Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 15.djvu/65

 TRIAL

39

TRIBE

of the Rialto in Venice. The bishops of Treviso who participated in the schism of the Three Chapters were: Felix (see above); Rusticus, present at the Council of Murano (588); and Fehx II, who signed the petition to the Emperor Maurice. In 905 Bishop Adelbert received from King Berengar the temporal jurisdiction of the city, which extended to Rozo (969-1001) and Rolando who adhered to the schism of Clement III. Bishop Tiso (1212-45) .suffered from the tyranny of Ezzelino, and Alberto Ricco, O.M. (1255), was imprisoned for preaching against him. Successive bishops were: Loto Gambacurta (1394), exiled by the Florentines from his archbishop- ric of Pisa; Giovanni Benedetti, O.P. (1418), who reformed many convents of his order and concubi- nary priests; Ludovico Barbo (1437), Abbot of S. Giustina of Padua, and reformer of the Benedictine order; Ermolao Barbaro (1443), a learned and zealous prelate; Cardinal Pictro Riario, O.ISl. (1471); Fra Giovanni Dacri (147S), formerly general of the Fran- ciscans, who restored the cathedral and reorganized the revenues of the bishopric, leaving many pious founda- tions; Nicolo Franco (1486), papal nuncio in v.arious countries; Francesco Cornaro (1577), who founded a seminary, introduced the reforms of the Council of Trent, resigned his see, and was created cardinal; Gian Antonio Lupo (1(346), who conflicted with his canons; GiambattLsta Saniedo (1684), zealous and beneficent pastor; Fortunato ISIorosini (1710), who enlarged the Seminary; Bernardino Marini (1788- 1817), a canon of the Lateran, present at the Council of Paris, 1811, who united the abbey nullius of Novisa with the See of Treviso; and Giuseppe GiapeUi, appointed by the Austrian Government, but not recognized by the Holy See, so that the diocese re- mained in turmoil until the death of the candidate.

In 1818 Treviso passed from the metropolitan juris- diction of Aquileia (Udine) to that of Venice. Bishop Giuseppe Crasser (1822) healed the evils caused by the interregnum. Bishop Antonio Farina (1890) con- ferred sacred orders on Giuseppe Sarto, now Pius X. United with Treviso is the ancient Diocese of Asolo, the bishops of which are unknown from 587 (Agncllus) until 1049 (Ugo), and that of Heraclea (Citta Nova), a city founded in the times of the Byzantine emperor Heraclius, as a refuge for the inhabitants of Opiter- gium (Oderzo), who with their bishop (Magnus) had been exiled by the Lombards. Twenty-six bishops are known, from 814 until the union of the see with Treviso, 1440. The Diocese of Treviso has 215 parishes with 386 sectdar and 30 regular clergy, 5 monasteries, 27 convents, 2 educational institutions for boys, five for girls, and 414,330 souls.

Cappellf-tti. Le C'hiese d' Italia, X; Colleclio Historicorum de Marchia Trerisana (Venice, 1636); Verci, Storia delta Marchia THvigiana (Venice, 1789); Rioamonti, Descrizione delle picture piit celebri nelle chie^e di Treviso (Treviso. 1744); Riccati, Stato antico e moderno della cittti di Asolo (Pesaro, 1763); Seme.nzi. Treviso e la sua provincia (Trevii^o, 1862); Piccotti, I Caminesi e la loTO aignoria in Treviso dal ISSS al 1312 (Leghorn, 1904).

U. Benigni. Trial. See Courts, Ecclesiastical; 0.\ths.

Tribe, Jewish {'Clt, ~'J", ^'h, Iribus) — The earlier Hebrew term rendered in our English versions by the word "tribe" is ~2t', shehet, while the term, ~U'^, maUeh, prevails in the post-exilic writings. The two terms are nearly sjnonymous, signifying "branch", "rod", "staff", "sceptre", and in the sense of "tribe" are used figuratively with probable reference to the derivation of the tribe as a branch of the family of Jacob (stirj>s), or perhaps signifying originally a company led by a chief with a staff or sceptre. Ar- rangement by clans or tribes represents a form of social and political organization natural to Semitic nomads, as may be observed among the Bedouins of to-day, and the division of the Jewish people into twelve tribes is a prominent feature of the Old Testa-

ment records, while frequent allusion to the same is found in the New Testament writings. There is a difference of opinion among scholars as to the origin and nature of this most famous of all known tribal organizations. If the Biblical account of the patri- archs be accepted as personal (not tribal) history, each of the twelve tribes owed its origin to direct lineal descent from one of the sons or grandsons of Jacob. The sons of Jacob by Lia were Ruben, Simeon, Levi, Juda, Lssachar, and Zabulon; and by Lia's handmaid Zelpha, Gad and Aser, who were legally reputed according to the custom of the time as children of Lia. Jacob's sons by Rachel were Joseph and Benjamin, and by Rachel's handmaid Bala, Dan and Nephtali. The names of all of these, with the exception of Joseph, were given to their respective groups of descendants in the tribal organi- zation, but instead of the tribe of Joseph we find in most of the lists and in the final traditional classifi- cation two tribes named after his two sons, Ephraim and Manasses.

Thus, in reality, there were thirteen tribes in all but they are habitually referred to as twelve, doubt- less because in the distribution of the land after the conquest of Palestine only twelve tribal territories were assigned, the tribe of Levi being distributed among the others because of its priestly functions and Divine inheritance. To this may be added the fact that the sons of Jacob or Israel were twelve, to say nothing of the probable artificial influence of this mystic number. According to this traditional view the origin of the tribes was due to the fact that the descendants of each of these thirteen fathers or epo- nyms kept together, forming as many social groups which were to some extent augmented by the inclu- sion of foreign slaves and wives. Another theory, which has prevailed to a considerable extent among modern scholars, interprets as tribal history and tradition much of what is told of the patriarchal eponyms in jiersonal form. The tribes, according to this view, were not constituted by a subdivision of Israel, but rather the nation was formed originally by the aggregatiim of some of the earlier tribes which ha<l themselves grown out of the union of pre-existing groups of families and clans. Little is historically known of the tribal system during the nomadic period, but it is assumed on general grounds that the organization was much similar to that of the nomadic Arabs among whom thr unifying forces are chiefly the blood bond and the tribal or family cult. At the time of the invasion of Palestine the nation was still in the stage of loose tribal confederation and the war was waged by tribes and subdivisions of tribes, sometimes acting separately, sometimes in combina- tion with others (Judges, i, 3, iv, v). The process of consolidation went on after the conquest; the kindred families and clans naturally settled in the same neighbourhood, and finally the complete tribal organ- ization was evolved with territorial boundaries and independent historical- traditions.

It would seem that prior to the monarchy the tribal districts varied in number and extent, as may be gathered from the discrep.ancies that occur in the Bil)lical descriptions of their respective boundaries, nor do they apjjcar to have had any fixed or continu- ous political organization. Aggression by a foreign enemy would tmite the clans of a tribe or even several distinct tribes under a common leader as in the case of Gideon and others of the judges; but there is no intimation that in times of peace the tribe was governed by any single chief, though mention is occasionally made of "ancients" and "i)rinces" (Judges, X, IS; xi, 5; I Kings, iv, 3; xi, 3; II Kings, xix, 11; etc.). These were probably the heads of the clans and families of which the tribes were com- posed. After the establi.shment of (he monarchy the autonomy and importance of the tribe as a pohtical