the am Urmia-See and in Kurdutan, Leipsie. 1868; idem, Kurape/asste syrisde Grammatik, Leipeic,1898; S. D. Luzzato, Elements prammaticali del Caldeo biblico a del dialetto talmudico babllonese, Padua, 1865, Eng. tranal. by G. Goldammer, New York, 1877; E. Kautzsch, Gramrriatik des biblischen Aramaischen, Leipsic, 1884; J. Levy, Chaldtiuches WSrterbuch fiber die Targumim and einen grossen Theil des rabbiniachen Schriftthums, 2 vols., Leipsie, 1867-68; C.. Broekelmann, Lexicon Sbriacum, Berlin, 1895; R. Payne Smith and J. Payne Smith (Mrs. Margoliouth), Compendioua Syriac Dictionary, Oxford, 1903; A. Meyer, Jesu Muttersprache, Freiburg, 1896. For the Aramaic and Nabatazan inscriptions, CIS, i. and ii. For the important inscriptions of Senjirli in northern Syria, D H. Mailer, Die alten aemitischen Inaehriften von Sendsehirli, Vienna. 1893; Ausgrabungen in Sendachirli, in Mittheilungen des k6niglichen Museums, Berlin, 1893 sqq. On the extent of the Aramean settlements and their possessions in northern Palestine consplt: Schrader, KAT, pp. 28-29, 36, 182, 232, 239; and H. Winckler, Oriantalische Porechungen, vol. iii., part 3, Leipsic, 1905.

ARATOR, a-r6'-ter: Christian poet of the middle of the sixth century. He was a Ligurian of noble family, and was educated by the archbishop Laurentius at Milan; the poet Ennodius was his friend, and the latter's nephew Parthenius was Arator's fellow student at Ravenna. He chose a diplomatic career and for a time acted as comes domesticorum, and afterward as comes privalorum of the Ostrogothic king Athalaric. He then entered the priesthood and was made subdeacon at Rome by Pope Vigilius, to whom lie dedicated his epico-didactic poem, De actibus apostolorum libri ii. (read in public in 544) In 1076 and 1250 hexameters he describes the deeds of the apostles to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, taking the Acts of Luke as a basis. He treats his subject with some poetical skill and with rich allegorical expositions, which are often in bad taste. He aims to show the superiority of Peter to Paul, and the work contains traces of Mariolatry, hagiolatry, and relic-worship. An epistle of Arator's to Vigilius, a second to an abbot Florianus, and a third to his early friend Parthenius are also extant. His main work was much read in the Middle Ages, and exists in many manuscripts of the tenth and eleventh centuries. It and the letters are in MPL, lxviii. 46-252, and there is an edition by A. Hilbner, Neisse, 1850.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: K. Leimbaeh, Ueber den Dichter Arator in TSK, xlvi. (1873) 225 eqq., and the works on Latin literature.

ARCADIUS, dr-k6'-di-us, FLAVIUS: Eastern Roman emperor 383-408; b. in Spain, about 377; d. at Constantinople May 1, 408. He was the elder son of the emperor Theodosius and the empress Elia Flavilla, and was educated in secular sciences at Constantinople by the sophist Themistius, and by Arsenius, an ascetic, in the Christian religion. In 383 his father conferred upon him the title of Augustus, and in 384 he was made consul. When in 394 Theodosius went to the West to over throw the usurper Eugenius, the government was left in care of Arcadius, with the assistance of the minister Rufinus. By the unexpected death of the emperor, Jan. 17, 395, at Milan, Arcadius became emperor of the East. By nature good-hearted and yielding, also without energy and narrow-minded, he became the weak tool of those who knew how to obtain his favor, above all of Rufinus, a cunning

and unprincipled Gaul, and, afterhis murder, of the eunuch Eutropius, who covered his selfish atrocities with the name of the lawful ruler, and finally till his fall (399) united all power in himself. Arcadius was also influenced by his wife Eudocia, the beautiful daughter of Bauto, a Frank. Under him the Byzantine empire assumed that oriental character, which it subsequently retained. His piety was sincere, and he worshiped the relics of saints and martyrs devoutly. Even before he was sole regent he interdicted the public worship, instruction, and organization of the heretics (Cod. Theod., XVI. v. 24; a. 394), and in the following year withdrew all former privileges (XVI. v. 25). Investigations had to be made for heretics in the imperial chancery, and among the court-officials (XVI. v. 29). Closely connected with this was his procedure against polytheism. In 397 he ordered that the material from temples in Syria should be used for the repair or construction of public roads, bridges, aqueducts, and walls (XV. i. 36), and in 399 he issued an order to the prefect of the East to destroy all rural sanctuaries. In all this Chrysostom was his hearty supporter. The most important result was probably the destruction of the Marneion and of seven other temples in Gaza in 401 (cf. the interesting account in Marcus's life of Porphyrius, bishop of Gaza, and J. Driseke, Gesammelte patristische Untersuchungen, Leipsic, 1889, pp. 208 sqq.). Yet it can not be said that Hellenism suffered much under Arcadius; compared with the policy of Theodosius, there was even a certain relaxation (cf. V. Schultze, Geschichte des Unterganges des griechi8chr6mischen Heidentums, i., Jena, 1887, 353 sqq., ii., 1892, passim). Toward the Jews Arcadius was surprisingly friendly, and it has been suspected that they secured the favor of Eutropius by money. They had a jurisdiction of their own similar to that of the bishops, and the right of sanctuary analogous to the ecclesiastical (Cod. Theod., II. i. 10; IX. xlv 2; cf. Grmtz, Ge3ehiehte der Juden, iv. 387 sqq) Seditions from within, and inroads of the barbarians from without, made the rule of the weak emperor a sad chapter of Byzantine history, which, however, must not be judged wholly according to the unfriendly or hostile heathen sources (especially Eunapius and Zosimus) Quite a number of reforms were decreed during his government which is also not lacking in other good measures.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The sources are in the writings of Zosimus, Philostorgius, Socrates, Sozomen, and Chryaostom; consult further Gibbon, Decline and Fall, chap. xxxi.; S. R. Sievers, Studien cur Geschichte der romisden Kaiser, 335 eqq., Berlin, 1870; F. w. Unger, Quellen cur byzantiniachenKun8tgeaehichte, vol. i., Vienna, 1878; A. Guldenpen

Bing, Geschirhte des oabr6miadwn Rcichea unter den Kai sern Armdiua and Theodosius ll., Halls. 1885; A. Puech. St. Join Chrysostome et Yes meeurs de son temps. Paris, 1891; C. W. C. Oman, Story o/ the Byzantine Emptre, London, 1892.

[Sacred] Secret," i.e., initiation into the mystery): A term first applied by Dallacus and G. T. Meier to the practise of maintaining a studied reticence (fides salentii) concerning the form and character of introduction into the Church, as if this were

other bishop, but also certain rights of oversight and precedence over several other bishops whose dioceses are included in his province. In the third century, by analogy with the political divisions of the Empire (see EPARcHy), there grew up an organization of several bishoprics under the leadership of a metropolitan, the bishop of the provincial capital; it was his place to conduct episcopal elections, to confirm the choice and to consecrate the one chosen, and to convoke the bishops of his province in an annual synod. In concert with them, he regulated the affairs of the province, and the synod formed a court of appeal from the decisions of individual bishops, as well as one of first instance for charges brought against them. In the following centuries the metropolitan system was adopted by the Christian countries of the west .as well. In the Merovingian period, however, the joint power claimed by the princes in filling episcopal sees and the importance attained by national councils robbed the position of the metropolitans of much of its independence; nor were they able to recover it in the Carolingian era, between the domination assumed by Charlemagne and the papal claims to an immediate decision in weighty matters, for which the pseudo-Isidorian decretals had furnished a basis. The rights of a metropolitan were accordingly limited in the thirteenth century legal compilations of the Corpus Juria Canonici to the following particulars: (1) The confirmation of episcopal elections and consecration of bishops in his province; (2) calling and presiding over provincial councils; (3) general oversight of his suffragans, visitation of their dioceses, and imposition of censures and penalties on them, though not of deposition; (4) hearing,of appeals from episcopal courts; and (5) the so-called Jus devolutionis (q.v.). The first of these he lost in the fifteenth century, when confirmation and consecration of bishops were reserved to the pope. The Council of Trent confirmed the second, but limited the third by requiring the assent of the provincial council. At the same time, however, he was charged with the erection, maintenance, and direction of seminaries in the dioceses of his suffragans, and with the enforcement of their obligation of residence. An archbishop has the title of " Most Reverend," and ranks immediately after patriarchs. He wears the pallium (q.v.) as a special symbol of his jurisdiction, and a particular kind of cross (crux erectaoor gsstatoria) is carried before him within his own province. The . title apXcmfatcmrot is frequently applied in the fourth century to the metropolitan of Alexandria, but after the development of the great patriarchates it came to denote other bishops of large cities who were undistmguishable in rank from metropolitans; and the titles have been practically synonymous in the West---though there are a few Roman Catholic archbishops (such as those of Amalfi, Lucca, and Udine) who are not metropolitans, and in the case of titular archbishops (see BisHoP, TiTuLAR) it follows from the nature of their office that there is no metropolitan jurisdiction. In the Anglican communion, the title of archbishop was for a long time confined to the metropolitans of England and Ireland, owing

and sacramental gift, but the elements and the ritual performance. 1n Theodoret's dialogue Inconfttaw (iv. 125, ed. Schultze), the orthodox shrinks from openly naming bread and cup The Im- lest " some one uninitiated be presmediate Ob- ent," and vaguely calls the body and ject of the blood of the Lord a gift. The dire Discipline. . was, of course, to withhold even from the eyes of the initiated the act and the " mystic symbols "; hence the exclusion of the unbaptized from the miaaa fidelium and the watch at the door by the ostiaries. Baptism and the Lord's Supper were the real object of the discipline. To keep people in actual ignorance was, of course, impossible, but the silence observed produced the impression of a mystery. The Lord's Prayer at the Supper held the same position as ',gin confession in baptism; the character of secret objects was given to both (cf. Sozomen, Hiat. eccl., i. 20; Ambrose, De Cain et Abel, I. ix. 37). The opposite to the confession of the neophyte was the renunciation, which was also kept secret. Everything which preceded and followed baptism necessarily partook of the secrecy. The eucharist as the climax of the whole mystagogy is the mystery par excellence. Dogmas were mysteries (Basil, De spir. sattc., xavii. fib) only in so far as the Church generally claimed to possess wonderful mysteries, especially the dogma of the Trinity on account of its relation to the baptismal symbol; but no secrecy of the dogma was intended. With the disappearance of the catechumenate the arconi disciPlina ceased, although in the Greek liturgy the formula for dismissing the catechumens remained; but the cult of the Greek Church now actually assumed the character of a mystico-allegorical drama, a mystery of the heathen kind, though of a higher type. N. BONWETBCH.

BIBLIOGRAPHY; I. Casaubon. De re4ue eaeria et ecclesiaatieia, Geneva, 1854; G. T. Meier, De reeondita veterie ecdseIm theoloyia, Helmstedt, 1870; E. von Schelstrate, Antiquitae i7lwtrata circa concilia psneralia et pronineialia and Commentatio de a. Antioeheno eoneilio, Antwerp, 1878, 1881; W. E. Tentsel, Exercitationea aeledo:, ii., Leipeic, 1892, contains Tentzel's Diessrtatia do diaciplina arcani, 1883; $eheletrate's Diseertatio apolopetica de discipline arcani contra diaputationem E. Tentselii, 1885; and Tentsel'e reply, Animadversiowe; G. C. L. T. Frommsnn, De discipline arcani, Jena, 1833; R. Rothe, De diacipLina arcani origins. Heidelberg, 1841; K. A. Credner, in the Janaer allgemeine Li#eraturseitunp. 853 eqq.. 1844: T. Hatnaek, Der chrrosUieha t3erneindepotteadienat im aPoetoliechen and allkatholiwAon ZsitaLter, pp. 1-M, Erlangen , 1854; G. von Zeasehwits,13yatem der ICatachetik, i.154-209, Leipeio, 1883; N. Bonweteeh, Weaen, Entatehung, and Fortganp der Arkan-disciplin, in ZHT, aliii. (1873) 203299; T. Zahn, (iiauLxnarepel and Tau/LMksnntnie in der allen Kuche, in ZICW, i. (1880) 315 eqq.; E. Bratke, Die 3teLiunp des Clemens Alexandrines sum anfieken Myakrientoeun, in T$IC, lx. (1887) 847-708; E. Hatch, The InRu· snoe o/ Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church, chap. z., London, 1890; H. Holtamsnn. Die %a

der allen Ruche, in ThsoiogierJu Abhandlungan Weizatirker astsidmet, pp. 88-78, Freiburg, 1892; G. Anrich, Daa antike Myaterieraouen in aeiwm EinRuea auf daa Cluiatentunt, GSttingen, 1894; G. Wobbermin, Relipionepasrhiehtliche $tadien our Frays der BesinRwaunp dea Urehrirfertums dureh daa antike Mysterienweaen, Berlin, 1898; P. Batiffol, Lludea d'hiatoire et de thEolopie posikroe. Paris. 1902; H. Gravel. Die Arkandieeiplin, part i.. llflneter, 1902.

ARCHBISHOP: A bishop in the Roman Catholic and some parts of the Anglican Church, who has not only the charge of his own diocese like any

an increasing tendoncy to its use, and the proposal I

in der kaWwliedunKirche.Freiburg, 1878; Hauck, RD, iii. 18 sQq.

ARCHDALL, MERVYN: Anglican bishop of Kiltaloe, Ireland; b. Feb. 18, 1833. He was educated at Trinity College, Dublin (B.A., 1858), and wag successively curate of Templecrone (185657), Trinity Church, Dublin (1857-62), Lislee (1882-63), vicar of Templebready (1863-72), and rector of St. Luke's, Cork (1872-94). He was archdeacon of Cork from 1878 to 1894, canon of

bishop, the archpriest more in liturgical functions the archdeacon in those of church government.

a number of archpriests whose functions are ferent from those indicated. The diocese is

vided into parishes (much larger than the modern parishes), frequently following political divisions in their boundaries. The inhabitants of a parish, considered as a single community, have one church, often on the site of a heathen temple, set .apart for the principal ecclesiastical functions. This is the church for Sunday service, baptism, funerals, and the payment of church taxes. Through the surrounding country are scattered other Smaller churches used for less important functions, and served by clergy who are representatives of the parish priest. With the increase in the number of priacipsl or " baptismal " churches, the importance of the archprieeta diminished. From the ninth century their place was taken by rural dean,, who had the oversight of more than one archpresbyterate; and, as they were generally taken from among the *""Priests, frequently Detained that title. The archdeacons did not hold everywhere the same reIation to the archpriests. Under Leo the Great (440461) they appear in charge of church property and jurisdiction in the dioceses. By the ninth century,

priests to be named to this office, and finally none but priests held it, who were placed over the mhpriests. About the same fAme in France, somewhat later in Getmany, the custom arose of dividing the dioceses into several of these archdeaconriea. With the development of the cathedral chapters, it became usual for the head of the chapter to be archdeacon, or, if there were several archdeacons in the diocese, the office was held also by canons or other heads of collegiate bodies. The

power of the archdeacon gradually increased; by the beginning of the thirteenth century he is already known as jtu3ez ordinaries, and has an independent right to make canonical visitations, to decide many cases (especially matrimonial), to examine candidates for ordination, and to install beneficed clergy. The bishops found it necessary to repress the presumption of the archdeacons, and.

in some cases (as at Tours 1239, LiEge 1287, lb!" 1310) they obtained legislation in councils against further growth of these powers; in other cases they set up officials of their own to exercise the Jurisdiction which the archdeacons either had or claimed. Among these latter are the officialea forane'i, with a concurrent jurisdiction, and above both, for the

exercise of appellate jurisdiction and of the rights reserved to the bishops, the officialea Pr'fnciPales and vicars-general. Since neither the archdeacons

m usage grew up, which were first reduced to some art of uniformity by the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century. By it the archdeacons were

disappeared entirely in many dioceses, and their functions are nowadays discharged usually by the

Bmloaurer: J. G. Pertaab, Von Urrprunp der Archdia;eae. Hildwheim. 1743; Branoid, Daa aposfoliisdw Alkr der ArohdiaQOmlwfirds, Wittenberg, 1788; A. J. Binterim, DenkvMJrdipksibw der cJLriehkatkoliedwn Ruche. I. i. 388434. Mains. 1826; DCA, L 186-188; A. 8ohr8der, Die Rt&hpi&olu"gdwArchi-dinkamik.Aupburg.*18W; and-the works on canon law.

ARCHELAUS, ar"ke-Ig'vs. Bee HsaoD AND am Fein:.

templefurniture, and various Assyrian, Egyptian, and Phenician monuments and sculptures illustrate Israelitic architecture (temples,

Distinc- branch of historical study, namely dons. the history and antiquities of the related peoples, and neither the beginnings nor progress of Hebrew history can be understood without a good knowledge of the older and of the contemporary Semites out of whom Israel grew, by whom its fortunes were determined, and whose genius influenced vitally its religious and social character. For example, in the first order of value for Biblical study must be placed the history and religion of Babylonia and Assyria, and the religious and social institutions of the ancient Arabians and Arameans. (2) The distinction between the relevant and the irrelevant in the history and antiquities of the related or neighboring peoples. Here the vaguest notions are encouraged by a loose application of the term archeology. For example, Egypt is constantly looked to for illustration of the Bible and for confirmation of its records, and a large part of the material pub-

lished by the Society of Biblical Archeology, and the greater portion of many separate works upon the same theme are devoted to Egyptian research, which has yielded very little for the understanding of Biblical history, and virtually nothing for the illustration of the religious and social life of the Hebrews. The reason therefor lies partly in the unique and unsympathetic character of Egyptian culture, partly in the fact that Egypt had very seldom any controlling influence on Palestine during the formative period of Israel, and partly in the circumstance that the Egyptian records are not so businesslike and accurate as, for example, those of Assyria and Babylonia, which form an indispensable supplement to Biblical history. (3) The distinction between ancient and modern conditions. It is a common error to suppose that the study of Bible lands and the manners and customs of their present habitants furnish Biblical archeology accurately reproduced. A(; a matter of fact such a study is informing only along the line of external resemblance. The outward life of the Semitic peoples has remained in many respects like its ancient past because of a similarity of occupation and the slow march of civilization. Occasional Bible texts here and there are illumined by a referende to modern customs. But there is a world-wide difference in the Nearer East, as elsewhere, between the life and spirit of the past and the present. The Bible itself, regarded in the light of its own political, social, and religious atmosphere, is the great handbook of Biblical archeology, whose primary elements, moreover, are not so much facts as conditions and principles, such as the inseparable relation between God and his people, between the people and the land, and between God and the land; the immediate and direct action of the Deity in all events and in all phenomena; the unity and actual identity of what are called the sacred and the secular, of religion and life, or of religion and morals; the solidarity of the community as the basis of the State and the ground of the responsibility of the individual; and a world-consciousness without abstract ideas and to which even God himself was the most concrete of realities. J. F. M.

BIBLYOGR·PHr: Of works on Biblical archeology or useful as sources, the more important of ancient time are: Enos_ biue, " On the Names of plsm in the Holy Scripture." commonly called the onomaatieon. translated into Latin by Jerome, with title, De situ et nominibua locorum Be. brafeorwn, both in P. de Lagarde. Onomastiea sacra. GStr tingen, 1870, 1887; Epiphaniue, " On Weights and Measures," ed. Lagarde, SHmmida. ii. 149-216, Gottingen, 1880. More modern works: C. Sigoniue, Ds republics Hebraica, Bologna, 1582; B. Arias Montanus, Anhluitates Judaica, Leyden. 1593; T. Godwin, Moses et Aaron, Oxford, 1616; ed. J. H. Hottinger. Frankfort. 1710; P. Cuneue, De republics Hebraica, Lyons, 1617; J. Spencer, De lepibw Hebr- ritualibw, Cambridge, 1685; rev. ed. by L. Chappelow, 1727, by C. M. Pfaff, Ttlbingen, 1732; J. Lund, Die open jadisehen j qeaiptMmer, Goaeediends, and Gmohnheitan, Hamburg. 1695; M. Leydekker. De repubti0a flebrmorurn. Amsterdam, 1704; A. Relsad, pal., "* a monu"e"s »ekribus illustrate. Utrecht. 1714; A. G. Wihnet, Antiquitates Ebrmormw, Gottingen, 1743; J. D. Miehaelfe, Mosaisehes Redd, Frankfort, 1771-75, Biehl. 1777. Eng tranel., London, 1814; H. E. Warnekroe. Rntw,at der hebrdishen AlferWUmer, Weimar. 1782, 1794, 1832. Most of the works which had appeared at 4he time were collected by B. Ugolino in his Thesaurus at*uifatum mcrarum, 34 vole., Venice. 1744-M. From this time on there are numssrous works, wlch as those of

1894 (goes well with Bensinger); C. Clermont-Ganneau, Recuesl des monuments inddif ou peu connus, art, are*& olopie, epigraphic, 3 vols., Paris, 1897-1900; Recent Be-

march in Bible Lands, ed. H. V. Hilprecht. Philadelphia, 1898; T. Nicol, Recent Arrhmolopy and the Bible, London, 1899; a useful book is H. V. Hilprecht, Explorations in Bible Lands, Philadelphia, 1903; the various histories of Israel by Wellhausen, Stade, Kittel, and others are also important. For Arabian Antiquities we under ARABIA, and for Egypt and Asia Minor see those articles. For the medieval itineraries and modern works of travel, consult R. RShrieht. Bibliotheca qeopraphica Palaatina, Berlin, 1890; a useful bibliography will be found in J. F. Hurst, Literature of Theology, 118-130, New York, 1896.

ARCHEOLOGY, CHRISTIAN: The science which investigates and exhibits the ecclesiastical and religious forms of life and conditions of the Christian community for the.period terminating with the Middle Ages. It may be divided into: (1) Law and government, including such topics as constitution, the clergy, monasticism, discipline, church law, synods, relations to the State, etc.; (2) worship-the various forms of divine service, festivals, such acts as baptism, confirmation, the marriage ceremony, burial, consecrations (of churches, altars, bells, holy water, etc.), benedictions and maledictions, exorcism, etc.; (3) artarchitecture, painting, sculpture, church furniture, burial arrangements, etc.; (4) private and public life-the giving of names, marriage, position of women, prayer, education, slavery, occupations, corporations and societies, amusements, pilgrimages, superstitions, benevolent institutions, etc. Church music and books are better treated, it would seem, under the head of worship than of art. Tke sources of Christian archeology are the same as for church history. One of the most important and the last to receive the attention it deserves is furnished by monumental remains.

The history of the science begins with the first work of Protestantism on church history, the " Magdeburg Centuries" (15511-74; see MAGDEBURG CENTofuEs), which, however, makes no distinction between archeology and history; the same is true of the work of the Roman Catholic scholar, Cesar Baronius (cf. the epitome of Baronius's Annalm by C. Schulting, Cologne, 1601). As an independent science Christian archeology may be said to have originated with Joseph Bingham's massive work, Origin" Wdeaiaatica, or the Antiquities of the Christian Church (10 vols., London, 1708-22; see

BIBLIOGRAPHY: F. Piper, Einleitung in die monumeatale Theologie, Gotha, 1887; F. X. Kraus, Ueber Begriff, Um-

1111ace or in the church house. The court is rarely convened. The judge is the only ecclesiastical judge authorized to sentence clergymen of the Church of England to deprivation. Appeals from the decision of the court are heard by the judicial committee of the Privy Council. The present judge (1906) is Sir Arthur Charles, appointed by the archbishop of Canterbury in 1899 and holding a life office.

ARCHEVITES, ar'ke-vans: The name of a people mentioned only in Ezra iv. 9, possibly one of the tribes settled by the Assyrians in Samaria (II Rings xvii. 24). While it is possible that

the name was an official designation, it is better taken as meaning "inhabitants of Erech" (see APHARsAcHrras).

BIBLIOG19APHY: A. J. Binterim, Denkwardigksikn der chrietkatholisdea Kirche, I ii. 83 eqq.. Mainz, 1825; G. Waits,

ARCHIEREUS, ar"ki-$r'e-us: A common designation in the Greek Orthodox Church for the higher clergy in distinction from the other from presbyter down.

ARCHIMARDRITE, er"ki-man'drait (Gk. archimandrites, " ruler of the fold," itandra, " fold," being applied to a monastic association as consisting of the sheep of Christ): A name given to the head of a larger monastic community, either the abbot of a single monastery or, more in accord with the meaning of the word, the general abbot of several monasteries belonging to one congregation. The title was in general use in the East as early as the fifth century. In the West it is found in the rules of Isidore of Seville (vi.) and Columban (vii.), of the latter part of the sanje century. From the tenth century it served as a general designation of prelates, even of archbishops. In 1094 Roger of Sicily put all Basilian monks of Sicily and Calabria under as archimandrite, who was later superseded by a secular prelate. By a brief of Urban VIII., Feb. 23, 1635, the archimandrite of Messina was granted quasiepiscopal jurisdiction, the use of the pontificals, and other privileges. The abbots of the Greek Uniate Churches in Poland, Galicia, Transylvania, Hungary, Slavonia, and Venice also have the title " archimandrite." In the Russian Church the archimandrites enjoy high honor and wear marks of respect which elsewhere belong only to bishopsinfulee, staves, crosses, and the like. They are genemlly under the diocesan bishop, though many had become immediately subject to the patriarch of Constantinople or the Russian metropolitan previous to the formation of the Holy Synod. Consult Du Cange and, for a most exhaustive treatment, AOL, s.v.

I. General Treatment: Christian architecture, as a separate and independent thing, exists no more than a Christian state. The conception of a state is not altered by the fact that its citizens happen to be Christians; nor does architecture receive its essential form from being used for Christian or non-Christian purposes. Some of the problems of architecture were altered with the advent of Christianit3, as it had now to build churches instead of temples, one of the most important tasks ever laid upon architecture, and in fact for many centuries almost the only important one. The first question to be considered is the origin of this problem, the origin, that is, of specially designed church buildings.

The oldest documents referring to Christian worship show that the faithful assembled in the house of

some member of the Church. At Je:. The rusalem they met from house to house

First (Acts ii. 46); at Troas in an upper Places of room (Acts xx. 7-8); Paul designated Christian Gaius as the host of the whole church

that when they came together as a church, they met in his house. The mention of upper rooms does not prove that such were the only parts of the houses in which these gatherings took place; and we must remember that these houses were usually the small houses of poor people, constructed in the usual manner of the Greco-Roman world. Since the rooms were generally small, there would be no place for the assembly as soon as it got beyond a small number, except in the atrium or court-yard; the contention that divine worship could not have been held there, because the sacred mysteries would have been exposed to profane eyes, can not be upheld, as the arcani discipline (q.v.) is of later growth. This domestic worship was in harmony with the spirit of early Christianity, full as it was of ideas of one family of brethren. A Christian house was the ideal place for it. The primitive Church, therefore, lacked not only the means but the motive to erect any special building for divine worship; it had no temples, and expressly rejected the idea of building them (of., e.g., Minucius Felix, Octariua, x., xxxii.).

Nevertheless, it wag not long before special buildings were erected for worship, and considered holy. To understand the change, it is necessary to try to fix the date at which this took place. Un-

and Romanesque Basilica (5 18). lfrenah Eadeeisatical Development

questionably special places existed in Alexandria in the time of Origen (cf. his " On Prayer," xxxi. 5,

Berlin ed., p. 398); but the date may a. The be put further back by observation First of the popular use of the term ekkluia.

Buildinga. bly of citizens, it came in Christian use to denote, first the gathering of the believers, then the Christian community either local or universal, and finally the meeting-place. This last use is common by the beginning of the fourth century; it is found in Eusebius and in his Latin contemporary Lactantius (De mort. peraec., sii., p. 186, ed. Brandt and Laubmann). But still earlier, Clement of Alexandria (Strom., vii. 5, p. 846, ed. Potter), Hippolytus (In Dan., i. 20, p. 32), and Tertullian (De idol., p. 36), shortly before or shortly after the year 200, all apply the word to a distinctly recognized place of worship. The two latter also call it " the house of God." The Greek term kyriakort (Eng. " church "),with its Latin equivalent domini cum, appears somewhat later. But by about 200 there were at least two recognized names for a Christian place of worship, and the existence of a name demonstrates the prior existence of the thing. Whether these buildings belonged to the community or to individual Christians can scarcely be answered with certainty for the third century; the theory of corporate ownership is doubtful at the beginning of this period, though it becomes demonstrable toward the close. The edict of Constantine and Licinius, given in Eusebius, Hilt. eccl., x. b, in 313 assumes a generally recognized corporate possession of many Christian meeting-places.

Between the spring of 58, when Gains was receiving the church of Corinth in his house, and the

time about 200, when a Christian goes 3. Changes into a special " house of God," ChrisDemanded tianity had ceased to be the close by Altered brotherhood which it was at first; it Circum- had developed a complicated organiza-

The neat question, as to the form of these earliest distinct churches, is one which it is

impossible to answer certainly from direct tradition. But it can not be avoided, because on it depends another, as to the origin of the Christian

basilica, than which there is none q. Origin more important in the whole range of of the ecclesiastical archeology. The ba-

present day, and this development is unintelligible without an attempt to arrive at a theory of the origin of this structural form. Its definition is hot matter of controversy; it is an oblong building, divided by rows of pillars into three (or sometimes five) aisles, the central one the highest and covered with a flat roof, with a projecting addition, generally semicircular, more rarely square, at one end. When, however, it is asked how such a building came to be constructed for Christian worship, there is no such possibility of agreement. It has been held to have originated from the forensic basilica or the so called private basilica; from the Roman dwelling-bouse or the ulla cimiterialis; and from the demands of Christian worship by a new creation. The limits of an article like the present preclude minute examination of these various theories; but obvious objections lie against all of them, as they are expressed by their defenders. The most certain fact in this whole discussion is that when the Church was established under Constantine, it did not need to go in search of a form for its buildings; the form already existed, substantially the same in all parts of the empire. It is not too much to say that we are forced to consider the form found in the beginning of the fourth century as the product of a long course of development. From what has been said, it follows that this development took place approximately from 180 to 300. Eusebius (Hiat. eccl., viii. 1, b) indicates, that before 260 the churches were what we might call small oratories, but increased in size after that date-though this increase must not be exaggerated; the facts that the famous church of Nicomedia could be razed to the ground in a few hours (Laetantius, De mort. persec., xii., p. 187; Athanasius, Apol. ad Const., xv., ed. Maur, i. 1, p. 241), and that the churches of Treves and Aquileia needed to be replaced by larger buildings as early as 336, show that it was only relative. Thus, though the hypothesis of a development from the private house of the earliest age is attractive, it does not lead directly to the basilican form, which in its essence requires a considerable size; a basilica for one or even two hundred people could not have been constructed. What we need, and what these various theories do not provide, is an intermediate stage.

A direct prescription as to church-building is found for the first time in a fourth century passage

incorporated with the Apostolic Con s. First stitutions (11. lvii. 3), which shows

Step to- what was then regarded as essential. ward a This was very little; it is limited to a Church marking of the distinction between

for the bishop. Accordingly, the place set apart for the clergy was a more or less fixed dimension; its form might vary-it might be

made either by the cutting off of one end, or by the addition of a semicircular or oblong space, in the middle of which was the bishop's seat. That the semicircular or apsidal form finally prevailed is due partly to acoustic considerations--the bishop preached from his throne-and partly to the esthetic motive which made this form a popular one in the architecture of the imperial period. The space assigned to the laity, as long as they were comparatively few in number, could only be a simple oblong, the form which appears as normal in the Apostolic Constitutions. This general type, of a simple oblong room with an apse at one end, may safely be taken as that of the churches which after 260 were demolished or abandoned. None of them is preserved; but churches like Santa Balbina in Rome and that of Hidra in Africa show that this form did not at once disappear even when the basilica became the recognized type. The Hidra church is particularly instructive; it is square and small-if the measurements given by Kraus are correct, the sides are only about 20 feet, with a corresponding apsidal presbyterium. This is the church for not more than 100 people which we need for our intermediate stage.

The development from this to the basilica falls probably in the period between 260 and 303, which

was marked by great activity in build6. Second ing. The motive of the change was Step. the need for more space; the problem

was, how to attain this end without upsetting the recognized plan of an oblong auditorium with an added apse for the clergy. The proportional lengthening of the main hall could not go far, as the extension of the width was limited. The only thing to do was to break up the width, and thus came a division of aisles. The final solution, that of a wide central division with narrower side aisles, does not seem to have been reached at once; the basilica at Hidra shows the singular arrangement of side aisles wider than the middle section. A period of experiment must have come first; but, given the division, both esthetic and practical considerations inevitably suggested the plan finally adopted. The middle section being the main division, its raising to a greater height followed, for purposes of lighting, especially since other buildings must have frequently stood on each side of the church. This arrangement was not new; it has been found, for example, in the temples of Hierapolis and Samothrace: and thus it is not surprising that the same or a similar solution of the problem was found simultaneously in different places-though it probably required some time for this solution to be universally recognized as the best, as it was in the fourth century. The designation of churches as basilicas must have begun in the third century, since it is already a familiar term at the beginning of the fourth. This transition was the easier because the original meaning of the word had been practically superseded by what was nearly the sense of our word " hall."

With the reign of Constantine begins the building of large and splendid churches, through his encouragement and the activity of the bishops, first in the East, later in Rome and the West. The earli-

est was the church at Tyre under Licinius; then follow, under Constantine, the buildings at Jeru-

salem, Bethlehem, Mamre, Constanti7. Church- nople, Nicomedia, Heliopolis, and per-

and the churches of Ravenna, belong to the fifth and sixth centuries. Thus we are dependent on the descriptions of the lost buildings, the first of which is the unfortunately too rhetorical account given by Eusebius (Hiat. eccl., x. 4) of the church at Tyre. According to this picture, it corresponded in essential details to the type of basilica found in Africa and the West; but we learn from the latter not to suppose that everything desccribed by Eusebius was uniformly present.

Though the adoption of the basilican style did not exclude creative freedom on the part of the archi-

tect, no further development of the 8. Basilica idea ever took place in the Roman

tented itself with endless reproductions of an accepted type, and reproductions which were successively poorer. The basilican style in itself, however, was capable of development to a marked degree. Among the artistic creations of the ancient world, it was the one which was destined to have the greatest future. It is conceived wholly in the ancient spirit, as is shown particularly in the feeling for space which regulated its dimensions. The relation of height to length and breadth shows that the beauty of the building was sought in broad, dignified extent. That it grew up in an era of decaying art is evident on the face of it. Only in the rows of columns which divide the aisles is constructive necessity made to minister to beauty; nowhere in the rest of the building is there any attempt to please. There is nothing more depressing in the history of architecture than the straight brick walls, only broken here and there by a few small windows, that enclose it. Decoration of a sumptuous kind partly makes us forget this poverty; but the decoration is purely arbitrary, extraneous, not required by the nature of the plan.

The basilica, then, was the normal type of churches built to hold congregations assembled for worship. But these were not the only ecclesiastical

buildings thought of after the fourth y. Change century. Special ritual observances

structure, which became the normal one for baptisteries and memorial chapels. As to the former, when we remember that adult baptism was frequent, that immersion was customary; and that the observance of regular seasons for baptism made the number of candidates large, we see that a comparatively large pool was required; and the building constructed to enclose it naturally allowed for placing it in the center, and so could be only circular. The building of memorial churches was begun by Constantine with that of the Holy Sepulcherat Jerusalem, and again the circular or polygonal form was proscribed by its relation to the sacred

object or the tomb which they were intended to

enshrine. The simple structure might be enriched

by a number of small chapels or niches, or sur

rounded by a corridor; a cupola or dome necessa

rily covered it. Here it was not so much the work

ing out of a new form as the adaptation of one

already existing; even when the chapels were pro

longed so as to make the ground-plan into a Greek

cross, it was scarcely a new form. Examples are

the Lateran baptistery and the two at Ravenna,

the tombs of Galls Placidia and Theodoric at Ra

venna, and the church of Santa Costanza in Rome,

When an attempt was made to use these build

ings for general purposes of worship, a new problem

arose in the laying out of the approved places for

clergy and people. Churches of this type were used

. in the East for congregational purposes as early

as Constantine's reign; according to

:o. Me- Eusebius's description (Vita Const., iii.

morial 50, p. 207), that which the emperor built

Nazianzen in his see city(Orat.,xviii. 39, M PG, xxxv.

1037), while Gregory of Nyasa (EVist., xxv., MPG,

xlvi. 1093) describes a similar one. But we know

nothing of the interior arrangements of these.

Later (not before the second half of the fifth cen

tury) comes the puzzling church of Santo Stefano

Rotondo on the Celian Hill, whose size proves

that it was meant for public worship. This, the

ugliest building of the kind ever constructed, only

shows how far the Roman architect was from

understanding his task; he built a church as he

would have built a memorial chapel, without real

izing the total difference in requirements. Yet, in

spite of all the difficulties presented by this form,

especially by the absence of perspective when the

altar was placed in the middle, a certain number

of churches were built with which no basilica can

compare in beauty-really the highest achieve

ments of the older ecclesiastical architecture. The

best of these is San Vitals at Ravenna (early sixth

century). Here one of the eight chapels is removed,

and a longer apse put in its place, which gives a cer

tain effect of length-though only by a disturbance

of the harmony of the original plan. Much more

admirable is the solution found in the church of

Sts Sergius and Bacchus, and, more completely,

in. St. Sophia, both in Constantinople. But here

the essence of this central form of structure is not

only disturbed, as in San Vitals-it is absolutely

abandoned. In the Greek and Russian churches

the domed church became the accepted type,

after the model of St. Sophia. The ground,

plan of the latter was not commonly followed,

the cruciform being preferred; and thus, when

each arm of the cross was surmounted with its

cupola, as well as the central space, they became

simply a number of similar connecting rooms, and

the main attraction of the type, its impressive

The new peoples who were to carry on the work of civilization during the Middle Ages inherited in the basilica a type capable of great development, though not, as it came to them, much developed.

It was the only type which had great influence on medieval architecture. The men of the Middle

Ages were by no means blind to the ii. Basilica attractions of the style which we call