% ~ DUKE UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL LIBRARY BLACKVELL’S ee. a Handbooks for the Clergy EDITED BY ARTHUR W. ROBINSON, B.D. VICAR OF ALLHALLOWS BARKING BY THE TOWER THE STUDY OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY ; m Ce Petes. 1. AG G0 . han " } pa i VAAL. oe rd “ ci, ig ry ; r¢ v1} TA i? } ‘ THE STUDY OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BY WILLIAM EDWARD COLLINS, B.D. — PROFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY AT KING'S COLLEGE LONDON CHAIRMAN OF THE CHURCH HISTORICAL SOCIETY ; COUNCILLOR OF THE ROYAL HISTORICAL SOCIETY LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON NEW YORK AND BOMBAY 1903 All rights reserved * WO ¥AITH Div.S. xX 70,07 LIS) S TO MY PUPILS AT KING’S COLLEGE LONDON 1893-1903 DISCIPULUS CONDISCIPULIS se PREFACE Tuis little book is the realisation, all too unworthy as I know well, of a plan which has been long in my mind. Having had to teach ecclesiastical history continuously for some twelve years, I have endeavoured again and again, as doubtless other teachers have, to say something in lecture as to the methods of study to be used. But whilst lecturing is the ideal method of imparting some kinds of knowledge, it is ill fitted for the com- munication of such guidance as this; and I have felt increasingly the need of a book which could be placed in the hands of students at our colleges, and of those who, being already at work in their parishes, desire to continue their historical studies. It is for these two classes (they are really one) that I have written; and the book is not intended primarily as a manual for the professed student of history. Nevertheless I venture to hope that some of these may find it useful. It may be noticed that I have spoken through- out of “ecclesiastical history” rather than of “Church history.” Ihave done so of set purpose ; and the reason will be obvious to anybody who will read the first chapter of this book. In point vu Vili Preface of fact there may be nothing to choose between the two phrases; and rightly understood, Church history is as wide a definition as one could wish for. But as long as people will go on thinking that Church history is concerned only with one class of acts, or one sect of mankind (even though it be the sect “of Paul,” or “of Apollos,” or “ of Cephas,” or “‘of Christ”), so long will it seem desirable to use any variant that serves to guard against such an idea, even though it be identical in meaning. I am sensible that the list of books in the last chapter is open to the criticism of being somewhat unsystematic and capricious: the books are not graduated in any way, and no attempt is made to arrange them so as to form a consecutive course of reading. But I have adopted this plan on purpose. Those for whom the book is intended will not be likely to enter upon a systematic course of study on these lines, nor is it to be desired that they should doso. And I hope that the list may be more useful by way of suggestion because it contains books of all kinds arranged in this apparently unstudied order. It might, of course, have been prolonged indefinitely ; but it did not seem wise to occupy more of the space at my disposal in this way. Some students, and especially such as are quite new to the study of ecclesiastical history, may find it advisable to pass on directly from the first chapter to the fifth and those which follow it, Preface ix returning afterwards to chapters ii-iv, which they will then be in a better position to appre- ciate. But I greatly hope that they will not omit these last-mentioned chapters, under the impression that for the elementary student they are irrelevant. Nothing could really be further from the truth. I have made use, in writing this book, of the notes of several addresses which I have given in different places, and in one or two cases of what I have said elsewhere in writing; but it has not seemed necessary in such cases to give references. And I trust that in the strictures which I have felt bound to make upon certain books, chosen in illustration of particular kinds of errors, there may be nothing which passes the bounds of charity or of courtesy. W. E. COLLINS. Sr Niyzan’s House, Perrta, Feast of St Augustine of Hippo, momu11. CONTENTS CHAPTER I Tue Meanine anv Score or Eccrxsiasticat History PAGES What Ecclesiastical History is not—What it is— No limitations in subject - matter—No limitations in time—Limitations in point of view—Truly historical in method—A priori methods inadmissible—The Church historian seeks good in all sides—D’ Aubigné and Von Ranke . : ; : : . 41-14 CHAPTER II Tue Science or History History not a branch of literature—The applica- tion of the scientific method to a particular class of data—These data unlike those of the natural sciences ; history not a *‘ science of observation ’—The limitations of historical knowledge—Really incidental to the subject —History concerned with the actions of rational beings—Though it does not usurp the function of a judge of morals—Yet its facts are *‘ moral facts” . : " . 15-27 Xi xii Contents CHAPTER III Historica Meruop 1. The Work of Analysis The claims of scientific method—I. The collection of material—Printed collections : of private persons, of societies, of public bodies— Scattered and unpublished material—The process of discovery—Aids of all sorts— Finality never reached—II. The examina- tion of documents—Guides—No substitute for original work—Not enough to know a work is genuine, contemporary, honest— A work of opposite character not necessarily worthless—Forgeries have a certain value— Ill. The investigation of details—The con- sideration of motive—Copying—The argu- ment from silence, when valid—Examples —The historian’s ‘‘ methodical distrust ”— IV. Possible sources of error— Froude’s dis- ease”’—Treating facts as isolated units: Mr Herbert Spencer—Mixing processes— ‘* History with a purpose” . ps CHAPTER IV Historica Mersop 2. The Work of Synthesis Full of difficulty—I. A mental picture of the events—Dangers and safeguards—IlI. The picture to be scrutinised in detail_—Without this nothing has been done—-It must be PAGES Contents xill systematic and exhaustive—A systematic series of questions—III. Filling in of gaps by reasoning — Inference —The comparative method and method of survivals : examples —Is conjecture allowable ?—IV. Collecting and systematising : methods—V. Sources of error—Undisciplined use of the imagina- tion—A priori assumptions—VI. Historical method learnt by observation: suggested books : CHAPTER V How to Strupy Eccixsiasticat History Historical method common to all students—I. Two schemes of study: better to choose a definite subject—II. Advantages of this plan: use of spare time—III. Read round it as a centre—IV. “ Make it your own”—V. Avoid drawing morals: partisan study—VI. Right use of the memory, and the judgment —VII. Use of note-books, &c. —VIII. History banishes illusions—IX. The law of diminishing returns . : : . 72-91 CHAPTER VI Tue Cuoice or Booxs I. Books good or bad in relation to the reader, not in themselves—II. Books written from our own standpoint not preferable—IIJ. The best books: the place of special treatises, Xiv Contents PAGES general Church histories, text-books, apolo- getic works—IV. Subsidiary aids: atlas, chronological and genealogical tables, lists, &c.—V. Advantages of wide read- ing: glancing at, referring to books—VI. Value of old books, of different stand- points—VII. Original authorities: trans- lations, and examples 2 , ; . 92-114 CHAPTER VII SpecraL Aspects oF Stupy 1n Eccriesiastican History The spiritual manifested in the natural—I. The preparation in Judaism: the Higher Criticism — II. The preparation of the world—III. Christianity and other re- ligions : the Absolute Religion—IV. The inter-relation of civil and ecclesiastical ; St Paul at Ephesus, Pliny, the Friday fast in the English Reformation, the Council of Trent, &c.—V. Philosophy and Theology: development of doctrine, its nature and methods—VI. The Canonical system : its nature and growth: principles precede practice, and practice precedes theory— VII. Marvels and portents : legendary and authenticated —VIII. The Church the heir of all the ages . : ; : 115-138 CHAPTER VIII BIBLIOGRAPHY I. Dictionaries, encyclopaedias, and books con- taining bibliographical matter—II. Books Contents for study under separate heads: Judaism and Christianity, the heathen world ,and Christianity, Christianity and other reli- gions, Christian doctrine and philosophy, Canon Law, &c., Liturgies, the papacy, and miscellaneous—III. Books on special periods: Early Church history, to Gregory the Great, to the rise of Hildebrand, to 1500, the Reformation period, the post- Reformation period—IV. Books relating to particular Churches, &c.: the Eastern Churches, the Church of England, other XV PAGES Churches, Monasticism . : § 139-166 CHAPTER I THE MEANING AND SCOPE OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY BerorE attempting to speak in detail of the methods to be made use of in studying Ecclesias- tical History, it may be well to clear our minds a little, and to endeavour to see precisely what our subject is. What then do we mean by the term Ecclesiastical History ? Our first impulse may very naturally be to say that ecclesiastical history is exclusively con- cerned with a certain definite society, the Church of Christ or the Holy Catholic Church; that in fact it is the history of the Church in the same sense in which we might speak of the history of the Army, or of the Royal Society, or the history of some particular movement or interest or incident. So it has often been regarded; and some people have been inclined to say that just as each of these is concerned only with one class of facts or one department of life, so the subject-matter of eccle- siastical history is to be found solely in matters ecclesiastical. But a very little consideration will show that such a view (in which every teacher of A 2 Study of Ecclesiastical History ecclesiastical history will recognise one of the most tiresome delusions with which he has to contend) is both inadequate and misleading. The truth is that it is never possible to isolate one class of facts and study them alone by historical methods. For the distinctions which we draw for purposes of convenience are after all mere generalisations which have no existence apart from ourselves; and when we classify facts as military, or ecclesiastical, or economic, we are only going through a mental process which has no effect upon their essential character. There is no sequence of cause and effect peculiar to them; they have no existence apart from the whole stream of life of which they are elements. We cannot therefore confine our attention solely to one class of facts, and treat them as if they were an independent whole and complete in them- selves, without mutilating them and altogether removing them from the sphere of historical study. We cannot do it, indeed, without remoy- ing them from the category of life to that of mechanics. For in life, and in history which mirrors life, there is no such thing as an isolated fact: each one must have its due environment, and its place in the great unity which is also catholicity. Even in dealing with the history of such a specialised institution as a standing army, we cannot be content to deal with “ military ” facts only, to the exclusion of all others. Warfare Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 3 itself, which has given rise to standing armies, depends upon causes of the most various kinds ; upon personal ambition, upon dynastic or religious disputes, on commercial or territorial rivalry. The existence and well-being of an army depend upon agriculture and industry and commerce ; the perfection of its weapons is based upon the mechanical arts; and its health and its general efficiency are conditioned by causes which are moral and physical and sanitary, and not strictly “military” at all. Thus then not even the history of such an institution as this, specialised as it is, can be sharply divided off from the general stream of life; much less therefore can this be done when the connection with that stream is more intimate. History was not made, nor can it be studied, in disjointed sections, The institution with which we are concerned, however, is not one which has a merely local or temporary interest; it does not belong to one particular side of life, or to one particular epoch, nor is it bound up with the fortunes of one par- ticular nation or race. From any point of view, the Church is the most prominent and the most significant factor in the history of civilised nations ; for good or for evil it has left its mark everywhere. If we Christians are right in what we believe, the cosmic significance of the Church is not less than it appears to be to-day, but infinitely greater ; and the relation between the Church and the world is more wonderful still. 4 Study of Ecclesiastical History The Church is the home of the new spiritual order in the world. But its history is not a separate history; it is realised in the course of history at large. Spiritual facts can no more be isolated than natural facts; for the separation of the spiritual from the natural is as much Dualism as the worship of Ahriman and Ormuzd; and Dualism is the fundamental heresy, as well in thought as in worship. This being so, we cannot be satisfied with the view which would regard ecclesiastical history as having to do solely with such things as the succes- sion of bishops and the records of councils, dis- putes about doctrines and conflicts with heretics, We cannot take up the position of those who appear to think that if it is concerned at all with people at large, it is concerned with their church- going and their participation in sacraments only, and not with the details of their life as citizens and social beings. It is true that the Church isa divine society among men, but for that very reason it realises its divine life in human history; we have a treasure that the world knows not, but we have it in earthen vessels. If, on the one hand, the kingdom of heaven is likened to a net, it is also like unto a grain of mustard seed growing secretly ; if the Church is the city of God in the world, it is also, as the writer of the Epistle to Diognetus has said, in the world “ what a soul is ina body.”! Though it be true that “because of 1 Ep, ad Diogn., c. T. Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 5 the Church the worlds were made,” and that “the world stands because of the intercession of Christians,” as Aristides says in his Apology,’ yet is the history of the Church but part and parcel of the general history of mankind. It is realised through the same human channels and under the same human conditions; it is worked out in the ordinary processes and subject to the ordinary limitations of natural life. In the light of the In- carnation, out of which the Church flows, nothing human is foreign to its line of development. Ecclesiastical history, then, cannot be isolated from history as a whole; it is, in Bishop Creighton’s words, “a most important part of all history.” It is not the history of one section or one element of human life, but of all human life as seen from one particular point of view. This point of view has, of course, its effect upon the whole perspective; things will loom large from this point of view which would be compara- tively immaterial from a different one, and vice versa. ‘The significance of an event from the point of view of political or economic history will be no measure of its significance from that of ecclesias- tical history. But although a fact of the very greatest importance from one point of view may be of very little importance from another, the student soon learns to see, and sees increasingly as he goes on, how closely inter-related his facts are, 1 Apol, Arist., c. 17 (Texts and Studies, Cambridge, 1891, vol, I. part 1). 6 Study of Ecclesiastical History and how impossible it is to shut his eyes to any. Political considerations have their effect, and a very profound and far-reaching effect, upon almost every ecclesiastical or even doctrinal situation ; both alike are dominated, in a limited degree but in a very real sense, by ethnic, social, and economic conditions. Nothing, therefore, may be arbitrarily neglected or set aside as irrelevant; we are not concerned with some of the facts only, but with allthe facts. Every circumstance must be allowed its due importance, and every consideration its proper weight. Ecclesiastical history, then, is history regarded from a particular point of view, as centred in the faith of Christ and summed up in the life of His Church. It recognises no limits whatever, other than such as are involved in this point of view; in Professor Gwatkin’s words, it is “the spiritual side of universal history.” Does it then recognise any limits of time? is it concerned only with the Christian centuries? or can it be said to be con- cerned with the events which took place hundreds or thousands of years before the Church itself had its beginning? Here again the question has been answered in very different ways. ‘There are many who have confined the name strictly to that period which it more particularly suggests, viz. to the history of the Christian centuries and of the peoples which have entered within the borders of the Christian Church. On the other hand, it has been used much more loosely. As is well known, - Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 7 Dean Stanley held that ecclesiastical history must include in its scope the Church of the Old Dis- pensation as well as that of the New, and that it began with the Call of Abraham ;? and accord- ingly he entered upon his duties as Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Oxford by delivering his noble course of ‘‘ Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church.” Nor did Dean Stanley stand alone: amongst many more who took the same view were the younger Casaubon, John Spencer (d. 1693), Dean of Ely and author of the famous De legibus Hebraeorum ritualibus,and Jean Le Clerc, Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Amsterdam and editor of Erasmus’s works. The last-named of these, in his inaugural lecture at Amsterdam, divided all history into civil and ecclesiastical, and defined their respective spheres as follows : “The first reports the Actions of Commanders of Kingdoms and Cities, or of Kings and Nations ; and the last the affairs which pass’d formerly among the Hebrews, and since our Saviour’s Birth among the Christians, as far as Religion is con- cern’d in them.” * We may say without the least hesitation that 1 See A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church, new edition, London 1883, pp. [18}{76]. 2 An Oration concerning the excellence and usefulness of Ecclesi- astical History. Pronounc’d Septemb. 6, 1712. By Mr Le Clerc. Translated from the Zatin. London. Printed for 4. Baldwin near the Oxford-Arms in Warwick-Lane. M.DCC.XIII. [1 have been unable to consult the Latin original.] 8 Study of Ecclesiastical History — in one sense even this extended description is not too wide but too narrow. Ecclesiastical history must not indeed be made to inelude, still less to be synonymous with, the history of comparative re- ligions: the very basis of its existence as a definite study lies in the fact that the Christian religion differs in kind and not merely in degree from all other religions whatsoever. But it is this unique character of Christianity which is the basis of the wide range of ecclesiastical history. We need not shrink from claiming that it is concerned not only with the preparation for Christ in Judaism, but with all other early religions and civilisations in so far as they shared in that same preparation. And we may go farther still, and say that it has to do with all else in human history which is brought into contact with, or derives its signi- ficance from, or finds its interpretation and fulfilment in, the Church of Christ. In Arch- bishop Benson’s words, “The Old World is with the Bible a factor in Church History. The History of the World and of the Church will be at last identical.”? But this limitation must not be lost sight of: they are not identical yet. Ecclesiastical history is not merely religious history. Nor is it merely Jewish history as con- tinued and consummated in Christianity : pace Le Clerc, the Old Dispensation does not share in it in the same sense as the New. Its centre of 1 Vigilemus et Oremus, editio altera, London and Lincoln, 1881, p. 14. Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 9 gravity, so to speak, is neither religion in general nor the Bible in particular, but the Incarrate Life of Jesus Christ as manifested and perpetuated in His Church, and realised by degrees in the world through His Spirit. “In a peculiar sense,” as Bishop Westcott says, “all history from the Day of Pentecost is a sacred history.” 1 But just because ecclesiastical history sees all things in the light of the Incarnation, and from the point of view of the Church of Christ, we must be the more careful to remember that its facts are subject to the same laws as any other facts, that the sequence of cause and effect is not interrupted, but rather established, because the hand of God is at work in a special degree. We know indeed by faith what the end of life must be, and that it must be good. But we have to walk by faith too; and walking by faith implies not knowledge but ignorance of many of the stages on the way; so that we cannot judge a priori what the history of the Church is likely to be. We must therefore give ourselves loyally to the study of the facts without anticipating them by foregone conclusions, and without allowing any prepossessions to bias our judgment. No- where is there a greater danger of doing this. Nowhere is it easier to take sides, and to assume that everything is justifiable which took place on that side with which our sympathies lie; or at any rate to take it for granted that a thoroughly 1 The Gospel of Life, London, 1892, p. 279. 10 Study of Ecclesiastical History satisfactory explanation can be found for every- thifg which is not in accordance with our own idea of the fitness of things. We must be pre- pared, on the contrary, to find that all that was best was defiled with much that was bad, and that even the worst was not without elements of good. We must be prepared to recognise large elements of truth in the contentions of which we least approve ; to find at times the spirit of partisanship and sectarianism on the side of what was in reality larger and better, and a lowly and catholic temper in those whose position in effect involved the fatal surrender of much of the Catholic heritage. It need not surprise us, though it should humble us, to find a higher level of conduct in the leaders of some secession from the Church than amongst the members of the Church at large at the time of the secession; or how should we have heard of them at all? How else could they have drawn followers to themselves but by the attractive force of a holy life? but for that, their movements would probably have been still-born. It need not startle us to find that nearly every heresy was bearing witness to some neglected element or elements of the truth which perhaps sorely needed re-statement, even though the attempt at re-statement may be never so crude and arrogant, and even though the result have taken such an exaggerated and distorted shape, owing to the neglect of other necessary elements, that in effect partial truth has become total error. In no con- Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 11 troversy, if we study the facts fairly, shall we find that either side had a monopoly of good- ness or of enlightenment; for the world has yet to see the contest (which nevertheless is already going on) in which all that is good is ranged on one side and all that is evil on the other. There is always something to be said on both sides, and we cannot always see how much; as Herbert of Bosham long ago said with regard to the quarrel between Thomas Becket and King Henry II: “Both parties had a zeal for God; which zeal was most according to knowledge His judgement alone can determine.”* Nor does this apply only to contests within the Church; the same thing holds good of the relations between those within the Church and those without. For the faith of Christ alters men’s destiny and their important status, but does not automatically alter their character or their gifts. It places them in a position of privilege and gives them the earnest of the graces which pertain to that position, but it does not at once, or apart from their own effort, bring them to maturity: they have to assimilate that of which they are made partakers. ‘They have to win their souls still, to make them their own under the same strenuous discipline of life which is common to all men. Prepossessions, then, must be rigorously set on one side; for the study of ecclesiastical history 1 Materials for the History of Archbishop Becket, Rolls Series, vol, iii. p. 273, 12 Study of Ecclesiastical History is simply the study of all human life from one particular point of view. In order to take part profitably in this study a man must, of course, be able to enter into this point of view. We are not, indeed, justified in saying that he must of necessity be a Christian in order to take part in it: good work in ecclesiastical history has been done by some who were not Christians,’ just as Christian writers have done good work on the history of Islam or of the Indian religions.2 But he must, as a most essential part of his equip- ment, have such a knowledge and such an appreci- ation of the essential idea of the Church, and its manifestation in history, as to be able to under- stand and enter into the nature of that which he is studying. This is a necessary part of his edu- cation for that particular work. But having this, he does not therefore treat his material in a different way from any other student of history ; or in so far as he does so he fails to attain his real object. The best historical student will make the best ecclesiastical historian; i.e. the man whose knowledge is greatest, whose judg- ment is at once the most active and the most cautious, and whose sympathies are at once keenest and most carefully kept under control. ‘The story is told that on one occasion the Swiss diplomat 1 For instance, Philipp Jaffé, the editor of the Bibliotheca Rerum Germanicarum, and of the first series of Regesta Ponti- jicum, was a Jew. 2 For instance, Sir William Muir, Professor Stanley Lane Poole, and Sir M. Monier-Williams. Meaning of Ecclesiastical History 13 Merle d’Aubigné, the author of a History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century, met Leo- pold von Ranke, and claimed acquaintance with him as a brother historian. The author of the History of the Popes demurred a little, and then replied that d’Aubigné wrote as a Protestant first and a historian afterwards, whereas in his own works he endeavoured to be the historian first of all. Setting on one side the greatness of the one and the mediocrity of the other, it would not be easy to give a better illustration of the difference between them. D’Aubigné’s work is of course long dead; but even in its own day, and even from the point of view of the most militant Protestantism, it was immeasurably in- ferior in value to von Ranke’s work, simply be- cause the one is true history and the other is the evil thing which is sometimes spoken of as “ his- tory with a purpose.” It would be easy to give more conspicuous instances of this evil than dAubigné; but for the particular object which we have in view it is unnecessary, and the illustra- tion is all the better because it does not repre- sent an extreme case. On the subject of this chapter, reference may be made to The Meaning of Ecclesiastical History, an inaugural lecture by Professor H. M. Gwatkin (Cam- bridge, 1891); to an essay on “ Methods and Results in Modern Theology,” by the present writer, at the beginning of vol, xxxiii of the Encyclopaedia Britan- 14 Study of Ecclesiastical History nica (tenth edition, London, 1902); and to Dean Stanley’s three “ Lectures Introductory to the Study of Ecclesiastical History,’’ prefixed to his Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church, London, 1861 (many subsequent editions). CHAPTER II THE SCIENCE OF HISTORY Tue student of ecclesiastical history, for whom this little manual is more particularly intended, may perhaps not have the opportunity of doing much in the way of historical research on his own account. He will be concerned rather with modern works than with original documents, and with the results of the historical researches of others rather than with the processes by which such results have been obtained. Nevertheless, if he is to direct his own reading to the best advantage, he ought to have some idea of what history actu- ally means. He should also know something at any rate of the methods of historical research, both because in that way alone can he learn to appreciate rightly the results to which those who make use of them have been led, and because he himself, in all his reading even of modern authors, must make use more or less efficiently, and mutatis mutandis, of these very same methods. In the next three chapters, therefore, we shall in the first place deal with the nature of history itself, and then shall endeavour to sketch in outline those methods of study —— as we have already 16 Study of Ecclesiastical History seen, are not the peculiar possession of the ecclesi- astical historian, but are common to all students of history. cP In the first place, we must lay all possible stress upon the fact that history is a true science, and that, as Professor J. B. Bury has recently re- minded us, it is in no sense a branch of literature. It differs indeed both in method and in scope from certain other sciences, as we shall see pre- sently; it has its own subject-matter, its own laws, and its own methods of investigation and verification. But these are based on general principles, not merely on individual preferences ; and within its own limits history is as truly scientific as any study can possibly be. The fact must be borne in mind. Most people nowadays would recognise that a man who has not studied the rudiments of any particular science is incap- able of dealing profitably with questions which presuppose a knowledge of the principles and methods of that science. But there is still a widespread idea that certain subjects, historical and theological subjects in particular, are the happy hunting-ground of the tyro, and that any man of ordinary intelligence is perfectly capable of expressing weighty opinions in such matters without any special study or research. Such ideas rest upon a radical misunderstanding of 1 In his Inaugural Lecture at Cambridge, 1903. The Science of History 17 what history actually means. It is of course true that history depends to a larger extent than some other studies upon literary expression. The historian cannot tabulate his conclusions, or ex- hibit them in the shape of prepared specimens or diagrams or mathematical formulae, simply because they represent life itself and not merely the mechanical coefficient of life, and therefore must be expressed in terms of life and not merely in terms of matter and motion. For this reason if for no other (and that there are other reasons every lover of literature will recognise) the modern tendency to neglect literary form in historical writing, which has had such disastrous results in Germany and is by no means unknown elsewhere, is very greatly to be deplored. Nevertheless, from this point of view, literature is the handmaiden of history; and history, in Professor York Powell’s words, is not and never can be merely “a pretty but rather difficult branch of literature.” ** A history book is not necessarily good if it appears to the literary critic ‘readable and in- teresting, nor bad because it seems to him ‘ hard or heavy reading.’ The literary critic, in fact, is beginning to find out that he reads a history as he might read a treatise on mathematics or linguistics, at his peril, and that he is no judge of its value or lack of value. Only the expert can judge that.”? 1 In his preface to Langlois and Seignobos, Jntroduction to the Study of History, London, 1898, p. v. B 18 Study of Ecclesiastical History I If we are asked for our justification of the claim that there is such a thing as scientific history, our answer must be that history itself is nothing but the application of the scientific method, i.e. the method of induction, for the determination of that which was previously un- known and otherwise unknowable. It has nothing to do (that is, so far as it is truly historical) with a priori reasoning ; it assumes nothing and takes nothing for granted, but works from the known to the unknown in accordance with fixed and definite laws. In other words, it makes use of precisely the same inductive method which has led to all our modern triumphs in natural science. In the case of natural science, indeed, the end which is sought is general law, whereas in that of history it is particular fact; but in either case it is one which is incapable of attainment by logical proof, and which can only be reached as the result of a process of induction and synthesis. The two methods are substantially the very same, though applied under different circumstances. In one sense, indeed, we may even say that the inductive method in physical science is only one special form of the historical method, since it does not base its generalisations upon merely external resemblances but endeavours to discover and set forth the order of historical development which underlies the phenomena of the universe. The Science of History 19 From this point of view history may be described as the meeting point of all the sciences. And it would be making no unreal or baseless claim on behalf of history to say that the real secret of all, or nearly all, of the progress which has been made in our own day in almost every study, physical or metaphysical, is to be found in the fact that they have all become increasingly historical in their method. III If now we proceed to compare the science of history with other sciences, we at once observe that its data are, in some respects at any rate, unlike those of the natural sciences. In these latter, the facts are as a rule capable of direct observation and verification. Although they are frequently taken on trust, on the evidence of pre- vious observers in the case of things past, and on the evidence of eyewitnesses in the case of things afar off, they can in most cases be tested and re-tested whenever it is thought desirable. With history it is different; the facts are not capable of direct observation or verification, simply be- cause they are facts of the past. ‘To the student of natural science, again (excepting in so far as he is at work upon “ applied science”), the actual facts are important chiefly as the manifestation of particular Jaws, and have no value in them- selves excepting in their bearing upon other facts 20 Study of Ecclesiastical History which happen to be the subject of investigation. With the historian, on the contrary, the facts themselves have a value; and, indeed, his chief object is to get into actual contact with things as they actually happened, to see the past as though it were present. He works not with facts, but with documents. He starts from evidence of one kind and another, ample or fragmentary, designed or undesigned, contemporary or belated, and he endeavours to ascertain as best he may what actually happened. In other words, “ the docu- ment is his starting point, the fact his goal;”* and the work of the historian is comprehended in the complicated process, or series of processes, of investigation and sifting, of induction and in- ference, of reconstruction and combination, by which the result is reached. It follows, of course, from what has been said that there are certain distinct limitations in the sphere of historical knowledge: (1) its evidence cannot produce in us the same degree of certainty with regard to any particular fact that direct evidence can, and (2) its results cannot have the same kind of fixity and finality as the results of natural science. It must be borne in mind, how- ever, that this does not so much imply that there is a greater degree of improbability with regard to historic truth, as that the subject is one in which any other degree of certainty is in the nature of 1 Langlois and Seignobos, Introduction to the Study of History, p. 64. The Science of History 21 the case unattainable. (1) As regards the first of the limitations mentioned above, it is of course clear that testimony, however trustworthy, cannot produce in our minds the same kind of conviction as direct observation, seeing that the testimony itself ultimately rests on observation. But the fact remains that testimony is the only material that we can have for the investigation of the history of the past. If then the past record of the human race be worthy of study at all (and this no believer in the Incarnation, at any rate, can doubt), we must be content with the kind of knowledge which is appropriate to it, and which from the very nature of the case is alone possible in it; just as we have to investigate the chemistry of the sun without the aid of the direct methods which we can use in terrestrial chemistry. More- over, it must be remembered that this kind of knowledge (knowledge resting on “probable evidence”) is after all that upon which all our ordinary concepts are built up and all our every day actions are based: that, in Bishop Butler’s pregnant phrase, “'To us, probability is the very guide of life.” And once more, it must be re- membered that after all the essential difference between probable evidence and demonstrative evidence is qualitative rather than quantitative: it is not that the former is weak whilst the latter is strong, but that whilst the latter is invariable, the former “admits of degrees, and of all variety of them, from the highest moral certainty to the 22 Study of Ecclesiastical History very lowest presumption.”? ‘There are things of which we cannot feel at all sure; there are others of which we feel almost as sure as if they were the subject of formal proof. (2) As regards the latter limitation, it is quite true that we cannot be so sure of the results of history, which are a series of concrete facts, as we can of those of the natural sciences, which are as a rule abstract laws. But although we so commonly forget that it is so, itis none the less the case that all our knowledge is relative, not absolute, and that in every sphere it is a knowledge which corresponds with the nature of its subject-matter; that abstract and concrete thinking are two distinct things, and that we can never have the same kind of knowledge as regards concrete life as we can in matters of thought; that “‘as we gain exactness we lose contact with actuality.”* Moreover, the results of historical processes have at times a fixity which is not remotely akin to those of processes in natural science. In history, our conclusions are to be found at the point of meeting of different though converging lines of evidence, derived from documentary sources of the most varied character. If this cumulative evidence be sufficiently varied and weighty, the conclusions which we base upon 1 Bishop Butler, Analogy: the opening sentence of the Introduction. For an analysis of the degrees of belief, see W. Thomson, Outline of the Laws of Thought, § 120. 2 See a very valuable chapter on “ The Distinction between Abstract and Concrete Knowledge” in J. R. Illingworth, Reason and Revelation, London, 1902, pp. 41-64. The Science of History 23 it may be, and often are, so fixed and sure that any other conclusion would be absolutely incon- ceivable, unless all our methods and all our results are to be regarded as nugatory, and history itself to be repudiated as a meaningless sham. Some- times, too, the historical conclusion to which we have been led by the consideration of the evidence reflects back light upon the whole of the other facts within our sphere of vision, in such a way as to make their entire meaning far plainer than it was before, and thus to clinch the whole argument. In such a case, whilst it is still necessary to be on our guard against the tendency to think that the ‘law ” which we have discovered, so to speak (ze. the assured sequence of events which we have observed), is anything more than a partial one, based upon what is only an imperfect summary of the facts, shall we be wrong in holding that we have solved the problem before us in just the same way as the natural scientist has done when he dis- covers the “law” which underlies the phenomena which he has been engaged in explaining? And if so, are we not right in claiming that history is just as truly scientific as any of the natural sciences ? IV History then has its place by the side of the natural sciences in spite of the fact that it cannot be regarded as one of the “sciences of observa- tion.” But there is another respect in which it 24 Study of Ecclesiastical History differs in toto from them; viz., in that it has usually to do with elements of an altogether different character. History is mainly concerned with human action ; and this would be meaningless and inconsequent apart from the motives upon which it is based and the ideas which underlie it. Unless human action be rational in this sense it is hard to see how there can be either object or method in historical study ; apart from this, history would not be worthy of study at all. It is quite true, of course, that the historian may not introduce transcendental causes to account for his facts; nor may he write history on the basis of some foregone conclusion as to the progress of the human race, as most of the authors of “ philoso- phies of history” have done; nor may he inter- pret the facts by some arbitrary theory of physical or metaphysical causes as Buckle and Taine have done; nor may he adopt a purely partisan position and see his facts through a lens which at once distorts and colours them, like Macaulay or (on a far lower level) Theiner and Janssen. Again, it is not the function of the historian, as such, to pronounce abstract ethical judgments; nor is he called upon to arraign his characters before the tribunal of the moral stan- dards of his own country or period, and to award praise or blame. Nevertheless, he is called upon to understand and to appreciate motives as well as acts, to see what is done in the light of the standards of those who took part in it, and of the The Science of History 25 causes which prompted them both consciously and unconsciously. He need have no theory on the subject; he must keep his belief on the subject, if he have any, under a rigid control ; but he must none the less remember that in sober fact there are moral and intellectual waves in human life just as truly as there are fashions in dress. He need not personify the spirit of the age, and may not introduce it as a means of accounting for his facts; but he only shows his blindness if he fails to see that such a spirit, call it what he will, is manifested in the facts. His work, therefore, will be valuable and lasting in proportion as he is able to enter into the character of the age with which he is dealing, and to understand the persons with whom he has to deal by the light of their own standards and those of their day. Ina word, he must re- member that the facts which are the end of his pro- cesses are not dead but living facts, that they have a moral character which cannot be ignored without altering their essential nature, and that the agents with whose activities he has to deal belong to a higher order than that of merely animal life. Once more, he need have no theory as to the differ- ence between the two: but he must recognise the fact that the data with which he is concerned can- not be expressed (from his point of view at any rate) in the terms of the data of natural science.1 1 Needless to say, all this is still more true with regard to ecclesiastical history, the standpoint of which is farthest removed from that of the purely natural order. 26 Study of Ecclesiastical History What we have been saying is well expressed in the following passage : “Historical science is radically different from the natural sciences in that it has to deal with purposive units. Physics, Chemistry, and Biology are concerned with the co-ordination of things and appearances, the What and the How. His- tory must needs have a wider scope; the tabula- tion of fact is essential, the What and the How must be known; but this is not the end; the Why cannot be excluded. History deals with men as men of thought and purpose, and it is incomplete until the thought and purpose of those who make history are interpreted by those who write it,”? Thus, then, history has its point of contact with natural science on the one hand, and with the moral sciences on the other. In its methods it more closely resembles the former, in its subject- matter it approximates to the latter. Those who deny the name of science to ethics and meta- physics are doubtless perfectly logical in refusing it to that part of historical study which has for its object the investigation of motives and ideals and the realisation of the moral atmosphere of past days. Even so, however, it is hard to see how they can reasonably refuse it to all that con- cerns the actual reconstruction of the facts of the past, if it be given to geology or palaeontology. And if the name be rightly given to the natural 1 W. B. Frankland, Zhe Early Eucharist, Cambridge, 1902, pl. The Science of History 27 and moral sciences, it would seem to belong a fortiori to history, which in so many respects shares the character of both. For further study on the subject of this chapter : E. Bernheim, Lehrbuch der historische Methode, Leipzig, new edition, 1903. With a very full bibliography. C. V. Langlois and C. Seignobos, Introduction aux études historiques (second edition), Paris, 1898 (English translation of the first edition by G. G. Berry, with preface by Prof. York Powell, London, 1898). C. and V. Mortet, La Science de Uhistoire, Paris, 1894. P. Lacombe, De I’ Histoire considérée comme science, Paris, 1894. N. Marselli, La scienga della storia, Torino, 1873. The Discours de la Méthode of René Descartes is eminently worthy of study. (Many editions ; a good translation by J. Veitch, ninth edition, Edinburgh, 1887.) CHAPTER III HISTORICAL METHOD Ir is not enough that history should vindicate its right to be considered a true science; for a great deal of mere empiricism masquerades under that august name. ‘The historical method is not always to be recognised in so-called historical work, just as the scientific method is not always to be found in so-called scientific circles; and the scientific spirit is unfortunately not always to be recognised amongst those who think that they fulfil its requirements most adequately, whether they be students of history or anything else. With the best will in the world we are hardly likely to be successful in altogether avoiding un- scientific haste and prejudice; with the very greatest care our practice will not attain to the accuracy or the precision of our theory. There is all the greater need that we should place before ourselves, as simply and as explicitly as possible, the claims which scientific method makes upon the student of history. The work of the historian may be summed up under two heads: first, there is a process of analysis; and secondly, one of synthesis. It will 28 Historical Method—1 29 be well to consider these two separately, and the © former of them will form the subject of the present chapter. Tue Work or ANALYsIS I The first task which must be undertaken in the investigation of the history of any period is the collection of material. 'This may be of all kinds: actual vestiges of the past, pictures, en- gravings, inscriptions, laws, canons, state papers, letters, narratives of eye-witnesses, chronicles, poems, sermons, treatises, and so forth, accord- ing to the nature of the subject. Evidence of this kind is of course scattered far and wide; but amongst the most available storehouses of it may be mentioned the following: (a) The great collections of printed documents which have been edited by the scholars of former days, such as Rymer’s Foedera, London, 1704— 1723 (new edition, Hagae Comitum, 1739-1745), Martene and Durand’s Scriptorum et Monu- mentorum amplissima Collectio, Paris, 1724-1733 ; Mabillon’s Acta Sanctorum ordinis S. Benedicti, Paris, 1733-1738; Muratori’s Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, Milan, 1723-1751; Bouquet’s Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, Paris, 1738 f.; the great collection of the Concilia by Labbe and Cossart, Harduin, and Mansi; the Bollandist Acta Sanctorum, Paris and Brussels, 30 Study of Ecclesiastical History 1749 f.; Niebuhr’s Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae, Bonn, 1828 f.; Migne’s Patrologia Latina and Patrologia Graeca, and the like. (6) The chronicles, &c., published by various learned societies, such as the Société de lhistoire de France, the Société de lhistoire de Belgique, the Societa Romana di Storia Patria, the Spalding Club, the Irish Archaeological and Celtic Societies, the English Historical, Surtees, Camden, and Chetham Societies, and many more. (c) Above all, the many noble series of State Papers and other Monwmenta which are being issued by the chief governments of Europe or by Academies subsidised by them: such as the Chron- icles and Memorials published in the Rolls Series ; the works issued by the Record Commission, the Historical Manuscripts Commission, the Commis- sion Royale dhistoire de Belgique, the (Danish) Aarsberetninger fra K. Geheime-Archivet, and the Kongliga Samfundet for Utgivanda af Hand- skrifter rérande Skandinaviens Historia; the Monumenta Historiae Germaniae, the Fontes Rerum Austriacarum, the Italian Monumenta Historiae Patriae and Archivio Storico; the Coleccién de documentos ineditos para la historia de Espana, and the Corpo Diplomatico Portuguez. Or again, the Vienna Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, the similar collections of Greek writers now in course of publication at Berlin, and of Syriac writers which is just commencing (1903) at Paris; the Corpus Reformatorum published Historical Method—l1 31 at Brunswick ; the Bullarum Magnum now appear- ing at Turin, and the great collections of inscrip- tions of all kinds (Corpus inscriptionum Atticarum, Graecarum, Indicarum, Latinarum, &c.), which are being published by the Royal Prussian Academy. ‘These are but specimens of the larger collections; but in addition to what is contained in them, there is an immense amount of material available only in smaller collections, or published in single volumes, or scattered through various periodicals. In addition to this a very large amount, existing in libraries public and private, is still unpublished and even uncatalogued ; whilst for many periods the material at our disposal is being added to almost every year by fresh discoveries. The process of finding what we want amidst this immense mass of material is naturally no easy one. But it is greatly facilitated by the fact that every student stands, as it were, on the shoulders of his predecessors; he avails himself of the work which they have already done, makes use of their guidance in finding materials, and pro- fits (or should do so) by their accumulated experi- ence. Much help, moreover, is to be obtained from the transactions of the various national historical and local archaeological societies, and from the various historical magazines and reviews at home and abroad (English Historical Review, Archiv fiir Geschichte and Neues Archiv, Boletin de la historia, Historische Zeitschrift [Miimich], Historisk Tidsskrift (Christiania, and Copen- 32 Study of Ecclesiastical History hagen], Revista de Espana, Revue critique (histoire et de la littérature, Revue historique, Zeitschrift Sir Kirchengeschichte, Analecta Bollandiana, and the like). Most useful of all, amongst printed works, are a number of systematic bibliographies ; two of the most important of which are the Bibliographie der deutschen Zeitschriften-Litteratur and the Bibliographie historique de la France, now in course of publication, the Quellenkunde der deutschen Geschichte of F. C. Dahlmann, G. Waitz, and E. Steindorff (Géttingen, 1894), and C. Gross, Sources and Literature of English History, London, 1900. For material which is still unpublished we have a number of catalogues and calendars, chief amongst which may be mentioned the English Calendars of State Papers and the Appendices to the Reports of the Historical MSS. Commission, and the great French Catalogue générale des manuscripts des bibliothéques publiques des dé- partements. But a vast amount of the manuscript material which is known to exist still remains uncatalogued, and especially that part of it which is in private libraries; and the practice which has very frequently prevailed, by which single students have been allowed to grope about in them and carry away whatever they could find, or make use of for their particular work, is for this purpose useless, if not worse. So that our task is not approaching its end. The student of history can never be sure, any more than the student of natural science can, that he has made use of all Mstorical Method—I 33 the evidence that there is.1 He may easily over- look some parts of the available material through carelessness or haste, or through lack of training, or through lack of linguistic ability, or because there is not yet sufficient co-operation amongst historical scholars to enable the ground to be covered properly, where individual work cannot cover it. And even if it were possible to avoid all these pitfalls, the field may still at any moment be widened by the discovery of fresh evidence. This is happening continually. In early Church history, for instance, within recent years, we have had the Didache, the Testamentum Domini, the Sacramentary of Sarapion, and a great many apocalyptic writings; and there is every prospect of much more. II The next step that the student must undertake is the examination of the documents which he has obtained. He must take them one by one and examine and appraise them as carefully as he can. Is this a faithful text or is it corrupt? is it 1JIn reviewing a book by Robert Vaughan on Revolutions in English History (1859), Charles Kingsley expressed the opinion that future works on English history were likely to take the same shape and to deal with special aspects of English life, since the time had almost come when the facts of English history were ascertained, so that there would be no more to be done in that direction. We have not found it so yet! The fact need not change our opinion of Kingsley’s greatness in other ways, but it does not give us confidence in the system of ministerial recommendation which made him Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge. Cc oe a ie ee): Me . “ « 34 Study of Ecclesiastical History really the work of the author to whom it is ascribed ? was he a contemporary witness? if not, when did he live? when did he write? what were his opportunities of knowing the facts? was he biassed, and, if so, in what direction? did he write with a purpose, and, if so, what purpose? What can be learned on these points from in- ternal, and what from external evidence? and do the conclusions agree to which these two re- spectively lead? Such are the questions which must be asked with regard to each document; and the answers to these questions, so far as they can be ascertained, must henceforward be borne constantly in mind in dealing with the document concerned. Here, again, much of the necessary work has been done already. Most authors, and a considerable number of single works, have been made the subject of minute and careful examina- tion, the results of which may be found in the prolegomena of modern editions, or in the articles in the great dictionaries and encyclopaedias.” It is therefore possible with comparatively little trouble to obtain fairly exact answers to most of these questions. But the student may not accept 1 Amongst the most valuable of these may be mentioned Bishop J. B. Lightfoot’s monumental edition of the 4 Fathers (London, 1885-1890), and (so far as the text is con- cerned) G. Hartel’s edition of St Cyprian (Corpus Script. Eecl. Lat., 3 vols, Vienna, 1868). 2 For a list of the chief works of this class see below, p. 141. 3 The best illustration of work of this kind, for the pur- poses of the historian, is to be found in Bishop W. Stubbs’s: Historical Prefaces to Chronicles, d&c., in the Rolls Series, Oxford, 1902. Historical Method—I 35 the conclusions of others too readily, and must never relax his own vigilance because the work seems to have been done already. Every few years sees the overthrow of some old conclusion, the formation of a more exact estimate of the value of some important document or a revision of the accepted theory as to its authorship or date; and every increase of our knowledge in this as in other directions has been the outcome of the working of a critical mind, which could not be content to accept other people’s opinions at second-hand. There are large numbers of writ- ings which were formerly accepted as genuine, and are now known to be forgeries; on the other hand, there are some which were formerly the object of grave suspicion, and which are now universally accepted. Of the former class the Chronicle of Ingulf and the Pragmatic Sanction of St Lewis are well-known instances, not to speak of the pseudo-Isidorian Decretals and the Donation of Constantine ; of the latter we may mention the seven Letters of St Ignatius of Antioch, and (although this latter was not by any means so widely suspected) the Bull Unam _ Sanctam. Critical work of this kind is still being done; for instance, Harnack has recently proved, almost to demonstration, that the so-called “ Pfaffian fragments of St Irenaeus,” the genuineness of which was hardly doubted, were in reality the 1 Dr Bernheim (op. cit., ed. 1903, pp. 301 f.) gives a lengthy list of such documents. 36 Study of Ecclesiastical History work of Christoph Matthius Pfaff himself, who professed to have discovered them in the library at Turin.! Plainly, then, we may not be sure that all our material is what it seems. It must not be supposed, however, that our task is done when it is known that a particular work is genuine or spurious ; that the writer was a contemporary or a man who lived a hundred years after the event ; that he was a guileless and truth- loving chronicler or a zealous and unscrupulous partisan. ‘The former will not show that we can believe all that he tells us, the latter will not mean that we can throw his work into the waste-paper basket; they are merely important facts which must be borne carefully in mind when we come to consider what he actually says. It is, of course, true that a contemporary writer is of greater value than a later one. But a contem- porary witness is not always right, and a later writer is not always wrong. ‘The former may not be able “to see the wood for the trees”; he may be misled by his very proximity to the events which he describes; or by the fact that he sees things too exclusively from one point of view; or he may be so overpowered by it all that when he begins to put pen to paper he can produce nothing but vague declamation or vituperation. Now as to the later writer. It is true that so far as he is a mere copyist of material which we still possess 1 Texte wnd Untersuchungen, neue Folge, vol. v. part 3, Leipzig, 1900. Historical Method—I 37 he has no value for us. But he may turn out to be a born historian who could gather and sift and weigh} or he may have epitomised or made use of earlier materials which are now lost, like Eutropius and Sulpitius Severus.’ Nor does it follow that a document is useless because the writer is not free from bias. It is, of course, true that we can more often trust the statement of a straightforward and unbiassed person than we can that of a dishonest and _pre- judiced one; but the former is not always accurate, and the latter is not always lying or deceived. Every class of men has its own characteristic form of mental blindness; placid serenity is no exception, nor is there any more prejudiced person, as a rule, than the man with what he calls an “open mind.” On the other hand, fanaticism sometimes has a clear-sightedness which is all its own; and even when we find no signs of truth in what it has to tell us, the thing itself is neverthe- less a historical fact of the most momentary kind. Every such fact has its value, and none may be neglected. If we were writing a history of our own times, there are certain smooth and respectable newspapers which might perhaps be ignored; but we could not safely ignore the existence, or the contents, of those of the most violent and extreme 1 The latter writer appears to be making use of a lost book of the Histories of Tacitus in his account of the de- struction of Jerusalem (Chron., lib. ii. c. 30). He also made use of the Acts of Peter (R. A. Lipsius, Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten, Brunswick, 1883, vol. ii. p. 331 f.). > 38 Study of Ecclesiastical History type. And so with regard to other periods. It would be hard to find a more violent and prejudiced writer than Lactantius, but we could not possibly dispense with his evidence; and his bias is so open and transparent that it suffices to put the discriminating student on his guard. And once more, even where a document has been proved to be an absolute forgery, it is not accurate to say that it is of no historical value whatever. It has of course no connection of any real kind with the period to which it professes to belong, but it may be of no little value when restored to its true environment. The Apostolical Constitutions and the pseudo-Isidorian Decretals tell us nothing new concerning the age of the Apostles and of the early Roman bishops respec- tively; but they are historical documents of great value for the latter part of the fourth century and the middle of the ninth century, when they were, respectively, composed and compiled. The ro- mances of Turpin are not an authority for the age of Karl the Great, but they have their place in the history of the twelfth century. The forged chronicle of Ingulf still has its value for a student who knows that it comes to us from a little before or after 1300. The forgeries of William Henry Ireland tell us nothing new about Shakespeare, but they have their importance for his own period. The “ Rowley Papers” are a sad and significant historical document of the eighteenth century, though they tell us nothing of the period Mistorical Method—I 39 of the Wars of the Roses; and not less signifi- cant are the forgeries of Simonides, Schapira, and Piggott in the nineteenth century. So then, in a word, documents are to be studied not primarily with a view to their external charac- ter, but with a view to what they have to tell us. Questions of authorship and the like are important, but they are not the only important questions; when we have solved them by means of internal and external evidence we are in a position to go further and to ask not only by whom and under what circumstances the document was written, but what it actually contains. Il This then is the work upon which the student now enters. The documents being such as they are, what have they to tell him? Their contents consist of a series of statements of fact, or what profess to be such, and all these need to be sifted and tested. He therefore takes the documents, breaks them up into their component parts, and considers these separately and together, bearing in mind that they are not facts, but merely the statements from which the facts have to be determined. He examines and weighs each statement as carefully as possible, both in itself and in conjunction with all the rest, and passes his judgement at length as the result of a consider- ation of all the evidence. Many facts can of course be accepted as certain almost at once; for 40 Study of Ecclesiastical History instance, the existence of such a person, the per- petration of such an act, and the like, But nothing may be allowed to settle itself mechani- cally, so to speak; nothing may be taken for granted (at this stage) without a distinct and definite act of themind. Even where the bulk of the authorities are in agreement it does not follow that they are in the right; what “everybody says” is not necessarily true, and especially is this the case where the event is one which everybody has expected, or where it is the interest of those in power to make it appear that such a thing has happened. In cases such as these, “secret his- tory,” such as the Anecdota of Procopius, has no little importance; hesitation or innuendo on the part of narrators is often very significant; and the silence of persons who were in a position to know what actually happened may itself be an important fact1 Again, examination will fre- quently show that identical statements in two writers are in reality the result of copying; in which case, of course, the statement of the later writer, unless he has had other opportunities of corroborating the statement which he adopted in reality, adds nothing whatever to the evidence.? 1 On the other hand, nothing is more difficult than to in- terpret evidence of this kind rightly, and nowhere are the chances of error greater, 2¥or example, the ecclesiastical historians Socrates and Sozomen are often quoted as distinct authorities by writers who ought to know better, when in reality they are nothing of the kind. Sozomen made use of the history of Socrates and incorporates long passages from it. Here he isa mere copyist: elsewhere, of course, he is an original authority. Mstorical Method—I 41 On the other hand, when the story of a later writer is a variant of that which is contained in earlier authorities, or when he gives additional details, it does not follow that we are in the presence of a fresh witness. A story is apt to grow as it is repeated from mouth to mouth, as everybody is aware who has played at the game called “Russian scandal”; and the additional facts may be merely “details added to give an air of verisimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing narrative.” Only experience and common sense, however, can possibly teach the student how to weigh and test evidence such as this; and although a great deal may be reduced to precept, we can never lay down any absolute and conclusive rule for the interpretation of evidence. ‘The work can never be done mechanically or by rote; there must always be exceptions, and in the last resort the student must judge for himself. Take for instance such a thing as the “argument from silence”: when may it be concluded, from the silence of a witness, that a fact did not occur, or a practice did not exist? Nobody nowadays would fall into the error of the author of Super- natural Religion, who ventured glibly to say that one after another of the early Fathers “knew no- thing of” this or that or the other, because he did not happen to mention it in the works which have come down to us, quite irrespective of the fact that there was no reason why he should. ‘This . eee ee pip 42 Study of Ecclesiastical History method of reasoning has been exposed and dis- credited for good and all by Bishop Lightfoot." Nevertheless, it is no easy thing to state with strict accuracy when the argument can be used conclusively. MM. Langlois and Seignobos, for instance, perhaps the two most scientific writers on the subject, tell us that the “negative argu- ment” or argument from silence is only of force when : (1) The author of the document in which the fact is not mentioned had the intention of systematically recording all the facts of the same class, and must have been acquainted with all of them. (Tacitus sought to enumerate the peoples of Germany; the Notitia Dignitatum mentioned all the provinces of the Empire; the absence. from these lists of a people or a province proves that it did not then exist.) (2) ‘The fact, if it was such, must have affected the author’s imagination so forcibly as necessarily to enter into his conceptions. (If there had been regular assemblies of the Frankish people, Gregory of Tours could not have conceived and described the life of the Frankish kings without mentioning them.) ”? . This looks precise enough, and yet it is easy to see that we have not eliminated one most 1 Essays on Supernatural Religion, London, 1889: the . essay on “The Argument from Silence.” 2 Introduction to the Study of History, p. 256. Cf. P. de Smedt, Principes de la Critique Historique, Liége and Paris, 1883, pp. 236-7. Historical Method—I 43 important source of possible mistake: that of simple error or forgetfulness. And yet either of these may easily occur, as an example will show. A good many years ago there was published in England the first edition of an elementary manual of mineralogy, by a writer who probably knows more about tin ores, and the lodes in which they occur, than anybody living; and yet it happened that, in the list of metals which was given at the beginning of the volume, tin was omitted! In this case we are not tempted to apply the argument from silence, and to conclude that tin was not known in 1873, because the point is easy of verification; and yet the case satisfies our authors’ criteria. Again, a contem- porary account of the consecration of Cornelius as Bishop of Rome in a.p. 251, the object of which was to show that he was a true Bishop of Rome, declares that he was “ made bishop by ( factus est . de) the judgement of God and His Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the suffrages of the people who were present,” &c.,} but does not mention the actual laying on of hands. Here again we are not inclined to doubt whether the laying on of hands was essential to the making of a bishop, for the point is capable of abundant verification in the literature of the time, and we have other evidence of the actual 1 §. Cypr. Zp. lv. 6. Cyprian has previously said, however, that Cornelius was ‘‘made a bishop by (factus est episcopus a) many of our colleagues who were then in Rome. 44 Study of Ecclesiastical History consecration of Cornelius. Once more, of two tracts commonly ascribed to St Ambrose, and both dealing with the Eucharist, De Mysteriis and De Sacramentis, one actually mentions the consecration, and the other does not happen to do so; but the evidence on the subject is so clear that no sane person would venture to suggest that the consecration was sometimes omitted. In each of these cases easy verification is possible; but they are enough to show that the argu- ment from silence is only to be used with very great care. So used, it is of the greatest value. But the negative argument is never formally conclusive, since silence cannot prove a negative. It may create a probability of the very highest order, but that is all, and that is enough for our purpose. In the face of difficulties such as these, it is clear that the student has to be on his guard against accepting anything too readily; for a too easy acceptance of some ill-substantiated hypo- thesis may easily deflect his judgement as regards all that comes after, and he is far more likely to be over credulous than over critical. In fact, Langlois and Seignobos go further and say that his attitude of mind towards the statements contained in documents should be one of methodical distrust ; 1 §. Cypr. Zpp. xlix. 1, lvii. 5; and the letter of Cornelius in Eus. H.£. vi. 43. Fora refutation of Dr Hatch’s argu- ment based on this case, see Gore, Ministry of the Church, ed. i., London, 1889, pp. 376, 385. Historical Method—I 45 he ought, they say, “to distrust @ priori every statement of an author; for he cannot be sure that it is not mendacious or mistaken.”1 This is perhaps going too far: methodical distrust is certainly not the best path to the discovery of truth in the ordinary relations of life, and is hardly likely to be so in history, which is a mirror of life. On the contrary, a certain power of sym- pathy is essential to any real insight. But it is undoubtedly true that the student of history must remember, in dealing with the evidence before him, that a documentary statement is only the material with which he works, and not the finished product. The result of this process of sorting and sifting # will be found to be that the student has rejected some statements, that others have been resolved into their constituent elements, of which part only is retained, and that others again, which seemed to have been taken out of their proper environment, have been restored to it. ‘There will remain, then, a large collection of isolated facts and dis- jointed impressions of the most diversified char- acter, each of which he has critically tested and estimated to the best of his power. These he will arrange and classify as best he can, either mentally, or in note-books, or on slips. ‘They will form the 2 Op, cit., p. 157. ? Something should be said here with regard to the treat- ment of legendary material. But it will come more con- veniently in a later chapter. See below, p. 133 f. 7~ een) ae i le ie a et ah C2, , =" 46 Study of Ecclesiastical History material for the second great historical process, that of synthesis. IV Before, however, we pass on to consider this second process something must be said with regard to the chief pitfalls by which the path of the his- torical student is beset in carrying out this work of analysis. We may pass over what the French call “‘Froude’s Disease,”! or chronic inaccuracy, because that is enough to mar any work; but two particular pitfalls into which the historical student is espe- cially liable to stumble should be mentioned here. (a) It has been said that the historical student must arrange and classify his facts. ‘This is an absolute necessity ; unless he does so he will never be able to use them properly. But this in itself constitutes a difficulty ; for the more he classifies them the more he is in danger of forgetting that historical facts are not isolated but related facts ; not separate things but parts of a great living whole. The danger, then, is not only one into which the antiquary or the mere annalist may fall, but one which besets the modern scientific historian equally with them. But none the less it is fatal. It is true that the historical method isolates for purposes of treatment things which converge in experience; but it takes as its starting point the principle that there is no such thing as an 1 Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., p. 125. 4 Historical Method—I A7 isolated fact in history. To separate incidents from their causes and effects, to treat them as if they had any meaning in themselves, is to remove them from the category of actuality, ie. from the sphere of history. Itis for this reason that a single fact has no value for the historian: it tells him nothing. It is only when he can bring it into connection with some other fact that it begins to exist for him; and after this, each new fact that he can bring into relation with it (so long as the relation is one of life) adds solidity and mean- ing. On the other hand, when the facts are treated as separate things, and isolated from their context, they become inert and meaningless. The climax of this process is reached in such a work as the Descriptive Sociology of Mr Herbert Spencer, in which many thousands of isolated “ facts,” collected by various persons from a large range of books of all kinds, and separated entirely both from their natural context and from their context in the books from which they are taken, are classified and arranged in pill-boxes, so to speak, or like the specimens in a museum. Such a process may or may not have its value from other stand- points; from the point of view of history it is utterly ridiculous. (6) To turn now to the other pitfall, which is of a different kind, and which especially besets the path of the untrained historical student. The stages in the process of analysis of which we have spoken are all necessary; and in so far as any one re tod A 48 Study of Ecclesiastical History of them is neglected the work will be marred. But in effect they are not usually carried out separately, The student who has learned to realise the neces- sity of each process separately soon learns to carry them out concurrently; just as in throwing a stone at a mark the operations of seeing the object, mentally locating it, directing the aim towards it, and discharging the stone, are per- formed all at once; the brain and the eye and the arm performing in a moment, and automa- tically, the processes which they at first performed as the outcome of distinct acts of volition, but have at length, as the result of practice, “ learned by heart.” The untrained student, of course, has never received this education, but he is in a worse plight in that he has never learned to differen- tiate the elements of the process at all, and is likely to reason as a woman throws (or used to throw), all at sea and anyhow. And herein lies the danger: the danger, namely, of mixing the processes in a kind of confused rule of thumb. It is not safe to combine the search for docu- ments with the criticism of documents, to confuse the analysis of the evidence with reasoning about the evidence. Nothing is more common, nothing can be more harmful. If this be done, neither process will be thorough. The mind is admirably adapted for reasoning, admirably adapted for measuring; but its operations are essentially unitary; and the result can only be muddy, confused, and delusive if we endeavour Historical Method—I 49 to mix processes such as these. It is difficult or impossible for one who is dominated by a foregone conclusion as to their genuineness or the reverse to study the documents with an open mind; it is difficult or impossible for one who is the slave of a theory to judge honestly of the value of the evidence. The man who writes “history with a purpose,” who starts with the object of white- washing somebody or proving some theory of his own (a besetting sin of the German writer of dissertations), frequently does much harm. Of course, looking for evidence of one particular kind, he has no difficulty in finding it and so making out a case for himself; but he usually ends by darken- ing counsel and throwing dust in the eyes of the general public. Work of this kind is common enough, and it is unfortunately especially common in ecclesiastical history. But wherever it may be, it is bad. Certainly the great historians who have reversed the judgement of scholars and supplied the clue to what was previously dark and confused did not start in ways such as these. But in truth the danger is not only one that besets the theorist, or the writer of “history with a purpose.” It besets every student; for directly we begin to study the facts the mind recognises in them something akin to itself, and endeavours to co-ordinate them and to explain their mutual relations. It is right and natural that this should be so. But it is important that we should lead and not merely follow; that we D 50 Study of Ecclesiastical History should reason out every question that arises and not allow ourselves to become merely the uncon- scious slaves of theories which have grown up whilst we slept, and which we have never really faced or pondered. And it is the more important that we should recognise that this danger is always present, and therefore be constantly alive to the necessity of keeping distinct from one another the mental processes which we have to carry out. The following works may be consulted on the subject of this chapter, in addition to that of Langlois and Seignobos, and that of Bernheim, already referred to: A. Tardif, Notions élémentaires de critique historique, Paris, 1883. C. de Smedt, Principes de la critique historique, Liége and Paris, 1883. J. G. Droysen, Grundriss der Historik, Berlin, 1888. J. von Pflugk-Harttung, Geschichtsbetrachtungen, Gotha, 1890. C. V. Langlois, Manuels de Bibliographie historique, Paris, 1896 f. P. Lacombe, Introduction a L histoire littéraire, Paris, 1898. CHAPTER IV HISTORICAL METHOD (continued) Tue Work or SyNTHEsIS We have seen that the completed process of analysis leaves the student of history with a body of disjointed and disconnected facts: living facts indeed, and having no meaning except in relation with one another, but yet isolated and violently torn out of relation with one another. These will form the material for the second great divi- sion of his work, that of Synthesis. He has to draw together this digested and critically appraised material, to reintegrate it with the help of the insight which he has acquired in the process of analysing it, and to reconstruct out of the chaotic elements before him a narrative of events which shall be absolutely faithful to the evidence and yet not merely jejune and skeleton-like. The aim which he has in view is to make this narrative as real and as living as if the events had actually taken place before his eyes. Now it is plain that this aim is one which can only be fulfilled with great difficulty, and very imperfectly. The evidence is often very scanty ; 61 Oe oe 52 Study of Ecclesiastical History and, at the best, the details which contemporary writers thought worthy of mention were often not at all such as we should have wished them to preserve for us. Moreover, the element of hard fact has often dwindled not a little under the test of careful criticism; so that when every available scrap of information has been duly utilised there will still remain many a hiatus which cannot be filled, many an important question the answer to which must still remain doubtful. What, then, is the work of the student of history under cir- cumstances such as these ?+ I To begin with, in order to describe things as if they had actually taken place before his eyes, he must endeavour to see the events which his facts represent. This, of course, is a purely subjective process ; he cannot actually reconstruct that which has passed away or see with his eyes that which has no objective reality; he can only form a mental picture. And even this is only possible on the assumption, which is “ the postulate of all the documentary sciences,”” that the features of the life of the past resembled in their essential char- acter the features of the life of his own day, upon which his own mental concepts are based. Other- 1See Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., book iii, upon which the sections which follow are largely based. 2 Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., p. 220. Historical Method—Il1 58 wise, of course, he can form no trustworthy idea of them at all, and all his documents are reduced to irrational and meaningless chaos. Plainly, the difficulties in the way of such a process as this are very great, and so are the chances of error. In a subjective process (as this is) much must of necessity depend upon the per- sonality of the student; and, whatever it be, he cannot hope to see things without some natural bias and some error of perspective. Even when he is most on his guard against allowing his judgement to be warped by mere theorising, he is hardly likely to be quite successful. And if he is, there still remains his own personal equation. It is a matter of common knowledge that in an astronomical observatory each worker has his own particular kind of liability to error in his observa- tions, which remains more or less constant with him, just as some people are colour-blind, some are deaf, some are devoid of the sense of smell, and soon. So again, we know in advance that if a number of persons are looking at a particular landscape or a picture, some of them will be struck with one feature and some with another; and that these personal predilections will answer to the character and the capacities of the par- ticular observers. In like manner some persons are liable, both constitutionally and by education, to disregard some kinds of evidence, or to over- look certain aspects of life, or to ignore particular classes of facts. Accordingly, in the efforts which al Was es he 54 Study of Ecclesiastical History he makes to reconstruct the life of the past the observer is morally certain to fail in some respects. There are, however, two safeguards: (a) In the first place, as we have already noticed, the his- torical student’s work does not stand alone, but is built up upon that of the historical students of the past, and organically united with it. This solidarity of historical work may be, and is,.a source of a certain amount of weakness in one direction, in that a student cannot break away from the atmosphere which surrounds him: he is tied by the limitations of his predecessors, and is liable to perpetuate their mistakes. But it is immeasurably greater as a source of strength. For this picturing of the past by the student has already been prepared for to a very great extent by the work of his predecessors: the main lines have been laid down, and many of the details have been filled in. And not only so: the same thing has been done for the events which went before and those which follow after; so that there exists already what we may compare not merely to an instantaneous photograph of the events which he has to study, but to a picture which shows them in their living consecutiveness. He must still see all this for himself, but not without guidance. (0) And in the second place, although this part of the work is subjective, it need not be either arbitrary or irrational. No doubt the student must form a mental picture, the details of which are coloured by his own concep- Historical Method—lI 55 tions and in the long run by his own experience. But he will not forget that the picture itself ought to be based ultimately upon the facts and these alone, and that he must test it again and again by them, remembering that they are its only fixed points, and that it depends upon them for its essential character. II Having endeavoured, then, to see the facts as a whole as clearly as possible, the student will now set to work to examine them systematically, just as the student of zoology enters upon a system- atic examination of a newly- discovered organism, or as an astronomer sets to work to observe the path of a new comet that “swims within his ken.” Until this has been done, indeed, it cannot be said that he has really seen the facts as a whole at all. ‘That this is so is a matter of daily experi- ence. We think that we quite understand some question which is engaging popular attention, and find indeed that we can talk about it quite in- telligently, even eloquently, in a general com- pany; but in the presence of those who really know we discover that our readiness and our complacency alike desert us, and we “ begin with shame to take the lowest room.” We imagine that we have thoroughly mastered some subject that we are engaged in studying, but are surprised to find, when we endeavour to put down our impressions in writing (and still more when we a Be Bas ae Te % a 56 Study of Ecclesiastical History endeavour to teach it to others) that our view was in reality very superficial, and that we had never really taken in the details at all. We gaze upon a picture, and are greatly interested in it, only to find when we endeavour to describe it afterwards that we are totally unable to answer many of the questions which even a sympathetic listener asks us. And this last fact suggests the only way in which such an examination can ever be made systematic and thorough. ‘The student must not be content with a “bird’s-eye view,” but must make a detailed survey. He must go over the whole ground and ask himself more or less consciously (and here as elsewhere, the more con- ' sciously the better, because the chances of error and oversight are less) a series of questions touch- ing every part of it. Thus he will learn what he knows, and learn to know it thoroughly; thus too, which is even more important, he will learn his own ignorance, the consciousness of which is the first stepping-stone to further knowledge. But if such a series of questions has to be asked, and if they had better be asked explicitly, it is plain that they ought to be arranged upon some system. A catechism which is arranged on no plan is hardly likely to be exhaustive; it may not improbably be tautological; it is nearly certain to be unintelligible. In like manner, unless these questions are methodically stated, it is probable that they will not cover all parts Historical Method—lIlI 57 of the ground, and certain that they will fail to do so in the easiest and most satisfactory way. What the basis of this order should be is a very difficult question to answer. Attempts have indeed been made to draw up schemes for the grouping of historical facts;+ but none of them can be pronounced wholly satisfactory, and per- haps all that we can say is that such a scheme should correspond with the subject-matter as closely as possible, and that there should be a certain amount of cross-division, so that each aspect may be as far as possible represented. In describing the pictured representation of some scene, for instance, we may consider (apart from the execution of the picture itself) the subject as a whole, the grouping of the parts, the general scheme of colour, the presentation of character, &c., and then proceed to the consideration of the details one by one. In the same way, here the questions may cover the whole ground chrono- logically, geographically, as well as from the points of view of economics, religion, politics, social life, and so on. In any case, the system, as we have said, must be the outcome of the mind which is responsible for the whole plan, and must be relative to that plan. We cannot form one single theoretical category which will comprehend all the facts of experience. 1 E.g., by Lacombe, op. cit., chap. vi; and by Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., book iii. chap. 2. 58 Study of Ecclesiastical History Ill The process of systematic arrangement and examination of the facts will have made it more abundantly clear that the facts which have sur- vived are very unequally distributed, and that there are large gaps in the student’s knowledge. The next thing to be done, therefore, is to see whether it is possible to fill in any of these gaps by reasoning from facts which are already known. Plainly, there are many cases in which it is quite possible to do so. (a) If we look at a portrait which is torn or otherwise damaged, it is often possible to infer what should be there by what is actually present. If, for instance, the portrait is defective where the arm should be, we can infer its existence from the existence of the shoulder and the hand; if the canvas is torn where the eye should be, we may infer from the existence of the rest of the features that there was something of the nature of an eye there, but not necessarily that it was not blinded, or that it was of a particular colour. In like manner it is often possible to some extent to supply a hiatus in a document, or even the absence of any record of particular facts, by inference from the facts that are recorded: the very existence of these involves the existence of more. The process, of course, needs to be carried out with great care. It is not justifiable, for instance, to base more upon Historical Method—Il 59 the indications than they of necessity involve. Nor is it justifiable to mix up inference with any other process; for instance, to make use of an inference from the absence of evidence in order to rehabilitate some theory which has already been set aside on adequate grounds. But within its own limits, historical inference is a perfectly legitimate and very valuable process. (6) More important still, as a means of supply- ing the lost facts of the past, and especially as a means of reconstructing the social order and recovering the institutions of former days, are the comparative method and the method of survivals. To deal with these at all adequately would re- quire a volume instead of a short paragraph. But briefly, their nature is as follows. The modern sciences of anthropology and ethnology have set before us in an entirely new light the widespread prevalence of social habits, customs, and institutions, and have enabled us to infer their former prevalence, even where they have now ceased to exist, by the vestiges which still remain. They set before us, for instance, the human sacri- fices still remaining in many parts of the world, the substitution in some regions of an animal for the man at the last moment, or the offering of a clay figure of a man together with something in the nature of a ransom, and so on, down to the offering of the last sheaf of a field at harvest in Cornwall and elsewhere, with rites which seem to point clearly to its being a kind of ransom for > Pe) rs 60 Study of Ecclesiastical History m the man.! The inference is clear: wherever we can trace any of these survivals, we are on the track of human sacrifices: either the ancestors of those amongst whom they survive used human sacrifices, or they have adopted the practices of those who did. Now this process, which is itself “historical” in character, may obviously be used in connection with historical evidence more fitly than with anything else; and it has been used with the greatest success. By its means, for instance, the range in early days of the system known as “the patriarchal family” has been traced ; the characteristic features of early Celtic religion have been restored at any rate in some measure. By its means we are daily getting more light on such subjects as the early history of the Hebrew people, the growth of the Christian ministry, the development of the disciplinary system of the Church, the crystallisation of the faith into doctrine, and so on; in fact it seems to be held by some that the comparative method and the method of survivals are the most valuable instruments that history possesses. ‘This is doubt- less an exaggeration. ‘The Muse of History, if the expression may be allowed, does not keep all her eggs in one basket, and it does not follow that a particular method will continue to be specially productive in the future because it happens to be so to-day. It is undoubtedly 1 See an article by 8. Baring-Gould on “Crying a Neck” in the Cornish Magazine, vol. i. p. 152. Mistorical Method—I1 61 true, however, that no method has been more fruit- ful in recent years; and the names of Schrader, Fustel de Coulanges, Maine, and Robertson Smith, not to speak of those of many more still living, must always stand out not only as the names of pioneers, but of historians who have left solid and substantial work behind them which will not soon need to be done over again. (c) If then it is possible to recover lost facts and to fill up gaps by means of reasoning on the basis of the facts which have already been dis- covered, is it possible to recover them also by the processes of the imagination, to eke out know- ledge with conjecture? ‘The answer to the question will depend upon the precise meaning which is given to the word. On the one hand, it has been said that conjecture is “the most delicate and at the same time the most powerful and the most indispensable instrument in the exploration of the domain of the historical sciences”; on the other hand, it has been said that mere conjecture has no place in the work of historical research. We feel that a difference of terminology must underlie so startling a disparity ; and such is the case. If by conjecture is under- stood the process by which the student tests his facts, mentally suggesting first one hypothesis and then another for the solution of a difficult point on which the evidence is conflicting, until he finds the explanation which best satisfies the 1 CO, de Smedt, Principes de la critique historique, p. 238. 62 Study of Ecclesiastical History whole of the conditions, there can be no question that it is an absolutely indispensable part of the work of the student in history, just as it is of the work of every other scientific student.! It is, in fact, not so much a means to which he has re- course under particular circumstances of difficulty as the very thing that he is doing continually. His hypotheses may not always prove satisfactory : indeed, the more brilliant they are the more likely it is that some at any rate will be overthrown some day; but even where his conclusions are wrong his methods will be found suggestive.” If, however, by conjecture is meant mere guess-work, which is put forward in the place of solid fact and sound inference, then indeed it certainly has no place in historical study. Few things have done more harm, both in the way of raising false issues and of hiding the truth, than this substitu- tion of caprice for sound study.® IV The results have now been ascertained, as com- pletely as it is possible to ascertain them. One other thing yet remains: they must be collected and 1 There is a striking book on this subject by M. Ernest Naville, La logique de Vhypothése, Paris, 1880. 2 Amongst the most distinguished instances in our own day may be mentioned Professor A. Harnack and Professor W. M. Ramsay. 3 Such as, in the opinion of most English scholars, is to be found in the work of Dr Cheyne in the Encyclopaedia Biblica, Historical Method—Il 63 reduced to a systematic form, as one organic whole. The facts must be expressed in formulas or general statements; they must be interpreted in terms which are universal; they must be brought into relation with other facts. If this is not done, the process remains incomplete. We may have the material for history, but not history itself. ‘There is a world of difference between the two. It is the difference between Epiphanius and Eusebius, between Strype’s Memorials and Dixon’s History of the Reformation, between Aubrey’s Collections and Walton’s Lives. A little thought will show how frequently this last step is left unfinished ; how many there are who seem to be able to produce materials for history but not to write history. Nor is it only a question of the possession and the utilisation of a good literary style. Many who have this cannot write history, and many who have it not can yet do so; for from this point of view, as we have said already, style is nothing but the vehicle for the presenta- tion of the work to the world after that work is in effect complete. What is really needed is that the facts should be digested and systematised until they have their right perspective and their right proportion: a perspective and proportion which will depend indeed upon the point of view, but which, when this is once taken up, have a real existence. Then they must be presented in such a way as to form one whole with a unity of its own, just as the elements of a landscape combine 64 Study of Ecclesiastical History to form one whole, or as the elements of a picture ought to combine to form one whole. ¥ Such then are the chief elements of the work of synthesis in history. In practice these too, like the processes of analysis, are to a large extent per- formed together; doubtless with modification in particular cases, for genius counts for more than method. After all, the historian, like the poet and the teacher, is born, not made; and although method can do much for him, it can only enable him to do in regular and thought-out ways what he already does naturally and spontaneously. But whatever he may be, the outcome of his work will probably be disappointing to himself, for it is likely to be in effect very different from the ideal which he had set before himself; as is only natural if its essential character be borne in mind. There are, however, certain dangers which beset this part of his work which can be in a measure guarded against by being kept in view. We will only speak of two of them, as we have done in the case of the process of analysis. (a) The first of these is the undisciplined use of the imaginative and intuitive faculties. It is true that these have their place, and a most important one, in the synthetic processes in history ; no good work, indeed, can be done without them. If it be the case that a man of great sympathy, or Historical Method—II 65 special insight into character, is more likely to foresee and to understand the conduct of other men than one who has not these gifts, it follows that he is likely to succeed in historical investiga- tions. Since history has to do with the whole of human life, it follows that all the gifts which serve to the interpretation of life must also have their place in historical research. But in the one case as in the other they must be kept carefully under control. So alone can they ever have their perfect work: apart from this they are sure to lead to mere unprofitable speculation or fanciful theorising. It would not be hard to mention many historical works which are vitiated by faults of this kind; but it may suffice to speak of Mr F. C. Conybeare’s edition of the Paulician manual called The Key of Truth, in which the editor has so mixed up his own somewhat extravagant theories of the life of the early Church with his account of the Paulicians and his interpretation of the document that the book is robbed of no small part of its value. (6) Another danger which is hardly, if at all, less serious is that of approaching the facts in the light of deliberate a priori assumptions, and in- terpreting them in accordance with these.2 Such a process is, from a historical point of view, wholly unjustifiable, We have, of course, every right to 1 London, 1898. 2 The prevalence of this practice has doubtless given rise to the cynical definition of history as “his story.” E a Per ae, & 66 Study of Ecclesiastical History take for granted, in the interpretation of the history of a period, any ideas or theories which we have already found, by an examination of the evidence, to have prevailed then: to do so is merely to make use of a new fact which we have discovered. But we have no right whatever con- sciously to introduce ideas of our own which we assume to have prevailed then, or to force the facts into harmony with presuppositions which we ourselves have consciously taken up. It is, of course, perfectly true that reasoning on the basis of facts, or indeed the actual investiga- tion of facts, can never be a purely neutral and colourless process, and that “the cogency of evidence—nay, its whole value, and even mean- ing—depends absolutely on the mental convictions with which we approach it.”? We can only see what we have eyes to see. But it does not follow that we may wear blinkers or a veil, or that, even if the landscape be ruddy with fire, we shall see it any the better for putting on fire-coloured glasses. It does not follow that we may interpret the facts in the light of conscious prepossessions because we know that we cannot escape from unconscious pre- possessions ; even if we believe that our preposses- sions are true, we have thereby so far incapacitated ourselves from testing them fairly, or from in- terpreting fairly the facts which, ex hypothesi, are inseparably knit up with them if they are true. Still less does it follow that, knowing that our 1 See Illingworth, Reason and Revelation, chaps iv and y. 2R. C. Moberly, Ministerial Priesthood, London, 1897, p. x Mistorical Method—Il 67 prepossessions will influence our conclusions, we are at liberty to hold fast to certain preposses- sions because we wish to be able to come to certain conclusions. To do this is nothing but to take up the position of the old lady who said, “Tm always open to conviction, but I'd like to see the man who can convince me !” Such a state of things is altogether lamentable. It may be in a measure inevitable, for instance, but it is none the less deplorable, that when the very same facts are studied by various students, Anglican, Roman Catholic, and Nonconformist, their conclusions should so frequently be, as it were, foregone conclusions, the outcome of a position which is already taken for granted. A contention which justifies such a state of things as this, and makes it quite inevitable, stands self-condemned. The fact is that fairness and impartiality of mind do not come by nature; they must be sought. It is no doubt true that we cannot divest ourselves of all our prejudices when we endeavour to do so, and that we may even be laying ourselves open to fresh prejudices ; never- theless, we are more likely to be impartial so. There is such a thing as the judicial habit of mind, which endeavours to set aside for the time being all that is not immediately necessary for the purpose in hand, even though it realises that this is a process of self-limitation; and the his- torical student has need to cultivate it more than most men. It is a process which brings its own 68 Study of Ecclesiastical History reward. “Treat the Bible,” it has been said, “like any other book, and you will find that no other book is like it.” The same thing is true of the study of Church history or any other history. Let the student take off his coloured glasses, and he will see the colours in the landscape as he never saw them before. Let him no longer seek for a deus ex machina at every step, and he will see the hand of God in all history as otherwise he never can. And then he will be able to make use of his conclusions with a new confidence. Having done his historical work, and reached his results on the basis of the evidence, he will now be justified in taking them for granted, and making use of them for the purposes of life, and explaining their bearing upon all the other facts within his cognisance. But even now he will not be justified in using theological or philosophical arguments of this kind in order to rehabilitate any theory of the facts which has already been set aside on his- torical grounds. The tendency which is here described is to be found in very many modern books, the most remarkable from several points of view being one which bears the dear and great name of one who is no longer with us. The examination of the origin of the Christian ministry in the late Robert Campbell Moberly’s Ministerial Priesthood, and many of his criticisms of the work of other scholars, are an illustration of what is referred to. The method is almost wholly a priori; and useful Historical Method—II 69 as the book may be in other ways, it presents a con- spicuous example of the way in which historical work is not to be done.” But there are plenty of books which have this same defect with none of the compensating virtues. Much modern apolo- getical literature is marred by it; and its effects are to be seen in a great deal that is said and written about the Bible. We should be prepared to find it,’ for instance, in a book bearing such a title as Lines of Defence of the Biblical Revelation. Wherever it is to be found, it should make us watchful. We need to be on our guard against that temper of which Frederick Denison Maurice has spoken in a most remarkable lecture on Tertullian,* that temper which assumes to be the champion and protector of the Gospel, instead of its disciple and servant. “I believe,” Maurice goes on, “that his [method] was far more fatal to that which he defended than to that which he opposed, . . . I often feel tempted to wish 1In view of what I have said, I ought to express my deep sense of the value of Dr Moberly’s theological work. For instance, I would venture respectfully to endorse most of what Dr Sanday has said of it in his noble tribute to his friend’s memory in the Journal of Theological Studies for July 1903 (vol. iv. pp. 481-499). 2 On this point I agree with my friend Canon Henson’s criti- cism in Godly Union and Concord, London, 1902, pp. xxviii ff. ; though, as I have said elsewhere (e.g. in a paper on “ The Relations between the Church and Nonconformity,” read before the Church Congress at Northampton in 1902), I do not agree with his position in other ways. 3 have not, however, examined the book in question. *In his Lectures on the Ecclesiastical History of the First and Second Centuries, London, 1854, 70 Study of Ecclesiastical History that it had been used against the Gospel: then one would have been better able to do it greater justice.” VI So much for the methods of historical research. But in history as in other things an ounce of practice is worth a pound of theory. The pro- cesses which are here described will be better understood by the student when he has watched them in operation; they will be still better understood when he has endeavoured to put them into practice for himself. As regards putting them into practice, it is done to some small extent by every intelligent reader of history ; but it can only be fully tested by a man who is prepared to give no small part of his time to historical study, and who will not stint labour and trouble. As regards watching them in oper- ation, it is well worth while to take up and read some good historical work, with the definite object of scrutinising its method as closely as may be. It would be easy to mention others, but such a book as one of the following would very well serve this particular purpose: W. Bright, Notes on the Canons, Oxford, 1882 (and later editions) ; E. A. Freeman, History of the Cathedral Church of Wells, London, 1870; N. D. Fustel de Cou- langes, Recherches sur quelques problémes (histoire, Paris, 1885; J. R. Green, The Conquest of Eng- land, London, 1883; H. M. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, Cambridge, 1882; G. Hanotaux, Mistorical Method—I1 a | Histoire de Richelieu, Paris, 1893, etc.; J. Havet, Questions mérovingiennes, Paris, 1896; C. Hoefler, Pabst Adrian VI, Vienna, 1880; M. Philippson, Kardinal Granvella, Berlin, 1895; W. Sichel, Bolingbroke and His Times, London, 1902 ; or W. Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religion of the Semites, London, 1894. In a rather more popular style, T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, 8 vols, Oxford, 1880-1899, is excellent for the purpose. In addition to the books already mentioned, the following may be consulted on the subject of this chapter : Sir H. J. S. Maine, Ancient Lan, London, many editions. R. Flint, Historical Philosophy in France, &c., 1893. (The first volume of his History of the Philo- sophy of History, which is all that has yet appeared. ) CHAPTER V HOW TO STUDY ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Ir may perhaps be thought that we have dwelt upon these historical processes at inordinate length, and that much of what we have said only has reference to the specialist in history, and does not directly concern the general reader. But the fact is that, just as M. Jourdain had spoken prose all his life without being aware of it, and just as every person who thinks and talks is making use, either accurately or inaccurately, of logical pro- cesses, so too (as we have indicated already) every reader of history is making use in some measure, or ought to be, of the very methods by which the historian obtains his results. In one sense, rela- tively to historical science, he is not doing original work ; but in another sense, relatively to his own knowledge, he is. The processes are in effect the same. His reading is likely to be all the more useful if he has some idea of what those processes are; and this is the more necessary in the case of the study of ecclesiastical history, which is sometimes supposed to have canons and methods peculiarly its own. They are most characteristically seen at the centre and not at the cironentraney in the work How to Study Ecclesiastical History 73 of the professed student rather than in that of the general reader; and it is for this reason that we have dealt with them in detail there. Butin their essential character they are one and the same. Still, the fact must not be forgotten that although the end which the historian has in view is truth itself and not mere utility, it is neverthe- less he who exists for the sake of the reader of history and not vice versa. 'The less numerous body of necessity ministers to the more numerous, the professed student to the professed teachers, the professed teachers to the learners; and it is upon the class of teachers rather than upon that of students that the diffusion of the truth, as con- trasted with its discovery, in the long run depends. It is with these also that we are more particularly concerned ; and although the underlying principle of their work as students is the same as that of the work of the historian, the practical applica- tion is very different. It is to this practical appli- cation that we now turn, and especially as it concerns the student of ecclesiastical history. If much of what is here said should seem obvious, on consideration it will be found to be so only in the same sense in which many of the other lessons which we most need to learn may be called obvious. I There are two possible ways of setting to work on the study of ecclesiastical history. On the one 74 Study of Ecclesiastical History hand, the student might make it his endeavour to get into his head a general idea of the history of the Christian Church from its beginning to the present day, and then gradually deepen and widen his knowledge, passing by degrees to the detailed investigation of particular subjects. He might, for instance, begin with a short text-book, and then go on to a longer one, and then to one of the general Church histories, and then to the histories of special periods, to the monographs on particular points, and soon. Or he might begin at exactly the opposite end. He might take, for example, some well-written biography of a great man, or some clear and straightforward history of an important crisis or interesting period, and use this as a starting point, deepening his knowledge | as he goes on, and stretching out from this as a centre on both hands, seeking light from the events that went before and that followed after, and bringing to them the reflected light from his own period. In a word, he might either work from the general to the particular, or from the particular to the general. Now which of these is the better way of setting to work? Perhaps our first impulse might be to say that the former is the better way; and certainly it is that which most would-be students incline to adopt. Nevertheless, it seems clear that this is not really the most natural order of procedure, nor is it the best. The “experimental method” which we have used since we were babes un- How to Study Ecclesiastical History 75 doubtedly began with the investigation of details ; and it would be a very surprising thing if, in such a science as history, the best method of study were one that proceeded from generals to par- ticulars. We cannot do anything without having a definite base; we cannot exert any power with- out a fulcrum; we cannot even draw a straight line without starting from a point. Again, even if it were desirable in other ways to attempt it, it would not really be possible to obtain a general view of Church history, so as to work by the deductive method ; for we must never forget that the history of the Church is not finished. And once more, on the practical side, such a method would be doomed to failure by its dulness; for in history as in life, we cannot get away from the details without losing much of our interest and much of our grasp of truth. From every point of view, then, the right method of study is that which begins by taking some definite subject for investigation.! II In other words, the student should begin by finding some subject for special study; let him take to himself a “hobby ” and treat it seriously. In one way it does not greatly matter what it is; for it can be changed later on should it prove 1 I assume, of course, such a general knowledge as will enable the student to understand the main bearing of his facts. Most churchmen have this; it may at any rate be taken for granted in the case of the clergy. 76 Study of Ecclesiastical History uncongenial, or it may itself lead on to some- thing more congenial. Let it then be something suggested by his previous reading, or by his tastes, or by his work, or by the place in which he lives, or the like. Or he may with advantage seek the advice of a friend. Anything that he really studies is sure to prove worthy of study; for the real way to find any subject in God’s world inter- esting is to take an interest init. It will form a kind of centre for his reading and his thoughts; for he is sure to find his thoughts turning towards it refreshingly. He will be impelled to read around it and in illustration of it. And he will presently learn in a very wonderful way that, whatever it may be, it has points of contact with all his studies, and that it is continually illustrat- ing and being illustrated by the events of his daily work ; just as we find that the offices of the Church always seem to fit in with the changes and chances of our lives, whatever those changes and chances may be. Nor will it only invest his whole intellectual life with a new meaning; it will itself be a source of unceasing interest and enrichment. He may not indeed attain to the level of Freeman’s “ideal man,” who knows “something about everything and everything about something,” but before long he will dis- cover that the humblest student who labours on at one particular piece of work may outstrip even the historical expert who has not made it a special subject of study; and that so he may be of very How to Study Ecclesiastical History 77 real service both to other scholars and to the cause of sound learning. And he will find that this method of study has another advantage. The ordinary parish priest is apt to say that he has no time to read. Such a state of things would be grievous indeed ; for unless there be time to pray and to study, all else must go wrong; and the time which is snatched from reading and prayer is simply squandered. But it is not quite true that he has no time to read. The parish priest has a good deal of time on his hands, but it is mostly broken up into very short periods, or else it comes when he is very tired; and he is always liable to be interrupted. Under these circum- stances it is very hard indeed to get much reading done, unless there is some definite object in view. No man can start upon some new work when he is tired out; no man can do much at it in odd periods of five minutes. But with such a “hobby” as has been described, things are different. It is possible to follow up a scent even when we are tired out; it is possible to work at a subject in which we are keenly interested even for odd periods of five minutes. Some of John Richard Green’s best historical work was done when he was curate-in-charge of an East End parish ; and there are those yet living there who can tell us that he in no way neglected the duties 1 See the Letters of J. R. Green, edited by Sir Leslie Stephen (London, 1901). 78 Study of Ecclesiastical History of his charge. So also, much of the fifth volume of Bishop Creighton’s History of the Papacy was written in odd periods of a few minutes, in the intervals between appointments, or as he travelled about his diocese. lil Having found such a subject for special study, the student will endeavour to “ make it his own.” He will study it in general and in detail, not only in its strictly ecclesiastical aspect, but as broadly as he can; he will try to look at it from the point of view of those who were concerned in it, and not only to see their actions but to enter into their motives. He will ask himself questions which are not to be found in the ordinary books, and endeavour to ascertain the answers. He will try to acquire a kind of personal acquaintance (leading on to an intimate friendship if it may so be!) with the great men who are connected with it, to read what they have written, and to under- stand what they are aiming at even where he does not approve of their action. He will also proceed to read round it on every side, as we have said, tracing the steps which led up to every great event and following it out in its results, seeking illustrations from other sources and bringing to bear upon his own subject all the light which he 1 Perhaps no better illustration could be given of what is meant than the loving friendship for his characters which is manifested in the late William Bright’s Lessons from the Lives of Three Great Fathers, second edition, London, 1891. How to Study Ecclesiastical History 79 can derive from them. If he endeavours to do this faithfully and wisely, even though it be at first on a very moderate scale, he will soon find that his other studies have acquired an entirely new interest for him, and that he must needs read outside the special subject not only for its own sake but because of this new interest that he takes in them. IV The student who has formed such a centre of interest as this will need to exercise upon it all the powers of his mind and spirit. It is not enough to be brought into contact with new material; he must assimilate it and “make it his own.” It is not enough to read ; he must “ mark, learn, and inwardly digest.” The mere passive reception of impressions is not thinking ; the mind must work upon the material placed before it, or what has been done is not different in kind from what is done by a phonograph when it receives and re- cords; in one respect it is even less, for the phonograph does not let slip what it has once recorded. It is of course quite impossible to lay down any mechanical rules as to thinking: and the only way to think is—to think. But there are several things which may help the man who wishes really to master his subject ; in particular, to write, and to communicate his knowledge to others. By writing, as some of us have learned in - 80 Study of Ecclesiastical History the writing of sermons, we begin to realise for the first time what gaps there were in our knowledge of a subject, how inconsecutive it was, how many of the stages in our argument which seemed satis- factory enough were in reality illogical. The very fact of putting things into writing makes them clearer and more definite than they previously were, and at the same time, by removing a strain from it, sets the memory free for further work. Nor is the advantage of communicating our knowledge less great; certainly to ourselves, per- haps also to others. The student who has found such an interest as that which we have spoken of ought never to be at a loss for a subject for an occasional lecture to his people ; and this will be a valuable help in his own studies. We love to speak of that which interests us, and our concep- tions undoubtedly become clearer in the effort to make things clear to others. The college tutor who once said with regard to some particular sub- ject of study, “I know nothing about that; I _ haven't even lectured on it,” was not only direct- ing an obvious satire against the light-hearted way in which college lectures are sometimes under- taken, but was also enunciating a very profound truth. Vv But if the delivery of lectures upon any subject has a very obvious educational value for the lecturer as well as for the hearers, it also lays him How to Study Ecclesiastical History 81 open to certain dangers, and those of a kind which particularly beset the parish priest at all times. He will be tempted to be perpetually trying “to point a moral and adorn a tale”; and he will be tempted to read in order to do so. The former of these is dangerous, the latter is fatal. (a) There is no need to be perpetually drawing conclusions. Even from the point of view of effect it is a mis- take, for it is most trying to the hearers. The true art of the teacher is to present the facts so clearly, and withal so convincingly, that the hearers think that the conclusions which they in- evitably draw from them are really their own. But it is bad in another way; for the habit of watching for cheap and obvious “morals” is like that of “seeking for a sign,” or being on the watch for occasional and exceptional interpositions of God’s providence. It both biases our ordinary judgement and incapacitates us for seeing the broader and deeper signs of God’s over-ruling guidance of this world and His true immanence in it. (6) The other danger, that of reading with a view to being able to point a moral, is far worse, for it is contrary to the very nature of historical study. We cannot read fairly with some ulterior purpose in our minds, and the conclusions which we arrive at from such premisses are not likely to be either fair or trustworthy. It is of course quite true that we must try to correlate our facts with other facts, to see them in the light of our previous knowledge, and to understand their F 82 Study of Ecclesiastical History bearing upon the life of the Church and the questions of the day. But this is a process which should follow our study of history and not accom- pany it. ‘l'o mix them is to mar both; to take up the position of a mere partisan is to ower the whole level of our work.? VI From what has been said, it is clear that even a slight excursion in the field of ecclesiastical history may easily involve a very considerable amount of reading, extending over a very wide range. This is inevitable and unavoidable: from the very nature of his work the student of history has to make use of more books than almost any other student. It sometimes happens, in con- sequence, that the beginner is discouraged by finding that the tax upon his memory is likely to become greater than it can well bear. But he need not be discouraged. ‘The memory improves through proper use; and, which is more im- portant, the student will learn in time not to over- burden it. For it is easy to be under an entire misapprehension as to the proper function of the memory in historical reading. It is impossible to remember any but a very small part of what we read. It would probably be undesirable to re- 1 Compare what is said above of a priori reasoning and “history with a purpose” (pp. 49, 65). 2 A well-known historical scholar, whose memory is the marvel of all who know him, once asked me what pro- How to Study Ecclesiastical History 83 member it all even if it were possible, for the multiplicity of detail would only render impos- sible any intelligent assimilation of what was read. Moreover, it is not that which is grasped by the memory and retained, but that which sinks into our minds and dies, that which we seem to have forgotten, which really becomes part of our- selves, goes to the building up of character, and “brings forth much fruit.” Even in the special processes of history this is not less true than elsewhere; the judgement works unconsciously, and the mind gradually sees its way to a con- clusion, on the basis not so much of the single facts which stand out clearly and are remembered as of the whole impression which has been pro- duced by the evidence. But the fact is that the proper action of the memory is not so much a process of compression and preservation as one of selection. We may even reduce it to an epigrammatic form and say that the art of remembering is in reality the art of forgetting ; ze. of separating off the important facts from the unimportant, storing the former and rejecting the latter ; or better still, of putting aside what is trivial in order that what is im- portant may stand out in its proper size and so be retained. This, of course, is not all. The memory may undoubtedly be trained, by careful portion of the facts which we read are remembered. I guessed about two per cent.; to which he replied that he thought it was probably nearer one two-hundredth part! 84 Study of Ecclesiastical History and kindly practice, to hold a larger number of single facts than it otherwise could have done; and a wise man will endeavour thus to train his memory, by whatever precise method experience may commend to him, taking particular care, however, not to overstrain it, and especially in times of fatigue. Nevertheless, even at the best the number of facts that the memory can retain must be limited, though it may not be calculable. Here, then, the judgement must come to its aid. The important thing is to reject merely “isolated facts,” i.e. those facts upon which little else depends, and to retain the great “key facts,” i.e. those which are central and vital, and from which, by a process of conscious or unconscious reasoning, we may be able to recover most of the rest. - VII It is not enough, however, that the memory should be used wisely and trained to do its work better: it can be relieved, to a very considerable extent, of what would otherwise overburden and so cripple it. 'The wise scholar will endeavour to register the results of his reading in common- place-books and note-books. The former, which will be used for entries and memoranda from his “occasional” reading, should be more or less carefully indexed ; the latter, which will deal with particular subjects, should be planned with all the foresight possible. Only one side of the page How to Study Ecclesiastical History 85 should be written on, the other being left clean for further references and notes; there should be a large margin, and the arrangement should be made as plain as it can possibly be by means of indentation, underlining, and the use of capitals. On the other hand, it is usually a mistake to copy out the contents of a note-book for the sake of clearness; for even the corrections and the in- evitable confusions of the original arrangement are sometimes a help to the memory. Carefully kept note-books of this description, whether of lectures heard or of reading done, soon become invaluable to the student; and in after years he will find them one of his most treasured posses- sions. Printed books can be bought again, or their place can be supplied by others of later date, but the note-books represent the reading of years, it may be; and nothing short of living those years over again could reproduce them. The taking of notes is a difficult art, and one that can only be acquired by practice. The fol- lowing points, however, should always be kept in view. (a) It is a process of selection: the note- book is not to be a substitute for the books, but a guide to them. (6) It looks to the future, not to the present: it is not enough to have down what would be intelligible at the present moment ; it should be as clear years hence as it is now, as clear when looked at from an entirely different 1 Dr William Bright’s great series of note-books, which he called his Silva, were a sight to behold. 86 Study of Ecclesiastical History standpoint as from that of to-day. (c) To this end, a note-book should have a plan of its own, and not be a mere skeleton outline of books read, a sort of commonplace-book in disguise. The important thing is not that it should contain a summary of every book read, but that it should represent the point of contact of the books with the mind of the reader, and the growing accumu- lation of his knowledge. And unless this be kept clearly in mind, the result to the reader is likely to be represented by Archbishop Benson’s words: “ His note-book is full, his mind is empty, and his self-content perfect.” + These, however, are not the only ways in which the student should endeavour to lighten the burden on his memory and to make his reading intelligent. He should put down in writing all that is capable of being reduced to the form of a table or conspectus. He should make rough maps for himself in order to represent whatever can be represented in this way: the results of a war of conquest, the nations supporting a pope and antipope respectively, the dominions of a king, the houses of a monastic order, the extent of an ecclesiastical province, or the like. He should insert cross-references in his books, taking care, however, only to do so when there is real reason for it. He may with advantage make a sort of manuscript index or list of contents at the end of 1 Vigilemus et Oremus, editio altera, London and Lincoln, 1881, How to Study Ecclesiastical History 87 the books that he reads.1 How far it is wise to underline passages in books, or to mark the margins, is perhaps another question; for such marking, made when the book was read from one point of view, is rarely useful, and indeed is apt to be a hindrance rather than a help when it is read again from another point of view. The practice is recommended by Archbishop Benson ;? but those who haveiseen the delicate pencil-marking in the margin of any of his books® will realise that what he speaks of is something very different from the thick black underlining in ink, making every page hideous, which one is sometimes unfor- tunate enough to find disfiguring the early parts of books which one has bought second-hand. It rarely goes further than the first chapter or two, and then ceases abruptly, the former owner having apparently given up the whole thing in disgust, as well he might ! Vill The more faithfully and impartially he sets about his work, the more likely is the student to experience a certain feeling of dissatisfaction with the results. It is not simply that he will be pain- fully conscious of the imperfections of his own work : every true worker will find that this is so, 1 Many of the books in Bishop Jacobson’s library at Chester, which he left for the clergy of the diocese, have such an index in the Bishop’s writing. 2 Vigilemus et Oremus, p. 20. 3 Or those of Bishop Westcott. 88 Study of Ecclesiastical History and it almost goes without saying. But the con- clusions to which his study of the evidence will lead him are likely to disappoint him. It is almost a commonplace to say that modern historical study whitewashes those whose reputations have been bad and blackens those who have been more fortunate. The student will find that this is so: that as he passes from the judgement of men, who always distribute praise and blame alike with a lavish hand, to the contemplation of the facts, the proportions dwindle and the perspective changes. Many a hero falls from his pedestal; many a villain turns out to be not quite so black as he was painted. ‘The geese are not quite such geese as they seemed, nor the swans such swans. Even the party|to which we belong, or the Church - of which we are members, would seem not always to have been above blame. Bishop Creighton has said of the time of the English Reformation that “it is difficult in such a time [of revolt and upheaval] to find heroes, to discover a man whom we can unreservedly admire.”1 The same thing might be said of other periods too. As the sober “light of common day” spreads over the landscape, the student’s first feeling is likely to be one of disappointment: the world of realities is not so beautiful as the world of dreams. As Bishop Stubbs has said, “He who devotes himself to the study of history may be a wiser, 1 Archbishop Laud Commemoration Book, London, 1895, p. 14. How to Study Ecclesiastical History 89 he will be a sadder man.” But although he may be a sadder, he should also be a gladder man; he will find that another great teacher, Joseph Barber Lightfoot, was right when he said that history is the best cordial for drooping spirits. For although the heroes of the past have failed him, “God is it that transcends.” Although the heroes of his imagination may have been more highly adorned than their historic prototypes, the latter, with all their faults, are more loveable, for they are nearer to ourselves: they are even nobler with the stains of their conflicts upon them than in their unreal and lifeless perfection. Al- though the ancient civilisations turn out on ex- amination to have been sordid and unclean, and the ages of faith to have been brutal and un- believing, it only means that the “ increasing purpose” runs through all more plainly than ever; and the golden age, which we thought to be in the distant past, turns out to be before us and not behind. Ix There remains one other subject which must be spoken of in this chapter. Many who enter upon the study of ecclesiastical history with avidity make no real headway because after a time they get discouraged. They seem to make quick pro- gress at first, and everything looks simple enough; but after a time they discover that the progress 90 Study of Ecclesiastical History has slackened, and that the same amount of labour expended does not produce anything like the same apparent result. They therefore begin looking elsewhere, in the hope of finding some employment in which they can hope for quicker and more abundant returns. It is not surprising, however, that the results should seem to be less as the work proceeds ; all that it means is that the “law of diminishing returns” applies to ecclesiastical history as it applies to everything else. We do not expect to find that a double expenditure of fuel will double the speed of our warships, or that a double charge of powder will send a projectile twice as far as the single charge; nor can we reasonably expect to find it otherwise with regard to the study of ecclesiastical history. At any rate, the law does so apply, both in this and in every other scientific study. He who would do any real work must be prepared to re- cognise the fact, to face much drudgery for which he will never have anything to show, and to apply himself all the more diligently because the results seem few and far between. He will have his reward ; not perhaps that of which he dreamed at first, but one far better worth the winning. On the subject of this chapter the reader may refer to: E. W. Benson, Vigilemus et Oremus, London (James Parker) and Lincoln (Williamson), second 7 How to Study Ecclesiastical History 91 edition, 1881. (A little manual of Hints on Reading and Prayers, written for the students of the Scholae Cancellarii at Lincoln ; it is not nearly so well known as it ought to be.) E. A. Freeman, The Methods of Historical Study, London, 1886. W. Stubbs, Lectures on the Study of Medieval and Modern History, third edition, Oxford, 1900 (especially lectures ii-v and ix). i CHAPTER VI THE CHOICE OF BOOKS Havine considered the general object which the student of ecclesiastical history should have in view, and the methods of working which he will make use of, we pass on in the present chapter to the choice of books in general. I To begin with, let it be borne in mind that there is no question so hard to answer, or so unprofitable (ze. as it stands) as that which is more frequently asked, perhaps, than any other: Is this a good book to read? or, What is the best book on so-and so? It is difficult to reply cate- gorically to such a question, because the answer depends entirely upon the questioner. The book may be never so good to read, but it may still be the case that he would be better employed in read- ing anything else. It may be the most learned or most thorough book upon the subject, and yet of such a nature as only to perplex and mystify him, whereas a much slighter book might be more likely to supply what he needs. In other words, The Choice of Books 93 the value of a book is relative to its reader: there are few books which everybody could read with ad- vantage, few perhaps which could benefit no reader. It is told in the life of George Crabbe the poet that he used to read every book that came into his hands, saying that there was no book so worth- less that it had nothing to teach. This is pro- bably quite true, though it does not by any means follow that every book would compensate us for the time and trouble that would be expended in reading it: still less that the time could not be better spent. But however this may be, the fact remains that the abstract value of a book is not a sufficient criterion by which to gauge its value relatively to a particular reader. If a book is valuable to him, it will be so as part of his general education, or as fitting him for some special task, or as a stage in the pursuit of know- ledge, or as a means of refreshment and relaxation. And unless it serves some such purpose as this (unless, that is, it has some definite and salutary relation to his own personality) the reading of it will be merely desultory reading, which may be good indeed within limits, but needs to be carefully kept within bounds. II Secondly, let it be remembered that the object of reading books is not to find something with which we can agree. “There are not a few 94 Study of Ecclesiastical History persons who seem to read books with the object of finding in print ideas with which they are already familiar, and who always call things obscure if they are new to them and not very easy of assimilation.” In like manner they regard a book as a good book if it can pronounce their own particular Shibboleth and a bad one if it cannot: and a considerable number of the reviewers of books for some of the so-called reli- gious newspapers seem to share the same opinion. But this is not the case. A book is none the better because it happens to say just what we thought already, and to add a few additional facts which serve to bolster up our opinion; nor is it any the worse because it gives us something to think about, and shows us that our view is not the only one which reasonable people have held. In fact, the book with which we most profoundly disagree is often that which is likely to teach us most and to stimulate us most.? From the point of view with which we are at present especially concerned, that is the best book which is most honest and which is based upon the most thorough knowledge of the facts. That the author does not write from our own standpoint does not matter in the least. That he should be pre- 1 Saturday Review, August 1, 1903, p. 143d. 2 On one occasion when Bishop Westcott was about to give an address on some educational subject I found him reading an essay on education by Emerson. ‘I do not agree,” he explained, “ with his views on the subject, but that is why I find him so stimulating.” The Choice of Books 95 judiced does not greatly matter, for we can soon see and can easily allow for his bias; and if he gives abundant references (as it is to be hoped that he will?) he will have given us the means of checking some at any rate of his vagaries. On the other hand, mere compilations, however orthodox and however cordially we agree with them, are not likely to be of much use ; “ popular” works are of very little value unless they are the work of really good scholars; and mere ex parte statements are to be avoided carefully, as giving rise to far more misunderstandings than they can hope to allay. It The best books then are those which are most honestly written and which are based upon the largest and most discriminating study of the original authorities. But the student needs some further criterion than this in the selection of books; and it is supplied by the plan of study upon which he is supposed to be entering or to have already entered.? He is studying some par- ticular period, or subject, or the like, and making this a centre from which to read in all directions, always however in some sort of relation with his 1 The plan which is fashionable just now of giving no references is surely much to be deplored. Nor is the lack of them really compensated for when, as in the Cambridge Modern History, there is an abundant bibliography. 2 See above, p. 75 f. 96 Study of Ecclesiastical History main subject of study for the time being. He will use books or monographs on particular subjects, or general Church histories, or text- books, or whatever it may be, in accordance with the exigencies of his plan. (a) Of these classes of books, the first-named is undoubtedly the most important. Books of this kind are as a rule more interesting, on account of the larger scope which is given to the personal element; they are more thorough, because the author is not so much tied by the necessity of uniformity of scale; and the difference of treat- ment which we experience as we pass from one subject to another is in reality a help to the student rather than a hindrance. Books on particular subjects then are undoubtedly the mainstay of historical literature. . (b) Nevertheless, the general history has a place which is all its own. The student who has begun to find that his grasp is closing upon his subject will feel the need of them at every turn, and will at times have to spend no small part of his energies upon them. He may not read any of them through from end to end,! but they will never be out of reach, and first one, then another, will have to be consulted. Gibbon’s great masterpiece, the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, stands of course in the 1 A well-known ecclesiastical historian told me once that he had never read through any general ecclesiastical history. Probably many others could say the same. The Choice of Books 97 front rank, though it is not a Church history at all. In spite of its scepticism and its bias against the Christian Faith, it is one of the strongest evidential works in existence; and in spite of the hundred years and more that have passed away since its completion it still remains the greatest historical work that any English writer has produced. Of other general ecclesiastical histories, some are to be preferred for one purpose and some for another; and all, of course, need to be brought up to date on parti- cular points by means of the books on special subjects. Baronius and his continuators must always be of the greatest value for the documents which they give. Mosheim is fair-minded and accurate, and in the latest English edition is useful as one of the best summaries that we have. Neander is excellent on the philosophical side; and Gieseler, prejudiced as he is, is nevertheless of great value for the very full quotations from authorities which are given in the notes. Milman gives a spirited account of the development of Latin Christendom, which, however, is not alto- gether deserving of its high reputation; and Schaff has produced a work which, if no more than a compilation, is at all events full, learned, and fair-minded. The most valuable work for pur- poses of reference is undoubtedly that of the late Wilhelm Moeller, which is written with scientific 1 The best edition is that by J. B. Bury, 7 vols, London, 1896-1900. G 98 Study of Ecclesiastical History accuracy and method, and gives the results of the latest research, but in such a condensed form, and with such barbarity of style, that it is hardly fitted for consecutive reading. (c) We pass on to text-books, whose name is legion. These also are of great value if they are rightly used. 'They are not, however, with a few exceptions,} fit to be used as introductions to the subjects with which they deal; and much of the distaste for Church history amongst certain classes of students is probably to be traced to the fact that they have endeavoured to learn it from them. For this purpose few of them are fitted; and a man needs a certain amount of previous knowledge to be able to read a text-book withadvantage. As a rule they are so full of facts, jammed together until all semblance of life has been obliterated, that it is hard to derive any knowledge of history from a study of them alone. Where they are valuable, however, is for purposes of revision. The man who already knows something of the subject will be able to recall the facts to his mind by means of them, and the mind will proceed to restore something of life to them, compressed and lifeless as they are. (d) One other class of books must still be spoken 1 The most notable of these is the little Kirchengeschichte im Grundriss of Dr Rudolf Sohm, translated into English under the title Outlines of Church History (London, 1895), with a preface by Professor Gwatkin. It is written from a de- finitely Lutheran standpoint ; but allowance is easily made for this. The Choice of Books 99 of, viz. those which have a definitely apologetic character. Now the proper function of historical writings of an apologetic character is to deal in detail with points which have been made the subject of controversy, isolating them indeed for the purposes of separate treatment, but dealing faithfully with everything, extenuating nothing nor setting down aught in malice. These have, of course, a real place in the studies of every teacher, and he may not neglect them. With “gutter apologetics,” which appeal to the pas- sions and not to the reason, and view the facts through the medium of a false lens which dis- torts and colours that which it magnifies, the less he has to do the better. But even apart from things such as this, the student will find it wise to endeavour under no circumstances to mix up the reading of apologetic literature with the systematic study of Church history. When we have as far as possible covered our ground this will help us to utilise what we have read, and to direct it towards the resolution of doubts and difficulties, and to teach rightly those who are committed to our instruction. But, as it has been said already, we cannot carry on the two processes of studying and interpreting con- currently without loss to both. When we do so we fall into the same kind of error as they do who read only with a view to the preparation of sermons, and, if possible, in an even more per- nicious form. 100 Study of Ecclesiastical History iv It is hardly necessary to say that the student should be careful to make use of all the subsidiary aids that come in his way; no amount of con- secutive reading of books can compensate for the neglect of facilities of this kind. (a) The first of these, which indeed is so important that it can hardly be called subsidiary, is an atlas. “Never read without an Atlas.”4 Such was Archbishop Benson’s advice; and the student will do all the better if he has two, a good modern one and a good historical one. As re- gards the latter, the best of all is undoubtedly the new Historical Atlas of Modern Europe, edited by R. L. Poole (Oxford, 1902). Next to it may be placed Spruner and Menke’s Hand-Atlas fiir die Geschichte des Mittelalters und der neueren Zeiten (Gotha, 1880)?; whilst on a rather smaller scale F. Schrader’s Atlas de géographie historique (Paris, 1896), and G. Droysen’s Historische Hand- Atlas (Bielefeld, 1886) are excellent. Other books which will be found useful are E. A. Free- man’s Historical Geography of Europe (2 vols, London, 1882; new edition by Prof. J. B. Bury in preparation), and E. McClure’s His- torical Church Atlas (London, 1897). (6) The student will also make use of all the help supplied by calendars, chronological and genealogical tables 1 Vigilemus et Oremus, p. 14. 2 Single maps from this atlas may be purchased, which is often a great convenience. The Choice of Books 101 and lists, &c. Mention may be made of H. F. Clinton’s Fastt Hellenici (3 vols, Oxford, 1827-34) and Fasti Romani (2 vols, Oxford, 1845-50), both of which need revision ; and especially of De Mas Latrie’s Trésor de chronologie, @histoire et de géographie pour Pétude des documents du moyen age (Paris, 1889), an enormous folio volume which contains nearly all that one can wish for in the way of tables and lists, almost exhaustive so far as France is concerned, and fuller than any other single collection for the whole of Europe. This, however, is now very expensive, and for most students unattainable. The following works will to some extent supply the same material, though they are of varying degrees of accuracy: N. H. Nicolas, Chronology of History (London, 1838); J. Blair and J. W. Rosse, Chronological Tables, 3 vols, London, 1891-2; H. B. George, Genealo- gical Tables (Oxford, 1874); and O. Lorenz, Genealogische Handbuch der europdischen Staaten- geschichte (Berlin, 1895). To these may be added the following, which contain the lists of succession of bishops, &c.: P. B. Gams, Series episcoporum ecclesiae Catholicae, and supplement (Ratisbon, 1873, 1886) ; W. Stubbs, Registrum Sacrum Angli- canum (Oxford, 1858, new edition 1897); J. Le Neve, Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, new edition by T. Duffus Hardy (3 vols, Oxford, 1854); and H. Cotton, Fasti Ecclesiae Hibernicae (6 vols, Dublin, 1848-78). ‘The great Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis of C. du Fresne du Cange is 102 Study of Ecclesiastical History an unfailing source of information, not only as to the meaning of medieval Latin words and phrases, but as to the customs and life of the middle ages: the most convenient editions are those of G. A. L. Henschel (7 vols, Paris, 1840- 50) and L. Favre (10 vols, Niort, 1883-7). For the modern equivalents of Latin place-names the student may consult J. G. T. Graesse, Orbis Latinus (Dresden, 1861), and C. T. Martin, The Record Interpreter (London, 1882), the latter of which contains a large amount of information which is of great service to the reader of manu- scripts. ¥ It is of course an excellent thing that the student should know his way thoroughly well through any good book, so as to be able to use’ it as a thread, so to speak, by which to join together all his other reading. But the “one- book” man, who swears by a single author and regards his work as having the same relation to knowledge at large which the Creed has to the Faith, is a deplorable creature. This is of course a very extreme case; such a man as this is seldom met with; but the temper is a very common one. If there is to be any progress at all, this sort of one-sidedness must be avoided at all costs. One of the best ways in which to avoid it is to adopt a 1 The Lexicon Manuale of W. H. Maigne d’Arnis, on the basis of Du Cange, is only useful as a glossary, in the strict sense of the word. The Choice of Books 103 practice which Archbishop Benson used to re- commend: “ Always be reading at least two books on the period [upon which you are engaged], and the life of one or more great men who lived in it.”"1 The advantages to be derived from the practice are obvious: the two or more books will help to correct one another’s one-sidedness; the repeated study of the same subject-matter in different forms will assist the memory; and (what is even more important) it will give to what is studied that light and shade, that sense of depth and solidity, which distinguishes a stereoscopic picture from an ordinary photograph. The same purpose will be served by the practice of read- ing up particular subjects in one of the great dictionaries or other large works; by cultivating the habit of “dipping into” substantial books “dealing with the subject which is being explored, and even by glancing through books for a few minutes at a time. An occasional half hour spent in this way in a library, browsing upon the treasures which it contains, or even upon the books in a good second-hand book-shop, is a very profitable thing. Perhaps all this may sound superficial, but even if it meant no more than getting familiar with the appearance of the books it would be well worth doing; for he who does not know the outside of great books will probably not know the inside either. As a matter of fact it means a great deal more; for the student very 1 Vigilemus et Oremus, p. 14. 104 Study of Ecclesiastical History soon learns to know something of the inside of the books which are glanced at in this way. There is of course a certain knack about it, but it is easily learned ; and the student who has once acquired the habit of scrutinising prefaces and tables of contents, and the general arrangement of the text and the notes upon the page, will soon find it easy to get what he wants out of a book without unnecessary waste of time. VI It follows from what has been said that the student should do much of his reading in books that are not new. This is indeed inevitable, for if he is to read ecclesiastical history to any advantage he will certainly find it hard to get all that he wants in new, or even in modern’ books. ‘The whole range of historical literature cannot be brought up to date every few years, and there are many subjects which have not been adequately treated at all within recent times. Nor is it to be wished that they should be fully treated de novo; for if a piece of work has once been well done there is no reason why it should be done over again. But the reading of the litera- ture of a former day is a desirable thing in itself. As it is a good thing to read books written from a point of view other than our own, so is it good, and to a much larger degree, to read that which represents the standpoint of a former age. The Choice of Books 105 There are, of course, some matters in which this is not possible. If we want the latest dis- coveries and the results of the most recent re- search, it is plain that we must seek them in modern works ;! and for this reason it would be simply ridiculous to advise a student of one of the natural sciences to read old books. Again, and for the same reason, it is rarely possible to make use of a text-book of more than, say, twenty years old. Once more, there are parti- cular modern books which ought to be read not less but more than they are. Nearly every age has its prophetic teachers, whose function it is to discover and proclaim some fresh revelation of the age-long Faith under the new conditions and the new needs of to-day. It is always a good thing for us if we can recognise and study them; and the real difficulty is that these prophets of to-day, who will be the teachers of to-morrow, are not always easily recognised by their con- temporaries: sometimes, alas, they are not re- cognised until it is time for the sons to build the sepulchres of those whom their fathers have slain. For nothing is easier than to mistake the true character of the age in which we live, to be bold when we should tremble, and to be afraid ' Such new finds are chronicled in the Journal of Theolo- logical Studies, the English Historical Review, &c. Convenient summary accounts of the chief work that has been done in Church history, &c., during the last twenty-five years will be found in the articles on the respective subjects in the new volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannice (tenth edition). 106 Study of Ecclesiastical History where no fear is. We may easily fail to see what is really critical and vital, and thus spend our strength in avoiding the dangers of the past rather than the dangers of the present, in con- futing Sabellius who is dead and buried rather than Arius who is very much alive. If, then, we can learn to follow our prophets, who set forth for us things as they are, we shall do well. But apart from things such as these, the older standard books are greatly to be preferred, and the reader of them has many advantages. For one thing, he may be sure that these books have at any rate some permanent value, or they would not have retained their position so long as they have. What is much more important, they represent another standpoint than our own, and thus help to deliver us from the limitations of present-day thinking. For the chief recommendation of the “up-to-date” book, in the eyes of many, is that it represents the most approved theological standpoint of our own day and the latest fashion in Churchmanship. As a matter of fact this is just what condemns it, so far as the work of the student is con- cerned. No doubt these things have their value; they are probably just what the students of the last generation most needed. But they are not what we need. They are with us always; they influence us whether we will or not; they are, so to speak, in the very air we breathe. For us, in fact, they are no longer a thing to be sought but a thing to be avoided, no longer an aspiration The Choice of Books 107 but a limitation. It is almost time to unlearn them ; it is quite time to reach forward to some- thing that shall be wider, ampler, more Catholic. The student, at any rate, has little or nothing to learn from the book that says the obvious thing, just “ whot a owt to a’ said”; the best thing that he can do under such circumstances is to “‘ coom awaiiy”; to seek the books of to-morrow, to which reference has been made above, or the books of yesterday. ‘These latter have much to teach him, for they measure things by altogether different standards. No doubt they too have their limit- ations ; they too were dominated by the spirit of their age; they too have their elements which were merely transitory and evanescent. . But these elements will not enslave the student; rather he will take note of them as characteristic of par- ticular periods. By this means he will be the richer in proportion as he can learn to enter into something of the limitations of former days, and rise above them by entering into them. Vil But the student of ecclesiastical history cannot be said to have done anything at all until he has begun to read the original authorities, 7.e. until he has passed from what modern writers say about events to what is said of them by the persons who actually took part in them or lived whilst they were going on. He may not indeed be able to 108 Study of Ecclesiastical History study them in detail, still less to work through them systematically at first hand; this is the work of the trained historian. But even the reading of a single contemporary narrative will bring him into closer touch with what was going on than anything else can; and the more he can read, the more he will be able to enter into the spirit of it all. To pass in this way from the life of to-day into the very midst of the life of other days is like living in space of three dimen- sions instead of upon a superficies of two; and he who has realised the difference will never be able to look at things from quite so narrow or limited a point of view in the future. Here, of course, there comes in the difficulty of language, at any rate for every period before the sixteenth century, and for all but English history after that period. But the difficulty is not so overwhelming, perhaps, as is commonly supposed. It is of course true that for any real study of history a certain knowledge of classical and modern languages is indispensable. A very little, how- ever, can be made to go a long way for most purposes: plenty of pluck, plenty of perseverance, plenty of dictionary, and no more grammar than need be, will make many things possible which at first sight seem impossible. There is of course a point, however, where everything depends upon precise and accurate scholarship; and there the ill-equipped student must needs depend upon the exact scholar. For the purposes of which we are The Choice of Books 109 at present speaking, however, even this much is not essential. He who cannot read other languages will do well to get what he can (and it is no little) in translations; and even a bad translation is better than nothing, for this purpose. He will, of course, lose something both in accuracy and in beauty, and the reading of translations is in general tedious; but at least he will secure what is really all-important, the power to transport himself into the very atmosphere of the period which he is studying. It is true, of course, that the use of translations is offensive to the pedant; but the student who is handicapped by his lack of lin- guistic ability will not allow this fact to rob him of what is a most useful help.! And indeed it is not only he who finds them useful. If the truth were known, it would probably appear that at least nine out of every ten students of history make use of translations wherever they can, of course verifying their quotations, in the explora- tion of the immense masses of material with which they have to deal. The only difference is that some use their translations openly and gratefully, while others do not. 1 Mention may be made here of some collections of trans- lated documents or passages which the student will find useful: H. M. Gwatkin, Selections from Early Church Writers, second edition, London, 1899 (with the originals); E. F. Henderson, Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages, London, 1896; H. Gee and W. J. Hardy, Documents Illustrative of English Church History, London, 1896; G. C. Lee, Leading Documents of English History, London, 1900; and the useful series of Translations and Reprints published by the Columbia University. 110 Study of Ecclesiastical History de If he is wise, then, the student will endeavour as quickly as possible to get into touch with the sources for the history of the period which he is studying. Of course, the more he can read the better; but in case he can only read a little, he will do well to choose such things as will give him the atmosphere of the period rather than those which the historian would have to use for the discovery of exact fact: chronicles will be more suitable than official documents, familiar letters than state papers, and so on. Most important of all, of course, are certain great historical works : the man who really knows his Tacitus or Euse- bius or Beda, or on a lower plane Gregory of Tours or Anna Comnena, Ordericus Vitalis or Matthew Paris, has by that fact alone acquired a sound grasp of the history of the period repre- sented by his author. Next to histories (for this purpose) we may place letters. They are often disappointingly empty and rhetorical, partly owing to the fact that a letter was a much more important literary undertaking once than it is nowadays. Nevertheless, they are of the greatest possible value ; and the man who will enter upon the study of the letters of Cyprian, or Ambrose, or Augustine, or Jerome, or Basil, or Leo, or Gregory the Great, or Boniface of Mainz, or Gerbert of Reims (Pope Sylvester II), or Anselm, or ‘Thomas Becket and his correspondents, or Grostete, or above all Erasmus, not to mention many others, will find that he has discovered a rich storehouse. The Choice of Books 111 Next after these, if not indeed before them, may be placed a class of documents which usually have an even greater historical importance, viz. “oc- casional” writings; such as the Apology of Aristides, or the Martyrdom of Perpetua and her Companions, or Athanasius de Synodis, or the Appeal of Flavian to Leo; or the Rule of Bene- dict, or the Caroline Books, or the Mirror of Perfection, or the Consilium de emendanda ecclesia, or the Constitutions of the Society of Jesus. All these of course are no more than specimens ; and the list might be indefinitely extended. These, however, may serve. And the reader who endeavours, in reading the history of any period, to get into touch as quickly as possible with its actual documents will find that his knowledge is of an altogether different kind from anything that he could claim to have before. The following are the full titles of the works mentioned in Section III of this chapter: C. Baronius, Annales Ecclesiastici (to 1198). Continued by O. Raynaldus to 1565; and by G. Laderchi to 1572. The most con- venient edition is that in 19 vols, Lucea, 1738-46.! J. L. von Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, translated by J. Murdock and 1 There is a modern continuation to 1585 by Aug. Theiner, 3 vols, Rome, 1856. 112 Study of Ecclesiastical History H. Soames, and edited by W. Stubbs, 3 vols, London, 1863. J. A. W. Neander, History of the Christian Re- ligion and Church, 10 vols, London, 1850-8. J. C. L. Gieseler, Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte, 6 vols, Bonn, 1828-57. (English transla- tion of first 4 vols, Edinburgh, 1850 f.) H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity, 6 vols, London, 1854-5 (many later editions). P. Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 12 vols, Edinburgh, 1883-93. W. Moeller, Kirchengeschichte (English trans- lation to 1648, 3 vols, London, 1892-1900). Most of the works mentioned in Section VI of this chapter may be found in Migne’s Patrologia, though there are, of course, many other editions. Those - which are not to be found there, or which are more conveniently studied elsewhere, are given in the following list : Tacitus, Annals and History (any modern edition). Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, ed. W. Bright, Oxford, 1881. Beda, Ecclesiastical History, ed. C. Plummer, 2 vols, Oxford, 1896. Anna Comnena, Alezias, ed. Schopen and Reifferscheid; 2 vols, Bonn, 1839-78. Matthew Paris, Chronica Maiora, ed. H. R. Luard, Rolls Series, 7 vols, 1872-83. (An old edition in folio by W. Wats, London, 1640, may often be picked up cheaply.) The Choice of Books 113 Boniface, Epistolae, ed. E. L. Diimmler, Monwmenta Historiae Germaniae, Berlin, 1897. (Or P. Jaffé, Monumenta Moguntina, Berlin, 1865.) Gerbert, Epistolae, ed. J. Havet, Paris, 1889. Thomas Becket, Materials for the History of, ed. J. C. Robertson, Rolls Series, 7 vols, 1875-85. (The letters are in vols v—vii.) Grostete, Epistolae, ed. H. R. Luard, Rolls Series, 1861. Erasmus, Epistolae, in the edition of his works by J. Le Clere, 10 vols, Leyden, 1703-6. (Old folio editions of the letters are often to be picked up cheaply.) The Apology of Aristides, ed. J. Armitage Robinson and J. Rendel Harris, second edition, Cambridge, 1893. (Teats and Studies, vol. i, No. 2.) | The Martyrdom of Perpetua, ed. J. Armitage Robinson, Cambridge, 1891. (Jo. ii. 1.) Appellatio Flaviani, ed. T. A. Lacey, London, 1903. (Church Historical Society’s Publica- tions, No. lxx.) Speculum Perfectionis Beati Francisci, ed. P. Sabatier, Paris, 1899. Fasciculus rerum expetendarum, &c., ed. E. Brown, 2 vols, London, 1690. (Contains the Consilium de emendanda Ecclesia, and many other documents of great value.) Constitutiones Societatis Jesu, Avignon, 1827. (Many other editions. ) There are translations of Tacitus, Eusebius, Beda, and Ordericus Vitalis in Bohn’s Libraries ; but H cee 114 Study of Ecclesiastical History the best translation of Tacitus is that of A. J. Church and W. J. Brodribb (London, the History, 1864, the Annals, 1877), and of Eusebius that with notes by A. C. McGiffert in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Library} (Oxford, Parker). Selections from the letters of Ambrose, Augustine, Jerome, Basil, and Gregory the Great are given in the same collection, and a larger collection of Augustine’s letters in vols vi and xiii of the translation of his works, edited by Marcus Dods (Edinburgh, 1871-76). The letters of St Cyprian are translated in the Oxford Library of the Fathers (Parker) and the Ante-Nicene Library (T. & T. Clark), which latter also contains the Martyrdom of St Perpetua and the Apology of Aristides (the latter in the supplementary volume, Edinburgh, 1897). The Mirror of Perfection has been translated by Sebastian Evans (London, 1899) ; and the Rule of St Benedict in Henderson’s Select Documents, already referred to. Erasmus’s earlier letters are translated in F. M. Nichols, The Epistles of Erasmus down to his fifty-first year, London, 1901. 1 The translation is but an imperfect revision of an earlier one, but the notes are full and admirable. CHAPTER VII SOME SPECIAL ASPECTS OF STUDY IN ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Tue student of ecclesiastical history, then, has to make use of precisely the same processes and precisely the same kind of material as any other student of history. He introduces no element of irregularity ; he postulates no fresh laws of causa- tion; in fact, he would be entirely at a loss if there were any breach of ordinary natural sequence in the events which he has to investi- gate. Nevertheless, he cannot forget that this order is also a spiritual order, of the meaning and purpose of which he has the key. The very rationale of his study is to be found in the fact that “The history of Christianity is the history of the slow and progressive efforts which have been made to gain and to embody an adequate know- ledge of Christ in the fulness of His twofold nature, of the eternal revealed under the condi- tions of time, of the earthly raised to the heavenly, of the harmony that is established potentially between man and humanity and God, under the 116 116 Study of Ecclesiastical History continuous guiding of the living Spirit. It is undoubtedly a chequered and often a sad history. The human organs often obey most imperfectly the spirit which moves them. ‘There are times of torpor, of sloth, of disease in the Body; but even so the spirit is not quenched. ‘There are fallings away,and dismemberments, but even so an energy of reproduction supplies the loss. Empires rise and pass away, but the Church lives on, changed from age to age and yet the same, gathering into her treasure house all the prizes of wisdom and knowledge, and gradually learning more and more of the infinite import and power of the Truth which she has to proclaim.”? It is this inwardness, this manifestation of the Divine in the human, which gives its fundamental meaning to ecclesiastical history. We proceed then to consider in detail certain aspects of the study which derive their importance from this its essential character. I Christianity did not appear in the world with- out an orderly preparation: it came at the zenith of the history of a prepared race, as the climax of a process of revelation which had been manifested to and in some measure apprehended by that chosen race from very early days. It was the fulfilment of all that the prophets had dimly discerned by faith, of all that righteous souls had 1 Westcott, Gospel of Life, p. 277. Some Special Aspects of Study 117 longed after for centuries. The student cannot therefore overlook the preparation for the coming of Christ in the history of the Chosen People; he must not neglect the connection of Christianity with Judaism. He must remember, however, that his concern with it is historical, not theolo- gical or literary: that is to say, he is not con- cerned, at any rate primarily, with the theological question of the relation between the partial revelation made to the Jews and the full revela- tion of God in Christ, nor yet with the literary question of the relation between the books of the Old Testament or those of the New. On the other hand, the new knowledge which has been obtained in modern days of the history of the Hebrew people, partly as the result of archzo- logical discoveries and still more as the result of the application of the methods of the Higher Criticism,' concerns him very closely. This is of course a subject which cannot be entered upon here in detail; but whatever others may do, the student of history cannot hesitate to accept the results? which have been obtained by the very same 1 For a wise and moderate justification of the methods of the Higher Criticism see George Adam Smith, Modern Criti- cism and the Preaching of the Old Testament, London, 1901. 2 £.g. that the Prophets, not the Law, must be taken as the starting point in Hebrew history; that few of the histori- cal narratives were contemporaneous with the events which they describe ; that the books of the Hexateuch in the shape in which we possess them are a compilation of a late period, and that much of the contents of the earlier books must be regarded as ethnic tradition rather than as true history. 118 Study of Ecclesiastical History inductive methods which have achieved such great triumphs in other regions of study. And it may be stated without hesitation that this reading of the history, which is now taken for granted by most Old Testament scholars, has brought it into line and into correspondence, as regards its fundamental features and methods of develop- ment, with all our other knowledge of the history of early peoples, without in any way detracting from its unique significance; and has thus reduced to order what was previously, from the historian’s point of view, nothing but chaos. Recognising in Judaism, then, the cradle of Christianity, the student of ecclesiastical history will be quick to notice every stage in the prepara- tion for the coming of Christ, every link that bound the new faith to the environment of its birth and every step of the process by which the two were parted asunder. He will watch for the relics of Jewish teaching and worship to be found in early Christian documents ;1 he will observe the not altogether unnatural animus of Jews against Christians from the early days of the apostles downward, and the part which they took in fomenting the persecution of Christians; he will notice the sad and significant change which comes over the language of Christians with regard to the chosen race as time goes on, until he reaches the 1 For example, in the Didache. But see especially F. H. Chase, The Lord’s Prayer in the Early Church, Cambridge, 1891 (Texts and Studies, i, 3). Some Special Aspects of Study 119 popular outbreaks of tumult against them in the middle ages and the persecutions by the Inquisi- tions of Seville and Lisbon in the sixteenth century. Il If Christianity did not come unprepared into the world, neither did it come into a world that was unprepared. Christ was born “ in the fulness of the time”:? and it would hardly be too much tc say that the whole of the first century of Christian history is a commentary on these words. ** No war, or battle’s sound Was heard the world around ; The idle spear and shield were high uphung ; The hooked chariot stood, Unstained with hostile blood ; The trumpet spake not to the arméd throng ; And Kings sat still with awful eye As if they surely knew their sovran Lord was by. In consecrated earth And on the holy hearth The Lars and Lemures moan with midnight plaint ; In urns and altars round A drear and dying sound Affrights the Flamens at their service quaint ; And the chill marble seems to sweat While each peculiar Power foregoes his wonted seat.” Everything that is connected with this pre- paration is within the range of the student of 1 See Bishop Lightfoot's notes on Gal. iy. 4, 11. 120 Study of Ecclesiastical History ecclesiastical history. He will be concerned to trace and follow out the causes which prepared the way for the propagation and the reception of the new religion: the decay of the old nature religions and the hard-and-fast boundaries of ancient and national tribal life, the influence of Greek philosophy and Roman law in developing the conceptions of individual duty and of universal law, the work of Roman conquest in preparing a field for the new faith and of Greek colonisation in rendering the spread of this faith possible through the medium of a common language. His interest in the spread of Christianity implies an interest in the order of life which it is supersed- ing: the one cannot be studied without the other. He will be prepared to find that the conquest was very slow and gradual, that for centuries there were survivals of the old in the new, and that the very conquests of the new helped to bring about a recrudescence of the old. Ill But Christianity has not merely a relation to the earlier life of Judaism out of which it sprung and to the Roman world within and beyond which it spread: it has a relation to all human religions as at once their crown and completion and as the Divine response to the human aspiration to which they all bear witness. Some of these have faded away rapidly when brought face to face with ahd Some Special Aspects of Study 121 Christianity, their votaries seeming to find in it almost at once “Him whom they ignorantly worshipped”; others have survived in close con- tact with it during long centuries; one, which may indeed be fitly described from tae point of view of Christianity as a heresy rather than as a heathen religion,! may actually have derived some part of its strength from contact with a debased form of Christianity. But whenever and wherever these are brought into contact with Christianity they supply material for the ecclesiastical historian. No student of the Church history of the fourth century can afford to ignore the Persian religious systems; the student of the seventh century must reckon with the early Mohammedans; whilst for the student of the religious history of Spain or Sicily during the middle ages the Moors of the one and the Saracens of the other are all im- portant. The student of the records of the con- version of northern Europe finds himself at times face to face with interesting glimpses of the older worship; and asthe evidence from this and other sources is little by little being made to yield up its information with regard to Teutonic and Celtic heathendom, so this in turn sheds back light upon Church history. Nor is it otherwise in our own day. In Japan and China and India, more 1 It has been so described by Bishop Westcott, and by Professor 8. Lane Poole in a valuable lecture on Jsldém, delivered before the Theological Faculty of Trinity College Dublin (Dublin, 1908). 122 Study of Ecclesiastical History clearly perhaps than at home, we can see Church history in the making; and whenever that Church history comes to be written down, he who writes it must assuredly concern himself more carefully than we commonly do with the non-Christian religions of the East. ef The student must carefully keep in mind the fact, upon which stress has already been laid, that civil and ecclesiastical history are not two separate things, but simply two aspects of one and the same thing ; and that consequently he may never neglect any side of human life. The heathen writers Ammianus Marcellinus and Zosimus are as much primary authorities for him as are Eusebius and Lactantius; Gibbon and Hume belong as truly to him as they do to the historian of nations. It is not only that every act of human life has a certain spiritual significance, but that the acts and the motives which seem proper to the “ civil” and the “ecclesiastical” in reality interpenetrate one another in such a way as to be wholly in- extricable. Economic and religious causes act and react upon one another; or political and ecclesiastical causes; or the like. A few examples will make this clear. (a) As regards economics and religion. The tumult in Ephesus against St Paul, in which the multitude “cried out saying, Great is Diana of Some Special Aspects of Study 123 the Ephesians,” was in reality stirred up by Demetrius the silversmith, and in part at any rate in anxiety lest the craft should suffer.1. In like manner, as Pliny writes to Trajan,” his action against the Christians stimulated the trade of the fodder-sellers; partly perhaps because some Christians recanted, but doubtless also because many pagans who had been slack in their religi- ous duties now hastened to purchase animals for sacrifice in order to avert suspicion. So also in England, in the sixteenth century, the purely civil question of the encouragement of the fisheries was mixed up with the ecclesiastical question of the keeping of the Friday fast.2 And things of _the same kind exist even in our own day. The writer has been told more than once by devout nonconformists of the way in which the religious life of a chapel is hampered by the fact that some few individuals, who have advanced the money to build it, have thus a proprietary control over it. (0) As regards politics and matters ecclesiastical. No honest student can deny, or should wish to deny, that the whole history of a Church is modified, partly for the better, partly for the worse, by the fact that it is “established.” The 1 Acts xix. 23-41. 2 Epist. 97. 3 On the one hand, we have proclamations directing people to eat fish on Friday expressly for the sake of the fishing industry : on the other hand, ecclesiastical dispensations from fasting continue to be given. By a judicious suppres- sion of one part of the evidence or the other, it has been read in opposite ways. 124 Study of Ecclesiastical History conversion of Constantine did not indeed, as Pope Gregory VII thought, involve the endowment of the papacy with the whole of Italy, nor did it involve the creation of a hierarchy, as Wyclif thought; but it undoubtedly had a profound effect upon the Church at large. The foundation of the Inquisition at Lisbon might seem to have been an ecclesiastical measure, and it undoubtedly had ecclesiastical consequences; but it was actually the result of causes purely fiscal.1 Froude’s Lectures on the Council of Trent (London, 1896), whatever faults they may have, at least have the merit of throwing into clear relief the enormous extent to which the proceedings in the Council were influenced by political considerations; and quite recently we have been reminded, in the election of Pope Pius X (August, 1903), that political considerations are a very strong factor in the making of a pope.” That they sometimes count for much in the choosing of bishops, or of the presiding persons in other religious bodies, is a fact which it would be easy to prove, were it worth while. 1 IJ have summarised the story in the Cambridge Modern History, vol. II, chap. xii. It is toldat length by A. Herculano de Carvalho, Historia da Origem e do Estabelecimento da In- quizigido em Portugal, 3 vols, Lisbon, 1864-72. 2 Whether Austria possesses a formal veto or not does not matter for our purpose. An informal veto would seem to be quite sufficient, Some Special Aspects of Study 125 V If it is necessary to remember that the “civil” and the “ ecclesiastical” meet and interpenetrate at every point, it is not less necessary to bear in mind the very close relations of philosophy and theology, and the way in which they inevitably act and react upon one another. This indeed is almost self-evident: there is a large philo- sophical element in every religious system, and every system of philosophy is to a large extent the outcome of the religious feeling of the age which produces, or at any rate immediately pre- cedes it. But the historical student must do -more than recognise this in general terms: he must be prepared at every step to perceive and make allowance for it. The idea of development of doctrine, not unknown to St Vincent of Lerins,} has been in bad repute ever since John Henry Newman endeavoured to trace it by purely a priori methods to an end which he had already taken for granted. But the time has surely come now that it should be recognised in plain terms that there is such a thing as development of doctrine, and that it is unthinkable that it should be otherwise. From the historical point of view there are four things which stand out as facts of observation : (a) In the first place, there can be no question 1 Commonitorium, c,. Xxili. 126 Study of Ecclesiastical Histpry at all that both the whole content of doctrine, so to speak, of any age, and also its particular doc- trinal statements, differ not a little from those of the age which immediately preceded it, and indeed from those of every other. In order to see that this is so, we have only to compare the theological writings of any one age with those of any other, or of our own. There will be much, no doubt, which we can adopt without any conscious effort; some- thing also that we can assimilate, not without conscious effort, but with a sense that our own concepts have thereby been widened and deep- ened, and that we are richer as the result of the process. But there will be much more which we cannot accept at all; part of which has ceased to have any meaning whatever for us, whilst the rest we must needs reject as false. (6) Moreover, this variation of doctrine is neither inconsequent nor arbitrary: it has a law of growth corresponding with that of the Body. Not indeed that the doctrine of each age can be said to be a direct advance upon that of the preceding one, or that the doctrine of each teacher is a direct advance upon that of his predecessor. It is often quite the reverse. ‘The deep spiritual idea of one age is exaggerated and distorted in the next; the reaction from one mode of thought goes far in the opposite direction ; theological ‘ tendency ” which is true in its proper proportion leads in the limit to negation of all else, as the top of a twig departs Some Special Aspects of Study 127 further and further from the parent stem. Never- theless, the consecutiveness of doctrine is clear throughout: there is nothing merely fortuitous or inconsequent; and, viewed on a large scale, there is continuous and united growth in it which makes a history of doctrine no mere collection of isolated details, but one true whole. There is such a thing as the development of doctrine: of course it may be true and perfect, or it may be one-sided, stunted, and perverted ; 1 but it is undoubtedly always there, and could never be absent. (c) Furthermore, there is one feature of this development of Christian doctrine which distin- guishes it from everything else. In a very real sense it is a growth backwards. ‘There are of course temporary and local aberrations, but the thing which can hardly fail to strike the historian is that every “ critical point” in the development of doctrine is an attempt at any rate, however unsuccessful it may be, to realise afresh or vindi- cate afresh some element in or some aspect of the primitive revelation. How far as a matter of fact such developments are really faithful to the original deposit is of course a question upon which only detailed historical inquiry can throw light. But that practically every new teaching makes the claim to be so is simply a matter of experience ; 1 See Bishop Gore, The Test of Theological and Ecclesias- tical Development: Church Historical Society’s Publications, No. Ixiii. 128 Study of Ecclesiastical History and unless in the long run such teachings at any rate satisfy the Christian consciousness (rightly or wrongly) that they bear this character, they die away. In other words, here as elsewhere, develop- ment is orderly, not capricious; and Christian doctrine looks not forward into the unknown, but backward to the Person of Christ. The revelation in Christ is, in the minds of all Christian teachers, not partial but complete, not a stage in the un- veiling of truth but Absolute Truth. Growth is regarded as growth from Him and unto Him; so that the ultimate test which is applied by all Christian teachers alike to all Christian doctrine alike is that of fidelity to the revelation in Christ. (d) But if there is an underlying unity in the growth of Christian doctrine, there is likewise, as we have seen, an element which is peculiar to each single age. It is inevitable that this should be so; for if doctrine be the expression of the Faith in terms of thought, it follows that this expression will have in every age an element which is peculiar to that age, and which must of necessity pass away with that age. As Dr Salmon has said, the theologians of every age have sought to combine “The doctrines which they learned from re- velation with the results of what they regarded as the best philosophy of their own day, so as to obtain what seemed to them the most satis- 1 Compare A. M. Fairbairn, Christ in Modern Theology, London, 1893, p. 200. “ é * Some Special Aspects of Study 129 factory account and explanation of the facts of the universe.” In this fact is to be found the explanation of the perpetual and apparently meaningless disputes which are ever going on in the realm of theology. ‘They are simply the result of successive attempts to bring it into line with its new environment: to eliminate the philosophical elements which have become effete and merely traditional, and once more to express the old truths in the language of the new thought. It is likewise the explanation of every so-called conflict of religion with science. As Dr Salmon goes on, “Every union of philosophy and religion is the marriage of a mortal with an immortal; the religion lives; the philosophy grows old and dies. When the philosophic element of a theological system becomes antiquated, its explanations, which contented one age, become unsatisfactory to the next, and then ensues what is spoken of as a conflict between religion and science; whereas, in reality, it is a conflict between the science of one generation and that of the preced- ing generation.” ‘The student of ecclesiastical history will be prepared, then, to find such a philosophical . element in all doctrine, and such a development of doctrine: not as a law which is to bind him, but as a generalisation based on the combined experience of other students. Here, as elsewhere, - * Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. ii. p. 678, art. ** Gnosticism.” I 130 Study of Ecclesiastical History he must be prepared at all times to test his con- clusions by the light of new evidence; and the more faithfully he does this, the more those con- clusions, in their ultimate form, will be found to be no mere result of a mental process peculiar to himself, but the orderly statement of the facts, and the interpretation of them in terms which, if not universal, are at least common to the age and the civilisation of which he forms part. VE Another feature of the life of the Church which will need very careful study is its canonical system. There are few subjects which are more talked about, and with a greater lack of know- ledge, than the Canon Law, that great series of canonical regulations which by the twelfth and following centuries had grown into the most elaborate and complex system of law, perhaps, that the world had ever seen. The student of the history of the middle ages soon begins to realise that in practice this great system was by no means so universal or so uniform in its operation as it seemed. The medieval mind was essentially synthetic; it loved an all-em- bracing logical system, which provided for every case and dealt with each with the greatest minuteness and on the highest authority. But it also loved its own way; and consequently in practice this great system was never strictly carried out, thanks to the various counterpoises which Some Special Aspects of Study 131 existed. ‘here was always some loophole: it might be evaded by a dispensation, or by the intervention of the law’s endless delays until death brought the contention to a close; or by tacit consent, or by private treaty, or by the interference of the civil power, or even by an open appeal to force. Nevertheless, there is a widespread tendency to treat this “ great store- house of good advice,” as Bishop Creighton has called it,! not only as if it had been always and everywhere carried into effect just as it stood in the law-books of the canonists, but as if it were of the very essence of the Church, and had in effect existed from the very beginning. Nothing, of course, could well be further from the truth. It is not merely that the great bulk of the actual provisions of the Corpus Juris Canonici are late in date, or that the canonical system of the West differs from that of the East, or that of any one day from that of any other day. The very idea of “the Canon Law” as a binding system of legislation is essentially medieval. It would have been unthinkable in early days; to an Eastern, the very idea is paradoxical to-day, and the phrase xavoviKos voyos a contradiction in terms.2 It is the outcome of a condition of things in which the Church was regarded as a State on the analogy of the Empire, with a body of law analogous to the civil law, deriving its 1 The Abolition of the Roman Jurisdiction, Church Historical Society’s Publications, No. vii, p. 9. 2 As I have been told by more than one clergyman of the Orthodox Eastern Church. 132 Study of Ecclesiastical History force not from the consent of those who keep the law, but from the authority of the supreme legis- lator, the Pope.1 Apart from this, the whole idea loses its force. The fact is that “ Canon Law” is largely crys- tallised and codified practice: a statement of the way in which things are done, not of the way in which they ought to be done. The Church did not start, any more than the Hebrew people did, with an elaborate code of laws which it forthwith proceeded to put into practice. From the first it had an essential character and certain essential principles, not explicitly set forth but implied in its very nature. When need arose for action, it acted as best it could in accordance with these. When the same circumstances arose again, it naturally acted in the same way; and thus there grew up by degrees a regular customary pro- cedure. Then, when new circumstances seemed to require new action, action was taken in accord- ance with this customary procedure. When necessary also local churches met together in council and dealt with particular cases as they arose by means of canons: canons which primarily applied only to special cases or classes of cases, but which naturally came to be followed else- where if they were found in experience to be suit- able and wise: if otherwise, they were laid aside and forgotten when they had done their parti- cular work. The passing of the centuries added 1 See my Nature and Force of the Canon Law, Church His- torical Society’s Publications, No. xxxiy. Some Special Aspects of Study 133 not a little, of course, both to the amount and the value of this codified experience, but at the same time it made more and more of it obsolete and unworkable; so that no lapse of time ever did or could do away with the liberty of the Church in setting aside or modifying former methods, or in taking fresh action in view of new circumstances. Now all this may be summed up in a sentence which should be borne carefully in mind: prin- ciples precede practice, and practice precedes theory. The student who forgets this will never attain to true views of the history of the Church; he who bears it in mind will find in the Corpus Juris Canonici and other similar collections an unfailing source of illustrative evidence, of a kind that is sometimes invaluable. Vil One of the difficulties which dog the footsteps of the student of ecclesiastical history is to know how to interpret the marvels and portents of which many of his authorities are full. The difficulty is not, of course, one which touches him alone; for things of the kind are neither peculiar to, nor especially char- acteristic of, the writings of ecclesiastics or be- lievers. They have a not inconsiderable place in all early records, and must be considered and weighed by every student of the facts. But they concern the student of ecclesiastical history in a special degree because, from its very nature, the question is one ial i 134 Study of Ecclesiastical History which touches the spiritual side of life most closely. How then is it to be solved ? There are two aspects of the question which may with advantage be considered separately. (a) There is that of evidence. Some of the “evidence” with which we have to do is plainly of very little value. It comes to us, not in the shape of a continuous narrative, but as an isolated story; it is plainly not contemporary, from the anachronisms which it contains; it seems to have been compiled with an obvious purpose ; its inter- nal character is such that, if we were brought face to face with a similar story to-day, in matters which concern our daily life, we should not trust it. It is, in other words, what may be con- veniently described as legend. How are we to treat material of this character? ‘There is a difficulty at the outset in the fact that it is not easy to draw a hard-and-fast line between material such as this and the work of an inaccurate and untrustworthy narrator. But the difference, nevertheless, is very real, and it is not one of dégree only but of kind. The first thing to be done, therefore, is to determine which of the two it is. But when we have decided that the material is nothing but a legend, what is to be done with it ? The answer is that we cannot use it for historical purposes. We may, indeed, read it as a legend, connected with our subject, and throwing light upon the character of the people amongst whom it originated though not on their history;* but 1 As Freeman has used it in his Old English History. Some Special Aspects of Study 1385 that is all. It probably is based on some fact, but we cannot interpret it, for we do not know the law which underlies its formation: it is, in Niebuhr’s words, “a mirage produced by an invisible object according to an unknown law of refraction.” For instance, in a very large number of parishes all over England it is told that the church was despoiled by Oliver Cromwell, so many in fact that if he had done nothing else he would have had plenty to occupy his time. And yet we know that he did nothing of the sort. The allegation may represent something, but it tells us—nothing. So with other legends. Some of the alleged events may have happened; but history is not concerned with what may have happened; else we might all fill in the meagre outlines of any narrative out of our own imaginations.!_ Least of all may we neglect the fantastic or marvellous elements as untrue and accept the rest; for the evidence for one part of the story is at any rate no worse and no better than that for the other; and+such a process, it has been said, would be like rejecting Puss in Boots and accepting the Marquis of Carabas as an historical character.? (6) There remains, however, a very great deal which cannot possibly be explained on grounds such as these: chronicles, for instance, which are contemporary or practically contemporary, in which marvels of all sorts are described with just 1 As the younger Froude did in the work which he contri- buted to Newman’s series of Lives of the English Saints. 2 Langlois and Seignobos, op. cit., p. 183. 136 Study of Ecclesiastical History the same naturalness and unconsciousness of effect as any other part of the narrative, and often, as in Beda, with the most careful naming of witnesses and informants, &c. What then is to be said with regard to things such as these? ‘The answer must be twofold. (1) Marvels are described by such writers with absolute naturalness and truthfulness simply because they were so absolutely natural and real to them. Life was full of marvels, and the marvellous thing would have been if they had not been recorded. It does not indeed follow that we should have seen them had we been there, or that if so we should have found them as incapable of explanation by natural causes as people then did: that is a matter which can only be decided by a consideration of al/ the antecedent cireum- stances, natural and spiritual! They may or may not have had an objective reality. But any- how, there they are: they are as much part of the life of the peoples concerned as their actions are, or their beliefs; and the historian has but to investigate and record. (2) And they may truly have had the character of signs (oneia) without being supernatural events; for a oneiov is rela- tive to him who gives and to him who receives it, and does not depend on the method by which it is given. That oneia do occur nowadays is a matter of experience. The man who asserts the con- trary on the ground that he has never experienced anything of the sort has no more right to deny 1 See Illingworth, Reason and Revelation, chap. viii, “ The Modern View of Christian Evidence.” Some Special Aspects of Study 137 this on the basis of his lack of experience than the man who is colour-blind has the right to deny the existence of colour; and his denial has even less weight if he is the kind of man who is not antecedently likely to be influenced by any but material considerations. If then there are signs in our own day for those who have eyes to see, we have a right to believe that there were such then; and if we see that the marvels which are recorded by witnesses were followed by the appropriate effects in the lives of those who witnessed them, we need not hesitate to allow this character to them, what- ever their actual objective nature may have been.! Vil One other point remains to be touched upon. The student cannot go far without noticing what is one of the saddest and yet (from another point of view) one of the most glorious facts about the Church: viz. the vast difference between its destiny and the spirit which ever strives for the mastery in it. On the one hand, sad as it is to have to confess it, it is nevertheless true that the representatives of the Church have not in all ages been on the side of progress in times of change, nor have they, as a rule, been ready to claim what was good as 1 The argument of John Henry Newman in his “ Essay on Ecclesiastical Miracles,” prefixed to his translation of part of the Abbé Fleury’s Lcclesiastical History, Oxford, 1842, cannot be considered very satisfactory. But there is an admirable discussion of the historical value of documents containing miracles and prodigies in Dom C. Butler, The Lausiac History of Palladius, Cambridge, 1898, vol. i, § 15 ( Texts and Studies, vi. 1) 138 Study of Ecclesiastical History belonging to the Church by right. Usually there has been a willingness to meet new truths with worn-out philosophical weapons, to stifle inquiry with dogma, and to reject much that was because it did not fit in with established canons of thought. Neither in the sphere of life nor in that of thought can it be said that the contention of those who represented the Church was such as to win our whole-hearted sympathy: sometimes the very reverse is the case. ‘There is no need to give instances: the facts are patent. And yet in the long run everything that is good in the new order, whether in poetry or philosophy, in science or in morals, has at length gained its true home in the bosom of the Church. The facts which were regarded with jealous eyes, as endangering the Faith, have in the end been accepted and found to form new bulwarks of that Faith; all that is really good and true and enduring, reject it as we might, has ultimately proved to be ours. If we looked merely at our own age we might find much to make us doubtful and anxious; but if we look back over the past, we can no longer fail to see that the Church of the Living God is indeed the heir of all the ages. He who has come to see this will not have studied Ecclesiastical History in vain. For books bearing upon the subjects here dealt with, see Section II of the following chapter. CHAPTER VIII BIBLIOGRAPHY Ir is no part of the plan of this little volume to attempt to offer to the student anything like com- plete or systematic guidance with regard either to the contemporary documents or the modern works for the study of particular subjects in ecclesiastical history. The best work of the kind in existence is that of C. de Smedt, Jntroductio generalis ad historiam ecclesiasticam, Gand, 1876, which must always have a considerable value on account of its wide range, its thoroughness, and its systematic arrangement. As an actual working bibliography for the student of any par- ticular period, however, it can have been of little use from the first, and it is now very largely out of date so far as modern works are concerned. Still, it is the best book of the kind that we have. In point of fact, the range of subjects in Church history is so wide, and the literature, both ancient and modern, is so vast that any such plan would be impossible within the limits of the space at his disposal, even if the present writer were capable of attempting it. But there are other reasons too, on account of which it would hardly be worth attempting. For one thing the rate at which books are published nowadays is so great 139 ~ oy é ; 7" 140 Study of Ecclesiastical History : that a systematic bibliography of modern litera- ture would be almost out of date from the day of its publication. Then again, such a list of books, unless it were practically exhaustive, would not be likely to be helpful unless it were made with a view of supplying the needs of some particular class of student, in which case it would not be of much use to other students. But in point of fact the enterprising reader, if he can have occasional recourse to a good library, will soon discover for himself what are the available books upon any subject, and to judge between the good and the bad. No doubt he will occasionally make mistakes, but he will profit by his very mistakes, and meanwhile he will be acquiring information and learning to judge of books as he can in no other way. The material that he will make use of in the course of his investigations is almost endless. Most systematic books on Church his- tory give lists of authorities, besides what is contained in the notes, and the same sort of help will be found at the end of articles in the various historical and theological dictionaries. Subject-indexes of various kinds and systematic catalogues of libraries are sometimes useful; and so, to a much larger extent, are the chronicles of new books which appear from time to time, either in a separate form? or in the various historical and theological magazines. Each book or list that he consults will lead the student on 1The most valuable of these is the classified “ Monthly List” of books published in Europe and America, It is Bibliography 141 to others; and before long he will find that the difficulty is not so much to procure information as to master that which is already within his reach. All that will be attempted in this chapter, therefore, will be to give the merest sketch list of books on various subjects, together with a few hints to facilitate the use of them. English books will be chosen as far as possible. I The following are some of the chief dictionaries and encyclopaedias which may be consulted !: Dictionary of Christian Antiquities and Dictionary of Christian Biography. Dictionary of National Biography. F. Cabrol, Dictionnaire de l’archéologie Chrétienne et de la Liturgie, Paris, 1901 f. (In progress. Promises to be the largest and best work of the kind in existence.) Herzog, Plitt, and Hauck, Real-Encyklopddie fiir protestantische Theologie und Kirche. Third Edition. (In progress. An abridged trans- lation of the second edition with additions, edited by Philipp Schaff, Edinburgh, T. & T. Clark, is sometimes useful.) Pauly and Wissowa, Real-Encyklopddie der classischen Alterthumsnissenschaft, Vienna. (In progress.) issued by Messrs Tauchnitz of Leipzig, but can be obtained of Mr David Nutt, Messrs Williams & Norgate, or Messrs Deighton & Bell. 1 A Dictionary of Religion on a large scale is announced, to be edited by F. Hastings ; but it is not likely to see the . light for some time. 142 Study of Ecclesiastical History A. Vacant, Dictionnaire de la Théologie, Paris, 1901 f. (In progress. On the same scale as the work of Cabrol mentioned above.) Wetzer, Welte, and Kaulen, Kirchenlexikon oder Encyklopiidie der katholischen Theologie, Frei- burg, 1883 f. See also the following works in general bibliography : R. Ceillier, Histoire générale des auteurs sacrés et ecclésiastiques, new edition, Paris, 1858-69. (In chronological order.) U. Chevalier, Répertoire des sources historiques du moyen-dge, Paris, 1883, &c. (The first part is biographical, giving under each name refer- ences to all the chief sources and modern writings in which the person referred to is mentioned ; the second part, which treats the names of places in the same way, is in course of publication. ) A. Ebert, Allgemeine Geschichte der Litteratur des Mittelalters im Abendland, 3 vols, Leipzig, 1874-87. J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca sive Notitia Scriptorum Veterum Graecorum, &e., ed. 4, by T. C. Harles, 12 vols, Hamburg, 1790-1809 ; index (imperfect), Leipzig, 1837. (On the same general lines as Ceillier.) J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Latina, ed. J. D. Mansi and I. A. Ernesti, Leipzig, 1773, 6 vols in 3, or Florence, 1858. (Largely superseded by Chevalier but still useful.) A. Potthast, Bibliotheca historica Medti Aevi, second edition, Berlin, 1896. (An invaluable book, giving in alphabetical order the chief writers Bibliography 143 and anonymous writings of the middle ages, with particulars as to manuscripts, editions, and modern works relating to them.) W. S. Teuffel, History of Roman Literature, ed. L. Schwabe, translated with large additions by G, C. Warr, 2 vols, London, 1891-2. The following books, many of which are of course of the highest value in themselves, are mentioned here on account of the bibliographical help which they will afford to the student : Annals of England [By W. E. F(laherty)], Lon- don, 1876. (With full list of chronicles, &c. : a convenient book of reference.) P. Batiffol, La Littérature Grecque, Paris, 1897. (Greek Christian literature down to the fourth century.) The Cambridge Modern History. (Very full biblio- graphies of documents and modern works at the end of each volume.) F. C. Dahlmann, G. Waitz, and E. Steindorff, Quel- lenkunde der deutschen Geschichte, Gottingen, 1894. (A chronological bibliography of Ger- man history. J. G. Dowling, Notitia scriptorum ss. patrum et aliorum veteris ecclesiae monumentorum, Oxford, 1839. (Giving a full list of the contents of fifty great collections of patristic and other documents, which had been published down to that date.) S. R. Gardiner and J. B. Mullinger, Introduction to the Study of English History, third edition, ; | “ar, ' 4 > , 144 Study of Ecclesiastical History London, 1894. (The second part deals-with the sources and modern works. ) J. Gillow, Bibliographical Dictionary of English [Roman] Catholics, 5 vols, London, 1885-1902. C. Gross, Sources and Literature of English History to about 1485, London, 1900. G. Kriiger, History of Early Christian Literature, tr. by C. R. Gillett, London, 1897. W. Moeller, History of the Christian Church, 3 vols, 1892-1900. (To 1648. Most valuable for references to documents and modern works, and especially to the latest work scattered through German and other periodicals. ) A. Molinier, Les Sources de ’ histoire de France, Paris, 1901 f. (Three vols published, to 1328.) H. B. Swete, Patristic Study, London, 1902. T. Wright, Bibliographia Britannica literaria, 2 vols, London, 1842-6. In addition to these, the Subject-Index of Modern Works added to the Library of the British Museum since 1880, edited by G. K. Fortescue, will be found very useful; and even more so is the Catalogue of the London lanes edited by C. T. Hagbert Wright, London, 1903. This latter not only contains the names of a very large collection of books (about 220,000) but gives full lists of the contents of a great many collections, such as Migne’s Patrologia, the Coleccién de documentos inéditos, and of the pub- lications of a great many societies and clubs. Owing to this, and to its convenience of arrangement and abundant cross-references, it is one of the most convenient bibliographical collections that we possess. wt Bibliography 145 II The following books will be found useful for study under the special heads referred to in Chapter VII. The student will of course bear in mind the fact that the books are written from very different stand- points, for which allowance must be made, and that he must read carefully and discriminatingly. 1. JupaismM AND CHRISTIANITY. G. H. A. von Ewald, History of Israel, 8 vols, London, 1867-86 (especially vols vi-viii). H. Graetz, History of the Jews, 5 vols, London, 1891-2. C. G. Montefiore, Religion of the Ancient Hebrens, London, 1892. A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the Jenish Church, 3 vols, London, many editions. (Largely superseded, but still useful if read with care.) J. J. I. von Doellinger, Heidenthum und Judenthum, Ratisbon, 1857. (Translated into English as The. Gentile and the Jew, 2 vols, London, 1862.) A. Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah, 2 vols, London, 1883. A. Edersheim, History of the Jenish Nation, ed. H. A. White, London, 1896. A. Hausrath, History of New Testament Times, 6 vols, London, 1878-95. E. Schiirer, History of the Jewish People in the Time of Christ, 6 vols, Edinburgh, 1890-91. J. B. Lightfoot, Epistle to the Colossians, Lon- K Bn Ns so > Pas 146 Study of Ecclesiastical History don, many editions: dissertation on “The Essenes.” 2. Tue HeatruHen Wortp anp CuRISTIANITY. Doellinger, Hausrath, and Schiirer ut supra. L. Friedlinder, Sillengeschichte Roms, seventh edi- tion, Leipzig, 1901. J. B. Lightfoot, Epistle to the Philippians, London, many editions: dissertation on “St Paul and Seneca.” H. J. S. Maine, Ancient Law, London, many editions. J. Marquardt and T. Mommsen, Handbuch der romischen Alterthiimer, 7 vols, Leipzig, 1874— 1884. C. Merivale, History of the Romans under the Empire, 8 vols, London, 1865, ete. . Mommsen, The Roman Provinces from Cesar to Diocletian, 2 vols, London, 1886. Dill, Roman Society in the Last Century of the Western Empire, London, 1898. K. Franke, Stoicismus und Christenthum, Breslau, 1876. G. Boissier, La religion romaine d Auguste aux G F lar} wn Antonins, 2 vols, Paris, 1892. . Boissier, La fin du paganisme, 2 vols, Paris, 1891. . Granger, The Worship of the Romans, London, 1895. 3. CHRISTIANITY AND OTHER RELIGIONS. R. S. Copleston, Buddhism, London, 1892. S. Lane-Poole, Siudies in a Mosque, London, 1883. Bibliography 147 S. Legge, The Religions of China compared nith Christianity, London, 1880. L. Krehl, Mohammed's Leben, Leipzig, 1884 W. Muir, Life of Mahomet, third edition, London, 1894. W. Muir, The Early Caliphate, London, 1891. Non-Christian Religious Systems, London, S.P.C.K., various years. A. M. Fairbairn, The Philosophy of the Christian Religion, London, 1902. C. Hardwick, Christ and other Masters, London, 1859. B. F. Westcott, The Gospel of Life, London, 1892. . CuristTIAN DocTrINE AND PHILosoPHy. A. Hahn, Bibliothek der Symbole, ed. A. Harnack, Breslau, 1897. Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 3 vols, London, 1882 f. . Kattenbusch, Das apostolische Symbol, 2 vols, Leipzig, 1894, 1900. . E. Burn, /ntroduction to the Creeds, London, 1899. A. Dorner, Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, 5 vols, Edinburgh, 1861 f. K. R. Hagenbach, History of Christian Doctrines, 3 vols, Edinburgh, 1880-81. A. Harnack, History of Dogma, 7 vols, London, 1894-99. E. Hatch, Influence of Greek Ideas upon the Church, fifth edition, London, 1895. F. Loofs, Leitfaden zum Studium der Dogmen- geschichte, Halle, 1893. ol eee mee 148 Study of Ecclesiastical History J. B. Hauréau, De la philosophie scholastique, 2 — vols, Paris, 1850. J. B, Hauréau, Histoire de la philosophie scholas- taque, 3 vols, Paris, 1872-80. R. L. Poole, Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought, London, 1884. J. Tulloch, Rational Theology in England during the Seventeenth Century, 2 vols, Edinburgh, 1872. L. Stephen, History of English Thought in the Eighteenth Century, 2 vols, London, 1881. 5. Canon Law, &c. Decretales pseudo - Isidorianae, ed. P. Hinschius, Leipzig, 1863. Quinque compilationes antiquae, ed. H. Friedberg, : Leipzig, 1882. Corpus Juris Canonici, ed. . Friedberg, 2 vols, Leipzig, 1879-81. J. D. Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplis- sima Collectio, Florence and Venice, 1759 f. W. Beveridge, Synodikon sive Pandectae Conciliorum ab Ecclesia Graeca receptorum, 2 vols, Oxford, 1672. G. A. Ralli and M. Potli, 2vvraypa trav Gedy Kai iepov Kavovev, 5 vols, Athens, 1852 f. A. Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Chris- tenthums, Leipzig, 1902. P. Hinschius, Das Kirchenrecht der Katholiken und Protestanten, 7 vols, Berlin, 1869-97. F. Maassen, Geschichte der Quellen des canonischen Rechts, Gratz, 1870. G. Phillips, Kirchenrecht, 8 vols, Regensburg, 1851, &e. Bibliography 149 J. F. von Schulte, Lehrbuch des Katholischen Kir- chenrechts, fourth edition, Stuttgart, 1886. J. F. von Schulte, Geschichte der Quellen des Kir- chenrechts, Stuttgart, 1875. R. Sohm, Kirchenrecht, Leipzig, 1892. L. Thomassin, Vetus et nova ecclesiae disciplina, Venice, 1773. Z. B. Van Espen, Scripta omnia and Supplementum, Louvain, 1753, and Paris, 1768. 6. Lirurerrs, &c. E. Martene, De antiquis ecclestae ritibus, Venice, 1783. L. A. Muratori, Liturgia Romana vetus, 2 vols, Venice, 1748. F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, vol. i (Eastern), Oxford, 1896. H. Denzinger, Ritus orientalium, Wiirtzburg, 1863. M. Magistretti, La Liturgia della Chiesa Milanese nel Secolo IV, Milan, 1899. M. Magistretti, Beroldus, Milan, 1894. P. Batiffol, Histotre du bréviaire romain, Paris, 1895. L. Duchesne, Origines du culte chrétien, third edition, Paris, 1902. (English translation by M. L. McClure, London, 1902.) J. Wordsworth, The Ministry of Grace, London, 1901. 7. MisceLttaNeous: Tue Papacy, &c. Liber Pontificalis, ed. L. Duchesne, 2 vols, Paris, 1886-92. (The great collection of bio- graphies, &c., of Roman popes till towards — a the end of the ninth century. A new edition by Mommsen is appearing in the Monumenta Germaniae Historiae.) J. Langen, Geschichte der rimischen Kirche, 4 vols, Bonn, 1881-1893. (By far the best general treatment in existence of the rise of the Papal power. Goes down to Innocent III.) F. Bohringer, Die Kirche Christi, Kirchengeschichte in Biographieen, 24 vols, Ziirich, &e., 1864-79. (Useful on account of its detailed treatment.) F. W. Puller, The Primitive Saints and the See of Rome, third edition, London, 1900. W. Bright, The Roman See in the Early Church, London, 1896. A. Robertson, Roman Claims to Supremacy, London, 1897. (Church Historical Society’s Publica- tions, No, xiii.) C. J. von Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, 10 vols, Freiburg, 1855-90. (Down to Constance and Basel: the later volumes are in part the work of J. Hergenréther. An English translation down to a.p. 787, 5 vols, Edinburgh, 1871-96.) S. Berger, Histoire de la Vulgate, Paris, 1893. B. F. Westcott, The Bible in the Church, London, many editions. J. A. Méhler, Symbolism: Doctrinal Differences between Catholics and Protestants, 2 vols, London, 1843 (and later editions). F. D. Maurice, The Kingdom of Christ, 2 vols, London, fourth edition, 1891. A. J. Mason, The Relation of Confirmation to Bap- tism, London, 1891. q Bibliography 151 J. Morinus, De sacris ecclesiae ordinationibus, Ant- werp, 1695. H. B. Swete, History of the Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Spirit, Cambridge, 1876. On a number of points of detail, especially such as have been made the subject of controversy, refer- ence should be made to the publications of the Church Historical Society (London, S.P.C.K.). A detailed list may be obtained from the Secretary, Church Historical Society, Sion College, London, E.C. Ill It must of course be remembered that any division of history into periods is only made for purposes of convenience, since history is continuous. But the following suggestions and lists of books dealing with special periods of Church history may be found useful by the student: 1. Earty Cuurcu History To THE ACCESSION OF Grecory THE Great (a.D. 594). Gibbon is of course indispensable; so are the great dictionaries (above, p. 141). The great work of L. S. Le Nain de Tillemont, Mémoires pour servir a Uhistoire ecclésiastique des 6 premiers siécles, 16 vols, Paris, 1710-12, is. still useful owing to its laborious fulness. Of the general Church histories, Neander, Langen, Schaff, and Moeller are perhaps the most useful. F. J. A. Hort, The Christian Ecclesia, London, 1897. & o_ 152 Study of Ecclesiastical History F. J. A. Hort, Judaistic Christianity, Cambridge, 1894. F. J. A. Hort, Six Lectures on the ante-Nicene Fathers, London, 1895. J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 5 vols, . London, 1885-90 (invaluable). | J. B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, lesser edition, London, 1891. H. L. Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies, London, 1875. W. M. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, Cc e London, many editions. (Very suggestive.) . Merivale, Conversion of the Roman Empire, second edition, London, 1865. . Allard, Histotre des persécutions, 5 vols, Paris, 1892, &c. (The fullest treatment of the subject that we possess.) P. Allard, Le Christianisme et l'empire romain de Néron a@ Théodore, Paris, 1896. (A good summary.) C. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria, Oxford, 1896. E. W. Benson, Cyprian, London, 1897. A. de Broglie, L’Eglise et l'empire romain au 4° siecle, 6 vols, Paris, 1856-66. . M. Gwatkin, Studies of Arianism, Cambridge, 1882. Robertson, Athanasius, Oxford, 1892. (Nicene and post-Nicene Library.) Allard, Julien Apostat, 3 vols, Paris, 1900-3. . Bright, The Age of the Fathers, 2 vols, Oxford, 1903. . R. W. Stephens, Life of St Chrysostom, London, 1902. a> . P a Bibliography 153 J. McCabe, St Augustine of Hippo, London, 1902. (Well written, but biased.) W. S. Crawfurd, Synesius the Hellene, London, 1901. C. Gore, Leo the Great, London [1880]. W. H. Hutton, Church in the Siath Century, London, 1897. C. Diehl, Justinien, Paris, 1901. F. J. Foakes Jackson, History of the Church to 451, second edition, Cambridge, 1897. (This and the two following are text-books.) S. Cheetham, History of the Christian Church to 600 a.p., London, 1894. L. Pullan, History of Early Christianity, London, 1893. (To the third century.) See also the Suggestions for the Study of Early Church History, by the present writer (Church Historical Society’s Publications, No. Ixxvi, price 4d), where the subject is dealt with on a much fuller scale. . From THE Accession oF GREGORY THE GREAT TO THE Rise oF HILDEBRAND (a.D. 1054). The general Church histories in English are not very good for this period. Moeller, however, is invaluable, as also is Langen, for its own special subject. We lose the guidance of the Dictionary of Christian Biography after a.v. 800. P. Jatfé, Regesta pontificum Romanorum ad annum 1198, ed. G. Wattenbach, &c., 2 vols, Leipzig, 1885-98. (Précis of papal documents; an invaluable source of information from this time forward ) nee. g hte -! ee “ aha f . ms bP a 154 Study of Ecclesiastical History J. A. G. von Pflugk-Harttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita, 3 vols, Tiibingen and Stuttgart, 1881-1888. (Gives the text of documents hitherto inedited.) J. M. Watterich, Pontificum Romanorum vitae ab aequalibus conscriptae, 2 vols, Leipzig, 1862. (Contains contemporary lives of the popes from 872-1099 : an attempt to supply the place left vacant by the cessation of the Liber Pontificalis. ) J. F. Boehmer (and others), Regesta imperii, Inns- briick, 1889, &e. (Précis of imperial docu- ments. ) W, Altmann and E. Bernheim, Ausgemihlte Urdkun- den sur Erliuterung der Verfassungsgeschichte Deutschlands, Berlin, 1895. (Useful collec- tions of documents.) F. Gregorovius, History of the City of Rome in the Middle Ages, 7 vols in 11, London, 1894-1900. (From the fifth century to the sixteenth. Not always quite judicious or accurate, but still a most useful guide to the whole of the middle ages.) T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, Oxford, 1880- 1899. (A very interesting and valuable account of the period from a.p, 376-800. Vols vi—-viii especially concern us.) F. Dahn, Die Konige der Germanen, vols 1-8, Leipzig, 1861-1899. N. D. Fustel de Coulanges, Histoire des institutions politiques de l’ancienne France, 6 vols, Paris, 1875-92. W. Giesebrecht, Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserseit, fifth edition, vols 1-3, Leipzig, 1881-90. Bibliography 155 H. K. Mann, History of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, 1901 f. (From Gregory I: in progress. Written from a pronouncedly ultra- montane standpointand somewhat amateurish, but well-informed.) L. Duchesne, Les premiers temps de [ Etat pontifical, Paris, 1898. E. Emerton, /ntroduction to the Middle Ages, Boston, 1888. (From 378-800. An excellent outline.) E. Emerton, Medieval Europe, Boston, 1894. (Con- tinuation of the former.) R. W. Church, The Beginning of the Middle Ages, London, 1894 (valuable). J. Barmby, Gregory the Great, London, 1892 (popular). F. W. Kellett, Gregory the Great and his Relations nith Gaul, Cambridge, 1899. C. Merivale and G. F. Maclear, Conversion of the West, 5 vols, London, S.P.C.K. (popular). J. Mendham, The Seventh General Council, London, n.d. (c. 1840). (Translations of documents for the most part.) Eginhard [Einhard], Life of Charles the Great. Tr. by W. Glaister, London, 1877. T. Hodgkin, Charles the Great, London, 1897. J. I. Mombert, History of Charles the Great, London, 1888. J. Bass Mullinger, Schools of Charles the Great, London, 1877. J. A. G. Hergenréther, Photius, 3 vols, Regens- burg, 1867-69. E. Hatch, Gronth of Church Institutions, London, 1887. ata 156 Study of Ecclesiastical History S. R. Maitland, The Dark Ages, London, many editions. S. Lane-Poole, History of Egypt in the Middle Ages, London, 1901. R. P. A. Dozy, Histoire des Musulmans d’ Espagne, 4 vols, Leyden, 1861. 3. From THE Time or Hi_tpesrRaNnD TO THE END OF THE FirreENTH CENTURY. Langen, Gregorovius, and Giesebrecht are still useful. Milman improves as he goes on; but from 1376 his place is taken altogether by Creighton. Jaffé (after 1198 Potthast), Pflugk-Harttung, and Boehmer are still in- valuable. The registers of the Popes from the middle of the thirteenth century are being pub- lished under the auspices of the French School in Rome (see below under Berger and Prou). A. Potthast, Regesta pontificum Romanorum, 1198- 1304, 2 vols, Berlin, 1874—5. S. Loewenfeld, Epistolae pontificum Romanorum ineditae, Leipzig, 1885. E. Berger, Les registres d’ Innocent IV, Paris, 1886. M. Prou, Les registres d’Honorius IV, Paris, 1886. (And the registers of later popes.) M. Goldast, Monarchia 8S, Romani imperii, 3 vols, Hanover and Frankfort, 1611-13. J. Bryce, The Holy Roman Empire, London, many editions. H. A. L. Fisher, The Medieval Empire, 2 vols, London, 1900. J. J. I. von Doellinger, Fables respecting the Popes of the Middle Ages, London, 1871. Bibliography 157 P. Jaffé, Monumenta Gregoriana, Berlin (Bibl. rer. Germanicarum, 1864-73, vol. ii.). A. F. Villemain, Life of Gregory VII, 2 vols, London, 1874. W. R. W. Stephens, Hildebrand and his Times, London, 1888 (popular). R. W. Church, Life of St Anselm, London, many editions. B. Kugler, Geschichte der Kreuzsiige, Berlin, 1880. R. Réhricht, Beitrage zur Geschichte der Kreussiige, 2 vols, Berlin, 1874—78. R. Rohricht, Geschichte der Kreuzsiige im Umriss, Innsbriick, 1898. (An excellent summary.) T. A. Archer and C. L. Kingsford, The Crusades, London, 1894. J. C. Morison, Life of St Bernard, London, 1868. U. Balzani, The Popes and the Hohenstaufen, Lon- don, 1889 (popular). G. B. Testa, The War of Frederick I against the Communes of Lombardy, London, 1887. I. Farnell, The Lives of the Troubadours, London, 1896. F. von Hurter, Geschichte Innocenz III, 4 vols, Hamburg, 1834-42. (French translation by St Cheron and Haiber, Paris, 1855.) H. D. Lacordaire, Vie de St Dominique, Paris, many editions. P. Sabatier, Vie de S,. Frangois d’Assise,1 Paris, 1 For other literature on St Francis and the Franciscan movement see the first occasional paper of the British branch of the International Society of Franciscan Studies. (Secretary, Rev. James Adderley, St Mark’s Vicarage, Mary- lebone Road, London.) 158 Study of Ecclesiastical History many editions. (English translation by L. S. Houghton, London, many editions.) T. L. Kington [Oliphant], History of Frederick II, 2 vols, Cambridge, 1862. M. Amari, Guerra del Vespro Siciliano, new edition, Florence, 1897. (Translation of an old edition by the Earl of Ellesmere, 3 vols, London, 1850.) L. Tosti, Storia de Bonifazio VIII, 2 vols, Monte Cassino, 1846. M. Creighton, History of the Papacy to the Sack of Rome, 6 vols, London, 1897. L. Pastor, History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages, 6 vols, London, 1891-98. F, Palacky, Documenta J. Hus vitam &c, illus- trantia, Prag, 1869. H. B. Workman, The Church in the Middle Ages, London, 1898, 1900. H. B. Workman, The Dann of the Reformation, 2 vols, London, 1901-2. (Good popular works. ) J. H. Wylie, The Council of Constance to the Death of Hus, London, 1900. J. Burckhardt, The Civilisation of the Renaissance, London, 1890. J. Addington Symonds, Renaissance in Italy, T vols, London, 1897-99. P. Villari, Life of Savonarola, 2 vols, London, 1888. P. Villari, Machiavelli and his Times, 2 vols, London, 1892. A. von Reumont, Lorenso de’ Medici, 2 vols, London, 1876. Bibliography 159 E. Armstrong, Lorenzo de’ Medici, London, 1897 (Heroes of the Nations). . Tue Periop or THE REFORMATION, Of the general Church histories, Moeller, Schaff, and Mosheim are especially valuable, the latter in particular for all that concerns the smaller religious bodies. On the secular side, the Cambridge Modern History supersedes all else (especially vol. ii, with a very complete bibliography). Unfortunately we lose Creigh- ton after a.p. 1527. C. Beard (Unitarian), The Reformation of the Six- teenth Century (Hibbert Lectures), London, 1883. C. Beard, Martin Luther and the Reformation in Germany, London, 1889. K. R. Hagenbach, History of the Reformation in Germany and Switzerland, 2 vols, Edinburgh, 1878. L. Von Ranke, History of the Popes, London, many editions. A. L. Moore, History of the Reformation, London, 1890 (lectures, unsystematic), M. Philippson, La Contre-Révolution, Brussels, 1884. J. Jortin, Life of Erasmus, 2 vols, London, 1758-60. R. B. Drummond, Erasmus, 2 vols, London, 1873. J. Késtlin, Life of Luther, London, 1883. (Second edition of the original, practically a new book, 2 vols, Elberfeld, 1883.) Th. Kolde, Martin Luther, 2 vols, Gotha, 1884-93. F. W. Kampschulte, Calvin in Genf, Leipzig, 1896- 99. 160 Study of Ecclesiastical History R. Stihelin, Zwingli, 2 vols, Basel, 1895-7. Heroes of the Reformation, ed. by S. M. Jackson, New York, 1898 f. (Good popular biogra- phies of Erasmus, Luther, Calvin, Melan- chthon, Zwingli, Beza, and others.) P. Sarpi, History of the Council of Trent. (Many translations; the best in French, with notes by P. F. Le Courayer.) C. Cantu, Gli Eretici d’ Italia, 3 vols, Turin, 1865-7. M. Menendez y Pelayo, Historia de los Heterodoxos Espaiioles, 3 vols, Madrid, 1880-82. J. L. Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic, many editions. J. L. Motley, The United Netherlands, 4 vols, London, 1875-6. H. M. Baird, The Rise of the Huguenots, 2 vols, London, 1880. H. M. Baird, The Huguenots and Henry of Navarre, 2 vols, London, 1886. L. A. Anjou, Svenska Kyrko-reformationens Historia, 8 vols, Stockholm, 1851. (English transla- tion by H. Mason, New York, 1859.) A. C. Bang, Den Norske Kirkes Historie i det sextende aarhundrede, Christiania, 1901. For a fuller treatment see the (forthcoming) Sug- gestions for the Study of the History of the Reformation Period, by the present writer (Chureh Historical Society's Publications). 5. Tue Post-Rerormation Perron. The material is so voluminous, and the lines of development so widespread, that it is diffi- cult to study the Church history of modern Bibliography 161 days in a collected form. The general Church histories of Gieseler (vol. v, Bonn, 1855) and Mosheim, however (especially Mosheim in its English dress, with continua- tions by Soames and Stubbs, the latter valu- able), are very convenient ; and the following books may also be used: J. J. I. von Doellinger, The Church and the Churches, London, 1862. K. R. Hagenbach, History of the Church in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, 2 vols, New York, 1869 (being vols vi and vii of his Kirchengeschichte, Leipzig, 1870-1887, of which vols iv and v will also be found useful), F. Nippold, Handbuch der neuesten Kirchengeschichte, 5 vols, Berlin, 1880-96. (There is an abbre- viated translation of vol. ii by L. Schwab, The Papacy in the Nineteenth Century, New York, 1900.) J. Tholuck, Das kirchliche Leben des 17. Jahrhun- derts, 2 vols, Berlin, 1861-2. E. L. T. Henke, Neuere Kirchengeschichte, 3 vols, Halle, 1874-80. FY, The Church of Christ knows no limits of space or time, but its history has been realised from the first in that of Churches which are limited both in space and time. The conception of the Cuurcues is as ancient and in one sense (from the point of view of the historian) as important as that of the Cuurcn. L 162 Study of Ecclesiastical History Amongst books dealing with the history of par- ticular Churches, and of particular institutions, the following may be mentioned : 1, Toe Eastern Cuurcues, M. Le Quien, Oriens Christianus, 3 vols, Paris, 1740. J. S. Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis, 4 vols, Rome, 1719-28. H. Denzinger, Ritus Orientalium, Wiirzburg, 1863. F. E. Brightman, Liturgies Eastern and Western, vol. i, Oxford, 1896. E. J. Kimmel, Monumenta fidei Ecclesiae Orientalis, 2 vols, Jena, 1850. G. A. Ralli and M. Potli, 2tvraypa trav Oey Kai iepdv Kavovwv, 5 vols, Athens, 1852 f. G. Finlay, History of Greece, ed. H. F. Tozer, 7 vols, Oxford, 1877. Leo Allatius, De ecclesiae orientalis et occidentalis consensione, Kéln, 1648. G. F. Hertzberg, Geschichte der Byzantiner, Berlin, 1883. J. M. Neale, History of the Holy Eastern Church, 5 vols, 1847, 1850, 1873. J. M. Vansleb, Histoire de léglise d’ Alexandrie, Paris, 1677. A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the Eastern Church, Lon- don, 1883. J. Hackett, History of the Church of Cyprus, Lon- don, 1901. A. N. Mouravieff, History of Church of Russia, Oxford, 1842. A. Leroy Beaulieu, L’empire des Tsars, vol. iii, Paris, 1889. Bibliography 163 R. W. Blackmore, Doctrine of the Russian Church, Aberdeen, 1845. W. J. Birkbeck, Russia and the English Church, vol. i, London, 1895. J. Ludolf, Historia £thiopica and Commentarius, Frankfurt, 1691-92. A. J. Butler, Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt, Oxford, 1884. E. Dulaurier, Histoire de ['église Arméniane, Paris, 1859. G. P. Badger, The Nestorians, 2 vols., London, 1852. J. W. Etheridge, The Syrian Churches, London, 1846. A. J. Maclean, The Catholicos of the East and his People, London, 1891. 2. Tue Enciish Cuurcu. W. R. W. Stephens (editor), History of the Church of England, 7 vols, London, 1899 f. (Refer- ences to authorities ; indispensable.) Jeremy Collier, Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain, 9 vols, London, 1840. (To the death of Charles II.) T. Fuller, Church History of Britain, ed. J. S. Brewer, 6 vols, London, 1862 f. H. O. Wakeman, History of the Church of England, London, many editions. G. G. Perry, Student’s History of the Church of England, 3 vols, London, many editions. J. H. Overton, The Church of England, 2 vols, London [1897]. 164 Study of Ecclesiastical History W. H. Hutton, Short History of the Church in Great Britain, London, 1899. D. Wilkins, Concilia Magnae Britanniae, 4 vols, London, 1737. A. W. Haddan and W. Stubbs, Councils and Eccle- siastical Documents, 3 vols, Oxford, 1869-78. J. Johnson, English Canons, 2 vols, Oxford, 1850-51. E. Cardwell, Works, Oxford, 1840-44. W. Lyndwode, Provinciale, Oxford, 1679.. E. Gibson, Codex Juris Ecclesiastici Anglicani, second edition, 2 vols, Oxford, 1761. H. Gee and W. J. Hardy, Documents illustrative of English Church History, London, 1896. W. Maskell, Monumenta Ritualia Ecclesiae Angli- canae, 3 vols, Oxford, 1882. W. Maskell, Ancient Liturgy of the Church of England, Oxford, 1882. F. Makower, Constitutional History of the Church of England, London, 1895. R. W. Dixon, History of the English Church (from the beginning of the Reformation to 1570), 6 vols, London, 1878-1902. W. E. Collins, The English Reformation and its Consequences, London, 1901. For further information see Suggestions for the Study of English Church History, by the present writer. (Church Historical Society’s Publica- tions, No. Ixi, price 2d.) 8. Orner Loca CuvrcueEs. V. Guettée, Histoire de l'église de France, 12 vols, Paris, 1856. J. Longueval, &c., Histoire de ['église Gallicane, 18 vols, Paris, 1732-49. Bibliography 165 W. H. Jervis, History of the Church of France from 1516, 3 vols, London, 1872-82. A. J. Binterim, Geschichte der deutschen Concilien, 7 vols, Mainz, 1835-48. F, W. Rettberg, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 2 vols, Géttingen, 1846-48. A. Hauck, Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands, 3 vols, Leipzig, 1896-1900. H. Florez and others, Espaia Sagrada, 52 vols, Madrid, 17541879. V. de la Fuente, Historia eclesidstica de Espana, 5 vols, Madrid, 1874, &c. P. B. Gams, Kirchengeschichte von Spanien, 5 vols, Regensburg, 1862-70. R. Altamira y Crevea, Historia de Espaiia, 3 vols, Barcelona, 1900 f. (An admirable short history.) F. Miinter, Kirchengeschichte von Dénemark und Norwegen, 3 vols, Leipzig, 1823-33. L. N. Helveg, Den Danske Kirkes Historie, 5 vols, Copenhagen, 1870. T. B. Willson, History of Church and State in Norway, London, 1903. O. Montelius, H. Hildebrand, &c, Sveriges historia, 6 vols, Stockholm, 1877-81. 4, Tue Monastic Orpers, &c. L. Holstenius, Coder Regularum, ed. M. Brockie, 6 vols, Vienna, 1759. 166 Study of Ecclesiastical History E. Martene, De antiquis monachorum ritibus, Lyons, 1690. P. Helyot, Histoire des ordres monastiques, ed. Philippon, 7 vols, Paris, 1838. J. Mabillon, Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedict, 6 vols, Lucca, 1739-45. T. Malvenda, Annales Ordinis Praedicatorum, Naples, 1627. L. Wadding, Annales Minorum, 24 vols, Rome, 1731-1864. THE END Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & Co, Edinburgh & London Handbooks for the Clergy EDITED BY Tue Rey. ARTHUR W. ROBINSON, B.D. VICAR OF ALLHALLOWS BARKING BY THE TOWER Price 2s. 6d. each net. The purpose of the writers of the Volumes in this Series will be to present in a clear and attractive way the responsibilities and opportunities of the Clergy of to-day, and to offer such practical guidance, in regard both to aims and to methods, as experience may have shown to be valu- able. It is hoped that the Series, while primarily intended for those who are already face to face with the duties and problems of the ministerial office, may be of interest and assistance also to others who are consider- ing the question of entering into Holy Orders ; and, indeed, to all who have the welfare of the Church at heart. THE PERSONAL LIFE OF THE CLERGY. By the Eprror, Third Impression. PATRISTIC STUDY. By the Rev. H. B. Swers, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge. Second Edition. THE MINISTRY OF CONVERSION. By the Rev. A. J. Mason, D.D., Master of Pembroke College, Cambridge. Second Impression. FOREIGN MISSIONS. By the Right Rev. H. H. Montcomery, D.D., formerly Bishop of Tasmania, Secretary of the Society for the Pro- pagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts. Third Impression. THE STUDY OF THE GOSPELS. Bythe Very Rev. J. AnmitacE ROBINSON, D.D., Dean of Westminster. Third Impression. A CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC. By the Very Rev. Witrorp L. ROBBINS, Dean of the General Theological Seminary, New York. Second Impression. PASTORAL VISITATION. By the Rev. H. E. Savacz, M.A,, Vicar of South Shields, and Hon. Canon of Durham. AUTHORITY AND THE PRINCIPLE OF OBEDIENCE. By the Very Rey. T. B. STRONG, D.D., Dean of Christ Church. THE STUDY OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. By the Rev. W. E. Couns, M.A., Professor of Ecclesiastical History in King’s College, London, and Chairman of the Church Historical Society. SCIENCE AND RELIGION. By the Rev. P. N. Waaczrt, M.A., of the Society of St. John the Evangelist, Cowley. [In the Press. CHURCH MUSIC. By A. Mavetry RicHarpson, Mus. Doc, Organist of St. Saviour’s Collegiate Church, Southwark. [In the Press. INTEMPERANCE. By the Rev. H. H. Pererra, M.A., Vicar of Croydon, and Hon. Canon of Canterbury. (Jn the Press. SCHOOLS. By the Rev. W. Foxiey Norris, M.A., Rector of Barnsley, and Hon. Canon of Wakefield. (Zn Preparation. LAY WORK. By the Right Rev. Huysnz Yrarman-Bices, D.D., Lord Bishop of Southwark. Un Preparation. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. LONDON, NEW FORE, AND BOMBAY Che Orford Library of Wractical a Edited by the Rev, W. C. E. Newsout, M.A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul's; and the Rev. DARWELL Stor, M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford, Price 5s. per Volwme. RELIGION. By the Rev. W. C. E. Newsort, M.A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul's. Fifth Impression. HOLY BAPTISM. By the Rev. Darwett Stone, M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. Third Edition. CONFIRMATION. By the Right Rev. A.C, A. Hatt, D.D., Bishop of Vermont. Third Impression. THE HISTORY OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER, | By the Rey. LEIGHTON PULLAN, M.A., Fellow of St. John Baptist’s College, Oxford. Third Edition. HOLY MATRIMONY. By the Rev. W. J. Knox Lirtie, M.A., Canon of Worcester. Second Edition. THE INCARNATION, By the Rev. H. V.S. Eox, M.A., Rector of Bethnal Green, Second Edition. FOREIGN MISSIONS. By the Right Rev. E. T. Cuurton, D.D., formerly Bishop of Nassau. PRAYER. By the Rev. ArtHur JoHN Woxr.ugper, M.A., Canon and Chancellor of Truro. Second Edition. SUNDAY. By the Rev. W. B. Trevetyan, M.A., Vicar of St. Matthew's, Westminster. Second Edition. THE CHRISTIAN TRADITION. By the Rev. LzicHTon Putian, M.A., Fellow of St. John Baptist’s College, Oxford. BOOKS OF DEVOTION. By the Rev. Cuartes BopineTon, Canon and Treasurer of Lichfield. HOLY ORDERS. By the Rev. A. R. WuiTHam, M.A., Principal of Culham College, Abingdon. THE CHURCH CATECHISM THE CHRISTIAN’S MANUAL, By the Rev. W. C. E. NEWBOLT, M.A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul’s. THE HOLY COMMUNION. By the Rev. D, Sronz, M.A, Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. (Un the Press. IN PREPARATION, THE BIBLE. By the Rev. Darnwett Strong, M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. RELIGIOUS CEREMONIAL. By the Rev. Watrer Howarp FRERE, M.A., of the Community of the Resurrection, Examining Chaplain to the ‘Bishop of Rochester. VISITATION OF THE SICK. By the Rev. E. F. Russert, M.A, of St. Alban’s, Holborn CHURCH WORK. By the Rev. Bernarp ReyrNnowps, M.A., Pre- bendary of St. Paul’s. OLD TESTAMENT CRITICISM. By the Very Rev. Henry Wacz, D.D., Dean of Canterbury. NEW TESTAMENT CRITICISM. By the Rev. R. J, Know1ina, D.D., Professor of New Testament Exegesis at King’s College, London. CHURCH HISTORY. By the Rev. H. N. Barz, M.A, Magdalen College, Oxford. 2 vols. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO, LONDON, NEW ORE, AND BOMBAY Messts. Longmans & Co.’s Mew Books THE AGE OF THE FATHERS: Being Chapters in the History of the Church during the Fourth and Fifth Century. By the late WILLIAM BRIGHT, D.D., Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the University of Oxford, and Canon of Christ Church. Edited by WALTER Loog, D.D., Warden of Keble College, Oxford, and C. H, TURNER, M.A., Magdalen College, Oxford. 2 vols., 8vo. 28s, net. ORDINATION ADDRESSES. By W. Srusss, D.D., late Lord Bishop of Oxford. Edited by the Rev. E. E. HouMEs, formerly Domestic Chaplain to the Bishop; Hon. Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. With Photogravure Portrait. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. UNIVERSITY AND OTHER SERMONS. By Manpet CREIGHTON, late Bishop of London. Crown 8vo. 65s. net. THE CHURCH AND THE NATION: Charges and Addresses, By MANDELL CREIGHTON, D.D., late Lord Bishop of London, Crown 8vo. 5s. net. APOSTLES OF THE LORD: Being Six Lectures on Pastoral Theology, delivered in the Divinity School, Cambridge. Lent Term, 1901. By the Rev. W. C. E. NEWBOLT, M,A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul's Cathedral. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net. PRIESTLY BLEMISHES Nor, Some Secret Hindrances to the Realisation of Priestly Ideals. A Sequel. Being a Second Course of Prac- tical Lectures delivered in St. Paul’s Cathedral to ‘Our Society” and other Clergy in Lent 1902. By the Rev. W. C. E. NEWBOLT, M.A., Canon and Chancellor of St. Paul’s Cathedral. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. PRAEPARATIO: Or, Notes of Preparation for Holy Communion founded on the Collect, Epistle, and Gospel, for Every Sunday in the Year. With Preface by the Rev. GEORGE CONGREVE, S.S.J.E. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. THE INVOCATION OF SAINTS. An Article reprinted, with slight Additions, from the Church Quarterly Review. By DARWELL STONE, M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. THE GLORY OF THE CROSS. Sermons by the Rev. Joun WAKEFORD, B.D., Vicar of St. Margaret, Anfield, Liverpool. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. MEDITATIONS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT FOR EVERY DAY IN THE YEAR. By the Rev. B. W. RANDOLPH, D.D., Principal of the Theological College, Ely. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. GOD AND THE INDIVIDUAL. By the Very Rev. T. B, Srnone, D.D., Dean of Christ Church, Oxford. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. LONDON, NEW bie sa AND BOMBAY M Lath i: * e Books 4 . Messrs. Longmans & Co.’s Mew SEconD AND CHEAPER EDITION, REVISED. THE MINISTRY OF GRACE: Studies in Early Church History, with Reference to Present Problems. By JOHN WORDSWORTH, Bishop of Salisbury, D.D. Oxford, Hon. D.D, Berne, Hon. LL.D. Dublin. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net. GOSPEL RECORDS INTERPRETED BY HUMAN EXPERI- ENCE. By H. A. DALLAS, Author of ‘‘The Victory that Overcometh.” Crown 8vo. 65s. net. JESUS’ WAY: An Appreciation of the Teaching in the Synoptic Gospels. By WILLIAM DE WITT Hybz, President of Bowdoin College, U.S. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net. FirrH IMPRESSION. THE VARIETIES OF RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE: A Study in Human Nature. Being the Gifford Lectures on Natural Religion delivered at Edinburgh in 1901-1902. By WILLIAM JAmeEs, LL.D., Professor of Philosophy at Harvard University. 8vo. 12s. net. THE CREEDS: An Historical and Doctrinal Exposition of the Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds. By the Rev. ALFRED G. Mor- TIMER, D.D., Rector of St. Mark’s, Philadelphia, U.S. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. HUMAN NATURE A REVELATION OF THE DIVINE: A Sequel to “Studies in the Character of Christ.” By the Rey. CHARLES HENRY ROBINSON, M.A., Editorial Secretary to the S.P.G. and Hon. Canon of Ripon. Crown 8vo. 6s. net. OUTLINES OF MEDITATIONS FOR USE IN RETREAT. By the Rev. DARWELL STONE, M.A., Librarian of the Pusey House, Oxford. Feap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. * ANIMA CHRISTI :” Devotional Addresses. By the Rev. Jessz BRETT, L.Th., Chaplain of All Saints’ Hospital, Eastbourne. Feap. 8vo. ls. net. By THE Rev. W. R. CARSON, Roman Catuouic Priest, AN EUCHARISTIC EIRENICON. With an Introduction by the Right Honourable the VISCOUNT HALIFAX. S8vo. Sewed, Is. 6d. net. REUNION ESSAYS. With an Appendix on the Non-infallible Force of the Bull Apost. Cure in condemnation of the Holy Orders of the Church of England. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. net. LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. LONDON, NEW YORK, AND BOMBAY oe Loe — =? " | 4 | t. te niin | n