Roderic as 'el officio Frances' and 'el officio Toledano,' are said to have been submitted to the tests of a duel between two champions and of fire, the Toletan in both cases proving victorious. Still the Mozarabic rite, though thus abolished generally in Spain towards the close of the eleventh century, continued to be observed in six parish churches of Toledo as late as the thirteenth century, notwithstanding repeated endeavours of the Roman See to effect its extinction. But by the latter part of the fifteenth century it had fallen into almost complete desuetude and neglect even in these Churches; and Cardinal Ximenes, finding it in this moribund condition on his accession to the archbishopric of Toledo in 1495, at once set himself to provide a remedy. For this purpose he not only caused the Mozarabic Missal and Breviary to be printed and edited, but also erected a Chapel at the west end of Toledo Cathedral, called the Chapel of Corpus Christi, wherein their ritual might be daily celebrated in perpetuity by a college of thirteen priests, founded and endowed by him. There the Mozarabic Office is celebrated to this day and there, as part and parcel of it, the Roman Psalter is still sung, as it is also at St. Peter's, Rome, and at Milan; whether it is still used at St. Mark's, Venice, I am unable to say 1.

:

(d) The Hebraic Psalter is Jerome's translation from the Hebrew, which he made some time after his other versions. It has never been used in Church Offices.

The Athanasian Creed being very commonly found in MS. Latin Psalters owing to its being recited as a Canticle or Psalm in Church Offices, it is clearly of importance in reference to its history to note to what particular version the several Psalters, in which it appears, belong. We shall thus obtain a clue by which we may in some degree ascertain in what Churches and countries it was received and used, and at what dates. But we can only expect to find it in Roman and Gallican Psalters. In the very few MSS. of the Old Latin version which are extant it does not

For the history of the Mozarabic rite, see especially the work of Pinius, quoted and referred to above; also Praefatio Alexandri Lesleii in Liturgia Mozarabica, Migne, Patrol. Lat. tom. lxxxv; also Florez, España Sagrada, tom. iii. Madrid, 1754.

appear, nor could we expect to find it in them, as that Psalter, though necessarily the first used, had passed or was passing out of use at the time when the Quicunque began to be recited in the Office. Nor can we look for it in a Hebraic Psalter for the reason above mentioned, that it was never used in Divine worship, except in MSS. containing also a Roman or Gallican Psalter or both.

Numerous MSS. are extant containing two or more of these Latin versions of the Psalter. Among them may be mentioned Paris Bibliothèque Nationale, Latin 2195-a MS. written at Tournay A.D. 1105-containing the Gallican, Roman, and Hebraic, and in addition the LXX version in Latin characters in parallel columns; another quadruple Psalter now at Bamberg, containing the same four versions, written A.D. 909; the magnificent Eadwin Psalter of the twelfth century at Trinity College, Cambridge, containing the Gallican, Roman, and Hebraic; and in the Bodleian Library, Laud. Bibl. 35, also a triple Psalter, Gallican, Roman and Hebraic, assigned to the tenth century; in the Cathedral Library at Salisbury, No. 180, a double Psalter, Gallican and Hebraic, written in France in the tenth century. Manuscripts of the Roman and Old Latin Psalters are necessarily scarce the latter especially so-compared with those of the Gallican version, which are very abundant owing to its coming into more general use in the Middle Ages. Some MSS. of the Roman Psalter have been already mentioned: a copy of the Old Latin appears in a double Psalter belonging to the cathedral at Verona, and described by Blanchini as written before the seventh century, the other version being that of the Septuagint in Latin characters'. A Quincuplex Psalterium, comprising the Gallican, Roman, Hebraic, and Vetus versions, with a fifth called Conciliatum, and constructed by a harmony of the Gallican and Hebraic, was printed by Stephens at Paris in 1509 and 1513, being edited with a preface and expositions by Jacobus Faber Stapulensis; and the same book was reprinted at Caen in 1515 by Peter Olivier. Faber does not specify the MSS. from which his text is derived: but, as regards the three Hieronymian versions, it is identical with that of the Paris Psalter previously Blanchini Vindiciae Canonicarum Scripturarum, Romae, 1740.

noticed-Latin 2195, if we may judge from the collation of the facsimile of it, produced among the publications of the Palaeographical Society, vol. iii. plate 156.

E.

The Text of the Athanasian Creed.

The text as it appears in Waterland's Critical History, with various readings from the following MSS. :—Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Latin 13159, 4858, 1451, 3848 B, 2076; Rome, the Vatican Library, Vat. 82, 84, and Palat. 574; Milan, Ambrosian Library, O. 212; British Museum, Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Galba A. xviii; Oxford Bodleian Library, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88; Cambridge University Library, F. f. 1. 23; Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, Parker 272. O. 5 and 391; Salisbury, Cathedral Library, 150; the Utrecht Psalter.

I have purposely omitted collations from the Trèves fragment, because it cannot be regarded as an authority for the text, inasmuch as it is not a copy of the Creed nor of a portion of it, but of a portion of a sermon delivered at the 'Traditio Symboli,' in which the preacher adapts, but with large variations, the clauses relating to the Incarnation.

Paris 4858, it will be recollected, contains only the commencement of the Creed, ending with the words 'non tres aeterni,' the deficiency being caused by the mutilation of the MS.

In some of these MSS. the Creed bears no title, viz. the Ambrosian MS. O. 212; Paris 13159 and 4858; Cambridge University, F. f. 1. 23, Parker 391. It should be noted that in the Parker MS. the Canticles and Lord's Prayer and Apostles' Creed all appear without any title. In the other MSS. the title is as follows:-Paris 1451, Exemplar fidei chatolice sancti Atanasii episcopi alexandrine ecclesie; Paris 3848 B, Fides Sancti Athanasii Episcopi; Paris 2076, Fides dicta a Sancto Athanasio Episcopo; Vat. 82, Fides catholica quam sanctus Athanasius dictavit; Vat. 84, Fides catholica edita a Beato Athanasio episcopo; Palat. 574, Fides catholica beati Atanasi episcopi ; British Museum, Bib. Reg. 2. B. v, Hymnus athanasii de fide trinitatis quem tu

concelebrans discutienter intellege; British Museum, Cotton Galba A. xviii, Fides sancti Athanasii Alexandrini; Bodleian, Canonici Patr. Lat. 88, Fides Anathasii episcopi; Parker 272. O. 5, Fides catholica; Salisbury 150, Hymnus athanasii de fide Trinitatis quem tu concelebrans discutienter intellege; Utrecht Psalter, Fides Catholicam (sic).

Abbreviations used in the notes:-B. M. for British Museum; B. L. for Bodleian Library; C. U. L. for Cambridge University Library; S. C. L. for Salisbury Cathedral Library; and U. P. for Utrecht Psalter.

1. Quicunque vult salvus esse, ante omnia opus est ut teneat Catholicam Fidem.

2. Quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit, absque dubio in aeternum peribit.

3. Fides autem Catholica haec est, ut unum Deum in Trinitate et Trinitatem in Unitate veneremur.

4. Neque confundentes personas, neque substantiam sepa

rantes.

5. Alia est enim persona Patris, alia Filii, alia Spiritus Sancti. 6. Sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas, aequalis gloria, coaeterna maiestas.

7. Qualis Pater, talis Filius, talis et Spiritus Sanctus.

Ver. 1. salvus esse: Milan O. 212 esse salvus. After opus est B. M. Reg. 2. B. v. adds enim. Catholicam: Paris 13159 chatolicam.

2. quisque: Milan O. 212 quis. absque dubio is omitted by Paris 4858. 3. ut is omitted by Paris 2076. Trinitatem: Paris 13159 and 2076 trinitate, the mark of contraction above the e being omitted, doubtless through inadvertence.

4. confundentes: Milan O. 212 confudentes, Paris 13159 and 1451, B.M. Reg. 2. B. v, and Cotton Galba A. 18; also C.U.L. F. f. 1. 23, confundantes. substantiam: Paris 4858 substantia, omitting the mark of contraction.

5. enim: Paris 2076 ergo. Milan O. 212 inserts persona before Filii and Spiritus. Vat. 84 inserts et before Spiritus.

6. sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti were omitted originally in Milan O. 212, but have been inserted above the line by another but still early hand; only fili is written for filii. The ink is so pale that the four last words are almost illegible. The omission is clearly due to inadvertence, being caused by the repetition of the words Spiritus Sancti. coaeterna: Paris 4858 and 1451 quoaeterna.

7. In Vat. 84 et is omitted. In Parker 391 it seems to be erased.

8. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus.

9. Immensus Pater, immensus Filius, immensus et Spiritus Sanctus.

10. Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus.

11. Et tamen non tres aeterni, sed unus aeternus.

12. Sicut non tres increati, nec tres immensi, sed unus increatus et unus immensus.

13. Similiter, omnipotens Pater, omnipotens Filius, omnipotens et Spiritus Sanctus.

14. Et tamen non tres omnipotentes, sed unus omnipotens. 15. Ita Deus Pater, Deus Filius, Deus et Spiritus Sanctus.

16. Et tamen non tres Dii, sed unus est Deus.

17. Ita Dominus Pater, Dominus Filius, Dominus et Spiritus Sanctus.

8. et is omitted in Milan O. 212. It is also omitted in S.C.L. 150, but there is an appearance of erasure before Spiritus in the latter MS. In Vat. 84 it is omitted. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased. This and the two following verses in Paris 1451 stand thus: Aeternus Pater, aeternus Filius, aeternus et Spiritus Sanctus. Increatus Pater, increatus Filius, increatus et Spiritus Sanctus. Inmensus Pater, inmensus Filius, inmensus et Spiritus Sanctus. This reading clearly derives support from the received text of verses II and 12.

9. et is omitted in Milan O. 212, also in Vat. 84. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased.

10. et is omitted in Milan O. 212; also in Vat. 84. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased.

12. unus increatus et unus immensus: Milan O. 212 unus inmensus et unus increatus. Paris 2076 has incretus.

13. et is omitted in Milan O. 212; also in Vat. 84. In Falat. 574 it was evidently omitted originally, but there is a later insertion above of the symbol representing it.

14. tamen is omitted in Milan O. 212.

15. et is omitted in Milan O. 212; also in Vat. 84 and Canonici Pat. Lat. 88. And as in ver. 13, it was also omitted originally in Palat. 574, but the symbol denoting it has been inserted later above the line. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased.

16. est is omitted in Milan O. 212; also in Paris 13159. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased.

17. et is omitted in Milan O. 212 and Vat. 84; also it was omitted originally in Palat. 574, but here again, as in vv. 13 and 15, the symbol denoting it has been inserted later above the line. In Parker 391 it seems to have been erased.