_________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 3: Brownson-Clairvaux Creator(s): Herbermann, Charles George (1840-1916) Print Basis: 1907-1913 Rights: From online edition Copyright 2003 by K. Knight, used by permission CCEL Subjects: All; Reference LC Call no: BX841.C286 LC Subjects: Christian Denominations Roman Catholic Church Dictionaries. Encyclopedias _________________________________________________________________ THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA AN INTERNATIONAL WORK OF REFERENCE ON THE CONSTITUTION, DOCTRINE, DISCIPLINE, AND HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EDITED BY CHARLES G. HERBERMANN, Ph.D., LL.D. EDWARD A. PACE, Ph.D., D.D. CONDE B PALLEN, Ph.D., LL.D. THOMAS J. SHAHAN, D.D. JOHN J. WYNNE, S.J. ASSISTED BY NUMEROUS COLLABORATORS IN FIFTEEN VOLUMES VOLUME 3 Brownson-Clairvaux New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK _________________________________________________________________ Orestes Augustus Brownson Orestes Augustus Brownson Philosopher, essayist, reviewer, b. at Stockbridge, Vermont, U.S.A., 16 September, 1803; d. at Detroit, Michigan, 17 April, 1876. His childhood was passed on a small farm with plain country people, honest and upright Congregationalists, who treated him with kindness and affection, taught him the Lord's Prayer, the Apostles' Creed, and the Assembly's Catechism; to be honest and industrious, truthful in all circumstances, and never to let the sun go down on his wrath. With no young companions, his fondness for reading grew rapidly, though he had access to few books, and those of a grave or religious nature. At the age of nineteen he had a fair knowledge of grammar and arithmetic and could translate Virgil's poetry. In October, 1822, he joined the Presbyterian Church, dreamed of becoming a missionary, but very soon felt repelled by Presbyterian discipline, and still more by the doctrines of unconditional election and reprobation, and that God foreordains the wicked to sin necessarily, that He may damn them justly. Rather than sacrifice his belief in justice and humanity on the altar of a religion confessedly of human origin and fallible in its teachings, Brownson rejected Calvinism for so-called liberal Christianity, and early in 1824, at the age of twenty, avowed himself a Universalist. In June, 1826, he was ordained, and from that time until near the end of 1829, he preached and wrote as a Universalist minister, calling himself a Christian; but at last denying all Divine revelation, the Divinity of Christ, and a future judgment, he abandoned the ministry and became associated with Robert Dale Owen and Fanny Wright in their war on marriage, property, and religion, carried on in the "Free Enquirer" of New York, of which Brownson, then at Auburn, became corresponding editor. At the same time he established a journal in western New York in the interest of the Workingmen's Party, which they wished to use for securing the adoption of their system of education. But, besides this motive, Brownson's sympathy was always with the labouring class, and he entered with ardour on the work of elevating labour, making it respected and as well rewarded in its manual or servile, as in its mercantile or liberal, phases, and the end he aimed at was moral and social amelioration and equality, rather than political. The introduction of large industries carried on by means of vast outlays of capital or credit had reduced operatives to the condition of virtual slavery; but Brownson soon became satisfied that the remedy was not to be secured by arraying labour against capital by a political organization, but by inducing all classes to co-operate in the efforts to procure the improvement of the workingman's condition. He found, too, that he could not advance a single step in this direction without religion. An unbeliever in Christianity, he embraced the religion of Humanity, severed his connexion with the Workingmen's Party and with "The Free Enquirer", and on the first Sunday in February, 1831, began preaching in Ithaca, New York, as an independent minister. As a Universalist, he had edited their organ, "The Gospel Advocate"; he now edited and published his own organ, "The Philanthropist". Finding, from Dr. W. E. Channing's printed sermons, that Unitarians believed no more of Christianity than he did, he became associated with that denomination, and so remained for the next twelve years. In 1832 he was settled as pastor of the Unitarian Church at Walpole, New Hampshire; in 1834 he was installed pastor of the First Congregational Church at Canton, Massachusetts; and in 1836 he organized in Boston "The Society for Christian Union and Progress", to which he preached in the Old Masonic Temple, in Tremont Street. After conducting various periodicals, and contributing to others, the most important of which was "The Christian Examiner", he started a publication of his own called "The Boston Quarterly Review", the first number of which was dated January, 1838. Most of the articles of this review were written by him; but some were contributed by A. H. Everett, George Bancroft, George Ripley, A. Bronson Alcott, Sarah Margaret Fuller, Anne Charlotte Lynch, and other friends. Besides his articles on literary and philosophical subjects, his political essays in this review attracted attention throughout the country and brought him into close relations with the leaders of the Democratic Party. Although a steadfast Democrat, he disliked the name Democrat, and denounced pure democracy, called popular sovereignty, or the rule of the will of the majority, maintaining that government by the will, whether that of one man or that of many, was mere arbitrary government, and therefore tyranny, despotism, absolutism. Constitutions, if not too easily alterable, he thought a wholesome bridle on popular caprice, and he objected to legislation for the especial benefit of any individual or class; privileges i. e. private laws; exemption of stockholders in corporations from liability for debts of their corporation; tariffs to enrich the moneyed class at the expense of mechanics, agriculturists, and members of the liberal professions. He demanded equality of rights, not that men should be all equal, but that all should be on the same footing, and no man should make himself taller by standing on another's shoulders. In his "Review" for July, 1840, he carried the democratic principles to their extreme logical conclusions, and urged the abolition of Christianity; meaning, of course, the only Christianity he was acquainted with, if, indeed, it be Christianity; denounced the penal code, as bearing with peculiar severity on the poor, and the expense to the poor in civil cases; and, accepting the doctrine of Locke, Jefferson, Mirabeau, Portalis, Kent, and Blackstone, that the right to devise or bequeath property is based on statute, not on natural, law, he objected to the testamentary and hereditary descent of property; and, what gave more offence than all the rest, he condemned the modern industrial system, especially the system of labour at wages. In all this he only carried out the doctrine of European Socialists and the Saint-Simonians. Democrats were horrified by the article; Whigs paraded it as what Democrats were aiming at; and Van Buren, who was a candidate for a second term as President, blamed it as the main cause of his defeat. The manner in which he was assailed aroused Brownson's indignation, and he defended his essay with vigour in the following number of his "Review", and silenced the clamours against him, more than regaining the ground he had lost, so that he never commanded more attention, or had a more promising career open before him, than when, in 1844, he turned his back on honours and popularity to become a Catholic. At the end of 1842 the "Boston Quarterly Review" was merged in the "U.S. Democratic Review", of New York, a monthly publication, to each number of which Brownson contributed, and in which he set forth the principles of "Synthetic Philosophy" and a series of essays on the "Origin and Constitution of Government", which more than twenty years later he rewrote and published with the title of "The American Republic". The doctrine of these essays provoked such repeated complaints from the editor of the "Democratic Review", that Brownson severed his connexion with that monthly and resumed the publication of his own review, changing the title from "Boston" to "Brownson's Quarterly Review". The first number was issued in January, 1844, and the last in October, 1875. From January, 1865, to October, 1872, he suspended its publication. The printed works of Brownson, other than contributions to his own and other journals, from the commencement of his preaching to the establishment of this review consisted of his sermons, orations, and other public addresses; his "New Views of Christianity, Society, and the Church" (Boston, 1836), in which he objected to Protestantism that it is pure materialism, to Catholicism, that it is mere spiritualism, and exalts his "Church of the Future" as the synthesis of both; "Charles Elwood" (Boston, 1840), in which the infidel hero becomes a convert to what the author calls Christianity and makes as little removed as possible from bald deism; and "The Mediatorial Life of Jesus" (Boston, 1842), which is almost Catholic, and contains a doctrine of life which leads to the door of the Catholic Church. He soon after applied to the Bishop of Boston for admission, and in October, 1844, was received by the Coadjutor Bishop, John B. Fitzpatrick. The Catholic body in the United States was at that time largely composed of men and women of the labouring class, who had emigrated from a country in which they and their forefathers had suffered centuries of persecution for the Faith, and had too long felt themselves a down-trodden people to be able to lift their countenances with the fearless independence of Americans; or, if they were better-to-do, feared to make their religion prominent and extended to those of other faiths the liberal treatment they hoped for in return. It was Brownson's first labour to change all this. He engaged at once in controversy with the organs of the various Protestant sects on one hand, and against liberalism, latitudinarianism, and political atheism of Catholics, on the other. The American people, prejudiced against Catholicity, and opposed to Catholics, were rendered more prejudiced and opposed by their tame and apologetic tone in setting forth and defending their Faith, and were delighted to find Catholics labouring to soften the severities and to throw off whatever appeared exclusive or rigorous in their doctrine. But Brownson resolved to stand erect; let his tone be firm and manly, his voice clear and distinct, his speech strong and decided. So well did he carry out this resolution, and so able and intrepid an advocate did he prove in defence of the Faith, that he merited a letter of approbation and encouragement from the Bishops of the United States assembled in Plenary Council at Baltimore, in May, 1849, and from Pope Pius IX, in April, 1854. In October, 1855, Brownson changed his residence to New York, and his "Review" was ever after published there—although, after 1857, he made his home in Elizabeth, New Jersey, till 1875, when he went to live in Detroit, where he died in the following April. A little over a year before moving to New York, he wrote, "The Spirit Rapper" (Boston, 1854), a book in the form of a novel and a biography, showing the connexion of spiritism with modern philanthropy, visionary reforms, socialism, revolutionism; with the aim of recalling the age to faith in the Gospel. His next book, written in New York, was "The Convert; or, Leaves from my Experience" (New York, 1857), tracing with fidelity his entire religious life down to his admission to the bosom of the Catholic Church. Brownson had not been many years in New York before the influence of those Catholics with whom he mainly associated was perceptible in the tone of his writings, in the milder and almost conciliatory attitude towards those not of the Faith, which led many of his old admirers to fear he was becoming a "liberal Catholic". At the same time, the War of the Rebellion having broken out, he was most earnest in denouncing Secession and urging its suppression, and as a means to this, the abolition of slavery. This alienated all his Southern and many of his Northern supporters. Domestic affliction was added by the death of his two sons in the summer of 1864. In these circumstances, he felt unable to go on with his "Review", and in October of that year announced its discontinuance. But he did not sit idle. During the eight years that followed, he wrote "The American Republic; Its Constitution, Tendencies, and Destiny" (New York, 1865); leading articles in the New York "Tablet", continued till within a few months of his death; several series of articles in "The Ave Maria"; generally one or two articles a month in "The Catholic World"; and, instructed by the "Syllabus of Errors" condemned by Pope Pius IX, "Conversations on Liberalism and the Church" (New York, 1869), a small book which shows that if for a short period of his Catholic life, he parleyed with Liberalism, he had too much horror of it to embrace it. In January, 1873, "Brownson's Quarterly Review" appeared again and regularly thereafter till the end of 1875. His last article was contributed to the "American Catholic Quarterly Review", for January, 1876. Brownson always disclaimed having originated any system of philosophy and acknowledged freely whatever he borrowed from others; but he had worked out and arrived at substantially the philosophy of his later writings before he ever heard of Gioberti, from whom he obtained the formula ens creat existentias, which Gioberti expressed in the formula ens creat existens, to indicate the ideal or intelligible object of thought. By the analysis of thought he finds that it is composed of three inseparable elements, subject, object, and their relation, simultaneously given. Analysis of the object shows that it is likewise composed of three elements simultaneously given, the ideal, the empirical, and their relation. He distinguished the ideal intuition, in which the activity is in the object presenting or offering itself, and empirical intuition or cognition, in which the subject as well as the object acts. Ideal intuition presents the object, reflection takes it as represented sensibly; that is, in case of the ideal, as represented in language. Identifying ideas with the categories of the philosophers, he reduced them to these three: Being, Existences, and their Relations. The necessary is Being; the contingent, Existences; and their relation, the creative act of Being. Being is God, personal because He has intelligence and will. From Him, as First Cause, proceed the physical laws; and as Final Cause, the moral law, commanding to worship Him, naturally or supernaturally, in the way and manner He prescribes. ORESTES A. BROWNSON, The Convert (New York, 1857); HENRY F. BROWNSON, Brownson's Early, Middle and Latter Life (Detroit, 1898-1900); IDEM, ed., Brownson's Works (Detroit, 1883-87). HENRY F. BROWNSON Sarah M. Brownson Sarah M. Brownson Daughter of Orestes A. Brownson, b. at Chelsea, Massachusetts, 7 June, 1839; married William J. Tenney, of Elizabeth, New Jersey, 26 November, 1873; died at Elizabeth, 30 October, 1876. She wrote some literary criticisms for her father's "Review", and many articles, stories, and poems which appeared mainly in Catholic magazines. Her other works were: "Marian Elwood, or How Girls Live" (New York, 1863); "At Anchor; a story of the American Civil War" (New York, 1865); "Heremore Brandon; or the Fortunes of a Newsboy" (in "The Catholic World", 1869); and "Life of Demetrius Augustine Gallitzin, Prince and Priest" (New York, 1873). Her novels are interesting, genuine, and original, and all that she published is stamped with her distinguishing traits of character, and shows that she thought for herself, expressed herself freely, with good sense and judgment, without undue bitterness, and with great benevolence towards the poor; and she scatters over her pages many excellent reflections. The life of Gallitzin is her principal production, for which she spared no pains to collect such materials as remained. She more than once visited the scenes of the missionary's labours, and formed the acquaintance of priests and others who had known him, collecting such facts and anecdotes of him as they remembered. It is a sincere and conscientious tribute to the rare virtues and worth of an extraordinary man, devoted priest, and humble missionary. HENRY F. BROWNSON Brownsville Brownsville Vicariate Apostolic, erected 1874. Previous to this date the entire State of Texas was under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Galveston. It was then divided into two dioceses: Galveston, comprising all that part of the State north and north-west of the Colorado River; San Antonio, comprising all the territory south of the Colorado River and north of the Nueces River, with the exception of Bee, San Patricio, Refugio, Goliad, and Aransas Counties and the Vicariate Apostolic of Brownsville comprising Cameron, Hidalgo, Starr, Zapata, and Webb Counties, bordering on the Rio Grande; Encinal, Duval, and Nueces, situated north of these counties; the part of La Salle, McMullen, and Live Oak, south of the Nueces River, and finally San Patricio, Bee, Refugio, Goliad, and Aransas Counties, north of the Nueces River, a territory comprising 22,391 square miles. Its principal cities and towns are: + Laredo (Texas side), with 12,000 inhabitants; + Brownsville, near the mouth of the Rio Grande, with 8,000; + Corpus Christi, on the Corpus Christi Bay, with 7,000; + San Diego, in Duval County, with 2,000; + Alice, in Nueces County, with 1,000; + Rockport, on Aransas Bay, with 1,000; + Goliad and Refugio with about the same population; + Beeville, in Bee County, with 2,000. There are other towns with less population, Skidmore in Bee County, Kingsville in Nueces County, Falfurrias, Benavides, Realitos, Hebbronville, Edinburgh, Hidalgo, Carrizo (or Zapata), Minas, Rio Grande City, each with a population of 1,500. The Catholic population is estimated at 79,000, mostly Mexicans; there are about 3,000 English-speaking Catholics. The total population is about 110,000. This southern part of Texas was inhabited by Indians less than sixty years ago. Corpus Christi had for its first settler Capt. Kenny, who had a store several times visited by hostile Indians. Brownsville owes its beginning to Major Brown, who came there at the time of the Mexican War. The church there was begun in 1852. San Patricio and Refugio were settled by Irish colonists under the Mexican Government. La Bahia is the most ancient settlement; it was built by the Spaniards to oppose the encroachments of the French under La Salle. After La Bahia the oldest place is Laredo, built at the end of the eighteenth century. In 1866 there was not a fence nor a railroad to be seen from San Antonio to Brownsville; now the whole country is fenced in, and there are six railroad lines in operation. The Oblate Fathers, whose missions extend from San Ignacio to the mouth of the Rio Grande, located in Texas in 1852, their first superior being Father Verdet. Within a week he was drowned in the Gulf on his way from Brownsville to New Orleans. The mission of Rio Grande City was begun in 1872, the one at Roma in 1864, the San Diego mission in 1866. Laredo was in charge of Mexican priests until Father Girandon came in 1855. San Patricio was under the care of Irish priests. Father O'Reilly built in 1856 the first Catholic church of Corpus Christi. Brownsville, Laredo, Corpus Christi, Refugio, and Beeville have large and well decorated churches. There are twelve churches with resident pastors: Brownsville, Rio Grande City, Roma, Laredo, San Diego, Corpus Christi, Rockport, Goliad, Refugio, Beeville, and San Patricio. There are also forty chapels where regular monthly services are held. The vicariate has two hospitals, one in Laredo under the care of the Sisters of Mercy, and a new one in Corpus Christi, under the care of the Sisters of the Incarnate Word, of San Antonio. There are four academies, namely, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Laredo, and Rio Grande City, with about 60 boarders in all, and about 200 scholars. Besides, there are nine parochial schools, with about 500 pupils, under the care of 52 teaching sisters, assisted by 20 lay sisters. There are, in addition to these, 12 hospital sisters, and 6 engaged in teaching non-Catholic public schools. There is but one college (in Brownsville, under the care of the Oblate Fathers), with about 100 pupils. The Reverend Dominic Manucy, then rector of St. Peter's church, Montgomery, Alabama, was appointed first Vicar Apostolic of Brownsville, and consecrated Titular Bishop of Dulma, 8 December, 1878. He was born 20 December, 1823, and ordained priest, at Mobile, 15 August, 1850. He took possession at Brownsville, 11 February, 1875, and remained there until he was transferred to the Diocese of Mobile upon the death of Bishop Quinlan, 9 March, 1883. He resigned the See of Mobile the following year and was reappointed to Brownsville, with the Titular See of Maronia. He died at Mobile, 4 December, 1885. Bishop Neraz of San Antonio, Texas, was then appointed administrator of Brownsville, and directed its affairs until 1890, when the Rev. Pedro Verdaguer, pastor of the church of Our Lady of Angels, Los Angeles, California, was appointed to Brownsville by a Brief, dated 3 July. He was consecrated 9 November, 1890, at Barcelona, Spain, titular Bishop of Aulon, and was installed at Brownsville, 21 May, 1891. He was born 10 December, 1835, at San Pedro de Torello, Cataluna, Spain, and ordained priest, 12 December, 1862, at San Francisco, California, U.S.A. C. JAILLET Heinrich Bruck Heinrich Brück Ecclesiastical historian and bishop, born at Bingen, 25 October, 1831; died 4 November, 1903. He followed for some time the cooper's trade. After a course of studies under of a distinguished ecclesiastic, Dr. Joseph Hirschel, he entered the seminary at Mainz. He was ordained to the priesthood in 1855, exercised for some time the sacred ministry, made a postgraduate course at Munich under Döllinger, and at Rome, and in 1867 was appointed to the chair of ecclesiastical history in the seminary of Mainz. He continued to teach until his elevation to the episcopate, with the exception of the years from 1878 to 1887, when seminary was closed by the order of the Government. In 1889 he became a canon of the cathedral; he received also several positions of trust in the administration of the diocese. In 1899 he was chosen Bishop of Mainz; as such he directed the diocese with zeal and intelligence. The merit of Brück consists chiefly in his literary activity. Perhaps his best known work is his manual of church history, from "Lehrbuch der Kirchengeschichte" (Mainz, 1874; 8th ed., 1902). It has been translated into English, French, and Italian, all of which translations passed through second editions before 1899, an evidence that its excellent qualities were widely appreciated. The author shows himself possessed of extensive knowledge not only in history, but also in theology and canon law. A more special work is his "Geschichte der katholischen Kirche in Deutschland im neunzehnten Jahrhundert" -- History of the catholic Church in Germany in the Nineteenth Century", in five volumes (1887-1905). It contains a rich store of information, arranged with thoroughness and sound critical judgment, and was received with universal approval by Catholic scholars. He was also the author of an account of rationalistic movements in Catholic Germany (1865), a life of Dean Lennig (1870), and a work on secret societies in Spain (1881). FRANCIS J. SCHAEFER Joachim Bruel Joachim Bruel (Brulius). A theologian and historian, born early in the seventeenth century at Vorst, a village of the province of Brabant, Belgium, died 29 June, 1653. After entering the order to assist in the establishment of Augustinians he was sent to Bourges, France, to finish his studies in philosophy and theology. At Bourges he received the degree of Master in Sacred Theology. In 1638 he was chosen prior of the convent of his order at Cologne. Twice afterwards (1640 and 1649) he filled the office of prior provincial. He is of special interest to the student of Peruvian and Chinese missions. Among his published works are: (1) "Historiae Peruanae Ordinis Eremitarum S.P. Augustini: Libri octodecim." This work follows the Spanish "Cronica moralizada del Orden de San Augustin en el Peru", published by Fra Antonio de la Calancha, Barcelona, 1638; continued by Fra Diego de Cordova, and printed at Lima, 1653. Bruel's Latin version was printed at Antwerp, 1651. (2) He made also a Latin translation of Mendoza's monumental history of China, "Rerum Morumque in Regno Chinensi" etc. FRANCIS E. TOURSCHER David-Augustine de Brueys David-Augustine de Brueys A French theologian and dramatic author, born at Aix in 1640; died 25 November, 1723, at Montpellier. His family was Protestant, and he was brought up a Calvinist. After devoting some time to the study of law, he applied himself to theology with so much success that he was made a member of the consistory of Montpellier. In 1691, he published an answer to Bossuet's "Exposition of Catholic Doctrine", entitled "Réponse au livre de M. de Condom intitute Exposition de la doctrine catholique" (Geneva, 1681). He was soon, however, converted by Bossuet himself, abjured Protestantism in l682, and, after his wife's death, became a priest. Before his conversion he wrote, besides the "Réponse", the "Suite du Preservatif (de Jurieu) contre le changement de religion" (1682). His principal works, written after his conversion, are: "Examen des raisons qui ont donné lieu à la séparation des protestants" (Paris, 1683), in which he explains the reasons of his conversion; "Traité de la sainte messe" (Paris, 1683); "Défense du culte extérieur de l'Eglise catholique" (Paris, 1686); "Response aux plaintes des protestants contre les moyens que l'on emploie en France pour les réunir à l'Eglise" (Paris, 1686); "Traité de l'Eglise" (Paris, 1686); "Traité de l'Eucharistie" (Paris, 1686); "Histoire du fanaticisme de notre temps" (I, 1692; II, 1709; III and IV, 1713); "Traité de l'obéissance des chrétiens aux puissances temporelles" (Paris, 1710); "Traité du légitime usage de la raison principalement sur les objets de la foi" (Paris, 1717). In collaboration with Palaprat, Brueys also wrote several comic plays and a few tragedies, most of which were produced with great success. They were published in two volumes in 1712, under the title of "OEvres dramatiques". A new edition to three volumes appeared in 1755, with the author's life by De Launay; again in 1755 (5 vols.), under the title of "OEuvres de Brueys et Palaprat"; and finally in 1812 (2 vols.) as "OEuvres choisies". C.A. DUBRAY Louis-Frederic Brugere Louis-Frédéric Brugère Professor of apologetics and church history, born at Orléans, 8 (October 1823; died at Issy, 11 April, 1888. He studied with the Christian Brothers at St. Euverte, and at the Petit Séminaire of Orléans. His poem of 300 lines describing an inundation of the Rhone and composed in 1841, was printed and sold for the benefit of the flood victims at Lyons. He entered the Grand seminaire of Orléans in 1841 and the Paris seminaire 1845, where he received the degrees of Bachelor of Licentiate, and Doctor. From 1846 to 1861 with the exception of two years spent as assistant in the parish of St. Aignan, Brugère taught the classics and philosophy in the Orléans diocesan college of La Chapelle-saint-Mesmin. In 1862 he entered the society of Saint-Sulpice and was appointed professor of apologetics in the seminary of Paris where, in 1868, he occupied the chair of of church history in addition to his other labours. Brugère's teaching was characterized by rare tact and discernment. It was his conviction that, in order to assist in the establishment of communication between the naturally darkened mind and the radiance of revealed truth, the Christian apologist must consider the individual mental attitude of those whom he would direct. Thus he was a strong advocate of the methodus ascendens ab intrinseco, which was introduced towards the end of the fifteenth century, and which holds that the apologist should first arouse interest by setting forth the needy condition of the human soul, with its problems unsolved and its cravings unsatisfied; then gradually suggest the unchanging organization which offers satisfaction and peace. Curiosity and interest thus intensified, and the admirable adjustment of Christianity to the needs of the soul once recognized, fairmindedness urging further research, the honest inquirer will learn how moral certitude, though differing from metaphysical and physical certitude, is nevertheless true certitude, excluding all reasonable fear of error, and is not to be confounded with probability, however great. Thus, only when prepared to recognize in the genuine miracle the credentials of the Divinity, may this inquirer be conducted back through history, from fulfilment to prediction, in the hope of discovering, by well authenticated miracles, that the Almighty has stamped as His own the Christianity preserved, defended, and explained by His one true Church. Such, in brief outline, is the method advocated in "De Verâ Religione" and "De Ecclesia", two treatises which Brugère published in 1873, and which, from their adaptability to the needs of the day, merited the approval of competent judges. In addition to these treatises, Brugère published "Tableau de l'histoire et de la littérature de l'Eglise". But it is chiefly as a professor that Brugère is remembered. Gitfted with a remarkable memory, his mind was a storehouse of exact information which he freely imparted, embellishing it with anecdote and illustration, so that students gladly sought him out for pleasure and profit DANIEL P. DUFFY Bruges Bruges The chief town of the Province of West Flanders in the Kingdom of Belgium. Pope Nicholas I in 863 effected a reconciliation between Charles the Bald, King of the West Franks, and his vassal Baldwin "Bras-de-Fer"; by it the latter's abduction of his daughter Judith was forgiven and the union legalized. The Frankish king further invested his son-in-law with sovereign power over the northern marches enclosed by the North Sea, the Scheldt, and the River Canche, later known as Royal Flanders, of which he thus became the first count. On the ruins of an old burg, said to have dated from 366, Baldwin built himself a new stronghold, with a chapel for the relics of St. Donatian, the gift of Ebbo, Archbishop of Reims, the metropolitan see at that time of most of the Belgian dioceses, and by his valour and untiring energy speedily checked the inroads of the ravaging Northmen. The security he was thus able to afford his subjects caused merchants and artisans to gather round the new settlement, which rapidly grew in size and in wealth. Such was the origin of Bruges. But it was under the rule of the third count, Arnulph the Great (918-989), that the Church attained the full measure of its vitality in Flanders. This prince not only founded and richly endowed the famed Chapter of St. Donatian, but he established collegiate churches in the neighbouring towns of Aardenburg and Thorholt, and built or restored eighteen great monasteries, besides a number of minor foundations; and such was his prestige that it was to him St. Dunstan turned for shelter in the hour of danger, much as St. Thomas of Canterbury at a later epoch (1164) besought the protection of his successor, Thierry of Alsace, against the wrath of Henry II. Under the fostering care of the monastery learning and the arts speedily revived, while commerce and agriculture made equally rapid strides under the patronage of the court. The great charter of liberties conferred by Baldwin IV (988-1036) provided a new incentive to business, which increased by leaps and bounds, and the town so outgrew its boundaries that his successor was compelled in 1039 to rebuild and extend its walls. The epoch of the Crusades (1096-1270) contributed in no small measure to the fame and prosperity of Bruges. Count Robert II from the first of these great undertakings brought back from Caesarea in Cappadocia the relics of St. Basil; Thierry of Alsace returned from the second with the relic of the Holy Blood presented to him by his cousin Baldwin, King of Jerusalem, as the reward of his great services; while Baldwin IX, who took part in the fourth, was raised to the imperial throne on the founding of the Latin Empire after the fall of Constantinople, 9 April, 1204. From 7 April, 1150, the day on which Thierry of Alsace returned to his capital with the precious relic, it has played no small part in the religious life of the city. The solemn Procession of the Holy Blood, instituted in 1303 to commemorate the deliverance of the city, by the national heroes Breidel and De Coninck, from French tyranny in May of the previous year and which takes place annually on the Monday following the first Sunday in May, is to this day one of the great religious celebrations in Belgium, to which thousands congregate from all parts. By the close of the thirteenth century Bruges had attained the height of its prosperity: it boasted a population of 150,000, a seaport with 60,000 inhabitants at Damme at the end of the Zwijn, three miles away, an important harbour at Sluus at the mouth of the Zwijn, seven miles further, besides several subordinate townships, and was one of the three wealthiest cities of Northern Europe. In 1296 the staple of wool was fixed at Bruges, in 1300 it became a member of the Hanseatic League, and by 1356 it was the chief emporium of the cities of the League. With the removal of Baldwin IX the long line of purely Flemish counts came to an end, and Flanders passed under French domination. This period of foreign rule, which lasted the best part of a century, was a time of almost continual warfare between the suzerain power and the vassal people, complicated by internecine strife with the rival town of Ghent; and though humiliating disasters alternated with glorious victories, this the heroic epoch of Flemish history closed without the commercial prosperity of Bruges having suffered any very serious check. With the advent of the House of Burgundy in 1384, Flanders unhappily became involved in the religious troubles which were then agitating Europe. The new prince, Philip "le Hardi" (1384-1404), who favoured the pretensions of the antipope, soon proceeded from aimless sympathy to open proselytism, but the edict by which he forbade obedience to the Pope of Rome was utterly disregarded by his turbulent subjects, the clergy, almost to a man, and the great mass of the people acknowledging Urban VI. The Clementine Bishop of Tournai, whose spiritual administration embraced Bruges, came hither to ordain schismatic priests, but the people refused their ministrations, and a period of persecution followed during which public worship was entirely suspended. Ghent, however, had purchased the right to liberty of conscience, and so in 1394 the strange spectacle was witnessed of a whole town's population on pilgrimage from Bruges to Ghent to fulfil their Easter duties. Philip's successors, John the Fearless (1404-19) and Philip "l'Asseuré" (1419-67), pursued this policy of subjugation, until in 1440, the year of "the Great Humiliation", the burghers of Bruges were completely at the mercy of their prince. The next quarter of a century was a period of pomp and pageantry, a feverish succession of gorgeous tournaments, public banquets, and triumphal entries, and a display of opulence out of all proportion to the true productive forces of the commonwealth. Like a true Duke of Burgundy Philip revelled in the splendour of his court. It was he who on 10 January, 1429, founded at Bruges the Order of the Golden Fleece. Munificent in all things, he gathered about him all the great luminaries of his day. It is also on record that within the twenty-four hours of one day about 1450, no less than one hundred and fifty foreign vessels entered the basin and canals of Bruges under the auspices of the resident consuls of seventeen kingdoms, several of whom were established there in sumptuous palaces. Industry at the time boasted no less than fifty-four incorporated associations or guilds, fifty thousand of whose members found constant employment within the city's walls. The days of Charles the Bold (1467-77) saw the culmination of all this splendour. And then suddenly the blow fell. The great haven of the Zwijn was found to be fast silting up; before the close of the century no vessel of any considerable draught could enter the port of Damme, and by the middle of the sixteenth century Bruges was entirely cut off from the sea. By the marriage of the daughter of Charles the Bold to Archduke Maximilian Flanders passed under the rule of the House of Austria (1477), and from 1485 the decay of the old Flemish city steadily set in. A period of continual disturbances, ruthlessly repressed by a government destitute of stability, produced a feeling of uneasiness in the commercial world. Antwerp at the time was already proving a dangerous rival, and gradually the merchant princes, enticed by the greater security offered and the many advantages held out to them, removed to the city of the Scheldt. The religious disturbances of the last quarter of the sixteenth century hastened the exodus, even to the removal of the last of the foreign consuls. The severities of the Emperor Charles V (1519-56) and the harsher rule of Philip II (1556-98) and the Duke of Alva led to the capture of Bruges by the Calvinists in March, 1578, when for six years Catholic worship was entirely proscribed. The clergy were exiled or murdered, the churches pillaged and desecrated, some even levelled to the ground, and when peace returned in 1584 the population scarcely numbered 30,000. A period of utter misery followed, in which was developed among the wealthy, under the guidance of the Church--Bruges had been created an episcopal see in 1558--that great spirit of charity which led to the founding of innumerable Godshuizen (God's houses) which exist to this day for the relief of an impoverished community. Flanders then became the cockpit of Europe: there was the unsuccessful bombardment of Bruges by the Dutch in 1704, the surrender to the Allies in 1706, its surprise-capture by the French in 1708, its capture by Marlborough in 1712, its surrender to the French again in 1745, and eventually its return to the rule of Austria in 1748; in 1792 the French again took it, were expelled, and retook it in 1794, when it became the chief town of the department of the Lys; by the Treaty of Vienna (1815) it was incorporated in the new Kingdom of the Netherlands, eventually, as a result of the Revolution of 1830, becoming the chief town of the Province of West Flanders in the then constituted Kingdom of Belgium. In 1877 the idea of recreating the canal with an outer harbour abreast of Heyst was first mooted, thus reviving an old scheme of the painter and engineer Lancelot Blondeel (1496-1561), discovered in the local archives. Eventually the project, despite the determined opposition of Antwerp, received the sanction of the legislature on 11 September, 1895, the cost of the undertaking being fixed at 38,969,075 francs. Seven years was the limit allowed for the completion of the work, but it was not until 29 May, 1905, that the informal opening of the canal to navigation took place, the official inauguration being celebrated in July of 1907. The result has been a large increase in population (which stood at 56,587 in 1906), the establishment of considerable industries, and a corresponding decrease in the chronic poverty of the city; so that it is not surprising if its good folk are already indulging dreams of a revival of its medieval grandeur and prosperity. It were difficult to exaggerate the importance attaching to Bruges from the point of view of art. Singularly ill-favoured as West Flanders was in respect of building material, the only local stone available (veld steen) being of a description little adapted to weather the centuries, Bruges presents no examples of stone architecture of the early period; and later, when suitable stone came to be imported from Tournai and from France, the master masons employed in its use and treatment were likewise of foreign origin. In respect of civic and domestic brick architecture, however, Bruges stands unrivalled, both for number and variety of design. Her school of sculpture was early held in high esteem, eliciting a large foreign demand for stalls and other descriptions of church and domestic furniture in oak, and the revival of the art during the past half-century has been attended with marked success. In equally high esteem stood her wrought-iron work, and in even greater her engraved monumental brasses, which, prior to the Calvinist outbreak in the sixteenth century, were exceedingly numerous throughout Flanders, and examples of which are of frequent occurrence in England, Germany, Scandinavia, and Spain, from which countries there was a constant influx of orders. In the department of embroidery and lace work Bruges likewise enjoyed a high reputation, especially in respect of ecclesiastical vestments, in the production of which, as of lace, a large number of hands are employed to this day. But above all, Bruges, since the second quarter of the fifteenth century, has been celebrated for her paintings. Owing to the greater peace and security enjoyed within her walls many master painters from the valley of the Maas, from Holland, and from Brabant were attracted thither at that period. These, however, had all learned their art elsewhere. John van Eyck, who worked there from 1431 to 1441, exercised a considerable influence, and the scheme of his altar-piece in the Town Museum was imitated by the Brabanter Peter Christus, the Rhenish Hans Memlinc, and the Hollander Gerard David. The Town Museum and the Hospital of St. John are treasure houses of paintings from the brush of these great artists. Gerard David was the first to form a school, whose traditions were carried on until the seventeenth century; and he with his pupils and followers produced an immense number of paintings, scattered all over Europe. Later on Peter Pourbus of Gouda and the Claeissens adhered to the old traditions, which held the field in Bruges longer than anywhere else. In the matter of illuminated books and miniatures it also enjoyed considerable celebrity, and examples of both are to be found in almost every library of importance. In 1558 Pope Paul IV, at the request of Philip II, raised Bruges to a separate bishopric. The diocese at the present day comprises the entire province of West Flanders, an area of 1,249 square miles with 828,152 inhabitants, almost exclusively Catholics. Twenty-two bishops have so far administered the see. For the purposes of administration the diocese is divided into the archpresbytery of Bruges and 14 rural deaneries, the former being subdivided into 8 parishes ministered to by 31 priests, and the latter into 286 parishes served by 642 priests. The cathedral chapter consists of 10 titular and 19 honorary canons, with 6 chaplains. The diocesan seminary at Bruges has more than a hundred students, advanced from the preparatory seminary at Roulers. For the purposes of general education there is an episcopal college at Bruges and eight similar colleges at the larger centres of the diocese in which all the humanities are taught, besides four others at minor centres were the studies are not so advanced; for technical education there is a normal school at Bruges and four in other parts of the diocese, all these institutions being almost entirely taught by ecclesiastics. Most of the religious orders, both male and female, have houses in the diocese, besides hospitals and asylums for the aged and the poor. Bruges returns 2 members to the Senate and 4 members to the House of Representatives, while other portions of the Province elect a total of 7 senators and 16 representatives, the Provincial Council further electing 3 senators. Under the law of proportional representation, which first came into operation in 1900, Bruges returns 1 Catholic and 1 Liberal to the Senate, and 3 Catholics and 1 Liberal to the House of Representatives; other portions of the Province return 5 Catholics and 2 Liberals to the Senate, and 12 Catholics, 3 Liberals, and 1 Socialist to the House of Representatives; the 3 members returned to the Senate by the Provincial Council belong to the Catholic party; the result is that West Flanders (otherwise the Diocese of Bruges) is represented in the Senate by 9 Catholics and 3 Liberals (in addition to the Count of Flanders, who is a member by virtue of his title), and in the House of Representatives by 15 Catholics, 4 Liberals, and 1 Socialist. The government of the province is entirely in the hands of the Catholics, the governor and the great majority of the Provincial Council belonging to that party. As much may be said of the local administration of Bruges, the Communal Council (which consists of the burgomaster, 5 aldermen, and 24 councillors) with the exception of 6 councillors (five of whom are Liberals and one a Christian Democrat) being in the hands of the Catholic party. MIRAEUS, Rerum Belgicarum Annales (Brussels, 1625); GILLIODTS, Inventaire des Archives de la ville de Bruges, avec une introduction: tables and glossary by EDW. GILLIARD (Bruges, 1878-85); GILLIAT-SMITH, The Story of Bruges (London, 1901); ROBINSON, Bruges: an Historical Sketch (Bruges, 1899); VERSCHELDE, De Kathedrale van Sint Salvator te Brugge: Geschiedkundige Beschryving (Bruges, 1863); Les anciennes Maisons de Bruges (Bruges, 1875); W. H. JAMES WEALE, Hans Memlinc: Biography; Pictures at Bruges (Bruges, 1901); Gerard David, Painter and Illuminator (London, 1895); VON BODENHAUSEN, Gerard David und seine Schule (Munich, 1905); FRANCES C. WEALE, Hubert and John van Eyck (London, 1903). J. CYRIL M. WEALE Pierre Brugiere Pierre Brugière A French priest, Jansenist, and Juror, born at Thiers, 3 October, 1730; died at Paris, 7 November, 1803. He was chaplain of the Ursulines and canon in his native place when his refusal to sign the formula of the acceptation of the Bull "Unigenitus" forced him to leave. He went to Paris where for twelve years he remained with the community of St. Roch. A strongly Jansenistic book which he wrote, "Instructions catholiques sur la dévotion au Sacre-Coeur" (Paris, 1777), brought this connection to an end. When the Revolution broke out he welcomed it with enthusiasm. He rushed headlong into the fray with two books calling loudly for reform: "Doléances des églisiers" and "Relation sommaire et véritable de ce qui s'est passé dans l'Assemblée du clergé" (1789). Brugière not only took the Constitutional Oath on the day fixed, 9 Jan., 1791, but he became as it were the heart and soul of the Constitutional Church. Elected curé of St. Paul's he defended the civil constitution of the clergy against episcopal and papal censures in his "Discours patriotique au sujet des brefs du pape" and "La lanterne sourde" (aimed at Bonal, Bishop of Clermont). It is to his credit, however, that he energetically condemned the marriage of priests which the Constitution was doing its utmost to encourage. Against this practice he wrote his "Réflexions d'un curé", and "Lettre d'un curé" (1791), and together with several other constitutionals he denounced its advocates without mercy in "Le nouveau disciple de Luther" (1792). This brochure was aimed at Aubert, a married priest appointed by Gobel curé of St. Augustin. Brugière's fearless preaching placed him in the hands of the revolutionary tribunal, and it was while he was imprisoned he wrote to his followers the "Lettre d'un cure du fond de sa prison à ses paroissiens" (1793). Set at liberty, he continued his pastoral ministrations in spite of the charge of treasonable conduct, a dangerous thing in those days. But his ministrations were of a novel kind. Mass was said and the sacraments were administered by him in French, and in support of that singularity an appeal was made to the people, "Appel au peuple francais" (1798) Brugière had rebuked the bishops who condemned the oath. He had likewise rebuked the priests who married. Now he was no less violent against the Jurors who began to retract. He attended the two councils of 1797 and 1801 which were trying hard to sustain the ebbing life of the Constitutional Church, and he founded a society for its protection: "Société de philosophie chrétienne". Even after the promulgation of the Concordat of 1801 he clung to the then dead Constitutional Church. Besides the works already mentioned, Brugière wrote a number of pamphlets and left many sermons which were published after his death: "Instructions choisies" (Paris,1804). Two contemporaries, the Abbé Massy and the Christian Brother Renaud, wrote his life under the title: "Mémoire apologétique de Pierre Brugière" (Paris, 1804). J.F. SOLLIER John Brugman John Brugman A renowned Franciscan preacher of the fifteenth century, b. at Kempen in the Diocese of Cologne, towards the end of the preceding century; d. at Nimwegen, Netherlands, 19 sept., 1473. He became lector of theology, vicar-provincial and one of the founders Cologne Province of the Friars of the Minor Observance. For twenty years his name was celebrated as the most illustrious preacher of the Low Countries. Being the friend of Denis the Carthusian, it was due to his suggestion that he latter wrote his work: "De doctrinâ et regulis vitae Christianæ", dedicating it to Father Brugman. He also espoused the cause of the Brothers of the Common Life, which congregation, successfully devoted to the interests of education, had been established by two priests, Gerhard Groote and Florentius Radewiyns. He addressed them in the two letters which are still extant to strengthen them in the persecution to which they were subjected. He died in the odour of sanctity and is commemorated in the "Martyrologium Minoritico-Belgicum" on the l9th of September. Father Brugman wrote two lives of St. Lidwina, the first of which, printed at Cologne in 1433, was reprinted anonymously at Louvain in 1448, and later epitomized by Thomas à Kempis at Cologne. The second life appeared at Schiedam in 1498; both have been embodied by the Bollandists in the Acta SS., 2 April. He also wrote a devout "Life of Jesus." Father Brugman ranked among the best poets of his day. Two of his poems "O Ewich is so lanc!" and "The Zielejacht" are included by Hoffmann von Fallersleben in his "Horae Belgicae" (II, 36, 41.) His life was written by Dr. Mohl under the title "Joannes Brugman en bet Godsdlenstegen Leven Onzer Vaderen in de Vijftiende eeuw", and published at Amsterdam in 1854. It consists of two volumes, second containing Brugman's unedited works. ANDREW EGAN Constantino Brumidi Constantino Brumidi An Italian-American historical painter, celebrated for his fresco work in the Capitol at Washington, b. at Rome, 1805; d. at Washington, 19 February, 1880. His father was a native of Greece and his mother a Roman. He showed his talent for fresco painting at an early age and painted in several Roman palaces, among them being that of Prince Torlonia. Under Gregory XVI he worked for three years in the Vatican. The occupation of Rome by the French in l849 apparently decided Brumidi to emigrate, and he sailed for the United States, where he became naturalized in 1852. Taking up his residence in New York City the artist painted a number of portraits. Subsequently he undertook more important works, the principal being a fresco of the Crucifixion in St. Stephen's Church, for which he also executed a "Martyrdom of St. Stephen" and an "Assumption of the Virgin". In 1854 Brumidi went to the city of Mexico, where he painted in the cathedral as allegorical representation of the Holy Trinity. On his way back to New York he stopped at Washington and visited the Capitol. Impressed with the opportunity for decoration presented by its vast interior wall spaces, he offered his services for that purpose to Quartermaster-General Meigs. This offer was accepted, and about the same time he was commissioned as a captain of cavalry. His first art work in the Capitol was in the room of the House Cornmittee on Agriculture. At first he received eight dollars a day, which Jefferson Davis, then Secretary of War of the United States, caused to be increased to ten dollars. His work attracting much favourable attention, he was given further commisssons, and gradually settled into the position of a Government painter. His chief work in Washington was done in the rotunda of the Capitol and included the apotheosis of Washington in the dome, as well as other allegories, and scenes from American history. His work in the rotunda was left unfinished at his death, but he had decorated many other of the building. In the Catholic Cathedral of Philadelphia he pictured St. Peter and St. Paul. Brumidi was a capable, if conventional painter, and his black and white modelling in the work at Washington, in imitation of bas-relief, is strikingly effective. AUGUSTUS VAN CLEEF Pierre Brumoy Pierre Brumoy Born at Rouen in Normandy, 1688; entered the Society of Jesus in 1704; died in Paris, 1742. Brumoy belonged to that distinguished group of humanists who shed lustre upon the Society of Jesus shortly before its suppression in France. Between the years 1722 and 1739 he contributed many articles to the celebrated "Journal de Trevoux" of which he was for some time the editor. Of the "History of the Gallican Church", which had been begun by Fathers Longueval and Fontenay, he wrote volumes XI and XII (1226-1320). He also composed several college tragedies on sacred subjects and many poems and discourses in Latin and in French. His Latin didactic poem "De motibus animi" (on the passions) was highly esteemed by his contemporaries. His most important work, "Le theatre des Grecs", which was first published in 1730 in three volumes, has often been reprinted. It contains translations and analyses of the Greek tragedies, supplemented by keen critical and aesthetic observations. An English translation was made by Mrs. Charlotte Lennox with the assistance of the Earl of Cork and Dr. Samuel Johnson, and first published in London in 1759. B. GULDNER Filippo Brunellesco Filippo Brunellesco (Or Brunelleschi) An architect and sculptor, born at Florence, 1377; died there 16 April, 1446. As an architect Brunellesco was one of the chief leaders in the early period of the Renaissance movement. Though rather unprepossessing in appearance, he was of a cheerful and congenial disposition, of active and inventive mind, and withal somewhat quick-tempered. Even in his childish games he evinced a decided inclination towards the mechanical. Beginning as a goldsmith, and later turning to sculpture, he finally applied himself exclusively to architecture without, however, neglecting his general culture. He read the Bible and Dante to feed his fancy, but devoted himself with decided preference to the study of perspective which he was the first to apply to art in accordance with definitely formulated rules. The correlated studies of mathematics and geometry also received his attention. He was considerably influenced by the lifelong friendship of the mathematician Paolo del Pozzo Toscanelli, by his joint studies with his younger friend Donatello, by the the artists and art-works of his native Florence, particularly by the monuments of Rome, to the study of which he devoted many years. Classical antiquity was already, at this period, well known and highly appreciated. SCULPTURE The Duomo of Pistoia contains several examples of niello-work and two silver statues of prophets said to be the earliest works of Brunellesco. A wooden Magdalen in the church of Santo Spirito at Florence was destroyed by fire in 1471. His wooden crucifix in Santa Maria Novella is true to nature and beautiful, while that by his friend Donatello, in Santa Croce, deserved the criticism ascribed to Brunellesco: "This is a rustic hanging on the cross". Two of his perspectives created a great sensation in Florence. Seventy years later they are described at length by his first anonymous biographer. Masaccio learned perspective from Brunellesco and according to Vasari, the architect's second biographer, it was also applied to intarsia. Brunellesco entered into competition with Ghiberti and other masters in 1401, when models for the reliefs of the second bronze door of the Baptistery at Florence were called for. The designs of both are exhibited side by side in the National Museum at Florence. We may agree with the verdict of the commission which awarded the first prize to Ghiberti and the second to Brunellesco. Ghiberti's relief is noteworthy for its agreeable dignity, while that of Brunellesco looks restless and laboured. Soon after Brunellesco went to Rome and for many years explored its ancient ruins, alone and with Donatello. The remains of the classic buildings so enraptured him that he decided to make architecture his lifework, instead of, as heretofore, and to a greater degree in Santo Spirito, a occasional occupation. In the meantime the much discussed problem of the completion of the Duomo (Santa Maria del Fiore) of Florence seems to have awakened in him the ambition to attain in this way undisputed supremacy in one of plastic arts. ARCHITECTURE At the end of the thirteenth century Arnolfo di Cambio had begun the construction of Santa Maria del Fiore substantially a Gothic cathedral, and carried it as far as the dome whose span of forty metres (one hundred and thirty eight and one-half feet), nearly equal to that of the Pantheon, had deterred from its completion all contemporary architects. In 1417 a conference of experts failed to arrive at a solution. Brunellesco, who was present, did not fully declared himself, but instead visited Rome again, manifestly for the purpose of coming forward with greater assurance. The following year (March, 1419) a meeting of the most noted architects took place, and in the discussion relative to the cathedral dome Brunellesco with full confidence purposed to complete it without centering, since it was impossible to construct scaffolding for such a height. At first, he was regarded as a fool, but later was actually commissioned to execute the work, with two other artists as associates. Whether to harmonize it with the pointed arches of the rest of the design or to relieve the substructure of the greater thrust, Brunellesco built the dome not on spherical, but on pointed octagonal, clustered-arches. He then braced it not only by means of the octagonal drum, previously agreed on, but also borrowed from Baptistery, besides its lantern, the idea of a protective roof, not an ordinary roof, but a second and lighter dome. This novel concept of a dome of two shells greatly relieved the weight of the structure, gave to the exterior an agreeable rounded finish, and in the space between the shells furnished room for ribbing passageways, and stairs. In technical or constructive skill the dome of St. Peter's marked no advance on the work of Brunellesco; it is superior only in formal beauty. The crowning lantern, statically important weight, adds sixteen metres to the height of the dome which is ninety-one metres; it is inadequate, however, to the lighting of the edifice. Brunellesco's work remained in its essential features, a model for succeeding ages. The lantern was not completed until five years after the death of the master. Inspired by classical art he executed other domical structures and basilicas, in all of which the essential characteristics of the new style appear. For the sacristy of San Lorenzo at Florence he built its polygonal dome, without a drum, on a square plan, by means of pendentives (projecting spherical triangles). As a central feature for Santa Maria degli Angeli in Florence, he designed a dome resting on a substructure, octagonal on the interior and sixteen-sided on the exterior. On a freestanding centralized plan he built a still more charming structure, the Pazzi Chapel. Over the middle portion of the rectangular hall a dome with radial ribbings is carried on arches and flanked on two sides by barrel vaults. The square sanctuary rises on the long side of this rectangular hall and is covered with a dome. The corresponding square on the entrance side is also domed; he added to it an antique colonnade covered in by a barrel vault, thus forming a loggia that extends the entire width of the building. The interior wall surfaces are decorated with Corinthian pilasters. The straight entablature, the rounded windows, the coffered ceiling, the medallions, complete on a small scale an ideal Renaissance edifice. It is probable that the cruciform and domical church of Badia di Fiesole was built from Brunellesco's design. In all these works he treated antique classical principles rather freely. In larger churches his practical mind induced him to return to the basilica plan. In San Lorenzo, it is true, he found the cruciform plan already fixed; he added, however, a wooden ceiling for the nave, spherical vaults for the side aisles, and rectangular chapels with barrel vaults along the outer walls; lateral aisles also surround the transept. The external cornice is carried out in a straight line; the height of the nave is double its width, the Corinthian columes bear the classical triple entablature but the arches springing therefrom; to increase the height these arches bear another broad triple entablature. We are frequently reminded in this edifice of the ancient Christan and Romanesque basilicas. Its dome was completed by Monetti, who allowed himself here, and to a greater degree in San Spirito, a certain liberty in dealing with the designs of Brunellesco. The plan of the latter church is in the main the same as that of San Lorenzo; the interior niches are rounded, though their exterior walls are rectangular. These niches follow the lateral aisles around the transepts and the apse. Over the meeting of the great nave and apse rises a low drum supporting a ribbed dome; it is finished with around windows and a lantern. Brunellesco executed also no little domestic architecture. He supervised the construction of the Foundling Hospital (Spedale degli Innocenti) and drew the model of a magnificent palace for Cosimo de' Medici which the latter failed to carry out through fear of envy. Finally he built a part of the Pitti Palace, and in this work left to posterity a model method of the use of quarry-faced stone blocks for the first story. In recognition of his merits this epoch-making architect, no less distinguished in the decorative than sacred precincts of the cathedral. G. GIETTMANN Ferdinand Brunetiere Ferdinand Brunetière A French critic and professor, born at Toulon, 19 July, 1849; died at Paris, 9 December, 1906. After finishing his studies at the Lycée Louis-le-Grand, he took the entrance examination of the Ecole Normale, a higher training-school for teachers, but failed on account of deficiency in Greek. When the Franco-German war broke out, he enlisted in the heavy-armed infantry. After the war he returned to Paris and led a very precarious life as a teacher in private schools. In 1874, he began to write for the "Revue des Deux Mondes", then edited by Charles Buloz, whose principal associate he soon became. From the first he was an opponent of the Naturalist School, which in retaliation feigned to ignore him and declared that the name of Brunetière was the pseudonym of some writer of no account. His mastery of criticism and his immense and minute learning, which were combined with a keen and cutting style, soon proved his intellectual power. The editor-ship in chief of the "Revue des Deux Mondes" was tendered to him in 1893. Although he had not attained the higher academic degrees, he was appointed professor of the French language and literature in the Ecole Normale in 1886, a position he held up to 1905, when the school was reorganized. On account of his conversion to Catholicism he was dropped from the list of professors. He was elected to the French Academy in 1893. In 1897, M. Brunetière lectured in the United States, under the auspices of the Alliance Française. After delivering nine lectures on French poetry in the annual course of the Percy Turnbull lectures on poetry, at the Johns Hopkins University, he travelled through the country speaking to enthusiastic audiences on classical and contemporary literature. He met with a success that no French lecturer before him had ever attained. In New York more than three thousand persons gathered to hear him. His most famous lecture was on Zola, whose so-called lifelike pictures of the French bourgeois, of a workman, soldier, and peasant, he described as gloomy, pessimistic, and calumnious caricatures. Brunetière was a French critic of the last twenty years of the nineteenth century. His articles in the "Revue des Deux Mondes" resemble a strongly framed building, without frivolous ornament, majestic in proportion, impressive through solidity. They have been published in about fifteen volumes bearing various titles, as: "Etudes critiques sur l'histoire de la littérature française"; "Questions de critique"; "Essais sur la littérature contemporaine", etc. Brunetière was a dogmatist, judging literay works not by the impression they made upon him, but according to certain principles he had laid down as criteria. According to his dogmatic system, literary work derives its value from the general ideas it contains, and the originality of a writer consists only in setting his own stamp upon a universal design. A good survey of his ideas may be had from the "Manuel de la littérature française" (tr. New York). This form of criticism was more or less borrowed from Désiré Nisard. About the year 1889, M. Brunetière changed his method and applied to literature the theories of evolution, explaining the formation, growth, and decay of various literary genres in their development from a common origin, by the same principles as those by which Darwin explained the development of the animal species. (L'évolution des genres; L'évolution de la poésie lyrique au XIXe siècle.) However weak the basis of such a system may be, all the details are interesting. In 1892 M. Brunetière showed himself a orator of the highest rank. His lectures at the Odéon théâtre on "Les époques du Theatre Francais" proved very successful. In 1893 he delivered a course of public lectures at the Sorbonne on "L'évolution des genres", and in 1894 on "Les sermons de Bossuet". When he was deprived of his professorship at the Ecole Normale, in 1905, he became ordinary lecturer to the Société des Conférences. M. Brunetière was master of the difficult art of convincing a large audience. He had all the qualities of a true orator: clearness of exposition, strength and logic of reasoning, an unusual command of general ideas, a fine and penetrating voice, and above all, a certain strange power of conviction which won the immediate sympathy of the most prejudiced hearers. M. Brunetière became a convert to Catholicism, in consequence of long and thorough study of Bossuet's sermons, and, strange to say, by a logical process of deductions which had been suggested to him by Auguste Comte's philosophy. (See Discours de combat, 2d series, p. 3.) In giving up his materialistic opinions to adopt the Catholic Faith he was prompted by a deep conviction, and there was no emotional element in this radical change. The article he wrote in 1895, "Après une visite au Vatican", augured his conversion to catholicism. In this article, M. Brunetière showed that science, in spite of its solemn promises, had failed to give happiness to mankind, and that faith alone was able to achieve that result. Soon after, M. Brunetière publicly adhered to Catholicism and for ten years he made numerous speeches in all parts of France, to defend his new faith against the free-thinkers. Among these addresses may be mentioned: "Le besoin de croire", Besancon, 1898; "Les raisons actuelles de croire", Lille, 1899; "L'idée de solidarité", Toulouse, 1900; "L'action catholique", Tours, 1901; "Les motifs d'esperer", Lyons, 1901, etc. He devoted himself to this task with the greatest energy, for he was naturally a man of will and a fighter. The most interesting feature of his apology is his attempt to show how much the positivism of Auguste Comte was akin to Catholicism. He endeavoured to prove that modern thought contained in itself, without suspecting it, the seed of Catholicism. (see "Sur les chemins de la croyance. Primiere etape, L'utilisation du positivisme".) On one occasion, in the course of a discussion with a Socialist, he went so far as to infer the identity of the social aspirations of Catholicism and the aspirations of the Socialists for a general reform of the world. LOUIS N. DELAMARRE Ugolino Brunforte Ugolino Brunforte Friar Minor and chronicler, born c. 1262; died c. 1348. His father Rinaldo, Lord of Sarnano in the Marches, belonged to an ancient and noble family of French origin, from which sprang the famous Countess Matilda. Ugolino entered the Order of Friars Minor at the age of sixteen and served his novitiate at the convent of Roccabruna, but passed most of his life at the convent of Santa Maria in Monte Giorgio, whence he is often called Ugolino of Monte Giorgio. In 1295 he was chosen Bishop of Abruzzi (Teramo) under Celestine V, but before his consecration the pope had resigned and Boniface VIII who suspected Ugolino as belonging to the Zelanti annulled the appointment (see Bull "In Supremae Dignitatis Specula" in "Bullarium Francis", IV, 376. Nearly fifty years later he was elected provincial of Macerata. Most scholars are now agreed on fixing upon Ugolino as the author of the "Fioretti" or "Little Flowers of St. Francis" in their original form. For recent research has revealed that this classic collection of narratives, which forms one of the most delightful productions of the Middle Ages, or rather the fifty-three chapters which form the true text of the "Fioretti" (for the four appendixes are additions of later compilers) were translated into Italian by an unknown fourteenth-century friar from a larger Latin work attributed to Ugolino. Although this Latin original has not come down to us, we have in the "Actus B. Francisci et Sociorum Ejus", edited by Paul Sabatier in "Collection d'Etudes" (Paris, 1902, IV), an approximation to it which may be considered on the whole as representing the original of the "Fioretti". That Ugolino was the principal compiler of the "Actus" seems certain; how far he may be considered the sole author of the "Fioretti" of the primitive "Actus Fioretti" is not so clear. His labour which consisted chiefly in gathering the flowers for his bouquet from written and oral local tradition appears to have been completed before 1328. WADDING, Script. ord. Min. (1650), 179; SBARALEA, Supplementum (8106), addenda 727; LUIGI DA FABRIANO, Disquisizione istorica intorno all' autore dei Fioretti (Fabriano, 1883); Cenni cronologico-biografici dell' osservante Provincia Picena (Quaracchi, 1886), 232 sqq.; MANZONI, Fioretti (2nd ed., Rome, 1902), prefazione; SABATIER, Fioretum S. Francisci (Paris, 1902), preface; MARIOTTI, Primordi Gloriosi dell' ordine Minoritico nelle Marche (Castelplanio, 1903), VI; ARNOLD, The Authorship of the Fioretti (London, 1904); PACE, L'autore del Floretum in Rivista Abruzzese, ann. XIX, fasc. II; VAN ORTROY in Annal. Bolland., XXI, 443 sqq. PASCHAL ROBINSON Leonardo Bruni Leonardo Bruni An eminent Italian humanist, b. of poor and humble parents at Arezzo, the birthplace of Petrarch, in 1369; d. at Florence, 9 March, 1444. He is also called Aretino from the city of his birth. Beginning at first the study of law, he later, under the patronage of Salutato and the influence of the Greek scholar Chrysoloras, turned his attention to the study of the classics. In 1405 he obtained through his friend Poggio the post of Apostolic secretary under Pope Innocent VII. He remained at Rome for several years, continuing as secretary under Popes Gregory XII and Alexander V. In 1410 he was elected Chancellor of the Republic of Florence, but resigned the office after a few months, returning to the papal court as secretary under John XXIII, whom he afterwards accompanied to the Council of Constance. On the deposition of that pope in 1415, Bruni returned to Florence, where he spent the remaining years of his life. Here he wrote his chief work, a Latin history of Florence, "Historiarium Florentinarum Libri XII" (Strasburg, 1610). In recognition of this great work the State conferred upon him the rights of citizenship and exempted the author and his children from taxation. In 1427 through the favour of the Medici he was again appointed state chancellor, a post which he held until his death. During these seventeen years he performed many valuable services to the State. Bruni contributed greatly to the revival of Greek and Latin learning in Italy in the fifteenth century and was foremost among the scholars of the Christian Renaissance. He, more than any other man, made the treasures of the Hellenic world accessible to the Latin scholar through his literal translations into Latin of the works of Greek authors. Among these may be mentioned his translations of Aristotle, Plato, Plutarch, Demosthenes, and Æschines. These were considered models of pure Latinity. His original works include: "Commentarius Rerum Suo Tempore Gestarum"; "De Romae Origine"; "De Bello Italico adversus Gothos"; and ten volumes of letters, "Epistolae Familiares", which, written in elegant Latin, are very valuable for the literary history of the fifteenth century. He was also the author of biographies in Italian of Dante and Petrarch and wrote in Latin the lives of Cicero and Aristotle. So widespread was the admiration for Bruni's talents that foreigners came from all parts to see him. The great esteem in which he was held by the Florentines was shown by the extraordinary public honors accorded him at his death. His corpse was clad in dark silk, and on his breast was laid a copy of his "History of Florence". In the presence of many foreign ambassadors and the court of Pope Eugenius, Manetti pronounced the funeral oration and placed the crown of laurel upon his head. He was then buried at the expense of the State in the cemetery of Santa Croce, where his resting-place is marked by a monument executed by Rossellino. Symonds, Renaissance in Italy (New York, 1900), II; The Revival of Learning; Voight, Die Wiederbelebung des classischen Altherthums (Berlin, 1893); the most complete ed. of Bruni's works is that of Mehus (Florence, 1731). EDMUND BURKE Bruenn Brünn Suffragan diocese of the Archdiocese of Olmutz, embracing the south-western part of Moravia, an area of 3825 sq. m., and containing, according to the "Catalogus cleri Dioceseos Brunensis 1907", about 1,051,654 inhabitants, 1,000,607 of whom are Catholics. I. HISTORY The erection of the Diocese of Brünn was due to Empress Maria Theresa. The territory comprised in this diocese belonged from a very early period to the Diocese of Olmutz. To obviate the difficulties arising from the administration of such a vast territory, Maria Theresa in 1773 entered into negotiations with Pope Clement XIV. Olmutz was to be raised to the rank of an archbishopric and two newly created bishoprics — Brünn and Troppau — assigned it as suffragans. Eventually, however, only one was created. By a papal Bull of Pius VI, dated 5 December, 1777, Olmutz was made an archbishopric and Brünn erected into an episcopal see. The collegiate chapter of the provostship of Sts. Peter and Paul which had been in existence in Brünn since 1296 was constituted the cathedral chapter, and the provost-church was made the cathedral. Matthias Franz, Count von Chorinsky, mitred provost of the chapter was appointed by the empress first bishop. He was succeeded by Johann Baptist Lachenbauer (1787-99), Vincenz Joseph von Schrattenbach (1800-16), Wenzel Urban Ritter von Stuffler (1817-31), Franz Anton von Gindl (1832-41), Anton Ernst, Count von Schaffgotsche (1842-70), Karl Nöttig (1871-82), Franz Sales Bauer (1882-1904), since 1904 Archbishop of Olmutz, and Paulus, Count von Huyn, b. at Brünn, 1868, appointed bishop 17 April, 1904, and consecrated 26 June, 1904. II. STATISTICS For the cure of souls the diocese is divided into 7 archipresbyterates and 37 deaneries with 429 parishes and the same number of parish churches, 30 simple benefices, 545 mission churches (Filialkirchen) and oratories. In 1907 the number of secular clergy was 751,612 engaged in the care of souls, 102 in other offices (professors, military chaplains, etc.), and 47 retired from active duty; regulars, 101, of whom 54 are engaged in the active ministry. The cathedral chapter consists of a dean, an archdeacon, 4 canons capitular, 6 honorary canons, and 1 canon extra statum; the consistory is composed of 15 members. In Nikolsburg there is a collegiate chapter with 6 canons and 4 honorary canons. The bishop and the 4 capitulars are appointed by the emperor, the dean by the cathedral chapter, and the archdeacon by the bishop. Among the benefices, 26 are by free collation, 106 subject to appointment by administrators of the religious fund, 8 by administrators of the fund for students, 23 by ecclesiastical patrons, 250 by lay families, 22 are incorporated with monasteries, and 2 of mixed patronage. For the training of the clergy there is a seminary, in connection with which is a theological school with 11 ecclesiastical professors, also an episcopal preparatory school for boys. In the intermediate schools of the diocese 67 priests are engaged in teaching religion, in the primary schools and intermediate schools for girls 79 priests. The following religious congregations have establishments in the diocese: Men: Premonstratensians 1 abbey (Neureisch) with 12 priests; Benedictines 1 abbey in raigern (from which is issued the well-known periodical "Studien u. Mitteilungen aus dem Benediktiner-und Cistercienserorden"), with 20 fathers and 2 clerics; the Hermits of St. Augustine 1 foundation in Brünn, with 16 priests and 5 clerics; the Piarists 1 college at Nikolsburg with 2 fathers and 3 lay brothers; the Dominicans 1 monastery with 7 fathers and 7 brothers; the Franciscans 2 convents with 7 fathers and 5 brothers; the Minorites 1 monastery with 2 priests and 2 lay brothers; the Capuchins 3 monasteries with 9 fathers and 8 brothers; the Brothers of Mercy, 2 foundations with 3 priests and 15 brothers. Women: 32 foundations and 379 sisters engaged in the education of girls and the care of the sick: 1 Cistercian abbey (Tischnowitz)with 25 religious; 1 Ursuline convent with 21 sisters; 1 Elizabethan convent with 19 sisters; 3 foundations of the Sisters of Mercy of St. Vincent de Paul, with 34 sisters; 9 houses of the Sisters of Mercy of St. Charles Borromeo, with 71 sisters; 2 houses of the Daughters of the Divine Saviour with 26 sisters; 6 convents of the Poor Sisters of Notre Dame with 35 sisters; 1 house of Daughters of Divine Love, with 24 sisters; 1 mother-house and 5 branches of the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, with 108 sisters, and 1 foundation of the Order of St. Hedwig, with 4 sisters. The above named congregations of women conduct 4 boarding schools for girls, 21 schools for girls, 6 hospitals, 4 orphan asylums, 13 creches, 5 hospital stations, 2 asylums for aged women, 2 homes for the aged, 1 institution for the blind, and 1 home for servant girls. Among the associations to be found in the diocese may be mentioned: the Catholic Journeymen's Union (Gesellenverein), 7; the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, 9 conferences; the Association of Christian Social Workers, the Apostolate of Sts. Cyril and Methodius, the St. Joseph's Verein for men and young men. Chief among the churches of the diocese is the Cathedral of Sts. Peter and Paul at Brünn; built between the thirteenth and fifteenth century in Gothic style, it was destroyed in 1645, rebuilt as a Renaissance structure (1743-80), remodeled in 1906 and two towers added. The stateliest and most beautiful Gothic church of the diocese is the church of St. James at Brünn, begun as early as the thirteenth century but completed only in 1511. Other prominent ecclesiastical buildings are the church of St. James at Iglau, erected 1230-43, with three naves, a spacious choir, and a Roman portico; the Jesuit church at Brünn, erected in 1582 in the Barocco style. JOSEPH LINS Francis de Sales Brunner Francis de Sales Brunner The founder of the Swiss-American congregation of the Benedictines, b. 10 January, 1795, at Muemliswil, Switzerland; d. at the Convent of Schellenberg, Duchy of Lichtenstein, 29 December, 1859. He received in baptism the name of Nicolaus Joseph. After the death of his father he entered, 11July, 1812, the Benedictine monastery near his residence in Maria Stein. He made his vows two years later and studied for the priesthood under the direction of the pious Abbot Pfluger. Ten years after his ordination (1819) he felt a vocation for a stricter life and joined the Trappists of Oehlemberg, also near his home. This convent being suppressed, he offered his services for foreign missions to Gregory XVI, and was to have gone as Apostolic missionary to China, but shortly before the time set for his departure the order was recalled. Next he founded a school for poor boys in the castle of Löwenberg, which he had purchased from the Count de Montfort. In 1833 with his mother he made a pilgrimage to Rome, where they were both enrolled in the Archconfraternity of the Most Precious Blood. Returned to Lowenberg, his mother gathered around her pious virgins to "hold a perpetual (day and night) adoration and dedicate their lives to the education of orphans and the furnishing of vestments for poor churches". Thus began the Sisters of the Most Precious Blood; their foundress died in 1836, and the community was brought to America under the second mother superior, Sister Clara, who died in 1876 at Grunewald, Ohio. Meanwhile, in 1838, Father Brunner had made a second visit to Rome, and had entered the Congregation of the Most Precious Blood at Albano. After his novitiate he returned, continued the work he had previously begun, and also began educating boys for the priesthood, so as to inaugurate a German province of the congregation. The Government interfering more and more with his school, he accepted the invitation of Archbishop Purcell of Cincinnati, brought to him by Monsignor Henni, to establish his community in America. Accompanied by eight priests, he landed, 21 December, 1843, at New Orleans and, ascending the Ohio River, arrived at Cincinnati on New year's Day. From Cincinnati they proceeded to St. Alphonsus, near Norwalk, Ohio, where the first station was erected. Their missionary circuit included all the Germans within a radius of 100 miles; they began to erect convents and parishes and entrusted the schools to the Sisters of the most Precious Blood, who had followed them on the 22nd of July, 1844. After this Father Brunner made several trips to Europe in the interest of his institution, and it was during the last of these that he died. He was an indefatigable missionary and a very prolific writer on religious subjects. Many of his writings, all of which in German, still await publication. U.F. MÜLLER Sebastian Brunner Sebastian Brunner A versatile and voluminous writer, b. in Vienna, 10 December, 1814; d. there, 27 November, 1893. He received his college education from the Benedictines of his native city, his philosophical and theological training at the Vienna University, was ordained priest in 1838, and was for some years professor in the philosophical faculty of the Vienna University. The University of Freiburg honored him with the degree of Doctor of Theology. In the revolutionary year, 1848, he founded the "Wienver Kirchenzeitung", which he edited until 1865, and in which he scourged with incisive satire the Josephinist bondage of the Church. It is mainly owing to his fearless championship, which more than once brought him into conflict with the authorities, that the Church in Austria to-day breathes more freely. He wrote some ascetical books and many volumes of sermons, also a biography of Clemens Hofbauer, the apostle of Vienna. His books of travel dealing with Germany, France, England, Switzerland, and especially Italy, are distinguished by keen observations on men and manners, art and culture, and most of all on religion, and are thus connected closely with his apologetic and controversial writings. Among the latter may be mentioned his book on "The Atheist Renan and his Gospel". Brunner's voluminous historical works are very valuale, particularly those on the history of the Church in Austria. It is, however, as a humorist that Brunner takes a permanent place in the history of literature, for he counts among the best modern German humorous writers. His works of this class were composed partly in verse, which at times reminds the reader of Hudibras, and partly in the form of prose stories. One of the best of the former is "Der Nebeljungen Lied"; of the latter, "Die Prinzenschule zu Möpselglück". These works, conceived with a high and noble purpose, are marked by brilliant satire, inexhaustible wit, and genuine humour, combined with great depth of feeling. A collection of his stories in prose and verse was published in eighteen volumes at Ratisbon in 1864. It is not surprising, though it is regrettable, that an author whose literary output was so vast and varied, often shows signs of haste and a lack of artistic finish. In his later years he turned his satirical pen against the undiscriminating worship of modern German literary celebrities. Selbstiographie (Autobiography (Ratisbon, 1890-91)l Scheicher, Sebastian Brunner (Wurzburg and Vienna, 1890); Lindemann, Geschichte der deutschen Literatur (Freiburg im Br., 1898), 938, 939; Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, XLVII (Supplement, 1903), s.v. B. GULDNER St. Bruno (1048-1123) St. Bruno Bishop of Segni, in Italy, born at Solero, Piedmont, about 1048; died 1123. He received his preliminary education in a Benedictine monastery of his native town. After completing his studies at Bologna and receiving ordination, he was made a canon of Sienna. In appreciation of his great learning and eminent piety, he was called to Rome, where, as an able and prudent counsellor, his advice was sought by four successive popes. At a synod held in Rome in 1079 he obliged Berengarius of Tours, who denied the real presence of Our Lord in the Holy Eucharist to retract his heresy. He enjoyed the personal friendship of Gregory VII, and was consecrated Bishop of Segni by him in the Campagna of Rome, in 1080. His humility caused him to decline the cardinalate. He is called "the brilliant defender of the church" because of the invincible courage he evinced in aiding Gregory VII and the succeeding popes in their efforts for ecclesiastical reform, and especially in denouncing lay investiture, which he even declared to be heretical. He accompanied Pope Urban II in 1095, to the Council of Clermont in which the First Crusade was inaugurated. In 1102 he became a monk of Monte Casino and was elected abbot in 1107, without, however, resigning his episcopal charge. With many bishops of Italy and France, Bruno rejected the treaty known in history as the "Privilegium", which Henry V of Germany had extorted from Pope Paschal II during his imprisonment. In a letter addressed to the pope he very frankly censured him for concludmg a convention which conceded to the German king in part the inadmissible claim to the right of investiture of ring and crosier upon bishops and abbots, and demanded that the treaty should be annulled. Irritated by his opposition, Paschal II commanded Bruno to give up his abbey and to return to his episcopal see. With untiring zeal he continued to labour for the welfare of his flock, as well as for the common interest of the Church at large, till his death. He was canonized by Pope Lucius III in 1183. His feast is celebrated on the 18th of July. St. Bruno was the author of numerous works, chiefly Scriptural. Of these are to be mentioned his commentaries on the Pentateuch, the Book of Job, the Psalms, the four Gospels, and the Apocalypse. J.A. BIRKHAEUSER St. Bruno (1030-1101) St. Bruno Confessor, ecclesiastical writer, and founder of the Carthusian Order. He was born at Cologne about the year 1030; died 6 October, 1101. He is usually represented with a death's head in his hands, a book and a cross, or crowned with seven stars; or with a roll bearing the device O Bonitas. His feast is kept on the 6th of October. According to tradition, St. Bruno belonged to the family of Hartenfaust, or Hardebüst, one of the principal families of the city, and it is in remembrance of this origin that different members of the family of Hartenfaust have received from the Carthusians either some special prayers for the dead, as in the case of Peter Bruno Hartenfaust in 1714, and Louis Alexander Hartenfaust, Baron of Laach, in 1740; or a personal affiliation with the order, as with Louis Bruno of Hardevüst, Baron of Laach and Burgomaster of the town of Bergues-S. Winnoc, in the Diocese of Cambrai, with whom the Hardevüst family in the male line became extinct on 22 March, 1784. We have little information about the childhood and youth of St. Bruno. Born at Cologne, he would have studied at the city college, or collegial of St. Cunibert. While still quite young (a pueris) he went to complete his education at Reims, attracted by the reputation of the episcopal school and of its director, Heriman. There he finished his classical studies and perfected himself in the sacred sciences which at that time consisted principally of the study of Holy Scriptures and of the Fathers. He became there, according to the testimony of his contemporaries, learned both in human and in Divine science. His education completed, St. Bruno returned to Cologne, where he was provided with a canonry at St. Cunibert's, and, according to the most probable opinion, was elevated to the priestly dignity. This was about the year 1055. In 1056 Bishop Gervais recalled him to Reims, to aid his former master Heriman in the direction of the school. The latter was already turning his attention towards a more perfect form of life, and when he at last left the world to enter the religious life, in 1057, St. Bruno found himself head of the episcopal school, or écolâtre, a post difficult as it was elevated, for it then included the direction of the public schools and the oversight of all the educational establishments of the diocese. For about twenty years, from 1057 to 1075, he maintained the prestige which the school of Reims has attained under its former masters, Remi of Auxerre, Hucbald of St. Amand, Gerbert, and lastly Heriman. Of the excellence of his teaching we have a proof in the funereal titles composed in his honour, which celebrate his eloquence, his poetic, philosophical, and above all his exegetical and theological, talents; and also in the merits of his pupils, amongst whom were Eudes of Châtillon, afterwards Urban II, Rangier, Cardinal and Bishop of Reggio, Robert, Bishop of Langres, and a large number of prelates and abbots. In 1075 St. Bruno was appointed chancellor of the church of Reims, and had then to give himself especially to the administration of the diocese. Meanwhile the pious Bishop Gervais, friend of St. Bruno, had been succeeded by Manasses de Gournai, who quickly became odious for his impiety and violence. The chancellor and two other canons were commissioned to bear to the papal legate, Hugh of Die, the complaints of the indignant clergy, and at the Council of Autun, 1077, they obtained the suspension of the unworthy prelate. The latter's reply was to raze the houses of his accusers, confiscate their goods, sell their benefices, and appeal to the pope. Bruno then absented himself from Reims for a while, and went probably to Rome to defend the justice of his cause. It was only in 1080 that a definite sentence, confirmed by a rising of the people, compelled Manasses to withdraw and take refuge with the Emperor Henry IV. Free then to choose another bishop, the clergy were on the point of uniting their vote upon the chancellor. He, however, had far different designs in view. According to a tradition preserved in the Carthusian Order, Bruno was persuaded to abandon the world by the sight of a celebrated prodigy, popularized by the brush of Lesueur--the triple resurrection of the Parisian doctor, Raymond Diocres. To this tradition may be opposed the silence of contemporaries, and of the first biographers of the saint; the silence of Bruno himself in his letter to Raoul le Vert, Provost of Reims; and the impossibility of proving that he ever visited Paris. He had no need of such an extraordinary argument to cause him to leave the world. Some time before, when in conversation with two of his friends, Raoul and Fulcius, canons of Reims like himself, they had been so enkindled with the love of God and the desire of eternal goods that they had made a vow to abandon the world and to embrace the religious life. This vow, uttered in 1077, could not be put into execution until 1080, owing to various circumstances. The first idea of St. Bruno on leaving Reims seems to have been to place himself and his companions under the direction of an eminent solitary, St. Robert, who had recently (1075) settled at Molesme in the Diocese of Langres, together with a band of other solitaries who were later on (1098) to form the Cistercian Order. But he soon found that this was not his vocation, and after a short sojourn at Sèche-Fontaine near Molesme, he left two of his companions, Peter and Lambert, and betook himself with six others to Hugh of Châteauneuf, Bishop of Grenoble, and, according to some authors, one of his pupils. The bishop, to whom God had shown these men in a dream, under the image of seven stars, conducted and installed them himself (1084) in a wild spot on the Alps of Dauphiné named Chartreuse, about four leagues from Grenoble, in the midst of precipitous rocks and mountains almost always covered with snow. With St. Bruno were Landuin, the two Stephens of Bourg and Die, canons of St. Rufus, and Hugh the Chaplain, "all, the most learned men of their time", and two laymen, Andrew and Guerin, who afterwards became the first lay brothers. They built a little monastery where they lived in deep retreat and poverty, entirely occupied in prayer and study, and frequently honoured by the visits of St. Hugh who became like one of themselves. Their manner of life has been recorded by a contemporary, Guibert of Nogent, who visited them in their solitude. (De Vitâ suâ, I, ii.) Meanwhile, another pupil of St. Bruno, Eudes of Châtillon, had become pope under the name of Urban II (1088). Resolved to continue the work of reform commenced by Gregory VII, and being obliged to struggle against the antipope, Guibert of Ravenna, and the Emperor Henry IV, he sought to surround himself with devoted allies and called his ancient master ad Sedis Apostolicae servitium. Thus the solitary found himself obliged to leave the spot where he had spent more than six years in retreat, followed by a part of his community, who could not make up their minds to live separated from him (1090). It is difficult to assign the place which he then occupied at the pontifical court, or his influence in contemporary events, which was entirely hidden and confidential. Lodged in the palace of the pope himself and admitted to his councils, and charged, moreover, with other collaborators, in preparing matters for the numerous councils of this period, we must give him some credit for their results. But he took care always to keep himself in the background, and although he seems to have assisted at the Council of Benevento (March, 1091), we find no evidence of his having been present at the Councils of Troja (March, 1093), of Piacenza (March, 1095), or of Clermont (November, 1095). His part in history is effaced. All that we can say with certainty is that he seconded with all his power the sovereign pontiff in his efforts for the reform of the clergy, efforts inaugurated at the Council of Melfi (1089) and continued at that of Benevento. A short time after the arrival of St. Bruno, the pope had been obliged to abandon Rome before the victorious forces of the emperor and the antipope. He withdrew with all his court to the south of Italy. During the voyage, the former professor of Reims attracted the attention of the clergy of Reggio in further Calabria, which had just lost its archbishop Arnulph (1090), and their votes were given to him. The pope and the Norman prince, Roger, Duke of Apulia, strongly approved of the election and pressed St. Bruno to accept it. In a similar juncture at Reims he had escaped by flight; this time he again escaped by causing Rangier, one of his former pupils, to be elected, who was fortunately near by at the Benedictine Abbey of La Cava near Salerno. But he feared that such attempts would be renewed; moreover he was weary of the agitated life imposed upon him, and solitude ever invited him. He begged, therefore, and after much trouble obtained, the pope's permission to return again to his solitary life. His intention was to rejoin his brethren in Dauphiné, as a letter addressed to them makes clear. But the will of Urban II kept him in Italy, near the papal court, to which he could be called at need. The place chosen for his new retreat by St. Bruno and some followers who had joined him was in the Diocese of Squillace, on the eastern slope of the great chain which crosses Calabria from north to south, and in a high valley three miles long and two in width, covered with forest. The new solitaries constructed a little chapel of planks for their pious reunions and, in the depths of the woods, cabins covered with mud for their habitations. A legend says that St. Bruno whilst at prayer was discovered by the hounds of Roger, Great Count of Sicily and Calabria and uncle of the Duke of Apulia, who was then hunting in the neighbourhood, and who thus learnt to know and venerate him; but the count had no need to wait for that occasion to know him, for it was probably upon his invitation that the new solitaries settled upon his domains. That same year (1091) he visited them, made them a grant of the lands they occupied, and a close friendship was formed between them. More than once St. Bruno went to Mileto to take part in the joys and sorrows of the noble family, to visit the count when sick (1098 and 1101), and to baptize his son Roger (1097), the future Kind of Sicily. But more often it was Roger who went into the desert to visit his friends, and when, through his generosity, the monastery of St. Stephen was built, in 1095, near the hermitage of St. Mary, there was erected adjoining it a little country house at which he loved to pass the time left free from governing his State. Meanwhile the friends of St. Bruno died one after the other: Urban II in 1099; Landuin, the prior of the Grand Chartreuse, his first companion, in 1100; Count Roger in 1101. His own time was near at hand. Before his death he gathered for the last time his brethren round him and made in their presence a profession of the Catholic Faith, the words of which have been preserved. He affirms with special emphasis his faith in the mystery of the Holy Trinity, and in the real presence of Our Saviour in the Holy Eucharist--a protestation against the two heresies which had troubled that century, the tritheism of Roscelin, and the impanation of Berengarius. After his death, the Carthusians of Calabria, following a frequent custom of the Middle Ages by which the Christian world was associated with the death of its saints, dispatched a rolliger, a servant of the convent laden with a long roll of parchment, hung round his neck, who passed through Italy, France, Germany, and England. He stopped at the principal churches and communities to announce the death, and in return, the churches, communities, or chapters inscribed upon his roll, in prose or verse, the expression of their regrets, with promises of prayers. Many of these rolls have been preserved, but few are so extensive or so full of praise as that about St. Bruno. A hundred and seventy-eight witnesses, of whom many had known the deceased, celebrated the extent of his knowledge and the fruitfulness of his instruction. Strangers to him were above all struck by his great knowledge and talents. But his disciples praised his three chief virtues--his great spirit of prayer, an extreme mortification, and a filial devotion to the Blessed Virgin. Both the churches built by him in the desert were dedicated to the Blessed Virgin: Our Lady of Casalibus in Dauphiné, Our Lady Della Torre in Calabria; and, faithful to his inspirations, the Carthusian Statutes proclaim the Mother of God the first and chief patron of all the houses of the order, whoever may be their particular patron. St. Bruno was buried in the little cemetery of the hermitage of St. Mary, and many miracles were worked at his tomb. He had never been formally canonized. His cult, authorized for the Carthusian Order by Leo X in 1514, was extended to the whole church by Gregory XV, 17 February, 1623, as a semi-double feast, and elevated to the class of doubles by Clement X, 14 March, 1674. St. Bruno is the popular saint of Calabria; every year a great multitude resort to the Charterhouse of St. Stephen, on the Monday and Tuesday of Pentecost, when his relics are borne in procession to the hermitage of St. Mary, where he lived, and the people visit the spots sanctified by his presence. An immense number of medals are struck in his honour and distributed to the crowd, and the little Carthusian habits, which so many children of the neighbourhood wear, are blessed. He is especially invoked, and successfully, for the deliverance of those possessed. As a writer and founder of an order, St. Bruno occupies an important place in the history of the eleventh century. He composed commentaries on the Psalms and on the Epistles of St. Paul, the former written probably during his professorship at Reims, the latter during his stay at the Grande Chartreuse if we may believe an old manuscript seen by Mabillon--"Explicit glosarius Brunonis heremitae super Epistolas B. Pauli." Two letters of his still remain, also his profession of faith, and a short elegy on contempt for the world which shows that he cultivated poetry. The "Commentaries" disclose to us a man of learning; he knows a little Hebrew and Greek and uses it to explain, or if need be, rectify the Vulgate; he is familiar with the Fathers, especially St. Augustine and St. Ambrose, his favourites. "His style", says Dom Rivet, "is concise, clear, nervous and simple, and his Latin as good as could be expected of that century: it would be difficult to find a composition of this kind at once more solid and more luminous, more concise and more clear". His writings have been published several times: at Paris, 1509-24; Cologne, 1611-40; Migne, Latin Patrology, CLII, CLIII, Montreuil-sur-Mer, 1891. The Paris edition of 1524 and those of Cologne include also some sermons and homilies which may be more justly attributed to St. Bruno, Bishop of Segni. The Preface of the Blessed Virgin has also been wrongly ascribed to him; it is long anterior, though he may have contributed to introduce it into the liturgy. St. Bruno's distinction as the founder of an order was that he introduced into the religious life the mixed form, or union of the eremitical and cenobite modes of monasticism, a medium between the Camaldolese Rule and that of St. Benedict. He wrote no rule, but he left behind him two institutions which had little connection with each other--that of Dauphiné and that of Calabria. The foundation of Calabria, somewhat like the Camaldolese, comprised two classes of religious: hermits, who had the direction of the order, and cenobites who did not feel called to the solitary life; it only lasted a century, did not rise to more than five houses, and finally, in 1191, united with the Cistercian Order. The foundation of Grenoble, more like the rule of St. Benedict, comprised only one kind of religious, subject to a uniform discipline, and the greater part of whose life was spent in solitude, without, however, the complete exclusion of the conventual life. This life spread throughout Europe, numbered 250 monasteries, and in spite of many trials continues to this day. The great figure of St. Bruno has been often sketched by artists and has inspired more than one masterpiece: in sculpture, for example, the famous statue by Houdon, at St. Mary of the Angels in Rome, "which would speak if his rule did not compel him to silence"; in painting, the fine picture by Zurbaran, in the Seville museum, representing Urban II and St. Bruno in conference; the Apparition of the Blessed Virgin to St. Bruno, by Guercino at Bologna; and above all the twenty-two pictures forming the gallery of St. Bruno in the museum of the Louvre, "a masterpiece of Le Sueur and of the French school". AMBROSE MOUGEL Giordano Bruno Giordano Bruno Italian philosopher, b. at Nola in Campania, in the Kingdom of Naples, in 1548; d. at Rome, 1600. At the age of eleven he went to Naples, to study "humanity, logic, and dialectic", and, four years later, he entered the Order of St. Dominic, giving up his worldly name of Filippo and taking that of Giordano. He made his novitiate at Naples and continued to study there. In 1572 he was ordained priest. It seems, however, that, even as a novice, he attracted attention by the originality of his views and by his outspoken criticism of accepted theological doctrines. After his ordination things reached such a pass that, in 1576, formal accusation of heresy was brought against him. Thereupon he went to Rome, but, apparently, did not mend his manner of speaking of the mysteries of faith; for the accusations were renewed against him at the convent of the Minerva. Within a few months of his arrival he fled the city and cast off all allegiance to his order. From this point on, his life-story is the tale of his wanderings from one country to another and of his failure to find peace anywhere. He tarried awhile in several Italian cities, and in 1579 went to Geneva, where he seems to have adopted the Calvinist faith, although afterwards, before the ecclesiastical tribunal at Venice, he steadfastly denied that he had ever joined the Reformed Church. This much at least is certain; he was excommunicated by the Calvinist Council on account of his disrespectful attitude towards the heads of that Church and was obliged to leave the city. Thence he went to Toulouse, Lyons, and (in 1581) to Paris. At Lyons he completed his "Clavis Magna", or "Great Key" to the art of remembering. In Paris he published several works which further developed his art of memory-training and revealed the two-fold influence of Raymond Lully and the neo-Platonists. In 1582 he published a characteristic work, "Il candelaio", or "The Torchbearer", a satire in which he exhibits in a marked degree the false taste then in vogue among the humanists, many of whom mistook obscenity for humour. While at Paris he lectured publicly on philosophy, under the auspices, as it seems, of the College of Cambrai, the forerunner of the College of France. In 1583 he crossed over to England, and, for a time at least, enjoyed the favour of Queen Elizabeth and the friendship of Sir Philip Sidney. To the latter he dedicated the most bitter of his attacks on the Catholic Church, "Il spaccio della bestia trionfante", "The Expulsion of the Triumphant Beast", published in 1584. He visited Oxford, and, on being refused the privilege of lecturing there, he published (1584) his "Cena delle ceneri", or "Ash-Wednesday Supper", in which he attacked the Oxford professors, saying that they knew more about beer than about Greek. In 1585 he returned to France, and during the year which he spent in Paris at this time made several attempts to become reconciled to the Catholic Church, all of which failed because of his refusal to accept the condition imposed, namely, that he should return to his order. In Germany, whither he went in 1587, he showed the same spirit of insolent self-assertion as at Oxford. In Helmstadt he was excommunicated by the Lutherans. After some time spent in literary activity at Frankfort, he went, in 1591, to Venice at the invitation of Mocenigo, who professed to be interested in his system of memory-training. Failing to obtain from Bruno the secret of his "natural magic", Mocenigo denounced him to the Inquisition. Bruno was arrested, and in his trial before the Venetian inquisitors first took refuge in the principle of "two-fold truth", saying that the errors imputed to him were held by him "as a philosopher, and not as an honest Christian"; later, however, he solemnly abjured all his errors and doubts in the matter of Catholic doctrine and practice (Berti, Docum., XII, 22 and XIII, 45). At this point the Roman Inquisition intervened and requested his extradition. After some hesitation the Venetian authorities agreed, and in February, 1593, Bruno was sent to Rome, and for six years was kept in the prison of the Inquisition. Historians have striven in vain to discover the explanation of this long delay on the part of the Roman authorities. In the spring of 1599, the trial was begun before a commission of the Roman Inquisition, and, after the accused had been granted several terms of respite in which to retract his errors, he was finally condemned (January, 1600), handed over to the secular power (8 February), and burned at the stake in the Campo dei Fiori in Rome (17 February). Bruno was not condemned for his defence of the Copernican system of astronomy, nor for his doctrine of the plurality of inhabited worlds, but for his theological errors, among which were the following: that Christ was not God but merely an unusually skilful magician, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, that the Devil will be saved, etc. To the works of Bruno already mentioned the following are to be added: "Della causa, principio ed uno"; "Dell' infinito universo e dei mondi"; "De Compendiosâ Architecturâ"; "De Triplici Minimo"; "De Monade, Numero et Figurâ." In these "the Nolan" expounds a system of philosophy in which the principal elements are neo-Platonism, materialistic monism, rational mysticism (after the manner of Raymond Lully), and the naturalistic concept of the unity of the material world (inspired by the Copernican astronomy). His attitude towards Aristotle is best illustrated by his reiterated assertion that the natural philosophy of the Stagirite is vitiated by the predominance of the dialectical over the mathematical mode of conceiving natural phenomena. Towards the Scholastics in general his feeling was one of undisguised contempt; he excepted, however, Albert tbe Great and St. Thomas, for whom he always maintained a high degree of respect. He wished to reform the Aristotelean philosophy, and yet he was bitterly opposed to his contemporaries, Ramus and Patrizzi, whose efforts were directed towards the same obect. He was acquainted, though only in a superficial way, with the writings of the pre-Socratic philosophers of Greece, and with the works of the neo-Platonists, especially with the books falsely attributed to Iamblichus and Plotinus. From the neo-Platonists he derived the tendency of his thought towards monism. From the pre-Socratic philosophers he borrowed the materialistic interpretation of the One. From the Copernican doctrine, which was attracting so much attention in the century in which he lived, he learned to identify the material One with the visible, infinite, heliocentric universe. Thus, his system of thought is an incoherent materialistic pantheism. God and the world are one; matter and spirit, body and soul, are two phases of the same substance; the universe is infinite; beyond the visible world there is an infinity of other worlds, each of which is inhabited; this terrestrial globe has a soul; in fact, each and every part of it, mineral as well as plant and animal, is animated; all matter is made up of the same elements (no distinction between terrestrial and celestial matter); all souls are akin (transmigration is, therefore, not impossible). This unitary point of view is Bruno's justification of "natural magic." No doubt, the attempt to establish a scientific continuity among all the phenomena of nature is an important manifestation of the modern spirit, and interesting, especially on account of its appearance at the moment when the medieval point of view was being abandoned. And one can readily understand how Bruno's effort to establish a unitary concept of nature commanded the admiration of such men as Spinoza, Jacobi, and Hegel. On the other hand, the exaggerations, the limitations, and the positive errors of his scientific system; his intolerance of even those who were working for the reforms to which he was devoted; the false analogies, fantastic allegories, and sophistical reasonings into which his emotional fervour often betrayed him have justified, in the eyes of many, Bayle's characterization of him as "the knight-errant of philosophy." His attitude of mind towards religious truth was that of a rationalist. Personally, he failed to feel any of the vital significance of Christianity as a religious system. It was not a Roman Inquisitor, but a Protestant divine, who said of him that he was "a man of great capacity, with infinite knowledge, but not a trace of religion." The latest edition of Bruno's works is by Tocco, Opere latine di G. B. (Florence, 1889); Opere inedite (Naples, 1891); (Leipzig, 1829, 1830). See also: McIntyre, Giordano Bruno (London and New York, 1903); Frith, Life of G. B. (London and Boston, 1887); Adamson in Development of Modern Philosophy (London, 1903), II, 23-44; Höffding, Hist. of Modern Philosophy, tr. Meyer (London, 1900), I, 110 sqq.; Stöckl, Gesch. der Phil. des Mittelalters (Mainz, 1866), III, 106 sqq.; Turner, Hist. of Phil. (Boston, 1903), 429 sqq. WILLIAM TURNER St. Bruno of Querfurt St. Bruno of Querfurt (Also called BRUN and BONIFACE). Second Apostle of the Prussians and martyr, born about 970; died 14 February, 1009. He is generally represented with a hand cut off, and is commemorated on 15 October. Bruno was a member of the noble family of Querfurt and is commonly said to have been a relative of the Emperor Otto III, although Hefele (in Kirchenlex., II, s.v. Bruno) emphatically denies this. When hardly six years old he was sent to Archbishop Adalbert of Magdeburg to be educated and had the learned Geddo as his teacher in the cathedral school. He was a well-behaved, industrious scholar, while still a lad he was made a canon of the cathedral. The fifteen year-old Otto III became attached to Bruno, made him one of his court, and took him to Rome when the young emperor went there in 996 to be crowned. At Rome Bruno became acquainted with St. Adalbert Archbishop of Prague, who was murdered a year later by the pagan Prussians to whom he had gone as a missionary. After Adalbert's death Bruno was tied with an intense desire for martyrdom. He spent much of has time in the monastery on the Aventine where Adalbert had become a monk, and where Abbot Johannes Canaparius wrote a life of Adalbert. Bruno, however, did not enter the monastic life here, but in the monastery of Pereum, an island in the swamps near Ravenna. Pereum was under the rule of the founder of the Camaldoli reform, St. Romuald, a saint who had great influence over the Emperor Otto III. Under the guidance of St. Romuald Bruno underwent a severe ascetic training; it included manual work, fasting all week except Sunday and Thursday, night vigils, and scourging on the bare back; in addition Bruno suffered greatly from fever. He found much pleasure in the friendship of a brother of the same age as himself, Benedict of Benevento, who shared his cell and who was one with him in mind and spirit. The Emperor Otto III desired to convert the lands; between the EIbe and the Oder, which were occupied by Slavs, to Christianity, and to plant colonies there. He hoped to attain these ends through the aid of a monastery to be founded in this region by some of the most zealous of Romuald's pupils. In 1001, therefore, Benedict another brother of the same monastery, Joannes, went, laden with gifts from the emperor, to Poland, where they were well received by the Christian Duke Boleslas, who taught them the language of the people. During this time Bruno studied the language of Italy, where he remained with Otto and awaited the Apostolic appointment by the pope. Sylvester II made him archbishop over the heathen and gave him the pallium, but left the consecration to the Archbishop of Magdeburg, who had the supervision of the mission to the Slavs. Quiting Rome in 1003, Bruno was consecrated in February, 1004, by Archbishop Tagino of Magdeburg and gave his property for the founding of a monastery. As war has broken out between Emperor Henry II and the Polish Duke, Bruno was not able to go at once to Poland; so, starting from Ratisbon on the Danube, he went into Hungary, where St. Alalbert had also laboured. Here he finished his life of St. Adalbert, a literary memorial of much worth. Bruno sought to convert the Hungarian ruler Achtum and his principality of "Black-Hungary", but he met with so much opposition, including that of the Greek monks, that success was impossible. In December, 1007, he went to Russia. Here the Grand duke Vladimir entertained him for a month and then gave him a territory extending to the possessions of the Petschenegen, who lived on the Black Sea between the Danube and the Don. This was considered the fiercest and most cruel of the heathen tribes. Bruno spent five months among them, baptized some thirty adults, aided in bringing about a treaty of peace with Russia, and left in that country one of his companions whom he had consecrated bishop. About the middle of the year 1008 he returned to Poland and there consecrated a bishop for Sweden. While in Poland he heard that his friend Benedict and four companions had been killed by robbers on 11 May, 1003. Making use of the accounts of eyewitnesses, he wrote the touching history of the lives and death of the so-called Polish brothers. Towards the end of 1008 he wrote a memorable, but ineffectual, letter to the Emperor Henry II, exhorting him to show clemency and to conclude a peace with Boleslas of Poland. Near the close of this same year, accompanied by eighteen companions, he went to found a mission among the Prussians, but the soil was not fruitful, and Bruno and his companions travelled towards the borders of Russia, preaching courageously as they went. On the borders of Russia they were attacked by the heathen, the whole company were murdered, Bruno with great composure meeting death by decapitation. Duke Boleslas bought the bodies of the slain and had them brought to Poland. It is said that the city of Braunsberg is named after St. Bruno. Soon after the time of their death St. Bruno and his companions were reverenced as martyrs. Little value is to be attached to a legendary account of the martyrdom by a certain Wipert. Bruno's fellow-pupil, Dithmar, or Thietmar, Bishop of Merseburg, gives a brief account of him in his Chronicle. VI, 58. GABRIEL MEIER Bruno the Saxon Bruno the Saxon (SAXONICUS.) A German chronicler of the eleventh Century and author of the "Historia de Bello Saxonico". Little is known of his life. He was apparently a Saxon monk belonging to the household of Archbishop Werner, of Magdeburg, who was a vigorous opponent of Henry IV and one of the leaders of the Saxon uprising against the emperor. After the death of the archbishop in 1078 at the hands of peasants, Bruno attached himself to Werner, Bishop of Merseburg, to whom, in 1082, he dedicated the work, "De Bello Saxonico" by which he is chiefly known. As its name indicates, it is a record of the struggles of the Saxons with the Emperor Henry IV. The author begins with an account of the youth of Henry and the evil influence exerted over him by Adalbert of Bremen after he had passed from the stern tutelage of Anno, Archbishop of Cologne. He then traces the relations of the emperor with the Saxons and narrates at length the causes and events of the rebellion, ending with the election of Hermann of Luxemburg as king in 1081. There has been a difference of opinion regarding the historical value of Bruno's work. It was written during the contentions between Henry and Gregory VII, and the author has been classed with those partisans who, either through ignorance or malice, endeavoured to lower Henry in the esteem of his subjects (Stenzel). Bruno indeed supported the pope's cause, and his Saxon sympathies manifest themselves at times in his writings, but of his sincerity and his expressed purpose to narrate the truth there can be no doubt. He made the most of his sources of information and, in spite of occasional omissions, gives a vivid picture of the times from the point of view of an interested contemporary. The letters of Saxon bishops and other original documents which he includes in his history give an added value to the work. The text of the "De Bello Saxonico" is given in the "Monum. Germ. Hist." (Pertz, Hanover, 1848), V. 327-384. A German translation, with an introduction, was published by W. Wattenbach (Berlin, 1853). For an extended, though not unbiased, history of the time, cf. Stenzel, "Geschichte Deutschlands unter den frankischen Kaisen", (Leipzig, 1827). HENRY M. BROCK Brunswick (Braunschweig) Brunswick (Braunschweig) A duchy situated in the mountainous central part of Northern Germany, comprising the region of the Harz mountains. Territorially, the duchy is not a unit, but parcelled into three large, and six smaller, sections. Both in extent of territory and in population it ranks tenth among the confederated states of the German Empire. The inhabitants are of the Lower Saxon race. The census of 1900 enumerated 464,333 inhabitants. Of these 432,570 were Lutherans, 4406 Reformed, 24,175 Catholics, and 1824 Jews. The Government is a constitutional monarchy, hereditary in the male line of the House of Brunswick-Luneberg. The elder line having become extinct in 1884 by the death of Duke Wilhelm, the younger line, represented by the Duke of Cumberland, should have succeeded to the throne. For political reasons, however, Prussia objected to his taking possession, and by decree of the Bundesrat he was excluded. The present regent, chosen by the legislature, is Duke Johann Albrecht of Mecklenberg. Agriculture, industries, and commerce are highly developed in the duchy. It is stated that the first potatoes raised in Germany were planted in Brunswick from five of the tubers brought to Europe by Francis Drake. The town Brunswick (Brunonis vicus, Bruno's village), which has given its name to the duchy, was founded in the second half of the ninth century. The country was part of the allodial lands of Henry the Lion. After his defeat and exile in 1180, he lost all his possessions. Brunswick, however, was restored to his grandson Otto, who was made first Duke of Brunswick by Frederick II. In the fourteenth century the town became a centre of the Hanseatic League, as well as of the confederation of the Lower Saxon towns. Christianity dates from Charlemagne's conquest of the Saxon country of which Brunswick is a part. Charlemagne found and destroyed an ancient German idol in the place where now Brunswick stands. At Kissenbruck many of the conquered Saxons were baptized. During the Middle Ages the country was partly under the jurisdiction of the Diocese of Halberstadt, partly under that of Hildesheim. At the end of the eighth and the beginning of the ninth century St. Ludger laboured in the neighbourhood of Helmstedt, where he founded a monastery. The pious Duke of Eastphalia and his devout wife founded, in 852, the monastery of Brunshausen, near Gandersheim, for Benedictine nuns, where his daughter Hathumod was first abbess. It was her brother Bruno who some years later founded the town of Brunswick. When, in 881, the church and monastery of Gandersheim were completed, the community was transferred thither, under the abbess Gerberga, sister of Hathumod. This monastery reached its highest point of prosperity in the tenth century, as is shown by the life of Hrotswitha, the celebrated "nun of Gandersheim", who sang the praises of Otto the Great and wrote Latin comedies after the manner of Terence. Other Benedictine monasteries founded in the eleventh and twelfth centuries were Steterburg, Lutter, and Clus. The great Cistercian Order also flourished in Brunswick. The three monasteries of Amelungsborn, Marienthal, and Riddaghausen were founded in the twelfth century. The Augustinians also had a monastery for men and one for women at Helmstedt. In the town of Brunswick religion flourished from an early period. Among the older monasteries should be mentioned St. Blasius and St. Cyriacus, also the Benedictine monastery built in honour of St. Autor, whose relics were brought from Trier, and who became the patron saint of the town. In the twelfth century Henry the Lion did much for his town of Brunswick. He rebuilt some monasteries and erected several churches. The Franciscans made a foundation in the town in the thirteenth, the Dominicans, early in the fourteenth, century. The town also possessed several hospitals and Beguinages. Mention must here be made of the great reform of monasteries which was wrought in North Germany in the fifteenth century. The celebrated reformer of monasteries, Johannes Busch, canon regular of Windesheim, extended his beneficent labours to Brunswick. The Benedictine Congregation of Bursfeld, which at the end of the fifteenth century counted 142 monasteries, may be said to have sprung from the monastery of Clus near Gandersheim. (See Bursfeld.) With regard to the religious revolution of the sixteenth century it will be necessary to consider the town of Brunswick separately. It was a proud and rich town and had long sought to make itself independent of the authority of its dukes. Hence the revolutionary doctrines of the Reformers were readily accepted by the townsmen. Lutheranism was introduced as early as 1521, and firmly established by Burgenhagen in 1528, not without ruthless fanaticism. In the country, however, Duke Henry's authority prevailed, and the Reformers gained no foothold until 1542, when, owing to the victory of the Smalkaldic League, the duke fell into captivity, Bugenhagen was recalled, and the external observance of the new religion was forced upon the people with much violence and cruelty. When Henry recovered his duchy, in 1547, he re-established the Catholic religion. His son and successor made the whole district Lutheran, and it has since remained a Protestant stronghold. Duke Julius did not destroy all the monasteries, but allowed many of them to persist as so-called Protestant convents. Among these was the once celebrated Gandersheim which was only suppressed during the general spoliation and secularization of 1802. Prominent among the Dukes of Brunswick in post-Reformation times is Anton Ulrich, said to have been the most learned prince of his time, a patron of the arts and sciences, himself a poet, and a student of the early Fathers. He took a lively interest in the movement for the reconciliation of the Protestant sects with the Church, the same movement with which Leibniz was identified. Early in 1710 the duke abjured Protestantism and a few months later published his "Fifty Reasons Why the Catholic Church is Preferable to Protestantism". (See Räss, Convertiten, IX.) Two of his daughters followed him into the Catholic Church. The only result of his conversion so far as the duchy was concerned was his erection of two Catholic churches, one in Brunswick, the other in Wolfenbuttel, to which according to his desire Franciscans were appointed. Pope Gregory XVI placed the Catholics of the Duchy of Brunswick under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Hildesheim. They are merely tolerated in the duchy. The Constitution of 1832, it is true, granted liberty of conscience and the rights of public worship, but subjected all churches to the "supervision of the Government", that is to say, of the Lutheran church authorities. The law of 1848 brought little relief to the Catholics. No ecclesiastical ordinance or pontifical constitution may be published without the government's placet; all Catholic congregations were incorporated in Protestant parishes. The last intolerable law was abolished in 1867 for three Catholic parishes, henceforth recognized as such by the State, viz., Brunswick, Wolfenbuttel, and Helmstedt, all the others remaining parts of Protestant parishes. Catholic priests (with the three aforesaid exceptions) may not perform baptisms, marriages, or hold funeral services without giving previous notice to the Protestant pastor and obtaining his leave. And no priest, unless duly recognized by the State, may perform any ecclesiastical function without falling under the penalty of the law. Non-recognized priests are even fined for conferring baptism in the case of necessity, and for administering the last sacraments. The same intolerance prevails with regard to schools and the education of children of mixed marriages. The State contributes nothing towards the support of Catholic worship. In the year 1864 a law was passed abolishing Stolgebühren, i.e., all perquisites and fees received by the priest for certain ecclesiastical functions, such as marriages and funerals, which had previously to be handed over to the Protestant pastor. The general statement, therefore, in the "Kirchenlexicon", that the law of 1867 has rendered the condition of the Catholics in the Duchy of Brunswick "wholly satisfactory", needs recension; it must be restricted to the three above-named parishes; in the rest of the duchy the condition of Catholics is far from satisfactory. It is for this reason that the Centre Party in the Reichstag has brought in the Toleration Bill, which, if carried, would sweep away all Catholic disabilities throughout the empire, in Brunswick as well as in Mecklenburg, and in the Kingdom of Saxony. Daniel, Handbuch der Geographie (5th ed., Leipzig), IV, 568-82; Bruck, Gesichte der kath. Kirch in Deutschland im 19. Jahrh. (Mainz and Kirchheim), III; Woker in Kirchenlex.,s.v.; Janssen-Pastor, Gesch. des deutsch. Volkes (18th ed., Freiburg), III, Bk. II, xvii; IV, Bk. II, viii, Bk. III, xi; Staatslexikon (2nd ed.), I, s.v. Konversations-Lex. (3rd ed., Freiburg), s.v. B. GULDNER Anton Brus Anton Brus Archbishop of Prague, b. at. Muglitz in Moravia, 13 February, 1518; d. 28 August, 1580. After receiving his education at Prague he joined the Knights of the Cross with the Red Star, an ecclesiastical order established in Bohemia in the thirteenth century. After his ordination to the priesthood Emperor Ferdinand appointed him chaplain of the Austrian army, in which capacity he served during the Turkish war (1542-45). He was elected Grand Master General of his order in 1552, when he was only 34 years of age. In 1558 he became Bishop of Vienna; in 1561 the emperor made him Archbishop of Prague, a see which had remained vacant since 1421 when Archbishop Conrad abandoned his flock and entered the Hussite camp. During the intervening years the archdiocese was governed by administrators elected by the cathedral chapter. Before Archbishop Brus took possession of his see, Emperor Ferdinand I, who was also King of Bohemia, sent him as Bohemian legate to the Council of Trent (1562). Besides other ecclesiastical reforms, he urged the archbishop to advocate the expediency of permitting the Utraquists, or Calixtines, of Bohemia and adjoining countries to receive the Holy Eucharist under both species; he hoped that after this concession many of the Utraquists would return to the Catholic Church. The archbishop was ably assisted in his endeavours by the imperial delegate from Hungary, Bishop George Draskovich of Funfkirchen (Pécs), and by Baumgärtner, the delegate of Duke Albrecht V of Bavaria. Brus could not be present at the twenty-first and the twenty-second sessions of the Council, during which this petition of the emperor was discussed. The majority of the fathers of Trent considered it beyond their power to grant the privilege of lay communion under both kinds and referred the matter to Pope Pius IV, who, in a Brief dated 16 April, 1564, granted the petition, with certain restrictions, to the subjects of the emperor and of Duke Albrecht of Bavaria. The Archbishop of Prague was to empower certain priests to administer the Holy Eucharist in both kinds to such of the laity as desired it. The faithful who wished to take advantage of this privilege were obliged to profess their belief in the Real Presence of the whole Christ in each species, while the priest at the administration of each species pronounced the formula: "Corpus et sanguis Domini nostri Jesu Christi custodiant animam tuam in vitam aeternam. Amen." instead of the customary formula: "Corpus Domini nostri," etc. The emperor and the archbishop expected great results from this papal concession. Thinking that the Utraquist consistory at Prague would at once accept all Catholic doctrine, the emperor put it under the jurisdiction of the archbishop. Both, however, were soon undeceived. The Utraquist consistory was ready to present its sacerdotal candidates to the archbishop for ordination, but there his authority was to end. They refused to permit their candidates for the priesthood to undergo examination on Catholic theology or to give proof of their orthodoxy, and complained to the emperor that the archbishop was infringing upon their rights. Had Ferdinand not died at this critical moment, the papal concession would perhaps have produced some salutary effects, but under the weak rule of his son Maximilian, who became emperor in 1564, the gulf that separated the Catholics from the Utraquists was continually widening. In order to publish and put into execution the decrees of the Council of Trent, the archbishop intended to convene a provincial synod at Prague; but Maximilian, fearing to offend the Bohemian nobility of whom the majority were Protestants, withheld his consent. Hampered on all sides, the archbishop and the small body of Catholic nobles, despite their almost superhuman efforts, could only postpone the impending crisis. The Utraquists no longer heeded the archbishop's commands, continued to administer the Holy Eucharist to infants, disregarded many decrees of the Council of Trent, neglected sacramental confession--in a word, were steering straight towards Protestantism. After 1572, the archbishop refused to ordain Utraquist candidates, despite the expostulations of Emperor Maximilian. The death of Maximilian (12 October, 1576) brought no relief to the archbishop and his ever-decreasing flock of Catholics. His successor, Emperor Rudolph II, though a good Catholic at heart, was as weak as his predecessor. After the death of Brus the Catholics of Bohemia continued on their downward course until the victory of Ferdinand II over the Winterkönig Frederick V at the White Mountain near Prague (8 November, 1620). FRIND, Geschichte der Bischofe und Erzebischofe von Prag (Prague, 1873), 182-189; BORWY in Kirchenlex., s.v.; biography in Oesterreichische Vierteljahrschrift fur kath. Theologie (Vienna, 1874). MICHAEL OTT Brusa Brusa A titular see of Bithynia in Asia Minor. According to Strabo, XII, iv, the city was founded by King Prusias, who carried on war with Croesus; according to Stephenus Byzantius, by another Prusias, contemporary of Cyrus, so that it would have been founded in the sixth century B.C. It is more probable that it was founded by, and was named after, Prusias, King of Bithynia and Hannibal's friend, 237-192 B.C. Situated in a beautiful, well-watered fertile plain at the foot of Mount Olympus, it became one of the chief cities of Roman Bithynia and received at an early date the Christian teaching. At least three of its bishops, Sts. Alexander, Patritius, and Timothy, suffered martyrdom during the persecutions (Lequien, I, 615-620, numbers only twenty-two bishops to 1721, but this list might be increased easily). The see was first subject to Nicomedia, metropolis of Bithynia Prima; later, as early at least as the thirteenth century, it became an exempt archbishopric. In the veighbouring country and at the foot of Mount Olympus stood many monasteries; from the eighth to the fourteenth centuries it shared with Mount Athos the honour of being a principal centre of Greek monachism. In 1327 it was taken by Sultan Orkhan after a siege of ten years and remained the capitol of the Ottoman Empire till 1453. Brusa is to-day the chief town of the Vilayet of Khodavendighiar. It is celebrated for its numerous and beautiful mosques and tombs of the Sultans. Its mineral and thermal waters are still renowned. The silk worm is cultivated throughout the neighbouring territory; there are in the town more than fifty silk-mills. Brusa has about 80,000 inhabitants, of whom 6,000 are Greeks, 9,000 are Gregorian Armenians, 2,500 Jews, 800 Catholic Armenians, 200 Latins, and a few Protestants. The Assumptionists conduct the Latin parish and a college. The Sisters of Charity have a hospital, an orphan's institute, and a school. Brusa is still a metropolis for the Greeks. It is also a bishopric for Gregorian and Catholic Armenians; the latter number about 4,000. S. VAILHÉ Brussels Brussels (From Bruk Sel, marsh-castle; Flem. Brussel, Ger. Brussel, Fr. Bruxelles). Capital of the Kingdom of Belgium. Its population at the end of 1905 (including the eight distinct communes that make up its faubourgs or suburbs) was 612,041. The city grew up on the banks of the little River Senne, one of the affluents of the Scheldt, whose course through the old town is now arched over and covered by the inner boulevards. The medieval city gained steadily in importance, owing to its position on the main inland commercial highway between the chief commercial centres of the Low Countries and Cologne. It is now connected with the Sambre by the Charleroi Canal, and with the Scheldt by the Willebroek Canal which has been considerably enlarged since 1901 and is destined to justify the title of "seaport" that Brussels has borne since 1895. HISTORY The earliest settlement of Brussels is attributed by tradition to S. Géry (Gaugericus), Bishop of Cambrai at the end of the sixth century; he is said to have built a village on an island in the Senne (Place Saint-Géry), also a small chapel ("Analecta Bollandiana" 1888, VII, 387-398; L. Van der Essen, "Les 'Vitae' des saints mérovingiens", Louvain, 1907; R. Flahault, "Notes et documents relatifs au culte de S. Géry", Dunkerque, 1890). From the eighth century it was one of the villas or temporary residences of the Frankish kings, but is first mentioned in history towards the end of the ninth century as Brosella (dwelling on the marsh). It was later a part of the dower of Gerberga, sister of Emperor Otto the Great (936-973) on her marriage to Giselbert of Lorraine. Duke Charles of Lorraine, the last but one of the direct descendants of Charlemagne, is said to have been born at Brussels. He certainly made it his chief place of abode, and brought thither from the Abbey of Mortzelle, which had fallen into the hands of a robber chief, the bones of his kinswoman, St. Gudule (979), who has ever since been regarded as the patron saint of the town. Upon the death of Charles' only son Otto (1004), without direct heirs, the castles of Brussels, Vilvord, Louvain, and all the adjoining estates, the nucleus of the territory which later on formed the Duchy of Brabant, fell to his brother-in-law Lambert Balderic, who sometimes in his charters styles himself Count of Brussels and sometimes Count of Louvain, the man to whom the Dukes of Brabant traced their descent. There remain of the Brussels of this period the nave and aisles of the old parish church of St. Nicholas, the chapel of the Holy Cross in the church of Notre-Dame de La Chapelle, some fragments of the fortifications with which Lambert Balderic surrounded the city in 1040 and, most important of all, the subterranean church of St. Guy at Anderlecht which remains to-day as the builder planned it. From the twelfth century the Dukes of Lower Lorraine and Brabant, and later the Counts of Louvain, made Brussels their residence and though it suffered, like most medieval cities, from pestilence, fire, and pillage, it grew to be a populous centre of life and commerce and followed all the vicissitudes of medieval Brabant, with which it fell to the Dukes of Burgundy, and on the death of Charles the Bold (1477), to his heirs, the Austrian Hapsburgs. In the fifteenth century the Dukes of Burgundy, heirs of both Brabant and Flanders, held court at Brussels, and being French in speech and habits and surrounded by French knights, courtiers, and civil servants, gradually introduced at Brussels and elsewhere the French language until it became the speech of the local nobility and the upper classes, much to the detriment of the native Flemish. The latter, however, held its own among the common people and the burghers, and remains yet the speech of the majority of the citizens. Charles V made Brussels the capital of the Low Countries, but under Philip II, it was always a centre of patriotic opposition to Spanish rule. In 1577 was signed the peace known as the "Brussels Union" between the Spanish authority and the rebellious Belgians; in 1585 the city was beseiged and captured by the Spanish general Alessandro Farnese. In 1695 it was almost entirely consumed by fire on occasion of the siege by Marechal Villeroi. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries it was under Austrian rule, with brief exceptions. From 1794 to 1814 it was incorporated with France by Napoleon, as head of the department of the Dyle. In the latter year it became with The Hague a capital of the new Kingdom of the Netherlands. In 1830 it was the seat of the Belgian Revolution against Dutch misrule, and in the same year was made the capital of the new Kingdom of Belgium. (See BELGIUM.) GOVERNMENT The municipal organization of Brussels was at first of a very simple character. It consisted of an unpaid magistracy, a College of Aldermen appointed by the sovereign for life from among the chief freeholders of the city, of which they were held to be representatives. It was presided over by a paid officer who bore the title of Amman, was the direct delegate of the sovereigh and in all things the representative of his authority. Alongside the College of Aldermen was the Merchants' Guild. Probably this corporation had legal existence before the institution of the magistracy; it is certain that by the end of the twelfth century it was firmly established. It exercised from the first much influence on public affairs, and contributed in great measure to the full expansion of municipal self-rule. With the increase of the population, the old machinery no longer sufficed for the maintenance of public peace and the regulation of trade, and the burghers, united as they were in the powerful organization of their guild, were strong enough to take the matter into their own hands. Hence was formed the Council of Jurors, a subsidiary body annually elected by the people for policing the city and managing municipal affairs. The members also participated with the College of Aldermen in the administration of justice. Though there is no record of the Council of Jurors before 1229, it is almost certain that it dates from a much earlier period. Its existence, however, as a body distinct from the higher magistracy, was not of long duration. It disappeared at a very early period. From the first the relations between the two corporations had been strained, as they were the embodiment of hostile ideals, oligarchy, and popular rule. For a long period after the municipal organization of Brussels had been definitely determined, all administration and legislative power was in the hands of a narrow oligarchy of capitalists, headed by the patrician families which from time immemorial had furnished the members of the magistracy. The source of their title to distinction was the ownership of land. Together they formed a class apart, distinct alike from the feudal nobility and from the general body of townsmen. They were divided into seven groups, or Lignages, but it is certain that many patricians were not the direct lineal descendants of the houses whose names and arms they bore. Admission to the aristocracy and to different lignages was to be obtained in various ways. Indeed, the lignages of Brussels were to a certain extent voluntary associations of aristocratic families banded together for the sake of mutual protection, and with a view to securing the election of their own nominees to the magistracy. What the trade companies were to the plebeians, the lignages were to the patricians. The patricians were not all rich men, but the wealth of the patrician body was being constantly augmented by the new members who gained admission into its ranks, and with the increasing prosperity of the town land was becoming daily more valuable for building purposes. Many were thus able to live in luxury on the rents produced by their property; others increased their revenues by farming the state taxes; others were engaged in banking operations; others again in commerce, in which case they became members of the Merchants' Guild, the members of which were constantly being enrolled in the lignages. Thus the Guild was growing daily more aristocratic, until at last nearly all its members were patricians by birth or by adoption. Embracing as it did at first traders of every kind, it now became an exceedingly close corporation and admitted to its membership only the sellers of cloth and the sellers of wool, the cream of the commercial world. Such were the men who owned the soil of Brussels, who had endowed the city, often at their own cost, with magnificent public buildings, who had won for themselves free institutions, and who for the best part of 200 years tyrannized over everyone else. They wrested from religious houses their right of appointment to city livings; they withdrew the management of schools from the clergy and placed them under municipal control. By a special privilege of the Holy See no new monastery could be founded in Brussels without the authorization of the municipality. The tyranny aroused discontent. The people first attempted to obtain a share in the government during the troublous times which followed the death of Duke Henry III (1260), and it seems to have been for the moment successful, for the Council of Jurors was re-established, only however to be suppressed again a few years later, and that was doubtless the cause of the rising which took place in 1302. It was not a very serious affair, and the ruling class with the aid of the sovereign had little difficulty in suppressing it. The riot which occurred on the eve of Candlemas, 1306, during the absence of Duke John II, though it rose out of a small matter, became a revolution. The party which triumphed showed singular moderation; it was decided that the magistracy should consist as heretofore of seven members, but that henceforth the people should name them; that two financial assessors should be added to the city council, and that the Council of Jurors should be re-established; the new aldermen were all members of the old ruling class chosen from among the little band of patricians whose sympathies were sure to be with the popular cause. The new constitution did not, however, last six months. Duke John II on his return to Brussels refused to ratify it, and in spite of the energetic resistance of the craftsmen, the old order of things was re-established. The duke, however, gave discretionary powers to the College of Aldermen to admit individual craftsmen to the freedom of the city, no doubt to purchase the good will of leading plebeians. Fifty years later Duke Wenceslaus, to reward the plebeians for driving the Flemings out of Brussels, and to mark his displeasure at the conduct of the patricians who had welcomed them with open arms, granted to the trade companies by charter an equal share with the lignages in the government of the city. But the ink of the new charter was hardly dry when he revoked it. It is not known why, but as Duke Wenceslaus throughout his reign was always in financial straits and considering his shifty conduct in his dealings with the opposing factions at Louvain, it is not unlikely that he had been purchased by the patricians. The riot which followed was suppressed without much difficulty. Though the College of Aldermen was annually renewed for more than 100 years, there had been no election, the outgoing aldermen having obtained a prescriptive right to name their successors; the magistracy was notoriously corrup and the city was honeycombed with debt, the outcome of so many years of extravagance and thieving. In addition to this, the plebeian triumph at Louvain had inflamed the people with an unquenchable thirst for liberty, and they were only awaiting a favourable moment to try their luck again. It was not, however, till 1368, when Brussels was on the verge of revolution, that the patricians made up their minds to set their house in order. They were not yet prepared to give the people any voice in the magistracy, but they were determined that when their work was done, no man should be able to say that Brussels was ill governed. By the advice of a committee composed of four patricians and four plebeians stringent measures were taken to ensure the even administration of justice; a permanent board was appointed for the administration of finance, on which several seats were allotted to the representatives of the trade companies. This measure proved so successful that the following year revenue covered expenditure and the interest on the debt; the year after that payments were made on the principal, and by 1386, the whole debt was wiped out. In 1368 the Guild was thoroughly reorganized on popular lines, and about the same time it became customary to bestow a certain number of government appointments on burghers of the middle class; lastly, in 1375, the old system of electing the magistracy was revived. The franchise was restricted to patricians of twenty-seven years and upwards, and if any man failed to take part in the election, he thereby lost all civil rights and privileges. The method of election was exceedingly long and complicated. Thanks to this important measure and to the other reforms which had preceded it, Brussels was now honestly and capably governed and for something like fifty years patricians and plebeians lived, if not on terms of affection, at all events without quarrelling. No doubt the greater material prosperity which the city at this time enjoyed, was conducive in no small measure to the maintenance of peace. Brussels was not dependent on cloth to anything like the same extent as most of the other great towns of the Netherlands, and the loss which she had sustained on this head from English competition was probably made good by the profit arising from trade which formerly went to Louvain, but which was now, owing to the disturbed state of that city, directed to the markets of Brussels. For the same reason Brussels had now become the seat of the court, and she devoted her attention to the manufacture of articles of luxury. Thanks to these new industries the diminution, if any, of her cloth trade was a matter of little concern to the people. Headed by Count Philip of St. Pol, brother of the duke, the best members of the three estates of Brabant had joined hands against Duke John IV, who had been led astray by evil counsellors. When all seemed lost, when Brussels was filled with foreign mercenaries, the craftsmen had saved the situation, and received as guerdon an equal share with the patricians in the government and administration of their city. The articles of the new charter were agreed upon in a great assembly of barons and of deputies of the towns of Brussels, Antwerp, and Louvain, 6 February, 1421. The charter itself was signed and sealed by Count Philip who had been appointed regent and its provisions were immediately put into execution. The constitution of 1421 continued to be the legal constitution of the city of Brussels until the close of the eighteenth century. The great struggle between the patricians and the craftsmen was never again to be renewed. The former disassociated themselves more and more from trade and from municipal affairs, and were gradually absorbed in the ranks of the old feudal aristocracy. The dissensions in the centuries which followed were not the outcome of class hatred, but of difference of opinion in religious matters, and of the impolitic measures taken to restore religious unity by alien rulers, who had no sympathy with the customs and traditions of the Netherlands. CHIEF BUILDINGS There is probably no city in Europe which contains grander medieval municipal buildings than those of Brussels, and the greatest of them were built after the craftsmen obtained emancipation. The foundation stone of the town hall was laid at the beginning of the fifteenth century, but very little progress was made till after 1421, and it was not completed till 1486; the beautiful Hall of the Bakers opposite, now called La Maison du Roi, dated from the following century; the grand old church of Notre-Dame du Sablon, where most of the trade companies had their chapels, was built in the course of the fourteenth century, the greater portion of it probably after 1421. The church of St. Gudule, dedicated to St. Michael, the grandest church in Brussels, is rather a monument of the Dukes of Brabant, than of the burghers. The foundation stone was probably laid toward the close of the twelfth century, but it was not completed till 1653. Its stained glass (sixteenth to nineteenth century) is famous, especially that in the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament, donated (1540-47) by several Catholic kings and queens in honour of the Miraculous Hosts preserved in St. Gudule since 1370 when (on Good Friday) several Jews stole from the tabernacle of the church of St. Catherine a number of consecrated Hosts and sacrilegiously transfixed them in their synagogue. The Hosts, it is said, bled miraculously; eventually some of them were deposited in the church of St. Gudule, while others were kept at Notre-Dame de La Chapelle, whence they disappeared in 1579. But the guilty parties were discovered, some were burned alive, and others were banished from Brabant forever. An annual procession on the Sunday after 15 July, perpetuates the memory of this event, and on this occasion the identical Hosts are exposed in St. Gudule for the veneration of the faithful (Corblet, "Hist. de l'Eucharistie", Paris, 1885, II, 485-486; Balleydie, "Hist. de Ste-Gudule et du St-Sacrement de Miracle", Brussels, 1859; Matagne, "Précis historiques", Paris, 1870). Other noteworthy churches are: the Chapelle de l'Expiation built in 1436 on the site of the above-mentioned synagogue, in expiation of the sacrilege; Notre-Dame de La Chapelle (1216-1485), a Gothic and Romanesque building, after St. Gudule the finest of the medieval churches of Brussels; Notre-Dame-des-Victoires or du Sablon, Flemish Gothic, founded in 1304 by the Guild of Crossbowmen; the barocco church of the Beguines (1657-76). The other churches of the city proper are: St. Catherine, Sts. Jean et Etienne, Notre-Dame du Finistère, St. Jacques sur Caudenberg, St. Nicholas, Riches-Claires, Notre-Dame de Bon Secours, St. Josse-ten-Noode (Bruyn, Trésor artistique des églises de Bruxelles, Louvain, 1882). The famous guild houses in the market place, of which there are no less than seventeen, were not erected until after the bombardment of 1695, when the old guild houses were all destroyed, which proves, that at the close of the seventeenth century the masons of Brussels were still cunning workers. Brussels is noted for its magnificent system of boulevards. The Place Royale is one of the noblest squares in modern Europe, while the Grand Place in the heart of the old town is equally remarkable as a medieval square. Around it are gathered the Hotel de Ville, said to be the noblest piece of civil architecture in Europe, the Maison du Roi, or former government-house, and the seventeen famous guild houses or halls of the industrial corporations (butchers, brewers, tailors, carpenters, painters, etc.). These guild houses were erected after the bombardment of 1695, when the old buildings were destroyed. The modern Palais de Justice is the largest architectural work of the nineteenth century; it rises on a massive basis that measures 590 by 560 feet, and recalls by its imposing bulk some vast Egyptian or Assyrian structure. RELIGIOUS LIFE There are three episcopal educational institutes, among them the Institut Saint-Louis (about 100 teachers), with departments of philosophy, letters, natural sciences, and a commercial school. The city is divided into four deaneries, St. Gudule and three in the faubourgs. There are 37 parishes in the city and faubourgs, and in the city proper 72 prieses, 11 parishes, and 16 churches. The religious orders are numerous, among them Dominicans, Capuchins, Minor Conventuals, Jesuits, Redemptorists, Carmelites, Servites, Barnabites, Alexians, etc. There are also several communities of teaching brothers, principally Christian Brothers. The religious houses of women in 1906 numbered about 80, divided among many orders and congregations, and devoted to various educational and charitable works. The Hospital Saint-Jean (1900) has 600 beds, that of Saint-Pierre 635. There are 11 hospices and refuges for the aged, poor, and insane, and 27 other institutions for the care of the sick and needy. THE UNIVERSITY OF BRUSSELS The University of Brussels, known as the Université libre (Free University), was founded in 1834 by the Belgian Liberals as a rival of the Catholic University of Louvain. It occupies the former palaces of Cardinal Granvelle. In 1904 it numbered 1054 students. It has faculties of philosophy, the exact sciences, jurisprudence, and medicine. The last faculty, located in the picturesque Parc Léopold, possesses there a Physiological Institute founded in 1895, an Institute of Hygiene, Bacteriology, and Therapeutics, an Institute of Anatomy founded 1896-97, and a Commercial Institute (1904). Close by is the valuable Musée d'Histoire Naturelle; connected with it is the Ecole Polytechnique (1873) or school of applied sciences, with six departments: mining, metallurgy, practical chemistry, civil and mechanical engineering, and architecture. Similarly related to the university are the School of Political and Social Sciences and the School of Commerce founded by Ernest Solvay; also the Instituts Solvay (Physiology, 1894; Sociology, 1901). Since 1901 several universities for the people have been founded in the faubourgs. There are in addition the important museums of Brussels, military, ethnographic, commercial, pedagogic, natural history, decorative arts, communal, Wiertz (at Ixelles), etc. The Palais des Beaux Arts houses a unique and valuable collection of Old Flemish Masters. The Bibliothèque Royale contains a collection of some 500,000 volumes, and has also inherited the famous Bibliothèque de Bourgogne, (27,000 manuscripts) founded by Philippe le Bon, Duke of Burgundy (1419-67) and one of the largest and most important collections of its kind in Europe (De la Serna, Mém. hist. sur la bibliothèque dite de Bourgogne, Brussels, 1809; Namur, His. des bibliothèques publiques de Bruxelles, ibid., 1840). Among the learned bodies of Brussels are the Académie Royale des Sciences (1772), Académie de Medecine (1772), Académie des Beaux Arts, with a school, the Société Scientifique (1876), an important and unique International Institute of Bibliography (1895). In 1905 the Conservatory of Music (1899) numbered 1229 pupils. The Jesuit College of Saint-Michel at Brussels is the actual seat of the famous publication known as the "Acta Sanctorum" (see Bollandists), and here are now kept the library and the archives of this enterprise, originally begun and long conducted at Antwerp. Henne and Wauters, Histoire de Bruxelles (Brussels, 1845); Wauters, Bruxelles et ses environs (ibid., 1852-56); Pirienne, Histoire de la Belgique (Brussels, 1907); Gilliat-Smith, The Story of Brussels. ERNEST GILLIAT-SMITH Simon William Gabriel Brute de Remur Simon William Gabriel Bruté de Rémur First Bishop of Vincennes, Indiana, U.S.A. (now Indianapolis), b. at Rennes, France, 20 March 1779; d. at Vincennes, 26 June, 1839. His father was Simon-Guillaume-Gabriel Bruté de Remur, of an ancient and respectable family, and Superintendent of the Royal Domains in Brittany; and his mother, Jeanne-Renee Le Saulnier de Vauhelle Vater, widow of Francis Vater, printer to the King and Parliament at Rennes. Young Bruté had attended the schools of his native city several years when the Revolution interrupted his studies. He then learned and practised the business of a compositor in the printing establishment of his mother, where she placed him to avoid his enrolment in a regiment of children who took part in the fusillades of the Reign of Terror. This did not prevent his witnessing many horrible and exciting scenes, and in his diary he mentions having been present at the trial and precipitate execution of priests and nobles in the cause of their religion. He frequented the prisons and made friends of the guards, who admitted him to the cells, where he received and delivered letters for the clergy incarcerated there. More than once he bore in his bosom to these suffering heroes the Blessed Sacrament. In 1796 Bruté began the study of medicine, and in spite of the avowed infidelity then prevalent in the schools, he remained proof against sophistry and ridicule. He was graduated in 1803, but did not practice medicine, as he immediately entered upon the ecclesiastical studies, which he pursued for four years at the Seminary of Saint-Sulpice, Paris. Ordained priest on the 11th of June, 1808, he joined the Society of Saint-Sulpice and, after teaching theology for two years, he sailed for the United States with Bishop-elect Flaget (1810). At St. Mary's Seminary, Baltimore, he taught philosophy for two years and then was sent for a short time to the Eastern Shore of Maryland. He was transferred thence to Mt. St. Mary's Emmitsburg, where he taught and at the same time performed the duties of pastor for the Catholics of that vicinity with such devotion that he became known as the "Angel of the Mount". During this period he became the spiritual director of Mother Seton, foundress of the Sisters of Charity in the United States, with whom he maintained a lifelong friendship. In 1815 he was appointed President of St. Mary's College, Baltimore, but after three years (1818) he returned to Emmitsburg. In 1826, Mt. St. Mary's College being no longer dependent upon the Fathers of Saint-Sulpice, its founders, Father Bruté ceased to belong to that society, but continued his duties at the "Mountain" until 1834, when he was appointed to the newly created See of Vincennes. He was consecrated in St. Louis, October the 28th, 1834, by the Right Rev. Benedict J. Flaget, Bishops Rosati and Purcell assisting. After travelling over his vast diocese, comprising the whole State of Indiana and eastern Illinois, Bishop Bruté visited France, where he secured priests and funds for the erection of churches and schools in his needy diocese. Bishop Bruté left no published work except some ephemeral contributions, which, over the pseudonym "Vincennes", appeared in various journals, notably the Cincinnati "Catholic Telegraph". It is to be regretted that he did not write an autobiography, for which his Memoranda, notes, and Diary seem a preparation. They teem with interest, and show him to have been the friend of famous men in France. Conspicuous among the number was de Lamennais, whom he tried to reconcile with the Church both by his letters from this country, as well as by conferring with him personally during one of his visits to France, but without success. Bayley, Momoirs of Bishop Bruté (New York, 1865); White, Life of Mother Seton (Baltimore, 1879), VIII, 314; O'Gorman, American Church History (New York, 1895), IX, xxiv, 394; Shea, History of the Catholic Church in the United States (New York, 1890), III, xv, 640; Alerding, History of the Catholic Church in the Diocese of Vincennes (Indianapolis, 1888), 124; Bruté de Remur, Vie de Mgr. Bruté de Remur, premier eveque de Vincennes (Rennes, 1887). MICHAEL F. DINNEEN Jacques Bruyes Jacques Bruyas Born at Lyons, France, 13 July, 1635; died at Sault St. Louis, Canada, 15 June 1712. He entered the Society of Jesus, 11 November, 1651, joined the mission of Canada in 1666, and labored there for 46 years among the Iroquois. From 1693 to 1698 Bruyas was Superior General of the Canadian missions, and in 1700, 1701, [sic] actively helped to secure for the French a general peace with the Iroquois tribes. Besides writing a catechism, prayers for the sick, and similar works, he is the author of the oldest known Iroquois grammar. It was published from the original manuscript by the Regents of the University of the State of New York in their Sixteenth Annual Report of the State Cabinet of Natural History (Albany, 1863). Father Bruyas is considered to be the author of the "Iroquois Dictionary" preserved in the Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal of Paris. Sommervogel, Bibl. de la c. de J., I, 317; Jesuit Relations (Cleveland, 1899), I, 323. JOSEPH M. WOODS John Delavau Bryant John Delavau Bryant Physician, poet, author, and editor, b. in Philadelphia, U.S.A., 1811; d. 1877. He was the son of an Episcopalian minister, the Rev. Wm. Bryant. His mother, was a daughter of John Delavau, a shipbuilder of Philadelphia. His early education was under his father and in the Episcopalian Academy. He received the degree of A.B. in 1839, and A.M. in 1842 from the University of Pennsylvania, and entered the General Theological Seminary of the Protestant Episcopal Church in New York in 1839. After one year he left the seminary to travel in Europe. On his return he was received into the Catholic Church at St. John's Church, Philadelphia, 12 February, 1842. He graduated in medicine at the University of Pennsylvania in 1848. In 1855, during the yellow fever epidemic in Portsmouth and Norfolk, Virginia, he volunteered for duty and returned only after the epidemic had subsided. In 1857, he married Miss. Mary Harriet Riston, daughter of George Riston. For two years in the early sixties he was editor of the "Catholic Herald." His principal work, published in 1859 by subscription, is an epic poem entitled "The Redemption", apparently inspired by a visit to Jerusalem. It is founded on the Bible and Catholic tradition, and, when it was first published, attracted some attention and received many favourable reviews. He also published, about 1852, a controversial novel entitled "Pauline Seward" which had considerable vogue at the time, especially among Catholics, and ran through ten editions. In 1855 he published "The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God", an exposition of the dogma recently promulgated. All of his works are now out of print and can be found practically only in reference libraries. Records of the Amer. Catholic Hist. Soc., September, 1904. JOSEPH WALSH Bubastis Bubastis A titular see of Lower Egypt, on the right bank of the Pelusiac branch of the Nile, near the modern Zagâzig, where its ruins are shown under the name of Tell Bastah. Its true name was Bast owing to the name of the local goddess Bastet; it became in Old Egyptian Per-bastet (Coptic Boubasti, Hebrew Pi-beseth, Greek Boubastis or more commonly Boubastos, i.e. House of Bastet). It was a place of importance under the twenty-third dynasty about 950-750 B.C. When the eastern part of Lower Egypt was divided into Augustamnica Prima in the north and Augustamnica Secunda in the south, Bubastis was included in the latter, whose capital was Leontopolis (Hierocles, Synecdemos, 728, 4), as the chief town of the Bubastites nomos and like every Egyptian nomos was the seat of a bishopric. Its bishop, Harpocration, was mentioned at Nicaea by Meletius among his well-wishers (Athan. Apol.c. Arianos, 71). About 340 the see was occupied by Hermon (Acta SS., May, III, 61). Julianus was present at the Latrocinium of Ephesus, 449. The see is mentioned in Georgius Cyprius (ed. Gelzer, 705). In the Middle Ages its fate is blended with that of Khandek, a Jacobite see near Cairo, to which it had been united. Thus in 1078 Gabriel, ep. Basta, quoe et Khandek, interfered in the election of the Patriarch Cyrillus (Renaudot, Hist. patriarch Alexandr. 450, 458, 465), and in 1102 John took a share in the consecration of the Patriarch Macarius II (ibid., 482). Under the Patriarch Cyrillus III (1235-43), the see is often mentioned, but without the name of its titular. Lequien, Or. Christ., II, 559-562: Gams, Series episcop., 461. L. PETIT Gabriel Bucelin Gabriel Bucelin (Buzlin). A Benedictine historical writer, born at Diessenhofen in Thurgau, 29 December, 1599, died at Weingarten, 9 June, 1681. A scion of the distinguished line of Bucellini counts, Gabriel, at the age of thirteen, entered the Benedictine monastery at Weingarten. After a course in Philosophy and theology at Dillingen he was ordained priest 23 April, 1624, and in the same year sent, as master of novices, to restore the primitive fervour and raise the standard of studies in the monastery of St. Trudpert in the Black Forest. Having filled the position of master of novices at Weingarten and professor of humanities at Feldkirch (1635), whence on the approach of the Swedish army he was forced to flee to Admont (1646), he was appointed prior of St. John's monastery, Feldkirch (1651), where he remained until a few months before his death. Bucelin was a very prolific writer, being the author of some fifty-three works, a large number of which are still in manuscript in the royal library at Stuttgart. His chief claim to the gratitude of posterity lies in the fact that he was, if not the very first, at least among the first authors to deal with the ecclesiastical history of Germany. Of his published works the most important are: "Germania sacra" (Augsburg, 1655), containing accounts of the principal ecclesiastics, archbishops, abbots, etc., as well as a list of the most important monasteries of Germany; "Germaniae topo-chrono-stemmatographia sacra et profana" (1665-78), treating, as its name implies, of the genealogy of the most distinguished members of the clergy and the nobility; "Constantia sacra et profana" (Frankfort, 1667), "Rhaetia etrusca, romana, gallica, germanica" (Augsburg, 1661); "Nucleus historicae universalis" (Ulm, 1650, 1654; carried from 1650 to 1735 by Schmier, "Apparatum ad theologiam scholastico-polemico-practicam"), of great importance to Scholars interested in ancient charts, bulls, diplomata, etc. Bucelin was also the author of many works on the Benedictine Order and its most illustrious members, among them "Aquila imperii benedictina" (Venice, 1651); "Menologium benedictinum" (Feldkirch, 1655). F.M. RUDGE Martin Bucer Martin Bucer (Also called BUTZER.) One of the leaders in the South German Reformation movement, b. 11 November, 1491, at Schlettstadt, Alsace; d. 28 February, 1551, at Cambridge, England. He received his early education at the Latin School of his native place, where at the age of fifteen (1506) he also entered the Order of St. Dominic. Later he was sent to the University of Heidelberg to prosecute his studies, and matriculated, 31 January, 1517. He became an ardent admirer of Erasmus, and soon an enthusiastic disciple of Luther. He heard the Saxon monk at a public disputation, held at Heidelberg in 1518, on the occasion of a meeting of the Augustinian order, became personally acquainted with him, and was immediately won over to his ideas. Having openly adopted the new doctrine he withdrew from the Dominican order, in 1521, became court chaplain of Frederick the Elector Palatine, and laboured as secular priest at Landstuhl, in the Palatinate (1522), and as a member of the household of Count Sickengen and at Weissenburg, Lower Alsace (1522-23). During his incumbency at Landstuhl he married Elizabeth Silbereisen, a former nun. When, in 1523, his position became untenable at Weissenburg, he proceeded to Strasburg. Here his activity was soon exercised over a large field; he became the chief reformer of the city and was connected with many important religio-political events of the period. His doctrinal views on points controverted between Luther and Zwingli at first harmonized completely with the ideas of the Swiss Reformer. Subsequently he sought to mediate between Lutherans and Zwinglians. The highly questionable methods to which he resorted in the interest of peace drew upon him the denunciation of both parties. In spite of the efforts of Bucer, the Conference of Marburg (1529), at which the divergent views of Luther and Zwingli, especially the doctrine regarding the Eucharist, were discussed, failed to bring about a reconciliation. At the Diet of Augsburg, in the following year, he drew up with Capito the "Confessio Tetrapolitana", or Confession of the Four Cities (Strasburg, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau). Later on, moved by political considerations, he abandoned this for the Augsburg Confession. In 1536, he brought about the more nominal than real "Concordia of Wittenberg" among German Protestants. He gave his own, and obtained Luther's and Melanchthon's approbation for the bigamy of the Landgrave Philip of Hesse, attended in 1540 the religious conference between Catholics and Protestants at Hagenau, Lower Alsace, and in 1541 the Diet of Ratisbon. The combined attempt of Bucer and Melanchthon to introduce the Reformation into the Archdiocese of Cologne ended in failure (1542). Political troubles and the resistance of Bucer to the agreement arrived at by Catholics and Protestants in 1548, and known as the "Augsburg Interim", made his stay in Strasburg impossible. At the invitation of Archbishop Cranmer, he proceeded to England in 1549. After a short stay in London, during which he was received by King Edward VI (1547-53), he was called to Cambridge as Regius Professor of Divinity. His opinion was frequently asked by Cranmer on church matters, notably on the controversy regarding ecclesiastical vestments. But his sojourn was to be of short duration, as he died in February, 1551. Under the reign of Queen Mary (1553-58) his remains were exhumed and burned, and his tomb was demolished (1556), but was reconstructed in 1560 by Queen Elizabeth (1558-1603). Bucer was, after Luther and Melanchthon, the most influential of German Reformers. For a clear statement of doctrine he was ever ready to substitute vague formulas in the interest of unity, which even his able efforts could not establish among the Reformers. He forms a connecting link between the German and the English Reformation. Of the thirteen children he had by his first marriage, only one, a weak-minded son, survived. Wibrandis Rosenblatt, the successive wife of several Reformers (Cellarius, Oecolampadius, Capito, and Bucer), whom he married after his first wife died from the plague in 1541, bore him three children, of whom a daughter survived. Only one of the ten folio volumes in which his works were to appear was published (Basle, 1577). It is known as "Tomas Anglicanus" because its contents were mostly written in England. BAUM, Capito und Butzer (Elberfeld, 1860); MENTZ AND ERICHSON, Zur 400 jahrigen Geburtsfeier Martin Butzers (Strasburg, 1891); STERN, Martin Butzer (Strasburg, 1891); PAULUS, Die Strasburger Reformatoren (Freiburg, 1895); SCHAFF, History of the Christian Church (New York, 1904), VI, 571-573 and passim; WARD in Dict. of Nat. Biog., VII, 172-177. N.A. WEBER Victor de Buck Victor de Buck Bollandist, born at Oudenarde, Flanders, 21 April, 1817; died 28 June, 1876. His family was one of the most distinguished in the city of Oudenarde. After a brilliant course in the humanities, at the municipal College of Soignies and the petit seminaire of Roulers and completed in 1835 at the college of the Society of Jesus at Alost, he entered this Society on 11 October of the same year. After two years in the novitiate, then at Nivelles, and a year at Tronchiennes reviewing and finishing his literary studies, he went to Namur in September, 1838, to study philosophy and the natural sciences, closing these courses with a public defence of these bearing on these subjects. The work of the Bollandists (q.v.) had just been revived and, in spite of his youth, Victor De Buck was summoned to act as assistant to the hagiographers. He remained at this work in Brussels from September, 1840, to September, 1845. After devoting four years to theological studies at Louvain where he was ordained priest in 1848, and making his third year of probation in the Society of Jesus he was permanently assigned to the Bollandist work in 1850, and way engaged upon it until the time of his death. He had already published in part second of Vol. VII of the October "Acta Sanctorum", which appeared in 1845, sixteen commentaries or notices that are easily distinguishable because they are without a signature, unlike those written by the Bollandists. Moreover, during the course of his theological studies which suffered thereby no interruption, and before becoming a priest, he composed, in collaboration with Antoine Tinnebroeck who, like himself was a scholastic, an able refutatoin of a book published by the professor of canon law at the University of Louvain, in which the rights of the regular clergy were assailed and repudiated. This refutation which fills an octavo volume of 640 pages, abounding in learned dissertations, was ready for publication within four months. It was to have been supplemented by a second volume that was almost completed but could not be published because of the political disturbances of the year which were but the prelude to the revolutions of 1848, and the work was never resumed. Father De Buck's literary activity was extraordinary. Besides the numerous commentaries in Vols. IX, X, XI, XII, and XIII of the October "Acta Sanctorum", which won the praise of those best qualified to judge, he published in Latin, French, and Flemish, a large number of little works of piety and dissertations on devotion to the saints, church history, and Christian archaeology, the partial emumeration of which fills two folio columns of his eulogy, in the fore part of vol. II of the November "Acta". Because of his extensive learning and investigating turn of mind he was naturally bent upon probing abstruse and perplexing questions; naturally, also, his work was often the result of most urgent requests. Hence it was that, in 1862, he was led to publish in the form of a letter to his brother Remi, then professor of church history at the theological college of Louvain and soon afterwards his colleague on the Bollandist work, a Latin dissertation "De solemnitate praecipue paupertatis religiosae", which was followed in 1863 and 1864 by two treatises in French, one under the title: "Solution aimable de la question des couvents" and the other "De l'etat religieux", treating of the religious life in Belgium in the nineteenth century. At the solicitation chiefly of prelates and distinguised Catholic savants, he undertook the study of a particularly delicate question on order to satisfy the many requests made to Rome by churches and religious communities for the relics of saints, it had become customary to take from the Roman catacombs the bodies of unknown personages believed to have been honoured as martyrs in the early Church. The sign by which they were to be recognized was a glass vial sealed up in the plaster outside the loculus that contained the body, and bearing traces of a red substance that had been enclosed and was supposed to have been blood. Doubts had arisen as to the correctness of this interpretation and, after careful study, Father De Buck felt convinced that it was false and that what had been taken for blood was probably the sediment of consecrated wine vhich, owing to misguised piety held and had been placed in the tomb near the bodies of the dead. The conclusion, together with its premises, was set forth in a dissertation published in 1885 under the title "De phialis rubricatis quibus martyrum romanorum sepulcra dignosci dicuntur". Naturally it raised lively protestations, particularly on the part of those who were responsible for distributing the bodies of the saints, the more so, as after the discussions on the vials of blood, the cardinal vicar in 1861 strictly forbade any further transportation of these relics. The author of the dissertation, "De phialis rubricatis", had but a few copies of his work struck off, these being intended for the cardinals and prelates particularly Interested in the question and as none were put on the market, it was rumoured that De Buck's superiors had suppressed the publication of the book and that all the copies printed, save five or six, had been destroyed. This, of course. was untrue; not one copy had been destroyed and his superiors had laid no blame upon the author. Then, in 1863, a decree was obtained from the Congregation of Rites, renewing an older decree, thereby it was declared that a vial of blood placed outside of a sepulchral niche in the catacombs was an unmistakable sign by which the tomb of a martyr might be known, and it was proclaimed that Victor De Buck's opinion was formally disapproved and condemned by Rome. This too was false, as Father De Buck had never intimated that the placing of the vial of blood did not indicate the resting-place of a martyr, when it could be proved that the vial contained genuine blood, such as was supposed by the decree of the congregation. Finally, there appeared in Paris in 1897 a large quarto volume written by the Roman prelate, Monsignor Sconamiglio, "Reliquiarum custode". It was filled with caustic criticisms of the author of "De phialis rubricatis" and relegated him to the rank of notorious heretics who had combated devotion to the saints and the veneration of their relics. Father De Buck seemed all but insensible to the attacks and contented himself with opposing to Monsignor Sconamiglio's book a protest in which he rectified the more or less unconscious error of his enemies by proving that neither the decree of 1863 nor any other decision emanating from ecclesiastical authority had affected his thesis. However, another attack made about the same time touched him more deeply. The gravest and most direct accusations were made against him and reported to the Sovereign Pontiff himself, he was even credited with opinions which, if not formally heretical, at least openly defied the ideas that are universally accepted and held in veneration by Catholics devoted to the Holy See. In a Latin letter addressed to Cardinal Patrizzi, and intended to come to the notice of the Supreme Pontiff, Father De Buck repudiated the calumnies in a manner that betrayed how deeply he had been affected, his pretest being supported by the testimony of four of his principal superiors, former provincials, and rectors who eagerly vouched for the sincerely of his declarations and the genuineness of his religious spirit. With the full consent of his superiors he published this letter in order to communicate with those of his friends who might have been disturbed by an echo of these accusations. What might have invested these accusations with some semblance of truth and what certainly gave rise to them, were the amicable relations established, principally through correspondence, between Father De Buck and such men as Alexander Forbes, the learned Anglican bishop the celebrated Edward Pusey in England, Montalembert, and Bishop Dupanloup in France and a number of others whose names were distasteful to many ardent Catholics. These relations were brought about by the reputation for deep learning, integrity, and scientific independence that De Buck's works had rapidly earned tor him, by his readiness to oblige those who addressed themselves to him in their perplexities, and by his remarkable earnestness and skill in elucidating the most difficult questions. Moreover, he was equipped with all the information that incessant study and a only great rounds groping outside of the true Faith or weakened by harassing doubts who thus appealed to his knowledge. The different papal nuncios who succeeded one another in Belgium during the course of his career as Bollandist, bishops, political men, mernbers of learned bodies and journalists ceased not to importune this gracious scholar whose answers often formed important memoranda which, although the result of several days and sometimes several nights of uninterrupted labour, were read only those who called them forth or else appeared anonymously in some Belgian or foreign periodical. Although Father De Buck had an unusually robust constitution and enjoyed exceptionally good health, constant and excessive work at length told upon him and he was greatly fatigued when Father Beckx, Father General of the Society, summoned him to Rome to act as official theologian at the Vatican Council. Father Victor assumed these new duties with his accustomed ardour and, upon his return, showed the first symptoms of the malady arterio-sclerosis that finally carried him off. He struggled for some years longer against a series of painful attacks each of which left him decidedly weaker, until a final attack that lasted almost interruptedly for nearly four years, caused his death. CH. DE SMEDT Buckfast Abbey Buckfast Abbey The date of the foundation of the monastery of Our Lady of Buckfast, two miles from Ashburton, England, in a beautiful Devonshire valley watered by the Dart, is unknown; but it was certainly long before the Norman Conquest. The eartiest authentic document is a grant by King Canute (1015-1035), to the monks of Buckfast of the manor of Sele, now called Zeal Monachorum. The best authorities assign the foundation to the middle of the tenth century. Early in the twelfth century it was incorporated into the Benedictine Congregation of savigny, founded in Normandy in 1112. In 1148, five years before the death of St. Bernard, the thirty Savigny houses, including Buckfast (of which Eustace was then abbot) were affiliated to Clairvaux, thus becoming a part of the great Cistercian Order. Buckfast now developed into one of the most important monasteries in the great Diocese of Exeter. It flourished both materially and spiritually originating the celebrated woollen trade of the district encouraging other industries, and preserving unimpaired its discipline and the fervour of its observance. The latter, however, became relaxed (as in other Cistercian houses) in the fourteenth century, one result being the rapid diminution in the community. The reputation, however, of the monks for learning was sustained until the dissolution, and they seem to have been generally beloved in the district for their piety, kindliness, and benevolence. The last legitimately elected Abbot of Buckfast was John Rede, who died about 1535, the year of the Visitation ordered by Henry VIII, which resulted in the intrusion of Gabriel Donne into the vacant chair. Donne surrendered the house to the King in 1538, receiving for himself ample compensation. The buildings were immediately sold, the lead stripped from the roof, and the monastery and church left to decay. In 1882, about three centuries and a half after the suppression of the Cistercian Abbey, the ruined building came again into the possession of Benedictine monks, belonging to the French province of the Cassinese Congregation of the Primitive Observance. Mass was again said and the Divine Office chanted at Buckfast on 29 October, 1882, and eight months later the Abbey was legally conveyed to the monks. The plan of the buildings at Buckfast followed the conventional Cistercian arrangement, with the cloister south of the church, and grouped round it the chapter-house, calefactory, refectory, and other loca regularia. The church was 220 feet long, with short transcripts, each with a small eastern chapel. The Benedictines now in possession have built a temporary church, and are proceeding with the work of rebuilding the former one, and the rest of the monastic buildings, on the ancient foundations. The tower which still remains was been carefully restored, and the southern wing of the monastery has been rebuilt in simple twelfth-century style, and was opened in April, 1886. The third abbot since the return of the monks in 1882, Dom Anscher Vouier, formerly one of the professors at the Benedictine University of St. Anselm in Rome, was solemnly blessed by the Bishop of Plymouth in October, 1906. D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR Sir Patrick Alphonsus Buckley Sir Patrick Alphonsus Buckley A soldier, lawyer, stateman, judge, born near Castletownsend, County Cork, Ireland, in 1841; died at Lower Hutt, New Zealand, 18 May, 1896. He was educated at the Mansion House School, Cork; St. Colman's College, Paris; the Irish College, Paris; and the Catholic University, Louvain. He was in Louvain when the Piedmontese invaded the States of the Church in 1860, and at the request of Count Carlo MacDonnell, Private Chamberlain to Pius IX, conducted the recruits of the Irish Papal Brigade from Ostend to Vienna, where they were placed in charge of representatives of the Holy See. He served under General Lamoriciere, received a prisoner at Ancona. After the war he returned to Ireland. Thence he emigrated to Queensland, where he completed his legal studies and was admitted to the Bar. After a short residence in Queensland he settled in New Zealand, and commenced the practice of his profession in Wellington. Soon after his arrival in New Zealand, he became a member of the Wellington Provincial Council, and was Provincial Solicitor in the Executive when the Provincial Parliaments were abolished in 1875. He was called to the Legislative Council in 1878; was Colonial Secretary and leader of the Upper House in the Stout-Vogel Ministry (1884-87), and Attorney-GeneraL, Colonial Secretary, and leader of an overwhelmingly Opposition Upper House under the Ballance Administration from 1891 till 1895, when he accepted the position of Judge of the Supreme Court. He was created Knight Commander of St. Michael and St. George in 1892. HENRY W. CLEARY Buddhism Buddhism The religious, monastic system, founded c. 500 B.C. on the basis of pantheistic Brahminism. The speculations of the Vedanta school of religious thought, in the eighth and following centuries, B.C., gave rise to several rival schemes of salvation. These movements started with the same morbid view that conscious life is a burden and not worth the living, and that true happiness is to be had only in a state like dreamless sleep free from all desires, free from conscious action. They took for granted the Upanishad doctrine of the endless chain of births, but they differed from pantheistic Brahminism both in their attitude towards the Vedas and in their plan for securing freedom from rebirth and from conscious existence. In their absolute rejection of Vedic rites, they stamped themselves as heresies. Of these the one destined to win greatest renown was Buddhism. I. THE FOUNDER Of Buddha, the founder of this great movement, legendary tradition has much to say, but very little of historical worth is known. His father seems to have been a petty raja, ruling over a small community on the southern border of the district now known as Nepal. Buddha's family name was Gotama (Sanskrit Gautama), and it was probably by this name that he was known in life. In all likelihood it was after his death that his disciples bestowed on him a number of laudatory names, the most common being Buddha, i.e. "the enlightened". Like the newborn youths of his day, he must have spent some time in the study of the sacred Vedas. After the immemorial custom of the East, he married at an early age, and, if tradition may be trusted, exercised a prince's privilege of maintaining a harem. His principal wife bore him a son. His heart was not at rest. The pleasures of the world soon palled upon him, and abandoning his home he retired to the forest, where as a hermit he spent several years in austere self-discipline, studying doubtless, the way of salvaion as taught in the Upanishads. Even this did not bring peace to his mind. He gave up the rigorous fasts and mortifications, which nearly cost him his life, and devoted himself in his own way to long and earnest meditation, the fruit of which was his firm belief that he had discovered the only true method of escaping from the misery of rebirth and of attaining to Nirvana. He then set out to preach his gospel of deliverance, beginning at Benares. His magnetic personality and his earnest, impressive eloquence soon won over to his cause a number of the warrior caste. Brahmins, too, felt the persuasiveness of his words, and it was not long before he was surrounded by a band of enthusiastic disciples, in whose company he went from place to place, by making converts by his preaching. These soon became very numerous and were formed into a great brotherhood of monks. Such was the work to which Buddha gave himself with unsparing zeal for over forty years. At length, worn out by his long life of activity, he fell sick after a meal of dried boar's flesh, and died in the eightieth year of his age. The approximate date of his death is 480 B.C. It is noteworthy that Buddha was a contemporary of two other famous religious philosophers, Pythagoras and Confucius. In the sacred books of later times Buddha is depicted as a character without flaw, adorned with every grace of mind and heart. There may be some hesitation in taking the highly coloured portrait of Buddhist tradition as the exact representation of the original, but Buddha may be credited with the qualities of a great and good man. The records depict him moving about from place to place, regardless of personal comfort, calm and fearless, mild and compassionate, considerate towards poor and rich alike, absorbed with the one idea of freeing all men from the bonds of misery, and irresistible in his manner of setting forth the way of deliverance. In his mildness, his readiness to overlook insults, his zeal, chastity, and simplicity of life, he reminds one not a little of St. Francis of Assisi. In all pagan antiquity no character has been depicted as so noble and attractive. II. BUDDHIST TEXTS The chief sources for early Buddhism are the sacred books comprised in the first two divisions of the Ti-pitaka (triple-basket), the threefold Bible of the Southern School of Buddhists. In India, today, the Buddhists are found only in the North, in Nepal, and in the extreme South, in the island of Ceylon. They represent two different schools of thought, the Northern worshipping Buddha as supreme personal deity though at the same time adopting most of the degrading superstitions of Hinduism, the Southern adhering in great measure to the original teachings of Buddha. Each school has a canon of sacred books. The Northern canon is in Sanskrit, the Southern in Pali, a softer tongue, into which Sanskrit was transformed by the people of the South. The Southern canon, Ti-pitaka, which reflects more faithfully the teachings of Buddha and his early disciples, embraces + the Vinaya-pitaka, a collection of books on the disciplinary rules of the order, + the Sutta-pitaka, didactic tracts consisting in part of alleged discourses of Buddha; and + the Abhidhamma-pitaka, comprising more detailed treatises on doctrinal subjects. Most of the Vinavas and some of the Suttas have been made accessible to English readers in the "Sacred Books of the East". The Ti-pitaka seems to date back to the second and third centuries B.C., but a few additions were made even after it was committed to writing in the early part of the first century of the Christian Era. While there may be doctrinal and disciplinary parts from the time of Buddha none of the twenty-nine books comprised in the Ti-pitaka can be proved to be older than 300 B.C. These books stripped of their tiresome repetitions, would be about equal in size to the Bible, though on the whole they are vastly inferior to the Sacred Scripture in spirituality, depth of thought, variety of subject, and richness of expression. There are also a few extra-canonical books, likewise in Pali on which the Southern Buddhists set great value, the Dipavansa and Mahavansa, which give an uncritical history of Buddhism down to about A.D. 300, the "Commentaries of Buddhagosa", and the Milinda Panha, ably translated by Rhys Davids under the title "The Questions of King Milinda". These works belong to the fourth and following centuries of our era. In the Tri-pitaka of the Northern School are included the well-known Saddharma-pundarika (Lotus of the True Law), and the legendary biographies of Buddha, the Buddha Charita, and the Lalita Vistara (Book of Exploits), which are generally assigned to the last quarter of the first century A.D. Besides the Tri-pitaka, the Northern Buddhists reckon as canonical several writings of more recent times adapted from the abominable Hindu Tantras. III. PRIMITIVE BUDDHISM Buddhism was by no means entirely original. It had much in common with the pantheistic Vedanta teaching, from which it sprang belief in karma, whereby the character of the present life is the net product of the good and evil acts of a previous existence; belief in a constant series of rebirths for all who set their heart on preserving their individual existence; the pessimistic view that life at its best is misery and not worth living. And so the great end for which Buddha toiled was the very one which gave colour to the pantheistic scheme of salvation propounded by the Brahmin ascetics, namely, the liberation of men from misery by setting them free from attachment to conscious existence. It was in their conception of the final state of the saved, and of the method by which it was to be attained that they differed. The pantheistic Brahmin said: Recognize your identity with the great impersonal god, Brahma, you thereby cease to be a creature of desires; you are no longer held fast in the chain of rebirths; at death you lose your individuality, your conscious existence, to become absorbed in the all-god Brahma. In Buddha's system, the all-god Brahma was entirely ignored. Buddha put abstruse speculation in the background, and, while not ignoring the value of right knowledge, insisted on the saving part of the will as the one thing needful. To obtain deliverance from birth, all forms of desire must be absolutely quenched, not only very wicked craving, but also the desire of such pleasures and comforts as are deemed innocent and lawful, the desire even to preserve one's conscious existence. It was through this extinction of every desire that cessation of misery was to be obtained. This state of absence of desire and pain was known as Nirvana (Nibbana). This word was not coined by Buddha, but in his teaching, it assumed a new shade of meaning. Nirvana means primarily a "blowing out", and hence the extinction of the fire of desire, ill-will, delusion, of all, in short, that binds the individual to rebirth and misery. It was in the living Buddhist saint a state of calm repose, of indifference to life and death, to pleasure and pain, a state of imperturbable tranquility, where the sense of freedom from the bonds of rebirth caused the discomforts as well as the joys of life to sink into insignance. But it was not till after death that Nirvana was realized in its completeness. Some scholars have so thought. And, indeed, if the psychological speculations found in the sacred books are part of Buddha's personal teaching, it is hard to see how he could have held anything else as the final end of man. But logical consistency is not to be looked for in an Indian mystic. If we may trust the sacred books, he expressly refused on several occasions to pronounce either on the existence or the non-existence of those who had entered into Nirvana, on the ground that it was irrelevant, not conducive to peace and enlightenment. His intimate disciples held the same view. A monk who interpreted Nirvana to mean annihilation was taken to task by an older monk, and convinced that he had no right to hold such an opinion, since the subject was wrapped in impenetrable mystery. The learned nun Khema gave a similar answer to the King of Kosala, who asked if the deceased Buddha was still in existence. Whether the Perfect One exists after death, whether he does not exist after death, whether he exists and at the same time does not exist after death, whether he neither exists nor does not exist after death, has not been revealed by Buddha. Since, then, the nature of Nirvana was too mysterious to be grasped by the Hindu mind, too subtle to be expressed in terms either of existence or of non-existence, it would be idle to attempt a positive solution of the question. It suffices to know that it meant a state of unconscious repose, an eternal sleep which knew no awakening. In this respect it was practically one with the ideal of the pantheistic Brahmin. In the Buddhist conception of Nirvana no account was taken of the all-god Brahma. And as prayers and offerings to the traditional gods were held to be of no avail for the attainment of this negative state of bliss, Buddha, with greater consistency than was shown in pantheistic Brahminism, rejected both the Vedas and the Vedic rites. It was this attitude which stamped Buddhism as a heresy. For this reason, too, Buddha has been set down by some as an atheist. Buddha, however, was not an atheist in the sense that he denied the existence of the gods. To him the gods were living realities. In his alleged sayings, as in the Buddhist scriptures generally, the gods are often mentioned, and always with respect. But like the pantheistic Brahmin, Buddha did not acknowledge his dependence on them. They were like men, subject to decay and rebirth. The god of today might be reborn in the future in some inferior condition, while a man of great virtue might succeed in raising himself in his next birth to the rank of a god in heaven. The very gods, then, no less than men, had need of that perfect wisdom that leads to Nirvana, and hence it was idle to pray or sacrifice to them in the hope of obtaining the boon which they themselves did not possess. They were inferior to Buddha, since he had already attained to Nirvana. In like manner, they who followed Buddha's footsteps had no need of worshipping the gods by prayers and offerings. Worship of the gods was tolerated, however, in the Buddhist layman who still clung to the delusion of individual existence, and preferred the household to the homeless state. Moreover, Buddha's system conveniently provided for those who accepted in theory the teaching that Nirvana alone was the true end of man but who still lacked the courage to quench all desires. The various heavens of Brahminic theology, with their positive, even sensual, delights were retained as the reward of virtuous souls not yet ripe for Nirvana. To aspire after such rewards was permitted to the lukewarm monk; it was commended to the layman. Hence the frequent reference, even in the earliest Buddhist writings to heaven and its positive delights as an encouragement to right conduct. Sufficient prominence is not generally given to this more popular side of Buddha's teaching, without which his followers would have been limited to an insignificant and short-lived band of heroic souls. It was this element, so prominent in the inscriptions of Asoka, that tempered the severity of Buddha's doctrine of Nirvana and made his system acceptable to the masses. In order to secure that extinction of desire which alone could lead to Nirvana, Buddha prescribed for his followers a life of detachment from the comforts, pleasures, and occupations of the common run of men. To secure this end, he adopted for himself and his disciples the quiet, secluded, contemplative life of the Brahmin ascetics. It was foreign to his plan that his followers should engage in any form of industrial pursuits, lest they might thereby be entangled in worldly cares and desires. Their means of subsistence was alms; hence the name commonly applied to Buddhist monks was bhikkus, beggars. Detachment from family life was absolutely necessary. Married life was to be avoided as a pit of hot coals, for it was incompatible with the quenching of desire and the extinction of individual existence. In like manner, worldly possessions and worldly power had to be renounced—everything that might minister to pride, greed, or self-indulgence. Yet in exacting of his followers a life of severe simplicity, Buddha did not go to the extremes of fanaticism that characterized so many of the Brahmin ascetics. He chose the middle path of moderate asceticism which he compared to a lute, which gives forth the proper tones only when the strings are neither too tight nor too slack. Each member was allowed but one set of garments, of yellowish colour and of cheap quality. These, together with his sleeping mat, razor, needle, water-strainer, and alms bowl, constituted the sum of his earthly possessions. His single meal, which had to be taken before noon, consisted chiefly of bread, rice, and curry, which he gathered daily in his alms-bowl by begging. Water or rice-milk was his customary drink, wine and other intoxicants being rigorously forbidden, even as medicine. Meat, fish, and delicacies were rarely eaten except in sickness or when the monk dined by invitation with some patron. The use of perfumes, flowers, ointments, and participation in worldly amusements fell also into the class of things prohibited. In theory, the moral code of Buddhism was little more than a copy of that of Brahminism. Like the latter, it extended to thoughts and desires, no less than to words and deeds. Unchastity in all its forms, drunkenness, lying, stealing, envy, pride, harshness are fittingly condemned. But what, perhaps, brings Buddhism most strikingly in contact with Christianity is its spirit of gentleness and forgiveness of injuries. To cultivate benevolence towards men of all classes, to avoid anger and physical violence, to be patient under insult, to return good for evil—all this was inculated in Buddhism and helped to make it one of the gentlest of religions. To such an extent was this carried that the Buddhist monk, like the Brahmin ascetic, had to avoid with the greatest care the destruction of any form of animal life. In course of time, Buddha extended his monastic system to include women. Communities of nuns while living near the monks, were entirely secluded from them. They had to conform to the same rule of life, to subsist on alms, and spend their days in retirement and contemplation. They were never as numerous as the monks, and later became a very insignificant factor in Buddhism. In thus opening up to his fellow men and women what he felt to be the true path of salvation, Buddha made no discrimination in social condition. Herein lay one of the most striking contrasts between the old religion and the new. Brahminism was inextricably intertwined with caste-distinctions. It was a privilege of birth, from which the Sudras and members of still lower classes were absolutely excluded. Buddha, on the contrary, welcomed men of low as well as high birth and station. Virtue, not blood, was declared to be the test of superiority. In the brotherhood which he built around him, all caste-distinctions were put aside. The despised Sudra stood on a footing of equality with the high-born Brahmin. In this religious democracy of Buddhism lay, doubtless, one of its strongest influences for conversion among the masses. But in thus putting his followers on a plane of equal consideration, Buddha had no intention of acting the part of a social reformer. Not a few scholars have attributed to him the purpose of breaking down caste-distinctions in society and of introducing more democratic conditions. Buddha had no more intention of abolishing caste than he had of abolishing marriage. It was only within the limits of his own order that he insisted on social equality just as he did on celibacy. Wherever Buddhism has prevailed, the caste-system has remained untouched. Strictly speaking, Buddha's order was composed only of those who renounced the world to live a life of contemplation as monks and nuns. The very character of their life, however, made them dependent on the charity of men and women who preferred to live in the world and to enjoy the comforts of the household state. Those who thus sympathized with the order and contributed to its support, formed the lay element in Buddhism. Through this friendly association with the order, they could look to a happy reward after death, not Nirvana but the temporary de!ights of heaven, with the additional prospect of being able at some future birth to attain to Nirvana, if they so desired. The majority, however, did not share the enthusiasm of the Buddhist Arhat or saint for Nirvana, being quite content to hope for a life of positive, though impermanent, bliss in heaven. IV. LATER DEVELOPMENTS AND SPREAD OF BUDDHISM The lack of all religious rites in Buddhism was not keenly felt during the lifetime of its founder. Personal devotion to him took the place of religious fervour. But he was not long dead when this very devotion to him began to assume the form of religious worship. His reputed relics, consisting of his bones, teeth, alms-bowl, cremation-vessel, and ashes from his funeral pyre, were enclosed in dome-shaped mounds called Dagobas, or Topes, or Stupas, and were honoured with offerings of lights, flowers, and incense. Pictures and statues of Buddha were multiplied on every side, and similarly honoured, being carried about on festal days in solemn procession. The places, too, associated with his birth, enlightenment, first preaching, and death were accounted especially sacred, and became the objects of pilgrimage and the occasion of recurring festivals. But as Buddha had entered into Nirvana and could not be sensible of these religious honours, the need was felt of a living personality to whom the people could pray. The later speculations of Buddhist monks brought such a personality to light in Metteyya (Maitreya), the loving one, now happily reigning in heaven as a bodhisattva, a divine being destined in the remote future to become a Buddha, again to set in motion the wheel of the law. To this Metteyya the Buddhists turned as the living object of worship of which they had so long felt the need, and they paid him religious homage as the future saviour of the world. The emergence of the Northern School Such was the character of the religious worship observed by those who departed the least from Buddha's teachings. It is what is found today in the so-called Southern Buddhism, held by the inhabitants of Ceylon, Burma, and Siam. Towards the end of first century A.D., however, a far more radical change took place in the religious views of the great mass of Buddhists in Northern India. Owing, doubtless, to the ever growing popularity of the cults of Vishnu and Siva, Buddhism was so modified as to allow the worship of an eternal, supreme deity, Adi-Buddha, of whom the historic Buddha was declared to have been an incarnation, an avatar. Around this supreme Buddha dwelling in highest heaven, were grouped a countless number of bodhisattvas, destined in future ages to become human Buddhas for the sake of erring man. To raise oneself to the rank of bodhisattva by meritorious works was the ideal now held out to pious souls. In place of Nirvana, Sukhavati became the object of pious longing, the heaven of sensuous pleasures, where Amitabha, an emanation of the eternal Buddha, reigned. For the attainment of Sukhavati, the necessity of virtuous conduct was not altogether forgotten, but an extravagant importance was attached to the worship of relics and statues, pilgrimages, and, above all, to the reciting of sacred names and magic formulas. Many other gross forms of Hindu superstition were also adopted. This innovation, completely subversive of the teaching of Buddha, supplanted the older system in the North. It was known as the Mahayana, or Great Vehicle, in distinction to the other and earlier form of Buddhism contemptuously styled the Hinayana or Little Vehicle, which held its own in the South. It is only by the few millions of Southern Buddhists that the teachings of Buddha have been substantially preserved. Buddha's order seems to have grown rapidly, and through the good will of rulers, whose inferior origin debarred them from Brahmin privileges, to have become in the next two centuries a formidable rival of the older religion. The interesting rock-edicts of Asoka—a royal convert to Buddhism who in the second quarter of the third century B.C. held dominion over the greater part of India—give evidence that Buddhism was in a most flourishing condition, while a tolerant and kindly spirit was displayed towards other forms of religion. Under his auspices missionaries were sent to evangelize Ceylon in the South, and in the North, Kashmer, Kandahar, and the so-called Yavana country, identified by most scholars with the Greek settlements in the Kabul valley and vicinity, and later known as Bactria. In all these places Buddhism quickly took root and flourished, though in the Northern countries the religion became later on corrupted and transformed into the Mahayana form of worship. Buddhism in China In the first century of the Christian Era, the knowledge of Buddha made its way to China. At the invitation of the Emperor Ming-ti, Buddhist monks came in A.D. 67 with sacred books, pictures, and relics. Conversions multiplied, and during the next few centuries the religious communications between the two countries were very close. Not only did Buddhist missionaries from India labour in China, but many Chinese monks showed their zeal for the newly adopted religion by making pilgrimages to the holy places in India. A few of them wrote interesting accounts, still extant, of what they saw and heard in their travels. Of these pilgrims the most noted are Fahien, who travelled in India and Ceylon in the years A.D. 399-414, and Hiouen-Tsang who made extensive travels in India two centuries later (A.D. 629-645). The supplanting of the earlier form of Buddhism in the northern countries of India in the second century led to a corresponding change in the Buddhism of China. The later missionaries, being mostly from the North of India, brought with them the new doctrine, and in a short time the Mahayana or Northern Buddhism prevailed. Two of the bodhisattvas of Mahayana theology became the favourite objects of worship with the Chinese— Amitabha, lord of the Sukhavati paradise, and Avalokitesvara, extravagantly praised in the "Lotus of the True Law" as ready to extricate from every sort of danger those who think of him or cherish his name. The latter, known as Fousa Kwanyin, is worshipped, now as a male deity, again as the goddess of mercy, who comes to the relief of the faithful. Amitabha goes by the Chinese name Amita, or Mito. Offerings of flowers and incense made before his statues and the frequent repetition, of his name are believed to ensure a future life of bliss in his distant Western paradise. An excessive devotion to statues and relics, the employment of magic arts to keep off evil spirits, and the observance of many of the gross superstitions of Taoism, complete the picture of Buddhism in China, a sorry representation of what Buddha made known to men. Chinese Buddhism was introduced into Korea in the fourth century, and from there taken to Japan two centuries later. The Buddhism of these countries is in the main like that of China, with the addition of a number of local superstitions. Annam was also evangelized by Chinese Buddhists at an early period. Tibetan Buddhiism (Lamaism) Buddhism was first introduced into Tibet in the latter part of the seventh century, but it did not begin to thrive till the ninth century. In 1260, the Buddhist conqueror of Tibet, Kublai Khan, raised the head lama, a monk of the great Sakja monastery, to the position of spiritual and temporal ruler. His modern successors have the title of Dalai Lama. Lamaism is based on the Northern Buddhism of India, after it had become saturated with the disgusting elements of Siva worship. Its deities are innumerable, its idolatry unlimited. It is also much given to the use of magic formulas and to the endless repetition of sacred names. Its favourite formula is, Om mani padme hum (O jewel in the lotus, Amen), which, written on streamers exposed to the wind, and multiplied on paper slips turned by hand or wind or water, in the so-called prayer-wheels, is thought to secure for the agent unspeakable merit. The Dalai Lama, residing in the great monastery at Lhasa, passes for the incarnation of Amitabha, the Buddha of the Sukhavati paradise. Nine months after his death, a newly born babe is selected by divination as the reincarnate Buddha. Catholic missionaries to Tibet in the early part of the last century were struck by the outward resemblances to Catholic liturgy and discipline that were presented by Lamaism—its infallible head, grades of clergy corresponding to bishop and priest, the cross, mitre, dalmatic, cope, censer, holy water, etc. At once voices were raised proclaiming the Lamaistic origin of Catholic rites and practices. Unfortunately for this shallow theory, the Catholic Church was shown to have possessed these features in common with the Christian Oriental churches long before Lamaism was in existence. The wide propagation of Nestorianism over Central and Eastern Asia as early as A.D. 635 offers a natural explanation for such resemblances as are accretions on Indian Buddhism. The missionary zeal of Tibetan lamas led to the extension of their religion to Tatary in the twelfth and following centuries. While Northern Buddhism was thus exerting a widespread influence over Central and Eastern Asia, the earlier form of Buddhism was making peaceful conquests of the countries and islands in the South. In the fifth century missionaries from Ceylon evangelized Burma. Within the next two centuries, it spread to Siam, Cambodia, Java, and adjacent islands. Statistics The number of Buddhists throughout the world is commonly estimated at about four hundred and fifty millions, that is, about one-third of the human race. But on this estimate the error is made of classing an the Chinese and Japanese as Buddhists. Professor Legge, whose years of experience in China give special weight to his judgment, declares that the Buddhists in the whole world are not more than, one hundred millions, being far outnumbered not only by Christians, but also by the adherents of Confucianism and Hinduism. Professor Monier Williams holds the same views. Even if Buddhism, however, outranked Christianity in the number of adherents, it would be a mistake to attribute to the religion of Buddha, as some do, a more successful propagandism than to the religion of Christ. The latter has made its immense conquests, not by compromising with error and superstition, but by winning souls to the exclusive acceptance of its saving truths. Wherever it has spread, it has maintained its individuality. On the other hand, the vast majority of the adherents of Buddhism cling to forms of creed and worship that Buddha, if alive, would reprobate. Northern Buddhism became the very opposite of what Buddha taught to men, and in spreading to foreign lands accommodated itself to the degrading superstitions of the peoples it sought to win. It is only the Southern Buddhists of Ceylon, Burma, and Siam who deserve to be identified with the order founded by Buddha. They number at most but thirty millions of souls. V. BUDDHISM AND CHRISTIANITY Between Buddhism and Christianity there are a number of resemblances, at first sight striking. + The Buddhist order of monks and nuns offers points of similarity with Christian monastic systems, particularly the mendicant orders. + There are moral aphorisms ascribed to Buddha that are not unlike some of the sayings of Christ. + Most of all, in the legendary life of Buddha, which in its complete form is the outcome of many centuries of accretion, there are many parallelisms, some more, some less striking, to the Gospel stories of Christ. A few third-rate scholars taking for granted that all these resemblances are pre-Christian, and led by the fallacious principle that resemblance always implies dependence, have vainly tried to show that Christian monasticism is of Buddhist origin, and that Buddhist thought and legend have been freely incorporated into the Gospels. To give greater speciousness to their theory, they have not scrupled to press into service, besides the few bona fide resemblances many others that were either grossly exaggerated, or fictitious, or drawn from Buddhist sources less ancient than the Gospels. If, from this vast array of alleged Buddhist infiltrations, all these exaggerations, fictions, and anachronisms are eliminated, the points of resemblance that remain are, with perhaps one exception, such as may be explained on the ground of independent origin. The exception is the story of Buddha's conversion from the worldly life of a prince to the life of an ascetic, which was transformed by some Oriental Christian of the seventh century into the popular medieval tale of "Barlaam and Josaphat". Here is historic evidence of the turning of a Buddhist into a Christian legend just as, on the other hand, the fifth-century sculptures of Gospel scenes on the ruined Buddhist monasteries of Jamalgiri, in Northern Panjab, described in the scholarly work of Fergusson and Burgess, "The Cave Temples of India", offer reliable evidence that the Buddhists of that time did not scruple to embellish the Buddha legend with adaptations from Christian sources. But is there any historical basis for the assertion that Buddhist influence was a factor in the formation of Christianity and of the Christian Gospels? The advocates of this theory pretend that the rock-inscriptions of Asoka bear witness to the spread of Buddhism over the Greek-speaking world as early as the third century B.C., since they mention the flourishing existence of Buddhism among the Yavanas, i.e. Greeks within the dominion of Antiochus. But in the unanimous judgment of first-rate scholars, the Yavanas here mentioned mean simply and solely the Greek-speaking peoples on the extreme frontier next to India, namely, Bactria and the Kabul valley. Again the statement in the late Buddhist chronicle, Mahavansa, that among the Buddhists who came to the dedication of a great Stupa in Ceylon in the second century B.C., "were over thirty thousand monks from the vicinity of Alassada, the capital of the Yona country" is taken to prove that long before the time of Christ, Alexandria in Egypt was the centre of flourishing Buddhist communities. It is true that Alassada is the Pali for Alexandria; but the best scholars are agreed that the city here meant is not the ancient capital of Egypt, but as the text indicates, the chief city of the Yona country, the Yavana country of the rock-inscriptions, namely, Bactria and vicinity. And so, the city referred to is most likely Alexandria ad Caucasum. In short, there is nothing in Buddhist records that may be taken as reliable evidence for the spread of Buddhism westward to the Greek world as early as the foundation of the Christian religion. That Buddhist institutions were at that time unknown in the West may be safely inferred from the fact that Buddhism is absolutely ignored in the literary and archaeological remains of Palestine, Egypt, and Greece. There is not a single remains of Buddhist monastery or stupa in any of these countries; not a single Greek translation of a Buddhist book; not a single reference in all Greek literature to the existence of a Buddhist community in the Greek world. The very name of Buddha is mentioned for the first time only in the writings of Clement of Alexandria (second century). To explain the resemblances in Christianity to a number of pre-Christian features of Buddhism, there is no need of resorting to the hypothesis that they were borrowed. Nothing is more common in the study of comparative ethnology and religion than to find similar social and religious customs practised by peoples too remote to have had any communication with one another. How easily the principle of ascetic detachment from the world may lead to a community life in which celibacy as observed, may be seen in the monastic systems that have prevailed not only among Buddhists, Essenes, and Christians, but also among the early Aztecs and Incas in the New World. Nor is this so strange when it is recalled that men everywhere have, to a large extent, the same daily experiences, the same feelings, the desires. As the laws of human thought are every here the same, it lies in the very nature of things that men, in so far as they have the same experiences, or face the same religious needs, will think the same thoughts, and give expression to them in sayings and customs that strike the unreflecting old server by their similarity. It is only by losing sight of this fundamental truth that one can unwittingly fall into the error of assuming that resemblance always implies dependence. It is chiefly the legendary features of Buddha's life, many of which are found for the first time only in works of later date than the Gospels, that furnish the most striking resemblances to certain incidents related of Christ in the Gospels, resemblances which might with greater show of reason be traced to a common historic origin. If there has been any borrowing here, it is plainly on the side of Buddhism. That Christianity made its way to Northern India in the first two centuries is not only a matter of respectable tradition, but is supported by weighty archaeological evidence. Scholars of recognized ability beyond the suspicion of undue bias in favour of Christianity—Weber, Goblet d'Alviella, and others—think it very likely that the Gospel stories of Christ circulated by these early Christian communities in India were used by the Buddhists to enrich the Buddha legend, just as the Vishnuites built up the legend of Krishna on many striking incidents in the life of Christ. The fundamental tenets of Buddhism are marked by grave defects that not only betray its inadequacy to become a religion of enlightened humanity, but also bring into bold relief its inferiority to the religion of Jesus Christ. In the first place, the very foundation on which Buddhism rests—the doctrine of karma with its implied transmigrations—is gratuitous and false. This pretended law of nature, by which the myriads of gods, demons, men, and animals are but the transient forms of rational beings essentially the same, but forced to this diversity in consequence of varying degrees of merit and demerit in former lives, is a huge superstition in flat contradiction to the recognized laws of nature, and hence ignored by men of science. Another basic defect in primitive Buddhism is its failure to recognize man's dependence on a supreme God. By ignoring God and by making salvation rest solely on personal effort, Buddha substituted for the Brahmin religion a cold and colourless system of philosophy. It is entirely lacking in those powerful motives to right conduct, particularly the motive of love, that spring from the consecration of religious men and women to the dependence on a personal all-loving God. Hence it is that Buddhist morality is in the last analysis a selfish utilitarianism. There is no sense of duty, as in the religion of Christ, prompted by reverence for a supreme Lawgiver, by love for a merciful Father, by personal allegiance to a Redeemer. Karma, the basis of Buddhist morality, is like any other law of nature, the observance of which is prompted by prudential considerations. Not infrequently one meets the assertion that Buddha surpassed Jesus in holding out to struggling humanity an end utterly unselfish. This is a mistake. Not to speak of the popular Swarga, or heaven, with its positive, even sensual delights the fact that Nirvana is a negative ideal of bliss does not make it the less an object of interested desire. Far from being an unselfish end, Nirvana is based wholly on the motive of self-love. It thus stands on a much lower level than the Christian ideal, which, being primarily and essentially a union of friendship with God in heaven, appeals to motives of disinterested as well as interested love. Another fatal defect of Buddhism is its false pessimism. A strong and healthy mind revolts against the morbid view that life is not worth living, that every form of conscious existence is an evil. Buddhism stands condemned by the voice of nature the dominant tone of which is hope and joy. It is a protest against nature for possessing the perfection of rational life. The highest ambition of Buddhism is to destroy that perfection by bringing all living beings to the unconscious repose of Nirvana. Buddhism is thus guilty of a capital crime against nature, and in consequence does injustice to the individual. All legitimate desires must be repressed. Innocent recreations are condemned. The cultivation of music is forbidden. Researches in natural science are discountenanced. The development of the mind is limited to the memorizing of Buddhist texts and the study of Buddhist metaphysics, only a minimum of which is of any value. The Buddhist ideal on earth is a state of passive indifference to everything. How different is the teaching of Him who came that men might have life and have it more abundantly. Again Buddhist pessimism is unjust to the family. Marriage is held in contempt and even abhorrence as leading to the procreation of life. In thus branding marriage as a state unworthy of man, Buddhism betrays its inferiority to Christianity, which recommends virginity but at the same time teaches that marriage is a sacred union and a source of sanctification. Buddhist pessimism likewise does injustice to society. It has set the seal of approval on the Brahmin prejudice against manual labor. Since life is not worth living, to labour for the comforts and refinements of civilized life is a delusion. The perfect man is to subsist not by the labour of his hands but on the alms of inferior men. In the religion of Christ, "the carpenter's son", a healthier view prevails. The dignity of labour is upheld, and every form of industry is encouraged that tends to promote man's welfare. Buddhism has accomplished but little for the uplifting of humanity in comparison with Christianity. One of its most attractive features, which, unfortunately, has become wellnigh obsolete, was its practice of benevolence towards the sick and needy. Between Buddhists and Brahmins there was a commendable rivalry in maintaining dispensaries of food and medicine. But this charity did not, like the Christian form, extend to the prolonged nursing of unfortunates stricken with contagious and incurable diseases, to the protection of foundlings, to the bringing up of orphans, to the rescue of fallen women, to the care of the aged and insane. Asylums and hospitals in this sense are unknown to Buddhism. The consecration of religious men and women to the lifelong service of afflicted humanity is foreign to dreamy Buddhist monasticism. Again, the wonderful efficacy displayed by the religion of Christ in purifying the morals of pagan Europe has no parallel in Buddhist annals. Wherever the religion of Buddha has prevailed, it has proved singularly inefficient to lift society to a high standard of morality. It has not weaned the people of Tibet and Mongolia from the custom of abandoning the aged, nor the Chinese from the practice of infanticide. Outside the establishment of the order of nuns, it has done next to nothing to raise woman from her state of degradation in Oriental lands. It has shown itself utterly helpless to cope with the moral plagues of humanity. The consentient testimony of witnesses above the suspicion of prejudice establishes the fact that at the present day Buddhist monks are everywhere strikingly deficient in that moral earnestness and exemplary conduct which distinguished the early followers of Buddha. In short, Buddhism is all but dead. In its huge organism the faint pulsations of life are still discernible, but its power of activity is gone. The spread of European civilization over the East will inevitably bring about its extinction. CHARLES F. AIKEN Guillaume Bude Guillaume Budé (Budaeus). A French Hellenist, born at Paris, 1467; died there 22 August, 1540. He studied at Paris and Orleans but with little success or application. Subsequently, however, he seemed to acquire a sudden passion for learning. After taking lessons in Greek from Hermonymus, and profiting by the advice of Joannes Lascaris, he attained great proficiency in that language. He studied at the same time, philosophy, theology, law, and medicine, in all of which he made rapid progress. Budé's abilities were recognized by Louis XII, whose secretary he became after his return from a successful embassy on occasion of the coronation of Pope Julius II. He was sent to Rome again on a mission to Pope Leo X (1515), but was recalled at his own request and accompanied Francis I in his travels. It was then that he suggested to the king the creation of a college for the study of the three languages (Greek, Hebrew, and Latin), afterwards the "College de France." Empowered to ask Erasmus to take charge of it (1517-18), he failed in his mission, and the college was not founded until 1530. At his suggestion, also, Francis declined to prohibit printing, as the Sorbonne had advised (1533). Literary France owes to Budé's efforts the foundation of the "Bibliothèque de Fontainebleau", which was the origin of the "Bibliothèque Nationale". His letters to Erasmus, Thomas More, Sadolet, Rabelais, and others written in Greek, Latin, or French, were the delight of scholars of the time. Budé was suspected of leanings towards Calvinism, and certain parts of his correspondence with Erasmus seemed to countenance this suspicion. However, it was disproved after his death. Having already translated into Latin many of Plutarch's Lives (1502-05), he pubIished his "Annotationes in XXIV libros Pandectarum" (Paris, 1508), in which, by applying philology and history to the Roman law, he revolutionized the study of jurisprudence. Budé's treatise on Roman coins and weights, "De asse et partibus ejus" (Venice, 1522), was the best book on the subject written up to that time. In 1520 he published a philosophical and moral dissertation, "De contemptu rerum fortuitarum"; in 1527, "De studio litterarum", in which he urges youth not to neglect their literary studies. Greek, however, was his favourite study and we have from him, "Commentarii linguae graecae" (Paris, 1529), which greatly advanced the study of Greek literature in France, "De transitu helenismi ad Christianismum" (Paris, 1534), and various other works of similar scope though of minor importance. His compIete works were published at Bêsle in 1557. M. DE MOREIRA Budweis Budweis (Czech, BUDEJOVICE; Lat. BUDOVICIUM; BOHEMO-BUDVICENSIS). A diocese situated in Southern Bohemia, suffragan to the Archdiocese of Prague. Although projected since 1630, the diocese was not erected until the reign of Emperor Joseph II, by a papal Bull of 20 September, 1785. By the provisions of this Bull, the civil districts of Budweis, Tabor, Prachatitz, and Klattau were separated from the Archdiocese of Prague and erected into the new Diocese of Budweis, thus giving it an area of 5600 sq. miles with a population of 660,000. The church of St. Nicholas at Budweis was made cathedral, and the Archbishop of Prague contributed 3300 Rhenish marks (present value 10,080 kronen or $2,016) towards its endowment. The following bishops have occupied the See of Budweis: (1) Johann Prokop, Count von Schaffgotsche (1785-1813), formerly rector of the Generalseminar at Brunn, and canon at Olmütz; (2) Ernst Konstantin Ruzicka (1815-45); (3) Joseph Andreas Lindauer (1845-50); (4) Johann Valerian Jirsik (1851-83), especially noteworthy for the part he took in the development of the diocese; (5) Franz, Count Schonborn (1883-85), later Cardinal and Archbishop of Prague, d. 1899; (6) Martin Joseph Riha (7 July, 1885-6 February, 1907), the first diocesan ecclesiastic to be appointed Bishop of Budweis. The present administrator (1907) is the Vicar Capitular, J. Hulka. In conformity with the decree of the provincial council of Prague (1860) three diocesan synods have been held (1870, 1872, 1875). STATISTICS According to the organization of 1857 the Diocese of Budweis is divided into the Vicariate-General of Budweis on which depend the archdeaconry of Krummau, the provostship of Neuhaus, and 8 archipresbyterates: Budweis, Klattau, Krummau, Neuhaus, Taus, and Winterberg, with 4 vicariates each, and Strakonitz and Tabor with 5 vicariates each, making a total of 34 vicariates. Among the 432 ecclesiastical divisions for the cure of souls, there are two archdeaconries, 57 deaneries, 366 parishes, 5 expositures, and 1 administrature, with a total population (1907) of 1,123,113. This number is divided as follows: 1,106,729 Roman Catholics (an average of 98.1 per cent, in many vicariates 99.92 percent of the whole population); 1589 members of the Augsburg Evangelical Church; 2302 members of the Helvetic Evangelical Church; 12,447 Jews; and 46 of no religious persuasion. The population of 282 of the ecclesiastical divisions (68.9 per cent), 761,568 is almost entirely Czech; that of 110 (15.34 per cent), 181,790, purely German; that of 25 (10.66 per cent), 119,830, predominantly Czech; and of 15 (5.1 per cent), 59,925, prevailingly German. The average population of a parish is 2000, the population of the largest, Budweis, being 45,528, and of the smallest, Korkushatten, 414. The clergy actively engaged in the ministry number 849 secular and 136 regular priests. The latter are thus divided: 59 Cistercians from Hohenfurth, with 4 professed clerics; 18 Brothers of the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar, a congregation founded at Budweis in 1888, with 5 clerics, 18 lay brothers, and 11 novices; 11 Premonstratensians; 11 Knights of Malta; 3 Minorites; 4 Reformed Franciscans, with 5 lay brothers; 3 Calced and 4 Discalced Augustinians, with 4 lay brothers; 6 Redemptorists, with 4 lay brothers; 6 Servites with 4 lay brothers; 4 Capuchins, with 4 lay brothers; 3 Piarists. Twenty-nine parishes are attended by members of religious orders; 2 are granted by free collation, i.e. bestowed by the metropolitan; and the rest are subject to patronage, 88 to ecclesiastical patronage. The cathedral chapter consists of a provost, a dean, who is also the urban dean of Budweis, a cantor, and 3 capitular canons to which are added 4 honorary canons; the consistory has 9 members. Young men are trained for the priesthood in the theological seminary at Budweis, which provides for those speaking the different languages found in the diocese; it has 6 professors and 103 students, 3 in the Bohemian College in Rome. There is also in Budweis an episcopal school for boys (petit séminaire) without a special gymnasium attached (founded 1853). FEMALE RELIGIOUS ORDERS, SHRINES, CHURCHES, ETC. In the diocese there are 7 orders of women, with 362 sisters, 90 novices and lay sisters, and 40 houses; 216 Poor School Sisters of Notre Dame (since 1849); 129 Sisters of St. Charles Borromeo (1842); 93 Sisters of the Most Blessed Sacrament of the Altar (founded at Budweis in 1887); 2 Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul; 3 Sisters of the Holy Cross; 3 Servites; and 2 Franciscans. The great mass of the people are engaged in agricultural pursuits and are in general religiously inclined. Popular missions (Volksmissionen) are frequent, 450 of them being held between 1850 and 1897 in 228 parishes, 334 by Redemptorists and 112 by Jesuits. The chief confraternities are: the Confraternity of the Rosary, in 230 parishes, with 30,000 members; the Confraternity for the Adoration of the Most Blessed Sacrament and the Adornment of Poor Churches, founded in 1859, in 238 parishes, which has 15,000 members and disburses yearly 5,000 kronen ($1,000); the Confraternity of St. Michael in 265 parishes, with 5,000 members, who contribute annually 4,000 kronen ($800) toward Peter's-pence. The principal places of pilgrimage are: Brunn, founded in 1715, visited yearly by 300 processions; Rimau, built at the end of the seventeenth century, with 100 annual processions; Gojau mentioned as early as 1469; and Kremeschnik, built in 1632. Here, as in the rest of Bohemia, ecclesiastical edifices of earlier centuries were greatly damaged during the religious wars of the fifteenth to the seventeenth century. The prevailing architectural style is baroque. Mention should be made of the Romanesque church of Muhlhausen, built between 1184 and 1250, formerly a Premonstratensian church; the Cistercian abbey-churches of Goldenkron (1263-1300), and Hohenfurth (1259-1350), built in Gothic style; the two-naved church of St. Ægidius in Muhlhausen, originally Romanesque (in the twelfth century), in 1407 rebuilt in the Gothic style; the cathedral at Budweis (1642-49) and the parish church at Prestitz (1748-73) are examples of the baroque style, the latter designed by Kilian Dienzenhofer. Popular Catholic associations are not at present very numerous. There are but two Catholic weekly papers in the diocese. It is only within recent years that any serious attempts have been made to organize the Catholics of the diocese, both on political and non-partisan lines. These efforts have so far met with scant success; in the past, therefore, the territory of the diocese has been represented in the Austrian Parliament by Liberal deputies. Trajer, Historisch-statistische Beschreibung der Diozese Budweis (Budweis, 1862); Mardetschlager-Trajer, Geschichte des Bistums Budweis (ibid., 1885); Ladenbauer, Das soziale Wirken der kathol. Kirche in Oesterriech: Diozese Budweis (Vienna, 1899); Catalogus Cleri dioec. Budvicen, 1907 (Budweis, 1907). KARL HILGENREINER Buenos Aires Buenos Aires The federal capital of the Argentine Republic, and the second city of the Latin races in the world (having a population of 1,100,000), as well as the first in commercial importance among the cities of South America, is situated in latitude 34°35'30"S., and longitude 58°22'20"W., on the right bank of the Río de la Plata, at an elevation of about 65 feet. The Río de la Plata (Plate, or Silver, River), the estuary of which has a maximum width of more than 108 miles, is about 43 miles wide at Buenos Aires. With a mean annual death-rate of 14 per thousand, the city takes rank in respect of sanitation with the most advanced cities of the world. The mean temperature is 62°6'F., snow never falls, and hail only rarely, and the thermometer ranges from 59°F. to 82°4'F., at times, however, reaching 95°. The north wind, humid and warm, and in summer even suffocating, charges the atmosphere with electricity, causing general debility and nervous troubles; but this wind never lasts for more than three days, and generally changes to a south-east wind, bringing rain or storm, upon which there follows the cold, dry south-west wind called the Pampero, which clears the sky. The vicissitudes of weather are extremely abrupt, with changes of temperature amounting sometimes to as much as 36°, with violent winds. The Pampero, highly charged with ozone, exercises a disinfecting influence and serves to purify the vitiated atmosphere of the thickly populated sections of the city. The healthiness of Buenos Aires (in English, literally, Good Airs) arises from two other most important causes; the supply of running water and the drainage system — as to both of which something will be said later on. The mean annual rainfall recorded in the five years from 1899 to 1903 was a little more than 43.164 inches. The barometer ordinarily ranges from 29.825 inches to 30.03 inches. At the time of its founding in 1580 this settlement had 300 inhabitants; in 1744 the population was 11,118; 40,000 in 1801 (estimated); 62,228 in 1822; 177,787 in 1869; 404,000 in 1887; 663,854 in 1895; 950,891 in 1904; 1,084,280 in December, 1906; 1,109,202 (estimated) in July, 1907. All of these amounts, except the third and the last, are taken from the official census. Of the total annual increase in population (46.3 per thousand), 19 to 20 per thousand is due to excess of birth-rate over death-rate; the rest being the effect of immigration. In the 950,981 inhabitants reported in the census of 18 September, 1904, the Argentines numbered 523,041; the foreigners, 427,850 (228,556 of the latter number being Italians, and 105,206 Spaniards). Classified by religious beliefs the figures were: 823,926 Catholics; 24,996 Protestants; 6,065 Jews; 8,054 of various other creeds; 13,335 professing no religious belief, and 74,515 unspecified. The municipality of Buenos Aires is a federal district of 73 3/8 square miles (19,006 hectares). The governing authority of this district, vested in the president of the republic, is exercised through a minister of the interior and a chief of police, for the maintenance of public order, and in a superintendent (intendiente de la capital) and a municipal council, for the construction and management of public works. The police force carry modern firearms. Both the municipal council and the superintendent have been since 1901 appointed by the president with the assent of the senate, though the question of reverting to the former system of popular election was, in 1907, under discussion by the Legislature. The municipal revenue in 1904, was $5,571,840 (5,804,000 pesos oro). In the older portions of Buenos Aires the streets are from 30 to 40 feet wide; the few avenues as yet in existence have a width, generally, of about 57 feet, though the Avenida de Mayo, nearly a mile in length, is 99 feet wide. The paving of the city, formerly defective, has gone on improving from year to year until the present time, when 70 per cent of the public thoroughfares is paved with granite over a bed of cement or sand, 15 per cent with macadam, asphalt, or carob block, and the remainder with cobblestone. There are upwards of 300 miles of street railway, mostly electric, the traffic on which for the year 1903 was registered at 133,719,218 passengers. Since the cholera epidemic of 1867-68, and the yellow fever of 1872, two public engineering achievements have most powerfully co-operated towards the healthfulness of the city: the waterworks and the drainage system. The supply of drinking water is derived from the Río de la Plata by means of a great pumping tower whence the water passes, through a tunnel three and two-thirds miles in length, to the reservoirs, to be filtered, clarified, and then raised by powerful pumps to the monumental structure known as the Depósito de las aguas corrientes. In this building twelve iron tanks, each 134 1/2 feet square and 13 feet deep, are arranged in three tiers of four each, at different levels. These twelve tanks have an aggregate capacity of 72,000 tons of water. The drainage system includes an installation in every house, connected scientifically with the cloaca máxima, or main sewer of the city, which runs a distance of 19 miles and 7 furlongs (32 km.) and discharges into the Río de la Plata opposite Berasategui. The rain-drainage pipes are connected with the main system in such a manner that in case of a heavy downpour, the excess of water is turned aside to a special rain-drainage conduit, having a capacity of 1419 cubic feet per second, which, after running a distance of nearly two and three-quarter miles, discharges its contents at a point north of Dársena Norte. The establishment of these two great systems of sanitary works has lowered the death-rate from 30 per thousand, in 1887, to 14 per thousand, in 1904. Other municipal institutions worthy of mention are the great abattoirs of Liniers, which cover an area of more than 61 acres, and from which 700,000 carcasses of beef and 900,000 of mutton, ready for the market, are annually turned out, and the produce-market, an immense depository where the wheat, wool, leather, etc., produced in the country are collected for exportation. The state university of the republic, with faculties of law, medicine, engineering, philosophy, and literature, established in separate buildings, is situated at Buenos Aires; also many institutions of secondary and primary education, both public and private. From very early times Buenos Aires has been generally known throughout South America by the colloquial name of El Puerto, and to this day the natives of the city are called Portenos, rather than Bonarenses, or Buenos-Aireans. Nevertheless, until 1885, and even later, El Puerto, being only a river port, and as the bottom of the river had gone on rising with the deposits of mud brought down by the stream, the river front could not offer a sufficient depth of water for vessels of even moderate draught; which were, therefore, obliged to anchor many miles away from the bank. The improvements of Puerto Madero, however, effected between 1890 and 1899, have now attracted ocean steamers of the highest tonnage. Vessels of lower tonnage anchor at the little port of Boca del Riachuelo, the mouth of a comparatively small stream which empties into the Plata south of the city. Both these ports are subject to the necessity of constant dredging to counteract the silting-up of the bottom by the action of the stream. The number of entries and clearings at these two ports amounts to 6000 in the year, aggregating more than 28,000,000 tons. The commerce of Buenos Aires is 849 per thousand of the imports, and 515 per thousand of exports of the whole republic. The first foundation of Buenos Aires took place in the beginning of the year 1536, under Don Pedro de Mendoza, Gentleman of the Bedchamber to the Emperor Charles V and Adelantado of the Río de la Plata. In 1541 it was deliberately depopulated by Don Domingo Martínez de Irala, the governor, its inhabitants being transferred to Asunción, in Paraguay. The second founding took place 11 June, 1580, under Juan de Garay, Lieutenant-Governor and Captain-General for the Adelantado Juan Ortiz de Zarate. Since its first foundation the place had been called the Port of Santa María de Buenos Aires, and the city was called Santísima Trinidad, taking its name from the day (Trinity Sunday, 29 May, 1580) on which Garay arrived there with his followers, and erected the Royal Standard in anticipation of the formalities of the founding proper. Hence the name usual in ancient documents: Ciudad de la Santísima Trinidad, Puerto de Buenos Aires. Santísima Trinidad is still an alternative title of the archdiocese. Buenos Aires in 1617 was made the capital of the province of Río de la Plata, which was created a vice-royalty in 1776. In 1593 the city was threatened by the expedition under Hawkins sent against the Spanish possessions in South America by Queen Elizabeth of England; in 1627 by the Dutch who had taken possession of Brazil; in 1657 by the French expedition of Timoleon Osmat, a soldier of fortune; in 1698 by another French squadron; in 1700 by a Danish. But on none of these occasions was the city actually attacked. A British expedition under Popham obtained a footing in Buenos Aires (27 June, 1806), but the place was recovered by conquest on the 12th of the following August, and defended against a new and formidable expedition commanded by Whitelock (2-5 July, 1807) by the country people organized as a militia force, who, on the former occasion, made prisoners of the invading force and, on the latter, forced a definitive evacuation of the territory. From 1810 to 1824 the city was a principal centre of the uprising which led to the separation of the Spanish-American colonies from the mother country. ARCHDIOCESE OF BUENOS AIRES (BONAERENSIS; SANTISIMA TRINIDAD) The Diocese of Buenos Aires was formed upon the dismemberment of the original Diocese of Asunción, in Paraguay, by a Bull of Paul III in 1620. Its first bishop was Pedro Carranza, a Carmelite, who was succeeded by a series of nineteen bishops, ending in 1855, when a Bull of Pius IX created Buenos Aires as archdiocese. This archdiocese comprises, besides the federal district with its 1,100,000 inhabitants, the territories of Río Negro, Chubut, and Santa Cruz, commonly known as Patagonia, or Tierra del Fuego, and containing altogether a population of 41,964. The city itself is divided into 22 parishes and 2 mission (succursal) parishes, each with its church. Besides these parish churches there are 50 churches and public chapels, also 80 other chapels, many of them semi-public, connected with religious and charitable institutions. (For some account of particular churches see ARGENTINE REPUBLIC.) The archbishop is assisted by an auxiliary bishop and two vicars-general. The metropolitan chapter consists of a dean, five other dignitaries, and five canons (a theologian, a penitentiary, a canon of the first class, a canon of the second class, and a secretary). There are in the archdiocese 254 secular priests. The seminary, situated at Villa Devoto, is a fine edifice with a public chapel dedicated to the Immaculate Conception. It is expected that this establishment will be converted into the central seminary of the republic and a Pontifical university of sacred sciences. there are 54 religious communities. Pious associations for seculars, women as well as men, are numerous, particularly those devoted to works of charity, upon which the people of Buenos Aires spend immense sums. Catholic colleges for primary and secondary instruction are numerous. Among those conducted by religious are San Jose, under the Bayonne Fathers; Salvador, under the Fathers of the Society of Jesus; the Dominican college of Lacordaire; that of the Escolapios, and that of the Brothers of the Christian Doctrine. Active efforts are being made to establish a Catholic university. Among the various periodicals the "Revista Eclesiástica del Arzobispado" and the daily "El Pueblo" deserve special mention. The workingmen have organized themselves into Catholic clubs, the membership of which now exceeds 40,000. It is to be remarked that the Catholics of this city, like those of the whole republic, whether failing to realize exactly the existing social conditions, or because they have been too much occupied with political contentions, have restricted their efforts to the formation of charitable associations, doing nothing, until very recently, in the direction of socio-political organization. A sectarian persecution which arose during the years 1884-88 aroused the dormant zeal of the faithful, and a Catholic congress was held which produced copious results. A congress of Franciscan tertiaries was held in 1906, and a second congress of Catholics in general has been convoked for the year 1907, through the initiative of the Congregation of the Immaculate Conception and Saint Aloysius Gonzaga in the College of San Salvador. PABLO HERNANDEZ Buffalo Buffalo Diocese established 23 April, 1847, now comprises the counties of Erie, Niagara, Genesee, Orleans, Chautauqua, Wyoming, Cattaraugus, and Allegany, in the State of New York, U.S.A., an area of 6,357 square miles. It was set apart from the great Diocese of New York and the see located at Buffalo on Lake Erie, the territory comprising nearly one-third of the State of New York. In 1868 the Diocese of Rochester was formed from the eastern counties of this territory; and in 1896, after Bishop Ryan's death, four more counties, Steuben, Schuyler, Chemung, and Tioga, were taken from the Diocese of Buffalo and added to the Rochester jurisdiction. INDIAN MISSIONS Two of the nations of the Iroquois League, the Senecas and the Cayugas, dwelt in this region before the advent of the white men. The Senecas had villages in the valley of the Genesee about twenty miles from Lake Ontario, and the Cayugas erected their cabins near the lake which still bears their name. The Seneca was the most populous and warlike nation of the League. In their frequent raids into the country of the Hurons of Northern Canada, they carried off many captives who had been instructed in Christianity by the French missionaries from Quebec. So numerous were these Huron Christian captives that they formed an entire village, which was called St. Michael's, in memory of their old Huron home. Jesuit missionaries visited these towns in 1656, and cheered the Christian captives who had lost all hope of ever again beholding a "Black Robe". In 1669 this village was located in the north-east part of the present town of East Bloomfield. The Rev. Father Fremin, a Jesuit, established his residence in this town in the fall of 1668, built a chapel, and said the first Mass there, 3 November, 1668. Three years later the Rev. James Pierron became the resident missionary at Gannagaro, or St. James, a Seneca town situated on Boughton Hill, south of the present village of Victor. The principal village of the Cayugas was situated about three and one-half miles south of Union Springs, near Great Gully Brook. This was called St. Joseph's by the Jesuits. Father Carheil built a chapel there in November, 1668, and immediately began his work of instructing. There was another town of the Cayugas at the northern extremity of Seneca Lake. Another chapel was built in the large Seneca town of Gandachioragon, or Totiakton, which was called the Immaculate Conception by the Jesuits. This was situated near Lima, about ten miles west of St. James. The Jesuits had four or five prosperous missions within the territory of the original Diocese of Buffalo, in which they laboured successfully for ten years until English intrigue and subsequent wars with the French forced them from the field. During those years they baptized nearly all the dying; they imparted a general knowledge of Christianity to the two western nations of the League; they strengthened the old Huron Christians in their faith, and added several hundred Iroquois converts to the Church. Many of the Iroquois chiefs sided with the English, in the war of the latter against the French, and the French missionaries were forced from the field of their labours. Many of the Christian Indians had already abandoned their homes in the Iroquois country for the new settlements on the St. Lawrence, under the protection of the French; and many more accompanied the Fathers in their flight, and settled on the St. Regis, or at Caughnawaga, where they still practise the Faith they acquired in their Iroquois homes. In the summer of 1669 the explorer, La Salle, with two Sulpicians and a party of twenty-five men, started to explore the region of the Great Lakes in search of a north-west passage to India. They skirted along the southern shore of Lake Ontario, crossing the mouth of Niagara River, until they reached Burlington Bay, where the party disbanded. La Salle went again in 1678, with Father Hennepin, in a large vessel which entered the Niagara River on 6th December, to the strains of the Te Deum. The next day a party with Father Hennepin ascended the river in a canoe, and landed on the northern shore, near the present suspension bridge on the Canada side. On 11 December, 1678, they landed on the other side of the river where Father Hennepin said Mass. This was probably the first Mass celebrated within the present limits of the Diocese of Buffalo. A little fort was built there as a protection against Indian assault. Then they proceeded up the river, about five miles about the Falls, where the "Griffon" was built. Father Hennepin remained there all winter, holding service for the men in a little chapel until the vessel was towed up the river to the present harbour of Black Rock, where it anchored until it was in readiness to sail as the first vessel on the lakes. CATHOLIC SETTLERS After Denonville had destroyed the Seneca towns in 1687, he sent a detachment of his army to establish a fort at the mouth of the Niagara River. A garrison of one hundred men was left there with a chaplain. Many died the following winter, and the fort was abandoned. It was reoccupied in 1726, and from that date regular services were held in the chapel until 1759, when the fort capitulated to the English. Soon after the Revolutionary War the Government began building military roads, and the State legislature made appropriations for building highways, and these offered intending settlers better facilities for proceeding farther inland. There was a highway through the State before 1820, reaching to Lake Erie. Buffalo and Erie County offered advantages to intending settlers, and about 1820 many Alsatians located in the vicinity. Many of these were Catholics, but they had no priest, and they could only keep alive the religious spirit by family devotions. The Rev. Patrick Kelly, ordained by Bishop Connolly of New York in 1821, was sent to minister to the Catholics of the western part of the State. He visited Buffalo the same year, and held one public service in a little frame building on Pearl Street. The Rev. Stephen Badin was the first priest to remain any length of time in Buffalo. His field of labour was Kentucky, but sickness compelled him to seek rest. He visited Buffalo for six weeks as the guest of Louis Le Couteulx, who then lived at the corner of Main and Exchange Streets. Here he said Mass for the Catholics of the town; and he urged them to organize and form a congregation. Mr. Le Couteulx started the good work by donating a site for church, cemetery, and priest's residence, at the corner of Main and Edward Streets. The deed was sent to Bishop Dubois as a New Year's gift in January, 1829. Bishop Dubois visited Buffalo the same year and concluded that the number of Catholics in the vicinity required the attention of a resident priest, so the Rev. John Nicholas Mertz was sent as the first pastor of Buffalo. On this occasion Bishop Dubois sang a solemn high Mass in the court-house; and in the afternoon a procession composed of different nationalities marched from the court-house to the site for the new church where the ground was blessed by the bishop. father Mertz rented a little frame building on Pearl Street, back of the old Eagle tavern; and here he held services until the "Lamb of God", a rough timber church, was erected on the property at Main and Edward Streets. The corner stone of this first church of the diocese was laid 8 July, 1831, but the church was not opened for services until the following year. In the next five years congregations were formed at Lancaster, Williamsville, Nor Bush, East Eden, and Lockport. Father Mertz, with his assistant, the Rev. Alexander Pax, looked after the spiritual interests of the Catholics of the first four places, and the Rev. Bernard O'Reilly of Rochester attended the Catholics of Lockport. Buffalo grew quickly after becoming a city. The church on Main Street was too small for the rapidly increasing numbers. The English-speaking members withdrew from the church in 1837 and formed a separate congregation, renting the second floor of a building at the corner of Main Street and the Terrace; where the Rev. Charles Smith said Mass for them once a month. Father Smith was employed on the other Sundays at Java, or in looking after the spiritual well-being of the Catholics employed in the construction of the Genesee Valley Canal. Soon afterwards property was bought at the corner of Ellicott and Batavia Streets, for a church for the English-speaking Catholics of the city. The Rev. John N. Neumann, who was afterwards Bishop of Philadelphia, and who has been proposed for canonization went to Buffalo in July, 1836, and laboured zealously for four years in the missions of the Erie County and vicinity. The missionary then had few of the comforts and conveniences of the present day and Father Neumann was often compelled to tramp many miles over rough roads, or through the forest, carrying his vestments on his back, to say Mass or to administer to the sick. The Rev. Bernard O'Reilly of Rochester, who was afterwards Bishop of Hartford, also did effective work among those engaged in building the Erie Canal and in constructing the locks at Lockport. The Rev. Thomas McEvoy of Java attended to the spiritual wants of the Catholics of three or four counties. He resided at Java, and from this place he frequently visited clusters of Catholics in Allegany, Wyoming, Steuben, and Chautauqua counties. Among the lay people Louis Le Couteulx was the greatest benefactor of the incipient church in Buffalo. He located at Buffalo in 1803, and it was at his house, corner of Main and Exchange Streets, that the Catholics were first assembled and were urged to form a congregation. Besides donating the site for the first church, he also gave the land for the Deaf Mute Institute, the Infant Asylum, the Immaculate Conception church, and the Buffalo Orphan asylum. Other lay people of that period and later prominent in church work were: Patrick Milton, Maurice Vaughn, Patrick Cannon, John Connolly, Mrs. O'Rourke, Mrs. Rowen, Mrs. Kimmit, and Messrs. Ambrose, Feldman, Fisher, Steffan, Dingens, Lautz, Paul, Diebold, Gittere, Pfohl, Wechter, Doll, Smith, Miller, Hager, Guinther, Vogt, Davis, John Straus, Gerhard Lang, and their families. The Very Rev. John Timon, a Visitor General of the Congregation of the Mission (Vincentians) was consecrated first Bishop of Buffalo in the cathedral in New York, 17 October, 1847, by Bishop Hughes. The new bishop appointed the Rev. Bernard O'Reilly, pastor of St. Patrick's church, Rochester, his vicar-general, and began a retreat for his priests; then he gave missions for his people in the sixteen churches of the diocese. Many of these were plain frame structures, without architectural ornament, and many of them had no altar except a table or some rough timber fitted up for the purpose. In many cases services were held in rented buildings, especially where public works attracted large numbers of men but gave no promise of permanent settlement. Such was the case along the Erie Canal and the Genesee Valley Canal, where services were held in the largest workmen's shanty, or in the nearest town hall. Men engaged in these public works were attracted by the fertility of the soil or the advantages of localities, and sent for their families and friends, and established homes in the western part of the State along the lines of public traffic. Thus little Catholic settlements were formed, and incipient congregations were organized. The first Catholic congregations were made up of settlers from the East or immigrants from Europe. SCARCITY OF PRIESTS The growth of the Church, before the advent of the bishop to the western part of the State, was entirely from immigration. Many were lost to the Church during this period because they had settled in remote localities, and priests were scarce. Nearly all the priests who laboured in Western New York during this period were from Europe, and some were not permanently attached to the diocese. The small number of priests could not visit regularly the many small settlements in that extensive territory, and many Catholics would not see a priest for months, or even years. Under such conditions it was but natural that some should fall away. Before there was a resident priest at Buffalo people journeyed all the way to Albany to have their children baptized, others took their children to Monroe, Michigan, where there was a resident priest. When young people decided to get married, two or three of the respectable old people of the community were called in as witnesses; troth was plighted, and the couple became man and wife, with the understanding that as soon as a priest came the blessing of the Church would be invoked upon the marriage. A journey to Albany in those days was a difficult undertaking. It meant many days travel through the forest, on horseback, by stage-coach, or rough wagons. When the Erie Canal was built, part of the journey could be made by packet boat; but as a rule people postponed the reception of the sacraments until some priest went through this region on his way to the Catholic settlements of the West, or in transit between the East and Montreal or Quebec. Priests were scarce for some years after Buffalo was made a diocese; and one of bishop Timon's first labours was directed to the establishment of colleges and seminaries for the education of youth. He induced the Oblates, the Franciscans, and the Jesuits to send communities to found colleges, and to assist in the formation of parishes. The Oblate Fathers in August, 1851, started a seminary and college in a brick building, which was located on the site of the present cathedral rectory. This institution was later transferred to Prospect Hill, on the site of the present Holy Angels church property. The Franciscans in 1855 located at Ellicottville, but shortly after moved to Allegany. The Jesuits started the present St. Michael's Church and Canisius College (1851). After the advent of Bishop Timon fallen-away Catholics began to return to the Church, and many non-Catholics embraced the Faith. His missions and his lectures in all the towns of the diocese awakened an interest in Catholic teaching and practice; and from three to five hundred new members were added to the Church each year through the conversion of non-Catholics. Much of the prejudice also, which existed in some localities, was dispelled by the diffusion of knowledge of the Church. BISHOPS OF THE SEE (1) Bishop Timon died 16 April, 1867. He was born 12 February, 1797, at Conewago, Pennsylvania, and ordained at St. Louis, Missouri, in June, 1825. For a long time he was a missionary in Texas and in April, 1840, was named Prefect Apostolic there but refused the office. (2) The Very Rev. Stephen Vincent Ryan who, like his predecessor, was a Visitor General of the Congregation of the Mission, was appointed to succeed him as Bishop of Buffalo and was consecrated 8 November, 1868. Bishop Ryan was born 1 January, 1825, at Almonte, Ontario, Upper Canada. Distinguished for his piety, zeal, and learning, he continued the great work of Bishop Timon. He died 10 April, 1896. (3) The Rev. James E. Quigley, D.D., his successor, was consecrated 24 February, 1897. Bishop Quigley's condemnation of the attempt of the Socialists to identify their doctrines with the principles of labour unionism, and thus wean men from their allegiance to the Church, gained for him a national reputation. He was promoted to the vacant archbishopric of Chicago, 19 February, 1903. (4) The Rev. Charles H. Colton of New York, was next appointed to the see and consecrated in St. Patrick's Cathedral, New York, 24 August, 1903. STATISTICS There are 264 priests in the diocese; 168 secular, 96 of religious orders; 142 churches with resident priests, 32 mission churches, and 16 chapels; 54 Brothers and 1,085 Sisters of religious orders, teaching 94 parochial schools, with 27,787 pupils. There is one university, Niagara, under the Lazarist Fathers; five colleges for boys with 952 students; and two seminaries for secular clergy, and one for religious, with 181 students. The seminary at Niagara is conducted by the Lazarists; that at Allegany, by the Franciscans. The preparatory seminaries are the college departments at Niagara and at Allegany, and the colleges of Canisius, Holy Angels, and the Christian Brothers. The Oblates have a seminary in Buffalo for candidates for their order, and the Passionists have one in Dunkirk for their students. There are 159 students in the large seminaries, 81 in the preparatory, and 200 students in the university. There are eight academies for young ladies, with 1,200 students. St. John's Protectory for homeless, or wayward boys, founded in 1861, accommodates about 600 boys, who are taught some trade, along with the elementary branches of education. A Deaf Mute Institute, started in Buffalo in 1856, is now an important institution, under the charge of the Sisters of St. Joseph, with 166 pupils. In 1861 Bishop Timon secured the sisters of St. Francis to care for the aged; these sisters now have three houses: one in Buffalo, one in Gardenville and one in Williamsville, with 600 inmates. The Sisters of the Good Shepherd in 1855 started a refuge for wayward girls and fallen women. They care for 150 inmates and 75 children. In 1888 the Rev. Daniel Walsh established the Working Boys Home, in which 80 boys and young men now find a comfortable home. In 1906 Bishop Colton established the St. Charles's Home for Working Girls, under the Sisters of Mercy. Bishop Quigley founded two mission houses for poor children, the Angel guardian Mission and the St. James's Mission. In June, 1848, Bishop Timon secured a community of Sisters of Charity and placed them in the orphan asylum, which now has 250 orphans, and a large number of young girls employed in a technical school. There is a German orphan asylum in Buffalo, incorporated in 1874, in which there are 370 orphans, under the Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis. The Polish orphan asylum at Doyle, under the care of the Felician Sisters of St. Francis, has 186 inmates. The Sisters of St. Joseph have the Orphan Asylum at Dunkirk with 88 orphans; and the Sisters of Charity direct an infant asylum in Buffalo, where 185 infant children can be accommodated, with 60 patients in the maternity hospital. The Sisters of Charity hospital accommodates 250 patients. Their emergency hospital treats 1,200 patients a year. The sisters of Mercy at the Mercy Hospital accommodate about 40 patients. Estimated Catholic population 200,000. THOMAS DONOHUE Claude Buffier Claude Buffier A philosopher, and author, born in Poland, of French parents, 25 May, 1661; died in Paris, 17 May, 1737. He received his early education at the Jesuit College in Rouen and entered the Society of Jesus in 1679. After teaching literature in Paris, he returned to Rouen to take a chair of theology. Mgr. Colbert, archbishop of that city issued a pastoral recommending to his clergy certain books of Gallican and Jansenistic tendencies. Buffier attacked the pastoral in a pamphlet and having refused to make a retractation journeyed, with the leave of his superiors, to Rome to lay his case before the congregations. Where he easily justified himself and returning to Paris was connected from 1701 to 1731, with the "Journal de Trévoux." He published works on history, asceticism, biography, education, literature, and especially on philosophy. He was not, as is often asserted, a disciple of Descartes, for he rejects altogether methodic doubt and follows in general the scholastics. The Encyclopedists, according to Tabaraud, inserted in their publications, without due credit, entire pages from his books, and Reid, the Scottish metaphysician, acknowledges his great indebtedness to Buffier. His chief works are: a Life of Count Louis de Sales, brother of the saint (Paris, 1708); "Pratique de la mémoire artificielle" (Paris, 1701) often reprinted; Grammaire française sur un plan nouveau (Paris, 1732), in many editions and translations; "Exposition des preuves les plus sensibles de la Vraie Religion" (Paris, 1732); and "Cours des sciences" (Paris, 1722). WALTER DWIGHT Louis Buglio Louis Buglio A celebrated missionary in China, mathematician, and theologian, born at Mineo, Sicily, 26 January, 1606; died at Peking, 7 October, 1682. He entered the Society of Jesus, 29 January, 1622, and, after a brilliant career as a professor of the humanities and rhetoric in the Roman College, asked to be sent to the Chinese mission. With great zeal and success Father Buglio preached the Gospel in the provinces of Su-Tchuen, Fu-kien, and Kiang-si. He suffered severely for the faith in the persecution which was carried on during the minority of the Emperor Kang-hi. Taken prisoner by one of the victorious Tartar chiefs, he was brought to Peking in 1648. Here, after a short captivity, he was left free to exercise his ministry. Father Buglio collaborated with Fathers Adam Schall, Verbiest, and Magalhaens in reforming the Chinese calendar, and shared with them the confidence and esteem of the emperor. At his death he was given a state funeral. Thoroughly acquainted with the Chinese language, Father Buglio both spoke and wrote it fluently. A list of his works in Chinese, more than eighty volumes, written for the most part to explain and defend the Christian religion, is given in Sommervogel. Besides Parts I and III of the "Summa" of St. Thomas, he translated into Chinese the Roman Missal (Peking, 1670) the Breviary and the Ritual (ibid, 1674 and 1675). These translations require a special notice, as they were part of a project which, from the beginning of their apostolate in China, the Jesuit missionaries were anxious to carry out. Their purpose was not merely to form a native clergy, but, in order to accomplish this more easily, to introduce a special liturgy in the Chinese tongue, for the use at least of native priests. This plan was approved by Paul V, who, 26 March 1615, granted to regularly ordained Chinese priests the faculty of using their own language in the liturgy and administrations of the sacraments. This faculty was never used. Father Philip Couplet, in 1681, tried to obtain a renewal of it from Rome, but was not successful. Acta SS., XIII, 123. Diss. xlviii; Sommervogel, Biblotheque de la c. de J., II, 363; Cordier, Bibliotheca Sinica (Paris, 1881), I, 514; Menologe S.J.: Assistance d'Italie JOSEPH M. WOODS Bernardo Buil Bernado Buil (Also Boil or Boyal.) A Friar Minor. The fact that there were two religious of the name of Bernardo Boil living in Spain at the same time has given rise to much confusion and even to the opinion that they were not two distinct persons, but that the same individual was at one time a member of the Franciscan order, and later became a Benedictine. It seems however, more probable to assert that Bernardo Boil, the Franciscan, was a different person from Bernardo Boyl, the Benedictine. It was to the former that Alexander Vl addressed his Bull dated 25 June, 1493, appointing him first vicar Apostolic of the New World. This appears to be certain, first of all from the opening words "Dilecto filio Bernardo Boil, fratri Ordinis Minorum", etc. of the Bull itself, a part of which is reproduced in the first volume of THE CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA. In the second place, the concluding words of the Bull, where reference is made to the prohibition of Boniface VIII concerning members of mendicant orders taking new domiciles without permission from the Holy See, seem clearly to indicate that the papal rescript was intended for Boil, the Franciscan, and not for his namesake the Benedictine. It is a matter of fact, however, that Bernardo Boyl, 0.S.B., became first vicar Apostolic of the New World. This was due to the intrigues of King Ferdinand of Spain who employed Boyl, the Benedictine, to great advantage in several important diplomatic negotiations and had sought his appointment as vicar Apostolic in America. When the papal Bull arrived in Spain, ignoring the king's choice, and nominating a Franciscan of the same name with the trifling difference of the i and y, which letters were pronounced alike, the only exception being in the order to which the respective priests belonged, it became convenient to conclude that a mistake had been made in Rome--which interpretation Ferdinand found expedient to favour his own ends and views. A false copy of the Bull was therefore made with the necessary changes and delivered to Boyl, the Benedictine, while appointmg Boil, the Franciscan. In time this latter document disappeared so completely that no trace of it could be found in the Spanish archieves. A copy, however, was carefully preserved in the Vatican library and was brought to light by the researches of the historian Roselly. Bernado Boil, O.F.M., never knew of the high dignity which Alexander VI had conferred upon him. It is certain he did not leave Spain; yet he was de jure the true, legistimate, and first vicar Apostolic of the New World . As regards Bernardo Boyl, O.S.B., it is a matter of history that his labours were without fruit, and the only record of his official action in America is the fulmination of censures. STEPHEN M. DONOVAN Ecclesiastical Buildings Ecclesiastical Buildings This term comprehends all constructions erected for the celebration of liturgical acts, whatever be the name given to them:-- church, chapel, oratory, basilica, etc. The subject will be treated under the following heads: I. History II. Division III. Erection IV. Repair and Maintenance V. Consecration and Blessing VI. Immunity VII. Church Fabric I. HISTORY In the earliest days of the Christian religion, there were no buildings specially consecrated to Eucharistic worship; the assemblies for liturgical service were held in private houses (Acts, ii, 46; Rom., xvi, 5; I Cor., xvi, 15; Col., iv, 15; Philemon, 2). The assemblies which the first Christians held in the Temple of Jerusalem, in the synagogues or even in hired halls, were assemblies for instruction or for prayer (Acts, v, 12-13; xvii, 1-2; xix, 9). At the end of the second century and even later, during the period of persecution, assemblies for Christian worship were still held in private houses. During this epoch, however, we begin to hear of the domus ecclesiae (the house of the Church), an edifice used for all the services of the Christian community, in which one apartment was specially set apart for Divine worship. At an early date this apartment took on a special importance. During the third century the other parts of the building were detached from it and the domus ecclesiae became the Domus Dei (the house of God) known also as the Dominicum or the kyriakon oikon (Duchesne, Origines du culte chrétien, 399-400, Paris, 1902; Wieland, Mensa und Confessio: Studien uber den Altar der altchristlichen Liturgie, Munich, 1906, I, 27-35, 68-73). All such churches were situated in towns, and the inhabitants of the rural districts came thither on the Lord's Day, in order to assist at the Eucharistic Sacrifice; in large cities, like Rome, Alexandria, and Carthage, there are several churches, but they did not constitute separate parishes (Duchesne, 400; Wieland, 73-76). They depended upon the cathedral church, in which was established the see (sedes), or the chair (cathedra) of the bishop. There were, however, since the second century, outside the cities, mortuary churches attached to the Christian cemeteries. Here were celebrated the funeral rites, also the anniversary commemorations of the departed, but not the ordinary offices of Divine worship. Sanctuaries were also erected over the sepulchres of the martyrs, and popular devotion brought thither a large concourse of people, not only for the celebration of the anniversary, but at other times as well. The necessity of providing accommodation for these gatherings, as well as the desire to honour the saint, led to the construction of buildings, sometimes large and richly adorned. These churches multiplied when the people began to accord to any relic whatever, to a piece of cloth stained with his blood, to a phial of oil drawn from the lamp that burned constantly before his sepulchre, etc., the veneration at first given only to his burial place. These were the churches of "relics". They prevailed finally to such an extent that today every church must have relics in each of its altars (Duchesne, 402-403). It is almost universally recognized at the present day that only on exceptional occasions did the catacombs serve for ordinary worship even during the times of persecution. They were used solely for funeral services and for the celebration of the festivals of martyrs (Wieland, 81-100). That churches existed in rural districts as early as the fourth century is undeniable. Priests went thither periodically to administer the sacraments. In the fifth century, however, on account of the increase in the number of the faithful, it became necessary to station resident priests in such districts. This was the origin of parish churches, which were established by the bishops in the most populous districts, the vici, and were known as ecclesiae rusticanae, parochitanae, diocesanae, diocesis, parochia, ecclesiae baptismates, because in these churches only could the Sacrament of Baptism be administered; they were also termed tituli majores to distinguish them from the private churches, or tituli minores (Imbart de la Tour, Les paroisses rurales du IVe au XIIe siècle, Paris, 1900). In addition to these churches of the vici, the owners of the villae or great estates founded churches for their own use and for that of the persons connected with their establishments. Such churches could not be used for Divine worship without the consent of the local bishop, who was wont to exact from the proprietor a renunciation of all rights of possession. The ecclesiastical authority, however, was not long able to resist the proprietors, who from the seventh and eighth centuries retained the proprietary right over the churches they had built. These were called oratoria, basilicae, martyria, or tituli minores, and were in no respect parish churches, because in them baptism could not be administered; moreover, on certain solemn days, the faithful were obliged to assist at Mass in the parish church. Neither did these churches receive any tithes. From the Carlovingian period, however, such private churches gradually became parish-churches. Some authors contend that from that epoch all churches became the private property of the laity, or of convents, or bishops. The ecclesiastical reforms of the eleventh and twelfth centuries brought this condition of things to all end. The Second Lateran Council (1139) commanded all laymen, under pain of excommunication, to resign to the bishops the churches in their possession. (Mansi, "Coll. Conc." XXI, 529-532; Stutz, "Geschichte des kirchl. Benefizialwesens", Berlin, 1895, I; Hinschius, "System des kath. Kirchenrechts", Berlin, 1878, II, 262-269, 277- 281; Imbart de la Tour, op. cit.) Even within the parishes, for the benefit of the faithful, there were established at various times, chapels which did not enjoy the prerogatives of parish churches, and were more or less dependent upon the latter (Von Scherer, Handbuch des Kirehenrechtes, Graz, 1898, II, 627). In addition to churches specially intended for the use of the faithful, others known as oratories were erected in the monasteries; they acquired a greater importance when the majority of the monks were ordained priests, still more when the exclusive privileges of the parish churches suffered diminution. Such oratories were also common in beneficent and charitable institutions. The medieval corporations (guilds) which were also religious confraternities, had sometimes their own special chapels (Viollet, Histoire des institutions politiques de la France, Paris, 1903, III,143-176). II. DIVISION Ecclesiastical buildings are usually divided into four classes: + churches properly so called, + public oratories, + private oratories, and + semi-public oratories. This division was confirmed by the Congregation of Rites, 23 January, 1899 (Decreta authent. Congreg sacr. Rit. no. 4007, Rome, 1900). Churches are edifices set apart in perpetuity for the public exercise of Divine worship; such are basilicas, primatial, metropolitan, cathedral, collegiate and parish churches, and lastly the conventual churches of regulars, properly so called. Public oratories are buildings of less importance, definitely given over to Divine worship, and accessible to the public, whether the entrance itself be upon the public road or upon a passage-way leading to the latter. A private oratory is one established in favour of a particular family or even of a single individual. Finally, a semi-public oratory is established for the benefit of a number of people; such is the chapel of a seminary, a college, a congregation of simple vows, a hospital, a prison, etc. With these may be classed the chapels of cardinals and of bishops. III. ERECTION Basilicas, cathedrals, collegiate churches, and private oratories, may be erected only with the consent of the Holy See; other churches or oratories with the consent of the bishop. Nevertheless the authorization given by a bishop to a religious order of solemn vows to establish a monastery in his diocese involves, unless there is a stipulation to the contrary, the right to construct a monastic church. On the other hand all provincial superiors of religious orders have the power to open semi-public oratories for the use of their religious, and that without the authorization of the bishop (Bull of Gregory XIII, "Decet Romanum", 3 May, 1575, granted to the Society of Jesus and applicable likewise to all religious orders in virtue of the communication of privileges. Cf. Vermeersch, De religiosis institutis et personis, Bruges, 1902, I, 316). For the erection of a private oratory, even by religious, the authorization of the pope is necessary (C.S.R.,10 November, 1906; "Canoniste Contemporain", 1907, XXX, 109, 110). Congregations of simple vows may have but one semi-public or public oratory, with the authorization of the bishop. If they wish to erect several for the convenience of priests or of the infirm, it is necessary to obtain the consent of the Holy see (C.S.R. 8 March, 1879, Decreta, no. 3484). The erection of every church on the other hand must be justified by its necessity, or by its use; it must not in any way prejudice the rights of churches already established (c. iii, "De ecclesiis aedificandis vel reparandis", X, III, xlviii, c. i, ii, iv, "De novi operis nuntiatione", X, V, xxxii; Friedberg, "Corpus juris canonici", Leipzig, 1881, II, 652, 843). The church should also be sufficiently endowed (c. viii, "De consecratione ecclesiae vel altaris", X, III, xl; Friedberg, II, 634). Practically it is sufficient that the church have at its disposal, e.g. through the gifts of the faithful, the revenues necessary for the maintenance of the building, the celebration of Divine service, and the support of its ministers (Bargilliat, Praelect. jur. can., Paris, 1900, II, 331). In certain countries the consent of the civil power is also needed. The building of a church cannot be begun before the bishop or his delegate has approved of the site, placed a cross there, and blessed the first stone (Pontificate Romanum, Pars II, De benedict. et imposit. prim. lapid. pro eccl. aedif.). The bishop can also reserve to himself the approval of the plans and conditions according to which the church is to be constructed (Wernz, Jus Decretal., Rome, 1901, III, 432, 433. To avoid useless expenditure and to prevent the parish priest from improvidently contracting debts, the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore enacted as a preliminary condition for the construction of a church, the consent of the bishop in writing (Acta et decreta Concilii Plenarii Baltimorensis, III, no. 279). The bishop has power to apply to the construction of his cathedral a part of the revenues, which in certain countries are annually assigned to him from the revenues of the different churches; the cathedral church being the ecclesia matrix, or mother-church of all those of the diocese, its construction is a work which interests the whole diocese (the Eighth Provincial, the Second Plenary, Councils of Baltimore, 1855 and 1866, and the Second Provincial Council of Australia, 1869; "Collectio Lacensis", Freiburg, 1875, III, 162, 429, 1078; also 200-202, 242, 1085). The bishop can even levy a subsidium charitativum for this purpose, i.e a moderate tax upon the revenues of the churches and on those priests who enjoy ecclesiastical benefices. In default of other resources the usual means is to collect money for this object, or to ask the priests of the diocese for voluntary contributions. IV. REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE Originally the repairs of the churches were incumbent upon the bishops, as administrators of all ecclesiastical goods. When, according to ancient custom, these goods were divided into four parts, one part was assigined to the Fabrica (see below) i.e. to the church building and its maintenance. Later, each church had its own patrimony, and one part of its goods was assigned to its maintenance. This charge was also incumbent upon the holders of the goods and revenues of the church. The Decretals sanctioned this obligation, at the same time they urged the people to help defray the expenses (c. i. iv, "De ecclesii aedificandis", X, II, xlviii; Friedberg, II. 652, 653). Finally the Council of Trent (Sess. XXI, De ref. c. vii) located more exactly the obligation to repair the parish churches (Permander, Die kirchliche Baulast, Munich, 1890, 1-18). By present ecclesiastical legislation the repairs of the church belong especially to the fabric, which must use the funds appropriated for that special purpose and if need be, its superfluous revenues (c. vi, "De ecclesiis aedificandis"; Friedberg, II, 654; Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, De ref. c. vii). These resources failing, the persons who possess the right of patronage over the church intervene if they wish to preserve their privileges (Canones et decreta conc. Trid. ed. Schulte and Richter, Leipzig, 1853, 121, no. 4). This obligation rests also on all persons who enjoy part of the revenues of the church the tithe-owners, whether laymen or ecclesiastics, seculars or regulars, the parish priest, and all those who enjoy a benefice from the church. The parishioners themselves are bound to provide for the maintenance of the church, each according to his means. In practice collections should be made for this object. These same principles apply to cathedral churches; in case the revenues of the church are insufficient, the bishop, the chapter, the clergy of the cathedral, and the inhabitants of the diocese ought to contribute for its support (Sägmüller, Lehrbuch des kathol. Kirchenrechts, Freiburg, 1900-04, 798, 799). For the support of his cathedral, as for its erection, the bishop can ask from his clergy a special aid or subsidium charitativum. Wherever these rules have been abrogated by other customs, the latter should be followed. In case of fire, the insurance might cover the damage. Hence special laws may make obligatory the insurance of churches (Acta et Decreta Concilii Baltimorensis III, no. 283). Chapels or churches belonging to congregations of regulars or to particular establishments, ought to be maintained at the expense of these establishments. It sometimes happens that the civil power contributes to the support of churches, as well as to their construction. In reality such co-operation is often only a restitution of ecclesiastical property or revenues misappropriated by the civil government. V. CONSECRATION AND BLESSING Churches and oratories cannot be used for liturgical functions, without having first been consecrated or at least blessed. Cathedral and parish churches ought to be consecrated. However, in case of necessity they may be provisionally blessed (Rit. Rom., tit. viii, c. xxvii). Public oratories and other churches may be consecrated, though this is not necessary. They ought, however, to receive a solemn benediction. Private oratories, on the other hand, cannot receive such benediction; it is fitting, however, that the benedictio loci be given to them (op. cit. c. vi.) Some hold that semi-public oratories which in exterior appearance resemble churches or chapels, and which are definitely destined for Divine worship, may be solemnly consecrated (C.S.R., 7 August, 1875, 5 June, 1899; Decreta, nos. 3364, 4025). The custom of dedicating churches to the worship of God by a solemn ceremony is very ancient. In his Ecclesiastical History (X, iii, iv) Eusebius describes the dedication, in 314, of the church erected by Constantine at Tyre, at which time, however, there was no special rite for that purpose. At Rome in the sixth century, the dedication consisted in the public celebration of a solemn Mass, and if it was a church which was to contain relics, these latter were brought to the church in solemn procession. It seems that at the same period, there existed a special rite of consecration in Gaul. In their brief outlines, the present ceremonies are derived from a combination of the rites used in France and in Rome, a combination which had already been made before the beginning of the eighth century (Duchesne, op. cit., 403-418). The consecration or dedication is performed according to the rite prescribed in the "Pontificale Romanum" (De ecclesiae dedicatione seu consecratione) by the bishop, or by a priest delegated for that office by the Holy See. The essential rite of this dedication consisting in the anointing of the twelve crosses upon the walls with holy chrism, and the recitation of the words Sanctificetur, etc. (Wernz, III, 437). It is not permitted to consecrate a church without at the same time consecrating the high altar, or, if this has already been consecrating another fixed altar. If all the altars have been consecrated, it will be necessary to ask the authorization of the Holy See. Without the consecration, however, of an altar, the consecration of the church will not be invalid (C.S.R., 12 August, 1854; 3 March, 1866, 19 May 1896, Decreta, nos. 3025, 3142, 3907). When the public authorities forbid the performance of the prescribed ceremonies outside the church, a pontifical indult must be obtained, except in case of necessity; such ceremonies must then be performed in the sacristy or some other dependency of the church (C.S.R., 22 February, 1888; Decreta, no. 3687). A church built of wood cannot be consecrated (C. S. R., 11 April, 1902; "Canoniste contemporain", 1902, XXV, 495). The vigil of the day of consecration is a fast-day of obligation for the bishop and for those who have asked for the consecration of the church (C.S.R., 29 July, 1780, 12 September, 1840; Decreta nos. 2519, 2821; Reply of the Holy Office, 14 December, 1898; "Acta Sanctae Sedis", 1898-99, XXXI, 533). The feast of the dedication must be celebrated every year on the anniversary day of the consecration. The Bishop may, if he chooses, fix another day; but this he should on the very day on which he consecrates the church (C.S.R. 19 September, 1665, 23 May, 1834; Decreta, nos 1321, 2719). While this feast should be celebrated by all the clergy connected with the consecrated church, the anniversary of the dedication of the cathedral ought to be celebrated by all the secular clergy of the diocese, and by all the regulars all the episcopal city (C.S.R., 12 September 1884, 9 July, 1895; Decreta, nos. 3622, 3863). If the exact date of the anniversary is unknown, the most probable date should be chosen until such time as the date can be determined with certainty (C.S.R. 14 June, 1608, 13 March, 1649; Decreta, nos. 261, 920). The bishop may fix a day if the right one be completely unknown (C.S.R., 18 August, 1629; 3 March, 1674; 27 November, 1706; 12 March, 1735; Decreta, nos. 511, 1498, 2174, 2313). The Holy See sometimes permits the celebration of the anniversary of the dedication of the cathedral church and of all the churches of the diocese on the same day. All the clergy of the diocese are then bound to celebrate this festival (C.S.R., 29 November, 1878; Decreta, no. 3469). The solemn benediction is a rite inferior to consecration. It is performed by a priest delegated by the bishop for that purpose (Rit. Rom. tit. viii, c. xxvii). It consists in the sprinkling of the upper and lower parts of the walls of the church with holy water, and in the prayers which accompany this action (Wernz, III, 437). A new consecration or benediction of a church or oratory ought to be made in the case of execration or desecration, that is to say, when the building has lost its consecration or benediction. This is the case when eccleciastical buildings have been definitely put to profane uses (Council of Trent, Sess. XXI, De ref. c. vii.); similarly, in accordance with modern discipline, if almost the entire church or a large portion of the walls have been destroyed or renewed (C.S.R., 14 September, 1875; Decreta, no. 3372). Successive alterations and repairs, however, even though considerable, as also the renewal of the roof, are not to be regarded as execration (C.S.R., 31 August, 1872, Decreta, no. 3269). The consecration affects the entire building, but especially the walls; the removal, therefore, of the anointed crosses or even of the interior plastering (intonaco) of the walls, does not necessitate a new consecration (C.S.R., 13 July, 1883; 19 May, 1896; Decreta, nos. 3584, 3907). The same principles are applicable to churches that have been solemnly blessed this benediction affects the walls rather than the pavement of the church. If, however, the belief was that the benediction attached itself to the pavement the mere destruction of the walls would not have the effect of producing the execration of the church (Wernz, III, 441 442). Widely different from desecration is the pollutio of a church. This is a defilement of the church which prevents the celebration of the Divine offices until the church has been reconciled or purified. The priest is bound to interrupt the celebration of Mass, if the church in which he is celebrating is polluted before he has commenced the Canon (Missale Romanum, De defectibus in celebratione missarum occurrentibus, X). A church is polluted by every kind of homicide even by a case of capital punishment, or by voluntary suicide committed in the church, but the wound must have been inflicted within the church and, according to some authors, death must have taken place there. A church is likewise polluted when a considerable quantity of blood has been wilfully and culpably spilled within it, or when the effusio seminis humani has taken place, wilfully and in a seriously culpable manner (c. iv, x, De consecratione ecclesiae, X, III xi; Fridberg, II, 634- 635). In like manner also a church is polluted by the burial within it of an infidel, or of a person who has been excommunicated (excommunicatus vitandus) (c. vii, loc. cit.; Bargilliat, II, 343-344), not, however, by the burial of catechumens, and perhaps not by that of unbaptized infants born of baptized parents (C.S.R., 23 April, 1875; Decreta, no 3344). It is important to remark that the reconciliation must be performed only when the pollution has been public. A church that has been solemnly blessed can be reconciled by a priest, according to the ceremonies prescribed in the "Rituale Romanum" (tit. viii, c. xxviii). Many authors, however, affirm that the priest should be delegated by the bishop and the Congregation of Rites has given a decision to the same effect (8 July, 1904, Canoniste Contemporain, 1904, XXIV, 683). A church that has been consecrated can be reconciled only by the bishop, or by a priest delegated by the Holy See, and with water blessed by the bishop. This privilege as has been granted to exempt religious (Bull of Leo X, "Religionis", 3 February, 1514). The Propaganda grants to bishops in missionary countries the power to delegate to priests the right to reconcile a consecrated church, but the water employed must be blessed by the bishop or, in case of necessity, by a priest (Bargilliat, II, 345, Putzer-Konings, "Commentarium in facultates apostolicas", New York, 1898, 215-217). Sometimes the reconciliation is performed ad cautelam as for instance when a church has been occupied by soldiers for two days (C.S.R., 27 February, 1847; Decreta, no. 2908). This legislation does not refer to oratories which have received only the benedictio loci. VI. IMMUNITY Churches enjoy by ecclesiastical law the same immunity from secular burdens and as all ecclesiastical property. The state may not burden them with taxes (Council of Trent, Sess XXV, De ref. c. xx; Syllabus nos. 30, 32). In many states the law recognize this privilege for parish and cathedral churches. Such immunity is very ancient and dates from the Christian emperors of the fourth century (O. Grashof, in Archiv f. kath Kirchenrecht, 1876, XXXV, 3 sqq., 193 sqq.) On the other hand, every irreverence within a church or public oratory is a sacrilege, such as the theft of an article even though it does not belong to the church or an article that has been consecrated (Decretum Gratiani P. II, c xvii, q. 4, c. xxi; Friedberg, I, 820). Such also are the sins of the flesh (Lehmkuhl, Theologia moralis, Freiburg, 1898, I, 238, 239). The reverence due to the holy place forbids all profane actions. Therefore, the following actions are forbidden in a church: trials not falling within ecclesiastical jurisdiction, trading; games, plays and secular songs; banquets; the making of a dwelling either above or below the church; etc. In this category may be included the introduction of draperies and banners which have not been blessed by the Church (Wernz, III, 446). It belongs to the office of the bishop to specify what actions are forbidden in the churches, and to settle the controversies which may arise. The bishop is also empowered to provide for the maintenance of order and may also commit this care to a delegate, for instance, to the parish priest. In connection with this see RIGHT OF ASYLUM. VII. THE CHURCH FABRIC By the term Fabrica ecclesiae are to be understood not only the goods belonging to the Church but also the administrators of these goods. Ever since the thirteenth century the laity have been allowed to participate in this administration, and the Council of Trent did not reprove their intervention (Sess. XXII, De ref. ch. ix). The civil power also intervenes in order to regulate the administration of the property of cathedral and parish churches. The following are examples of how the fabrics are organized in certain countries. In France, Napoleon recognized fabrics of the churches, and entrusted the administration of the property of parish churches to five or nine elected members, to the parish priest, and mayor. These formed the conseil de fabrique. The elective members holding office for six years and eligible for re-election, were chosen by the council itself. These vestrymen had in hand the administration of the temporal property of the church elected from amongst their number a bureau des Marguilliers composed of three members and the parish priest, charged with the ordinary administration and execution of the decisions of the council. The bishop had the right of control over the management of the vestrymen. His approbation as well as that of the State was required for their most important undertakings. The communal authority could control the budgets and the accounts when the fabric asked the former for the necessary funds to defray the expenses of Divine worship, and for the maintenance of ecclesiastical buildings. The French Municipal Law of 5 May, 1884, ordered that the budgets and accounts should be submitted to the communal council, and freed the commune from the obligation of making up a deficit in the resources of the fabric for ordinary expenses of divine worship. The bishop had the power to organize the fabric of the cathedral church himself, but the administration of its goods was still under the control of the Government (De Champeaux, "Recueil général de droit civil eccelésiastique francais", Paris, 1860; Bargilliat, II, 110-159). This organization, modified, however, by the Constitution of 1831 and by the law of 4 March, 1874, still continues in force in Belgium (De Corswarem, Des Fabriques d'églises, Hasselt, 1904). The Law of 11 December 1905, suppressed the fabrics in France and replaced them by associations cultuelles which Pius X forbade by his Encyclical, "Gravissimo officii" (10 August, 1906; Canoniste contemporain, 1906, XXIX, 572). This law by handing over to seven, fifteen, or twenty-five persons the administration of church property, without making any mention whatever of ecclesiastical control, increases the State's power of interference in the administration of these associations and give it full power to suppress them (Jenouvrier, Expose de la situation légale de l'Eglise de France, d'apres la loi du 11 décembre, 1905, Paris, 1906). In Prussia the fabrics of the churches were organized by the law of 20 June, 1875, enacted during the Kulturkampf. In each parish (Kirchegemeinde) ecclesiastical goods are administered by a body of churchwardens termed Kirchenvorstand under the control of a parish board or Gemeindevertretung. This assembly is not, however, everywhere obligatory. The members of these assemblies are elected by all the male parishioners, who are of age and have resided for at least one year in the parish, pay the ecclesiastical tax, and have their own homes, conduct a business concern, or fill a public office. All electors over thirty years of age are eligible for office with the exception of ecclesiastics and the servants or employees of the church. No man can hold office in both these assemblies. The Kirchenvorstand is composed of members varying in number from four to ten, according to the total number of the population. Since the law of 21 May, l886 the parish priest (Pfarrer) is the president ex officio of this assembly, except in those places in which, before the law of 1875, the presidency was given to a layman. This assembly administers the temporal concerns of the church. The Gemeindevertretung includes three times as many members as the Kirchenvorstand. It is necessary that they should give their consent to the most important acts of the administration of the Kirchenvorstand: the alienations, the acquisitions, the loans, the most important works, taxes (Kirchensteuer), etc, and approve the budgets and accounts. The president of the Kirchenvorsiand, or his delegate, assists as a consultor at their meetings. All mandates remain in force for six years. The State and the ecclesiastical authority exercise supreme control over the most important actions of these fabrics (Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht, 1875 XXXIV, I67, 1876, XXXV, 161, 1886, LVI, 196, 1887, LVII, 153. In the French-speaking portion of the Dominion of Canada (Province of Quebec) fabrics also exist. Their organization still corresponds, in its main outlines, to the ancient organization of the parishes in France before the Revolution of 1789, as described by Jousse in his "Traité du gouvernement spirituel et temporel des paroisses" (Paris, 1769). There is, first of all, the Parochial Assembly (Vestry) comprising all the Francs-tenanciers of the parish; no alienation, no loan, can be concluded without their intervention. In case a subscription is necessary they raise it by assessment. The churchwardens actually in office, called marguilliers du Banc, and the former churchwardens, must pay the ordinary expenses. This is the bureau ordinaire of the ancient French law. Finally, ordinary matters of administration are attended to by a commission composed of three members chosen for three years by the old and the newly elected churchwardens. Each one of the three churchwardens is in charge for a year i.e., he performs the functions of treasurer and must render an account to the assembly. The parish priest is president of the fabric and represents the bishop. All the important accounts must be approved of by the latter (Beaudry, "Code des curés, marguilliers, et paroissiens", Montreal, 1870, Gignac, "Compendium juris canonici ad usum cleri Canadensis," Quebec, 1901; Migneault, "Droit paroissial", Montreal (1891) For other countries, see Sägmüller, "Lehrbuch des katholischen Kirchenrechts" (782, 795). In English speaking countries fabrics properly so called do not exist. In England ecclesiastical property is given in trust to reliable men. The bishops themselves regulate the administration of these goods. In Ireland the trustees are the bishop, the vicar-general, the parish priest and sometimes other reliable persons (First and Second Synod of Westminster, XIV, 4, and VIII,1-21; Provincial Synod of Maynooth, 1875, tit. xxix, nos. 270-277; Collectio Lacensis, III, 926, 980)). In the United States property is often given in trust to the bishop, and in cases where the parishes are civilly incorporated, sometimes the bishop forms the corporation sole; sometimes the administration of the property belongs to a board of trustees composed of the bishop, his vicar-general, the pastor of the church, and two lay trustees (Taunton, The Law of the Church, London, 1906, 310-317). In accordance with the Third Council of Baltimore (nos. 284-287) the bishop of each diocese judges whether or not it is wise to establish councilmen or a board of trustees; he fixes their number and the mode of their election. They are subject to the authority of the parish priest and the bishop. The relations of the State to church property, especially in English-speaking countries, will be treated in the articles: ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY; INCORPORATION; TRUSTEE SYSTEM. A. VAN HOVE Bukarest Bukarest (Bucharest; Bucarestiensis; Rumanian, Bucharesci "City of enjoyment") Comprises the Kingdom of Rumania, of which Bukarest is the capital, excluding Moldavia, and contains, according to the archdiocesan year-book for 1907, about 56,000 Catholics of the Latin Rite, 4,000 to 5,000 Uniat Rumanians, chiefly immigrants from Transylvania, Banat, and Bukowina, and a few hundred Uniat Armenians. In the city of Bukarest which in 1905 had 285,445 inhabitants there are about 202,000 Orthodox Greeks and 43,000 Jews. The city is situated in a swampy plain on both sides of the Dimbobitza which is here crossed by about a dozen bridges. It is noted for many stately edifices, and the semi-Oriental appearance of its older quarters is heightened by the numerous gardens and the bright domes of its Greek churches. The Catholic cathedral chapter consists at present of 4 canons, 1 honorary canon, and 4 honorary canons outside the diocese. There are in the archdiocese 40 priests (in addition to the archbishop), including 2 Passionists, 1 Benedictine, and 1 Dominican; 24 parishes, one of the Greek-Rumanian Rite; 45 churches including 23 parish churches. The training of the clergy is provided for in the archiepiscopal seminary at Bukarest, which has four professors and nineteen seminarists; six seminarists are being trained outside the diocese. The opposition of the Rumanian Government has hitherto rendered the establishment of a Catholic college impossible. Catholic primary schools exist in all parishes. In the city of Bukarest are twenty-six Brothers of the Christian Schools who conduct three schools, with an attendance of 1,028. The English Ladies, numbering about 252, have two houses in Bukarest, one each in Braïla, Craiova, and Turnu Severin, and conduct five boarding schools with 705 pupils, eight primary schools for girls with an attendance of 1,493, and one orphanage with 20 children. The Dames de Sion have one foundation in Bukarest, with thirty-seven sisters and conduct a boarding school with an attendance of 133; the Sisters of Mercy one foundation with four sisters. The Hungarians have established nine Catholic schools (two in Bukarest), attended by about 945 children. In addition to the above-mentioned orders, the Passionists have one house with four members. The most important churches are: the cathedral, dedicated to St. Joseph, a three-naved Gothic edifice, the largest Catholic church in the country, which was completed in 1884; and the Baratsia, an early church of the Franciscans, destroyed by fire in 1848 and since rebuilt. HISTORY For the history of the Catholic Church in the territory now comprised within the Archdiocese of Bukarest see RUMANIA. The present archdiocese was erected by Pope Leo XIII, 27 April, 1883. Bukarest, however, had previously been the residence of Catholic bishops, viz., the Bishops of Nicopolis, Bulgaria, who were also Administrators Apostolic of Wallachia, and had resided at Rustchuk. Bishop Paulus Davanlia (1777-1804) left Rustchuk and lived at the Franciscan monastery at Bukarest (1792-93), where he also died. His successor, Franciscus Ferreri transferred his residence to Cioplea, a village near Bukarest founded in 1812 by Bulgarian refugees, but he was prevented from entering Bukarest by the opposition of the Greek orthodox bishop. Only in 1847 was Bishop Josephus Molajoni able to establish his residence in Bukarest. His successor, Angelus Parsi, restored the episcopal palace, which had been destroyed by fire in 1847, and in 1852 brought to Bukarest the English Ladies, and in 1861 the Brothers of the Christian Schools. In 1863 Bishop Parsi was succeeded by Josephus Pluym, since 1869 Patriarchal Vicar of Constantinople, who in turn was followed by Ignatius Paoli. After the establishment of Rumania as a kingdom, a movement was set on foot by the Government to release the Catholic subjects from dependence on a foreign bishop, and negotiations were begun with Rome. In 1883 Pope Leo XIII erected two dioceses in Rumania immediately subject to the Holy See, the Archdiocese of Bukarest and the Diocese of Jassy. The first archbishop was Ignatius Paoli, succeeded in turn by Paulus Josephus Palma (1885-92); Otto Zardetti (1894-95), who was the second Bishop of St. Cloud, Minnesota, U.S.A. (1889-94), when he was transferred to Bukarest. He resigned this last office in 1895 and died in Rome, on 9 May, 1902; Xaverius Hornstein (1896-1905), who built a new episcopal residence and for the second time called the Brothers of the Christian Schools to Bukarest; Raymundus Netzhammer, O.S.B., born at Erzingen, Baden, 19 January, 1862, professed in the Benedictine monastery at Einsiedeln, 1881, and consecrated Archbishop of Bukarest 16 September, 1905. JOSEPH LINS Bulgaria Bulgaria A European kingdom in the northeastern part of the Balkan Peninsula, bounded by the Black Sea, the Rhodope Mountains, Servia, and the Danube; it embraces an area of 37,200 sq. m. The population according to the census of 1900 numbers 3,744,283, divided according to religion into 3,019,296 Greek Orthodox, 28,579 Catholics of the Latin Rite and Uniat Greeks, 4524 Protestants, 13,809 Gregorian Armenians, 33,663 Jews, 643,300 Mohammedans, and 1112 of other creeds; according to nationality into 2,887,860 Bulgarians, 539,656 Turks, 89,549 Gypsies, 75,223 Rumanians, 70,887 Greeks, 32,753 Jews, 18,856 Tatars, 13,926 Armenians, and 15,741 of other nationalities. The number of inhabitants in 1905 was 4,028,239. HISTORY At the beginning of the Christian Era, what is now Bulgaria constituted the Roman provinces of Moesia and Thrace, a territory in which Christianity was preached at a very early period, as proved by the Council of Sardica in 343. During the migratory period Slavic races pushed forward into this region. Some time after the middle of the seventh century, the Bulgars, a people of Hunnic and Finnic stock, who had been driven from their habitations on the Volga as far as the Lower Danube, began to make incursions into Moesia and Thrace. Completing their conquest of the country in a war with the Byzantine Empire, they founded an independent kingdom about 680. The Bulgars gradually became amalgamated with the former inhabitants, adopting the nationality and language of the latter, but giving their own name to the ethnographic mixture. The new State often came into conflict with the neighbouring Byzantine Empire, to which, however, in 718, it lent its support against the Arabs. Prince Boris, or Bogoris (844-845 or 852-888), d. 907), accepted Christianity for political reasons and was baptized in 864 or the beginning of 865; he first negotiated with Pope Nicholas I for the creation of a Bulgarian hierarchy, but in the end joined the Byzantine Church. During the reign of his younger son Symeon (893-927) the ancient Bulgarian State reached the zenith of its prosperity; its territories extended from the Danube to the Rhodope Mountains and from the Black Sea to the Ionian Sea. In 917 Symeon assumed the title of Tsar, and in 924 compelled Byzantium to recognize the Bulgarian Church as an autocephalous patriarchate, with its seat at Ochrida or Achrida. Under his son Peter (927-969) the kingdom began to decline; during the reign of Shishman I the western part proclaimed its independence; two years after Peter's death the eastern section was pledged to the Eastern Empire. The western part, not able to preserve its autonomy, went to pieces in 1018 under the repeated attacks of the Emperor Basil II, surnamed Bulgaroktonos (the slayer of the Bulgarians). Though Basil left the Bulgarian Church its autonomy, the Metropolitans of Achrida were no longer styled Patriarchs, but Archbishops, and after 1025 were chosen from the Greek clergy, instead of the Bulgarian. After several futile uprisings against the oppressive Byzantine rule, a fresh Bulgarian insurrection took place about 1185. Two brothers, Peter and Ivan Asen, assumed the leadership, threw off the Byzantine yoke and re-established Symeon's empire. On their death (1197) their youngest brother Kaloyan, or Ivanitza, ruled alone until 1207; he entered into negotiations with the Holy See, promised to recognize the spiritual supremacy of the pope, and in November, 1204, was crowned with the royal diadem by Cardinal Leo, legate of Pope Innocent III. At the same time Archbishop Basil of Tirnovo was consecrated Primate of Bulgaria. This new Bulgarian Church embraced eight dioceses, Tirnovo being the primatial see, but the union with Rome was not of long duration. The new empire soon came into conflict with the recently founded Latin Empire (1204) of Constantinople; the Greeks fanned the dissensions in order to gain the Bulgarians over to their side. King Ivan Asen II (1218-41) formed an alliance with Emperor Vatatzes against the Latin Empire (1234), and again joined the Greek Church, which thereupon solemnly recognized the autonomy of the Church of Tirnovo (1235). Since that time, with the exception of brief intervals, the Bulgarian Church has persisted in schism. In 1236 Pope Gregory IX pronounced sentence of excommunication on Asen II, and in 1238 had a Crusade preached against Bulgaria. The history of the following period shows a succession of struggles with the Greeks, the Servians, and the Hungarians, of internal wars for the possession of the throne, and of religious disturbances, as, for instance, those consequent on the spread of the Bogomili and the Hesychasts, all of which weakened the State. During the fourteenth century, the Turks, flushed with victory, invaded the Balkan Peninsula, and under Amurath I overthrew the Servian kingdom in the battle of Kossovo (Field of Blackbirds, 1389), captured Tirnovo, and imprisoned Ivan III Shishman, the last Bulgarian Tsar, thus destroying the Bulgarian hegemony. The Church shared the fate of the State, and the last Bulgarian patriarch, Euthymius (1375-93), was driven into exile. Only the Patriarchate of Achrida continued as a Graeco-Bulgarian metropolitan see, with Greek or helenized occupants, until it was suppressed by the Porte in 1767 in consequence of the intrigues of the oecumenical patriarchs. The Greek language prevailed everywhere in schools and churches, and the remains of ancient Bulgarian literature were destroyed to a large extent by the Greeks. For almost five centuries the Bulgarian people groaned under the political yoke of the Turks and the ecclesiastical domination of the Greeks, yet continuous persecution did not avail to obliterate the memory of the nation's former greatness. The nineteenth century was destined to bring liberty to the Bulgarians, as well as to other Christian peoples of the Balkan Peninsula. The self-sacrificing generosity of wealthy Bulgarians made it possible to establish Bulgarian schools (the first at Gabrovo, 1835) and printing presses (at Saloniki, 1839, Smyrna, 1840, Constantinope., 1843), by which the national culture and patriotic sentiment were elevated. The reawakened national feeling first manifested itself in the ecclesiastical order. In 1860 a representative body of the Bulgarian nation requested the Greek patriarch at Constantinople to recognize their national church, to accord them freedom in the selection of their bishops, and to appoint Bulgarian, rather than Greek prelates to Bulgarian sees. The Patriarch of Constantinople refused these concessions. This act inflamed the national feeling and was followed by the expulsion of the Greek bishops and finally insurrections against Turkish authority. To ensure its supremacy, the Porte sought to mediate between the parties, but fresh negotiations were productive of no further result, and the Sultan by a firman of 11 March, 1870, granted the Bulgarians an exarchate of their own, independent of the Greek patriarchate. In 1872, the first Bulgarian exarch was chosen by an assembly of Bulgarian bishops and laymen. In a council at which only twenty-nine orthodox bishops assisted the oecumenical patriarch solemnly excommunicated the Bulgarian Church and declared it schismatical. National autonomy followed close upon ecclesical independence. On May, 1876, the Turkish Government perpetrated unspeakable atrocities in the suppression of a Bulgarian insurrection. These horrors might never have touched the conscience of the civilized world had it not been for the courage and enterprise of Januarius Aloysius MacGahan, an American Catholic (b. in Perry County, Ohio, 12 June, 1844, d. at Constantinople, 9 June, 1878). As correspondent of the London "Daily News ", and accompanied by Eugene Schuyler, Commissioner of the United States Government, MacGahan was the only journalist to visit the devastated districts; he obtained the evidence of eyewitnesses and, supplementing this with his own observation, published a mass of facts which enabled Mr. Gladstone to arouse among the English-speaking peoples a lively sympathy for the Bulgarian Christians. A conference of the European powers demanded of Turkey the erection of an autonomous Bulgarian province. The Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78, however, and the Peace of San Stefano created an autonomous Bulgarian principality, tributary to the Porte. The Berlin Congress of 1878 abrogated some of the provisions of the Peace of San Stefano and divided Greater Bulgaria into an autonomous Bulgarian principality and a province of Eastern Rumelia under a Christian governor-general, to be appointed by the Porte every five years, but subject to the approval of the Powers. On 22 February, 1879, the first Bulgarian assembly of notables convened in the principality; on 28 April the new constitution was signed; and on 29 April Prince Alexander of Battenberg was chosen as sovereign by the first national assembly. In Eastern Rumelia, from the very first the trend of events pointed to union with the Bulgarian principality. In September, 1885, an insurrection broke out, and a provisional regency proclaimed the union with Bulgaria. In September, Alexander announced from Philippopolis the union of the two countries and, after repelling a Servian invasion, received recognition as Governor-General of Eastern Rumelia (5 April, 1886). The unexpected independence which Alexander had shown in the face of Russia, brought him into disfavour with that power, and a military conspiracy, secretly supported by Russia, was successful in having him transported across the frontier (20 August, 1886). He was recalled, it is true, by the popular voice, after ten days, but, not wishing to rule without Russia's favour, which Bulgaria found indispensable, and yet not being able to gain the Tsar's friendship., he abdicated, 7 September, 1886. A regency, under Stambuloff, administered the national affairs until a new sovereign was elected by the National Assembly. The choice fell on the Catholic prince, Ferdinand of Saxe-Koburg-Kohary, 7 July, 1887. As Ferdinand at first left the national policy in the hands of Russia's enemy, Stambuloff, Russia, as well as the Porte, refused to recognize the new king. Only after the assassination of Stambuloff (1895) was a reconciliation with Russia effected. The Sultan then recognized Ferdinand as prince and governor-general, in view of the fact that Ferdinand had his son Boris, heir to the throne, baptized in the Greek orthodox faith (1896). The economic and intellectual progress of the country is retarded by financial complications, by partisanship in politics, and by the unrest incident to the so-called Macedonian question. STATISTICS (a) Catholics, Latin Rite The Catholics of Bulgaria are for the most part descendants of the Bogomili or Paulicians converted by the Franciscans during the sixteenth century, and are directly subject to the Diocese of Nicopolis with its seat at Rustchuk, and the Vicariate Apostolic of Sofia and Philippopolis, with the seat at Philippopolis. The Diocese of Nicopolis (Diocecesis Nicopolitana) contains, according to the Missiones Cattolicae (Rome, 1907), about 13,000 Latin Catholics, 14 parishes, 3 stations, 5 secular and 18 regular priests, a great seminary in Rustchuk, 3 parish schools for boys and 3 for girls, 3 notaries of male religious orders (Passionists, Marists, and Assumptionists); there are also houses of the Sisters of the Assumption, with a boarding school at Varna; Dames de Sion, with day school at Rustchuk, and Dominican Sisters from Cette, France. The Vicariate Apostolic of Sofia a Philippopolis (Sofiae et Philippolis), established in 1759, contains 11,880 Latin Catholics, 1000 Greek Catholics, 13 parishes, 23 secular and 27 regular priests, 31 Capuchin Fathers, almost all engaged in parochial work; 20 Assumptionists, Fathers and lay brothers, with 4 foundations, one a college at Philippopolis, the only Catholic college in Bulgaria; 2 Resurrectionists, 10 Brothers of the Christian Schools, with a boarding and a day school at Sofia; 40 French sisters of St. Joseph de l'Apparition, with 6 houses, a boarding school, orphan asylum and hospital at Sofia; a boarding school and day school at Philippopolis, and a boarding school and a day school at Burgas; 13 Austrian Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul, with a hospital at Philippopolis; 22 Bulgarian Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis; and 7 Sisters of the Assumption. There are also 2 colleges for boys, 3 for girls, 2 hospitals, 3 orphanages and 3 asylums for girls. (b) Eastern Catholics While the Bulgarians were contending with the Greek patriarchate for ecclesiastical autonomy, and the patriarch refused to make any concession, a movement was set on foot among the Bulgarians which pointed towards union with Rome. On 30 December, 1860, 120 deputies of the people petitioned the Apostolic Delegate to receive them into the Roman Church on condition of the recognition of their language and liturgy, and the appointment of a bishop of their own nationality; almost 60,000 of their fellow-countrymen joined in the request. Pius IX himself, 21 January, 1861, consecrated a priest named Solkolski its first Vicar Apostolic of Uniat Bulgaria. This movement, however, did not win the support of Catholic Europe, while the greatest obstacles were placed in its way by Russia and the patriarchate of Constantntinople. Sokolski lapsed back into schism in June, 1861, and embarked for Odessa on a Russian vessel; the majority of the Bulgarian priests and laymen attached themselves to the recently founded national exarchate. Only about 13,000 Bulgarians remained true to the Roman Church, and they live for the most part outside of Bulgaria in the Turkish provinces of Macedonia and Thrace. For these, two Vicariates Apostolic have been erected. The Vicariate Apostolic of Thrace, with seat at Adrianople, contains 3,000 Catholics, 14 parishes and stations, 20 churches and chapels, 16 native secular priests, 25 Resturrectionists in 3 houses and 10 Assumptionists in 3 houses, 36 Sisters of the Assumption, with a boarding school, 3 Sisters of the Resurrection, 2 colleges, one in Kara-Agasch near Adrianopolis under the Assumptionists and the other at Adrianople under the Resurrectionists. The Vicariate Apostolic of Macedonia, with its see at Saloniki, contains 5,950 Graeco-Bulgarian Catholics, 21 churches, 33 Bulgarian priests of the Slavonic Rite, a seminary at Zeitenlink near Saloniki, 17 schools for boys and 10 for girls, 4 houses of the Congregation of the Mission, with 15 priests, 6 houses of the Sisters of Mercy, 4 of the Eucharistines, 3 orphan asylums. (c) Other Oriental Churches The Greek Orthodox church of Bulgaria is divided into 5 eparchies or provinces. The Bulgarians under the exarch (or supreme lead of the Bulgarian National Church) are divided into 11 eparchies, 3 in Eastern Rumelia, with 2123 parishes, 78 monasteries for men, 15 for women, 1800 churches and 1906 clergy. VAILHE in "Dict. de theol. Cath., II, 1174-1236, containing an extensive bibliography; MIKLOSICH, "Monumenta Serbica" (Vienna, 1858); HILFERDING, "Geschichte der Serben un Bulgaren, tr. From Russian (2 parts, Bautzen, 1856, 1864); D'AVRIL, "La Bulgarie chretienne (Paris, 1861); L. DUCHESNE, "Les eglises separees" (Paris, 1869); DUMONT, "Les Bulgares" (2nd ed., Paris, 1872); JIRECEK, "Geschichte der Bulgaren" (Germ. Tr., Prague, 1876); KANITZ, "Donau-Bulgarien und der Balkan" (2nd ed., 3 vols., Leipzig, 1882); BALAN, Delle relazioni fra la chiesa Catolica e gli Slavi" (Rome, 1880); FERMENDZIN, "Acta Bulgariae ecclesiastica ab anno 1565 usque ad annum 1799" (Agram, 1887); JIRECZEK in "Kirchenlexikon," II, 1459-67; SAMUELSON, "Bulgaria, Past and Present" (London, 1888); DICEY, "The Peasant State: an account of Bulgaria in 1894" (London, 1894); JIRECEK, "Das Furstentum Bulgarien" (Prague, 1891); LAMOUCHE, "La Bulgarie dans le passe et le present" (Paris, 1892), with bibliography; RATTINGER, "Die Bulgaren und die griech. schismat. Kirchen", in "Stimmen aus Maria Laach" (1873), IV, 45-57, 252-655; DRANDAR, "Les evenements politiques en Bulgarie depuis 1876 jusqu'a nos jours" (Paris, 1896); MARKOVICH, "Gli Slavi ed i papa" (Agram, 1897); STRAUSS, "Die Bulgaren" (Leipzig, 1898); DURASTEL, "Annuaire international de la Bulgarie" (Sofia, 1898----); FALKENEGG, "Aus Bulgariens Vergangenheit und Gegenwart" (Berlin, 1900); GELZER, "Der Patriarchat von Achrida" (Leipzig, 1902); BOJAN, "Les Bulgares et le patriarche oecumenique" (Paris, 1905); VON MACH, "Der Machtbereich des bulgarischen Exarchats in der Turkei" (Leipzig and Neuchatel, 1906); "Echos d'Orient" (Paris, 1898----), I-X, passim; HERBERT, "By-Paths in the Balkans" (London, (1906); MACGAHAN, "Turkish Atrocities in Bulgaria" (London, 1876). JOSEPH LINS Bulla Aurea (Golden Bull) Bulla Aurea (Golden Bull). A fundamental law of the Holy Roman Empire; probably the best known of all the many ordinances of the imperial diet. It takes its name from the golden case in which the seal attached to the document proclaiming the decree was placed. The law was signed by the Emperor Charles IV, January, 1356, during the Diet of Nuremberg, and was revised at the Diet of Metz in November of the same year. The contents of the Bulla Aurea were of constitutional importance for the empire. It ordained that each emperor should be chosen by election, the right of voting being vested in electoral princes, the number of whom was fixed at seven. As electors the edict appointed, on the one side, the three ecclesiastical princes most closely connected with the history of the empire i.e. the Archbishops of Mainz, Trier, and Cologne. On the other side, the law settled the question, as far as it was still in dispute, as to whether the electoral vote pertained to certain secular principalities or to certain ruling families. It ordained that the right belonged to Bohemia, the Rhenish Palatinate, Saxony (Sachsen-Wittenberg), and the Mark of Brandenburg; this made the secular electors the King of Bohemia, the Count Palatine of the Rhine, Duke of Saxony, and Margrave of Brandenburg. The Bull also defined the powers given by the imperial constitution to the electors, taken as a body, and to certain individual electors separately, both during a vacancy of the throne and during an imperial reign. Thus the document granted to the electors in their character as rulers of principalities certain privileges which had been originally reserved to the German king and emperor and were the signs of his sovereignty. The transfer of these rights to subordinate rulers would, necessarily, gradually make them independent of the head of the empire. The Bull also provided for the preservation of peace in the empire and enacted measures for holding in check the increasing political importance of the rising free cities. In the main the law was intended to confirm rights which had already had a historical development and to settle disputed details of these rights. Constitutional law in the Holy Roman Empire reached its full growth between the years 1220 and 1555. As to the position of the "Golden Bull" in connection with this development, see GERMANY. MARTIN SPAHN Ven. Thomas Bullaker Ven. Thomas Bullaker (Also John Baptist). A Friar Minor and English martyr, born at Chichester about the year 1604; died at Tyburn, 12 October,1642. He was the only son ot a pious as well-to-do physician of Chichester. His parents were both fervent Catholics, and, following their example, Bullaker grew up in the ways of innocence and piety. At an early age he was sent to the English College at St-Omer, and from there he went to Valladolid in Spain to complete his studies. Convinced of his vocation to the Franciscan Order, after much anxious deliberation, he received the habit at Abrojo, and a few years later, in 1628, was ordained priest. Having left Spain to labour on the English mission, he landed at Plymouth, but was immediately seized and cast into prison. Liberated after two weeks from the loathsome dungeon where he had suffered the most untoward hardships, Bullaker by order of Father Thomas of St. Francis, then Provincial in England, laboured for nearly twelve years with much zeal and devotedness among the poor Catholics of London. On the 11th of September, 1642, Bullaker was seized while celebrating the Holy Sacrifice in the house of the pious benefactress. He has left a partial and but touching account of his apprehension and trial. He was condemned to be drawn on a hurdle to Tyburn and there hanged, cut down alive, quartered and beheaded. It is related that as he was going out of prison he met Ven. Arthur Bell, a religious of his own order, who said to him: "Brother, I was professed before you. Why do you take precedence of me?" Bullaker answered: "It is the will of God. But you will follow me." Bell remembered the prophetic words of the pious Bullaker when his own day of martydom was at hand. The cause of the beautification of Bullaker was introduced in Rome in 1900. STEPHEN M. DONOVAN Bullarium Bullarium Bullarium is a term commonly applied to a collection of bulls and other analogous papal documents, whether the scope of the collection be general in character, or whether it be limited to the bulls connected to any particular order, or institution, or locality. The name bullarium seems to have been invented by the canonist Laertius Cherobini who in 1586 published under the title "Bullarium, sive Collectio diversarum Constitutionum multorum Pontificum" a large folio volume of 1404 pages containing 922 papal constitutions from Gregory VII down to Sixtus V, the pope then reigning. With regard to this and all subsequent collections, three things have carefully to be borne in mind. First, whatever may have been the intrinsic importance or binding force of any of the bulls so published, the selection itself was a matter that depended entirely upon the arbitrary choice of the various editors. As a collection the publication had no official character. The only recognized exception to this assertion is the first volume of a collection of his own bulls which was sent by Benedict XIV in 1746 to the University of Bologna to serve as a fons iuris, or source of legal principles. Secondly, it was never seriously maintained, despite some pretentious title pages, that these collections were in any sense complete, or that they even contained all the constitutions of more general interest. Thirdly, it was the intention of the editors, at least at first, rather to exclude than to include the papal pronouncements which had already been incorporated into the text of canon law. The avowed object of the early collections was to render assistance to canonists by bringing within their reach papal enactments which either had been overlooked by the compilers of the "corpus" or which had been issued subsequently to the latest decrees included in it. We may disregard in the present notice various collections of relatively recent papal constitutions which were published in the early part of the sixteenth century. A typical specimen of such booklets is supplied by a rare little volume of sixty-two pages printed at Rome per Stephanum Guillereti in regione Parionis 1509, a copy of which is in the British Museum Library. A contribution of more substantial volume appears to have been a volume edited by Mazzutellus in 1579 which contained 723 documents. But it is to Laertius Cherubini that the credit is usually given of creating the bullarium in substance as well as in name. In the preface to the volume of which the title has already been given, the editor refers to his experiences in the ecclesiatical courts of Rome. In these courts I have noticed (he says) that certain advocates and judges went completely astray because they had not at hand the text of those apostolic constitutions a knowledge of which is most necessary in treating and pronouncing upon causes, seeing that in such constitutions is embodied the whole of the most recent pontifical law. After this explanation it is not surprising to find that out of Cherubini's 922 documents more than 800 were of recent date, that is to say they belonged to the hundred years immediately preceding the appearance of the volume. Of this collection, a second edition in three volumes, was printed at Rome in 1617, and a third edition in four volumes extending in this case from Leo I to Urban VIII, was prepared by the editor's son, Angelo Cherubini, in 1638, with a supplement added in 1659. Other editions followed, always somewhat enlarged. The fifth in six volumes was brought out by two Franciscans at Rome, 1669-72. THE LUXEMBURG BULLARIUM Moreover, a fuller but not more accurate reprint with supplementary volumes appeared in the eighteenth century, nominally at Luxemburg, although the actual place of impression is said to have been Geneva. Of this edition, which is one of the most commonly met with in libraries, the first eight volumes coming down to Benedict XVIII all bear the date 1727, while a ninth and tenth volume, supplementing the earlier portion, appeared in 1730. Other supplements followed at intervals. Four volumes were published in 1741 covering respectively the periods 1670-89, 1689-1721, 1721-30, 1730-40. In the same series, and still later, we have the following volumes: XV (1748), extending over 1734-40; XVI (1752) 1740-45; XVII (1753), 1746-49; XVIII (1754), 1748-52; XIX (1758), 1752-57. The last four volumes are entirely taken up with the Bulls of Benedict XIV. Although this is not the most important bullarium, it seemed worthwhile to indicate the arrangement of this Luxemburg edition as it appears to have been in part the source of the great confusion which is to be found in many accounts of the subject, notably in the recent article "Bullaire" in the "Dictionnaire de theologie catholique." It is not quite true, as has sometimes been supposed, that the "Luxemburg" editors contributed nothing of their own to the collection. For example, in Vol. IX (1730) we have two bulls of the English pope, Adrian IV, printed from the originals at Geneva with engraved facsimiles of the rota and the leaden bulla, and in fact the whole of the content of Vols. IX and X represent a large measure of independent research. The later volumes of the series, however, have simply been copied from the Roman edition next to be mentioned. MAINARDI'S ROMAN BULLARIUM This Roman edition of the bullarium, which still remains the most accurate and practically useful, bears on the title pages of its thirty-two volumes, the name of the publisher, Girolamo Mainardi, while the dedications to the cardinals prefixed to the different volumes and extending from 1733 to 1762 are also signed by him. The arrangement of the volumes, however, is peculiar, and the neglect to indicate these peculiarities has made the accounts given to this edition in most bibliographies almost unintelligible. Mainardi began with the idea of printing a supplement to the latest Roman edition of Cherubini's bullarium. As this was six volumes and stopped short at the pontificate of Clement X (1670-76), Mainardi called his first published volume Tome VII, and reprinted the bulls of Clement X from the beginning of his pontificate to his death. Moreover, an engraved frontispiece prefixed to this volume, printed in 1733, bears the words "Bullarium Romanum Tom. VII." The book further contains a promise that the six volumes of Cherubini's bullarium should in the course of time be reprinted in a corrected and enlarged form, with the aid of the documents contained in the secret archives of the Holy See. Seven other volumes followed in sequence to this first. They were printed from 1734 to 1744 and brought the collection from Clement X in 1670 to the accession of Benedict XIV in 1740. Meanwhile, the publisher had engaged an able scholar, Charles Cocquelines, to re-edit the six volumes of Cherubini's bullarium from Leo I to Clement X. In his hands an immense mass of material accumulated. The first volume was printed in 1739 and it bore a slightly different title from that of the installment which Mainardi had already published, beginning at "Tom VII." Cocquelines' section was headed "Bullarium privilegarium ac diplomatum Romanorum Pontificum amplissima collectio" and in comparison with Cherubini's meager gleanings from antiquity the epithet amplissima was fully deserved. This series, like all good work, advanced very slowly. A tabular arrangement will best show the details. The editor had to make his numbering correspond with Cherubini's six volumes and consequently some of the nominal tomi of the new edition were divided into several parts: I II II-V VI-IX X-XIV XV-XX Tom. I Tom. II Tom. III (in 3 parts) Tom. IV (in 4 parts) Tom. V (in 5 parts) Tom. VI (in 6 parts) 450-1061 1061-1181 1181-1521 1521-1588 1588-1626 1626-1669 1739 1740 1740-1743 1745-1747 1751-1756 1758-1762 Some time before the compilation of this series, Cocquelines had died, and the last five volumes to appear did not bear his name. Simultaneously with this amplified edition of Cherubini, Mainardi had also been publishing, in folio, but somewhat smaller, the four volumes of the bullarium of Benedict XIV, the first of which, as already noted, appeared with that pontiff's own authentication. In sum, the whole collection which issued from Mainardi's press amounted to thirty-two folio volumes and extended from Leo I in 450 to the death of Benedict XIV, 1758. As this in time grew antiquated, Andrew Barberi began in 1835 the publication of the Bulls of Pope Clement XIII and his successors "Bullarii Romani Continuato" (19 volumes, fol.), Rome, 1835-57. These came down to the fourth year of Gregory XVI, i.e. to 1834. There is also another series of the same kind which appeared as a continuation of the Bullarium of Benedict XIV at Prato in 1843-67 (10 vols., folio). THE TURIN BULLARIUM Finally, a large quarto edition of the bullarium was begun at Turin under the auspices of Cardinal Gaudi in 1857, edited by Tomasetti. It claims to be more comprehensive, better printed, and better arranged than the work of Cocqueline, but the additions made are insignificant and the typographical errors are numerous. Moreover, among the documents added, especially in Appendix I (1867), are included some whose authenticity is more than doubtful. At Turin, twenty-two volumes were printed (1857-72) down to Clement XII and five more, continuing the work to the end of Benedict XIV, were added at Naples (1867-85). PARTICULAR BULLARIA Besides the general Bullaria of which we have so far spoken, various particular bullaria have been compiled at different times collecting the papal documents relating to this or that religious order or institution or locality. For example, eight volumes have recently been published by R. de Martinis under the title "Jus Pontificium de Propaganda Fide" (Rome, 1888-98). This is in substance the bullarium of the Congregation of Propaganda brought up to date. Similarly, an exhaustive collection or rather calendar of early papal documents concerning the churches of Italy has been undertaken by P.F. Kehr under the title "Italia Pontificia" (Berlin 1906). The expense is defrayed by the Gottinger Academy. Of the more important religious orders nearly all have at some time or other collected their privileges in print. Among the most extensive of such compilations, which formerly often went by the name "Mare Magnum" (the Great Ocean) may be mentioned the Bullarium of the Dominicans, edited by Ripoli and Bremond (eight vols., Rome, 1729-40); that of the Franciscans, edited by Sbaralea (4 vols., Rome, 1758-80), with a more modern continuation by Eubel, (3 vols., Rome, 1897-1904); that of the Capuchins (7 vols., Rome, 1740-52); that of the Benedictines of Monte Cassino (2 vols., Venice, 1650). All the volumes mentioned here were folios, mostly of considerable bulk. Historically speaking, the most interesting papal volumes are often those contained in the "Regesta" (see BULLS and BRIEFS) which have never been included in the general Bullarium. Since the archives of the Vatican were thrown open to students by Leo XIII in 1883, immense labor has been spent upon the copying and publication of the Bulls contained in the "Regesta." but even before this date, facilities for research were not infrequently accorded. Many hundreds of copies of documents relating to Great Britain were made for the British Government by Marino de Marinis in the early part of the nineteenth century and are now preserved in the British Museum. In 1873 the Reverend Joseph Stevenson was sent to Rome for a similar purpose and the large collection of transcripts made by him during four years' residence may be consulted at the Record Office, London. Since then, Messrs, Bliss and Tenlow have been engaged in the same task and have published at the expense of the British Government seven volumes of a "Calendar of Entries in the Papal Register illustrating the History of Great Britain and Ireland." These are primarily papal letters, and they extend from the beginning of the thirteenth to the middle of the fifteenth century. The members of the Ecole Française de Rome have been equally active and it is mainly to them that we owe the publication of detailed calendars of the entire content of the "regesta" of various pontificates mostly of the thirteenth century. Those of + Honorius IV (1285-87), + Nicolaus IV (1288-92), + Benedict XI (1304-04) have been published and are complete. Those of + Innocent IV (1243-54), + Urban IV (1261-64), + Clement VI (1265-68) are all but complete; while great progress has been made with those of + Gregory X and John XXI (1271-77), + Nicolaus III (1271-80), + Martin IV (1281-85), + Boniface VIII (1291-03), + Gregory IX (1227-41), and + Alexander IV (1254-61). Besides these, the "Regesta" of Clement V (1305-1314) have been published by the Benedictines in nine volumes folio at the cost of Leo XIII, and those of John XXII (1316-34), as far as they relate to France, are being printed by A. Coulon, while those of the other Avignon popes are also in hand. The "Regesta" of Innocent III and his successor Honorius III have long been printed, and they are among the last volumes printed in the Patrology of Migne. Finally among local bullaria we may mentioned the considerable collections published some time ago by Augustine Theiner for various countries under the general heading of "Vetera Monumenta." With regard to the early centuries, where no originals of official copies exist to which we can make appeal, the task of distinguishing genuine from spurious papal letters becomes exceedingly delicate. The collection of Dom Coustant, "Epistolae Romanorum Pontificorum" (Paris, 1721), is of the highest value, but the compiler only lived to carry his work down to the year 440, and A. Thiele, who continued it, brought it no further than 553. Some further help has been provided by Hampe, regarding the papal letters to Charlemagne and to Louis the Pious, and by Herth-Gerenth for Sergius II. For practical purposes the chief court of appeal for an opinion on all papal documents is the "Regesta Pontificorum Romanorum" of Jaffe', much improved in its second edition by its editors, Wattenbach, Ewald, Kalterbrunner, and Löwenfeld. In this a brief synopsis of given of all existing papal documents known to be in existence, from the time of Peter to that of Innocent III (1198), with indications of the collections in which they have been printed and with an appendix dealing with spurious documents. This most useful work has been continued by Potthast to the year 1304 (2 vols., Berlin). It may be added that compendiums have also been published of the "Bullarium Romanum" as printed in the eighteenth century. Of these the most valuable is probably that of Guerra "Pontificarium Constitutionem in Bullario Magno contentarum Epitome" (4 vols., Venice, 1772), which possesses a very complete and useful index. Commentaries on the bullarium or on large portions of it have been published by the Jesuit J. B. Scortia (Lyons, 1625), by the Dominican, M. de Gregorio (Naples, 1648), and by Cardinal Vincent Petra (Rome, 1705-26). Finally, attention may be called to the important bulls contained in a useful little volume recently edited by Galante "Fontes Juris Canonici" (Innsbruck, 1906). No long bibliography is needed for an article which is itself bibliographical. Ortolan in Dict. de theol. cath., II, 1243-55, with fuller details regarding monastic and other bullaria. See remark, p. 49 col. 2 under subtitle The Luxemburg Bullarium. Grisar in Kirkenlex, II, 1479-82; Pitra, Analecta Solesmensia Novissima (Frascati, 1885); Philips, Kirchenrecht (Ratisbon, 1845), IV, 483 sqq.; Werne, Jus Decretalium (Rome, 1905), I, 379. HERBERT THURSTON The Spanish Bull-Fight The Spanish Bull-Fight Neither the English term nor the German (Stiergefecht) used to designate this popular diversion of the Spaniards, can be said to express adequately the essential idea of the Spanish corrida de toros. Great has been the discussion as to the origin of this spectacle. Some attribute it to the Roman Circus, where men contended with wild beasts, among them wild bulls; others—Doñ Nicolás de Moratin, for example—to the customs of the ancient Celtiberians. As Spain was infested by wild bulls, first necessity and afterwards sport led to this personal combat. In this opinion, indeed, is to be found what might be called the philosophic origin of the bull-fight. Man, surrounded by wild natural conditions, saw himself obliged to struggle with wild beasts in order to protect himself from them; and as the peoples naturally acclaimed as heroes those who slew in single combat these ferocious animals, so, when the necessity of protecting life had ceased, brave men still sought glory in these struggles. (In this connection the killing of the Calydonian boar by the Ætolians, as related by Homer, the legend of Hercules and the Nemean lion, the Catalonian legend of Wilfrid slaying the Tarasque, and the Swiss legend preserved by Schiller in his "William Tell", with many others of a like nature, suggest themselves as examples.) But if, putting aside these a priori considerations, we turn our attention to historical facts, we shall find that the Spanish bull-fight originated in a Moorish custom. To understand this better it will be necessary to distinguish between three kinds of bull-fights: (1) caballerescas, (2) populares, and (3) gladiatorias. (1) Corridas Caballerescas The corridas caballerescas had their origin, without a doubt, in the usages of the Arabo-Spanish jinetes (cavaliers or mounted men-at-arms) who, to accustom themselves to the activities of war, occupied themselves in time of peace with exercises in the use of arms, among which exercises were fights with wild bulls; the Moorish cavaliers fought on horseback, killing the bulls with spears, thus combining courage with knightly address. From historical sources we know that the Cid Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar was the first Christian to vie with the Arab knights in the sport of killing fierce bulls, spearing several from his horse in the year 1040, to the enthusiastic admiration of Ferdinand I of Castile. The lawyer Francisco de Cepeda, in his "Resumpta Historial de España", assures us that in 1100 there were bull-fights for the public, and that in Leon there was a bull-fight on the occasion of the marriage of Doña Urraca, daughter of Alfonso VIII, to the King Doñ Garcia of Navarre. These corridas caballerescas reached the highest degree of splendour in the reign of John II, when plazas began to be built, as we see by a story of the Marques de Villena. The marriage of John II to Doña María de Aragon (20 October, 1418) was celebrated by corridas in Medina del Campo. In the last epoch of the reconquest, the intercourse, frequent in times of peace, between the Spaniards and the Moors of Granada—where bull-fights were held until the time of Boabdil—resulted in an increase of valour among the Christian cavaliers, and a desire to demonstrate it in this dangerous sport. (2) Corridas Populares From this time the bull-fight developed into a popular amusement, and became so rooted in the affections of the Spanish people that neither Isabella the Catholic, who wished to suppress it, nor Philip II, nor Charles III, dared issue an order that would prohibit it absolutely. The Emperor Charles V, although he had not been educated in Spain, killed a bull during the festivities held in Valladolid to celebrate the birth of his son Philip. The first Bourbons were educated in France and naturally did not display much fondness for the popular corridas de toros. The corridas populares, heritage of the Mohammedan population, more especially in Valencia and Andalusia, differ from the caballerescas in their democratic character. Bulls not quite so ferocious are selected and are fought on foot, sometimes in an enclosure formed of wagons and planks, sometimes through the streets, in which case the bull is generally tied to a long rope. In these corridas populares the bull is not killed, but after the populace has amused itself with the bull, provoking him, and then fleeing from his attack, a tame cow is let loose and the bull follows her quietly to the pen. Generally the bull is taken to the slaughter-house and the meat used for the feasts that follow. (3) Corridas Gladiatorias The corridas gladiatorias are those in which the participants are professionals, and these are the ones which have given rise among foreigners to so much criticism of this popular diversion of the Spaniards. Francisco Romero, a native of Ronda, about the middle of the eighteenth century, sets forth in the "Arte Taurino" (Tauromaquia) the rules which are the guiding principle of these contests. Romero invented the muleta, a scarlet cloth laid over a stick, used to attract the attention of the bull, and he was the first to kill a bull on foot and face to face. His skill was inherited by his son Juan, and his grandsons, Pedro, José, and Antonio. After this the different skilful manoeuvres (suertes) that give variety to the bull-fight were evolved. Juan Romero was the first to organize a cuadrilla de toreros (band, or company, of bullfighters). THE MODERN BULL-FIGHT The modern bull-fight begins with the entrance of the toreros into the plaza (ring), marching to music, and dressed in richest satin, embroidered in silk or gold thread. The costume consists of tight-fitting satin knee-breeches, a short open Andalusian coat and vest, silk hose, and shoes without heels. The shoulders are decorated with handsome shoulder knots which in reality serve as protection in case of falls, as also the moña, a pad which is worn on the head, and which is covered with a rich cloth cap ornamented with tassels on each side. From the shoulders a short cape of embroidered satin is suspended. In the centre of the ring they ceremoniously salute the presiding official—the governor, sometimes the king himself—and receive from him the key of the bull pen (toril). Then each one takes his place. At the four equi-distant points of the circumference of the ring the picadores are situated. These are men mounted on old or otherwise incapacitated horses, with cow-boy saddles, very large iron stirrups, and one leg protected against the bull's horns by the espinillera, an apparatus of iron. The bugle now gives the signal, the door of the pen opens, and the first bull is released. The capeadores attract the bull's attention with their scarlet capes, leading him towards the picadores who ride into the middle of the ring to meet him, and parry his attacks with their spears. If the bull happens to unhorse one of the picadores, or kill his horse, the capeadores rush to the rescue, attracting the bull once more with their scarlet capes, and carrying him off to another part of the ring. When the picadores have had their turn with the bull, the bugle sounds for banderillas. These are tiny steel points to which are attached many coloured ribbons or papers, which are stuck in the fleshy portion of the bull's neck by the banderilleros, who await his coming in the centre of the ring, facing him with arms extended. These, and many other tricks, such as el salto de la garrocha, etc., besides giving incident and variety to the spectacle, have as their object to weaken the enormous strength of the bull, so as to render possible and less dangerous the work of the matador—not, as many imagine, to infuriate the bull still more. When the presiding officer gives the signal for the death of the bull, the matador draws near the bull with the muleta in his left hand and the sword in his right hand; he calls the bull to him, or throws himself upon him, and plunges the sword into the neck of the bull. If he strikes him in the nape of the neck, killing him instantly, it is called descabellar, but if the bull is simply wounded the puntillero puts an end to his life with a dagger. The music now strikes up, while two little mules, richly caparisoned, drag out the bull and the dead horses. This is repeated again and again, the number of bulls being usually eight for each corrida. The Morality of the Bullfight Bull-fights have occasioned many accusations of barbarity against the Spaniards. + The reason for this is, first, an utter ignorance of a game in which man with his reason and dexterity overcomes the brutal strength and ferocity of the bull. Foreigners as a rule think that the Spanish populace go to the bull-fight to witness the shedding of human blood. This is false. Generally there are no casualties; and when an accident does occur, no one derives pleasure from it; on the contrary, all deplore it. + Second, the misconception implies a lack of comparison with other spectacles. The risks taken by acrobats, tight-rope dancers, and tamers of wild beasts are no less barbarous than those of the bull-fight, although the performances themselves are less diverting. And prize-fighting is surely much more brutal, seeing that the vanquished is a human being and not a brute. + Lastly, the modern theatre is frequently more evil in its effects than bull-fighting, which, whatever else may be said of it, arouses no immoral or anti-social passions. The authorities of the Catholic Church have often condemned bull-fighting. St. Pius V (1 November, 1567, Const. "De salute") prohibited this form of amusement everywhere, threatening with many penalties the princes who countenanced it, as well as the performers and spectators, especially clergymen and religious. But in Spain to-day these prohibitions are not in force. Gregory XIII (23 August, 1575, "Exponi") moderated the constitution of St. Pius V for Spanish laymen, and Clement VIII (Bull "Suscepti muneris", 12 January, 1597) reduced it to a jus commune, limiting the prohibition to holidays and to the clergy. Moralists as a rule are of the opinion that bull-fighting as practised in Spain is not forbidden by the natural law, since the skill and dexterity of the athletes precludes immediate danger of death or of serious injury (cf. P.V, Casus conscientiae, Vromant, Brussels, 1895, 3d ed., I, 353, 354; Gury-Ferreres, Comp. Th. mor., Barcelona, 1906, I, n. 45). Even in Spain and Spanish America they have been forbidden to clergymen and religious, by Pius V, as well as by the Plenary Council for Spanish America (n. 650; cf. also C. prov., Vallisol., I, p. 5, tit. 1, n. 11). The Bishop of Ciudad Rodrigo received the same answer from the Penitentiaria (19 September, 1893). It is false to say that the Spanish clergy encourage these spectacles. Although public festivals are celebrated with religious ceremonies as well as bull-fights, the clergy is in no-wise responsible for this. If both are announced on the same bill poster, the authorities, or particular associations, are responsible for the printing of this, not the clergy. It is worthy of note that foreigners who have been present at bull-fights are not so harsh in their judgments as those who have formed an opinion from what they have heard about them from the societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals. RAMÓN RUIZ AMADO Angelique Bullion Angélique Bullion Born in Paris, at commencement of the seventeenth century, her parents being Guichard Favre and Madeleine Brulart de Sillery. Claude de Bullion, her husband, was Keeper of the Seals and Superintendent of Finances under Louis XIII; Cardinal Richelieu annually rewarded his intelligent and disinterested administration by a bonus of 100,000 livres. After his death (1640), her four children being well provided for, she followed the advice of the Recollet Father Rapin, and contributed in 1641-42, 60,000 livres to the foundation of Ville-Marie, now the city of Montreal, Canada. She founded and endowed (1643) a Hotel-Dieu in honour of St. Joseph, begun at Ville-Marie (1642) by Mademoiselle Mance, and confided in 1657-59 to the care of the Sisters of St. Joseph, an order instituted at La Flèche by a pious layman, Royer de la Dauversiére, one of the joint founders of Montreal. She likewise contributed more than 20,000 livres for the defence of the settlement against the Iroquois Indians, thereby helping to solve the whole colony of New France from destruction. She always insisted on being mentioned in the deeds ratifying her donations as "An unknown benefactress". Her identity was revealed only after her death. LIONEL LINDSAY Bulls and Briefs Bulls and Briefs A bulla was originally a circular plate or boss of metal, so called from its resemblance in form to a bubble floating upon water (Lat. bullire, to boil). In the course of time the term came to be applied to the leaden seals with which papal and royal documents were authenticated in the early Middle Ages, and by a further development, the name, from designating the seal, was eventually attached to the document itself. This did not happen before the thirteenth century and the name bull was only a popular term used almost promiscuously for all kinds of instruments which issued from the papal chancery. A much more precise acceptance has prevailed since the fifteenth century, and a bull has long stood in sharp contrast with certain other forms of papal documents. For practical purposes a bull may be conveniently defined to be "an Apostolic letter with a leaden seal," to which one may add that in its superscription the pope invariably takes the title of episcopus, servus servorum Dei. In official language papal documents have at all times been called by various names, more or less descriptive of their character. For example, there are "constitutions," i.e., decisions addressed to all the faithful and determining some matter of faith or discipline; "encyclicals," which are letters sent to all the bishops of Christendom, or at least to all those in one particular country, and intended to guide them in their relations with their flocks; "decrees," pronouncements on points affecting the general welfare of the Church; "decretals" (epistolae decretales), which are papal replies to some particular difficulty submitted to the Holy See, but having the force of precedents to rule on all analogous cases. "Rescript," again, is a form applicable to almost any form of Apostolic letter which has been elicited by some previous appeal, while the nature of a "privilege" speaks for itself. But all these, down to the fifteenth century, seem to have been expedited by the papal chancery in the shape of bulls authenticated with leaden seals, and it is common enough to apply the term bull even to those very early papal letters of which we know little more than the substance, independently of the forms under which they were issued. It will probably be most convenient to divide the subject into periods, noting the more characteristic features of papal documents in each age. I. EARLIEST TIMES TO ADRIAN I (772) There can be no doubt that the formation of a chancery or bureau for drafting and expediting of official papers was a work of time. Unfortunately, the earliest papal documents known to us are only preserved in copies or abstracts from which it is difficult to draw any safe conclusions as to the forms observed in issuing the originals. For all that, it is practically certain that no uniform rules can have been followed as to superscription, formula of salutation, conclusion, or signature. It was only when some sort of registry was organized, and copies of earlier official correspondence became available, that a tradition gradually grew up of certain customary forms that ought not to be departed from. Except for the unsatisfactory mention of a body of notaries charged with keeping a record of the Acts of the Martyrs, c. 235 (Duchesne, Liber Pontificalis, I, pp. c-c1), we meet with no clear reference to the papal archives until the time of Julius I (337-353), though in the pontificate of Damascus, before the end of the same century, there is mention of a building appropriate to this special purpose. Here, in the scrinium, or archivium sanctæ Romanæ ecclesiæ, the documents must have been registered and kept in a definite order, for extracts and copies still in existence preserve traces of their numbering. These collections or regesta went back to the time of Pope Gelasius (492-496) and probably earlier. In the correspondence of Pope Hormisdas (514-525) there are indications of some official endorsement recording the date at which letters addressed to him were received, and for the time of St. Gregory the Great (590-604) Ewald has been at least partially successful in reconstructing the books which contained the copies of the pope's epistles. There can be little doubt that the Pontifical chancery of which we thus infer the existence was modeled upon that of the imperial court. The scrinium, the regionary notaries, the higher officials such as the primicerius and the secundarius, the arrangement of the Regesta by indictions, etc., are all probably imitations of the practice of the later empire. Hence we may infer that the code of recognized forms soon established itself, analogous to that observed by the imperial notaries. One formulary of this description is probably still preserved to us in the book called "Liber Diurnus," the bulk of which seems to be inspired by the official correspondence of Pope Gregory the Great. In the earlier papal letters, however, there are as yet but few signs of the observance of traditional forms. Sometimes the document names the pope first, sometimes the addressee. For the most part the pope bears no title except Sixtus episcopus or Leo episcopus catholicae ecclesiæ, sometimes, but more rarely he is called Papa. Under Gregory the Great, servus servorum Dei (servant of the servants of God) was often added after episcopus -- Gregory, it is said, having selected this designation as a protest against the arrogance of the Patriarch of Constantinople, John the Faster, who called himself "Ecumenical Bishop." But though several of St. Gregory's successors followed him in this preference, it was not until the ninth century that the phrase came to be used invariably in documents of moment. Before Pope Adeodatus (elected 672) few salutations were found, but he used the form "salutatem a Deo et benedictionem nostram." The now consecrated phrase "salutatem et apostolicam benedictionem" hardly ever occurs before the tenth century. The Benedictine authors of "Nouveau traité de diplomatique" in ascribing a much earlier date to this formula were misled by a forged bull purporting to be addressed to the monastery at St. Benignus at Dijon. Again, in these early letters the pope often addressed his correspondent, more especially when he was a king or a person of high dignity, by the plural Vos. As ages went on, this became rarer, and by the second half of the twelfth century, it had completely disappeared. On the other hand, it may be noticed incidentally that persons of all ranks, in writing to the pope, invariably addressed him as Vos. Sometimes a salutation was introduced by the pope at the end of his letter just before the date--for example, "Deus te incolumem custodiat" or "Bene vale frater carissime." This final salutation was a matter of importance, and it is held by high authorities (Bresslau, "Papyrus und Pergament, 21; Ewald in Neues Archiv," III, 548) that it was added in the pope's own hand, and that it was the equivalent of his signature. The fact that in classical times the Romans authenticated their letters not by signing their names, but by a word of farewell, lends probability to this view. In the earliest original Bulls preserved to us BENE VALETE is written at full length in capitals. Moreover, we have at least some contemporary evidence of the practice before the time of Pope Adrian. The text of a letter of Pope Gregory the Great is preserved in a marble inscription at the basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls. As the letter directs that the document itself is to be returned to the papal archives (Scrinium), we may assume that the copy on stone accurately represents the original. It is addressed to Felix the subdeacon and concludes with the formula BENE VALE. Dat. VIII Kalend. Februarius imp. du. n. Phoca PP. anno secundo, et consultatus eius anno primo, indict. 7. This suggests that such letters were fully dated and indeed we find traces of dating even in extant copies as early as the time of Pope Siricius (384-398). We have also some bullæ or leaden seals preserved apart from the documents to which they were once attached. One of these dates back perhaps to the pontificate of John III (560-573) and another certainly belongs to Deusdedit (615-618). The earliest specimens simply bear the pope's name on one side and the word papæ on the other. II. SECOND PERIOD (772-1048) In the time of Pope Adrian the support of Pepin and Charlemagne had converted the patrimony of the Holy See into a sort of principality. This no doubt paved the way for changes in the forms observed in the chancery. The pope now takes the first place in the superscription of letters unless they are addressed to sovereigns. We also find the leaden seal used more uniformly. But especially we must attribute to the time of Adrian the introduction of the "double date" endorsed at the foot of the bull. The first date began with the word Scriptum and after a chronological entry, which mentioned only the month and the indiction, added the name of the functionary who drafted or engrossed the document. The other, beginning with Data (in later ages Datum), indicated, with a new and more detailed specification of year and day, the name of the dignitary who issued the bull after it had received its final stamp of authenticity by the addition of the seal. The pope still wrote the words BENE VALETE in capitals with a cross before and after, and in certain bulls of Pope Sylvester II we find some few words added in shorthand or "Tyronian notes." In other cases the BENE VALETE is followed by certain dots and by a big comma, by a S S (subscripsi), or by a flourish, all of which no doubt served as a personal authentication. To this period belong the earliest extant bulls preserved to us in their original shape. They are all written upon very large sheets of papyrus in a peculiar handwriting of the Lombard type, called sometimes littera romana. The annexed copy of a facsimile in Mabillion's "De re diplomaticâ" reproducing part of a bull of Pope Nicolaus I (863), with the editor's interlinear decipherment, will serve to give an idea of the style of writing. As these characters were even then not easily read outside of Italy it seems to have been customary in some cases to issue at the same time a copy upon parchment in ordinary minuscule. A French writer of the tenth century speaking of a privilege obtained from Pope Benedict VII (975-984) says that the petitioner going to Rome obtained a decree duly expedited and ratified by apostolic authority, two copies of which, one in our own character (nostra littera) on parchment, the other in the Roman character on papyrus, he deposited on his return in our archives. (Migne, P. L., CXXXVII, 817) Papyrus seems to have been used almost uniformly as the material for these official documents until the early years of the eleventh century, after which it was rapidly superseded by a rough kind of parchment. Apart from a small fragment of a bull from Adrian I (22 January, 788) preserved in the national library at Paris, the earliest original bull that remains to us is one of Pope Paschal I (11 July, 819). It is still to be found in the capitular archives of Ravenna, to which church it was originally addressed. The total number of papyrus bulls at present known to be in existence is twenty-three, the latest being one issued by Benedict VIII (1012-24) for the monastery of Hildesheim. All these documents at one time had leaden seals appended to them, though in most cases these have disappeared. The seal was attached with laces of hemp and it still bore only the name of the pontiff and the word papæ on the other. After the year 885, the letters of the pope's name were usually stamped round the seal in a circle with a cross in the middle. The details specified in the "double dates" of these early bulls afford a certain amount of indirect information about the personnel of the papal chancery. The phrase scriptum per manum is vague and leaves uncertain whether the person mentioned was the official who drafted or merely engrossed the bull, but we hear in this connection of persons described as notarius, scriniarius (archivist), proto scrinarius sanctæ Romanæ ecclesiæ, cancellarius, ypocancellarius, and after 1057 of camerarius, or later still notarius S. palatii. On the other hand, the datarius, the official mentioned under the heading data, who presumably delivered the instrument to the parties, after having superintended the subscriptions and the apposition of the seal, seems to have been an official of still higher consequence. In earlier documents he bears the titles primicerius sanctæ sedis apostolicae, senior et consiliarius, etc., but as early as the ninth century we have the well-known phrase bibliothecarius sanctæ sedis apostolicæ, and later cancellarius and bibliothecarius, as a combined title borne by a cardinal, or perhaps by more than one cardinal at once. Somewhat later still (under Innocent III), the cancellarius seemed to have threatened to develop into a functionary who was dangerously powerful, and the office was suppressed. A vice-chancellor remained, but this dignity also was abolished before 1352. But this of course was much later than the period we have now reached. III. THIRD PERIOD (1048-1198) The accession of Leo IX, in 1048, seems to have inaugurated a new era in the procedure of the chancery. A definite tradition had by this time been created, and though there is still much development we find uniformity of usage in documents of the same nature. It is at this point that we begin to have clear distinctions between two classes of bulls of greater and less solemnity. The Benedictine authors of "Nouveau traité de diplomatique" call them great and little bulls. Despite a protest in modern times from M. Léopold Delisle, who would prefer to describe the former class as "privileges" and the latter as "letters," this nomenclature has been found sufficiently convenient, and it corresponds, at any rate, to a very marked distinction observable in the papal documents of the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. The most characteristic features of the "great bulls" are the following: 1. In the superscription the words servus servorum Dei are followed by a clause of perpetuity, e.g., in perpetuam memoriam (abbreviated into IN PP. M) or ad perpetuam rei memoriam. In contrast to this the little bulls usually have salutatem et apostolicam benedictionem, but those words also appear in some great bulls after the clause of perpetuity. 2. After the second quarter of the twelfth century, the great bulls were always subscribed by the pope and a certain number of cardinals (bishops, priests, and deacons). The names of the cardinal-bishops are written in the center, under that of the pope; those of cardinal-priests on the left, and those of cardinal-deacons on the right, while an occasional blank shows that space has been left for the name of a cardinal who accidentally failed to be present. The pope has no cross before his name; the cardinals have. Earlier than this, even the great bulls were subscribed by the pope alone, unless they embodied conciliar or consistorial decrees, in which case the names of cardinals and bishops were also appended. 3. At the foot of the document to the left of the signature of the pope is placed the rota or wheel. In this the outer portion of the wheel is formed by two concentric circles and within the space between these circles is written the pope's signum or motto, generally a brief text of scripture chosen by the new pontiff at the beginning of his reign. Thus Leo IX's motto was "Miseracordia domini plena est terra," Adrian IV's "Oculi mei semper ad dominum." Before the words of the motto a cross is always marked, and this is believed to have been traced by the hand of the pope himself. Not only in the case of the pope, but even in the case of the cardinals, the signatures appear not to have been their own actual handwriting. In the center of the rota we have the names of Sts. Peter and Paul, above and beneath them the name of the reigning pope. 4. To the right of the signature opposite the rota stands monogram which stands for Bene Valete. From the time of Leo IX, and possibly somewhat earlier, the words are never written in full, but as a sort of grotesque. It seems clear that the Bene Valete is no longer to be regarded as the equivalent of the pope's signature or authentification. It is simply an interesting survival of an earlier form of salutation. 5. As regards the body of the document, the pope's letter, in the case of great bulls always ends with certain imprecatory and prohibitory clauses, Decernimus ergo, etc., Siqua igitur, etc. On the other hand, Cunctis autem, etc., is a formula of blessing. These and the like clauses are generally absent from the "little bulls," but when they appear--and this happens sometimes--the wording used is somewhat different. 6. In the eleventh century it was usual to write Amen at the end of the text of a bull and to repeat it as many time as necessary to fill up the line. 7. In appending the date, or more precisely, in adding the clause which begins the datum, the custom was to enter the place, the name of the datarius, the day of the month (expressed according to the Roman method) the indiction, the year of Our Lord's Incarnation, and the regnal year of the pontiff, who is mentioned by his name. An example from a bull of Adrian IV will make the matter clear: "Datum Laterani per manu Rolandi sanctæ Romanæ ecclesiæ presbyteri cardinalis et cancellarii, XII Kl. Junii, indic. Vo, anno dominicae incar. MCLVIIo pontificatus vero domini Adriani papæ quarti anno tertio." Before this period it was also usual to insert the first dating clause, "Scriptum," and there was sometimes an interval of a few days between the "Scriptum" and the "Datum." The use of the double date, however, soon came to be neglected even in "great bulls" and before 1124 it had gone out of fashion. This was probably a result of the general employment of "little bulls," the more distinctive features of which may now be specified. 1. Although great and little bulls alike begin with the pope's name--Urbanius, let us say, or Leo, "episcopus, servus servorum Dei"--in the little bulls we have no clause of perpetuity, but instead of it there follows immediately "salutatem et apostolicam benedictionem." 2. The formulae of imprecation, etc., at the end only occur by exception, and they are in any case more precise than those of the great bulls. 3. The little bulls have no rota, no Bene Valete monogram and no subscription of pope and cardinals. The purpose served by this distinction between the great and little bulls becomes tolerably clear when we look more narrowly into the nature of their contents and the procedure followed in expediting them. Excepting those which are concerned with purposes of great solemnity or public interest, the majority of the "great bulls" now in existence are in the nature of confirmations of property or charters of protection accorded to monasteries and religious institutions. At an epoch when there was much fabrication of such documents, those who procured bulls from Rome wished at any cost to secure that the authenticity of their bulls should be above suspicion. A papal confirmation, under certain conditions, could be pleaded as itself constituting sufficient evidence of title in cases where the original deed had been lost or destroyed. Now the "great bulls" on account of their many formalities and the number of hands they passed through, were much more secure from fraud of all kinds, and the parties interested were probably willing to defray the additional expenditure that might be entailed by this form of instrument. On the other hand, by reason of the same multiplication of formalities, the drafting, signing, stamping, and delivery of a great bull was necessarily a matter of considerable time and labor. The little bulls were much more expeditious. Hence we are confronted by the curious anomaly that during the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries, when both forms of document were in use, the contents of the little bulls are, from an historical point of view immensely more interesting and important than those of the bulls in solemn form. Of course the little bulls may themselves be divided into various categories. The distinction between litteræ communes and curiales seems rather to have belonged to a later period, and to have rather concerned the manner of entry in the official "Regesta," the communes being copies into the general collection, the curiales into a special volume in which documents were preserved which by reason of their form or their contents stood apart from the rest. We may note, however, the distinction between tituli and mandamenta. The tituli were letters of a gracious character--donations, favors, or confirmations constituting a "title." They were indeed little bulls and lacked the subscriptions of cardinals, the rota etc., but on the other hand, they preserved certain features of solemnity. Brief imprecatory clauses, like Nulli ergo, Si quis autem, are usually included, the pope's name at the beginning is written in large letters, and the initial is an ornamental capital, while the leaden seal is attached with silken laces of red and yellow. As contrasted with the tituli, the mandamenta, which were the "orders," or instructions, of the popes, observe fewer formalities, but are more business-like and expeditious. They have no imprecatory clauses, the pope's name is written with an ordinary capital letter, and the leaden seal is attached with hemp. But it was by means of these little bulls, or litteræ, and notably of the mandamenta, that the whole papal administration, both political and religious, was conducted. In particular, the decretals, on which the whole science of Canon Law is built up, invariably took this form. IV. FOURTH PERIOD (1198-1431) Under Innocent III, there again took place what was practically a reorganization of the papal chancery. But even apart from this, we might find sufficient reason for beginning a new epoch at this date in the fact that the almost complete series of Regesta preserved in the Vatican archives go back to this pontificate. It must not, of course, be supposed that all the genuine bulls issued at Rome were copied into the Regesta before they were transmitted to their destination. There are many perfectly authentic bulls which are not found there, but the existence of this series of documents places the study of papal administration from this time forward on a new footing. Moreover, with their aid it is possible to make out an almost complete itinerary of the medieval popes, and this alone is a matter of considerable importance. In light of the Regesta were are able to understand more clearly the working of the papal chancery. There were, it seems, four principals bureaus or offices. At the office of the "Minutes" certain clerks (clerici), in those days really clerics, and known then or later as abbreviatores, drew up in precise form the draft (litera notata) of the document to be issued in the pope's name. Then this draft, after being revised by a higher official (either one of the notaries or the vice-chancellor) passed to the "Engrossing" office, where other clerks, called grossatores or scriptores, transcribed in a large official hand (in grossam literam) the copy or copies to be sent to the parties. At the "Registration" office again it was the duty of the clerks to copy such documents into the books, known as Regesta, specially kept for the purpose. Why only some were copied and others not, is still uncertain, though it seems probable that in any cases this was done at the request of the parties interested, who were made to pay for the privilege which was regarded as an additional security. Lastly, at the office of "Bulls," the seal, which now bore the heads of the two apostles on one side, and the name of the pope on the other, was affixed by the officials called bullatores or bullarii. At the beginning of the thirteenth century, the great bulls, or privilegia, as they were then usually called, with their complex forms and multiple signatures became notably more rare, and when the papal court was transferred to Avignon in 1309 they fell practically into disuse save for a few extraordinary occasions. The lesser bulls (litteræ) were divided, as we have seen, into tituli and mandamenta, which became more and more clearly distinguished from each other not only in their contents and formulæ but in the matter of writing. Moreover, the rule of authenticating the letter with a leaden seal began in certain cases to be broken through, in favor of a seal of wax bearing the impression of the "ring of the fisherman." The earliest mention of the new practice seems to occur in a letter of Pope Clement IV to his nephew (7 March, 1265). We do not write [he says] to thee or to our intimates under a [leaden] bull, but under the signet of the fisherman which the Roman pontiffs use in their private affairs. (Potthast, Regesta, no, 19,051) Other examples are forthcoming belonging to the same century. The earliest impression of this seal now preserved seems to be one lately discovered in the treasury of the Sancta Sanctorum at the Lateran, and belonging to the time of Nicholas III (1277-80). It represents St. Peter fishing with a rod and line and not as at present drawing his net. V. FIFTH PERIOD (1431-1878) The introduction of briefs, which occurred at the beginning of the pontificate of Eugenius IV, was clearly prompted for the same desire for greater simplicity and expedition which had already been responsible for the disappearance of the greater bulls and the general adoption of the less cumbersome mandamenta. A brief (breve, i.e., "short") was a compendious papal letter which dispensed with some of the formalities previously insisted on. It was written on vellum, generally closed, i.e., folded, and sealed in red wax with the ring of the fisherman. The pope's name stands first, at the top, normally written in capital letters thus: PIUS PP III; and instead of the formal salutation in the third person used in bulls, the brief at once adopts a direct form of address, e.g., Dilecte fili--Carissime in Christo fili, the phrase being adapted to the rank and character of the addressee. The letter begins by way of preamble with a statement of the case and cause of writing and this is followed by certain instructions without minatory clauses or other formulæ. At the end the date is expressed by the day of the month and year with a mention of the seal--for example in this form: Datum Romae apud Sanctum Petrum, sub annulo Piscatoris die V Marii, MDLXXXXI, pont. nostri anno primo. The year here specified, which is used in dating briefs, is probably to be understood in any particular case as the year of the Nativity, beginning 25 December. Still this is not an absolute rule, and the sweeping statements sometimes made in this matter are not to be trusted, for it is certain that in some instances the years meant are ordinary years, beginning with the first of January. (See Giry, "Manuel de diplomatique," pp. 126, 696, 700.) A similar want of uniformity is observed in the dating of bulls though, speaking generally, from the middle of the eleventh century to the end of the eighteenth, bulls are dated by the years of the incarnation, counted from 25 March. After the institution of briefs by Pope Eugenius IV, the use of even lesser bulls, in the form of mandamenta, became notably less frequent. Still, for many purposes, bulls continued to be employed--for example in canonizations (in which case special forms are observed, the pope by exception signing his own name, under which is added a stamp imitating the rota as well as the signatures of several cardinals), as also in the nomination of bishops, promotion to certain benefices, some particular marriage dispensations, etc. But the choice of the precise form of instrument was often quite arbitrary. For example, in granting the dispensation which enabled Henry VIII to marry his brother's widow, Catherine of Aragon, two forms of dispensation were issued by Julius II, one a brief, seemingly expedited in great haste, and the other a bull which was sent on afterwards. Similarly we may notice that, while the English Catholic hierarchy was restored in 1850 by a brief, Leo XIII in the first year of his reign used a bull to establish the Catholic episcopate of Scotland. So also the Society of Jesus, suppressed by a brief in 1773, was restored by a bull in 1818. A very interesting account of the formalities which had to be observed in procuring bulls in Rome at the end of the fifteenth century in contained in the "Practica" recently published by Schmitz-Kalemberg. VI. SIXTH PERIOD: SINCE 1878 Ever since the sixteenth century the briefs have been written in a clear Roman hand upon a sheet of vellum of convenient size, while even the wax with its guard of silk and the impression of the fisherman's ring was replaced in 1842 by a stamp which affixed the same devices in red ink. The bulls, on the other hand, down to the death of Pope Pius IX retained many medieval features apart from their great size, leaden seal, and Roman fashion of dating. In particular, although from about 1050 to the reformation the writing employed in the papal chancery did not noticeably differ from the ordinary book-hand familiar throughout Christendom, the engrossers of papal bulls, even after the sixteenth century, went on using an archaic and very artificial type of writing known as scrittura bollatica, with manifold contractions and an absence of all punctuation, which was practically undecipherable by ordinary readers. It was in fact the custom in issuing a bull to accompany it with a transsumption, or copy, in ordinary handwriting. This condition of things was put an end to by a motu proprio issued by Leo XIII shortly after his election. Bulls are now written in the same clear Roman script that is used for briefs, and in view of the difficulties arising from transmission by post, the old leaden seal is replaced in many cases by a simple stamp bearing the same device in red ink. In spite, however, of these simplifications, and although the pontifical chancery is now as an establishment much reduced in numbers, the conditions under which bulls are prepared are still very intricate. There are still four different "roads" which a bull may follow in its making. The via di cancellaria, in which the document is prepared by the abbreviatori of the chancery, is the ordinary way but it is, and especially was, so beset with formalities and consequential delays (see Schmitz-Kalemberg, Practica) that Paul III instituted the via di camera (see APOSTOLIC CAMERA) to evade them, in the hope of making the procedure more expeditious. But if the process was more expeditious, it was not less costly, so St. Pius V, in 1570, arranged for the gratuitous issue of certain bulls by the via segreta; and to these was added, in 1735, the via di curia, intended to meet exceptional cases of less formal and more personal interest. In the three former processes, the Cardinal Vice-Chancellor, who is at the same time "Sommista," is the functionary now theoretically responsible. In the last case it is the Cardinal "Pro-Datario," and he is assisted in this charge by the "Cardinal Secretary of Briefs." As the mention of this last office suggests, the minutanti employed in the preparation of briefs form a separate department under the presidency of a Cardinal Secretary and a prelate his substitute. SPURIOUS BULLS There can be no doubt that during a great part of the Middle Ages papal and other documents were fabricated in a very unscrupulous fashion. A considerable portion of the early entries in chartularies of almost every class are not only open to grave suspicion, but are often plainly spurious. It is probable, however, that the motive for their forgeries was not criminal. They were prompted by the desire of protecting monastic property against tyrannical oppressors who, when title deeds were lost or illegible, persecuted the holders and extorted large sums as the price of charters of confirmation. No doubt, less creditable motives--e.g., an ambitious desire to exalt consideration of their own house--were also operative, and while lax principles in this matter prevailed almost universally it is often difficult to distinguish the purpose for which a papal bull was forged. A famous early example of such forgery is supplied by two papyrus bulls which profess to have been addressed to the Abbey of St. Benignus at Dijon by Popes John V (685) and Sergius I (697), and which were accepted as genuine by Mabillion and his confrères. M. Delisle has, however, proved they are fabrications made out of later bull addressed by John XV in 995 to Abbot William, one side of which was blank. The document was cut in half by the forger and furnished him with sufficient papyrus for two not unsuccessful fabrications. Though deceived in this one instance, Mabillion and his successors, Dom Toustain and Dom Tassin, have supplied the most valuable criteria by the aid of which to detect similar fabrications, and their work has been ably carried on in modern times by scholars like Jaffé, Wattenbach, Ewald, and many more. In particular a new test has been furnished by the more careful study of the cursus, or rhythmical cadence of sentences, which were most carefully observed in the authentic bulls of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries. It would be impossible to go into details here, but it may be said that M. Noæl Valois, who first investigated the matter, seems to have touched upon the points of primary importance. Apart from this, forged bulls are now generally detected by blunders in the dating clauses and other formalities. In the Middle Ages one of the principal tests of the genuineness of bulls seems to have been supplied by counting the number of points in the circular outline of the leaden seal or in the figure of St. Peter depicted on it. The bullatores apparently followed some definite rule in engraving their dies. Finally, regarding these same seals, it may be noted that when a bull was issued by a newly elected pope before his consecration, only the heads of the Apostles were stamped on the bulla, without the pope's name. These are called bullæ dimidiatæ. The use of golden bullæ (bullæ aureæ), though adopted seemingly from the thirteenth century (Giry, 634) for occasions of exceptional solemnity, is too rare to call for special remark. One noteworthy instance in which a golden seal was used was that of the bull by which Leo X conferred upon King Henry VIII the title of Fidei Defensor. Ortolan in Dict. de theol, cath., II, 1255-63--see remark, page 49, col. 2; Grisar in Kirkenlex, II, 1482-95; Giry, Manuel de diplomatique (Paris, 1894), 661-704--an excellent summary of the whole subject; Pflugk-Harttung, Die Bullen der Papste (Gotha, 1901)--mainly concerned with the period before Innocent III; Melampo in Miscellanea di Storia e Cultura Ecclesiastica (1905-07), a valuable series of articles not too technical in character, by a Custodian of the Vatican Archives; Mas-Latrie, Les élementes de diplomatique pontificale in Revue des questions historiques (Paris, 1886-87), XXXIX and XLI; De Kamp, Zum papstlichen Urkundenvessen in Mittheilungen des Inst. f. Oesterr. Geschictesforschung (Vienna, 1882-83), III and IV, and in Historiches Jahrbuch, 1883, 1883, IV; Delisle, Des régitres d'Innocent III in Biblioth=8Fque de l'écoles des chartres (Paris, 1853-54), with many other articles; Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre (Leipzig, 1889), I, 120-258; De Rossi, Preface to Codices Palatini Latin Bib. Vat. (Rome, 1886); Berger, preface to Les régistres d'Innocent IV (Paris, 1884); Kehr and Brockman, Papsturkunden in various numbers of the G=9Attinger Nachrichten (Phil. Hist. Cl., 1902-04); Kehr, Scrinium und Palatium in the Austrian Mittheilungen, Ergènzungaband, VI; Pitra, Analecta Novissima Solesmensia (Tusculum, 1885), I; Schmitz-Kahlemberg, Practica (1904). Among earlier works mention may be made of Mabillion, De Re Diplomatica (Paris, 1709), and the Nouveau traité de diplomatique by the Benedictines of Saint-Maur (Paris, 1765, VI volumes). Early Bulls--Bresslau, Papyrus und Pergament in der papstlichen Kanzlei in the Mittheilungen der Instituts f=9Fr Oest. Geschictsforschung (Innsbruck, 1888), IX; Omont, Bulles pontificales sur papyrus in Bibl. les l'école des chartes (Paris, 1904), XLV; Ewald, Zur Diplomatik Silvesters II in Neues Archiv (Hanover, 1884), IX; Kehr, Scrinium und Palatium in the Austrian Mittheilungen, Ergènzungaband, (Innsbruck, 1901) VI; Kehe, Verschollene Papyrusbullen in Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven (Rome, 1907), X, 216-224; Rodolico, Note paleografiche e diplomatiche (Bologna, 1900). For facsimiles both of early bulls and their seals, the great collection of Pflugk-Harttung, Specimena Selecta Chartarum Pontificum Romanorum (3 vols., Stuttgart, 1887) is of primary importance but isolated facsimiles are to be found elsewhere. On the cursus it will be sufficient to mention the article of Noæl Valois, Etudes sur le rythme des bulles pontificales in Bibl de l'école des chartes (1881), XLII, and De Santi, Il Cursus nella storia litter. e nella liturgia (Rome, 1903). HERBERT THURSTON Sir Richard Bulstrode Sir Richard Bulstrode A soldier, diplomatist, and author, born 1610; died 1711, was the second son of Edward Bulstrode by Margaret, daughter of Richard Ashtey, chamberlain of the queen's household and member of the Inner Temple. He was educated at Pembroke College, Cambridge, and while at the university was the author of a poem on the birth of the Duke of York. At twenty-three years of age he entered the Inner Temple and in 1649, at his father's request and through his interest, was made a bencher. During the Civil War he was loyal to the king, serving in the Prince of Wales's regiment and holding at times the post of adjutant. He was later promoted to the rank of Adjutant-General of Horse, and still later to be Quartermaster-General. He was appointed to take charge of the funeral of Lord Strafford and became responsible for the expenses attending it; on being pressed by his creditors he fled to Bruges. He subsequently underwent a short term of imprisonment, which was terminated by the payment of the debt by Charles II. On his return he was appointed auditor of a Scotch regiment then serving in the Netherlands and in 1673 was appointed agent at the court of Bruges. He was temporarily recalled two years later, and on 1675 was knighted and again sent to Brussels, this time as resident, where he remained until the accession of James II when he was made envoy. When the revolution of 1688 compelled James to leave England, Bulstrode accompanied him to the court of Saint-Germain, where he remained until his death. Among his writings are: "Original Letters written to Earl of Arlinton, with an account of the Author's Life and Family", "Life of James II", "Memoirs and Reflections on the Reign and Government of Charles I and Charles II" and a large number of elegies and epigrams. THOMAS GAFFNEY TAAFFEE Joannes Bunderius Joannes Bunderius (VAN DEN BUNDERE). A Flemish theologian and controversialist, born of distinguished parents at Ghent in 1482; died there 8 January, 1557. He entered the Dominican Order in his native city about 1500, and after having made his religious profession was sent to Louvain to pursue his studies in philosophy and theology. He obtained the degree of Lector in Sacred Theology, and in 1517 returned to Ghent, where, until near the close of his life, he taught philosophy and theology. While occupied in teaching he filled the office of prior of the convent of Ghent three times (1529-35; 1550-53), and discharged the duties of General Inquisitor of the Diocese of Tournai. As inquisitor he was untiring in his efforts to check the spread of the errors that were being disseminated by Lutherans, Calvinists, and Mennonites; but always used prudence in his dealings with heretics. Long training in the schools and the experience he had gained as the professor of theology fitted him especially well to explain and defend Catholic doctrine, and to detect and expose the errors of heretical teaching. While prior of the convent of Ghent for the first time, he formed a federation of religious orders in that city for the safeguarding of the faith of the people and of the preservation of the rights of the Church and the privileges of the orders. In recognition of his ability as a preacher and as a reward for his long labours in the pulpit a general chapter of his order conferred upon him the degree of Preacher General. Of his writings, which are nearly all of a polemical character, the most worthy of note are: + "Compendium dissidii quorundam hereticorum" (Paris, 1540-43, 1545); + "Compendium concertationis hujus saeculi sapientium et theologorum" (Paris, 1549, Venice, 1553, etc). After the author's death, this work was frequently published under the title: "Compendium rerum theologarum, quae hodie in controversia agitantur"; + "Detectio nugarum Lutheri cum declaratione veritatis Catholicae (Louvain, 1551); + "De Vero Christi baptismo contra Mennonem Anabaptistarum principe" (Louvain, 1553). A.L. McMAHON Michelangelo Buonarroti Michelangelo Buonarroti Italian sculptor, painter, and architect, b. at Caprese in the valley of the upper Arno, 6 March, 1475; d. at Rome, 18 February, 1564. Michelangelo, one of the greatest artists of all times, came from a noble Florentine family of small means, and in 1488 was apprenticed to Domenico Ghirlandajo. While apprentice, he excited the admiration of his master by the life-like animation of this drawings, and upon Ghirlandajo's recommendation, and a the wish of Lorenzo the Magnificent, he received further training (1489-92) in the palace of the Medici, at the school of sculpture then under the direction of Bertoldo, one of Donatello's pupils. As student and resident of the palace, Michelangelo lived with Lorenzo's sons in the most distinguished society of Florence, and at this time was introduced by the poet Politian into the circle of the scholars of the Academy and to their learned pursuits. Meanwhile, Michelangelo was studying with marked success the frescoes in the Branacci chapel. After Lorenzo's death he passed his time partly at home, partly at the monastery of Santo Spirito, where he busied himself with anatomical studies, and partly in the house of Pietro de' Medici, who, however, was banished in 1494. About the same time Michelangelo left Florence for Bologna. He returned in 1495, and began to work as a sculptor, taking as his model the works of his predecessors and the masterpieces of classical antiquity, without, however, sacrificing his individuality. In 1496 he went to Rome, whither his fame had preceded him, and remained there working as a sculptor until 1501. Returning to Florence, he occupied himself with his painting and sculpture until 1505, when Pope Julius II called him to enter his service. After this, Michelangelo was employed alternately in Rome and Florence by Julius and his successors, Leo X, Clement VII, and Paul III being his special patrons. In 1534, shortly after the death of his father, Michelangelo left Florence never to return. The further events of his life are closely connected with his artistic labours. Some weeks after his death his body was brought back to Florence and a few months later a stately memorial service was held in the church of San Lorenzo. His nephew, Leonardo Buonarroti, erected a monument over his tomb in Santa Croce, for which Vasari, his well known pupil and biographer, furnished the design, and Duke Cosimo de' Medici the marble. The three arts are represented as mourning over the sarcophagus, above which is a niche containing a bust of Michelangelo. A monument was erected in his memory in the church of the Santi Apostoli, at Rome, representing him as an artist in working garb, with an inscription: Tanto nomini nullum par elogium. (No praise is sufficient for so great a man.) Michelangelo was a man of many-sided character, independent and persistent in his views and his endeavours. His most striking characteristic was a sturdy determination, guided by a lofty ideal. Untiring, he worked until far advanced in years, at the cost of great personal sacrifices. He was not, however, unyielding to the point of obstinancy. His productions in all departments of art show the great fertility of his mind. In literature he was a devoted student and admirer of Dante. A copy of the "Divine Comedy", ornamented by him with marginal drawings, has unfortunately been lost. Imitating the style of Dante and Petrarch, he wrote verses, "canzoni", and especially sonnets, which are not without value, and excite surprise by their warmth of feeling. Some of his poems give expression to an ideally pure affection. He never married. A stern earnestness is characteristic of the sculptor, but the tenderness of his heart is shown in his touching love and solicitude for his father and brothers. Although seemingly absorbed in his art, and often straitened in circumstances, he was ever ready to aid them by word and deed. "I will send you what you demand of me", he wrote, "even if I have to sell myself as a slave". After the death of his father he conceived a deep affection for a young Roman, Tommaso de' Cavalieri, and also entered into intimate friendship with the noble-minded poetess, Vittoria Colonna, then past her youth. With his pupils, Vasari and Condivi, he was on the most cordial terms, and a servant who was twenty-six years in his employ experienced his bounty. The biographies we have from the pupils just mentiond and the letters of Michelangelo himself testify to the gentler traits of his character. He gave younger artists generous aid by suggestions, sketches, and designs, among others to Sebastiano del Poimbo, Daniele da Volterra, and Jacopo da Pontormo. Michelangelo had few personal wants and was unusually self-denying in dress and diet. Savonarola's sermons, which he recalled even in his old age, probably influenced him in some degree to adopt this austerity of life. Moreover, the seriousness of his own mind caused him to realize the vanity of earthly ideals. His spirit was always absorbed in a struggle to attain perfection. Yet with all this he was not haughty; many of his sayings that have come down to us show him to have been unusually unassuming. The explanation of his unwillingness to have the aid of assistants must be sought in the peculiarity of his artistic methods. Michelangelo's life was one of incessant trials, yet in spite of an imperious temper and many bodily infirmities he showed remarkable composure and forbearance. No matter how much trouble was caused him by his distinguished patrons he seldom failed in loyalty to them. He was equally faithful to his native city, Florence, although the political confusion which reigned there wrung from him many complaints. It obliged him to spend half of his life elsewhere, yet he wished to lie after death in Florentine earth; nor could the most enticing offers induce him to leave Italy. A contemporary bestows praise which seems merited, when he says that Michelangelo in all the ninety years of his life never gave any grounds for suspecting the integrity of his moral virtue. SCULPTURE First Period If the years before 1505, that is, before the summons by Julius II, be taken as Michelangelo's youth, it may be said that, even when a pupil in Bertoldo's school, he attracted attention not only by his work in clay and by the head of a faun in marble after a classical model, but especially by two marble bas-reliefs of his own design. The "Madonna Seated on a Step", pressing the Child to her breast under her mantle, shows, it is true, but little individuality, grace, and tenderness, though perhaps for this very reason all the more dignity. Michelangelo's later style is more easily recognized in the "Battle of the Centaurs", which represents a large group of figures, anatomically well drawn, engaged in a passionate struggle. It is said that in after years the artist, in referring to this group, expressed regret that he had not devoted himself exclusively to sculpture. He appears to have taken the conception for this work from a bronze relief of Bertoldo and to have imitated the style of Donatello. Michelangelo's work certainly recalls Donatello in the drapery of the Madonna above mentioned and in the realistic way in which the sentiment of this composition is expressed. After Lorenzo's death Michelangelo produced a marble Hercules of heroic size that was taken to Fontainebleau and has since disappeared. Thode, however, appears to have found the Crucifix which Michelangelo carved for the church of Santo Spirito. The body in this is almost entirely free from the cross; there is no intense pain expressed on the youthful face, and the hands and hair are not completely worked out. The "St. John in the Wilderness", with the honeycomb, now at Berlin, is probably the San Giovannino that Michelangelo executed in Florence in 1495. The realistic modelling of the head and the beautiful lines of the body show a study of both classic and modern models. Shortly after this Michelangelo completed several figures for the shrine of St. Dominic which Niccolo dell' Arca had left unfinished. A figure of a pagan deity was the occasion of Michelangelo's first visit to Rome, and a statue of Bacchus carved by him on that occasion is extant at Florence. This work, which is the result of study of the antique, is merely a beautiful and somewhat intoxicated youth. Far more important is the Pieta executed in 1499 for the French chapel in St. Peter's. A calm, peaceful expression of grief rests on all the figures of the group. The face of the mother has youthful beauty; the head is bowed but slightly, yet expressive of holy sorrow. Her drapery lies in magnificent folds under the body of the Saviour. The latter is not yet stiff and reveals but slight traces of the suffering endured, especially the noble countenance so full of Divine peace. Not the lips but the hand shows the intensity of the grief into which the mother's soul is plunged. When sixty years old Michelangelo desired to execute a Pieta, or, more properly, a "Lamentation of Christ" for his own tomb. The unfinished group is now in the Cathedral of Florence, and is throughout less ideally conceived than the Pieta just mentioned. The body of Christ is too limp, and Nicodemus and Mary Magdalen are somewhat hard in modelling. This Pieta was broken into pieces by the master, but was afterwards put together by other hands. Two circular reliefs of the "Virgin and Child", one now in London and one in Florence, belong to the sculptor's youthful period. In the Florentine relief, especially, intensity of feeling is combined with a graceful charm. Mother and Child are evidently pondering a passage in Scripture which fills them with sorrow; the arms and head of the Boy rest on the book. A life-sized group of about the same date in the church of Our Lady (Eglise Notre-Dame) at Bruges shows the Madonna again, full of dignity and with lofty seriousness of mien, while the Child, somewhat larger than the one just mentioned, is absorbed in intense thought. In contrast to Raphael, Michelangelo sought to express Divine greatness and exalted grief rather than human charm. He worked entirely according to his own ideals. His creations recall classical antiquity by a certain coldness, as well as by the strain of superhuman power that characterizes them. Second Period To Michelangelo's second creative period (beginning 1505) belongs the statue of Christ which he carved for the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva. It was sent to Rome in 1521 in charge of an assistant who was to add some last touches to the statue when it was put in position. The Saviour, a life-sized marble figure, holds the cross, sponge, and rod of hyssop. The face, earnest, almost hard, is turned to the left, as if saying: "My people, what have ye done to Me?" Properly however, the figure is not that of the suffering Saviour, but of the risen Saviour and therefore nude, according to the desire of the patron who have the commission. The age of the Renaissance, in its ardour for the nude, paid no regard to decorum. At a later date a bronze loin cloth, unfortunately too long, was placed on the statue. In conformity with the spirit in which the whole composition is conceived, the figure of Christ is not stiff and severe like the statue of an antique god, but expresses a resigned humanity. A youthful Apollo produced at about the same time has also little of the classic in its design. A dying Adonis comes nearer to classic models in its conception. But the gigantic David, the embodiment of fresh young daring, in reality a representation of a noble boy, resembles an antique god or hero. It can hardly be said that the colossal size, over twelve and a half feet, is suitable for a youth; however, the deed for which David is preparing, or more probably, the action which he has just completed, is a deed of courage. The right hand is half closed, the left hand with the sling seems to be going back to the shoulder, while the gaze follows the stone. The figure resembles that of an ancient athlete. The body is nude, and the full beauty of the lines of the human form is strikingly brought out. In 1508 Michelangelo agreed to carve the twelve Apostles in heroic size (about nine and a half feet high) for the church of Santa Maria del Fiore, but of the whole number only the figure of St. Matthew, a great and daring design, was hewn in the rough. Similarly, he executed but four of the saints which were to decorate the memorial chapel to Pius II and left the rest of the work unfinished. A bronze statue of David with the head of Goliath under his feet was sent to France and has since disappeared. A pen-and-ink sketch of this statue is still in the Louvre. His powers fully matured, Michelangelo now entered the service of the popes and was entrusted with the carrying out of two great undertakings. In 1505 Julius II called him to Rome to design and erect for the pope a stately sepulchral monument. The monument was to be a four-sided marble structure in two curses, decorated with some forty figures of heroic size. Michelangelo spent eight months in Carrara superintending the sending of the marble to Rome. He hoped in carrying out this commission to execute a work worthy of classic times, one containing figures that would bear comparison with the then newly discovered Lacoon. His plans, however, were brought to nought by a sudden change of mind on the part of Julius, who now began to consider the rebuilding of St. Peter's after the designs of Bramante. Julius may be said to have driven Michelangelo from the Roman court. Fearful of the malice of enemies, Buonarroti fled in despair to Florence and, turning a deaf ear to the pope's entreaties to return to Rome, offered to go on with the work for the monument at Florence. To this, however, Julius would not listen. In his exasperation Michelangelo was on the point of going to Constantinople. However, at the invitation of the pope, in the latter part of 1506, he went to Bologna, where, amid the greatest difficulties and in straitened circumstances, he cast a bronze statue of Julius II, of heroic size. This effigy was destroyed during a revolt against Julius in 1511. Once more in Rome, he was obliged for the time being to abandon the scheme for the monument to Julius and, against his will, to decorate the Sistine Chapel with frescoes. Julius II lived only long enough after the completion of the frescoes to arrange for his monument in his will. After his death in 1513 a formal contract was made for the construction of the memorial. According to this new agreement the monument was no longer to be an independent structure, but was to be placed against the church wall in the form of a chapel. The plan for the structure was even more magnificent than the original design, but was in the end abandoned, both on account of its size and of other circumstances which arose. The new pope, Leo X, of the Medici family, was a friend of Michelangelo's youth and looked on him with much favour, but had new designs in reference to him. After Michelangelo had laboured for two years on the monument to Julius, Pope Leo, during a visit to Florence, commanded him, to construct a stately new facade for the church of San Lorenzo, the family burial place of the Medici. With tears in his eyes, Michelangelo agreed to this interruption of his great design. The building of the new facade was abandoned in 1520, but the sculptor returned to his former work for a time only. The short reign of Adrian VI was followed by the election to the papal throne of another early friend of Michelangelo, Giulio de' Medici, who took the name of Clement VII. Since 1520 Giulio de' Medici had desired to erect a family mortuary chapel in San Lorenzo. When be became pope he obliged Michelangelo to take up this task. The new commission was not unworthy of the sculptor's powers, yet an evil fate prevented this undertaking also from reaching its full completion. Michelangelo suffered unspeakably from the constant alteration of his plans; he was, moreover, beset by many detractors; the political disorders in his native city filled him with grief, and the years brought with them constantly increasing infirmities. In 1545 the designs, some of which still exist, for the monument of Julius II were carried out on a much reduced scale. The monument is in the church of San Pietro in Vincoli; in the centre of the lower course of the monument between two smaller figures is placed the gigantic statue of Moses, which was originally intended for the upper course, where it would have made a much more powerful impression. When seen close by, the criticism may be made that the expression is too violent, there is no sufficient reason for the swollen veins in the left arm, the shoulders are too massive in comparison with the neck, the chin, and the forehead; that even the folds of the robe are unnatural. Yet, seen from a distance, it is precisely these features that produce the desired effect. The great statue, which is double life size, was intended to express the painfully restrained and mighty wrath of the leader of a stiff-necked people. It is plain that an allusion to the warlike prowess of Julius II was intended and that the sculptor here, as in many of his other undertakings, has embodied his own tremendous conception of force. The way in which the Tables of the Law are grasped, the bare arm and right knee, the heavy beard and the "horns" heighten the effect that is aimed at. The flanking figures of Rachel and Leah, symbols respectively of contemplative and active life, were carved by Michelangelo himself, but they are not as satisfactory as the Moses. The monument itself and the figures on the upper course were not executed by the great master, though they were worked out according to his suggestions. On the other hand, two shackled figures out of the series planned by the sculptor are in the Louvre, though incomplete. The "Slaves" were intended to typify the power of the pope in the domains of war and art, and were to stand in front of the hermae pillars, where the inverted consoles now are. In the "Slaves" in the Louvre the antithesis between resistance to the fetters and submission to the inevitable is expressed with remarkable skill. There are also in Florence some unfinished figures belonging to this monument, namely a victor kneeling on a fallen foe, and four other figures, which are merely blocked out. About the time of the completion of this monument Michelangelo carved a striking bust of Brutus as the hero of liberty. Michelangelo regarded the freedom of his native city as lost after the second return of the Medici from exile and the assumption of the control of affairs by Alessandro and Cosmo de' Medici. The sorrow this caused him suggested the bust of Brutus, and cast a shadow on the tombs of Giuliano and Lorenzo de' Medici in the chapel spoken of above. The greater part of the work in the chapel, however, had been done before this time, and so the expression of embittered sorrow must be explained by the general depression of the artist not less than by his failure to realize his highest ideal, which also accounts for the gloom characteristic of his other creations. Twelve figures included in the original design for the sepulchral monument of the Medici were never carved. According to Vasari's arrangement in 1563, a seated figure of Giuliano is placed in an upper niche of one of the monuments, while symbolical figures representing Day and Night recline on a sarcophagus below. If Michelangelo's words have been rightly understood, these symbolical figures are to be regarded as mourning for the untimely death of the duke, and as grieving that life for him had not been worth the living. "Not to see, nor to hear must be happiness for me", are the words attributed to Night, which is represented as a giantess sunk in heavy and uneasy slumber, and symbolized by a mask, an owl, and a bunch of poppy-heads. The other allegorical figure, Day, a man, is represented as having no desire to rouse himself to action. The plan of the second monument is similar to that of the one just described; the figures of Evening and Dawn make the same impression as those of Night and Day. The two Medicean dukes are ideally treated as ancient warriors, rather than portrayed as in life. In the statue of Giuliano it is the superb modelling of the different parts that delights the eye; in the statue of Lorenzo the charm lies in the pose and the way in which the face is shadowed by the helmet. This figure of Lorenzo bears the name of Il Penseroso (the Meditative). Against the wall of the chapel stands the unfinished and really unsuccessful Madonna and Child; the pose of the Madonna is unique. PAINTINGS Michelangelo once said that he was no painter; on another occasion he declared he was no architect, but in reality he was both. About 1503 he painted a Holy Family, now in Florence in which the Madonna holds the Child over her shoulder to St. Joseph who stands behind. In this canvas Michelangelo departs from the traditional representation of the Holy Family, by the quaint grouping of nude figures in the background even more than by the entirely new pose of the Mother and Child. An "Entombment of Christ:, now in London, is unfinished. Like Leonardo da Vinci, the greatest painter of that period, Michelangelo made a large number of sketches. He also entered into competition with that famous artist by undertaking (1504) a battle-piece which was to adorn the wall opposite Leonardo's "Battle of Anghiari" in the great council chamber of the palace of the Signory, called the Palazzo del Priori, and now the Town-hall of Florence. As Michelangelo just at this date entered the service of the popes, the cartoon he prepared was never carried out and is now lost. After years of disagreement with Julius II the painting of the Sistine Chapel was begun in 1508, and in 1512 the ceiling was uncovered. Michelangelo, who was not a fesco-painter, exerted all his powers of mind and body, abandoning his preference for the effects of sculpture in order to express without assistance and in defiance of the envious, the full ideal of his conceptions in this unwonted medium. Creation, the Fall, and the preparation for the coming of the Redeemer form the subject of the fresco. The painter first divided and enclosed the ceiling with painted architecture which formed a fame for the frescoes; the cornice for this frame on the broad side of the chapel is adorned with the figures of naked youths. The nine fields of the smooth vault contain the history of the sinful human race as far as Noe. Around the dome, between the lunettes, are vaulted triangular spaces or pendentives; in these are placed prophets and sibyls, together with boy-angels, all pointing to the approaching redemption. In the lunettes over the windows and in the vaulted triangular spaces over the lunettes are represented the ancestors of Christ. The subject, arrangement, and technical excellence of these frescoes have always excited the greatest admiration. The Divine, the prophetic, and the human are here most happily expressed; the conception of the first is original; the prophets and sibyls have wonderful individuality, and great skill is shown in handling the drapery, while human beings are represented in animated action. The architect created the beautiful division of the space and the exact proportions, the sculptor produced the anatomically correct figures, and the painter knew how to blend forms and colours into perfect harmony. After the completion of the work Michelangelo could no longer regret that it had been forced upon him against his will. Equally famous is the great fresco of the "Last Judgment" which he painted upon the altar-wall of the chapel (1535-41). In this fresco, however, the nudity of the figures aroused objection, and they have been painted over by various hands. The "Last Judgment" has been more blackened and disfigured by time than the painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. ARCHITECTURE The commission given by Leo X for the rebuilding of the facade of the church of San Lorenzo, which has been already mentioned, ended in a bitter disappointment for Michelangelo. He produced very rapidly a fine design for the front and made the first preparations for the work. After four years (in 1520) the contract was rescinded without anything having been accomplished. However, the commission that Michelangelo received from Giulio de' Medidi, afterwards Clement VII, for a mortuary chapel for the Medici family was not revoked, and the chapel was completed in 1524. It is a simple building surmounted by a dome. Its only purpose is to hold the monuments. Michelangelos design for the enlargement of San Giovanni de' Fiorentini at Rome was never used. He also produced designs for the Piazza of the Campidoglio (Capitol) and the Porta Pia. It is a remarkable fact that the citizens of Florence in 1529 appointed him engineer-in-chief of the fortifications of the city. Of more importance was his appointment as chief architect for the reconstruction of St. Peter's by Pope Paul III, after the death of Sangallo (1546). He held this position seventeen years. Michelangelo carried out, with some changes, Bramante's plans for the new building and rejected those of Sangallo. His own work is notably the magnificent dome. He completed the drum, but not, however the upper dome. The clay model made by his own hands is still to be seen at the Vatican. Death brought to an end a life filled with fame and success, but also replete with suffering and sorrow; a life on which a great genius made demands which could not be satisfied. The ambitions of Michelangelo were insatiable, not so much owing to his desire for renown, as to his almost gigantic striving after the absolute ideal of art. For this reason Michelangelo's creations bear the stamp of his subjectivity and of his restless efforts to attain the loftiest ideals by new methods. He accomplished much that was extraordinary in three or four departments of art, but at the same time broke through many limitations prescribed by the laws of beauty in all arts, wilfully disregarding, at times, in his modelling of the human figure, even that fidelity to nature which he esteemed so highly. The way he pointed was dangerous, inasmuch as it led directly to extravagance, which, though perhaps endurable in Michelangelo obscured even the fame of Raphael; he swayed not only his own age, but succeeding generations. Monographs by SUTHERLAND-GOWER, HOLYROD, STRUTT (London, 1903); THODE, "Michelangelo und das Ende der Renaissance" (1903, 1904); ROLLAND, "Michelange" (1905). G. GIETMANN Burchard of Basle Burchard of Basle (Also of HASENBURG or ASUEL, from his ancestral castle in Western Berne, Switzerland). Bishop of Basle in the eleventh century and a warm partisan of Henry IV (1056-1106). He belonged to the family of the counts of Neuenburg, or Neuchatel, was b. towards the middle of the eleventh century, and d. 12 April, 1107. Having entered the ecclesiastical state he was made Bishop of Basle (1072) by Henry IV; in recognition of this favour he was ever loyal to the king, and became one of his foremost advisers. In Henry's first difficulties with the Saxons (1073-75) Burchard rendered him all possible assistance. When the conflict between the king and Pope Gregory VII (1073-85) broke out, Burchard was among the bishops who assembled at Worms (January, 1076), proclaimed the deposition of the pope, and wrote him an insulting letter. Together with Bishop Huzmann of Speyer he also went to Northern Italy for the purpose of inducing the Lombard bishops to take similar action with regard to the pope. In this he was successful; a synod was assembled at Piacenza, and the Lombard bishops renounced obedience to Gregory. For these rebellious acts Burchard was excommunicated and deposed by the pope in the Lenten synod of 1076; a similar sentence was inflicted on other bishops and on Burchard's royal master. King Henry obtained absolution at Canossa in January, 1077; and Burchard, who accompanied him on the penitential pilgrimage, was reinstated in office. During the civil war in 1077 and the following years, between Henry and his rival, Duke Rudolf of Suabia, raised to the throne by many princes, Burchard stood on the side of Henry, in whose interest he fought repeatedly, both against Rudolf and his supporter, Berthold of Zahringen. In 1078 Burchard and his friend suffered a crushing defeat, and he barely saved his life by precipitate flight. But the fortunes of war turned; Burchard and his partisans ravaged the country of Alemannia, or Suabia, the home of Rudolf and Berthold, and many cruelties were committed. Churches, sanctuaries, and perhaps monasteries as well were destroyed by the reckless and savage soldiery. But it all helped the cause of Henry and weakened that of his rival, who was finally vanquished and killed in 1080. Burchard was rewarded for his services with grants of land from Henry. It is not certain that he was present in the synod held at Brixen (Tyrol) in June, 1080, where the partisans of Henry again deposed Gregory VII and elected in his stead Wibert, Archbishop of Ravenna. He was with Henry, however, when the schismatic king took possession of Rome, 21 March, 1084, and it may be taken for granted that he assisted at the installation of the antipope Clement III (1084-1100) and at the imperial coronation of Henry, which events occurred on the 24th and 31st of March respectively. Shortly afterwards Burchard returned to Germany with his royal master. Two synods were held there during the year 1085, in which Burchard, though not present, was directly concerned. The first, in the latter part of April, was held at Quedlinburg by the partisans of Gregory VII; it condemned all adversaries of the pope, including Bishop Burchard. Henry's faction held its synod at Mainz in the early part of May; Pope Gregory and all the bishops loyal to him were deposed. For the next twenty years Burchard was less active in the cause of Henry, but he remained to the end loyal to his king. When Henry was hard pressed in Italy by his son Conrad, in rebellion since 1093, and other enemies, Burchard was one of the very few bishops of Germany, who brought him any comfort. In 1095 he appeared at the king's court at Padua, and after Henry's return to Germany he paid several other visits to the royal court. How much Henry counted on the loyalty of Burchard was made evident in a letter which the monarch wrote to the princes of the empire from Liege in the early part of the year 1106, shortly before his death. Henry besought the princes to accord him sufficient time to consult with the princes and bishops about the matters relating to his abdication or reconciliation with his rebellious son Henry V (1106-25), and among the bishops faithful to him he mentioned the name of Burchard of Basle. Burchard, however, did not always remain an uncompromising adversary of the popes. After the death of Gregory VII, particularly after the election of Urban II (1088-99), his sentiments underwent a change. He sought a reconciliation with the Holy See; and in order to prove his interest in purely ecclesiastical and spiritual matters he became instrumental in the erection of several monasteries or other religious institutions. Among those founded by him may be mentioned the monastery of St. Alban in Basle, and chapterhouse of Grandis Vallis to the south of Basle, and the monastery of St. John, erected partly by his brother and partly by himself at Erlach in the neighbourhood of his ancestral castle. In spite of his attachment to Henry IV he died fully reconciled with the pope. TROUILLAT, Monuments de l'histoire de l'ancien eveche de Bale (Porrentruy, 1852); BLOSCH, Zwei bernische Bischofe in Berner Taschenbuch (Bern, 1881); GIESEBRECHT, Gesch. der deutschen Kaiserzeit (Leipzig, 1890), III; FIALA in Kirschenlex., II, 1514-19. FRANCIS J. SCHAEFER Burchard of Worms Burchard of Worms Bishop of that see, b. of noble parents in Hesse, Germany, after the middle of the tenth century; d. 20 August, 1025. He received his education in Coblenz and other places, and ultimately entered the service of Archbishop Willigis of Mainz (975-1011), by whom he was ordained deacon. He rose gradually in ecclesiastical rank and was finally appointed by Willigis first chamberlain, and primate or judge of the city. In these offices he showed so much discretion and impartiality, that his reputation reached Emperor Otto III. During a personal interview with his imperial master (1000) he was appointed to the vacant Bishopric of Worms; a few days later he was advanced to the priesthood and the episcopal dignity by Willigis at Heiligenstadt. Thenceforth he laboured unceasingly for the temporal and spiritual welfare of his subjects. He rebuilt the walls of Worms and with the approval of Henry II tore down the stronghold of a certain Duke Otto, which served as a place of refuge to criminals and malefactors. Between 1023 and 1025 he promulgated a celebrated body of laws, the "Leges et Statuta familiae S. Petri Wormatiensis", with the purpose of insuring the impartial administration of justice. (Boos, in Urkundenbuch der Stadt Worms, I, 1886; Weiland, in Mon. Ger. Hist.: Leges, IV, 1.) Many monasteries and churches were erected by him. On the site of the aforesaid Otto's castle he built a monastery in honour of St. Paul; his sister Mathilda was placed in charge of a community of religious women, whose home was practically rebuilt; the cathedral of St. Peter at Worms was reconstructed and dedicated in 1016. He also devoted himself to the formation of ecclesiastical students in his cathedral school and to the instruction of ecclesiastics generally. To stimulate their zeal he would at times answer difficult questions submitted to him. The prevalent evils he tried to reform through visitations and synods. For the sake of uniformity in all church matters he drew up a manual for the instruction and guidance of young ecclesiastics, this is his well-known "Collectarium canonum" or "Decretum" in twenty books, a compilation of ecclesiastical law and moral theology, drawn from previous similar collections, the penitential books, the writings of the Fathers, the decrees of councils and popes, and the Sacred Scriptures. For more than a century, until the publication of the "Decretum" of Gratian (c. 1150), this was a widely used practical guide of the clergy, often quoted as "Brocardus". The nineteenth book, known as "Corrector, seu medicus", was circulated frequently as a separate work and was esteemed as a practical confessor's guide. (Von Scherer, Kirchenrecht, I, 238.) The work was undertaken at the suggestion of Brunicho, the provost of the Worms Cathedral, and was executed with the help of Bishop Walter of Speyer and Abbot Olbert of Gembloux (ed. Foucher, Paris, 1549; Migne, P.L., CXL, Paris, 1853). Burchard enjoyed the special esteem of his imperial masters. With Otto III he was on the most intimate terms; Henry II and Conrad II made visits to him in 1009 and 1025 respectively. Personally Burchard was a saintly man. His biographer, probably an ecclesiastic, praises his devotion to prayer, his mortification, his fairness and charity towards others. Vita Burchardi Episcopi in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., IV; also in P.L. (Paris, 1853), CXL; GROSCH, Burchard I Bischof zu Worms (Jena, 1890); HAUCK, Kirchengesch. Deutschlands (Leipzig, 1896), III; VON SCHERER in Kirchenlex., II; HAUCK in HERZOG, Realencyc. (Leipzig, 1897); GIETL, Hist. Jahrb. (1895), XVI, 116-119; WATTENBACH, Deutschl. Geschichtsquellen (6th ed., 1893), I, 392; CONRAT, Gesch. d. Quellen des rom. Rechts im M. A., 1, 261. FRANCIS J. SCHAEFER St. Burchard of Wurzburg St. Burchard of Würzurg First bishop of Würzurg, b. in England of Anglo-Saxon parents, date unknown; d. in Germany most probably in 754. After the death of his father and mother he left home to go as a missionary to Germany, being drawn to this life by the great reputation of his countryman, St. Boniface, to whom he offered himself as an assistant. As Boniface was at this time an archbishop it must have been after the year 732 that Burchard began missionary work on German soil. He soon showed himself a competent and zealous messenger of the Faith and was consecrated Bishop of the new See of Würzurg by St. Boniface when the latter erected the ecclesiastical hierarchy in the mission territory of Thuringia. The date is probably 741, for on 22 October, 741, Burchard and Witta of Buraburg took part as bishops in the consecration of St. Willibald as Bishop of Eichstatt. In a letter to St. Boniface, 1 April, 743, Pope Zachary confirmed the founding of the new diocese. But a year before this (April, 742) Burchard had been a member of the first German synod. He now devoted himself to spreading and confirming Christianity in the new bishopric. In the spring of 748 he went to Rome to make a report on the condition of the Church in Franconia and to submit various questions for decision. Burchard was held in high esteem by Pepin the Short. When the latter, in 749, appointed an embassy to lay before Pope Zachary the question who should be King of the Franks, he placed Burchard and Abbot Fulrad of St. Denis at its head. After his return from Rome Burchard was not able to continue his apostolic activity for any great space of time and died before St. Boniface. One of his successors, Hugo (984-990), had Burchard's remains dug up and solemnly buried on 14 October. This day has remained the feast-day of the saint. Vita S. Burchardi in Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., XV, 47-50 (unreliable account of ninth and tenth centuries); Vita S. Burchardi, in Acta S. S., Oct., IV, 575 sqq. (account of twelfth century); NURNBERGER, Aus der litterar. Hinterlassenschaft des hl. Bonifatius und des hl. Burchardus (Neisse, 1888); ULRICH, Der hl. Burchardus, erster Bischof von Würzurg (Würzurg, 1877); HAUCK, Kirchengesch. (2nd ed., Leipzig, 1898-1900), I, II, passim. J.P. KIRSCH Hans Burckmair Hans Burckmair (Or Burgkmair). A painter of the Swabian school, b. at Augsburg in 1473; d. in 1531. He was the son of Toman, or Thomas Burckmair, and received his first lessons in are from his father, then went, it appears, to Schongauer in Alsace, and afterwards to Italy. In company with the elder Holbein he painted, between the years 1501 and 1504, the seven great churches of Rome on panels in the monastery if St. Catherine of Augsburg. To Burckmair belong, among these, the basilica of St. Peter, the basilica of the Lateran, and the church of Santa Croce. The building itself is represented in the main compartment of each picture; above are, respectively, Christ's prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane, the Scourging, and the Crucifixion. Following the titles of the churches there are, in the first picture, St. Peter, enthroned and accompanied by the Fourteen Holy Martyrs; in the second, the legend of St. John the Evangelist, and in the third, the martyrdom of the Eleven Thousand Virgins. Several fine figures in the paintings show Italian influence. Not much later in date is the painting of Christ and the Blessed Virgin, the latter wearing a crown; most charming figures of angels and three groups of saints are depicted on the wings as surrounding the central personages. The pictures just mentioned are in Augsburg. Among the Madonnas at Nuremburg, the Madonna with the bunch of grapes is especially admired. An attractive genre picture with a backgroun