These friars of Greccio, who, scattered over the mountain, under the
shade of the olive-trees, passed their days in singing the Hymn of the
Sun, are the true models of the primitive Umbrian Masters. They are all
alike; they are awkwardly posed; everything in and around them sins
against the most elementary rules of art, and yet their memory pursues
you, and when you have long forgotten the works of impeccable modern
artists you recall without effort these creations of those unknown
painters; for love calls for love, and these vapid personages have very
true and pure hearts, a more than human love shines forth from their
whole being, they speak to you and make you better.

Such is this book, the first utterance of the Spiritual Franciscans, in
which we already see the coming to life of some of those bold doctrines
that not only divided the Franciscan family into two hostile branches,
but which were to bring some of their defenders to the heretic's
stake.[43]

V. FRAGMENTS OF THE SUPPRESSED PART OF THE LEGEND OF THE THREE
COMPANIONS

We may now take a step forward and try to group the fragments of the
Legend of the Three Companions, or of Brother Leo, which are to be found
in later writings.

We must here be more than ever on our guard against absolute theories;
one of the most fruitful principles of historic criticism is to prefer
contemporary documents, or at least those which are nearest them; but
even with these it is necessary to use a little discretion.

It seems impossible to attack the reasoning of the Bollandists, who
refuse to know anything of legends written after that of St. Bonaventura
(1260), under pretext that, coming after several other authorized
biographies, he was better situated than anyone for getting information
and completing the work of his predecessors.[44] In reality this is
absurd, for it assumes that Bonaventura undertook to write as a
historian. This is to forget that he wrote not only for the purpose of
edification, but also as minister-general of the Minor Brothers. From
this fact his first duty was to keep silent on many facts, and those not
the least interesting. What shall we say of a biography where Francis's
Will is not even mentioned?

It is easy to turn away from a writing of the fourteenth century, on the
ground that the author did not see what was going on a hundred years
before; still we must not forget that many books of the end of the
Middle Ages resemble those old mansions at which four or five generators
have toiled. An inscription on their front often only shows the touch of
the last restorer or the last destroyer, and the names which are set
forth with the greatest complacency are not always those of the real
workmen.

Such have been many Franciscan books; to attribute them to any one
author would be impracticable; very different hands have worked upon
them, and such an amalgam has its own charm and interest.

Turning them over--I had almost said associating with them--we come to
see clearly into this tangled web, for every work of man bears the trace
of the hand that made it: this trace may perhaps be of an almost
imperceptible delicacy; it exists none the less, ready to reveal itself
to practised eyes. What is more impersonal than the photograph of a
landscape or of a painting, and yet among several hundreds of proofs the
amateur will go straight to the work of the operator he prefers.

These reflections were suggested by the careful study of a curious book
printed many times since the sixteenth century, the _Speculum Vitæ S.
Francisci et sociorum ejus_.[45] A complete study of this work, its
sources, its printed editions, the numerous differences in the
manuscripts, would by itself require a volume and an epitome of the
history of the Order. I can give here only a few notes, taking for base
the oldest edition, that of 1504.

The confusion which reigns here is frightful. Incidents in the life of
Francis and his companions are brought together with no plan; several of
them are repeated after the interval of a few pages in a quite different
manner;[46] certain chapters are so awkwardly introduced that the
compiler has forgotten to remove the number that they bore in the work
from which he borrowed them;[47] finally, to our great surprise, we
find several _Incipit_.[48]

However, with a little perseverance we soon perceive a few openings in
the labyrinth. In the first place, here are several chapters of the
legend of Bonaventura which seem to have been put in the van as if to
protect the rest of the book. If we abstract them and the whole series
of chapters from the Fioretti, we shall have diminished the work by
nearly three-quarters.

If we take away two more chapters taken from St. Bernard of Clairvaux
and those containing Franciscan prayers, or various attestations
concerning the indulgence of Portiuncula, we finally arrive at a sort of
residue, if the expression may be forgiven, of a remarkable homogeneity.

Here the style is very different from that in the surrounding pages,
closely recalling that of the Three Companions; a single thought
inspires these pages, that the corner-stone of the Order is the love of
poverty.

Why should we not have here some fragments of the original legend of the
Three Companions? We find here nothing which does not fit in with what
we know, nothing which suggests the embellishments of a late tradition.

To confirm this hypothesis come different passages which we find cited
by Ubertini di Casali and by Angelo Clareno as being by Brother Leo, and
an attentive comparison of the text shows that these authors can neither
have drawn them from the Speculum nor the Speculum from them.

There is, besides, one phrase which, apart from the inspiration and
style, will suffice at the first glance to mark the common origin of
most of these pieces.[49] _Nos qui cum ipso fuimus_. "We who have been
with him." These words, which recur in almost every incident,[49] are
in many cases only a grateful tribute to their spiritual father, but
sometimes, too, they have a touch of bitterness. These hermits of
Greccio suddenly recall to mind their rights. Are we not the only, the
true interpreters of the Saint's instructions--we who lived continually
with him; we who, hour after hour, have meditated upon his words, his
sighs, and his hymns?

We can understand that such pretensions were not to the taste of the
Common Observance, and that Crescentius, with an incontestable
authority, has suppressed nearly all this legend.[51]

As for the fragments that have been preserved to us, though they furnish
many details about the last years of St. Francis's life, they still are
not those whose loss is so much to be regretted. The authors who
reproduce them were defending a cause. We owe them little more than the
incidents which in one way or another concern the question of poverty.
They had nothing to do with the other accounts, as they were not writing
a biography. But even within these narrow limits these fragments are in
the first order of importance; and I have not hesitated to use them
largely. It is needless to say that while ascribing their origin to the
Three Companions, and in particular to Brother Leo, we must not suppose
that we have the very letter in the texts which have come down to us.
The pieces given by Ubertini di Casali and Angelo Clareno are actual
citations, and deserve full confidence as such. As for those which are
preserved to us in the Speculum, they may often have been abridged,
explanatory notes may have slipped into the text, but nowhere do we find
interpolations in the bad sense of the word.[52]

Finally, if we compare the fragments with the corresponding accounts in
the Second Life of Celano, we see that the latter has often borrowed
verbatim from Brother Leo, but generally he has considerably abridged
the passages, adding reflections here and there, especially retouching
the style to make it more elegant.

Such a comparison soon proves that Brother Leo's narratives are the
original and that it is impossible to see in them a later amplification
of those of Thomas of Celano, as we might at first be tempted to think
them.[53]

VI. SECOND LIFE BY THOMAS OF CELANO[54]

_First Part_

In consequence of the decision of the chapter of 1244 search was begun
in all quarters for memorials of the early times of the Order. In view
of the ardor of this inquiry, in which zeal for the glory of the
Franciscan institute certainly cast the interests of history into the
background, the minister-general, Crescentius, was obliged to take
certain precautions.

Many of the pieces that he received were doing double duty; others might
contradict one another; many of them, under color of telling the life of
the Saint, had no other object than to oppose the present to the past.

It soon became imperative to constitute a sort of commission charged to
study and coördinate all this matter.[55] What more natural than to put
Thomas of Celano at its head? Ever since the approbation of the first
legend by Gregory IX. he had appeared to be in a sense the official
historiographer of the Order.[56]

This view accords perfectly with the contents of the seventeen chapters
which contain the first part of the second legend. It offers itself at
the outset as a compilation. Celano is surrounded with companions who
help him.[57] A more attentive examination shows that its principal
source is the Legend of the Three Companions, which the compilers
worked over, sometimes filling out certain details, more often making
large excisions.

Everything that does not concern St. Francis is ruthlessly proscribed;
we feel the well-defined purpose to leave in the background the
disciples who so complacently placed themselves in the foreground.[58]

The work of the Three Companions had been finished August 11, 1246. On
July 13, 1247, the chapter of Lyons put an end to the powers of
Crescentius. It is, therefore, between these two dates that we must
place the composition of the first part of Thomas of Celano's Second
Life.[59]

VII. SECOND LIFE BY THOMAS OF CELANO[59]

_Second Part_

The election of Giovanni di Parma (1247-1257) as successor of
Crescentius was a victory for the Zealots. This man, in whose work-table
the birds came to make their nests,[61] was to astonish the world by
his virtues. No one saw more deeply into St. Francis's heart, no one was
more worthy to take up and continue his work.

He soon asked Celano to resume his work.[62] The latter was perhaps
alone at first, but little by little a group of collaborators formed
itself anew about him.[63] Thenceforth nothing prevented his doing with
that portion of the work of the Three Companions which Crescentius had
suppressed what he had already done with the part he had approved.

The Legend of Brother Leo has thus come down to us, entirely worked over
by Thomas of Celano, abridged and with all its freshness gone, but still
of capital importance in the absence of the major part of the original.

The events of which we possess two accounts permit us to measure the
extent of our loss. We find, in fact, in Celano's compilation all that
we expected to find in the Three Companions: the incidents belong
especially to the last two years of Francis's life, and the scene of
many of them is either Greccio or one of the hermitages of the vale of
Rieti;[64] according to tradition, Brother Leo was the hero of a great
number of the incidents here related[65] and all the citations that
Ubertini di Casali makes from Brother Leo's book find their
correspondents here.[66]

This second part of the Second Life perfectly reflects the new
circumstances to which it owes its existence. The question of Poverty
dominates everything;[67] the struggle between the two parties in the
Order reveals itself on every page; the collaborators are determined
that each event narrated shall be an indirect lesson to the Liberals, to
whom they oppose the Spirituals; the popes had commented on the Rule in
the large sense; they, on their side, undertook to comment on it in a
sense at once literal and spiritual, by the actions and words of its
author himself.

History has hardly any part here except as the vehicle of a thesis, a
fact which diminishes nothing of the historic value of the information
given in the course of these pages. But while in Celano's First Life and
in the Legend of the Three Companions the facts succeed one another
organically, here they are placed side by side. Therefore when we come
to read this work we are sensible of a fall; even from the literary
point of view the inferiority makes itself cruelly felt. Instead of a
poem we have before us a catalogue, very cleverly made, it is true, but
with no power to move us.

VIII. NOTES ON A FEW SECONDARY DOCUMENTS

a. _Celano's Life of St. Francis for Use in the Choir._

Thomas of Celano made also a short legend for use in the choir. It is
divided into nine lessons and served for the Franciscan breviaries up to
the time when St. Bonaventura made his _Legenda Minor_.

That of Celano may be found in part (the first three lessons) in the
Assisi MS. 338, fol. 52a-53b; it is preceded by a letter of envoy:
"_Rogasti me frater Benedicte, ut de legenda B. P. N. F. quædam
exciperem et in novem lectionum seriem ordinarem_ ... etc. _B.
Franciscus de civitate Assisii ortus a puerilibus annis nutritus extitit
insolenter._"

This work has no historic importance.

b. _Life of St. Francis in Verse._

In the list of biographers has sometimes been counted a poem in
hexameter verse[68] the text of which was edited in 1882 by the
lamented Cristofani.[69]

This work does not furnish a single new historic note. It is the Life by
Celano in verse and nothing more; the author's desire was to figure as a
poet. It is superfluous, therefore, to concern ourselves with it.[69]

c. _Biography of St. Francis by Giovanni di Ceperano._

One of the biographies which disappeared, no doubt in consequence of the
decision of the chapter of 1266,[71] is that of Giovanni di Ceperano.
The resemblance of his name to that of Thomas of Celano has occasioned
much confusion.[72] The most precious information which we have
respecting him is given by Bernard of Besse in the opening of his _De
laudibus St. Francisci_: "_Plenam virtutibus B. Francisci vitam scripsit
in Italia exquisitæ vir eloquentiæ fr. Thomas jubente Domino Gregorio
papa IX. et eam quæ incipit: Quasi stella matutina vir venerabilis
Dominus et fertur Joannes, Apostolicæ sedis notarius._"[73]

In the face of so precise a text all doubt as to the existence of the
work of Giovanni di Ceperano is impossible. The Reverend Father Denifle
has been able to throw new light upon this question. In a manuscript
containing the liturgy of the Brothers Minor and finished in 1256 he
found the nine lessons for the festival of St. Francis preceded by the
title: _Ex gestis ejus abbreviatis quæ sic incipiunt: Quasi stella_
(_Zeitschrift für kath. Theol._, vii., p. 710. Cf. _Archiv._, i., p.
148). This summary of Ceperano's work gives, as we should expect, no new
information; but perhaps we need not despair of finding the very work of
this author.

d. _Life of St. Francis by Brother Julian._

It was doubtless about 1230 that Brother Julian, the Teuton, who had
been chapel-master at the court of the King of France, was commissioned
to put the finishing touches to the Office of St. Francis.[74]
Evidently such a work would contain nothing original, and its loss is
little felt.

IX. LEGEND OF ST. BONAVENTURA

Under the generalate of Giovanni di Parma (1247-1257) the Franciscan
parties underwent modifications, in consequence of which their
opposition became still more striking than before.

The Zelanti, with the minister-general at their head, enthusiastically
adopted the views of Gioacchino di Fiore. The predictions of the
Calabrian abbot corresponded too well with their inmost convictions for
any other course to be possible: they seemed to see Francis, as a new
Christ, inaugurating the third era of the world.

For a few years these dreams moved all Europe; the faith of the
Joachimites was so ardent that it made its way by its own force;
sceptics like Salimbeni told themselves that on the whole it was surely
wiser not to be taken unawares by the great catastrophe of 1260, and
hastened in crowds to the cell of Hyères to be initiated by Hugues de
Digne in the mysteries of the new times: as to the people, they waited,
trembling, divided between hope and terror. Nevertheless their
adversaries did not consider themselves beaten, and the Liberal party
still remained the most numerous. Of an angelic purity, Giovanni di
Parma believed in the omnipotence of example: events showed how mistaken
he was; at the close of his term of office scandals were not less
flagrant than ten years earlier.[75]

Between these two extreme parties, against which he was to proceed with
equal rigor, stood that of the Moderates, to which belonged St.
Bonaventura.[76]

A mystic, but of a formal and orthodox mysticism, he saw the revolution
toward which the Church was hastening if the party of the eternal Gospel
was to triumph; its victory would not be that of this or that heresy in
detail, it would be, with brief delay, the ruin of the entire
ecclesiastical edifice; he was too perspicacious not to see that in the
last analysis the struggle then going on was that of the individual
conscience against authority. This explains, and up to a certain point
gains him pardon for, his severities against his opponents; he was
supported by the court of Rome and by all those who desired to make the
Order a school at once of piety and of learning.

No sooner was he elected general than, with a purpose that never knew
hesitation, and a will whose firmness made itself everywhere felt, he
took his steps to forward this double aim. On the very morrow of his
nomination he sketched the programme of reforms against the Liberal
party, and at the same time secured the summons of the Joachimite
Brothers before an ecclesiastical tribunal at Città-della-Pieve. This
tribunal condemned them to perpetual imprisonment, and it needed the
personal intervention of Cardinal Ottobonus, the future Adrian V., for
Giovanni di Parma to be left free to retire to the Convent of Greccio.

The first chapter held under the presidence of Bonaventura, in the
extended decisions of which we find everywhere tokens of his influence,
assembled at Narbonne in 1260. He was then commissioned to compose a new
life of St. Francis.[77]

We easily understand the anxieties to which this decision of the
Brothers was an answer. The number of legends had greatly increased, for
besides those which we have first studied or noted there were others in
existence which have completely disappeared, and it had become equally
difficult for the Brothers who went forth on missions either to make a
choice between them or to carry them all.

The course of the new historian was therefore clearly marked out: he
must do the work of compiler and peacemaker. He failed in neither. His
book is a true sheaf, or rather it is a millstone under which the
indefatigable author has pressed, somewhat at hazard, the sheaves of his
predecessors. Most of the time he inserts them just as they are,
confining himself to the work of harvesting them and weeding out the
tares.

Therefore, when we reach the end of this voluminous work we have a very
vague impression of St. Francis. We see that he was a saint, a very
great saint, since he performed an innumerable quantity of miracles,
great and small; but we feel very much as if we had been going through a
shop of objects of piety. All these statues, whether they are called St.
Anthony the Abbot, St. Dominic, St. Theresa, or St. Vincent de Paul,
have the same expression of mincing humility, of a somewhat shallow
ecstasy. These are saints, if you please, miracle-workers; they are not
men; he who made them made them by rule, by process; he has put nothing
of his heart in these ever-bowed foreheads, these lips with their wan
smile.

God forbid that I should say or think that St. Bonaventura was not
worthy to write a life of St. Francis, but the circumstances controlled
his work, and it is no injustice to him to say that it is fortunate for
Francis, and especially for us, that we have another biography of the
Poverello than that of the Seraphic Doctor.

Three years after, in 1263, he brought his completed work to the
chapter-general convoked under his presidence at Pisa. It was there
solemnly approved.[78]

It is impossible to say whether they thought that the presence of the
new legend would suffice to put the old ones out of mind, but it seems
that at this time nothing was said about the latter.

It was not so at the following chapter. This one, held at Paris, came to
a decision destined to have disastrous results for the primitive
Franciscan documents. This decree, emanating from an assembly presided
over by Bonaventura in person, is too important not to be quoted
textually: "Item, the Chapter-general ordains on obedience that all the
legends of the Blessed Francis formerly made shall be destroyed. The
Brothers who shall find any without the Order must try to make away with
them since the legend made by the General is compiled from accounts of
three who almost always accompanied the Blessed Francis; all that they
could certainly know and all that is proven has been carefully inserted
therein."[79] It would have been difficult to be more precise. We see
the perseverance with which Bonaventura carried on his struggle against
the extreme parties. This decree explains the almost complete
disappearance of the manuscripts of Celano and the Three Companions,
since in certain collections even those of Bonaventura's legend are
hardly to be found.

As we have seen, Bonaventura aimed to write a sort of official or
canonical biography; he succeeded only too well. Most of the accounts
that we already know have gone into his collection, but not without at
times suffering profound mutilations. We are not surprised to find him
passing over Francis's youth with more discretion than Celano in the
First Life, but we regret to find him ornamenting and materializing some
of the loveliest incidents of the earlier legends.

It is not enough for him that Francis hears the crucifix of St. Daraian
speak; he pauses to lay stress on the assertion that he heard it
_corporeis auribus_ and that no one was in the chapel at that moment!
Brother Monaldo at the chapter of Arles sees St. Francis appear
_corporeis oculis_. He often abridges his predecessors, but this is not
his invariable rule. When he reaches the account of the stigmata he
devotes long pages to it,[79] relates a sort of consultation held by
St. Francis as to whether he could conceal them, and adds several
miracles due to these sacred wounds; further on he returns to the
subject to show a certain Girolamo, Knight of Assisi, desiring to touch
with his hands the miraculous nails.[81] On the other hand, he uses a
significant discretion wherever the companions of the Saint are in
question. He names only three of the first eleven disciples,[82] and
no more mentions Brothers Leo, Angelo, Rufino, Masseo, than their
adversary, Brother Elias.

As to the incidents which we find for the first time in this collection,
they hardly make us regret the unknown sources which must have been at
the service of the famous Doctor; it would appear that the healing of
Morico, restored to health by a few pellets of bread soaked in the oil
of the lamp which burned before the altar of the Virgin,[83] has little
more importance for the life of St. Francis than the story of the sheep
given to Giacomina di Settesoli which awakened its mistress to summon
her to go to mass.[84] What shall we think of that other sheep, of
Portiuncula, which hastened to the choir whenever it heard the psalmody
of the friars, and kneeled devoutly for the elevation of the Holy
Sacrament?[85]

All these incidents, the list of which might be enlarged,[86] betrays
the working-over of the legend. St. Francis becomes a great
thaumaturgist, but his physiognomy loses its originality.

The greatest fault of this work is, in fact, the vagueness of the figure
of the Saint. While in Celano there are the large lines of a
soul-history, a sketch of the affecting drama of a man who attains to
the conquest of himself, with Bonaventura all this interior action
disappears before divine interventions; his heart is, so to speak, the
geometrical locality of a certain number of visitants; he is a passive
instrument in the hands of God, and we really cannot see why he should
have been chosen rather than another.

And yet Bonaventura was an Italian; he had seen Umbria; he must have
knelt and celebrated the sacred mysteries in Portiuncula, that cradle of
the noblest of religious reformations; he had conversed with Brother
Egidio, and must have heard from his lips an echo of the first
Franciscan fervor; but, alas! nothing of that rapture passed into his
book, and if the truth must be told, I find it quite inferior to much
later documents, to the Fioretti, for example; for they understood, at
least in part, the soul of Francis; they felt the throbbing of that
heart, with all its sensitiveness, admiration, indulgence, love,
independence, and absence of carefulness.

X. DE LAUDIBUS OF BERNARD OF BESSE[87]

Bonaventura's work did not discourage the biographers. The historic
value of their labor is almost nothing, and we shall not even attempt to
catalogue them.

Bernard of Besse, a native probably of the south of France[88] and
secretary of Bonaventura,[89] made a summary of the earlier legends.
This work, which brings us no authentic historic indication, is
interesting only for the care with which the author has noted the places
where repose the Brothers who died in odor of sanctity, and relates a
mass of visions all tending to prove the excellence of the Order.[89]

Still the publication of this document will perform the valuable office
of throwing a little light upon the difficult question of the sources.
Several passages of the _De laudibus_ appear again textually in the
Speculum,[91] and as a single glance is enough to show that the
Speculum did not copy the _De laudibus_, it must be that Bernard of
Besse had before him a copy, if not of the Speculum at least of a
document of the same kind.

FOOTNOTES:

   [1] Bull _Quo elongati_ of September 28, 1230. See p. 336.

   [2] It is needless to say that I have no desire to put myself in
       opposition to that principle, one of the most fruitful of
       criticism, but still it should not be employed alone.

   [3] The learned works that have appeared in Germany in late
       years err in the same way. They will be found cited in the body
       of the work.

   [4] Eccl., 13. _Voluerunt ipsi, quos ad capitulam concesserat
       venire frater Helias; nam omnes concessit, etc._ _An. fr., t.
       i._, p. 241. Cf. _Mon. Germ. hist. Script._, t., 28, p. 564.

   [5] The death of Francis occurred on October 3, 1226. On March
       29, 1228, Elias acquired the site for the basilica. The
       _Instrumentum donationis_ is still preserved at Assisi: Piece
       No. 1 of the twelfth package of _Instrumenta diversa pertinentia
       ad Sacrum Conventum_. It has been published by Thode: _Franz von
       Assisi_, p. 359.

       On July 17th of the same year, the day after the canonization,
       Gregory IX. solemnly laid the first stone. Less than two years
       afterward the Lower church was finished, and on May 25, 1230,
       the body of the Saint was carried there. In 1236 the Upper
       church was finished. It was already decorated with a first
       series of frescos, and Giunta Pisano painted Elias, life size,
       kneeling at the foot of the crucifix over the entrance to the
       choir. In 1239 everything was finished, and the campanile
       received the famous bells whose chimes still delight all the
       valley of Umbria. Thus, then, three months and a half before the
       canonization, Elias received the site of the basilica. The act
       of canonization commenced at the end of May, 1228 (1 Cel., 123
       and 124. Cf. Potthast, 8194ff).

   [6] _Spec._, 167a. Cf. _An. fr._, ii., p. 45 and note.

   [7] The Bollandists followed the text (A. SS., Octobris, t. ii.,
       pp. 683-723) of a manuscript of the Cistercian abbey of Longpont
       in the diocese of Soissons. It has since been published in Rome
       in 1806, without the name of the editor (in reality by the
       Convent Father Rinaldi), under the title: _Seraphici viri S.
       Francisci Assisiatis vitæ dual auctore B. Thoma de Celano_,
       according to a manuscript (of Fallerone, in the March of Ancona)
       which was stolen in the vicinity of Terni by brigands from the
       Brother charged with bringing it back. The second text was
       reproduced at Rome in 1880 by Canon Amoni: _Vita prima S.
       Francisci, auctore B. Thoma de Celano. Roma, tipografia della
       pace_, 1880, in 8vo, 42 pp. The citations will follow the
       divisions made by the Bollandists, but in many important
       passages the Rinaldi-Amoni text gives better readings than that
       of the Bollandists. The latter has been here and there retouched
       and filled out. See, for example, 1 Cel., 24 and 31. As for the
       manuscripts, Father Denifle thinks that the oldest of those
       which are known is that at Barcelona: _Archivo de la corona de
       Aragon_, Ripoll, n. 41 (_Archiv._, t. i., p. 148). There is one
       in the National Library of Paris, Latin alcove, No. 3817, which
       includes a curious note: "_Apud Perusium felix domnus papa
       Gregorius nonus gloriosi secundo pontificus sui anno, quinto
       kal. martii (February 25, 1229) legendam hanc recepit,
       confirmavit et censuit fore tenendam._" Another manuscript,
       which merits attention, both because of its age, thirteenth
       century, and because of the correction in the text, and which
       appears to have escaped the researches of the students of the
       Franciscans, is the one owned by the École de Médicine at
       Montpellier, No. 30, in vellum folio: _Passionale vetus ecclesiæ
       S. Benigni divionensis_. The story of Celano occupies in it the
       fos. 257a-271b. The text ends abruptly in the middle of
       paragraph 112 with _supiriis ostendebant_. Except for this final
       break it is complete. Cf. Archives Pertz, t. vii., pp. 195 and
       196. Vide General catalogue of the manuscripts of the public
       libraries of the departments, t. i., p. 295.

   [8] Vide 1 Cel., Prol. _Jubente domino et glorioso Papa
       Gregorio_. Celano wrote it after the canonization (July 16,
       1228) and before February 25, 1229, for the date indicated above
       raises no difficulty.

   [9] 1 Cel., 56. Perhaps he was the son of that Thomas, Count of
       Celano, to whom Ryccardi di S. Germano so often made allusion in
       his chronicle: 1219-1223. See also two letters of Frederick II.
       to Honorius III., on April 24 and 25, 1223, published in
       Winckelmann: _Acta imperii inedita_, t. i., p. 232.

  [10] Giord., 19.

  [11] Giord., 30 and 31.

  [12] Giord., 59. Cf. Glassberger, ann. 1230. The question
       whether he is the author of the _Dies iræ_ would be out of place
       here.

  [13] This is so true that the majority of historians have been
       brought to believe in two generalates of Elias, one in
       1227-1230, the other in 1236-1239. The letter _Non ex odio_ of
       Frederick II. (1239) gives the same idea: _Revera papa iste
       quemdam religiosum et timoratum fratrem Helyam, ministrum
       ordinis fratrum minorum ab ipso beato Francisco patre ordinis
       migrationis suæ tempore constitutum ... in odium nostrum ...
       deposuit_. Huillard-Breholles: _Hist. dipl. Fred. II._, t. v.,
       p. 346.

  [14] He is named only once, 1 Cel., 48.

  [15] 1 Cel., 95, 98, 105, 109. The account of the Benediction is
       especially significant. _Super quem inquit (Franciscus) tenes
       dexteram meam? Super fratrem Heliam, inquiunt. Et ego sic volo,
       sit...._ 1 Cel., 108. Those last words obviously disclose the
       intention. Cf. 2 Cel., 3, 139.

  [16] 1 Cel., 102; cf. 91 and 109. Brother Leo is not even named
       in the whole work. Nor Angelo, Illuminato, Masseo either!

  [17] 1 Cel., Prol., 73-75; 99-101; 121-126. Next to St. Francis,
       Gregory IX. and Brother Elias (1 Cel., 69; 95; 98; 105; 108;
       109) are in the foreground.

  [18] 1 Cel., 18 and 19; 116 and 117.

  [19] Those which occurred during the absence of Francis
       (1220-1221). He overlooks the difficulties met at Rome in
       seeking the approbation of the first Rule; he mentions those
       connected neither with the second nor the third, and makes no
       allusion to the circumstances which provoked them. He recognized
       them, however, having lived in intimacy with Cæsar of Speyer,
       the collaborator of the second (1221).

  [20] For example, Francis's journey to Spain.

  [21] 1 Cel., 1, 88. _Et sola quæ necessaria magis occurrunt_ ad
       præsens _intendimus adnotare_. It is to be observed that in the
       prologue he speaks in the singular.

  [22] In 1238 he had sent Elias to Cremona, charged with a
       mission for Frederick II. Salembeni, ann. 1229. See also the
       reception given by Gregory IX. to the appellants against the
       General. Giord., 63.

  [23] See the letter of Frederick II. to Elias upon the
       translation of St. Elizabeth, May, 1236. Winkelmann, _Acta_ i.,
       p. 299. Cf. Huillard-Bréholles, _Hist. dipl._ Intr. p. cc.

  [24] The authorities for this story are: _Catalogus ministrorum_
       of Bernard of Besse, _ap_ Ehrle, _Zeitschrift_, vol. 7 (1883),
       p. 339; _Speculum_, 207b, and especially 167a-170a; Eccl., 13;
       Giord., 61-63; _Speculum_, Morin., tract i., fo. 60b.

  [25] _Asserabat etiam ipse prædictus frater Helyas ... papam ...
       fraudem facere de pecunia collecta ad succursum Terræ Sanctæ,
       scripta etiam ad beneplacitum suum in camera sua bullare clam et
       sine fratrum assensu et etiam cedulas vacuas, sed bullatas,
       multas nunciis suis traderet ... et alia multa enormia imposuit
       domino papæ ponens os suum in celo_. Matth. Paris, _Chron.
       Maj._, _ann. 1239_, _ap Mon. Ger. hist. Script._, t. 28, p. 182.
       Cf. Ficker, n. 2685.

  [26] Vide Ryccardi di S. Germano, _Chron._, _ap Mon. Ger. hist.
       Script._, t. 19, p. 380, ann. 1239. The letter of Frederick
       complaining of the deposition of Elias (1239):
       Huillard-Bréholles, _Hist. Dipl._, v., pp. 346-349. Cf. the
       Bull, _Attendite ad petram_, at the end of February, 1240,
       ibid., pp. 777-779; Potthast, 10849.

  [27] He was without doubt one of the bitterest adversaries of
       the emperor. His village had been burnt in 1224, by order of
       Frederick II., and the inhabitants transported to Sicily,
       afterward to Malta. Ryccardi di S. Germano, _loc. cit._, _ann._
       1223 and 1224.

  [28] Vide the prologue to 2 Cel. and to the 3 Soc. Cf.
       Glassberger, ann. 1244, _An. fr._, ii., p. 68. _Speculum_,
       Morin, tract. i., 61b.

  [29] _Catalogus ministrorum_, edited by Ehrle: _Zeitschrift_, t.
       7 (1883). no. 5. Cf. _Spec._, 208a. Mark of Lisbon speaks of it
       a little more at length, but he gives the honor of it to
       Giovanni of Parma, ed. Diola, t. ii., p. 38. On the other hand,
       in manuscript 691 of the archives of the Sacro-Convento at
       Assisi (a catalogue of the library of the convent made in 1381)
       is found, fo. 45a, a note of that work: "_Dyalogus sanctorum
       fratrum cum postibus cujus principium est: Venerabilia gesta
       patrum dignosque memoria, finis vero; non indigne feram me
       quoque reperisse consortem. In quo libro omnes quaterni sunt
       xiii_."

  [30] The text was published for the first time by the
       Bollandists (A. SS., Octobris, t. ii., pp. 723-742), after a
       manuscript of the convent of the Brothers Minor of Louvain. It
       is from this edition that we make our citations. The editions
       published in Italy in the course of this century, cannot be
       found, except the last, due to Abbé Amoni. This one,
       unfortunately, is too faulty to serve as the basis of a
       scientific study. It appeared in Rome in 1880 (8vo, pp. 184)
       under the title: _Legenda S. Francisci Assisiensis quæ dicitur
       Legenda trium sociorum ex cod. membr._ _Biblioth. Vatic. num.
       7339._

  [31] 2 Cel., 2, 5; 3, 7; 1 Cel., 60; Bon., 113; 1 Cel., 84;
       Bon., 149; 2 Cel., 2, 14; 3, 10.

  [32] Giovanni di Parma retired thither in 1276 and lived there
       almost entirely until his death (1288). _Tribul._, _Archiv._,
       vol. ii. (1886), p. 286.

  [33] 3 Soc., 25-67.

  [34] 3 Soc., 68-73.

  [35] The minister-general Crescentius of Jesi was an avowed
       adversary of the Zealots of the Rule. The contrary idea has been
       held by M. Müller (_Anfänge_, p. 180); but that learned scholar
       is not, it appears, acquainted with the recitals of the
       Chronicle of the Tribulations, which leave not a single doubt as
       to the persecutions which he directed against the Zealots
       (_Archiv._, t. ii., pp. 257-260). Anyone who attempts to dispute
       the historical worth of this proof will find a confirmation in
       the bulls of August 5, 1244, and of February 7, 1246 (Potthast,
       11450 and 12007). It was Crescentius, also, who obtained a bull
       stating that the Basilica of Assisi was _Caput et Mater
       ordinis_, while for the Zealots this rank pertained to the
       Portiuncula (1 Cel., 106; 3 Soc., 56; Bon., 23; 2 Cel., 1, 12;
       _Conform._, 217 ff). (See also on Crescentius, Glassberger, ann.
       1244, _An. fr._, p. 69; Sbaralea, _Bull. fr._, i., p. 502 ff;
       _Conform._, 121b. 1.) M. Müller has been led into error through
       a blunder of Eccleston, 9 (_An. fr._, i., p. 235). It is evident
       that the chapter of Genoa (1244) could not have pronounced
       against the _Declaratio Regulæ_ published November 14, 1245. On
       the contrary, it is Crescentius who called forth this
       _Declaratio_, against which, not without regret, the Zealots
       found a majority of the chapter of Metz (1249) presided over by
       Giovanni of Parma, a decided enemy of any _Declaratio_
       (_Archiv._, ii., p. 276). This view is found to be confirmed by
       a passage of the Speculum Morin (Rouen, 1509), f^o 62a: _In hoc
       capitulo (Narbonnæ) fuit ordinatum quod declaratio D.
       Innocentii, p. iv., maneat suspensa sicut in Capitulo_ METENSI.
       _Et præceptum est omnibus ne quis utatur ea in iis in quibus
       expositioni D. Gregorii IX. contradicit._

  [36] Published with all necessary scientific apparatus by F.
       Ehrle, S. J., in his studies _Zur Vorgeschichte des Concils von
       Vienne_. _Archiv._, ii., pp. 353-416; iii., pp. 1-195.

  [37] See, for example, _Archiv._, iii., p. 53 ff. Cf. 76.
       _Adduxi verba et facta b. Francisci sicut est aliquando in
       legenda et sicut a sociis sancti patris audivi et in cedulis
       sanctæ memoriæ fratris Leonis legi manu sua conscriptis, sicut
       ab ore beati Francisci audivit._ Ib., p. 85.

  [38] _Hæc omnia patent per sua [B. Francisci] verba expressa per
       sanctum fratrem virum Leonem ejus socium tam de mandato sancti
       patris quam etiam de devotione prædicti fratris fuerunt
       solemniter conscripta, in libro qui habetur in armario fratrum
       de Assisio et in rotulis ejus, quos apud me habeo, manu ejusdem
       fratris Leonis conscriptis. Archiv._, iii., p. 168. Cf. p. 178.

  [39] 3 Soc., Prol. _Non contenti narrare solum miracula ...
       conversationis insignia et pii beneplaciti voluntatem_.

  [40] _Leggenda di S. Francesco, tipografia Morici et Badaloni_,
       Recanati, 1856, 1 vol., 8vo.

  [41] See Father Stanislaus's preface.

  [42] 3 Soc., 68-73.

  [43] The book lacks little of representing St. Francis as taking
       up the work of Jesus, interrupted (by the fault of the secular
       clergy) since the time of the apostles. The _viri evangelici_
       consider the members of the clergy _filios extraneos._ 3 Soc.,
       48 and 51. Cf. 3 Soc., 48. _Inveni virum ... per quem, credo
       Dominus velit in toto mundo fedem sanctæ Ecclesiæ reformare_.
       Cf. 2 Cel., 3, 141. _Videbatur revera fratri et omnium
       comitatium turbæ quod Christi et b. Francisci una persona
       foret_.

  [44] A. SS. p. 552.

  [45] _Venetiis, expensis domini Jordani de Dinslaken per Simonem
       de Luere_, 30 januarii, 1504. _Impressum Metis per Jasparem
       Hochffeder_, Anno Domini 1509. These two editions are identical,
       small 12mos, of 240 folios badly numbered. Edited under the same
       title by Spoelberch, Antwerp, 1620, 2 tomes in one volume, 8vo,
       208 and 192 pages, with a mass of alterations. The most
       important manuscript resembles that of the Vatican 4354. There
       are two at the Mazarin Library, 904 and 1350, dated 1459 and
       1460, one at Berlin (MS. theol. lat., 4to, no. 196 sæc. 14).
       Vide Ehrle, _Zeitschrift_. t. vii. (1883), p. 392f; _Analecta
       fr._, t. i., p. xi.; _Miscellanea_, 1888, pp. 119. 164. Cf. A.
       SS., pp. 550-552.

       The chapters are numbered in the first 72 folios only, but these
       numbers teem with errors; fo. 38b. caput lix., 40b, lix., 41b,
       lxi. ibid., lxii., 42a, lx., 43a, lxi. Besides at fos. 46b and
       47b there are two chapters lxvi. There are two lxxi., two
       lxxii., two lxxiii., etc.

  [46] For example, the history of the brigands of Monte-Casale,
       fos. 46b, and 58b. The remarks of Brother Elias to Francis, who
       is continually singing, 136b and 137a. The visit of Giacomina di
       Settesoli, 133a and 138a. The autograph benediction given to
       Brother Leo, 87a; 188a.

  [47] At fo. 20b we read: _Tertium capitulam de charitate et
       compassione et condescensione ad proximum. Capitulum_ xxvi. Cf.
       26a, 83a, 117b, 119a, 122a, 128b, 133b, 136b, where there are
       similar indications.

  [48] Fo. 5b: _Incipit Speculum vitæ b. Francesci et sociorum
       ejus_. Fo. 7b; _Incipit Speculum perfectionis_.

  [49] We should search for it in vain in the other pieces of the
       Speculum, and it reappears in the fragments of Brother Leo cited
       by Ubertini di Casali and Angelo Clareno.

  [50] Fo. 8b, 11a, 12a, 15a, 18b, 21b, 23b, 26a, 29a, 33b, 43b,
       41a, 48b, 118a, 129a, 130a, 134a, 135a, 136a.

  [51] Does not Thomas de Celano say in the prologue of the Second
       Life: "_Oramus ergo, benignissime pater, ut laboris hujus non
       contemnenda munuscula ... vestra benedictione consecrare
       velitis, corrigendo errata et superflua resecantes_."

  [52] The legend of 3 Soc. was preserved in the Convent of
       Assisi: "_Omnia ... fuerunt conscripta ... per Leonem, ... in
       libro qui habetur in armario fratrum de Assisio_." Ubertini,
       _Archiv._, iii., p. 168. Later, Brother Leo seems to have gone
       more into detail as to certain facts; he confided these new
       manuscripts to the Clarisses: "_In rotulis ejus quos apud me
       habeo, manu ejusdem fratres Leonis conscriptis_," ibid. Cf. p.
       178. "_Quod sequitur a sancto fratre Conrado predicto et viva
       voce audivit a sancto fratre Leone qui presens erat et regulam
       scripsit. Et hoc ipsum in quibusdam rotulis manu sua conscriptis
       quos commendavit in monasterio S. Claræ custodiendos.... In
       illis multa scripsit ... quæ industria fr. Bonaventura omisit et
       noluit in legenda publice scribere, maxime quia aliqua erant ibi
       in quibus ex tunc deviatio regulæ publice monstrabatur et
       nolebat fratres ante tempus in famare._" _Arbor._, lib. v., cap
       5. Cf. _Antiquitates_, p. 146. Cf. _Speculum_, 50b. "_Infra
       scripta verba, frater Leo socius et Confessor B. Francisci,
       Conrado de Offida, dicebat se habuisse ex ore Beati Patris
       nostri Francisci, quæ idem Frater Conradus retulit, apud Sanctum
       Damianum prope Assisium._" Conrad di Offidia copied, then, both
       the book of Brother Leo and his _rotuli_; he added to it certain
       oral information (_Arbor, vit. cruc._, lib. v., cap. 3), and so
       perhaps composed the collection so often cited by the
       Conformists under the title of _Legenda Antiqua_ and reproduced
       in part in the Speculum. The numbering of the chapters, which
       the Speculum has awkwardly inserted without noting that they
       were not in accord with his own division, were vestiges of the
       division adopted by Conrad di Offida.

       It may well be that, after the interdiction of his book and its
       confiscation at the Sacro Convento, Brother Leo repeated in his
       _rotuli_ a large part of the facts already made, so that the
       same incident, while coming solely from Brother Leo, could be
       presented under two different forms, according as it would be
       copied from the book or the _rotuli_.

  [53] Compare, for example, 2 Cel., 120: Vocation of John the
       Simple, and Speculum, f^o 37a. From the account of Thomas de
       Celano, one does not understand what drew John to St. Francis;
       in the Speculum everything is explained, but Celano has not
       dared to depict Francis going about preaching with a broom upon
       his shoulder to sweep the dirty churches.

  [54] It was published for the first time at Rome, in 1806, by
       Father Rinaldi, following upon the First Life (vide above, p.
       365, note 2), and restored in 1880 by Abbé Amoni: _Vita secunda
       S. Francisci Assisiensis auctore B. Thomade Celano ejus
       discipulo. Romæ, tipografia della pace_, 1880, 8vo, 152 pp. The
       citations are from this last edition, which I collated at Assisi
       with the most important of the rare manuscripts at present
       known: Archives of Sacro Convento, MS. 686, on parchment of the
       end of the thirteenth century, if I do not mistake, 130 millim.
       by 142; 102 numbered pages. Except for the fact that the book is
       divided into two parts instead of three, the last two forming
       only one, I have not found that it noticeably differs from the
       text published by Amoni; the chapters are divided only by a
       paragraph and a red letter, but they have in the table which
       occupies the first seven pages of the volume the same titles as
       in the edition Amoni.

       This Second Life escaped the researches of the Bollandists.
       It is impossible to explain how these students ignored the
       worth of the manuscript which Father Theobaldi, keeper of the
       records of Assisi, mentioned to them, and of which he offered
       them a copy (A. SS., _Oct._, t. ii., p. 546f). Father Suysken
       was thus thrown into inextricable difficulties, and exposed
       to a failure to understand the lists of biographies of St.
       Francis arranged by the annalists of the Order; he was at the
       same time deprived of one of the most fruitful sources of
       information upon the acts and works of the Saint. Professor
       Müller (_Die Anfänge_, pp. 175-184) was the first to make a
       critical study of this legend. His conclusions appear to me
       narrow and extreme. Cf. _Analecta_ fr., t. ii., pp. xvii.-xx.
       Father Ehrle mentions two manuscripts, one in the British
       Museum, Harl., 47; the other at Oxford, Christ College, cod.
       202. _Zeitschrift_, 1883, p. 390.

  [55] The Three Companions foresee the possibility of their
       legend being incorporated with other documents: _quibus
       (legendis) hæc pauca quæ scribimus poleritis facere inseri, si
       vestra discretio viderit esse justum._ 3 Soc., Prol.

  [56] One phrase of the Prologue (2 Cel.) shows that the author
       received an entirely special commission: _Placuit ... robis ...
       parvitati nostræ injungere_, while on the contrary the 3 Soc.
       shows that the decision of the chapter only remotely considered
       them: _Cum de mandato proeteriti capituli fratres teneantur
       ... visum est nobis ... pauca de multis ... sanctitati vestræ
       intimare._ 3 Soc., Prol.

  [57] Compare the Prologue of 2 Cel. with that of 1 Cel.

  [58] _Longum esset de singulis persequi, qualiter bravium
       supernæ vocationis attigerit_. 2 Cel., 1, 10.

  [59] This first part corresponds exactly to that portion of the
       legend of the 3 Soc., which Crescentius had authorized.

  [60] Observe that the Assisi MS. 686 divides the Second Life
       into two parts only by joining the last two.

  [61] Salimbeni, ann. 1248.

  [62] Glassberger, ann. 1253. _An. fr._ t. ii., p. 73. _Frater
       Johannes de Parma minister generalis, multiplicatis litteris
       præcipit fr. Thomæ de Celano (cod. Ceperano), ut vitam beati
       Francisci quæ antiqua Legenda dicitur perficeret, quia solum de
       ejus conversatione et verbis in primo tractatu, de mandato, Fr.
       Crescentii olim generalis compilato, ommissis miraculis fecerat
       mentionem, et sic secundum tractatum de miraculis sancti Patris
       compilavit, quem cum epistola quæ incipit: Religiosa vestra
       sollicitudo eidem generali misit_.

       This treatise on the miracles is lost, for one cannot identify
       it, as M. Müller suggests (_Anfänge_, p. 177), with the second
       part (counting three with the Amoni edition) of the Second Life:
       1^o, epistle _Religiosa vestra sollicitudo_ does not have it;
       2^o, this second part is not a collection of miracles, using
       this word in the sense of miraculous cures which it had in the
       thirteenth century. The twenty-two chapters of this second part
       have a marked unity; they might be entitled _Francis a prophet_,
       but not _Francis a thaumaturgus_.

  [63] In the Prologue (2 Cel., 2, Prol.) _Insignia patrum_ the
       author speaks in the singular, while the Epilogue is written in
       the name of a group of disciples.

  [64] Greccio, 2 Cel., 2, 5; 14; 3, 7; 10; 103.--Rieti, 2 Cel.,
       2, 10; 11; 12; 13; 3, 36; 37; 66; 103.

  [65] St. Francis gives him an autograph, 2 Cel., 2, 18. Cf.
       _Fior._ ii. _consid._; his tunic, 2 Cel., 2, 19; he predicts to
       him a famine, 2 Cel., 2, 21; cf. _Conform._, 49b. Fr. Leo ill at
       Bologna, 2 Cel., 3, 5.

  [66] The text of Ubertini di Casali may be found in the
       _Archiv._, t. iii., pp. 53, 75, 76, 85, 168, 178, where Father
       Ehrle points out the corresponding passages of 2 Cel.

  [67] It is the subject of thirty-seven narratives (1, 2 Cel., 3,
       1-37), then come examples on the spirit of prayer (2 Cel., 3,
       38-44), the temptations (2 Cel., 3, 58-64), true happiness (2
       Cel., 3, 64-79), humility (2 Cel., 3, 79-87), submission (2
       Cel., 3, 88, 91), etc.

  [68] Le Monnier, t. i., p. xi.; F. Barnabé, _Portiuncula_, p.
       15. Cf. _Analecta fr._, t. ii., p. xxi. _Zeitschrift für kath.
       Theol._, vii. (1883), p. 397.

  [69] _Il piu antico poema della vita di S. Francisco d'Assisi
       scritto inanzi all' anno 1230 ora per la prima volta pubblicato
       et tradotto da Antonio Cristofani_, Prato, 1882, 1 vol., 8vo.
       288 pp.

  [70] Note, however, two articles of the Miscellanea, one on the
       manuscript of this biography which is found in the library at
       Versailles, t. iv. (1889), p. 34 ff.; the other on the author of
       the poem, t. v. (1890), pp. 2-4 and 74 ff.

  [71] See below, p. 410.

  [72] Vide Glassberger, ann. 1244; _Analecta_, t. ii., p. 68. Cf.
       A. SS., p. 545 ff.

  [73] Manuscript in the Library of Turin, J. vi., 33, f^o 95a.

  [74] _Plenam virtutibus S. Francisci vitam scripsit in Italia
       ... frater Thomas ... in Francia vero frater Julianus scientia
       et sanctitate conspicuus qui etiam nocturnali sancti officium in
       littera et cantu possuit præter hymnos et aliquas antiphonas
       quae summus ipse Pontifex et aliqui de Cardinalibus in sancti
       præconium ediderunt._ Opening of the _De laudibus_ of Bernard of
       Besse. See below, p. 413. Laur. MS., f^o 95a. Cf. Giord., 53;
       _Conform._, 75b.

  [75] In proof of this is the circular letter, _Licet
       insufficentiam nostram_, addressed by Bonaventura, April 23,
       1257, immediately after his election, to the provincials and
       custodes upon the reformation of the Order. Text: _Speculum_,
       Morin, tract. iii., f^o 213a.

  [76] Salimbeni, ann. 1248, p. 131. The _Chronica tribulationum_
       gives a long and dramatic account of these events: _Archiv._, t.
       ii., pp. 283 ff. "_Tunc enim sapientia et sanctitas fratris
       Bonaventuræ eclipsata paluit et obscurata est et ejus manswetudo
       (sic) ab agitante spiritu in furorum et iram defecit._" Ib., p.
       283.

  [77] Bon., 3. 1. At the same chapter were collected the
       constitutions of the Order according to edicts of the preceding
       chapters; new ones were added to them and all were arranged. In
       the first of the twelve rubrics the chapter prescribed that,
       upon the publication of the account, all the old constitutions
       should be destroyed. The text was published in the _Firmamentum
       trium ordinum_, f^o 7b, and restored lately by Father Ehrle:
       _Archiv._, t. vi. (1891), in his beautiful work _Die ältesten
       Redactionen der General-constitutionen des Franziskanerordens_.
       Cf. _Speculum_ Morin, fo. 195b of tract. iii.

  [78] The _Legenda Minor_ of Bonaventura was also approved at
       this time; it is simply an abridgment of the _Legenda Major_
       arranged for use of the choir on the festival of St. Francis and
       its octave.

  [79] "_Item præcipit Generale capitulum per obedientiam quod
       omnes legenæ de B. Francisco olim factæ deleantur et ubi
       inveniri poterant extra ordinem ipsas fratres studeant amovere,
       cum illa legenda quæ facta est per Generalem sit compilata prout
       ipse habuit ab ore illorum qui cum B. Francisco quasi semper
       fuerunt et cuncta certitudinaliter sciverint et probata ibi sint
       posita diligenter._" This precious text has been found and
       published by Father Rinaldi in his preface to the text of
       Celano: _Seraphici viri Francisci vitæ duæ_, p. xi. Wadding
       seems to have known of it, at least indirectly, for he says:
       "_Utramque Historiam, longiorem et breviorem, obtulit
       (Bonaventura) triennio post in comitiis Pisanis patribus
       Ordinis, quas reverentur cum gratiarum actione_, SUPRESSIS ALIIS
       QUIBUSQUE LEGENDIS, ADMISERUNT." Ad ann., 1260, no. 18. Cf.
       Ehrle, _Zeitschrift für kath. Theol._, t. vii. (1883), p.
       386.--"_Communicaverat sanctus Franciscus plurima sociis suis et
       fratribus antiquis, que oblivioni tradita sunt, tum quia que
       scripta erant in legenda prima, nova edita a fratre. Bonaventura
       deleta et destructa sunt_, IPSOJUBENTE _tum quia_ ..." _Chronica
       tribul._, _Archiv._, t. ii., p. 256.

  [80] Bon., 188-204.

  [81] Bon., 218.

  [82] Bernardo (Bon., 28), Egidio (Bon., 29), and Silvestro
       (Bon., 30).

  [83] Bon., 49.

  [84] Bon., 112.

  [85] Bon., 111.

  [86] Vide Bon., 115; 99, etc. M. Thode has enumerated the
       stories relating especially to Bonaventura: (_Franz von Assisi_,
       p. 535).

  [87] Manuscript I, iv., 33, of the library of the University of
       Turin. It is a 4to upon parchment of the close of the fourteenth
       century, 124 ff. It comprises first the biography of St. Francis
       by St. Bonaventura and a legend of St. Clara, afterwards at f^o
       95 the _De laudibus_. The text will soon be published in the
       _Analecta franciscana_ of the Franciscans of Quaracchi, near
       Florence.

  [88] In reading it we quickly discover that he was specially
       well acquainted with the convents of the Province of Aquitania,
       and noted with care everything that concerned them.

  [89] Wadding, ann. 1230, no. 7. Many passages prove at least
       that he accompanied Bonaventura in his travels: "_Hoc enim_ (the
       special aid of Brother Egidio) _in iis quæ ad bonum animæ
       pertinent devotus Generalis et Cardinalis predictus ... nos
       docuit_." F^o 96a. _Jamdudum ego per Theutoniæ partes et
       Flandriæ cum Ministro transiens Generali._ Ibid., f^o 106a.

  [90] Bernard de Besse is the author of many other writings,
       notably an important _Calalogus Ministrorum generalium_
       published after the Turin manuscript by Father Ehrle
       (_Zeitschrift für kath. Theol._, t. vii., pp. 338-352), with a
       very remarkable critical introduction (ib., pp. 323-337). Cf.
       _Archiv für Litt. u. Kirchg._, i., p. 145.--Bartolommeo di Pisa,
       when writing his _Conformities_, had before him a part of his
       works, f^o 148b, 2; 126a, 1; but he calls the author sometimes
       _Bernardus de Blesa_, then again _Johannes de Blesa_. See also
       Mark of Lisbon, t. ii., p. 212, and Hauréau, _Notices et
       extraits_, t. vi., p. 153.

  [91] "_Denique primos Francisci xii. discipulos ... omnes
       sanctos fuisse audirimus preter unum qui Ordinem exiens leprosus
       factus laqueo vel alter Judas interiit, ne Francisco cum Christo
       vel in discipulis similitudo deficeret_," f^o 96a.

DIPLOMATIC DOCUMENTS

In this category we place all the acts having a character of public
authenticity, particularly those which were drawn up by the pontifical
cabinet.

This source of information, where each document has its date, is
precisely the one which has been most neglected up to this time.

I. DONATION OF THE VERNA

The _Instrumentum donationis Montis Alvernæ_, a notarial document
preserved in the archives of Borgo San Sepolcro,[1] not only gives the
name of the generous friend of Francis, and many picturesque details,
but it fixes with precision a date all the more important because it
occurs in the most obscure period of the Saint's life. It was on May 8,
1213, that _Orlando dei Catani_, Count of Chiusi in Casentino, gave the
Verna to Brother Francis.

II. REGISTERS OF CARDINAL UGOLINI

The documents of the pontifical chancellery addressed to Cardinal
Ugolini, the future Gregory IX., and those which emanate from the hand
of the latter during his long journeys as apostolic legate,[2] are of
first rate importance.

It would be too long to give even a simple enumeration of them. Those
which mark important facts have been carefully indicated in the course
of this work. It will suffice to say that by bringing together these two
series of documents, and interposing the dates of the papal bulls
countersigned by Ugolini, we are able to follow almost day by day this
man, who was, perhaps without even excepting St. Francis, the one whose
will most profoundly fashioned the Franciscan institute. We see also
the pre-eminent part which the Order had from the beginning in the
interest of the future pontiff, and we arrive at perfect accuracy as to
the dates of his meetings with St. Francis.

III. BULLS

The pontifical bulls concerning the Franciscans were collected and
published in the last century by the monk Sbaralea.[3] But from these
we gain little help for the history of the origins of the Order.[4]

The following is a compendious list; the details have been given in the
course of the work:

No. 1. August 18, 1218.--Bull _Literæ tuæ_ addressed to Ugolini. The
pope permits him to accept donations of landed property in behalf of
women fleeing the world (Clarisses) and to declare that these
monasteries are holden by the Apostolic See.

No. 2. June 11, 1219.--_Cum delecti filii._ This bull, addressed in a
general way to all prelates, is a sort of safe conduct for the Brothers
Minor.

No. 3. December 19, 1219.--_Sacrosancta romana._ Privileges conceded to
the Sisters (Clarisses) of Monticelli, near Florence.

No. 4. May 29, 1220.--_Pro dilectis._ The pope prays the prelates of
France to give a kindly reception to the Brothers Minor.

No. 5. September 22, 1220.--_Cum secundum._ Honorius III. prescribes a
year of noviciate before the entry into the Order.

No. 6. December 9, 1220.--_Constitutus in præsentia._ This bull concerns
a priest of Constantinople who had made a vow to enter the Order. As
there is question here of _frater Lucas Magister fratrum Minorem de
partibus Romaniæ_ we have here indirect testimony, all the more precious
for that reason, as to the period of the establishment of the Order in
the Orient.

No. 7. February 13, 1221.--New bull for the same priest.

No. 8. December 16, 1221.--_Significatum est nobis._ Honorius III.
recommends to the Bishop of Rimini to protect the Brothers of Penitence
(Third Order).

No. 9. March 22, 1222.[5]--_Devotionis vestræ._ Concession to the
Franciscans, under certain conditions, to celebrate the offices in times
of interdict.

No. 10. March 29, 1222.--_Ex parte Universitatis._ Mission given to the
Dominicans, Franciscans, and Brothers of the Troops of San Iago in
Lisbon.

Nos. 11, 12, and 13.--September 19, 1222.--_Sacrosancta Romana._
Privileges for the monasteries (Clarisses) of Lucca, Sienna, and
Perugia.

No. 14. November 29, 1223.--_Solet annuere._ Solemn approbation of the
Rule, which is inserted in the bull.

No. 15. December 18, 1223.--_Fratrum Minorum._ Concerns apostates from
the Order.

No. 16. December 1, 1224.--_Cum illorum._ Authorization given to the
Brothers of Penitence to take part in the offices in times of interdict,
etc.

No. 17. December 3, 1224.--_Quia populares tumultus._ Concession of the
portable altar.

No. 18. August 28, 1225.--_In hiis._ Honorius explains to the Bishop of
Paris and the Archbishop of Rheims the true meaning of the privileges
accorded to the Brothers Minor.

No. 19. October 7, 1225.--_Vineae Domini._ This bull contains divers
authorizations in favor of the Brothers who are going to evangelize
Morocco.

This list includes only those of Sbaralea's bulls which may directly or
indirectly throw some light upon the life of St. Francis and his
institute. Sbaralea's nomenclature is surely incomplete and should be
revised when the Registers of Honorius III. shall have been published in
full.[6]

FOOTNOTES:

   [1] It was published by Sbaralea, Bull., t. iv., p. 156, note h.
       This act was drawn up July 9, 1274, at a time when the son of
       Orlando as well as the Brothers Minor desired to authenticate
       the donation, which until then had been verbal.

   [2] See _Registri dei Cardinali Ugolino d'Ostia e Ottaviano
       degli Ubaldini pubblicati a cura di Guido Levi dall'Istituto
       storico italiano.--Fonti per la storia d'Italia_, Roma, 1890, 1
       vol., 4to, xxviii. and 250 pp. This edition follows the
       manuscript of the National Library, Paris: Ancien fonds Colbert
       lat., 5152A. We must draw attention to a very beautiful work due
       also to Mr. G. Levi: _Documenti ad illustrazione del Registro
       del Card. Ugolino_, in the _Archivio della societa Romana di
       storia patria_, t. xii. (1889), pp. 241-326.

   [3] _Bullarium franciscanum seu Rom. Pontificum constitutiones
       epistolæ diplomata ordinibus Minorum, Clarissarum et
       Poenitentium concessa, edidit Joh. Hyac. Sbaralea ord. min.
       conv._, 4 vols., fol., Rome, t. i. (1759), t. ii. (1761), t.
       iii. (1763), t iv., (1768)--_Supplementum ab Annibale de Latera
       ord. min. obs. Romæ_, 1780.--Sbaralea had a comparatively easy
       task, because of the number of collections made before his. I
       shall mention only one of those which I have before me. It is,
       comparatively, very well done, and appears to have escaped the
       researches of the Franciscan bibliographers: _Singularissimum
       eximiumque opus universis mortalibus sacratissimi ordinis
       seraphici patris nostri Francisci a Domino Jesu mirabili modo
       approbati necnon a quampluribus nostri Redemptoris sanctissimis
       vicariis romanis pontificabus multipharie declarati notitiam
       habere cupientibus profecto per necessarium. Speculum Minorum
       ... per Martinum Morin ... Rouen_, 1509. It is 8vo, with
       numbered folios, printed with remarkable care. It contains
       besides the bulls the principal dissertations upon the Rule,
       elaborated in the thirteenth century, and a _Memoriale ordinis_
       (first part, f^o 60-82), a kind of catalogue of the
       ministers-general, which would have prevented many of the errors
       of the historians, if it had been known.

   [4] The Bollandists themselves have entirely overlooked those
       sources of information, thinking, upon the authority of a single
       badly interpreted passage, that the Order had not obtained a
       single bull before the solemn approval of Honorius III.,
       November 29, 1223.

   [5] And not March 29, as Sbaralea has it. The original, which I
       have had under my eyes in the archives of Assisi, bears in fact:
       _Datum Anagnie XI. Kal. aprilis pontificatus nostri anno sexto_.

   [6] The Abbé Horoy has indeed published in five volumes what he
       entitles the _Opera omnia_ of Honorius III., but he omits,
       without a word of explanation, a great number of letters,
       certain of which are brought forward in the well-known
       collection of Potthast. The Abbé Pietro Pressuti has undertaken
       to publish a compendium of all the bulls of this pope according
       to the original Registers of the Vatican. _I regesti del
       Pontifice Onorio III._ Roma, t. i., 1884. Volume i. only has as
       yet appeared.

IV

CHRONICLERS OF THE ORDER

I. CHRONICLE OF BROTHER GIORDANO DI GIANO[1]

Born at Giano, in Umbria, in the mountainous district which closes the
southern horizon of Assisi, Brother Giordano was in 1221 one of the
twenty-six friars who, under the conduct of Cæsar of Speyer, set out for
Germany. He seems to have remained attached to this province until his
death, even when most of the friars, especially those who held cures,
had been transferred, often to a distance of several months' journey,
from one end of Europe to the other. It is not, then, surprising that he
was often prayed to commit his memories to writing. He dictated them to
Brother Baldwin of Brandenburg in the spring of 1262. He must have done
it with joy, having long before prepared himself for the task. He
relates with artless simplicity how in 1221, at the chapter-general of
Portiuncula, he went from group to group questioning as to their names
and country the Brothers who were going to set out on distant missions,
that he might be able to say later, especially if they came to suffer
martyrdom: "I knew them myself!"[2]

His chronicle bears the imprint of this tendency. What he desires to
describe is the introduction of the Order into Germany and its early
developments there, and he does it by enumerating, with a complacency
which has its own coquetry, the names of a multitude of friars[3] and
by carefully dating the events. These details, tedious for the ordinary
reader, are precious to the historian; he sees there the diverse
conditions from which the friars were recruited, and the rapidity with
which a handful of missionaries thrown into an unknown country were able
to branch out, found new stations, and in five years cover with a
network of monasteries, the Tyrol, Saxony, Bavaria, Alsace, and the
neighboring provinces.

It is needless to say that it is worth while to test Giordano's
chronology, for he begins by praying the reader to forgive the errors
which may have escaped him on this head; but a man who thus marks in his
memory what he desires later to tell or to write is not an ordinary
witness.

Reading his chronicle, it seems as if we were listening to the
recollections of an old soldier, who grasps certain worthless details
and presents them with an extraordinary power of relief, who knows not
how to resist the temptation to bring himself forward, at the risk
sometimes of slightly embellishing the dry reality.[4]

In fact this chronicle swarms with anecdotes somewhat personal, but very
artless and welcome, and which on the whole carry in themselves the
testimony to their authenticity. The perfume of the Fioretti already
exhales from these pages so full of candor and manliness; we can follow
the missionaries stage by stage, then when they are settled, open the
door of the monastery and read in the very hearts of these men, many of
whom are as brave as heroes and harmless as doves.

It is true that this chronicle deals especially with Germany, but the
first chapters have an importance for Francis's history that exceeds
even that of the biographers. Thanks to Giordano of Giano, we are from
this time forward informed upon the crises which the institute of
Francis passed through after 1219; he furnishes us the solidly
historical base which seems to be lacking in the documents emanating
from the Spirituals, and corroborates their testimony.

II. ECCLESTON: ARRIVAL OF THE FRIARS IN ENGLAND[5]

Our knowledge of Thomas of Eccleston is very slight, for he has left no
more trace of himself in the history of the Order than of Simon of
Esseby, to whom he dedicates his work. A native no doubt of Yorkshire,
he seems never to have quitted England. He was twenty-five years
gathering the materials of his work, which embraces the course of events
from 1224 almost to 1260. The last facts that he relates belong to years
very near to this date.

Of almost double the length of that of Giordano, Eccleston's work is far
from furnishing as interesting reading. The former had seen nearly
everything that he described, and thence resulted a vigor in his story
that we cannot find in an author who writes on the testimony of others.
More than this, while Giordano follows a chronological order, Eccleston
has divided his incidents under fifteen rubrics, in which the same
people continually reappear in a confusion which at length becomes very
wearisome. Finally, his document is amazingly partial: the author is not
content with merely proving that the English friars are saints; he
desires to show that the province of England surpasses all others[6]
by its fidelity to the Rule and its courage against the upholders of new
ways, Brother Elias in particular.

But these few faults ought not to make us lose sight of the true value
of this document. It embraces what we may call the heroic period of the
Franciscan movement in England, and describes it with extreme
simplicity.

Aside from all question of history, we have here enough to interest all
those who are charmed by the spectacle of moral conquest. On Monday,
September 10th, the Brothers Minor landed at Dover. They were nine in
number: a priest, a deacon, two who had only the lesser Orders, and five
laymen. They visited Canterbury, London, Oxford, Cambridge, Lincoln, and
less than ten months later all who have made their mark in the history
of science or of sanctity had joined them; it may suffice to name Adam
of Marisco, Richard of Cornwall, Bishop Robert Grossetête, one of the
proudest and purest figures of the Middle Ages, and Roger Bacon, that
persecuted monk who several centuries before his time grappled with and
answered in his lonely cell the problems of authority and method, with a
firmness and power which the sixteenth century would find it hard to
surpass.

It is impossible that in such a movement human weaknesses and passions
should not here and there reveal themselves, but we owe our chronicler
thanks for not hiding them. Thanks to him, we can for a moment forget
the present hour, call to life again that first Cambridge chapel--so
slight that it took a carpenter only one day to build it--listen to
three Brothers chanting matins that same night, and that with so much
ardor that one of them--so rickety that his two companions were obliged
to carry him--wept for joy: in England as in Italy the Franciscan gospel
was a gospel of peace and joy. Moral ugliness inspired them with a pity
which we no longer know. There are few historic incidents finer than
that of Brother Geoffrey of Salisbury confessing Alexander of
Bissingburn; the noble penitent was performing this duty without
attention, as if he were telling some sort of a story; suddenly his
confessor melted into tears, making him blush with shame and forcing
tears also from him, working in him so complete a revolution that he
begged to be taken into the Order.

The most interesting parts are those where Thomas gives us an intimate
view of the friars: here drinking their beer, there hastening, in spite
of the Rule, to buy some on credit for two comrades who have been
maltreated, or again clustering about Brother Solomon, who had just come
in nearly frozen with cold, and whom they could not succeed in
warming--_sicut porcis mos est cum comprimendo foverunt_, says the pious
narrator.[7] All this is mingled with dreams, visions, numberless
apparitions,[8] which once more show us how different were the ideas
most familiar to the religious minds of the thirteenth century from
those which haunt the brains and hearts of to-day.

The information given by Eccleston bears only indirectly on this book,
but if he speaks little of Francis he speaks much at length of some of
the men who have been most closely mingled with his life.

III. CHRONICLE OF FRA SALIMBENI[9]

As celebrated as it is little known, this chronicle is of quite
secondary value in all that concerns the life of St. Francis. Its
author, born October 9, 1221, entered the Order in 1238, and wrote his
memoirs in 1282-1287; it is therefore especially for the middle years of
the thirteenth century that his importance is capital. Notwithstanding
this, it is surprising how small a place the radiant figure of the
master holds in these long pages, and this very fact shows, better than
long arguments could do, how profound was the fall of the Franciscan
idea.

IV. THE CHRONICLE OF THE TRIBULATIONS BY ANGELO CARENO[10]

This chronicle was written about 1330; we might therefore be surprised
to see it appear among the sources to be consulted for the life of St.
Francis, dead more than a century before; but the picture which Clareno
gives us of the early days of the Order gains its importance from the
fact that in sketching it he made constant appeal to eye-witnesses, and
precisely to those whose works have disappeared.

Angelo Clareno, earlier called Pietro da Fossombrone[11] from the name
of his native town, and sometimes da Cingoli, doubtless from the little
convent where he made profession, belonged to the Zelanti of the March
of Ancona as early as 1265. Hunted and persecuted by his adversaries
during his whole life, he died in the odor of sanctity June 15, 1339, in
the little hermitage of Santa Maria d' Aspro in the diocese of Marsico
in Basilicata.

Thanks to published documents, we may now, so to speak, follow day by
day not only the external circumstances of his life, but the inner
workings of his soul. With him we see the true Franciscan live again,
one of those men who, while desiring to remain the obedient son of the
Church, cannot reconcile themselves to permit the domain of the dream to
slip away from them, the ideal which they have hailed. Often they are on
the borders of heresy; in these utterances against bad priests and
unworthy pontiffs there is a bitterness which the sectaries of the
sixteenth century will not exceed.[12] Often, too, they seem to
renounce all authority and make final appeal to the inward witness of
the Holy Spirit;[13] and yet Protestantism would be mistaken in seeking
its ancestors among them. No, they desired to die as they had lived, in
the communion of that Church which was as a stepmother to them and which
they yet loved with that heroic passion which some of the _ci-devant_
nobles brought in '93 to the love of France, governed though she was by
Jacobins, and poured out their blood for her.

Clareno and his friends not only believed that Francis had been a great
Saint, but to this conviction, which was also that of the Brothers of
the Common Observance, they added the persuasion that the work of the
Stigmatized could only be continued by men who should attain to his
moral stature, to which men might arrive through the power of faith and
love. They were of the violent who take the kingdom of heaven by force;
so when, after the frivolous and senile interests of every day we come
face to face with them, we feel ourselves both humbled and exalted, for
we suddenly find unhoped-for powers, an unrecognized lyre in the human
heart.

There is one of Jesus's apostles of whom it is difficult not to think
while reading the chronicle of the Tribulations and Angelo Clareno's
correspondence: St. John. Between the apostle's words about love and
those of the Franciscan there is a similarity of style all the more
striking because they were written in different languages. In both of
these the soul is that of the aged man, where all is only love, pardon,
desire for holiness, and yet it sometimes wakes with a sudden
thrill--like that which stirred the soul of the seer of Patmos--of
indignation, wrath, pity, terror, and joy, when the future unveils
itself and gives a glimpse of the close of the great tribulation.

Clareno's works, then, are in the strictest sense of the word partisan;
the question is whether the author has designedly falsified the facts or
mutilated the texts. To this question we may boldly answer, No. He
commits errors,[14] especially in his earlier pages, but they are not
such as to diminish our confidence.

Like a good Joachimite, he believed that the Order would have to
traverse seven tribulations before its final triumph. The pontificate of
John XXII. marked, he thought, the commencement of the seventh; he set
himself, then, to write, at the request of a friend, the history of the
first six.[15]

His account of the first is naturally preceded by an introduction, the
purpose of which is to exhibit to the reader, taking the life of St.
Francis as a framework, the intention of the latter in composing the
Rule and dictating the Will.

Born between 1240 and 1250, Clareno had at his service the testimony of
several of the first disciples;[16] he found himself in relations with
Angelo di Rieti,[17] Egidio,[18] and with that Brother Giovanni,
companion of Egidio, mentioned in the prologue of the Legend of the
Three Companions.[19]

His chronicle, therefore, forms as it were the continuation of that
legend. The members of the little circle of Greccio are they who
recommend it to us; it has also their inspiration.

But writing long years after the death of these Brothers, Clareno feels
the need of supporting himself also on written testimony; he repeatedly
refers to the four legends from which he borrows a part of his
narrative; they are those of Giovanni di Ceperano, Thomas of Celano,
Bonaventura, and Brother Leo.[20] Bonaventura's work is mentioned only
by way of reference; Clareno borrows nothing from him, while he cites
long passages from Giovanni di Ceperano,[21] Thomas of Celano[22] and
Brother Leo.[23]

Clareno takes from these writers narratives containing several new and
extremely curious facts.[24]

I have dwelt particularly upon this document because its value appears
to me not yet to have been properly appreciated. It is indeed partisan;
the documents of which we must be most wary are not those whose tendency
is manifest, but those where it is skilfully concealed.

The life of St. Francis and a great part of the religious history of the
thirteenth century will surely appear to us in an entirely different
light when we are able to fill out the documents of the victorious party
by those of the party of the vanquished. Just as Thomas of Celano's
first legend is dominated by the desire to associate closely St.
Francis, Gregory IX., and Brother Elias, so the Chronicle of the
Tribulations is inspired from beginning to end with the thought that the
troubles of the Order--to say the word, the apostasy--began so early as
1219. This contention finds a striking confirmation in the Chronicle of
Giordano di Giano.

V. THE FIORETTI[25]

With the Fioretti we enter definitively the domain of legend. This
literary gem relates the life of Francis, his companions and disciples,
as it appeared to the popular imagination at the beginning of the
fourteenth century. We have not to discuss the literary value of this
document, one of the most exquisite religious works of the Middle Ages,
but it may well be said that from the historic point of view it does not
deserve the neglect to which it has been left.

Most authors have failed in courage to revise the sentence lightly
uttered against it by the successors of Bollandus. Why make anything of
a book which Father Suysken did not even deign to read![26]

Yet that which gives these stories an inestimable worth is what for want
of a better term we may call their atmosphere. They are legendary,
worked over, exaggerated, false even, if you please, but they give us
with a vivacity and intensity of coloring something that we shall search
for in vain elsewhere--the surroundings in which St. Francis lived. More
than any other biography the Fioretti transport us to Umbria, to the
mountains of the March of Ancona; they make us visit the hermitages, and
mingle with the life, half childish, half angelic, which was that of
their inhabitants.

It is difficult to pronounce upon the name of the author. His work was
only that of gathering the flowers of his bouquet from written and oral
tradition. The question whether he wrote in Latin or Italian has been
much discussed and appears to be not yet settled; what is certain is
that though this work may be anterior to the Conformities,[27] it is a
little later than the Chronicle of the Tribulations, for it would be
strange that it made no mention of Angelo Clareno, if it was written
after his death.

This book is in fact an essentially local[28] chronicle; the author has
in mind to erect a monument to the glory of the Brothers Minor of the
March of Ancona. This province, which is evidently his own, "does it
not resemble the sky blazing with stars? The holy Brothers who dwelt in
it, like the stars in the sky, have illuminated and adorned the Order of
St. Francis, filling the world with their examples and teaching." He is
acquainted with the smallest villages,[29] each having at a short
distance its monastery, well apart, usually near a torrent, in the edge
of a wood, and above, near the hilltop, a few almost inaccessible cells,
the asylums of Brothers even more than the others in love with
contemplation and retirement.[30]

The chapters that concern St. Francis and the Umbrian Brothers are only
a sort of introduction; Egidio, Masseo, Leo on one side, St. Clara on
the other, are witnesses that the ideal at Portiuncula and St. Damian
was indeed the same to which in later days Giachimo di Massa, Pietro di
Monticulo, Conrad di Offida, Giovanni di Penna, and Giovanni della Verna
endeavored to attain.

While most of the other legends give us the Franciscan tradition of the
great convents, the Fioretti are almost the only document which shows it
as it was perpetuated in the hermitages and among the people. In default
of accuracy of detail, the incidents which are related here contain a
higher truth--their tone is true. Here are words that were never
uttered, acts that never took place, but the soul and the heart of the
early Franciscans were surely what they are depicted here.

The Fioretti have the living truth that the pencil gives. Something is
wanting in the physiognomy of the Poverello when we forget his
conversation with Brother Leo on the perfect joy, his journey to Sienna
with Masseo, or even the conversion of the wolf of Gubbio.

We must not, however, exaggerate the legendary side of the Fioretti:
there are not more that two or three of these stories of which the
kernel is not historic and easy to find. The famous episode of the wolf
of Gubbio, which is unquestionably the most marvellous of all the
series, is only, to speak the engraver's language, the third state of
the story of the robbers of Monte Casale[31] mingled with a legend of
the Verna.

The stories crowd one another in this book like flocks of memories that
come upon us pell-mell, and in which insignificant details occupy a
larger place than the most important events; our memory is, in fact, an
overgrown child, and what it retains of a man is generally a feature, a
word, a gesture. Scientific history is trying to react, to mark the
relative value of facts, to bring forward the important ones, to cast
into shade that which is secondary. Is it not a mistake? Is there such a
thing as the important and the secondary? How is it going to be marked?

The popular imagination is right: what we need to retain of a man is the
expression of countenance in which lives his whole being, a heart-cry, a
gesture that expresses his personality. Do we not find all of Jesus in
the words of the Last Supper? And all of St. Francis in his address to
brother wolf and his sermon to the birds?

Let us beware of despising these documents in which the first
Franciscans are described as they saw themselves to be. Unfolding under
the Umbrian sky at the foot of the olives of St. Damian, or the firs of
the March of Ancona, these wild flowers have a perfume and an
originality which we look for in vain in the carefully cultivated
flowers of a learned gardener.

APPENDICES OF THE FIORETTI

In the first of these appendices the compiler has divided into five
chapters all the information on the stigmata which he was able to
gather. It is easy to understand the success of the Fioretti. The people
fell in love with these stories, in which St. Francis and his companions
appear both more human and more divine than in the other legends; and
they began very soon to feel the need of so completing them as to form a
veritable biography.[32]

The second, entitled Life of Brother Ginepro, is only indirectly
connected with St. Francis; yet it deserves to be studied, for it offers
the same kind of interest as the principal collection, to which it is
doubtless posterior. In these fourteen chapters we find the principal
features of the life of this Brother, whose mad and saintly freaks still
furnish material for conversation in Umbrian monasteries. These
unpretending pages discover to us one aspect of the Franciscan heart.
The official historians have thought it their duty to keep silence upon
this Brother, who to them appeared to be a supremely indiscreet
personage, very much in the way of the good name of the Order in the
eyes of the laics. They were right from their point of view, but we owe
a debt of gratitude to the Fioretti for having preserved for us this
personality, so blithe, so modest, and with so arch a good nature.
Certainly St. Francis was more like Ginepro than like Brother Elias or
St. Bonaventura.[33]

The third, Life of Brother Egidio, appears to be on the whole the most
ancient document on the life of the famous Ecstatic that we possess. It
is very possible that these stories might be traced to Brother Giovanni,
to whom the Three Companions appeal in their prologue.

In the defective texts given us in the existing editions we perceive the
hand of an annotator whose notes have slipped into the text,[34] but in
spite of that this life is one of the most important of the secondary
texts. This always itinerant brother, one of whose principal
preoccupations is to live by his labor, is one of the most original and
agreeable figures in Francis's surroundings, and it is in lives of this
sort that we must seek the true meaning of some of the passages of the
Rule, and precisely in those that have had the most to suffer from the
enterprise of exegetes.

The fourth includes the favorite maxims of Brother Egidio; they have no
other importance than to show the tendencies of the primitive Franciscan
teaching. They are short, precise, practical counsels, saturated with
mysticism, and yet in them good sense never loses its rights. The
collection, just as it is in the Fioretti, is no doubt posterior to
Egidio, for in 1385 Bartolommeo of Pisa furnished a much longer
one.[35]

VI. CHRONICLE OF THE XXIV. GENERALS[36]

We find here at the end of the life of Francis that of most of his
companions, and the events that occurred under the first twenty-four
generals.

It is a very ordinary work of compilation. The authors have sought to
include in it all the pieces which they had succeeded in collecting, and
the result presents a very disproportioned whole. A thorough study of it
might be interesting and useful, but it would be possible only after its
publication. This cannot be long delayed: twice (at intervals of fifteen
months) when I have desired to study the Assisi manuscript it was found
to be with the Franciscans of Quaracchi, who were preparing to print it.

It is difficult not to bring the epoch in which this collection was
closed near to that when Bartolommeo of Pisa wrote his famous work.
Perhaps the two are quite closely related.

This chronicle was one of Glassberger's favorite sources.

VII. THE CONFORMITIES OF BARTOLOMMEO OF PISA[37]

The Book of the Conformities, to which Brother Bartolommeo of Pisa
devoted more than fifteen years of his life,[38] appears to have been
read very inattentively by most of the authors who have spoken of
it.[39] In justice to them we must add that it would be hard to find a
work more difficult to read; the same facts reappear from ten to fifteen
times, and end by wearying the least delicate nerves.

It is to this no doubt that we must attribute the neglect to which it
has been left. I do not hesitate, however, to see in it the most
important work which has been made on the life of St. Francis. Of course
the author does not undertake historical criticism as we understand it
to-day, but if we must not expect to find him a historian, we can boldly
place him in the front rank of compilers.[40]

If the Bollandists had more thoroughly studied him they would have seen
more clearly into the difficult question of the sources, and the authors
who have come after them would have been spared numberless errors and
interminable researches.

Starting with the thought that Francis's life had been a perfect
imitation of that of Jesus, Bartolommeo attempted to collect, without
losing a single one, all the instances of the life of the Poverello
scattered through the diverse legends still known at that time.

He regretted that Bonaventura, while borrowing the narratives of his
predecessors, had often abridged them,[41] and himself desired to
preserve them in their original bloom. Better situated than any one for
such a work, since he had at his disposal the archives of the Sacro
Convento of Assisi, it may be said that he has omitted nothing of
importance and that he has brought into his work considerable pieces
from nearly all the legends which appeared in the thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries; they are there only in fragments, it is true, but
with perfect accuracy.[42]

When his researches were unsuccessful he avows it simply, without
attempting to fill out the written testimonies with his own
conjectures.[43] He goes farther, and submits the documents he has
before him to a real testing, laying aside those he considers
uncertain.[44] Finally he takes pains to point out the passages in
which his only authority is oral testimony.[45]

As he is almost continually citing the legends of Celano, the Three
Companions, and Bonaventura, and as the citations prove on verification
to be literally accurate, as well as those of the Will, the divers
Rules, or the pontifical bulls, it seems natural to conclude that he was
equally accurate with the citations which we cannot verify, and in which
we find long extracts from works that have disappeared.[46]

The citations which he makes from Celano present no difficulty; they are
all accurate, corresponding sometimes with the First sometimes with the
Second Legend.[47]

Those from the Legend of the Three Companions are accurate, but it
appears that Bartolommeo drew them from a text somewhat different from
that which we have.[48]

With the citations from the _Legenda Antiqua_ the question is
complicated and becomes a nice one. Was there a work of this name?
Certain authors, and among them the Bollandist Suysken, seem to incline
toward the negative, and believe that to cite the _Legenda Antiqua_ is
about the same as to refer vaguely to tradition. Others among
contemporaries have thought that after the approbation and definitive
adoption of Bonaventura's _Legenda Major_ by the Order the Legends
anterior to that, and especially that of Celano, were called _Legenda
Antiqua_. The Conformities permit us to look a little closer into the
question. We find, in fact, passages from the _Legenda Antiqua_ which
reproduce Celano's First Life.[49] Others present points of contact
with the Second, sometimes a literary exactitude,[50] but often these
are the same stories told in too different a way for us to consider them
borrowed.[51]

Finally there are many of these extracts from the _Legenda Antiqua_ of
which we find no source in any of the documents already discussed.[52]
This would suffice to show that the two are not to be confounded. It has
absorbed them and brought about certain changes while completing them
with others.[53]

The study of the fragments which Bartolommeo has preserved to us shows
immediately that this collection belonged to the party of the Zealots of
Poverty; we might be tempted to see in it the work of Brother Leo.

Most fortunately there is a passage where Bartolommeo di Pisa cites as
being by Conrad di Offida a fragment which he had already cited before
as borrowed from the _Legenda Antiqua_.[54] I would not exaggerate the
value of an isolated instance, but it seems an altogether plausible
hypothesis to make Conrad di Offida the author of this compilation. All
that we know of him, of his tendencies, his struggle for the strict
observance, accords with what the known fragments of the _Legenda
Antiqua_ permit us to infer as to its author.[55]

However this may be, it appears that in this collection the stories have
been given us (the principal source being the Legend of Brother Leo or
the Three Companions before its mutilation) in a much less abridged form
than in the Second Life of Celano. This work is hardly more than a
second edition of that of Brother Leo, here and there completed with a
few new incidents, and especially with exhortations to perseverance
addressed to the persecuted Zealots.[56]

VIII. CHRONICLE OF GLASSBERGER[57]

Evidently this work, written about 1508, cannot be classed among the
sources properly so called; but it presents in a convenient form the
general history of the Order, and thanks to its citations permits us to
verify certain passages in the primitive legends of which Glassberger
had the MS. before his eyes. It is thus in particular with the chronicle
of Brother Giordano di Giano, which he has inserted almost bodily in his
own work.

IX. CHRONICLE OF MARK OF LISBON[58]

This work is of the same character as that of Glassberger; it can only
be used by way of addition. There is, however, a series of facts in
which it has a special value; it is when the Franciscan missions in
Spain or Morocco are in question. The author had documents on this
subject which did not reach the friars in distant countries.

FOOTNOTES:

   [1] _Chronica fratris Jordani a Giano._ The text was published
       for the first time in 1870 by Dr. G. Voigt under the title:
       "_Die Denkwürdigkeiten des Minoriten Jordanus von Giano_ in the
       _Abhandlungen der philolog. histor. Cl. der Königl. sächsischen
       Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften_," pp. 421-545, Leipsic, by
       Hirzel, 1870. Only one manuscript is known; it is in the royal
       library at Berlin (Manuscript. theolog. lat., 4to, n. 196, sæc.
       xiv., foliorum 141). It has served as the base of the second
       edition: _Analecta franciscana sive Chronica aliaque documenta
       ad historiam minorum spectantia. Ad Claras Aquas (Quaracchi) ex
       typographia collegii S. Bonaventuræ_, 1885, t. i., pp. 1-19.
       Except where otherwise noted, I cite entirely this edition, in
       which is preserved the division into sixty-three paragraphs
       introduced by Dr. Voigt.

   [2] Giord., 81.

   [3] He names more than twenty four persons.

   [4] It does not seem to me that we can look upon the account of
       the interview between Gregory IX. and Brother Giordano as
       rigorously accurate. Giord., 63.

   [5] _Liber de adventu Minorum in Angliam_, published under the
       title of _Monumenta Franciscana_ (in the series of _Rerum
       Britannicarum medii Ævi scriptores_, _Roll series_) in two
       volumes, 8vo; the first through the care of J. S. Brewer (1858),
       the second through that of R. Howlett (1882). This text is
       reproduced without the scientific dress of the _Analecta
       franciscana_, t. i., pp. 217-257. Cf. English Historical Review,
       v. (1890), 754. He has published an excellent critical edition
       of it, but unfortunately partial, in vol. xxviii., _Scriptorum_,
       of the _Monumenta Germaniæ Historica_ by Mr. Liebermann,
       Hanover, 1888, folio, pp. 560-569.

   [6] Eccl., 11; 13; 14; 15. Cf. Eccl., 14, where the author takes
       pains to say that Alberto of Pisa died at Rome, surrounded by
       English Brothers "_inter Anglicos_."

   [7] Eccl., 4; 12.

   [8] Eccl., 4; 5; 6; 7; 10; 12; 13; 14; 15.

   [9] It was published, but with many suppressions, in 1857, at
       Parma. The Franciscans of Quaracchi prepared a new edition of
       it, which appeared in the _Analecta Franciscana_. This work is
       in manuscript in the Vatican under no. 7260. Vide Ehrle.
       _Zeitschrift für kath. Theol._ (1883), t. vii., pp. 767 and 768.
       The work of Mr. Clédat will be read with interest: _De fratre
       Salembene et de ejus chronicæ auctoritate_, Paris, 4to, 1877,
       with fac simile.

  [10] Father Ehrle has published it, but unfortunately not
       entire, in the _Archiv._, t. ii., pp. 125-155, text of the close
       of the fifth and of the sixth tribulation; pp. 256-327 text of
       the third, of the fourth, and of the commencement of the fifth.
       He has added to it introductions and critical notes. For the
       parts not published I will cite the text of the Laurentian
       manuscript (Plut. 20, cod. 7), completed where possible with the
       Italian version in the National Library at Florence
       (Magliabecchina, xxxvii.-28). See also an article of Professor
       Tocco in the _Archivio storico italiano_, t. xvii. (1886), pp.
       12-36 and 243-61, and one of Mr. Richard's: Library of the École
       des chartes, 1884, 5th livr. p. 525. Cf. Tocco, the _Eresia nel
       medio Evo_, p. 419 ff. As to the text published by Döllinger in
       his _Beiträge zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters_, Münich,
       1890, 2 vols., 8vo, II. _Theil Dokumente_, pp. 417-427, it is of
       no use. It can only beget errors, as it abounds with gross
       mistakes. Whole pages are wanting.

  [11] _Archiv._, t. iii., pp. 406-409.

  [12] Vide _Archiv._, i., p. 557 ... "_Et hoc totum ex rapacitate
       et malignitate luporum pastorum qui voluerunt esse pastores, sed
       operibus negaverunt deum_," et seq. Cf., p. 562: "_Avaritia et
       symoniaca heresis absque pallio regnat et fere totum invasit
       ecclesie corpus_."

  [13] "_Qui excommunicat et hereticat altissimam evangelii
       paupertatem, excommunicatus est a Deo et hereticus coram
       Christo, qui est eterna et in commutabilis veritas._" _Arch._,
       i., p. 509. "_Non est potestas contra christum Dominum et contra
       evangelium._" Ib. p. 560. He closes one of his letters with a
       sentence of a mysticism full of serenity, and which lets us see
       to the bottom of the hearts of the Spiritual Brothers. "_Totum
       igitur studium esse debet quod unum inseparabiliter simus per
       Franciscum in Christo._" Ib., p. 564.

  [14] For example in the list of the first six generals of the
       Order.

  [15] The first (1219-1226) extends from the departure of St.
       Francis for Egypt up to his death; the second includes the
       generalate of Brother Elias (1232-1239); the third that of
       Crescentius (1244-1248); the fourth, that of Bonaventura
       (1257-1274); the fifth commences with the epoch of the council
       of Lyon (1274) and extends up to the death of the inquisitor,
       Thomas d'Aversa (1204). And the sixth goes from 1308 to 1323.

  [16] "_Supererant adhuc multi de sociis b. Francisci ... et alii
       non pauci de quibus ego vidi et ab ipsis audivi quæ narro._"
       Laur. Ms., cod. 7, pl. xx., f^o 24a: "_Qui passi sunt eam
       (tribulationem tertiam) socii fundatoris fratres Aegdius et
       Angelus, qui supererant me audiente referibant_." Laur. Ms., f^o
       27b. Cf., Italian Ms., xxxvii., 28, Magliab., f^o 138b.

  [17] The date of his death is unknown; on August 11, 1253, he
       was present at the death-bed of St. Clara.

  [18] Died April 23, 1261.

  [19] "_Quem (fratrem Jacobum de Massa) dirigente me fratre
       Johanne socio fratris prefati Egidii videre laboravi. Hic enim
       frater Johannes ... dixit mihi_...." _Arch._, ii., p. 279.

  [20] " ... _Tribulationes preteritas memoravi, ut audivi ab
       illis qui sustinuerunt eas et aliqua commemoravi de hiis que
       didici in quatuor legendis quas vidi et legi._" _Arch._, ii., p.
       135.--"_Vitam pauperis et humilis viri Dei Francisci trium
       ordinum fundatoris quatuor solemnes personæ scripserunt, fratres
       videlicet scientia et sanctitate præclari, Johannes et Thomas de
       Celano, frater Bonaventura unus post Beatum Franciscum Generalis
       Minister et vir miræ simplicitatis et sanctitatis frater Leo,
       ejusdem sancti Francisci socius. Has quatuor descriptiones seu
       historias qui legerit_...." Laurent. MS., pl. xx., c. 7, f^o 1a.
       Did the Italian translator think there was an error in this
       quotation? I do not know, but he suppressed it. At f^o 12a of
       manuscript xxxvii., 28, of the Magliabecchina, we read:
       "_Incominciano alcune croniche del ordine franciscano, come la
       vita del povero e humile servo di Dio Francesco fondatore del
       minorico ordine fu scripta da San Bonaventura e da quatro altri
       frati. Queste poche scripture ovveramente hystorie quello il
       quale diligentemente le leggiera, expeditamente potra cognoscere
       ... la vocatione la santita di San Francisco._"

  [21] Laur. MS., f^o 4b ff. On the other hand we read in a letter
       of Clareno: "_Ad hanc (paupertatem) perfecte servandam Christus
       Franciscum vocavit et elegit in hac hora novissima et precepit
       ei evangelicam assumere regulam, et a papa Innocentio fuit
       omnibus annuntiatum in concilio generali, quod de sua
       auctoritate et obedientia sanctus Franciscus evangelicam vitam
       et regulam assumpserat et Christo inspirante servare promiserat,
       sicut sanctus vir fr. Leo scribit et fr. Johannes de Celano._"
       _Archiv._, i., p. 559.

  [22] "_Audiens enim semel quorundam fratrum enormes excessus, ut
       fr. Thomas de Celano scribit, et malum exemplum per eos
       secularibus datum._" Laur. MS., f^o 13b. The passage which
       follows evidently refers to 2 Cel., 3, 93 and 112.

  [23] "_Et fecerunt de regula prima ministri removeri capitulum
       istud de prohibitionibus sancti evangelii, sicut frater Leo
       scribit._" Laur. Ms. f^o 12b. Cf. _Spec._, 9a, see p. 248. "_Nam
       cum rediisset de partibus ultramarinis, minister quidam
       loquebatur cum eo, ut frater Leo refert, de capitulo
       paupertatis_," f^o 13a, cf. _Spec._, 9a, "_S. Franciscus, teste
       fr. Leone, frequenter et cum multo studio recitabat fabulam ...
       quod oportebat finaliter ordinem humiliari et ad sue humilitatis
       principia confitenda et tenenda reduci_." _Archiv._, ii., p.
       129.

       There is only one point of contact between the Legend of the
       Three Companions, such as it is to-day, and these passages; but
       we find on the contrary revised accounts in the _Speculum_ and
       in the other collections, where they are cited as coming from
       Brother Leo.

  [24] Clareno, for example, holds that the Cardinal Ugolini had
       sustained St. Francis without approving of the first Rule, in
       concert with Cardinal Giovanni di San Paolo. This is possible,
       since Ugolini was created cardinal in 1198 (Vide Cardella:
       _Memorie storiche de' Cardinali_, 9 vols., 8vo, Rome, 1792-1793,
       t. i., pt. 2, p. 190). Besides this would better explain the
       zeal with which he protected the divers Orders founded by St.
       Francis, from 1217. The chapter where Clareno tells how St.
       Francis wrote the Rule shows the working over of the legend, but
       it is very possible that he has borrowed it in its present form
       from Brother Leo. It is to be noted that we do not find in this
       document a single allusion to the Indulgences of Portiuncula.

  [25] The manuscripts and editions are well-nigh innumerable. M.
       Luigi Manzoni has studied them with a carefulness that makes it
       much to be desired that he continue this difficult work. _Studi
       sui Fioretti_: Miscelenea, 1888, pp. 116-119, 150-152, 162-168;
       1889, 9-15, 78-84, 132-135. When shall we find some one who can
       and will undertake to make a scientific edition of them? Those
       which have appeared during our time in the various cities of
       Italy are insignificant from a critical point of view. See
       Mazzoni Guido, _Capitoli inediti dei Fioretti di S. Francesco_,
       in the _Propugnatore_, Bologna, 1888, vol. xxi., pp. 396-411.

  [26] Vide A. SS., p. 865: "_Floretum non legi, nec curandum
       putavi._" Cf. 553f: "_Floretum ad manum non habeo._"

  [27] Bartolommeo di Pisa compiled it in 1385; then certain
       manuscripts of the Fioretti are earlier. Besides, in the stories
       that the Conformities borrow from the Fioretti, we perceive
       Bartolommeo's work of abbreviation.

  [28] I am speaking here only of the fifty-three chapters which
       form the true collection of the Fioretti.

  [29] The province of the March of Ancona counted seven
       custodias: 1, Ascoli; 2, Camerino; 3, Ancona; 4, Jesi; 5, Fermo;
       6, Fano; 7, Felestro. The Fioretti mention at least six of the
       monasteries of the custodia of Fermo: Moliano, 51, 53;
       Fallerone, 32, 51; Bruforte and Soffiano, 46, 47; Massa, 51;
       Penna, 45; Fermo, 41, 49, 51.

  [30] At each page we are reminded of those groves which were
       originally the indispensable appendage of the Franciscan
       monasteries: _La selva ch' era allora allato a S. M. degli
       Angeli_, 3, 10, 15, 16, etc. _La selva d' un luogo deserto del
       val di Spoleto_ (Carceri?), 4; _selva di Forano_, 42. _di
       Massa_, 51, etc.

  [31] The _Speculum_, 46b, 58b, 158a, gives us three states. Cf.
       _Fior._, 26 and 21; _Conform._, 119b, 2.

  [32] This desire was so natural that the manuscript of the
       Angelica Library includes many additional chapters, concerning
       the gift of Portiuncula, the indulgence of August 2d, the birth
       of St. Francis, etc. (Vide Amoni, Fioretti, Roma, 1889, pp. 266,
       378-386.) It would be an interesting study to seek the origin of
       these documents and to establish their relationship with the
       Speculum and the Conformities. Vide _Conform._, 231a, 1; 121b;
       _Spec._, 92-96.

  [33] Ginepro was received into the Order by St. Francis. In 1253
       he was present at St. Clara's death. A. SS., _Aug._, t. ii., p.
       764d. The Conformities speak of him in detail, f^o 62b.

  [34] The first seven chapters form a whole. The three which
       follow are doubtless a first attempt at completing them.

  [35] Conformities, f^o 55b, 1-60a, 1.

  [36] See _Archiv._, t. i., p. 145, an article of Father Denifle:
       _Zur Quellenkunde der Franziskaner Geschichte_, where he
       mentions at least eight manuscripts of this work. Cf. Ehrle:
       _Zeitschrift_, 1883, p. 324, note 3. I have studied only the two
       manuscripts of Florence: Riccardi, 279, paper, 243 fos. of two
       cols. recently numbered. The Codex of the Laurentian Gaddian.
       rel., 53, is less careful. It is also on paper, 20 x 27, and
       counts 254 fos. of 1 column. F^o 1 was formerly numbered 88. The
       order of the chapters is not the same as in the preceding.

  [37] The citations are always made from the edition of Milan,
       1510, 4to of 256 folios of two columns. The best known of the
       subsequent editions are those of Milan, 1513, and Bologna, 1590.

  [38] He began it in 1385 (f^o 1), and it was authorized by the
       chapter general August 2, 1399 (f^o 256a, 1). Besides, on f^o
       150a, 1, he set down the date when he was writing. It was in
       1390.

  [39] I am not here concerned with the foolish attacks of certain
       Protestant authors upon this life. That is a quarrel of the
       theologians which in no way concerns history. Nowhere does
       Bartolommeo of Pisa make St. Francis the equal of Jesus, and he
       was able even to forestall criticism in this respect. The
       Bollandists are equally severe: "_Cum Pisanus fuerit scriptor
       magis pius et credulus quam crisi severa usus_...." A. SS., p.
       551e.

  [40] He has avoided the mistakes so unfortunately committed by
       Wadding in his list of ministers general. Vide 66a. 2, 104a, 1,
       118b, 2. He was lecturer on theology at Bologna, Padua, Pisa,
       Sienna, and Florence. He preached for many years and with great
       success in the principal villages of the Peninsula and could
       thus take advantage of his travels by collecting useful notes.
       Mark of Lisbon has preserved for us a notice of his life. Vide
       _Croniche dei fratri Minori_, t. iii., p. 6 ff. of the Diola
       edition. He died December 10, 1401. For further details see
       Wadding, ann. 1399, vii., viii., and above all Sbaralea,
       _Supplementum_, p. 109. He is the author of an exposition of the
       Rule little known which can be found in the Speculum Morin,
       Rouen, 1509, f^o 66b-83a, of part three.

  [41] This opinion is expressed in a guarded manner. For example,
       f^o 207a, 1, Bartolommeo relates the miracle of the Chapter of
       the Mats, first following St. Bonaventura, then adding: "_Et
       quia non aliter tangit dicta pars (legendæ majoris) hoc insigne
       miraculum: antiqua legenda hoc refertur in hunc modum_." Cf.
       225a, 2m. "_Et quia fr. Bonaventura succincte multa tangit et in
       brevi: pro evidentia prefatorum notandum est ... ut dicit
       antiqua legenda._"

  [42] However, it is necessary to note that not only are there
       considerable differences between the editions published, but
       also that the first (that of Milan, 1510) has been completed and
       revised by its editor. The judgments passed upon Raymond
       Ganfridi, 104a, 1, and Boniface VIII., 103b, 1, show traces of
       later corrections. (Cf. 125a, 1. At f^o 72a, 2m, is indicated
       the date of the death of St. Bernardin, which was in 1444, etc.)
       Besides, we are surprised to find beside the pages where the
       sources are indicated with clearness others where stories follow
       one another coming one knows not from whence.

  [43] F^o 70a, 1: "_Cujus nomen non reperi._" 1a, 2: "_Multaque
       non ex industria sed quia ea noscere non valui omittendo._"

  [44] F^o 78a, 1: _Informationes quas non scribo quia imperfectas
       reperi._ Cf. 229b, 2: "_De aliis multis apparitionibus non
       reperi scripturam, quare hic non pono._"

  [45] F^o 69a, 1: "_Hec ut audivi posui quia ejus legendam non
       vidi._" Cf. 68b, 2m: _Fr. Henricus generalis minister mihi
       magistro Bartholomeo dixit ipse oretenus._

  [46] The citations from Bonaventura are decidedly more frequent.
       We should not be surprised, since this story is the official
       biography of St. Francis; the chapter from which Bartolommeo
       takes his quotations is almost always indicated, and, naturally,
       follows the old division in five parts. Opening the book at
       hazard at folio 136a I find no less than six references to the
       _Legenda Major_ in the first column. To give an idea of the
       style of Bartolommeo of Pisa I shall give in substance the
       contents of a page of his book. See, for example, f^o 111a (lib.
       i., conform. x., pars. ii., Franciscus predicator). In the third
       line he cites Bonaventura: "_Fr. Bonaventura in quarta parte
       majoris legende dicit quod b. Franciscus videbatur intuentibus
       homo alterius seculi._" Textual citation of Bonaventure, 45.
       Three lines further on: "_Verum qualis esset b. F. quoad
       personam sic habetur in legenda antiqua ... homo facundissimus,
       facie hilaris_, etc." The literal citation of the sketch of
       Francis follows as 1 Celano, 83, gives it as far as: "_inter
       peccatores quasi unus ex illis_," and to mark the end of the
       quotation Bartolommeo adds: "_Hec legenda antiqua_." In the next
       column paragraph 4 commences with the words: _B. Francisci
       predicationem reddebat mirabilem et gloriosam ipsius sancti
       loquutio: etenim legenda trium Sociorum dicit et Legenda major
       parte tertia: B. Francisei eloquia erant non inania, neo risu
       digna_, etc., which corresponds literally with 3 Soc., 25, and
       Bon., 28. Then come two chapters of Bonaventura almost entire,
       beginning with: _In duodecima parte legende majoris dicit Fr.
       Bonaventura: Erat enim verbum ejus_, etc. Textual quotation of
       Bon., 178 and 179. The page ends with another quotation from
       Bonaventura: _Sic dicebat prout recitat Bonaventura in octava
       parte Legende majoris: Hac officium patri misericordiarum_. Vide
       Bonav., 102 end and 103 entire. This suffices without doubt to
       show with what precision the authorities have been quoted in
       this work, with what attention and confidence ought to be
       examined those portions of documents lost or mislaid which he
       has here preserved for us.

  [47] F^o 31b, 2: _ut dicit fr. Thomas in sua legenda_, cf. 2
       Cel., 3, 60.--140a, 2: _Fr. in leg. fr. Thome_, cf. 2 Cel., 3,
       60.--140a 1, cf. 2 Cel., 3 16.--142b, 1: _Fr. in leg. Thome
       capitulo de charitate_, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 115.--144b, 1: _Fr. in
       leg. fr. Thome capitulo de oratione_, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 40.--144b,
       1, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 65.--144b, 2, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 78.--176b, 2, cf.
       2 Cel., 3, 79.--182b, 2, cf. 2 Cel., 2, 1.--241b, 1, cf. 2 Cel.,
       3, 141.--181a, 2, cf. 1 Cel., 27. It is needless to say that
       these lists of quotations do not pretend to be complete.

  [48] F^o 36b, 2. _Ut enim habetur in leg._ 3 Soc., cf. 3 Soc.,
       10.--46b, 1, cf. 3 Soc., 25-28.--38b 2, cf. 3 Soc. 3.--111a, 2,
       cf. 3 Soc., 25.--134a, 2, cf. 3 Soc., 4.--142b, 2, cf. 3 Soc., 57
       and 58.--167b, 2, cf. 3 Soc., 3 and 8.--168a, 1, cf. 3 Soc.,
       10.--170b, 1, cf. 3 Soc., 39, 4.--175b, 2, cf. 3 Soc.,
       59.--180b, 2, cf. 3 Soc., 4.--181a, 1, cf. 3 Soc., 5, 7, 24, 33,
       and 67.--181a. 2, cf. 3 Soc., 36.--229b, 2, cf. 3 Soc., 14. etc.
       The reading of 3 Soc. which Bartolommeo had before his eyes was
       pretty much the same we have to day, for he says, 181a, 2.
       referring to 3 Soc., 67: "_Ut habetur quasi in fine leg_. 3
       _Soc._"

  [49] F^o 111a, 1, _Sic habetur in leg. ant._, corresponds
       literally with 1 Cel., 83.--144a, 2. _Franciscus in leg. ant.
       cap. v. de zelo ad religionem_, to 1 Cel. 106.

  [50] F^o 111b, 1. _De predicantibus loqueus sic dicebat in ant.
       leg._ Cf. 2 Cel., 3, 99 and 106. 140b, 1. Cf. 2 Cel., 3,
       84.--144b, 1, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 45--144a, 1, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 95 and
       15.--225b, 2, cf. 2 Cel., 3, 116.

  [51] F^o 31a, 1. Vide 2 Cel., 3, 83.--143a, 2. Vide 2 Cel., 3,
       65 and 116.--144a, 1. Vide 2 Cel., 3, 94.--170b. 1. Vide 2 Cel.,
       3, 11.

  [52] F^o 14a, 2.--32a. 1.--101a, 2.--169b, 1.--144b, 2.--142a,
       2.--143b, 2.--168b, 1.--144b, 1.

  [53] Chapters 18 (chapter of the mats) and 25 (lepers cured) of
       the _Fioretti_ are found in Latin in the Conf. as borrowed from
       the Leg. Ant. Vide 174b, 1, and 207a. 1.

       Finally, according to f^o 168b, 2, it is also from the Leg. Ant.
       that the description of the coat, such as we find at the end of
       the _Chronique des Tribulations_, was borrowed. See _Archiv._,
       t. ii., p. 153.

  [54] F^o 182a, 2; cf. 51b, 1; 144a, 1.

  [55] He died December 12, 1306, at Bastia, near Assisi. See upon
       him _Chron. Tribul. Archiv._, ii.; 311 and 312; _Conform._, 60,
       119, and 153.

  [56] Although the history of the Indulgence of Portiuncula was
       of all subjects the one most largely treated in the
       Conformities, 151b, 2--157a, 2, not once does Bartolommeo of
       Pisa refer to it in the _Legenda Antiqua_. It seems, then, that
       this collection also was silent as to this celebrated pardon.

  [57] Published with extreme care by the Franciscan Fathers of
       the Observance in t. ii. of the _Analecta Franciscana, ad Claræ
       Aquas_ (Quaracchi, near Florence), 1888, 1 vol., crown 8vo, of
       xxxvi.-612 pp. This edition, as much from the critical point of
       view of the text, its correctness, its various readings and
       notes, as from the material point of view, is perfect and makes
       the more desirable a publication of the chronicles of the xxiv.
       generals and of Salimbeni by the same editors. The beginning up
       to the year 1262 has been published already by Dr. Karl Evers
       under the title _Analecta ad Fratrum Minorum historiam_,
       Leipsic, 1882, 4to of 89 pp.

  [58] I have been able only to procure the Italian edition
       published by Horatio Diola under the title _Croniche degli
       Ordini instituti dal P. S. Francesco_, 3 vols., 8vo, Venice,
       1606.

V

CHRONICLES OUTSIDE OF THE ORDER

I. JACQUES DE VITRY

The following documents, which we can only briefly indicate, are of
inestimable value; they emanate from men particularly well situated to
give us the impression which the Umbrian prophet produced on his
generation.

Jacques de Vitry[1] has left extended writings on St. Francis. Like a
prudent man who has already seen many religious madmen, he is at first
reserved; but soon this sentiment disappears, and we find in him only a
humble and active admiration for the _Apostolic Man_.

He speaks of him in a letter which he wrote immediately after the taking
of Damietta (November, 1219), to his friends in Lorraine, to describe it
to them.[2] A few lines suffice to describe St. Francis and point out
his irresistible influence. There is not a single passage in the
Franciscan biographers which gives a more living idea of the apostolate
of the Poverello.

He returns to him more at length in his _Historia Occidentalis_,
devoting to him the thirty-second chapter of this curious work.[3]
These pages, vibrating with enthusiasm, were written during Francis's
lifetime,[4] at the time when the most enlightened members of the
Church, who had believed themselves to be living in the evening of the
world, _in vespere mundi tendentis ad occasum_, suddenly saw in the
direction of Umbria the light of a new day.

II. THOMAS OF SPALATO

An archdeacon of the Cathedral of Spalato, who in 1220 was studying at
Bologna, has left us a very living portrait of St. Francis and the
memory of the impression which his preachings produced in that learned
town.[5]

Something of his enthusiasm has passed into his story; we feel that that
day, August 15, 1220, when he met the Poverello of Assisi, was one of
the best of his life.[6]

III. DIVERS CHRONICLES

The continuation of William of Tyre[7] brings us a new account of
Francis's attempt to conquer the Soudan. This narrative, the longest of
all three we have on this subject, contains no feature essentially new,
but it gives one more witness to the historic value of the Franciscan
legends.

Finally, there are two chronicles written during Francis's life, which,
without giving anything new, speak with accuracy of his foundation, and
prove how rapidly that religious renovation which started in Umbria was
being propagated to the very ends of Europe. The anonymous chronicler of
Monte Sereno[8] in fact wrote about 1225, and tells us, not without
regret, of the brilliant conquests of the Franciscans.

Burchard,[9] Abbot Prémontré d'Ursberg (died in 1226), who was in Rome
in 1211, leaves us a very curious criticism of the Order.

The Brothers Minor appeared to him a little like an orthodox branch of
the Poor Men of Lyons. He even desires that the pope, while approving
the Franciscans, should do so with a view to satisfy, in the measure of
the possible, the aspirations manifested by that heresy and that of the
Humiliati.

It is impossible to attribute any value whatever to the long pages given
to St. Francis by Matthew Paris.[10] His information is correct
wherever the activities of the friars are concerned, and he could
examine the work around him.[11] They are absolutely fantastic when he
comes to the life of St. Francis, and we can only feel surprised to find
M. Hase[12] adopting the English monk's account of the stigmata.

The notice which he gives of Francis contains as many errors as
sentences; he makes him born of a family illustrious by its nobility,
makes him study theology from his infancy (_hoc didicerat in litteris et
theologicis disciplinis quibus ab ætate tenera incubuerat, usque ad
notitiam perfectam_), etc.[13]

It would be useless to enlarge this list and mention those chroniclers
who simply noticed the foundation of the Order, its approbation, and the
death of St. Francis,[14] or those which spoke of him at length, but
simply by copying a Franciscan legend.[15]

It suffices to point out by way of memory the long chapter consecrated
to St. Francis in the Golden Legend. Giachimo di Voraggio ([Cross]
1298) there sums up with accuracy but without order the essential
features of the first legends and in particular the Second Life by
Celano.[16]

As for the inscription of Santa Maria del Vescovado at Assisi it is too
unformed to be anything but a simple object of curiosity.[17]

I have given up preparing a complete bibliography of works concerning
St. Francis, that task having been very well done by the Abbé Ulysse
Chevalier in his _Répertoire des sources historiques du moyen age_,
Bio-Bibliographie, cols. 765-767 and 2588-2590, Paris, 1 vol., 4to,
1876-1888. To it I refer my readers.

FOOTNOTES:

   [1] He was born at Vitry sur Seine, became Curé of Argenteuil,
       near Paris; Canon of Oignies, in the diocese of Namur, preached
       the crusade against the Albigenses, and accompanied the
       Crusaders to Palestine; having been made Bishop of Acre, he was
       present in 1219 at the siege and at the capture of Damietta and
       returned to Europe in 1225; created Cardinal-bishop of Frascati
       in 1229, he died in 1244, leaving a number of writings. For his
       life, see the preface of his _Historiæ_, edition of Douai, 1597.

   [2] This letter may be found in (Bongars) _Gesta Dei per
       Francio_, pp. 1146-1149.

   [3] _Jacobi de Vitriaco Libri duo quorum prior Orientalis, alter
       Occidentalis Historiæ nomine inscribitur studio Fr. Moschi Duaci
       ex officina Balthazaris Belleri_, 1597, 16mo, 480 pp. Chapter
       xxxii. fills pages 349-353, and is entitled _De ordine et
       prædicatione fratrum Minorum_. See above, p. 229.

   [4] This appears from the passage: _Videmus primus ordinis
       fundatorem magestrum cui tanquam summo Priori suo omnes alii
       obediunt._ _Loc. cit._, p. 352.

   [5] It is inserted in the treatise of Sigonius on the bishops of
       Bologna: _Caroli Sigonii de episcopis Bononiensibus libri
       quinque cum notis L. C. Rabbii_, a work which occupies cols.
       353-590 of t. iii. of his _Opera omnia_, Milan, 1732-1737, 6
       vols., f^o. We find our fragment in col. 432.

   [6] This passage will be found above, p. 241.

   [7] _Guillelmi Tyrensis arch. Continuala belli sacri historia_
       in Martène: _Amplissima Collectio_, t. v. pp. 584-572. The piece
       concerning Francis is cols. 689-690.

   [8] _Chronicon Montis Sereni_ (at present Petersberg, near
       Halle), edited by Ehrenfeuchter in the _Mon. Germ. hist.
       Script._, t. 23, pp. 130-226, 229.

   [9] _Burchardi et Cuonradi Urspergensium chronicon_ ed., A. Otto
       Abel and L. Weiland, _apud Mon. Germ, hist._, t. 23, pp.
       333-383. The monastery of Ursperg was half-way between Ulm and
       Augsburg. Vide p. 376.

  [10] _Matthæi Parisiensis monachie Albanensis, Historia major_,
       edition Watts, London, 1640. The Brothers Minor are first
       mentioned in the year 1207, p. 222, then 1227, pp. 339-342.

  [11] See the article, _Minores_, in the table of contents of the
       _Mon. Germ. hist. Script._, t. xxviii.

  [12] _Franz von Assisi_, p. 168 ff.

  [13] See above, p. 97, his story of the audience with Innocent
       III.

  [14] For example, _Chronica Albrici trium fontium_ in Pertz:
       _Script._, t. 23, _ad ann. 1207_, 1226, 1228. Vide Fragment of
       the chron. of Philippe Mousket ([Cross] before 1245). _Recueil des
       historiens_, t. xxii., p. 71, lines 30347-30360. The number of
       annalists in this century is appalling, and there is not one in
       ten who has omitted to note the foundation of the Minor
       Brothers.

  [15] For example, Vincent de Beauvais ([Cross] 1264) gives in his
       _Speculum historiale_, lib. 29, cap. 97-99, lib. 30, cap.
       99-111, nearly every story given by the Bollandists under the
       title of _Secunda legenda_ in their _Commentarium prævium_.

  [16] _Legenda aurea_, Graesse, Breslau, 1890, pp. 662-674.

  [17] A good reproduction of it will be found in the _Miscellanea
       francescana_, t. ii., pp. 33-37, accompanied by a learned
       dissertation by M. Faloci Pulignani.

APPENDIX

CRITICAL STUDY OF THE STIGMATA AND THE INDULGENCE OF AUGUST 2

I. THE STIGMATA

A dissertation upon the possibility of miracles would be out of place
here; a historic sketch is not a treatise on philosophy or dogmatics.

Still, I owe the reader a few explanations, to enable him with thorough
understanding to judge of my manner of viewing the subject.

If by miracle we understand either the suspension or subversion of the
laws of nature, or the intervention of the first cause in certain
particular cases, I could not concede it. In this negation physical and
logical reasons are secondary; the true reason--let no one be