THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG 14
nnn nnn EEE EEE EES
there was evidence of a dissatisfaction with the state religion, a waking of the soul to life and of a desire for nobler things, which was in a manner met by the acceptance and symbolic interpretation of primitive performances. In this movement the mysteries described above had the leading part. But other secret cults in considerable numbers had their vogue, some merely local, others (like those of the Great Mother) pervasive, and still others the invention of mountebanks, intent upon using the trend of things in the religious world to their own advantage. Of the first and second, part were associated with the deities already named. Others, like the Pythagorean and Isiac, were on a different basis. But together the effect upon religion was profound, and was by no means unfelt in Christianity (cf. G. Anrich, Das antike Mysterienwesen in seinem Einfluss auf das Christentum, Gottingen, 1894; E. H. Hatch, Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church, London,-1890). Greek tragedians and philosophers were hardly less under the spell of these performances and ideas. So that the mysteries, tribal and cultic, are among the forces the vast effects of which are only now beginning to be appreciated. Gro. W. GILMORE.
BrsiiocGRApHy: For tribal mysteries incomparably the best works for the student are those which deal with the life of savages in different lands, compiled by competent observers. Among the best and indispensable works of this kind are: L. Fison and A. W. Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, Melbourne, 1880; R. H. Codrington, Melanesian Studies, London, 1891; A. Hamilton, Maori Art, Wellington, 1896; B. Spencer and F. J. Gillen; Native Tribes of Central Australia, London, 1899; idem, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, ib. 1904; F. H. Cushing, Zuni Folk Tales, New York, 1902; W. H. Furness, Borneo Head Hunters, London, 1902; A. W. Howitt, Native Tribes of South-East Australia, ib. 1904; Mrs. K. L. Parker, Zuahlayt Tribe, ib. 1905; and the Reports and Bulletins of the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C. The material has been brought together in two books of the highest value: H. Schurtz, Altersklassen und Mdannerbunde, Berlin, 1902; and H. Webster, Primitive Secret Societies, a Study in Early Politics and Religion, New York, 1908 (an excellent handbook on the subject). Consult further: E. B. Tylor, in Journal of Anthropological Studies, xxviii (1898), 145 sqq.; idem, Primitive Culture, new ed., London, 1903; J. G. Frazer, Golden Bough, iii. 422-445, ib. 1900; E. Crawley, Mystic Rose, pp. 215-223, 270-314, New York, 1902; G.S. Hall, Adolescence, ii. 232-260, ib. 1904.
On Greek Mysteries the work of Miss Harrison cited so frequently in the text is of prime importance, adducing evidence which is frequently unique. Consult further: C. A. Lobeck, Aglaophamus, Regensburg, 1829 (indispensable for the collection of materials from the classics); L. Preller, Demeter und Persephone, Hamburg, 1837; idem, Griechische Mythologie, ed. C. Robert, Berlin, 1894; F. Lenormant, Monographie de la vote sacrée eleusinienne, Paris, 1864; idem, in Contemporary Review, 1880, i. 847 sqq., ii. 119 sqq., 412 sqq.; A. Mommsen, Heortologie, Leipsic, 1864; C. Strube, Ueber den Bilderkreis von Eleusis, Leipsic, 1870; C. S. Wake, Evolution of Morality, ii., chap. vi., London, 1878; W. Mannhardt, Mythologische Forschungen, Strasburg, 1884; H. Junker, Die Studenwachen in den Osirismysterien nach den Inschriften von Dendera, Edfu, und Phile, Vienna, 1890; L. Dyer, Gods in Greece, pp. 174-218, London,1891; P. Gardner, New Chapters in Greek Hist., ib. 1892; H.Rubensohn, Die Mysterienheiligtiimer in Eleusis und Samothrace, Berlin, 1892; A. Dieterich, Nekyia, Leipsic, 1893 (important); Pp. Foucart, Recherches sur l’origine et la nature des mystéres d’Hleusis, Paris, 1895 (of very considerable value); E. Maass, Orpheus, Munich, 1895; D. Philios, Eleusis, ses mystéres, ses ruines, et son musée, Athens, 1896, Eng. transl., Hleusis, her Mysteries, Ruins, and Museum, London, 1906 (the treatment of the mysteries is rather su-
perficial); T. Mommsen, Die Feste der Stadt Athen, Leipsic, 1898; A. Lang, Myth, Ritual, and Religion, i. 270 sqq., ii. 286 sqq., London, 1899; idem, Homeric Hymns, pp. 55-100, 183-210, ib. 1899; G. D’Alviella, in RHE, xlvi (1902), nos. 2 and 3, xlvii (1903), nos. 1 and 2; idem, Eleusinia, Paris, 1903; E. Rohde, Psyche, 3d ed., Tiibingen, 1902 (indispensable); O. Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte, Munich, 1906; R. Reitzenstein, Die hellenistischen Muysterienreligion, ihre Grundgedanken und Wirkungen, Leipsic, 1910; F.Cumont, Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism, Chicago, 1911; Ersch and Gruber,’ Encyklopddie, 1., xxxiii. 268-296, Ixxxii. 219-380.
TRIBES, HEBREW. See Israux, History or, I.
TRIBUR, SYNOD OF: A synod held early in May, 895, at Tribur (12 m. w.n.w. of Darmstadt) in the presence of King Arnulf, and attended by the archbishops of Cologne, Mainz, and Treves, and twenty-six or twenty-seven bishops. It is chiefly noteworthy as marking a closer relation between Arnulf and the higher clergy; for, while a large number of its enactments referred to the restoration of ecclesiastical discipline, a series of important canons bound the king to make sweeping concessions to the higher clergy. The synod was also important as further strengthening the judicial powers of the Curia, to which it enjoined subjection and obedience, even though the yoke should prove heavy. Almost two centuries later (Oct., 1076) a second assembly met at Tribur, at which the secular princes combined with a great portion of the clergy and the Curia against the emperor, subjecting Henry IV. to Gregory VII., and requiring him to appear at Augsburg on Feb. 2, 1077, to receive the verdict of the pope, with the threat that, if he did not purge himself of the ban within a year from the pronouncement of excommunication, he should irrevocably forfeit the empire. The result was Canossa (see Gregory VII.). (D. KeRuert.) BrsriograPHy: For the Acta consult NA, xiv. 49-82, 281-
326, xv. 411-427, xviii. 365-409, xx. 289-352; MGH,
Cap., ii. 196-249. Consult also: E. L. Diimmler, Ge-
schichte des ostfrinkischen Reichs, iii. 395-404; Hefele, Conciliengeschichte, iv. 552-561.
TRIDENTINE PROFESSION OF FAITH (CREED OF PIUS IV.): For practical purposes the most important creed-statement of the Roman Catholic Church. The original name was Forma professionis fidet Catholice, or orthodoxe fidet. It was preceded by three other professions of faith issued by Pius IV.: that of 1556 in thirty-six articles; that of 1560, intended for prelates; and that of 1563. The decrees of the Council of Trent (q.v.) contain no profession, but in the twenty-fourth session such a form was suggested. This was prepared by a commission of cardinals under the direction of Pius IV. in 1564. It must be subscribed or sworn to by all priests and public teachers of that church, and also by Protestant converts (hence called the “ Profession of converts’’). It was solemnly affirmed during the Vatican Council of 1870 at its second session. It is a very clear and precise summary of the specific doctrines of the Roman Church as settled by the Council of Trent, put in the form of a binding oath of obedience to the pope, as the successor of the prince of the apostles, and the vicar of Christ. It consists of twelve articles of which the first runs as follows: