Concerning the life of St Francis and the beginnings of the order, the chief documents that come under discussion are: the two _Lives_ by Thomas of Celano (1228 and 1248 respectively; Eng. trans. with introduction by A.G. Ferrers Howell, 1908), of which the only critical edition is that of Friar Ed. d'Alencon (1906); the so-called _Legenda trium sociorum_; the _Speculum perfectionis_, discovered by Paul Sabatier and edited in 1898 (Eng. trans. by Sebastian Evans, _Mirror of Perfection_, 1899). Sabatier's theory as to the nature of these documents was, in brief, that the _Speculum perfectionis_ was the first of all the Lives of the saint, written in 1227 by Br. Leo, his favourite and most intimate disciple, and that the _Legenda 3 Soc._ is what it claims to be--the handiwork of Leo and the two other most intimate companions of Francis, compiled in 1246; these are the most authentic and the only true accounts, Thomas of Celano's Lives being written precisely in opposition to them, in the interests of the majority of the order that favoured mitigations of the Rule especially in regard to poverty. For ten years the domain of Franciscan origins was explored and discussed by a number of scholars; and then the whole ground was reviewed by Professor W. Goetz of Munich in a study entitled _Die Quellen zur Geschichte des hl. Franz von Assisi_ (1904). His conclusions are substantially the same as those of Pere van Ortroy, the Bollandist, and Friar Lemmens, an Observant Franciscan, and are the direct contrary of Sabatier's: the _Legenda 3 Soc._ is a forgery; the _Speculum perfectionis_ is a compilation made in the 14th century, also in large measure a forgery, but containing an element (not to be precisely determined) derived from Br. Leo; on the other hand, Thomas of Celano's two Lives are free from the "tendencies" ascribed to them by Sabatier, and that of 1248 was written with the collaboration of Leo and the other companions; thus the best sources of information are those portions of the _Speculum_ that can with certainty be carried back to Br. Leo, and the Lives by Thomas of Celano, especially the second _Life_. Goetz's criticism of the documents is characterized by exceeding carefulness and sobriety. Of course he does not suppose that his conclusions are in all respects final; but his investigations show that the time has not yet come when a biography of St Francis could be produced answering to the demands of modern historical criticism. The official life of St Francis is St Bonaventura's _Legenda_, published in a convenient form by the Franciscans of Quaracchi (1898); Goetz's estimate of it (op. cit.) is much more favourable than Sabatier's.