of the Italian
manuscripts.

[2] E. Renan: _Nouvelles etudes d'histoire religieuse_, Paris,
1884, 8vo, p. 331.

[3] See above, pp. 304 ff.

[4] Mazarine Library, MS. 8531: _Speculum perfectionis S.
Francisci_; the Canticle is found at fo. 51. Cf. MS., 1350 (date
of 1459). That text was published by Boehmer in the _Romanische
Studien_, Halle, 1871. pp. 118-122. _Der Sonnengesang v. Fr.
d'A._

[5] _Conform._ (Milan, 1510), 202b, 2s. For that matter it is
correct that Diola, in the _Croniche degli ordini instituti da
S. Francisco_ (Venice, 1606, 3 vols. 4to), translated after the
Castilian version of the work composed in Portuguese by Mark of
Lisbon, was foolish enough to render into Italian this
translation of a translation.

[6] See pages 333 ff.

* * * * *

I

ST. FRANCIS'S WORKS

The writings of St. Francis[1] are assuredly the best source of
acquaintance with him; we can only be surprised to find them so
neglected by most of his biographers. It is true that they give little
information as to his life, and furnish neither dates nor facts,[2]
but they do better, they mark the stages of his thought and of his
spiritual development. The legends give us Francis as he appeared, and
by that very fact suffer in some degree the compulsion of circumstances;
they are obliged to bend to the exigencies of his position as general of
an Order approved by the Church, as miracle-worker, and as saint. His
works, on the contrary, show us his very soul; each phrase has not only
been thought, but lived; they bring us the Poverello's emotions, still
alive and palpitating.

So, when in the writings of the Franciscans we find any utterance of
their master, it unconsciously betrays itself, sounding out suddenly in
a sweet, pure tone which penetrates to your very heart, awakening with a
thrill a sprite that was sleeping there.

This bloom of love enduing St. Francis's words would be an admirable
criterion of the authenticity of those opuscules which tradition
attributes to him; but the work of testing is neither long nor
difficult. If after his time injudicious attempts were here and there
made to honor him with miracles which he did not perform, which he would
not even have wished to perform, no attempt was ever made to burden his
literary efforts with false or supposititious pieces.[3] The best
proof of this is