_________________________________________________________________ Title: The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 14: Simony-Tournon 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 14 Simony to Tournon New York: ROBERT APPLETON COMPANY Imprimatur JOHN M. FARLEY ARCHBISHOP OF NEW YORK _________________________________________________________________ Simony Simony (From Simon Magus; Acts, viii, 18-24) Simony is usually defined "a deliberate intention of buying or selling for a temporal price such things as are spiritual of annexed unto spirituals". While, this definition only speaks of purchase and sale, any exchange of spiritual for temporal things is simoniacal. Nor is the giving of the temporal as the price of the spiritual required for the existence of simony; according to a proposition condemned by Innocent XI (Denzinger-Bannwart, no. 1195) it suffices that the determining motive of the action of one party be the obtaining of compensation from the other. The various temporal advantages which may be offered for a spiritual favour are, after Gregory the Great, usually divided in three classes. These are: (1) the munus a manu (material advantage), which comprises money, all movable and immovable property, and all rights appreciable in pecuniary value; (2) the munus a lingua (oral advantage) which includes oral commendation, public expressions of approval, moral support in high places; (3) the munus ab obsequio (homage) which consists in subserviency, the rendering of undue services, etc. The spiritual object includes whatever is conducive to the eternal welfare of the soul, i.e. all supernatural things: sanctifying grace, the sacraments, sacramentals, etc. While according to the natural and Divine laws the term simony is applicable only to the exchange of supernatural treasures for temporal advantages, its meaning has been further extended through ecclesiastical legislation. In order to preclude all danger of simony the Church has forbidden certain dealings which did not fall under Divine prohibition. It is thus unlawful to exchange ecclesiastical benefices by private authority, to accept any payment whatever for holy oils, to sell blessed rosaries or crucifixes. Such objects lose, if sold, all the indulgences previously attached to them (S. Cong. Of Indulg., 12 July, 1847). Simony of ecclesiastical law is, of course a variable element, since the prohibitions of the Church may be abrogated or fall into disuse. Simony whether it be of ecclesiastical or Divine law, may be divided into mental, conventional, and real (simonia mentalis, conventionalis, et realis). In mental simony there is lacking the outward manifestation, or, according to others, the approval on the part of the person to whom a proposal is made. In conventional simony an expressed or tacit agreement is entered upon. It is subdivided into merely conventional, when neither party has fulfilled any of the terms of the agreement, and mixed conventional, when one of the parties has at least partly complied with the assumed obligations. To the latter subdivision may be referred what has been aptly termed "confidential simony", in which an ecclesiastical benefice is procured for a certain person with the understanding that later he will either resign in favour of the one through whom he obtained the position or divide with him the revenues. Simony is called real when the stipulations of the mutual agreement have been either partly or completely carried out by both parties. To estimate accurately the gravity of simony, which some medieval ecclesiastical writers denounced as the most abominable of crimes, a distinction must be made between the violations of the Divine law, and the dealings contrary to ecclesiastical legislation. Any transgression of the law of God in this matter is, objectively considered, grievous in every instance (mortalis ex toto genere suo). For this kind of simony places on a par things supernatural and things natural, things eternal and things temporal, and constitutes a sacrilegious depreciation of Divine treasures. The sin can become venial only through the absence of the subjective dispositions required for the commission of a grievous offense. The merely ecclesiastical prohibitions, however, do not all and under all circumstances impose a grave obligation. The presumption is that the church authority, which, in this connection, sometimes prohibits actions in themselves indifferent, did not intend the law to be grievously binding in minor details. As he who preaches the gospel "should live by the gospel" (I Cor., ix, 14) but should also avoid even the appearance of receiving temporal payment for spiritual services, difficulties may arise concerning the propriety or sinfulness of remuneration in certain circumstances. The ecclesiastic may certainly receive what is offered to him on the occasion of spiritual ministrations, but he cannot accept any payment for the same. The celebration of Mass for money would, consequently, be sinful; but it is perfectly legitimate to accept a stipend offered on such occasion for the support of the celebrant. The amount of the stipend, varying for different times and countries, is usually fixed by ecclesiastical authority (SEE STIPEND). It is allowed to accept it even should the priest be otherwise well-to-do; for he has a right to live from the altar and should avoid becoming obnoxious to other members of the gy. It is simoniacal to accept payment for the exercise of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, e.g., the granting of dispensations; but there is nothing improper in demanding from the applicants for matrimonial dispensations a contribution intended partly as a chancery fee and partly as a salutary fine calculated to prevent the too frequent recurrence of such requests. It is likewise simony to accept temporal compensation for admission into a religious order; but contributions made by candidates to defray the expenses of their novitiate as well as the dowry required by some female orders are not included in this prohibition. In regard to the parish clergy, the poorer the church, the more urgent is the obligation incumbent upon the faithful to support them. In the fulfilment of this duty local law and custom ought to be observed. The Second Plenary Council of Baltimore has framed the following decrees for the United States: (1) The priest may accept what is freely offered after the administration of baptism or matrimony, but should refrain from asking anything (no. 221). (2) The confessor is never allowed to apply to his own use pecuniary penances, nor may he ask or accept anything from the penitent in compensation of his services. Even voluntary gifts must be refused, and the offering of Mass stipends in the sacred tribunal cannot be permitted (no. 289). (3) The poor who cannot be buried at their own expense should receive free burial (no. 393). The Second and Third action of a compulsory contribution at the church entrance from the faithful who wish to hear Mass on Sundays and Holy Days (Conc. Plen. Balt. II, no 397; Conc. Plen. Balt. III, no 288). As this practice continue din existence in many churches until very recently, a circular letter addressed 29 Sept., 1911, by the Apostolic Delegate to the archbishops and bishops of the United States, again condemns the custom and requests the ordinaries to suppress it wherever found in existence. To uproot the evil of simony so prevalent during the Middle Ages, the Church decreed the severest penalties against its perpetrators. Pope Julius II declared simoniacal papal elections invalid, an enactment which has since been rescinded, however, by Pope Pius X (Constitution "Vacante Sede", 25 Dec., 1904, tit. II, cap. Vi, in "Canoniste Contemp.", XXXII, 1909, 291). The collation of a benefice is void if, in obtaining it, the appointee either committed simony himself, or at least tacitly approved of its commission by a third party. Should he have taken possession, he is bound to resign and restore all the revenues received during his tenure. Excommunication simply reserved to the Apostolic See is pronounced in the Constitution "Apostolicae Sedis" (12 Oct., 1869): (1) against persons guilty of real simony in any benefices and against their accomplices; (2) against any persons, whatsoever their dignity, guilty of confidential simony in any benefices; (3) against such as are guilty of simony by purchasing or selling admission into a religious order; (4) against all persons inferior to the bishops, who derive gain (quaestum facientes) from indulgences and other spiritual graces; (5) against those who, collecting stipends for Masses, realize a profit on them by having the Masses celebrated in places where smaller stipends are usually given. The last-mentioned provision was supplemented by subsequent decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Council. The Decree "Vigilanti" (25 May, 1893) forbade the practice indulged in by some booksellers of receiving stipends and offering exclusively books and subscriptions to periodicals to the celebrant of the Masses. The Decree "Ut Debita" (11 May, 1904) condemned the arrangements according to which the guardians of shrines sometimes devoted the offerings originally intended for Masses partly to other pious purposes. The offenders against the two decrees just mentioned incur suspension ipso facto from their functions if they are in sacred orders; inability to receive higher orders if they are clerics inferior to the priests; excommunication of pronounced sentence (latae sententiae) if they belong to the laity. N.A. WEBER Pope St. Simplicius Pope St. Simplicius Reigned 468-483; date of birth unknown; died 10 March, 483. According to the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, I, 249) Simplicius was the son of a citizen of Tivoli named Castinus; and after the death of Pope Hilarius in 468 was elected to succeed the latter. The elevation of the new pope was not attended with any difficulties. During his pontificate the Western Empire came to an end. Since the murder of Valentinian III (455) there had been a rapid succession of insignificant emperors in the Western Roman Empire, who were constantly threatened by war and revolution. Following other German tribes the Heruli entered Italy, and their ruler Odoacer put an end to the Western Empire by deposing the last emperor, Romulus Augustulus, and assuming himself the title of King of Italy. Although an Arian, Odoacer treated the Catholic Church with much respect; he also retained the greater part of the former administrative organization, so that the change produced no great differences at Rome. During the Monophysite controversy, that was still carried on in the Eastern Empire, Simplicius vigorously defended the independence of the Church against the Cæsaropapism of the Byzantine rulers and the authority of the Apostolic See in questions of faith. The twenty-eighth canon of the Council of Chalcedon (451) granted the See of Constantinople the same privileges of honour that were enjoyed by the Bishop of Old Rome, although the primacy and the highest rank of honour were due to the latter. The papal legates protested against this elevation of the Byzantine Patriarch, and Pope Leo confirmed only the dogmatic decrees of the council. However, the Patriarch of Constantinople sought to bring the canon into force, and the Emperor Leo II desired to obtain its confirmation by Simplicius. The latter, however, rejected the request of the emperor and opposed the carrying out of the canon, that moreover limited the rights of the old Oriental patriarchates. The rebellion of Basiliscus, who in 476 drove the Emperor Zeno into exile and seized the Byzantine throne, intensified the Monophysite dispute. Basiliscus looked for support to the Monophysites, and he granted permission to the deposed Monophysite patriarchs, Timotheus Ailurus of Alexandria and Peter Fullo of Antioch, to return to their sees. At the same time he issued a religious edict (Enkyklikon) addressed to Ailurus, which commanded that only the first three ecumenical synods were to be accepted, and rejected the Synod of Chalcedon and the Letter of Pope Leo. All bishops were to sign the edict. The Bishop of Constantinople, Acacius (from 471), wavered and was about to proclaim this edict. But the firm stand taken by the populace, influenced by the monks who were rigidly Catholic in their opinions, moved the bishop to oppose the emperor and to defend the threatened faith. The abbots and priests of Constantinople united with Pope Simplicius, who made every effort to maintain the Catholic dogma and the definitions of the Council of Chalcedon. The pope exhorted to loyal adherence to the true faith in letters to Acacius, to the priests and abbots, as welI as to the usurper Basiliscus himself. In a letter to Basiliscus of 10 Jan., 476, Simplicius says of the See of Peter at Rome: "This same norm of Apostolic doctrine is firmly maintained by his (Peter's) successors, of him to whom the Lord entrusted the care of the entire flock of sheep, to whom He promised not to leave him until the end of time" (Thiel, "Rom. Pont.", 182). In the same way he took up with the emperor the cause of the Catholic Patriarch of Alexandria, Timotheus Salophakiolus, who had been superseded by Ailurus. When the Emperor Zeno in 477 drove away the usurper and again gained the supremacy, he sent the pope a completely Catholic confession of faith, whereupon Simplicius (9 Oct., 477) congratulated him on his restoration to power and exhorted him to ascribe the victory to God, who wished in this way to restore liberty to the Church. Zeno recalled the edicts of Basiliscus, banished Peter Fullo from Antioch, and reinstated Timotheus Salophakiolus at Alexandria. He did not disturb Ailurus on account of the latter's great age, and as matter of fact the latter soon died. The Monophysites of Alexandria now put forward Peter Mongus, the former archdeacon of Ailurus, as his successor. Urged by the pope and the Eastern Catholics, Zeno commanded the banishment of Peter Mongus, but the latter was able to hide in Alexandria, and fear of the Monophysites prevented the use of force. In a moment of weakness Salophakiolus himself had permitted the placing of the name of the Monophysite patriarch Dioscurus in the diptychs to be read at the church services. On 13 March, 478, Simplicius wrote to Acacius of Constantinople that Salophakiolus should be urged to wipe out the disgrace that he had brought upon himself. The latter sent legates and letters to Rome to give satisfaction to the pope. At the request of Acacius, who was still active against the Monophysites, the pope condemned by name the heretics Mongus, Fullo, Paul of Epheseus, and John of Apamea, and delegated the Patriarch of Constantinople to be in this his representative. When the Monophysites at Antioch raised a revolt in 497 against the patriarch Stephen II, and killed him, Acacius consecrated Stephen III, and afterwards Kalendion as Stephen's successors. Simplicius made an energetic demand upon the emperor to punish the murderers of the patriarch, and also reproved Acacius for exceeding his competence in performing this consecration; at the same time, though, the pope granted him the necessary dispensation. After the death of Salophakiolus, the Monophysites of Alexandria again elected Peter Mongus patriarch, while the Catholics chose Johannes Talaia. Both Acacius and the emperor, whom he influenced, were opposed to Talaia, and sided with Mongus. Mongus went to Constantinople to advance his cause. Acacius and he agreed upon a formula of union between the Catholics and the Monophysites that was approved by the Emperor Zeno in 482 (Henotikon). Talaia had sent ambassadors to Pope Simplicius to notify the pope of his election. However, at the same time, the pope received a letter from the emperor in which Talaia was accused of perjury and bribery and a demand was made for the recognition of Mongus. Simplicius, therefore, delayed to recognize Talaia, but protested energetically against the elevation of Mongus to the Patriarchate of Alexandria. Acacius, however, maintained his alliance with Mongus and sought to prevail upon the Eastern bishops to enter into Church communion with him. For a long time Acacius sent no information of any kind to the pope, so that the latter in a letter blamed him severely for this. When finally Talaia came to Rome in 483 Simplicius was already dead. Simplicius exercised a zealous pastoral care in western Europe also, notwithstanding the trying circumstances of the Church during the disorders of the Migrations. He issued decisions in ecclesiastical questions, appointed Bishop Zeno of Seville papal vicar in Spain, so that the prerogatives of the papal see could be exercised in the country itself for the benefit of the ecclesiastical administration. When Bishop John of Ravenna in 482 claimed Mutina as a suffragan diocese of his metropolitan see, and without more ado consecrated Bishop George for this diocese, Simplicius vigorously opposed him and defended the rights of the papal see. Simplicius established four new churches in Rome itself. A large hall built in the form of a rotunda on the Cælian Hill was turned into a church and dedicated to St. Stephen; the main part of this building still exists as the Church of San Stefano Rotondo. A fine hall near the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore was given to the Roman Church and turned by Simplicius into a church dedicated to St. Andrew by the addition of an apse adorned with mosaics; it is no longer in existence (cf. de Rossi, "Bull. di archeol. crist.", 1871, 1-64). The pope built a church dedicated to the first martyr, St. Stephen, behind the memorial church of San Lorenzo in Agro Verano; this church is no longer standing. He had a fourth church built in the city in honour of St. Balbina, "juxta palatium Licinianum", where her grave was; this church still remains. In order to make sure of the regular holding of church services, of the administration of baptism, and of the discipline of penance in the great churches of the catacombs outside the city walls, namely the church of St. Peter (in the Vatican), of St. Paul on the Via Ostiensis, and of St. Lawrence on the Via Tiburtina, Simplicius ordained that the clergy of three designated sections of the city should, in an established order, have charge of the religious functions at these churches of the catacombs. Simplicius was buried in St. Peter's on the Vatican. The "Liber Pontificalis" gives 2 March as the day of burial (VI non.); probably 10 March (VI id.) should be read. After his death King Odoacer desired to influence the filling of the papal see. The prefect of the city, Basilius, asserted that before death Pope Simplicius had begged to issue the order that no one should be consecrated Roman bishop without his consent (cf. concerning the regulation Thiel, "Epist. Rom. Pont.", 686-88). The Roman clergy opposed this edict that limited their right of election. They maintained the force of the edict, issued by the Emperor Honorius at the instance of Pope Boniface I, that only that person should be regarded as the rightful Bishop of Rome who was elected according to canonical form with Divine approval and universal consent. Simplicius was venerated as a saint; his feast is on 2 or 3 March. Liber pontificalis, ed. DUCHESNE, I, 249-251; JAFFÉ, Regesta Pont. Rom., 2nd ed., I, 77-80; THIEL, Epist. Rom. Pontif., I (Brunswick, 1868), 174 sq.; LIBERATUS, Breviar. Causæ Nestor., xvi sq.; EVAGRIUS, Hist. eccl., III, 4 sq.; HERGENRÖTHER, Photius, I, 111-22; GRISAR, Geschichte Roms und der Päpste, I, 153 sq., 324 sq.; LANGEN, Geschichte der römischen Kirche, II (Bonn, 1885), 126 sqq.; WURM, Die Papstwahl (Cologne, 1902). J.P. KIRSCH Simplicius, Faustinus, and Beatrice Simplicius, Faustinus, and Beatrice Martyrs at Rome during the Diocletian persecution (302 or 303). The brothers Simplicius and Faustinus were cruelly tortured on account of their Christian faith, beaten with clubs, and finally beheaded; their bodies were thrown into the Tiber. According to another version of the legend a stone was tied to them and they were drowned. Their sister Beatrice had the bodies drawn out of the water and buried. Then for seven months she lived with a pious matron named Lucina, and with her aid Beatrice succoured the persecuted Christians by day and night. Finally she was discovered and arrested. Her accuser was her neighbor Lucretius who desired to obtain possession of her lands. She courageously asserted before the judge that she would never sacrifice to demons, because she was a Christian. As punishment, she was strangled in prison. Her friend Lucina buried her by her brothers in the cemetery ad Ursum Pileatum on the road to Porto. Soon after this Divine punishment overtook the accuser Lucretius. When Lucretius at a feast was making merry over the folly of the martyrs, an infant who had been brought to the entertainment by his mother, cried out, "Thou hast committed murder and hast taken unjust possession of land. Thou art a slave of the devil". And the devil at once took possession of him and tortured him three hours and drew him down into the bottomless pit. The terror of those present was so great that they became Christians. This is the story of the legend. Trustworthy Acts concerning the history of the two brothers and sister are no longer in existence. Pope Leo II (683-683) translated their relics to a church which he had built at Rome in honour of St. Paul. Later the greater part of the relics of the martyrs were taken to the Church of Santa Maria Maggiore. St. Simplicius is represented with a pennant, on the shield of which are three lilies called the crest of Simplicius; the lilies are a symbol of purity of heart. St. Beatrice has a cord in her hand, because she was strangled. The feast of the three saints is on 29 July. Acta SS., July, VII, 34-37; Bibliotheca hagiographica latina (Brussels, 1898-1900), 1127-28. KLEMENS LOFFLER Richard Simpson Richard Simpson Born 1820; died near Rome, 5 April, 1876. He was educated at Oriel College, Oxford, and took his B. A. degree, 9 February, 1843. Being ordained an Anglican clergyman, he was appointed vicar of Mitcham in Surrey, but resigned this in 1845 to become a Catholic. After some years spent on the continent, during which time he became remarkably proficient as a linguist, he returned to England and became editor of "The Rambler". When this ceased in 1862 he, with Sir John Acton, began the "Home and Foreign Review", which was opposed by ecclesiastical authority as unsound and was discontinued in 1864. Afterwards Simpson devoted himself to the study of Shakespeare and to music. His works are: "Invocation of Saints proved from the Bible alone" (1849); "The Lady Falkland: her life" (1861); "Edmund Campion" (1867), the most valuable of his works; "Introduction to the Philosophy of Shakespeare's Sonnets" (1868); "The School of Shakespeare" (1872); and "Sonnets of Shakespeare selected from a complete setting, and miscellaneous songs" (1878). Though he remained a practical Catholic his opinions were very liberal and he assisted Mr. Gladstone in writing his pamphlet on "Vaticanism". His papers in "The Rambler" on the English martyrs deserve attention. COOPER in Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v.; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., s. v.; WARD, Life and Times of Cardinal Wiseman (London, 1897); GASQUET, Lord Acton and His Circle (London, 1906). EDWIN BURTON Sin Sin The subject is treated under these heads: I. Nature of sin II. Division III. Mortal Sin IV. Venial Sin V. Permission and Remedies VI. The Sense of Sin I. NATURE OF SIN Since sin is a moral evil, it is necessary in the first place to determine what is meant by evil, and in particular by moral evil. Evil is defined by St. Thomas (De malo, 2:2) as a privation of form or order or due measure. In the physical order a thing is good in proportion as it possesses being. God alone is essentially being, and He alone is essentially and perfectly good. Everything else possesses but a limited being, and, in so far as it possesses being, it is good. When it has its due proportion of form and order and measure it is, in its own order and degree, good. (See GOOD.) Evil implies a deficiency in perfection, hence it cannot exist in God who is essentially and by nature good; it is found only in finite beings which, because of their origin from nothing, are subject to the privation of form or order or measure due them, and, through the opposition they encounter, are liable to an increase or decrease of the perfection they have: "for evil, in a large sense, may be described as the sum of opposition, which experience shows to exist in the universe, to the desires and needs of individuals; whence arises, among human beings at least, the suffering in which life abounds" (see EVIL). According to the nature of the perfection which it limits, evil is metaphysical, physical, or moral. Metaphysical evil is not evil properly so called; it is but the negation of a greater good, or the limitation of finite beings by other finite beings. Physical evil deprives the subject affected by it of some natural good, and is adverse to the well-being of the subject, as pain and suffering. Moral evil is found only in intelligent beings; it deprives them of some moral good. Here we have to deal with moral evil only. This may be defined as a privation of conformity to right reason and to the law of God. Since the morality of a human act consists in its agreement or non-agreement with right reason and the eternal law, an act is good or evil in the moral order according as it involves this agreement or non-agreement. When the intelligent creature, knowing God and His law, deliberately refuses to obey, moral evil results. Sin is nothing else than a morally bad act (St. Thomas, "De malo", 8:3), an act not in accord with reason informed by the Divine law. God has endowed us with reason and free-will, and a sense of responsibility; He has made us subject to His law, which is known to us by the dictates of conscience, and our acts must conform with these dictates, otherwise we sin (Rom. 14:23). In every sinful act two things must be considered, the substance of the act and the want of rectitude or conformity (St. Thomas, I-II:72:1). The act is something positive. The sinner intends here and now to act in some determined matter, inordinately electing that particular good in defiance of God's law and the dictates of right reason. The deformity is not directly intended, nor is it involved in the act so far as this is physical, but in the act as coming from the will which has power over its acts and is capable of choosing this or that particular good contained within the scope of its adequate object, i.e. universal good (St. Thomas, "De malo", Q. 3, a. 2, ad 2um). God, the first cause of all reality, is the cause of the physical act as such, the free-will of the deformity (St. Thomas I-II:84:2; "De malo", 3:2). The evil act adequately considered has for its cause the free-will defectively electing some mutable good in place of the eternal good, God, and thus deviating from its true last end. In every sin a privation of due order or conformity to the moral law is found, but sin is not a pure, or entire privation of all moral good (St. Thomas, "De malo", 2:9; I-II:73:2). There is a twofold privation; one entire which leaves nothing of its opposite, as for instance, darkness which leaves no light; another, not entire, which leaves something of the good to which it is opposed, as for instance, disease which does not entirely destroy the even balance of the bodily functions necessary for health. A pure or entire privation of good could occur in a moral act only on the supposition that the will could incline to evil as such for an object. This is impossible because evil as such is not contained within the scope of the adequate object of the will, which is good. The sinner's intention terminates at some object in which there is a participation of God's goodness, and this object is directly intended by him. The privation of due order, or the deformity, is not directly intended, but is accepted in as much as the sinner's desire tends to an object in which this want of conformity is involved, so that sin is not a pure privation, but a human act deprived of its due rectitude. From the defect arises the evil of the act, from the fact that it is voluntary, its imputability. II. DIVISION OF SIN As regards the principle from which it proceeds sin is original or actual. The will of Adam acting as head of the human race for the conservation or loss of original justice is the cause and source of original sin. Actual sin is committed by a free personal act of the individual will. It is divided into sins of commission and omission. A sin of commission is a positive act contrary to some prohibitory precept; a sin of omission is a failure to do what is commanded. A sin of omission, however, requires a positive act whereby one wills to omit the fulfilling of a precept, or at least wills something incompatible with its fulfillment (I-II:72:5). As regards their malice, sins are distinguished into sins of ignorance, passion or infirmity, and malice; as regards the activities involved, into sins of thought, word, or deed (cordis, oris, operis); as regards their gravity, into mortal and venial. This last named division is indeed the most important of all and it calls for special treatment. But before taking up the details, it will be useful to indicate some further distinctions which occur in theology or in general usage. Material and Formal Sin This distinction is based upon the difference between the objective elements (object itself, circumstances) and the subjective (advertence to the sinfulness of the act). An action which, as a matter of fact, is contrary to the Divine law but is not known to be such by the agent constitutes a material sin; whereas formal sin is committed when the agent freely transgresses the law as shown him by his conscience, whether such law really exists or is only thought to exist by him who acts. Thus, a person who takes the property of another while believing it to be his own commits a material sin; but the sin would be formal if he took the property in the belief that it belonged to another, whether his belief were correct or not. Internal Sins That sin may be committed not only by outward deeds but also by the inner activity of the mind apart from any external manifestation, is plain from the precept of the Decalogue: "Thou shalt not covet", and from Christ's rebuke of the scribes and pharisees whom he likens to "whited sepulchres... full of all filthiness" (Matt. 23:27). Hence the Council of Trent (Sess. XIV, c. v), in declaring that all mortal sins must be confessed, makes special mention of those that are most secret and that violate only the last two precepts of the Decalogue, adding that they "sometimes more grievously wound the soul and are more dangerous than sins which are openly committed". Three kinds of internal sin are usually distinguished: + delectatio morosa, i.e. the pleasure taken in a sinful thought or imagination even without desiring it; + gaudium, i.e. dwelling with complacency on sins already committed; and + desiderium, i.e. the desire for what is sinful. An efficacious desire, i.e. one that includes the deliberate intention to realize or gratify the desire, has the same malice, mortal or venial, as the action which it has in view. An inefficacious desire is one that carries a condition, in such a way that the will is prepared to perform the action in case the condition were verified. When the condition is such as to eliminate all sinfulness from the action, the desire involves no sin: e.g. I would gladly eat meat on Friday, if I had a dispensation; and in general this is the case whenever the action is forbidden by positive law only. When the action is contrary to natural law and yet is permissible in given circumstances or in a particular state of life, the desire, if it include those circumstances or that state as conditions, is not in itself sinful: e.g. I would kill so-and-so if I had to do it in self-defence. Usually, however, such desires are dangerous and therefore to be repressed. If, on the other hand, the condition does not remove the sinfulness of the action, the desire is also sinful. This is clearly the case where the action is intrinsically and absolutely evil, e.g. blasphemy: one cannot without committing sin, have the desire -- I would blaspheme God if it were not wrong; the condition is an impossible one and therefore does not affect the desire itself. The pleasure taken in a sinful thought (delectatio, gaudium) is, generally speaking, a sin of the same kind and gravity as the action which is thought of. Much, however, depends on the motive for which one thinks of sinful actions. The pleasure, e.g. which one may experience in studying the nature of murder or any other crime, in getting clear ideas on the subject, tracing its causes, determining the guilt etc., is not a sin; on the contrary, it is often both necessary and useful. The case is different of course where the pleasure means gratification in the sinful object or action itself. And it is evidently a sin when one boasts of his evil deeds, the more so because of the scandal that is given. The Capital Sins or Vices According to St. Thomas (II-II:153:4) "a capital vice is that which has an exceedingly desirable end so that in his desire for it a man goes on to the commission of many sins all of which are said to originate in that vice as their chief source". It is not then the gravity of the vice in itself that makes it capital but rather the fact that it gives rise to many other sins. These are enumerated by St. Thomas (I-II:84:4) as vainglory (pride), avarice, gluttony, lust, sloth, envy, anger. St. Bonaventure (Brevil., III, ix) gives the same enumeration. Earlier writers had distinguished eight capital sins: so St. Cyprian (De mort., iv); Cassian (De instit. cænob., v, coll. 5, de octo principalibus vitiis); Columbanus ("Instr. de octo vitiis princip." in "Bibl. max. vet. patr.", XII, 23); Alcuin (De virtut. et vitiis, xxvii sqq.). The number seven, however, had been given by St. Gregory the Great (Lib. mor. in Job. XXXI, xvii), and it was retained by the foremost theologians of the Middle Ages. It is to be noted that "sin" is not predicated univocally of all kinds of sin. "The division of sin into venial and mortal is not a division of genus into species which participate equally the nature of the genus, but the division of an analogue into things of which it is predicated primarily and secondarily" (St. Thomas, I-II:138:1, ad 1um). "Sin is not predicated univocally of all kinds of sin, but primarily of actual mortal sin ... and therefore it is not necessary that the definition of sin in general should be verified except in that sin in which the nature of the genus is found perfectly. The definition of sin may be verified in other sins in a certain sense" (St. Thomas, II, d. 33, Q. i, a. 2, ad 2um). Actual sin primarily consists in a voluntary act repugnant to the order of right reason. The act passes, but the soul of the sinner remains stained, deprived of grace, in a state of sin, until the disturbance of order has been restored by penance. This state is called habitual sin, macula peccati. reatus culpæ (I-II:87:6). The division of sin into original and actual, mortal and venial, is not a division of genus into species because sin has not the same signification when applied to original and personal sin, mortal and venial. Mortal sin cuts us off entirely from our true last end; venial sin only impedes us in its attainment. Actual personal sin is voluntary by a proper act of the will. Original sin is voluntary not by a personal voluntary act of ours, but by an act of the will of Adam. Original and actual sin are distinguished by the manner in which they are voluntary (ex parte actus); mortal and venial sin by the way in which they affect our relation to God (ex parte deordinationis). Since a voluntary act and its disorder are of the essence of sin, it is impossible that sin should be a generic term in respect to original and actual, mortal and venial sin. The true nature of sin is found perfectly only in a personal mortal sin, in other sins imperfectly, so that sin is predicated primarily of actual sin, only secondarily of the others. Therefore we shall consider: first, personal mortal sin; second, venial sin. III. MORTAL SIN Mortal sin is defined by St. Augustine (Contra Faustum, XXII, xxvii) as "Dictum vel factum vel concupitum contra legem æternam", i.e. something said, done or desired contrary to the eternal law, or a thought, word, or deed contrary to the eternal law. This is a definition of sin as it is a voluntary act. As it is a defect or privation it may be defined as an aversion from God, our true last end, by reason of the preference given to some mutable good. The definition of St. Augustine is accepted generally by theologians and is primarily a definition of actual mortal sin. It explains well the material and formal elements of sin. The words "dictum vel factum vel concupitum" denote the material element of sin, a human act: "contra legem æternam", the formal element. The act is bad because it transgresses the Divine law. St. Ambrose (De paradiso, viii) defines sin as a "prevarication of the Divine law". The definition of St. Augustine strictly considered, i.e. as sin averts us from our true ultimate end, does not comprehend venial sin, but in as much as venial sin is in a manner contrary to the Divine law, although not averting us from our last end, it may be said to be included in the definition as it stands. While primarily a definition of sins of commission, sins of omission may be included in the definition because they presuppose some positive act (St. Thomas, I-II:71:5) and negation and affirmation are reduced to the same genus. Sins that violate the human or the natural law are also included, for what is contrary to the human or natural law is also contrary to the Divine law, in as much as every just human law is derived from the Divine law, and is not just unless it is in conformity with the Divine law. Biblical Description of Sin In the Old Testament sin is set forth as an act of disobedience (Gen., ii, 16-17; iii, 11; Is., i, 2-4; Jer., ii, 32); as an insult to God (Num., xxvii, 14); as something detested and punished by God (Gen., iii, 14-19; Gen., iv, 9-16); as injurious to the sinner (Tob., xii, 10); to be expiated by penance (Ps. 1, 19). In the New Testament it is clearly taught in St. Paul that sin is a transgression of the law (Rom., ii, 23; v, 12-20); a servitude from which we are liberated by grace (Rom., vi, 16-18); a disobedience (Heb., ii, 2) punished by God (Heb., x, 26-31). St. John describes sin as an offence to God, a disorder of the will (John, xii, 43), an iniquity (I John, iii, 4-10). Christ in many of His utterances teaches the nature and extent of sin. He came to promulgate a new law more perfect than the old, which would extend to the ordering not only of external but also of internal acts to a degree unknown before, and, in His Sermon on the Mount, he condemns as sinful many acts which were judged honest and righteous by the doctors and teachers of the Old Law. He denounces in a special manner hypocrisy and scandal, infidelity and the sin against the Holy Ghost. In particular He teaches that sins come from the heart (Matt., xv, 19-20). Systems Which Deny Sin or Distort its True Notion All systems, religious and ethical, which either deny, on the one hand, the existence of a personal creator and lawgiver distinct from and superior to his creation, or, on the other, the existence of free will and responsibility in man, distort or destroy the true biblico-theological notion of sin. In the beginning of the Christian era the Gnostics, although their doctrines varied in details, denied the existence of a personal creator. The idea of sin in the Catholic sense is not contained in their system. There is no sin for them, unless it be the sin of ignorance, no necessity for an atonement; Jesus is not God (see GNOSTICISM). Manichaeism (q.v.) with its two eternal principles, good and evil, at perpetual war with each other, is also destructive of the true notion of sin. All evil, and consequently sin, is from the principle of evil. The Christian concept of God as a lawgiver is destroyed. Sin is not a conscious voluntary act of disobedience to the Divine will. Pantheistic systems which deny the distinction between God and His creation make sin impossible. If man and God are one, man is not responsible to anyone for his acts, morality is destroyed. If he is his own rule of action, he cannot deviate from right as St. Thomas teaches (I:63:1). The identification of God and the world by Pantheism (q.v.) leaves no place for sin. There must be some law to which man is subject, superior to and distinct from him, which can be obeyed and transgressed, before sin can enter into his acts. This law must be the mandate of a superior, because the notions of superiority and subjection are correlative. This superior can be only God, who alone is the author and lord of man. Materialism, denying as it does the spirituality and the immortality of the soul, the existence of any spirit whatsoever, and consequently of God, does not admit sin. There is no free will, everything is determined by the inflexible laws of motion. "Virtue" and "vice" are meaningless qualifications of action. Positivism places man's last end in some sensible good. His supreme law of action is to seek the maximum of pleasure. Egotism or altruism is the supreme norm and criterion of the Positivistic systems, not the eternal law of God as revealed by Him, and dictated by conscience. For the materialistic evolutionists man is but a highly-developed animal, conscience a product of evolution. Evolution has revolutionized morality, sin is no more. Kant in his "Critique of Pure Reason" having rejected all the essential notions of true morality, namely, liberty, the soul, God and a future life, attempted in his "Critique of the Practical Reason" to restore them in the measure in which they are necessary for morality. The practical reason, he tells us, imposes on us the idea of law and duty. The fundamental principle of the morality of Kant is "duty for duty's sake", not God and His law. Duty cannot be conceived of alone as an independent thing. It carries with it certain postulates, the first of which is liberty. "I ought, therefore I can", is his doctrine. Man by virtue of his practical reason has a consciousness of moral obligation (categorical imperative). This consciousness supposes three things: free will, the immortality of the soul, the existence of God, otherwise man would not be capable of fulfilling his obligations, there would be no sufficient sanction for the Divine law, no reward or punishment in a future life. Kant's moral system labours in obscurities and contradictions and is destructive of much that pertains to the teaching of Christ. Personal dignity is the supreme rule of man's actions. The notion of sin as opposed to God is suppressed. According to the teaching of materialistic Monism, now so widespread, there is, and can be, no free will. According to this doctrine but one thing exists and this one being produces all phenomena, thought included; we are but puppets in its hands, carried hither an thither as it wills, and finally are cast back into nothingness. There is no place for good and evil, a free observance or a wilful transgression of law, in such a system. Sin in the true sense is impossible. Without law and liberty and a personal God there is no sin. That God exists and can be known from His visible creation, that He has revealed the decrees of His eternal will to man, and is distinct from His creatures (Denzinger-Bannwart, "Enchiridion", nn. 178 2, 1785, 1701), are matters of Catholic faith and teaching. Man is a created being endowed with free will (ibid., 793), which fact can be proved from Scripture and reason (ibid., 1041-1650). The Council of Trent declares in Sess. VI, c. i (ibid., 793) that man by reason of the prevarication of Adam has lost his primeval innocence, and that while free will remains, its powers are lessened (see ORIGINAL SIN). Protestant Errors Luther and Calvin taught as their fundamental error that no free will properly so called remained in man after the fall of our first parents; that the fulfillment of God's precepts is impossible even with the assistance of grace, and that man in all his actions sins. Grace is not an interior gift, but something external. To some sin is not imputed, because they are covered as with a cloak by the merits of Christ. Faith alone saves, there is no necessity for good works. Sin in Luther's doctrine cannot be a deliberate transgression of the Divine law. Jansenius, in his "Augustinus", taught that according to the present powers of man some of God's precepts are impossible of fulfilment, even to the just who strive to fulfil them, and he further taught that grace by means of which the fulfilment becomes possible is wanting even to the just. His fundamental error consists in teaching that the will is not free but is necessarily drawn either by concupiscence or grace. Internal liberty is not required for merit or demerit. Liberty from coercion suffices. Christ did not die for all men. Baius taught a semi-Lutheran doctrine. Liberty is not entirely destroyed, but is so weakened that without grace it can do nothing but sin. True liberty is not required for sin. A bad act committed involuntarily renders man responsible (propositions 50-51 in Denzinger-Bannwart, "Enchiridion", nn. 1050-1). All acts done without charity are mortal sins and merit damnation because they proceed from concupiscence. This doctrine denies that sin is a voluntary transgression of Divine law. If man is not free, a precept is meaningless as far as he is concerned. Philosophical Sin Those who would construct a moral system independent of God and His law distinguish between theological and philosophical sin. Philosophical sin is a morally bad act which violates the natural order of reason, not the Divine law. Theological sin is a transgression of the eternal law. Those who are of atheistic tendencies and contend for this distinction, either deny the existence of God or maintain that He exercises no providence in regard to human acts. This position is destructive of sin in the theological sense, as God and His law, reward and punishment, are done away with. Those who admit the existence of God, His law, human liberty and responsibility, and still contend for a distinction between philosophical and theological sin, maintain that in the present order of God's providence there are morally bad acts, which, while violating the order of reason, are not offensive to God, and they base their contention on this that the sinner can be ignorant of the existence of God, or not actually think of Him and His law when he acts. Without the knowledge of God and consideration of Him, it is impossible to offend Him. This doctrine was censured as scandalous, temerarious, and erroneous by Alexander VIII (24 Aug., 1690) in his condemnation of the following proposition: "Philosophical or moral sin is a human act not in agreement with rational nature and right reason, theological and mortal sin is a free transgession of the Divine law. However grievous it may be, philosophical sin in one who is either ignorant of God or does not actually think of God, is indeed a grievous sin, but not an offense to God, nor a mortal sin dissolving friendship with God, nor worthy of eternal punishment" (Denzinger-Bannwart, 1290). This proposition is condemned because it does not distinguish between vincible and invincible ignorance, and further supposes invincible ignorance of God to be sufficiently common, instead of only metaphysically possible, and because in the present dispensation of God's providence we are clearly taught in Scripture that God will punish all evil coming from the free will of man (Rom., ii, 5-11). There is no morally bad act that does not include a transgression of Divine law. From the fact that an action is conceived of as morally evil it is conceived of as prohibited. A prohibition is unintelligible without the notion of some one prohibiting. The one prohibiting in this case and binding the conscience of man can be only God, Who alone has power over man's free will and actions, so that from the fact that any act is perceived to be morally bad and prohibited by conscience, God and His law are perceived at least confusedly, and a wilful transgression of the dictate of conscience is necessarily also a transgression of God's law. Cardinal de Lugo (De incarnat., disp. 5, lect. 3) admits the possibility of philosophical sin in those who are inculpably ignorant of God, but he holds that it does not actually occur, because in the present order of God's providence there cannot be invincible ignorance of God and His law. This teaching does not necessarily fall under the condemnation of Alexander VIII, but it is commonly rejected by theologians for the reason that a dictate of conscience necessarily involves a knowledge of the Divine law as a principle of morality. Conditions of Mortal Sin: Knowledge, Free Will, Grave Matter Contrary to the teaching of Baius (prop. 46, Denzinger-Bannwart, 1046) and the Reformers, a sin must be a voluntary act. Those actions alone are properly called human or moral actions which proceed from the human will deliberately acting with knowledge of the end for which it acts. Man differs from all irrational creatures in this precisely that he is master of his actions by virtue of his reason and free will (I-II:1:1). Since sin is a human act wanting in due rectitude, it must have, in so far as it is a human act, the essential constituents of a human act. The intellect must perceive and judge of the morality of the act, and the will must freely elect. For a deliberate mortal sin there must be full advertence on the part of the intellect and full consent on the part of the will in a grave matter. An involuntary transgression of the law even in a grave matter is not a formal but a material sin. The gravity of the matter is judged from the teaching of Scripture, the definitions of councils and popes, and also from reason. Those sins are judged to be mortal which contain in themselves some grave disorder in regard to God, our neighbour, ourselves, or society. Some sins admit of no lightness of matter, as for example, blasphemy, hatred of God; they are always mortal (ex toto genere suo), unless rendered venial by want of full advertence on the part of the intellect or full consent on the part of the will. Other sins admit lightness of matter: they are grave sins (ex genere suo) in as much as their matter in itself is sufficient to constitute a grave sin without the addition of any other matter, but is of such a nature that in a given case, owing to its smallness, the sin may be venial, e.g. theft. Imputability That the act of the sinner may be imputed to him it is not necessary that the object which terminates and specifies his act should be directly willed as an ends or means. It suffices that it be willed indirectly or in its cause, i.e. if the sinner foresees, at least confusedly, that it will follow from the act which he freely performs or from his omission of an act. When the cause produces a twofold effect, one of which is directly willed, the other indirectly, the effect which follows indirectly is morally imputable to the sinner when these three conditions are verified: + first, the sinner must foresee at least confusedly the evil effects which follow on the cause he places; + second, he must be able to refrain from placing the cause; + third, he must be under the obligation of preventing the evil effect. Error and ignorance in regard to the object or circumstances of the act to be placed, affect the judgment of the intellect and consequently the morality and imputability of the act. Invincible ignorance excuses entirely from sin. Vincible ignorance does not, although it renders the act less free (see IGNORANCE). The passions, while they disturb the judgment of the intellect, more directly affect the will. Antecedent passion increases the intensity of the act, the object is more intensely desired, although less freely, and the distrubance caused by the passions may be so great as to render a free judgment impossible, the agent being for the moment beside himself (I-II:6:7, ad 3um). Consequent passion, which arises from a command of the will, does not lessen liberty, but is rather a sign of an intense act of volition. Fear, violence, heredity, temperament and pathological states, in so far as they affect free volition, affect the malice and imputability of sin. From the condemnation of the errors of Baius and Jansenius (Denz.-Bann., 1046, 1066, 1094, 1291-2) it is clear that for an actual personal sin a knowledge of the law and a personal voluntary act, free from coercion and necessity, are required. No mortal sin is committed in a state of invincible ignorance or in a half-conscious state. Actual advertence to the sinfulness of the act is not required, virtual advertence suffices. It is not necessary that the explicit intention to offend God and break His law be present, the full and free consent of the will to an evil act suffices. Malice The true malice of mortal sin consists in a conscious and voluntary transgression of the eternal law, and implies a contempt of the Divine will, a complete turning away from God, our true last end, and a preferring of some created thing to which we subject ourselves. It is an offence offered to God, and an injury done Him; not that it effects any change in God, who is immutable by nature, but that the sinner by his act deprives God of the reverence and honor due Him: it is not any lack of malice on the sinner's part, but God's immutability that prevents Him from suffering. As an offence offered to God mortal sin is in a way infinite in its malice, since it is directed against an infinite being, and the gravity of the offence is measured by the dignity of the one offended (St. Thomas, III:1:2, ad 2um). As an act sin is finite, the will of man not being capable of infinite malice. Sin is an offence against Christ Who has redeemed man (Phil., iii, 18); against the Holy Ghost Who sanctifies us (Heb., x, 29), an injury to man himself, causing the spiritual death of the soul, and making man the servant of the devil. The first and primary malice of sin is derived from the object to which the will inordinately tends, and from the object considered morally, not physically. The end for which the sinner acts and the circumstances which surround the act are also determining factors of its morality. An act which, objectively considered, is morally indifferent, may be rendered good or evil by circumstances, or by the intention of the sinner. An act that is good objectively may be rendered bad, or a new species of good or evil may be added, or a new degree. Circumstances can change the character of a sin to such a degree that it becomes specifically different from what it is objectively considered; or they may merely aggravate the sin while not changing its specific character; or they may lessen its gravity. That they may exercise this determining influence two things are necessary: they must contain in themselves some good or evil, and must be apprehended, at least confusedly, in their moral aspect. The external act, in so far as it is a mere execution of a voluntary efficacious internal act, does not, according to the common Thomistic opinion, add any essential goodness or malice to the internal sin. Gravity While every mortal sin averts us from our true last end, all mortal sins are not equally grave, as is clear from Scripture (John, xix, 11; Matt., xi, 22; Luke, vi), and also from reason. Sins are specifically distinguished by their objects, which do not all equally avert man from his last end. Then again, since sin is not a pure privation, but a mixed one, all sins do not equally destroy the order of reason. Spiritual sins, other things being equal, are graver than carnal sins. (St. Thomas, "De malo", Q. ii, a. 9; I-II, Q. lxxiii, a. 5). Specific and numeric distinction of Sin Sins are distinguished specifically by their formally diverse objects; or from their opposition to different virtues, or to morally different precepts of the same virtue. Sins that are specifically distinct are also numerically distinct. Sins within the same species are distinguished numerically according to the number of complete acts of the will in regard to total objects. A total object is one which, either in itself or by the intention of the sinner, forms a complete whole and is not referred to another action as a part of the whole. When the completed acts of the will relate to the same object there are as many sins as there are morally interrupted acts. Subject causes of Sin Since sin is a voluntary act lacking in due rectitude, sin is found, as in a subject, principally in the will. But, since not only acts elicited by the will are voluntary, but also those that are elicited by other faculties at the command of the will, sin may be found in these faculties in so far as they are subject in their actions to the command of the will, and are instruments of the will, and move under its guidance (I-II:74). The external members of the body cannot be effective principles of sin (I-II:74:2, ad 3um). They are mere organs which are set in activity by the soul; they do not initiate action. The appetitive powers on the contrary can be effective principles of sin, for they possess, through their immediate conjunction with the will and their subordination to it, a certain though imperfect liberty (I-II:56:4, ad 3um). The sensual appetites have their own proper sensible objects to which they naturally incline, and since original sin has broken the bond which held them in complete subjection to the will, they may antecede the will in their actions and tend to their own proper objects inordinately. Hence they may be proximate principles of sin when they move inordinately contrary to the dictates of right reason. It is the right of reason to rule the lower faculties, and when the disturbance arises in the sensual part the reason may do one of two things: it may either consent to the sensible delectation or it may repress and reject it. If it consents, the sin is no longer one of the sensual part of man, but of the intellect and will, and consequently, if the matter is grave, mortal. If rejected, no sin can be imputed. There can be no sin in the sensual part of man independently of the will. The inordinate motions of the sensual appetite which precede the advertence of reason, or which are suffered unwillingly, are not even venial sins. The temptations of the flesh not consented to are not sins. Concupiscence, which remains after the guilt of original sin is remitted in baptism, is not sinful so long as consent is not given to it (Coun. of Trent, sess. V, can. v). The sensual appetite of itself cannot be the subject of mortal sin, for the reason that it can neither grasp the notion of God as an ultimate end, nor avert us from Him, without which aversion there cannot be mortal sin. The superior reason, whose office it is to occupy itself with Divine things, may be the proximate principle of sin both in regard to its own proper act, to know truth, and as it is directive of the inferior faculties: in regard to its own proper act, in so far as it voluntarily neglects to know what it can and ought to know; in regard to the act by which it directs the inferior faculties, to the extent that it commands inordinate acts or fails to repress them (I-II:74:7, ad 2um). The will never consents to a sin that is not at the same time a sin of the superior reason as directing badly, by either actually deliberating and commanding the consent, or by failing to deliberate and impede the consent of the will when it could and should do so. The superior reason is the ultimate judge of human acts and has an obligation of deliberating and deciding whether the act to be performed is according to the law of God. Venial sin may also be found in the superior reason when it deliberately consents to sins that are venial in their nature, or when there is not a full consent in the case of a sin that is mortal considered objectively. Causes of Sin Under this head, it is needful to distinguish between the efficient cause, i.e. the agent performing the sinful action, and those other agencies, influences or circumstances, which incite to sin and consequently involve a danger, more or less grave, for one who is exposed to them. These inciting causes are explained in special articles on OCCASIONS OF SIN and TEMPTATION. Here we have to consider only the efficient cause or causes of sin. These are interior and exterior. The complete and sufficient cause of sin is the will, which is regulated in its actions by the reason, and acted upon by the sensitive appetites. The principal interior causes of sin are ignorance, infirmity or passion, and malice. Ignorance on the part of the reason, infirmity and passion on the part of the sensitive appetite, and malice on the part of the will. A sin is from certain malice when the will sins of its own accord and not under the influence of ignorance or passion. The exterior causes of sin are the devil and man, who move to sin by means of suggestion, persuasion, temptation and bad example. God is not the cause of sin (Counc. of Trent, sess. VI, can. vi, in Denz.-Bann., 816). He directs all things to Himself and is the end of all His actions, and could not be the cause of evil without self-contradiction. Of whatever entity there is in sin as an action, He is the cause. The evil will is the cause of the disorder (I-II:79:2). One sin may be the cause of another inasmuch as one sin may be ordained to another as an end. The seven capital sins, so called, may be considered as the source from which other sins proceed. They are sinful propensities which reveal themselves in particular sinful acts. Original sin by reason of its dire effects is the cause and source of sin in so far as by reason of it our natures are left wounded and inclined to evil. Ignorance, infirmity, malice, and concupiscence are the consequences of original sin. Effects of Sin The first effect of mortal sin in man is to avert him from his true last end, and deprive his soul of sanctifying grace. The sinful act passes, and the sinner is left in a state of habitual aversion from God. The sinful state is voluntary and imputable to the sinner, because it necessarily follows from the act of sin he freely placed, and it remains until satisfaction is made (see PENANCE). This state of sin is called by theologians habitual sin, not in the sense that habitual sin implies a vicious habit, but in the sense that it signifies a state of aversion from God depending on the preceding actual sin, consequently voluntary and imputable. This state of aversion carries with it necessarily in the present order of God's providence the privation of grace and charity by means of which man is ordered to his supernatural end. The privation of grace is the "macula peccati" (St. Thomas, I-II, Q. lxxxvi), the stain of sin spoken of in Scripture (Jos., xxii, 17; Isaias, iv, 4; 1 Cor., vi, 11). It is not anything positive, a quality or disposition, an obligation to suffer, an extrinsic denomination coming from sin, but is solely the privation of sanctifying grace. There is not a real but only a conceptual distinction between habitual sin (reatus culpæ) and the stain of sin (macula peccati). One and the same privation considered as destroying the due order of man to God is habitual sin, considered as depriving the soul of the beauty of grace is the stain or "macula" of sin. The second effect of sin is to entail the penalty of undergoing suffering (reatus pænæ). Sin (reatus culpæ) is the cause of this obligation (reatus pænæ). The suffering may be inflicted in this life through the medium of medicinal punishments, calamities, sickness, temporal evils, which tend to withdraw from sin; or it may be inflicted in the life to come by the justice of God as vindictive punishment. The punishments of the future life are proportioned to the sin committed, and it is the obligation of undergoing this punishment for unrepented sin that is signified by the "reatus poenæ" of the theologians. The penalty to be undergone in the future life is divided into the pain of loss (pæna damni) and the pain of sense (pæna sensus). The pain of loss is the privation of the beatific vision of God in punishment of turning away from Him. The pain of sense is suffering in punishment of the conversion to some created thing in place of God. This two-fold pain in punishment of mortal sin is eternal (I Cor., vi, 9; Matt., xxv, 41; Mark, ix, 45). One mortal sin suffices to incur punishment. (See HELL.) Other effects of sins are: remorse of conscience (Wisdom, v, 2-13); an inclination towards evil, as habits are formed by a repetition of similar acts; a darkening of the intelligence, a hardening of the will (Matt., xiii, 14-15; Rom., xi, 8); a general vitiating of nature, which does not however totally destroy the substance and faculties of the soul but merely weakens the right exercise of its faculties. IV. VENIAL SIN Venial sin is essentially different from mortal sin. It does not avert us from our true last end, it does not destroy charity, the principle of union with God, nor deprive the soul of sanctifying grace, and it is intrinsically reparable. It is called venial precisely because, considered in its own proper nature, it is pardonable; in itself meriting, not eternal, but temporal punishment. It is distinguished from mortal sin on the part of the disorder. By mortal sin man is entirely averted from God, his true last end, and, at least implicitly, he places his last end in some created thing. By venial sin he is not averted from God, neither does he place his last end in creatures. He remains united with God by charity, but does not tend towards Him as he ought. The true nature of sin as it is contrary to the eternal law, repugnant namely to the primary end of the law, is found only in mortal sin. Venial sin is only in an imperfect way contrary to the law, since it is not contrary to the primary end of the law, nor does it avert man from the end intended by the law. (St. Thomas, I-II, Q. lxxxviii, a. 1; and Cajetan, I-II, Q. lxxxviii, a. 1, for the sense of the præter legem and contra legem of St. Thomas). Definition Since a voluntary act and its disorder are of the essence of sin, venial sin as it is a voluntary act may be defined as a thought, word or deed at variance with the law of God. It retards man in the attainment of his last end while not averting him from it. Its disorder consists either in the not fully deliberate choosing of some object prohibited by the law of God, or in the deliberate adhesion to some created object not as an ultimate end but as a medium, which object does not avert the sinner from God, but is not, however, referable to Him as an end. Man cannot be averted from God except by deliberately placing his last end in some created thing, and in venial sin he does not adhere to any temporal good, enjoying it as a last end, but as a medium referring it to God not actually but habitually inasmuch as he himself is ordered to God by charity. "Ille qui peccat venialiter, inhæret bono temporali non ut fruens, quia non constituit in eo finem, sed ut utens, referens in Deum no n actu sed habitu" (I-II:88:1, ad 3). For a mortal sin, some created good must be adhered to as a last end at least implicitly. This adherence cannot be accomplished by a semi-deliberate act. By adhering to an object that is at variance with the law of God and yet not destructive of the primary end of the Divine law, a true opposition is not set up between God and that object. The created good is not desired as an end. The sinner is not placed in the position of choosing between God and creature as ultimate ends that are opposed, but is in such a condition of mind that if the object to which he adheres were prohibited as contrary to his true last end he would not adhere to it, but would prefer to keep friendship with God. An example may be had in human friendship. A friend will refrain from doing anything that of itself will tend directly to dissolve friendship while allowing himself at times to do what is displeasing to his friends without destroying friendship. The distinction between mortal and venial sin is set forth in Scripture. From St. John (I John, v, 16-17) it is clear there are some sins "unto death" and some sins not "unto death", i.e. mortal and venial. The classic text for the distinction of mortal and venial sin is that of St. Paul (I Cor., iii, 8-15), where he explains in detail the distinction between mortal and venial sin. "For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble: every man's work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it; because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire." By wood, hay, and stubble are signified venial sins (St. Thomas, I-II:89:2) which, built on the foundation of a living faith in Christ, do not destroy charity, and from their very nature do not merit eternal but temporal punishment. "Just as", says St. Thomas, [wood, hay, and stubble] "are gathered together in a house and do not pertain to the substance of the edifice, so also venial sins are multiplied in man, the spiritual edifice remaining, and for these he suffers either the fire of temporal tribulations in this life, or of purgatory after this life and nevertheless obtains eternal salvation." (ibid.) The suitableness of the division into wood, hay, and stubble is explained by St. Thomas (iv, dist. 21, Q. i, a. 2). Some venial sins are graver than others and less pardonable, and this difference is well signified by the difference in the inflammability of wood, hay, and stubble. That there is a distinction between mortal and venial sins is of faith (Counc. of Trent, sess. VI, c. xi and canons 23-25; sess. XIV, de poenit., c. v). This distinction is commonly rejected by all heretics ancient and modern. In the fourth century Jovinian asserted that all sins are equal in guilt and deserving of the same punishment (St. Aug., "Ep. 167", ii, n. 4); Pelagius (q.v.), that every sin deprives man of justice and therefore is mortal; Wyclif, that there is no warrant in Scripture for differentiating mortal from venial sin, and that the gravity of sin depends not on the quality of the action but on the decree of predestination or reprobation so that the worst crime of the predestined is infinitely less than the slightest fault of the reprobate; Hus, that all the actions of the vicious are mortal sins, while all the acts of the good are virtuous (Denz.-Bann., 642); Luther, that all sins of unbelievers are mortal and all sins of the regenerate, with the exception of infidelity, are venial; Calvin, like Wyclif, bases the difference between mortal sin and venial sin on predestination, but adds that a sin is venial because of the faith of the sinner. The twentieth among the condemned propositions of Baius reads: "There is no sin venial in its nature, but every sin merits eternal punishment" (Denz.-Bann., 1020). Hirscher in more recent times taught that all sins which are fully deliberate are mortal, thus denying the distinction of sins by reason of their objects and making the distinction rest on the imperfection of the act (Kleutgen, 2nd ed., II, 284, etc.). Malice of Venial Sin The difference in the malice of mortal and venial sin consists in this: that mortal sin is contrary to the primary end of the eternal law, that it attacks the very substance of the law which commands that no created thing should be preferred to God as an end, or equalled to Him, while venial sin is only at variance with the law, not in contrary opposition to it, not attacking its substance. The substance of the law remaining, its perfect accomplishment is prevented by venial sin. Conditions Venial sin is committed when the matter of the sin is light, even though the advertence of the intellect and consent of the will are full and deliberate, and when, even though the matter of the sin be grave, there is not full advertence on the part of the intellect and full consent on the part of the will. A precept obliges sub gravi when it has for its object an important end to be attained, and its transgression is prohibited under penalty of losing God's friendship. A precept obliges sub levi when it is not so directly imposed. Effects Venial sin does not deprive the soul of sanctifying grace, or diminish it. It does not produce a macula, or stain, as does mortal sin, but it lessens the lustre of virtue -- "In anima duplex est nitor, unus quiden habitualis, ex gratia sanctificante, alter actualis ex actibus virtutem, jamvero peccatum veniale impedit quidem fulgorem qui ex actibus virtutum oritur, non autem habitualem nitorem, quia non excludit nec minuit habitum charitatis" (I-II:89:1). Frequent and deliberate venial sin lessens the fervour of charity, disposes to mortal sin (I-II:88:3), and hinders the reception of graces God would otherwise give. It displeases God (Apoc., ii, 4-5) and obliges the sinner to temporal punishment either in this life or in Purgatory. We cannot avoid all venial sin in this life. "Although the most just and holy occasionally during this life fall into some slight and daily sins, known as venial, they cease not on that account to be just" (Counc. of Trent, sess. VI, c. xi). And canon xxiii says: "If any one declare that a man once justified cannot sin again, or that he can avoid for the rest of his life every sin, even venial, let him be anathema", but according to the common opinion we can avoid all such as are fully deliberate. Venial sin may coexist with mortal sin in those who are averted from God by mortal sin. This fact does not change its nature or intrinsic reparability, and the fact that it is not coexistent with charity is not the result of venial sin, but of mortal sin. It is per accidens, for an extrinsic reason, that venial sin in this case is irreparable, and is punished in hell. That venial sin may appear in its true nature as essentially different from mortal sin it is considered as de facto coexisting with charity (I Cor., iii, 8-15). Venial sins do not need the grace of absolution. They can be remitted by prayer, contrition, fervent communion, and other pious works. Nevertheless it is laudable to confess them (Denz.-Bann., 1539). V. PERMISSION OF SIN AND REMEDIES. Since it is of faith that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and all good it is difficult to account for sin in His creation. The existence of evil is the underlying problem in all theology. Various explanations to account for its existence have been offered, differing according to the philosophical principles and religious tenets of their authors. Any Catholic explanation must take into account the defined truths of the omnipotence, omniscience, and goodness of God; free will on the part of man; and the fact that suffering is the penalty of sin. Of metaphysical evil, the negation of a greater good, God is the cause inasmuch as he has created beings with limited forms. Of physical evil (malum pænæ) He is also the cause. Physical evil, considered as it proceeds from God and is inflicted in punishment of sin in accordance with the decrees of Divine justice, is good, compensating for the violation of order by sin. It is only in the subject affected by it that it is evil. Of moral evil (malum culpæ) God is not the cause (Counc. of Trent, sess. VI, can. vi), either directly or indirectly. Sin is a violation of order, and God orders all things to Himself, as an ultimate end, consequently He cannot be the direct cause of sin. God's withdrawal of grace which would prevent the sin does not make Him the indirect cause of sin inasmuch as this withdrawal is affected according to the decrees of His Divine wisdom and justice in punishment of previous sin. He is under no obligation of impeding the sin, consequently it cannot be imputed to Him as a cause (I-II:79:1). When we read in Scripture and the Fathers that God inclines men to sin the sense is, either that in His just judgment He permits men to fall into sin by a punitive permission, exercising His justice in punishment of past sin; or that He directly causes, not sin, but certain exterior works, good in themselves, which are so abused by the evil wills of men that here and now they commit evil; or that He gives them the power of accomplishing their evil designs. Of the physical act in sin God is the cause inasmuch as it is an entity and good. Of the malice of sin man's evil will is the sufficient cause. God could not be impeded in the creation of man by the fact that He foresaw his fall. This would mean the limiting of His omnipotence by a creature, and would be destructive of Him. He was free to create man even though He foresaw his fall, and He created him, endowed him with free will, and gave him sufficient means of persevering in good had he so willed. We must sum up our ignorance of the permission of evil by saying in the words of St. Augustine, that God would not have permitted evil had He not been powerful enough to bring good out of evil. God's end in creating this universe is Himself, not the good of man, and somehow or other good and evil serve His ends, and there shall finally be a restoration of violated order by Divine justice. No sin shall be without its punishment. The evil men do must be atoned for either in this world by penance (see PENANCE) or in the world to come in purgatory or hell, according as the sin that stains the soul, and is not repented of, is mortal or venial, and merits eternal or temporal punishment. (See EVIL.) God has provided a remedy for sin and manifested His love and goodness in the face of man's ingratitude by the Incarnation of His Divine Son (see INCARNATION); by the institution of His Church to guide men and interpret to them His law, and administer to them the sacraments, seven channels of grace, which, rightly used, furnish an adequate remedy for sin and a means to union with God in heaven, which is the end of His law. VI. SENSE OF SIN. The understanding of sin, as far as it can be understood by our finite intelligence, serves to unite man more closely to God. It impresses him with a salutary fear, a fear of his own powers, a fear, if left to himself, of falling from grace; with the necessity he lies under of seeking God's help and grace to stand firm in the fear and love of God, and make progress in the spiritual life. Without the acknowledgment that the present moral state of man is not that in which God created him, that his powers are weakened; that he has a supernatural end to attain, which is impossible of attainment by his own unaided efforts, without grace there being no proportion between the end and the means; that the world, the flesh, and the devil are in reality active agents fighting against him and leading him to serve them instead of God, sin cannot be understood. The evolutionary hypothesis would have it that physical evolution accounts for the physical origin of man, that science knows no condition of man in which man exhibited the characteristics of the state of original justice, no state of sinlessness. The fall of man in this hypothesis is in reality a rise to a higher grade of being. "A fall it might seem, just as a vicious man sometimes seems degraded below the beasts, but in promise and potency, a rise it really was" (Sir O. Lodge, "Life and Matter", p. 79). This teaching is destructive of the notion of sin as taught by the Catholic Church. Sin is not a phase of an upward struggle, it is rather a deliberate, wilful refusal to struggle. If there has been no fall from a higher to a lower state, then the teaching of Scripture in regard to Redemption and the necessity of a baptismal regeneration is unintelligible. The Catholic teaching is the one that places sin in its true light, that justifies the condemnation of sin we find in Scripture. The Church strives continually to impress her children with a sense of the awfulness of sin that they may fear it and avoid it. We are fallen creatures, and our spiritual life on earth is a warfare. Sin is our enemy, and while of our own strength we cannot avoid sin, with God's grace we can. If we but place no obstacle to the workings of grace we can avoid all deliberate sin. If we have the misfortune to sin, and seek God's grace and pardon with a contrite and humble heart, He will not repel us. Sin has its remedy in grace, which is given us by God, through the merits of His only-begotten Son, Who has redeemed us, restoring by His passion and death the order violated by the sin of our first parents, and making us once again children of God and heirs of heaven. Where sin is looked on as a necessary and unavoidable condition of things human, where inability to avoid sin is conceived as necessary, discouragement naturally follows. Where the Catholic doctrine of the creation of man in a superior state, his fall by a wilful transgression, the effects of which fall are by Divine decree transmitted to his posterity, destroying the balance of the human faculties and leaving man inclined to evil; where the dogmas of redemption and grace in reparation of sin are kept in mind, there is no discouragement. Left to ourselves we fall, by keeping close to God and continually seeking His help we can stand and struggle against sin, and if faithful in the battle we must wage shall be crowned in heaven. (See CONSCIENCE; JUSTIFICATION; SCANDAL.) DOGMATIC WORKS: ST. THOMAS, Summa theol., I-II, QQ. lxxi-lxxxix; IDEM, Contra gentes, tr. RICKABY, Of God and His Creatures (London, 1905); IDEM, Quaest. disputatae: De malo in Opera omnia (Paris, 1875); BILLUART, De peccatis (Paris, 1867-72); SUAREZ, De pecc. in Opera omnia (Paris, 1878); SALMANTICENSES, De pecc. in Curs. theol. (Paris, 1877); GONET, Clypeus theol. thom. (Venice, 1772); JOHN OF ST. THOMAS, De pecc. in Curs. theol. (Paris, 1886); SYLVIUS, De pecc. (Antwerp, 1698); Catechismus Romanus, tr. DONOVAN, Catechism of the Council of Trent (Dublin, 1829); SCHEEBEN, Handbuch d. kath. Dogmatik (Freiburg, 1873-87); MANNING, Sin and its Consequences (New York, 1904); SHARPE, Principles of Christianity (London, 1904); IDEM, Evil, its Nature and Cause (London, 1906); BILLOT, De nat. et rat. peccati personalis (Rome, 1900); TANQUEREY, Synopsis theol., I (New York, 1907). A.C. O'NEIL Sinai Sinai The mountain on which the Mosaic Law was given. Horeb and Sinai were thought synonymous by St. Jerome ("De situ et nom. Hebr.", in P.L., XXIII, 889), W. Gesenius amd, more recently, G. Ebers (p. 381). Ewald, Ed. Robinson. E.H. Palmer, and others think Horeb denoted the whole mountainous region about Sinai (Ex., xvii, 6). The origin of the name Sinai is disputed. It seems to be an adjective from the Hebrew word for "the desert" (Ewald and Ebers) or "the moon-god" (E. Schrader and others). The mount was called Sinai, or "the mount of God" probably before the time of Moses (Josephus, "Antiq. Jud.", II, xii.) The name is now given to the triangular peninsula lying between the desert of Southern Palestine, the Red Sea, and the gulfs of Akabah and Suez, with an area of about 10,000 square miles, which was the scene of the forty years' wandering of the Israelites after the Exodus from Egypt. The principal topographical features are two. North of the Jabal et-Tih (3200 to 3950 feet) stretches an arid plateau, the desert of Tih, marked by numerous Wadis, notably El-Arish, the "River of Egypt", which formed the southern boundary of the Promised Land (Gen., xv, 18; Num., xxxiv, 5). South of Jabal et-Tih rises a mountainous mass of granite streaked with porphyry, dividing into three principal groups: the western, Jabal Serbal (6750 feet); the central, Jabal Musa (7380 feet), Jabal Catherine (8560 feet), and Jabal Um Schomer (8470 feet); the eastern, Jabal Thebt (7906 feet) and Jabal Tarfa, which terminates in Ras Mohammed. It is among these mountains that Jewish and Christian tradition places the Sinai of the Bible, but the precise location is uncertain. It is Jabal Musa, according to a tradition traceable back to the fourth century, when St. Silvia of Aquitaine was there. Jabal Musa is defended by E.H. and H.S. Palmer, Vigouroux, Lagrange, and others. However, the difficulty of applying Ex., xix, 12, to Jabal Musa and the inscriptions found near Jabal Serbal have led some to favour Serbal. This was the opinion of St. Jerome (P.L., XXIII, 916, 933) and Cosmas (P.G., LXXXVIII, 217), and more recently of Birkhard and Lepsius, and it has of late been very strongly defended by G. Ebers, not to mention Beke, Gressmann, and others, who consider the whole story about Sinai (Ex., xix) only a mythical interpretation of some volcanic eruption. The more liberal critics, while agreeing generally that the Jewish traditions represented by the "Priest-Codex" and "Elohistic documents" place Sinai among the mountains in the south-central part of the peninsula, yet disagree as to its location by the older "Jahvistic" tradition (Ex., ii, 15, 16, 21; xviii, 1, 5). A. von Gall, whose opinion Welhausen thinks the best sustained, contends that Meribar (D. V. Temptation. - Ex., xvii, 14), that the Israelites never went so far south as Jabal Mûsa, and hence that Sinai must be looked for in Madian, on the east coast of Akabar. Others (cf. Winckler, II, p.29; Smend, p. 35, n. 2; and Weill, opp. Cit. Infra in bibliography) look for Sinai in the near neighbourhood of Cades (Ayn Qâdis) in Southern Palestine. Sinai was the refuge of many Christian anchorites during the third-century persecutions of the Church. There are traces of a fourth-century monastery near Mount Serbal. In 527 the Emperor Justinian built the famous convent of Mt. Sinai on the north foot of Jabal Mûsa, which has been known since the ninth century as St. Catherine's. Its small library contains about 500 volumes of valuable manuscripts in Greek, Arabic, Syriac, Ethiopic, etc. It was here that Tischendorf, during his researches in 1844, 1853, and 1859, found a very ancient Greek MS. (since known as the "Codex Sinaiticus") containing most of the Septuagint, all the new Testament, the "Epistle of Barnabas" and the first part of the "Shepherd" of Hermas. Forty-three MS. Pages found by him are preserved at the University of Leipzig and known as the "Codex Friderico-Augustanus". In 1892 Mrs. Smith Lewis found at Sinai a fourth-century palimpsest Syriac text of St. Luke's Gospel. Sinai is rich in valuable inscriptions. M. de Vogüé gives 3200 Egyptian and Semitic inscriptions found in the Wâdi Mukatteb, the ruins of the temple of Ischta, or Astaroth-Carmain, and the iron and turquoise mines and granite and marble quarries, which were extensively worked under the twelfth and eighteenth Egyptian dynasties. The present population of Sinai is 4000 to 6000 semi-nomadic Arabs, Mohammedans, governed by their tribal sheikhs and immediately subject to the commandant of the garrison at Qal' at un-Nakhl, under the Intelligence Department of the Egyptian War Office at Cairo. NICHOLAS REAGAN Sinaloa Sinaloa DIOCESE OF SINALOA (SINALOENSIS) Diocese in the Republic of Mexico, suffragan of the Archdiocese of Durango. Its area is that of the State of Sinaloa, 27,552 sq. miles, and its population (1910) 323,499. Culiacan, the capital of the state and residence of the bishop and governor, counts a population (1910) of 13,578. The present territory of Sinaloa was discovered in 1530 by the ill-reputed D. Nuño de Guzman who founded the city of San Miguel de Culiacan. A few Spaniards established a colony there. The province of Culiacan was soon obliged to face the terrors of war brought upon it by the barbarous cruelties of Nuño and his favourite, Diego Hernandez de Proaño. So frightened was Nuño by the terrible insurrection that he removed Proaño, placing in his stead Cristóbal de Tapia, whose humanitarian measures slowly restored confidence. Although colonized from the beginning of the sixteenth century, most of the territory, excepting a few strong places, was inhabited by fierce pagan tribes, for whose conversion the Jesuits laboured early in the seventeenth century. After having subdued and evangelized the Indians of the mission of Piaxtla in a comparatively short time, and after having turned over to the Bishop of Durango the settlements under their control, the Jesuits extended their domination over the Indians living in the northern part of the actual state and at the time of their expulsion (by decree of Charles III) they fruitfully administered the missions of Chinipas and Sinaloa. In Chinipas they had residences at Guasarapes, Santa Ana, Secora, Moris, Barbaroco, Santa Ines, Serocagui, Tubares, Satebó, Baborigame, Nabogame, and San Andres; in Sinaloa (misión del Fuerte) they had residences at Mocorito, Nio, Guazave, Chicorato, Mochicave, Batacosa, Conicari, Tehueco, Ocoroni, and Bacubirito. It is notable that the towns of the misión del Rio Yaqui, which now belong to the Diocese of Sonora, were then included in the mission of Sinaloa. When the See of Durango was founded in 1620, Sinaloa, which until then had belonged to the Diocese of Guadalajara, became part of it; on the foundation (1780) of the Diocese of Sonora, it became a part of the latter. However, the residence of the bishop, after having been successively at Arispe and Alamo, passed to Culiacan, capital of Sinaloa until 1883, when Leo XIII founded the Diocese of Sinaloa, which had formed part of the ecclesiastical province of Guadalajara, and the Bishop of Sonora removed to Hermosillo. In 1891, when the new archiepiscopal See of Durango was created, Sinaloa became one of its suffragans. The diocese has 1 seminary with 18 students; 10 parochial schools; 3 colleges with 677 students. CAMILLUS CRIVELLI Sinigaglia Sinigaglia (SENIGALLIA), DIOCESE OF SINIGAGLIA (SENOGALLIENSIS) Diocese in the Province of Ancona in the Marches (Central Italy). The city is situated on the Adriatic at the mouth of the Misa, which divides it into two parts. Maritime commerce, the cultivation and manufacture of silk, agriculture, and cattle-raising from the means of support of the population. The fortifications constructed by the dukes of Urbino and by the popes still remain in part. Among the churches besides the cathedral, that of Santa Maria delle Grazie (1491) without the city walls deserves mention; it possesses a Madonna with six saints by Perugino, and another Madonna by Piero della Francesca. The name Senigallia records the Senones, a tribe of Gauls who possessed this city before its conquest by the Romans. The latter founded a colony here called Sena Hadria, but later the name most commonly used was Senogallia or Senigallia. In the Civil War (B.C. 82) it was sacked by Pompey, then one of Sulla's generals. It was pillaged a second time by Alaric, A.D. 408. Under the Byzantine rule it belonged to the so-called Pentapolis. Several times in the sixth and eighth centuries the Lombards attempted to capture it, and, in fact, shortly before the city was bestowed upon the Holy See it was the seat of a Duke Arioldo, who in 772 owed allegiance to King Desiderius. It afterwards shared the vicissitudes of the March of Ancona, and at the end of the twelfth century was the seat of a count. In the wars between the popes and Frederick II it belonged for the most part to the party of the Guelphs, for which reason it sustained many sieges, and was in 1264 sacked by Percivale Doria, captain of King Manfred. Hardly recovered from this calamity, it fell into the power of Guido di Montefeltro (1280). In 1306 it was captured by Pandolfo Malatesta of Pesaro and remained in his family, notwithstanding that they were expelled by Cardinal Bertrando du Poyet and were expelled by Cardinal Albornoz (1355). In 1416 Ludovico Migliorati of Fermo and the cities of Ancona and Camerino formed a league against Galeotto Malatesta, and captured Sinigaglia, but they afterwards restored it. In 1445 it was take by Sigismondo Malatesta of Rimini, who also secured the investiture from Eugenius IV and fortified the city. After various vicissitudes Sinigaglia was (1474) given in fief to Giovanni della Rovere, a nephew of Sixtus IV. He married the last heiress of the duchy of Urbino, of which the city thus became a part (1508). In December, 1502, Sinigaglia, which had thrown open its gates to Caesar Borgia, was the scene of the celebrated treachery by which Borgia rid himself of his enemies, the petty lords of the Romagna. In 1624 it came under the immediate suzerainty of the popes. In 1683 Turkish pirates disembarked and plundered the city. Sinigaglia was the birthplace of Pius IX and B. Gherardo di Serra (fourteenth century). The patron saint of Sinigaglia is St. Paulinus, whose body is preserved in the cathedral (as is attested for the first time in 1397). He is, therefore, not identical with St. Paulinus of Nola, nor is it known to what epoch he belongs. The first bishop of certain date was Venantius (502). About 562 the bishop was St. Bonifacius, who at the time of the Lombard invasion was martyred by the Arians. Under Bishop Sigismundus (c. 590) the relics of St. Gaudentius, Bishop of Rimini and martyr, were transported to Sinigaglia. Other bishops of the diocese are: Robertus and Theodosius (1057), friends of St. Peter Damianus:; Jacopo (1232-1270), who rebuilt the cathedral which had been destroyed in 1264 by the Saracen troops of King Manfred; Francesco Mellini (1428), an Augustinian, who died at Rome, suffocated by the crowd at a consistory of Egenius IV. Under Bishop Antonio Colombella (1438), an Augustinian, Sigismondo Malatesta, lord of Sinigaglia, angered by his resistance to the destruction of certain houses, caused the cathedral and the episcopal palace to be demolished. The precious materials were transported to Rimini and were used in the construction of S. Francesco (tempio Malatestiano). Under Bishop Marco Vigerio Della Rovere (1513) the new cathedral was begun in 1540; it was consecrated in 1595 by Pietro Ridolfi (1591), a learned writer. Other bishops were Cardinal Antonio Barberini, a Capuchin brother of Urban VIII; Cardinal Domenico Poracciani (1714); Annibale della Genga (1816), who afterwards became Pope Leo XII. The diocese is suffragan of Urbino; it has 48 parishes with 114 secular and 78 regular clergy; 92,000 souls; 15 monasteries for men; 19 convents for women; and 3 institutes for female education. U. BENIGNI Sinis Sinis Sinis, a titular See in Armenia Secunda, suffragan of Melitene. The catalogue of titular bishoprics of the Roman Curia formerly contained a see of Sinita, in Armenia. When the list was revised in 1884, this name was replaced by Sinis, mentioned as belonging to Armenia Secunda, with Melitene, now Malatia, as its metropolis. Ptolemy, V. 7, 5, mentions a town called Siniscolon in Cappadocia at Melitene, near the Euphrates. Müller in his "Notes à Ptolemy" ed. Didot, I (Paris, 1901), 887, identifies this with Sinekli, a village near the Euphrates, "ab Argovan versus ortum hibernum", about nineteen miles north of Malatia in the vilayet of Mamouret ul-Aziz. But it seems certain that Siniscolon is a mis-reading for "Sinis Colonia", a form found in several Manuscripts. Ramsay, "Asia Minor", 71, 272, 314, reads Sinis for Pisonos in "Itinerar. Anton." and especially for Sinispora in the "Tabula Peutingeriana" (Sinis, Erpa), and places Sinis Colonia twenty-two Roman miles west of Melitene, on the road to Cæsarea. There is no mention of this town in the Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum" among the suffragans of Melitene, and none of its bishops is known, so it seems never to have been a bishopric. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Sinope Sinope A titular see in Asia Minor, suffragan of Amasea in Helenopontus. It is a Greek colony, situated on a peninsula on the coast of Paphlagonia, of very early origin, some attributing its foundation to the Argonaut Autolycus, a companion of Hercules. Later it received a colony from Miletus which seems to have been expelled or conquered by the Cimmerians (Herodotus, IV, 12); but in 632 B.C. the Greeks succeeded again in capturing it. Henceforth Sinope enjoyed great prosperity and founded several colonies, among them being Cerasus, Cotyora, and Trapezus. The town took part in the Peloponnesian War, supporting Athens. Zenophon stopped there with his forces on the retreat of the Ten thousand (Anab. V, v, 3; Diodor,. Sicul., XIV, 30, 32; Ammien Marcel., XXII, 8). Fruitlessly besieged in 220 B.C. by Mithridates IV, King of Pontus, Sinope was taken by Pharnaces in 183 B.C., and became the capital and residence of the kings of Pontus. It was the birthplace of Mithridates the Great, who adorned it with magnificent monuments and constructed large arsenals there for his fleet. Lkucullus captured it and gave it back its autonomy. Caesar also established the Colonia Julia Caesarea there in 45 B.C. when his supremacy began. Sinope was also the birthplace of the cynic philosopher, Diogenes, Diphilus, the comic poet, and Aquila, the Jew, who translated the Old Testament into Greek in the second century A.D. A Christian community existed there in the first half of the second century, with a bishop, the father of the celebrated heretic Marcion, whom he expelled from his diocese. Among its other bishops may be mentioned St. Phocas, venerated on 22 September, with St. Phocas, the gardener of the same town, who is possibly to be identified with him; Prohaeresios, present at the Councils of Gangres and Philippopolis in 343 and 344; Antiochus at the Council of Chalcedon, 451; Sergius at the Sixth Ecumenical Council, 681; Zeno, who was exiled in 712 for opposing Monothelitism; Gregory, present at the Seventh Council in 787, beheaded in 793 for revolting against the emperor, etc. A little before 1315 the Bishop of Sinope, driven out of his see by the Turks, received in compensation the metropoles of Sida and Sylaeos (Miklosich and Muller, "Acta patriarchatus Constantinopolitani", I, 34); the diocese must have been suppressed upon his death, as it is not mentioned in the "Notitiae episcopatuum" of the fifteenth century. In 1401 a Greek merchant who visited Sinope found everything in disorder as a result of the Turkish inroads (Wächter, "Der Verfall des Griechentums in Kleinasien im XIV. Jahrhundert", 20); however, the town, which had belonged to the Empire of Trapezus from 1204 was not captured till 1470 by Manomet II. In November, 1853, the Turkish fleet was destroyed by the Russians in the port of Sinope. Sinope is now the chief town of a sanjak of the vilayet of Castamouni, containing 15,000 inhabitants, about one half of whom are Greek schismatics. S. VAILHÉ Sion Sion Sion, a titular see in Asia Minor, suffragan of Ephesus. No civil document mentions it. It is numbered among the suffragans of Ephesus in the Greek "Notitiæ episcopatuum", from the seventh to the thirteenth century. [See Gelzer in "Abhandlungen der k. bayer. Akademie der Wiss.", I. Cl. XXI Bd. III Abth. (Munich, 1900), 536, 552; Idem, "Georgii Cyprii descriptio orbis romani" (Leipzig, 1890), 8, 62; Parthey, "Hierocles Synecdemus e Notit. gr. episcopat. (Berlin, 1866), 61, 103, 155, 167, 203, 245.] The names of only three bishops of Sion are known: Nestorius, present at the Council of Ephesus, 431; John, at the Council in Trullo, 692; Philip, represented at Nicæa, 787, by the priest Theognis (Le Quien, "Oriens christianus", I, 721). This author asks if Basil, Bishop poleos Asaion represented at Chalcedon, 451, by his metropolitan does not belong to Sion; it is more likely that he was Bishop of Assus. Ramsay ("Asia Minor", 105) thinks that Sion is probably the same town as Tianae, or Tiarae mentioned by Pliny, V, 33, 3, and Hierocles, 661, 8, and Attaca, mentioned by Strabo, XIII, 607; but this is very doubtful. In any case the site of Sion is unknown. S. PÉTRIDÈS. Diocese of Sion Sion (Sedunensis) A Swiss bishopric, depending directly on the Holy See. HISTORY The Diocese of Sion is the oldest in Switzerland and one of the oldest north of the Alps. At first its see was at Octodurum, now called Martinach, or Martigny. According to tradition there was a Bishop of Octodurum, named Oggerius, as early as a.d. 300. However, the first authenticated bishop is St. Theodore (d. 391), who was present at the Council of Aquileia in 381. On the spot where the Abbey of Saint-Maurice now stands he built a church in honour of St. Mauritius, martyred here about 300. He also induced the hermits of the vicinity to unite in a common life, thus beginning the Abbey of Saint-Maurice, the oldest north of the Alps. Theodore rebuilt the church at Sion, which had been destroyed by Emperor Maximianus at the beginning of the fourth century. At first the diocese was a suffragan of Vienne; later it became suffragan of Tarentaise. In 589 the bishop, St. Heliodorus, transferred the see to Sion, as Octodurum was frequently endangered by the inundations of the Rhone and the Drance. There were frequent disputes with the monks of the Abbey of Saint-Maurice, who were jealously watchful that the bishops should not extend their jurisdiction over the abbey. Several of the bishops united both offices, as: Wilcharius (764-80), previously Archbishop of Vienne, from which he had been driven by the Saracens; St. Alteus, who received from the pope a Bull of exemption in favour of the monastery (780); Aimo II, son of Count Hubert of Savoy, who entertained Leo IX at Saint-Maurice in 1049. The last king of Upper Burgundy, Rudolph III, granted the Countship of Valais to Bishop Hugo (998- 1017); this union of the spiritual and secular powers made the bishop the most powerful ruler in the valley of the Upper Rhone. Taking this donation as a basis, the bishops of Sion extended their secular power, and the religious metropolis of the valley became also the political centre. However, the union of the two powers was the cause of violent disputes in the following centuries. For, while the spiritual jurisdiction of the bishop extended over the whole valley of the Rhone above Lake Geneva, the Countship of Valais included only the upper part of the valley, reaching to the confluence of the Trient and the Rhone. The attempts of the bishops of Sion to carry their secular power farther down the Rhone were bitterly and successfully opposed by the abbots of Saint-Maurice, who had obtained large possessions in Lower Valais. The medieval bishops of Sion belonged generally to noble families of Savoy and Valais and were often drawn into the feuds of these families. Moreover the bishops were vigorously opposed by the petty feudal nobles of Valais, who, trusting to their fortified castles on rocky heights, sought to evade the supremacy of the bishop who was at the same time count and prefect of the Holy Roman Empire. Other opponents of the bishops were the flourishing peasant communities of Upper Valais, which were called later the sieben Zehnten (seven-tenths). Their struggles with Savoy forced the bishops to grant continually increasing political rights to the peasant communities. Thus Bishop William IV of Raron (1437-57) was obliged to relinquish civil and criminal jurisdiction over the sieben Zehnten by the Treaty of Naters in 1446, while a revolt of his subjects compelled Bishop Jost of Silinen (1482-96) to flee from the diocese. Walter II of Supersax (1457-82) took part in the battles of the Swiss against Charles the Bold of Burgundy and his confederate, the Duke of Savoy, and in 1475 drove the House of Savoy from Lower Valais. The most important bishop of this era was Matthew Schinner (1499-1522), a highly cultivated Humanist. Bishop Schinner, fearing that French supremacy would endanger the freedom of the Swiss, placed the military force of the diocese at the disposal of the pope and in 1510 brought about an alliance for five years between the Swiss Confederacy and the Roman Church. In return for this Julius II made the bishop a cardinal. In 1513 the bishop had succeeded in having his diocese separated from the Archdiocese of Tarentaise and placed directly under the control of the pope. The defeat of the Swiss in 1515 at the battle of Marignano, at which Schinner himself fought, weakened his position in the diocese, and the arbitrary rule of his brothers led to a revolt of his subjects; in 1518 he was obliged to leave the diocese. The new doctrines of the Reformation found little acceptance in Valais, although preachers were sent into the canton from Berne, Zurich, and Basle. In 1529 Bishop Adrian I of Riedmatten (1529-48), the cathedral chapter, and the sieben Zehnten formed an alliance with the Catholic cantons of the Confederation, the purpose of which was to maintain and protect the Catholic Faith in all the territories of the allied cantons against the efforts of the Reformed cantons. On account of this alliance Valais aided in gaining the victory of the Catholics over the followers of Zwingli at Cappel in 1531; this victory saved the possessions of the Catholic Church in Switzerland. The abbots of Saint-Maurice opposed all religious innovations as energetically as did Bishops Adrian I of Riedmatten, Hildebrand of Riedmatten (1565-1604), and Adrian II of Riedmatten (1604-13), so that the whole of Valais remained Catholic. Both Adrian II and his successor Hildebrand Jost (1613-38) were again involved in disputes with the sieben Zehnten in regard to the exercise of the rights of secular supremacy. In order to put an end to these quarrels and not to endanger the Catholic Faith he relinquished in 1630 the greater part of his rights as secular suzerain, and the power of the bishop was thereafter limited almost entirely to the spiritual sphere. The secular power of the bishops was brought to an end by the French Revolution. In 1798 Valais, after an heroic struggle against the supremacy of France, was incorporated into the Helvetian Republic, and Bishop John Anthony Blatter (1790-1817) retired to Novara. During the sway of Napoleon Valais was separated from Switzerland in 1802 as the Rhodanic Republic, and in 1810 was united with France. Most of the monasteries were suppressed. In 1814 Valais threw off French supremacy, when the Allies entered the territory; in 1815 it joined Switzerland as one of the cantons. As partial compensation for the loss of his secular power the bishop received a post of honour in the Diet of the canton and the right to four votes. Disputes often arose as the Constitution of 1815 of the canton gave Upper Valais political predominance in the cantonal government, notwithstanding the fact that its population was smaller than that of Lower Valais. This led in 1840 to a civil war with Lower Valais, where the "Young Swiss" party, hostile to the Church, were in control. The party friendly to the Church conquered, it is true, and the influence of the Church over teaching was, at first, preserved, but on account of the defeat of the Sonderband, with which Valais had united, a radical Government gained control in 1847. The new administration at once showed itself unfriendly to the Church, secularized many church landed properties, and wrung large sums of money from the bishop and monasteries. When in 1856 the moderate party gained the cantonal election, negotiations were begun with Bishop Peter Joseph von Preux (1843-75), and friendly relations were restored between the diocese and the canton. In 1880 the two powers came to an agreement as to the lands taken from the Church in 1848; these, so far as they had not been sold, were given back for their original uses. Since then the bishop and the Government have been on friendly terms. The new Constitution of 1907 declares the Catholic religion to be the religion of the canton, and forbids any union of spiritual and secular functions. The ordinances regulating the election of a bishop which have been in existence from early times, at least, contradict this (see below). The present bishop is Julius Mauritius Abbet, b. 12 Sept., 1845, appointed auxiliary bishop cum jure successionis 1 Oct., 1895, succeeded to the see 26 Feb., 1901. STATISTICS The boundaries of the Diocese of Valais have hardly been changed since it was founded; the diocese includes the Upper Rhone Valley, that is, the Canton of Valais, with exception of the exempt Abbey of Saint-Maurice, and of the Catholic inhabitants of Saint-Gingolph, who belong to the French Diocese of Annecy; it also includes the parishes of Bex and Aigle that belong to the Canton of Vaud. In 1911 the diocese had 11 deaneries, 125 parishes, 70 chaplaincies, 208 secular priests, 135 regular priests and professed, about 120,000 Catholics. Nearly 30 per cent of the population of the diocese speak German, and nearly 65 percent French; the language of the rest of the population is Italian. The bishop is elected by the denominationally mixed Great Council from a list of four candidates presented by the cathedral chapter, and the election is laid before the pope for confirmation. The cathedral chapter consists of ten canons; in addition five rectors are included among the cathedral clergy. The clergy are trained at a seminary for priests at Sion that has six ecclesiastical professors and twelve resident students; there are also six theological students studying at the University of Innsbruck. The religious orders of men in the diocese are: Augustinian Canons, with houses on the Great St. Bernard, the Simplon, and at Martigny, containing altogether 45 priests, 6 professed and 7 lay-brothers; Capuchins, at Sion and Saint-Maurice, numbering 22 priests, 6 students of theology, and 9 lay-brothers. The exempt abbey of Augustinian Canons at Saint-Maurice contains 46 priests, 9 professed and lay- brothers. The orders and congregations of nuns in the diocese are: Bernardines at Colombay; Hospital Sisters at Sion; Sisters of St. Vincent de Paul at Saint-Maurice; Franciscan Nuns, at the same place; Sisters of Charity of the Holly Cross at Sion, Leuk, and Leukerbad; Ursuline Nuns at Sion and Brieg. Briguet, Vallesia christ. seu diœc. Sedunensis hist. sacra (Sion, 1744); Boccard, Hist. du Valais (Geneva, 1844); Burgener, Die Heiligen des walliser Landes (Einsiedeln, 1857); Gremaud, CAtalogue des évêques de Sion (Lausanne, 1864); Idem, Doc. relatifs à l'hist. du Valais (Lausanne, 1875-84); Gay, Hist. du Valais (Geneva, 1888-89); Idem, Mélanges d'hist. valaisanne (Geneva, 1891); Rameau, Le Valais hist. (Sion, 1891); BÜchi, Die kath. Kirche der Schweiz (Munich, 1902); Bourbon, L'archevêque s. Vultchaire (Fribourg, 1900); Mélanges d'hist. et d'archéol. de la soc. helvétique de Saint-Maurice (1901); Grenat, Hist. moderne du Valais 1536-1815 (Geneva, 1904); Besson, Recherches sur les orig. des évêchés de Genève, Lausanne, Sion, etc. (Paris, 1906); Status venerabilis cleri diœc. Sedunen. (Sion, 1911); Blätter aus der walliser Gesch. (Sion, 1899–). Joseph Lins Sioux City Sioux City DIOCESE OF SIOUX CITY (SIOPOLITAN). Erected 15 Jan., 1902, by Leo XIII. The establishment of this diocese was provided for in the Bull appointing Most Rev. John J. Keane, D.D., to the Archbishopric of Dubuque on 24 July, 1900. This provision was made on the occasion of that appointment for the reason that the new diocese was taken entirely from Archdiocese of Dubuque. It comprises twenty-four counties in north-western Iowa, including a territory of 14,518 square miles. Sioux City is on the extreme limit of the western boundary of Iowa, situated on the east bank of the Missouri River, about one hundred miles north of Omaha. With the exception of Des Moines, the capital, it is the largest and most enterprising municipality in the State of Iowa, containing a population of between fifty and sixty thousand. It is in the midst of a large and rich agricultural country, and relies chiefly on the products of the soil, of which the staple article is corn; consequently grain-packing is the chief industry of Sioux City. The Catholic population of the diocese is almost sixty thousand. It has 138 churches, including missions, 122 priests, of whom 6 are religious (4 Friars Minor and 2 Fathers of the Sacred Heart); 53 parochial schools, with 4 hospitals; 4 academies; 2 schools of domestic science; an orphanage, a Good Shepherd home, an infant asylum, a home for the aged, and a working girls' home. There are 7327 children in the parish schools, and nearly 8000 under Catholic care. The composition of the Catholic population of the diocese is English-speaking and German. These form the principal elements of the Church's membership here, and are almost equally divided in numbers. A characteristic feature of western Catholicism is manifest here as in other western dioceses, that is the ardent desire of the people for parochial schools wherever it is possible. Out of the 10,000 children of school age (i.e. under seventeen years) in the diocese, three-fourths are in parochial schools. The following orders conduct schools and charitable institutions in the diocese: Sisters of Charity B.V.M., Sisters of Christian Charity, Sisters of St. Dominic, Sister of St. Francis (Dubuque, Iowa), Franciscan Sisters (Clinton, Iowa), Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration, School Sisters of St. Francis, Presentation Nuns, Servants of Mary, Sister of St. Benedict, Sisters of Mercy, Sisters of the Good Shepherd. Since its establishment nine years ago, the diocese is thoroughly organized and has been constantly expanding by the erection of churches, schools, and expanding by the erection of churches, schools, and other institutions. The present bishop, the Right Reverend Philip J. Garrigan, D.D., first bishop of the diocese, was born in Ireland in the early forties, came to this country with his parents, and received his elementary education in the public schools of Lowell, Mass. He pursued his classical course at St. Charles's College, Ellicott City, Maryland, and courses of philosophy and theology at the Provincial Seminary of New York at Troy, where he was ordained on 11 June, 1870. After a short term as curate of St. John's Church, Worcester, Massachusetts, he was appointed director of the Troy seminary for three years; and was for fourteen years afterwards pastor of St. Bernard's Church, Fitchburg, Massachusetts. In the fall of 1888 he was appointed first vice-rector of the Catholic University at Washington, D. C., which position he also held for fourteen years. He was named Bishop of Sioux City on 21 March, 1902, and consecrated at the see of his home diocese, Springfield, Massachusetts, on 25 May of the same year, by the Right Rev. T.D. Beaven, and on 18 June following took possession of his see. PHILIP J. GARRIGAN Sioux Falls Sioux Falls DIOCESE OF SIOUX FALLS (SIOUXORMENSIS). Suffragan of St. Paul, comprises all that part of the State of South Dakota east of the Missouri River, an area of 34,861 square miles. The western portion of the state, forming the present Diocese of Lead, was detached from the Diocese of Sioux Falls, 8 August, 1902. The early history of religion in South Dakota (until 1879) must be sought for in the histories respectively of St. Paul, Dubuque, and Nebraska. The first Mass celebrated in South Dakota was in 1842, in Brown County, by the late Monsignor Ravoux of St. Paul on his first visit to the Sioux Indians; and the first church erected was in 1867, by the late Father Pierre Boucher, who was sent by Bishop Grace of St. Paul to Jefferson, Union County, to attend the Catholics scattered about that centre. In August, 1879, the Vicariate Apostolic of Dakota, whose boundaries corresponded with the ten existing civil boundaries of the newly formed Territory of Dakota, was established, and the Right Reverend Martin Marty, Abbot of St. Meinrad's Benedictine Abbey, Indiana, nominated Bishop of Tiberias and vicar Apostolic of the new district. Bishop Marty was consecrated in the Church of St. Ferdinand, Ferdinand, Indiana, 1 February, 1880, by the Right Reverend Francis Silas Chatard, the present Bishop of Indianapolis. The vicariate was an immense district to govern (149,112 square miles) with scarcely any mode of travelling, except by the primitive ox or mule teams. A few miles of railroad existed from Sioux City to Yankton. The new vicar Apostolic went directly to Yankton, where he took up his residence. He found 12 priests administering to a scattered Catholic population of less than 14,000 souls and 20 churches. Many and heroic were the hardships endured by both bishop and priests. At the close of 1881 the number of priests increased to 37, the number of churches to 43 with 35 stations. There were 3 convents, 2 academies for young ladies, 4 parochial schools for the white and 4 schools for the Indian children, while the Catholic population, including 700 Indians, numbered 15,800 souls. The decade beginning with 1880, witnessed a wonderful development and the population increased from 135,180 to 250,000. The statistics at the end of 1883 show 45 priests, 82 churches, 67 stations, 4 convents, 4 academies, 12 parochial schools, 6 Indian schools and a Catholic population, including 1,600 Indians, of 25,600 souls. The Territory of Dakota was divided by Act of Congress, 22 February, 1889, and the two states, North and South Dakota, were admitted to the Union, 2 November, 1889. The same month witnessed the ecclesiastical division of the vicariate, and two new dioceses were formed, Sioux Falls (South Dakota) with Bishop Marty its first bishop; and Jamestown (North Dakota), now Fargo, with Bishop Shanley (d. July, 1909) its first incumbent. In 1894 Bishop Marty was transferred to the Diocese of St. Cloud, Minnesota, where he died 19 September, 1896. The efforts of Bishop Marty were crowned with marvellous success. He devoted himself especially to the Indian race. He spoke their language and translated hymns and prayers into their tongue. The second and present (1911) Bishop of Sioux Falls, the Right Rev. Thomas O'Gorman, was born at Boston, Massachusetts, 1 May, 1843, he moved with his parents to St. Paul, and was one of the first two students selected for the priesthood by Bishop Cretin, the other was Archbishop Ireland. Having pursued his ecclesiastical studies in France, he returned to St. Paul, where he was ordained priest, 5 November, 1865. He was pastor in turn of Rochester and Faribault, Minn., and first president and professor of dogmatic theology at St. Thomas' College, St. Paul. In 1890 he was appointed Professor of Church History in the Catholic University, Washington, D. C., was consecrated in St. Patrick's Church, Washington, D. C. (19 April, 1896) by Cardinal Satolli, then Apostolic delegate to this country, and on 1 May, 1896, was installed in the pro-cathedral of his episcopal see. The statistics of the diocese then showed 51 secular and 14 regular priests, 50 churches with resident priests, 61 missions with churches, 100 stations, 10 chapels, 14 parochial schools, 61 Indian schools, 2 orphanages, and l hospital. There were 3 communities of men and 6 of women, while the Catholic population, white and Indian, was estimated at 30,000 souls. Bishop O'Gorman infused new life into the diocese. The population increased so rapidly that in 1902 the Diocese of Lead was erected. The statistics of the diocese (1911) are in priests, secular 102, regular 13; students 10; churches with resident priests, 91; missions with churches, 70; stations, 23; chapels, 13; parochial schools, 23 with 2,500 children in attendance; hospitals, 4. There are 3 communities of men: Benedictines, Eudists, and the Clerics of St. Viateur. The communities of women are: Dominican Sisters; Presentation Sisters; Benedictine Sisters; Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis; School Sisters of St. Francis, and the Sisters of Charity of St. Louis. Columbus College at Chamberlain, in charge of the Clerics of St. Viateur is an institution of great promise. The Catholic population, including 500 Indians, is 50,000. In the vicariate Apostolic of thirty-one years ago, where there were only 1 bishop and 12 priests, there are now (1911) 4 bishops and 284 priests. DANIEL F. DESMOND Sioux Indians Sioux Indians The largest and most important Indian tribe north of Mexico, with the single exception of the Ojibwa (Chippewa), who, however, lack the solidarity of the Sioux, being widely scattered on both sides of the international boundary, while the Sioux are virtually all within the United States and up to a comparatively recent period kept up close connection among the various bands. NAME AND AFFILIATION The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states. Linguistically the Sioux are of the great Siouan stock, to which they have given name and of which they themselves now constitute nearly three-fourths. Other cognate tribes are the Assiniboin, Crow, Hidatsa, or Minitarí, Mandan, Winnebago, Iowa, Omaha, Ponca, Oto, Missouri, Kaw, Osage, and Quapaw, all excepting the Winnebago living west of the Mississippi; together with a number of tribes formerly occupying territories in Mississippi and the central regions of the Carolinas and Virginia, all now virtually extinct, excepting a handful of Catawba in South Carolina. Linguistic and traditionary evidence indicate this eastern region as the original home of the stock, although the period and causes of the westward migration remain a matter of conjecture. The Sioux language is spoken in three principal dialects, viz. Santee (pronounced Sahntee), or eastern; Yankton, or middle; and Teton, or western, differing chiefly in the interchange of d, n, and l, as indicated in the various forms of the tribal name. The Assiniboin are a seceded branch of the Yankton division, having separated from the parent tribe at some time earlier than 1640. HISTORY When and why the Sioux removed from their original home in the East, or by what route they reached the upper Mississippi country, are unknown. When first noticed in history, about 1650, they centered about Mille Lac and Leech Lake, toward the heads of the Mississippi, in central Minnesota, having their eastern frontier within a day's march of Lake Superior. From this position they were gradually driven by the pressure, from the east, of the advancing Ojibwa, who were earlier in obtaining firearms, until nearly the whole nation had removed to the Minnesota and upper Red River, in turn driving before them the Cheyenne, Omaha, and other tribes. On reaching the buffalo plains and procuring horses, supplemented soon thereafter by firearms, they rapidly overran the country to the west and southwest, crossing the Missouri perhaps about 1750, and continuing on to the Black Hills and the Platte until checked by the Pawnee, Crow, and other tribes. At the beginning of treaty relations in 1805 they were the acknowledged owners of most of the territory extending from central Wisconsin, across the Mississippi and Missouri, to beyond the Black Hills, and from the Canada boundary to the North Platte, including all of Southern Minnesota, with considerable portions of Wisconsin and Iowa, most of North Dakota and South Dakota, Northern Nebraska, and much of Montana and Wyoming. The boundaries of all that portion lying east of the Dakotas were defined by the great inter-tribal treaty of Prairie du Chien in 1825 and a supplemental treaty at the same place in 1830. At this period the Minnesota region was held by the various Santee bands; Eastern Dakota and a small part of Iowa were claimed by the Yankton and their cousins the Yanktonai; while all the Sioux territory west of the Missouri was held by bands of the great Teton division, constituting three-fifths of the whole nation. Under the name of Naduesiu the Sioux are first mentioned by Father Paul le Jeune in the Jesuit Relation of 1640, apparently on the information of that pioneer western explorer, Jean Nicolet, the first white man known to have set foot in Wisconsin, probably in 1634-5. In 1655-6 two other famous French explorers, Radisson and Groseilliers, spent some time with them in their own country, about the western border of Wisconsin. At that time the Sioux were giving shelter to a band of refugee Hurons fleeing before the Iroquois. They were rated as possessing thirty villages, and were the terror of all the surrounding tribes by reason of their number and prowess, although admittedly less cruel. Fathers Allouez and Marquette, from their mission of St. Esprit, established at Lapointe (now Bayfield, Wis.) on Lake Superior in 1665, entered into friendly relations with the Sioux, which continued until 1671, when the latter, provoked by insults from the eastern tribes, returned Marquette's presents, declared war against their hereditary foes, and compelled the abandonment of the mission. In 1674 they sent a delegation to Sault Ste. Marie to arrange peace through the good offices of the resident Jesuit missionary, Father Gabriel Druillettes, who already had several of the tribe under instruction in his house, but the negotiations were brought to an abrupt end by a treacherous attack made upon the Sioux while seated in council in the mission church, resulting in the massacre of the ambassadors after a desperate encounter, and the burning of the church, which was fired over their heads by the Ojibwa to dislodge them. The tribal war went on, but the Sioux kept friendship with the French traders, who by this time had reached the Mississippi. In 1680 one of their war parties, descending the Mississippi against the Illinois, captured the Recollect Father Louis Hennepin with two companions and brought them to their villages at the head of the river, where they held them, more as guests than prisoners, until released on the arrival of the trader, Du Luth, in the fall. While thus in custody Father Hennepin observed their customs, made some study of the language, baptized a child and attempted some religious instruction, explored a part of Minnesota, and discovered and named St. Anthony's Falls. In 1683 Nicholas Perrot established a post at the mouth of the Wisconsin. In 1689 he established Fort Perrot near the lower end of Lake Pepin, on the Minnesota side, the first post within the Sioux territory, and took formal possession of their country for France. The Jesuit Father Joseph Marest, officially designated "Missionary to the Nadouesioux", was one of the witnesses at the ceremony and was again with the tribe some twelve years later. Another post was built by Pierre LeSueur, near the present Red Wing about 1693, and in 1695 a principal chief of the tribe accompanied him to Montreal to meet the governor, Frontenac. By this time the Sioux had a number of guns and were beginning to wage aggressive warfare toward the west, driving the Cheyenne, Omaha, and Oto down upon the Missouri and pushing out into the buffalo plains. During Frontenac's administration mission work languished owing to his bitter hostility to missionaries, especially the Jesuits. About the year 1698, through injudiciously assisting the Sioux against the Foxes, the French became involved in a tedious forty-years' war with the latter tribe which completely paralyzed trade on the upper Mississippi and ultimately ruined the Foxes. Before its end the Sioux themselves turned against the French and gave refuge to the defeated Foxes. In 1700 LeSueur had built Fort L'Huillier on the Blue Earth River near the present Mankato, Minnesota. In 1727, an ineffective peace having been made, the Jesuit Fathers, Ignatius Guignas and Nicolas de Gonnor, again took up work among the Sioux at the new Fort Beauharnais on Lake Pepin. Although driven out for a time by the Foxes, they returned and continued with the work some ten years, until the Sioux themselves became hostile. In 1736 the Sioux massacred an entire exploring party of twenty-one persons under command of the younger Verendrye at the Lake of the Woods, just beyond the northern (international) Minnesota boundary. Among those killed was the Jesuit father, Jean-Pierre Aulneau. In 1745-6, the Foxes having been finally crushed, De Lusignan again arranged peace with the Sioux, and between them and the Ojibwa, and four Sioux chiefs returned with him to Montreal. On the fall of Canada the Sioux, in 1763, sent delegates to the English post at Green Bay with proffers of friendship and a request for traders. They were described as "certainly the greatest nation of Indians ever yet found", holding all other Indians as "their slaves or dogs". Two thousand of their warriors now had guns, while the other and larger portion still depended upon the bow, in the use of which, and in dancing, they excelled the other tribes. In the winter of 1766-7 the American traveller, Jonathan Carver, spent several months with the Santee visiting their burial-ground and sacred cave near the present St. Paul, and witnessing men and women gashing themselves in frenzied grief at their bereavement. Soon after this period the eastern Sioux definitively abandoned the Mille Lac and Leech Lake country to their enemies the Ojibwa, with whom the hereditary war still kept up. The final engagement in this upper region occurred in 1768 when a great canoe fleet of Sioux, numbering perhaps five hundred warriors, while descending the Mississippi from a successful raid upon the Ojibwa, was ambushed near the junction of Crow Wing River and entirely defeated by a much smaller force of the latter tribe. In 1775 peace was again made between the two tribes through the efforts of the English officials in order to secure their alliance in the coming Revolutionary struggle. The peace lasted until the close of the Revolutionary War, in which both tribes furnished contingents against the American frontier, after which the warriors returned to their homes, and the old feud was resumed. In the meantime the Teton Sioux, pressing westward, were gradually pushing the Arikara (Ree) up the Missouri, and by acquiring horses from the plains tribes had become metamorphosed from canoe men and gatherers of wild rice into an equestrian race of nomad buffalo hunters. Some years after the close of the Revolution, perhaps about 1796, French traders in the American interest ascended the Missouri from St. Louis and established posts among the Yankton and Teton. In 1804 the first American exploring expedition, under Captains Lewis and Clark, ascended the river, holding councils and securing the allegiance of the Sioux and other tribes, and then crossing the mountains and descending the Columbia to the Pacific, returning over nearly the same route in 1806. As a result of this acquaintance the first Sioux (Yankton) delegation visited Washington in the latter year. At the same time, 1805-6, Lieutenant Zebulon Pike ascended the Mississippi on a similar errand to the Santee Sioux and other tribes of that region. In this he was successful and on 23 September, 1805, negotiated the first treaty of the Sioux with the United States, by which they ceded lands in the vicinity of the present St. Paul for the establishment of military posts, at the same time giving up their English flags and medals and accepting American ones. Up to this period and for some years later the rapidly diverging bands of the east and west still held an annual renunion east of the lower James River in eastern South Dakota. In 1807 Manuel Lisa, founder of the American Fur Company, "the most active and indefatigable trader that St. Louis ever produced" (Chittenden), established headquarters among the Sioux, at Cedar Island, below the present Pierre, S.D., later moving down to about the present Chamberlain. Lisa was a Spaniard, and like his French associates, Chouteau, Ménard, and Trudeau, was a Catholic. At his several trading posts among the Teton and Yankton Sioux, and the Omaha lower down the river, he showed the Indians how to plant gardens and care for cattle and hogs, besides setting up blacksmith shops for their benefit, without charge, and caring for their aged and helpless, so that it was said that he was better loved by the Sioux than any other white man of his time. Being intensely American in feeling, he was appointed first government agent for the upper Missouri River tribes, and by his great influence with them held them steady for the United States throughout the War of 1812, notwithstanding that most of the eastern, or Santee, Sioux, through the efforts of Tecumtha and a resident British trader, Robert Dickson, declared for England and furnished a contingent against Fort Meigs. Lisa died in 1820. At the close of the war, by a series of five similar treaties made 15 July, 1815, at Portage des Sioux, above St. Louis, the various Sioux bands made their peace with the United States and finally acknowledged its sovereignty. Other late hostile tribes made peace at the same time. this great treaty gathering, the most important ever held with the tribes of the Middle West, marks the beginning of their modern history. In 1820 Fort Snelling was built at the present Minneapolis to control the Santee Sioux and Ojibwa, an agency being also established at the same time. In 1825 another great treaty gathering was convened at Prairie du Chien for the delimitation of tribal boundaries to put an end to inter-tribal wars, and clear the way for future land cessions. At this period, and for years after, the Sioux led all other tribes in the volume of their fur trade, consisting chiefly of buffalo robes and beaver skins. With the establishment of permanent government relations regular mission work began. In 1834 the brothers Samuel and Gideon Pond for the Congregationalists, located among the Santee at Lake Calhoun, near the present St. Paul, Minnesota. In 1835 the same denomination established other missions at Lake Harriet and Lac-qui-Parle, Minnesota, under Rev. J.D. Stevens and Thomas Williamson respectively. In 1837 Williamson was joined by Rev. Stephen Riggs and his son Alfred. In 1852 the two last-named missions were removed to the upper Minnesota in consequence of a treaty cession. All of these workers are known for their linguistic contributions as well as for their missionary service. In 1837 a Lutheran mission was established at Red Wing and continued for some years. The successful establishment of these missions was due chiefly to the encouragement and active aid afforded by Joseph Renville, a remarkable half-breed, who stood high in the respect and affection of the eastern Sioux. Born in the wilderness in 1779 of an Indian mother, he had been taken to Canada, when a small boy, by his French father, a noted trader, and placed under the care of a Catholic priest, from whom he acquired some knowledge of French and of the Christian religion. The death of his father a few years later and his consequent return to the Sioux country put an end to his educational opportunity, but the early impression thus made was never effaced. On coming to manhood and succeeding to his father's business he sent across the ocean, probably through Dickson, the British trader, for a French Bible (which, when it came, was Protestant) and then hired a clerk who could read it to him. On the establishment of the post at Prairie du Chien he brought down his Indian wife and had her regularly married to him by a Catholic priest, he himself having previously instructed her in religion as well as he could. When the Congregationalists arrived he welcomed them as bringing Christianity, even though not of the form of his childhood teacher. He died in 1846. In 1841 Father Augustine Ravoux began work among the Santee in the neighbourhood of Fort Snelling, near which Father Galtier had just built a log chapel of St. Paul, around which grew the modern city. Applying himself to the study of the language, in which he soon became proficient, Father Ravoux in 1843 repaired to Prairie du Chien, and there with his own hands printed a small devotional work, "Katolik Wocekiye Wowapi Kin", which is still used as a mission manual. He continued with the tribe for several years, extending his ministrations also to the Yankton, until recalled to parish work. As early at least as 1840 the great Jesuit apostle of the North-West, Father P.J. De Smet, had visited the bands along the Missouri River, where Father Christian Hoecken had preceded him in 1837, instructing adults and baptizing children. Father De Smet made several other brief stops later on his way to and from the Rocky Mountain missions, and in the summer of 1848 spent several months in the camps of the Bruleé and Ogalala, whom he found well disposed to Christianity. In 1850 Father Hoecken was again with the Yankton and Teton, but the design to establish a permanent mission was frustrated by his untimely death from cholera, 19 June, 1851. In the same summer Father De Smet attended the great inter-tribal gathering at Fort Laramie, where for several weeks he preached daily to the Sioux and other tribes, baptizing over fifteen hundred children. From that period until his death in 1872 a large portion of his time was given to the western Sioux, among whom his influence was so great that he was several times called in by the Government to assist in treaty negotiations, notably in the great peace treaty of 1868. In 1837 the Sioux sold all of their remaining territory east of the Mississippi. In the winter of 1837-8 smallpox, introduced from a passing steamer, swept over all the tribes of the upper Missouri River, killing perhaps 30,000 Indians, of whom a large proportion were Sioux. About the same time the war with the Ojibwa on the eastern frontier broke out again with greater fury than ever. In a battle near the present Stillwater, Minnesota, in June, 1839, some 50 Ojibwa were slain and shortly afterward a Sioux raiding party surprised an Ojibwa camp in the absence of the warriors and brought away 91 scalps. In 1851 the various Santee bands sold all their remaining lands in Minnesota and Iowa, excepting a twenty-mile strip along the upper Minnesota River, Although there were then four missions among the Santee, the majority of the Indians were reported to have "an inveterate hatred" of Christianity. In March, 1857, on some trifling provocation, a small band of renegade Santee, under an outlawed chief, Inkpaduta, "Scarlet Point," attacked the scattered settlements about Spirit Lake, on the Iowa-Minnesota border, burning houses, massacring about fifty persons, and carrying off several women, two of whom were killed later, the others being rescued by the Christian Indians. Inkpaduta escaped to take an active part in all the Sioux troubles for twenty years thereafter. In 1858 the Yankton Sioux sold all their lands in South Dakota, excepting the present Yankton reservation. The famous pipestone quarry in southwestern Minnesota, whence the Sioux for ages had procured the red stone from which their pipes were carved, was also permanently reserved to this Indian purpose. In 1860 the first Episcopalian work was begun among the (Santee) Sioux by Rev. Samuel D. Hinman. In 1862 occurred the great "Minnesota outbreak" and massacre, involving nearly all the Santee bands, brought about by dissatisfaction at the confiscation of a large proportion of the treaty funds to satisfy traders' claims, and aggravated by a long delay in the annuity issue. The weakening of the local garrisons and the general unrest consequent upon the Civil War also encouraged to revolt. The trouble began 2 August with an attack upon the agency store-house at Redwood, where five thousand Indians were awaiting the distribution of the delayed annuity supplies. The troops were overpowered and the commissary goods seized, but no other damage attempted. On 17 August a small party of hunters, being refused food at a settler's cabin, massacred the family and fled with the news to the camp of Little Crow, where a general massacre of all the whites and Christian Indians was at once resolved upon. Within a week almost every farm cabin and small settlement in Southern Minnesota and along the adjoining border was wiped out of existence and most of the inhabitants massacred, in many cases with devilish barbarities, excepting such as could escape to Fort Ridgely at the lower end of the reservation. The missionaries were saved by the faithful heroism of the Christian Indians, who, as in 1857, stood loyally by the Government. Determined attacks were made under Little Crow upon Fort Ridgely (20-21 August) and New Ulm (22 August), the latter defended by a strong volunteer force under Judge Charles Flandrau. Both attacks were finally repulsed. On 2 Sept. a force of 1500 regulars and volunteers under Colonel (afterwards General) H. H. Sibley defeated the hostiles at Birch Coulee and again on 23 September at Wood Lake. Most of the hostiles now surrendered, the rest fleeing in small bands beyond the reach of pursuit. Three hundred prisoners were condemned to death by court martial, but the number was cut down by President Lincoln to thirty-eight, who were hanged at Mankato, 26 December, 1862. They were attended by Revs. Riggs and Williamson and by Father Ravoux, but although the other missionaries had been twenty-five years stationed with the tribe and spoke the language fluently, thirty-tree of the whole number elected to die in the Catholic Church, two of the remaining five rejecting all Christian ministration. Three years later Father Ravoux again stood on the scaffold with two condemned warriors of the tribe. Two months after the outbreak Congress declared the Santee treaties abrogated and the Minnesota reservations forfeited. One part of the fugitives trying to escape to the Yanktonai was overtaken and defeated with great loss by Sibley near Big Mound, North Dakota, 24 July, 1863. The survivors fled to the Teton beyond the Missouri or took refuge in Canada, where they are still domiciled. On 3 Sept. General Sully struck the main hostile camp under Inkpaduta at Whitestone Hill, west of Ellendale, N.D., killing 300 and capturing nearly as many more. On 28 July, 1864, General Sully delivered the final blow to the combined hostile force, consisting of Santee, Yanktonai, and some northern Teton, at Kildeer Mountain on the Little Missouri. The prisoners and others of the late hostile bands were finally settled on two reservations established for the purpose, viz. the (Lower) Yanktonai at Crow Creek, S.D., and the Santee at Santee, northeastern Nebraska. Here they still remain, being now well advanced in civilization and Christianity, and fairly properous. The outbreak had cost the lives of nearly 1000 whites, of whom nearly 700 perished in the first few days of the massacre. The Indian loss was about double, falling almost entirely upon the Santee. Pananapapi (Strike-the-Ree), head chief of the 3000 Yankton, and a Catholic, had steadily held his people loyal and the great Brulé and Ogalala bands of the Teton, 13,000 strong, had remained neutral. In October, 1865, at old Fort Sully (near Pierre), S.D., a general treaty of peace was made with the Sioux, and one Teton band, the Lower Brulé, agreed to come upon a reservation. The majority of the great Teton division, however, comprising the whole strength of the nation west of the Missouri, refused to take part. In the meantime serious trouble had been brewing in the West. With the discovery of gold in California in 1849 and the consequent opening of an emigrant trail along the North Platte and across the Rocky Mountains, the Indians became alarmed at the disturbance to their buffalo herds, upon which they depended for their entire subsistence. The principal complainants were the Brulé and Ogalala Sioux. For the protection of the emigrants in 1849 the Government bought and garrisoned the American Fur Company post of Fort Laramie on the upper North Platte, in Wyoming, later making it also an agency headquarters. In September, 1851, a great gathering of nearly all the tribes and bands of the Northern Plains was held at Fort Laramie, and a treaty was negotiated by which they came to an agreement in regard to their rival territorial claims, pledged peace among themselves and with the whites, and promised not to disturb the trail on consideration of a certain annual payment. Father De Smet attended throughout the council, teaching and baptizing, and gives an interesting account of the gathering, the largest ever held with the Plains Indians. The treaty was not ratified and had no permanent effect. On 17 August, 1854, while the Indians were camped about the post awaiting the distribution of the annuity goods, occurred the "Fort Laramie Massacre", by which Lieutenant Grattan and an entire detachment of 29 soldiers lost their lives while trying to arrest some Brulés who had killed and eaten an emigrant's cow. From all the evidence the conflict was provoked by the officer's own indiscretion. The Indians then took forcible possession of the annuity goods and left without making any attempt upon the fort or garrison. The Brulé Sioux were now declared hostile, and Gen. W.S. Harney was sent against them. On 3 September, with 1200 men, he came upon their camp at Ash Hollow, Western Nebraska, and while pretending to parley on their proffer of surrender, suddenly attacked them, killing 136 Indians and destroying the entire camp outfit. Late in 1863 the Ogalala and Brulé under their chiefs, Red Cloud (Makhpiya-luta) and Spotted Tail (Shinté-galeshka) respectively, became actively hostile, inflamed by reports of the Santee outbreak and the Civil War in the South. They were joined by the Cheyenne and for two years all travel across the plains was virtually suspended. In March, 1865, they were roused to desperation by the proclamation of two new roads to be opened through their best hunting rounds to reach the new gold fields of Montana. Under Red Cloud's leadership they notified the Government that they would allow no new roads or garrison posts to be established in their country, and carried on the war on this basis with such determination that by treaty at Fort Laramie through a peace commission in April-May, 1868, the Government actually agreed to close the "Montana road" that had been opened north from Laramie, and to abandon the three posts that had been established to protect it. Red Cloud himself refused to sign until after the troops had been withdrawn. The treaty left the territory south of the North Platte open to road building, recognized all north of the North Platte and east of the Bighorn Mountains as unceded Indian territory, and established the "Great Sioux Reservation", nearly equivalent to all of South Dakota west of the Missouri. Provision was made for an agency on the Missouri River and the inauguration of regular governmental civilizing work. In consideration of thus giving up their old freedom the Indians were promised, besides the free aid of blacksmiths, doctors, a saw mill, etc., a complete suit of clothing yearly for thirty years to every individual of the bands concerned, based on the actual yearly census. Among the official witnesses were Rev. Hinman, The Episcopalian missionary, and Father De Smet. This treaty brought the whole of the Sioux nation under agency restriction, and with its ratification in February, 1869, the five years' war came to a close. In this war Red Cloud had been the principal leader, Spotted Tail having been won to friendship earlier through the kindness extended by the officers at Fort Laramie on the occasion of the death of his daughter, who was buried there with Christian rites at her own request. The Cheyenne and Northern Arapaho also acted with the Sioux. The chief fighting centered around Fort Kearney, Wyoming, which Red Cloud himself held under repeated siege, and near which on 21 December, 1866, occurred the "Fetterman Massacre", when an entire detachment of 80 men under Captain Fetterman was exterminated by an overwhelming force of Indians. By treaties in 1867 reservations had been established at Lake Traverse, S.D. and at Fort Totten, N.D., for the Sisseton and Wahpeton Santee and the Cuthead Yanktonai, most of whom had been concerned in the Minnesota outbreak. In 1870 a part of the Christian Santee separated from their kinsmen in Nebraska and removed to Flandreau, S.D., and became citizens. In 1871, despite the protest of Red Cloud and other leading chiefs, the Northern Pacific railway was constructed along the south bank of the Yellowstone and several new posts built for its protection, and war was on again with the Teton Sioux, Cheyenne, and part of the Arapaho. Several skirmishes occurred, and in 1873 General G.A. Custer was ordered to Dakota. In the next year, while hostilities were still in progress, Custer made an exploration of the Black Hills, South Dakota, and reported gold. Despite the treaty and the military, there was at once a great rush of miners and others into the Hills. The Indians refusing to sell on any terms offered, the military patrol was withdrawn, and mining towns at once sprang up all through the mountains. Indian hunting by agents' permission in the disputed territory were ordered to report at their agencies by 31 January, 1876, or be considered hostile, but even the runners who carried the message were unable to return, by reason of the severity of the winter, until after war had been actually declared. This is commonly known as the "Custer War" from its central event, 25 June, 1876, the massacre of General Custer and every man of a detachment of the Seventh Cavalry, numbering 204 in all, in an attack upon the main camp of the hostile Sioux and Cheyenne, on the Little Bighorn River in southeastern Montana. On that day and the next, in the same vicinity, other detachments under Reno and Benteen sustained desperate conflicts with the Indians, with the loss of some sixty more killed. The Indians, probably numbering at least 2500 warriors with their families, finally withdrew on the approach of Generals Terry and Gibbons from the north. The principal Sioux commanders were Crazy Horse and Gall, although Sitting Bull was also present. Red Cloud and Spotted Tail had remained at their agencies. Several minor engagements later in the year resulted in the surrender and return of most of the hostiles to the reservation, while Sitting Bull and Gall and their immediate following escaped into Canada (June, 1877). by a series of treaties negotiated 23 September-27 October, 1876, the Sioux surrendered the whole of the Black Hills country and the western outlet. On 7 September, 1877, Crazy Horse, who had come in with his band some months before, was killed in a conflict with the guard at Fort Robinson, Nebraska. In the same month the last hostiles surrendered. Soon after the treaty a large delegation visited Washington, following which event the Red Cloud (Ogalala) and Spotted Tail (Brulé) agencies were permanently established in 1878 at Pine Ridge and Rosebud, S.D., respectively. This date may be considered to mark the beginning of civilization in these two powerful bands. In 1881 all the late hostiles in Canada came in and surrendered. Sitting Bull and his immediate followers, after being held in confinement for two years, were allowed to return to their homes on Standing Rock reservation. On 5 August, 1881, Spotted Tail was killed by a rival chief. On 29 July, 1888, Strike-the-Ree, the famous Catholic chief of the Yankton, died at the age of 84. In the allotment of Indian agencies to the management of the various religious denominations, in accord with President Grant's "peace policy" in 1870, only two of the eleven Sioux agencies were assigned to the Catholics, namely, Standing Rock and Devil's Lake, notwithstanding that, with the exception of a portion of the Santee and a few of the Yankton, the only missionaries the tribe had ever known from Allouez to De Smet had been Catholic, and most of the resident whites and mixed-bloods were of Catholic ancestry. Santee, Flandreau, and Sisseton (Lake Traverse) agencies of the Santee division were assigned to the Presbyterians, who had already been continuously at work among them for more than a generation. Yankton reservation had been occupied jointly by Presbyterians and Episcopalians in 1869, as was Cheyenne River reservation in 1873. Pine Ridge, Rosebud, Lower Brulé and Crow Creek reservations, comprising nearly one-half the tribe, were given to the Episcopalians, who erected buildings between 1872 (Crow Creek) and 1877 (Pine Ridge). At Devil's Lake an industrial boarding school was completed and opened in 1874 in charge of Benedictine Fathers and Grey Nun Sisters of Charity. At Standing Rock a similar school was opened in 1877 in charge of Benedictine priests and Sisters. Thus by 1878 regular mission plants were in operation on every Sioux reservation. Other Catholic foundations were begun at Crow Creek and Rosebud in 1886, at Pine Ridge in 1887, and at Cheyenne River in 1892. In 1887 the noted secular missionary priest, Father Francis M.J. Craft, opened school at Standing Rock and later succeeded in organizing in the tribe an Indian sisterhood which, however, was refused full ecclesiastical recognition. In 1891 he removed with his community to the Fort Berthold reservation, N.D., where for some years the Sioux Indian Sisters proved valuable auxiliaries, particularly in instructing the women and nursing the sick of the confederated Grosventres, Arikara, and Mandan. Later on several of them won commendation as volunteer nurses in Cuba during the Spanish War. This zealous sisterhood is no longer in existence. In 1889, after long and persistent opposition by the older chiefs, the "Great Sioux Reservation" was cut in two and reduced by about one half by a treaty cession which included almost all territory between White and Cheyenne Rivers, S.D., and all north of Cheyenne river west of 102°. The ceded lands were thrown open to settlement by proclamation in the next spring, and were at once occupied by the whites. In the meantime payment for the lands was delayed, the annuity goods failed to arrive until the winter was nearly over, the crops had failed through attendance of the Indians at the treaty councils in the preceding spring, epidemic diseases were raging in the camps, and as the final straw Congress, despite previous promise, cut down the beef ration by over four million pounds on the ground of the stipulated money payment, which, however, had not arrived. A year before rumours had come to the Sioux of a new Indian Messiah arisen beyond the mountains to restore the old-time Indian life, together with their departed friends, in a new earth from which the whites should be excluded. Several tribes, including the Sioux, sent delegates to the home of the Messiah, in Western Nevada, to investigate the rumour. The first delegation, as well as a second, confirmed the truth of the report, and in the spring of 1890 the ceremonial "Ghost Dance", intended to hasten the fulfillment of the prophecy, was inaugurated at Pine Ridge. Because of its strong appeal to the Indians under the existing conditions, the Dance soon spread among other Teton reservations until the Indians were in a frenzy of religious excitement. The newly-appointed agent at Pine Ridge became frightened and called for troops, thus precipitating the outbreak of 1890. By 1 December 3000 troops were disposed in the neighbourhood of the western Sioux reservations then under orders of General Nelson Miles. Leading events of the outbreak were: + the killing of Sitting Bull, his son, and six others on 15 December, at his camp on Grand River, Standing Rock reservation, while resisting arrest by the Indian police, six of whom were killed in the encounter; + the flight of Sitting Bull's followers and others of Standing Rock and Cheyenne River reservations into the Bad Lands of western South Dakota where they joined other refugee "hostiles" from Pine Ridge and Rosebud; + the fight at Wounded Knee Creek, twenty miles northeast of Pine Ridge agency, 29 December, 1890, between a band of surrendered hostiles under Big Foot and a detachment of the Seventh Cavalry under Colonel Forsyth. On 16 January, 1891, the hostiles surrendered to General Miles at Pine Ridge, and the outbreak was at an end. With the restoration of peace, grievances were adjusted and the work of civilization resumed. Under provision of the general allotment law of 1887 negotiations were concluded from time to time with the various bands by which the size of the reservations was still further curtailed, and lands allotted in severalty, until now almost all of the Sioux Indians are individual owners and well on the way to full citizenship. Indian dress and adornment are nearly obsolete, together with the tipi and aboriginal ceremonial, and the great majority are clothed in citizen's dress, living in comfortable small houses with modern furniture, and engaged in farming and stock raising. The death of the old chief, Red Cloud, at Pine Ridge in 1909, removed almost the last link binding the Sioux to their Indian past. RELIGIOUS STATUS In 1909 nearly 10,000 of the 25,000 Sioux within the United States were officially reported as Christians. The proportion is now probably at least one-half, of whom about half are Catholic, the others being chiefly Episcopalian and Presbyterian. The Catholic missions are: + Our Lady of Sorrows, Fort Totten, N.D. (Devil's Lake Res.), Benedictine; + St. Elizabeth, Cannonball, N.D. (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + St. Peter, Fort Yates, N.D. (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + St. James, Porcupine (Shields P. O.), N.D. (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + St. Benedict, Standing Rock Agency, S.D. (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + St. Aloysius, Standing Rock Agency, S.D., (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + St. Edward, Standing Rock Agency, S.D., (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + St. Bede, Standing Rock Agency, S.D. (Standing Rock Res.), Benedictine; + Immaculate Conception, Stephan, S.D. (Crow Creek Res.), Benedictine; + St. Matthew, Veblen Co. (Britton P.O.) S.D. (former Sisseton Res.), secular; + Corpus Christi, Cheyenne River Agency, S.D. (Chey. R. Res.), secular; + St. Francis, Rosebud, S.D. (Rosebud Res.), Jesuit; + Holy Rosary, Pine Ridge, S.D. (Pine Ridge Res.), Jesuit. The two Jesuit missions maintain boarding-schools, and are assisted by Franciscan Sisters. The Immaculate Conception mission also maintains a boarding-school, with Benedictine Sisters. At the Fort Totten mission a monthly paper, "Sina Sapa Wocekiye Taeyanpaha" (Black-gown Prayer Herald), entirely in the Sioux language, is published under the editorship of Father Jerome Hunt, who has been with the mission from its foundation. Notable events in the religious life of the tribe are the Catholic Sioux congresses held in the summer of each year, one in North and one in South Dakota, which are attended by many high church dignitaries and mission workers and several thousands of Catholic Indians. Of some 470 Christian Sioux in Canada about one-fourth are Catholic, chiefly at Standing Buffalo Reservation, Sask., where they are served from the Oblate mission school at Qu'Appelle. ORGANIZATION AND CULTURE The Sioux were not a compact nation with centralized government and supreme head chief, but were a confederacy of seven allied sub-tribes speaking a common language, each with a recognized head chief and each subdivided into bands or villages governed by subordinate chiefs. The seven sub-tribes, from east to west, were: (1) Mdewakantonwan (Mde-wakanton) Village (people) of the Spirit Lake (i.e. Mille Lac); (2) Wakhpekute "Leaf Shooters"; (3) Wakhpetonwan (Wahpeton), "Village in the Leaves"; (4) Sisitonwan (Sisseton), "Village of the Marsh"; (5) Ihanktonwan (Yankton), "Village at the End"; (6) Ihanktonwanna (Yanktonai), "Little Yankton"; (7) Titonwan (Teton), "Village of the Prairie". Of these, the first four, originally holding the heads of the Mississippi, constitute the Isanti (Santee) or eastern, dialectic group. The Yankton and Yanktonai, about the lower and upper courses of the James River respectively, together with the Assiniboin tribe constitute the central dialectic group. The great Teton division, west of the Missouri and comprising three-fifths of the whole nation, constitutes a third dialectic group. The Teton are divided into seven principal bands, commonly known as Ogalala (at Pine Ridge); Brulé (at Rosebud and Lower Brulé); Hunkpapa (at Standing Rock); Miniconju, Sans-Arc; and Two Kettle (Cheyenne River). Among the more sedentary eastern bands chiefship seems to have been hereditary in the male line, but with the roving western bands it depended usually upon pre-eminent ability. In their original home about the heads of the Mississippi the Sioux subsisted chiefly upon wild rice, fish, and small game, and were expert canoe men, but as they drifted west into the plains and obtained possession of the horse their whole manner of life was changed, and they became a race of equestrian nomads, subsisting almost entirely upon the buffalo. They seem never to have been agricultural to any great extent. Their dwelling was the birch-bark lodge in the east and the buffalo-skin tipi on the plain. Their dead were sometimes deposited in a coffin upon the surface of the ground, but more often laid upon a scaffolding or in the tree-tops. Food and valuables were left with the corpse, and relatives gashed their bodies with knives and cut off their hair in token of grief. Besides the knife, bow, and hatchet of the forest warrior, they carried also on the plains the lance and shield of the horseman. Polygamy was recognized. There was no clan system. To the Sioux the earth was a great island plain surrounded by an ocean far to the west of which was the spirit world. There were two souls -- some said four -- one of which remained near the grave after death, while the other traveled on to the spirit world, or in certain cases became a wandering and dangerous ghost. In the west also, in a magic house upon the top of a high mountain and guarded by four sentinel animals at the four doorways, lived the Wakinyan, or thunders, the greatest of the gods, and mortal enemies of the subterranean earth spirits and the water spirits. the sun also was a great god. There was no supreme "Great Spirit", as supposed by the whites, no ethical code to their supernaturalism, and no heaven or hell in their spirit world. Among animals the buffalo was naturally held in highest veneration. Fairies and strange monsters, both good and bad, were everywhere, usually invisible, but sometimes revealing themselves in warning portent. Dreams were held as direct revelations of the supernatural. Taboos, fasting, and sacrifices, including voluntary torture, were frequent. Among the great ceremonials the annual sun dance was the most important, on which occasion the principal performers danced at short intervals for four days and nights, without food, drink, or sleep, undergoing at the same time painful bodily laceration, either as a propitiation or in fulfillment of a thanksgiving vow. The several warrior orders and various secret societies each had their special dance, and for young girls there was a puberty ceremony. (For cults and home life see works of Dorsey and Eastman quoted in bibliography below.) In physique, intellect, morality, and general manliness the Sioux rated among the finest of the Plains tribes. Under the newer conditions the majority are now fairly industrious and successful farmers and stock-raisers. LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE The Sioux language is euphonious, sonorous, and flexible, and possesses a more abundant native literature than that of any other tribe within the United States, with the possible exception of the Cherokee. By means of an alphabet system devised by the early Presbyterian missionaries, nearly all of the men can read and write their own language. The printed literature includes religious works, school textbooks, grammars, and dictionaries, miscellaneous publications, and three current mission journals, Catholic, as already noted, Presbyterian, and Episcopal, all three entirely in Sioux. The earliest publication was a spelling-book by Rev. J.D. Stevens in 1836. In linguistics the principal is the "Grammar and Dictionary of the Dakota Language", by Rev. S. R. Riggs, published by the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, in 1852, and republished in part, with editing by Dorsey, by the Bureau of Am. Ethnology, Washington, in 1892-4. POPULATION Contrary to the usual rule with Indian tribes, the Sioux have not only held their own since the advent of the whites, but have apparently slightly increased. This increase, however, is due largely to incorporation of captives and intermarriage of whites. We have no reliable estimates for the whole tribe before 1849, when Governor Ramsey gave them "not over 20,000", while admitting that some resident authorities gave them 40,000 or more. Riggs in 1851 gives them about 25,000, but under-estimates the western (Teton) bands. By official census of 1910 they number altogether 28,618 souls, including all mixed-bloods, distributed as follows: Minnesota, scattered, about 929; Nebraska, Santee agency, 1155; North Dakota, Devil's Lake (Fort Totten) agency, 986; Standing Rock agency, 3454; South Dakota, Flandreau agency, 275, Lower Brulé, 469, Crow Creek, 997, Yankton, 1753, Sisseton, 1994, Cheyenne River, 2590, Rosebud, 5096, Pine Ridge, 6758. Canada: Birdtail, Oak Lake, Oak River, Turtle Mountain, Portage La Prairie (Manitoba), 613; Wahspaton, Standing Buffalo, Moosejaw, Moose Woods (Sask.), 455. Those in Canada are chiefly descendants of refugees from the United States in 1862 and 1876. BRYANT AND MURCH, Hist. of the Great Massacre by the Sioux Indians (St. Peter, 1872); BUREAU CATH. IND. MISSIONS, Annual Reports of the Director (Washington); Annual Reports of the Dept. of Ind. Affairs (Ottawa, Canada); CARVER, Travels through in Interior Parts of N. Am. (1766-8); (London, 1778, and later editions); CATLIN, Manners, Customs and Condition of the N. Am. Inds. (London, 1841, and later editions); CHITTENDEN, Am. Fur Trade (New York, 1902); CHITTENDEN AND RICHARDSON, Life, Letters and Travels of Fr. Pierre-Jean De Smet, (New York, 1905); COMMISSIONER OF IND. AFFAIRS, Annual Reports (Washington); Condition of the Indian Tribes, Report of Joint Special Committee (Washington, 1867); DORSEY, Study of Siouan Cults, in 11th Rept. Bur. Am. Eth. (Washington, 1894); EASTMAN, Indian Boyhood (New York, 1902); IDEM, Wigwam Evenings (Boston, 1909); FINERTY, Warpath and Bivouac (Chicago, 1890); HAYDEN, Conts. to the Ethnography and Philology of the Ind. Tribes of the Missouri Valley in Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., n. s., XII (Philadelphia, 1862); HENNEPIN, Déscription de la Louisiane (Paris, 1683), tr. SHEA (New York, 1880); HINMAN AND WELSH, Journal of the Rev. S.D. Hinman (Philadelphia, 1869); Jesuit Relations, ed. Thwaites, 73 vols., especially Ottawa and Illinois, L-LXXI (Cleveland, 1896-1901); Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, ed. KAPPLER, (Washington, 1903 - 4); KEATING, Expedition (Long's) to the Sources of St. Peter's River (Philadelphia, 1824 and later editions); LEWIS AND CLARK, Original Journals of the Expedition of 1804-6, ed. THWAITES, 8 vols. (New York, 1904-5. numerous other editions more or less complete, the first offical report being contained in the Message from the President, Washington, 1806); MCGEE, Siouan Indians in 15th Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology (Washington, 1897); MCKENNEY AND HALL, Hist. Ind. Tribes of North Am. (Philadelphia, 1854, and other editions); MCLAUGHLIN, My Friend the Indian (Boston, 1910); MALLERY, Pictographs of the N. Am. Indians in 4th Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology (Washington, 1886); IDEM, Picture Writing of the Am. Inds. in 10th Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology (Washington, 1893); MARGRY, Découvertes et établissements des Francais (6 vols., Paris, 1879-86); MAXIMILIAN, PRINCE OF WIED, Travels in the Interior of N. Am. (London, 1843; original German ed. 2 vols., Coblenz, 1839-41); MILES, Personal Recollections (Chicago, 1896); Minnesota Hist. Soc. Colls. (1872-1905); MOONEY, Siouan Tribes of the East, bull. 22, Bureau Am. Ethnology (Washington, 1895); IDEM, The Ghost Dance Religion and Sioux Outbreak of 1890 in 14th Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology, (Washington, 1896); NEILL, Hist. of Minnesota (Philadelphia, 1858); New York, Documents Relating to the Colonial Hist. of (15 vols., Albany, 1853-87); NICOLLET, Report on . . . Upper Mississippi (Senate Doc.) (Washington, 1843); North Dakota Hist. Soc. Colls. (2 vols., Bismarck, 1906-8); PARKMAN, Oregon Trail (New York, 1849, and later editions); PERRIN DU LAC, Voyages dans les deux Louisianes, 1801-3 (Paris and Lyons, 1805); PIKE, Expedition to the Sources of the Mississippi (Philadelphia, 1810); PILLING, Bibl. of the Siouan Languages, Bull. 5, Bur. Am. Ethnology (Washington, 1887); POOLE, Among the Sioux of Dakota (New York, 1881); RAMSEY, Report on Sioux in Rept. Comsner. Ind. Affairs for 1849 II (Washington, 1850); RAVOUX, Reminiscences, memoris and Lectures (St. Paul, 1890); RIGGS, The Dakota Language in Colls. Minn. Hist. Soc., I (St. Paul, 1851, reprint St. Paul, 1872); IDEM, Grammar and Dict. of the Dakota Language: Smithsonian Contributions, IV (Washington, 1852); IDEM, Tahkoo Wahkan, or the Gospel among the Dakotas (Boston, 1869); IDEM, Mary and I: Forty Years with the Sioux (Chicago, 1880); ROBINSON, Hist. of the Sioux Indians in Colls. South Dakota Hist. Soc., II (Aberdeen, S.D., 1904); ROYCE AND THOMAS, Indian Land Cessions in 18th Rept. Bur. Am. Ethnology, II (Washington, 1899); SCHOOLCRAFT, Travels . . . to the Sources of the Mississippi (Albany, 1821); IDEM, Hist. Condition and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the U. S. (6 vols., Philadelphia, 1851-7); Sheridan (in charge), Record of Engagements with Hostile Indians, etc., 1868-1882 (Washington, 1882); SHEA, Hist. of the Catholic Missions among the Indian Tribes of the U.S. (New York, 1855); IDEM, Disc. and Expl. of the Mississippi Valley (New York, 1852); and Albany, 1903); DE SMET, Oregon Missions (New York, 1847); Fr. edition, Ghent, 1848); IDEM, Western Missions and Missionaries (New York,1863); (see also CHITTENDEN AND RICHARDSON), South Dakota Hist. Soc. Colls. (3 vols., Aberdeen, S.D., 1902-6); WALL, Recollections of the Sioux Massacre (1862) (Lake City, Minn., 1909); WARREN, Explorations in the Dakota Country, 1855, Senate Doc. (Washington, 1856); WARREN, Hist. of the Ojibways in Minn. Hist. Soc. Colls., V (St. Paul, 1885); WHIPPLE, Lights and Shadows of a Long Episcopate (New York, 1899); Wisconsin Hist. Soc. Colls. (16 vols., Madison, 1855-1902). JAMES MOONEY Sipibo Indians Sipibo Indians A numerous tribe of Panoan linguistic stock, formerly centring about the Pisqui and Aguaitia tributaries of the upper Ucayali River, Province of Loreto, north-eastern Peru, and now found as boatmen or labourers along the whole course of that stream. They speak the same language as the Conibo, Pano, and Setebo, whom they resemble in habit and ceremonial. The Sipibo became known about the same time as their cognate tribes early in the seventeenth century, but opposed a determined resistance to the entrance of both gold-hunters and missionaries (1657), for a long time frustrating all Christianizing efforts in the Ucayali region by their constant raids upon the mission settlements, particularly of the Setebo. In 1670, in common with other tribes of that region, they were greatly wasted by smallpox. In 1736 they broke the power of the Setebo in a bloody battle, but in 1764 the Franciscan Father Juan de Frezneda entered their country and so far won their good will that he succeeded in making peace between the two tribes and in the next year (1765) established the first mission among the Sipibo under the title of Santo Domingo de Pisqui. This was shortly followed by the founding of Santa Barbara de Archani and Santa Cruz de Aguaitia in the same tribe, together with a resumption of work among the Conibo, first undertaken in 1685. Among other labourers in the Sipibo field at this period was Father José Amich, author of a history of the Ucayali missions. Suddenly and without warning in the summer of 1766 all the river tribes attacked the missions simultaneously, slaughtered nine of the missionaries together with their neophytes, and completely destroyed all that had been accomplished by years of presevering sacrifice. Rungato, a Setebo chief, who had professed the greatest friendship for the missionaries, appears to have been the leader. The reason of the outbreak was never known. It may have been jealousy of authority, impatience of restraint, covetousness of the mission property, some unrecorded outrage by the Spaniards on the frontier, some dream, or superstitious panic such as are of so frequent occurrence among savages. A small relief expedition sent out in charge of three Franciscans the next year learned the details of the massacre, and was forced to turn back, but was permitted to retire without molestation. This last rising of the wild tribes of the middle Ucayali was in some measure an echo of a similar rising of the wild Campa tribes on the upper branches of the same stream in 1742, led by Juan Santos, an apostate Quichua Indian, who assumed the title of the Inca Atahualpa (see QUICHUA), and resulting in the destruction of all the missions of that region and the slaughter of nearly eighty Franciscan missionaries. Of this rising of the Campa, Herndon says: "It is quite evident that no distaste for the Catholic religion induced this rebellion; for in the year 1750, eight years afterward, the Marquis of Mina-hermosa, marching into this country for the punishment of the rebels, found the church at Quimisi in perfect order, with candles burning before the images. He burned the town and church, and six years after this, when another entrance into this country was made by General Bustamente, he found the town rebuilt and a large cross erected in the middle of the plaza. I have had occasion myself to notice the respect and reverence of these Indians for their pastors, and their delight in participating in the ceremonial and sense-striking worship of the Roman Church." A similar instance is recorded of the revolted Pueblos (q.v.), as also of the unconverted Setebo. Following close upon the massacre of 1766 came the expulsion of the Jesuits by royal decree in the following year, and the Ucayali region was given over to barbarism until 1791, when by direction of the superior of the Franciscan college of Ocopa, Father Narciso Girbal with two companions once more braved the wilderness dangers and made successful foundation at Sarayacu (q.v.) into which mission and its branches most of the wandering river Indians were finally gathered. A description of the Sipibo will answer in most of its details for all the tribes of the Ucayali and Huallaga region, within the former sphere of influence of the Franciscan missionaries, with the addition that certain tribes, particularly the Cashibo, were noted for their cannibalism. There was very little tribal solidarity, each so-called tribe being broken up into petty bands ruled by local chiefs, and seldom acting together even against a common enemy. They subsisted chiefly on fish, game, turtle eggs, bananas, yuccas, and a little corn, agriculture, however, being but feebly developed. The root of the yucca was roasted as bread, ground between stones for flour, boiled or fried, while from the juice, fermented with saliva, was prepared the intoxicating masato or chicha, which was in requisition at all family or tribal festivals. Salt was seldom used, but clay-eating was common and sometimes of fatal consequence. Their houses, scattered simply at intervals along the streams, were of open framework thatched with palm leaves. The arrow poison, usually known as curari, was prepared from the juice of certain lianas or tree vines and was an article of intertribal trade over a great extent of territory. They either went entirely naked or wore a short skirt or sleeveless shirt woven of cotton or bark fibre. Head flattening and the wearing of nose and ear pendants and labrets were common. They blackened their teeth with a vegetable dye. The modern civilized Indians dress in light peon fashion. Although most of the tribes could count no higher than five, their general mentality was high, and they progressed rapidly in civilized arts. Their religion was animism, dominated by the yutumi or priests, but with few great ceremonies. As among all savages, disease and death were commonly ascribed to evil spirits or witchcraft. Polygamy was universal, the women being frequently obtained by raids upon other tribes. Among their barbarous customs were the eating of prisoners of war, and sometimes of deceased parents, the killing of the helpless and of deformed children and twins, and a sort of circumcision of young girls at about the age of twelve years. A part of the Sipibo still roam the forests, but the majority are now civilized and employed as boatmen, rubber-gatherers, or labourers along the river. In common with all the tribes of the region their numbers are steadily decreasing. See also SETEBO INDIANS. Consult particularly: RAIMONDI, El Perú, II and III, Hist. de la Geografía del Perú, bks. i and ii (Lima, 1876-79), Raimondi derives much of his information from a MS. history of the Franciscan missions, by Fernando Rodriguez, 1774, preserved in the convent at Lima; IDEM, Provincia Litoral de Loreto (Lima, 1862), condensed tr. by BOLLÆRT in Anthropological Review (London, May, 1863); BRINTON, American Race (New York, 1891); CASTELNAU, Expédition dans les parties centrales de l' Amérique du Sud. IV (Paris, 1891); EBERHARDT, Indians of Peru in Smithson. Miscel. Colls., quarterly issue, V (Washington, 1909), 2; HERNDON, Exploration of the Amazon (Washington, 1854); ORDINAIRE, Les Sauvages du Pérou in Revue d'Ethnographie, VI (Paris, 1887); SMYTH and LOWE, Journey from Líma to Pará (London, 1836). JAMES MOONEY Pope St. Siricius Pope St. Siricius (384-99). Born about 334; died 26 November, 399, Siricius was a native of Rome; his father's name was Tiburtius. Siricius entered the service of the Church at an early age and, according to the testimony of the inscription on his grave, was lector and then deacon of the Roman Church during the pontificate of Liberius (352-66). After the death of Damasus, Siricius was unanimously elected his successor (December, 384) and consecrated bishop probably on 17 December. Ursinus, who had been a rival to Damasus (366), was alive and still maintained his claims. However, the Emperor Valentinian III, in a letter to Pinian (23 Feb., 385), gave his consent to the election that had been held and praised the piety of the newly-elected bishop; consequently no difficulties arose. Immediately upon his elevation Siricius had occasion to assert his primacy over the universal Church. A letter, in which questions were asked on fifteen different points concerning baptism, penance, church discipline, and the celibacy of the clergy, came to Rome addressed to Pope Damasus by Bishop Himerius of Tarragona, Spain. Siricius answered this letter on 10 February, 385, and gave the decisions as to the matters in question, exercising with full consciousness his supreme power of authority in the Church (Coustant, "Epist. Rom. Pont.", 625 sq.). This letter of Siricius is of special importance because it is the oldest completely preserved papal decretal (edict for the authoritative decision of questions of discipline and canon law). It is, however, certain that before this earlier popes had also issued such decretals, for Siricius himself in his letter mentions "general decrees" of Liberius that the latter had sent to the provinces; but these earlier ones have not been preserved. At the same time the pope directed Himerius to make known his decrees to the neighbouring provinces, so that they should also be observed there. This pope had very much at heart the maintenance of Church discipline and the observance of canons by the clergy and laity. A Roman synod of 6 January, 386, at which eighty bishops were present, reaffirmed in nine canons the laws of the Church on various points of discipline (consecration of bishops, celibacy, etc.). The decisions of the council were communicated by the pope to the bishops of North Africa and probably in the same manner to others who had not attended the synod, with the command to act in accordance with them. Another letter which was sent to various churches dealt with the election of worthy bishops and priests. A synodal letter to the Gallican bishops, ascribed by Coustant and others to Siricius, is assigned to Pope Innocent I by other historians (P.L., XIII, 1179 sq.). In all his decrees the pope speaks with the consciousness of his supreme ecclesiastical authority and of his pastoral care over all the churches. Siricius was also obliged to take a stand against heretical movements. A Roman monk Jovinian came forward as an opponent of fasts, good works, and the higher merit of celibate life. He found some adherents among the monks and nuns of Rome. About 390-392 the pope held a synod at Rome, at which Jovinian and eight of his followers were condemned and excluded from communion with the Church. The decision was sent to St. Ambrose, the great Bishop of Milan and a friend of Siricius. Ambrose now held a synod of the bishops of upper Italy which, as the letter says, in agreement with his decision also condemned the heretics. Other heretics including Bishop Bonosus of Sardica (390), who was also accused of errors in the dogma of the Trinity, maintained the false doctrine that Mary was not always a virgin. Siricius and Ambrose opposed Bonosus and his adherents and refuted their false views. The pope then left further proceedings against Bonosus to the Bishop of Thessalonica and the other Illyrian bishops. Like his predecessor Damasus, Siricius also took part in the Priscillian controversy; he sharply condemned the episcopal accusers of Priscillian, who had brought the matter before the secular court and had prevailed upon the usurper Maximus to condemn to death and execute Priscillian and some of his followers. Maximus sought to justify his action by sending to the pope the proceedings in the case. Siricius, however, excommunicated Bishop Felix of Trier who supported Ithacius, the accuser of Priscillian, and in whose city the execution had taken place. The pope addressed a letter to the Spanish bishops in which he stated the conditions under which the converted Priscillians were to be restored to communion with the Church. According to the life in the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, I, 216), Siricius also took severe measures against the Manichæans at Rome. However, as Duchesne remarks (loc. cit., notes) it cannot be assumed from the writings of the converted Augustine, who was a Manichæan when he went to Rome (383), that Siricius took any particular steps against them, yet Augustine would certainly have commented on this if such had been the case. The mention in the "Liber Pontificalis" belongs properly to the life of Pope Leo I. Neither is it probable, as Langen thinks (Gesch. der röm. Kirche, I, 633), that Priscillians are to be understood by this mention of Manichæans, although probably Priscillians were at times called Manichæans in the writings of that age. The western emperors, including Honorius and Valentinian III, issued laws against the Manichæans, whom they declared to be political offenders, and took severe action against the members of this sect (Codex Theodosian, XVI, V, various laws). In the East Siricius interposed to settle the Meletian schism at Antioch; this schism had continued notwithstanding the death in 381 of Meletius at the Council of Constantinople. The followers of Meletius elected Flavian as his successor, while the adherents of Bishop Paulinus, after the death of this bishop (388), elected Evagrius. Evagrius died in 392 and through Flavian's management no successor was elected. By the mediation of St. John Chrysostom and Theophilus of Alexandria an embassy, led by Bishop Acacius of Beroea, was sent to Rome to persuade Siricius to recognize Flavian and to readmit him to communion with the Church. At Rome the name of Siricius is particularly connected with the basilica over the grave of St. Paul on the Via Ostiensis which was rebuilt by the emperor as a basilica of five aisles during the pontificate of Siricius and was dedicated by the pope in 390. The name of Siricius is still to be found on one of the pillars that was not destroyed in the fire of 1823, and which now stands in the vestibule of the side entrance to the transept. Two of his contemporaries describe the character of Siricius disparagingly. Paulinus of Nola, who on his visit to Rome in 395 was treated in a guarded manner by the pope, speaks of the urbici papæ superba discretio, the haughty policy of the Roman bishop (Epist., V, 14). This action of the pope is, however, explained by the fact that there had been irregularities in the election and consecration of Paulinus (Buse, "Paulin von Nola", I, 193). Jerome, for his part, speaks of the "lack of judgment" of Siricius (Epist., cxxvii, 9) on account of the latter's treatment of Rufinus of Aquileia, to whom the pope had given a letter when Rufinus left Rome in 398, which showed that he was in communion with the Church. The reason, however, does not justify the judgment which Jerome expressed against the pope; moreover, Jerome in his polemical writings often exceeds the limits of propriety. All that is known of the labours of Siricius refutes the criticism of the caustic hermit of Bethlehem. The "Liber Pontificalis" gives an incorrect date for his death; he was buried in the cæmeterium of Priscilla on the Via Salaria. The text of the inscription on his grave is known (De Rossi, "Inscriptiones christ. urbis Romæ", II, 102, 138). His feast is celebrated on 26 November. His name was inserted in the Roman Martyrology by Benedict XIV. Liber Pontif., ed; DUCHESNE, I, 216-17; COUSTANT, Epist. Roman. Pont., I; JAFFÉ, Reg. Pont. Rom., I, 2nd ed, 40-42; BABUT, La plus ancienne Décrétale (PARIS, 1904); LANGEN, Gesch. der röm. Kirche, I (Bonn, 1881), 611 sqq.; RAUSCHEN, Jahrb. der christl. Kirche (Freiburg, 1897); GRISAR, Gesch. Roms u. der Päpste, I, passim; HEFELE, Konziliengesch., II, 2nd ed., 45-48, 51. J.P. KIRSCH Gugliemo Sirleto Gugliemo Sirleto Cardinal and scholar, born at Guardavalle near Stilo in Calabria, 1514; died at Rome, 6 October, 1585. The son of a physician, he received an excellent education, made the acquaintance of distinguished scholars at Rome, and became an intimate friend of Cardinal Marcello Cervino, later Pope Marcellus II. He prepared for Cervino, who was President of the Council of Trent in its initial period, extensive reports on all the important questions presented for discussion. After his appointment as custodian of the Vatican Library, Sirleto drew up a complete descriptive catalogue of its Greek manuscripts and prepared a new edition of the Vulgate. Paul IV named him prothonotary and tutor to two of his nephews. After this pope's death he taught Greek and Hebrew at Rome, numbering St. Charles Barromeo among his students. During the concluding period of the Council of Trent, he was, although he continued to reside at Rome, the Constant and most heeded adviser of the cardinal-legates. He was himself created cardinal in 1565, became Bishop of San Marco in Calabria in 1566, and a Squillace in 1568. An order of the papal secretary of state, however, enjoined his residence at Rome, where he was named, in 1570, librarian of the Vatican Library. His influence was paramount in the execution of the scientific undertakings decreed by the Council of Trent. He collaborated in the publication of the Roman Catechism, presided over the Commissions for the reform of Roman Breviary and Missal, and directed the work of the new edition of the Roman Martyrology. Highly appreciative of Greek culture, he entertained all friendly relations with the East and encouraged all efforts tending to ecclesiastical reunion. He was attended in his last illness by St. Philip Neri and was buried in the presence of Sixtus V. HURTER, Nomenclator Lit., I (2nd ed., Innsbruck, 1892), 95-6; BÄUMER-BIRON, Hist. du bréviaire, II (Paris, 1905), 169-71, passim. N.A. WEBER Diocese of Sirmium Diocese of Sirmium (SZERÉM, SIRMIENSIS) Sirmium, situated near the modern town of Mitrovitz in Slavonia; its church is said to have been founded by St. Peter. The district of Szerém was subject to the Archbishop of Kalocsa after the Christianization of Hungary. In 1228, the archbishop petitioned the Holy See, in consideration of the large extent of his diocese, to found a new bishopric, and in 1229 Gregory IX established the See of Szerém, the jurisdiction of which covered almost exclusively the country on the right bank of the Sava River. The see was under the Turkish Government in 1526. It had no bishop from 1537 to 1578, and was held by a titular bishop after 1624. In 1709 the see was re-established with some changes in its territory. Clement XIV united it with Bosnia and Diakovár in 1773. SZÖRÉNYI, Vindiciœ Sirmienses (Buda, 1746); FARLATI, Illyricum sacrum, VII, 449-811; PRAY, Specimen Hierarchiaœ Hungariœ, II, 362-95; A katolikus Magyarország (Budapest, 1902). A. ÁLDÁSY. Jacques Sirmond Jacques Sirmond One of the greatest scholars of the seventeenth century, born at Riom in the Department of Puy-de-Dome, France, October, 1559; died in Paris, 7 October 1651. He entered the Society of Jesus in 1576 and was appointed in 1581 professor of classical languages in Paris, where he numbered St. Francis de Sales among his pupils. Called to Rome in 1590, he was for sixteen years private secretary to the Jesuit superior general, Aquaviva, devoting his leisure moments during the same period to the study of the literary and historical treasures of antiquity. He entertained intimate relations with several learned men then present at Rome, among them Bellarmine and particularly Baronius, whom he was helpful in the composition of the "Annales". In 1608 he returned to Paris, and in 1637 became confessor to King Louis XIII. His first literary production appeared in 1610, and from that date until the end of this life almost every year witnessed the publication of some new work. The results of his literary labours are chiefly represented by editions of Greek and Latin Christian writings. Theodoret of Cyrus, Ennodius, Idatius of Gallicia, Sidonius Apollinaris, Theodulph of Orleans, Paschasius Radbertus, Flodoard, and Hincmar of Rheims are among the writers whose works he edited either completely or in part. Of great importance were his editions of the capitularies of Charles the Bald and successors and the ancient councils of France: "Karoli Calvi et successorum aliquot Franciae regum Capitula" (Paris, 1623); "Concilia antiqua Galliae" (Paris, 1629). His collected works, a complete list of which will be found in de Backer- Sommervogel (VII, 1237-60), were published in Paris in 1696 and again at Venice in 1728. DE BACKER-SOMMERVOGEL, Bibl. De la comp. de Jésus, VII (Brussels, 1896), 1237-61; COLOMIÈS, Vie du Père Sirmond (La Rochelle, 1671); CHALMERS, Biog. Dict. (London, 1816), s. v. N.A. WEBER Pope Sisinnius Pope Sisinnius Date of birth unknown; died 4 February, 708, Successor of John VII, he was consecrated probably 15 January, 708, and died after a brief pontificate of about three weeks; he was buried in St. Peter's. He was a Syrian by birth and the son of one John. Although he was so afflicted with gout that he was unable even to feed himself, he is nevertheless said to have been a man of strong character, and to have been able to take thought for the good of the city. He gave orders to prepare lime to repair the walls of Rome, and before he died consecrated a bishop for Corsica. Liber Pontificalis, I, 338: MANN, The Lives of the Popes in the Early Middle Ages, I, pt. ii (St. Louis and London, 1902), 124. HORACE K. MANN Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati, Ohio On 27 October, 1829, at the request of Bishop Fenwick of Cincinnati, several sisters from Mother Seton's community at Emmitsburg, Maryland, opened an orphanage, parochial school, and academy on Sycamore Street opposite the old cathedral, then occupying the present site of St. Xavier's Church and college. When Bishop Purcell built the new cathedral on Eighth and Plum Sts., the sisters moved to Third and Plum Sts., and later the academy was transferred to George St., near John. When Father Etienne, superior of the Daughters of Charity of France, in December, 1850, effected the affiliation of the sisterhood at Emmitsburg with the Daughters of Charity of France, Sister Margaret George was superior in Cincinnati. She had entered the community at Emmitsburg early in 1812, and had filled the office of treasurer and secretary of the community, teaching in the academy during most of Mother Seton's life. She wrote the early records of the American Daughters of Charity, heard all the discussions regarding rules and constitutions, and left to her community in Cincinnati letters from the first bishops and clergy of the United States, Mother Seton's original Journal written in 1803 and some of her letters, and valuable writings of her own. She upheld Mother Seton's rules, constitutions, traditions, and costume, confirmed by Archbishop Carroll 17 Jan., 1812, objecting with Archbishop Carroll and Mother Seton to the French rule in its fulness, in that it limited the exercise of charity to females in the orphanages and did not permit the teaching of boys in the schools. The sisters in New York had separated from Emmitsburg in December, 1846, because they were to be withdrawn from the boys' orphanage. When it was finally decided that the community at Emmitsburg was to affiliate with the French Daughters of Charity, the sisters in Cincinnati laid before Archbishop Purcell their desire to preserve the original rule of Mother Seton's foundation. He confirmed the sisters in their desire and notified the superior of the French Daughters of Charity that he would take under his protection the followers of Mother Seton. Archbishop Purcell became ecclesiastical superior and was succeeded by Archbishop Elder and Archbishop Moeller. The novitiate in Cincinnati was opened in 1852. During that year twenty postulants were received. The first Catholic hospital was opened by the sisters in November, 1852. In February, 1853, the sisters took charge of the Mary and Martha Society, a charitable organization established for the benefit of the poor of the city. On 15 August, 1853, the sisters purchased their first property on the corner of Sixth and Parks Sts., and opened there in September a boarding and select day-school. The following July they bought a stone house on Mt. Harrison near Mt. St. Mary Seminary of the West, and called it Mt. St. Vincent. The community was incorporated under the laws of Ohio in 1854 as "The Sisters of Charity of Cincinnati, Ohio". Mother Margaret George, Sister Sophia Gillmeyer, Mother Josephine Harvey, Sister Anthony O'Connell, Mother Regina Mattingly, Sister Antonio McCaffrey, and Sister Gonzalva Dougherty were the incorporators. In 1856 Mt. St. Vincent Academy was transferred to the "Cedars", the former home of Judge Alderson. It remained the mother-house until 29 September, 1869, and the boarding-school until July, 1906. It is now a day academy and a residence for the sisters teaching adjacent parochial schools. In 1857 Bishop Bayley of New Jersey sent five postulants to Mt. St. Vincent, Cedar Grove, Cincinnati, to be trained by Mother Margaret George. At the conclusion of their novitiate, Mother Margaret and Sister Anthony were to have gone with them to Newark, New Jersey, to remain until the little community would be well established, but affairs proving too urgent, Mother Margaret interceded with the New York community, and Sisters Xavier and Catherine were appointed superiors over the little band. In July, 1859, Mother Margaret George having held the office of mother for the two terms allowed by the constitution, was succeeded by Mother Josephine Harvey. During the Civil War many of the sisters served in the hospitals. Between 1852 and 1865 the sisters had taken charge of ten parochial schools. Archbishop Lamy of New Mexico, and Bishop Machebeuf of Colorado, both pioneer priests of Ohio, in 1865 petitioned Archbishop Purcell for a colony of Sisters of Charity to open a hospital and orphanage in the West. Accordingly four sisters left Cincinnati 21 August, 1865, arriving at Santa Fé, 13 September, 1865. The archbishop gave them his own residence which had been used also as a seminary. There were twenty-five orphans to be cared for and some sick to be nursed. On 15 August, 1866, Joseph C. Butler and Lewis Worthington presented Sister Anthony O'Connell with the Good Samaritan Hospital, a building erected by the Government for a Marine Hospital at a cost of $300,000. Deeply impressed by the charity done in "Old St. John's" during the war, these non-Catholic gentlemen bought the Government hospital for $90,000 and placed the deeds in the hands of Sister Anthony, Butler suggesting the name "Good Samaritan". Early in 1870 Bishop Domenec of Pittsburg, desiring a diocesan branch of Mother Seton's community, sent four postulants to be trained in the Cincinnati novitiate. On their return they were accompanied by five of the Cincinnati sisters who were to remain with them for a limited time, and to be withdrawn one by one. Finally all were recalled but Mother Aloysia Lowe and Sister Ann Regina Ennis, the former being superior and latter mistress of novices. Mother Aloysia governed the community firmly but tenderly, and before her death (1889) had the satisfaction of seeing the sisters in their new mother-house at Seton Hill, Greensburg, Pa., the academy having been blessed, and the chapel dedicated, 3 May, 1889. Mother Aloysia's term of office had expired 19 July, 1889, and she was succeeded by Sister Ann Regina (d. 16 May, 1894). The community at Greensburg, Pa., at present number more than three hundred. Their St. Joseph Academy at the mother-house is flourishing; they teach about thirty parochial schools in the Dioceses of Altoona and Pittsburg and conduct the Pittsburg Hospital and Roselia Foundling Asylum in Pittsburg. From 1865 to 1880 the Sisters in Cincinnati opened thirty-three branch houses, one of these being the St. Joseph Foundling and Maternity Hospital, a gift to Sister Anthony from Joseph Butler. In 1869 a site for a mother-house, five miles from Cedar Grove, was purchased. The first Mass was offered in the novitiate chapel, 24 October, 1869, by Rev. Thos. S. Byrne, the chaplain, the present Bishop of Nashville, Tennessee. In 1882 the building of the new mother-house began under his direction. Before its completion Mother Regina Mattingly died (4 June, 1883). Mother Josephine Harvey again assumed the office. In 1885 the new St. Joseph was burned to the ground. The present mother-house was begun at once under the superintendence of Rev. T. S. Byrne. Mt. St. Mary Seminary, closed since the financial troubles, was now used for the sisters' novitiate. In July, 1886, the sisters took possession of the west wing of the mother-house, and the following year the seminary reopened. Mother Josephine Harvey resigned the office of mother in 1888, and was succeeded by Mother Mary Paul Hayes, who filled Mother Josephine's unexpired term and was re-elected in July, 1890, dying the following April. Mother Mary Blanche Davis was appointed to the office of mother, and held it until July, 1899. During her incumbency the Seton Hospital, the Glockner Sanitarium at Colorado Springs, St. Joseph Sanitarium, Mt. Clemens, Mich., and Santa Maria Institute for Italians were begun; additions were made to the mother-house. During the administration of Mother Sebastian Shea were built: the St. Joseph Sanitarium, Pueblo; the San Rafael Hospital, Trinidad; the St. Vincent Hospital, Santa Fé, New Mexico; the St. Vincent Academy, Albuquerque; and the Good Samaritan Annex in Clifton. Mother Mary Blanche resumed the duties of office in 1905, and was re-elected in 1908. During these terms a very large addition was built to the Glockner Sanitarium and to the St. Mary Sanitarium, Pueblo; the Hospital Antonio in Kenton, Ohio; a large boarding school for boys at Fayetteville, Ohio; the new Seton Hospital was bought; the new Good Samaritan Hospital was begun. Many parochial schools were opened, among them a school for coloured children in Memphis, Tennessee. The community numbers: about 800 members; 74 branch houses; 5 academies; 2 orphan asylums; 1 foundling asylum; 1 Italian institute; 11 hospitals or sanitariums; 1 Old Ladies' Home; 53 parochial schools throughout Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, Colorado, and New Mexico. SISTER MARY AGNES Sisters of the Little Company of Mary Sisters of the Little Company of Mary A congregation founded in 1877 in England to honour in a particular manner the maternal Heart of the Blessed Virgin, especially in the mystery of Calvary. The sisters make an entire consecration of themselves to her, and aim at imitating her virtues. They devote themselves to the sick and dying, which is their principal exterior work. They nurse the sick in their own homes, and also receive them in the hospitals and nursing-homes attached to their convents. They make no distinction of class, nationality or creed, and exact no charge for their services, but accept any offering which may be made them. Besides the personal attendance on the sick, they are bound to pray continually for the dying, and in the novitiate watch before the Blessed Sacrament, both by day and night, praying for the dying. When circumstances require it, the sisters may engage in various forms of mission work, especially in poor districts. The rules received final approbation from Leo XIII in 1893. The order conducts houses in: Italy (1 in Rome, 1 at Florence, 1 at Fiesole); England (3 in London, 1 in Nottingham); Ireland (1 at Limerick, 1 in Fermoy); Malta (1); Untied States (Chicago); Australia (2 at Sydney, 1 at Adelaide); South Africa (Port Elizabeth). The sisters when in the convent wear a black habit and blue veil, with a white cloak in the chapel; when nursing, the habit is of white linen, with a blue veil. An association of pious women, known as "Pie Donne" or "Affiliated", are aggregated to the order, and share in its prayers and good works, some residing in their own homes, others living in the convent, though in part separated from the community. A confraternity is attached to the order, called the Calvary Confraternity, the members of which assist those in their last agony by their prayers and, if possible, by personal attendance. MOTHER M. PATRICK Sistine Choir Sistine Choir Although it is known that the Church, from her earliest days, employed music in her cult, it was not until the time of her emergence from the catacombs that she began freely to display her beauty and splendour in sacred song. As early as in the pontificate of Sylvester I (314-35) we find a regularly-constituted company of singers, under the name of schola cantorum, living together in a building devoted to their exclusive use. The word schola was in those days the legal designation of an association of equals in any calling or profession and did not primarily denote, as in our time, a school. It had more the nature of a guild, a characteristic which clung to the papal choir for many centuries. Hilary II (461-8) ordained that the pontifical singers live in community, while Gregory the Great (590-604) not only made permanent the existing institution attached to St. John Lateran and including at that time in its membership monks, secular clergy, and boys, but established a second and similar one in connection with the Basilica of St. Peter. The latter is supposed to have served as a sort of preparatory school for the former. For several centuries the papal schola cantorum retained the same general character. Its head, archicantor or primicerius, was always a clergyman of high rank and often a bishop. While it was his duty to intone the various chants to be followed by the rest of the singers, he was by no means their master in the modern technical sense. It is at the time of the transfer of the papal see from Rome to Avignon in the thirteenth century that a marked change takes place in the institution. Innocent IV did not take his schola cantorum with him to his new abode, but provided for its continuance in Rome by turning over to it properties, tithes, and other revenues. Community life among the singers seems to have come to an end at this period. Clement V (1305-14) formed a new choir at Avignon, consisting for the most part of French singers, who showed a decided preference for the new developments in church music -- the déchant and falsibordoni, which had in the meantime gained great vogue in France. When Gregory XI (1370-8) returned to Rome, he took his singers with him and amalgamated them with the still-existing, at least in name, ancient schola cantorum. Before the sojourn of the papal Court at Avignon, it had been the duty of the schola to accompany the pope to the church where he held station, but after the return to Rome, the custom established at Avignon of celebrating all pontifical functions in the papal church or chapel was continued and has existed ever since. The primicerius of former times is now no longer mentioned but is replaced by the magister capellae, which title, however, continues to be more an honorary one held by a bishop or prelate than in indication of technical leadership, as may be gathered from the relative positions assigned to various dignitaris, their prerogatives, etc. Thus the magister capellae came immediately after the cardinals, followed, in the order given, by the sacrista, cantores, capellani, and clerici. With the building by Sixtus IV (1471-84) of the church for the celebration of all papal functions since known as the Sistine Chapel, the original schola cantorum and subsequent capella pontificia or capella papale, which still retains more or less of the guild character, becomes the capella sistina, or Sistine Choir, whose golden era takes its beginning. Up to this time the number of singers had varied considerably, there being sometimes as few as nine men and six boys. By a Bull dated November, 1483, Sixtus IV fixed the number at twenty-four, six for each part. After the year 1441 the records no longer mention the presence of boys in the choir, the high voices, soprano and alto, being thenceforth sung by natural (and occasionally unnatural) soprani falsetti and high tenors respectively. Membership in the papal choir became the great desideratum of singers, contrapuntists, and composers of every land, which accounts for the presence in Rome, at=20least for a time, of most of the great names of that period. The desire to re-establish a sort of preparatory school for the papal choir, on the plan of the ancient schola, and incidentally to become independent of the ultramontane, or foreign, singers, singers, led Julius II (1503-13) to issue, on 19 February, 1512, a Bull founding the capella Julia, which to this day performs all the choir duties at St. Peter's. It became indeed, and has ever since been, a nursery for, and stepping-stone to, membership in the Sistine Choir. The high artistic aims of its founder have, however, but rarely been attained, owing to the rarity of the truly great choirmasters. Leo X (1513-21), himself a musician, by choosing as head of the organization a real musician, irrespective of his clerical rank, took a step which was of the greatest importance for the future. It had the effect of transforming a group of vocal virtuosi on equal footing into a compact vocal body, whose interpretation of the greatest works of polyphony which we possess, and which were then coming into existence, became the model for the rest of the world, not only then but for all time. Leo's step was somewhat counteracted by Sixtus V (1534-49) on 17 November, 1545, published a Bull approving a new constitution of the choir, which has been in force ever since, and according to which the choir, which has been in force ever since, and according to which the choir-master proposes the candidates for membership, who are then examined by the whole company of singers. Since that time the state of life of the candidate has not been a factor. While the Sistine Choir has, since its incipiency, undergone many vicissitudes, its artistic and moral level fluctuating, like all things human, with the mutations of the times, it has ever had for its purpose and object to hold up, at the seat of ecclesiastical authority, the highest model of liturgical music as well as of its performance. When the Gregorian melodies were still the sole music of the Church, it was the papal choir that set the standard for the rest of Christendom, both s regards the purity of the melodies and their rendition. After these melodies had blossomed into polyphony, it was in the Sistine Chapel that it received adequate interpretation. Here the artistic degeneration, which church music suffered in different periods in many countries, never took hold for any length of time. The use of instruments, even of the organ, has ever been excluded. The choir's ideal has always been that purely vocal style, Since the accession of the present pope [1912], and under its present conductor, the falsetto voices have been succeeded by boys' voices, and the artistic level of the institute has been raised to a higher point than it had occupied for the previous thirty or forty years. Haberl, Baustein fur Musikgeschicte, III, Die romische Schola Cantorum und die papstlichen Kapellsanger bis zur Mitte des 16. Jarhunderts (Leipzig, 1888); Schelle, Die papstliche Sangerschule in Rom (Leipzig, 1872); Kienle, Choralschule (Freiburg, 1899); Baini, Memorie storico-critiche della via e delle opere di Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina (Rome, 1828). JOSEPH OTTEN Sitifis Sitifis (Sitifensis). Titular see in Mauretania Sitifensis. Sitifis, situated in Maurentania Caesarensis, on the road from Carthage to Cirta, was of no importance under the Numidian kings and became prominent only when Nerva established a colony of veterans there. When Mauretania Sitifensis was created, at the close of the third century, Sitifis became its capital. Under the Vandals it was the chief town of a district called Zaba. It was still the capital of a province under Byzantine rule and was then a place of strategic importance. Captured by the Arabs in the seventh century, it was almost ruined at the time of the French occupation (1838). It is now Setif, the chief town of an arrondissement in the Department of Constantine, Algeria. It contains 15,000 inhabitants, of whom 3700 are Europeans and 1,600 Jews; it has a trade in cattle, cereals, leather, and cloths. Interesting Christian inscriptions are to be found there, one of 452 mentioning the relics of St. Lawrence, another naming two martyrs of Sitifis, Justus and Decurius; there are a museum and the ruins of a Byzantine fortress. St. Augustine, who had frequent relations with Sitifis, informs us that in his time it contained a monastery and an episcopal school, and that it suffered from a violent earthquake, on which occasion 2000 persons, through fear of death, received baptism (Ep., lxxxiv; Serm., xix). Five bishops of this see are known: Servus, in 409, mentioned in a letter of St. Augustine; Novatus present at the Council of Carthage (484), and exiled by Huneric; Optatus, at the Council of Carthage (525). Smith, Dict. of Greek and Roman Geog., s. v. Sitifi; Muller Notes a Ptolmy, ed. Didot, I. 612; Toulotte, Geog. de l'Afrique chretienne: Mauretanie (Montreuil, 1894), 185-9; Diehl, L'Afrique byzantine (Paris, 1896), passim. S. PÉTRIDÈS Buenaventura Sitjar Buenaventura Sitjar Born at Porrera, Island of Majorca, 9 December, 1739; died at San Antonio, Cal., 3 Sept., 1808. In April, 1758, he received the habit of St. Francis. After his ordination he joined the College of San Fernando, Mexico. In 1770 he was assigned to California, arriving at San Diego, 21 May, 1771. He was present at the founding of the Mission of San Antonio, and was appointed first missionary by Father Junipero Serra. He toiled there until his death, up to which time 3400 Indians had been baptized. Father Sitjar mastered the Telame Language, spoken at the Mission of San Antonio, and compiled a vocabulary with Spanish explanations, published at New York in 1861. Though the list of words is not as long as Arroyo de la Cuesta's dictionary of 2884 words and sentences in the Mutsun idiom of Mission San Juan Bautista, Sitjar's gives the pronunciation and fuller explanations. He also left a journal of exploring expedition which he accompanied in 1795. His body was interred in the sanctuary of the church. Archives of Mission of Santa Barbara; Records of Mission San Antonio; SITJAR, Vocabulary, in SHEA'S Library of American Linguistics (New York, 1861); ENGELHARDT, The Franciscans in California (Harbor Springs, 1897); BANCROFT, California, II (San Fancisco, 1886). ZEPHYRIN ENGELHARDT Siunia Siunia Siunia, a titular see, suffragan of Sebastia in Armenia Prima. Siunia is not a town, but a province situated between Goghtcha, Araxa, and Aghovania, in the present Russian districts of Chamakha, or Baku, and Elisavetpol. The real name should be Sisacan, the Persian form, for Siunia got its name from Sisac, the son of Gegham, the fifth Armenian sovereign. Its first rulers, vassals of the kings of Armenia or the shahs of Persia, date back to the fourth century of our era; about 1046 it became an independent kingdom, but only till 1166. The Church of Siunia was established in the fifth century or perhaps a little earlier. It soon became a metropolis subject to the Catholicos of Armenia, and, as we see in a letter of the patriarch Ter Sargis in 1006, it counted twelve crosiers, which must signify twelve suffragan sees. The archdiocese contained 1400 villages and 28 monasteries. In the ninth century the metropolitan see was fixed in the convent of Tatheo, situated between Ouronta and Migri, sixty-two miles south-east of Lake Gokcha. Separated for a brief interval from Noravank, the See of Siunia was reunited to it, but was definitively separated again in the thirteenth century. In 1837 the Diocese of Siunia was, by order of the Synod of Etchmiadzin, suppressed and subjected directly to the catholicos under the supervision of the Bishop of Erivan, who had a vicar at Tatheo. The complete list of the bishops and metropolitans of Siunia, from the fifth century till the nineteenth century, is known; amongst them we may mention Petros, a writer at the beginning of the sixth century, and Stephanos Orbelian, the historian of his Church. It is not known why the Roman Curia introduced this episcopal title, which does not appear in any Greek or Latin "Notitia episcopatuum", and was never a suffragan of Sebastia. LE QUIEN, Oriens christianus, I (Paris, 1740), 1443; BROSSET, Listes chronologiques des princes et des métropolites de Siounie in Bulletin de l'Académie des Sciences de Saint-Pétersbourg, IV (1862), 497-562; STEPHANOS ORERLIAN, Histoire de la Siounie, tr. BROSSET (Saint-Petersburg, 1864). S. VAILHÉ. Pope St. Sixtus I Pope St. Sixtus I Pope St. Sixtus I (in the oldest documents, Xystus is the spelling used for the first three popes of that name), succeeded St. Alexander and was followed by St. Telesphorus. According to the "Liberian Catalogue" of popes, he ruled the Church during the reign of Adrian "a conulatu Nigri et Aproniani usque Vero III et Ambibulo", that is, from 117 to 126. Eusebius, who in his "Chronicon" made use of a catalogue of popes different from the one he used in his "Historia ecclesiastica", states in his "Chronicon" that Sixtus I was pope from 114 to 124, while in his "History" he makes him rule from 114 to 128. All authorities agree that he reigned about ten years. He was a Roman by birth, and his father's name was Pastor. According to the "Liber Pontificalis" (ed. Duchesne, I, 128), he passed the following three ordinances: (1) that none but sacred ministers are allowed to touch the sacred vessels; (2) that bishops who have been summoned to the Holy See shall, upon their return, not be received by their diocese except on presenting Apostolic letters; (3) that after the Preface in the Mass the priest shall recite the Sanctus with the people. The "Felician Catalogue" of popes and the various martyrologies give him the title of martyr. His feast is celebrated on 6 April. He was buried in the Vatican, beside the tomb of St. Peter. His relics are said to have been transferred to Alatri in 1132, though O Jozzi ("Il corpo di S. Sisto I., papa e martire rivendicato alla basilica Vaticana", Rome, 1900) contends that they are still in the Vatican Basilica. Butler (Lives of the Saints, 6 April) states that Clement X gave some of his relics to Cardinal de Retz, who placed them in the Abbey of St. Michael in Lorraine. The Xystus who is commemorated in the Canon of the Mass is Xystus II, not Xystus I. Acta SS., April, I, 531-4; Liber Pontificatis, ed. DUCHESNE, I (Paris, 1886), 128; MARINI, Cenni storici popolari sopra S. Sisto I, papa e martire, e suo culto in Aletri (Foligno, 1884); DE PERSIIS, Del pontificato di S. Sisto I, papa e martire, della translazione delle sue reliquie da Roma ecc., memorie (Alatri, 1884); BARMBY in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Sixtus (2) I. MICHAEL OTT Pope St. Sixtus II Pope St. Sixtus II (XYSTUS). Elected 31 Aug., 257, martyred at Rome, 6 Aug., 258. His origin is unknown. The "Liber Pontificalis" says that he was a Greek by birth, but this is probably a mistake, originating from the false assumption that he was identical with a Greek philosopher of the same name, who was the author of the so-called "Sentences" of Xystus. During the pontificate of his predecessor, St. Stephen, a sharp dispute had arisen between Rome and the African and Asiatic Churches, concerning the rebaptism of heretics, which had threatened to end in a complete rupture between Rome and the Churches of Africa and Asia Minor (see CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, SAINT). Sixtus II, whom Pontius (Vita Cyprian, cap. xiv) styles a good and peaceful priest (bonus et pacificus sacerdos), was more conciliatory than St. Stephen and restored friendly relations with these Churches, though, like his predecessor, he upheld the Roman usage of not rebaptizing heretics. Shortly before the pontificate of Sixtus II the Emperor Valerian issued his first edict of persecution, which made it binding upon the Christians to participate in the national cult of the pagan gods and forbade them to assemble in the cemeteries, threatening with exile or death whomsoever was found to disobey the order. In some way or other, Sixtus II managed to perform his functions as chief pastor of the Christians without being molested by those who were charged with the execution of the imperial edict. But during the first days of August, 258, the emperor issued a new and far more cruel edict against the Christians, the import of which has been preserved in a letter of St. Cyprian to Successus, the Bishop of Abbir Germaniciana (Ep. lxxx). It ordered bishops, priests, and deacons to be summarily put to death ("episcopi et presbyteri et diacones incontinenti animadvertantur"). Sixtus II was one of the first to fall a victim to this imperial enactment ("Xistum in cimiterio animadversum sciatis VIII. id. Augusti et cum eo diacones quattuor"—Cyprian, Ep. lxxx). In order to escape the vigilance of the imperial officers he assembled his flock on 6 August at one of the less-known cemeteries, that of Pr=E6textatus, on the left side of the Appian Way, nearly opposite the cemetery of St. Callistus. While seated on his chair in the act of addressing his flock he was suddenly apprehended by a band of soldiers. There is some doubt whether he was beheaded forthwith, or was first brought before a tribunal to receive his sentence and then led back to the cemetery for execution. The latter opinion seems to be the more probable. The inscription which Pope Damasus (366-84) placed on his tomb in the cemetery of St. Callistus may be interpreted in either sense. The entire inscription is to be found in the works of St. Damasus (P.L., XIII, 383-4, where it is wrongly supposed to be an epitaph for Pope Stephen I), and a few fragments of it were discovered at the tomb itself by de Rossi (Inscr. Christ., II, 108). The "Liber Pontificalis" mentions that he was led away to offer sacrifice to the gods ("ductus ut sacrificaret demoniis"—I, 155). St. Cyprian states in the above-named letter, which was written at the latest one month after the martyrdom of Sixtus, that "the prefects of the City were daily urging the persecution in order that, if any were brought before them, they might be punished and their property confiscated". The pathetic meeting between St. Sixtus II and St. Lawrence, as the former was being led to execution, of which mention is made in the unauthentic "Acts of St. Lawrence" as well as by St. Ambrose (Officiorum, lib. I, c. xli, and lib. II, c. xxviii) and the poet Prudentius (Peristephanon, II), is probably a mere legend. Entirely contrary to truth is the statement of Prudentius (ibid., lines 23-26) that Sixtus II suffered martyrdom on the cross, unless by an unnatural trope the poet uses the specific word cross (" Jam Xystus adfixus cruci") for martyrdom in general, as Duchesne and Allard (see below) suggest. Four deacons, Januarius, Vincentius, Magnus, and Stephanus, were apprehended with Sixtus and beheaded with him at the same cemetery. Two other deacons, Felicissimus and Agapitus, suffered martyrdom on the same day. The feast of St. Sixtus II and these six deacons is celebrated on 6 August, the day of their martyrdom. The remains of Sixtus were transferred by the Christians to the papal crypt in the neighbouring cemetery of St. Callistus. Behind his tomb was enshrined the bloodstained chair on which he had been beheaded. An oratory (Oratorium Xysti) was erected above the cemetery of St. Pr=E6textatus, at the spot where he was martyred, and was still visited by pilgrims of the seventh and the eighth century. For some time Sixtus II was believed to be the author of the so-called "Sentences", or "Ring of Sixtus", originally written by a Pythagorean philosopher and in the second century revised by a Christian. This error arose because in his introduction to a Latin translation of these "Sentences". Rufinus ascribes them to Sixtus of Rome, bishop and martyr. It is certain that Pope Sixtus II is not their author (see Conybeare, "The Ring of Pope Xystus now first rendered into English, with an historical and critical commentary", London, 1910). Harnack (Texte und Untersuchungen zur altchrist. Literatur, XIII, XX) ascribes to him the treatise "Ad Novatianum", but his opinion has been generally rejected (see Rombold in "Theol. Quartalschrift", LXXII, Tübingen, 1900). Some of his letters are printed in P.L., V, 79-100. A newly discovered letter was published by Conybeare in "English Hist. Review", London, 1910. Acta SS., Aug., II, 124-42; DUCHESNE, Liber Pontificalis, I, 155-6; BARMBY in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Xystus; ROHAULT DE FLEURY, Les Saints de la messe, III (Paris, 1893): HEALY, The Valerian Persecution (Boston and New York, 1905); 176-9; ALLARD, Les derni=E8res persecutions du troisi=E8me si=E8cle (Paris, 1907), 80-92, 343-349; DE ROSSI, Roma Sotteranea, II (Rome; 1864-77), 87-97; WILPERT, Die P=E4pstgraber und die C=E4ciliengruft in der Katakombe des hl. Callistus, supplement to De Rossi's Roma Sotteranea (Freiburg im Br., 1909). MICHAEL OTT Pope St. Sixtus III Pope St. Sixtus III (XYSTUS). Consecrated 31 July, 432; d. 440. Previous to his accession he was prominent among the Roman clergy and in correspondence with St. Augustine. He reigned during the Nestorian and Pelagian controversies, and it was probably owing to his conciliatory disposition that he was falsely accused of leanings towards these heresies. As pope he approved the Acts of the Council of Ephesus and endeavoured to restore peace between Cyril of Alexandria and John of Antioch. In the Pelagian controversy he frustrated the attempt of Julian of Eclanum to be readmitted to communion with the Catholic Church. He defended the pope's right of supremacy over Illyricum against the local bishops and the ambitious designs of Proclus of Constantinople. At Rome he restored the Basilica of Liberius, now known as St. Mary Major, enlarged the Basilica of St. Lawrence-Without-the-Walls, and obtained precious gifts from the Emperor Valentinian III for St. Peter's and the Lateran Basilica. The work which asserts that the consul Bassus accused him of crime is a forgery. He is the author of eight letters (in P.L., L, 583 sqq.), but he did not write the works "On Riches", "On False Teachers", and "On Chastity" ("De divitiis", "De malis doctoribus", "De castitate") attributed to him. His feast is kept on 28 March. DUCHESNE (ed.), Lib. Pont., I (Paris, 1886), 126-27, 232-37; BARMBY in Dict. Christ. Biog., s. v. Sixtus (3); GRISAR, History of Rome and the Popes, tr. CAPPADELTA, I (St. Louis, 1911), nos. 54, 135, 140, 144, 154. N.A. WEBER Pope Sixtus IV Pope Sixtus IV (FRANCESCO DELLA ROVERE) Born near Abisola, 21 July, 1414; died 12 Aug., 1484. His parents were poor, and while still a child he was destined for the Franciscan order. Later he studied philosophy and theology with great success at the University of Pavia, and lectured at Padua, Bologna, Pavia, Siena, and Florence, having amongst other eminent disciples the famous Cardinal Bessarion. After filling the post of procurator of his order in Rome and Provincial of Liguria, he was in 1467 created Cardinal of S. Pietro in Vincoli by Paul II. Whatever leisure he now had was devoted to theology, and in 1470 he published a treatise on the Precious blood and a work on the Immaculate Conception, in which latter he endeavoured to prove that Aquinas and Scotus, though differing in words, were really of one mind upon the question. The conclave which assembled on the death of Paul II elected him pope, and he ascended the chair of St. Peter as Sixtus IV. His first thought was the prosecution of the war against the Turks, and legates were appointed for France, Spain, Germany, Hungary, and Poland, with the hope of enkindling enthusiasm in these countries. The crusade, however, achieved little beyond the bringing back to Rome of twenty-five Turkish prisoners, who were paraded in triumph through the streets of the city. Sixtus continued the policy of his predecessor Paul II with regard to France, and denounced Louis XI for insisting on the royal consent being given before papal decrees could be published in his kingdom. He also made an effort like his predecessor for the reunion of the Russian Church with Rome, but his negotiations were without result. He now turned his attention almost exclusively to Italian politics, and fell more and more under his dominating passion of nepotism, heaping riches and favours on his unworthy relations. In 1478 took place the famous conspiracy of the Pazzi, planned by the pope's nephew — Cardinal Rafael Riario — to overthrow the Medici and bring Florence under the Riarii. The pope was cognizant of the plot, though probably not of the intention to assassinate, and even had Florence under interdict because it rose in fury against the conspirators and brutal murderers of Giuliano de' Medici. He now entered upon a two years' war with Florence, and encouraged the Venetians to attack Ferrara, which he wished to obtain for his nephew Girolamo Riario. Ercole d'Este, attacked by Venice, found allies in almost every Italian state, and Ludovico Sforza, upon whom the pope relied for support, did nothing to help him. The allied princes forced Sixtus to make peace, and the chagrin which this caused him is said to have hastened his death. Henceforth, until the Reformation, the secular interests of the papacy were of paramount importance. The attitude of Sixtus towards the conspiracy of the Pazzi, his wars and treachery, his promotion to the highest offices in the Church of such men as Pietro and Girolamo are blots upon his career. Nevertheless, there is a praiseworthy side to his pontificate. He took measures to suppress abuses in the Inquisition, vigorously opposed the Waldenses, and annulled the decrees of the Council of Constance. He was a patron of arts and letters, building the famous Sistine Chapel, the Sistine Bridge across the Tiber, and becoming the second founder of the Vatican Library. Under him Rome once more became habitable, and he did much to improve the sanitary conditions of the city. He brought down water from the Quirinal to the Fountain of Trevi, and began a transformation of the city which death alone hindered him from completing. In his private life Sixtus IV was blameless. The gross accusations brought against him by his enemy Infessura have no foundation; his worst vice was nepotism, and his greatest misfortune was that he was destined to be placed at the head of the States of the Church at a time when Italy was emerging from the era of the republics, and territorial princes like the pope were forced to do battle with the great despots. PASTOR, History of the Popes, IV (London, 1894); GREGOROVIUS, Rome in the Middle Ages, IV (London, 1901); BURKHARDT, Geschichte der Renaissance in Italien (1904); FRANTZ, Sixtus IV und die Republik Florenz (Ratisbon, 1880). R. URBAN BUTLER Pope Sixtus V Pope Sixtus V (FELICE PERETTI). Born at Grottamare near Montalto, 13 December, 1521; elected 24 April, 1585; crowned 1 May, 1585; died in the Quirinal, 27 August, 1590. He belonged to a Dalmatian family which in the middle of the preceding century had fled to Italy from the Turks who were devastating Illyria and threatened to invade Dalmatia. His father was a gardener and it is said of Felice that, when a boy, he was a swineherd. At the age of nine he came to the Minorite convent at Montalto, where his uncle, Fra Salvatore, was a friar. Here he became a novice at the age of twelve. He was educated at Montalto, Ferrara, and Bologna and was ordained at Siena in 1547. The talented young priest gained a high reputation as a preacher. At Rome, where in 1552 he preached the Lenten sermons in the Church of Santi Apostoli, his successful preaching gained for him the friendship of very influential men, such as Cardinal Carpi, the protector of his order; the Cardinals Caraffa and Ghislieri, both of whom became popes; St. Philip Neri and St. Ignatius. He was successively appointed rector of his convent at Siena in 1550, of San Lorenzo at Naples in 1553, and of the convent of the Frari at Venice in 1556. A year later Pius IV appointed him also counselor to the Inquisition at Venice. His zeal and severity in the capacity of inquisitor displeased the Venetian Government, which demanded and obtained his recall in 1560. Having returned to Rome he was made counsellor to the Holy Office, professor at the Sapienza, and general procurator and vicar Apostolic of his order. In 1565 Pius IV designated him to accompany to Spain Cardinal Buoncompagni (afterwards Gregory XIII), who was to investigate a charge of heresy against Archbishop Carranza of Toledo. From this time dates the antipathy between Peretti and Buoncompagni, which declared itself more openly during the latter's pontificate (1572-85). Upon his return to Rome in 1566 Pius V created him Bishop of Sant' Agata dei Goti in the Kingdom of Naples and later chose him as his confessor. On 17 May, 1570, the same pope created him cardinal-priest with the titular Church of S. Simeone, which he afterwards exchanged for that of S. Girolamo dei Schiavoni. In 1571 he was transferred to the See of Fermo. He was popularly known as the Cardinal di Montalto. During the pontificate of Gregory XIII he withdrew from public affairs, devoting himself to study and to the collection of works of art, as far as his scanty means permitted. During this time he edited the works of St. Ambrose (Rome, 1579-1585) and erected a villa (now Villa Massimi) on the Esquiline. Gregory XIII died on 10 April 1585, and after a conclave of four days Peretti was elected pope by "adoration" on 24 April, 1585. He took the name Sixtus V in memory of Sixtus IV, who had also been a Minorite. The legend that he entered the conclave on crutches, feigning the infirmities of old age, and upon his election exultantly thrust aside his crutches and appeared full of life and vigour has long been exploded; it may, however, have been invented as a symbol of his forced inactivity during the reign of Gregory XIII and the remarkable energy which he displayed during the five years of his pontificate. He was a born ruler and especially suited to stem the tide of disorder and lawlessness which had broken out towards the end of the reign of Gregory XIII. Having obtained the co-operation of the neighbouring states, he exterminated, often with excessive cruelty, the system of brigandage which had reached immense proportions and terrorized the whole of Italy. The number of bandits in and about Rome at the death of Gregory XIII has been variously estimated at from twelve to twenty-seven thousand, and in little more than two years after the accession of Sixtus V the Papal States had become the most secure country in Europe. Of almost equal importance with the extermination of the bandits was, in the opinion of Sixtus V, the rearrangement of the papal finances. At his accession the papal exchequer was empty. Acting on his favourite principle that riches as well as severity are necessary for good government, he used every available means to replenish the state treasury. So successful was he in the accumulation of money that, despite his enormous expenditures for public buildings, he had shortly before his death deposited in the Castello di Sant' Angelo three million scudi in gold and one million six hundred thousand in silver. He did not consider that in the long run so much dead capital withdrawn from circulation was certain to impoverish the country and deal the death-blow to commerce and industry. To obtain such vast sums he economized everywhere, except in works of architecture; increased the number of salable public offices; imposed more taxes and extended the monti, or public loans, that had been instituted by Clement VII. Though extremely economical in other ways, Sixtus V spent immense sums in erection of public works. He built the Lateran Palace; completed the Quirinal; restored the Church of Santa Sabina on the Aventine; rebuilt the Church and Hospice of San Girolamo dei Schiavoni; enlarged and improved the Sapienza; founded the hospice for the poor near the Ponte Sisto; built and richly ornamented the Chapel of the Cradle in the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore; completed the cupola of St. Peter's; raised the obelisks of the Vatican, of Santa Maria Maggiore, of the Lateran, and of Santa Maria del Popolo; restored the columns of Trajan and of Antoninus Pius, placing the statue of St. Peter on the former and that of St. Paul on the latter; erected the Vatican Library with its adjoining printing-office and that wing of the Vatican Palace which is inhabited by the pope; built many magnificent streets; erected various monasteries; and supplied Rome with water, the "Acqua Felice", which he brought to the city over a distance of twenty miles, partly under ground, partly on elevated aqueducts. At Bologna he founded the Collegio Montalto for fifty students from the March of Ancona. Far-reaching were the reforms which Sixtus V introduced in the management of ecclesiastical affairs. On 3 Dec., 1586, he issued the Bull "Postquam verus", fixing the number of cardinals at seventy, namely, six cardinal-bishops, fifty cardinal-priests, and fourteen cardinal-deacons. Before his pontificate, ecclesiastical business was generally discharged by the pope in consistory with the cardinals. There were, indeed, a few permanent cardinalitial congregations, but the sphere of their competency was very limited. In his Bull "Immensa aeterni Dei", of 11 February, 1588, he established fifteen permanent congregations, some of which were concerned with spiritual, others with temporal affairs. They were the Congregations: (1) of the Inquisition; (2) of the Segnatura; (3) for the Establishment of Churches; (4) of Rites and Ceremonies; (5) of the Index of Forbidden Books; (6) of the Council of Trent (7); of the Regulars; (8) of the Bishops; (9) of the Vatican Press; (10) of the Annona, for the provisioning of Rome and the provinces; (11) of the Navy; (12) of the Public Welfare; (13) of the Sapienza; (14) of Roads, Bridges, and Waters; (15) of State Consultations. These congregations lessened the work of the pope, without in any way limiting his authority. The final decision belonged to the pope. In the creation of cardinals Sixtus V was, as a rule, guided by their good qualities. The only suspicion of nepotism with which he might be reproached was giving the purple to his fourteen-year-old grand-nephew Alessandro, who, however did honour to the Sacred College and never wielded an undue influence. In 1588 he issued from the Vatican Press an edition of the Septuagint revised according to a Vatican MS. His edition of the Vulgate, printed shortly before his death, was withdrawn from circulation on account of its many errors, corrected, and reissued in 1592 (see BELLARMINE, ROBERT FRANCIS ROMULUS, VENERABLE). Though a friend of the Jesuits, he objected to some of their rules and especially to the title "Society of Jesus". He was on the point of changing these when death overtook him. A statue which had been erected in his honour on the Capitol during his lifetime was torn down by the rabble immediately upon his death. (For his relations with the various temporal rulers and his attempts to stem the tide of Protestantism, see THE COUNTER-REFORMATION). VON HUBNER, Sixte-Quint (Paris, 1870), tr. JERNINGHAM (London, 1872); BALZANI, Rome under Sixtus V in Cambridge Modern History, III (London, 1905), 422-55; ROBARDI, Sixti V gesta guinquennalia (Rome, 1590); LETI, Vita di Sisto V (Losanna, 1669), tr. FARNEWORTH (London, 1754), unreliable; TEMPESTI, Storia della vita e geste di Sisto V (Rome, 1755); CESARE, Vita di Sisto V (Naples, 1755); LORENTZ, Sixtus V und seine Zeit (Mainz, 1852); DUMESNIL, Hist. de Sixte-Quint (Paris, 1869); CAPRANICA, Papa Sixto, storia del s. XVI (Milan, 1884); GRAZIANI, Sisto V e la riorganizzazione della s. Sede (Rome, 1910); GOZZADINI, Giovanni Pepoli e Sisto V (Bologna, 1879); SEGRETAIN, Sixte-Quint et Henri IV (Paris, 1861); CUGNONI, Memorie autografe di Papa Sisto V in Archivio della Soc. Romana di storia patria (Rome, 1882); BENADDUCI, Sisto documento inedito per la storia di Sisto V (Venice, 1896); ROSSI-SCOTTI, Pompilio Eusebi da Perugia e Sisto papa V (Perugia, 1893); PAOLI, Sisto V e i banditi (Sassari, 1902); HARPER in Amer. Cath. Quarterly Review, III (Philadelphia, 1878), 498-521. MICHAEL OTT Peter Skarga Peter Skarga Theologian and missionary, b. at Grojec, 1536; d. at Cracow, 27 Sept., 1612. He began his education in his native town in 1552; he went to study in Cracow and afterwards in Warsaw. In 1557 he was in Vienna as tutor to the young Castellan, Teczynski; returning thence in 1564, he received Holy orders, and later was nominated canon of Lemberg Cathedral. Here he began to preach his famous sermons, and to convert Protestants. In 1568 he entered the Society of Jesus and went to Rome, where he became penitentiary for the Polish language at St. Peter's. Returning to Poland, he worked in the Jesuit colleges of Pultusk and Wilna, where he converted a multitude of Protestants, Calvinism being at the time prevalent in those parts. To this end he first published some works of controversy; and in 1576, in order to convince the numerous schismatics in Poland, he issued his great treatise "On the Unity of the Church of God", which did much good then, and is even now held in great esteem. It powerfully promoted the cause of the Union. King Stephen Báthori prized Skarga greatly, often profited by his aid and advice, took him on one of his expeditions, and made him rector of the Academy of Wilna, founded in 1578. In 1584 he was sent to Cracow as superior, and founded there the Brotherhood of Mercy and the "Mons pietatis", meanwhile effecting numerous conversions. He was appointed court preacher by Sigismund III in 1588, and for twenty-four years filled this post to the great advantage of the Church and the nation. In 1596 the Ruthenian Church was united with Rome, largely through his efforts. When the nobles, headed by Zebrzydowski, revolted against Sigismund III, Skarga was sent on a mission of conciliation to the rebels, which, however, proved fruitless. Besides the controversial works mentioned, Skarga published a "History of the Church", and "Lives of the Saints" (Wilna, 1579; 25th ed., Lemberg, 1883-84), possibly the most widely read book in Poland. But most important of all are his "Sermons for Sundays and Holidays" (Cracow, 1595) and "Sermons on the Seven Sacraments" (Cracow, 1600), which, besides their glowing eloquence, are profound and instructive. In addition to these are "Sermons on Various Occasions" and the "Sermons Preached to the Diet". These last for inspiration and feeling are the finest productions in the literature of Poland before the Partitions. Nowhere are there found such style, eloquence, and patriotism, with the deepest religious conviction. Skarga occupies a high place in the literature and the history of Poland. His efforts to convert heretics, to restore schismatics to unity, to prevent corruption, and to stem the tide of public and political license, tending even then towards anarchy, were indeed as to this last point unsuccessful; but that was the nation's fault, not his. S. TARNOWSKI Josef Skoda Josef Skoda (Schkoda) Celebrated clinical lecturer and diagnostician and, with Rokitansky, founder of the modern medical school of Vienna, b. at Pilsen in Bohemia, 10 December, 1805; d. at Vienna, 13 June, 1881. Skoda was the son of a locksmith. He attended the gymnasium at Pilsen, entered the University of Vienna in 1825, and received the degree of Doctor of Medicine on 10 July, 1831. He first served in Bohemia as physician during the outbreak of cholera, was assistant physician in the general hospital of Vienna, 1832-38, in 1839 city physician of Vienna for the poor, and on 13 February, 1840, on the recommendation of Dr. Ludwig, Freiherr von Türkheim, chairman of the imperial committee of education, was appointed to the unpaid position of chief physician of the department for consumptives just opened in the general hospital. In 1846, thanks to the energetic measures of Karl Rokitansky, professor of pathological anatomy, he was appointed professor of the medical clinic against the wishes of the rest of the medical faculty. In 1848 he began to lecture in German instead of Latin, being the first professor to adopt this course. On 17 July, 1848, he was elected an active member of the mathematico-physical section of the Academy of Sciences. Early in 1871 he retired from his professorship, and the occasion was celebrated by the students and the population of Vienna by a great torchlight procession in his honour. Rokitansky calls him "a light for those who study, a model for those who strive, and a rock for those who despair". Skoda's benevolent disposition is best shown by the fact that, notwithstanding his large income and known simplicity of life, he left a comparatively small fortune, and in his will bequeathed legacies to a number of benevolent institutions. Skoda's great merit lies in his development of the methods of physical investigation. The discovery of the method of percussion diagnosis made in 1761 by the Viennese physician, Leopold Auenbrugger (1722-1809), had been forgotten, and the knowledge of it was first revived in 1808 by Corvisart (1755-1821), court-physician to Napoleon I. Laennec (1787-1826) and his pupils Piorry and Bouillaud added auscultation to this method. Skoda began his clinical studies in close connexion with pathological anatomy while assistant physician of the hospital, but his superiors failed to understand his course, and in 1837, by way of punishment, transferred him to the ward for the insane, as it was claimed that the patients were annoyed by his investigations, especially by the method of percussion. His first publication, "Über die Perkussion" in the "Medizinische Jahrbücher des k.k. österreichen Kaiserstaates", IX (1836), attracted but little attention. This paper was followed by: "Über den Herzstoss und die durch die Herzbewegungen verursachten Töne und über die Anwendung der Perkussion bei Untersuchung der Organe des Unterleibes", in the same periodical, vols XIII, XIV (1837); "Über Abdominaltyphus und dessen Behandlung mit Alumen crudum", also in the same periodical, vol. XV (1838); "Untersuchungsmethode zur Bestimmung des Zustandes des Herzens", vol. XVIII (1839); "Über Pericarditis in pathologisch-anatomischer und diagnostischer Beziehung", XIX (1839); "Über Piorrys Semiotik und Diagnostik", vol. XVIII (1839); "Über die Diagnose der Herzklappenfehler", vol. XXI (1840). His small but up to now unsurpassed chief work, "Abhandlung über die Perkussion und Auskultation" (Vienna, 1839), has been repeatedly published and translated into foreign languages. It established his universal renown as a diagnostician. In 1841, after a journey for research to Paris, he made a separate division in his department for skin diseases and thus gave the first impulse towards the reorganization of dermatology by Ferdinand Hebra. In 1848 at the request of the ministry of education he drew up a memorial on the reorganization of the study of medicine, and encouraged later by his advice the founding of the present higher administration of the medical school of Vienna. As regards therapeutics the accusation was often made against him that he held to the "Nihilism" of the Vienna School. As a matter of fact his therapeutics were exceedingly simple in contrast to the great variety of remedial agents used at that time, which he regarded as useless, as in his experience many ailments were cured without medicines, merely by suitable medical supervision and proper diet. His high sense of duty as a teacher, the large amount of work he performed as a physician, and the early appearance of organic heart-trouble are probably the reasons that from 1848 he published less and less. The few papers which he wrote from 1850 are to be found in the transactions of the Academy of Sciences and the periodical of the Society of Physicians of Vienna of which he was the honorary president. DRASCHE, Skoda (Vienna, 1881). LEOPOLD SENFELDER Slander Slander Slander is the attributing to another of a fault of which one knows him to be innocent. It contains a twofold malice, that which grows out of damage unjustly done to our neighbor's good name and that of lying as well. Theologians say that this latter guilt considered in itself, in so far as it is an offence against veracity, may not be grievous, but that nevertheless it will frequently be advisable to mention it in confession, in order that the extent and method of reparation may be settled. The important thing to note of slander is that it is a lesion of our neighbor's right to his reputation. Hence moralists hold that it is not specifically distinct from mere detraction. For the purpose of determining the species of this sin, the manner in which the injury is done is negligible. There is, however, this difference between slander and detraction: that, whereas there are circumstances in which we may lawfully expose the misdeeds which another has actually committed, we are never allowed to blacken his name by charging him with what he has not done. A lie is intrinsically evil and can never be justified by any cause or in any circumstances. Slander involves a violation of commutative justice and therefore imposes on its perpetrator the obligation of restitution. First of all, he must undo the injury of the defamation itself. There seems in general to be only one adequate way to do this: he must simply retract his false statement. Moralists say that if he can make full atonement by declaring that he has made a mistake, this will be sufficient; otherwise he must unequivocally take back his untruth, even at the expense of exhibiting himself a liar. In addition he is bound to make compensation to his victim for whatever losses may have been sustained as a result of his malicious imputation. It is supposed that the damage which ensues has been in some measure foreseen by the slanderer. JOSEPH F. DELANY Slavery and Christianity Slavery and Christianity How numerous the slaves were in Roman society when Christianity made its appearance, how hard was their lot, and how the competition of slave labour crushed free labour is notorious. It is the scope of this article to show what Christianity has done for slaves and against slavery, first in the Roman world, next in that society which was the result of the barbarian invasions, and lastly in the modern world. I. THE CHURCH AND ROMAN SLAVERY The first missionaries of the Gospel, men of Jewish origin, came from a country where slavery existed. But it existed in Judea under a form very different from the Roman form. The Mosaic Law was merciful to the slave (Ex., xxi; Lev., xxv; Deut., xv, xxi) and carefully secured his fair wage to the labourer (Deut., xxiv, 15). In Jewish society the slave was not an object of contempt, because labour was not despised as it was elsewhere. No man thought it beneath him to ply a manual trade. These ideas and habits of life the Apostles brought into the new society which so rapidly grew up as the effect of their preaching. As this society included, from the first, faithful of all conditions -- rich and poor, slaves and freemen -- the Apostles were obliged to utter their beliefs as to the social inequalities which so profoundly divided the Roman world. "For as many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek: there is neither bond nor free: there is neither male nor female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal., iii, 27-28; cf. I Cor., xii, 13). From this principle St. Paul draws no political conclusions. It was not his wish, as it was not in his power, to realize Christian equality either by force or by revolt. Such revolutions are not effected of a sudden. Christianity accepts society as it is, influencing it for its transformation through, and only through, individual souls. What it demands in the first place from masters and from slaves is, to live as brethren -- commanding with equity, without threatening, remembering that God is the master of all - obeying with fear, but without servile flattery, in simplicity of hear, as they would obey Christ (cf. Eph., vi, 9; Col. iii, 22-4; iv, 1). This language was understood by masters and by slaves who became converts to Christianity. But many slaves who were Christians had pagan masters to whom this sentiment of fraternity was unknown, and who sometimes exhibited that cruelty of which moralists and poets so often speak. To such slaves St. Peter points out their duty: to be submissive "not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward", not with a mere inert resignation, but to give a good example and to imitate Christ, Who also suffered unjustly (I Peter, ii, 18, 23-4. In the eyes of the Apostles, a slave's condition, peculiarly wretched, peculiarly exposed to temptations, bears all the more efficacious testimony to the new religion. St. Paul recommends slaves to seek in all things to please their masters, not to contradict them, to do them no wrong, to honour them, to be loyal to them, so as to make the teaching of God Our Saviour shine forth before the eyes of all, and to prevent that name and teaching from being blasphemed (cf. I Tim, vi, 1; Tit., ii, 9, 10). The apostolic writings show how large a place slaves occupied in the Church Nearly all the names of the Christians whom St. Paul salutes in his Epistles to the Romans are servile cognomina: the two groups whom he calls "those of the household of Aristobulus and "those of the household of Narcissus" indicate Christian servitors of those two contemporaries of Nero. His Epistle, written from Rome to the Philippians (iv, 22) bears them greeting from the saints of Caesar's household, i.e. converted slaves of the imperial palace. One fact which, in the Church, relieved the condition of the slave was the absence among Christians of the ancient scorn of labour (Cicero, "De off.", I, xlii; Pro Flacco", xviii; "pro domo", xxxiii; Suetonius, "Claudius, xxii; Seneca, "De beneficiis", xviii; Valerius Maximus, V, ii, 10). Converts to the new religion knew that Jesus had been a carpenter; they saw St. Paul exercise the occupation of a tentmaker (Acts, xviii, 3; I Cor, iv, 12). "Neither did we et any man's bread", said the Apostle, "for nothing, but in labour and in toil we worked night and day, lest we should be chargeable to any you (II Thess., iii, 8; cf. Acts, xx, 33, 34). Such an example, given at a time when those who laboured were accounted "the dregs of the city", and those who did not labour lived on the public bounty, constituted a very efficacious form of preaching. A new sentiment was thereby introduced into the Roman world, while at the same time a formal discipline was being established in the Church. It would have none of those who made a parade of their leisurely curiosity in the Greek and Roman cities (II Thess., iii, 11). It declared that those who do not labour do not deserve to be fed (ibid., 10). A Christian was not permitted to live without an occupation (Didache, xii). Religious equality was the negation of slavery as it was practiced by pagan society. It must have been an exaggeration, no doubt, to say, as one author of the first century said, that "slaves had no religion, or had only foreign religions" (Tacitus, "Annals", XIV, xliv): many were members of funerary collegia under the invocation of Roman divinities (Statutes of the College of Lanuvium, "Corp. Inscr. lat.", XIV, 2112). But in many circumstances this haughty and formalist religion excluded slaves from its functions, which, it was held, their presence would have defiled. (Cicero, "Octavius", xxiv). Absolute religious equality, as proclaimed by Christianity, was therefore a novelty. The Church made no account of the social condition of the faithful. Bond and free received the same sacraments. Clerics of servile origin were numerous (St. Jerome, Ep. lxxxii). The very Chair of St. Peter was occupied by men who had been slaves -- Pius in the second century, Callistus in the third. So complete -- one might almost say, so levelling -- was this Christian equality that St. Paul (I Tim., vi, 2), and, later, St. Ignatius (Polyc., iv), are obliged to admonish the slave and the handmaid not to contemn their masters, "believers like them and sharing in the same benefits". In giving them a place in religious society, the Church restored to slaves the family and marriage. In Roman, law, neither legitimate marriage, nor regular paternity, nor even impediment to the most unnatural unions had existed for the slave (Digest, XXXVIII, viii, i, (sect) 2; X, 10, (sect) 5). That slaves often endeavoured to override this abominable position is touchingly proved by innumerable mortuary inscriptions; but the name of uxor, which the slave woman takes in these inscriptions, is very precarious, for no law protects her honour, and with her there is no adultery (Digest, XLVIII, v, 6; Cod. Justin., IX, ix, 23). In the Church the marriage of slaves is a sacrament; it possesses "the solidity" of one (St. Basil, Ep. cxcix, 42). The Apostolic Constitutions impose upon the master the duty of making his slave contract "a legitimate marriage" (III, iv; VIII, xxxii). St. John Chrysostom declares that slaves have the marital power over their wives and the paternal over their children ("In Ep. ad Ephes.", Hom. xxii, 2). He says that "he who has immoral relations with the wife of a slave is as culpable as he who has the like relations with the wife of the prince: both are adulterers, for it is not the condition of the parties that makes the crime" ("In I Thess.", Hom. v, 2; "In II Thess.", Hom. iii, 2). In the Christian cemeteries there is no difference between the tombs of slaves and those of the free. The inscriptions on pagan sepulchres -- whether the columbarium common to all the servants of one household, or the burial plot of a funerary collegium of slaves or freedmen, or isolated tombs -- always indicate the servile condition. In Christian epitaphs it is hardly ever to be seen ("Bull. di archeol. christiana", 1866, p. 24), though slaves formed a considerable part of the Christian population. Sometimes we find a slave honoured with a more pretentious sepulchre than others of the faithful, like that of Ampliatus in the cemetery of Domitilla ("Bull. di archeol. christ.", 1881, pp. 57-54, and pl. III, IV). This is particularly so in the case of slaves who were martyrs: the ashes of two slaves, Protus and Hyacinthus, burned alive in the Valerian persecution. had been wrapped in a winding-sheet of gold tissue (ibid., 1894, p. 28). Martyrdom eloquently manifests the religious equality of the slave: he displays as much firmness before the menaces of the persecutor as does the free man. Sometimes it is not for the Faith alone that a slave woman dies, but for the faith and chastity equally threatened -- "pro fide et castitate occisa est" ("Acta S. Dulae" in Acta SS., III March, p. 552). Beautiful assertions of this moral freedom are found in the accounts of the martyrdoms of the slaves Ariadne, Blandina, Evelpistus, Potamienna, Felicitas, Sabina, Vitalis, Porphyrus, and many others (see Allard, "Dix leçons sur le martyre", 4th ed., pp. 155-- 64). The Church made the enfranchisement of the slave an act of disinterested charity. Pagan masters usually sold him his liberty for his market value, on receipt of his painfully amassed savings (Cicero, "Philipp. VIII", xi; Seneca "Ep. lxxx"); true Christians gave it to him as an alms. Sometimes the Church redeemed slaves out of its common resources (St. Ignatius, "Polyc.", 4; Apos. Const., IV, iii). Heroic Christians are known to have sold themselves into slavery to deliver slaves (St. Clement, "Cor.", 4; "Vita S. Joannis Eleemosynarii" in Acts SS., Jan., II, p. 506). Many enfranchised all the slaves they had. In pagan antiquity wholesale enfranchisements are frequent, but they never include all the owner's slaves, end they are always by testamentary disposition -- that is when the owner cannot be impoverished by his own bounty, (Justinian, "Inst.", I, vii; "Cod. Just.", VII, iii, 1). Only Christians enfranchised all their slaves in the owner's lifetime, thus effectually despoiling themselves a considerable part of their fortune (see Allard, "Les esclaves chrétiens", 4th ed., p. 338). At the beginning of the fifth century, a Roman millionaire, St. Melania, gratuitously granted liberty to so many thousand of slaves that her biographer declares himself unable to give their exact number (Vita S. Melaniae, xxxiv). Palladius mentions eight thousand slaves freed (Hist. Lausiaca, cxix), which, taking the average price of a slave as about $100, would represent a value of $800,000 [1913 dollars]. But Palladius wrote before 406, which was long before Melania had completely exhausted her immense fortune in acts of liberality of all kinds (Rampolla, "S. Melania Giuniore", 1905, p. 221). Primitive Christianity did not attack slavery directly; but it acted as though slavery did not exist. By inspiring the best of its children with this heroic charity, examples of which have been given above, it remotely prepared the way for the abolition of slavery. To reproach the Church of the first ages with not having condemned slavery in principle, and with having tolerated it in fact, is to blame it for not having let loose a frightful revolution, in which, perhaps, all civilization would have perished with Roman society. But to say, with Ciccotti (Il tramonto della schiavitù, Fr. tr., 1910, pp. 18, 20), that primitive Christianity had not even "an embryonic vision" of a society in which there should be no slavery, to say that the Fathers of the Church did not feel "the horror of slavery", is to display either strange ignorance or singular unfairness. In St. Gregory of Nyssa (In Ecclesiastem, hom. iv) the most energetic and absolute reprobation of slavery may be found; and again in numerous passages of St. John Chrysostom's discourse we have the picture of a society without slaves - a society composed only of free workers, an ideal portrait of which he traces with the most eloquent insistence (see the texts cited in Allard, "Les esclaves chrétiens", p. 416-23). II. THE CHURCH AND SLAVERY AFTER THE BARBARIAN INVASIONS It is beyond the scope of this article to discuss the legislative movement which took place during the same period in regard to slaves. From Augustus to Constantine statutes and jurisprudence tended to afford them greater protection against ill- treatment and to facilitate enfranchisement. Under the Christian emperors this tendency, in spite of relapses at certain points, became daily more marked, and ended, in the sixth century, in Justinian's very liberal legislation (see Wallon, "Hist. de l'esclavage dans l'antiquité", III, ii and x). Although the civil law on slavery still lagged behind the demands of Christianity ("The laws of Caesar are one thing, the laws of Christ another", St. Jerome writes in "Ep. lxxvii"), nevertheless very great progress had been made. It continued in the Eastern Empire (laws of Basil the Macedonian, of Leo the Wise, of Constantine Porphyrogenitus), but in the West it was abruptly checked by the barbarian invasions. Those invasions were calamitous for the slaves, increasing their numbers which had began to diminish, and subjecting them to legislation and to customs much harder than those which obtained under the Roman law of the period (see Allard, "Les origines du servage" in "Rev. des questions historiques", April, 1911. Here again the Church intervened. It did so in three ways: redeeming slaves; legislating for their benefit in its councils; setting an example of kind treatment. Documents of the fifth to the seventh century are full of instances of captives carried off from conquered cities by the barbarians and doomed to slavery, whom bishops, priests, and monks, and pious laymen redeemed. Redeemed captives were sometimes sent back in thousands to their own country (ibid., p. 393-7, and Lesne, "Hist de la propriété ecclésiastique en France", 1910, pp. 357-69). The Churches of Gaul, Spain, Britain, and Italy were incessantly busy, in numerous councils, with the affairs of slaves; protection of the maltreated slave who has taken refuge in a church (Councils of Orléans, 511, 538, 549; Council of Epone, 517); those manumitted in ecclesiis, but also those freed by any other process (Council of Arles, 452; of Agde, 506; of Orléans, 549; of Mâcon, 585; of Toledo, 589, 633; of Paris, 615); validity of marriage contracted with full knowledge of the circumstances between free persons and slaves ((Councils of Verberie, 752, of Compiègne, 759); rest for slaves on Sundays and feast days (Council of Auxerrre, 578 or 585; of Châlon-sur-Saône, middle of the seventh century; of Rouen, 650; of Wessex, 691; of Berghamsted, 697); prohibition of Jews to possess Christian slaves (Council of Orléans, 541; of Mâcon, 581; of Clichy, 625; of Toledo, 589, 633, 656); suppression of traffic in slaves by forbidding their sale outside the kingdom (Council of Châlon-sur-Saône, between 644 and 650); prohibition against reducing a free man to slavery (Council of Clichy, 625). Less liberal in this respect than Justinian (Novella cxxiii, 17), who made tacit consent a sufficient condition, the Western discipline does not permit a slave to be raised to the priesthood without the formal consent of his master; nevertheless the councils held at Orléans in 511, 538, 549, while imposing canonical penalties upon the bishop who exceeded his authority in this matter, declare such an ordination to be valid. A council held at Rome in 595 under the presidency of St. Gregory the Great permits the slave to become a monk without any consent, express or tacit, of his master. At this period the Church found itself becoming a great proprietor. Barbarian converts endowed it largely with real property. As these estates were furnished with serfs attached to the cultivation of the soil, the Church became by force of circumstances a proprietor of human beings, for whom, in these troublous times, the relation was a great blessing. The laws of the barbarians, amended through Christian influence, gave ecclesiastical serfs a privileged position: their rents were fixed; ordinarily, they were bound to give the proprietor half of their labour or half of its products, the remainder being left to them (Lex Alemannorum, xxii; Lex Bajuvariorum, I, xiv, 6). A council of the sixth century (Eauze, 551) enjoins upon bishops that they must exact of their serfs a lighter service than that performed by the serfs of lay proprietors, and must remit to them one-fourth of their rents. Another advantage of ecclesiastical serfs was the permanency of their position. A Roman law of the middle of the fourth century (Cod. Just., XI, xlvii, 2) had forbidden rural slaves to be removed from the lands to which they belonged; this was the origin of serfdom, a much better condition than slavery properly so called. But the barbarians virtually suppressed this beneficent law (Gregory of Tours, "Hist. Franc.", VI, 45); it was even formally abrogated among the Goths of Italy by the edict of Theodoric (sect. 142). Nevertheless, as an exceptional privilege, it remained in force for the serfs of the Church, who, like the Church itself remained under Roman law (Lex Burgondionum, LVIII, i; Louis I, "Add. ad legem Langobard.", III, i). They shared besides, the inalienability of all ecclesiastical property which had been established by councils (Rome, 50; Orléans, 511, 538; Epone, 517; Clichy, 625; Toledo, 589); they were sheltered from the exactions of the royal officers by the immunity granted to almost all church lands (Kroell, "L'immunité franque", 19110); thus their position was generally envied (Flodoard, "Hist eccl. Remensis", I, xiv), and when the royal liberality assigned to a church a portion of land out of the state property, the serfs who cultivated were loud in their expression of joy (Vita S. Eligii, I, xv). It has been asserted that the ecclesiastical serfs were less fortunately situated because the inalienability of church property prevented their being enfranchised. But this is inexact. St. Gregory the Great enfranchised serfs of the Roman Church (Ep. vi, 12), and there is frequent discussion in the councils in regard to ecclesiastical freedmen. The Council of Agde (506) gives the bishop the right to enfranchise those serfs "who shall have deserved it" and to leave them a small patrimony. A Council of Orléans (541) declares that even if the bishop has dissipated the property of his church, the serfs whom he has freed in reasonable number (numero competenti) are to remain free. A Merovingian formula shows a bishop enfranchising one-tenth of his serfs (Formulae Biturgenses, viii). The Spanish councils imposed greater restrictions, recognizing the right of a bishop to enfranchise the serfs of his church on condition of his indemnifying it out of his own private property (Council of Seville, 590; of Toledo, 633; of Merida, 666). But they made it obligatory to enfranchise the serf in whom a serious vocation was discerned (Council of Saragossa, 593). An English council (Celchyte, 816) orders that at the death of a bishop all the other bishops and all the abbots shall enfranchise three slaves each for the repose of his soul. This last clause shows again the mistake of saying that the monks had not the right of manumission. The canon of the Council of Epone (517) which forbids abbots to enfranchise their serfs was enacted in order that the monks might not be left to work without assistance and has been taken too literally. It is inspired not only by agricultural prudence, but also by the consideration that the serfs belong to the community of monks, and not to the abbot individually. Moreover, the rule of St. Ferréol (sixth century) permits the abbot to free serfs with the consent of the monks, or without their consent, if, in the latter case, he replaces at his own expense those he has enfranchised. The statement that ecclesiastical freedmen were not as free as the freedmen of lay proprietors will not bear examination in the light of facts, which shows the situation of the two classes to have been identical, except that the freedman of the Church earned a higher wergheld than a lay freedman, and therefore his life was better protected. The "Polyptych of Irminon", a detailed description of the abbey lands of Saint-Germain-des-Prés shows that in the ninth century the serfs of that domain were not numerous and led in every way the life of free peasants. III. THE CHURCH AND MODERN SLAVERY In the Middle Ages slavery, properly so called, no longer existed in Christian countries; it had been replaced by serfdom, an intermediate condition in which a man enjoyed all his personal rights except the right to leave the land he cultivated and the right to freely dispose of his property. Serfdom soon disappeared in Catholic countries, to last longer only where the Protestant Reformation prevailed. But while serfdom was becoming extinct, the course of events was bringing to pass a temporary revival of slavery. As a consequence of the wars against the Mussulmans and the commerce maintained with the East, the European countries bordering on the Mediterranean, particularly Spain and Italy, once more had slaves -- Turkish prisoners and also, unfortunately, captives imported by conscienceless traders. Though these slaves were generally well-treated, and set at liberty if they asked for baptism, this revival of slavery, lasting until the seventeenth century, is a blot on Christian civilization. But the number of these slaves was always very small in comparison with that of the Christian captives reduced to slavery in Mussulman countries, particularly in the Barbary states from Tripoli to the Atlantic coast of Morocco. These captives were cruelly treated and were in constant danger of losing their faith. Many actually did deny their faith, or, at least, were driven by despair to abandon all religion and all morality. Religious orders were founded to succour and redeem them. The Trinitarians, founded in 1198 by St. John of Matha and St. Felix of Valois, established hospitals for slaves at Algiers and Tunis in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; and from its foundation until the year 1787 it redeemed 900,000 slaves. The Order of Our Lady of Ransom (Mercedarians), founded in the thirteenth century by St. Peter Nolasco, and established more especially in France and Spain, redeemed 490,736 slaves between the years 1218 and 1632. To the three regular vows its founder had added a fourth, "To become a hostage in the hands of the infidels, if that is necessary for the deliverance of Christ's faithful." Many Mercedarians kept this vow even to martyrdom. Another order undertook not only to redeem captives, but also to give them spiritual and material assistance. St. Vincent of Paul had been a slave at Algiers in 1605, and had witnessed the sufferings and perils of Christian slaves. At the request of Louis XIV, he sent them, in 1642, priests of the congregation which he had founded. Many of these priests, indeed, were invested with consular functions at Tunis and at Algiers. From 1642 to 1660 they redeemed about 1200 slaves at an expense of about 1,200,000 livres. But their greatest achievements were in teaching the Catechism and converting thousands, and in preparing many of the captives to suffer the most cruel martyrdom rather than deny the Faith. As a Protestant historian has recently said, none of the expeditions sent against the Barbary States by the Powers of Europe, or even America, equalled "the moral effect produced by the ministry of consolation, and abnegation, going even to the sacrifice of liberty and life, which was exercised by the humble sons of St. John of Matha, St. Peter Nolasco, and St. Vincent Of Paul" (Bonet-Maury, "France, christianisme et civilisation", 1907, p. 142). A second revival of slavery took place after the discovery of the New World by the Spaniards in 1492. To give the history of it would be to exceed the limits of this article. It will be sufficient to recall the efforts of Las Casas in behalf of the aborigines of America and the protestations of popes against the enslavement of those aborigines and the traffic in negro slaves. England, France, Portugal, and Spain, all participated in this nefarious traffic. England only made amends for its transgressions when, in 1815, it took the initiative in the suppression of the slave trade. In 1871 a writer had the temerity to assert that the Papacy had not its mind to condemn slavery" (Ernest Havet, "Le christianisme et ses origines", I, p. xxi). He forgot that, in 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be "a great crime" (magnum scelus); that, in 1537, Paul III forbade the enslavement of the Indians; that Urban VIII forbade it in 1639, and Benedict XIV in 1741; that Pius VII demanded of the Congress of Vienna, in 1815, the suppression of the slave trade and Gregory XVI condemned it in 1839; that, in the Bull of Canonization of the Jesuit Peter Claver, one of the most illustrious adversaries of slavery, Pius IX branded the "supreme villainy" (summum nefas) of the slave traders. Everyone knows of the beautiful letter which Leo XIII, in 1888, addressed to the Brazilian bishops, exhorting them to banish from their country the remnants of slavery -- a letter to which the bishops responded with their most energetic efforts, and some generous slave-owners by freeing their slaves in a body, as in the first ages of the Church. In our own times the slave trade still continued to devastate Africa, no longer for the profit of Christian states, from which all slavery had disappeared, but for the Mussulman countries. But as European penetrations progresses in Africa, the missionaries, who are always its precursors -- Fathers of the Holy Ghost, Oblates, White Fathers, Franciscans, Jesuits, Priests of the Mission of Lyons -- labour in the Sudan, Guinea, on the Gabun, in the region of the Great Lakes, redeeming slaves and establishing "liberty villages." At the head of this movement appear two men: Cardinal Lavigerie, who in 1888 founded the Société Antiesclavagiste and in 1889 promoted the Brussels conference; Leo XIII, who encouraged Lavigerie in all his projects, and, in 1890, by an Encyclical once more condemning the slave-traders and "the accursed pest of servitude", ordered an annual collection to be made in all Catholic churches for the benefit of the anti-slavery work. Some modern writers, mostly of the Socialist School -- Karl Marx, Engel, Ciccotti, and, in a measure, Seligman -- attribute the now almost complete disappearance of slavery to the evolution of interests and to economic causes only. The foregoing exposition of the subject is an answer to their materialistic conception of history, as showing that, if not the only, at least the principal, cause of that disappearance is Christianity acting through the authority of its teaching and the influence of its charity. PAUL ALLARD Ethical Aspect of Slavery Ethical Aspect of Slavery In Greek and Roman civilization slavery on an extensive scale formed an essential element of the social structure; and consequently the ethical speculators, no less than the practical statesmen, regarded it as a just and indispensable institution. The Greek, however, assumed that the slave population should be recruited normally only from the barbarian or lower races. The Roman laws, in the heyday of the empire, treated the slave as a mere chattel. The master possessed over him the power of life and death; the slave could not contract a legal marriage, or any other kind of contract; in fact he possessed no civil rights; in the eyes of the law he was not a "person". Nevertheless the settlement of natural justice asserted itself sufficiently to condemn, or at least to disapprove, the conduct of masters who treated their slaves with signal inhumanity. Christianity found slavery in possession throughout the Roman world; and when Christianity obtained power it could not and did not attempt summarily to abolish the institution. From the beginning, however, as is shown elsewhere in this article, the Church exerted a steady powerful pressure for the immediate amelioration of the condition of the individual slave, and for the ultimate abolition of a system which, even in its mildest form, could with difficulty be reconciled with the spirit of the Gospel and the doctrine that all men are brothers in that Divine sonship which knows no distinction of bond and free. From the beginning the Christian moralist did not condemn slavery as in se, or essentially, against the natural law or natural justice. The fact that slavery, tempered with many humane restrictions, was permitted under the Mosaic law would have sufficed to prevent the institution form being condemned by Christian teachers as absolutely immoral. They, following the example of St. Paul, implicitly accept slavery as not in itself incompatible with the Christian Law. The apostle counsels slaves to obey their masters, and to bear with their condition patiently. This estimate of slavery continued to prevail till it became fixed in the systematized ethical teaching of the schools; and so it remained without any conspicuous modification till towards the end of the eighteenth century. We may take as representative de Lugo's statement of the chief argument offered in proof of the thesis that slavery, apart from all abuses, is not in itself contrary to the natural law. Slavery consists in this, that a man is obliged, for his whole life, to devote his labour and services to a master. Now as anybody may justly bind himself, for the sake of some anticipated reward, to give his entire services to a master for a year, and he would in justice be bound to fulfil this contract, why may not he bind himself in like manner for a longer period, even for his entire lifetime, an obligation which would constitute slavery? (De Justitia et Jure, disp. VI, sec. 2. no. 14.) It must be observed that the defence of what may be termed theoretical slavery was by no means intended to be a justification of slavery as it existed historically, with all its attendant, and almost inevitably attendant, abuses, disregarding the natural rights of the slave and entailing pernicious consequences on the character of the slave-holding class, as well as on society in general. Concurrently with the affirmation that slavery is not against the natural law, the moralists specify what are the natural inviolable rights of the slave, and the corresponding duties of the owner. The gist of this teaching is summarized by Cardinal Gerdil (1718-1802): Slavery is not to be understood as conferring on one man the same power over another that men have over cattle. Wherefore they erred who in former times refused to include slaves among persons; and believed that however barbarously the master treated his slave he did not viol;ate any right of the slave. For slavery does not abolish the natural equality of men: hence by slavery one man is understood to become subject to the dominion of another to the extent that the master has a perpetual right to all those services which one man may justly perform for another; and subject to the condition that the master shall take due care of his slave and treat him humanely (Comp. Instit. Civil., L, vii). The master was judged to sin against justice if he treated his slave cruelly, if he overloaded him with labour, deprived him of adequate food and clothing, or if he separated husband from wife, or the mother from her young children. It may be said that the approved ethical view of slavery was that while, religiously speaking, it could not be condemned as against the natural law, and had on its side the jus gentium, it was looked upon with disfavour as at best merely tolerable, and when judged by its consequences, a positive evil. The later moralists, that is to say, broadly speaking, those who have written since the end of the eighteenth century, though in fundamental agreement with their predecessors, have somewhat shifted the perspective. In possession of the bad historical record of slavery and familiar with a Christian structure of society from which slavery had been eliminated, these later moralists emphasize more than did the older ones the reasons for condemning slavery; and they lay less stress on those in its favour. While they admit that it is not, theoretically speaking at least, contrary to the natural law, they hold that it is hardly compatible with the dignity of personality, and is to be condemned as immoral on account of the evil consequences it almost inevitably leads to. It is but little in keeping with human dignity that one man should so far be deprived of his liberty as to be perpetually subject to the will of a master in everything that concerns his external life; that he should be compelled to spend his entire labour for the benefit of another and receive in return only a bare subsistence. This condition of degradation is aggravated by the fact that the slave is, generally, deprived of all means of intellectual development for himself or for his children. This life almost inevitably leads to the destruction of a proper sense of self-respect, blunts the intellectual faculties, weakens the sense of responsibility, and results in a degraded moral standard. On the other hand, the exercise of the slave-master's power, too seldom sufficiently restrained by a sense of justice or Christian feeling, tends to develop arrogance, pride, and a tyrannical disposition, which in the long run comes to treat the slave as a being with no rights at all. Besides, as history amply proves, the presence of a slave population breeds a vast amount of sexual immorality among the slave-owning class, and, to borrow a phrase of Lecky, tends to cast a stigma on all labour and to degrade and impoverish the free poor. Even granting that slavery, when attended with a due regard for the rights of the slave, is not in itself intrinsically wrong, there still remains the important question of the titles by which a master can justly own a slave. The least debatable one, voluntary acceptance of slavery, we have already noticed. Another one that was looked upon as legitimate was purchase. Although it is against natural justice to treat a person as a mere commodity or thing of commerce, nevertheless the labour of a man for his whole lifetime is something that may be lawfully bought and sold. Owing to the exalted notion that prevailed in earlier times about the patria potestas, a father was granted the right to sell his son into slavery, if he could not otherwise relieve his own dire distress. But the theologians held that if he should afterwards be able to do so, the father was bound to redeem the slave, and the master the was bound to set him free if anybody offered to repay him the price he had paid. To sell old or worn-out slaves to anybody who was likely to prove a cruel master, to separate by sale husband and wife, or a mother and her little children, was looked upon as wrong and forbidden. Another title was war. If a man forfeited his life so that he could be justly put to death, this punishment might be committed into the mitigated penalty of slavery, or penal servitude for life. On the same principle that slavery is a lesser evil than death, captives taken in war, who, according to the ethical ideas of the jus gentium, might lawfully be put to death by the victors, were instead reduced to slavery. Whatever justification this practice may have had in the jus gentium of former ages, none could be found for it now. When slavery prevailed as part of the social organization and the slaves were ranked as property, it seemed not unreasonable that the old juridical maxim, Partus sequitur ventrem, should be accepted as peremptorily settling the status of children born in slavery. But it would be difficult to find any justification for this title in the natural law, except on the theory that the institution of slavery was, in certain conditions, necessary to the permanence of the social organization. An insufficient reason frequently offered in defence of it was that the master acquired a right to the children as compensation for the expense he incurred in their support, which could not be provided by the mother who possessed nothing of her own. Nor is there much cogency in the other plea, i.e. that a person born in slavery was presumed to consent tacitly to remaining in that condition, as there was no way open to him to enter any other. It is unnecessary to observe that the practice of capturing savages or barbarians for the purpose of making slaves of them has always been condemned as a heinous offence against justice, and no just title could be created by this procedure. Was it lawful for owners to retain in slavery the descendants of those who had been made slaves in this unjust way? The last conspicuous Catholic moralist who posed this question when it was not merely a theoretical one, Kenrick, resolves it in the affirmative on the ground that lapse of time remedies the original defect in titles when the stability of society and the avoidance of grave disturbances demand it. Notes See ST. THOMAS, Summa Theologica I-II:94:3, ad 2um; II-II:57:3, ad 2um; II-II:57:4, ad 2um. JAMES J. FOX Slaves (Dene Indians) Slaves (Déné "Men"). A tribe of the great Déné family of American Indians, so called apparently from the fact that the Crees drove it back to its original northern haunts. Its present habitat is the forests that lie to the west of Great Slave Lake, from Hay River inclusive. The Slaves are divided into five main bands: those of Hay River, Trout Lake, Horn Mountain, the forks of the Mackenzie, and Fort Norman. Their total population is about 1100. They are for the most part a people of unprepossessing appearance. Their morals were not formerly of the best, but since the advent of Catholic missionaries they have considerably improved. Many of them have discarded the tepees of old for more or less comfortable log houses. Yet the religious instinct is not so strongly developed in them as with most of their congeners in the North. They were not so eager to receive the Catholic missionaries, and when the first Protestant ministers arrived among them, the liberalities of the strangers had more effect on them than the other northern Dénés. To-day perhaps one-twelfth of the whole tribe has embraced Protestantism, the remainder being Catholics. The spiritual wants of the latter are attended to from the missions of St. Joseph on the Great Slave Lake, Ste. Anne, Hay River, and Providence, Mackenzie. A.G. MORICE Slavonic Language and Liturgy Slavonic Language and Liturgy Although the Latin holds the chief place among the liturgical languages in which the Mass is celebrated and the praise of God recited in the Divine Offices, yet the Slavonic language comes next to it among the languages widely used throughout the world in the liturgy of the Church. Unlike the Greek or the Latin languages, each of which may be said to be representative of a single rite, it is dedicated to both the Greek and the Roman rites. Its use, however, is far better known throughout Europe as an expression of the Greek Rite; for it is used amongst the various Slavic nationalities of the Byzantine Rite, whether Catholic or Orthodox, and in that form is spread among 115,000,000 people; but it is also used in the Roman Rite along the eastern shores of the Adriatic Sea in Dalmatia and in the lower part of Croatia among the 100,000 Catholics there. Whilst the Greek language is the norm and the original of the Byzantine or Greek Rite, its actual use as a church language is limited to a comparatively small number, reckoning by population. The liturgy and offices of the Byzantine Church were translated from the Greek into what is now Old Slavonic (or Church Slavonic) by Sts. Cyril and Methodius about the year 866 and the period immediately following. St. Cyril is credited with having invented or adapted a special alphabet which now bears his name (Cyrillic) in order to express the sounds of the Slavonic language, as spoken by the Bulgars and Moravians of his day. Later on St. Methodius translated the entire Bible into Slavonic and his disciples afterwards added other works of the Greek saints and the canon law. These two brother saints always celebrated Mass and administered the sacraments in the Slavonic language. News of their successful missionary work among the pagan Slavs was carried to Rome along with complaints against them for celebrating the rites of the Church in the heathen vernacular. In 868 Saints Cyril and Methodius were summoned to Rome by Nicholas I, but arriving there after his death they were heartily received by his successor Adrian II, who approved of their Slavonic version of the liturgy. St. Cyril died in Rome in 869 and is buried in the Church of San Clemente. St. Methodius was afterwards consecrated Archbishop of Moravia and Pannonia and returned thither to his missionary work. Later on he was again accused of using the heathen Slavonic language in the celebration of the Mass and in the sacraments. It was a popular idea then, that as there had been three languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, inscribed over our Lord on the cross, it would be sacrilegious to use any other language in the service of the Church. St.Methodius appealed to the pope and in 879 he was again summoned to Rome, before John VIII, who after hearing the matter sanctioned the use of the Slavonic language in the Mass and the offices of the Church, saying among other things: We rightly praise the Slavonic letters invented by Cyril in which praises to God are set forth, and we order that the glories and deeds of Christ our Lord be told in that same language. Nor is it in anywise opposed to wholesome doctrine and faith to say Mass in that same Slavonic language (Nec sanæ fidei vel doctrinæ aliquid obstat missam in eadem slavonica lingua canere), or to chant the holy gospels or divine lessons from the Old and New Testaments duly translated and interpreted therein, or the other parts of the divine office: for He who created the three principal languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, also made the others for His praise and glory (Boczek, Codex, tom. I, pp. 43-44). From that time onward the Slavonic tongue was firmly fixed as a liturgical language of the Church, and was used wherever the Slavic tribes were converted to Christianity under the influence of monks and missionaries of the Greek Rite. The Cyrillic letters used in writing it are adaptations of the uncial Greek alphabet, with the addition of a number of new letters to express sounds not found in the greek language. All Church books in Russia, Servia, Bulgaria, or Austro-Hungary (whether used in the Greek Catholic or the Greek Orthodox Churches) are printed in the old Cyrillic alphabet and in the ancient Slavonic tongue. But even before St. Cyril invented his alphabet for the Slavonic language there existed certain runes or native characters in which the southern dialect of the language was committed to writing. There is a tradition, alluded to by Innocent XI, that they were invented by St. Jerome as early as the fourth century; Jagic however thinks that they were really the original letters invented by St. Cyril and afterwards abandoned in favour of an imitation of Greek characters by his disciples and successors. This older alphabet, which still survives, is called the Glagolitic (from glagolati, to speak, because the rude tribesmen imagined that the letters spoke to the reader and told him what to say),and was used by the southern Slavic tribes and now exists along the Adriatic highlands. (See GLAGOLITIC.) The Slavonic which is written in the Glagolitic characters is also the ancient language, but it differs considerably from the Slavonic written in the Cyrillic letters. In fact it may be roughly compared to the difference between the Gaelic of Ireland and the Gaelic of Scotland. The Roman Mass was translated into this Slavonic shortly after the Greek liturgy had been translated by Sts. Cyril and Methodius, so that in the course of time among the Slavic peoples the southern Slavonic written in Glagolitic letters became the language of the Roman Rite, while the northern Slavonic written in Cyrillic letters was the language of the Greek Rite. The prevailing use of the Latin language and the adoption of the Roman alphabet by many Slavic nationalities caused the use of the Glagolitic to diminish and Latin to gradually take its place. The northern Slavic peoples, like the Bohemians, Poles and Slovaks, who were converted by Latin missionaries, used the Latin in their rite from the very first. At present the Glagolitic is only used in Dalmatia and Croatia. Urban VIII in 1631 definitively settled the use of the Glagolitic-Slavonic missal and office-books in the Roman Rite, and laid down rules where the clergy of each language came in contact with each other in regard to church services. Leo XIII published two editions of the Glagoltic Missal, from one of which the illustration on page 45 is taken. The liturgy used in the Slavonic language, whether of Greek or Roman Rite, offers no peculiarities differing from the original Greek or Latin sources. The Ruthenians have introduced an occasional minor modification (see RUTHENIAN RITE), but the Orthodox Russians, Bulgarians, and Servians substantially follow he Byzantine liturgy and offices in the Slavonic version. The Glagolitic Missal, Breviary, and ritual follow closely the Roman liturgical books, and the latest editions contain the new offices authorized by the Roman congregations. The casual observer could not distinguish the Slavonic priest from the Latin priest when celebrating Mass or other services, except by hearing the language as pronounced aloud. ANDREW SHIPMAN The Slavs The Slavs I. NAME A. Slavs At present the customary name for all the Slavonic races is Slav. This name did not appear in history until a late period, but it has superseded all others. The general opinion is that it appeared for the first time in written documents in the sixth century of the Christian era. However, before this the Alexandrian scholar Ptolemy (about A.D. 100-178) mentioned in his work, " Geographike hyphegesis", a tribe called Stavani (Stavanoi) which was said to live in European Sarmatia between the Lithuanian tribes of the Galindae and the Sudeni and the Sarmatic tribe of the Alans. He also mentioned another tribe, Soubenoi, which he assigned to Asiatic Sarmatia on the other side of the Alani. According to Safarik these two statements refer to the same Slavonic people. Ptolemy got his information from two sources; the orthography of the copies he had was poor and consequently he believed there were two tribes to which it was necessary to assign separate localities. In reality the second name refers very probably to the ancestors of the present Slavs, as does the first name also though with less certainty. The Slavonic combination of consonants sl was changed in Greek orthography into stl, sthl, or skl. This theory was accepted by many scholars before Safarik, as Lomonosov, Schlözer, Tatistcheff, J. Thunmann, who in 1774 published a dissertation on the subject. It was first advanced probably in 1679 by Hartknoch who was supported in modern times by many scholars. Apart from the mention by Ptolemy, the expression Slavs is not found until the sixth century. The opinion once held by some German and many Slavonic scholars that the names Suevi and Slav were the same and that these two peoples were identical, although the Suevi were a branch of the Germans and the ancestors of the present Swabians, must be absolutely rejected. Scattered names found in old inscriptions and old charters that are similar in sound to the word Slav must also be excluded in this investigation. After the reference by Ptolemy the Slavs are first spoken of by Pseudo-Caesarios of Nazianzum, whose work appeared at the beginning of the sixth century; in the middle of the sixth century Jordanis and Procopius gave fuller accounts of them. Even in the earliest sources the name appears in two forms. The old Slavonic authorities give: Slovene (plural from the singular Slovenin), the country is called Slovensko, the language slovenesk jazyk, the people slovensk narod. The Greeks wrote Soubenoi, but the writers of the sixth century used the terms: Sklabenoi, Sklauenoi, Sklabinoi, Sklauinoi. The Romans used the terms: Sclaueni, Sclauini, Sclauenia, Sclauinia. Later authors employ the expressions Sthlabenoi, Sthlabinoi, while the Romans wrote: Sthlaueni, Sthlauini. In the "Life of St. Clement" the expression Sthlabenoi occurs; later writers use such terms as Esklabinoi, Asklabinoi, Sklabinioi, Sklauenioi. The adjectives are sclaviniscus, sclavaniscus, sclavinicus, sclauanicus. At the same time shorter forms are also to be found, as: sklaboi, sthlaboi, sclavi, schlavi, sclavania, later also slavi. In addition appear as scattered forms: Sclauani, Sclauones (Sklabonoi, Esthlabesianoi, Ethlabogeneis). The Armenian Moises of Choren was acquainted with the term Sklavajin: the chronicler Michael the Syrian used the expression Sglau or Sglou; the Arabians adopted the expression Sclav, but because it could not be brought into harmony with their phonetical laws they changed it into Saklab, Sakalib, and later also to Slavije, Slavijun. The anonymous Persian geography of the tenth century used the term Seljabe. Various explanations of the name have been suggested, the theory depending upon whether the longer or shorter form has been taken as the basis and upon acceptance of the vowel o or a as the original root vowel. From the thirteenth century until Safarik the shorter form Slav was always regarded as the original expression, and the name of the Slavs was traced from the word Slava (honour, fame), consequently it signified the same as gloriosi (ainetoi). However, as early as the fourteenth century and later the name Slav was at times referred to the longer form Slovenin with o as the root vowel, and this longer form was traced to the word Slovo (word, speech), Slavs signifying, consequently, "the talking ones," verbosi, veraces, homoglottoi, consequently it has been the accepted theory up to the present time. Other elucidations of the name Slav, as clovek (man), skala (rock), selo (colony), slati (to send), solovej (nightingale), scarcely merit mention. There is much more reason in another objection that Slavonic philologists have made to the derivation of the word Slav from slovo (word). The ending en or an of the form Slovenin indicates derivation from a topographical designation. Dobrowsky perceived this difficulty and therefore invented the topographical name Slovy, which was to be derived from slovo. With some reservation Safarik also gave a geographical interpretation. He did not, however, accept the purely imaginary locality Slovy but connected the word Slovenin with the Lithuanian Salava, Lettish Sala, from which is derived the Polish zulawa, signifying island, a dry spot in a swampy region. According to this interpretation the word Slavs would mean the inhabitants of an island, or inhabitants of a marshy region. The German scholar Grimm maintained the identity of the Slavs with Suevi and derived the name from sloba, svoba (freedom). The most probable explanation is that deriving the name from slovo (word); this is supported by the Slavonic name for the Germans Nemci (the dumb). The Slavs called themselves Slovani, that is, "the speaking ones", those who know words, while they called their neighbours the Germans, "the dumb", that is, those who do not know words. During the long period of war between the Germans and Slavs, which lasted until the tenth century, the Slavonic territories in the north and southeast furnished the Germans large numbers of slaves. The Venetian and other Italian cities on the coast took numerous Slavonic captives from the opposite side of the Adriatic whom they resold to other places. The Slavs frequently shared in the seizure and export of their countrymen as slaves. The Naretani, a piratical Slavonic tribe living in the present district of Southern Dalmatia, were especially notorious for their slave-trade. Russian princes exported large numbers of slaves from their country. The result is that the name Slav has given the word slave to the peoples of Western Europe. The question still remains to be answered whether the expression Slavs indicated originally all Slavonic tribes or only one or a few of them. The reference to them in Ptolemy shows that the word then meant only a single tribe. Ptolemy called the Slavs as a whole the Venedai and says they are "the greatest nation" (megiston ethnos). The Byzantines of the sixth century thought only of the southern Slavs and incidentally also of the Russians, who lived on the boundaries of the Eastern Empire. With them the expression Slavs meant only the southern Slavs; they called the Russians Antae, and distinguished sharply between the two groups of tribes. In one place (Get., 34, 35) Jordanis divides all Slavs into three groups: Veneti, Slavs, and Antae; this would correspond to the present division of western, southern, and eastern Slavs. However, this mention appears to be an arbitrary combination. In another passage he designated the eastern Slavs by the name Veneti. Probably he had found the expression Veneti in old writers and had learned personally the names Slavs and Antae; in this way arose his triple division. All the seventh-century authorities call all Slavonic tribes, both southern Slavs and western Slavs, that belonged to the kingdom of Prince Samo, simply Slavs; Samo is called the "ruler of the Slavs", but his peoples are called "the Slavs named Vindi" (Sclavi cognomento Winadi). In the eighth and ninth centuries the Czechs and Slavs of the Elbe were generally called Slavs, but also at times Wens, by the German and Roman chroniclers. In the same way all authorities of the era of the Apostles to the Slavs, Cyril and Methodius, give the name Slav without any distinction both to the southern Slavs, to which branch both missionaries belonged, and to the western Slavs, among whom they laboured. As regards the eastern Slavs or Russians, leaving out the mention of Ptolemy already referred to, Jordanis says that at the beginning of the era of the migrations the Goths had carried on war with the "nation of Slavs"; this nation must have lived in what is now Southern Russia. The earliest Russian chronicle, erroneously ascribed to the monk Nestor, always calls the Slavs as a whole "Slavs". When it begins to narrate the history of Russia it speaks indeed of the Russians to whom it never applies the designation Slav, but it also often tells of the Slavs of Northern Russia, the Slavs of Novgorod. Those tribes that were already thoroughly incorporated in the Russian kingdom are simply called Russian tribes, while the Slavs in Northern Russia, who maintained a certain independence, were designated by the general expression Slavs. Consequently, the opinion advocated by Miklosic, namely, that the name Slav was originally applied only to one Slavonic tribe, is unfounded, though it has been supported by other scholars like Krek, Potkanski, Czermak, and Pasternek. From at least the sixth century the expression Slav was, therefore, the general designation of all Slavonic tribes. Wherever a Slavonic tribe rose to greater political importance and founded an independent kingdom of its own, the name of the tribe came to the front and pushed aside the general designation Slav. Where, however, the Slavs attained no political power but fell under the sway of foreign rulers they remained known by the general description Slav. Among the successful tribes who brought an entire district under their sway and gave it their name were the Russians, Poles, Czechs, Croats, and the Turanian tribe of the Bulgars. The old general name has been retained to the present time by the Slovenes of Southern Austria on the Adriatic coast, the Slovaks of Northern Hungary, the province Slavonia between Croatia and Hungary and its inhabitants the Slavonians, and the Slovinci of Prussia on the North Sea. Up to recent times the name was customary among the inhabitants of the most celebrated Republic of Dubrovnik (Ragusa). Until late in the Middle Ages it was retained by the Slavs of Novgorod in Northern Russia and by the Slavs in Macedonia and Albania. These peoples, however, have also retained their specific national and tribal names. B. Wends A much older designation in the historical authorities than Slav is the name Wend. It is under this designation that the Slavs first appear in history. The first certain references to the present Slavs date from the first and second centuries. They were made by the Roman writers Pliny and Tacitus and the Alexandrian already mentioned Ptolemy. Pliny (d. A.D. 79) says (Nat. hist., IV, 97) that among the peoples living on the other side of the Vistula besides the Sarmatians and others are also the Wends (Venedi). Tacitus (G., 46) says the same. He describes the Wends somewhat more in detail but cannot make up his mind whether he ought to include them among the Germans or the Sarmatians; still they seem to him to be more closely connected with the first named than with the latter. Ptolemy (d.about 178) in his Geographike (III, 57) calls the Venedi the greatest nation living on the Wendic Gulf. However, he says later (III, 5, 8) that they live on the Vistula; he also speaks of the Venedic mountains (III, 5, 6). In the centuries immediately succeeding the Wends are mentioned very rarely. The migrations that had now begun had brought other peoples into the foreground until the Venedi again appear in the sixth century under the name of Slavs. The name Wend, however, was never completely forgotten. The German chroniclers used both names constantly without distinction, the former almost oftener than the latter. Even now the Sorbs of Lusatic are called by the Germans Wends, while the Slovenes are frequently called Winds and their language is called Windish. Those who maintain the theory that the original home of the Slavs was in the countries along the Danube have tried to refute the opinion that these references relate to the ancestors of the present Slavs, but their arguments are inconclusive. Besides these definite notices there are several others that are neither clear nor certain. The Wends or Slavs have had connected with them as old tribal confederates of the present Slavs the Budinoi mentioned by Herodotus, and also the Island of Banoma mentioned by Pliny (IV, 94), further the venetae, the original inhabitants of the present Province of Venice, as well as the Homeric Venetoi, Caesar's Veneti in Gaul and Anglia, etc. In all probability, the Adriatic Veneti were an Illyrian tribe related to the present Albanians, but nothing is known of them. With more reason can the old story that the Greeks obtained amber from the River Eridanos in the country of the Enetoi be applied to the Wends or Slavs; from which it may be concluded that the Slavs were already living on the shores of the Baltic in the fourth century before Christ. Most probably the name Wend was of foreign origin and the race was known by this name only among the foreign tribes, while they called themselves Slavs. It is possible that the Slavs were originally named Wends by the early Gauls, because the root Wend, or Wind, is found especially in the districts once occupied by the Gauls. The word was apparently a designation that was first applied to various Gallic or Celtic tribes, and then given by the Celts to the Wendic tribes living north of them. The explanation of the meaning of the word is also to be sought from this point of view. The endeavour was made at one time to derive the word from the Teutonic dialects, as Danish wand, Old Norwegian vatn, Lation unda, meaning water. Thus Wends would signify watermen, people living about the water, people living by the sea, as proposed by Jordan, Adelung, and others. A derivation from the German wended (to turn) has also been suggested, thus the Wends are the people wandering about; or from the Gothic vinja, related to the German weiden, pasture, hence Wends, those who pasture, the shepherds; finally the word has been traced to the old root ven, belonging together. Wends would, therefore mean the allied. Pogodin traced the name from the Celtic, taking it from the early Celtic root vindos, white, by which expression the dark Celts designated the light Slavs. Naturally an explanation of the term was also sought in the Old Slavonic language; thus, Kollar derived it from the Old Slavonic word Un, Sassinek from Slo-van, Perwolf from the Old Slavonic root ved, still retained in the Old Slavonic comparative vestij meaning large and brought it into connection with the Russian Anti and Vjatici; Hilferding even derived it from the old East Indian designation of the Aryans Vanila, and Safarik connected the word with the East Indians, a confusion that is also to be found in the early writers. II. ORIGINAL HOME AND MIGRATIONS There are two theories in regard to the original home of the Slavs, and these theories are in sharp opposition to each other. One considers the region of the Danube as the original home of the Slavs, whence they spread northeast over the Carpathians as far as the Volga River, Lake Ilmen, and the Caspian Sea. The other theory regards the districts between the Vistula and the Dnieper as their original home, whence they spread southwest over the Carpathians to the Balkans and into the Alps, and towards the west across the Oder and the Elbe. The ancient Kiev chronicle, erroneously ascribed to the monk Nestor, is the earliest authority quoted for the theory that the original home of the Slavs is to be sought in the region of the Danube. Here in detail is related for the first time how the Slavs spread from the lower Danube to all the countries occupied later by them. The Noricans and Illyrians are declared to be Slavs, and Andronikos and the Apostle Paul are called Apostles to the Slavs because they laboured in Illyria and Pannocia. This view was maintained by the later chroniclers and historical writers of all Slavonic peoples, as the Pole Kadlubek, "Chronika pol." (1206), Boguchwal (d. 1253), Dlugos, Matej Miechowa, Decius, and others. Among the Czechs, this theory was supported by Kozmaz (d. 1125), Dalimir (d.1324), Johann Marignola (1355-1362), Pribik Pulkava (1374), and V. Hajek (1541). The Russians also developed their theories from the statements of their first chronicler, while the Greek Laonikos Harkondilos of the fifteenth century did not commit himself to this view. The southern Slavs have held this theory from the earliest period up to the present time with the evident intention to base on it their claims to the Church Slavonic in the Liturgy. At an early period, in the letter of Pope John X (914-29) to the Croatian Ban Tomislav and the Sachlumian ruler Mihael, there is a reference to the prevalent tradition that St. Jerome invented the Slavonic alphabet. This tradition maintained itself through the succeeding centuries, finding supporters even outside these countries, and was current at Rome itself. Consequently if we were to follow strictly the written historical authorities, of which a number are very trustworthy, we would be obliged to support the theory that the original home of the Slavs is in the countries along the Danube and on the Adriatic coast. However, the contrary is the case; the original home of the Slavs and the region from which their migrations began is to be sought in the basin of the Dnieper and in the region extending to the Carpathians and the Vistula. It is easy to explain the origin of the above-mentioned widely believed opinion. At the beginning of the Old Slavonic literature in the ancient Kingdom of the Bulgars the Byzantine chronicles of Hamartolos and Malala, which were besides of very little value, were translated into Slavonic. These chronicles give an account of the migrations of the nations from the region of Senaar after the Deluge. According to this account the Europeans are the descendants of Japhet, who journeyed from Senaar by way of Asia Minor to the Balkans; there they divided into various nations and spread in various directions. Consequently the Slavonic reader of these chronicles would believe that the starting point of the migrations of the Slavs also was the Balkans and the region of the lower Danube. Because the historical authorities place the ancient tribe of the Illyrians in this region, it was necessary to make this tribe also Slavonic. In the later battles of the Slavs for the maintenance of their language in the Liturgy, this opinion was very convenient, as appeal could be made for the Slavonic claims to the authority of St. Jerome and even of St. Paul. Opinions which are widely current yet do not correspond to facts are often adopted in historical writings. Among the Slavonic historians philogists supporting this theory are: Kopitar, August Schlötzer, Safarik, N. Arcybasef, Fr. Racki, Bielowski, M.Drinov, L.Stur, Ivan P. Filevic, Dm. Samaokvasov, M.Leopardov, N.Zakoski, and J.Pic. We have here an interesting proof that a tradition deeply rooted and extending over many centuries and found in nearly all of the early native historical authorities does not agree with historical fact. At present most scholars are of the opinion that the original home of the Slavs in Southeastern Europe must be sought between the Vistula and the Dneiper. The reasons for this belief are: the testimony of the oldest accounts of the Slavs, given as already mentioned by Pliny, Tacitus, and Ptolemy; further the close relationship between the Slavs and the Lettish tribes, pointing to the fact that originally the Slavs lived close to the Letts and Lithuanians; then various indications proving that the Slavs must have been originally neighbours of the Finnish and Turanian tribes. Historical investigation has shown that the Thraco- Illyrian tribes are not the forefathers of the Slavs, but form an independent family group between the Greeks and the Latins. There is no certain proof in the Balkan territory and in the region along the Danube of the presence of the Slavs there before the first century. On the other hand in the region of the Dneiper excavations and archeological finds show traces only of the Slavs. In addition the direction of the general march in the migrations of the nations was always from the northeast towards the south- west, but never in the opposite direction. Those who maintain the theory that the Slavs came from the region of the Danube sought to strengthen their views by the names of various places to be found in these districts that indicate Slavonic origin. The etymology of these names, however, is not entirely certain; there are other names that appear only int he later authorities of the first centuries after Christ. Some again prove nothing, as they could have arisen without the occupation of these districts by the Slavs. It can therefore be said almost positively that the original home of the Slavs was in the territory along the Dneiper, and farther to the northwest as far as the Vistual. From these regions, they spread to the west and southwest. This much only can be conceded to the other view, that the migration probably took place much earlier than is generally supposed. Probably, it took place slowly and be degrees. One tribe would push another ahead of it like a wave, and they all spread out in the wide territory from the North Sea to the Adriatic and Aegean Seas. Here and there some disorder was caused in the Slavonic migration by the incursions of Asiatic peoples, as Scythians, Sarmatians, Avars, Bulgars, and Magyars, as well as by the German migration from northwest to southeast. These incursions separated kindred tribes from one another or introduced foreign elements among them. Taken altogether, however, the natural arrangement was not much disturbed, kindred tribes journeyed together and settled near one another in the new land, so that even to-day the entire Slavonic race presents a regular succession of tribes. As early as the first century of our era individual Slavonic tribes must have crossed the boundaries of the original home and have settled at times among strangers at a considerable distance from the native country. At times again these outposts would be driven back and obliged to retire to the main body, but at the first opportunity they would advance again. Central Europe must have been largely populated by Slavs, as early as the era of the Hunnish ruler Attila, or of the migrations of the German tribes of the Goths, Lombards, Gepidae, Heruli, Rugians etc. These last-mentioned peoples and tribes formed warlike castes and military organizations which became conspicuous in history by their battles and therefore have left more traces in the old historical writings. The Slavs, however, formed the lower strata of the population of Central Europe; all the migrations of the other tribes passed over them, and when the times grew more peaceful the Slavs reappeared on the surface. It is only in this way that the appearance of the Slavs in great numbers in these countries directly after the close of the migrations can be explained without there being any record in history of when and whence they came without their original home being depopulated. III. CLASSIFICATION OF THE SLAVONIC PEOPLES The question as to the classification and number of the Slavonic peoples is a complicated one. Scientific investigation does not support the common belief, and in addition scholars do not agree in their opinions on this question. In 1822 the father of Slavonic philology, Joseph Dobrovsky, recognized nine Slavonic peoples and languages: Russian, Illyrian or Serb, Croat, Slovene, Korotanish, Slovak, Bohemians, Lusatian Sorb and Polish. In his "Slavonic Ethnology" (1842) Pavel Safarik enumerated six languages with thirteen dialects: Russian, Bolgarish, Illyrian, Lechish, Bohemians, Lusatian. The great Russian scholar J. Sreznejevskij held that there were eight Slavonic languages: Great Russians, Serbo-Croat, Korotanish, Polish, Lusatian, Bohemian, Slovak. In 1865 A. Schleicher enumerated eight Slavonic languages: Polish, Lusatians, Bohemian, Great Russian, Little Russian, Serb, Bulgarian, and Slovene. Franc Miklosic counted nine: Slovene, Bulgarian, Serbo-Croat, Great Russian, Little Russian, Bohemian, Polish, Upper Lusatian, Lower Lusatian. In 1907 Dm. Florinskij enumerated nine: Russian, Bulgarians, Serbo-Croat, Slovene, Bohemian-Moravian, Slovak, Lusatian, Polish and Kasube. In 1898 V. Jagic held that there were eight: Polish, Lusatian, Bohemian, Great Russian, Little Russian, Slovene, Serbo-Croat, Bulgarian. Thus it is seen that the greatest representatives of Slavonic linguistics are not in accord upon the question of the number of Slavonic languages. The case is the same from the purely philological point of view. Practically the matter is even more complicated because of other factors, which often play an important part, have to be considered, as religion, politics etc. At the present time some eleven to fourteen languages, not including the extinct ones, can be enumerated which lay claim to be reckoned as distinct tongues. The cause of the uncertainty is that it is impossible to state definitively of several branches of the Slavonic family whether they form an independent nation, or only the dialect and subdivision of another Slavonic nation, and further because often it is impossible to draw the line between one Slavonic people and another. The Great Russians, Poles, Bohemians and Bulgarians are universally admitted to be distinctive Slavonic peoples with distinctive languages. The Little Russians and the White Russians are trying to develop into separate nationalities, indeed the former have now to be recognized as a distinct people, at least this is true of the Ruthenians in Austria-Hungary. The Moravians must be included in the Bohemian nation, because they hold this themselves and no philological, political, or ethnographical reason opposes. The Slovaks of Moravia also consider that they are of Bohemian nationality. About sixty years ago the Slovaks of Hungary began to develop as a separate nation with a separate literary language and must now be regarded as a distinct people. The Lusatian Sorbs also are generally looked upon as a separate people with a distinct language. A division of this little nationality into Upper and Lower Lusatians has been made on account of linguistic, religious, and political differences; this distinction is also evident in the literary language, consequently some scholars regard the Lusatians as two different peoples. The remains of the languages of the former Slavonic inhabitants of Pomerania, the Sloventzi, or Kasube are generally regarded at present as dialects of Polish, though some distinguished Polish scholars maintain the independence of the Kasube language. The conditions in the south are even more complicated. Without doubt the Bulgarians are a separate nationality, but it is difficult to draw the line between the Bulgarians and the Serbian peoples, especially in Macedonia. Philologically the Croats and Serbs must be regarded as one nation; politically, however, and ethnographically they are distinct peoples. The population of Southern Dalmatia, the Moslem population of Bosnia, and probably also the inhabitants of some parts of Southern Hungary, and of Croatia cannot be assigned to a definite group. Again, the nationality and extent of the Slovenes living in the eastern Alps and on the Adriatic coast cannot be settled without further investigation. From a philological point of view the following fundamental principles must be taken for guidance. The Slavonic world in its entire extent presents philologically a homogeneous whole without sharply defined transitions or gradations. When the Slavs settled in the localities at present occupied by them they were a mass of tribes of closely allied tongues that changed slightly from tribe to tribe. Later historical development, the appearance of Slavonic kingdoms, the growth of literary languages, and various civilizing influences from without have aided in bringing about the result that sharper distinctions have been drawn in certain places, and that distinct nationalities have developed in different localities. Where these factors did not appear in sufficient number the boundaries are not settled even now, or have been drawn only of late. The Slavonic peoples can be separated into the following groups on the basis of philological differences: + The eastern or Russian group; in the south this group approaches the Bulgarian; in the northwest the White Russian dialects show an affinity to Polish. The eastern group is subdivided into Great Russian, that is, the prevailing Russian nationality, then Little Russian, and White Russian. + The northwestern group. This is subdivided into the Lechish languages and into Slovak, Bohemians, and Sorb tongues. The first sub-division includes the Poles, Kasubes, and Slovintzi, also the extinct languages of the Slavs who formerly extended across the Oder and the Elbe throughout the present Northern Germany. The second division includes the Bohemians, Slovaks, and the Lusatian Sorbs. The Slavs in the Balkans and in the southern districts of the Austro-Hungarians Monarchy are divided philologically into Bulgarians; Stokauans, who include all Serbs, the Slavonic Moslems of Bosnia, and also a large part of the population of Croatia; the Cakauans, who live partly in Dalmatia, Istria, and on the coast of Croatia; the Kajkauans, to whom must be assigned three Croatian countries and all Slovene districts. According to the common opinion that is based upon a combination of philological, political and religious reasons the Slavs are divided into the following nations: Russian, Polish, Bohemian-Slovak, Slovenes, Serbs, Croats, Bulgarians. IV. PRESENT CONDITION A. Russians The Russians live in Russia and the northeastern part of Austria-Hungary. They form a compact body only in the southwestern part of the Russian Empire, as in the north and east they are largely mixed with Finnish and Tatar populations. In Austria the Little Russians inhabit Eastern Galicia and the northern part of Bukowina; in Hungary they lice in the eastern part on the slopes of the Carpathians. Scattered colonies of Little Russians or Ruthenians are also to be found in Slavonia and Bosnia among the southern Slavs, in Bulgaria, and in the Dobrudja. In Asia Western Siberia is Russian, Central Siberia has numerous Russians colonies, while Eastern Siberia is chiefly occupied by native tribes. There are Russians, however, living in the region of the Amur River, and on the Pacific as well as on the Island of Saghalien. Turkestan and the Kirghiz steppes have native populations with Russian colonies in the cities. There are large numbers of Russian emigrants, mostly members of sects, in Canada and elsewhere in America. Brazil, Argentina, and the United States have many Little Russian immigrants. There are small Russian colonies in Asia Minor and lately the emigration has also extended to Africa. According to the Russian census of 1897 there were in the Russian Empire 83,933,567 Russians, that is, 67 percent of the entire population of the empire. Allowing for natural increase, at the present (1911) time there are about 89 millions. In 1900 there were in Austria 3,375,576 Ruthenians, in Hungary 429,447. Consequently in 1900 the total number of Russians could be reckoned at about 93 million persons. This does not include the Russian colonists in other countries; moreover, the numbers given by the official statistics of Austria-Hungary may be far below reality. Classified by religion the Russian Slavs are divided as follows: in Russian Orthodox, 95.48 percent; Old Believers 2.59 per cent; Catholics 1.78 per cent; Protestants .05 percent; Jews .08 per cent; Moslems .01 per cent; in Austria-Hungary Byzantine Catholics, 90.6 percent, the Eastern Orthodox, 8 percent. In the Russian Empire, excluding Finland and Poland, 77.01 percent are illiterates; in Poland, 69.5 percent; Finland and the Baltic provinces with the large German cities show a higher rate of literacy. The Russians are divided into Great Russians, Little Russians or inhabitants of the Ukraine, and White Russians. In 1900 the relative numbers of these three divisions were approximately: Great Russians, 59,000,000; White Russians, 6,2000,000; Little Russians, 23,700,000. In addition there are 3,8000,000 Little Russians in Austria-Hungary, and 5000,000 in America. The Russian official statistics are naturally entirely too unfavourable to the White Russians and the Little Russians; private computations of the Little Russian scholars give much higher results. Hrusevskij found that the Little Russians taken altogether numbered 34,000,000; Karskij calculated that the White Russians numbered 8,000,000. A thousand years of historical development, different influences of civilization, different religious confessions, and probably also the original philological differentiation have caused the Little Russians to develop as a separate nation, and to-day this fact must be taken as a fixed factor. Among the White Russians the differentiation has not developed to so advances a stage, but the tendency exists. In classifying the Little Russians three different types can be again distinguished: the Ukrainian, the Podolian-Galician, and the Podlachian. Ethnographically interesting as the Little Russian or Ruthenian tribes in the Carpathians, the Lemci, Boici, and Huzuli (Gouzouli). The White Russians are divided into two groups; ethnographically the eastern group is related to the Great Russians; the western to the Poles. B. Poles The Poles represent the northwestern branch of the Slavonic race. From the very earliest times they have lived in their ancestral regions between the Carpathians, the Oder, and the North Sea. A thousand years ago Boleslaw the Brave united all the Slavonic tribes living in these territories into a Polish kingdom. This kingdom which reached its highest prosperity at the close of the Middle Ages, then gradually declined and, at the close of the eighteenth century, was divided by the surrounding powers -- Russia, Prussia, and Austria. In Austria the Poles form the population of Western Galicia and are in a large minority throughout Eastern Galicia; in Eastern Galicia the population of the cities particularly is preponderantly Polish, as is also a large part of the population of a section of Austrian Silesia, the district of Teschin. The Poles are largely represented in the County of Zips in Hungary and less largely in other Hungarian counties which border on Western Galicia. There is a small Polish population in Bukowina. In Prussia the Poles live in Upper Silesia, from a large majority of the inhabitants of the Province of Posen, and also inhabit the districts of Dantzic and Marienwerder in West Prussia, and the southern parts of East Prussia. In Russia the Poles from 71.95 percent of the population in the nine provinces formed from the Polish kingdom. In addition they live in the neighbouring district of the Province of Grodno and form a relatively large minority in Lithuania and in the provinces of White and Little Russia, where they are mainly owners of large estates and residents of cities. According to the census of 1900 the Poles in Russia numbered about 8,400,000; in Austria, 4,259,150, in Germany, including the Kasubes and Mazurians, 3,450,200; in the rest of Europe about 55,000; and in America about 1,500,00; consequently altogether, 17,664,350. Czerkawski reckoned the total number of Poles to be 21,111,374; Straszewicz held that they numbered from 18 to 19,000,000. As regards religion the Poles of Russia are almost entirely Catholic; in Austria 83.4 per cent are Catholics, 14.7 percent are Jews, and 1.8 per cent are Protestants; in Germany they are also almost entirely Catholics, only the Mazurians in East Prussia and a small portion of the Kasubes are Protestant. Ethnographically the Polish nation is divided into three groups: the Great Poles live in Posen, Silesia, and Prussia; the Little Poles on the upper Vistula as far as the San River and in the region of the Tatra mountains; the Masovians east of the Vistula and along the Narva and the Bug. The Kasubes could be called a fourth group. All these groups can be subdivided again into a large number of branches, but the distinctions are not so striking as in Russia and historical tradition keeps all these peoples firmly united. The Kasubes live on the left bank of the Vistula from Dantzic to the boundary of Pomerania and to the sea. According to government statistics in 1900 there were in Germany 100,213 Kasubes. The very exact statistics of the scholar Ramult gives 174,831 Kasubes for the territory where they live in large bodies, and 200,000 for a total including those scattered through Germany, to which should be added a further 130,000 in America. According to the latest investigation the Kasubes are what remains of the Slavs of Pomerania who are, otherwise, long extinct. C. Lusatian Sorbs The Lusatian Sorbs are the residue of the Slavs of the Elbe who once spread across the Oder and Elbe, inhabiting the whole of the present Germany. During centuries of combat with the Germans their numbers gradually decreased. They are divided into three main groups: the Obotrites who inhabited the present Mecklenburg, Lüneburg, and Holstein whence they extended into the Old Mark; the Lutici or Veltae, who lived between the Oder and Elbe, the Baltic and the Varna; the Sorbs, who lived on the middle course of the Elbe between the Rivers Havel and Bober. The Lutici died out on the Island of Rügen at the beginning of the fifteenth century. In the middle of the sixteenth century there were still large numbers of Slavs in Lüneburg and in the northern part of the Old Mark, while their numbers were less in Mecklenburg and in Brandenburg. However, even in Lüneburg the last Slavs disappeared between 1750-60. Only the Lusatian Sorbs who lived nearer the borders of Bohemia have been able to maintain themselves in declining numbers until the present time. The reason probably is that for some time their territory belonged to Bohemia. At present the Lusatian Sorbs numbers about 150,000 persons on the upper course of the Spree. They are divided into two groups, which differ so decidedly from each other in speech and customs that some regard them as two peoples; they also have two separate literatures. They are rapidly becoming Germanized, especially in Lower Lusatia. The Lusatian Sorbs are Catholics with exception of 15,000 in Upper Lusatia. D. Bohemians and Slovaks The Bohemians and Slovaks also belong to the northwestern branch of the Slavonic peoples. They entered the region now constituting Bohemia from the north and then spread farther into what is now Moravia and Northern Hungary, and into the present Lower Austria as far as the Danube. The settlements of the Slovaks in Hungary must have extended far towards the south, perhaps as far as Lake Platten, where they came into contact with the Slovenes who belonged to the southern Slavonic group. Probably, however, they did not formerly extend as far towards the east as now, and the Slovaks in the eastern portion of Slovakia are really Ruthenians who were Slovakanized in the late Middle Ages. Directly after their settlement in these countries the Bohemians fell apart into a great number of tribes. One tribe, which settled in the central part of the present Bohemia, bore the name of Czechs. It gradually brought all the other tribes under its control and gave them its name, so that since then the entire people have been called Czechs. Along with this name, however, the name Bohemians has also been retained; it comes from the old Celtic people, the Boii, who once lived in these regions. Soon, however, German colonies sprang up among the Bohemians or Czechs. The colonists settled along the Danube on the southern border of Bohemia and also farther on in the Pannonian plain. However, these settlements disappeared during the storm of the Magyar incursion. The Bohemians did not suffer from it as they did from the later immigrations of German colonists who brought into the country by the Bohemian rulers of the native Premsylidian dynasty. These colonists lived through the mountains which encircle Bohemia and large numbers of them settled also in the interior of the country. From the thirteenth century the languages of Bohemia and Moravia became distinct tongues. The Bohemians have emigrated to various countries outside of Bohemia-Moravia. In America there are about 800,000 Bohemians; there are large Bohemian colonies in Russian in the province of Volhynia, also in the Crimea, in Poland, and in what is called New Russia, altogether numbering 50,385. In Bulgaria there are Bohemian colonies in Wojewodovo and near Plevna; there is also a Bohemian colony in New Zealand. Nearly 400,000 Bohemians live at Vienna, and there are large numbers of Bohemians in the cities of Linz, Pesth, Berlin, Dresden, Leipzig, Triest; there are smaller, well-organized Bohemian colonies in nearly all Austrian cities, besides large Bohemian colonies in Hungary and Slavonia. In the last-mentioned country there are 31,581 Bohemians. These settlements are modern. The Slovaks occupy the southeastern part of Moravia and the northeastern part of Hungary from the Carpathians almost to the Danube. But there are scattered settlements of Slovaks far into the Hungarian plain and even in Southern Hungary, besides colonies of Slovaks in Slavonia. On account of the barreness of the soil of their native land many Slovaks emigrate to America. According to the Austrian census of 1900 there were 5,955,297 Bohemians in Austria. The numbers may be decidedly higher. In Germany there were 115,000 Bohemians,; in Hungary 2,019,641 Slovaks and 50,000 Bohemians; in America there are at least 800,000 Bohemians; in Russia 55,000; in the rest of Europe 20,000. Consequently taking all Bohemians and Slovaks together there are probably over 9,000,000. If, as is justifiable, the figures for America, Vienna, Moravia, Silesia, and Hungary are considered entirely too low, a maximum of about 10,000,000 may be accepted. As to religion 96.5 percent of the Bohemians are Catholics, and 2.4 percent are Protestants; 70.2 per cent of t the Slovaks are Catholics, 5.3 percent are Byzantine Catholics, and 23 percent are Protestants. E. Slovenes The Slovenes belong, together with the Croats, Serbs, and Bulgarians, to the southern group of Slavs. The Slovenes have the position farther to the west in the Alps and on the Adriatic. They first appeared in this region after the departure of the Lombards for Italy and the first date in their history in 595, when they fought an unsuccessful battle with the Bavarian Duke Tassilo on the field of Roblach. They occupied at first a much larger territory than at present. They extended along the Drave as far as the Tyrol, reaching the valleys of the Rivers Riem and Eisack; they also occupied the larger part of what is now Upper Austria, Lower Austria as far as the Danube, and from the district of the Lungau in Southern Salzburg through Carinthia, Carniola, Styria, the crownland of Görz-Gradiska, and a large part of Friuli. Under German supremacy the territory occupied by them has grown considerable less in the course of the centuries. They still maintain themselves only in Carniola, in the northern part of Istria, about Görz, and in the vicinity of Triest, in the mountainous districts north of Udine in Italy, in the southern part of Carinthia and Styria, and in the Hungarians countries bordering on the farther side of the Mur River. Carinthia is becoming rapidly Germanized, and the absorption of the other races in Hungary constantly advances. According to the census of 1900 there were 1,192,780 Slovenes in Austria, 94,993 in Hungary, 20,987 in Croatia and Slavonia, probably 37,000 in Italy, in America 100,000 and 20,000 in other countries. There are, taking them altogether, probably about 1,5000,000 Slovenes int he world; 99 percent of them are Catholics. F. Croats and Serbs In speech the Croats and Serbs are one people; they have the same literary language, but use different characters. The Croats write with the Latin characters and the Serbs with the Cyrillic. They have been separated into two peoples by religion, political development, and different forms of civilization; the Croats came under the influence of Latin civilization, the Serbs under that of the Byzantines. After the migration the warlike tribe of the Croats gained the mastery over the Slavonic tribes then living in the territory between the Kulpa and the Drave, the Adriatic and the River Cetina, in Southern Dalmatia. They founded the Croat Kingdom on the remains of Latin civilization and with Roman Catholicism as their religion. Thus the Croat nation appeared. It was not until a later date that the tribes living to the south and east began to unite politically under the old Slavonic name of Serbs, and in this region the Serbian nation developed. Decided movements of the population came about later, being caused especially by the Turkish wars. The Serbian settlements, which originally followed only a southeastern course, now turned in an entirely opposite direction to the northeast. The original home of the Serbs was abandoned largely to the Albanians and Turks; the Serbs emigrated to Bosnia and across Bosnia to Dalmatia and even to Italy, where Slavonic settlements still exist in Abruzzi. Others crossed the boundaries of the Croat Kingdom and settled in large numbers in Serbia and Slavonia, also in Southern Hungary, where the Austrian Government granted them religious and national autonomy and a patriarch of their own. Some of the Serbs settled here went to Southern Russia and founded there what is called the New Serbia in the Government of Kherson. Consequently, the difference between the Croats and the Serbs consists not in the language but mainly in the religion, also in the civilization, history, and in the form of handwriting. But all these characteristic differences are not very marked, and thus there are districts and sections of population which cannot be easily assigned to one or the other nation, and which both peoples are justified in claiming. Taking Serbs and Croats together there are: in Austria 711,382; in Hungary and Croatia, 2,839,016; in Bosnia and Herzegovina, probably 1,7000,000; in Montenegro, 350,000; in Serbia 2,298,551; Old Serbia and Macedonia, 350,000; Albania and the vilayet of Scutari, about 100,000; Italy 5000; Russia 2000; America and elsewhere, 300,000. In addition there are about 108,000 Schokzians, Bunjevzians, and Krashovanians, Serbo-Croatian tribes in Hungary who were not included with these in the census. Consequently the number of this bipartite people may by reckoned approximately as 8,700,000 persons. According to Serbian computation there are about 2,300,000 Croats in Austria-Hungary; the Croats reckon their number as over 2,700,000. The controversy results from the uncertainty as to the group to which the Bosnian Moslems and the above-mentioned Schokzians, Bunjevzians, and Krashovanians, as well as the population of Southern Dalmatia, belong. As to religion, the Serbs are almost exclusively Eastern Orthodox, the Croats Catholic, the great majority of the inhabitants of Southern Dalmatia are Catholic, but many consider themselves as belonging to the Serbian nation. The branches in Hungary mentioned above are Catholic; it is still undecided whether to include them among the Croats or Serbs. G. Bulgarians The Slavonic tribes living in ancient Roman Mœsia and Thrace south of the Danube and southeast of the Serbs as far as the Black Sea came under the sway of the Turanian tribe of the Bulgars, which established the old Kingdom of Bulgaria in this region as early as the second half of the seventh century. The conquerors soon began to adopt the language and customs of the subjugated people, and from this intermixture arose the Bulgarian people. The historical development was not a quiet and uniform one; there were continual migrations and remigration, conquests and inter- mingling. When the Slavs first entered the Balkan peninsula they spread far beyond their present boundaries and even covered Greece and the Peloponnesus, which seemed about to become Slavonic. However, thanks to their higher civilization and superior tactics, the Greeks drove back the Slavs. Still, Slavonic settlements continued to exist in Greece and the Peloponnesus until the late Middle Ages. The Greeks were aided by the Turkish conquest, and the Slavs were forced to withdraw to the limit that is still maintained. The Turks then began to force back the Slavonic population in Macedonia and Bulgaria and to plant colonies of their own people in certain districts. The chief aim of the Turkish colonization was always to obtain strategic points and to secure the passes over the Balkans. The Slavonic population also began to withdraw from the plains along the Danube where naturally great battles were often fought, and which were often traversed by the Turkish army. A part emigrated to Hungary, where a considerable number of Bulgarian settlements still exist; others journeyed to Bessarabia and South Russia. After the liberation of Bulgaria the emigrants began to return and the population moved again from the mountains into the valleys, while large numbers of Turks and Circassians went back from liberated Bulgaria to Turkey. On the other hand the emigration from Macedonia is still large. Owing to these uncertain conditions, and especially on account of the slight investigation of the subject in Macedonia, it is difficult to give the size of the Bulgarian population even approximately. In approximate figures the Bulgarians number: in the Kingdom of Bulgaria, 2,864,735; Macedonia, 1,200,000; Asia Minor, 600,000; Russia, 180,000; Rumania, 90,000; in other countries 50,000, hence there are altogether perhaps over 5,000,000. In Bulgaria there are besides the Bulgarian population, 20,644 Pomaks, that is Moslems who speak Bulgarian, 1516 Serbs, 531,217 Turks, 9862 Gagauzi (Bulgarians who speak Turkish), 18,874 Tatars, 66,702 Greeks in cities along the coast, 89,563 Gypsies, and 71,023 Rumanians. The kingdom, therefore, is not an absolutely homogeneous nationality. In religion the Bulgarians are Eastern Orthodox with the exception of the Pomaks, already mentioned, and of the Paulicians who are Catholics. The Bulgarians are divided into a number of branches and dialects; it is often doubtful whether some of these subdivisions should not be included among the Serbs. This is especially the case in Macedonia, consequently all enumerations of the population differ extremely from one another. If, on the basis of earlier results, the natural annual growth of the Slavonic populations is taken as 1.4 percent, it may be claimed that there were about 156-157 million Slavs in the year 1910. In 1900 all Slavs taken together numbered approximately 136,500,000 persons divided thus: Russians, 94,000,000; Poles, 17,500,000; Lusatian Serbs, 150,000; Bohemians and Slovaks, 9,800,000; Slovenes, 1,500,000; Serbo-Croats, 8,550,000; Bulgarians, 5,000,000. LEOPOLD LÉNARD The Slavs in America The Slavs in America The Slavic races have sent large numbers of their people to the United States and Canada, and this immigration is coming every year in increasing numbers. The earliest immigration began before the war of the States, but within the past thirty years it has become so great as quite to overshadow the Irish and German immigration of the earlier decades. For two-thirds of that period no accurate figures of tongues or nationalities were kept, the immigrants being merely credited to the political governments or countries from which they came, but within the past twelve years more accurate data have been preserved. During these years (1899-1910) the total immigration into the United States has been about 10,000,000 in round numbers, and of these the Slavs have formed about 22 percent (actually 2,117,240), to say nothing of the increase of native-born Slavs in this country during that period, as well as the numbers of the earlier arrivals. Reliable estimated compiled from the various racial sources show that there are from five and a half to six millions of Slavs in the United States, including the native-born of Slavic parents. We are generally unaware of these facts, because the Slavs are less conspicuous among us than the Italians, Germans, or Jews; their languages and their history are unfamiliar and remote, besides they are not so massed in the great cities of this country. I. BOHEMIANS (Cech; adjective, cesky, Bohemian) These people -- also called the Czechs -- are named Bohemians after the original tribe of the Boii, who dwelt in Bohemia in Roman times. By a curious perversion of language, on account of various gypsies who about two centuries ago travelled westward across Bohemia and thereby came to be known in France as "Bohemians," the word Bohemian came into use to designate one who lived an easy, careless life, unhampered by serious responsibilities. Such a meaning is, however, the very antithesis of the serious conservative Czech character. The names of a few Bohemians are found in the early history of the United States. Augustyn Herman (1692) of Bohemia Manor, Maryland, and Bedrich Filip (Frederick Philipse, 1702) of Philipse Manor, Yonkers, New York, are the earliest. In 1848 the revolutionary uprisings in Austria sent many Bohemians to this country. In the eighteenth century the Moravian Brethren (Bohemian Brethren) had come in large numbers. The finding of gold in California in 1849-50 attracted many more, especially as serfdom and labour dues were abolished in Bohemia at the end of 1848, which left the peasant and the workman free to travel. In 1869 and the succeeding years immigration was stimulated by the labour strikes in Bohemia, and one occasion all the women workers of several cigar factories came over and settled in New York. About 60 percent of the Bohemians and Moravians who have settled here are Catholics, and their churches have been fairly maintained. Their immigration during the past ten years has been 98,100, and in 1910 the number of Bohemians in the United States, immigrants and native born, was reckoned at 55,000. They have some 140 Bohemian Catholic churches and about 250 Bohemian priests; their societies, schools, and general institutions are active and flourishing. II. BULGARIANS (Bulgar; adjective bulgarski, Bulgarian) This part of the Slavic race inhabits the present Kingdom of Bulgaria, and the Turkish provinces of Eastern Rumelia, representing ancient Macedonia. Thus it happens that the Bulgarians are almost equally divided between Turkey and Bulgaria. Their ancestors were the Bolgars or Bulgars, a Finnish tribe, which conquered, intermarried, and coalesced with the Slav inhabitants, and eventually gave their name to them. The Bulgarian tongue is in many respects the nearest to the Church Slavonic, and it was the ancient Bulgarian which Sts. Cyril and Methodius are said to have learned in order to evangelize the pagan Slavs. The modern Bulgarian language, written with Russian characters and a few additions, differs from the other Slavic languages in that it, like English, has lost nearly every inflection, and, like Rumanian, has the peculiarity of attaching the article to the end of the word, while the other Slavic tongues have no article at all. The Bulgarians who have gained their freedom from Turkish supremacy in the present Kingdom of Bulgaria are fairly contented; but those in Macedonia chafe bitterly against Turkish rule and form a large portion of those who emigrate to America. The Bulgarians are nearly all of the Greek Orthodox Church; there are some twenty thousand Byzantine Catholics, mostly in Macedonia, and about 50,000 Latin-Rite Catholics. The Greek Patriach of Constantinople has always claimed jurisdiction over the Bulgarian Orthodox Church, and he enforced his jurisdiction until 1872, when the Bulgarian exarch was appointed to exercise supreme jurisdiction. Since that time the Bulgarians have been in a state of schism to the patriarch. They are ruled in Bulgaria by a Holy Synod of their own, whilst the Bulgarian exarch, resident in Constantinople, is the head of the entire Bulgarian Church. He is recognized by the Russian Church, but is considered excommunicate by the Greek Patriarch, who however retained his authority over the Greek-speaking churches of Macedonia and Bulgaria. Bulgarians came to the United States as early as 1890; but there were then only a few of them as students, mostly from Macedonia, brought hither by mission bodies to study for the Protestant ministry. The real immigration began in 1905, when it seems that the Bulgarians discovered America as a land of opportunity, stimulated probably by the Turkish and Greek persecutions then raging in Macdeonia against them. The railroads and steel works in the West needed men, and several enterprising steamship agents brought over Macedonians and Bulgarians in large numbers. Before 1906 there were scarcely 500 to 600 Bulgarians in the country, and these chiefly in St. Louis, Missouri. Since then they have been coming at the rate of from 8000 to 10,000 a year, until now (1911) there are from 80,000 to 90,000 Bulgarians scattered throughout the United States and Canada. The majority of them are employed in factories, railroads, mines, and sugar works. Granite City, Madison, and Chicago, Illinois; St. Louis, Missouri; Indianapolis, Indiana; Steelton, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon, and New York City all have a considerable Bulgarian population. They also take to farming and are scattered throughout the northwest. They now (1911) have three Greek Orthodox churches in the United States, at Granite City and Madison, Illinois, and at Steelton, Pennsyvania, as well as several mission stations. Their clergy consist of one monk and two secular priests; and they also have a church in Toronto, Canada. There are not Bulgarian Catholics, either of the Greek or Roman Rite sufficient to form a church here. The Bulgarians, unlike the other Slavs, have no church or benefit societies or brotherhood in America. They publish five Bulgarian papers, of which the "Naroden Glas" of Granite City in the most important. III. CROATIANS (Hrvat; adjective, hrvatski, Croatian) These are the inhabitants of the autonomous or home-rule province of Croatia-Slavonia, in the southwestern part of the Kingdom of Hungary where it reaches down to the Adriatic Sea. It included not only them but also the Slavic inhabitants of Istria and Dalmatia, in Austria, and those of Bosnia and Herzegovina who are Catholic and use the Roman alphabet. In blood and speech the Croatians and Serbians are practically one; but religion and politics divide them. The former are Catholics and use the Roman letters; the latter are Greek Orthodox and use modified Russian letters. In many of the places on the borderline school-children have to learn both alphabets. The English word "cravat" is derived from their name, it being the Croatian neckpiece which the south Austrian troops wore. Croatia-Slavonia itself has a population of nearly 2,500,000 and is about one-third the size of the state of New York. Croatia in the west is mountainous and somewhat poor, while Slavonia in the east is level, fertile, and productive. Many Dalmatian Croats from seaport town came here from 1850 to 1870. The original emigration from Croatia-Slavonia began in 1873, upon the completion of the new railway connections to the seaport of Fiume, when some of the more adventurous Croatians came to the United States. From the early eighties the Lipa-Krbava district furnished much of the emigration. The first Croatian settlements were made in Calumet, Michigan, while many of them became lumbermen in Michigan and stave-cutters along the Mississippi. Around Agram (Zagreb, the Croatian capital) the grape disease caused large destruction of vineyards and the consequent emigration of thousands. Later on emigration began from Varasdin and from Slavonia also, and now immigrants arrive from every county in Croatia-Slavonia. In 1899 the figures for Croatia-Slavonia were 2923, and by 1907 the annual immigration had risen to 22,828, the largest number coming from Agram and Varasdin Counties. Since then it has fallen off, and at the present time (1911) it is not quite 20,000. Unfortunately the governmental statistics do not separate the Slovenians from the Croatians in giving the arrivals of Austro-Hungarian immigrants, but the Hungarian figures of departures serve as checks. The number of Croatians in the United States at present, including the native-born, is about 280,000, divided according to their origin as follows: from Croatia-Slavonia, 160,000; Dalmatia, 80,000; Bosnia, 20,000; Herzegovina, 15,000; and the remainder from various parts of Hungary and Serbia. The largest group of them is in Pennsylvania, chiefly in the neighbourhood of Pittsburg, and they number probably from 80,000 to 100,000. Illinois has about 45,000, chiefly in Chicago. Ohio has about 35,000, principally in Cleveland and the vicinity. Other considerable colonies are in New York, San Francisco, St. Louis, Kansas City, and New Orleans. They are also in Montana, Colorado, and Michigan. The Dalmatians are chiefly engaged in business and grape culture; the other Croatians are mostly labourers employed in mining, railroad work, steel mills, stockyards, and stone quarries. Nearly all of these are Catholics, and they now have one Greek Catholic and 16 Latin-Rite Catholic churches in the United States. The Greek Catholics are almost wholly from the Diocese of Krizevac (Crisium), and are chiefly settled at Chicago and Cleveland. They have some 250 societies devoted to church and patriotic purposes, and in some cases to Socialism, but as yet they have no very large central organization, the National Croatian Union with 29,247 members being the largest. They publish ten newspapers, among them two dailies, of which "Zajednicar" the organ of Narodne Hrvatske Zajednice (National Croatian Union) is the best known. IV. POLES (Polak, a Pole; adjective polski, Polish) The Poles came to the United States quite early in its history. Aside from some few early settlers, the American Revolution attracted such noted men as Kosciuszko and Pulaski, together with many of their fellow countrymen. The Polish Revolution of 1830 brought numbers of Poles to the United States. In 1851 a Polish colony settled in Texas, and called their settlement Panna Marya (Our Lady Mary). In 1860 they settled at Parisville, Michigan, and Polonia, Wisconsin. Many distinguished Poles served in the Civil War (1861-65) upon both sides. After 1873 the Polish immigration began to grow apace, chiefly from Prussian Poland. Then the tide turned and came from Austria, and later from Russian Poland. In 1890 they began to come in the greatest numbers from Austrian and Russian Poland, until the flow from German Poland has largely diminished. The immigration within the past ten years has been as follows: from Russia, 53 percent; from Austria about 43 percent; and only a fraction over 4 percent from the Prussian or German portion. It is estimated that there are at present about 3,000,000 Poles in the United States, counting the native-born. It may be said that they are almost solidly Catholic; the dissident and disturbing elements among them being but comparatively small, while there is no purely Protestant element at all. They have one Polish bishop, about 750 priests, and some 520 churches and chapels, besides 355 school. There are large numbers, both men and women, who are members of the various religious communities. The Poles publish some 70 newspapers, amongst them nine dailies, 20 of which are purely Catholic publications. Their religious and national societies are large and flourishing; and altogether the Polish element is active and progressive. V. RUSSIANS (Rossiyanin; adjective rossiiski, Russian) Russia is the largest nation in Europe, and its Slavic inhabitants (exclusive of Poles) are composed of Great Russians or Northern Russians, White Russians or Western Russians, and the Little Russians (Ruthenians) or Southern Russians. The area around Moscow and St. Petersburg is called Great Russia, in allusion to its stature and great predominance in number, government, and language. The White Russians are so called from the prevailing colour of the clothing of the peasantry, and inhabit the provinces lying on the borders of Poland -- Vitebsk, Mohilev, Minsk, Vilna, and Grodno. Their language differs but slightly from Great Russian, inclining towards Polish and Old Slavonic. The Little Russians (so called from their low stature) differ considerably from the Great Russians in language and customs, and they inhabit the Provinces of Kiev, Kharkov, Tchernigov, Poltava, Podolia, and Volhynia, and they are also found outside the Empire of Russia, in Galicia, Bukovina, and Hungary (see below, section VI). The Great Russians may be regarded as the norm of the Russian people. Their language became the language of the court and of literature, just as High German and Tuscan Italian did, and they form the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of the Russian Empire. They are practically all Eastern Orthodox, the Catholics in Russia being Poles or Germans where they are of the Roman Rite, and Little Russians (Ruthenians) where they are of the Greek Rite. The Russians have long been settled in America, for Alaska was Russian territory before it was purchased by the United States in 1867. The Russian Orthodox church has been on American soil since the early nineteenth century. The immigration from Russia is however composed of very few Russians. It is principally made up of Jews (Russian and Polish), Poles, and Lithuanians. Out of an average emigration of from 250,000 to 260,000 annually from the Russian Empire to the United States, 65 percent have been Jews and only from three to five percent actual Russians. Nevertheless the Russian peasant and working class are active emigrants, and the exodus from European Russia is relatively large. But it is directed eastward instead of to the west, for Russia is intent upon settling up her vast prairie lands in Siberia. Hinderances are placed in the way of those Russians (except the Hews) who would leave for America or the west of Europe, while inducements and advantages are offered for settlers in Siberia. For the past five years about 500,000 Russians have annually migrated to Siberia, a number equal to one-half the immigrants yearly received by the United States from all sources. They go in great colonies and are aided by the Russian Government by grants of land, loans of money, and low transportation. New towns and cities have sprung up all over Siberia, which are not even on our maps, thus rivalling the American settlement of the Dakotas and the North West. Many Russians religious colonists, other than the Jews, have come to America; but often they are not wholly of Slavic blood or are Little Russians (Ruthenians). It therefore happens that there are very few Russians in the United States as compared with other nationalities. There are, according to the latest estimates, about 75,000, chiefly in Pennsylvania and the Middle West. There has been a Russian colony in San Francisco for sixty years, and they are numerous in and around New York City. The Russian Orthodox Church is well established here. About a third of the russians in the United States are opposed to it, being of the anti-government, semi-revolutionary type of immigrant. But the others are enthusiastic in support of their Church and their national customs, yet their Church included not only them but the Little Russians of Bukovina and a very large number of Greek Catholics of Galicia and Hungary whom they have induced to leave the Catholic and enter the Orthodox Church. The Russian Church in the United States is endowed by the tsar and the Holy Governing Synod, besides having the support of Russian missionary societies at home, and is upon a flourishing financial basis in the United States. It now (1911) has 83 churches and chapels in the United States, 15 in Alaska, and 18 in Canada, making a total of 126 places of worship, besides a theological seminary at Minneapolis and a monastery at South Canaan, Pennsylvannia. Their present clergy is composed of one archbishop, one bishop, 6 proto-priests, 89 secular priests, 2 archimandrites, 2 hegumens, and 18 monastic priests, making a total of 119, while they also exercise jurisdiction over the Serbian and Syrian Orthodox clergy besides. Lately they took over a Greek Catholic sisterhood, and now have four Basilian nuns. The United States is now divided up into the following six districts of the Russian Church, intended to be the territory for future dioceses: New York and the New England States, Pennsylvania and the Atlantic States; Pittsburg and the Middle West; Western Pacific States; Canada; and Alaska. Their statistics of church population have not been published lately in their year-books, and much of their growth has been of late years by additions gained from the Greek Catholic Ruthenians of Galicia and Hungary, and is due largely to the active and energetic work and financial support of the Russian church authorities at St. Petersburg and Moscow. They have the "Russkoye Pravoslavnoye Obshestvo Vzaimopomoshchi" (Russian Orthodox Mutual Aid Society) for men, founded in 1895, now (1911) having 199 councils and 7072 members, and the women's division of the same, founded in 1907, with 32 councils and 690 members. They publish two church papers, "America Orthodox Messenger", and "Svit"; although there are some nine other Russian papers published by Jews and Socialists. VI. RUTHENIANS (Rusin; adjective russky, Ruthenian) These are the southern branch of the Russian family, extending from the middle of Austria-Hungary across the southern part of Russia. The use of the adjective russky by both the Ruthenians and the Russians permits it to be translated into English by the work "Ruthenian" or "Russian". They are also called Little Russians (Malorossiani) in Russia itself, and sometimes Russniaki in Hungary. The appellations "Little Russians" and "Ruthenians" have come to have almost a technical meaning, the former indicating subjects of the Russian Empire who are of the Greek Orthodox Church, and the latter those who are in Austria-Hungary and are Catholics of the Greek Rite. Those who are active in the Panslavic movement and are Russo-philes are very anxious to have then called "Russians", no matter whence they come. The Ruthenians are of the original Russo-Slavic race, and gave their name to the peoples making up the present Russian Empire. They are spread all over the southern part of Russia, in the provinces of Kiev, Kharkov, Tchernigogg, Poltava, and Podolia, and Volhynia (see above, V. RUSSIANS), but by force of governmental pressure and restrictive laws are being slowly made into Great Russians. Only within the past five years has the use of their own form of language and their own newspapers and press been allowed by law in Russia. Nearly every Ruthenian author in the empire has written his chief works in Great Russian, because denied the use of his own language. They are also spread throughout the Provinces of Lublin, in Poland; Galicia and Bukovina, in Austria; and the Counties of Szepes, Saros, Abauj, Zamplim, Ung, Marmos, and Bereg, in Hungary. They have had an opportunity to develop in Austria and also in Hungary. In the latter country they are closely allied with the Slovaks, and many of them speak the Slovak language. They are all of the Greek Rite, and with the exception of those in Russia and Bukovina are Catholics. They use the Russian alphabet for their language, and in Bukovina and a portion of Galicia have a phonetic spelling, thus differing largely from Great Russian, even in words that are common to both. Their immigration to America commenced in 1880 as labourers in the coal mines of Pennsylvania and Ohio, and has steadily increased ever since. Although they were the poorest of peasants and labourers, illiterate for the most part and unable to grasp the English langauge or American customs when they arrived, they have rapidly risen in the scale of prosperity and are now rivalling the other nationalities in progress. Greek Ruthenian churches and institutions are being established upon a substantial basis, and their clergy and schools are steadily advancing. They are scattered all over the United States, and there are now (1911) between 489,000 and 500,000 of them, counting immigrants and native born. Their immigration for the past five years has been as follows: 1907, 24,081; 1908, 12,361; 1909, 15,808; 1910, 27,970; 1911, 17,724; being an average of 20,000 a year. They have chiefly settled in the State of Pennsylvania, over half of them being there; but Ohio, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois have large numbers of them. The Greek Rite in the Slavonic language is firmly established through them in the United States, but they suffer greatly from Russian Orthodox endeavours to lead them from the Catholic Church, as well as from frequent internal dissensions (chiefly of an old-world political nature) among themselves. They have 152 Greek Catholic churches, with a Greek clergy consisting of a Greek Catholic bishop who has his seat at Philadelphia, but without diocesan powers as yet, and 127 priests, of whom 9 are Basilian monks. During 1911 Ruthenian Greek Catholic nuns of the Order of St. Basil were introduced. The Ruthenians have flourishing religious mutual benefit societies, which also assist in the building of Greek churches. The "Soyedineniya Greko-Katolicheskikh Bratstv" (Greek Catholic Union) in its senior division has 509 members, brotherhoods or councils and 30,255 members, while the junior division has 226 brotherhoods and 15,200 members; the "Russky Narodny Soyus" (Ruthenian National Union) has 301 brotherhoods and 15,200 members; while the "Obshchestvo Russkikh Bratstv" (Society of Russian Brotherhood) has 129 brotherhoods and 7359 members. There are also many Ruthenians who belong to Slovak organizations. The Ruthenians publish some ten papers, of which the "Amerikansky Russky Vietnik", "Svododa", and "Dushpastyr" are the principal ones. VII. SERBIANS (Srbin; adjective srpski, Serbian, or Servian) This designation applies not only to the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Serbia, but includes the people of the following countries forming a geographical although not a political whole: southern Hungary, the Kingdoms of Serbia and Montenegro, the Turkish Provinces of Kossovo, Western Macedonia, and Novi-Bazar, and the annexed Austrian provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The last two provinces may be said to furnish the shadowy boundary line between the Croatians and the Serbians. The two peoples are ethnologically the same, and the Serbian and Croatian languages are merely two dialects of the same Slavonic tongue. Serbians are sometimes called the Shtokavski, because the Serbian word for "what" is shto, while the Croats use the word cha for "what", and Croatians are called Chakavski. The Croatians are Catholics and use the Roman alphabet (latinica), whilst the Serbians are Eastern Orthodox and use the Cyrillic alphabet (cirilica), with additional signs to express special sounds not found in the Russian. Serbians who happen to be Catholic are called Bunjevaci (disturbers, dissenters). Serbian immigration to the United States did not commence until about 1892, when several hundred Montenegrins and Serbians came with the Dalmatians and settled in California. It began to increase largely in 1903 and was at its highest in 1907. They are largely settled in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois. There are no governmental statistics showing how many Serbians come from Serbia and how many from the surrounding provinces. The Serbian Government has established a special consular office in New York City to look after Serbian immigration. There are now (1911) about 150,000 Serbians in the United States. They are located as follows: New England States, 25,000; Middle Atlantic States, 50,000; Middle Western States, 25,000; Western and Pacific States, 25,000; and the remainder throughout the Southern States and Alaska. They have brought with them their Orthodox clergy, and are at present affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church here although they expect shortly to have their own national bishop. They now (1911) have in the United States 20 churches (of which five are in Pennsylvania) and 14 clergy, of whom 8 are monks and 6 seculars. They publish eight newspapers in Serbian, of which "Amerikanski Srbobran" of Pittsburg, "Srbobran" of New York, and "Srpski Glasnik" of San Francisco are the most important. They have a large number of church and patriotic societies, of which the Serb Federation "Sloga" (Concord) with 131 drustva or council and over 10,000 members and "Prosvjeta" (Progress), composed of Serbians from Bosnia and Herzegovina, are the most prominent. VIII. SLOVAKS (Slovak; adjective slovensky, Slovak) These occupy the northwestern portion of the Kingdom of Hungary upon the southern slopes of the Carpathian mountains, ranging over a territory comprising the Counties of Poszony, Nyitra, Bars, Hont, Zólyom, Trencsén, Turocz, Arva, Liptö, Szepes, Sáros, Zemplin, Ung, Abauj, Gömör, and Nógrad. A well-defined ethnical line is all that divides the Slovaks from the Ruthenians and the Magyars. Their language is almost the same as the Bohemian, for they received their literature and their mode of writing it from the Bohemians, and even now nearly all the Protestant Slovak literature is from Bohemian sources. It must be remembered however that the Bohemians and Moravians dwell on the northern side of the Carpathian mountains in Austria, whilst the Slovaks are on the south of the Carpathians and are wholly in Hungary. Between the Moravians and the Slovaks, dwelling so near to one another, the relationship was especially close. The Slovak and Moravian people were among those who first heard the story of Christ from the Slavonic apostles Sts. Cyril and Methodius, and at one time their tribes must have extended down to the Danube and the southern Slavs. The Magyars (Hungarians) came in from Asia and the East, and like a wedge divided this group of northern Slavs from those on the south. The Slovaks have had no independent history and have endured successively Polish rule, Magyar conquest, Tatar invasions, German invading colonization, Hussite raids from Bohemia, and the dynastic wars of Hungary. In 1848-49, when revolution and rebellion were in the air, the Hungarians began their war against Austria; the Slovaks in turn rose against the Hungarians for the language and national customs, but on the conclusion of peace, they were again incorporated as part of Hungary without any of their rights recognized. Later they were ruthlessly put down when they refused to carry out the Hungarian decrees, particularly as they had rallied to the support of the Austrian throne. In 1861 the Slovaks presented their famous Memorandum to the Imperial Throne of Austria, praying for a bill of rights and for their autonomous nationality. Stephen Moyses, the distinguished Slovak Catholic Bishop, besought the emperor to grant national and language rights to them. The whole movement awoke popular enthusiasm, Catholics and Protestants working together for the common good. In 1862 high schools were opened for Slovaks; the famous "Slovenska Matica", to publish Slovak books and works of art and to foster the study of the Slovak history and language, was founded; and in 1870 the Catholics also founded the "Society of St. Voytech", which became a powerful helper. Slovak newspapers sprang into existence and 150 reading clubs and libraries were established. After the defeat of the Austrian arms at Sadowa in 1866, pressure was resumed to split the empire into two parts, Austrian and Hungarian, each of which was practically independent. The Slovaks thenceforth came wholly under Hungarian rule. Then the Law of Nationalities was passed which recognized the predominant position of the Magyars, but gave some small recognition to the other minor nationalities, such as the Slovaks, by allowing them to have churches and schools conducted in their own language. In 1878 the active Magyarization of Hungary was undertaken. The doctrine was mooted that a native of the Kingdom of Hungary could not be a patriot unless he spoke, thought, and felt as a Magyar. A Slovak of education who remained true to his ancestry (and it must be remembered that the Slovaks were there long before the Hungarians came) was considered deficient in patriotism. The most advanced political view was that a compromise with the Slovaks was impossible; that there was but one expedient, to wipe them out as far as possible by assimilation with the Magyars. Slovak schools and institutions were ordered to be closed, the charter of the "Matica" was annulled, and its library and rich historical and artistic collections, as well as its funds, were confiscated. Inequalities of every kind before the law were devised for the undoing of the Slovaks and turning them into Hungarians; so much so that one of their authors likened them to the Irish in their troubles. The Hungarian authorities in their endeavour to suppress the Slovak nationality went even to the extent of taking away Slovak children to be brought up as Magyars, and forbade them to use their language in school and church. The 2,000,000 Catholic Slovaks clung to their language and Slavic customs, but the clergy were educated in their seminaries through the medium of the Magyar tongue and required in their parishes to conform to the state idea. Among the 750,000 Protestant Slovaks the Government went even further by taking control of their synods and bishops. Even Slovak family names were changed to Hungarian ones, and preference was only through Hungarians channels. Naturally, religion decayed under the stress and strain of repressed nationality. Slovak priests did not perform their duties with ardour or diligence, but confined themselves to the mere routine of canonical obligation. There are no monks or religious orders among the Slovaks and no provision is made for any kind of community life. Catechetical instruction is at a minimum and is required to be given whenever possible through the medium of the Hungarian language. There is no lack of priests in the Slovak country, yet the practice of solemnizing the reception of the first communion by the children is unknown and many other forms of Catholic devotion are omitted. Even the Holy Rosary Society was dissolved, because its devotions and proceedings and devotions were conducted in Slovak. The result of governmental restriction of any national expression has been a complete lack of initiative on the part of the Slovak priesthood, and it is needless to speak of the result upon their flocks. In the eastern part of the Slovak territory where there were Slovak-speaking Greek Catholics, they fared slightly better in regard to the attempts to make them Hungarians. There the liturgy was Slavonic and the clergy who used the Magyar tongue still were in close touch with their people through the offices of the Church. All this pressure on the part of the authorities tended to produce an active Slovak emigration to America, while bad harvests and taxation also contributed. A few immigrants came to America in 1864 and their success brought others. In the late seventies the Slovak exodus was well marked, and by 1882 it was sufficiently important to be investigated by the Hungarian Minister of the Interior and directions given to repress it. The American immigration figures indicated the first important Slovak influx in 1873 when 1300 immigrants came from Hungary, which rose to 4000 in 1880 and to nearly 15,000 in 1884, most of them settling in the mining and industrial regions of Pennsylvania. At first they came from the Counties of Zemplin, Saros, Szepes, and Ung, where there were also many Ruthenians. They were called "Huns" or "Hankies", and were used at first to fill the places left vacant by strikers. They were very poor and willing to work for little when they arrived, and were accordingly hated by the members of the various unions. The Slovak girls, like the Irish, mostly went into service, and because they had almost no expense for living managed to earn more than the men. Today the Slovaks of America are beginning to possess a national culture and organization, which presents a striking contrast to the cramped development of their kinsmen in Hungary. Their immigration of late years has ranged annually from 52,368 in 1905 to 33,416 in 1910. Altogether it is estimated that there are now some 560,000 Slovaks in the United States, including the native born. They are spread throughout the country, chiefly in the following states: Pennsylvania, 270,000; Ohio, 75,000; Illinois, 50,000; New Jersey, 50,000; New York, 35,000; Connecticut, 20,000; Indiana, 15,000; Missouri, 10,000; whilst they range from 5000 to a few hundreds in the other states. About 450,000 of them are Latin-Rite Catholics, 10,000 Byzantine-Rite Catholics and 95,000 Protestants. The first Slovak Catholic church in the United States was founded by Rev. Joseph Kossalko at Streator, Illinois, and was dedicated 8 Dec., 1883. Following this he also built St. Joseph's Church at Hazleton, Pennsylvania, in 1884. In 1889 Rev. Stephen Furdek founded the Church of St. Ladislas at Cleveland, Ohio, together with a fine parochial school, both of which were dedicated by Bishop Gilmour. The American bishops were anxious to get Slovak priests for the increasing immigration, and Bishop Gilmour sent Father Furdek to Hungary for that purpose. The Hungarian bishops were unwilling to send Slovak priests at first, but as immigration increased they acceded to the request. At present (1911) the Catholic Slovaks have a clergy consisting of one bishop (Rt. Rev. J.M. Koudelka) and 104 priests, and have `34 churches situated as follows: in Pennsylvania, 81 (Dioceses of Altoona, 10; Erie, 4; Harrisburg, 3; Philadelphia, 15; Pittsburg, 35; and Scranton, 14); in Ohio, 14 (in the Diocese of Cleveland, 12; and Columbus, 2); in Illinois, 10 (in the Arch-diocese of Chicago, 7; and Peoria, 3); in New Jersey 11 (in the Diocese of Newark, 7; and Trenton, 4); in New York, 6; and in the States of Connecticut, 3; Indiana, 2; Wisconsin, 2; and Minnesota, Michigan, Missouri, Alabama, and West Virginia, one each. Some of the Slovak church buildings are very fine specimens of church architecture. There are also 36 Slovak parochial schools, that of Our Lady Mary in Cleveland having 750 pupils. They have also introduced and American order of Slovak nuns, the Sisters of Saints Cyril and Methodius, who are established under the direction of Bishop Hoban in the Diocese of Scranton, where they have four schools. The Protestant Slovaks followed the example of the Catholics and established their first church at Streator, Illinois, in 1885, and later founded a church at Minneapolis in 1888, and from 1890 to 1894 three churches in Pennsylvania. They now have in the United States 60 Slovak churches and congregations (of which 28 are in Pennsylvania), with 34 ministers (not including some 5 Presbyterian clergymen), who are organized under the name of "The Slovak Evangelical Lutheran Synod of America". The Slovaks have a large number of organizations. The principal Catholic ones are: Prva Katokícka Slovenská Jednota (First Slovak Catholic Union), for men, 33,000 members; Pennsylvánska Slovenská Rimsko a Grécko Katolícka Jednota (Pennsylvania Slovak Roman and Greek Catholic Union), 7500 members; Prva Katolícka Slovenská Zenská Jednota (First Catholic Slovak Women's Union), 12,000 members; Pennsylvánska Slovenská Zenská Jednota (Pennsylvania Slovak Women's Union), 3500 members; Zivena (Women's League), 6000 members. There are also: Národny Slovensky Spolok (National Slovak Society), which takes in all Slovaks except Jews, 28,000 members; Evanjelícka Slovenská Jednota (Evangelical Lutheran Slovak Union), 8000 members; Kalvinská Slovenská Jednota (Presbyterian Slovak Union), 1000 members; Neodvisly Národny Slovensky Spolok (Independent National Slovak Society), 2000 members. They also have a large and enterprising Press, publishing some fourteen papers. The chief ones are: "Slovensky Denník" (Slovak Journal), a daily, of Pittsburg; "Slovak v Amerike" (Slovak in America), of New York; "Narodne Noviny" (National News), a weekly, of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, with 38,000 circulation; "Jednota" (The Union), also a weekly, of Middleton, Pennsylvania, with 35,000 circulation; and "Bratstvo" (Brotherhood) of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania. There are also Protestant and Socialistic journals, whose circulation is small. Among the distinguished Slovaks in the United States may be mentioned Rev. Joseph Murgas of Wilkes-Barre, who, in addition to his work among his people, has perfected several inventions in wireless telegraphy and is favourably known in other scientific matters. IX. SLOVENES (Slovenec; adjective slovenski, Slovenian) These come chiefly from southwestern Austria, from the Provinces of Carniola (Kranjsko; Ger., Krain), Carinthia (Kransjsko; Ger., Kärnten), and Styria (Krain; Ger., Steiermark); as well as from Resia (Resja) and Udine (Videm) in northeastern Italy, and the Coast Lands (Primorsko) of Austria-Hungary. Their neighbours on the southwest are Italians; on the west and north, Germans; on the east, Germans and Magyars; and towards the south, Italians and Croatians. Most of them are bilingual, speaking not only the Slovenian but also the German language. For this reason they are not so readily distinguishable in America as the other Slavs, and have less trouble in assimilating themselves. At home the main centres of their language and literature have been Laibach (Ljubljana), Klagenfurt (Celovec), Graz (Gradec), and Görz (Gorica), the latter city being also largely Italian. In America they are more often known as "Krainer", that being the German adjective of Krain (Carniola), from whence the larger number of them come to the United States; sometimes the word has even been mispronounced and set down as "Griner". The Slovenes became known somewhat early in the history of the United States. Father Frederic Baraga was among the first of them to come here in 1830, and began his missionary work as a priest among the Indians of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, and finally became the first Bishop of Marquette, Michigan. He studied the Indian languages and wrote their grammars and history in his various English, German, and Slovenian works. He also published several catechisms and religious works in Slovenian, and brought over several other Slovenian priests. In Calumet, Michigan, the Slovenes settled as early as 1856; they first appeared in Chicago and in Iowa about 1863, and in 1866 they founded their chief farming colony in Brockway, Minnesota. Here they still preserve their own language and all their minute local peculiarities. They came to Omaha in 1868, and in 1873 their present large colony in Joliet, Illinois, was founded. Their earliest settlement in New York was towards the end of 1878, and gradually their numbers have increased until they have churches in Haverstraw and Rockland Lake, where their language is used. They have also established farm settlements in Iowa, South Dakota, Idaho, Washington, and in additional places in Minnesota. Their very active immigration began in 1892, and has been (1990-1910) at the rate of from 6000 to 9000 annually, but has lately fallen off. The official government statistics class them along with the Croatians. There are now (1911) in the United States a little over 120,000 Slovenes; practically all of them are Catholics, and with no great differences or factions among them. There is a leaning towards Socialism in the large mining and manufacturing centres. In Pennsylvania there are about 30,000; in Ohio, 15,000; in Illinois, 12,000; in Michigan, 8000; in Minnesota, 12,000; in Colorado, 10,000; in Washington, 10,000; in Montana, 5000; and in fact there are Slovenes reported in almost every state and territory except Georgia. Their immigration was caused by the poverty of the people at home, especially as Carniola is a rocky and mountainous district without much fertility, and neglected even from the times of the Turkish wars. Latterly the institution of Raffeisen banks, debt-paying and mutual aid associations introduced among the people by the Catholic party (Slovenska Ljudska Stranka), has diminished immigration and enabled them to live more comfortably at home. The Slovenes are noted for their adaptability, and have given many prominent missionary leaders to the Church in the United States. Among them are Bishop Baraga, Mrak, and Vertin (of Marquette), Stariha (of Lead), and Trobec (of St. Cloud); Monsignori Stibil, Buh, and Plut; Abbot Bernard Locnika, O.S.B.; and many others. There are some 92 Slovenian priests in the United States, and twenty-five Slovenian churches. Many of their churches are quite fine, especially st.Joseph's, Joliet, Illinois; St. Joseph's, Calumet, Michigan; and Sts.Cyril and Methodius, Sheboygan, Wisconsin. There are also mixed parishes where the Slovenes are united with other nationalities, usually with Bohemians, Slovaks, or Germans. There are no exclusively Slovenian religious communities. At St. John's, Minnesota, there are six Slovenian Benedictines, and at Rockland Lake, New York, three Slovenian Franciscans, who are undertaking to establish a Slovenian and Croatian community. From them much of the information herein has been obtained. The Franciscan nuns at Joliet, Illinois, have many Slovenian sisters; at Kansas City, Kansas, there are several Slovenian sisters engaged in school work; and there are some Slovenians among the Notre Dame Sisters of Cleveland, Ohio. Archbishop Ireland of St. Paul, Minnesota, sent to Austria for Slovenian seminarians to finish their education here, and also appointed three Slovenian priests are professors in his diocesan seminary, thus providing a Slovenian- American clergy for their parishes in his province. There are several church and benevolent organizations among the Slovenians in America. The principal ones are: Kranjsko Slovenska Katoliska Jednota (Krainer Slovenian Catholic Union), organized in April, 1894, now having 100 councils and a membership of 12,000; Jugoslovenska Katoliska Jednota (South Slovenian Catholic Union), organized in Jan., 1901, having 90 councils and 8000 members; besides these there are also Slovenska Zapadna Zveza (Slovenian Western Union), with 30 councils and about 3000 members, Drustva Sv. Barbara (St. Barbara Society), with 80 councils, chiefly among miners, and the semi-socialistic Delvaska Podporna Zveza (Workingmen's Benevolent Union) with 25 councils and a considerable membership. There are also Sv. Rafaelova Druzba (St. Raphael's Society), to assist Slovenian immigrants founded by Father Kasimir, O.F.M., and the Society of Sts. Cyril and Methodius to assist Slovenian schools, as well as numerous singing and gymnastic organizations. The Slovenians publish ten newspapers in the United States. The oldest is the Catholic weekly "Amerikanski Slovenec" (American Slovene), established in 1891 at Joliet, and it is the organ of the Krainer Slovenian Catholic Union. "Glas Naroda" (Voice of the People), established in 1892 in New York City, is a daily paper somewhat Liberal in its views, but it is the official organ of the South Slavonic Catholic Union and the St. Barbara Society. "Ave Maria" is a religious monthly published by the Franciscans of Rockland Lake, New York. "Glasnik" (The Herald) is a weekly of Calumet, Michigan; as are "Edinost" (Unity), of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania; "Clevelandska Amerika", of Cleveland, Ohio; "Narodni Vestnik" (People's Messenger), of Duluth, Minnesota; and "Slovenski Narod" (Slovenian People), of Pueblo, Colorado. There are also two purely Socialistic weeklies in Chicago: "Proletarec" (Proletarian) and "Glas Svobode" (Voice of Freedom). ANDREW J. SHIPMAN Anton Martin Slomsek Anton Martin Slomšek Slomšek, Anton Martin, Bishop of Lavant, in Maribor, Styria, Austria, noted Slovenian educator, born 1800; died 24 Sept., 1862. The dawn of the nineteenth century found the Slovenian schools in a precarious condition; their number was pitifully small, and the courses they offered were inadequate and unsatisfactory. This deplorable state was due to the fact that the Austrian officials endeavoured to suppress the national language, and, to compass this end, introduced foreign teachers thoroughly distasteful to the people, whom in turn they despised. Moreover, books, magazines, papers, and other educational influences were lacking, not because they would not have been gladly welcomed, but because they were forbidden by the Government in its fear of Panslavism. This situation Bishop Slomšek was compelled to face. A man of initiative and discernment, the changes he wrought in a short time were wonderful. In the Constitution of 1848, granting national rights long denied, he found his instrument. Following this measure, though only after many futile attempts, he received official sanction to undertake the reform of the schools. The first fruits of his labours were a series of excellent text-books, many from his own pen, which proved powerful factors in the growth and development of religious as well as national education. The founding of the weekly, "Drobtinice" (Crumbs), was his next step. Essays and books on a great variety of subjects, embracing practically every question on which his countrymen stood in need of enlightenment, were published in quick succession, and his vigorous and incisive style, well adapted to the intelligence of his readers, though not lacking scholarly refinement, made his works exceedingly popular. His pastorals and sermons constitute a literature of lasting value. In 1841 he sought to realize a dream of years — the establishment of a society for the spread of Catholic literature. Unfortunately, the movement was branded as Panslavistic, and failed at the time; but ten years later this organization was effected, and Druzba sv. Mohora began sending a few instructive books to Catholic homes. To-day, a million educational volumes have been distributed among a million and a half of people. Although Slomšek was ardent and active in the interests of his own race, yet he was admired and loved by great men of other nations, and his kindness and tact eliminated all bitterness from the controversies in which he was forced to engage. Patriotism, the education of his people. their temporal and spiritual welfare, were his inspiring motives, as the non-Catholic Makusev remarks: "Education, based on religion and nationality, was his lofty aim". Humility and childlike simplicity marked his life. His priests, sincerely devoted to him, frequently heard him repeat the words: "When I was born, my mother laid me on a bed of straw, and I desire no better pallet when I die, asking only to be in the state of grace and worthy of salvation". GRAFENANER, Hist. of Slovenian Literature (1862). P. CYRIL ZUPAN. Slotanus, John John Slotanus (SCHLOTTANUS, VAN DER SLOOTIEN), (JOHN GEFFEN) Slotanus, John, polemical writer; born at Geffen, Brabant; died at Cologne, 9 July, 1560. He joined the Dominican order at Cologne about 1525. For many years he ably defended the Faith against the heretics by preaching and writing. Later he taught sacred letters at Cologne, and in 1554 was made a doctor of theology. About this same time he became prior of his convent at Cologne, and as such exercised the offices of censor of the faith and papal inquisitor throughout the Archdiocese of Cologne and the Rhine country. In the discharge of these responsible duties Slotanus came into conflict with the learned Justus Velsius, who in 1556, on account of heretical teachings, was obliged to leave Cologne. The vehement writings which Velsius afterwards published against the Cologne theologians moved Slotanus to write two works in which nearly all the heretical doctrines of his time are discussed with admirable skill. Among his various works those most worthy of mention are: "Disputationum adversus hæreticos liber unus" (Cologne, 1558); "De retinenda fide orthodoxa et catholica adversus hæreses et sectas" (Cologne, 1560); "De barbaris nationibus convertendis ad Christum" (Cologne, 1559). In the last-named work Slotanus witnesses to the ardent missionary zeal which fired the religious men of his time. ECHARD, Script. Ord. Prœd., II, 175; HURTER, Nomenclator; MEUSER, Zur Geschichte der Kölner Theologen im 16. Jahrh. in Kath. Zeitschr. für Wissenschaft und Kunst, II (Cologne, 1845), 79 sq.; PAULUS, Kölner Dominicanerschriftsteller a.d. 16. Jahrh. in Katholik II (1897) 238 sq. CHAS. J. CALLAN. Sloth Sloth One of the seven capital sins. In general it means disinclination to labour or exertion. As a capital or deadly vice St. Thomas (II-II:35) calls it sadness in the face of some spiritual good which one has to achieve (Tristitia de bono spirituali). Father Rickaby aptly translates its Latin equivalent acedia (Gr. akedia) by saying that it means the don't-care feeling. A man apprehends the practice of virtue to be beset with difficulties and chafes under the restraints imposed by the service of God. The narrow way stretches wearily before him and his soul grows sluggish and torpid at the thought of the painful life journey. The idea of right living inspires not joy but disgust, because of its laboriousness. This is the notion commonly obtaining, and in this sense sloth is not a specific vice according to the teaching of St. Thomas, but rather a circumstance of all vices. Ordinarily it will not have the malice of mortal sin unless, of course, we conceive it to be so utter that because of it one is willing to bid defiance to some serious obligation. St. Thomas completes his definition of sloth by saying that it is torpor in the presence of spiritual good which is Divine good. In other words, a man is then formally distressed at the prospect of what he must do for God to bring about or keep intact his friendship with God. In this sense sloth is directly opposed to charity. It is then a mortal sin unless the act be lacking in entire advertence or full consent of the will. The trouble attached to maintenance of the inhabiting of God by charity arouses tedium in such a person. He violates, therefore, expressly the first and the greatest of the commandments: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength." (Mark, xii, 30). JOSEPH F. DELANY Slythurst, Thomas Thomas Slythurst Slythrust, Thomas, English confessor, born in Berkshire; died in the Tower of London, 1560. He was B. A. Oxon, 1530; M. A., 1534; B. D., 1543; and supplicated for the degree of D. D., 1554-5, but never took it. He was rector of Chalfont St. Peter, Bucks, from 1545 to 1555, canon of Windsor 1554, rector of Chalfont St. Giles, Bucks, 1555, and first President of Trinity College, Oxford. He was deprived of these three preferments in 1559. On 11 Nov., 1556, he was appointed with others by Convocation to regulate the exercises in theology on the election of Cardinal Pole to the chancellorship. WARTON, Life of Sir Thomas Pope (London, 1772), 359; Catholic Record Society Publications, I (London, 1905-), 118; FOX, Acts and Monuments, VIII (London, 1843-9), 636. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT. Smalkaldic League Smalkaldic League A politico-religious alliance formally concluded on 27 Feb., 1531, at Smalkalden in Hesse-Nassau, among German Protestant princes and cities for their mutual defence. The compact was entered into for six years, and stipulated that any military attack made upon any one of the confederates on account of religion or under any other pretext was to be considered as directed against them all and resisted in common. The parties to it were: the Landgrave Philip of Hesse; the Elector John of Saxony and his son John Frederick; the dukes Philip of Brunswick-Grubenhagen and Otto, Ernest, and Francis of Brunswick-Lünenburg; Prince Wolfgang of Anhalt; the counts Gebhard and Albrecht of Mansfeld and the towns of Strasburg, Ulm, Constance, Reutlingen, Memmingen, Lindau, Biberach, Isny, Magdeburg, and Bremen. The city of Lübeck joined the league on 3 May, and Bavaria on 24 Oct., 1531. The accession of foreign powers, notably England and France, was solicited, and the alliance of the latter nation secured in 1532. The princes of Saxony and Hesse were appointed military commanders of the confederation, and its military strength fixed at 10,000 infantry and 2000 cavalry. At a meeting held at Smalkalden in Dec., 1535, the alliance was renewed for ten years, and the maintenance of the former military strength decreed, with the stipulation that it should be doubled in case of emergency. In April, 1536, Dukes Ulrich of Würtemberg and Barnim and Philip of Pomerania, the cities of Frankfort, Augsburg, Hamburg, and Hanover joined the league with several other new confederates. An alliance was concluded with Denmark in 1538, while the usual accession of the German Estates which accepted the Reformation continued to strengthen the organization. Confident of its support, the Protestant princes introduced the new religion in numerous districts, suppressed bishoprics, confiscated church property, resisted imperial ordinances to the extent of refusing help against the Turks, and disregarded the decisions of the Imperial Court of Justice. In self-defence against the treasonable machinations of the confederation, a Catholic League was formed in 1538 at Nuremberg under the leadership of the emperor. Both sides now actively prepared for an armed conflict, which seemed imminent. But negotiations carried on at the Diet of Frankfort in 1539 resulted, partly owing to the illness of the Landgrave of Hesse, in the patching up of a temporary peace. The emperor during this respite renewed his earnest but fruitless efforts to effect a religious settlement, while the Smalkaldic confederates continued their violent proceedings against the Catholics, particularly in the territory of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, where Duke Henry was unjustly expelled, and the new religion introduced (1542). It became more and more evident as time went on that a conflict was unavoidable. When, in 1546, the emperor adopted stern measures against some of the confederates, the War of Smalkalden ensued. Although it was mainly a religious conflict between Catholics and Protestants, the denominational lines were not sharply drawn. With Pope Paul III, who promised financial and military assistance, several Protestant princes, the principal among whom was Duke Marice of Saxony, defended the imperial and Catholic cause. The beginning of hostilities was marked nevertheless by the success of the Smalkaldic allies; but division and irresoluteness soon weakened them and caused their ruin in Southern Germany, where princes and cities submitted in rapid succession. The battle of Mühlberg (24 April, 1547) decided the issue in favour of the emperor in the north. The Elector John Frederick of Saxony was captured, and shortly after the Landgrave Philip of Hesse was also forced to submit. The conditions of peace included the transfer of the electoral dignity from the former to his cousin Maurice, the reinstatement of Duke Henry of Wolfenbüttel in his dominions, the restoration of Bishop Julius von Pflug to his See of Naumburg-Zeitz, and a promise demanded of the vanquished to recognize and attend the Council of Trent. The dissolution of the Smalkaldic League followed; the imperial success was complete, but temporary. A few years later another conflict broke out and ended with the triumph of Protestantism. Winckelmann, Der Schmalkald. Bund (1530-32) u. der Nürnberger Religionsfriede (Strasburg, 1892); Hasenclever, Die Politik der Schmalkaldener vor Ausbruch des Schmalkald. Krieges (Marburg, 1903); Berentelg, Der Schmalkald. Krieg in Norddeutschland (Münster, 1908); Janssen, Hist. of the German People, tr. Christie, V (St. Louis, 1903), passim; Pastor, History of the Popes, tr. Kerr, X (St. Louis, 1910), 166 sqq. N.A. Weber Ardo Smaragdus Ardo Smaragdus Hagiographer, died at the Benedictine monastery of Aniane, Herault, in Southern France, March, 843. He entered this monastery when still a boy and was bought up under the direction of Abbot St. Benedict of Aniane. On account of his piety and talents he was ordained and put at the head of the school at his monastery. In 794 he accompanied his abbot to the Council of Frankfort and in 814 was made abbot in place of Benedict, who on the invitation of Louis-le-Debonnaire had taken up his abode at the imperial Court at Aix-la-Chapelle. Smaragdus was honoured as a saint in his monastery. He is the author of a life of St. Benedict of Aniane which he wrote at the request of the monks of Cornelimünster near Aix-la-Chapelle, where Abbot Benedict had died. It was written in 822, and is one of the most reliable hagiological productions of that period. Mabillon edited it in his "Acta SS. of the Benedictine Order" (saeculum IV, I, 192-217), whence it was reprinted in P. L., CIII, 353-84. MICHAEL OTT James Smith James Smith Journalist, b. at Skolland, in the Shetland Isles, about 1790; d. Jan., 1866. He spent his boyhood at Skolland, a small place belonging to his mother, who was a member of a branch of the Bruce family which had settled in Shetland in the sixteenth century. He studied law in Edinburgh, became a solicitor to the Supreme Court there, and married a Catholic lady (a cousin of Bishop Macdonell of the Glengarry clan), the result being his own conversion to Catholicism. Naturally hampered in his career, at that period, by his profession of Catholicism, he turned his attention to literature, and became the pioneer of Catholic journalism in Scotland. In 1832 he originated and edited the "Edinburgh Catholic Magazine", which appeared somewhat intermittently in Scotland until April, 1838, at which date Mr. Smith went to reside in London, and the word "Edinburgh" was dropped from the title of the magazine, the publication of which was continued for some years in London. Mr. Smith, on settling in London, inaugurated the "Catholic Directory" for England, in succession to the old "Laity's Directory", and edited it for many years; and he was also for a short time editor of the "Dublin Review", in 1837. Possessed of considerable gifts both as a speaker and as a writer, he was always ready to put them at the service of the Catholic cause; and during the years of agitation immediately preceding Catholic Emancipation, as well as at a later period, he was one of the most active champions of the Church in England and Scotland. He made a brilliant defence in public of Catholic doctrine when it was violently attacked by certain prominent members of the Established Church of Scotland, and published in this connexion, in 1831, his "Dialogues on the Catholic and Protestant Rules of Faith", between a member of the Protestant Reformation Society and a Catholic layman. He also edited (1838) Challoner's abridgment of Gother's "Papist Misrepresented and Represented", with copious notes. Mr. Smith was father of the Most Rev. William Smith, second Archbishop of St. Andrews and Edinburgh in the restored hierarchy of Scotland, and a distinguished Biblical scholar. GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath., S.V.; Catholic Directory for Scotland (1893), 264. D.O. HUNTER-BLAIR Richard Smith Richard Smith Bishop of Chalcedon, second Vicar Apostolic of England; b. at Hanworth, Lincolnshire, Nov., 1568 (not 1566 as commonly stated); d. at Paris, 18 March, 1655. He was educated at Trinity College, Oxford, where he became a Catholic. He was admitted to the English College, Rome, in 1586, studied under Bellarmine, and was ordained priest 7 May 1592. In Feb., 1593, he arrived at Valladolid, where he took the degree of Doctor of Theology, and taught philosophy at the English College till 1598, when he went to Seville as a professor of controversies. In 1603 he went on the English mission, where he made his mark as a missioner. Chosen to represent the case of the secular clergy in the archpriest controversy, he went to Rome, where he opposed Persons, who said of him: "I never dealt with any man in my life more heady and resolute in his opinions". In 1613 he became superior of the small body of English secular priests at Arras College, Paris, who devoted themselves to controversial work. In 1625 he was elected to succeed Dr. Bishop as vicar Apostolic, but the date usually assigned for his consecration as Bishop of Chalcedon (12 Jan., 1625) must be wrong, as he was not elected till 2 Jan. He arrived in England in April, of the same year, residing in Lord Montagu's house at Turvey, Bedfordshire. As vicar Apostolic he came into conflict with the regulars, claiming the rights of an ordinary, but Urban VIII decided (16 Dec., 1627) that he was not an ordinary. In 1628 the Government issued a proclamation for his arrest, and in 1631 he withdrew to Paris, where he lived with Richelieu till the cardinal's death in 1642; then he retired to the convent of the English Augustinian nuns, where he died. He wrote: "An answer to T. Bel's late Challenge" (1605); "The Prudentiall Ballance of Religion", (1609); "Vita Dominae Magdalenae Montis-Acuti" i.e., Viscountess Montagu (1609); "De auctore et essentia Protestanticae Religionis" (1619), English translation, 1621; "Collatio doctrinae Catholicorum et Protestantium" (1622), tr. (1631); "Of the distinction of fundamental and not fundamental points of faith" (1645); "Monita quaedam utilia pro Sacerdotibus, Seminaristis, Missionariis Angliae" (1647); "A Treatise of the best kinde of Confessors" (1651); "Of the all-sufficient Eternal Proposer of Matters of Faith" (1653); "Florum Historiae Ecclesiasticae gentis Anglorum libri septem" (1654). Many unpublished documents relating to his troubled episcopate (an impartial history of which yet remains to be written) are preserved in the Westminster Diocesan Archives. DODD, Church History, III (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-1742) the account from which most subsequent biographies were derived. See also Tierney's edition of Dodd for further documents; BERINGTON, Memoirs of Panzani (London, 1793); Calendar State Papers: Dom., 1625-1631; BUTLER, Historical Memoirs of English Catholics (London, 1819); SERGEANT, Account of the English Chapter (London, 1853); FULLERTON, Life of Luisa de Carvajal (London, 1873); FOLEY, Records Eng. Prov. S. J., VI (London, 1880); BRADY, Episcopal Succession, III (Rome, 1877), a confused and self-contradictory account with some new facts; ALGER in Dict. Nat. Biog.; GILLOW, Bibl. Dict. Eng. Cath.; CEDOZ, Couvent de Religieuses Anglaises a Paris (Paris, 1891); Third Douay Diary, C.R.S. Publications, X (London, 1911). EDWIN BURTON Richard Smith Richard Smith Born in Worcestershire, 1500; died at Douai, 9 July, 1563. He was educated at Merton College, Oxford; and, having taken his M.A. degree in 1530, he became registrar of the university in 1532. In 1536 Henry VIII appointed him first Regius Professor of divinity, and he took his doctorate in that subject on 10 July in the same year. He subsequently became master of Whittington College, London; rector of St. Dunstan's- in-the-East; rector of Cuxham, Oxfordshire; principal of St. Alban's Hall; and divinity reader at Magdalen College. Under Edward VI he is said by his opponents to have abjured the pope's authority at St. Paul's Cross (15 May, 1547) and at Oxford, but the accounts of the proceedings are obscure and unreliable. If he yielded at all, he soon recovered and accordingly suffered the loss of his professorship, being succeeded by Peter Martyr, with whom he held a public disputation in 1549. Shortly afterwards he was arrested, but was soon liberated. Going to Louvain, he became professor of divinity there. During Mary's Catholic restoration he regained most of his preferments, and was made royal chaplain and canon of Christ Church. He took a prominent part in the proceedings against Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer. He again lost all his benefices at the change of religion under Elizabeth, and after a short imprisonment in Parker's house he escaped to Douai, where he was appointed by Philip II dean of St. Peter's church. There is no foundation for the slanderous story spread by the Reformers to account for his deprivation of his Oxford professorship. When Douai University was founded on 5 Oct., 1562, he was installed as chancellor and professor of theology, but only lived a few months to fill these offices. He wrote many works, the chief of which are: "Assertion and Defence of the Sacrament of the Altar" (1546); "Defence of the Sacrifice of the Mass" (1547); "Defensio cœlibatus sacerdotum" (1550); "Diatriba de hominis justificatione" (1550); "Buckler of the Catholic Faith" (1555-56); "De Missæ Sacrificio" (1562); and several refutations of Calvin, Melanchthon, Jewell, and Beza, all published in 1562. Foster, Alumni Oxonienses, IV (Oxford, 1891); Pits, De illustribus Angliæ Scriptoribus (Paris, 1619); Dodd, Church History, II (Brussels vere Wolverhampton, 1737-42); Gardiner, Letters and Papers of Henry VIII; Cooper, Dict. Nat. Biog., s. v. Edwin Burton Thomas Kilby Smith Thomas Kilby Smith Born at Boston, Mass., 23 Sept., 1820; died at New York, 14 Dec., 1887; eldest son of Captain George Smith and Eliza Bicker Walter. Both his paternal and maternal forefathers were active and prominent in the professional life and in the government of New England. His parents moved to Cincinnati in his early childhood, where he was educated in a military school under O. M. Mitchel, the astronomer, and studied law in the office of Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase. In 1853 he was appointed special agent in the Post Office Department at Washington, and later marshal for the Southern District of Ohio and deputy clerk of Hamilton County. He entered the Union Army, 9 September, 1861, as lieutenant-colonel, and was conspicuous in the Battle of Shiloh, 6 and 7 April, 1862, assuming command of Stuart's Brigade, Sherman's Division, during the second day. As commander of brigade in the 15th and 17th Army Corps, he participated in all the campaigns of the Army of the Tennessee, being also for some months on staff duty with General Grant. Commissioned Brigadier-General of Volunteers, 11 August, 1863, he was assigned on 7 March, 1864, to the command of the detached division of the 17th Army Corps and rendered distinguished service during the Red River Expedition, protecting Admiral Porter's fleet after the disaster of the main army. After the fall of Mobile, he assumed the command of the Department of Southern Alabama and Florida, and then of the Post and District of Maine. He was brevetted Major-General for gallant and meritorious service. In 1866 President Johnson appointed him United States Consul at Panama. After the war he removed to Torresdale, Philadelphia. At the time of his death he was engaged in journalism in New York. On 2 May, 1848, he married Elizabeth Budd, daughter of Dr. William Budd McCullough and Arabella Sanders Piatt, of Cincinnati, Ohio. She was a gifted and devout woman, and through her influence and that of the venerable archbishop Purcell he became a Catholic some years before his death. He was remarkable for his facility of expression, distinguished personal appearance, and courtly bearing. He left five sons and three daughters. SMITH, Life and Letters of Thomas Kilby Smith (New York, 1898). WALTER GEORGE SMITH Smyrna Smyrna LATIN ARCHDIOCESE OF SMYRNA (SMYRNENSIS), in Asia Minor. The city of Smyrna rises like an amphitheatre on the gulf which bears its name. It is the capital of the vilayet of Aïdin and the starting-point of several railways; it has a population of at least 300,000, of whom 150,000 are Greeks. There are also numerous Jews and Armenians and almost 10,000 European Catholics. It was founded more than 1000 years B.C. by colonists from Lesbos who had expelled the Leleges, at a place now called Bournabat, about an hour's distance from the present Smyrna. Shortly before 688 B.C. it was captured by the Ionians, under whose rule it became a very rich and powerful city (Herodotus, I, 150). About 580 B.C. it was destroyed by Alyattes, King of Lydia. Nearly 300 years afterwards Antigonus (323-301 B.C.), and then Lysimachus, undertook to rebuild it on its present site. Subsequently comprised in the Kingdom of Pergamus, it was ceded in 133 B.C. to the Romans. These built there a judiciary conventus and a mint. Smyrna had a celebrated school of rhetoric, was one of the cities which had the title of metropolis, and in which the concilium festivum of Asia was celebrated. Demolished by an earthquake in A.D. 178 and 180, it was rebuilt by Marcus Aurelius. In 673 it was captured by a fleet of Arab Mussulmans. Under the inspiration of Clement VI the Latins captured it from the Mussulmans in 1344 and held it until 1402, when Tamerlane destroyed it after slaying the inhabitants. In 1424 the Turks captured it and, save for a brief occupation by the Venetians in 1472, it has since belonged to them. Christianity was preached to the inhabitants at an early date. As early as the year 93, there existed a Christian community directed by a bishop for whom St. John in the Apocalypse (i, II; ii, 8-11) has only words of praise. There are extant two letters written early in the second century from Troas by St. Ignatius of Antioch to those of Smyrna and to Polycarp, their bishop. Through these letters and those of the Christians of Smyrna to the city of Philomelium, we know of two ladies of high rank who belonged to the Church of Smyrna. There were other Christians in the vicinity of the city and dependent on it to whom St. Polycarp wrote letters (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", V, xxiv). When Polycarp was martyred (23 February), the Church of Smyrna sent an encyclical concerning his death to the Church of Philomelium and others. The "Vita Polycarpi" attributed to St. Pionius, a priest of Smyrna martyred in 250, contains a list of the first bishops: Strataes; Bucolus; Polycarp; Papirius; Camerius; Eudaemon (250), who apostatized during the persecution of Decius; Thraseas of Eumenia, martyr, who was buried at Smyrna. Noctos, a Modalist heretic of the second century, was a native of the city as were also Sts. Pothinus and Irenaeus of Lyons. Mention should also be made of another martyr, St. Dioscorides, venerated on 21 May. Among the Greek bishops, a list of whom appears in Le Quien, (Oriens Christ., I, 737-46), was Metrophanes, the great opponent of Photius, who laboured in the revision of the "Octoekos", a Greek liturgical book. The Latin See of Smyrna was created by Clement VI in 1346 and had an uninterrupted succession of titulars until the seventeenth century. This was the beginning of the Vicariate Apostolic of Asia Minor, or of Smyrna, of vast extent. In 1818 Pius VII established the Archdiocese of Smyrna, at the same time retaining the vicariate Apostolic, the jurisdiction of which was wider. Its limits were those of the vicariates Apostolic of Mesopotamia, Syria, and Constantinople. The archdiocese had 17,000 Latin Catholics, some Greek Melchites, called Alepi, and Armenians under special organization. There are: 19 secular priests; 55 regulars; 8 parishes, of which 4 are in Smyrna; 14 churches with resident priests and 12 without priests; 25 primary schools with 2500 pupils, 8 colleges or academies with 800 pupils; 2 hospitals; and 4 orphanages. The religious men in the archdiocese or the vicariate Apostolic are Franciscans, Capuchins, Lazarists, Dominicans, Salesians of Don Bosco, Assumptionists (at Koniah), Brothers of the Christian Schools, and Marist Brothers (at Metellin). Religious communities of women are the Carmelites, Sisters of Charity (13 houses with more than 100 sisters), Sisters of Sion, Dominicans of Ivrée, Sisters of St. Joseph, and Oblates of the Assumption. S. VAILHÉ Snorri Sturluson Snorri Sturluson Historian, born at Hvammr, 1178; died 1241. Snorri, who was the son of Sturla Thortsson (d. 1182), was the most important Icelandic historian of the Middle Ages. In him were united the experienced statesman and the many-sided scholar. As a child he went to the school of Saemund the Wise at Oddi, of which, at that time, Saemund's grandson Ján Loptsson was the head. On his father's side Ján was related to the most distinguished families of Iceland, while by his mother Thora he was connected with the royal family of Norway. Under this skillful teacher Snorri was thoroughly trained in many branches of knowledge, but he learned especially the old northern belief in the gods, the saga concerning Odin, and Scandinavian history. By a rich alliance Snorri obtained the money to take a leading part in politics, but his political course brought him many dangerous enemies, among whom King Haakon of Norway was the most powerful, and he was finally murdered at the king's instigation. Snorri's importance rests on his literary works of which "Heimskringla" (the world) is the most important, since it is the chief authority for the early history of Iceland and Scandinavia. However, it does not contain reliable statements until the history, which extends to 1177, reaches a late period, while the descriptions of the primitive era are largely vague narrations of sagas. The Sturlunga-Saga, which shows more of the local colouring of Iceland, was probably only partly the work of Snorri. On the other hand he is probably the author of the Younger Edda called "Snorra-Edda", which was intended as a textbook of the art of poetry. Its first part, "Gylfaginning" relates the mythology of the North in an interesting, pictorial manner, and is a compilation of the songs of the early scalds, the songs of the common people, sagas, and probably his own poetic ideas. PIUS WITTMAN Ven. Peter Snow Ven. Peter Snow English martyr, suffered at York, 15 June, 1598. He was born at or near Ripon and arrived at the English College, Reims, 17 April, 1589, receiving the first tonsure and minor orders 18 August, 1590, the subdiaconate at Laon on 22 September, and the diaconate and priesthood at Soissons on 30 and 31 March, 1591. He left for England on the following 15 May. He was arrested about 1 May, 1598, when on his way to York with Venerable Ralph Grimston of Nidd. Both were shortly after condemned, Snow of treason as being a priest and Grimston of felony, for having aided and assisted him, and, it is said, having attempted to prevent his apprehension. JOHN B. WAINEWRIGHT Sobaipura Indians Sobaipura Indians Once an important tribe of the Piman branch of the great Shoshonean linguistic stock, occupying the territory of the Santa Cruz and San Pedro Rivers, in southeastern Arizona and adjacent portion of Sonora, Mexico. In dialect and general custom they seem to have closely resembled the Pápago, by whom and by the closely cognate Pima most of them were finally absorbed. Their principle centre was Bac or Vaaki, later San Xavier Del Bac, on Santa Cruz River, nine miles south from the present Tucson, Arizona. Here they were visited in 1692 by the pioneer Jesuit explorer of the southwest, Father Eusebio Kino, who in 1699 began the church from which the mission took its name. Other Jesuit mission foundations in the same tribe were (Santa Maria de) Suamca, just inside the Sonora line, established also by Kino about the same time, and San Miguel de Guevavi, founded in 1732 near the present Nogales, Arizona, all three missions being upon the Santa Cruz River. There were also several visiting stations. The missions shared the misfortunes attending those of the Pima and Pápago, but continued to exist until a few years after the expulsion of the Jesuits in 1767. Before the end of the century the tribe itself had disappeared, and in later years San Xavier appears as a Pápago settlement. According to tradition the tribe was destroyed about the year 1790 by the attacks of the wild Apache, by whom a part were carried off, while others were forced to incorporate with the Pápago and Pima (q.v.). JAMES MOONEY John Sobieski John Sobieski Born at Olesko in 1629; died at Wilanow, 1696; son of James, Castellan of Cracow and descended by his mother from the heroic Zolkiewski, who died in battle at Cecora. His elder brother Mark was his companion in arms from the time of the great Cossack rebellion (1648), and fought at Zbaraz, Beresteczko, and lastly at Batoh where, after being taken prisoner, he was murdered by the Tatars. John, the last of all the family, accompanied Czarniecki in the expedition to Denmark; then, under George Lubomirski, he fought the Muscovites at Cudnow. Lubomirski revolting, he remained faithful to the king (John Casimir), became successively Field Hetman, Grand Marshal, and -- after Revera Potocki's death -- Grand Hetman or Commander-in-chief. His first exploit as Hetman was in Podhajce, where, besieged by an army of Cossacks and Tatars, he at his own expense raised 8000 men and stored the place with wheat, baffling the foe so completely that they retired with great loss. When, in 1672, under Michael Wisniowiecki's reign, the Turks seized Kamieniec, Sobieski beat them again and again, till at the crowning victory of Chocim they lost 20,000 men and a great many guns. This gave Poland breathing space, and Sobieski became a national hero, so that, King Michael dying at that time, he was unanimously elected king in 1674. Before his coronation he was forced to drive back the Turkish hordes, that had once more invaded the country; he beat them at Lemberg in 1675, arriving in time to raise siege of Trembowla, and to save Chrzanowski and his heroic wife, its defenders. Scarcely crowned, he hastened to fight in the Ruthenian provinces. Having too few soldiers (20,000) to attack the Turks, who were ten to one, he wore them out, entrenching himself at Zurawno, letting the enemy hem him in for a fortnight, extricating himself with marvellous skill and courage, and finally regaining by treaty a good part of the Ukraine. For some time there was peace: the Turks had learned to dread the "Unvanquished Northern Lion", and Poland, too was exhausted. But soon the Sultan turned his arms against Austria. Passing through Hungary, a great part which had for one hundred and fifty years been in Turkish hands, and enormous army, reckoned at from 210,000 to 300,000 men (the latter figures are Sobieski's) marched forward. The Emperor Leopold fled from Vienna, and begged Sobieski's aid, which the papal nuncio also implored. Though dissuaded by Louis XIV, whose policy was always hostile to Austria, Sobieski hesitated not a instant. Meanwhile (July, 1683) the Grand Vizier Kara Mustapha, had arrived before Vienna, and laid siege to the city, defended by the valiant Imperial General Count Stahremberg, with a garrison of only 15,000 men, exposed to the horrors of disease and fire, as well as to hostile attacks. Sobieski started to the rescue in August, taking his son James with him; passing by Our Lady's sanctuary at Czefistochowa, the troops prayed for a blessing on their arms; and in the beginning of September, having crossed the Danube and joined forces with the German armies under John George, Elector of Saxony, and Prince Charles of Lorraine, they approached Vienna. On 11 Sept., Sobieski was on the heights of Kahlenberg, near the city, and the next day he gave battle in the plain below, with an army of not more than 76,000 men, the German forming the left wing and the Pole under Hetmans Jahonowski and Sieniawski, with General Katski in command of the artillery, forming the right. The hussars charged with their usual impetuosity, but the dense masses of the foe were impenetrable. Their retreat was taken for flight by the Turks, who rushed forward in pursuit; the hussars turned upon them with reinforcements and charged again, when their shouts made known that the "Northern Lion" was on the field and the Turks fled, panic-stricken, with Sobieski's horsemen still in pursuit. Still the battle raged for a time along all the line; both sides fought bravely, and the king was everywhere commanding, fighting, encouraging his men and urging them forward. He was the first to storm the camp: Kara Mustapha had escaped with his life, but he received the bow-string in Belgrade some months later. The Turks were routed, Vienna and Christendom saved, and the news sent to the pope and along with the Standard of the Prophet, taken by Sobieski, who himself had heard Mass in the morning. Prostrate with outstretched arms, he declared that it was God's cause he was fighting for, and ascribed the victory (Veni, vidi, Deus vicit -- his letter to Innocent XI) to Him alone. Next day he entered Vienna, acclaimed by the people as their saviour. Leopold, displeased that the Polish king should have all the glory, condescended to visit and thank him, but treated his son James and the Polish hetmans with extreme and haughty coldness. Sobieski, though deeply offended, pursued the Turks into Hungary, attacked and took Ostrzyhom after the a second battle, and returned to winter in Poland, with immense spoils taken in the Turkish camp. These and the glory shed upon the nation were all the immediate advantages of the great victory. The Ottoman danger had vanished forever. The war still went on: step by step the foe was driven back, and sixteen years later Kamieniec and the whole of Podolia were restored to Poland. But Sobieski did not live to see this triumph. In vain had he again and again attempted to retake Kamieniec, and even had built a stronghold to destroy its strategic value; this fortress enabled the Tatars to raid the Ruthenian provinces upon several occasions, even to the gates of Lemberg. He was also forced by treaty to give up Kieff to Russia in 1686; nor did he succeed in securing the crown for his son James. His last days were spent in the bosom of his family, at his castle of Wilanow, where he died in 1696, broken down by political strife as much as by illness. His wife, a Frenchwoman, the widow of John Zamoyski, Marie-Casimire, though not worthy of so great a hero, was tenderly beloved by him, as his letters show: she influenced him greatly and not always wisely. His family is now extinct. Charles Edward, the Young Pretender, was his great-grandson -- his son James' daughter, Clementine, having married James Stuart in 1719. S. TARNOWSKI Socialism Socialism A system of social and economic organization that would substitute state monopoly for private ownership of the sources of production and means of distribution, and would concentrate under the control of the secular governing authority the chief activities of human life. The term is often used vaguely to indicate any increase of collective control over individual action, or even any revolt of the dispossessed against the rule of the possessing classes. But these are undue extensions of the term, leading to much confusion of thought. State control and even state ownership are not necessarily Socialism: they become so only when they result in or tend towards the prohibition of private ownership not only of "natural monopolies", but also of all the sources of wealth. Nor is mere revolt against economic inequality Socialism: it may be Anarchism (see ANARCHY); it may be mere Utopianism (see COMMUNISM); it may be a just resistance to oppression. Nor is it merely a proposal to make such economic changes in the social structure as would banish poverty. Socialism is this (see COLLECTIVISM) and much more. It is also a philosophy of social life and action, regarding all human activities from a definite economic standpoint. Moreover modern Socialism is not a mere arbitrary exercise at state-building, but a deliberate attempt to relieve, on explicit principles, the existing social conditions, which are regarded as intolerable. The great inequalities of human life and opportunity, produced by the excessive concentration of wealth in the hands of a comparatively small section of the community, have been the cause and still are the stimulus of what is called the Socialistic movement. But, in order to understand fully what Socialism is and what it implies, it is necessary first to glance at the history of the movement, then to examine its philosophical and religious tendencies, and finally to consider how far these may be, and actually have proved to be, incompatible with Christian thought and life. The first requirement is to understand the origin and growth of the movement. It has been customary among writers of the Socialist movement to begin with references to Utopian theories of the classical and Renaissance periods, to Plato's "Republic", Plutarch's "Life of Lycurgus", More's "Utopia", Campanella's "City of the Sun", Hall's "Mundus alter et idem", and the like. Thence the line of thought is traced through the French writers of the eighteenth century, Meslier, Monterquieu, d'Argenson, Morelly, Rousseau, Mably, till, with Linguet and Necker, the eve of the Revolution is reached. In a sense, the modern movement has its roots in the ideas of these creators of ideal commonwealths. Yet there is a gulf fixed between the modern Socialists and the older Utopists. Their schemes were mainly directed towards the establishment of Communism, or rather, Communism was the idea that gave life to their fancied states (see COMMUNISM). But the Collectivist idea, which is the economic basis of modern Socialism (See COLLECTIVISM), really emerges only with "Gracchus" Babeuf and his paper, "The tribune of the People", in 1794. In the manifesto issued by him and his fellow-conspirators, "Les Egaux", is to be found a clear vision of the collective organization of society, such as would be largely accepted by most modern Socialists. Babeuf was guillotined by the Directory, and his party suppressed. Meanwhile, in 1793, Godwin in England had published his "Enquiry Concerning Political Justice", a work which, though inculcating Anarchist-Communism (see ANARCHY) rather than Collectivism, had much influence on Robert Owen and the school of Determinist Socialists who succeeded him. But a small group of English writers in the early years of the nineteenth century had really more to do with the development of Socialist thought than had either Owen's attempts to found ideal communities, at New Lanark and elsewhere, or the contemporary theories and practice of Saint-Simon and Fourier in France. These English writers, the earliest of whom, Dr. Charles Hall, first put forward that idea of a dominant industrial and social "system", which is the pervading conception of modern Socialism, worked out the various basic principles of Socialism, which Marx afterwards appropriated and combined. Robert Thompson, Ogilvie, Hodgkin, Gray, above all William Carpenter, elaborated the theories of "surplus value", of "production for profit", of "class-war", of the ever-increasing exploitation of the poor by the rich, which are the stuff of Marx's "Das Kapital", that "old clothes-shop of ideas culled from Berlin, Paris, and London". For indeed, this famous work is really nothing more than a dexterous combination of Hegelian Evolutionism, of French Revolutionism, and of the economic theories elaborated by Ricardo, on the one hand, and this group of English theorists on the other. Yet the services of Karl Marx and of his friend and brother-Hebrew, Friedrich Engels, to the cause of Socialism must not be underrated. These two writers came upon the scene just when the Socialist movement was at its lowest ebb. In England the work of Robert Owen had been overlaid by the Chartist movement and its apparent failure, while the writings of the economists mentioned above had had but little immediate influence. In France the Saint-Simonians and the Fourierists had disgusted everyone by the moral collapse of their systems. In Germany Lassalle had so far devoted his brilliant energies merely to Republicanism and philosophy. But in 1848 Marx and Engels published the "Communist Manifesto", and, mere rhetoric as it was, this document was the beginning of modern "scientific Socialism". The influence of Proudhon and of the Revolutionary spirit of the times pervades the whole manifesto: the economic analysis of society was to be grafted on later. But already there appear the ideas of "the materialistic conception of history", of "the bourgeoisie" and "the proletariat", and of "class-war". After 1848, in his exile in London, Marx studied, and wrote, and organized with two results: first, the foundation of "The International Workingmen's Association", in 1864; second, the publication of the first volume of "Das Kapital", in 1867. It is not easy to judge which has had the more lasting effect upon the Socialist movement. "The International" gave to the movement its world-wide character; "Das Kapital" elaborated and systematized the philosophic and economic doctrine which is still the creed of the immense majority of Socialists. "Proletarians of all lands, unite!" the sentence with which the Communist Manifesto of 1848 concludes, became a reality with the foundation of the International. For the first time since the disruption of Christendom an organization took shape which had for its object the union of the major portion of all nations upon a common basis. It was not so widely supported as both its upholders believed and the frightened moneyed interests imagined. Nor had this first organization any promise of stability. From the outset the influence of Marx steadily grew, but it was confronted by the opposition of Bakunin and the Anarchist school. By 1876 the International was even formally at an end. But it had done its work: the organized working classes of all Europe had realized the international nature both of their own grievances and of capitalism, and when, in 1889, the first International Congress of Socialist and Trade-Union delegates met at Paris, a "New International" came into being which exists with unimpaired or, rather, with enhanced energy to the present day. Since that first meeting seven others have been held at intervals of three or four years, at which there has been a steady growth in the number of delegates present, the variety of nationalities represented, and the extent of the Socialistic influence over its deliberations. In 1900, an International Socialist Bureau was established at Brussels, with the purpose of Solidifying and strengthening the international character of the movement. Since 1904, an Inter-Parliamentary Socialist Committee has given further support to the work of the bureau. To-day the international nature of the Socialistic movement is an axiom both within and without its ranks; an axiom that must not be forgotten in the estimation both of the strength and of the trend of the movement. To the International, then, modern Socialism owes much of its present power. To "Das Kapital" it owes such intellectual coherence as it still possesses. The success of this book was immediate and considerable. It has been translated into many languages, epitomized by many hands, criticized, discussed, and eulogized. Thousands who would style themselves Marxians and would refer to "Das Kapital" as "The Bible of Socialism", and the irrefragable basis of their creed, have very probably never seen the original work, nor have even read it in translation. Marx himself published only the first volume; the second was published under Engels' editorship in 1885, two years after the death of Marx; a third was elaborated by Engels from Marx's notes in 1895; a fourth was projected but never accomplished. But the influence of this torso has been immense. With consummate skill Marx gathered together and worked up the ideas and evidence that had originated with others, or were the floating notions of the movement; with the result that the new international organization had ready to hand a body of doctrine to promulgate, the various national Socialist parties a common theory and programme for which to work. And promulgated it was, with a devotion and at times a childlike faith that had no slight resemblance to religious propaganda. It has been severely and destructively criticized by economists of many schools, many of its leading doctrines have been explicitly abandoned by the Socialist leaders in different countries, some are now hardly defended even by those leaders who label themselves "Marxian". Yet the influence of the book persists. The main doctrines of Marxism are still the stuff of popular Socialist belief in all countries, are still put forward in scarcely modified form in the copious literature produced for popular consumption, are still enunciated or implied in popular addresses even by some of the very leaders who have abandoned them in serious controversy. In spite of the growth of Revisionism in Germany, of Syndicalism in France, and of Fabian Expertism in England, it is still accurate to maintain that the vast majority of Socialists, the rank and file of the movement in all countries, are adherents of the Marxian doctrine, with all its materialistic philosophy, its evolutionary immorality, its disruptive political and social analysis, its class-conscious economics. In Socialism, to-day, as in most departments of human thought, the leading writers display a marked shyness of fundamental analysis: "The domain of Socialist thought", says Lagardelle, has become "an intellectual desert." Its protagonists are largely occupied, either in elaborating schemes of social reform, which not infrequently present no exclusively socialist characteristics, or else in apologizing for and disavowing inconvenient applications by earlier leaders, of socialist philosophy to the domain of religion and ethics. Nevertheless, in so far as the International movement remains definitely Socialist at all, the formulae of its propaganda and the creed of its popular adherents are predominantly the reflection of those put forward in "Das Kapital" in 1867. Moreover, during all this period of growth of the modern Socialist movement, two other parallel movements in all countries have at once supplemented and counterpoised it. These are trade-unionism and co-operation. There is no inherent reason why either of these movements should lead towards Socialism: properly conducted and developed, both should render unnecessary anything that can correctly be styled "Socialism". But, as a matter of fact, both these excellent movements, owing to unwise opposition by the dominant capitalism, on the one hand, and indifference in the Churches on the other, are menaced by Socialism, and may eventually be captured by the more intelligent and energetic Socialists and turned to serve the ends of Socialism. The training in mutual aid and interdependence, as well as in self-government and business habits, which the leaders of the wage-earners have received in both trade-unionism and the co-operative movements, while it might be of incalculable benefit in the formation of the needed Christian democracy, has so far been effective largely in demonstrating the power that is given by organization and numbers. And the leaders of Socialism have not been slow to emphasize the lesson and to extend the argument, with sufficient plausibility, towards state monopoly and the absolutism of the majority. The logic of their argument has, it is true, been challenged, in recent years, in Europe by the rise of the great Catholic trade-union and co-operative organizations. But in English-speaking nations this is yet to come, and both co-operation and trade-unionism are allowed to drift into the grip of the Socialist movement, with the result that what might become a most effective alternative for Collectivism remains to-day its nursery and its support. Parallel with the International movement has run the local propaganda in various countries, in each of which the movement has taken its colour from the national characteristics; a process which has continued, until to-day it is sometimes difficult to realize that the different bodies who are represented in the International Congresses form part of the same agitation. In Germany, the fatherland of dogmatic Socialism, the movement first took shape in 1862. In that year Ferdinand Lassalle, the brilliant and wealthy young Jewish lawyer, delivered a lecture to an artisans' association at Berlin. Lassalle was fined by the authorities for his temerity, but "The Working Men's Programme", as the lecture was styled, resulted in The Universal German Working Men's Association, which was founded at Leipzig under his influence the following year. Lassalle commenced a stormy progress throughout Germany, lecturing, organizing, writing. The movement did not grow at first with the rapidity he had expected, and he himself was killed in a duel in 1864. But his tragic death aroused interest, and The Working Men's Association grew steadily till, in 1869, reinforced by the adhesion of the various organizations which had grown out of Marx's propaganda, it became, at Eisenach, the Socialist Democratic Working Men's Party. Liebknecht, Bebel, and Singer, all Marxians, were its chief leaders. The two former were imprisoned for treason in 1870; but in 1874 ten members of the party, including the two leaders, were returned to the Reichstag by 450,000 votes. The Government attempted repression, with the usual result of consolidating and strengthening the movement. In 1875 was held the celebrated congress at Gotha, at which was drawn up the programme that formed the basis of the party. Three years later an attempt upon the emperor's life was made the excuse for renewed repression. But it was in vain. In spite of alternate persecution and essays in state Socialism, on the part of Bismarck, the power in 1890 and since then the party has grown rapidly, and is now the strongest political body in Germany. In 18909 Edward Bernstein, who had come under the influence of the Fabians in England since 1888, started the "Revisionist" movement, which, while attempting to concentrate the energies of the party more definitely upon specific reforms and "revising" to extinction many of the most cherished doctrines of Marxism, has yet been subordinated to the practical exigencies of politics. To all appearance the Socialist Party is stronger to-day than ever. The elections of 1907 brought out 3,258,968 votes in its favour; those of January, 1912, gave it 110 seats out of a total of 307 in the Reichstag -- a gain of more than 100 per cent over its last previous representation (53 seats). The Marxian "Erfurt Programme", adopted in 1891, is still the official creed of the Party. But the "Revisionist" policy is obviously gaining ground and, if the Stuttgart Congress of 1907 be any indication, is rapidly transforming the revolutionary Marxist party into an opportunist body devoted to specific social reforms. In France the progress of Socialism has been upon different lines. After the collapse of Saint-Simonism and Fourierism, came the agitation of Louis Blanc in 1848, with his doctrine of "The Right to Work". But this was side-tracked by the triumphant politicians into the scandalous "National Workshops", which were probably deliberately established on wrong lines in order to bring ridicule upon the agitation. Blanc was driven into exile, and French Socialism lay dormant till the ruin of Imperialism in 1870 and the outbreak of the Commune in 1871. This rising was suppressed with a ferocity that far surpassed the wildest excesses of the Communards; 20,000 men are said to have been shot in cold blood, many of whom were certainly innocent, while not a few were thrown alive in the common burial pits. But this savagery, though it temporarily quelled the revolution, did nothing to obviate the Socialist movement. At first many of the scattered leaders declared for Anarchism, but soon most of them abandoned it as impracticable and threw their energies into the propagation of Marxian Socialism. In 1879 the amnesty permitted Jules Guesde, Brousse, Malon, and other leaders to return. In 1881, after the Anarchist-Communist group under Kropotkin and Reclus had seceded, two parties came into existence, the opportunist Alliance Socialiste Republicaine, and the Marxian Parti Ouvrier Socialiste Revolutionaire de France. But these parties soon split up in others. Guesde led, and still leads, the Irreconcilables; Jaures and Millerand have bee