EPISTOLARIES. — By *epistolare* (also *epistolarium* or *epistolium*) is meant the book containing the epistles and Gospel passages read during the Mass throughout the liturgical year. In its history it has borne other names, the principal ones being: *apostolus*, *liber comitis* or *convivis* or more simply *comes* (already in the Corinian charter of 471), and *capitulare lectionum*, *lectionarium*. *Apostolus* is the oldest name; *comes* and *lectionarium* indicate, according to the case, the collection of epistles alone, or of Gospels alone, or of both together.
I. ORIGINS
The scriptural reading in liturgical assemblies was at first without any particular arrangement. The contrary opinion of the Romanian Israelite L. V. Netianer (Der Ursprung und die Bedeutung der Propheten-lektionen, in Zeitschr. d. deutsche Mor. Gesellschaft, 63 [1909], pp. 103-70), according to which the early Church would have adopted the lectionary arrangement of the Synagogue, however suggestive, has not been followed.The sacred books were read in continuous instalments (*lectio continua*): “ex ordine,” says St. Augustine (In epist. Iohann. ad Parthos, prol.: PL 35, 1977), taking the text directly from the volume of the Bible (the medieval “bibliotheca”), at the direction of the bishop, who presented the assembly with what he deemed suitable “prout tempus fert” (St. Justin, Apol., 1, cap. 67, ed. Th. Klauser [Floril. patrist., 7], Bonn 1935, p. 119; Contra Tryph., cap. 118; PG 6, 749).
This custom remained in force for a long time; it was still in vogue at the beginning of the 4th century in Africa and in the middle of the 5th century at Ravenna with St. Peter Chrysologus (d. 450 c., cf. G. Lucchesi, Nuove note agiografiche ravennati, Faenza 1943, p. 110). Rome also had its *lectio continua*, traces of which can be seen in the ancient arrangement of the Gospel pericopes for Advent (reading of the Synoptics) and for the Paschal cycle (Gospel of St. John: cf. P. Alfonzo, La lectio continua nei sinottici, in Rivista liturgica, 25 [1938], pp. 131-37). It is clear, however, that from the earliest times thought must have been given to the opportunity of reading in certain periods of the year, such as Lent and the *Tempora*, or on the great festivals of the Lord: Easter, Pentecost, Christmas, Epiphany, passages from the sacred books that had a more direct relation to the liturgical season or to the mystery being celebrated. The Fathers of the 3rd and 4th centuries mention readings proper to particular seasons or feasts: Genesis in Lent (St. Ambrose, De mysteriis, I, 1: PL 16, 389), Jonah—Job during Holy Week (id., Epist. XX, ad Marcell., cap. 14 and 25: ibid., 1040, 1044); at Easter the account of the Resurrection, which in Africa was read from the text of the four Evangelists (St. Augustine, Sermo 86, Tract. de quarta vera post Pascha, in Miscellanea agostiniana, I, Roma 1930, p. 324). Between Easter and Pentecost the Acts of the Apostles were read (id., Sermo 315, 1: PL 38-39, 1426; Tract. VI in Johann., cap. 18: ibid., 35, 1433). Even on the solemnities of the martyrs the *lectio continua* was suspended, at least in some places, as in Africa, to read the account of their deeds (cf. id., Sermo XVI, In natali sanctorum martyrum Scillitanorum, in Miscellanea agostiniana, I, Roma 1930, p. 80; see also ibid., p. 67, St. Cyprian).
The indication of the passage to be read was marked in the margin of the pages of the Holy Scripture; later, a second step was to draw up an index of the beginnings of the passages, numbered progressively (*capitula*, whence *capitulare*), and this list was placed at the beginning of the sacred volume, while in the text only the number corresponding to the list was written at the foot, marking the end of the pericope with a cross. These were the first drafts of lectionaries. Only much later (7th–8th centuries) were the lectionary pericopes copied in full, and the first complete lectionaries appeared (typical is the Lectionary of Luxeuil), which became the proper liturgical book, still used today in cathedrals and more orderly churches.
Thus, certain books were read in certain periods of the year, but this does not mean that these readings were already divided into fixed pericopes. Medieval liturgists, basing themselves on the *Epistula ad Constantinum*, which they attributed to St. Jerome, assigned the authorship of a first lectionary to the Doctor of Stridon. But the letter is apocryphal. Morin attributes it to St. Victor, bishop of Capua (b. 534; cf. G. Morin, L'auteur de la Lettre di Constantinus, in Revue bénédictine, 7 [1890], pp. 416-23).
The first historically certain attempts at systematic scriptural collections for liturgical use appear in Gaul in the 5th century. Gennadius of Marseille (b. 432) relates that the priest Musaeus “portauit sancti Venerii episcopi (b. 452) excerpsit ex sacris scripturis lectiones totius anni festivis diebus” (De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis, cap. 79; PL 58, 1104). A little later, Claudius Mamertus, priest of the church of Vienne (b. 473), also composed a lectionary (Sidonio Apollinare, Epist., I, IV, 11; ibid., 516). But of neither has anything survived except their memory.
The inventory of the church of Cornutum (a small rural parish near Tivoli), in 471, lists among the codices belonging to it: “Evangelia III apostolorum (apostolum?), psalterium et comitem.” Is this a proper lectionary (a rather unlikely thing) or the lectionary of Rome? The second alternative will not be surprising if one considers that precisely in the 5th century Rome witnessed a very fruitful liturgical activity. The two cycles that would fill the entire ecclesiastical year were organized in this period: Advent through the work of Pope Gelasius (b. 489), who transferred the readings of the monthly *Tempora* to those of Lent and fixed the reading of Isaiah for each day, and Lent through the work of Pope Hilary (b. 468).
These, however, are still matters of conjecture, however well founded. For the pre-Gregorian period the only secure document is the Lectionary of Capua. This is a numbered list of 77 epistolary pericopes, arranged according to the order of the liturgical year, prefixed to the famous Codex Fuldensis of the Pauline Epistles. In the margin of the pages of the text the beginning of the pericope is indicated by the corresponding number in the list. The list was written by Victor, bishop of Capua, in 546–47. This list of pericopes thus gives the shape of the liturgical year at Capua in the middle of the 6th century.
II. FORMATION PERIOD
By the end of the 5th century the *lectio continua* had definitively given way to fixed pericopes. The disappearance of the catechumens, for whom it was primarily intended as a first Christian instruction, and the development of the liturgical cycle, which was becoming ever more clearly defined around the great Mysteries of the Redemption and the early feasts of the martyrs, determined the final choice of the scriptural pericopes to be read at Mass and the formation of various systems according to the peculiarities of the different Churches. The liturgical books also acquired their own particular character, and in the case under consideration the division and difference between the Epistolary and the Evangelary became ever more marked. With regard to the former, the following systems can be distinguished:### Moxanobian System
The oldest document is the *Liber Comicus* (edited by G. Morin, in *Anecdota Maredsolana*, I, Maredsous 1893), which probably represents the usage of Toledo at the time of St. Ildefonso (b. 667). The Advent season consists of seven weeks; Lent has its own readings every day except Tuesdays and Thursdays of the first three weeks; it lacks the series of Sundays after Epiphany and at Pentecost but, in compensation, ends with 32 "daily Sundays." The sanctoral cycle is very limited. There are three readings.
### Gallican System
The principal representatives of this system are the Lectionary of Luxeuil and the Missal of Bobbio. The former (recently published by P. Salmon, *Le lectionnaire de Luxeuil*, Rome 1944), is a Gallican book with very few Roman influences, dating from the late 6th or early 8th century. The latter, nearly contemporary with the former, represents the liturgy of Gaul at the time of the Merovingians, with Visigothic, Irish, and Roman influences (critical edition with introduction by C. Mohlberg, *Missale Gothicum. Das gallikanische Sakramentar*, Augsburg 1929).
Notable characteristics of the Gallican system of readings include: three lessons at Mass, the reading of the Acts of the Martyrs, the Song of Daniel among the readings on feast days, and the Acts and Apocalypse during Eastertide. The Advent season consists of seven weeks, and Lent is marked by distinctive features. An interesting peculiarity of Gallican documents is the presence of more or less extended series of "daily" or "Sunday" lessons intended for days without a proper formulary, especially Sundays outside fixed cycles (i.e., our "Sundays per annum").
### Ambrosian System
This system is found essentially in the Bergamo Sacramentary (edited by P. Gagin, in *Antiquarium Solemense*, series liturgica, I, Solemense 1900), according to a manuscript from the 10th–15th centuries belonging to the library of St. Alexander in Colonna, Bergamo. The codex does not contain the prophetic readings (Old Testament), which the Ambrosian liturgy still preserves; consequently, the Bergamo Sacramentary was supplemented by Gagin with a 13th-century manuscript from the cathedral of Milan (ibid., pp. 193–207).
For a long time, the celebrated *Capitulare Epistolarum* of St. Paul (Vatic. regin. 9), from the first half of the 8th century, was considered of great importance for the study of the Ambrosian lectionary. However, Morin (Un vestigio inedito di letture liturgiche in uso nel VII–VIII secolo in una chiesa dell’Italia settentrionale, in *Revue bénédictine*, 20 [1903], pp. 375–86), followed recently by Borella (cf. M. Righetti, *Storia liturgica*, III, Milan 1949, pp. 514–15), has demonstrated that this document does not reflect the Ambrosian rite in use at Milan but rather in another church of northern Italy.
In the Bergamo Sacramentary, the structure of the Ambrosian liturgical year is already well delineated: Advent consists of seven weeks; the feast of Epiphany follows; the Pre-Lent season has its usual three Sundays; Lent is regular, with the first Sunday still bearing the designation *in caput Quadragesimae*. After Easter, there are five weeks, 22 after Pentecost, and two for the dedication of the church. The sanctoral cycle is very developed.
### Roman System
Undoubtedly the most important system, it has the most numerous documents. A secure starting point is the work of St. Gregory, whose biographer John the Deacon states that precisely the lectionary would have been the basis of his reform of the Gelasian Sacramentary (*Vita s. Gregorii*, II, 17: PL 75, 94). The principal sources of the Gregorian and post-Gregorian lectionary are the Comes of Würzburg, Alcuin, and Murbach.
The Comes of Würzburg, published by G. Morin (*Revue bénédictine*, 27 [1910], pp. 41–47), from an 8th-century manuscript of the University of Würzburg, is defined by its editor as "the oldest lectionary of the Roman Church." The lectionary arrangement is the same as that which must have existed at the end of the 6th century, when St. Gregory directed his organizational genius toward II. All offices introduced in the 7th century were eliminated, such as the Octave of Christmas, the four feasts of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the feast of the Cross, and the Masses of the Thursdays of Lent and other days formerly extended.
A formulary of this type was taken as the basis by Alcuin for his famous *Comes Emendatus* (first edited by J. M. Tommasi, *Opera omnia*, V, ed. F. Vezzosi, Rome 1750, pp. 297–323, and recently by A. Wilmart, *Le lectionnaire d’Alcuin*, in *Ephemerides liturgicae*, 50 [1937], pp. 136–197). It was compiled in the years 782–84, before Pope Adrian (d. 795) sent the revised Gregorian Sacramentary to Charlemagne, which became normative in Rome. The archetype of Alcuin’s lectionary can be placed between the end of the 7th and the beginning of the 8th century, certainly before the death of Gregory II (d. 731), who instituted the Lenten Thursdays, which do not yet appear in the *Comes Emendatus*.
Throughout the document, there is a perfect order in the distribution of the epistles: from Easter to the feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul, the Catholic epistles are read; in the five weeks after the Apostles, the Epistle to the Romans; in the five Sundays after St. Lawrence, the Epistles to the Corinthians and Galatians; for the Sundays of the 7th month and after St. Augustine, the Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians; and during the week of Pentecost, the Acts of the Apostles. Note the order of the canonical succession of sacred books (Rom., Cor., Gal., Eph., Phil., Col.) and the naming of the Sundays according to Roman tradition, in contrast to Gallican usage.
In the 9th century, a supplement was added to Alcuin’s codex, preceded by an anonymous preface: *Hunc codicum*. The author of this preface declares that the revision of the *Comes* was ordered by Charlemagne to bring it into harmony with the Gregorian Sacramentary. The additions were made particularly for the vigils of Easter and on ferial days, as well as for certain ecclesiastical offices. The author of this supplement was probably Helisachar, chancellor and confidant of Louis the Pious until 819. In later manuscripts, the supplement was merged with the *Comes* (cf. G. Morin, *Une rédaction inédite de la préface au supplément du "Comte" d’Alcuin*, in *Revue bénédictine*, 29 [1912], pp. 340–48).
Domitian’s expulsions of philosophers (88 or 92 A.D.) drove him to Nicopolis in Epirus, where he taught until his death. His lectures were recorded, perhaps in shorthand, by his disciple Arrian, apparently in two collections: the *Dissertationes* in eight books and the *Enchiridion* in twelve. Four books of the *Dissertationes* and the *Enchiridion*, along with a number of fragments, have come down to us. The form of the *Dissertationes* is that of the Cynic diatribe; the style, popular and lively, often rises to tones of intimate and solemn emotion.
E. is the penultimate representative of Stoicism between Seneca and Marcus Aurelius, and, reacting against the eclectic tendency of Panaetius (185–190 BC) and Posidonius (135–151 BC), he recalled its doctrine to the original form of the first masters, especially Chrysippus. He did not, however, escape the influence of Cynicism, and with the Cynics he conceives the life of the philosopher as a mission, restricting his activity to the ethical sphere, which he addresses in relation to the problem of freedom. Man is free because he possesses the faculty of using representations, from which impulses (ἡγεμονικόν) derive their content and are specified (Diss., I, 7; 12). It is through 'nepalepacis' that man is defined (ibid., II, 10) and through it he is made like to God (ibid., I, 27). Man, however, uses it correctly to attain his freedom only if he limits it to the sphere of things that are in our power (ἐφ' ἡμῖν): our representations, the movements of our soul, and our actions. All other things, beginning with the body, are in the power of others (Mar., I), and toward these, whoever wishes to be free and to attain the end that the author of the drama of the world has proposed for him (ibid., 17) must renounce every will, indeed will them as they are. You must not seek that things go as you wish, but wish that they go as they do, and your life will run smoothly (ibid., 8). Against those things that common opinion considers evils, one word alone is to be used: οὐδὲν πάθος ἐμέ, 'nihil ad me'. The maxim in which all the wisdom of E. is summed up is: ἐνέχου καὶ ἀπέχου, 'sustine et abstine' (Gellius, XVII, 19, 6). This does not mean that the sage must live the life of a recluse, but that of what is external to him he will make as little account as a passenger does of the shells and roots he gathers on the shore during a stop of the ship. 'If the helmsman calls you, run quickly to the ship without turning back; let everything else go' (Man., 7). The negativity of this attitude has less its reason in the recognition of human weakness than in the ultimate end, which for E. consists in the imitation of God and in the conformation of all one’s actions to the order He has established. E.’s faith in providence is unshaken, and, despite the nominalist premises of his system, God appears to him as a person and a father (Diss., I, 3, 1–3). 'Remember God and call Him to your aid as sailors call upon the Dioscuri in a storm' (ibid., II, 18, 28). And it is in the recognition that we are all children of that one Father that he places the source of the love that man must have for man (ibid., I, 13).
E. was highly esteemed by Christians, and the Byzantines even made extracts from the *Manual* for moral edification. According to a report found in some manuscripts, it was even believed that he had secretly been a Christian. Some moderns have thought of a direct influence of the Gospel, but this has no foundation. Christians are mentioned once in Diss., IV, 7, 6, but in such a way as to exclude that E. had any precise knowledge of them.