have termed an assembly of asses (Dungal, 1. C.). Nor was his refusal to attend followed by any measure to reduce him to obedience. The emperor, more, it should seem, to conciliate these prelates than from any serious intention of controlling Claudius, sent extracts of the offending book to Jonas, bishop of Orleans, with the desire that he would refute it (Jonas 167 D, E.). These extracts are all that remain to us of what to the historian is Claudius's most valuable work:[1] the refutation did not appear until after his death. Meantime, Dungal, a Scottish teacher of Pavia, issued a vehement Reply, (Dungal 199 F.) earnestly invoking the imperial aid in suppressing the new heresy. Theodemir also returned to the controversy. Perhaps we may infer (cf. Schmidt ubi supra, p. 64.) from Jonas's unwillingness to publish his polemic, that Claudius as he aged had tempered his fire: more probably Jonas himself found that the act would not increase his favour with the emperor. Be this as it may, the bishop lived more than ten years after he had sent forth his defence, to all appearance without let or molestation from any one. (F. Ugheil. Ital. sacr. 4. 1432 A, B, Rome 1652 folio.) His strenuous career was closed not earlier than 839, but he left behind him disciples enough to stimulate controversy (Jon. 167 E, F.). His writings too, with the exception of the Apologetic, were rapidly multiplied and diffused. His fame as a commentator secured the survival of a good deal of his peculiar teaching; but it is hazardous, if not impossible, to connect him in any direct way with the appearance of similar opinions, whether in the congregations of the Waldenses centuries later, or in those isolated puritan outbreaks which repeatedly confront us in the course of medieval history.
In his protest against the invocation of saints Claudius perhaps stood alone, but in the other points in which he separated himself from the current doctrine he had a
- ↑ The fragments are collected in two pages of the Maxima Bibliotheca Patrum 14. 197 sqq., which give an appearance of continuity to what is really a string of extracts by no means regularly consecutive. Moreover the text is so inaccurate and the punctuation so bewildering that I have preferred to seek the originals in the pages of Dungal and Jonas themselves.
