see. This is the first instance of such a proceeding that we meet with; neither popes nor kings had ever before interfered, except for the purpose of keeping the bishops within the just limits of their authority.

Such were the changes through which, in the interval I have described, the monastic associations passed, in their relations with the clergy. Their original condition was that of independence; this independence was lessened the moment that they obtained from the clergy some of the privileges which they had solicited from that body. The privileges so obtained, only served to augment their ambition: they became bent upon entering the ecclesiastical corporation: they did enter it, after a while, and found themselves thenceforward subject, like the priests, to the ill-defined, the unlimited authority of the bishops. The bishops abused their authority, the monasteries resisted, and in virtue of what still remained to them of their original independence, procured guarantees, charters. The charters being slighted, the monks had recourse to the civil authority, to royalty, and royalty confirmed the charters, and took the monks under its protection. This protection proving inadequate, the monks next addressed themselves to the pope, who interposed by another title, but without any more decisive success. It is in this struggle of royal and papal protection against episcopal tyranny, that we leave the monasteries in the middle of the eighth century. Under the Carlovingian race, they had to experience still more terrible shocks, assaults which it required their utmost efforts to overcome. We will speak of these at the proper time; at present, the analogy between the history of the monasteries and that of the commons, which manifested itself two centuries later, is the fact which most peculiarly calls for an observation.

We have now completed the history of social civilization, from the sixth to the middle of the eighth century. We have gone through the revolutions of civil and of religious society,viewed each of them in their various elements. We have still to study the history, during the same period, of purely intellectual and moral civilization; of the ideas which then occupied men's minds, the works which these ideas gave birth to-in a word, the philosophical and literary history of France at this epoch. We will enter upon this study in our next lecture.

SIXTEENTH LECTURE.

From the sixth to the eighth century all profane literature disappeared. sacred literature alone remained-This is evident in the schools and writings of this epoch-1. Of the schools in Gaul from the sixth to the eighth century-Cathedral schools-Rural schools-Monastic schools-What they taught there-2. Of the writings of the day-General character of literature-It ceased to be speculative, and to seek more especially science and intellectual enjoyments; it became practical; knowledge, eloquence, writings, were made means of action-Influence of this characteristic upon the idea formed of the intellectual state at this epoch-It produced scarcely any works, it has no literature properly so called; still minds were active-Its literature consists in sermons and legendsBishops and missionaries-1st, Of Saint Cesaire, bishop of Arles-Of his sermons-2nd, Of Saint Columban, missionary, and abbot of Luxeuil -Character of sacred eloquence at this epoch.

IN studying the. state of Gaul at the fourth and fifth centuries, we found two literatures, the one sacred, the other profane. The distinction was marked in persons and in things; the laity and the ecclesiastics studied, meditated, wrote; and they studied, they wrote, they meditated, upon lay subjects, and upon religious subjects. Sacred literature dominated more and more, but it was not alone, profane literature still existed.

From the fourth to the eighth century, there is no longer any profane literature; sacred literature stands alone; priests only study or write; and they only study, they only write, save some rare exceptions, upon religious subjects. The general character of the epoch is the concentration of intellectual development in the religious sphere. The fact is

1 Lecture 4th, vol. i. p. 346-389

evident, whether we regard the state of the schools which still existed, or the works which have come down to us.

The fourth and fifth centuries, you will remember, were in no want of civil schools, of civil professors, instituted by the temporal power, and teaching the profane sciences. All those great schools of Gaul, the organization and names of which I have mentioned to you, were of this description. I have even pointed out to you, that as yet there were no ecclesiastical schools, and that religious doctrines, which daily became more powerful over minds, were not regularly taught, had no legal and official organ. Towards the end of the sixth century, everything is changed: there are no longer civil schools; ecclesiastical schools alone subsist. Those great municipal schools of Trèves, of Poictiers, of Vienne, of Bordeaux, &c., have disappeared; in their place have arisen schools called cathedral or episcopal schools, because each episcopal see had its own. The cathedral school was not always alone; we find in certain dioceses other schools, of an uncertain nature and origin, wrecks, perhaps, of some ancient civil school, which, in becoming metamorphosed, had perpetuated itself. In the diocese of Reims, for example, there existed the school of Mouzon, some distance from the chief place of the diocese, and in high credit, although Reims had a cathedral school. The clergy began also, about the same epoch, to create other schools in the country, also ecclesiastical, destined to form young readers who should one day become priests. In 529, the council of Vaison strongly recommended the propagation of country schools; they were, indeed, multiplied very irregularly, numerous in some dioceses, scarcely any in others. Finally, there were schools in the great monasteries: the intellectual exercises were of two kinds; some of the most distinguished monks gave direct instruction to the members of the congregation, and to the young people who were being brought up at the monastery; it was, moreover, the custom, in a large number of monasteries, that after the lectures at which the monks were bound to attend, they should have conferences among themselves upon whatever had been made the subject of the lecture; and these conferences became a powerful means of intellectual development and instruction.

The most flourishing of the episcopal schools from the sixth to the middle of the eighth century were those of:

1. Poictiers. There were many schools in the monasteries of the diocese, at Poictiers itself, at Ligugé, at Ansion, &c. 2. Paris.

3. Le Mans.

4. Bourges.

5 Clermont. There was another school in the town where they taught the Theodosian code; a remarkable circumstance, which I do not find elsewhere.

6. Vienne.

7. Châlons-sur-Saone.

8. Arles.

9. Gap.

The most flourishing of the monastic schools of the same epoch were those of :

1. Luxeuil, in Franche-Comté.

2. Fontenelle, or Saint Vandrille, in Normandy; in which were about 300 students.

3. Sithiu, in Normandy.

4. Saint Médard, at Soissons.

5. Lerens.

It were easy to extend this list; but the prosperity of mo nastic schools was subject to great vicissitudes; they flourished under a distinguished abbot, and declined under his suc

cessor.

Even in nunneries, study was not neglected; that which Saint Cesaire founded at Arles contained, at the commencement of the sixth century, two hundred nuns, for the most part occupied in copying books, sometimes religious books, sometimes, probably, even the works of the ancients.

The metamorphosis of civil schools into ecclesiastical schools was complete. Let us see what was taught in them. We shall often find in them the names of sciences formerly professed in the civil schools, rhetoric, logic, grammar, geometry, astrology, &c.; but these were evidently no longer taught except in their relations to theology. This is the foundation of the instruction: all was turned into commentary of the Scriptures, historical, philosophical, allegorical, moral, commentary. They desired only to form priests; all studies, whatsoever their nature, were directed towards this result.

Sometimes they went even further: they rejected the profane sciences themselves, whatever might be the use made of them. At the end of the sixth century, Saint Dizier, bishop of Vienne, taught grammar in his cathedral school. Saint Gregory the Great sharply blamed him for it. "It is not fit," he writes to him, "that a mouth sacred to the praises of God, should be opened for those of Jupiter." I do not know exactly what the praises of God or of Jupiter had to do with grammar; but what is evident, is the crying down of the profane studies, although cultivated by the priests.

The same fact is visible, and far more plainly, in the written literature. No more philosophical meditations, no more learned jurisprudence, no more literary criticism; save some chronicles, some occasional poems, of which I shall speak at a later period, we have nothing belonging to this time except religious works. Intellectual activity appears only under this form, displays itself only in this direction.

A still more important revolution, and less perceived, is manifested: not only did literature become entirely religious, but, religious, it ceased to be literary; there was no longer any literature, properly so called. In the finest times of Greece and Rome, and in Gaul, up to the fall of the Roman empire, people studied, they wrote, for the mere pleasure of studying, of knowing, in order to procure for themselves and for others intellectual enjoyment. The influence of letters over society, over real life, was only indirect; it was not the immediate end of the writers; in a word, science and literature were essentially disinterested, devoted to the research for the true and the beautiful, satisfied with finding them, with enjoying them, and pretending to nothing more.

At the epoch which now occupies us it was otherwise; people no longer studied in order to know; they no longer wrote for the sake of writing. Writings and studies took a practical character and aim. Whoever abandoned himself thereto, aspired to immediate action upon men, to regulate their actions, to govern their life, to convert those who did not believe, to reform those who believed and did not practice. Science and eloquence were means of action, of government. There is no longer a disinterested literature, no longer any true literature. The purely speculative character of philo