though he did not carry his opinions so far as to suffer martyrdom in his own person.  Samson was now accused of heresy[2] and sacrilege, as has been already mentioned.  Hostegesis forced his views on the assembled bishops by the help of the secular arm, and a sentence of anathema and deposition was accordingly pronounced against the unfortunate Abbot.[3] One of the apparently consenting bishops was Valentius, Bishop of Cordova, but his judgement had evidently been coerced, for after the close of the council he sounded the other consenting bishops, and some who had not attended, as to their opinions, and found that most of them were ready to affirm Samson’s orthodoxy, and a memorial was drawn up to that effect This action of Valentius’ brought upon him also a sentence of deposition, and he was succeeded by Stephanus Flaccus,[4]—­the election of the latter being quite informal, as no metropolitan assisted thereat,[5] and neither the clergy nor laymen of his diocese made a petition in his favour.

    [1] Samson, “Apol.,” ii.  Pref.

[2] On the ground, among others, that he recognised “nescio quam similitudines (besides the Trinity) non creaturas sed creatores.”  These appear (chap, ix.) to have been merely qualities, such as wisdom, etc.  See Samson, chap. iii.

    [3] “Indiscreta simplicitate et metu impiorum in superbiae
    fascibus sedentium.”—­Ibid.  Samson was rendered incapable of
    holding office, or even of belonging to the Church.—­Ibid.

    [4] In 864.

    [5] See above, p. 8.

This fresh deposition was formally sanctioned by a new council, held at the church of St Acislus; Flaccus, and some of those who had sided with Valentius, but were now terrified into submission, being in attendance; while the places of those who refused to come were taken by Jews and Moslems.[1] These high-handed proceedings nearly led to an open rupture in the Church.[2]

In 914 a council is said to have been held (but on doubtful authority) by Orontius of Toledo,[3] and twenty years later by Basilius of Cordova.  These would fall under the reign of the greatest of the Umeyyade Khalifs of Spain.[4]

    [1] Sayones (?) in the Latin.  Samson, chap. iii.

    [2] Ibid., sec. 10.

    [3] “Pseudo Luit,” sec. 328.

    [4] Ibid. sec. 341.

CHAPTER VII.

SPAIN UNDER ABDURRAHMAN III.

Abdurrahman III., Annasir Lidinillah (912-961), may be looked upon as the Solomon of the Spanish Sultans.  Succeeding to the throne when quite a youth, to the exclusion of his uncles, the sons of the late Sultan, he found the country torn by innumerable factions, and the king’s power openly defied by rebels, Arab, Berber, and Christian.  In person, and through his generals, he put down all these rebels, and though not uniformly successful against the Christians in