ematic canon law. Such were the _Summae_ of the first disciples of
Gratian: Paucapalea (1150),[27] Rolando Bandinelli[28] (afterwards
Alexander III., c. 1150), Rufinus[29] (c. 1165), Etienne of Tournai[30]
(Stephanus Tornacensis, c. 1168), John of Faenza (c. 1170), Sicard,
bishop of Cremona (c. 1180), and above all Huguccio (c. 1180). For the
Decretals we should mention: Bernard of Pavia[31] (c. 1195), Sinibaldo
Fieschi (Innocent IV., c. 1240), Henry of Susa (d. 1271), commonly
called (cardinalis) Hostiensis, whose _Summa Hostiensis_ or _Summa
aurea_ is a work of the very highest order; Wilhelmus Durantis or
Durandus, Joannes Andreae, Nicolas de Tudeschis (_abbas siculus_), &c.
The 15th century produced few original treatises; but after the council
of Trent the _Corpus juris_ was again commented on by distinguished
canonists, e.g. the Jesuit Paul Laymann (1575-1635), the Portuguese
Agostinho Barbosa (1590-1649), Manuel Gonzalez Tellez (d. 1649) and
Prospero Fagnani (1598-1687), who, although blind, was secretary to the
Congregation of the Council. But as time goes on, the works gradually
lose the character of commentaries on the text, and develop into
expositions of the law as a whole.

Editions.

The "Correctores romani."

"Institutiones Lancelotti."

We can mention here only the chief editions of the _Corpus_. The council
of Trent, as we know, ordered that the official books of the Roman
Church--sacred books, liturgical books, &c.--should be issued in
official and more correct editions; the compilations of ecclesiastical
law were also revised. The commission of the _Correctores romani_,[32]
established about 1563 by Pius IV., ended its work under Gregory XIII
and the official edition, containing the text and the glosses, appeared
at Rome in 1582. Richter's edition (2 vols., Leipzig, 1839) remains
valuable, but has been greatly surpassed by that of E. Friedberg
(Leipzig, 1879-1881). Many editions contain also the _Institutiones_
composed at the command of Paul IV. (1555-1559) by Giovanni Paolo
Lancelotti, a professor of Bologna, on the model of the Institutes of
Justinian. The work has merits, but has never been officially approved.

Though the collections of canon law were to receive no more additions,
the source of the laws was not dried up; decisions of councils and popes
continued to appear; but there was no attempt made to collect them.
Canonists obtained the recent texts as they could. Moreover, it w