**ISIDORE** of Pelusium, St.
An ecclesiastical writer, according to a notice reported by Photius, born in Alexandria in the second half of the 4th century. Of noble and wealthy family, he soon felt the attraction of monastic life and retired to a monastery near Pelusium, where, having become abbot, he carried on a long activity as an apologist, as an interpreter of Holy Scripture, and, though indirectly and with little effect, as a defender of orthodoxy. The year of his death is uncertain, but from references to particular events in some of his letters it must be placed after 434.
The only work of I. that has come down to us is his *Epistolary*, one of the richest in Greek literature. It comprises, in fact, 2012 letters distributed in 5 books, though some are repeated (e.g., IV, 147 = V, 91; IV, 190 = V, 138); others are of doubtful authenticity because they lack epistolary character, to which must be added the 49 published by Aigrain and another 5 by Capo. Some are very long (II, 146; III, 154), others consist of only two or three lines (I, 30; III, 190), and they are addressed to persons of different conditions—bishops, deacons, monks, rhetoricians, politicians, and two (I, 35 and 311) even to the emperor Theodosius II. The most varied subjects are discussed: the superiority of the New Testament over the Old Testament (II, 53), the value of Baptism (III, 195), the immortality of the soul (IV, 125), Montanist heresies (I, 242-45), Manichaean (I, 52), Novatian (I, 100), and especially numerous passages of the Bible, in the exegesis of which I., following the Antiochene school, reconciles the historical-literal sense with the spiritual sense (θεωρίας), though he sometimes indulges in allegorical interpretation (e.g., IV, 117).
Other works have been erroneously inferred from I.’s own letters: in II, 138 and 228 he mentions a λόγος πρὸς Ἕλληνας, while in III, 253 he speaks of a λόγος πρὸς τὸ μὴ εἶναι εἰμαρμένην, which Niemeyer supposed to be one and the same as the first, conjecturing a λόγος πρὸς Ἕλληνας πρὸς τὸ μὴ εἶναι εἰμαρμένην, recently identified by A. Altaner (*Byzant. Zeitschrift*, 42 [1942], p. 91 sq.) with Ep. III, 154.
**
---
**ISIDORE** of Seville, St.
Born in 560, died in 636. Son of an illustrious Hispano-Roman family (though his mother may have been of Gothic stock) which gave the Church and Spain three bishops: Leander, Fulgentius, and Isidore, and a nun, Florentina, all of them saints. St. I. was born in Seville, where his father Severianus had moved from Cartagena shortly before. After the death of his parents, Leander, metropolitan of Seville, became both father and teacher to his youngest brother, I. Later, in 601, I. was to succeed him in the see and in the prestige of his school, “a shining and incorruptible light,” as St. Braulio of Saragossa called him.
He was indeed the reservoir into which the currents of ancient learning converged, to be distributed in a harmonious system. His work is not original; yet, as an exact comprehension of the past and a systematic adaptation of it to later generations, he makes I., as has been justly said, one of the most outstanding figures in all universal literature.
As bishop, he presided over the Second Council of Seville (619), in which he fought and succeeded in converting a Syrian bishop who was an *asciphali*; he also presided over the Fourth Council of Toledo (633), one of the most important of the national councils, which unified liturgical discipline in Spain and drew up one of the most precise formulations of Trinitarian and Christological faith. After a most fruitful episcopate, he died in 636: an edifying death described by his disciple Redemptus in moving pages.
II. WORKS
With encyclopedic ambition, I. embraced the entire study of human knowledge. Two catalogues of his works serve to reconstruct his literary output, which grew over time: the first is the *Praenotatio Librorum divi I.* (PL 81, 16-17) by St. Braulio of Saragossa, the second is chap. 9 of the *De viris inlustribus* by St. Ildefonsus of Toledo.Among his works belonging to dogmatic theology are the *Sententiarum libri III*, which form, so to speak, the first *Summa theologica*, a genre destined to survive so gloriously; the *De fide catholica contra Iudaeos*, dedicated to his sister Florentina, an apologetic work on the Messiah, later translated into Old High German at the end of the 7th century. To biblical theology belong the *Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum* of biblical typology; the *Prooemiorum liber unus*, introductory notes to the scriptural canon; the *De ortu et obitu patrum*, a biographical exposition of biblical figures; the *De numeris qui in Sacra Scriptura occurrunt*, a mystical interpretation of the numbers found in Holy Scripture; the *Allegoriae quaedam Sacrae Scripturae*, on the numbers and figures of the Old and New Testaments. To liturgy and ecclesiastical discipline belong the *De ecclesiasticis Officiis*, on worship and its ministers, the *Symbolum* and the *Sacraments*, the *Regula monachorum*, notable for the delicacy shown by I. toward the weak and for his advice on reading and study. Of an ascetical character are the *Synonymorum libri duo*, which deal with penitential asceticism and which St. Ildefonsus called *librum lamentationis*.
In the realm of the profane sciences are the *Differentiarum libri duo*, a lexicon of synonyms of things and words; the *De natura rerum*, dedicated to King Sisebut, and the *De ordine creaturarum*, a treatise on cosmography, meteorology, and other natural sciences. In the historical genre are the *Chronica maior*, a universal history continuing those of Julius Africanus, Eusebius of Caesarea, Jerome, and Victor, down to 615; the *Historia Gothorum*, with appendices on the Vandals and the Suevi, which opens with the enthusiastic, dithyrambic *De laude Spaniae*; the *De viris inlustribus*, a continuation of similar works by St. Jerome and Gennadius, but with special regard to Spanish figures; the *De haeresibus*, a brief history of crises. Of an encyclopedic character are the *Etymologiae*, which in 20 books contain all that could be known in the 7th century of sacred and profane matters—grammar and medicine, theology and mineralogy, precious stones, agriculture and pottery-making, warfare and domestic labor—all arranged in a marvelous system. St. I. spent several years compiling this work, which at his death was still unfinished. Its division into books is due to St. Braulio.
Language dominates the entire conception of the work. The method is etymological; and, taking the opportunity to explain the etymology of each word, I. often follows the ear, in the manner of ancient rhetoricians and grammarians. He unfolds all the richness of his knowledge: an entire volume of Migne’s *Patrologia* that astonishes and amazes the modern reader by the erudition and perseverance one must suppose in the man who accomplished such a work.
Innumerable are the sources of this great mosaic which modern philology attempts to analyze. Many are second-hand, not from the encyclopedic arsenal of Suetonius, which did not exist, but from various compendia and glossaries that are being identified day by day; the number of authors used is extraordinary. The study of the *Etymologiae* greatly benefits philology and grammar, literary history, archaeology, etc.
His epistolary correspondence, very limited, consists of 11 letters. Seven of these form the epistolary correspondence between I. and St. Braulio: a document of great interest for the study of the relations between these two great men, and which allows one to witness the slow elaboration of the *Etymologiae*. I. 27 Epigrammata in distichs, which adorned his library, sometimes beneath the busts of authors then celebrated, his pharmacy, and his scriptorium, are an interesting contribution to the history of culture. Their authenticity, denied or doubted by some, is today beyond question after the studies of H. Beeson.
This collection of his recognized works does not, without doubt, exhaust the abundance of his literary heritage, and modern research is striving to identify some of the “many other pamphlets” to which St. Braulio alludes in his *Praenotatio*. Nevertheless, some works recently attributed to him do not belong to him: the *Commonitiuncula ad sororem*, attributed to him by Anspach (*Script. eccles. Hisp. lat.*, III, El Escorial 1935), which is instead later than St. I., as Fr. A. Vaccari has shown. Also later than the Doctor of Spain is the *Liber de variis quaestionibus*, published as an Isidorean work in the same collection by Anspach and Fr. Vega: examination of the work leads one rather to seek its author in the Adoptionist Felix of Urgel.
The literary production of St. I., as has been said, lacks originality. Its doctrinal value lies in its sources. It has been said that for every statement he makes he has a specific source; this judgment appears ever more true as philological studies of his works progress. The composition is a museum or a work of inlay, in which phrases, maxims, and digressions from very many authors are ingeniously combined and adapted to the folds of reasoning in each particular case. Even when he has personal and direct knowledge of what he affirms, if he has at hand the already composed text of an ancient author, he uses it (cf., for example, in the *De viris illustribus*), instead of expressing his thought in different words.
Rarely does he name the authors he uses. They are usually the Holy Fathers, especially in writings of an ecclesiastical nature. Pagan authors are more extensively used in the *Etymologiae* and in works of secular sciences. Although he does not limit himself to extracting from a single author, but instead draws from various authors for each subject, it is certain that he particularly draws from classical authors.
Thus, in Book I of the *Differentiae*, his principal source is the *De orthographia* of Agroecius, a 5th-century grammarian; in the *De natura rerum*, the *Hexaemeron* of St. Ambrose, the *Recognitiones* of the Pseudo-Clement in Rufinus’s translation, and the pagans Hyginus, Solinus, and Servius; in the *De numeris*, the seven books *De arithmetica* of Martianus Capella (late 4th century) and various writings of St. Augustine on biblical symbolism; the *Sententiae* are an excerpt from the *Moralia* of St. Gregory; the *Regula monachorum* derives substantially from Cassian and St. Benedict; the *Tituli* of the library, finally, are a blend of numerous and interesting reminiscences of Martial.
The diffusion of his work was extraordinary, both for its rapidity and its extent. His codices carried culture from Spain to France and from there, by means of Irish monks, to all Christendom. French writers already cite Isidore in the 7th century. Aldhelm, in his *Epistola ad Acircium* (685–705), used the *De natura rerum* in the very century in which it was composed. The *De fide catholica* was translated into German at Murbach in the 8th century. The *Sententiae* were already being copied in the 8th century; and manuscripts from Bobbio of that century and the 8th are still preserved in Milan. The diffusion of the *Etymologiae* is remarkable: scarcely a century after the death of its author, 54 copies of the work had already crossed the Pyrenees. Today about a thousand manuscript codices survive. This suggests that some 10,000 may have existed in the Middle Ages: one of the “successful books” and most famous in history.
St. I., as has already been said, was the educator of the Middle Ages, and his books were required texts in schools. Archives still preserve a great number of extracts, adaptations, and fragments taken from his works for school purposes. His definitions and juridical aphorisms, expressed with precision and finality, were introduced into canonical collections and committed to memory, as John of Salisbury prescribed. If his works were used in antiquity, wherever he was copied and plagiarized without regard. Bede summarized in his *Chronica* the *Chronica* of I., and in his *De Temporibus* the *De natura rerum*. An unknown Scottus of the 8th century imitated his *Versus de alphabeto* in the *Tituli* of the Spaniard. Lathcen (ca. 660), though Irish, summarized the *De ortu et obitu patrum* in his *Dicta Isidori in libro de vita et exitu prophetarum*. Rabanus Maurus’s *De institutione clericorum*, in the 9th century, includes, without confessing it, chapter after chapter textually copied from I. The Middle Ages studied and thought under the sign of I., animated by his spirit.
The traditional ancient fund is joined by qualities of clarity and method that reduce everything to a luminous system and bring order to all that he treats. His style is clear, sober, and elegant in its simplicity, in what he retains of the personal; precision of concepts and concision of terms, which seals the expression, rendering it eternal; and, when he draws on ancient sources, skillful discernment in the selection of classical authors.
Finally, the man shines through all the work of I.: a noble and elevated character, transfigured by sanctity; vibrant with enthusiasm for all sentiments of piety, humanity, and patriotism, even reaching effusions of tenderness in his familiar letters. These, though few, provide a portrait that one searches for in vain in his impersonal expositions of the *Etymologiae* and in the *De ecclesiasticis officiis*.
Studies: the best updated bibliography is in B. Altaner, *Patrologie*, Freiburg in Br. 1930. General studies: M. Manitius, *Gesch. der lat. Liter. des Mittelalters*, I, Munich 1911, pp. 52–70; Z. Garcia Villada, *Historia ecclesiastica de España*, II, II, Madrid 1933, pp. 107–129; F. Pérez de Urbel, *Las letras en la época visigoda*, in the *Historia de España* directed by P. Menéndez y Pidal, 1910, pp. 379–431; G. Madoz, *Escritores de la época visigótica*, in the *Historia general de las literaturas hispánicas*, directed by G. Díaz Plaja, Barcelona 1949, pp. 114–40.
On questions of authenticity: A. Vaccari, *Un trattato ascetico attribuito a s. Girolamo*, in *Mélanges Cavallera*, Toulouse 1948, pp. 147-62 (on the *Commonitiumcula ad sororem*); G. Madoz, *Una obra de Félix de Urgel falsamente adjudicada a s. I. de Sevilla*, in *Estudios eclesiásticos*, 23 (1949), pp. 147-68. On the state of research concerning s. I., V. B. Altaner, *Der Stand der Isidorforschung*, Ein kritischer Bericht über die seit 1910 erschienene Literatur, in *Misc. Isid.*, Rome 1936, pp. 1-32; for chronology, J. A. de Aldama, *Indicaciones sobre la cronologia de las obras de s. I.*, ibid., pp. 57-89; on Isidorean survival, E. Ansbach, *Das Fortleben Isidors vom VII. bis IX. Jahrhundert*, ibid., pp. 323-56.
Monographs: In *Miscellanea Isidoriana*, Rome 1936, a collection of Isidorean studies by various specialists regarding the chronology and evaluation of the works of the Spaniard. For the canonical aspect, P. Séjourné, *Le dernier Père de l'Église, st Isidore de Séville*, Paris 1929. On his role in the councils, G. Madoz, *Il florilegio patristico del II Concilio de Sevilla*, in *Misc. Isid.*, pp. 177-220; id., *Le symbole du IV Concile de Tolède*, in *Rev. Christ. ecclés.*, 39 (1938), pp. 5-20. For his *Regula monachorum*, R. Klee, *Die Regula monachorum Isidors von Sevilla und in der Vorbildnis zu den übrigen abendländischen Mönchsregeln jener Zeit*, Marburg 1909. For his letters, R. Geiselmann, *Die Abendmahlsehere an der Wende der christl. Spätantike zum Frühmittelalter*, Munich 1933. On spirituality, J. Mullins, *The Spiritual Life according to St. Isidore*, Washington 1940. Giuseppe Madoz