Page:EB1911 - Volume 20.djvu/214

 ORDERIC VITALIS (1075–c. 1142), the chronicler, was the son of a French priest, Odeler of Orleans, who had entered the service of Roger Montgomery, earl of Shrewsbury, and had received from his patron a chapel in that city. Orderic was the eldest son of his parents. They sent him at the age of five to learn his letters from an English priest, Siward by name, who kept a school in the church of SS Peter and Paul at Shrewsbury. When eleven years old he was entered as a novice in the Norman monastery of St Evroul en Ouche, which Earl Roger had formerly persecuted but, in his later years, was loading with gifts. The parents paid thirty marks for their son’s admission; and he expresses the conviction that they imposed this exile upon him from an earnest desire for his welfare. Odeler’s respect for the monastic profession is attested by his own retirement, a few years later, into a religious house which Earl Roger had founded at his persuasion. But the young Orderic felt for some time, as he tells us, like Joseph in a strange land. He did not know a word of French when he reached Normandy; his book, though written many years later, shows that he never lost his English cast of mind or his attachment to the country of his birth. His superiors rechristened him Vitalis (after a member of the legendary Theban legion) because they found a difficulty in pronouncing his baptismal name. But, in the title of his Ecclesiastical History he prefixes the old to the new name and proudly adds the epithet Angligena. His cloistered life was uneventful. He became a deacon in 1093, a priest in 1107. He left his cloister on several occasions, and speaks of having visited Croyland, Worcester, Cambrai (1105) and Cluny (1132). But he turned his attention at an early date to literature, and for many years he appears to have spent his summers in the scriptorium. His superiors (at some time between 1099 and 1122) ordered him to write the history of St Evroul. The work grew under his hands until it became a general history of his own age. St Evroul was a house of wealth and distinction. War-worn knights chose it as a resting-place of their last years. It was constantly entertaining visitors from southern Italy, where it had planted colonies of monks, and from England, where it had extensive possessions. Thus Orderic, though he witnessed no great events, was often well informed about them. In spite of a cumbrous and affected style, he is a vivid narrator; and his character sketches are admirable as summaries of current estimates. His narrative is badly arranged and full of unexpected digressions. But he gives us much invaluable information for which we should search the more methodical chroniclers in vain. He throws a flood of light upon the manners and ideas of his own age; he sometimes comments with surprising shrewdness upon the broader aspects and tendencies of history. His narrative breaks off in the middle of 1141, though he added some finishing touches in 1142. He tells us that he was then old and infirm. Probably he did not long survive the completion of his great work.

 ORDINANCE, or, in architecture, a composition of some particular order or style. It need not be restricted to columnar composition, but applies to any kind of design which is subjected to conventional rules for its arrangement.

ORDINANCE, in medieval England, a form of legislation. The ordinance differed from the statute because it did not require the sanction of parliament, but was issued by the sovereign by virtue of the royal prerogative, although, especially during the reign of Edward I., the king frequently obtained the assent of his council to his ordinances. Dr Stubbs (Const. Hist. vol. ii.) defines the ordinance as “a regulation made by the king, by himself or in his council or with the advice of his council, promulgated in letters patent or in charter, and liable to be recalled by the same authority.” But after remarking that “these generalizations do not cover all the instances of the use of ordinance,” he adds: “The statute is primarily a legislative act, the ordinance is primarily an executive one.” Legislation by ordinance was very common during the reigns of Henry III. and Edward I. when laws were issued by the king in council or enacted in parliament indifferently. Both were regarded as equally binding. Soon, however, legislation by ordinance aroused the jealousy of parliament, especially when it was found that acts of parliament were altered and their purpose defeated by this means. Consequently in 1389 the Commons presented a petition to King Richard II. asking that no ordinance should be made contrary to the common law, or the ancient customs of the land, or the statutes ordained by parliament. For this and other reasons this form of legislation fell gradually into disuse, becoming obsolete in the 15th century. The modern equivalent of the ordinance is the order in council.

In 1310, when Edward II. was on the throne and England was in a very disturbed condition, a committee of twenty-one bishops, earls and barons was chosen to make certain ordinances for the better government of the country. These men were called ordainers.

In the 17th century the use of the word ordinance was revived, and was applied to some of the measures passed by the Long Parliament, among them the famous self-denying ordinance of 1645. This form was used probably in conformity with the opinion of Sir Edward Coke, who says in his Fourth Institute “an ordinance in parliament wanteth the threefold consent, and is ordained by one or two of them” (i.e. king, lords and commons). The ordinances of the Long Parliament did not, of course, obtain the assent of the king. At the present time the word ordinance is used to describe a body of laws enacted by a body less than sovereign. For example, the ordinances of Southern Nigeria are issued by the governor of that colony with the assent of his council.

Before 1789 the kings of France frequently issued ordonnances. These were acts of legislation, and were similar to the ordinances of the English kings in medieval times.

ORDINARY (med. Lat. ordinarius, Fr. ordinaire), in canon law, the name commonly employed to designate a superior ecclesiastic exercising “ordinary” jurisdiction (jurisdictionem ordinariam), i.e. in accordance with the normal organization of the church. It is usually applied to the bishop of a diocese and to those who exercise jurisdiction in his name or by delegation of his functions. Thus, in Germany, the term ordinariat is applied to the whole body of officials, including the bishop, through whom a diocese is administered. In English law, however, the term ordinary is now confined to the bishop and the chancellor