Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 18.djvu/725

P E T P E T 693 city by Bela IV., and repeopled with colonists of various national ities. The succeeding period seems to have been one of consider able prosperity, though Pesth was completely eclipsed by the sister- town of Buda with its fortress and palace. In 1526 Pesth was taken and pillaged by the Turks, and from 1541 to 1686 Buda was the seat of a Turkish pasha. Pesth in the meantime entirely lost its importance, and on the departure of the Turks was left little more than a heap of ruins. Its favourable situation and the renewal of former privileges helped it to revive, and in 1723 it became the seat of the highest Hungarian officials. Maria Theresa and Joseph II. did much to increase its importance, but the rapid growth which enabled it completely to outstrip Buda belongs entirely to the 19th century. A signal proof of its vitality was given in 1838 by the speed and ease with which it recovered from a disastrous inundation that destroyed 3000 houses. In 1848 Pesth became the seat of the revolutionary diet, but in the following year the insurgents had to retire before the Austrians under Windischgriitz. A little later the Austrians had to retire in their turn, leaving a garrison in the fortress of Buda, and, while the Hungarians en deavoured to capture this position, General Hentzi retaliated by bombarding Pesth, doing great damage to the town. The inhabit ants to the number of 80,000 took refuge in the Stadtwaldchen. Between 1867 and 1873 Pesth is said to have doubled in size, and during the last four or five years the building activity has been little if at all inferior. See Hiiuffler, " Budapest," Historische Skizzen, I. Abth. (1854); Hevesi, Buda pest tind seine Umr/ebungen (1873) ; Sturm, Kulturbilder aus Budapest (Leipsic, 1876); Heksch, Iliimtrierter Fiihrer durch Budapest (1S82) ; Koriisi, Die Haup- ftadt Budapest im Jahre 1881 ; publications of the Statistical Bureau in Buda pest. (J. F. M.) PETAU, DENYS (1583-1652), better known in some departments of literature under the Latin form of his name as DIONYSIUS PETAVIUS, a highly-distinguished Catholic theologian and one of the most learned men of the 17th century, was born on 21st August 1583 at Orleans, where his father was a well-to-do merchant with some literary culture. Petau received his early education at Orleans, but finished his university course in Paris, where, after gradu ating in arts, he attended theological lectures at the Sor- bonne. By Isaac Casaubon, who had perceived his abilities, he was introduced to the MS. treasures of the Bibliotheque lloyale ; and, at the suggestion of that scholar, he began to work for the edition of Synesius which he afterwards published. In 1603, before he had completed his twentieth year, he received a teaching appointment in the faculty of philosophy at the university of Bourges ; here his leisure hours were devoted to his editorial labours and to a system atic study of the ancient philosophers and mathematicians. Having come under the influence of the learned Jesuit Fronton le Due, he was induced to resign his post at Bourges in order that he might join the Society of Jesus, and in June 1 605 he entered upon his novitiate at Nancy. After an interval of four years, he taught rhetoric success ively at llheims, La Fleche, and Paris, taking the four vows of the order at the last-named place in 1618 ; from 1621 to 1644 he was professor of positive theology in the college of the order. On account of growing infirmities and to secure leisure for his great work, to be mentioned below, he then retired from teaching duties, but retained the librarianship in the College de Clermont until his death, which took place on llth December 1652. The list of Petau s literary labours bears witness to an extraor dinary and many-sided activity, and includes several works which still enjoy the recognition of scholars. He edited Synesius (1611, 2d ed. 1631, 3d ed. 1633), Themistius (1613), Julian (1630), the Breviarium of Nicephorus (1616), and Epiphanius (1622) ; his Animadvcrsiones on the last-named have been reprinted by Dindorf, as a still unexhausted mine of valuable material, in the fifth vol. of his Epiphanii Opera (1859). Carrying on and improving on the chronological labours of Scaliger, he published in two folio volumes an Opus de doctrina tcmporum (1627 ; frequently reprinted), followed iu 1630 by Uranologion s. sy sterna variorum authorum qui de spluera ac sideribus corumque motibus graecc commentati sunt and Variarum disscrtationum ad Uranologion libri VIII. Of the first-mentioned of these lie made an abridgment, entitled Ration- arium tcmporum, which passed through numerous editions, was translated into English and French, and in a recent reprint has been brought down to the year 1849. In theology proper Petau s first appearance was polemical, and quite in the manner of that time, a pseudonymous criticism on the recently-published com mentary of Salmasius on Tertullian s De Pallio (Antonii Kcrkoetii Arcmorici animadversionum liber, 1622). The controversy was con tinued in a series of replies and rejoinders, and was renewed in connexion with other publications of his distinguished antagonist. In particular, some references to the church doctrine as to the authority of bishops made by Salmasius in his Dcfcenore trapczitico was the occasion of Petau s Dissertationum ecclcsiasticarum libri duo, in quibus de cpiscoporum diynitate et potcstate deque aliis ccdcsiasticis dogmatibus disputatur (1641) and also of his DC ccclesiastica hierarchia libri V. (1641). Petau also had his share in the Jansenist controversy, and has the honour of being twice men tioned as a Jesuit authority in the Provinciates. His first appear ance in the dispute was against Arnauld s DC lafreqnente communion, which he met with a treatise, DC la penitence publique et de la pre paration a la communion (1643) ; his subsequent works, viewed in the light of the struggle then at its height, explain themselves by their titles (De leye et gratia libri II. (1648), De Tridentini concilii inter pretationc et S. Augustini doctrina (1649), De adjutorio sine quo non et adjutorio quo (1651). In his great but unfinished work, De thcologicis dogmatibus (5 vols. fol., 1644-50), he deals with the doctrine of God, the Trinity, Creation, and the Incarnation ; his design had been to complete it by an exhaustive treatment of the sacraments and of the Christian graces and virtues. Its scope, which was to free theology from the subtleties of scholasticism and to rest the science on the simple and firm basis of Scripture, the councils, and the fathers, is well enough explained by his own avowal, "nova quserant alii, nil nisi prisca peto." The work is a treasury of well-digested learning, and justly entitles its author to the praise of Muratori, who speaks of him as "the restorer of dog matic theology." By some of his fellow- Jesuits he was supposed to have been too ready to recognize the Jansenism of Augustine, and in various quarters his declaration that many of the ante-Nicenc fathers were less orthodox than the decrees of the first council has been made a matter of reproach. But in these charges the impar tial critic will recognize only proof of his candour. Petau, it may be added, was a rigid ascetic, and in particular is said to have indulged in the discipline of self-flagellation to a degree that injured his health. PETER. Simon Peter was "an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter i. 1). His two names are both found in two forms : of the one the full form is Symeon (pvpt^ 2u/xeaiv, which is found in the speech of James, Acts xv. 14, and in most MSS. of 2 Peter i. 1), the shorter and more usual form being Simon ; the other is found both in its Greek form Peter (Herpos) and in the Grtecized form Cephas (Kv^as) of the Aramaic Kepha (ND^S). Simon is the name by which he is always addressed by Jesus Christ ; Peter is that by which he is most commonly spoken of in the Synoptic Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and subsequent ecclesiastical literature ; the combined name, Simon Peter, is found once in St Matthew, once in St Luke, and frequently in St John ; sometimes Peter is expressly stated to be a surname (Matt. iv. 18, x. 2 ; Acts x. 5, 18, 32, xi. 13); St Paul, in 1 Cor. and in Gal. i. 18, ii. 11, 14 (according to the chief uncial MSS., except D), uses Cephas, but in Gal. ii. 7, 8, he uses Peter. 1 The name of his father is also found in two forms, John ( Iwavr^s, Iwav>j?, in most MSS. of John i. 42, xxi. 15, 16) and Jonas ( Iwvas, Matt. xvi. 17, and cod. A in John). In John i. 44 he is said to have been of Bethsaida, which was possibly the place of his birth ; but it appears from Mark i. 29 ( = Matt. viii. 14; Luke iv. 38) that he and his brother Andrew had a house together at Capernaum. With the same brother, and with James and John as partners, he was engaged in what was probably the thriving business of a fisherman on the Lake of Genne- saret ; and from the fact that he went back to his business after the resurrection it has been inferred that, at least up to that time, he had never wholly left it. That he was married is clear from the mention of his wife s mother 1 Throughout the New Testament the Peshito-Syriac uses Cephas where the Greek has Peter, and there is no reasonable doubt of the identity of the two names ; but Clement of Alexandria, in a fragment preserved by Eusebius, H. E., i. 12, 3, and the so-called "Two Ways" (Harnack, Lehre der zwolf Apostel, p. 225, and Hilgenfeld, zVor. Test. extra Canonem receptum, fasc. iv. p. Ill) take them to refer to differ ent persons, probably from an unwillingness to believe that Gal. ii. 11 really referred to Peter.