sh that they had
reached us without details which awake all sorts of suspicions,[8] but
it is very seldom that a witness does not try to prove his affirmations
and to prop them up by arguments which, though detestable, are
appropriate to the vulgar audience to which he is speaking.

II. THE PARDON OF AUGUST 2D, CALLED INDULGENCE OF PORTIUNCULA[9]

This question might be set aside; on the whole it has no direct
connection with the history of St. Francis.

Yet it occupies too large a place in modern biographies not to require a
few words: it is related that Francis was in prayer one night at
Portiuncula when Jesus and the Virgin appeared to him with a retinue of
angels. He made bold to ask an unheard-of privilege, that of plenary
indulgence of all sins for all those who, having confessed and being
contrite, should visit this chapel. Jesus granted this at his mother's
request, on the sole condition that his vicar the pope would ratify it.

The next day Francis set out for Perugia, accompanied by Masseo, and
obtained from Honorius the desired indulgence, but only for the day of
August 2d.

Such, in a few lines, is the summary of this legend, which is surrounded
with a crowd of marvellous incidents.

The question of the nature and value of indulgences is not here
concerned. The only one which is here put is this: Did Francis ask this
indulgence and did Honorius III. grant it?

Merely to reduce it to these simple proportions is to be brought to
answer it with a categorical No.

It would be tedious to refer even briefly to the difficulties,
contradictions, impossibilities of this story, many a time pointed out
by orthodox writers. In spite of all they have come to the affirmative
conclusion: _Roma locuta est_.

Those whom this subject may interest will find in the note above
detailed bibliographical indications of the principal elements of this
now quieted discussion. I shall confine myself to pointing out the
impossibilities with which tradition comes into collision; they are both
psychological and historical. The Bollandists long since pointed out the
silence of Francis's early biographers upon this question. Now that the
published documents are much more numerous, this silence is still more
overwhelming. Neither the First nor the Second Life by Thomas of Celano,
nor the anonymous author of the second life given in the Acta Sanctorum,
nor even the anonymous writer of Perugia, nor the Three Companions, nor
Bonave