The Seven Ecumenical Councils · Part 5

(3) "Kniga pravil" nicut' ne predstavljaet avtorizovannago textus receptus, i posle eja izdanija sam Sv. Sinod ne redko privodil v svoih ukazah pravila po slavjanskoj redakcii "Kormcej knigi," a potom rekomendoval Afinskoe izdanie "Sintagmy" dlja vseh duhovno-ucebnyh zavedenij. Eto otkryvalo mesto dlja novoj obrabotki, kotoraja s razre?enija vys?ej duhovnoj vlasti i byla predprinjata Moskovskim "Ob?cestvom ljubitelej duhovnago prosve?cenija". Objavlenie ob etom bylo sdelano v N-re 3 "Moskovskih Eparhialnyh Cerkovnyh Vedomostej"za 1875 g., a v janvarskoj knizke togoze goda Moskovskago zurnala "Ctenija v Ob?cestve ljubitelej duhovnago prosve?cenija"byla napecatana i samaja "programma"izdanija (strn. 79-90 v otdele bibliografii. Po povodu eja professor kanoniceskago prava v Novororossijskom Universitete (skoncav?ijsja 16go avgusta 1898 g. professorom Moskovskago Universiteta) Aleksej Stepanovic Pavlov sdelal "Zamecanija na programmu izdanija, v russkom perevode, cerkovnyh pravil s tolkovanijami" v "Zapiskah Imperatorskago Novorossijskago Universiteta", t. XVI (Odessa 1875 g.) strn. 1-17 prilozenij (i v otdel'noj bro?ure), a posle perepecatal ih--s nekotorymi dopolnenijami--v Moskovskom zurnale "Pravoslavnoe Obozrenie"za aprel' 1876 g. (strn. 730-746) pod zaglaviem "O novom perevode tolkovanij na cerkovnyja pravila". Na eti vozrazenija otvecal professor cerkovnago prava v Moskovskoj Duhovnoj Akademii Aleksandr Feodorovic Lavrov v zurnale "Ctenija v Ob?cestve ljubitelej duhovnago prosve?cenija" (c. II, strn. 158-194 za 1877 g.) "Pecatnym pis'mom k Alekseju Stepanovicu Pavlovu". Tak postepenno opredelilsja plan izdanija, kotoroe pecatalos' snacala v prilozenijah k zurnalu "Ctenija v Ob?cestve i pr.", a potom javilos' i otdel'no in octavo v sleduju?cih vypuskah: (a) I-j "Pravila svjatih Apostol s tolkovanijami" v dvuh izdanijah--Moskva 1876 g. iz "Ctenij 1875 g., strn. 1-163) 4+12+175 strn., i ibid. 1887 g., 5+12+163 strn.; II-j "Pravila svjatyh vselennyh soborov s tolkovanijami"(iz "Ctenij" 1875 g., strn. 165-328; 1876 g., strn. 329-680; 1877 g., strn. 681-900) v dvuh castjah: 1-ja "pravila soborov 1-4" Moskva 1877 g., 260 strn., 2-ja "pravila soborov 5-7" ibid., 736 strn.; b) "Pravila svjatyh pomestnyh soborov s tolkovanijami" toze v dvuh vypuskah (iz "Ctenij" 1877 g., strn. 900-1066; 1878 g., strn. 1067-1306; 1879 g., strn. 1307-1410: 1-j (pravila soborov Ankirskago, Neokesarijskago, Gangrskago, Antiohijskago, Laodikijskago i Sardikijskago) Moskva 1880, strn. 359; 2-j (pravila soborov Karfagenskago [s poslanijami k pape Vonifatiju i pape Kelestinu], Konstantinopol'skago, Dvukratnago i vo hrame premudrosti slova Bozija) ibid. 1881, strn. 876; c) "Pravila svjatyh otec s tolkovanijami" ibid. 1884, strn. 626. Pri nih imeetsja otdel'nyj "Ukazatel' predmetov, soderza?cihsja v izdanii pravil apostol'skih, sobornyh i svjatyh otcev s tolkovanijami", Moskva 1888, 58 strn. in octavo. Greceskij tekst pravil privoditsja po izdaniju Suntagma ton Theion kai hieron kanonon...hupo G. A. Ralle kai M. Potln, 'Athenesin 1852-1854, rjadom s nim pome?cajetsja doslovnyj slavjanskij perevod tolkovanij vizantijskih kommentatorov (Zonary, Aristina, Val'samona), tekst i tolkovanija slavjanskoj Kormcej; vse eto soprovozdaetsja vydanijami i vsjakago roda pojasnenijami (istoriceskimi, filologiceskimi i t. p.). Izdanie eto specialistami spravedlivo scitaetsja ves'ma cennym v naucnom otno?enii. Glavnym redaktorom i dejatelem ego byl prof. A. F. Lavrov (v mona?estve Aleksij, skoncav?ijsja arhiepiskopom Litovskim i Vilenskim), no privlekalis' k ucastiju mnogija drugija lica i mezdu nimi prof. A. S. Pavlov.

(4) Russkij perevod pravil imeetsja tol'ko pri izdanijah Kazanskoj Duhovnoj Akademii: a) "Dejanija vselenskih soborov v perevode na russkij jazyk", t. I VII (7), Kazan' 1859-1878 (nekotorye tomy vo vtorom izdanii) i b) "Dejanija devjati pomestnyh soborov v perevode na russkij jazyk", odin tom, Kazan' 1878. Etot perevod sdelan po porucenii Sv. Sinoda, a pravila peredajutsja v nem po tekstu sobornyh dejanij.

Iz predstavlennago ocerka pecatnyh izdanij sobornyh pravil vidno, cto oni--v predelah svoej fakticeskoj primenimosti--pocitajutsja istocnikom dejstvuju?cago prava v Russkoj pravoslavnoj cerkvi, pocemu dlja neja osobennuju vaznost' imejut li?' avtoritetnyja vizantijskija, tolkovanija, o kotoryh su?cestvujut izsledovanija V. Demidova, harakter i znacenie tolkovanij na kanoniceskij kodeks greceskoj cerkvi--Aristina, Zonary i Val'samona--v "Pravoslavnom Obozrenii" t. II-j za 1888 g., Kazanskago prof. V. A. Narbskago, Tolkovanija Val'samona na nomokanon Fotija, Kazan' 1889, i Jur'evskago (=Derptskago) prof. M. E. Krasnozena, Tolkovateli kanoniceskago kodeksa vostocnoj cerkvi: Aristin, Zonara i Val'samon, Moskva 1892.

Otdel'nyh naucnyh tolkovanij vseh sobornyh pravil v russkoj literature net, no oni izlagajutsja i razjasnjajutsja v kursah cerkovnago prava (arhimandrit. [ep. Smolenskago] Ioanna, prof. N. S. Suvorova, I. S. Berdnikova, P. A. Laskareva, M. A. Ostroumova), v socinenijah po istorii vselenskih soborov (ep. Ioanna, prof. Alekseja Petrovica Lebedeva), v kanoniceskih i cerkovno-istoriceskih monografijah. Kasatel'no kriticeskago izdanija podlinnago teksta pravil est' ucenaja i poleznaja stat'ja (o knige Fr. Lauchert, Die Kanones usw., Freiburg i. Br. und Leipzig 1896) professora cerkovnnoj istorii v S. Peterburgskoj Duhovnoj Akademii Vasilija Vasilievica Bolotova v "Hristianskom Ctenii", vyp. IV-j za 1896 g., strn. 178-195.

Professor S.-Peterburgskoj Duhovnoj Akademii po kafedre Sv. Pisanija Novago Zaveta

Nikolaj Glubokovskij

S.-Peterburg, 1898, X, 11-voskresenie.

A Bibliographical Index of the Printed Editions of the Canons of the Apostles and of the Councils in the Slavonic and Russian Languages.

(Prepared by Nicolas Glubokoffski, Professor of the Chair of the Holy Scriptures of the New Testament in the Ecclesiastical Academy of St. Petersburgh.)

In the orthodox Russian Church, editions of the Conciliar Canons and Decrees have only been issued under the immediate disposition and sanction of the supreme ecclesiastical authority, and, in fact, are amongst those things which it is not within the competence of private scholars to undertake. Such editions therefore have been published in Russia only in accordance with practical requirements.

1. The earliest printed edition of the afore-mentioned canons appeared in the Slavonic "Kormchaja Kniga" (=Gk. pedalion), the printing of which was commenced at Moscow, on October 7th, 1649, under the Patriarch Joseph of Moscow, and was finished on July 1, 1650; but the Patriarch Nicon caused it to be submitted to a Council for revision, in consequence of which certain pages were reprinted and inserted afresh into it. Thereupon copies of this "Kormchaja" were distributed for use amongst the churches, and came into general circulation not earlier than the year 1653. The second edition of the "Kormchaja" appeared in 1787, after a revision under the Metropolitan Gabriel of Novgorod and St. Petersburgh, and was followed by others (e.g., those of 1804, 1816, and 1823) without any alterations of importance. The latest editions differ from that of Nicon in certain particulars, but these particulars do not concern the ecclesiastical Canons, which are placed in the first part of the "Kormchaja" and include the 85 Apostolic Canons, the decrees of the sixteen councils (of Nicæa, Ancyra, Neocæsarea, Gangra, Antioch, Laodicea, the 2d, 3d, and 4th Ecumenical, Sardica, Carthage, Constantinople under Nectarius, in Trullo, a.d. 692, the 7th Ecumenical, the First-and-Second [council of Constantinople] and that in the church of St. Sophia) and the Canons of the 13 Holy Fathers.

2. In the printed "Kormchaja" the canons are set forth, not in their full text, but in a shortened form which sometimes gives but a very insufficient representation of the contents of the original. On this account attempts at full translations were made many years back, but these never appeared in print. It was not until 1839 that such an edition as this was put forth by the Holy Synod at St. Petersburgh, under the title: "The Book of the Canons of the Holy Apostles, of the Holy Ecumenical and local Councils, and of the Holy Fathers," printed in large folio in "the Imperial city of St. Peter, the first impression in the 7347th year from the creation of the world, and the 1839th from the Birth in the flesh of God the Word, indict. 12." In this edition there are 4 unnumbered leaves and 455 numbered pages. On each page there are two columns, for the original text and the new translation of the whole text into the Slavonic respectively, but without the commentaries of the Byzantine Canonists; occasionally, but rarely, notes based upon Zonaras or Balsamon are given, which are not always historically accurate (for instance, that to the 10th Canon of Ancyra, the 3d of Sardica, the 4th of Carthage, and the one which deals with the First-and-Second Council of a.d. 861) while in some places the text itself is not correct (for instance, in the 13th Canon of the 1st Ecumenical Council). This "Book of the Canons" subsequently went through the following editions: the 2d, printed in Moscow at the Synodal Press in 1862, in folio 8 leaves + 672 + 74 numbered pages, with Greek and Slavonic texts; the 3d ibid. in 1866, in quarto, 3 leaves + 373 pages + 1 leaf + 59 pages, with the Slavonic text only; the 4th, ibid. in 1874, in octavo, 4 leaves 4 + 455 pages + 2 leaves + 104 + 4 pages, also with the Slavonic text only; the 5th, ibid. in 1886, in folio, 3 leaves + 395 + 42 pages + 1 leaf, again with Slavonic text only.

3. The "Book of Canons" by no means represents an authorized textus receptus, and after its publication, the Holy Synod itself not unfrequently introduced the Canons as given in the Slavonic edition of the "Kormchaja Kniga" into its edicts, and moreover recommended the Athenian Edition of the "Syntagma" for all the ecclesiastico-educational establishments. This opened the way for a new work, which, with the permission of the supreme ecclesiastical authority, was undertaken by the Moscow "Society of Amateurs of Spiritual Enlightenment." The announcement of this was made in No. 3 of the "Moscow Diocesan Church Gazette" of the year 1875, whilst in the same year in the January number of the Moscow Journal, "Lectures delivered in the Society of Amateurs of Spiritual Enlightenment," the "programe" of the edition itself was printed (pages 79-90 in the section devoted to bibliography). In criticism of it the Professor of Canonical Law in the University of Novorossiisk, Alexis Stepanovich Pavloff (who died on August 16, 1898, as Professor of the University of Moscow) wrote "Notes on the programme of an edition, in a Russian translation of the Canons of the Church with Commentaries" in the sixteenth volume of "Memoirs of the Imperial University of Novorossiisk" (Odessa, 1875), pages 1-17 of the Appendix (and in a separate pamphlet), which was afterwards reprinted with certain additions in the Moscow Journal, "Orthodox Review," of April, 1876 (pages 730-746), under the title: "A new translation of the Commentaries upon the canons of the church." To these criticisms the Professor of Ecclesiastical Law in the Moscow Ecclesiastical Academy, Alexander Theodorovich Lavroff, wrote a reply in "Lectures delivered in the Society of Amateurs of Spiritual Enlightenment" (for the year 1877, part 2, pages 158-194), entitled "A printed letter to Alexis Stepanovich Pavloff." Thus the plan of the edition gradually took shape. It was first printed in the Appendices to the Journal "Lectures in the Society, etc.," and subsequently was published separately in octavo in the following parts (A) I. "The Canons of the Holy Apostles with Commentaries" in two editions--Moscow, 1876, (from "Lectures," 1875, pages 1-163) 4 + 12 + 175 pages, and ibid., 1887, 5-12 + 163 pages; II. "Canons of the Holy Ecumenical Councils with Commentaries" (from "Lectures" 1875, pages 165-325; 1876, pages 329-680; 1877, pages 891-900), in two parts: 1st "The Canons of the Councils I.-IV.," Moscow, 1877, 260 pages; 2d. "The Canons of Councils V.-VII.," ibid., 736 pages; (B) "The Canons of the Holy Local Councils with Commentaries," also in two parts (from "Lectures" 1877, pages 900-1066; 1878, pages 1067-1306; 1879, pages 1307-1410): the 1st (The Canons of the Councils of Ancyra, Neocæsarea, Gangra, Antioch, Laodicea, and Sardica) Moscow, 1880, 359 pages; the 2d (The Canons of the Councils of Carthage [with the letters to Pope Boniface and to Pope Celestine], Constantinople, the First-and-Second, and that in the Temple of the Wisdom of the Word of God) ibid., 1881, 876 pages; (C) "The Canons of the Holy Fathers with Commentaries," ibid., 1884, 626 pages. Together with these is a separate "Index of subjects contained in the edition of the Canons of the Apostles, Councils and Holy Fathers with Commentaries," Moscow, 1888, 58 pages in octavo. The Greek text of the canons follows the edition Suntagma ton theion kai ieron kanonon...hupo G. A. Ralle kai M. Potle, Athenesin 1852-1854, and alongside of it is placed a literal Slavonic translation, after which follows a Russian translation of the Commentaries of the Byzantine Canonists (Zonaras, Aristenus, Balsamon), and the text and commentaries of the Slavonic "Kormchaja;" all this is accompanied by introductions and explanations of all sorts (historical, philological, etc.). This edition is rightly considered by specialists to be of very great value from a scientific point of view. Professor A. Th. Lavroff (who became a monk under the name Alexis, and died Archbishop of Lithuania and Vilna) was its chief editor and had most to do with it, but many others took part in the work, and amongst these Professor A. S. Pavloff.

4. The only Russian translation of the canons which exists is contained in the publications of the Ecclesiastical Academy of Kazan: (a) "The Acts of the Ecumenical Councils translated into Russian," 7 volumes. Kazan, 1859-1878 (some of these volumes have run into a second edition) and (b) "Acts of the nine local councils translated into Russian," 1 volume, Kazan, 1878. This translation was made under the direction of the Holy Synod, and the Canons are reproduced in it according to the text of the Acts of the Councils.

From the outline here presented of the printed editions of the Canons of the Councils, it will be seen that, within the limits of their practical applicability, they are reverenced as the source of the operative law in the Russian orthodox church, and therefore for her it is only the authoritative Byzantine commentaries which have any particular importance. There are works upon these by V. Demidoff, "The character and significance of the commentaries upon the Canonical Codex of the Greek Church--of Aristenus, Zonaras, and Balsamon," in the "Orthodox Review," vol. ii. of 1888, and of Professor V. A. Narbekoff, of Kazan, "The commentaries of Balsamon upon the Nomocanon of Photius," Kazan, 1889, and of Professor M. E. Krasnozhen, of Jurieff (Dorpat) "The Commentators of the Canonical Codex of the Eastern Church: Aristenus, Zonaras, and Balsamon." Moscow, 1892.

No separate scientific commentaries upon all the canons of the councils exist in Russian literature, but they are described, and explained in courses of Ecclesiastical law (of the Archimandrite John [who, when he died, was Bishop of Smolensk] of Professors N. S. Suvoroff, T. S. Berdnikoff, N. A. Lashkareff, M. A. Ostroümoff) in our works upon the history of the Ecumenical Councils (by Bishop John, and Professor Alexis Petrovich Lebedeff), and in monographs dealing with Canon Law and Church History. As far as a critical edition of the original text of the canons is concerned, there is a learned and useful article (upon a book by Fr. Lauchert, Die Kanones usw., Freiberg i. Br. und Leipsig, 1896), by Vasili Vasilievich Bolotoff, Professor of Ecclesiastical History in the St. Petersburgh Ecclesiastical Academy in the "Christian Reading," vol. iv. for 1896, pp. 178-195.

Excursus on the History of the Roman Law and Its Relation to the Canon Law.

The foregoing bibliographical outline would be entirely incomplete did I not give the reader at least a sketch of how those canons adopted by the various councils gradually won admission to the law-code of the Empire, and how that code itself came into being. For those wishing to study the matter in detail I would name as the most recent authorities upon the Roman Law, Mr. Muirhead, who has published with additions and notes his article on the subject in the "Encyclopædia Britannica," and Mr. Bury's new edition of Gibbon's Rome just being issued with most learned notes.

But neither of these writers has put the matter exactly as I desire for this purpose, and I have therefore been forced to seek elsewhere the information I now lay before the reader.

The study of Jurisprudence did not form a separate department among the ancient Greeks, but among the Romans it was quite otherwise, and a very elaborate system was developed, so elaborate as to demand the care of a special class of men, who devoted themselves to this business alone and handed down to their successors a constantly increasing mass of legal matter.

When Greece fell under the Roman yoke the laws of the victor were imposed upon the vanquished, but even then the Greeks did not take to legal studies. In fact not until the seat of the Empire was removed to Constantinople did the East become a centre of jurisprudence or the residence of the chief legal experts. In the whole period before the fourth century of our era we know of but one barrister who wrote in Greek, and he came from the West, Herennius Modestinus. He was a disciple of Ulpian and preceptor to the Emperor Maximian the Younger.

From the time of Hadrian to that of Alexander Severus the influence of the legal schools of Rome had been paramount. The Emperors consulted them and asked them to decide difficult points. But after the death of Alexander this custom fell into entire disuse, and the Emperors themselves decided the matters formerly entrusted to the lawyers. After this time the Imperial Constitutions became the chief sources of Roman law. It is only in the time of Constantine the Great that we find once again the lawyers rising into prominence and a flourishing school at Beyroot in Syria. It was at this time that the Imperial Constitutions or Edicts were first collected, for until then they existed only in detached documents. This collection was made by two lawyers, Gregory or Gregorian, and Hermogenes. Gregory's collection contains the laws set forth from the time of Hadrian to Constantine, and Hermogenes wrote a supplement. Although this was but a private enterprise, yet it was cited in the courts of law, just as Lord Lyndwood's Provinciale is with us to-day.

It is interesting to note that it was about this same time that the first attempt was made to collect the ecclesiastical canons, and so the Civil Law and the Canon Law (as we know them in after times) had their rise about the same period.

The law of the Empire was not, however, to be left to private and unofficial action, but by the care of Theodosius the Younger its first official collection was made. This prince directed eight men learned in the law to gather into one body of laws all the Imperial Constitutions published since the last included in the collections of Gregory and Hermogenes. This is the "Theodosian Code," and contains the laws set forth by Constantine and his successors. It was promulgated in 438 in the East, and received by the then Emperor of the West, Valentinian III. To this were subsequently added such laws as each set forth, under the title of "New Constitutions."

The Emperor Justinian determined still further to simplify the attaining of judicial decisions. It is true that the making of the legal collections referred to had added greatly to the ease of determining the law in any given case, but there was a source of great confusion in the endless number of legal decisions which by custom had acquired the force of law, and which were by no means always consistent between themselves; these were the famous responsa jurisperitorum. To clear up this difficulty was no small task, but the Emperor went about it in the most determined fashion and appointed a commission, consisting of Tribonian and ten other experts, to make a new collection of all the imperial constitutions from Hadrian to his own day. This is the famous Justinian Code, which was promulgated in 529, and abrogated all previous collections.

This, however, was not sufficient to remove the difficulty, and Tribonian next, together with sixteen lawyers, spent three years in making extracts from the great mass of decisions of the ancient jurists, filling as they did nearly two thousand volumes. These they digested and did their best to clear away the contradictions. When the work was finished it appeared to the world as the "Pandects," because it was intended to contain all there was to be said upon the subject. It is also known as the "Digest." This work was set forth in 533 and from that time such of the former decisions as were not incorporated ceased to have any force.

It must however be remembered that, while this was the case, all the decisions contained in the Pandects did not obtain the force of law. The Pandects are not a code of laws, but a system of public jurisprudence composed by public authority. To the Pandects were added by the Emperor two ordinances, the first to forbid any copyist to write them in an abbreviated form; and the second forbidding commentators to treat them in anything but their literal sense.

While this work was in progress some points were so complicated and obscure that the Emperor had to be appealed to, and his writings in these particulars are the origin of the "Fifty Decisions."

At the same time was prepared the "Institutes," containing the elements of the whole Roman law.

Later, new laws having been made, the Code had to be revised; the former edition was abrogated in 534, and a new one set forth with the title "Codex repetitæ prælectionis."

The last of Justinian's labours in the field of jurisprudence (if indeed they were not collected after his death) are his "Novels," a series of imperial constitutions issued between 535 and 559 (Nearai Diataxeis). There are one hundred and sixty-eight of these Novels, but the ancient glosses only know ninety-seven, and the rest have been added since, as they have been found.

Such is the origin of the Corpus Juris Civilis, and its history needed to be set forth in this place on account of its close connection with the Corpus Juris Canonici. In the foregoing I have followed M. Schoell in his admirable Histoire de la Littérature Grecque Profane, to which I am also chiefly indebted for the following notes upon the jurists of the sixth and ensuing centuries.

A work which is often looked upon as the origin of the Canon Law was composed by a lawyer of Antioch, somewhere near the middle of the sixth century. This jurist was John of Antioch, surnamed Scholasticus. He was representative or apocrisiarius of the Church of Antioch at Constantinople, and afterward was made Patriarch of that see, over which he ruled from 564 until his death in 578. While still a simple priest at Antioch he made his Collection of the Canons of the Councils.

"He was not the first who conceived the idea of such a work. Some writers, resting upon a passage in Socrates, have been of opinion that this honour belonged to Sabinus, bishop of Heraclea, in Thrace, at the beginning of the fifth century; but Socrates is not speaking of a collection of canons at all, but of the synodal acts, of the letters written by or addressed to the synods. If, however, Sabinus did not make a collection of canons, it is certain nevertheless that before John of Antioch there existed one, for he himself cites it many times, although he does not name the authors."

"In gathering together thus the canons of the councils John of Antioch did not form a complete body of ecclesiastical law. By his Novel CXLI., Justinian had indeed given to the canons of the Church the force of law, but he himself published a great number of constitutions upon Church matters. Now it was necessary to harmonize these constitutions and canons, and to accomplish this feat was the object of a second work undertaken by John of Antioch, to which he gave the title of Nomocanon (Nomokanon ), a word which from that time has served to designate any collection of this sort."

Bury says, "In the troubles of the VII^th century the study of law, like many other things, declined, and in the practical administration of justice the prescriptions of the Code and Digest were often ignored or modified by the alien precepts of Christianity. The religion of the Empire had exerted but very slight influence--no fundamental influence, we may say--on the Justinian law. Leo III., the founder of the Syrian (vulgarly called Isaurian) dynasty, when he restored the Empire after a generation of anarchy, saw the necessity of legislation to meet the changed circumstances of the time. The settlements of foreigners--Slavs and Mardaites--in the provinces of the Empire created an agrarian question, which he dealt with in his Agrarian Code. The increase of Slavonic and Saracenic piracy demanded increased securities for maritime trade, and this was dealt with in a Navigation Code. But it was not only for special relations that Leo made laws; he legislated also, and in an entirely new way, for the general relations of life. He issued a law book (in a.d. 740 in the name of himself and his son Constantine), which changed and modified the Roman law, as it had been fixed by Justinian. The Ecloga, as it is called, may be described as a Christian law book. It is a deliberate attempt to change the legal system of the Empire by an application of Christian principles. Examples, to illustrate its tendency, will be given below. The horror in which the iconoclasts were held on account of their heresy by the image-worshippers, cast discredit upon all their works. This feeling had something to do with the great reaction, which was inaugurated by Basil I., against their legal reforms. The Christian Code of Leo prevailed in the empire for less than a century and a half; and then, under the auspices of Basil, the Roman law of Justinian was (partially) restored. In legal activity the Basilian epoch faintly reflected the epoch of Justinian itself. A handbook of extracts from the Institutes, Digest, Code, and Novels, was published in a.d. 879, entitled the Prochiron, to diffuse a knowledge of the forgotten system. But the great achievement of the Basilian epoch is the Basilica'--begun under Basil, completed under Leo VI.--a huge collection of all the laws of the Empire, not only those still valid, but those which had become obsolete. It seems that two commissions of experts were appointed to prepare the material for this work. One of these commissions compiled the Prochiron by the way, and planned out the Basilica in sixty Books. The other commission also prepared a handbook called the Epanagoge, which was never actually published (though a sketch of the work is extant), and planned out the Basilica in forty Books. The Basilica, as actually published, are arranged in sixty Books, compiled from the materials prepared by both commissions.

"The Basilian revival of Justinianean law was permanent; and it is outside our purpose to follow the history further, except to note the importance of the foundation of a school of law at Constantinople in the 11th century by the Emperor Constantine IX. The law enacting the institution of this school, under the direction of a salaried Nomophylax, is extant. John Xiphilin (see above) was the first director. This foundation may have possibly had some influence on the institution of the school at Bologna half a century later."

I take from Schoell the following description of the "Basilica":

"The Basilica' are a body of Roman law in the Greek language, extracted from the Institutes, the Pandects, the Codes and the Novels of Justinian as well as from the Imperial Constitutions posterior to that prince; also extracts from the interpretations of such jurists as had won a fixed authority in the courts, and the canons of the councils. Here is found together the civil and the ecclesiastical law of the Greeks, these two laws having been in an intimate union by reason of the authority which the Emperors exercised over the Church; on the other hand, in the West there was formed step by step a canon law separate from the civil law, and having a different source."

Such, then, were the "Basilica," but what is most singular is that this collection was not given the force of law, neither by Leo VI. nor by Constantine VI., although it was prepared at their order, under their authority, and was written in the language which was spoken by their subjects. The Justinian code of law, although in Latin, still continued to be the only authority in the entire East. An anonymous writer prepared an Epitome of the Basilica, digested into Alphabetical order, and beginning with "Of the Orthodox faith of Christians."