Among the comparatively rare ὲκΦράσ∊ις τόπου included by Vergil in his epic, is the description (Aen. 1.159–169) of the Libyan estuary which gives harbor to the remnants of the Trojan fleet. The Homeric pattern (Od. 13.96–112) to which Vergil is indebted, is a portrayal of the haven of Phorcys, consisting in largest part of a picture of the cave sacred to the Naiades (105–112). As has been pointed out, the cave is an idyllic abode brimming with life. All objects mentioned as furnishing the interior are described as being of stone: mixing vessels and jars in which bees store up honey, and very tall looms “whereon the nymphs weave raiment of sea-purple.” It should be observed also that all the articles are, in the normal order of things, hand-fashioned and adventitious—human imports.

L'Essai que nous présentons constitue le premier chapitre d'une étude plus compréhensive sur l'Idée d'évolution chez S. Irénée. Encore qu'elles soient amputées d'une introduction aux fins de définir ce terme d'évolution, nous croyons que les pages qu'on va lire ont un sens par elles-mêmes et que leur intelligence reste entière, même si l'on ajourne provisoirement le contexte total où les situer. Notre propos se donne donc comme une enquête sur la mentalité d'Irénée et ses orientations théologiques possibles. Si prévenu qu'on puisse être contre le critère psychologique en critique, nous le croyons cette fois urgent et nous tentons de lui attribuer la fonction précise de caractériser une oeuvre dont les sources demeurent, par ailleurs, hypothétiques et plus ou moins invérifiables.

The most important source for our knowledge of the Gallican liturgy is the so-called Expositio Brevis Antiquae Liturgiae Gallicanae. It is preserved in a Codex of the Abbey of St. Martin at Autun, at present in the library of the Seminary of Autun, the only manuscript of this valuable document which we possess. The Expositio consists of two letters, the first of which describes the rite of the Gallican Mass, while the second deals with diversa ecclesiae carismata, that is, with the Baptismal rite, liturgical vestments, antiphons, responses, etc. The question naturally arises as to the authorship of these valuable letters and also as to when they were written.

The following Latin version, hitherto unpublished, of the Byzantine Liturgies of St. Basil and St. John Chrysostom was generously placed at my disposal by my confrère, the late lamented Dom André Wilmart, O.S.B., who about seventeen years ago discovered and transcribed it from a manuscript purchased at London in 1899 by the Bibliothèque Nationale: Nouv. Acq. lat. 1791 Since the manuscript was written in the second half of the twelfth century, this translation is—to put it roughly—at least as old as that of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (= X) made at Constantinople about 1180 by the Pisan interpreter, Leo Tuscus, or that of the Liturgy of St. Basil (= B) made shortly afterward by Nicholas of Otranto. But it is important to note at the outset that the present translation represents a considerably earlier redaction of the Liturgies than do the two aforesaid versions, for we have here, as in the earliest of our manuscripts, the Barberinum S. Marci (= BSM), and several others, the prayers of the celebrant only and a corresponding minimum of rubrics. Of special significance, moreover, are the two following facts: first, the precedence given to B, an arrangement found in comparatively few manuscripts, among them the oldest which we know; and secondly, the occurrence in this same Liturgy of ancient rubrics and of the ancient form of at least one exclamation of the deacon, which point to a very early recension as the original from which the translator worked. On the other hand, over against this ancient form stands a relatively modern text, for not only are certain prayers which appear in the most ancient manuscripts only, missing from this translation, but in those few prayers also in the tradition of which it is possible to distinguish an older from a more recent set of readings, it is the latter which are almost invariably found. Similarly, the indication of certain acclamations by the initial words only (an ancient trait) and the writing out of the ἐκΦωνήσ∊ις in full (a very late practice) constitute another combination of ancient and recent features. But to attempt on the basis of these characteristics to fix the date of either the original or the translation, is to face possibilities only, concerning which it would be useless to speculate.

Georgia was, at the time of the Russian annexation at the beginning of the last century, the only country in Christendom whose socio-political and cultural development dated uninterruptedly from Classical times. Yet hers are perhaps the only important history and culture that are almost totally unknown to the West. Needless to say, this lack of familiarity extends to the Georgian historical writings as well. However, whereas Georgian history and culture are simply little known, regarding the Georgian historical sources there exist also misunderstanding and misinformation. Nevertheless, the value of these sources and their importance, not only for the history of Caucasia, but generally for that of the Christian East, have now found universal recognition among specialists. Therefore, a presentation of a systematic account, based on the latest research, of these monuments of Georgian historical literature, should be of interest to Western scholars. But no such presentation has, to our knowledge, ever been attempted. To do this is the aim of the present study.

Obwohl über die Bedeutung des Nominalismus kein Zweifel besteht, sind wir über viele Einzelheiten seiner Geschichte noch immer ziemlich unvollständig unterrichtet. So fehlt vor allem, was sehr zu bedauern ist, eine Zusammenstellung der Summe der Lehren, die den Nominalisten gemeinsam waren. Für den späteren Nominalismus hat sich bei Gelegenheit seiner Arbeit über Petrus von Candia F Ehrle der Mühe unterzogen, nach Massgabe der ihm während des Krieges in München zur Verfügung stehenden Materialien die Characteristica aufzusuchen und darzustellen. In seiner ungemein wertvollen, anregenden und richtunggebenden Schrift, Über die Scholastik und ihre Aufgaben in unserer Zeit, hat er noch einmal Stellung dazu genommen und sich hierbei zu der zwischen M. de Wulf und M. Baumgartner spielenden Kontroverse über den Namen der Richtung geäussert. Auch B. Geyer hat dem späten Nominalismus eine eingehende Darstellung gewidmet. An den Arbeiten von C. Michalski darüber bedaueren wir nur, dass sie lediglich als kurze Bulletins der Polnischen Akademie der Wissenschaften erscheinen konnten. Für die Frühscholastik hat wohl J. Reiners treffliche Arbeit geleistet, ohne aber die ganze Zeit oder auch die gesamte Fülle der Probleme zu erfassen. Ausserdem hat dann noch der achte Jahrgang des Bulletin Thomiste einige wertvolle Angaben gebracht.

The following study has a threefold aim: (1) to give an historically exact interpretation of the frequently misunderstood teaching of Ockham on the notitia intuitiva as regards non-existents; (2) to substantiate this interpretation by a revised edition of one key text; (3) to prepare the ground for this edition by a short critical study of the text of the Reportatio Ockham.

Master Bernard, archdeacon of Compostella, and a member of the Canon Law School of Bologna in the early thirteenth century, is generally known as the author of a collection of decretals which he compiled in 1208 at the Roman Curia, with the aid of Pope Innocent III's registers, covering the first ten years (February 22, 1198–February 21, 1208) of that pontificate. Bernard's contemporary, the celebrated master Tancred, further tells us that the Spaniard's compilation was used by the school for some time as Collectio Romana, until in 1210 Pope Innocent promulgated an official collection of his decretals, arranged by his subdeacon and notary, Petrus Collivaccinus of Benevento. One of the Pope's reasons for issuing the authentic law book—the first of its kind in Church history—had been the fact that some of the decretals in Bernard's work, though genuine papal letters, were not considered by the Curia as universally binding. The new official collection, commonly known as Compilatio tertia, at once superseded Bernard's private collection, and for centuries the latter was known only from hearsay until rediscovered in modern times.

“Habent sua fata libelli.” This often-quoted line from the work of the North African grammarian Terentianus Maurus can safely be applied to two biographies of St. Augustine written by two men outstanding in the literary world of their age. They are Jordanus of Saxony (1300–1380 ca.) and John Capgrave (1393–1464).

By the end of the thirteenth century the royal writ of summons to Parliament usually specified that communities send representatives with “full power” to consent to whatever should be ordained by the king in his court and council. This “full power” was the famous plena potestas which was stated in the mandates carried by knights and burgesses to Parliament and by delegates of cities and towns to Cortes and States General, and which is still current in proxies for stockholders' meetings. It has, of course, like almost every word of the terminology in documents relating to representation, challenged interpretation: on the one side is the argument of J. G. Edwards, who confines himself to England, that plena potestas implied an almost political or sovereign consent which limited the royal authority; on the other, the assumption that it was an expression of involuntary consent to the acts and decisions of the royal government. In general, of course, whatever modern scholars have decided as to the right of consent has resulted either from modern conceptions of representation or from a strict interpretation of the terminology in the sources for the history of assemblies. No one has examined plena potestas in the light of the legal theory and procedure of the thirteenth century It is possible that by studying how legists and canonists viewed the meaning of plena potestas—for it, like most of the terminology in the mandate, came from Roman Law—we can find at least a relatively new approach to the problem of medieval consent.

Incidental to their account of a riot against the Emperor Maurice in 602, the Byzantine historians give some valuable information about the observance of the feast of the Purification. These passages are isolated and out of the way and have so far escaped the attention of students of the subject. The only purpose of the present note is to make them available.