almost a contemporary: "Rex omnipotentem Dominum in Trinitate confessus, baptizatus est a sancto Remigio, in nomine Patris, etc.——et sacro chrismate delibutus cum signaculo crucis."

But towards the end of the ninth century, nearly four hundred years after the baptism of Clovis, an archbishop of Rheims, Hincmar, claimed for the holy oil the honour of having been miraculously sent down from heaven. I place his account in the note below :9 and extract here from his Capitular the assertion, also first made by him, that Clovis was anointed with this to be emperor; he is speaking of Charles the Bald. "Sanctæ memoriæ pater suus Hludowicus pius, imperator augustus, ex progenie Hludowici (Clodoveum intelligit) regis Francorum inclyti, per beati Remigii Francorum apostoli catholicam prædicationem cum integra gente conversi, et cum tribus Francorum millibus, vigilia sancti Paschæ in Remensi metropoli bap

8 Rorico Monachus. in Chronico. lib. 2.

9 Hincmar in vita S. Remigii. "Cum vero pervenissent ad baptisterium, clericus, qui chrisma ferebat, a populo est interceptus, ut ad fontem venire nequiverit. Sanctificato autem fonte, nutu divino chrisma defuit. Et quia propter populi pressuram ulli non patebat egressus vel ingressus ecclesiæ, sanctus pontifex, oculis ac manibus protensis in cœlum, cœpit tacite orare cum lacrymis. Et ecce subito columba nive candidior attulit in rostro ampullulam chrismate sancto repletam, cujus odore

mirifico super omnes odores, quos ante in baptisterio senserant, omnes qui aderant in æstimabili suavitate repleti sunt. Accipiente autem sancto pontifice ipsam ampullulam, species columbæ disparuit. De quo chrismate fudit venerandus episcopus in fontem sacratum. Viso autem rex tanto miraculo, abnegatis diaboli pompis et operibus ejus, petiit se a sancto pontifice baptizari, etc. Et susceptus ab ipso pontifice de sacro fonte, perunctus est sacro chrismate, cum signo sanctæ crucis Domini nostri Jesu Christi." Apud Surium, 13 Januarii.

tizati, et cœlitus sumpto chrismate, unde adhuc habemus, peruncti, et in regem sacrati, exhortus, etc."

Now, not only would we naturally look with some suspicion upon a history of an event, whether miraculous or not, so long after its supposed occurrence, but with that suspicion encreased, if it came from a quarter likely to be personally interested in the matter. Hincmar was archbishop of Rheims: and sixteen archbishops had occupied that see between S. Remigius and himself, of not one of whom can it be proved, that he had ever heard of such a miracle. But more than this: the account he gives us is full of errors: Hincmar says that Clovis was baptized in the metropolitan church; a contemporary of the king, Nicetius bishop of Treves, declares that it took place in the church of S. Martin: 10-and again, that it was on the vigil of Easter Day; but another contemporary, Avitus, bishop of Vienna, declares that it was upon Christmas Eve.

So that, as the supposed history of the oil used at the coronation of the kings of France (that it was first provided from heaven for Clovis, and afterwards no less miraculously preserved, without wasting, at Rheims), rests upon no better or earlier authority than that of Hincmar in the ninth century, who was ignorant of the facts of the case, we must conclude that the whole is a mere story, unworthy of the least credit. Nor should I have delayed to examine it, even so shortly, had it not been for the general reception with which it

10 Epist. ad Clodoswindam. cit. Chifletio, de ampulla Remensi nova disquisitio. A learned treatise; in which the writer points

out other errors in the archbishop's story, which are scarcely required to satisfy the reader, and I have omitted them.

has been received, and the attempts by some to prove, that on account of this miraculous oil, the French kings have a precedence over other sovereigns.

There appears to be sufficient evidence, that the rite of anointing, can be traced higher with respect to the kings and princes of England, than of any other country. And I do not see, how it could be disproved, if one was inclined to assert that the ceremony took its origin from our own forefathers; and was from them adopted into the ceremonial of other churches. For, not only are the coronation of Clovis, and his unction with any oil, though not miraculous, incapable of being substantiated, but it has been confessed by very learned writers, that Pepin, in the eighth century, was the first French king who was anointed. Thus, Selden says; "the first testimony that is worthy of credit for any unction of their kings, is that which the stories have of king Pepin. So say Regino, Sigebert, Siffridus, and enough others of the antients."" And Chifletius; Pipinus omnium Franciæ regum primus, imitatus Judæorum reges, ut se sacra unctione venerabiliorem augustioremque faceret, semel atque iterum ungi voluerit." 12

11 Titles of honour, p. 113. 19 P. 30. citing, "Fauchetus in Pipino." Pepin more probably imitated the already fixed custom of the Anglo-saxon Church.

I extract also the following from Martene, whose judgment, learning, and candour, upon every question which he has investigated, are equally to be praised. "Longe tardius in Galliis reges solemnem episcoporum benedictionem susce

pisse videntur, quippe ante Pippinum qui Suessione a Moguntino archiepiscopo Bonifacio unctus est in regem, nullus ab episcopis benedictus legitur: sed omnes ut regni imperium adepti erant, a populis clypeo evecti, reges constituebantur. Observat Mabillonius, post Valesium, solitos tum fuisse Francorum optimates ad constituendum regem convenisse, singulosque in electi verba jurasse,

But before the coronation of Pepin, the pontifical of archbishop Egbert was the service-book of at least

that part of England, over which he was placed, and the rite of unction, as the reader will see below, is especially ordered by it to form a part of the solemnity of a coronation: and long before even that time, during the existence of the earlier British Church, we have this testimony in Gildas: "ungebantur reges, et non per Deum, sed qui cæteris crudeliores exstarent; et paulo post ab unctoribus, non pro veri examinatione, trucidabantur, aliis electis trucioribus." 13

This place in Gildas, is certainly (as Selden urges) not open to any objection which might be brought, from the use of a phrase of later acceptation and meaning than the fact related: as in the relation by Malmesbury of the coronation of Egferth, in the year 785, the first of which any account has come down to us. He writes after unction had become a settled part of the solemnity and says, speaking of Offa, the father of Egferth; "dulci vitam consumpsit otio, et Egfertum filium, ante mortem suam, in regem inunctum, successorem dimisit." And even as regards this expression as used by Malmesbury, it is an argument of very great

neus Albus in vita S. Columbæ. Sed ea supponit quidem hunc ritum jam usu receptum; nam ait, angelum Domini ad dictum abbatem missum, qui in manu vitreum ordinationis regum habebat librum.' Quæ verba plane innuunt, jam antea reges ordinatos fuisse." The sentence from Martene, which I have given above, is then quoted, and Catalani continues. "Id ipsum tradit alius scriptor Gallus Franciscus Pagius in vita S. Zachariæ Papæ, ubi ita

6

scribit: Et quidem Pippinus videtur esse primus ex Francorum regibus, qui unctus est in regem.’ Ex quorum testimonio facile confutantur ii Galliæ scriptores, qui contendunt, primos fuisse Galliæ reges, qui rite ab episcopo consecrarentur, ad eorumque exemplum cæteros reges sacro oleo ungi cœpisse." Comment. in pontif. Rom. tom. 1. p. 384.

13 Hist. §. 21.

"De gest. reg. Angliæ. lib. 1. cap. 5.