in which he re-states the doctrine of the Incarnation, endeavouring to clear up any misconceptions which the inaccuracy of the Greek version of the Tome may possibly have caused. Eventually he was able to congratulate the Emperor on the restoration of peace and order in that quarter of their empire.

Similar riots were reported in Cappadocia, where the monks were led by one of their number named George, in Constantinople itself, where the ringleaders were Carosus and Dorotheus, and in Egypt.

But before we narrate the final victory of the orthodox cause throughout Christendom against the Eutychians, there are two events in the political world, belonging one to the year 452 and the other to 455, to which reference must be made, as showing the remarkable prestige which Leo's character had gained for him among all classes of society. When he was made pope we found him absent in Gaul mediating between rival generals. We now find him employed on still harder missions. Leo himself makes none but the slightest indirect allusion to either of these later incidents, but this silence is only characteristic of the man, in whom there is no trace of vain-boasting, and who consistently sank the personality of himself as well as of others in the principles and causes which absorbed him. There seems no reason, however, to doubt the substantial truth of what Prosper and others have related. In 452 Attila and the Huns, notwithstanding the defeat they had sustained from Aetius at Chalons, continued their devastating inroad into Italy. The whole city of Rome was paralysed with terror, and at last sent Leo with the Consular Avienus and the Prefect Tregetius to intercede with them. The meeting took place on lake Benacus, and Leo's arguments, aided, it is thought, by rumours of threatened invasion at home, persuaded Attila to retire beyond the Danube, on condition of receiving Honoria with a rich dowry as his wife. This was the last time that Attila troubled the Romans: for he died the next year.

Less than three years after this successful encounter with the barbarian, in 455 Leo's powerful services were again brought into requisition by the State. That year the licentious Valentinian was murdered at the instigation of an enraged husband, Maximus, who subsequently compelled the widow, Eudoxia, to marry him. Eudoxia, however, discovering the part Maximus had taken in Valentinian's death, invited the Vandals under Genseric to invade Italy. Maximus himself was put to death before the invaders reached Rome: but, when they did arrive, the panic-stricken citizens again threw themselves into the hands of Leo, who at the head of the clergy went forth to meet the foe outside the city. Once more his intercessions in some measure prevailed, but not sufficiently to prevent the city being pillaged fourteen days.

We now return to more purely religious matters. In 457 Marcian died (his wife having pre-deceased him four years), and was succeeded by a Thracian, named Leo2. Fresh outbreaks immediately took place both at Constantinople and at Alexandria: at the former place they were soon stopped, but at Alexandria they were more serious and prolonged. The disaffected monks set up one of their number, Timothy Elurus (or the Cat) in opposition to Proterius, who was soon after foully murdered in the baptistery, to which he had fled. This flagrant outrage at once aroused the bishop of Rome to fresh energy in every direction: by his promptitude the new Emperor was stirred to action, among the other means employed being a re-statement of the Faith in a long epistle with a catena of patristic authority, sometimes called "the Second Tome." Elurus was deposed and banished, and another Timothy, surnamed Solophaciolus, of well-approved orthodoxy, elected into his place. This satisfactory consummation was effected in 460, while a no less orthodox successor, named Gennadius, had been found two years before, when Anatolius died, for the See of Constantinople. Thus

Styled "Magnus," like his great namesake, though with infinitely less good reason.

Leo's joy was full at last, as his latest letters testify. Late in the year 461 he died, after a rule of twenty-one years, during which he had won at least one great victory for the Faith, and had given the See of Rome a prestige, which may be said to have lasted even to the present day.

His body was buried in the church of S. Peter's, since which time it has been thrice moved to different positions, once towards the end of the 7th century by Pope Sergius, again in 1607, after the re-building of the church in its present form, and lastly in 1715. As "saint" and "confessor" from the earliest times, as "doctor of the church" since 1754, he is commemorated in the East on Feb. 18, in the West on April 11.

"It will not be wholly out of place," says Mr. Gore 3, "to mention that tradition looks "back to Leo as the benefactor of many of the Roman churches: he is said to have "restored their silver ornaments after the ravages of the Vandals, and to have repaired the "basilicas of S. Peter and S. Paul, placing a mosaic in the latter, which represented the "adoration of the four and twenty elders: we are told also that he built a church of S. Cor"nelius, established some monks at S. Peter's, instituted guardians for the tombs of the Apostles, and erected a fountain before S. Paul's, where the people might wash before entering the church."

The only writings of Leo which are usually accepted as authentic are his numerous Sermons and Letters. Certain anti-Pelagian treatises and a long tract upon Humility in the form of a letter to Demetrias, a virgin, have been ascribed to him; but the most important work of all the doubtful ones is a "Sacramentary," which is one of the earliest extant of the Roman church, and is sometimes held to be Leo's composition or compilation. Many of the collects and prayers which it contains bear a remarkable resemblance to his teaching, and may well have come from his pen: there is indeed good reason for the opinion that the Collect proper, which is a distinct feature of the Western Church, owes its origin to Leo.

As a theologian Leo is thoroughly Western in type, being not speculative but dogmatic : no one was better suited in GoD's Providence to give the final completeness to the Church's Doctrine of the Incarnation than this clear-sighted, unimaginative, and persistent bishop of Rome. His theological position on the cardinal doctrines of the Faith is identical with that of the Athanasian symbol, to the language of which his own language often bears a close resemblance. With his theory of the Pope as universal Ruler of the Church in virtue of his being the successor of S. Peter, the vast majority of English-speaking people will have but little sympathy and yet it can but be admired from an objective standpoint as a bold, grand, and almost original conception. And there are no doubt many smaller points of detail in his writings connected more with discipline than with doctrine, which will now be reckoned if not as actually objectionable, at least as arising from forgotten needs or belonging to a byegone system: among these may be instanced his objection to slaves as clergy and to the celebration of the Eucharist more than once in one day except on festivals, where the church is too small to hold all the worshippers at once: his advocacy of the innovation of private instead of public confession for ordinary penitents, and on the other hand his insisting on the old rule that baptism should be administered only twice a year (at Easter and at Whitsuntide): and again the somewhat undue prominence that he gives to fasting and almsgiving as being on a level with prayer for Lenten or Ember exercises, and to the intercessions of the saints—particularly of the patron saints of Rome, SS. Peter, Paul, and Lawrence. And yet at the same time there is very much more to

3 Life, p. 165.

4 Milman attributes the real initiation of the Papal theory to the imperious Innocent I., who held the See of Rome at the beginning of the fifth century (402—417).

be thankful for as instructive than to object to as obsolete or dangerous. For on the negative side we have no trace after all of the later direct invocation of the Saints, nor of the modern cultus of the B. V. M. and of relics, while among the many positive good points in his teaching must be reckoned his most proper theory of a bishop as not only the channel of divine grace in virtue of ordination (sacerdos) but also the overseer of the flock (episcopus), in virtue of the people's choice and approval, which is essential to his office; his strong condemnation of the practice of usury in laity as well as clergy; his high appreciation of corporate even more than individual action among the faithful; the thoroughly practical view he always puts before us of the Christian life; and above all the "singularly Christian" character of all his sermons, in which Christ is the Alpha and Omega of all his thoughts and of all his exhortations. These are some of the benefits which Leo has conferred upon the Church, and which have rightfully earned for him the title “Great.”

MANUSCRIPTS.

I. At the Vatican. (a) Of the Sermons. (1) Codd. 3835 and 6 are two volumes in Roman Character of a Lectionary of about the 8th century; the second volume contains the "Tome" (which in the 8th and 9th centuries used to be read in the Church offices before Christmas): (2) 3828, a parchment (10th century), also a lectionary: (3) 1195, a parchment folio (11th century), a lectionary containing inter alia some of Leo's homilies: (4) 1267, 8 and 9 of the same character (11th century): (5) 1270 contains the Sermon de Festo Petri cathedra (now xiv. in Migne's Appendix), from which Cacciari restored Quesnel's imperfect edition of it to its present state: (6) 1271 and 2 are also lectionaries: (7) 4222 in Lombardic characters (9th century), a lectionary: (8) 5451 in Roman characters (12th century), a lectionary: (9) 6450 parchment (12th century): a lectionary containing the sermon de Festo Petri cathedra in the form found and printed by Quesnel; (10) 6451 similar: it contains sermons de Quadragesima and others: (11) 6454 similar.

(3) Of the Letters: these are mostly rather later (i.e. about 12th or 13th century): but (1) 1322 is of an older date, and contains besides the epistles, all the acts of the Council of Chalcedon : : (2) 5759 is earlier than the 9th century; it used to belong to the monastery of S. Columban at Bobbio, and contains 31 letters: (3) 5845 is very ancient, and according to Cacciari, Lombardic: it contains 24 letters.

(y) Letters and Sermons together: of these there are nine collections in the Vatican, of which 548 and 9 contain the sermon de Absalom which is condemned by Cacciari. The Regio-Vaticanus codex 139 is a fine collection of Leo's works (12th century).

II. At other places: (1) The codex Urbinas 65 is thought to be a copy of the RegioVaticanus 139 made in the 14th century.

(2) Codex Grimanicus 5 is a MS. on which Quesnel lays great stress: Quesnel assigns it to the ninth century; it contains 107 letters, of which 28 had never been printed before Quesnel.

(3) The Thuanei; (a) 129 contains 123 letters (8) 780 contains the Tome: (7) 729 contains the spurious de vocatione gentium and some epistles.

(4) The Corbeienses are old.

(5) The Taurinensis 29 D. iv. is a fine 13th-century MS. containing 52 letters.

(6) The Florentinus codex belongs to the 13th century also.

(7) Ratisbonensis 113 DD. AA., in the monastery of S. Emeramus, contains 72 letters:

it is said to date from about 750 A.D.

(8) The two Bergonenses are of 12th century, and contain 12 sermons.

5 Grimanus, from whom this Codex is named, was Cardinal of S. Mark, &c., in the 16th century.

(9) Two Chigiani also of 12th century contain 4 sermons.

(10) The Padilironenses contain 9 sermons and the Tome.

(11) There are three Patavini, of which two contain the Tome.

(12) Vallicellani: these are a number of 11th or 12th-century codices.

There are also the Veneti, the Vercellenses, the Veronenses, &'c.

N. B. The foregoing account is taken from Schönemann's Notitia Historico-Literaria (1794), and the translator has no means of knowing whether it is still correct (1890).

EDITIONS.

1. The earliest important edition is P. Quesne's (prêtre de l'oratoire), Paris, 1675, Lyons, 1700, of which Migne's Dict. de Bibliogr. catholique says, 'on reproche aux éditions du P. Quesnel un grand nombre de falsifications, par lesquelles le P. Quesnel se proposait notamment d'affaiblir l'autorité pontificale. . . . L'édition que l'on doit aujourd'hui préférer, est (naturally enough!) celle qui a été publiée par M. l'abbé Migne sous le titre d'

2. Euvres très complètes de Saint Leon le Grand publiées d'après l'édition des frères Ballerinii et celle de Paschase Quesnel enrichées de préfaces, d'avertissements et de commentaires, suivies des exercices de Cacciari sur toutes les œuvres du saint docteur. Paris 1846.

3. P. Cacciari (a carmelite) brought out editions at Rome, 1751 and 1753-5, the latter with dissertations.

4. The edition of the brothers P. and H. Ballerinii (Jesuists), Venice, 1753-7, was a recension of Quesnel's second edition with copious dissertations and notes.

5. H. Hurter, S. J., has published selections of Sermons and Letters in vols. xiv., xxv. and xxvi. of his SS. PP. opuscula selecta, 1871-4.

TRANSLATIONS.

Bright's Leo on the Incarnation, London, 1862 (2nd edn. enlarged, 1886, in which the Tome is translated), consists of xviii. sermons translated and the Tome in Latin, with many valuable notes.

2. Reithmayr's Bibliothek (1869) contains a German translation.

3. Dr. Neale's History of the Alexandrian Patriarchate embodies a translation of the Tome. 4. Dr. Heurtley published a version of the Tome in 1886.

AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS.

The chief ancient and mediæval authorities for the life and times of Leo the Great are such works as Prosper's, and Idatius' Chronicles, Iornandes de rebus Geticis, Anastasius Billothecarius Historia de vitis Romanorum Pontificum (9th cent.), the Historia Miscella (10th cent), &c.

Among lives may be mentioned the following:—(1) La vie et religion de deux bons papes Léon premier et Gregoire premier par PIERRE DU MOULIN (the younger: a protestant theologian), Sedan, 1650. 12m0. (2) QUESNEL'S valuable Dissertatio de vita et rebus gestis S. Leonis Magni, originally included in his edition of Leo and re-printed by Migne in Vol. ii. of his edition. with the Ballerinii's annotations and critical remarks, Paris, 1675, Lyons, 1700. (3) Histoire du Pontificat de Saint Léon le Grand par Monsr. L. Maimbourg La Haye, 1687. (4) The Bollandists' Life by Canisius (Acta Sanctorum), April, vol. ii. pp. 14-22. (5) ALPHONSI CIACONII Vita Pontificum (Tom 1, pp. 303-314), Rome, 1677, 4to. (6) LE NAIN DE TILLEMONT, Memoires pour servir à l'histoire Ecclesiastique (vol. xv. pp. 414-832, 885-934), Paris, 1711. (7)

6 That is to say, it upheld the Gallican opinions; and so it was condemned and put on the Index in 1632. But being too valuable a work to be altogether suppressed, Benedict XIV.

enjoined the issue of (4), which rebutted and rectified Quesnel's false deductions in its notes and excursuses.

AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS.

XV

Breve Descrizione della vita di S. Leone Primo di GABRielle BertazZOLO: Mantova, 1727. (8) Memoire istoriche di Sa. Leone Papa da TEOFILO PACIFICO: Brescia, 1791, 8vo. (9) DU PIN, L. E., History of Ecc. writers (Eng. Edn. vol. 1, pp. 464—480), Dublin, 1722. (10) C. OUDINUS, de Scriptoribus Ecclesia (vol. 1, pp. 1271-5), Leipzig, 1722. (11) WILHELM AMAdeus Arendt (Roman Catholic), Leo der Grosse und seine Zeit, Mainz, 1835, 8vo. (12) EDUARD PERTHEL, Papst Leo's I. Leben und Lehren, Jena, 1843, 8vo. (a counterblast to No. 11, and no less exaggerated and prejudiced in statement). (13) A. de Saint-CHRON, Histoire du pontificat de Saint Léon le Grand, Paris, 1846. (14) F. Böhringer, die Kirche Xti und ihre Zeugen (vol. 1 part 4, pp. 170-309), Zürich, 1845. (15) CHARLES GORE'S Life of Leo the Great (S.P.C.K.); also his article in Smith's Dict. of Christian Biogr. (16) The article in HERZOG'S Real-Encyklopädie of which a condensed English edition was edited by Dr. Philip Schaff at New York in 1883. Other more general accounts of his times will be found in (1) l'abbé FLEURY, Histoire du Xtianisme (vol. ii. pp. 384—480), Paris, 1836. (2) BRIGHT's History of the Church from 313-451 (chaps. xiv., xv.), Oxford and London, 1860. (3) MILMAN'S Latin Christianity (Book ii. chap. 4), London, 1864. (4) R. J. ROHRBACHER'S Histoire Universelle de l'Eglise catholique (15th edn., vol. 4, pp. 461-575), Paris, 1868. A short account of Leo's writings is given in ALZOG's Grundriss der Patrologie, § 78, pp. 368375: a most exhaustive one in CEILLIER'S Histoire générale des Auteurs sacrés (new edition) (vol. x., pp. 169—276), 1858—1869. BÄHR's Geschichte der Römischer Literatur-Supplement Band. II. Abtheilung (pp. 354-362), im Abendland, vol. 1, p. 448, may also be consulted; and EBERT'S Allgemeine Geschichte der Literatur des Mittelalters.