ubique terrarum_ ... et intelligit festivitates præcipuas, _dies
Dominicos_, et alios dies festivos."--Lyndwood, _Prov._, p. 21., not.
e., ed. Oxon. 1679.

Though Lyndwood himself, as I understand him, seems to doubt the cardinal's
statement, that the payment could be _enforced_, unless sanctioned by local
custom.

Ducange, in v. "Denarius," 8vo. ed., Adel. 1774, says, the "Denarius de
Palmâ" and "Denarius Dominicalis" were the same:

"Habebit (vicarius) cum eis victum suum competentem, et ad vestes sibi
emendas XL. solidos Andegavenses, et _Denarium singulis diebus
Dominicis ecclesiasticâ consuetudine offerendum_."

On this extract from a charter he observes:

"Erat itaque _Denarius de Palmâ_, ille qui singulis Diebus Dominicis et
[lege à] fidelibus offerrebatur. Cur autem dictus 'de Palmâ' non
constat, nisi forte sic dictus fuerit quod in manum seu _palmam_
traderetur." _Denarius Dominicalis_, idem.--Arest. MS. a. 1407.

It would seem also from his definition to be the same as the payment called
"Denaria Sacramentorum," that is:

"iidem denarii qui _singulis offerrebantur Dominicis_, ideoque
Sacramentorum dicti, quod tempore Sacrosancti Missæ Sacrificii, pro
excellentiâ interdum nudè appellati Sacramentum, a fidelibus
offerrentur."--_Annal. Bened._, t. iv. p. 466., n. 80. ad annum 1045.