Without attempting to inquire whether this or that portion of the

building is correctly designed, or even whether the whole is entirely

satisfactory, or the reverse, we may say that in the opinion of most

persons the external flight of steps and the entrance are too large

and elaborate for the building, reminding one of those remarkable

edifices for banking or other public purposes occasionally to be seen

in this city, which are all portico, as if the main structure had

walked away, or had not been considered of sufficient importance to be

added to the entrance. It is partly owing to this defect, and partly

to the insufficient area on which it is built, {422} that the Academy

seems wanting in height and depth, and therefore devoid of just

proportions--has in fact an unmistakable _dumpy look_. Many an

architect before Mr. Wight has been prevented by want of space from

effectively developing ideas intrinsically good, and perhaps the

severest criticism that can be pronounced against him in the present

instance is that ambition has led him to attempt what his better

judgment might have taught him was impossible. "Cut your coat

according to your cloth," is a maxim of which the applicability is not

yet exhausted. Again, the obtrusive ugliness of the skylights, rising

clear above the sculptured cornices, can hardly fail to offend the

eye, and suggests the idea of an encumbered or even an overloaded

roof. If to these defects be added the curious optical delusion by

which the gray marble checker-work on the upper story appears uneven

and awry, and which denotes a radical error in design, we believe we

have mentioned the chief features of the building which even those who

profess to admire it unite in condemning. The objection that the

building is of unusual form and appearance, and out of keeping with

the styles of architecture in vogue with us, is not worthy of serious

consideration.

Having said so much in depreciation of the Academy, we must also say

that it conveys on the whole an elegant, artistic, and even cheerful

impression to the mind, relieving, with its beautiful contrasts of

white and gray and slate, the sombre blocks of red or brown buildings

which surround it, and actually lightening up the rather prosaic

quarter in which it stands. Too much praise cannot be accorded to the

architect for the combinations of color which he has infused into his

design; and, granting that in this respect he has committed some

errors of detail, they are trifling in comparison with the good

effects which will probably result from the future employment of this

means of embellishment. What if the idea, imperfectly embodied in this

experimental building, should in the end compass the overthrow of that

taste which leads us to build gloomy piles of brown houses, overlaid

with tawdry ornamentation, and pronounce them beautiful? When such an

innovation is attempted and finds even a moderate degree of favor,

there is hope that the era of architectural coldness and poverty may

yet pass away. The carving profusely distributed on both the exterior

and interior of the building, and of which, we are told, "the flowers

and leaves of our woods have furnished the models," is for the most

part exquisite in design and execution. Here, at least, is

naturalistic art, against which the sticklers for idealism can offer

no objection, so beautiful and appropriate are the designs, and so

suggestive of the necessity of going back to nature for inspiration.

If the new Academy possessed no other merit than this, it would

nevertheless subserve a useful purpose in the development of taste.

Having devoted so much space to the building, we can only allude

generally to the contents of its galleries, of which we propose to

speak more at length in a future notice. The exhibition, though

inferior to those of some years in the number, exceeds them all in the

quality of its pictures, and presents on the whole a creditable and

encouraging view of the progress of American art. If the capacity of

the galleries is not so great as was expected, there is on the other

hand less danger that the eye will be offended by a long array of

unsightly works, and we may probably bid good-bye to the monstrosities

of composition and color which the Academy was formerly compelled to

receive, in order to eke out its annual exhibitions. Such has been the

increase in the number of our resident artists of late years, that but

a limited number of pictures, and those consequently their best

efforts, can henceforth be contributed by each. This fact alone will

ensure a constantly increasing improvement to succeeding exhibitions.

As usual, landscape predominates, with every variety of treatment and

motive, from Academic generalization and pure naturalism down to

Pre-Raphaelitism and hopeful though somewhat imperfect attempts at

ideal sentiment. Portraiture and genre are also well represented, with

a fair proportion of animal, flower, and still-life pieces, and of the

numerous family of miscellaneous subjects which defy classification.

History is even less affected than usual, the dramatic episodes of the

great rebellion failing to suggest subjects to our painters other than

those of an indirect or merely probable character. So far as the

present exhibition may be supposed to afford an {423} indication,

"high art," and particularly that branch of it which illustrates

sacred history, is defunct among--us a circumstance which those who

have witnessed previous efforts by contemporary American painters in

that department will not perhaps regret. The pictures are generally

hung with judgment, and in a spirit of fairness which ought to

satisfy, though it will not probably in every instance, the demands of

exhibitors. And it may be added that they appear to good effect, and

are daily admired, using the word in its derived as well as its more

common sense, by throngs of visitors.

Church, the landscape painter, has recently gone to the West Indies,

with the intention of passing the summer in the mountain region of

Jamaica, where he will doubtless find abundant materials for study. He

leaves behind a large unfinished work of great promise, "The Rainbow

in the Tropics," and some completed ones of less dimensions.

Augero, an Italian artist, has recently completed for a church in

Boston a picture of St. Andrew bearing the cross, of which a

contemporary says: "Mr. Augero has departed from the traditional types

that have descended to him, and has treated the picture in a manner

entirely his own. The head of the saint is finely handled, and,

without being too much spiritualized, has sufficient of the ideal to

give it value both as a church picture and a work of art. In general

arrangement and color the work is especially to be admired." This

artist is said to have received quite a number of commissions for

ecclesiastical decoration.

Palmer is completing a bust of Washington Irving, which has been

pronounced by the friends of the latter a successful likeness.

An essay on Gustave Dore, by B. P. G. Hamilton, will soon be published

by Leypoldt of Philadelphia.

The spring exhibition of the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts is now

open in Philadelphia. The collections are said to be large and to

represent all departments of painting.

_Foreign_.--The Exhibition of the Society of British Artists and the

General Exhibition of Water Color Drawings opened in London in the

latter part of April. The former contains more than a thousand

pictures, few of which, it is said, rise above the most common average

of picture-making, while the greater part fall below it. "There is

something very depressing," says the _Reader_, "about such a large

display of commonplace art. It is almost painful to have the fact

forced upon one's mind, that the thought and labor represented in all

these pictures is misapplied, if not wasted; for to this conclusion we

must come, if we bring the display in Suffolk street to the test of

comparison with any real work of art. A fine picture by Landseer or

Millais would outweigh, in intrinsic value, the whole collection.

Denude the Royal Academy exhibition of the works of Landseer, Millais,

Philip, and other of its most accomplished contributors, and subtract

from it at the same time the works of promise which lend to it so

great an interest, and we should have a second Suffolk street

exhibition, characterized by a similar dead level of mediocrity and

insipidity; for neither highly accomplished work nor sign of promise

is to be seen in this the forty-second annual exhibition of the

Society of British Artists." From which it would appear that

contemporary art in England gives no remarkable promise.

A large collection of the late John Leech's sketches, etc., was lately

sold in London. It comprised the original designs for the political

cartoons and pictures of life and character which have appeared in

Punch during the last twenty years; the designs for the "Ingoldsby

Legends," "Jorrock's Hunt," "Ask Mamma," "Mr. Facey Romford's Hounds,"

and other sporting novels, and several pictures in oil. The prices ran

very high, the net result being L4,089.

The collection of paintings and water color drawings by the best

modern British artists, formed by Mr. John Knowles, of Manchester, was

recently disposed of in London at very handsome prices. The chief

attraction was Rosa Bonheur's "Muleteers Crossing the Pyrenees," which

brought 2,000 guineas. The collection realized L21,750.

Preparations are making to remove the cartoons of Raphael from Hampton

Court to the new north fire-proof gallery in the South Kensington

Museum, formerly occupied by the British pictures of the National

Gallery.

The Great Pourtales sale has closed {424} after lasting upward of a

month and realizing a sum total of nearly three millions of francs. A

Paris paper states that, considering the interest of the sums expended

in forming the collection as money lost, the sale will give a profit

on the outlay of a million and a half of francs, or about a hundred

per cent.--a notable illustration of the mania for picture buying now

prevailing in Europe. The owner died ten years ago, leaving directions

that the collection should not be sold until 1864, for which his heirs

and representatives are doubtless properly grateful. The following

will give an idea of the prices fetched by the best pictures:

Campagne, Ph. de: The Marriage of the Virgin, formerly the altar-piece

of the chapel of the Palais Royal, sold for 43,500f. Hals, Francis: An

unknown portrait of a man; his left hand leaning on his hip and

touching the handle of his sword, 51,000f. Rembrandt: Portrait of a

Burgomaster, 34,500f. By the same: Portrait of a veteran soldier

seated at a table, 27,000f. Murillo: The Triumph of the Eucharist;

with the words _"In finem dilexit eos,"_ 67,500f.; bought for the

Louvre. By the same: The Virgin bending over the infant Christ, whom

she presses to her bosom, 18,000f. By the same: St. Joseph holding the

infant Christ by the hand, 15,000f. Velasquez: The Orlando Muerto, a

bare-headed warrior, in a black cuirass, lying dead in a grotto strewn

with human bones, his right hand on his breast, his left on the guard

of his sword; from the roof of the grotto hangs a lamp, in which the

flame is flickering, 37,000f. Albert Durer: A pen drawing,

representing Samson, of colossal size, routing the Philistines with

the jaw-bone of an ass, 4,500f. A portrait by Antonelli di Messina,

bought years ago in Florence by Pourtales for 1,500f., and appraised

in his inventory at 20,000f., was sold to the Louvre, where it now

hangs in the _salon carre_, for 113,000f.

Gustave Dore is announced to have undertaken to illustrate Shakespeare

and the Bible.

The sale of the Due de Moray's gallery of paintings will take place in

June. It contains six Meissoniers, which cost, at the utmost, not

above 60,000 francs, but which will now probably fetch more than

double that price.

A picture by Ribera, representing St. Luke taking the likeness of the

Virgin, was sold recently in Paris for 21,000f.

French landscape art has lost one of its chief illustrators in the

person of Constant Troyon, who died in the latter part of March, aged

about fifty-two. He has been called the creator of the modern French

school of landscape, and delighted in cheerful aspects of nature,

which he rendered with masterly skill. Rural life, with its pleasing

accessories of winding streams, picturesque low banks, groups of

cattle, and shady hamlets, formed the favorite subjects of his pencil;

and though his style was not always exact, he succeeded in infusing an

unusual degree of physical life into his pictures, without ever

degenerating into mere naturalism. As a colorist he excelled all

contemporary animal and landscape painters, and used his brush with a

freedom rivalling that of Delacroix. He died insane, and is said to

have left a fortune of 1,200,000 francs. Some of his pictures are

owned in New York.

A painting by Murillo, from the collection of the late Marquis Aguado,

representing the death of Santa Clara, has been sold to the Royal

Gallery of Madrid for 75,000 francs.

----

{425}

NEW PUBLICATIONS.

THE CORRELATION AND CONSERVATION OF FORCES:

A SERIES OF EXPOSITIONS,

by Prof. Grove, Prof. Helmholtz, Dr. Mayer, Dr. Faraday, Prof. Liebig,

and Dr. Carpenter. With an Introduction and brief Biographical Notices

of the chief Promoters of the new views. By Edward L. Youmans, M.D.

12mo., pp. xlii., 438. New York: D. Appleton & Company.

Religious writers have repeatedly deplored the materialistic tendency

of modern scientific research, and in many cases, no doubt, the

complaint is a just one. But we must not forget that the bad tendency

is in the philosophical system which is sought to be built upon the

facts of discovery, not in the facts themselves. Every development, of

truth, every fresh unveiling of the mechanism of the universe, must of

necessity redound to the greater glory of God. And it seems to us that

no scientific theory which has been broached for many years speaks

more gloriously of the disposing and over-ruling hand of an all-wise

Creator than the one to which the volume now before us is devoted. If

there could be any place for comparison in speaking of the exercise of

omnipotence, we might say that the new view of the nature and mode of

action of the physical forces represents creation as a far more

marvellous act than the old one did.

We speak of the correlation and conservation of force as a "new"

theory because it is only lately that it has attracted much attention

beyond the higher scientific circles, and indeed it would perhaps be

going too far to say that it is yet firmly established. It has been

developing however for a number of years, and the most distinguished

experts in physical science have for some time accepted it with

remarkable unanimity. In the book whose title we have given above, Dr.

Yournans has brought together eight of the most valuable essays in

which the theory has been maintained or explained by its founders and

chief supporters. He has made his selection with excellent judgment,

and prefixed to the whole a clear and well-written introduction, by

the aid of which any reader of ordinary education will be able to

appreciate what follows. The longest and most important essay is that

by Professor Grove on "The Correlation of Physical Forces."

Force is defined by Professor Grove as that active principle

inseparable from matter which induces its various changes. In other

words, it is the agent or producer of change or motion. The

modifications of this general agent--heat, light, electricity,

magnetism, chemical affinity, gravity, cohesive attraction, etc.--are

called the physical forces. In many cases, where one of these is

excited all the others are set in motion: thus when sulphuret of

antimony is _electrified_, at the moment of electrization it becomes

_magnetic_; at the same time it is _heated_; if the heat is raised to

a certain intensity, _light_ is produced; the compound is decomposed,

and _chemical action_ is thereby brought into play; and so on.

Moreover, we cannot magnetize a body without electrizing it, and

vice-versa. This necessary reciprocal production is what is understood

by the term "correlation of forces"--or in other words, we may say

that any one of the natural forces may be converted into another mode

of force, and may be reproduced by the same force. A striking example

of the conversion of heat into electricity is furnished by an

experiment of Seebeck's. Two dissimilar metals are brought together

and heated at the point of contact. A current of electricity flows

through the metals, having a definite direction according to the

metals employed; continues as long as an increasing temperature is

pervading the metals; ceases when the temperature is stationary; and

flows backward when the heat begins to decrease. The immediate

convertibility of heat into light is not yet established beyond

question, although these two forces exhibit many curious analogies

with each other. But heat through the medium of electricity may easily

be turned into light, chemical affinity, magnetism, etc. Electricity

directly produces heat, as in the ignited wire, the electric spark,

and the {426} voltaic arc. The last-named phenomenon--the flame which

plays between the terminal points of a powerful voltaic battery

produces the most intense heat with which we are acquainted; so

intense, in fact, that it cannot be measured, as every sort of matter

is dissipated by it. For instance, it actually _distils_ or

volatilizes iron, a metal which by ordinary means is fusible only at a

very high temperature. The voltaic arc also produces the most intense

light that we know of. Instances of the conversion of electricity into

magnetism and chemical action are familiar to everybody. The

reciprocal relations of light with other modes of force are thus far

very imperfectly known. Professor Grove however describes an

experiment by which light is made to produce simultaneously chemical

action, electricity, magnetism, heat, and motion. The conversion of

light into chemical force in photography is another exemplification of

the law of correlation, and Bunsen and Roscoe have experimentally

shown that certain rays of light are extinguished or absorbed in doing

chemical work. A familiar example of the change of light into heat is

seen in the phenomena of what is termed the absorption of light. Place

different colored pieces of cloth on snow exposed to sunshine: black

will absorb the most light, and will also develop the most heat, as

may be seen by its sinking deepest in the snow; white, which absorbs

little or no light, will not sink at all.

The evolution of one force or mode of force into another has naturally

induced many to regard all the different natural agencies as reducible

to unity, and much ingenuity has been expended on the question which

force is the efficient cause of all the others. One says electricity,

another chemical action, another gravity. Professor Grove believes

that all are wrong: each mode of force may produce the others, and

none can be produced except by some other as an anterior force. We can

no more determine which is the efficient cause than we can determine

whether the chicken is the cause of the egg, or the egg the cause of

the chicken. The tendency of recent researches however is toward the

conclusion that all the physical forces are simply modes of motion;

that as, in the case of friction, the gross or palpable motion which

is arrested by the contact of another body, is subdivided into

molecular motions or vibrations (or as Helmholtz expresses it,

peculiar shivering motions of the ultimate particles of bodies), which

motions are only heat or electricity, as the case may be; so the other

affections are only matter moved or molecularly agitated in certain

definite directions. The identity of motion with heat was established

in the last century by our countryman, Count Rumford, and has lately

been beautifully illustrated by Professor Tyndall in his charming

lectures on "Heat considered as a Mode of Motion." Dr. Mayer, of

Heilbronn, and Mr. Joule, of Manchester, independently of each other,

established the exact ratio between heat and motive power, showing

that a quantity of heat sufficient to raise one pound of water one

degree Fahrenheit in temperature is able to raise to the height of one

foot a weight of 772 pounds; and conversely, that a weight of 772

pounds falling from a height of one foot evolves enough heat to raise

the temperature of a pound of water one degree. That is, this quantity

of force, expressed as 772 "foot-pounds," is to be regarded as the

mechanical equivalent of 1 deg. of temperature. Professor Grove considers

at some length the identity of motion with other forms of force,

especially electricity and magnetism, and alludes briefly to the

inevitable consequence of this theory, that the different forces must

bear an exact _quantitative_ relation to each other. "The great

problem which remains to be solved," he says, "in regard to the

correlation of physical forces, is this establishment of their

equivalents of power, or their measurable relation to a given

standard."

The doctrine of the conservation or persistence of force seems to flow

naturally from what has been said above. It means simply that force is

never destroyed: when it ceases to exist in one form it only passes

into another. Power or energy, like matter, is neither created nor

annihilated: "Though ever changing form, its total quantity in the

universe remains constant and unalterable. Every manifestation of

force must have come from a pre-existing equivalent force, and must

give rise to a subsequent and equal amount of some other force. When,

therefore, a force or effect appears, we are not at liberty to assume

that it was self-originated, or {427} came from nothing; when it

disappears we are forbidden to conclude that it is annihilated: we

must search and find whence it came and whither it has gone; that is,

what produced it, and what effect it has itself produced."

(_Introduction_, p. xiii.) This branch of the subject will be found

clearly and concisely treated in Professor Faraday's paper on "The

Conservation of Force" (pp. 359-383).

Dr. Carpenter carries the new theory into the higher realms of nature,

and shows the applicability of the principle of correlation and

conservation to the vital phenomena of growth and development. "These

forces," he says, "are generated in living bodies by the

transformation of the light, heat, and chemical action supplied by the

world around, and are given back to it again, either during their

life, or after its cessation, chiefly in motion and heat, but also, to

a less degree, in light and electricity." Vital force is that power by

virtue of which a germ endowed with life is developed into an

organization of a type resembling that of its parents, and which

subsequently maintains that organism in its integrity. The prevalent

opinion until lately has been that this force is inherent in the germ,

which has been supposed to derive from its parent not merely its

material substance, but a _germ-force_, in virtue of which it develops

and maintains itself, beside imparting a fraction of the same force to

each of its descendants. In this view of the question, the aggregate

of all the germ-forces appertaining to the descendants, however

numerous, of a common parentage, must have existed in the original

progenitors. Take the case of the successive viviparous broods of

_Aphides_, which (it has been calculated) would amount in the tenth

brood to the bulk of _five hundred millions_ of stout men: a

germ-force capable of organizing this vast mass of living structure

must have been shut up in the single individual, weighing perhaps the

1-1000th of a grain, from which the first brood was evolved! So, too,

in Adam must have been concentrated the germ-force of every individual

of the human race, from the creation to the end of the world. This,

says Dr. Carpenter, is a complete _reductio ad absurdum_. According to

his theory, the germ supplies not the force, but the directive agency.

The vital force of an animal or a plant is supplied by the same

physical agencies which we have considered above.

Dr. Youmans in his introduction is disposed to push this part of the

subject yet further, and to identify physical with intellectual force;

but into this dangerous region it is unnecessary to follow him.

Some of the explanations of natural phenomena which are drawn as

corollaries from the new theory of forces are in the highest degree

curious and beautiful. Many of our readers will find Dr. Mayer's paper

"On Celestial Dynamics" one of the most interesting portions of the

book. He applies the principle of the convertibility of heat and

motion to the question of the origin of the sun's heat, which he

ascribes to the fall of asteroids upon the sun's surface. That an

immense number of cosmical bodies are moving through the heavens and

streaming toward the solar surface, is well known to all physicists.

Now it is calculated that a single asteroid falling into the sun

generates from 4,600 to 9,200 times as much heat as would be generated

by the combustion of an equal mass of coal, and the mass of matter

which in the form of asteroids falls into the sun every minute is from

two to four hundred thousand billions of pounds! The enormous heat

which must be evolved by such a bombardment is almost inconceivable.

REAL AND IDEAL. By John W. Montclair. 12mo., pp. 119. Philadelphia:

Frederick Leypoldt. New York: Hurd & Houghton.

This is a dainty little volume of poems, partly translated from the

German, partly the offspring of the native muse. They are simple,

unpretending, and as a general thing melodious. The author probably

has not aspired to a very high place in the temple of fame; without

the ambition to produce anything very striking or very original, he

has been satisfied with the endeavor which he pithily expresses in his

"Prologue:"

"Clearer to think what others thought before--

Keenly to feel th' afflictions of our race--

Better to say what others oft have said--"

and if he does not always think clearer and speak better than those in

whose footsteps he treads, there is at all events that in his verse

which promises better {428} things after more practice. His faults are

chiefly those of carelessness and inexperience. His metaphors are

superabundant, and sometimes incongruous. He has a good ear for

rhythm; but we often find him tripping in his prosody. Often too the

requirements of the metre lead him to eke out a line with expletives,

or weaken it with unnecessary epithets.

But we can commend the book for its healthy tone. Mr. Montclair has no

tendency toward the morbid psychological school of poetry. He delights

rather in the contemplation of nature, and in moralizing on the life

and aspirations of man. In neither does he discover much that is new;

but the natural beauties which he sings are those of which we do not

easily tire, and his moral reflections are just though they may not be

profound. For the matter of his translations he has chosen some of the

simplest and shortest of the German legendary ballads. Several of them

are rendered with considerable neatness and delicacy. The following

version of a ballad to which attention has been particularly called of

late, is a favorable specimen of Mr. Montclair's powers:

"LENORE.

"Above the stars are twinkling--

The moon is shining bright--

And the dead they ride by night.

"'My love, wilt ope thy window?

I cannot long remain,

And may not come again.

"'The cock already crows--

Tells of the dawning day,

And warns me far away.

"'My journey distant lies;

Afar with thee, my bride,

A hundred leagues we'll ride.

"'In Hungary's fair land

I've found a tranquil spot,

A little garden plot.

"'And there, within the green,

A little cottage rests,

Befitting bridal guests.'

"'Oh, thou hast lingered long;

Beloved, welcome here--

Lead on, I'll never fear.'

"'So, wrap my mantle 'round;

The moon will be our guide,

And quick by night we'll ride.'

"'When will our journey end?

For heavy grows my sight,

And lonely is the night.'

"'Yon gate leads to our home:

Our bridal tour is done--

My purpose now is won.

"'Dismount we from our steed;

Here lay thy aching head--

This tomb's our bridal bed.

"'Now art thou truly mine:

I rode away thy breath--

Thou art the bride of death!'"

FAITH, THE VICTORY; ON A COMPREHENSIVE VIEW OF

THE PRINCIPAL DOCTRINES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

By Rt. Rev. John McGill, D.D.,

Bishop of Richmond. 12mo., pp. viii.,

336. Richmond: J. W. Randolph.

This work is a curiosity as a specimen of the literature of the late

"Confederate States of America," and of course its typography and

general execution are plain and unpretending. The work itself is the

production of a prelate of high character and reputation for his

thorough theological erudition and ability as a writer, and as a clear

logical expounder of Catholic doctrine. It is written in a very

systematic and exact manner; the style is terse, the treatment of

topics brief but comprehensive; and yet, so lucid are the statements

and so simple the language, that it is throughout intelligible to the

ordinary reader, and in great part so to any one of good common sense

who can read English and is able to understand a plain, simple

treatise on religious doctrine. It may be characterized as an

elementary treatise on theology for the laity, and as such is adapted

to be very useful to Catholics, and also to those non-Catholics who

retain the doctrine of the old orthodox Protestant tradition. The

right reverend author is throughout careful to discriminate between

the defined doctrine of the Church and the teaching of theologians,

and is extremely cautious in expounding his opinion on those topics

which are controverted between the different schools. The authority of

the Catholic Church is established by the usual plain and irresistible

deductions from the premises admitted by those who fully accept

Christianity as a divine revelation and the Scripture as the

infallible word of God. The dogmas of the {429} Catholic faith are

stated in the plain ordinary language of the Church, with some account

of the principal methods of explaining difficulties in vogue among

theologians, and with proofs derived from Scriptures and tradition.

The stress of the entire argument rests principally on the evidence

that the Catholic dogmas have been revealed by God and clearly deduced

by the infallible authority of the Church, consequently must be

believed as certain truths. The line of fracture, where that fragment

of Christianity called orthodox Protestantism was broken off from the

integral system of Christian doctrine at the Reformation, is

distinctly traced, and orthodox Protestants are shown that they are

logically compelled to complete their own belief by becoming

Catholics. The old Protestant tradition has a far more extensive sway

in the southern states than among ourselves, and this excellent

treatise will no doubt be the means of bringing numbers of those who

are well-disposed, and need only to be taught what the revealed

doctrines of Christianity really are, into the bosom of the Church. In

this section of the United States, the greater portion of those who

are willing to examine the evidences of the Catholic religion have

floated far away from their old land-marks. In order to reach their

minds, it is necessary to present the rational arguments which will

solve their difficulties much more fully than is done in this

treatise, and to interpret for them ecclesiastical and theological

formulas in which divine truths are embodied in language which is

intelligible to their intellect in its present state. They are either

extreme rationalists or moderate rationalists; that is, they either

reject the supernatural revelation entirely, or admit only so much of

it as can be proved to them to be true on grounds of pure reason.

Hence, we are obliged to begin with the intrinsic evidence of the

truth and reasonableness of the Catholic faith, before we can bring

the force of extrinsic revelation by the authority of the Church to

bear upon their mind.

We welcome the present of this treatise from the Bishop of Richmond

for another reason, as well as for its intrinsic value. It is a sign

of the renewal of that ecclesiastical intercourse with our brethren of

the southern states which has so long been interrupted.

And, in conclusion, we desire to call particular attention to the

ensuing extract, as an evidence of the falsehood of the charge which

our enemies are at present disposed to make against the Catholic

Church of "sanctioning some of the worst enormities of slavery:"

"And here we would take occasion to deplore the conduct of the civil

government in this country, regarding the matrimonial contract of

slaves, which, though the rulers profess Christianity, is completely

ignored even as a civil contract, and left entirely to the caprice of

owners, who frequently without scruple or hesitation, and for the sake

of interest or gain, part man and wife, separate parents from their

children, and treat the matrimonial union among them as if it were

really no more than the chance association of unreasoning animals.

Often, also, some of these marriages are indissoluble by the

sacramental bond, as well as by the original design of the Creator,

and by the action of Christian proprietors and the neglect of a

Christian government, these separated parties are subjected to the

temptation to form criminal and forbidden alliances, from which

frequency, custom, and the condition of servitude have removed, in the

public view, the shame and stigma which they possess before God, and

according to the maxims of the gospel. Christian proprietors will know

and tolerate these alliances in their slaves, even when made without

any formality, and where they are aware that one or both is under the

obligation of other ties.

"It is not certain that the present dreadful calamities which afflict

the country are not the scourge of God, chiefly for this sin, among

the many that provoke his anger, in our people. He is not likely to

leave long unpunished in a nation the palpable and flagrant contempt

of his holy laws, such as is evinced in this neglect or refusal to

respect in slaves the holiness, the unity, and the indissolubility of

marriage. It would appear that by the present convulsions his

providence is preparing for them at least a recognition of those

rights as immortal beings which are required for the observance of the

paramount laws of God. And if citizens desire to see the nation

prosper and enjoy the blessing of God, let all unite to procure from

the civil government, for the slaves, that their marriages be esteemed

as God intends, and not be dealt with in future as they have been

hitherto."

----

{430}

MATER ADMIRABLIS; OR, FIRST FIFTEEN YEARS OF MARY IMMACULATE.

By Rev. Alfred Monnin, author of "The Life of the Cure d'Ars."

Translated from the French by the Sisters of Charity, Mount St.

Vincent, KY. 12mo., pp. 535. New York: James B. Kirker.

On the wall of a corridor in the convent of _Trinita del Monti_, at

Rome, there is a fresco representing the Blessed Virgin, _Mater

admirabilis_, at the age of fifteen. She is depicted spinning flax

within the precincts of the temple, with her work-basket and an open

book beside her. The picture was painted some twenty years ago by a

young postulant of the community of Ladies of the Sacred Heart, to

whom the _Trinita_ belongs. It is not said that it is in any way

remarkable as a work of art; but it has acquired a celebrity among

pious Catholics second to that of hardly any picture in the world.

Since the year 1846, when the Holy Father gave his solemn blessing to

the picture, remarking that "it was a pious thought to represent the

most Holy Virgin at an age when she seemed to have been forgotten,"

signal favors have repeatedly been bestowed upon persons who have

prayed before it. The Rev. Mr. Blampin, a missionary from Oceanica,

recovered his voice at the feet of the _Mater admirabilis_, in 1846,

after having been deprived of it for twenty-one months. In a transport

of gratitude he obtained permission to say mass before the fresco, and

from that day the corridor became a real sanctuary. A great number of

miraculous cures were reported as having been wrought there, and

multitudes of sinners who came out of mere curiosity to gaze upon a

picture of which so much had been said, were converted by an

instantaneous infusion of divine grace. In 1849 Pope Pius IX., by an

apostolic brief, granted permission for the celebration of the

festival of the _Mater admirabilis_ on the 20th of October, and

enriched the sanctuary with indulgences. In 1854, by a second

rescript, he confirmed an indulgence of three hundred days, which he

had previously granted verbally to all the faithful who should recite

three Hail Maries before this holy painting, adding the invocation,

_Mater admirabilis, ora pro nobis;_ and in the following year the

indulgences were extended to the entire order of the Sacred Heart. The

devotion to the "Mother most admirable" spread rapidly, and copies of

the painting at the _Trinita_ were soon to be found in various parts

of Europe and America. There is one in the Convent of the Sacred Heart

at Manhattanville, N. Y., from which the frontispiece to the volume

before us has been engraved. "I admit," says Father Monnin, speaking

of the original, "that of all the different ways by which art has

represented this Virgin by excellence, there is not one which better

corresponds with the _beau ideal_ which, as a priest, I had loved to

form in my mind. Like the chaste Madonnas of the most fervent

ages--those of _Beato_ in particular--this Madonna of the Lily makes

one feel and understand that its designer had prayed before painting

it, and that her imagination, fed by faith and the love of God, has

delineated the most holy virgin child by interior lights derived from

her meditations. By means of a constant communion with things divine,

the disciples of Fiesole have succeeded in placing themselves as so

many mediums between the Creator and the creature, by transmitting a

ray of that eternal light amidst which they live; we may say that

_Mater admirabilis_ is of the school of Fra Angelico, although several

centuries have elapsed since his time. There is, as it were, the image

of a pure soul preserved ever from all stain, sent into the world to

be joined to a perfect and immaculate body, and to become, in this

twofold perfection and purity, the ineffable instrument of our

salvation! It is thus the prophet deserved to see her, brilliantly

resplendent with grace and innocence, with the clearness of eternal

light, and the splendor of eternal or perpetual virginity. The

ineffable peace which took possession of me, made me understand that

beauty of which St. Thomas speaks, the sight whereof purifies the

senses. . . . There in the wall, within a niche contiguous to the

great church of the monastery, is the most holy Virgin, painted in

fresco at full size. . . . The pilgrim looks in surprise, and very

soon feels as if the air around this fair flower of the field and lily

of the valley were embalmed with the perfumes of silence and

recollection. He sees her occupied in simply spinning flax; near her,

on the right, is a distaff resting upon a slender standard, and on the

left a lily rising out of a crystal vase, and bending its flexible

stalk toward Mary. .... Absorbed in her meditation, the most holy

child has suspended her work; her shuttle, become motionless, falls

from her hand, while her left hand still holds {431} a light thread

which remains joined to the flax in the distaff; one foot of this most

holy spinner rests upon a stool, near which lies an open book, spread

out on a work-basket, filled with shuttles and skeins. The features of

the youthful Mary express a purity in which there is nothing of earth;

her countenance is modestly tinged, the ringlets of her golden hair

are just perceptible through the wavings of a transparent veil which

covers her neck; her pure virginal brow, slender figure, and delicate

limbs give her a youthful appearance, full of grace and truthfulness.

It is truly the Virgin of virgins; it is truly Mary,--and Mary at an

age when but few works of art have sought to represent her."

The little chapel was soon decorated with votive offerings from all

parts of the world. It became a venerated shrine, and few devout

travellers now leave Rome without having prayed at it. The "archives

of _Mater admirabilis_," preserved at the _Trinita_, contain records

of the conversions, vocations, and cures effected at this consecrated

spot; and these, together with some devotional writings composed by

the pupils of the convent, form the groundwork of Father Monnin's

book. The matter is arranged in such a way that the work may be used

for the devotions of the month of May. It is divided into thirty-one

chapters, or "days," each of which contains a meditation having

special reference either to some virtue indicated by the picture, or

to Mary's childhood; this is followed by an appropriate prayer, and a

narrative taken from the archives.

Having explained the purpose of Father Monnin's book, we do not know

that we need say more by way of recommending it. Whatever tends to

foster love and veneration for the Blessed Virgin must commend itself

strongly to every pious Catholic; and in the new devotion, which is

here explained and illustrated, there is something so beautiful and

touching, that we believe it has only to be known in this country to

be embraced with the same eager affection as in Europe.

The external appearance of the volume is very attractive. We hail with

great pleasure the improvement in taste and liberality evinced by the

manufacture of such books as Kirker's "Mater Admirabilis" and O'Shea's

edition of Dr. Curnmings's "Spiritual Progress."

There is no sufficient reason why Catholics should not print and bind

books as well as other people.

THE LOVE Of RELIGIOUS PERFECTION; ON, HOW TO AWAKEN, INCREASE,

AND PRESERVE IT IN THE RELIGIOUS SOUL.

By Father Joseph Bayma, of the Society of Jesus. Translated from the

Latin by a Member of the same Society. 24mo., pp. 254. Baltimore: John

Murphy & Company.

The style and method of this little treatise are modelled upon those

of "The Imitation of Christ." The style is clear and severely simple,

not above the plainest comprehension, and not without attraction for

those who are somewhat fastidious in literary matters. Father Bayma

professes in his preface to have disregarded all ornaments of

composition, having written his little book not so much for the

edification of others as for the profit of his own soul. Our readers

can readily understand that it is for that very reason all the more

searching in its mental examinations and practical in its precepts.

Father Bayma divides his work into three books. The first treats of

the motives which should urge us toward religious perfection; the

second, of the means by which perfection is most easily obtained; and

the third, of the virtues in which it consists. The chapters are

short, and broken up into verses, and open where we will, we find

something to turn our thoughts toward God. Nor must it be supposed

that, because the book was written by a religious for his own

instruction, it contains only those more difficult counsels of

perfection which few people in the world are found strong enough to

follow. Like its prototype, "The Imitation of Christ" is a work for

all classes--for the easy-going Christian no less than for the saint.

Here is an extract from the chapter on "The Choice and Perfection of

Virtues;" we choose it because it illustrates how well even those

passages which are directly addressed to religious persons are adapted

to the use of persons in the world:

"1. So long as we are weighed down by our mortal flesh, we cannot

acquire the perfection of all virtues; and therefore, we have need of

selection that we may not labor in vain.

"Choose then a virtue to practise, until, {432} by the assistance of

God, thou become most perfect in it.

"Some virtues are continually called for in our daily actions, and are

necessary for all; and therefore, should be acquired with particular

industry.

"The more thou shalt make progress in meekness, patience, modesty,

temperance, humility, and others, that come into more frequent use,

the sooner wilt thou become holy.

"2. Some seek after virtues which have a greater appearance of

nobility, and are reckoned amongst men to be more glorious.

"They instruct with pleasure, but it must be in famous churches, and

to a large assembly of noble and learned men.

"They visit the sick with pleasure, and hear confessions, but only of

those that are conspicuous for riches or honors.

"See that thou set not a high value upon these things: it is more

perfect and safer to imitate Christ our Lord, and to go about

villages, than to hunt for the praise of eloquence and learning in

cities.

"It is more useful to thee to visit and console the poor and the rude,

than the rich and noble, who, moreover, are less prepared to listen to

and obey thy words.

"3. Some are content with the virtues that agree with their natural

inclinations; because they seem easier, and require not any, or a less

violent struggle.

"But when they have need of self-denial and mortification, they have

not the courage to practise virtue; but they lose heart, turn

faint-hearted, and think it is best to spare themselves.

"Do thou follow them not, for they that are such make no progress, but

rather fall away from the way of perfection, because they follow not

the teaching and example of Christ.

"For it was not those who spare themselves, and fear the hardship of

the struggle, whom Christ declared blessed, but those that mourn, and

fight manfully for justice sake."

----

LA MERE DE DIEU. From the Italian of Father Alphonse Capecelatro, of

the Oratory of Naples. 24mo., pp. 180. Philadelphia: Peter F.

Cunningham. New York: D. & J. Sadlier & Company.

Why not say "The Mother of God?" And why should Father Capecelatro,

being an Italian, figure with the French name of _Alphonse_? If we

cannot have the title of the book in English, at least let us have it

in Italian--the language in which it was written--not in French.

But despite the bad taste displayed on the title-page, this is a very

good little book. It exhales a genuine aroma of piety; it is written

with great simplicity; and it is devoted to a subject which is dear to

all of us. It is supposed to be addressed by a Tuscan priest to his

sister. The first part treats of the respect to which the Blessed

Virgin is entitled; the second traces her life, principally in the

pages of the Holy Scriptures; and the third is devoted to an

exhibition of the marks of veneration which she has received from the

Church since the very beginning of Christianity. "It is charmingly,

almost plaintively sweet," says Father Gratry, of the Oratory of

Paris. "It is written as a prayer, not as a book; it is learned and

affectionate, religious and instructive."

COUNT LESLIE; OR, THE TRIUMPH OF FILIAL PIETY.

A Catholic Tale. From the French. 24mo., pp. 108.

PHILIP HARTLEY; OR, A BOY'S TRIALS AND TRIUMPHS.

A Tale for Young People. By the author of "The Confessors of

Connaught." 24mo., pp. 122.

THE CHILDREN OF THE VALLEY; OR, THE GHOST OF THE RUINS.

Translated from the French. 24mo., pp. 123.

MAY CARLETON'S STORY; OR, THE CATHOLIC MAIDEN'S CROSS.

THE MILLER'S DAUGHTER.

Catholic Tales. 24mo., pp. 115.

COTTAGE EVENING TALES FOR YOUNG PEOPLE.

Compiled by the author of "Grace Morton." 24mo., pp. 126.

Philadelphia: Peter F. Cunningham. New York: D. & J. Sadlier &

Company.

The above five volumes are portions of Cunningham's "Young Catholic's

Library." They seem to have an excellent moral tendency, and as a

general thing are well written--better written, we believe, than the

majority of tales intended, as these are, for sodality and

Sunday-school libraries. The first mentioned, however, "Count Leslie,"

is not rendered into irreproachable English. What respect can we

expect children to entertain for the English grammar if our school

libraries give them such cruel sentences to read as the following: "It

was this young man, and _him_, only, who knew the cause of his mother's

sadness?" With this exception we can honestly recommend so much as we

have seen of the Young Catholic's Library to public favor. Mr.

Cunningham has other volumes in preparation.

----------

{433}

THE CATHOLIC WORLD

VOL. I., NO. 4. JULY, 1865.

THE TRUTH OF SUPPOSED LEGENDS AND FABLES.

BY H. E. CARDINAL WISEMAN. [Footnote 79 ]

[Footnote 79: From "Essays on Religion and Literature. By Various

Writers." Edited by H. E. Manning, D.D. London; Longman, Green & Co.

1865.]

The subject of the address which I am about to deliver is as follows:

Events and things which have been considered legendary, or even

fabulous, have been proved by further research to be historical and

true.

Before coming directly to the subject upon which I wish to occupy your

attention, I will give a little account of a very extraordinary

discovery which may throw some light upon the general character and

tendency of our investigation. In the year 1775 Pius VI. laid the

foundation of the sacristy of St. Peter's. Of course, as is the case

whenever the ground is turned up in Rome, a number of inscriptions

came to light; these were carefully put aside, and formed the lining,

if I may so say, of the corridor which unites the sacristy with the

church. It was observed, however, that a great many of these

inscriptions referred to the same subject, and a subject which was

totally unknown to antiquarians: they all spoke of certain Arval

Brethren--_Fratres Arvales_. Some were mere fragments, others were

entire inscriptions.

These, to the number of sixty-seven, were carefully put together and

illustrated by the then librarian of the Vatican, Mgr. Marini. It was

an age when in Rome antiquarian learning abounded. There were many,

perhaps, who could have undertaken the task, but it naturally belonged

to him as being attached to the church near which the inscriptions

were found. He put the fragments together, collated them one with

another, and with the entire inscriptions. He procured copies at

least, when he could not examine the originals, of such other slight

fragments as seemed to have reference to the subject, the key having

now been found, and the result was two quarto volumes, [Footnote 80]

giving us the entire history, constitution, and ritual of this

singular fraternity. Before this period two brief notices in Varro,

one passage in Pliny, and allusions in two later writers, Minutius

Felix and Fulgentius, were all that was known concerning it. One

merely told the origin of it from the time of the kings, and the

others only stated that it had something to do with questions about

land; and there the matter ended. Now, out of this ignorance, out of

this darkness, there springs, through the researches of Mgr. Marini,

perhaps the most {434} complete account or history that we have of any

institution of antiquity. So complete was the work, in fact, that only

two inscriptions relating to this subject have been found since; one

by Melchiorri, who undertook to write an appendix to the work; and the

other in 1855 in excavating the Dominican garden at Santa Sabina,

which indeed threw great light upon the subject. From these

inscriptions we learn that this was one of the most powerful bodies of

augurs or priests in Rome. Yet neither Pliny, nor Livy, nor Cicero,

when expressly enumerating all the classes of augurs, ever alludes to

them. Now, we know how they were elected. On one tablet is an order of

Claudius to elect a new member, so to fill up their number of twelve,

in consequence of the death of one. They wrote every year, and

published, at least put up in their gardens, a full and minute account

of all the sacrifices and the feasts celebrated by them. They were

allied to the imperial family, and all the great families in Rome took

part in their assemblies. They had a sacred grove, the site of which

was perfectly unknown until the last inscription, found in 1855,

revealed it. It was out of Porta Portese, on the road to the English

vineyard at La Magliana. There they had sacrifices to the _Dea Dia_,

whose name occurs nowhere else among all the writers on ancient

mythology. It is supposed to be Ceres. They had magnificent sacrifices

at the beginning of the year. There are tablets which say where the

meetings will be held, whether at the house of the rector or

pro-rector, leaving the date in blank, to be filled in the course of

the year. We are told who were at the meetings, especially who among

the youths from the first families--four of whom acted somewhat as

acolytes; and we are told how they were dressed, which of their two

dresses they wore. Then there is a most minute ritual given. We are

told how each victim was slain; how the brethren took off the toga

praetexta, their crowns and golden ears of corn, then put them on

again, and examined the entrails of the sacrifices; all as minutely

detailed as the rubrics of any office of unction and coronation could

possibly be. Then we are told how many baskets of fruit they carried

away, and what distribution there was of sweetmeats at the end, every

one taking a certain quantity. All this is recorded, and with it their

song in barbarous Oscan or early Etruscan, perfectly unintelligible,

in which their acclamations were made. So that now we know perfectly

everything about them. I may mention as an interesting fact, that

Marini's own copy of his work on the Arval Brethren, two quarto

volumes, having their margins covered with notes for a second edition,

which was never published, and filled with slips of paper with

annotations and new inscriptions of other sorts, which he subsequently

found, is now in the library at Oscott.

[Footnote 80: _Atti e Monumenti dei Fratelli Arvali_. Da Mgr.

Marini. 2 tom. Roma, 1795. ]

What do I wish to draw from this account? It is that history may have

remained silent upon points which it seems impossible, in the

multiplicity of writers that have been preserved to us, should not

have cropped out, not have been mentioned in some way, not even have

been made known to us through innumerable anterior discoveries. One

fortunate circumstance brought to light the whole history of this

body. How unfair, then, is it, on the reticence of history, at once to

condemn anything, or to say, "We should have heard of it; writers who

ought to have told us would not have concealed it from us." For a

circumstance may arise which will bring out the whole history of a

thing, and make that plain and clear before us which has been scouted

completely by others, or of which we have been kept in the completest

ignorance.

I could illustrate this by several other examples which I have

collected together, but I foresee that I shall not get anything like

through the subject I propose to myself. But here is one such instance

bearing on Scripture truth. It was said by infidel writers {435} of

the last century, "How is it that there could have been such a

remarkable occurrence as the massacre of the Innocents without a

single profane historian ever mentioning it--Josephus, if no one

else?" Of course the answer was, "We do not know why, except that we

might give plausible reasons why it should not have been noticed."

That is all we need say. It is our duty to accept the fact. We must

not reject things because we cannot find corroboration of them all at

once. We may have to wait with patience; the world has had to wait

centuries even before some doubted truth has come out clearly.

I. The subject which I wish to bring before you is one of those which,

perhaps beyond any other, may be said to be considered thoroughly

legendary, and even perhaps worse:--it is the history of St. Ursula

and her eleven thousand companions, virgins and martyrs. At first

sight it may appear bold to undertake a vindication of that narrative,

or to bring it within the compass of history by detaching from it what

has been embellishment, what has been perhaps even wilful invention,

and bringing out in its perfect completeness a history corroborated on

all sides by every variety of research. Such, however, is the object

at which I aim to-day; other instances may occupy us afterward.

It has, in fact, been treated as fabulous by Protestants, beginning

with the Centuriators of Magdeburg down to the present time. There is

hardly any story more sneered at than this, that an English lady, with

eleven thousand companions, all virgins, should have met with

martyrdom at Cologne, and should have even gone to Rome on their

journey by some route which is very difficult to comprehend; for they

are always represented in ships. Hence the whole thing has been

treated as a fable. But the more refined Germanism of later times

takes what is perhaps meant to be a mitigated view, and treats it as a

myth, that is, a sort of mythological tale. Thus the writer of a late

work, [Footnote 81] entitled the History, or fable, of St. Ursula and

the Eleven Thousand Virgins, printed in Hanover, in 1854, considers

that St. Ursula is the ancient German goddess Rehalennia, and explains

the history by the mythology of that ancient divinity.

[Footnote 81: _Die Sage von der heilige Ursula und den, 11,000

Jungfrauen._ Von Oskar Schade. Hanover, 1854. ]

But let us come to Catholics. A great number have been staggered

completely by this history, and have said, "It is incredible; it is

impossible to believe it; we must reject it: what foundation is there

for it?" Some have tried to search one out; and perhaps one of the

most ingenious explanations, though the most devoid of any foundation,

is that which Sirmondus and Valesius [Footnote 82] and several other

Catholics have brought forward--that there were only two saints, St.

Ursula and St. Undecimilla, and that this last has been turned into

the eleven thousand. This name Undecimilla has nowhere been found;

there have been some like it, but that name is not known. The

explanation is the purest conjecture, and has now been completely

rejected. But still many find it very difficult to accept the history.

If they were interrogated, and required to answer distinctly the

question, "What do you think about St. Ursula?" there are very few who

would venture to face the question and say, "I believe there is a

foundation for it in truth."--For that is all one might be expected

to say about a matter which has come down to us through ages, probably

with additions.--"I believe the substance of it; it has been so

altered by time as to reach us clogged with difficulties; still I

believe there were martyrs in great number who had come from England

that were martyred at Cologne." But there are few who like to talk

about it: most say it is a legendary story. Even Butler only gives

about two pages of history. He rejects the explanation which I have

{436} just mentioned; but he throws the whole narrative into the

shade, and passes it over with one of those little sermons which he

gives us, to make up for not knowing much about a saint; so that his

readers are left quite in the dark.

[Footnote 82: _Acta Sanct._ Bolland, Oct. tom. ix. p. 144. ]

Then unfortunately while many Catholics have been inclined to look at

it as more legendary than historical, they have been badly served by

those who have undertaken the defence or explanation of the event.

There may be many here who have gone into what is called the golden

chamber in the church of St. Ursula at Cologne, and have seen that

multitude of skulls and bones that line the walls, and have been

inclined to give an incredulous shrug and to say, "How could these

martyrs have been got together? where did they come from? how do we

know they were martyrs?"

We generally content ourselves with looking at such things through the

eyes of Mr. Murray's traveller who tells us about them. Accordingly we

look round at these startling objects, and say, "It is very singular;

it is very extraordinary." But there is very little awe, very little

devotion felt by us; while, to a good native of Cologne, it is the

most venerable, sacred, and holy place almost in Christendom. He prays

earnestly to the virgins of Cologne, and considers that they are his

powerful patrons and intercessors.

However, little has been done to help us. Works have been published in

favor of the truth of this history, but then they have run into

excess. The most celebrated of all is one by a Jesuit named Crombach,

who was led to compose it by Bebius, another learned Jesuit, whose

papers were unfortunately burned in a conflagration at the college in

Cologne. Crombach in 1647 published two large volumes entitled _"St.

Ursula vindicata."_ In them he has included an immense variety of

things. He has accepted with scarce any discrimination works that are

entitled to little or no credit--contradictory works; he has mingled

them all up; and he insists upon the story or the history being true

with all details. The consequence is that the work has been very much

thrown aside, or severely attacked.

Yet it is acknowledged that it contains a great deal of valuable

information, together with an immense quantity of documents which may

be made good use of when properly examined, when the chaff is

separated from the wheat. On the whole, however, it has not been

favorable to the cause of the martyrs.

Now, however, there has appeared such a vindication, such a wonderful

re-examination of the whole history, as it is impossible to resist. It

is impossible to read the account of St. Ursula given in the 9th

volume for October of the Bollandists, published in 1858, without

being perfectly amazed at the quantity of real knowledge that has been

gained upon the subject, and still more at the powerful manner in

which this knowledge has been handled;--an erudition which, merely

glancing over the pages and notes, reminds us of the scholars of three

hundred years ago, in whom we have often wondered at the learning

which they brought to bear on any one point.

This treatise occupies from page 73 to 303, 230 pages of closely

printed folio in two columns. I acknowledge that it is not quite a

recreation to read it, but still it is very well worth reading. All

documents are printed at full length. Now, it so happened, that just

after the volume had come out, I was at Brussels, and called at the

library of the Bollandists, and had a most interesting conversation

with Father Victor de Buck, the author of this history. He gave me an

interesting outline of what he had been enabled to do. He told me that

when they came to October 21, and he had to write a life of St. Ursula

and her companions, his provincial wrote to him from Cologne and said,

"Take care what you say, for the people are tremendously alarmed lest

you should knock down all their traditions, and I {437} do not know

what will be the case if you do." He replied, "Don't be at all afraid;

I shall confirm every point, and I am sure they will be pleased with

what I have to say." He was kind enough to put down in a letter the

chief points of his vindication for me; but I have lost it, and so

there was nothing left but to read through the whole of this great

work. But, beside, a very excellent compendium has appeared, which

takes pretty nearly the same view on every point, and approves of

everything the author has said; indeed some points are perhaps put

more popularly in it, though the history is reduced to a much smaller

compass. I have the work before me. It is entitled, "St. Ursula and

her Companions: A Critical, Historical Monograph. By John Hubert

Kessel. Cologne, 1863." It is a work which is not too long to be

translated and made known. What I have to say, after having gone

through this preliminary matter, is, that I lay claim to nothing

whatever beyond having been diligent, and having endeavored to grasp

all the points in question, and reduce them to a moderate compass. I

have changed the order altogether, taking that which seems to me most

suitable to the subject, and co-ordinating the different parts and

facts so as to make it popularly intelligible. In this I have the

satisfaction to find that in a chapter at the end of the book, in

which the history is summed up, exactly the same order is taken which

I have adopted here. It will not be necessary to give a reference for

every assertion that I shall have occasion to make; but I may say that

I have the page carefully noted where the subject is fully drawn out

and illustrated.

Now, let me first of all give, in a brief sketch, what Father de Buck

considers the real history, which has been wrapt up in such a quantity

of legendary matter--that which comes out from the different documents

laid before us, as the kernel or the nucleus of the history, as Kessel

calls it. He supposes that this army of martyrs, as we may well call

them, was composed of two different bodies: a body of virgins who

happened, under circumstances which I shall describe to you, to be at

Cologne, and a body of the inhabitants, citizens of Cologne, and

others, very probably many English and other virgins who had there

sought safety. It may be asked how came these English to be there?

About the year 446 the Britons began to be immensely annoyed by the

incursions of the Picts and Scots, which led to their calling in

(after the manner of the old fable, about the man calling in the dogs

to hunt the hare in his garden) the Anglo-Saxons, who in return took

possession of the country; and the inhabitants that they did not

exterminate they made serfs. At this period we know the English were

put to sad straits. Having so long lain quiet and undisturbed under

the Roman dominion, they had almost lost their natural valor, and were

unable to defend themselves. There was, therefore, a natural tendency

to emigrate and get away. They had already done this before; for as De

Buck shows, with extraordinary erudition, the occupation of Brittany

or Armorica was a quiet emigration from England, which sought the

continent, and also established colonies in Holland and Batavia, and

by that means obtained a peace which they could not have at home. We

have a very interesting document upon this subject. The celebrated

senator Aetius was at that time governor of Gaul; the Britons sent to

him for help, and this is one passage of a most touching letter which

has been preserved by Gildas: "Repellunt nos barbari ad mare, repellit

nos mare ad barbaros; oriuntur duo genera funerum; aut jugulamur aut

mergimur." [Footnote 83] They were tossed backward and forward by the

sea to the barbarians, and by the barbarians to the sea; when they

fell upon the barbarians they were cut to pieces, and when they were

driven into the {438} sea "mergimur"--we go to the bottom. It does not

mean that they ran into the sea, but that they went to their ships,

and many of them perished in the sea by shipwreck or by sinking--"aut

jugulamur aut mergimur." That shows that the English were leaving

England to go to the continent. I am only giving you the web of the

history, without its proofs; but I quote this passage to show it is

not at all unlikely that at that moment, when they were in a manner

straitened between the barbarians of the north and those coming upon

them in the south, a great many of them went out of the country, and

that especially being Christians they would wend their way to Catholic

countries. Religious and other persons of a like character, we know,

in every invasion of barbarians, were the first to suffer a double

martyrdom. This is a supposition, therefore, about which there is no

improbability, that a certain number, I do not say how many, of

Christian ladies of good family, some of them, perhaps, royal, got

over to Batavia or Holland (where there have been always traditions

and names of places in confirmation of this), and made their way to

Cologne, which was a capital and a seat of the Roman government, a

Christian city, and in every probability considered a stronghold, both

on account of its immense fortifications, and on account of the river.

[Footnote 83: _Gildas de Excidio Britanniae_, pars i., cap. xvii.

Ed. Migne: _Patrologia_, tom. lxix., p. 342.]

Well, then comes the history, very difficult indeed to reconcile, of a

pilgrimage to Rome, which it is said they made; but let us suppose

that instead of the whole of them a certain number of them might go

there. It is not at all improbable that at that time, as De Buck

observes, a deputation, or a certain number of citizens and others,

did go to Rome to obtain assistance there, as their only hope against

the invasion, which I shall describe just now. There is no great

difficulty in supposing this; and assuming that some of the English

virgins also went, that would be a foundation for the great legendary

history, I might say the fabulous history, which has been built upon

it. Now, there is a strong confirmation of such a thing being done.

St. Gregory of Tours [Footnote 84] mentions that at this very time

Bishop Servatius did go to Rome to pray the Apostles Sts. Peter and

Paul to protect his country and city against the coming invasion, and

he saw no other hope of safety. He must have passed through Cologne

exactly at that time, and, therefore, there is nothing absurd or

improbable in supposing that some inhabitants of Cologne went with him

as a deputation to Rome, and that some of the English virgins may have

accompanied them. In the year following, Attila, the scourge of God,

the most cruel of all the leaders of barbaric tribes who invaded the

Roman empire, was marching along the Rhine with the known view of

invading Gaul, and not only invading it, but, as he said, of

completely conquering and destroying it; for his maxim was, "Where

Attila sets his foot no more grass shall ever grow"--nothing but

destruction and devastation. I will say a little more about the Huns

later. In the meantime we leave them, in 450, on their way to cross

the Rhine, with the intention of invading and occupying France. Attila

united great cunning with his barbarity; he pretended to the Goths

that he was coming to help them against the Romans, and to the Romans

that he was going to help them to expel the Goths. By that means he

paralyzed both for a time, until it was too well seen that he was the

enemy of all. It is most probable, knowing the character as we shall

see just now of the Huns, that the inhabitants of the neighboring

towns would seek refuge in the capital, and that all living in the

country would get within the strong walls of cities. We have important

confirmation, at this very time, in the history of St. Genevieve,

[Footnote 65] who was {439} a virgin living out in the country, but

who, upon the approach of the Huns, hastened, we are told, immediately

to seek safety in Paris, and was there the means of saving the city,

by exhorting the inhabitants to build up walls, to close their gates,

and to fight. This they did, and so saved themselves. That is just an

example. When it is known that throughout his march Attila destroyed

every city, committing incredible barbarities (ruins of some of the

places remaining to this day), not sparing man, woman, or child, it is

more than probable that there would be a great conflux and influx to

the city of Cologne, where the Roman government still kept its seat,

and where, of course, there was something like order, although we have

unfortunate proofs, in the works of Salvianus, [Footnote 86] that the

morality of the city had become so very corrupt that it deserved great

chastisement. However, so far all is coherent. In 451, after Attila

had gone to France, and had been completely defeated, he made his way

back, greatly exasperated, burning and destroying everything in his

way, sparing no one. Then he appeared before Cologne; and this is the

invasion in which it is supposed the martyrdom took place.

[Footnote 84: S. Greg. Turon., _Hist. Franc_., lib. ii., cap. v. Ed.

Migne: _Patrologia_. tom. lxviii., pp. 197, 576.]

[Footnote 85: Vid. Tillemont, _Hist. des Emp.,_ vi. p. 151. _Acta

Sanct. Boll.,_ Jan. tom. i. in vit. S. Genovevae.]

[Footnote 86: _De Gubernatione Dei_, Ed. Baluzii, Paris, 1864, pp.

140, 141. ]

Having given you what the Bollandist considers the historical thread,

every part of which can be confirmed and made most probable, I will

now, before going into proofs of the narrative, direct your attention

for a few minutes to what we may call the legendary parts of the

history. When we speak of legends we must not confound them with

fables, that is, with pure inventions. We must not suppose that people

sat down to write a lie under the idea that they were edifying the

Church or anybody. There have been such cases, no doubt; for

Tertullian mentions the delinquency of a person's writing false acts

of St. Paul, and being suspended from his office of priest in

consequence. Such follies have happened in all times. We have had many

instances in our own day of attempts at forging documents, and

committing the worst of social crimes; but old legends as we have

them, and even the false acts as they were called, were no doubt

written without any intention of actually deceiving, or of passing off

what was spurious for genuine. The person who first suggested this was

a man certainly no friend of Catholics, Le Clerc, better known by his

literary name of Clericus; who observes that school exercises were

sometimes drawn from martyrdoms, as in our day from a classical

subject, as Juvenal says of Hannibal:

"I demens et saevas curre per Alpes

Ut pueris placeas et declamatio flas."

Not that students professed to write a real history, but they gave

wonderful descriptions of deeds of valor and marvellous events which

had never occurred, and were never intended to be believed. In the

same way, at a time when nothing but a religious subject could create

interest, that sort of composition came to be applied to acts of

saints and martyrs; so that many books and narratives which we have of

that description may be thus accounted for. It is much like our

historical novels, or the historical plays of Shakespeare, for

instance. Nobody imagines that their authors wished to pass them off

for history, but they did not contradict history; they kept to

history, so that you may find it in them; and you might almost write a

history from some of those books which are called historical works of

fiction. In early times such compositions were of a religious

character. Then came times of greater ignorance, and those works came

to be regarded as true historical accounts. But, are we to reject them

on that ground altogether? Are we to say, any more than we should with

regard to the fictitious works of which I have just spoken, that there

is no truth in them? We should proceed in the same way as people do

who seek for gold. A {440} man goes to a gold-field, and tries to

obtain gold from auriferous sand. Now suppose he took a sieve full,

and said at once, "It's all rubbish," and threw it away; he might go

on for a long time and never get a grain of gold. But if he knows how

to set to work, if he washes what he obtains, picks out grain by

grain, and puts by, he gets a small hoard of real genuine gold; and

nobody denies that when, many such supplies are put together they make

a treasure of sterling metal. So it is with these legendary accounts.

They are never altogether falsehoods--I will not say never, but

rarely. Whenever they have an air of history about them, the chances

are that, by examining and sifting them well, we may get out a certain

amount of real and solid material for history.

The legendary works upon these virgins are numerous and begin early.

The first is one which I shall call, as all our writers do, by its

first words, "Regnante Domino." This is an account of traditions,

evidently written between the ninth and eleventh centuries. It is

impossible to determine more closely than this. But we know that it

cannot have been written earlier than the ninth century, nor later

than the eleventh. It contains a long history of these virgins while

in England, who they were, and what they were; of a certain marriage

contract that was made with the father of St. Ursula, a very powerful

king; how it was arranged that she should have eleven companions, and

each of these a thousand followers; how they should embark for three

years and amuse themselves with nautical exercises; how the ships went

to the other side of the channel. It is an absurd story and full of

fable, but there are three or four most important points in it.

Geoffrey of Monmouth comes next. He gives another history, totally

different from that of the "Regnante Domino;" but retains two or three

points of identity. His is evidently a British tradition, which, of

course, it is most important to compare with the German one; and we

shall find how singularly they agree. Then, after these, come a number

of legends called _Passiones_, long accounts filled with a variety of

incongruous particulars which may be safely put aside; but in the same

way germs or remnants of something good, which have been thus

preserved, are found in them all, and when brought together may give

us some valuable results. We next meet with what is more difficult to

explain--the supposed revelations of St. Elizabeth of Schoenau, and of

Blessed Hermann of Steinfeld. It is not for us to enter into the

discussion, which is a very subtle one, of how persons who are saints

really canonized and field in immense veneration--one of them,

Hermann, singularly so--can be supposed to have been allowed to follow

their own imaginations on some points, while at the same time there

seems no doubt that they lived in an almost ecstatic state. This

question is gone into fully; and the best authorities are quoted by

the Bollandist. It would require a long discussion, and it would not

be to our purpose, to pursue it further. These supposed revelations

are rejected altogether. Now we come to positive forgeries, consisting

of inscriptions, or of engraved stones with legends carved upon them.

One of these mentions a pope who never existed, and also a bishop of

Milan who never lived, beside a number of other imaginary people. From

the texture and state of these inscriptions there can be no doubt

whatever that they are absolute forgeries, and the author of them is

pretty well discovered. He was a sacristan of the name of Theodorus.

In order to enhance the glory of these virgins, they are represented,

as you see in legendary pictures, as being in a ship accompanied by a

pope, bishops, abbots, and persons of high dignity, who are supposed

to have come from Rome with them. All this we discard, making out what

we can from the sounder traditions.

And this is the result. There are {441} two or three points on which,

whether we take the English or the German traditions, all are agreed.

First, we have that a great many of these virgins were English: that

the Germans all agree upon; the earliest historical documents say the

same. Secondly, that they were martyred by the Huns: that we are told

both by the English and the German writers. It is singular that they

should agree on such a point as this; and you will see how--I do not

say corroborated, but absolutely proved it is. The third fact is, that

there was a tremendous slaughter at the time, a singular slaughter of

people committed at Cologne by these Huns. This comes out from all the

legendary histories, which agree upon this point, and we can hardly

know how they should do so except through separate traditions; for

they evidently have nothing else in common. Their separate narratives

we may reject as legendary.

Thus we come to an investigation of the true history, and see how it

is proved. And first I must put before you what I may call the

foundation-stone of the whole history on which it is based--the

inscription now kept in the church of St. Ursula. It had remained very

much neglected, though it had been given by different authors, until,

when the Bollandists were going to write their history, they took

three casts of it; one they gave to the archbishop of Cologne, another

they kept for themselves; the third--I cannot say what became of it,

but I think it went to Rome, having been taken by De Rossi. I could

not afford to have a cast brought here, but I have had a most accurate

tracing made of it. Those of you who are judges of graphic character

will see the nature of the letters; they are capital, or uncial

letters. First, you may ask what is the age of this inscription? It is

pretty well agreed that it cannot be later than the year 500--that

would be fifty years after that assigned to the martyrdom of the

virgins. De Buck, who is really almost hypercritical in rejecting,

says he does not see a single objection to the genuineness of this

inscription. There is not a trace of Lombard or later character about

it; it is purely Roman. The union of some of the letters is just what

we find about that time in Roman inscriptions. It is then, as nearly

as one can judge, of the age I have mentioned--about the year 500. De

Rossi, passing through Cologne three or four years ago, examined it

and pronounced it to be genuine, and said it could not be of a later

period than that. Dr. Enner, a layman of Cologne, when writing his

"History of Cologne," could not bring himself to believe that the

inscription was so old, and he sent an exact copy in plaster (perhaps

that was the third) to Professor Ritschl, the well-known editor of

Plautus, and a Protestant, at Bonn. I have a copy of the Professor's

letter here, in which he says that he has minutely examined the

inscription, and that he cannot see anything in it to make it more

modern than the date assigned to it, and that it contains

peculiarities which no forger would ever hit upon, such as the double

_i,_ and other forms. He says, "I am not sufficiently acquainted with

the history of St. Ursula to connect it in any way; but I have no

hesitation in saying that the inscription cannot be later than the

beginning of the sixth century;" which, you see, takes us back very

nearly to the time when the martyrdom is supposed to have occurred.

Then I may mention that the very inscription is copied in the next

historical document that we have, as being already in the church. This

is the translation of the inscription, of which I present an exact

copy:

"Clematius came from the East; he was terrified by fiery visions, and

by the great majesty and the holiness of these virgins, and, according

to a vow that he made, he rebuilt at his own expense, on his own land,

this basilica." Then follows a commination at the end, which is not

unusual in such cases. Now, every expression here is to be found in

inscriptions of the time.

{442}

[Illustration: ]

{443}

For instance, "de proprio;" "votum;" "loco suo" (sometimes it is "loco

empto"), meaning of course land which one made his own, or which was

his own before. There had been then a basilica--not the church that

now exists, but a basilica--at the tombs where these saints were

buried, which we shall have to describe later. He rebuilt the basilica

fifty years after the martyrdom, destroyed no doubt during the

constant incursions of barbarians. It was probably a very small one;

for we know that at Rome every entrance to the tombs of martyrs had

its basilica. De Rossi has been successful in finding one or two. One

was built by St. Damasus, who wrote: "Not daring to put my ashes among

so many martyrs, I have built this basilica for myself, my mother and

sister;" and there are three niches at the end for three sarcophagi.

It is universally allowed that there never was a catacomb without its

basilica. In fact, in that of Pope St. Alexander, and Sts. Evantius

and Theodulus, found lately, there is a basilica completely standing,

and the bodies of these saints were found--one under the altar--and

the others near it. Then from the basilica you go into the catacomb.

So that nothing is more natural than that in the place where these

martyrs were buried, Clematius should rebuild their basilica. After

this monument we proceed to the next genuine document, though one of a

later date, and by an unknown author--the "Sermo in Natali." This,

there is no doubt, was written between the years 751 and 839; and I

will give the ingenious argument by which this date is proved. But

first it quotes the inscription I have read, with the exception of the

threat at the end; in the second place it mentions that the virgins

were probably Britons--that it was not certain, but the general

opinion was that they had come from Britain; thirdly, it attributes

the martyrdom to the Huns; fourthly, it insinuates what is of great

importance in filling up the history, that it is by no means to be

supposed that they were all virgins, but that many were widows and

married people. The reason for fixing the earliest date at 751 is,

that it quotes Bede's Ecclesiastical History, which was written in

that year, giving apparently his account of the conversion of Lucius;

though one cannot say that it is certainly a copy from Bede, because

Bede himself copied from more ancient books, and both may have drawn

from the same source. Then it could not have been written after 839

for two reasons. In 834 there was a tremendous incursion of other

barbarians--of Normans; and it is plain from our book that there had

been no such invasion when it was written; nothing was known of it,

because the writer speaks of countries, particularly Holland, as being

flourishing, which were completely destroyed by them. There is also

this singular circumstance. In speaking of the great devotion to the

virgins in Batavia, the writer states that this happened at a time

when Batavia was an island formed by the two branches of the Rhine.

Now in 839 an inundation completely destroyed it, one of the horns or

arms being entirely obliterated. Therefore that gives us a certain

compass within which the book was written. The author himself was a

native of Cologne--for in referring to the inhabitants he once or

twice speaks of "us"--and he would therefore be familiar with the

traditions of the people. He says there was no written history at that

time; he defends the traditions, and shows how natural it was that the

people should have kept them. I ought to mention that he calls the

head of the band of martyrs Pinnosa. He says, "She is called in her

own country Vinosa, in ours Pinnosa;" and there is evidence that this

was the name first given to the leader; how, by what transformation,

it came to be St. Ursula, we cannot tell; it is certain that up to

that time hers was not the name of the leader. Afterward Pinnosa

appears on the list, but not as the chief, St. Ursula being the

prominent name.

{444}

After that period there comes a mass of historical proofs that one can

have no difficulty about. From 852 there are an immense number of

diplomas giving grants of land to the nuns of the monastery of St.

Ursula, at her place of burial. There is no doubt of the existence of

that church, from other documents. Then the martyrologies repeat the

whole tradition again and again. Thus, then, we fill up that gap of

four hundred years (from A.D. 400 to A.D. 800). There is the

inscription; there is the "Sermo in Natali," which quotes it, and

gives old traditions; and afterward there are diplomas and other

testimonies which are abundant.

We now proceed to compare the whole tradition with history, with known

history, for after all this is our chief business. When we possess a

tradition of a country and people, we ask, "What confirmation, what

corroboration, have we? what does history tell us?" Let us then see

what history does tell. It tells us, in the first place, that in the

year 450 Attila was known to be coming to invade and take possession

of Gaul, having been ejected from Italy. His army is said by

contemporary writers to have been composed of 700,000 men. It was a

hostile emigration. They brought their women and children in carts, as

the Huns always used to do, and they of course marched but slowly.

They went along both sides of the Danube, and got at length into

France. De Buck, by a most interesting series of proofs, makes it

almost as evident as anything can be that they crossed over at

Coblentz, therefore not coming near Cologne. They entered, as I have

said, into Gaul, destroying everything in their march. Some of their

barbarities and massacres are almost incredible. After devastating

nearly the whole of the country, they besieged Orleans. The

inhabitants having been encouraged to resist, at last succeeded in

obtaining certain terms; that is, Attila and his chiefs went into the

city and took what they liked, but left the city standing. After this

they were pursued by the general whom I have mentioned--Aetius, a

Gaul, but who got together all the troops he could, Goths, Visigoths,

Franks, and others, who saw what the design of these horrible

barbarians was.

A most tremendous battle was now fought, that of Catalaunia

(Chalons-sur-Marne), in which contemporary historians tell us 300,000

men were left on the field; but that number has been reduced to

200,000. Such battles, thank God! we seldom hear of now-a-days.

Attila, routed, immediately took to flight, and got clear away from

his pursuers. He went through Belgium, destroying city after city,

leaving nothing standing, and massacring the people in the most

barbarous way.

Here comes the most difficult knot of the whole history. Authors agree

that Attila now made his way into Thuringia, that is to the heart of

Germany; he must therefore be supposed to have got clear over the

Rhine, and marched a long way through the country. On this subject De

Buck has one of the most exquisite and beautiful geographical

investigations, I should think, that have ever appeared. He proves, so

that you can no more doubt it than you can doubt my having this paper

before me, that there was Thuringia which lay on this side of the

Rhine; he proves it by a series documents taken from mediaeval

writers, and from inscriptions, that there was a Thuringia which

stretched from Louvain to the Rhine. Indeed, it is impossible to

conceive how Attila could have got, as by a leap, into the very midst

of Germany. He traces the natural course of march (which you can

follow by any map), taking the cities destroyed as landmarks, and

brings him to this province; and when there, there was no possible way

of crossing the Rhine but by Cologne; there was the only bridge, the

only military pass of any sort. So there can be no doubt that the

Huns, exasperated by their tremendous losses, and by being driven

{445} out of Gaul, which they intended to occupy, having revenged

themselves as they went on, were obliged to go through Cologne; and if

you calculate the date of the victory, and consider the country

through which Attila passed, destroying everything as he went, you

bring him almost to a certainty to Cologne about the 21st of October,

nearly the day of the martyrdom. The "Regnante Domino," which

attributes the martyrdom to the Huns, corroborates all this account,

which is the result of a most painstaking examination, extending over

many pages.

Next we come to another important point. Why attribute this massacre

to the Huns? Because there was no other invasion and passage of

savages except that one. It accords, then, both with geographical and

chronological facts. We have the martyrs at Cologne at the very time

when these barbarians came.

But we must needs say something about the Huns. There is no question

that the Huns were the most frightful, cruel, and licentious

barbarians that ever invaded the Roman empire. They were not of a

northern race, Germans or Scandinavians; they were, no doubt, Mongols

or Tartars; they came from Tartary, from Scythia, and settled on the

Caspian sea; they then moved on to the mouths of the Danube, and again

to Hungary, and rolled on in this way toward the richer countries of

the west. There are several authors of that period--Jornandes,

Procopius, and others--who describe them to us. [Footnote 87] They

tell us that when they were infants their mothers bound down their

noses, and flattened them in such a way that they should not come

beyond the cheek-bones; that their eyes were so sunk that they looked

like two caverns; that they scarified all the lower part of the face

with hot irons when young, so that no hair could grow; that they had

no beard, and were more hideous than demons; that they wore no dress

except a shirt fabricated by the women in the carts in which they

entirely lived; it was never changed, but was worn till it dropped

off, under a mantle made entirely of wild-rat skins. Their chaussure

consisted of kid skins round their legs, with most extraordinary shoes

or sandals, which had no shape whatever, and did not adapt themselves

to the form; the consequence was that they could not walk, and they

fought entirely on their wretched horses. They had no _cuisine_ except

between the saddle and the back of the horse, where they put their

steaks and softened them a little before eating; but as to drink, they

could take any amount of it. With regard to their morality it cannot

be described. The writers of that age tell us that no Roman woman

would allow herself to be seen by a Hun. They were licentious to a

degree, and they carried off all the women they could into captivity;

probably they destroyed a great many; which was their custom when they

became a burden to them. These, then, were the sort of savages that

reached Cologne.

[Footnote 87: Ammianua Marcellinus, lib. xxxi., cap. ii. ]

They had another peculiarity; of all the hordes of savages that

invaded the Roman empire, they are the only ones that used the bow and

arrow. The Germans hardly made any use of the bow, except a few men

who mixed in the ranks; as a body their execution was with the sword,

the lance, and the pike. The use of the bow was distinctly Tartar, or

Scythian. Then we are told that their aim from horseback was

infallible; that when flying from a foe they could turn round and

shoot with perfect facility; that they rode equally well astride or

seated sideways like a woman; in fact that they flew and turned just

like the Parthians and Scythians from whom they were descended. In

this great battle of Catalaunia they either lost heart or steadiness,

and they could not fire upon their enemies, so that they were pursued

and tremendously routed. That their mode of fighting was by the bow

and arrow, you {446} will see in the representations given in the

beautiful shrine at Hamelink, where the martyrs are fired into by the

barbarians with bows and arrows. Let us see what this has to do with

our question. The "Regnante Domino," which we have mentioned as

legendary, gives a most beautiful description of the mode of dealing

with the bodies. The writer says that when the inhabitants saw that

the enemy were gone they came out, and in a field they found this

great number of virgins lying on the ground. They collected their

blood, got sarcophagi, or made graves, and put them in; "and there

they lay, as they were placed," the writer says, "as any one can tell

who has seen them," evidently suggesting that he had seen them. Now,

in the year 1640, on July 2, Papebroch, an authority beyond all

question, and Crombach, whose word may be relied on as that of a most

excellent and holy man, were at the opening of the tombs. From all

tradition this was no doubt the place of the stone of Clematius; there

has always been a convent there; and you remember that part of the

inscription which threatens eternal punishment to those who should

bury any but virgins there. It is now called "St. Ursula's Acker," a

sort of sacred field where the basilica was. Here they were buried,

and so they remained undisturbed except by some translations of the

middle ages, which do not concern us. In 1640 there was a formal

exhumation, and eye-witnesses tell us what they saw. A nuncio came

afterward to verify the facts.

I will give you the account of how these bodies were found. Many of

them were in graves, in rows, but each body separate, there being a

space of a foot between them. In other places there were stone

sarcophagi in which they were laid separately. Then Crombach describes

that there were some large fosses, sixty feet long, eight feet deep,

and sixteen wide, containing a large number of bodies. They were

placed in a row with a space between them; at their feet was another

row; then a quantity of earth was thrown on, and another row was

placed, and so on, until you came to the fourth. Every skeleton in the

three rows was entire, and they all looked toward the east. They had

their arms crossed upon their bosoms, and almost every one had a

vessel containing blood, or sand tinged with blood. The fourth, or

upper stratum, consisted of disjointed bones, and with these also

there were vessels containing blood or colored sand. In this way, the

writer says, he saw a hundred bodies. Then there was this remarkable

circumstance about their clothes. Eutychianus, [Footnote 88] the

pope, had published a decree that no body of a martyr was ever to be

buried without having a dalmatic put upon it; and clothes in abundance

were found upon these bodies.

[Footnote 88: _Acta SS._ Bolland. Octob., tom, ix., p. 139.

_Constant. Rom. Pont. Epist._ Paris, 1721, p. 299. ]

Another important discovery was, that immense quantities of arrows

were found mingled with the bones; some sticking in the skull, others

in the breast, others in the arms--right in the bones. So it was clear

that all these bodies had been put to death by means of arrows, and

there was no other tribe but the Huns which made use of the arrow as

its instrument of death. I may add that there were no signs of

burning, or of any heathen burial about them. This also is most

important. I have said that there had been other exhumations in the

eleventh and twelfth centuries. There are pictures of these, and there

are sarcophagi preserved in which bodies were found. These are laid in

exactly the same manner as others were found in 1640. Crombach says

the whole had been done most scientifically, that the distances were

all arranged by measure, so that there was not a quarter of a foot

difference anywhere.

Now, I ask, could these bodies have been put there in consequence of a

plague, or an earthquake, or any event of that kind? Putting aside the

arrows found in immense quantities, and the {447} vessels containing

blood, we know that when people die in a plague to the number of

hundreds, a foss is made, and they are thrown in, and there is an end

of them. This could not have been a common cemetery. It contained

nothing but the bodies of these women (I will speak of their physical

characteristics later), all laid in studied order, with great care,

and with such peculiarities, and all evidently buried at the same

time. After reading all this, may we not exclaim with St. Ambrose, "We

have found the signs of martyrdom," and with St. Gaudentius, "What can

you desire more to show that they were all martyred?" [Footnote 89]

And who does not see here confirmed the history of Clematius?

Comparing the whole with traditions, both English and German, it seems

to me that you have as much proof as you can reasonably require.

[Footnote 89: S. Ambros., class, i., epist. xxii Ed Ben., tom, iii.,

p. 927. S. Gaud., _Serm. in Dedic. SS. XL. Martyr_, ap. Migne, tom,

xx., col. 963.]

Having given you concisely the facts and corroborations of history,

let me now proceed to answer objections.

And, first there is the question, Were all these martyrs? Well, if

they were to be tried by the rules established very justly in the

modern Church, it would no doubt be difficult to say; because how can

you prove that each of these women laid down her life voluntarily for

Christ? The tradition of Cologne is that they would not sacrifice

their virtue to those heathens, and that they were surrounded and

shot. But in those times a wider meaning was sometimes attached to the

word "martyr." There were what are called _martyres improprie dicti_,

where there could not be the same kind of evidence as in the case of

others; or _martyres latiore sensu_. A person was called a martyr when

he was put to death without his will being consulted, as in the case

of our own St. Edmund, and in the case of St. Wenceslaus, who was put

to death without being interrogated as to whether he would remain a

Christian or not, and many others. De Buck shows that there was

nothing more common. We have the remarkable case of the Theban

legion--another instance of a large number of men being surrounded and

cut down by soldiers without being questioned as to whether they were

in a state of grace, or whether they were prepared to die. The deed

was done _in odium religionis_, by people who merely looked to the

gratification of their own passions and their desire for revenge. In

those days the question of such persons being martyrs would be a very

simple one, if it were known that they were killed by the Huns in

hatred, as was supposed, of their virginity and because of their

resistance. We have in martyrologies the account of Nicomedia and its

twelve thousand martyrs. De Buck supposes that the number included all

the martyrs of the persecution. And the 6,700 of the Theban legion are

explained in the same way.

The next question is, Were these persons all virgins? Who can know? It

is quite certain that even married persons, when martyred, had

sometimes the title of virgins given to them. Many instances are

supplied by the martyrologies and offices. St. Sabina, [Footnote

90]for instance, is called a virgin martyr, though she was a married

person. It was considered that martyrdom raised all women to a higher

degree of excellence. There are some curious questions, too, arising,

which would not very well do for a discussion here. It is, however,

sufficiently proved that when there was a great number of virgins, and

others were mixed with them, the nobler title was given to all. Just

as, if you have a great many martyrs and some confessors united, the

title of martyrs is applied to all, as they are included in one

office, each sharing in the glory of martyrdom. The "Sermo in Natali"

expressly tells us that it was not supposed at its early period that

all were virgins, but that there were ladies of all ranks and children

amongst them. Indeed, some remains of children were found.

[Footnote 90: _Acta SS._ Bolland. Octob., tom, ix., p. 143.]

{448}

Then comes the question, Were there eleven thousand? Certainly not as

all one company. It is supposed, and there appears nothing

unreasonable in it, that when once the rage of the Huns was excited

they would give way to an indiscriminate massacre, and that the eleven

thousand most probably included persons who had sought refuge, perhaps

their own captives, and probably a great number of the inhabitants of

the city.

But does it not seem a frightful number of persons to be massacred?

Not by the Huns. In the year 436 these same Huns slaughtered at once

in Burgundy 30,000 men. They were of the same race, the same family of

men, as Tamerlane, who had 70,000 heads cut off in Ispahan. And the

Turks, when they took the island of Chios, reduced the population of

120,000 to 8,000. So that those slaughters, which to us seem so

fearful, are not to be considered in the same light when occurring in

those times. We have a frightful example in the case of Theodosius and

the inhabitants of Thessalonica. It is said that 15,000 persons were

put to death in the theatre for a simple insult. The most moderate

calculation is that by St. Ambrose, who gives the number as 7,000.

Human life, of course, was not then regarded as by us, especially by

men who devastated whole cities and burned them to the ground. Hence

the difficulty as to the number of persons, including among them not

merely the followers of St. Ursula, but the bulk of the female

inhabitants, is explained.

Another question arises, Were they English, or were there English

amongst them? That is answered unhesitatingly, Yes. All the

traditions, English and German, agree that these ladies had come from

England and sought refuge.

I have mentioned the facilities for emigration, and the way in which

many went out of the country; so that there would be nothing wonderful

in a certain number of British women being at Cologne at that time.

Now there is this curious fact illustrating the subject. Very lately

the Golden Chamber, as it is called, adjoining the church, where the

chief remains are deposited, was visited by Dr. Braubach and Dr. Gortz

of Cologne, Dr. Buschhausen of Ratingen, and others, who examined the

skulls and pronounced them to be Celtic, not German. The Celtic

characteristics, as given by Blumenbach and other writers, are quite

distinct--the chin falls back considerably, the skull is very long,

and the vertex of the head goes far behind--quite distinct from the

Romans or Germans. Moreover, with the exception of ten or fifteen out

of from eighty to a hundred, they were all the bodies of females. Now

all the writers--all that I have seen at least--say that there could

not have been an emigration of some hundreds of women without some

men, some persons to guard them, and these would be with them and

would share their martyrdom. Then, in the next place, they were all

young people, there was no sign of their having died of a plague or

any other casualty, but they appeared to be strong, healthy young

women; which of course, as far as we can judge, verifies the narrative

to the utmost.

I now leave you to judge how very different historical research has

made this legend, as it is called, appear, and how much we have a

right to regard it in a devotional spirit, as the inhabitants of

Germany certainly do. I do not say that there have not been many

exaggerations, false relics, and stories; but critical investigation

enables us to put all these aside, and to sift their evidence. But

certainly we have a strong historical verification of what has been

considered until within the last few years as legendary, not only by

real discoveries which have come to light, but also by a right use of

evidence which before had been overlooked and neglected.

The whole of what I have said relates to events. But my subject

embraces "events and things." The latter part remains untouched, and I

have {449} yet to show how things or objects which have been looked

upon as fabulous have been proved to be real and genuine.

II. I proceed, therefore, to objects which have been, or may be,

easily misrepresented, as if asserted to be what they are not, and

involving an imputation of imposture on the part of those who propose

them to the notice or veneration of Catholics.

I will begin with a rather singular example, but one which, I trust,

will verify the assertion which I have made; and if time permits, I

will multiply the examples by giving two or three other instances.

I do not know whether any of you in your foreign travels have visited

the cathedral of Chartres; I have not seen it myself, but I believe

that it is one of the most noble, most majestic, and most inspiring of

all Gothic buildings on the continent. The French always speak of it

as combining the great effects of a mediaeval church, more perhaps

than any other in their country; and as my address will relate to that

cathedral, I think it is necessary to give a little preliminary

account of it; at the same time warning you that I do not by any means

intend to plunge into the depths of the singular mystery in which the

origin of that cathedral is involved. It takes its rise from a

Druidical cavern which was for some time the only church or cathedral.

Over that the Christians--for the town was early converted to

Christianity--built a church, of course modest, and simple, and poor,

as the early churches of the Christians were; but in this was

preserved, with the greatest jealousy, and with the deepest devotion,

what was called a Druidical image of Our Lady, which was always kept

in the crypt, for it was over the crypt that the church was built. It

was said to have existed there before the building of the church; but

into that part of the history it is not necessary to enter. In the

year 1020 this poor old church was struck by lightning, was set on

fire, and entirely consumed. The bishop at that time was one of the

most remarkable men in the French Church--Fulbert, who has left us a

full account of what was done in his time there. He immediately set to

work to build another church, proposing that it should be perfectly

magnificent according to all the ideas of the age; and to enable him

to do so, he had recourse to our modern practice of collecting money

on all sides. Among others Canute, king of England and Denmark, and

Richard, duke of Normandy, and almost all the sovereigns of the north

contributed largely. The result was the beginning of a very

magnificent church. The singularity of the building was this, that

everybody labored with his hands, not only men, but women, not only

the poor, but the noble. These furnished with their own hands

provisions or whatever was necessary for the workmen. However, after

Fulbert's death, like most undertakings of that class, the work became

more languid; and before it was completed (that was in 1094), the

building, in which there was a great quantity of wood used, was again

burnt to the ground. Well, this time it was determined that there

should be a splendid church, such as had never been seen before; and

here, again, that same plan of working with their hands was adopted to

an extent which, as stated in an account given us by Haymon and one or

two others, seems incredible. The laborers relieved one another day

and night, lighting up the whole place with torches; provisions were

abundantly furnished to all the workmen without their having to move

from their places. In fact, the writer says that you might see

noblemen, not a few, but hundreds and thousands, dragging carts or

drawing materials and provisions; in fact, not resting until, in 1160,

seventy years after the destruction, the church was consecrated; and

there it remains, the grand cathedral church of Chartres at this day.

Now, it may be asked, what was {450} there which most particularly

made Chartres a place of such great devotion, and so attached the

inhabitants to its cathedral that they thus sacrificed their ease and

comfort so many years to build a church worthy of their object? It was

a relic--a relic which had existed for several hundred years at that

time in the church, which made it a place of pilgrimage, and which was

considered most venerable. What was this relic? The name which it has

always borne in the mouths of the simple, honest, and devoted people

of Chartres and its neighborhood, and in fact of all France, is _La

Chemise de la Sainte Vierge_--that is, a tunic which was supposed and

believed to have been worn by the Blessed Virgin, her under-clothing,

and was of course considered most venerable from having been in

contact with her pure virginal flesh. However, you may suppose that

you require strong proof of such a relic at all, and you will remember

that my object is to show how things which may have been doubtful, and

perhaps considered almost incredible, have received great proof and

elucidation by research. I do not pretend to say that in all respects

you can prove the relic: the research to which I allude is modern, but

it may guide us back, may confirm a tradition, may give us strong

reasons in its favor, showing that it has not been received without

good ground, though it may not be able to penetrate the darkness which

sometimes surrounds the beginning of anything in very remote

antiquity. I am not going, then, to prove the relic, but I am going to

show you the grounds on which it had been accepted, and then come to

the modern verification of it.

The history is this. A Byzantine writer of the fourteenth century,

Nicephorus Calixtus, [Footnote 91] tells us that this very relic was

in the possession of persons in Judaea, to whom it was left by our

Blessed Lady before her death; that it fell, in the course of time,

into the hands of a Jew in Galilee; that two patricians of

Constantinople, Galbius and Candidus, traced it, purchased it, and

took it to Constantinople, where, considering themselves in possession

of a great treasure, they concealed it, and would not let it be known

(this was in the middle of the fifth century); that the Emperor Leo,

in consequence of the miracles which were wrought, and by which this

relic was discovered, in spite of those who possessed it, immediately

entered into negotiations, obtained it, and built a splendid church in

Constantinople expressly to keep it; and that the church so built was

considered as the safety, the palladium as it were, of the city of

Constantinople. He mentions another fact which is important; that is,

that there were at that time in Constantinople three other churches,

each built expressly for the preservation of one relic of our Lady. I

mention these facts for this purpose: there is a very prevalent idea,

I believe among Catholics as well as certainly among Protestants, that

what may be called the great tide of relics came into Europe through

the crusades; that the poor ignorant crusaders, who were more able to

handle a sword than to use their discretion, were imposed upon, and

bought anything that was offered to them at any price, and so deluged

Europe with spurious and false relics. Now, you will observe, that all

that I have been relating is referred to an age quite anterior to the

crusades, or to any movement of the west into the east. It is true

that Nicephorus Calixtus is a comparatively modern writer, but he

could bear testimony to churches that were existing, and tell by whom

they were built. The mere writer of a hand-book can trace out the

history of a church or any other public monument which is before the

eyes of all: but he was not of that character: he was a historian, and

he tells us that there were [Footnote 92] three churches in

Constantinople, just as we might say that {451} in Rome there is the

church of Santa Croce, built by Constantine to preserve the relics of

the cross. Nobody can doubt that the church was built for the relic,

that the relic was deposited there, and that earth from the Holy Land

was put into its chapel. Monuments like that preserve their own

history. Therefore, when this writer tells us that these churches

existed from that period, we can hardly doubt that he could arrive at

a knowledge of such facts; and at any rate it removes the impression

that these wonderful relics were merely the sweepings, as it were, of

Palestine during a fervent and pious but at the same time ignorant and

unenlightened age.

[Footnote 91: _Hist. Eccles._, lib. xv., cap. xxiv.]

[Footnote 92: _Hist. Eccles._, lib. xv., cap. xxv., xxvi.]

Thus, we get the history so far. Now, we know that there was no one

who valued relics to such an extent as Charlemagne. We see, by

Aix-la-Chapelle and other places, what exceedingly curious relics he

collected. I am not here to defend them individually, because I do not

know their history; nor is it to our purpose. He was in close

correspondence with the east, from which he received large presents;

for it was very well known what he valued most. There was a particular

reason for this. The Empress Irene at that time (Charlemagne died in

814) wished to have his daughter Rothrude in marriage for her son

Porphyrogenitus, and later offered her own hand to himself.

Many relics existed at the time of this correspondence; and as

presents are now made of Arab horses and China services, so were they

then made of relics, which, if true, monarchs preferred to anything

else. Now, there is every reason to suppose that among the presents

sent by Irene to Charlemagne was this veil or tunic. [Footnote 93]

There is in the cathedral of Chartres a window expressly commemorating

the passage of this relic from the east to Chartres. Secondly, the

relic, as you will see later, was, up to a few years ago, wrapped in a

veil of gauze, which was entirely covered with Byzantine work in gold

and in silk, which had never been taken off; and it was wrapped up in

it till the last time it was verified. We have every reason to suppose

that it had come from Constantinople, and that it was delivered at

Chartres in that covering. In the third place, it is historical--there

is no question about it, for all chronicles and authorities agree upon

the point--that Charles the Bald, the grandson of Charlemagne, being

obliged to leave Aix-la-Chapelle, in consequence of going to settle in

France, which was the portion of the empire allotted to him, took the

relic away, and deposited it in the cathedral of Chartres. So that, as

far as we can trace a transaction of this sort, there seems to be as

much evidence as would be accepted in respect to the transmission of

any object of a profane character from one country to another. There

is the correspondence of the workmanship; there are the records of the

place; and there is the fact that the relics were brought from

Aix-la-Chapelle, where Charlemagne had collected so many relics that

he had received from Constantinople. Mabillon, who certainly is an

authority in matters of ecclesiastical history, says it would be the

greatest rashness to deny the genuineness of this relic. "Who will

presume to deny that it is real and genuine?" This is in a letter to

the bishop of Blois, in which he is expressly treating the subject of

discerning true relics. Everything so far, therefore, helps to give

authenticity to this extraordinary relic which made Chartres a place

of immense pilgrimage.

[Footnote 93: See note at p. 455.]

Bringing it down so far, we may ask, what was the common, and we may

say the vulgar, opinion of the people regarding it? It had never been

opened, and was never seen until the end of the last century. The

consequence was, that it was called by the name I have mentioned. It

was represented as a sort of tunic. It was the custom to make tunics

of that form, which were laid upon the shrine and {452} worn in

devotion; they were sent specially to ladies of great rank, and were

so held in veneration that it was the rule, that if any person going

to fight a duel had on one of these chemisettes, as they were called,

he must take it off; as it was supposed his rival had not fair play so

long as he carried it upon him. In giving an account of the building I

forgot to mention the wonderful miracles in connection with the relic

there, which are believed by everybody to have taken place. It is even

on record that the _Chevalier sans peur et sans reproche_ went to

Chartres _pour se faire enchemiser_ before he went to war.

In 1712, we find that the relic was in a cedar case richly ornamented

with gold and jewels--the original case in which it had arrived. The

wood being worm-eaten and crumbling, it was thought proper to remove

and clean it, and put it in some better place. The cedar case had no

opening by which it could in any way be examined, and the bishop of

the time, Mgr. de Merinville, proposed to open it. He chose a jury of

the most respectable inhabitants of the town, clergy and laity, to

assist. The box was unclosed, and the relic was found wrapped up, as I

have said, in the veil of Byzantine work. The veil was not unclosed,

so that they did not see the relic itself. The debris of the box was

swept away, and the relic, as it was, was put into a silver case that

had been prepared; this was locked up, and then deposited in a larger

shrine distinct from all the other relics. The _proces verbal_ still

exists in the archives of Chartres giving an account of all that took

place, from which the account I have given you is taken.

Infidelity was then spreading in France, and, as you may know, a great

deal of ridicule was thrown on this relic. It was said that such a

garment was not worn in those days, that the system of dress was quite

different, and that it was absurd to imagine any article like this.

Now, as no one had seen the relic, there was no way of answering these

reproaches. In 1793, three commissioners came from the French

government, went into the sacristy, and imperiously desired to look at

the relic; it was very richly enshrined, and they intended to carry it

off. The shrine was brought to them, as the _proces verbal_ of the

second examination relates, when they seemed to be seized with a

certain awe, and said, "We will not touch it; let it be opened by

priests." Two priests were ordered to open the box, and they did so.

These men had come prepared to have a good laugh, and scoffing at this

wonderful relic. For antiquarians had been saying that such inward

clothing was not known so early as the first century, but that instead

a long veil used to be wrapped round the body.