[28] Gieseler, Per. III, Div. II, pt. iii, § 46. [↑]
[29] Gibbon, vi, 249, note; Poole, p. 91, note; De Potter, L’Esprit de L’Église, 1821, vi, 16, note. [↑]
[30] Boniface, Ep. lxvi, cited by Poole, p. 23; Reid’s Mosheim, p. 263, note 3; Neander, Hist. of the Christian Church, Bohn tr. v, 86–67; Hardwick, p. 23. [↑]
[31] For excellent accounts of both see Mr. Poole’s Illustrations, pp. 28–50. As to Claudius cp. Monastier, Hist. of the Vaudois Church, Eng. tr. 1848, pp. 13–42, and Faber, The Ancient Vallenses, bk. iii, ch. iv. [↑]
[32] See Mr. Poole’s Illustrations, pp. 46–48, for an account of the privileges then accorded to Jews. [↑]
[33] This is not incompatible with their having opposed both Saracens (Claudius in actual war) and Jews, as Christian bishops. [↑]
[34] Poole, Illustrations, p. 37. [↑]
[35] This when the Church found its account in adopting all such usages. Lea, Superstition and Force, pp. 242, 280, etc. It is to be noted, however, that one Council, that of Valence, 855, perhaps under the influence of Agobard’s teaching, published a canon prohibiting all duels, and praying the emperor to abolish them. Cited by Waddington, History of the Church, 1833, p. 242, note, from Fleury. [↑]
[36] De Grandine et tonitruis, c. 3; and De imaginibus, c. 13, cited by Reuter. [↑]
[37] “He had the clearest head in the whole ninth century; and as an influence (Mann der Tendenz) is above comparison” (Reuter, Gesch. der religiösen Aufklärung im Mittelalter, i, 24). As to his acute handling of the thorny question of reason and authority see Reuter, i, 40–41. [↑]