ON STS. AFER AND THE OTHER MARTYRS
AT AUGSBURG.
In the year 304.
HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.
Their cult legitimately proved; its obscure beginnings.
Afer, Martyr at Augsburg (S.)
Other Martyrs in the same place
BY THE AUTHOR P. B.
In the Martyrology composed in German by Walasser, and published at Dillingen in the years 1573 and 1599, Their birthday is referred to this day; although it is transferred after the other announcements of this day this next-to-last is placed: Likewise of St. Afer the martyr; who was the paternal uncle of St. Afra (of whom below at the VII day of this month it is treated) and suffered martyrdom at Augsburg. Ferrarius agrees in the General Catalogue: At Augsburg, of St. Afer, martyr, paternal uncle of St. Afra. But in the Calendar prefixed to the proper Offices of the diocese of Augsburg, published at Dillingen in the year 1638, at the same day he is not reported alone, in these words: Of Afer, and of the other Martyrs of Augsburg, Double: then in its own place this Rubric is read prefixed to the Office: On this day also (V Aug.) falls the feast of Sts. Afer and the other Martyrs of Augsburg, Double: which is always transferred to a day not impeded by a feast of nine lessons (namely to the IX day of August, according to Stengel in the History of Augsburg written in German, pages 17 and 159). And all things are said from the common of many Martyrs, except those which are here proper: namely the Collect, and the fourth lesson of the second nocturn, which run thus:
[2] Collect. Almighty and everlasting God, who willed to establish and to adorn the beginnings of this your church with the blood of blessed Afer and of your other Martyrs, The Office; mercifully grant that we who rejoice in their glorious confession may, by their intercession, be able with free minds to follow perpetual constancy in your faith. Through our Lord. In the second nocturn, LESSON IV: Afer, paternal uncle of blessed Afra, led to the faith of Christ by St. Narcissus the bishop, together with Hilaria and others of the household and domestics of the same and of St. Afra, being butchered by the hands of the impious, (as is believed) for an example of terror, obtained the palm of martyrdom in the confession of that same faith at Augsburg, on the Nones of August. On which day the church of Augsburg venerates with pious celebration also the memory of the other holy Martyrs who in the same city, the persecution of the emperor Diocletian raging, before St. Afra's martyrdom, poured out their blood for Christ's name; whose names are known to God alone. It is remarkable that no mention is here made of relics; since indeed in the cathedral church, on the testimony of Corbinian Khamm, Hierarchy of Augsburg, part 1, page 487, is preserved a Head of St. Afer, paternal uncle of St. Afra.
[3] Since the Roman Congregation, as is clear from the Preface, approved the use of this cult and Legend among the proper Offices of Augsburg, there is no reason why anyone should hesitate at least about the legitimate antiquity of either. But if anyone should require ancient monuments by which the beginning of either might in some way be determined, we are compelled to confess that we have not thus far obtained them: for concerning St. Afer, paternal uncle of St. Afra, and suffering at Augsburg before Afra, there is not one word in the Acts of St. Afra, whether in the Manuscripts, as many as we have seen, or in the printed copies, except in the Velserian alone, in which these things are read: But blessed Afer, paternal uncle of St. Afra (whose day of passion is venerated the day before that of the martyr Afra herself) is to be believed to have been punished beforehand for an example of terror to her and to others: but (See how much credit Stengel deserves in the Chronicle of Augsburg, book 1, chapter 7, where he says Afer was beheaded) by what kind of martyrdom, is not read. But Velser himself candidly confesses in his annotations how much he judged should be attributed to this text and to the other which follows it in the same place, concerning St. Dionysius, when he says: The things which follow concerning St. Afer and St. Dionysius are of another author (than the Acts of St. Afra are), of another age: and again: You see that, besides the holy man's (Afer's) name, all the rest is uncertain: besides, when he carps at the author for asserting that Afer is venerated the day before Afra, whereas it should have been said "two days before": finally when he subjoins: He acted the good man, whoever ascribed these chapters concerning Afer and Dionysius: for he confesses that he brings forward what he himself has gathered and thought out, read nowhere. But each man according to his own judgment will withdraw or add credit to conjectures. I am unwillingly brought to assert those things which are destitute of the testimony of antiquity.
[4] nay, our St. Afer seems to have been long unknown, What of this, that not even the name of any St. Afer whatever is found inscribed in most of the old Martyrologies? Certainly the old Roman reports none, Wandelbert none, Ado none, Usuard none; and, what is stronger, not even Raban Maur himself, although he was already then (as is manifest from his preface, in Mabillon's Analecta, volume 4, page 326) archbishop of Mainz; and accordingly (according to Pagi's Critique at the year 852, number 5, and Serarius, Affairs of Mainz, book 1, chapter 23) metropolitan of the church of Augsburg. Wonderful indeed, if so learned an investigator of the Saints could either be ignorant of a St. Afer known and venerated in his own province — the paternal uncle of St. Afra, a martyr most well known to him — or could wish to pass him over in silence. And Notker indeed acknowledged some holy Afer and martyr on this very day; but as having suffered At Augusta of Euphratensis. Tell me, would he who sought a Saint of this name even to the farthest part of Syria, and alone of absolutely all Martyrologists found him, not have seen this Augsburg Saint of ours, so near to the monastery of St. Gall where he wrote, not have commemorated him, if he had been known at Augsburg about the tenth century, or openly venerated?
[5] even at Augsburg, at least down to the 12th century: But neither does that Afer of theirs seem to have become known to the people of Augsburg themselves before the twelfth century: for thus at this day runs the Augsburg Martyrology of that age of the monastery of St. Udalric, long ago published by us at the end of June: On the Nones of August, of Eraclus, Herena, Afer, Dasius. At Autun, of Cassian, etc.: where we have Afer indeed, but with no indication that he is of Augsburg; nay, rather with an open argument that he is far different, since, as a companion in the contest, he is mingled with three others who, according to the most ancient codices of the Hieronymian Martyrology in Florentinius, suffered at Axiopolis in Lower Moesia. And indeed one may observe that Saints whose special memory and cult then flourished at Augsburg are noted otherwise in that Augsburg Martyrology: for, not to go far afield, thus is St. Udalric announced: IV Non. July. At Augsburg (then in red letters) N. of St. Udalric, bishop — that is, unless I am mistaken, the birthday of St. Udalric the bishop. Where you see that the memory of the city of Augsburg is by no means neglected by the Augsburg Martyrology. So again St. Afra: VII Ides of August (then a rubric) At Augsburg of the Vindelici, of St. Afra, martyr. Why was nothing similar observed on this day, if that St. Afer whom he mentions was in any way held to belong to the church of Augsburg? Why in the Augsburg Martyrology, if he properly belonged to it, is he announced no otherwise than in the Labbean one in the same place, and the Gellonensian in d'Achery, to which he belongs by no singular title?
[6] Someone may object that there is no lack of old Martyrologies in which on this same day the birthday of St. Afer the martyr of Augsburg is expressed distinctly enough; as in the Fontanelle copy in Florentinius: On the Nones of August… In the city of Augusta, the Passion of St. Afer. The same words are read on the same day in the Manuscript copy of the queen of Sweden, published by us among the abridged Hieronymian ones; the same also in the supplement to Bede and Florus, according to the Barberini codex. Nay, Notker even contends that in this place not "Afra" but "Afer" should be read, and that Afra should be remitted to the seventh day of August. Besides, unless on this day "the Passion of St. Afer" be read, since on the next day and the day after in most Hieronymian ones "the Passion of St. Afra" is announced, it will have to be said that the same thing is repeated on three continuous days in certain copies; which seems inept.
[7] I answer to the first, that the Hieronymian Martyrology, as it is the most ancient of all, in this place discrepant and corrupt, so it is everywhere in its copies the most faulty of all: and accordingly nothing can be decided from one copy, if others are discordant. But here the Corbie one is discordant, in which most expressly in the same Florentinius it is read at this day: In the city of Augusta, the Passion (not of St. Afer, but) of St. Afra. The same is had on the same day among us in the abridged Rheinau and Reichenau ones. In the most ancient Epternach one and in several others on the V day of August there is not one word either of St. Afer or of St. Afra. In the Manuscript of the queen of Sweden the fault is manifest: for unless you say that on this day one should read in it "the Passion of St. Afra" for "of St. Afer," you will be forced to confess that no mention at all is made in it anywhere of St. Afra, whether on this day or on the following ones; which is against all Martyrologies of every class: for very few report Afer on these days; all report Afra, and many indeed repeatedly, as being most celebrated. Then this reading, In the city of Augusta, the Passion of St. Afer, is either ancient and genuine, or it is not: if the first, why did neither Raban nor Usuard, both of whom used Hieronymian sources, employ it; why did they consecrate no memory anywhere in their work to St. Afer? If the second, it must surely be rejected. The supplements of Bede and Florus are more recent; and to the Barberini one is opposed in the same place the Dijon one in these words: In the province of Rhaetia, in the city of Augusta, the Birthday of St. Afra; who, when she was a pagan, etc.
[8] I answer to the second, that Notker nevertheless in this matter hinders rather than helps the people of Augsburg; since he places that St. Afer of his, as has been said, and even so explained by Notker of another St. Afer; at Augusta of Euphratensis; which is a province, not a city, in my judgment at least; or if those who say it was also a city shall have shown it, they certainly will not be able to remove it far from the Euphrates: Notker therefore knew no Afer as martyr among the Vindelici nearest him: but whence he produced that man of Euphratensis, known nowhere else, who could divine? If there is room for conjecture, I for my part should suspect that Notker fell upon Hieronymian codices not very unlike the Florentinian ones, in which he read on the V day of Aug.: In the city of Augusta, the Passion of St. Afer; or (as the Corbie one has): In the city of Augusta, the Passion of St. Afra; on the VI day of Aug.: The Passion of St. Afra; on the VII day of Aug.: In the province of Rhaetia, in the city of Augusta, the Birthday of St. Afra; or (as it is in the Corbie one): In the province of Rhaetia, in the city
of Augusta, the Birthday of St. Afer. But because the passion or birthday of one and the same Saint cannot really fall on different days, hence he may have judged that his codices should be so purged that to each day there should correspond a different birthday of a different Martyr: and to the fifth day indeed the birthday of St. Afer, who suffered not in the city of Augusta of the Vindelici (since about him, though so near, he had been able to find out nothing), but nevertheless in some Augusta, say that of Euphratensis; but to the sixth day, the Passion of St. Afra, yet not the Augsburg one, but another, inasmuch as she was a virgin; and then finally to the seventh day, the Passion of St. Afra of Augsburg in Vindelicia. This is indeed an ingenious method of correcting: but if it once be admitted in the Hieronymian Martyrology, there will shortly be no counting those Saints whom no church ever venerated, none knew; such as are here St. Afer the martyr of Euphratensis, and that Afra, martyr and virgin.
[9] who nevertheless does not himself seem to be followed. I answer therefore to the third, that in the copies of the Hieronymian Martyrology it is exceedingly usual for the same Saints to recur on different days with "Birthday" appended; as we too have now so often observed, and as no one at all versed in them can be ignorant. It is credible that this happened because in the older codices the names of those Saints were first noted in the margin at different days, according as different churches observed their birthday or another solemnity on one day and another: and further, these marginal notes, as has often been done elsewhere, gradually crept into the text through unskilled copyists. Whence from that multiplication of announcements no argument can be drawn by which the Saints themselves should be multiplied without another and more solid foundation. And so Tillemont too, with Castellanus, Monuments of the Church, volume 5, page 694, after he had weighed the announcements set forth in the Hieronymian Martyrology on these three days, says: As regards the Martyrologies of St. Jerome, it is quite probable that they meant to note nothing else than St. Afra of Augsburg alone, now indeed on her true birthday, but now on the one and the other preceding days; which in them is common enough. The same we too think; judging the Fontanelle copy no less corrupt on the V day, when it is there written: In the city of Augusta, the Passion of St. Afer, than the Corbie one on the VII day, when in it is announced: In the province of Rhaetia, in the city of Augusta, the birthday of St. Afer: here no one doubts that in place of "St. Afer" one must read "St. Afra": why then should we doubt that the same fault could have been committed there, and accordingly was committed, after the considerations already brought forward — at least until someone shall have shed greater light here?