(Planc. 13, 31.) And Seneca, in the book already quoted, writes: "Clementia est temperantia animi in potestate ulciscendi, vel lenitas in constituendis poenis." (Clem. 2, 3.) In this sense we find the word frequently employed in the Vulgate version of the Bible. Moses, for example, when the Lord appeared to him in a cloud, on the mountain, cried out: "Dominator Domine Deus, misericors, et clemens, patiens et multae miserationis ac verax." (Ex. xxxiv. 6.) Again, in the prayer of the Levites, recorded in the Second Book of Esdras, we read: "Tu autem Deus propitius, clemens et misericors, longanimis et multae miserationis non dereliquisti eos." (II. Esd. ix. 17.) And in the Third Book of Kings: "Audivimus quod reges domus Israel clementes sint; ponamus igitur saccos in lumbis nostris, et funiculos in capitibus nostris, et egrediamur ad regem Israel: forsitan salvabit animas nostras." (III. Kings xx. 31.) The Prophet Jonas, too, says: "Scio enim quia tu Deus clemens et misericors, patiens et multae miserationis, et ignoscens super malitia." (Jon. iv. 2.) Now as regards the translation of this word into English. The usual practice in the Douay version is this: when clemens. in the original, is accompanied by misericors, it is translated gracious; when it is not so accompanied, it is translated merciful. A similar practice seems to have been followed by the authors of the Protestant English version, in translating from the Hebrew. Where we have clemens et misericors in the Vulgate, we generally find gracious and merciful, in the Protestant version; where we have clemens alone, we usually find merciful. If, then, there were question of making a translation, for the first time, of the Salve Regina, I should be inclined to follow this usage, and to render clemens by merciful or gracious. But I do not think the English word clement so inadequate as to make a change necessary. When Tertullus, the orator, in the Acts of the Apostles, prayed for an indulgent hearing before the governor, Felix, his words are thus rendered in the Douay version: “I desire thee, of thy clemency, to hear us." (Acts xxiv. 4.) The Protestant authorized version uses the same phrase: "I pray thee, that thou wouldst hear us, of thy clemency." We have also the authority of Shakespeare, for this use of the word. The players in Hamlet thus pray for the indulgent favour of the King and his Court : "For us, and for our tragedy, Here stooping to your clemency We beg your hearing patiently." Act III., sc. ii, And, in Cymbeline, Posthumus says, addressing the gods :- VOL. VI. A sixth, a tenth, letting them thrive again Act V., sc. iv. 2 B To sum up: I would retain the word sweet, as the best translation that can be found for the Latin dulcis; I would retain clement, as at least a suitable translation for clemens, and one, therefore, which there is no need to change; and I would substitute tender for pious. The line would then read:— "O clement! O tender! O sweet Virgin Mary!" Believe me, Rev, dear Sir, yours very faithfully, GERALD MOLLOY. NOTICES OF BOOKS. Auctore Dissertationes Selectae in Historiam Ecclesiasticam. BERNARDO JUNGMANN; Tomus IV. Ratisbonae: Pustet, 1884. The judicious selection of a number of important subjects, and the ability with which they are discussed, render the Fourth Volume of Jungmann's Select Dissertations a worthy companion of his preceding volumes, which have been already brought under notice in the pages of the RECORD.' The work before us comprises five Dissertations. The First of the Volume, and Eighteenth of the Series, treats of the Roman Pontiffs of the tenth century; the next discusses "certain Controversies of the eleventh century, and the relations of Otho I. and his immediate successors with the Holy See." Then follow three dissertations: "On the State of the Church in the middle of the Eleventh Century"; "On S. Gregory VII., Roman Pontift"; and "On the Continuation and Close of the Controversy regarding Investiture." It is no exaggeration to say that in the whole range of Church History, few subjects are to be met with possessing a deeper interest for those who study the records of the past, or which have given rise to keener polemical discussion, than the subject so fully and so carefully examined by Dr. Jungmann in his Eighteenth Dissertation. To present the matter in this light a few observations are required. The interval between the close of the Fifth, and that of the Fifteenth century, may, in accordance with a very commonly received chronological division of History, be assumed as the duration of the "Middle Ages." The opprobrious designation of "Dark Ages" was applied, if not to all, to many of the centuries falling between the limits of medieval History. Dazzled by the lingering light of the Augustan Age, and by the lustre shed on ecclesiastical literature by the great Fathers of the early Church, critics, who declined the labour of deep research and looked back from an age in which a revival of letters had been established and a new era of progress inaugurated, judged too harshly and !See IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD, October, 1880-'81, and February, 1883, for brief notes of Vols. I., II., and III., under these dates respectively. condemned too hastily the social and literary condition of those centuries to which they have given the dishonouring name of "Dark Ages." At the present day they are very few, with any pretension to scholarship, who should not blush to be found sneering at the Middle Ages-few who would not be ashamed to say: I know nothing of those ages which knew nothing." We are indebted to the learned and impartial researches of Maitland, Voigt, Hurter, Boehmer, Gallé, Grimm, Daniel, Müller, Montalembert, and many other authors with whom medieval history has been a special study, for abundant evidence to prove that the disparaging statements of several popular writers regarding the learning, knowledge, and literature of the Middle Ages, even in the darkest days, are not only exaggerated but false. Between the middle of the Fifth and the beginning of the Twelfth century, there were periods when the task of preserving society from ignorance and corruption was one of extreme difficulty. One of those periods dates almost from the death in 814 of Charlemagne, and runs far into the tenth century. The splendour of the reign of that great prince was transient, the improvements he effected were not maintained, the progress of science was interrupted, and insecurity and anarchy returned, because he had no successor who inherited those rare qualities which won for him a title that "has been indissolubly blended with his name "—the appellation of Great. Louis le Debonnaire was embroiled in civil war with his own sons, and these with each other. Whilst the mighty empire founded by Charlemagne was torn by intestine dissension, a new swarm of barbarians threatened the growing civilization of Christian Europe. Normans, Saracens, and Hungarians filled Western Europe during the greater part of the ninth and tenth centuries with terror, and left many a sad vestige of their sudden and ruinous incursions. On the death of Louis le Debonnaire in 840, the empire of Charlemagne was broken up into an Eastern or German, and a Western or Frankish, Kingdom. The Carlovingian dynasty, founded in 752, came to an end in the German Kingdom in 911; and in the Frankish Kingdom in 987. It was in the midst of these convulsions that the tenth century was ushered in. The distracted condition of France and the feeble government of the degenerate Carlovingians rendered hopeless any chance of protection from that quarter in favour of the Popes. The disputed claims of candidates for the Imperial Crown of Germany caused the protectorate, the protectorate, exercised by Charlemagne and his successors, in upholding the rights and privileges of the Holy See, to pass into abeyance. Italy, abandoned by the Emperors, became the prey of petty princes, and Rome itself felt the shock. The counts of Tusculum and Margraves of Tuscany exercised a tyranny within the Fapal Territory, and in the capital of the Christian world. The freedom of Papal election was for a time at an end. The Papacy was regarded by every paltry faction in the enjoyment of a brief ascendency as a mere political engine, and the interests of religion were unscrupulously sacrificed to the lowest intrigues of worldly ambition. The Popes of the tenth century are described by a certain class of Protestant writers, including Mosheim and Milman, as ignorant and vicious, and disqualified for the duties of guardians of the interests of the Church. Their history is presented in still darker colours by a host of nameless scribes, who pander to the morbid tastes of anti-Catholic readers by detailing with a zest every scandal that calumny has invented or strangely exaggerated. With a view to refute these unfounded statements or to expose their vagueness and inaccuracy, to set forth the history of the Popes of the tenth century in a true light, and to reverse the judgments that have been unfairly pronounced against them. Dr. Jungmann critically examines the evidence which is to decide the question, and avails himself of every help which modern research supplies in throwing light on the difficult points which arise in the investigation. The brief sketch which we have drawn of the political and social condition of the age to which his inquiry relates will enable us to estimate the importance and the difficulty of the task which he has undertaken. We believe that a careful perusal of what he has to say will have the effect of inducing every impartial reader to form a decidedly favourable opinion of the maligned Pontiffs of the tenth century, and to pronounce them, with a few exceptions, not unworthy of the elevated and responsible position in which they were placed. We do not hesitate to assert that, as the "Dark Ages" have become brighter by the light thrown upon them by the patience and skill of the writers already named, so the Lives of the Popes of the tenth century, a few excepted. will be rescued, by the diligence and learning of authors like Dr. Jungmann, from the misrepresentation with which they have been sullied, whether from ignorance or malice. Even in the exceptional instances referred to, the degree of weakness or guilt is shown to be less than what it has hitherto been commonly regarded. We feel that we are going beyond the bounds of a brief literary notice, but before we close we may be permitted to add a word or two. The theological student will find the Dissertations on Ordination and Marriage equally instructive and interesting. Nor can we too strongly recommend the perusal of the powerful picture which Dr. Jungmann has drawn of the difficult problem to which the renowned Hildebrand had to address himself, and of the great and abiding success with which he solved it. No one who has had an opportunity of knowing what Dr. Jungmann has already done in advancing the study of theology and church history has failed to appreciate his vast services, or will be slow to unite in a sincere wish that he may long continue to enrich that department of ecclesiastical science to which he is now devoted, with contributions equal in merit and value to that which he has lately given us.—D. G. THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD. JUNE, 1885. COMPULSORY EDUCATION. W THEN introducing his Bill to improve National Education in Ireland, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman was very sparing of proof that could justify the application of the principle of compulsion to this country. His calculation as to attendance at school was made upon the same basis as that of the Census Commissioners which has been allowed to pass for months unchallenged, and which, as I shall show, is calculated to mislead the public. Before doing so, I would call attention to the comparative analysis of attendance as furnished by the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland in their last report. "The percentage of average attendance of pupils for the year to the number on the rolls who attended on any of the last fourteen days of the month preceding the annual examinations was 70.2. In 1882, this percentage was 69 1. The percentages in 1883 were in England and Wales, 73-2; in Scotland, 761." England with its compulsory law is barely above Ireland; but in fact, when allowance is made for the want of schools, and for the quality of a large number already existing, as well as for the distance from the homes of the children, and other causes too obvious to mention, education is more availed of in Ireland than in England. Only per cent. of a gain in school attendance in the richest nation in the world over the poorest, at a cost of millions of pounds to create and sustain the modern system; at the sacrifice of liberty and to the dishonour of the poor, and already midst cries of overpressure, underfeeding and cruelty. A stronger objection to the working of it could not be afforded than the admission that 27 per cent. of schoolgoing age in England do not comply with the compulsory law of education, VOL. VI. 2 C |