FOOTNOTES

1. 1 Cel., 23; 3 Soc., 25 and 26; Bon., 27. Cf. Auct. Vit. Sec. ap., A. SS., p. 579.

2. 1 Cel., 24. We must correct the Bollandist text: Inter quos quidam de Assisio puer ac simplicem animum gerens, by: quidam de Assisio pium ac simplicem, etc. The period at which we have arrived is very clear as a whole: the picture which the Three Companions give us is true with a truth which forces conviction at first sight; but neither they nor Celano are giving an official report. Later on men desired to know precisely in what order the early disciples came, and they tortured the texts to find an answer. The same course was followed with regard to the first missionary journeys. But on both sides they came up against impossibilities and contradictions. What does it matter whether there were two, three, or four missions before the papal approbation? Of what consequence are the names of those early disciples who are entirely secondary in the history of the Franciscan movement? All these things took place with much more simplicity and spontaneity than is generally supposed. There is a wide difference between the plan of a house drawn up by an architect and a view of the same house painted by an artist. The second, though abounding in inexactitudes, gives a more just notion of the reality than the plan. The same is true of the Franciscan biographies.

3. 1 Cel., 24. Bernard de Besse is the first to call him B. di Quintavalle: De laudibus, fo. 95 h.; cf. upon him Mark of Lisbon, t. i., second part, pp. 68-70; Conform., 47; Fior., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 28; 3 Soc., 27, 30, 39; 2 Cel., 1, 10; 2, 19; Bon., 28; 1 Cel., 30; Salimbeni, ann. 1229, and Tribul. Arch., ii., p. 278, etc.

4. 1 Cel., 24; 3 Soc., 27, 28, 29; 2 Cel., 1, 10; 3, 52; Bon., 28; A. SS., p. 580. It is evident that the tradition has been worked over here: it soon came to be desired to find a miracle in the manner in which Francis found the passage for reading. The St. Nicholas Church is no longer in existence; it stood upon the piece of ground now occupied by the barracks of the gendarmerie (carabinieri reali).

5. Matt., xix., 21; Luke, ix., 1-6; Matt., xvi., 24-26. The agreement of tradition upon these passages is complete. 3 Soc., 29; 2 Cel., 1, 10; Bon., 28; Spec., 5b.; Conform., 37b. 2, 47a. 2; Fior., 2; Glassberger and the Chronicle of the xxiv. generals reversing the order (Analecta, fr., t. ii., p. 5) as well as the Conformities in another place, 87b, 2.

6. 3 Soc., 30. Cf. Anon. Perus., A. SS., p. 581a. This scene is reported neither by Celano nor by St. Bonaventura.

7. This date is given in the life of Brother Egidio; A. SS., Oct., t. ii., p. 572; Aprilis, t. iii., p. 220. It fits well with the accounts. Through it we obtain the approximate date of the definitive conversion of Francis two full years earlier.

8. 1 Cel., 25; 3 Soc., 23; Bon. 29. Cf. Anon. Perus., A. SS., p. 582, and A. SS., Aprilis, t. iii., p. 220 ff.

9. Spec., 25a: Qualiter dixit fratri Egidio priusquam esset receptus ut daret mantellum ciudam pauperi. In primordio religionis cum maneret apud Regum Tortum cum duobus fratribus quos tunc tantum habehat. If we compare this passage with 3 Soc., 44, we shall doubtless arrive at the conclusion that the account in the Speculum is more satisfactory. It is in fact very easy to understand the optical illusion by which later on the Portiuncula was made the scene of the greater number of the events of St. Francis's life, while it would be difficult to see why there should have been any attempt to surround Rivo-Torto with an aureola. The Fioretti say: Ando inverso lo spedale dei lebbrosi, which confirms the indication of Rivo-Torto. Vita d' Egidio, § 1.

10. An. Perus, A. SS., p. 582. Cf. Fior., Vita di Egidio, 1; Spec., 124, 136; 2 Cel., 3, 68; A. SS., Aprilis, t. iii., p. 227.

11. Spec., 34a; Conform., 219b, 1; Ant. fr., p. 96.

12. The Gyrovagi. Tr.

13. 3 Soc. 32-34; 1 Cel., 27 and 28; Bon., 31.

14. 3 Soc., 35. Cf. Anon. Perus.; A. SS., p. 584.

15. Later on, naturally, it was desired that Francis should have had no better supporter than Guido; some have even made him out to be his spiritual director (St. François, Plon, p. 24)! We have an indirect but unexceptionable proof of the reserve with which these pious traditions must be accepted; Francis did not even tell his bishop (pater et dominus animarum, 3 Soc., 29) of his design of having his Rule approved by the pope. This is the more striking because the bishop would have been his natural advocate at the court of Rome, and because in the absence of any other reason the most elementary politeness required that he should have been informed. Add to this that bishops in Italy are not, as elsewhere, functionaries approached with difficulty by the common run of mortals. Almost every village in Umbria has its bishop, so that their importance is hardly greater than that of the curé of a French canton. Furthermore, several pontifical documents throw a sombre light on Guido's character. In a chapter of the decretals of Honorius III. (Quinta compil., lib. ii., tit. iii., cap. i.) is given a complaint against this bishop, brought before the curia by the Crucigeri of the hospital San Salvatore delle Pareti (suburbs of Assisi), of having maltreated two of their number, and having stolen a part of the wine belonging to the convent: pro eo quod Aegidium presbyterum, et fratrem eorem conversum violentas manus injecerat ... adjiciens quod idem hospitale quadam vini quantitate fuerat per eumdem episcopum spoliatum. Honorii opera, Horoy's edition, t. i., col. 200 ff. Cf. Potthast, 7746. The mention of the hospital de Pariete proves beyond question that the Bishop of Assisi is here concerned and not the Bishop of Osimo, as some critics have suggested.

Another document shows him at strife with the Benedictines of Mount Subasio (the very ones who afterward gave Portiuncula to Francis), and Honorius III. found the bishop in the wrong: Bull Conquerente œconomo monasterii ap. Richter, Corpus juris canonici. Leipzig, 1839, 4to, Horoy, loc. cit., t. i., col. 163; Potthast, 7728.

16. 3 Soc., 36 and 37. Cf. Anon. Perus. ap., A. SS., p. 585; Test. B. Francisci.

17. 3 Soc., 38-41.