Order of Preachers
Pierre Mandonnet, O.P., S.T.D.,
Rector, University of Fribourg.
The Article from “The Catholic Encyclopedia”, (1913), V. XII, pp. 354-370, is written by one of the great Dominican historians. It presents a remarkable summary of the order as seen from the scholarship available at the turn of the century. The historical source notes are still useful in identifying primary sources. Although in the encyclopedia the notes are woven into the text, we have taken the liberty to separate the notes to facilitate reading the summary itself. Links from the footnote numbers will open a distinct file containing all the footnotes. The initial outline too, is drawn from the text of the encyclopedia article. Owing to its length, the article has been divided into two files.
A. Formation of the Legislative Texts.
B. Nature of the Order of Preachers.
(i) Works on the Bible.
(ii) Philosophical works.
(iii) Theological works.
(iv) Apologetic works.
(v) Educational literature.
(vi) Canon law.
(vii) Historical writings.
(viii) Miscellaneous works.
(x) Humanistic works.
(g) The Preachers and Art.
(h) The Preachers and the Roman Church.
(i) The Friars Preachers and the Secular Clergy.
(j) The Preachers and Civil Society.
(k) The Preachers and the Faithful.
(l) The Preachers and the Foreign Mission.
(m) The Preachers and Sanctity.
(a) Geographical Distribution and Statistics.
(b) Administration of the Order.
(c) Scholastic Organization.
(d) Doctrinal Activity.
(e) Scientific productions.
(f) The Preachers and Christian Society.
(g) The Preachers and the Missions.
(h) Dominican Saints and Blessed.
As the Order of the Friars Preachers is the principal part of the
entire Order of St. Dominic, we shall include under this title the two other parts of the
order: the Dominican Sisters (Second Order) and the Brothers of Penitence of St. Dominie
(Third Order). First, we shall study the legislation of the three divisions of the order, and
the nature of each. Secondly, we shall give an historical survey of the three branches of the
I. LEGISLATION AND NATURE.–
In its formation and development, the Dominican
legislation as a whole is closely bound up with historical facts relative to the origin and
progress of the order. Hence some reference to these is necessary, the more so as this
matter has not been sufficiently studied. For each of the three groups, constituting the
ensemble of the Order of St. Dominic, we shall examine: A. Formation of the Legislative
Texts; B. Nature of the Order, resulting from legislation.
A. Formation of the Legislative Texts. —
In regard to their legislation the first two orders
are closely connected, and must be treated together. The preaching of St. Dominic and his
first companions in Languedoc led up to the pontifical letters of Innocent III, 17 Nov.,
1205. #1 They created for the first time in the Church of the Middle Ages the type of
apostolic preachers, patterned upon the teaching of the Gospel. In the same year, Dominie
founded the Monastery of Prouille, in the Diocese of Toulouse, for the women whom he
had converted from heresy, and he, made this establishment the centre of union of his missions and of his apostolic works. #2 St. Dominic gave to the new monastery the Rule of
St. Augustine and also the special Institutions which regulated the life of the Sisters, and
of the Brothers who lived near them, for the spiritual and temporal administration of the
community. #3 On 17 Dec., 1219, Honorius III, with a view to a general reform among
the religious of the Eternal City, granted the monastery of the Sisters of St. Sixtus of
Rome to St. Dominic, and the Institutions of Prouille were given to that monastery under
the title of Institutions of the Sisters of St. Sixtus of Rome. With this designation they
were granted subsequently to other monasteries and congregations of religious. It is also
under this form that we possess the primitive Institutions of Prouille, in the editions
already mentioned. St. Dominic and his companions, having received from Innocent III
authorization to choose a rule, with a view to the approbation of their order, adopted in
1216, that of St. Augustine, and added thereto the “Consuetudines” which regulated the
ascetic and canonical life of the religious. These were borrowed in great part from the
Constitutions of Prémontré, but with some essential features, adapted to the purposes of
the new Preachers who also renounced private possession of property, but retained the
revenues. The “Consuetudines” formed the first part (prima distinctio) of the primitive
Constitutions of the order. #4 The order was solemnly approved, 22 Dec., 1216. A first
letter, in the style of those granted for the foundation of regular canons, gave the order
canonical existence; a second determined the special vocation of the Order of Preachers as
vowed to teaching and defending the truths of faith. “Nos attendentes fratres Ordinis tui
futuros pugiles fidei et vera mundi lumina confirmamus Ordinem tuum”. #5. (Expecting the
brethren of your order to be the champions of the Faith and true lights of the world, we
confirm your order.)
On 15 Aug., 1217 St. Dominic sent out his companions from Prouille. They went through
France, Spain, and Italy, and established as principal centres, Toulouse, Paris, Madrid,
Rome, and Bologna. Dominic, by constant journeyings, kept watch over these new
establishments, and went to Rome to confer with the Sovereign Pontiff. #6 In May, 1220,
St. Dominic held at Bologna the first general chapter of the order. This assembly drew up
the Constitutions, which are complementary to the “Consuetudines” of 1216 and form the
second part (secunda distinctio). They regulated the organization and life of the order, and
are the essential and original basis of the Dominican legislation. In this chapter, the
Preachers also gave up certain elements of the canonical life; they relinquished all
possessions and revenues, and adopted the practice of strict poverty; they rejected the title
of abbey for the convents, and substituted the rochet of canons for the monastic scapular.
The regime of annual general chapters was established as the regulative power of the
order, and the source of legislative authority. #7 Now that the legislation of the Friars
Preachers was fully established, the Rule of the Sisters of St. Sixtus was found to be very
incomplete. The order, however, supplied what was wanting by compiling a few years
after, the Statuta, which borrowed from the Constitutions of the Friars, whatever might be
useful in a monastery of Sisters. We owe the preservation of these Statuta, as well as the
Rule of St. Sixtus, to the fact that this legislation was applied in 1232 to the Penitent
Sisters of St. Mary Magdalen in Germany, who observed it without further modification.
The Statuta are edited im Duellius, “Misc.”, bk. I, 182. After the legislative work of the
general chapters had been added to the Constitution of 1216-20, without changing the
general ordinance of the primitive text, the necessity was felt, a quarter of a century later,
of giving a more logical distribution to the legislation in its entirety. The great canonist
Raymond of Penaforte, on becoming master general of the order, devoted himself to this
work. The general chapters, from 1239 to 1241, accepted the new text, and gave it the
force of law. In this form it has remained to the present time as the official text, with some
modification, however, in the way of suppressions and especially of additions due to later
enactments of the general chapters. #8
The reorganization of the Constitutions of the Preachers called for a corresponding reform
in the legislation of the Sisters. In his letter of 27 Aug., 1257, Alexander IV ordered
Humbert of Romans, the fifth master general, to unify the Constitutions of the Sisters.
Humbert remodelled them on the Constitutions of the Brothers, and put them into effect at
the General Chapter of Valenciennes, 1259. The Sisters were henceforth characterized as
Sorores Ordinis Prdicatorum. #9 To this legislation, the provincials of Germany, who
had a large number of religious convents under their care, added certain admonitiones by
way of completing and definitely settling the Constitutions of the Sisters. They seem to be
the work of Herman of Minden, Provincial of Teutonia (1286-90). He drew up at first a
concise admonition #10; then other series of admonitions, more important, which have not
been edited #11. The legislation of the Friars Preachers is the firmest and most complete
among the systems of law by which institutions of this sort were ruled in the thirteenth
century. Hauck is correct in saying: “We do not deceive ourselves in considering the
organization of the Dominican Order as the most perfect of all the monastic organizations
produced by the Middle Ages”. #12 It is not then surprising that the majority of the
religious orders of the thirteenth century should have followed quite closely the Dominican
legislation, which exerted an influence even upon institutions very dissimilar in aim and
nature. The Church considered it the typical rule for new foundations. Alexander IV
thought of making the legislation of the Order of Preachers into a special rule known as
that of St. Dominic, and for that purpose commissioned the Dominican cardinal, Hugh of
St. Cher (3 Feb., 1255), but the project encountered many obstacles, and nothing came of
B. Nature of the Order of Preachers.
(1) Its Object. —
The canonical title of “Order of
Preachers”, given to the work of St. Dominic by the Church, is in itself significant, but it
indicates only the dominant feature. The Constitutions are more explicit: “Our order was
instituted principally for preaching and for the salvation of souls.” The end or aim of the
order then is the salvation of souls, especially by means of preaching. For the attainment of
this purpose, the order must labour with the utmost zeal — “Our main efforts should be
put forth, earnestly and ardently, in doing good to the souls of our fellow-men.”
(2) Its Organization. —
The aim of the order and the conditions of its environment
determined the form of its organization. The first organic group is the convent, which may
not be founded with less than twelve religious. At first only large convents were allowed
and these were located in important cities #14, hence the saying:
Bernardus valles, montes Benedictus amabat,
Oppida Franciscus, celebres Dominicus urbes.
(Bernard loved the valleys, Benediet the mountains, Francis the towns, Dominic the
The foundation and the existence of the convent required a prior as governor, and a
doctor as teacher. The Constitution prescribes the dimensions of the church and the
convent buildings, and these should be quite plain. But in the course of the thirteenth
century the order erected large edifices, real works of art. The convent possesses nothing
and lives on alms. Outside of the choral office (the Preachers at first had the title of
canonici) their time is wholly employed in study. The doctor gives lectures in theology, at
which all the religious, even the prior, must be present, and which are open to secular
clerics. The religious vow themselves to preaching, both within and without the convent
walls. The “general preachers” have the most extended powers. At the beginning of the
order, the convent was called praedicatio, or sancta praedicatio. The convents divided up
the territory in which they were established, and sent out on preaching tours religious who
remained for a longer or shorter time in the principal places of their respective districts.
The Preachers did not take the vow of stability, but could be sent from one locality to
another. Each convent received novices, these, according to the Constitutions, must be at
least eighteen years of age, but this rule was not strictly observed. The Preachers were the
first among religious orders to suppress manual labour, the necessary work of the interior
of the house being relegated to lay brothers called conversi whose number was limited
according to the needs of each convent. The prior was elected by the religious and the
doctor was appointed by the provincial chapter. The chapter, when it saw fit, relieved
them from office.
The grouping of a certain number of convents forms the province, which is administered
by a provincial prior, elected by the prior and two delegates from each convent. He is
confirmed by the general chapter, or by the master general, who can also remove him
when it is found expedient. He enjoys in his province the same authority as the master
general in the order; he confirms the election of conventual priors, visits the province, sees
to it that the Constitutions and the ordinances are observed and presides at the provincial
chapters. The provincial chapter, which is held annually, discusses the interests of the
province. It is composed of a provincial prior, priors from the convents, a delegate from
each convent, and the general preachers. The capitulants (members of the chapter), choose
from among themselves, four counsellors or assistants, who, with the provincial, regulate
the affairs brought before the chapter. The chapter appoints those who are to visit annually
each part of the province. The provinces taken together constitute the order, which has at
its head a master general, elected by the provincial priors and by two delegates from each
province. For a long time his position was for life; Pius VII (1804), reduced it to six years,
and Pius IX (1862) fixed it at twelve years. At first the master general had no permanent
residence; since the end of the fourteenth century, he has lived usually at Rome. He visits
the order, holds it to the observance of the laws, and corrects abuses. In 1509, he was
granted two associates (socii); in 1752, four; in 1910, five. The general chapter is the
supreme authority within the order. From 1370, it was held every two years; from 1553,
every three years, from 1625, every six years. In the eighteenth and at the beginning of the
nineteenth century, chapters were rarely held. At present they take place every three years.
From 1228, for two years in succession, the general chapter was composed of definitors
or delegates from the provinces, each province sending one delegate; the following year it
was held by the provincial priors. The chapter promulgates new constitutions, but to
become law they must be accepted by three constitutive chapters. The chapter deals with
all the general concerns of the order, whether administrative or disciplinary. It corrects the
master general, and in certain eases can depose him. From 1220 to 1244, the chapters
were held alternately at Bologna and Paris; subsequently, they passed round to all the
principal cities of Europe. The generalissimo chapter acknowledged by the Constitution
and composed of two definitors from each province, also of provincials, i. e. equivalent to
three consecutive general chapters, was held only in 1228 and 1236. The characteristic
feature of government is the elective system which prevails throughout the order. “Such
was the simple mechanism which imparted to the Order of Friars Preachers a powerful and
regular movement, and secured them for a long time a real preponderance in Church and
in State”. #15
(3) Forms of its Activity. —
The forms of life or activity of the Order of Preachers are
many, but they are all duly subordinated. The order assimilated the ancient forms of the
religious life, the monastic and the canonical, but it made them subservient to the clerical
and the apostolic life which are its peculiar and essential aims. The Preachers adopted
from the monastic life the three traditional vows of obedience, chastity, and poverty; to
them they added the ascetic element known as monastic observances; perpetual
abstinence, fasting from 14 Sept. until Easter and on all the Fridays throughout the year
the exclusive use of wool for clothing and for the bed a hard bed, and a common
dormitory, silence almost perpetual in their houses, public acknowledgment of faults in the
chapter, a graded list of penitential practices, etc. The Preachers, however, did not take
these observances directly from the monastic orders but from the regular canons,
especially the reformed canons, who had already adopted monastic rules The Preachers
received from the regular canons the choral Office for morning and evening, but chanted
quickly. They added, on certain days, the Office of the Holy Virgin, and once a week the
Office of the Dead. The habit of the Preachers, as of the regular canons, is a white tunic
and a black cloak. The rochet, distinctive of the regular canons, was abandoned by the
Preachers at the General Chapter of 1220, and replaced by the scapular. At the same time
they gave up various canonical customs, which they had retained up to that period. They
suppressed in their order the title of abbot for the head of the convent, and rejected all
property, revenues, the carrying of money on their travels, and the use of horses. The title
even of canon which they had borne from the beginning tended to disappear about the
middle of the thirteenth century, and the General Chapters of 1240-1251 substituted the
word clericus for canonicus in the article of the Constitutions relating to the admission of
novices; nevertheless the designation, “canon” still occurs in some parts of the
Constitutions. The Preachers, in fact, are primarily and essentially clerics. The pontifical
letter of foundation said: “These are to be the champions of the Faith and the true lights of
the world.” This could apply only to clerics. The Preachers consequently made study their
chief occupation, which was the essential means, with preaching and teaching as the end.
The apostolic character of the order was the complement of its clerical character. The
Friars had to vow themselves to the salvation of souls through the ministry of preaching
and confession, under the conditions set down by the Gospel and by the example of the
Apostles: ardent zeal, absolute poverty, and sanctity of life. #15
The ideal Dominican life was rich in the multiplicity and choice of its elements, and was
thoroughly unified by its well-considered principles and enactments; but it was none the
less complex, and it, full realization was difficult. The monastic-canonical element tended
to dull and paralyze the intense activity demanded by a clerical-apostolic life. The
legislators warded off the difficulty by a system of dispensations, quite peculiar to the
order. At the head of the Constitutions the principle of dispensation appears jointly with
the very definition of the order’s purpose, and is placed before the text of the laws to show
that it controls and tempers their application. “The superior in each convent shall have
authority to grant dispensations whenever he may deem it expedient, especially in regard
to what may hinder study, or preaching, or the profit of souls since our order was
originally established for the work of preaching and the salvation of souls”, etc. The
system of dispensation thus broadly understood while it favoured the most active element
of the order, displaced, but did not wholly eliminate, the difficulty. It created a sort of
dualism in the interior life, and permitted an arbitrariness that might easily disquiet the
conscience of the religious and of the superiors. The order warded off this new difficulty
by declaring in the generalissimo chapter of 1236, that the Constitutions did not oblige
under pain of sin, but under pain of doing penance. #16 This measure, however, was not
heartily welcomed by everyone in the order #17, nevertheless it stood.
This dualism produced on one side, remarkable apostles and doctors, on the other, stern
ascetics and great mystics. At all events the interior troubles of the order grew out of the
difficulty of maintaining the nice equilibrium which the first legislators established, and
which was preserved to a remarkable degree during the first century of the order’s
existence. The logic of things and historical circumstances frequently disturbed this
equilibrium. The learned and active members tended to exempt themselves from monastic
observance, or to moderate its strictness; the ascetic members insisted on the monastic life,
and in pursuance of their aim, suppressed at different times the practice of dispensation,
sanctioned as it was by the letter and the spirit of the Constitutions.
(4) Nature of the Order of the Dominican Sisters. —
We have indicated above the various
steps by which the legislation of the Dominican Sisters was brought into conformity with
the Constitutions of Humbert of Romans (1259). The primitive type of religious
established at Prouille in 1205 by St. Dominic was not affected by successive legislation.
The Dominican Sisters are strictly cloistered in their monasteries; they take the three
religious vows, recite the canonical Hours im choir and engage in manual labor. The
eruditio litterarum inscribed in the Institutions of St. Sixtus disappeared from the
Constitutions drawn up by Humbert of Romans. The ascetic life of the Sisters is the same
as that of the Friars. Each house is governed by a prioress, elected canonically, and
assisted by a sub-prioress, a mistress of novices, and various other officers. The
monasteries have the right to hold property in common; they must be provided with an
income sufficient for the existence of the community; they are independent and are under
the jurisdiction of the provincial prior, the master general, and of the general chapter. A
subsequent paragraph will deal with the various phases of the question as to the relation
existing between the Sisters and the Order of Preachers. Whilst the Institutions of St.
Sixtus provided a group of brothers, priests, and lay servants for the spiritual and temporal
administration of the monastery, the Constitutions of Humbert of Romans were silent on
these points. (See the legislative texts relating to the Sisters mentioned above.)
(5) The Third Order. —
St. Dominic did not write a rule for the Tertiaries, for reasons
which are given further on in the historical sketch of the Third Order. However, a large
body of the laity, vowed to piety, grouped themselves about the rising Order of Preachers,
and constituted, to all intents and purposes, a Third Order. In view of this fact and of
some circumstances to be noted later on, the seventh master general of the order, Munio
de Zamora, wrote (1285) a rule for the Brothers and Sisters of Penitence of St. Dominic.
The privilege granted the new fraternity 28 Jan., 1286, by Honorius IV, gave it a canonical
existence. #19 The rule of Munio was not entirely original; some points being borrowed
from the Rule of the Brothers of Penitence, whose origin dates back to St. Francis of
Assisi; but it was distinctive on all essential points. It is in a sense more thoroughly
ecclesiastical; the Brothers and Sisters are grouped in different fraternities; their
government is immediately subject to ecclesiastical authority; and the various fraternities
do not form a collective whole, with legislative chapters, as was the case among the
Brothers of Penitence of St. Francis. The Dominican fraternities are local and without any
bond of union other than that of the Preaching Brothers who govern them. Some
characteristics of these fraternities may be gathered from the Rule of Munio de Zamora.
The Brothers and Sisters, as true children of St. Dominic, should be, above all things, truly
zealous for the Catholic Faith. Their habit is a white tunic, with black cloak and hood, and
a leathern girdle. After making profession, they cannot return to the world, but may enter
other authorized religious orders. They recited a certain number of Paters and Aves, for
the canonical Hours; receive communion at least four times a year, and must show great
respect to the ecclesiastical hierarchy. They fast during Advent, Lent, and on all the
Fridays during the year, and eat meat only three days in the week, Sunday, Tuesday, and
Thursday. They are allowed to carry arms only in defense of the Christian Faith. They visit
sick members of the community, give them assistance if necessary, attend the burial of
Brothers or Sisters and aid them with their prayers. The head or spiritual director is a
priest of the Order of Preachers, whom the Tertiaries select and propose to the master
general or to the provincial; he may act on their petition or appoint some other religious.
The director and the older members of the fraternity choose the prior or prioress, from
among the Brothers and Sisters, and their office continues until they are relieved. The
Brothers and the Sisters have, on different days, a monthly reunion in the church of the
Preachers, when they attend Mass, listen to an instruction, and to an explanation of the
rule. The prior and the director can grant dispensations; the rule, like the Constitutions of
the Preachers, does not oblige under pain of sin. #20
II. HISTORY OF THE ORDER. —
A. The Friars Preachers. —
Their history may be
divided into three periods: (1) The Middle Ages (from their foundation to the beginning of
the sixteenth century); (2) The Modern Period up to the French Revolution; (3) The
Contemporaneous Period. In each of these periods we shall examine the work of the order
in its various departments.
(1) The Middle Ages. —
The thirteenth century is the classic age of the order, the witness
to its brilliant development and intense activity. This last is manifested especially in the
work of teaching. By preaching it reached all classes of Christian society, fought heresy,
schism, paganism, by word and book, and by its missions to the north of Europe, to
Africa, and Asia, passed beyond the frontiers of Christendom. Its schools spread
throughout the entire Church its doctors wrote monumental works in all branches of
knowledge and two among them, Albertus Magnus, and especially Thomas Aquinas,
founded a school of philosophy and theology which was to rule the ages to come in the
life of the Church. An enormous
number of its members held offices in Church and State — as popes, cardinals, bishops,
legates, inquisitors, confessors of princes, ambassadors, and paciarii (enforcers of the
peace decreed by popes or councils). The Order of Preachers, which should have remained
a select body, developed beyond bounds and absorbed some elements unfitted to its form
of life. A period of relaxation ensued during the fourteenth century owing to the general
decline of Christian society. The weakening of doctrinal activity favoured the development
here and there of the ascetic and contemplative life and there sprang up, especially in
Germany and Italy, an intense and exuberant mysticism with which the names of Master
Eckhart, Suso, Tauler, St. Catherine of Siena are associated. This movement was the
prelude to the reforms undertaken, at the end of the century, by Raymond of Capua, and
continued in the following century. It assumed remarkable proportions in the
congregations of Lombardy and of Holland, and in the reforms of Savonarola at Florence.
At the same time the order found itself face to face with the Renaissance. It struggled
against pagan tendencies in Humanism, in Italy through Dominici and Savonarola, in
Germany through the theologians of Cologne but it also furnished Humanism with such
advanced writers as Francis Colonna (Poliphile) and Matthew Brandello. Its members, in
great numbers, took part im the artistic activity of the age, the most prominent being Fra
Angelico and Fra Bartolomeo.
(a) Development and Statistics. —
When St. Dominic, in 1216, asked for the official
recognition of his order, the first Preachers numbered only sixteen. At the general Chapter
of Bologna, 1221, the year of St. Dominic’s death, the order already counted some sixty
establishments, and was divided into eight provinces: Spain, Provence, France, Lombardy,
Rome, Teutonia, England, and Hungary. The Chapter of 1228 added four new provinces:
the Holy Land, Greece, Poland, and Dacia (Denmark and Scandinavia). Sicily was
separated from Rome (1294), Aragon from Spain (1301). In 1303 Lombardy was divided
into Upper and Lower Lombardy; Provence into Toulouse and Provence; Saxony was
separated from Teutonia, and Bohemia from Poland, thus forming eighteen provinces. The
order, which in 1277 counted 404 convents of Brothers, in 1303 numbered nearly 600.
The development of the order reached its height during the Middle Ages; new houses
were established during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, but in relatively small
numbers As to the number of religious only approximate statements can be given. In 1256,
according to the concession of suffrages granted by Humbert of Romans to St. Louis, the
order numbered about 5000 priests; the clerks and lay brothers could not have been less
than 2000. Thus towards the middle of the thirteenth century it must have had about 7000
members. #21 According to Sebastien de Olmeda, the Preachers, as shown by the census
taken under Benedict XII, were close on to 12,000 in 1337. #22 This number was not
surpassed at the close of the Middle Ages; the Great Plague of 1348, and the general state
of Europe preventing a notable increase, The reform movement begun in 1390 by
Raymond of Capua established the principle of a twofold arrangement in the order. For a
long time it is true, the reformed convents were not separate from their respective
provinces; but with the foundation of the congregation of Lombardy, in 1459, a new order
of things began. The congregations were more or less self-governing, and, according as
they developed, overlapped several provinces and even several nations. There were
established successively the congregations of Portugal (1460), Holland (1464), Aragon,
and Spain (1468), St. Mark in Florence (1493), France (1497), the Gallican (1514). About
the same time some new provinces were also established: Scotland (1481), Ireland (1484),
Bétique or Andalusia (1514), Lower Germany (1515). #23
(b) Administration. —
The Preachers possessed a number of able administrators among
their masters general during the Middle Ages, especially in the thirteenth century. St.
Dominic, the creator of the institution (1206-1221), showed a keen intelligence of the
needs of the age. He executed his plans with sureness of insight, firmness of resolution,
and tenacity of purpose. Jordan of Saxony (1222-1237) sensitive, eloquent, and endowed
with rare powers of persuasion, attracted numerous and valuable recruits. St. Raymond of
Penaforte (1238-1240), the greatest canonist of the age, ruled the order only long enough
to reorganize its legislation. John the Teuton (1241-1252), bishop and linguist, who was
associated with the greatest personalities of his time pushed the order forward along the
line of development outlined by its founder. Humbert of Romans (1254-1263), a genius of
the practical sort, a broad-minded and moderate man, raised the order to the height of its
glory, and wrote manifold works, setting forth what, in his eyes, the Preachers and
Christian society ought to be. John of Vercelli (1264-1283), an energetic and prudent
man, during his long government maintained the order in all its vigor. The successors of
these illustrious masters did their utmost in the discharge of their duty, and in meeting the
situations which the state of the Church and of society from the close of the thirteenth
century rendered more and more difficult. Some of them did no more than hold their high
office, while others had not the genius of the masters general of the golden age. #24 The
general chapters which wielded supreme power were the great regulators of the
Dominican life during the Middle Ages. They are usually remarkable for their spirit of
decision, and the firmness with which they ruled. They appeared even imbued with a
severe character which, taking no account of persons, bore witness to the importance they
attached to the maintenance of discipline. #25
(c) Modification of the Statute. —
We have already spoken of the chief exception to be
taken to the Constitution of the order, the difficulty of maintaining an even balance
between the monastic and canonical observances and the clerical and apostolical life. The
primitive régime of poverty, which left the convents without an assured income, created
also a permanent difficulty. Time and the modifications of the state of Christian society
exposed these weak points. Already the General Chapters of 1240-1242 forbade the
changing of the general statutes of the order, a measure which would indicate at least a
hidden tendency towards modification. #26 Some change seems to have been contemplated also by the Holy See when Alexander IV, 4 February, 1255, ordered the
Dominican cardinal, Hugh of Saint Cher, to recast the entire legislation of the Preachers
into a rule which should be called the Rule of St. Dominic. #27 Nothing came of the
project, and the question was broached again about 1270. #28 It was during the
pontificate of Benedict XII, (1334-1342), who undertook a general reform of the religious
orders, that the Preachers were on the point of undergoing serious modifications in the
secondary elements of their primitive statute. Benedict, desiring to give the order greater
efficiency, sought to impose a régime of property-holding as necessary to its security and
to reduce the number of its members (12,000) by eliminating the unfit etc.; in a word, to
lead the order back to its primitive concept of a select apostolic and teaching body. The
order, ruled at that time by Hugh de Vansseman (1333-41), resisted with all its strength
(1337-40). This was a mistake. #29 As the situation grew worse, the order was obliged to
petition Sixtus IV for the right to hold property, and this was granted 1 June, 1475.
Thence forward the convents could acquire property, and perpetual rentals. #30 This was
one of the causes which quickened the vitality of the order in the sixteenth century.
The reform projects of Benedict XII having failed, the master general, Raymond of Capua
(1390) sought to restore the monastic observances which had fallen into decline. He
ordered the establishment in each province of a convent of strict observance, hoping that
as such houses became more numerous, the reform would eventually permeate the entire
province. This was not usually the case. These houses of the observance formed a
confederation among themselves under the jurisdiction of a special vicar. However, they
did not cease to belong to their original province in certain respects, and this, naturally
gave rise to numerous conflicts of government. During the fifteenth century, several
groups made up congregations, more or less autonomous; these we have named above in
giving the statistics of the order. The scheme of reform proposed by Raymond and
adopted by nearly all who subsequently took up with his ideas, insisted on the observance
of the Constitutions ad unguem, as Raymond, without further explanation, expressed it.
By this, his followers, and, perhaps Raymond himself, understood the suppression of the
rule of dispensation which governed the entire Dominican legislation. “In suppressing the
power to grant and the right to accept dispensation, the reformers inverted the economy of
the order, setting the part above the whole, and the means above the end”.
different reforms which originated within the order up to the nineteenth century, began
usually with principles of asceticism, which exceeded the letter and the spirit of the
original constitutions. This initial exaggeration was, under pressure of circumstances,
toned down, and the reforms which endured, like that of the congregation of Lombardy,
turned out to be the most effectual. Generally speaking, the reformed communities
slackened the intense devotion to study prescribed by the Constitutions; they did not
produce the great doctors of the order, and their literary activity was directed preferably
to moral theology, history, subjects of piety, and asceticism. They gave to the fifteenth
century many holy men. #32
(d) Preaching and Teaching. —
Independently of their official title of Order of Preachers,
the Roman Church especially delegated the Preachers to the office of preaching. It is in
fact the only order of the Middle Ages which the popes declared to be specially charged
with this office. #33 Conformably to its mission, the order displayed an enormous activity.
The “Vitæ Fratrum” (1260) (Lives of the Brothers) informs us that many of the brothers
refused food until they had first announced the Word of God. #34 In his circular letter
(1260), the Master General Humbert of Romans, in view of what had been accomplished
by his religious, could well make the statement: “We teach the people, we teach the
prelates, we teach the wise and the unwise, religious and seculars, clerics and laymen,
nobles and peasants, lowly and great.” #35 Rightly, too, it has been said: “Science on one
hand, numbers on the other, placed them [the Preachers] ahead of their competitors in the
thirteenth century.” #36 The order maintained this supremacy during the entire Middle
Ages. #37 During the thirteenth century, the Preachers in addition to their regular
apostolate, worked especially to lead back to the Church heretics and renegade Catholics.
An eyewitness of their labours (1233) reckons the number of their converts in Lombardy
at more than 100,000. #38 This movement grew rapidly, and the witnesses could scarcely
believe their eyes, as Humbert of Romans (1255) informs us. #39 At the beginning of the
fourteenth century, a celebrated pulpit orator, Giordano da Rivalto, declared that, owing
to the activity of the order, heresy had almost entirely disappeared from the Church. #40
The Friars Preachers were especially authorized by the Roman Church to preach crusades,
against the Saracens in favour of the Holy Land, against Livonia and Prussia, and against
Frederick II, and his successors. #41 This preaching assumed such importance that
Humbert of Romans composed for the purpose a treatise entitled, “Tractatus de
prædicatione contra Saracenos infideles et paganos” (Tract on the preaching of the Cross
against the Saracens, infidels and pagans). #42 In certain provinces, particularly in
Germany and Italy, the Dominican preaching took on a peculiar quality, due to the
influence of the spiritual direction which the religious of these provinces gave to the
numerous convents of women confided to their care. It was a mystical preaching; the
specimens which have survived are in the vernacular, and are marked by simplicity and
strength. #43 Among these preachers may be mentioned: St. Dominic, the founder and
model of preachers (d. 1221); Jordan of Saxony (d. 1237); #44 Giovanni di Vincenza,
whose popular eloquence stirred Northern Italy during the year 1233 — called the Age of
the Alleluia; #45 Giordano da Rivalto, the foremost pulpit orator in Tuscany at the
beginning of the fourteenth century; #46 Johann Eckhart of Hochheim (d. 1327), the
celebrated theorist of the mystical life; #47 Henri Suso (d. 1366), the poetical lover of
Divine wisdom; #48 Johann Tauler (d. 1361), the eloquent moralist; #49 Venturino la
Bergamo (d. 1345), the fiery popular agitator; #50 Jacopo Passavanti (d. 1357), the noted
author of the “Mirror of Penitence”; #51 Giovanni Dominici (d. 1419), the beloved orator
of the Florentines; #52 Alain de la Rochei (d. 1475), the Apostle of the Rosary; #53
Savonarola (d. 1498), one of the most powerful orators of all times. #54
(e) Academic Organization. —
The first order instituted by the Church with an academic
mission was the Preachers. The decree of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) requiring the
appointment of a master of theology for each cathedral school had not been effectual. The
Roman Church and St. Dominic met the needs of the situation by creating a religious
order vowed to the teaching of the sacred sciences. To attain their purpose, the Preachers
from 1220 laid down as a fundamental principle, that no convent of their order could be
founded without a doctor. #55 From their first foundation, the bishops, likewise,
welcomed them with expressions like those of the Bishop of Metz (22 April, 1221):
“Cohabitatio ipsorum non tantum laicis in praedicationibus, sed et clericis in sacris
lectionibus esset plurimum profutura, exemplo Domini Papæ, qui eis Romæ domum
contulit, et multorum archiepiscoporum ac episcoporum” etc. #56 (Association with them
would be of great value not only to laymen by their preaching, but also to the clergy by
their lectures on sacred science, as it was to the Lord Pope who gave them their house at
Rome, and to many archbishops and bishops.) This is the reason why the second master
general, Jordan of Saxony, defined the vocation of the order: “honeste vivere, discere et
docere”, i. e. upright living, learning and teaching; #57 and one of his successors, John the
Teuton, declared that he was “ex ordine Praedicatorum, quorum proprium esset docendi
munus”. #58 (Of the Order of Preachers whose proper function was to teach.) In pursuit
of this aim the Preachers established a very complete and thoroughly organized scholastic
system, which has caused a writer of our own times to say that “Dominic was the first
minister of public instruction in modern Europe”. #59
The general basis of teaching was the conventual school. It was attended by the religious
of the convent, and by clerics from the outside; the teaching was public. The school was
directed by a doctor, called later, though not in all cases, rector. His principal subject was
the text of Holy Scripture, which he interpreted, and in connection with which he treated
theological questions. The “Sentences” of Peter Lombard, the “History” of Peter
Comestor, the “Sum” of cases of conscience, were also, but secondarily, used as texts. In
the large convents, which were not called studia generalia, but were in the language of
the times studia solemnia, the teaching staff was more complete. There was a second
master or sub-rector, or a bachelor, whose duty it was to lecture on the Bible and the
“Sentences”. This organization somewhat resembled that of the studia generalia. The
head master held public disputations every fortnight. Each convent possessed a magister
studentium, charged with the superintendence of the students, and usually an assistant
teacher. These masters were appointed by the provincial chapters, and the visitors were
obliged to report each year to the chapter on the condition of academic work. Above the
conventual schools were the studia generalia. The first studium generale which the order
possessed was that of the Convent of St. Jacques at Paris. In 1229 they obtained a chair
incorporated with the university and another in 1231. Thus the Preachers were the first
religious order that took part in teaching at the University of Paris, and the only one
possessing two schools. In the thirteenth century the order did not recognize any
mastership of theology other than that received at Paris. Usually the masters did not teach
for any length of time. After receiving their degrees, they were assigned to different
schools of the order throughout the world. The schools of St. Jacques at Paris were the
principal scholastic centres of the Preachers during the Middle Ages.
In 1248 the development of the order led to the erection of four new studia generalia — at
Oxford, Cologne, Montpellier, and Bologna. When at the end of the thirteenth and the
beginning of the fourteenth century several provinces of the order were divided, other
studia were established at Naples, Florence, Genoa, Toulouse, Barcelona, and Salamanca.
The studium generale was conducted by a master or regent, and two bachelors who
taught under his direction. The master taught the text of the Holy Scriptures with
commentaries. The works of Albert the Great and St. Thomas Aquinas show us the nature
of these lessons. Every fifteen days the master held a debate upon a theme chosen by
himself. To this class of exercises belong the “Quæstiones Disputatæ” of St. Thomas, while
his “Quaestiones Quodlibeticae” represent extraordinary disputations which took place
twice a year during Advent and Lent and whose subject was proposed by the auditors.
One of the bachelors read and commentated the Book of Sentences. The commentaries of
Albert and Thomas Aquinas on the Lombard are the fruit of their two-year baccalaureate
course as sententiarii. The biblicus lectured on the Scriptures for one year before
becoming a sententiarius. He did not commentate, but read and interpreted the glosses
which preceding ages had added to the Scriptures for better understanding of the text.
The professors of the studia generalia were appointed by the general chapters, or by the
master general, delegated for the purpose. Those who were to teach at Paris were taken
indiscriminately from the different provinces of the order.
The conventual schools taught only the sacred sciences, i. e. Holy Scripture and theology.
At the beginning of the thirteenth century neither priest nor religious studied or taught the
profane sciences As it could not set itself against this general status the order provided in
its constitutions, that the master general, or the general chapter, might allow certain
religious to take up the study of the liberal arts Thus, at first, the study of the arts, i. e. of
philosophy was entirely individual. As numerous masters of arts entered the order during
the early years, especially at Paris and Bologna, it was easy to make a stand against this
private teaching. However, the development of the order and the rapid intellectual
progress of the thirteenth century soon caused the organization — for the use of religious
only — of regular schools for the study of the liberal arts. Towards the middle of the
century the provinces established in one or more of their convents the study of logic; and
about 1260 the studia naturalium, i.e. courses in natural science. The General Chapter of
1315 commended the masters of the students to lecture on the moral sciences to all the
religious of their convents; i. e. on the ethics, politics, and economics of Aristotle. From
the beginning of the fourteenth century we find also some religious who gave special
courses in philosophy to secular students. In the fifteenth century the Preachers occupied
in several universities chairs of philosophy, especially of metaphysics. Coming in contact
as it did with barbaric peoples — principally with the Greeks and Arabs — the order was
compelled from the outset to take up the study of foreign languages. The Chapter
Generalissimo of 1236 ordered that in all convents and in all the provinces the religious
should learn the languages of the neighbouring countries. The following year Brother
Phillippe, Provincial of the Holy Land, wrote to Gregory IX that his religious had
preached to the people in the different languages of the Orient, especially in Arabic, the
most popular tongue, and that the study of languages had been added to their conventual
course. The province of Greece furnished several Hellenists whose works we shall
mention later. The province of Spain, whose population was a mixture of Jews and Arabs,
opened special schools for the study of languages. About the middle of the thirteenth
century it also established a studium arabicum at Tunis; in 1259 one at Barcelona;
between 1265 and 1270 one at Murcia; in 1281 one at Valencia. The same province also
established some schools for the study of Hebrew at Barcelona in 1281, and at Jativa in
1291. Finally, the General Chapters of 1310 commanded the master general to establish,
in several provinces, schools for the study of Hebrew, Greek, and Arabic, to which each
province of the order should send at least one student. In view of this fact a Protestant
historian, Molmier, in writing of the Friars Preachers, remarks: “They were not content
with professing in their convents all the divisions of science, as it was then understood;
they added an entire order of studies which no other Christian schools of the time seem to
have taught, and in which they had no other rivals than the rabbis of Languedoc and
This scholastic activity extended to other fields, particularly to the universities which were
established throughout Europe from the beginning of the thirteenth century; the Preachers
took a prominent part in university life. Those universities, like Paris, Toulouse etc., which
from the beginning had chairs of theology, incorporated the Dominican conventual school
which was patterned on the schools of the studia generalia. When a university was
established as in a city — as was usually the case — after the foundation of a Dominican
convent which always possessed a chair of theology, the pontifical letters granting the
establishment of the university made no mention whatever of a faculty of theology. The
latter was considered as already existing by reason of the Dominican school and others of
the mendicant orders, who followed the example of the Preachers. For a time in the
Dominican theological schools were simply in juxtaposition to the universities, which had
no faculty of theology. When these universities petitioned the Holy See for a faculty of
theology, and their petition was granted, they usually incorporated the Dominican school,
which thus became a part of the theological faculty. This transformation began towards
the close of the fourteenth and lasted until the first years of the sixteenth century. Once
established, this state of things lasted until the Reformation in the countries which became
Protestant, and until the French Revolution and its spread in the Latin countries.
The archbishops, who according to the decree of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215) were
to establish each metropolitan church a master of theology, considered themselves
dispensed from this obligation by reason of the creation of Dominican schools open to the
secular clergy. However, when they thought it their duty to apply the decree of the
council, or when later they were obliged by the Roman Church to do so, they frequently
called in a Dominican master to fill the chair of their metropolitan school. Thus the
metropolitan school of Lyons was entrusted to the Preachers, from their establishment in
that city until the beginning of the sixteenth century. #61 The same arrangement, though
not so permanent, was made at Toulouse, Bordeaux, Tortosa, Valencia, Urgel, Milan etc.
The popes, who believed themselves morally obligated to set an example regarding the
execution of the scholastic decree of the Lateran Council, usually contented themselves
during the thirteenth century with the establishment of schools at Rome by the Dominicans
and other religious orders. The Dominican masters who taught at Rome or in other cities
where the sovereign pontiffs took up their residence, were known as lectores curiae.
However, when the popes, once settled at Avignon, began to require from the archbishops
the execution of the decree of Lateran, they instituted a theological school in their own
papal palace; the initiative was taken by Clement V (1305-1314). At the request of the
Dominican, Cardinal Nicolas Alberti de Prato (d. 1321), this work was permanently
entrusted to a Preacher, bearing the name of Magister Sacri Palatii. The first to hold the
position was Pierre Godin, who later became cardinal (1312). The office of Master of the
Sacred Palace, whose functions were successively increased, remains to the present day
the special privilege of the Order of Preachers. #62
Finally, when towards the middle of the thirteenth century the old monastic orders began
to take up the scholastic and doctrinal movement, the Cistercians, in particular, applied to
the Preachers for masters of theology in their abbeys. #63 During the last portion of the
Middle Ages, the Dominicans furnished, at intervals, professors to the different orders, not
themselves consecrated to study. #64
The teaching activity of the order and its scholastic organization placed the Preachers in
the forefront of the intellectual life of the Middle Ages. They were the pioneers in all
directions as one may see from a subsequent paragraph relative to their literary
productions. We speak only of the school of philosophy and of theology created by them
in the thirteenth century which has been the most influential in the history of the Church.
At the beginning of the thirteenth century philosophical teaching was confined practically
to the logic of Aristotle and theology, and was under the influence of St. Augustine; hence
the name Augustinism generally given to the theological doctrines of that age. The first
Dominican doctors, who came from the universities into the order, or who taught in the
universities, adhered for a long time to the Augustinian doctrine. Among the most
celebrated were Roland of Cremona, Hugh of Saint Cher, Richard Fitzacre, Moneta of
Cremona, Peter of Tarentaise, and Robert of Kilwardby. It was the introduction into the
Latin world of the great works of Aristotle, and their assimilation, through the action of
Albertus Magnus, that opened up in the Order of Preachers a new line of philosophical
and theological investigation. The work begun by Albertus Magnus (1240-1250) was
carried to completion by his disciple, Thomas Aquinas (q. v.), whose teaching activity
occupied the last twenty years of his life (1245-1274). The system of theology and
philosophy constructed by Aquinas is the most complete, the most original, and the most
profound, which Christian thought has elaborated, and the master who designed it
surpasses all his contemporaries and his successors in the grandeur of his creative genius.
The Thomist School developed rapidly both within the order and without. The fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries witnessed the struggles of the Thomist School on various points of
doctrine. The Council of Vienne (1311) declared in favour of the Thomistic teaching,
according to which there is but one form in the human composition, and condemned as
heretical any one who should deny that “the rational or intellective soul is per se and
essentially the form of the human body”. This is also the teaching of the Fifth Lateran
Council (1515). See Zigliara, “De Mente Concilii Viennensis”, Rome, 1878, pp. 88-89.
The discussions between the Preachers and the Friars on the poverty of Christ and the
Apostles was also settled by John XXII in the Thomistic sense (12 Nov., 1323). #65 The question
regarding the Divinity of the Blood of Christ separated from His Body during His Passion,
raised for the first time in 1351, at Barcelona, and taken up again in Italy in 1463, was the
subject of a formal debate before Pius II. The Dominican opinion prevailed; although the
pope refused a sentence properly so called. #66 During the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries the Thomist School had to make a stand against Nominalism, of which a
Preacher had been one of the protagonists. The repeated sentences of the universities and
of princes slowly combatted this doctrine. #67
The Averroism against which Albert the Great and especially Aquinas had fought so
energetically did not disappear entirely with the condemnation of Paris (1277), but
survived under a more or less attenuated form. At the beginning of the sixteenth century
the debates were renewed, and the Preachers found themselves actively engaged therein in
Italy where the Averroist doctrine had reappeared. The General of the Dominicans,
Thomas de Vio (Cajetan) had published his commentaries on the “De Anima” of Aristotle
(Florence, 1509), in which, abandoning the position of St. Thomas, he contended that
Aristotle had not taught the individual immortality of the soul, but affirming at the same
time that this doctrine was philosophically erroneous. The Council of Lateran, by its
Decree, 19 Dec., 1513, not only condemned the Averroistic teaching, but exacted still
further that professors of philosophy should answer the opposing arguments advanced by
philosophers — a measure which Cajetan did not approve. #68 Pietro Pomponazzi, having
published at Bologna (1516) his treatise on the immortality of the soul in the Averroistic
sense, while making an open profession of faith in the Christian doctrine, raised numerous
polemics, and was held as a suspect. Chrysostom Javelli, regent of theology at the
Convent of St. Dominic, in agreement with the ecclesiastical authority, and at the request
of Pomponazzi, sought to extricate him from this difficulty by drawing up a short
theological exposé of the question which was to be added in the future to the work of
Pomponazzi. But this discussion did not cease all at once. Several Dominicans entered the
lists. Girolamo de Fornariis subjected to examination the polemic of Pomponazzi with
Augustin Nifi (Bologna, 1519); Bartolommeo de Spina attacked Cajetan on one article,
and Pomponazzi in two others (Venice, 1519); Isidore of Isolanis also wrote on the
immortality of the soul (Milan, 1520); Lucas Bettini took up the same theme, and Pico
della Mirandola published his treatise (Bologna, 1523); finally Chrysostom Javelli himself,
in 1523, composed a treatise on immortality in which he refuted the point of view of
Cajetan and of Pomponazzi. #69 Cajetan, becoming cardinal, not only held his position
regarding the idea of Aristotle, but further declared that the immortality of the soul was an
article of faith, for which philosophy could offer only probable reasons. #70
(f) Literary and Scientific Productions. —
During the Middle Ages the order had an
enormous literary output, its activity extending to all spheres. The works of its writers are
epoch-making in the various branches of human knowledge.
(i) Works on the Bible. —
The study and teaching of the Bible were foremost among the
occupations of the Preachers, and their studies included everything pertaining to it. They
first undertook correctories (correctoria) of the Vulgate text (1230-36), under the
direction of Hugh of Saint Cher, professor at the University of Paris. The collation with
the Hebrew text was accomplished under the sub-prior of St-Jacques, Theobald of
Sexania, a converted Jew. Two other correctories were made prior to 1267, the first called
the correctory of Sens. Again under the direction of Hugh of Saint Cher the Preachers
made the first concordances of the Bible which were called the Concordances of St.
Jacques or Great Concordances because of their development. The English Dominicans of
Oxford, apparently under the direction of John of Darlington, made more simplified
concordances in the third quarter of the thirteenth century. At the beginning of the
fourteenth century a German Dominican, Conrad of Halberstadt simplified the English
concordances still more; and John Fojkowich of Ragusa, at the time of the Council of
Basle, caused the insertion in the concordances of elements which had not hitherto been
incorporated in them. The Dominicans, moreover, composed numerous commentaries on
the books of the Bible. That of Hugh of Saint Cher was the first complete commentary on
the Scriptures. #71 The commentaries of Bl. Albertus Magnus and especially those of St.
Thomas Aquinas are still famous. With St. Thomas the interpretation of the text is more
direct, simply literal, and theological. These great Scriptural commentaries represent
theological teaching in the studia generalia. The lecturae on the text of Scripture, also
composed to a large extent by Dominicans, represent scriptural teaching in the other
studia of theology. St. Thomas undertook an “Expositio continua” of the four Gospels
now called the “Catena aurea”, composed of extracts from the Fathers with a view to its
use by clerics. At the beginning of the fourteenth century Nicholas of Trevet did the same
for all the books of the Bible. The Preachers were also engaged in translating the Bible
into the vernacular. In all probability they were the translators of the French Parisian Bible
during the first half of the thirteenth century, and in the fourteenth century they took a
very active share in the translation of the celebrated Bible of King John. The name of a
Catalonian Dominican, Romeu of Sabruguera, is attached to the first translation of the
Scriptures into Catalonian. The names of Preachers are also connected with the Valencian
and Castilian translations, and still more with the Italian. #72 The first pre-Lutheran
German translation of the Bible, except the Psalms, is due to John Rellach, shortly after
the middle of the fifteenth century. Finally the Bible was translated from Latin into
Armenian about 1330 by B. Bartolommeo Parvi of Bologna, missionary and bishop in
Armenia. These works enabled Vercellone to write: ” To the Dominican Order belongs the
glory of having first renewed in the Church the illustrious example of Origen and St.
Augustine by the ardent cultivation of sacred criticism”. #73
(ii) Philosophical works. —
The most celebrated philosophical works of the thirteenth
century were those of Albertus Magnus and St. Thomas Aquinas. The former compiled on
the model of Aristotle a vast scientific encyclopedia which exercised great influence on the
last centuries of the Middle Ages. #74 Thomas Aquinas, apart from special treatises and
numerous philosophical sections in his other works, commentated in whole or in part
thirteen of Aristotle’s treatises, these being the most important of the Stagyrite’s works.
#75 Robert of Kilwardby (d. 1279) a holder of the old Augustinian direction, produced
numerous philosophical writings. His “De ortu et divisione philosophiae” is regarded as
“the most important introduction to Philosophy of the Middle Ages”. #76 At the end of
the thirteenth and the beginning of the fourteenth century, Dietrich of Vriberg left an
important philosophical and scientific work. #77 At the end of the thirteenth and the
beginning of the fourteenth century the Dominicans composed numerous philosophical
treatises, many of them bearing on the special points whereon the Thomistic School was
attacked by its adversaries. #78
(iii) Theological works. —
In importance and number theological works occupy the
foreground in the literary activity of the order. Most of the theologians composed
commentaries on the “Sentences” of Peter Lombard, which was the classical text in
theological schools. Besides the “Sentences” the usual work of bachelors in the
Universities included Disputationes and Quodlibeta, which were always the writings of
masters. The theological summae set forth the theological matter according to a more
complete and well-ordered plan than that of Peter Lombard and especially with solid
philosophical principles in which the books of the “Sentences” were wanting. Manuals of
theology and more especially manuals, or summae, on penance for the use of confessors
were composed in great numbers. The oldest Dominican commentaries on the “Sentences”
are those of Roland of Cremona, Hugh of Saint Cher, Richard Fitzacre, Robert of
Kilwardby and Albertus Magnus. The series begins with the year 1230 if not earlier and
the last are prior to the middle of the thirteenth century. #79 The “Summa” of St. Thomas
(1265-75) is still the masterpiece of theology. The monumental work of Albertus Magnus
is unfinished. The “Summa de bono” of Ulrich of Strasburg (d. 1277), a disciple of Albert
is still unedited, but is of paramount interest to the historian of the thought of the
thirteenth century. #80 The theological summa of St. Antoninus is highly esteemed by
moralists and economists. #81 The “Compendium theologicæ veritatis” of Hugh Ripelin
of Strasburg (d. 1268) is the most widespread and famous manual of the Middle Ages.
#82 The chief manual of confessors is that of Paul of Hungary composed for the Brothers
of St. Nicholas of Bologna (1220-21) and edited without mention of the author in the
“Bibliotheca Casinensis” #83 and with false assignment of authorship by R. Duellius,
“Miscellan. Lib.” #84 The “Summa de Poenitentia” of Raymond of Pennafort, composed
in 1235, was a classic during the Middle Ages and was one of the works of which the
MSS. were most multiplied. The “Summa Confessorum” of John of Freiburg (d. 1314) is,
according to F. von Schulte, the most perfect product of this class of literature. The Pisan
Bartolommeo of San Concordio has left us a “Summa Casuum” composed in 1338, in
which the matter is arranged m alphabetical order. It was very successful in the thirteenth
and fourteenth centuries. The manuals for confessors of John Nieder (d. 1438), St.
Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence (d. 1459), and Girolamo Savonarola (d. 1498) were
much esteemed in their time. #85
(iv) Apologetic works. —
The Preachers, born amid the Albigensian heresy and founded
especially for the defense of the Faith, bent their literary efforts to reach all classes of
dissenters from the Catholic Church. They produced by far the most powerful works in the
sphere of apologetics. The “Summa contra Catharos et Valdenses” (Rome, 1743) of
Moneta of Cremona, in course of composition in 1244, is the most complete and solid
work produced in the Middle Ages against the Cathari and Waldenses. The “Summa
contra Gentiles” of St. Thomas Aquinas is one of that master’s strongest creations. It is the
defense of the Christian Faith against Arabian philosophy. Raymond Marti in his “Pugio
fidei”, in course of composition in 1278, #86 measures arms with Judaism. This work, to a
large extent based on Rabbinic literature, is the most important medieval monument of
Orientalism. #87 The Florentine, Riccoldo di Monte Croce, a missionary in the East (d.
1320), composed his “Propugnaculum Fidei” against the doctrine of the Koran. It is a rare
medieval Latin work based directly on Arabian literature. Demetrius Cydonius translated
the “Propugnaculum” into Greek in the fourteenth century and Luther translated it into
German in the sixteenth. #88
(v) Educational literature. —
Besides manuals of theology the Dominicans furnished a
considerable literary output with a view to meeting the various needs of all social classes
and which may be called educational or practical literature. They composed treatises on
preaching, models or materials for sermons, and collections of discourses. Among the
oldest of these are the “Distinctiones” and the “Dictionarius pauperum” of Nicholas of
Biard (d. 1261), the “Tractatus de diversis materiis prædicabilibus” of Stephen of Bourbon
(d. 1261), the “De eruditione prædicatorum” of Humbert of Romans (d. 1277), the
“Distinctiones” of Nicholas of Goran (d. 1295), and of Maurice of England (d. circa
1300). #89 The Preachers led the way in the composition of comprehensive collections of
the lives of the saints or legendaries, writings at once for the use and edification of the
faithful. Bartholomew of Trent compiled his “Liber epilogorum in Gesta Sanctorum” in
1240. After the middle of the thirteenth century Roderick of Cerrate composed a
collection of “Vitæ Sanctorum”. #90 The “Abbreviatio in gestis et miraculis sanctorum”,
composed in 1243 according to the “Speculum historiale” of Vincent of Beauvais, is the
work of Jean de Mailly. The “Legenda Sanctorum” of Jacopo de Voragine (Vorazze)
called also the “Golden Legend”, written about 1260, is universally known. “The success
of the book,” writes the Bollandist, A. Poncelet, “was prodigious; it far exceeded that of
all similar compilations.” It was besides translated into all the vernaculars of Europe. The
“Speculum Sanctorale” of Bernard Guidonis is a work of a much more scholarly character.
The first three parts were finished in 1324 and the fourth in 1329. About the same time
Peter Calo (d. 1348) undertook under the title of “Legenda sanctorum” an “immense
compilation” which aimed at being more complete than its predecessors. #91
Catechetical literature was also early taken in hand. In 1256-7 Raymond Marti composed
his “Explanatio symboli ad institutionem fidelium”. #92 Thomas Aquinas wrote four small
treatises which represent the contents of a catechism as it was in the Middle Ages: “De
articulis fidei et Ecclesiae Sacramentis”; “Expositio symboli Apostolorum”; “De decem
præceptis et lege amoris”; “Expositio orationis dominicae”. Several of these writings have
been collected and called the catechism of St. Thomas. #93 In 1277 Laurent d’Orléans
composed at the request of Philip the Bold, whose confessor he was, a real catechism in
the vernacular known as the “Somme le Roi”. #94 At the beginning of the fourteenth
century Bernard Guidonis composed an abridgment of Christian doctrine which he revised
later when he had become Bishop of Lodève (1324-31) into a sort of catechism for the use
of his priests in the instruction of the faithful. #95 The “Discipulus” of John Hérolt was
much esteemed in its day. #96
The order also produced pedagogical works. William of Tournai composed a treatise “De
Modo docendi pueros” #97 which the General Chapter of 1264 recommended, as well as
one on preaching and confession for school children. #98 Vincent of Beauvais wrote
especially for the education of princes. He first composed his “De eruditione filiorum
regalium” (Basle, 1481), then the “De eruditione principum”, published with the works of
St. Thomas, to whom as well as to Guillaume Perrault it has been incorrectly ascribed;
finally (c. 1260) the “Tractatus de morali principis institutione”, which is a general treatise
and is still unedited. #99 Early in the fifteenth century (1405) John Dominici composed his
famous “Lucula noctis”, in which he deals with the study of pagan authors in the education
of Christian youth. This is a most important work, written against the dangers of
Humanism. #100 Dominici is also the author of a much esteemed work on the government
of the family. #101 St. Antoninus composed a “Regola a ben vivere”. #102 Works on the
government of countries were also produced by members of the order; among them are
the treatises of St. Thomas “De rege et regno”, addressed to the King of Cyprus (finished
by Bartolommeo of Lucca), and the “De regimine subditorum”, composed for the
Countess of Flanders. At the request of the Florentine Government Girolamo Savonarola
drew up (1493) his “Trattati circa il reggimento e governo della cittá di Firenze” in which
he shows great political insight. #103
(vi) Canon law. —
St. Raymond of Pennafort was chosen by Gregory IX to compile the
Decretals (1230-34); to his credit also belong opinions and other works on canon law.
Martin of Troppau, Bishop of Gnesen, composed (1278) a “Tabula decreti” commonly
called “Margarita Martiniana”, which received wide circulation. Martin of Fano, professor
of canon law at Arezzo and Modena and podeatà of Genoa in 1260-2, prior to entering
the order, wrote valuable canonical works. Nicholas of Ennezat at the beginning of the
fourteenth century composed tables on various parts of canon law. During the pontificate
of Gregory XII John Dominici wrote copious memoranda in defense of the rights of the
legitimate pope, the two most important being still unedited. #104 About the middle of the
fifteenth century John of Torquemada wrote extensive works on the Decretals of Gratian
which were very influential in defense of the pontifical rights. Important works on
inquisitorial law also emanated from the order, the first directories for trial of heresy being
composed by Dominicans. The oldest is the opinion of St. Raymond of Pennafort (1235).
#105 The same canonist wrote (1242) a directory for the inquisitions of Aragon. #106
About 1244 another directory was composed by the inquisitors of Provence. #107 But the
two classical works of the Middle Ages on inquisitorial law are that of Bernard Guidonis
composed in 1321 under the title of “Directorium Inquisitionis hereticae pravitatis” #108
and the “Directorium Inquisitorum” of Nicholas Eymerich (1399). #109
(vii) Historical Writings. —
The activity of the Preachers in the domain of history was
considerable during the Middle Ages. Some of their chief works incline to be real general
histories which assured them great success in their day. The “Speculum Historiale” of
Vincent of Beauvais (d. circa 1264) is chiefly, like the other parts of the work, of the
nature of a documentary compilation, but he has preserved for us sources which we could
never otherwise reach. #110 Martin the Pole, called Martin of Troppau (d. 1279), in the
third quarter of the thirteenth century composed his chronicles of the popes and emperors
which were widely circulated and had many continuators. #111 The anonymous chronicles
of Colmar in the second half of the thirteenth century have left us valuable historical
materials which constitute a sort of history of contemporary civilization. #112 The
chronicle of Jacopo da Voragine, Archbishop of Genoa (d. 1298) is much esteemed. #113
Ptolemy of Lucca and Bernard Guidonis are the two great ecclesiastical historians of the
early fourteenth century. The “Historia ecclesiastica nova” of the former and the “Flores
cronicorum seu cathalogus pontificum romanorum” of the latter contain valuable historical
But the historical activity of Bernard Guidonis far exceeded that of Ptolemy and his
contemporaries; he is the author of twenty historical publications, several of which, such
as his historical compilation on the Order of Preachers, are very important in value and
extent. Bernard Guidonis is the first medieval historian who had a wide sense of historical
documentation. #114 The fourteenth century beheld a galaxy of Dominican historians, the
chief of whom were: Francesco Pipini of Bologna (d. 1320), the Latin translator of Marco
Polo and the author of a “Chronicon” which began with the history of the Franks; #115
Nicholas of Butrinto (1313), author of the “Relatio de Henrici VII imperatoris itinere
italico”; #116 Nicholas Trevet, compiler of the “Annales sex regum Angliæ”; #117 Jacopo
of Acqui and his “Chronicon imaginis mundi” (1330); #118 Galvano Fiamma (d. circal 1340)
composed various works on the history of Milan; #119 John of Colonna (c. 1336) is the
author of a “De viris illustribus” and a “Mare Historiarum”. #120 In the second half of the
fourteenth century Conrad of Halberstadt wrote a “Chronographia summorum Pontificum
et Imperatorum romanorum”; #121 Henry of Hervordia (d. 1370) wrote a ” Liber de rebus
memorabilibus”; #122 Stefanardo de Vicomercato is the author of the rhythmical poem
“De gestis in civitate Mediolani”. #123 At the end of the fifteenth century Hermann of
Lerbeke composed a “Chronicon comitum Schauenburgensium” and a “Chronicon
episcoporum Mindensium”. #124 Hermann Korner left an important
“Chronica novella”. #124b The “Chronicon” or “Summa Historialis” of St.
Antoninus, Archbishop of Florence, composed about the middle of the fifteenth century is
a useful compilation with original data for the author’s own times. #125 Felix Fabri #126
left valuable historical works; his “Evagatorium in Terræ Sanctæ, Arabiæ et Aegypti
peregrinationem” #127 is the most instructive and important work of this kind during the
fourteenth century. He is also the author of a “Descriptio Sueviæ” #128 and a “Tractatus
de civitate Ulmensi”. #129
(viii) Miscellaneous works. —
Being unable to devote a section to each of the different
spheres wherein the Preachers exercised their activity, we shall mention here some works
which obtained considerable influence or are particularly worthy of attention The
“Specula” (“Naturale”, “doctrinale”, “historiale”; the “Speculum morale” is apocryphal)
of Vincent of Beauvais constitute the largest encyclopedia of the Middle Ages and
furnished materials for many subsequent writers. #130 The work of Humbert of Romans,
“De tractandis in concilio generali”, composed in 1273 at the request of Gregory X and
which served as a programme to the General Council of Lyons in 1274, contains the most
remarkable views on the condition of Christian society and the reforms to be undertaken.
#131 Burchard of Mount Sion with his “Descriptio Terræ Sanctae” written about 1283,
became the classic geographer of Palestine during the Middle Ages. #132 William of
Moerbeke, who died as Archbishop of Corinth about 1286, was the revisor of translations
of Aristotle from the Greek and the translator of portions not hitherto translated. To him
are also due translations of numerous philosophical and scientific works of ancient Greek
authors. #133 The “Catholicon” of the Genoese John Balbus, completed in 1285, is a vast
treatise on the Latin tongue, accompanied by an etymological vocabulary. It is the first
work on profane sciences ever printed. It is also famous because in the Mainz edition
(1460) John Guttenberg first made use of movable type. #134 The “Philobiblion” edited
under the name of Richard of Bury, but composed by Robert Holcot (d. 1349), is the first
medieval treatise on the love of books. #135 John of Tambach (d. 1372), first professor of
theology at the newly-founded University of Prague (1347), is the author of a valuable
work, the “Consolatio Theologiæ”. #136 Towards the end of the fifteenth century
Frederico Frezzi, who died as Bishop of Foligno (1416), composed in Italian a poem in
the spirit of the “Divine Commedia” and entitled “Il Quadriregio” (Foligno, 1725). #137
The Florentine Thomas Sardi (d. 1517) wrote a long and valued poem, “L’anima
peregrina”, the composition of which dates from the end of the fifteenth century. #138
(ix) Liturgy. —
Towards the middle of the thirteenth century the Dominicans had definitely
established the liturgy which they still retain. The final correction (1256) was the work of
Humbert of Romans. It was divided into fourteen sections or volumes. The prototype of
this monumental work is preserved at Rome in the general archives of the order. #139 A
portable copy for the use of the master general, a beautiful specimen of thirteenth-century
book-making, is preserved in the British Museum, no. 23,935. #140 Jerome of Moravia,
about 1250, composed a “Tractatus de Musica”, #141 the most important theoretical
work of the thirteenth century on liturgical chant, some fragments of which were placed as
preface to the Dominican liturgy of Humbert of Romans. It was edited by Coussemaker in
his “Scriptores de musica medii ævi”, I (Paris, 1864). #142 The Preachers also left
numerous liturgical compositions, among the most renowned being the Office of the
Blessed Sacrament by St. Thomas Aquinas, one of the masterpieces of Catholic liturgy.
#143 Armand du Prat (d. 1306) is the author of the beautiful Office of St. Louis, King of
France. His work, selected by the Court of Philip the Bold, came into universal use in
France. #144 The “Dies Iræ” has been attributed to Cardinal Latino Malabranca who was
in his time a famous composer of ecclesiastical chants and offices. #145
(x) Humanistic works. —
The order felt more than is commonly thought the influence of
Humanism and furnished it with noteworthy contributions. This influence was continued
during the following period in the sixteenth century and reacted on its Biblical and
theological compositions. Leonardo Giustiniani, Archbishop of Mytilene, in 1449,
composed against the celebrated Poggio a treatise “De vera nobilitate”, edited with
Poggio’s “De nobilitate” (Avellino, 1657). The Sicilian Thomas Schifaldo wrote
commentaries on Perseus about 1461 and on Horace in 1476. He is the author of a “De
viris illustribus Ordinis Prædicatorum”, written in humanistic style, and of the Office of St.
Catherine of Siena, usually but incorrectly ascribed to Pius II. #146 Colonna’s work aims
to condense in the form of a romance all the knowledge of antiquity. It gives evidence of
its author’s profound classical learning and impassioned love for Græco-Roman culture.
The work, which is accompanied by the most perfect illustrations of the time, has been
called “the most beautiful book of the Renaissance”. #147 Tommaso Radini Todeschi
(Radinus Todischus) composed under the title “Callipsychia” (Milan, 1511) an allegorical
romance in the manner of Apuleius and inspired by the Dream of Poliphilus. The
Dalmatian, John Polycarpus Severitanus of Sebenico, commentated the eight parts of the
discourse of Donatus and the Ethics of Seneca the Younger #148 and composed
“Gramatices historicæ, methodicæ et exegeticæ” (Perugia, 1518). The Bolognese Leandro
Alberti (d. 1550) was an elegant Latinist and his “De viris illustribus ordinis
praedicatorum” (Bologna, 1517), written in the humanistic manner, is a beautiful specimen
of Bolognese publishing. #149 Finally Matteo Bandello (d. 1555), who was called the
“Dominican Boccacio”, is regarded as the first novelist of the Italian Cinquecento and his
work shows what an evil influence the Renaissance could exert on churchmen. #150
(g) The Preachers and Art. —
The Preachers hold an important place in the history of art.
They contributed in many ways to the artistic life of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance.
Their churches and convents offered an extraordinary field of activity to contemporary
artists, while a large number of the Preachers themselves did important work in the
various spheres of art. Finally by their teaching and religious activity they often exercised a
profound influence on the direction and inspiration of art. Primarily established under a
regime of evangelic poverty, the order took severe measures to avoid in its churches all
that might suggest luxury and wealth. Until the middle of the thirteenth century its
constitutions and general chapters energetically legislated against anything tending to
suppress the evidence of poverty. #151 But the order’s intense activity, its establishment in
large cities and familiar contact with the whole general movement of civilization triumphed
over this state of things. As early as 1250, churches and convents appeared called opus
sumptuosum. #152 They were, however, encouraged by ecclesiastical authority and the
order eventually relinquished its early uncompromising attitude. Nevertheless ascetic and
morose minds were scandalized by what they called royal edifices. #153 The second half
of the thirteenth century saw the beginning of a series of monuments, many of which are
still famous in history and art. “The Dominicans,” says Cesare Cantù, “soon had in the
chief towns of Italy magnificent monasteries and superb temples, veritable wonders of art.
Among others may be mentioned: the Church of Santa Maria Novella, at Florence; Santa
Maria Sopra Minerva, at Rome; St. John and St. Paul, at Venice; St. Nicholas, at Treviso;
St. Dominic, at Naples, at Perugia, at Prato, and at Bologna, with the splendid tomb of the
founder, St. Catherine, at Pisa; St. Eustorgius and Sta Maria delle Grazie, at Milan, and
several others remarkable for a rich simplicity and of which the architects were mostly
France followed in Italy’s footsteps. Here mention must be made of the Jacobins of
Toulouse; #155 St. Jacques de Paris; #156 St. Maximin in Provence; #157 Notre-Dame-de-Confort at Lyons. #158 A comprehensive account of the architectural work of the
Dominicans in France may be found in the magnificent publication of Rohault de Fleury
“Gallia Dominicana, Les couvents de Saint-Dominique en France au moyen-âge”. #159
Spain was also covered with remarkable monuments: St. Catherine of Barcelona and St.
Thomas of Madrid were destroyed by fire; S. Esteban at Salamanca, S. Pablo and S.
Gregorio at Valladolid, Santo Tomas at Avila, San Pablo at Seville and at Cordova. S.
Cruz at Granada, Santo Domingo at Valencia and Saragossa. #160 Portugal also had
beautiful buildings. The church and convent of Batalha are perhaps the most splendid ever
dwelt in by the order. #161 Germany had beautiful churches and convents, usually
remarkable for their simplicity and the purity of their lines. #162
Whatever may be said to the contrary the Dominicans as well as other mendicant orders
created a special architectural art. They made use of art as they found it in the course of
their history and adapted it to their needs. They adopted Gothic art and assisted in its
diffusion, but they accepted the art of the Renaissance when it had supplanted the ancient
forms. Their churches varied in dimensions and richness, according to the exigencies of
the place. They built a number of churches with double naves and a larger number with
open roofs. The distinct characteristic of their churches resulted from their sumptuary
legislation which excluded decorated architectural work, save in the choir. Hence the predominance of single lines in their buildings. This exclusivism, which often went as far as
the suppression of capitals on the columns, gives great lightness and elegance to the naves
of their churches. While we lack direct information concerning most of the architects of
these monuments, there is no doubt that many of the men who supervised the construction
of its churches and convents were members of the order and they even assisted in works
of art outside of the order. Thus we know that Brother Diemar built the Dominican church
of Ratisbon (1273-77). #163 Brother Volmar exercised his activity in Alsace about the
same time and especially at Colmar. #164 Brother Humbert was the architect of the
church and convent of Bonn, as well as of the stone bridge across the Aar, in the Middle
Ages the most beautiful in the city. #165 In Italy architects of the order are known to
fame, especially at Florence, where they erected the church and cloisters of S. Maria
Novella, which epitomize the whole history of Florentine art. #166 At first the order
endeavoured to banish sculpture from its churches, but eventually accepted it and set the
example by the construction of the beautiful tomb of St. Dominic at Bologna, and of St.
Peter of Verona at the Church of St. Eustorgius at Milan. A Dominican, William of Pisa,
worked on the former. #167 Brother Paschal of Rome executed interesting sculptural
works, e. g. his sphinx of Viterbo, signed and dated (1286), and the paschal candlestick of
Sta. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome. #168
There were many miniaturists and painters among the Preachers. As early as the thirteenth
century Hugh Ripelin of Strasburg (d. 1268) was renowned as a painter. #169 But the
lengthy list is dominated by two masters who overshadow the others, Fra Angelico and
Fra Bartolommeo. The work of Fra Giovanni Angelico da Fiesole (d. 1455) is regarded as
the highest embodiment of Christian inspiration in art. #170 Fra Bartolommeo belongs to
the golden age of the Italian Renaissance. He is one of the great masters of drawing. His
art is scholarly, noble and simple and imbued with a tranquil and restrained piety. #171
The order also produced remarkable painters on glass: James of Ulm (d. 1491), who
worked chiefly at Bologna and William of Marcillat (d. 1529), who in the opinion of his
first biographer was perhaps the greatest painter on glass who ever lived. #172 As early as
the fourteenth century Dominican churches and convents began to be covered with mural
decorations. Some of these edifices became famous sanctuaries of art, such as S. Maria
Novella and S. Marco of Florence. But the phenomenon was general at the end of the
fifteenth century, and thus the order received some of the works of the greatest artists, as
for instance the “Last Supper” of Leonardo da Vinci (1497-98) in the refectory of S.
Maria delle Grazie at Milan. #173
The Preachers exercised a marked influence on painting. The order infused its apostolic
zeal and theological learning into the objects of art under its control, thus creating what
may be called theological painting. The decoration of the Campo Santo of Pisa, Orcagna’s
frescoes in the Strozzi chapel and the Spanish chapel at S. Maria Novella, Florence, have
long been famous. #174 To the same causes were due the numerous triumphs of St.
Thomas Aquinas (Hettner, op. cit.; Berthier, “Le triomphe de Saint Thomas dans la
chapelle des Espagnols à Florence”, Fribourg, 1897; Ucelli, “Dell’ iconografia di s.
Tommaso d’Aquino”, Naples, 1867). The influence of Savonarola on the artists and the art
of his time was profound. #175 The Dominicans also frequently furnished libretti, i. e.
dogmatic or symbolic themes for works of art. They also opened up an important source
of information to art with their sanctoriaux and their popularizing writings. Artistic works
such as the dances of death and sybils allied with the prophets are greatly indebted to
them. #176 Even the mystical life of the order, in its way, exercised an influence on
contemporary art. #177 Its saints and its confraternities, especially that of the Rosary,
inspired many artists. #178
(h) The Preachers and the Roman Church. —
The Order of Preachers is the work of the
Roman Church. She found in St. Dominic an instrument of the first rank. But it was she
who inspired the establishment of the order, who loaded it with privileges, directed its
general activity, and protected it against its adversaries. From Honorius III (1216) till the
death of Honorius IV (1287) the papacy was most favourable to the Preachers. Innocent
IV’s change of attitude at the end of his pontificate (10 May, 1254), caused by the
recriminations of the clergy and perhaps also by the adhesion of Arnold of Trier to
Frederick II’s projects of anti-ecclesiastical reform, was speedily repaired by Alexander IV
(22 Dec., 1254). #179 But as a general thing during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries
the popes remained much attached to the order, displaying great confidence in it, as is
made manifest by the “Bullarium” of the Preachers. No other religious order, it would
seem, ever received eulogies from the papacy like those addressed to it by Alexander IV,
23 May, 1257. #180 The order co-operated with the Church in every way, the popes
finding in its ranks assistants who were both competent and devoted. Beyond doubt
through its own activity, its preaching and in instruction, it was already a powerful agent
of the papacy; nevertheless the popes requested of it a universal co-operation. Matthew
Paris states in 1250: “The Friars Preachers, impelled by obedience, are the fiscal agents,
the nuncios and even the legates of the pope. They are the faithful collectors of the
pontifical money by their preaching and their crusades and when they have finished they
begin again. They assist the infirm, the dying, and those who make their wills. Diligent
negotiators, armed with powers of every kind, they turn all to the profit of the pope”.
#181 But the commissions of the Church to the Preachers far exceeded those enumerated
by Matthew Paris, and among the weightiest must be mentioned the visitation of
monasteries and dioceses, the administration of a large number of convents of nuns and
the inquisitorial office. The order attempted to withdraw from its multifarious
occupations, which distracted it from its chief end. Gregory IX partially yielded to their
demands (25 Oct., 1239), #182 but the order never succeeded in wholly winning its cause.
The Dominicans gave to the Church many noted personages: among them during the
Middle Ages were two popes, Innocent V (1276) and Benedict XI (1303-4). #184 There
were twenty-eight Dominican cardinals during the first three centuries of the order’s
existence. Some of them were noted for exceptional services to the papacy. The earliest of
them, Hugh of Saint Cher, had the delicate mission of persuading Germany to accept
William of Holland after the deposition of Frederick II. #185 Cardinal Latino Malabranca is
famous for his legations and his pacification of Florence (1280). #186 Nicholas Albertini of
Prato (1305-21) also undertook the pacification of Florence (1304). #187 Cardinal
Giovanni Dominici (1408-19) was the staunchest defender of the legitimate pope, Gregory
XII, at the end of the Great Schism; and in the name of his master resigned is the papacy at
the Council of Constance. #188 Cardinal John de Torquemada (Turrecremata, 1439-68),
an eminent theologian, was one of the strongest defenders of the pontifical rights at the
time of the Council of Basle. #189
Many important officials were furnished to the Church: Masters of the Sacred Palace;
#190 pontifical penitentiaries; #191 and especially pontifical inquisitors. The defense of the
Faith and the repression of heresy is essentially an apostolic and pontifical work. The
Preachers also furnished many delegate judges holding their powers either from the bishops
or from the pope, but the order as such had no mission properly so called, and the
legislation for the repression of heresy was in particular absolutely foreign to it. The
extreme dangers run by the Church at the beginning of the thirteenth century owing to the
progress of the Albigensians and Cathari impelled the papacy to labour for their repression.
It first urged the bishops to act, and the establishment of synodal witnesses was destined to
make their mission more effective, but the insufficiency of their arrangement induced
Gregory IX to advise the bishops to make use of the Preachers and finally doubtless owing
to the lack of zeal displayed by many bishops, to create inquisitorial judges by pontifical
delegation. The Preachers were not chosen de jure but de facto and successively in the
various provinces of the order. The pope usually charged the Dominican provincials with
the nomination of inquisitorial officers whose jurisdiction ordinarily coincided with the
territory of the Dominican province. In their office the inquisitors were removed from the
authority of their order and dependent only on the Holy See. The first pontifical inquisitors
were invariably chosen from the Order of Preachers, the reason being the scarcity of
educated and zealous clerics. The Preachers, being vowed to study and preaching, were
alone prepared for a ministry, which required both learning and courage. The order
received this like many other pontifical commissions, only with regret. The master general,
Humbert of Romans declared that the friars should flee all odious offices and especially the
The same solicitude to remove the order from the odium of the inquisitorial office impelled
the provincial chapter of Cahors (1244) to forbid that anything should accrue to the friars
from the administration of the Inquisition, that the order might not be slandered. The
provincial chapter of Bordeaux (1257) even forbade the religious to eat with the inquisitors
in places where the order had a convent. #193 In countries where heresy was powerful, for
instance in the south of France and the north of Italy, the order had much to endure,
pillage, temporary expulsion, and assassination of the inquisitors. After the putting to death
of the inquisitors at Avignonet (28 May, 1242) and the assassination of St. Peter of Verona
(29 April, 1242) #194 the order, whose administration had much to suffer from this war
against heresy, immediately requested to be relieved of the inquisitorial office. Innocent IV
refused (10 April, 1243), #195 and the following year the bishops of the south of France petitioned the pope
that he would retain the Preachers in the Inquisition. #196 Nevertheless the Holy See
understood the desire of the Preachers; several provinces of Christendom ceased to be
administered by them and were confided to the Friars Minor viz., the Pontifical States,
Apulia, Tuscany, the March of Trevisa and Slavonia, and finally Provence. #197 The
suppression of heresy which had been especially active in certain more affected parts of
Christendom, diminished notably in the second half of the thirteenth century. The particular
conditions prevailing in Spain brought about the reestablishment of the Inquisition with
new duties for the inquisitor general. These were exercised from 1483 to 1498 by Thomas
of Torquemada, who reorganized the whole scheme of suppression, and by Diego de Deza
from 1498 to 1507. These were the first and last Dominican inquisitors general in Spain.
(i) The Friars Preachers and the Secular Clergy. —
The Preachers, who had been
constituted from the beginning as an order of clerics vowed to ecclesiastical duties with a
view to supplementing the insufficiency of the secular clergy, were universally accepted by
the episcopate, which was unable to provide for the pastoral care of the faithful and the
instruction of clerics. It was usually the bishops who summoned the Preachers to their
dioceses. The conflicts which broke out here and there during the thirteenth century were
not generally due to the bishops but to the parochial clergy who considered themselves
injured in their temporal rights because of the devotion and generosity of the faithful
towards the order. As a general thing compromises were reached between the convents and
the parishes in which they were situated and peaceful results followed. The two great
contests between the order and the secular clergy broke out in France during the thirteenth
century. The first took place at the University of Paris, led by William of Saint-Amour
(1252-59), and was complicated by a scholastic question. The episcopate had no share in
this, and the church supported with all its strength the rights and privileges of the order,
which emerged victorious. #199 The strife broke out anew in the north of France after the
privilege of Martin IV, “Ad fructus uberes” (13 Dec., 1281), and lasted until the Council of
Paris in 1290. It was to a large extent conducted by Guillaume de Flavacourt, Bishop of
Amiens, but in this instance also the two great mendicant orders triumphed over their
adversaries, thanks to the energetic assistance of two cardinal legates. #200
The order gave many of its members to the episcopate, but endeavoured to prevent this.
Sts. Dominic and Franeis seem to have disapproved of the accession of their religious to
ecclesiastical dignities. #201 Jordanus of Saxony the immediate successor of St. Dominic,
forbade all acceptance of election or postulation to the episcopate, under pain of
excommunication, without special permission of the pope, the general chapter, and the
master general. #202 During his administration he resisted with all his strength and declared
that he would rather see a friar buried than raised to the episcopate. #203 Everyone knows
the eloquent letter which Humbert of Romans wrote to Albertus Magnus to dissuade him
from aecepting the nomination to the See of Ratisbon (1260) #204 But all this opposition
could not prevent the nomination of a great many to high ecclesiastical dignities. The worth
of many religious made them so prominent that it was impossible that they should not be
suggested for the episcopate. Princes and nobles who had sons or kinsmen in the order
often laboured for this result with interested motives, but the Holy See especially saw in the
accession of Dominicans to the episcopate the means of infusing it with new blood. From
the accession of Gregory IX the appointment of Dominicans to dioceses and archdioceses
became an ordinary thing. Hence until the end of the fifteenth century about fifteen hundred
Preachers were either appointed or translated to dioceses or archdioceses, among them
men remarkable for their learning, their competent administration, their zeal for souls, and
the holiness of their lives. #205
(j) The Preachers and Civil Society. —
During the Middle Ages the Preachers influenced
princes and communities. Princes found them to be prudent advisers, expert ambassadors,
and enlightened confessors. The French monarchy was much attached to them. As early as
1226 Jordanus of Saxony was able to write, in speaking of Blanche of Castile “The queen
tenderly loves the friars and she has spoken with mc personally and familiarly about her
affairs”. #206 No prince was more devoted to the order than St. Louis, nor did any grant it
more favours. The French monarchy sought most of its confessors during the Middle Ages
from the Order of Preachers. #207 It was the entrance of Humbert II, Dauphin of Vienna,
into the order, which gained Dauphiny for France. #208 The Dukes of Burgundy also
sought their confessors from the order. #209 The kings of England did likewise and
frequently employed its members in their service. #210 Several German emperors were
much attached to the order nevertheless the Preachers did not hesitate to enter into conflict
with Frederick II and Louis of Bavaria when these princes broke with the Church. #211
The kings of Castile and Spain invariably chose their confessors from among the Preachers.
#212 The kings of Portugal likewise sought their directors from the same source. #213
The first to be established in the centres of cities, the Dominicans exercised a profound
influence on municipal life, especially in Italy. A witness at the canonization of St. Dominic
in 1233 expresses the matter when he says that nearly all the cities of Lombardy and the
Marches placed their affairs and their statutes in the hands of the Preachers, that they might
arrange and alter them to their taste and as seemed to them fitting. The same was true of
the extirpation of wars, the restoration of peace, restitution for usury, hearing of
confessions and a multitude of benefits which would be too long to enumerate. #214 About
this time the celebrated John of Vicenza exercised powerful influence in the north of Italy
and was himself podestà of Verona. #215 An idea of the penetration of the order into all
social classes may be formed from the declaration of Pierre Dubois in 1300 that the
Preachers and the Minors knew better than anyone else the condition of the world and of
all social classes. #216 The part played by Catherine of Siena in the pacification of the
towns of Central Italy and the return of the papacy from Avignon to Rome is well known.
“She was the greatest figure of the second half of the fourteenth century, an Italian, not
only a saint, a mystic, a miracle-worker, but a statesman, and a great statesman, who
solved for the welfare of Italy and all Christendom the most difficult and tragic question of
her time”. #217 It was the Dominican Bishop of Geneva Adémar de la Roche, who granted
that town its liberties and franchise in 1387. #218 Finally reference must be made to the
profound influence exercised by Girolamo Savonarola (1498) on the political life of
Florence during the last years of the fifteenth century. #219
(k) The Preachers and the Faithful. —
During the thirteenth century the faithful were almost
without pastoral care and preaching. The coming of the Preachers was an innovation which
won over the people eager for religious instruction. What a chronicler relates of Thuringia
was the case almost everywhere: “Before the arrival of the Friars Preachers the word of
God was rare and precious and very rarely preached to the people. The Friars Preachers
preached alone in every section of Thuringia and in the town of Erfurt and no one hindered
them”. #220 About 1267 the Bishop of Amiens, Guillaume de Flavacourt, in the war
against heresy already mentioned, declared that the people refused to hear the word of God
from any save the Preachers and Minors. #221 The Preachers exercised a special influence
over the piously inclined of both sexes among the masses, so numerous in the Middle Ages,
and they induced to penance and continence a great many people living in the world, who
were commonly called Beguins, and who lived either alone or in more or less populous
communities. Despite the order’s attraction for this devout, half-lay, half-religious world,
the Preachers refused to take it under their jurisdiction in order not to hamper their chief
activity nor distort their ecclesiastical ideal by too close contact with lay piety. The General
Chapters of 1228 and 1229 forbade the religious to give the habit to any woman or to receive her profession, or to give spiritual direction to any community of women not strictly
subject to some authority other than that of the order. #222 But the force of circumstances
prevailed, and, despite everything, these clients furnished the chief elements of the Penitential Order of St. Dominic, who received their own rule in 1285, and of whom more has
been said above. #223 The Order especially encouraged congregations of the Blessed
Virgin and the saints, which developed greatly, especially in Italy. Many of them had their
headquarters in convents of the Preachers, who administered them spiritually. After the
Penitential movement of 1260 confraternities were formed commonly called Disciplinati,
Battuti, etc. Many of them originated in Dominican churches (there is no general historical
work on this subject). In 1274, during the Council of Lyons, Gregory X confided to the
Dominicans the preaching of the Holy Name of Jesus, whence arose confraternities of that
name. #224 Finally the second half of the fifteenth century saw the rapid development of
confraternities of the Holy Rosary under the influence of the Preachers. #225 With the
object of developing the piety of the faithful the Preachers allowed them to be buried in the
habit of the order. #226 From the time of Jordanus of Saxony they issued letters of
participation in the spiritual goods of the order. The same general established at Paris the
custom of the evening sermon (collatio) for the students of the University, in order to turn
them aside from dissipation, which custom passed to all the other universities.
(l) The Preachers and the Foreign Missions. —
During the Middle Ages the Order of
Preachers exercised considerable activity within the boundaries of Christendom and far
beyond. The evangelization of heathen countries was confided to the nearest Dominican
provinces. At the beginning of the fourteenth century the missions of Asia became a special
group, the congregation of Friars Pilgrims for Christ. Some of the remote provinces,
especially those of Greece and the Holy Land, were recruited from volunteers throughout
the order. Besides the work of evangelization the religious frequently assumed the mission
of ambassador or agent to schismatic or pagan princes, and Friars Preachers frequently
occupied sees in partibus infidelium. A number of them, faithful to the order’s doctrinal
vocation, composed works of all kinds to assist their apostolate to defend the Christian
Faith, to inform the Roman Church or Latin princes concerning the condition of the East,
and to indicate measures to be taken against the dangers threatening Christianity. Finally
they frequently shed their blood in these inhospitable and unfruitful countries. The province
of Spain laboured for the conversion of the Arabs of the Peninsula, and in 1256 Humbert of
Romans described the satisfactory results. #228 In 1225 the first Spanish Dominicans
evangelized Morocco and the head of the mission, Brother Dominic, was consecrated in
that year first Bishop of Morocco. #229 Some years later they were already established at
Tunis. #230 In 1256 and the ensuing years Alexander IV, at the instance of St. Raymond of
Pennafort, gave a vigorous impulse to this mission. #231
In the north of Europe the province of England or that of Dacia carried its establishments
as far as Greenland. #232 As early as 1233 the province of Germany promoted the crusade
against the Prussians and the heretical Stedingers, and brought them to the Faith. #233 The
province of Poland, founded by St. Hyaeinth (1221), extended its apostolate by means of
this saint as far as Kieff and Dantizig. In 1246 Brother Alexis resided at the Court of the
Duke of Russia, and in 1258 the Preachers evangelized the Ruthenians. #234 The province
of Hungary, founded in 1221 by Bl. Paul of Hungary, evangelized the Cumans and the
people of the Balkans. As early as 1235-37 Brother Richard and his companions set out in
quest of Greater Hungary — the Hungarian pagans still dwelling on the Volga. #235
The province of Greece, founded in 1228, occupied those territories of the empire of the
East which had been conquered by the Latins, its chief centre of activity being
Constantinople. Here also the Preachers laboured for the return of the schismatics to
eeelesiastical unity. #236 The province of the Holy Land established in 1228, occupied all
the Latin conquest of the Holy Land besides Nicosia and Tripoli. Its houses on the
Continent were destroyed one after the other with the defeat of the Christians, and at the
beginning of the fourteenth century the province was reduced to the three convents on the
Island of Cyprus. #237 The province of the Holy Land was the starting point for the
evangelization of Asia during the thirteenth century. As early as 1237 the provincial, Philip,
reported to Gregory IX extraordinary results obtained by the religious; the evangelization
reached Jacobites and Nestorians, Maronites and Saracens. #238 About the same time the
Friars established themselves in Armenia and in Georgia. #239
The missions of Asia continued to develop through out the thirteenth century and part of
the fourteenth and missionaries went as far as Bagdad and India. #240 In 1312 the master
general, Béranger de Landore, organized the missions of Asia into a special congregation
of “Friars Pilgrims”, with Franco of Perugia as vicar general. As a base of evangelization
they had the convent of Pera (Constantinople), Capha, Trebizond, and Ncgropont. Thence
they branched out into Armenia and Persia. In 1318 John XXII appointed Franco of
Perugia Archbishop of Sultanieh, with six other Dominicans as suffragans. During the first
half of the fourteenth century the Preachers occupied many sees in the East. When the
missions of Persia were destroyed in 1349, the Preachers possessed fifteen monasteries
there, and the United Brethren (see below) eleven monasteries. In 1358 the Congregation
of Pilgrims still had two convents and eight residences. This movement brought about the
foundation, in 1330, of the United Brethren of St. Gregory the Illuminator. It was the work
of Bl. Bartolommeo Petit of Bologna, Bishop of Maragha, assisted by John of Kerni. It was
formed by Armenian religious who adopted the Constitution of the Dominicans and were
incorporated with the order after 1356. Thirty years after their foundation the United
Brethren had in Armenia alone 50 monasteries with 700 religious. This province still
existed in the eighteenth century. #241
(m) The Preachers and Sanctity. —
It is characteristic of Dominican sanctity that its saints
attained holiness in the apostolate, in the pursuit or promotion of learning, administration,
foreign missions, the papacy, the cardinalate, and the episcopate. Until the end of the
fifteenth century the order in its three branches gave to the Church nine canonized saints
and at least seventy-three blessed. Of the first order (the Preachers) are St. Dominic, St.
Peter of Verona, martyr, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Raymond of Pennafort, St. Vincent
Ferrer, St. Antoninus of Florence. Among the Dominican saints in general there is a
predominance of the intellectual over the emotional qualities; their mystical life is more subjective than objective; and asceticism plays a strong part in their holiness. Meditation on the
sufferings of Christ and His love was common among them. Mystic states, with the
phenomena which accompany them, were ordinary, especially in convents of women in
German countries. Many received the stigmata in various forms. St. Thomas Aquinas and
Meister Eckhart were, from different standpoints, the greatest medieval theorists
concerning the mystical state. #242
(2) Modern Period. —
The modern period consists of the three centuries between the
religious revolution at the beginning of the sixteenth century (Protestantism) and the
French Revolution with its consequences. The Order of Preachers, like the Church itself,
felt the shock of these destructive revolutions but its vitality enabled it to withstand them
successfully. At the beginning of the sixteenth century the order was on the way to a
genuine renaissance when the Revolutionary upheavals occurred. The progress of heresy
cost it six or seven provinces and several hundreds of convents, but the discovery of the
New World opened up a fresh field of activity. Its gains in America and those which arose
as a consequence of the Portuguese conquests in Africa and the Indies far exceeded the
losses of the order in Europe, and the seventeenth century saw its highest numerical
development. The sixteenth century was a great doctrinal century, and the movement lasted
beyond the middle of the eighteenth. In modern times the order lost much of its influence
on the political powers, which had universally fallen into absolutism and had little sympathy
for the democratic constitution of the Preachers. The Bourbon Courts of the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries were particularly unfavourable to them until the suppression of
the Society of Jesus. In the eighteenth century there were numerous attempts at reform
which created, especially in France, geographical confusion in the administration. During
the eighteenth century the tyrannical spirit of the European Powers and, still more, the
spirit of the age lessened the number of recruits and the fervour of religious life. The
French Revolution ruined the order in France, and the crises which more or less rapidly
followed considerably lessened or wholly destroyed numerous provinces.
(a) Geographical Distribution and Statistics. —
The modern period saw a great change in
the geographical distribution of provinces and the number of religious in the order. The
establishment of Protestantism in Anglo-Saxon countries brought about during the
sixteenth century, the total or partial disappearance of certain provinces. The provinces of
Saxony, Dacia, England, and Scotland completely disappeared, that of Teutonia was
mutilated; that of Ireland sought refuge in various houses on the Continent. The discovery
and evangelization of America opened up vast territories, where the first Dominican
missionaries established themselves as early as 1510. The first province, with San Domingo
and the neighbouring islands for its territory, was erected, under the name of the Holy
Cross, in 1530. Others followed quickly — among them St. James of Mexico (1532), St.
John Baptist of Peru (1539), St. Vincent of Chiapa (1551), St. Antoninus of New Granada
(1551), St. Catherine of Quito (1580), St. Lawrence of Chile (1592). In Europe the order
developed constantly from the middle of the sixteenth century till the middle of the
eighteenth. New provinces or congregations were formed. Under the government of
Serafino Cavalli (1571-78) the order had thirty-one provinces and five congregations. In
1720 it had forty-nine provinces and four congregations. At the former date there were
about 900 convents; at the latter, 1200. During Cavalli’s time the order had 14,000
religious, and in 1720 more than 20,000. It seems to have reached its greatest numerical
development during the seventeenth century. Mention is made of 30,000 and 40,000
Dominicans; perhaps these figures include nuns; it does not seem probable that the number
of Preachers alone ever exceeded 25,000. The secularization in Austria-Hungary under
Joseph II began the work of partial suppression of convents, which was continued in
France by the Committee of Regulars (1770) until the Convention (1793) finally destroyed
all religious life in that country. The Napoleonic conquest overthrew many provinces and
houses in Europe. Most of them were eventually restored; but the Revolution destroyed
partially or wholly the provinces of Portugal (1834), Spain (1834), and Italy (1870). The
political troubles brought about by the revolt of Latin America from the mother country at
the beginning of the nineteenth century partially or wholly destroyed several provinces of
the New World. #243
(b) Administration of the Order. —
During the modern period the Preachers remained
faithful to the spirit of their organization. Some modifications were necessitated by the
general condition of the Church and civil society. Especially noteworthy was the attempt, in
1569, of St. Pius V, the Dominican pope, to restrict the choice of superiors by inferiors and
to constitute a sort of administrative aristocracy. #244 The frequent intervention of popes
in the government of the order and the pretensions of civil powers, as well as its great
development, diminished the frequency of general chapters; the rapid succession of masters
general caused many chapters to be convened during the seventeenth century; in the
eighteenth century chapters again became rare. The effective administration passed into the
hands of the general assisted by pontifical decrees. During these three centuries the order
had many heads who were remarkable for their energy and administrative ability, among
them Thomas de Vio (1508-18), Garcia de Loaysa (1518-24), Vincent Giustiniani (1558-70), Nicolo Ridolfi (1629-44), Giovanni Battista de’ Marini (1650-69), Antonin Cloche
(1686-1720), Antonin Brémond (1748-55), John Thomas de Boxadors. #245
(c) Scholastic Organization. —
The scholastic organization of the Dominicans during this
modern period tended to concentration of studies. The conventual school required by the
Constitutions disappeared, at least in its essentials, and in each province or congregation
the studies were grouped in particular convents. The studia generalia multiplied, as well as
convents incorporated with universities. The General Chapter of 1551 designates 27
convents in university towns where, and where only, the religious might take the degree of
Master in Theology. Through the generosity of Dominicans in high ecclesiastical offices
large colleges for higher education were also established for the benefit of certain
provinces. Among the most famous of these were the College of St. Gregory at Valladolid,
founded in 1488 by Alonzo of Burgos, adviser and confessor of the kings of Castile; #246
that of St. Thomas at Seville, established in 1515 by Archbishop Diego de Deza. #247 The
Preachers also established universities in their chief provinces in America — San Domingo
(1538), Santa Fé de Bogotá (1612), Quito (1681), Havana (1721) — and even in the
Philippines, where the University of Manila (1645) is still flourishing and in their hands.
During the sixteenth and following centuries the schedule of studies was more than once
revised, and the matter extended to meet the needs of the times. Oriental studies especially
received a vigorous impulse under the generalship of Antonin Brémond. #248
(d) Doctrinal Activity. —
The doctrinal activity of the Preachers continued during the
modern period. The order, closely connected with the events of the Reformation in German
countries, faced the revolutionary movement as best it could, and by preaching and writing
deserved what Dr. Paulus has said of it: “It may well be said that in the difficult conflict
through which the Catholic Church had to pass in Germany in the sixteenth century no
other religious order furnished in the literary sphere so many champions, or so well
equipped, as the Order of St. Dominic”. #249 The order was conspicuous by the number
and influence of the Dominican bishops and theologians who took part in the Council of
Trent. To a certain extent Thomistic doctrine predominated in the discussions and decisions
of the council, so that Clement VII, in 1593, could say, when he desired the Jesuits to
follow St. Thomas, that the council approved and accepted his works. #250 The
“Catechismus ad Parochos”, the composition of which had been ordered by the council,
and which was published at the command of Pius V (1566), is the work of Dominican
theologians. #251 The Spanish Dominican School of the sixteenth century, inaugurated by
Francisco de Vitoria (d. 1540), produced a series of eminent theologians: Melchior Cano
(1560), the celebrated author of “De locis theologicis”; Domingo Soto (1500); Bartolomé
de Medina (1580); Domingo Bañez. This. line of theologians was continued by Tomás de
Lemos (1629); Diego Alvarez (1635); Juan de S. Tomás (1644). #252
Italy furnished a contingent of Dominican theologians of note, of whom Thomas de Vio
Cajetan (d. 1534) was incontestably the most famous. #253 Franceseo Silvestro di Ferrara
(d. 1528) left a valuable commentary on the “Summa contra Gentiles”. #254 Chrysostom
Javelli, a dissenter from the Thomistic School, left very remarkable writings on the moral
and political sciences. #255 Catharinus (1553) is a famous polemicist, but an unreliable
theologian. #256 France likewise produced excellent theologians — Jean Nicolai (d. 1673);
Vincent de Contenson (d. 1674); Antoine Reginald (d. 1676); Jean-Baptiste Gonet (d.
1081); Antoine Gondin (d. 1695); Antonin Manoulié (d. 1706); Noël Alexandre (Natalie
Alexander) (d. 1724); Hyacinthe de Graveson (d. 1733); Hyacinthe Serry (d.1738).
From the sixteenth century to the eighteenth the Thomistic School upheld by the authority
of Dominican general chapters and theologians, the official adhesion of new religious
orders and various theological faculties, but above all by the Holy See, enjoyed an
increasing and undisputed authority.
The disputes concerning moral theology which disturbed the Church during the seventeenth
and eighteenth centuries, originated in the theory of probability advanced by the Spanish
Dominican Bartolomé de Medina in 1577. Several theologians of the order adopted, at the
beginning of the seventeenth century the theory of moral probability; but in consideration
of the abuses which resulted from these doctrines the General Chapter of 1656 condemned
them, and after that time there were no more Probabilists among the Dominicans. The
condemnations of Alexander VII (1665, 1667), the famous Decree of Innocent XI, and
various acts of the Roman Church combined to make the Preachers resolute opponents of
Probabilism. The publication of Concina’s “Storia del probabilismo” in 1743 renewed the
controversy. He displayed enormous activity, and his friend and disciple, Giovanni Vicenzo
Patuzzi (d. 1769) defended him in a series of vigorous writings. St. Alphonsus Liguori felt
the consequences of these disputes, and, in consideration of the position taken by the Holy
See, greatly modified his theoretical system of probability and expressed his desire to
adhere to the doctrine of St. Thomas Aquinas. #258
(e) Scientific productions. —
The literary activity of the Preachers of the sixteenth and
eighteenth centuries was not confined to the theological movement noticed above, but
shared in the general movement of erudition in the sacred sciences. Among the most
noteworthy productions were the works of Pagnini (d. 1541) on the Hebrew text of
Scripture; his lexicons and grammars were famous in their day and exercised a lasting
influence; #259 Sixtus of Siena (d. 1569), a converted Jew created the science of
introduction to the sacred Books with his “Bibliotheca Sancta”; #260 Jacques Goar,
liturgist and Orientalist published the “Euchologium sive rituale Græeorum” (Paris, 1647),
a work which, according to Renaudot, was unsurpassed by anything in its time. #261
François Combefis (d. 1679) issued editions of the Greek Fathers and writers. #262 Michel
le Quien, Orientalist, produced a monumental work in his “Oriens Christianus”. Vansleb (d.
1679) was twice sent by Colbert to the Orient, whence he brought a large number of MSS.
for the Bibliothèque du Roi. #263 Thomas Mammachi (d. 1792) left a large unfinished
work, “Origines et Antiquitates Christianæ ” (Rome, 1753-57).
In the historical field mention must be made of Bartholomew de Las Casas (d. 1566) who
left a valuable “Historia de las Indias” (Madrid, 1875), Noël Alexandre (d. 1724) left an
ecclesiastical history which was long held in esteem. #264 Joseph Augustin Orsi (d. 1761)
wrote an “Historia eelesiastica” which was continued by his confrère Filippo Angelo
Becchetti (d. 1814). The last edition (Rome, 1838) ; numbers 50 volumes. #265 Nico, las
Coeffeteau was, according to Vaugelas, one of the two greatest masters of the French
language at the beginning of the eighteenth century. #266 Thomas Campanella (d. 1639)
won renown by his numerous writings on philosophy and sociology as well as by the
boldness of his ideas and his eventful life. #267 Jacques Barelier (d. 1673) left one of the
foremost botanical works of his time, which was edited by A. y de Jussieu, “Icones
plantarum per Galliam, Hispaniam et Italiam observatarum ad vivum exhibitarum” (Paris,
(f) The Preachers and Christian Society. —
During the modern period the order performed
countless services for the Church. Their importance may be gathered from the fact that
during this period it gave to the Church two popes, St. Pius V (1566-72) and Benedict XIII
(1724-30), forty cardinals, and more than a thousand bishops and archbishops. From the
foundation of the Roman Congregations in the sixteenth century a special place was
reserved for the Preachers; thus the titulars of the Commissariat of the Holy Office and the
secretary of the Index were always chosen from this order. The title of Consultor of the
Holy Office also belonged by right to the master general and the Master of the Sacred
Palace. #269 The influence of the Preachers on the political powers of Europe was
unequally exercised during this period: they remained confessors of the kings of Spain until
1700; in France their credit decreased especially under Louis XIV, from whom they had
much to suffer. #270
(g) The Preachers and the Missions. —
The missions of the Preachers reached their greatest
development during the modern period. They were fostered, on the one hand, by the
Portuguese conquests in Africa and the East Indies and, on the other, by the Spanish
conquests in America and Western Asia. As early as the end of the fifteenth century
Portuguese Dominicans reached the West Coast of Africa and, accompanying the
explorers, rounded the Cape of Good Hope to settle on the coast of East Africa. They
founded temporary or permanent missions in the Portuguese African settlements and went
in succession to the Indies, Ceylon, Siam, and Malacca. They made Goa the centre of these
missions which in 1548 were erected into a special mission of the Holy Cross, which had to
suffer from the British conquest, but continued to flourish till the beginning of the
nineteenth century. The order gave a great many bishops to these regions. #271 The
discovery of America soon brought Dominican evangelization in the footsteps of the
conquistadores, one of them Diego de Deza, was the constant defender of Christopher
Columbus, who declared (letter of 21 Dec. 1504) that it was to him the Sovereigns of
Spain owed the possession of the Indies. #272 The first missionaries reached the New
World in 1510, and preaching was quickly extended throughout the conquered countries,
where they organized the various provinces already mentioned and found in Bartolomé de
las Casas who took the habit of the order, their most powerful assistant in the defence of
St. Louis Bertrand (d. 1581) was the great apostle of New Granada, and St. Rose of Lima
(d. 1617) the first flower of sanctity in the New World. #273 Dominican evangelization
went from America to the Philippines (1586) and thence to China (1590), where Gaspar of
the Holy Cross, of the Portuguese Congregation of the Indies, had already begun to work
in 1559. The Preachers established themselves in Japan (1601), in Tonking (1676), and in
the Island of Formosa. This flourishing mission passed through persecutions, and the
Church has raised its numerous martyrs to her altars. #274 In 1635 the French Dominicans
began the evangelization of the French Antilles, Guadaloupe, Martinique etc., which lasted
until the end of the eighteenth century. #275 In 1750 the Mission of Mesopotamia and
Kurdistan was founded by the Italian religious; it passed to the Province of France (Paris)
in 1856. #276
(h) Dominican Saints and Blessed. —
From the beginning of the sixteenth century members
of the Order of St. Dominic eminent for sanctity were the subjects of twenty-one
canonizations or beatifications. Some of the beatifications included a more or less large
number at one time: such were the Annamite martyrs, who formed a group of twenty-six
beati canonized 21 May, 1900, by Leo XIII, and the martyrs of Tonking, who numbered
eight, the last of whom died in 1861, and who were canonized by Pius X, 28 Nov., 1905.
Five saints were canonized during this period; St. John of Gorkum (d. 1572), , martyr; St.
Pius V (d. 1572), the last pope canonized; St. Louis Bertrand (d. 1581), missionary in the
New World; St. Catherine de’ Ricci (d. 1589), of the second order, and St. Rose of Lima
(d. 1617), tertiary, the first American saint. #277
(3) Contemporaneous Period . —
The contemporaneous period of the history of the
Preachers begins with the different restorations of provinces under taken after the
revolutions which had destroyed the order in several countries of the Old World and the
New. This period begins more or less early in the nineteenth century, and it cannot be
traced down to the present day without naming religious who are still living and whose
activity embodies the present life of the order. The revolutions not having totally destroyed
certain of the provinces, nor decimated them, simultaneously, the Preachers were able to
take up the laborious work of restoration in countries where the civil legislation did not
present insurmountable obstacles. During this critical period the number of Preachers seems
never to have sunk below 3500. The statistics for 1876 give 3748 religious, but 500 of
these had been expelled from their convents and were engaged in parochial work. The
statistics for 1910 give a total of very nearly 4472 religious both nominally and actually
engaged in the proper activities of the order. They are distributed in 28 provinces and 5
congregations, and possess nearly 400 convents or secondary establishments.
In the revival movement France held a foremost place, owing to the reputation and
convincing power of the immortal orator, Henri-Dominique Lacordaire (1802-61). He took
the habit of a Friar Preacher at Rome (1839), and the province of France was canonically
erected in 1850. From this province were detached the province of Lyons, called Occitania
(1862), that of Toulouse (1869), and that of Canada (1909). The French restoration
likewise furnished many labourers to other provinces, to assist in their organization and
progress. From it came the master general who remained longest at the head of the
administration during the nineteenth century, Père Vincent Jandel (1850-72). Here should
be mentioned the province of St. Joseph in the United States. Founded in 1805 by Father
Dominic Fenwick, afterwards first Bishop of Cincinnati, Ohio (1821-32), this province has
developed slowly, but now ranks among the most flourishing and active provinces of the
order. In 1910 it numbered 17 convents or secondary houses. In 1905 it established a large
house of studies at Washington.
The province of France (Paris) has produced a large number of preachers, several of whom
became renowned. The conferences of Notre-Dame-de-Paris were inaugurated by Père
Lacordaire. The Dominicans of the province of France furnished most of the orators:
Lacordaire (1835-36, 1843-51), Jacques Monsabré (1869-70, 1872-90), Joseph Ollivier
(1871, 1897), Thomas Etourneau (1898-1902). Since 1903 the pulpit of Notre Dame has
again been occupied by a Dominican. Père Henri Didon (d. 1900) was one of the most
esteemed orators of his time. The province of France displays greater intellectual and
scientific activity than ever, the chief centre being the house of studies at present situated at
Kain, near Tournai, Belgium, where are published “L’Année Dominicaine” (founded 1859),
“La Revue des Sciences Philosophiques et Theologiques” (1907), and “La Revue de la
The province of the Philippines, the most populous in the order, is recruited from Spain,
where it has several preparatory houses. In the Philippines it has charge of the University of
Manila, recognized by the Government of the United States, two colleges, and six
establishments; in China it administers the missions of North and South Fo-Kien, in the
Japanese Empire, those of Formosa and Shikoku, besides establishments at New Orleans,
at Caracas (Venezuela) and at Rome. The province of Spain has seventeen establishments
in the Peninsula and the Canaries, as well as the missions of Urubamba (Peru). Since 1910
it has published at Madrid an important review, “La Ciencia Tomista”. The province of
Holland has a score of establishments, and the missions of Curaçao and Puerto Rico. Other
provinces also have their missions. That of Piedmont has establishments at Constantinople
and Smyrna; that of Toulouse, in Brazil; that of Lyons, in Cuba, that of Ireland, in Australia
and Trinidad; that of Belgium, in the Belgian Congo, and so on.
Doctrinal development has had an important place in the restoration of the Preachers.
Several institutions besides those already mentioned have played important parts. Such is
the Biblical school at Jerusalem, open to the religious of the order and to secular clerics,
and which publishes the “Revue Biblique”, so highly esteemed in the learned world. The
faculty of theology of the University of Freiburg, confided to the care of the Dominicans in
1890, is flourishing and has about 250 students. The Collegium Angelicum, established at
Rome (1911) by Hyacinth Cormier (master general since 1902), is open to regulars and
seculars for the study of the sacred sciences. To the reviews mentioned above must be
added the “Revue Thomiste”, founded by Père Thomas Coconnier (d. 1908), and the
“Analecta Ordinis Prædicatorum” (1893). Among the numerous writers of the order in this
period are: Cardinals Thomas Zigliara (d. 1893) and Zephirin González (d. 1894), two
esteemed philosophers; Father Alberto Guillelmotti (d. 1893), historian of the Pontifical
Navy, and Father Heinrich Denifle, one of the most famous writers on medieval history (d.
1905). In 1910 the order had twenty archbishops or bishops, one of whom, Andreas Frühwirth,
formerly master general (1892-1902), is Apostolic nuncio at Munich. #278
B. The Second Order; Dominican Sisters. —
The circumstances under which St. Dominic
established the first convent of nuns at Prouille (1206) and the legislation given the second
order have been related above. As early as 1228 the question arose as to whether the Order
of Preachers would accept the government of convents for women. The order itself was
strongly in favour of avoiding this ministry and struggled long to maintain its freedom. But
the sisters found, even among the Preachers, such advocates as the master general,
Jordanus of Saxony (d. 1236), and especially the Dominican cardinal, Hugh of St. Cher (d.
1263), who promised them that they would eventually be victorious (1267). The
incorporation of monasteries with the order continued through the latter part of the
thirteenth and during the next century. In 1288 the papal legate, Giovanni Boccanazzi,
simultaneously placed all the Penitent Sisters of St. Mary Magdalen in Germany under the
government of the provincial of the Preachers, but this step was not final. The convents of
sisters incorporated with the order were especially numerous in the province of Germany
The statistics for 1277 show 58 monasteries already incorporated, 40 of which were in the
single province of Teutonia. The statistics for 1303 give 149 convents of Dominican nuns,
and these figures increased during the succeeding centuries. Nevertheless, a certain number
of monasteries passed under the jurisdiction of bishops. In the list of convents drawn up
during the generalship of Serafino Cavalli (1571-78) there are only 168 monasteries. But
the convents of nuns are not indicated for most provinces, and the number should really be
much higher. The Council of Trent placed all the convents of nuns under the jurisdiction of
bishops, but the Preachers frequently provided these houses with chaplains or almoners.
The statistics for 1770 give 180 monasteries, but they are incomplete. The revolutions,
which affected the ecclesiastical situation in most Catholic countries from the end of the
eighteenth century, brought about the suppression of a great many monasteries; several,
however, survived these disturbances, and others were re-established. In the list for 1895
there are more than 150 monasteries including some of the Third Order, which are
cloistered like the Second Order. These monasteries are most numerous in Spain. In
Germany the convents of nuns in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries witnessed the
development of an intense mystical life, and several of these houses have preserved
accounts of the life of the sisters, usually in the vernacular. The Dominican sisters,
instructed and directed by an order of preachers and teachers, were remarkable not only for
spiritual but also for intellectual culture. In the course of seven centuries various nuns have
left literary and artistic works which bear witness to the culture of some of these
C. The Third Order. —
Neither St. Dominic nor the early Preachers wished to have under
their jurisdiction — and consequently under their responsibility — either religious or lay
associations. We have seen their efforts to be relieved of the government of nuns who,
nevertheless, were following the rule of the order. But numerous laymen, and especially lay
women, who were leading in the world a life of penance or observing continence, felt the
doctrinal influence of the order and grouped themselves about its convents. In 1285 the
need of more firmly uniting these lay elements and the idea of bringing under the direction
of the Preachers a portion of the Order of Penance led the seventh master general, Muñon
de Zamora, at the instance of Honorius IV to draw up the rule known as that of the
Penance of St. Dommic. Inspired by that of the Brothers of Penance, this rule had a more
ecclesiastical character and firmly subordinated the conduct of the brothers to the authority
of the Preachers. Honorius IV confirmed the foundation by the collation of a privilege (28
Jan., 1286). The former master general of the Friars Minor, Jerome d’Ascoli, having
become pope in 1288 under the name of Nicholas IV, regarded the action of his
predecessor and of the master general of the Friars-Preachers as a kind of defiance of the
Friars Minor who considered themselves the natural protectors of the Brothers of Penance,
and by his letters of 17 August, 1289, he sought to prevent the desertion of the Brothers of
Penance. Muñon de Zamora discharged his office of master general as it had been confided
to him by Martin IV. The Order of Preachers protested with all its might against what it
regarded as an injustice. These events retarded the development of the Dominican Third
Order, a portion of the Preachers remaining un favourable to the institution. Nevertheless,
the Third Order continued to exist; one of its fraternities, that of Siena, was especially
flourishing, a list of its members from 1311 being extant The sisters numbered 100 in 1352,
among them she who was to become St. Catherine of Siena. They numbered 92 in 1378.
The reforming movement of Raymund of Capua, confessor and historian of St. Catherine,
aimed at the spread of the Third Order; in this Thomas Caffarini of Siena was especially
active. The Dominican Third Order received new approbation from Boniface IX, 18
January, 1401, and on 27 April of the following year the pope published its rule in a Bull,
whereupon its development received a fresh impetus. It never became very widespread, the
Preachers having sought quality rather than number of tertiaries. St. Catherine of Siena,
canonized in 1461, is the patroness of the Third Order, and, following the example of her
who has been called the Joan of Arc of the papacy, the Dominican tertiaries have always
manifested special devotion to the Roman Church. Also in imitation of their patroness, who
wrote splendid mystical works, they endeavoured to acquire a special knowledge of their
religion, as befits Christians incorporated with a great doctrinal order. The Third Order has
given several blessed to the Church, besides St. Catherine of Siena and St. Rose of Lima.
For several centuries there have been regular convents and congregations belonging to the
Third Order. The nineteenth century witnessed the establishment of a large number of
regular congregations of tertiaries devoted to works of charity or education. In 1895 there
were about 55 congregations with about 800 establishments and 20,000 members. In the
United States there are flourishing convents at Sinsinawa (Wisconsin), Jersey City,
Traverse (Michigan), Columbus (Ohio), Albany (New York), and San Francisco
In 1852 Père Lacordaire founded in France a congregation of Priests for the education of
youth called the Third Teaching Order of St. Dominic. It is now regarded as a special
province of the Order of Preachers, and had flourishing and select colleges in France at
Oullins (1853), Sorèze (1854), Arceuil (1863), Arcachon (1875), Paris (Ecole Lacordaire
1890). These houses have ceased to be directed by Dominicans since the persecution of
1903. The teaching Dominicans now have the Collège Lacordaire at Buenos Aires,
Champittet at Lausanne (Switzerland), and San Sebastian (Spain). During the Paris
Commune four martyrs of the teaching order died in company with a priest of the First
Order, 25 May, 1871. One of them, Père Louis Raphael Captier was an eminent educator.
1 Potthast, “Reg., Pont., Rom.”, 2912.
2 Balme-Lelaidier, “Cartulaire ou Histoire Diplomatique de St. Dominic “, Paris, 1893, I,
130sq.; Guiraud, ” Cart. de Notre Dame de Prouille,” Paris, 1907, I, CCCXXsq.
3 The Institutions are edited in Balme, “Cart.” II, 425; “Bull. Ord. Præd.”, VII, 410;
Duellius, ” Misc.”, bk. I (Augsburg, 1723), 169; “Urkundenbuch der Stadt.”, I (Fribourg,
Leipzig, 1883), 605.
4 Quétif-Echard, “Scriptores Ord. Præd.”, L 12-13; Denifle, “Archiv. für Literatur und
Kirehengeschichte”, I, 194; Balme, “Cart.”, II, 18.
5 Balme, “Cart.” II, 71-88; Potthast, 5402-5403.
6 Balme, “Cart.” II, 131; “Annales Ord. Præd.”, Rome, 1756, p. 411; Guiraud, “St.
Dominic”, Paris, 1899, p. 95.
7 “Script. Ord. Præd.”, I, 20; Denifle, “Archiv.”, I, 212; Balme, “Cart.”, III, 575.
8 It was edited in Denifle, “Archiv.”, V, 553; “Acta Capitulorum Generalium”, I (Rome,
1898), II, 13, 18, in “Monum. Ord. Præd. Hist.”, bk. III.
9 The Constitutions are edited in “Analecta, Ord. Præd.” (Rome, 1897), 338; Finke,
“Ungedruckte Dominicanerbriefe des 13 Jahrhunderts” (Paderborn, 1891), D. 53;
“Litterae Encyclicae magistrorum generalium” (Rome, 1900), in ” Mon. Ord. Praed.
Hist.”, V, p. 513.
10 Denifle, “Archiv.”, II, 549.
11 Rome, Archives of the Order, Cod. Ruten, 130-139.
12 “Kirchengeschichte Deutschlands”, part IV, Leipzig, 1902, p. 390.
13 Potthast, n. 1566; Humberti de Romanis, “Opera de vita regulari”, ed., Berthier, I,
Rome, 1888, n. 43.
14 Mon. Ger. Hist.: SS. XXXII, 233, 236.
15 Delisle, “Notes et extraits des mss. de la Bibl. Nat.”, Paris, xxvii, 1899, 2nd part, p. 312.
See the editions of the Constitutions mentioned above: “Const. Ord. Fr. Præd.”, Paris, 1,
1888, “Acta Capit. Gen. Ord. Fr. Præd.”, ed., Reichert, Rome, 1898, sq. 9 vols.; Lo
Cicero, Const., “Declar. et Ord. Capit. Gen. O. P.”, Rome, 1892; Humbert de Romanis,
“Opera de vita regulari”, ed. Berthier, Rome, 1888; Reichert, “Feier und Gesehäftsordung
der Provincialkapitel des Dominikanerordens im 13 Jahrhundert” in “Römische Quart.”,
1903, p. 101.
16 Acta Cap. Gen. I, 8.
17 Humbert de Romanis, Op., II, 46.
18 “Cons”. Ord. Praed.”, passim;. Denifle, “Die Const. des Predigerordens” in “Archiv. f.
Litt. u. Kirchengesch.”, I, 165; Mandonnet, ” Les Chanoines — Prêcheurs de Bologne
d’après Jacques de Vitry” in “Archives de la société d’histoire du canton de Fribourg”, bk.
VIII, 15; Lacordaire, ” Mémoire pour la restauration des Frères Prêcheurs dans la
Chrétienté”, Paris, 1852; P. Jacob, “Memoires sur la canonicité de l’institut de St.
Dominic”, Béziers, 1750, tr. into Italian under the title; ” Difesa del canonicato dei FF.
Predicatori”, Venice, 1758; Laberthoni, “Exposé de l’état, du régime, de la legislation et
des obligations des Frères Prêcheurs”, Versailles, 1767 (new ed., 1872).
19 Potthast, 22358.
20 The text of the Rule of the Brothers of the Penitence of St. Dominic is in “Regula S.
Augustini et Constitutiones FF. Ord. Praed.” (Rome, 1690), 2nd pt. p. 39; Federici,
“Istoria dei cavalieri Gaudent” (Venice, 1787), bk. II, cod. diplomat., p. 28; Mandonnet,
“Les règles et le gouvernement de l’Ordo de Poenitentia au XIIIe siècle” (Paris, 1902);
Mortier, “Histoire des Maîtres Généraux des Frères Prêcheurs”, II (Paris, 1903), 220.
21 De Laborde, “Layette du trésor des chartes”, Paris 1875, III, 304.
22 Fontana, “Monumenta Dominicana”, Rome, 1674, pp. 207-8.
23 Quétif-Echard, “Script. Ord. Praed.”, I, p. 1-15; “Anal. Ord. Praed.”, 1893, passim;
Mortier, “Hist. des Maîtres Généraux”, I-V, passim.
24 Balme-Lelaidier, “Cart. de St. Dominic”; Guiraud, ” St. Dominic” (Paris, 1899); Mothon,
“Vie du B. Jourdain de Saxe” (Paris, 1885); Reichert, “Des Itinerar des zweiten
Dominikaner-generals Jordanis von Sachsen” in “Festschrift des Deutschen Campo Santo
in Rom” (Freiburg, 1897) 153; Mothon, “Vita del B. Giovanini da Vecellio” (Vecellio
1903); Mortier, ” Histoire des Maîtres Généraux”, I-V.
25 See the Acta Cap. Gen. already referred to.
26 Acta, I, p. 14-20.
27 Potthast, 156-69.
28 Humbert de Romanis, “Opera”, I, p. 43.
29 Mortier, op. cit., III, 115.
30 Mortier, IV, p. 495.
31 Lacordaire, “Mémoire pour la restauration des Frères L Prêcheurs dans la chrétienité”,
new ed., Dijon, 1852, p. 18.
32 Thomae Antonii Senesis, “Historia disciplinæ regularis instaurata in Cnobiis Venetis Ord. Præd.” in Fl. Cornelius, “Ecclesiæ Venetæ”, VII, 1749, p. 167; Bl. Raymond of Capua, “Opuscula et Litterae”, Rome, 1899; Meyer, “Buch der Reformacio
Predigerordens” in “Quellen und Forschungen zur Geschichte des Dominikanerordens in
Deutschland”, II, III, Leipzig 1908-9; Mortier, “Hist. des Maîtres Généraux”, III, IV.
33 Bull. Ord. Præd., VIII, p. 768.
34 Op. cit., p. 150.
35 Monum. Ord. Præd. Historia, V, p. 53.
36 Lecoy de la Marche, “La chaire française au Moyen Age “, Paris, 1886, p. 31.
37 L. Pfleger, ” Zur Geschichte des Predigtwesens in Strasburg”, Strasburg, 1907, p. 26; F.
Jostes, “Zur Geschichte der Mittelalterlichen Predigt in Westfalen”, Münster, 1885, p. 10.
38 “Annales Ord. Præd.”, Rome, 1756, col. 128.
39 Opera, II, p. 493.
40 “Prediche del Beato Fra Giordano da Rivalto”, Florence, 1831, I, p. 239.
41 Bull. O. P., XIII, p. 637.
42 This still exists in its first edition in the Paris Bibliothèque Mazarine, incunabula no. 259;
Lecoy de la Marche, “La prédication de la Croisade au XIIIe siècle” in “Rev. des questions
historiques”, 1890, p. 5.
43 Denifle, “Uber die Anfänge der Predigtweise der deutschen Mystiker” in “Archiv. f. Litt.
u. Kirchengesch”, II, p. 641; Pfeiffer, “Deutsche Mystiker des vierzehnten Jahrhundert”,
Leipzig, 1845; Wackernagel, “Altdeutsche Predigten und Gebete aus Handschriften”,
44 Lives of the Brothers, pts. II, III.
45 Sitter, “Johann von Vincenza und die Italiensche Friedensbewegung”, Freiburg, 1891.
46 Galletti, “Fra Giordano da Pisa”, Turin, 1899.
47 Pfeiffer, ” Deutsche Mystiker “, II, 1857; Buttner, “Meister Eckharts Schriften und Predigten”, Leipzig, 1903.
48 Bihlmeyer, “Heinrich Seuse Deutsche Schriften”, Stuttgart, 1907.
49 “Johanns Taulers Predigten” ed. T. Harnberger, Frankfort, 1864.
50 Clementi, “Un Santo Patriota, Il B. Venturino da Bergamo”, Rome, 1909.
51 Carmini di Pierro, “Contributo alla Biografia di Fra Jacopo Passavanti” in “Giornale
storico della letteratura italiana”, XLVII, 1906 p. 1.
52 Gallette, “Una Raccolta di Prediche volgari del Cardinale Giovanni Dominici” in
“Miscellanea di studi critici publicati in onore di G. Mazzoni”, Florence, 1907, I.
53 Script. Ord. Præd., I, p. 849.
54 Luotto, ” II vero Savonarola”, Florence, p. 68.
55 Const., Dist. II, cog. I.
56 Annales Ord. Præd. I, append., col. 71.
57 Vitæ Fratrum, p. 138.
58 Annales, p. 644.
59 Larousse, “Grand Dictionnaire; Universel du XIXe Siècle”, s. v. Dominic.
60 “Guillem Bernard de Gaillac et l’enseignement chez les Dominicains”, Paris, 1884, p. 30.
61 Forest, “L’école cathédrale de Lyon”, Paris-Lyons, 1885, pp.238, 368; Beyssac, “Les
Prieurs de Notre Dame de Confort”, Lyons, 1909; “Chart. Univer. Paris”, III, p.28.
62 Catalani, “De Magistro Sacri Palatii Apostolici”, Rome, p. 175.
63 “Chart. Univ Paris”, I, p. 184.
64 Denifle, “Quellen zur Gelehrtengeschichte des Predigerordens im 13. und 14.
Jahrhundert” in “Archiv.” II, p.165; Mandonnet, “Les Chanoines Prêcheurs de Bologne”
Fribourg 1903; Douais,” Essai sur l’organisation des études dans l’Ordre des Frères-Prêcheurs”, Paris: 1884; Mandonnet, “De l’incorporation des Dominicains dans l’ancienne
Université de Paris” in “Revue Thomiste”, IV 1896, p. 139; Denifle, “Die Universitäten
des Mittelalters”, Berlin, 1885; I, passim; Denifle-Chatelain, “Chart. Univ., Paris” 1889,
passim; Bernard, “Les Dominicains dans l’Université de Paris “, Paris, 183; Mandonnet,
“Siger de Brabant et l’averroisme Latin au XIIIe siècle”, Louvain, 1911, I, n. 30-95. The
legislation regarding studies occurs here and there in the constitutions, and principally in
the “Acta Capitularium Generalium’, Rome, 1898, sq. and Douais, “Acta Capitulorum
Provincialium” (Toulouse, 1894.
65 Ehrle, “Archiv. f. Litt. u Kirchengesch.”, III, p. 517; Tocco, “La
Questione della povertà nel Secolo XIV”, Naples, 1910.
66 Mortier, ” Hist. des Maîtres Généraux”, III, p. 287, IV, p. 413; G. degli Agostini, “Notizie
istorico-critiche intorno la vita e le opere degli scrittori Viniziani”, Venice, 1752, I, p. 401.
67 De Wulf, “Histoire de la philosophic médiévale”, Louvain-Paris, 1905, p. 453.
68 Mansi, “Councils”, I, 32, col. 842.
69 Chrysostomi Javelli, “Opera”, Venice, 1577, I-III, p. 52.
70 (“In Ecclesiasten”, 1534, cap. iv; Fiorentino, “Pietro Pomponazzi”, Florence, 1868.
71 Last ed., Venice, 1754, 8 vols. in fol..
72 F. L. Mannoci, “Intorno a un volgarizzamento della Biblia attribuita al B. Jacopo da
Voragine” in “Giornale storico e letterario della Liguria”, V, 1904, p. 96.
73 P. Mandonnet “Tràvaux des Dominicains sur les Saintes Ecritures” in “Dict. de la Bible”,
II, col. 1463; Saul, “Des Bibelstudium im Predigerorden” in “Der Katholik”, 82 Jahrg, 3 f.,
XXVII, 1902, a repetition of the foregoing article.
74 “Alberti Magni Opera”, Lyons, 1651, 20 vols. in fol.; Paris, 1890, 38 vols. in 40;
Mandonnet, “Siger de Brabant”, I, 37, n. 3.
75 Mandonnet, “Des écrits authentiques de St. Thomas d’Aquin”, 2nd ed., p. 104, Opera,
Paris, 1889, XXII-XVI.
76 Baur “Dominicus Gundissalinus De divisione philosophiae”, Münster, 1903, 368.
77 Krebs, “Meister Dietrich, sein Leben, seine Werke, seine Wissenschaft”, Münster, 1906.
78 “Archiv f. Litt. und Kirchengesch.”, II, 226 sqq..
79 Mandonnet, “Siger de Brabant”, I, 53.
80 Grabmann, “Studien ueber Ulrich von Strassburg” in “Zeitschrift für Kathol. Theol.”,
XXIX, 1905, 82.
81 Ilgner, “Die Volkswirtschaftlichen Anschaungen Antonins von Florenz”, Paderborn,
82 Mandonnet, “Des écrits authentiques de St. Thomas”, Fribourg, 1910, p. 86.
83 IV, 1880, 191.
84 Augsburg, 1723, 59.
85 Quétif-Echard, “Script. Ord. Praed.”, I, passim; Hurter, “Nomenclator literarius; aetas
media”, Innsbruck, 1906, passim; F. von Schulte, “Gesch. der Quellen und Literatur des
canonischen Rechts”, Stuttgart, II, 1877, p. 410 sqq.; Dietterle, “Die Summæ confessorum
. . . von ihren Anfängen an bis zu Silvester Prierias” in “Zeitschrift für Kirchengesch.”,
XXIV, 1903; XXVIII, 1907.
86 Paris, 1642; 1651: Leipzig, 1687.
87 Neubauer, “Jewish Controversy and the Pugio Fidei” in “The Expositor”, 1888, p. 81 sqq.;
Loeb, “La controverse religieuse entre les chrétiens et les Juifs au moyen-âge en France et
en Espagne ” in “Revue de l’histoire des religions”, XVIII, 136.
88 Mandonnet, “Fra Riccoldo di Monte Croce, pélerin en Terre Sainte et missionnaire en
Orient” in “Revue Biblique”, I, 1893, 44; Grabmann, “Die Missionsidee bei den
Dominikanertheologien des 13. Jahrhunderts” in “Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft”, I,
89 Quétif-Echard, “Script. Ord. Præd.”, II, 968; 970; Lecoy de la Marche, ” La chaire
française au moyen âge”, Paris, 1886; Crane, “The exempla or illustrative stories from the
‘Sermones vulgares’ of Jacques de Vitry”, London, 1890.
90 Madrid University Library, cod. 146.
91 A. Poncelet, “Le légendier de Pierre Calo” in “Analecta Bollandiana”, XXIX, 1910, 5-116.
92 “Revue des Bibliothèques”, VI, 1846, 32; March, “La ‘Explanatio Symboli’, obra inedita de
Ramon Marti, autor del ‘Pugio Fidei”‘, in “Anuari des Institut d’Estudis Catalans”, 1908,
and Bareclona, 1910.
93 Portmann-Kunz, “Katechismus des hl. Thomas von Aquin”, Lucerne, 1900.
94 Mandonnet, “Laurent d’Orléans l’auteur de la Somme le Roi” in “Revue des langues
romanes”, 1911; “Dict. de théol. cath.”, II, 1900.
95 “Notices et extraits de la Bib. Nat.”, XXVII, Paris, 1879, 2nd part, p. 362, C. Douais, “Un
nouvel écrit de Bernard Gui. Le synodal de Lodève, “Paris, 1944 p. vii.
96 Paulus, “Johann Hérolt und seine Lehre. Ein Beitrag zur Gesch. des religiosen
Volksunterichte am Ausgang des Mittelalters” in “Zeitsch. für kath. Theol.”, XXVI, 1902,
97 Paris, Bib. Nat. lat. 16435.
98 “Act. Cap. Gen.” I, 125; “Script. Ord. Præd.”, I, 345.
99 “Script. Ord. Præd.”, I, 239; R. Friedrich, “Vincentius von Beauvais als Pädagog nach
seiner Schrift De eruditione filiorum regalium”, Leipzig, 1883.
100 “B. Johannis Dominici Cardinalis S. Sixti Lucula Noctis”, ed. R. Coulon, Paris, 1908.
101 “Regola del governo di cure familiare dal Beato Giovanni Dominici”, ed. D. Salve,
102 Ed. Palermo, Florence, 1858.
103 Ed. Audin de Rians, Florence, 1847.
104 Vienna, Hof-bibliothek, lat. 5102, fol. 1-24.
105 Ed. in Bzovius, “Annal. eccles.” ad ann. 1235 “Monum. Ord. Præd. Hist.”, IV, fasc.
II, 41; “Le Moyen Age”, 2nd series III, 305.
106 C. Douais, “L’Inquisition”, Paris, I, 1906, p. 275.
107 “Nouvelle revue historique du droit français et étranger”, Paris, 1883, 670; E. Vacandard,
“L’Inquisition”, Paris, 1907, p. 314.
108 Ed. C. Douais Paris, 1886.
109 “Archiv für Literatur und Kirchengeschechte”; Grahit, “El inquisidor F. Nicholas
Eymerich”, Girona, 1878; Schulte, “Die Gesch. der Quellen und Literatur des Canonischen
Rechts”, II, passim.
110 E. Boutarie, “Examen des sources du Speculum historiale de Vincent de Beauvais”, Paris,
111 “Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script.”, XXII.
112 Mon. Germ. Hist.: Script., XVII.
113 “Rer. Ital. Script.”; Mannucci, “La Cronaca di Jacopo da Voragine”, Genoa, 1904.
114 “Rer. Ital. Script.”, XI K. Krüger, “Des Ptolemäus Lucensis Leben und Werke”, Göttingen,
1874; D. König, “Ptolemaus von Lucca und die Flores Chronicorum des B. Guidonis”,
Würzburg, 1875, Idem, “Tolomeo von Lucca”, Harburg, 1878; Delisle, “Notice sur les
manuscrits de Bernard Gui” in “Notices et manuscrits de la Bib. Nat.”, XVII, pt. II, 169-455; Douais, “Un nouveau manuscrit de Bernard Gui et de ses chroniques des papes
d’Avignon” in “Mém. soc. Archéol. Midi”, XIV, 1889, p. 417, Paris, 1889; Arbellot,
“Etude biographique et bibliographique sur Bernard Guidonis”, Paris-Limoges, 1896.
115 L. Manzoni, “Di frate Francesco Pipini da Bologna, storico, geografo, viaggiatore del sec.
XIV”, Bologna, 1896.
116 Ed. Heyck, Innsbruck, 1888.
117 Ed. T. Hog, London, 1845.
118 Monumenta historiæ patriæ, script.” III, Turin, 1848.
119 Ferrari, “Le cronache di Galvano Flamma e le fonti della Galvagnana” in “Bulletino dell’
Istituto Storico Italiano”, Rome, 1891.
120 Mandonnet, “Des écrits authentiques de St. Thomas d’Aquin”, Fribourg, 2nd ed., 1910, p.
121 Merck, “Die Chronographia Konrads von Halberstadt” etc. in “Forsch. deutsch. Gesch.”
XX, 1880, 279.
122 Ed. Potthast, Göttingen, 1859.
123 In “Script. Rer. Ital.”, IX; G. Calligaris, “Alcune osservazioni sopra un passo del poema ‘De
gestis in civitate Mediolani’ di Stefanardo” in “Misc. Ceriani”, Milan, 1910.
124 Eckmann, “Hermann von Lerbeke mit besonderer Berücksichtigung seines Lebens und der
Abfassungszeit seiner Schriften”, Hamm, 1879.
124 b Ed. J. Schwalm, Göttingen 1895; cf. Waitz, “Ueber Hermann Korner und die Lübecker Chronikon”, Göttingen, 1851.
125 Schaube, “Die Quellen der Weltchronik des heil. Antonin Erzbischofs von Florenz”
126 Schmid, d. 1502.
127 Ed., Hassler, Stuttgart, 1843.
128 “Quellen zer Schweizer Gesch.”, Basle, 1884.
129 Litterarischesverein in Stuttgart, no. 186, Tübingen, 1889, ed. G. Veesenmeyer; cf., under
the names of these writers, Quétif-Echard, “Script. Ord. Præd”, Chevalier, “Répertoire . . .
du moyen-âge; Bio-Bibl.”, Paris, 1907, Potthast “Bib. Hist. Medii Ævi”, Berlin, 1896;
Hurter, “Nomenclator Lit.”, II, 1906.
130 Vogel, “Literar-historischen Notizen über den mittelalterlichen Gelehrten Vincenz von
Beauvais”, Freiburg, 1843; Bourgeat, “Etudes sur Vincent de Beauvais”, Paris, 1856.
131 Mortier, “Hist. des Maîtres généraux de l’ordre des Frères Prêcheurs”, I, 88. The treatise is
edited in full only in Brown “Appendix ad fasc. rerum expectandarum et fugendarum”,
London, 1690, p. 185.
132 J. C. M. Laurent, “Peregrinatores medii ævi quatuor”, Leipsig, 1873.
133 Mandonnet “Siger de Brabant”, I, 40.
134 “Incunabula xylographica et typographica”, 1455-1500, Joseph Baer Frankfort, 1900, p.
135 Ed. Cocheris, Paris, 1856; tr. Thomas, London, 1888.
136 Denifle, “Magister Johann von Dambach” in “Archiv für Litt. u. Kirchengesch” III, 640.
137 cf. Canetti, “Il Quadriregio”, Venice, 1889; Filippini, ” Le edizioni del Quadriregio” in
“Bibliofilia”, VIII, Florence, 1907.
138 Romagnoli “Frate Tommaso Sardi e il suo poema inedito dell’ anima peregrine” in “Il
propugnatore”, XVIII, 1885, pt. II, 289.
139 “Script. Ord. Præd.” I, 143; “Zeitschr. f. Kathol. Theol.”, VII, 10.
140 J. W. Legg, “Tracts on the Mass”, Bradshaw Society, 1904; Barge, “Le Chant liturgique
dans 1’Ordre de Saint-Dominique” in “L’Année Dominicaine”, Paris, 1908, 27; Gagin, “Un
manuscrit liturgique des Frères Prêcheurs antérieur aux réglements d Humbert de Romans”
in “Revue des Bibliothèques”, 1899, p. 163; Idem, “Dominicains et Teutoniques, conflit
d’attribution du ‘Liber Choralis'” no. 182 du catalogue 120 de M. Ludwig Rosenthal” in
“Revue des Bibliothèques”, 1908.
141 Paris, Bib. Nat. lat. 16,663.
142 Cf. Kornmüller “Die alten Musiktheoretiker XX. Hieronymus von Mären” in
“Kirchenmusikalisehes Jahrbueh”, IV, 1889, 14.
143 Mandonnet, “Des écrits authentiques de S. Thomas d’Aquin”, 2nd ed. p. 127.
144 “Script. Ord. Præd.” I, 499; “Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bib. Nat.”, XXVII,
11th pt., 369, n. 6.
145 “Scritti vari di Filologia”, Rome, 1901, p. 488.
146 Cozzuli “Tommaso Schifaldo umanista siciliano del sec. XV”, Palermo, 1897, in
“Documenti per servire alla storia di Sicilia”, VI. The Venetian Francesco Colonna is the
author of the celebrated work “The Dream of Poliphilus” (“Poliphili Hypnerotomachia, ubi
humane omnia non nisi somnium esse docet”, Aldus, Venice, 1499; cf. Popelin, “Le songe
de Poliphile ou hypnerotomachia de Frère Francesco Colonna”, Paris, 1880.
147 Ilg, “Ueber den kunsthistorisches werth der Hypnerotomachia Poliphili”, Vienna, 1872;
Ephrusi, “Etudes sur le songe de Poliphile” in “Bulletin de Bibliophile” 1887, Paris, 1888;
Dorez, “Des origines et de la diffusion du songe de Poliphile” in “Revue des
Bibliothèques”, VI, 1896, 239; Gnoli “Il sogno di Polifilo, in “Bibliofila”, 1900, 190;
Fabrini, “Indagini sul Polifilo” in “Giorn. Storico della letteratura Italiana”, XXXV, 1900, I;
Poppelreuter, “Der anonyme Meister des Polifiloi” in “Zur Kunstgesch. des Auslandes”,
XX, Strassburg, 1904; Molmenti, “Alcuni documenti concernenti l’autore della
(Hypnerotomachia Poliphili)” in “Archivio storico italiano”, Ser. V, XXXVIII, 1906, 291.
148 Perugia, 1517; Milan, 1520; Venice, 1522.
149 “Script. Ord. Præd.”, II, 137; Campori, “Sei lettere inedite di Fra Leandro Alberti” in “Atti
e memorie della Deput. di Storia patria per le prov. Modenesi e Parmensi”, I, 1864, p.
150 Masi “Matteo Bandello o vita italiana in un novelliere del cinquecento”, Bologna, 1900.
151 “Archiv. f. Litt.-und Kirchgesch.”, I, 225, “Acta Cap. Gen.”, I, passim.
152 Finke, “Die Freiburger Dominikaner und der Münsterbau”, Freiburg, 1901 p. 47; Potthast,
op. cit., 22,426.
153 Matthew Paris, “Hist. maj.”, ad. ann. 1243; d’Achéry, “Spicelegium”, Paris, 1723, II, 634;
Cocheris “Philobiblion”, Paris, 1856, p. 227.
154 “Les Hérétiques de l’Italie”, Paris, 1869, I, 165; Berthier, “L’église de Sainte Sabine à
Rome”, Rome, 1910; Mullooly, “St. Clement, Pope and Martyr, and his Basilica in Rome”,
Rome, 1873; Nolan, “The Basilica of St. Clement in Rome” Rome, 1910; Brown, “The
Dominican Church of Santa Maria Novelli at Florence, An historical, architectural and
artistic study”, Edinburgh, 1902; Berthier, “L’église de la Minerve à Rome, Rome: 1910;
Marchese, “San Marco convento dei Padri Predicatori in Firenze”, Florence, 1853;
Malaguzzi, “La chiesa e il convento di S. Domenico a Bologna secondo nuove richerche”
in “Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft”, XX, 1897, 174; Caffi, “Della chiesa di Sant’
Eustorgio in Milano”, Milan, 1841; Valle, “S. Domenico Maggiore di Napoli”, Naples,
1854; Milanese, “Le Chiesa monumentale di S. Nicolò in Treviso”, Treviso, 1889; Mortier,
“Notre Dame de la Guercia” Paris, 1904; Ital. tr. Ferretti, Florence, 1904; Oriandini,
“Descrizione storica della chiesa di S. Domenico di Perugia”, Perugia, 1798; Biebrach, “Die
holzgedeckten Franziskaner und Dominikanerkirchen in Umbrien und Toskana”, Berlin,
155 Carrière, “Les Jacobins de Toulouse”, 2nd ed., Toulouse, s. d..
156 Millie, “Antiquités rationales”, Paris, 1790, III, 1.
157 Rostan, “Notice sur l’église de Saint-Maximin”, Brignoles, 1859.
158 Cormier, “L’ancien couvent des Dominicains de Lyon”, Lyons, 1898.
159 Paris, 1903, 2 vols. in 4.
160 Martinez-Vigil, “La orden de Predicadores”, Barcelona, 1886.
161 Murphy, “Plans, elevations, sections and views of the Church of Batalha”, London, 1795;
de Condeixa, “O mosteiro de Batalha em Portugal”, Paris, 1892; Vascoucellos, “Batalha.
Convento de Santa Maria da Victoria”, Porto, 1905.
162 Scherer, “Kirchen und Kloster der Franziskaner und Dominikaner in Thuringen”, Jena,
1910; Schneider, “Die Kirchen der Dominikaner und Karmeliten” in “Mittelalterliche
Ordensbauten in Mainz”, Mainz, 1879; “Zur Wiederherstellung der Dominikanerkirche in
Augsburg” in “Augsburger Postzeitung”, 12 Nov., 1909; “Des Dominikanerkloster in
Eisenach”, Eisenach, 1857; Ingold, “Notice sur l’église et le couvent des Dominicains de
Colmar”, Colmar, 1894; Burckhardt-Riggenbach, “Die Dominikaner Klosterkirche in
Basel”, Basle, 1855; Stammler, “Die ehemalige Predigerkirche in Bern und ihre
Wandmalerein” in “Berner Kunstdenkmaler”, III, Bern, 1908.
163 Sighart, “Gesch. d. bildenden Künste im Kgn. Bayern”, Munich, 1862.
164 Ingold, op. cit..
165 Howard, “Des Dominikaner-Kloster in Bern von 1269-1400 “, Bern, 1857.
166 Davidsohn, “Forschungen zur Gesch. von Florenz”, Berlin, 1898, 466; Marchese,
“Memorie dei più insigni pittori, scultori e architetti domenicani”, Bologna, 1878, I.
167 Berthier, “Le tombeau de St. Dominique”, Paris, 1895; Beltrani, “La cappella di S. Pietro
Martire presso la Basilica di Sant Eustorgio in Milano” in “Archivio storico dell’ arte”, V,
168 “Römische Quartalschrift”, 1893, 29.
169 Mon. Germ. Hist.: SS., XVII, 233.
170 Marchese, “Memorie”, I, 245; Tumiàti, “Frate Angelico”, Florence, 1897; Supino “Beato
Angelico”, Florence, 1898; Langton Dougias, “Fra Angelico”, London, 1900; Wurm,
“Meister und Schülerarbeit in Fra Angelicos Werk “, Strasburg, 1907; Cochin, “Le
Bienheureux Fra Giovanni Angelico da Fiesole”, Paris, 1906; Schottmuller, “Fra Angelico
da Fiesole”, Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1911 (Fr. ed., Paris, 1911.
171 Marchese, “Memorie”, II, 1; Franz, “Fra Bartolommeo della Porta”, Ratisbon, 1879;
Gruyer, “Fra Bartolommeo della Porta et Mariotto Albertinelli”, Paris-London, s. d.;
Knapp, “Fra Bartolommeo della Porta und die Schule von San Marco”, Halle, 1903.
172 Marchese, “Memorie”, II; Mancini, “Guglielmo de Marcillat francese insuperato pittore sul
vetro”, Florence, 1909.
173 Bossi, “Del cenacolo di Leonardo daVinci”, Milan, 1910; Sant’ Ambrogio, “Note
epigrafiche ed artistiche intorno alla sale del Cenacolo ed al tempio di Santa Maria delle
Grazie in Milano” in “Archivio Storico Lombardo”, 1892.
174 Michel, “Hist. de l’art depuis les premiers temps chrétiens jusqu’à nos jours”, Paris, II,
1908; Hettner, “Die Dominikaner in der Kunstgesch. des l4. und 15. Jahrhunderts” in
“Italienische Studien zur Gesch. der Renaissance”, Brunswick, 1879, 99; “Renaissance und
Dominikaner Kunst” in “Hist.-polit. Blatter”, LXXXXIII, 1884; Perate, “Un Triomphe de
la Mort de Pietro Lorenzetti”, Paris, 1902; Bacciochi, “Il chiostro verde e la cappella degli
Spagnuoli “, Florence; Endres, ” Die Verherrlichung des Dominikanerordens in der Spanischen Kapelle an S. Maria Novella zu Florenz” in “Zeitschr. f. Christliche Kunst”, 1909, p.
175 Gruyer, “Les illustrations des écrits de Jérôme Savonarole et les paroles de Savonarole sur
l’art”, Paris, 1879; Lafenestre, “Saint François d’ Assise et Savonarole inspirateurs de l’art
Italien”, Paris, 1911.
176 Neale, “L’art religieux du XIIIe siècle”, Paris, 1910; Idem, “L’art religieux de la fin du
moyen-âge en France”, Paris, 1910.
177 Peltzer, “Deutsche Mystik und deutsche Kunst”, Strassburg, 1899; Hintze, “Der Einfluss
des mystiken auf die ältere Kölner Malerschule”, Breslau, 1901.
178 Neuwbarn, “Die Verherrlichung des hl. Dominicus in der Kunst”, 1906.
179 “Chart Univ. Paris”, I, 263, 276; Winckelmann, “Fratris Arnoldi Ord. Præd. De correctione
Ecclesiae Epistola”, 1863; “Script. Ord. Praed.”, II, 821 b.
180 Potthast, op cit., 16,847.
181 Matthew Paris, “Hist. Angl.”, III, 317, in “Rer. Brit. Med. Æv. Script.”
182 Cf. Potthast, op; cit., 10,804.
183 Fontana, “Sacrum Theatrum Dominicanum” pt. II, De S. R. Ecclesiae Officialibus, Rome,
1666; “Bull. Ord. Præd.”, I-II, passim; Potthast, “Regest. Pont. Rom.”, Papal Register of
the XIII cent. in “Bib. des Ecoles Françaises d’Athènes et de Rome”.
184 Mothon, “Vie du B. Innocent V”, Rome, n 1896; Fietta, “Nicolò Boccasino di Trevigi e il
suo tempo”, Padua, 1875; Funk, “Papst Benedikt XI”, Münster, 1891; Grandjean; “Benoît
XI avant son pontificat ” (1240-1303) in ” Mélanges archiv.-Hist. de L’école française de
Rome”, VIII, 219; Idem, “Recherches sur l’administration financière du pape Benoît XI”,
loc. cit., III, 1883, 47; Idem, “La date de la mort de Benoît XI”, loc. cit. XIV, 1894, 241;
Idem, “Registre de Benoît XI”, Paris, 1885.
185 Sassen, “Hugh von St. Cher em Seine Tätigkeit als Kardinal, 1244-1263”, Bonn, 1908.
186 Davidsohn, “Gesch. von Florenz”, II, Berlin, 1908, p. 152; Idem, “Forsch. zur Gesch von
Florenz”, IV, 1908, p. 226.
187 Bandini, “Vita del Cardinale Nicolo da Prato”, Leghorn, 1757; Fineschi, “Supplemento alla
vista del Cardinale Nicolò da Prato”, Lucca, 1758; Perrens, “Hist. de Florence”, Paris, III,
188 Rossler, “Cardinal Johannes Dominici, O.Pr., 1357-1419”, Freiburg, 1893; Mandonnet,
“Beiträge zur. Gesch. des Kardinals Giovanni Dominici” in “Hist. Jahrbuch.”, 1900;
Hollerbach, ” Die Gregorianische le Partei, Sigismund und das Konstanzer Konzil” in.
“Römische Quartalschrift”, XXIII-XXIV, 1909-10.
189 Lederer, “Johann von Torquemada sein Leben und seine Schriften”, Freiburg, 1879; Hefele,
190 Catalamus, ” De magistro sacri palatii apostolici” Rome, 1751.
191 Fontana, “Sacr. Theatr Dominic”, 470; 631, “Bull. O. P.”, VIII, 766, Poenitentiarii; Goller,
“Die päpstliche Ponitentiarii vor ihrem Ursprung bis zu ihrer Umgestaltung unter Pius VII”,
192 Opera, ed. Berthier, II, 36.
193 Douais, “Les Frères Prêcheurs en Gascogne”, Paris-Auch, 1885, p. 64.
194 “Vitae fratrum”, ed. Reichart, 231; Perein, “Monumenta Conventus Tolosani”, Toulouse,
1693, II, 198, Acta SS., 29 April.
195 Potthast, 11,083.
196 “Hist. gén. du Languedoc”, III, ed. in folio, proof CCLIX, Vol. CCCCXLVI.
197 Potthast, 11,993, 15,330, 15,409, 15,410, 18,895, 20,169; Tanon, “Hist. des tribunaux de
l’inquisition en France” Paris, 1893; Idem, “Documents pour servir a l’hist. de l’Inquisition
dans le Languedoc”, Paris, 1900; Vacandard, “L’Inquisition”, Paris, 1907; Lea, “Hist. of the
Inquisition in the Middle Ages” New York-London, 1888, French tr., Paris, 1900;
Frédéricq, “Corpus documentorum Inquisitionis hæreticæ pravitatis Neerlandicæ”, Ghent,
1900; Amabile, “Il santo officio della Inquizione in Napoli” Citta di Castello, 1892,
Canzons, “Hist. de l’Inquisition en France”, Paris, 1909; Jordan, “La responsabilité de
l’Eglise dans la répression de l’hérésie au moyen-âge” in “Annales de Philosophie chrét.”,
CLIV, 1907, p. 225.
198 Lea, “Hist. of the Inquisition of Spain”, New York, 1906, Cotarelo y Valledor, “Fray Diego
de Deza”, Madrid, 1905.
199 Mandonnet, “Siger de Brabant”, I, 70, 90; Perrod, “Etude sur la vie et les oeuvres de
Guillaume de Saint-Amour” in “Mémoires de la société d’émulation de Jura”, Lons-le-Saunier, 1902, p. 61; Seppelt, “Der Kampf der Bettelorden an der Universität Paris in der
Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts” in “Kirchengeschichtliche Abhandlungen”, Breslau, III, 1905;
200 Denifle-Chatelain, “Chart. Univ. Paris” I, passim; Finke, “Des Pariser National Konzil
1290” in “Römische Quartalschrift”, 1895, p. 171; Paulus, “Welt und Ordensclerus beim
Ausgange des XIII. Jahrhunderts in Kampfe um die Pfarr-Rechte”, Essen-Ruhr, 1900.
201 “Speculum perfectionis”, ed. Sabatier, Paris, 1898, p. 75; Thomas of Celano, “Legenda
secunda S. Francisci”, III, lxxxvi.
202 “Acta Cap. Gen.”, ed. Reichert, 4.
203 “Vitæ Fratrum”, ed. Reichert, 141, 143, 209.
204 Peter of Prussia, “Vita B. Alberti Magni”, Antwerp, 1621; p. 253.
205 Eubel, “Hierarchia catholica”, I-II; “Bull Ord. Præd.”, I-IV; “Script. Ord. Præd.”, I, p. xxi;
Cavalieri, “Galleria de’ sommi Pontefici, Patriarchi, Areivescovi, e Vescovi dell’ ordine de’
Predicatori”, Benevento, 1696; Vigna, “I veseovi domenicani Liguri ovvero in Liguria”,
206 Bayonne, “Lettres du B. Jourdain de Saxe” Paris-Lyons 1865, p. 66.
207 Chapotin, “A travers l’histoire dominicaine: “Les princes français du Moyen Age et l’ordre
de Saint Dominique”, Paris, 1903, p. 207; Idem, “Etudes historiques sur la province
dominicaine de France”, Paris, 1890, p. 128.
208 Guiffrey, “Hist. de la réunion du Dauphiné à la France” Paris, 1878.
209 Chapotin, op. cit. 190.
210 Palmer; “The Kings’s Confessors” in “The Antiquary”, London, 1890, p. 114; Tarett,
“Friars Confessors of the English Kings” in “The Home Counties Magazine”, XII, 1910, p.
211 Opladen, “Die Stellung der deutschen Könige zu den Orden im dreizethnten Jahrhundert”
Bonn, 1908; Paulus, “Thomas von Strassburg und Rudolph von Sachsen. Ihre Stellung zum
Interdikt” in “Hist. Jahrbuch.”, XIII, 1892, 1; “Neues Archiv. der Geschellschaft für altere
deutsche Geschictskunde”, XXX, 1905, 447.
212 “Catalogo de los religiosos Dominicos qui hen servido e a los Señores de Castilla, de
Aragon, y de Andalucia, en el empleo de sus Confessores de Estado”, Madrid, 1700.
213 De Sousa, “Historia de S. Domingos particulor de Reino, e conquistas de Portugal”
Lisbon, 1767; Grégoire, “Hist. des confesseurs les empereurs, des rois et d’autres princes”,
214 “Annales Ord. Præd.”, Rome, 1756, append., col. 128.
215 Sutter, “Johann von Vicenza und die italienisehe Friedensbewegung im Jahre 1233”,
Freiburg, 1891; Ital. tr., Vicenza, 1900; Vitali, “I Domenicani nella vita italiana del secolo
XIII”, Milan, 1902; Hefele, “Die Bettelorden und das religiöse Volksleben Ober-und
Mittelitaliensim XIII. Jahrhundert”, Leipzig-Berlin, 1910.
216 “De recuperatione Terre Sancte”, ed. Langlois, Paris, 1891, pp. 51, 74, 84.
217 Gebhart “Une sainte homme d’état, Ste Catherine de Sienne”; in “Revue Hebdomadaire”,
16 March, 1907, 257.
218 Mallet, “Libertés, franchises, immunités, et coutumes de la ville de Genève promulgés par
évêque Adémar Fabri le 23 Mai, 1387” in “Mémoires et documents de la société d’histoire
et d’archéologie de Genève”, Geneva, II, 1843, p. 270.
219 Vilari, “La Storia di Girolamo Savonarola e dé suoi tempi”, Florence, 1887; Luotto, “Il
vero Savonarola”, Florence, 1897.
220 Koch, “Graf Elger von Holmstein”, Gotha, 1865, pp. 70, 72.
221 Bibl. de Grenoble, MS. 639, fol. 119.
222 “Archiv. f. Litt. a Kirchengesch.”, I, 27; Bayonne, “Lettres du B. Jourdain de Saxe”, 110.
223 Mosheim, “De Beghardis et Beguiniabus”, Leipzig, 1720; Le Grand “Les Béguines de
Paris”, 1893; Nimal, “Les Beguinages”, Nivelles, 1908.
224 Bull. Ord. Præd., VIII, 524.
225 “Acta Sanctae Sedis nec non magistrorum et capitulorum generalium sacri ordinis
Prædicatorum pro Societate SS. Rosarii”, Lyons, 1890.
226 Cantimpratanus, “De bono universali apum”, lib. II, viii, n. 8.
227 “Vita fratrum”, ed. Reichert, 327.
228 H. de Romanis, “Opera”, ed. Berthier, II, 502.
229 Analecta Ord. Præd., III, 374 sqq.
230 “Mon. Ord. Præd.: Hist.”, IV (Barmusidiana) fasc. II, 29.
231 Potthast, 16,438; 17,187; 17,929.
232 Telié, ” L’évangelization de l’Amérique avant Christophe Colomb” in “Compte rendu du
congrès scient. intern. des Catholiques”, 1891, sect. hist., 1721.
233 Schomberg, “Die Dominikaner im Erzbistum Bremen”, Brunswick, 1910, 14; “Bull. Ord.
Præd.”, I, 61; H. de Romanis, “Opera”, II, 502.
234 Abraham, ” Powstanie organizacyi Kosicio lacinskiego na Rusi”, Lemberg, 1904; Rainaldi,
“Annal. eccl.”, ad ann. 1246, n. 30; Potthast, 17,186; Baracz, “Rys dziejó Zakonn
Kaznodzie jskiego w Polsce” Lemberg, 1861; Comtesse de Flavigny, “Saint Hyacinthe et
ses compagnons”, Paris, 1899.
235 “Vitæ Fratrum”, ed. Reichert, 305; “De inventa Hungaria Magna tempore Gregorii IX”, ed.
Endlicher, in “Rerum Hungaricarum Monumenta”, 248; Ferrarius, “De rebus Hungaricæ
Provinciæ S. Ord. Præd.”, Vienna, 1637.
236 “Script. Ord. Præd.”, I, pp. i, xii, 102, 136, 156, 911; Potthast, 3198; “Vitæ fratrum”,
237 “Script. Ord. Præd.”, I, pp. i, xii; Balme, “La Province dominicaine de Terre-Sainte de
1277 à 1280” in “Archives de l’Orient Latin”; Idem, ” Les franciscains et les dominicains à
Jérusalem au treizième et au quatorzième siècle”, 1890, p. 324.
238 Script. Ord. Præd., I, 104.
239 “Bull. Ord. Præd.”, I, 108, “Script. O P.”, I, 122; H. de Romanis, “Opera” II, 502 Vinc.
Bellovacensis, “Speculum historiale”, l. b XXI, 42; Tamarati, “L’Eglise Géorgienne des
origines jusqu’à nos jours”, Rome, 1910, 430.
240 Mandonnet, “Fra Ricoldo de Monte Croce” in “Revue bib.”, I, 1893; Balme, “Jourdain
Cathala de Sévérae, Evêque de Coulain” (Quilon), Lyons, 1886.
241 Eubel, “Die während des 14. Jahrhunderts im Missionsgebiet der Dominikanel und
Franziskaner errichteten Bistümer” in “Ferstchrift des deutschen Campo Santo in Rom”,
Freiburg i. Br., 1897, 170; Heyd, “Die Kolonien der römischen Kirche, welche die
Dominikaner und Franziskaner im 13. und 14. Jahrhundert in dem von der Tataren
beherrschten Ländern Asiens und Europas gregründet haben” in “Zeitschrift für die
historische Theologie”, 1858; Tournebize, “Hist. politique et religieuse de l’Arménie”,
Paris, s. d (1910) 320; André-Marie, “Missions dominicaines dans l’Extrême Orient”, Lyons
and Paris, 1865 Mortier, “Hist. des maîtres généraux de l’ordre des Frères Prêcheurs”, I,
242 Giffre de Rechac, “Les vies et actions mémorables des saints canonisés de l’ordre des Frères
Prêcheurs et de plusieurs bienheureux et illustres personnages du même ordre”, Paris,
1647; Marchese, “Sagro diario domenicano”, Naples, 1668, 6 vols. in fol.; Manoel de
Lima, “Agiologio dominico”, Lisbon, 1709-54, 4 vols. in fol.; “Année dominicaine”, Lyons,
1883-1909, 12 vols. in 4; Imbert-Gourbeyre, “La Stigmatisation”, Clermont-Ferrand, 1894;
Thomas de Vallgormera, “Mystica theologia D. Thomae”, Barcelona, 1662; Turin, 1911,
243 “Script. Ord. Præd.”, II, p. I, “Analecta Ord. Præd.”, I sqq.; “Dominicanus orbis
descriptus”; Mortier, “Hist. des maîtres généraux”, V sqq.; Chapotin,” Le dernier prieur du
dernier couvent”, Paris, 1893; Rais, “Historia de la provincia de Aragón, orden de
Predicadores desde le año 1803 haste el de 1818”, Saragossa, 1819; 1824.
244 Acta Cap. Gener., V, 94.
245 Mortier, “Hist. des maîtres généraux”, V sq.; “Acta cap. gen.”, IV sq.; “Chronicon
magistrorum generalium”; “Regula S. Augustini et Constitutiones Ord. Præd.”, Rome,
1695; Paichelli, “Vita del Rmo P. F. Giov. Battista de’ Marini”, Rome, 1670; Messin, “Vita
del Rmo P F. Antonino Cloche”, Benevento, 1721; “Vita Antonini Bremondii” in “Annales
Ord. Præd.”, Rome, 1756, I, p. LIX.
246 Bull. O. P., IV, 38.
247 “Historia del colegio major de Ste Tomás de Sevilla”, Seville, 1890.
248 Fabricy, “Des titres primitifs de la Révélation”, Rome, 1772, II, 132; “Acta. Cap. Gen.”,
IV-VII; “Bull. O. P.”, passim; V. de la Fuente, ” La enseñanza Tomistica en España”,
Madrid, 1874; Contarini ” Notizie storiche circa gli publici professori nello studio di
Padova scelti dall’ ordine di San Domenieo”, Venice, 1769.
249 “Die deutschen Dominikaner in Kampfe gegen Luther, 1518-1563”, Freiburg i. Br., 1903.
250 Astrain, “Historia de la Compañia de Jésus en la asistencia de España”, III, Madrid, 1909,
251 Reginaldus, “De catechismi romani auctoritate dissertatio”, Naples, 1765.
252 “Script. O.P.”, II, s. vv.; P. Getino, “Historia de un convento” (St. Stephen of Salamanca),
Vergara, 1904 Ehrle, “Die Vatikanischen Handschriften der Salamanticenser Theologen des
sechszehnten Jahrhunderts” in “Der Katholik”, 64-65, 1884-85; L. G. Getino, “El maestro
Fr. Francisco de Vitoria” in “La Ciencia tomista”, Madrid, I, 1910, 1; Caballero, “Vida del
Illmo. dr. D. Fray Melchor Cano”, Madrid, 1871; Alvarez, “Santa Teresa y el P. Bañez “,
253 Cossio, “II cardinale Gaetano e la riforma”, Cividale, 1902.
254 Script. O. P., II, 59.
255 Op. cit., 104.
256 Schweizer, “Ambrosius Catharinus Politus, 1484-1553, ein Theologe des Reformations-zeitalters”, Münster, 1910.
257 “Script. O. P.”, II; Hurter “Nomenelator”, IV; H. Serry, “Opera omnia”, I , Lyons, 1770, p.
258 Mandonnet, “Le décret d’Innocent XI contre le probabilisme”, in “Revue Thomiste” 1901-03; Ter Haar, “Des Decret des Papstes Innocenz XI über den Probabilismus”, Paderborn,
1904; Concina, “Della storia del Probabilismo e del Rigorismo”, Lucca, 1743; Mondius, ”
Studio storico-critico sul sistema morale di S. Alfonso M. de Liguori”, Monza, 1911;
Dölinger-Reuseh, “Gesch. der Moralstreitigkelten”, Nordlingen, 1889.
259 Script. O. P., II 114.
260 Venice, 1566; op. cit., 206.
261 Hurter, “Nomenclat. litt.”, III, 1211.
262 Op. cit., IV, 161.
263 Pougeois “Vansleb”, Paris, 1869.
264 Paris, 1676-89; (Dict. de Théol. Cath., I, 769).
265 Kirchenlex., IX, 1087.
266 Urbain, “Nicolas Coeffeteau, dominicain, évêque de Marseille, un des fondateurs de la
prose française, 1574-1623”, Paris, 1840.
267 Dict. de théol. Bath., II, 1443.
268 Script. O. P., II, 645.
269 Gams, “Series episcoporum ecclesiae catholicae”, Ratisbon, 1873; Falloux, “Histoire de
Saint Pie V”, Paris, 1858; Borgia, “Benedicti XIII vita”, Rome, 1741; Catalano, “De
secretario Indicis”, Rome 1751.
270 “Catalogo de los religiosos dominicanos confessores de Estado, 1700”; Chapotin, “La
guerre de succession de Poissy, 1660-1707”, Paris, 1892.
271 Joao dos Santos, “Ethiopia oriental”, Evora, 1609; re-edited Lisbon, 1891; Cacegas-de
Sousa, “Historia de S. Domingo partidor do reino e conquistas de Portugal”, Lisbon, 1767
(Vol. IV by Lucas de Santa Catharina. André Marie, “Missions dominicaines dans
l’extrême Orient”, Lyons-Paris, 1865.
272 Mandonnet, “Les dominicains et la découverte de l’Amérique”, Paris 1893.
273 Remesal “Historia de la provincia de S. Vicente de Chiapa y Guatemala”, Madrid, 1619;
Davila Padilla “Historia de la fundacion y discorso de la provincia de Santiago de Mexico”,
Madrid, 1592; Brussels 1625; Franco, “Segunda parte de la historia de provincia de
Santiago de Mexico”, 1645, Mexico re-ed. Mexico, 1900; Melendez, “Tesores verdadero
de la Indias en la historia de la gran provincia de S Juan Bautista del Peru”, Rome, 1681;
Alonso d’ Zamora, “Historia de la provineia de San Antonio del nuevo reyno de Granada”,
Barcelona, 1701; Helps, “Life of las Casas, the Apostle of the Indies” London, 1883;
Gutierrez, “Fray Bartolomé de las Casas sus tiempos y su apostolado”, Madrid, 1878;
Fabie, “Vida y escritos de Fray Bartolomé de las Casas”, Madrid, 1879; Wilberforce, “Life
of Louis Bertrand”, Fr. tr. Folghera, Paris, 1904; Masson, “Sainte Rose, tertiaire
dominicaine, patronne du Nouveau Monde”, Lyons, 1898.
274 Ferrando-Fonseca, “Historia de los PP. Dominicos a las isles Filipinas, y en sus misiones de
Japón, China, Tungkin y Formosa”, Madrid, 1870; Navarrete, “Tratados historicos,
politicos, ethicos y religiosos de la monarquia de China”, Madrid, 1676-1679, tr., London,
1704; Gentili, “Memorie di un missionario domenicano nella Cina”, 1887; Orfanel, “Historia
eclesiastica de los succesos de la christiandad de Japón desde 1602 que entró en el la orden
de Predicadores, haste el año de 1620”, Madrid, 1633; Guglielmotti, “Memorie delle
missioni cattoliche nel regno del Tunchino”, Rome, 1844; Arias, “El beato Sanz y
companeros martires”, Manila, 1893; “I martiri annamiti e chinesi (1798-1856)”, Rome,
1900; Clementi, “Gli otto martiri tonchinesi dell’ ordine di S. Domenico”, Rome, 1906.
275 Du Tertre, “Hist. générale des Antilles”, Paris, 1667-71; Labat “Nouveau voyage aux isles
de l’Amérique”, Paris 1742.
276 Goormachtigh, “Hist. de la mission Dominicaine en Mésopotamie et Kurdistan”, in
“Analecta O. P.” III, 271.
277 See general bibliography of saints in section Middle Ages above.
278 Sanvito, “Catalogus omnium provinciarum sacri ordinis praedicatorum”, Rome, 1910; “Analecta O. P.”, Rome, 1893–; “L’Année Dominicaine”, Paris, 1859–. In the last two publications will be found historical and bibliographical information concerning the history of the Preachers during the contemporaneous period.
279 “Script. O. P.”, I, pp. i-xv; II, Pp. i-xix, 830; “Bull. O. P.”, passim; Mortier, “Hist. des
maîtres généraux”, passim; Danzas, “Etudes sur les temps primitifs de l’ordre de St.
Dominique”,IV, Poitiers-Paris (1877. “Analecta O. P.”, passim I Greith, “Die deutsche
Mystik im Prediger Orden”, Freiburg i. Br., 1861; de Villermont, “Un groupe mystique
allemand”, Brussels, 1907.
280 Mandonnet, “Les règles et le gouvernement de l’ordo de Poenitentia au XIIIe siècle” in
“Opuscules de critique historique”, IV, Paris, 1902; Federici, “Istoria de’ Cavalieri
Gaudenti”, Venice, 1787.