetrius 
 Palseologus, general of the forces, Isidore abbot of the con- 
 vent of S. Demetrius, afterwards metropolitan of Eussia and 
 cardinal, and John a son-in-law of the emperor, who had 
 been twice consul, from Constantinople, with full powers, as 
 ambassadors to the council. It was the news of their depar- 
 ture, we are told by Syropulus, that caused Eugenius to send 
 back his secretary Christopher, accepting Constantinople defi- 
 nitively for the synod, as proposed by the Greeks."* There 
 was plenty of time for all this, owing to shipwreck and other 
 accidents which detained the ambassadors upwards of six 
 
 »" Martene and Durand, as above, iiroTwriSo-ei toS irriiro re koI ttjs Kodpriji 
 p. 766. Dated Nov. 15, a.d. 1434. outoC. Syrop. as above, § ii. c. 21. 
 
 »" Kol fiiMara iirX Tp (ruOToAj) Kol "' Ibia. § ii. t. 22. 
 
 T 
 
322 PROJECTS FOE EEUNION. 
 
 months on the road.^'^ On their arrival, they were greeted 
 with a warm reception; and a long address was delivered in 
 honor of them by the president, cardinal Julian, to which 
 they made a suitable reply.^'^ Together with their creden- 
 tials from the emperor, they presented a letter from the 
 patriarch to the council,"'' dated October 15, a.d. 1433, re- 
 ciprocating its good intentions, as they had been announced 
 to him, and trusting that a general council would be held, 
 composed of all who ought to be there, in perfect keeping 
 with the constitution of oecumenical councils in olden time ; 
 and that what such a council under Grod should decree would 
 be accepted by all religiously without cavil. A distinguished 
 committee of cardinals and prelates, including amongst others 
 the Latin patriarch of Antioch, was appointed to treat with 
 them. One of the first declarations which the ambassadors 
 were instructed to make was, that if the westerns would 
 concur in holding the proposed council at Constantinople, 
 the easterns would be ready to defray their own costs, and 
 the emperor would do what he could towards paying the ex- 
 penses of the westerns who came to it. But in case the 
 council should be held in the west, it would be necessary 
 that the easterns should be franked thither and back at the 
 cost of the westerns. The committee suggested that the 
 Greeks could not do better than come to Basle, where there 
 was a council already sitting. The ambassadors replied that 
 Basle was not on their list of places, which was confined to 
 Calabria, Ancona, or some such town on the coast ; Bologna, 
 Milan, or some other in Italy ; Buda in Hungary, or Vienna 
 in Austria ; last of all. Savoy. This was their extreme limit ; 
 but the committee might, if it pleased, send to Constanti- 
 nople to propose Basle. Eeserving that point for the present, 
 it was agreed between the ambassadors and the committee : 
 1. That the emperor, the patriarch of Constantinople, the 
 three other patriarchs, and all other archbishops, bishops, and 
 clergy who could conveniently attend, should not fail to be 
 present at the proposed council ; and that deputies with full 
 powers from all other countries where the Grreek church was 
 
 "" See the letter of the emperor ia Christopher was sent back, asEugenius 
 
 Martens and Durand, as before, p. 673, himself says, 
 
 and the letter of Albert de Crispis, ^" Ibid. p. 674-90. 
 
 p. 723, which was read before the conn- '" Both in Mansi, torn. xxix. pp. 
 
 cil in July — the very month in which 96, 97. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT BASLE. 3s:3 
 
 dominant should be there too. 2. That towards collecting 
 the Grreek prelates from all parts to Constantinople, a sum of 
 8,000 ducats should be sent from the west, to be refunded, 
 however, in case they turned back or declined coming. 
 3. That the west should bear the cost of four large galleys, 
 to convey to the council and back the emperor, the patri- 
 archs and prelates of the eastern church with their respective 
 suites, to the number of 700 persons, pay 15,000 ducats towards 
 their expenses from Constantinople to the port at which they 
 shall land ; and from that time forth to their return home, 
 maintain them honorably^^ wherever they may be. 4. The 
 west, within ten months, dating from November next, to 
 provide two large and two small galleys, to take a deputation 
 from the council and the Greek ambassadors back to Con- 
 stantinople, with 300 archers on board for their protection. 
 The deputation to take with it the 15,000 ducats stipulated, 
 and to be empowered to spend 10,000 for the defence of 
 Constantinople, in case of danger from the Turks in the 
 absence of the emperor. The two light galleys and the 300 
 archers to remain there in his service on guard, while he is 
 away. The two large galleys to be armed and equipped in 
 the usual way. 5. The deputation to name the port to the 
 emperor at which he is to land, and the place — which must 
 be one of those specified on the list of the ambassadors, un- 
 less Basle can be agreed upon — where the coimcil is to be. 
 6. The Basle fathers must not separate meanwhile ; nor, un- 
 less for some grave cause, transfer themselves elsewhere ; and 
 within a month after the arrival of the emperor at the port 
 named by them, must have removed to the place chosen for 
 the council. 7. That what had been covenanted between the 
 ambassadors and committee should be confirmed by reso- 
 lution under seal of the council, and the assent of the 
 pope secured to it by bulls patent from him in due form. 
 8. Finally, it was declared on both sides that the whole 
 transaction had been in good faith. The ambassadors, in 
 token of their own sincerity, deposited their credentials with 
 the council, and made oath, in the name of their master, that 
 the synod for which they had been negotiating should take 
 place, unless prevented by circumstances that he could not 
 control. In answer to some questions on the part of the 
 committee, they explained that by the words universal synod 
 they meant one in which the pope and patriarchs were present 
 
 I 2 
 
324 PROJECTS FOE REUNIOK. 
 
 either personally or by deputies ; and other prelates similarly. 
 Then, as for the synod about to be held, they guaranteed that 
 the emperor and patriarch of Constantinople should be there 
 personally; and that it should be one in which everybody 
 should express his judgment freely without any restraint or 
 constraint whatever ; and in which, though there .might be 
 peaceful, honest, and charitable discussion in abundance, 
 there should be no wrangling of any kind. The Greek em- 
 peror afid the Greek church would have the same honor 
 paid them that they had when the schism broke out; but 
 always without prejudice to the jights, honors, privileges, 
 and dignities of the sovereign pontiff, the church of Eome, 
 and the Eoman emperor. Should any questions arise, they 
 would be decided by the council. 
 
 On application of the committee, the council coninrmed all 
 that had passed, in their nineteenth session, September 7, 
 A.D. 1434; and in conformity with the wish expressed by the 
 Greeks, adjured Eugenius in the most solemn manner to 
 confirm it by his bulls patent in the manner customary with 
 the court of Eome."® 
 
 The council despatched a copy of their decree by two of the 
 Greek ambassadors to the emperor Sigismund forthwith, who 
 returned his congratulations to them with equal prompti- 
 tude, in a letter dated Eatisbon, October 1 ; and sent off 
 another letter simultaneously to the Greek emperor, assuring 
 him of his co-operation, and begging him to use despatch in 
 responding to it.'^° Simon Freron, a canon of Orleans, was 
 sent with a copy of the decree to the pope, with the request 
 of the council that he would confirm it. Freron wrote 
 from Florence to the council, October 20, to say that the 
 Greeks who were there and had seen it were in raptures with 
 it, and said that it was far preferable to anjrthing that had 
 been proposed by Eome. Eugenius, he added, wished well 
 to the union; but deferred his answer to the scheme that 
 had been submitted to him, till two of his own cardinals, 
 whom he was expecting from the council, arrived. A letter 
 from Eugenius to the council of the same date, shows that 
 the canon had not misrepresented him.®^' On the other 
 hand, the pope received letters from the Greek patriarch of 
 
 °'" Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 92-98 — and Durand, as before, p. 750-3. 
 ' More Eomanse euriss' — as it is aaid. ''' Ibid, for both letters, p. 755-7. 
 
 ■"" Both letters are given by Martene 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT BASLE. 325 
 
 Jerusalem, and from the emperor of Trebizond,*'^ in favour 
 of the scheme negotiated by his secretary. His final answer 
 to the council of November 1 5, which has been in part antici- 
 pated, was, that of the two he preferred his own plan as 
 most likely to please all parties in the end, especially the 
 Greeks, and as far the least costly. He had replies in favour 
 of it not only from the Greek emperor and patriarch, who 
 had in fact proposed it, but from the emperor of Trebizond 
 and the Armenian patriarch. His own assent to it had been 
 sent, as far back as the month of July, by his secretary 
 Christopher. While they had been concluding one thing, he 
 has been authorising another ; what confusion if both are 
 accepted, what disgrace should both fail! Any plan that 
 will ensure success will be the same to him — therefore, 
 should they decide on adhering to their plan in preference 
 to his, he assents cheerfully to their request.'^* Cardinal 
 Ursini, writing to the council a day later, assured them how 
 religiously pleased the pope had been to do so. Nor can he 
 express with what joy his holiness 'and all Jerusalem with 
 him,' had heard of the success of their laudable efforts.^'''' 
 For all that, he defeated them in the end, as we shall see. 
 
 The council was bound to despatch ambassadors to Con- 
 stantinople within ten months ; it had likewise to obtain his 
 assent previously to their proceedings. It could hardly have 
 reached them before Christopher was writing— December 21 
 — from Venice to the pope to announce the entire success of 
 his mission. He- reported that he had brought back two dis- 
 tinguished envoys — bishops, he calls them — and their suite, 
 sixteen persons in all, with him, to hear his holiness confirm 
 with his own lips the scheme with which he had been en- 
 trusted.'^' He accompanied them without loss of time to 
 Florence, where they assured Eugenius unhesitatingly that 
 union was out of the question on the basis understood to 
 have been accepted by the ambassadors negotiating with the 
 Basle fathers; and therefore prayed his ratification of the 
 scheme of his secretary with some modifications. These 
 modifications, however, on his objecting to them, they with- 
 
 '" Ibid. p. 757-8. p. 783-5, for both; it being aho-wnina 
 
 "^ Ibid. p. 776-8, or Eaynald. a.d. note that the heading of the first is 
 
 1434, n. 17. erroneous, and should be — 'To the 
 
 »-« Ibid. p. 769-70. pope.' 
 "» Martene and Durand, ibid. 
 
326 PBOJECTS FOE REUNION. 
 
 drew subsequently. For the rest, he referred them to the 
 council, whither he despatched them with two letters from 
 him, dated February 22, a.d. 1435 ; one setting forth their 
 sentiments in favour of his scheme, the other furnishing 
 details of it, countersigned by the cardinals that were with 
 him.3^« Could it have been carried out honestly, we may 
 quite believe that it would have resulted in a more permanent 
 settlement of the Greek question than the other ; but, un- 
 fortunately, the experiment of sending a legate to Constanti- 
 nople to hold a synod there had been tried by several of his 
 predecessors, beginning with Nicholas I., 600 years ago, and 
 not been blessed with success. His letters were communi- 
 cated to the fathers April 5 — in the interval between their 
 twentieth and twenty-first session — and the envoys presented a 
 letter of their own at the same time to the council from the 
 emperor.^^' The ubiquitous Christopher was of course there 
 to second them with plausible arguments ; yet he was able to 
 show from his instuctions that he was authorised to defer to 
 the council. The council accordingly decided against the 
 plan of the pope, and commenced talang steps for despatching 
 their ambassadors, and raising the necessary funds for their 
 conveyance,^^' to Constantinople, deputing one of their own 
 body, meanwhile, to acquaint the pope with their reasons.^'*' 
 Christopher, they told him, had made them a long address, 
 in which he had left nothing unsaid that could be urged 
 in favour of his scheme; but their reply was, that what 
 the Greeks wanted was a proper cecumenical council; and 
 this the presence of a few western bishops at Constanti- 
 nople, with a single legate at their head, could never effect. 
 If the Greek bishops mustered in no greater numbers, it 
 would be, not a general, but a particular council; if they 
 mustered in full force, they would swamp the westerns. 
 These arguments had convinced even the Greek envoys who 
 had come from the pope ; and one of them had said in con- 
 gregation openly, that the patriarch had told him that even 
 if the plan of coining to Constantinople were not adopted, he 
 would rather be borne on shoulders to the west than not keep 
 his word with the council. Finally, Christopher had assured 
 the council that the pope left it free to adopt which plan it 
 
 ™ Martene and Durand, for both, »» Ibid. p. 833-9, -mthout date, 
 
 805-9. tut this will appear from the answer 
 
 "" Mansi, torn. rxix. p. 623. to it as we proceed. 
 °" Ibid. 763-6, a very curious paper. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT BASLE. 327 
 
 pleased. As for the expense, it could easily be met by a 
 proportionate issue of plenary indulgences ; and when, indeed, 
 could there be a better cause for publishing one? let his 
 holiness concur with the council in authorising them, and 
 suspending all others for the time being. 
 
 As the first reply from the pope to their request bears date 
 August 12,''° we may conclude that their deputy must have 
 been with him some weeks before. At all events, six days 
 before that time, we have the deputies to Constantinople from 
 Basle writing to that council from Venice, to say that they 
 were on the point of starting at last, after a host of difficulties 
 — having hired the galley that was to convey them from a 
 relative of the bishap of Padua — and were to sail on the 8th, 
 or the Monday following. They were on the best of terms 
 with the Greek ambassadors, in whose company they were 
 travelling. They conclude with the remarkably significant 
 communication, made by them with so much simplicity — 
 ' Sir Christopher is here with galleys, and going to Constanti- 
 nople — we know not why. We have not yet spoken with 
 him.''" And the inevitable secretary turned up, as we shall 
 find, at Constantinople as soon as they. 
 
 Simon Freron, the canon of Orleans, who had been sent 
 from Basle to the pope, with his two fellows, Henry Menger 
 and John of Eagusa, reached Constantinople on the 24th of 
 September, as we learn from their own letters, which are full 
 of interest ; ^^^ or forty-seven days from the Monday on which 
 they were to have left Venice. According to Syropulus, they 
 brought with them the 8,000 ducats covenanted between the 
 ambassadors and the council for preliminary expenses.''^ 
 An honorable reception awaited them ; and they were lodged 
 in a house which afterwards turns out to be the convent of 
 S. George, provided for them by order of the emperor. Nine 
 days after their arrival they were admitted to audience by 
 him, presented their letters, and each of them addressed him 
 in a set speech, which has been preserved.''* They merely 
 announced that the council adhered to its own scheme in 
 
 tso Tlirough his seciretary, Poggius. ing, both for the information ■which 
 
 Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 459. they convey and for the true Christian 
 
 »" Maitene and Durand, p. 820. feeling which they display. For their 
 
 This letter contains some choice state- arrival, vide p. 651. 
 
 ments for the antiquarian. '" § ii. c. 23. 
 
 '" Their four letters in Mansi, torn. '"* Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 429-61. 
 xxix. p. 661-65, are well worth read,- 
 
328 PEOJECTS FOE EEUNIOX. 
 
 preference to tbat of the pope ; and that the pope had left it 
 free, both in the answer brought back by one of themselves 
 and in the subsequent message conveyed through his own 
 secretary, to adopt which plan it pleased. Afterwards they 
 were received by the patriarch ; and the account given of him 
 by one of them in a subsequent letter, when they had im- 
 proved their acquaintance, is so naive and amiable that it 
 shall be recorded in his own words. 'He has a profound 
 sense of the inner life,' says John of Eagusa®'' to cardinal 
 Julian : ' a wonderful experience ; so much so, that whenever 
 I go to him alone ... I never can tear myself away from 
 him under four or five hours ; indeed, but for the difference 
 that there is between the churches, I should call him the most 
 perfect old man I had ever beheld, exactly answering to the 
 description of those holy fathers whose lives I am in the 
 habit of reading with so much reverelice and wonder.' And 
 is there not one at least among our Anglican contemporaries 
 of whom it would be crying injustice to say that this is not a 
 life-like portrait ? But we must not forget that Christopher, 
 as we are reminded by Syropulus, had been beforehand with 
 them ; and that the last communications between Constanti- 
 nople and the west had passed through his hands. He was 
 now at his post once more to observe their proceedings ; and 
 with the patriarch his relations were of the most friendly 
 character.'^^ When they had their first interview, therefore, 
 with the head of the Grreek church, he told them flatly, that 
 much as he desired union, it was out of the question to ex- 
 pect him at his advanced age to cross the sea. The other 
 plan, he showed by his manner, was much more to his 
 liking.^'^ Besides, there were rumours spread now about the 
 Basle fathers, to the efi'eet that they were disposed to be 
 mutinous, and could not even agree amongst themselves.''" 
 On the other hand, the emperor and his ambassadors worked 
 in their favour, and at length so far talked over the patri- 
 arch, as to get a committee, with his consent, appointed to 
 report upon their proposals.''' Meanwhile there was a gene- 
 ral desire on the part of the Greeks to hear the decree of the 
 council read out ; and loud and universal was the burst of 
 
 '" Mansi, as beforp, p. 657. "' Ibid. c. 27. Ne(rd^ovTfs- in the 
 
 ""' § ii. 0. 25. letter of John of Eag^sa and Simon 
 
 =" Ibid. c. 24. Freron, called ' deputati.' Mansi, as 
 
 »^» Ibid. c. 25. before, p. 651. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT BASLE. 329 
 
 indignation, when they found themselves classed in it with 
 the Bohemians, and called the ancient, as opposed to the 
 modern heresy, says Syropulus ; dissent, says the text in Latin 
 of the decree as it now stands.^*" 
 
 The three deputies from Basle apologised for the expression 
 as well as they could, promised that it should be changed, or 
 a fresh decree put forth.'*' All in vain; their cause never 
 really recovered from the shock which it sustained then. 
 And as it lost ground, so that of the pope gained. The final 
 arrangement was, that Henry Monger, one of the deputies, 
 should return to Basle for the purpose of getting a new pre- 
 amble, with which the Greeks had expressed themselves 
 satisfied,'*^ authorita,tively substituted in the decree for the 
 original one which had caused so much ofiFence, and likewise 
 a pledge given at the end of it for a safeconduct and proper 
 conveyance to and from the council, whether attended or not 
 with success.^'" But in the course of the discussions which 
 intervened, Christopher was sent for, and questioned by the 
 deputies on the assent of the pope to what they were nego- 
 tiating; and by the Greeks as to whether his master had 
 promised attending the proposed council in person."^* The 
 secretary perceived his advantage in a twinkling, but took 
 time to deliberate how he should employ it. The next day 
 he produced a paper, showing that he had authority from the 
 pope to acquiesce in all that might be done there by the 
 deputies.'^" But it so happened that the only thing which 
 they had not as yet been able to do, was to persuade the 
 patriarch to waive his objections to travel so far away from 
 home at his advanced age; and it was on his answer that 
 their success or that of the smooth-tongued Cliristopher hvmg 
 in suspense. ' I will come to the council,' at last said he ; 
 ' but I make it a condition of my coming for the pope to be 
 there too.''''® Christopher might start for Italy now, as soon 
 as he liked ; and with him Henry Monger, the deputy, may 
 have travelled in company till they branched off at Venice — 
 he for Florence and the other for Basle. 
 
 The engagements entered into by the deputies,'^' and the 
 
 •'• Syrop. c. 28. ' lUud recens '" Ibid. i;. 36. 
 
 Bohemorum antiquumque Grsecorum °" Ibid. c. 37. 
 
 dissidium.'— Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 92. "" Ibid. 38 ; at the end of -whicli is 
 
 •" Syrop. c. 29. the notice of their departure. 
 
 »« Ibid. c. 35. "' For these t. Martene and Durand 
 
 •" Ibid. asbefore, p.875-9, andMansi,p.444-6. 
 
330 PEOJECTS FOR REUNION. 
 
 despatches with which Menger was charged, are all dated 
 Nove^iber 25 or 26, a.d. 1435 ;'" and it is with praiseworthy 
 punctuality that we find him writing to Cardinal Julian, 
 January 4, A.D. 1436, from Venice to announce his landing, 
 and the good news which he would have to communicate to 
 the council ; he was hastening back to it, he said, olive-branch 
 in hand, as the dove to the ark,^^^ _ _, 
 
 His papers consisted of a letter to the council in his own 
 favour from the two deputies whom he had left behind ; "*" 
 of two memorandums addressed to him on his departure by 
 the emperor and patriarch,'" copies of the speeches made 
 by the three deputies to the emperor on their arrival ; '** their 
 four articles submitted to him, his answers, and their re- 
 joinders ; ^°' the engagements entered into by them for getting 
 the decree of the council altered ; ®^* letters from the patri- 
 arch, the emperor, and his brother Constantine, to the coun- 
 cil;^*' finally, ratifications under the golden seal of the 
 emperor, and the leaden seal of the patriarch respectively, 
 subject to the modifications covenanted with the deputies, of 
 the entire plan of the council.'** 
 
 In other words, the obnoxious part of the decree, calling 
 the Greeks heretics or dissenters, was to be struck out, and 
 its place supplied by the new preamble composed by the 
 deputies, in which ' the union of the western and eastern 
 churches ' is said to be the object for which they were striving. 
 Safeconduct and proper conveyance to and from the council, 
 whether it succeeded or not, was to be guaranteed to the 
 Greeks in a supplemental clause. The choice of place, nomi- 
 nally left in the hands of the council, was shackled with two 
 conditions. It must be some place near or on the sea, as 
 Ancona; easy of access both to them and the pope, for it was 
 indispensable that he should attend in person. On both 
 
 '** MarteneandDurand^Pref.p.xxiv. '"' Martene and Durand, p. 879. 
 
 § 63, make this the date of their arriTal '^' Mansi, p. 649-50. 
 
 in Constantinople — not having noticed '" Ibid. p. 445-51, already referred 
 
 its real date in the letter of John of Ea- to. 
 
 gusa and his companion above quoted. ^" Ibid. p. 452-4. 
 
 Then, from not having read Syropulns, '** Ibid. p. 444-5. 
 
 they cannot make out how the new "' Ibid. p. 627-9. 
 
 form of the decree -which they brought '^ Ibid, p. 125-8. The confusion 
 
 back with them should be identical with which these are arranged in both 
 
 with that of the twenty-fourth session, the works containing them is inde- 
 
 ™ Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 650. scribable. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT BASLE. 331 
 
 points the emperor professed to be as resolved as the patri- 
 arch.^" 
 
 Yet these were the very points passed over in silence by 
 the council when it next met — April 14, a.d. 1436. Every- 
 thing else, literally, that the Greeks asked for was acceded to 
 by the fathers in their twenty-fourth session ; and a year was 
 allowed on both sides for preparations, to date from the en- 
 suing May. A plenary indulgence, finally, was offered in the 
 name of the council to all who should furnish subsidies in 
 aid of the reunion of the Greeks.*'' Authentic copies of 
 their proceedings were sent to Constantinople, which had the 
 effect of setting the emperor in motion on his side. He sent 
 off messengers to Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Eussia; 
 Wallachia, Moldavia, Trebizond, and Iberia or Georgia, as we 
 learn from Syropulus °** and John of Eagusa,'*" to invite the 
 prelates of those parts to Constantinople, where it had been 
 agreed that they should assemble previously to their depar- 
 ture for the west. On the other hand, he sent once more to 
 Basle to press for the immediate fixing of the place, and to 
 reiterate his wish that it should be some town in Italy near 
 the sea.'*' 
 
 Here we may pause to take breath before plunging into 
 the last act of the drama. 
 
 »" Both in their letters to the eoim- '" Mansi, as before, p. 660. 
 
 cil and their memorandums to Men- °" Martene and Durand, as before, 
 
 ger. Praef. p. zsxi. Eaynald. a.d. 1437, 
 
 •" Mansi, aa before, p. 121-33. n. 4. 
 
 «• § iii. c. 2, 
 
332 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 PROJECTS FOR EEtJNION. THE COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 The remaining incidents between the twenty-fourth session 
 of the council of Basle, and the first of that of Ferrara, 
 one would be glad to draw a veil over entirely, were it pos- 
 sible to convey a right estimate of the council of Ferrara, 
 and therefore of Florence, without alluding to them. The 
 process of raising money by the sale of indulgences, and of 
 contracting with owners of capital and owners of vessels 
 on the strength of it, for the transport of the Grreeks to 
 and from the council ; the haggling that ensued between Eu- 
 genius and the Basle fathers about it — for there never was 
 peace between them after that delicate subject had once 
 been broached ; ^^^ the intrigues by which the Grreeks were 
 brought to Ferrara ; the grounds on which they were induced 
 to remove to Florence ; the circumstances under which their 
 assent to the decree promulgated there was obtained : all 
 these details unfortunately form part and parcel of the 
 history of the council of Florence — distasteful as it is to have 
 to refer to them — as much as the doctrinal defijiition with 
 which it ended. 
 
 Must it be told, then, how Florence came to be fixed upon 
 for the council, and how the Grreeks were brought to it? 
 Not according to vague rumours, or to Grreek testimony, 
 but according to the explicit statement of the learned arch- 
 bishop of Palermo, afterwards made cardinal, who was present, 
 and speaks from ofl&cial knowledge — for he with two others 
 had the seal of the council in his special keeping ^^^ — the 
 
 ''' For the sentiments of the pope, '" The instrument bo committing 
 
 see Mansi as hefore, p. 459-63, in an- them is to be seen in Mansi's Siyapl. to 
 
 swer to their rejoinder shortly before. Colet. vol. v. p. 1. 
 For those of the council, p. 282-8. 
 
SCANDALOUS PRELIMINARIES. 333 
 
 decree which named Florence for their meeting was not the 
 decree passed by a majority of the fathers in their tumultuous 
 session of May 7, a.d. 1437 — only too graphically described 
 by ^neas Silvius, afterwards Pius 11.^^^ — but it was tlie 
 decree of the small minority headed by the legates of the 
 pope, smuggled through the council underhandedly, and to 
 which the seal of the council was aflSxed surreptitiously by 
 the secretary and another domestic of cardinal Julian, the 
 president, who came by night and broke open the chest in 
 which it was kept.^^* History records few scenes more dis- 
 graceful, considering who the actors were, or, unhappily, 
 better authenticated.^*®. The last ambassadors from Con- 
 stantinople, unless they belied the emperor, had been 
 instructed to press for some town in Italy; they were 
 persuaded, therefore, without difficulty, to accompany the 
 promoters of the Florentine scheme to Bologna, where Eu- 
 genius was then, and join in praying his assent to it, which 
 he readily gave, May 29 ;^®' after which they discharged their 
 master from his engagements to the Basle fathers, and 
 pledged him conditionally to come to the place named by 
 the pope.'*' 
 
 Let us now ask how the Greeks were conveyed to the 
 council. Eugenius had no sooner set his seal to the decree 
 of his legates, than the citizens of Florence in all haste 
 equipped four galleys at their own expense, to transport the 
 Greeks to their city. But the pope was beforehand even with 
 them. He had four galleys of his own equipped at Venice, 
 which he placed under command of his own nephew Condol- 
 mieri, and in which he sent as his legates — in company with 
 the Greek ambassadors who were returning from him — three 
 bishops, at the bead of whom was Christopher, decorated 
 with a mitre for past services, and two theologians, one of 
 
 '" Mansi, torn. xxxi. p. 220-9. It iWd. p. 874-84. 
 
 stops short of the final scene. "" Eaynald. a.d. 1437, n. 8-9, where 
 
 »«» See his statement, ibid. p. 215. his bull is also given, with the reasons 
 
 »»« See the letter of Sigismund, ibid, that led him to do so. iEneas Silvius, 
 
 torn. XXX. p. 1218, and the sentence of above cited, p. 221, reports the French 
 
 the council thereon, torn. xxix. p. 144. saying that the Greek ambassador 
 
 It is glossed over by Aug. Patric. in Pissipatus had been bribed at Venice ; 
 
 his history, c. 55, ap. Colet. Condi, 'quod de re incognita non potuisset 
 
 torn xviii. p. 1354, and not frankly habere instructiones.' 
 
 confessed by Mansi, tom. xxx. p. 30, in '"' See the various documents rela- 
 
 his. Eugenius himself affects to re- ting to this negotiation in Eaynald, 
 
 gard it as a trumped up story. Colet. ibid. n. 11-13. 
 
334 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 whom was John of Ea^usa, the most accomplished of the, 
 four deputies previously sent from Basle.',** 
 
 The galleys of the pope reached Constantinople towards 
 the end of September, as we learn from Syropulus ; and the 
 explanation given to the Greeks, according to the version of 
 the archbishop of Palermo, was, that the council had not been 
 able to raise the necessary funds, and had therefore remitted 
 the whole business to the pope ; besides which, according to 
 Syropulus, the Grreek ambassadors assured the emperor that 
 the fathers and pope had been reconciled, the council dis- 
 solved, and his holiness left supreme.*^" The joint presence 
 of Christopher his secretary, and of John of Ragusa the 
 former deputy from Basle, must have tended to confirm their 
 story. The emperor, patriarch, and other prelates, accord- 
 ingly were preparing to start in them, when, to the confusion 
 and bewilderment of all, the real galleys of the council 
 arrived in port. Condolmieri alone was not unprepared for 
 the emergency. He was commissioned, he said, ' to burn, 
 sink, and destroy the galleys of the council, wherever he 
 might encounter them ;''" and this he was preparing to 
 attempt in good earnest, when he received orders from the 
 emperor to desist — orders which he took some time to consider 
 whether he would obey or not. The galleys of the council, 
 to their credit, merely stood on their defence. The deputies 
 from Basle represented in vain to the emperor the unworthy 
 trick by which their decree had been rendered abortive, and 
 their preparations forestalled.^'^ Not even a letter from the 
 emperor Sigismund could stay his departure to the west 
 now,*" and on November 24, the emperor and his clergy put 
 themselves on board of the galleys of the pope, and set 
 forth.*'* 
 
 They set forth, but they had been carefully sifted and 
 selected beforehand : of all the prelates who had been invited, 
 whose travelling expenses had been paid to Constantinople 
 
 »«' Fleury, liv. cvii. 47. The letter action like this he would have hardly 
 
 of Eugenius to Christopher in Eaynald. dared to misstate. The written oom- 
 
 estabUshes his identity. mission given to Condolmieri by Eu- 
 
 ™ Mansi, tom. xxxi. p. 216, Syrop. genius is not, of course, as explicit. 
 
 iii. 9. The two accounts are well worth Colet. Condi, tom. xviii. p. 863-E 
 comparing and bear out each other. =" Ug^e again see the archbishop of 
 
 "" I am ashamed to own that Gibbon Palermo. Mansi, tom. X3xi. p. 216. 
 C Ixvi. has translated Syrop. iii. 11, »" Syrop. iii. 13. 
 only too literally ; and a public trans- "< Ibid. iv. 1. 
 
COLLISION WITH THE BASLE FATHERS. 335 
 
 from their respective sees by the 8,000 florins sent over from 
 Basle for that purpose, who had as good a right to seats in 
 a general council as any that went, but a select few — twenty- 
 two in all — were permitted to embark. Why the rest were 
 left behind, the patriarch, whose doing it was, would never ex- 
 plain :*'* and as the galleys came prepared with accommodai- 
 tion for 700 persons,^'* and as one of the chief demands of the 
 emperor all along had been''' that the council should be free, 
 canonical, and oecumenical, it is difiicult to conceive the 
 motives on which the patriarch could have acted in excluding 
 any who had every right to be present, when the interests 
 of the whole church were discussed, unless indeed he was 
 acting under advice from Christopher. Christopher is never 
 absent from the scene throughout, when any turning point is 
 to be attained. His previous ubiquity, during the negotiations 
 between Basle and Constantinople, cannot have escaped the 
 reader. During the voyage he never remains in the back- 
 ground one moment."' They had hardly landed before he 
 was off to the pope''' — hardly gone, before he was back 
 again.''" When the patriarch paid his first visit to the pope, 
 subsequently to his formal reception, he remained closeted 
 with him for some time with only Christopher to interpret.'*' 
 Again they meet, and Christopher is the only person that 
 can make them understand each other.'*' It was Christopher, 
 who, with two others, was sent to congratulate the emperor 
 by the pope, when the first step towards union had been 
 achieved ;"' it was Christopher, who, when the council was 
 over, was despatched to Constantinople once more, to get 
 the union enforced, or, as the new patriarch phrased it, the 
 Greek church refortned.^*^ However, whether it was by his 
 counsel or not, it is evident that, for some reason or other, 
 numbers of Greek bishops who were invited, and would have 
 attended the council, were left behind ; while those who came 
 were, whether they liked it or not, dragged into collision with 
 the Basle fathers, having been made parties to the trick 
 
 •» Ibid. iii. 15. »»° Ibid. 16. 
 
 •'" Colet. torn, xviii. p. 864, where »" Ibid. 24. 
 
 'the safeconduct' of Eugenius is made "' Ibid. vi. 3. 
 
 out for that number. '*' Colet. torn, xviii. p. 502. 
 
 •" Ibid. p. 871, all which is assented '" Syrop. xii. 6, comp. c. 11. 'E\f7e 
 
 to by Eugenius, p. 872. Se ii6pBaioiv Tijs i«KKi\ala! ixeivos, tV 
 
 »ia Syrop. iv. 5. 5f(f4vSev<nv toS AarwiiriitaD. 
 
 •" Ibid. 14. 
 
836 COUNCIL or FLORENCE. 
 
 that was played upon them at the outset. Who could have 
 anticipated in his inmost soul the blessing of heaven upon 
 a council so brought together to treat for peace ? Besides, 
 while treating for peace with the Greeks, was it not waging 
 war 9,11 that time with numbers of those to whom the Greeks 
 bad in fact come to be reconciled ? ' Qualis, pro Deo ! erit 
 ista futura unio, in ipso suo initio tanto dissidio et scandalo 
 ecclesise Latinse referta ? ' said a great archbishop, who has 
 proved a true prophet, and was witness to the truth of what 
 he was stating.^*^ Irritated at the paltry artifice which had 
 supplanted them with the Greeks — it might be designated by 
 a worse name — the Basle fathers cited Eugenius, July 31, to 
 appear before them within sixty days, to render account of his 
 conduct.''^ He replied by transferring the council from 
 Basle to Ferrara, Sept. 18.^" They pronounced him contu- 
 macious Oct. 1, and declared its removal invalid'^* Oct. 12. 
 He opened the council which he had summoned to meet at 
 Ferrara, Jan. 8, a.d. 1438.^*' And they passed sentence of 
 suspension upon him, Jan. 24.^'" He excommunicated them 
 in the second session of his new council Feb. 15.'^' They 
 replied, March 24, by anathematising his new council if it 
 went on,^'' and on June 25, a.d. 1439, they deprived him of 
 his pontificate.'^^ Sept. 4 he renewed his condemnation of 
 them in the bitterest form and rescinded their acts.''* Within 
 a fortnight of that time, they had elected a new pontiff"''' 
 in the person of Amadeus duke of Savoy, who took the name 
 of Felix V. Imagine the declaration coming in the midst 
 of all this, in the month of July, that the Greek and Latin 
 churches were united. With infinitely greater truth it might 
 be said that on the sixth day of that month the Basle fathers 
 received their death-blow. This, at all events, was the only 
 permanent effect resulting from it. The rest ended in smoke. 
 The west put off reforming those numberless abuses which 
 everybody professed to deplore, and council after council bad 
 
 »=' Panormit. ap. Mansi, Supphm. '" Ibid. p. 179-81. 
 
 ad Cokt. torn. iv. p. 1364. »»' Colet. ibid. p. 1202-6. The cele- 
 
 "s" Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 137-41. "brated bull beginning -with the 'word 
 
 °'' Colet. Conail. torn, xviii. p. 874- ' Moyses.' Their thirty-eighth session 
 
 84. The date is given p. 883. was held on its receipt, and is headed 
 
 '=' Mansi, torn. xxix. p. 147-58. ' Contra invectivam.' — Mansi, ibid. 
 
 =»» Colet. ibid. p. 147-58. p. 191-5. 
 
 '=" Mansi, ibid. p. 165-9. ""^ His assent was announced in their 
 
 "' Colet. ibid. p. 912-16. fortieth session. Mansi, ibid. p. 201-5. 
 
 '"'■ Mansi, ibid. p. 170-8. 
 
EUGENIUS ON THE GREEK QUESTION. 337 
 
 been dissolved -without correcting f^^ and the east drifted 
 away as far from union as ever. The conquest of Constanti- 
 nople by the Turks, and the Eeformation, were the answers 
 of Providence to what was done then. 
 
 Into the more special details of the council we may defer 
 entering for the present; but there are three points on which 
 it will be necessary to dwell at some length, for the explana- 
 tion which they afford of its general aim and results: 1. ITio 
 grounds alleged by Eugenius for summoning it; 2. How the 
 decree was obtained ; and 3. By whom signed. 
 
 1. As the subject had been before Eugenius for a length of 
 time, as we shall hear him say presently, we may well suppose 
 that he had studied it from every point of view ; and that each 
 word and act proceeding from him had been carefully weighed 
 beforehand. He must have known how many of his predeces- 
 sors had of late years declined holding any fresh council at 
 all on the Greek question ; that, in fact, it purported to have 
 been settled already by two councils reputed cioumenical in 
 the west — the fourth Lateran and the second of Lyons ; that 
 there had been no new light thrown on it by any phenomena 
 that had occurred since ; and that the creed of Clement IV. 
 applied to it as much now as when framed originally. Then, 
 again, the scheme favoured by him at first had been to send 
 delegates from the west to Constantinople, and hold the 
 council there. Having abandoned his own plan for that of 
 the Basle fathers, he was no longer free, but was obliged to 
 start from the terms on which they were pledged to the east, 
 and the east to them. And one condition there was, of the 
 highest importance doctrinally, to which the Basle fathers, 
 in concert with his legates, had assented in the most emphatic 
 way : namely that the word ' heresy ' should not be so much 
 as breathed in connection with the Greek question.'^' Let us 
 now hear Eugenius speak for himself, and gather from his 
 own words the stand-point assumed by him. First in his 
 form of safeconduct for the Greeks coming to the council : 
 • As by the grace of God there is to be a catholic and universal 
 synod held in Italy, in which according to the agreement 
 
 "'Even Eugenius, in transferring c. 70: 'Adaliaperficienda.quaeBasileae 
 
 the council of Basle to Ferrara, had erant incepta.' It never arrived at that 
 
 ^said it was to meet there ' pro reforma- point, 
 tione universalis ecclesise.' — Colet. '" Above, p. 329-30. 
 torn, xviii. p. 816. Or, as Aug.Patric. 
 
338 COUNCIL OF PLOKENCE. 
 
 made in the synod of Basle, and confirmed afterwards at 
 Constantinople, the -western and the eastern church is to come 
 together ... we grant, in virtue of these presents' — and 
 so forth. ^'8 Or again in his letter to the emperor, of July 15, 
 A.D. 1438 : ' As the holy synod of Basle has at length selected 
 the spot for holding the future council in Italy to accomplish, 
 if God will, the most holy union of the western and eastern 
 church.'^' Or as he tells his legates in their instructions of 
 the sa,va,e date: It is 'for the union of the western and 
 eastern church so long and ardently desired by us,' that you 
 are sent."""' It is for this that he accepts to be bound in 
 certain engagements to the patriarch and emperor.""" ' Ear- 
 nestly striving with our whole heart that the union of the 
 churches of Christ in west and east, for which we have yearned 
 and laboured so long and intensely, maybe effected and carried 
 out, as it ought, at last.' For this it is that he has decided 
 on translating the council from Basle to Ferrara.'""^ ' As 
 long ago as when we were in minor orders, we never ceased 
 contemplating with excessive sorrow and bitterness the di- 
 vision of the eastern and western church.'' How scrupu- 
 lously he weighed each word may be seen from the fact, that 
 when he speaks of union, he puts the western church first ; 
 when of division, as here, the eastern. 'As we saw what 
 innumerable evils resulted from it to the Christian religion, 
 and th'erefore we have been doing all in our power that it 
 might be stopped ; first bringing it forward in the council of 
 Constance with great urgency, and afterwards, in addition, 
 before our predecessor Martin V. of happy memory ; labouring 
 in each case with all our might that the wall of separation 
 might be taken out of the way, and the union of each church 
 assured.' 
 
 So in the decree read out in opening the council by the 
 bishop of Forlij^""* 'the business of the most holy union of the 
 western and eastern church ' is that for which they meet. 
 More explicitly, in the decree read out after the arrival of 
 
 "»» Colet. Concil. torn, xviii. p. 864. to classify them. 
 
 Mansi's thirty-first vol. is incomplete. »=' Ibid. p. 867. 
 
 But between these two and the fifth '"" Ibid, 
 
 vol. of Mansi's Suppl. to Coletus, all "»' Ibid. p. 872. 
 
 our materials for the council of Florence '»" See his bull, ibid. p. 874. 
 
 lie thrown together in such wild con- "" Ibid. p. 898. 
 fusion, that it is the work of a full week 
 
EUGENIUS ON THE GREEK QUESTION. 389 
 
 the Greeks and in their presence.'""^ ' For, lo ! the eastern 
 and the western peoples, long since separated from each 
 other by mutual discord, are hastening to come together in 
 one holy bond of peace and unity. Hence by His blessing, 
 from whom is every good gift, they are here assembled, 
 sincerely desirous of holy fellowship, and bitterly taking to 
 heart, as is only right, the long discord that has separated 
 them for so many ages. Hither, then, are they come ; not 
 for purposes of noisy contention, or with turbulent passions, 
 each obstinately bent on securing its own ; but far otherwise, 
 to treat on this holy matter of union in all love, which, under 
 God, we trust wjjl be crowned with success, together with 
 the remaining pious objects for which this assembly has been 
 convened.' 
 
 When the Greek prelates were reported hopeless of coming 
 to terms, and on the point of dispersing, he made a moving 
 appeal to them in the presence of his nine cardinals, but 
 without the emperor or patriarch, that affected many of them 
 to tears, so well calculated was it to excite their sympathies.'""® 
 '1, brethren,' he calls them . . . 'when I saw your alacrity, 
 and the risks to which you exposed yourselves, in adventuring 
 both by land and sea, for eagerness to unite the church of 
 Ood, I had great expectation. And now, after witnessing 
 your backslidings, I am at a loss to account for them. I 
 pity you, when I reflect on your absence from home, the 
 privation of your domestic comforts, and the mischief done 
 to the churches. ' For of what possible advantage can your 
 backslidings be ; or in what shall we be benefited, if we fail 
 to unite the church of God ? ' 
 
 Then, after it was all over, his song of praise is, ' Glory to 
 God in the highest ... for lo ! that which we desired so 
 intensely — the long and deadly dissention of the eastern and 
 western church — has at length, after 450 years, by the mercy 
 of God been removed. ... ' The Greeks,' he says, ' came 
 
 """ Ibid. 22-3. It is dated April 9, conference of bishops only. The ad- 
 
 A.D. 1438. dress as reported in the Greek Acts 
 
 1005 The Latin Acts, by Andreas della might have produced tears ; at aU 
 
 Croce, one of the advocates employed events, Dorotheus, metropolitan of 
 
 at the council alone mention this oir- Mitylene, their author (see the note to 
 
 cumstance ; but the address as re- p. 6 of PopofFs Sist.) was present, and 
 
 ported by him, never could have pro- was one of those personally addressed, 
 
 duced that effect; nor is it at all likely — Colet. torn, xviii. p. 482-3 and 
 
 that he should have been present at a p. 1145. 
 
 z 2 
 
340 COUNCIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 to dispute, but without the vice of contention, or the zeal of 
 obstinacy.' This is his account of the council to the crowned 
 heads of Europe. "">« That the Greeks shared his views, and 
 expressed them without reserve in his presence, is clear from 
 the dogmatic speech of Bessarion on union in the twenty-fifth 
 sessioDj.where he is reported in the Greek acts as saying : '""" 
 ' Hence, from the time of this occurrence, the one body of 
 Christ has been, alas ! divided into many, and the members 
 of it armed against each other, without understanding that 
 they are warring against themselves, and harming themselves 
 in separating from their brethren.' In the Latin acts, on the 
 other hand, he is repoi-ted as addressing the pope — personally 
 present on that occasion — 'Blessed father . . . what rewards 
 will be prepared for you by God should you succeed m unit'mg 
 His holy church ! ' """ 
 
 In all which what do we read but the identical views 
 propounded by Clement IV. and Gregory X. previously to the 
 meeting of the second council of Lyons ; '""^ of Clement, who 
 spoke of 'the catholic and universal church as rent and 
 divided with schisms ; ' of Gregory, who likened it in that 
 state to the net of Peter, that brake for the multitude of 
 fishes which it enclosed ? Neither of them, as was shown, 
 meant that the church of Christ was ever divided formally, 
 that is, in faith and docrine ; yet both of them asserted it to 
 be then divided materially by the schisms that were separat- 
 ing integral parts of it from each other. Neither of them 
 ever swerved from the settled conviction that, in virtue of 
 the promise made by our Lord to S. Peter, his successors 
 always had been, and always would be, in possession of the 
 true faith ; so that their faith was, and always ought to be, 
 that of the whole church ; so that those who denied or op- 
 posed it deliberately were not of the church at all. For all 
 that, both of them held, and held consistently— for it involved 
 no real contradiction — that the actually subsisting separation 
 between the eastern and western churches was one that had 
 rent the church materially, by dividing its members from 
 each other, without excluding either of them, as yet, from it. 
 
 1006 Coiet. p. 1197-9. one of the interlocutors that questions 
 
 "" Ibid. p. 402. of faith should have been submitted to 
 
 "'°' Ibid. p. 937. It is expressly discussion there. 
 
 stated, p. 934, that the pope vas pre- "™ Above, p. 259-60, 
 
 sent. Some wonder is expressed by 
 
EUGBNIUS ON THE GREEK QUESTION. 341 
 
 This, in short, was their charitable interpretation of the 
 Greek question; hut for that very reason we must not be 
 surprised to meet with a dififerent interpretation of it else- 
 where sometimes. There were seasons when it might be 
 viewed even by them differently with perfect honesty. Con- 
 vinced that their own faith and the true faith were synony- 
 mous by Divine appointment, let them only be supplied with 
 evidence that the Greek church unequivocally contradicted 
 or abjured any doctrine maintained by them, and to that 
 extent they would be led to speak of it as no church at all ; 
 and perhaps apply to it the term by which it was once desig- 
 nated by the Basle fathers. In proportion as they believed 
 or hoped it to be" clear from that imputation, they would 
 speak of it as a church again, even as estranged from their 
 communion. 
 
 It is in this sense, therefore, that Eugenius is to be under- 
 stood, when speaking of his sorrow for the division of the 
 eastern and western churches — which in his estimation had 
 lasted 450 years ; of his intense desire to unite them ; of the 
 eagerness of the Greeks to unite the church of God ; and so 
 far, not only he, but Clement and Gregory before him, au- 
 thorise those expressions. But there is another point of view 
 likewise, from which they deserve to be studied. They were 
 used by Clement and Gregory before — by him after — the 
 second council of Lyons. Why not, therefore, after the 
 council of Florence as well ? In his mouth, assuredly, they 
 make the council of Lyons as though it had never been — ^in 
 other words, they prove that he must have held it in sus- 
 pense for the time being, and not pressed it against the 
 Greeks. He could not have looked upon them as con- 
 tumacious in respect of it, and addressed them as ' brethren,' 
 or their ecclesiastical establishment as a church. He must 
 have held the creed of Clement IV. in suspense for the same 
 reason. Accordingly we find no oflBcial, or any but the most 
 cursory mention of the second council of Lyons throughout 
 the acts of the council of Florence ; """ nor was the creed of 
 Clement reimposed. Eugenius acted by the second council 
 of Lyons, as Gregory X., under whom the second council of 
 Lyons met, by the fourth Lateran. The Greeks were not 
 
 '»•» In the bitter speech of Andrew of ludes to it in a letter of remonstrance 
 Rhodes. — Colet.tom.xviii.p. 54. Three to the clergy of the east. Ibid. p. 1237-8. 
 years after the council Eugenius al- 
 
34-2 COUNCIL OF FLOEBNCE. 
 
 confronted by the Lateran decrees at Lyons, nor at Florence 
 by the Lyonese. The council of Lyons proclaimed in effect 
 that the Greek question had not been solved by the fourth 
 Lateran; the council of Florence, that it had not been 
 solved by the second of Lyons. The light in -which a saint 
 and contemporary puts it is peculiar. According to S. 
 Antoninus, archbishop of Florence, 'The Greek emperor 
 and patriarch desirous of union with the Latins .... de- 
 manded that a general council should be convened, at 
 ■which the Eoman pontiff, the patriarch of Constantinople, 
 and his emperor, should be present in person, and doctors 
 on either side should dispute before them, for the purpose 
 of showing what points of Christian truth should be held 
 or abandoned. To which the sovereign pontiff,' he adds, 
 ' assented.' ">" 
 
 2. The. second council of Lyons failed for a single reason ; 
 the council of Florence for many more reasons than one. It 
 commenced in unseemly strife between the assembled prelates 
 of the west and the pope, which was aggravated as it went on, 
 and became downright schism as it closed. This alone pre- 
 judiced the fairness and freedom of its deliberations in many 
 ways. Eugenius, as we have seen, declared in favour of the 
 decree purporting to be that of the council of Basle— which it 
 was not — in which Florence was named for the oecumenical 
 synod. Udine, in Venefcia, was the only place besides named in 
 it. But in the original list submitted by the Greek ambassadors 
 to the Basle fathers, there happened to be the vague phrase 
 'some other in Italy.' Of this latitude — for some reason 
 which may be guessed at but is nowhere given — Eugenius 
 took advantage to set aside the decree of his legates, as they 
 had set aside that of the council, and fix upon Ferrara. Ferrara, 
 he says in the bull ""^ for translating the council from Basle 
 thither, he has fixed upon ' in the plenitude of his power ' — 
 which was no doubt the case — and he is informed for certain 
 that the Greeks accepted it. What may have passed in secret 
 between him and the Greek ambassadors before their depar- 
 ture, nobody could of course know so well as he ; but what 
 is historical is, that the date — September 18 — of his bull 
 naming Ferrara, was coincident, not with their leaving Italy, 
 
 '"" S. jinton. Chron. part iii. tit. tenendum respuendumve foret de veri- 
 xxii. c. 11 . 'per doctores utriusque tate Christian^.' 
 partis disoeptaretur rationibus, quid '»'= Colet. torn, xviii. p. 874-84. 
 
FEERAEA WHY CHOSEX TIEST. 343 
 
 but with their reaching Constantinople.""' At the time of 
 their starting, it was to the choice of Florence or Udine that 
 his assent had been given. In a subsequent document,""* 
 called ' the declaration of the translation,' he says explicitly 
 that he had named Ferrara with the consent of his cardinals, 
 archbishops, bishops, and abbots ; but he had not spoken so 
 clearly to that effect in his previous bull. His true reason 
 for choosing Ferrara may be guessed at, therefore, from what 
 ensued. It proved a terrible failure in every sense of the 
 word. The Greek emperor, soon after his arrival in March 
 — with what motives it will be shown presently — said he had 
 come expecting to find the princes of Europe assembled to 
 meet him. Andl*he declined having the council opened in 
 their absence.""* This occasioned an adjournment for four 
 months, extending practically to six and upwards; a great 
 part of which was spent, as Gribbon says,""^ by the emperor 
 'at a pleasant monastery six miles from Ferrara, in the 
 pleasures of the chase ; ' and by the Greeks in private dis- 
 cussions, that in their opinion were never intended to do more 
 than decoy prelates from Basle.'°" No other subject but that 
 of purgatory ""' seems to have occupied them during the dog- 
 days. As at the end of that time there were no new comers, 
 or hopes of any, from Basle or Italy — the Greeks had received 
 one accession in the person of Isidore ""^ metropolitan of 
 Kiow and his suite from Russia — they were compelled to 
 open the council &s they were ; the pope telling them "'^'' — 
 ex cathedra literally — ' that it was a collective synod of 
 Christendom, wherever he, the emperor, and the patriarch 
 were ; particularly when all the patriarchs and his own car- 
 dinals were joined with them, as in the present instance.' 
 He had good cause for reassuring them ; as their numbers 
 had been seriously thinned by pestilence, and were falling off 
 instead of increasing. Out of 150 bishops and eleven car- 
 dinals who were present, according to all accounts,'"^' on the 
 
 '»" Above, p. 334. Syrop. iv. 17, '""' Colet. ibid. p. 16. 
 
 asserts that when the Greeks arrived ""' C. Ixvi. 
 
 in Venice they had not made up their '""' oJs &•> exp * irairns ^iriSoirii> 4k 
 
 minds whether to go to the place named roirov, koX v iv Baai\ela (rivoSos iKar- 
 
 by the pope or not. S. Anton. Chron. rairiv. — Syrop. v. 3. 
 
 part iii. tit. xxii. c. 11, fully bears him "'* Colet. ibid. p. 26-34. 
 
 out : ' Prsevaluit tamen auetoritas "" Popoff, p. 59. 
 
 Eugenii, cum suasionibus plnrimorum, '°* Colet. ibid. p. 34. 
 
 ut ad ejus prsesentiam se conferrent.' '"" Colet. ibid. p. 16, where 150, and 
 
 '"" Colet. ibid. p. 883. p. 921 where 160, are the numbers 
 
344 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 Latin side, when the first meeting in church took place— r 
 April 9 — only fifty bishops and five cardinals were present 
 when the first session opened, October 8 : only fifty-nine bishops 
 and eight cardinals affixed their signatures to the definition 
 of the twenty-fifth session. '"^^ Ambassadors were sent to the 
 council from England, but it was over before they arrived.'"^? 
 Ambassadors from the duke of Burgundy — the only potentate 
 in Europe who was represented there — arrived November 27, 
 during the thirteenth session ; but instead of having come to 
 conciliate, they signalised their entry by affronting in the 
 most deliberate manner both the Greeks and their emperor. 
 
 The question of supplies was one that had produced great 
 discontent among them previously. The agreement had 
 come to be that everyone on the books of the emperor or 
 patriarch should receive four florins a month for his mainte- 
 nance, servants three, the patriarch twenty-five, despot or 
 brother of the emperor twenty, and emperor thirty. On 
 this, as was only natural, the price of provisions commenced 
 instantly rising. '"^^ But while the Greeks were detained at 
 Ferrara doing nothing, in consequence of the adjournment of 
 the council — for which they certainly were not to blame — 
 they rarely could get their money without altercation, except 
 it was to reward their compliance. For instance, after a 
 speech on purgatory by Mark of Ephesus, favourable to the 
 Latin view, they received their allowance for the third 
 month, which had been in arrear till then.'"^^ At a later 
 period we find Christopher objecting to make Mark any 
 further remittance, as one who ate the bread of the pope, and 
 was always opposing him.""*^ Stories from Syropulus in any 
 number, though he was present, and had better opportunities 
 of knowing all that passed on the Greek side of the question 
 than anyone else, would not be conclusive to the extent 
 urged sometimes, even admitting their truth, as most of them 
 may be attributed to petty squabbles between the paymasters 
 general of the pope and receivers of the patriarch.'"^' But 
 to what is the broad fact to be attributed of the reasons 
 
 given. Syrop. yi. 3, from whom the "^^ Syrop. v. 18. 
 
 Btetement in the text is taken, by men- """ Ibid. ix. 2. 
 
 tion of eleven cardinals, reconciling the '""'The pope,' says M. Popoff 
 
 other two. (P- 42), 'found this the best -way of 
 
 ""' Colet. ibid. p. 527-34. making the Greeks obedient. FoV 
 
 '°2' Syrop. X. 18. whenever the Greeks refused to com- 
 
 '™ Syrop. iii. 28. ply with any of his wishes, he imme- 
 
FEUKABA WHY CHOSEN FIRST. 345 
 
 alleged by Eugenius in proposing, and by the Greeks in 
 accepting, the transfer of the council from Ferrara to 
 Florence before the year was out ? Were they not under- 
 stood to be purely financial ? And here perhaps is the clue 
 to what Eugenius left unexplained before — his previous 
 change from Florence to Ferrara. By December the pay of 
 the Grreeks was five months in arrears. This is admitted on 
 all hands.'""* Eugenius frankly tells thera that he had been 
 disappointed in his expectations — what expectations, but 
 those which had determined him in favour of Ferrara 
 originally ? — that he was certain of a loan from Florence if 
 he could get them to remove thither, and that he could not 
 pay them unless they would. Accordingly the Greeks as- 
 sented, but upon what conditions ? first and foremost, of 
 having all that was due to them paid up instantly ; secondly, 
 of having regular credit in future given them upon ' the 
 bank ' of Florence ; thirdly, of not being kept there over four 
 months under any circumstances, nor asked to remove else- 
 where from thence. Till the first condition had been com- 
 plied with, they would not have stirred. As soon, therefore, 
 as the decree for translating them had been read out and 
 accepted, they received all that was due to them in hard 
 cash, January 16. , 
 
 Now, here, was a pitiable state of things for a grave coun- 
 cil met to discuss the procession of the Holy Ghost to have 
 glided into. Whether in his haste to outstrip the Basle 
 fathers, Eugenius had miscalculated his resources, or else in 
 selecting Ferrara, which was all his own doing, he had made 
 a bad bargain : the long and short of it is, he had contracted 
 larger engagements than it was in his power to meet, and 
 was simply insolvent — insolvent, with all the great powers of 
 
 diately stopped their pay, so that many give you 12,000 pieces of gold and two 
 
 of the bishops were obliged to sell galleys as succours for Constantinople; 
 
 their clothes. But as soon as the and to you as many florins as I owe 
 
 Greeks agreed to his proposals, their you, and n. "bank" guarantee [the 
 
 wages were immediately given out as very word used, though barbarously 
 
 a reward for their obedience.' Ho spelt] for your future payment regu- 
 
 sbould have said the pope's officials, larly by the month as fixed. Come to 
 
 Comp. the curious note by Dr. Neale, Florence, I say, and after three or four 
 
 p. 58, for more details ; copied, how- months you shall have the means of 
 
 ever, I find from a note in Gibbon. returning, whether we are united or 
 
 '»^» For what follows see Colet. ibid, not by then.' P. 219. Comp. Syrop. 
 
 pp. 218-9, 222, 224, and 226. 'Follow vii. 12 ; but all the previous chapters 
 
 me to Florence,' were the actual words supply preliminary details of great 
 
 used by Eugenius, ' and I will engage to importance. 
 
346 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 Europe looking on, but keeping aloof from him, because of 
 his feud with Basle, These were the moral shocks that Kome 
 was encountering, while Constantinople lay hopeless and past 
 cure. This is not all. In the decree for translating the 
 council to Florence,^"^' not a syllable is breathed of the 
 grounds on which the pope had got the Grreeks to remove, as 
 might have been expected ; but the continuance of the plague 
 there since autumn is gravely put forward as the true reason, 
 and the emperor in his speech confirms it. It so happens, 
 that the great mortality from pestilence took place before the 
 first session was held ; that is, before October 8. By that 
 time no less than one hundred bishops and five cardinals, 
 according to Syropulus,^"^" had been swept or been driven 
 away, so that there were but fifty bishops and five cardie 
 nals left on the Latin side to commence the first session. Yet 
 the alarm was not so great as to deter them from going 
 on three months uninterruptedly from that time, and hold- 
 ing no less than fifteen different sessions. The pestilence was 
 no bar to their staying when the deaths or flights averaged 
 "three to one: it was their excuse for removing, when the 
 mortality occasioned by it, so far as appears, had ceased. Are 
 we, then, free to surmise that the true reason for transferring 
 the council was kept a profound secret after all, and was 
 really that the Latins were getting thoroughly the worst of it 
 on the point of adding to the creed — at which point the 
 discussions in Ferrara terminated — and that attention was 
 sought to be diverted from the subject by a change of scene 
 and improved fare ? Certain it is, that when they got to 
 Florence they never returned to it. But this is a question 
 on which light will be thrown as we proceed. The pestilence 
 must, at all events, be pronounced a blind. The Greeks 
 prided themselves on the fact that not one of their body fell 
 a victim to it.'"^' It will have been made clear from what 
 has been stated, that on whomsoever the blame rested, the 
 engagements entered into with them were grudgingly ful- 
 filled, and often in abeyance for months. It is useless to ask 
 whether it was pressure put upon them or not, intentionally, 
 and for specific ends in each case. There can be no doubt 
 but that, as hunger will tame a lion, so sojourn in a strange 
 country for a year and six months on a bare pittance, con- 
 
 '»2» Colet. ibid. p. 223 ; but fuller in '«=» Above, p. 443. 
 the Latin Acts, p. 1047, "=' Popoff, p. 59, from Syrop. 
 
FEREARA WHY ABANDOXED. 347 
 
 stantly withheld, rarely meted out when due, whether from 
 deliberate purpose or not ; with no means of getting home, 
 but what had to pass through the same channels; in the 
 midst of a population not over friendly from the first, and 
 always ready to explode on the faintest whisper of any sup- 
 posed indignity to the creed in which it had been brought 
 up, is enough, of itself, to render any conscience pliable — 
 let alone that of a broken-down citizen of a worn-out empii-e 
 — particularly when what is required of it is of that subtle 
 character that every mesh presents the means of escape to 
 those sufficiently supple to squeeze through. When, there- 
 fore, the majority of the Greeks — bishops and archbishops 
 not excepted — were called upon to subscribe to what they 
 had already committed themselves, at the close of the council 
 — so they state themselves to their own shame who signed — 
 they said : ' We are not going to subscribe but on condition 
 of receiving our arrears and our passage money.' On those 
 terms 'the pen was dipped into the ink.' Hence, when 
 asked on their return to Constantinople what they had done,' 
 their reply was, ' We have sold ourselves.' When asked 
 ' what had induced them to do so,' they said, ' fear of the 
 Franks.' '"^a 
 
 There was another cause which they kept in the background, 
 as people are commonly wont to do with their besetting sin ; 
 namely, that they had been acting throughout as erastians. 
 Between their supplies on one side, and their emperor on the 
 other, they were never free agents. The part played by the 
 emperor, indeed, was by no means confined to his action upon 
 the Greek bishops ; and it must therefore be very carefully 
 sifted, and distinguished under the separate heads. We may 
 remember that of all the Greek bishops 'that had been in- 
 vited, and had come to Constantinople for the council, only 
 twenty-two were permitted to embark for Italy. '"^^ The patri- 
 arch preferred taking the blame on his own shoulders to 
 saying why, but, as Gibbon has not failed to remark,'"'* one 
 of his avowed objects in coming himself was ' his hope of 
 delivering his church through the pope from the servitude 
 imposed on it by the emperor.' We have but to enquire 
 what the motives of John, in demanding a council at all, 
 
 i»« Ducas, who was a warm Latiniser '"" Above, p. 335. 
 Hist, Byzant. c. 32. Syrop. x. 17 and "" C. Ixvi. from Syrop. 
 xii. 1. 
 
348 COUNCIL OF FLORKNCE. 
 
 were, to explain his acts. True to the traditions of his name 
 and house, the uppermost thought of his heart was, not union 
 of the churches, but help against the Turk. He could see no 
 prompter or more likely way of ensuring it under the cir- 
 cumstances, and therefore union he was determined upon at 
 any cost. It was a foregone conclusion with him before he 
 set out. By the terms of the agreement concluded at Basle, 
 to which Eugenius was pledged likewise, two galleys and 300 
 archers were to be doing duty for the emperor, while the 
 council lasted, in guarding his capital, at the cost of the west. 
 But as soon as ever he had brought matters to that point, 
 that all the other prelates had declared for union, and only 
 Mark held out, he commenced negotiating with Eugenius 
 that moment, for a specific and solemn declaration of the more 
 permanent advantages in the same point of view that he was 
 to derive from it."^^ These, then, were the immediate results 
 — it is intolerable to have to specify them — assured to the 
 Greeks on accepting the doctrine of the double procession of 
 the Holy Ghost. Three cardinals notified them to him in due 
 form on Trinity Tuesday. 1. There would be ships and 
 money in plenty to take them home. 2. 300 soldiers for the 
 defence of their capital, and to be maintained there at the 
 cost of the pope. 3. Two galleys to remain on guard there, 
 at his cost likewise. 4. Pilgrimages to Jerusalem to pass by 
 Constantinople ; and the large galleys that accompany them 
 to put up there too. 5. When the emperor has need of ships 
 of war, the pope will supply twenty, and maintain them at 
 his own expense for him for six months. 6. In case the em- 
 peror should need help by land, the pope, hy Christ, will do 
 his utmost to get Christian nations to send an army to his 
 assistance. 
 
 When union was imminent, the emperor said: 'The time 
 draws near ; we must be thinking of our departure.' The 
 pope replied : ' I have seen to it already, and will see to it. I 
 sent a captain all in good time to prepare ships, and should 
 anything else be needed for your return I will give orders for 
 it at once. Meanwhile, take this paper from me, and when you 
 have read it, let me have your reply.'i"36 ji/^^g ^^g ^^g ^g^_ 
 nition ; not, of course, in the precise shape in which it passed. 
 
 '"^ Isidore was tie bearer of his "=« Colet. ibid. p. 510. The Latin 
 message. It was during session xxv. Acts, p. 1152, express its contents. 
 Colet. ibid. p. 498. 
 
ACTION OF THE GREEK EMPEROR. 349 
 
 Ships and pay were forthcoming when it was signed ; not of 
 course that the pope would have denied his obligation to 
 supply both in any case.""' 
 
 The scene shifts, and the emperor is on his road home — a 
 letter follows him from the pope dated Florence, Sept. 23, 
 in confirmation of his covenant.'"^' By the end of the ensuing 
 March, ten armed galleys would, he hoped, be ready to start 
 for Constantinople, to remain on guard there for one year, or 
 twenty for six months. The pdpe will do his best to get 
 Albert king of Hungary and Bohemia, to head an expedition 
 against the Turks bordering on his dominions, to divert them 
 from attacking Constantinople by land. He will pay 300 
 slingers or archefs to remain on guard at Constantinople 
 while the galleys are there. Should impediments intervene, 
 two galleys and 300 slingers will be despatched under any 
 circumstances. It is understood, all along, that John will do 
 all he can to make the union popular. But Eugenius was 
 unable to send the galleys for some years ; ""^ and John ab- 
 stained, in consequence, from taking active measures for 
 getting the Florentine decree received in bis capital.'"*" Eu- 
 genius avowed that he withheld the succours because John 
 was lukewarm.'"*' John retorted that without those succours 
 he was powerless even with his own people. 
 
 John, therefore, came to the council with very definite mo- 
 tives ; and he avowed them. Union with him was secondary : 
 not the end, but a means to it. As a secular prince there 
 would have been much to be said in his favour on that score, 
 had he done nothing ever to force the consciences of his 
 clergy, and compel them to accept union against their will. 
 But his conduct is a fact as well authenticated as his motives. 
 It must be set to his credit indeed that he was no coarse or 
 fiery despot, but a smooth-tongued diplomatist ; nor devoid of 
 religion, though it was, in his case, overlaid with hypocrisy. 
 
 1037 ipjje Latin Acts, p. 1161-2, make the new patriarch, Aug. 1, A..D. 1443. — 
 
 him say : ' QuAd festinetis ad recessum Syrop. xii. i. Comp. the letter of 
 
 cum galeis, etiam placet mihi : expe- Eugenius promising them, dated June 
 
 ditd mabrid unionis ecclesia . . Etiam 11 of that year. — Colet. ibid. p. 1237. 
 
 non factA unione, misi nobilem de domo "" It had not been done when the 
 
 me4 ad parandas galeas . . sperans new patriarch died. — Syrop. ibid. 
 
 omnia parata, et cum glorii et honors '"*' See his letter to Constantine, the 
 
 posse redire.' despot and future emperor. — Colet. 
 
 '»»» Raynald. a.d. 1439, n. 10. ibid. p. 1229-30. 
 
 ""» After the death of Metrophanes, 
 
350 COUiS^CIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 Hence, while bent on reducing the bishops that offered to a 
 manageable number, he was careful not to exclude those 
 whose abilities and acquirements would create respect for his 
 party; and whose staunch adherence to their principles, which 
 he wanted to disarm only for the final crisis, would by making 
 union more difficult enhance the value of his own services in 
 accomplishing it. So well contrived were his measures, that 
 Mark of Ephesus proved the only recusant, when it came to 
 the point; yet Mark had 'done far more for his reputation 
 previously than all the rest put together. As has been said 
 previously, and will be explained subsequently, Mark was 
 getting the best of it, when the council was removed to 
 Florence from Ferrara. At all events it had come to that point 
 that neither side would yield. The Greeks saying, ' show us 
 at what time, and by whose authority, those words " and 
 from the Son " were inserted ;' the Latins, ' prove them blas- 
 phemous and we will remove them.' '"^^ Whether the removal 
 was resolved upon in consequence, or not — and that there 
 were mysterious communications passing between Florence 
 and Ferrara, between Christopher and the patriarch, between, 
 the emperor and the republic, long before it was announced, 
 is clear from Syropulus '"^^ — one thing is certain, namely, 
 that it was then the emperor commenced interfering with and 
 dictating to his bishops. The bishops in despair of getting 
 satisfaction from the Latins on the point of adding to the 
 creed, all voted for returning home.'"*'' The emperor in high 
 wrath rebuked them for their obstinacy, and insisted on their 
 abandoning it for the doctrine which it involved, as the Latins 
 wished. Dorotheus of Mitylene, the supposed author of the 
 Grreek Acts, was cowed into submission at his first interview 
 with them.'"*' At the next he gained over Bessarion and 
 Isidore. The remaining bishops conjured the metropolitan of 
 Heraclea, representing Alexandria likewise, to be firm. His 
 answer was that he would consent if the rest would. At last 
 even Mark said the same. Only the patriarch from his sick- 
 bed refused.'"" The emperor assumed that point carried ; 
 and when the first session was opened in Florence, acting as 
 spokesman for his bishops, declared it as such.'"*' Cardinal 
 Julian was too good a diplomatist to let the opportunity slip. 
 
 '«« Colet. ibid. p. 213-24. i»« Itid. 7. 
 
 '»'' Syrop. vii. 1-3. '»'" Ibid. 9-10. 
 
 '»" Ibid. 4. '»" Colet. ibid. p. 231. 
 
ACTION OP THE GREEK EMPEBOE. 351 
 
 He said the Latins were quite prepared to argue the previous 
 question ; but the emperor would have his own way.'"*^ It 
 was adjourned, as we should say for six months, never to be 
 revived. 
 
 Discussions on the doctrine succeeded between John, pro- 
 vincial of the Dominicans in Lombardy, and Mark of Ephesus. 
 Their arguments had wandered from the main point to the 
 readings or meanings of some passages in the fathers, when 
 suddenly — Tuesday, March iT'cis — in the twenty-third session 
 John brought out a well-turned sentence to the effect that 
 the Koman church admitted but one cause and one principle 
 in the procession of the Holy Ghost and anathematised all 
 those who asserted "two. This could have been no news to 
 theologians on either side, as will be shown in the next 
 chapter ; but it was received with applause, and possibly may 
 have been news to the emperor. He was with the patriarch 
 early the following day ; sent for the bishops to his sick room, 
 and told them that any further debate was unnecessary. John 
 had given into his hands the exact words used by him on 
 paper. They must take them, and make the basis of a con- 
 sistent formulary for union without delay.'"^" By his express 
 orders neither the metropolitans of Ephesus or Heraclea were 
 present at the two following sessions."®' And when the pro- 
 vincial rose to speak in the twenty-fourth session, the emperor 
 got up and told him that there would be no reply made to him 
 by the Greeks. '"^^ John took care to construe this, like car- 
 dinal Julian, into a confession of their defeat. In the dis- 
 cussions that ensued amongst the Greeks themselves, the 
 metropolitans of Mitylene, Nicsea, and Eussia, and his own 
 chaplain or confessor Gregory, '"^^ having been gained over to 
 the views of the emperor, worked upon the rest, and were 
 sometimes permitted to work upon him likewise,'"" lest he 
 should be supposed to be yielding in all cases to the Latins 
 themselves. Sometimes, when it was a point affecting his own 
 dignity, or that he thought superfluous, he was immovable. 
 
 io<8 Oolet. p. 235-8. 6, not what John had said, but -what 
 
 '»" Ibid. p. 382. He had indeed S. Maximns had -written, is taken up 
 
 asserted the same thing before, sess. by the emperor, which is quite as likely. 
 
 xxii. (ibid. p. 343), and Mark had al- '™ Colet. ibid. p. 383. 
 
 lowed it. Hence, perhaps, the empe- "*' Ibid. 385-6. 
 
 ror got him to repeat it and called """ Ibid. 
 
 attention to it. The Latin Acts, '"' Syrop. viii. U, eomp. is. 4-9. 
 
 p. 1117, report it best. In Syrop. viii. '»" Ibid. x. 1-3. 
 
35'2 COUNCIL OF FLOBENGE. 
 
 At length all but Mark of Ephesus voted for union.'"** 
 However, when it came to the actual signing, we find him for 
 some reason or other obliged to resort to his old work again 
 of scolding or threatening.'"*^ It was to be signed in his 
 hall. He is imperative that they should sign^ or not show 
 themselves there. But should they stay away, they must be 
 prepared for, he will not say what ! Christopher, as usual, 
 was in attendance, to watch them signing. After subscribing, 
 they returned to the emperor, who entertained them for a 
 time with marked smiles and courtesy. Then without giving 
 them the least hint or warning of his intentions, he sent a 
 deputation of them — ten in number, of whom Syropulus was 
 one — with Bessarion at their head, to the pope, whom they 
 found sitting in state, surrounded by his bishops and car- 
 dinals. A notary was present. Bessarion without hesitation 
 — for he had been well primed beforehand — commenced 
 making a profession of the doctrine of transubstantiation in 
 the name of his brethren. ' Notary, write that down,' said 
 cardinal Julian. It was written down, and is preserved ; '°°'' 
 but no more was said of it. The artifice was too transparent. 
 The emperor for once had been too abrupt in his method ; 
 but as the decree was signed, he thought he was safe ; and it 
 had certainly no effect whatever on the results. But what he 
 accomplished then so abruptly forms the best commentary 
 that could be given on what he had hitherto been accomplish- 
 ing so gradually, that most people, even in these days, are 
 possessed with the idea that the Grreeks were voluntary free 
 agents throughout ; and that they retracted afterwards, by a 
 signal act of perfidy, what they need never have professed 
 against their conscience. What are the stern facts of their 
 case ? They came, but not of their own accord, a packed 
 
 ■»^= Colet. ibid. p. 514. Sjrop. x. 5. we have cardinal Julian saying: ' Ante- 
 
 A special exception was made in favour quam sessio fiat, venient in hunc locum 
 
 of Mark. Grseci, et confitebuntur, quod solis 
 
 "»» Syrop. X. 7. verbis Dominicis conficitur.' There 
 
 '"" Colet. torn, xviii. p. 640. But had been discussion about it previously, 
 
 for Syropulus it would have been hard and Turrecremata the Spaniard had in 
 
 to discover under what circumstances a long speech explained the Latin view, 
 
 this was done. He gives a full account But, at the end of it, Isidore the 
 
 of it, X. 8. It was done late in the metropolitan of Eussia had begged that 
 
 afternoon of Sunday, July 5, the sub- it shoiild not be inserted in the defini- 
 
 scribing having taken place at 2 p.m. tion ; and there the matter was sup- 
 
 The Greek Acts pass it over in silence, posed to have dropped. — Colet. ibid 
 
 In the Latin Acts (Colet. ibid. p. 1177), p. 1173, 1174. 
 
ACTION OF THE GREEK EMPEROR. 353 
 
 body ;'"" they were detained against their will, when they 
 would have returned home ' re infecta,'^"^^ They were forced 
 to waive the point which of all others they held to be most 
 sacred.'"^" They were worked upon into compliance with 
 what was required of them, by stopping their supplies ;'"*' by 
 stopping their mouths ;"'^^ by threatening, intimidating, and 
 at last bribing them ;'°^' by talking them over one by one ;'"** 
 and keeping them all close prisoners till they had sub- 
 scribed.'"^' The single prelate who refused to the last escaped 
 punishment only by a special favour. '"^^ 
 
 3. The pope need not be supposed to have known of, or 
 may not have been called upon to express his disapproval of, 
 any pressure put u^on the Greek bishops by their emperor. 
 But he might at all events have been expected to let the em- 
 peror know his proper place in an oecumenical synod. John 
 Palaeologus was by no means the first emperor who had per- 
 sonally attended one; there were precedents in abundance, 
 beginning with Constantino, for what they might say or do 
 there. There was a seat at Florence reserved for the emperor 
 of the Eomans as well as for him. The old rule embodied 
 in the Theodosian code had been, ' Quotiens de religione 
 agitur, episcopos convenit judicare.'"""' And when the em- 
 peror came among them, as Marcian said in the sixth action 
 or session of the fourth general council, ' he came to confirm 
 their acts, not to make a display of his power.' Now, what 
 was the formal part taken by John Palaeologus in the Flo- 
 rentine council ? In what is it to be distinguished from that 
 of any mitred prelate ? In what light was he regarded by 
 the bishops themselves on the Latin side who were present ? 
 In the eleventh session we have cardinal Julian terminating 
 his long speech, which is exclusively doctrinal, in the follow- 
 ing words : ' Such is what I have found to say ; submitting it 
 to the correction of our holy father the pope, of his viost 
 
 loss Above, p. 335. Hist, ab IncUn. Rom. Imp, dec iii. 
 
 '»»» P. 350. lib. X. p. 651, ed. 1631. 
 
 loeo p 351. 1064 p 542. 
 
 """ Note to p. 344. '°°' Syrop. viii. 4, which bears like- 
 
 1062 p 352. wise on the preceding point. Even 
 
 '"" See Gibbon's picture, c. Ixvi. Bessarion was turned back at the gates 
 
 The bribery which is alike disgraceiful on going out once for a ride. 
 
 to both sides is related by Syrop. i. 4, "'"' Syrop. x. 5. Comp. the pope's 
 
 and confirmed by the pope's own seore- three requests, Colet. ibid. p. 535. 
 
 tary, Flavius Blondus, as having added "*' Christendom's Divisions, part i. 
 
 immensely to the cost of the council. § 8. 
 
 A A 
 
354 COUNCIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 serene majeaty the emperor as well, and of the other most 
 reverend fathers!' It was, in fact, the emperor who had 
 invited him to speak on that subject.""^' Are we dealing with 
 a general council of the church catholic, or are we not ? It 
 is in the later sessions that his interference is most marked. 
 In session twenty-three, he it is who discovers that John the 
 provincial has hit the nail on the head.'"^' In session twenty- 
 four, he it is who prevents the Greeks from answering John.'"^" 
 In session twenty-five, on the other hand, we find him say- 
 ing, ' Give us the books and the passages of the saints which 
 you have cited, that we may consider what to answer.''"^' 
 Later, we find him correcting his own bishops on four pro- 
 positions subnjitted to them by the pope. ' This is not the 
 question — our object is to answer which of the four proposi- 
 tions of the pope we shall choose ' '"'^ And it is through 
 him, eventually, that their answer is sent.'"'' Further on, 
 we find him conferring with cardinal Julian,'"^'* and with the 
 pope afterwards, on the best way of conducting the argu- 
 ment, and it is his plan which is adopted. '"^^ Still more won- 
 derful is the scene where'""^ he goes into the pith of the 
 theological dispute with the pope, and wants to go. It was 
 a private conference, doubtless, but it forms part and parcel 
 of the public acts. Then, in another conference of his own 
 clergy, the patriarch having delivered his solemn sentence, 
 he follows with his,'"^'' capping the patriarch by telling them 
 that the ' holy church cannot err in her synodical definitions.' 
 At length, rising to his full force, he objects to a clause in 
 the definition where it most intimately touched the pope, 
 being on the delicate subject of his own power. The pro- 
 posed clause stood, ' according to the determination of 
 Holy Scripture, and the words of the saints ; ' and he was 
 explicit enough upon it. ' This must be corrected,' said the 
 emperor, ' or I shall leave.' And it was changed eventually, 
 nearly into the words proposed by him then, 'according to 
 the power,' or meaning, ' of the canons.' '"^^ The climax of all 
 was when he subscribed to the entire definition at the head 
 
 '"«' Colet.itid. pp. 174 andl84. The ■»'» Ibid. p. 399. 
 
 Latin Acts, pp. 978 and 982, state both '»" Ibid. p. 467-70. 
 
 facts in the same words. "'* Ibid. p. 471 et seq 
 
 ■»»» Above, p. 351. '»'« Ibid. p. 478-82. 
 
 "'» Ibid. '»" Ibid. p. 494. 
 
 - "" Colet. ibid. p. 391. ""» KaT^SipafiiyTuvKavdvuv — Colet 
 
 "'2 Ibid. p. 398. ibid. p. 518. 
 
rOKM OF THE SUBSCRIPTIONS. 355 
 
 of his bishops, and to the right; side by side with the pope, 
 at the head of his bishops, to the left.'"'* 
 
 As this is unique in the history of all oecumenical synods 
 that have ever been, some remarks must be made on it. We 
 must commence by noticing a difference in the form of sub- 
 scriptions. In compliance with another demand of the em- 
 peror,""" the commencement of the decree ran as follows : 
 *• Definition of the holy and oecumenical synod that has been 
 held at Florence. Eugenius, servant of the servants of God, 
 in eternal memory of the transaction, with the consent of 
 our most dearly beloved son, John Palaeologus, illustrious 
 emperor of the Eomans, of the representatives of our revered 
 brethren the patfiarchs, and of the rest appearing for the 
 eastern church, to the under-written.' ""' 
 
 The line, therefore, was sought to be drawn all the more 
 sharply in the mode of subscribing. That of Eugenius is, 
 ' I, Eugenius, bishop of the catholic church so defining, have 
 subscribed.' The other prelates, with a single exception, 
 • subscribe ' without ' defining.' It was with a smile, pro- 
 bably, that the Greek prelates relinquished their usual form 
 for one denoting that the definition was no act of theirs, and 
 subscribed themselves merely ' content.' The metropolitan 
 of Heraclea, who subscribed in his bed,'"*^ alone claimed to 
 'have pronounced' upon it; making himself, so far, responsi- 
 ble for what it contained. The emperor signed in red letters, 
 but without adding ' I have subscribed,' as ' John the Palaeo- 
 logus in Christ, emperor and autocrat of the Eomans, faith- 
 ful to God.""^' How far were these distinctions without a 
 difference ? 
 
 It is a singular circumstance that with the eighth general 
 council, that of Constantinople a.d. 869, subscriptions to 
 general councils ceased. In provincial councils they con- 
 tinued to be the rule — as in tlae east, so in the west. But 
 all the western councils assuming to be general, had been 
 
 '»" Ibid. p. 522. But the copy of left. Colet. ibid. p. 519-22. 
 the decree on parchment, Bent to ""° Ibid. p. 518. 
 Henry VI. among the Cottonian pa- "" Ibid. p. 622. 
 pers in the British Museum, Cleop. "'^ Syrop. x. 8. This accounts for 
 
 B. 78, is the place for us to study that his unusual regrets over what he had 
 
 definition. No Greek prelates at all done. PopofF, p. 166. 
 subscribe there. It was originally '"*' Ibid. p. 527. 'AfKerhs {mlr/im^a, 
 
 intended that the Latins should sign say the others; the metropolitan of 
 
 on the right side of the decree, not the Heraclea, aTro^roi inriypw^a. 
 
 A A 2 
 
356 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 without them hitherto. The pope superseded all action on 
 the part of his suffragans apparently. No bishops are found 
 subscribing at the four Lateran councils, or at Lyons, or at 
 Vienue, Pisa, Constance, or Basle. Even here, the consent of 
 the western bishops to the decree is left out, where that of the 
 emperor, and of the eastern bishops, is expressed. The pre- 
 cedents of the first eight oecumenical synods are clear enough. 
 None but bishops, or clergy, rarely below deacons,""* repre- 
 senting bishops, are found subscribing. Their names and 
 sees are recorded in each case, and their concurrence with 
 the council ^°*' expressed or understood. ' I have defined 
 and have subscribed'^"'^ is the ordinary form of a bishop sub- 
 scribing to a definition of faith in his own name. On very 
 solemn occasions it is employed likewise by presbyters, and 
 even deacons, representing absent bishops ;^°*^ but usually 
 bishops themselves, when subscribing for others, only testify 
 to the bare fact of their subscription.'"^* The legates of the 
 pope, for he was never present in person, subscribed like the 
 rest, with the exception of subscribing first. That the sub- 
 scriptions would not have varied, had he been present in 
 person, may be gathered from the acts of the Lateran council 
 of A.D. 649 under Martin I., and of the Eoman council of 
 A.D. 680 under Agatho, where the pope signs in the first place, 
 but just as any other bishop, and his suffragans after him in 
 the same form.'"^'' Emperors, or their officers, were gene- 
 rally present, but never subscribed. When the bishops had 
 finished subscribing, the emperor of his own accord, or in 
 compliance with a message from them,'"^" sent or came to 
 ' set his seal to their acts.' There are two precedents of a 
 
 1084 i^ reader ' is found subscri'bing foregoing in conjunction with the pre- 
 at the second, and a monk at the sent synod, I have with my own hand 
 seventh for absent bishops. Mansi, subscribed.' All the other bishops 
 torn. iii. p. 568-72, and xiii. p. 380-98. after him repeat the same form. Mansi, 
 
 1085 "^^j, ^^ i^yi^ a-vv6S!f, as at the torn. x. p. 1161-9. Agatho speaks to 
 third. — Mansi, tom. iv. p. 1212-26. the same effect; but his bishops, more 
 
 "'" 'Opta-as iiriypaf/a, from the fourth pointedly, represent themselves sub- 
 downwards. Mansi, tom. vii. p. 136- scribing to what ' they have framed 
 170. In the third it is li,TTo<j>rivcii),evos. with one consent.' — Mansi, tom. xi. 
 Of the first and second the original p. 297-316. 
 subscriptions have been lost. "'" Constantine Pogonatus did both, 
 
 1087 £ g_ jjj ^jjg geyenth, Mansi, tom. one after the other. Mansi, tom. xi. 
 xiii. p. 380-98. _ pp. 656 and 681. The bishops in their 
 
 1088 E.g. in the fourth, Mansi, tom. address seem to say, ' wait till you are 
 vii. p. 136-70, asked.' 
 
 '°*° Martin says, 'Having defined the 
 
FORM OF THE SUBSCRIPTIONS. 857 
 
 different kind, on -which some stress may be laid. One, 
 that of an emperor subscribing first and in red letters,'"^' as 
 here ; but the council in which it happened, the Trullan or 
 Quini-sext, only met to frame canons, and was never ac- 
 counted general in the west. Again, there is a broad dis- 
 tinction drawn between his act and that of the bishops. 
 
 ' I, Flavius Justinian, faithful in Christ Jesus, emperor of 
 the Romans, consenting to all things that have been defined, 
 and accepting them, have subscribed.' All the rest who sub- 
 scribe are bishops or archbishops, and each employs the 
 episcopal form, ' I have defined and have subscribed.' This, 
 then, is in the nature of a precedent ; but it makes all the 
 difference, that tte business of the council was not doctrine, 
 but discipline. The other precedent happened nearer home, 
 and certainly the connection between the two councils is very 
 remarkable. There is a clause in the Florentine decree 
 which says, ' We define too, that those explanatory words, 
 " and from the Son," were to the end that the truth might 
 be elucidated, under the necessity which existed then, law- 
 fully, and with good reason added to the creed.' Apparently, 
 the framers of the decree themselves bid us ask, what S. An- 
 toninus of Florence candidly professed his inability to solve, 
 • when was then ' ? '"^^ And those who defended the addition 
 against the Greeks, appeal continually to the synods of 
 Toledo.^"^* Of these, the first to set forth the addition in any 
 document allowed to be genuine is that of a.d. 589, 
 commonly called the third. It has been touched upon 
 previously. "'°'' It is one of the most singular upon record. 
 Eeccared king of the Goths and his queen Badda, converts 
 from Arianism, commence proceedings in it, by making pro- 
 fession of their orthodoxy, and reciting the creeds of Nicsea 
 and Constantinople, as the faith professed by the catholic 
 church throughout the whole world, and then subscribing to 
 them, and to the definition of the council of Chalcedon, in 
 their own names. In reciting the creed of Constantinople, 
 
 '*" Per oinnabarim,' as it was called. "■" E.g. Andrew of Bhodes in the 
 
 Manai, torn. xi. p. 987. sixth session. — Syrop. vi. 20. John 
 
 1002 1 Certum est, nee credendum ab the proTineial in the twenty-fonrth. 
 
 alio appositum, nisi a papd, vel aliquo — Colet. ibid. p. 1130. Eeferred to 
 
 concUio. Quis enim alius hoc prsesump- likewise by Benedict XIII. Above, 
 
 serit ? Venim a quo papA, vel coneilio, p. 297. 
 non usquequaque certum.' — Chron. '°" Above, p. 67. 
 p. iii.tit. iii. c. 13, § 13. 
 
338 COUNCIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 they insert'°s5 the clause, 'and from the Son.' Eight bishops, 
 a number of presbyters, deacons, and of the high nobility, 
 converts from Arianism likewise, follow with their profession ; 
 in which, besides reciting the two creeds, and the definition 
 of the fourth general council, as their sovereign, they anathe- 
 matise twenty-three different errors, the third of which is 
 that of those who deny the double procession. It has been 
 cited at length already. '"^^ Eegulations for discipline come 
 next by order of the king, embodied in a series of canons.'"" 
 Among the subscribers to them, and to the acts of the council 
 generally, are those bishops whose abjuration is recorded 
 previously, as well as the orthodox — with the king at their 
 head, who signs first : anticipating Eugenius upon the pre- 
 sent, occasion, and as no king, probably, before or since: 
 ' I, king Flavius Eeccared, in confirmation of these matters, 
 which with the holy synod we have defined, have subscribed.' 
 Each bishop after him meekly says, ' I have subscribed as- 
 senting to these constitutions.' So that the addition to the 
 creed, and doctrine involved in it, was originally ' defined,' in 
 point of fact, by a convert prince, at the head of the same 
 council that received his abjuration. On the other hand, in 
 the second of those very canons, we read, ' The holy synod 
 ordains that throughout all the churches of Spain and Gral- 
 licia the creed of the council of Constantinople — that is, of 
 the 150 fathers — be recited, according to the form of the 
 Oriental churches ; so that before the reading of the Lord's 
 prayer it may be intoned in a loud voice by the people.' 
 Hence it follows that, in anathematising the opponents of the 
 double procession, the council never really contemplated in- 
 terpolating the creed, but meant in all honesty to adhere to 
 the form used in the east. They were not aware of the 
 difference between it and their copy. It is a real pleasure 
 to be able to hold them guiltless of the mischief that has 
 ensued from it. 
 
 This, then, is the historical account of 'the necessity,' 
 which, in the language of the Florentine decree, 'existed' 
 when the addition was made to the creed for the first time; 
 and the next to insist upon it, as we shall see, was Charle- 
 magne. It is easy to imagine what a triumph Mark of 
 
 1095 3^j even here 'Filioqxie' is follows makes its insertion protable. 
 ■wanting in another MS. Mansi, torn. """' Above, p. 67. 
 ix. p. 991. Yet the anathema which "»' Mansi, ibid. p. 990. 
 
FOEM OF THE SUBSCRIPTIONS. 359 
 
 Ephesus must have won over the Latins, had he possessed 
 the acts of this third council of Toledo and the letter of 
 Adrian I. to Charlemagne in defence of the Greek professions 
 accepted by the second Nicene council. '"'* The Latins pre- 
 judiced a very sound and holy doctrine by their manner of 
 upholding it. Far be it from me to assert that they can be 
 proved guilty of suppressing what they knew to be true, or 
 of alleging what they knew to be false. But unconsciously 
 they were led into misrepresentations of every sort by the 
 mass of spurious authorities which they believed genuine. 
 A list of the most obvious of these will be found in the next 
 chapter. Eugenius claimed to have the clause, on which 
 we have been commenting, introduced into the definition : 
 'Because you Greeks in all discussions have been in the 
 habit of invoking excommunication on the Eoman church on 
 account of the addition made to the creed ... it is only 
 just, therefore, that the definition should state this to have 
 been done lawfully, that the honor of the church of Eome 
 and your own honor may be maintained intact.'""' Eu- 
 genius could not have used that language had he been 
 aware that one of his own predecessors, John VIII., had led 
 the way in anathematising those who first inserted the ad- 
 dition and occasioned schism in the church of Christ by so 
 doing.""" Still less could it have been known to him that 
 the addition commenced with a council that never intended 
 to recite the creed in any other form than as used in the east. 
 How strange, therefore, was the fatality from first to last at- 
 tending it ! The council at which it originated was a pro- 
 vincial council at which a convert prince subscribed first, and 
 in terms not unlike those of the pope who justified it. The 
 council in which it was justified was a general council, at 
 which a pope not only presided but subscribed for the first 
 time in history, and in terms different from what his prede- 
 cessors Martin and Agatho seem to have used in councils 
 second only to general. Side by side with him an emperor 
 is found subscribing, and for the first time in history like- 
 wise. The pope had often subscribed through his legates to 
 the definitions of a general council before : an emperor in his 
 own name, or by deputy, never ! And what had the emperor 
 
 ">" Above, p. 90 et seq. "" Colet. ibid. p. 1161. 
 
 "»» Above, p. 74 et eeq. 
 
860 COUNCIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 John, like Eeccared, been, in the eyes of the Latins, up to 
 the moment of his subscribing ? 
 
 After this, it will be secondary to point out that two 
 bishops on the Latin side, who had places there in their own 
 right, and one archdeacon,'""' who had no right to be there at 
 all, are found subscribing as ambassadors of the duke of Bur- 
 gundy ; that five of the bishops, besides the patriarch of 
 Jerusalem, were Latin occupants of Greek sees,"""^ and six 
 more bishops elect only:""^ two bishops signed for Modena, 
 one as late bishop. Then forty-five abbots or generals of 
 orders on the Latin side, and eleven abbots or ofiicials on the 
 Greek side subscribe, who had never subscribed at any 
 general council previously. For the rest, England was re- 
 presented by one bishop only, Eochester; Anglo-Normandy 
 by one, Bayeux ; Portugal by two, Portugal and Faro ; Spain 
 by five, Artana, Huesca, Tuj, Granada, Tervel, exclusive of 
 the bishop elect of Leon ; France, besides those who came 
 from Burgundy and Normandy by five, Digne, Grasse, Ause, 
 Cavailhon, Conserans, and exclusive of the .bishops elect of 
 Agde, S. Pol de Leon, and Angers. All the rest were from 
 Italy, Venetia, or Sicily. None came from Germany, or any 
 country to the north of it. The total number of prelates on 
 the Latin side who subscribed was sixty-eight, including eight 
 cardinals and the pope ; the total number on the Greek side 
 eighteen, for some, as the Georgian prelates, contrived to make 
 their escape from Florence.""* Eighty-six bishops only sub- 
 scribed in all. The copy of the decree sent to the king of 
 England authenticated by the signature of Blondus, the papal 
 secretary, contains the subscriptions of thirty-four bishops 
 and archbishops only besides the pope; with that of the 
 emperor alone in behalf of the east""' — a meagre list indeed, 
 in either case, for a general council, compared with any that 
 had preceded it, and which it was sought to compensate for 
 at the time by the subscriptions of those who had no place 
 there. 
 
 A sad pity it is that a beautiful composition as the Floren- 
 tine definition is unquestionably, whoever composed it,'""' 
 
 ""' The ■bishops of Tervanne and "°' Joselian's Hist, of the Georgian 
 
 Nevers, and the archdeacon of Troyes. Church, Malan's tr. p. 139, with the 
 
 ""'- Spalatro, Crete, Rhodes, Coron, note. Popoif, p. 154. 
 
 and Megara. ""s Above, note to p. 356. 
 
 >'°= Chieti, Agde, S. Pol de Leon, "»= ' Ambrose the monk,' says Syrop. 
 
 Citari. Leon, and Angers. x. 2, but his biographer, Augnstine of 
 
FLORENTINE DEFINITION. 361 
 
 should be open to so much fair criticism. In the preamble, 
 • the wall of partition separating between the eastern and 
 western church,' is said to have been ' taken away,' and 
 'Christ, the corner-stone, to have made both one' again. 
 The church is called upon ' to rejoice over her children, till 
 now at variance with each other, returning to peace and 
 unity, that as she wept bitterly over their disunion, she may 
 give thanks to God with joy unspeakable for the wonderful 
 unanimity now existing between them.' The eastern and 
 western fathers have met together . . . and not failed of 
 their object •. . . the Greeks having explained, that in assert- 
 ing the Holy Ghost to proceed from the Father, it was not 
 their intention to exclude the Son, but only protest against 
 the notion of two principles or spirations ; the Latins, that 
 in asserting the Holy Ghost to proceed from the Father and 
 the Son, they never meant to exclude the Father, either as 
 fountain and principle of the whole Godhead, or as author of 
 the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son. Hence their 
 unanimous assent to the definition which follows their 'union,' 
 as it is called. 
 
 ' In the name of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy 
 Ghost, this sacred and oecumenical synod in Florence approv- 
 ing, we define that this, the truth of the faith, be believed 
 and set forth by all Christians, and acknowledged by all. 
 
 1. That the Holy Ghost is of the Father and Son eternally, 
 and has His substance and subsistence from both the Father 
 and the Son together, and proceeds from both eternally as from 
 one principle and unique spiration.'"" Declaring that what 
 the holy doctors and fathers mean, who say that the Holy 
 Ghost proceeds from the Father through the Son, is to the 
 same effect, and intended to express that the Son, according 
 to the Greeks, is the cause, as, according to the Latins, the 
 principle of the subsistence of the Holy Ghost. And, foras- 
 much as all that belongs to the Father, with the sole excep- 
 tion of His paternity, was by the Father himself communicated 
 to His only begotton Son on begetting Him, so likewise this 
 proceeding of the Holy Ghost from the Son, the Sou Himself 
 
 Florence, asserts (Vit. iii. 28-9) that de Turrecremata (ibid. p. 1157-60). 
 
 he was not even allowed to speEik there. It was probably the work of the two 
 
 This the Greek Acts (Colet.ibid.p.510) Dominican Johns, 
 make him do ; but the Latin Acts, in ""' The Greek word is Trpo/SoA^. 
 giving the speech, assign it to John 
 
362 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 received from the Father eternally, as having been by Him 
 eternally begotten. 
 
 Furthermore, we define that those explanatory words 'and 
 from the Son,' were to the end that the truth might be eluci- 
 dated, under the necessity which existed then, lawfully and 
 with good reason added to the creed. 
 
 That the body of Christ is truly consecrated in leavened 
 or unleavened bread made from wheat, and that priests ought 
 to consecrate in either, each according to the custom of his 
 own church, in west or east. 
 
 That those who, after true repentance, die in the love of 
 G-od, before they have done worthy fruits of penance in suf- 
 ficiency for their sins of commission and omission, have their 
 souls purified after death by the pains of purgatory, for the 
 lightening of which the assistance of the faithful who are 
 alive is profitable to them ; the holy sacrifices, for instance, 
 prayers, alms, and other works of piety, that are wont to be 
 made by the faithful in behalf of other faithful according to 
 the ordinances of the church. 
 
 Their souls, on the other hand, that after baptism have 
 never been stained with sin, or having been stained have 
 been purified subsequently, whether in the body or after 
 having put off the body in the way before mentioned, are 
 received forthwith into heaven, and admitted to the beatific 
 vision of God in Unity and Trinity as He is ; one more per- 
 fectly than another, according to the worth of what they have 
 done in their lives. 
 
 But the souls of those who have deceased in deadly sin, 
 actual or original, go down straight into hell, to be punished 
 there unequally nevertheless. 
 
 Further, we define that the holy apostolic chair and Roman 
 pontiff [is possessed of the primacy over the whole world, 
 and that the Eoman pontiff himself""'] is successor of blessed 
 Peter — the coryphaeus of the apostles — true vicar of Christ, 
 head of the whole church, father and teacher of all Christians, 
 and that to him, in blessed Peter, has been given by Christ 
 our Lord full power of tending, directing, and governing the 
 
 HOB These words are not found in the Oxon. 1696. Prsef. p. xlv. and p. 144. 
 
 Greek version of the official copy of the The MS. is in the Cottonian collection 
 
 decree sent to England. For some belonging to the British Museum, and 
 
 remarks on which vide CataJ,. lAh. MSS. numbered ' Cleop, E. iii. 78/ as already 
 
 Bihlioth. Cotton, per T. Smith, a.m. staled. 
 
FLORENTINE DEFINITION. 363 
 
 catholic church, agreeably with what is laid down both in 
 the acts of the oecumenical synods, and in the holy canons. 
 Eenewing, moreover, the traditionary order, contained in 
 the canons, of the rest of the venerable patriarchs, so that 
 the patriarch of Constantinople should be second after the 
 most holy pope of Home, the patriarch of Alexandria third, 
 the patriarch of Antioch fourth, the patriarch of Jerusalem 
 fifth, with all their privileges and just rights of course pre- 
 served."»» 
 
 On the matter of the decree, what remains to be said will 
 follow in the next chapter more conveniently. Much more 
 remains to be said on the conduct of the pope who promul- 
 gated it. The patriarch of Constantinople was not alive 
 when it was agreed upon ; and whether, had he survived, he 
 would have subscribed to it with the rest, is a point on which 
 there may be fairly two opinions. His will, hastily penned 
 on the eve of his death, June 9, in which we find him ' pro- 
 fessing to agree to everything held and taught by the catholic 
 and apostolic church of our Lord Jesus Christ, the senior of 
 Rome,' '"" — looks one way; his last sentence delivered only 
 two weeks previously, when he said, ' on condition of having 
 to add nothing to our creed, and of retaining all our own 
 rites, will we unite with them,' "" looks another. Yet even 
 in his will his style is, ' Joseph, by the grace of God, arch- 
 bishop of Constantinople, and oecumenical patriarch ; ' and 
 again, his signature is wanting at the end of his will. He 
 received honorable interment in the church of S. Maria 
 Novella, Thursday, June 11 ; and the Greeks showed their 
 respect for his memory by celebrating a double novena on the 
 17th and 27th, at his tomb.'"^ 
 
 No notice was taken of the vacancy created by his death 
 till the eventful July 6 ; and then, apparently for the first 
 time, the Greeks were reminded of it. Several questions 
 were put to them after the decree for union had been read 
 out, on their peculiar usages, all of which were answered by 
 Dorotheus of Mitylene satisfactorily but two : the first, on di- 
 vorces, which the Greek church for grave causes allowed; the 
 
 '"» Colet. ibid. p. 522-7. Latin ActB, p. 1146, this condition is 
 
 1110 Translated in Popoff, p. 144, who wanting; and the v<>rsion of Syrop. 
 
 throws doubts on its genuineness. But viii. 14, agrees more with the Latin 
 
 a Latin certainly would not have than the Greek Acts, 
 
 written him 'oecumenical patriarch.' '"^ Colet. ibid, pp.506, 511, and 
 
 "" Colet. ibid. p. 491. But in the 616. 
 
364 COUNCIL OF FLOKENCE. 
 
 second, on the vacant patriarcliate. Eight days afterwards, 
 therefore, July 14,^"^ the pope sent to invite the Greek bishops 
 to come and confer with him, desiring to treat with them ' as 
 brethren, as members, as leaders of the churches.' There 
 were three points, he said, that he wished to lay before them : 
 1. The question of divorces; 2. The refusal of the metro- 
 politan of Ephesus to subscribe to the decree of the coxmcil ; 
 3. The vacant patriarchate. On the first two points the pope 
 had a clear right to be heard as head of the church. On the 
 third point, on which he was most urgent and most diffuse, 
 it would be difficult to defend his conduct. Had the holy 
 see never remained vacant above a month itself? But the 
 pope had his own reasons for interfering. 
 
 ' Your patriarch is dead, and you ought to elect another 
 while you are here. For this would be for the greater con- 
 firmation of the union, and support of the future patriarch. 
 For he would find at our hands honor and regard, concur- 
 rence and favour. At the same time we have here our own 
 patriarch of Constantinople, a serviceable person and well- 
 born, old and rich. If, then, you would accept him as your 
 patriarch, it would be for the advantage of your church. For 
 he is old, and has not long to live. So that in a short time the 
 church would be a gainer by his wealth. I cannot say whether 
 his foreign tongue would prove any impediment to you. 
 But should that impediment oblige you to look elsewhere, 
 choose one of your own people, only choose him here.*"'' , , . 
 The emperor is here, and a general council, with the pope at 
 the head of it. The superior prelates are here, from whom 
 your patriarch is to be taken. What is to hinder you ? , , . 
 Provided you elect him here in my presence, I will cause 
 him to be sole patriarch, and will remove the patriarch ap- 
 pointed by me. But I can make no such engagement 
 unless you elect him here.' "'^ Scandalous propositions, in- 
 deed, both of them, to have emanated from the head of the 
 church. The Greeks, according to his own showing, had 
 been 450 years estranged from unity ; on the octave of their 
 return to it, he, the head of the church, is found inciting 
 them deliberately to a breach of the canons. One of his most 
 saintly predecessors had said, ' "We are defenders and guar- 
 
 "" Colot. ibid. p. 535. i'" Syrop. x. 12. 
 
 ""> Colet. ibid. p. 538. 
 
CONDUCT OF EUGEXIUS. 365 
 
 dians, not transgressors of the holy canons ; inasmuch as 
 for every transgression of them there are signal retributions 
 in store.' '"^ And he summons the Greek bishops before him 
 to tell them that if they will only consent to act in the teeth 
 of their canons, and scatter to the winds, for once, those 
 privileges which eight days ago were by a solemn decree of 
 the whole church ordered to be maintained inviolate, he will 
 be just towards them, but not otherwise. The Greek prelates 
 answered with dignity, that ' it was customary for the patri- 
 arch to be elected in Constantinople by the whole province, 
 and consecrated in the great church of S. Sophia ; and that 
 they were sure that the emperor, knowing the custom of their 
 church, would never assent to act otherwise.' The pope re- 
 joined : ' It is all for your advantage that I would have you 
 elect one here : not for any friend or relative of mine, but 
 whomsoever you may choose. I will equip and coniirm him. 
 If you will not do so, I will do what I ought, and you will 
 repent of it hereafter. Had I not spoken to you, ye had not 
 had sin, but now you are without excuse.' "" Sad words, 
 indeed, considering where the sin lay ! The canonical obli- 
 gation was too clear even for the emperor to iind it in his 
 conscience to depart from it: 'When we have got back to 
 Constantinople,' said he,'^'^ 'by the blessing of God, we will 
 assemble the rest of the prelates — for there are others liJce- 
 tvise in our dominions — and elect a patriarch there with 
 their collective suffrage.' The Greeks were approving them- 
 selves worthy descendants of the Nicene fathers in contending 
 for the observance of their 'antient customs;""' the pope 
 was proclaiming his own decree, eight days after it had 
 passed, mockery, in seeking to undermine those privileges 
 which it had renewed. After the example which had been 
 set them, however, it was only natural for some of the Greek 
 prelates to be found intriguing with him subsequently for a 
 repetition of his proposal, in favour of one of their number — 
 Isidore. And but for their abrupt departure from Florence 
 it might have been carried this time.'""" 
 
 But who was ' the patriarch of our own appointment,' that 
 
 "" S. Martini, in aletter addressed "" Svrop. x. 12. 
 
 to his vicar in the east, Baron. A.D. 649, "" Tck opx"'" eSri KpaTfiru. — Can. 
 
 n. 62. A sentence which is printed by Nic. 6. 
 
 Baronius in capital letters. "^'' Sjrop. x. 16. 
 
 "" Colet. ibid. p. 538. 
 
366 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 Eugenius began by suggesting to them so insinuatingly — 
 ' the old man, who had not long to live,' -whose wealth would 
 be so advantageous to their church at his decease, if only his 
 foreign tongue could be borne with ' ? 
 
 Few questions could be found in church history necessitat- 
 ing for their answer a disclosure of more distressing facts ; at 
 once conducting us to the true reason why succours to Con- 
 stantinople were so long delayed, and why they failed so 
 lamentably when they arrived at last. 
 
 The Latin patriarch of Constantinople, of whom Eugenius 
 speaks, was his own nephew, Francis Condolmieri— cardinal 
 of Venice, as he was called — brother of Antony who com- 
 manded the ileet that brought the Grreeks to Venice from 
 Constantinople. He had another brother Mark, who was 
 made bishop of Avignon, governor of Bologna, and for his 
 services as governor, archbishop of Tarento."^^ Francis was 
 the first cardinal created by Eugenius, in the first year of his 
 pontificate, a.d. 1431 ; and was twice promoted afterwards 
 in the sacred college. A.d. 1437 he was made patriarch of 
 Constantinople and archbishop of Besanpon in France simul- 
 taneously, and the year following bishop of Verona ; but the 
 Veronese so energetically protested against having a non- 
 resident bishop that it cost him four years to obtain posses- 
 sion of that see. Le Quien "^^ thinks he must have resigned 
 the patriarchate before the council of Florence, because he is 
 not found subscribing there. Not he ! The Greek patriarch 
 of Constantinople might perhaps have viewed his presence in 
 the light of a personal insult. But it is also probable that 
 like the Latin patriarch of Alexandria who was not far off, 
 yet not there either, he had other matters on hand. Laoniciis 
 Chalcocondylas tells us that the pope sent no succours worthy 
 of the name to the Greeks, as he had promised, on their 
 return home ; the reason of which was, that he was always at 
 war with some one or other of his neighbours ; and what en- 
 couraged him in it was, that, besides a fair supply of men 
 and money, he had a distinguished general, nearly related to 
 him, a, patriarch, who fought his battles ! '^^' Unfortunately, 
 this description will not quite fit FrancivS, as we shall see. 
 But a Greek may well be pardoned the confusion. Eugenius 
 
 "" Chron. di Bologn. ap. Muiat. "^^ De i?e6. TVrc. lib. ti. p. 301, ed. 
 Eer. Ital. Script, torn, xviii. p. 646. Bekker. 
 
 nzz Orien. Christian, torn. iii. p. 834. 
 
CONDUCT OF EUGENIUS. 367 
 
 had tivo other patriarchs who fought his battles, and with 
 more success, both while the council of Florence was going 
 on, and when it was, as far as the Greeks were concerned, 
 over. Blondus, his secretary, '''* is lost in wonder at the vast 
 sums of money expended by his master in conciliating the 
 high dignitaries or indigent prelates of the Grxeek emperor 
 with presents, and in maintaining, at no less cost, his own 
 army svmuUcmeously, at the head of which — operating 
 against Nicholas Piccinino, Philip of Milan, or Francis 
 Sforza — not combating Greek bishops on the addition to 
 the creed, or the divine rights of the primacy, was John 
 Vitellius Vitelleschi, cardinal of Florence and Latin patriarch 
 of Alexandria. Tftis distinguished general — of the episcopal 
 order — was all in all to Eugenius while the council of Florence 
 was sitting."'"' Let us hear how his career was terminated 
 April 1, A.D. 1440, exactly two months after the Greeks had 
 reached home."^^ It is the tale of a partial biographer. 
 
 ' Such at last was his pride and arrogance, when, as prefect 
 of Eome, he behaved with so much cruelty and ferocity, that 
 Antonius Eidus, of Padua, prefect of the citadel, by command 
 of the pontiff' — so he declared, and was not contradicted, at 
 least — 'seized him by force, though his capture was not 
 effected without wounding him in three places ; and shut 
 him in the fort of S. Angelo, where on the following day he 
 died, either from the effect of his wounds or by some other 
 means ' — poison, says another account. ' His corpse was car- 
 ried to the church of S. Mary above Minerva, and there ex- 
 posed naked, without shoes or trowsers. Such is the fickle- 
 ness, and such are the vicissitudes of human affairs, that he 
 who was exposed to day to scorn and contumely, was, two 
 days before, ordering about everybody, and disposing of 
 everything at pleasure within the domain of the church ; 
 governing Eome, the patrimony, the duchy, Campania, the 
 coast, and whatever else belonged to the church.' The climax 
 was attained, when in spite of his ignominious death the 
 senate decreed a statue to him not long afterwards with this 
 inscription : "^r t -po the third father of the city of Eome after 
 Eomulus.' Such was the man, whom, up to the day of his 
 
 "=' Inclin. Horn. Imp. Decad. III. Script, torn. xxy. p. 145-50. 
 lib. X. p. 561 (ed. 1531). "" Ciacon. De vit. Fontif. et Card. 
 
 "25 His exploits are given in the vol. ii. p. 874. Comp. p. 9(10. 
 Annul. Bonin. ap. Murat. Scr. Ital. "" Ibid. 
 
SaS COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 death, Eugenius delighted to honor ! By -whom was he suc- 
 ceeded ? By another patriarch of the same stamp. , Lewis, 
 archbishop of Flor^ence, patriarch of Aquileia — made cardinal 
 we are expressly told, a.d. 1440, for his defeat in battle of 
 Nicholas Piccinino ! ^'^^ This, to be given as a reason for 
 exalting a bishop of the church of Christ in a grave church 
 history ? How did he become bishop ? ' He,' says his ad- 
 miring biographer, ''merited the love of Eugenius to that 
 extent by his military prowess that he became first bishop 
 of Trau in Dalmatia, then archbishop of Florence, finally 
 patriarch of Dalmatia, being the first Venetian who had ever 
 held that see.' "^^ Eugenius, a true-born Venetian, was fond 
 of his race. The culminating distinction reserved for his 
 fellow-townsman was to succeed the patriarch of Alexandria 
 as commander-in-chief of the papal army; and the first 
 thought of the patriarch of Aquileia in entering upon ofiice 
 was, not to keep Eugenius to his engagements to the Greek 
 emperor of succouring him against the Turks, but to engage 
 his master in hostilities against his rival in adventure, Fran- 
 cis Sforza,"^" whom from that time forth, Eugenius, acting 
 under the advice of his commander-in-chief, employed all his 
 energies to crush, writing at the same time to Constantinople 
 with the utmost assurance to tell Constantino, that it was the 
 supineness of the emperor and nothing else that ^delayed his 
 fulfilling his engagements to him."^' There are few popes, 
 it appears to me, whose character, so fair and glittering to 
 outside view, suffers from closer inspection more fatally than 
 that of Eugenius. His chief praise seems to have been in 
 his success, shortlived as it was, and anything but success to 
 the church. His medallion in Ciaconius bespeaks the man. 
 Was he not clearly one of those popes to whom is applicable 
 what the great saint of the north, almost his contemporary — S. 
 Bridget — said by revelation of some pontiff of her own days, 
 whom she will not name : ' pope ! thou art worse than 
 Lucifer, more unjust than Pilate, more of a foe to me than 
 Judas, more of an abomination to me than the Jews them- 
 selves ' ? And may not cardinal Tui-recremata, the great 
 
 "'^ Eaynald. a.d. 1440, n. 11. quern omnem rerum summam detu- 
 
 ""' Ciaeon, toI. ii. p. 919. lerat.' — For his appointment, t. p. 283. 
 
 "'° Simonet. lib. vi. ap. Murat. Eer. ' >'" See his letter, dated Florence, 
 
 Ital. Script, torn. :kxv. y. 32i. ' Hor- April 21, a.d. 1441, in Colet. ibid. 
 
 tante maximiLudovico patriarch^, ad p. 1229-30. 
 
CONDUCT OF EUGENIUS. 3fi9 
 
 champion of papal authority, when her writings were delated 
 to the council of Basle for expressing such sentiments, have 
 been influenced hy what lie saw around him in defending 
 them, and exculpating them from any disloyal or heretical 
 charge."'' ' There would seem to be no contradiction,' he 
 says, 'in asserting S. Peter, and the pope in some sense, 
 to be founder of the church, and asserting the pope to be 
 worse than Lucifer ; as the first regards official pre-eminence, 
 the second heinous crime, both of which it is possible to find 
 conjoined in wicked prelates, according to that verse in S. 
 Matthew : " The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat ; all 
 therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and 
 do : but do not yanafter their works." Beyond doubt she is 
 there speaking of the priests of her own days ; not of all, but 
 of many. And would that it were not so even in these 
 modem days of ours! To speak as she speaks of the 
 clergy seems no more scandalous than what the prophets 
 and saints of God have said with much more vehemence.' 
 Apposite quotations follow from Isaiah and S. Bernard ; and 
 his vindication of the saint was deemed complete. 
 
 Cardinal Turrecremata, John the Provincial, and Ambrose 
 Traversari,'"' were churchmen and theologians, worthy re- 
 spondents, in every sense of the word, to Bessarion, Mark of 
 Ephesus, and others on the Greek side. Had they been left 
 to themselves without the emperor, cardinal Julian, or the 
 pope to influence or overawe them, they might have got to 
 the bottom of their theological differences, and concluded a 
 peace that, on religious grounds at least, might never have 
 been disturbed again. But between John Palseologus and 
 Eugenius it was a barter of temporal and spiritual gains from 
 the first. The more soldiers and sailors the one promised, 
 the greater submission the other engaged to extort from his 
 bishops to the teaching of the Latin church. Each hoped to 
 be victorious through the other; Eugenius over the Basle 
 fathers, Palajologus over the Turks. This was the common 
 interest that united them as long as it lasted and no longer. 
 
 "" Mansi, torn. xxx. p. 715-18. ever used to quite other things. To 
 
 Comp. what is said, in c. 42 of her say the truth, I more willingly spend 
 
 4th Book of Revelations, of Gregory XI. my time with the peasants of our mo- 
 
 iias I vriiile in Florence,' said Am- nastery, than with the pillars of the 
 
 broae, ' I was obliged to hear and see earth, than even with the pope of 
 
 things done, which could not but make Eome.' Quoted by PopofF, p. 187 
 
 an impression on me, who had been note. 
 
 B B 
 
370 COUNCIL OF FLOEEKCE. 
 
 ' Eugenius,' as Sismondi "'* says of him, 'was austere in his 
 private habits, and indulged but little in what vulgar spirits 
 call pleasure. But he never set any bounds to the passions that 
 were strongest in him ; and his cupidity was never restrained 
 by the fear of breaking his oaths.' His most partial bio- 
 grapher can only say of him that ' he was esteemed constant 
 in adhering to his engagements, unless he happened to have 
 promised anything which it were better to recall than per- 
 form^ "'^ We have seen him opposing, overreaching, and 
 at length excommunicating the council convened by his pre- 
 decessor for reforming ecclesiastical abuses ; was there the 
 smallest attempt made to correct those abuses in the council 
 substituted for it by him ? We have seen him as head of the 
 church persistently tempting the Greek bishops to a breach 
 of their canonical obligations ; and in his temporal capacity 
 withholding the armed aid promised to their emperor, that 
 he might employ it for his own ends at home. We have 
 seen him promoting men to be bishops, archbishops, and 
 patriarchs of the church of Christ because they served him 
 well in his petty wars ; the parallel to which would be that 
 of a temporal prince putting a bishop at the head of his army, 
 because he was a good divine, or an eloquent preacher. We 
 have seen him ordering or conniving at the death of the most 
 distinguished of his episcopal generals one day, without any 
 previous trial, whom he had been allowing to dispose of 
 everything in church and state the day before. And we have 
 seen him heaping preferments, till even his own age cried 
 * shame,' on those least fit for it of his own kin. Look at his 
 own encyclics of a.d. 1442-3 ! Engrossed with the warlike 
 projects of the patriarch in command of his forces in Italy, 
 he had a.d. 1440-1 put the Grreeks ofif, owing, as was then 
 said, to their lukewarmness about the union. But as soon as 
 ever policy dictated that he should assist Hungary,'*'^ we have 
 him appealing piteously to the whole Christian world in 
 behalf of the oppressed Greeks, now so completely united to 
 the church of Kome that they had accepted the Roman rite, 
 and ' are therefore not merely of one flesh and blood, but of 
 
 "'' Eep. Ital. vol. ix. p. 166, ehapa. side on -which he says the Turks were 
 
 Ixx. Ixxi. contain facts that should be committing the worst atrocities, and 
 
 known to all interested in the council where help was most wanted. This is 
 
 of Florence. in the encyclic dated Florence, Jan. 1, 
 
 "" Ciacon. vol. ii. p. 876. a.d. 1442, and given in Eaynald. a.d. 
 
 "" 'ExHungari&prsesertim,'.is the 1443, n. 13-19. 
 
CONDUCT OF EUGENIUS. 371 
 
 the same faith with ourselves.' "'^ Yet the emperor had done 
 no more for union a.d. 1442-3 than he had been doing 
 A.D. 1440-1 ; and during that time Eugenius was too much 
 absorbed in his Italian wars even to keep faith with him. 
 A.D. 1444, the ecclesiastical historian fails to discover the 
 trace of a tear dropped by him over the slaughter of Chris- 
 tians at Varna, for which he alone was responsible, as we 
 shall see ; but within a month of it we find him at his old 
 work again in scheming for the possession of Corsica, and 
 making peace with his inveterate foes Philip and Sforza, not 
 that he might send fresh succours to Hungary or Constan- 
 tinople, but that he might recover Bologna for himself. 
 ' Having done so much towards protecting Christianity from 
 the Turks and Egyptians,' says Raynaldus, ' he would not 
 overlook the opportunity of advancing the possessions of the 
 Roman church.' "'* One might almost say of him that he 
 had demoralised the whole race of ecclesiastical historians 
 and biographers, for the time being, to call evil good, and 
 good evil ! Wonder of wonders it would have been indeed, 
 had the peace of Christendom been achieved under his 
 auspices. War, not peace, was his congenial element. His 
 biographer, weary of the scenes of turmoil and strife with 
 which his pen had been taken up, on coming to the last year 
 of his pontificate, says, ' meanwhile Eugenius, lest he should 
 appear exclusively devoted to the affairs of wa7',"'' decreed 
 the canonisation of S. Nicholas of Tolentino. This was, ac- 
 cording to the best accounts, on June 5, a.d. 1446."'"' And 
 he died the following February, with these words on his lips, 
 let it be said in his praise, ' Gabriel I how much better 
 would it have been for thy soul's health, hadst thou never 
 been made cardinal or pope, but practised religious discipline 
 in thy cloister.' '"' • 
 
 What was his nephew doing meanwhile, the cardinal whose 
 nuptials with the Constantinopolitan see would have done so 
 much to cement the union ? a.d. 1442 he obtained forcible 
 possession of the see of Verona, a.d. 1443, by way of show- 
 
 "" Ibid, or still better in the third sumpserunt, et nohiscum, et dicti 
 
 encyclic, following the second in Eay- ecclesi& ... in fide uniti sunt.' 
 nald. A..D. 1444, n. 8, in which he repre- "" Ibid. n. 12. 
 sents it as his bounden duty so to act: "" Ciacon. ibid. p. 875. 
 ' pro liberandis Grracis, et aliis catho- "" Mansi ad Raynald. a.d. 1447, 
 
 licvi, qui nostris temporibus, Dei cle- n. 8. 
 mentis, ritum Eomanse ecclesise as- "" Eaynald. ibid. n. 12. 
 
 B B 2 
 
372 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 ing that he could and would be non-resident in spite of his 
 flock, he was appointed commander-in-chief"^^ of the naval 
 force which Eugenius despatched at last to Constantinople, but 
 to succour Poland arid Hungary, rather than the Grreek em- 
 pire. '"^ Ladislaus was in full march against the Turks 
 encroaching upon his dominions. What Francis had to do 
 was, to prevent the Turks in Asia from crossing to the assists 
 ance of their brethren in Europe. Cardinal Julian, whom we 
 left at Florence reading out the decree for union in Latin, 
 was much more characteristically employed now in command- 
 ing the forces of the pope by land. He was a great man 
 unquestionably,"^* but neither a divine nor a saint. ' Fran- 
 cis,' says the chronicler, ' behaved with the utmost inertness, 
 as pope Pius reports of him ; neglecting not merely to guard 
 the straits, but to send intelligence to the Hungarians and 
 other Christian generals, as he ought to have done, that the 
 Turks had got over and effected a landing in Europe. His 
 conduct entailed upon the Christians a most fatal over- 
 throw.' »« 
 
 Unfortunately, the tale is but half told. The crusade, as 
 it was called, had been in the first instance successful, and 
 had concluded a solemn peace with the Turks. They had 
 hardly done so, when vague rumours were spread abroad of 
 immense successes that had attended the arms of their allies 
 by sea; and cardinal Julian, in the name, and it must be 
 added by peremptory command, of Eugenius, absolved them 
 from their engagements."*^ Their illusions were but too 
 fatally dispelled when they were confronted by Amurath in 
 person on the plains of Varna, where Ladislaus and 10,000 
 Christians expiated their breach of faith with their lives ; and 
 cardinal Julian, a fugitive from the battle-field, fell pierced 
 by three arrows in the marshes between it and Shumla."*' 
 This was the sequel to the council of Florence on the Latin 
 side ; here cardinal Julian paid the price of the decree which 
 he had read out, and of the means by which it had been 
 
 "" Eaynald. a.d. 1443, n. 22. lere fcedus, quod ee inconsulto cum 
 ■'" Ibid. n. 13-19. ^ _ hostibus religionis percussum est. La- 
 11" ' Magni animi et spiritus vir,' dislao, regi Polonise . . . uti eonventa 
 says Onuph, contrasting him with dissolveret, imperavit : juramenta re- 
 Francis. Quoted in Ciacon. vol. ii. misit. Novum instaurari bellum turn 
 p. 894. Gibbon has a fair sketch of precibus, turn minis, extorsit.'— JEn. 
 him, after the battle of Varna, c Ixvii. Silv. de Europ. c. 5. 
 '■" Ciacon. ibid. i"' Ciacon. ibid. p. 
 "" ' Seripsit cardinali, nullum va- 
 
RESULTS AMOXGt THE GREEKS. 873 
 
 obtained. He had been the most conspicuous actor in it all 
 by far, and on him fell the blow. 
 
 Returning to the Grreeks, we should not be surprised to 
 find them leaving Florence dissatisfied and crestfallen. It 
 was not the decree, but the way in which they had been got 
 to subscribe to it, so humiliating to their self-esteem, against 
 which they rebelled in spirit. There was one clause doubt- 
 less in it — that in which the addition to the creed was justified 
 — to which they may have felt they ought never to have 
 assented ; but against this they could set the fact that they 
 had not been asked, nor were bound in any way, to recite the 
 creed but in their own form. Still there was the feeling that 
 they had been ca_foled into subscribing, and slighted after 
 having subscribed. But a few hours afterwards they had 
 been taken before the pope to hear Bessarion profess his 
 assent to the doctrine of transubstantiation in their name, 
 without any previous authorisation from them.'"' The pope 
 had bade them prepare themselves by abstinence and self- 
 examination in case they intended communicating at his mass 
 the- day following, as though they had been going to make 
 their first communion. This was too much even for Bes- 
 sarion and Dorotheus ofMitylene to let pass without remark. 
 The emperor requested to have a Greek mass celebrated after 
 that of the pope, at which the cardinals and pope should 
 assist. The pope evaded the request by pleading his igno- 
 rance of the ceremonial, and even doubting whether he 
 should be able to approve of it. The request was withdrawn, 
 but never forgotten. The proposal of the pope that they 
 should elect their patriarch uncanonically to please him, 
 evidently filled them with distrust of him ; it was redoubled 
 when he eluded their request that all Latin occupants of 
 Greek sees should be removed. One of their number, Mark 
 of Ephesus, had been summoned into his presence, and been 
 lectured by him. "What Mark answered in his defence, if it 
 failed to disconcert the pope, must have been felt severely by 
 those who had been more pliant."*' Two of their number 
 were asked to stay behind and receive the reward of their 
 services, their red hats and pensions."^" This not merely 
 
 ii« Syrop. X. 8, 9,11, 12, 14 and 15, Deo. 18, a.d. 1439, with sixteen others, 
 
 for this and what follows. eighteen in all, one for every day in 
 
 '"» Well given in PopofF, p. 159-60. the month as it were to that date, 
 
 iiso They were created cardinals, Ciacon. ibid. p. 900. 
 
374 COUNCIL OF FLOKENCE. 
 
 rendered them proof against slights administered to them in 
 common, but alienated them from their companions. There 
 are grounds for supposing that Bessarion,"*' as well as 
 Isidore, schemed to get made patriarch on the spot. Still, 
 in reality, the Greeks left Florence committed to nothing 
 different in practice from what they were when they arrived 
 there. Mutual explanations on doctrine had taken place; 
 but of their privileges, rites, and discipline there had been no 
 surrender. Only the name of the pope was to be no longer 
 left out in their liturgy. "'^ This was the explanation which 
 they gave themselves to the ambassadors coming to the council 
 from England, with whom they fell in, and spent a social 
 evening at Bologna, in their way home.'"' The ambassadors 
 were most anxious to hear how things had gone. Philip, a 
 deacon, who was with the Greeks, and approved of the union, 
 replied ' that it had been a great success and that the churches 
 were now one again.' ' But on what terms ? ' said the English ; 
 ' did you give in to our way of thinking or we to yours ? ' 
 ' Neither the one nor the other,' said Philip ; ' when the 
 opinions of each church were compared, they were found to 
 agree ; so that though apparently different they have been 
 judged one and the same, and each side is allowed to retain 
 its own.' • But as to the addition of the creed,' rejoined the 
 English; 'is it ejected from ours, or imposed in yours?' 
 * Neither,' again returned Philip : ' it has been settled that we 
 should recite ours without it, and you yours with it.' ' Then as 
 to the use of unleavened bread ? ' 'As before,' was the reply. 
 ' Each follows its own usage.' ' But has a decree been made, 
 and if so, how is the creed written in it — with or without the 
 addition ? ' 'In neither way,' returned Philip for the last 
 time, ' for there was no creed at all published in the decree.' 
 The Grreeks may have been as much disconcerted by the 
 home-thrust of the Englishman, ' How is the creed written 
 in the decree' — for it must have reminded them that general 
 councils were not in the habit of separating without pro- 
 fessing their adhesion to the creed of the church at some 
 stage of their proceedings "^^ — as English common-sense was 
 
 "" Namely, the story in Phranza sarion. 
 
 that he was actually made patriarch "" The emperor, unasked, ordered 
 
 there. — Hist. ii. 17. But it is highly its insertion.' — Syrop. x. 12. 
 
 prohable that the statement in Syrop. "^'' Syrop. x. 18. 
 
 X. 16, about Isidore, lies at the bottom "" 'Following herein the examples 
 
 of the story in Phranza about Bes- of the fathers . . in the most sacred 
 
RESULTS AMONG THE GREEKS. 375 
 
 on heariag that ' the union of the churches ' meant only, 
 that ' they had agreed to differ.' Each fact, nevertheless, 
 was as undeniable as the other ; 'yet there was a third fact 
 as certain as either of them, namely, that the pope meant 
 in his inmost soul to supersede the Grreek rite by the Latin 
 throughout the east as soon as he could, and the Greeks 
 in their inmost souls could not divest themselVes of the 
 idea that union would sooner or later prove fatal to the 
 integrity of their ancient usages. Hence there was evasion 
 and equivocation among the promoters of the union on both 
 sides, confirming the prejudices of those who opposed it with 
 invincible proofs of its treacherous and delusive character. 
 ' These people,' -v^rote Mark "*' of his own side who were 
 favourable to it, ' admit with the Latins that the Holy Ghost 
 proceeds from the Son, and derives His existence from Him, 
 for so says their definition ; and at the same time they say 
 with us that the Spirit proceeds from the Father. With 
 the Latins, they think the addition made to the creed law- 
 ful and just, and with us will not pronounce it. With them 
 they say that azymes are the body of Christ, and with us 
 dare not communicate on them. Is not this sufficient to 
 show that thej'^ came to the Latin council, not to inves- 
 tigate the truth, which they once professed and then be- 
 trayed, but simply to earn some gold, and attain a false 
 and not true union ? False — for they read two creeds, as 
 they did before, perform two different liturgies, one on 
 leavened, the other on unleavened bread ; two baptisms, one 
 by the true immersion, the other by aspersion ; one with the 
 holy chrism, the other without it. . . . What sort of union 
 is this, then, when it has no external sign ? How could 
 they join together, retaining each his own?' The Greek 
 unionists would have been indifferent to these taunts, could 
 they have felt certain that their own rite was not threatened. 
 It ought not to have been, because the rights and privileges 
 of the eastern churches had all been renewed solemnly ; it 
 was, because the pope was bent on undermining them one by 
 one. He had done his best to establish a precedent in the 
 election of their patriarch, of which his own successors would 
 not have been slow to avail themselves. And even when 
 
 councils,' as it is said Condi. Trident, the extracts given of his letter in the 
 sess. iii. reply to it by Joseph, bishop of Modon. 
 
 "» PopofT, p. 171, as contained in Colet. ibid. p. 689-754. 
 
376 COUNCIL OP" FLOEBNCE* 
 
 their new patriarch, Metrophanes of Cyzicus, had been elected 
 in the usual way on their return home, May 4, a.d. 1440, 
 the inevitable Christopher was seen at his side immediately, , 
 in the procession from court to his palace, whispering into 
 his ear on behalf of the pope, what he was expected to do 
 for the union."^« On this, we are told, all his suffragans to 
 a man declined officiating with him ; and two of them, the 
 metropolitans of Ephesug and Heraclea, left Constantinople 
 ten days afterwards. He himself withdrew subsequently, 
 and would no longer ofBciate. ' Unless the emperor will re- 
 form the church,' he said, ' I will not return.' He meant 
 ' latinising it,' when he talked of ' reforming it,' says the 
 historian. The emperor continued irresolute for three years. 
 When the fleet arrived, fresh pressure was put upon him, 
 under which he seemed to give way, and named a day for it ; 
 but as the patriarch died two days before, August 1, a.d. 
 1443, it was never carried out, nor are we told what it was to 
 have been. The probability, indeed, is that it was intended 
 to have been all that it could. Syropulus asserts as much."*'' 
 The cardinal in command of the fleet was undoubtedly 
 bearer of the letter of remonstrance from his imcle to the 
 'patriarchs, archbishops, abbots, doctors, and masters of the 
 east,' dated March 4, a.d. 1443,"** on which some remarks 
 have been made previously ; and it was now far more pro^ 
 bably, than either A.d. 1445 or 1447 that the celebrated 
 dispute took place between Mark of Ephesus and Demetrius 
 the professor of theology from Florence, who became bishop 
 of Coron subsequently just as Mark died."*^ It would be 
 thus in anticipation of what would be effected by the presence 
 of his fleet, by the theologians who accompanied it, and by 
 his own letter, that Eugenius ventured to tell the west 
 officially, some months before, that the Greeks had accepted 
 
 '"' Atove, p. 335, with the referen- likewise (Fabric. Bibl. Gr. torn. xi. 
 
 cea in the note. pp. 356 and 670). Even if placed 
 
 "" Syrop.xii.il. A.D. 1446, therefore, the story of Mark's 
 
 "^' Colet. ibid. p. 1237-8. sudden death after the dispute cannot 
 
 '"' The great authority for this is be true. On the other hand, S. Anton. 
 
 S. Anton. Chrmi. p. iii. tit. xxii. e. 11. expressly says that Demetrius aecom- 
 
 But it is given more fully by John panied the cardinal of Venice, which 
 
 Plusid. in his Summary. — Mansi, only could have been a.d. 1443. No 
 
 Suppl. ad Colet. vol. v. p. 222-6. As date at all is assigned by S. Anton, as 
 
 Eugenius died in Feb. a.d. 1447, it Le Quien, Or. CAnWaa. vol. iii. p. 900, 
 
 could hardly have been that year ; but and Baynald. a.d. 1445, n. 17, assert. 
 
 this was the year of Mark's death 
 
RESULTS AMONG THE GREEKS. 377 
 
 the Latin rite.^^^" ' The wish was father to the thought,' and 
 there was a vigorous effort in progress on his part to make 
 them ; but the death of the patriarch and the disaster at 
 Varna counteracted his designs, of which his own extant 
 letter is decisive proof, though they never became fact. 
 
 Now, let us study the same phenomenon from the Greek 
 side. That the Greeks left Florence, not merely dissatisfied 
 with the past, but with misgivings for the future, is clear 
 from what took place during their journey from Italy, and 
 the disclaimer by which it was followed. Arrived at Venice, 
 where Eugenius was all-powerful, they were informed of the 
 wish of the doge to see a Greek mass celebrated at S. Mark's."^' 
 What made them Hesitate ? It waa the very thing which they 
 had been wishing to do themselves at Florence. They knew 
 they were to be watched. They felt their rite was to be put 
 on trial. The pope had told them he was not sure that it 
 was what he could accept. It was with the utmost difficulty 
 that any bishop could be prevailed upon to accede to the 
 request of the doge. When at length the metropolitan of 
 Heraclea volunteered at his church as celebrant, he made a 
 point of not availing himself of anything belonging to the 
 Latins ; of not commemorating the name of the pope ; of not 
 reciting the creed in the Latin form. He would not have 
 been so extra stifif had he thought the Greek rite safe. 
 
 As they touched at Corfu, and as they touched at Modon 
 more particularly,'"'^ their own misgivings were re-echoed 
 back to them in plain terms. ' Until now,' said the Modonese, 
 ' we could defend our faith and customs against the Latins, 
 but now we must silently obey them in everything,' and much 
 more to the same effect. In other words, from henceforth 
 they were doomed to the Latin rite. How were their appre- 
 hensions sought to be quieted ? Within a month of his in- 
 stallation, the new patriarch,'"" 'oecumenical patriarch' as he 
 persists in styling himself as of old, addressed a special letter 
 to the spiritualities of Modon, to disabuse them of their pre- 
 judices and make known the union to them as it ought to be. 
 All ground of offence between them and the Latins had been 
 
 "" Above, p. 370 and the notes. Propaganda, that I almost hesitate 
 
 III] Syrop. xi. 2-4. about accepting aletterneverpublished 
 
 ""- Syrop. xi. 7. before on its authority, with no reason 
 
 "«> Efflise Orient, par J. Pitzipios, assigned why it should be addressed 
 
 Rome, 1855, part ii. p. 47, a work so to the Modonese. 
 
 full of mistakes, though printed at the 
 
378 COUNCIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 removed at the council from which he had just come. The 
 Latin doctrine on the procession proved to be that of the 
 western fathers, dear to the east as saints, and was seen to be 
 no sort of hindrance to their union. They were, therefore, 
 happily united once more and made one flock. In conse- 
 quence, the name of Eugenius was to be restored to its usual 
 place in the liturgy, and the terms of the decree cheerfully 
 accepted one and all, and carried out in their integrity. ' At 
 the same time,' he tells them, 'it is necessary that you should 
 know that all our ecclesiastical usages, both in celebrating the 
 blessed eucharist and in all other divine offices, particularly 
 in reading of the creed, we observe as before, modified in no 
 one particular.' So that, notwithstanding his lecture from 
 Christopher and his own request to be allowed to ' reform ' 
 the metropolitan church indefinitely, he is far from venturing 
 to admit as yet that any disloyalty to the Grreek rite was in- 
 tended. Grradually, nevertheless, he commenced appointing 
 a set of bishops to Greek sees notorious for their predilections 
 — among them, possibly, Joseph bishop of Modon,' "** whose 
 treatise against Mark of Ephesus seems to be our only reason 
 for remembering him — to bring about the indefinable reforma- 
 tion to which he was committed himself, but in his pastoral 
 dared not allude. But though he moved stealthily, there 
 were others whom the slightest rustling of the leaves disturbed. 
 Why had his colleagues,^^^^ on their return to Constantinople, 
 accused themselves in public of having ' sold their faith, their 
 pure sacrifice, and become azymites ? ' His own irregular 
 ordinations were watched by the metropolitan of Csesarea 
 whom they affected most, a worthy successor of S. Basil, but 
 who for some reason or other was not invited to be of the 
 party to Florence, and delated to the three eastern patriarchs 
 whom he lit upon at Jerusalem in making a pilgrimage thither. 
 Each of these patriarchs had assented to be represented at 
 Florence; one of them, the patriarch of Jerusalem,"^* had 
 
 "" There must have been some at Florence, and thinks he may have 
 
 special reason for the letter of Metro- heen the Latin bishop of Modon, of 
 
 phanes to the Modonese. Fabric, whom Syrop. iv. 4, speaks in going 
 
 Bibl. Gr. vol. xi. p. 458, thinks him to the council, as so friendly to the 
 
 the same with John Plusiaden, having Greeks. 
 
 taken the name of Joseph on being "«= Ducas, Hist. Byzant. c. 32. 
 
 made bishop. Oudin, de Script. Eecl. "ns Oolet. ibid. p. 562, dated Con- 
 
 tom. iii. p. 2422, points out that he stantinople, Nov. 1, A..D. 1434. 
 was not one of those who subscribed 
 
RESULTS AMONG THE GEEEKS. 379 
 
 even undertaken to translate and forward to the ' catholicos ' 
 of the Armenians a letter of Eugenius inviting him to the 
 council. Each of them apparently received a copy of the 
 decree, when it was over, from the pope. Philotheus, patriarch 
 of Alexandria, had already written to acknowledge his, and 
 to promise that it should receive his respectful attention.'"' 
 But the news brought them by Arsenius filled them with 
 apprehensions. The Florentine decree was creating great 
 scandal in practice. Many were declaring for the use of the 
 creed in the Latin form, besides pledging themselves to the 
 doctrine involved in it, and commemorating the pope. The 
 emperor was reported favourable to their designs. Metro- 
 phanes, as head of the party, was ordaining a number of 
 bishops and metropolitans of well-known proclivities — to the 
 sees of Amasea, Neo-Caesarea, and Tyane, for instance — for 
 some unknown purpose. The metropolitan of Csesarea, to 
 whose jurisdiction those sees were subject, had begged them 
 to issue a synodical epistle, suspending all such episcopal 
 intruders till their orthodoxy had been examined. They had 
 accordingly done this in full synod April 6, a.d. 1443; and 
 their decree was to that effect.'""' A letter frona them to the 
 emperor follows, setting forth their motives, which have been 
 grievously misrepresented on both sides, in the clearest terms. 
 It is one of the most dignified, straightforward documents of 
 the whole period ; nor is it the Florentine decree which they 
 reject at all, but the treachery with which it was accompanied 
 by the pope on one side and Metrophanes and his following 
 on the other, to the subversion of all those rights and privi- 
 leges, one by one, which the council had solemnly renewed in 
 their entirety. 
 
 ' They had each received letters from Eugenius,' they tell 
 John, ' on the union that had been effected, requesting them 
 to accept it and commemorate the pope. But Eugenius had 
 not informed them at all how it had been brought about. 
 One of their number, on the other hand, had heard from the 
 late patriarch Joseph how things had been managed at the 
 council, very differently from what had been agreed upon on 
 both sides when it was summoned. What had been done 
 there had been accomplished by fraud, and was in the teeth 
 of the canons, justifying even the addition to the creed. He, 
 
 "" Colet. ibid. p. 1189-90. "'' Mansi, Suppl. ad Colet. p. 247-56. 
 
380 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 therefore ' — the patriarch in question, Philotheus of Alexan- 
 dria, whose letter was noticed previously—' had answered the 
 pope that he was quite ready to accept the council of Florence, 
 on condition of the pope accepting all that was laid down in 
 the canons and oecumenical councils, and commemorate the 
 pope too, on his giving the necessary assurances to that efifect. 
 But without these they would not any of them either accept 
 the council of Florence or commemorate the pope ; and they 
 would suspend and excommunicate all who did, not excepting 
 his imperial majesty. They are willing enough to excuse his 
 having assented to the union in the excitement of the mo- 
 ment, hoping to benefit his distressed empire thereby ; but 
 should he persist in adhering to it after their remonstrance, 
 they will, they declare, cease to pray for him and proceed to 
 inflict (3ensures on him due to his conduct.' They send their 
 letter by the monk Macarius, who will tell him more about 
 their synod ; and they conclude their letter in terms worthy 
 of the palmiest days of the old mother church of the east : 
 'There is no one living, we assure your majesty, who can 
 desire union with the elder Rome and all the Italians more 
 ardently than we do, but on express condition of their coming 
 to the truth. If, on the other hand, they should out of mere 
 contentiousness persist in upholding what is false, it is quite 
 out of our power to communicate with them, even though it 
 cost all of us our heads on the same day.' In other words, 
 they would have nothing to do with them if they persisted 
 in maintaining that their addition to the creed had been made 
 by competent authority or in imposing it upon others. The 
 Latins had evaded the historical solution of the first question 
 at the council, as well they might, and had, ever since the 
 council, been endeavouring to dictate by force to the Greeks 
 on the last. Their conduct throughout had been unworthy 
 of a Christian church. This letter of the eastern patriarchs is 
 dated December, the sixth indi'ction, or a.d. 1443, the year in 
 which their synodical letter of April 6 was penned, of which 
 it speaks. As originally the Constantinopolitan indictions 
 commenced each year on September 25, Mansi looks upon 
 this date as an anachronism, and on the letter consequently 
 with suspicion.^^^^ But the fact is,"™ there was another kind 
 
 ""' Ibid, et ad Eaynald. a.d. U43, >>™ Art de Verif. Us Dates, vol. i. 
 "• 22. Diss. 0. iv. 
 
RESULTS AMONG THE GREEKS. 881 
 
 of indiction in use when they wrote, which commenced either 
 December 25 or January 1. So that the date of their letter 
 to the emperor is in perfect harmony with the date of their 
 synod. 
 
 The reason why the publication of the Florentine decree 
 in the east was refused once more, therefore, was in part 
 owing to the assertion contained in it that the addition to the 
 creed had been made with good reason, when it had in fact 
 been originally the work of a convert prince,"" though this 
 never came out, and in part owing to the attempts made sub- 
 sequently to extort from the Greeks exactly what that decree 
 professed to have assured to them for ever. All the condem- 
 nations cited or prcfnounced by Benedict Xiy."'^ against those 
 missionaries who, some hundreds of years afterwards, were 
 charged with intriguing against oriental rites, or exciting pre- 
 j udices against oriental usages, ' sanctioned by the council of 
 Florence,' apply with tenfold force to Eugenius, his emis- 
 saries, and the Greek unionists, his admirers, who from the 
 octave of the day on which the decree was read out to the 
 eve of the very day on which Constantinople fell into the 
 hands of the Turks, as we shall see presently, were engaged 
 in plotting with the most barefaced dishonesty, for the sub- 
 stitution of the Latin rite for the Greek throughout the east. 
 "Whether the eastern patriarchs, as M. Popoff thinks, again 
 met in synod a.d. 1451,""' deposed Gregory, the next patri- 
 arch of Constantinople, created another, Athanasius, in his 
 room, and revoked the signatures made by their vicars in 
 their names to the Florentine decree, is not clear, but in any 
 case their grounds would have been the same, and what hap- 
 
 "" Above, p. 358. iUi, qui in Graecis reprehendebant ob- 
 
 '"2 Bullar. Ben. XIV. torn. iii. p. ii. servantiam eorum, quse in Florentino 
 
 11.47: ' Ad missionarios per orientem concilia iisdim permissa ftiernnt ; prae- 
 
 deputato3.' Jul. 26, a.d. 1765, where sertim quod sacrificium oflFerrent infer- 
 
 a summary of them all is given, and mentato, uxorem ducerent antequam 
 
 in which he shows that the condition saeris ordinibus initiarentur, eamque 
 
 laid down both at Lyons and at Flo- post susceptos ordines sacros retine- 
 
 rence by the Greeks on subscribing, had rent, quodque eucharistiam sub utrique 
 
 been : ' ne ex ritibus nostrae ecclesise specie etiam pueris exhiberent.' Com- 
 
 aliguid immutetur,' referring to Har- pare this with what was attempted 
 
 duin, torn. viii. p. 698 and ix. p. 395. now. If Benedict's motto, ' nihil inno- 
 
 'Then, § 13, he proceeds: 'inGrsecorum vandum' had really been made the 
 
 enchiridio edito Beneventi, duse sum- rule throughout, there would never 
 
 morum pontificum Leonis X. et Cle- have been any breach at all. 
 
 mentis VII. habentur constitutiones, "" P. 177, with the note, 
 quibus vehement&r increpantur Latini 
 
382 COra'CIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 pened subsequently would have justified them then, as now. 
 Gregory, who succeeded Metrophanes a.d. 1445 or 1446, after 
 the see had been vacant some two or three years, surnamed 
 Mamma, or Melisenus, from his native town Melise in Cala- 
 bria, was a Latin by birth. He came to the council of 
 Florence as confessor or penitentiary to the emperor, and was 
 one of the first, as he was one of the most eager, to subscribe 
 to it, as one of the two representatives of the Alexandrine 
 patriarch.'"* On becoming patriarch himself,' he showed 
 that his partialities were unchanged by writing against Mark 
 of EphesLis, and getting Bessarion to do the same;"'* but act 
 as he wished he could not, nor was Constantine, who succeeded 
 to the empire on the death of John, October 31, a.d. 1448, 
 able to help him. Hence, even if he was not deprived by 
 his brethren in synod, he left Constantinople A.d. 1451 or 
 1452, for his native land,"'^ from which he never afterwards 
 returned, in spite of all the severe reflections made by Nicholas 
 V. on his pusillanimous conduct.""" To compensate for his 
 absence, and to endeavour to get the decree promulgated, 
 Nicholas sent over Isidore,"'* the ci-devant metropolitan of 
 Eussia, now cardinal, at the urgent request of Constantine, 
 with a small force to back him, as well as to make head 
 against the Turks. The emperor, senate, and some few of 
 the clergy, met in the church of S. Sophia on his arrival, and 
 after offering a number of suitable prayers there and listening 
 to a sermon from the cardinal, accepted the decree for union, 
 on the understanding, however, that should the danger from 
 the Turks cease, it should be examined carefully by com- 
 petent persons, and corrected, where not found orthodox on 
 any points. This done, they assented to have a common 
 mass celebrated of the Grreeks and Latins, in which Nicho- 
 las, the pope, and Gregory the absent patriarch, were com- 
 memorated, December 12, a.d. 1452. It was the most that 
 could be effected. Even so, the historian adds, there were 
 many who declined accepting the ' antidoron,' or blest bread, 
 
 "" Syrop. iv. 29. of Florence.— ^r< de Verif. Us Dates, 
 
 '"= Popofe, p. 174, note 2. His vol. iv. p. 121, 8to ed. 
 
 o-wn piece is in Colet. ibid. p. 753-840. "'« Phranz. Hist. ii. 19. 
 
 And a long letter from Bessarion to "" In his letter to Constantine. — 
 
 PhUantliropinus on the success of the Eaynald. a.d. 1461, n. 1, 2. 
 
 coiincilofPlorencefollows, p. 1244-80. >"s Dueas, Hist. c. 36, whence the 
 
 Gregory wrote likewise under the name following account is taken, 
 of Gennadius in behalf of the council 
 
RESULTS AMONG THE GREEKS. 383 
 
 on that occasion, regarding the sacrifice that had been cele- 
 brated as defiled by the uniate liturgy that had been used."" 
 From that time the church of S. Sophia is said to have been 
 deserted and avoided by the Constantinopolitans as a Jewish 
 synagogue. The use of the Latin, or at all events of a strange 
 rite there, had polluted it. The Latin rite, they felt, in fact, 
 hadbeen the ruin of their empire.'"" And, by a strange fatality, 
 we are told, that ' on the night before the assault, the em- 
 peror rode round to all the posts occupied by the garrison, 
 and encouraged the troops to expect victory by his cheerful 
 demeanour. He then visited the church of S. Sophia, already 
 deserted by the orthodox, where, with his attendants, he par- 
 took of the holy sacrament, according to the Latin form,' "" 
 The next solemn service performed there was that of the 
 Koran ! The day following, the city called after his great 
 namesake Constantine, the first of the dynasty, fell into the 
 hands of the Turks ; and the last of all the Latinisers, and 
 of all the Palseologi likewise, 'neglected by the catholics, 
 deserted by the orthodox,' by perishing as a hero should in 
 the thick of the fray, ' alone gave dignity to the final catas- 
 trophe,' "^* May 29, A.D. 1453, in the midst,as we are reminded, 
 of the holy season of Pentecost ! So ended the council of 
 Florence as far as concerned the Greeks. For the Latins 
 themselves, ' the end was not yet.' And of the share taken 
 in it by the Armenians, Jacobites, and ^Ethiopians, it will be 
 best to treat in a future chapter, in which all their various 
 overtures for union will be summed up. That there were 
 faults committed on both sides — gross faults — is only too 
 patent ; but one fault certainly there was on the Latin side, 
 with which the opponents of the council on the Greek side 
 gain immeasurably by comparison, and that fault was bad 
 faith. I am not here speaking of forged documents adduced 
 in good faith, though practically their effect was the same."*^ 
 At the head of the Latin side was one whose name was 
 Eugenius, pontiff of the apostolic see of old Eome ; and at 
 the head of the Greek opposition there was one whose name 
 was Eugenius likewise : Mark Eugenius, metropolitan of the 
 
 lira iyuTinii \eiTaupyla. "" Finlay, Byzant. Emp. vol. ii. 
 
 iibo 'Her empire only had been sub- p. 641. 
 
 verted by the Latins,' says Gibbon, "^^ Ibid. p. 649. Easter in that 
 
 e. Ixviii. ' her religion was trampled in year falling on April 1. 
 
 the dust by the Moslem conquerors.' '"' See this subject treated below, 
 
 This last remark we shall see qualified c. viii. 
 in what follows. 
 
384 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 apostolic see of Ephesus, and the contrast between them in, 
 that one respect — history compels the avowal — was complete: 
 they were the antipodes of each other. Gabriel Eugenius^ 
 with all his show, was, as his partial biographer says, only 
 faithful to his engagements when it suited him to keep them. 
 Mark Eugenius, with all his narrowness, was honesty to the 
 backbone ; the ' venerable ' metropolitan of Ephesus, as the 
 chief of his opponents ^^^* calls him: 'a rule and measure 
 that could never be made to swerve,' says another."'^ John, 
 the Palseologus, was true to the principles and the practice of 
 the first of his line, Michael; and the last union accomplished 
 under the auspices of a Palseologus was as honorable and as 
 long-lived as the first had been, and no more. Bessarion and 
 Metrophanes, Joseph of Modon, and Grennadius or Gregory, 
 were not more successful in their vindication of it than John 
 Veccus of his. They could dilate on the general fickleness 
 of their countrymen with some success; on the prejudices of 
 Mark, on whom devolved the task of exposing their own, with 
 more ; on the reasonableness and fairness of the decree, pure 
 and simple, with most. But what was utterly beyond them 
 was to gainsay the unworthy arts by which it had been 
 obtained, the price stipulated for it beforehand, or the still 
 more unworthy practice by which it was sought to be made 
 the means of undermining all that it had assured to the rights 
 and privileges of the Greek church, to the very last day of 
 the continuance of Constantinople as a Christian city. One 
 by one the knot of Greek unionists died off, and their race 
 became extinct. Bessarion and Isidore became titular patri- 
 archs of Constantinople in turn, but of their old dioceses re- 
 spectively they saw no more. Bessarion prudently remained 
 in Eome ; Isidore,^ '^^ in attempting to get back to his was 
 thrown into prison by the grand-duke Basil, and with difiBculty 
 made his escape. He was present at the fall of Constanti- 
 nople, and the record of his sentiments, breathed in bis 
 narrative, shows that party-spirit had not obliterated his 
 patriotism or Christian charity.'"' Bessarion opened his 
 doors at Eome wide to his distressed countrymen who made 
 
 "" Greg. Antirrh. adv. Marc. ap. Blackmore's tr. 
 
 Fabric, Bibl. Gr. torn. xi. p. 393. "" Dacher, SpicU. ed. de la Barre, 
 
 "«= Ducas Hist. a. 31, quoted by vol. iii. p. 793, where his letter is 
 
 Popoff, p. 160. given, dated Crete, July 8, a.d. 1453. 
 
 "»« Mouravieff"B.BKsm»i Ch. p. 77-8. 
 
BESULTS AMONG THE GREEKS. 385 
 
 their escape."'' Of the remnant of the Palseologi, one 
 branch, as represented by Sophia, their heiress, found a home 
 in the palace of the sovereign of Russia, John III. ;'"*'' another 
 branch took refuge in Italy. Their descendants, having 
 been, for some cause or other, expelled subsequently, took up 
 their abode in England, from whence one is known to have 
 emigrated to Barbadoes, and to be buried there;'""" another 
 found his last resting-place in Westminster^ Abbey ;"'' a third, 
 on whose monument is preserved their simple tale,'"^ died at 
 Clyfton, the manor-house of the Courtenays,"^' their Latin 
 rivals and predecessors in the empire, and in whose parish 
 church of Landulph, on the right bank of the Tamar, to the 
 north of Plymouth, he lies buried : a singular testimony to 
 the vicissitudes of human affairs in both families ; a stranger 
 destiny that divided the representatives of the Greek empire 
 between England and Russia ! 
 
 The reflections of S. Antoninus, archbishop of Florence, on 
 the overthrow of the Greek capital are worth comparing with 
 what Nicholas V., the successor of Eugenius, was thought to 
 have written in the spirit of prophecy two years before, by 
 its refugee patriarch. The pope likened the condition of the 
 Greeks to that of the fig-tree of which ' a certain man '"■' said, 
 behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig-tree 
 and find none : cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground ? ' 
 And in the third year from that time, says the patriarch, 
 having been 'let alone' till then, it was cut down."'^ The 
 fifth and last Nicholas was certainly the most proper person 
 to announce the consummation, of which Nicholas I. had 
 
 iiss Pabric. i?A'. ffr. vol. xi. p. 424. thesonneof John, the sonne of Thomas, 
 
 '"" MouraviefF, ibid. p. 84. second brother to Constantine Palao- 
 
 "™ See ' A brief description of the logics, the eighth of that name, and 
 
 town of Hadleigh.' Hadleigh, 1853, last of that lyne that rayned in Con- 
 
 8vo. p. 37. Btantinople, until subdewed by the 
 
 "" Theodore by name, as appears Turks; -who married with Mary, the 
 
 from an entry in the register, kindly daughter of William Balls of Hadlye 
 
 supplied to me by the Dean; and from in Souffolke, gent., and had issue five 
 
 the date of his burial, apparently eldest children — Theodoro, John, Ferdinando, 
 
 son of the next. Maiia, and Dorothy ; and departed 
 
 1192 j^ giren in the Gentleman's this life at Clyfton, the 21st January, 
 
 Magazine, vol. xlv. p. 80, A.n. 1775. 1636.' 
 
 'Here lyeth the body of Theodoro '"' Murray's Handbook for Devon 
 
 Palseologus of Pesaro, in Italye, des- and Cornwall, p. 225. 
 cended from the imperyail lyne of the "" S. Luke, xiii. 6. 
 last Cliristian Imperors of Greece, "" Quoted by Eaynald. a.d. 1541, 
 
 being the sonne of Camilio, the sonne u. 3. 
 of Prosper, the sonne of Theodoro, 
 
 C C 
 
386 COUNCIL OF FLOEENCE. 
 
 laid the first stone. But it escaped both the patriarch and 
 the pope that there were two fig-trees in the gospel nar- 
 rative that had not borne the fruit that was expected of 
 them."'^ S. Antoninus compared the actual catastrophe to 
 the judgment decreed against the ten tribes. ' It happened 
 therefore to the Grreeks separating themselves from the church 
 of Eome through schisms and heresies, as it had ha.ppened 
 to the children of Israel, who in their ten tribes were guilty 
 of schism, separating themselves from the tribe and kingdom 
 of Judah, where was the temple of the Lord. . . . Similarly, 
 the Grreek empire separated by its own act from the church 
 of Eome, where is the high priesthood, and true worship, and 
 true empire, fell into divers heresies, and though occasionally 
 recovering itself, its endurance was not for long. . . . But 
 the church of Eome, and the Latin empire, though it has 
 gone through many disasters, still it has escaped those judg^ 
 ments which have befallen the other, always abiding and 
 always destined to abide in the true faith.' In saying this, 
 the archbishop of Florence was only repeating what hundreds 
 on the Latin side had said before him : it was the old tradi- 
 ditionary view on which we heard Grregory IX. in a former 
 chapter expatiate so dogmatically when corresponding with 
 the Greek patriarch of his day, Grermanus."^^ But the Grreek 
 had his rejoinder incontestably. For if the east was Israel, 
 the west was Judah : if Samaria fell to Shalmaneser B.C. 721, 
 Jerusalem fell to Nebuchadnezzar B.C. 588. 
 
 *p£8f60 vvv, nil Tol Ti flecDi/ liiivi/xa yepuiuu 
 ''H^uaTt TqJ, Stc. , . . *^^^ 
 
 The interval between the fall of Constantinople and the 
 Eeformation was within half that time ! And the Grreek who 
 came to Florence armed not merely with his fathers and 
 councils, but with his Grreek Testament and with his Plato,"'^ 
 might boast that he it was who had ' breathed into the 
 
 "»« Math. xxi. 19. the lectures of Gemistius Pletho, vide 
 
 "" Above, p. 237. TroUope's Florence, vol. iii. p. 141 
 
 "'» n. xxii.^ 368. et seq., with the references eon- 
 
 'Yet think, a day wiU come, when tained in the notes; the letter of 
 
 Fate's decree Nicholas Hawkins, archdeacon of Ely, 
 
 'And angry gods shaU wreak this to Henry VIII., for instance. Also, the 
 
 wrong on thee.' Pope. splendid close of c. bcvi. in G-ibbon, 
 
 "™ On the influence of the study and Mosheim, Cent. XV. part ii. o. i. 
 
 of Plato promoted at Florence by § 4. 
 
CONSTANTINOPLE UNDER THE TURKS. 387 
 
 kindred spirits of the great Teutonic races such love of free 
 enquiry and of liberty,' that they rose and exacted full ven- 
 geance upon Latium, not for the first time his destroyer."""" 
 The conduct of the Mohammedan conqueror is alone want- 
 ing to complete the tale, and he happened to have a rite of his 
 own as well as the Latins. He acted as Saladin, not as the 
 pious Grodfrey, alas I at Jerusalem ; nor as the immaculate 
 Baldwin at Constantinople. When Baldwin and his hosts 
 entered Constantinople, the Greek patriarch had to fly to 
 save his positioa, and the Greek rite was abolished. One of 
 the first cares of the second Mohammed was to set forth a 
 proclamation encQjiraging the Christians to return to their 
 homes, and live and practice their religion as before.'^"' His 
 next care was to ask where the Greek patriarch was, and on 
 hearing that he was no more,being either dead or disgraced,'^"* 
 he bade them elect another according to their customs, and 
 begged to be instructed in the manner of inducting him, as 
 observed under the emperors. So the few clergy and laity 
 present elected George Scholarius, who had been of the party 
 to Florence, and had spoken there at great length'^"' in favour 
 of the union which he had afterwards lived to repent. He 
 took the name of Gennadius on his appointment, the same 
 name under which the patriarch in exile, Gregory, was writing 
 in behalf of the council of Florence. Hence no small con- 
 fusion between them.""^ After his election he was received in 
 state by the sultan, who in presenting him with a magnificent 
 crozier, said ' Be patriarch and prosper : use our friendship 
 for any purpose that you wish: having all the rights and 
 privileges that former patriarchs had before you. Take the 
 church of the holy apostles for your residence. "^"^ Thereupon 
 be was mounted on horseback, and sent, accompanied by the 
 court officials in procession, to the church of the apostles, 
 where he was consecrated, in the presence of a large number 
 of his future suffragans, by the metropolitan of Heraclea,'^"* 
 and where he remained and resided for some time; till, to 
 
 1200 Professor Goldwin Smith's Lee- ""' Given in Colet. ibid. p. S54-690. 
 twrcs on the Study of History. Ed. "" Art de Virif. les Bates, vol. iv. 
 1861, p. 34. P- 112; Oudin, de Script. Eccl. iii. 
 
 1201 Phran. Hist. iii. 11. p. 2360; Fabric. Sihl. Gr. xi. p. 393. 
 
 1202 That is, if Gregory had been ™^ Hist. Pol. Turcogrcee. by Crus, 
 really deposed, and Athanasius ap- lib. i. p. 15. 
 
 pointed by the other patriarchs. — '="' Ibid. lib. ii. p. 1 08, and Phran. 
 Above, p. 381. ibid. 
 
 C C 2 
 
388 COUNCIL OP FLOEENCE. 
 
 be nearer the Christian quarter, he sought and obtained the 
 convent of the Blessed Virgin as his abode. ' Policy,' says 
 Phranza, ' not love for Christianity, dictated this act of the 
 sultan;' but it cannot be denied that Christianity, backed 
 by policy, had sometimes failed in persuading other conquerors 
 to act in the same way. 'He wanted,' doubtless, ' to get the 
 Christians to return and inhabit the city ; ' but to be able 
 to do so was it absolutely necessary for him ' to give royal 
 letters patent to the patriarch, to secure him from harm or 
 insult ; to maintain him scatheless against all molestations or 
 adverse attacks ; and to confer upon him, and upon all future 
 patriarchs for ever, immunity from tolls and taxes ? ' Some 
 time afterwards, we are told, he visited the patriarch in church, 
 sat down, and requested to have the principles of the Chris- 
 tian religion explained to him. This the patriarch did at 
 great length, and the sultan engaged that no harm should 
 happen to him in consequence. The patriarch subsequently 
 wrote down at his request the substance of his discourse, 
 comprising a full exposition of the articles of the Christian 
 faith, and it was translated into Turkish by order of the 
 sultan, and read by him in that form with much pleasure. 
 He conversed, in short, so frequently with the patriarch on 
 the subject, that reports were spread of his having embraced 
 Christianity.'^"' Grennadius abdicated of his own accord, and 
 went into retirement, after having been patriarch five years 
 and some months.'^"* But, meanwhile, Constantinople had 
 been finally stripped of its treasures, and was lost to Christen- 
 dom as a Christian city. 
 
 That there were some genuine tears shed in Europe over 
 what was in effect a public calamity, it would probably be 
 unfair to deny; but the 'sentiment of consternation,' of 
 which Mr. Hallam speaks, '^"^ inspired by fear of the Turks 
 extending their conquests westwards, undoubtedly predomi- 
 nated over that of ' self-reproach.' The emperor of Germany, 
 Frederick IV., says in his letter to the pope : 
 
 ' A most famous city has been lost : in regards of its situa- 
 tion and other conditions, very necessary for the defence of 
 Christianity. In it for many ages the patriarchal dignity was 
 
 '^' Hist. Pol. Turoogrmc. lib. i. p. 16. '=>« Ibid. lib. ii. p. 120. Comp. 
 
 The patriarch's exposition is given at Fabric. Bihl. Gr. vol. xi. p 352-69 
 
 full length, lib. ii. p. 109-19. Comp. "ob MiMle Ages, c. vi. 
 Butler's Formularies, e. 3. 
 
EEMOESE OP THE LATINS. 389 
 
 conspicuous, and the emblems of imperial majesty flourished. 
 We need saj' nothing about literature and the study of all the 
 liberal arts, that had as it were, from all Grreece, their proper 
 home at Constantinople. We cannot believe that there is a 
 soul boasting of the name of Christian, who is hot grieved 
 and afflicted beyond expression at the ruin of so great a city, 
 and of all that it contained. A great and horrible wound 
 has been inflicted on the catholic church in our days : more 
 grave than either pen or tongue can express.""" 
 
 jEneas Silvius appealed to a higher order of sensibilities, 
 and struck a deeper chord. It was reserved for one destined 
 to be pope before the event had grown cold, to proclaim to 
 Christendom the 'fall extent of the mischief involved in it, 
 and in so doing to pass the severest censure retrospectively 
 upon all who had in any way helped it on. Christians had 
 been over and over again excommunicated for supplying 
 munitions of war to the Turks : what tenfold excommunication 
 was not merited by those who had been so often doing their 
 work for them effectually, and for so long ! ' The loss of Con- 
 stantinople, most reverend fathers and illustrious princes,"^" 
 so he told them at Frankfort a.d. 1454, ' and all of you that 
 are high-born and well educated, is a great success to the 
 Turks, utter ruin to the Greeks, and the height of infamy to 
 the Latins, as, in my opinion, the nobler a,nd more virtuous 
 that we are, we must all feel the more bitterly and severely. 
 Not for many a long day, if we are candid enough to confess 
 the truth, has ChristiaJi society been put to a greater shame. 
 . . . May we not well say that one of the two eyes of Chris- 
 tianity has been put out : one of its two heads amputated ? 
 . . . What Christian would not gneve over the vast wound 
 that has been inflicted on the Catholic faith? ^^^^ 
 
 '0 noble Greece, lo ! now is your end ! Who would not 
 grieve for you, and the many cities renowned and powerful 
 that once flourished in you . . . Sparta, Athens, Corinth, 
 Mycene, Larissa, and many more whose very foundations 
 bave disappeared? . . . Your eminence, I remember ' — he is 
 addressing the cardinal archbishop of Brescia now ^^^^ — ' used 
 to say that although Constantinople had often fallen into the 
 hands of the enemy, since the translation of the empire to 
 
 1210 
 1211 
 
 JEn. Silv. Ep, cLsiii. "" Ep. oxxxv. 
 
 £p. cxxx. '■" Ep. civ. 
 
390 COUNCIL OF FLORENCE. 
 
 the Franks, still that it had never been actually possessed by 
 aliens from the Christian name ; nor its basilicas of the sainte 
 destroyed, its libraries burnt, nor its monasteries entirely 
 despoiled. Hence, there has not been wanting at Constan- 
 tinople to this day a memorial of antient wisdom, and as it 
 were the home of letters. No Latin was considered a man of 
 erudition unless he had studied for some years at Constan- 
 tinople. What name Athens had for learning under the old 
 Eoman empire, the same Constantinople had to all appear- 
 ance for our own time. From thence was Plato restored to 
 us; from thence Aristotle, Demosthenes, Xenophon, Thu- 
 cydides, Basil, Dionysius, Origen, and many other authors 
 brought to light in our own days for the use of the Latins. 
 And many more we hoped for from thence as in store for us. 
 But now it is, I fear, all over with Greek literature . . . the 
 fountain head of all learning is cut off: the source of the 
 muses is dried up. Poetry and philosophy seem to have been 
 laid in their tomb. Eome, Paris, Bologna, Padua, Sienna, 
 Perusia, Cologne. Vienna, Salamanca, Oxford, Pavia, Leipsic, 
 Erfurt, are all of them celebrated for the study of letters ; 
 but all of them are so many rivulets derived from Greek 
 springs. . . . "Who can doubt but that all the great writers 
 of antiquity to be found at Constantinople will be shortly 
 consigned to the flames? There will be a second death of 
 Homer and Menander ; a second death of the 6lite whether 
 of Greek poets or philosophers. There will be a trifle of 
 light left amongst the Latins, it is true ; but even that, in 
 my opinion, will not last long, unless God look down upon 
 us with more benign eyes, and either grant better fortune to 
 the Eoman empire or to the apostolic see. Latin literature 
 lives or dies with the Eoman see. . . . Greek literature, w« 
 mourn to say it, has fallen with Constantinople.' 
 
 So he spoke and lamented : and in the opinion of assembled 
 Europe it was very sad ; for it was a fate that might be her 
 own any day, and, under existing circumstances, who could 
 say how soon ? But she was not long in proclaiming that her 
 sorrow was the momentary emotion which men experience at. 
 the funeral of some aged relative, to whose effects they suc- 
 ceed. The Greeks who made their escape from Constanti- 
 nople were hospitably received, for they brought their tra- 
 ditions and superior refinement with them ; and Europe 
 bought up with avidity the curious manuscripts and chefs- 
 
REMORSE OF THE LATIljrS. 391 
 
 d'ceuvre of art which they had been able to save from ruin. 
 The foundations of the "Vatican library were laid in the 5,000 
 volumes brought in by the wreckers from the glorious old 
 ship that had gone to pieces ; and that the names of the four 
 great sees of the church that had been swept away might be 
 had in remembrance, Eome took them into her own keeping, 
 and quartered them on the portals of her four principal basi- 
 licas, after the church of S. John Lateran-^— reserved as her 
 own — so that in future the patriarchate of Constantinople was 
 to be represented by the church of S. Peter in the Vatican ; 
 the patriarchate of Alexandria by the church of S. Paul ; the 
 patriarchate of Antioch by the church of S. Maria Major ; 
 and the patriarchate of Jerusalem by the church of S. Lau- 
 rence. 
 
 But the land that had once been Christian — that had pro- 
 duced Christianity ; that had been civilised and had twice 
 carried civilisation into the west — was abandoned to the 
 Koran and to barbarism from henceforth ; fourteen centuries 
 of Christianity had not been sufficient to teach men to love 
 their neighbours as themselves. Have we learnt to practise 
 that duty better since then ? 
 
392 
 
 CHAPTEE VIII. 
 
 POPES, WEITEES, AND COUNCILS DtJEINS THE SCHISM : COMPAEED 
 AND CEITICISED. 
 
 The subjects reserved for this chapter are some points of 
 special importance, requiring to be brought out, on which it 
 might have interrupted the course of the narrative too much 
 to have digressed elsewhere, relating I. to popes, II. to writers, 
 III. to councils I and resumed from, and in some respects sup- 
 plementing, the discussion with which the first chapter ends. 
 It is proposed to treat of them, one after the other, in order. 
 I. The last occasion on which the east and west acted 
 together in any real harmony under the pope was at the 
 seventh general or second Nicene council, as it is called. 
 It has been much disparaged or undervalued as a council of 
 late years ; but we live in the days of rehabilitation, and, 
 rightly understood, there is a good deal to be said in its 
 favour. The real question at issue, stripped of the adven- 
 titious fanaticism or superstition by which it is apt to be 
 hid from view, was whether art should be taken into al- 
 liance with Christianity ; whether, in short, there should be 
 such a thing as Christian art. There was a strong party 
 who said there should not, both in east and west — and at 
 their head, in each case, was an emperor, or the next thing 
 to one. But there was a stronger party who said there should, 
 headed in the east by the patriarch, and in the west by the 
 pope. This was the true church-party, and it prevailed: 
 and the second Mcene council authorised the practice 
 which has obtained ever since. Adrian I. who was pope when 
 it was held, acted in the true spirit of the head of the church. 
 The church had been duly represented in it, and it had on 
 the whole decreed what was right and proper ; he therefore 
 supported it without hesitation against a powerful minority, 
 backed and inspired by no less a personage than Charlemagne. 
 
ADKIAN I. AND CHARLEMAGNE. 393 
 
 But east and west were true to each other, and the pope to 
 both, and hence their work so far has been permanent. Art 
 has never lost the place which they assigned to it in the 
 church of Christ. Those who are admirers of Michael 
 Angelo or Mino of Fiesole, of the tenderness of devotion 
 breathed into marble by the one, or of the majesty of in- 
 tellect and power by the other ; who have heard sermons 
 preached to them as they stood and gazed upon the holy 
 families of Eaphael or Francia ; or who have had the terrors 
 of the judgment day brought home to them by the life-like 
 renderings of it over the vast portals of the cathedral of 
 .Bourges, or at Pisa, on the walls of the Campo Santo : from 
 them some gratitude is due to the fathers of the second Nicene 
 council — the last oecumenical council whose decrees are regis- 
 tered in the canon law both of the east and west. 
 
 As yet the empire was one, at least there was no rival to it 
 in the west, which there was to be soon. Mark how on one 
 question alone the change that was impending operated in 
 determining the action of the popes themselves. It has been 
 stated that the earliest authentic insertion into the creed of 
 the words ' Filioque ' — certainly the earliest enunciation 
 under anathema of the doctrine involved in them — is due to 
 the third council of Toledo, legislating for Spain under king 
 Eeccared a.d. 589. That they were both of them well meant 
 cannot be doubted ; still, is it not a strange fatality that it 
 was in connection with the condemnation of Elipand arch- 
 bishop of Toledo, and Felix bishop of Urgel one of his 
 northern suffragans, that the church of France proclaimed 
 its adhesion, two centuries later, to the new doctrine and en- 
 larged creed ? Felix and Elipand taught that Christ as man 
 was the adopted, not the true. Son of Grod, His sonship as 
 God they held to be distinct from His sonship as man ; so 
 that it was difficult to distinguish their error from that of Nes- 
 torians, who made two persons of Him. Hence the arguments 
 by which they were refuted were, to a great extent, identical 
 with what had been used previously by S. Cyril of Alexandria,'^''* 
 the opponent of Nestorius. One of his arguments had been 
 
 '■" See the tenth position in his let- naOdTrep ifiehei koI in rov 0eo3 koI 
 
 tertoNestorius, Mansitom.iT.p. 1079- naTp6s. He is speaking of Christ all 
 
 80 Con which his ninth anathema, throngh, and showing how after His as- 
 
 ibid. p. 1083-4, was founded), where it cension, Jle poured or shed abroad the 
 
 is said, Kal irpoxE'Toi irap' outoD, Holy Spirit on His apostles ; whatwas 
 
394 POPES DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 that the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of God, is spoken of as ' the 
 Spirit of Christ, as belonging to Him ; as sent or poured 
 forth from Him, as from God and the Father,' Here S. 
 Cyril stopped short. In recasting it, the opponents of Felix 
 and Elipand advanced two steps beyond S. Cyril, as we shall 
 see. But the question with which we are concerned most, is 
 not so much what they taught as who inspired them. 
 
 Unquestionably the most important action taken by them 
 in the matter was that of the council .of Frankfort a.d. 794. 
 It was held, as we are told by one of themselves, in the hall 
 of the imperial palace,'^'^ just as the TruUan council, to which 
 reference was made some pages back, under Justinian II., 
 and was attended by 300 bishops from Italy, France, Ger- 
 many, Spain, and Great Britain. Two bishops, Stephen and 
 Theophylact, says Eginhard,'^'* without naming their sees, 
 represented the pope. The first of the letters said to have 
 been read out there, as from Adrian to the bishops of Spain and 
 Gallicia, was much more likely to have been their composition 
 than his.'^'^ But let it be supposed to have been his, and what 
 is it compared with the circular of the bishops of Italy,'^'* 
 or rather the ' sacrosyllabus ' of S. Paulinus of Aquileia, 
 which follows it ? as what indeed is even the ' sacrosyllabus,' 
 for importance, compared with the letter of Charlemagne 
 which is placed last of all, iinishing with a dogmatic para- 
 phrase of the different articles of the Nicene creed, among 
 which, according to him, is included procession from the Son 
 as well as the Father, in the manner and for the reasons ex- 
 
 afterwards called 'the temporal mission sise prsesidentibus in roseo Christi san- 
 
 of the Holy Ghost.' The Latin v. guine salutem.' Adrian has left many 
 
 renders ' sicut ex Deo Patre proeedit' letters behind him, in particular one to 
 
 erroneously for ' difiimditur.' Hence the bishops of Spain, but none com- 
 
 the mistake of Thomas a Jesu, De mencing in this way. 2. It is not 
 
 Convers. Procur. lib. vi. u. 3, which, found in either of the collections of 
 
 however, Alcuin, de Process. Sp. S. (in his letters received as genuine. Mansi, 
 
 Migne's Patrol, tom. cii. p. 70-1) was tom. xii. pp. 767 and 819. 3. It is 
 
 the first to originate. unlike the style of his letter to the 
 
 '^" In the ' Libellus,' Mansi, tom. -bishops of Spain received as genuine, 
 
 xiii. p. 873. 4. The paragraph from ' cur B. Petri' 
 
 '^"' Annal. a.d. 794; Patrol, tom. civ. to 'adoptionis,' from whence the extract 
 
 p. 444, ed. Migne. further on is made, evidently betrays 
 
 >="' Mansi, tom. xiii. p. 867. Against the design of the whole. In the same 
 
 its genuineness is — 1. The address: way what is pompously called the 
 
 ' Adrianus papa, sanctse cathoUcae atque ' libellus ' of the bishops of Italy, was 
 
 apostolicse primseque pontifex sedis, no more than the speech of one of 
 
 dilectissimis fratribus et consacerdo- them, S. Paulinus. 
 
 tibus nostris Galliciis Spaniisque eccle- '-" Mansi, ibid. p. 873. 
 
ADRIAN I. AND CHARLEMAGNE. 395 
 
 plained by him ? As this, and not the error of Eh'pand, is the 
 point with which we are concerned, the synodical letter of the 
 bishops of France and Germany,'^'^ which deals exclusively 
 with the latter, may be passed over. ' On whom,' Adrian is 
 made to say, ' do you think the Holy Ghost descended in 
 the form of a dove ? On God or man ? Was it not on the 
 one Person of Christ, on the son of God and of man ? For 
 since the Holy Spirit is inseparable from both — ^the Father and 
 the Son that is — and proceeds essentially from the Father and 
 the Son, in what way can He be thought to have descended 
 upon God, from whom He had never parted, and from whom 
 He ever proceeds ineffably ? For the Son of God, as God, 
 sends forth in an ijidescribable manner the Holy Ghost in 
 concert with the Father, who is never absent from Him."^^" 
 
 This is all that Adrian is ever even reported to have written 
 on the procession. Contrast his handling it with that of the 
 emperor, whose letter was to go to Spain with his to instruct 
 the church. 
 
 But, again, this was the least part of the business trans- 
 acted at Frankfort, though as, for some reason or other, 
 the acts of the council are not forthcoming, we cannot say in 
 what order it was taken in hand. Some of the canons passed 
 by the council have been preserved. By the second of them 
 the decision of ' a recent Greek synod at Constantinople, on 
 adoring images,' is set aside and condemned.'*''' It is no 
 longer denied ^^^^ that the synod here specified was the 
 second Nicene council, whose rulings Adrian had ratified 
 seven years before. And it is no longer denied that the 
 Caroline books were promulgated at Frankfort in refutation 
 of it, to be answered in their turn by the pope, whose cele- 
 brated reply was shown, as the reader may remember, in the 
 opening chapter of this work, to contain a vindication of the 
 Greek doctrine on the procession. 
 
 Now, of all the works treating of the procession on the 
 Latin side, there is not one that can be named in the same 
 
 "'» Ibid. p. 883-99. Almost as though he had penned it 
 
 '•■=° Ibid. p. 871. And what is said himself! 
 
 of this letter by Charlemagne, in the "'" Mansi, torn. xiii. p. 909. 
 
 course of his own ? ' PrimA, quid '"' Sirmond, ibid. p. 906. ' Pseudo- 
 
 Domiuus apostolicus cum sanctA Eo- synodus Grsecorum, quam falso septi- 
 
 man& ecclesii et episcopis illis in mam vocabant, pro adorandis imagini- 
 
 partibus quaquaversum eommorantibus, bus fecerant, rej ecta est a Pontiflcibus ' 
 
 et catholicis doctoribus, sentiret, sub (Duchesne, vol. ii. p. 17), is the lan- 
 
 unius libelli tenore statuimus,' p. 901. guage of one annalist after another. 
 
396 POPES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 breath down to the days of S. Anselm and the schoolmen 
 with these Caroline books, for the account which is there 
 given of it: not that it forms their principal subject, of 
 course, or is even discussed in them at any great length. But 
 it is discussed exhaustively and deliberately for all that mid- 
 way in the work, and laid down as part of the catholic faith ; 
 after which the nearest approach to it on the Greek side is 
 criticised only to be discarded, as will be shown further on. 
 It is doubtful whether they were not the earliest work treating 
 of the procession in that sense made piibUc. Whether com- 
 posed by Charlemagne or not, they were set forth in his name, 
 and received as such by the council, whose second canon 
 alone shows that their main object had been attained ; and it 
 was to Charlemagne, and no other, that Adrian addressed his 
 reply. This, therefore, is literally what we know from au- 
 thentic sources to have passed at Frankfort, and Frankfort is 
 the first council of which we know anything of the kind for 
 certain out of Spain, for what is stated of the synod of 
 Grentillv a.d. 767 is vague conjecture, and the date of the 
 synod of Friuli is now allowed to have been a.d. 796 not 
 79j_i22a pirst Charlemagne, at the head of his bishops, in 
 condemning the archbishop of Toledo and the bishop of Urgel 
 in Spain, took occasion to promulgate the creed interpolated 
 as it had been in the matter of the procession by the third 
 council of Toledo two centuries before, and to expound it 
 dogmatically for their edification. Secondly, there had been 
 a general council of the church seven years before, which the 
 reigning pope had confirmed, where the creed had been set 
 forth in the shape in which it had been handed down to be 
 no more changed, and where the professions of faith that had 
 been received from the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constan- 
 tinople had been pronounced by the council and by the pope 
 to be in keeping with it. Charlemagne at the head of his 
 bishops attacked all these in a work deliberately composed to 
 refute them. The decrees of the Nicene fathers were shown 
 to be so faulty that they were set aside by a formal canon ; 
 their creed was shown to be capable of improvement by inter- 
 polation, according to the form used by him ; the dogmatic 
 professions of the patriarchs of Jerusalem and Constanti- 
 nople were shown to be inexact or unintelligible, it was 
 
 1223 Pagi, quoted by Mausi,, torn. xiii. p. 856, 
 
ADRIAN I. AND CHARLEMAGNE. 397 
 
 Charlemagne, therefore, who promulgated authoritatively, and 
 explained dogmatically, the interpolated clause 'Filioque,' 
 for France and Germany, and no other Adrian must have 
 had the lucid exposition given of it in the opening chapters 
 of the third of the Caroline books before his eyes, when he 
 vindicated the decrees of the second Nicene council, and the 
 faith of the Greek patriarchs. He was the last instance of a 
 pope writing in defence of the east, and as the synod of 
 Frankfort was held in April, and he died on the 26th of 
 December in the same year, he must have died almost pen 
 in hand. 
 
 Charlemagne, we are told, wept at the news of his death ; 
 what effect was produced on him by his letter we are not 
 told. Was the synod of Friuli A.n. 796 held against the 
 Greeks, as well as against Elipand and Felix, or not ? Ac- 
 cording to S. Paulinus, who presided in it, the false doctrine 
 which it was designed to check consisted in ' the various 
 errors of those who entertained improper notions on the 
 myster)' of the Trinity ; that is to say, those who doubted 
 about the distinction of persons, and thought that the Father 
 and Son were the same ; or else that the Son was inferior or 
 posterior to the Father ; or else confessed three principles ; 
 or else, by drawing a distinction between the natural and 
 the adopted son of God, appeared to make two sons.' '^'* If 
 it is true that he speaks in one place of ' those heretics, who 
 whispered that the Holy Spirit belonged to, and proceeded 
 from, the Father alone,' asserts that the words ' and from 
 the Son ' were added to the creed on their account, and 
 that, in consequence, ' it had been dogmatically laid down by 
 his predecessors that the works of the Holy Trinity were 
 always inseparable : ' '^'-' it is also true that we find him ex- 
 claiming in another,'^^* 'How catholic those fathers who, 
 grounded in faith unwavering, have confessed the Holy Spirit 
 to proceed from the Father ! how glorious those likewise who 
 have confessed Him to proceed from the Father and the Son I ' 
 Still the creed promulgated by him ^^^'' for the benefit of the 
 clergy and laity of his patriarchate in north Italy differs 
 from that of the seventh general or second Nicene council, 
 and is interpolated like that of Frankfort : ' every Christian,' 
 
 '«« Mangi, torn. xiii. p. 841. '^'' Ibid. p. 839. 
 
 '«» Ibid. p. 836-7. '"' Ibid. p. 842. 
 
398 POPES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 according to him, was bound ' to know it by heart ' in that 
 shape : and nobody would gather from his comments on it, 
 that there had been any correspondence on the subject pre- 
 viously between his imperial master and the deceased pope.'^^* 
 The same must be said of all those treatises, composed 
 sooner or later by order of Charlemagne, directly or indirectly 
 bearing on the procession. Not that in any one of them the 
 Greek church is ever attacked by name — far from it ; at the 
 same time they are unanimous in upholding a twofold axiom 
 of their own : firstly, that the interpolated form of the creed 
 was not merely lawful, but had become necessary ; and, 
 secondly, that to deny the double procession is a heresy. '^^* 
 History proclaims, then, that on this point at least it was 
 not a case of the pope ins'tructing the church, but of Charle- 
 magne and his theologians instructing the pope. Almost all 
 of them dedicate their works to the emperor, sometimes 
 acknowledging that they had been written in obedience to 
 his commands. Take these lines as a sample from the dedi- 
 cation to him in verse of the work of Theodulph, bishop of 
 Orleans, on the procession : 
 
 Inclyta sanctorum mecum est sententia Tatum, 
 
 Quos beni spiramen Flaminis hujus agit — 
 Tuque manum injicies, vegetat quem Spiritus llle, 
 
 Causa tuo Cujus tempore coepit agi.'^'" 
 
 This quotation brings us down to the synod of Aix-la- 
 Chapelle, A.d. 809. A new era had dawned with the division 
 of the empire, with the Christmas day a.d. 800 that witnessed 
 the coronation of Charlemagne as emperor of the west. 
 The empire which had long been disintegrating was rent 
 asunder at last, and united Christendom, was it destined to 
 weather the political earthquake — that disrupture of citizen- 
 ship, and of the ties involved in it — and remain one ? This 
 was in reality the problem which those simple monks of 
 Mount Olives, whose case was given in their own words at 
 the end of the first chapter, were the first to agitate, and 
 Charlemagne to consider. As Eginhard says,'^^^ ' the emperor 
 having returned, in the month of November, a.d. 809, to 
 
 '«» Mansi, torn. xiii. p. 842-5. At the third council of Toledo, 
 
 the end of which follows the ordinance : "™ See further on. 
 
 'Sjmbolum vero, et orationem Domini- ''^so Migne's Fatrol. torn. er. p. 240- 
 
 cam, omnis Christianusmemoritersciat' 276. 
 
 reminding one of the second canon of '*" Ibid. torn. civ. p. 472, 
 
LEO III. AND CHARLEMAGNE. 399 
 
 Aix-la-Chapelle, held a council on the procession of the Holy 
 Spirit, a question first raised by a monk at Jerusalem of the 
 name of John ; for defining which Bernhar bishop of Worms 
 and Adelhard abbot of Corbey were despatched to Rome.' 
 ' First raised,' that is, as a question between the east and 
 west. Charlemagne took the precaution of writing a letter 
 by them,"'''' to let the pope know his opinion on the procession 
 beforehand ; and Leo, as was shown in the first chapter from 
 his own statement, "'' took care that his own ' profession of 
 the orthodox faith,' which he was sending into the east, 
 should be submitted for perusal to the emperor. Both were, 
 so far, in happy accord with each other ; but it is instructive 
 to compare that df the pope with the profession of faith 
 which he was content to receive two years before from 
 Nicepborus patriarch of Constantinople, in which the single 
 procession is explained and enforced at some length.'^''' Both 
 views, therefore, could be professed, according to him, as in 
 fact Adrian had already ruled. It was on the question of 
 adding to the public creed, which the emperor had not touched 
 upon in his letter, that the mission of the deputies fell through. 
 On that head the arguments of the pope were unanswerable; 
 nor have they lost their force now. Abbot Smaragdus, who 
 was one of their party, records them. 
 
 ' Is it more necessary to salvation to believe, or more 
 perilous not to believe, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from 
 the Son as from the Father, than that the Son is God the 
 Wisdom, begotten of God the Wisdom, God the Truth, of 
 God the Truth, and yet that both are essentially one God, 
 when yet it is clear that this was not inserted by the holy 
 fathers in the creed ? . . . Matters of faith not expressed in 
 the creed, we do not, as we have often said, presume to in- 
 sert ; but we take care to minister them, in fitting places and 
 times, to such as are competent to receive them.' 
 
 ' As I understand them,' said one of the deputies, ' Your 
 Paternity orders that the clause in question be first ejected 
 from the creed, and then afterwards be lawfully and freely 
 taught and learnt by anyone, either by singing, or by oral 
 tradition.' 
 
 1232 Given in Mansi, t. xiv. p. 23-6, torn. cii. p. 1030, for that of Leo, and 
 
 with a note by Pagi. p. 1037-68, for that of Nioephorus, 
 
 's»3 Above, p. 72. which is in Greek and Latin. His 
 
 '-" Both are given in Migne, Patrol, views on the procession are p. 1052. 
 
400 POPES DDEI^fG THE SCHISM. 
 
 ' Doubtless that is my desire,' returned the pope : ' and I 
 would persuade you by all means so to act.'^^^^ If they objected 
 to do this, he told them subsequently, they might drop the 
 custom of singing the creed altogether in the^palace, as it 
 was not, he said, sung in his own church. 
 
 So they separated — the pope to have the uninterpolated 
 creed engraved upon silver shields, and set up in the most 
 precious spot in his church to show his preference for it in 
 that form ; '^^* and they to rejoin Charlemagne, and with Mm 
 to continue chanting their interpolated version of it in 
 church all over the west, in spite of the pope. ' The whole 
 Grallican church so sings it at mass on Sundays,' wrote the 
 bishop of Paris some sixty years after, when Nicholas I. was, 
 or had just ceased to be, pope.'^'^ The first orthodox king 
 had authorised it in Spain, and the first emperor of the west 
 in France and Grermany, in one case without the knowledge, 
 in the other against the expressed wish, of the head of the 
 church. Adrian I. maintained the tenableness of the Greek 
 view of the procession with his last breath, and Leo III. the 
 interpolated form of the creed in one of his latest acts. But 
 the Latin party carried the day on both points, as it increased 
 ia strength, and gradually, but very gradually, contrived to 
 force their adopted creed on the pope. To assert that aay 
 pope ever disapproved of or was a disbeliever in the doctrine 
 of the double procession, after it had once been started, 
 would of course be untrue ; but it would be much more 
 untrue to assert that it was the pope who instructed the west 
 in it, and not the west the pope. Spain, not Eome, had the 
 honor of starting it. As it became knowDj each pope in turn 
 accepted it, as if by instinct, and transmitted it to his suc- 
 cessors. But so far from any of them explaining or dogma- 
 tising upon it themselves, it is one of the most curious 
 passages in ecclesiastical history to see how invariably they 
 had recourse to others for that purpose, and how diffident 
 they were throughout in making that doctrine part of the 
 catholic faith, or the addition to the creed expressing it 
 obligatory. 
 
 ' Nicholas I. has to answer for the final insertion,' says Dr. 
 Neale.'^'* He would have corrected that statement, had he 
 
 "> ■ 
 
 12S5 These translations are jfrom Dr. "'^ Aboye, p. 73. 
 Neale, Eastern Ch. General Int. vol. ii. '^" Above, p. 75. 
 p. 1164-66. '238 As before, p. 1167. 
 
NICHOLAS I. AND THE FBENCH BISHOPS. 401 
 
 beea spared to complete his great work. Not a word is said 
 on either the creed or the double processioa in any writings 
 of Nicholas that have come down to us, including his long 
 answers to the Bulgarians, except in that one letter to Hinc- 
 mar, in which the details of his rupture with the Greek 
 emperors are given. The interpolated form of the creed 
 being in general use in the west — everywhere probably, but 
 at Rome — his missionaries would naturally take it with them 
 into Bulgaria without any special orders from him to that 
 effect ; and burning, as they were, to supplant the rival 
 mission that had preceded them thither from Constantinople, 
 would be sure to make the most of every difference between 
 their formularies ^d those of the Greek church. But his 
 own letter to Hincmar, and the treatment to which it has 
 been subjected, is appositely illustrative of the neutral attitude 
 even in his day observed by Rome, as compared with the 
 provinces, on the point of all others destined to form the 
 excuse for separation between the east and west. He, with 
 his mind full of the general attack made by the Greek 
 emperors on the Latin church and his eyes fixed on the 
 twenty-first section of their encyclic that lay open before 
 him, says, ' They taunt us as not confessing that the Holy 
 Ghost proceeds from the Father.' '^'' 
 
 But the Greeks are not accused by him in return of not 
 confessing His procession from the Son. If he stands on the 
 defensive, it is only because he has been attacked. ' Who is 
 not aware,' he says, ' that illustrious men, and particularly 
 Latins, have written before now on the procession of the Holy 
 Spirit ? Supported by their authorities, it would have been 
 easy enough for us to have replied to the mad charges of these 
 people, had any custom required either that they should be 
 held blameless, or we called upon to explain ourselves as 
 often as it may suit them to talk and whine.' He throws the 
 task of refuting them, as far as was necessary, upon Hincmai* 
 and his suffragans, lineal descendants, as it happened, of the 
 theologians of the great Charles. As they had not the en- 
 cyclic before them to verify his statement, what did they do 
 but correct the text of his letter.' The pope had meant to 
 say, doubtless, • The Greeks taunt us with aflBrming that the 
 Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, while they 
 
 '»» Baron. A.D. 867. n. 49. See above, note 253. 
 D D 
 
402 POPES DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 themselves confess Him to proceed only from the Father,' '"*" 
 They believed themselves better able to teach the pope than 
 the pope them, on that one subject at least. They knewwhat 
 their predecessors had written on it, and how the creed was 
 read in their churches. Accordingly they altered his letter 
 into what they thought it ought to be, and then wrote on the 
 test supplied by themselves. The consequence was that the 
 Greek encyclic might as well have never been written at all 
 for anything that either Eatramn or the bishop of Paris say in 
 reply to it ; though certainly they would not have been a bit 
 nearer answering it, where it needed answer most, had they 
 followed Nicholas. Nicholas neither instructed the Greeks 
 on the double procession nor explained the difficulties, by 
 which in their opinion it was involved, to the Latins. John 
 VIII., as the reader may remember, in his correspondence 
 with Photius, boasted of having the creed in his keeping in- 
 tact ; and condemned those who had been the means of adding 
 to it elsewhere. Leo IX. is found two centuries later asserting 
 the double procession in his own profession of faith, and com- 
 mending the orthodoxy of Peter of Antioch in the same 
 breath, whose profession was that of the uninterpolated creed. 
 Throughout the long* letter attributed to him in reply to 
 Michael Cerularius and archbishop Leo, the subject of the 
 procession is studiously avoided, where it would have been 
 discussed most naturally. Forty-five years afterwards, Urban 
 II. is found at Bari, where the Normans were masters, but 
 where the Greeks predominated, discoursing before a mixed 
 multitude ' on various points relating to the catholic faith 
 with great point and fluency.' He had scarcely sat down, 
 when a move was made on the part of the Greeks to prove 
 from Scripture that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the 
 Father alone. The pope rejoined, but his proofs were criti- 
 cised, and difficulties started to his position, which it W£(fe 
 hopeless to pacify the subtle enquirers who were listening to 
 him without solving. At length he broke silence, but it 
 was not to answer them, ' exclaiming with a loud voice, 
 "Father, and Master Anselm, archbishop of the English, 
 
 "" So the passage now stands in the century. Still it was the text on which 
 
 letter of Nicholas itself, vide Migne's Eatramn and JEneas of Paris wrote, 
 
 Patrol, torn. cxix. Ep. clii. p. 1157. as appears by their works. The true 
 
 But it has been corrected from Erode- text of the letter is as in Baronius. 
 ard, a canon of Eheims of the tenth 
 
URBAN II. AND S. ANSELM. 403 
 
 where art thou ?" The father was sitting in the first rank 
 among the other bishops who were there, with the narrator 
 at his feet. As soon as he heard himself called on, he rose 
 at once, and replied : " My Lord and Father, what is your 
 bidding ? Here I am." " What are you doing there, silent 
 with the rest," quoth the pope. " Come, come, I pray you : 
 come up to us, and by contending in behalf of your mother 
 and ours, help us, whom these Greeks, as you see, are trying 
 to rob of her integrity, and doing all they can to precipitate 
 us into the same offence. Succour us, therefore, as though 
 God had really sent you hither for that end." The council 
 was then adjourned till the following day by common request. 
 When it met again, Anselm rose, and standing on a raised 
 platform before them all so treated, argued, and exhausted 
 the subject in question, under the influence of the same 
 Spirit, that there was not a soul in the assembly, who was 
 not willing to admit that he had been satisfied on all points. 
 . . . When he had finished, the pope, fixing his eyes upon 
 him, said, " Blessed be your heart and your perceptions, and 
 mayyourmouth and the speech of your mouth be blessed."' '^^' 
 But Urban himself went no further into the question then, or 
 on any future occasion ; and it is the treatise of the primate 
 of all England on 'the procession — in other words, his speech' 
 in a revised and enlarged form "'^^ — alone, which has made the 
 synod of Bari famous in the history of the Greek question. 
 
 And, as S. Anselm expounded the Latin doctrine of the 
 procession at the request of Urban, so his namesake of 
 Havelburg performed the same office for Eugenius III. ; 
 Hugh Eterian for Alexander III.; S. Thomas Aquinas for 
 Urban IV. ; S. Bonaventure at the second council of Lyons 
 for Gregory X. ; John the Provincial at the council of Flo- 
 rence for Eugenius IV. There are some remarks which sug- 
 gest themselves in each case. 
 
 ' When I was at Frascati,' says the bishop of Havelburg, 
 ' in the month of March, with your holiness, among the many 
 topics on which you were pleased to converse with me, you 
 told me that a certain bishop had recently visited the apos- 
 tolic see as ambassador from the Greek emperor, bearer of a 
 
 ""' Badmer, Hist. Nov. lib. ii. pp. 22, Petavius, Dog. T%. J)e Trin. vii. i. 4, 
 
 23. FoL ed. shows from a letter of Hildebert,' 
 
 iz« Therefore not reckoned among bishop of Le Mans, that it was pub- 
 
 his other works by Eadmer in Vit. lished at his request as a treatise. 
 
 D S 2 
 
404 POPES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 letter written in Greek characters. You told me, besides, 
 that this bishop, who was exceedingly well versed in Greek 
 literature, fairly eloquent, and of some assurance, proposed 
 several questions on the doctrine and ecclesiastical rite of the 
 Greeks, which are by no means consonant to the doctrine of 
 the church of Eome, and widely diiferent from its rite. How- 
 ever, by violently distorting Holy Scripture to his own views, 
 he upheld, in appearance at least, all those points in which 
 the Greeks differ from the Latins as right ; and invalidated 
 all those in which the Latins differ from the Greeks as 
 wrong ; proving his own position in every sense, not because 
 it was true, but because it was his ; and utterly rejecting ours, 
 because it was not his but ours. Among the chief points on 
 which he disputed, as you said, was the procession of the 
 Holy Spirit, which the Greeks hold is from the Father only; 
 the Latins from the Father and the Son. . . . Hence your 
 holiness was pleased to request by commanding, and com- 
 mand by requesting me to put together all that I had said 
 myself at Constantinople, or heard the Greeks say while I 
 was there . . . compose, in short, a controversial work, in 
 the form of dialogues, by which means all that is urged by 
 the Greeks, or reasonably said in reply to them, on these 
 matters, might be submitted to your wisdom for examination, 
 and your judgment given with more freedom, from the greater 
 veracity with which they had been laid before you. ... I 
 have therefore done what your apostolic authority commanded.' 
 And the result is his work.'^*' Hugh Eterian dedicated his 
 three books on the procession to Alexander III., who in 
 thanking him for them says : ' Looking at the benefit which 
 we anticipate to the church of God from it, we have with 
 grateful and joyful hand received your work.' ^^** The work 
 of S. Thomas ' against the errors of the Greeks' originated in 
 a different way from either of the preceding. Urban IV. 
 seems to have sent him a treatise to examine, before it was 
 published, on that subject ; one, therefore, of which he may 
 be supposed to have thought well. S, Thomas, on the con- 
 trary, thought so ill of it, for several defects which he men- 
 tions,* that he rewrote most of it, apparently down to the end 
 of the thirty-second chapter. Unfortunately, he left many 
 spurious quotations attributed to the fathers remaining in it, 
 
 "" See the account of it, p. 130 et seq. >«" Above, p. 135. 
 
ROME PASSIVE ON THE PROCESSION. 405 
 
 for which it is not clear who is responsible. Indeed, he says 
 of it in conclusion : ' There are, perhaps, other things in the 
 said treatise which may be doubted about, and need explana- 
 tion ; but all that it contains likely to prove of use in main- 
 taining the faith, may, in my opinion, be reduced to the 
 foregoing.' '"** 
 
 Of the service rendered to Gregory X. by S. Bonaventure, 
 and to Eugenius IV. by John the Provincial, it is only neces- 
 sary to remark that as there are strong reasons for supposing 
 the first canon of the second council of Lyons '^*° to have been 
 penned by S. Bonaventure, so there are strong reasons for 
 supposing the Flgrentine decree, so far as it deals with the 
 procession, to have been based on the speech of John the 
 Provincial. In other words, that the Franciscan view of it 
 was adopted at Lyons and the Dominican at Florence. Now, 
 these views were by no means identical, but in some respects 
 opposed to each other, as will be shown further on. 
 
 Thus we see that from first to last the popes were studiously 
 reserved, maintained what may be called a passive attitude, 
 sat as listeners to the arguments of their theologians in the 
 west on the doctrine of the procession, rather than expounded 
 it themselves to the whole church as teachers. The inter- 
 polated creed they were the last of the whole west to adopt ; 
 the doctrine contained in it, the least forward of any that 
 held it to explain, Charlemagne, the first emperor of the 
 west, having been one of the first and foremost to do both. 
 Those who adhered to the doctrine of the single procession 
 were never met by them in anything like the fulness or dog- 
 matic precision with which S. Leo I. confuted monophysite 
 or SS. Martin and- Agatho monothelite errors. Hence the 
 general result attained under their auspices has been, that 
 although nothing erroneous has ever been taught as true, still 
 different explanations of the procession have been put forward 
 from time to time and nothing absolutely complete or ex- 
 haustive defined as yet. On the other hand, it is impossible 
 to deny that the popes have been swayed, not merely by the 
 fluctuations but by the mistakes and inaccuracies of their theo- 
 logians on what may be called matters of fact : they have not 
 been proof against the mistranslations, quotations from spu- 
 rious documents, and historical misstatements which, as we 
 
 "« Ad f. Opuscul. tract i. Antwerp, 1605. "" Above, p. 270. 
 
40(i POPES DURIJfG THE SCHISM. 
 
 shall see, were bandied about in endless profusion on the 
 Latin side. 
 
 What Benedict XII. told abbot Barlaam in private audience 
 has been already criticised;^^'" what he wrote to the Armenians 
 in his ofScial character is still more portentous. In a letter 
 addressed by him, a.d. 1341, to his dear son in Christ the 
 king and his dear brother in Christ the catholicos, or primate 
 of the Armenians, he sends them a list of 117 points on 
 which they had fallen away from the truth and needed cor- 
 rection. Their forefathers, he tells them, had taught ori- 
 ginally that the Holy Grhost proceeds from the Son as well 
 as the Father ; but this doctrine they had long since abanT 
 doned — 612 years ago is his statement'^*' — after which he 
 proceeds : ' Now, although it was not expressly defined in the 
 council of Chalcedon, that the Holy Grhost proceeds from the 
 Son as from the Father, yet this had been defined in the 
 councils of Ephesus and Constantinople ; as, therefore, the 
 council of Chalcedon approved of all that had been defined 
 in the said previous councils, in rejecting the council of Chal- 
 cedon the Armenians rejected the rulings of the said councils 
 that had been approved by it, and among them the doctrine 
 that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as from the 
 Father.' ^^^^ 
 
 Such a declaration as this, on what had passed at Ephesus 
 and Constantinople by the pope, must have made the catho- 
 licos, unless he was ignorant- of all that he ought to have 
 known best, doubt whether he stood on his head or his heels. 
 The excuse for Benedict is that he was only saying what 
 western theologians had got into the habit of repeating over 
 and over again till they believed it. The work on the pro- 
 cession attributed to Alcuin is, perhaps, the earliest instance 
 of a similar assertion.'^^" On the teaching of the couucil of 
 Ephesus some remarks have been made previously.'^^' The 
 council of Constantinople certainly condemned those who 
 denied the divinity of the Holy Grhost ; but as to what it laid 
 down — ' I believe in the Holy Grhost, the Lord and Griver of 
 life : Who proceedeth from the Father : Who with the Father 
 and the Son together is worshipped and glorified ' — the re- 
 
 '«' Atove, p. 297. mand of Omar n. ; but he died a.d. 720. 
 
 ■ >™ Alluding, says Gieseler, E. S., "49 Raynald, a.d. 1341, n. 49. 
 
 Per. iii. Biv. iv. § 130, note 2, to the "» Above, note 1214. 
 
 syno'd of Manasehierti held by the com- "" Ibid. 
 
WRITEES DURING THE SCHISM. 407 
 
 mark of Dr, Neale is not without force : ' The addition of the 
 " Filioque" in the second clause, while it is omitted in the 
 first, is a most pregnant argument. . . . No words, not abso- 
 lutely denying, could more strongly imply a denial of the 
 double procession.' '^*^ Eevereuce for Him whose words they 
 are, 'Who proceedeth from the Father,' in all probability 
 deterred the council from either adding to them or going 
 beyond them. 
 
 II. In treating of writers, it is not my intention to attempt 
 a complete account either of them or their works. A list of 
 both is given in the Latin version of the work of Procopovich, 
 archbishop of Novgorod in Kussia, on the procession ; '^'' and 
 for their arguments generally let me refer to the exhaustive 
 summaries of Mr. Palmer'^'* and Dr. Neale.'^^* All that is 
 here contemplated is to bring out some points in connection 
 with them, illustrative of the ground which has been traversed 
 already and tending to fix it in the memory as a whole. To 
 begin, therefore, with some remarks on the views held by 
 Charlemagne and his inspirers or followers on the procession. 
 As has been observed previously, one of the clearest and 
 earliest accounts of it is found in the third of the books in- 
 scribed with his name. Alcuin may or may not have com- 
 posed it. There is considerable similarity between it and 
 some chapters in his third book likewise on the faith of the 
 Holy Trinity, but it is distinguished from them again by the 
 direct criticism which it contains of the Grreek views. Here 
 are passages from it which Adrian must have perused when 
 he replied to their author : ' We believe likewise in the Holy 
 Ghost, true God, proceeding from the Father and the Son, 
 equal in all things to the Father and the Son — in will, power, 
 eternity, substance, to wit. . . . This is the tradition of the 
 Catholic faith, true and entire, which we believe and confess 
 in sincerity of heart : this confession we maintain and up- 
 hold, which if a man keep unshaken and undefiled he will 
 obtain everlasting salvation.' '^^^ Having laid down his own 
 faith, he proceeds to remark upon that of Tarasius : ' ^^" 
 
 '=" Introd. vol. ii. pp. 1097 and >"' Lib. iii. i. 
 
 1147. >"' Ibid. e. 3. It is worthy of 
 
 IMS Printed at Gotha in a.d. 1772. notice that the heading of this chapter 
 
 "" Diss. X. on the Orth. Com. is ' Utrum Tarasius recti sentiat, qui 
 
 i2» Introd. vol. ii. diss. iii. Spiritum S. non ex Patra et Tilio, 
 
408 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 ' Let our starting-point be this, that Tarasius has notj, in 
 his profession of faith, expressed his belief in the Holy Spirit 
 as proceeding from the Father alone, like some who, believing 
 thoroughly that He proceeds from the Father and the Son, 
 have, nevertheless, in some way been silent on His procession 
 from the Son ; nor again, as proceeding from the Father and 
 the Son, which is the confession and belief of the whole, 
 church universal, but as proceeding from the Father through 
 the Son. . . . Now, the right faith and usual profession is, 
 not that He proceeds from the Father through the Son, but 
 from the Father and the Son, inasmuch as it is not the case 
 that he proceeds through the Son as a creature made by Him, 
 or as posterior in time, inferior in power, or of a different 
 substance ; but He is believed to proceed from the Father 
 and the Son as coeternal, as consubstantial, as coequal, as 
 being of one glory, power and divinity with them.' 
 
 Then he goes off to prove the divinity of the Holy Grhost 
 from various sources, as though Tarasius or any of the fathers 
 composing the second Nicene council had denied that ; after 
 which, returning to his point, he says : ' Wherefore as by 
 these testimonies He is proved both Creator and Grod, and is 
 believed by the whole catholic church to proceed from the 
 Father and the Son, we must enquire whether it be necessary 
 to profess that He proceeds from the Father through the Son 
 and not rather from the Father and the Son, no such profes- 
 sion, as far as appears, having been made by the holy fathers, 
 either in the Nicene creed or that of Chalcedon.' And he 
 ends by deciding against the phrase ' procession through the 
 Son' as unusual and open to misconception. If he seems to 
 criticise the patriarch of Jerusalem, Theodore, more tenderly, 
 it is either because he cannot unravel his meaning for certain, 
 or else because he was well aware, and had in fact stated, that 
 others, against whose authority it would have been vain for 
 him to except, were silent on procession from the Son as well 
 as he.'^*^ Having disposed of the patriarch, he sums up as 
 
 secundum verissi/mam Sanctis fideiregu- of Toledo; should the latter be correct 
 
 lam,' &c. while in the letter of Adrian, also, then it shows that Charlemagne 
 
 instead of the underlined, the reading was either ignorant of the true version 
 
 is, ' secundum Nicseni symboli fidem ' of the Nicene creed like Eeecajed, or 
 
 hoth in Mansi, torn. xiii. p. 760, and else misrepresented it in sheer arro- 
 
 in Patrol, torn, xcviii. p. 1249. The gance. 
 
 former of these two readings seems to "''' Ibid. c. 4. 
 point to the ' regula fidei ' of the synods. 
 
CHARLEMAGNE ON THE PROCESSION. 409 
 
 follows : ' "We must acknowledge the Father and the Son to 
 be the principle of the Holy G-host, not two principles ; for 
 as the Father and the Son are one God, and with reference 
 to the creature, one Creator and one Lord, so they are, with 
 reference to the Holy Ghost, one principle ; while Father, 
 Son, and Holy Ghost are one principle as they are one Creator 
 and one Lord with reference to the creature. 
 
 We need not shrink from doing full justice to the lumin- 
 ousness of these dogmatic statements, '^^s for it is indisputable 
 that they were never set aside, and barely improved upon, 
 down to the days of the Angelic and Seraphic doctors. But, 
 as regards the general position assumed by their author, and 
 its consequences, can anything, I would ask the reader once 
 more, be well conceived more astounding ? First look at the 
 marvellous assurance of some of his assumptions ? ' The 
 confession of the catholic faith, handed down by the fathers,' 
 included, according to him, explicit belief in the procession 
 of the Holy Ghost from the Son. This was the ' faith, by 
 the keeping of which inviolate a man might obtain salvation : ' 
 the ' faith of the whole catholic church in all the world ; ' the 
 ' faith on which some few individuals indeed might be re- 
 ticent, but they believed it thoroughly.' Just exactly what 
 one might have expected from the Napoleon of the middle 
 ages, bearing the impress of his imperious spirit and colossal 
 stature all over. He has the face to assert all this within 
 seven years of a general council of the whole church con- 
 firmed by the pope, in which only the single procession was 
 afiBrmed in the public creed, which nobody thought of 
 questioning at the time, but everybody received as having 
 been the creed of all previous councils since the second ; and 
 in which two other professions, differing from his own, but 
 at least as much in harmony with that creed as his, were 
 received as orthodox by the council and by the pope. These 
 professions are attacked by him in the next place ; and so far 
 from considering them screened from criticism by the au- 
 thority which had been imparted to them, he considers the 
 
 i»» Borrowed in the main, doubtless, turas.' From which the inference is — 
 
 from S. Augustine, as quoted and com- ' Quod ab seterno Pater est principium 
 
 mented on, in Sent. lib. i. Dist. xxix. et Filius, sed Spiritus S. non, immo 
 
 ' Pater est principium totius Divinita- capit esse principium.' But is not the 
 
 tis. . . . Filius ad Spiritum Sanctum tendency of this to lower the divinity 
 
 dicitur principium. Spiritus vero S. of the Holy Ghost as much as to 
 
 non dicitur principium, nisi ad crea- heighten that of the Son ? 
 
410 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 council itself open to criticism for having received them. 
 Three hundred bishops of the west approve of his attack 
 upon the council and the patriarchs. The reigning pope de- 
 fends both deliberately with his last breath. What follows ? 
 a compromise, nowhere registered or defined, but evolved 
 without any collusion gradually. The decrees of Nicsea,-not 
 of Frankfort, govern the practice of the west in future as 
 regards images ; the creed, not of Nicaea, but of Frankfort, 
 and interpreted by Charlemagne and his theologians, not the 
 pope, governs the faith of the west on the doctrine of the 
 procession, including the pope. Those luminous statements, 
 with which his exposition of it ends, his reasons for rejecting 
 the notion of procession through the Son, his explanations of 
 procession from the Father and the Son, as from one principle, 
 compose the volume of the whole stream of western theology, 
 so far, downwards, till it was gently parted, or intercepted at 
 least, in its entirety by a slight divergence between the 
 Franciscan and Dominican schools. What that divergence 
 was will be explained further on ; we have not done yet with 
 the great Charles and his theologians. Alcuin, Paulinus, and 
 others, as has been said befope, led or followed their imperial 
 master, but with this difference, that we never find them in 
 so many words openly criticising or attacking the Greeks. 
 In general, the treatises published by them against Felix and 
 Elipand abstain from treating on the procession at all.'^^" 
 If it was dwelt upon at Frankfort by S. Paulinus in his 
 ' sacrosyllabus,' the presence of the emperor, who was to 
 follow him on the same subject, explains it ; '^^' and at the 
 synod of Friuli, he was only repeating what had been said at 
 Frankfort to his own clergy.'^^^ Theodulph, bishop of Orleans, 
 indeed wrote by order of Charlemagne on the procession in 
 consequence of the dispute raised at Jerusalem, and con- 
 sidered A.D. 809 at Aix-la-Chapelle, in which of course the 
 Greeks were involved. A work is attributed to Alcuin of the 
 same kind ; and two more anonymous pieces edited by the 
 late cardinal Mai '^^^ may be classed with them ; but no 
 
 1260 The work of Paulinus against 70. Alcuin wrote against both Eelix 
 
 Felix was written after the synod of and Elipand more voluminously than 
 
 Eriuli as, appears from his letter to either. Ibid. torn. cii. 
 
 Charlemagne, at whose request it was '2«i Above, p. 394. 
 
 written. Migne's Patrol, torn. xcix. '^'^ Above, p. 397. 
 
 p. 343. Another written by Agobard, '^" This is clear on comparing them., 
 
 bishop of Lyons, is in tom. civ. p. 30— His eminence was mistaken in classing 
 
ALCUIN SUPPLEMENTS CHAELEMA6NE. 411 
 
 original remarks, so to speak, are ventured upon by their 
 authors ; the object of all four seems to have been confined 
 to making out a case from the fathers in favour of the Latin 
 doctrine, without reasoning in behalf of it themseves. 
 
 The next best explanation of it in a dogmatic form to that 
 of the Caroline books is that of Alcuin in his work ' on the 
 faith of the Holy Trinity,' dedicated to their author, whom he 
 supplements to some extent. Here is a passage from it which 
 has the additional interest of having been cited, sixty years 
 later or more, by the bishop of Paris, in the controversy 
 raised by Photius : 
 
 'The Holy Spirit is never called unbegotten or begotten 
 anywhere, lest, should He be called unbegotten as the Father, 
 it might be supposed that there were two Fathers in the 
 blessed Trinity, or, should He be called begotten, two sons. 
 But the only account, consistent with orthodoxy, to be given 
 of Him is, that He proceeds from the Father and the Son. Not 
 that He proceeds from the Father to the Son, as was once 
 supposed erroneously to be part of our belief, to sanctify the 
 creature ; but simultaneously proceeds from both, the Father 
 having so begotten the Son, that the Holy G-host should pro- 
 ceed from Him as from Himself.' ^^^* 
 
 Thus Alcuin resolves, in fact, the only point, which his 
 master had left, or might be said to have left, doubtful: 
 namely, whether by the procession of the Holy Grhost from 
 the Son, eternal procession or temporal mission was to be 
 nnderstood. By temporal mission was meant the coming of 
 the Holy Grhost from heaven for the sanctification of man. 
 And so far it had been taught by S. Cyril and others all along, 
 that He had been sent by Christ, the Incarnate Word, as well 
 as the Father ; and it was plain from Scripture. His pro- 
 cession from the Son, before the world or time began, was 
 another question. That there might be, therefore, no doubt 
 on the subject, Alcuin affirms, in the plainest terms, that 
 what he means by the double procession, is, not that the Holy 
 Grhost had been given to the Son or bestowed by the Son 
 since the incarnation, but that He proceeds eternally from 
 
 them with the writings of Eatramn and only the single procession in very 
 
 ^neas of Paris. Fet. Script. Nov. marked terms, pp. 322 and 335. 
 
 Coll. vol. Tii. p. 245 et seq., where '"* Lib. i. c. \i. Cited, u. 81, in 
 
 are printed likewise two works by the work of iEneas of Paris. 
 Nioetas, bishop of Aquileia, teaching 
 
412 WEITEES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 the Son, as from the Father in the G-odhead. He expressly 
 condemns those who affirmed the one, but shrank from 
 affirming the other. 
 
 Here, therefore, we have the Latin doctrine, both on the 
 Trinity and on the procession, as full and complete as it was 
 ever held. Three persons in the Godhead, Father, Son, and 
 Holy Ghost; of one substance, power, and eternity; the 
 Father unbegotten, the Son begotten of the Father alone, 
 the Holy Ghost proceeding from the Father and the Son as 
 from one principle ; and the whole Trinity co-operating in the 
 creation and government of the universe without Them, as 
 one God. 
 
 Such, according to Charlemagne and his theologians, had 
 been the dogmatic teaching of the whole church in all ages ; 
 countenance was given to it in the Athanasian creed, set 
 forth, perhaps even composed in their time,'^^^ and it was 
 inculcated in sermons like that of Agobard, bishop of Lyons, 
 ' on the truth of the faith.'^^^^ Its only fault is, that it mis- 
 represents facts. Nobody but a crowned head had as yet 
 authorised the interpolation of the creed ; nor had the doc- 
 trine involved in it been ever submitted to or confirmed by 
 the judgment of the whole church. 
 
 So matters remained till Photius wrote. Few pens have 
 produced greater or more lasting effects in the theological 
 world than his. For intellectual range combined with argu- 
 mentative subtlety, for force and exuberance of expression 
 combined with the most varied erudition, he stands ' facile 
 princeps ' in this controversy. In one sense, indeed, it may 
 he said to have commenced and ended with him : for it has 
 never really advanced since his time. And even he is 
 driven to repeat himself in his later writings, so completely 
 had his genius exhausted the subject once for all in what he 
 had written on it on the spur of the moment. But his letter 
 to the patriarch of Aquileia,'^'^ and his work on the procession 
 dedicated to bishop Bede,'^^' whoever he was, have special 
 
 ""' At least there is no certain evi- lished for the first time at Ratisbon 
 
 denee of its existence earlier. Giese- a.d. 1857. Op. torn. ii. p. 263 et seq. 
 
 ler, Per. iii. Div. i. § 12, note 7, and ed. Migne. Its ohject was to show, 
 
 below, some pages on. ' Sicuti Filius ex solo Patre nasci a 
 
 '2™ Migne's Patrol, torn. civ. p. 267- sacris oraculis dicitur, ita Spiritus ex 
 
 288. ips4 sol4 e&demque eausS, procedere 
 
 '^'" Ep. lib. ii. 24, ed. Migne. prsedicatur;dicitiirver6Filiips3e,utpote 
 
 ':" Lib. de iipir. 8. Mystag. pub- ei consubstantialis et per eum missus.' 
 
PHOTIUS REFUTES CHARLEMAGNE. 413 
 
 claims of their own upon our attention : the first as having 
 been addressed to a bishop of Italy who preferred adhering 
 to the more primitive teaching of his predecessor S. Nicetas,'*®^ 
 to embracing what the friend of Charlemagne, S. Paulinus, 
 had laid down but the other day ; the second, as having 
 never been printed till about ten years back, and containing 
 incontestable evidence of the origin of the legend of pope 
 Joan,'^'" and of its existence then — and both, for the confident 
 assertions which we find him making in the face of his foes, 
 of the undisturbed harmony still existing between Eome and 
 the east on the subject of the procession. SS. Ambrose, 
 Jerome, and Augustine, he admits unasked and without dif- 
 ficulty, might be «[uoted for the Latin view ; but they had 
 spoken as private doctors, for the ' consensus Patrum ' went 
 the other way ; in particular, SS. Damasus and Leo, Gregory 
 and Martin, among popes.'"" All the legates who had come 
 to Constantinople in his time from Eome had brought the 
 old doctrine with them, especially the legates of John VIII., 
 who had not hesitated to subscribe to the creed in its original 
 form in the great council which they had attended a.d 879, 
 and to join in denouncing those who should ever presume to 
 deviate from it in the slightest degree. ' John the saint,' as 
 he calls him in one place; 'my John,' as he calls him in 
 another, ' for the exceeding interest which he took in my con- 
 cerns ; ' ' John the manly,' as he calls him a third, three times 
 over, with marked emphasis, to proclaim his contempt for 
 the lying fable which malice was thus early circulating to his 
 discredit ; he had been all one with him on that subject, and 
 Adrian III. the next pope, short-lived as he was, had not 
 omitted ' to send him a synodical letter, in conformity with 
 antient custom, in which he testified to the same orthodox 
 doctrine, declaring that the Holy Grhost proceeds from the 
 Father.'"'" Those who may wish to study these questions in 
 
 "i«» AboTe, note 1263. The titles '"i gp. § 16-24. Myatag. § 66-90, 
 of his two works are relevant enough, for this and for what follows. 
 1. ' De Spiritils S. Potentia.' 2. 'Ex- >2« ' Haec Adrianini.adPhotium.si 
 plic. Symboli.' Cardinal Mai (note vera est, epistola desideratur : Photius 
 \o p. 338) supposes him to have lived autem ejus dicto abutitur.' Curious 
 two centuries before S. Ildefonsus of reasoning indeed ! the letter is not ex- 
 Toledo who flourished a.b. 650. tant, yet Photius is convicted of having 
 
 "" See the note by cardinal Mai to misrepresented it ! If only such a 
 
 § 89 of the IM>. de S. S. Mystag. as letter was written, it speaks for itself, 
 
 jljoyg^ See note to § 89. Leo Allat. de Con- 
 
414 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 the freshest and fullest work ever written on them, will owe' 
 many thanks to its editor, M. Hergenroether, for having 
 rescued it from oblivion, and commented upon it, if not 
 without bias, with so much learning ; abundantly showing, 
 should it prove nothing else, the difficulty experienced by 
 him as a Latin in finding any tolerable answers to it on his 
 own side. 
 
 But though this is the fullest, the encyclic which preceded 
 it by many years is by far the most original of the three 
 pieces, and contains the two others in germ ; but it has 
 hitherto lacked the services of a proper commentator. Accord-' 
 ing to the accounts usually given of the controversy raised 
 by Photius, the entire point of his encyclic is missed. Ni- 
 cholas had never started any new views on the procession-to 
 disturb his equanimity — nor can the Latin missionaries who 
 invaded Bulgaria be supposed to have done more than scatter 
 the interpolated form of the creed amongst his flock. But 
 Photius, as the reader may remember, was a near relative of 
 the president of the second Nicene council, Tarasius ; and a 
 man who could read and analyse for posterity 279 books, as 
 he did during his temporary absence from Constantinople as 
 ambassador to the court of Bagdad,'^^' would be the last per- 
 son in the world not to have read a treatise, reflecting in part 
 upon his great-uncle, by the great monarch of the west, 
 personally known to so many with whom he must have con- 
 versed himself. The true clue, therefore, to that part of his 
 encyclic which treats of the procession I conceive to be, that 
 it was written with the Caroline books open before him; '^'* 
 that it is their doctrine which it attacks, and on that account 
 that he dwells so much, in conclusion, on the authority of 
 the second Nicene council against which those books were 
 directed. 
 
 ' This,' he says, ' we deemed all the more necessary to 
 be noticed in our writings, in order that it might be passed 
 on to all the churches in your several jurisdictions to rank and 
 reckon the seventh holy and cecumenical council among the 
 
 sens. ii. 4, 6, asserts that AdriaTi III. of explaining how Photius got up his 
 
 execrated Photius as a layman ; but list of charges against the Latins : so 
 
 cites no proofs. one view actually was, that he went to 
 
 •^" So Gibbon, c. liii. interprets the Rome in person with his case to 
 
 phrase €ij 'Aoavpiovs, in the pref. to his Nicholas ; another, that Nicholas came 
 
 JBiblioth. to Constantinople to try it on the spot. 
 
 '"■' Later writers felt the difficulty Leo Ailnt. de Consens.lih.ii. 5,1: 
 
PHOTIUS HEFUTES CHAELEMAGNE. 415 
 
 holy and oecumenical councils. For a report has reached us 
 that some of the churches under your apostolic thrones are 
 wont to reckon six oecumenical councils, ignoring the seventh, 
 though at the same time they hold in esteem and veneration 
 all that it decreed, as much as any other. Nor, again, has it 
 as yet been promulgated in church, though equally prized 
 everywhere witli the rest."'''^ It condemned some of the worst 
 errors, he goes on to say ; was attended by representatives of 
 the four pontifical thrones, including old Eome, and was pre- 
 sided over by ' my paternal uncle Tarasius.' It is his urgent 
 request, therefore, that it may be put on the same level in 
 every respect with the six that had preceded it, exactly what 
 the Caroline booksjwere designed to prevent. I noticed one 
 remarkable circumstance, previously connected with the en- 
 cyclic, not generally noticed — namely, that it apparently came 
 out under a different title from what it bears now, in the 
 names of the emperors Basil and Michael. It is evidently 
 designated by Nicholas as their work.'^"* Similarly, the 
 Caroline books, by whomsoever composed, came out as the 
 work of the w-estern emperor. On the supposition, therefore, 
 that the encyclic was a reply, so far, to the Caroline books, it 
 is a case of one emperor answering another on points on 
 which the churches in their respective dominions had been 
 found to differ ; a battle of the two empires on theological 
 grounds waged by their respective sovereigns. And the posi- 
 tions which they traced out were never improved upon. On 
 the subject of the procession, as we have seen, the Caroline 
 books contain the western theory, not in germ, but full-blown ; 
 for objections to the western theory, the encyclic of Photius 
 not merely contains all that has ever been urged since, but 
 has never really been answered. Photius with his pen pierced 
 to the marrow of the question as with the fine thrust of a 
 rapier, so bright and keen, that of his adversaries some could 
 not imagine that they had been wounded at all, and the best 
 of them have never been able to realise the fatal extent of their 
 wound. Of his fourteen arguments this is the substance, 
 divested of all that is extraneous to them, and ranged under 
 
 i!'» § 40. like contents as the Encyclica.' But 
 
 |2'« Atove, p. 18-19, Gieseler, Per. where are two such letters found men- 
 
 iii. Div. ii. § 41, note 12, says: 'The tioned together, and distinguished from 
 
 emperors Michael and Basil issued a each other ? 
 
 letter to the king of the Bulgarians of 
 
 o- 
 
416 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 two heads. The strength of his first position is, that neither 
 in the creeds of the oecumenical councils, nor in any text of 
 Scripture, is there any direct statement of procession of the 
 Holy Grhost from the Sou, while there is of procession from 
 the Father in each case ; '"7 the strength of his second, that the 
 interpolated clause 'Who proceedeth from the Father and 
 the Son is equivocal, and therefore contains two propositions, 
 not one.'^'* His first position asserts a plain matter of fact, 
 which it was impossible to gainsay, and diffioilt to elude. 
 The logic of his second position would have been as resistless 
 as the plainest fact, had he been content to have stated it and 
 there left it. If it is undeniable that procession of the 
 Holy Grhost from the Father means one thing, and procession 
 from the Son another, it is self-evident that the same pro- 
 position cannot in the same sense describe both. But nobody 
 ever denied that it is by gift of the Father that the Holy 
 Grhost proceeds from the Son ; or that it is not by gift of the 
 Son that the Holy Grhost proceeds from the Father. Or, 
 again, as it is undeniable that the Father is the origin and 
 source both of the Son and of the Holy Grhost, so it is im- 
 possible to maintain that the Holy Grhost proceeds from the 
 Father and the Son in the same sense, in which both the Son 
 and Holy Ghost proceed from the Father. It was prejudicing 
 his position to charge the Latins with consequences from 
 which they recoiled as much as he ; it was inviting objections 
 to it to connect it with dialectical terms like ' cause' and 
 ' property,' in the use of which the Latins were destined to be 
 great adepts. ' If the Father and the Son are regarded as 
 causes of the Holy Grhost in the same sense, this is ditheism ;'^'^ 
 and if the Holy Grhost is said to proceed from Them, as 
 one Grod, His origin must be derived from Himself as Grod, as 
 well as from Them.'^*" All that we can say or think of the 
 Trinity is either common to all Three Persons as One God, or 
 else peculiar to each member of the Godhead as one person.'^^' 
 Hence, to regard the procession of the Holy Ghost as a 
 property belonging to the Son, is to cease to regard it as a 
 property belonging to the Father.' "^^ This was the innuendo 
 which so vexed Mcholas,'^*^ and all these were points on which 
 the Latins had replies of some sort or other to make and 
 
 1277 
 
 §§ 15 and 16. '■"'' § 9.. '^s' 8 22 
 
 '™ §1 9 and 17. '™ § 12. '282 § 21. 
 
 "»» Above, p. 635. 
 
LATIN REPLIES TO PHOTIUS. 417 
 
 made them. But, say what they might, they never could 
 parry the point of his twofold thrust. 
 
 What had S. Thomas, for instance, to say to his statement 
 about oecumenical councils and Holy Scripture? Simply 
 that it is quite correct. He has, of course, his own explana- 
 tions to offer of it in each case. But, ' as far as words go, 
 it is not found in Holy Scripture that the Holj"^ Ghost pro- 
 ceeds from the Son,"*'* and, 'the old councils have not 
 expressed it, because there was no necessity that it should be 
 affirmed expressly when they were held. , . . Afterwards,' he 
 proceeds, ' a certein error having been taught by certain per- 
 sons, a certain council was held in the west, where it was 
 expressed by authority of the Eoman pontiff, by whose 
 authority even the old councils were convened and con- 
 firmed.' '*'' What the error, and who the persons — what the 
 council, and who the pope, he is unable to state ; so much 
 so, that against all the authorities enumerated by him in be- 
 half of the single procession, the sole witness adduced by him 
 is that of the Athanasian creed,'**^ a matchless composition it 
 may be, but unknown to the church before the days of Charle- 
 magne. This was all the answer that could be made to the 
 statement of the Greek patriarch 400 years afterwards, when 
 the second council of Lyons met : and within a few years of 
 the council of Florence separating, where the Latins had 
 been expressly challenged to say when and where the words 
 ' Filioque ' were first added to the creed, we have the arch- 
 bishop of the city in which it was held as much perplexed 
 as S. Thomas to account for it, and exclaiming in despair — 
 ' It must have been done by the pope or by some council : 
 who else would have presumed to meddle with it ? Albeit 
 we cannot be certain by what council, or by what pope.''"*' 
 
 But if they were by their own confession unable to gain- 
 say Photius in his first statement, their perplexities or admis- 
 sions in endeavouring to meet his second are no less palpable 
 from age to age. First, Anastasius, the papal librarian and 
 biographer, who was contemporary with Photius, corre- 
 sponded with him at one time, and at another assisted in 
 
 •2»* Sum. Th. P. i. q. xxxvi. art. ii. Athanasiusinsymbolosuo.'&c. S.Tho- 
 ad prim. mas of course was under the impression 
 
 's» Ibid, ad sec. that it was really composed by him, 
 
 i!»« Ibid. ' Sed contra est quod dicit '"' Above, note 1092. 
 
 E £ 
 
418 WRITERS DUBING THE SCHISM. 
 
 deposing him a.d. 869,'="' fled for shelter from it to the cele- 
 brated letter alleged by him to have proceeded from the pen 
 of S. Maximus, his senior by two centuries, incidentally 
 touching on the procession. S. Maximus, he ' says, in that 
 epistle ' shows that it is a groundless charge which the Grreeks 
 make against us, as we do not, as they suppose, make the 
 Son the cause or principle of the Holy Ghost ; but knowing 
 the Father and the Son to be of one substance, we confess 
 Him to proceed from the Son as from the Father, under- 
 standing the words "mission" and "procession'" to he 
 synonymous. Piously interpreting us, therefore, and in the 
 interests of peace instructing those who are conversant with 
 both languages, he would make both ourselves and the Grreeks 
 cognisant of the Holy Grhost proceeding from the Son in one 
 sense, and not proceeding from Him in another : and in the 
 same breath intimate the difficulty of finding proper equiva- 
 lents to express this in either language.' '^^' 
 
 In other words, Anastasius shrinks from going the whole 
 lengths of the Caroline doctrine, after the onslaught made 
 upon it by Photius, almost in his own hearing. Constanti- 
 nople must have been ringing with it a.d. 869, at all events 
 when he arrived there. With Eatramn therefore, whose answer 
 to the encyclic he must have seen, and may have assisted in 
 framing, he seems to say : ' The mission of the Son is the pro- 
 cession of the Holy Grhost — the effusion of the Holy Grhost 
 by the Son is the procession of the Holy Grhost from the 
 Son.' ^^^^ Doubtless this was a position which Alcuin had ex- 
 pressly repudiated sixty years before ; but Photius, had he 
 been alive then, might have succeeded in making even Alcuin 
 feel diffident of his higher ground. Upwards of two centuries 
 elapsed before the Latins ventured to emerge from the posi- 
 tion to which they had retired, and try to look their opponent 
 in the face again. 
 
 The great archbishop of Canterbury, S. Ansel m, a host in 
 himself, entered the lists first ; he was followed at no great 
 interval by the master of the sentences and the schoolmen. 
 
 How was the second of the objections of Photius met by 
 
 12S8 TJieir correspondence is proved he was present, 
 
 by a short letter to him from Photius '^' Ep. ad Johan. in Prsef. ad Collect, 
 
 amongst his epistles, lib. ii. 66. Ana- Fatrol. torn, cxxix. p. 560. 
 
 stasius published a Latin version of the "'• Batra.nm c. Grsec opp. lib. i. 3, 4. 
 acts of the synod of a.d. 869, at which 
 
LATIN REPLIES TO PHOTIUS. 419 
 
 them? As, in the previous case, by conceding it. There 
 certainly was one sense, they owned reluctantly, in which the 
 Holy Grhost is said to proceed 'principally and properly ' 
 from the Father : because the Son deriving His being from the 
 Father, it must have been due to the Father originally that 
 the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son. While, therefore, 
 they upheld the Caroline doctrine that the Holy Ghost pro- 
 ceeds equally and eternally from both, they were obliged to 
 concede to Photius that He proceeds properly and principally 
 from the Father, in a sense inapplicable to the Son.'^^' 
 
 On other points where they opposed him with more success, 
 they were not agreed amongst themselves. The Caroline 
 books had laid dibwn that the Holy Ghost proceeds from 
 the Father and the Son as from dne principle. Photius met 
 them on their own ground with this dilemma : ' if by one 
 principle you mean from their common essence as one God, 
 you make the Holy Ghost proceed from Himself ;'^^'' if by one 
 principle you mean a property, then if it is not shared in 
 common by the whole Trinity, it can only be the property of 
 one Person.' "'' There were several rejoinders made to him at 
 different times ; but in some sense they may be considered 
 answers to each other. ' As when we speak of God,' says S. 
 Anselm,'^^* ' as the principle of the creation, we understand the 
 Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as one principle, not three — so 
 when we speak of the Holy Ghost as being of the Father and 
 the Son, we do say that He is from two principles, but from 
 one ... if indeed He who is God ought to be said to have a 
 cause or principle.' Here S. Anselm questions the propriety 
 of both words, principle as well as cause, in describing the 
 relations of the Persons of the Godhead amongst Themselves. 
 His doubts were shared by others, and were not dissembled by 
 S. Thomas himself.'^^' Nevertheless Hugh Eterian, in the work 
 
 iMi 1 Quoniam Klius hoc quod est de so, non ab alio, ut de ipso sit et pro- 
 Patre habet, idcirco hoc ipsiim, quod cedat Spiritus S. Filius autem non 
 Spiritus S. est de Pilio, habere de Patre a se, sed a Patre.' S. Thorn. Sum. 
 de quo habet esse, non inconTenientir j[%. p. i. q. xxxvi. art. iii. ad see. most 
 asseritur,' says S. Ansalm with evident grudgingly of all. ' Licit aliquando 
 reluctance. De Spiritu S. c. 24. His dicatur principalitir rel propria pro- 
 namesake is more explicit, lib. ii. 25. cedere de Patre.' Was it not al-ways 
 ' Idebque tametsi non legatur ade6 pro- true ? 
 pri6 et principalitir a Filio procedere '^ § 12. 
 , . . ab utroque sequaliter procedere '^ § 21. 
 affirmatur.'— Peter Lombaid, Sent. i. '»• C. 18. 
 dist. xii. D. ' Quia hoc habet Pater a '^'' Q. zzxri. art. ir. reap. 
 
 £ E 2 
 
420 WEITEES DURING THK SCHISM. 
 
 dedicated byhimto Alexanderlll., can speak without hesitation 
 of the Father and the Son as the cause and principle of the 
 Holy Grhost."'^ The final result was that the word ' principle ' 
 was retained, and ' cause ' abandoned.'''" Again, as the archr 
 bishop of Nicomedia put it to the bishop of Havelburg : 
 ' Does the Holy Ghost, in your opinion, proceed from the 
 Father and the Son as distinct persons, or as one God ? ' The 
 archbishop of Nicomedia was, of course, merely borrowing from 
 the encyclic. The answer of Anselm is in substance, ' Keally, 
 I cannot aflSrm either.' ''^' But how had the question been 
 answered by his great namesake fifty years before, when he 
 treated of it ? ' From the Fa,ther and the Son, not as distinct 
 Persons, but as one God, I afiirm the Holy Ghost to be ; and 
 to the objection which has been urged on that score, I reply, 
 that no Person can be from Himself.*^'' For as the Son who is 
 of the substance of the Father, and of one substance with 
 Him is not on that account from Himself as well as the 
 Father ; so the Holy Spirit, through the substance of the 
 Father and the Son, and one substance with Them, is not 
 therefore from Himself; but only from Them. For the 
 same reason, as the Father is not more God than the Son, so 
 the Holy Ghost cannot be said to be more from one than the 
 other.' 
 
 These were plausible statements, but they were not free from 
 objection, and they failed to satisfy S. Thomas. He took the 
 opposite line, and answered the difficulty by saying that the 
 Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the Son not as frorn 
 one God, but as one spirative power.'^"" Here S. Thomas 
 
 '^ ' In quibusdam a propria, et ex- tion is that you would be attributing 
 
 act4 loquendi normi theologorum de- ■wrongly to the Holy Ghost what you 
 
 clinare videtur, preesertiia in eo, quod would rightly to the Father. Petavius 
 
 Patrem Filii et Spiritus S. causam objects to his statement upon other 
 
 fisepissimi appellat,' says his editor grounds. Dog. Th. De 2H». vii. 11, 
 
 at starting, which is understating it. 16. 
 
 Lib. i. c. i. Max. BiM. Pat.\iam.-s^i. '*" Q. xxxvi. art. iv. ad prin. — 
 
 p. 1198-1260. ; Spiritus S. procedit a Patre et Pilio, 
 
 '2" PatresLatiniprincipiuminTrini- in quantum sunt unum in virtute 
 
 tate ad intra, recti cognoscunt, non spirativS,' or as Albert the Great, 
 
 item causam fatentur.' Ibid, ad c. 8. 'secundum quod sunt unum principium 
 
 '^™ Lib. ii. c. 4 and 10. In stating spirandi.' (Sam. Th. q. xxxi. § 3 ad'f.) 
 
 I his views previously, to the objection S. Thomas has stated the objection in 
 
 he had said indeed, ' Pater et Pilius the exact form of the dilemma of the 
 
 unum sunt principium, sieut unus encycHo. In his earlier work, against 
 
 Deus.' c. 2, and comp. c. i. the Greeks, he had answered it as S. 
 
 '^" Not the Father ? Photius might Anselm, in the twenty-seventh of his 
 
 have rejoined, The point of my objec- unnumbered positions. 
 
LATIN REPLIES TO PHOTIUS. 421 
 
 encountered the other horn of the dilemma, ' How can a pro- 
 perty, distinct from those which are common to the whole 
 Trinity, be the property of two Persons in it ? ' and seems 
 perplexed for his answer, saying in one place 'by reason of 
 their common nature '""' — in another, ' it is not a property but 
 a relation.' '""' On the other hand, he is willing to concede that 
 in one sense the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and 
 the Son as two distinct Persons, that is, as 'two spirants."^"^ 
 One more statement of the encyclic is remarkable for the 
 answers which it drew forth, as being of a practical character. 
 ' When we say that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father,' 
 asks Photius,'^"* • are we supposed to imply that anything is 
 wanting to His existence ? then, if not, what purpose is an- 
 swered by making Him proceed from the Son as well?' 
 Hugh Eterian, who is seldom at a loss for words, is fairly 
 puzzled with it.'^°' He has put it into the mouth of his more 
 immediate adversary, the bishop of Modon, possibly from not 
 liking to let Photius have the credit of it, against whom he 
 declaims afterwards with the bitterness of one that knew his 
 master.""® ' This, in my humble opinion,' says he, ' seems not 
 a sufficient reason for doing away with procession from the 
 Son. . . . Ignorance, surely, on such a topic is more pru- 
 dent than a cavil of this kind.' S. Thomas was infinitely 
 better prepared with his rejoinder. ' Without procession from 
 the Son, the second and third Persons in the Trinity cannot 
 be distinguished from each other. As God, they are consub- 
 stantial and inseparable. Opposite relations amongst them- 
 selves — relations which cannot coexist in the same Person — 
 alone separate them from each other. Either, therefore, the 
 Son must proceed from the Holy Ghost, or the Holy Ghost 
 from the Son.' '*"' This, according to S. Thomas, is what 
 
 ""' Ibid. ' Neque est inconveniens ""• The work of Photius criticised 
 
 unam proprletatem esse in duobua sup- by him was the Mystag. de Sp. S. 
 
 positis, quoruin est una natuia.' which accounts for its learned editor 
 
 '"" Q. XXX. art. ii. ad prin. ' Licit quoting him so often in the notes. But 
 
 sit relatio, no» tamen dicitur proprie- to say that 'Master Hugh' answered 
 
 tas, quia non convenit uni tantim Photius, is to admit that Photius has 
 
 perso'nse,' just the reverse of his previous never been answered, 
 
 statement. ""' In Sent. lib. i. dist. xi. art. 4. 
 
 ""' Q,. xxxvi. art. iv. ad sept. Exp. Lit. and Sum. Th. part i. q. xxx. 
 
 "I' g 20. art. ii. resp. Also, contra Gr<Be. 27- 
 
 •"" Lib. i. c. 14. 'Bcce Methnnes 30 of his unnumbered positions. The 
 
 praesul talia proponit: "Si perfecta axiom expressed briefly is, 'In divinis 
 
 ex Patre processio Spiritus . . . quid omnia sunt unum, ubi non obviat re- 
 
 confert ad banc ilia quae ex Filio?'" lationis oppositio.' Petav. de Trin.yu. 
 
422 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 necessitated bringing out the dogma of the double proces- 
 sion. Yet, according to S. Anselm, from whom he borrowed 
 the idea, ' The Son is not the Holy Ghost, nor the Holy 
 Ghost the Son, because the Son is of the Father by genera- 
 tion : the Holy Ghost not by generation, but by procession ; 
 neither can the Son be His own spirit — nor the Holy Ghost 
 identical with Him whose spirit He is.' '"« . . These character- 
 istics,' he adds, ' would serve to distinguish them, though 
 they were not further distinguished by proceeding one from 
 the other.' ''"^ S. Anselm said this, having been the first to 
 lay stress on the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son, 
 as a means of distinguishing them from each other. S. 
 Thomas adopts it as the exclusive means — though he repre- 
 sents ' generation ' and ' procession ' as distinct from each 
 other, as the operations of the intellect and of the will.'*'"' 
 
 In conclusion, the encyclic is as remarkable for what it 
 omits as for what it lays down. Photius is as silent as the 
 grave on the peculiar view associated with the name of his 
 great-uncle Tarasius of procession through or by the Son. 
 It was criticised and rejected in the Caroline books ; there is 
 not a word said in defence of it in the encyclic. Superficial 
 persons might infer from his silence that Photius had not 
 read the Caroline books ; others, surely, may regard it, with 
 more reason, as a remarkable proof of his good generalship. 
 Why should he quit his impregnable position to cover a weak 
 point ? a point, by the way, which he was doing his best all 
 the while to secure by other means unobserved. Let the 
 authority of the second Nicene council be admitted, and the 
 confession of his great-uncle was safe; the objections which 
 had been urged against it were not easy to answer, but it 
 would be above criticism from the day on which the council 
 which received it was reputed to be the seventh oecumenical 
 council. On the other hand, Photius may have come to the 
 conclusion in his own mind that his great-uncle had, inten- 
 
 9,6. He had said of it previously: tionibus etiamdisparatis.necoppositis, 
 
 * Quae argumentatio novam qusestionem personas posse distingui.' Ibid. § 3-5. 
 
 peperit, an verfe dicatur illud : " Spiri- So that there were those who doiibted 
 
 turn S. eundem prosus fore cum Filio, even the reasoning of S. Thomas. 
 
 si non ab eo procederet." Nee desunt ""' C. i. ad f. cited by S. Thom. 
 
 aliqu), qui nihilominiis diversos invioem q. xxxvi. art. ii. 7. 
 
 futures putant, etsi neuter oriretur ab '""• C. 27. 
 
 altero. Satis enini ad disorimen con- '"" Q. xxvii. art. iv. resp. and 
 
 stituendumfore,qu6ddiTersaamborum q. xxviii. art. iv. resp. and q. xxxvi. 
 
 . sset a. Patre processio, projnde rela- art. ii. resp. 
 
LATIIf REPLIES TO PHOTIUS. 423 
 
 tionally or not, stretched a point in favour of the Latins, 
 which it would never do for him to admit. The view ex- 
 pressed by Tarasius had not really originated with him ; it 
 was as old as S. Maximus — at least a letter written in his 
 name to Marinus, a presbyter of Cyprus, contained it. And 
 it is there put into the mouth of the Romans for the express 
 object of exculpating them in the eyes of the Constantino- 
 politan clergy for their views on the procession. Whether 
 genuine or not,^^" it was believed to be genuine then, and 
 Anastasius who has been quoted as having referred to it in 
 dedicating his ' collectanea ' to a deacon of the Roman church, 
 translated it word for word in the course of his work, thereby 
 causing it to be e:xtensively known and circulated in a Latin 
 form. 
 
 ' The synodical letter of the pope that now is, holy 
 brethren,' said S. Maximus,'''^ meaning, it is presumed, S. 
 Martin, ' was not censured on as many grounds by them of 
 the queen of cities ' — Constantinople — ' as you have written ; 
 but upon only two : the first, theological, because as they 
 say, he stated that the Holy Grhost proceeds also from the 
 Son ; the other in reference to the Incarnation, because, for- 
 sooth, he wrote that our Lord, as Man, is without original 
 sin. As regards the first, they alleged concordant testimonies 
 from the Roman fathers, and even from S. Cyril of Alex- 
 andria on the gospel of S. John besides. And from these 
 they showed that they themselves are far from making the 
 Son the cause of the Spirit ; as they know the Father to be 
 the one cause of the Son and of the Spirit, of the former by 
 generation, of the latter by procession. But they sought in 
 
 '»" Some of the reasons for doubt- though seyeral are without it. Baron, 
 
 ing it are : a.d. 649 u. 25-36 is the first of a 
 
 1. Anastasius, who is the first to series. 
 
 refer to it, lived two centuries after S. 4. This letter speaks of six councils, 
 
 lilaxinius, and had obvious reasons for generalcouncils, that is — whereas only 
 
 wishing it to be genuine. five had been held. The explanation 
 
 2. S. Maximus himself in his letter that by the sixth he meant the Lateran 
 to the catholics in Sicily speaks of a of a..d. 649, is inconclusive, as why 
 spurious letter as from hira to Marinus should he have distinguished one Eo- 
 that was in circulation (Migne's Patrol, man council above another? Migne's 
 Gr. torn. xcl. p. 129, with the note. Patrol. (?r. torn. xci. note to p. 139, has 
 and Baron. A.D. 645 n. 22). Which was all that can be said in its favour. 
 
 it, if not this ?• '"^ Ibid. p. 136. The Latin version 
 
 3. No synodical letter of S. Martin of Anastasius is P«<ro/.ia<.tom.cxxix. 
 is extant with any such statement ; p. 578. 
 
4-24 WEITEES DUEING THE kSCHISM. 
 
 this way to express His going forth through Hvm,^^^^ and bo 
 establish the oneness and undistinguishableness of their sub- 
 stance.' He goes on to state that he had recommended the 
 .Romans to be more guarded in what they said, but is not 
 certain that they will heed his advice. Nothing can be 
 clearer than that the view of procession through the Son is 
 here laid down ; as in fact Veccus interpreted the passage 
 long afterwards.'*'* Hence, the genuineness of the letter 
 being admitted, it must have originated with S. Maximus, or 
 in strict truth, his Roman friends — not Tarasius. But, in 
 any case, it must have become familiar to the west, before, 
 the end of the ninth century, through the Latin version ofit 
 occurring in the works of a writer so well known there, and 
 largely studied, as Anastasius. The consequence was, that 
 instead of remaining at all a Greek view, according to the 
 account given of it by most writers, it was discussed and 
 gradually adopted by a large section of the Latins themselves. 
 The objection taken to it in the Caroline books, as we have 
 seen, was that it was novel and unauthorised ; besides which 
 it had a bad sound. There were several passages in the New 
 Testament, to say nothing of the creed, in which it is said of 
 the Son, ' Through, or hy whom, all things were made.' '*'* 
 The inference naturally was, that it would be hazardous, for 
 obvious reasons, to employ the same phrase for explaining 
 the procession of the Holy Grhost from the Son. Charlemagne 
 was the first to object to it, but he had some distinguished 
 followers. S. Anselm has two whole chapters on it, and is 
 prejudiced against it to the last ; '"* his namesake of Havel- 
 burg only grants that there are passages in the fathers in 
 which it occurs ; "" the master of the sentences accepts it on 
 the sole authority of S. Hilary;'*'* and S. Bonaventure, in 
 deference to the teaching of Richard of S. Victor. '*'' Scotus, 
 the head of the Franciscan school, for some reason or other, 
 omits to treat of it in commenting upon the same text of the 
 sentences. On the other hand, what Greek in advocating it 
 ever went beyond Hugh Eterian ? According to him, ' the 
 Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son . . . for 
 
 "" Ti 8i' AStoC (to9 TioS) wpotevai. ">« C. 15, 16. 
 
 "'* Christendom's Divisions, part i. "" Lib. ii. c. 26. 
 note to p. 70. "»>s Sent. lib. i. dist. xii. e. 
 
 "" S. John i. 3 ; Heb. i. 2; 1 Cor. "'= Sum. Tk. q. xxxvi. art. 6., and 
 
 ■V""'- 6. on the sentences as above. 
 
LATIN REPLIES TO PHOTIUS, 425 
 
 the Spirit is like the Son, as being His immediate cause and 
 principle ; with whom, as He communicates immediately, so 
 He proceeds from Him without any medium, and is through 
 Him joined to the Father. . . . WTierefore, let none doubt 
 that the communion of the Spirit with the Father is to be 
 traced through the Son.' '^m Then,''^! in the course of a long 
 account of the different meanings of the prepositions ' per ' 
 and ' ex,' he exclaims, ' both the Greeks and the Latins 
 confess that the Holy Spirit proceeds through the Son.' He 
 forgot that he had previously charged the archbishop of Nico- 
 media with objecting to the Latin view of procession through 
 the Son, or through the medium of the Son. '3'"' 
 
 And indeed it would have been difficult to have avoided 
 calling it a Latin view some years later, when it was pro- 
 pounded by Gregory IX. through his envoys in explaining 
 the Latin doctrine to the Greek patriarch. 'The Father,' 
 he tells Germanus, 'is perfect God in Himself; the Son per- 
 fect God, begotten of the Father ; the Holy Ghost perfect 
 God, proceeding from the Father and the Son. The Spirit 
 indeed proceeds from the Son immediately ; from the Father, 
 through the medium of the Son. Notwithstanding, it is from 
 the Father that the Son has the Holy Ghost proceeding from 
 Him. He, therefore, who denies the procession of the Holy 
 Ghost from the Son, is on the road to ruin.''^^^ Or, as Eichard 
 of S. Victor, according to S. Bonaventure,'*" inverts it: 
 ' The production of the Holy Spirit is at once mediate and 
 immediate ; mediate, so far as He is from the Son, and the 
 Son from the Father; but immediate, so far as the Holy 
 Ghost is also from the Father Himself.' ' You see, there- 
 fore,' says Eichard of Middle-Town,'^^* ' that it is not every- 
 thing which is excluded from being immediate by being 
 mediate.' In the words of Albert the Great: ' As the Father 
 is the principle of the Holy Ghost in His own right, the Son, 
 by derivation from the Father; so the Son is, as it were, the 
 
 '•" Lib. i. 1. Comp. ii. 6. (torn. xiii. p. 61) heads it 'Definitdon 
 
 '"' Lib. iii. 20. of the envoys of pope Gregory,' still 
 
 "22 Lib. ii. 9. he places it among the letters of that 
 
 iwi The heading: of this in Combef. pope. It has the names of the envoys 
 
 (op. S. Max. tom. ii. p. 690) is, ' Ex- appended to it. 
 
 position of the Confession of theLatins, '"* Sum. Th. q. xxxvi. art. 6. 
 
 composed and sent by Gregory pope "" By whom he is likewise qnoted. 
 
 of Rome to Germanus, most holy Ad. Stmt. lib. i. dist. xii. resp. ad sec. 
 
 patriarch of Constantinople.' Mansi, 
 
426 WEITEES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 medium, or, as theologians speak, the derived principle.' '^^* 
 Or, as S. Thomas : ' Because it is from the Father that the 
 Son has the Holy Grhost proceeding from Him, it may there- 
 fore be said that the Father effects the procession of •^z- the 
 Holy Grhost through the Son ; or, which comes to the same 
 thing, that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father through 
 theSon."328 
 
 Photius, therefore, would have committed a great error, as 
 the results showed still more, had he come forward in support 
 of procession through the Son as a Greek doctrine, though it 
 had been upheld by his great-uncle ; for it was, of the two, 
 more of a Latin view than a Greek. Of the fathers S. 
 Hilary of Poitiers was as old as any that could be quoted for 
 it on the Greek side. For controversial purposes it had been 
 alleged by the western friends of S. Maximus a full century 
 before Tarasius could have adopted it. He may have been 
 in fact only borrowing from them. Anastasius was giving it 
 back to the west in the vernacular about the very time when 
 Photius was engaged on his encyclic. One of the Latin 
 champions against the Greeks, Hugh Eterian, three hundred 
 years afterwards is found defending it against a Greek arch- 
 bishop as the Latin view. What caused it to be so generally 
 regarded as belonging to the Greeks, what caused it to be in 
 such bad odour generally amongst the Greeks themselves 
 was, that it became the ' via media' by which converts passed 
 over from them to the Latins. It bridged over the gulf sepa- 
 rating between the two churches, which other causes disinclined 
 the mass of the Greek people to see spanned. Veccus was 
 the first to walk over by laying hold of it; and he pronounced 
 it trustworthy.'^^' From that time forth the Greeks kept the 
 letter of S. Maximus and the profession of S. Tarasius as 
 much out of sight as possible. It was Andrew of Ehodes, 
 not Mark of Ephesus, who refeiTed to both at Florence for 
 the first time, in his reply to Mark ; and once confronted by 
 them even the metropolitan of Ephesus could but say :"'' 
 ' All the passages of the western fathers that accord with the 
 letter of S. Maximus I accept as genuine ; all that are not 
 in accord with it I reject.' The Latins on their side were 
 disposed to insist upon both all the more, becayse procession 
 
 "^° ' Principium de priueipio.' Sum. "^* Q. xxxvi. art. 3. resp. adf. 
 Th. q. xxxi. § 3 ad f. "2s Above, note 1049. 
 
 1327 . pgj, piiiujn spiret.' 
 
LATIN EEPLIES TO PHOTIUS. 427 
 
 from the Sod, from having been criticised among them at 
 first adversely, took its place ultimately as a received 
 doctrine of the schools, through favour more of the Domini- 
 cans, apparently, than of the Franciscans. The most elabo- 
 rate justification of it at all events is by S. Thomas. And it 
 was John, the provincial of the Dominicans in Lombardy, 
 ■who advocated it at Florence with so much success. ' The 
 Father,' so he explained it, ' in begetting the Son communi- 
 cates His essence to the Son, so far as it is communicable ; the 
 Son receiving from the Father all that He can receive from 
 Him, communicates the same to the Spirit, as communi- 
 cable to Him from the Person of the Son ; since it is one 
 essence, in respect of which one is begotten, and the other 
 proceeds. In this way, therefore, the Father is the one 
 principle and cause of the Holy Spirit, and He proceeds from 
 both.' '"2 
 
 We shall be in a better position to appreciate most of the 
 conclusions to which these facts point, when we have gone 
 through what remains to be said in connection with them 
 under the next head, or that of councils. For the present, let 
 it sufiice to reiterate the main assertion with which we set 
 out, and which few probably will by this time dispute to have 
 some foundation in history — that the Latin doctrine of the 
 procession was first explained and is essentially contained in 
 the treatise inscribed with the name of Charlemagne, and the 
 Greek objections to it in the treatise put forward in the joint 
 names of the emperors Basil and Michael. The Caroline 
 books and the encyclic together have supplied Christendom 
 with materials for their controversy on the procession of the 
 Holy Grhost exactly for 1,000 years, dating from the year 
 which is just now current, and symbolising both the origin of 
 the dispute, and the way in which it has been conducted on 
 the whole. For it bears the impress of a strife not of 
 churches but of nations ; not of bishops but of emperors ; 
 not of Christians but of men. And there have been few, 
 very few, concerned in it on whom the taint of party-spirit 
 has not passed. I have already stated it as my conviction — 
 not that the truth of the double procession is disproved in 
 the encyclic — God forbid — but that the twofold position 
 
 "" Colet, torn, xviii. p. 127-8. vii. 10. 13. And see his speech in 
 
 laai Syrop. viii. 2. Colet. torn, iviii. as given in the Greek 
 
 "« As quoted by Petay. De Trin. Acts p. 386, and the Latin p. 1117. 
 
428 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 maintained by the Latins, as against the Greeks, in asserting 
 it was overthrown utterly : first, on the ground that, in high 
 theology, the proposition ' Who proceedeth from the Father 
 and the Son ' is equivocal ; as there is a sense in which pro- 
 cession from the Father alone, as the original source both of 
 the Son and Holy Ghost, is true likewise ; and therefore that 
 the first clause, ' Who proceedeth from the Father,' must 
 mean more than the second, ' And from the Son.' And 
 next, on the ground that it was introduced into the creed 
 in a novel and irregular manner, without sanction of the 
 church. On both points the objections of the encyclic were 
 never answered; to some extent they were conceded, though 
 by no means with the best grace, as has been shown in each 
 case. But too often, it must be confessed, they were sought 
 to be answered or evaded by assertions which were not fact, 
 and authorities that were not genuine. '''' Thus we are 
 brought to a phase in the controversy, which no western, it is 
 to be hoped, in modern times will ever look back to without 
 unfeigned regret and shame. The two great questions on 
 which the controversy between the east and west turned were 
 the procession of the Holy Ghost and the papacy. On both, 
 the west has been convicted by modern criticism of having 
 sought to establish the positions on which it insisted by 
 means of such volumes of forged or spurious evidence as 
 would damn any cause for ever irrecoverably. Christian or 
 pagan, could it also be proved to have been used knowingly, 
 that it was what it has since turned out to be. It would be 
 difficult, in short, to name any secular controversy where so 
 much utterly worthless testimony had been adduced in favour 
 of the points sought to be proved ; and the most painful 
 circumstance connected with it, to my mind, is the contrast 
 which the Greek convert so often exhibits to the rest of his 
 countrymen, in attempting to convince them ; he basing his 
 case upon spurious or otherwise false data which he has 
 picked up from the Latins ; they rarely producing any docu- 
 mentary proofs in controversy that are not of acknowledged 
 authenticity. To begin with the procession. 
 
 1S33 rjijjg remark of Leo Allatius, Be Florence cannot, perhaps, be convicted 
 
 Consens. lib. iii. 1, 5, ' Neque minus of having tampered with manuscripts 
 
 ridiculi sunt, cum tradunt 'Latinos cor- themselves ; this is all that can be said 
 
 iiiptis Patrum auctoritatibus, Grsecis in their favour. Spurious authoritaes 
 
 imposuisse,' shows how much he is to they quoted from in abundance, 
 be trusted himself. The Latins at 
 
SPURIOUS WOHKS USED BY THE LATINS. 429 
 
 1 . At the head of the list of Latin authorities purporting 
 to be what they were not, is the creed so long maintained to 
 have been written by S. Athanasius. It is no longer pub- 
 lished among his genuine works. Thus its statements were 
 antedated considerably by its title. When or by whom it 
 was composed is not certain. The first of the synods of 
 Autun is said to have been held a.d. 640 under S. Leodegar ;"'* 
 and there happens to be a canon styled in a collection of 
 canons found at the abbey of S. Benignus in Dijon, the first 
 canon of Autun, in which the reading of 'the faith of S. 
 Athanasius ' is enjoined on the clergy. By connecting this 
 canon with the first synod of Autun, though it may have 
 been the first catron of any subsequent synod held there 
 equally well, evidence has been assumed of the existence 
 of the Athanasian creed before the days of Charlemagne by 
 Pagi and others.''^ But what had been the previous assertion 
 of the learned cardinal ? ' That the envoys of Gregory IX. 
 were the first to appeal to it in connection with the Greek 
 question.'"^® A strange mistake indeed for him to have 
 made. On the contrary, the monks of Mount Olives,'"' 
 with whom the controversy really commenced, appeal to it 
 in their letter to Leo III. to excuse themselves ; then, there 
 is a long extract from it, as from a work of S. Athanasius, 
 in the treatise composed by Theodulph bishop of Orleans at 
 the request of Charlemagne,'^'' showing that the importance 
 of those words ' The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the 
 Son ; not made, nor begotten, but proceeding,' had been 
 fully realised even then on the Latin side. In the work 
 attributed to Alcuin,'''* but more probably written after his 
 death, on the same subject, it is called the ' Exposition of the 
 Catholic Faith' by S. Athanasius, ' to which the whole church 
 is pledged.' JEne&s, bishop of Paris,''^" appeals to it, as 
 
 >»" Mansi, torn. xi. p. 126. Gregorii IX. postqiiam hsee contro- 
 
 '"' Bingham, Antiq. x. 4, 18, where versia durasset annis prope 500 ! ' 
 
 Pagi ad Bajon. a.d. 340, n. 6, is quoted "" Above, p. 72. 
 
 at length. The bishop of Ely on the "" Patrol, torn. cv. p. 247. 
 
 thirty-nine articles, vol. i. art. viii. § 4, '"' Alcuin died a.d. 804 ; the synod 
 
 is in favour of a still earlier date. Has of Aix-la-Chapelle, -which gave rise to 
 
 Jie tested his proofs ? The damnatory these tieatises was not till a.d. 809. 
 
 dause at the end is not in the style of Sirmond quotes it as the work of a 
 
 any of the primitive creeds cited by nameless author. Ibid. note. Comp. 
 
 Bingham, but quite in that of the Patrol, tom. ci. p. 73, and the Prtsv. 
 
 Caroline age. Monit. p. 66. 
 1S3S 'jViOTt, quos hoc argumento '"° C. 19. 
 
 adhibuisse legimus, sunt apocrisiarii 
 
430 WBITEES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 'the Catholic faith' of the same saint. Finally, Eatramn, 
 after calling it ' the treatise concerning the faith which 
 he published, and proposed to all catholics for acceptance,' 
 turns it to the following account against the Greeks ; ''^* 
 'The Latin bishops, therefore, highly approving of the 
 orthodox doctrine which it contained, and looking upon it as 
 a singular bulwark of strength against the wicked Arian 
 dogma, for they perceived that it had been drawn from Scrip- 
 ture, added to the symbol of faith in speaking of the Holy 
 Ghost, "Who proceedeth from the Father and the Son." 
 Hence it is that from those days, that is, from Constantine, 
 when the council of the 318 fathers met at Nicsea, down to 
 our own times, the western church has ever held this faith ; 
 not that the Catholic church of the Greeks has ever aban-t 
 doned it, from unwillingness to part with the true doctrine, 
 as is declared in their works. Still it is this faith which yoa 
 are accusing now, moved by I know not what levity, deceived 
 by I know not what error.' So that, in point of fact, the use 
 of the Athanasian creed for controversial purposes origi- 
 nated with the Greek question ; and the effect of it was to 
 set up a fictitious antiquity for Latin doctrine, analogous to 
 what was set up through the pseudo-decretals for Latin 
 discipline. From what is said of it by the envoys of 
 Gregory IX. we may infer not only that it existed in Greek 
 as well as in Latin at that date, but that S. Athanasius was 
 supposed at that date to have composed it in both.'^^'' 
 
 2. Manuel Calecas in his work against the Greeks, Joseph 
 bishop of Modon, and George Aristinus,'^''^ all of them con- 
 verts apparently, maintain that it was by S. Damasus, a.d, 
 366-84, that the words ' Filioque' were added to the creed. 
 'Sed hoc falsissimum est,' exclaims Petavius'**^ — be it so; 
 though Baronius had said the contrary, and the commentator 
 upon S. Antoninus of Florence sticks to it ; '^^^ for as Pagi 
 
 "*' C. 3. the creed in that form, immediately 
 
 »« < -w-jjg^gg jjQjy Athanasius, when after the'second general council, under 
 
 an exile in the west, in the exposition pope Damasus.' Fabric Biil. Gr. 
 
 of faith, which he elucidated in Latin,' vol. xii. p. 21. 
 
 afterwards 'which he set forth in "" De Trin. vii. 2. 1. 
 
 Greek.'— Mansi, torn. xiii. p, 61. isis <^ majoribus, a Damaso in- 
 
 12" Alexius Aristenus, sayPetavius cipiendo, Eomanig pontificibus et aliis 
 
 and Merenda; but the bishop of asserts.' Baron, a.d. 867, n. 64; S. 
 
 Modon says ' an historian,' named as Anton. Chiron, p. iii. tit. xxii. note to 
 
 in the text ; his assertion being, that § 3. 
 
 'the Boman church commenced singing 
 
SPURIOUS WORKS USED BY THE LATINS. 431 
 
 shows,'^^ it was the consubstantiality of the Holy Spirit 
 with the Father and the Son, not of His procession from 
 them, that was ruled by S. Damasus, native of Spain though 
 he was ; but to whom were those Greeks beholden for their 
 information ? Was it not Benedict XII. who assured the 
 Armenians officially,"^' that the double procession had been 
 defined at Ephesus and Constantinople ? Knowing for cer- 
 tain, as Grreeks, that nothing of the kind had been defined 
 at Constantinople, in a.d. 381 at least, was it not their only 
 way of reconciling the Latin account of it with facts, to 
 suppose that it must have been ruled at Rome by S. Damaaus, 
 if at all then — the second general council having been held 
 in his pontificate ? • 
 
 3. Synods of Toledo, previously to that of a.d. 589, or of 
 Braga, have been and continue to be quoted for the inter- 
 polated form of creed. There is ' a rule of faith ' appended 
 to the first of the synods of Toledo, said in the collection of 
 Loaisa to have been held a.d. 396,"^' Unfortunately, this is 
 described in the heading as having been sent by S. Leo to 
 Balconius bishop of Gallicia; and is supplemented by a 
 letter of Innocent I. to the council. But Innocent was not 
 pope till A.D. 402, nor S. Leo till a.d. 440. While, therefore, 
 the council had, for other reasons, to be transferred to a.d. 
 400, the letter of Innocent had even so to be shifted to a 
 council of Toulouse really held in his pontificate;'^''* and 
 the ' rule of faith ' to a synod of Toledo, purporting to have 
 been held a.d. 447 to meet the difficulty. But even here 
 Pagi's^" confronts it with the candid avowal that the story 
 of the Spanish bishops having received it from S. Leo is ab- 
 surd, and only means that it was framed in his pontificate ; 
 and that, besides, the clause * Filioque' which it contains, was 
 added to it at a later age. It has been already shown to have 
 been wanting in one MS. even of the creed of the council of 
 l.D. 589, which council, again, was under the impression 
 that its creed was in exact accordance with the form used in 
 the easf '' Of the synod of Braga, a.d. 411, where pro- 
 
 "" Ad Baron, a.d. 369, n. 7-4. "" Above, p. 406. 
 
 What was laid down by S. Damasus, "" Condi. Hisp. p. 45. 
 
 A.D. 372, was, ' Spiritum S. non esse "" Condi, ed. Reg. vol. i. p. 1021. 
 
 Patris tantummodo, ant Filii tantum- '"" Ad Baron. a.d. 405, n. 16, 17. 
 
 modo, sed Patris et Filii Spiritum.' Comp. Petav. J)e Trin. vii. 2, 2. 
 
 Merend. Proleff. c. xxi. 3;Pairo/.toni "" Above, p. 358. 
 xiii. p. 215. 
 
432 WBITEBS DUBING THE SCHISM. 
 
 fession of the double procession is made, cardinal Aguirre "'' 
 says : ' Should anybody be for looking upon this council as 
 genuine, he certainly must be content to reckon it as of 
 inferior authority to the rest.' 
 
 4. That the double procession had been defined at Ephesus 
 was affirmed by Benedict XII. and long before him by 
 Alcuin, or some nameless author, and long after him by 
 Thomas a Jesu and others. As the great Carmelite says : 
 ' The infererence from which is, that the dogma of the pro- 
 cession of the Holy Grhost from the Son was defined in the 
 third general council, and confirmed by the three subsequent 
 councils held in Greece.' Inference from what ? why, from 
 the letter adduced by him, written to Nestorius by S. Cyril, 
 in the name of the council of Ephesus, in which the Holy 
 Grhost is said to be * poured forth from Christ,' the Incarnate 
 Word, 'as from Grod and the Father.' The words of S. 
 Cyril, ' is poured forth from Christ,^ had been mistranslated 
 into 'proceeds from the Son.'^^^^ 
 
 5. A letter of Hormisdas to the emperor Justin supplied 
 another stock passage. Benedict XII. may have been think- 
 ing of it in his reply to Barlaam. ' We know that it is the 
 property of the Father to beget the Son : the property of 
 the Son of Grod to be bom of the Father, equal to Him : the 
 property of the Holy Grhost, to proceed from the Father and 
 Son in one substance of the Godhead. It is likewise the 
 property of the Son, as it is written, to be made flesh.' 
 But the words underlined were what the editor ''** in a note 
 calls a ' reformation of the text,' as it stood originally, by a 
 difi^erent hand, so ' ancient,' however, in his judgment, as to 
 be ' nearly contemporary.' What Hormisdas really wrote, 
 therefore, is mere conjecture : but it so happens that the very 
 next letter of his which follows, extant in Grreek and Latin, 
 was written to Epiphanius, patriarch of Constantinople, on the 
 self-same day ; and in it he travels over the same ground pre- 
 cisely, explaining the doctrines of the Trinity and of the In- 
 carnation in terms similar to those of his previous letter, but 
 without one word on either the single or double procession of 
 
 "« Condi. Beg. ibid. p. 1190. autem Filii Dei,' &e.— Migne's Patrol. 
 
 "»' Above, note 1214. torn. Ixiii. p. 514. The text was cer- 
 
 135) ' Primigenia manus ita hunc tainly defective, but on whose authority 
 
 textum ferebat : notum etiam quod sit was it reformed ? 
 
 proprium Spiritus Saneti ; proprium 
 
SPURIOUS WORKS USED BY THE LATINS. 433 
 
 the Holy Ghost. Like the letter of Nicholas, the letter of Hor- 
 miedas has been altered into what it should have been, in the 
 opinion of those who transcribed it. Previously to the days of 
 Charlemagne, no genuine writings have yet been discovered 
 of any pope, in which explicit assertion of the double pro- 
 cession is contained. 
 
 6. At a later period the Latins had the assurance to con- 
 tend that it was openly set forth in the creed of the seventh 
 oecumenical council held in his reign. 
 
 All these positions are the more remarkable from having 
 been, with a single exception, as conspicuous by its absence 
 as the rest by their presence, maintained at the council of 
 Florence on the Latin side. And, in referring to the occa- 
 sions on which they were there reaffirmed, the contrast pre- 
 sented on the Greek side is too striking to be passed over 
 unnoticed. 
 
 One of the recommendations proposed by Humbert the 
 Dominican for consideration at the second council of Lyons 
 in his interesting memorandum,"'^ was, that for the better 
 study of the canons, acts of the principal councils extant 
 should be kept in all metropolitan churches. Was it from 
 knowing too little, or too much of them, that the Latin 
 champions at Ferrara did all they could to avoid having the 
 definitions of the oecumenical councils read out in public, as 
 the Greeks proposed ? ''''' Eead out they were, notwithstand- 
 ing, in the sixth session, one by one, to be translated into 
 Latin as fast as they were read out, and interspersed with 
 remarks by Mark of Ephesus, or quotations from official 
 documents illustrative of the circumstances under which 
 they had been framed or sanctioned. '^'' 
 
 He would commence with Ephesus, he said, to avoid repe- 
 tition — it was the council of all others about which, as 
 archbishop of the metropolis in which it was held, he might 
 be expected to know most — because the rule had" been laid 
 down there that the creed of the Nicene fathers should be 
 maintained inviolate, and no other allowed. Having explained 
 and commented upon both enactments so as to make them 
 intelligible, he adduced the following extract from a well- 
 known letter of S. Cyril to John of Antioch, after the council 
 
 isss p. iii. c. 9. Nicholas Secundinus the Cretan, as 
 
 1959 gyrop. vi. 19. fast ivs they were read out in Greek. 
 
 "" That is, translated into Latin by Colet. torn, xviii. p. 65-88. 
 
434 WEITEES DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 was over, to enhance their value. '^^' 'In no way can we 
 allow the faith defined by our holy fathers who met in their 
 day at Nicsea, in other words, the symbol of the faith, to be 
 shaken by any : neither can we permit ourselves or others to 
 change a word, or even one syllable, of what is laid down 
 there : remembering Him who says : " Eemove not the 
 ancient landmarks which thy fathers have placed," words, 
 Which were not spoken by them, but by the Spirit of Grod 
 and the Father : who proceeds from Him indeed, yet is not 
 alien from the Son, in all that we understand by the word 
 substance.' 
 
 Later, among the documents relating to the sixth general 
 council, a synodical epistle from Agatho was read out, in 
 which the pope says : ' Perfectly certain are we, that we pre- 
 serve intact in our inmost soul the definitions of the catholic 
 and apostolic faith, which the apostolic throne, including our- 
 selves has kept and handed down until now ; believing in one 
 Grod, the Father Almighty . . . His only begotten Son . . . 
 and the Holy Ghost . . . Who proceedeth from the Father, 
 Who with the Father and the Son is together worshipped 
 and together glorified. "^^' 
 
 The reading of these authentic documents produced im- 
 mense sensation amongst the Latins themselves. ' The pick 
 of the Latins,' says Syropulus,*^^" ' who were present, and the 
 virtuous monks — for there are numbers of that sort among 
 them, leading truly conventual lives — when they heard the 
 definitions, and the comments of Mark of Ephesus upon them, 
 said : " We never knew or heard of such things before ; nor 
 have our teachers ever taught us such things. Now, how- 
 ever, we see that the Greeks are more accurate in their state* 
 merits than we are," and all admired Mark of Ephesiis.' 
 They had good reason for what they said, as we shall see. 
 
 When the creed of the Seventh council was read outj 
 cardinal Julian exhibited another version of it, in which the 
 words ' Filioque ' occurred.'^*' Which of the two versions was 
 correct? It is a question that can hardly be discussed 
 seriously. When Charlemagne wrote against the decrees of 
 the second Nicehe council, he had tbeir text,'^*^ as he says in 
 
 "f» Colet. ibid. p. 71 ; or S. Cyr. Ep. "«■ Colet. torn, xviii. p. 948. 
 
 xxxix. ; or iv. Patrol. Gr. torn. x. "^^ 'Quse . . . in Bithynisepartabns 
 
 p. 180, ed. Migne. gesta est sjnodus,, cyjus scriptftrse 
 
 "*" Colet. torn. Svdii. p. 82. textus, eloquentii seneuque earens, ad 
 
 "*> vi. 19. nos usque pervenit.'— Pj-ffi/iir:. ad lib. i. 
 
SPURIOUS WORKS USED BY THE LATINS. 435 
 
 one place, and their creed in another,'^*^ before him, and 
 affects to be dissatisfied with both. He is dissatisfied with 
 the creed, not merely because it has a declaration on images 
 appended to it, but because it is, according to him, defective 
 in its theology. It had been reticent where it should haye 
 been explicit, tolerant where it should have required pre- 
 cision. ' We have proved in the briefest manner we could, 
 that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and the 
 Son.' "^■' Here the author of the Caroline books avows the 
 object for which the preceding chapters of his third book, 
 setting forth the doctrine of the Trinity, had been written. 
 He bad come forward to prove what ' the council had passed 
 over in silence, or expressed ambiguously. . . . What they 
 really mean, we are unable to say ; but, for ourselves, we 
 fear to leave the subject undiscussed, lest by our reticence we 
 should seem to assent to them. . . . Assuming them to be 
 orthodox on the point in question, still we cannot but re- 
 gard them as verging on error, because they have neglected 
 to make profession of their orthodox sentiments. For, if 
 " with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, it is with 
 the mouth that confession is made unto salvation." Had 
 procession from the Son been expressed in his copy of the 
 creed of the second Nicene council, why should he have set 
 about proving it himself, or spoken of the profession of 
 Tarasius as the only form in which it had been expressed at 
 all, and expressed ambiguously ? Photius and Anastasius 
 are two more witnesses against cardinal Julian, writing on 
 different sides and for dififerent ends. Photius in his pastoral 
 letter to the king of Bulgaria,'^* where he recites the creed 
 apart from controversy, and calls it the creed of the seven 
 oecumenical councils, whose history he proceeds to sketch : or 
 in his encyclic, where his principal charge against the Latins 
 is that of having added to the creed. '^^^ Had a general 
 council within memory, presided over by his great-uncle, 
 been the first to do this, his whole letter would have been 
 nonsense, nor could he ever have looked his opponents in the 
 face again. Inexplicable, too, would have been the synod of 
 A.D. 879-80 that restored him, in which the smallest change 
 
 "M Lib. iv. 13, where he contrasts follows is also taken, 
 it at great length with that of the first "" Ep. i. 5, comp. l!8-20. 
 Nieene council. ""' § 1". 
 
 ""' Lib. iii. 8, from which what 
 
 p F 2 
 
436 WRITERS DUKIJiTG THE SCHISM. 
 
 from the original form of the creed, whether by addition or 
 subtraction, is condemned.''*' Times had changed when 
 Anastasius published his version of the acts of the second 
 Nicene council in Latin, with a dedication of them to John 
 VIII. ' A few Franks only, to whom the utility of its decrees 
 Bad not as yet been revealed,' then disputed its oecumenical 
 character. ''*' His version of the creed, according to the read- 
 ing of manuscripts, is without the ' Filioque ' clause, showing 
 that he had done his work honestly. His editor admits as 
 honestly,''*^ that he has inserted it, on the sole authority of 
 cardinal Julian, into the text. This is one way of settling 
 matters; but as Gemistius argued in his prompt reply to the 
 cardinal : ' In that case, the writers on the Latin side, Thomas 
 Aquinas, and those who preceded him, must be allowed to 
 have done a very superfluous work, attempting to prove from 
 numberless arguments and authorities that the addition had 
 been made by the Latin church reasonably and befittingly, 
 while overlooking the strongest recommendation that could 
 be pleaded for it, as irrelevant to their cause. Instead of all 
 the shifts and syllogisms invented by them, it would have 
 been enough to have stated simply, that the addition to the 
 creed was of older date, and that it had been read out and 
 accepted with the addition in the seventh council. Latin 
 writers had naver mentioned it in connection with the 
 seventh council, because the creed of the seventh coimoil had 
 never been quoted with the addition previously.' '^'° This 
 fact, for fact it is, suggests a further enquiry, which Gemistius 
 possibly would have been too polite to pursue. Was the 
 cardinal using a copy that had been interpolated for the 
 occasion? There are some circumstances at all events in 
 connection with it requiring explanation. As exhibited to 
 the Greeks it purported to be a copy of the acts of the 
 seventh council, written in Greek, oa parchment, and of 
 great antiquity, challenging comparison with their copy.'^^' 
 In the Latin acts of the council of Florence we find equal 
 stress laid upon its antiquity, but it is unhesitatingly called 
 a Latin book. '^'^ How are these discrepancies to be got over? 
 
 "" Above, p. 19. Greek Acts, Colet. xviii. p. 86, only 
 
 1S68 p^^y; ap. Patrol, torn, cxxix. they omit to say that it was written in 
 
 p. 197. Greet. 
 
 '"» Ibid, note to p. 458. ""^ < Cardinalis libnim Latinum ex- 
 
 ""> Syrop. vi. 19. hibuit antiquissimum.'— Ibid. p. 948. 
 ""Ibid. Comp. the account of the 
 
SPURIOUS WORKS USED BY THE LATINS. 437 
 
 To say that it was a copy written in both languages, would 
 be to assert what is not consistent with the positive descrip- 
 tions which are given of it on either side ; to say that the 
 Greeks and Latins, sitting apart, were not shown the same 
 copy, would be to assimilate what passed at Ferrara to what 
 passed at Basle, where the fathers believed that they were 
 voting for one degi-ee, but found two carried, thanks to the 
 adroit generalship of the cardinal-president.'*'^ There re- 
 mains one more circumstance to be noticed in connection 
 with it. The cardinal appealed to Martin of Poland, a well- 
 known historian, but of the thirteenth century, five hundred 
 years therefore frgm the date of the council, in proof of his 
 statement. The work of Martin is celebrated for the notice 
 whicjj^ it contains of the female pope, which his admirers con- 
 tend was not written by him. But it is not the only myth 
 adorning his chronicle by any means. He reckons Charle- 
 magne, for instance, not as the first, but as the seventy-fourth 
 emperor,'^'^ and tells how he headed a vast host to the Holy 
 Land, recovered it, and then returning home by way of Con- 
 stanthiople, would have none of the gold and silver which 
 his brother emperor had designed for him, but only some 
 relics of the saints. He has two accounts of the seventh 
 council in two consecutive chapters,'*" asserting in one place 
 that it consisted of four hundred bishops, and was held at 
 Constantinople; in another, of three hundred and fifty 
 bishops at Nicsea. Then, without a word in connection with 
 it about images, he sums up all that it had done in a single 
 sentence, by representing it as 'having aflSrmed that the 
 Holy Grhost proceeds from the Father and the Son.' After 
 this, we may well ask whether the MS. was intended to sup- 
 port Martin, or Martin thfe MS. 
 
 This was the only creed emanating from a general council 
 to wtich the Latins ventured on appending the ' Filioque ' 
 clause ; the only general council in which they had the as- 
 surance to say the doctrine of the double procession had been 
 laid down. They carefully abstained from asserting that it 
 had been taught at Ephesus, in the presence of Mark ; they 
 forbore to refer to the Athanasian creed at all till the Greeks 
 
 "" Above, p. 333. seventy-first emperor;' and the other. 
 
 "" Ed. Col. Ag. 1616. • Adrian, the hundredth pope.' 
 
 ""' One headed, ' Conetantine, the 
 
4'?8 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 had left.'''^ But on the remaining three positions with which 
 we started, they were not slow to insist. John the Pro- 
 vincial, in fact, maintained them all in the speech to which 
 no Greek was allowed to reply. ' We have in our possession,' 
 he says, ' the book in which pope Damasus propounds his 
 confession of faith, and says anathema to all the heresies 
 that had gone before.' '*" This document purports to have 
 been sent by him to S. Paulinus of Antioch ; and in the short 
 extract which is given from it, S. Bamasus is represented as 
 twice inculcating the doctrine of the twofold procession. It 
 is needless to say that his letters to S. Paulinus, as we have 
 them, contain no such enclosure ; '^"^ nor has any such docii- 
 ment ever, Apparently, been printed among his genuine 
 works."'' That John was not particular, may be infj^rred 
 from his mode of dealing with S. Hilary, to whom he refers 
 next. S. Hilary really speaks, in one place, of the Father 
 and the Son as authors of the Holy Grhost.'^'" This was not 
 enough for John, who immediately appends as from him: 
 ' Et quod spiratur a Patre et Filio, et ab utroque procedit.' 
 The letter of Hormisdas,'^^^ and the ' rule of the calJholic 
 faith ' made by the bishop of Tarragona and others, and by 
 command of pope Leo sent to the bishop of Grallicia,' follow 
 in order, supplemented by the decrees of a number of synods 
 of Toledo, of which naturally enough the Greeks had never 
 before heard. Had the doctrine of the double procession 
 depended on the authorities usually alleged in support of it 
 by the Latins, it must have fallen long since. Were they 
 more felicitous in their proofs of the power which they 
 attributed to the pope ? 
 
 Enough has been said of the pseudo-decretals and pseudo- 
 donation in a former chapter,'-^*^ how they arose and what 
 they contained. It only remains to be shown how often 
 they were appealed to, and what consequences were sought 
 to be drawn from them. 1. First, the pseudo-donation was 
 
 ""' And then inserted into the decree "" Justiniani thinks, therefore, that 
 
 for the Armenians : ' Sexto, compen- it must have been lost. — Colet. xviii. 
 
 diosam illam fldei regulam per bea- p. 1131. 
 tissimum Athanasium editnm, ipsia ,"*° Be Trin. ii. 29, ed. Ben. 
 praebemus oratoribus, cujus tenor talis ""' Referred to previously by An- 
 
 est " Quicnnque vult salvus esse." ' — ■ drew of Rhodes, Colet. ibid. p. 129-30, 
 
 Colet. xviii. p. 550. and by cardinal Julian in his speech, 
 
 "•" Colet. ibid. p. 1124. ibid. p. 1032-46. 
 ' "™ Fatrol. torn. xiii. p. 354-61. "sa q y^_ 
 
SPURIOUS WOEKS USED BY THE LATINS. 439 
 
 literally dinaed into the ears of the Greeks, till they accepted 
 its authenticity. • Eefer,' says Theodore Balsamon, 'to c. i. 
 tit. viii. of my present work, and you will there find, among 
 the laws passed on the privileges of old and new Eome, the 
 written decree by Constantine the great and good, in favour 
 of S. Silvester, then pope of Eome, in behalf of the privi- 
 leges assigned to the church of old Eome,' •''' ' The sin- 
 gular privilege,' as ^neas of Paris calls it, ' copies of which, 
 whole and entire, existed in the archives of the churches 
 of France.' ''^^ And ' in our possession ' as well, adds the 
 ambassador of Otho I.'^" ' The privilege granted by Con- 
 stantine to the Eoman pontiff, that all priests should account 
 him their head, as all magistrates the emperor,' says Leo IX. 
 or the long letter ascribed to him.'^'^ ' Constantine,' says 
 Humbert the Dominican, ' ordained by the will of G-od that 
 all churches should be subject to the Eoman church : on 
 which subjection there are many councils of the fathers 
 besides extant.' '''' 
 
 2. Of course there were ; but among them the most telling 
 were these — the fifty-nine decretal epistles of thirty popes 
 before Silvester, all of them spurious. That they formed 
 part and parcel of the canon law of the west has been shown 
 previously.''^' The reader may remember with what effect 
 the preface to the Nicene council by the compiler of them 
 was quoted in proof of the divine rights of the primacy by 
 the bishop of Havelburg to the archbishop of Nicomedia,"'* 
 The pseudo-decretal of S. Clenjent to S. James is adduced 
 by the abbot Barlaam to convert his brethren.'^'" After 
 which he proceeds : ' Hence, from that time forth, you will 
 find the prelates of other cities meddling with nothing be- 
 yond the affairs of their respective dioceses ; the Eoman pon- 
 tiffs, on the contrary, beginning with S. Clement, as though 
 charged with the prelacy and superintendence of the whole 
 world, commenced ordering all things forthwith, sending 
 their decretal epistles all over the world, attempting to correct 
 everything everywhere that was done amiss, and to teach 
 everybody their duty. To prove this, one need only look 
 
 '»" In Can. Constant. 3, ap. Bever. "" Part ii. c. 7. 
 Sunod. torn. i. p. 89. "" AboTe, p. 200, 
 
 "" C. 209. "" Above, p. 199. 
 
 "" Above, p. 48. "°° Max. Bibl. Pat. torn. xxvi. p. 8. 
 
 lass ^bove, note 1 79. Ep. ad amicos suos Gracoa. 
 
440 WEITEES DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 through the decretal epistles of the Eoman pontiffs from S. 
 Clement to S. Silvester, in which are contained not a few 
 things which the Greek church observes still, owing their 
 origin and institution to those pontiffs.' In other words, the 
 pseudo-decretals had been quoted to Barlaam as authentic 
 evidence of the justice of the actual claims advanced by 
 Rome ; and he accepted it, and in turn pressed it upon his 
 brethren, as such. His good faith alone remains : but as far 
 as the argument is concerned he was thoroughly taken in, 
 as were his proselytisers. Who would think of charging the 
 prince of theologians, and one of the purest of saints, S. 
 Thomas Aquinas, for instance, with conscious disingenuous- 
 ness ? But in his work against the Greeks, where he seeks 
 to prove the plenitude of power claimed over the whole 
 church by the pope from Greek authorities,*'" what are the 
 authorities on which he lays most stress ? The reader may 
 remember how the sixth Nicene canon was cited by the 
 legates of S. Leo, when the fathers of the fourth council 
 proposed renewing the third canon of Constantinople in 
 favour of the Constantinopolitan patriarch.'^^^ In its genuine 
 form it runs thus : ' Let antient customs prevail,' &c., for 
 which words they substituted ' the church of Rome ever had 
 the primacy.' Meanwhile, the genuine version of the third 
 canon of Constantinople, against wljich their gloss was di- 
 rected, is : 'that the bishop of Constantinople have the pre- 
 rogative of honor next after the bishop of Eome ; for Con- 
 stantinople is new Eome.' Incredible as it may seem, the 
 reading of this canon in the west, when S. Thomas wrote, 
 was : ' we venerate according to the Scriptures and the 
 definitions of the canons the most holy bishop of antient 
 Eome, as being the first and greatest of all bishops ; and 
 after him the Constantinopolitan prelate.' *''' 
 
 His fourth position is that ' the pope has the same power 
 that was conferred by Christ on S. Peter.' To establish it, 
 the following canon is produced — it might be difficult to say 
 from what collection — as of Chalcedon. ' Should evil report 
 attach to any bishop, let him have full liberty to appeal' to 
 
 i3»i Beginning with the position, Govt. p. 282. 
 
 freely admitted by the Greeks : ' Quod "'» ' Canon concilii,' he calls it here ; 
 
 pontifex Romanus est primus, et maxi- but on Sent. lib. iv. dist. xxiv. q. 3, 
 
 mus inter omnes episcopos,' after the art. 2. or Sum. Th. part iii. q.xl. art. 2, 
 
 chapters on the procession. where the last clause is supplied, it is 
 
 1302 ji[(j(g 593 Comp. Cave, Ch. called a canon of Constantinople. 
 
SPURIOUS WOEKS USED BY THE LATINS. 441 
 
 the most holy bishop of old Eome, because Peter is to us a 
 father of refuge ; and he alone has full power, in the place 
 of God, to decide the case of a bishop of whom any wicked- 
 ness has been reported, in virtue of the keys given to him by 
 o\ir Lord.' 
 
 At this rate, most assuredly, councils of the fathers were 
 not wanting, as Humbert says,'^** to support ' the subjection 
 to Eome ' prescribed in the pseudo-donation. Three passages 
 adduced by S. Thomas, in support of his third, fourth, and 
 fifth positions, from the Thesaurus or work on the holy 
 Trinity by S. Cyril, exist there no longer, which had they 
 been genuine, they of course would. '^^* 
 
 But it was at Florence or Ferrara that by far the greatest 
 display was made by the Latins under false colours. In 
 refuting Mark of Ephesus on December 8, cardinal Julian 
 says : ""^ 'I have sent, to Verona, and have received from 
 thence a decree by Eoman pontiffs thoroughly genuine and 
 authentic. Looking for another thing, I found this un- 
 awares.' They were letters purporting to have been written 
 by S. Athanasius to Mark and Liberius of Eome. Both have 
 been pronounced forgeries."" In his rejoinder he speaks of 
 the letters of Hormisdas to Justin, improving upon what 
 others had said ; "'^ of a letter of Liberius to S. Athanasius 
 equally spurious with the letter of S. Athanasius to him ; "^* 
 and of the pseudo-decretal of S. Clement to S. James. 
 
 A remarkable discussion having arisen between the arch- 
 bishop of Ephesus and John the Provincial, five sessions 
 later, March 7, on the falsification of manuscripts, a delicate 
 subject indeed for the Latins, and Mark having reminded 
 his opponent of a certain pope, by name Zosimus, who had 
 quoted the Sardican canons under the name of Nicene, John 
 rejoined unhesitatingly: ' Yes, but you should remember that 
 his eminence the cardinal of S. Sabina, who is here, produced 
 you most ancient and authentic letters of popes Julius and 
 Liberius, and what S. Athanasius wrote to popes Felix, Mark, 
 Julius, and Liberius — for all four were popes in his time — to 
 beg them to send him the acts of the Nicene council, as being 
 
 '»" Above, p. 43,9. "" Pagi ad Baron. a.d. 336, n. 11, 
 
 "" Launoy, Ep. i. and ii. ad Ant. and Op. S. Ath. torn. iv. p. 1442 et 
 
 Four. ed. Saywell, Cambridge, 1689. eeq. ed. Migne. 
 
 And many more instances, Ep. ix. ad '*" Above, p. 432. 
 
 Thorn. Fortin. "" Op. 8. Ath. ibid. p. 1469. 
 '"• Colet. xviii. p. 1022. 
 
443 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 possessed in their integrity by the Roman court . . , and 
 how they wrote back to him, that they were certainly in the 
 patriarchal archives in all their genuineness, written in Grreek 
 and Latin, with the seal and subscriptions of the fathers affixed 
 to them ... but that they could not spare the originals 
 . . . however, Liberius seAt him the Nicene canons, as they 
 were numbered at Ferrara, among which was the canon that 
 appeal belongs to the Eoman church."^"" All forgeries as 
 before, without exception, as might have been anticipated. 
 S. Athanasius to be sending to the Roman court-^' What pri- 
 mitive pope speaks of the court of Eome ? ' said Greroo to 
 Eugenius III.'*"' — for the decrees of a council of which he 
 was the life and soul : and Felix the first of his correspondents 
 an antipope ! To be sure John must have believed these do-, 
 cuments authentic, or he would never have been so ready to 
 refer to them, when Mark and he were discussing forgeries. 
 Still his good faith must not blind us to the worthless cha- 
 racter of the evidence adduced by him, or indispose us to 
 admit how much he left unproved. 
 
 Spurious authorities multiply on him as he proceeds. In 
 the twenty-first session he instructs Mark from the pseudo- 
 decretal of S. Clement, on the composition of the creed.'*"^ 
 In the twenty-fifth session he is ordered to address the 
 Grreeks on the rights of the pope.""^ Twice he argues from 
 the pseudo-decretal of S. Anacletus ; at another time from a 
 synodical letter of S. Athanasius to Felix ; at another time 
 from a letter of Julius to the easterns, both counterfeits.'*"'* 
 Afterwards, in reply to objections taken by Bessarion in 
 conference to the authority of the decretal epistles of the 
 popes, apart from any question of their authenticity, his 
 position in another speech is : '*°^ ' that those decretal 
 epistles of the popes, being synodical epistles in each case, 
 are entitled to the same authority as the canons themselves.' 
 And, in the same breath, he appeals once more to the pseudo- 
 decretals of SS. Clement and Anacletus, to the spurious letter 
 of Julius to the easterns, and ends with long extracts from 
 two different pseudo-decretals of S. Anacletus again for the 
 
 I™ Colet. ibid. p. 298. ibid. p. 1152-7. 
 ""' Christendom's Divisions, part i. '■'°'' For the last, Patrol, torn. viii. 
 
 p. 54, note. p. 974. 
 
 "I" Colet. xviii. p. 327. "»= Colet. ibid. 1163. 
 
 "°3 Given in the Latin Acts only, 
 
SPURIOUS WORKS USED BY THE LATINS. 443 
 
 fifth or sixth time. These were the glosses by which he 
 claimed, oa the part of the Latins, to have Scripture, and the 
 genuine acts of the councils to which he refers — the fourth, 
 sixth, and seventh, for instance'*"' — interpreted. But for the 
 opposition of the Grreeks, express reference was to have been 
 made to them in the definition, as we shall see, the awkward- 
 ness of which, after what modern criticism has proved them 
 to be, would not have been small ; not that the Greeks were 
 without their misgivings even then, only they despaired of 
 substantiating them. 
 
 ' If Euthemius our late patriarch,' says Syropulus,'*"' ' was 
 often unable to detect the difference between the spurious 
 and genuine sermons of S. Chrysostom, how can we, in our 
 circumstances, hope to discover whether all the passages 
 alleged by our opponents from the Latin fathers are authentic 
 or not? Cardinal Julian .has shown that they can cite what 
 is not genuine, by producing a copy of the creed of the 
 second Nicene council with the interpolated clause. . . . 
 JS'evertheless,' he adds, 'the majority voted for accepting 
 them.' They voted for accepting them, and some of them 
 once more vied with the Latins afterwards in appealing to 
 them for confirmation of the conclusions which they had 
 been persuaded to adopt, as having been the best evidence 
 on which they had heard them proved. Take the fifth 
 chapter, for instance, of the work of Gennadius'*"* in de- 
 fence of the Florentine definition. After illustrating from 
 Scripture what it had ruled on the prerogatives of the pope, 
 he says, ' Which position the holy fathers and the acts of 
 the oecumenical synods most clearly set forth.' Of his list of 
 authorities. No. 1 is the pseudo-donation quoted at length ; 
 2, the pseudo-decretal of S. Anacletus ; 3, of S. Marcellus ; 
 4, of S. Callistus. The rest are read by their light. This 
 was what be had gained from the speeches of the provincial. 
 Once, and once only were the Greeks supposed to be caught 
 tripping themselves. One reason which had determined 
 them'*"* to abstain from producing the letter of S. Maximus 
 in evidence on their side, was the dilapidated state of the 
 manuscript containing it, which showed their scrupulousness. 
 Some time afterwards, a passage having been quoted from S. 
 
 "»' Colet. xviii. p. 1152-7. ""' Ibid. vi. 20 : eird ovk i\6itKiipos 
 
 "" is. 3. fipiaKfTttt ri ^kttoA.'^. 
 
 i"8 Bibl. Pat t. zxri. p. 560 et seq. 
 
444 WRITERS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 Basil by Mark of Ephesus, his reading of it was called in 
 question by the provincial — and ultimately the text used by 
 him was affirmed corrupt, on the authority of a Greek manu- 
 script, which the Latins alleged had been brought by Nicho- 
 las of Cusa from Constantinople.'^'" This was the incident 
 which gave rise to the discussion on the falsification of 
 manuscripts already referred to. Mark pleaded in vain that 
 the majority of manuscripts was in his favour ; the Latins set ' 
 up a shout, and claimed the victory.'^" It was their revenge 
 for his exposure of the copy produced by cardinalJulian of the 
 creed of the seventh council. Strange to say, Mark has since 
 been given right in both cases. His version, as of the creed, 
 so of S. Basil, Las been verified. Jn all the printed editions 
 of S. Basil '^'^ tardy justice has been done to his memory. 
 
 I have confined myself in these references strictly to what 
 my own historical investigations have forced me to notice, 
 without going out of my way in any sense to look for them. 
 But my belief is, that pages, in addition, might be filled with 
 others. How often the fathers have been mistranslated, mis-, 
 quoted, or even interpolated — how often spurious works 
 passed off as their genuine works — on the Latin side, is a 
 wide question of itself, and on the subject of the procession 
 alone there is a long list given by the late Dr. Neale in his 
 dissertation,''"* to which reference has been made already, 
 distinct, in general, from mine ; yet both together I fear not 
 likely to prove exhaustive by any ireans, even on that one 
 point. It is a serious difficulty, therefore, which there can be 
 no good gained by dissembling, in which we of the west are 
 placed. P"'or if our forefathers are found to have based their 
 positions upon spurious authorities, to an extent that it would 
 take almost a life to explore, what account is to be given of 
 those positions themselves? With the facts before us, it 
 would be impossible to assert for certain that they' had ever 
 been proved, and at the council of Florence least of all. 
 The tissue of false evidence which was produced there par- 
 ticularly cries aloud for a thorough re-examination, in the 
 most impartial spirit, of all the points that were debated, and 
 
 "'° Colet. xviii. p. 287. scripta Basilii, Klium subtrahendo in 
 
 "" See the account given by S. An- ips4 Processione.' 
 ton. Chron. p. iii. tit. xxii. ; i)e Condi. "'^ Popoff, note to p. 99. 
 Flor. c. 11 : ' MaKtia Graeconim,' as it '"» Introd. vol. ii. diss. iii. p. 1095 
 
 is called, ' quod scilicet corruperant et seq. 
 
SPURIOUS WOEKS USED BY THE LATINS. 445 
 
 supposed to have been ruled there for good. Yet let us not, 
 in thus excepting to their authorities, be unjust to the cir- 
 cumstances, and still less to the good faith of our Latin 
 ancestors. That there was no such thing as conscious dis- 
 honesty on their part in general, we may feel sure. They 
 were simply taken in ; and in particular instances, where it 
 cannot he proved, they are entitled to the full benefit of the 
 
 doubt. We have seen instances — painful instances indeed 
 
 where there has been scarcely any room for avoiding un- 
 favourable conclusions; but what age is free from them? 
 certainly not our own. Again, let us reflect how different 
 their circumstances were from those of the Greeks. Con- 
 stantinople, till itibad been taken by the Latins in the thir- 
 teenth century— and they were more civilised than any besides 
 its own inhabitants in the world— was a virgin city. Its 
 archives had never been disturbed before. Christian litera- 
 ture, the original acts of its councils, the genuine works of 
 its fathers, reposed there peacefully, in all the honor that 
 could be shown, and amid all the care that could be taken of 
 them. There, too, the traditions of primitive Christianity 
 had never been broken through — and the language of primi- 
 tive Christianity still formed the language both of science and 
 of the people. What had been the condition of the west 
 meanwhile? By how many barbarous tribes had it been 
 overrun in turn ? How many times had Rome been sacked 
 or otherwise pillaged ? In proportion as the different nation- 
 alities of Europe began to be marked off, the language of SS. 
 Hilary and Augustine gave place gradually to the language of 
 the medieval church or to the rude vernaculars that were 
 founded on it. The knowledge of Greek speedily ceased to 
 be an accomplishment even amongst the learned. To the race 
 of interpreters for the most part — a caste not of the highest 
 character and of no other qualifications — was left the task of 
 translating all that came from the east, antient or modern, as 
 it was wanted ; bub who was there to judge of the manuscripts 
 which they employed for that purpose, or of the merits of the 
 versions which they executed ? Let us not, with our printed 
 literature, and the clearest of types, be extreme to mark of- 
 fences committed by those who must have gathered all their 
 information from manuscripts, and a good deal of it from 
 manuscripts worn or difiicult to decipher, and of which 
 the transcriber alone had corrected the proofs ; nor, again. 
 
4-16 WEITEES DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 because we find a good deal of anti-Grreek feeling displayed 
 from first to last on the Latin side, let us assume the Latin 
 controversialists began anyhow by wishing to prove the Greeks 
 in the wrong. For the Latins were believers in the integrity 
 of their authorities, as well as of their cause ; and on the 
 hypothesis that thei/r authorities were correct, their indigna- 
 tion against the Greeks who repudiated the conclusions which 
 they drew from them was not unreasonable. Yet, through- 
 out the controversy, the unwillingness exhibited by Peter 
 of Antioch and Theophylact of Bulgaria to condemn the 
 Latins, was reciprocated by writers of weight and talent on the 
 Latin side in what they said of the Greeks. The conference 
 between Anselm of Havelburg and the archbishop of Nico- 
 media terminated in mutual expressions of admiration and 
 goodwill.'*'* With the schoolmen, be it said to their praise, 
 there was a marked disinclination, in defending what they 
 believed themselves, to pronounce the Greeks wrong, imless 
 for having, as they supposed, attacked it. The master of the 
 sentences openly declared it as his opinion that the Greeks 
 agreed in faith, though they differed in words, with the 
 Latins.'*'^ It was the general line taken by those who com- 
 mented on him. Let the old Oxford man, who divided the 
 palm with S. Thomas, be their spokesman. ' I reply,' says 
 Duns Scotus, ' that the answer to be given in this case is, that 
 the Greeks are said to differ herein from the Latins, as do the 
 passages, apparently, of the Damascene ' — S. John — ' but on 
 this difference our Lincoln-doctor observes in a note . . . that 
 the opinion of the Greeks is that the Holy Spirit is the 
 spirit of the Son ; not, however, as proceeding from the Son, 
 but from the Father alone, yet through the Son — and this 
 opinion appears contrary to ours, as we say He proceeds from 
 Both. Still even so, possibly, were two wise men, one a 
 Greek and the other a Latin, and each a sincere lover of the 
 truth, and not of his own way of speaking, as such, to meet 
 to discuss this apparent contrariety,- it would be seen for cer- 
 tain at last that such contrariety was not as truly real as it is 
 verbal — otherwise either the Greeks themselves, or we Latins, 
 should be veritable heretics.' "'^ 
 
 '•"■' Above, p. 132. art. i. Wholiis 'Lineoln" doctor was 
 
 U15 ' In eandem nobisonm fideisen- is not certain. Echard, Ord. Frad. 
 
 tentiam convenire videntur, licM in Script, vol. i. p. 490, says there were 
 
 verbis dissentient.' — Lib. i. dist. xi. d. ten different ' Lincolnienses.' 
 "" In Sent. lib. i. dist. xi. q. xta. 
 
HUMBERT THE DOMINICAN". 447 
 
 Then he bursts forth as he has been already quoted:'*'^ 'Who 
 would dare to call the Damascene or any other of the sainted 
 fathers of the east heretics any more than those of the west ? ' 
 After which he returns once more to his point and says : ' The 
 probability is, therefore, that though their words are contrary, 
 the sentiments of the saints on either side who employ them 
 are not contrary ; for words have many meanings, according 
 to which a thing is said to be of another, or from another, 
 and by another. Hence, possibly, were this diversity to be 
 taken into account and recognised, it might be made clear that 
 contrary terras need not involve discordant sentiments. Still, 
 whatever we may decide thus in their case, ever since the 
 catholic church has declared that it must be held as of the 
 essence of faith . . . held it must be without flinching that 
 the Holy Spirit proceeds from Both.' 
 
 The canon-law of the west,''"' into which the first canon of 
 the second council of Lyons had been incorporated, alone sets 
 bounds to his moderation. 
 
 Humbert of Eomans in Dauphiny — 'de Komanis' as he is 
 called— fifth general of the Dominicans, was under no such 
 restrictions. A number of memorandums were prepared by 
 otder of Gregory X. in anticipation of the second council of 
 Lyons on the existing state of things in the church, and sug- 
 gestions were invited from their different authors for im- 
 proving it.'^'* Humbert appears to have been one of those 
 who was asked for a paper. He would naturally set about 
 his work with unusual interest, as the council was about to be 
 held in his own neighbourhood ; and though there are parts 
 of his paper which are not free from historical errors and 
 other defects, still, as it is, on the whole, one of the freshest 
 and least conventional and most superior to prejudice of all 
 the extant contributions on the Greek question, it may deserve 
 to be quoted at some length. 
 
 According to him,'*'"' the guilt of the schism rested with 
 the Greeks for three reasons : first, as having caused it; se- 
 condly, as having rebelled against the head of the church ; 
 
 "" Above, p. 283. It is in three parts : the first on the 
 
 "" Clfement. lib. i. tit. i. De sum. work of the church against the Sara- 
 
 Trm. et Fide Cath. ; or Sexti Decret. cens ; the second on the Greek echism ; 
 
 lib. i. tit. i. cap. ' Fideli.' the third on the points requiring to be 
 
 "" Rohrbaolier, toI. xix. p. 54. reformed in the Latin church. See 
 
 '«" Mansi, torn. xxir. p. 119 et seq. above, p. 283. 
 
448 WEITEKS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 and thirdly, as having set up a head of their own.'^'" Never- 
 theless there were disposing causes to be takea into account 
 also.'*^'' First, there was the difference of rites, the use of 
 beards and the disuse of them, the celebration of the eucharist 
 with or without leaven, the ministrations of married or un- 
 married priests. Secondly, there were the grievances of the 
 Eoman church in exactions, excommtmications, and oppres- 
 sive enactments ; the tyrannical conduct of the Latin princes 
 ia word and deed towards the Greeks, calling them dogs, 
 dragging them by the beards, and so forth ; the headstrong 
 violence by which Rehobowm divided his MngdoTn. Hence 
 there was no reason to doubt that exasperation had to some 
 extent predisposed the Greeks to schism. Again, because 
 according to the histories of the Latins themselves, the 
 greatest kingdoms had been derived from the Greeks, and 
 even Christianity in some sense commenced with them, there- 
 fore they have proved so much the more sensitive when 
 slighted or neglected ; and accordingly, to the addition made 
 by the Latins to the creed without consulting them, they are 
 never likely to submit. Such were the causes, he thinks, 
 that inclined them to schism. Speculatively, there was again 
 another cause for the schism. Whereas, down to the time 
 of Charlemagne, the empire remained one though the seat 
 of the empire had been transferred to Constantinople, 
 afterwards there came to be two emperors, a Greek and a 
 Latin one ; and the Roman church inclining to favour the 
 Roman or Latin emperor to the detnment of the other, it 
 was quite possible that the Greek emperor commenced rebel- 
 ling, and his people to support him. Hence Constantinople 
 having attained precedence as the seat of empire, Boniface 
 got the emperor Phocas to ordain that the Eoman church 
 should be called head of all, as it really is. 
 
 The schism, he says, continues, because the disposing 
 causes have not ceased; or secondly, from custom, as in 
 the case of the Guelphs and Ghibelines, who went on quar- 
 relling mainly because their ancestors had done so before 
 them ; or, thirdly, from ignorance, so few earing to know the 
 merits of the question ; or, fourthly, from the diversity of 
 tongues that prevailed ; or, fifthly, from the distance sepa- 
 rating them from each other ; or sixthly, because they cannot 
 
 »"' Part ii. c. 8 et seq. iw C. 11. 
 
HUMBERT THE DOMINICAN. 449 
 
 agree who is to govern, the western church wishing the 
 government to be in the hands of the Latins, the easterns 
 inclining to that of their own native rulers. The Grreeks, he 
 remarks, who are under Latin governors, as in Calabria, obey 
 the Roman church. One more reason, he thinks, under re- 
 serve may be alleged — namely, that the Greeks having been 
 in schism for so long, have fallen into various errors and 
 heresies which they will not abandon, and have therefore 
 come to be, not merely schismatics, but heretics of late years. 
 
 On the mischief done by the schism,'*^* he seems to think 
 there can be but one opinion — comparing it to the worship 
 of the golden c|,lves under Jeroboam. The Latins, he says, 
 are bound to do all they can to heal it ; but hitherto they 
 have behaved much too like the priest and Levite in the 
 pai-able, and so the schism has become worse : '*^'' the duty of 
 bringing about a reconciliation devolves, above all others, 
 upon the pope.'^'^^ 
 
 Among the means to that end are i^*^^ 1. A knowledge of the 
 Greek language and study of Greek books, as in the days of 
 SS. Austin and Jerome. At the present time, he says, there 
 is hardly one person in the court of Rome who can read the 
 letters that come from the Greeks ; and no legates, he coun- 
 sels, should ever be sent into the east without Greek inter- 
 preters. 2. Greek books should be procured in abundance 
 that the Latins may be acquainted with their theological, 
 exegetical, canonical, legal, ritualistic, and historical writers. 
 3. Frequent messages and embassies should be despatched to 
 them in the spirit of the good king Hezekiah inviting the ten 
 tribes to Jerusalem to keep the passover. 4. Persons should 
 be sent among them to study their habits and customs, 5. 
 All Greeks who come to the west should be honorably enter- 
 tained. 6. Intermarriages with them should be encouraged, 
 especially between persons of rank. 7. All further oppression 
 of the Greeks by the Latins should cease. 8. Kindly offices 
 should be interchanged between persons of rank on both sides. 
 9. Latin works should be translated into Greek for the Greeks 
 to study. 
 
 With regard to the three principal causes of discord still 
 in force between the Greeks and Latins "^' — that is to say : 
 
 '«' Ibid. i;. 13. The twelve causes "" e. 15. '«« c. 17. 
 
 adduced in c. 12 from a work of Leo "'^ c. 16. "" c. 18-19. 
 
 the Tuscan are not worth repeating. 
 
 G G 
 
450 WEITEES DUBING THE SCHISM. 
 
 (1) the Greek empire, which was brought about by the 
 transfer of the empire from the Grreeks to the Grermans in 
 the person of Charlemagne, the breach on account of which 
 was enhanced on the capture of Constantinople by the Franks 
 and Venetians ; (2) the diversity of rites, which, he says, 
 commenced in the mission of Nicholas I. to the Bulgarians, 
 in revenge for which the Grreeks charged the Latins with 
 heresy on the procession; and (3) disputed jurisdiction be- 
 tween Eome and Constantinople — his opinion is : (1) that the 
 Grreek emperor might be able, either by marriage or by pur- 
 chase, to settle all the points at issue between him and any of 
 the Latin princes who had established themselves in the east ; 
 
 (2) that all rights might be tolerated, so long as the substance 
 of the faith was not violated nor the Latin rite condemned ; 
 
 (3) that the fulness of obedience should not be required from 
 the Grreeks so long as their patriarch was confirmed by the 
 pope and the legates of the pope treated by them with proper 
 honor. But without a thorough reformation of the Latin 
 church the far-sighted general of the Dominicans was con- 
 vinced that it would be nugatory, as Gregory IX. and his 
 cardinals had been told by the patriarch of Constantinople"^* 
 Avith whom they corresponded forty years before, to discuss 
 preliminaries for any reunion likely to prove permanent be- 
 tween it and the east. The third part of his work accordingly 
 contains a list of abuses then requiring to be reformed in the 
 Latin church, which, in spite of his having pointed them out, 
 went on increasing, amidst indignant protests in every age 
 from the best of men, and discussions on it in every council 
 down to the council of Florence, when the experiment of uni- 
 ting the Greeks without attending to it was finally tried. Hum- 
 bert may have been read with deference, but he was not heeded. 
 Of all his suggestions but one seems to have been carried 
 out, not immediately, but by the council that met in his own 
 neighbourhood and in the neighbourhood of Lyons, at Vienne 
 forty years afterwards., in ordering the foundation of profes- 
 sorial chairs for the study of Hebrew and Ghaldee, Greek and 
 Arabic, in the universities of Eome, Paris, Oxford, and Sala- 
 manca.**^' This was one of the most practical measures ever 
 taken for promoting better relations with the east, and it may 
 well be associated with his name. Few have expressed them- 
 
 "^ Above, p. 233. '"= Christendom's Divisions, part i. p. 131, note. 
 
S. ANTONINUS OF FLORENCE. 451 
 
 selves on the Greek question more sensibly than he has. It 
 has been an agreeable surprise to myself to find so many of 
 the positions for which I have ventured to contend from first 
 to last in connection with it, so often anticipated in this ela- 
 borate paper of the thirteenth century by the Dominican 
 general. 
 
 S. Antoninus, archbishop of Florence, is one more writer 
 whose opinions on the Greek question are worth examining 
 before we close. In many respects he is the pendant to 
 Humbert ; one having written in anticipation of the second 
 council of Lyons, the other in illustration of that of Florence, 
 at which he wa?^ present, after it was over, and both having 
 gone into the whole question of the schism at some length. 
 S. Antoninus has indeed been supposed to be more favourable 
 to the Greeks than he really is ; '^''' but his true meaning id 
 even of more interest than his supposed meaning. He has 
 been quoted in support of the position that the Greeks were 
 only schismatics ; "" this is incorrect. In speaking of the 
 schism, he employs the phrase consonant with antiquity, 
 * Division of the eastern and the western church ; ' but in 
 speaking of the Greeks he calls them heretics as well as 
 schismatics in their disunion. What he really affirms is 
 that the Latins were not heretics unless the Greeks were, 
 which is another thing altogether. Worthy of all notice is 
 what he really says. He had not listened to the telling facts 
 of Mark of Ephesus, at Florence, for nothing. That they 
 haunted his imagination may be seen from his historical 
 sketch. He has credited both Photius "^^ and Cerularius ■'"* 
 with having expressly declared in the synods over which they 
 presided respectively, that the pope and all the western 
 bishops had forfeited their sees and fallen under excommimi- 
 cation, as having incurred the full penalties decreed in the 
 seventh canon of the council of Ephesus, against those who 
 proposed any creed for public use, different from the exact 
 form received there. Mark, not Photius or Cerularius, had 
 suggested this. It was an ugly dream : could it be true by 
 any chance ? No ! it was a groundless apprehension. The 
 
 '"° Thomas a Jesu, Be Conv. om. in this chapter ; but, with respect he 
 
 gent, procur. lib. vi. p. 1, c. iriii. it said, not at all as comprehensiyely 
 
 "" That is, in Chron. p. iii. tit, xxii. as by Humbert. 
 2)e Eccl. Bom. et Constant, c. 13, §§ 3 '«' Ibid. § 10. 
 and 13. The whole schism is reviewed "" Ibid. § 11. 
 
 G G 2 
 
452 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 Greeks themselves had at Constantinople made considerable 
 alterations in the creed of Nicsea. Who ever accounted them 
 ' excommunicated ' or ' deposed ' for what they had done ? 
 JBut if not they, then, for the same reason, not the Latins 
 either; as, in each case, declaratory words were added in 
 opposition to the heresy that had arisen, and no more was 
 attempted ; quite another thing, he says, surely, from setting 
 forth a different creed. The defect in the argument, of 
 course, was that the creed specified in the seventh canon of 
 Ephesus, must have been not the Nicene simply, but the 
 Nicseno-Constantinopolitan creed, as Mark had pointed 
 out, "^* and few would think of disputing now. Accordingly, 
 the difficulty that agitated S. Antoninus so profoundly, 
 remains in full force for what it is worth ; how far, namely, 
 the priests and bishops of the entire west in every successive 
 age have incurred all the penalties of the seventh canon of 
 Ephesus, ever since their adoption, in public, of the 'Filioque' 
 clause. 
 
 III. In proceeding to speak of councils in the third and 
 last place, I commence gladly with the remark, that what- 
 ever harsh or vmgenerous treatment the Grreeks and Latins 
 may have experienced from each other as individuals in word 
 or deed, in their formal assemblies, their meetings of the 
 clergy celebrated in the name of Christ and opened with 
 prayer, the conduct of the two churches towards each other 
 has been characterised by singular forbearance and amenity. 
 No council of the east has ever anathematised the western 
 church by name, nor any council of the west the eastern. 
 Excommunications were doubtless exchanged between Pho- 
 tius and Nicholas, Michael Cerularius and the legates of Leo 
 IX., in the early part of the quarrel, but particular care was 
 taken on both sides to limit the sentence to the individuals 
 who were the objects of it, and to declare that it was intended 
 to go no further. Ample compensation, on the other hand, 
 was made for them in any case by the synods of Placentia, 
 Clermont, Bourges, and Vezelai, in which the resolve of the 
 west was registered to assist the east. Great forbearance 
 continued to be exercised on both sides, even after the turn 
 taken by the crusades had completed their estrangement. 
 
 "" Colet. xviii. p. 65-88, -with the tween him and cardinal Julian, p. 173 
 discuBBions on the same subject he- —212, 
 
MODERATION ON BOTH SIDES. 453 
 
 If the Constantinopolitan synod of a.d. 1168, over which 
 Michael of Anchiali presided, voted for separating from the 
 Latins, it equally voted against excommunicating them.'''*' 
 If the fourth canon of the fourth Lateran coimcil a.d. 1215 
 threatened any of the Greek clergy with excommunication 
 and deposition who said or did anything in disparagement of 
 the Latin rite, it commenced with general expressions of 
 good will towards them, and a promise to treat their rite 
 with consideration.'''*'' The work of a renowned abbot of the 
 west, Joachim, is condemned for the theological errors which 
 it contains in the second canon; but no censure is pro- 
 nounced in the first canon against those who refused to 
 recite the creed with the ' Filioque ' clause. Similarly, the 
 damnatory clause in the first canon of the second council of 
 Lyons is directed against those who /denied that the Holy 
 Ghost proceeds eternally from the Father and the Son, or 
 asserted that He proceeds from them, as from two principles,' 
 not against those who professed their faith without doing 
 either one or the other. Further, there was nothing in the 
 oath then required from the Greek emperor and his subjects 
 to oblige them to deviate from the original form of "their 
 creed. They were not binding themselves to use the creed 
 of Clement IV. in public or private by accepting it. Exception 
 having been taken to the word ' dissent,' or ' heresy,' when 
 the Greek question was under consideration, in the decree of 
 the Basle fathers, it was ordered to be removed;"*' and 
 when a motion was made for appending a damnatory clause 
 to the definition of the council of Florence, it was not sup- 
 ported, and fell through."*' Finally, when the three eastern 
 patriarchs met in council to repudiate the union which the 
 emperor and patriarch of Constantinople between them had 
 been endeavouring to enforce, what they repudiated was, not 
 really the council of Florence, or anything that had been 
 ruled there, but the attempts by which it had been followed 
 to Latinise the Greek church and get rid of the Greek 
 rite.'"" 
 
 In short, whenever the two churches met in council to 
 discuss each other, it was much more to fraternise than to 
 
 "" Above, p. 1 37. dore proposed it, evidently by way of 
 
 '"" Above, p. 221, and comp.p. 220. sounding the others. 
 >"' Above, p. 270. '«' Above, p. 381. 
 
 H3S Syrop. X. 5. Bessarion and Isi- 
 
454 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 condemn. Were we possessed of the acts of every council 
 that has heen held in the west on the Greek question, or in 
 the east on the Latin, we might discover instancdte of amiable 
 inconsistency to a far greater extent on both sides, and in 
 greater abundance, than we can with our existing materials. 
 Creorge, archbishop of Corcyra, would have attended the third 
 Lataran council a.d. 1179, had he not fallen sick on the road. 
 As it was, his place was supplied by Nectarius, a Greek abbot. 
 Nectarius would seem to have taken his seat there just as 
 any other episcopal vicegerent, without any questions having 
 been put to him about his faith first, though his archbishop 
 must have been known ix> WiUiam of Tyre and other prelates 
 from the Holy Land of the Latin church who were present.'"" 
 Among those invited to the fourth Lateran council was 
 Nicholas, patriarch of Alexandria; "" and Nicholas seems to 
 have been represented there by his deacon. Innocent must 
 have known all the time that Nicholas was in full communion 
 with the rest of the eastern bishops ; yet we do not find him 
 calling upon the patriarch to explain his faith before inviting 
 him, nor making any difference between his deacon at the 
 council and the rest who came to it. If he was there at all, 
 Germanus must have sat in the place which the patriarch, 
 had he been there, would have filled. 
 
 Practically, we are limited to the acts of two councils, the 
 second of Lyons and that of Florence, both held in the west, 
 for the class of facts of which we are now in search, illustra- 
 tive of the behaviour of the two churches towards each other 
 when they met for consultation, though our knowledge of 
 what passed at Lyons is far from clear. In each case, as has 
 been shown conclusively from official statements, the pro- 
 gramme for discussion was said to be, ' the division of the 
 eastern and western church.' Each side, therefore, recog- 
 nised the other at starting as forming part of the church that 
 was divided so far, and in need of reunion.'*^^ The net of 
 Peter had broken, and wanted mending. Israel and Judah 
 were desirous of keeping the passover again as one people. 
 The alteration made to meet objections in their decree by the 
 Basle fathers, to which Eugenius was afterwards committed 
 as it stood, affords decisive proof both of the ground on which 
 and of the object for which they were pledged to meet. Un- 
 
 ""> Above, p. 140. Comp. p. 148. '"' Above, p. 213. Comp. p. 140. 
 "« Above, pp. 259 et seq. and 337-41. 
 
PACHYMEKES ON THE COUNCIL OF LYONS. 455 
 
 less, therefore, they met as hypocrites they met as equals, 
 one regarded as much a part of the church as the other ; only 
 that what may be called the junior side was headed by the 
 head of the whole church ; the senior side by one who con- 
 fessedly ranked second, not first. The Latin church ranked 
 second in antiquity, the Greek church in headship. Both 
 sides were fully alive to the strength of their respective 
 claims, and never failed to make the most of them ; other- 
 wise they met as equals. To begin with the council of Lyons. 
 The arrival of the Greek ambassadors, as we have seen, took 
 place while the third session was in progress, on the feast 
 of S. John Baptist, on June 24. Who were they ? ' The 
 ambassadors named in the letter to the pope,' '^*' says the 
 Latin report; but neither Michael nor the Greek bishops 
 mention a soul by name "■''' in the letters which the pope 
 received from them at the council, nor the pope in his answers 
 to them after the council was over. The Latin report is 
 equally vague, except so far as it distinctly calls one of them 
 the 'logothete.' 
 
 However, there is a detailed account of this embassy by 
 the Greek historian Pachymeres,'^^' as it left Constantinople. 
 Two ships sailed early in March, one with two prelates on 
 board — Germanus who had once been patriarch of Constan- 
 tinople, and Theophanes, archbishop of Nicsea, accompanied 
 by George, logothete, or chancellor of the empire ; the other, 
 with their respective suites and a rich cargo of presents for 
 the pope. On the fifth day in Holy Week, or Maundy- 
 Thursday, towards the end of the month, as they were round- 
 ing the south-eastern horn of the Morea, cape S. Angel o, 
 they encountered a violent tempest, in which the ship con- 
 taining the presents went down, and every soul but one 
 belonging to it. The ambassadors themselves, after spending 
 some days to refit, with laudable constancy sailed on for Kome, 
 where, says the historian, they arranged matters to satisfaction 
 with the pope, were presented by him with rings, mitres, and 
 tiaras, such as are worn by bishops, and spent the summer. 
 Autumn was waning when they reached home ; but before 
 the year was over Michael had commenced giving effect to 
 
 144S ■ Nunoii imperatoris Grsecorvua, '"• Ibid. p. 67 et seq. and p. 79 et 
 quorum nomina sunt in litterft missft seq. 
 papse.' — Mansi, torn. xxiv. p. 61 et seq. '"» Lib. v. c. 17 and 21. 
 
456 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 the covenants entered into between them and the pope.'*^^ 
 That these were the ambassadors accredited by Michael to 
 the council of Lyons admits of no doubt at all ; and, as far as 
 dates are concerned, there is no diflSculty connected with 
 their appearance there. For starting early in March, and 
 arriving at Lyons on June 24, they would have had 110 days 
 and upwards for their journey ; and as forty-five days "*'' 
 would seem to have been the average passage between Venice 
 and Constantinople, ninety days would be ample allowance 
 between Constantinople and Marseilles, leaving them twenty 
 days for rest, and for their journey from thence to Lyons by 
 land. But then, according to the calculations ^"* of the 
 learned Jesuit Possinus, their journey must have taken place 
 in the spring of a.d. 1273, not 1274 ; and he adds that other- 
 wise they would have found the pope not at Eome, but in 
 France, which is perfectly true. According to him, therefore, 
 they must either have remained in the west a year and six 
 months, or they must have arranged matters and returned 
 home six months before the actual meeting of the council. 
 The letter of Gregory to Michael from Lyons of November 
 21, A.D. 1273,^**^ is enough to negative either hypothesis of 
 itself. Besides, according to modern calculations, Easter-day 
 A.D. 1273 occurred April 9,'^?° not March 26 as he says, 
 so that Maundy-Thursday would not be in March at all; 
 ■whereas a.d. 1274, Easter-day occurred April 1, so that 
 Maundy-Thursday would exactly fall, as Pachymeres says, at 
 the end of the month »*" or March 29. 
 
 The difficulty still remains that Pachymeres sends them to 
 Eome, not Lyons. Was he, perhaps, thinking more of the 
 pope than of the council ? Or was it that his eastern pride 
 would not allow him to represent one of the highest dig- 
 nitaries of the empire travelling so far from home to be 
 lodged in a provincial town in. France after all ? Pachymeres 
 may have substituted Eome for Lyons on either of these 
 grounds, or from sheer, ignorance; but if the ambassadors 
 named by him ever reached Lyons, why is the Latin report 
 
 »« Above, p, 272. Leo Allat. de. '"' Above, p. 327 for the first in- 
 
 Or. et Occ. Eccl. Cons. ii. 15, 1, gets stance. 
 
 over the difficulty by taking Pachym. '"' Observ.Paehym.C%?'on.l.iii.6,6. 
 
 at his word, and making no mention '''"' Above, pp. 266, 267. 
 
 of the council of Lyons whatever. This, "^" Chronol. by Sir H. Nicholas, 
 
 too, with Wadding before him, whom table K. p. 62. 
 
 he quotes (§ 2) at great length. "" X^yovTos toD ii.tiv6s. 
 
PACHYMEEES ON THE COUNCIL OF LYONS, 457 
 
 of the council so studiously reticent throughout on the sub- 
 ject of their names ? The ' logothete ' is there represented 
 as swearing in the name of the emperor, but he is not named; 
 ' the patriarch and archbishop of the Greeks ' are represented 
 as taking part in the ceremonial, but they are not named 
 either ! How is it, if the two prelates named by Pachymeres 
 were really present, that they were let off swearing altogether 
 in the name of the Greek clergy ? If the evidence of the 
 presence of the logothete consists in the oath said to have 
 been taken by him, no such evidence can be produced at all 
 events for the presence of his archiepiscopal companions. If 
 it be said that ^le share taken by them in the ceremonial 
 attests their presence, it must be pointed out that the Latin 
 report is, in many respects, not only reserved, but ambiguous. 
 Two patriarchs are mentioned as present before the Greeks 
 arrived, Pantaleon of Constantinople and Opizio of Antioch. 
 It is not stated in the report that they were Latin patriarchs, 
 but they are betrayed by their names ; Pantaleon had in fact 
 only quitted Constantinople when the Latins were expelled.'''*^ 
 The Greek ambassadors arrived, are received with every honor 
 by the pope and cardinals in the palace of the former, and 
 admitted to the kiss of peace ; who they were, bishops or lay- 
 men, priests or nobles, is nowhere stated. On the festival of 
 SS. Peter and Paul, the pope celebrated mass in the metro- 
 politan church of the city, dedicated to S. John Baptist, all 
 the cardinals and bishops who had been summoned to the 
 council assisting. S. Bonaventure preached. After the ser- 
 mon, the creed was chanted in Latin by the cardinals and 
 canons of the church ; it was chanted in Greek subsequently 
 by ' the before-named patriarch, '''^^ and all the Greek arch- 
 bishops of Calabria present.' Now, the only patriarchs 
 hitherto named had been the patriarchs of Antioch and 
 Constantinople, whose Latin extraction was suppressed. So 
 that, according to the letter of the report, it must have been 
 
 '"- Fleury, xcii. 9. Above, p. 289. nuchi, viri omnes graves et in auU 
 
 145S ■Wadding, Annal. Min. torn. iv. imperatoris celebres;' but two pages 
 
 p. 394, says : ' Iminedia,t6 prsedictus on he distrusts his former account, and 
 
 G-ermanus olim patriarcha cum cseteris asks, ' Who is this patriarch ? . . per- 
 
 Graecis ;' and he is so far consistent, for chance Germanus ! ' — P. 396, marginal 
 
 (p. 387) he had stated the embassy to note. Most probably, in his former 
 
 consist of the two prelates andlogothete account he had given us the names of 
 
 named by Pachym. and had given them the two subordinates who personified 
 
 two companions : ' Nicolaus Panaretha, tlie ambassadors, 
 camerarius imperii, et Georgiu-s Zi- 
 
458 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 one of these — the patriarch of Constantinople probably — 
 who chanted the creed on this occasion with ' the Greek 
 archbishops of Calabria,' Greeks by race but Latins by 
 church, ' with the words Filioque thrice repeated.' "°* After 
 which 'the said .patriarch' once more, 'and archbishops, with 
 the logothete and others, chanted solemn praises in Greek to 
 the pope.' A similar scene was enacted on the octave of the 
 festival. ' The before-named patriarch and archbishop of the 
 Greeks,' this time, or the two patriarchs, ' descended into the 
 nave, and took up their position on high seats, so as to have 
 the cardinal-presbyters behind them. The pope, unmitred, 
 chanted the creed in Latin, and the patriarch of the Greeks,' 
 this is his title now, ' assisted by the archbishop of Nicosia 
 and the Greeks who came with him, and by the other arch- 
 bishops and Greek abbots from Sicily, chanted it in Greek 
 afterwards, with the words Filioque twice repeated.' Hence 
 the whole performance from first to last, according to the 
 text of the Latin report strictly construed, was confined to 
 the Latin titulars of the two sees of Antioch and Constan- 
 tinople, assisted by the Latin archbishop of Nicosia and the 
 Greeks from Cyprus who came with him on the one hand, 
 and by the Greek archbishops and abbots from Sicily and 
 Calabria, all members of the Latin church, on the other. 
 They would be ready enough, all of them of course, to sing 
 the creed any number of times in the Latin form. The 
 ' logothete ' is the only personage who performed any func- 
 tion, expressly designated in the report as one of the Greek 
 ambassadors. ' One of the ambassadors,' it says, in speaking 
 of the proceedings of July 6, ' rose, and swore, in the name 
 of the emperor, adhesion to the faith of the Eoman church 
 as contained in the formulary that had just been read out ; 
 and promised always to remain faithful to it for the time to 
 come.' But his oath is not given at length. It has been 
 obtained by the collectors of councils from some unknown 
 source. Our countryman, Mathew of Westminster, omits 
 it ; '*^^ in Wadding "*^ it begins without his name or style. 
 The reader may refer to the translation of it, as in Mansi, 
 given in a former chapter. '*^^ It begins there, ' I, George 
 
 1454 Wadding's account is, ' Solem- "" Flores. Hist. a.d. 1274. 
 
 nitJr et devotfe ilium expresserunt, "^^ Annal. Min. torn. iv. p. 395. No 
 
 lento et gravi cantu dicentea " Qui a second oath is given here either. 
 
 Patre Filioijue procedit." ' — Ibid. "" Above, p. 268. 
 p. 394. 
 
PACHYMEEES ON THE COUNCIL OF LYONS. 459 
 
 Acropolita.' Let it be granted that this version is correct. 
 Are we bound to infer from it that he was personally present, 
 in other words, swore to it on the spot ? The other oath, 
 ' oath of the Greeks,' as it is called, ends with the name of 
 * John the reader, keeper of the records,' and so forth, ' of the 
 patriarchate,' Now, this office was, as yet, held by John Veccus, 
 who was in favour again, but not, as yet, patriarch ; and it 
 has never been asserted that John Veccus was one of those 
 who came to the council. In neither case, then, even sup- 
 posing them correct, can we consider the names affixed to 
 the oath proof positive, that it was sworn there and then by 
 the persons answering to them. It may have been sworn at 
 Constantinople 1^ the actual person in one case; and at 
 Lyons by deputy in the other. 
 
 On the whole, therefore, there seems great reason for doubt- 
 ing, and small reason for affirming, that the ambassadors 
 named by Pachymeres appeared in person at Lyons. That 
 Greek dignitaries had a horror of venturing beyond Italy, is 
 shown by the obstinacy with which they excluded Avignon 
 and Basle subsequently from the list of places at which they 
 would be willing to meet the Latins, There is just a 
 tradition that Greek ambassadors once got so far as Gentilly, 
 near Paris, to negotiate a marriage between a daughter of 
 Pepin and a fson of Constantine V. ; but their quality is not 
 stated. Barlaam, who visited Benedict XII. at Avignon, was 
 a native of Calabria, Then the express words of Pachymeres 
 are that Eome, not Lyons, was the destination of the ambas- 
 sadors named by him, and where they passed the whole sum- 
 mer. When they arrived there and found the pope gone to 
 hold his council in PVance — he had not intimated to Michael 
 in his previous letters where it was to be held — it would only 
 be natural for them to send on their papers in all haste after 
 him by persons empowered to act in their stead. Wadding "'* 
 supplies the names of a chamberlain of the empire, Nicholas 
 Panaretha, and George Zinuchi, another subordinate, who 
 accompanied them ; and he would have made his own account 
 more consistent, had he added, who represented them at the 
 council. The bulk of their suite had perished, it is true ; 
 but three dignitaries, as they were, could never have travelled 
 wholly without attendants. These they would despatch, and 
 
 "" Above, note 1463. 
 
460 COUNCILS DURING THK SCHISM. 
 
 excuse themselves : it would be a saving of time to the pope, 
 -and of fatigue to them. Perhaps in their inmost hearts they 
 were not sorry to find the pope gone when they arrived. 
 Another circumstance-connected with their movements is not 
 to be passed over. The two Franciscans who were to have 
 returned with them, are not said to have arrived at the council 
 with the ambassadors. Naturally enough, if the real ambas- 
 sadors remained at Eome, they would remain there with 
 them to do the honors. The pope received letters from 
 them on May 28, but abstained from acquainting the council 
 with their contents. The report only says that they caused 
 him great joy. If they announced the arrival of the ambas- 
 sadors in Eome, and reported that their papers would be sent 
 on immediately by persons empowered to act in their name, 
 they would have sufficed, surely, to have caused the pope all 
 the satisfaction which he is said to have received from them, 
 by setting his mind at ease, and acquainting him possibly 
 beforehand with the tenor of the despatches about to be 
 forwarded. It would only remain for him to make the most 
 of the personages representing the ambassadors when they 
 arrived. Their oriental dresses would go far to compensate 
 for their assumed rank, if they were not betrayed ; and how 
 well their secret was kept we may infer from the fact that, 
 according to some accounts, not merely the emperor Michael, 
 but the patriarch Joseph and all his suffragans, besides the 
 ambassadors and some notables actually then unborn, as 
 Manuel Calecas, graced the council by their attendance."^^ 
 Now, if the ambassadors were taken for Michael, why not the 
 representatives of the ambassadors for the ambassadors them- 
 selves ? One case of mistaken identity challenges another. At 
 Constance, ^*^° as the reader may remember, the representa- 
 tives of a convert prince of Lithuania were mistaken for 
 the representatives of the Greek empire, and a metropolitan, 
 who had actually been refused consecration by the Constanti- 
 nopolitan patriarch, for his vicegerent. Appearances were so 
 strong there as to have taken in both Gibbon and Fleury. 
 Here, perhaps, they are more problematical. Still, it is the 
 only consistent explanation that can be given of the words of 
 
 '«» Galesln. in Fit. S. Bonav. § 14. Michael present ; bnt admits Mmself 
 
 Comp. Caye. Hist. lAt. q. v. ' Manuel for certain that he was not. 
 Calecas.' Wadding, vol. iv. p. 397, "™ Above, p. 314. 
 gives a list of writers who believed 
 
PACHYMEEES ON THE COUNCIL OF LYONS. 461 
 
 the Latin report, and of the Greek historian, without sacri- 
 ficing one to the other. But take the usual hypothesis, and 
 Ayhat follows? That a former patriarch of Constantinople, 
 and an actual archbishop of Nicasa, came to the council, 
 occupied the most honorable place there next the pope, 
 took part in his mass one day, and in a solemn service cele- 
 brated by him another, and then left, without ever having 
 professed their allegiance to him as head of the church, or 
 their faith otherwise than by chanting the words ' Filioque ' 
 five times over in the creed. For that there was any oath 
 taken by them is nowhere said. On the contrary, the express 
 statement of the f eport is, that as soon as ever the letters of 
 the emperor, of his son, and of the bishops had been read 
 out, and the oath of the logothete pronounced, the pope laid 
 aside his mitre, and began chanting the ' Te Deum ' in a loud 
 voice with great earnestness and emotion, in token that all 
 had been done that was necessary, and that the churches 
 were one. ' Confirm, God, that which Thou hast wrought 
 in us,' was the versicle : and ' From Thy holy temple which 
 is in Jerusalem,' the response that followed. A few short 
 prayers by the pope, a brief sermon, and the creed chanted 
 in the Latin form, with the disputed clause twice repeated, 
 concluded the ceremony. The next day was engrossed with 
 the death and interment of S. Bonaventure. The day after, 
 July 17, the pope, in a parting address, congratulated the 
 fathers on the happy termination of the Greek question ; 
 and after the usual prayers, pronounced the blessing. Where- 
 upon the cardinal presbyter said, ' Let us depart in peace,' 
 and all was over. 
 
 No particulars are given of the departure of the Greek 
 ambassadors, which, if they were acting for others, is quite 
 intelligible. The pope showered presents through them upon 
 their absent chiefs, whom he abstains from mentioning in his 
 letter of congratulations to Michael at the same time, because 
 he had never really made their acquaintance.'*^^ This is the 
 most that can be got out of our existing materials. Other 
 documents may be forthcoming, and it is clear that there are 
 some letters which have never been printed as yet,"^'' calcu- 
 lated to throw additional light upon what passed. In any 
 
 "" Above, note 752. margin as 'ext. ib. u. 11.' i.< 
 
 "" E.g. the letter omitted by Eay- Greg. lib. ii. 
 nald. A.D. 1273, n. 50, marked in the 
 
462 COUNCILS DURING THE SCSISM. 
 
 case, the Greek ambassadors, whoever they were, received the 
 treatnxent of churchmen throughout ; aud should it really 
 turn out that two of them were of archiepiscopal rank, and 
 took part in the ceremonial, it will have to be admitted that 
 they officiated in the mass of the pope, and stood by his side 
 at the altar, '*^^ without having made the smallest profession 
 of any kind themselves, and even before the profession of 
 their imperial master had been read out. That they were 
 willing to join in the celebration of the holy eucharist, ac- 
 cording to the Latin rite, was accepted as a sufficient pledge, 
 both that they had ceased to be schismatics and were not 
 heretics. 
 
 At Florence, with our three reports of what passed there, 
 and by eye-witnesses in each case,"^^ we have neither mystery 
 nor reserve to contend with. All is plain-spoken to the 
 minutest details. The numbers present on both sides, their 
 general attitude towards each other, the names and argu- 
 ments of the speakers, the topics discussed, the means used, 
 the results achieved, are all given with praiseworthy fulness 
 and fairness, and the accounts on the whole tally with each 
 other far more than they disagree. Taking them in their 
 aggregate, then, it would be difficult to point out in what 
 respect the acts of the council of Florence differed from the 
 acts of any general council preceding the schism in which 
 easterns and westerns had met before. Were they not meet- ; 
 ing for deliberation, and after deliberation, to promulgate 
 what they had defined in common ? Neither sat as judges 
 upon the other ; both, by the very terms of their meeting, 
 were admitted to be constituent parts of the council. Points 
 of etiquette there were that had to be ruled necessarily. 
 When had pope, patriarch, and emperor, ever met in council 
 before ? When the primate of England visited the primate 
 of all England in a kingdom belonging to the same master, 
 it had often proved much more difficult to adjust their pre- 
 cedence.'^^' 
 
 '•"' See particularly what passed on Acts printed in Colet. (Popoff, p. 6, 
 
 the festival of SS. Peter and Paul. It note) ; and Andreas Delia Croee, one 
 
 was on the octave that all the readings of the advocates on the Latin side 
 
 out took place. author of the Latin Acts published by 
 
 '"' Namely, Syropulus, who as ec- Justiniani, and printed likewise in 
 
 cjesiarch attended the Greek patriarch Colet. but not in Mansi. 
 (Popoff, p. 3 et seq.) : Dorotheus, arch- i«5 Collier, iii. p. 113, ed. Straker. 
 bishop of Mitylene, author of the Greek 
 
PROCEEDINGS AT FLORENCE. 463 
 
 When the patriarch arrived before Ferrara, March 7, he was 
 honorably met. He rode into the town between twq car- 
 dinals, on a white horse, followed by two more cardinals and 
 a vast concourse. The pope received Mm in his palace stand- 
 ing, and the patriarch likewise standing kissed his cheek. 
 The bishops who accompanied the patriarch kissed the cheek 
 and the right hand of the pope as he sat.'^^^ The patriarch 
 told the pope that he could not celebrate mass without leave 
 from him, being in his territory, and he begged, in addition, 
 to be allowed to use the Greek rite. The pope acceded to 
 both his requests.'**^ On the Simday following a solemn 
 mass was celebrated by fifteen priests according to the Greek 
 rite, with a number of prelates assisting, and a full quire. 
 When it was over, all present received the antidoron, or blest 
 bread, at the hands of the patriarch.'''** Another point of 
 etiquette that was discussed, and took some trouble to arrange, 
 related to places in church. As easterns had never attended 
 a western council in any numbers before, nor westerns ap- 
 peared at any previous council of the east and west in the 
 same force, they had never met previously so as to form two 
 bodies. It was finally arranged that the church of S. George, 
 in which they were to meet, should be shared between them; 
 the left or north aisle being assigned to the Latins, and the 
 right or south aisle to the Greeks, with the nave reserved for 
 the speakers. The seat of the pope was to be four feet from 
 the altar, and below it, about a foot distant, a vacant seat for 
 the German emperor; behind, places for cardinals, arch- 
 bishops, and bishops, to the number of 150, and any number 
 of the inferior clergy. On the opposite side was the seat of 
 the emperor, adorned with crimson and gold tapestry, but 
 not quite so magnificent as that of the pope; and a little 
 below him, one for his brother, then the patriarch, and the 
 vicars of the absent patriarchs ; behind them, the other 
 bishops and clergy from the east.'''*^ One side entered by 
 the north door, the other by the south. According to the 
 Latin acts, a mass of the Holy Ghost was celebrated by the 
 Latins before the Greeks came in.'^'" But when all were 
 entered and were seated, the pope intoned the ' Benedictus,' 
 and psalms and hymns followed, in which all joined. '*'' The 
 
 »™ Colet. torn, xviii. p. U. """ Colet.ibid.p. 16-18.Syrop.iii.25. 
 
 »•' Syrop. iii. 23. "™ Ibid. p. 922. 
 
 '«« Colet. ibid. p. 16. "" Ibid. p. 19. 
 
464 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 patriarch was absent from illness, but on the members of the 
 council seating themselves after prayers, his ' exhortation,' or 
 general invitation to come to the council, was read out by his 
 deacon, afterwards the decree of the pope for opening it, in 
 Greek and Latin, by the archbishops of Mitylene and Grrado 
 respectively ; last of all the bishops were asked on both sides 
 whether they assented to what had been read out, and replied 
 in the affirmative."^^ 
 
 The iirst session, October 8, was held in the chapel of the 
 palace inhabited by the pope. The same order was observed 
 there as in church. On the altar was a copy of the Grospels 
 open between relics of SS. Peter and Paul, and three lighted 
 candles on each side. The centre of the chapel was occu- 
 pied by disputants on the Latin side facing westwards, and 
 disputants on the Greek side facing eastwards, twelve accord- 
 ing to one account,"^^ sixteen according to the second,"'* 
 and twenty according to the third. "'^ But their number 
 varied at different times. Those whose speeches are reported, 
 on the Latin side were cardinal Julian Csesarini, or cardinal 
 of S. Sabina or of S. Angelo, as he is sometimes called, 
 Andrew bishop of Ehodes or Colossus, a convert, Aloysius 
 bishop of Forli, John de Monte Nigro, Dominican provincial 
 of Lombardy, pronounced by the Greeks a ' first-rate dia- 
 lectician,' and John de Turrecremata, a magnate of the 
 Dominican order likewise from Spain, afterwards cardinal. 
 The chief speakers on the Greek side were Mark, archbishop 
 of Ephesus, and Bessarion archbishop of Nicsea, Gemistius, 
 surnamed Pletho, the philosopher who lectured on Plato, 
 and George Scholarius, afterwards patriarch of Constan- 
 tinople under the Turks. Three notaries"'^ on both sides 
 to take down what was said, and one interpreter between 
 them, Nicholas Secundinus, whose performances elicited uni- 
 versal admiration, completed the programme. When it came 
 to the signing of the decree, the Latins signed to the left, 
 and the Greeks to the right, following the order in which 
 they had sat."'' Six on each side copied it out ; the seal 
 of the emperor was appended to it as well as that of the 
 
 "" Colet. ibid. p. 19-22. p. 45, note, says two. 
 »" Ibid. p. 36. »" The Greek Acts, Colet. ibid. 
 
 "'* Ibid. p. 925 ; but preTiously, p. 619-22, say the reverse ; but the 
 
 p. 918, they had said twelve. official copy of the decree in the 
 
 "" Syrop. V. 3. British Museum is signed as in the 
 
 "" Colet. ibid. p. 66, but Popoff, text. 
 
PROCEEDINGS AT FLOKENCE. 465 
 
 pope. It was read out ia Latia by cardinal Julian, and in 
 Greek by Bessarion, at the close of a mass celebrated by the 
 pope, attended by the Greeks, in the cathedral of Florence, 
 one of the noblest edifices in existence, dedicated to S. Mary : 
 one of the tenderest of whose festivals, her presentation in 
 the Temple, was actually borrowed by the west from the east, 
 in the height of their estrangement, a.d. 1372, midway 
 between the councils of Lyons and Florence.'*^' 
 
 When the decree was promulgated, it ran in the name of 
 the pope, but ' the consent of the emperor and of the repre- 
 sentatives of the eastern church,' was ordered to stand part 
 of it as well. AJf, one time when agreement seemed hopeless, 
 the pope is said to have proposed to the Greeks that it should 
 be decided by vote. He gave them four plans to choose 
 from, of which this was the last. It is related at some length 
 in the Greek acts, and according to Syropulus was suggested 
 to him by Dorotheus of Mitylene their author.'''^* He pro- 
 posed that all members of the council should attend mass in 
 a body, and after it was over pledge themselves by a solemn 
 oath to speak the truth, and then record their decisions : 
 having agreed previously that the decision of the ma;jority 
 should bind all. But the Greeks had as strong grounds for 
 declining, as he for proposing it : as the Latins must have far 
 outnumbered the Greeks, had the votes been taken. As it 
 was, the Greeks got several points altered in the definition 
 in deference to their objections ; nor, in fact, were they ever 
 overborne more than every minority is apt to be in all cases 
 where there are two parties and two sides to a question. 
 Had the council of Florence met to decide some point on 
 which the orders of SS. Dominic and Francis, or the schools 
 of S. Thomas and Dun Scotus were divided, it must have 
 exhibited precisely the same phenomena. Indeed, on any 
 other hypothesis than that the Greeks sat and voted in it as 
 equals, it would have to be conceded that its definition was 
 the joint work of those who formed, and of those who were 
 outside, the church. Had it succeeded, had it not been after- 
 wards disowned by the Greeks, part of the original under- 
 standing seems to have been that the council of Florence 
 was to have been called the eighth general council. Both 
 sides were to have consented to waive the right of all councils 
 
 un Bukler, Lives of the Saints, Not. "" Colet. ibid. p. 398; Syrop. viii. 8. 
 21. 
 
 H H 
 
466 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 held during the schism to be considered oecumenical, and the 
 council of Florence was to have been reckoned next after the 
 second Nicene, or seventh council, as the eighth.'**" As such 
 it was designated by the sly Cretan, Bartholomew Abram, in 
 translating and publishing the Greek acts a.d. 1526, under 
 Clement VII., for the first time in their present shape. 
 
 The trick was discovered, the edition called in, and another 
 substituted for it with another title."" Still, after all, what 
 can we gather from the non -adoption of his title but only 
 that the thing had failed ? 
 
 It has been already remarked '■•^^ that the meeting of the 
 council of Florence carried with it on the surface the tacit 
 admission that the second council of Lyons had so far failed ; 
 the meeting of the second council of Lyons that the 
 fourth Lateran had failed to the same extent. The time has 
 come for testing those positions upon internal evidence, by 
 comparing one council with another, and by examining what 
 was decided in each case, so far as regards the Greeks. What 
 was required from them at Florence was different from what 
 was required from them at Lyons, and before Lyons at Eome. 
 Singularly enough, it will be found that the pope required 
 less from the Greeks in Italy than he required from them in 
 France, and least of all at Eome. The further west he nego- 
 tiated, the more unfavourable to the Greeks his terms. It 
 was from Eome that the earliest overture for reunion to 
 the Greek church sped, a.d. 1167, from Alexander III.'^*^ The 
 primacy of the pope, his right of appeals, the commemoration 
 of his name in the liturgy, was all that was asked ; no more 
 than what is laid down in the Sardican canons. Not a word 
 was added about the creed, or about doctrine. Why they 
 failed has been explained previously. General submission 
 was apparently the sole condition prescribed by Innocent 
 III. for continuing Greek bishops in their sees.'**^ In the 
 canons of the fourth Lateran council the only dogmatic 
 statement that could have affected the Greeks in anyway 
 
 "'» Palmer's Diss, on the Orth. Com. '"' Under Paul V.by John Matthew 
 
 p. 21. It falls in with this, that no men- Caryophilus, another Cretan, whose 
 
 tion is made of any general oounoil he- edition in Greek and Latin it is that is 
 
 sides the first six, in the decrees for the printed in Coletns and Mansi. 
 
 Armenians and Jacobites. Colet. torn. "'^ Above, p. 341. 
 
 xviii. p. 641-52, and p. 1220-9; nor "»^ Above, p. 137. 
 
 any but the creeds of the first seven '■•" Above, p. 208 et seqj 
 discussed with the Greeks. 
 
PROCEEDINGS AT FLORENCE. 467 
 
 is what is said in the first canon on the procession. But it 
 is nowhere stated that this profession was ever required from 
 them. Innocent IV. was in Italy when proposals reached 
 him on the eve of his death from' John Vataces, and were 
 accepted by him. In character they were said to have been 
 similar to what had emanated from Alexander III. ; and 
 even as Alexander IV. represents them they can hardly be 
 construed to contain much more.'''*' But Clement IV. was 
 a Frenchman, and in active communication with Charles of 
 Anjou when the creed bearing his name was drawn up, sub- 
 scription to which was afterwards required from the G-reeks 
 at the second council of Lyons. Though it saw daylight at 
 Viterbo, therefore, it was thoroughly French by extraction, 
 and was imposed upon the Greeks under Gregory X., not in 
 Italy, but in France, It was accompanied by a canon setting 
 forth the doctrine of the procession, and ending with a 
 damnatory clause against those who dissented from it. At 
 Florence the definition was all the Greeks were called 
 upon to sign ; and the creed of Clement was not renewed. 
 Italy, therefore, beyond doubt, was not so exacting as France 
 had been. Again, there is one more fact of the ,same kind 
 to be told. The second council of Lyons was from beginning 
 to end a Franciscan council. Franciscan envoys had been 
 employed at Constantinople to negotiate for it; the great 
 Dominican who had been invited to it died on his road 
 thither ; the suggestions of Humbert, the Dominican general, 
 if received at all, were unheeded. S. Bonaventwe, the glory 
 of the rival order, was all in all there to the fathers and to 
 the pope ; he it was, according to his biographer and to the 
 report of the council, who preached, spoke, and framed their 
 principal canon, which is certainly in the spirit of his 
 writings.'**^ Finally, Franciscan annals supply most of what 
 we are supposed to know of the council. At Florence, we 
 may well ask what had become of the Franciscans. For all 
 that appears they were in a minority of one. Lewis or 
 Aloysius, bishop of Forli, is the only name in the foreground 
 that bespeaks their presence : '^" and he, by quoting S. 
 Bonaventure several times in the course of his argument, 
 
 '*" Above, p. 250. Michael's inter- Annal. Min. vol. iv. p. 398. 
 pretation of them is in Pachym. Mich. "" Colet. ibid. p. 934. Another, 
 
 partv. 10-12. Peter Perguerius, is named, but is 
 
 ■«« Above, p. 270. Comp. Wadding, never heard of afterwards. 
 
 B E 2 
 
468 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 seems to betray no small sensitiveness in behalf of his own 
 order. The rival order was certainly in the ascendant. All 
 the principal actors are Dominicans, or not Franciscans at 
 least. Two out of the three deputies from Basle to Constan- 
 tinople were canons regular ; but the third and most con- 
 spicuous of them, who lent his influence subsequently to the 
 ambassadors from Eugenius, was John of Kagusa, the Domi- 
 nican."^' Of the principal speakers, Andrew bishop of 
 Ehodes, John of the Black Mountain, and John of the Burnt 
 Tower, were all Dominicans. '^*^ The definition is stamped 
 throughout with their impress, accepting procession through 
 the Son as synonymous with procession from the Son, in 
 conformity with the teaching of S. Thomas ;"*" enumerating 
 the prerogatives of the pope as he had enumerated them in 
 his work against the Greeks ; '*'^ and finally, in the decree 
 for the Armenians, including a long instruction taken from» 
 his treatise on the sacraments,"'^ though Eugenius delivers 
 it to them, as his own."'' Lastly' S. Antonintis, who was 
 made archbishop of Florence for his services at the council, 
 at the suggestion of his dear friend Fra Angelico, and who 
 has discoursed so much upon it in his history, was a Domi- 
 nican."''' Florence, naturally enough, with its renowned 
 convents of SS. Mark and Maria Novella, was to all intents 
 and purposes a Dominican city ; and so difficult was it for 
 other orders to make themselves heard at the council, that 
 Ambrose of Camaldoli, one of the best Greek scholars there, 
 was positively refused leave to deliver a speech in Greek 
 which he had prepared with great care. Such, at all events^ 
 is the complaint of Augustine of Florence, his brother monk 
 and biographer-"'^ 
 
 Besides the procession and the power of the pope, the 
 only subjects entering into the Florentine definition "'^ were 
 
 *■"' Echari. Script. Ord. Frtsd. YoVi. redigmas formuld.' — Ibid. 
 
 p. 797, but see also .p. SIO. "»* Eehard. ibid. p. 817. 
 
 '"' Ibid. pp. 799, 801, and 837. "=» Fit. lib. iii. 28, 29. This, aswe 
 
 "™ Above, p. 426. learn from the Grreek Acts, was to have 
 
 "" Adf. Six or seven in all. been on 'azymes;' while from the 
 
 '■"^ Colet. ibid, p. 546-50, with the Latin Acts we find the speaker put in 
 
 marginal note to p. 646. his place was Turrecremata, the Do- 
 
 '■">' ' Eeclesiastieorum Sacramento- minican. — Colet. torn, xviii. pp. 610 
 
 rumveritateniproipsorumArmenorum, and 1157-60. 
 
 tarn prsesentium quam futurorum, fa- "^ Above, p. 361-3. 
 
 ciliori doctrinft, sub h&o brevissimd 
 
RULINGS OF LYONS AND FLORENCE COMPARED. 469 
 
 the addition made to the creed, celebrating the holy eucha- 
 rist with or without leaven, and purgatory ; though Bessarion 
 is said to have accepted the doctrine of transubstantiation iu 
 the name of his brethren after subscribing.'^'^ On the re- 
 maining sacraments, on the other points specified in the 
 creed of Clement, no more was said. So that at Florence, 
 under Dominican influence, there were fewer requirements 
 than there had been at Lyons under Franciscan; nor was 
 the definition, as then, supplemented by any canon or ana- 
 thema. Lyons exacted most, and Eome least ; Florence 
 went as much beyond Eome as it fell short of Lyons. The 
 Greeks, if they ever put things together, must have felt that 
 the treatment to which they had been subjected from time 
 to time was at least inconsistent, if not capricious, and in 
 striking contrast to their own unchangeableness. 
 
 Let us now turn to the principal points actually ruled : 
 the procession, and the primacy. On the procession councils, 
 it must be admitted, had varied in their language to some 
 extent. The fourth Lateran under Innocent III. had said : 
 ' The Father is of none : the Son of the Father alone : the 
 Holy Ghost of both equally : without beginning, as without 
 end. The Father begetting, the Son begotten, the Holy 
 Spirit proceeding : consubstantial and coequal.' "'* Inno- 
 cent, it will be observed, keeps strictly to the measured 
 statements of the Athanasian creed. Not so Gregory IX. 
 in the formulary submitted to the synod of Nymphsum by 
 his envoys. ' The Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son imme- 
 diately : from the Father mediately through the Son.' "'' 
 Was it not possible to believe what Innocent had laid down, 
 without accepting the exact interpretation put upon it by 
 his successor ? By the creed of Clement,'*"" thirty years 
 later, the Greeks were to have been committed to a third 
 profession, simpler even than that of the Lateran canon. 
 ' We believe in the Holy Ghost, very, perfect, and true God : 
 proceeding from the Father and the Son : coequal and consub- 
 stantial, co-omnipotent and coeternal in all things with the 
 Father and the Son. But it is not said ' proceeding from,' 
 or 'of both equally.' Lyons was not inclined to be more 
 exacting on that point. In the canon which passed there by 
 
 "»' Above, p. 373. "" Above, p. 242 et seq. 
 
 "" Above, p. 220. '"'' Above, p. 261 et seq. 
 
470 COUNCILS DUHING THE SCHISM. 
 
 ■way of supplement to the creed of Clement, only those are 
 <;ondemned who deny that He proceeds eternally from both, 
 or assert that He .proceeds from them as from two prin- 
 ciples.^'*'" Thus, till the council of Florence met^ the Latins 
 themselves had not settled definitively whether procession 
 from the Father through the Son, and procession from both 
 equally, and procession from both eternally, meant the same 
 thing; and this not on account of the Greeks at all, but 
 simply because the subject had been under discussion amongst 
 themselves till then, and even at Florence the exact view put 
 forward by Gregory IX. was never examined. So that, in 
 fact, the Florentine definition legislated so far for themselves 
 as well as the Greeks ; and the true difference between the 
 rulings of Lyons and Florence was, that one emanated from 
 the Franciscan school, the other from the Dominican ; one 
 pronounced for the doctrine of Charlemagne, pure and simple, 
 promulgating it in his very words literally ,'°°^ by the pen of 
 S. Bonaventure ; the other pronounced for another view as 
 well, from which he shrank. ^^°' 
 
 In other words, procession from the Son having been de- 
 clared orthodox, and procession through the Son akin to 
 heterodox in the Caroline books submitted to the council of 
 Frankfort, A.D. 794, the Greeks were told 500 years after- 
 wards that they Tnust accept the one, and 650 years after- 
 wards that they might hold the other. So that both churches 
 literally went their own way, and finished at the same point. 
 The east after maintaining in conjunction with the west the 
 doctrine of the single procession for above seven centuries, . 
 came suddenly by intuition in the eighth century to tolerate 
 the doctrine of procession through the Son : the west after 
 maintaining against the east the doctrine of the double pro- 
 cession for above seven centuries, came slowly by argument 
 in the fifteenth century to tolerate the doctrine of proces- 
 sion through the Son likewise ; westerns were brought by the 
 council of Florence to the same middle term that the east 
 had pronounced for accepting in the second Nicene council, 
 side by side with the west. One more step, and they might 
 have agreed thoroughly. Truth seems to require that both 
 forms of the creed should be retained equally, and interpreted 
 
 ""' Above, p. 269. admits the diflferenee between the two 
 
 1502 Aijove, p. 408-11. rulings in his closing speech.— Colet. 
 
 '*°^ Ibid. Cardinal Julian frankly torn, xviii. p. 1176. 
 
KULINGS OF LYONS AND FLORENCE COMPAEED. 471 
 
 in strict harmony with each other by means of the explana- 
 tion which has been pronounced applicable to both forms. 
 Procession through the Son has been pronounced equivalent 
 to procession from the Father alone in one sense, and to 
 procession from the Son as weU as the Father in another ; so 
 the east explained their form of the creed by it in the eighth, 
 the west theirs in the fifteenth century. Neither form, 
 therefore, can be deemed at variance or incompatible with 
 the other on their own showing, and both forms together 
 enunciate the whole truth. Considerations of time and of 
 eternity, doubtless, weighed with the west in pressing for 
 the exclusive adoption of the Latin form. Time is the mea- 
 sure which has been given us of our own duration, and that 
 of our fellow-creatures, upon earth. Days, weeks, months, 
 and yefirs, follow upon the different motions of the planet in 
 which we live. One thing is said to happen before or after 
 another, according to the date assigned to it in those revo- 
 lutions. Eternity diifers from time, in our sense of the word, 
 as much as Grod from man. Nevertheless some likeness 
 between God and man we are told there is. Why not, 
 therefore, between time and eternity to the same extent : 
 eternity being only God's time not man's? Or, because 
 eternity has neither beginning nor end, should it be supposed 
 a chaos, without order or precedence, lest it should be thought 
 time ? These considerations, apparently, were not taken into 
 sufficient account by our Latin forefathers, when they con- 
 tended for the ' Filioque ' clause, to the abandonment of the 
 older form of the creed. So far as the Father is the origin 
 and source both of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, so far the 
 Holy Ghost must be held to proceed from Him alone, and 
 cannot in the same sense be said to proceed from the Son as 
 well, though His eternal procession from the Son in a differ- 
 ent sense is not thereby denied. One relation is not to be 
 confused with another, because both are eternal. In their 
 zeal to establish one truth, it must be confessed, our fore- 
 fathers endangered another. Surely they might have man- 
 aged to distinguish the eternal procession of the Holy Ghost 
 from the Son, and His temporal mission by the Son, without 
 appearing to lose sight of the derivation of both from the 
 Father ! To alter the words of our Lord so hap-hazardly 
 in which six oecumenical councils of the church, one after 
 another, had professed their faith so religiously, was not the 
 
472 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 surest way, one would have thought, of promoting His 
 honor. Who can say how much of the socinianism and 
 unitarianism, long since prevalent in most parts of the west, 
 but nowhere to be found in any part of the east, may be 
 traced back to their impetuous adoption of the interpolated, 
 instead of the original, form of the creed ? Is not adop- 
 tionism, in reality, but another name for unitarianism ? and 
 was not adoptionism originally the conceit of an archbishop of 
 Toledo, of the very city in which the interpolated form of 
 the creed had been first used ? So that if it may be affirmed 
 to have counteracted arianism in one sense, it cannot be 
 denied in another to have bred adoptionism, the very heresy 
 which Charlemagne in his dictatorial wisdom thought fit to 
 send it back into Spain to put down ! 
 
 But Eeccared in the first instance seems to have employed 
 it inadvertently, believing it to be part of the genuine creed 
 of the east ; Charlemagne to have ruled autocratically that it 
 should be there, whether it were there or not. Rome, in the 
 person of Leo III., admitted the dogma, but forbade that it 
 should be added to the creed. If every portion of the church 
 assumed to insert a clause in the creed for every local heresy 
 that arose, who could say where the creed would end ? But 
 have it the west would, in spite of the pope. The last pope 
 who attempted to stem the tide was handed down con- 
 temptuously to posterity as Pope Joan, in plain English an 
 old woman, and ' became a fable.' Gradually Eome gave 
 way, yet so gradually that nobody should be able to say 
 when or how. Afterwards, what had been done in the teeth 
 of the pope was said to have been done by his authority. 
 Thus it became at length irretrievably the shibboleth of the 
 Latin party. Nobody cared to enquire when or how it got 
 there too minutely ; but everybody discoursed on the duty of 
 maintaining it there at all hazards, as part of the catholic 
 faith. At the second council of Lyons the Greeks were 
 required to deduce from it that one of the prerogatives of 
 the pope was to define doctrine, when, in fact, if it proved 
 anything, it proved he could be forced to assent to what had 
 been added to the creed against his will. At Florence they 
 were called upon to pronounce that it had been added to the 
 creed with good reason, when the bare fact seems to have 
 been that it originated unawares in Spain from a faulty MS., 
 and therefore from ignorance. It is high time, surely, that 
 
RULINGS OF LYONS AND FLORENCE COMPARED. 473 
 
 these facts, unless it can be shown that they have been mis- 
 stated, should be looked in the face ! 
 
 Turning to the primacy from the procession, are we able 
 to demonstrate the rulings of councils to have been more 
 consistent? What was claimed for the pope by his envoys in 
 the Constantinopolitan synod of a.d. 1168, amounted to no 
 more really than the full acknowledgment by the Greeks of 
 those prerogatives which it is certain from authentic history 
 that he ppssessed and exercised, as of undoubted right, before 
 the schism. ''"^ What was claimed for him at the fourth 
 Lateran council has been considered separately, and may be 
 put on one side, now, as it formed part and parcel of the 
 conquest of the Greek metropolis by the Latins.'^"' What 
 was proposed by John Vataces, and accepted by Innocent IV., 
 was in some measure dictated on either side by the same 
 influences, though it was qualified by some striking limita- 
 tions, and involved some reciprocal concessions. ' Constan- 
 tinople was to be restored to John Vataces, the eastern 
 patriarchates in each case to the Greek patriarchs, and the 
 Latin patriarchs removed. Obedience was to be paid to any 
 sentences promulgated by the pope, provided they were not 
 adverse to the canons. His decisions on doctrine were to be 
 received and followed, but they miist contain nothing con- 
 trary to the ordinances of the Gospel, as well as the canons. 
 His decrees on all other subjects were to be accepted by all, 
 when not opposed to the decrees of the holy councils' — of 
 councils, that is, already confirmed by the holy see. Inno- 
 cent having excepted to the limitations attached to his deci- 
 sions on doctrine, as he was given to understand frankly, that 
 they referred to the disputed clause in the creed, it was cove- 
 nanted by him expressly — and his successor is constrained to 
 vouch for the fact — that the creed should remain unaltered, 
 unless the interpolated clause passed, as he hoped it would, 
 in the proposed council.""^ All these limitations were scat- 
 tered to the winds in the creed of Clement IV., which 
 Michael was worked upon to accept through fear of Charles 
 of Anjou, and professed at the second council of Lyons 
 through his ambassadors. There the holy see is represented 
 as absolutely free to do what it will. ' When any questions 
 are raised on doctrine, it ought to define them. All persons 
 
 iM< Above, p. 466. "" Above, p. 206-8. "»= Above, p. 250-1. 
 
474 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 ia matters cognisable by the church ' — and what were not? — 
 ' are free to appeal to it. To it all churches are subject, and 
 their prelates owe reverence and obedience. It is made sole 
 judge how far it should admit other churches, as for instance 
 patriarchal, into partnership of its cares and responsibi- 
 lities.' i^»7 
 
 However, though proposed without limitations, it was dis- 
 tinctly stated to have been accepted only with limitations by 
 Michael, in the salvo with which his letter ends, interpreted 
 by Benedict XIV. as a condition, though couched in form as 
 a request, that neither the creed nor the Greek rite should 
 undergo the least change from what they had been before the 
 schism ; '*"* and by the Grreek prelates in their letter, where 
 they expressly limit their submission to the acknowledgment 
 of those prerogatives which their predecessors, anterior to 
 the schism, had been in the habit of attributing to the holy 
 see. As Grregory pronounced the union accomplished imme- 
 diately after the reading of these letters, it stands to reason 
 that he must have accepted their coiLstruction of the creed of 
 his predecessor, though Clement himself had insisted upon 
 Michael swearing to it without reserve as it stood. Hence, 
 when we come to contrast Florence with Lyons in the last 
 place, we must by no means forget the reserve — the emphatic 
 reserve— under which alone Michael and his followers ever 
 pledged themselves to the articles embodied in the creed of 
 Clement, on which they were readmitted into communion 
 by Grregory ; for in it is contained the true key to the milder 
 statements of the Florentine definition, and of the intention 
 of the Glreeks in assenting and subscribing to them. Where 
 there have been two parties to a covenant, it would be 
 absurd to contend that it could be interpreted by reference 
 solely to the sentiments of one. Besides, in this instance, 
 the Latins had shifted their ground so often, and were so 
 notoriously divided amongst themselves on the power of the 
 pope when the council of Florence met — witness the councils 
 of Constance and Basle : ' In my time the whole church 
 changed sides,' as a member of the latter of them said,'*"^ 
 
 ■™' Above, p. 262 et seq. "™ ' Meo tempore tota mutabat ec- 
 
 >«« Above, p. 269. Comp. Bmed. clesia.'— jEn. Silv. Hist, de Eufop. 
 
 XIV. BuUax, torn. iii. p. ii. n. 47, § 9 e. 58. He said this as cardinal. Then 
 
 et seq. He says that the answer of for Opposite views, Nicholas, cardinal 
 
 Gregory has perished, but that it mist of Cusa, De Concord. Oath. lib. ii. 17 : 
 
 hare been in the affirmative. ' Manifestum est ex his universale con- 
 
RULINGS OF LYONS AND FLOKENCE COMPARED. 475 
 
 who changed still more when he became pope — that there 
 would be great diflSculty in ascertaining the real sentiments 
 of the Latin church at that date for certain; whereas the 
 Grreeks adhered consistently to their point all along, council 
 after council. Every power of which the pope was regularly 
 possessed over the east, up to the time of Nicholas I. inclu- 
 sive, they professed themselves on every occasion ready to 
 submit to loyally, provided that no more was claimed. As 
 Photius and Ignatius had both appealed to Kome, and legates 
 had been sent from Rome to try their cause on the spot, so 
 they professed themselves willing to appeal once more, under 
 the same restrictions that existed then. In councils the 
 pope would always have the first place assigned to him, as 
 his due ; in liturgies he would be commemorated according 
 to custom as before ; no new canons would be passed without 
 his consent. What they would never listen to for a moment 
 was, that any power should be supposed to be vested in him 
 of setting aside the canons, of acting in opposition to them in 
 his own person, or of abrogating, whenever he thought fit, 
 what had been sanctioned by immemorial usage. What had 
 passed in a council and been ratified by the pope, could not 
 afterwards, according to their principles, be dispensed from 
 or set aside, but by the joint action of the pope and another 
 council. 
 
 Taking these principles with us to Florence, let us enquire 
 more particularly what happened there when the power of 
 the pope was discussed. If Dorotheus of Mitylene was as 
 much mixed up with it as he is said to have been, and the 
 Greek acts of the council were really written by him, we 
 must have the best of testimony for what passed. 
 
 Thursday, June IS,'"" the Greek bishops assembled before 
 the pope, to hear one of his theologians descant on his pre- 
 rogatives. This was the second speech '*" which they had 
 heard on the subject from De Monte Nigro, therefore they 
 cannot be supposed to have been convinced by the first, and 
 
 cilium simplioitfer supra papam esse, papalis a nuUo alio quam a Deo re- 
 
 nec amplius de hoc opus est exempla stringi possit, nee ampliari.' And iii. 
 
 producere, quim habeamus varia de- 51 : ' Qu6d Eomanus pontifex legibns 
 
 erota sacri Basiliensis roneilii, et etiam et statutis universalium coneiliorum 
 
 Constantiensis, quomodo papa dicatur nee ligatur, nee necessari6 subjicitur.' 
 subesse conciliis." On the other hand, '^"' Colet. vol. xriii. p. 513, 514. 
 Turreeremata, cardinal of S. Sixtus, "" Ibid. p. 510. 
 Sum. de Eccl. lib. ii. 44 : ' Quod potostas 
 
476 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 for the same reason they cannot be supposed to have assented 
 entirely to the view taken of it in a paper placed in their 
 hands by the pope soon afterwards.'"^ When the second 
 speech was concluded, the Greeks retired, and after dinner 
 went and reported all that had passed to the emperor, as he 
 had not gone with them. By his order books were brought 
 in, and the privileges of all the churches enquired into ; this 
 took them all that day, and Friday as well. On Saturday 
 they met again before the emperor, but after much decision 
 could come to no conclusion. At length, early on Sunday, 
 they wrote down their acquiescence in the prerogatives that 
 had been claimed for the pope, with two exceptions : 1. That 
 he should not hold a general council without the emperor 
 and patriarchs, should they be for coming to it ; and should 
 they be invited and decline coming, that it should be broken 
 off; 2. That in case of appeals, the patriarchs should not have 
 to go to Kome themselves, but that the pope should send 
 persons to conduct the enquiry on the spot. 
 
 This decision they forwarded to the pope that same even- 
 ing by the emperor. He was much pleased to hear it, but 
 replied that he would confer with his synod and send his 
 answer on the Monday following, or June 22. On that day 
 two cardinals came from him to the emperor, saying that he 
 wished for all the prerogatives of his church in particular, 
 that appeals should be made to him, and that he should 
 govern and superintend the whole church of Christ as a 
 shepherd his flock. Further, that he claimed power and 
 authority to hold a general council, whenever it might be 
 necessary, and that all the patriarchs should submit to his 
 will. On this '^'* the emperor in despair only replied that 
 they must allow the Grreeks to depart ; and nothing more was 
 said or done till Thursday, June 25. Then the metropoli- 
 tans of Eussia, Nicsea, and Mitylene, appealed to the em- 
 peror and pope simultaneously, who in consequence conferred 
 together in private, and the result was that the Greeks 
 assembled in the palace of the pope, and four Greeks and four 
 Latins met and discussed the question in one room, while the 
 rest sat with the emperor several hours in another, over 
 
 "" Ibid.; but the Latin Acts assert ported to have found them all reason- 
 it to have been given before, p. 1152. able on the whole, p. 512. 
 It contained four other points besides '"^ Ibid. pp. 515, 516. 
 the primacy, and the Greeks are re- 
 
PAPAL PREKOQATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 477 
 
 comfits and wine supplied by the pope; still nothing was 
 done. On their return to the emperor's house, they took 
 further counsel, and at length wrote down by common con- 
 sent : ' On the power '^" of the pope, we confess him to be 
 chief pontiff and steward, vicegerent and vicar of Christ, 
 shepherd and teacher of all Christians, directing and govern- 
 ing the church of God, without prejudice to the rights and 
 privileges of the eastern patriarchs ; Constantinople ranking 
 next after him, then Alexandria, then Antioch, and then 
 Jerusalem.' This was on Friday evening, and they said they 
 would assent to no more. 
 
 The next da^the Greeks all went in solemn ceremony to 
 the church of S. Maria Novella, to visit the tomb of their 
 patriarch and make their second novena; after which the 
 metropolitans of Eussia and Mitylene proceeded to the pope 
 to inform him how matters stood, reminded him that the 
 feast of SS. Peter and Paul was at hand, and suggested that 
 if anything was to be done, it should be done then, as they 
 were anxious to be gone.'°'° On Saturday evening the 
 bishops of Crete, Ehodes, and Coron — we have heard some- 
 what of the two last previously — came to them in the name 
 of the pope, and said the union was agreed on, and should 
 be put into shape the next day. 
 
 Sunday, June 28, some of the Latins came accordingly, 
 and taking some of the Greeks with them, went to the 
 church of S. Francis, where they wrote the decree for union. 
 When it was shown to the emperor, he objected to it on two 
 grounds. First he drew a line through its preamble, as run- 
 ning in the name of Eugenius only : ' let the words,' he said, 
 • " with the consent of the emperor and patriarch of Constan- 
 tinople and the other patriarchs " be added.' Next he ob- 
 served it was said of the prerogatives of the pope, ' that he 
 should have them as holy Scripture and the sayings of the 
 saints define them.' He objected to the last phrase, 'for 
 expressions of honor occurring in the letter of a saint could 
 not constitute prerogatives.' The pope was vexed when he 
 heard this, and wondered how the emperor should have con- 
 descended to such paltry statements. However, despatching 
 some cardinals to him once more, he conceded that the 
 words ' with the consent of his majesty the emperor and of 
 
 IS" 'Apxvs. It may mean ' first place,' or it may mean ' office ' or ' magistracy.' 
 "" Ibid. pp. 518, 519. • 
 
478 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 the patriarchs ' might be added; but on the second point he 
 stood out. ' How,' said he, ' can we describe his power 
 better than by what the saints write ? ' But the emperor 
 insisted on some further addition, and proposed that it should 
 run, ' according to the tenor of the canons, and not according 
 to the sayings of the saints.' To this the cardinals in turn de- 
 murred. In the evening the emperor assembled his bishops 
 and told them the result.'^'^ While he was speaking, a num- 
 ber of cardinals, archbishops, and theologians on the Latin side 
 came in, and cardinal Julian delivered a shoirt speech, observ- 
 ing that 'his holiness had allowed one of their objections, and 
 modified the preamble accordingly. There was no equivocal 
 meaning,' he assured them, ' in the phrase, " sayings of the 
 saints ; " that, in fact, the creed had been drawn up according 
 to what the saints had said, the liturgy, and whatever was 
 contained in the canons. Hence he begged them not to 
 defer their agreement any longer.' The emperor requested 
 time to consider. On the departure of the Latins the 
 Greeks wrotp 'that the pope should have his prerogatives 
 according to the canons, and the sayings of the saints, holy 
 Scripture, and the acts of councils.' This they gave to the 
 Latins, who said they would report it to the pope, and bring 
 back his answer the next morning. This was on Tuesday. 
 On Wednesday the cardinals came and told the emperor that 
 the pope had exhibited two forms and bade them select one. 
 They requested it might be read and examined. When 
 read, it was accepted ; and the emperor assented that six on 
 each side should be chosen to copy it out on diptychs in 
 Greek and Latin. The only further dispute was whether the 
 word ' all ' should or should not stand in the clause where it 
 is said ' the privileges and rights of the four patriarchs being 
 preserved.' This having been conceded eventually, Sunday 
 passed ; and on Monday, July 6, the decree was read out, as 
 we have seen, publicly, when it appeared how the disputed 
 clause had been finally settled. The whole question had 
 taken them twenty days to resolve. Before considering what 
 was expressed in it, let us advert more particularly to what 
 was expunged from it. The phrase « sayings of the saints,' 
 to which the Latins had clung so pertinaciously, was given 
 up at last. Thank Heaven, it was ! Why so ? Fortunately 
 
 "'• Ibid. pp. 51«, 520. 
 
PAPAL PREROGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 479 
 
 it is a case where the truthfulness of the Greek acts of the 
 council is not at stake, for they have passed it over in 
 silence. It is all explained in the Latin acts. Cardinal 
 .Julian, as we have just seen, made the last stand in favour ^ 
 of the phrase, when he assured the Greeks that ' there was 
 no equivocal meaning in it ' — a remark which the reader 
 must have thought at the time required some explanation — 
 ' that, in fact, the creed, the liturgy, and whatever was con- 
 tained in the canons, had all been drawn up according to 
 what the saints had said.' This, however, the Greeks had 
 never disputed. What they had doubted about, as we learnt 
 from Syropulus gome time back, was whether the authori- 
 ties alleged by the. Latins were genuine ; but despairing 
 of being able to prove them otherwise, they had kept 
 their objection to themselves, and said nothing."'"' Still 
 it weighed with them, and incidentally came out after- 
 wards in another form. John, in his first speech to 
 them on the papal prerogatives,'*'* had plied them pro- 
 fusely with arguments drawn from the decretal epistles of 
 the popes, some spurious and some genuine. The genuine 
 were letters of Adrian I., Agatho, and S. Leo the Great, 
 of which the Greeks were not ignorant ; the spurious were 
 letters of S. Anacletus, Felix, and Julius, of which they had 
 never before heard. Unable to disprove their authenticity, 
 they tried demurring to their authority ; and this was the 
 objection made to them by Bessarion at the close of his 
 speech. When John next addressed them on the same sub- 
 ject, he replied to Bessarion at some length ; '^'^ nor can we 
 doubt for a moment, on reading his answer, that he intended 
 that what he said should apply with peculiar force to those 
 worthless productions now known as the pseudo- decretals. 
 ' Habemus confitentem reum,' literally, on the showing of 
 his own side. ' I say, then, that those decretal epistles, as 
 they were synodical every one of them, have no less autho- 
 rity than the canons themselves ; in fact, to me they seem to 
 have greater, because, as your right reverence knows, in all 
 oecumenical councils in which doctrine is defined, before 
 promulgating any definitions, it is customary to produce 
 testimonies and letters of the saints, out of which the fathers 
 of the councils extracted their definitions and canons, pre- 
 
 "" a. 3. '"' Colet. ibid. p. 1162-7. "" IbiA.-p. 1163 et seq. 
 
4sO COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 cisely because what they defined was drawn from them.' His 
 instances are (1) the letter of S. Cyril to Nestorius, with the 
 twelve anathemas, one of the best known on both sides ; (2) a 
 letter of Julius to the easterns ; and (3) a letter of Felix— both 
 spurious ; of which he says, ' being synodical letters, therefore, 
 they are of greater authority than the canons which are passed 
 in synods, because the Holy Spirit worlcs in the Roman church 
 as in other councils.' John must have been ignorant of the 
 share due to the father of lies in their composition when he 
 said this : at the same time the order in which his instances 
 occur is singular. His next instances are two genuine 
 epistles of S. Martin and Agatho with which the Greeks 
 were familiar ; but after them he goes back to the spurious 
 decretals of SS. Clement and Anacletus, and brings his 
 speech to a climax in the last. His alternate use of spurious 
 and genuine documents might seem too systematic to be the 
 effect of accident, but for his solemn claim, in behalf of 
 those since proved to be spurious, of the co-operation of the 
 Holy Ghost. He was probably then as convinced of their 
 genuineness as we are now of their mendacity. ■ 
 
 So that these were 'the sayings of the saints' for which 
 the Latins fought so obstinately that they should form part 
 of the clause defining the primacy : an ill-sorted collection of 
 indeterminate testimonies to which the Latins had been wont 
 to refer, false and genuine; the genuine making nothing 
 whatever for their position against the Greeks, unless side by 
 side luith the false. The decretum was full of them, cited 
 by their traditionary names, and confessed. The decretals, 
 starting from conclusions that had been drawn from them, 
 piled story upon story, till the foundations had been lost 
 sight of and forgotten in the superstructure. Hence the 
 zeal of Benedict XII. and Clement VI. to get them received 
 in Armenia, describing them in the very terms in which they 
 were now described to the Greeks. 'An excellent thing it 
 would be,' said Benedict ''2'* to the catholicos, ' if your coun- 
 cil would decree that the books of the decretum and decre- 
 tals, together with other sayings of the holy fathers, and 
 ordinances of the canons held and observed by the church 
 of Kome, should be received by the Armenian bishops and 
 clergy, for their perfect instruction in faith and manners, 
 
 '"» Eaynald. a.d. 1341, n. 47. 
 
PAPAL PBEROGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 481 
 
 and in the salutary observances of the Roman church.' 
 Those words, ' sayings of the saints,' had the same emphasis 
 attached to them then as now, and Eugenius showed as 
 much eagerness as Benedict to bind the east to their ac- 
 ceptance. 
 
 Why the Latins should have assented tacitly to their with- 
 drawal at last, it would be difficult to conjecture, unless for 
 one of two reasons : first, from the knowledge that the Grreeks 
 suspected them ; or, second, from suspicions entertained by 
 some of themselves of their untrustworthiness in some cases. 
 The reader may be disposed in any case to regard it with me 
 as a providential interposition, by which the church was 
 saved, while defining doctrine, from employing any language 
 calculated to give countenance to so gross a fiction as the 
 pseudo-decretals. For this, humanly speaking, we have cer- 
 tainly to thank the Greeks, and it is only due to them to 
 say that they protested to the last against the unhistoric 
 account which is given earlier of the addition to the creed. 
 Here, luckily, they were more successful. Now for another 
 point which concerns us as Englishmen. It will have been 
 observed that throughout the various overtures that passed to 
 and fro on the subject, as they have been given above from 
 the Grreek acts, the word ' primacy ' never occurs once. The 
 Grreeks spoke of his 'prerogatives' (w/aovo/ita), of his ' power' 
 {dpxfjs), of him as ' chief pontiff ' (axpov apj^Lspsa), and so 
 forth ; and in stipulating for the precedence of the sees, 
 allowed him by implication the first place ; still, for all that, 
 they studiously abstained from ever using the word ' primacy ' 
 (irptoTsiov), and the pope, unless misreported, was as re- 
 served in his replies. Equally reserved too, curiously enough, 
 is the Grreek version of the official copy of the decree sent to 
 England, as I observed before : the words ' possessed of the 
 primacy over the whole world' are not only wanting, but so 
 wanting, that they cannot well have been omitted by a mere 
 slip of the pen.'^^' The Latin version has them, the Greek 
 
 "21 The Latin version runs, ' Item toS fiaKoplov Uerpov, &c. The Italic- 
 
 definimus sanctam apostolicam sedem, ised words in the Latin are the words 
 
 et Eomanum pontifioem in universum in question. AhoTe, p. 362. I am 
 
 orbem tenere priviatiim, et .ipsvmponti- ready to admit their being 1, in the 
 
 Jicem Eomanum suecessorem esse beati version given in the Latin Acts ; 2, 
 
 Petri,' &c. The Greek in ipl^onfv that by Blondus ; 3, that by S. Anto- 
 
 tJji' 07^01' iiroirTo\iKjii' KoBeipav Kal ninus; and 4, even in a Greek ver- 
 
 rhv 'PuiiouKbi' apx'fp^a SiaSox"'' ^^i"" sion, in the treatise ascribed to George 
 
 I I 
 
482 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 has thetn not, in the authentic copy made for England, to 
 which the seals of the pope and emperor were to be afiBxed, 
 and attested by the signature of Blondus, the papal secretary. 
 The question is, was Blondus to blame for having put his 
 name to a document of that importance which he had not 
 verified ; or were the works, ' possessed of a primacy over 
 the whole world,' fraudulently introduced into the Latin, or 
 fraudulently omitted from the Grreek version of those copies 
 of the decree that were made for official purposes before 
 the coimcil separated ? As there are several official copies ^^^*: 
 supposed to be known of, besides the original which must 
 exist somewhere, it would be well for those in authority, who 
 can command access to them, to have this uncertainty cleared 
 up speedily ; for as matters stand now it would be impossible 
 to regard the Florentine definition as received in England 
 with any pleasant feelings. Either it is a monument of the 
 most flagrant dishonesty somewhere, or else it is a monument 
 of unpardonable negligence on his part, whoever was re- 
 sponsible for sending it over to us in that state. Henry VI., 
 founder of Eton though he was, could never have mastered 
 its contents in both versions, when he wxote'*^' with all the 
 enthusiasm of a boy not quite out of his teens, and of a 
 saint, to congratulate Eugenius^ on the splendid results of 
 which its arrival in England professed to be the announce- 
 ment. Till this question has been set at rest by faithful 
 collation of both versions of the decree, Grreek and Latin, 
 as they are commonly printed in the collections of councils, 
 either with the original, if it can be found, or with all the 
 official copies known of, it will be difficult for candid en- 
 quirers everywhere to disabuse themselves of the suspicion of 
 foul play both in this case, and that of the Latin rendering of 
 
 Seholarius, on which see below; and the palace of thegrand-dnke Horence. 
 
 5, in a contemporary life of Eugenius, v. Union Ileview,Ma,Te}i 1866, p. 197-9. 
 m Balm. Misedl. -vol. i. p. 331, ed. "s^s Copies of his two letters are pre- 
 
 Mansi. served at Lambeth, No. ccxi. 98-9; 
 
 "22 1. One in the Colbertine coUec- He speaks as he had been taught, of 
 
 tion originally possessed by the Dukes God, ' having taken pity of our holy 
 
 of Burgundy. 2. Another in the mother and His spouse the church in 
 
 'arehivium' of S. Peter's, Eome. 3. Aer dmsiona, brought about by the sins 
 
 Another in the Franciscan convent at of men in . so many past ages,' and 
 
 ■Piesole near Florence included in the of 'the old schism between the eastern 
 
 decree for the Jacobites. 4. A collated and western church,' that 'has found' 
 
 copy of the last in the fort of S. Angelo, in Eugenius ' its successful physician.' 
 Borne. 5. Another in the chapel of 
 
PAPAL PREROGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 483 
 
 the celebrated clause at the end of the paragraph about the 
 pope : particularly where koI . . , koI in Greek is translated by 
 'etiam . . . et' in Latin. In both cases it is against the 
 truthfulness of the Latin version, be it observed, that ap- 
 pearances are ; the Greek is perfectly straightforward, and 
 consistent with what we should have expected. No scholar 
 who wished to make the Oreek and Latin versions of the 
 decree mean the same thing, would think of employing 
 ' etiam . . . et ' as the proper equivalent for koX . . kuI or vice 
 versS, ; '*'* but it would certainly be one way of breathing into 
 the Latin a different sense from what was implied in the 
 Greek for any parson so minded so to employ them. Bossuet 
 saw this, and instinctively shrank from it, protesting that the 
 notion of any such overt disingenuousness on the part of the 
 Latins was intolerable. ' What ! must we say that the Greeks 
 were cheated? Were they by a treacherous interpretation 
 seduced from the meaning which naturally belongs to those 
 words in Greek ? Far be this from the integrity and majesty 
 of the Latin church.' Those who had preceded Bossuet in 
 the enquiry were much less hampered than he was. They 
 could charge the inaccuracy, as De Marca changed it in fact, 
 upon Bartholomew Abraham, the first translator into Latin 
 of the Greek acts of the council. But Bossuet having ascer- 
 tained that ' etiam ' was likewise the reading of ' the au- 
 thentic copy ' of the decree in the Colbertine collection, his 
 only way of getting out of the difficulty that ' the Greeks 
 were cheated,' was to demand that the text shouldj^be con- 
 strued in any case ' as the Greek words require.' But this 
 Orsi "*''* — bent on refuting Gallicanism at all risks, and ap- 
 parently no less bent on proclaiming his entire ignorance of 
 Greek scholarship, by disgracing his pages with one of the 
 
 '"* That is, supposing anyone to he rendered 'etiam' in good Greek, be- 
 
 asked to translate the Latin as it now cause, forsooth, in such phrases as 
 
 stands into Greek. oli ii6vov . . . aXAi koI . . . Kai : and 
 
 "2s ])g Eom. Pont. Auct. lib. vi. KoSdvep ko(, or Sintff xai, followed by 
 
 0. 11, ait. unie. ' Quse mihi per- no itai at aJl, have been translated so 
 
 humanitir communieavit egregius ju- and so ! As if anybody doubted that 
 
 venis F. Thomas Lusinianus .... ' etiam ' was the proper rendering for 
 
 probfe, et supra retatem Latinis Graee- Kal.in some combinations. Orsi's own 
 
 isque Uteris . . . exeultus.' With theory that the 'Greek was translated 
 
 the first part of his criticisms we are from, the Latin would not, even if 
 
 not concerned : in the second he at- it could be proved, bring the two 
 
 tempts to show that of the double ml versions into harmony a bit more. 
 here, the former is or may be naturally 
 
 112 
 
484 COUNCILS DUEING THE SCHISM. 
 
 silliest specimens of criticism by a youthful acquaintance of 
 his ever introduced into a serious work — would by no means 
 concede ; though Launoy, De ' Marca, Bossuet, Alexander 
 Natalis, and Lewis Maimbourg the Jesuit — no mean authori- 
 ties under any circumstances, crushing authorities compared 
 with his vain young friend — had expressed themselves un- 
 hesitatingly to the effect that ' etiam ' was a wrong render- 
 ing. And this part of the question I cannot hesitate to con- 
 sider settled after the answers so kindly forwarded to me 
 some months since by two of our highest living authorities, 
 the Dean of Christ Church Oxford, and the Master of Trinity 
 Cambridge, then Greek professor, according to whom ' both 
 . . . and,' or ' not only . . . but,' would be the correct 
 equivalents in English for xai . . . kal in Grreek. ' I should 
 translate ' Quemadmodum non soltim in gestis conciliorum 
 verum etiam in sacris canonibus statuitur,'' or 'consti- 
 tuitur,' says Dean Liddell — confirming umconsciously the 
 rendering which approved itself to De Marca most — ' as is 
 now determined not only in the acts of the cecumenical 
 councils, but also in the canons.''*^® Orsi clung to the fact 
 as it was reported to him — for though most of the MSS. 
 in question were lying under his nose he never verified it 
 apparently — that the reading of all the ofiScial copies of the de- 
 cree then discoverable was ' etiam ' not ' et ' ; and be would not 
 stoop to enquire whether it had found its way there originally 
 by fair or foul means. So it is likewise in the official copy 
 sent to England, as I can testify from personal inspection ; 
 at the same time personal inspection has showed me that one 
 of the official copies at least is worthless from culpable 
 negligence or downright dishonesty^I cannot say which. 
 Again, the decree is given at length by two contemporary 
 historians, hard to choose between as authorities, and of these 
 the version of the archbishop of Florence is once more- 
 ' etiam ; ' that of Blondus, the papal secretary, who should 
 have known best, is ' et.' How much is held to be involved in 
 the difference between ' etiam ' and ' et ' was explained by Bos- 
 suet.'*^' ' The defenders of unlimited prerogative assert that 
 the concluding words on that subject in the Florentine decree 
 were not placed there to restrain the power of the pope within 
 just limits, but only to show that the plenary power of tend- 
 
 "^* Both answers are given at length pp. 191, 192. 
 in the Union Seview for March 1866, >"' Oef. Decl. Cler. Gall. vi. 2. 
 
PAPAL PREEOGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 485 
 
 ing, governing, and so forth, had been likewise recognised by 
 general councils and in the holy canons.' A person, indeed, 
 must be supremely impudent, or supremely ignorant, to 
 contend that the Latins would have opposed, or the Greeks 
 contended for, the insertion of these words in the decree, 
 with so much obstinacy on both sides, had the purpose to be 
 served by their insertion been to show this ; as diametrically 
 opposed to the principles maintained by the Greeks all along, 
 as it is utterly false in fact: for where are the genuine 
 canons, or genuine acts of any council acknowledged as 
 general by the whole church in which it is set forth ? On the 
 other side, hear De Marca:'"* 'The following is the sense 
 of the passage as it stands in the Greek : that the authority of 
 the pope is supreme, and conferred on him by Christ ; but to 
 what extent, and in what way it should be exercised to 
 maintain the communion of the church must be gathered 
 from precedent, and that not merely from the canons, but 
 from the acts of the oecumenical councils. And the discharge 
 of this authority must be so regulated as to leave the 
 privileges of the patriarchs untouched.' This is, unquestion- 
 ably, much nearer its historical as well as its grammatical 
 meaning. But there is still another interpretation of it : the 
 'via media' suggested by Mansi, whose edition of the 
 councils certainly should point to him as a sound exponent 
 both of their phraseology and of the intention in each case 
 which dictated it. His words are: 'What offended the 
 G-reeks was the inclination to measure the power of the pope 
 by what the saints had said ; for they pleaded that it was 
 not to be estimated by what certain saints had written in 
 their epistles. In order, therefore, that all difficulty might 
 be removed, it was said that from no mere honorary titles, 
 but from what is actually read in oecumenical councils and 
 the holy canons, was it to be acknowledged what power 
 belongs to the pope. It was not, therefore, to explain that 
 the power of the pope was limited by the decrees of councils 
 and the holy canons — a position displeasing to Eugenius — 
 that those words were added ; nor again to declare that 
 councils and the canons attributed to the Roman pontiflFa 
 
 1588 proleff. § vi). This was on contending for, namely — that the pri- 
 second thoughts. His original expla- vileges of the pope were to he inter- 
 nation had been : ' So the Greeks preted as prescribed in the canons.' Se 
 obtained what they were so uigently Sac. et Imp. lib. iii. u. viii. § 25. 
 
486 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 power that was under no control — a position which the 
 Greeks would not have admitted— but rather to specify 
 whence it may be ascertained what the power of the pope 
 
 jg '1529 
 
 How merry might a Greek make with these theologians of 
 the Galilean, Ultramontan, and media via schools and their 
 ' variations,' to borrow a term immortalised by the most re- 
 doubtable champion of the first of them, on what concerned 
 them most. ' What ! not done disputing on the power of the 
 pope yet,' he might exclaim ironically ; ' we thought it had 
 been settled once for all when we took leave of you at our 
 last happy meeting. We Greeks are the same now that we 
 were at Florence, and before Florence at Lyons, and before 
 Lyons at the seventh general council before we separated. 
 Then we were both of us of the same mind ; now some of you 
 want actually to put a different interpretation upon the Flo- 
 rentine decree from what it certainly bore when we signed it 
 with you, seme of yoa contending that those words for which 
 we Greeks fought so resolutely were placed in the decree to 
 limit the power of the pope, others to testify that his power 
 is, according to the canons themselves, unlimited. Excuse 
 me for saying that we understood them to do neither the one 
 nor the other; certainly not the last, else why should we 
 have contended for them at all ? nor the first either, other- 
 wise we should have insisted on the use, not of the present, 
 but of the past tense.'^^" What we meant to enunciate was 
 simply this : that what the pope and a general council have 
 ruled conjointly can never more be disturbed in any way, 
 unless by a subsequent act of the same authority — neither by 
 the pope without a council, nor by a council without the pope. 
 But (Ecumenical councils with the pope at their head may go 
 on legislating for the church to the end of time without any 
 limit to their power, save that of the canonical Scriptures and 
 such of the joint rulings of their predecessors as are from 
 their subject-matter unalterable. The question on which you 
 were divided when we met at Florence — whether the pope 
 should be considered superior to a general council or a general 
 
 "" § 4. Anvmad. in Alex. Natal, being done, not what is over, one that 
 
 Dissert, x. art. vii. is still going on and never ended,' in 
 
 isjo Union Beview, p. 190. 'It is the present-imperfect sense. The 
 
 just here that the force of the Greek Latin 'continetur' is a very inadequate 
 
 present comes in, representing as it equivalent for Sia\aii$iv€Tai. 
 does a continuous action; what is 
 
PAPAL PREROGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 487 
 
 council to the pope^has never been entertained by tis ; nor 
 can we submit to the way in which you seem to have resolved 
 it practically amongst yourselves. According to our views, 
 the first place in every general council is assigned to the 
 pope, and every canon that is passed there must obtain his 
 assent. Enforce them he can afterwards of his sole authority 
 — it is his duty to do so ; but not afterwards of his sole autho- 
 rity set them aside or make new.' 
 
 Constitutional or not, clear and consistent or otherwise, 
 this was, historically, the theory which the Greeks brought 
 with them to Florence, and beyond it at Florence they never 
 went. The Latin theory was there proposed to them couched 
 in the most moderate language that it would admit of; and 
 for twenty days they discussed it, the question never once 
 being whether they should accept it unconditionally, but only 
 what restrictions they should insist on to make it agree with 
 their own. First, they were for allowing it with two funda- 
 mental reservations immediately declined by the pope."^' 
 Next, on the understanding that the rights and privileges of 
 the eastern patriarchs were not affected by it in any way.'''* 
 Finally, on the understanding that it should be interpreted 
 ' according to the canons and the sayings of the saints, holy 
 Scripture, and the acts of the councils.' '*'' Of these, the first 
 and last only, which were what the Grreeks had pressed for 
 most, were embodied in the decree, and a separate clause 
 followed in which all the rights of the patriarchs were de- 
 clared to be reserved to them over and above. Strange para- 
 dox ! that any modern historian with these facts before him 
 should have the face to contend that the Greeks, after having 
 stood out so long, and to all appearance secured what they 
 had stood out for at last, ended by admitting the Latin 
 theory pure and simple, to be not only true, but ' also con- 
 tained in the acts of the oecumenical councils and the holy 
 canons ' "'* — by ' oecumenical councils,' meaning of necessity 
 the seven first, as no more were acknowledged in common, 
 and by canons, not more than were contained in the Greek 
 code, of which the Sardican furnished the strongest specimen. 
 But, again, apart from these facts is the language of con-: 
 
 "" Above; p. 476. "»^ Above, p. 477- "" Above, p. 478. 
 
 "" ' Comme cela est aussi contenu,' &c. Eohrbacker, vol. xxi. p. 554. 
 
488 COUNCILS DUEIN& THE SCHISM. 
 
 temporaries so reserved as to leave it uncertain in what sense 
 both sides understood what they signed. 
 
 ' The council of Florence was held,' says a strong unionist 
 who has epitomised it,'^^* ' against those who were not willing 
 to bow the head and pay reverence and submission to the 
 Eoman pontifif, as in former days and olden time had been 
 attributed to him traditionally, and delineated in the holy 
 canons;' all, in short, that had been paid him before the 
 schism, as the Greek bishops expressed it in their letter to the 
 president of the second council of Lyons. 'A judge was 
 placed over the pope at the council of Florence,' says"_^^ a 
 strong anti-unionist nothing loth to accept it so far — ' subject 
 to the laws of Scripture, and of councils, as well as testi- 
 monies of the saints, he cannot of himself annul the decision 
 which has been come to formally in a general council with 
 the concurrence of the pope.' On the other hand, what say 
 the Latins ? Their marked reticence is more expressive than 
 any words could be. For years they quoted the decree 
 systematically without the clause, never dropping a hint that . 
 it existed, and getting the Grreeks who sided with them to do 
 the same, till all controversy had died away on the subject, 
 and the Greeks having abjured the union, it was open to them 
 to affix any sense to the clause that they thought proper. 
 Eugenius employed one John to lecture the Greeks on 
 his prerogatives ; but he had another John in reserve to 
 reply to the deputation from Basle as soon as the Greeks 
 were gone. ' Suaviter in mode,' was the watchword of one, 
 ' fortiter in re ' of the other : in obtaining from the east the 
 ' minimum,' from the west the ' maximum.' In quoting the 
 Florentine decree to his opponents, John de Turrecremata 
 never once let the words of the concluding clause pass his 
 lips. His own views,'^'^ to do him justice, were opposed to 
 it ; he never could have subscribed to it in any but a non- 
 natural sense. He therefore quoted the decree so far as it 
 could be of service to him and no further. '^^* It was in- 
 ferred from his words to the deputation that the Greeks had 
 been induced to subscribe to his extremest views. The con- 
 sequence was, that two years afterwards, or a.d. 1441, Peter 
 
 1535 piusiad, ap Biansi, Suppl. ad "" See his work Smn. de Ecd. ia 
 
 Colet, vol. V. p. 221. four books. 
 
 '"' Amirut. ap. Leon. Allat. (ie Eccl "=» Colet, torn, xviii. p. 1471. 
 Or. e( Oc. Cons, addend, p. 1373. 
 
PAPAL PREKOGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLORENCE. 489 
 
 of Versailles was sent to Eugenius by Charles VII., to demand 
 that another council should be summoned to correct the deci- 
 sions of Basle and Florence together ; of Basle that had done 
 too much, of Florence that had done too little.'**' ' The council 
 of Basle,' said Peter, ' stimulated one extreme by its menaces, 
 when it endeavoured to overthrow the truth of the supreme 
 power vested in one. The council of Florence has well elu- 
 cidated this truth so far, as is evident from the decree rela- 
 ting to the Greeks, but for regulating the use of that power, it 
 has set forth nothvng, it has spoken nothing; whence it is con- 
 sidered by many to have stimulated the other extreme.' What 
 was Turrecrematais reply to him — for it was he again who was 
 spokesman ? His whole discourse turned upon the Floren- 
 tine decree, but in no one place is he to be found letting fall 
 the smallest bint that it contained a word more on the power 
 of the pope than he had cited in his reply to the deputation 
 from Basle : and then one of his positions appears to have 
 been,'"^" that ' a definition had already been promulgated at 
 Florence on the power of the Roman pontiff, and of councils.^ 
 Again and again he insists on the necessity of adhering to 
 it, as having been the work of an oecumenical synod, pro- 
 nounced by the pope its president, and as such unalterable ; 
 but he speaks under evident reserve as to what was contained 
 in it, never noticing, still less contradicting, what the ambas- 
 sador had asserted, that it contained no clause bearing on 
 the exercise of the papal power. At Bourges, Mayence, 
 Frankfort, speeches were made in the interest of Eugenius 
 to the same effect. To have talked" of half measures then 
 would have ruined his cause. The battle between him and 
 the Basle fathers had become internecine : one or other of • 
 them was doomed. They deprived him of his pontificate, 
 just as the Florentine decree was drawn up : they elected a 
 new pontiff, just as the Greeks were preparing to leave 
 Venice."^' Florence was the argument with which they 
 were fought. It was represented as a complete success, 
 whatever it had been ; and the Greeks, whatever they were 
 likely to be, as thorough -going and unwavering in their 
 allegiance. Shame upon France and Germany to hesitate, 
 when the east had spoken. ' Wonder of wonders,' as said 
 
 "" Raynald. a.d. U41, n. 10. '"° Mansi, Suppl. to Colet. vol. v. p. 242. 
 '"' Above, p. 336. 
 
490 COUNCILS DURING THE SCHISM. 
 
 Turrecremata ; "''2 'the fathers, of Basle shrink from the sub- 
 ject ; the Greeks and Armenians follow it up ; the church 
 is deserted by her own children and embraced by foreigners.' 
 Could he have stated, without fear of contradiction, that the 
 Greeks had granted, not only that the pope was by divine ap- 
 pointment head of the church, but that every claim that 
 could he set up for him in the way of power unlimited was 
 attested in the acts of the oecumenical councils received by 
 them, and in the holy canons, would this have been the time 
 to have passed it over ? His reserve under the circumstances 
 is inexplicable upon any other ground than that their admis- 
 sions had not been so unqualified. The reserve of the sup- 
 porters of Eugenius on the Greek side is readily explained 
 by his.'*'*^ All in their account of the decree, various enough 
 in other respects, concur in omitting the last clause of the 
 paragraph relating to the pope, and the salvo by which it is 
 followed of all the rights of the patriarchs. As late as a.d. 
 1480, Augustine Patricius, in the summary published by him 
 of the councils of Basle and Florence at the request of 
 Francis Piccolomini, cardinal of Sienna, professing to give 
 what has been defined on the power of the pope in full, 
 omits the concluding sentence.'*'''' So it had been quoted by 
 every writer systematically till then; and so, for the most 
 part, it has been quoted since, Flavjus Blondus,''*^ and S. 
 Antoninus,^*** whose works came out at Venice a.d. 1481-4, 
 supply the paragraph unmutilated for the first time in print ; 
 but little heed has ever been paid to the difference between 
 it in their versions and elsewhere. The principles for which 
 Eugenius had contended ^^" were triumphant everywhere, 
 
 >"2 Mansi.tom.xsxi. p. 125. Speech first printed in Greek at Eome a.d. 
 atBourges. _ 1577, in fol. His question c. 5, 
 154S These are Plusiad. ap. Allat. t£ tout' 4frTlv, ri Tijj lKK\Ti(rlas apxfl 
 Grcec. Ortkad. vol. i. p. 646-6, and (the expression of the Greek acts), Kal 
 again in Mansi, Suppl. ad Colet, torn. v. rh tou niwa irpwTeioi' (a word which 
 p. 223. Also the piece attributed never occurs there) is very suspicious, 
 to George Schol., hardly possible to be '«" Colet. torn, xviii. p. 1299 et seq. 
 his (Leo AUat. de Cons. in. 6, raves in Compare the life of Eugenius by a con- 
 attempting to prove it), in defence of temporary, before cited, in Baluz. 
 thecounciL Si6Z. Pai. torn. xxvi. p. 660 '"^ j)g(,_ jj; jj^, ^ p 550-1, ed. 
 et seq. c. v. It -will be seen by this 1531. 
 
 chapter's heading that he attempts '=" Chron. p. iii. tit. xxii. c. 11, Be 
 
 proving one part of the definition by Cone. Flor. § 1. 
 
 means of the other. All these pieces "" See the ' Assertiones Eugeniano- 
 
 have something suspicious about their rum pro auctoritate pontificis,' c. 118 
 
 history. See particularly Fabric. Bihl. of the history of Patricius. 
 Gr. torn. xi. J. 372, on the last ; it was 
 
PAPAL PEEEOGATIVES DISCUSSED AT FLOEENCE. 491 
 
 and the Greek church having abjured the union, there was 
 nobody to contend against interpreting the Florentine decree 
 for the future by their light One of them actually was, 
 ' the pope can lawfully contravene all the laws and statutes 
 even of oecumenical councils;' and this, "the very position 
 which, as Mansi says,'*'" the Grreeks would have never ad- 
 mitted, has been accepted ever since practically as the 
 measure of the meaning of what they signed. As Charle- 
 magne had said of the ' Filioque ' clause, that if it was not in 
 the creed it ought to be there and should be there, so the 
 Florentine decree has been held to signify this, because it 
 never ought, sqy its modern interpreters, to have meant 
 anything else. 
 
 Let the Latins be supposed to have subscribed actually to 
 it in this sense, and that the Grreeks were cheated can admit 
 of no dispute ; or else that both sides subscribed in two 
 different senses knowingly to each other ; in which case the 
 Florentine decree may be regarded as a fit pendant to the 
 Thirty-nine Articles of the church of England. The reader 
 will, I fear, have discovered some grounds for either supposi- 
 tion in the details which we have gone through together. 
 There is just a chance that the original — the prototype, as 
 the Grreeks called it — of the decree, should it ever come to 
 hand, may unravel some of out difficulties ; or that some 
 future council may be held, which may supersede the rulings 
 of Florence, as the rulings of Florence superseded those of 
 Lyons, and become the veritable eighth council to the whole 
 church after all. 
 
 •"» Above, p. 485. 
 
492 
 
 CHAPTER IX. 
 
 DEALINGS WITH THE CHEISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 I HAVE refrained hitherto from speaking of the Christian sects 
 in the east, separated for some reason or other from the body 
 known to us as the eastern or Grreek church, as well as from 
 the west, and from each other. It seemed preferable for 
 many reasons to give them a chapter to themselves. Each 
 of them indeed would supply matter for a long chapter, were 
 all the different negotiations between them and Eome or 
 Constantinople to be detailed in full ; and perhaps there is 
 no part of their history that would be without interest to our 
 special subject. Here so much space cannot be assigned them^ 
 however; we must endeavour to confine ourselves to the 
 degree in which they affected the general question between 
 Eome and Constantinople, without going into all the par- 
 ticulars of their negotiations with either, or with each other. 
 Some general remarks may not be irrelevant to it in intro- 
 ducing them. 
 
 1. All of them were in existence before the sixth general 
 council A.D. 681, which condemned monothelism. This is a 
 point dwelt upon in my former volume ''^^ with emphasis. 
 The great heresies of the east ended with monothelism ; no 
 new errors of any magnitude or consequence have been 
 devised since. The sixth council therefore is their modern 
 boundary. 2. Their ancient boundary can be fixed with 
 equal precision, and is at least as noteworthy. No sects are 
 to be found in the east as old as the second general council of 
 A.D. 381. The earliest of those which survive — that is to say, 
 Nestorianism — was condemned by the third general council 
 A.D. 431. This a remarkable fact, which we westerns, whose 
 forefathers were so much in the habit of upbraiding the east 
 for the countless heresies that had been bred in it, would do 
 
 "« Part i. § 47. 
 
NESTORIANS AND EUTTCHIANS. 493 
 
 well to consider. There is no such thing as deism, unitari- 
 anism, or anti-trinitarianism in the east, except amongst 
 Mohammedans, or worshippers of idols. Their whole race 
 is extinct in oriental Christendom. Sabellians who denied 
 that there were three persons in the Godhead ; Arians who 
 denied the divinity of the Son; Macedonians who denied the 
 divinity of the Holy Ghost, have disappeared from the scene. 
 Nobody that was condemned by the councils of Nicsea or 
 Constantinople can boast of any living representatives. All 
 are gone. The anathemas themselves of the councils have 
 become obsolete. Their creed alone survives — survives, and 
 is acknowledged Jpy all without exception calling themselves 
 Christians in the east. Christians ai"e divided there, not on 
 the question whether the Son of God became man — a point 
 on which all are agreed — but how far or in what way He 
 became man. This is the sole question in theology on which 
 oriental Christendom is divided at all ; and so delicate are 
 the bearings of it in every sense as to transcend or elude the 
 grasp often of European criticism. Writers of the highest 
 distinction have mistaken Eutychians for Nestorians, and 
 Nestorians for Eutychians, knowing all the time that they were 
 the antipodes of each other, yet deceived by their professions. 
 Nestorius held that there are two persons in Christ. Eutyches, 
 that there is but one nature. But the same word may at one 
 time signify * nature,' and at another time ' person.' '°*'' And 
 in the Armenian language, which the followers of Eutyches 
 almost monopolised, one word only seems used to express 
 both.'*'' Understand, therefore, Nestorius to say that there 
 are two natures in Christ, and Eutyches but one person, and 
 instead of teachers of heresy, you make them teachers of 
 orthodoxy in the strictest sense. Nestorius allowed that the 
 Word was substantive, and consubstantive with the Father. 
 His heresy related not to the two natures of Christ, but to 
 the Incarnation, or junction of those two natures, by which 
 he asserted them to be connected rather than united.'*^^ 
 
 isso iriaTaa-ts, the same word that mean virdffTcuns or nature in the con- 
 had caused so much trouble in the Arian Crete; a sense which it sometimes 
 controversy; the Greeks reckoning bears even in S. Cyril. Vide note to 
 ' three Hypostases ' or ' Persons :' the Fleury, b. xxviii. c. 9, Oxford tr. 
 Latins but ' one Hypostasis ' or sub- '"' Dr. Neale, Gen. Introd. vol. ii. 
 stance. Vide Dr. Newman's Arians, p. 1080. 
 
 c. v. § 2. So here, i^iais, meaning '"* Note to Fleury, xxv. 2, Eng. tr. 
 ordinarily nature in the abstract, might 
 
494 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 Eutyches maintained that the natures of the Grodhead and 
 manhood are \inited and made one ; and prior to the union 
 that there were two distinct natures,'^^^ not that a moment 
 intervened between the creation of the human nature and 
 their union. Monothelitism was, logically speaking, involved 
 in the tenets of the Eutychians or Monophysites, as they were 
 called ; as every Monophysite, or maintainer of one nature in 
 Christ, was by anticipation a Monothelite, or maintainer of 
 one will in Him ; still it was at one time thought possible 
 that if the people were let off admitting two wills, they 
 might not object to admit two natures. Hence monothe- 
 litism was actually started as a means of effecting the return 
 of the Monophysites to the church. Having failed in this, it 
 practically ceased to exist except amongst the Monophysites 
 themselves, though it added another variety to their already 
 overgrown family. Nestorians and Eutychians, therefore, 
 the opponents of the third and fourth councils respectively, 
 form the only sects that have survived even in theory ; and 
 in practice we shall find that there have rarely been any 
 negotiations on either side worth recording except with Mo- 
 nophysites. Morinus was supposed to have indicated four dif- 
 ferent occasions on which the Nestorians had made peace with 
 the pope, till Asseman "''' showed conclusively that in three 
 out of the four cases he had confused them with Eutychians ; 
 and his remaining instance belongs to the sixteenth century 
 with which at present we are not concerned. The question 
 at once suggests itself. How came the Nestorians to be passed 
 over to that degree ? Were they more confirmed in their 
 heresy, fewer, or more insignificant, less ubiquitous or less 
 active than their rivals ? Apparently, there was no point of 
 comparison in which they could be shown wanting but one. 
 They claimed to be, and were in some sense, the representa- 
 tives of the east proper. Patriarch of the east they called 
 their patriarch. Chaldseans or Assyrians was the name by 
 which they were known. The schools of Antioch and Edessa 
 had given them teachers ; and they denounced the Egyptians, 
 or S. Cyril and his supporters, as the influence to which 
 Nestorius their founder had been sacrificed. In point of 
 numbers they must have been considerable, to have been as 
 wide-spread as they were; their schools at Nisibis and 
 Seleucia, at Bagdad and Diabekir, in Arabia and Persia 
 "s' Ibid, xrviii. 6, note. '"" Bibl. Or. tom.iii. p. 2, e. yiii. § 1. 
 
NESTOBIANS AND EUTTCHIANS. 495 
 
 show tl.at in point of education they were certainly not be- 
 hind others; as missionaries, notoriously, they proved the 
 most untiring and enterprising of all. With their head- 
 quarters ajb Ctesiphon or Seleucia on the banks of the Tigris, 
 they spread themselves eastwards as far as the Ganges, with 
 the coasts of Malabar for their southern limits, and having 
 been the first to introduce Christianity to the Tartars and 
 Chinese. 
 
 Whatever interest may have attached to the names of 
 Prester John in the middle ages, or of the Christians of S. 
 Thomas in modern times, should be placed to their credit. 
 Their establishmejjts were considerable in Arabia and Persia 
 when no other forms of Christianity could live there. To 
 what cause, then, is to be ascribed the fact that so little ac- 
 count was taken of them by the Greeks ns well as the Latins 
 in their various schemes for reunion. The condemnation of 
 the three chapters was intended as a concession to the Mono- 
 physite party. The same party was sought to be met half- 
 way in the proposed doctrine of one will ; for though, strange 
 to say, there have been Nestorians who embraced it,'^^' that it 
 was not designed for their relief seems certain. For some 
 reason or other they never seem to have been thought worth 
 conciliating. Why so, but because they were never possessed 
 of any political influence ? So far as Nest&rianism was pa- 
 tronised by the government in Persia, and Eutychianism by 
 the government in Egypt, they were on a par with each other ; 
 but as neither of these governments were Christian, their in- 
 fluence in each case was purely negative, and based on their 
 hostility to the rest of Christendom. They could not have 
 become friends either of the Greeks or Latins without for- 
 feiting it, to say the least. Eutychianism was placed in a 
 different category from Nestorianism directly it had made a 
 conquest of the Christian kingdom of Armenia; and certainly, 
 to judge from appearances, one is constrained to admit either 
 that the Armenian Monophysites promised to be much more 
 
 isss The ecthesis, as Gibbon remarks, we have the following profession : 
 
 says of Nestorius— mentioning him, 'Itemcredidi in FilinmJDei.D.N. J. C. 
 
 however, in terms of reproach — that per nnionem Deum perfectum, et Ho- 
 
 even he had not dared to teach two minem perfectum ; duasque hypostases 
 
 wills (note to c. xlvii. on the monothe- in uno Prosopo, et \m& dominatione, et 
 
 lite controversy). In the inscription to un4 voluntate.' — Asseman, BUI. Or. 
 
 the memory of Mar Elias, in the church torn. iii. p. 2. c. xv. 5, 3. 
 of Mosul, who died in May, a.d. 1591, 
 
496 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 attractive converts than the rest of their brethren, or else that 
 for some special reason it was of much more consequence to 
 reclaim them from heresy than other heretics. Certain it is 
 that there was a solicitude manifested ia the west as well as 
 the east for the return of the Armenians to orthodoxy far 
 beyond any other portion of the Monophysite body; and hence, 
 perhaps, we should hardly be wrong in inferring that had 
 Nestorianism succeeded in making a conquest of any Christian 
 kingdom, as Georgia for instance, there would have been as 
 much pains bestowed on it in proportion. And this obser- 
 vation suggests another which we mast not shrink from 
 making or examining. We find no interest evinced by the west 
 in behalf of any of the Christian sects of the east before the 
 establishment of the Latin kingdom in Palestine, no missions 
 speeding to them from Eome till the vicissitudes of the 
 crusades may be supposed to have suggested the value of 
 their alliance. They were approached, as we shall see, with 
 mixed motives from the first, and temporal considerations, 
 whatever pains were taken to disguise them, lay at the bottom 
 of all the negotiations ever entered into for their reunion. 
 Great zeal was expressed of course for their return to the 
 church, but much or little was required of them spiritually, 
 in proportion to the services expected from them, or to the 
 need in which they were supposed to stand of assistance them- 
 selves. As William of Tyre says of the Maronites, the first 
 converts of the kind on record, but whose conversion, accord- 
 ing to him, only took place, A.d. 1182 : ' They were a people 
 by no means inconsiderable in numbers, upwards of 40,000 
 in all, if report said true . . . brave men and strong in arms, 
 very useful to our people in the greater actions that they had 
 from time to time with the enemy, whence too there was the 
 greatest joy caused to our people by their conversion to the 
 true faith.' 
 
 This conversion of the Maronites, as it was the first, so it 
 has proved to be the only permanent conversion of all. There 
 was one motive wanting for it which the rest afterwards had, 
 and to which their superficial character is attributable, namely, 
 that they were sought to be turned to account against the 
 Greeks as well as the Turks. When the crusaders directed 
 their arms against Constantinople and aspired to make con- 
 quest of the Greek church as well as of the holy Sepulchre 
 for the pope, then it was that Franciscan and Dominican 
 
PREFERENCE SHOW^' FOR THE ARMENIANS. 497 
 
 emissaries were despatched into Georgia, Armenia, and the 
 far east with overtures from Eome, and were received in the 
 same spirit in which they came. The temporal advantages 
 of submitting to the pope were weighed by the subtle easterns 
 to whom they were addressed against the professions of faith 
 or obedience demanded by him in return, and the scale which 
 preponderated was accepted as long as it answered politically 
 and no longer. The princes of Armenia particularly showed 
 themselves as great adepts in the game played between Eome 
 and them as Michael Palaeologus and his successors, with 
 results to the church equally short-lived and delusive. 
 
 3. Lastly, so fp,r as anthropological or sacramental ques- 
 tions are concerned, the Christian sects of the east in the 
 eyes of the eastern church, and in the eyes of Rome, 
 occupied precisely the same footing. Nobody doubted the 
 validity, whether of the orders of the Nestorian and Mono- 
 physite bishops and clergy, or of the sacraments administered 
 by them, any more than those of the orthodox communion, 
 any more than those of the Latin church. Neither Eome 
 nor Constantinople shrank from giving the patriarch of the 
 east or the catholicos of Armenia their ecclesiastical titles in 
 addressing them, or proposed reordaining them on receiving 
 them into communion. Though their ministerial acts were 
 irregular, the character of those who performed them was not 
 disputed; and though leaders of heretical bodies officially, 
 they were not considered heresiarchs. As to their rituals, 
 there were points in which they agreed with the Latin 
 church against the G-reek, or with the Greek church against 
 the Latin, or differed from both. Yet the Greeks found no 
 greater fault with the ritual of the Armenians on the whole 
 than with that of the Latins, or than Eome with theirs. 
 There were no low views of the sacraments, no contentions 
 about grace, no lack of reverence for the saints, no lack of 
 charity for the departed, no disparagement of celibacy, vows, 
 or asceticism to be repudiated on any side. And when Eome 
 demanded that the Greeks or Armenians should testify their 
 assent to the western doctrines of original siuj transubstantia- 
 tion, or purgatory, it was not because there was any false 
 teaching in connection with these points charged upon either, 
 but only because Eome was bent on exacting assent from 
 both to the decisions of the schools of Paris and Bologna, that 
 as the west had learnt its theology from the east, so the east 
 
498 CHEISTIAlSr SECTS OF THE BAST. 
 
 should learn its anthropology, in other words, its sacramental 
 systena from the west. 
 
 In adverting to the different negotiations in detail, of 
 which the records have been preserved, it will be best to 
 treat of them, according to the method hitherto pursued, in 
 theii- chronological order ; connecting them with the various 
 popes in whose reigns they took place, and by the help of 
 their names reminding ourselves of any simultaneous com- 
 munications that may have been passing between Eome and 
 Constantinople, calculated to illustrate them, related at 
 length in former chapters. But we must commence with 
 two specimens of another character, prior in point of time, 
 and for the peculiar freshness and air of intelligence that 
 there is about them, standing alone in their individuality; 
 negotiations that Constantinople twice carried on in undis- 
 turbed equanimity with the Armenians and Jacobites, 
 before Eome, so to speak, appeared in force. Political 
 motives were certainly not wanting in either case; and so 
 -far they were neither ulore disinterested nor more successful 
 than others. 
 
 In the first of them it is Photius who appears before us in 
 the character of a peacemaker, a character evidently more 
 congenial to him than that of belligerent, and in which he 
 came out originally, till he was forced to assume the other, 
 though it would be difficult to say in which he excelled most. 
 Polite, refined, full of learning and orthodox sentiment, 
 thoroughly familiar with the history of those to whom he 
 was writing — the antipodes of Benedict XII. in this respect — 
 he had evidehtly felt the importance of establishing friendly 
 relations between the Armenian king and his master the 
 emperor, during his embassy to Bagdad; Armenia having 
 been about that time conquered, a.d. 855, by Baga, general 
 of the caliph, and many of the principal nobles brought from 
 thence captive to Bagdad, and compelled to turn Moham- 
 medans, possibly before his eyes.''^^ Asutius or Ashod, the 
 reigning monarch, owed his throne to the favour of the caliph; 
 one reason, probably, why the letters of Photius to him and 
 Zachariah, the Armenian patriarch, achieved so little success. 
 That they should have been preserved so long in Armenian, 
 
 '"° See the Temny Cyclopiedia, urt. of Photius took place while he held the 
 'Armenia,' containing an excellent office of ' protospathaire,' as Gibbon 
 summary of its history. The embassy says, c. liii. 
 
PHOTIUS COREESPOKDS WITH THE ARMENIANS. 499 
 
 the only form in which they seem to have been discovered as 
 yet, is at least a proof of the estimation in which they were 
 held. To the late cardinal Mai '*'' belongs the credit of 
 having them published in a Latin version, and made generally 
 accessible ; but was his eminence justified in suppressing a 
 considerable portion of one of them, merely because it said a 
 great deal on the services of the Greeks to literature, which 
 he thought superfluous ; and some things on the patriarchates 
 which in his opinion were neither true nor new ? Pbotius 
 addressed the patriarch as 'the illustrious, and conspicuous 
 for virtues of every description, our most beloved lord 
 Zachariah, apostolic man, and successor of the great apostle 
 Thaddseus, and most blessed Gregory, master and overseer of 
 the region of Ararat, primate of the northern people, great 
 pastor of the hosts of Ashkenaz, exalted to the pontifical 
 dignity, and possessed of a pledge of future reward amongst 
 the angels.' This is his eastern paraphrase for what Gregory 
 VII. wrote, 200 years afterwards, in terse Latin, to another 
 Armenian prelate : 'To G. m/y beloved brother in Christ, 
 archbishop of Synnada, health and apostolic benediction.^ '*'* 
 It was not that either Pbotius or Gregory condoned their 
 errors, or forebore to expose them vigorously ; but with innate 
 magnanimity they disdained the vulgar littleness of address- 
 ing those whom they were seeking to convert — not from the 
 irnany vital and saving truths which they held in common 
 with themselves, but from two or three wrong tenets of their 
 own exclusively, which they were called upon to abandon — as 
 ' so-called ' or ' schismatical bishops.' Photius and Gregory 
 remembered, what only grovelling minds persist in forgetting, 
 that those who have been brought up in error generation 
 after generation, cannot easily retrace their steps, and are 
 very differently circumstanced from those who either invented 
 error, or embraced it in preference to the truth in which 
 they had been instructed from childhood. Photius begins 
 his letter to the Armenian patriarch by telling him 'how 
 much rejoiced he was at what they had written to him in 
 explanation of their scruples about the council of Chalcedon; 
 suspecting it merely because rumours had reached them to the 
 effect that it was opposed to the other orthodox councils ; and 
 not because they were disciples of Jacob Zanzalus, founder of 
 
 '"' Ep. Phot. i. 9, ed. Migne ; with the ' Monitum' prefixed to it. 
 '«» Ep. lib. viii. 1. ed. Migne. 
 
 K. K 2 
 
500 CHEISTIAX SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 the Jacobites, of Julian of Halicarnassus, Peter of Antioch, 
 or Eutyches ; for they were children of S. Gregory, martyr 
 and confessor, illuminator of all the northern peoples.' He 
 can testify to the general truth of their statement from his 
 own researches. 
 
 ' Armenia was suffering horribly from the Persians at the 
 time of the fourth council. None of the clergy could attend 
 it, or even ascertain for certain what had been ruled in it. 
 Still they admitted its authority for some time, down to the 
 synod of Theves, or Thevin, in the province of Ararat, a.d. 
 537^1659 JQ ^iig tenth year of the emperor Justinian, when 
 some Syrian bishops coming among them, various works that 
 had been written against it were translated into Armenian, 
 and the addition of Peter the Fuller to the trisagion, " who 
 was crucified for us," was adopted. After this manifestation 
 of their hostility to the council of Chalcedon and the five 
 patriarchs, they were anathematised by the Greeks, and sepa- 
 rated from their communion, a result highly gratifying to the 
 Persian monarch. To show his approval of it, he heaped 
 favours on the Armenian patriarch, gave him his son to 
 educate, and allowed him and the bishops who sided with 
 him a share in the government of their country. But this 
 policy proved unpalatable to the Armenian nobles, and one of 
 them named Vardan slew Surena, the Persian prefect em- 
 ployed in giving effect to it, and escaped to Constantinople, 
 in the seventeenth year of Justinian, or seven years after the 
 council of Chalcedon had been abandoned by them. Justi- 
 nian was then occupied in building his great church of S. 
 Sophia, and a considerable function taking place there on 
 holy cross day, Vardan openly declined communicating with 
 the Greeks, alleging that he had been forbidden to do so by 
 his spiritual guides. On this Justinian held a council of 130 
 bishops, at which deputies from Armenia were present, and 
 testified in writing that they accepted the fourth council. 
 Afterwards, another council met at Constantinople, when 
 Maurice was emperor, at the request of Musceghus, one of 
 
 '==' So dated by Sir H. Nicholas, which is also the tenth year of Jus- 
 
 Chron. of Hist. p. 220. Photius says tinian and likewise the fourth (so pro- 
 
 the Armenians remained faithful for bably it should have been translated, 
 
 106 years ; that is, evidently, from not the fourteenth) of Chosroes. For 
 
 A.D. 431, the year of the council of other dates vide G-ieseler, per. ii. div. ii. 
 
 Ephesus, the last of the councils re- §112; Neale, Introd. vol. ii. p. 1080; 
 
 ceived by them. a.d. 431 + 106 = 537, and the Monit. by cardinal Mai. 
 
PHOTIUS CORRESPONDS WITH THE ARMENIANS. 501 
 
 their leaders, who had achieved a signal success against 
 Chosroes, the Persian king. It was attended by twenty-one 
 Armenian and 160 Greek bishops ; and again the Armenians 
 declared their adhesion to the council of Chalcedon with the 
 sanction of Moses their catholicos.'^'^" Finally, when the 
 emperor Heraclius, returning victorious from Persia, passed 
 through Carina or Erzeroum in his way home, a council was 
 held there by Esdras,'^^' the catholicos of those days, at- 
 tended by his own bishop, and many likewise that he had in- 
 vited from Syria, when, after a discussion spread over a whole 
 month, the Armenians of their own accord once more testified 
 their assent in writing of the fourth council, John, bishop of 
 the Mamigonians alone dissenting. He, for the heterodox 
 opinions then avowed by him, was branded on his forehead 
 with the mark of a fox, and banished into the Caucasus — a 
 sentence which he avenged afterwards, on his return from 
 exile, by translating the works of Julian of Halicarnassus, 
 one of the great bulwarks of the Monophysite sect, into 
 Armenian. In conclusion, as the council of Chalcedon 
 received the three general councils preceding it,' says Photius, 
 ' and is their genuine complement, it cannot, in reason, pos- 
 sibly be rejected by any that receive the other three.' Here 
 his letter to the patriarch breaks off abruptly; the Latin 
 version of it at least goes no further. Like the encyclic, it is 
 as remarkable for what it omits as for what it contains. 
 Against Rome there is not a word of caution or ill-will ex- 
 pressed or implied. On the subject of ritual, where there 
 was so much to be said, he is equally silent. In writing to 
 the king he complains of some controversial letters that he 
 had received from him by no means to his credit ; and rejoins 
 by exhorting him to return to the faith of the holy councils 
 and of the Christian world. ' Thus going on improving from 
 day to day, protected by divine grace from your enemies, 
 secure from harm and treachery, you will attain to present 
 and future happiness by the intercession of the glorious queen- 
 mother of Grod and of all the saints. We beg to send your 
 serene highness, as a spiritual keepsake, a particle of the 
 venerable and life-giving cross.' Photius endeavoured to add 
 
 "™ But not, as Dr. Neale Bays the patriarch's name 'Jeser.' We must 
 
 (p. 1080), to the laying aside of their remember that our extracts are from 
 
 ritual. Photius translated. 
 
 "°' Galan. Hist. Arm. p. 249, makes 
 
502 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 to the effect of these letters by despatching John archbishop 
 of Nicsea as his legate into Armenia. ' In the synod of Ani,' 
 says Dr. Neale,^^^^ t notwithstanding the fierce opposition of 
 many bishops, John was heard, and the patriarch Zachariah 
 proposed and carried this declaration: "If anyone thinks 
 the faith of Chalcedon opposed to the traditions of the 
 apostles, and through connivance rejects it not, he himself is 
 to be rejected ; but if any believes it to be agreeable to the 
 three first councils, and yet anathematises it, let him- be ana- 
 thema." ' That is, they admitted that Photius was correct in 
 his conclusions, if he was correct in his premises ; a point 
 which they were not wholly prepared to concede. Nicholas 
 Mysticus, the patriarch who declared against fourth mar- 
 riages in the next age, expostulated with them to no purpose 
 to make their return to the church complete. '^^^ Yet this 
 pacification, such as it was, ' opened the door to a tacit 
 intercommunion of a century.' Then a reaction took place, 
 for popular feeling ran high against the Greeks, and not 
 without reason. Shortly afterwards, the capital, Ani, and the 
 dynasty of the Bagratidse, fell under the emperor Constantine 
 Monomachus. 
 
 ' Under Byzantine rule, catholici of the race of the Arsa- 
 cidse, which was also that of S. Gregory the Illuminator, as- 
 cended the chair of Etchmiadzine. Gregory, in the eleventh 
 century, and his brother and successor Narcissus, were per- 
 fectly orthodox. The premature death of the latter alone 
 prevented his completing the union ; but his nephews, the 
 catholicos Gregory the younger, and Narcissus of Lambron, 
 brought it to a happy termination at the councils of Tarsus 
 and Eoumkla. The synodal act was subscribed by thirty- 
 three bishops. . . . This union at Eoumkla was brought to 
 pass in consequence of the two legations of Theorian,' with 
 whom we must halt again. Manuel Comnenus, as we have 
 seen, was a great schemer as well as a bold general. During 
 the contest between Alexander III. and Frederic Barbarossa, 
 he was always tendering his submission to the pope, and as 
 often petitioning for his own advancement to the dignity 
 vacant by the deposition of Frederic — aspiring to be emperor 
 of the west as well as of the east. To proclaim his proficiency 
 as a theologian, and his zeal for orthodoxy, he summoned the 
 
 ""' Generallntrod.Yol.ii. p. 1081-2. 
 1163 Monit. as before, by cardinal Mai. 
 
EMBASSIES OF THEOKIAN. 503 
 
 synod of a.d. 1166, and had the doctrine of the fourth and 
 sixth councils reasserted in it. '*°* In the same spirit he 
 seized on the opportunity which a letter from Nerses the 
 Armenian patriarch gave him of endeavouring to get it re- 
 ceived more completely than it had been hitherto by the 
 Armenians. He made choice of Theorian, a philosopher re- 
 markable for his theological attainments, for this delicate 
 mission, and despatched him into Armenia to confer on the 
 points touched upon in the letter of Nerses face to face witb 
 the patriarch. By Armenia, we should understand Armenia, 
 not proper, but minor : a principality formed by Kupen, a 
 relative 'of the last of the Bagratidae, between the river 
 Euphrates and the Taurus range, north of Cilicia, and ex- 
 tending gradually to the coast of the Mediterranean sea, so 
 as to include Tarsus. Their conferences commenced May 16, 
 A.D. 1170, and were neither strictly private nor wholly 
 official. '*°° They turned partly on the theological question of 
 the two natures of our Lord, and partly upon ritual. Theorian 
 conducted the argument in each case with great candour and 
 ability, but the few bishops who are said to have dropped in 
 at different times as listeners were clearly not so well satisfied 
 with his conclusions as the patriarch. Of this fact, which 
 Theorian, to his credit, has not attempted to disguise, un- 
 mistakeable evidence is afforded in the details of his second 
 mission. The first bad ended in the patriarch engaging to 
 hold a council of the Armenians, get the council of Chal- 
 cedon received in it, and send a deputation of his bishops to 
 Constantinople to have their decree confirmed there. Then 
 he burst forth, amid visible emotion, ' I conjure our pious 
 emperor, when my bishops shall have presented themselves 
 before him, and obtained the confirmation that I have stated, 
 to cause the patriarch of Constantinople to sit in his chair, 
 during the celebration of the liturgy, vested in his pontifical 
 robes, and holding in his hand the true cross, to give his 
 benediction to the Armenian nation in the presence of the 
 whole clergy and people of the city, and to pray for the souls 
 of the Armenians, whose only sin has been their ignorance.' 
 Such was his parting appeal to Theorian then on their taking 
 leave of each other. 
 
 '"' See its acts, published for the "'' Published by Leunclav. ' The- 
 first time by cardinal Mai. — Script, oriani cum Cath. disput.' Gr. and 
 Vet. et Nov. Coll. torn. iv. p. 1 et seq. Lat. Sasil. 1S78, 12mo. 
 
504 CHEISTIAK SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 When tliey met again two years subsequently,."''® A.n. 
 1172, Nerses expressed great annoyance at having been, as 
 he said, duped by Theorian. They had agreed solemnly that 
 the particulars of their former conference should- be kept a 
 profound secret between him and the emperor, instead of 
 which.all the world had become privy to them. Theorian 
 was reproached bitterly, as one that had broken his word, 
 nor was it till he had explained that it was the emperor, not 
 he, who had divulged them, and for the sole purpose of 
 refuting some slanders circulated against the patriarch him- 
 self, that their conferences were resumed. Even so, Nerses 
 never recovered his equanimity. Before they separated, he 
 requested Theorian to make a parting speech to his bishops 
 to reassure them ; but there was a marked absence of any- 
 thing like enthusiasm on his own part in responding to the 
 terms sketched out by Theorian for securing their complete 
 fusion with the Grreeks, in strong contrast to the tears that 
 flowed from his eyes at the hopes inspired by their first in- 
 terview. Theorian required, ' that the Armenians should 
 anathematise all who affirmed one nature in Christ, as 
 Eutyches, Dioscorus, Severus, Timothy ^lurus, and their fol- 
 lowers ; and that they should profess the doctrine of two 
 natures and two wills in Him themselves. Also, that they 
 should recite the trisagion without the clause " crucified for 
 us," as well as without "and " the copula. That they should 
 keep their festivals on the same day as the Grreeks : the An- 
 ' nuntiation, March 25 ; the Nativity, December 25 ; Circum- 
 cision, eight days after or January 1 ; Baptism, January 6 ; 
 Purification, February 2 ; and all others in honor of our 
 Lord, the B. V. M., S. John Baptist, and the apostles, in the 
 same way. That they should celebrate the eucharist with 
 leavened bread, and wine mixed with water, and make their 
 chrism with olive oil. Let everybody be present in church 
 during the celebration of the liturgy, except those excluded 
 by the canons, and likewise at all other public offices. Let 
 them admit seven oecumenical councils, and allow the selec- 
 
 1668 pirgt published by Mai, Script, named Micliael. The conference -with 
 
 Vet. et Nov. Coll. torn. vi. with an ae- the Syrian Jacobites follows ; and at 
 
 count of it, Prsf. p. xxv. Together the end of all a summary of tiiree dog- 
 
 ■with it are three letters of Manuel ; matic letters of Nerses which the editor 
 
 the first relating to their former meet- has not thought fit to get translated 
 
 ing; one of Nerses, and two of the entire, 
 then patriarch of Constantinople, 
 
EMBASSIES OF THEORIAN, £05 
 
 tion of their patriarch, but of no other ecclesiastic, to be 
 made by the emperor.' 
 
 On Nerses enquiring whether union could not be had 
 unless all these points were conceded, Theorian replied that 
 they were what had in fact caused the schism. Still, for 
 reasonable causes, the church and emperor, he had no doubt, 
 would relax some of them: as in Hungary, for instance, 
 under king Stephen I., the pope had allowed bishops to have 
 wives there legally on the same terms as priests in the Greek 
 church, a custom which he averred was adhered to by some 
 bishops in those parts still.'*^^ In the course of some further 
 conversation, N»rses declared that he could enter into no 
 definite engagement without first holding a national synod, 
 and obtaining the concurrence of the patriarch of Albania, 
 meaning Georgia. The only thing that he can promise to 
 do before they part, is to abstain entirely for the future from 
 speaking of one nature in Christ, as it caused scandal in cer- 
 tain quarters. This was the most to which he could bind 
 himself, and he died the year following, leaving the rest 
 undone. Dr. Neale considers ' Theorian's conduct decidedly 
 culpable ' for insisting upon so many changes in the Ar- 
 menian ritual ; ' the Armenians having undoubtedly as good 
 a right to their practice as the Greeks to theirs.' '^^^ He 
 might have added that the synod of Tarsus, a.d. 1177, over 
 which Gregory the nephew of Nerses presided, went in fact 
 a step further, and told the Greeks that if they would adopt 
 the custom of ' azymes,' which was also that of the apostolic 
 see of S. Peter, with the Armenians, the Armenians would on 
 the same principle use wine raised with water in future with 
 the Greeks and with Eome.'^^^ But Theorian plainly could 
 not have represented the matter thus, several of the customs 
 to which he objected having been condemned by name in 
 the Trullan canons, and others by implication. Was it for 
 him, a layman, to suggest that the Armenians might hope to 
 be indulged in any observances which the Greek church bad 
 formally condemned ? Five of the Trullan canons —the 32nd, 
 
 "" Ibid. p. 379. His eminence in "" Mansi, torn. xxii. p. 200. At 
 a note is disposed to treat aU this as a this synod the Greeks made nine de- 
 fable ; but Theoarin surely would not mands, of which this was the sixth, 
 hare stated as fact then, what could and the Armenians as many replies to 
 have been so easily disproved had it them, followed by seven coanter-de- 
 been false. mauds of their own. 
 
 ises ^g before, p. 1083. 
 
506 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 33rd, 56th, 81st, and 99th — were deliberately framed against 
 certain usages of the Armenians, to which their synod of 
 Manasgerd had lately challenged attention : '"" the 33rd 
 against their custom of not putting any water in the chalice, 
 the 81st against their mode of reciting the trisagion. Pho- 
 tius of course must have known these canons by heart, every 
 one of them, and abstained from alluding to them with his 
 usual tact, but Photius was patriarch, and at the proper time 
 he would doubtless have taken steps to procure their repeal, 
 Theorian could go no further than his instructions, which 
 were from the patriarch as well as the emperor, from both 
 of whom he was the bearer of letters to Nerses in reply to his. 
 As Theorian quitted the Armenian patriarch for the second 
 time, he was met at Cessunium, a town on the frontier, by a 
 monk named Theodore, and some Jacobite bishops who ac- 
 companied him, with a friendly message from the patriarch 
 of the Jacobites in Syria, and his profession of faith, in which 
 unless it is the Latin version that is in fault, the words 
 'hypostasis' and 'natura' are strangely confused.'*^' As 
 Theorian had not come prepared to treat with them, and the 
 road to the village where their patriarch lived was unsafe, 
 the conversation which ensued between them is only interest- 
 ing for the manner in which the monk and the philosopher 
 disputed over first principles : the monk upholding the au- 
 thority of Aristotle against the fathers ; the philosopher 
 quoting the fathers against Aristotle. But there is one point 
 more to be noticed, and it is common to both conferences, 
 namely, the entire absence on all sides of anything like 
 proselytism or party-feeling against Rome, joined to the 
 loyalty with which the name of S. Leo continued to be 
 associated by the Greeks with the authority of the fourth 
 council. As Michael, patriarch of Constantinople, says in 
 one of his letters to Nerses : ' Every doubt on my mind is 
 removed by the doctrine of the fourth council, and its con- 
 fession ; besides which there is the letter of the great pontiff 
 of Rome, S. Leo, which our church has always called a bul- 
 wark of orthodoxy.' '^'^ And Theodore the monk, evidently 
 because such terms had been proposed to him, ends by pro- 
 
 "'° Galan. Hist. Arm. p. 261 et seq. et naturis, una hypostasis et natura, 
 
 "" ' Dei Verbiim, Homo J. C qui Christus unus.' Ibid. p. 391. 
 
 est ex duabus rebus divinitate scilicet "" Ibid. p. 333. 
 
 et humanitate, ex duabus hypostai^bus 
 
EMBASSIES OF THEOEIAK. 507 
 
 feesing, that so long as they were not called upon to anathe- 
 matise Severus, to whom they lay under so many obligations, 
 he trusts in God that the time will arrive when the scandal 
 of one nature having been removed from among them, they 
 will be found accepting the doctrine of the fourth council and 
 of S. Leo."'* Lastly, Theorian, in an unpublished letter of 
 his cited by cardinal Mai, to some of the more distant clergy, 
 whether from diplomatic considerations or not, with true 
 Christian feeling : ' In the first place, we exhort you to lay 
 aside contentions, for we have no such customs, neither the 
 church of God. But follow peace with all men ; having for 
 your peace Christ, who hath made both one. Love the Latins 
 as brethren with yourselves of Him. For they are orthodox, 
 and children of the catholic and apostolic church as much as 
 we. Speculations there always have been, and may be still ; 
 but they affect not the faith. All things are good, provided 
 we do them to the glory of God. Nor is there any custom 
 prevalent amongst Latin ecclesiastics, any more than our- 
 selves, that is not good and honorable ; nay, rather of high 
 meaning and intention.' "'^ 
 
 Manuel had two objects in view, and to make square with 
 the Latins. He wanted to propitiate, yet to keep them in 
 check. He would naturally instruct his ambassadors never 
 to let a word drop from their lips of a nature calculated to 
 prejudice his interests or the sincerity of his professions 
 with the pope. And to the Latins in hig own dominions he 
 showed as much favour individually as was not incompatible 
 with his retaining in his own hands a steady control over 
 their collective progress. How well he succeeded in both 
 may be inferred from what took place on his decease. 
 William of Tyre has been already quoted for the murderous 
 onslaughts of the two nations of Latins and Greeks upon 
 each other in the capital, on the accession of Andronicus, the 
 cousin of Manuel, and last of his race. And Dr. Neale,'"* 
 speaking of the synodal act of the synods of Tarsus and 
 Eoumkla, says, ' before it could be ratified at Constantinople, 
 the death of Manuel opened the door to civil commotions; 
 the imperial city fell into the hands of the crusaders; the 
 Armenian church lost all sympathy with the Greek, and 
 
 '5" Ibid, ad fin. 
 
 '"* Ibid. p. 414, in a note to the Suppl. of the first conference. 
 
 "" As above, p. 1082. 
 
ms CHRISTIAN SECTS OF TUB EAST. 
 
 received many practices, and even its vestments from the vic- 
 torious arms of the west.' We shall find exceptions to this 
 statement as we proceed. But the significant fact,^ which 
 speaks volumes to our purpose, is, that as Manuel died A.d. 
 1180, so the first instance of proselytism to the Latin church 
 that occurred in the east was effected two years afterwards, 
 A.D. 1 182, in the conversion of the Maronites. Of the mixed 
 feelings with which it was regarded we have heard already by 
 anticipation ; but it was the straw likewise which showed in 
 which direction the political tide was setting. William of 
 Tyre '^''^ mentions it in his characteristic way. 
 
 ' Meanwhile, the kingdom as we have said, being in the 
 enjoyment of general peace, a certain nation of the Syrians, 
 in the province of Phoenicia, about the passes of Lebanon, 
 not far from the city of Biblus, underwent a great moral 
 change. For whereas it had for nearly 500 years followed 
 the errors of a certain heresiarch named Maron, so much so 
 that they had been called Maronites, and separated from the 
 church of the faithful, celebrated their sacraments apart : re- 
 turning to heart by Divine inspiration, and laying aside all 
 slothfulness, they came to Aimeric, third Latin patriarch of 
 the church of Antioch, and surviving now, by whom, having 
 abjured the errors in which they had already been, too long 
 wanderers to their peril, they were received back to the 
 unity of the catholic church embracing the orthodox faith, 
 and prepared to accept and keep all the traditions of the 
 Eoman church with due reverence. Their numbers were by 
 no means inconsiderable — 40,000 in all, as was reported — all 
 living in the dioceses of Bostra, Biblus, and Tripoli, on the 
 spurs and slopes of Lebanon. They were brave men more- 
 over, and strong in arms, most useful to our people in the 
 greater actions that they had from time to time with the 
 enemy ; whence too there was the greatest joy caused to our 
 people by their conversion to the integrity of the faith. The 
 error of Maron and his followers is and was, as is also read in 
 the sixth council, which is known to have been collected 
 against them, and condemned them, that in our Lord Jesus 
 Christ there is and always was but one will and operation. 
 To this article, reprobated by the church, they added a num- 
 ber of others highly dangerous, after separating from the 
 
 "" Lib. xxii. 8. 
 
CONVEKSIOK OF THE MAEONITES. 509 
 
 congregation of the faithful. Penitent for all which they 
 returned, as has been said, to the catholic church, together 
 with their patriarch and some bishops, who as having for- 
 merly preceded them into error, so now piously led the way 
 in their return to the truth.' 
 
 This conversion of the Maronites, then, was the first of its 
 kind in the experience of the Latins. It was different from 
 the substitution of the Latin rite by force or intrigue for the 
 Greek in Bulgaria, Calabria, or those parts of Syria which 
 the Latins had conquered. It was the spontaneous con- 
 version of a whole tribe, such as it was, to orthodoxy, pre- 
 viously heterodoj^ accompanied by a profession of obedience 
 to the pope. Their heterodoxy, like that of the Arians in 
 Spain or Burgundy, consisted in errors which general coun- 
 cils had met to condemn, and had condemned ; but then, 
 unlike the Arians of Spain and Burgundy, the Maronites 
 were not western but oriental in their general character and 
 observances. By what motives they were determined, and 
 to what terms they were pledged, as we are not told, we are 
 left to surmise. The crusaders had been in their neighbour- 
 hood for eighty years or more without affecting them. On 
 the death of Manuel, all of a sudden, and as if by instinct, 
 they joined themselves in a body to the power whose fortunes 
 the state of the empire subsequently to his decease left in the 
 ascendant. Had their motive been purely religious, there 
 was plenty of time for them to have done this long before ; 
 or had their conversion been due to the missionary labours 
 of the reigning patriarch of Antioch, his near neighbour the 
 archbishop of Tyre would hardly have said in describing it, 
 that they came to him, not he to them. His virtues, of 
 course, determined them to apply to him ; so that perhaps 
 had he resembled some of his predecessors or compeers, their 
 conversion might never have come off at all. So far, there- 
 fore, it may be regarded as creditable to him personally ; 
 still he would have stood in a very different relation to it, 
 had it been effected by his preaching. By the Latins, who 
 rejoiced over it, their services as allies in battle were naively 
 dilated on. Such conversions were new when William of 
 Tyre wrote ; there were no conventional phrases as yet in 
 use for describing them as so much pure gain to the gospel. 
 He tells us of the plain unvarnished way in which the men 
 of his age and race discussed their value. The Maronites 
 
510 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 were from their position the Gibraltar of Syria to the Latins ; 
 and the immense importance of keeping good friends with 
 them seems to have been discerned from the first. They 
 were placed at once in the position of the most favoured 
 nation. We hear of no interference with their rites, or their 
 hierarchy, till both were formally secured to them in the 
 sixteenth century.'^'' Nor, apparently, were they ever com- 
 pelled to subscribe to the creed of Clement IV. or any similar 
 profession. One of their patriarchs, Jeremiah by name, is 
 said to have paid Innocent III. a long visit of five years and 
 a half, and been present at the fourth Lateran council ; and 
 a schism having broken out amongst them in the time of his 
 predecessors, he was assisted in extinguishing what remained 
 of it by the cardinal-legate for Syria on his return. But it 
 was no legate, but Theodore, bishop of Kfarsu, one of his 
 suffragans, who acted for him as vicar during his absence; 
 and he himself came back with power to absolve all who had 
 incurred excommunication, and to take an oath of all that 
 they would be true to the faith of S. Peter.'"' In strong 
 contrast to almost every other portion of oriental Christendom 
 received into communion by Eome, the Maronites seem never 
 to have swerved from their engagements, because they were 
 let alone. 
 
 After their conversion there was another pause. Prester 
 John had indeed been solicited by Alexander III. to join the 
 communion of the church of Eome two years previously,'^" 
 but he returned no answer ; and Eome was not as yet ini- 
 pressed with the duty of converting the Christian east. The 
 Greeks were brethren in name still. Nor, again, was it 
 always certain how overtures proceeding from the pope for 
 detaching any from their communion would be received. 
 When John IV., for instance, was consecrated in the reign of 
 Manuel to the see of KiefiF in Eussia by the Greek patriarch, 
 he was invited by the pope to join his communion. What 
 was his reply ? He tells his holiness that he has the greatest 
 respect for his ofiBce, but the gravest doubts of the orthodoxy 
 
 '"' ' Les Maronites du Liban, qui des pretres le calice, et quelques autres 
 
 dfeR le xii" sitele se rapprochferent de usages.' — Alzog. § 369, Hist, de I'ig. 
 
 I'Aglise romaine, s'y rattacli^rent Trad. Fr. 
 
 compl Jtement dans la seoonde moitJA "" Le Quien, Or. Christian, vol. iii. 
 
 du xvi* sifeele, lorsqu'on leur eut ac- p. 42, •with the ' Index Urb.' at the 
 
 cordS au patriarche I'usage de leur end. Comp. Floury, liv. Ixxvii. 40. 
 
 langue pour I'offiee divin, le manage '=" G-ieseler, Per. iii. Dir. iii. § 93. 
 
DEALINGS BETWEEN HOME AND ABMENIA. 611 
 
 of the church in communion with him on some points, on 
 which he proceeds to dwell at great length, and with some 
 ability. His parting advice is humorous, and in excellent 
 keeping with the grave tone of respect which is observed 
 throughout : ' Would your lordship be so good as to write 
 and ask our lord the patriarch of Constantinople and his 
 holy metropolitans, who have the word of life abiding in 
 them and shine as lights of the world, about it all ? . . . 
 "Write to me, in conjunction with the rest, if you will.' '**" 
 Contrariwise, sometimes there was a disposition on the part 
 of Rome to hang back, as it were, from separate treaties. 
 Ambassadors had reached Eugenius III. from Armenia, 
 A.D. 1145,'**' anS his reception of them was characteristic. 
 They found him at Viterbo, having been eight months get- 
 ting to him. They tendered liim their submission unre- 
 servedly, and consulted him on some points in which their 
 ritual and that of the Greeks diflFered. Heretics though 
 they were, the pope invited them to assist at his mass, in 
 order that they might see exactly how he celebrated. One 
 of them affirmed subsequently that he had seen a ray of the 
 sun, with two doves hovering up and down in it, on the head 
 of Eugenius during a mass celebrated by him on the dedica- 
 tion of the churches of S. Peter and S. Paul. Two years 
 afterwards the second crusade sped at his beck from Europe 
 to assist all Christians in the east without distinction against 
 their common foe, but not to benefit the Armenians in any 
 way exclusively. The result was that for the next fifty years 
 or more Rome was not approached again with overtures from 
 either Armenia. This embassy, judging from the eight 
 months that it was on the road, would seem to have come 
 from Armenia proper; that of Theorian, twenty-five years 
 later, from having been followed by the synod of Tarsus, to 
 have been addressed rather to the prelates of Armenia minor. 
 And here it was, certainly, that the scene of the next -batch 
 of negotiations was laid. Leon II., who reigned there from 
 A.D. 1185 to A.D 1219, like Guy of Lusignan, preferred 
 receiving his crown from a son of the great Barbarossa to 
 acknowledging himself a vassal of the Greek empire under 
 Isaac Angelus. Accordingly, when Henry VI. was at Beyrout, 
 
 isso jviouravieff, Hist, of the Bussian given at length. 
 Church, p. 39, with Mr. Blackmore's "" Fleuiy, liy. Ixix. 10. 
 note, p. 368-70, where this letter is 
 
512 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 he solicited and obtained the services of the archbishop of 
 Mayerice, who crowned him in the name of the German 
 emperor,: and with a view to the spiritual well-being of his 
 subjects, counselled him to acknowledge the pope as his 
 spiritual head.'^^^ Eupen, a brother of the king, had a 
 daugliter named Alice married to Eaymond, eldest son of 
 Bohemond III. of Antioch, and her infant, heir apparent to 
 the honors and emoluments of his grandfather, was baptised 
 by the archbishop at the same time — a circumstance which 
 may have strengthened the force of his arguments. Leon at 
 all events judged it to be his wisest plan. In the month of 
 May, A.D. 1199, he addressed a letter to Innocent III. from 
 Tarsus,"^^ expressing a strong wish to unite his kingdom 
 and people to the church of Eome, and ending with the 
 inevitable request for aid. The archbishop would explain 
 the nature and extent of their necessities, and how much 
 they had already gone through. Gregory, the catholicos, 
 wrote likewise to the same effect. The archbishop of Mayence 
 had explained to them the doctrine of the church of Eome, 
 and so far from objecting to it, they were all for embracing 
 it aad becoming one with the church in which it was taught. 
 Conrad, the cardinal archbishop, conveyed these letters to 
 the pope on his return from Palestine ; and Innocent 
 answered them in the November following, congratulating 
 the writers of them on the sentiments expressed in them ; a 
 virtual announcement, as he is disposed to consider it, that 
 they had come back to his obedience. The catholicos had 
 written of him as ' head under Christ . . . head of the 
 catholic church of Eome, mother of all churches.' His 
 orthodoxy was established. Accepting the supremacy of 
 the pope, he must have accepted everything else which it 
 involved. There was no reason to cross-question him about 
 the fourth council, the trisagion, or the unmixed chalice. 
 No formal profession of faith, no formal retractation of 
 heresy, was asked or received in addition from the patriarch 
 or the king. The simple acknowledgment that the pope 
 was their head had whitewashed every man, woman, and 
 child in Armenia. They might now turn to something else 
 that was of more pressing interest ; unfold, without any more 
 preface, the real object of their correspondence. It had probably 
 
 "=* Fleury, liv. Ixxiv. 61. "" Innoe. ep. lib. ii. 217-20. 
 
DEALINGS BETWEEN ROME AND AEMENIA. 513 
 
 been foreknown on both sides. The husband of Alice was 
 dead, and she bad a brother-in-law in the count of Tripoli, 
 by whom the rights of her child were threatened. 
 
 Leon appeals to Innocent'*** in behalf of the young prince 
 his nephew ; and Innocent, referring the case to his legates, 
 sends the king a standard, hoping that he will speedily unfurl 
 it against the infidels. Leon's anxieties are not quieted. He 
 must make further efforts. He fills another letter with com- 
 plaints against the count of Tripoli, and sends it by a G-erman 
 knight named Grarnier, to which the catholicos, professing to 
 represent the archbishops, bishops, and clergy subject to him, 
 adds another ; aq^ the archbishop of Sis, a chaplain of the 
 king, a third ; petitioning between them for a pall, ring, and 
 mitre, in one case, and for the extension of the indulgence 
 bestowed upon crusaders to the Armenians who should fight 
 in behalf of the cross under Leon, in the other. Innocent 
 answers them all on June I, a.d. 1202. He informs 
 the catholicos that cardinals Soffred and Peter have been 
 commissioned to bring him the pall ; no profession of faith 
 having been tendered by the catholicos, or required by Inno- 
 cent previously, beyond that of the primacy. However, on 
 the arrival of the cardinal-legate Peter, the submission of the 
 church of Armenia to that of Eome was discussed, and the 
 catholicos placed the instrument of his own submission in 
 the hands of the legate, as required by the bull, on receiving 
 his pall ; and engaged to visit the holy see by deputy every 
 five years, as well as to attend in person or by deputy all the 
 councils to which he should be summoned. None should be 
 held, it was expressly covenanted, without giving him notice. 
 The usages of the church of Eome he received provisionally, 
 but not absolutely, till his more distant suflFragans had been 
 consulted. When they came to settle the difference between 
 Leon and the count of Tripoli, they found that Peter had 
 been playing them false all the time, and Leon and his chief 
 bishop were loud in their complaints of him to the pope.'*'* 
 Unknown to the catholicos, unknown to the patriarch of 
 Antioch as well, he had held a council, and in the interest of 
 the count of Tripoli, placed the royal doinains und^r an in- 
 terdict. With the patriarch of Antioch and cardinal Soffred 
 they had no fault to find. ' Miserable dupes that we have 
 
 •"« Ibid. lib. iii. 43-8. "" Ibid. lib. viii. 119,120. 
 
 L L 
 
514 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 been ! ' exclaimed the catholicos ; ' expecting that the iSrst 
 milk drawn by us from the breast of our mother would be 
 sweet and luscious, we have discovered that we are drinking 
 sheer gall and vinegar.' His chapter is not going to accept 
 what has been decteed by this council, till it has all been 
 laid before his holiness, a fraudulent conspiracy between the 
 templars and the legate having been detected. A truly dis- 
 edifying picture this, of the conversion of a whole people 
 from heresy — from heresy condemned formally by a general 
 council. Their patriarch invested with the pall without re- 
 nouncing his distinctive errors ; a legate binding him to 
 reciprocal engagements in the name of the pope, which he 
 encourages him to tfeak the next moment by his own example. 
 That the templars had the best of it with Innocent is shown 
 by a letter from him to the king, in which Leon is 
 ordered to make satisfaction to them for the injuries which 
 they have received at his hands, or take the consequences.'*'^ 
 The whole matter had to be referred over again for settle- 
 lEient to the abbots of Lucidio and Mount Tabor,"'^ the 
 cardinals quietly betaking themselves to Constantinople, 
 having forwarded each his version of it to Innocent in a joint 
 letter. '=88 
 
 Innocent certainly was not fortunate in his convert kings — 
 his proceedings in Armenia and Bulgaria deserve to be com- 
 pared so far — any mflre than in his legates and patriarchs; 
 and his first and foremost requirement of ' I believe in the 
 pope,' was not, if we may judge from results, productive of 
 any lasting conversions. 
 
 The capture of Constantinople was followed by no accessions 
 to the Latin church of any of the Christian sects of the east ; 
 which is a remarkable fact, to whatever causes it may be due. 
 Was it not because reunion seemed offered to them at the 
 point of the sword ? Such, at all events, would appear to 
 have been the feelings of the Russian church in declining it. 
 When a legate from Innocent offered to Eomanus, prince of 
 Gralich, the protection of the apostolic sword, the chieftain, 
 pointing to his own proudly, asked : " Has the pope any sword 
 like this?" 'However',' adds the historian, 'his youthful 
 sons had already been driven out by Coleman, king of Ven- 
 
 »»« Ibid. lib. vii. 189. ■»»' Ibid. lib. viii. 1-2. 'ms Gest. Innnc. § cxviii. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER GREGORY IX. 515 
 
 gria, and a Latin archbishop established at Gralich."'^' 
 Gradually the Latin rite was established by similar means in 
 Lithuania. Of voluntary reunions, apart from political consi- 
 derations or force of arms, there were plainly none, as of any 
 local churches in communion with the Grreek, so of the sects in 
 all parts estranged from it. There seems to have been a dif- 
 ficulty in getting them to join on any terms, notwithstanding 
 that they continued to be allowed to join on the easiest terms ; 
 and the Greek patriarch in exile was receiving overtures from 
 them contemporaneously with Gregory IX. Thus much we 
 know from manuscripts that have come to hand in the Vatican ; 
 perhaps, could aceess be had to all that lie entombed there, 
 we might know more. The solitary case to which we are in- 
 troduced by Eaynaldus is of the vaguest, as it is of the most 
 frothy description, a.d. 1237, Philip, prior of the Dominicans 
 in the Holy Land, wrote word to the pope that the patriarch 
 of the. eastern Jacobites had just been on a pilgrimage to 
 Jerusalem, attended by a great number of archbishops, bishops, 
 and monks, in his obedience, and after having conferred with 
 Philip, and had the catholic faith explained to him, had in 
 the solemn procession down Mount Olives on Palm Sunday, 
 that was then customary, promised and sworn obedience to 
 the Roman church, abjuring every heresy ; in token of which 
 he had given Philip his confession in Chaldee and Arabic, and 
 had received from Philip oji parting the Dominican habit. 
 'He,' proceeds Philip, 'has authority over the Chaldeans, 
 Medes, Persians, and Armenians — lands which the Tartars 
 have to a great extent ravaged of late — and over seventy pro- 
 vinces elsewhere, densely populated by Christians subject to 
 him ; yet all possessed by the Mohammedans, and obliged to 
 pay tribute to them, except the monks, who have been 
 specially exempted. Two archbishops, one a Jacobite of 
 Egypt, the other a Nestorian of the east, had made the same 
 profession. The Dominicans were full of hope. They were 
 preparing to send missionaries into Armenia to study the 
 language on the spot, having been urged to go thither at the 
 request of the king. They were corresponding likewise with 
 the Nestorians of India proper, and of the kingdom of Prester 
 John. And they had been sending some of their brethren 
 into Egypt to the patriarch of the Jacobites. To him lesser 
 
 "" MouraviefiF, p. 42. 
 L I. 2 
 
5J6 CHEISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 India, Ethiopia, Lybia, besides Egypt, were subject. As for 
 the Maronites of Mount Lebanon, they remained faithful to 
 the communion which they had embraced. Thus, while all 
 these various nations acquiesce in the doctrine of the Trinity,^ 
 concludes Philip, ' and in our preachvng, the Greeks alone 
 persist in their perverseness, and everywhere covertly or 
 openly contradict the church, blaspheming our sacraments, 
 and calling every sect, alien from their own, wicked and 
 heretical.' 
 
 This is a fair specimen of a sensational letter, written 
 amid the bustle of the most sensational of all gatherings, as 
 any who have ever visited Jerusalem in holy week can tes- 
 tify. We cease to wonder at the world-wide jurisdiction 
 attributed to the Jacobite patriarch, when we are told that 
 on parting lie assumed the Dominican habit ; or at the unex- 
 ceptionableness of his orthodoxy, when we hear that it came 
 out in the procession down Mount Olives, on Palm-Sunday, 
 and for proofs of it are referred to his confession in Chaldee 
 and Arabic. PhiUp would not weaken its force by trans- 
 lating it ; h-e forwarded it to the pope as it stood, and 
 Gregory taking his word for what it contained, wrote from 
 Viterbo in Italy to compliment the patriarch on his return to 
 orthodoxy, as testified by Philip, hoping sincerely that he 
 will not fail to edify the church by his doctrine as long as he 
 lived, and afterwards shine as a star in glory. ^^^^ These 
 affectionate wishes elicited no response from the patriarch. 
 According to Mathew Paris, fear of the Tartars had been his 
 sole motive for accosting Philip ; he had already been a 
 beggar to the Saracens, and had begged in vain, and when 
 he found that nothing was to be gained by communicating 
 with the Latins in the way of help, he abandoned their 
 communion.'*^' 
 
 While Gregory was corresponding with Jerusalem, Arme- 
 nia was corresponding with his plain-spoken correspondent, 
 Germanus. That the letters of the ex-patriarch should have 
 found their way to the Vatican is odd enough ; but it is 
 cardinal Mai who vouches for their existence there.'^^^ 
 Germanus is as courteous as Photius in addressing his 
 missive : ' To the most lofty catholicos of the Armenian 
 
 ■*"' Rajmald. a.t>. 1237, n. 87, 88. »»= Monit. ad Phot. Ep. i. 9, ed. 
 
 "" Ibid. Migne. 
 
XEGOTIATIONS UNDEE GKEGOKY IX. 517 
 
 church throughout the world, the lord Constantine, endowed 
 with wisdom and experience, Grermanus by the mercy of God 
 archbishop of Constantinople, new Eome, and oecumenical 
 patriarch.' After this exordium he endeavours to account 
 tor the difference between them. The Armenians received 
 the first three councils, but demurred to the fourth, as 
 though it made Christ two persons : a position, as he says, 
 absolutely repudiated by the third. Then he dwells on the 
 piety of their king Haiton, which he had learnt from two 
 monks, Theodoret and Basil, whom the king had sent to him 
 to negotiate for union; and says, with a gush of genuine 
 feeling, that it -^ould give him more joy to see the hopes 
 thus excited become fact, than to see Constantinople in the 
 hands of his master the emperor once more. Though he had 
 received no letters from the catholicos, still from what he had 
 heard of him from the patriarch of Antioch, confirmed by 
 Theodoret, he had no doubt of his friendly dispositions. 
 He therefore despatched this epistle by the metropolitan of 
 Mitylene, who might, he begged, return accompanied by 
 some Armenian bishops, to inform him of the pleasure of the 
 king. 
 
 Constantine wrote back to Germanus a letter, which is 
 likewise in the Vatican, enclosing in it ' a short confession of 
 the faith of the Armenians, as handed down by the holy 
 fathers, and received by themselves; purporting to have 
 been addressed by Constantine, catholicos of the Armenians,- 
 to the holy-born patriarch of Constantinople.' On its con- 
 tents more will be said presently. Grermanus being dead 
 when it arrived, a reply was addressed, and is preserved in 
 the Vatican equally, to Coastantine, ' by the pontiffs subject 
 to the throne of Constantinople,' containing a profession of 
 their faith likewise, and inviting the Armenians to join them^ 
 in it, as there were some things in that of the Armenians of 
 which they could not quite approve. They profess their 
 rigid adherence to the seven cecumenical councils, among; 
 which is that of Chalcedon and also the second Nicene, the 
 Armenians having once exhibited some iconoclastic tenden- 
 cies ; and earnestly recommend their making a full professiooi 
 of orthodoxy without reserve on any single point. The me- 
 tropolitan of Mitylene was charged with this mission also, 
 but associated this time with John, logothete of the patri- 
 archal church. What came of it we are not told ; but a.d. 
 
518 CHBISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 1248, a third letter was addressed to king Haiton, and to 
 « the lord catholicos' Constantino as well, by Manuel, the next 
 patriarch but one, in which he prays Grod to open the eyes of 
 the king and people, showing that they had not, as yet, 
 embraced orthodoxy. There had been a series of negoti- 
 ations, he observes, commencing in a letter of the Greek 
 patriarch of Antioeh, in whose jurisdiction the Armenians 
 lay, to Grermanus and John Vataces, urging them to forward 
 the union in all sincerity to the best of their power, and 
 followed by active communications on each side to the death 
 of his predecessor. After a delay of some years, they had 
 been resumed by the Armenians ; hence this third embassy. 
 It consisted of the metropolitan of Mitylene again, associated 
 with the metropolitan of Philadelphia, Phocas; and they 
 were prepared with several questions, to which they were 
 instructed to press for explicit answers before receiving the 
 Armenians into communion. 
 
 Thus it appears from these letters, or rather from the 
 account given of them by cardinal Mai, that two Greek 
 patriarchs in succession, animated by the most friendly 
 dispositions towards Constantino, still had thought his con- 
 fession unsatisfactory, or at all events that there were points 
 in it requiring to be cleared up — a verdict which has re- 
 ceived high confirmation of late years. ' It is certainly not 
 free from ambiguous expressions,' says the cardinal, ' other- 
 wise it affirms that Christ suffered and died in His human 
 nature, but not in His divinity ; that the Holy Ghost pro- 
 ceeds from the Father ; that the body of Christ is given to 
 us for food, and His blood as propitiation for our sins. 
 S. Athanasius is twice cited in it as an authority, with plain 
 reference to his creed.' It is a pity that his eminence 
 should have been prevented enabling us to verify these 
 points for ourselves by printing it in full, as he had designed ; 
 for what follows ? ' Beyond doubt this Constantino was 
 considered orthodox by the Eoman pontiff Gregory IX., 
 who sent him the pall with other ornaments and letters of 
 peace.' His eminence could not well have said less on the 
 subject ; he might have said more. We learn from the scrap 
 of the letter of Gregory to Constantino in forwarding it, 
 printed by Eaynaldus long since, that the catholicos had 
 sent to Eome to beg for it, making a profession of sub- 
 mission at the same time to the Eoman church and to 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER GEEGORY IX. 519 
 
 Gregory, and supplicating for a supply of plenary indul- 
 gences for those Armenians who might die fighting against 
 the Saracens.""' 
 
 It is a perfect ' multum in parvo,' therefore, which this 
 short section of Eaynaldus unfolds. Constantine was evi- 
 dently playing a fast and loose game with the Greeks ; and 
 by whom could his letters to the Greek patriarch, with the 
 answers to them, have been sent to Eome but by him ? 
 The Greeks at once put their fingers on the ambiguous 
 expressions contained in his confession, and called upon him 
 to explain, which was not so easy. Putting them off for a 
 time, he ^ould kt Eome know what was going on, and try 
 what luck his confession would have there unexplained. 
 Eome might be willing to outbid the patriarch. In other 
 words, would it satisfy the pope, provided that it was supple- 
 mented by a profession of general obedience to his behests ? 
 Not only was it received at Eome in spite of its ambiguities, 
 but while the envoys of Gregory were instructed to inform 
 the Greeks that a profession of the double procession, and 
 acquiescence in the interpolated form of the creed at least, 
 was indispensable to their return to communion with the 
 west,"'"* Gregory, without hesitation, himself invests with' 
 the pall and admits to full communion the Armenian patri- 
 arch, on the faith of a confession too ambiguous for the 
 Greeks on points connected with the incarnation of our 
 Lord, and as explicit as they were or ever had been in 
 favour of the single procession of the Holy Ghost, because it 
 was accompanied by a profession of submission to his church 
 and to him. Assuredly, could any more light be thrown 
 upon this transaction of his from unpublished documents in 
 the Vatican, it would be well. Or Armenian archbishops, 
 the anecdote told of one of them', who came to England 
 A.D. 1228 and created a great sensation there, may be 
 thought to afford a good illustration. He was ' accompanied 
 by a knight of Antioch, who interpreted for him, and testi- 
 fied gi'avely to his knowing intimately, and often having 
 entertained at table, the wandering Jew, Pilate's porter, who 
 had been present at the Crucifixion and reviled our Lord. 
 But all these, be it observed, belonged to Armenia minor, bor- 
 
 ""^ Eaynald. a.d. 1239, n. 82. "Was gi-EUited to the king and queen in the 
 there nothing else in the letter worth matter of the indulgences omitted ? 
 extracting ; and why is the diploma '"* Above, p. 240. 
 
520 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE BAST. 
 
 dering upon Latin territory, and by this time semi-latinised 
 by intermarriages and long-continued intercourse. 
 
 There was indeed one country beyond Armenia proper that 
 treated with Gregory, but it was for assistance — Georgia. Both 
 countries had suffered horriblyfromthe desolating effects of the 
 march of Zingis, the great Tartar or Mogul chief, and were trem- 
 bling at what they might have to endure from his successors. 
 Easudana, queen of Georgia, had previously corresponded 
 with Honorius III., one of whose legates had written to her 
 from Damietta begging that succour might be despatched 
 from Georgia to the Holy Land. This she professed herself 
 heartily desirous of doing, as soon as ever the Tartars left 
 her free ; for the celebrated convent of the holy cross near 
 Jerusalem, and part of Golgotha, belonging to the Georgians, 
 they had a considerable stake there as well as the Latins. 
 However, a.d. 1239, she seems to have been obliged to write 
 to the pope for succour herself. ' Instead of the assistance 
 which she asked, he sent her seven monks of the order of 
 preachers, whose errand was ... to try and persuade the 
 queen to submit herself and her people to the chair of 
 S. Peter.' '*'* He was not more successful with her than he 
 had been with John Vataces. 
 
 The instructions given by Innocent IV. to Laurence the 
 Franciscan, his penitentiary, whom he sent into the east on 
 a conciliatory mission g>3nerally with legatine powers, were 
 given and commented upon in connection with his overtures 
 to the Greeks. The pity is that we have so few of his 
 epistles comparatively in print. My own belief is, that were 
 the regests, or collection of his letters, '^'^ given to the world, 
 as those of his third namesake have been, his superiority 
 would be. very generally recognised in those special qualities 
 which one would wish to see stereotyped in each head of the 
 church. There is a frankness and comprehensiveness in his 
 aims, and a real as well as avowed sympathy for the weaker 
 side, that could not fail to be appreciated by those whose 
 confidence he was desirous of winning, and what is more, he 
 seems to have inspired his legates with the same spirit. 
 Those who negotiated for him in the east made themselves a 
 
 "«= Joselian's Hist, of the Georgian ■'=» Apparently in five volumes : 
 
 Church, translated by Malan, c. vii. ' Quae in BibliothecEe Vaticanse eecre- 
 
 diid viii. Comp. Eaynald. a.d. 1239, tiori cubiculo asservantur.' Ondin, de 
 
 u. 9, and Flenry, liv. Ixsix. 1. Script. Eccl. torn. iii. p. 166. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER INNOCENT IV. 5-/1 
 
 name there by their personal holiness and amiability ; but 
 had they been otherwise, they would have found little scope 
 allowed them for abusing their powers. For his plan was to 
 have done away with intermeddlers altogether. 
 
 Laurence had other Franciscans acting under him, whom 
 he sent about in all directions and forwarded the answers 
 which they brought back with them to Eome. Four of 
 these are given entire by Raynaldus, but strangely jumbled 
 or misnamed. 
 
 The first '*^' is not that of a catholicos at all as it is headed, 
 but of Rabban Ara, ' vicar of the east,' that is, vicar of the 
 Nestorian patriasch of the east, or of the Chaldseans, and 
 afterwards their patriarch. On questions of faith he says 
 nothing himself ; he has another matter on hand more urgent. 
 He entreats the pope to pardon Frederick II., whom he had 
 excommunicated, in order that succours might not be delayed 
 coming to the Holy Land, where they were so much needed ; 
 adding that he said this in the name of all the oriental 
 bishops of his communion, whom he entreats the pope to 
 befriend everywhere. The archbishop of Nisibis, his sub- 
 ordinate, had supplied him with a document signed by him- 
 self, two more archbishops, and three bishops attesting their 
 orthodoxy which, with another from Jerusalem, he begs 
 leave to forward. Of these the first is given by Eaynaldus 
 farther on, but without any hint of the connection between 
 the two prelates, and is interesting as the first profession 
 received from any bishops of the Nestorian communion by 
 the Latin church. It is confined to a statement of the 
 doctrine of the Incarnation in orthodox language; two 
 natures indissolubly united in one person.'"' 
 
 Ofthe two following professions '•'"''' Raynaldus seems equally 
 perplexed for any intelligible account to give. They are 
 either duplicates from the same patriarch, or else they come 
 from two different patriarchs of the same name, Ignatius, and 
 both Jacobite, the former of the body so called in Egypt, the 
 latter in Syria. The first is much the most important of 
 them, and evidently the work of a practised hand, from the 
 conditions which are attached to it, taking Innocent, as it 
 were, at his word. It recites that .Jesus Christ is perfect Grod 
 
 '"' A.D. 1247, u. 32-6. Comp. Aaseman, Bibl. Or. torn. iii. part ii. p. 
 
 CCCC£ 1 • 
 
 "»» Ibid. n. 43. "»» Ibid. n. 36-8. 
 
522 CHEISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 and perfect man, without admixture or confusion, and holds 
 Eutyches excommunicated. ' This is our faith,' says the 
 patriarch, ' and that of the Egyptians, Armenians, Libyans, 
 and Ethiopians, and we confess that the holy Eoman church 
 is mother and mistress of all churches. To consolidate peace 
 between us, we request: first, that on the death of our 
 patriarch, our archbishops assemble and choose one from 
 among them in conformity with the canons ; second, that the 
 patriarch, archbishops, and bishops of the Latins have no 
 jurisdiction over ours, but that we depend on you, like them ; 
 third, that the Latin bishops exact no toll of our churches 
 or monasteries within their territory ; fourth, that those who 
 intermarry with the Latins be not obliged to receive confirma- 
 tion a second time, having been already confirmed at their 
 baptism.' For the Jacobites administered confirmation like 
 the Greeks. 
 
 The profession of the patriarch of the Jacobites in Syria 
 comes next, and is of the same character, admitting the 
 supremacy of S. Peter, and of the church founded by him ; 
 the two natures and one person of our Lord ; the Holy Grhost 
 proceeding from the Father, but receiving from the Son. 
 
 The profession of John,'^"" maphrian or primate of the 
 Jacobites, the next in dignity to the patriarch, follows. His 
 views on the Incarnation read as though they had been 
 dictated to him by some Latin ; and at the end of it he says, 
 ' The Father is distinguished from the Son and Holy Grhost 
 by paternity, the Son from the Father and Holy Ghost by 
 sonship ; the Holy Ghost by procession from the Father and 
 the Son.' 
 
 That Innocent should have negotiated so wisely, yet in 
 each case so fruitlessly, was much more the fault of his pre- 
 decessors than his own. As Mouravieff says : ""^ ' Now that 
 the attempts made to convert Russia by force of arms had 
 proved fruitless, the pope. Innocent IV., began to employ 
 other means. Seeing the distressed condition of the eastern 
 church, the patriarchs of Constantinople living as exiles at 
 Nicsea, and Russia having been now already ten years with- 
 out a metropolitan, the Eoman pontiff sent to Daniel of 
 Galich the present of a regal crown, together with the pro- 
 position of a union of the churches, and a crusade against the 
 
 "°° Ibid. n. 41, 42. And on his dignity, Assemau's Diss, de Monoph. S riii. 
 "" Hist. p. 46. ■ ^ ^ 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER INNOCENT IV. 523 
 
 Moguls. The papal legates visited also the court of Alex- 
 auder, and addressed him with flattering speeches ; but the 
 saint of Neva refused decidedly either to receive their letters 
 or listen to their solicitations. Daniel, however, owing to the 
 neighboui-hood of Vengria and Poland acted more cautiously. 
 He accepted the crown and the title of the king of Gralich, 
 but put off the proposition for a union of the churches till 
 there should be an oecumenical council ; while in the mean 
 time he sent Cyril, a Russian, whom he had selected, to 
 Nicsea to the patriarch Manuel II., to be consecrated to the 
 dignity of metropolitan of Kieff.' 
 
 Russia's loyal^ to the see that converted it in weal and in 
 woe, is not the least extraordinary feature in its eventful 
 destinies ; nor is the interest attaching to its history di- 
 minished by the circumstance that the patriarch of Constan- 
 tinople, to whom popular hagiography ascribes its conversion, 
 is Photius. " So far as we know,' says the authority just 
 quoted, ' it appears that Oskold and Dir, two princes of Kiefif 
 and of the companions of Ruric, were the first of the Russians 
 who embraced Christianity, a.d. .866 they made their ap- 
 pearance in armed vessels before the walls of Constantinople, 
 when the emperor was absent, and threw the Greek capital 
 into no little alarm and confusion. Tradition reports that 
 the patriarch Photius took the virginal robe of the Mother of 
 God from the Blachern church and plunged it beneath the 
 waves of the strait, when the sea immediately boiled up from 
 underneath, and wrecked the vessels of the heathen. Struck 
 with awe, they believed in the God who had smitten them, 
 and became the first-fruits of their people to the Lord.' '°°^ 
 
 In conclusion, we find Innocent IV. sending his spiritual 
 envoys with messages of peace to the Tartar chiefs ; '^"^ and 
 originating those missions into the far east which developed 
 themselves under his successors, and may be set down as the 
 first and only tentative on the part of the west during the 
 middle ages to convert not the Christians or Mohammedans, 
 but literally the heathen of the east. Here was a grand 
 opening, had it been pursued as it might have been, for 
 missionary zeal and papal solicitude. How was it that the 
 Moguls ended by turning, not Christians, but Mohammedans? 
 Michael Palseologus and the return of the Greeks to their 
 
 ""-' I'oid. p. 8. "" Eaynald. a.d. 1245, u. 16. 
 
524 CHBISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 capital engrossed the thoughts of his immediate successors. 
 A.D. 1289 ambassadors were despatched into Georgia by- 
 Nicholas IV., where they were favourably received ; '"''"' and 
 about the same time he wrote by some Franciscans to the 
 Nestorian patriarch Jaballaha, enclosing him a form of pro- 
 fession in which he is exhorted to instruct his people.'^"* 
 John de Monte Corvino, whose celebrated mission to Cublai, 
 grandson of Zingis and emperor of the Tartars and Moguls, 
 will be noticed again shortly, was bearer of letters from him 
 to the Nestorians in China. No reply seems to have been 
 received from any portion of the Nestorian body during his 
 lifetime; but, a.d. 1304,'^°^ a Dominican named Jacob laid 
 one before Benedict XI., purporting to be from their patri- 
 arch, and in the name of all the archbishops, bishops, priests, 
 monks, and laity subject to his jurisdiction. In it the pope 
 is acknowledged as ' supreme pastor and arbiter of all Chris- 
 tians, and the Eoman church as mother and mistress of all 
 churches ' — phrases which to the easterns who used them 
 were pure poetry ; while to the Latins who inspired them 
 they were sober prose and canon-law. A stray epistle from 
 Boniface VIII. to Sembat, king of Armenia minor, is not 
 without interest.'^"^ The king was married to a daughter of 
 the count of Joppa. Being related within the forbidden 
 degrees, they, had obtained a dispensation at the time of their 
 marriage from the Armenian patriarch ; but after his death 
 they were advised by the next patriarch to apply to Eome 
 for a formal dispensation, which Boniface has great pleasure 
 in granting, and commends them highly for having so- 
 licited. 
 
 John XXII. engaged in a much longer correspondence 
 with a successor of Sembat, named Oissim. The king had 
 addressed him through the bishop of Cabala in Cilicia on 
 grave matters affecting his realm. John took advantage of 
 the opening to tell him that, from all he had heard, the 
 Armenians seemed to be estranged in several particulars of 
 doctrine and discipline from the Eoman church, their mother 
 and mistress. Hence he sends him the creed of Clement 
 IV., with a long instruction on the principal points contained 
 
 '=" Joselian, p. 132. '»' Ibid. a.d. 1298, n. 20. 
 
 ""?* Assema.a, Sibl. On torn. iii. part '™' Ibid. a.d. 1318, n. 8 et seq. : 
 
 ii. p. ccccxii. Pro arduie regni tui neeotiis.' 
 "°« Eaynald. a.d. 1304, n. 23-6. 
 
NEGOTUTIONS UNDER JOHN XXII. 525 
 
 ia it, to all which he affirms the bishop of Cabala had given 
 his full assent. In a second letter John'*"^ proposed sending 
 some Don^inicans into Armenia, to open schools there, and 
 have the Armenian youth taught Latin. For this purpose 
 the king is asked to assign them quarters ; and Ajacio, a town 
 on the extreme coast of Cilicia, is particularly named as 
 where they might establish themselves conveniently. There 
 was another matter on which John promised his good offices. 
 The king was married to a Latin princess, Joanna, daughter 
 of Philip of Sicily, prince of Tarento, and was then at feud 
 with the king of Cyprus.'^'" A legate should be sent out to 
 reconcile them. , John wrote to the catholics and bishops of 
 Armenia on the same topics on which he had addressed the 
 king. What answers were received from them we are not 
 told ; but A.D. 1231 more letters arrived from the king with 
 the usual prayer for aid against the Saracens.'^" These John 
 forwarded to Philip of Valois, and a crusade was preached, 
 but nothing came of it. The king professed, the pope 
 promised, and neither performed. Elsewhere John was more 
 successful in his negotiations. John of Florence was ap- 
 pointed by him to the see of Tiflis in Georgia with the con- 
 sent of the queen.'*''' Sees were founded by him in Persia 
 and in the Crimea ; missionaries sent out by him penetrated 
 into Thibet, Hindoostan, and China. John de Monte Corvino 
 had laboured in the last-named country with praiseworthy 
 zeal and no small success, having translated all the books of 
 the New Testament, and the psalms of the Old, into Tartar.'*'^ 
 By Clement V., the predecessor of John XXII., he had been 
 appointed, a.d. 1307, archbishop of Pekin or Cambalu ;'^'* 
 and from a statement made by some ambassadors who arrived 
 at Avignon from thence some time later, it would appear that 
 he had worked as archbishop for twenty-three years, and 
 made many distinguished converts. He died full of honour 
 A.D. 1230, and Nicholas, another Franciscan, who was ap- 
 pointed to succeed him by the reigning pope, a.d. 1333, had 
 leave to take twenty priests and six lay brothers out with him 
 of the same order. ""^ 
 
 "«• Ibid. n. 15-16. '=" Joselian, p. 132 ; but surely not 
 
 I6I0 j^ft ^j Verif. les Dates, yo\. i. the Easudana -who corresponded in 
 
 p. 465, where a ehron. hist, of the kings a.d. 1239 with Gregory IX. 
 
 of Armenia and Cyprus explains most '*" Mosheim,Cent.XIlI.p.i.c.l,§2. 
 
 of these negotiations. "" Ibid. Cent. XTV. p. i. c. 1, §2. 
 
 '«" Fleury, lir. xciv. 22. "" Eohrbacker, vol. xx. p. 149-52. 
 
526 CHEISTIAN SECTS OP THE EAST. 
 
 Benedict XII. aspired to keep pace with his predecessors 
 in the work that they had cut out for him, but he lacked 
 their ability. When ambassadors presented themselves be- 
 fore him from the great khan to negotiate for the establish- 
 ment of diplomatic relations between them, and to request 
 his blessing ; and when four native princes wrote to him at 
 the same time to say how well they had been instructed in 
 the catholic faith by his legate John, the late archbishop of 
 Pekin, whose successor, they added, had not arrived when 
 they wrote ; he deemed it his duty to present them with the 
 creed of Clement IV., with some comments of his own upon 
 it, and press it upon their acceptance. As if Tartars would 
 be likely to be edified by, or to appreciate, the latest con- 
 clusions of the schools in Paris ! Three Franciscans, indeed, 
 one of whom had been appointed bishop of Tiflis in Greorgia 
 nine years before John of Florence, were despatched by him 
 into Tartary with letters of instructions to take with them, 
 empowering them possibly to deal with the new converts in 
 some more genial and attractive fashion, but they are not 
 siven.'^'* 
 
 o 
 
 Unfortunately, what has been given of his correspondence 
 with the Armenians, is by no means to his credit, a.d. 1341, 
 Leon, king of Armenia, applied to him for assistance. To 
 cover his inability to afford any, or for other reasons to which 
 we shall allude presently, Benedict maintained that heavy 
 charges had been made against their orthodoxy. They had 
 been orthodox enough for Innocent III., who admitted them 
 to communion without putting a single question to them 
 about their faith, on receiving a general profession of obedi- 
 ence to his see from their patriarch ; and for Gregory IX., 
 who sent their patriarch a pall, though holding the same 
 views as the Grreeks on the procession. John XXII. had 
 certainly charged them with errors, but then John was of a 
 very speculative turn of mind himself; and who can say 
 whether he may not have been all the while aiming a side 
 blow at some of their Franciscan teachers, in attacking'them ; 
 there being a fierce conflict on foot between him and the 
 spirituals of the Franciscan order,'"^ some of whom perished 
 at the stake for their opinions. Hence his proposal to send 
 
 ■">» Eaynald. a.d. 1338, n. 77-9. 
 
 1617 Fully described in Moslieim, Cent. XIV. p. ii. c. ii. §§ 8, 9 and 24-34. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER BENEDICT XII. 527 
 
 Dominicans among the Armenians to found schools and so 
 forth, was probably not so much to convert them from any- 
 false tenets of their own, as to disabuse them of any tenete 
 still more abnoxious to him personally, that they might have 
 imbibed from the Franciscans. In other words, the Domini- 
 cans were designed to supplant the Franciscans there ; and 
 Armenia became the battle-field between the two orders on a 
 small scale. This is unquestionably part of the explanation 
 of the 107 errors that were now charged upon it; they be- 
 spoke the bitter fight that was going on between the two 
 orders. The Franciscans had been in possession of the run 
 of the country, ti^ John endeavoured to transfer it to the rival 
 order, by whom it was represented to be in a deplorable state, 
 to show how much they were wanted there. But in enume- 
 rating the various errors infecting it, they would have to take 
 good care to prevent their own clandestine purpose from 
 oozing out of displacing the Franciscans. Accordingly the 
 commission appointed by Benedict purported to have ex- 
 amined several natives of Armenia who happened to be 
 within call, several Latins who had been in Armenia, several 
 books used in the country. The result was the ignorantly 
 drawn up report of 117 errors '^'* which Benedict calls upon 
 the Armenians to retract, taking upon himself the respon- 
 sibility of what it contained. Its misstatements on the pro- 
 cession '°'' have been already pointed out. The disruption 
 by John of Oznia and the synod of Manasgerd,'*'"' of the 
 union effected under the auspices of the emperor Heraclius, 
 of which we heard from Photius, is raked up, as though no 
 communications had ever passed between Armenia and the 
 Greeks or Latins since then ; and the Armenians of both 
 kingdoms are charged with maintaining a number of posi- 
 tions '^'*' about the pope and his power, which, if true, prove 
 how completely those predecessors of Benedict must have 
 been taken in, who had sent palls to their patriarchs. Bene- 
 dict supplements his commissioners by recommending that 
 a council be held in Armenia to condemn the errors specified 
 in their report, and embrace the doctrine of the Eoman 
 
 "»» Raynald. a.d. 1341, n. 48-69. Manasgerd took place about the time 
 "'• The first charge. of the sixth council, or a.d. 681, accord- 
 mo The seventy-first charge. Dr. ing to Galanus, and quite possibly in 
 
 Neale, Zntrod. vol. ii. p. 1081, speaks defiance of it. — Hist. Arm. p. 261 et 
 
 of ' John Manasgerd.' This is a mis- seq. 
 
 print or slip of the pen. The synod of "" Charges 84-6, 90, 91, and 117. 
 
528 CHRISTIAN SECTS IN THE EAST. 
 
 church. After the synod had been held, a deputation should 
 be sent to confer with the pope, who would in turn possibly 
 send some learned men among them from the west. In 
 other words, the Dominicans would come and set up there.^^^''' 
 To the catholicos, ' his dear brother in Christ,' he adds,"^' 
 that 'should he and his bishops effectively recognise the 
 primacy of the Eoman see in their proposed synod, his holi- 
 ness would be found always ready to attend to them, pro- 
 pitious in his embassies, his favours, and well-timed sub- 
 ventions in their behalf. It would be a good thing likewise 
 for their council to enact that the books of the decretum and 
 of the decretals, and other sayings of the holy fathers, and 
 ordinances of the canons, as held and received by the church 
 of Eome, be accepted by the bishops and clergy of those 
 parts for their perfect instruction in faith and manners, and 
 in the salutary observances of the Eoman church.' 
 
 On the receipt of this communication from the pope, says 
 Mansi,'^^* a council was held under king Constantine, in 
 which six archbishops besides the catholicos and twenty-two 
 bishops were present, and a book was drawn up there, contain- 
 ing answers to each of the 117 charges.' Durand and Mar- 
 tene, who have inserted it in their collection, '^^' think some 
 of them not quite satisfactory. 'I,' says Mansi, 'having 
 gone through the whole work, have found nothing in it to 
 prove them unsound in faith.' The bishops indeed, only 
 profess to answer for the church of Armenia Minor, to which 
 they belonged themselves. 
 
 By the time that it reached Avignon, Benedict was no 
 more, and the bishops of Merchur and Trebizond to whom it 
 was entrusted, accompanied by a Franciscan named David, 
 vicar of his order out there, and a native of Armenia, were 
 received, a.d. 1346, by Clement VI. In his answer he speaks 
 of its contents with satisfaction, and in reply to the request 
 made by them in obedience to the suggestion of Benedict, he 
 sends them copies of the decretum and decretals by Antony, 
 bishop of Graeta, and John bishop elect of Coron, who are to 
 instruct them in both, and to whose teaching they will do 
 well to attend. His letter is dated August 31, a.d. 1346. 
 What happened in the interim we are not told ; but some- 
 
 "22 Ibid. n. 45. "'* Ibid, ad n. 48. 
 
 ■"23 Ibid. n. 46, 47. '"'' Vet. Monum. torn. vii. p. 310 et seq. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS UNDER CLEMENT VI. 529 
 
 thing analogous to a change of ministry must have occurred^ 
 for at the end of five years Clement would appear to have 
 changed his opinion of them completely, and to be as dissatis- 
 fied with their explanations as he had been satisfied. Could 
 his legates have been Dominicans, or in the Dominican in- 
 terest? A.D. 1351, at all events, a letter was addressed by 
 him to the Armenian catholicos with a string of questions in: 
 it, that could have been only dictated by the Inquisitor- 
 general. Clement sets forth in it that one of his legates, 
 namely John, had come back in safety, but the other, Antony, 
 had died on the road. And John had been made arch- 
 bishop of Pisa en his return, in token of the satisfaction 
 which his conduct had given. After this his rejoinder to the 
 catholicos begins. Their answers had not been as explicit aa 
 they ought to have been, leaving several points unexplained. 
 Hence the necessity for recurring to them at some length, 
 and putting questions for him to answer of the most search- 
 ing and minute description. ' Do you and your people, for 
 instance, believe that no man living, who is outside the faith 
 of the church, and the obedience of the Roman pontiffs, can 
 be finally saved? ... Do you believe that the pope can be 
 judged by none, but should be left to be judged by Grod 
 alone ? . . . Also, that the pontifical authority cannot and 
 ought not to be subject to any regal or imperial authority 
 whatsoever . . . particularly as regards trial, correction, and 
 deprivation . . . also, that it belongs to the Roman pontiff 
 alone to make canons of sacred and universal obligation ? ' 
 There are no less than fourteen such questions put to them 
 in all on the same subject : something like making them pass 
 an examination in the decretals. A course of questions follows 
 on original sin, which had been a favourite topic with Bene- 
 dict. From what is said further on, it would appear that 
 they had been worried to death by the two bishops who had 
 been sent out to thera, and begged to be spared any further 
 discussions. And now follows a letter which has at least the 
 merit of being plain-spoken. It is from the pope to the 
 king. Benedict had talked vaguely to the catholicos of 
 ' the favours and well-timed subventions ' that would be 
 theirs, should the council be for effectively accepting his 
 primacy. 
 
 Clement throws away all reserve, and interprets his. words 
 
 MM 
 
530 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 by his acts. King Constantine,'^^" he trusts, will oblige the 
 eatholicos to obey his injunctions, and answer his questions 
 -with as much explicitness as may be requisite for the catholic 
 truth. ' Your majesty will in that case know for a certainty, 
 that we who are thus bent on assuring your salvation and 
 that of your subjects, and seek you and your kingdom in all 
 simplicity, are disposed, by the blessing of God, to promote 
 your interests in many ways, as well by spiritual graces as 
 also by temporal favours and subventions. In proof of which, 
 small "as it is, for immediate use, we have ordered to be placed 
 to your credit or that of your agent in Cyprus, a sum of 
 6,000 florins out of the moneys of the apostolic camera.' 
 Bribery, barefaced and deliberate, there is no other name for 
 it ! And who is it that witnesses to the pope having admi- 
 nistered it unasked, and with his own hands, but the pope 
 himself? Yet for hinting that a similar course was pursued 
 towards his countrymen by Eugenius, it has long been the 
 fashion to decry the Grreek historian of the council of Flo- 
 rence, Syropulus, as a writer of no credit, and his work a 
 tissue of calumnies of the most malignant kind. The pa- 
 tience of the Armenians was fairly exhausted. They sent 
 back to say that their eatholicos was precluded answering the 
 questions that had been put to him for want of a proper 
 interpreter, as well he might. They would be too much for 
 most people to mastej' in the original Latin without special 
 triiining. Innocent VI. in vain called upon the archbishop 
 of Manasgerd to undertake the task of interpreting them 
 after they had been shelved for two years.'^^^ The whole 
 ' scheme collapsed. The next time Rome negotiated with the 
 Christian sects of the east, it was at Florence, but after the 
 Grreeks were gone, otherwise S3'ropulus would doubtless have 
 contributed materially to our stock of information as to what 
 really took place then. The departure of the Grreeks left 
 the Latins free both to negotiate as they thought fit, and to 
 relate what they had done when it was all over. But the 
 accounts which have come down to us of these transactions 
 are so confused as to inspire misgivings of one kind or another, 
 and no sort of pains has been taken hitherto by our collectors 
 of councils to explain them satisfactorily, even to the extent 
 to which they seem capable. 
 
 "M Raynald. ibid. n. 18. This letter is dated Villa Nova, near Avignon 
 Sept. 15, A.D. 1361. "i" Ibid. A.D. 13S3, n. 25. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLORENCE. 531 
 
 ' The sole lasting consequence,' says dean Milman, ' of the 
 council of Florence, even in the west, was the fame acquired 
 by pope Eugenius, which he wanted neither the art nor the 
 industry to propagate in the most magnificent terms . . . 
 The splendid illusion was kept up by the appearance of 
 ecclesiastical ambassadors — how commissioned, invested with 
 what authority, none knew, none now know — from the more 
 remote and barbarous churches of the east, from the utter- 
 most parts of the Christian world. The Iberians, Armenians, 
 the Maronites and Jacobites of Syria, the Chaldaean Nes- 
 toriaus, the Ethiopians, successively rendered the homage of 
 their allegiance to the one supreme head of the church.' 
 There is some truth in all this, but there are several mis- 
 statements likewise, which may be corrected with ease from 
 existing documents by anybody who will be at the pains to 
 look through them carefully. Whatever unions were effected 
 at Florence fol Towed on that of the Greeks, and were brought 
 about mainly through their instrumentality, though it is not 
 a little singular that none of them actually took place till 
 aftei- the Greeks had left. Yet, in the case of one of them, 
 that of the Armenians, and the most important, we are ex- 
 pressly told by the author of the Greek acts of the council, 
 at the end of his narrative, that apocrisiaries of the Armenian 
 patriarch, highly respectable persons, arrived from Armenia, 
 professing to be in quest of union and of the orthodox faith. 
 Having made their obeisances to the pope, and addressed 
 him • as vicar of Christ, in the seat of the apostles, and 
 their own head,' "'^' they appeared before the emperor, and 
 made known their design, informing him how they longed 
 to be imited to the catholic church, and seeking counsel and 
 help from him to attain their object. The emperor replied 
 that what they wanted was exceedingly satisfactory news to 
 him, and that it would be a pleasure to him should they be 
 brought over to orthodoxy and to the catholic church. ' I 
 pray God,' said he, 'to facilitate the way for their union, and 
 should it take place, I will myself do all I can to help 
 them by every means' in my power.' With these words he 
 dismissed them, and the Greeks left Florence : ■**' the Ar- 
 menians having ascertained previously that it was the wish 
 
 "-'" See theirbrief address in Mansi, Sujrpl. ad Colet. toI. v. p. 210. 
 "-» Colet. torn, xviii. p. 539. Comp. Lat. Christ, h. xiii. c. H. 
 
.132 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 of ttieir emperor that they should come to terms with the 
 pope. 
 
 But for the good offices of the Greek patriarch of Jeru- 
 salem, it is just possible that they would have never found 
 their way thither at all. A letter has been preserved of his 
 to Eugenius, dated Constautinople, November 1, a.d. 1434,^^^" 
 in which he speaks of 'having received two briefs from the 
 pope on the union of the Armenians with the church of Eome^ 
 and says in reply that, as he had told Christopher, the se- 
 cretary and envoy of Eugenius, the year before, he would 
 be well pleased to do all he could to assist in the matter. 
 The secretary was now further aware that he had duly for- 
 warded the letters of his holiness to the Armenian patriarch 
 by a trustworthy messenger, translated into Armenian, that 
 the patriarch might understand their contents, and compare 
 them with what he had himself written to him on the same 
 subject previously. He expects to hear from the catholicos 
 shortly, and in the aflBrmative ; meanwhile, he will send a 
 presbyter of his own back with Christopher to the pope, to 
 take any further commands of his holiness, which he engages 
 beforehand to do his best to speed.' 
 
 We can accompany these letters of Eugenius yet a further 
 stage, without finding his obligations to the Greeks dimi- 
 nish. The apocrisiaries of the Armenian patriarch, as we 
 find from the words of the commission appointing them,'^" 
 belonged to Kaffa, in the Crimea, then inhabited largely by 
 the Armenians. The letters of the pope had been transmitted 
 to him from thence ; thus we learn both their route and 
 their destination in the most authentic form, for as there 
 had been ordinarily for some time two patriarchs ""^^ — one 
 residentin Armenia proper, the other in Armenia minor — it is 
 not always easy to discover which of them is intended. But 
 in the present instance the mention of Kaffa can only refer 
 us to the patriarch of Armenia prope)-,'^33 f^j. ^j^q would 
 
 "'" Colet. p. 552. Cilicia. The Gregory (iHd. p. 211) 
 
 "^' Ibid. p. 1214. who writes as ' servus senrorum D. N. 
 
 '="2 Sometimes there had been four ; J. C. . . . catholieus quoque omnium 
 
 Etohmiadzine in Armenia proper, and provinciarum, et episcopus episcopomm 
 
 Sis in Armenia Minor, their usual utriusque Armenia,' may hare been 
 
 titles and residences. Vide Neale, this in spite of the titles assumed by 
 
 Introd. vol. i. p. 65-9. him, or else, as Mansi thinks, succes- 
 
 '"" Mansi, Suppl. ad Colet. rol. v. sor of Constantine, only not at Sis but 
 
 p. 210, without any apparent warrant, at Etchmiadzine. 
 ■vrould make him patriarch of Sis in 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLORENCE. 533 
 
 think of sending a letter destined for Armenia minor round 
 by Kafifa? There was constant communication between 
 Kaffa and Constantinople, as has been elsewhere noticed ; and 
 between KafFa and Armenia proper, as we see now. So that 
 this was the route by which the letters of Eugenius travelled. 
 And Constantine, ' servant o^ the servanta of God,' as his style 
 runs, who received and acted on them, calls himself 'by the 
 grace of God patriarch of Vagarshabad, or the town in which 
 the celebrated convent of Etchmiadzine, from which he t-ook 
 his title, was situate. Three of his clergy resident at KaflFa, 
 with the bishop of Pera, formed the deputation empowered 
 by him to act in Jjis name ; and they were accompanied by a 
 count Nerses, who seems to have acted as spokesman for 
 them;''^^* and brought a letter from 'the imperial governor 
 of KafFa,' whose name was Paul, commending them to the 
 pope.'^^'' This letter is dated Dec. 1, a.d. 1438, and it was 
 acknowledged by Eugenius with warmest thanks and honorary 
 distinctions, the year following, after the union of the Arme- 
 nians had been accomplished.""^ We see, therefore, the full 
 extent to which Eugenius was obliged to the Greeks for any 
 success tfiat he may be supposed to have achieved at Florence 
 with the Armenians. The Greek patriarch of Jerusalem 
 translated and forwarded his invitation to them in the first 
 instance. The deputies empowered to act in their behalf by 
 their patriarch seem to have been subjects of the Greek 
 emperor ; they came from KafFa, with letters commendatory 
 from the imperial governor there, and they sought counte- 
 nance from the emperor himself, which was given cordially, 
 before proceeding to treat with the pope. Their submission 
 may have been, in short, bargained for in the original con- 
 tract. Doubtless the circulars sent round by the emperor to 
 the heads of churches in communion with his church, but 
 out of the pale of his empire, inviting them to join his party 
 to Florence, wotild have caused a good deal of talk about the 
 
 "" Blondus, iii. Dec.lih. x. mentions tainly calls him ' civi Januensi ' in his 
 
 that he read out the decree in Arme- reply. In any ease the Genoese owed 
 
 nian, when it was promulgated. theirpossessions in these parts, of whidi' 
 
 1033 Colet. ibid. p. 1214-16, headed Pera likewise was one, to Michael Pa- 
 
 " Pauli imperialis consulis, et regentis Iseologus, and were not independent of 
 
 civitatis Caffse.' But is 'imperialis' a his successors, though sometimes at 
 
 surname or not? Justiniani, being a war with them, 
 connection of the 'Imperiali' family of '"" Ibid. p. 1216. 
 Genoa, asserts it is ; and Eugenius cer* 
 
5f34 CHEISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 council among Christians of all denominations in those 
 countries to which they were addressed. As we were told by 
 Syropulus,'^^' as soon as ever it had been settled that a council 
 of the east and the west would meet, the emperor despatched 
 his envoy Jagaris to Iberia or Georgia, whither he could have 
 scarce gone without skirting Armenia, to Trebizond, Mol- 
 davia, Eussia, and Servia. The bishops who came from those 
 parts and sat in the council, came at his invitation and sum- 
 mons. Paul Longimanus was charged by him at the same 
 time with similar missives for the patriarchs of Antioch, 
 Jerusalem, and Alexandria, requesting their attendance, and 
 probably engaging them to speak favourably of the council 
 in their respective sees. Not being able to absent themselves 
 from their flocks just then, they empowered others who were 
 going to act for them. As the council went on, they were 
 apprised of its progress by the Constantinopolitan patriarch, 
 as we heard from their own statement. And as both he and 
 some of their own representatives were strongly in favour of 
 the union, it would not be till after the return of the Greeks 
 to Constantinople some time that they would be for disparag- 
 ing it themselves. Hence Philotheus, patriarch of Alexandria, 
 writing to Eugenius from Egypt to acknowlege the receipt of 
 the Florentine decree sent to him by the pope, testifies to the 
 feelings of deference with which it inspired him, and trusts 
 to be able to give his unqualified adhesion to it, as it had 
 reached him contemporaneously with despatches from the em- 
 peror, giving precisely the same account of it as the pope. 
 Albert the Franciscan is mentioned as having been the 
 bearer of the good news from Eugenius. 
 
 This mention of the name of Albert in connectipn with 
 Egypt, and with the patriarch of Alexandria whom he found 
 there, throws light upon one more of the unions, happening 
 to be the third in importance, of which Florence was the 
 scene — namely, that of the Jacobites. Their patriarch John, 
 another ' humble servant of the servants of Christ,' and 
 'patriarch of S. Mark, that is of Alexandria and all Egypt, 
 Ethiopia and Libya, western Pentapolis, and Africa,' speaks 
 to their mission having been occasioned by a letter received 
 from the pope by Albert the Franciscan ; and the date of his 
 reply to it, ' Chayren, September 12, a.d. 1440, points to the 
 
 "" Lib. ill. 2. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLORENCE. S3^ 
 
 same conclusion, as designating in all probability the ancient 
 town of Sethron in the east of Egypt, and adjusting it in 
 point of time to the mission of Albert to the orthodox or 
 Melchite patriarch. '^^' Thus Philotheus would seem to have 
 proved the same channel of communication with the Jacobites 
 in Egypt that Isaiah patriarch of Jerusalem had been with 
 the Armenians, to have assisted Albert in making himself and 
 his despatches intelligible to them, and spoken in favour of 
 their accepting the invitation to union which he brought 
 them from Florence. What is called, therefore, the decree 
 for the Jacobites,""*" is to be understood of the Jacobites in 
 Egypt exclusivelv, whose patriarch is found dating his letter 
 from thence, ana whose ambassador Andrew, bearer of their 
 petition for union to the pope, is introduced as abbot of 
 S. Antony,'^^" a designation sufficiently bespeaking the lo- 
 cality of his convent. 
 
 There was another correspondence of about the same date, 
 and of some interest, though too local to be followed by any 
 decree : that of the Ethiopians, or Abyssinians, inhabiting 
 Jerwtalem. An abbot, indeed, named Nicodemus, delivered 
 an address in the council of Florence, September 2, a.d. 
 1441, as ambassador from the Ethiopian king, but it was in 
 their behalf exclusively ; '**' and a letter from themselves, 
 petitioning for union, is dated Jerusalem, October 14, pro- 
 bably of the year before."'''* Here, again, we may suppose 
 the Greek patriarch Isaiah to have worked benevolently for 
 Eugenius with the separated Christians of his own metropolis. 
 Eugenius,'^''* replied to them from Florence in a letter dated 
 October 4, a.p. 1441. Later, he seems to have expected a 
 deputation from the Ethiopians on a larger scale, as we find 
 him writing from Florence once more, October 4, a.d. 1442, 
 to the canons of S. Peter's, Rome,'^" to bid them show thfe 
 ambassadors of the king of Ethiopia, when they arrive there, 
 the celebrated relic of S. Veronicg,. i 
 
 The fourth decree promulgated is no longer dated as from 
 
 '«'» Colet. ibid. pp. 1217,1218. The 1441. 
 
 letter of the Melchite patriarch given ""' Eeceived by the pope, Aug. 31, 
 
 by Mansi. Sippl. ad Cotet. vol. v. the year is not given, ibid. p. 1218-20. 
 
 p. 218, can only have been from Philo- "" Ibid. p. 1230-33. 
 
 thens. "" Ibid. 
 
 '«»» Ibid. p. 1220-29, dated, accord- ""' Ibid, 
 
 ing to the account given of it at the '"' Ibid. p. 1234. 
 council of Trent (ibid. p. 1219) a.d. 
 
536 CHRISTIAJSr SECTS OP THE EAST. 
 
 .Florence, but from the Lateran, September 30, a.d. 1444, 
 Eugenius having by that time removed to Eome, and it is 
 beaded for the Syrians, who are further described as inhabit- 
 ing Mesopotamia, between the Tigris and Euphrates.'"* 
 ■These, therefore, were the Jacobites of Syria, as distinct from 
 Egypt; and they sent Abdala, archbishop of Edessa, to 
 Tepresent them and their patriarch Ignatius. As the three 
 patriarchs of Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria declared 
 ■ against the union, or rather the way iu which it was being 
 ■carried out, in their synodical letter of April 6, a.d. 1443, of 
 (which previous notice has been taken, it can hardly be sup- 
 posed that this application of the Jacobites of Syria was 
 inspired or encouraged in any sense by the patriarch of 
 Antioch, in whose jurisdiction they lay. The question is, 
 therefore, what prompted it, and the date fixes it. There 
 was a fifth and last decree, such as it is, published in behalf 
 of the Chaldseans and Maronites of Cyprus, Aug. 2, a.d. 1445, 
 at S. Peter's, Rome, that is just a year later. And here it 
 is stated that Andrew, archbishop of Rhodes, with whose 
 antecedents we are well acquainted, having been sent into 
 Cyprus and into the east as legate by Eugenius, after the 
 passing of the decrees at Florence for the Greeks, Armenians, 
 and Jacobites, to publish them in those parts, Timothy 
 metropolitan of the Chaldseans in Cyprus, or Nestorians, as 
 they werr there called, and Elias bishop of the Maronites in 
 Cyprus likewise, till then followers of the doctrines of Ma- 
 carius of Antioch, a well-known monothelite, had both made 
 their recantations and professions which are then given, in 
 neither case conspicuous by their length, in return for which 
 they are guaranteed the protection of the pope.'^''^ 
 
 From this statement it seems clear in what the origin of 
 the fourth as well as the fifth decree lay. They were both 
 due to the exertions of Andrew, who had given ample proofs 
 of his zeal at Plorence, in disputing against the Greeks, and 
 who remained there to assist till no more came. Then he 
 was sent off to the east to beat up for recruits, and taking 
 with him the decrees for the Greeks. Armenians, and Jacob- 
 ites of Egypt in triumph, he succeeded in the first year of 
 his mission, or a.d. 1444, in inducing the Syrian Jacobites to 
 apply for admission into the union on the same terms as the 
 
 Ifi4S 
 
 Colet. p. 1238-41. '•" Ibid. p. 1241-43. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLOBENCE. S37 
 
 rest ; and the year following, on his way home through Cyprus, 
 two small communities of Nestorians and Maronites, whom 
 he found there. 
 
 Thus we seem to have got at the bottom of all the recorded 
 unions, at last, at Florence: the Greeks, the Armenians, 
 Jacobites, ^Ethiopians, Syrians, Chaldaeans, and Maronites. 
 Of these, the two first alone were what their name would 
 imply ; and with that of the Greeks, of course, we are not 
 here concerned. The Jacobites were the Jacobites of Egypt 
 exclusively ; the Ethiopians a small colony of Ethiopians or 
 Abyssinians inhabiting Jerusalem; the Syrians only the 
 Jacobites of Syria or Mesopotamia; the Chaldseans and 
 Maronites a congregation of Nestorians, and a congregation 
 of Maronites, existing in Cyprus only. For the Ethiopians of 
 Jerusalem there was no decree passed at all, nor any decree 
 to compare with the others — for there is literally not the 
 shadow of a rule of faith laid down in it for the Chaldsean 
 and Maronite colonies in Cyprus. And. when the three that 
 remain have been thus eliminated and assigned to their 
 proper belongings, they present an appearance that is almost 
 grotesque, and scarce distinguishable from a joke or cari- 
 cature. For Armenians, Jacobites of Egypt, and Jacobites 
 of Syria, who were they but the monophysites of three coun- 
 tries, all in full communion with each other, holding the 
 same errors, and using, as nearly as possible, the same ritual ? 
 Infinitesimal differences tbere may have been among them 
 from their own point of view, but not appreciable by western 
 intellects. Now look at the decrees that were issued for 
 tiiem. There is the well-known proverb amongst us of ' first 
 come, first served : ' it was in this case certainly ' last come, 
 worst used.' The Armenians who came first, and were 
 Jacobites equally with the Syrians who came last, had a decree 
 to themselves, containing all the instruction that was thought 
 expedient in their case, and all to which they were bound in 
 addition was the definition to which the Greeks were pledged. 
 The Jacobites of Egypt, who came next, were bound by all 
 that had been imposed on the Armenians, and something 
 more ; the unfortunate Jacobites of Syria, who came last of 
 all, by all that had been imposed on their brethren of Egypt 
 and something more still. It was just as though Eome 
 should be now treating with the Anglican communion in and 
 out of England, wherever it exists, and should draw up one 
 
538 CHEISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 formula for its members in England to accept, as having been 
 the first to apply; this and another for those inhabiting 
 Scotland, as the next applicants ; both these and a third for 
 all in America, as having been somewhat later in they: 
 application ; all the preceding and a fourth besides for those 
 •who, having been so unfortunate as to have heard of the 
 scheme last, came with overtures three years afterwards from 
 Australia. 
 
 Nor, if we test these decrees by what they contain, are the 
 results a whit more satisfactory. In each case they are 
 represented as having been preceded by a conference between 
 the deputies of those bodies for whose benefit they were in- 
 tended, and learned men of the council named by the pope; 
 and what they were designed to effect was unity of doctrine 
 and discipline throughout the church. For that purpose, 
 ' the holy council approving ' — that is, of course, the Latins 
 who remained after the Greeks were gone — ' and their own 
 deputies consenting,'. Eugenius presented the Armenians with 
 their decree. By it they were bound: 1. To the creed of 
 Constantinople, but with the words ' Filioque ' inserted ; 2. 
 To the definition of the fourth council ; 3. To the definition of 
 the sixth council ; 4. To the decrees of the fourth council, and 
 of all others celebrated by authority of the pope ; 5. To a com- 
 pendium on the sacraments drawn up, he says, by himself, 
 but in reality dovetailed or toned down from a treatise by 
 S. Thomas ; 6. To the creed of S. Athanasius ; 7. To the defi- 
 nition of Plorence ; 8. To the celebration of their principal 
 festivals on the same days as the rest of the church ; and 9, 
 To all that the Roman church holds and approves. Thus the 
 Armenians were rigidly pledged on several points, on which 
 the Greeks had been left free. The Greeks were not asked, 
 nor would they have consented, to accept any of the councils 
 accounted general in the west since the seventh ; the Ar- 
 menians were tied to all councils in general convened by 
 the pope. The Armenians were bound by the teaching of 
 S. Thomas on the sacraments, which it is needless to say not 
 only the Greeks but the Latins themselves were not; for 
 instance, they were required to hold on the sacrament of 
 orders, that as far as the matter of the sacrament is concerned, 
 the priesthood is conferred by the delivery of the chalicg 
 with wine, and of the paten with bread, and by this alone. , 
 
 Now and then, indeed, Eugenius is for diluting or im- 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLORENCE. 539 
 
 proving upon S. Thomas.'"' On confirmation the great 
 Dominican had laid down : ' The minister of this sacrament 
 is the bishop solely , . . and it is erroneously maintained by 
 some Greeks that a simple priest can confer the same.' 
 Eugenius, excluding all mention of the Greeks, says : The 
 ordinary minister of it is the bishop . . . still it is read 
 occasionally, that by dispensation of the apostolic see, for 
 reasonable and very urgent causes, a simple priest has ad- 
 ministered the sacrament of confirmation with chrism pre- 
 pared by the bishop.' For the contents of the chalice, ' wine 
 of the grape, mixed with water in small quantity,' says S. 
 Thomas : Eugenius, ' wine of the grape should be mixed with 
 water in the smailest quantity.' S. Thomas is content to 
 state what the practice was : Eugenius is for proving that the 
 Roman church ' received it from the teaching of SS. Peter 
 and Paul, and has maintained it ever since the church 
 began ' — but how ? The authorities adduced by him are the 
 first of the three pseudo-decretals of Alexander,'*" ' the fifth 
 pope from S. Peter :' and another of Julius, 'the second pope 
 from S. Silvester.' On such evidence he calls upon the Ar- 
 menians to believe the use of the mixed chalice imperative. 
 
 The Jacobites of Egypt, besides what was required of them 
 in common with their brethren of Armenia, were pledged to 
 receive the canon of Scripture as received by the Roman 
 church, to anathematise various heresiarchs by name, to 
 accept a statement about original sin, and to engage not to 
 postpone baptism. None of these things had been specified 
 in the decree for the Armenians. They were required to 
 believe, what the Roman church is said firmly to believe, 
 hold, and teach, that no persons existing outside the catholic 
 church, whether pagans or Jews, heretics or schismatics, 
 can be made partakers of eternal life, but must go into 
 eternal fire . . . and that nobody, no matter what alms 
 he may have given, although he may have shed his blood 
 for the name of Christ, can be saved unless he shall have 
 continued in the bosom and in the unity of the catholic 
 church. In a kind of appendix to their decree, they are 
 committed to some particulars relating to the eucharist, 
 ' which had not been explained in the decree for the Arme- 
 
 1M7 Tiig treatise of S. Thomas is sides those which follow. 
 Opnscul. v. ' De sacram. Ecd.' There "" c. 9, a grand ' locus classicus.' 
 ale other points worth comparing be- 
 
540 CHRISTIAN SECTS OB' THE EAST. 
 
 nians,' to a vindication of fourth marriages, and to a declara- 
 tion that their ambassador had accepted in their name all 
 that the Roman church holds or approves. The Syrian 
 Jacobites, in addition to all this over again, are pledged to a 
 doctrinal exposition on three points, on which their faith had 
 been found defective : namely, 1. The procession of the Holy 
 Ghost ; 2. The two natures ; and 3. The two wills of our Lord. 
 As if their singularities on all these points had not been 
 shared by the Jacobites of Egypt and the Armenians to the 
 full. Five decrees unquestionably made a greater show than 
 one or two ; but nobody, till Eugenius, had been so clever as 
 to discriminate so broadly between one set of Monophysites 
 or Jacobites and another. 
 
 It remains to be observed, in conclusion, that the decree 
 fcr the Armenians was read out in solemn session,'^*' as the 
 definition of the two churches had been, in the cathedral 
 of Florence, Nov. 22, a.d. 1439, in Armenian first by Nerses, 
 who came attached to the embassy, and then in Latin by 
 a Franciscan of the name of Basil, who, as Eugenius says, 
 interpreted for them and for him. The Armenian version of 
 it seems to have been lost, at least it has been only printed 
 in Latin. The decree for the Jacobites followed upon the 
 arrival of abbot Andrew from Egypt, as has been said, and 
 bears date Feb. 4, a.d. 1441. The Jacobite patriarch of 
 Alexandria who sent him says that the letters brought to him 
 from Eugenius had to be translated into Syrian for him to 
 understand them ; and that he sent his profession by Andrew 
 to Eugenius in Syrian likewise. "''^'' Some one unnamed 
 having translated it into Italian, it was translated from 
 Italian into Latin for Eugenius by Blondus his secretary. 
 Syrian was discarded in favour of Arabic, when it came to the 
 decree, which was first read out in Latin before the council 
 in the church of S. Maria Novella, and then in Arabic by 
 Andrew himself. It is subscribed by Eugenius and his car- 
 dinals only, twelve in number, among whom it is said was 
 JBessarion,'^" being the only one, besides the definition, to 
 which any subscriptions are attached at all. Andrew subj 
 sequently pronounced a short address in Arabic which was 
 turned into Latin on the spot, expressive of his devotion to 
 the pope, and entire satisfaction at what had been done. 
 
 '"" Blondus, iii. Dec. lib. x. '"' Only his initial B. is given in 
 
 '"• Colet. torn, xviii. pp. 1217, 1218. the list. 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLORENCE. 541 
 
 A discussion.having arisen in the council of Trent on the 
 decree for the Jacobites, the bishop of Chozza affirming that 
 its date alone showed that the council of Florence was over 
 when it passed, the original, having the Florentine definition 
 and the decree for the Armenians appended to it, was ex- 
 amined by the Tridentine legates, Feb. 26, a.d. 1547, and was 
 afterwards found to agree with the copy kept of it in the fort 
 of S. Angelo by their secretary Massarellus; but whether 
 they were both in Arabic and Latin, or in Latin only, was not 
 stated. The original is still preserved in the Vatican library. 
 The explanation given of the duration of the council was that 
 it went on continuously till Engenius left Florence for Eome, 
 when it was transferred by him to the Lateran."**^ 
 
 The decree for the Jacobites, with all that it included, is 
 said to have been perused in Arabic by Abdalla archbishop of 
 Edessa, representing the Syiian community when it was ap- 
 pended to the doctrinal exposition contained in their decree, 
 and to have been approved of by him.'^*^ Hence we may 
 infer that Arabic was likewise one version of their decree. 
 
 The difference between the decrees for these three sections 
 of monophysites, and the definition to which the Greeks and 
 Latins subscribed, is not to be overlooked. The decrees de- 
 fined nothing for the whole church as the definition had. 
 The Armenian and Jacobite bishops of Egypt and Syria had 
 not been invited to the council, or sat and debated in it on 
 its definition, as the Greeks had ; neither were they joint 
 framers of their own decrees. One by one their ambassadors 
 came and were examined, and the decree followed in each 
 case. Their concurrence was asked before it was read out ; 
 but they had no hand in framing it — and it was expressly 
 directed against tenets to which they had confessed. Those 
 tenets were not differences of opinion or practice merely, but 
 included errors on which general councils had already pro- 
 nounced. It is quite true that the Greeks had no hand in 
 framing these decrees either. It only follows from hence, 
 that it is by no means clear how far they can be called the 
 work of an oecumenical council — how far the council of 
 Florence can be considered oecumenical after the Greeks 
 were gone. That the pope passed them in council is, 
 of course, true; but it was not a council composed as it 
 
 "« Colet. ibid. p. 1219, >«Mbid. p. 1238-41. 
 
542 CHRISTIAN SKCTS OF THE BAST. 
 
 had been, when its definition was framed and promulgated. 
 Nobody can pretend that either the Armenian and Jacobite 
 prelates ever formed part of the council as the prelates of the 
 G-reek church had, or that the decrees promulgated in their 
 behalf are to be regarded as possessed of equal authority with 
 the Florentine definition. 
 
 We have now gone through the different negotiations re^ 
 corded to have taken place, down to the council of Florence 
 inclusively, between the Christian sects of the east and the 
 Latin and Greek churches. And there are two reflections. 
 Surely, which must suggest themselves to most minds on be- 
 coming acquainted with their history, as was said in com- 
 mencing it. The first is, that for the intelligence, candour, 
 and urbanity, manifested in their conferences or corres- 
 pondence respectively, there have been no negotiators on the 
 Latin side comparable with Photius and Theorian. The 
 letters of Photius, even in their present imperfect state, are 
 full of his usual tact and information ; the speechs of Theorian 
 exhibit a masterly combination of philosophical accuracy with 
 common gense. Should the Armenians have kept, and ever 
 had occasion to refer to their back letters, they could not 
 fail to be struck with the difference between the records 
 preserved of their negotiations with the Greek church and 
 the papers received by them from Benedict XII., Clement VI., 
 and Eugenius IV. — from Benedict XII. egregiously misin- 
 forming them on the question of the procession, to say no 
 more ; from Clement VI., overwhelming them with a long 
 list of vexatious interrogatories, and offering a bribe to their 
 king to get them answered according to his wishes ; from 
 Eugenius IV., engaging them to change their ritual on the 
 faith of two spurious authorities adduced by him to establish 
 the superior claims of his own. They would assuredly find no 
 such blemishes attached to the published records of thenego-t: 
 tiations of the Greek church with Armenia, their country. 
 
 The second reflection is, that on the Latin side most of the 
 negotiations had a political character, and therefore suffer 
 proportionably from close inspection. No efforts were made 
 to reclaim any of the heretics of the east till a Latin kingdom 
 had been set up in Palestine, and nine-tenths of the efforts 
 that were made subsequently were confined to the Christiana 
 of Armenia minor, where there was a kingdom and govern- 
 menti with whom it was desirable for other reasons than 
 
NEGOTIATIONS AT FLORENCE. 543 
 
 spiritnal. to cultivate relations, so as to employ them against 
 the Greeks or Turks. 
 
 Negotiations with them were conducted in most cases 
 avowedly for mixed objects: on the Armenian side they 
 were rarely unaccompanied by a direct request for temporal 
 aid. The missions into China and Tartary, and the negotia- 
 tions which preceded them, of which Innocent IV. was the 
 centre, seems alone to have been dictated by the higher 
 motives of evangelising the heathen, of disabusing mankind 
 of their errors, and of reuniting Christendom, honorably to 
 all the various members of it, as one family. To make pro- 
 selytes from the Grneek church, to weaken or assist in conquer- 
 ing it, to outflank it, or occupy positions in its rear, giving 
 Rome the advantage, seems to have been the spiritual object 
 that was sought most otherwise where there was any spiritnal 
 object avowed at all. The Greek church was pointed at as 
 the seed-plot of heresy, the parent of all the theological 
 errors that had led men astray — the only remedy was to des- 
 troy its independence, and bring it completely into subjection 
 to the pope. This was the theory on which the capture of 
 Constantinople was justified, the Greek bishops, where it was 
 possible, turned out of their sees, and the Greek rite sup- 
 pressed. Negotiations with the Christian sects of the east 
 were conducted on the same principle that the conqueror of a 
 country finds it for his policy to pursue, hj making friends 
 with its disaffected citizens or dependent states. "We may 
 picture to ourselves the course that was pursued then, by what 
 might happen now, were Russia to become suddenly master 
 of Constantinople, and the Constantinopolitan patriarch to 
 rise to the full measure, and determine to take the full benefit, 
 of his altered circumstances. Under the successors of Peter 
 the Great he might unquestionably become double the per- 
 sonage that his predecessors had ever been under the de- 
 scendants of Constantine. Should it then ever enter into his 
 head to commence a course of proselytism in the west, he 
 would have a fine harvest before him. His missionaries 
 would cross from Russia to America, from America to Eng- 
 land, and from England to the Continent on their way home. 
 Anthropological or sacramental heresies and schismatical 
 bodies they would encounter in far greater abundance, and 
 more friendly disposed, than ever the Christian sects of the 
 east had been, among whom the orders of S. Dominic and 
 
544 CHRISTIAN SECTS OF THE EAST. 
 
 S. Francis laboured. Who can say how far retributive justice 
 might crown his eiforts, or what results ensue ? We have, 
 the best reasons, indeed, for thinking that the Greeks, had 
 they the power, would never aspire to carry their revenge so 
 far ; but if they did, Constantinople would only be doing by 
 the west as it had been done by. 
 
545 
 
 CHAPTEE X. 
 
 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 This year 1,000 years back exactly, Photius was penning his 
 encyclic — exactly sixty-seven years after the coronation of 
 Charlemagne — just as, in round numbers, 1,000 years inter- 
 vened between the coronation of Charlemagne and that of 
 the first Napoleon. The coronation of Napoleon closed the 
 political system inaugurated by the coronation of Charlemagne 
 in the west, and the year on wliich we are now entering bids 
 fair to sweep away the last remnants of the ecclesiastical sys- 
 tem depending on it, against which the encyclic of Photius, 
 as it.was the earliest, so it has ever since been the standing 
 protest on the part of the collective east. And should the spirit 
 of Photius be still alive in any of his oppressed countrymen, 
 conversant with the stern facts of the intermediate period, it 
 would be the most natural thing in the world to hear them 
 apostrophising over the spiritual chief of Christian Latiurn in 
 his adversity, and exclaiming : 
 
 Pallas te hoc Tulnere, Pallas immolat."" 
 
 How far it would be applicable to him will be seen by re- 
 capitulating the events which have been adduced in each of 
 the foregoing chapters, and the conclusions which have been 
 founded on them from time to time. It is the most delicate 
 of all questions that is forced upon us : nevertheless in the 
 interests of truth, it must be looked full in the face. 
 
 If there is any inference, then, deducible from facts at all, 
 the three following would seem to be the only conclusions 
 consistent with history: 1. That the division of Christendom 
 was occasioned by the division of the empire that was accom- 
 
 lau virg. ^n. xii. 948 : ' 'Tis Pallas, Pallas guides the blade.' — Conington. 
 
546 GENERAL SUMMAKf. 
 
 plished under Charlemagne ; 2. That the' pope, the head of 
 the church by divine right, has been pledged in practice for 
 the last 1,000 years to the abnormal position of a party leader, 
 or spiritual chief of the Latins ; 3. That the Greeks, whether 
 as a nation or not, as members of a Christian church, have been 
 atrociously treated. Let us endeavour to mark out exactly 
 how much is implied, and ought to be understood, in each of 
 these propositions. 
 
 1. We cannot assume that every division of the empire 
 would have divided Christendom; otherwise Christendom 
 might have been rent, upwards of four centuries earlier, into 
 as many portions as the empire was divided on the death of 
 Constantine amongst his sons, and been a sharer in all its 
 vicissitudes of redintegration or fresh partition from that 
 time forth. Whereas the fact is, that in those four centuries, 
 with one exception, all the oecumenical councils of the church 
 were held, the last of them actually meeting when Charle- 
 magne was king, but not emperor, and king, in virtue of the 
 sovereignty that had been adjudicated to Pepin, his father, 
 by the last of the Greek popes, Zachariah. Similarly, we 
 must beware of exaggerating the connection which there cer- 
 tainly is between the coronation of Charlemagne, under the 
 circumstances under which jt took place, and the results to 
 Christendom that ensued, yet by a mere accident might have 
 been changed or diverted from what they were. Had Charle- 
 magne married the empress of the east!, as was actually pro- 
 posed, and left a family by her, who shall say whether the 
 east and west might not have been reunited for centuries 
 under one master. Had the successors of Charlemagne ex- 
 tended his empire, without dividing it, in the west, it is at 
 least doubtful whether the pope would not have remained as 
 much of a subject as ever; at all events his dealings would 
 have been with one potentate, not many ; the conflicting in- 
 terests of independent nationalities would never have per- 
 plexed his course. 
 
 Lastly, let us not be supposed to imply that the crowning 
 of Charlemagne by the pope was an act of treason to the 
 Greek emperor. For that matter it would be suJSBcient to 
 refer to the diplomatic communications that were exchanged 
 by the two emperors after it was over,"'^^ or to point out that 
 Irene, the murderess of her son, and Nicephorus, who de- 
 
 '«" All told in Gibbon, c. xlix. 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 547 
 
 throned her, were both usurpers, notoriously disentitled to any 
 sacred rights of their own; the points involved in it, to which 
 we must confine our attention, leave the duties of rulers to 
 their subjects, and of subjects to their rulers, on one side. 
 
 The revolt of Italy which preceded, and in same sense pre- 
 pared for it, was applauded by the orthodox Greeks them- 
 .selves; and if Gregory II., in whose pontificate it commenced, 
 was a Roman, his two next successors, and his six immediate 
 predecessors, were natives of Greece or Syria. It was, there- 
 fore, not a national in any sense, but a religious revolt ; 
 Italians and Greeks, patriarch and pope, were ranged on the 
 same side againa* the destroyers of images, headed by Leo 
 the Isaurian. The contest raged on uninterruptedly, and 
 without any perceptible modification of parties, during the 
 liwo following reigns of Constantine V. and Leo IV. Then 
 Irene, the widow of Leo, came forward to assist in reversing 
 the iconoclastic sentence of the 338 bishops, who had met, 
 A.D. 754, under the fifth Constantine ; at the second Nicene 
 council the empire fraternised with the church once more, and 
 Rome and Constantinople wished each other jay of the triumph 
 of orthodoxy for which they had been joint labourers and 
 joint sufferers. 
 
 They had hardly celebrated their victory and proclaimed 
 their unanimity, before the spirit of Leo the Isaurian passed 
 over to the extreme west, and was revived in Charlemagne. 
 Through his instrumentality the bishops of the north of 
 Italy, France, and Germany, met at Frankfort, condemned 
 the council which the pope had confirmed, and promulgated 
 a work in the name of their king, levelled against not merely 
 what it had ruled on images, but what it had stamped with 
 its approval on doctrine. The acts of their council have been 
 destroyed, but one of its canons and this work remains, as 
 well as the elaborate rejoinder to them immediately returned 
 by the pope. It is impossible to peruse them all and not be 
 struck with their supreme relevancy to the Greek question. 
 What passed on the subject of images on either side is not 
 worth recalling, for on that head the west before long eschewed 
 its prejudices, and gave way to tlie east and to the pope ; 
 what passed on the subject of the procession is of untold 
 moment, for on that head it was the pope who forsook the 
 pope and a general council for the west. We may begin by 
 asking, why was it that Charlemagne was crowned, and Leo 
 
 N V 2 
 
548 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 the Isaurian revolted from, both of them being iconoclasts, 
 and Charlemq,gne with not only the experience of the whole 
 controversy before him, but the rulings of a general council 
 confirmed by the pope to assist him to form a correct judg- 
 ment on it ? "'^ What other answer is consistent with truth, 
 than that the Greek emperor had confiscated all the patri- 
 monies of the pope in Sicily and Calabria, and his jurisdiction 
 over Illyria, which even the orthodox Irene failed to restore, 
 while Charlemagne compensated to him for their loss by a 
 nobler and far ampler patrimony nearer home. Again, in 
 the oath taken by him at his coronation, he swore to maintain 
 the faith and privileges of the church intact, among which 
 was the splendid offering just received at his hands. Further, 
 his successors ever afterwards engaged to do the same, or they 
 were not> crowned.'^" No wonder at all, therefore, thaj; 
 Charlemagne and his decrees against images should have been 
 consigned to oblivion, and Charlemagne and his benefactions 
 to the church exhibited to posterity in their most attractive 
 form. Unfortunately there are chains which are chains of 
 gold, and there are gifts which come medicated, as it were, 
 from the hands of their donors. Is it not the conscience of 
 the catholic church in every age that says : 
 
 ''n. iratSey, us &p' Tjfuy oh (r^iKpwv KaKuy 
 "^Hp^ev Th Bupov 'HpaK\u rh ird^irifiov ; ^^^^ 
 
 How it has escaped notice, or been kept out of sight so long, 
 is another question, but of the fact there is the clearest his- 
 torical evidence, that, together with the donation of Charle- 
 magne, the Latin church accepted his version and interpre- 
 tation of the creed. For 1,000 years, in round numbers, the 
 Latin church has been committed to the theological 'ipse 
 dixit ' of a secular autocrat, as lax in practice as Henry 
 VIII. on divorce and marriage,'^^" as sanguinary, when it 
 
 16S6 That his empire continued to Not thy conversion, but those rich 
 
 reject images long after his death, is domains 
 
 shown "by Gieseler, E, H. Per. iii. That the first wealthy pope re- 
 
 DiT. i. § 11. ceived of thee.' 
 
 "'^' See the quotation from Thei- As quoted by Dean Stanley, Eastern 
 
 ner, Christendom's Divisions, part i. Ch. lect. vi. 
 
 note 117. • '"">" Here are the facts: 'Cum matris 
 
 ""' Soph. Track, v. 873, almost and hortatu filiam Desiderii regis Lango- 
 
 parodied by Dante, Inferno, xix. 115. bardorum duxisset uxorem, incertum 
 
 ;'Ah! Gonstantine, to how much qvA de causA post annum earn, re- 
 ill gave birth, pvdiavU.' This was No. 1. ' Et Hil- 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 549 
 
 suited his purpose,'^*" as Eccelin da Eomano, son-in-law of 
 Frederic II., great in intellect and great in arms, but un- 
 scrupulous, and impatient of any control short of his own 
 will, in both. Listen to his exposition of the creed once 
 more, which he propounds not as a learner or enquirer but as 
 sitting in judgment on a profession of faith which he knew 
 to be that of the second bishop in the world, accepted by a 
 general council, confirmed by the pope."''*' ' The profession 
 of Tarasius, is not that of the single procession, like some, who 
 though they may have been in a manner silent on the proces- 
 sion of the Holy Ghost from the Son, were certainly believers 
 in His processiojj from the Father and the Son.' 
 
 In other words, our Lord had been in a manner silent, 
 where he might have been more explicit ; and if any previous 
 oecumenical councils of the church had professed their faith 
 in His words, they believed more. ' The whole church 
 throughout the world confesses and believes as I have stated,' 
 is his arrogant assertion, with the acts of the seventh council 
 before him, in which of all the extant professions stamped 
 with its approval the only one wanting is literally that which 
 he maintains to have been immemorially the profession and 
 belief of the whole church. Look what treatment even the 
 head of the church gets from him. First and foremost of all 
 the missives despatched by him to the bishops of Spain from 
 Frankfort is a letter written in the name of the pope, which 
 it is next to certain was not composed by him. Even so, read 
 his own letter which is placed last in the series, and then 
 say which of the two letters it is that claims to fix the doc- 
 trine of the church most ? Adrian, the reigning pope, it was 
 who supplied him with a copy of the acts of the seventh 
 council, which he had confirmed himself. The magnificent 
 prince returns them to the pope refuted by himself, having'**^ 
 
 degaidam de gente Suavorum praa- was No. 4. ' Post cujus mortem tres 
 
 cipuse Dcbilitatis feminam in matrimo- habuitconcubinas.' Eginhard,B.(eati!) 
 
 nium accepit.' This was No. 2. 'Then Caroli M. Vit. c. IS. 
 
 follows a list of the children of their '°°° ' He beheaded in one day 4,000 
 
 marriage. Then those 'de FastradA Saxons, an act of atrocious butchery.' 
 
 uxore, quae de orientalium Francorum, Hallam, Middle Ages, part i. e. i. 
 
 Germanorum videlicit, gente erat.' "'°' The references for what follows 
 
 This was No. 3. Then a child during have been given in full, c. viii. and 
 
 her life-time ' de concubinA qn4dam, therefore are not repeated, 
 
 cujus nomen modo m'femorise non "'^ See more particularly the fourth 
 
 occurrit.' Then, 'defunctA FastradA, book, c. 13, as quoted above p. 435. 
 Liudgardam Alemannam duxit.' This 
 
550 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 at the head of all the bishops in his dominioDs condemned 
 its decrees and attacked its creed. Did Adrian show any 
 signs of imitating Vigilius and of retracing his steps ? On 
 the contrary, without a moment's delay — with his dying 
 breath, it may be said — he defends the council deliberately, 
 paragraph after paragraph, against the arguments that had 
 been brought against it by his patron. Where is the docu- 
 ment in which Charlemagne retracts his offensive treatise, 
 and defers to the superior judgment of the pope ? 
 
 Leo III. was accused of grave misdemeanours to Charle- 
 magne before he crowned him, and submitted to take the 
 canonical oath of purgation before him in public.'^"^^ Nine 
 years afterwards the emperor did him the honor of consult- 
 ing him on the interpolation of the creed — which had by that 
 time given umbrage to the Greeks — and the pope not only 
 declined sanctioning it, but registered his preference for the 
 old form on tables of silver set up in the most sacred part of 
 his church. Yet he seems to have taken the precaution, at 
 the same, time, of transmitting his circular to the easterns 
 under cover to Charlemagne — unless the same hand may be 
 thought to have written for Leo that wrote for Adrian — to 
 satisfy the emperor that he believed as he did. But, in any 
 case, what became of the refusal of the pope to sanction the 
 interpolated form of the creed? When, sixty years after- 
 wards, the grandson of Charlemagne was seated on the throne 
 of France, the bishop of Paris wrote : ' Every church in 
 France sings it in that form every Sunday.' In that form it 
 was carried into Bulgaria by the missionaries of Nicholas I. — 
 but apparently without any orders from him — where it had 
 the effect of bringing the two churches into fatal collision ; 
 and when John VIII. raised his voice against the innovators 
 for the last time, he was disgracefully lampooned by them as 
 a woman, and no man. When or how the popes adopted 
 the interpolation themselves is a secret that has been kept 
 under lock and key ever since ; but it was cardinal Humbert 
 the Frenchman, under the French pope Leo, who tried to 
 turn the tables upon the Greeks by charging them with 
 having expunged it from their creed : it was Anselm the 
 semi-Norman, in the pontificate of the semi-Norman Urban, 
 who first expounded the doctrine that was involved in it, 
 south of Lombardy, face to face with the pope. But the 
 16S3 Eginhard, Annal. a.d. 800, and Annul. Lauriss. ibid. 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 551 
 
 venerable archbishop of Canterbury was called upon to defend 
 a thesis which was not his own, nor could he tell when or 
 how it came in : all he can say about is that it is a Latin 
 addition.'*"* He was far from being aware that the interpo- 
 lation in which he professed his faith had been appended to 
 the creed in the teeth of the pope who was consulted on 
 it, or that the first literally to clothe the doctrine which he 
 had been defending in a dogmatic form was neither pope nor 
 doctor but a blood-stained emperor. Charlemagne decreed 
 both the interpolation and the doctrine upon false premises, 
 and by his manner of doing it — for I need have no scruples 
 in criticising hi» statements — he well-nigh succeeded, as 
 Photius has well shown, in committing the church to a 
 formal denial of the first article of the Christian faith. His 
 assertion, which has beguiled so many since then, was, that 
 all those who affirmed the single, were believers in the double 
 procession in the same sense — in other words, that those who 
 inserted the clause 'Who proceedeth from the Father' into 
 the creed, meant really by it ' Who proceedeth from the 
 Father and the Son.' Just the sort of rough and ready 
 dogmatism that we might have expected from him. Any 
 child would have interpreted their meaning better. The 
 framers of the creed, after having professed their belief 
 in ' one God, the Father Almighty ' next predicated of 
 the two other Persons in the Grodhead these two truths : 
 of the Son, that He was ' begotten, or born, of the F'ather ;' 
 of the Holy Ghost, that He ' proceeds from the Father.' On 
 their relations to each other, apart from the Father, nothing 
 was said: their relations to the F'ather exclusively were fixed 
 by the council. Had another grave council, like the first and 
 second, been called upou subsequently to define their relations 
 to each other, is it credible for a moment that it would have 
 so defined them as to obscure what had been defined pre- 
 viously respecting the relations of either of them to the 
 Father ? As it is, who can deny that the doctrine of the 
 original procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father has 
 been imperilled by including it in the same proposition with 
 His derivative procession, however eternal, from the Son? 
 Suppose, for instance, the Greeks had not stood out for the 
 last 1,000 years for the old form of the creed, who can say, 
 humanly speaking of course, whither we might not have 
 '"•< De Process. Sp. 8. c. 22. Comp. Prol, ' sicut nos Latini confitemur.' 
 
552 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 drifted from it by this time ? On the other hand, suppose 
 the change had run, 'Who proceedeth from the Father, 
 Who by gift of the Father proceedeth equally from the Son, 
 and is sent by the Son,' would not the doctrine of the 
 double procession have been expressed with greater accuracy, 
 without disturbing any of the old landmarks, without the ap- 
 parent irreverence of adding to words spoken by our Lord 
 Himself? 
 
 It was in an evil hour, undoiibtedly, for the church that 
 Eome, forgetful of their avowed antagonism to the teaching 
 of Adrian I. and of the seventh general council, slid into first 
 countenancing, and then authorising, the doctrine of the 
 Caroline books on the procession ; so that, in point of fact, 
 they furnished at once the thesis which the schoolmen are 
 found defending, and the mature judgment at which the 
 second council of Lyons arrived ; corrected indeed, but on 
 one point only, by the Florentine definition ; for the Floren- 
 tine fathers persisted in affirming — ^what the Greeks after- 
 wards declared they had committed a great sin in assenting 
 to — that the addition to the creed had been made 'lawfully 
 and justifiably by reason of the necessity that existed then.' 
 The historical account of the necessity that existed then is, 
 that it was the iron will of Charlemagne domineering over 
 that of the pope. 
 
 How was it all brought about? Are there evidences of 
 any clandestine understanding between Eome and the em- 
 pire ; a vile betrayal of the faith on one side in return for 
 temporal dominion on the other? Happily, this is just what 
 we have the best of reasons for affirming that there never 
 was ; it is negatived not merely by the glorious struggles in 
 •defence of the faith by Eome for so many centuries, to which 
 S. Martin had fallen a victim as late as the seventh, but also 
 by the plain fact that Adrian upheld with his last breath the 
 doctrine of the seventh council against his princely bene- 
 factor, and Leo III. could never be brought to assent to the 
 interpolation of the creed, say or do what Charlemagne would. 
 No ; it was a gradual, and in many ways involuntary, change 
 that stole over Eome. For two centuries it was doubtful 
 whether the successors of Adrian and Leo would be able to 
 maintain their neutrality, or succumb to party. At length 
 the influences of their new position, founded indeed by 
 Charlemagne, but boisterously recast by the Normans, over- 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 553 
 
 came them, and they gave in — gave in, so that what one 
 pope had justified and vindicated as head of the church was 
 gradually allowed by his successors to be made a 'casus belli' 
 by one half of the church against the other. 
 
 Nor was this the whole of the mischief by any means. 
 Whether from wilfulness or from sheer ignorance, whether 
 to give colour to their separation from the Greek empire, or 
 gratify the passion for mythology that even Christianity can- 
 not eradicate from the heart of man, there can be no doubt 
 but that one of the principal occupations of men of letters in 
 the west, contemporary with Charlemagne, must have been 
 to fabricate documents under fictitious names, and multiply 
 pseudonymous compositions on every subject of public in- 
 terest at that date. According to the absence or presence of 
 malicious motives in the minds, of those who framed them, 
 lies or legends would be their proper name. But as the 
 effect which they were designed to have was decidedly prac- 
 tical, so it has been far more pestiferous, we may be allowed 
 to hope, than any of their most ardent votaries could have 
 intended. There was an air of positiveness, assurance, and 
 menace about them highly characteristic of the autocrat, and 
 powerfully ministering to the naturally domineering propen- 
 sities of the Latin mind, that stood out in marked contrast 
 to the genuine freedom and philanthrophy of the gospel, and 
 to the hitherto large and free spirit of the church. To in- 
 stance the most perfect specimen of the kind in all other 
 respects, the Athanasian creed, claiming at least equal 
 antiquity with the Nicene, and identity with it as regards doc- 
 trine. The Nicene fathers having set forth the faith of the 
 church in terms taken from Scripture with one exception, 
 end by anathematising the maintainors of certain errors, which 
 are carefully specified : ' Those who say that there was a time 
 when the Son of God was not, or that He was not before He 
 was begotten ; or that He was begotten after the manner of 
 a creature,' and so forth, but only those ; only those are 
 anathematised who had actually transgressed. How different 
 the tenor of the Athanasian creed, which, after setting forth 
 the faith of the church reasoned out with extraordinary pre- 
 cision, but couched in anything but Scriptural language, 
 finishes with the sweeping sentence: 'This is the catholic 
 faith, which except a Tnan believe faithfully, he cannot be 
 saved.' While the church in council is content with denouncing 
 
554 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 a specific class of persons obstinately naaintaining errors 
 opposed to the leading articles of her public creed, a private 
 doctor is made to pronounce the salvation of all impossible, 
 who are not faithful believers in every single particular of 
 his dogmatic statement. Whether the Athanasian creed 
 itself set the fashion, or was drawn up to suit a fashion 
 already set, the resemblance between it and the known for- 
 mularies of the age of Charlemagne is, to say the least, very 
 striking. ' This is the catholic faith,' says Charlemagne of 
 the creed paraphrased by himself, ' which everyone keeping 
 whole and undefiled will have everlasting life.' And Leo III. 
 in the profession attributed to him, but in any case submitted 
 to Charlemagne before it was published : ' He that believes 
 not according to this right faith is damned by the catholic 
 and apostolic church.' Having been falsely palmed upon S. 
 Athanasius to begin with, it was not long before the Athan- 
 asian creed became the occasion of a foul calumny- The 
 Greeks were taunted on false evidence with having cast oflf 
 their faith. ' You deny the double procession ! Why, here 
 is S. Athanasius, the greatest of all your doctors, the presi- 
 ding genius in the greatest of all your councils, teaching it in 
 one of his most dogmatic works.' Then, as other untruths 
 were needed to support the first, the same teaching was 
 attributed to the second and third councils, and to SS. 
 Damasus and Cyril their contemporaries. It was even 
 asserted that the Greeks had expunged it fraudulently from 
 the creed of Nicsea. Spurious works were ascribed to the 
 fathers, or their genuine works were interpolated, to make 
 antiquity testify, not merely to the doctrine of the double 
 procession in the abstract, but to the doctrine as laid down 
 in the Caroline books. 
 
 The forgeries of the pseudo-decretals and pseudo-donation 
 had the same effect upon discipline that the Athanasian creed 
 had upon doctrine. They entailed another set of false theses 
 upon the Latin church, and another set of false charges 
 against the Greek. The Greeks were accused of rebellion 
 against the pope, because they took their stand upon their 
 genuine canons sanctioned by his predecessors, and refused 
 him the immediate jurisdiction that was claimed for him 
 under the pseudo-decretals and pseudo-donation. They ad- 
 mitted his primacy, as their acts testify; but they denied 
 that he had any patriarchal or metropolitan rights over the 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 55S 
 
 east. The case was precisely what it would be in the church 
 of England were the acknowledged primate of all England 
 to insist on coming into every parish within the provinces of 
 York and Canterbury, and assuming to exercise the powers 
 vested by the canons in their respective rectors and diocesans ; 
 excommunicating them as rebels in case they opposed his 
 action, and grounding his interference upon forged instru- 
 ments, anterior to the canons under which they had been 
 hitherto governed. Whether the pseudo-decretals and 
 pseudo-donation were framed on purpose to be employed 
 against the east, we are not called upon to decide ; it is enough 
 for our object to h^ve produced instances in abundance where 
 they were so used. Every convert from the Greek to the Latin 
 church is found appealing to them, as the authorities on 
 which he would defend his submission; those who argued 
 at the council of Florence before the pope in support of his 
 prerogatives are found citing them with the utmost assu- 
 rance, and a perfect belief in their genuineness ; contending 
 even that their testimony should be specially noticed in 
 the decree defining his power. The pope himself refers the 
 Armenians to them in his ofiicial capacity, as affording proof 
 positive of the apostolic origin of the mixed chalice. In 
 short, the Latin church was gradually committed to a tissue 
 of falsehoods through their instrumentality resulting in so 
 much injustice to the Grreeks, that it would be difiScult to 
 conceive any honest man now in communion with Rome 
 reading through merely the acts of the last council held on 
 the Greek question, and testing the genuineness of the 
 authorities addiiced on the Latin side as he went on, without 
 feeling his cheeks tingle. It is some relief no doubt to re- 
 flect that among the detectors of the forgeries which were 
 then in vogue, learned men of the Roman catholic church — 
 Jesuits and Benedictines principally, let it be said to their 
 credit — occupy foremost rank ; still when there has been 
 any public acknowledgment made to the Greeks since, that 
 almost all the principal authorities urged against them at the 
 council, which they have been so much abused for repudiating, 
 have turned out spurious ? Having appealed to them offi- 
 cially, the Latin church must disown them officially, or 
 remain open to the imputation of upholding what having 
 once been proved fictious can only be upheld as lies. 
 
 These, then, are the encumbrances, the rent-charge or 
 
555 GENERAL SUMMABY. 
 
 mortgage with which the property was burdened, which the 
 pope received from Charlemagne. One and all of them were 
 the work of his age ; one and all of them were forced upon 
 the pope gradually by him, or by the Latin party that was 
 formed then. Direct evidence has been adduced that this 
 was the case with respect to the creed; indirect evidence 
 seems to warrant the conclusion that this was equally the 
 case with respect to the pseudo-decretals and the pseudo- 
 donation. If I thought that the pope either had a hand in 
 compiling those forgeries, or palmed them upon the church 
 knowing them to be false, I would never say another word in 
 his defence. What I gather from history is, that the Latin 
 party coerced the papacy, not that the papacy demoralised 
 the Latin party. Let us deal with this whole question 
 honestly. It is no part of 'the faith of catholics' — at least 
 in England : I quote from a standard authority — to believe in 
 the temporal power ; for, ' as to any temporal power being of 
 divine right vested in the apostolic see, both Scripture and 
 history testify against such a doctrine being a term of cotti- 
 tnunion or a revealed truth.' '^^'. And as to the temporalities 
 bestowed on the holy see by Charlemagne, it would be im- 
 possible to speak of them more truly than was done by the 
 268 bishops and archbishops in their address of June 9, 1862, 
 to his present holiness : ' What monarchy or commonwealth, 
 either in ancient or modern times, can boast of rights so 
 ■august and of such long prescription, and of such undoubted 
 authority ? If all these should be once contemned and 
 trampled upon, what prince can be sure of his realms, what 
 commonwealth of its territory ? ''^^*' Charlemagne was free 
 to bestow them, and the pope to accept them ; there never 
 was a title to property better established. And they placed 
 
 1S65 Waterworth's revised edition of text, after which as follows : 'On points 
 
 The Faith of Catholics, dedicated to avowedly undefined by the voice of the 
 
 bishop Walsh. Dolman, 1846. The church the opinions of men are not 
 
 whole passage runs thus : ' On the two restrained — this proves our liberty ; 
 
 points contained in these two proposi- but it touches not the substance of 
 
 tions, that is, the personal infallibility, faith, if on such questions discordant 
 
 and the temporal power of the Eoman notions have been entertained.'' — Vol. ii. 
 
 bishop, it is not necessary to adduce pp. 110, 111. The italics are the author's, 
 
 authorities. That the former is not an This work, I take it, explains the sense 
 
 essential term of communion, is certain, in which the creed of Pins IV. has been 
 
 whatever may be the private opinions received in England, 
 
 of individuals, as to whether that in- '^"^ See note 121, Christendom's 
 
 fallibility does or does not form a part Divisions, part i. 
 ' of the deposit of faith.' Then as in the 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 557 
 
 the pope in ' the providential ' position which he has occu- 
 pied for the last 1,000 years, to the civilisation of Europe, 
 to the reconstitution of society : by teaching the one Chris- 
 tian manners, by providing the other with governments im- 
 pressed with a sense of their responsibility before God and 
 Divine law.'^" 
 
 Whether the work might not have been done as well, or 
 better, had the holy see never been endowed with tempo- 
 ralities, is a question on which there may be two opinions. 
 But, taking facts as they are, Europe can never deny those 
 revifying influences, that had the effect of raising it from 
 the dust, when reqpvery seemed hopeless, to have radiated 
 from Eome for the most part, and had their source in the 
 pope. On this point positively two opinions are impossible. 
 Would that the gain to the papacy and to the church 
 had been half as clear. The property bestowed upon the 
 holy see by Charlemagne, besides coming into the hands of 
 the pope with a mortgage upon it to which his assent had 
 not been obtained, committed him to new duties in a way 
 that could only be proved by experience, and dawned upon 
 him so gradually as to blind him to their real nature. Step 
 by step under their influence he drifted away insensibly from 
 his original type. The gift was fair and comely to look upon ; 
 and he was far from realising that, in accepting it he might 
 be putting on the Nessian tunic over the seamless robe, 
 splendidly bedizened for outward show, but each time that it 
 came within range of the sacrificial fire convulsing his whole 
 frame with violent shocks, and sticking all the closer to him for 
 the greater distress of mind and body that it occasioned. His 
 best friends called out to him when they saw him in it ; ' in 
 his successisti non Petro, sed Constantino.' '^''^ Prophecies 
 were rife all over the church that it would be his ruin. For 
 every passage that might be cited from the fathers on the 
 Divine prerogatives of the Eoman church, two might be cited 
 from medieval churchmen of approved name, denouncing the 
 institution or the action of the Eoman court. The character 
 which he was assuming was radically distinct from the 
 
 "" Ibid. §§ ] 9, 20, 30, 40. and decked with gold and costly silks ; 
 
 1™' De Consid. lib iv. 3. ' For in- nor mounted on a milk-white horse an j 
 
 deed you sit in Peter's seat,' as S. surrounded by guards; nor attended by 
 
 Bernard had said a little before, 'yet swarms of servants.' — it/c, byNeander, 
 
 of him we nowhere read that he went p. 302, Wrench's tr. 
 about adorned with precious stones. 
 
558 GEXERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 character which he had hitherto borne. The terms ' bishop ' 
 and ' prince,' ' church ' and ' court,' were not synonymes. He, 
 whose vicar he claimed to be, had said to him whose successor 
 he was, ' Get thee behind me, Satan,'"°» for only counselling 
 Him to deflect from the harsher lines of His mission. ' Man, 
 who made Me a judge or a divider over you ? ' was His reply, 
 when asked to arbitrate on a question involving earthly pos- 
 sessions.'*'" He was a 'king ; ' He never denied it ; but His 
 kingdom was emphatically ' not of this world.' '*'' ' Fear God, 
 honour the king,' had been the language of the first pope,'*'^ 
 when that king was Nero. And such had been both the 
 teaching and the conduct of his successors uniformly till then. 
 Can anybody deny that it was another type which they put 
 on when they accepted temporal power themselves with all its 
 accessories, and assumed to bestow kingdoms upon others as 
 fiefs of their see ; when th^y claimed to regulate the succes- 
 sion to every inheritance, public or private, that was worth 
 their thought; sat in judgment upon kings and emperors to 
 pronounce whether they were to be obeyed or not ; deposed 
 them on grounds of which the church had never before taken 
 cognisance ; meddled in the politics of every nation till their 
 action had to be restrained by law ; levied troops, set armies 
 in motion, waged war, caused blood to be shed — till, by force 
 of example, bishops and archbishops became feudal barons, 
 and frequently lived as such, only distinguishable from them 
 as being pledged to celibacy ; and the church militant, con- 
 fessing herself a pilgrim and a sojourner upon earth in her 
 public offices, became the largest holder of real property in 
 the world ? 
 
 True, the ' mammon of unrighteousness ' is capable of 
 being employed largely for good. What is it that our mis- 
 sionary societies are appealing to the public so imploringly to 
 contribute, for speeding the work of converting the heathen, 
 but money as well as men? The medieval church had 
 abundance of both to have Christianised two worlds of the 
 size of our own — judging from what the immediate successors 
 of the first ' fishers of men ' accomplished — shortly after the 
 establishment of the mendicant orders. Did it attempt any- 
 thing of the kind? The only pope that I can discover in 
 
 "^ S. Math. xvi. 23. >«" S. John, xriii. 36, 37. 
 
 ""» S. Luke, xii 14. '«« S. Peter, Ep. i. „. ii.. 2. 
 
EMPIRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 559 
 
 the middle ages of a truly missiouary spirit is Innocent IV. ; 
 the only true missionaries, the handful of brave men who 
 accompanied or who followed John de Monte Corvino into 
 China. And even they had long been anticipated in their 
 labour of love by the Nestoriana. Great and good works 
 were doubtless achieved ; but the main object of them seemed 
 to be to people the west with religious orders, cathedrals, and 
 schools ; to provide for the wants and comforts, temporal and 
 spiritual, of the Latin race ; to found a heaven upon earth 
 in Europe, and leave the rest of mankind to their fate. It 
 was essentially a national, as opposed to a catholic or cosmo- 
 politan, object to which Latin Christianity aspired — a second 
 Eoman empire, partitioned out into fiefs under the pope. 
 
 Here was a system in practice analogous to that of the 
 pseudo-decretals in theory, full of inconsistencies as compared 
 with Scripture, as unlike the manners of the primitive church 
 as the pseudo-decretals to the primitive canons. How would 
 it have been possible for the two churches — the Greek and 
 the Latin — not to have separated, when the extremes of both 
 were brought into close contact, as they were during the cru- 
 sades ? The Greek clergy, with all their faults — of which 
 ignorance and levity were perhaps the chief — adhered per- 
 sistently to the creed of their forefathers, to the letter of their 
 ancient canons, to the traditional type in which they had 
 been moulded themselves. Where do we read of Greek 
 bishops arraying themselves in armour, and fighting in battle, 
 or interfering in politics, or notorious as pluralists for the 
 extent of their benefices, or keeping mistresses, or following 
 secular pursuits, or addicted to gambling or field sports ? 
 
 Anselm, bishop of Havelburg '*'* in the twelfth, and Bro- 
 card the Dominican pilgrim '^^* in the thirteenth century, 
 testify to their abstemious and devout habits, taken as they 
 were from the monks. When the Latin prelates came among 
 them — bad specimens, it must be allowed, of their kind — 
 they found their sees so poor and ill-provided, that they had 
 to suppress tlie greater number of them, to provide them- 
 selves with adequate funds. '^'* Ten sees were suppressed, 
 and the revenues of four more confiscated in Cyprus to make 
 provision for one Latin archbishop and four suffragans. '*'^ 
 The Greek bishops were astounded at the rapacious and 
 licentious habits of their Latin brethren, and at the feudal 
 
 '«" Above, p. 131. ""' Ibid. p. 116. «» Ibid. '«'« Ibid. p. 231. 
 
ceo GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 customs to which they were pledged. , Their oath of fealty 
 and act of homage, in particular, they could not abide, and 
 said they would sooner die than submit to,"'^ as well they 
 might ; for nothing could be more contrary to the spirit of 
 the ancient canons. Both were rendered imperative by the 
 feudal system, to which the Latin church, by accepting tem- 
 poralities under it, had become enslaved. 
 
 The crusades, therefore, that should have united the two 
 churches completed their estrangement, because in them the 
 extremes of the old and the new system came into collision. 
 The crusaders, as a body, particularly the clergy, were the 
 roughest specimens of the Latin church exhibiting its inno- 
 vations, the fruits of its alliance with feudalism in their worst 
 colours, and bringing with them none of the virtues which 
 lay concealed at its depths. As a general rule, the men who 
 frequented schools, founded monasteries, built cathedrals, 
 preached to the people, fed the poor, transcribed manuscripts, 
 reclaimed waste tracts by converting them into smiling corn 
 fields and sunny vineyards, stayed at home ; and as a general 
 rule the rude, lawless, uneducated, adventurous, licentious, 
 warlike spirits of every country flocked to the east. They 
 embarked under pretence of fighting for the cross — no excuse 
 could have served them better — but when they arrived they 
 showed that they had come solely to enrich themselves and 
 be able to lead what lives they pleased. 'When I look 
 around me in the west,' said one who had devoted all the 
 energies of his master-mind to stem the torrent ; ' whether 
 to the north or south, I can hardly find any bishops elected 
 or living as the canons prescribe, or governing the people of 
 Christ for the love of Christ and not for worldly motives. 
 Of secular princes I know positively none, who place the 
 honor of God before their own, or justice before gain. Those 
 among whom I dwell, the citizens of Eome, that is, the 
 Lombards and the Normans, as I often tell them, I convict 
 of being in some respects worse than Jews and pagans. 
 When I return to myself, I find myself so weighed down by 
 the burden of my own responsibilities, that I can see no hope 
 of safety whatever remaining, but in the mercy Of Christ 
 alone.' '"* 
 
 "" Above, p. 232. sentence he mourns ever the eastern 
 
 '«" Greg. VII. Ep. lib. ii. 49, 'ad church, which, in his opinion, the devil 
 Hiigonem abbat. Clun.' In the previous had seduced from the catholic faith. 
 
E:\iriRE UNDER CHARLEMAGNE. 561 
 
 The characters whom Hildebrand despairs of reclaiming 
 began to be let loose upon the east before the generation of 
 which he is speaking had passed away. S. Bernard is urgent 
 upon them to reflect how much more profitably they would 
 be employed in fighting against the Turk than in breaking 
 the peace at home : the further they went from Europe the 
 better. And, as a nation, the' Normans certainly never re- 
 turned from their eastern raids. The difficulty was- when 
 they called upon the pope to legalise what they had done in 
 the east. Then he found there was no help for it, but to 
 give way once more. Charlemagne had carried the day 
 gradually against Jlome on the creed ; the pseudo-decretals 
 and pseudo-donation which had been forged in his age 
 seemed framed for the emergency ; the Normans and Vene- 
 tians called upon him to apply them all three without mercy 
 against the east. If they were true, the Greeks were heretics 
 and schismatics — there was no other name for them — and 
 the Latin party had, their reasons for wishing to prove them 
 such. To become masters of Constantinople was their day- 
 dream. If the pope wished to hold his own in the west, he 
 must go with the Latin party through thick and thin in their 
 designs against the east. This completed the change that 
 had been operating in his character ever since the establish- 
 ment of the western empire under Charlemagne. The pope 
 was too deeply compromised already to retrace his steps. 
 Ey virtue of his position he was a Latin all over, as well as 
 head of the Latins ; he was pledged to his course beforehand. 
 We must not indeed forget — accordingly there need never 
 be any question but that he acted so far with a clear con- 
 science and from a sense of duty — that he believed the 
 pseudo-decretals and pseudo-donation genuine ; besides which 
 there is this further consideration — and a very practical one 
 too — that should not be left out in any review of his policy. 
 The Latins were a collection of independent nationalities 
 that had been welded into one spiritual brotherhood by his 
 action among them as their acknowledged head. Why should 
 not the Greeks constitute one more member of the same 
 family on the same terms ? How, according to the teaching 
 of the pseudo- decretals, could they refuse without sin ? The 
 secret of the paralogism or delusion was that the pseudo- 
 decretals were false, not true; nor could. a civilised nation 
 like the Greeks be expected to step into the same boat by 
 
 
 
562 GENEEAL SUMMARY. 
 
 choice witli so many barbarians. What was food for the 
 lawless Normans and Venetians, they could neither swallow 
 nor digest. They had always been accustomed to_ a freer 
 atmosphere — in their better days politically, in their wprst 
 days ecclesiastically — than the Latins. The consequence 
 was that, as they would not succumb, they were to be sub- 
 dued; and as the attempt to subdue them failed, the per- 
 manent division of the church ensued. 
 
 II. ' The -permanent division of the church,^ I say ad- 
 visedly — meabing by the church Christendom — in conformity 
 with the formal teaching of the popes themselves. ' Well 
 known to us,' says Clement IV., 'are the evils that have 
 been for so long entailed on Christendom by the old and 
 odious quarrel of the Greek and Latin races. . . . This it is 
 for which we supplicate with many prayers, in all the ardour 
 of sincere affection, that the great Corner-stone, who made 
 His holy catholic and universal church one, would deign to 
 assist it, rent and divided with schisms, in mercy causing it 
 to unite throughout the world in one ojthodox faith. "^'^ 
 ' We,' says Gregory X., ' behold with extreme bitterness the 
 rent of the universal church foreshadowed in the net of 
 Peter the fisherman, that brake for the number of fishes 
 which it enclosed — we do not say divided as regards its 
 faith.' '^*'' ' As long ago,' says Eugenius, ' as when we were 
 in minor orders, we never ceased contemplating with exces- 
 sive sorrow and bitterness the division of the eastern and the 
 western church.' '^*' ' In what shall we be benefited,' he 
 asks the Greeks, ' if we fail to unite the church of God ? ' '^'^ 
 And Bessarion, making answer to him in their name, says : 
 ' Blessed father, what rewards will be prepared for you by 
 God, should you succeed in uniting His holy church.^ '^'' 
 And Henry VI., writing his congratulations to the pope from 
 Windsor, in the name of England, on the splendid success 
 thought to have been achieved by him, says : ' To the most 
 holy and undivided Trinity, who hath condescended to call 
 the church, long since divided, into one confession of the 
 true faith under the pastoral vigilance of your holiness, be 
 praise, honor, and glory, for ever and ever, in the mouth of 
 all.' '^'^ Either words can . have no meaning at all, or the 
 
 '"» AToove, p. 259. '"^ Ibid. v. 339. 
 
 "«' Ibid. p. 260. "»3 Ibid. p. 340. 
 
 ■"' Ibid. p. 338. ""> Lambeth MSS. ocxi. 98. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPE. 563 
 
 teaching of Clement, Gregory — and Innocent V. and Nicholas 
 III. shared his views'*" — Eugenius, amounts to this: the 
 sense put upon it by the metropolitan of Nicaea in the name 
 of the Greeks, and the king of England in the name of our 
 ancestors, that the church militant had been divided and was 
 divided to the full extent of the division actually separating 
 the Latin and Greek churches, its component parts, so that 
 neither could claim to be the whole church apart from the 
 other. Differences were magnified, reproaches were bandied 
 about reciprocally from age to age ; but the unfailing belief 
 and hope always was, that however grievously rent the church 
 had been by the.division of its members, it was still un- 
 divided as regards its faith — in other words, that neither party 
 were heretics. The phrases of ' eastern and western, Latin 
 and Greek, churches ' all through the middle ages, endorsed 
 by every pope from Urban II. inclusive to Eugenius IV., are 
 to the same effect. To the same effect are titles of bishops 
 allowed on both sides in corresponding with each other by 
 the heads of the hierarchy. The irregular intercourse be- 
 tween both churches in their respective members, all through 
 the schism, points to the same conclusion. A patriarch of 
 Alexandria, in full communion with the Greek church, writing 
 to'the pope for leave to ordain a deacon for the Latin cap- 
 tives detained in his diocese ; '^'^ Latin residents in the east 
 with Greek priests for their spiritual directors ; '*" Greek 
 bishops deciding that it was not incompatible with true piety 
 for the dead of the Greeks and Latins to be commemorated 
 at the altar by Latin and Greek priests celebrating in their 
 behalf with harmonious unanimity ; '**' Latins on the eve of 
 the Epiphany receiving blest tapers at the hands of the 
 Greeks in the church of S. Sophia three days after the second 
 council of Lyons had been abjured there ; "''^ the Greek 
 patriarch in coming to the council of Florence asking per- 
 mission of the pope before venturing to officiate within his 
 territory ; '*'" the pope, during the council, offering •*'" to put 
 the whole question to the vote, for the purpose of deci- 
 ding, in the words of S. Antoninus, ' what points of Christian 
 truth should be held or abandoned.' '^'^ Then, if anything 
 
 '«» Martene and Durand, Vet. Script. •«*» Ibid. p. 279. 
 torn. vii. pp. 247-9, 259. "" Ibid, p. 463. 
 
 '«'• Above, p. 213. '®' Ibid. p. 465. 
 
 '""' Ibid. p. 239. ""= Ibid. p. 342. 
 
 '«»» Ibid. p. 139. 
 
 o o 2 
 
564 GENERAL SUMJMARY. 
 
 were wanted to supplement this proposal, it would be found 
 in this fact — the marked difference, namely, made between 
 the G-reeks — who sat and deliberated in solemn conclave with 
 the Latins on the decree which was modified in many ways 
 to suit their respective views, and afterwards promulgated in 
 their joint names — and the Armenians and Jacobites, Syrians 
 and Chaldaeans, who came later, and after having been each 
 subjected to a strict examination on their faith and practice, 
 were summarily presented -with decrees, framed by the pope 
 and those who sat with him, corrective of the errors to which 
 they had pleaded guilty; which fact, therefore, even if it 
 stood alone, would be decisive evidence of the position occu- 
 pied by the Greeks at the council. ^'''^ 
 
 If we go back to Innocent III., we find him telling the 
 patriarch of Constantinople, ofiBcially, that the word 'uni- 
 versal' had two meanings ; one, the Grreek equivalent to 
 which was ' catholic,^ and that in this sense the Eoman 
 church was not the universal, that is, the catholic church. 
 In this sense it was but as a part to the whole, the chief and 
 principal part indeed, as the head to the body.'^^* Or, as he 
 illustrated his own meaning afterwards, in commenting on 
 the occupation of Constantinople by the Latins : ' God has 
 caused that Ephraim should return to Judah, and Samaria to 
 Jerusalem;"*^' that is, likening the Greek church to the ten 
 tribes, the majority of the people of God in point of numbers ; 
 the Latin to Judah, or the minority, but the part in which 
 sovereignty by divine right was inherent. Gregory IX. is no 
 less explicit in telling Germanus that ' the presumptuous 
 division of the ten tribes under Jeroboam, who made Israel 
 to sin, is in patent resemblance to the Greek schism,' "'''' 
 and that his church therefore 'was prefigured by Samaria 
 in revolting from the temple, and from Judah.' Yet ' Elijah 
 and Elisha,' he admits, ' shone there as great luminaries in a 
 dark place.' And S. Antoninus was only expressing what 
 every member of the Latin church had long thought, when in 
 expatiating upon the second fall of Constantinople, he said : 
 '• It happened, therefore, to the Greeks separating themselves 
 from the church of Eome through schisms and heresies, as it 
 had happened to the children of Israel, who in their ten 
 tribes were guilty of schism, separating themselves from the 
 
 ■« AtoTo, p. 341. "w Above, p.l70. >«'= Above, p. 180. '™ ^^j^^^^ ^ 337. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPK. 565 
 
 tribe and kingdom of Judah, where was the temple of the 
 Lord.''^'' Only, aa the Dominican general with extraordi- 
 nary candour had observed long before, if the Grreek church 
 had followed the counsels of Jeroboam who made Israel to 
 sin, the Eoman church and the Latins between them had 
 imitated the ways of Eehoboam, whose headstrong violence 
 drove the ten tribes into revolt.'^"' 
 
 Again, if it be said that it is laid down in the celebrated 
 bull of Boniface VIII., that ' whether they be Greeks there- 
 fore, or any others, who deny their having been entrusted to 
 Peter and his successors, they must admit of necessity that 
 they are not of th# flock of Christ, according, to the words of 
 our Lord in S. John, who- says that there is but one fold and 
 one shepherd '^^^ — the obvious answer is, first, that it is not 
 asserted, nor would it have been true to assert, that the 
 Greeks ever denied the primacy : the statement is hypothe- 
 tical; secondly, that the Basle fathers at once cancelled the 
 phrase ' ancient heresy of the Greeks' occurring in their 
 decree, when the Greeks objected to it,""" and Eugenius 
 ratified their decree formally with the phrase struck out,""' 
 and in place of it, 'the union of the western and eastern 
 churches,' said to be' the object for which they were striving. 
 Finally, in the preamble to the Florentine definition, it is, 
 expressly stated that, mutual explanations having taken 
 place, both sides had come to the conclusion that they bad 
 hitherto misunderstood, not really contradicted each other.'^"* 
 And so wonderfully were their proceedings overruled even 
 then, that what they defined was not defined, as some wanted 
 it to have been, under anathema ; ""' so that the Greeks in- 
 curred no anathema literally for abjuring the council. 
 
 What, I ask, is the inevitable consequence of this teaching 
 of the popes themselves, to act upon which notoriously the 
 councils of Lyons and Florence were both held, and which, 
 both having failed in succession to effect their purpose, a 
 fresh council might be convened any day on the same prin- 
 ciple to act upon for the third time ? "">* It follows, literally, 
 that for the last 1,000 years— all through the schism, that is 
 
 >"" Above, p. 386. "" Ibid. pp. 337, 338. 
 
 '™ Ibid. p. 448. ""' Itid. p. 361. 
 
 "»' Ibid. p. 287, and what follows ""' Ibid. p. 453. 
 in the next page. ""' Ibid. p. 341. 
 
 '■»» Ibid. p. 329. 
 
566 GENEEAL SUMMARY. 
 
 — tlie popes on their own showing have been at the head of a 
 party — the Latin party, the dominant party, no doubt ; the 
 Latin church, that part of the church in which sovereignty 
 by divine right is inherent, but not the whole church. The 
 Koman church, according to the teaching of the most magni- 
 ficent of the mediaeval popes, is not called the universal as 
 being the catholic, but universal as being the dominant 
 church : in other words, mother and mistress of all churches 
 and the Greek church, according to the teaching of his suc- 
 cessors, is as much a part of the catholic church as the Latin, 
 although separated for the time being from the pope. This, 
 surely, is the logical result of their language : I believe 
 sincerely that it will go far to explain their conduct. The 
 gift which they accepted from Charlemagne committed them 
 to local ties, iu effect circumscribing their independence. He 
 and the party formed by him in the west gradually succeeded 
 iu enlisting the papacy on their side, in bending it to their 
 exclusive benefit, and employing it in furtherance of national 
 as opposed to cosmopolitan objects, to the incalculable bane 
 of the church, and of the best interests of mankind at large. 
 For ten centuries it has been in thraldom — ^virtual thraldom 
 to the Latin world, by whom it has been flattered and 
 cajoled, dishonored and oppressed in turn ; beguiled into 
 the adoption of a type and a policy, different from that 
 which had been habitual to it till then; puffed up with exag- 
 gerated notions of its own pre-eminence derived frpm forged 
 documents, to be debited with the responsibility of all the 
 ruin and wretchedness inflicted on one part of Christendom 
 by the other ; then gradually let down, as it could be dis- 
 pensed with or done without ; at length turned round upon 
 passionately, and inveighed against as a tyrant, false prophet, 
 impostor, and what not, when there was not only no more 
 to be gained by upholding it, but a vast deal to be gained by 
 serving it in the same way precisely in which the church of 
 the east had been served before ! No wonder that there 
 should be so many difficult passages in the policy of the 
 popes before and since Charlemagne, when they have been the 
 victims of so much incessant intrigue since then — of so much 
 well-meant but utterly misdirected zeal on the one hand ; of 
 so much unscrupulous, but adroitly concealed, selfishness on 
 the other. 
 
 Look at the contradictions in which it involved the two 
 
ABNORMAL POSITIOX OP THE POPE. 567 
 
 popes under whom the schism either commenced or was con- 
 summated — Nicholas I. and Innocent III. There was a suit 
 instituted a.d, 858, in which Ignatius was plaintiff, Photius 
 defendant, and Nicholas I. judge. The process of conducting 
 it could not have well been more regular. Photius and 
 Ignatius had both appealed to Eome, and Nicholas had sent 
 out judges in strict conformity with the Sardican canons to 
 try the cause on the spot.'"^ But his legates allowed them- 
 selves to be corrupted, so that the settlement of the case was 
 thrown back, though Nicholas acted at once as became the 
 head of the church, in punishing his unworthy representatives. 
 Before any furthei; steps could be taken, it happened to suit 
 the policy of the king of Bulgaria to apply to Rome for mis- 
 sionaries ; and the missionaries despatched thither by Nicholas 
 seem to have played him as reckless a game as his legates. 
 Whether at the instigation of the king, or otherwise, they 
 commenced a regular crusade there against the Greek clergy, 
 part of which consisted in the introduction of the interpolated 
 creed. This was bitterly denounced by Photius in his 
 encyclic ; and this it is principally which Nicholas calls upon 
 the bishops of France — of the dominions of Charlemagne, 
 where the grandson of Charlemagne was still reigning ""^ — 
 to vindicate. But what is it that Nicholas is betrayed into 
 stating in communicating with them for that purpose? 
 ' They,' that is, the Grreeks, ' boast that when the emperors 
 transferred themselves from Eome to Constantinople, the 
 primacy of the Roman see likewise then migrated to the Con- 
 stantinopolitan church, so that a transfer of the privileges of 
 the Roman church took place simultaneously with the digni- 
 ties of the empire.'"" As if the appeal then pending, sub- 
 mitted to him as head of the church by both parties concerned 
 in it, claimants for the very see to which he is alluding prin- 
 cipally, was not refuting him as he wrote. The Greeks 
 had been misrepresented to him cldarly through the intrigues 
 of the Latin party ; still, in adopting their statement, Nicholas 
 elected to become their leader, a position from which every 
 previous pope had shrunk hitherto, for fear of having to break 
 with the Greeks. The contradictions into which Innocent III. 
 was betrayed by the action of the same party are still more 
 palpable. 
 
 ""Ibid. p. 45. "»• Above, note 51. "•' Ibid, note 171. 
 
5C8 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 First, look at the contrast between him and his predecessors 
 Urban II. and Eugenius III, ' As you value your souls,' 
 said Urban, ' rush to the defence of the eastern church.' ''"* 
 According to Eugenius,''"" the liberation of the eastern church 
 was the object of the second crusade as well as the first ; 
 under Innocent, the fourth crusade was engaged in sacking 
 Constantinople, the Christian city, par excellence, that had 
 never been pagan.'"" If the Grreeks were heretics, was it 
 right to have gone to their defence at all ? Not one jot or 
 tittle had they changed in faith or practice since the crusades 
 began : either they had been assisted as heretics, or were 
 attacked as brethren. What was the judgment of Innocent 
 himself upon it ? ' You had been forbidden under pain of 
 excommunication to meddle with any territory belonging to 
 Christians ; and you, apparently, without having the smallest 
 power or jurisdiction ot any kind over the Grreeks, have de- 
 parted from the integrity of your vows, and waged war, not 
 against Saracens, but Christians. Instead of recovering 
 Jerusalem, you have seized on Constantinople . . . you have 
 laid hands on the ornaments of the church and its possessions, 
 tearing from the altar its tablets of silver, and carrying off 
 from its shrines crosses, images, and relics. Hence it is that 
 the church of the Grreeks, notwithstanding its persecutions, 
 mocks at the notion of returning to its obedience to the apos- 
 tolic see ; and forasmuch as in the Latins it is only conversant 
 with examples of treachery and works of darkness, it on that 
 account abhors them with good reason as dogs."'" What is 
 his practice ? He sanctions the consequences ! He appoints, 
 he consecrates with his own hands to the patriarchate, which 
 men guilty of the crimes enumerated by him had declared 
 vacant, without so much as enquiring what they had done 
 with its former occupant, or for what misconduct he had been 
 turned out.'"^ Again, what was it that S. Leo told Anatolius 
 A.D. 451 ? 'Let not the rights of the primates of provinces 
 be disturbed, or metropolitans defrauded of their time- 
 honored privileges. Let there be no loss of dignity to the 
 see of Alexandria, and let the church of Antioch abide in the 
 order prescribed by the fathers : having been placed third 
 in rank, let it never descend lower.' "'^ Or, as he wrote the 
 
 "«» Above, p. 100. >"' Ibid. pp. 178, 179 
 
 ™ Ibid. p. 144. "12 Ibid. p. 184. 
 
 .. "" Stanley's Eastern Ch, loot. vi. ■"» Ibid, note 190. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPE. 5G!) 
 
 emperor Marcian word : ' the privileges of the churches, 
 ordained by canons of the holy fathers and fixed by the 
 decrees of the venerable council of Nicsea, must not be dis- 
 turbed by any intrigues, or changed by any innovations. 
 This I ought ever be on the vpatch against; this is the dis- 
 pensation confided to me. I should be greatly to blame were 
 the rules of the fathers to be violated through my connivance ; 
 or if the wishes of a single brother had more weight with me 
 than the common profit of the whole house of the Lord.'"'^ 
 'The patriarch of Constantinople,' said Nicholas, a.d. 867, 
 'is, more through royal favour than with any reason, styled 
 patriarch.'"" 'Erficroach not upon the privileges of your 
 brethren of Antioch and Alexandria,' wrote Leo IX. to 
 Michael Cerularius, a.d. 1054."'^ But what says Innocent 
 III. A.D. 1204 ? ' The privilege of love and favour which the 
 apostolic see exhibited to the Byzantine church in consti- 
 tuting it a patriarchal see, manifestly attests the plentitude 
 of power granted in blessed Peter to the Roman church . . . 
 the apostolic see has made it a great name . . . and raised 
 it from the dust to that eminence in point of dignity to render 
 it superior to the churches of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jesu- 
 salem, and exalt it above others next after itself.' '"'' Fathers 
 of the council of Chalcedon, Paschasinus, Lucentius, and 
 Boniface, legates of S. Leo, could you have lived to hear it ! 
 The secret of it all was that Constantinople had become a 
 Latin city. Innocent, therefore, as head of the Latin party, 
 had no scruples in ordaining ' proprio motu,' what S. Leo 
 peremptorily told the Greeks, their emperor and his own, as 
 well as the largest general council ever held, his duties as 
 head of the church and the rules of the ancient fathers made 
 it impossible for him to allow. 
 
 So it was that his successors acted by their predecessors 
 and by the Greeks on the creed. One would have said ante- 
 cedently that nothing could be more incredible than that 
 the Greeks in all- their subsequent negotiations with Rome 
 should be so worried as they were for adhering to the creed 
 in that form, in which Leo III. absolutely refused to sanction 
 the very change which they were called schismatics afterwards 
 fpr not accepting ; that form which he caused to be inscribed 
 on the shrine of the founder of the apostolic see, to proclaim 
 
 "" Ep. 104, ibid. '"" Ibid. p. 36. 
 
 "" Above, p. 11. "" Ibid. p. 184. 
 
570 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 its immutability. Then, the doctrine to which they excepted, 
 in the form in which it was proposed to them, was the 
 doctrine laid down by Charlemagne in a work deliberately 
 published against a general council confirmed by the pope ; 
 while the views to which they adhered themselves had been 
 deliberately defended by the pope in upholding the council 
 and his own judgment on it against Charlemagne. The most 
 that their inflexibility could achieve, after centuries of ill- 
 treatment, was that one of those views defended by him was 
 pronounced admissible in the last council held on the Greek 
 question, mainly because the Dominicans were there in force ; 
 but in return for this they were made to concur in stating 
 that the addition to the creed which Charlemagne declared 
 for, but the pope forbade, had been a just and necessary 
 proceeding."''* 
 
 So it was that they deviated from the views and sentiments 
 of their predecessors on the canons. The zeal of Innocent, 
 Zosimus, Boniface, and Grelasius, in the fifth century, had 
 been to prove that they conformed to, as well as upheld the 
 canons."'* The zeal of the Latin party with whom the popes 
 identified themselves, onwards from the days of Gratian, 
 was to prove that 'the Eoman church imparts force and 
 authority to the canons, but is not bound by them ; ' "^^ in 
 other words, as the supporters of Eugenius expressed it, ' the 
 pope may lawfully contravene all the laws and statutes of 
 even general councils.' "^' Two of their earlier uncanonical 
 acts, for the confusion imported by them into the episcopate, 
 call for especial notice — some may think unanimous censure. 
 The first was that of Formosus a.d. 891, who authorised by 
 his own example the custom of translating a bishop from one 
 see to another in the Eoman church, "^^ a custom directly 
 encouraging ambition, which is a mortal sin, in the hierarchy. 
 The second, that of Adrian IV., alas ! the Anglo-Saxon pope, 
 who, for no other earthly reason, apparently, than to gratify 
 the Venetians, issued a bull "^^ empowering the patriarch of 
 Grado to consecrate bishops for them in the imperial or any 
 other city — no matter in whose diocese — where they may 
 happen to be in sufficient numbers to want one. The leave 
 
 >'■' Above, pp. 435, 357. '"' Ibid. p. 21, comp. Eohrbacker, 
 
 "'• Ibid. p. 197. vol. xii. p. 459. 
 
 '"" Ibid. p. 201. , "2= Ibid. p. 162. 
 
 "2' Ibid. p. 491. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITIOX OF THE POPE. 571 
 
 of the bishops in whose jurisdiction they may have settled is 
 not worth his consideration. ' Gro and conquer where you 
 will, and take the Latin church with you,' is the moral of his 
 address in confirming the privilege. The noble words of S. 
 Martin, 'We are defenders and guardians, not transgressors of 
 the holy canons,' were scattered to the wind ; not so the abi- 
 ding prophecy with which he closed them, ' as for every trans- 
 gression there are signal retributions in store.' "^* If you wish 
 evil to any government on earth, whether in church or state, 
 expend all your eloquence in persuading it to speak and act 
 as though it were above law. The moment it elects to do 
 this habitually, itsjioom is sealed. Negotiations for reunion 
 between the two churches may be said to have commenced 
 with the synod of Nymphseum under Gregory IX., and ended 
 with the council of Florence under Eugenius IV. Let us 
 reca,ll the condition of the west at each time. The failure of 
 the iirst negotiations is attributed by a well-known historian 
 and contemporary to the scandals consequent on the iniquity 
 perpretrated in the name of the Eonian church amongst our 
 ancestors, and described by him in language that I forbear 
 translating,'^'* but not at all likely to have escaped censure 
 at the time, had it not been true. Then he proceeds : 'TAe 
 result of such a spectacle of wickedness and oppression was 
 a rising of the Greek church against the Eoman, by expelling 
 its emperor, and paying obedience to its archbishop of Con- 
 stantinople, by name Germanus, alone.' Before the last 
 negotiations were matured, the system had grown so intoler- 
 able to the majority of those who had originally been active 
 parties to its construction, that a council of the west — and 
 not the first either that had sat for that purpose — was actually 
 deliberating on the decree that it should pass for controlling 
 the pope, and setting bounds to his power. By the union of 
 the two churches a splendid triumph was thought to have 
 been secured to his cause, but here again the solemn ejacula- 
 tion of a great archbishop proved as prophetic as that of a 
 great pope before. 'What, in God's name, is this union 
 going to be, which is pregnant at starting with so much 
 scandal and division of the Latin church?'""^ 
 
 And what is true of the first and last, is true likewise of 
 all the intermediate negotiations, as may be seen by referring 
 
 '"' Above, p. 365. "" Ibid, note 684 and p. 234. "-' Ibid. p. 336. 
 
5:2 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 to them— the correspondence of all the fifteen different popes 
 between Gregory IX. and Eugenius IV. that has been given 
 above, whether with members of the Grreek church or the 
 Christian sects of the east, with the sole exception, unless 
 there is anything in his unfvMished letters to necessitate a 
 different conclusion, of Innocent IV. He alone seems to 
 have been thoroughly alive to the flagrant treatment which 
 the Greeks had received, and to have been sincerely desirous 
 of getting them to return to his communion on the least 
 onerous and most honorable terms that the duties of his posi- 
 tion, as he found it, would allow him to proffer or accept. 
 What those terms were, we shall never know really, till his 
 own letters containing them have been published ; at present 
 they are before us only in the form in which his successor 
 Alexander IV. professed his willingness to be bound by them, 
 and proceed with the negotiation ; but in what spirit lei;, his 
 own words. declare. 'If you can manage to get the Greeks 
 to assent to other terms,' he tells his legate, ' more advan- 
 tageous and honorable to the Roman church, more adapted to 
 the vjork of reconciliation, do not be in too great a hurry to 
 propose the foregoing, still less to accept them. But if you 
 find that you cannot possibly do better, then accept them 
 discreetly, as you may judge expedient, in our name and that 
 of the Eoman church.' '^" What Alexander meant by 'the 
 work of reconciliation ' is incontestably shown by his own 
 acts in Cyprus, where we find him deliberately reversing 
 the settlement of the late pope, stripping the Greek arch- 
 bishop of all his newly-acquired rights, except his title, and 
 placing the Greek bishops once more in immediate depen- 
 dance on the Latin archbishop. '^^' 
 
 The remaining negotiations were, so far as we have been 
 allowed access to them, all conducted on the principles 
 avowed by Alexander in instructing his legate : ' If you can 
 manage to get the Greeks to assent to better terms — more 
 advantageous and honorable to the Roman church — do not 
 be in a hurry to strike the bargain with them. Ascertain 
 first exactly to what point they will bear squeezing, and only 
 stop when you find you can go no further. Try for the 
 creed of Clement IV. pure and simple ; if that will not do, 
 abstain from urging the adoption of the Latin rite, or the 
 
 "" Above, p. 251. >«» Ibid. p. 248. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPE. 573 
 
 recital in church of the ' Filioque ' clause ; but the moment 
 you find them in a difficulty — threatened by the Turks — 
 press both.' Who can doubt but that had the conditions on 
 which, according to the authoritative declaration of Benedict 
 XIV., the Greeks subscribed to both the councils of Lyons 
 and Florence '^^' — ne quid ex ritihus nostrce ecclesice aliquid 
 immutetur' — been observed honestly by the Latins; or his 
 own peremptory rule, ' nihil iniiovandum,,^ made the basis 
 of all dealings with the Greeks by Kome, the Greeks would 
 have long since availed themselves of the sheltering wing of 
 the Roman church, and been reconciled to the mediation — 
 the effectual mediation — of the pope between them and the 
 Latins. But, in practice, was it the spirit of Benedict XIV. 
 that lived in his predecessors of the fourteenth and fifteenth 
 centuries ? We get our answer in the measures adopted in 
 Candia by order of Urban V. ; 'T'" in the measures adopted at 
 Constantinople by the ' reformers ' of the church there to 
 please Eugenius."^' One solitary instance there is of a 
 nearer approach to it, in words at least, occurring in the 
 encyclic of Boniface IX., a.d. 1398, when Bajazet was 
 threatening Europe : 'We compassionate from our heart 
 the distress of the illustrious prince Manuel, emperor of 
 Constantinople, and his people, who, though they have not 
 been constant to the full measure of their devotion and 
 obedience to ourselves, or of the faith and fellowship of the 
 Roman church, nevertheless call upon the saving name of 
 Christ, and are in danger of extermination from the Turks. '^'^ 
 This is language that may remind us of the sentiments of 
 Urban II. and S. Bernard — unlike any that had been heard 
 for centuries. It may be said — it may be perfectly true — 
 that a straightforward policy would have been impossible with 
 such characters as Michael Palseologus and his successors. 
 No doubt the part played by them all was in exact conformity 
 with the secret counsel of Manuel Palseologus to his son 
 John, 'Our last resource against the Turks is their fear 
 of our union with the Latins, of the warlike nations of the 
 west, who may arm for our relief and for their destruction. 
 As often as you are threatened by the miscreants, present 
 this danger before their eyes. Propose a council, consult on 
 the means ; but ever delay and avoid the convocation of an 
 
 '«" Above, note 1172. '"' Ibid. p. 381-3. 
 
 '™ Ibid. p. 310. "" Ibid. p. C12. 
 
■574 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 assembly, which cannot tend either to our spiritual or tem- 
 poral emolument. The Latins are proud, the Greeks are 
 obstinate ; neither party will recede or retract ; and the 
 attempt of a perfect union will confirm the schism, alienate 
 the churches, and leave us, without hope or defence, at the 
 mercy of the barbarians.' '^^^ It happens, curiously enough, 
 therefore, that we are in possession of the secret principles 
 which swayed the emperors no less than the popes, and the 
 popes no less than the emperors, in their negotiations. Is 
 there so much as a pin's head to choose between them? 
 between the instructions of Alexander IV. to his legate, and 
 the counsels of Manuel II. to his son ? Are they not ' birds 
 of a feather,' so to speak — the temporal prince revealed in 
 both — ^though, owing to the peculiar combination existing on 
 one side, the basis of the negotiation between them is, that 
 one has temporal advantages to give away, and would fain 
 add to his spiritualities ; the other, by assisting him to what 
 he wants in the last, may secure a proportionable supply for 
 himself of the first ? Who cannot, at a glance, detect the 
 incongruousness of the whole transaction ? The pope, as 
 head of the Latin world, corresponding with the emperor as 
 head of the Greek world, as though the pope were master of 
 all that the einperor wanted, or the emperor of all that the 
 pope ! To the authorities of the Greek church apart from 
 the emperor he never made any overtures at all deserving 
 the name ; so that he was literally asking the emperor to 
 exert a pressure upon the Greek church that he would have 
 been the first to deprecate any sovereign in the west exerting 
 — probably to threaten for so much as attempting — upon the 
 Latin church, or any part of it, in the strongest terms ; con- 
 tinually reproaching the Greek clergy for their erastianism, 
 , yet doing all in his power, by his mode of communicating 
 with them, to make them double the erastians that they 
 were before. The climax was attained when Clement VI. 
 placed 6,000 florins to the credit of the Armenian king to 
 assist in getting his terms accepted by the Armenian patri- 
 arch,^^^'' and when. Eugenius was prevented fulfilling his 
 engagements to the Greek emperor of men and money, on 
 the union of the two churches, by the petty wars that he had 
 been waging with his own spiritual children, all through the 
 
 '"= Above, p. 316. >'" Ibid. p. 530. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OP THE POPE. 575 
 
 council for reuniting them, with two patriarchs of the church 
 at the head of his army.'"^ 
 
 Miserable results, indeed, of a temporal crown and court, 
 yet cei'tain to be inseparable from them on earth. The 
 theory of the papacy"'^ presupposes that the pope should be 
 to the whole church what every bishop is to his diocese, every 
 priest to his parish. We need not go far, therefore, for our 
 illustration. Not many years since there was a plain parish 
 priest alive, whose extraordinary devotion, and extraordinary 
 works which were the fruits of it, caused an obscure, and till 
 then godless, village in France to become the theme of con- 
 versation in every religious circle all over the world. He 
 was a man of no learning, of no eloquence ; yet his piety was 
 irresistible to high and low. His parishioners caught the 
 flame from him, and reformed their ways ; persons of con- 
 siderable station and acquirements flocked from all countries 
 to consult him on the concerns of their souls, and were fre- 
 quently told all they wanted from him before they opened 
 their lips. He was in church at his post regularly from early 
 morning till midnight, and even so was not able to satisfy 
 half the demands that were made upon his time. His trans- 
 lation to a better world created a void felt by millions who 
 had only read of, but never had personal experience of, his 
 saintly life. Now, suppose this emphatically ' man of God,' 
 as he should be called, had, at the commencement of his 
 ministry, thought his stipend as parish priest insufficient for 
 securing him the full measure of respect and influence which 
 he felt he ought to possess, and with a view of advancing 
 both had accepted the salaried position of manager of a bank 
 to hold with his benefice — any canons to the contrary being 
 left out of sight for the present — is it not easy to see what 
 the result must have been even to a person of his sensitive 
 conscience and pious instincts. He would have been ' serving 
 tables,' at best, during banking hours, instead of spending his 
 whole day in church; and not only so, but in the course 
 of his banking business he would have found numerous 
 afifairs to transact, not sinful by any means in themselves, 
 and only then sinful to him, when they caused him to leave 
 any necessary duties to his parish undone, or tempted him 
 into courses unbecoming a priest; still, of themselves engen- 
 dering in him a worldly spirit, and making him think much 
 >"5 Above, p. 366-68. '"' S. Bern, de Cotmd. ii. 8. 
 
576 GENEEAL SUMMAKY. 
 
 more frequently of the present than of the future, of earth 
 than heaven, of the houses and lands of his parishioners 
 much more frequently than their souls. In short, could any- 
 body at all conversant with his history, picture the ' Cure 
 d'Ars ' managing a banking business one part of the day and 
 attending to his church another ; or is it conceivable that 
 any person now or formerly could do both and be the saint 
 he was. Excellent men there are doubtless amongst bankers 
 as well as clergymen ; but as every good banker would scout 
 the notion of accepting a cure of souls in addition to his 
 banking cares, so every good clergyman, surely, would shrink 
 from having mercantile interests to look after as well as his 
 parish. Those who ply secular avocations have enough to do 
 to keep their own souls intact ; those charged with directing 
 the souls of others have enough to do to keep their own at 
 the level to which it ought to be their business through life 
 to raise those of their flock. 
 
 Turning to the canons, we find the same views pervading 
 them in every age, and consequently that any such combina- 
 tion of professions in a priest is illicit. 'Let no bishop or 
 presbyter descend to any public administrations or employ- 
 ments, instead of keeping himself disengaged for his ecclesi- 
 astical duties; either therefore let him assent not to do this, 
 or let him be deposed. For " no man can serve two masters," 
 according to the monitory words of .our Lord,' says the 
 primitive church. But if the pope should be to the whole 
 church what every bishop is to his diocese, and every priest 
 to his parish, it is not easy to discover on what grounds what 
 is disallowed in priest and bishop should have been allowed 
 in the pope. It is a mere figure of rhetoric, a mere trifling 
 with history, surely, to argue that it was necessary to com- 
 bine both powers in the pope, that they might be separated 
 elsewhere.'''^' Doubtless his case was exceptional, but was 
 it not likewise contagious ? It was exceptional to the extent 
 of gradually becoming the rule. What he did was copied 
 again and again by those beneath him till it created a system 
 
 1737 Jj'^glise Libre dans VEtat LiSre, setil point des autres pouvoirs de la 
 
 p. 103, note. 'Dans son domaine, ces terre, est la consequence de la sipara- 
 
 deux pouvoirs sent confondus, afin tion des pouvoirs, bien loin d'en toe 
 
 qu'ils puissent toe divis^s partout la contradiction. It surely commenced 
 
 ailleurs, comme on I'a tant de fois their union in the middle ages. Can. 
 
 riT^hk La, souverainete pontiflcale, Apost. 72 al. 81, was the canon just 
 
 exception unique et distincte sur ce cited. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPE. 577 
 
 — a system which found numerous advocates, for the various 
 interests to which it ministered. Princes and patriarchs, 
 abbots and barons, found it for their advantage too often to 
 be on the side of exalting his prerogatives when they wanted 
 a favour done, or could invoke them generally to establish or 
 confirm rights iu their own behalf. Schoolmen and canonists 
 took the system as they found it without questioning, rea- 
 soned it into shape and consistency, and then deduced con- 
 sequences from it, that left it several stories higher than it 
 was before. If anybody thought of asking whether it was 
 in harmony with the old laws of the church, there were the 
 pseudo-decretals and other forgeries of the same kind 'to 
 prove this to his saSsfaction. If anybody was for reforming 
 its abuses, there were too many practical goods that flowed 
 from it, constituted as society then was, not to dispose men 
 generally to be tender to its imperfections sooner than en- 
 danger its integrity. So that between them all it may fairly 
 be said that the popes all through the middle ages derived a 
 great part of their inspiration from without, were worked 
 upon at least as much as they worked upon others. Every- 
 body was appealing to them — was urging them on in one 
 way, bidding them be supreme, bidding them direct the 
 affairs of the world. The decretal epistles of their earliest 
 predecessors, which they believed genuine, bade them go for- 
 ward: the impetuous restless action of the Latin party de- 
 prived them of the option of hanging back or remaining 
 stationary. ' A bishop instructing a bishop,' wrote S. Ber- 
 nard once more to his old pupil Eugenius, '■said, "no man 
 that warreth entangleth himself .with the affairs of this life ;" 
 but I spare you. Possible things, not strong things, are 
 what r counsel. Can you suppose these times would put up 
 with it, if, when people were contending for their earthly in- 
 heritances, and asking judgment of you, your reply were to 
 be, in the words of our Lord, "Men, who made me a judge or 
 a divider over you ?" What would be the inevitable remarks 
 made on your conduct ? " What is this simple rustic saying, 
 ignorant of the rights of his primacy, dishonoring a high 
 and lofty position, derogating from the dignity of the 
 apostolic see ?" ' "^^ Such was the temper of the Latin party 
 throughout in addressing the papacy. They regarded it as 
 an institution ordained for their exclusive benefit, and to be 
 '"s j)e Consid. i. 6. 
 P P 
 
578 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 turned to every possible purpose where it could serve their 
 interests. On the break up of the empire founded by Charle- 
 magne, Eome became their rallying point — the focus of their 
 intrigues — and their universal referee the pope. If they 
 failed in getting out of him all they wanted, it was not their 
 fault. They were essentially a kaleidoscopic heterogeneous 
 party — a party whose personal identity was continually shift- 
 ing, represented as it was by so many independent nationali- 
 ties, in general united and ready to act in concert against 
 the Grreeks, but not always : and never united as a general 
 rule amongst themselves. Hence it assumled frequently 
 the characteristics of the nationality to which it was most be- 
 holden for the time being — Norman, Venetian, French, Ger- 
 man, Spanish, Italian. Sometimes it even assumed the religious 
 habit, and came out under Franciscan or Dominican colours. 
 As Norman, it committed the pope to the Sicilian monarchy 
 within sight of home, to the Latin kingdom in Palestine and 
 its aggressions upon the local church. '"' As Venetian, it 
 obliged him to sanction the sack of Constantinople against 
 his better judgment. As French, it began by associating him 
 with the ambitious designs of Charles of Anjou, and ended 
 by leading him away captive into France, binding him to the 
 destruction of the Templars, and a good deal more. As Ger- 
 man and Anglo-Norman, it opposed and wrestled with him on 
 investitures. As Spanish, it mocked him by leaguing with 
 infidels against his own spiritual children, by completing the 
 ruin of the Greek empire as the Catalan company,*''"' and by 
 rending the west with schism at the instigation of Pedro di 
 Luna."'*' As Italian, it embroiled him in all the petty 
 squabbles and intrigues of factions that went on incessantly 
 between Florence, Venice, Pisa, Genoa, Milan, Naples, Sicily. 
 As Franciscan, it swayed the rulings of the second council of 
 Lyons, and as Dominican the Florentine. Both Innocent 
 III.'^*^ and Gregory X.''^' testify to the pressure that was 
 put upon them, to the influences at work in their vicinity, 
 which they could not avoid taking into account, no matter 
 what conclusions they might have formed themselves. Even 
 
 '"' Above, pp. 93, 94. records few angry outbreaks that have 
 
 "" Ibid. p. 284. Comp. note TAB. been more steadily persevered in, or 
 
 "" See au able paper in The Month, more fatal in their consequences, than 
 
 Aug. 1866, headed ' Pedro di Luna.' this of the Spanish cardinal.' P. 165. 
 
 'But for Pedro di Luna, the schism "« Above, p. 178. 
 
 might have soon died out . . . history "" Ibid. p. 266. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPE. 57<J 
 
 at Florence, where the gathering was so limited on the Latin 
 side, Eugenius could take no step that was not narrowly 
 watched and criticised by his own party. Pushing his pre- 
 rogatives to the highest pitch in theory, their confidence in 
 his infallibility was shaken the moment he showed the 
 smallest disposition to deviate from the gi'oove stereotyped 
 in their traditions. It was part of their creed as long as he 
 acted as they thought he ought, but no longer. S. Antoninus 
 is evidently stating the popular notion of the object for which 
 the council of Florence was held, as well as his own, when he 
 says, that ' the plan was for doctors on either side to dispute 
 before the pope, patriarch, and emperor, by way of showing 
 what points of Chfistian truth should be held or abandoned,' 
 and that 'the pope assented to the arrangement.'"'''' If the 
 pope was really infallible, could anything that he sanctioned 
 go wrong ? his presence alone, was it not a suflScient gua- 
 rantee for the maintenance of the faith ? so long as he was 
 on the spot' a free agent, was it not all safe in his hands? 
 By no means, thought his extreme partisans. He was acting 
 upon impulse ; he was too favourable to the Greeks by the 
 half ; he was imperilling the faith by his conduct. ' What 
 you report is passing strange for you to tell and me to listen 
 to,' says the interlocutor in the Latin Acts to their author, 
 ' a debate held on the faith — which it would have been im- 
 possible for all present in this assembly, had they been ever 
 so unanimous, to have changed in any way. But I will enter 
 on that question hereafter, whether it was lawfully done, to 
 admit that the Grreeks came there to discuss doctrine with 
 us upon equal terms: instead of which they should have 
 been rather invited solely to accept our faith, and the re- 
 ligious teaching held and inculcated by the universal church 
 of Rome, whither the taint of hereay has never penetrated.'"" 
 Elsewhere their author tells us that he has written a tract on 
 the character of the whole proceedings at Florence,"''^ which 
 has either been lost or suppressed. So unwilling were the 
 Eugenians themselves to bow to the judgment of the pope, 
 when it ran counter to their notions of what was required 
 from him. They were ready to make an idol of him to any 
 
 "" Above, p. 342. 'conTivandi' for ' conritandi,' the word 
 
 "« Colet. torn, xviii. p. 934. There used p. 923. 
 is evidently a misprint in the text of '"= Ibid. p. 1178. 
 
 P P 2 
 
480 GENERAL SUMMAET. 
 
 extent, but on condition of finding their own opinions in 
 each case become law. 
 
 The consequence of all this impetuous and overbearing 
 action of the Latin pai-ty was, that the papacy gradually con- 
 tracted and shrank from its original proportions, and became 
 a much narrower and closer institution, as time went on — a 
 result for which it had certainly to thank its own local ties as 
 well — till it resembled what are called close fellowships, or 
 close foundations, cohfined to particular schools or counties 
 in our English universities, and became as confined ultimately 
 as the closest of them. Analyse, for example, the long list 
 of popes, beginning with S. Linus, and their respective pe- 
 digrees. Then take these two facts into consideration which 
 are revealed in them : First, that there has been no Grreek 
 wearer of the triple crown since Charlemagne ; nor, secondly, 
 any but natives of Italy wearers of it since the Eeformation ; 
 and contrast the intervening periods in each case. Zachariah, 
 the king-maker of the father of Charlemagne, was the ninety- 
 second successor of S. Peter, and the twenty-second Greek or 
 Syrian who had been pope. Out of every four, therefore, 
 who had sat till then, there had always been one from the 
 east, and there had been three natives of Africa besides. Of 
 the 165 popes, including his present holiness, who followed 
 Zachariah, there has not been another eastern or African at 
 all — all are from the west. ■ With Adrian VI., again, similarly, 
 the list of these began to be still more contracted. Up to his 
 time there had been fourteen French, six Grerman, two 
 Spanish, two Portuguese, one English, and one Dutch — him- 
 self, that is. After him come none but Italians : none but 
 Italians ; not by any means that all Italians are eligible. 
 There are various restrictions narrowing the list of candidates 
 even in their case. Then, when all possible candidates have 
 been put forward, Austria, France, and Spain, each have the 
 privilege of excluding one, as if to guarantee between them 
 that none above a fourth-rate Italian should ever be pope.''*' 
 
 So that, in reality, the most cosmopolitan institution that 
 the world had ever seen has dwindled down under the in- 
 fluence, of party to be the national heir-loom of a country, 
 which is only just beginning to have national aspirations at 
 all — who knows how soon they may evaporate ? and there- 
 
 '■" Mosheim, Cent. XVI. sect. iii. part i. c. i., with the references in tJie 
 note. Murdock's tr. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OF THE POPK. 581 
 
 fore far from cosmopolitan in its ideas and practice : the oflBce 
 in which every part of the Christian family should have the 
 same interest has become a close monopoly in the hands of 
 one, where provincial idiosyncrasies have 'been, till recently, 
 strongest and most rife. On any other subject it would surely 
 be vehement nonsense to maintain that natives of Italy were 
 the only persons capable of appreciating or administering 
 to the interests or the wants of mankind in general, and from 
 every conceivable point of view is it not strange that regula- 
 tions should have come to be observed in the choice of a pope 
 that would have excluded S. Peter ? No I Latinism has 
 kept the papacy locked for centuries in close embrace ; and 
 it— not the pope or his divine office by any means — is at its 
 last gasp, and this is its expiring, its convulsive clutch. Let 
 the papacy be dissociated as a national institution only from 
 Italy, and it will be restored to the world. 
 
 Undoubtedly, the plea for confining it to Italy was to pro- 
 tect it against intrigues, to exclude foreign influences from 
 Eome, to prevent Rome from being moved to Avignon or 
 elsewhere again, to stop its being made the rendezvous of 
 ambition and rivalry by the nations of Europe that it had 
 come to be during each vacancy. But what caused it to be 
 so thronged by suitors ? What, so much as its court and 
 temporalities ? What, so much as its power of giving away 
 kingdoms abroad, of wearing a crown itself, and creating 
 princes ' ad libitum ' at home ; with the immense revenues 
 and importance that accrued from both ? So that the mode 
 of electing to the headship of the church was sacrificed to his 
 worldly possessions ; the see of S. Peter to the inheritance of 
 Charlemagne ! Contrast the statistics, to the last even, of the 
 rival see — the see which ranked next after it by imperial favour, 
 the see whose patriarch was a subject, and in which an em- 
 peror resided and held his court. S. Gregory, of Na^ianzus 
 in Cappodocia, and therefore not of Constantinople, is placed 
 tenth on the list of its prelates ; ''** and there had been three 
 before him who were foreigners. Of the 122 who came after 
 him down to G-ennadius, the first patriarch under Moham- 
 medan rule, forty-nine were from the provinces, making fifty- 
 two in all out of 132 who were not Constantinopolitans ; in 
 many cases its brightest ornaments, as Nectarius, S. John 
 
 "" In the list given in the Art de Verifier les Dates. 
 
i82 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 Chrysostom, Proclus, Anatolius, Memnas, the last but one, 
 Grregory Melisenus, a native of Calabria. That the emperorR 
 often over bore the elections, nominated creatures of their 
 own, and changed them at will, is true enough ; but had the 
 see of Eome fared better under the counts of Tusculum ? '^*' 
 Several of the patriarchs resigned or were deposed for resent- 
 ing in their emperor crimes which Eome, strangely enough, 
 overlooked or condoned — Michael Palaeologus, for example.'''''" 
 Notoriously, the patriarchate of Constantinople had never any 
 such emoluments or worldly prerogatives attached to it as to 
 render it a tenth part the object of ambition and intrigue 
 that Eome was ; if some of its occupants turned out heterodox 
 in their opinions, there were few, if any, besides Theophylact, 
 who led scandalous or luxurious lives ; nor to the last do there 
 seem to have been any positive rules in force connected with 
 their appointment, to prevent the best man in the empire, 
 whether of the nearest or remotest province, from being 
 elected.'"! 
 
 All things considered, therefore, the popes never said a 
 truer thing, than when they compared the actual circum- 
 stances of the church to the net of Peter that brake ; or re- 
 presented the church as divided in the same way as Israel and 
 Judah under the law ; or summoned the councils of Lyons 
 and Florence expressly for the purpose of uniting the eastern 
 and western churches, regarded as integral parts of the whole 
 church j notwithstanding their outward and visible estrange- 
 
 "" Christendom's Divisions, part i. ecclesiastical charges at Constantinople, 
 
 § 18. the general ignorance of the other sub- 
 
 iiso ^ijoygj p_ 253. ject races threw every ecclesiastical 
 
 "'' Hence, for once, Mr. Knlay, office into the hands of the Greeks, 
 
 Byz. Emp. Tol. ii. p. 334-5, seems un- who converted the Oriental church into 
 
 just to those for whom he has done so a national monopoly.' 1. I find no 
 
 much. ' The Byzantine emperors, as native of Italy or Sicily, hut one, in 
 
 they identified the ecclesiastical with the list of patriarchs — whereas there 
 
 the civil administration, always held were several from Antioch, Alexandria, 
 
 the eastern clergy in a state of abject and various other parts of the empire, 
 
 dependence on the imperial power.' 2. The best schools anywhere, as 
 
 Couldhe have named no instances to the .Sneas Silvius says (above p. 390) were 
 
 contrary? ' They used the church as at Constantinople. 3. Persons who at- 
 
 a m-nisterial department for the re- tended them would naturally speak and 
 
 ligious affairs and education of the write in Greek, to whatever race they 
 
 people.' Had they done this solely, belonged ; but if more Greeks came to 
 
 would they have done badly? ' So them than others, was it not to their 
 
 that when the loss of Italy and Sicily credit ? What office in the church was 
 
 had excluded men of education belong- ever confined to natives of Greece^ 
 ing to those countries from the higher 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OP THE POPE. 583 
 
 ment one from the other. Their official statements afford 
 the best commentajy that could be given of their official acts 
 during the period of which they speak — during the whole 
 period of the middle ages. They sat and legislated in the 
 Lateran and other western councils in succession as patriarchs 
 of the west, as heads of the Latin world, as earthly sovereigns 
 as well as Christian bishops. The legislation transacted in 
 them was of a partial as well as a mixed character, entering 
 into the concerns of church and state, wedded as they were 
 then under the feudal system, providing for the wants, temporal 
 and spiritual, of Europe — present and immediate — not of 
 Christendom generally ; binding upon none but westerns ; as- 
 suming neither to speak in the name of the whole church, nor 
 to make the whole church responsible for what it laid down. 
 The mere fact that the pope sat and presided in them could 
 not of itself make them oecumenical, otherwise every Soman 
 synod in which any pope had ever sat would have been oecu- 
 menical for the same reason — which has never been dreamt of. 
 The pope has a fourfold character in the Christian episcopate. 
 He is bishop, metropolitan, and patriarch, as well as pope. 
 As bishop, he performs functions that could not be discharged . 
 by a priest. As metropolitan, he holds synods of the suffragan 
 bishops of his province. As patriarch, of the bishops and 
 archbishops of his patriarchate. As pope, of the bishops, 
 archbishops, and patriarchs of the whole church. Head of 
 the church he is always, but it by no means follows that he 
 should always act as such; nor are the councils in which he 
 sits as patriarch, and to which only the bishops and archbishops 
 of his patriarchate have been summoned or brought together, 
 at all different from those in which he sits as simple metro- 
 politan, except so far as they are larger and bind more to their 
 observance. Neither, in short, are general or oscumenical 
 councils, unless both are, the popes themselves being witnesses. 
 Either this, in short, or else they took part with Charlemagne 
 throughout as heads of the church, in flagrant opposition to 
 the rulings of Adrian I. and the second Nicene council ; a po- 
 sition from which, providentially, they can be saved on their 
 own showing. 
 
 The inference from their express teaching, the tacit under- 
 standing on which the proceedings of the council of Florence 
 were conducted, is, distinctly, that during the whole period 
 between the second Nicene council and that of Florence, 
 
.584 GENEKAIi SUMMAEY. 
 
 each side legislated for themselves independently ; but the 
 collective church was silent, and never spoke, Florence was, 
 had it succeeded, to have been accepted on both sides as the 
 eighth council. Seven councils were cited and recognised 
 there ; but no mbre.i''^ To the first six, and to no more 
 specifically, were the eastern sects pledged by the pope, whom 
 he admitted into communion after the Greeks were gone. If 
 conformity to any tenets or practices of the Eoman church 
 was exacted over and above, it was not because any western 
 council of late years had ordained them, but because they 
 were believed to have prevailed there immemorially from 
 apostolic times, or else because the pope had defined or en- 
 joined them as head of the church — a thing which, by aban- 
 doning all the intermediate councils between the second 
 Nicene and that of Florence, so far as their oecumenical 
 character was concerned, he virtually declared had not taken 
 place during the interval. 
 
 How many crucial difficulties in church history are solved 
 instantaneously by this explicit teaching of the popes them- 
 selves 1 Holy wars and the indulgences attached to them, 
 whether against Turk or heretic; the deposition of kings and 
 emperors in and out of council by the pope ; the whole 
 question of investitures, and a good deal more that was 
 enacted or laid down then '^^^ — useful and necessary measures, 
 it may well be, for those days of feudal relations between 
 church and state — all are full of embarrassment, when the 
 whole church is made responsible for them in every age, but 
 have none whatever the moment they are regarded as the 
 work of a part of the church only, and in the peculiar cir- 
 cumstances in which it then was. Diocesan, provincial, and 
 
 '"^ Above, p. 466, and note 1480. submit to such a decree.' Again: 'It is 
 1753 I jt; jg uQ article of faith,' we are no matter of faith to believe that the 
 told in one of the propositions laid pope is in himself infallible, separated 
 down in the standard work before from the church even in expounding the 
 quoted, or the Faith of Catholics, ' that faith ; by consequence, papal defini- 
 the church cannot err either in matters tions or decrees in whatever form pro- 
 of fact or disoipline, alterable by cir- nounced, taken exclusively from the 
 cumstances of time and place, or in general council, or universal acceptance 
 matters of speculation or civil policy, of the church, oblige none, under pain 
 depending on mere human judgment or of heresy, to an interior assent.' — Vol. 
 testimony . . . hence ... if a general i. pp. 4,59 and 477, also ii. pp. 110, 111. 
 council, much less a papal consistory, Thedifficultiesare confessed as strongly 
 should presume to depose a king and in each ease, though the explanations 
 to absolve his subjects from their alle- given of them slightly differ from that 
 glance, no catholic could be bound to in the text. 
 
ABNORMAL POSITION OP THE POPE. 685 
 
 still more national synods — representing church. and state 
 conjointly — may in their wisdom order many things to be 
 done for local or occasional emergencies, for which nobody 
 would wish to see the entire church of Christ made for ever 
 responsible. 
 
 The prerogatives of the popes themselves are similarly 
 placed by their own teaching in the clearest light, and a 
 great deal that had grown up around them of a more local or 
 adventitious character is cleared off. A broad distinction is 
 at once drawn between the power which the successors of S. 
 Peter exercised over the whole west as patriarchs, and over 
 the whole church as popes ; between temporal rights acquired 
 through Charlemagne or Constautine, and spiritual rights 
 interpreted to be the result of his divine primacy by the 
 church. Thus all fictions of the pseudo- decretals and pseudo- 
 donation, all the fine-drawn logic of the western schools, all 
 the canon-law derived from genuine sources that are purely 
 western, all the interminable disputes between parties in the 
 west respecting the power of the pope over councils, or 
 councils over the pope, are swept away. Even the pope, as 
 a temporal sovereign, is not considered. The only general 
 council defining his power is that of Florence ; the only 
 general councils, and their acts, known to Florence, terminate 
 with the second Nicene ; the only canons known to Florence 
 were the canons received equally by the east and west, among 
 which were the Sardican. • The power of the pope, therefore, 
 to which the whole church is committed, is exactly what it 
 had been interpreted to be by the acts of those councils, and 
 the enactments of those canons, and no more. All the rest 
 is purely western in extent and origin — how far built upon 
 the pseudo-decretals of his predecessors will be made plain 
 when they have been honestly abandoned, with all the 
 maxims and positions derived from them ; how far depend- 
 ing on his temporal sovereignty will be soon seen should he 
 ever cease to be a temporal prince. Taken from him by 
 force, his dominions cannot be without crime and robbery ; 
 but of resigning them he surely must have the power in his 
 own hands at any moment he may think fit. They came to 
 him not from above, but from beneath ; not from S. Peter 
 but from Constantine ; they are of earth, not of heaven. Of 
 them it is in the power of man to strip and spoil him at any 
 time. They—* the kingdoms of this world, and the glory of 
 
586 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 them' — have been his vulnerable point throughout — his 
 ' heel,' as saith the Scripture, and as saith the legend — the 
 secret of the spell by which Latinism has for so long swayed 
 his destinies. Providentially ordered they doubtless have 
 been in the highest sense. They have stood us all in the 
 best stead here in the west. During the period of his tem- 
 poral power Europe has been civilised — civilised to a pitch 
 to which mankind had never attained before ; and he, incom- 
 parably more than anyone else, past or present, in all the 
 world, its civiliser. Empires and republics have arisen, 
 bloomed, and faded away ; races have developed, amalga- 
 mated, or become extinct ; but the one institution with all its 
 chequered history — chequered principally through the fraud 
 or violence of the lawless natures it has had to tame — that 
 has stood by and ministered to Europe during the whole 
 period of its regeneration and Christian education — its pre- 
 paratory schooling for our existing civilisation-^and is still 
 among us, hale and vigorous, protesting against our excesses, 
 unquailing under our menaces, as confident as ever in the 
 divine claims of its mission — is the papacy. The west has 
 certainly never had any benefactor that can compare with it. 
 ' Si monumentum qitceris, circuTnspice.' What has it done, 
 or assisted in doing, for the east during the same period? 
 Alas ! ' si monumentum quseris, circumspice,' as truly as 
 before. The price of the civilisation of Europe has been the 
 decivilisation of the east ; the price of the gift of Charlemagne 
 to the pope the division of the church ! Latinism it is 
 which has done all this. It endowed the papacy to get pos- 
 session of the pope ; inveigled him from the church ; set him, 
 on false pretences, against a part of his flock ; ruined it in a 
 way so as to cast the principal blame on him ; served itself of 
 him in a hundred ways to advance its own exclusive schemes 
 — at length, having made the discovery that it can do without 
 him, or cannot well use him for any further purpose, turns 
 round upon him abruptly, questions the title-deeds of his 
 estate and his own powers of managing it ; ends by declaring 
 it forfeited to the public good ; treats him, finally, with the 
 same ingratitude with which it had treated the Greek church 
 and people before — must it be added, how can it be denied ? 
 — ^with his concurrence. 
 
 Pallas te hoc Tulnere, Pallas 
 Immolat, 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 587 
 
 may the Greeks say ! The pope has one way left him of 
 anticipating this the second crime of his children. He may 
 with his own hands restore their gifts, bid adieu to their 
 temporal interests, be quit of their politics, wash his hands 
 of their diplomatic notes and concordats. Laying aside his 
 crown and court, he may shake off the trammels of party 
 with the ties of earth, and be all in all to the whole church 
 once more. As successor of S. Peter, though as plain bishop 
 of Eome, he may publish to the world that the Greeks have 
 been alienated from his communion by the malice or igno- 
 rance of party upon false pretences — their country lost to 
 Christendom by a Jarful o-ime ; and he may call upon us all, 
 high and low, to join him in humbling ourselves for the past, 
 in shaking off this accursed spirit — this demon of old Eome, 
 as it may fitly be called — that has possessed us all for so 
 long — and in making a public act of reparation — to our op- 
 pressed brethren, for the infamous treatment that they have 
 received at our hands: to humanity, for the ruin and bar- 
 barism that we have for so many centuries entailed upon all 
 that was, till then, the centre of civilisation, and is by nature 
 still one of the noblest and most favoured zones of the earth. 
 If his holiness would be pleased to do this, he might be doing 
 humanity perhaps the greatest service that he had ever yet 
 done ; at all events he would be taking away the reproach of 
 his predecessors. 
 
 3. For that the Greeks have been atrociously treated, 
 must have been by this time made plain enough — enough to 
 damn all our boasted civilisation for ever, unless we bestir 
 ourselves without delay to make amends for the past. As 
 benefactors to mankind, what nation is there, besides the 
 Jews, absolutely fit to hold a candle to the Greeks ? On 
 the other hand, where is the nation, Jew or Gentile, that 
 has been so vilely, that has been so undeservedly, recom- 
 pensed — by those most indebted to it literally — for what it 
 has done ? It twice civilised, once Christianised, the Eoman 
 empire. For its pains, it has been twice trodden down and 
 trampled upon ; but with twice the savagery by its Christian, 
 that it had been by its pagan, conquerors. When the Eomans 
 destroyed Corinth, they were only doing what they had done 
 by Carthage but a few months before — what every nation, 
 till Christ came, supposed it ought or had a right to do by 
 its vanquished foes. But the Eomans proceeded, as soon as 
 
588 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 ever the horrors of war were over, to present Greece with a 
 strong government, ensuring it against sedition at home, and 
 invasion from without. Then they did honor to its superior 
 enlightenment ; they sent the sons of their proudest citizens 
 to school at Athens, they adopted the Greek language as a 
 mark of education and refinement, as we Englishmen have 
 French ; they wrote history, they wrote poetry, they con- 
 structed philosophical systems, upon Greek models; and 
 without disguising their obligations, they professed openly 
 that, in all that elevates and adorns man, Greece had been^ 
 their conqueror ! 
 
 The Latin ruffians who sacked Constantinople, who ruined 
 the Greek empire, had none of the redeeming qualities of 
 the old Eoraans. They left the capital a wilderness, and 
 destroyed the government, so that they subdued the Greeks 
 literally to hand them over crippled and demoralised to the 
 Turks. Doubtless the character of the Constantinopolitan 
 court had been far from immaculate, but any worse than that 
 of our Normans and Plantagenets, saving only that it was 
 richer and more voluptuous ? And of its excesses who 
 were the victims but its own subjects ? The Greek empire, 
 with all its faults, which were many, was never an aggressive 
 power, nor was the art of tyrannising over others ever plied 
 or studied by the Greeks in their worst days. 
 
 Lovers of liberty they had always been. ' Live, and let 
 live,' was perhaps too much their motto. It would have let 
 the Latins alone most certainly, had they never meddled with 
 it. Numbers of them were, by their own admission, pos- 
 sessed of privileges in the metropolis, from which its own citi- 
 zens were excluded, up to the very hour of their sacking it. The 
 ground on which they sought to justify themselves mainly to 
 the pope, and to obtain his sanction to their proceedings, was 
 that the Greeks were heretics. It increased their own iniquity 
 tenfold. It was a tissue of falsehood throughout. It was 
 false, unless the popes who sent them into the east in the 
 first instance to assist the Greeks were hypocrites ; for on all 
 matters connected with doctrine the two churches were not 
 more divided then, if they were not more agreed, than they 
 had been for centuries. It was false, unless the creeds of 
 all the oecumenical councils down to the seventh, to which the 
 Greeks adhered, are heretical ; it was false, unless the pseudo- 
 decretals, by which they refused to be bound, are true ; it 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 589 
 
 ■was false, unless the teaching of Charlemagne and his ver- 
 sion of the creed are to be received in preference to that of 
 Adrian I. and the seventh council, against whom they were 
 deliberately propounded. Charlemagne, as we have seen, in 
 one part of his work lays down his views on the procession 
 in open hostility to the professions of the patriarchs of Jeru- 
 salem and Constantinople, which the council and the pope 
 had declared orthodox."*'' In another part of his work he 
 attacks the creed of the council itself, which had been that 
 of all previous councils ever since it was framed originally, 
 because the doctrine of the double procession was not ex- 
 pressed in it ; in other words, because it wanted the ' Filio- 
 que ' cause."^® In\ain the pope rejoined that the council 
 was right and he wrong : he never acknowledged his error. 
 And so completely did he manage to indoctrinate the Latin 
 church with his thesis, that as late as the fourteenth century 
 we have Duns Scotus,'"''' our countryman — 'the subtle doc- 
 tor,' far excellence — virtually stating that the error of the 
 Greeks was, ' that they taught procession through the Son' — 
 it having been reprobated as such by Charlemagne — the his- 
 torical account of it all the time being that it originated with 
 the Romans themselves, if S. Maximus is to be believed,"" 
 in the seventh century, and so passed to the east ; having been 
 adopted in the east it was received by the seventh council, 
 but only to be condemned by Charlemagne, and therefore 
 by the west likewise up to the second council of Lyons in- 
 clusive, to whose authority Duns Scotus himself bows. At 
 length, having commended itself to the Dominicans, it was 
 inserted in the Florentine definition, and became law to the 
 west, after the sanction given to it by Adrian I. and the 
 seventh council had been literally set at nought in the west 
 for 700 years. It is easy to acquit the popes — as in the matter 
 of the pseudo-decretals so on the doctrine of the procession, 
 on the ground that they were taken in themselves, misin- 
 formed, imposed or worked upon by those to whom they 
 looked for information — of any wilful injustice towards the 
 Greeks, of any premeditated espousal of positions which they 
 knew to be false. But it is by no means easy to acquit them 
 of culpable negligence — by no means easy to deny that they 
 must have acted without proper enquiry somej;imes, animated 
 
 "" Above, p. 408. ^*^ Ibid. p. 446. 
 
 "" Ibid. p. 435. "" Ibid. p. 423 et seq. 
 
590 GENERAL SUMMAKT. 
 
 either by party-spirit or by a sheer love of dictation — or they 
 could not have looked on to see the Greeks so bullied as they 
 were throughout — to call things by their right names — with- 
 out ever giving them the chance of a fair hearing till all their 
 churches had been ruined and their capital sacked. History 
 will not allow us to forget by any means that it was not till 
 after the Latins had been expelled from Constantinople, and 
 shown utterly incapable of reducing the east by force, that 
 the councils of Lyons and Florence were held to investigate 
 the merits of the religious question pending between the two 
 churches for the first time ; and of these only Florence per- 
 mitted any serious enquiry. The one point on which the 
 Greeks had so oft«n and so persistently desired information, 
 'when and how were the words " Filioque" first added to the 
 creed.?' had been always, till then, met by the reply: ' We 
 cannot tell — it must have been by some council or some 
 pope ' ; and at Florence itself the Gordian knot was not 
 untied but cut. Surely this was a point — if ever there was 
 a point — which the popes ought to have insisted on having 
 cleared up — with the necessary documents all the while in 
 their own archives — and not left posterity to discover, four 
 centuries after Constantinople had been lost to Christendom — 
 mainly through the dispute between the Greeks and Latins 
 about the creed — that it was done by order of a crowned 
 head in the teeth of their predecessors, as well as of the general 
 council held in his reign. 
 
 In the same way from the various professions on the same 
 subject, to which the Greeks were called upon at different 
 times to subscribe, we get the most convincing proofs how 
 the Latins themselves fluctuated on the doctrine of the pro- 
 cession from age to age : from the Romans in the days of S. 
 Maximus, who explained themselves to him by saying that 
 what they meant was ' procession through the Son,' ''^* to 
 Charlemagne, ''■'' who told their pontiff that procession through 
 the Son was a novel and unsound doctrine ; from Alcuin, the 
 friend of Charlemagne, who taught expressly that by proces- 
 sion from the Son was not meant temporal mission,'^^" to Ana- 
 stasius the papal historian and librarian, and Ratramn the 
 monk of Corbey, in the very next age, who taught that it 
 meant no more^; ''*' from the second council of Lyons, where 
 
 '"' Above, p. 423. "«" Above, p. 411 
 
 '«» Ibid. p. 408. "«' Ibid. p. 418. 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 591 
 
 the only profession, in the opinion of Duns Scotus, allowed 
 was that of the double procession pure and simple,''^^ to the 
 council of Florence, where the Latins discovered at last that 
 by procession from the Son they meant no more than what 
 Tarasius had professed at the second Nicene council — and he 
 no less than they — by ' procession through the Son.' "^* So 
 that the end of it all was that at Florence the pope set his 
 seal to the statement that, as far as doctrine was concerned, 
 the Greeks and Latins had been in perfect accord all along — 
 exactly what Adrian I. seven centuries before had assured 
 Charlemagne ! ''^* 
 
 Scan all the different professions, therefore, to which the 
 Greeks were called upon to subscribe between the second 
 Nicene council and that of Florence, or were allowed to be 
 stigmatised as heretics for not subscribing, by the light of 
 these two facts — the history of the interpolation of the creed 
 and of the doctrine involved in it — and then decide on the 
 treatment which they received. The Greeks had at their 
 backs all through the rulings of Adrian I. and the second 
 Nicene council — and the Latins, in opposition to them, the 
 rulings of Charlemagne. Nobody can doubt for a moment 
 on which side the right lay. Nevertheless, a fresh statement 
 of the doctrine of the procession was demanded of the Greeks 
 about once every fifty years, as though their own views were 
 erroneous ; and advantage was sought to be taken of their 
 difficulties at one time to make them accept a creed, which, 
 if it meant anything at all, implied that on the form and 
 matter of the sacraments, where their adherence to the cus- 
 toms of their forefathers was proverbial, both their teaching 
 and their rituals needed revising.''^^ What should we call 
 this, in any parallel case, but ill-advised policy or wanton 
 tyranny ? The Greeks may have been persecuted in igno- 
 rance, but they were certainly not persecuted with justice ; 
 they may have been sinners and deserved punishment, but 
 certainly not from the Latins. They may have quibbled, 
 and been disputatious, narrow-minded, and obstinate, but 
 they may console themselves with this reflection at least in 
 their misfortunes, that they have been martyrs to catholic and 
 eternal truth. Martyrs to catholic and eternal truth : I weigh 
 
 "« Ibid. p. 269. "" Ibid. p. 469. 
 
 "" Ibid. p. 361. "" Ibid. p. 263. 
 
592 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 each word advisedly, and accept their responsibility. Human 
 instruments have been employed in all ages to keep the 
 church straight. There were times when, humanly speaking, 
 S. Athanasius may be said to have stood between it and 
 Arianism ; S, Augustine between it and Pelagianism ; SS. 
 Sophronius and Maximus between it and Monothelitism. In 
 the same way it has been shown that the Greeks have for the 
 last 1,000 years literally stood between it and error on the 
 first article of the creed."^" They have, through their in- 
 flexible adherence to the old form of the creed, maintained 
 the relations of the Son and Holy Ghost to the Father intact, 
 by refusing to confound them with the relations of the Son 
 and Holy Ghost to each other. They have saved the whole 
 church from being amenable to the charge of professing its 
 faith in a proposition of which the meaning is equivocal. 
 They have saved us all from the consequences of the fatal 
 impetuousness of our ancestors, and been perfectly right in 
 maintaining against them all this time, that as the Holy 
 Ghost proceeds from the Son by gift of the Father, but not 
 conversely from the Father by gift of the Son, His pro- 
 ceeding from both, however eternally, cannot and ought 
 never to have been attempted tp be expressed in a single 
 proposition. 
 
 To the pope they have been of the greatest service, not- 
 withstanding their estrangement from him, and in more senses 
 than one. By standing out for the old creed, they saved him 
 from committing the whole church to the version of it adopted 
 by the west in direct opposition to his predecessors, Adrian 
 and Leo. At the council of Florence they succeeded in get- 
 ting the doctrine of the procession ruled in conformity with 
 the rulings of Adrian I. and the second Nicene council, which 
 till then had, through the teaching of Charlemagne, been 
 traduced in the west. At the council of Florence they suc- 
 ceeded in saving him from the shame of promulgating, in the 
 name of the council, a formal decree referring to a collection' 
 of forgeries for authentic evidence of the power inherited by 
 him over the church."^^ At the council of Florence, finally, 
 they succeeded in getting his prerogatives over the whole 
 church represented to be what they had always been, in ac- 
 cordance with Scripture, reason, and history. He had been 
 
 "" Aloove, p. 551. >«■ Ibid. p. 480. 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED, 593 
 
 often told"^' by his own party that one of his highest prero- 
 gatives consisted in his being above law, at liberty to break 
 every canon that had ever been enacted with his sanction, 
 confirmed by his authority. The Greeks knew this to be 
 both. irrational and unhistoric. 'We are guardians, not trans- 
 gressors, of the canons,' had been the invariable language of 
 his own . predecessors before the schism ; "^^ and as for the 
 reason of the thing, would it not have been about as rational 
 to have asserted that one of the chiefest perfections of the 
 Deity, one of the greatest proofs of His omnipotence, con- 
 sisted in His being free to commit sin ? Full power, it was 
 at length ruled throjagh their instrumentality, had been given 
 to S. Peter and to his successors after him by Christ of exer- 
 cising all the duties appertaining to the headship of the 
 church in the way prescribed by the canons. 
 
 Such were the parting gifts of the. Greeks to the church, to 
 the Latins, and to the pope — a legacy worthy of the palmiest 
 days of old Greece. There she stood before the council at 
 Florence, with one foot in the grave for the second time, in the 
 squalor and nakedness to which her fellow-Christians, her 
 brethren in the west, had arrayed her, as devotedly the friend 
 of civilisation and of mankind as in her early youth, protest- 
 ing against despotism and imposture with her waning breath, 
 clinging to her faith with a tenacity which was all the more 
 surprising as it coexisted in perfect harmony with her still pas- 
 sionate fondness for discussion and for free enquiry, stretching 
 out a forgiving hand to the Europe that had so misused her in 
 her declining years, and yet as resolute as ever in resisting any 
 encroachment upon her creed and canons. Look into the 
 countenances once more of the forlorn band representing her 
 there, with all their shortcomings, and measure them by those 
 to whom they were opposed. Look at their patriarch, then 
 pause to glance from him to the figure opposite, the president 
 of the council. See him' rolling in mysterious mines of 
 wealth discovered on the demise of his predecessor,'''" with 
 one ear listening to the discussions conducted in his presence 
 on the procession of the Holy Ghost, with the other to mes- 
 sages from his patriarch-generals on the fortunes of the 
 miserable wars that he was waging against some of his spiritual 
 
 170S Ibid. p. 491. still better, Fleuiy, to whom he refers 
 
 '"=" Ibid. p. 365. in a note ; and see above, p. 367. 
 '"" Rohrbacker, vol. xxi. p. 469, or 
 
 Q Q 
 
594 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 children but a few leagues off.'"' What was the character 
 of the venerable servant of Grod, whom he was pleased to 
 make so much difficulty about admitting to the kiss of 
 peace ? ''" ' He has a profound sense of the inner life,' said 
 John of Eagusa, no contemptible witness on the Latin side,"^' 
 ' a wonderful experience ; so much so, that whenever I go to 
 him alone ... I never can tear myself away from him under 
 four or five hours ; indeed, but for the difference that there 
 is between the churches, I should call him the most perfect 
 old man I had ever beheld, exactly answering to the descrip- 
 tion of those holy fathers whose lives I am in the habit of 
 reading with so much reverende and wonder.' Look at the 
 unaffected piety with which his surviving brethren honored 
 his memory when his head was laid. Twice, during the three 
 weeks succeeding his funeral, they all went to weep at his 
 tomb.'^'* Who but cardinal Julian, on the Latin side, was 
 the man of mark that Bessarion was ? the difference between 
 them being that Bessarion had, ' after teaching one-and- 
 twfinty years in his monastery, collected forty gold florins,' all 
 of which had been expended by him in coming to the council, 
 so that he was absolutely penniless when he arrived there.^"^ 
 Yet Bessarion, if he was rewarded by Eugenius for abetting 
 the union, preserved his ecclesiastical character to the last : 
 cardinal Julian was off to the war as soon as he could be 
 spared from the council, where he was killed flying from the 
 battle-field, after his last act had been to dictate to his un- 
 willing soldiers to break faith with their adversaries ! '^'* 
 Eead the history of the council by Syropulus, one of the most 
 lively narratives of the kind ever penned. Compare the 
 Greek acts of the council by the archbishop of Mitylene with 
 the only Latin version of them as yet discovered, and then say 
 on which side, even then, education and refinement lay. In- 
 deed, the chief interest attaching to the Latin acts is the 
 insight which they afford into the worthless character of the 
 authorities adduced by the Latins.'"^ And this brings us, in 
 conclusion, to the finest and truest character of them all, in 
 spite of all that has ever been laid to his charge — Mark of 
 Ephesus — ' the brave old man,' as the distinguished historian 
 
 "" Above, p. 366 et seij. "" Gribbon, c. bcvi. note u., from 
 
 "" Popoff, p. 38-40. Syrop. 
 
 "" Above, p. 328. '"« Above, p. 372. 
 
 '"•■ Ibid. p. 477. '"' Ibid. p. 441-4. 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 595 
 
 of Latin Christianity calls him, who stood firm as a rock when 
 all others gave way, and at length prevailed so far that the 
 Greeks never surrendered their creed. Should the church 
 ever confess her obligations' to the Greeks for having main- 
 tained it, on Mark will devolve the honor of having kept them 
 steadfast. In all ecclesiastical history, that of general councils 
 at least, there is probably no scene more touching — none 
 more deserving of eternal remembrance by the descendants 
 of the Latins, themselves — than that of the sixth session of 
 Ferrara, where the hoary representative of the last surviving 
 apostle stood forward on his defence, and face to face with 
 his opponents unsoUed, one after another, the decrees and 
 definitions of each of the great councils, authentic and un- 
 garbled as on the day on which they were promulgated, with 
 comments on them by the great saints who had assisted in 
 framing them, and to which the whole church had been 
 pledged ever since. Well, indeed, might a thrill pass over 
 ' the pick of the Latins and the virtuous monks,' as they 
 listened, occasioning them to exclaim: ' We never knew or 
 heard of such things before, nor have our teachers ever taught 
 us such things ! Now we see that the Greeks are more accu- 
 rate in their statements than we are.' '"' For the literal 
 truth of both which remarks we have but to turn to the 
 Latin acts. They, not the Greek acts, providentially, contain 
 unimpeachable specimens of what 'their teachers had taught 
 them ' till then, widely differing from the primitive and au- 
 thentic documents adduced in evidence by the fine old Greek. 
 At that moment a ray of light darted across the length and 
 breadth of Christian Europe, and its purification was decreed ! 
 So far as the strict facts of the case go, therefore, the whole 
 church might have been committed, humanly speaking, to 
 formal heresy during the middle ages, but for the Greeks ; 
 and certainly if there has been any work of expurgation of 
 any description accomplished in the western church since 
 then, it has been mainly through them. By their inflexi- 
 bility they have proved the saviours of Christendom. Most 
 of us have been taught to look upon them as schismatics, if 
 not heretics ; even Gibbon says of them : ' The Greeks were 
 stationary or retrograde, while the Latins were advancing 
 with a rapid and progressive motion.' '"' But Gibbon was 
 
 '"» Above, p. 131. '"• clivi. 
 
 « Q 2 
 
596 GENEEAL SUMMARY. 
 
 thinking of general progress, not religion. It seems to roe, 
 that, had the Greeks not been stationary, there is really no 
 saying where Latin recklessness and ignorance might not 
 have landed us by this time. If the consent of the pope 
 could have been, in spite of so many centuries of opposition 
 from the Glreeks, extorted on false pretences at length to a 
 definitive change in the creed — first made by order of a king 
 immediately on his own conversion from heresy ; then re- 
 ordained by another crowned head in overt opposition to the 
 teaching of the general council held in his reign — if the con- 
 sent of one part of the church could have been for so many 
 centuries irrevocably pledged to his doctrine, in open dis- 
 paragement of the doctrine that had been held by the whole 
 church hitherto, based on the words of our Lord ; if the 
 records of the past could have been overlaid with so much 
 spurious and forged literature perverting their genuine 
 meaning and intention to the extent they have been ; if 
 Christian bishops could have changed so widely, as beyond 
 controversy they did, from their primitive type, by consent- 
 ing to become feudal lords, leaders or followers of armies, 
 shedders of blood — if all this could have been, as it has been 
 too plainly, the direct effect of our ' quick march ' in the 
 west, then, certainly, but for Greek stationariness, it is diffi- 
 cult to see to what extent, humanly speaking of course, de- 
 velopments might not have obtained in the Christian church 
 — as in the crusades themselves — involving absolutely the 
 reversal of every one of the objects for which it became mili- 
 tant. Who can deny that we came to the conclusion our- 
 selves shortly afterwards that we had been going too fast; 
 that our progress in church-matters for the last three cen- 
 turies has been in reality retrograde — retrograde from what 
 our ancestors were at Florence to what the Greeks were then, 
 had always been, and still are. Time has proved them lite- 
 rally the church's ' echeneis ' "^° in their worst days — better 
 friends to the pope than his own party ; better friends to 
 the faith than those who dubbed them heretics ; the best, 
 the most devoted friends to Christianity, to Europe, to man- 
 kind at large, even in death, that have ever been known. 
 And then this has been their recompense. They — -the freest, 
 the noblest, most beneficent representatives of our world-wide 
 
 "" 'Piseia minutissiimis, qui naves retinet.' Blomf. Gloss, ad. Agam.Ub. 
 
THE GKEEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 597 
 
 brotherhood — have been for four centuries in extreme bond- 
 age to a race of which no one beneficent act of any descrip- 
 tion to any portion of mankind is recorded in history, not 
 for their own faults by any means, as much as the headstrong 
 and ungenerous conduct of our ancestors ; and we, the rest of 
 Christendom, three parts of whose civilisation are due to them 
 and have been effected at their expense, mute spectators of 
 their thraldom all that time ; till recently, quite indifferent 
 to their condition, and even now content with obtaining for 
 them privileges on paper from their effete master ; sparing of 
 any encouragement in word or deed to them in their attempts 
 to regain their freedom, unless for the purpose of maintaining 
 intact the balance Sf power amongst ourselves. 
 
 But Greece has a surer friend in God than in man ; she 
 has been His civiliser of nations in Christian as well as in 
 pagan times, and been twice conquered and trodden down 
 in the discharge of her humane mission only to render her 
 ultimate triumph the more secure. Her spirit it is which 
 has been stirring in us ever since she fell; she will be 
 restored to her pedestal before long in a halo of glory, 
 from the mere force of truth, and God will display to the 
 world through her the power of Christianity to revivify 
 nations as well as individuals that have faith in Him. Her 
 religion more than anything else brought her into bondage 
 for adhering to it ; her religion, doubly more than anything 
 else, for adhering to it, will set her free. ' The Greek church,' 
 wrote Dean Stanley in 1861,"^' 'properly so called, includes 
 the wide-sprea,d race which speaks the Greek language from 
 its southernmost outpost in the deserts of Mount Sinai, 
 through all the islands and coasts of the Levant, and the 
 Archipelago, having its centre in Greece and Constantinople. 
 It represents to us, in however corrupt and degraded a form, 
 the old, glorious, world-inspiring people of Athens, Thebes, 
 and Sparta. It is the means by which that people has been 
 kept alive through four centuries of servitude. It was no 
 Philhellenic enthusiast, but the grey-headed Germanus, 
 archbishop of Patras, who raised the standard of Greek in- 
 dependence ; the first champion of that cause of Greek 
 liberty, in behalf of which in our own country the past 
 generation was so zealous, and the present generation is so 
 
 '■" Eastern Ch. lect. i. 
 
.598 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 indifferent.' We have been indifferent ; we have been serving 
 our own purposes, and thinking but little of them prac- 
 tically since then, but the world has been moving in their 
 direction for all that steadily. Talk of 'peoples' and 
 ' nationalities ' — in whose behalf, if it has any true meaning 
 at all, was that cry raised ? As usual, ' charity begins at 
 home,' but justice will have her way before long. Germans 
 and Italians ! to whom have they been in bondage principally, 
 but to their own flesh and blood ; and what are they, what are 
 all of us literally, but upstarts and plagiarists, compared with 
 "the Hebrew and with the Greek ? They — under Providence 
 ■ — have been the original benefactors to man ; to them con- 
 jointly we owe both our existing civilisation and religion; 
 both, of all oppressed nationalities, have been beyond com- 
 parison the greatest outcasts and the greatest sufferers. 
 Whatever may have been their sins before God, they have 
 conferred more benefits upon mankind than all the rest of 
 the world together. The occupant of their territory is the 
 power that has, as yet, done worst for man ; yet there is no 
 need of exterminating him. The happiest fate that could 
 befal him would be to reverse positions with them, live under 
 their government, and be their subject. The Greeks have 
 civilised many ruder and more intractable natures than his 
 before now ; and the Jews, converted to the faith of Christ, 
 as they certainly will be, before regaining their own — if God 
 is true — will be their best auxiliaries for repeopling and re- 
 civilising the east. Of these, we may possibly do best to 
 leave the Jews in His hands, whose people they are ; but the 
 Greeks, ever since they became a nation, have been emphati- 
 cally Tnan's people,^''^^ and for his welfare they have been 
 working incessantly — such is the witness of monuments as 
 well as of books- — for between three and four thousand years. 
 Are we to go on eternally vapouring on the rights of peoples, 
 and be indifferent to the abject degradation of a race like 
 this, merely because four centuries of oppression have left their 
 mark upon it in more ways than one; because we are not sure 
 that the regeneration of the east, unless we have the doing of 
 it ail in our own way, would be likely to benefit ourselves in 
 
 ""' Compare the well-known address thoughtful paper on which appeared in 
 
 of the righthon. W. E. Gladstone, M.P., The Month for January 1866, in which 
 
 on ' The place of ancient Greece in the it is said, ' Greece will always be the 
 
 Providential order of the world,' a schoolmistress of the world.' — P. 76. 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 599 
 
 the long run? Any individual treating his earliest and 
 greatest benefactor in private life with similar apathy for 
 the same reasons, wonld surely forfeit his place in society, 
 and be cut by all. How long will Europe take to be dispos- 
 sessed of the demon of old Eome ? Latins or Teutons, Pro- 
 testants or Roman catholics, have we no reparation to make 
 to humanity — let alone Christianity — for the sins of our 
 forefathers, for the disastrous effects of their misguided zeal ? 
 All or nearly all Europe participated at one time or another, 
 when the east was ruined. 
 
 There are two modern powers alone, Russia and America, 
 whose hands are cle^. But of these, America lives at a dis- 
 tance in a world of her own, though she could make her voice 
 heard all over the world speedily, should she decide to speak. 
 Russia, though American, as well as European and Asiatic, is 
 on the spot. And between Greece and Russia there are afiB- 
 nities that it would be monstrous in anybody, church-historian 
 or otherwise, to overlook. ' If oriental Christendom is bound 
 to the past,' says Dean Stanley once more in the same lecture, 
 ' by its Asiatic and its Greek traditions, there can be no doubt 
 that its bond of union with the present and the future is 
 through the greatest of Sclavonic nations, whose dominion 
 has now spread over the whole east of Europe, over the whole 
 north of Asia, over a large tract of western America, If Con- 
 stantinople be the local centre of the eastern church, its per- 
 sonal head is, and has been for four centuries, the great 
 potentate, who under the successive names of Grand Prince, 
 Tzar, and emperor, has reigned at Moscow and St. Petersburg. 
 Not merely by its proximity of geographical situation, but by 
 the singular gift of imitation with which the Sclavonic race 
 has been endowed, is the Russian church the present repre- 
 sentative of the old imperial church of Constantine. The 
 Sclavonic alphabet is Greek. The Russian names of emperor, 
 saint, and peasant, are Greek. Sacred buildings, which in 
 their actual sites in the east have been altered by modern in- 
 novations, are preserved for our study in the exact models 
 made from them in earlier days by Russian pilgrims. And, in 
 like manner, customs and feelings which have perished in 
 Greece and Syria may still be traced in the churches and 
 monasteries of the north.' "Who can be so blind as to fail to 
 perceive that their cause is the same ? The same creed which 
 has saved the Greeks as a people from extinction, has been the 
 
600 GENERAL SUMMARY. 
 
 making of Eussia as a colossal power, and one is conscious of 
 having received it from the other. Eussia further inherits 
 directly from the Palseologi, from the last of the Byzantine 
 emperors, whose heiress Sophia became the consort of John 
 III., and shared his throne. The two-headed eagle "^^ in the 
 escutcheon of his present majesty Alexander II. proclaims him 
 the living representative of the Greek empire. 
 
 Where, in the history of nations, would it be possible to dis- 
 cover stronger, more natural, more historical, ties than these ? 
 Can anybody deny that Eussia and Greece stand in the posi- 
 tion of betrothed persons to each other, with the religious 
 part of the ceremony long since performed ? Is it that 
 Europe would interpose to forbid the banns, that their 
 union has been so long delayed ? If it be so, nothing 
 can be more certain than that Europe would be playing 
 ' the dog in the manger '-^is Latin to the back-bone still. 
 If we are really civilised ourselves, and not savages in 
 sheep's clothing, what on earth should we desire more than 
 to see the east recivilised ? And can any person capable 
 of reflection, French, German, Italian, Spanish, or English, 
 put his hand to his heart and say he honestly thinks that 
 any nation in existence — setting the Jews on one side — 
 would have the smallest chance of recivilising the east, but 
 Greece and Eussia, or that they would not be much more 
 likely to effect it together than apart? At all events, let them 
 be free to decide for themselves, and should Greece say ' yea,' 
 let not Europe say ' nay.' We westerns surely cannot indulge 
 in the absurd notion that we can deal with the east half as 
 well as those who by geographical position, and a hundred 
 affinities of race, manners, and religion, are semi-orientals 
 themselves. If to civilise is what we want, there is the vast 
 continent of Africa l3'ing at our feet almost in its primeval 
 state, with its mines of wealth undeveloped. Instead of in- 
 terfering in a spirit of selfishness and jealousy where we can 
 only retard progress, let us for once cease to be Latins, and in 
 a true spirit of philanthrophy rejoice that there are those who 
 both can and will do what is wanting for the east, if we will let 
 them alone. The man who could hold up his hand for keeping 
 the east a year longer in its existing barbarism, when it might 
 be emancipated, is a worse barbarian than any that inhabit it. 
 
 »"» Moiiravieff, note 43 to p. 84. 
 
THE GREEKS ATROCIOUSLY TREATED. 601 
 
 I sincerely believe there are no such amongst us, if they would 
 but put the question before them in that point of view, and 
 divesting their hearts of envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharit- 
 ableness, think how the real interests of mankind at large 
 would be best served, and the blessings of civilisation most 
 widely diffused. It is indeed quite possible that there is another 
 cause in the background, that has the effect of making Eussia 
 morally diffident in asserting her rights ; the fear of hearing 
 Poland— inevitable Poland — in the same breath assert her 
 wrongs. Poland may prove the spell after all, by which the 
 public conscience of Europe is closed to Russia — everybody 
 forgetting all the wiiile what Dean Stanley has described so 
 graphically,"'** that the partition of Russia and the subver- 
 sion of the Russian church was attempted actually by Poland 
 in the seventeenth century. But Russia can well afford to 
 be generous and forget the past ; in all other respects she has 
 laid Europe under considerable obligations to her as the 
 friend of order and progress, which few would be disposed 
 to deny. Let Russia try the experiment of doing for Po- 
 land what Austria is doing for Hungary, or even more, and 
 who can say how insensibly the number of those might melt 
 away, who would interfere to stay the course of events which 
 history seems to have traced out for us all. Greece was the 
 making of Russia by Christianising it, and Russia seems pre- 
 destined to be the remaking of Greece by restoring it — re- 
 storing it not merely to the material territory that once be- 
 longed to it, but by restoring it to the pedestal that it should 
 occupy among nations as their good genius, the channel of 
 all the civilisation to which it has pleased God hitherto to per- 
 mit man to attain. Russia wedded to Greece would gradually 
 undergo the same transformation that softer influences are 
 wont to accomplish in a private home ; for Russia at Constan- 
 tinople would be no longer Russia, nor yet ' new Rome,' but 
 new Greece! 
 
 "8« Lect. X. 
 
 LOXDON 
 FEINTED BT SPOTTISWOODE AND CO, 
 SEiy- STREET SQUAEE 
 
tNOVEMBEK 1866.] 
 
 G-EIEEAL LIST OE WOEKS 
 
 PDBLISHED BT 
 
 Messrs. LONGMANS, GREEN, and CO. 
 
 PATERJ^OSTER ROW, LONDON. 
 
 Historical Works. 
 
 lOBD MACATTLAY'S WORKS. Complete and Uniform Library 
 Edition. Edited by his Slater, Lady TEErBLTAK. 8 vols. 8vo. with Portrait, 
 price £5 6s. cloth, or £S Ss. bound in tree-calf by Kivi6re. 
 
 The HISXOBY of ENGLAND from the FiiU of Wolsej to the Death 
 of Elizabeth. By .Tames Ahthoitt Feoude. M.A. late Fellow of Exeter 
 College, Oxford. Vols. 1. to X. in 8vo. price £7 is. cloth. 
 
 Vols. I. to IV. the Eeign of Henry VIII. Third Edition, 64». 
 Vois. V. and VI. the Reigns of Edward VI. and Mary. Second Edition, 28.!. 
 Vols. VII. and VIII. the Eeign of Elizabeth, Vols. I. and II. Fourth 
 Edition, 28s. 
 
 Vols. IX. and X. the Eeign of Elizabeth, Vols. III. and IV. Sis. 
 
 The HISTOET of ENGLAND from the Accession of James IT. By 
 Lord Macaulat. 
 liiBEART Edition, 6 vols. 8vo. £4. 
 Cabihet Edition, 8 vols, post 8vo. 4as. 
 People's Edition, 4 vols, crown 8vo. 16<. 
 
 EEVOLUTIONS in ENGLISH HISTOEY. By Robeet Vacshan, 
 D.D. 3 vols. 8vo. 45s. 
 Vol. I. Eevolutions of Race, Second Edition, revised, 15s. 
 Vol. II. Revolutions in Religion, 15s. 
 Vol. III. Eevolutions in Government, IBs. 
 
 An ESSAY on the HISTOEY of the ENGLISH GOVEENUENT and 
 
 Oonstitntion, ffom the Ee'gn of Henry VII. to the Present Time, By 
 John Eahl Russell. Fourth Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 The HISTOEY of ENGLAND during the Rnign of George the Third. 
 By the Right Hon. W. N. Mjsset. Cabinet Edition. 4 vols, post 8vo.24s. 
 
 The CONSTITUTIONAI HISTOEY of ENGLAND, gince the Acces- 
 sion of George III. 1760—1860. By Sir TsoMAS Eesiine Mat, C£ Secoiid 
 Edition. 2 vols. Svo. 33s. 
 
 A 
 
2 NEW WOEKS PtrELiSHED et LONGMANS AND CO. 
 
 CONSTITTJTIONAl HISTORY of the BRITISH EMPIRE from the 
 Accession of Charles I. to the Eestnration. By G. Beodie, Esq. Historio- 
 grapher-Hoyal of Scotland. .Second Edition. 3 vols. 8vo. 86«. ; 
 
 HISTORICAL STITDIES. I. On Some of the Precursors of the French 
 Revolution ; II. Studies from the History of the Seventeenth Century ; 
 III. Leisure Hours of a Tourist. .By Heemait Mekivale, M.A. 8vo. 
 price 12s. 6<i!. 
 
 LECTURES on the HISTORY of ENGLAND. By Willtam Long- 
 man. Vol. I. from the earliest times to theDi>ath of King Edward II. with 
 6 Maps, a coloured Plate, and 53 Woodcuts. 8vo. 15s. 
 
 HISTORY of CIVILISATION. By Henrt Thomas BnOKiB. 2 vols. 
 8vo. £1 17s. 
 
 ToL. I. England and France, Pourth Edition, 21s. 
 Vol. II. Spain and Scotland, Second Edition, 16s. 
 
 DEMOCRACY in AMERICA. By Alexis De TocQTOViLtE. Trans- 
 lated by Henrt Reeve, with an Introductory Notice by the Translator, 
 a vols. 8vo. 21». 
 
 The SPANISH CONQTTEST in AMERICA, and its Eelation to the 
 History of Slavery and to the Government of Colonies. By AKTHtTB Helps. 
 4 vols. 8vo. £3. Vols. I. and II. 28«. Vols. III. and IV. 16». eafh. 
 
 HISTORY of the REFORMATION in EUROPE in the Time of 
 Calvin. By J. H. Merle D'Aueigk^, D.D. Vols. I. and II. 8vo. 28s. and 
 Vol. Ill, 12s. Vol. IV. 16s. 
 
 LIBRARY HISTORY of FRANCE, in 5 vols. 8vo. By Etee Evans 
 Crowe. Vol. L 14s. Vol. II. IBs. Vol. III. 18s. Vol. IV. ISs. 
 
 LECTURES on the HISTORY of FRANCE. By the late Su: James 
 Stephen, LL.D. 2 vols. 8vo. 24s. 
 
 The HISTORY of GREECE. By C. Thiklwall, D.D. Lord Bishop 
 of St. David's. 8 vols. 8vo. £i; or'in 8 vols. fcp. 28s. 
 
 The TALE of the GREAT PERSIAN WAR, from the Histories of 
 Herodotus. By George W. Cox, M.A. Me Scholar of Trin. Coll. Oxon. 
 Pep. 7s. 6d. 
 
 GREEK HISTORY from Themistocles to Alexander, in a Series of 
 Lives from Plutarch. Revised and arranged by A. H. Clough. Pep. with 
 44 Woudcuts, 6s. 
 
 CRITICAL HISTORY of the LANGUAGE and LITERATURE of 
 
 Ancient Greece. By William Mtjke, of Caldwell. B vols. 8vo. £3 9s. 
 
 HISTORY of the LITERATURE of ANCIENT GREECE. By Pro- 
 fessor K. O. MiiLLEE. Translated by the Right Hon. Sir George Cokne- 
 wall Lewis, Bart, and by J. W. Donaldson, D.D. 3 vols. 8vo. 36s. 
 
 HISTORY of the CITY of ROME from its Foundation to the Sixteenth 
 Century of the Christian Era. By Thomas H. Dtee, LL.D. 8vo. with 2 
 Maps, 15s. 
 
 HISTORY of the ROMANS under the EMPIRE. By Charms 
 Meeivale, B.D. Chaplain to the Speaker. Cabinet Edition, with Maps 
 complete in 8 vols, post 8vo. 48s. 
 
NEW WOEKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS AXD CO. 
 
 The FALL of the BOUAN BEFUBLIC : a Short History of the Last 
 Century of the Commonwealth. By Ohableb MEBirAlE, B.D. Chaplain to 
 the Speaker. Fourth £dltion. 12mo. 7s. ed. 
 
 The CONVEBSION of the BOMAN EMFIBE : the Boyle Lectures for 
 
 the year 1864, delivered at the Chapel B.oyal, Whitehall. By Chahles 
 Mbbitale, B.D. Chaplain to the Speaker. Second Edition, 8to. Ss. Hd. 
 
 The CONVEBSION of the NOBTHEBN NATIONS ; the Boyle Lec- 
 tures for 1865. By the same Author. Svo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 CBITIOAL and HISTOBICAL ESSAYS contributed to the Edinburgh 
 
 Bevimv. By the Right Hon. Lord Macaulat. 
 Library Edition, 3 vols. Svo. 86s. 
 Cabinet JEdition, 4 vols..post Svo. 2is. 
 Teavellee's Edihon, in 1 vol. 21«. 
 Pocket Edixioit, 3 vols. (cp. 21s. 
 People's Edition, 2 vols, crown Svo. 6s. 
 
 HISTOEY of the EISE and INFLUENCE of the SPIBIT of 
 RATIONALISM in EUROPE. By W. E. H. Lboky, SLA. Third Edition, 
 revised. 2 vols. Svo. 26s, 
 
 The HISTOBY of PHILOSOPHY, from Thales to the Present Day. 
 By flEOBOE Heney Lewes. Third Edition, partly rewritten and greatly 
 enlarged. In 2 vols. Vol. I. Ancient Philosophy, Vol. H. Modern, 
 PhUoso-phy. [Nearly ready. 
 
 HISTOEY ef the INDUCTIVE SCIENCES. By William Whbwbll, 
 D.D. F.R.S. late Master of Trinity College, Cambridge. Third Edition. S vols. 
 orowD Svo. 24s. 
 
 EGYPT'S PLACE in UNIVEBSAL HISTOBY ; an Historical Investi- 
 gation. By 0. C. J. Bdnsen, D.D. Translated by C. H. Cotteell, ULA. 
 With many Illustrations. 4 vols. Svo. JBo 8s. Vol. V. is nearly ready. 
 
 MAUNDEB'S HISTOBICAL TEEASTTBY ; comprising a General In- 
 troductory Outliuo of Universal History, and a series of Separate Histories. 
 Pep. 10s. 
 
 HISTOBICAL and CHBOKOLOGICAL ENCYCLOPiEDIA, presenting 
 in a brief and convenient form Chronological Notices of all the Great Events 
 of Universal History. By B. B. Woodward, F.S.A. Librarian to the Queen. 
 
 [In tfte press. 
 
 HISTOEY of the CHBISTIAN CHUECH, from the Ascension of 
 Christ to the Conversion of Constantine. By E. BuBTON, D.D. late 
 Prof, of Divinity in the Univ. of Oxford. Eighth Edition. Fop. 3s. ed. 
 
 SKETCH of the HISTOEY of the CHUECH of ENGLAND to the 
 Revolution of 1688. B.v the Right Rev. T. V. Shoet, D.D. Lord Bishop of 
 St. Asaph. Seventh Edition. Lrown Svo. 10s.6d. 
 
 HISTOEY of the EAELY CHUECH, from the First Preaching of the 
 Gospel to the Council of Niciea, A.D. 325. By the Author of 'Amy Herbert.' 
 Fcp. is. 6d. 
 
 The ENGLISH EEFOEMATION. By F. C. Massingbbrd, M.A. 
 Chancellor of Lincoln and Rector of South Ormsby. Fourth Edition, revised. 
 Fcp. Svo. 7s. (id. 
 
4 NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS AND CO. 
 
 HISTORY of WESLEYAH METHODISM. ■ By George Smith, 
 F.A.S. Fourth Edition, with numerous Portraits. S vols. or. 8vo. 7s. each. 
 
 LECTURES on the HISTORY of MODERN MUSIC, delivered at the 
 Royal Institution. By John Hdilah. Fiest Couese. with Chro- 
 nological Tables, post 8vo. ts. ed. Second Couese, on the Transition 
 Periofl, with 4/0 Specimens, 8vo. 16s. 
 
 Biography and Memoirs. 
 
 LIFE and CORRESPONDENCE of RICHARD WHATELY, D.D. late 
 .\rohbishop of Dublin. By E. Jake M'hatelt, Author of ' English 
 Syuonymes.' "With Two Portraits. 2 vols. Svo. 28*. 
 
 EXTRACTS of the JOURNALS and CORRESPONDENCE of MISS 
 Beeet, from the Year 1783 to 1852. Edited by Lady Theeesa Lewis. 
 Second Edition, with 3 Portraits. S vols. 8vo. 42s. 
 
 The DIARY of the Eight Hon. "WILLIAM WINDHAM, M.P. From 
 
 1783 to 1809. Edited by Mrs. Hesey Baeis-g. Svo. ISs. 
 
 LIFE of the DUKE of WELLINGTON. By the Rev. G. R. Gleig, 
 M.A. Popular Edition, carefully revised; with copious Additions. Crown 
 8vo. with Portrait, 5s. 
 
 Evialmont and Gleig's Life of the Duke of Wellington. (The 
 Parent Work.) 4 vols. Svo. with Illustrations, £2 14s. 
 
 Life of the Duke of Wellington, Intermediate Edition, partly from 
 the French of M. Bkialmont, partly from Original Documents. By tho 
 Rev. G. R. GiEiG, M.A. Svo. with Portrait, 15s. 
 
 LIFE of ROBERT STEPHENSON, F.E.S. By J. C. Jeaffeeson, 
 Barrister-at-Law ; and William Pole, P.R.S. Member of the Institution 
 of Civil Engineers. With 2 Portraits and 17 Illustrations on Steel and 
 Wood. 2 vols. Svo. 32s. 
 
 HISTORY of MY RELIGIOUS OPINIONS. By J. H. Newman, D.D. 
 Being the Substance of Apologia pro Vitft Su4. Post Svo. 6s. 
 
 FATHER MATHEW; a Biography. By John Francis Maouiee, 
 
 M.P. Popular Edition, with Portrait. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 Some ; its Rulers and its Institutions. By the same Author. New 
 
 Edition in prepai'ation. 
 LIFE of AMELIA WILHELMINA SIEVEKING, from the German. 
 
 Edited, with the Author'ssanction,by Catherine Winkwoeth. Post 8to. 
 
 with Portrait, 12«. 
 
 MOZART'S LETTERS (1769-1791), translated from the Collection of 
 Dr. LuDwiG NoHL by lady Wallace. 2 vols, post Svo. with Portrait and 
 Facsimile, ISs. 
 
 BEETHOVEN'S LETTERS (1790-1826), from the Two Collections of 
 Drs. NoHL and discovered Letters to the Archduke Rudolph, Cardinal- Arch- 
 bishop of Olmutz, Vos KocHEL. Translated by Lady Wallace. 2 vols, 
 post Svo. with Porti-ait, 18s. 
 
NEW WORKS PTJEI.isiTED BY LONGMANS AND CO. 6 
 
 FELEK MENDELSSOHN'S LETTERS from Italy and Switzerland, 
 and Letters from 1833 to 1847, translated by Lady Wallace. New Edition, 
 with Portrait, a vols, crown Svo. 6«. each. 
 
 EECOLLECTIONS of the late WILLIAM WILBEBFOKCE, M.P. 
 for the County of York during nearly 80 Tears. By J. S. Haefoed, F.E.S. 
 Second Edition. Post Svo. 7». 
 
 MEMOIRS of SIR HENRY HAVELOCK, K.C.B. By JonN Clakk 
 Maebiimaw. Second Edition. Svo. with Portrait, \2s. 6d. 
 
 VICISSITUDES of FAMILIES. By Sir Bernakd Burke, tTlster 
 KinK of Arms, FiEST, Second, and Thihd Seeies. 3 vols, crown Svo. 
 12«. id. each. 
 
 ESSAYS in ECCLESmSTICAL BIOGRAPHY. By the Bight Hon. 
 Sir J. Stephen, LL.D. Fourth Edition. Svo. l-ls. 
 
 BIOGRAPHIES of DISTINGUISHED SCIENTIFIC MEN. By 
 Franqois Aeaso. Translated by Admiral W. II. Smyth, F.E.S. the E«v. 
 B. Powell, M.A. and B. Grant, M.A. Svo. 1S<. 
 
 MAUNDER'S BIOGRAPHICAL TREASURY; a Dictionary of Uni- 
 versal Biography. Thirteenth Edition, reconstructed, thoroughly revised, 
 and in great part rowritten : with about 1,000 additional Memoirs and 
 Notices, by W. L. E. Cates. Fcp. 10». 6d. 
 
 LETTERS and LIFE of FRANCIS BACON, including all his Occa- 
 sional Works. Collected and edited, with a Commentary, by J. Speddiho, 
 Trin. Coll. Cantab. Volb. I. and II. Svo. Us. 
 
 Criticism, Philosophy, Polity, dfc. 
 
 The INSTITUTES of JUSTINIAN; with English Introduction, Trang- 
 lation, and Notes. By T. C. Sakdaes, M.A. Barrister, late Fellow of Oriel 
 Coll. Oxon. Third Edition. Svo. 16«. 
 
 The ETHICS of ARISTOTLE. Illustrated with Essays and Notes. 
 
 By Sir A. Geast, Bart. M.A. LL.D. Director of Public Instruction in the 
 
 Bombay Presidency. Second Edition, revised aud completed, i vols. 8to. 
 
 28». 
 ELEMENTS of LOGIC. By R. Whately, D.D. late Archbishop of 
 
 Dublin. Ninth Edition. Svo. 10s. M. crown Svo. is. 6d. 
 
 Elements of Rhetoric. By the same Author. Seventh Edition. 
 
 Svo. IOj. ed. crown Svo. is. 6d. 
 English Synonymes. Edited by Archbishop Wuately. 5th Edition. 
 
 Fop. 3s. 
 BACON'S ESSAYS with ANNOTATIONS. By E. "Whatelt, D.D. 
 
 late Archbisliop of Dublin. Sixth Edition. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 LORD BACON'S WORKS, collected and edited by R. L. Ellis, M.A. 
 J. Spedding, M.A. and D. D. Heath. Vols. I. to V. Philosophical Works, 
 a vols. Svo. £i es. Vols. VI. and VII. Literary and Prqfesstonal Works, 
 2 vols. £1 16s. 
 
6 NEW WOEKS PrBLISHED by LONGMANS AND CO. 
 
 On EEPBESENTATIVE GOVERHMENT. By John Stuabt Mill, 
 ' M.P. for Westmiuster. Third Edition, 8vo. 9s. crown 8to. is. 
 
 On Liberty. By the same Author. Third Edition. Post 8vo. 7«. 6rf. 
 crown 8vo. Is. 4d. 
 
 Principles of Political Economy. By the same. Sixth Edition. 
 2 Tols. 8vo. 30s. or in 1 vol. crowu 8vo. Bs. 
 
 A. System of Logic, Batiocinative and Indnctive. By the same. 
 
 Sixth Edition. Two vols. Svo. 23s. 
 
 Utilitarianism. By the same. Second Edition. Svo. 5s. 
 
 Dissertations and Discussions. By the same Author. 2 vols. Sro. 
 price 24s. 
 
 Examination of Sir W. Hamilton's Philosophy, and of the Principal 
 Philosophical Questions discusiied in his Writings. By the same Author. 
 Second Edition. Svo. 14s. 
 
 The ELEMENTS of POLITICAL ECONOMY. By Henry Dunning 
 Macleob, M.A. Barrister-at-Law. Svo. 16s. 
 
 A Dictionary of Political Economy; Biographical. Bibliographical, 
 Historical, and Practical. By the same Author. Tot. I. royal Svo. SOs. 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS EEMAINS from the Common-place Booli of 
 RiOHAED WHATEtY. D.U. late Archbishop of Dublin. Edited by E. Jane 
 Whately. Second Edition. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 ESSAYS on the ADMINISTBATIONS of &BEAT BBITAIN from 
 ]78:)tolS30. By the Right Hon. Sir G.C. Lewis, Bart. Edited by the 
 Eight Hon. Sir E. Head, Bart. Svo. with Portrait, 16s. 
 
 By the saTtie Autlwr, 
 
 Inquiry into the Credibility of the Early Soman History, 2 vols, 
 price SOs. 
 
 On the Methods of Observation and Beasoning in Politics, 2 vols, 
 price. 28s. 
 
 Irish Disturbances and Irish Chnrch Question, 12s. 
 
 Bemarks on the Use and Abuse of some Political Terms, 9s. 
 
 The Fables of Babrins, Greek Text with Latin Notes, Part I. 
 5s. ed. Pabt II. 3s. 6d. 
 
 An OUTLINE of the NECESSABY LAWS of THOUGHT : a Treatise 
 on Pure and Applied Logic. By the Most Eev. W. Thomson, D.D. Arch- 
 bishop of York. Crown Svo. 5s. Gd. 
 
 The ELEMENTS of LOGIC. By Thomas Shedden, M.A. of St. 
 Peter's Coll. Cantab. 12tno. is. 6d. 
 
 ANALYSIS of Mr. MILL'S SYSTEM of LOGIC. By W. Stebbino, 
 M.A. Fellow of Worcester ColleRe, Oxford. Second Edition. 12mo. Ss. 6rf. 
 
 ,The ELECTION of BEPEESENTATIVES, Parliamentarv and Muni- 
 cipal i a Treatise. By Thomas Haee, Barxister-at-iaw. Third Edition, 
 with Additions. Crown Svo. 6s. 
 
NEW WOEKS PUBLISHBO by LONGMANS ANB 00. 7 
 
 SPEECHES of the EIGHT HON. lOED MACAULAT, corrected by 
 Hliusieir. Library Edition, 8to. Vis. People's Edition, crown 8vo. Sa. 6d. 
 
 LOBD MACATTLAY'S SPEECHES on FAailAMENIABT BEFOEM 
 in ISIil and ISii. 16mo. 1«. 
 
 A DICTIONABY of the ENGLISH LANGUAGE. By R G. Latham, 
 M.A. M.B. P.R.S. Founded on the Dictionary of Dr. S. JoiiirsoH, as edited 
 by the Rt!v. H. J. Todd, with numerous Kniendaiious and Additions. 
 PubliBhing in 36 Parts, price Sa. ed. each, to form 2 vols. 4to. 
 
 THESAUBTTS of ENGLISH WOBDS and PHBASES, classified and 
 arranged so as to facilitate the Expressinn of Ideas, and a8.si8t in Literary 
 Composition. By P. M. RoasT, M.D. 18th Edition. Crowu 8vo. llU.6d. 
 
 LECTTTEES on the SCIENCE of LANGUAGE, delivered at the Royal 
 Institution. By Max UiihLEVt, M .A . Tayloriau Professor in the University 
 of Oxford. FiuaT Babies, Fifth Edition, lis. Second Sebieb, iSs. 
 
 CHAPTERS on LANGUAGE. By Frederic W. Fabbar, F.R.S late 
 Fellow of Trin. Coll. Cambridge, Author of The Origin of Language,' &c. 
 Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 The DEBATES ; a Series of Complete Debates, Outlines of Debates, 
 and Questions for Discussion. By F. Rowtok. Fcp, es. 
 
 A COUESE of ENGLISH BEADING, adapted to every taste and 
 capiK^ity: or. How and What to Read. By the Rev. J. PrCEOPT, B.A. 
 Fourth Edition. Fcp. 6*. 
 
 MANUAL of ENGLISH LITEEATUBE, Historical and Critical. By 
 TnoMAs Aknold, M.A. New Edition, thoroughly revised. Crown 8vo. 
 
 [Nearly ready. 
 
 SOUTHEY'S DOCTOE, complete in One Volume. Edited by the Key. 
 J. W. Waeteb, B.D. Square crown 8vo. 12s. 6d. 
 
 HISTOEICAL and CEITICAL COMMENTAEY on the OLD TESTA- 
 
 JlEN'l'i with a New Translation. By M. M. Kaiibch, Ph.D. Vol. I. 
 Genesis, 8vo. 18s. or adapted for the General Reader, lis. Toi. II. Exodus, 
 Us. or adapted for the General Reader, 12s. 
 
 A Hebrew Grammar, with Exercise?. By the same. Part I. Out- 
 lines with Exercises, 8vo. 12s. 6d. KEY, 6s. Pabt II. Exceptional Forms 
 and Construotiuns, \2s. 6d. 
 
 A LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONABY. By J. T. White, D.D. of 
 Corpus Ohristi College, and J . B. Riddle, M.A. of St. Edmund Hall, Oxford. 
 Imperial 8vo. pp. 2,128, price 42s. cloth. 
 
 A New Latin-English Dictionary, abridged from the larger work 
 of ^mnite and Riddle (as above), hy J. T. White, D.D. Joint-Author. 
 Medium 8vo. pp. 1.0i8, price 18s. cloth. 
 
 The Junior Scholar's Latin-English Dictionary, abridged from the 
 larger works of White mA Riddle (as above), by J.T.White, D.D. surviving 
 Joint-Author. Square 12mo. pp. 662, price 7s. 6d. cloth. 
 
8 NEW WOEKS puemshbd bt LONGMANS and CO. 
 
 An ENGfLISH-GSEEK lEXICON, containing all the Greek Words 
 used by Writers of good authority. By C. D. ToHGE, B.A. Fifth Edi- 
 tion. 4to. 21s. 
 
 Hr. YONGE'S NEW LEXICON, English and Greek, abridged from 
 his larger work (as above), fieyised Edition. Square 12mo. 8s. 6d. 
 
 A GEEEK-ENGLISH LEXICON. Compiled by H. G. Liddell, D.D. 
 
 Dean of Christ Church, and E. Soott, D.D. Master of Balliol. I'ifth Edition. 
 Crown 4(to. 31s. Qd. 
 
 A Lexicon, Greek and English, abridged from Liddell and Scott's 
 
 Greek-English Lexicon. Eleventh Edition. Square 12mo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 A SANSKEIT-ENGLISH DICTIONAEY, the Sanskrit words printed 
 both in the original Devanagari and in Roman letters ; with Eeferences to 
 the Best Editions of Sanskrit Authors, and with Etymologies and Compa- 
 risons of Cognate Words chiefly in Greek, Latin Gothic, and A' glo-Saxon. 
 Compiled by T. Behfet, Prof, in the Univ. of Gottingen. 8vo. 52s. 6d. 
 
 A PRACTICAL DICTIONAEY of the EEENCH and ENGLISH LAN- 
 GUAGES. By 1. CoKIAsaEAU. Eleventh Edition. Post Svo. 10s. 6d, 
 
 Contanseau's Pocket Dictionary, French and English, abridged from 
 the above by the Author. New and Cheaper Edition, ISmo. 3s. ed. 
 
 NEW PEACTICAI DICTIONAEY of the GEEIKAN LANGUAGE; 
 German-English and English-German. By the Eev. W.L. Biacklet, M.A. 
 and Dr. Cael Maetik Pkiedlaseee." Post Svo. Us. 
 
 Miscellaneous Works and Popular Metaphysics. 
 
 EECEEATIONS of a COTTNTEY PAESON. By A. K. H. B. Fikst 
 Seeieb, with 41 Woodcut Illustrations from Designs by E. T. Pritehett. 
 Crown 8vo. 12s. Qd. 
 
 Eecreations of a Country Parson. Seoosb Series. Cr. Svo. 3s. 6of. 
 
 The Common-place Philosopher in Town and Country. By the same 
 Author. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 leisure Hours in Town; Essays Consolatory, .SEsthetical, Moral, 
 Social, and Domestic. By the same Author. Crown Svo. Ss. 6rf. 
 
 The Auttimn Holidays of a Country Parson ; Essays contributed 
 to Frase^s Magazine and to Good Words. By the same. Crown Svo. 3s. Zd. 
 
 The Graver Thoughts of a Country Parson. Second Series. By / 
 the same Author. Crown Svo. Ss. 6(?-. 
 
 Critical Essays of a Country Parson, Selected from Essays con- 
 tributed to JPraser's Magazine. By the same Author. Post Svo. 9s. 
 
 Sunday Afternoons at the Parish Church of a University City. 
 By the same Author. Crown Svo. 3s. M. 
 
 A CAMPAIGNEE AT HOME. By Shirley, Author of 'Thalatta' 
 
 avrl ' Ni!!rre Critics.' Pet Svo, with Viimpttp. 7-«, R'/, 
 
NEW WORKS PUBLISHED BT LONGMANS ahd CO. 9 
 
 STUDIES in PAELIAMENT. A Series of Sketches of Leading Poli- 
 ticians. By E. H. HuTTOM. [fieprinted from the 'Pall Mall Gazette.'] 
 Crown 8vo. is. ed. 
 
 lOBD MACATTLAY'S MISCELLANEOUS WBITINGS. 
 
 LiBBABY EDtTiON. Si Tols. Sro. Portrait, 2U. 
 Pbovle's Editioit. 1 vol. crown Sro. is. 6d. 
 
 The BEV. SYSKET SMITH'S MISCELLANEOUS WOBKS ; inclad- 
 iug his Contributions to tho BcUnburoh Review. 2 vols, crown 8vo. is. 
 
 Elementary Sketches of Moral Philosophy, delivered at tlie Boyal 
 Institution. By the same Author. Fcp. Is. 
 
 The Wit and Wisdonvof the Bev. Sydney Smith: a Selection of 
 the most memorable Passages in his Writings and Conversation. l6mo. 6s. 
 
 EFI6BAMS, Ancient and Modern ; Humorous, Witty, Satirical, Moral, 
 and Panegyrical. Edited by Bev. JoHir Booth, B.A. Cambridge. Second 
 Edition, revised and enlarged. Pop. Is. 9d. 
 
 From MATTEE to SPIBIT : the Result of Ten Years' Experience in 
 Spirit Manifestations. By Sophia E. De Mobgah. With a Pbezace by 
 Professor Se Mobqan. Post 8vo. 8s. ed. 
 
 The ENGLISH and THEIB OBIGIN : a Frologne to authentic English 
 History. By Luke Owek Pieb, M.A. Barrister-at-Law. 8vo. 9». 
 
 ESSAYS selected from C0NTBIBUTI0N8 to the Edinburgh Heview. 
 By Heitbt Boqebs. Second Edition. 3 vols. fcp. 21s. 
 
 Beason and Faith, their Claims and Conflicts. By the same Author. 
 New Edition, revised and exi;onded, and accompanied by several other 
 Essays, on related subjects. Crown 8vo. 6s. ed. 
 
 The Eclipse of Faith ; or, a Visit to a Beligious Sceptic. By the 
 
 same Author. Eleventh Edition. Pep. Ss. 
 Defence of the Eclipse of Faith, by its Author ; a rejoinder to Dr. 
 
 Newman's Reply. Third Edition. Fop. is. ed. 
 Selections from the Correspondence of B. E. H. Greyson. By the 
 
 same Author. Third Edition. Crown 8vo. Vs. ed. 
 
 FuUeriana, or the Wisdom and Wit of Thomas Fuller, with Essay 
 on his Life and Genius. By the same Author. 16mo. 2s. ed. 
 
 OCCASIONAL ESSAYS. By Chandos Wren Hosktns, Author of 
 ' Talpa, or the Chronicles of a Clay Farm,' &c. 16mo. 6s. ed. 
 
 An ESSAY on HUMAN NATUEE ; showing the Necessity of a Divine 
 Eevelation for tho Perfect Development of Man's Capacities. By Henet 
 S. BOASE, M.D. F.R.S. and G.S. 8vo. 12s. 
 
 The PHILOSOPHY of NATUBE ; a Systematic Treatise on the Causes 
 and Laws of Natural Phianomena. By the same Author. 8vo. 125. 
 
 An INTBODUCTION to MENTAL PHILOSOPHY, on the Inductive 
 Method. By. J. D. Moeell,MA.LL.D. 8vo. 12«. 
 
 Elements of Psychology, containing the Analysis of the Intellectnal 
 Powers. By the same Author. Post 8vo. 7s. Sd. 
 
 n 
 
M NEW WOKKS PUBLISHEB BT liONGMiNS AKB CO. 
 
 The SECBET of H£6£L : being the Hegelian System in Origin, 
 Prinniple, Form, and Matter. By Jajies HnOHiBoif SiiBLiifa. 2 vols. 
 8ro. SSs. 
 
 SI&HI and TOTTCH : an Attempt to Disprove the Eeceived (or Berfee- 
 leian) Theory of Vision. By Thomas K. Abbott, M.A. Fellow and Tutor 
 of Trin. Coll. Dublin. 8vo. with 21 Woodcuts, 5s. td. 
 
 The SENSES and the IH'TEILECT. By Alexanseb 'Bats, M.A. 
 Professor of Logic in the University of Aberdeen. Second Edition. 8to. 
 price 16s. 
 
 The Emotions and the Will, by the same Author ; completing a 
 Systematic Exposition of the Human Mind. 8vo. 15». 
 
 On the Study of Character, including an Estimate of Phrenology. 
 By the same Author. Svo. 9s. 
 
 TIME and SPACE: a Metaphysical Essay. By Shadwokth H. 
 HonaaoK. Svo. pp. 588, price 16s. 
 
 The WAY to BEST; Results from a Life-search after Religious Truth. 
 By R. Vaughak, D.D. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
 
 HOTJBS WITH THE MYSTICS : a Contribution to the History of 
 B«ligious Opinion. By BOBEBT At.fbep TAuesAir, BA, Second Edition. 
 2 vols, crown Svo. 12s. 
 
 The PHILOSOPHY of NECESSITY ; or. Natural Law as applicable to 
 Mental, Moral, and Social Science. By CsAELEB Beat. Second Edition. 
 Svo. 9s. 
 
 The Education of the Feelings and AfTections. By the same Author. 
 Third Edition. Svo. 3s. 6d. 
 
 On Force, its Mental and Moral Correlates. By the same Author. 
 Svo. 5s. 
 
 CHBISTIANITY and COMMON SENSE. By Sir Willoughbt 
 
 JOITES, Bart. M.A. Trin. Coll. Cantab. Svo. 6s. 
 
 Astronomy, Meteorology, Popular Geography, ^c. 
 
 OUTLINES of ASTBONOMY. By Sir J. P. W. Heeschel, Bart. 
 
 M.A. Eighth Edition, revised ; with Plates and Woodcuts. Svo. 18s. 
 ABAGO'S POPULAB ASTBONOMY. Translated by Admiral W. H. 
 
 Smtth, F.R.S. and E. Geaht, MX With 25 Plates and 368 Woodcuts. 
 
 2 vols. Svo. £i is. 
 
 SATTTBN and its SYSTEM. By Richard A. Pkoctoe, B.A. late 
 Scholar of St John's Coll. Camb. and King's Coll. London. Svo. with 
 14 Plates, lis. 
 
 The Handbook of the Stars. By the same Author. 3 Maps. Sijuare 
 
 fcp. 5s. 
 
 CELESTIAL OBJECTS for COMMON TELESCOPES. By the Rev. 
 
 T. W. Webb, M.A. F.E.A.S. With Map of the Moon, and Woodcuts. 16mo.7s. 
 PHYSICAL GEOGBAPHY for SCHOOLS and GENEBAl EEADEES. 
 
 By M. F. Mauet, LL.D. Fcp. with 2 Charts, 2». ed. 
 
NEW 'WOBKS FITBLISHBD BT LONGMANS aitd CO. U 
 
 M'CTTLLOCH'S DICTIONABT, Geographical, Statistical, and Historical, 
 of tliP various Countries, PlatcSi and Principal Natural Objects in the World. 
 New Edition, carefully revised, with the Statistical Information brought 
 up to the latest returns b; F. Mastiit, i vols, medium 8to. with nuuerous 
 coloured Maps, £4 is. 
 
 A OENEBAL SICTIONABY of OEOGBAFHT, Descriptive, Physical, 
 Statistical, and Historical ; forming acomplete Gazetteerof the World. Sj 
 A. Keith Johnbioit, E.B.S.E. 8vo. 3U. ed. 
 
 A MANTTAL of GEOOBAFHY, Physical, Industrial, and Political 
 By W. HtroHES, F.E.G.S. Professor of Geography in King's College, and !■ 
 Queen's College, London. With 6 Maps. Fcp. 7t. 6d, 
 
 HAWAII; the Past, Present, and Future of its Island-Kingdnm : an 
 Historical Accounfof the Sandwich Islands. By MASurr Hopkinb, 
 Hawaiian Consul-General, &c. Second Edition, revised and coutiuued; 
 with Portrait, Map, and 8 other Illustrations. Post Svo. 12«. fid. 
 
 UATTNDEB'8 TBBASUBY of GEOGBAFHT, Physical, Historical, 
 Descriptive, and Political, Edited by W, HtroHXB, F,B,G.S. With 7 Maps 
 and 16 Plates, Fcp. 10«. ed. 
 
 Natural History and Popular Science. 
 
 The ELEMENTS of PHYSICS or NATUEAI PHILOSOPHY. By 
 
 Neil Aeuott, M.D. r.R.S. Physician Extraordinary to the Queen. Sixth 
 Edition, rewritten and completed. '1 Parts, 8vo. 2l«. 
 
 HEAT CONSIDEBES as a MODE of MOTION, By Professor John 
 Tyhdail, LL.D. F.E,S, Second Edition, Crown Svo, with Woodcuts, 12», M. 
 
 VOLGANOS, the Character of their Phenomena, their Share in the 
 Structure and Composition of the Surface of the Globe, 4c. By G. PouLETT 
 SOBOPB, M.P. F.B.S. Second Edition. 8vo. with LUustrations, \bt. 
 
 EOCKS CLASSIFIED and DESCEIBED. By Bernhard Von Cotta. 
 
 An English Edition, by P. H. Lawrehcb (with English, German, and 
 
 French Synonymes), revised by the Author. Post Svo, I4s. 
 
 *,' Lithology, or a Classified Synopsis of the Names of Bocks and Minerals, 
 
 also by Mr. Lawrence, adapted to the above work, may; be had, price 6^, or 
 
 printed on one side only (iuterpaged blank) for use in Cabinets, price 7s. 
 
 A TEEATISE on ELECTBICITY, in Theory and Practice. By A. 
 Db la Urrs, Prof, in the Academy of Geneva, Translated by C, V,Wai,k:eb, 
 P,B.S, 3 vols, Svo. with Woodcuts, £3 ISs. 
 
 The COKEELATION of PHYSICAL FOECES. By W. B. Gkotb, 
 
 Q.O. V.P.E.S. Fourth Edition. Svo. 7s. 6d. 
 MANUAL of GEOLOGY. By S. Hauohtom, M.D. F.R.S. Fellow of 
 
 Trin. Coll. and Prof, of Geol. in the Univ. of Dublin. Bevised Edition, with 
 
 66 Woodcuts. Fcp. 6s. 
 
 A GUIDE to GEOLOGY, By J, Phillips, M.A, Professor of Geology 
 in the University of Oxford. Fifth Edition, with Plates. Fcp. 4«. 
 
 A GLOSSAEY of MINEEALOGY. By H. W. Bristow, F.G.S. of 
 the Geological Surrey of Great Britain. With 486 Figures, Crown Svo. 12«. 
 
12 NEW WORKS PtTBIISSED BY LONGMANS Airo CO. 
 
 PHILLIPS'S ELEMEWTABT INTEODTTCTION to MINEEAIOGT, 
 with extensive Alterations and Additions, by H. J. Bkooke, F. R.S. and 
 ■W. H. MiLiEE, KG.S. Post 8to. with Woodcuts, 18». 
 
 VAN DEE HOEVEN'S HANDBOOK of ZOOLOGY. Translated from 
 the Second Dutch Edition by the Eev. W. CLiBK, M.D. P.E.S. 2 vols. 8vo. 
 with 24 Plates of Figures, 60s. 
 
 The COHPAEATIVE ANATOMY and PHYSIOLOGY of the VEETE- 
 brate Animals. Sy Richaeb Owew, F.R.S. D.C.L. 3 vols. 8vo. with 
 upwards of 1,200 Woodcuts. Vols. L and II. price 21». each, now ready. 
 
 The FIEST SAN and HIS PLACE in CEEATION, considered on 
 the Principles of Common Sense from a Christian Point of View ; with an 
 Appendix on the Negro. By Geokge Moobe, M.D. 1I.E.C.P.L. &c. Poet 
 8vo. Ss. 6(2. 
 
 The LAKE DWELLINGS of SWITZEELAND and other parts of 
 Europe. By Dr. F. Keilek, President of the Antiquarian Association of 
 Zurich. Translated and arranged by J.B.Lee, F.S.A. F.G.S. Author of 
 ' Isca Silurum.' With several Woodcuts and nearly 100 Plates of Figures. 
 Eoyal 8vo. 31s. 6d. 
 
 HOMES WITHOUT HANDS: a Description of the Habitations of 
 Animals, classed according to their Principle of Construction. By Eev. J. 
 G. Wood, M.A. P.L.S. With about 140 Vignettes on Wood (20 full size of 
 page). Second Edition. 8vo. 2l8. 
 
 MANUAL of COEALS and SEA JELLIES. By J. R. Gkekne, B.A. 
 Edited by the Eev. J. A. Gaibeaith, M.A. and the Eev. S. Hatjghton, 
 M.D. Fop. with 39 Woodcuts, 5s. 
 
 Manual of Sponges and Animalcniae ; with a General Introduction 
 on the Principles of Zoology. By the same Author and Editors. Fcp. with 
 16 Woodcuts, 2». . 
 
 Manual of the Metalloids. By J. Apjohn, M.D. F.R.S. and the 
 same Editors. Bevised Edition. Fcp. with 38 Woodcuts, 7».6<J. 
 
 The HAEMONIES of NATTJEE and UNITY of CEEATION. By Dr. 
 
 George Haetwig. 8vo. with numerous Illustrations, 18s. 
 
 The Sea and its Living Wonders. By the same Author. Third 
 
 (English) Edition. 8vo. with many niustrations. 18s. 
 The Tropical World. By the same Author. With 8 Chromoxylo- 
 
 graphs and 172 Woodcuts. 8vo. 21s. 
 
 A HUNTEE'S EXPEEIENCES in the SOUTHEEN STATES of 
 AMERICA ; being an Account of the Natural History of the various Quad- 
 rupeds and Birds which are the objects of Chase in those Countries. By 
 Captain FiACK (The Ranger). Post 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 SKETCHES of the NATUEAL HISTOEY of CEYLON. By Sir J. 
 
 Emeesou Tenitent, K.C.S. LL.D. With 82 Wood Engravings. Post 8vo. 
 price 12s. Gd. 
 
 Ceylon. By the same Author. Fifth Edition ; with Maps, &c. and 90 
 Wood Engravings. 2 vols. 8vo. £2 10s. 
 
 The Wild Elephant, its Structure and Habits, with the Method of 
 Taking and Training it in Ceylon. By the same Author. With Illustrations. 
 In 1 vol. INearly ready. 
 
 A FAMILIAE HISTOEY of BIED& By E. Stanley, D.D. F.R.S. 
 late Lord Bishop of Norwich. Seventh Edition, with Woodcuts. Fcp. 3s. 6d. 
 
NBW WORKS PUBXI8HED BT LONGMANS Airo CO. 
 
 KIBBY and SPEITCE'S IKXEODUCTIOIT to ENTOMOLOGY, or 
 
 Elements of the Natural History of Insects. Seventh Edition. Crown 8yo. 
 price 6«. 
 
 MAUNDER'S TEEASTJEY of NATUBAL HISTORY, or Popnlar 
 Dictionary of Zoology. Revised and corrected by T. S. Cobbold, M.D. 
 Fop. with 900 Woodcuts, 10». 
 
 The TREASURY of BOTAinr, or Popular Dictionary of the Vegetable 
 Kinffdom; \vith which is incorporated a Glossary of Botanical Terms. 
 Edited by J. LiNDLET, F.E.S. and T. Moobe, F.L.S. assisted by eminent 
 Contributors. Pp. 1,274, with 274 Woodcuts and 20 Steel Plates. 2 Parts, 
 fop. 20». 
 
 The ELEMENTS of BOTANY for FAMILIES and SCHOOLS. 
 Tenth Edition, revised by Thomas Mooee, P.L.S. Pep. with 15* Wood- 
 cuts, 2a. M. » 
 
 The ROSE AMATEUR'S GUIDE. By Thomas Eivees. New Edition. 
 Pop. 4«. 
 
 The BRITISH FLORA; comprising the Phsenogamous or Flovfering 
 Plants and the Perns. By Sir W. J. Hookbb, K.H. and G. A. Walkkk- 
 Aenott, LL.D. 12mo. with 12 Plates, 14«. or coloured, 2l«. 
 
 BRYOLOGIA BRITANNICA ; containing the Mosses of Great Britain 
 and Ireland, arranged and described. By W. Wubon, 8vo. with 61 Plates 
 42s. or coloured, £4 is. 
 
 The INDOOR GARDENER. By Miss Malino. Fcp. with Frontis- 
 piece, printed in Colours, Bs. 
 
 LOUDON'S ENCYCLOP.a;DIA of PLANTS; comprising the Specific 
 Character, Description, Culture, Histoid, Ac. of aU the Plants found in 
 Great Britain. With upwards of 12,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 42«. 
 
 London's Encyclopeedia of Trees and Shrubs ; containing the Hardy 
 Trees and Shrubs of Great Britain scientifically and popularly described. 
 With 2,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 50«. 
 
 MAUNDER'S SCIENTIFIC and LITERARY TREASURY; a Popnlar 
 EnoyolopKdia of Science, Literature, and Art. New Edition, thoroughly 
 revised and in great part re.written, with above 1,000 new Articles, by 
 J. Y. Johnson, Corr. M.Z.S. Fop. 10s. 6d. 
 
 A DICTIONARY of SCIENCE, LITERATURE, and ART. Fourth 
 
 Edition, re-edited by W. T. Beande (the Author), and Geoege W. Cox, M.A. 
 
 assisted by contributors of eminent Scientific and Literary Acquuremcnts. 
 
 ii vols, medium 8vo. price 63s. cloth. 
 ESSAYS on SCIENTIFIC and other SUBJECTS, contributed to 
 
 Reviews. By Sir H. Holianb, Bart. M.D. Second Edition. 8vo. lis. 
 ESSAYS tiom the EDINBURGH and QUARTERLY REVIEWS; 
 
 with Addresses and other Pieces. By Sir J. P. W. Heeschei, Bart. M.A. 
 
 8vo. 18s. 
 
 Chemistry, Medicine, Surgery, and the 
 Allied Sciences. 
 
 A DICTIONARY of CHEMISTRY and the Allied Branches of other 
 Sciences : founded on that of the late Dr. Ure. By Henet Watts, F.CS. 
 assisted by eminent Contributors. 5 vols, medium 8vo. in course of publica- 
 tion in Parts. Vol. 1. 31s. 6c2. Vol. II. 26s. Vol. III. 81s. 6d. Vol. IV. 24s. are 
 now ready. 
 
14 NteW WOUKS PUBLISHED BT LONGMANS ASD CO. 
 
 A HAUDBOOK of VOIUMETEICAI AHAIYSIS. By Eobeet H. 
 
 SOOTT, M.A. T.C.D. PostSvo. 4s.6ii. 
 ELEMENTS of CHEJIISTET, Theoretical and Practical. By William 
 A. MiLLEB, M.D. LL.D. F.R.S. P.G.S. Professor of Chemisfry, King's 
 College, London. 3 vols. 8vo. S,l 18s. Paet L Chemioai, PHTaiOB. 
 Third Edition, 12s. Pakt II. Iwokgasic Chemistet, 21». Paet IIL 
 Oboahio Chemistby, Second Edition, 20s. 
 
 A MANTJAL of CHEMISTRY, Descripdye and Theoretical. By 
 William Odliitg, M.B. F.E.S. Pabt 1. 8vo. 9s. 
 
 A Course of Practical Chemistry, for the use of Medical Students. 
 By the same Author. Second Edition, with 70 new Woodouts. Crown Sto. 
 price 7s. 6i2. 
 
 Lectures on Animal Chemistry, delivered at the Eoyal College of Phy- 
 sicians in 1865. £y the same Author. Crown 8vo. 4s. Ek2. 
 
 The DIAGNOSIS and TREATMENT of the DISEASES of WOMEN; 
 
 including the Diagnosis of Pregnancy, By Gbailt Hbwitt. M.D. New 
 Edition, thoroughly revised; with numerous "Woodcut Illustrations. 
 8vo. [Nearly retidy. 
 
 LECTURES on the DISEASES of INFANCY and CHILDHOOD. By 
 Ghableb West, M.D. &g. Fifth Edition, revised and enlarged. 8va. 16s. 
 
 EXPOSITION of the SIGNS and SYMPTOMS of PREGNANCY: 
 
 with other Papers on subjects connected with Midwifery. By W. F. 
 MOMTOOMEBT, M.A. M.D. M.E.I.A. Svo. with Illustrations, aSs. 
 
 A SYSTEM of SURGERY, Theoretical and Practical. In Treatises 
 by Various Authors. Edited' by T. Holmes, M.A. Cantab. Assistant-Surgeon 
 to St. George's Hospital. 4 vols. Svo. £4 13s. 
 
 Vol. I. General Pathology, 21s. 
 
 Vol. II. Local Injuries: Gunshot Wounds, Injuries of the Head, 
 Back, Face, Neck, Chest, Abdomen, Pelvis, of the Upper and Lower Ex- 
 tremities, and Diseases of the Eye. 21s. 
 
 Vol. III. Operative Surgery. Diseases of the Organs of Clrcnla- 
 tlon. Locomotion, &c. 21s. 
 
 Vol. IV. Diseases of the Organs of Digestion, of the Genito- 
 urinary System, and of the Breast, Tliyroid Gland, and Skin ; with 
 Appendix and Gesbkal Ijjdex. 30s. 
 
 LECTURES on the PRINCIPLES and PRACTICE of PHYSIC. By 
 Thomas Watsou, M.D. Physician-Extraordinary to the Queen. Fourth 
 Edition. 2 vols. Svo. 34s. 
 
 LECTURES on SURGICAL PATHOLOGY. By J. Paget, F.RS. Sur- 
 geon-Extraordinary to the Queen. Edited by W. Tuesee, M.B. Svo. with 
 117 Woodcuts, 21s. 
 
 A TREATISE on the CONTINUED FEVERS of GREAT BRITAIN. 
 
 By C. Mtjechisos , M.D. Senior Physician to the London Fever Hospital. 
 Svo. with coloured Plates, 18s. 
 
 ANATOMY, DESCRIPTIVE and SURGICAL. By Henrt Gkat, 
 
 F.II.S. With 410 Wood Engravings from Dissections. Fourth Edition, by 
 T. Holmes, M.A. Cantab. Royal Svo. 28s. ■ , 
 
 The CYCLOP.ffiDIA of ANATOMY and PHYSIOLOGY. Edited hy 
 the late E. B. ToBD, M.D. P.R.8. Assisted by nearly all the most eminent 
 cultivators of Physiological Science of the present age. 6 vols. Svo. with 
 2,868 Woodcuts, £8 Ss. 
 
NEW WOEKS PTOLIBHED BT LONGMANS AJnJ CO. 16 
 
 PHYSIOLOGICAL ANATOMY and PHYSIOLOGY of MAN. By the 
 late E. B. Todd, M.D. F.E.8. and W. Bowmak, F.E.S. of King's College. 
 With numerouH Illustrations. Vol. II. 8vo. 26s. 
 
 Vol. I. New Edition by Dr. Lionel S. Bbale, F.E.S. in coarse of publi- 
 cation ; Pabi I. with i Plates, Is. 6cl. 
 
 HISTOLOGICAL DEMONSTRATIONS ; a Guide to the Microscopical 
 Examination of the Animal Tissues in Health and Disr'a.se, for the use of 
 the Medii'al and Veterinary Professions. By G. Haelet, M J), and G. T. 
 'BnowTS, M.E.C.V.S. Post Svo. with 228 Woodcuts. 
 
 A DICTIONARY of PRACTICAL MEDICINE. By J. Copland, M.D. 
 P.R.S. Abridged from the larger work by the Author, &'-8isted by J, C. 
 Copland, M.K.C.S. and throughout brought down to the present State of 
 Medical Bclenue. Pp. 1,660 in Svo. price 8B«, 
 
 Dr. Copland's Dictionary of Practical Medicine (the larger work). 
 3 vols. Svo. £5 lis. 
 
 The WORKS of SIR B, C, ERODIE, Bart, collected and arranged 
 by ChasL£S Hawkins, F.E.C.8.E. 3 vols. Svo. with Medallion and Fac- 
 simile, 48ff. 
 
 Antohiography of Sir B. C. Brodie, Bart. Printed from the Author's 
 materials left in MS. Sec^ond Edition, Fcp. 4s. 6d. 
 
 The TOXICOLOGIST'S GUIDE : a New Manual on PoisoDS, giving the 
 Best Methods to be pursued for the Detection nf Poisons (post-mortem or 
 otherwise). By Jons Hoeslby. F.C.S. Analytical Chemist. Post 8yo. S«. 6d. 
 
 A MANUAL of MATERIA MEDICA and THERAPEUTICS, abridged 
 from Dr. Peeeiea's Elements by F. J^. Faeee, M.D. assisted by R. Bekxlbt, 
 M.E.O.S. and by E. WAEINGTOIf, P.E.S. Svo. with 90 Woodcuts, 21». 
 
 Dr. Fereira's Elements of Materia Medica and Therapeutics. Third 
 Edition. By A. 8. Tatloe, M.D. and G. O. Eebs, M.D. S vols. Svo. with 
 Woodcuts, £i 16S. 
 
 THOMSON'S CONSPECTUS of the BRITISH PHARMACOPEIA. 
 
 Twenty-fourth Edition, corrected and made conrormable throuuhout to the 
 Now Pharmacopoeia of the General Council of Medical Education. By E, 
 Lloyd Biekbit, M.D. 18mo. 6s. M. 
 
 MANUAL of the DOMESTIC PRACTICE of MEDICINE. By W. B. 
 
 Kesteven, r.B.O.S.E. Second Edition, revised, with Additions. Fcp. 6s. 
 The RESTORATION of HEALTH ; or, the Application of the Laws of 
 
 Hygiene to the Eecovery of Health ; a Manual for the Invalid, and a Guide 
 
 in tlie Sick Eoom. By W. Steanqe, M.D. Fcp. 6s. 
 
 SEA-AIR and SEA-BATHING for CHILDREN and INVALIDS. 
 
 By the same Author. Fop. boards, 3s. 
 MANUAL for the CLASSIFICATION, TRAINING, and EDUCATION 
 of the Feeble-Minded, Imbecile, and Idiotic. By P. Martin DuH CAN, M.B. 
 and WiLLlAH MiLLASD. Crown Svo. 6s. 
 
 The Fine Arts, and Illustrated Editions. 
 
 The NEW TESTAMENT, illustrated with Wood Engravings after the 
 Early Masters, chiefly of the Italian School. Crown Ite. fiSs. doth, gilt top ; 
 or £5 6s. elegantly bound in morocco. 
 
le NEW ■WOaKS PUBLISHED BT LONGMANS AITD CO. 
 
 LYBA GERHANICA ; Hymns for the Sundays and Chief FestiTals of 
 the Christian Tear. Translated by Catheetse WisKrwoB'ra ; 12S Illus- 
 trations on Wood di-awn by J. Leighiom, F.S.A. Vcp. 4to. 21s. 
 
 The LIFE of HAN SYMBOLISED by the MONTHS of the TEAK in 
 their Seasons and Pha.ses ; with Passages selected from Ancient and Modern 
 Authors. By Eichaed Pigot. Accompanied by a Series of 25 full-page 
 Illustrations and numerous Marginal Devices, Decorative Initial Letters, 
 and Tailpieces, engraved on "Wood from Original Designs by JoHir Leightok, 
 P.SA. 4to. 42s. 
 
 CATS' and FAELIE'S KOEAI EMBLEMS ; with Aphorisms, Adages, 
 and Proverbs of all Nations : comprising 121 Illustrations on Wood by J. 
 Leightoit, P.S.A. with an appropriate Text by B. Pigot. Imperial 8vo. 
 316'. 6d. 
 
 SHAKSPEABE'S SENTIMENTS and SIMILES, printed in Black and 
 Gold, and Illuminated in the Missal Style by Henet Noel Humpheets. 
 In massive covers, containing the Medallion and Cypher of Shakspeare. 
 Square post 8vo. 21s. 
 
 The HISTORY of OITE LORD, as exemplified in Works of Art. 
 Being the fourth and concluding series of ' Sacred and Legendary Art.' By 
 Mrs. jAMESOir and Lady Eaetlaee. Second Edition, with IS Etchings 
 and 281 Woodcuts. 2 vofi. square cro>vn 8vo. 4Zs. 
 
 In the same Series, by Mrs. Jamesoit. 
 Legends of the Saints and Martyrs. Fourth Edition, with 19 
 Etchings and 187 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 81s. 6(2. 
 
 Legends of the Monastic Orders. Third Edition, with 11 Etchings 
 and 88 Woodcuts. 1 vol. 21s. 
 
 Legends of the Madonna. Third Edition, with 27 Etchings and 165 
 Woodcuts. 1 vol. 21s. 
 
 Arts, Manufactures, <SfC. 
 
 DRAWING from NATURE ; a Series of Progressive Instructions in 
 Sketching, from Elementaiy Studies to Pinished Views, with Examples 
 from Switzerland and the Pyrenees. B5[ Geoege Baewaed, Professor of 
 Drawing at Kugby School. With 18 Lithographic Plates, and 103 Wood 
 Engravings. Imp. 8vo. 2f)S. 
 
 GWILT'S ENCYCLOP.a:DIA of ARCHITECTURE. New Edition, 
 revised, with Alterations and considerable Additions, by Wtatt Papwoeth, 
 With above 350 New Engravings and Diagrams on .Wood by O. Jewitt, and 
 upwards of 100 other Woodcuts. 8vo. [In December, 
 
 TUSCAN SCULPTORS, their Lives, Works, and Times. With 45 
 Etchings and 28 Woodcuts fi-om Original Drawings and Photographs. By 
 CnABLES C. Peekihs. 2 vols, imperial 8vo. 63s. 
 
 The GRAMMAR of HERALDRY: containing a Description of all the 
 Principal Charges used in Armory, the Signification of Heraldic Terms, and 
 the Biulcs to be observed in Blazoning and MarshaJling. By John E, 
 CnssAHS. Pep. with 196 Woodcuts, 4s. ^. 
 
 The ENGINEER'S HANDBOOK; explaining the Principles which, 
 .should guide the young Engineer in the Construction of Machinery. By 
 C. S. LOWKBES. Post 8vo. 5«. 
 
NEW "WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMANS AiTD CO. 17 
 
 The EIEMENTS of MECHANISM. By T. M. Goodeve, M.A. 
 Prol'essor of Mechanics at the E. M. Acad. 'Woolwich. Second Edition, 
 with 217 Woodcuts. Fost 8vo. 6<. 6<2. 
 
 TJEE'S DICTIONARY of AETS, MANTTFACTTTEES, and MINES. 
 Ee-written and enlarged by Eobeet Huht, F.R.S. assisted by mimcrons 
 Contributors eminent in Science and the Arts. With 2,000 Woodruts. S vols. 
 8vo, [/it December. 
 
 ENCYC10P.ffiDIA of CIVIL ENGINEEEING, Historical, Theorciicul, 
 and Practical. By E. Cbhst, C.E. With above 3,000 Woodcuts. 8yo. 42s. 
 
 TEEATISE on MILLS and MILLWOEK. By W. Fairdaibn, C.E. 
 Second Edition, with 18 Plates and 822 Woodcuts. 2 vols. 8vo. 32*. 
 
 Useful Information for Engineers. By the same Author. First 
 and Second Sebies, with many Plates and Woodcuts. 2 vols, crown 8vu. 
 10s. ed. each. 
 
 The Application of Cast and Wronght Iron to Building Purposes, 
 By the same Author. ThirdEdition, with 6 1 latts and 118 Woodcuts. 8vo. Ids. 
 
 IBON SHIP BUILDING', its History and Progress, as comprised in a 
 Series of Experimental Researches on the Laws of Strain ; the Strengths, 
 Porms, and other conditions of the Material ; and an Inquiry into the Present 
 and Prospective State of the Navy, including the Experimental Bcsults on 
 the Besisting Powers of Armour Plates and Shot at High Velocities. By the 
 same Author. With 4 Plates and 130 Woodcuts. 8vo. 18«. 
 
 The PEACTICAL MECHANIC'S JOTJENAL; an Illustrated Record 
 of Mechanical and Engineering Science, and Epitome of Patent Inventions. 
 *to. price 1». monthly. 
 
 The PEACTICAL DEAUGHTSMAN'S BOOK of INDTISTEIAL DE- 
 SIGN. By W.JonifBOir, Assoc. Inst. C.E. With many hundred Illustrations. 
 4to. 2Ss. ed. 
 
 The PATENTEE'S MANUAL : a Treatise on the Law and Practice t.f 
 Letters Patent for the use of .Patentees and Inventors. By J. and J. H. 
 JOHNSOir. Post 8vo. Is. ed. 
 
 The ARTISAN CLUB'S TEEATISE on the STEAM ENGINE, in its 
 various Applications to Mines, Mills, Steam Navigation. Railways andApri- 
 culture. By J. Boukne, C.E. Seventh Edition ; with 37 Plates and 646- 
 Woodouts. 4to. 42«. 
 
 Catechism of the Steam Engine, in its various Applications to- 
 Mines, Mills, Steam Navigation, Railways, and Agriculture. By the same- 
 Author. With 199 Woodcuts. Pep. 9s. The IifTEODUCTiow of 'Beccnti 
 Improvements' may be had soparatelyi ^th 110 Woodcuts, price 3«. ed. 
 
 Handbook of the Steam Engine. By the same Author, forming a 
 Key to the Catechism of the Steam Engine, with 67 Woodcuts. Pep. 9«. 
 
 A TEEATISE on the SCEEW FBOFELLEE, SCBEW VESSELS, and 
 Screw Engines, as adapted for purposes of Peace and War ; illustrated by 
 many Plates and Woodcuts. By the same Author, New and enlarged 
 Edition, in course of publication in 24 Farts. Royal 4to. 2s. Sd. each. 
 
 The THEOET of WAE Illustrated by numerous Examples from 
 History. By Lieut.-Ool. P. L. MacDocoail. Third Edition, with 10 PK^iis. 
 Post 8vo. 10s. 6i2. 
 
 c 
 
18 NEW WORKS published et LONGMANS Aim CO. 
 
 The AET of PEEFTJMESY ; the History and Theory of Odonre, and 
 the Methods of Extracting the Aromas of Plants. By Dr. PlEBSE, F.C.S. 
 Third Edition, with 63 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. Ms. ed. 
 
 Chemical, Natural, and Physical Magic, for JuTeniles during the 
 Holidays. By the same Author, Third Edition, enlarged, with 38 Woodcuts. 
 Pep. 6«. 
 
 TALFA; or the Chronicles of a Clay Farm. By C. W. Hosktnb, 
 
 Esq. Sixth Edition, with 24 Woodcuts by G. Oeuikshakk. 16mo. 6«. 6d. 
 LOUDON'S ENCYCLOP.ffiDIA of AGRICULTIIEE : comprising the 
 Laying-out, Improvement, and Management of Landed Property, and the 
 Cultivation and Economy of the Productions of Agriculture. With 1,100 
 Woodcuts. 8vo. Sis. 6d. 
 
 Loudon's Encylopasdia of Gardening : comprising the Theory and 
 Practice of Horticulture, Floriculture, Arboriculture, and .Landscape Gar- 
 dening. With 1,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. Sis. ed. 
 
 Loudon's Encyclopeedia of Cottage, Farm, and Villa Architecture 
 
 and Furniture. With more than 2,000 Woodcuts. 8vo. 4Ss. 
 
 GARDEN AECHITECTUEE and LANDSCAPE GARDENING: illus- 
 trating the Architectural Embellishment of Gardens, with Remarks on 
 Landscape Gardening in its relation to Architecture. By John Abthue 
 Hdohes. 8to. with 194 Woodcuts, lis. 
 
 HISTORY of WINDSOR GREAT PARK and WINDSOE FOEEST. 
 
 By William Menzies, Eesident Deputy-Surveyor. With 2 Maps and 20 
 
 Photographs. Imp. folio, £8 8«. 
 
 BAYLDON'S AET of VALUING EENTS and TILLAGES, and Claims 
 of Tenants upon Quitting Farms, both at Michaelmas and Lady-Day. 
 Eighth Edition, revised by J. G. Moetok. 8vo. IDs. ed. 
 
 Religious and Moral Works. 
 
 An EXPOSITION of the 39 AETICLES, Historical and Doctrinal. 
 
 By E. Haeold Beowne, D.D. Lord Bishop of Ely. Seventh Edit. 8vo. 16». 
 The Pentateuch and the Elohistlc Psalms, in Keply to Bishop Colenso. 
 
 By the same. Second Edition. 8vo. is. 
 
 Examination Questions on Bishop Browne's Exposition of the 
 Articles. By the Eev. J. Goele, M.A. Pep. 3s. 6d. 
 
 The ACTS of the APOSTLES ; with a Commentary, and Practical and 
 Devotional Suggestions for Readers and Students of the EnglishBible. By 
 the Eev. F. C. toOK, M.A. Canon of Exeter, &c. New Edition. 8vo. 12«. ed. 
 
 The LIFE and EPISTLES of ST. PAUL. By W. J. Cobtbeare, 
 M.A. late Fellow of Trin. Coll.Cantab. and J. S. HowsoH, D.D. late Principal 
 of Liverpool College. 
 
 LiBEAET Editioit, With all the Original Illustrations, Maps, Landscapes 
 on Steel, Woodcuts, &c. 2 vols. 4to. 48s. 
 
 INTEEMEDIATB EmTioif, with a Selection of Maps, Plates, and Woodcuts. 
 2 vols, square crown 8vo. 31s. ed. 
 
 People's Editioh, revised and condensed, with 46 Illustrations and 
 Maps. 2 vols, crown 8vo. 12s. 
 
NEW WOBKS ruBiiSHED by IKJNGMANS abd CO. IB 
 
 The VOYAGE and SHIFWSEC2 of ST. PAUL; with Dissertations 
 on tho LifK and Writiniis of St. Luke and the Ships and Naviiration of the 
 Ancients. By James Smith, of Jordaiihill, F ILS. Third Edition, with 
 rrontispieoe, 4 Charts, and 11 Woodcuts. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 FASTI SACRI, or a Key to the Chronology of the New Testament ; 
 comprising an Historical Harmony of the Four Gospels, and Chronological 
 Tables generally from B.C. 70 to A.D. 70 : with a Preliminary Dissertation on 
 the Chronology of the New Testament, and other Aids to the elucidation of 
 the subject. £y Thomas Lewik, M.A. F.S.A. Imperial 8vo. 429. 
 
 A CBITICAL and GBAHUATICAI. COMUENTABT on ST. FAirX'S 
 Epistles. By C. J. Ellicoix, D.D. Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. Sto 
 
 Galatians, Third Edition, 8«. 6d. 
 
 Ephesians, Third Edition, 8». 6d, 
 
 Pastoral Epistles, Third Edition, 10s. 6d. 
 
 PhilippiauB, Colossians, and Philemon, Third Edition, 10s. 6d. 
 
 Thessalonians, Second Edition, 7s. 6d. 
 
 Historical Lectures on the Iilfe of our Lord Jesus Christ : being the 
 Hulsean Lectures for 18S9. By the same Author. Fourth Edition. 8to. 
 price 10s. id. 
 
 The Sestiny of the Creature; and other Sermons preached before 
 the Uuiversity of Cambridge. By the same. Fourth Edition. FostSvo. E«. 
 
 The Broad and the Narrow Way; Two Sermons preached before 
 
 the University of Cambridge. By the same. Crown 8vo. 2s. 
 Eev. T. H. HOENE'S INTRODUCTION to the CBITICAL STUDY 
 
 and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. Eleventh Edition, corrected and 
 extended under careful Editorial revision. With 4 Maps aud 22 Woodcuts 
 and Facsimiles. 4 vols. Bvo. £S 13s. ed. 
 
 Bev. T. H. Home's Compendious Introduction to the Study of the 
 Bible, being an Analysis of the larger work by the same Author. £e-cdited 
 by the Eev. John Ayee, M.A. With Maps. Ac. Post 8vo. 9s. 
 
 The TEEASUBY of BIBLE KNOWLEDGE ; being a Dictionary of the 
 Books, Persons, Places, Events, and other matters of which mention is made 
 in Holy Scripture: intended to establish its Authority and illustrate its 
 Contents. By Eev. J. Atke, M.A. With Maps, 16 Plates, and numerous 
 Woodcuts. Fcp. 10s. 6d. 
 
 The GREEK TESTAMENT; with Notes, Grammatical and Exegetical. 
 By the Eev. W. Websiee, M.A. and the Bev. W. P. Wilkihsoh, ilA, 2 
 vols. Svo. £2 ts. 
 Vol. I. the Gospels and Acts, 20s. 
 Vol. IL the Epistles and Apocalypse, 24s. 
 
 EVERY-DAY SCBIPTURE DIFFICULTIES explained and illustrated. 
 By J. E. Pkbsooit, M.A. Vol. I. Maltlww and Mark; Vol. II. Lake and 
 John. 2 vols. Svo. 9s. each. 
 
 The PENTATEUCH and BOOK of JOSHUA CRITICALLY EXAMINED. 
 By the Right Rev. J. W. Colenso, D.D. Lord Bishop of Natal. People's 
 Edition, in 1 vol. crown Svo. 6s. or in 5 Parts, Is. each. 
 
 The PENTATEUCH and BOOK of JOSHUA CBITICALLY EXA MINED. 
 By Prof. A. KnENES, of Leyden. Translated from tho Dutch, and edited 
 with Notes, by J. W. Colbhso, D.D. Bishop of Natal. «vo. 8». 6d. 
 
2(1 NEW WORKS PTJBLISHBl) BT LONGMANS AND CO. 
 
 The CHTJECH and the WOBIS : Essays on Questions of the Day. 
 By Various Writers. Edited by the Rev. Oebt Shipiey, M.A. Second 
 Kdition, thoroughly revised, 8vo. 15». 
 
 The FOEffiATION of CHHISTENDOM. Pakt I. By T. W. Allies, 
 
 Svo. 12s. 
 CHaiSTENDOM'S DIVISIONS: a Philosophical Sketch of the Divi- 
 sions of the Christian Familyin East and West. By Edmottd S. FroULKES, 
 formerly I'ellow and Tutor of Jesus Coll. Oxford. Post Svo. 7s. dd. 
 
 Christendom's Divisions, Pakt II. Greeks and Latins, being a His- 
 tory of tiheir Dissensions and Overtures for Peace down to the Reformation. 
 By the same Author. [Neurly ready. 
 
 The IIFE of CHRIST ; an Eclectic Gospel, from the Old and New- 
 Testaments, arranged on a New Principle, with Analytical Tables, &c. By 
 Chaeles De la Peyme, M.A. Trin. CoU. Camb. Revised Edition. Svo. 5s. 
 
 The HIDDEN WISDOM of CHRIST and the XET of KNOWLEDGE ; 
 
 or, History of the Apocrypha. By Benest db BuifSEif. 2 vols. Svo. 2Ss. 
 
 ESSAYS on RELIGION and LITEEATTJEE. Edited by the Most 
 Rev. Archbishop Mank:ng. Svo. 10s. 6d. 
 
 The TEMPORAL MISSION of the HOLT GHOST; or, Reason and 
 
 Revelation. By the Most Rev. Archbishop Manitisg. SecoDd Edition. 
 Crown Svo. 8s. &d, 
 
 ESSAYS and REVIEWS. By the Eev. W. Temple, D.D. the Kev. 
 R. Williams, B.D. the Rev. B. Powell, M.A. the Rev. H. B. Wilson, 
 B.D. 0. W. Goonwiir, M.A. the Rev. M; Pattison, B.D. and the Rev. B. 
 JowETT, M.A. Twulfth Edition. Pep. Svo. 6*. 
 
 MOSHEIM'S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Muedock and Soames's 
 Translation and Notes, re-edited by the Eev. W. SlUBBS, M.A. 3 vols. 
 Svo. 45s. 
 
 BISHOP JEREMY TAYLOR'S ENTIEE WOEKS: With Life by 
 Bishop Hebee. Revised and corrected by the Rev, C. P. Eden, 10 vols, 
 price £5 5s. 
 
 PASSING THOUGHTS on RELIGION. By the Author of 'Amy 
 
 Herbert.' New Edition. Fcp. Svo. Bs. 
 
 Thoughts for the Holy Week, for Young Persons. By the same 
 Author. Third Edition. Fcp. Svo. 'is. 
 
 Solf-Examination before Confirmation. By the same Author. 32mo. 
 price Is. Qd. 
 
 Eeadings for a Month Preparatory to Confirmation, from Writers 
 of the Early and English Church. By the same. Fcp. 4«. 
 
 Readings for Every Day in lent, compiled from the Writings of 
 Bishop Jeeemt Tatloe. By the same. Fcp. 6s. 
 
 Preparation for the Holy Communion; the Devotions chiefly from 
 the works of Jeeekt Tayloe. By the same. 82mo. 3s. 
 
 PEINCIPLES of EDUCATION Drawn from Nature and Eevelation, 
 and applied to Female Education in the Upper Classes. By the same. 
 •i vols. fcp. las. W. 
 
NEW WOEKS PUBUSHED BT LONGMANS ahd CO. 21 
 
 The WIFE'S MANtTAL ; or, Prayers, Thoughts, and Songs on Several 
 Occasions of a Matron's Life. By the Ecv. W. Oaiveet, MJL. Crown 8vo. 
 price 10s. ed. 
 
 SPIRITUAL SONGS for the SUNDAYS and HOLIDAYS through- 
 
 out the Tear. By J. S. B. MossELL, LL.D. Vicar of Egham. Fourth Edition, 
 Fcp. 4s, 6d. 
 
 The Beatitudes : Abasement before God ; Sorrow for Sin ; Meekness 
 of Spirit; Desire for Holiness; Gentleness; Purity of Heart; the Peace- 
 makers ; Sufferings fur Christ. By the same. Third Edition. Fcp. S». 6d. 
 
 LYRA DOMESTICA; Christian Songs for Domestic Edification. 
 Translated from the Pnaltery and Barp of C. J. P. Spitta, and from other 
 sources, by EiohabD Mabsie. Fibst and Secohd Seeies, fcp. 4s. M. each. 
 
 LYRA SACRA; Hymns, Ancient and Modern, Odes and FraRments 
 of Sacred Poetry. Edited by the Eev. B. W. Savilb, MA. Third Dditiou, 
 enlarged and improved. Pop. B». 
 
 LYEA GEEMANICA, translated from the German by Miss C. Wijoc- 
 WOBTH. Fiest Sebiks, Hymns for the Sundays and Chief Festivals; 
 SecoitI) Sebies, the Christian Life. Fcp. 6«. each Sebies. 
 
 Hymns from Lyra Germanica, 18mo. Is. 
 
 LYRA EUCHARISTICA; Hymns and Verses on the Holy Communion, 
 Ancient and Modern: with other Poems. Edited by the Rev. Obbt Ship- 
 ley, M.A. Second Edition. Fcp. Is. ed. 
 
 Lyra Messianica ; Hymns and Verses on the Life of Christ, Ancient 
 and Modern ; with other Poems. By the same Editor. Second Edition, 
 altered and enlarged. Fcp. 7s. 6d. 
 
 Lyra Mystica ; Hymns and Verses on Sacred Subjects, Ancient and 
 itiodern. By the same Editor. Fop. 7s. 6d. 
 
 The CHORALE BOOK for ENGLAND; a complete Hymn-Book in 
 accordance with the Services and Festivals of the Church of England : the 
 Hymns translated by Miss C. Winkwoetu j the tunes arranged by Prof, 
 w. S.Benneti and Otto Goldschmidt. Fcp. 4to.l2«.6d. 
 
 Congregational Edition, Fcp. 2s. 
 
 The CATHOLIC DOCTRINE of the ATONEMENT: an Historical 
 Inquiry into its Development in the Church ; with an Introduction on the 
 Principle of Theological Developments, By H. N. Oxesham, M.A, for- 
 merly Scholar of Balliol College, Oiford, 8vo. 8j. 6d. 
 
 FROM SUNDAY TO SUNDAY : an attempt to consider familiarly the 
 Weekday Life and Labours of a Country Clergyman. By E. Gbe, M.A. 
 Vicar of Abbott's Langley and Eural Dean. Fcp. Bs. 
 
 Our Sermons : an Attempt to consider familiarly, but reverently, the 
 Preacher's Work in the present day. By the same Author. Fcp, 6s. 
 
 PALEY'S MORAL PHILOSOPHY, with Annotations. By Richaed 
 Whatelt, D.D. late Archbishop of Dublin. 8vo. 7s. 
 
NEW WOfiKS PUBLISHED BT LONGMANS Alfl) CO. 
 
 Travels, Voyages, 6fc. 
 
 ICE-CAVES of FRANCE and SWITZEEEAND ; a Narrative of Sub- 
 terranean Exploration. By the Rev. G. F. Beowne, M.A. Fellow and 
 Assistant-Tutor of St. Catherine's Coll. Cambridge, M.A.C. With 11 Illus- 
 trations on "Wood. Square crown 8vo. 12*. 6d. 
 
 VIILAGE LIFE in SWITZEELAND. By Sophia D. Dblmabd. 
 Post 8vo. 98. 6d. 
 
 HOW WE SPENT the STJMMEK; or, a Voyage en Zigzag in Switzer- 
 land and !Eyrol with someMembers of the Alpike Ciub. From the Sketch- 
 Book of one of the Party. Third Edition, re-drawn. In oblong *to. with 
 about 300 Illustrations, IS^. 
 
 BEATEN TRACKS ; or, Pen and Pencil Sketches in Italy. ]5y the 
 Authoress of ' A Voyage en Ziszag.' With 42 Plates, containing about 200 
 Sketches from Drawings made on the Spot. 8vo. 16s. 
 
 MAP of the CHAIN of MONT BLANC, from an actual Survey in 
 1863—1864. By A. Adams-Eeillt, F.E.G.S. M.A.C. Published under the 
 Authority of the Alpine Club. In Chromolithography on extra stout 
 drawing-paper 28in. x 17in. price 10s. or mounted on canvas in a folding 
 case, 12s. 6i2. 
 
 TRANSYLVANIA, its PRODUCTS and its PEOPLE. By Charles 
 Bones. With S Maps and 43 Illustrations on Wood and in Chromolitho- 
 graphy. 8vo. 21s. 
 
 EXPLORATIONS in SOUTH WEST AFRICA, from Walvisch Bay to 
 Lake Ngamj and the Victoria Falls. By Thomas Saiites, F.E.G.S. 8vo. 
 with Map and Illustrations, 21s. 
 
 VANCOUVER ISLAND and BRITISH COLUMBIA; their History, 
 Resources, and Prospects. By Matthew Maceib, F.R.6.S. With Maps 
 and iiluiitrations. 8vo. 18s. 
 
 HISTORY of DISCOVERY in our AUSTRALASIAN COLONIES, 
 
 Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand, from the Earliest Bate to the 
 Present Day. By William Howiit. With 3 Maps of the Recent Explora- 
 tions from Official Sources. 2 vols. Bvo. 20s. 
 
 The CAPITAL of the TYCOON ; a Narrative of a Three Years' Eesi- 
 dence in Japan. By Sir Rutheepoed Alcoce, K.C.B. 2 vols. 8vo. with 
 numerous Illustrations, 42s. 
 
 FLORENCE, the NEW CAPITAL of ITALY. By C. R. Weld. With 
 several Engravings on Wood from Drawings by the Author. Post 8vo. 
 
 The DOLOMITE MOUNTAINS. Excursions through Tyrol, Carinthia, 
 Carniola, and Friuh in 1861, 1862, and 1863. By J. Gilbeet and G. C. 
 Chuechill, F.R.G.S. With numerous Illustrations. Square crown 
 8vo. 21s. 
 
 A SUMMER TOUR in the 6RIS0NS and ITALIAN VALLEYS of 
 
 the Bernina. By Mrs. Hehey Feeshiieij). With 2 Coloured Maps and 
 4 Views. Post 8vo. IDs. 6d. 
 
 Alpine Byeways; or. Light Leaves gathered in 1 859 and 1S60, By 
 the same Authoress. Post 8vo. with Illustrations, lOs. &d. 
 
NEW WOKKS FrBLigmsD bt LONGMANS aitd CO. iS 
 
 A LADY'S TOTJE EOTJHD MOWTE ROSA; including Visits* to tlie 
 Italian Valleys. With Map and Illustrations. Post Svo. 14«. 
 
 OTTIBE to the FYBEITEES, for the nse of Monntaineers. By 
 Chahles FA.CEE. With Maps, &c. and Appendix. Fcp. 6«. 
 
 The ALPINE GUIDE. B7 John Ball, M.R.I.A. late President of 
 
 the Alpine Club. Post Svo. with Maps and other Illustrations. 
 
 Guide to the Eastern Alps, nearli/ ready. 
 
 Guide to the Western Alps, including Mont Blanc, Monte Hosa, 
 Zermatt, &c. Is. &d. 
 
 Guide to the Oberland and all Switzerland, excepting the Keighbonr- 
 hood of Monte Host and the Great St. Bernard ; with fombardy and the 
 adjoining portion of Tyrol. 79. 6(2. 
 
 A GUIDE to SPAIH, By H. O'Shea. Post 870. with TrarelUng 
 
 Map, 169. 
 
 CHBISTOFHEB COLUMBUS; his Life, Voyages, and DiscoTcries. 
 Bevlsed Edition, with 4 Woodcuts. ISmo. is. 6d. 
 
 CAFTAIN JAMES COOK ; his Life, Voyages, and Discoveries. Revised 
 Edition, with numerous Woodcuts. 18mo. 2«. 6d. 
 
 HUMBOLDT'S TRAVELS and DISCOVERIES in SOUTH AMERICA. 
 
 Third Edition, with numerous Woodcuts. ISmo. 2s. 6(2. 
 
 NARRATIVES of SHIPWRECKS of the BOTAL NAVY between 1793 
 and 1857, compiled from Official Documents in the Admiralty by W. O. 8. 
 GiLLT i with a Preface by W. S. Qillt, D.D. Third Edition. Pep. 5s. 
 
 A WEEK at the LAND'S END. By J. T. Blight ; assisted by E. 
 H. RosD, B. Q. Couch, and J. Baxib. With Map and S6 Woodcuts. Fcp. 
 price 6s. 6(2. 
 
 VISITS to REMARKABLE PLACES : Old Halls, Battle-Fields, and 
 Scenes Illustrative of Striking Passages in English History and Poetry. 
 Bj; William Howiti. 2 vols, square crown Svo. with Wood Engravings, 
 price 'i&s. 
 
 The RURAL LIFE of ENGLAND. By the same Author. With 
 Woodcuts by Bewick and Williams. Medium Svo. 12». M. 
 
 Works of Fiction. 
 
 ATHERSTONE PRIORY. By L. N. Comto. 2 vols, post 8to. 21*. 
 
 Ellice : a Tale. By the same Author. Post Svo. 9s. 6d. 
 
 STORIES and TALES by the Author of ' Amy Herbert,' uniform 
 Edition, each Tale or Story complete in a single Volume. 
 
 Amy Herbebt, 2*.6<2. 
 Gebtbude, is. 6(2. 
 Earl's Dauohtee, 2s. 6(2. 
 Experience of Live, %s. 6d, 
 Cleve Hall, Ss. 6d. 
 
 Ivors, 3s. 6d. 
 
 Katharine Ashton, 3s. td. 
 Maroarbt Pebcival, bs. 
 Iianeton Parsonage, is. 6d. 
 Ubsula, is. ed. 
 
 A Glimpse of the World. By the Author of 'Amy Herbert.' Fcp. 7*. 6d. 
 
24 NEW "WOEKS PTJBLTGHED ET LONGMANS AlfD CO. 
 
 THE SIX SISTERS of the VALLEYS : an Historical Eomance. By 
 "WTBeamiet-Mooee, M.A. Incumbent of Gerrard's Cross, Bucks. Third 
 Edition, with 14 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. Es. 
 
 The GLADIATOES : A Tale of Rome and Judtea. By G. J. Whttb 
 
 MeIiYIUiE. Crown 8vo. Bs. 
 Dighy Grand, an Autobiography. By the same Author. 1 vol. 5s. 
 Kate Coventry, an Autobiography. By the same. 1 vol. 5s. 
 General Bonnoe, or the Lady and the Locusts. By the same. 1 vol. 5s. 
 Holmhy House, a Tale of Old Northamptonshire. 1 vol. 5s. 
 Good for Nothing, or All Down Hill. By the same. 1 vol. 6s. 
 The Queen's Maries, a Romance of Holyrood. 1 vol. 6s. 
 The Interpreter, a Tale of the War. By the same. 1 vol. 5s. 
 
 TALES from GBEEK MYTHOLOGY. By George W. Cox, M.A. 
 
 late Scholar of Trin. Coll. Oxon. Second Edition. Square 16mo. 3s. 6d. 
 Tales of the Gods and Heroes. By the same Author. Second 
 
 Edition. Fcp. 5s. 
 
 Tales of Thebes and Argos. By the same Author. "Fcp. 4s.6d, 
 
 BECKEE'S GALLTTS ; or, Roman Scenes of the Time of Augustus : 
 with Notes and Excursuses illustrative of the Manners and Customs of the 
 Ancient Romans. New Edition. Post 8vo. 7». erf. 
 
 BECKER'S CHARICLES; a Tale illustrative of Private Life among the 
 Ancient Greeks ; with Notes and Excursuses. New Edition. Post 8vo. 7s. 6rf. 
 
 ICELAirSIC LEGENDS. Collected by Jon Aenason. Selected and 
 Translated from the Icelandic by G. E. J. Powell and E. Magnusboit. 
 Second Seeieb, with Notes and an Introductory Essay on the Origin and 
 Genius of the Icelandic Folk-Lore, and 3 Illustrations on Wood. Cr. 8vo. 21s. 
 
 The WARDEN: a Novel. By Anthony Tbollope. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
 
 Earchester Towers : a Sequel to ' The Warden.' By the same 
 Author. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6rf. 
 
 Poetry and The Drama. 
 
 GOETHE'S SECOND FATTST. Translated by John Anstee, LL-D. 
 M.E.I.A. Regius Professor of Civil Law in the University of Dublin. Post 
 8to. ISs. 
 
 TASSO'S JERUSALEM DELIVERED, Translated into English Verse 
 by Sir J. KufOBTON James, Kt. M.A. 2 vols. fcp. with Facsimile, Us. 
 
 POETICAL WORKS of JOHN EDMUND EEADE ; with final Revision 
 and Additions. 3 vols. fcp. 18s. or each vol. separately, 6s. 
 
 MOORE'S POETICAL WORKS, Cheapest Editions complete in 1 vol. 
 including the Autobiographical Prefaces and Author's last Notes, which are 
 still copyright. Crown 8vo. ruby type, with Portrait, 6s. or People's 
 Edition, in larger type, 12s. erf. 
 
 Moore's Poetical Works, as above. Library Edition, medium 8to. 
 with Portrait and Tignette, 14s. or in 10 vols. fcp. 3s. erf. each. 
 
NEW WORKS PUBLI8HEI> BY LONGMANS AST CO. 25 
 
 MOOEE'S IRISH MELODIES, Maclisc's Edition, -with 161 Steel Plates 
 from Original Drawings. Super-royal 8vo. 31«. 6d. 
 
 miniature Edition of Moore's Irish Mebdies -with Maclise's De- 
 _ signs (as above) reduced in Lithography. Imp. ICmo. 10». 6d. 
 
 MOOBE'S lALLA BOOKH. Tenniel's Edition, with 68 Wood 
 Engravings from original Drawings and other Ulustrations. Fcp. 4to. 21f. 
 
 SOTITHEY'S POETICAL WORKS, with the Author's last Corrections 
 and copyright Additions. Library Edition, in 1 vol. medium 8vo. with 
 Portrait and Vignette, 149. or in 10 vols. fcp. is. ed. each, 
 
 LAYS of ANCIENT BOME ; with Ivry and the Armada. By the 
 Kight Hon. LoBD Mucaulat. 16mo. 4«. 6d. 
 
 Lord Macanlay's Lays of Ancient Rome. With 90 Illustrations on 
 Wood, Original and from the Antique, from Drawings by 6. Schabf. I'cp. 
 4to. 2K. 
 
 Miniature Edition of Lord Macanlay's Lays of Ancient Borne, 
 with MacUse's Designs (as above) reduced in Lithography. Imp. 16mo. 
 10». ad. 
 
 POEMS. By Jean Inoblow. Eleventh Edition. Pep. 8vo. Ss. 
 
 Poems by Jean Ingelow. A New Edition, with nearly 100 Illustra- 
 tions by Eminent Artists, engraved on Wood by the Brothers Dalzisl. 
 Fcp. 4to. 2\s. 
 
 POETICAL WOBKS of LETITIA ELIZABETH LANDON (^L.E.L.) 
 2 vols. 16mo. 10s. 
 
 PLAYTIME with the POETS : a Selection of the best English Poetry 
 for the use of ChQdren. By a Lady. Bevised Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
 
 SHAKSPEABE'S SONNETS NEVER EEFOBE INTEBPRETEB ; 
 
 his PRIVATE FRIENDS idpntifiedj together with a recovered LIKE- 
 NESS of Hl.VlSELF. By Gekald Massey. 8vo. 18». 
 
 BOWSLEB'S FAMILY SHAESPEARE, cheaper Genuine Edition, 
 complete in I vol. hirge type, with 36 Woodcut Illustrations, price 1*». or 
 with the same Illusxkationb, in 6 pocket vols. 3s. 6d. each. 
 
 ABTJNDINES CAMI, sive Musarum Cantabrigiensium Lusus canori. 
 
 Collegit atque edidit H. Dbcbt, M.A. Editio Sexta, ouravit H. J. Hodgson, 
 
 M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. ed. 
 The JENEID of VIBGIL Translated into English Verse. By John 
 
 OoNiNQTON. M.A. Corpus Professor of Latin in the University of Oxford. 
 
 Crown Svo. 9s. 
 The ILIAD of HOMEB TEANSLATED into BLANK VEESE. By 
 
 IcuABOD CHAELEa WKioitT, M.A. late Fellow of Magd. Coll. Oxon. 2 vols. 
 
 crown Svo. 21s. 
 The ILIAD of HOMEB in ENGLISH HEXAMETEB VEBSE. By 
 
 J Heney Dabt, M.A. of Exeter College, Oxford: Author of 'The Exile of 
 
 St. Helena, Newdigate, 1888." Square crown Svo. 21s. 
 
 DANTE'S DIVINE COMEDY, translated in English Terza Eima by 
 John Dayman, M.A. [With the Italian Text, after Brtinetti, interpaged.] 
 8to. 21». 
 
NEW "WOBKS PUBLISHED BT LONGMANS Anv OO. 
 
 Rural Sports, ^c. 
 
 ElTCTCLOP^DIA of BUBAL SPOBTS; a complete Account. His- 
 torical, Practinal, and Deaoriptive, of Hunting, Shooting, Fishinp, Racing, 
 &c. By D. P. BlAINE. With above 600 Woodcuts (20 from Designs by 
 John Leech). 8vo. 42». 
 
 NOTES on EIFLE SHOOTING. By Captain Heaton, Adjutant of 
 
 the Third Manchester Rifle Volunteer Corps. Revised Edition. Fcp. 2*. &d. 
 
 COL. HAWKEE'S INSTBUCTIONS to YOUNG SPOBTSMEN in all 
 
 that relates to Guns and Shooting. Revised by the Author's Soir. Square 
 crown 8vo. with Illustratious, 18s. 
 
 The BIFIE, its THEOEY and PBACTIOE. By Arthuk Walker 
 
 (79th Highlanders), Staff. Hythe and Fleetwood Schools of Musketry. 
 Second Edition. Crown 8vo. with 125 Woodcuts, 5s. 
 
 The DEAD SHOT, or Sportsman's Complete Guide ; a Treatise on 
 the Use of the Gun, Dog-brcakinK. Pigeon-shooting, &c. By Maeksmak . 
 Revised Edition. Fcp. 8vo. with Plates, 5s. 
 
 HINTS on SHOOTING, FISHING, &c. both on Sea and Land and in 
 the Fresh and Saltwater Lochs of Scotland; being the Experiences of 
 C. Idle. Second Edition, revised. Fcp. 6s. 
 
 The FLY-FISHEE'S ENTOMOLOGY. By Alfred Ronalds. With 
 coloured Representations of the Natural and Artificial Insect. Sixth 
 Edition ; with 20 coloured Plates. 8vo. 14s. 
 
 HANDBOOK of ANGLING : Teaching Fly-fishing, Trolling, Bottom- 
 fishing, Salmon-fishing; with the Natural History of River Fish, and the 
 best modes of Catching them. By Ephemera. Fop. Woodcuts, B«. 
 
 The CEICKET FIELD ; or, the History and the Science of the Game 
 of Cricket. By James Ptokopt, B.A. Fourth Edition. Fop. 6s. 
 
 The Cricket Tutor ; a Treatise exclusively Practical. By the same. 
 ISmo. Is. 
 
 Cricketana. By the same Author. With 7 Portraits. Fcp. 5». 
 
 The HOBSE-TBAINEB'S and SPOETMAN'S GUIDE ; with Consider- 
 ations on the Duties of Grooms, on Purchasing Blood Stock, and on Veteri- 
 nary Examination. By Diqbt CoLLIIfS. Post 8vo. 6s. 
 
 The HOESE'S FOOT, and HOW to -KEEP IT SOUND. By W. 
 
 Miles, Esq. Ninth Edition, with Illustrations. Imperial 8vo. I2s. Qd, 
 A Plain Treatise on Horse-Shoeing. By the same Author. Post 
 
 8vo. with Illustrations, 2s. 6d. 
 Stables and Stable-Fittings. Bythesame. Imp.8vo.withl3Plates,15s. 
 Eemarks on Horses' Teeth, addressed to Purchasers. By the same. 
 
 Post 8vo. Is. 6<i. 
 
 On DRILL and MANffiUVEES of CAVALBY, combined with Horse 
 Artillery. By Major-Gen. Michael W. Smith, C.B. Commanding the 
 Ponnah Division of the Bombay Army. Svo. 12s. 6d. 
 
 BLAINE'S VETEEINAEY ART ; a Treatise on the Anatomy, Physi- 
 ology, and Curative Trpatment of the Diseases of the Horse, Neat Cattle 
 and Slieep. Seventh Bilition, revised and enlarged by C. Steel, M.B.C>¥.S.L. 
 Svo. with Plates and Woodcuts, 18s. 
 
NEW WORKS FUBLISHBD BY LONGMANS Am) CO. 27 
 
 The HOESE: with a Treatise on Draught. By William Yodatt. 
 New Edition, reviaed and ealarged. 8vo. with numerous WootUnits, 10«. 6d. 
 
 The Dog. By the same Author. 8vo. with numerous Woodcuts, 6t. 
 
 The DOG in HEALTH and DISEASE. By Stonehekgb. With 70 
 Wood Engravings. Square trowu 8vo. 16». 
 
 The Greyhound. By the same Author. Hevised Edition, with 24 
 Portraits of Greyhounds. Square crown 8vo. 21s. 
 
 The OX ; his Diseases and their Treatment: with an Essay on Parturi- 
 tion ill the Cow. By J. B. Dobsos, M.B.O. V.S. Crown 8vo. with Illustrations, 
 price la. id. 
 
 Commerce, Navigation, and Mercantile A fairs. 
 
 BANEINO, C1TBBEITCT, and the EXCHANGES : a Practical Trea- 
 tise. By Akthub Cevmf, Bank Manager, formerly of the Bank of England. 
 Post 8vo. (it. 
 
 The THEORY and PBACTICE of BANKING. By Henry Donning 
 
 Macleod, M.A. Barristor-at-Law. Second Edition, entirely remodelled. 
 2 vols, 8vo. HOs. 
 
 PBACTICAL GUIDE fOT BBITISH SHIPMASTEBS to UNITED 
 
 States Horts. By Piekkepont Kdwabds, Her Britannic Majesty's Vioo- 
 Coiisul at New York. Post 8vo. 8«. Bd. 
 
 A NAUTICAL DICTIONARY, defining the Technical Language re- 
 Intive to the Building and Equipment of Sailing Vessels and Stcauiers, ftc. 
 By Akthub Youno. Second Edition ; with Plates and 160 Woodeuts. 
 8vo. 18«. 
 
 A DICTIONABY, Practical, Theoretical, and Historical, of Com- 
 niiTce and Corameroial Navigation. By J. R. M'Ccliooh, Esq. Svawith 
 Maps and Plans, 60fi. 
 
 A MANUAL for NAVAL CADETS. By J. M'Neil Boyd, late Cap- 
 tain R.N. Third Edition; with 240 Woodcuts and 11 coloured Plates: 
 Post Svo. I2ii. ed. 
 
 The LAW of NATIONS Considered as Independent Political Oom- 
 mimities. By Travers Twiss, D.C.L. Regius Professor of Civil Law in the 
 University of Oxford. 2 vols. Svo. 30«. or separately, Pabi I. I'eace. Vis. 
 Pabt 11. irar, iss. 
 
 Works of Utility and General Information. 
 
 MODERN COOKEEY for PRIVATE FAMILIES, reduced to a System 
 of Easy Practice in a Series of oari-fiilly-tested H«?ceitits. By Eliza Acton. 
 Newly ri'vised and enlarged; with 8 Plates, Figures, and 150 Woodcuts. 
 Pep. 7«. M. 
 
 On FOOD and its DIGESTION; an Introdnction to Dietetics. By 
 W. Beinton, IM.D. Physiciauto St. Thomas's Hospital, &c. With 48 Wood- 
 cuts. Post Svo. 12s. 
 
28 NEW WORKS published bt LONGMANS AND CO. 
 
 WINE, the VINE, and the CELIAE. By Thomas G. Shaw. Se- 
 cond Edition, revised and enlarged, with Frontispiece and 31 Illustrations 
 on Wood. 8to. 16«. 
 
 HOW TO BBEW GOOD BEER: a complete Gnide to the Art of 
 Brewing Ale, Bitter Ale, Table Ale, Brown Stout, Porter, and Table Beer. 
 By John Pitt. Revised Edition. Fcp. 4s. 6d. 
 
 A PBACTICAL TREATISE on BREWING ; with Formulas for Public 
 Brewers, and Instructions for Private Families. By W. Black. Svo. lOs.fld. 
 
 SHORT WHIST. By Major A. Sixteenth Edition, revised, with an 
 Essay on the Theory of the Modem Soientiflo GamebyPEOP.P. Fcp. 3s. 6d. 
 WHIST, WHAT TO lEAD. By Cam. Third Edition. 39mo. \s. 
 
 The EXECUTOR'S GUIDE. By J. C. Hddson. Enlarged Edition, 
 revised by the Author, with reference to the latest reported Cases and 
 Acts of Parliament. Fcp. G5. 
 
 Hudson's Plain Directions for Kaking Wills. Ecp. 2;,'. 6d. 
 
 TWO HUNDRED CHESS PROBLEMS, composed by E. Healet, 
 including the Problems to which tlie Prizes were awarded by the Committees 
 of the Era, the Manchester, the Hirnungham , and the Bristol Chess Problem 
 Tournaments ; accompanied by the Solutions. Crown 8vo. with 200 Dia- 
 grams, 6s. 
 
 The CABINET LAWYER ; a Popular Digest of the Laws of England, 
 Civil, Criminal, and Constitutional. Tweiity-second Edition, entirely ro- 
 oomposed. and brought down by the AninoE to the close of the Parliameu- 
 tary Session of 1866. Fcp. 10«. id. 
 
 The PHILOSOPHY of HEALTH j or, an Exposition of the Physio- 
 logical and Sanitary Conditions conducive to Human Longevity and 
 Happiness. By SoniHWOOD Smith, M.D. Eleventh Edition, revised and 
 enlarged : with 113 Woodcuts, Svo. 15s. 
 
 HINTS to MOTHERS on the MANAGEMENT of their HEALTH 
 during the Period of Pregnancy and in the Lying-in Room. By T. Boll, 
 M.D. Fop. 6s. 
 
 The Maternal Management of Children in Health and Disease. By 
 the same Author. Fcp. 5s. 
 
 The LAW RELATING to BENEFIT BUILDING SOCIETIES; with 
 Practical Observations on the Act and all the Cases decided thereon ; also a 
 Form of Rules and Forms of Mortgages. By W. Tidd Peatt, Barrister. 
 Second Edition. Fcp. 3s. &d. 
 
 NOTES on HOSPITALS. By Florence Nightingale. Third Edi- 
 tion, enlarged ; with 13 Plans. Post 4to. 18s. 
 
 C. M. WILLICH'S POPULAR TABLES for ascertaining the Value 
 of Lifehold, Leasehold, and Church Property, Renewal Fines, &c. ; the 
 Public Funds ; Annual Average Price and Interest on Consols IVom 1731 to 
 1861 ; Chemical, Geographical, Astronomical, Trigonometrical Tables, &c. 
 Post Svo. 10s. 
 
 THOMSON'S TABLES of INTEREST, at Three, Four, Four and a 
 Half, and Five per Cent, from One Pound to Ten Thousand and from 1 to 
 865 Days. 12mo. 3s. Gd. 
 
 MAUNDER'S TREASURY of KNOWLEDGE and LIBRARY of 
 Reference: oomjirising an Eiiglish Dictionary and Grammar, Universal 
 Gazetteer, Classical Dictionary, Chronology, Law Dictionary, a Synopsis 
 of the Peerage, useful Tables, &c. Revised Edition. Fcp. 10s. Grf. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 AnoQTT on Sight and Touch 10 
 
 Acton '■ Modern Cookery '-iJ 
 
 ALcocK'sHeaiclencein Japnn '^'i 
 
 Allibsoti Formation of ChriBtendom ^0 
 
 Alpine Guide (The) SS 
 
 Apjorn's Manual of the Metalloids I'i 
 
 Aaaoo's Bioffraphies of Scientific Men .... & 
 
 Popular Aatronomv 10 
 
 AiiNftLo's Ulanual of EneliBn Literature. ... 7 
 
 AnNorr's Elements of Physics U 
 
 Arundlnea Citml 25 
 
 Atherstone Priory 23 
 
 Autumn holidays of a Country Faraou .. t^ 
 
 AvuB*8 Treasury of Bible KnovlcdiEC 19 
 
 Bacon's Essays, by Wdatblv a 
 
 LifeaudLettera, by Spsduinq ft 
 
 Works fi 
 
 Bain on the Emotions and Will 10 
 
 on the Senses and Intellect 10 
 
 on the Study of Character in 
 
 Bainkb'h Explorations in S.W.AMca 22 
 
 Ball's Alpine Guide -3 
 
 Bahnaud 8 Drawing from Nature )6 
 
 Baylson'b Rentaaud Tillages 18 
 
 Beaten Tracks '22 
 
 Bbckbu's Charieles aiid Qallus 24 
 
 jU8BTHovBN*a Letters 4 
 
 Bknfsy'b SttPHkrit Dictionary h 
 
 BicnHY*8 Journals and Correspondeace .... 4 
 
 Black's Treatine on Brewing Sd 
 
 Blacrlet and FnisDLAADBii's Ucrmaii and 
 
 English Dictionary B 
 
 Bi.ainb'8 Rural Sports Sti 
 
 ■ . Veterinary Art 2fi 
 
 Bliodt's Week at the Land's End 'iS 
 
 Boasr's E9Ba,\ on UumanNature ^ 
 
 Philoiiophy of Nature n 
 
 Booth's EpfKraniB l> 
 
 Bomeh's TrauBy tvania 22 
 
 Bovhnb on Screw Piopetler 17 
 
 Bodhnb's Catechism of tlie Steam Engine.. 17 
 
 Handbook of Steam Enniue )7 
 
 Treatise on the Steam Engine ... 17 
 
 BoWDLRb'B FailillySHAKSPRAAR SI> 
 
 Bovd'b Manual for Nuval Cadets 27 
 
 Bhahlrv-Mookk's Six Sisteraof tlio Valleys 24 
 Bhandb's Dictionary of Science, Literature, 
 
 and Art 13 
 
 Baay'sIC.) Education of theFcetiuKs 10 
 
 . — -1- Philosophy of Necessity 10 
 
 on Force 10 
 
 Bainton on Food and Digestion 2? 
 
 Bkiatow's nioaaary of Miueralo^y M 
 
 BiioDiB'scSirC.B.) Works IS 
 
 Autobiography 1 '» 
 
 Conatitutional History ~ 
 
 Browni'.'i Ice Cuvca ofFrancc and Switzer- 
 land sm 22 
 
 KxpOBition 39 Articlea 1h 
 
 Pentateuch H 
 
 Bucklk's History of Civilizntion 2 
 
 Boll's Hints to Mothera 2d 
 
 Maternal Manaeement of Children. 'Jt* 
 
 Bdnbrn'b Ancient Egypt 3 
 
 Bunsbn on Apocr>pha 'iO 
 
 Burke's Vicissitude* of Familiea •'■ 
 
 Buaton's Christian Church ^ 
 
 Cabinet Lawyer -^ 
 
 Calvkrt's Wife's Manual -I 
 
 Camnaigner at Home "^ 
 
 Cats and Fablib's Moral Emblems If* 
 
 Chorale Book for England 21 
 
 Clouou's I'ivesfrom Plutarch £ 
 
 CoLENSo (Bishop) ou Pentateuch and Book 
 
 of Jusliua 1^ 
 
 CoLLiNs's Horse- Trainer's Guide HO 
 
 CoLUMDL s'a Voyages 2:i 
 
 Commonplace Philosopher in Town and 
 
 Country B 
 
 Coninotqn's Translation of ViiioiLV^i.'"-.j'V 2j 
 CoNTAKSBAu's Pockct Frcuch and Eaglish 
 
 Dictionary h 
 
 Practical ditto » 
 
 CoNYDRAHBond Huwudn's Llf^ aud Epistlcs 
 
 of St. Paul IC 
 
 Cooa on the Acts 1H 
 
 Cook's Voyages '2-i 
 
 CoPLANo'sDictionary of Practical Medicine l."* 
 
 Abridgment of ditto li 
 
 Cox's Tales of the Great Persian War 2 
 
 Tales from Orevk Mytliology St 
 
 Tales of tlie Uoda and Heroes 24 
 
 Tatcsof Tliebcs and Argos 24 
 
 Cabby's Encyclopiedia oC Civil Enginoeriui; 17 
 
 Critical Esiays ot a Country Parson ■* 
 
 Ck"wb'9 History ot France i 
 
 CitHMP on Banking, Currency, & ExchansrCi^ '27 
 
 Cduan&'s Grainmtu of Heraldry Ii> 
 
 Daat'b niad of Homer ■>:* 
 
 Dayman's Dante's Dlvlna Commedia Yt 
 
 D'AuBiuNit's History of the Reformation in 
 
 the time of Caltin 'i 
 
 Dead Shot (The), by Marrsman 26 
 
 De la Rive's Treatise on Electridty II 
 
 Dklmard's Village Life in Switzerland ... . 22 
 
 Dk LA Pbyme'8 Life of Christ « 2o 
 
 Dr MonnANOQ Matter and Spirit 
 
 De Tdcquktillk's Democracy in America. . 2 
 
 DoasoN on the Ox 27 
 
 DtTNCAN and Millard on Clasaificatiun, &c. 
 
 of the Idiotic : > 
 
30 
 
 NEW WORKS PT7BLISHED BY LONGMANS atstd CO. 
 
 DvEB'eCity of Roma 2 
 
 Edwards' Shipmaater's Guide 2? 
 
 Elements of Botany 13 
 
 Ellice,aTale 23 
 
 Ellicott's Broad and Narrow Way 19 
 
 Commentary on Ephesians 19 
 
 Destiny of the Creature 19 
 
 Lectures on Life of Chri-it 19 
 
 Commentary on Galatiana 19 
 
 Pastoral Epist... 19 
 
 Philippians, &c.. 19 
 
 Thessaloniana ... 19 
 
 Eaeaye and Reviews 20 
 
 . on Religion and lAterature, edited 
 
 by Manning 20 
 
 Eairbairn on Iron Shipbuilding ., 17 
 
 Fairbairn's Application of Cast and 
 
 Wrought Iron toBuildihe 17 
 
 - ■ ■ ■ Information forEngineera... 17 
 
 Treatise on Mills & MiJlwork 17 
 
 Farrar's Cliflpters on Language 7 
 
 Flack's Hunter's Experiences 12 
 
 Fpoolkes's Christenddm'fi Divisions iO 
 
 Freshfibld's Alpine Byways 2a 
 
 Tom" in the Griaons 22 
 
 Friends in Council , 9 
 
 Froddb's H^tory of England 1 
 
 Gee's Sunday to Sunday 21 
 
 Our Sermons 21 
 
 Gilbert and CHDAaHiu.'s Dolomite Moun- 
 tains 22 
 
 GiLiv's Shipwreckfl of the Navy 23 
 
 GoETRE'a Second Faust, by Anater 24 
 
 Guodevb's Elements of Mechanism 17 
 
 Gori-e's (Questions on Browne's Exposition 
 
 of the 39 Articles 18 
 
 Grant's Ethics of Aristotle 5 
 
 Graver Thoughta of a Country Parson .... 8 
 
 Grav's Anatomy 14 
 
 Greene's Corals and Sea Jellies 12 
 
 Sponges and Animalculae 12 
 
 Grove on Correlation of Physical Forces.. 11 
 
 GwiLT'aEucyclopffidia of Arubitecture .... 16 
 
 Handbook of Angling, by Epsbmbra 26 
 
 Haheou Election of Rppresentativea 6 
 
 Harlry and Bhown's Histological Demon- 
 strations IB 
 
 Hartwio's Seaand its Living Wonders.... 12 
 
 . Harmonies of Nature 12 
 
 Tropical World 12 
 
 Haoghtox's Manual of Gpology 11 
 
 Hawker's TnatfurtionB to Young Sportsmen 2fi 
 
 Healry's Chess Problems 28 
 
 Beaton's Notes on Rifle Shooting 26 
 
 Hrlps's Spanish Conquest in America 2 
 
 Herschkl a Ehsays from the Edinburgh 
 
 and Quarterly Reviews 13 
 
 Outlinesof Astronomy 10 
 
 Hewitt'oo the Diseases: of Women H 
 
 Hodoson's Time and Space., , 10 
 
 HotLAND'i Essayson HcentifJc Subjects.... 13 
 
 HoLMBs's System of Surgery 14 
 
 HofiKER and Walkbk-Arnott'b British 
 
 Flora 13 
 
 HorKiNs'sHawnii II 
 
 Horne's Intpoductionto 'he Scriptures .... 19 
 
 Compendium of rlitto 19 
 
 HoRsLBv's Manual of Poisons ,. 15 
 
 Hosu y Ns's Tal na 18 
 
 Occasional Essays 9 
 
 How we Spent the Summer 22 
 
 Howitt's Australian Discovery , 22 
 
 Howitt's Rural Life of England 23 
 
 Visits to Remarkable Places 23 
 
 Hudson's I<^xecutor'a Guide 28 
 
 Directionsfor Making Wills 28 
 
 HuoHEs's (A.) (tarden Architecture 18 
 
 CW.lMairual of Geography 11 
 
 Holijih's History of Mode- n Music 4 
 
 Transition Musical Lectures .... 4 
 
 Humboldt's Travels in South America .... 23 
 
 HiiMPHiiKvs' Sentiments of Shakspeare .... 16 
 
 Hottiin's Studies in Parliament 9 
 
 Hymns irom X^a Oermanica 21 
 
 Icelandic Legends. Second Series 24 
 
 Idlb's Hints on Shooting 2& 
 
 iNOELow'a Poems 25 
 
 Jameson's Legends of the Saints and Mar- 
 tyrs 16 
 
 T^genrtsof the Madonna 16 
 
 Legendsflf the Monastic Orders 16 
 
 Jameson and Eastlake's History of Our' 
 
 Lord 16 
 
 JoH nson's Patentee's Manual 17 
 
 Practical Draughtsman 17 
 
 Johnston's Gazetteer, or Geographical Dic- 
 tionary 11 
 
 Jones's Christianity and Common Sense. ... 10 
 
 Kaiisch'b Commentary on the Bible , 7 
 
 Hebrew Grammar 7 
 
 Keixeb's Lake Dwellings of Switzerland.. 12 
 
 Kbsteven's Domestic Medicine 15 
 
 KiRBv and Rprnce's Entomology 13 
 
 KuENEN on Pentateuch and Joshua 19 
 
 Lady's Tonr Round Monte Rosa .,., 2S 
 
 Landon'sCL. E L.I Poetical Works 25 
 
 Latham's English Dictionary 7 
 
 Lawrrnc on Rocks 11 
 
 Lrosv's History of Rationalism S 
 
 Le'sure Hours in Town 8 
 
 Lewes' History of Philosophy 3 
 
 LpwiN'sFaati Sacri 19 
 
 Lewis on Early Roman History 6 
 
 EsBayson Administrations 6 
 
 Fables of Bahiiiub 6 
 
 on Foreiffn Jurisdiction 6 
 
 on Irish Disturbances 6 
 
 on Observation and Reasoning in 
 
 Pol iticB 6 
 
 on Political TermB ft 
 
 LiDDELLand Scott's Greek-English Lexicon 8 
 
 Abridged ditto 8 
 
 Lifte of Man Symbolispd ifl 
 
 LiNDLKT and Moork's Treasury of Bo'any 13 
 L4)NGMAN*s Lectures on the History of Eng- 
 land 2 
 
 Loudon's Agriculture is 
 
 Cottage. Farm.Villa Architecture 1m 
 
 Gardening IR 
 
 Plants 13 
 
 Trees and Shrubs la 
 
 Lowndes's Engineer's Handbook 1& 
 
 Lyra Dom es ' i ca gi 
 
 Eucharistica 21 
 
 Oermnnica 16,21 
 
 Messianica 21 
 
 — Mystica 21 
 
 Sacra 21 
 
 Maoaulat's (Lordi Essays 3 
 
 History of England 1 
 
 Lays of Ancient Rome 2b. 
 
NEW "VTORKS PUuLiaHED by LONGMANS asd CO. 
 
 HAcAirLAv*« (Tx)rd1 MiBcellaneoua "Writings 9 
 
 SpL'i'cheB 7 
 
 , Worku I 
 
 Uacdouqall'! Theory of Wttr 17 
 
 Macxsoo'i Klementa uf Folttical Economy 6 
 
 „»_ DJctijnary • f PolUtcal Eiiooomy 6 
 
 Thcfiry and Pruetiue of Banking 27 
 
 McCdlloch'i Dictionary uf Cummerue 27 
 
 I Oeoiiraphlcal Dictionary U 
 
 MAOpts'a Vancouver Inland 28 
 
 Mauuihb'x I/ifttr)f FutherMaChew 4 
 
 Rome and its Kulera 4 
 
 MALrnu'i Indoor Gardener 18 
 
 MANNiNoon HnlyOhost 20 
 
 lilAaBHHAi>''8 Life of Ilavelock & 
 
 XlABsav's Hi-itury of li^iiKland 1 
 
 (t*.) nu shiikapeare'a Sannetfl Sft 
 
 MAas'NHRRnD*! Elistury of the Kcformatiun.. 3 
 
 Magitdkr'i Bii)tfra|>hlualTrea«iry & 
 
 ifcoicraiphiual T'Ciuiury LI 
 
 HirttiiricttI Treasury 3 
 
 RctenliHuand I <lterury Treasury IS 
 
 Treasury of Knowledee 28 
 
 Tieiwury <»f Natural History .. 13 
 
 Madrv's i'hystual fieouriiphy 10 
 
 MAv'sConsMtutional MiDtory of Gnsland.. I 
 
 MIblvillk's Dliihy Grand 24 
 
 fltiinTal Buuuee 24 
 
 OladlatttrB 21 
 
 O'Shra's Guide to Spain S3 
 
 Owbm's Comparative Anatomy and Fhydo- 
 
 lofcy of Vertebrate Animals IS 
 
 OxRNHAM on Atonement 2t 
 
 pACHs'sUuide Co che cyrene^s 23 
 
 Paort'b I.ecr.ure« on Pnrtrical PathoIoBfy .. 14 
 
 Fkrrika'i Elemenu of Materia Medica.... 16 
 
 Manual of Materia Meilica \b 
 
 Prhkinu'i TuHcan Kcul|>tors 16 
 
 PiirLMPs'i Guide to Geoloey 11 
 
 Intrirtliiction toAtinenUogy .... \9 
 
 Pibssr's Art of Perfumery 18 
 
 Chemical, Natural, and FhyBical 
 
 Manic 18 
 
 Piur's English ood their Origin K 
 
 PirronBrewine 28 
 
 Playtime with the Poets 3b 
 
 Pructicul Mechanlc'i Journal 17 
 
 Pratt's Law of Buddint Sooletioi 28 
 
 Phruott'9 Scripture Difficulties 19 
 
 PaooTun'i Saturn 10 
 
 Handbook of the Stars lo 
 
 PvcRorr'i Course ot BiizUsh lleadine 7 
 
 CHoketField 26 
 
 CrioketTuior 26 
 
 Crloketana 26 
 
 Gimrl for iVothlnff 21 
 
 Holmby Houne 24 
 
 Interpreter 24 
 
 KiiteCuventry ai 
 
 Queen's Vlaiiea 24 
 
 Mrndhlmuhn's Letters 4 
 
 Mrnxirs' Windsor (>rcat Park 18 
 
 MaarvALK'sdl.) I-Iistorlual -tudien 2 
 
 iClFall ofthe Roman Republic 3 
 
 . Boyle Lectures 8 
 
 Humuna under the F.mpire 2 
 
 MiLHB Oil HonteV Foot and Homeshoeins;... 2(.i 
 
 on Horxes* Teeth and Stables 2U 
 
 Mill on Liberty 6 
 
 r on HepreBentative (/overninent 6 
 
 on Utilitarianism t> 
 
 MuJi'BDiasfrtitiunB and Discussions 6 
 
 Political <-ci>n'my 6 
 
 System of Lovio 
 
 Hamilton's Philosophy ti 
 
 MiLLRii's Elli-meiitsnf Chemititry 14 
 
 MoNSBix's Spiritual Socks 21 
 
 Beatltodes 21 
 
 MoNrnoMRKv on Pi-evrnaricy 14 
 
 MooRR'sIrish MelodieH 2b 
 
 Lai In Rook h 2S 
 
 P.eticHl Wnrks 24 
 
 Dr. G.) First Man 12 
 
 MoRRLi-'s KlemeiitM of P8ychol()g>- 9 
 
 Mental PbiloMont-y 9 
 
 Mo8hbim'» Ko-lesiastical History 20 
 
 Moiart's ratters .' ■ 4 
 
 MoLthR'siMaxlTjectures on the Science of 
 
 Lanicuaare .• • • • 7 
 
 (K O.) Literature of Ancient 
 
 Greece 2 
 
 MoHCHtsoN on Continufd Fever* 14 
 
 filuAB's Laofiuatf e and Literature of Greece 2 
 
 KewTeKtamsnt.ilTuBtrated with "Wood En- 
 
 irravinsrs from tbo Old Musters lA 
 
 Nbwman'b Hift'Tyof hla Relitfioust 'pinions 4 
 
 Nightihoalb'b Notesun HospiCalB 2B 
 
 Odlino'b Animal Chprnistry 14 
 
 Course iif ProctUial Chemiatry . . . . 14 
 
 Manual of Chemiatry 14 
 
 Rradb'b Poetical Works S4 
 
 Kecreations ot a Country Varson 8 
 
 Rrily'r Mapof Mont Ulanc S> 
 
 KivMRs's Koso Amateur'h I'uide 13 
 
 RonRRt'iCorreapciiidencc of Greyson 9 
 
 licliiwe of FaUh 9 
 
 Defence of ditto 9 
 
 Essays from the Mmhurgh Remeto 9 
 
 Fullerisna 9 
 
 Reason und Faith 9 
 
 Rourt'b ThesauruKuf English Words and 
 
 Phrases 7 
 
 lloNAr.os'a Fly-Fisher's Entomology 26 
 
 Rowton'b Deliater 7 
 
 Rosasu. on Government andConatitution.. 1 
 
 SArroAaa'ii Justinian's Tnatitutcs fi 
 
 Scott's Handbook ofVolumetrical Analyflis 14 
 
 ScRorson Volcanos U 
 
 Sbwrll's Amy Herbert 23 
 
 -Cleve Hall.. 
 
 Eurl's Dauiiliter S3 
 
 Exuminiition for Confirmation ... 20 
 
 Kxpericnce of Life 23 
 
 (lertrude 28 
 
 Oliinpseof the World 23 
 
 Hi-tory ofthe Early Church 3 
 
 [vors 23 
 
 Katharine A^htun 23 
 
 Laneton Parbimoee 23 
 
 MarKaret P' rcivul 23 
 
 Poseintr Thouifhts on Religion.... 2t> 
 
 Preparation for Communion 20 
 
 Princlpltrs ot F.ducation 20 
 
 — Read>n^ for Cuntirmation 20 
 
 Heading's fur l^nt 20 
 
 Stories and Tales 23 
 
 Thouahts fur the Holy Week 20 
 
 Ursula 23 
 
 Shaw's Work on Wine 28 
 
 Skbddbn's Elements of Loeric 6 
 
 Sniri.KY'8 Church and the World 20 
 
 Shore Whist 28 
 
 Short's Church History 8 
 
 <4lBVEKIHn's(AMBI.IA I Life, by WlNKWORTH 4 
 
 Smith's (Southwood) Ptiilosopby of Health 28 
 
 (J. t Paul ■ Voyaee and Shipwreck. . 19 
 
 lO.lWesleyun Methodism 4 
 
 (Stdnbt) Miscellaneous Works .... 9 
 
 Moral Philosophy 9 
 
 Wit and Wisdom 9 
 
NEW "WORKS PUBLISHED BY LONGMAXS and CO. 
 
 S»iTHon Cavalry Drill and MancEUTTCs.... 2G 
 
 Southey's (Doctor) 7 
 
 Poetical WorkB 25 
 
 SrANLKT'sUistory of British Bii-dB 12 
 
 Stbbbino's Analysis of Mux's Lo^c 6 
 
 Strpren's Essays in £ccleBiastical Bio- 
 graphy.. 5 
 
 LecturesonBistoryof France.. 2 
 
 Stkpiienson's tR.) Life, by Jeafpreson and 
 
 3*oi,ii 4 
 
 Sti RLiNa'g Secret of Hegel JO 
 
 Stonehcnoe on the Dog 27 
 
 on the Greyhound 27 
 
 STRANOBon Sea Air 15 
 
 on E«Btoration of Health 15 
 
 Sunday Afternoons at the Parish Church : . 8 
 
 Tasso'h JerUBalem . by Jambs ; 24 
 
 Taylok'b (Jeremy) Works, edited by JjIdkn 20 
 
 Tennbkt's Ceylon 12 
 
 Natural History of Ceylon 12 
 
 Wild Elephant 12 
 
 Thirlwall's History of Greece 2 
 
 Thomson's (Archbishop) Laws of Thouglit 6 
 
 (J.l Tables of Interest 28 
 
 Conspectufly by Bibkbtt 15 
 
 ToDDs Cyclopffidia of Anatomy and Phy- 
 
 «ology 14 
 
 and Bowuan's Anatomy aud Phy- 
 siology of Man. , 15 
 
 TROLLors's Borchester Towers 24 
 
 Warden 24 
 
 Twiss's Law of Nations 27 
 
 Tvndaix's Lectures on Heat 11 
 
 Urb's Dictionary of Arts, Manufactures, 
 and Mines I7 
 
 Y\y Dfr Hofven's Handbook of Zoology. . 12 
 
 Vavohan'b (R.) Revolutions in English 
 
 History I 
 
 Way toRest 10 
 
 Vauqhan's (R. a.) HooTfl with the Mystics 10 
 
 Walker on the Kille 20 
 
 Watson's Principles and Practice of Physic 14 
 
 Watts's Dictionary of Chemistry 13 
 
 Webb's Objects for Common Telescopes. ... 10 
 
 Webster^ Wilkinson'! Greek Testament 19 
 
 Weld's Florence 22. 
 
 Wellinqton's LU^, by Bbialmont and 
 
 Glrio 4 
 
 byGLEio 4 
 
 West on Children's Diseases 14 
 
 Whately's English Synonymes 5 
 
 Logic & 
 
 ^Remains S 
 
 ^Rhetoric 5 
 
 Life and Correspondence 4 
 
 Pttley'e Moral Pnilosophjr £1 
 
 Whewell's History of the Inductive Sci- 
 
 Whist, what'to lead,' by Cam .* .' .' '.'..'....'.'.'.'." 28 
 White and Riddle's Latin-English Dic- 
 tionaries T 
 
 WiLBEHPOBCE (W.) RecoUections of, by 
 
 Harford 5 
 
 Willich's Popular Tables 28 
 
 Wilson's Bryotogia Britannica 13 
 
 Windham's Diarv 4 
 
 Wood's Homes without Hands 12 
 
 Woodward's Historical and (^onological 
 
 Encyclopsedia 3 
 
 Wriqiit's Homer's Hiad 25 
 
 ToNOK'a Bnglish-Gpeek Lexicon R 
 
 Abridged ditto s 
 
 Yodnq's Nautical Dictionary 27 
 
 ToDATTon theDog 27 
 
 onthe Horse 27 
 
 LONBOIT 
 
 PEIKTED BT SPOTTISWOODK AKD CO, 
 
 NEW-STBEET SQTTAEE 
 
' 
 
 II