UBERU
216
UBS&tl.
ftctfl by which the Church acquired property, the es-
tablishment of private cliapels, and m general for all
the many decrees called for oy the extensive papal ad-
ministration. The collection opens with the super-
scriptions and closing formula) used in writing to the
emperor and empress at Constantinople, the Patricius,
the Exarch and the Bishop of Ravenna, a king, a con-
sul; to patriarchs, metropolitans, priests, and other
clerics. The collection is important both for the his-
tory of law and for church history, particularly for the
history of the Roman Church. The formulwies and
modcfs set down are taken from earlier papal docu-
ments, especiallv those of Gelasius I (492-6) and
Greeory I (590-604).
Tnis collection was certainly compiled in the chan- cery of the Roman Church, but pronably a comparar- ti vely small numl>er of the formularies contained in the extant manuscripts were included at first, the re- mainder being aadt»d from time to time. There is no systematic arrangement of the formularies in the manuscripts. In its final form, as seen in the two ex- isting manuscripts (one codex in the Vatican Ar- chives, and another, originally from Bobbio, in the Ambrosian Library at Milan), the LilH?r Diumus dates back to the eighth century. Concerning the more exact determination of the date of its compilation, there is even a still great diversity of opinion. Gamier gives in his edition the vear 715. Zaccaria, in his " Disscrtationes" (P. L., CV, 119 sqq.), attributes the com()iIatiou to the ninth century ; Kozi^re, to whom we owe the first good edition (see below), decides for the period 685 to 751 — the former date, because Em- peror Constantine Pogonatus (d. 685) is mentioned as dead, and the latter, because in 751 Northern Italy was conquered by the Lombanls and the Byzantine administration at Ravenna came to an end (see Intro- duction, pp. 25 sqq.). Nickel, however, in his "Prole- gomena and in his researches on the Liber Diumus (see below), has shown that the work possess^ by no means a uniform character. He recognizes in it three divisions, the first of whit^h he a-scribes to the time of Honorius I (625-38), the second to the end of the seventh centurv, and the third to the time of Hadrian I (772-95). Duchesne (Biblioth^que de TEcole des Chartes, LII, 1801, pp. 7 sqq.) differs from Sickel, and maintains that the original version of most of the formularies, and among tliem the most important, must Imj referrt»d to the years aft«r 682, and that only the last formularies (nn. lxxx\'i-xcix) were added in the time of Hadrian I, though some few of these mav have existed at an earlier dato. Hartmann defends the views of Sickel (Mitteilungen des Instituts fOr (jsterrcich. Gesch., XIII, 1892, pp. 239 s<jq.). Fried- erich (Sitzungsbericht« der Imver. Akademie der Wiss. zu MQnchen, Phil.-liist. Kl., I, 1890, pp. 58 sqq.) investigated more closely the case of some of the fonnularies attributed by Sickel to one of the afore- said periods, and attempted to indicate more nearlv the occasions and pontificates to which they belonged. These investigations have established Ijcyond doubt that the collection had already attained its present form towards the end of the eighth ccntun', though no insignificant portion ha<l l)een compiled during the seventh centur>'. The Lil)er Diurnus was used offi- cially in the papal cliancer>' until the eleventh century, after which time, as it no longer corresponded to tfie needs of papal administration, it gave way to other collections. Twelfth century canonists, like Ivo of ^'hartres and Gratian, continued to use the Liber Diumus, i)ut suKMccjuently it censed to be consulted, and was finally completely forgotten.
Lucas Holstenius (q. v.) was the first who under- took to edit the Liber Diumus. He had found one manuscript of it in the monastery of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme at Rome, and obtained another from the Jesuit College de Clermont at Paris; but as Hol- stenius died in the meantime and his notes could not
be found, this edition printed at Rome in 1650 was
withheld from publication, by advice of tho ecclesias-
tical censors, and the copies put away in a room at the
Vatican. The reason for so doing was apparently
formula Izxxi v, which contained the profession of f a^
of the newly elected pope, in which the latter recog-
nized the Sixth General Council and its anathemas
against Pope Honorius for his (alleg^) Monothelism.
The edition of Holstenius was reprinted at Rome in
1658; but was again withdrawn in 1662 by papal
authority, though in 1725 Benedict XIII permitted
the issue of some copies. From the Clermont manu-
script, which has since disappeared, Gamier prepcured
a new edition of the Liber Diumus (Paris, 1680), but
it is very inaccurate, and contains arbitrary altera-
tions of the text. In his *' Museum Italicum" (I, II,
32 sqq.) Mabillon issued a supplement to tlus edition
of Gamier. From these materials, the Liber Diumus
was reprinted at Basle (1741), at Vienna (1762), and
by Migne (P. L.. CV, Paris, 1851). The first good
edition, as stated above, we owe to Eug. de Roiidre
(Liber Diumus ou Recueil des formules usit^es par la
Chancellerie pontificale du V® au XI® si^cle, Paris.
1869). In the interest of this edition Daremberg ana
Renan compared Gamier 's text with the Vatican
manuscript, then regarded as the only authentic one.
From this manuscript Th. von Sickel prepared a crit-
ical edition of the text: " Liber Diumus Rom. Pont, ex
unico codice Vatican© denuo ed." (Vienna, 1889).
Just after the appearance of this work, however, Ceri-
ani announced the discovery of a new manuscript,
originally from Bobbio, in the Ambrosian Library at
Milan; towards the end this was more complete -than
the Vatican manuscript. This text was published by
Achille Ratti (Milan, 1891).
PoTTHAST. BibL hiat, medii crvt, I, 734-5; Roniuu, Recher" che» mr U Liber Diumua des PorUifet romaint (Paris,^ 1868): SicKKL, Prolegomena rum Liber Diumus, I and II, in Sitguno*' benchte der k.k. Akad. der Wiss. in Wien, Phil.-hist. KL, CXVU (1888-9). nn. 7, 13, also edited separately; loxii. Die Vita Hadriani Nonanlulana und die Diumusliandschriften in Neun Archiv, XVIII (1893), 107 sqq.; cf. ibid., XV (1890). 22 so.; Idem, Nouveaux Maircissements sur la premiere fditian du Diumus |n MHanges Julien Havel (Paris. 1895), 14-38; CiioB- ai, Storia eslema del codice Valicano del Liber Diumus Rom. Pont, in Archivio della Societh Romana di storia patria, XI (1889!-. 641 sqq.; Ccriani. Notizin diun antico mantuiritto AmbrosiaMto del Lwer Diumtis in Rendiconli del IsLituto lA>mbardo di scierut, 2nd series, XXVI, 376 sqq.: Duchkhnk, Le Liber Diumus H les flections pontificales au VII* sifcle in Bibl. de VEeole dm ChaHes, 111 (1891), 5-30; Hahtmann, Die Bntstehwufsgeit des Liber Diumus in Mitteilungen de* Instituts fur OsUrr. Oeseh,, XIII (1892). 239-64; Friedrich, Zur Entstehunq des Liber Diumus in Sitsungaber. der k, layer. Akademie der Wiss., PAt'l.- hisl. Kl, I (1890), 58-141.
J. P. K1R8CH.
Ziiberia, a republic on the west coast of Africa, be- tween 4** 2(/ and 7** 2(/ N. lat ., extending from the Sher- bro river on the north-west, near the south l>oundary of the British colony of Sierra Leone, to the Pedro river on the south-east, a distance along the coast of nearly six hundred miles. It has enjoyed the status of a sove- reign State since 1874, when its independence was for- mallv recognized by England, France, and Germany, The habitable region of the country is a strip from t^ to twelve miles wide along a slightly indente- lisbed, and continued under the management of the
