On Saint Eleutherius's Aecanan Pontificate, and the errors arisen from ignorance of it. Are his Relics there?
Eleutherius, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Anthia the mother, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Parthenius, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Calocerus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Febus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Proculus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Apollonius, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Fortunatus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Crispinus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Expeditus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Mappalicus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Victorinus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
Gagus, Martyr at Rome (Saint)
By D. P.
[36] The solemnity of the principal cult, which Saint Eleutherius the Bishop
had most anciently at Constantinople, Saint Eleutherius Bishop
son of Antia the Consular matron, has made it that those by whom
we think the legend of the same Saints was first written,
from the information found about them among the Romans, we think should believe this among other things:
that he was immediately after his consecration given to
the Illyrians, for by no other title is he known to the Greeks than
Bishop of the Illyrians. Their right is favored in their Martyrologies
by Rabanus, Notker, and the author of the spurious Bede, when
they write that he was ordained Bishop at Aquileia: given as a herald of faith to the Illyrians because, as the Poet Ausonius sang,
"Aquileia thrown up against the Illyrian mountains,"
it could to some extent be counted as belonging to Illyricum. Since however
the Acts, which make him Bishop of Aecana, although, like the rest,
apocryphal, the antiquity is shown to be the greatest, from
the consensus of the very oldest martyrologies following those Acts;
we thought it could be granted to the people of Aecana, that among them
imbued with sacred letters and adorned with the Presbyterate, from their
own Bishop, who wished him as his successor, he was sent to Rome to be ordained
by him who then held the See of Peter; for from him almost
all Italy, even in the first centuries, received its Bishops. at the petition of the people of Aecana he could have been ordained
Certainly if the mother Antia sent her only and still young son,
who on account of the brightness of his lineage could not at Rome
have been so educated for the ministry of the church without incurring the eyes
of persecutors, for the cause of safer education she sent him to Apulia,
she can be believed to have followed an example customary in those times; since
we have from the Acts of Saint Sebastian that Pope Caius
was the author to those Christians who were less strong for Martyrdom,
that they should withdraw into Campania; where, as also in the neighboring
Apulia, Christians had quiet, if not perpetual,
at least interrupted by rarer and less vehement storms,
even when the persecution was at its height at Rome and in the Roman territory.
[37] Their city is now called Troia. With this supposed, or indulgently conceded beyond full proof,
it is to be explained what Aecana was. We gave
on February 11, from various Manuscripts, a double discovery of Saint Secundus the Bishop,
whom Troia, the Episcopal city of Apulia in the present
Capitanata, venerates as Patron, together with Saints Eleutherius and
Pontianus the Pontiffs and Martyrs, and Anastasius the Confessor:
and in that place we have treated at length of the aforesaid city of Troia,
explaining on what occasion it was founded by the Greeks, and intercepted by Saint
Henry the Emperor; teaching this especially
(as Guaiferius the Cassinese monk there relates in n. 4):
that it was first called Ecana, by others Aecana, Hecana, and Ecananum;
then, that those whom Pliny book 3 chapter 11 names Aecani, are
the townsmen of this place; and that concerning them in an ancient inscription
these words are read: Cur. Reip. Aecanorum: For Aecana indeed that Ferrarius teaches,
in the old Itinerary of Antoninus and the Peutinger Tables
they are called Aecas or Escas. These things need not now be repeated or
confirmed at more length; for they suffice thus briefly indicated
for understanding how Saint Eleutherius in the Acts cited at note a
is said to have been destined to the Apulian city of Hecana;
and again in the same Acts at note u they are said "from that city
of Hecana, in which (more truly 'for which') he had been ordained Bishop,
many followed him, and transmitted the relics of Saints
Eleutherius and Anthia to their own country."
In which place in Mombritius it is read: "from the city of Henechum
where he was Bishop." In the Manuscript Passional of Mount Oliveto among
the Neapolitans it is said he was Bishop in the city of Equa
in Apulia, or certainly Equum as it is handed down in the Syracusan Manuscript.
In the History of the Translation Saint Eleutherius is named
Bishop of the city of Aecana, which is now called Troia.
[38] Hence those who in Gaul and Germany wrote Martyrologies,
since the said city either no longer existed, with the name wrongly written. or
because what was called by the ancients Hecana, Aecana, or Equa,
was then called Troia, very easily erred, and
led others into greater darkness. It is found in some as Nesanum, In the Manuscript of Dijon,
which is some genuine supplement of Bede,
and in another Roman-Franco Manuscript obtained by us in Paris,
Nesanum of Apulia is ascribed in place of Hecana
of Apulia. Others more distortedly said Mesaenam, Misanam,
Mesenam, Messanam, the city of Apulia.
Thus Usuard, Ado, Notker, Bellinus,
Greven, Canisius, Molanus, and others. But omitting
mention of Apulia, Galesinius with the present Roman Martyrology
attributed it to Messana. Others on the contrary, omitting
the name of the Episcopal city, wrote that the Bishop was ordained
in Apulia, Messana of Apulia and that the citizens of Apulia transferred the bodies
to their city: so with several Manuscripts Peter de Natalibus book 4 chapter 61. But who
knows whether among those too, who wrote that Eleutherius was ordained
Bishop at Aquileia, the name of Aquileia has not crept in in place of what they had perhaps read "Apuliae,"
or corruptly "Apulejae"? So thought Cardinal Baronius
in his notes to the Roman Martyrology. Maurolycus
the Sicilian in his Martyrology, or Misenum of Campania. "at Misenum of Campania":
"but by conjecture," says Baronius, "because
Misenum is situated in Campania, and not in Apulia:
just as also those reading Messana thought it should be understood
of Messana the noble city in Sicily, whom
it is manifest to have been deluded; for neither at Miseni
in Campania, nor at Messana in Sicily is there any
mention of this Bishop Eleutherius. If therefore by the consent
of all the Latins the place should be placed in Apulia;
since neither Misenum nor Mesana can be found in that province,
we are led by conjecture that in place of
Messana should be read Messapia, which is a town
near Tarentum." Thus Baronius. But Messapia
is not so much a town as a region of the Salentinians
distinct from Apulia. But what need of conjecture,
when Aecana in the ancient Manuscripts is clearly indicated,
and what this is already appears from what has been said?
[39] Among some Canna Another error crept in among some, derived from
the etymology of the name Eleutherius; for what in Greek
is eleutheros, in Latin is called ingenuus, liber, liberalis;
whence they made a Saint Liberalis, and ascribed to him all the Acts
of Saint Eleutherius. So did Peter de Natalibus
book 2 chapter 20, who writes that he was Bishop of Canne
in Apulia, namely because Aecana and
Canna differ little. Following Peter, and on the day
December 30, on which he himself had referred Saint Liberalis of Canne,
they inscribed the same in their Martyrologies with the same
eulogy, Greven, Maurolycus, Galesinius,
Canisius, Ghinius. Ughelli in volume VII of Italia Sacra
published the Bishops of Canne, but found no one
named Liberalis, who is certainly none other than the
Eleutherius mentioned in this place, Bishop of Aecana, not Canne.
Ferrarius in his Catalog of Saints of Italy,
perhaps to escape the said objection, writes "Bishop of Canosa";
but in the Catalog of Saints
who are not in the Roman Martyrology afterwards written, or Canosa.
he again writes "Bishop of Canne," citing
also Paulus Regius and David Rhomaeus on the Saints
of the Kingdom of Naples. But these, without any examination,
followed Peter de Natalibus, and wished with one who was erring
to wander. Meanwhile Ferrarius leaves the matter to be discussed
by others, as the abundance of writers does not
supply; which will not be lacking to one reading this our account.
[40] Some take Messana of Sicily, The whole controversy could be ended, unless Bonfiglius
in the History of Sicily and Messina; Melchior
Inchofer, in *The Truth of the Letter of the Blessed Virgin Mary to the
People of Messina Vindicated*, chapter 36; Octavius Cajetanus,
in the Martyrology of Sicily and in the Lives of the Sicilian Saints;
and Philip Ferrarius, in the Catalog of Saints
of Italy, had assigned the same to Messana of Sicily; and that
with such confidence that it seems there could be no doubt about it.
But Roch Pirrus, in his Notice of the Messina Church
page 254 and following, broadly rejects these
authors' opinions; which, since this our elucidation has been seen,
another can present more briefly. Pirrus shows
that the first Bishop given to the Messinans was Eucarpus about
the year of Christ 500; and ridicules those who say Saint Eleutherius
is the same as him who is Bacchylus to others.
To us their opinion seems so much the more infirm and less
worthy of refutation, because Bacchylus himself,
as well as Eleutherius, was always unknown to the somewhat
older Messinans. Certainly if of either, as
Bishop of Messina, any notice had been in the old
records of the church or in any other monuments,
the Abbot of Messina and most diligent investigator of the affairs of his country,
Maurolycus, would not have failed to insert their names as Bishops of
Messina into his Martyrology; nor would he have transmitted
Eleutherius to Misenum of Campania, as we said above.
The rest may be read in Pirrus.
[41] The bodies of the Martyrs neither at Aecana, Let it remain therefore, if Eleutherius was ordained Bishop for any
other than the Illyrians, which the Greeks neither deny nor affirm,
that he was ordained for the people of Aecana: some of whom, having accompanied him to Rome,
could be believed to have carried the body back there, as is read
in the Acts described among them, unless those Acts in our judgment had been received from the people of Rieti
and through them from the Greeks, both of whom
claimed Eleutherius's body for themselves, and proving their claim by ancient possession
rather than by the faith of the Acts, which is slight. This
possession therefore the people of Aecana gratuitously arrogated to themselves,
by substituting the name of their city for the name of Illyricum, which alone
was read among the Greeks. nor at Rieti, but in the Roman territory first buried. Moreover since the same Greeks say nothing other
than that the bodies were secretly carried off from the place of martyrdom by the Illyrians,
and by them and by the Romans with common zeal were buried;
we cannot assent either to the people of Rieti that the first burial of the Martyrs was anywhere other
than in the Roman territory; from which afterwards, in
the full peace of the Church, being dug up, they were taken partly to Constantinople partly
to Rieti; of which also, either then or afterwards, afterwards they were shared with various places: other provinces
participated; in particular Campania, where among the people of Terracina
we have said the patronage of Saints Eleutherius and Anthia is vigorous;
where there is also Mons Virginis between Capua and Benevento,
as our Beatillus taught us (whom on geographical maps
we have not found, unless perhaps under the name of Saint Mary
della Grotta), and in it the body, that is the relics, of Saint Anthia. In like
manner I might easily believe that some portion of the said relics
also came to the people of Aecana, if they did not have
those Relics of Saint Eleutherius, which the Trojans now possess and think
to be those of the Aecana Bishop, not as ones deposited among them from antiquity,
but as brought from Tivoli in the year 1105.
[42] which however are now held at Troia as relics of Saint Eleutherius We have the history of the Translation, both of these and
of the Relics of Saint Pontianus the Pope and of Saint Anastasius the Confessor,
written by Roffredus, the Precentor of the Trojan church, an eyewitness,
who doubted nothing but that he, of whom the discussion is, was the Bishop of Aecana.
But since by no indication can I discover
that anything of his body was ever possessed by the people of Tivoli,
and a just cause occurs for suspecting that, no less
than Saint Pontianus, Saints Eleutherius and Anastasius were Roman
Pontiffs, whose remains
were brought to Tivoli from the city of Rome; I am forced to fear lest only the affection
toward him who was believed to have been educated and ordained at Aecana, now Troia,
brought from Tivoli in the year 1105 persuaded the Trojans that he whose bones
they had received from Tivoli was their Eleutherius, without
any other proof.
[43] A native of Tivoli was Saint Simplicius the Pope, elevated in the year 467
to the Apostolic See, of whom we treated on March 2, and whose
Relics are asserted by Baronius to have been buried at Tivoli, which I should easily understand of
the whole body, since no Roman church
claims him for itself. They believe and worship him as the one who consecrated
the image of the Savior in their Cathedral church.
Why should we not suspect the same man was solicitous
about his own country, to be enriched by sacred Relics, they seem to be of the Roman Pontiff,
especially if there he ordered himself to be buried?
and that he took them from the bodies of his Predecessor Pontiffs Eleutherius,
Pontianus, and Anastasius? The Relics certainly, afterwards brought to Troia, are scarcely
otherwise called in the course of the aforesaid history than "Saints
Eleutherius and Pontianus the Pontiffs and Martyrs, and
Anastasius the Confessor," as supposed a Pontiff, for "Brother
and Co-Bishop Eleutherius" is said to have accompanied Pontianus
in the Translation. Nor does it matter that Anastasius
the Pope is thought to have died on April 27, while the Trojans
celebrate the feast, as they received it to be celebrated from the people of Tivoli,
on September 12: for this could have been the day of the translation. Yet not
in this month of April shall we give the History of the said Translation,
nor even on March 26 at the memory of Saint Eleutherius the Pope;
but we shall reserve it for November 19, when Saint Pontianus
is venerated, concerning whom not even the Trojans themselves think otherwise
than we do; and they have the relics themselves in wooden gilded statues,
with silver heads and hands; whence the more easily
they will admit, what they call bodies are only parts of bodies,
and perhaps very small.