Page:American Historical Review vol. 6.djvu/555

 Sabaficr : Collection dc Dociimciits 545 discussion. He controverts the argument of the " improbability in rep- resenting Francis, a declared opponent of privileges and the chief of an order just founded, as imploring from the Holy See an exorbitant favor," by the argument that " this indulgence is not a privilege, it is an act of love on the part of the sovereign pontiff for the members of the church. Neither the Chapel of the Portiuncula nor the Minorites were to receive the slightest profit from it." The argument from the silence, with regard to the indulgence, observed by the earliest biogra- phers of St. Francis he thinks is no longer tenable. The Legend of the Three Companions published by Marcellino da Civezza and Teofilo Do- menichelli is, as they argue, one of the earliest and most authentic sources, and this document is explicit on the subject of the indulgence. As the authenticity of this biography is questioned, Sabatier does not care to press this point, but turns to the consideration of the traditional biographies. He argues that the various authors have copied from one another, and that we have, properly speaking, only two biographies : one by Tommaso da Celano, the other by the Three Companions. The latter cannot be said to have made no mention of the indulgence, be- cause we do not possess their work in its primitive form. The portions which have been lost may have contained a full statement as to the origin of this indulgence. Tommaso da Celano would not have been permitted by Gregory IX. to speak of the indulgence, as this pope regarded it "as indiscreet and dangerous." But the silence of the earlier biographies is "more apparent than real." "Without the indulgence, the chapters which they all consecrate to chanting the glories of the little sanctuary of Portiuncula appear . . . inexplicable." This is merely a bald sum- mary of his arguments, stated as far as possible in his own words, but very greatly abridged. To the present reviewer they seem far from conclusive. In fact, Sa- batier does not seem wholly ingenuous in neglecting what is (as has been pointed out by Mr. Lea in his History of Confession and Indulgences, III. 238) the strongest argument against the genuineness of the legend. "Tommaso da Celano expressly tells us that no layman was allowed to enter it [the church of the Portiuncula], and this injunction is crystal- lized in the legend that when Piero da Catania, whom St. Francis had put at the head of the Order, died and was buried in the Portiuncula, and, coruscating in miracles, brought multitudes of worshippers to it, Francis, on returning to Assisi, went to his tomb and addressed him : ' Brother Peter, in life you were always obedient to me ; as, through your miracles, we are pestered by laymen, you must obey me in death. I therefore order you on your obedience to cease from the miracles through which we are troubled by laymen.' " Other arguments which Sabatier has not answered are set forth in Mr. Lea's work, as well as elsewhere. In conclusion it is hardly necessary to say that both of these volumes are models, in most respects, of critical scholarship. We owe a great debt of gratitude to Sabatier for the information which he has made ac-