PRISONS
430
PRISONS
severest reprobation. St. Martin, hearing what had
taken place, returned to Trier and compelled the
emperor to rescind an order to the militarj' tribunes,
already on their way to Spain to extirpate the heresy.
There is no ground in the condemnation and death of
Priscillian for the charge made against the Church
of having invoked the civil authority to punish
heretics. The pope censured not only the actions of
Ithacius but also that of the emperor. St. Ambrose
was equally stern in his denunciation of the case and
some of the Gallican bishops, who were in Trier under
the leadership of Theognistus, broke off communion
with Ithacius, who was subsequently deposed from
his see by a synod of Spanish bishops, and his friend
and abettor, Idatius, was compelled to resign. Tlie
death of Priscillian and his followers had an unlooked-
for sequel. The numbers and zeal of the heretics
increased; these who were executed were venerated
as saints and martjTS. The progress and spread of
the heresy called for fresh measures of repression.
In 400 a sjTiod was held in Toledo at which many
persons, among them two bishops, Symphonius and
Dictinnius, were reconciled to the Church. Dic-
tirmius was the author of a book "Libra" (Scales),
a moral treatise from the Priscillianist viewpoint.
The upheaval in the Spanish peninsula consequent
on the invasion of the Vandals and the Suevi aided
the spread of Priscillianism. So menacing was this
revival that Orosius, a Spanish priest, wrote to St.
Augustine (415) to enlist his aid in combating the
here.sy. Pope Leo at a later date took active steps
for its repression and at his urgent insistence coun-
cils were held in 446 and 447 at Astorga, Toledo, and
Galicia. In spite of these efforts the sect continued
to spread during the fifth century. In the following
century it commenced to decline, and after the Synod
of Braga, held in 56.3, had legislated concerning it, it
soon flied out.
In regard to the doctrines and teaching of Pris- cillian and his sect, it is not necessary to go into the merits of the discussion as to whether Priscillian was guilty of the errors traditionally ascribed to him, whether he was really a heretic, or whether he was un- justly condemned — the object of misunderstanding and reprobation even in his lifetime and afterwards made to bear the burden of heretical opinions sub- sequently developed and associated with his name. The weight of evidence and the entire course of events in his lifetime make the supposition of his innocence extremely improbable. The discovery by Schepss of eleven treatises from his pen in a fifth- or sixth-century manuscript, in the librarj' of the University of Wiirzburg, has not put an end to a controversy still involved in considerable difficulty. Ktinstle (Antipriscilliana), who has examined all the testimony, has decided in favour of the traditional view, which alone seems capable of offering any ade- quate solution of the fact that the Church in Spain and Aquitaine was aroused to activity by the separa- tist tendency in the Priscillianist movement. The foundation of the doctrines of the Priscillianists was Gnostic-Manicha'an Dualism, a belief in the existence of two kingdoms, one of Light and one of Darkness. Angels and the souls of men were said to be severed from the substance of the Deity. Human souls were intended to conquer the Kingdom of Darkness, but fell and were imprisoned in material bodies. Thus both kingdoms were represented in man, and hence a conflict symbolized on the side of Light by the Twelve Patriarchs, heavenly spirits, who corresponded to certain of man's powers, and, on the side of Darkness, by the Signs of the Zodiac, the symbols of matter and the lower kingdom. The salvation of man con- sists in liberation from the domination of matter. The twelve heavenly spirits having failed to accom-
Clish this relea.se, the Saviour came in a heavenly ody, which appeared to be like that of other men,
and through His doctrine and His apparent death
released the souls of men from the influence of the
material. These doctrines could be harmonized with
the teaching of Scripture only by a strange system
of exegesis, in which the liberal sense was entirely
rejected, and an equally strange theory of personal
inspiration. The Old Testament was received, but
the narrative of creation was rejected. Several of
the apocryphal Scriptures were acknowledged to be
genuine and inspired. The ethical side of the
Dualism of Priscillian with its low concept of nature
gave rise to an indecent system of asceticism as well
as to some peculiar liturgical observances, such as
fasting on Sundays and on Christmas Day. Because
their doctrines were esoteric and exoteric, and be-
cause it was believed that men in general could not
imderstand the higher paths, the Priscillianists, or
at least those of them who were enlightened, were
permitted to tell lies for the sake of a holy end. It
was because this doctrine was likely to be a scandal
even to the faithful that Augustine wrote his famous
work, "De mendacio".
Ed. Schepss, Prifcilluini qufr supersunt in Corpus script, eccles. Int., XVIII (Vienna, 18S9); Sulpicics SEVERns, Hist. sac. II, 46-51; Idem, Dialog., Ill, ii sq.; Orosius, Commonitorium ad Augustinum in P, L., XXXI, 124 sq.; Augustine, De Har., xxx; Idem, Ep. xxxvi Ad Casulnm; Jerome, De vir. iUus., cxxi; Leo Magnus, Ep. xv Ad Turribium: Hilgenfeld, Priscillianus u. seine neuentdeckten Schriften in Zcitschr.f. wissensch. Theol. (1892), 1-S2; P.\ret, Pri.^cillianu.% ein RcformatOT des 4. Jahrh. (Wiirz- burg, 1891) ; Michael, Priscillian u. die neueste Kritik in Zeitschr. /. kath. Theol. (1892), 692-706; Dierich, Die Quellen zur Gesch. Priscillians (Breslau, 1897); Kunstle, Eine Bibliothek der Symbole u. theolog. Tractate zur Bekdmpfung des Priscillianismus u. westgotischen Arianismus aus dem 6. Jahrh. (Mainz. 1900); Idem, Antipriscilliana. Dogmengeschichll. Untersuchungen u. Texte aus dem Streite gegen Priscillians Irrlehre (Freiburg, 1905); PUECK in Journal des Sarants (1891), 110-134, 243-53, 307, 318; Leclercq, L'Espagne chrcl. (Paris, 1906), iii, 130-213.
P. J. Healt.
Prisons. — I. In Ancient Times. — Many juris- consults and Scriptural interpreters include imprison- ment among the number of penalties recognized in Hebrew legislation, but the fact may well be ques- tioned. However, on the coming of the Chaldeans under Nebuchadnezzar, there were at least three prisons at Jerusalem, and, about the same time, the names of the places of detention were expressive of the regime to which the culprits were subjected, such as Belh ha-keli (house of detention), Beth ha- asourim (house of those in chains), Beth ha-mah- pecketh (from the name of an instrument for chaining the hands and feet), and Bor (cistern, underground receptacle) [cf. Thonissen, "Etudes sur I'histoire du droit criminel des peuples anciens" (Brussels, 1869)].
At Athens imprisonment was imposed as a penalty, though this is doubted by many. It seems there was only one prison placed under the authority of the Eleven. The prisoners were not isolated and could be visited by their friends and the members of their family. Some were deprived of freedom of move- ment by having their feet attached to wooden blocks (Thonissen, "Le droit penal de la republique ath^n- ienne", 1875). At Rome there still remains at the foot of the Capitol the ancient JSIamertine prison. It comprised an upper portion and a dungeon, the Tullianum. The prisoners were enclosed in the former which was lighted only by narrow loopholes, and, if they were condemned to death, they were thrown into the dungeon through an opening in its roof, to be strangled like Cafaline's accomplices or starve to death like Jugurtha. Their naked corpses were then thrown out on the stejis of the Gemonies. Imprisonment, which the laws did not usually pro- nounce, w;is of two kinds, simple detention or de- tention in chains. It was for life or for a time, ac- cording to the gravity of the offence. The super- vision of the public prisons at Rome was entrusted to the triumviri capiiales. Under the empire per- petual imprisonment was abolished theoretically,
