[1] Dr Armitage Robinson, in his edition of the _Philocalia_
(extracts made c. 358 by Basil and Gregory from Origen's writings),
proved that the passage cited below is simply introduced as a
parallel to an extract of Origen's; while Dom Chapman, in the
_Journal of Theol. Studies_, iii. 436 ff., made it probable that the
passages in Origen's _Comm. on Matthew_ akin to those in the _Opus
Imperf. in Matth._ are insertions in the former, which is extant only
in a Latin version. Subsequently he suggested (_Zeitsch. f. N.T.
Wissenschaft_, ix. 33 f.) that the passage in the _Philocalia_ is due
not to its authors but to an early editor, since it is the only
citation not referred to Origen.
[2] While Hort and Waitz say c. 200, Harnack says c. 260. The reign
of Gallienus (260-268) would suit the tone of its references to the
Roman emperor (Waitz, p. 74), and also any polemic against the
Neoplatonic philosophy of revelation by visions and dreams which it
may contain.
[3] Even Waitz agrees to this, though he argues back to a yet earlier
anti-Pauline (rather than anti-Marcionite) form, composed in
Caesarea, c. 135.
[4] Dom Chapman maintains that the _Recognitions_ (c. 370-390,) even
attack the doctrine of God in the _Homilies_ or their archetype.
[5] Dom Chapman (ut supra, p. 158) says during the Neoplatonist
reaction under Julian 361-363, to which period he also assigns the
_Homilies_.
CLEOBULUS, one of the Seven Sages of Greece, a native and tyrant of
Lindus in Rhodes. He was distinguished for his strength and his handsome
person, for the wisdom of his sayings, the acuteness of his riddles and
the beauty of his lyric poetry. Diogenes Laertius quotes a letter in
which Cleobulus invites Solon to take refuge with him against
Peisistratus; and this would imply that he was alive in 560 B.C. He is
said to have held advanced views as to female education, and he was the
father of the wise Cleobuline, whose riddles were not less famous than
his own (Diogenes Laertius i. 89-93).
See F.G. Mullach, _Fragmenta Philosophorum Graecorum_, i.
CLEOMENES ([Greek: Kleomenes]), the name of three Spartan kings of the
Agiad line.
CLEOMENES I. was the son of Anaxandridas, whom he succeeded about 520
B.C. His chief exploit was his crushing victory near Tiryns over the
Argives, some 6000 of whom he burned to death in a sacred grove to which
they had fled for refuge (Herodotus vi. 76-82). This secured for Sparta
the undisputed hegemony of the Peloponnese. Cleomenes' interposition in
the politics of central Greece was less successful. In 510 he marched to
Athens with a Spartan force to aid in expelling the Peisistratidae, and
subsequently returned to support the oligarchical party, led by
Isagoras, against Cleisthenes (q.v.). He expelled seven hundred families
and transferred the government from the council to three hundred of the
oligarchs, but being blockaded in the Acropolis he was forced to
capitulate. On his return home he collected a large force with the
intention of making Isagoras despot of Athens, but the opposition of
the Corinthian allies and of his colleague Demaratus caused the
expedition to break up after reaching Eleusis (Herod. v. 64-76;
Aristotle, _Ath. Pol._ 19, 20). In 491 he went to Aegina to punish the
island for its submission to Darius, but the intrigues of his colleague
once again rendered his mission abortive. In revenge Cleomenes accused
Demaratus of illegitimacy and secured his deposition in favour of
Leotychides (Herod. vi. 50-73). But when it was discovered that he had
bribed the Delphian priestess to substantiate his charge he was himself
obliged to flee; he went first to Thessaly and then to Arcadia, where he
attempted to foment an anti-Spartan rising. About 488 B.C. he was
recalled, but shortly afterwards, in a fit of madness, he committed
suicide (Herod. vi. 74, 75). Cleomenes seems to have received scant
justice at the hands of Herodotus or his informants, and Pausanias (iii.
3, 4) does little more than condense Herodotus's narrative. In spite of
some failures, largely due to Demaratus's jealousy, Cleomenes
strengthened Sparta in the position, won during his father's reign, of
champion and leader of the Hellenic race; it was to him, for example,
that the Ionian cities of Asia Minor first applied for aid in their
revolt against Persia (Herod. v. 49-51).
For the chronology see J. Wells, _Journal of Hellenic Studies_ (1905),
p. 193 ff., who assigns the Argive expedition to the outset of the
reign, whereas nearly all historians have dated it in or about 495
B.C.
CLEOMENES II. was the son of Cleombrotus I., brother and successor of
Agesipolis II. Nothing is recorded of his reign save the fact that it
lasted for nearly sixty-one years (370-309 B.C.).
CLEOMENES III., the son and successor of Leonidas II., reigned about
235-219 B.C. He made a determined attempt to reform the social condition
of Sparta along the lines laid down by Agis IV., whose widow Agiatis he
married; at the same time he aimed at restoring Sparta's hegemony in the
Peloponnese. After twice defeating the forces of the Achaean League in
Arcadia, near Mount Lycaeum and at Leuctra, he strengthened his position
by assassinating four of the ephors, abolishing the ephorate, which had
usurped the supreme power, and banishing some eighty of the leading
oligarchs. The authority of the council was also curtailed, and a new
board of magistrates, the _patronomi_, became the chief officers of
state. He appointed his own brother Eucleidas as his colleague in
succession to the Eurypontid Archidamus, who had been murdered. His
social reforms included a redistribution of land, the remission of
debts, the restoration of the old system of training ([Greek: agoge])
and the admission of picked perioeci into the citizen body. As a general
Cleomenes did much to revive Sparta's old prestige. He defeated the
Achaeans at Dyme, made himself master of Argos, and was eventually
joined by Corinth, Phlius, Epidaurus and other cities. But Aratus, whose
jealousy could not brook to see a Spartan at the head of the Achaean
league called in Antigonus Doson of Macedonia, and Cleomenes, after
conducting successful expeditions to Megalopolis and Argos, was finally
defeated at Sellasia, to the north of Sparta, in 222 or 221 B.C. He took
refuge at Alexandria with Ptolemy Euergetes, but was arrested by his
successor, Ptolemy Philopator, on a charge of conspiracy. Escaping from
prison he tried to raise a revolt, but the attempt failed and to avoid
capture he put an end to his life. Both as general and as politician
Cleomenes was one of Sparta's greatest men, and with him perished her
last hope of recovering her ancient supremacy in Greece.
See Polybius ii. 45-70, v. 35-39, viii. 1; Plutarch, _Cleomenes;
Aratus_, 35-46; _Philopoemen_, 5, 6; Pausanias ii. 9; Gehlert, _De
Cleomene_ (Leipzig, 1883); Holm, _History of Greece_, iv. cc. 10, 15.
(M. N. T.)
CLEON (d. 422 B.C.), Athenian politician during the Peloponnesian War,
was the son of Cleaenetus, from whom he inherited a lucrative tannery
business. He was the first prominent representative of the commercial
class in Athenian politics. He came into notice first as an opponent of
Pericles, to whom his advanced ideas were naturally unacceptable, and in
his opposition somewhat curiously found himself acting in concert with
the aristocrats, who equally hated and feared Pericles. During the dark
days of 430, after the unsuccessful expedition of Pericles to
Peloponnesus, and when the city was devastated by the plague, Cleon
headed the opposition to the Periclean regime. Pericles was accused by
Cleon of maladministration of public money, with the result that he was
actually found guilty (see Grote's _Hist. of Greece_, abridged ed.,
1907, p. 406, note 1). A revulsion of feeling, however, soon took place.
Pericles was reinstated, and Cleon now for a time fell into the
background. The death of Pericles (429) left the field clear for him.
Hitherto he had only been a vigorous opposition speaker, a trenchant
critic and accuser of state officials. He now came forward as the
professed champion and leader of the democracy, and, owing to the
moderate abilities of his rivals and opponents, he was for some years
undoubtedly the foremost man in Athens. Although rough and unpolished,
he was gifted with natural eloquence and a powerful voice, and knew
exactly how to work upon the feelings of the people. He strengthened his
hold on the poorer classes by his measure for trebling the pay of the
jurymen, which provided the poorer Athenians with an easy means of
livelihood. The notorious fondness of the Athenians for litigation
increased his power; and the practice of "sycophancy" (raking up
material for false charges; see SYCOPHANT), enabled him to remove those
who were likely to endanger his ascendancy. Having no further use for
his former aristocratic associates, he broke off all connexion with
them, and thus felt at liberty to attack the secret combinations for
political purposes, the oligarchical clubs to which they mostly
belonged. Whether he also introduced a property-tax for military
purposes, and even held a high position in connexion with the treasury,
is uncertain. His ruling principles were an inveterate hatred of the
nobility, and an equal hatred of Sparta. It was mainly through him that
the opportunity of concluding an honourable peace (in 425) was lost, and
in his determination to see Sparta humbled he misled the people as to
the extent of the resources of the state, and dazzled them by promises
of future benefits.
In 427 Cleon gained an evil notoriety by his proposal to put to death
indiscriminately all the inhabitants of Mytilene, which had put itself
at the head of a revolt. His proposal, though accepted, was, fortunately
for the credit of Athens, rescinded, although, as it was, the chief
leaders and prominent men, numbering about 1000, fell victims. In 425,
he reached the summit of his fame by capturing and transporting to
Athens the Spartans who had been blockaded in Sphacteria (see PYLOS).
Much of the credit was probably due to the military skill of his
colleague Demosthenes; but it must be admitted that it was due to
Cleon's determination that the Ecclesia sent out the additional force
which was needed. It was almost certainly due to Cleon that the tribute
of the "allies" was doubled in 425 (see DELIAN LEAGUE). In 422 he was
sent to recapture Amphipolis, but was outgeneralled by Brasidas and
killed. His death removed the chief obstacle to an arrangement with
Sparta, and in 421 the peace of Nicias was concluded (see PELOPONNESIAN
WAR).
The character of Cleon is represented by Aristophanes and Thucydides in
an extremely unfavourable light. But neither can be considered an
unprejudiced witness. The poet had a grudge against Cleon, who had
accused him before the senate of having ridiculed (in his _Babylonians_)
the policy and institutions of his country in the presence of foreigners
and at the time of a great national war. Thucydides, a man of strong
oligarchical prejudices, had also been prosecuted for military
incapacity and exiled by a decree proposed by Cleon. It is therefore
likely that Cleon has had less than justice done to him in the portraits
handed down by these two writers.
AUTHORITIES.--For the literature on Cleon see C.F. Hermann, _Lehrbuch
der griechischen Antiquitaeten_, i. pt. 2 (6th ed. by V. Thumser,
1892), p. 709, and G. Busolt, _Griechische Geschichte_, iii. pt. 2
(1904), p. 988, note 3. The following are the chief authorities:--(a)
_Favourable to Cleon_.--C.F. Ranke, _Commentatio de Vita Aristophanis_
(Leipzig, 1845); J.G. Droysen, _Aristophanes_, ii., introd. to the
_Knights_ (Berlin, 1837); G. Grote, _Hist. of Greece_, chs. 50, 54; W.
Oncken, _Athen und Hellas_, ii. p. 204 (Leipzig, 1866); H.
Mueller-Struebing, _Aristophanes und die historische Kritik_ (Leipzig,
1873); J.B. Bury, _Hist. of Greece_, i. (1902). (b)
_Unfavourable_.--J.F. Kortuem, _Geschichtliche Forschungen_ (Leipzig,
1863), and _Zur Geschichte hellenischen Staatsverfassungen_
(Heidelberg, 1821); F. Passow, _Vermischte Schriften_ (Leipzig,
1843); C. Thirlwall, _Hist. of Greece_, ch. 21; E. Curtius, _Hist. of
Greece_ (Eng. tr.) iii. p. 112; J. Schvarcz, _Die Demokratie_ (Leipzig,
1882); H. Delbrueck, _Die Strategie des Perikles_ (Berlin, 1890); E.
Meyer, _Forschungen zur alten Geschichte_, ii. p. 333 (Halle, 1899).
The balance between the two extreme views is fairly held by J. Beloch,
_Die attische Politik seit Perikles_ (Leipzig, 1884), and _Griechische
Geschichte_, i. p. 537; and by A. Holm, _Hist. of Greece_, ii. (Eng.
tr.), ch. 23, with the notes.
CLEOPATRA, the regular name of the queens of Egypt in the Ptolemaic
dynasty after Cleopatra, daughter of the Seleucid Antiochus the Great,
wife of Ptolemy V., Epiphanes. The best known was the daughter of
Ptolemy XIII. Auletes, born 69 (or 68) B.C. At the age of seventeen she
became queen of Egypt jointly with her younger brother Ptolemy Dionysus,
whose wife, in accordance with Egyptian custom, she was to become. A few
years afterwards, deprived of all royal authority, she withdrew into
Syria, and made preparation to recover her rights by force of arms. At
this juncture Julius Caesar followed Pompey into Egypt. The personal
fascinations of Cleopatra induced him to undertake a war on her behalf,
in which Ptolemy lost his life, and she was replaced on the throne in
conjunction with a younger brother, of whom, however, she soon rid
herself by poison. In Rome she lived openly with Caesar as his mistress
until his assassination, when, aware of her unpopularity, she returned
at once to Egypt. Subsequently she became the ally and mistress of Mark
Antony (see ANTONIUS). Their connexion was highly unpopular at Rome, and
Octavian (see AUGUSTUS) declared war upon them and defeated them at
Actium (31 B.C.). Cleopatra took to flight, and escaped to Alexandria,
where Antony joined her. Having no prospect of ultimate success, she
accepted the proposal of Octavian that she should assassinate Antony,
and enticed him to join her in a mausoleum which she had built in order
that "they might die together." Antony committed suicide, in the
mistaken belief that she had already done so, but Octavian refused to
yield to the charms of Cleopatra who put an end to her life, by applying
an asp to her bosom, according to the common tradition, in the
thirty-ninth year of her age (29th of August, 30 B.C.). With her ended
the dynasty of the Ptolemies, and Egypt was made a Roman province.
Cleopatra had three children by Antony, and by Julius Caesar, as some
say, a son, called Caesarion, who was put to death by Octavian. In her
the type of queen characteristic of the Macedonian dynasties stands in
the most brilliant light. Imperious will, masculine boldness, relentless
ambition like hers had been exhibited by queens of her race since the
old Macedonian days before Philip and Alexander. But the last Cleopatra
had perhaps some special intellectual endowment. She surprised her
generation by being able to speak the many tongues of her subjects.
There may have been an individual quality in her luxurious profligacy,
but then her predecessors had not had the Roman lords of the world for
wooers.
For the history of Cleopatra see ANTONIUS, MARCUS; CAESAR, GAIUS
JULIUS; PTOLEMIES. The life of Antony by Plutarch is our main
authority; it is upon this that Shakespeare's _Antony and Cleopatra_
is based. Her life is the subject of monographs by Stahr (1879, an
_apologia_), and Houssaye, _Aspasie, Cleopatre_, &c. (1879).
CLEPSYDRA (from Gr. [Greek: klheptein], to steal, and [Greek: hudor],
water), the chronometer of the Greeks and Romans, which measured time by
the flow of water. In its simplest form it was a short-necked
earthenware globe of known capacity, pierced at the bottom with several
small holes, through which the water escaped or "stole away." The
instrument was employed to set a limit to the speeches in courts of
justice, hence the phrases _aquam dare_, to give the advocate speaking
time, and _aquam perdere_, to waste time. Smaller clepsydrae of glass
were very early used in place of the sun-dial, to mark the hours. But as
the length of the hour varied according to the season of the year,
various arrangements, of which we have no clear account, were necessary
to obviate this and other defects. For instance, the flow of water
varied with the temperature and pressure of the air, and secondly, the
rate of flow became less as the vessel emptied itself. The latter defect
was remedied by keeping the level of the water in the clepsydra uniform,
the volume of that discharged being noted. Plato is said to have
invented a complicated clepsydra to indicate the hours of the night as
well as of the day. In the clepsydra or hydraulic clock of Ctesibius of
Alexandria, made about 135 B.C., the movement of water-wheels caused the
gradual rise of a little figure, which pointed out the hours with a
little stick on an index attached to the machine. The clepsydra is said
to have been known to the Egyptians. There was one in the Tower of the
Winds at Athens; and the turret on the south side of the tower is
supposed to have contained the cistern which supplied the water.
See Marquardt, _Das Privatleben der Roemer_, i. (2nd ed., 1886), p.
792; G. Bilfinger, _Die Zeitmesser der antiken Voelker_ (1886), and
_Die antiken Stundenangaben_ (1888).
CLERESTORY, or CLEARSTORY (Ital. _chiaro piano_, Fr. _clairevoie_,
_claire etage_, Ger. _Lichtgaden_), in architecture, the upper storey of
the nave of a church, the walls of which rise above the aisles and are
pierced with windows ("clere" being simply "clear," in the sense of
"lighted"). Sometimes these windows are very small, being mere
quatrefoils or spherical triangles. In large buildings, however, they
are important objects, both for beauty and utility. The windows of the
clerestories of Norman work, even in large churches, are of less
importance than in the later styles. In Early English they became
larger; and in the Decorated they are more important still, being
lengthened as the triforium diminishes. In Perpendicular work the latter
often disappears altogether, and in many later churches, as at Taunton,
and many churches in Norfolk and Suffolk, the clerestories are close
ranges of windows. The term is equally applicable to the Egyptian
temples, where the lighting of the hall of columns was obtained over the
stone roofs of the adjoining aisles, through slits pierced in vertical
slabs of stone. The Romans also in their baths and palaces employed the
same method, and probably derived it from the Greeks; in the palaces at
Crete, however, light-wells would seem to have been employed.
CLERFAYT (or CLAIRFAYT), FRANCOIS SEBASTIEN CHARLES JOSEPH DE CROIX,
COUNT OF (1733-1798), Austrian field marshal, entered the Austrian army
in 1753. In the Seven Years' War he greatly distinguished himself,
earning rapid promotion, and receiving the decoration of the order of
Maria Theresa. At the conclusion of the peace, though still under
thirty, he was already a colonel. During the outbreak of the Netherlands
in 1787, he was, as a Walloon by birth, subjected to great pressure to
induce him to abandon Joseph II., but he resisted all overtures, and in
the following year went to the Turkish war in the rank of lieutenant
field marshal. In an independent command Clerfayt achieved great
success, defeating the Turks at Mehadia and Calafat. In 1792, as one of
the most distinguished of the emperor's generals, he received the
command of the Austrian contingent in the duke of Brunswick's army, and
at Croix-sous-Bois his corps inflicted a reverse on the troops of the
French revolution. In the Netherlands, to which quarter he was
transferred after Jemappes, he opened the campaign of 1793 with the
victory of Aldenhoven and the relief of Maestricht, and on March 18th
mainly brought about the complete defeat of Dumouriez at Neerwinden.
Later in the year, however, his victorious career was checked by the
reverse at Wattignies, and in 1794 he was unsuccessful in West Flanders
against Pichegru. In the course of the campaign Clerfayt succeeded the
duke of Saxe-Coburg in the supreme command, but was quite unable to make
head against the French, and had to recross the Rhine. In 1795, now
field marshal, he commanded on the middle Rhine against Jourdan, and
this time the fortune of war changed. Jourdan was beaten at Hoechst and
Mainz brilliantly relieved. But the field marshal's action in concluding
an armistice with the French not being approved by Thugut, he resigned
the command, and became a member of the Aulic Council in Vienna. He died
in 1798. A brave and skilful soldier, Clerfayt perhaps achieved more
than any other Austrian commander (except the archduke Charles) in the
hopeless struggle of small dynastic armies against a "nation in arms."
See von Vivenot, _Thugut, Clerfayt, und Wuermser_ (Vienna, 1869).
CLERGY (M.E. _clergie_, O. Fr. _clergie_, from Low Lat. form _clericia_
[Skeat], by assimilation with O. Fr. _clergie_, Fr. _clerge_, from Low
Lat. _clericatus_), a collective term signifying in English strictly the
body of "clerks," i.e. men in holy orders (see CLERK). The word has,
however, undergone sundry modifications of meaning. Its M.E. senses of
"clerkship" and "learning" have long since fallen obsolete. On the other
hand, in modern times there has been an increasing tendency to depart
from its strict application to technical "clerks," and to widen it out
so as to embrace all varieties of ordained Christian ministers. While,
however, it is now not unusual to speak of "the Nonconformist clergy,"
the word "clergyman" is still, at least in the United Kingdom, used of
the clergy of the Established Church in contradistinction to "minister."
As applied to the Roman Catholic Church the word embraces the whole
hierarchy, whether its _clerici_ be in holy orders or merely in minor
orders. The term has also been sometimes loosely used to include the
members of the regular orders; but this use is improper, since monks and
friars, as such, have at no time been _clerici_. The use of the word
"clergy" as a plural, though the _New English Dictionary_ quotes the
high authority of Cardinal Newman for it, is less rare than wrong; in
the case cited "Some hundred Clergy" should have been "Some hundred of
the Clergy."
In distinction to the "clergy" we find the "laity" (Gr. [Greek: laos],
people), the great body of "faithful people" which, in nearly every
various conception of the Christian Church, stands in relation to the
clergy as a flock of sheep to its pastor. This distinction was of early
growth, and developed, with the increasing power of the hierarchy,
during the middle ages into a very lively opposition (see ORDER, HOLY;
CHURCH HISTORY; PAPACY; INVESTITURES). The extreme claim of the great
medieval popes, that the priest, as "ruler over spiritual things," was
as much superior to temporal rulers as the soul is to the body (see
INNOCENT III.), led logically to the vast privileges and immunities
enjoyed by the clergy during the middle ages. In those countries where
the Reformation triumphed, this triumph represented the victory of the
civil over the clerical powers in the long contest. The victory was,
however, by no means complete. The Presbyterian model was, for instance,
as sacerdotal in its essence as the Catholic; Milton complained with
justice that "new presbyter is but old priest writ large," and declared
that "the Title of Clergy St Peter gave to all God's people," its later
restriction being a papal and prelatical usurpation (i.e. i Peter v. 3,
for [Greek: kleros] and [Greek: kleron]).
Clerical immunities, of course, differed largely at different times and
in different countries, the extent of them having been gradually
curtailed from a period a little earlier than the close of the middle
ages. They consisted mainly in exemption from public burdens, both as
regarded person and pocket, and in immunity from lay jurisdiction. This
last enormous privilege, which became one of the main and most efficient
instruments of the subjection of Europe to clerical tyranny, extended to
matters both civil and criminal; though, as Bingham shows, it did not
(always and everywhere) prevail in cases of heinous crime (_Origines
Eccles._ bk. v.).
This diversity of jurisdiction, and subjection of the clergy only to the
sentences of judges bribed by their _esprit de corps_ to judge
leniently, led to the adoption of a scale of punishments for the
offences of clerks avowedly much lighter than that which was inflicted
for the same crimes on laymen; and this in turn led to the survival in
England, long after the Reformation, of the curious legal fiction of
benefit of clergy (see below), used to mitigate the extreme harshness of
the criminal law.
CLERGY, BENEFIT OF, an obsolete but once very important feature in
English criminal law. Benefit of clergy began with the claim on the part
of the ecclesiastical authorities in the 12th century that every
_clericus_ should be exempt from the jurisdiction of the temporal courts
and be subject to the spiritual courts alone. The issue of the conflict
was that the common law courts abandoned the extreme punishment of death
assigned to some offences when the person convicted was a _clericus_,
and the church was obliged to accept the compromise and let a secondary
punishment be inflicted. The term "clerk" or _clericus_ always included
a large number of persons in what were called minor orders, and in 1350
the privilege was extended to secular as well as to religious clerks;
and, finally, the test of being a clerk was the ability to read the
opening words of verse 1 of Psalm li., hence generally known as the
"neck-verse." Even this requirement was abolished in 1705. In 1487 it
was enacted that every layman, when convicted of a clergyable felony,
should be branded on the thumb, and disabled from claiming the benefit a
second time. The privilege was extended to peers, even if they could not
read, in 1547, and to women, partially in 1622 and fully in 1692. The
partial exemption claimed by the Church did not apply to the more
atrocious crimes, and hence offences came to be divided into clergyable
and unclergyable. According to the common practice in England of working
out modern improvements through antiquated forms, this exemption was
made the means of modifying the severity of the criminal law. It became
the practice to claim and be allowed the benefit of clergy; and when it
was the intention by statute to make a crime really punishable with
death, it was awarded "without benefit of clergy." The benefit of clergy
was abolished by a statute of 1827, but as this statute did not repeal
that of 1547, under which peers were given the privilege, a further
statute was passed in 1841 putting peers on the same footing as commons
and clergy.
For a full account of benefit of clergy see Pollock and Maitland,
_History of English Law_, vol. i. 424-440; also Stephen, _History of
the Criminal Law of England_, vol. i.; E. Friedberg, _Corpus juris
canonici_ (Leipzig, 1879-1881).
CLERGY RESERVES, in Canada. By the act of 1791, establishing the
provinces of Upper and Lower Canada, the British government set apart
one-eighth of all the crown lands for the support of "a Protestant
clergy." These reservations, after being for many years a
stumbling-block to the economic development of the province, and the
cause of much bitter political and ecclesiastical controversy, were
secularized by the Canadian parliament in 1854, and the proceeds applied
to other purposes, chiefly educational. Owing to the wording of the
imperial act, the amount set apart is often stated as one-seventh, and
was sometimes claimed as such by the clergy.
CLERK[1] (from A.S. _cleric_ or _clerc_, which, with the similar Fr.
form, comes direct from the Lat. _clericus_), in its original sense, as
used in the civil law, one who had taken religious orders of whatever
rank, whether "holy" or "minor." The word _clericus_ is derived from the
Greek [Greek: klerikos], "of or pertaining to an inheritance," from
[Greek: koeros], "lot," "allotment," "estate," "inheritance"; but the
authorities are by no means agreed in which sense the root is connected
with the sense of the derivative, some conceiving that the original idea
was that the clergy received the service of God as their lot or portion;
others that they were the portion of the Lord; while others again, with
more reason as Bingham (_Orig. Eccl._ lib. i. cap. 5, sec. 9) seems to
think, maintain that the word has reference to the choosing by lot, as
in early ages was the case of those to whom public offices were to be
entrusted.
In the primitive times of the church the term canon was used as
synonymous with clerk, from the names of all the persons in the service
of any church having been inscribed on a roll, or [Greek: kanon], whence
they were termed _canonici_, a fact which shows that the practice of the
Roman Catholic Church of including all persons of all ranks in the
service of the church, ordained or unordained, in the term clerks, or
clergy, is at least in conformity with the practice of antiquity. Thus,
too, in English ecclesiastical law, a clerk was any one who had been
admitted to the ecclesiastical state, and had taken the tonsure. The
application of the word in this sense gradually underwent a change, and
"clerk" became more especially the term applied to those in minor
orders, while those in "major" or "holy" orders were designated in full
"clerks in holy orders," which in English law still remains the
designation of clergymen of the Established Church. After the
Reformation the word "clerk" was still further extended to include
laymen who performed duties in cathedrals, churches, &c., e.g. the
choirmen, who were designated "lay clerks." Of these lay clerks or
choirmen there was always one whose duty it was to be constantly present
at every service, to sing or say the responses as the leader or
representative of the laity. His duties were gradually enlarged to
include the care of the church and precincts, assisting at baptisms,
marriages, &c., and he thus became the precursor of the later _parish
clerk_. In a somewhat similar sense we find _bible clerk, singing
clerk_, &c. The use of the word "clerk" to denote a person ordained to
the ministry is now mainly legal or formal.
The word also developed in a different sense. In medieval times the
pursuit of letters and general learning was confined to the clergy, and
as they were practically the only persons who could read and write all
notarial and secretarial work was discharged by them, so that in time
the word was used with special reference to secretaries, notaries,
accountants or even mere penmen. This special meaning developed into
what is now one of the ordinary senses of the word. We find,
accordingly, the term applied to those officers of courts, corporations,
&c., whose duty consists in keeping records, correspondence, and
generally managing business, as _clerk of the market, clerk of the petty
bag, clerk of the peace, town clerk_, &c. Similarly, a clerk also means
any one who in a subordinate position is engaged in writing, making
entries, ordinary correspondence, or similar "clerkly" work. In the
United States the word means also an assistant in a commercial house, a
retail salesman.