[1] _Cat. of State Pap., England and Spain_, i. 469.
[2] _Letters and Papers_, iv. 6627, 6705, and app. 261.
[3] _Ib._ iv. 5072.
[4] _Cal. of State Pap., England and Spain_, iii. pt. ii. 779.
[5] _Cal. of State Pap., Foreign and Dom._, iv. 6290.
CATHERINE OF BRAGANZA (1638-1705), queen consort of Charles II. of
England, daughter of John IV. of Portugal, and of Louisa de Gusman,
daughter of the duke of Medina Sidonia, was born on the 15/25 of
November 1638 at Villia Vicosa. She was early regarded as a useful
medium for contracting an alliance with England, more necessary than
ever to Portugal after the treaty of the Pyrenees in 1659 whereby
Portugal was ostensibly abandoned by France. Negotiations for the
marriage began during the reign of Charles I., were renewed immediately
after the Restoration, and on the 23rd of June, in spite of Spanish
opposition, the marriage contract was signed, England securing Tangier
and Bombay, with trading privileges in Brazil and the East Indies,
religious and commercial freedom in Portugal and two million Portuguese
crowns (about L300,000); while Portugal obtained military and naval
support against Spain and liberty of worship for Catherine. She reached
England on the 13th of May 1662, but was not visited by Charles at
Portsmouth till the 20th. The next day the marriage was solemnized
twice, according to the Roman Catholic and Anglican usages. Catherine
possessed several good qualities, but had been brought up in a
conventual seclusion and was scarcely a wife Charles would have chosen
for himself. Her personal charms were not potent enough to wean Charles
away from the society of his mistresses, and in a few weeks after her
arrival she became aware of her painful and humiliating position as the
wife of the selfish and licentious king. On the first presentation to
her of Lady Castlemaine, Charles's mistress _en titre_, whom he insisted
on making lady of her bedchamber, she fainted away. She withdrew from
the king's society, and in spite of Clarendon's attempts to moderate her
resentment, declared she would return to Portugal rather than consent to
a base compliance. To overcome her resistance nearly the whole of her
Portuguese retinue was dismissed. She was helpless, and the violence of
her grief and anger soon changed to passive resistance, and then to a
complete forbearance and complaisance which gained the king's regard and
favour. In the midst of Charles's debauched and licentious court, she
lived neglected and retired, often deprived of her due allowance, having
no ambitions and taking no part in English politics, but keeping up
rather her interest in her native country.
As the prospect diminished of her bearing children to Charles, several
schemes were set on foot for procuring a divorce on various pretexts. As
a Roman Catholic and near to the king's person Catherine was the special
object of attack by the inventors of the Popish Plot. In 1678 the murder
of Sir Edmund Berry Godfrey was ascribed to her servants, and Titus
Oates accused her of a design to poison the king. These charges, of
which the absurdity was soon shown by cross-examination, nevertheless
placed the queen for some time in great danger. On the 28th of November
Oates accused her of high treason, and the Commons passed an address for
her removal and that of all the Roman Catholics from Whitehall. A series
of fresh depositions were sent in against her, and in June 1679 it was
decided that she must stand her trial; but she was protected by the
king, who in this instance showed unusual chivalry and earned her
gratitude. On the 17th of November Shaftesbury moved in the House of
Lords for a divorce to enable the king to marry a Protestant and have
legitimate issue; but he received little support, and the bill was
opposed by Charles, who continued to show his wife "extraordinary
affection." During the winter the calumnies against the queen were
revived by Fitzharris, who, however, before his execution in 1681
confessed to their falsity; and after the revival of the king's
influence subsequent to the Oxford parliament, the queen's position was
no more assailed.
During Charles's last illness in 1685 she showed great anxiety for his
reconciliation with the Romish Church, and it was probably effected
largely through her influence. She exhibited great grief at his death.
She afterwards resided at Somerset House and at Hammersmith, where she
had privately founded a convent. She interceded with great generosity,
but ineffectually, for Monmouth the same year. On the 10th of June 1688
she was present at the birth of the prince of Wales and gave evidence
before the council in favour of the genuineness of the child. She was
still in England at the Revolution, having delayed her return to
Portugal to prosecute a lawsuit against the second earl of Clarendon,
formerly her chamberlain. She maintained at first good terms with
William and Mary; but the practice of her religion aroused jealousies,
while her establishment at Somerset House was said to be the home of
cabals against the government; and in 1691 she settled for a short time
at Euston. She left England finally with a train of one hundred persons
in March 1692, travelling through France and arriving at Lisbon on the
20th of January 1693. She took up her residence at the palace of
Bemposta, built by herself, near Lisbon. In 1703 she supported the
Methuen Treaty, which cemented still further the alliance between
Portugal and England, and in 1704 she was appointed regent of Portugal
during the illness of her brother King Pedro II., her administration
being distinguished by several successes gained over the Spaniards. She
died on the 31st of December 1705, bequeathing her great wealth, the
result of long hoarding, after the payment of divers charitable
legacies, to King Pedro; and was buried with great ceremony and
splendour at Belem.
See L. C. Davidson, _Catherine of Braganza_ (1908).
CATHERINE OF VALOIS (1401-1437), queen of Henry V. of England, daughter
of Charles VI. of France by his wife Isabel of Bavaria, was born in
Paris on the 27th of October 1401. The lunacy of her father and the
depravity of her mother were serious drawbacks to Catherine, and her
only education was obtained in a convent at Poissy. About 1408 a
marriage was suggested between the princess and Henry, prince of Wales,
afterwards Henry V., who renewed this proposal after he became king in
March 1413. In addition to the hand of Catherine, however, the English
king asked for a large dowry both in money and lands, and when these
demands were rejected war broke out. Once or twice during short
intervals of peace the marriage project was revived, and was favoured by
Queen Isabel. When peace was eventually made at Troyes in May 1420 Henry
and Catherine were betrothed, and the marriage took place at Troyes on
the 2nd of June 1420. Having crossed to England with Henry, the queen
was crowned in Westminster Abbey on the 23rd of February 1421, and in
the following December gave birth to a son, afterwards King Henry VI.
She joined Henry in France in May 1422, returning to England after his
death in the succeeding August. Catherine's name soon began to be
coupled with that of Owen Tudor, a Welsh gentleman, and in 1428
Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, secured the passing of an act to prevent
her from marrying without the consent of the king and council. It
appears, however, that by this time Catherine and Tudor were already
married. They lived in obscurity till 1436, when Tudor was imprisoned,
and Catherine retired to Bermondsey Abbey, where she died on the 3rd of
January 1437. Her body was buried in the Lady chapel of Westminster
Abbey, and when the chapel was pulled down during the reign of Henry
VII., was placed in Henry V.'s tomb. It lay afterwards under the
Villiers monument, and in 1878 was re-buried in Henry V.'s chantry. By
Tudor Catherine had three sons and a daughter. Her eldest son by this
marriage, Edmund, was created earl of Richmond in 1452, and was the
father of Henry VII.
See Agnes Strickland, _Lives of the Queens of England_, vol. iii.
(London, 1877).
CATHETUS (Gr. [Greek: kathetos], a perpendicular line), in architecture
the eye of the volute, so termed because its position is determined, in
an Ionic or voluted capital, by a line let down from the point in which
the volute generates.
CATHOLIC (Gr. [Greek: katholikos], general, universal), a designation
adopted in the 2nd century by the Christian Church to indicate
Christendom as a whole, in contrast with individual churches. With this
idea went the notions that Christianity had been diffused throughout the
whole earth by the apostles, and that only what was found everywhere
throughout the church could be true. The term thus in time became full
of dogmatic and political meaning, connoting, when applied to the
church, a universal authoritative and orthodox society, as opposed to
Gnostic and other "sects" (cf. the famous canon of Vincent of Lerins
A.D. 434; _quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est_). The
term "Catholic" does not occur in the old Roman symbol; but Professor
Loofs includes it in his reconstruction, based on typical phrases in
common use at the time of the ante-Nicene creeds of the East. In the
original form of the Nicene creed itself it does not occur; but in the
creed of Jerusalem (348), an amplification of the Nicene symbol, we find
"one Holy Catholic Church," and in the revision by Cyril of Alexandria
(362) "Catholic and Apostolic Church" (see CREEDS). Thus, though the
word "Catholic" was late in finding its way into the formal symbols of
the church, it is clear that it had long been in use in the original
sense defined above. It must be borne in mind, however, that the
designation "Catholic" was equally claimed by all the warring parties
within the church at various times; thus, the followers of Arius and
Athanasius alike called themselves Catholics, and it was only the
ultimate victory of the latter that has reserved for them in history the
name of Catholic, and branded the former as Arian.
With the gradual development and stereotyping of the creed it was
inevitable that the term "Catholic" should come to imply a more narrowly
defined orthodoxy. In the Eastern churches, indeed, the conception of
the church as the guardian of "the faith once delivered to the saints"
soon overshadowed that of interpretation and development by catholic
consent, and, though they have throughout claimed the title of Catholic,
their chief glory is that conveyed in the name of the Holy Orthodox
Church. In the West, meanwhile, the growth of the power of the papacy
had tended more and more to the interpretation of the word "catholic" as
implying communion with, and obedience to, the see of Rome (see PAPACY);
the churches of the East, no less than the heretical sects of the West,
by repudiating this allegiance, had ceased to be Catholic. This
identification of "Catholic" with "Roman" was accentuated by the
progress of the Reformation. The Reformers themselves, indeed, like
other dissidents and reformers before them, did not necessarily
repudiate the name of Catholic; they believed, in fact, in Catholicism,
i.e. the universal sanction of their beliefs, as firmly as did the
adherents of "the old religion"; they included the Catholic creeds,
definitions formulated by the universal church, in their service books;
they too appealed, as the fathers of Basel and Constance had done, from
the papal monarchy to the great ecclesiastical republic. The Church of
England at least, emphasizing her own essential catholicity, retained in
her translations of the ancient symbols the word "catholic" instead of
replacing it by "universal." But the appeal to the verbally inspired
Bible was stronger than that to a church hopelessly divided; the Bible,
and not the consent of the universal church, became the touchstone of
the reformed orthodoxy; in the nomenclature of the time, "evangelical"
arose in contradistinction to "Catholic," while, in popular parlance,
the "protest" of the Reformers against the "corruptions of Rome" led to
the invention of the term "Protestant," which, though nowhere assumed in
the official titles of the older reformed churches, was early used as a
generic term to include them all.
"Catholic" and "Catholicism" thus again changed and narrowed their
meaning; they became, by universal usage, identified definitely with
"Romanist" and the creed and obedience of Rome. Even in England, where the
church retained most strongly the Catholic tradition, this distinction of
"Protestant" and "Catholic" was clearly maintained, at least till the
"Catholic revival" in the Church of England of the 19th century. On the
continent of Europe the equivalent words (e.g. Ger. _Katholik,
Katholizismus_; Fr. _catholique, catholicisme_) are even more definitely
associated with Rome; they have lost the sense which they still convey to
a considerable school of Anglicans. The dissident "Catholic" churches are
forced to qualify their titles: they are "Old Catholics"
(_Alt-Katholiken_) or "German Catholics" (_Deutsch-Katholiken_). The
Church of Rome alone, officially and in popular parlance, is "the Catholic
Church" (_katholische Kirche, eglise catholique_), a title which she
proudly claims as exclusively her own, by divine right, by the sanction of
immemorial tradition, and by reason of her perpetual protest against the
idea of "national" churches, consecrated by the Reformation (see CHURCH
HISTORY, and ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH). The additional qualification of
"Roman" she tolerates, since it proclaims her doctrine of the see of Rome
as the keystone of Catholicism; but to herself she is "the Catholic
Church," and her members are "Catholics."
Yet to concede this claim and surrender without qualification the word
"Catholic" to a connotation which is at best only universal in theory,
is to beg several very weighty questions. The doctrine of the Catholic
Church, i.e. the essential unity and interdependence of "all God's
faithful people scattered throughout the world," is common to all
sections of Christians. The creed is one; it is the interpretation that
differs. In a somewhat narrower sense, too, the Church of England at
least has never repudiated the conception of the Catholic Church as a
divinely instituted organization for the safe-guarding and proclamation
of the Christian revelation. She deliberately retained the Catholic
creeds, the Catholic ministry and the appeal to Catholic antiquity (see
ENGLAND, CHURCH OF). A large section of her members, accordingly, laying
stress on this side of her tradition, prefer to call themselves
"Catholics." But, though the invention of the terms "Roman Catholic" and
"Roman Catholicism" early implied the retention by the English Church of
her Catholic claim, her members were never, after the Reformation,
called Catholics; even the Caroline divines of the 17th century, for all
their "popish practices," styled themselves Protestants, though they
would have professed their adherence to "the Catholic faith" and their
belief in "the Holy Catholic Church."
Clearly, then, the exact meaning of the term varies according to those
who use it and those to whom it is applied. To the Romanist "Catholic"
means "Roman Catholic"; to the high Anglican it means whatever is common
to the three "historic" branches into which he conceives the church to
be divided--Roman, Anglican and Orthodox; to the Protestant pure and
simple it means either what it does to the Romanist, or, in expansive
moments, simply what is "universal" to all Christians. In a yet broader
sense it is used adjectivally of mere wideness or universality of view,
as when we speak of a man as "of catholic sympathies" or "catholic in
his tastes."
The name of _Catholic Epistles_ is given to those letters (two of Peter,
three of John, one of James, one of Jude) incorporated in the New
Testament which (except 2 and 3 John) are not, like those of St Paul,
addressed to particular individuals or churches, but to a larger and
more indefinite circle of readers. (See BIBLE: _New Testament, Canon_.)
The title of _Catholicus_ ([Greek: katholikos]) seems to have been used
under the Roman empire, though rarely, as the Greek equivalent of
_consularis_ and _praefectus_. Thus Eusebius (_Hist. eccl._ viii. 23)
speaks of the catholicus of Africa ([Greek: katholikon tes Aphrikes]).
As an ecclesiastical title it was used to imply, not universal
(ecumenical), but a great and widespread jurisdiction. Thus the bishop
of the important see of Seleucia (Bagdad), though subordinate to the
patriarch of Antioch, had the title of Catholicus and power to
consecrate even archbishops; and on the division of the see there were
two _Catholici_ under the patriarch of Antioch. In Ethiopia, too, there
were _Catholici_ with less extensive powers, subject to the patriarch of
Alexandria. The title now survives, however, only as that of the head of
the Armenian Church (q.v.). A bishop's cathedral church is, however, in
Greek the _Catholicon_.
An isolated use of the word "catholic" as a secular legal term survives
in Scots law; a _catholic creditor_ is one whose debt is secured over
several or over all of the subjects belonging to the debtor.
CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH, THE, a religious community often called
"Irvingites," though neither actually founded nor anticipated by Edward
Irving (q.v.). Irving's relation to this community was, according to its
members, somewhat similar to that of John the Baptist to the early
Christian Church, i.e. he was the forerunner and prophet of the coming
dispensation, not the founder of a new sect; and indeed the only
connexion which Irving seems to have had with the existing organization
of the Catholic Apostolic body was in "fostering spiritual persons who
had been driven out of other congregations for the exercise of their
spiritual gifts." Shortly after Irving's trial and deposition (1831),
certain persons were, at some meetings held for prayer, designated as
"called to be apostles of the Lord" by certain others claiming prophetic
gifts. In the year 1835, six months after Irving's death, six others
were similarly designated as "called" to complete the number of the
"twelve," who were then formally "separated," by the pastors of the
local congregations to which they belonged, to their higher office in
the universal church on the 14th of July 1835. This separation is
understood by the community not as "in any sense being a schism or
separation from the one Catholic Church, but a separation to a special
work of blessing and intercession on behalf of it." The twelve were
afterwards guided to ordain others--twelve prophets, twelve evangelists,
and twelve pastors, "sharing equally with them the one Catholic
Episcopate," and also seven deacons for administering the temporal
affairs of the church catholic. The apostles were the channels of the
Holy Ghost and the mysteries of God, and the authoritative interpreters
of "prophetic utterance"; their teaching was brought home to the people
by the "evangelists." The function of the prophets was to explain
scripture and exhort to holiness, that of the "pastors" is explained by
their title. The central episcopacy of forty-eight was regarded as
"indicated by prophecy," being foreshown in the forty-eight boards of
the Mosaic tabernacle. For ecclesiastical purposes the church universal
is under their charge in twelve tribes; for Christendom is considered to
be divided into twelve portions or tribes, each tribe being under the
special charge of an apostle and his co-ministers, and the seat of the
Apostolic College being at Albury, near Guildford. This is an ideal
outline which has never been fulfilled. There has never been a "central
episcopacy" of forty-eight. The "apostles" alone always held the supreme
authority, though, as their number dwindled, "coadjutors" were appointed
to assist the survivors, and to exercise the functions of the
"apostolate." The last "apostle" died on the 3rd of February 1901.
For the service of the church a comprehensive book of liturgies and
offices was provided by the "apostles." It dates from 1842 and is based
on the Anglican, Roman and Greek liturgies. Lights, incense, vestments,
holy water, chrism, and other adjuncts of worship are in constant use.
The ceremonial in its completeness may be seen in the church in Gordon
Square, London, and elsewhere. The daily worship consists of "matins"
with "proposition" (or exposition) of the sacrament at 6 A.M., prayers
at 9 A.M. and 3 P.M., and "vespers" with "proposition" at 5 P.M. On all
Sundays and holy days there is a "solemn celebration of the eucharist"
at the high altar; on Sundays this is at 10 A.M. On other days "low
celebrations" are held in the side-chapels, which with the chancel in
all churches correctly built after apostolic directions are separated or
marked off from the nave by open screens with gates. The community has
always laid great stress on symbolism, and in the eucharist, while
rejecting both transubstantiation and consubstantiation, holds strongly
to a real (mystical) presence. It emphasizes also the "phenomena" of
Christian experience and deems miracle and mystery to be of the essence
of a spirit-filled church.
Each congregation is presided over by its "angel" or bishop (who ranks
as angel-pastor in the Universal Church), under him are four-and-twenty
priests, divided into the four ministries of "elders, prophets,
evangelists and pastors," and with these are the deacons, seven of whom
regulate the temporal affairs of the church--besides whom there are also
"sub-deacons, acolytes, singers, and door-keepers." The understanding is
that each elder, with his co-presbyters and deacons, shall have charge
of 500 adult communicants in his district; but this has been but
partially carried into practice. This is the full constitution of each
particular church or congregation as founded by the "restored apostles,"
each local church thus "reflecting in its government the government of
the church catholic by the angel or high priest Jesus Christ, and His
forty-eight presbyters in their fourfold ministry (in which apostles and
elders always rank first), and under these the deacons of the church
catholic." The priesthood is supported by tithes; it being deemed a duty
on the part of all members of the church who receive yearly incomes to
offer a tithe of their increase every week, besides the free-will
offering for the support of the place of worship, and for the relief of
distress. Each local church sends "a tithe of its tithes" to the
"Temple," by which the ministers of the Universal Church are supported
and its administrative expenses defrayed; by these offerings, too, the
needs of poorer churches are supplied. It claims to have among its
clergy many of the Roman, Anglican and other churches, the orders of
those ordained by Greek, Roman and Anglican bishops being recognized by
it with the simple confirmation of an "apostolic act." The community has
not changed recently in general constitution or doctrine. It does not
publish statistics, and its growth during late years is said to have
been more marked in the United States and in certain European countries,
such as Germany, than in Great Britain. There are nine congregations
enumerated in _The Religious Life of London_ (1904).
For further details of doctrines, ritual, &c., see R. N. Bosworth,
_Restoration of Apostles and Prophets, Readings on the Liturgy, The
Church and Tabernacle_, and _The Purpose of God in Creation and
Redemption_ (6th ed., 1888); G. Miller, _History and Doctrines of
Irvingism_ (1878).
CATILINE [LUCIUS SERGIUS CATILINA] (c. 108-62 B.C.), a member of an
ancient but impoverished patrician family of Rome, the prime mover in
the conspiracy known by his name. He appears in history first as a
supporter of Sulla, and during the proscription he was conspicuous for
his greed and cruelty. He slew his inoffensive brother-in-law with his
own hand, and tortured and mutilated the much-loved Marius Gratidianus.
He was believed to have made away with his wife and his son to win the
profligate and wealthy Aurelia Orestilla; it was even suspected that he
had been guilty of an intrigue with the Vestal Fabia. In 77 he was
quaestor, in 68 praetor, and in 67-66 governor of Africa. His extortions
and subsequent impeachment by P. Clodius Pulcher having disqualified him
as a candidate for the consulship, he formed a conspiracy, in which he
was joined by young men of all classes, even Crassus and Caesar,
according to rumour, being implicated. The new consuls were to be
murdered on the 1st of January; but the plot--the execution of which
was deferred till the 5th of February--failed in consequence of the
impatience of Catiline, who gave the signal too hastily. Soon after,
Catiline, having bribed both judges and accuser, was acquitted in the
trial for extortion. His scheme was forthwith immensely widened. The
city was to be fired, and those who opposed the revolution were to be
slain; all debts were to be cancelled; and there was to be a
proscription of all the wealthy citizens. Among the conspirators were
many men of the first rank and influence. Arms and money were collected,
soldiers were enlisted, and the assistance of the slaves was sought. But
Catiline's hopes were again disappointed; once more he failed to obtain
the consulship (64); and, moreover, it soon became apparent that one of
the new consuls, Cicero, was mysteriously able to thwart all the schemes
of the conspirators. He was, in fact, informed of every detail, through
Fulvia, the mistress of Curius, one of the plotters, who was himself
soon persuaded to turn informer. The other consul, C. Antonius, in whom
Catiline hoped to find a supporter, was won over and got out of the way
by Cicero, who resigned the province of Macedonia in his favour. Before
the next _comitia consularia_ assembled, the orator had given so
impressive a warning of the danger which was impending, that Catiline
was once more rejected (63), and the consuls were invested with absolute
authority. Catiline now resolved upon open war; preparations were set on
foot throughout Italy, especially in Etruria, where the standard of
revolt was raised by the centurion C. Manlius (or Mallius), one of
Sulla's veterans. A plan to murder Cicero in his own house on the
morning of the 7th of November was frustrated. On the next day Cicero
attacked Catiline so vigorously in the senate (in his first Catilinarian
oration) that he fled to his army in Etruria. Next day Cicero awoke the
terror of the people by a second oration delivered in the forum, in
consequence of which Catiline and Manlius were declared public enemies,
and the consul Antonius was despatched with an army against them.
Meanwhile the imprudence of the conspirators in Rome brought about their
own destruction. Some deputies from the Allobroges, who had been sent to
Rome to obtain redress for certain grievances, were approached by P.
Lentulus Sura, the chief of the conspirators, who endeavoured to induce
them to join him. After considerable hesitation, the deputies decided to
turn informers. The plot was betrayed to Cicero, at whose instigation
documentary evidence was obtained, implicating Lentulus and others. They
were arrested, proved guilty, and on the 5th of December condemned to
death and strangled in the underground dungeon on the slope of the
Capitol. This act, which was opposed by Julius Caesar and advocated by
Cato Uticensis (and, indirectly, by Cicero), was afterwards vigorously
attacked as a violation of the constitution, on the ground that the
senate had no power of life and death over a Roman citizen. Thus a heavy
blow was dealt to the cause of Catiline, who, in the beginning of 62,
saw his legions, only partially armed and diminished by desertion, shut
in between those of Metellus Celer and C. Antonius. Near Pistoria he
hazarded battle with the forces of the latter, but was completely
defeated in a desperate encounter. He himself, fighting with the utmost
bravery, rushed into the ranks of the enemy and met his death.
Such was the conspiracy of Catiline and the character of its author, as
we find them in the speeches of Cicero, and the histories of Sallust and
Dio Cassius (see also Plutarch, _Cicero_; Vell. Pat. ii. 35; Florus iv.
1; Appian, _B.C._ ii. 6; Eutropius vi. 15). It must not be forgotten,
however, that our authorities were all members of the aristocratic
party. Some of the incidents given as facts by Dio Cassius are manifest
absurdities; and Cicero paid more regard to the effect than to the
truthfulness of an accusation. We find him at one time admitting that
Catiline had almost persuaded him of his honesty and merit, and even
seeking a political union with him; at another, when his alliance had
been rejected and an election was at hand, declaiming against him as a
murderer and a profligate. Lastly, though Sallust's vivid narrative is
consistent throughout, it is obvious that he cherished very bitter
feelings against the democratic party. Nevertheless, we cannot regard
Catiline as an honest enemy of the oligarchy, or as a disinterested
champion of the provincials. It is held by some historians that there
was at the time on the part of many of the Roman nobles a determination
to raise themselves to power, despite the opposition of the senate:
others with greater probability maintain that Catiline's object was
simply the cancelling of the huge debts which he and his friends had
accumulated. Catiline, by his bravery, his military talents, his
vigorous resolution, and his wonderful power over men, was eminently
qualified as a revolutionary leader. He is the subject of tragedies by
Ben Jonson and P. Crebillon, and of the _Rome sauvee_ of Voltaire.
See P. Merimee, _Etudes sur la guerre sociale et la conjuration de
Catiline_ (1844); E. Hagen, _Catilina_ (1854), with introductory
discussion of the authorities; E.S. Beesley, "Catiline as a Party
Leader" (_Fortnightly Review_, June 1865), in defence of Catiline; C.
John, _Die Entstehungsgeschichte der catilinarischen Verschworung_
(1876), a critical examination of Sallust's account; E. von Stern,
_Catilina und die Parteikampfe in Rom_ 66-63 (1883), with bibliography
in preface; C. Thiaucourt, _Etude sur la conjuration de Catiline_
(1887), a critical examination of Sallust's account and of his object
in writing it; J.E. Blondel, _Histoire economique de la conjuration de
Catiline_ (1893), written from the point of view of a political
economist; Gaston Boissier, _La Conjuration de Catiline_ (1905), and
_Cicero and his Friends_ (Eng. trans.); Tyrrell and Purser's ed. of
Cicero's _Letters_ (index vol. s.v. "Sergius Catilina"); J.L. Strachan
Davidson, _Cicero_ (1894), ch. v.; Warde Fowler's _Caesar_ (1892); see
also art. ROME: _History, The Republic_.
CATINAT, NICOLAS (1637-1712), marshal of France, entered the Gardes
Francaises at an early age and distinguished himself at the siege of
Lille in 1667. He became a brigadier ten years later, _marechal de camp_
in 1680, and lieutenant-general 1688. He served with great credit in the
campaigns of 1676-1678 in Flanders, was employed against the Vaudois in
1686, and after taking part in the siege of Philipsburg at the opening
of the War of the League of Augsburg, he was appointed to command the
French troops in the south-eastern theatre of war. In 1690 he conquered
Savoy, and in 1691 Nice; the battle of Staffarda, won by him over the
duke of Savoy in 1690, and that of Marsaglia in 1693, were amongst the
greatest victories of the time. In 1696 Catinat forced the duke to make
an alliance with France. He had in 1693 been made a marshal of France.
At the beginning of the war of the Spanish Succession, Catinat was
placed in charge of operations in Italy, but he was much hampered by the
orders of the French court and the weakness of the forces for their
task. He suffered a reverse at Carpi (1701) and was soon afterwards
superseded by Villeroy, to whom he acted as second-in-command during the
campaign of Chiari. He died at St Gratien in 1712. His memoirs were
published in 1819.
See E. de Broglie, _Catinat, 1637-1712_ (Paris, 1902).
CATLIN, GEORGE (1796-1872), American ethnologist, was born at
Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania, in 1796. He was educated as a lawyer and
practised in Philadelphia for two years; but art was his favourite
pursuit, and forsaking the law he established himself at New York as a
portrait painter. In 1832, realizing that the American Indians were
dying out, he resolved to rescue their types and customs from oblivion.
With this object he spent many years among the Indians in North and
South America. He lived with them, acquired their languages, and studied
very thoroughly their habits, customs and mode of life, making copious
notes and many studies for paintings. In 1840 he came to Europe with his
collection of paintings, most of which are now in the National Museum,
Washington, as the Catlin Gallery; and in the following year he
published the _Manners, Customs and Condition of the North American
Indians_ in two volumes, illustrated with 300 engravings. This was
followed in 1844 by _The North American Portfolio_, containing 25 plates
of hunting scenes and amusements in the Rocky Mountains and the prairies
of America, and in 1848 by _Eight Years' Travels and Residence in
Europe_. In 1861 he published a curious little volume, in "manugraph,"
entitled _The Breath of Life_, on the advantage of keeping one's mouth
habitually closed, especially during sleep; and in 1868, _Last Rambles
amongst the Indians of the Rocky Mountains and the Andes_. He died in
Jersey City, New Jersey, on the 22nd of December 1872.
CATO, DIONYSIUS, the supposed author of the _Dionysii Catonis Disticha
de Moribus ad Filium_. The name usually given is simply Cato, an
indication of the wise character of the maxims inculcated, but Dionysius
is added on the authority of a MS. declared by Scaliger to be of great
antiquity. This MS. also contains Priscian's translation of the
Periegesis of the geographer Dionysius Periegetes; this has probably led
to the _Disticha_ also being attributed to him. In the middle ages the
author on the _Disticha_ was supposed to be Cato the Elder, who wrote a
_Carmen de Moribus_, but extracts from this in Aulus Gellius show that
it was in prose. Nothing is really known of the author or date of the
_Disticha_; it can only be assigned to the 3rd or 4th century A.D. It is
a small collection of moral apophthegms, each consisting of two
hexameters, in four books. They are monotheistic in character, not
specially Christian. The diction and metre are fairly good. The book had
a great reputation in the middle ages, and was translated into many
languages; it is frequently referred to by Chaucer, and in 1483 a
translation was issued from Caxton's press at Westminster.
Editions by F. Hauthal (1869), with full account of MSS. and early
editions, and G. Nemethy (1895), with critical notes; see also F.
Zarncke, _Der deutsche Cato_ (1852), a history of middle age German
translations; J. Nehab, _Der altenglische Cato_ (1879); E. Bischoff,
_Prolegomena zum sogenannten Dionysius Cato_ (1893), in which the name
is discussed; F. Plessis, _Poesie latine_ (1909), 663; for medieval
translations and editions see Teuffel, _Hist. of Roman Lit._ S 398, 3.
CATO, MARCUS PORCIUS (234-149 B.C.), Roman statesman, surnamed "The
Censor," _Sapiens, Priscus_, or _Major_ (the Elder), to distinguish him
from Cato of Utica, was born at Tusculum. He came of an ancient plebeian
family, noted for some military services, but not ennobled by the
discharge of the higher civil offices. He was bred, after the manner of
his Latin forefathers, to agriculture, to which he devoted himself when
not engaged in military service. But, having attracted the notice of L.
Valerius Flaccus, he was brought to Rome, and became successively
quaestor (204), aedile (199), praetor (198), and consul (195) with his
old patron. During his term of office he vainly opposed the repeal of
the lex Oppia, passed during the Second Punic War to restrict luxury and
extravagance on the part of women. Meanwhile he served in Africa, and
took part in the crowning campaign of Zama (202). He held a command in
Sardinia, where he first showed his strict public morality, and again in
Spain, which he reduced to subjection with great cruelty, and gained
thereby the honour of a triumph (194). In the year 191 he acted as
military tribune in the war against Antiochus III. of Syria, and played
an important part in the battle of Thermopylae, which finally delivered
Greece from the encroachments of the East. His reputation as a soldier
was now established; henceforth he preferred to serve the state at home,
scrutinizing the conduct of the candidates for public honours and of
generals in the field. If he was not personally engaged in the
prosecution of the Scipios (Africanus and Asiaticus) for corruption, it
was his spirit that animated the attack upon them. Even Africanus, who
refused to reply to the charge, saying only, "Romans, this is the day on
which I conquered Hannibal," and was absolved by acclamation, found it
necessary to retire self-banished to his villa at Liternum. Cato's
enmity dated from the African campaign when he quarrelled with Scipio
for his lavish distribution of the spoil amongst the troops, and his
general luxury and extravagance.
Cato had, however, a more serious task to perform in opposing the spread
of the new Hellenic culture which threatened to destroy the rugged
simplicity of the conventional Roman type. He conceived it to be his
special mission to resist this invasion. It was in the discharge of the
censorship that this determination was most strongly exhibited, and
hence that he derived the title (the Censor) by which he is most
generally distinguished. He revised with unsparing severity the lists of
senators and knights, ejecting from either order the men whom he judged
unworthy of it, either on moral grounds or from their want of the
prescribed means. The expulsion of L. Quinctius Flamininus for wanton
cruelty was an example of his rigid justice. His regulations against
luxury were very stringent. He imposed a heavy tax upon dress and
personal adornment, especially of women, and upon young slaves purchased
as favourites. In 181 he supported the lex Orchia (according to others,
he first opposed its introduction, and subsequently its repeal), which
prescribed a limit to the number of guests at an entertainment, and in
169 the lex Voconia, one of the provisions of which was intended to
check the accumulation of an undue proportion of wealth in the hands of
women. Amongst other things he repaired the aqueducts, cleansed the
sewers, prevented private persons drawing off public water for their own
use, ordered the demolition of houses which encroached on the public
way, and built the first basilica in the forum near the curia. He raised
the amount paid by the publican for the right of farming the taxes, and
at the same time diminished the contract prices for the construction of
public works.
From the date of his censorship (184) to his death in 149, Cato held no
public office, but continued to distinguish himself in the senate as the
persistent opponent of the new ideas. He was struck with horror, along
with many other Romans of the graver stamp, at the licence of the
Bacchanalian mysteries, which he attributed to the fatal influence of
Greek manners; and he vehemently urged the dismissal of the philosophers
(Carneades, Diogenes and Critolaus), who came as ambassadors from
Athens, on account of the dangerous nature of the views expressed by
them. He had a horror of physicians, who were chiefly Greeks. He
procured the release of Polybius, the historian, and his
fellow-prisoners, contemptuously asking whether the senate had nothing
more important to do than discuss whether a few Greeks should die at
Rome or in their own land. It was not till his eightieth year that he
made his first acquaintance with Greek literature. Almost his last
public act was to urge his countrymen to the Third Punic War and the
destruction of Carthage. In 157 he was one of the deputies sent to
Carthage to arbitrate between the Carthaginians and Massinissa, king of
Numidia. The mission was unsuccessful and the commissioners returned
home. But Cato was so struck by the evidences of Carthaginian prosperity
that he was convinced that the security of Rome depended on the
annihilation of Carthage. From this time, in season and out of season,
he kept repeating the cry: "Delenda est Carthago."
To Cato the individual life was a continual discipline, and public life
was the discipline of the many. He regarded the individual householder
as the germ of the family, the family as the germ of the state. By
strict economy of time he accomplished an immense amount of work; he
exacted similar application from his dependents, and proved himself a
hard husband, a strict father, a severe and cruel master. There was
little difference apparently, in the esteem in which he held his wife
and his slaves; his pride alone induced him to take a warmer interest in
his sons. To the Romans themselves there was little in this behaviour
which seemed worthy of censure; it was respected rather as a traditional
example of the old Roman manners. In the remarkable passage (xxxix. 40)
in which Livy describes the character of Cato, there is no word of blame
for the rigid discipline of his household.
Cato perhaps deserves even more notice as a literary man than as a
statesman or a soldier. He was the first Latin prose writer of any
importance, and the first author of a history of Rome in Latin. His
treatise on agriculture (_De Agricultura_, or _De Re Rustica_) is the
only work by him that has been preserved; it is not agreed whether the
work we possess is the original or a later revision. It contains a
miscellaneous collection of rules of good husbandry, conveying much
curious information on the domestic habits of the Romans of his age. His
most important work, _Origines_, in seven books, related the history of
Rome from its earliest foundations to his own day. It was so called from
the second and third books, which described the rise of the different
Italian towns. His speeches, of which as many as 150 were collected,
were principally directed against the young free-thinking and
loose-principled nobles of the day. He also wrote a set of maxims for
the use of his son (_Praecepta ad Filium_), and some rules for everyday
life in verse (_Carmen de Moribus_). The collection of proverbs in
hexameter verse, extant under the name of Cato, probably belongs to the
4th century A.D. (See CATO, DIONYSIUS.)
AUTHORITIES.--There are lives of Cato by Cornelius Nepos, Plutarch and
Aurelius Victor, and many particulars of his career and character are
to be gathered from Livy and Cicero. See also F.D. Gerlach, _Marcus
Porcius Cato der Censor_ (Basel, 1869); G. Kurth, _Caton l'ancien_
(Bruges, 1872); J. Cortese, _De M. Porcii Catonis vita, operibus, et
lingua_ (Turin, 1883); F. Marcucci, _Studio critico sulle Opere di
Catone il Maggiore_ (1902). The best edition of the _De Agricultura_
is by H. Keil (1884-1891), of the fragments of the _Origines_ by H.
Peter (1883) in _Historicorum Romanorum Fragmenta_, of the fragments
generally by H. Jordan (1860); see also J. Wordsworth, _Fragments and
Specimens of Early Latin_ (1874); M. Schanz, _Geschichte der romischen
Litteratur_ (1898); article in Smith's _Dictionary of Greek and Roman
Biography_, Mommsen, _Hist. of Rome_ (Eng. trans.), bk. iii. ch. xi
and xiv.; Warde Fowler, _Social Life at Rome_ (1909).
CATO, MARCUS PORCIUS (95-46 B.C.), Roman philosopher, called _Uticensis_
to distinguish him from his great-grandfather, "the Censor." On the
death of his parents he was brought up in the house of his uncle, M.
Livius Drusus. After fighting with distinction in the ranks against
Spartacus (72 B.C.), he became a military tribune (67), and served a
campaign in Macedonia, but he never had any enthusiasm for the military
profession. On his return he became quaestor, and showed so much zeal
and integrity in the management of the public accounts that he obtained
a provincial appointment in Asia, where he strengthened his reputation.
Though filled with disgust at the corruption of the public men with whom
he came in contact, he saw much to admire in the discipline which
Lucullus had enforced in his own eastern command, and he supported his
claims to a triumph, while he opposed the inordinate pretensions of
Pompey. When the favour of the nobles gained him the tribuneship, he
exerted himself unsuccessfully to convict L. Licinius Murena (2), one of
their chief men, of bribery. Cicero, who defended Murena, was glad to
have Cato's aid when he urged the execution of the Catilinarian
conspirators. Cato's vote on this matter drew upon him the bitter
resentment of Julius Caesar, who did his utmost to save them.
Cato had now become a great power in the state. Though possessed of
little wealth and no family influence, his unflinching resolution in the
cause of the ancient free state rendered him a valuable instrument in
the hands of the nobles. He vainly opposed Caesar's candidature for the
consulship in 59, and his attempt, in conjunction with Bibulus, to
prevent the passing of Caesar's proposed agrarian law for distributing
lands amongst the Asiatic veterans, proved unsuccessful. Nevertheless,
although his efforts were ineffectual, he was still an obstacle of
sufficient importance for the triumvirs to desire to get rid of him. At
the instigation of Caesar he was sent to Cyprus (58) with a mission to
depose its king, Ptolemy (brother of Ptolemy Auletes), and annex the
island. On his return two years later he continued to struggle against
the combined powers of the triumvirs in the city, and became involved in
scenes of violence and riot. He succeeded in obtaining the praetorship
in 54, and strenuously exerted himself in the hopeless and thankless
task of suppressing bribery, in which all parties were equally
interested. He failed to attain the consulship, and had made up his mind
to retire from the arena of civic ambition when the civil war broke out
in 49. Feeling that the sole chance for the free state lay in conceding
an actual supremacy to Pompey, whom he had formerly vigorously opposed,
he did not scruple to support the unjust measures of the nobles against
Caesar. At the outset of the war he was entrusted with the defence of
Sicily, but finding it impossible to resist the superior forces of C.
Scribonius Curio, who had landed on the island, he joined Pompey at
Dyrrhachium. When his chief followed Caesar to Thessaly he was left
behind in charge of the camp, and thus was not present at the battle of
Pharsalus. After the battle, when Pompey abandoned his party, he
separated himself from the main body of the republicans, and conducted a
small remnant of their forces into Africa. After his famous march
through the Libyan deserts, he shut himself up in Utica, and even after
the decisive defeat at Thapsus (46), in spite of the wishes of his
followers, he determined to keep the gates closed till he had sent off
his adherents by sea. While the embarkation was in progress he continued
calm and dignified; when the last of the transports had left the port he
cheerfully dismissed his attendants, and soon afterwards stabbed
himself.
He had been reading, we are told, in his last moments Plato's dialogue
on the immortality of the soul, but his own philosophy had taught him to
act upon a narrow sense of immediate duty without regard to the future.
He conceived that he was placed in the world to play an active part, and
when disabled from carrying out his principles, to retire gravely from
it. He had lived for the free state, and it now seemed his duty to
perish with it. In politics he was a typical doctrinaire, abhorring
compromise and obstinately blind to the fact that his national ideal was
a hopeless anachronism. From the circumstances of his life and of his
death, he has come to be regarded as one of the most distinguished of
Roman philosophers, but he composed no works, and bequeathed to
posterity no other instruction than that of his example. The only
composition by him which we possess is a letter to Cicero (_Ad Fam._ xv.
5), a polite refusal of the orator's request that he would endeavour to
procure him the honour of a triumph. The school of the Stoics, which
took a leading part in the history of Rome under the earlier emperors,
looked to him as its saint and patron. It continued to wage war against
the empire, hardly less openly than Cato himself had done, for two
centuries, till at last it became actually seated on the imperial throne
in the person of Marcus Aurelius. Immediately after his death Cato's
character became the subject of discussion; Cicero's panegyric _Cato_
was answered by Caesar in his _Anticato_. Brutus, dissatisfied with
Cicero's work, produced another on the same subject; in Lucan Cato is
represented as a model of virtue and disinterestedness.
See _Life_ by Plutarch, and compare Addison's tragedy. Modern
biographies by H. Wartmann (Zurich, 1859), and F.D. Gerlach (Basel,
1866); C.W. Oman, _Seven Roman Statesmen of the Later Republic, Cato
..._ (1902); Mommsen, _Hist. of Rome_ (Eng. trans.), bk. v. ch. v.;
article in Smith's _Dictionary of Classical Biography_; Gaston
Boissier, _Cicero and his Friends_ (Eng. trans., 1897), esp. pp. 277
foll.; Warde Fowler, _Social Life at Rome_ (1909).
CATO, PUBLIUS VALERIUS, Roman poet and grammarian, was born about 100
B.C. He is of importance as the leader of the "new" school of poetry
(_poetae novi_, [Greek: neoteroi], as Cicero calls them). Its followers
rejected the national epic and drama in favour of the artificial
mythological epics and elegies of the Alexandrian school, and preferred
Euphorion of Chalcis to Ennius. Learning, that is, a knowledge of Greek
literature and myths, and strict adherence to metrical rules were
regarded by them as indispensable to the poet. The [Greek: neoteroi]
were also determined opponents of Pompey and Caesar. The great influence
of Cato is attested by the lines:--
"Cato grammaticus, Latina Siren,
Qui solus legit ac facit poetas."[1]
Our information regarding his life is derived from Suetonius (_De
Grammaticis_, 11). He was a native of Cisalpine Gaul, and lost his
property during the Sullan disturbances before he had attained his
majority. He lived to a great age, and during the latter part of his
life was in very reduced circumstances. He was at one time possessed of
considerable wealth, and owned a villa at Tusculum which he was obliged
to hand over to his creditors. In addition to grammatical treatises,
Cato wrote a number of poems, the best-known of which were the _Lydia_
and _Diana_. In the _Indignatio_ (perhaps a short poem) he defended
himself against the accusation that he was of servile birth. It is
probable that he is the Cato mentioned as a critic of Lucilius in the
lines by an unknown author prefixed to Horace, _Satires_, i. 10.
Among the minor poems attributed to Virgil is one called _Dirae_ (or
rather two, _Dirae_ and _Lydia_). The _Dirae_ consists of imprecations
against the estate of which the writer has been deprived, and where he
is obliged to leave his beloved Lydia; in the _Lydia_, on the other
hand, the estate is regarded with envy as the possessor of his
charmer. Joseph Justus Scaliger was the first to attribute the poem
(divided into two by F. Jacobs) to Valerius Cato, on the ground that
he had lost an estate and had written a _Lydia_. The question has been
much discussed; the balance of opinion is in favour of the _Dirae_
being assigned to the beginning of the Augustan age, although so
distinguished a critic as O. Ribbeck supports the claims of Cato to
the authorship. The best edition of these poems is by A.F. Nake
(1847), with exhaustive commentary and excursuses; a clear account of
the question will be found in M. Schanz's _Geschichte der romischen
Litteratur_; for the "new" school of poetry see Mommsen, _Hist. of
Rome_, bk. v. ch. xii.; F. Plessis, _Poesie latine_ (1909), 188.