Chapter XIX: Act 1899: are other codes of law designed for incorporation in special (5)

The conchoid is generated as follows:--Let O be a fixed point and BC a fixed straight line; draw any line through O intersecting BC in P and take on the line PO two points X, X', such that PX = PX' = a constant quantity. Then the locus of X and X' is the conchoid. The conchoid is also the locus of any point on a rod which is constrained to move so that it always passes through a fixed point, while a fixed point on the rod travels along a straight line. To obtain the equation to the curve, draw AO perpendicular to BC, and let AO = a; let the constant quantity PX = PX' = b. Then taking O as pole and a line through O parallel to BC as the initial line, the polar equation is r = a cosec [theta] [+-] b, the upper sign referring to the branch more distant from O. The cartesian equation with A as origin and BC as axis of x is x^2y^2 = (a + y)^2 (b^2 -y^2). Both branches belong to the same curve and are included in this equation. Three forms of the curve have to be distinguished according to the ratio of a to b. If a be less than b, there will be a node at O and a loop below the initial point (curve 1 in the figure); if a equals b there will be a cusp at O (curve 2); if a be greater than b the curve will not pass through O, but from the cartesian equation it is obvious that O is a conjugate point (curve 3). The curve is symmetrical about the axis of y and has the axis of x for its asymptote.

CONCIERGE (a French word of unknown origin; the Latinized form was _concergius_ or _concergerius_), originally the guardian of a house or castle, in the middle ages a court official who was the custodian of a royal palace. In Paris, when the _Palais de la Cite_ ceased about 1360 to be a royal residence and became the seat of the courts of justice, the _Conciergerie_ was turned into a prison. In modern usage a "concierge" is a hall-porter or janitor.

CONCINI, CONCINO (d. 1617), COUNT DELLA PENNA, MARSHAL D'ANCRE, Italian adventurer, minister of King Louis XIII. of France, was a native of Florence. He came to France in the train of Marie de' Medici, and married the queen's lady-in-waiting, Leonora Dori, known as Galigai. The credit which his wife enjoyed with the queen, his wit, cleverness and boldness made his fortune. In 1610 he had purchased the marquisate of Ancre and the position of first gentleman-in-waiting. Then he obtained successively the governments of Amiens and of Normandy, and in 1614 the baton of marshal. From then first minister of the realm, he abandoned the policy of Henry IV., compromised his wise legislation, allowed the treasury to be pillaged, and drew upon himself the hatred of all classes. The nobles were bitterly hostile to him, particularly Conde, with whom he negotiated the treaty of Loudun in 1616, and whom he had arrested in September 1616. This was done on the advice of Richelieu, whose introduction into politics was favoured by Concini. But Louis XIII., incited by his favourite Charles d'Albert, due de Luynes, was tired of Concini's tutelage. The baron de Vitry received in the king's name the order to imprison him. Apprehended on the bridge of the Louvre, Concini was killed by the guards on the 24th of April 1617. Leonora was accused of sorcery and sent to the stake in the same year.

In 1767 appeared at Brescia a _De Concini vita_, by D. Sandellius. On
the role of Concini see the _Histoire de France_, published under the
direction of E. Lavisse, vol. vi. (1905), by Mariejol.

CONCLAVE (Lat. _conclave_, from _cum_, together, and _clavis_, a key), strictly a room, or set of rooms, locked with a key; in this sense the word is now obsolete in English, though the _New English Dictionary_ gives an example of its use so late as 1753. Its present loose application to any private or close assembly, especially ecclesiastical, is derived from its technical application to the assembly of cardinals met for the election of the pope, with which this article is concerned.

Conclave is the name applied to that system of strict seclusion to which the electors of the pope have been and are submitted, formerly as a matter of necessity, and subsequently as the result of a legislative enactment; hence the word has come to be used of the electoral assembly of the cardinals. This system goes back only as far as the 12th century.

_Election of the Popes in Antiquity._--The very earliest episcopal nominations, at Rome as elsewhere, seem without doubt to have been made by the direct choice of the founders of the apostolic Christian communities. But this exceptional method was replaced at an early date by that of election. At Rome the method of election was the same as in other towns: the Roman clergy and people and the neighbouring bishops each took part in it in their several capacities. The people would signify their approbation or disapprobation of the candidates more or less tumultuously, while the clergy were, strictly speaking, the electoral body, met to elect for themselves a new head, and the bishops acted as presidents of the assembly and judges of the election. The choice had to meet with general consent; but we can well imagine that in an assembly of such size, in which the candidates were acclaimed rather than elected by counting votes, the various functions were not very distinct, and that persons of importance, whether clerical or lay, were bound to influence the elections, and sometimes decisively. Moreover, this form of election lent itself to cabals; and these frequently gave rise to quarrels, sometimes involving bloodshed and schisms, i.e. the election of antipopes, as they were later called. Such was the case at the elections of Cornelius (251), Damasus (366), Boniface (418), Symmachus (498), Boniface II. (530) and others. The remedy for this abuse was found in having recourse, more or less freely, to the support of the civil power. The emperor Honorius upheld Boniface against his competitor Eulalius, at the same time laying down that cases of contested election should henceforth be decided by a fresh election; but this would have been a dangerous method and was consequently never applied. Theodoric upheld Symmachus against Laurentius because he had been elected first and by a greater majority. The accepted fact soon became law, and John II. recognized (532) the right of the Ostrogothic court of Ravenna to ratify the pontifical elections. Justinian succeeded to this right together with the kingdom which he had destroyed; he demanded, together with the payment of a tribute of 3000 golden _solidi_, that the candidate elected should not receive the episcopal consecration till he had obtained the confirmation of the emperor. Hence arose long vacancies of the See, indiscreet interference in the elections by the imperial officials, and sometimes cases of simony and venality. This bondage became lighter in the 7th century, owing rather to the weakening of the imperial power than to any resistance on the part of the popes.

_9th to 12th Centuries._--From the emperors of the East the power naturally passed to those of the West, and it was exercised after 824 by the descendants of Charlemagne, who claimed that the election should not proceed until the arrival of their envoys. But this did not last long; at the end of the 9th century, Rome, torn by factions, witnessed the scandal of the posthumous condemnation of Formosus. This deplorable state of affairs lasted almost without interruption till the middle of the 11th century. When the emperors were at Rome, they presided over the elections; when they were away, the rival factions of the barons, the Crescentii and the Alberici especially, struggled for the spiritual power as they did for the temporal. During this period were seen cases of popes imposed by a faction rather than elected, and then, at the mercy of sedition, deposed, poisoned and thrown into prison, sometimes to be restored by force of arms.

Election reserved to the cardinals.

The influence of the Ottos (962-1002) was a lesser evil; that of the emperor Otto III. was even beneficial, in that it led to the election of Gerbert (Silvester II., in 999). But this was only a temporary check in the process of decadence, and in 1146 Clement II., the successor of the worthless Benedict IX., admitted that henceforth not only the consecration but even the _election_ of the Roman pontiffs could only take place in presence of the emperor. In fact, after the death of Clement II. the delegates of the Roman clergy did actually go to Polden to ask Henry III. to give them a pope, and similar steps were taken after the death of Damasus II., who reigned only twenty days. Fortunately on this occasion Henry III. appointed, just before his death, a man of high character, his cousin Bruno, bishop of Toul, who presented himself in Rome in company with Hildebrand. From this time began the reform. Hildebrand had the elections of Victor II. (1055), Stephen IX. (1057), and Nicholas II. (1058) carried out according to the canonical form, including the imperial ratification. The celebrated bull _In nomine Domini_ of the 13th of April 1059 determined the electoral procedure; it is curious to observe how, out of respect for tradition, it preserves all the former factors in the election though their scope is modified: "In the first place, the cardinal bishops shall carefully consider the election together, then they shall consult with the cardinal clergy, and afterwards the rest of the clergy and the people shall by giving their assent confirm the new election." The election, then, is reserved to the members of the higher clergy, to the cardinals, among whom the cardinal bishops have the preponderating position. The consent of the rest of the clergy and the people is now only a formality. The same was the case of the imperial intervention, in consequence of the phrase: "Saving the honour and respect due to our dear son Henry (Henry IV.), according to the concession we have made to him, and equally to his successors, who shall receive this right personally from the Apostolic See." Thus the emperor has no rights save those he has received as a concession from the Holy See. Gregory VII., it is true, notified his election to the emperor; but as he set up a series of five antipopes, none of Gregory's successors asked any more for the imperial sanction. Further, by this bull, the emperors would have to deal with the _fait accompli_; for it provided that, in the event of disturbances aroused by mischievous persons at Rome preventing the election from being carried out there freely and without bias, the cardinal bishops, together with a small number of the clergy and of the laity, should be empowered to go and hold the election where they should think fit; that should difficulties of any sort prevent the enthronement of the new pope, the pope elect would be empowered immediately to act as if he were actually pope. This legislation was definitely accepted by the emperor by the concordat of Worms (1119).

A limited electoral body lends itself to more minute legislation than a larger body; the college for electing the pope, thus reduced so as to consist in practice of the cardinals only, was subjected as time went on to laws of increasing severity. Two points of great importance were established by Alexander III. at the Lateran Council of 1179. The constitution _Licet de vitanda discordia_ makes all the cardinals equally electors, and no longer mentions the lower clergy or the people; it also requires a majority of two-thirds of the votes to decide an election. This latter provision, which still holds good, made imperial antipopes henceforth impossible.

The conclave.

Abuses nevertheless arose. An electoral college too small in numbers, which no higher power has the right of forcing to haste, can prolong disagreements and draw out the course of the election for a long time. It is this period during which we actually find the Holy See left vacant most frequently for long spaces of time. The longest of these, however, gave an opportunity for reform and the remedy was found in the conclave, i.e. in the forced and rigid seclusion of the electors. As a matter of fact, this method had previously been used, but in a mitigated form: in 1216, on the death of Innocent III., the people of Perugia had shut up the cardinals; and in 1241 the Roman magistrates had confined them within the "Septizonium"; they took two months, however, to perform the election. Celestine IV. died after eighteen days, and this time, in spite of the seclusion of the cardinals, there was an interregnum of twenty months. After the death of Clement IV. in 1268, the cardinals, of whom seventeen were gathered together at Viterbo, allowed two years to pass without coming to an agreement; the magistrates of Viterbo again had recourse to the method of seclusion: they shut up the electors in the episcopal palace, blocking up all outlets; and since the election still delayed, the people removed the roof of the palace and allowed nothing but bread and water to be sent in. Under the pressure of famine and of this strict confinement, the cardinals finally agreed, on the 1st of September 1271, to elect Gregory X., after an interregnum of two years, nine months and two days.

Laws made by Gregory X.

Taught by experience, the new pope considered what steps could be taken to prevent the recurrence of such abuses; in 1274, at the council of Lyons, he promulgated the constitution _Ubi periculum_, the substance of which was as follows: At the death of the pope, the cardinals who were present are to await their absent colleagues for ten days; they are then to meet in one of the papal palaces in a closed conclave; none of them is to have to wait on him more than one servant, or two at most if he were ill; in the conclave they are to lead a life in common, not even having separate cells; they are to have no communication with the outer world, under pain of excommunication for any who should attempt to communicate with them; food is to be supplied to the cardinals through a window which would be under watch; after three days, their meals are to consist of a single dish only; and after five days, of bread and water, with a little wine. During the conclave the cardinals are to receive no ecclesiastical revenue. No account is to be taken of those who are absent or have left the conclave. Finally, the election is to be the sole business of the conclave, and the magistrates of the town where it was held are called upon to see that these provisions be observed. Adrian V. and John XX. were weak enough to suspend the constitution _Ubi periculum_; but the abuses at once reappeared; the Holy See was again vacant for long periods; this further proof was therefore decisive, and Celestine V., who was elected after a vacancy of more than two years, took care, before abdicating the pontificate, to revive the constitution of Gregory X., which was inserted in the Decretals (lib. i. tit. vi., _de election._ cap. 3).

Julius II.

Since then the laws relating to the conclave have been observed, even during the great schism; the only exception was the election of Martin V., which was performed by the cardinals of the three obediences, to which the council of Constance added five prelates of each of the six nations represented in that assembly. The same was the case up to the 16th century. At this period the Italian republics, later Spain, and finally the other powers, took an intimate interest in the choice of the holder of what was a considerable political power; and each brought more or less honest means to bear, sometimes that of simony. It was against simony that Julius II. directed the bull _Cum tam divino_ (1503), which directed that simoniacal election of the pope should be declared null; that any one could attack it; that men should withdraw themselves from the obedience of a pope thus elected; that simoniacal agreements should be invalid; that the guilty cardinals should be excommunicate till their death, and that the rest should proceed immediately to a new election. The purpose of this measure was good, but the proposed remedy extremely dangerous; it was fortunately never applied. Similarly, Paul IV. endeavoured by severe punishments to check the intriguing and plotting for the election of a new pope while his predecessor was still living; but the bull _Cum secundum_ (1558) was of no effect.

Pius IV.

Gregory XV.

Pius IV. undertook the task of reforming and completing the legislation of the conclave. The bull _In eligendis_ (of October 1st, 1562), signed by all the cardinals, is a model of precision and wisdom. In addition to the points already stated, we may add the following: that every day there was to be a scrutiny, i.e. a solemn voting by specially prepared voting papers (concealing the name of the voter, and to be opened only in case of an election being made at that scrutiny), and that this was to be followed by the "accessit," i.e. a second voting, in which the cardinals might transfer their suffrages to those who had obtained the greatest number of votes in the first. Except in case of urgent matters, the election was to form the whole business of the conclave. The cells were to be assigned by lot. The functionaries of the conclave were to be elected by the secret vote of the Sacred College. The most stringent measures were to be taken to ensure seclusion. The bull _Aeterni Patris_ of Gregory XV. (15th of November 1621) is a collection of minute regulations. In it is the rule compelling each cardinal, before giving his vote, to take the oath that he will elect him whom he shall judge to be the most worthy; it also makes rules for the forms of voting and of the voting papers, for the counting, the scrutiny, and in fact all the processes of the election. A second bull, _Decet Romanum Pontificem_, of the 12th of March 1622, fixed the ceremonial of the conclave with such minuteness that it has not been changed since.

All previous legislation concerning the conclave was codified and renewed by Pius X.'s bull, _Vacante Sede Apostolico_ (Dec. 25, 1904), which abrogates the earlier texts, except Leo XIII.'s constitution _Praedecessores Nostri_ (May 24, 1882), authorizing occasional derogations in circumstances of difficulty, e.g. the death of a pope away from Rome or an attempt to interfere with the liberty of the Sacred College. The bull of Pius X. is rather a codification than a reform, the principal change being the abolition of the scrutiny of accession and the substitution of a second ordinary scrutiny during the same session.

On some occasions exceptional circumstances have given rise to transitory measures. In 1797 and 1798 Pius VI. authorized the cardinals to act contrary to such of the laws concerning the conclave as a majority of them should decide not to observe, as being impossible in practice. Similarly Pius IX., by means of various acts which remained secret up till 1892, had taken the most minute precautions in order to secure a free and rapid election, and to avoid all interference on the part of the secular powers. We know that the conclaves in which Leo XIII. and Pius X. were elected enjoyed the most complete liberty, and the hypothetical measures foreseen by Pius IX. were not applied.

The conclave at Rome.

Until after the Great Schism the conclaves were held in various towns outside of Rome; but since then they have all been held in Rome, with the single exception of the conclave of Venice (1800), and in most cases in the Vatican.

Modern procedure.

There was no place permanently established for the purpose, but removable wooden cells were installed in the various apartments of the palace, grouped around the Sistine chapel, in which the scrutinies took place. The arrangements prepared in the Quirinal in 1823 did duty only three times, and for the most recent conclaves it was necessary to arrange an inner enclosure within the vast but irregular palace of the Vatican. Each cardinal is accompanied by a clerk or secretary, known for this reason as a conclavist, and by one servant only. With the officials of the conclave, this makes about two hundred and fifty persons who enter the conclave and have no further communication with the outer world save by means of turning-boxes. Since 1870 the solemn ceremonies of earlier times have naturally not been seen; for instance the procession which used to celebrate the entry into conclave; or the daily arrival in procession of the clergy and the brotherhoods to enquire at the "rota" (turning-box) of the auditors of the Rota: "Habemusne Pontificem?" and their return accompanied by the chanting of the "_Veni Creator_"; or the "Marshal of the Holy Roman Church and perpetual guardian of the conclave" visiting the churches in state. But a crowd still collects morning and evening in the great square of St Peter's, towards the time of the completion of the vote, to look for the smoke which rises from the burning of the voting-papers after each session; when the election has not been effected, a little straw is burnt with the papers, and the column of smoke then apprises the spectators that they have still no pope. Within the conclave, the cardinals, alone in the common hall, usually the Sistine chapel, proceed morning and evening to their double vote, the direct vote and the "accessit." Sometimes these sessions have been very numerous; for example, in 1740, Benedict XIV. was only elected after 255 scrutinies; on other occasions, however, and notably in the case of the last few popes, a well-defined majority has soon been evident, and there have been but few scrutinies. Each vote is immediately counted by three scrutators, appointed in rotation, the most minute precautions being taken to ensure that the voting shall be secret and sincere. When one cardinal has at last obtained two-thirds of the votes, the dean of the cardinals formally asks him whether he accepts his election, and what name he wishes to assume. As soon as he has accepted, the first "obedience" or "adoration" takes place, and immediately after the first cardinal deacon goes to the _Loggia_ of St Peter's and announces the great news to the assembled people. The conclave is dissolved; on the following day take place the two other "obediences," and the election is officially announced to the various governments. If the pope be not a bishop (Gregory XVI. was not), he is then consecrated; and finally, a few days after his election, takes place the coronation, from which the pontificate is officially dated. The pope then receives the tiara with the triple crown, the sign of his supreme spiritual authority. The ceremony of the coronation goes back to the 9th century, and the tiara, in the form of a high conical cap, is equally ancient (see TIARA).

The right of veto.

In conclusion, a few words should be said with regard to the right of _veto_. In the 16th and 17th centuries the character of the conclaves was determined by the influence of what were then known as the "factions," i.e. the formation of the cardinals into groups according to their nationality or their relations with one of the Catholic courts of Spain, France or the Empire, or again according as they favoured the political policy of the late pope or his predecessor. These groups upheld or opposed certain candidates. The Catholic courts naturally entrusted the cardinals "of the crown," i.e. those of their nation, with the mission of removing, as far as lay in their power, candidates who were distasteful to their party; the various governments could even make public their desire to exclude certain candidates. But they soon claimed an actual right of formal and direct exclusion, which should be notified in the conclave in their name by a cardinal charged with this mission, and should have a decisive effect; this is what has been called the right of veto. We cannot say precisely at what time during the 16th century this transformation of the practice into a right, tacitly accepted by the Sacred College, took place; it was doubtless felt to be less dangerous formally to recognize the right of the three sovereigns each to object to one candidate, than to face the inconvenience of objections, such as were formulated on several occasions by Philip II., which, though less legal in form, might apply to an indefinite number of candidates. The fact remains, however, that it was a right based on custom, and was not supported by any text or written concession; but the diplomatic right was straightforward and definite, and was better than the intrigues of former days. During the 19th century Austria exercised, or tried to exercise, the right of veto at all the conclaves, except that which elected Leo XIII. (1878); it did so again at the conclave of 1903. On the 2nd of August Cardinal Rampolla had received twenty-nine votes, when Cardinal Kolzielsko Puzina, bishop of Cracow, declared that the Austrian government opposed the election of Cardinal Rampolla; the Sacred College considered that it ought to yield, and on the 4th of August elected Cardinal Sarto, who took the name of Pius X. By the bull _Commissum Nobis_ (January 20, 1904), Pius X. suppressed all right of "veto" or "exclusion" on the part of the secular governments, and forbade, under pain of excommunication reserved to the future pope, any cardinal or conclavist to accept from his government the charge of proposing a "veto," or to exhibit it to the conclave under any form.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--The best and most complete work is Lucius Lector, _Le
Conclave, origine, histoire, organisation, legislation ancienne et
moderne_ (Paris, 1894). See also Ferraris, _Prompta Bibliotheca, s. v.
Papa_, art. i.; Moroni, _Dizionario di erudizione
storico-ecclesiastica, s. v. Conclave, Conclavisti, Cella, Elezione,
Esclusiva_; Bouix, _De Curia Romana_, part i. c. x.; _De Papa_, part
vii. (Paris, 1859, 1870); Barbier de Montault, _Le Conclave_ (Paris,
1878). On the conclave of Leo XIII., R. de Cesare, _Conclave di Leone
XIII._ (Rome, 1888). On the conclave of Pius X.: an eye-witness (Card.
Mathieu), _Les Derniers Jours de Leon XIII et le conclave_ (Paris,
1904). See further, for the right of veto: Phillips, _Kirchenrecht_,
t. v. p. 138; Sagmuller, _Die Papstwahlen und die Staate_ (Tubingen,
1890); _Die Papstwahlbullen und das staatliche Recht des Exclusive_
(Tubingen, 1892); Wahrmund, _Ausschliessungsrecht der katholischen
Staaten_ (Vienna, 1888). (A. Bo.*)

CONCORD, a township of Middlesex county, Massachusetts, U.S.A., about 20 m. N.W. of Boston. Pop. (1900) 5652; (1910, U.S. census) 6421. Area 25 sq. m. It is traversed by the Boston & Maine railway. Where the Sudbury and Assabet unite to form the beautiful little Concord river, celebrated by Thoreau, is the village of Concord, straggling, placid and beautiful, full of associations with the opening of the War of Independence and with American literature. Of particular interest is the "Old Manse," built in 1765 for Rev. William Emerson, in which his grandson R. W. Emerson wrote _Nature_, and Hawthorne his _Mosses from an Old Manse_, containing a charming description of the building and its associations. At Concord there is a state reformatory, whose inmates, about 800 in number, are employed in manufacturing various articles, but otherwise the town has only minor business and industrial interests. The introduction of the "Concord" grape, first produced here by Ephraim Bull in 1853, is said to have marked the beginning of the profitable commercial cultivation of table grapes in the United States. Concord was settled and incorporated as a township in 1635, and was (with Dedham) the first settlement in Massachusetts back from the sea-coast. A county convention at Concord village in August 1774 recommended the calling of the first Provincial Congress of Massachusetts--one of the first independent legislatures of America--which assembled here on the 11th of October 1774, and again in March and April 1775. The village became thereafter a storehouse of provisions and munitions of war, and hence became the objective of the British expedition that on the 19th of April 1775 opened with the armed conflict at Lexington (q.v.) the American War of Independence. As the British proceeded to Concord the whole country was rising, and at Concord about 500 minute-men confronted the British regulars who were holding the village and searching for arms and stores. Volleys were exchanged, the British retreated, the minute-men hung on their flanks and from the hillsides shot them down, driving their columns on Lexington. A granite obelisk, erected in 1837, when Emerson wrote his ode on the battle, marks the spot where the first British soldiers fell; while across the stream a fine bionze "Minute-Man" (1875) by D. C. French (a native of Concord) marks the spot where once "the embattled farmers stood and fired the shot heard round the world" (Emerson). Concord was long one of the shire-townships of Middlesex county, losing this honour in 1867. The village is famous as the home of R. W. Emerson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, Henry D. Thoreau, Louisa M. Alcott and her father, A. Bronson Alcott, who maintained here from 1879 to 1888 (in a building still standing) the Concord school of philosophy, which counted Benjamin Peirce, W. T. Harris, Mrs J. W. Howe, T. W. Higginson, Professor William James and Emerson among its lecturers. Emerson, Hawthorne, Thoreau and the Alcotts are buried here in the beautiful Sleepy Hollow Cemetery. Of the various orations (among others one by Edward Everett in 1825) that have been delivered at Concord anniversaries perhaps the finest is that of George William Curtis, delivered in 1875.

See A. S. Hudson, _The History of Concord_, vol. i. (Concord, 1904);
G. B. Bartlett, _Concord: Historic, Literary and Picturesque_ (Boston,
1885); and Mrs J. L. Swayne, _Story of Concord_ (Boston, 1907).

CONCORD, a city and the county-seat of Cabarrus county, North Carolina, U.S.A., on the Rocky river, about 150 m. W.S.W. of Raleigh. Pop. (1890) 4339; (1900) 7910 (1789 negroes); (1910) 8715. It is served by the Southern railway. Concord is situated in a cotton-growing region, and its chief interest is in the manufacture of cotton goods. The city is the seat of Scotia seminary (for negro girls), founded in 1870 and under the care of the Presbyterian Board of Missions for Freedmen, Pittsburgh Pa. Concord was laid out in 1793 and was first incorporated in 1851.

CONCORD, the capital of New Hampshire, U.S.A., and the county-seat of Merrimack county, on both sides of the Merrimac river, about 75 m. N.W. of Boston, Massachusetts. Pop. (1890) 17,004; (1900) 19,632, of whom 3813 were foreign-born; (1910, census) 21,497. Concord is served by the Boston & Maine railway. The area of the city in 1906 was 45.16 sq. m. Concord has broad streets bordered with shade trees; and has several parks, including Penacook, White, Rollins and the Contoocook river. Among the principal buildings are the state capitol, the state library, the city hall, the county court-house, the post-office, a public library (17,000 vols.), the state hospital, the state prison, the Centennial home for the aged, the Margaret Pillsbury memorial hospital, the Rolfe and Rumford asylum for orphan girls, founded by Count Rumford's daughter, and some fine churches, including the Christian Science church built by Mrs Eddy. There are a soldiers' memorial arch, a statue of Daniel Webster by Thomas Ball, and statues of John P. Hale, John Stark, and Commodore George H. Perkins, the last by Daniel C. French; and at Penacook, 6 m. N.W. of Concord, there is a monument to Hannah Dustin (see HAVERHILL). Among the educational institutions are the well-known St Paul's school for boys (Protestant Episcopal, 1853), about 2 m. W. of the city, and St Mary's school for girls (Protestant Episcopal, 1885). From 1847 to 1867 Concord was the seat of the Biblical Institute (Methodist Episcopal), founded in Newbury, Vermont, in 1841, removed to Boston as the Boston Theological Seminary in 1867, and after 1871 a part of Boston University. The city has various manufactures, including flour and grist mill products, silver ware, cotton and woollen goods, carriages, harnesses and leather belting, furniture, wooden ware, pianos and clothing; the Boston & Maine Railroad has a large repair shop in the city, and there are valuable granite quarries in the vicinity. In 1905 Concord ranked third among the cities of the state in the value of its factory products, which was $6,387,372, being an increase of 51.7% since 1900. When first visited by the English settlers, the site of Concord was occupied by Penacook Indians; a trading post was built here about 1660. In 1725 Massachusetts granted the land in this vicinity to some of her citizens; but this grant was not recognized by New Hampshire, whose legislature issued (1727) a grant (the Township of Bow) overlapping the Massachusetts grant, which was known as Penacook or Penny Cook. The New Hampshire grantees undertook to establish here a colony of Londonderry Irish; but the Massachusetts settlers were firmly established by the spring of 1727, Massachusetts definitely assumed jurisdiction in 1731, and in 1734 her general court incorporated the settlement under the name of Rumford. The conflicting rights of Rumford and Bow gave rise to one of the most celebrated of colonial land cases, and although the New Hampshire authorities enforced their claims of jurisdiction, the privy council in 1755 confirmed the Rumford settlers in their possession. In 1765 the name was changed to the "parish of Concord," and in 1784 the town of Concord was incorporated. Here, for some years before the War of American Independence, lived Benjamin Thompson, later Count Rumford. In 1778 and again in 1781-1782 a state constitutional convention met here; the first New Hampshire legislature met at Concord in 1782; the convention which ratified for New Hampshire the Federal Constitution met here in 1788; and in 1808 the state capital was definitely established here. The New Hampshire _Patriot_, founded here in 1808 (and for twenty years edited) by Isaac Hill (1788-1851), who was a member of the United States Senate in 1831-1836, and governor of New Hampshire in 1836-1839, became one of the leading exponents of Jacksonian Democracy in New England. In 1814 the Middlesex Canal, connecting Concord with Boston, was completed. A city charter granted by the legislature in 1849 was not accepted by the city until 1853.

See J. O. Lyford, _The History of Concord, New Hampshire_ (City
History Commission) (2 vols., Concord, 1903); _Concord Town Records,
1732-1820_ (Concord, 1894); J. B. Moore, _Annals of Concord,
1726-1823_ (Concord, 1824); and Nathaniel Bouton, _The History of
Concord_ (Concord, 1856).

CONCORD, BOOK OF (_Liber Concordiae_), the collective documents of the Lutheran confession, consisting of the _Confessio Augustana_, the _Apologia Confessionis Augustanae_, the _Articula Smalcaldici_, the _Catechismi Major et Minor_ and the _Formula Concordiae_. This last was a formula issued on the 25th of June 1580 (the jubilee of the Augsburg Confession) by the Lutheran Church in an attempt to heal the breach which, since the death of Luther, had been widening between the extreme Lutherans and the Crypto-Calvinists. Previous attempts at concord had been made at the request of different rulers, especially by Jacob Andrea with his Swabian Concordia in 1573, and Abel Scherdinger with the Maulbronn Formula in 1575. In 1576 the elector of Saxony called a conference of theologians at Torgau to discuss these two efforts and from them produce a third. The _Book of Torgau_ was evolved, circulated and criticized; a new committee, prominent on which was Martin Chemnitz, sitting at Bergen near Magdeburg, considered the criticisms and finally drew up the _Formula Concordiae_. It consists of (a) the "Epitome," (b) the "Solid Repetition and Declaration," each part comprising twelve articles; and was accepted by Saxony, Wurttemberg, Baden among other states, but rejected by Hesse, Nassau and Holstein. Even the free cities were divided, Hamburg and Lubeck for, Bremen and Frankfort against. Hungary and Sweden accepted it, and so finally did Denmark, where at first it was rejected, and its publication made a crime punishable by death. In spite of this very limited reception the _Formula Concordiae_ has always been reckoned with the five other documents as of confessional authority.

See P. Schaff, _Creeds of Christendom_, i. 258-340, iii. 92-180.

CONCORDANCE (Late Lat. _concordantia_, harmony, from _cum_, with, and _cor_, heart), literally agreement, harmony; hence derivatively a citation of parallel passages, and specifically an alphabetical arrangement of the words contained in a book with citations of the passages in which they occur. Concordances in this last sense were first made for the Bible. Originally the word was only used in this connexion in the plural _concordantiae_, each group of parallel passages being properly a _concordantia_. The Germans distinguish between concordances of things and concordances of words, the former indexing the subject matter of a book ("real" concordance), the latter the words ("verbal" concordance).

The original impetus to the making of concordances was due to the conviction that the several parts of the Bible are consistent with each other, as parts of a divine revelation, and may be combined as harmonious elements in one system of spiritual truth. To Anthony of Padua (1195-1231) ancient tradition ascribes the first concordance, the anonymous _Concordantiae Morales_, of which the basis was the Vulgate. The first authentic work of the kind was due to Cardinal Hugh of St Cher, a Dominican monk (d. 1263), who, in preparing for a commentary on the Scriptures, found the need of a concordance, and is reported to have used for the purpose the services of five hundred of his brother monks. This concordance was the basis of two which succeeded in time and importance, one by Conrad of Halberstadt (fl. c. 1290) and the other by John of Segovia in the next century. This book was published in a greatly improved and amplified form in the middle of the 19th century by David Nutt, of London, edited by T. P. Dutripon. The first Hebrew concordance was compiled in 1437-1445 by Rabbi Isaac Nathan b. Kalonymus of Arles. It was printed at Venice in 1523 by Daniel Bomberg, in Basel in 1556, 1569 and 1581. It was published under the title _Meir Natib_, "The Light of the Way." In 1556 it was translated into Latin by Johann Reuchlin, but many errors appeared in both the Hebrew and the Latin edition. These were corrected by Marius de Calasio, a Franciscan friar, who published a four volume folio _Concordantiae Sacr. Bibl. Hebr. et Latin._ at Rome, 1621, much enlarged, with proper names included. Another concordance based on Nathan's was Johann Buxtorf the elder's _Concordantiae Bibl. Ebraicae nova et artificiosa methodo dispositae_, Basel, 1632. It marks a stage in both the arrangement and the knowledge of the roots of words, but can only be used by those who know the massoretic system, as the references are made by Hebrew letters and relate to rabbinical divisions of the Old Testament. Calasio's concordance was republished in London under the direction of William Romaine in 1747-1749, in four volumes folio, under the patronage of all the monarchs of Europe and also of the pope. In 1754 John Taylor, D.D., a Presbyterian divine in Norwich, published in two volumes the _Hebrew Concordance adapted to the English Bible_, disposed after the manner of Buxtorf. This was the most complete and convenient concordance up to the date of its publication. In the middle of the 19th century Dr Julius Furst issued a thoroughly revised edition of Buxtorf's concordance. The _Hebraischen und chaldaischen Concordanz zu den Heiligen Schriften Alten Testaments_ (Leipzig, 1840) carried forward the development of the concordance in several directions. It gave (1) a corrected text founded on Hahn's Vanderhoogt's Bible; (2) the Rabbinical meanings; (3) explanations in Latin, and illustrations from the three Greek versions, the Aramaic paraphrase, and the Vulgate; (4) the Greek words employed by the Septuagint as renderings of the Hebrew; (5) notes on philology and archaeology, so that the concordance contained a Hebrew lexicon. An English translation by Dr Samuel Davidson was published in 1867. A revised edition of Buxtorf's work with additions from Furst's was published by B. Bar (Stettin, 1862). A new concordance embodying the matter of all previous works with lists of proper names and particles was published by Solomon Mandelkern in Leipzig (1896); a smaller edition of the same, without quotations, appeared in 1900. There are also concordances of Biblical proper names by G. Brecher (Frankfort-on-Main, 1876) and Schusslovicz (Wilna, 1878).

A _Concordance to the Septuagint_ was published at Frankfort in 1602 by Conrad Kircher of Augsburg; in this the Hebrew words are placed in alphabetical order and the Greek words by which they are translated are placed under them. A Septuagint concordance, giving the Greek words in alphabetical order, was published in 1718 in two volumes by Abraham Tromm, a learned minister at Groningen, then in the eighty-fourth year of his age. It gives the Greek words in alphabetical order; a Latin translation; the Hebrew word or words for which the Greek term is used by the Septuagint; then the places where the words occur in the order of the books and chapters; at the end of the quotations from the Septuagint places are given where the word occurs in Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, the other Greek translations of the O. T.; and the words of the Apocrypha follow in each case. Besides an index to the Hebrew and Chaldaic words there is another index which contains a lexicon to the _Hexapla_ of Origen. In 1887 (London) appeared the _Handy Concordance of the Septuagint giving various readings from Codices Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus and Ephraemi, with an appendix of words from Origen's Hexapla, not found in the above manuscripts_, by G. M., without quotations. A work of the best modern scholarship was brought out in 1897 by the Clarendon Press, Oxford, entitled _A Concordance to the Septuagint and the other Greek versions of the Old Testament including the Apocryphal Books_, by Edwin Hatch and H. A. Redpath, assisted by other scholars; this was completed in 1900 by a list of proper names.

_The first Greek concordance_ to the New Testament was published at Basel in 1546 by Sixt Birck or Xystus Betuleius (1500-1554), a philologist and minister of the Lutheran Church. This was followed by Stephen's concordance (1594) planned by Robert Stephens and published by Henry, his son. Then in 1638 came Schmied's [Greek: tamieion], which has been the basis of subsequent concordances to the New Testament. Erasmus Schmied or Schmid was a Lutheran divine who was professor of Greek in Wittenberg, where he died in 1637. Revised editions of the [Greek: tamieion] were published at Gotha in 1717, and at Glasgow in 1819 by the University Press. In the middle of the 19th century Charles Hermann Bruder brought out a beautiful edition (Tauchnitz) with many improvements. The _apparatus criticus_ was a triumph of New Testament scholarship. It collates the readings of Erasmus, R. Stephens' third edition, the Elzevirs, Mill, Bengel, Webster, Knapp, Tittman, Scholz, Lachmann. It also gives a selection from the most ancient patristic MSS. and from various interpreters. No various reading of critical value is omitted. An edition of Bruder with readings of Samuel Prideaux Tregelles was published in 1888 under the editorship of Westcott and Hort. The _Englishman's Greek Concordance of the New Testament_, and the _Englishman's Hebrew and Chaldee Concordance_, are books intended to put the results of the above-mentioned works at the service of those who know little Hebrew or Greek. Every word in the Bible is given in Hebrew or Greek, the word is transliterated, and then every passage in which it occurs is given--the word, however it may be translated, being italicized. They are the work of George V. Wigram assisted by W. Burgh and superintended by S. P. Tregelles, B. Davidson and W. Chalk (1843; 2nd ed. 1860). Another book which deserves mention is, _A Concordance to the Greek Testament with the English version to each word; the principal Hebrew roots corresponding to the Greek words of the Septuagint, with short critical notes and an index_, by John Williams, LL.D., Lond. 1767.

In 1884 Robert Young, author of an analytical concordance mentioned below, brought out a _Concordance to the Greek New Testament with a dictionary of Bible Words and Synonyms_: this contains a concise concordance to eight thousand changes made in the Revised Testament. Another important work of modern scholarship is the _Concordance to the Greek Testament_, edited by the Rev. W. F. Moulton and A. E. Geden, according to the texts adopted by Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf, and the English revisers.

The first concordance to the English version of the New Testament was published in London, 1535, by Thomas Gybson. It is a black-letter volume entitled _The Concordance of the New Testament most necessary to be had in the hands of all soche as delyte in the communicacion of any place contayned in ye New Testament_.

The first English concordance of the entire Bible was John Marbeck's, _A Concordance, that is to saie, a worke wherein by the order of the letters of the A.B.C. ye maie redely find any worde conteigned in the whole Bible, so often as it is there expressed or mentioned_, Lond. 1550. Although Robert Stephens had divided the Bible into verses in 1545, Marbeck does not seem to have known this and refers to the chapters only. In 1550 also appeared Walter Lynne's translation of the concordance issued by Bullinger, Jude, Pellican and others of the Reformers. Other English concordances were published by Cotton, Newman, and in abbreviated forms by John Downham or Downame (cd. 1652), Vavasor Powell (1617-1670), Jackson and Samuel Clarke (1626-1701). In 1737 Alexander Cruden (q.v.), a London bookseller, born and educated in Aberdeen, published his _Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, to which is added a concordance to the books called Apocrypha_. This book embodied, was based upon and superseded all its predecessors. Though the first edition was not remunerative, three editions were published during Cruden's life, and many since his death. Cruden's work is accurate and full, and later concordances only supersede his by combining an English with a Greek and Hebrew concordance. This is done by the _Critical Greek and English Concordance_ prepared by C. F. Hudson, H. A. Hastings and Ezra Abbot, LL.D., published in Boston, Mass., and by the _Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament_, by E. L. Bullinger, 1892. The _Interpreting Concordance to the New Testament_, edited by James Gall, shows the Greek original of every word, with a glossary explaining the Greek words of the New Testament, and showing their varied renderings in the Authorized Version. The most convenient of these is _Young's Analytical Concordance_, published in Edinburgh in 1879, and since revised and reissued. It shows (1) the original Hebrew or Greek of any word in the English Bible; (2) the literal and primitive meaning of every such original word; (3) thoroughly reliable parallel passages. There is a _Students' Concordance to the Revised Version of the New Testament_ showing the changes embodied in the revision, published under licence of the universities; and a concordance to the Revised Version by J. A. Thoms for the Christian Knowledge Society.

Biblical concordances having familiarized students with the value and use of such books for the systematic study of an author, the practice of making concordances has now become common. There are concordances to the works of Shakespeare, Browning and many other writers. (D. Mn.)

CONCORDAT (Lat. _concordatum_, agreed upon, from _con-_, together, and _cor_, heart), a term originally denoting an agreement between ecclesiastical persons or secular persons, but later applied to a pact concluded between the ecclesiastical authority and the secular authority on ecclesiastical matters which concern both, and, more specially, to a pact concluded between the pope, as head of the Catholic Church, and a temporal sovereign for the regulation of ecclesiastical affairs in the territory of such sovereign. It is to concordats in this later sense that this article refers.

No one now questions the profound distinction that exists between the two powers, spiritual and temporal, between the church and the state. Yet these two societies are none the less in inevitable relation. The same men go to compose both; and the church, albeit pursuing a spiritual end, cannot dispense with the aid of temporal property, which in its nature depends on the organization of secular society. It follows of necessity that there are some matters which may be called "mixed," and which are the legitimate concern of the two powers, such as church property, places of worship, the appointment and the emoluments of ecclesiastical dignitaries, the temporal rights and privileges of the secular and regular clergy, the regulation of public worship, and the like. The existence of such mixed matters gives rise to inevitable conflicts of jurisdiction, which may lead, and sometimes have led, to civil war. It is, therefore, to the general interest that all these matters should be settled pacifically, by a common accord; and hence originated those conventions between the two powers which are known by the significant name of concordat, the official name being _pactum concordatum_ or _solemnis conventio_. In theory these agreements may result from the spontaneous and pacific initiative of the contracting parties, but in reality their object has almost always been to terminate more or less acute conflicts and remedy more or less disturbed situations. It is for this reason that concordats always present a clearly marked character of mutual concession, each of the two powers renouncing certain of its claims in the interests of peace.

For the purposes of a concordat the state recognizes the official _status_ of the church and of its ministers and tribunals; guarantees it certain privileges; and sometimes binds itself to secure for it subsidies representing compensation for past spoliations. The pope on his side grants the temporal sovereign certain rights, such as that of making or controlling the appointment of dignitaries; engages to proceed in harmony with the government in the creation of dioceses or parishes; and regularizes the situation produced by the usurpation of church property &c. The great advantage of concordats--indeed their principal utility--consists in transforming necessarily unequal unilateral claims into contractual obligations analogous to those which result from an international convention. Whatever the obligations of the state towards the ecclesiastical society may be in pure theory, in practice they become more precise and stable when they assume the nature of a bilateral convention by which the state engages itself with regard to a third party. And reciprocally, whatever may be the absolute rights of the ecclesiastical society over the appointment of its dignitaries, the administration of its property, and the government of its adherents, the exercise of these rights is limited and restricted by the stable engagements and concessions of the concordatory pact, which bind the head of the church with regard to the nations.

A concordat may assume divers forms,--historically, three. The most common in modern times is that of a diplomatic convention debated between the authorized mandatories of the high contracting parties and subsequently ratified by the latter; as, for example, the French concordat of 1801. Or, secondly, the concordat may result from two identical separate acts, one emanating from the pope and the other from the sovereign; this was the form of the first true concordat, that of Worms, in 1122. A third form was employed in the case of the concordat of 1516 between Leo X. and Francis I. of France; a papal bull published the concordat in the form of a concession by the pope, and it was afterwards accepted and published by the king as law of the country. The shades which distinguish these three forms are not without significance, but they in no way detract from the contractual character of concordats.