prince having burnt three thousand five hundred Champenese, who had
taken refuge in Vitry church,[67] was soon a prey to his stings of
conscience. Peter Lombard, bishop of Paris,[68] assured him, that there
was no more effectual way to expiate this crime, than to have his long
beard cut off forthwith. The king clearly saw there was nothing more
reasonable; and this pious bishop executed himself the function of
barber to his majesty.
Footnote 67:
In the war which he had with Theobald, count of Champaign. See page 41
of this work.
Footnote 68:
Philip, the king’s brother, being appointed bishop of Paris, thought
the place beneath him; he resigned it to Peter Lombard, who, according
to Zuinger, A. D. 1160, made use of his episcopal authority to have
all the priests and monks of his diocese shaved.
Frederick I. surnamed _Redbeard_, was not exempted from the common law;
the colour of his beard, the example of two princes, and the strong
solicitations of the clergy, prevailed on him to be shaved; and this
emperor, who had courageously refused to hold the stirrup to pope Adrian
IV. to kiss his feet, and lead his Spanish genet by the bridle, had not
the resolution to withstand the priests on this occasion.
When the clergy had succeeded to shave the principal princes of Europe,
they might justly expect to see a great many imitators among the rest of
the people. Far better than violence, the example would have triumphed
over the remaining beards; but the priests of those days of ignorance
were strangers to all moderate means.
Godfrey, bishop of Amiens, saying mass Christmas-day, 1105, formed the
design of unmercifully stripping all the bearded chins; those, who came
to the offering with long beards, were turned back. Frighted at this
cruel refusal, most of the men were eager to cut off the hair of their
chins, hastily laying hold of scissars, and even knives, in order to be
able to present themselves immediately before their bishop with a better
grace.[69]
Footnote 69:
See _le Mercure de France_ for January, 1732.
Never was reason the motive of such indecencies. It seems as if truth
had revenged itself on these silly, superstitious times at the expense
of decorum.
Envy, under the imposing cloak of religion, had just scattered its
venom; vengeance had its fill; every chin was shaved, and the Church
enjoyed its triumph. Time moderates all things, even the anger of
votaries; they forgot that beards had been anathematized: the successors
of those very popes, who had looked upon a bearded priest as guilty of a
shameful sin, were in a little time no longer afraid to sin themselves,
and publicly appeared with long beards. Such were Henry III. Alexander
IV. Adrian V. John XX. Nicholas III. &c. &c.
This calm was enjoyed but a short time, before a new storm arose against
sacerdotal beards, stirred up by envy and ignorance, to destroy the work
of peace and reason. The vicissitude of human things respects nothing.
Lewis V. in Germany, Peter the Cruel in Spain, and Philip of Valois in
France, had let out their beards, and the mode gained ground throughout
Europe. Priests are not blessed with a character that shelters them from
the influence of fashion; several were slaves to that which brought
beards again in vogue. The popes themselves did not disdain it, though a
number of provincial councils stood up against the new bearded chins: in
1323, clergymen, by a synodal statute of the church of Orleans, were
forbidden to wear long beards, under pain of excommunication. Meanwhile,
according to the quality and condition of the persons,[70] other synodal
statutes of the church of Beziers ordered the priests of the diocese to
cut off their beards and hair of their heads, except just the crown, in
order that they might apply themselves with more diligence to their
studies and functions.[71] A provincial council of Paris, and another of
Sens, ordered the same; a council of the same town of Beziers, under
archbishop Peter Narbonne, in 1351, canon xi. forbids wearing long
beards; and as a punishment for such temerity, it is there said: We
condemn the offender, if a canon, to be deprived of his daily
distribution, and if an incumbent, to pay twelve deniers for the use of
the church.[72] The custom of wearing beards was condemned likewise by a
synodal statute of the church of St. Malo, in 1370, and all sacerdotal
beards were shorn off.
Footnote 70:
_Statuta synodalia ecclesiæ Aurelianensis, anno 1323. Amplissima
Collectio veterum Scriptorum, &c._ vol. i. by Martenne and Durand.
Footnote 71:
_Statuta synodali ecclesiæ Bitteris_, 1332. Thæforus Anecd.
Footnote 72:
_Alioquin, canonicum privatum distributionibus illius diei esse
volumus, & Beneficiatum puniri pæna duodecimorum denariorum pro tali
usu temerario statuimus & mandamus Fabricæ illius ecclesiæ
applicandorum._ Thæsorus Anecdotorum.
The beards of the laity, it seems, were spared in this general
proscription. The time, no doubt, when the priests could take the
liberty of cutting off the beards of both people and kings with
impunity, began to decline.
The monks had, a long time before, settled rules for the government of
their chins: in 807, at the assembly of Aix-la-chapelle, it was ordered,
that the monks should not shave themselves at all during lent, and that
the rest of the year, they should do it once a fortnight. We see in the
statutes and customs of different monasteries, that the monks were
shaved, except the lay-brothers, who were called _Fratres barbati_,
bearded brothers.[73] We find in old manuscripts the very prayers that
were recited when a monk in full orders had his beard shorn. Humility
was the motive of this custom, which was practised with much ceremony.
At the taking of the habit, the beard of the candidate was blessed with
great ceremony; and when he was made a monk, he dedicated his beard to
God. This ceremony was practised likewise by the Heathens. See page 16
of this work.
Footnote 73:
Marbillon’s _Annales Benedictines, lib._ 71.
This new storm was succeeded by another calm, and long beards seemed
likely to have a fine time; and truly they appeared again in all their
ancient majesty. Julius II. gave the signal, and was followed by all
Europe. This pope, by his venerable look, recalled the image of the
patriarchs of old. The cardinals, and all the Church, were eager to
follow an example so commendable. The age was more enlightened: the
ancient disputes were either forgotten, or only thought of to lament the
injustice of their cause. The orthodoxy of beards was acknowledged, and
truth shined in all its brightness; but gloomy envy at length came to
obscure its splendour: some exclaimed that it was a piece of pride,
others a scandal; and quarrels that should have been buried for ever in
oblivion were again renewed. Jealousy, under a holy pretext, raised
itself with more daringness than ever, and occasioned violent
animosities. What writings appeared! what outrages and phrenzy!...
_Bella horrida, bella ... cerno...._ But let us not entrench upon such
precious matters: let us rather endeavour, with the same impartiality,
to discover the origin of so many disturbances.
Bessarion, the famous Greek, first, archbishop of Nice, afterwards,
cardinal, and, at length, patriarch of Constantinople, came into Italy
with the archbishop of Russia, to endeavour to bring about an union
between the Greek and Latin churches. Bessarion made no difficulty of
subscribing to the orthodoxy of the latter; and this was what got him a
cardinal’s hat: his long beard, and that of his companion, accustomed
the court of Rome to this mode. Bessarion was one of the stoutest men of
his time; every one longed to look like this illustrious man, were it
only in the fleece on his chin; and his fine Grecian beard soon produced
a number of Latin ones.[74]
Footnote 74:
This cardinal’s beard was not so well received in France. This great
man being sent thither as legate, visited, through policy, the duke of
Burgundy before he saw king Lewis XI. This monarch was so offended at
the preference given his enemy, that, at the first audience he gave
this legate, he roughly seized him by his long beard, and gave him a
great deal of abuse. The patriarch took this affront so near to heart,
that he did not survive it above a year.
Some years after, Julius II. was elected pope; his youth, which suited
but badly with the majesty of the papacy, determined him to let his
beard grow out, in order to inspire more respect: he was the first pope
of his time who gave the Church such a holy and rational example.
Clement VII. one of his successors, did not imitate him at first; but
having been detained five months in prison by the troops of Charles of
Bourbon, the general of the emperor’s army, he came out as if
regenerated and triumphant, with his face enobled with a large, bushy
beard, which he would never part with. This custom was eagerly adopted
by those clergy, who, by their revenues or exploits, held a
distinguished rank in the Church or State. It was then that the inferior
clergy, and especially the chapters, strongly opposed this pretended
indecorum. We read, that, in the reign of Lewis XII. one Anthony de
Langheac, canon of the church of Paris, abbot and canon of that of
Clermont, counsellor-clerk to the parliament, and ambassador to the
republic of Venice, could not enter the choir of the church of Our Lady
at Paris with his long beard. On account of the commission with which
the king had honoured him, he at length obtained permission to hear
matins, which were then said at midnight.[75] In a little time, they
were not so scrupulous, as all the clergy let out their beards, even the
lowest among them, in order to give themselves a pontifical
appearance;[76] when, in France, Francis I. (who might justly boast of
having worn the first beard of his kingdom,) for œconomical reasons,
armed the enemies of clerical beards with destructive weapons, and was
the occasion of the war which we are going to speak of.
Footnote 75:
These particulars are inserted in the register of the capitular
resolutions of the year 1505, which may be seen in the archives of the
metropolitical church of Paris.
Footnote 76:
_Beroald de Verville_, in his _Moyen de parvenir_, accounts for the
promptitude with which the priests imitated the popes. “I will tell
you a remark; when the pope has a large beard, the priests will have
the same; if he have a shaved chin, they will likewise, because they
all aim at the papacy.” _Moyen de Parvenir, chap. tom._
This king, in order to get money from the clergy of his kingdom, says
doctor Zuinger, a contemporary, obtained a brief from the pope, which
ordered all the French clergy to get themselves shaved, or else to pay a
certain sum to have permission to wear their beard.[77] A contribution
from such a body might be of great service in a time of scarcity.
Francis I. experienced it; for all the tufted prelates, court
ecclesiastics, incumbents, and expectant clergymen, paid the money, and
retained their beards; but all the canons of small revenue, village
curates, and poor rectors, freed themselves from the impost by getting
themselves shaved, and this was the source of the troubles which
disquieted the reign of Henry II. The difference of the chins of the
clergy of the same kingdom caused that dark, intestine war which owed
its rise solely to jealousy.
Footnote 77:
_Theatrum vitæ humanæ Theodori Zuingeri, lib._ 2.
Now is the time to mention the discussions which, on account of a beard
affair, began to trouble the ancient capital of the world. Some
seditious, jealous beings secretly fomented their ruin; the alarm
increased; and beards were in the utmost danger, when Pierrius
Valerianus undertook their defence. This man, one of the most learned
and most bearded of his time discussed, in a most able manner, the cause
he undertook; his book, intitled _pro Sacerdotum Barbis_, is dedicated
to cardinal Medicis. A just reasoning and a strength of elocution are
the great qualities of his discourse; we can perceive that the author
was impressed with his subject; he quotes a number of authorities, both
sacred and profane, which concur to the triumph of his cause. He
complains that the respect due to the ministers of God is already but
too much diminished, without endeavouring to destroy it by a debasing
custom; and adds, that Jesus never made any law that tended to alter the
Levitican ones, which we have cited; and that the son of God himself,
having given the example of this discipline, all Christians ought to
follow it. “What a piece of folly it is,” cries he, “to pretend that the
beard, which was given by God, should be unworthy of his creatures.” He
demonstrates, that the canon of the council of Carthage, which forbids
clergymen to let out their beards, has been absolutely mutilated: he
calls to his aid the opinion of all the great men of his time, and
several ancient manuscripts, among others, that which is in the elector
palatine’s library.[78]
Footnote 78:
“Who,” says he, “will dare maintain, that the beard is not the
ornament of man, the symbol of probity and justice; that it does not
give him a grave, stern look; I mean to speak of those who are
determined by reason rather than opinion? If it be admitted then that
the beard is the ornament of an honest, just man, why should it not be
the most decent ornament for a priest, who ought to be an example of
virtue.” _Apologia Joannis Pierii Valeriani belumen._ I have seen
three editions of this work.
Let us now examine whether this canon of the council of Carthage, on
which the antibearded gentry found their anathemas, deserves any
confidence. According to them, these are the words of the canon of that
council: _Clericus nec comam nutriat nec barbam_; and these, according
to the sticklers for beards: _Clericus nec comam nutriat, nec barbam
radat._ The former forbids to wear long beards; the latter orders it. So
the whole depends on the adding or suppressing of the word _radat_.
It seems at first, in favour of bearded chins, that the termination of
the phrase, _nec barbam_, should point out the suppression of a verb,
such as _radat_; and indeed it would have been much more simple, and
more regular, in the same sense, to write, _Clericus nec comam nec
barbam nutriat_.
This objection, which begins to throw light on the wiles of the enemies
of beards, would be but weak, were it not confirmed by a number of
triumphant proofs, and especially by the opinion of the most celebrated
and most laborious commentators, such as fathers Labbe and Hardouin, &c.
Savaron, in his commentary on the epistles of St. Sidoin Apollinarius,
warmly maintains, that the word _radat_ has been suppressed from the
44th canon of this council of Carthage, and that the custom of wearing
long beards was there precisely ordered. Father Sirmond, who published
some time after a commentary on the same epistles, is of the same
opinion as Savaron with respect to the suppression of this word _radat_.
Charles Dumoulin, in his notes to the 5th chapter of the 1st record of
the 3d book of the Decretals, assures us that the text of this canon has
been mutilated, and that we ought to read _nec barbam radat_.
Let us see on what authority the opinion of these learned men is
founded. The greatest part of the manuscripts of the councils have the
word _radat_. Pierrius Valerianus, in his book _pro Sacerdotum Barbis_,
quotes several, and those are the least suspected. Father Labbe has
added a note to the canon in question, in which he numbers the
manuscripts wherein the word _radat_ is found. Father Hardouin assures
us that this important _radat_ exists in the most authentic manuscripts,
such as those in the libraries of Corbie, Giblou, Barberin, Paris, &c.
From these modern proofs, let us pass to those which antiquity or the
contemporaries of this council ought to furnish us with. St. Sidoin
Apollinarius says very clearly, speaking of the time of this council of
Carthage: _Tum coma brevis & barba prolixa; At that time people wore
short hair and long beards._ Tertullian says a great deal about this
same council; he maintains that the word _radat_ has been suppressed in
the 44th canon; he cries out upon the licentiousness of his age, too
fertile in like impositions, and says, in plain terms! _Corrigendum est
reponendumque, juxta fidem veterum exemplarium, Clericus nec comam
nutriat, nec barbam radat. This canon ought to be corrected, and,
conformably to the fidelity of the old copies, it should be written,
that no clergyman should wear his hair, or shave his beard._[79] We see
what a distance our short cloke clergy keep from this edifying
regulation.
Footnote 79:
It may not be amiss perhaps to correct a chronological error that is
in the epochs of this council of Carthage and the life of Tertullian.
All the commentators and chroniclers place this council in the year
398, and the death of this learned man about the year 220 of our æra.
According to them, he should have lived about a century and half
before this council. After that, one is greatly surprised to find, in
the works of this same Tertullian, his observations on this council of
Carthage, and still more so, to find him speak of it as an epoch much
earlier than that in which he was writing; for, when he condemns the
supression of the word _radat_, he says it ought to be restored
conformably to the fidelity of the old copies, _juxta fidem veterum
exemplarium, &c._ The anachronism is more than two centuries.
Saint Epiphanius lived in the time of this council of Carthage: this was
a very learned Saint. Let us see in his writings if the fathers of those
days proclaim the proscription of long beards. With respect to the
heretic Massalians he speaks thus. “Is there any thing more contrary to
good morals than their customs? They cut off their beards, the mark of
manhood, and wear very long hair. Nevertheless, the sacred expressions
of the constitutions of the apostles dogmatically prescribe the rules
that are to be observed with respect to the beard: it is forbidden to
cut off any part of it, for fear lest men should at length get
themselves quite shaved, and lay hold of the effeminate manners and
luxury of abandoned rakes.”[80]
Footnote 80:
_Sed deterius quiddam, ac contrarium ab illis geritur: siquidem isti
barbam, hoc est, propriam viri formam, resecant; capillos vero, ut
plurimum, prolixiores habent. Atqui quod ad barbam attinet in
Apostolorum constitutionbus divino sermone, à degmate præscribitur, ne
ea corrumpatur: hoc est, ne barba ponatur neve meretricius cultus &
ornatus usurpetur, &c._ St. Epiphanius against the heretic Massalians,
sect. viii.
These reproaches, very conclusive in favour of the partisans of long
beards, will be much more so, and silence the adversaries of that mark
of manhood, if it be observed, that this same council of Carthage
condemns as heretics those same Massalians whose shaved chins St.
Epiphanius represents to be a crime. Is it likely that the Massalians
should be condemned as heretics, and that at the same time the orthodox
clergy should be required to imitate them, and follow a custom that is
looked upon as the most scandalous of debauchery; such a law would be
the height of inconsequence. It is much more reasonable to suppose,
that, instead of the priests’ being ordered to have their chins shaved,
they were forbidden to do it, that they might not look like the heretic
Massalians. Besides, what could be opposed to the council of Barcelona,
which was held some time after that of Carthage, a council that has
never experienced any contradiction, and in which shaving the beard is
again forbidden? We read in the third canon, _Ut nullus Clericorum comam
nutriat aut barbam radat. Let no clergyman keep up his hair or shave his
beard._
We have demonstrated then the fraud of the antibearded priests, and
proved that the word _radat_ has been suppressed in the 44th canon.
Clergymen therefore, by this council of Carthage, at which two hundred
and fourteen bishops attended, are forbidden to cut off their beards,
and the general opinion of the primitive church, on this point, is
established.
If we did not know, that private interests can persuade men to
contradict the best founded maxims, we should be greatly surprised no
doubt to find learned men of distinction presume to write, that the
general opinion of the primitive Church condemned long beards. At the
head is cardinal Baronius (tom. i. ad. ann. 48). Let us refer the
proselytes of this credulous writer of legends to _le Mercure_ for April
1765; they will there find that a learned Jesuit, father Oudin in his
inquiries concerning beards, proves, that this cardinal was a bad man,
or that he would not read his St. Epiphanius.
The ordinances of the provincial synods and councils which have made use
of this council of Carthage to justify their forbidding the clergy to
wear long beards, should therefore be void of course: the edifice falls
of itself when the foundation is undermined.
But let us return to the defenders of beards of the sixteenth century:
Pierrius was not the only champion that appeared on this occasion.
Adrian Junius, an ingenious physician, and distinguished for his
learning, in his commentary on the hair of the head, says a great deal
about clerical beards, with as much eloquence and more erudition than
his predecessor; he relates every thing that had not been advantageously
said before on the subject, and is not afraid to take a review of the
opinions and examples of all the ancients; he establishes, that even
when there should be neither law, constitution, nor council which
ordered the priests to preserve their beards, they ought to do it,
because it gives the wearer a grave, stern, respectable look, which
becomes the ministers of the altar, and that their thus changing the
nature of God’s work, in order to please mankind, is, for them, a very
criminal piece of luxury.[81]
Footnote 81:
_De comâ Commentarium Adriani Junii Honani, Medici, cap. ii. de rasurâ
capillorum pariter & barbæ._
These works produced their effect: nevertheless pope Paul III. being
displeased with the severe tone of Pierrius and the sharp reproaches
which he threw out against the manners of the clergy of the age, would
not seem to comply thereto; but without issuing a formal decree against
beards, as was talked of, he contented himself with commanding a
cardinal briefly to order the priests to get themselves shaved.[82]
Footnote 82:
Beroalde ridicules the shaved priests of those days. He says it was
ordered so, _in order that the regret which they have at not daring
nor being willing to partake of the pleasures of this world, may in no
wise appear; to which you may add that they ought to be merry_ (venite
exultemus), _and that theirs is a state of perpetual joy, which must
be made appear so, though it were not; and this is the reason why they
wear their chins shaved, because a man thus polished up about the
gills is always laughing ... from thence came this canon of the
council of Quarante_: THE PRIESTS SHALL SHAVE WITH HOG’S SWARD, _in
order that they may always appear laughing, dainty-mouthed, airy, &c._
Moyen de parvenir, chap. _Allegation._
The major part paid but little attention to this ordinance; some, more
scrupulous, obeyed, but not without repugnancy: there were a few of the
latter however, according to Gentian Hervet, who had reason to repent of
their exactness: among others, he speaks of one Leonicus Thomeus, an old
man of ninety, who was no sooner shaved, according to the decree of the
pontiff, than he was seized with such a confounded tooth-ach, that he
was obliged to solicit the pope’s clemency. Cardinal Bembe sent him
forthwith a permission to wear his beard a reasonable length.