liturgical editions, and thus to see that they con- form as closely as possible with historical data. This commission, though attached to the Congregation of Rites, is nevertheless autonomous. It consisted at first of five members under the presidency of Monsignor Duchesne, namely: Mgr. Wilpert, Father Ehrle, S. J., Father Roberti, Mgr. Umberto Benigni, Mgr. Mercati, and a few consultors. What the results of their labours may be is not yet known.
This sketch of the reforms of the Breviary proves, however, the desire of the Church to eliminate the blemishes which disfigure this book. All these efforts have not been sterile; some of these revisions mark real progress; and it may be hoped that the present commission will effect certain improvements which the progress of historical studies and criticism have made the more needful.
On the different Breviaries: Breviary of Cluny; Brigittine Breviary: Breviary of St. Bernard; Durham Breviary; Here- ford Breviary; Mozarabic Breviary; Breviary of Rouen; Sarum Breviary; etc., Cabrol, Introduction aux etudea liturgiques, a. v. Brei'iaire, Breviarium, Breviary. On the Milan Breviary, Mozarabic Breviary, and Eastern Breviaries, Probst, in Kirchenlex. (1883), II, s. v. Brevier; Baumer, Geschichte des Breviers (Freiburg, 1895), the most important and most com- plete work on the subject, Fr. tr., with additions and correc- tions by BiRON, as Hiatoire du breviaire (Paris, 1905). Id., Breviarii Romani editio nova Tomacensis, 1882, cotlata VaticantB Urbano Papd VIll eviUgatte, 16S2 (1882); Batiffol, L'His- toire du breviaire Romain (Paris, 1893; tr, London); Baudot, he breviaire romain (1907); Grancolas, Commentaire historique aur le brh'iaire romain (Paris. 1727; Lat. tr., Venice, 1734); RosKOv.<Ny, De Calibatu el Breviario (1861, 1877. 1881, 1888); Probst, Brevier und Breviergebet (Tubingen, 1868); Pimont, Lea hymnea du breviaire romain (Paris, 1874-84); Pleithner, j^lteate Geachichte dea Brevierf/ebetes (Kempten, 1887); Nilles, Kalerularium Manuale utriusgue Ecclesiw Orientalia et Occideji- alia (Innsbruck. 1896); Article Brevier, Realencyklopadie, IV; juerard, Polyptique de Vabbaye de St, Remy de Reima (Paris, 1853); Becker, Catalogi Bibliolhecarum antiqui (Home, 1885); DucANGE, Glosaarium; Micrologua de ecctesiasticia obaerva- tionibua in Bibl. Vet. Pair. (Lyon«), XVIII; Guebanger, Instit. liturg. (2nd ed.), I; Gerbert, Vet. Liturg.. II; Katholik. (1830), II, 511; Kaulen. Einleitung in die Heilwe Schrift; Geachichte der Vutgata (Mainz, 1868); Thomasi, Opera, ed., VEZzosl(Rome, 1747), II; Berger, Hiatoire de la Vulgate peiv- iant lea premiers aiMes du Moyen Age (Paris, 1893); Anglo- Saxon Paalter (1843); Walafrid Strabo, De rebus ecclesiaa- tiris in P. L., CXIV, 957; Muratori, Anecdola Ambrosiana, IV, P. L., LXXII. 580 sqq.; Warren. The Antiuhonary of Bangor (London, 1891^); Cabrol. Le Livre de la Pritre Antique Paris, 1900); Cabrol. Diet, d'archcologie et de liturgie; Taun- ON, The LitUe Office of Our Lady (London, 1903); Peregrinatio EtheruT, tr.. Holy Week in Jeruaalem in the Fourth Century, -eprinted from Duchesne, Christian Worahip (London. 1905); ^ev. d'histoire et de litterature religieusea (Paris, 1898); Probst, '^ehre und Gebet in den drei eraten Jahrh.; Pitra, H ymnographie le I'Egliae Grecque (Paris, 1867); Mone, Lateiniache Hymnen lea Mittelaltera (Freiburg im Br., 1853-55); Daniel, Theaaurua Hymnologicus (Halle, 1841); Chevalier, Topo-bibliographie, ■•. V. Hymnes; Leclercq, Actes des Martyrs in Diet, d'archeol., I, 379; Brambach, Psalterium. Bibtiographischer versuch uber lie liturgischen Biicher des chriatl. Abendlandes (Berlin, 1887); ^ELETH. Rationale Divinorum Officiorum; Molinier, Catalogue tea maa. de la biblioth. Mazarine; Radulphus Tongrensis, De I'ananum obaervantiil in Max, Biblioth. Vet. Patrum., XXVI; iasaegna Grcffor., September-October, 1903, 397 sqq.; Wickham '.EGG, Some Local Reforma (London. 1901); Schmid, Studien
rber die Reform des Romiachen Breviers in Theol. Quartalsch. rtibingen, 1884); Bergel, Die Emendation des Romischen Bre- viers in Zeitach. f. kalhol. Theol. (Innsbruck, 1884); Kirch, Die '.iturgie der Erzdioceae Kvln (Cologne, 1868); RoskovAny, 3rex<iarium. V; Chaillot, .irutlecta Juris Pont. (1885), XXIV; (Iartin, Omn. Cone. Vatic. Documentorum CoUecto (2nd ed., 'aderhorn, 1873); Acta et Decreta in Collectio Lacenaia (Frei- )urg im Br., 1890), VII; Leclercq, Lea Martyrs (Paris, 1905), V.
Breviary, Aberdee.n, The. — This breviary may )e described as the Sarum Office in a Scottish form. The use of the ancient Church of Salisbury was gen- rally adopted in Scotland and Ireland during the iliddle Ages, both for the Liturgy (or Mass) and for he canonical hours. Its introduction into Scotland \as been sometimes incorrectly attributed to Ed- rard I, King of England, and assigned to the year 292; but there is evidence to show that the date of ts introduction was considerably earlier. For exam- ple, Herbert, Bishop of (ilasgow from 1147 to llG-1, ertainly ailo()tcd the Sarum Tse for his church, ami " eceived the papal sanction for so doing. Father
Irmes, who died in Paris in 1744, asserts that "all the Scots missals or breviaries I ever saw are secundum usum Sarum, local saints being written in". Accord- ing to the "Registrum Moraviense", the bishop, dean, and chapter of Moray received and duly ap- proved the Ordo of the Church of Salisbury in the year 1242. The Diocese of Moray was contiguous with that of Aberdeen. The preference shown by the Scots for the Sarum Rite was evidently the outcome of the strong feeling, of which we find constant evi- dence in the history of the Scottish Church, against anything which seemed like admitting the claim to jurisdiction over her so often put forward by the Church of York. There might, it was no doubt thought, have been some apparent justification for this claim, had the Scottish Church adopted and maintained the Use of York in her liturgy and office.
The Breviary of Aberdeen was mainly the work of the learned and pious William Elphinstone, Bishop of Aberdeen from 1483 to his death in 1514. Not only did he bring together the materials, but in some instances, notably in that of the Scottish saints, he himself composed the lessons. A peculiar feature of this breviary, and one in which it differs from nearly every other, is that in some of the festi- vals of saints the whole of the nine lessons at Matins are concerned with their lives. These legends of the saints of Scotland are of singular interest and con- siderable historical value, and they have been ex- tensively drawn upon by the Bollandists and the later Scottish martyrologists. The accuracy of the quotations and references occurring in the book have been tested and admitted by many modern his- torians. Although the breviary is in its structure and essentials entirely in uniformity with that of Sarum, it is nevertheless exclusively proper to Scot- land, and it was, as we know, intended to supersede all service-books issued in connexion with the famous Church of Salisbury. This fact is quite clear from the royal mandate dated 15 September, 1501, wherein the Aberdeen book is set forth as the "Breviary for general use within the realm of Scotland".
The work was produced from the printing-pre.ss which Walter Chapman and Andrew Myllar had set up in Edinburgh, in the year 1.507. Four copies of the original breviary (in black-letter) are known to exist; one in Edinburgh University library; a secoiifl in the Library of the Faculty of Advocates, Edin- burgh; a third in the private library of the Earl of Stratlimore; and a fourth (an imperfect copy) in the library of King's College, Aberdeen. The reprinting of the volume was undertaken in 1854, under the supervision of the Rev. Wilham Blew, M.A., and it was subsequently publislied by Mr. G. J. Toovey, for private circulation among the members of tlic Bannatyne Club. The originally printed copies are of small octavo size, and bear the dates of 1509 and 1510. As a printed Office-lxjok its actual use was but of short duration, only about half a century elapsing between its issue and the overthrow of the ancient Church of Scotland (1560). There is no positive proof that it was ever generally adopted throughout the dioceses of Scotland; indeed the probabilities are against its ever having become anything like uni- versal at the time of tiie Reformation. It must be remembered, in connexion with this, that the in- junction for its adoption was civil rather than eccle- siastical, and there is some reason to suppose that on this account it was not considered strictly binding by the church authorities of the kingdom. It is in- teresting to note that in the new Scottish Proprium. which in 1903 was formally sanctioned and adopted for use in the Scottish dioceses forming the Province of St. Andrews (the cultus of the ancient Scottish saints having been approved by the Holy See several years previously), many collects, antiphons, etc.