Privatus

ON ST. PRIVATUS, BISHOP AND MARTYR,

IN THE OCCITAN PROVINCE OF GAUL,

AFTER THE MIDDLE OF THE THIRD CENTURY, OR AT THE BEGINNING OF THE FIFTH.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Privatus, bishop and martyr, in Occitania, a province of Gaul (St.)

BY G. C.

§ I. The ancient veneration of this Saint, the place of his see, and the disputed time of his martyrdom.

This holy Martyr is known to all the ancient Martyrologists, since in the Hieronymian Martyrology which Francesco Maria Fiorentini published he is announced at the XXI day of August thus: In the ancient Martyrologies this Saint is commemorated, In Gévaudan, at the town of Mende, the passion of St. Privatus the Martyr. The episcopal dignity here omitted is expressed on the same day in the old Martyrology which our predecessors published under the name of Bede before the second volume of March, with the Auctarium of Florus and others, in this manner: The passion of St. Privatus, who in the times of Valerian and Gallienus, when he was bishop of the people of Mende, for the confession of the holy faith was afflicted by the barbarians with scourges and burnings, and ended his time. Moreover Usuard on the XXI day of August has the following announcement: In the territory of the city of Gévaudan, the passion of St. Privatus, bishop and martyr, who suffered in the persecution of Valerian and Gallienus. Finally Wandalbert adorns the yearly memory of this holy Martyr with this little verse:

Hence shines the twelfth with the blood of the martyr Privatus.

There is no need here to heap up more announcements of the Martyrologies, since from those adduced the immemorial cultus of St. Privatus is sufficiently established.

[2] slain by the Alemanni bursting into Gaul, But when Usuard in this place asserts that that Saint underwent martyrdom in the persecution of Valerian and Gallienus, this is to be understood of the time of Valerian and Gallienus, in which St. Privatus was so struck by the barbarians bursting into Gaul that after a few days he departed from among the living, as will be said below. This we wished briefly to observe on account of our Jean Colombi, who among various historical opuscula, in book 2 On the Deeds of the Bishops of Viviers, in our edition at page 192, asserts that St. Privatus did not obtain the laurel of martyrdom in the irruption of the Alemanni into the Gauls, but was slain by the Romans at the command of Valerian and Gallienus. In the same place he cites for this assertion of his Ado and other ancient martyrologists. But this new opinion of his contradicts Florus, who at the preceding number expresses in clear words that that holy bishop was in the times of Valerian and Gallienus afflicted and slain by the barbarians for the confession of the holy faith. But the Romans were not called barbarians, and consequently the announcement of Florus is false, if the Romans killed St. Privatus by the edict of Valerian and Gallienus, as Colombi there asserts. Moreover that violent interpretation of the other Martyrologists is repugnant to Gregory of Tours, Fredegarius, Aimoin, Sigebert, and all the other writers, who with unanimous consent affirm that St. Privatus underwent martyrdom in the irruption of the barbarians under the king or leader Crocus.

[3] How certain writers call St. Privatus bishop of Gévaudan, who is in the Occitan province of Gaul. and others of Mende, will easily be understood from those things which Denis de Sainte-Marthe, in the latest edition of the Gallia Christiana, volume 1, column 83, before the series of the bishops

of Mende, advises thus: Mende on the river Lot, now the episcopal see of the Gabali, was once only a village, so called from Mount Mimat, on which it borders; which, being made illustrious by the martyrdom and tomb of St. Privatus, bishop of Gévaudan, became more famous, and at length was ennobled with an episcopal see and made a city; which Hadrien de Valois in the Notitia Galliarum thinks happened not long before the year of Christ one thousand. Formerly, therefore, the bishop of Gévaudan had his see in the city of Gabalum or of the Gabali, as very many subscriptions of the earlier councils of Gaul prove. Further, that that city was called Anderitum many testimonies of the ancients teach. Some will have it that the village or little town of Javols, which is four leagues distant from Mende, was once the capital of the nation of the Gabali, led by the similarity of the name rather than by any certain testimony.

[4] Then he assigns Anderitum and the people of Gévaudan from ancient authors, he was bishop of Gévaudan, and continues thus: At what time Mende was raised to the dignity of an episcopal see must be inquired. If credit is to be given to the Acts of St. Privatus, St. Privatus had his see there, BECAUSE THE BISHOPS WHO HAD BEEN THERE BEFORE HIM HAD BOTH DWELT AND BEEN BURIED IN THAT PLACE. And accordingly, according to these Acts, from the beginning of the Christian religion Mende would always have been an episcopal see, which fights against the custom of the ancients and the canons, by which it was provided that episcopal sees should not be established in villages. From these things certain learned men conjecture that the Acts of St. Privatus are not ancient: since, as was observed above, the episcopal see was not anciently at Mende. Moreover from these Acts it is held that several bishops preceded St. Privatus in the episcopate, which is by no means approved by the learned; especially by those who will have it that St. Privatus was slain in the irruption of the Alemanni made under the leader Crocus in the year 265 or 268. It is nevertheless probable that the village of Mende, after the martyrdom of St. Privatus, when peace had been restored to the Church, became celebrated by the throng of peoples who flocked to his tomb; and that in this place the bishop and clergy fixed their seat. Nor does it stand in the way that these prelates were nevertheless called Gabalitan: for they were not so called from the village of Javols, but from the whole nation of the Gabali over which they presided; just as those bishops were long called Arvernian who had their see at Clermont, not Clermontese, and those at Le Puy were called bishops of the Vellavi, not of Anicium or of Le Puy, etc.

[5] Finally Denis de Sainte-Marthe in the same place describes the city of Mende, whose situation Baudrand, volume one of his Geography, page 656, indicates more distinctly in these words: Mimatum or Mimate (in the vernacular it is now called Mende, as this geographer there advises) a city of Gaul formerly in Aquitaine, now in Occitania, the capital of the Gabali, toward the Cévennes mountains and the sources of the river Lot, is episcopal under the archbishop of Albi, and is called Anderitum or Gabalum by some; but in truth it is four leagues distant from the ruins of Anderitum, where now there is a village called Javols, on the testimony of Catel, and it grew from its ruins, since before it was only a village at the roots of Mount Gredon, where today it is situated, and where St. Privatus the martyr fell; it is ten leagues distant from Saint-Flour toward the winter sunrise, as also from Le Puy, and fourteen from Rodez toward the east, and it is in a mountainous but fertile district. Concerning the distance of the city of Mende from the city of Rodez a certain discrepancy occurs in the aforesaid Denis, who subjoins these few words to what has been reported above: The city of Mende is situated almost at the sources of the river Lot, not far from Lozère, a very lofty mountain, according to Apollinaris Sidonius a second Caucasus, which is part of the Cebennian mountains (les Cévennes). This episcopal city, formerly under the metropolis of Bourges, now under that of Albi, within the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Toulouse, is almost equally distant from Rodez, from Anicium or Le Puy, and from Saint-Flour. You see that here an equal distance of the city of Mende from the other three cities is assigned, whereas nevertheless Baudrand reckons ten leagues from Le Puy and Saint-Flour, and fourteen from the city of Rodez. This discrepancy of interval, which has nothing to do with our Saint, we leave to the natives to reconcile or correct.

[6] Gregory of Tours places his martyrdom in the third century, But among the learned an intricate question is agitated concerning the time in which St. Privatus obtained the palm of martyrdom: for some place his martyrdom after the middle of the third century, while others defer it to the beginning of the fifth. The first opinion St. Gregory of Tours manifestly hands down, when in the History of the Franks, book 1, chapters 30 and 32, he writes thus: In their time (namely of the emperors Valerian and Gallienus, of whom he treats a little before) that Crocus, king of the Alemanni, having set his army in motion, ranged over the Gauls. Now this Crocus is reported to have been of great arrogance, who, when he had done many things wickedly, by the counsel, as they say, of his wicked mother, having gathered, as we have said, the nation of the Alemanni, ranges over all the Gauls, and overturns from their foundations all the buildings which had been erected in ancient times. And coming to Auvergne, he burned, destroyed, and overturned that shrine which in the Gallic tongue they call VASSO GALATÆ … But when the Alemanni were bursting into the Gauls, St. Privatus, bishop of the city of Gévaudan, is found in a crypt of Mount Mimat, where he was giving himself to fastings and prayers, the people of the fortress of Gredon being shut up in its stronghold. But while the good Shepherd will not consent to hand over his sheep to the wolves, he is compelled to sacrifice to demons. Which foulness he as much execrating as refusing, he is beaten with cudgels so long that he was thought to be lifeless. But from that very battering, after a few days had intervened, he breathed out his spirit. But Crocus, being seized at the Gallic city of Arles, and afflicted with divers punishments, perished, beaten with the sword, not undeservedly paying the penalties which he had inflicted upon the Saints of God. In the following chapter Gregory makes mention of the bloody persecution of the emperor Diocletian against the Christians, so that from this order of the narrative it becomes plain that by him the martyrdom of St. Privatus was placed before the times of Diocletian.

[7] But Fredegarius Scholasticus, who flourished before the middle of the eighth century, which others defer to the beginning of the fifth century, calls this Crocus king of the Vandals, and defers his irruption into the Gauls to the beginning of the fifth century, as is plain from the fragments of this writer which Ruinart published after the History of St. Gregory of Tours, in whom that Fredegarius at columns 711 and 712 writes thus: Crocus, king of the Vandals, with the Suevi and Alani, having gone forth from their seats and making for the Gauls, using the counsel of his most wicked mother, when she had said to him: "If thou shalt wish to do a new thing and to acquire a name, destroy all that others have built, and slay the whole people whom thou overcomest. For thou canst not make a better building than thy predecessors, nor a greater thing whereby thou mayest exalt thy name." He, crossing the Rhine at Mainz by an ingeniously made bridge, first laid waste that very city and people: then, hemming in all the cities of Germany, he came to Metz, where, the wall of the city falling by night at the divine nod, the city was taken by the Vandals; but the men of Trier were delivered in the arena of that city, which they had fortified. After this Crocus, ranging with the Vandals, Suevi, and Alani over all the Gauls, destroyed some by siege, and, ingeniously breaking into others, laid them waste. Nor was any city or fortress in the Gauls delivered from them. And when they were besieging Arles, Crocus was taken by a certain soldier Marius and bound with chains; and he, being led to punishment through all the cities which he had laid waste, ended his impious life by a worthy death, and Trasemund succeeded him in the kingdom. Fredegarius was followed in chronology by Sigebert of Gembloux, who in his Chronicle at the year of Christ 411 records these few words: The Vandals, under the leader Croscus, ranging over the Gauls, overthrow many cities and churches. Croscus at length, being taken at Arles by the governor Marianus, and ignominiously dragged back through the conquered cities, is tormented to death. Under this whirlwind, among many, are martyred Florentinus of Sion and Hilarius, Desiderius of Langres with Vincentius the archdeacon, and Antidius bishop of Besançon.

[8] Certain German writers make no mention of this captivity and violent death of Crocus, concerning Crocus, the leader of the irruption, and seem to confound him with another leader or king of the Alemanni of the same name. Among them Heinrich Pantaleon in the Prosopographia, part 1, at the year 281, page 125, writes thus: Crocus was among the Germans in the greatest authority for the magnitude of his exploits, while Gallienus and Licinius Valerianus were administering the Roman commonwealth, in the year after Christ two hundred and seventy. And so the Germans chose him king, and under him, on account of the gathering together of many peoples, they called themselves Alemanni. He, since he despised the Romans, under his auspices the Germans burst in four columns into the Roman provinces. He himself, having set out with part of the army into the Gauls, laid all waste with fire and sword. First he crossed the bridge at Mainz, and plundered and burned the houses and temples. Afterwards the city of Chalon was stormed; Privatus the bishop was consumed by fire. Thence Arles, Augusta of the Treveri, and the city of the Mediomatrici were laid waste. Then, all being routed, they obtained the Spains, and stormed Tarragona, the capital of the Spains. Another band of the Germans laid waste Rhætia, Vindelicia, and Italy, and crushed everything as far as Ravenna. But then the Goths overrun Asia, Pontus, and Cappadocia, so that their arms thundered as far as Heraclea. When they had taken Athens, they heap up a vast pile of books in the forum, which, when they wished to burn it, one of the leaders forbade, saying: "Let us leave them to the Greeks, for while they pore over them they become unwarlike." At that time the nation of the Suevi occupied the Pannonias and Noricum, from which they were then separated by the Danube. And so vast grief and everywhere mourning arose in the Roman provinces. Hence it came about that Constantine, who was resisting the remaining tyrants, won the Germans to himself with pay, and enticed Crocus, king of Germany, with his forces to himself for the sake of aid; by whose service, his father being dead, he seized the reins of empire. Whence no small praise accrued to the Germans, that so great an emperor and restorer of the Church was raised up under their auspices. Johannes Aventinus, in the Annals of the Bavarians, published at Ingolstadt in the year 1554, book 2, pages 181 and 191, narrates nearly similar things concerning Crocus.

[9] whom some have confounded with another leader or king of like name. Concerning this narration of Pantaleon some things now occur to be noted; and first indeed I observe that by him the reign of Valerian and Gallienus is wrongly joined with the year two hundred and seventy after Christ: for before that year Valerian was being held captive among the Persians, and Gallienus had been slain, as the more exact chronologists commonly hand down. Secondly, he errs concerning the manner of St. Privatus's martyrdom, when he affirms that then Privatus the bishop was consumed by fire, unless perhaps he means only to signify that this holy bishop was afflicted with burnings, as we reported above from the Auctarium of Florus. Thirdly, it is in no way probable that that Crocus, enemy of the Romans, who devastated the Gauls in the times of Valerian and Gallienus, is the same as that king of the Alemanni by whose aid Constantine

obtained the empire. Add that this king of the Alemanni, who so greatly favored Constantine, is named Erocus by Sextus Aurelius Victor in the Epitome on the Roman Emperors, in our edition at page 642, and in the Historia miscella, book XI, page 304, although Hadrien de Valois in book 1 of the Rerum Francicarum, page 18, calls the same man Crocus. But whether that helper of the emperor Constantine be called Erocus or Crocus, his age can never be drawn out as far as the beginning of the fifth century, in which some think the martyrdom of St. Privatus should be placed, as we shall now briefly indicate.

[10] While the moderns are in doubt concerning this chronological question, Tillemont, volume 4 of the Ecclesiastical Monuments, pages 221 and 651, opposes various difficulties to the Acts of St. Privatus and to the narration of Gregory of Tours reported above. Nevertheless in the same place he professes that with many learned men he has followed the opinion of the same Gregory of Tours in chronology. Going further, two Benedictine writers, who published in print at Paris in the year 1730 the History of Occitania in French, in the Notes to the first volume of the same History, page 638 and following, set up a long disputation concerning the time in which St. Privatus obtained the crown of martyrdom. Relying on the authority of Fredegarius, Aimoin, Sigebert, and others (all these, however, wrote after the age of St. Gregory of Tours), they contend by various reasonings that Gregory confounded one irruption of the barbarians into the Gauls with another, and therefore they judge that the martyrdom of St. Privatus should be fixed to the beginning of the fourth century. Moreover from the principles of Tillemont, who seems ready enough to admit several leaders or kings of the barbarians of the same name at different times, they argue ad hominem, as it is commonly said. But meanwhile they assign at the beginning of the fifth century no Crocus distinct from the one of whom St. Gregory of Tours treats: for Fredegarius and the rest ascribe to Crocus king of the Vandals the same things which Gregory of Tours had narrated of his Crocus king of the Alemanni, as is manifest.

[11] Further, all the arguments of those Benedictines are not such or dispute among themselves, as to compel us to reject the authority of St. Gregory of Tours or to depart from the more common opinion, which the most illustrious Bosquet in the History of the Gallican Church, book 3, chapter 39, embraces and sets forth in these words: Several irruptions of the Alemanni into the Gauls are read of, under which Christians suffered. Among others illustrious is the devastation of Crocus their Leader, whose time is variously given in the authors: for Sigebert writes that the devastation of Crocus, whom he calls Croscus, belongs to the year of Christ 412, and that under him suffered Florentius, Hilarius, Desiderius of Langres, and Antidius of Besançon; with whom agree the manuscript Acts of Desiderius and Antidius, which refer them to the times of Honorius and Theodosius. But Gregory and very many others write that Crocus, entering the Gauls while Valerian and Gallienus were reigning, raged against Privatus of Gévaudan and others. This man Gregory calls Crocus; the common Acts of Privatus, Scorco; the same Acts in Mombritius, Herod. Nevertheless Crocus is the constant name of him who, it seems no longer to be doubted, ranged over the Gauls under Valerian and Gallienus, either before the capture of Valerian, or after Valerian's capture, under Gallienus, or under Postumus at last, slain under the tyrants: for so often in these times did the Alemanni burst into the Gauls, until they were driven by Probus beyond the rivers Neckar and Elbe. The most illustrious Bosquet in the following chapter reports the common deeds of Crocus, such as Gregory of Tours and Fredegarius and others commonly left to posterity, and reduces the Acts of St. Privatus to an abridgment.

[12] Denis de Sainte-Marthe, in the Notes to the documents of the first volume of the latest Gallia Christiana, page 137, makes mention of this controversy thus: we hitherto follow the opinion of St. Gregory of Tours. At what time the Alemanni, under the leader Crocus, burst into the Gauls and inflicted so many and so great losses must here be inquired somewhat more carefully. Those who would have it that this happened earlier assign it to about the year 265, while Valerian and Gallienus were emperors; but those who would have it later defer this slaughter of the Gauls to the beginning of the fifth century. Then in the same place he sets forth the opinion of Gregory of Tours, and defends it by this reason: Our Thierry Ruinart in the Notes on Gregory of Tours brings forward both opinions, but decides nothing, and is content to refer us to Tillemont, Hist. Eccles., volume IV, where he seems more inclined to the second opinion. That I should incline rather to the former, besides those things which I have already said, this reason makes. If at the beginning of the fifth century so many martyrs had been made in Gaul, they could not have been unknown in the sixth century, as most certainly they were unknown to Gregory of Tours himself, who is silent about them all (except one, Privatus). We are not unaware that the two aforesaid Benedictine writers, in the Notes to the History of Occitania, page 639, answered this argument of Sainte-Marthe after a fashion. But that solution, such as it is, does not yet move us to embrace their opinion, unless clearer weights of reasons be brought forward for it. Since nevertheless these and the other arguments of those authors are not to be despised, we have judged that so much weight should be attributed to them that at the beginning of this preliminary Commentary we have noted in the margin the martyrdom of St. Privatus as after the middle of the third century, or perhaps at the beginning of the fifth. Now we must treat of the Acts and the sacred relics of this holy Prelate.

\ al. collecta gente*

\ read melius*

\ al. obsidione*

\ read Croco or Chroco*

§ II. The various Acts of the Saint, the public translation of his sacred body, and the marvelous finding of the same.

The various Acts of this Saint are reviewed, The Acts of St. Privatus are read at the XXI day of August in Surius; but this editor after his manner somewhat changed the style. In our literary stock we have two manuscript transcripts of the same Acts, one of which our Pierre Poussines sent from Toulouse to Henschen in the year 1643, and to which this title is prefixed: Of St. Privatus the martyr, XII of the Kalends of September. From his deeds, which Bernard Gui, bishop of Lodève, has in a manuscript codex on the martyrs. The other transcript was copied for us from a Trier manuscript Codex of St. Maximin, and it agrees in the substance of the narration with the former Toulouse manuscript of Bernard Gui. If nevertheless any difference worthy of note occur between them, we shall observe it afterwards in the annotations. And each manuscript copy nearly agrees with the edition of Surius, if you except the style changed here and there.

[14] concerning whose antiquity Our Jean Colombi, in the historical Opuscula cited above, which were published at Lyons in the year 1675, at page 192, thinks that the Acts of St. Privatus were composed before the age of St. Gregory of Tours, and that he excerpted his narration of the martyrdom of St. Privatus from that author. Then, however, having cited certain fragments of the Acts, he confidently rejects both Gregory of Tours and that writer of the Acts in these words: But that author brought forward things as true concerning Croscus or Scorco as concerning him who slew St. Privatus. For it was not the Alemanni following the leader Croscus, but the Romans by the edict of Valerian and Gallienus, who killed St. Privatus. But this new opinion of Colombi not only contradicts St. Gregory of Tours and all the other historians whom I reviewed above at number 2, but also a venerable monument of antiquity which Denis de Sainte-Marthe published among the documents to the first volume of the latest Gallia Christiana, page 137: for in it we read that St. Amatius, third prelate of Avignon, when Avignon was besieged by the Alemanni, exhorted his subjects to prepare themselves eagerly for death, and to imitate the bishops renowned for age, sanctity, and learning (among these he names by name Privatus of Gévaudan), whom Crocus, the most foul of all the enemies of the Christians, sparing no rank, sex, or age, … struck down and cut to pieces.

[15] there is dispute among the learned, Tillemont, volume 4 of the Ecclesiastical Monuments, page 651, and other learned men suspect that the Acts of St. Privatus were composed after the tenth century, because in them St. Privatus and his predecessors are said to have had their see in the little village of Mende. Valois, moreover, in the Notitia Galliarum, page 214, thinks that the ancient see of the prelates of Gévaudan passed to the city of Mende at the end of the tenth century, because before this century the bishops of that diocese were never called of Mende, but always of Gévaudan. Certainly the two above-mentioned authors of the History of Occitania, volume 1, page 640, demonstrate from a certain diploma that Stephen about the middle of the tenth century first bore the title of bishop of Mende. Whatever be the case with the antiquity of the Acts of St. Privatus, which we cannot defend by certain arguments, the curious reader may see what Denis de Sainte-Marthe answered to this difficulty above among us at number 3 and the following.

[16] But at least those indications of novelty or of a more recent age do not appear in the shorter Acts of St. Privatus, and from which the shorter and the longer will here be published. which are perhaps more ancient than the aforesaid longer ones, and of which we know two copies printed in type. The first is had in the Speculum historiale of Vincent of Beauvais, where in book XI, chapter 75, the deeds of St. Privatus are narrated in few words. The second occurs in the Collection of Bonino Mombritius, in our copy, volume 2, folio 225. These two copies seem to have proceeded from the same fountain: for they are expressed in almost the same phrases, and in both places, instead of Crocus, king of the Alemanni, Herod is named. We doubt whether someone abridged these shorter Acts from the longer, or rather adorned the longer out of the shorter. Wherefore after this preliminary Commentary we shall in the first place reprint the shorter Acts from Vincent of Beauvais, and compare them with the Mombritian edition. Then to these we shall subjoin the longer Acts from the Trier manuscript transcript, that the learned reader may more easily pass judgment on the greater antiquity of the one or the other. Meanwhile we proceed to the translation of the sacred body and its later revelation or finding, concerning which we shall set forth a certain doubt of ours.

[17] In the proper Offices of the church of Mende, which we have printed at Lyons in the year 1619, The body of this holy Prelate, in the year 1036, the feast of the translation of St. Privatus is celebrated on the Sunday after the feast of St. Luke, as is prescribed in the Rubrics; and then, on the occasion of this festival, the following Lessons are recited in the second Nocturn: Lesson IV. About the year one thousand and thirty-six, when at Le Puy certain popular tumults were gravely disturbing the quiet of the public peace, and Stephen, bishop of the city, had labored in vain to check them, at length that prudent and provident man, against so many evils growing worse day by day, employed this salutary counsel. He asks all the neighboring bishops to deign to come together there with the relics of their Saints, by whose authority, the fickleness of the people being repressed, the so fierce waves of civil dissensions might be calmed. Among the several who lent ready ears to his pious requests, there was present Raymond, bishop of Mende, who with his clergy and people carried to that city the admirable pledge of the body of St. Privatus. Having received this news, all the people of Le Puy, to whom the fame of the Saint's power had long since come, together with the bishops already present in their priestly ornaments, likewise bearing their own pledges, and with the whole clergy of the city, the standards of our salvation going before, went forth to meet them.

[18] Lesson V. And when the two processions met one another a little way outside the city, is solemnly translated to Le Puy the whole clergy sounding forth the divine praises and the crowd which had gathered from all sides acclaiming with festal voices, it sought with groans and prayers the favor and intercession of the holy Martyr. One of them, carrying in his arms a son contracted in all his limbs (certain persons who had experienced the Martyr's power also urging him on), and leave having been given him by the bishops, especially by St. Odilo, abbot of Cluny, who for the aforesaid cause was himself also present at this solemnity, to approach nearer to the relics of the holy Martyr, brings forth his son with the greatest wailing, holds him up, lifting him repeatedly on high, and by his weeping and complaints invites the people who were looking on to remember him. Lesson VI. The bystanders, moved by so sad a spectacle, entreat the blessed martyr Privatus with their prayers, that he would by his prayer succor the unhappy man. And presently the Saint's power appeared manifest: for the vital spirits were diffused through the joints and limbs of the youth; and while the junctures of his frame were being loosed, a sound was heard, and at each part of his body that was healed the sick man uttered a groan. At length, while all who heard these things were praising the martyr Privatus with mind and voice, all marvel to see the man, but now feeble, suddenly standing up and, full soundness of limbs recovered, walking with the rest, and thundering forth praises to his Physician in thanksgiving. Hence some, astonished with awe, others exulting with gladness, look up to and venerate the supreme power of God in his Martyr, and as suppliants call upon the same for the confirming and establishing of a union of peace among themselves; which, all the waves of so many dissensions and tumults being straightway composed, they happily obtain by the pious intervention of the Martyr.

[19] by Ragamundus or Raymond, bishop of Mende, Denis de Sainte-Marthe, volume 1 of the new Gallia Christiana, column 89, notes that this bishop of Mende who translated the relics of St. Privatus to Le Puy is named Ragamundus or Raymond, and that he was the first who at the beginning of the eleventh century bore the title of bishop of Mende, since his predecessors before that were called prelates of Gévaudan. But Sainte-Marthe is mistaken in this last observation: for in Mabillon, book 6 of the Diplomatic Work, number 137, from the Chartulary of St. Théofrède, a diploma of the year 950 is brought forward, in which Stephen I, predecessor of this Raymond and of another, Matefredus, expressly calls himself bishop of Mende, as we noted above in passing from the two writers of the History of Occitania. Further, concerning the aforesaid translation of St. Privatus, the aforesaid Sainte-Marthe in the elogium of that Ragamundus or Raymond has these words in the same place: In the year 1036 he translated to Le Puy the body of blessed Privatus, conspicuous for the power of miracles, concerning which see in the Office of the Saints of Mende. It will be useful to remember this year one thousand and thirty-six hereafter.

[20] and yet it is said afterwards to have lain hidden, Du Saussay, in his Gallican Martyrology at the IX day of June, makes mention thus of the yearly memory of the revelation of St. Privatus, or of the finding of his sacred body: On that day, at Mende of the Gabali, the finding of St. Privatus, bishop and martyr, whose purple and laurel adorn the notable day of the XXI of August. But in the proper Offices of the church of Mende this Rubric is premised concerning that yearly festival: On the third Sunday after Easter is celebrated the feast of the revelation of St. Privatus, unless it be impeded by a double feast of the first or second class; for then it is transferred to the nearest Sunday. But on whatever day that feast be celebrated, the following are read there in the Office as bearing on our matter: The people of Mende, a long time after the death of St. Privatus, brought his venerable body out of the underground tomb in which they had first laid it after his martyrdom, in a leaden coffin, together with many other relics of saints, into the crypt of the basilica of St. Thecla, with the celebrity of a great assembly. But by the injury of the times, and piety growing faint, it came about that this place, at first destined for sacred uses, being ruined and fallen in, was made over to profane uses, taken partly into the episcopal dwelling, partly into a garden; and, a great mound of earth being heaped over the aforesaid crypt, for very many years the most holy body lay hidden, buried in the ground and consigned to oblivion together with various relics of Saints; until in the year one thousand one hundred and seventy, Alexander the Third being supreme Pontiff, Louis the Younger reigning, Aldebert being bishop and Count of the Gabali, who had caused the church of St. Thecla to be built in another place, by God's disposing it was revealed.

[21] The venerable Aldebert had ordered the earth in the aforesaid garden to be dug deep into a well; and to have been found in the year 1170 when behold, the soil being dug out more deeply, there was found a subterranean place, wonderful with squared and faced stone, twelve feet in length, ten in breadth, nine in height; at the top of which, on the east, was a small side door, through which entry was free to a man only with head bent and knees bowed, and which seemed fit only for relics to be brought into the crypt and taken out of it. The matter is reported to the prelate, who, when he had found that the bones of blessed Privatus, of certain Innocents, and of other Saints truly existed there, fasts being proclaimed and celebrated, and solemn processions, on the day after the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, with great religious display, the Clergy and people accompanying him, trembling with joy, carried in his arms from that subterranean cavern the holy relics of blessed Privatus, honorably laid in a prepared casket, into the crypt of the greater church, in which they had first been laid after the martyrdom, the head being kept outside, that on the days solemn to St. Privatus it might be exhibited to the people to be venerated and kissed. To those afflicted with various sicknesses prosperous health was then restored, the pledge of so great a body affording its patronage.

[22] We have the same history of the revelation or finding, in the time of Aldebert III, bishop of Mende, though somewhat different in style, in the manuscript sheets which our aforesaid Poussines sent from Toulouse to Henschen, and to which at the end the following are added: But his head was kept outside, so that on the day of his solemnity it might be exhibited to the faithful people to be seen and kissed. But the aforesaid finding and translation of the body of St. Privatus was preceded and foreshown by many visions and revelations divinely made both to the lord Aldebert himself and to certain others; and many miracles and mighty works were wrought, all of which are had and read written down one by one more carefully in a book: which book the aforesaid faithful and truthful man, the lord bishop Aldebert, composed in eloquent style and caused to be written down, and that book is preserved in the archives of the church of Mende. The aforesaid translation of the body of St. Privatus took place seven years after the council which Pope Alexander III had convoked and celebrated at Tours on the feast of Pentecost in the year of the Lord 1163, and thus it is concluded that the aforesaid translation took place in the year of the Lord's Incarnation 1170. You see that in this fragment there is assigned the same year of Christ one thousand one hundred and seventy which is also expressed in the Office of the church of Mende.

[23] But from each of those histories, of the translation and of the finding, a certain doubt arises for me: which finding we desire to have more clearly explained. for in the proper Lessons it is handed down that the sacred body of St. Privatus was solemnly translated to the city of Le Puy in the year 1036 under the episcopate of Ragamundus or Raymond; but afterwards in the history of the revelation or finding just reported, the same body is said to have been found by chance in the year 1170 under the episcopate of Aldebert III. But who would easily believe that this sacred treasure, after the solemn translation and the miracles wrought in the year 1036, was straightway so neglected and consigned to oblivion that until the year 1170 it lay hidden unknown to all, and was then first discovered? Or did it perhaps remain at Le Puy, and lie hidden until the year 1170? This Denis de Sainte-Marthe seems to intimate, when in the Gallia Christiana of the latest edition, volume 1, column 90, he writes thus among other things concerning Aldebert III, bishop of Mende: The body of St. Privatus was brought back by the same prelate Aldebert. But to this opinion the history is repugnant, which from all the circumstances indicates that that finding of the sacred body happened in the city of Mende. Let the learned men of Mende therefore deign to remove this scruple for us, and to explain more distinctly a probable cause of so marvelous a concealment.

THE SHORTER ACTS

From the Speculum historiale of Vincent of Beauvais, book XI, chapter 75, which we have compared with the Mombritian edition.

Privatus, bishop and martyr, in Occitania, a province of Gaul (St.)

BHL Number: 6933

The holy Prelate In the times of Valerian and Gallienus ^a, the persecution raging against the Christians, the indignation of the Lord was stirred against the Romans, so that barbarous nations rushed forth from East and West against the Commonwealth, to slaughter the peoples. Then the Alemanni with Herod ^b their king, having crossed the Rhine, made for the Gauls, and turned their minds and arms to the destruction of the region of Gévaudan \* ^c. Then the inhabitants of the place fled to Mount Gredon ^d as to a stronghold; over which region, or church, Privatus the bishop presided: who made himself a cave on the brow of a certain mountain, in which he remained at all times, except when he went forth to perform the solemn rites. And placed there, although he was not present in person to the men of Gredon, he did not fail them in prayer; and those whom he could not comfort in body he strengthened in spirit.

[2] being taken by the Alemanni, Meanwhile the barbarians, laying waste the region, flock also to Mount Gredon, and those whom they could not take by assault they held shut up for two years ^e, that they might overcome them at least by the ravening of hunger. Therefore, while they persist in this intent, report brought word that the Bishop of the region was not with those shut up, but was staying within a retreat which he had prepared for himself in time of peace. Straightway they rush together to seize him, hoping that through him the minds of the whole people would at once be broken, and that they would of their own accord come down to that condition in which they should see the bishop held. And when the holy Man had been addressed by the barbarians through an interpreter, and had learned that he had been so swiftly \* seized for this, that he might soften the minds of his own people to the persuasion of surrender ^f, he answered that he would by no means do this; and that it was better for him to undergo any dangers whatsoever than to lend consent to such a crime.

[3] is so afflicted with beatings and other torments, The barbarians, therefore, moved by such an answer, straightway beat him with cudgels, and, when he had been dealt many blows, lead him as far as the village, believing that even after the punishments inflicted his sentence would be changed. But he persisting in the same word, they offered their deadly sacrifices with great pomp, saying that either he should sacrifice to the idols or should fail amid torments. But he said: "It is better for me to experience present punishments than most foolishly to humble myself before you and your demons." And when he proclaimed these and many other things, the barbarians began so to rage against him that, tortured with greater scourges and fiercer flames and with new kinds of punishments, he was left lifeless.

[4] After this the barbarians, when they saw that they could accomplish nothing, so that after some days he died of the torture. returned to Gredon, that they might ask peace from those shut up; and, the course of things being reversed, the besieged granted what they ought to have begged ^g. The people therefore, liberty of going out being granted, straightway all ran together in congratulation to the bishop; some falling at his knees, others licking with their own mouths the wounds inflicted on his holy body. But the holy martyr Privatus, shattered by that very torture,

\*, not long after passed to the Lord. And because at that time so great a madness of the persecutors was raging against the Christians that they did not spare even the ashes of the Saints, a crypt was made underground, in which the holy body was placed with honor. His passion is celebrated on the twelfth of the Kalends of September.

ANNOTATIONS.

\ Mombrit. Guavalitanæ*

\ Mombrit. fame*

\ al. pertinaciter*

\ Mombrit. cassatus*

THE LONGER ACTS

From a manuscript transcript which was copied in the Trier monastery of St. Maximin, and which we have compared with another manuscript copy of Bernard Gui.

Privatus, bishop and martyr, in Occitania, a province of Gaul (St.)

BHL Number: 6932

FROM MANUSCRIPTS.

While the Roman emperors were persecuting the Christians, In the times of Valerian and Gallienus, who then presided over the Roman commonwealth, a grievous persecution was raging against the Christians, so much so that judges, compelled by their innumerable edicts, ran about everywhere with their staff and a band of soldiers, and consigned to prison the worshippers of God whom they seized, and, when they had been dragged to judgment, drove them with beatings, tore them with beasts, roasted them with fire, and afflicted them with so diverse a kind of torments that even a remedy of death might be desired by those who, it was plain, were being tortured with rejoicing. For in that storm Cornelius at Rome, and Cyprian at Carthage, chief prelates, were crowned with a glorious martyrdom for the name of Christ ^a. Whence it came about that through so many and so great evils the indignation of the Lord, being at length stirred, went forth. For whereas in those days the condition of the Roman name, its enemies being pacified, was held to be secure, suddenly nearly all the barbarous nations which were confined within their own seats burst forth against the commonwealth with united purpose, so that, laying waste East and West, they overthrew all things, slaughtered the peoples, and, every region being emptied by devastation, left solitudes horrible in their desolation.

[2] The Alemanni burst into the Gauls, Of these the Alemanni, then having crossed the Rhine, made for the Gauls, exceedingly strong in number rather than in valor; over whom antiquity affirms that Crocus was king at that time. And so this nation, innumerable in multitude, when, ranging like locusts not only over Gaul, it terrified or destroyed all things (which even the ruins of great cities attest), turned its mind and arms to the destruction of the region of Gévaudan ^b. And when the inhabitants of the place had learned this, they fled, as the necessity of the case required, to the mountain whose name is Gredon, and sought the protection of a lofty mountain, which as yet not care but nature had fortified — so much so that even peoples from abroad, running together for the protection of that place, congratulated themselves that they had escaped the evil of an intolerable hostility.

[3] and they seize the bishop of Gévaudan, At that time St. Privatus presided over that region or church, having his see in the little village of Mende ^c, for this reason, that those who before him had held the rank of the episcopate had both dwelt and been buried in that place ^d. Then the Man, outstanding in sanctity, as ardent in religion as he was solicitous for quiet, completed for himself a cauna ^e, as the manner of speaking is, on the brow of the mountain which overhangs that village, with great zeal and elegant workmanship; abiding in which at all times, he scarcely ever came forth anywhere, except that he went out only to perform the solemn rites according to the ritual. Therefore, when the peoples of the aforesaid region had shut themselves up in the stronghold of Mount Gredon, the terror of the enemy found the holy bishop Privatus in the retreat of his aforesaid cauna; placed in which, although he was not present in person to the men of Gredon, he did not fail them in prayer: for those whom he could not comfort in body he cherished in spirit.

[4] Meanwhile the barbarians, having entered the region, laying all waste, flock to the place of Gredon, whom, to persuade to surrender the fortress to his own Faithful, to besiege the inhabitants therein: for when they had shut up in the same siege very many and leading men flocking together from other regions, they were able to have not only no hope of storming it, but not even an approach for storming it. And these things being uncertain and deservedly despaired of, they turn their fierce minds to this deed: that those whom they had hemmed in with great swiftness they should hold shut up for a long time, and that those who could not be taken by assault should be overcome at least by the ravening of hunger. Hence it was that that confusion was drawn out through the space of two years. Therefore, while they persisted in this intent, report brought word that the bishop of that region was not with those shut up, but was staying in a retreat, as he had prepared for himself in time of peace. This being learned, straightway the multitude of the enemy flies to seize him; with this hope especially, that when he had been displayed and presented to the sight of his own people, the minds of the whole people would at once be broken, and they would of their own accord come down to that condition in which they should see the Prelate held.

[5] Straightway therefore the Saint is brought down from the cauna to the hill and to sacrifice to the idols, set between the mountain itself and the church, on which there is a fortification to which an ancient founder gave the name of "protector." And when there, as either necessity or custom is with barbarians, the holy bishop Privatus had been addressed, and had learned that he was for this being swiftly seized, and for this to be led away, that he might soften the minds of his own people by persuasion to surrender, and that the captive persuader might bring to voluntary captivity the people of God, who were to be delivered by the benefit of the place — he answered that he would by no means do this, affirming both that a priest ought not to give such counsel to his people, and that a people staying in a most secure place would not grant consent to surrender; and that it was better for him to undergo any dangers whatsoever than to lend consent to such a crime. Therefore the barbarians, moved by such an answer, straightway beat him with cudgels, and, when he had been dealt many blows, lead him as far as the village, believing that even after the punishments inflicted his sentence would be changed. But he, persisting in the same word, added only this: that what had been said once might have sufficed them, if they had had any prudence or humanity; but that for him what they demanded was not lawful.

[6] Then they, kindled with greater indignation, as being void of reason, which he steadfastly refuses, leap forth to much sharper measures, to compel a man of such great sanctity to sacrifice to idols; so that he who, being ill persuaded, had refused to be an enemy of his fellow citizens, should at least be made an enemy of his own soul. They therefore prepare their deadly sacrifices, and, when these had been displayed, began to offer them with great threatening, saying that either he should sacrifice to the idols after their manner, or should fail amid torments. But the holy bishop Privatus answered this without hesitation: "I marvel that you compel a prelate, such as he is, to things so execrable. If you exercised even any human foresight, it might be established with you without any assertion of mine that it is far more right for any man of my rank to undergo the tortures of the most cruel death, than to lose the people entrusted to him, and, while he himself perishes, to remain the author of their perdition."

[7] Hearing this, they, nevertheless in some way feigning moderation, say: and they afflict him with beatings and other torments, "Do we compel thee to things renowned and observed by barbarians? Do not both your emperors and their judges worship idols, and compel all Christians to sacrifice?" But the holy bishop Privatus answered: "I acknowledge, what is most grievous, that the things you say are true: for in the princes of the Romans there appear in heathen profanation not so much sins as crimes. For unless it were so, the barbarous nations would have no power in the shattering of the Roman commonwealth. For whatever you do to our destruction is accomplished not by your valor, but by the heathenism of our emperors; but our God, whom you utterly know not, is of such great power that in a moment of time he may free from error even those princes whom you cast in our teeth, and overthrow your idols; and may succor us, chastised with the scourge of present tribulations, with his wonted help. I, however, in the hope of eternal goods, despise whatever torments may now be threatened me."

[8] Then the barbarians brought forth punishments more savage than usual, saying: "Either sacrifice without delay, or know that thou, worn out with divers kinds of torments, shalt perish by a new and execrable death as an example to all." But the holy bishop Privatus, having by God's will a mind steadfast to endure all things, answered: "Apply therefore whatever kind of tortures you will, impose what end of life you wish. I in the name of the Lord my God cannot be other than I am: for it is better for me to await present punishments than that, by most foolishly serving you and your demons, I should not escape perpetual torments." And when he cried out these and many other things, as though his passion were then beginning, the barbarians began so to rage against him — and in such a way that, tortured with greater scourges, fiercer flames, and new wounds of punishments, the Priest and confessor of God was left lifeless.

[9] from which after a short time he dies, After this the barbarians, when they saw that they had been able to accomplish nothing, only betook themselves back to the place of Gredon, whence they had set out, that they might in whatever way \* ask peace from those shut up. But the course of things being reversed, they granted to the besieged what they ought to have begged, so that you would rather believe them to have been the ones set free; who, many gifts having been given to the besieged, obtained both peace and trade. And who would doubt that this was granted by the merits of the most holy Prelate and martyr, seeing that immediately after his passion the whole enemy host withdrew from the siege? But the people, liberty of going out being at last granted, straightway all ran together in congratulation to their Bishop and confessor; some falling at his knees, others licking with their mouths the wounds inflicted on his holy body. Thus by God's gift thanks are rendered in common for the benefit of so great a compassion.

[10] and is honorably buried by the Faithful. But the blessed Confessor thereafter remained some time in the body: shattered nevertheless by that very torture, not long after, departing from the world, he passed over to the glory due to him. And because at that time, as I have said, against the Christians

persecution was raging everywhere, and so great was the madness in the persecutors that they did not spare even the ashes of the Saints whom they most unjustly punished, those who attended their holy Prelate, by a more salutary counsel, made a crypt for his burial underground, in which the holy body was placed with the utmost veneration; in which the Lord our God deigns to work the benefits of his powers almost daily, the merits of his holy Martyr lending their support ^f, so that the name of the Lord may be blessed unto the ages of ages.

ANNOTATIONS.

\ al. conniventiam*

\ Or quodammodo*?