Vodalus

CONCERNING ST. VODALUS, OR VODOALUS, SURNAMED BENEDICTUS, AT SOISSONS IN GAUL.

AT THE BEGINNING OF THE EIGHTH CENTURY.

Vodalus, surnamed Benedictus, at Soissons in Gaul (Saint)

J. B.

[1] There is a monastery of holy virgins of the Benedictine rule at Soissons, which in the seventh century from the birth of Christ, Ebroin, Mayor of the Palace of King Theodoric, as will be told in the Life of St. Drausius, Bishop of Soissons, on March 5, overcome by the prayers and persuasions of his wife Leutrude, St. Vodalus was buried at Soissons; commanded to be built within the walls of the city, to be dedicated in the name of the holy and inviolate Mary, Mother of the Lord. Near that monastery lived St. Vodalus, or Vodoalus, surnamed Benedictus, and within it, after his death, he was honorably entombed in a chapel dedicated to the Holy Cross.

[2] He was by nation a Pict, that is, from the northern region of Britain, which is now called Scotland. But at what time he lived cannot be determined with certainty: a conjecture can be made from the era of Adalgardis, it is uncertain when he lived, who seems to be the same person whom Melchior Regnault in his Compendium of the History of Soissons calls Hildegardis, and establishes as the second Abbess of that monastery. The first was Etheria, as is stated in the cited Life of St. Drausius, leading a life ethereal in character, summoned from the monastery of Jouarre. How long she and then Adalgardis governed the place is unknown to us. We believe St. Vodalus died at the beginning of the eighth century.

[3] The volume of his little history, it is said, perished through negligence at Laon amid other papers; says the later writer of his Life, his Acts were lost: which we present. This writer was from the city of Soissons, or at least the province, as he indicates at number 5: "Until it drove him, sustained by the wings of so many virtues, from our borders." Indeed he seems to have lived in the very monastery, or near it, perhaps assigned to the performance of sacred rites or the hearing of confessions of the nuns. Thus in the Prologue described afresh by a certain man of Soissons, he calls him "our most blessed Patron." And at number 7: "This we see happening daily at his tomb, the dust of which, with the cooperation of heavenly dispensation, we perceive to sparkle with miracles." And at number 15: "We have frequently seen the lamp itself rekindle of its own accord, that is, without human help, and we have observed the eyes of the blind, anointed with this oil, illuminated after the darkness was dispelled." What he writes, moreover, he affirms at number 2 that he learned from the report of faithful elders, and in great part beheld with his own eyes. from the report of forebears,

[4] This Life was copied by Nicholas Belfort, Canon Regular in the monastery of the Vineyards near Soissons, from an old codex (of Soissons, we think); whence is this edition? and he had compared it with another copy from the monastery of Longpont. We have transcribed it from him.

[5] Molanus records Vodalus enrolled in the Sacred Calendar on the Nones of February, in these words: "At Soissons, of St. Vodalus, Confessor." Arnold Wion on the same day makes him a Benedictine; he died on February 5, though he confesses that he does not know to which monastery he belonged. Molanus, whom alone he cites, does not report that he was a monk, much less a Benedictine. That he was a monk, however, one might conjecture from the fact that he is said to have used a cappa instead of a pallium. whether a monk is uncertain: Benedict Dorgany also lists him in the Benedictine Calendar; Saussay in the Gallican Martyrology with a notable eulogy composed from the Life which we give: in which, however, he inaccurately says he was a Scythian by nation, and that he came to Gaul out of love of religion. The writer of the Life records that he was born of the nation of the Picts, but that the Picts themselves, whom he therefore calls Geloni, trace their origin from the peoples of Scythia: by nation a Pict, which Bede also wrote in book 1

of the Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation, but accepted only from report, "as they say," he says. But in our time learned men are more inclined to think that they were truly Britons, and that the same name signifies both — one being the native designation, the other Roman. And the writer shows that he came not for the sake of learning or practicing religion, but rather for disseminating it.

[6] When Molanus in his earlier edition of the supplement to Usuard had listed him on the day before the Nones, he is also venerated on February 4, and after him Canisius, and Ferrarius following both:

THE LIFE

by an anonymous writer of Soissons, from the manuscript of Nicholas Belfort, Canon Regular.

Vodalus, surnamed Benedictus, at Soissons in Gaul (Saint)

BHL Number: 8728

By an anonymous writer of Soissons.

PROLOGUE OF THE AUTHOR.

[1] At the beginning of the flourishing Church, we read that Apostolic men were accustomed to cling so tenaciously to God that they either professed or meditated upon His majesty and excellence continually. One must devote oneself to the praises of God or the Saints. And indeed it is evident to all that man was created on this condition and law — that he should rightly devote all his leisure time to heavenly service. Let us therefore lift up our heart with our hands to Him, and with every effort let us implore Him that, if we are blind to His divinity, He may at least deign to open our mouth to the praise of His Saints — He who caused the dumb beast of burden of the soothsayer to speak human words: and that through those same Saints, whom we cannot worthily proclaim, for the merit of this small praise and veneration, and through their intercession, we may be made like them and at last in some way share in their lot. Numbers 22.

[2] Since therefore concerning our holy and most blessed patron Vodoalus we have heard, and have learned from the report of faithful elders, how, intent upon divine ordinances, he came as a pilgrim and exile to our borders, and how strenuously he ran the arduous course of his life, it is fitting that we strive to extol to the praise of God a few things out of many, which we have received from their report Whence did the author draw this, the ancient Acts being lost? and in great part beheld with our own eyes. Concerning his deeds, indeed, many things worthy of admiration could be brought forward, if the booklet about the catalogue of his virtues were available: but the volume of his little history, it is said, perished through negligence at Laon amid other papers. Let us, however, set forth his virtues as briefly as we can, not hesitating to praise Our Lord Jesus Christ in his praise, according to the Psalmist who says: "Praise the Lord in His Saints." Psalm 150:1 Let us therefore praise this glorious man, a man endowed with great virtue and prudence, whose name lives from generation to generation: let us declare his wisdom to the peoples, and announce his praise to the churches.

a Laon, a city. That is, at Laon, as the Longpont codex reads. It is an episcopal city in the province of Rheims, situated on a hill, as its name indicates; called in French Laon.

CHAPTER I

The birth of St. Vodalus, his preaching among the people of Soissons, his flight and return.

[3] St. Vodoalus, a Pict by nation, This most blessed Vodoalus was, as they say, born of the arrow-bearing nation of the Geloni, who are reported to derive their origin from the peoples of Scythia, and of whom the Poet says:

"And the tattooed Geloni." Virgil, Georgics 2.115

Whence also to this day they are commonly called Picts. From there, I say, for the name of Christ, he was carried by ship across the seas, and traversing many regions, came to the parts of Gaul, accompanied by only one companion, named Magnebert. Where, like a prudent farmer laboring at the Gospel agriculture, wherever he turned, he ploughed the bristling thickets of depravity He preaches Christ in Gaul: and committed the seeds of faith to rude minds, following the example of the heavenly Master, who had said: "As the Father has sent me, I also send you." John 20:21. Thus, therefore, from the diverse cities and provinces of Gaul, this most faithful Priest was presenting one flock to the true Shepherd: He resides at Soissons when he devoutly approached the city of Soissons and arrived, with the Lord guiding him, at the monastery of maidens most famous for its illustrious reputation, situated there in honor of the gracious Virgin Mary, Mother of God: in which to this day a great company of holy women is gathered from diverse nations on every side. And when he had arrived there, he was received with all eagerness by the venerable Abbess Adalgardis, near the abbey of St. Mary: and received a small dwelling on the eastern side near the wall of the city before the gate of the monastery, which to this day is called the Tower of St. Benedict.

[4] But before we come to his particular virtues, we must in some general fashion inquire into his life. For that man of God displayed such serenity of countenance and such gentleness of speech shining with every virtue, that by sight and hearing he instilled justice in all, and by sweetness of this kind quickly incited them to intimacy with himself. Indeed, in holy exercises of works, he so flourished in himself that he was alien to every defilement of the flesh. He utterly abhorred the pride of arrogance, the blemish of anger, the plague of envy, and the gluttony of the belly. Free from boasting, he equated the joys of the passing world's pomp with its ruins. The sadness of this world, like a monster, he banished from the secret of his heart... as one who knew neither how to be bent by adversity nor how to be exalted by prosperity. He also restrained the barriers of his mouth and ear from idle and vain things. His steps did not run in vain, nor did his feet proceed to no purpose. He crowned the diadem of his other charisms with a double fast: while he restrained his mind from wicked deed and thought, and restrained his flesh from the appetite for food. But what shall we say about the constancy of his prayer, to which he so devoted himself daily that the praise and confession of Christ and a continual supplication for the diminishing of his own and the people's sins were always on his lips? He was a lover and teacher of the poor, himself poor: and in him and in the aforesaid Adalgardis was fulfilled that prophecy: "The rich and the poor have met one another; the Lord is the maker of them both." Proverbs 22:2 dear to the Abbess Adalgardis: For truly, when the poor in spirit Vodoalus and the wealthy Adalgardis, meeting one another, were in harmony, the Lord cooperated with both; conferring upon him constancy in establishing faith and truth, and upon her efficacy in believing and obeying.

[5] Since such and so great was this man of the Lord, the invisible serpent did not cease to envy his peace, until through the wiles of its art it drove him, sustained by the wings of so many virtues, from our borders. For on a certain day, he gives food received from her to a poor person, when the aforesaid Abbess, as was her custom, had sent him some of her food in a silver vessel, and he through his servant Magnebert had immediately given the love-feast to a poor person asking at the door, the poor man, refreshed by the food, departed carrying the vessel with him. The next day the servants, seeking the vessel and learning what had happened, because the poor man stole the silver dish, returned and told their mistress. She, summoning him to herself and rebuking him, said: "If I sent you food for your meal, I did not order you to seize the silver vessel and take what is mine from me." He, bearing this grievously, prostrated himself on the ground and begged pardon for the offense: and departing from there, he himself, suspected, departs; he again took unknown ways, and setting out on a journey, he traversed many regions over nine years.

[6] It came to pass, however, that in the middle of his journey a fever seized him, which is commonly called tertian or quartan: and greatly afflicted, he came to the seashore to board the ship of a certain rich man, suffering from quartan fever, desiring to return to his homeland. And when, consumed by fever and hunger, he had remained there

for eight days, suddenly a storm arose, and the shrieking north wind raised the waves to the stars and drove the sail against the ship and dashed it. But the shipmaster, remembering Vodoalus, said to his men: "Go and refresh that pilgrim who came aboard with us. For he seems to me a just man: he calms the storm that arose; refreshed with food by the sailor, and on account of our negligence toward him, we suffer this shipwreck, as I believe." They went and found him scarcely palpitating with his last breath: and as soon as they refreshed him, the swelling seas grew calm, and once they reached the land, the sea ceased from its fury.

[7] That very night, the Angel of the Lord appeared to him saying: "Vodoalus, or Benedictus, what are you doing here? And where do you wish to go? For the Lord has sent me to you, that from this hour you may be made whole he is healed by an Angel, and be free from all fever. Moreover He has deigned to confer upon you so great a grace, that whoever shall have been vexed by this malady and shall have remembered your name in their prayers, [with an added promise concerning the healing of quartan fevers through his patronage,] they shall immediately obtain their desire." This we see happening daily at his tomb, the dust of which, with the cooperation of heavenly dispensation, we perceive to sparkle with miracles, since whoever has taken of that dust in drink with full faith, immediately receives health. Not only among us, but also in Italy and Aquitaine and many other provinces, many have received health through this dust. Furthermore, the aforesaid Angel gave him a staff saying: "Arise, do not linger: but strive with the utmost haste to return to Soissons, and go back to the monastery of maidens, to the cell from which you departed: and he is commanded to return to Soissons: because there you must complete the course of this toilsome present life. But this also has been granted to you by the Lord, that in the place of your relics fire shall in no wise prevail." And immediately when the Angel departed from him, hastening upon his way, after the course of nine years he returned to the city of Soissons.

[8] But before he approached the gate of the city, and anyone there yet knew of his arrival, behold, one of the servants a demoniac who had foretold his return who served the holy women there, having a demon hidden in him unknown to all, began to run and cry out, saying: "Rise up, for the blessed Vodoalus is already coming to cast me out from here: go therefore to meet him." Wherefore some of the sisters followed him all the way to the gate of the monastery, and opening the door, they found the man of God standing there. he frees him with a slap: He immediately looked upon that servant and, perceiving the demon lurking in him, struck his face with a slap and cast out the unclean spirit. he is kindly received by the religious: And when this was made known, the Abbess with the entire congregation came forth to meet him and received him with great honor. And so that holy man seemed to be numbered among those whose appearance is described by Ezekiel, saying: "Their appearance was like burning coals of fire, and like the appearance of torches": for he himself, burning like a torch of fire and flame, by teaching and working also sprinkled others with the abundant light of the spring of life from his mouth, and kindled the hearts of the lukewarm to the imitation of himself. Ezekiel 1:13

a The Geloni are reckoned by some as peoples of Scythia, by others of Sarmatia; but whether the Picts descended from them is uncertain.

CHAPTER II

The miracles and death of St. Vodalus.

[9] He is led out from the flames by an Angel, who extinguishes them. Likewise, after a long time from his return, it happened that the cell in which he dwelt was suddenly believed to be burning with fire, but immediately the Angel of the Lord seized him by the hair of his head and transported him to an island of the river Aisne, and extinguished the fire.

[10] On a certain day also, when a kitchen attached to the monastery wall was burning with a fierce fire, and the Sisters, greatly terrified, did not know where to turn, he heals quartan fever and toothache: one of them, who was more closely attached to the holy man, and whom he himself had previously cured of quartan fever and toothache, came and said to him: "Blessed Vodoalus, come and rescue us from the present fire by your most pious prayer." He took his cloak, which is commonly called a "cappa," and casting it over her, ordered her to place it against the fire: he extinguishes a fire with his cappa; which power was afterward in his staff: and as soon as it was placed against the fire, the balls of flame were reflected back upon themselves, and the conflagration was immediately extinguished. Which even to this day we observe frequently accomplished through his staff (which is kept among us): for whenever a fire happens to break out anywhere in this city and that staff is brought against it, the fire immediately loses its power and is extinguished.

[11] When on a certain occasion the same venerable Priest, wishing to celebrate the solemnities of the Mass, was passing through the cloisters of the monastery, he saw two Sisters sitting, very sad and anxious. When he asked them what so great a sorrow afflicted them, one answered and said: he restores a torn garment with the Sign of the Cross: "One of the Nobles of the palace sent this garment which you see to the Abbess Adalgardis to be mended: she gave it to us to sew it: but when I seized the scissors, wishing to cut a knot of thread, I imprudently cut a piece of the garment: therefore, Father, we are distressed." He therefore, with the preeminent virtue of charity and armed with the shield of faith, made the Sign of the Cross over the garment: and immediately he restored it whole, as it had been before.

[12] he hears Angels singing: Finally, it was frequently granted to him to hear Angels singing in heaven. But since it would be lengthy to set forth the weight of his virtues through each particular kind of work, let it suffice to have gathered the sum of his religion and purity in a brief epilogue. Moreover, we call God to witness that nothing of panegyrical flattery has been inserted by us, lest we chance to fall into some charge of falsehood, especially because (as we mentioned above) the series of these deeds is by no means contained among us in written documents, but what we have learned from the deeds of other Fathers (of whose company this most holy man was) or what we have come to know from the report of the faithful, we have striven to insert here, though in unpolished speech.

[13] But why do we weave delays any longer, and, as though his death could be deferred, do we fear to turn our pen to it? In the month of January, he falls ill: when the earth was rough with excessive cold, falling into a most severe illness, he found what he desired — to leave the world and be joined wholly to the Lord. Perceiving, moreover, that his most prudent man that temporal death was at hand, closing his eyes, as though already despising human things, holding his finger to his mouth, he traced the Sign of the Cross on his lips. dying, he signs his mouth with the Cross: His breath was failing and he was gasping toward death: and his soul, straining to burst forth, was converting the very death-rattle, by which the life of mortals is ended, into praise of God. With only the warmth of his spirit palpitating in his sacred breast, he nonetheless whispered this verse from the Psalm, as though he were going to his own and leaving the others: reciting psalms, "Lord, I have loved the beauty of Your house and the place where Your glory dwells." Psalm 25:8 And: "I believe I shall see the good things of the Lord in the land of the living." Psalm 26:13 And thus, taken from human affairs, as the morning star first rose, when the dawn had already moved the dewy shadow from the sky, leaving the saffron couch and illuminating the earth with the Phoebean lamp, on the day of the Nones of February, he dies, joined to the angelic choirs, he departed to the heavens. he is buried: His body was carried to the monastery of maidens, and there, in the basilica dedicated to the holy Cross, on the left side, he was placed in a tomb by devout preparers and honorably buried.

[14] After his death it happened that his servant Magnebert was ordered to go with other servants to cut wood from the forest. Weeping therefore and wailing, to his companion Magnebert, who was mourning, he cast himself before the tomb of the blessed man, and said: "Lord Vodoalus, why did you leave me surviving, I who cannot live without you? To whom did you leave me, and who will have pity on me, oppressed by the heavy yoke of servitude, which I am utterly unable to bear?" That very night the man of God appeared to him in a vision, saying: "Do not fear, for henceforth no one will burden you with any service." he appears and foretells his death, Then afterward, taking him by the hand, he said: "Come with me." The next day Magnebert, seized with fever, breathed forth his spirit, and was buried before the tomb of the Lord

Vodoalus by faithful and religious men.

[15] His ashes and bones, moreover, having rested in the same place for many years, the honor due to him was not shown to him by us: whence, so that more diligent worship and reverence might be bestowed upon him, he began again to manifest himself through miracles. Indeed, in our own recent times, on a certain night, after the morning hymns were completed, the Sisters, to whom this oratory had been entrusted for safekeeping, coming according to custom to trim the lamps, he shines with miracles, found the entire pavement wet with oil, which was being poured from a lamp hanging before his tomb. the lamp kindling of its own accord, the blind illuminated by its oil, Moreover, we have frequently seen the lamp itself rekindle of its own accord, that is, without human help, and we have observed the eyes of the blind, anointed with this oil, illuminated after the darkness was dispelled. Finally, from various diseases, and especially from fevers (for which a special virtue was granted to him by the Lord while he was still in the body, fevers cured, as we related above), people are refreshed daily. Whence a popular crowd, not only from the city of Soissons but also from the villages and hamlets in the surrounding area, flocks to his tomb for the purpose of fulfilling their vows.

[16] This is Your power, O Christ, who accomplish all the wondrous things which Your athletes are seen to perform. We implore therefore Your mercy, O good Redeemer, the writer prays to be aided by his merit, that You who adorned the blessed Vodoalus, for the merit of his life, with the splendor of signs and associated him with the company of Angels, through his interceding merits may grant us who trust in You the efficacy of obeying his precepts: so that, following his salutary examples, we may merit to attain the companionship of Your supreme perfection; You who with God the Father and the Holy Spirit live and reign forever and ever, Amen.

a The river Aisne. The Aisne, commonly called Aine, a river of Champagne in the province of Rheims, which flows past the town of Sainte-Menehould, Attigny, Rethel, Château-Porcien, and Soissons, and is mingled with the Oise at Compiègne.

b See Gerard John Vossius, book 3 on faults of speech, etc., chapter 3, page 371, where he cites many authors using this word.

c Cicendele elsewhere, that is, a glass lamp. In the shorter Life of St. Sulpicius Pius, January 17, number 12, it is called Cicindilum; Cicendelum, Cincentillus in the Life of St. Tillo, January 7, chapter 3, number 32.

CONCERNING THE BLESSED DOMITIAN, OR TUITIAN, DUKE OF CARINTHIA, MARIA HIS WIFE, AND AN ANONYMOUS BOY.

AT THE BEGINNING OF THE NINTH CENTURY.

Preliminary Commentary.

Domitian, or Tuitian, Duke, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) Maria his wife, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) An anonymous boy, at Millstatt in Carinthia

By J. B.

Section I. The town of Millstatt. The church and monastery of Blessed Domitian.

[1] Millstatt is a town of Upper, or Western, Carinthia, situated between the rivers Drau and Lieser, on an enormous lake formed by the Rosbach stream. The town itself, which the Germans call Milstat, Mylstat, Millestat, or Mulstat, Millstatt, a town of Carinthia, is thought to have received its name from a thousand statues; as Hieronymus Megiser in his Annals of Carinthia, Matthaeus Merian in his description of the same province, and Wolfgang Lazius in his Commentary on the Roman Republic, book 12, section 6, chapter 3, and book 6 on the migrations of nations, page 161, have written. So also the monk of Millstatt below, in the Life of Blessed Domitian, number 2: "Millstatt," he says, "received its name from a thousand statues, which the people, deceived by an ancient error, worshipped there." A diploma of indulgences of the Cardinals James and Alan, which we shall give in section 3, number 15, so called from a thousand statues: likewise reads: "The Chapel of St. Ulrich at Planz, within the bounds of the parish Church of Blessed Domitian at Millestatuis." If this etymology is approved, it would more correctly be called Millstatt, or (as here) Millestatuae, than (as commonly in Lazius and others) Milstadium, which in German means a city at a mile, or a mile distant; perhaps from the river Drau, or from the mouth of the Lieser pouring itself into it. There is certainly indeed in the Antonine Itinerary a place called "Ad statuas," midway between Brigantium, or Brigetio, and Arrabona, or Arrabo, as is expressly added: which places Cluverius interprets as Ad statuas being Dotis, between Brigetio, that is, Gran, and Raab; though Lazius dissents. There could also have been another place in Noricum Mediterraneum, "Ad mille statuas." Could this perhaps be the same which is erroneously called Adundrinas in the Life of St. Virgil, instead of "Ad andrinas," that is, πρὸς ἀνδρίαντας, "At the statues"? It was certainly not far from there. "Those coming to the Carantani," says the writer, "dedicated there a church of the glorious St. Mary the Virgin, and another in the city of Liburnia, their own city of Adundrinas, and in very many other places." You will read more correctly: "and another in the city of Tiburnia and their own city 'Ad andrinas.'" We stated above, when treating of St. Ingenuinus, that Tiburnia was thought to be Villach, a city situated on the river Drau, not far from Millstatt, which here seems to be called "their own," that is, the city of Duke Chetimar. Others think that the town of Adundrinum, or Adundrinas — as if "ad undas," "at the waters" — is Klagenfurt, which was formerly called Glanfurt from the river Glan. They say it was also called Hydrundinum, either from ὕδωρ, which means water, or from the hydra, a water serpent or dragon, which that city bears as its insignia. It was indeed familiar to medieval writers to invent semi-Greek names for cities, with a certain affectation of learning, such as Herbipolis and Iatospolis for Würzburg and Regensburg. But let us return to the thousand statues.

[2] These statues, whether because they gave the people an occasion of impiety, or because they were ancient trophies of demons, which Blessed Domitian overturned, Lazius reports that Duke Domitian overturned and submerged in the nearby lake. He is certainly said in the epitaph inscribed on his tomb to have converted this people to Christianity from unbelief, and to have been the first founder of that church. Lazius subscribes thus: [having converted the people, he also founded a church there, with his wife Maria;] "He is reported to have had in marriage Maria, the daughter of the Duke of Merania; with whom he established a church at Millstatt." Megiser also in book 1, chapter 5, assigns the daughter of the Duke of Merania as his wife; not sufficiently mindful of what he had written in chapter 2 — that the first Duke of Merania was Godfrey, around the year 957, descended from the line of Verlin, who is said to have been the Chancellor of Charlemagne, although no mention of him is found anywhere in the Annals of the Franks. He whom Megiser calls Godfrey seems to be the Blessed Rasso, called by the Bavarians Grafrath, of whom we shall treat on June 19; for Lazius in book 7 asserts that from him both other nobles and the Dukes of Merania drew their lineage. was she the daughter of the Duke of Merania? But this later figure, whether Rasso or Godfrey, was of the same age as Blessed Domitian, as will appear afterward. Merania, moreover, called by some Maranum, is a town of the County of Tyrol, situated near the castle of Tirolo, from which the province takes its name; and it is itself believed to have formerly been the chief city of that Alpine district, whose lords were called Dukes of Merania and adorned with other princely titles which long since lapsed, their possessions having devolved upon various princely families, especially the Austrians.

[3] Megiser in book 1, chapter 5, maintains that Domitian founded a monastery at Millstatt from the dotal goods of his wife Maria. Lazius in book 6 says that Erbo, did he also found a monastery? the son of Hartwig, the Palatine Count

of Regensburg, was created Duke of Carinthia by the Emperor Lothair (the second of that name, who was created in 1125 and died in 1137), and that he... was the first to establish monks in the church of St. Domitian at Millstatt: Erbo the Prince, to whom Abbot Albert, Bishop of Trent, descended from the Ortenburg family, afterward granted an Abbot. But how could Erbo have been created Duke of Carinthia by the Emperor Lothair, before the year 1102, when he had died in the year of Christ 1102? Thus the Abbot of Ursberg at that year, not at 1140 as Lazius supposed: "Erbo, now aged, a noble Prince of Carinthia and formerly Palatine Count of Bavaria, departed to the Lord." The same author, at the year 1104, after narrating the death of Count Boto, a most noble man, says: "These two brothers, Erbo and Boto, from their father's blood traced the most ancient nobility of the Noric nation, being descendants of that famous Erbo whom popular songs still celebrate as having been pierced by a bison in the hunt — sons of Hartwig the Palatine Count... Their maternal lineage, however, was from Saxony, of the distinguished Immeding tribe, which is also said to have been related to the illustrious line of the Ottos." Which the Stade chronicler copies word for word at the same year. Our Brunner in book 11 of the Bavarian Annals, number 9, follows these.

[4] Megiser, following Lazius's chronology in establishing the era of Erbo, adds concerning Millstatt: "This Erbo established monks in the monastery of Millstatt in Carinthia, formerly founded by St. Domitian, Prince of the Carantanians: to whom Albert, Bishop of Trent, descended from the Counts of Ortenburg, afterward gave an Abbot." But in the Life of Blessed Domitian, the Benedictines are narrated as having been introduced to Millstatt by Erbo: nor is it stated whether there had previously been other monks, or canons regular, or secular priests. For thus it reads at number 3: He introduced Benedictines. "After much time had passed, a certain Palatine of Bavaria, by the name of Arbo, to whom belonged almost the entire estate situated around Millstatt, who was also the first founder of the monks of the Order of St. Benedict, began to be there." Lazius also writes that Popio, the son of Erbo, founded certain things in the monastery of Millstatt, and that his name is found inscribed there.

[5] What Lazius writes about an Abbot having been given to the monastery of Millstatt by Bishop Albert of Trent probably occurred when he had first either restored or enlarged that monastery: and what the same author writes when speaking of the Princes of the Carni of Frankish descent should be understood accordingly, lest it contradict what he himself wrote about Erbo and what we have already reported; and many Abbots before the era of that Albert are named below. Lazius, on page 161, writes thus: "To this first church of Millstatt, established by Blessed Domitian, Albert, Count of Ortenburg and Bishop of Trent, first added an abbey, around the year of the Lord 1240." And when he treats of the Counts of Ortenburg in the same book: Albert, Bishop of Trent, is said to have built a new monastery and enriched it; "Albert the second," he says, "elected Bishop of Trent, from the parish and first foundation made by the holy Duke Domitian, began and enriched the Abbey of Millstatt." And in the title of the same paragraph, speaking generally of the Ortenburgs, he says: "The works of these Counts include the former Abbey of Millstatt," etc. Megiser also in book 7, chapter 43: "The Counts of Ortenburg built the Abbey of Millstatt from the foundations," he says. And in book 8, chapter 56, he writes that before the monastery was founded by Bishop Albert of Trent, there had been there only a parish church.

[6] What the monk of Millstatt writes in the Life of Blessed Domitian refutes these claims: "A certain Abbot," he says, "by the name of Otto, a vigorous and religious man, having in his congregation one hundred and fifty men of the spiritual life." because long before, after the old one burned, "In his days, while the foundations of the greater monastery were being laid, after the burning of the former one," etc. Lazius estimates that Abbot Otto presided over the monastery and discovered the relics of Blessed Domitian three hundred years before his own time, that is, around the year 1240 (when he has already reported that Albert II, Bishop of Trent, also lived). Janus Pyrrhus Pincius in book 2 of his Lives of the Bishops of Trent makes Albert a full one hundred and twenty years later than Lazius does. And Abbot Otto was much older than even Lazius determines. "Albert the second," says Pincius, "of Ortenburg in Carinthia, raised to the pontificate, took the scepter, and distinguished with the mitre, governed the Church most wisely, in the year 1363." He writes that those who compiled his Life in public records say he was one of the Counts of Ocleia and Ortenburg, who are no less splendid for the glory of their deeds than for the antiquity of their lineage. Lazius enumerates what the Ortenburgs either possessed themselves or were accustomed to grant to others to possess by feudal right, most of which passed to the Austrians after the family became extinct. That family is said to have originated from the Spanheims in the region of the Rhine, and to have been propagated in Carinthia through Count Frederick, the brother of St. Hartwig, Bishop of Salzburg (of whom we shall treat on November 8), and to have borrowed its name from the castle of Ortenburg, which they built in Upper Carinthia on the right bank of the Drau, on a hill; not far from their own little town of Spittal, says Lazius, though he doubts whether the nomenclature should not be traced elsewhere. Megiser in book 7, chapter 2, agrees. But (as already suggested) the monastery which Count Erbo had either built for the Benedictines before the year 1100, or had given to them after it had previously been possessed by others, Abbot Otto had rebuilt it, having been burned almost two hundred years before Bishop Albert II of Trent was elected, and rebuilt by Abbot Otto, will be easily conjectured by anyone who reads attentively what is reported below as written by the monk of Millstatt. Perhaps it was again restored or enlarged by Albert in the fourteenth century: if indeed Lazius and Megiser narrate the truth.

[7] Besides the monastery of monks which we mentioned, there was another at Millstatt for holy women, of the same Benedictine rule. another monastery of holy women at Millstatt. Thus the monk of Millstatt in the Life of St. Domitian, number 8: "For the nuns of that same place, very devout," etc. And in the Miracles, number 17: "In modern times, a certain nun of this cloister, by name Kunegundis, the daughter of Lord Dietmar, Knight of Gurk, surnamed Biel," etc. And shortly after: "Likewise a nun of the cloister, by name Bigel." And at number 22: "While the pious nuns saw him laboring miserably." That monastery still exists, or perhaps only some part of it — namely, some small dwellings with two little gardens and a chapel of St. Andrew. The nuns, however, died out there even before the monks. Their dwelling serves the Parish Priest, the chapel a Congregation of citizens erected seven years ago under the title of the Assumption of the Virgin Mother of God.

Section II. Millstatt given to the Order of St. George, then to the Society of Jesus.

[8] The monastery of monks at Millstatt which we have described was afterward converted by the Emperor Frederick III into a royal seat for the Grand Master of the Order of St. George, with the consent of the Supreme Pontiff, Millstatt given to the Master of the Order of St. George: as Lazius writes in book 6 on the migrations of nations. Frederick III instituted this Order for the exaltation of the faith and as a defense against the Turks: Pope Paul II confirmed it, with the monks migrating elsewhere and a sustenance for their maintenance assigned. Maximilian I added a free and secular confraternity of St. George, confirmed by Alexander VI, Julius II, and Leo X. These matters, confusedly reported by certain authors, we shall clearly elucidate from the diplomas of the Pontiffs and Emperors themselves, in the Life of St. George on April 23.

[9] When that Order had either fallen apart of itself, or (as Fauvin suggests) been completely suffocated and extinguished by the civil wars, especially those stirred up on account of religion, the Austrian Nobles reclaimed Millstatt and the administration of the rest of the goods for themselves. Finally Millstatt, through the munificence of Archduke Ferdinand — who afterward became Emperor of that name, the second — in the second year after he had assumed the government of Styria and Carinthia, in the year of Christ 1598, then to the Society of Jesus, by the authority of the Supreme Pontiff, was conferred upon the Society of Jesus, for the endowment of a college and academy at Graz in Styria. This is recorded in the Annual Letters of the Austrian Province of the Society of Jesus for the year 1598, with a notable eulogy of Blessed Domitian.

[10] The annual revenue of the College of Graz was increased by the addition of the town. That town is situated in Upper Carinthia, with a quite broad territory and fertile cultivation, and the place itself is healthful, being pure and pleasantly agreeable; nor is it so new, since around the year of Christ 774

by the holy Domitian, Duke of Carinthia and of the Norici, a place celebrated by pagan superstition for a thousand statues of idols (whence the place was named Millstatt, with the letters altered). But to good effect, the Duke turned the tavern of idolatry into a dwelling of Christ. This was how it was done: During that time the Duke had learned by report that St. Virgil, Bishop of the city of Salzburg, was flourishing, celebrated equally for holiness and for the fame of miracles. By God's bidding, he summoned him through envoys, and instructed by him in the faith instead of perfidy, in Christ instead of the idol, with impiety overturned the most pious Prince wished, as a witness of his devotion to God, to found a house there for the Religious of St. Benedict: and afterward it was the seat of the Master of the Order of St. George. for the endowment of the college and academy of Graz: Thence an annual revenue was paid to the college. But since somewhat larger revenues were desired for the fuller state of our Seminary and University, and the accustomed ones were always obtained from there with greater difficulty, this town with its lands and its combined revenue, by the generous beneficence of the munificent Archduke Ferdinand, was assigned to the college. So much for that. That the writer supposes St. Domitian was once an idolater will be confirmed later: for as was narrated before, the Benedictines were first introduced to Millstatt not by him, but by Erbo, or Arbo, in the twelfth century.

[11] Certain members of the Society now reside there, to instruct the townspeople and neighbors in the doctrine of the faith and in piety. This enterprise, as is evident from the letters of the following years, has prospered well from the very beginning. And indeed in the very next year, 1599, the same Annual Letters report: "Although at first we found the inhabitants of this place who are subject to us to be vehemently estranged and averse from us, by some sort of error, we nevertheless so won them over by reason and kindness that, having begged pardon, the townspeople recalled from heresy and instructed in piety, they most eagerly love and venerate us. Forty returned from heresy to the orthodox faith. The use of the chalice, from which only six or seven had abstained, we entirely abolished: and this year we had 180 communicants under one species alone. Through the industry of our men, the custom of carrying the chalice to the sick in other parishes also ceased: the administration of the Sacrament of Baptism in the dining room during winter ceased: women were barred from access to the cloister precincts, even the public ones: the subjects were recalled from heretical sermons which were being held in neighboring places." In the year 1600, the townspeople of Millstatt and the neighboring subjects are written to have returned almost to a man to the Catholic faith: so that the following Easter of the year 1601, eight hundred and twenty-eight, purified by confession, approached the sacred Eucharist.

Section III. The public veneration of the Blessed Domitian, Maria, and the anonymous boy.

[12] In previous centuries there was great devotion among the people toward Blessed Domitian, so that they flowed together from even the farthest borders of Istria and Pannonia, not only from Carinthia, Carniola, and Styria, to visit his sepulchre. Blessed Domitian formerly celebrated with public worship and miracles, Nor is the devotion now infrequent or small. An enormous multitude of the neighboring inhabitants gathers indeed on the Nones of February to venerate him: to whom even now neither the propitious divinity nor the patronage of the Saint himself is lacking. For, just as very many miracles were formerly wrought through his aid, which we shall give below, so also now not a few are said to occur: none, however (as far as we have been able to ascertain), proved by legitimate authority; and now also indeed scarcely even a few committed to writing: for those who have experienced his aid do not think to have it handed down to the memory of posterity, through blessed bread deeming it sufficient if they proclaim the benefit among their own. Round loaves of rye bread, first blessed with a prescribed prayer and with the invocation of the patronage of St. Domitian, are distributed on the fifth of February, after the sacred rites are performed, one to each person present — as many as three thousand at a time. They are employed as remedies for various ailments: for they report that quartan fevers have been driven away by them, with fevers, pleurisy, etc. cured, women in labor have been helped, and stitches in the side have very often been cured.

[13] When the honors of the Blessed in heaven first began to be granted to Blessed Domitian by the authority of the Apostolic See is not sufficiently established. Abbot Otto of Millstatt, who lived about five hundred years ago, as we said at number 6, declares: "We know Blessed Domitian, and it is clearer than light that, although not canonized by our predecessors, he was nevertheless often distinguished by many signs from the Lord." The relics found by the same Abbot, however, had this ancient inscription upon them: "Blessed Domitian the Duke, if not canonized, founder of this church." And Wolfgang Lazius at the place cited above writes that he was enrolled among the Saints either on account of the continence of his life or on account of his miracles. certainly publicly called Blessed and Saint: Megiser also not only reports in chapter 31 of book 6 that he is called Saint by historians, but affirms in chapter 2 of book 1 that he was enrolled in the number of the Saints by the Roman Pontiff on account of the miracles wrought at his sepulchre. Ulrich, the last Count of Celje, whom Lazius writes was treacherously slain by the sons of John Hunyadi, calls him "St. Domitian, the principal Lord of the monastery" in public letters of a certain donation made in the year 1443; as a learned man has informed us.

[14] Already of old there were, as it were, preludes to a public apotheosis, namely several elevations of his relics: the first through Abbot Martin Daut, around the year 1100, relics honorably translated in the eleventh century, as may be conjectured from the era of the Palatine Erbo asserted above. He thought fit to place the relics of Blessed Domitian, as is stated below in his Life at number 4, in a more honorable place, worthy of his merits, namely near the principal altar: and approaching with fitting veneration, he opened the tomb, constructed with great workmanship, with great labor. Those relics were then, in the time of Abbot Otto, discovered and placed in an honorable location in the sacristy, so that (as the same Abbot expresses it) they might be venerated by all with fitting private honor. and in the twelfth or thirteenth century. For thus, as is stated there, they were kept hidden. Finally, by John, Bishop of Gurk in Carinthia, Vicar General in spiritual matters of the Archbishop of Salzburg, in the year 1441, the same relics, filled with a good fragrance, were taken from the chest in which they had been stored with no small diligence and care, and the fifteenth. carried with reverence to the sacristy of that church, and stored in a safer place, to be kept there for a more venerable and more fitting deposition of the same. The diploma of the Bishop itself we shall give below, in which he expressly calls him Blessed Domitian.

[15] It is likely that the matter was then referred to the Supreme Pontiff, and that either greater honors were decreed for him or at least permitted. For the very Cardinals of the Roman Church — Alanus Coëtivy, Archbishop of Avignon, and James Ammanati, Bishop of Pavia — called Blessed by Cardinals, call him Blessed and make mention of the parish Church of Blessed Domitian at Millestatuae in a diploma given in the year 1463, which for this very reason we have deemed it worthwhile to review here in full. It reads thus: "James, by divine mercy, Cardinal Priest of the title of St. Chrysogonus, and Alan, of the title of St. Praxedes, of the holy Roman Church, to each and every one of the faithful of Christ who shall inspect, view, and hear these present letters, perpetual greeting in the Lord. The splendor of the Father's glory, who illuminates His world with His ineffable charity, then especially follows the pious desires of the faithful who hope in His most merciful Majesty with benign favor, when their devout humility is aided by the prayers and merits of the Saints. Desiring therefore that the Chapel of St. Ulrich at Planz, within the bounds of the parish Church of Blessed Domitian at Millestatuae, of the diocese of Salzburg, in a public instrument: should be frequented with fitting honors, and that the faithful of Christ should the more willingly flock there for the sake of devotion, the more abundantly they know they will be refreshed there by the gift of heavenly grace, and that it should be venerated by the faithful of Christ; trusting in the mercy of Almighty God and in the authority of His Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, to each and every one who are truly penitent and confessed and who shall devoutly visit the said chapel annually on the feasts of St. Ulrich and the dedication of that church, on the Friday of the Ember Days before the Nativity of the Lord, the Friday of the Ember Days in Lent, the Friday of the Ember Days after Pentecost, and on these festivities and celebrations, and who shall extend helping hands for the repair and preservation of the building, chalices, books, and other ornaments necessary for divine worship therein; We the aforesaid Cardinals, for each day of these feasts and celebrations,

mercifully release in the Lord one hundred days of Indulgences from the penances imposed upon them, the present letters to endure in perpetuity for all times to come. In faith and testimony of all the foregoing, we have ordered and caused these our present letters to be drawn up, and to be fortified by the hanging of our cardinalatial seals. Given at Rome in the year from the Nativity of our Lord one thousand four hundred and sixty-three, on the eighth day of the month of April; in the fifth year of the pontificate of the most holy Father and our Lord in Christ, Pius, by divine providence Pope, the second.

[16] Entirely similar diplomas of each of these Cardinals exist, he is also called Tuitian, given on the same year and day, and differing from the one we have already reported only in this: that what read "Desiring therefore that the Chapel of St. Ulrich at Planz," etc., are expressed thus: "Desiring therefore that the Chapel of St. Ulrich, within the bounds of the parish Church of St. Tuitian, of the diocese of Salzburg, should be frequented with fitting honors," etc. For St. Domitian is also called Tuitian.

[17] The same relics of St. Domitian and his companions were then, in the year 1492, Another translation, altar, and image of his, as we have learned, brought from the sacristy into the church and deposited in a sepulchre before the altar. In that same year an altar was erected, on which his image, crowned with rays, is seen, as is customary for Saints. There also exists at Millstatt an old Breviary of the monks who resided there, in which, at the fifth day of February, feast; the name of Blessed Domitian is recorded in the first place before St. Agatha: and likewise in the old Missal of the same place, written in red ink as a mark of a certain distinction. It is also established that a Mass formerly said for him, three Masses used to be celebrated there on that day by different Priests, one indeed from the Common of Confessors. That religious practice was afterward antiquated, however, so that only two were said, one of St. Agatha, Virgin and Martyr, and the other at the seventh hour for the deceased founders and benefactors, with the funeral rite. This too was changed about thirty years ago. Some years back, a single Mass had again begun to be celebrated at the altar nearest the burial of Blessed Domitian, of the Most Holy Trinity, or of the Blessed Virgin: but the principal Mass was of the three Japanese Martyrs. Only this last is now observed, the former having been abrogated: but in such a way that this same Mass is offered to God for the founders and benefactors, both living and deceased. The secular Priests, however, read both the Mass and the Office of St. Agatha: which is not necessary, since, as we shall say below, any other Priests who come to the churches of the Society on that day are permitted to read the Mass and Office of those three Martyrs; the Office of St. Agatha having been transferred to another day. A sermon, however, is delivered about Blessed Domitian after the Mass of the Martyrs is celebrated: now a sermon, after which the distribution of bread, and when the divine services for that day are finished, the blessed breads are distributed, of which we spoke at number 12. This is also done on Holy Thursday, but with a small attendance then. On the days of the Nativity, the Circumcision, and the Epiphany, a certain measure of beer is distributed free of charge to each individual subject.

[18] Maria, the wife of Blessed Domitian, is also reckoned among the Saints in that church, and concerning her and her husband, this prayer is found in the cited Breviary: Maria his wife is Blessed: "O God, who sanctified Your servants Domitian and Maria with a merciful calling, and took them up with a happy consummation; graciously receive our prayers, and grant that, just as they are with You by their merits, so they may not depart from us by their intercessions and examples. Through Our Lord."

[19] The same must also be established concerning that anonymous boy — that he seems to have long been deemed worthy of public veneration, and an anonymous boy, whether he was their son, or whether his remains were brought there from elsewhere, perhaps because he had been killed in hatred of the faith. For the relics of all are mentioned as having been found and translated together, to be honored indeed with equal worship. Thus in the Life, number 7: "Then unexpectedly the relics of Blessed Domitian and of Maria his wife, and the bones of a certain small child, were found together by the aforesaid Abbot and the other Brothers." The relics of all were translated together, In addition, the inscription: "Blessed Domitian the Duke, founder of this Church." And on the other side: "These are the relics of Maria his wife." Who the boy was, however, has been unknown up to now. "But this is proven, that those relics possess such great sanctity, that recently a certain blind infant girl, having a white spot on her eye... anointed with the bone, immediately began to see clearly..." And then the relics of all are narrated as having been translated together, and the miracles wrought through them are reported as accepted without any distinction, attributed to all. and he ordered them to be honored; And so Blessed Domitian, appearing to a monk, speaks thus: "Dear Brother, do you not exhort this congregation to show themselves more diligent and more devout regarding our relics?" And then: "While they fulfilled their vows to these same Saints." In the Miracles, number 28: miracles attributed to all equally: "Almost all the miracles which Christ deigned to show temporally to men in sick bodies occurred at Millstatt through the relics of St. Domitian and his companions."

[20] John, Bishop of Gurk, moreover, in his diploma in which he narrates their translation, writes thus: "That the relics of this kind, both of Domitian himself and of Maria his wife and of a certain boy, found in that same church in times long past, and afterward in the course of time translated several times to diverse places within that same church." Then he reviews what individual members or fragments of each he found, and adds: all were deposited by the Bishop with equal reverence, "Which relics, thus discovered as is premised, and received by us, we, together with the aforesaid convent, carrying them with reverence to the sacristy of that church, have deposited them in a safer place, to be kept there for a more venerable and more fitting deposition of the same." So he writes, with no distinction made of place, or of a more honorable position, or of the veneration to be paid.

Section IV. Inquiry into the era of Blessed Domitian. Carinthia occupied by the Slavs. Their King Samo.

[21] The question of the era of Blessed Domitian is more difficult. A single characteristic is given — that he converted that people to Christianity. But neither is this sufficiently clear or certain. For the whole of Noricum had long since received the faith of Christ under the Romans, and retained it even in the fifth century after the birth of Christ, Carinthia formerly Christian, as is evident from the Life of St. Severinus on January 8: although all those provinces were devastated by very many incursions of the barbarians, and their religion was often gravely shaken and weakened. For even before, in the age of St. Jerome, under the Emperors Honorius and Arcadius, how hideous was the appearance of all things there can be learned from Jerome's own letter 3 to Heliodorus, chapter 9: "The mind shudders," he says, "to pursue the calamities of our times. For twenty years and more, with its neighboring provinces devastated in the time of St. Jerome, Roman blood has been shed daily between Constantinople and the Julian Alps. Scythia, Thrace, Macedonia, Dardania, Dacia, Thessalonica, Achaia, Epirus, Dalmatia, and all the Pannonias are devastated, dragged off, and plundered by the Goth, Sarmatian, Quadus, Alan, Huns, Vandals, and Marcomanni. How many matrons, how many Virgins of God, and noble persons of free birth have been the sport of these beasts! Bishops were captured, Priests killed, and the functions of diverse Clerics overthrown: churches overturned, horses stabled at the altars of Christ, the relics of Martyrs dug up," etc.

[22] How terrible then under Attila, King of the Huns (for it is pleasant to pass over very many things as if at a leap), how monstrous was the tempest; then by Attila, which, having ravaged nearly all of Europe, nevertheless more often devastated the region nearer to Pannonia in its going and coming! After his death, what was disturbed in both Pannonias and the other borderlands of the Danube by his sons; how often the provinces of Noricum were harassed and plundered by Heruli, Rugi, and Alemanni, the same Eugippius, the writer of the Life of St. Severinus, records: and how Tiburnia (which is now the Carinthian city of Villach, and Goths, as we have said elsewhere that learned men think) was besieged by the Goths, and after various combats was forced to purchase release from plunder. Religion, however, somehow stood even amid those storms: more gravely shaken, and gradually dying out after Odoacer, King of the Heruli, compelled as many as bore the Roman name to migrate to Italy, in the year of Christ 487, in the consulship of Boethius. Carinthia then seems to have obeyed the Goths.

[23] Finally the Slavs settled in that province and in the neighboring ones, first summoned in small numbers to give aid in war, then encouraged by frequent plundering, and they conceived the confidence of retaining the places through which they had so often roamed. Procopius in book 3 reports that a powerful incursion of theirs — I know not whether the first — occurred in the thirteenth year of the Gothic War, the year of Christ 547, in these words: The Slavs, after terrible depopulation, "Around that time, an army of the Sclavini, having crossed the river Danube, afflicted all the Illyrians up to Epidamnus with enormous evils, partly butchering them, partly driving off into slavery, without any distinction of age, those whom they could, and having plundered their goods, they raged. Moreover, they occupied not a few strongholds in those places, and indeed very powerful ones, and roaming everywhere at will they searched for everything to plunder." And again, in the seventeenth year of the Gothic War: "The Sclavini, invading the Illyrians with a huge multitude, afflicted them with inexpressible evils." Perhaps for this reason it happened that the Bishops of Gaul established priests in the Church of Tiburnia, the faculty of the Bishop of Aquileia to travel there having been taken away. This indeed, in the pseudo-synod held at Marano in the year 590, cited above in the Life of St. Ingenuinus on this very day, the Bishops of Venetia and Rhaetia Secunda they inhabit it: complain had begun to happen years before. It is credible that under the most cruel dominion of the barbarians, religion was uprooted, or perhaps even the entire ancient population was given over to destruction.

[24] The Slavs therefore held these places thereafter, and waged almost constant wars with their neighbors — on one side the Bavarians, on the other the Huns — with varying success. And indeed Tassilo, as Paul the Deacon writes in book 4, chapter 7, of his history of the Lombards, "having been appointed King over Bavaria by Childebert, King of the Franks... soon entering the province of the Slavs with an army, defeated by the Bavarians: and having won the victory, returned to his own country with very great spoil." Which Welser in book 3 of his Bavarian Affairs thus explains: "In the year five hundred and ninety-five, Tassilo attacked the Slavs, perpetual and hostile neighbors, in war: of whom, besides the nation of the Czechs, which, spreading from Sarmatia, occupied Bohemia, another nation, the Quarantani or Carantani, advancing from the Dalmatian coasts and settling in the part of Noricum inclining toward the Adriatic Gulf, was pressing upon Bavaria. Having won the victory, he brought home very great spoil of every kind." Our Brunner narrates the same in the Bavarian Annals, book 4, number 10, and more briefly Sigebert of Gembloux at the same year. why called Carantani? But on what authority did Welser learn that those Slavic peoples were called Carantani, whom everyone generally calls Slavs, or Sclavinian Wends? They seem to have been called Carantani afterward because they occupied the land of the Carni, or their borders. Unless one prefers that the Carantani be named as it were Carnic Antae. For in Procopius, book 3 of the Gothic War, the nations of the Antae and the Sclavini are both neighboring and very similar in customs. But this is perhaps more subtly contrived.

[25] The Bavarians received a defeat shortly afterward, in the year (as Welser and Brunner maintain) 600. They defeat the Bavarians: Thus Paul the Deacon, book 4, chapter 11: "In those very days the Bavarians, up to two thousand men, rushed upon the Slavs: with the Cagan coming upon them, they were all killed." The Cagan was the King of the Huns. The same author records another mutual slaughter of both nations in book 4, chapter 41: they defeat again and are defeated: "When Tassilo, Duke of the Bavarians, died," he says, "his son Garibald was defeated by the Slavs at Aguntum, and the borders of the Bavarians are plundered. But the Bavarians, recovering their strength, both wrested the spoils from the enemy and drove the enemy from their borders." Aguntum, a place mentioned by Antoninus and other ancient writers, is thought to be where Toblach or Innichen, towns of the County of Tyrol, are now seen, not far from the sources of the Drau. Lazius unhappily conjectures that this defeat at Aguntum was inflicted on Tassilo by Samo, Prince of Carinthia, whom he calls Samois. But Samo had not yet been placed at the helm by the Slavs, and Tassilo was dead.

[26] From then on, the Slavs were oppressed by the Avar Huns in the most shameful servitude, from which the industry of Samo, a man of Frankish nation, freed them in the year of Christ 624; and for this reason they made him their King; whereas before, as Procopius writes in book 3 of the Gothic War, the nations of the Antae and Sclavini accustomed to live without a King; were not ruled by any single man, but from ancient times lived in plebeian and common liberty, and therefore brought all matters that were useful or perhaps difficult to a common council. The manner of their servitude and the occasion for choosing a King is thus set forth by Fredegar the Scholastic in his Chronicle.

[27] "In the fortieth year of the reign of Clothar (who in the year 584 succeeded his father Chilperic, born four months before), a man by the name of Samo, a Frank by nation, from the district of Senonago, gathered several merchants with him and set out for the Slavs, surnamed Wends, to carry on trade. The Slavs had already begun to rebel against the Avars, surnamed the Huns, oppressed by a heavy servitude to the Huns, and their King the Cagan. The Wends had been auxiliaries of the Huns from ancient times, so that when the Huns advanced with their army against any nation, the Huns stood with their army drawn up before the camp, while the Wends fought. If they prevailed in victory, then the Huns advanced to seize the spoils. But if the Wends were overcome, they resumed their strength, supported by the aid of the Huns. For this reason they were called auxiliaries by the Huns, because in a double battle formation they went before the Huns, fighting in a double garb. The Huns came to winter among the Slavs every year: they took the wives and daughters of the Slavs to their beds: and suffering indignities, the Slavs paid tribute to the Huns in addition to other oppressions. The sons of the Huns, whom they had begotten upon the wives and daughters of the Wends, at last not able to bear the malice and oppression, they rebel and conquer, denying the dominion of the Huns, began (as I mentioned above) to rebel. through the industry of Samo; When the Wends had advanced with their army against the Huns, Samo the merchant (as I mentioned above) went with them in the army; and his usefulness there was so great that an enormous multitude of Huns was slaughtered by the sword of the Wends. whom they make King, The Wends, perceiving the usefulness of Samo, elected him King over themselves, where he reigned prosperously for thirty-five years. The Wends entered into very many battles against the Huns under his rule: by his counsel and effectiveness the Wends always prevailed." So far Fredegar: in whose edition prepared by Bochell, Samo is said to have been born "from the district of Sennonagago," a Frank by birth, perhaps from Belgium: which may perhaps be the region watered by the river Senne in Belgium between Soignies and Brussels, as if you were to say Senne-gau. So elsewhere Listergagium for the Laetic district, Lister-gaw, on the river Laetianus, or Lys, in Flanders. Moreover, from Fredegar's account it is clear that the Slavs endured a sufficiently prolonged servitude from a most foul nation, which they at last cast off in the year of Christ 624, the fortieth of Clothar, King of the Franks.

[28] Thus those two nations then clashed with each other, yet they were still troublesome to their neighbors and compelled them to look to the Franks for help. For Fredegar writes at the seventh year of Dagobert, the year of Christ 634: "With such prosperity did Dagobert govern... his royal rule, with certain peoples soliciting King Dagobert against him, that he had praise from all nations in immense order. And the fear struck so strongly by his effectiveness, that they would now eagerly seize to deliver themselves to his dominion by devotion: so that even the nations which dwelt near the border of the Avars and the Slavs eagerly sought that he would come prosperously behind them and subdue the Avars and Slavs and other nations to his dominion by public force, they confidently promised." These last words are expressed differently in the Deeds of Dagobert: "to such a degree that the Avars and Slavs, and the nations of other peoples, confidently promised to subject themselves to his dominion by public force." Which it is hardly likely the Slavs promised, at least by public counsel, since Samo was then ruling them prosperously, who even dared to provoke the Franks themselves and then afflicted them with various defeats; perhaps for this very reason, that he had learned that these counsels were being plotted by his own subjects or neighbors.

[29] Fredegar narrates this in these words: "In that year the Slavs, surnamed Wends, in the kingdom of Samo, had killed very many Frankish merchants and despoiled them of their goods; He kills plundered Frankish merchants: this was the beginning of scandal between Dagobert and Samo, King of the Slavs. Dagobert sent one Sicharius as ambassador

to Samo, requesting that the merchants whom his people had killed or whose goods they had unlawfully seized, he should cause to be justly compensated. Samo, not wishing to see Sicharius and not permitting him to come before him, Sicharius, dressed in the garb of the Slavs, an ambassador demanding reparations, came with his men into the presence of Samo: he announced all the things with which he had been charged to the same. But, as the pride and paganism of the depraved would have it, nothing that his people had done was redressed by Samo, except only that he wished to arrange hearings, so that concerning these and other disputes which had arisen between the parties, justice might be rendered to each other. Sicharius, like a foolish ambassador, spoke words of reproach, which had not been enjoined upon him, and threats against Samo — to the effect that Samo and the people of his kingdom owed service to Dagobert. Samo, now stung, replied and said: 'Both the land which we have belongs to Dagobert, and we are his — if, however, he has resolved to preserve friendship with us.' Sicharius said: but too proudly, 'It is not possible for Christians and servants of God to enter into friendship with dogs.' Samo on the contrary said: 'If you are servants of God and we are God's dogs; he wittily refutes him: since you act constantly against Him, we have received permission to tear you with our bites.' Sicharius was cast out from the presence of Samo."

[30] Dagobert soon stirred up a threefold army against the Slavs: he is attacked in war: of the Lombards, the Alemanni, and the Austrasians: the Austrasians, having fared poorly, shamefully fled. But the Alemanni and Lombards carried off with them a very great number of captives from the Slavs. These things were done in the ninth year of Dagobert, he draws others away from the Franks, the year of Christ 636. "After this," says the same Fredegar, "on many occasions the Wends burst into the kingdom of the Franks, ravaging Thuringia and the remaining districts. And Dervanus too, Duke of the nation of the Sorbs, who were of the Slavic race and had long since looked to the kingdom of the Franks, delivered himself and his people to the kingdom of Samo. And this victory which the Wends won against the Franks was obtained not so much by the valor of the Slavs as by the demoralization of the Austrasians, since they saw that they had incurred Dagobert's hatred and were constantly being plundered."

[31] In the following year, the year of Christ 637, the tenth of Dagobert, the same author reports that the army of the Wends entered Thuringia. and frequently ravages their provinces: "In the eleventh year of the reign of Dagobert, the year of Christ 638, when the Wends, by command of Samo, were raging fiercely and often crossing their border and entering the kingdom of the Franks, ravaging Thuringia and the remaining districts, Dagobert... raised his son Sigebert to the kingdom of Austrasia... Henceforth the Austrasians are known to have usefully defended the border and the kingdom of the Franks against the Wends by their zeal." he is checked under the auspices of St. Sigebert the King. So Fredegar; from which you may refute the author of the Life of St. Virgil, Bishop of Salzburg, who writes that the Carantani, together with their King Samo, were at last subdued to the service of Dagobert. This Aventinus, Lazius, and Megiser have drawn from him.

Section V. Dukes of Carinthia before and after Blessed Domitian.

[32] When Samo died around the year of Christ 660, whether any of his sons was placed at the helm of the kingdom (for he had twenty-two sons and fifteen daughters), or whether the royal power was abrogated and divided among several Dukes, Dukes of the Slavs, even during Samo's lifetime, is uncertain. For even during Samo's lifetime there were Dukes of certain districts belonging to the Slavic nation: such as Dervanus, mentioned above, Duke of the nation of the Sorbs: and when in the year of Christ 636 the Bulgarians, defeated by the Huns, fled to Dagobert, nine thousand men with their wives and children, and were ordered by him to winter in Bavaria, and after one night were all killed by the Bavarians; Altiacus, who escaped from that slaughter with seven hundred men, was protected in the march of the Wends by Wallacus, Duke of the Wends, and retained with him for many years.

[33] The author who wrote the Life of St. Virgil, Bishop of Salzburg, in the twelfth century, a disciple of the Blessed Archbishop Eberhard, writes the following about the state and Dukes of Carinthia after Samo: "Not long afterward the Huns began to afflict the same Carantani grievously with hostile insurrection, Boruth, Duke of the Carantani, and their Duke at that time was named Boruth, who, seeing the army of the Huns against them, meanwhile sent messengers to the Bavarians, asking them to come to his aid. And they, coming with great haste, vanquished the Huns He defeats the Huns with the help of the Bavarians: and strengthened the Carantani, and subjected them and their neighbors to the service of the Kings: and they led hostages from there with them to Bavaria, among whom was the son of Boruth, by name Karastus, his son Karastus, a Christian, succeeds him; then his cousin Chetimar, whom his father asked to be reared in the Christian manner and baptized: which was done. Likewise he asked the same to be done for Chetimar, the son of his brother. When Boruth died, by order of the Franks, the Bavarians sent back Karastus, now a Christian, at the request of the same Slavs, and they made him Duke: but afterward he died in the third year. And again, by the permission of King Pippin, at the request of those same peoples, Chetimar, a Christian, assumed the duchy... When Chetimar died, however, and a third insurrection arose, for some years there was no priest there, until their Duke Waltunc sent again to Bishop Virgil."

[34] From these facts it is concluded that Duke Boruth lived until King Pippin; in the time of Pippin, King of the Franks; with whose assent Chetimar was created Duke of the Carantani three years after the death of Boruth, and he kept with him Majoranus, initiated into the priesthood by St. Virgil, for the instruction of the Christian religion: for Virgil himself was first ordained Bishop in the year 767, the penultimate of Pippin. Duke Walcuno, moreover, again requested that priests be sent to him by the same St. Virgil. The latter died in the year 784: then Walcuno. when Walcuno died is not sufficiently established. Who afterward were set over that province, we shall say shortly.

[35] Wolfgang Lazius reports certain things from the national annals, as he frequently cites them, which are not sufficiently consistent with what has been narrated — such as that Baruch, together with his brother Cotio, the chronology of these Dukes confused by Lazius and Megiser: was stripped of the Carantanian kingdom by the Avars, and then restored to his dignity by the Kings of the Franks: that Karastus was washed in the sacred waters by Blessed Domingus, a disciple of the Blessed Rupert, Bishop of Juvavum (who had died 130 years before the principate of Karastus): that Cetemar, a Prince of the Carni, was given from the Frankish nation. Hieronymus Megiser writes that Samo died in the year of Christ 638, that Baruch thereafter ruled for forty-two years, Karastus for nineteen, Chitomar for fifty-seven, and that he was given as Duke to the Carantani by Pippin's authority in the year 700: that Valdung, his son, succeeded him, the last of the Slavic race. But this entire chronology is undermined by what has been adduced above.

[36] When Valtunco, or Waltcuno, died without children, the same Lazius and Megiser write that Theodo, the son of Tassilo, King of Bavaria, was placed over the Carantani by his father in the year 772 — born in that very year for the first time, as Welser reports; who also has the following about the Carantani at that year: "The domestic annals record that in the same year the Carantani were defeated and subdued by Tassilo: the Carantani defeated by the Bavarians: being content to have briefly indicated so great an event in a word (for it was an immense accession to Bavarian power)." That Valtuncus, who is shown by the friendship of Virgil to have reigned with the consent of the Bavarians, died earlier, is not in doubt, at least in my mind. Brunner records the same, and explains the cause of the war thus: "Violated treaties, defection from loyalty, and whatever other things are avenged by the sword, are understood to have given occasion for war, even though the records are silent." The expedition of Tassilo seems to us both doubtful, and the life of Waltcuno too far extended. For who would confine the reigns of Chetimar and Waltcuno to three years, together with so many insurrections raised and quelled?

[37] They then want a Duke named Ingo to have been given to the Carantani. Aventinus says he succeeded Baldungo, or Walcuno; Lazius and Megiser say he succeeded Theodo, son of Tassilo: Ingo, their Duke, Brunner places him in the year 791, when Charlemagne waged war in Pannonia against the Huns — when three years before Tassilo and Theodo had been tonsured as monks. It is surprising, if he was a Frank, as Megiser and Lazius maintain, that no mention of him is made in the Frankish annals.

[38] Other Dukes, unknown to the cited writers, are mentioned in the history of the conversion of the Bavarians and Carantani to the Christian faith, which was written around the year 858;

a fragment of which Chesne records in volume 2 of Frankish Affairs. The Huns driven out by the Franks There, in the year 796, Eric the Count is said to have been sent by Charlemagne against the Huns with a huge army: then Pippin, son of the same Charles, who having obtained the victory, "assigned the part of Pannonia around the lake of the lower Pelissa, beyond the river called the Raba, and so all the way to the river Drau, and as far as where the Drau flows into the Danube, insofar as he had authority, appointed him to care for the people who remained from the Huns and Slavs in those parts, with doctrine and ecclesiastical ministry," to Arno, Bishop of Juvavum (Salzburg). Which Charles the father ratified.

[39] "In the year 798 the Emperor ordered Archbishop Arno to proceed to the regions of the Slavs and to provide for all that region, the province inspected by Arno, Bishop of Salzburg: to conduct the ecclesiastical ministry in the episcopal manner, and to strengthen the peoples by preaching in faith and Christianity. As he ordered, so he did: going there he consecrated churches, ordained Priests, and taught the people by preaching. And returning from there he informed the Emperor that great benefit could be achieved there, if someone had the endeavor for it. Then by the Emperor's command, Bishop Theodoric was ordained by Arno, Bishop of Juvavum." Theodoric given as Bishop. "Arno himself and Count Gerold, leading him into Slavonia, gave him into the hands of the Princes; committing to that Bishop the region of the Carantani and their borders on the western part of the river Drau, as far as where the Drau flows into the stream of the Danube, that he might authoritatively govern the people by his preaching and teach them to serve God by Gospel doctrine."

[40] "After, therefore, the Emperor Charles, having expelled the Huns, committed the dignity of the episcopate to the Rector of the Church of Juvavum, namely to Archbishop Arno, and granted it to him and his successors to hold and govern in perpetuity, the peoples, whether Slavs or Bavarians, began to inhabit the land from which those Huns had been expelled, and to multiply. Then the first Count of the border was established by the Emperor, [Counts of the Avar border established by Charlemagne, under whom were native Dukes,] Gonterrannus; the second Werenharius; the third Albricus; the fourth Gotefrid; the fifth Gerold. Meanwhile, however, while the aforesaid Counts administered the eastern region, some Dukes dwelt in those parts belonging to that See, who were subject to the aforesaid Counts in the service of the Emperor: whose names are Prinnihlavuga, Ceincias, Hroymar, Etgar. After those Dukes, however, the Bavarians began to hold the aforesaid land, given by the Kings, as a county: Hebriwinus, Albgarius, and Palco. and Bavarians: These things having been thus accomplished, Ratbod assumed the defense of the border: in whose period of time a certain Prinnina, exiled by Moymar, Duke of the Moravians, came above the Danube to Ratbod. Who immediately presented him to our Lord King Louis... And at that time King Louis of the Bavarians sent Ratbod with a great army to destroy Duke Ratimar."

[41] Of these Dukes and Counts I find no mention in Megiser: Lazius lists them, but not in the order he should have. Both substitute for Ingo (who died in the year 792, as Megiser claims) Codolaus, after him Baldric, and after him Domitian. There was indeed, as is evident from the Frankish annals, Cadolach, or Cadolaus the Count, Duke of Friuli, Warden of the borders of Dalmatia; upon whose death in the year 819, Baldric was substituted: and to him in the following year a part of the Carantani, which had defected from the Emperor Louis the Pious to the party of Liudewit, Duke of Lower Pannonia, then other Wardens of the border and Presidents of the Carantani, Franks, surrendered, as Einhard testifies, who calls both him and Count Gerolt Wardens of the Avar border, and reports them as having been in the province of the Carantani in the year 826: and finally says that in the year 828 Baldric was reduced to the ranks, since through his negligence the Bulgars had ravaged the borders of Upper Pannonia with impunity. Gerolt, moreover, or Gerold, also called Gerald, is the one who is listed at number 40 as the fifth Count of the Hunnic and Slavic border, distinct from Gerold, Prefect of Bavaria, who at number 39 is recorded as having brought Bishop Theodoric to the Slavs with Arno, and who was slain by the Huns together with Eric, Duke of Friuli, in the year 800.

[42] Lazius, after treating of St. Domitian, writes the following: "Gerhold, in the national annals, together with his sons Goteramus and Wernherigo, is read to have governed the Carni after St. Domitian: as likewise Albricus, who follows, about whom besides I have found nothing in the annals: just as about the following — Gotefrid, Gerold, Helimbinus, Albaricus, Pado." But these are the same ones we have already listed: Gerold, Prefect of Bavaria; Gonterrannus, Werenharius, Albricus, Gotefrid, Gerold, the series and dates of those Dukes and Counts confused by Lazius, Hebriwinus, Albgarius, Palco. After these he places Carloman, son of Louis II the German, as Duke of the Carantani, from whom was born of a noble Carinthian woman, but from an illegitimate union, Arnulf — himself Duke of Carinthia, and afterward made Emperor.

Section VI. The era of Blessed Domitian determined — the end of the eighth century and the beginning of the ninth.

[43] To what purpose has this narrative about the arrival, King, and Dukes of the Slavic Carantani been traced so far back? Surely to discover the era of St. Domitian, Carinthia converted by St. Domitian; previously Christian: who is said to have converted this people to Christianity. I do not think this occurred at the time when the Romans held Noricum, although the name Domitian is Roman and the province was Christian. For neither, as is asserted, would a church built by him have escaped the hands of the barbarians for so many centuries, nor would his memory, as that of so many other Saints, not have been obliterated.

[44] Afterward too, even after the Romans had migrated from there, some sparks, as it were from the embers of a dying religion, shone forth from time to time. but religion had gradually withered Whence also (as we said before) the pseudo-synod held at Marano complains that priests were installed at Tiburnia by the Bishops of Gaul, and says that previously those churches among the nations had been accustomed to be held by the Metropolitan of Aquileia. But by the savagery of the Slavs, the worship of the true God was abolished. [and was afterward entirely uprooted by the Slavs: St. Columbanus is divinely forbidden to approach them;] At the time when St. Columbanus was expelled from Burgundy by King Theoderic and his grandmother Brunhild, around the year of Christ 610, the thought rushed into his mind of going to the borders of the Veneti, who are also called Slavs, and of illuminating their darkened minds with the Gospel light, and of opening the way of truth to those wandering from the beginning through byways: as Jonas writes in his Life on November 21. But from an Angel he understood that the progress of the faith of that nation was not at hand.

[45] Among the disciples of St. Columbanus, Eustasius, who is venerated on March 29, journeyed to the Boii, who are now called the Bicarij (perhaps Bavarians), and having imbued them with much labor whether Saints Eustasius and Rupert approached them is uncertain: and corrected them with the outlines of the faith, he converted very many of them to the faith. St. Rupert more fully spread the faith through Bavaria — first Bishop of Worms, then of Juvavum, or Salzburg, whose Life we shall give on March 27. Whether either of them entered the borders of the Carantani is not established: much less that Blessed Domitian was washed by him in baptism, as some conjecture. For long after the death of St. Rupert — which Welser and Brunner assign to the year 628 — the Slavs were still pagans, and especially their King Samo himself, as was reported above from Fredegar.

[46] Not long after, St. Amand penetrated to the Slavs. For, as Baudemund writes on February 6 in his Life, St. Amand approached them but converted few: "he heard that the Slavs, deceived by excessive error, were held oppressed by the snares of the devil. And trusting that he could there obtain the palm of martyrdom, having crossed the Danube, he went around those same places, preaching the Gospel of Christ to the nations with a free voice. But having regenerated only a few of them in Christ, and seeing that the fruit was not sufficiently increasing for him, and that he would not obtain the martyrdom he always sought, he returned again to his own flock." Those few were perhaps those who, as stated above in section 4, number 28, are said to have confidently promised to subject themselves to King Dagobert's dominion around the year of Christ 634. But Domitian was not among them; for he is said to have joined the entire nation to Christ, which at that time by no means occurred. For Aventinus is mistaken, as often, when he writes in book 3 of the Bavarian Annals that the region of the Wends was reduced to obedience and dominion by the armies of Dagobert,

and that the Wends were also sent under the yoke of the Christian religion. Above, in section 4, it was demonstrated that, apart from the very many captives carried off on a single occasion, the entire triumph of the Franks over the Slavs at that time consisted in having checked their incursions some years later, by giving the Austrasians St. Sigebert as King.

[47] For a long time after these events the Slavs were still pagans. For the Slavs, committing robberies rather than wars throughout Bavaria in the year 697, are reported to have killed St. Marinus the Bishop (who is venerated on November 15 together with St. Anianus the Archdeacon), according to the Acts of the monastery of Rott, by Welser in book 4, Brunner in book 5, number 8, they were still pagans in the year 697, and Raderus in volume 1 of his Bavaria Sancta. Those barbarians, as Welser writes, are recorded to have been Vandals, who must have been Slavs, that is, Wends from the neighborhood; for calling the same people Vandals is an old and widespread error.

[48] At last Duke Chetimar of the Carantani, a Christian, in the last years of King Pippin, brought Priest Majoranus, ordained by St. Virgil at Salzburg, with him into the province, Chetimar was the first Duke to publicly introduce preachers of the Gospel: and afterward obtained from the same Virgil, Bishop of Salzburg, Bishop Modestus and several Priests, and he invited Virgil himself into his province, both before and especially after Modestus had already died: but since various insurrections had arisen among the Carantani, perhaps under the pretext of religion, Virgil was unable to go there, and the Priest Latinus was compelled to withdraw from there. "When Ketmar died," says the writer of the Life of St. Virgil, "and a third insurrection arose, for some years there was no priest there, then Walcuno, until their Duke Waltunc sent again to Bishop Virgil and earnestly requested that he should send some priests to strengthen the aforesaid land in the faith." Which was done, and afterward Virgil himself, passing gradually through Carinthia to the borders of the Huns, "where the Drau flows into the Danube... passed through."

[49] After Aventinus, Lazius writes, with Brunner subscribing, that Ingo was placed over the Carantani. Concerning him, Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini narrates the following, as found in the same Lazius and Megiser: Ingo honors the Christian common people at a feast, "There is a tradition that in the year 790 after the birth of Christ the Savior, during the reign of Charlemagne, the Duke of the nation, Ingo by name, prepared a great banquet for the provincials: and having admitted the country people to his presence, he ordered them to be served in golden and silver vessels; but the nobles and magnates, placed far from his sight, he ordered to be served in earthen vessels: and when asked why he did this, he replied that those who cultivated the fields and humble cottages were not less clean than those who inhabited cities and lofty palaces. reproving the nobles; The country folk, who had received the Gospel of Christ and been purified by the waters of baptism, had white and shining souls; the nobles and powerful, who followed the filth of idols, had sordid and very black ones: and he had arranged the banquet according to the quality of their souls. the same as Prinnihlavuga, or Bruningwon. The nobles, chastised by this, seeking in droves the waters of holy baptism, in a short time, under Virgil and Arno, Bishops of Salzburg, all received the faith of Christ." So he writes, and many others after him. This Ingo, or, as Lazius writes, Inguo, I suspect to be Duke Prinnihlavuga, mentioned above at number 40: for those barbarous names are customarily written variously by writers, especially of a different nation, and often cut in half. And he was perhaps called both Inguo and Bruningwon: whence Prinnihlavuga was distorted. Thus he who in the History of the Conversion of the Bavarians and Carantani is called Prinnina, exiled by Moymar, Duke of the Moravians, is called by Megiser and others Bryno, and from him the city of Bryna, or Bruna (Brno), in Moravia is believed to have been named.

[50] If this conjecture is approved, it will also be permissible to surmise that the one who seems to have succeeded him, Ceincias, is our Domitian, who is also called Tuitian, after him Blessed Domitian; and was perhaps called by some harsher name by his pagan countrymen, which the writer closer to his time then called Ceincias, and his posterity Tuitian, and then Domitian. What if the name was not Ceincias but Tuicias, whence Tuicianus or Tuitianus? That change of letters is easy — T changing to C, and ui to in. Certainly this Saint of ours seems to be assignable to this time, not, as Lazius in book 6 on the migrations of nations and Megiser wished, after Baldric, around the year 828, in the time of Louis the Pious. And it is likely that he received baptism from St. Modestus the Bishop, and was among those Princes of whom it is said in the Life of St. Virgil: "O what great exultation of the Princes, of every rank of religion, proceeding to meet him with pomp!" and among those into whose hands Arno and Gerold, at number 39 above, are narrated to have given Bishop Theodoric.

[51] Lazius writes differently from what he wrote in the cited book on the migrations — in book 12 of his Commentary on the Roman Republic, not the same as Walcuno, section 6, chapter 5 — things closer to our opinion, though not sufficiently proved: namely, that Duke Walcuno was called Domitian in Christianity, and was induced not only to receive the faith and salutary doctrine by Bishop Modestus, but also to establish two great churches in the territory of the Carni, in the ruins of formerly Roman municipalities, namely at the Colony of Solva and at Millstatt. And then he repeats nor was it this Duke who established the episcopal See for St. Modestus. that Duke Domitian, under the guidance of the Blessed Modestus the Apostle, both established the church and the episcopal See. But we have already related above from the Life of St. Virgil that Bishop Modestus died while Chetimar was still ruling the Carantani. Nor was the entire nation converted before Arno surveyed the province, which is nevertheless said to have been accomplished through Blessed Domitian. But since Lazius in both places cites and approves the story of Ingo from Aeneas Silvius, if Domitian was Walcuno, he will certainly have to be said to have converted only the rustic common people, while the nobility still retained and defended pagan errors. Domitian therefore ruled Carinthia in the time of the Emperor Charlemagne, shortly before the year 800 and for some space thereafter. Thus it is permissible, upon weighing all the evidence, to pronounce not without reason.

Section VII. The inauguration of Blessed Domitian. Other deeds and miracles; by whom described?

[52] Blessed Domitian was inaugurated by a rite retained by his successors: To confirm our opinion about the era of Blessed Domitian, and to undermine that of Lazius, another conjecture of Lazius himself, also approved by Megiser, is very useful: that he was perhaps the first to be inaugurated as Duke of the Carni with that ceremony which the aforesaid Piccolomini reports. Thus Lazius in book 6 on the migrations of nations, page 161. Since we have not seen that work of Piccolomini, we shall describe that rite, pertaining to the deeds of Blessed Domitian, from Lazius himself, but in the words of his source. Thus it reads, both in the cited Commentary on the Roman Republic, book 12, and book 6 on the migrations of nations:

[53] "The House of Austria holds the rule of Carinthia, and they call Archduke the one to whom that region is subject. Whenever a new Prince enters upon the governance of the commonwealth, they observe a ceremony heard of nowhere else. Not far from the town of St. Veit, in a spacious valley, the remains of an ancient city are to be seen, whose name antiquity has abolished. Nearby, in the broad meadows, a marble stone is erected. where a stone tribunal in a meadow, This stone a peasant ascends, to whom this office is owed by hereditary right through succession of lineage: on the right stands a lean ox of black color, on the left a mare deformed by equal leanness: seated upon by a peasant, a large crowd of common people and every rustic band surrounds him. Then the Prince advances from the opposite part of the meadows: his purple-clad nobles attend him. The Count of Gorizia, who manages the care of the Palace, rides before him with a banner and the insignia of the principate, among twelve lesser banners: the remaining magistrates follow. No one in that retinue seems unworthy of honor, the new Prince, dressed in rustic garb, except the Prince, who bears the appearance of a peasant: a country garment, a country hat, and shoe, and a staff carried in his hand, show him to be a shepherd. When the peasant from the stone has caught sight of him coming, in the Slavic language (for the Carinthians themselves are Slavs), 'Who is this,' he cries out, 'whose so proud approach I see?' Those standing around reply that the Prince of the land is coming. Then he asks: 'Is he a just Judge, seeking the welfare of the fatherland? Of free condition, worthy of honor? Is he a worshipper and defender of the Christian faith?' All reply: 'He is, and will be.' he purchases it. Again the peasant asks: 'By what right will he move me from this seat?' But the Count of Gorizia says, 'The place is purchased from you for sixty denarii. These beasts shall be yours' — pointing to the ox and mare.

'You shall also receive the garments of the Prince, which he took off a short while ago. and is admonished to preserve justice and faith, And your house shall be free and exempt from tribute.' Upon which words, the peasant, having given the Prince a light slap, bids him be a good Judge: and rising, and leading the beasts away with him, yields his place."

[54] The Prince then ascends the stone, brandishing a naked sword in his hand, he ascends it; and turning in every direction, he promises equitable judgment to the people. They say he also drinks cold water, brought to him in the peasant's hat, as though condemning the use of wine. Then he proceeds to the church of Solium, and after sacred rites and feasting, which is situated on a nearby hill and bears the name of St. Peter, and is said to have formerly been a pontifical church: where, after the sacrifices are performed, the Prince puts off the rustic garments and puts on the royal cloak: and having feasted splendidly with the nobles, he pronounces judgment. he returns to the meadows: and there, sitting as on a tribunal, he pronounces judgment to those who seek it, and confers fiefs. Then, having appended the history of Ingo which we related before, Piccolomini concludes with this exclamation: "Hence the honor of investing the Prince was given to the peasantry." Even the last Dukes of Carinthia, Charles and Ferdinand II, were inaugurated at that stone tribunal (not marble, as Piccolomini writes in Lazius and Megiser): yet with the ceremonies of the rustic garb and the slap omitted; because perhaps the times did not permit so great a display of popular customs, with the minds of many turned away from God and the Prince by heresy: but they gave the nobles written documents, which they call Reversals, and declared that they wished nothing to be derogated from their privileges. Ferdinand III took possession through Prince John Ulrich of Eggenberg.

[55] Domitian may have been present at that banquet which Ingo arranged — either his son or kinsman, but, because a Christian, among the country people: and so that this should not be a reproach, either Ingo or he himself, about to assume the administration, may have decreed that the rite should be solemn for posterity. the name of Domitian was formerly inscribed on the tribunal. "There still survive in the field," says Lazius in the cited book of his Commentary on the Roman Republic, page 1037, "fragments of the stone tribunal where the Duke was accustomed to be inaugurated and to pronounce laws to the peoples." And he adds that, scrutinizing everything more diligently, he at last found on a rock, broken off by age from that tribunal, an inscription of Domitian himself, the Christian Prince of the Carni; but in very ancient letters, as he notes in book 6 on the migrations of nations.

[56] That Blessed Domitian established an episcopal See, as they report, I would by no means deny: but it does not seem to have been established for Bishop Modestus, but rather for Theodoric; he founds a See for Bishop Theodoric yet perhaps in that place where Modestus had previously had his dwelling, where now the Provostship of the Blessed Virgin at Solium is — commonly called Saal. Lazius thinks this is Solva, the town of the Norici mentioned by Pliny in book 3, chapter 24, called Solva in the List of the Empire under the Duke of the province of Valeria. "For those very extensive ruins which today," he says in the cited book 12, in the city of Solva, "are joined to the Provostship of the Blessed Virgin at Solium, and are commonly called Liburnia, I assert to be the traces of that Roman colony of Solva. For the adjoining field is still commonly called 'in Solfeld,' and... the church placed on a rather high hill amid ancient ruins is called the Blessed Virgin at Solium." And Megiser says that this is the church in which the Duke must attend sacred rites on the day of his inauguration, which Aeneas Silvius above called the church of St. Peter. Moreover, Lazius writes that the royal seat of both religion and the Prince always remained there for many centuries: but he confesses that he was unable to find the Bishops of this See who sat there after those times: the bishopric was afterward transferred to Gurk. St. Gebhard, Archbishop of Salzburg, certainly instituted, as will be stated in his Life on June 16, an episcopal See within Carinthia, which was afterward transferred to Gurk, in a place called Gurk, where formerly there had been a convent of holy women, and he appointed and consecrated as Bishop Gunther on the sixth day before the Nones of March, in the year of the Lord's Incarnation 1072. Gurk, or Gurcum, or Gurkium, is situated on the river of the same name, which also washes Strasburg, a small town lying at the foot of a high mountain, on whose summit is a castle, the dwelling of the Bishop of Gurk; the Provost residing at Gurk: as may be seen in Matthaeus Merian.

[57] The thousand statues, which they report were demolished by St. Domitian, formerly worshipped by the colonists in a pagan shrine, and which gave the town of Millstatt its name — these must have been placed there either by the Romans, or more likely by the Illyrian inhabitants of the place before the Romans subjugated those regions. For the name is Latin, and was made by the Romans, not the Slavs. Moreover, if they were statues of gods, [when were the thousand statues at Millstatt set up? they could have stood to his era, as the Pantheon at Rome,] whether a thousand or at least many, one might wonder that they stood until the times of Charlemagne and were not cast down while the Christian religion was flourishing in the fifth century. As if admirers either of art or of antiquity do not always find such monuments of impiety. If at Rome the Pantheon stood beyond the times of St. Gregory, closed perhaps but not yet purified and consecrated to the true God; is it surprising that the same happened in a distant province, almost always exposed to the incursions of pagans? If in the heart of Italy, on the summit of Monte Cassino, in the age of St. Benedict, at Monte Cassino a shrine and worship of Apollo, there was a most ancient shrine in which, according to the custom of the ancient pagans, Apollo was worshipped by the foolish rustic people; and all around, sacred groves had grown up in the worship of demons, in which at that same time an insane multitude of unbelievers sweated at sacrilegious sacrifices, as St. Gregory testifies in his Life on March 21; why could not similar shrines and images and sacrifices not have been entirely extirpated in Noricum? In this most religious city itself, in which we write, where idolatry was uprooted a thousand years ago, does not a stone effigy of Priapus Priapus at Antwerp. appear above the gate of the old burg next to the public prison, truncated indeed and disfigured, lest it be more unseemly if whole? Could not those statues, by a similar neglect of Christians, have remained and afterward been worshipped by the Slavs? We do not assert, however — even though it is established that the name of the place was made from a thousand statues — that all or any of them stood until the age of Blessed Domitian; but that it could have happened, which all report as having occurred.

[58] That Blessed Domitian waged many wars against the Huns, the perpetual enemies of the Slavs, is certain: the wars of Blessed Domitian: that he endured many labors at home, for the destruction of superstitions, for taming the savagery of character of his nation, for planting the faith of Christ: but we have received none of these committed to writing. For what Megiser writes, that Domitian together with Ratbod undertook an expedition against Ratislav, Bryno, and Hezelo, Dukes of the Moravians, is not sufficiently persuasive: since Ratbod was of a later era than Domitian, and Aventinus, whom he cites, does not mention Domitian; though he distorts in his usual fashion the history of Prinnina, proscribed by Duke Moymar of the Moravians, whereas it is narrated more accurately in the History of the Conversion of the Bavarians and Carantani, in the first volume of Chesne's collection of Frankish writers.

[59] What certain facts exist about the people converted through Blessed Domitian, the church built, his relics found and translated, and the very many miracles wrought at them, a few deeds and miracles these were concisely but faithfully reported in writing by a monk of Millstatt. He himself testifies that he lived in the monastery of Millstatt when he writes at number 9: "There was also one of the Brothers in the cloister of our congregation." And in the Miracles: described by a monk of Millstatt; "A certain scholar of our Church." Although one might ask whether one and the same person wrote both the Miracles and the Life. For the author of the Miracles not only at number 20 records certain events of the year of Christ 1273, or perhaps by two; but also at number 22 events of the year 1298, so that he must have written after the year 1300. But the earlier author, speaking of Abbot Otto (whom he reports as having presided over that monastery not long after Count Hartwig, grandson of the Palatine Arbo who died in the year 1102, was buried in the empty tomb of Blessed Domitian), or as it was reported from Lazius above, says that around the year 1240 the relics of Blessed Domitian were found "by the aforesaid Abbot and the other Brothers, of whom the greater part still remains." Unless one wishes to hold that the translation and the earlier miracles were written by the same author perhaps around the year of Christ 1270 or 1280; the later miracles twenty or thirty years after the earlier work was published.

[60] Moreover, with what faithfulness he narrates these things, and from what source he received them, he himself indicates at number 1: "By the mediation of truth, which is Christ," but with the best faith, he says, "we wish to set forth partly those things which we have received from writings, and also those which we have received from our predecessors and elders." And at number 5: "This celebrated report has reached us from men who saw these things and were present at them." Most of the miracles, moreover, he narrates as if they occurred in his presence, or were told to him by eyewitnesses.

[61] These things, however, we received from Graz some years ago from our Philip Alegambe, who said they were copied from tablets hanging in the church of Millstatt; and other things were communicated to him by those who had resided at Millstatt.

THE LIFE, FIRST AND SECOND TRANSLATION,

by a monk of Millstatt.

Domitian, or Tuitian, Duke, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) Maria his wife, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) An anonymous boy, at Millstatt in Carinthia

BHL Number: 2248

By a monk of Millstatt.

[1] To all who faithfully believe in Christ and who wish to know the most distinguished merits of Blessed Domitian, we wish to set forth, insofar as we are able, by the mediation of truth, which is Christ, partly those things which we have received from writings, and also those which we have received from our predecessors and elders. It is established, therefore, that Blessed Domitian was formerly a Duke of the land of Carinthia, as we have found inscribed in stone on the epitaph of his tomb thus: The epitaph of St. Domitian. "In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Here rests Blessed Domitian the Duke, the first founder of this Church, who converted this people to Christianity from unbelief." In addition, under what time he lived was also contained there; but through the negligence and fault of the ancients it has been obliterated.

[2] After he was baptized by the holy Bishop Rupert, as some assert, or by one of his successors, whom we are more inclined to favor; he went to the place of Millstatt and found there no small worship of demons, He at Millstatt, having overturned the idols, as the etymology of the name of that place clearly shows; for Millstatt received its name from a thousand statues, which the people, deceived by an ancient error, worshipped there: these he, a blessed man, following the example of Pope Boniface, destroyed; dedicates a church to the Saints; and having removed all the filth of demons, he caused the church, which had originally been dedicated to a thousand demons, to be consecrated afterward in honor of all the Saints. And when he had completed the course of his life with a good conduct and a happy consummation, as his merits declare, without complaint before God and men, and is buried there, honored with candles and offerings, he was laid to rest next to the greater church. His sacred body, not long after, was venerated by his holy posterity, who according to received custom celebrated vigils at his tomb every Saturday evening with candles and offerings; by God with miracles: and many obtained there in consequence diverse healings of bodily afflictions.

[3] After much time had passed, a certain Palatine of Bavaria, which cease when a layman is buried in his church, by the name of Arbo, to whom belonged almost the entire estate situated around Millstatt, who was also the first founder of the monks of the Order of St. Benedict there, this man presumed with reckless daring to entomb certain deceased members of his family in the aforesaid church; and by this act he removed all the grace of miracles.

[4] Whence a certain Abbot, by the name of Martin Daut, not a little moved by this, thought fit to place the relics of Blessed Domitian from that spot to another more honorable one, The relics are elevated, worthy of his merits, namely near the principal altar: and approaching with fitting veneration, he opened the tomb, constructed with great workmanship, with great labor. For in a wonderful manner, a dove settling on the reliquary, while those holy bones were being raised and placed in a new vessel, a dove was seen to descend from heaven and settle on the top of that vessel; until, being placed deeper in the earth, they were hidden in the wall of the sacristy.

[5] After these events he did not work any miracles of healing. But after some time had elapsed, a certain Count, by the name of Hartwig, the grandson of the aforesaid Arbo, was killed, a profane corpse cast out from his old tomb, and his body was placed in the tomb of Blessed Domitian, which was now empty: but the next night it was ejected, and was found far outside the tomb — and rightly so: for what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? This celebrated report has reached us from men who saw these things and were present at them.

[6] Not long afterward a certain Abbot, by the name of Otto, a vigorous and religious man, having in his congregation one hundred and fifty men of the spiritual life. In his days, while the foundations of the greater monastery were being laid, after the burning of the former one, The monastery is burned: a new one is built. then unexpectedly the relics of Blessed Domitian and of Maria his wife, and the bones of a certain small child were found together by the aforesaid Abbot and the other Brothers, of whom the greater part still remains; and a seal nearby, bearing the image of a Duke sitting on a throne, holding a sword in his hand. In addition the inscription: "Blessed Domitian the Duke, Founder of this Church." And on the other side: "These are the relics of Maria his wife." [The relics of the Blessed Domitian, Maria his wife, and an infant found; they heal a white spot on the eye:] Who the boy was has been unknown up to now. But this is proven, that those relics possess such great sanctity, that recently a certain blind infant girl, having a white spot on her eye... anointed with the bone, immediately began to see clearly. The aforesaid Abbot, having been present at the discovery of these relics, is reported to have prophesied as if by the spirit of prophecy: "We know Blessed Domitian, and it is clearer than light that, although not canonized by our predecessors, he was nevertheless often distinguished by many signs from the Lord: therefore it seems to me a sound counsel that, since these holy bones have been moved from their places by the will of God, they are transferred to the sacristy; they should not be placed back in the earth, but should be placed in an honorable location in the sacristy, and venerated by all with fitting private honor. Who knows whether in a time fitting to Him the works of God may be manifested in them?"

[7] After this was done, they remained there for many years until they came into neglect by all and were esteemed as nothing. But it happened afterward that hail, striking all the region around Millstatt, devastated it so severely they ward off hail, that it reduced the monks to almost the last degree of misery. This had made them so cautious and provident that, when danger of hail threatened afterward, they calm storms: when those same relics were brought out, all that fury of the air was so calmed that no trace of any storm could be observed.

[8] On a certain day a certain monk who had had a disease of the kidneys for three months, when he approached they heal the sick: and raised the aforesaid relics upon his shoulders, immediately without delay recovered from his illness.

[9] There was also one of the Brothers in the cloister of our congregation who rarely or never left the church from praying or kneeling: at the admonition of St. Domitian, appearing to a monk praying to them, and when on a certain night, remaining in the church, exhausted by his great labor according to his custom, he now lay prostrate many times before the said relics, he suddenly saw the whole church gleaming with immense light, and a man of great brightness standing at his head and saying to him: "Dear Brother, do you not exhort this congregation to show themselves more diligent and more devout regarding our relics, whence they can have no small accumulation of benefit? Indeed, if they neglect them as usual, they will endure every deficit in temporal things." In the morning he reported this vision to the community and the Brothers: which some, faithfully believing, gave thanks to God; others, regarding him as delirious and not in his right mind, said that he had seen not a vision but rather an illusion. they are more honored. For even the nuns of that place, very devout, of whom some in illness, even when placed at the point of death, while they fulfilled their vows to those same Saints, immediately began to feel better. they heal the sick. And so in many ways the merits and benefits of those relics were declared: but lest these things should become a reproach or a derision to some, they were until now kept hidden. So much for this: but now such manifest and frequent things have occurred that, even if men are silent, the miracles themselves cry out what is true.

a Wolfgang Lazius in book 6 on the migrations of nations, page 161, says that the sarcophagus of Blessed Domitian was found by Abbot Otto, with this inscription: "Domitian, Duke of the Norici and Carantani, with his wife Maria of Merania, the first founder of this church, who converted this people to Christianity from unbelief." But that inscription seems interpolated; the one in the manuscript is more genuine.

b For we have shown above that Blessed Domitian seems to have been baptized easily 140 years after the death of St. Rupert.

c Pope Boniface IV held the See from September 18, 607, to May 25 (or, as others say, the 8th), 614. He, as is found in the book on the Roman Pontiffs, "requested from the Emperor Phocas the temple which is called the Pantheon: in which he made a church of St. Mary Ever-Virgin and of All Martyrs."

d Concerning the era and nobility of this Arbo, or Erbo as others call him, we treated in section 1, number 3.

e "Vessel" is here used for a sepulchre or reliquary.

f Lazius, making no mention of the seal, writes that his image was also found there, Image of Blessed Domitian. namely of a Duke sitting on a throne and holding a sword in his hand: and that this existed in a chapel next to the greater church. There are in the cemetery, at the side of the Choir, two chapels, or shrines: one of Corpus Christi, and into that there is an entrance from the church: double chapel at Millstatt, the other chapel was of the Blessed Virgin; it is now the sacristy of the greater church. It is thought that Blessed Domitian was entombed there, later translated to the greater church by the Benedictines. In the same chapel the Georgian Knights made their profession, invested new Knights, and carried out other duties. next to the church dedicated to the Savior The greater church itself was dedicated to the Savior, whose statue stood on the high altar; now, that altar having been demolished, it is attached to the wall opposite the Chair. There was also above the middle door of the church, carved in stone, an image of the Savior, and of Abbot Conrad, distinguished in Benedictine habit, humbly presenting a church likewise carved to Him. Above the door of the cemetery also is painted an image of the Savior, between St. George and Blessed Domitian. But the monastery itself is said to have been dedicated to All Saints: whence, by the prescription of a certain provincial Provost, and to All Saints. on the Kalends of November the Office is performed as for Patrons. The dedication of the church is commemorated on October 18.

g From this it is evident that this writer was a monk of Millstatt.

MIRACLES OF BLESSED DOMITIAN.

Domitian, or Tuitian, Duke, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) Maria his wife, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) An anonymous boy, at Millstatt in Carinthia

BHL Number: 2248

By a monk of Millstatt.

[9] In the year one thousand one hundred and eighty-one, when almighty God deigned to manifest the grace of His mercy in the relics of St. Virgil and his companions at Salzburg, under the presidency of the Lord Pope Alexander III, At the relics of Blessed Domitian, cured in the year 1181, in the reign of the Emperor Frederick I, and of the Lord Conrad as Archbishop, and of the Lord Ulrich as Abbot at Millstatt; a certain woman, paralytic for three years, came, warned by a vision, to the tomb of Blessed Domitian, carried and placed upon it by the hands of friends, a paralytic woman, and immediately obtained health.

[10] Secondly, a girl also from Rottenstein, withered, blind, and deaf, received health there. Three lame men, one from Kirchheim, blind and deaf, 3 lame, another from Griffen, and a third from Circaniz, were restored to the use of their feet. A certain Brother from the cloister, as was known to many, his intestines being broken and spilled out, a man with a hernia, was suddenly and wonderfully restored.

[11] A certain weaver, saying that the monks were doing all these things to deceive people, immediately began to speak incoherently and go mad; a madman punished for blasphemy, 2 mute, a lame man, a deaf man, and being led to the tomb of St. Domitian, he was healed by prayers. A woman from Falkenstein, mute for eight years, began to speak. A certain man of Sinneck, hearing nothing, received his hearing. A certain lame man from Malten merited to walk properly. Two men from Hungary, one mute and the other hearing nothing, were healed. A woman from Rassa, unable to speak for six years on account of illness, began to speak.

[12] A peasant from Freiburg, wishing to cross a flooding river, a shipwrecked man saved, was driven by a storm and submerged in the depths: and when he invoked the name of St. Domitian, he was snatched from the deep, and was even set upon dry land. Two women from Delach — one with a contracted hand was healed, the other, blind, was given sight. A woman from Celje, blind and hearing nothing, was healed of both infirmities. 3 contracted, 3 blind, 2 deaf, A woman from Karst, brought in a cart and contracted, returned on her own feet to her home. A blind woman from Gurnitz was given sight. A baby girl from St. George in Carniola, with contracted legs, was raised up. A girl from Loffer, elephantiasis, having elephantine hands, was healed. The wife of the Lord of Freiburg, who had long been deaf, merited to hear.

[13] A peasant from the city which is in Friuli, blind, received his sight. A boy from Mildorf, seven years old, having no use of his feet, began to walk. Another from Trient was restored to his hearing. A girl from Celchak, blind, was given sight. Two boys, one from Grazlau, the other from Celsach, completely lame, were healed. 5 blind, 2 deaf, a weak person, 3 lame, 4 paralytics, A girl from Celje, completely lame, was healed. A woman from Pinzgau, blind for a long time, received light. Three paralytics, when they vowed to come to the tomb of Blessed Domitian, immediately obtained health. A certain peasant from Tigrich was freed from blindness and deafness. A woman from Rattenstein, not only one-eyed, but with half her body destroyed by paralysis, recovered from both. A certain man from Villach, seeing nothing for seven years, the cloud of his eyes being dispelled, merited to see clearly. a contracted woman, A certain woman from Velden, with contracted hands, was raised up.

[14] Afterward, on the feast of St. Michael, fourteen signs occurred, with up to three hundred people present, 5 blind, 4 deaf, 3 one-eyed, 2 mute, in five blind, four deaf, three one-eyed, and two mute persons. Then on Christmas Day the sepulchre of St. Domitian shone with such heavenly light that many, astonished, believed it was on fire. On Pentecost, moreover, the sepulchre illuminated; then a dove entering it, a dove descending from heaven was seen by many to have entered his tomb. A thief, while he snatched from pilgrims of St. Domitian a sack in the church containing bread and other necessities, while he attempted to exit the door of the monastery, was seen by all to stand immovable and fixed. A woman, while she dropped from above into the box an obol from Friesach brought to the sepulchre, it bounced back, repelled from heaven. sacrilegious persons punished. A cheese also, offered by someone, when stolen by another, the thief was not permitted to enter his house until he was compelled to bring it back.

[15] Three contracted persons, crawling on their hands and knees alone, one from Falkenstein, another from Solium, a third from the city of Trieste, were raised up by the grace of God and St. Domitian. cured: contracted, 3 blind, a paralytic, A blind woman from Freiberg merited to see. A woman from Viktring with a contracted hand was healed. A woman from Friesach was given sight. A man from Ljubljana, who was swarming full of worms and contracted with paralysis, was divinely healed. Likewise a young man from Ljubljana, having a contracted hand, was restored. And a woman from the same territory, blind, was restored to sight.

[16] A man from the Bridge of St. Stephen, mute for twelve years, through the grace of God and St. Domitian, his tongue being loosed, began to speak. Likewise a woman from Friesach, mute, 2 mute, obtained the same grace through the mercy of God and St. Domitian. A girl from St. Giles near Gurk, already given over to leprosy, so that she should have been separated from other people; who, when she came to the tomb of Blessed Domitian, was so freed on her return that everyone associated with her. 2 lepers, Afterward a certain scholar from Carinthia, already covered with leprosy and abominated by all, through the grace of almighty God and St. Domitian was perfectly cleansed.

[17] In modern times, moreover, a certain nun of this cloister, by name Kunegundis, the daughter of Lord Dietmar, Knight of Gurk, surnamed Biel, two demoniacs, was so harshly vexed by demons that, among other vexations and fits of madness which cannot be enumerated for their multitude and duration, she was seen to run with swift course like a cat along the tops of the roofs of the nuns of the same cloister; through the grace of God and the intercession of the aforesaid relics, she was fully and perfectly healed. Likewise a nun of the cloister, by name Bigel, also long vexed by a demon, was healed through the grace of Blessed Domitian.

[18] What more? Almost all the miracles which Christ deigned to show temporally to men in sick bodies occurred at Millstatt through the relics of St. Domitian and his companions, except that the bodies of the dead were not raised. We can also confess, under the testimony of truth, that more than two hundred

and twenty miracles were wrought at the tomb of St. Domitian. For he performed very few signs in secret, but all of them mixed together in the open. And indeed the greater the gathering of the people, the more abundant was the working of wonders. A certain man from Croatia also, contracted and having no use of his feet, more than 220 miracles wrought. A contracted Croatian cured: when he had been carried by the industry and faith of his friends to the tomb of Blessed Domitian, and there fulfilling his vows, lingering from day into night, during Matins he cried out and exclaimed so greatly from the straightening of his joints and sinews that the Brothers of that monastery, running and observing in competition with one another to see who was making that unusual and immense cry, left the aforesaid Matins unfinished at that hour: and having seen the signs and miracles which had been wrought through the merits of the aforesaid relics, the Brothers themselves, with the ringing of all the bells, sang with no small devotion the Te Deum laudamus and other chants appropriate to these events. In the morning, moreover, after the solemnities of the Masses were celebrated, a special procession was made, which the same man who had been healed accompanied, going before it, praising and glorifying God and Blessed Domitian.

[19] A certain priest, by name Henry, surnamed Falsich, from the household of the Church of Millstatt, had become so deaf a deaf man: that he heard neither the conversations of men nor even the sound of bells: when he fulfilled his vows with sighs at the relics of Blessed Domitian and departed thence by the same road, when he had arrived nearly at the middle of the courtyard, he merited to hear perfectly not only the sound of the bells but also conversations.

[20] A certain scholar, by name Rudolf Wetz, the son of Conrad of the same surname, suffering from a grave illness from the feast of St. George until the feast of St. James, which is in the harvest, to such a degree that from the most severe debility a sick man, he entirely lacked the use of his feet, was faithfully carried in the arms of his father Conrad to the monument of Blessed Domitian: and when he had fulfilled his vows with sobbing and groaning, and father and son had devoutly heard the Mass which they had procured, he immediately began to feel better: and with his father, on his own feet, though slightly assisted, he returned to the house of his parents: who afterward became Abbot in the year 1273, who afterward became a monk of that same place, and serving God well there for about thirty years, was made Abbot in the year one thousand two hundred and seventy-three, under the presidency of the Lord Pope who celebrated the Council of Lyons and decreed that a tithe be given in aid of the Holy Land, in the reign of the Lord Frederick as Archbishop, on the day of St. Bartholomew; and he sat in the Abbacy for six years, less one month. When, moreover, he had resigned the Abbacy, around three years later he again suffered an inestimable pain, having an abscess on his neck; and from this excessive swellings had grown upon him, to such a degree that many had almost despaired of his cure; afterward freed from another ailment; when the same Lord Rudolf, formerly Abbot, with sincere affection of heart, again devoutly fulfilled his vows at the tomb of Blessed Domitian and caused votive Masses to be celebrated there, on that very day he recovered from the aforesaid illness through the grace of God and Blessed Domitian.

[21] A Subdeacon also from the Cloister, by name Hartwig, deaf both in fact and in surname, suffered for a long time from the falling sickness, and thence the community of that place endured no small disturbance, another with epilepsy: because out of charity they had tolerated his remaining with them in the dormitory: finally when he emitted excessive howls and roars like a brute animal, the same Hartwig, together with the pallet on which he now lay out of his mind, was carried by the Brothers to the tomb of St. Domitian, and there through the immense mercy of God and the merits of Blessed Domitian, with the devout prayers of the Brothers mediating, he was fully and perfectly healed, and in the many years he survived afterward he never felt the aforesaid disease.

[22] In the year of the Lord one thousand two hundred and ninety-eight, under the governance of Lord Conrad, formerly Abbot of Rosazzo, a certain scholar of our Church, Haincelo by name, in whom the consumptive disease had so increased another with consumption and fever: that he could be heard by all those in the choir or refectory with him whenever he drew breath: he also fell into an acute fever, in which, while the pious nuns saw him laboring miserably, a vow having been made and devoutly rendered for him, and a candle burned at the sepulchre of Blessed Domitian during the celebration of Mass, he was immediately freed not only from the fever, likewise a demoniac: but also from the original sickness of the consumptive disease, in full. A certain noble matron also from Lickendorf near Feldsberg, vexed by an evil spirit, was brought to the tomb of Blessed Domitian and was similarly freed.

[23] In the times of Lord Ulrich of pious memory, surnamed Zand, it happened that a certain scholar, Rincher by name, assigned to the monastic life, secretly cast off the fetter of regular observance and sought out places of pleasure with a freer spirit under cover of the friendly silence of night. A certain fugitive is terrified by specters. To him the evil spirit, who had been the author of this vain resolution, fashioned such phantasmal illusions on that same road before his eyes that, from the excessive horror of the apparitions seen, his body was seized with the greatest sickness — he whose soul the same Satan had infected through the suggestion of an illicit purpose: and while he was held for a very long time in the bed of that same sickness, he falls ill, so that almost all his friends despaired of his recovery, it seemed to the ailing young man that if he were brought to the sepulchre of Blessed Domitian, he could without doubt obtain the benefit of health the next day. he is healed by the aid of St. Domitian: The friends of the ailing man therefore immediately carried him with their solemn offering and intent supplication to the sarcophagus of Blessed Domitian; and at that very moment he was freed from every bond of illness.

[24] Since therefore not only from this miracle but also from other infinite wonders the fame of Blessed Domitian was growing far and wide, a certain tailor from Spittal, having a son detained by such immense pains that he could neither be moved nor lifted from the place where he lay: but since the aforesaid boy, on account of his excessive weakness, could by no means be brought alive, likewise another sick person: his father began to implore Blessed Domitian for obtaining the boy's health, and promised to offer a sacrifice at the holy sepulchre of Blessed Domitian: and when he had fulfilled his vow, before he returned to his son, whom he had left lifeless, he found him well.

[25] In the first year of the governance of the Venerable Lord Ulrich, formerly Abbot, a certain woman from Kedsch came, upon whom divine punishment had withered one hand and blinded one eye, paralytic, one-eyed, deaf: and had taken away all the benefit of hearing: and while she lay most devoutly prostrate beside the sepulchre of Blessed Domitian, praying that power might be done for her, she immediately obtained the strength of all her members and the health of her entire body. Before the course of that same year was completed, on the day before the Nones of October, a certain man from Gmünd came, in whom paralysis had extinguished all strength from both sides downward to his legs, a paralytic, to such a degree that he could walk neither much nor little without the support of crutches: and when he had burned candles beside the tomb of Blessed Domitian and fulfilled his vow, he received such strength of body that, leaving his crutches there and glorifying God and Blessed Domitian, he returned home healthy.

a Wiguleus Hundius in his Metropolis, volume 1, page 11 (from the Salzburg Chronicle, as he writes at page 302) says: "In the year 1171, Vitalis, Virgil, Hartwig, Bishops of Juvavum, and Pilgrim of Passau, are renowned for many miracles." Better is the writer of the Life and Miracles of St. Virgil, who was living at that time: Discovery of St. Virgil the Bishop in the year 1181. "In the year of the Lord's Incarnation 1181, in the fourteenth Indiction, on the fourteenth day before the Kalends of March, under Pope Alexander III, in the twenty-first and last year of his Apostolate; in the reign of the most serene Prince Frederick, August Emperor of the Romans, in the twenty-eighth year of his reign, and with his son Henry, most glorious King of the Romans, co-reigning with him, and Otto of Wittelsbach, illustrious Duke of Bavaria, holding the duchy; while the above-mentioned construction of the monastery, which during the raging persecution of the schism had perished, demolished and crumbling, some years before, was beginning to be built from the foundations at the expense and by the command of the most distinguished Pastor Conrad, then Archbishop of Salzburg, Legate of the Apostolic See in Germany, Cardinal Priest of St. Marcellus, Bishop of Sabina, and now Archbishop of Mainz — by the cooperation of the grace of the Holy Spirit and with the favor of the clemency of the Divine Majesty, the body of Blessed Virgil, which on account of the antiquity of the immense time had been unknown to all, happened to be revealed." Our Brunner writes that this discovery occurred in the year 1182, but is refuted by the fourteenth Indiction and the time of the See of Alexander III; for the latter died in September 1181: yet it was his twenty-second year, as he had been chosen in the place of Adrian IV in the year 1159. How the writer reckons the years of Frederick I do not see: for he was elected in 1152, and crowned at Rome in 1155. But on these matters, see the Life of St. Virgil on November 27. Concerning St. Hartwig we shall treat on November 8. St. Vitalis is venerated on October 20 with a double feast.

b Conrad, Count of Wittelsbach, was Archbishop of Mainz; but he was cast down from his chair by the Emperor Frederick I because he adhered to Pope Alexander III, Conrad of Wittelsbach, Bishop of Mainz and of Salzburg, having repudiated Octavian (whom the Emperor had intruded). With equal madness, on another pretext, Frederick cast Adalbert from the throne of Salzburg, intruding a certain Henry. When in the year 1174 peace was struck between the Pontiff and the Emperor, so that Christianus might retain the See of Mainz, which he had meanwhile occupied with Frederick's favor, this was stipulated. But when Conrad vigorously stood upon his right, the Pontiff persuaded Adalbert voluntarily to cede the bishopric of Salzburg for the sake of concord, since he could not peacefully retain it while the Emperor was angry. Adalbert agreed: and soon the bishopric was given by the Pontiff to Conrad; but when Christianus later died, he preferred to return to Mainz, where he lived for many years; Adalbert recovering the mitre of Salzburg. Brunner in volume 3 of his Bavarian Affairs and Serarius in his work on Mainz narrate these things more fully; which Wiguleus touched upon carelessly, writing that Conrad was intruded into the chair of Salzburg.

c Forum Julii, or Forum Julium, was a Roman colony in the territory of the Carni, but was more than once destroyed by the barbarians: afterwards, however, it was restored as Cividale of Austria, now commonly called Cividà di Friuli or Cividale del Friuli.

d Trieste, a maritime city of Istria, under Austrian jurisdiction, commonly called Trieste.

e This is St. James the Greater, who is venerated on July 25.

f Gregory X celebrated the Council of Lyons in the year 1274.

g He was elected in the year 1270 and died on May 9, 1284, as Wiguleus writes.

h Hospitale, commonly Spittal, is a town not far from Millstatt, at the mouth of the Lieser flowing into the Drau, opposite Ortenburg.

THE THIRD TRANSLATION OF BLESSED DOMITIAN.

Domitian, or Tuitian, Duke, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) Maria his wife, at Millstatt in Carinthia (Blessed) An anonymous boy, at Millstatt in Carinthia

BHL Number: 2249

By John, Bishop of Gurk.

[1] John, by the grace of God and the Apostolic See Bishop of Gurk, Vicar General in spiritual matters of the holy Church of Salzburg; John, Bishop of Gurk to each and every one of the faithful of Christ to whom these presents shall come, greeting in Christ the Savior. The most high of heaven, among the manifold gifts of His goodness by which He wills us to attain the grace of His blessedness, has also willed that the holy relics of His Saints should be materially deposited among us in a deep place: so that, considering their presence, we might attend the more to their veneration, and through such worthy veneration the Lord may in His own time open to us through them the door of His mercy. Therefore we believe this to have come about, which we wish to make known to our community by these presents.

[2] For some time ago, when at the request of the Venerable in Christ, our most dear Brother Christopher, Abbot of the Monastery of Millstatt, he comes to Millstatt, of the Order of St. Benedict, of the Diocese of Salzburg, we had come to that same church for the consecration of certain altars; it came to our attention by report, concerning the relics of Blessed Domitian, Founder of that Church, how they were held in great veneration there by the people, and that the same had formerly shone with many kinds of miracles. And when we had made a diligent inquiry about the location of those relics, nothing certain about this was made known to us by anyone, except that the relics of this kind, both of Domitian himself and of Maria his wife [he hears about the relics of the Blessed Domitian, Maria his wife, and a boy: he searches for them,] and of a certain boy, found in that same church in times long past, had afterward been translated several times to diverse places within that same church in the course of time: as both the report of the people and certain written records more fully testified: and that in that same church, before the altar of St. John the Evangelist, there was a certain chest bearing the inscription of those relics, which was also frequented by the people with great devotion in veneration of that same Domitian.

[3] We therefore, having understood the foregoing, were stirred by a greater desire for the investigation of these relics: and on the appointed day, having taken with us the Abbot himself and the Brothers of the said monastery, together with our Chaplains named below, we approached the church itself and the chest, and having first said prayers and frequent psalms and fitting ceremonies, by common deliberation we labored at this and endeavored to open the chest for the investigation of the relics. When it was opened, and with great labor, we found, by the Lord's concession, in the middle of the chest itself the relics noted below, he finds them, deposited there with no small diligence and care, and filled with a good odor. The relics were as follows: first, the top of a skull with ribs, shins, and other more notable bones, as appeared to be those of a man's body. Likewise, the top of a skull with ribs and shins and other bones of a body, as appeared to be those of a woman. Likewise another broken top of a skull, with certain ribs and shins of a body, as appeared to be those of a certain boy, together with the spines of their backs and other small particles and minute fragments of the aforesaid bodies. Which relics, thus discovered as aforesaid, and received by us, we, together with the aforesaid Convent, carrying them with reverence to the sacristy of that church, deposited them in a safer place, he transfers them to the sacristy, to be kept there for a more venerable and more fitting deposition of the same.

[4] In testimony of which things we have ordered the present letters to be made, fortified by the affixing of our seal. These things were done and enacted in that same church of the monastery of Millstatt, the proceedings drawn up from there, in the presence there of the said venerable Abbot Christopher, and of the religious and honorable, beloved in Christ, Nicholas the Prior, Frederick, Wolfgang, Simon, and Martin, Priests; Conrad and Maurus, Deacons; Benedict, Subdeacon; George, Acolyte; Brother Andrew and Fabian the Lay Brother, Professed Brothers of that same monastery of Millstatt. Also Urban of Salzburg, of St. Peter's there; Leonard at Pernegg; and George of St. Paul in the Lavant Valley, Professed Brothers and Priests of monasteries of the same Order; together with Godfrey Spicken, Provost; John Krelober and Nicholas Erlacher, Canons of the Collegiate Church of St. Nicholas at Strasburg, of our Diocese; Priests and our Chaplains, witnesses to the foregoing. On the 27th day of June, in the year of the Lord's Nativity 1441.

a Lazius makes mention of this John in the Commentary on the Roman Republic, book 12, section 6, chapter 5, in the catalogue of Bishops of Gurk.

b Lazius writes in the Commentary on the Roman Republic, book 12, section 6, chapter 3, that the richest monastery of all Carinthia is that of St. Paul, in the Lavant Valley, close to the city of St. Andrä; which he contends is the Flavium of Pliny.

THE LIFE OF ST. POLYEUCTUS, PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE, COLLECTED FROM GREEK HISTORIANS.

YEAR OF CHRIST 970.

Polyeuctus, Patriarch of Constantinople (Saint)

By J. B.

CHAPTER I

The public veneration of St. Polyeuctus. His inauguration contrary to the Canons.

[1] The Greeks have enrolled in the register of Saints, and publicly venerate, the Patriarch Polyeuctus, who during the reigns of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Romanus his son, St. Polyeuctus, Patriarch of Constantinople, Nicephorus Phocas, and John Tzimisces, governed the Church of Constantinople, from the year of the common era 956 to 970, distinguished for his orthodox faith, piety toward God, zeal for justice, and devotion to the defense of ecclesiastical liberty: although he was perhaps not without certain blemishes, if we wish to weigh his acts by the judgment of historians. Concerning him the following is read in the Menaia on the fifth day of February: he is venerated on February 5, "On the same day, the commemoration of our Holy Father Polyeuctus, Patriarch of Constantinople." Maximus, Bishop of Cythera, has the same in the book which is inscribed Lives of the Saints.

[2] His beginnings were rendered more illustrious by the utterly debased morals of his predecessor Theophylact: whose father Romanus Lacapenus, the father-in-law of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, successor of Theophylact and himself afterward called Augustus, had elevated three sons — Christopher, Stephen, and Constantine — to the same eminence, so that at one and the same time there were five Emperors, and he who was lowest in authority was the only legitimate one, Constantine whom we mentioned, the son of Leo the Wise and the grandson of Basil the Macedonian. The same Lacapenus, moreover, intruded his son Theophylact, then only sixteen years of age, and indeed a eunuch, onto the patriarchal throne.

[3] George Cedrenus describes the most disgraceful life of Theophylact, and his death befitting such a life, as follows: In the twelfth year of Constantine's reign (that is, after the removal of Lacapenus together with his three sons, which occurred in the year of Christ 944), on the twenty-seventh day of February, in the fourteenth Indiction, Theophylact the Patriarch — a man of the most infamous character — departed this life, having presided over that pontificate for twenty-three years and twenty-five days. When he entered upon it, which was done contrary to the ecclesiastical laws, he was sixteen years of age, and for some time the Patriarch conducted himself under tutors — an utterly unworthy state of affairs! Although would that this had continued forever! For to that extent he seemed to lead a life of modesty and some gravity. When, having grown older, he was permitted to live according to his own judgment, he omitted nothing of those things which are most disgraceful and altogether prohibited by the laws: selling ecclesiastical ranks and the elections of bishops, and doing other things alien to the office of a true Patriarch, given over to an insane passion for horses and hunting, and committing many other things indecently — which to recount individually would be both unsuitable and impious... Having lived in this manner, he perished, dashed against a certain sea wall during a reckless equestrian exercise. From this fall, having vomited blood and struggled with illness for two years, he was carried off by dropsy. Curopalates, John Zonaras, Michael Glycas narrate the same things, and finally Cardinal Baronius in volume 10 at the year 956, sections 2 and 3, drawing from Curopalates.

[4] But let us come to Polyeuctus, concerning whom Cedrenus writes as follows: In the same Indiction, on the third day of April, Polyeuctus, a monk, was appointed in Theophylact's place — a man born and educated in Constantinople, castrated by his parents, who had for a long time performed the monastic life with distinction: the Emperor advanced him to that position on account of the gravity of his character, his remarkable wisdom, and his devotion to poverty. Not the Bishop of Heraclea, as was customary, but Basil, Bishop of Caesarea, laid hands upon him: because Nicephorus (for this was the name of the Bishop of Heraclea), having offended the Emperor's mind in a certain matter, was not permitted to lay on hands. This affair brought no small censure, not only upon the Emperor and Basil, but also upon Polyeuctus himself, because he had allowed himself to be ordained contrary to the sacred Canons. The aforementioned authors relate the same things. But who could understand Gabius, the interpreter of Curopalates, writing that Polyeuctus was the foster-child and pupil of Constantine — unless in Cedrenus the words were thus expressed: "happening to be an offspring and nursling of Constantinople"? And how fraudulent is the translation of Hieronymus Wolfius, who renders what Zonaras writes — "who was ordained by the Bishop of Caesarea" — as "elected by the Bishop of Caesarea": so that, forsooth, the heretical man might not be compelled to acknowledge episcopal consecration and the laying on of hands?

[5] As to why the Patriarch of Constantinople ought to be consecrated by the Metropolitan of Heraclea, George Codinus transmits the reason in his work On the Offices of Constantinople, chapter 20: The Patriarch is ordained by the Bishop of Heraclea, because Byzantium formerly belonged to the bishopric of Heraclea. And more fully, Theodore Balsamon in his commentary on the second Canon of the Second Council of Nicaea: The city of Byzantium itself, he says, did not possess the honor of an Archbishop: but by the Metropolitan of Heraclea a Bishop was sometimes ordained in it. For it is written that even though Byzantium was a self-governing city, it was nevertheless besieged by Severus, Emperor of the Romans, and subjected to the Perinthians: and Perinthus is Heraclea. And shortly after: That the most holy Patriarch of Constantinople is today ordained by him who is at that time the Metropolitan of Heraclea, derives from no other cause than from the fact that the city of Byzantium was subject, as was said above, to the Perinthians, or Heracleans. Moreover, it is found in the Chronicle of Scylitzes that the Patriarch Stephen Syncellus, brother of the Emperor Lord Leo the Wise, was ordained by the Archbishop of Caesarea, because the Archbishop of Heraclea had previously died.

[6] The passage cited here by Balsamon from the Chronicle of Scylitzes is found in Cedrenus, for John Scylitzes Curopalates is said to have copied this author word for word, and we possess his work only in the Latin version of John Baptist Gabius. Speaking therefore of Leo the Wise, Cedrenus, after relating how the pseudo-patriarch Photius was thrust back by him into the monastery of the Harmonians, adds the following: "And straightway the Emperor designates as Patriarch his own brother Stephen the Syncellus, since the Bishop of Heraclea was no longer numbered among the living, consecrated by Theophanes, the holder of the first throne." Which Gabius interpreted quite absurdly: "And immediately the Emperor chooses Stephen Syncellus, his brother, as Patriarch, because the one of Heraclea chosen by Theophanes of the first See was not living." Nor was Xylander much better: "Immediately in his place Leo installs his brother Stephen Syncellus: whom, because the Bishop of Heraclea was then not among the living, Theophanes the President designated." Understand this passage thus, as Balsamon also understood it: "And straightway the Emperor designates his brother Stephen Syncellus as Patriarch, consecrated by Theophanes, the Metropolitan of the first throne, because the Archbishop of Heraclea was not among the living." For, as may be seen in the Register of Churches in Charles of St. Paul, the order of the Metropolitan, Autocephalous, and Episcopal Sees under the Apostolic throne of the royal city of Constantinople, guarded by God, is as follows: that the first to sit is the Metropolitan of Caesarea, in the province of Cappadocia, who is therefore here called "protothronos," that is, of the first throne; the second is the Metropolitan of Ephesus, in the province of Asia; the third is the Metropolitan of Heraclea in Thrace, in the province of Europe; the fourth is the Metropolitan of Ancyra, in the province of Galatia; the fifth is the Metropolitan of Cyzicus, in the province of the Hellespont.

CHAPTER II

The zeal for justice of St. Polyeuctus. The name of the Patriarch Euthymius entered in the diptychs.

[7] As soon as Polyeuctus was inaugurated, he immediately turned his attention to suppressing the outrages that were rampant in the royal city, intending to make use of the Emperor's assistance (as he supposed): in which matter his hope greatly deceived him. Cedrenus narrates the affair as follows: Yet he, thus consecrated, freely professed the truth, and inveighed against many for the avarice of the kinsmen of the old Romanus — that is, Lacapenus — who in the month of December of the year 944 was cast down from his throne and tonsured as a monk, and died in the year 948. But Cedrenus continues: And on Great Saturday, two days after he himself had been inaugurated, he exhorted the Emperor, who came to the great church, to exercise judgment upon those things which had been done. This was not pleasing to the Emperor. But Basil also, who afterward became the chief Chamberlain, the son of the old Romanus by a slave woman, through his sister Helena Augusta, so affected Constantine's mind that not only did he repent of having promoted Polyeuctus to the patriarchate, but he even contemplated deposing him at the first opportunity. And to this end Theodore, Bishop of Cyzicus, was fanning the flames (as they say). Curopalates narrates the same things, and from him Baronius, and also Zonaras, who says that Helena herself, at the instigation of the eunuch Basil, sought an occasion by which to wrest the patriarchate from Polyeuctus.

[8] The same Polyeuctus, as Cedrenus writes, in the first year of his patriarchate, entered the name of the Patriarch Euthymius in the sacred tablets — the one who had admitted the Emperor Leo to the communion of the sacred mysteries after he had taken a fourth wife. In order that this matter may be understood, it must be traced back somewhat further. The Emperor Leo the Wise, after the death of his first wife, St. Theophano — whose Life we shall give on December 16 — married Zoe, the daughter of Stylianus Zaoutzes, with whom he had already carried on an affair during the lifetime of his lawful wife, a certain Palatine Cleric bestowing the blessing upon them, who was soon afterward deprived of his rank, by St. Anthony Cauleas, of whom we shall treat on February 12, or by his successor Nicholas. She too having died within a brief space of time, he joined to himself Eudocia, a woman born in the Opsician province, endowed with singular beauty: and she perished in childbirth together with her offspring. What then followed is set forth in the preface to the Novella of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, which is commonly called the "tomus of union" in the Greco-Roman Law: The Emperor, seized with unspeakable grief because he had raised no children, out of desire to beget them, took also a fourth wife, Zoe daughter of Carbonopsina (Cedrenus has "Zoe, the daughter of Carbonopsina"; elsewhere "Zoe Carbonopsina"), who bore him Constantine. But the Patriarch Nicholas and the Metropolitans excluded the Emperor from the church: and some of the Pontiffs said that this exclusion should be defined as lasting only a short time, and not extended for a long period; while others did not assent to this. And so there were dissensions among them, and great sedition: and the Emperor, earnestly entreating and praying, was received by some, but contumaciously rejected by others.

[9] Since, however, the Prince himself was prudent, and was not unaware whence the discord among the Pontiffs had arisen, he removed the Patriarch Nicholas from his place and expelled him from the Church, as a liar who had many times confirmed by oath and promised that he would grant the Emperor remission of the penalty, yet just as many times had changed his mind and deliberately delayed the matter. In his place he appointed as Patriarch his own spiritual father Euthymius, a man refined by many years of monastic discipline and partaking of the prophetic spirit. He declared the Emperor free from penalty, absolved him from his long-standing bond, and admitted him to communion. But there were still many Pontiffs who did not assent to the Patriarch's dispensation — especially those who stood on the side of the expelled Nicholas.

[10] After the Emperor Leo had departed to the Lord, his brother Alexander, having obtained the empire, expelled the Patriarch Euthymius from the church with insults, and restored Nicholas, who had been chosen, to his place. And so the affairs of the Church were even more turbulent, the Metropolitans being divided among themselves, some adhering to the expelled Patriarch and some to the restored one. Nor did much time intervene before Alexander died: and Constantine became heir to the empire. He, having convoked the Patriarch Nicholas and all the Pontiffs (for Euthymius had already departed to the Lord), was the author of their returning to one opinion and mutual concord, and of their granting to his father, even after death, by common decree, remission of his offense — a canonical edict being promulgated by which it was forbidden that anyone should hereafter dare to commit such an offense. So much from that source: of which Baronius reported part at the year 901, sections 5 and 6, and then at the year 921 recites the edict of Union itself; where he shows that in the Western Church a different custom from ancient times had been observed regarding these matters, with no limit placed on the taking of a wife.

[11] The history of this entire controversy is recounted more fully by the Greek writers in their annals: from whom it seems to be gathered that Euthymius was not an invader of another's throne, but was compelled by divine admonition to accept it as vacant and abandoned by Nicholas. Arethas of Caesarea, in the oration which he delivered on his praises and translation, after commemorating his cenobitic training on Mount Olympus, his devotion to poverty, and his vigils, adds the following: Hence he came to the notice of the Emperor: who admired the noble disposition of his virtue, attached him to himself as a friend, and made him a companion of the Patriarch who held office at that time. Not much later a violent storm assailed the Church, which the reckless arrogance of him who then held the helm had stirred up: in which tumult, since the one who had been its author lost heart and gave the Church a letter of repudiation of his sacred office, the wretch departed wretchedly. There was one man at that time fit to undertake the office abandoned by the other. For who could be judged more suitable to be appointed to that office, or more worthy, than he who was in favor with all? Whence it indeed came to pass that — what has not happened to many others — by the vote of the entire Church under heaven he was chosen to undertake the governance of this Church of Constantinople. If these things are so, why was it less lawful for Euthymius to accept the See when Nicholas Mysticus had abandoned it, than it was formerly for Nectarius when Gregory the Theologian had done the same? Moreover, Cedrenus and Scylitzes write that Euthymius is said, when he was declining the patriarchate, to have been induced by a divine revelation to undertake it. We here pass over the divine vengeance taken upon the Cleric who had plucked out his beard, and the most splendid ceremony with which the body of the deceased was carried back into the city.

[12] Since, therefore, that entire contention had long since been settled by the edict of union which we mentioned, the name of Euthymius had nevertheless not been entered in the sacred diptychs — neither by Nicholas, his rival, nor by the latter's successor Stephen, nor by Theophylact, who had greater care for horses than for the Church, nor lastly by his vicar, the monk Tryphon. Polyeuctus at last accomplished this, either because it was equitable and honorable for his Church that a man of recognized sanctity should be numbered among its Prelates, or in order to reconcile to himself the mind of the Emperor Constantine, who had formerly been crowned by the same Euthymius. But on account of this, as Cedrenus states, certain high-ranking Pontiffs for some time refused to share in sacred rites with Polyeuctus: but shortly afterward, yielding to the Emperor's will, they made themselves ridiculous to those debating the controversy.

CHAPTER III

The hand of St. John the Baptist brought to Constantinople by St. Polyeuctus. The death of Constantine Porphyrogenitus. Affairs under Romanus the Younger.

[13] About the same time, says the aforementioned author, the venerable hand of the Forerunner was brought from Antioch to Constantinople, stolen away by a certain deacon named Job. When it had arrived at Chalcedon, the Emperor sent out his trireme: and the more illustrious Senators, going out to meet it together with the Patriarch and the entire Clergy, with candles, torches, and incense, escorted it into the palace. Simeon Metaphrastes, who had witnessed the event, described the history of the affair, as may be seen in Surius under August 29. What pertains to Polyeuctus, we shall insert here. When therefore the vessel was approaching Chalcedon, he says, the Imperial ship was sent out, and the Pontiff with the Priests, and whoever in the Senate was distinguished and illustrious, all together, to bring that sacred treasure into the palace: with whom also a multitude of the faithful, having gone out of the city, sailed to meet it on the sea, in order to escort it. After it had been received into the hands of the Pontiff, and was being carried in his arms, and he embarked upon the sea, it was possible to see the very nature of the water itself, placid and calm, its gentle waves leaping before the vessel and directing their course all the way to the Emperors. When he says "Emperors," he means Constantine himself and his son Romanus. He then adds that the sacred relic was deposited in the middle of the royal churches. On January 7 (as we noted under that day) the synaxis of the holy Prophet, Forerunner, and Baptist John is celebrated, together with the commemoration of his venerable and holy hand translated to the royal city. On that day the Greek Menaia record that the sacred hand was first deposited in the palace by the Emperor; the annual celebration, however, is held in the church of the Phoratus, to which it was perhaps afterward transported. But we shall treat these matters more fully under August 29.

[14] Polyeuctus was unable, by this zeal of his — whether for propagating piety or for establishing concord — to placate the Emperor who was hostile to him, since Helena Augusta, her brother the Chamberlain Basil, and rival Bishops kept continually adding fuel to the fire. Therefore, as Cedrenus writes, in the fifteenth year of Constantine's reign (that is, after the removal of his father-in-law Romanus), in the month of September, in the third Indiction, in the year of the world 6468, the Emperor set out for Mount Olympus, ostensibly in order to set forth against the Saracens in Syria, armed with the prayers of the Fathers who lived there; but in reality to devise plans with Theodore, Bishop of Cyzicus, who was then residing there, for the deposition of Polyeuctus. But the God who avenges the innocent Patriarch drove him from his throne and his life. For from there, whether through a bodily ailment or because he was again poisoned by his son, he departed, seized with pains, and toward the end of October was carried back to Constantinople on a litter, and having achieved no outcome for his schemes, he died on the ninth day of November — in the year 959, Indiction 3. To his very last breath he bore a grudge against Polyeuctus, and contemplated his deposition.

[15] Yet he was divinely warned to prepare himself for death, had not a perverse mind stood in the way. For, as the same Cedrenus writes, some days before he died, after evening, stones were hurled in a mass from on high against his dwelling with violent force, producing an enormous crash. Constantine, thinking they were being thrown from the upper stories of the Magnaura, posted guards for several nights, to see if he might catch anyone who had dared to do this. But he did not know that he was laboring in vain: since this had proceeded not from human beings, but from some higher power. Glycas explains more clearly: It is reasonable to suppose that these things proceeded from the divine wrath. Zonaras says those stones were hurled against the Imperial bedchamber. What the Magnaura mentioned by Cedrenus was, Liudprand explains in book 6, chapter 2 of his History, where he describes the embassy he undertook to the same Constantine: There is, he says, in Constantinople a building adjacent to the palace, of marvelous size and beauty, which is called by the Greeks "Megaura," with rho substituted for lambda — as if "Magna aura" for "aula" (great hall).

[16] Constantine having died in this manner, says Zonaras, his son Romanus takes up the empire, who was called "the Boy" — not because he obtained the kingdom at a boyish age (for he was already a man), but to distinguish him from his maternal grandfather Romanus, an old man of advanced years. If anyone thinks he was called "Paidion," that is, "Boy," on account of the boyish manner in which he conducted his life, that too is most fitting to his character. Having recently obtained the scepter, he adorned his son Basil with the diadem and the Imperial title.

[17] But let us hear Cedrenus concerning Romanus, who writes as follows: He, having appointed magistrates who were well-disposed and acceptable to himself, and having secured the empire as circumstances allowed, in the same third Indiction, on the feast day of Easter, had the imperial crown placed upon his son by the agency of the Patriarch Polyeuctus in the great church. In the following year a son was again born to him in the Palace of the Fountain, whom he named Constantine after his father. Moreover, the young Emperor, given over to pleasures, entrusted the care of the state to his chief Chamberlain Joseph, surnamed Bringas: he himself devoted himself to nothing other than passing his life with catamites and impure wretches, harlots, mimes, and jesters. For this reason, a certain cleric John, a eunuch, who on account of certain disgraceful deeds had been expelled under the Emperor Constantine, and having been made a monk had remained hidden until the latter's death — once Romanus obtained the empire, he stripped him of the monastic habit, restored the clerical garment, and received him among his Counselors. But Polyeuctus, stirred by righteous indignation, vehemently pressed the Emperor to cast out from his household a man who had renounced his monastic vow. Nevertheless, when the Emperor made excuses, denying that the man had truly embraced the conditions of the monastic life or had been consecrated to that manner of life by any Priest, but had merely feigned these things out of fear of the Emperor — Polyeuctus, deceived, let the matter go, Joseph also lending diligent assistance in this affair. So that John lived a profane life under his new arrangement all the way until the death of Romanus: upon his death, veiled again in the monastic habit, he did not however change his disposition.

[18] The same author further on: In the year of the world 6471, Romanus the Emperor died on the fifteenth day of March, in the sixth Indiction (that is, in the year of our era 963), at the age of twenty-four ... Upon his death the empire reverted to Basil and Constantine, his sons, and their mother Theophano, who two days before her husband's death had also given birth to a daughter, whom they named Anna. This is the Anna who was the wife of the Blessed Wlodimir, Duke of the Russians, who was the cause of his accepting the Christian religion. Concerning her, Cedrenus, speaking of the Emperor Basil Porphyrogenitus, son of Romanus the Younger as we said, writes: By night, having prepared ships, he embarks the Russians (for he had obtained reinforcements from them), because he had joined his sister Anna in marriage to Wladimir their Prince. Zonaras writes the same. But Scylitzes says that Basil appointed Wladimir himself as commander of the fleet — not very plausibly, as we think. The same Cedrenus further on, before reporting the death of Basil, says: After Anna, the Emperor's sister, had died in Russia, her husband Wladimir having already previously died, etc.

CHAPTER IV

The empire of Nicephorus Phocas. His marriage with his spiritual kinswoman.

[19] In the same year that Romanus the Younger had died, 963, on the second day of July, in the same sixth Indiction, Nicephorus Phocas was acclaimed Emperor of the Romans by the Eastern armies, all stirred up by John Tzimisces. So writes Cedrenus, who also adds: There is also another account of this matter, and a more probable one: that he had long been burning with desire for the empire, and not so much for this as for the love of the Empress Theophano; with whom he had also conversed while in the city, and had often sent Michael, the most faithful of his servants, to her. Curopalates and Zonaras agree; but where Xylander translates the Greek word meaning "having conversed with her," John Baptist Gabius renders it as "having had relations with her," and Wolfius as "having been intimate with her." But who would believe that he burned more with love for the woman than with desire for the empire? More credible is what Glycas writes: Phocas is proclaimed Emperor by the armies of the East, having long been burning with desire for obtaining both the empire and the Empress Theophano. Yet it was her treachery and unbridled lust that afterward destroyed him.

[20] Phocas was, as Constantine Manasses writes, most skilled in the art of war, bold, robust, in no way yielding to hardships, bearing labors steadfastly in the manner of an anvil: yet he does not conceal his sordid avarice. His brilliant military exploits are celebrated by Cedrenus, Curopalates, Zonaras, Glycas, and all the rest. Liudprand describes his appearance and bearing in the history of his embassy to him, but in an exaggerated and satirical fashion: I was led before Nicephorus, he says, a sufficiently monstrous man, a dwarf, fat-headed and mole-like in the smallness of his eyes, disfigured by a short, broad, thick, and half-grey beard, disgraced by a neck the width of a finger, quite shaggy with the length and density of his hair, swarthy as an Ethiopian — one whom you would not wish to encounter in the middle of the night; distended in belly, lean in buttocks, with thighs exceedingly long for his overall short stature, short of leg, equal in heel and foot, dressed in a woolen garment but one quite worn out, or made foul and faded by long use, shod in Sicyonian shoes, bold of tongue, a fox in cunning, an Ulysses in perjury and lying. And then he calls him an old woman in gait, a Silvanus in visage, a rustic, a prowler, a goat-footed one, a horned one, a half-beast, a bristly one, unteachable, wild, barbarous, harsh, hairy, rebellious, a Cappadocian. And after much more: The King of the Greeks, he says, long-haired, wearing a tunic, long-sleeved, veiled, a liar, deceitful, merciless, foxy, proud, falsely humble, stingy, greedy, dining on garlic, onions, and leeks.

[21] Such as Nicephorus was, he nevertheless stirred up the love of Theophano toward himself. When he came to Constantinople, the urban multitude went out to meet him, as Constantine Manasses writes — the order of Patricians, men in purple-bordered togas, artisans from the workshops. Before all others the Empress with the Priests received the man with upturned hands, and now by the decree of all orders Nicephorus was created Emperor. First he was conducted to the Hebdomon, thence through the Golden Gate into the royal city, with auspicious acclamations, applause, trumpets, and cymbals. And when they had arrived at the great church, says Curopalates, they arranged for the Patriarch Polyeuctus to be prepared, so that he might place the royal diadem upon him. Polyeuctus therefore crowned him on the elevated platform of the great church, on Sunday, August 16, Indiction 6.

[22] After this, Nicephorus, says Cedrenus, sent Anthony the Studite monk and Syncellus, to lead Theophano out of the court and confine her in the palace of Petrius ... On the twentieth day of September, having dropped the pretense, he married Theophano ... The nuptials having been performed in the new church at the palace, when it was time to enter the sanctuary, Polyeuctus, holding him by the hand, when they had come to the sacred enclosures, himself entered the inner sanctum and repelled the Emperor, saying that he would not be admitted until he had paid the penalties for a second marriage. This was vexing to Nicephorus, and he bore a grudge against Polyeuctus to the end of his life. Zonaras writes that the Patriarch himself performed the nuptial rites in the ninth church near the palace. It is remarkable, therefore, that he was not warned by Polyeuctus beforehand, if the latter thought there was something sinful in second marriages.

[23] Cedrenus continues: A rumor was also widely circulating, which caused no small disturbances in the Church: that Nicephorus had received one of Theophano's children from the sacred baptismal font. Seizing upon this rumor as a plausible ground, Polyeuctus maintained that the Emperor was obligated either to repudiate his wife according to the prescription of the sacred constitution, or to abstain from church. And Nicephorus chose the latter course, being devoted to his wife. And having convoked the foreign Bishops who were then in the city, along with selected Senators, he proposed the matter for their deliberation. They all pronounced that the constitution was Copronymus's, and that the Emperor was not bound by it: and they gave him a letter of absolution signed by themselves. Nevertheless, with the Patriarch continuing to object and refusing to share in sacred rites with the Emperor, the Caesar gave assurance that Nicephorus had not been a godfather. But Stylianus also, the Protopapas of the great palace, from whom the rumor was said to have emanated, swore before the Council and the Senate that he had neither seen nor said to anyone that either Bardas or Nicephorus had become a godfather. Polyeuctus therefore, although he knew for certain that Stylianus was committing perjury, dropped the charge of spiritual kinship: and he who before pressed for a penalty to be imposed on account of the second marriage, pardoned that great offense as well. Curopalates, Glycas, and Zonaras have the same account. He who is here called "Caesar" was Bardas, the father of Nicephorus, created Caesar by him. The Protopapas, or, as it is in the Greek, "protopapas," is a title both in the Church and in the Palace clergy. Concerning his office, consult George Codinus. Zonaras explains this with a circumlocution in volume 3 under Basil Porphyrogenitus: "Eustathius was ordained Patriarch of the Church of Constantinople, who was chief among the priests of the Palatine church."

[24] What the Greek writers leave in ambiguity, and Polyeuctus, when it could not be proved, dissimulated, Liudprand treats as certain — that Nicephorus had attained the pinnacle of royal power through perjury and adultery. And for this reason he calls Nicephorus an onager, that is, a wild ass ... on account of his vain and empty glory, and his incestuous marriage with his mistress and spiritual kinswoman. Constantine Manasses says: As the ancient writers of history relate, although he was joined to the Empress by spiritual kinship, he nevertheless dared also to bind her to himself in carnal matrimony. As for what Cedrenus says, that Polyeuctus knew for certain that Stylianus was committing perjury, this is perhaps to be understood chiefly in the sense that Stylianus had affirmed on oath that nothing had been said by him about a child of Theophano having been received at baptism by Nicephorus.

CHAPTER V

The avarice of Nicephorus Phocas. His tyrannical laws concerning the election of Bishops and those slain in war.

[25] Nicephorus then incurred the immense hatred of the entire populace, both by imposing heavy taxes and by permitting an immense license to soldiers: to such a degree that (as Zonaras writes) he seemed to take delight in the injuries with which the citizens were burdened, although he had reached the empire through their support. Moreover, under the pretext of continual wars, he oppressed his subjects by the institution of new taxes, the increase of old ones, and exactions of every kind; and the soldiers, wherever they went, treated the people no more gently than they would enemies. Furthermore, on account of frequent expeditions, alleging a shortage of money, he partly diminished the imperial largesses customarily given to the Senate.

[26] Indeed, he even laid impious hands upon sacred things and arrogated to himself power over ecclesiastical offices. The same Zonaras continues: He completely abolished the annual gifts attributed from ancient times to churches and other pious houses. He also enacted a decree that the properties of the Churches should not be increased, because (as he himself asserted) those resources were squandered by the Bishops not for the benefit of the Churches. Indeed, he even abolished the donations bequeathed by pious Emperors to monasteries and churches — donations which it was sacrilege to disturb — as Curopalates and Cedrenus write.

[27] But most grievous of all, says the latter, was that he enacted a law — to which certain frivolous and flattering Bishops subscribed — that no Bishop should be created without the Emperor's order. And when any Bishop died, he would send one of his agents to fix the prescribed expenses: and whatever remained of the revenues he seized for himself. By what means he began to usurp this violent and unjust power, Zonaras narrates: When a dispute arose between the Bishops and the Patriarch Polyeuctus concerning elections — since the former claimed the right to elect whomever they wished, while Polyeuctus criticized the elections as being conducted neither without partiality nor with right judgment, and labored to ensure that he too should be admitted to the deliberations of those making the decisions — the Emperor, seizing upon this pretext, assumed to himself all authority for designating Bishops, issuing an edict that no one should be sent to any Church without his command. Accordingly, when a Bishop died, he would send one of his agents to the vacant Church, who would make expenses sparingly, while the Emperor claimed the rest for himself.

[28] Liudprand wittily describes and ridicules the meager expenses and squalid provisions of the Bishops in his embassy: On the eighth day before the Ides of December, he says, we came to Leucata; where by the Bishop of that place, a eunuch, we were most inhumanely received and treated, just as everywhere by others. In all of Greece (I speak the truth, I do not lie) I did not find hospitable Bishops. They are rich, they are poor: rich in gold pieces, with which they play at full coffers; poor in servants and furnishings. They sit at their bare little tables alone, setting before themselves hardtack, and then drinking — no, not drinking but sipping — bath water from a very small glass. They themselves sell, they themselves buy; they themselves close the doors, they themselves open them; they themselves are waiters, they themselves are grooms, they themselves are cap — but ha! I meant to write "caupon-es," that is, taverners; but the thing itself, which is true, compelled even an unwilling pen to write the truth. For we say that they are "capones," that is, eunuchs, which is not canonical: they are also "caupones," that is, taverners, which is against the Canons: whose

"Lettuce begins and closes the tenacious meal, Lettuce which used to close the suppers of our ancestors."

I would deem them happy, if this poverty imitated the poverty of Christ. But the harsh coin and the accursed hunger for gold produce this. But may God pardon them. I think they do this because their Churches are tributaries. The Bishop of Leucata swore to me that his Church was obligated to pay Nicephorus one hundred gold pieces annually; likewise all the others, more or less, according to their means. How unjust this is, the deeds of our most holy father Joseph demonstrate; for when he made all Egypt tributary to Pharaoh during the time of famine, he allowed the land of the priests to be free from tribute. So far Liudprand.

[29] From this it is easy to perceive how many labors and troubles Polyeuctus must have endured. But a still greater struggle then followed for him with the same profane Emperor, which Glycas, Cedrenus, Curopalates, and Zonaras report. And the last of these writes: Nicephorus, as far as it was in his power, decreed by edict that soldiers killed in war should be venerated with equal honor as the Martyrs, and should be celebrated with similar hymns and veneration. And perhaps that splendid decree would have been ratified, had not the Patriarch and certain Bishops, together with select members of the Senate, strenuously resisted, questioning how those who fell and killed in wars could be judged Martyrs or equal to Martyrs, when the censure of the sacred Canons bars them for a period of three years from the awesome and holy communion.

[30] The Canon principally cited here is the thirteenth from the epistle of St. Basil the Great to Amphilochius the Bishop, which reads as follows: Our Fathers did not reckon killings committed in wars as murders, as it seems to me, pardoning those who fight in defense of modesty and piety. But perhaps it is well to advise that those whose hands are not clean should abstain from communion alone for three years. But this Canon, as Theodore Balsamon annotates, is not in use, because it would follow from its acceptance that soldiers would never partake of the Sacraments, since in wars they are perpetually engaged against one another in order to kill enemies. He then appends this very disputation held under Nicephorus. For it is written, he says, that when the Emperor Phocas wished to number among the Martyrs those who are killed in wars, the Bishops who held office at that time, making use of this Canon, checked the Emperor's attempt, saying: How shall we number among the Martyrs those who have fallen in wars, whom the Great Basil, as men whose hands are not clean, prohibited from the Sacraments for three years? He shows, however, that there were not lacking in that council certain frivolous men who accommodated themselves to the Emperor's will. For when many priests, he says, and indeed one of them a Bishop, confessed that they had joined battle with the enemy, the divine and holy synod, in accordance with this Canon, and with the forty-fifth of the same Saint, and with other divine constitutions, wished that they should no longer celebrate the sacred rites. But a good number who were somewhat more military-minded contended that they were even worthy of rewards. Polyeuctus prevailed, however, together with the others, so that that impious decree was not enacted.

CHAPTER VI

The right to the Pallium, and authority over certain Italian Bishops, usurped by Polyeuctus.

[31] There follow other acts of Polyeuctus, the extent to which they ought or can be approved or excused, let others judge. Liudprand reports them in his second embassy, but with a mind hostile to all the Greeks, which he everywhere betrays. Thus, among other things, he writes to the Emperors Otto I and II: Nicephorus, being a man impious toward all the Churches, out of the envy with which he abounds against you, commanded the Patriarch of Constantinople to elevate the Church of Otranto to the honor of an archbishopric; and not to permit that in all Apulia or Calabria the divine mysteries be celebrated in Latin any longer, but only in Greek ... And so Polyeuctus, Patriarch of Constantinople, wrote a privilege to the Bishop of Otranto, granting him the authority by his license to consecrate Bishops in Acerenza, Tursi, Gravina, Matera, and Tricarico, who appear to belong to the consecration of the Lord Apostolic. Now of these cities, Otranto and Acerenza are Archiepiscopal; and to the latter indeed Matera is united; while Gravina, Tricarico, and Tursi are subject to it, where the Bishop of Anglona is said to reside.

[32] Liudprand brings forth another accusation against Polyeuctus — a just one perhaps, but one that does not properly fall upon him: But why should I mention this, he says, when the Church of Constantinople itself is rightly subject to our holy Catholic and Apostolic Roman Church? We know — indeed we see — that the Bishop of Constantinople does not use the pallium except by permission of our holy Father. But when the most impious Albericus, whom cupidity had filled not drop by drop but as a torrent, usurped the city of Rome for himself and kept the Lord Apostolic confined in a chamber as if he were his own slave, the Emperor Romanus appointed his son Theophylact, a eunuch, as Patriarch: and since the cupidity of Albericus was no secret to him, by sending him sufficiently large gifts he brought it about that letters were sent in the Pope's name to the Patriarch Theophylact, by whose authority both he and his successors should use the pallium without the permission of the Popes. From which shameful transaction the disgraceful custom grew up that not only the Patriarchs, but also the Bishops of all Greece use the pallium. Thus Liudprand provides the very argument by which the one he accuses might in some manner defend himself. For what? Could not Polyeuctus have believed that the honor had been legitimately granted by the Supreme Pontiff? The same Liudprand presses on: Therefore my advice is that a holy synod should be convened — by Imperial authority, naturally, like the one in which John XII was cast from the Apostolic throne by Otto, with Liudprand himself, among others, voting in favor. But let us hear the rest of his advice: And to the same synod, he says, Polyeuctus should be summoned. If he is unwilling to come, and to canonically amend his "sphalma" — that is, the faults written above — let that which the most holy Canons have decreed be done.

[33] But what were the causes of Liudprand's anger against Polyeuctus? A banquet jest directed at him by Polyeuctus, but one which he refuted rather vigorously and boastfully. Nicephorus, he says, thinking I set great store by his table, compelled me, quite ill as I was, to dine with him in the same place. The Patriarch was present with a number of Bishops: in whose presence he posed to me several questions from the sacred Scriptures, which, with the Holy Spirit breathing upon me, I elegantly expounded. Finally, however, in order to make sport of you, he asked what synods we had. When I recited to him the Nicene, Chalcedonian, Ephesian, Antiochene, Carthaginian, Ancyran, and Constantinopolitan, "Ha ha he!" he said, "you have forgotten to mention the Saxon one: and if you ask why our books do not have it, I reply that it is too new, and has not yet been able to reach us."

[34] To which I said: On that member in which infirmity reigns, the cautery must be applied. All heresies have emanated from you, have flourished among you: by us, that is, by the Westerners, they have here been slain, here been killed. We do not count the Roman or Pavian synod among these, although they were held more than once. For the Roman Cleric, afterward the universal Pope Gregory, whom you call "the Dialogist," freed the heretical Patriarch of Constantinople Eutychius from his heresy ... so too Euodius, Bishop of Pavia, was sent from Rome to Constantinople by the Roman Patriarch on account of another heresy; which he suppressed and reformed to the Catholic and orthodox faith.

[35] The Saxon race, since the time it received holy baptism and the knowledge of God, has been stained by no heresy, so that a synod should be held there which would correct an error when there was none. Because you say the Saxon faith is raw, I myself affirm the same: for among them the faith of Christ is always raw and not old, where works follow faith. Here the faith is not raw but old, where works do not accompany faith, but as if from age, like a garment despised, the faith is despised. But I know for certain that a synod was held in Saxony, in which it was debated and established that it is more honorable to fight with swords than with pens, and to meet death sooner than to show one's back to the enemy. So far Liudprand, who writes that Euodius, Bishop of Pavia, was sent to Constantinople — this is St. Ennodius the Bishop, who was sent twice to the heretical Emperor Anastasius by Pope Hormisdas, as we shall say on July 17 in his Life.

CHAPTER VII

The murder of Nicephorus Phocas. The empire of John Tzimisces. The death of St. Polyeuctus.

[36] While Phocas was thus ruining both the possessions and the authority of the Church, heavenly vengeance soon fell upon him, and through the machinations of the Empress Theophano — through whom he had risen to the empire — he was brought to destruction. Cedrenus, Glycas, Scylitzes, and briefly Constantine Manasses set forth the entire tragedy. Hear it from Zonaras: Although Phocas had previously been passionately in love with Theophano, he afterward abstained from her embrace, whether from a kind of satiety or from a desire for continence; for they say that even as a young man he was never inclined to such pleasures. She, however, either hating her husband on account of that estrangement, or anxious about her sons (for some were whispering that Nicephorus wished to castrate the royal boys and transfer the empire to his brother Leo), secretly confers with John Tzimisces — either captivated by love for him (for he excelled in elegance and charm of appearance) or deeming him a match for Nicephorus as an adversary ... Besides, John was already angry with the Emperor, because through the envy and calumnies of his brother Leo, he had been stripped by him of his military rank ...

[37] Being therefore further provoked by that adulteress, he resolved to aspire to the empire with her assistance: and at the same time he revealed the secret to his associates, and with them undertook the deed, and in the dead of night, having boarded a small boat with them, he came to the palace, which is washed by the sea on the south. That place is called the Bucoleon ... When they had arrived there, he sees a basket let down, and in it he and his companions are drawn up by the handmaids of Theophano. His companions were Michael Burtzes — who was himself offended with the Emperor on account of his rash anger — Leo Abalantes, Theodore the Black (who because of his dark complexion was called Atzypotheodorus), and two others. Entering the Emperor's bedchamber without noise (for Theophano had also provided for this), someone rouses Nicephorus — who was sleeping on the ground — from his slumber by kicks of contempt, and mortally wounds him on the head as he awakes and tries to raise himself: by which blow both his body and his spirit were severely shattered. Brought before Tzimisces, who had sat down on the royal bed, already collapsing and supported on both sides, when asked for what reasons he had been mistreated by him, he made no reply, only crying out: "Help me, Lord" ... One of them hurled a spear into his back with such force that it passed through his chest. When the guards were roused by the tumult (for they had now perceived the plot), the head of the already dead man was cut off and displayed through the window, and thus their attack was checked. So writes Zonaras. These things took place on December 11, Indiction 13, as Cedrenus writes — that is, in the year 969. The same author, together with Glycas and Curopalates, adds that he kept repeating these words: "Kyrie eleison, Theotoke boethei" — "Lord, have mercy; Mother of God, help me."

[38] John Tzimisces therefore assumed the empire, having taken as colleagues Basil and Constantine, the sons of Romanus the Younger, who were still quite young. Immediately, on that very night, as Cedrenus narrates, Tzimisces summoned to himself Basil the chief Chamberlain — whom Nicephorus, having been not inconsiderably aided by him in seizing the empire, had honored with a new title of dignity, calling him "Proedros" or President — and enlisted him as a partner in the conduct of affairs (and chose him as it were as a sharer of the empire), inasmuch as he had been engaged in public affairs for a long time, under his father Romanus the Elder, and under Constantine Porphyrogenitus his sister's husband, and had very often conducted affairs successfully against the Saracens, and knew how to adapt himself skillfully to difficult situations. As soon as this man was brought into the management of affairs by Tzimisces, he immediately removed from the palace all those attached to Nicephorus, sent his brother Leo with his sons into exile, and stripping others of their civil and military offices, substituted his own associates whom he knew to be loyal to the new Emperor. Those whom Nicephorus had banished were also recalled — especially the Bishops who, because they had refused to subscribe to his decree for vexing and despoiling the Churches, had been proscribed by him. Zonaras says that decree was the one by which he had forbidden anyone to be ordained as Pontiff without his command.

[39] With matters thus arranged, Cedrenus adds, that very night the Emperor, freed from all suspicion, went with a few companions to the great church, in order to receive the diadem from the Patriarch's hand. But Polyeuctus did not permit him to enter, saying that it was sacrilege for one to enter the divine temple whose hands still dripped with the fresh and still-steaming blood of a kinsman: let him make an effort to perform works of penance; then at last it would be permitted for him to tread the floor of the house of God. John received that rebuke meekly, promising that he would obediently do everything: he added also that he himself had not laid hands on Nicephorus, but that Nicephorus had been slaughtered by Abalantius and Atzypotheodorus, by the order of the Empress. The Patriarch therefore ordered her to be cast out of the palace and deported to some island: the assassins of Nicephorus to be banished as well; and the document of the edict which Nicephorus had issued for the disruption of ecclesiastical affairs to be torn to pieces. Immediately, therefore, Tzimisces ordered those assassins to depart from the city, and relegated Theophano to Proconnesus. When she later secretly escaped from there to the great church, she was driven out by the Chamberlain Basil, and was deported to the province of Armenia, to the monastery of Damidis, recently founded by the Emperor ... The mother of Theophano was also sent to Mantineum for the purpose of exile. The document of the edict was also brought forth and torn to pieces, and the ancient liberty of the Church was restored.

[40] When these things had been done, Polyeuctus, having exacted a promise that the Emperor would distribute to the poor whatever he had possessed as a private citizen for the expiation of his sin, admitted the Emperor to the church, and adorned him with the diadem on the feast of Christ's Nativity. So writes Cedrenus. Tzimisces then administered the empire for six years and as many months with great distinction. It is worth hearing from Constantine Manasses what his appearance was: This Tzimisces, he says, was handsome of face, charming in complexion and hair; patient, merciful, brave and manly of spirit, an unconquerable fighter, excelling in the abundance and swiftness of his counsel, liberal, chaste, mild, skilled in the hurling of spears and the drawing of bows, noble, free from lasting anger: so that, to embrace many and lengthy matters in a few words, he was a living paradise of graces, planted by the very hands of God and watered by the golden streams of the Holy Spirit, in which the entire company of virtues danced, as it were, while the Graces on the opposite side responded to them in song. So writes that author, not without poetic hyperbole.

[41] Two evidences of his piety are reported by most historians: that, after defeating the Bulgars, when he was about to enter Constantinople in the manner of a triumphant general, he had an image of the Blessed Virgin Mary placed upon a chariot magnificently adorned, and conveyed it in solemn procession through the city, ascribing to her the glory of the victory he had obtained. The second, that he was the first to stamp upon gold coins the image of the Savior, with this inscription: "Jesus Christ, King of Kings."

[42] Thirty-five days after his inauguration, Polyeuctus departed this life; as Cedrenus says. Curopalates has only thirty days; Zonaras expressly states "thirty-five." From which it follows that he died around January 29. He has, however, been assigned to this fifth day of February in the Menaia — that is, the books of ecclesiastical prayers, which the Greeks reconciled to the Catholic Church also recite, as we have said elsewhere — and on the same day he is recorded by Maximus, Bishop of Cythera. Perhaps because on that day, the eighth from his death, his funeral was celebrated, or solemn obsequies were held, which we shall show below under the twenty-fifth day of February also occurred in the case of St. Tarasius, Patriarch of the same See of Constantinople, one hundred and sixty-four years before Polyeuctus.