John Pope I

ON ST. JOHN POPE I, MARTYR

KILLED AT RAVENNA, BROUGHT BACK TO ROME.

A.D. DXXVI

HISTORICAL COMMENTARY.

In which is also treated of Symmachus and S. Severinus Boethius, Patricians and ex-Consuls of Rome.

John I, Roman Pontiff Martyr (S.)

BY D. P.

CHAPTER I.

Time and Acts of the Pontificate and the Constantinopolitan Legation.

[1] The second of the Old Pontifical Catalogues, brought forth

by Henschenius before April, and reproduced

by me in the Apparatus to the Chronico-historical Endeavour on

the same subject, From the year 523 to 526, ending in

Felix IV the immediate successor of S.

John Pope I, his elogium

thus begins: "John, by nation Tuscan, from his Father Constantius,

sat 2 years, 8 months, 15 days, from

the Consulate of Maximus to the Consulate of Olybrius:"

and after many things, near the end thus is read; "He died at Ravenna

with glory, on the 15th Kalends of July, in the custody of King

Theodoric." All the same words, with slight diversity of phrase,

are found in all the Anastasian copies

and Lives of the Pontiffs and old Roman Breviaries,

both manuscript and printed; except that

a few name for Father Constantius, Constantine;

some to UIII months, year 2, m. 8, days 15. add one, and

write UIIII; others for days XV; count XVI;

but all agreeingly add, that he was in the times

of King Theodoric and the Catholic Augustus Justin. This very thing

the Consuls prove, Maximus indeed, of the year DXXIII;

but Olybrius, of the year DXXVI: than which no more certain

note of times generally erudite men recognize. In the differing

number of months and days, I receive months VIII, days

XVI; for these also has the third Catalogue brought forth by me

whole, and praised by the most illustrious Schelstrate, as if

it from which Anastasius took his numbers: especially because

through these going backward, from May 18 to September 3

of the year DXXIII, is had through the Dominical letter

A, the Lord's day; on which I demonstrate Bishops are usually consecrated

through almost the entire said Endeavour. Conversely through nine months,

15 or 16 days, one falls upon Feria V or VI, and runs into the last

days of Hormisdas, who died only on August 4, as I have taught elsewhere. That John, when he was assumed to the Pontificate,

was Deacon of the Holy Roman Church, we conjecture

from the books of S. Severinus Boethius, inscribed to him under that title

and to be named below.

[2] To these things about the person, age, and Pontificate of John,

so ancient and so certain, it would not be quite prudently added,

that some of the more recent have presumed even to name the city, Whether his fatherland was Siena

in which he was born, Siena, a most ancient city of Tuscany;

and after more than a thousand years, as if by tradition worthy of credit,

they should report, his natal house also is shown in the village

of Fonte-blando. We may not, in a matter so ancient,

be so credulous. So tradition of this kind, only in the previous

century beginning to be heard, leaving to those wishing it, to the Acts

of his Pontificate I come, in Anastasius the Librarian thus described.

"This Pope made (or rather, remade?) the cemetery

of the blessed Martyrs Nereus and Achilleus, care for Roman cemeteries, gifts bestowed on churches. on the

Ardeatine Way. Likewise he renewed the cemetery of Felix and

Adauctus. Likewise he renewed the cemetery of Priscilla on the

Salarian Way. At the same time was placed an ornament

over the Confession of B. Paul the Apostle, of green and hyacinthine

gems. Likewise in his times

Justin the Emperor offered a golden paten with

gems, weighing twenty pounds; a golden chalice

with gems, weighing five pounds; five silver scyphi,

fifteen palls woven with gold: which

John himself brought to the Apostles, the most blessed Peter and

Paul, and to S. Mary, and to S. Lawrence. He

ordained Bishops in diverse places to the number of fifteen."

The same things, and with phrase perhaps more ancient, are read in our Mss.

of the Lives of the Pontiffs, brought down even to Martin V:

and, like other things of this kind, can be believed to have been

after each Pontiff's death, by their domestic ministers and prefects of the churches

faithfully committed to memory, more to provoke

the liberality of the successors by such minute enumeration

of things: since this from the time of Pope

Sylvester had begun to be done in the Pontifical Registers,

as in the same Anastasius can be seen.

[3] Paul de Angelis, in the Annotations on the description

of the Vatican Basilica, by a certain Roman Canon at the time

of Eugene III formerly published; recites this title,

found in the same Basilica anciently: whether also a baptismal font in the Vatican was adorned by him?

"To the Martyrs of Christ the Lord pious vows John

Has rendered as Bishop, with God sanctifying:

And of the sacred Font with similar shining metal,

"The provident Bishop now has joined the work:

By which whoever walking, and prone adoring Christ,

May send forth poured prayers to the stars to God."

But I fear, lest these things pertain to another John much later:

for Anastasius would not have omitted to commemorate the new work of the Baptistery.

But since no such John is found in the whole Anastasius:

I would have believed the said Baptistery to have been built or adorned

after his age. If it concerned the Lateran

Basilica, John IV would be at hand to name:

"who made a church to the Blessed Martyrs Venantius, Anastasius,

Maurus, and many other Martyrs, whose

Relics he had ordered to be brought from Dalmatia and Istria;

and he placed them in the church above-written, near the font

of the Lateran, near the oratory of B. John the Baptist:

which (the church, or perhaps, the font) he adorned

and offered diverse gifts to."

[4] Now further we must hear the Anonymous writer of the Caesarean History,

He is known from the contemporaneous Anonymus, from Constantius Chlorus father of the Great Constantine,

up to the death of Theodoric, treating of John more accurately than all others,

just as perhaps he had seen things done,

being present at Ravenna or in the vicinity. Henricus Valesius first

brought him forth for us, after the books of Ammianus Marcellinus,

and would that elsewhere another copy might come forth, more whole

and less faulty, whence defects might be supplied. He,

after many and just praises of Theodoric, although a barbarian and Arian,

(which had he not stained the latter acts of his life, he should be called the best

Prince and like Trajan) narrates how

an occasion having been received, the devil found a place, that

the man, well governing the commonwealth and without complaint, he might subvert.

Then pursuing more examples of his mind already alienated from the Romans,

and the unworthy death of Boethius the ex-Consul ordered by him;

"Returning," he says, "the King to Ravenna, and treating,

not as a friend of God, but as an enemy of his law; sent by King Theodoric to CP.

forgetful of every benefit and grace, which

he had given him; trusting in his own arm, also believing

that the Emperor Justin feared him; and summoning to Ravenna John President of the Apostolic See,

said to him: 'Walk to Constantinople to

Justin the Emperor, and tell him among other things, that the heretics

reconciled in the Catholic religion he should restore.'

To whom Pope John thus replied: excusing himself from what was plainly unlawful, 'What you are about to do,

King, do quickly, behold I stand in your sight. This

I do not promise you that I will do, nor will I tell him:

for in other matters, in which you may charge me, I shall be able to obtain

from him, with God consenting.'"

[5] So the King wrathful orders a ship to be prepared, and placed

him on it with other Bishops, that is, Ecclesius

of Ravenna, and Eusebius of Fano, Sabinus

of Campania, and two others; and Senators Theodorus,

Importunus, Agapitus, and another Agapitus.

But God, who does not forsake his faithful worshippers,

led them through with prosperity. To whom Justin the Emperor

coming thus met, as if to B. Peter: who having heard

the legation promised to do all things, except the reconciled:

those who gave themselves to the Catholic faith, by no means

could be restored to the Arians. Of the illustrious companions of this journey

elsewhere also wide mention is made; The Companions of this Legation but of the Bishops

added to them no one mentions, except this Anonymus.

Ecclesius of Ravenna lived until the year DXLI,

at least by the calculation of the Ravennate writers, to be examined

at July XXVII; nor can what they say stand,

that between him and Peter, sat Aurelianus, Bishop of eleven

years: since this same Anonymus treats of Peter,

Bishops as one who was then Bishop, when Eutharic of the year

DXIX as Consul was bearing or had borne the magistracy, and

between Catholics and Jews that controversy had arisen,

in which the faithful people behaving more insolently their synagogues

burned at Ravenna, which was for Theodoric the beginning of conceiving alienation against the Catholics. S. Eusebius of Fano,

or (as the ancients) Fanestrensis, is venerated on April XVIII: and

from the Roman Synods, celebrated in the year CCCCXCIX and DIII,

we did not know more about him; but from this we learn, that

he was still alive in the year DXXVI. The Capuan Church

knows no Sabinus, and at this time S. Germanus held it,

to be commemorated on October XXX; nor among the rest of the Bishops

of Campania does Ughelli refer any of this name in volume 6 of Italia Sacra;

it remains therefore that his See is still to be found there, nor can it be doubted

that he existed. Of the seculars who are named ex-Consuls and Patricians, the first

Theodorus in the year DV held the Consulate in the West, & Patricians.

and had as colleague in the East Sabinianus. Importunus,

in the year DIX gave his name alone; Agapitus, in the year DXVII

held the fasces in the West, which Anastasius Augustus took up

for himself in the East, for the fourth time. Of the other

Agapitus, who is called Patrician only by Anastasius, I have nothing

to add, except that on the return at Thessalonica

he is read to have died.

[6] And these things are said for the illustration of the Anonymus, than whom

no one has more clearly set forth the first head of the legation, imposed on John;

such as neither he could here ask, nor could Justin grant.

Other more tolerable heads of the same legation, The others explain other heads of the legation imposed,

less adverse to reason. Theophanes, near Constantinople

"This year," he says, "Theuderich, infected with the depraved opinions

of Arius, who had occupied Rome, that is, the Roman

Empire in Italy, compelled Pope John to set out

to the Emperor Justin at Byzantium; and

for the Arians, that they might not be drawn away from their heresy by force,

to undertake an embassy: since the same Theuderich himself

threatened to commit the same against the Catholic inhabitants of Italy."

The second Catalogue written at this time, narrates the matter thus: "The

King asking John, sent in legation to Constantinople to Justin Augustus,

a religious man, who with the supreme love of the Christian religion,

wished to exterminate the heretics (so

I think it is read better in a few copies of Anastasius, than in

the Catalogue 'extricate'); for with supreme fervor he dedicated the churches of the Arians

to Catholic use. Obtained from Justin. Whence Theodoric the Arian wrathful

wished to destroy all Italy with the sword.

Then John the venerable Pope, going forth

with weeping and bellowing walked, and the religious men

ex-Consuls and Patricians, accepting these in commands

of Legation from the same King, that the churches were to be returned

to the heretics in the parts of the East; which if it were not

done, he would destroy all Italy with the sword. But Justin

Augustus, when he had met them together with so great Senators

and Patricians of the city of Rome, granted every

petition; and on account of the blood of the Romans,

he restored the churches to the heretics, according to the will

of King Theodoric the heretic; lest the Christians,

especially the Priests, should be sent to the sword."

With similar words almost the same matter is narrated in our Mss. Lives

of the Pontiffs, ancient Breviaries, and in Anastasius: nor

does this narration disagree with the previous narrations of the Anonymus and Theophanes,

since there were many heads of the legation,

of which one being absolutely rejected, the others John hoped

to obtain, and indeed obtained. Meanwhile it appears with what

an insipid figment, in his spurious Decretal, John is induced,

to exhort the Bishops after his return from Greece, that, as

he having gone to Constantinople had done, whatsoever

churches of the Arians he could find in those parts,

consecrating them as Catholic; so they themselves the same

wherever they should find, without any delay should consecrate

as Catholic… although Theodoric

the King threatens to destroy the whole Italian region, and to consume

with sword and fire.

[7] John's journey to Constantinople was not so conducted by sea,

that at least, the longer circuit between the Peloponnesus and

Crete being avoided, Manner of the journey. at the Corinthian Isthmus

the ship was changed, of which Isthmus the small breadth of only XL stadia

while the Pontiff crosses, a miracle happened, which

S. Gregory in book 3 of the Dialogues chapter 2 narrates thus: "In the time of the Goths,

when John the most blessed man, Pontiff of this

Roman Church, was going to Justin the elder

Prince, in the parts of Corinth he came,

for whom it was necessary, that on the journey to sit a horse should be sought.

Which there a noble man hearing, the horse,

which on account of its great gentleness his wife was wont

to sit, thus offered to him, that with him reaching other places,

since another horse could be found, that one which he had given

ought, on account of his wife, to be sent back.

And it was done, and to a certain place

the said man was led, the same horse carrying him.

Who as soon as he found another, he sent back the one he had received.

The horse, on which John sat, afterwards does not admit a woman, And when

his wife of the said noble man wished to sit on it as was her custom,

she was no longer able, because after the sitting of so great a Pontiff to bear a woman

it refused. For it began with immense breath and tossing,

and unceasing motion of the whole body, as if despising

to show forth, that after the limbs of the Pontiff a woman

it could not bear. Which her husband prudently observing,

immediately sent it back to the same venerable man;

with great prayers asking, and a blind man is illuminated. that he himself should possess

the horse, which by his sitting he had dedicated to his right." Of which

that wonderful thing is wont to be narrated by our elders, that

in the city of Constantinople coming to the gate which is called

Golden, with the crowds of peoples meeting him,

in the sight of all to a blind man asking he gave back the light,

and with hand placed over he put to flight the darkness of his eyes.

Thus S. Gregory.

[8] The Golden Gate is the first of the land gates, which on the southern

side meets those entering the city; Entrance into the City of CP. honourable. which Cangius shows

in his Christian Constantinople, treating of it more

and learnedly, today is held closed, nearest

to the Selybrian; so that it is not altogether certain, that with Corinth crossed

the navigation was resumed. If however for the sake of brevity it was

resumed, the Pontiff with his company disembarked again,

when he was nearer the Royal city, thus probably ordering

Justin, that with greater pomp he might be able to receive so great a guest. For, as Marcellinus Comes says, living and writing at the same time,

with King Theodoric labouring for the renovation of his Arians' ceremonies;

alone only, that is, up to that time the first, of the Roman

Pontiffs his predecessors having departed the City

(for Clement and Liberius, did not depart willingly, but were violently

deported into exile from there) was received with wonderful

honour. This is explained in our Mss. Lives of the Pontiffs

in this manner: "When John approached the city,

the King himself and the whole city came to meet him with

candles and crosses, as if B. Peter were present in person."

But I do not know whence is taken what soon follows.

"Even the old Greeks testified this, Whether thus formerly was received Sylvester: saying;

As in the time of Augustus Constantine and B. Sylvester

Bishop of the Apostolic See, so in the times of Justin

the parts of Greece deserved the Vicar of B. Peter

the Apostle to receive with glory." More credible is what

is added; "Then Justin Augustus giving glory

to God, humbled himself prone to the earth, and adored

the most blessed Pope John." All the same things are had

in the ancient Breviaries, and Anastasius reports the same in almost the same words;

everywhere also supposing that opinion to have been

of the Greeks, that with similar honour there formerly was received, B. Sylvester

was. But we have read no such thing in any of the Greeks,

so that only by the unlearned populace it is credible to have been

bandied about.

[9] Procopius adds, that John on the right occupied the right

throne of the church, John holds the more honourable place in the church: and the day of our Lord's resurrection

celebrated with full voice with Roman prayers.

For, as Theophanes writes, having reached Byzantium,

and being invited by Patriarch Epiphanius,

he refused the meeting, until he himself who was Roman

Pontiff, had obtained the first place in the assembly above Epiphanius.

On the same day probably, Justin

Augustus, as Anastasius and the Breviaries have, was crowned

with glory by John's hands. Crowns Justin, denies communion to Timothy of Alexandria. Finally the same

Pontiff, by Theophanes' testimony, "to all the Eastern

Bishops imparted the commerce of communion,

but with Timothy of Alexandria proposed for himself no such;"

for he was a professed enemy of the Council of Chalcedon, in the year DXIX in the place

of the deceased Dioscorus the Younger by the heretics as a heretic himself substituted, with Justin the Emperor unable to prevent it,

or to eject the usurper from that See.

Furthermore from the circumstance of the Easter day,

celebrated in that year on April XIX, it is concluded, that John, who died

on May XVIII, did not afterwards delay long at Constantinople,

and on a hastened journey returned, that he might at least be able to spend a few days

in custody before death.

CHAPTER II.

Praise of Symmachus and Boethius vexed about this time, the captivity also of the latter, and his writings in prison.

[10] Although Eutharic, to whom King Theodoric

in the year DXIX had given the Consulate to be held in the West,

After the year 519 the King more placated toward the Catholics, was too harsh and an enemy against the Catholic

faith, by the testimony of the Anonymus

of Valois; and he no doubt instigating, the insolence of the Ravennate

Catholics against the Jews so badly bore he,

that with the devil creeping in upon the man, hitherto innocent,

he impelled to the little fountains, in the suburb of the city of Verona,

the oratory of S. Stephen, and the altar of S. Sylvester there situated, to be assigned

either to the Jews or the Arians (for the word missing in the text of the Anonymus

ought to be supplied by this or similar phrase) likewise that no Roman

should use arms, even to a knife;

yet so much did he not entirely cast off all Catholics, that in the year DXXII to the same

more placated, in the year 522 he names as Consuls Symmachus and Boethius,

he created as Consuls Symmachus

and Boethius. For whether these were of Severinus Boethius the ex-Consul,

born of Rusticiana the daughter of Symmachus likewise ex-Consul;

or whether the very ones I have spoken of, the father-in-law and son-in-law, of whom

the former had alone held the ordinary Consulate in the year CCCCLXXXV,

the latter likewise alone in the year DX; it is clear from either,

how much Boethius, although most Catholic, namely either the sons of the holy ex-Consul of the year 510. and boldly resisting depravity,

Theodoric esteemed (to be silent of Symmachus) when either he created him Consul a second time

(for I would not dare to say a third, on account of the Consul Boethius

of the year CCCCLXXXVII, but rather more probably his

father) or he conferred that honor on his sons, as the father speaks,

still boys. For from no other cause could he have done it,

than because in boys of that age, or at the most adolescents,

either paternal or grandfatherly specimen of genius shone forth.

[11] Philip Labbe, on the Ecclesiastical Writers

of Bellarmine, with Julius Martianus writing the Life of Boethius,

or rather himself with the father-in-law ex-Consul of the year 485. holds the latter; indeed says, that the father himself testifies this in more than

one place. But I would prefer to see those places: for in the book

On the Consolation of Philosophy, which alone of all his works

I have at hand, he indeed calls his children Consulares;

but rightly Baronius observes for the contrary opinion;

just as matrons are called Consulares, who

have had Consul husbands; so also boys whose fathers.

Likewise our Nicholas Caussinus, in the Holy Court, holds that the boys

were Consuls; but only titular and honorary,

not ordinary. But by what argument is this made credible? For

what Theodosius the Emperor, having taken into the consortship of Empire

his son Arcadius, one in the year CCCLXXXV, made Consul and indeed

Ordinary, then only ten years old; but Honorius

Caesar the other son, in the year CCCLXXXVI,

scarcely two years old; with Colleagues added, who would discharge the Office,

cannot be drawn here. Rather then we shall maintain, that to Symmachus

and Boethius the Elders the Consulate of the year DXXII fell;

for both a second time, also Boethius, who in the beginning

of the book On Consolation, composed about the year DXXVI,

complains, that "old age unforeseen comes upon me hastened by evils

and untimely white hairs are poured upon my head." Boethius's age

Indeed scarcely with good right could one already seventy thus complain:

for who younger than he had been, even already from the age of forty

when he died, who thus complains; and I will leave that grand age

to the father-in-law Symmachus; yet so that the equal virtue of both,

likewise as their doctrine, and authority was

with Theodoric.

[12] For these, as Procopius speaks, born in a most noble place,

and themselves (which we have already taught) Consulares, Praise of Symmachus, eminent

in the Senate. From Philosophy no one was more

instructed than they, no one more zealous of equity. Of both praises

bearing testimony to his father-in-law Symmachus, his son-in-law

Boethius in book 1 Prose 4 calls him "Holy and equally with Philosophy itself

reverend; and in book 2 Pr. 4, "the most precious

ornament of the human race;" and "a man, made wholly out

of wisdom and virtues, and who secure of his own things,

groaned over the injuries of Divinity alone." Boethius himself

is ascribed the praise of every kind of erudition by Theodoric

the King in Cassiodorus, Epist. 45 of book 1, ordering clocks to be cared for,

to be sent to his son-in-law the King of the Burgundians Gundobad, as to a man,

filled with much erudition, who the arts, "which men exercise commonly without knowing, also of Boethius from every kind of science,

drank in at the very

source of disciplines. For thus, he says, you entered the Athenian

schools though placed far away, you mingled the toga

with the choirs of the cloaked, that you have made the dogmas of the Greeks

to be Roman doctrine. For you have learned,

with what depth Speculative philosophy with its parts is to be cogitated;

with what reason the Active, with its division,

is to be learned; bringing to the Romulean Senators, whatever

the Cecropids had made special for the world. For by your translations

Pythagoras, the Musician; Ptolemy,

the Astronomer, are read by the Italians; Nicomachus the Arithmetician,

Euclid the Geometer, are heard by the Ausonians;

Plato the Theologian, Aristotle the Logician, with Quirinal voice

debate. Mechanical Archimedes also, you have rendered Latin

to the Sicilians: his Theological writings, and whatever disciplines or

arts fruitful Greece through individual men produced, with you as sole

author, Rome has received in the paternal tongue; whom you have made illustrious

with such elegance of words, conspicuous with such propriety of language,

that those even could prefer your work,

if they had learned both." Many of his works exist,

gathered into one volume at Basel, by the care of Henricus Loritus

Glareanus, in the year 1546, of which the order and titles are recited

by Labbé. Among these especially worthy of note are the Commentaries,

"That the Trinity is one God, and not three Gods," to Symmachus

his father-in-law; "Against Eutyches and Nestorius,

on the two natures and one person of Christ"; and "Whether

the Father and Son and Holy Spirit are predicated substantially of the Divinity," both to John Deacon

of the Roman Church, the very same probably whose

Pontiff's cause is here treated: for we have already observed

that nothing in the election of the Pontiffs was more frequent, than

that a Deacon, or (as we now say) Archdeacon should be elected,

as one most imbued with the knowledge and practice of ecclesiastical

affairs.

[13] As to the other part of the Encomium, given to Boethius by Procopius,

and supreme care of equity. namely the zeal of equity; he himself

in book 1 of the Consolation prose 4 thus addresses Philosophy: "You,

and the God who placed you in the minds of the wise, are

witnesses, that I came to the Magistracy from no other thing than the common

zeal of all good men. Hence with the wicked there have been grave

and inexorable discords, and (which the freedom of conscience has)

the offence of the more powerful was always despised. How often have I

opposed Conigastus making attack upon the fortunes of every weak person?

How often have I cast Triguilla, Provost of the Royal House,

down from injury begun and now altogether perpetrated? How often have I

protected the wretched, whom the unpunished avarice of Barbarians always

vexed with infinite calamities, by exposing my authority to dangers?

Never has anyone drawn me from right to injury. The fortunes of the provincials,

both with private rapine and public taxes being ruined, no otherwise than

those who suffered, I grieved over. When in a time of bitter famine

a grave and inexplicable forced purchase was decreed, about to ruin

with want the province of Campania,

I undertook a contest against the Praefect of the Praetorium, by reason of the common

advantage; with the King recognizing, I contended; and

prevented that the forced purchase be exacted. Paulinus a Consular

man (he had been Consul in the year CCCCXCVIII) whose riches the Palatine

dogs had already by hope and ambition devoured, I drew back from

the very gaping jaws. Lest Albinus Consular man (and this one had held the supreme magistracy in the year CCCCXCIII)

I opposed myself to the hatreds of Cyprianus the delator."

[14] Thus of himself Boethius. Furthermore the praises of him and Symmachus

Procopius pursues thus: "There was added in both

benignity, by which they relieved the want of citizens and foreigners alike.

Hence calumnies were structured against him and his father-in-law, Hence having obtained great glory, they accumulated

envy with most bitter men, by whose

calumnies Theodoric being induced, both, accused

of zeal for new things, he affected with death, and their goods

confiscated… Toward subjects this was the first and the same

last injury, which he made, against both men

bearing sentence, the cause not being known beyond custom." Either

Procopius forgets here or dissembles the injury done

to John and the companions of the legation, of which see soon below.

Anastasius and our Mss. Lives of the Pontiffs and others after

him with similar brevity say, that "at the same time when Pope John

with the Senators, Theodorus ex-Consul, Importunus

ex-Consul, Agapitus ex-Consul (Agapitus the Patrician

dead at Thessalonica) had been placed at Constantinople,

Theodoric the heretic King, held two

distinguished Senators and ex-Consuls, Symmachus and

Boethius; and killed them, slaying them with the sword."

[15] These things briefly they, not sufficiently distinguished as to their times:

the Anonymus of Valois is everywhere more distinct. For first

he narrates how a star with a torch appeared for XV days,

and frequent earthquakes happened: After the prodigies of the year 522, which earthquakes Theophanes seems

to indicate at the year DXXII, IV of Justin the Emperor,

in which as he himself says, Dyrrachium, a city of new Epirus in Illyricum,

received a stroke sent down from heaven, and equal calamity

suffered Corinth metropolis of Greece. After these things,

says the Anonymus, "the King began to fume against the Romans,

an occasion having been found": and at length Cyprianus, Boethius patronizing the accused Albinus, who at that time was Referendarius, afterwards Count of the Sacred

and Master, driven by cupidity, suggested concerning Albinus

the Patrician, that he had sent letters against his rule

to the Emperor Justin. Which deed when summoned

(perhaps the accused being summoned) he denied; then Boethius the Patrician,

who was Master of the Offices, in the sight

of the King said: "False is the suggestion of Cyprianus: but if Albinus

did this, both I and the entire Senate did it by one counsel.

It is false, Lord King." Then Cyprianus

hesitating, not only against Albinus, but also against

Boethius his defender, brings forward false witnesses.

… Here a single line seems to have fallen out, he himself is also accused, by which was refuted

the calumny structured against both, for what follows does not well cohere

with what precedes — "against Albinus." But

the King, [who] was preparing a snare for the Romans and seeking

how he might kill them, believed false

witnesses more than the Senators. Then Albinus and Boethius

were led under custody to the baptistery of the church,

namely of Pavia, having a baptistery under a tower.

For the tower (with Baronius testifying at the year 526)

made of brick is shown even still at Pavia,

Boethius's prison. and is enclosed in the Pavia tower, Bernard Saccus in his History of Pavia book

7 chapter 18 writes that today the tower of Boethius is called;

and is situated near the monastery, dedicated to the Blessed Annunciation.

There perhaps was the ancient pre-Lombard Cathedral;

for these Cathedral Churches had, just as

even now in Rome the Lateran Basilica, and in Florence

the Metropolitan, a separate baptistery,

removed at some interval, of nearly round form; to which that Tower

could have adhered, and at the same time afforded the use of a prison. Jacobus Gualla

in his Sanctuarium Ticinense book 4 chapter 16, "That Tower," he says, "with Paul

the historian reporting, is joined to the Royal palace, near

the gate, which now also, just as then, is named the Gate

of the Palace": which I do not think is opposed either to the Anonymus or to Saccus,

since the situation of the old church could have invited the Lombard Kings,

to build their Palace there,

and the church of the Annunciation is not far distant from the relics of the Palace, even now to be seen.

[16] Concerning his accusers, the witnesses brought against him,

and the heads of the delation, it is helpful to hear Boethius himself, under the testimony of most vile delators,

speaking before Philosophy. "By what informers were we struck?

Of whom one Basilius, formerly cast out

from the Royal ministry, was compelled into the delation of our

name, by the necessity of another's debt. But Opilio

and Gaudentius, when, on account of innumerable

and multiple frauds, the Royal censure had decreed they go into exile;

and when they, unwilling to obey, defended themselves

with the protection of sacred buildings, and this was discovered

to the King; he said, that, unless within a prescribed

day they departed from the city of Ravenna, marked

with brands on their foreheads they should be expelled. What can seem

to be added to this severity? But on the same day, with the same delating,

the delation of our name was undertaken.

What therefore? Did our arts thus deserve it?

Or did the previous condemnation make those accusers just? because he wished the Senate safe:

So has fortune been not at all ashamed, if not of accused

innocence, at least of the vileness of the accusers? But, of what crime

we are accused, do you ask the sum? We are said to have wished the Senate to be

safe. Do you desire the manner? We are charged that we hindered

the delator, lest he should bring forward documents, by which he might make the Senate

guilty of treason. What therefore, O

Mistress, do you judge? Shall we deny the crime, lest we be a shame

to you? But I willed it, nor shall I ever cease to will.

Shall we confess? But the work of hindering the delator will cease.

Shall I call wrong to have wished the safety of that Order? he

indeed by his decrees concerning me, had effected, that this should be wrong.

(What kind these were is not easy to divine: that they were unjust,

and that this was therefore not the first vexation suffered by Boethius for equity, you easily understand from this.) But, he proceeds, "imprudence always lying

cannot change the merits of things: nor by the Socratic decree

do I judge it lawful for me either to have hidden the truth,

or to have conceded falsehood.

But however that may be, to your judgment and that of the wise

I leave it to be estimated: of which matter the series and truth,

lest it should be able to escape posterity, I have committed to the pen and to memory."

But that kind of writing has remained hidden until this point.

[17] "About the falsely composed letters (to Justin the Emperor)

by which I am accused of having hoped for Roman freedom,

what does it pertain to say? hence unheard and undefended he is condemned, whose deceit would have appeared open,

if to us, by the confession of the very informers, which in all

matters has the greatest force, it had been permitted to use…

But it would have been right that wicked men, who seek the blood of all good men

and of the entire Senate, should have wished to ruin us also, whom

they see patronizing the good and the Senate… You remember,

at Verona, when the King avid of the common ruin, the crime of Majesty

reported against Albinus,

was striving to transfer to the entire Order of the Senate,

how I defended the innocence of the entire Senate, with what

security toward my own danger… But what end has received

our innocence, you see. For the rewards of true virtue,

we undergo the penalties of false crime. And of what

ever crime did the manifest confession have judges so

concordant in severity, that some did not either by the very

error of human genius, or by the condition of fortune uncertain to all mortals,

submit some? If we were said to have wished to inflame sacred

buildings, if to have slain Priests with impious sword, if

against all the good to have set up a slaughter, yet sentence

would have punished the present, confessing, and convicted.

Now removed almost five hundred miles

and undefended, on account of more inclined zeal toward the Senate

we are condemned to death and proscription: and that by the very

Senate, slavishly obeying the Royal madness:" so that justly the proceeding

Boethius adds: "O deserved ones, that of a similar crime no one

can be convicted! whose dignity of the charge even those who

informed have seen: which that they might darken with the admixture of some crime,

they have lied that I have polluted my conscience with sacrilege

through ambition for dignity."

[18] These things he, which since they were written after the sentence brought by the Senate at Rome,

and accepted by him in captivity, but written

in the first book On the Consolation of Philosophy, which the other five,

of equal elegance, follow in prose and verse; it easily

appears that the imprisonment was longer, held in custody several months before and after the sentence; than the words of Procopius

or Anastasius bear: not therefore however with Baronius

would I say "very prolix"; if by that word, not only months,

but also years are understood: it is enough if you place the calumniators beginning the deadly stratagem at the year DXXV verging to its end.

Perhaps even the innocent man was not given over to chains earlier,

than John had already set out to Constantinople. For

not therefore does the previously praised Anonymus narrate the captivity and death

of Boethius before he begins to treat of John, because

he wishes to say each preceded his journey; but lest he interrupt the narration

once begun about Boethius for the cause of another matter.

So also below, when he had introduced mention of Symmachus, while

abroad John was conducting himself, brought to Ravenna, consequently he narrates his death;

although from Procopius it is clear, only a few

days passed between Symmachus's death and Theodoric's perishing,

for a longer time his many writings there are alleged, and so it was perpetrated in the very month of August,

almost three months after the death of Pope John, and perhaps

four or five after Boethius's death. But that this captivity

he should believe very prolix moved Baronius

the words, before a certain book On the Discipline of Scholars,

under his person, as if dictated to Marcianus, as if of

that subject he wrote, "impeded with double kind of commentaries,

yet not entirely diverse, on certain editions of Aristotle and other Philosophers;

and worn out by his own zeal, and corroded

by the torment of the inhuman King of the Goths, with Philosophical anticipating consolation,

and softened by extreme

perception of the profound Trinity."

[19] Baronius must have hastened greatly, when he alleged these words,

that he did not notice, but from the pseudepigraphal book On the discipline of Scholars, that this barbarism, of unlovely

and not sufficiently incisive verbosity,

is most foreign to the concise and elegant style of Boethius, whose periods well

long he had transcribed on the same occasion. For if he had read through that very

book which he praises, he would have found there what Caussinus notes

(for I have not seen the book myself) the author among other ineptitudes

saying, that he was "in the city of Julius Caesar, which is called Paris,

for the cause of taking the air; and there found

a great crowd of bad Scholars"; mentioning

also Nations, and ascribing to the University that

form, which it has had in these last centuries; an more insipid

writing scarcely could proceed from a man,

whom common sense had failed. Add that the very name

of Scholares, taken substantively, in that sense in which it

and even today is used, is not of the Boethian age,

in which (although the Schools of Philosophers were named) "Σχολάριοι"

yet and Scholares were called, not those who frequented those

(adolescent literates) but those who in the Schools, that is, in the Palatine cohorts

served as soldiers, and in the Court watched

for the custody of the Emperor, as from Agathias, Severus Sulpicius, which is shown to be by no means ancient.

Procopius, and the Theodosian Code of Roman law teaches the most learned

Cangius in his Glossary. Our Labbé says, that this book

is said to be written by Dionysius Rikelius the Carthusian, who

in the year MCCCCLXXI ended his life. But this man's eminent

sanctity, on account of which he deserved in our work to have a Life

among the Saints on March XII, this man, I say, sanctity known forbids

to be believed the author of a book lying on its very front

with another's name, and the person of a man dead before so many ages: but his

distinguished erudition, by so many illustrious Commentaries of every kind

published and unpublished proved, sufficiently

defends him from that, with which Caussinus has judged that Writer

worthy of mark. Of Boethius Epo of Rordahusen the I. C.

a syntagma of Ecclesiastical Antiquities and several other

opuscules, of doctrine not to be despised by a man, the same I would say;

if perhaps anyone, on account of the synonymy, should think he could have been father

of that supposititious offspring: not to mention, that the book had to be older than Epo,

which was able to creep into the Basel edition of the year MDXLVI

as if ancient, and deceive the curator,

more zealous of augmenting the bulk from anywhere than of discerning.

CHAPTER III.

The death and cultus of SS. Severinus Boethius and Pope John.

[20] The Anonymus of Valois, after he led Albinus and Boethius

into custody to the baptistery of the church,

continues the begun narration thus: With his head cruelly broken he is killed,

"But the King called Eusebius, the Praefect of the City of Pavia:

and Boethius unheard he brought forth sentence against him, especially

after the previously held suffrages of the Roman Senate against the innocent man:

who soon to the Calventian field, where in custody he was held,

sent, and made the accused be killed. Who having received

a cord on his forehead was tortured for a very long time, so that his eyes

burst out, thus under torment at last with a club is killed."

This narration Caussinus regards as suspect, exhibited to him

in Ms. before it was published; suspect however

by this argument alone, that others generally said he was struck with the sword.

But this is not read in Procopius, or in

the Author of the Pontifical Catalogue praised at the beginning,

both contemporary. The first Anastasius in his John, after CCCL years, not struck with the sword,

interjected between the journey and return of the Saint a comma about Symmachus

and Boethius, saying, that meanwhile the King held them and

killed them, slaying with the sword; fitting both with what was fitting

for one; and what perhaps about both was once being scattered,

to soften the atrocity of the cruel torture, uncertain

whether to be imputed to the Royal command, or to the petulance of his ministers,

trying to extort confession of false crime.

Caussinus, I think, did not consider, in deeds done

a contemporary author was, whose testimony he undervalued

before others so much later.

[21] he is said to have sustained it with his own hands. Meanwhile, an opinion of this kind about the sword being once

prefixed, the people of Pavia themselves, to whom from old tradition

something had clung about the broken, not cut off head, fit a miracle,

by which they believe the sanctity of the dead one to have been declared divinely,

to the same persuasion. Thus Jacobus Gualla, "with the most ancient Pavia

Chronicles attesting," narrates, that "from the place of martyrdom,

with his head split into two parts bloody, by divine power

he himself sustaining them with his own hands, joined them and brought them

to the temple, and there at the altar with bent knees,

after Sacraments received as is the custom, the most blessed

spirit he sent forth." Thus he, in the year MDLXXXVII having his

Sanctuarium printed. Before him by XL years and more, Julius

Martianus in his Life of Boethius, which is said to exist before the works

(perhaps from the same Chronicles, whose age I judge to be

of a few centuries, although Gualla calls them most ancient)

in Baronius thus speaks: "The inhabitants of Pavia always,

constantly assert handed down by their ancestors,

that Severinus, when the Royal executioner had inflicted the lethal wound,

with both hands sustained the divided head;

and asked by whom he thought himself struck,

'By the impious,' replied; and so when he had come into a neighbouring

temple, and with bent knees before the altar had received the Sacraments,

after a little while expired." Let the reader see

what kind of credit he wishes to give to this tradition, The Calventian field, where the matter happened, is now unknown, after about a thousand

years of silence: only let him not believe it. The tragedy was performed at Pavia,

but in the Calventian field, which Boethius

himself in the words above-related complains was removed from Rome by almost

five hundred miles, whence Pavia is scarcely distant

three hundred. Yet it could be done, that with pious caretakers his body

was brought to Pavia, perhaps to the same church,

to whose baptistery Boethius's first custody pertained: but

the said miracle, if it truly was done, was done

in some neighbouring church of the said Field. Praised by Baronius

is the Tower of Pavia, "as once indeed on account of the accused detained in it,

and on account of crimes detestable; but by Boethius's habitation

and the sprinkling of his blood, more illustrious than any triumphal

arch, more celebrated than any monument of glory,

and more lasting than any solid mass erected, and stronger as a fortress,

which not even all-destroying time can ever invade and destroy." Thus

he, all rightly, but as to the sprinkling of blood to be transferred elsewhere.

[22] It is likely that the body, on account of fear of the King, first was given a humble

and almost unknown burial, until at length

with the heresy extinguished together with the kingdom of the Goths, and with the Lombards

embracing the Catholic faith, thence the body was carried back to Pavia Religion long oppressed could

raise its head, having attained its former splendour under King Luitprand.

He when at Pavia he had erected a new temple from the foundations to S. Peter the Apostle,

which from the beauty of the gilded vault

it pleased to call S. Peter in the Golden Heaven; with great expenses

brought there from Sardinia the body of S. Augustine, from whom

now the very temple has its name; and the same enriched with many other

pledges of Saints. Among these is believed the body of Severinus Boethius

to have been, and under King Luitprand placed at S. Peter in Golden Heaven whether he was already then venerated as a Saint, of

which I confess nothing is known to me, or whether due esteem for so great a man

moved the King to this. Of his work also is believed to be

the tomb, in which now the body is thought to rest, on the right side,

as Gualla says, where through steps of stairs is the way to the greater

altar, worthily elevated, and marked with these words:

"Behold Boethius great in heaven,

And to all the world a man to be admired: with a more rude epitaph,

Who being delated to the unjust King Theodoric,

Was led to old age in exile at Pavia.

In which consoling himself sad, hence gave forth a little book:

After being struck by the sword, he went out from the midst."

[23] The first verse I would not dare indeed to affirm to be had whole;

I nevertheless believe the entire Epitaph more sincere

in Gualla, than in Baronius, who received it,

reformed thus to Poetic laws:

"Behold Boethius is here, great in heaven, and to all the world

Conspicuous, a wonderful man to be held. than is read in Baronius:"

Then more recently the name of Pavia is changed into the ancient name

of Ticinum; and the second-to-last verse is somewhat innovated, so that it is

"In which city consoling himself sad he gave forth a little book."

But such Baronius thinks was inscribed on Boethius's tomb, to which another more elegant has been substituted,

before he was placed there where now he is by King Luitprand.

But I, judge that the earlier reading is to be retained from Gualla's eyewitness

faith; I taste here Lombardic barbarism of the VIII century,

and venerate the name of Pavia as genuine,

as introduced over Ticinum by the same Lombards.

But what about the following Epitaph?

"In Maeonian and Latin tongue most illustrious, and who

As Consul I was, here I perished, sent into exile.

And because death snatched me, probity bore me to the airs,

And now great fame thrives, the work lives."

He himself could have composed something like this for himself when still alive; but

his modesty, I believe, would have prevented him. For when in necessary

self-defence, in the books On the Consolation of Philosophy,

he had narrated, what we recited above of his freedom in defending the Senate;

"You know," he said, addressing Philosophy, "that I both report these things

truly, and have never boasted in any praise of myself:

for the secret of self-approving conscience is in some way diminished,

as often as anyone, ostentatiously displaying a deed, receives

the reward of fame." But what he did not do himself, by a more recent hand. does

for him someone more recent, of the XV century at most, and the same

received from Pavia by Julius Martianus: and the same is reported and

even rendered into Italian by Stephen Breventanus, in his History of Pavia

published in the year MDLXX, so that there can be no doubt that of him treats

Scaccus, after seventeen years, when he says, "the tomb

is seen adorned with verses, which both attest the deceased's

excellence and fall, and Theodoric's injustice"; although

both is done more distinctly in that which Gualla recites, adding nothing

about a change made afterwards.

[24] The same Stephen Breventanus says that the Church of S.

Peter makes solemn commemoration of his Birthday

on the 21st of October. Perhaps there is an error in the number, Commemoration at Pavia on Oct. 23 and

it ought to have been written, 23; on which day Ferrarius, in the Catalogue of Saints

of Italy treats of S. Severinus Boethius Martyr at Pavia

(also Scaccus had called him Saint) and in the other Catalogue

of those who are not in the Roman Martyrology, "At Pavia of S.

Severinus Boethius Martyr, under Theodoric King of the Goths;" and this indeed from the Tablet of the Pavia Church on this day: and in Ferrarius with the title of Saint:

there indeed he had noted, that the Birthday is celebrated on this day by the Church of Pavia.

But that this would have been his true Birthday

in the heavens, the death of Symmachus his father-in-law, only following in the month of August, scarcely allows to be believed.

I suspect therefore, either that on such a day the translation of the body was made

by King Luitprand; or even that this was chosen, because the Martyrology of Usuard, which all the Churches in Italy used in later

centuries, then named S. Severinus Bishop of Cologne.

However it is, the old Calendar of Milan, perhaps also in the Calendar of Milan. prefixed to the Breviary of the year MDXXXIX, when on the X Kalends of November

it notes the day of Saints Severus and Severinus

Martyrs, could seem to have looked at S. Severinus Boethius,

and to have joined him to Severus Martyr, in some

more augmented copies of Usuard named as having suffered at Hadrianople

of Thrace or Caesarea of Cappadocia. But very uncertain

is this proof of cultus taken from such a Calendar:

because the older Calendar before the Missal of the year MDXXII

for these notes the names of Saints Servandus and Germanus

Martyrs; and the later one of the year MDLXXXV, by order of S.

Charles Borromeo reformed, with every name expunged keeps

that day empty. But these things had to be treated in October,

but because the death of Boethius is so connected with the Pontificate of S. John,

that without it that one could scarcely be treated, much

less the death of Symmachus, having no other place,

it has pleased to bring everything together here.

[25] Silvester Maurolycus in his Mari Oceanus Religionum

page 271 book 4, treating of tombs after the Council of Trent's

decrees taken out of the church of S. Peter in the Golden Heaven (for they forbade

bodies of non-Saints to be kept elevated above the earth),

reports the Epitaphs of two of those, one of King Luitprand,

the other of a certain illustrious Matron, The wife of the Blessed was not a certain Sicilian Elpis, whom he says was Boethius's wife,

and the maternal aunt of the holy Placidus Monk and Martyr in Sicily

and a celebrated Poetess; but Puccinellus in the Life of B. Gomez

adds, that the Church has hymns from her, accustomed to be recited

on the feast of SS. Peter and Paul. But how certain

it is that Rusticiana, Boethius's wife, was Roman, not Sicilian;

and surviving her husband, not pre-deceasing him (such

as the one was who had the noted burial at Pavia) so

uncertain and probably false are the other elogies attributed to the same.

For thus begins the Epitaph:

"I was called Elpis, alumna of the Sicilian region,

Whom love of my husband led far from my fatherland… buried at Pavia before her husband;

My light was not closed with such a husband remaining,

And I shall be survivor with the greater part of my soul…"

Hear now Procopius in book 3 after the narrated entry of Totila

into the City of Rome, occupied in the year DXLVI, fully twenty

years after Boethius's death, writing as follows: "So

it happened that then both other Romans, But Rusticiana 20 years after his death and even

men of the Senatorial Order, and Rusticiana herself, formerly

wife of Boethius, daughter of Symmachus, who had bestowed her means

on the needy, were covered with servile or rustic habit,

from hostile mercy, now bread, now something else

necessary asking that they might live; nor were those, who shortly

before were so illustrious, ashamed to knock from house to house

at doors, found at Rome by Totila. and to coax for themselves the food of misery by prayers." And Rusticiana

indeed the Goths burned to kill, because

to the abolishing of Theuderich's images, the Roman Magistrates

with money given she had impelled, while she went avenging the deaths

of her father Symmachus and husband Boethius: but Totila

allowed nothing to be harmed in her. Nothing therefore is further from the truth,

than what by popular levity the people of Pavia have invented,

that this woman, whom in the same church as Boethius they saw placed with equal honor

of an elevated tomb, was also his wife.

[26] I return to S. Pope John. Of him left at Constantinople,

while Boethius is being tortured in prison,

the Anonymus says, With Boethius killed, John on returning is given into custody, that "returning from Justin, Theodoric

received him with deceit, and ordered him to be in his offence,

who after a few days died": where

I interpret offence as the Royal Indignation, by which

he who had incurred it was kept from the King's sight, and meanwhile to custody

was committed, until he should decree what he wished done with him,

to whom he professed himself offended. Thus while he wished to be openly seen by the supreme

Pontiff to have abstained his hands the impious King, secretly afflicted him

even unto death. The contemporary Author of the Elogium in the Catalogue more clearly expresses this: "The aforesaid men coming, with

John the Bishop, and there within a few days dies, after all things in order had been done (with Agapitus

the Patrician dead in Greece) were received

by King Theodoric with deceit and great hatred:

whom he wished to punish with the sword. But fearing the indignation

of Justin the orthodox Augustus, worn out with troubles, he did not do it: yet

he tortured all in custody; so much that B. Pope John,

worn out in custody, failing died: who died

at Ravenna with glory on the XV Kalends of June,

in the custody of King Theodoric." Anastasius and the ancient

Roman Breviaries, which we have also cited above, and have

printed in the year MCCCCLXXIX, and XC, also MDXXIV,

for "in glory" write "Martyr": and the same word substitutes

our Author of the Mss. Pontifical Lives. To the same

is consonant S. Gregory of Tours, from the report of the faithful coming from Italy,

mixing falsehoods with John's true praises, about the Arian

churches dedicated by him with supreme zeal as Catholic,

on account of which he deserved Royal indignation.

"Placed," he says, "the Saint of God in prison, was so worn

with injuries, that not after much time he exhaled

his spirit: and he died in prison with glory near the city

of Ravenna." Thus he, the troubles tolerated by John

nowhere more distinctly explaining; alone, the Author whom I have spoken of, of the Mss. Lives has, May 18;

that "by hunger and thirst, with the Senators

and ex-Consuls, he died near Ravenna."

About hunger and thirst the word "worn out" easily makes credit,

which others use. For Senators and ex-Consuls,

not only (which others have) likewise afflicted in custody

and worn out, but also killed, more witnesses you might rightly

require in the silence of so many codices, otherwise the same

and in the same words narrating. For "XV Kalends," the Breviaries

and certain Anastasius copies have "XII Kalends,"

with easy error from the close ductus of letters. I say error,

because from the XX day of June, thus going backward to the beginning of John,

it cannot be reached to a Sunday.

[27] But what happened on the publishing of John's death, the Anonymus thus

continues: with an energumen freed at the body, he is buried honourably, "The peoples going before his body,

suddenly one of the crowd, seized by a demon,

fell: and when the deceased had come with the bier

where he was placed, up to the man, suddenly [he] healthy

rose, and went before in the funeral procession. Which seeing

the peoples and Senators, began to take Relics of his garment.

So with supreme joy of the people his body was led

outside the city." That is to the common burial place of Catholics, that age still having

their cemeteries and tombs, from old Roman, indeed

and Eastern, custom, outside the cities.

There how long it remained is uncertain: the older Catalogue

adds nothing else, than the deadly end of King Theodoric,

of which see below. afterwards is translated to Rome, But since that Catalogue ends with Felix

John's successor, an opportunity is given to me of suspecting,

that the body was still in the first place of burial, when this man stopped writing.

But Anastasius adds, after recensing from elsewhere the Pontifical

Acts of John, which we have transcribed above; "Whose

body was translated from Ravenna, and buried in

the Basilica of B. Peter the Apostle, on the day VI Kalends of June.

Olybrius being Consul"; therefore on the tenth day after death,

which no one will believe could be done; since it is clear that the funeral was

celebrated at Ravenna, on the third day after death; and

with Theodoric still living all other things were to be cared for by the Romans,

thinking nothing safe for themselves under him, to whom new suspicions

he should have given by such concern for receiving the dead.

[28] The Consul, not Olybrius but perhaps Orestes, in the year 530, I would have believed Anastasius, in the old following Ms.

found the name of the Consul almost erased, of which only the initial O

remained, from which he made Olybrius, as named at the beginning

of the old elogium, where John was said to have sat,

"from the Consulate of Maximus to the Consulate of Olybrius."

But the next, whose name also begins with O

in the Consular fasti is Orestes, with Lampadius the Eastern

Consul marking the year DXXX, when there still lived

John's successor Felix IV, surviving up to September XXII.

This man certainly to King Athalaric, by the deceased father's

judgment, most approved, as can be seen from the Letter

given for his grateful reception to the Roman Senate;

could easily have obtained, after four years had elapsed,

with the odium of the paternal crime put to sleep, that to the Romans desiring

he should be returned dead, who had been snatched alive grieving.

Then place could have been had, what, and is received with solemn pomp. in another and not fitting

time of public joy, was done writes Baronius, when he says:

"And the City received its Pontiff, triumphing over Arian perfidy,

borne in a white quadriga, not

of white-shining beasts, but on the shoulders of white-clad

Priests. They run from everywhere to so great a spectacle,

all honour the sacred burden, with cultus due to the Pontiff and fitting Martyr,

and accompany with sacred songs the glorious pomp of victory.

Only the impious in darkness are silent, and impiety

mourns excluded from such great glory. Envy mourns:

rabid jealousy sharpens its teeth on itself; when with such great

honour it sees brought into the City, whom it thought it had inglorious

extinguished in prison."

[29] Baronius's improbable opinion about the day of death and translation. Then because the same Baronius, from a preconceived opinion about the day

of cultus elsewhere more fully refuted, that the same is the day Natal

as of cultus, would have John dead on VI Kalends

of June and on VI Kalends of July buried at Rome; that as

without any ancient witness, and without any apparent necessity

is said, so freely could be denied. But indeed by no means

is this denied freely, to which is opposed the consent of all the Anastasian codices,

first in establishing the day of death XV Kal.

leaning on the testimony of the old Catalogue; then the constant assertion

of the same about the LXXXXVIII days, interjected between the said

death and the vengeance taken from Theodoric. Add here many ancient

Martyrologies, in which one of the Queen of Sweden,

greatly esteemed by Lucas Holstenius in his Notes on the Roman

Martyrology, where to the common formula of genuine Bede, Ado,

Notker, Rabanus, about John, is added "death XV

Kal. undergone." But because in all the same ancient Martyrologies

burial cared for at Rome is ascribed to V Kal. of June,

hence all the same refer John to May XXVIII

with this tenor: "On the same day the deposition of S. John Pope, whom

(because he was orthodox, and by Justin the orthodox Emperor

coming to Constantinople was gloriously received)

returning to Ravenna, The name of John formerly in the Fasti on May 28, held in custody,

was led to death with other equally orthodox

men XV Kalends of June. Of him S. Gregory makes mention

in the book of Dialogues. Whose body

translated from Ravenna was buried in the Basilica

of S. Peter the Apostle, V Kalends of June, with Olybrius Consul."

The same in compendium contracted by Usuard are read thus:

"V Kal. of June at Rome the Birthday of B. John Pope, whom

Gregory reports on account of the orthodox faith first

held in custody, and indeed with companions: and then led to death,

with other orthodox men." Gregory's words

we shall give below: those orthodox men we named above,

both Bishops and Patricians: but since we find Bishops not

to have died with John, nor concerning Patricians do contemporary writers say

such a thing; we do not dare to number these among the holy

Martyrs, on the sole faith of Martyrologies.

[30] Bede seems, whom the others except Usuard transcribed word for word,

to have found V Kal. in his more ample copy of the old Catalogue;

but Anastasius must have had another writing VI Kalend.,

whence also the old Roman Breviaries, Calendars, and whatever more recent Martyrologies,

refer the Roman Deposition of John to this

May XXVII. And in that one indeed which in the year MDXCVIII

Bellinus had printed at Venice, thence more on the 27th, not without some error: thus is read: "On the same day

of S. John Pope and Martyr, whom Theodoric

King of the Arians sent into exile to Ravenna,

and there worn out long in prison ended his life." The error

about exile, the Gregorian reformers corrected; but

with Baronius as author they substituted another; and placing John in the first place,

they said Birthday with Usuard, which should have been called Deposition:

they also retained the long maceration,

which we have shown to have been only of a few days, so now is read: "Birthday of S. John Pope

and Martyr, who by Theodoric Italian King the Arian

was summoned to Ravenna, and there on account of orthodox

faith long worn out in prison, ended his life": which

can sometime be corrected. Otherwise from the said diversity

of ancient Martyrologies it seems to have been done, that

he who at Rome in the cloister of the Priory of Malta on Mount

Aventine, took care to have the old Calendar painted on a wall,

combining both readings, ordered to be written,

with Lucas Holstenius testifying in his said Animadversions

(for today nothing legible remains there, in a place exposed to all the injuries of weather,

so that the very plaster has almost flowed off from the walls, much less the letters; as he reported to me,

who in the year MDCLXXVIII had come to copy it, our Petrus

Possinus) it was done, I say, from this diversity of Martyrologies,

that he who there had the Calendar painted, some on each side.

perhaps in the XIII century or later, ordered John to be written on each day,

in this manner:

"VI Kalend. John PP. and Mart.

V Kalend. Reportation of John PP."

[31] His sacred body even now at Rome in the Vatican church

is preserved, is the common opinion of the Romans: to which agrees

the Roman Canon, describing the said Basilica

at the time of Pope Eugene III; but in what part of the basilica

it is held, is not known testifies Aringus in book 2 of Subterranean Rome

chapter 8. Meanwhile on the very Kalends of June, in the Ms.

Florarium of the Saints, is noted "Translation of S. John Pope I

and Martyr." Another Translation on June 1, And indeed it is necessary to admit some later

translation of the body, whether to or from the City of Rome,

unless we prefer to confess, that in the first translation

the body indeed was translated to Rome, but Ravenna kept

the Head. For this is shown today in

the sacristy of the Friars Minor of the Zoccolanti, where formerly is believed to have been

the palace of King Theodoric, The Head at Ravenna, a Relic at Augsburg, enclosed in a remonstrance

(as they call it) of wood indeed, but gilded. Their very

church is also thought to be the work of Theodoric, originally

dedicated to S. Martin; and in the year DCCCLVI it had

Benedictine Monks; and began to be called by the name of S. Apollinaris,

from his body then placed there. In the Basilica of S. Ulrich

and Afra at Augsburg, is preserved

a silver image of the D. Virgin, with Christ and the Baptist as boys

playing together, consecrated by John the Abbot of the place in the year

MDCXIX, which contains something of S. John Pope and

Mart. with other Relics, named by Bernard Hertfelder

in his description of that Basilica book 2 chapter 32. Moreover

at January XII in the Gallican Martyrology of Saussay it is noted,

at Liège, in Belgium, the memory of S. John Pope, Memory on Jan. 12, uncertain

for what cause, unless it be by reason of some Relic

of his. In the very ancient Calendar of the monastery of S. Maximinus,

written before many ages, and in many other Belgic ones,

in this month and day is had: "and of S. John Pope," which

scarcely can you understand of any other than this First, and on May 18. to whom alone the title

Saint is granted. On the very day on which he died, namely

May XVIII, also inscribed is found in the Martyrology under

the year MCCCCXC printed at Cologne and Lübeck, in the Additions

of Greven to Usuard, and several others with the said

Florarium.

CHAPTER IV.

Symmachus's killing: King Theodoric's unhappy end.

[32] It is likely that the journey of John from Ravenna to Constantinople,

just as it was on the return short and prosperous, Symmachus summoned to Ravenna in April,

so within a month was completed; was also so

accelerated on going, that it is much if all of March was spent on it.

In such month therefore or the next April

I judge Boethius was killed, long since committed to prison;

and in the same month Symmachus summoned to Ravenna, of whom thus

the Anonymus of Valois. "But while these things are being done, namely

what we have narrated as done by John with Justin, Symmachus,

head of the Senate, indeed an aged old man, and now from forty

years a Consular, whose daughter Boethius had as wife,

is led from Rome to Ravenna. But the King fearing,

killed in August: lest by grief for his son-in-law something against

his rule he should plot, with a crime alleged ordered him to be killed."

Here, what the old Catalogue says in the plural, "killed by the sword,

whose bodies even he caused to be hidden,"

I shall understand of Symmachus alone, whose body even now lies hidden:

for that Boethius was neither killed by the sword, nor his body

hidden, we have seen above. But Symmachus was not,

as soon as he came to Ravenna, slain: but first

in the month of August, that the delay interjected between the funerals of so many illustrious men

might soothe the odium of so great atrocity. That delay

soon Anonymus will prove, compared with Procopius: who when

he had said, that "not content with both their lives, also their goods

he confiscated," continually adds: a little after the King, terrified by a vision, "After a few

days, when he was supping, when his ministers had set before him the head of a larger fish,

it seemed to him to be Symmachus's head

freshly cut off; which with teeth fixed in the lower lip,

and eyes savagely and cruelly looking, had

the appearance of one grievously threatening. Terrified by the immense prodigy,

and rigid with cold beyond measure, he hastens to his bedchamber;

orders many cloaks to be placed upon him, and

under them keeps himself. Then having explained the order of the matter to Elpidius

his physician, condemned the deed and dies. he bewailed the crime committed against Symmachus and

Boethius. Lamenting this and pressed by grief of mind,

which the calamity brought, a little after he died."

[33] The older Pontifical Catalogue, written at that very time,

after narrating John's death undergone on XV Kalends of June, "After

these things," it says, "by the nod of omnipotent God, on the XLVIII day,

after Bishop John died in custody,

suddenly Theodoric perished, struck by Divinity."

All the Anastasian copies and the Anonymus to be alleged just now

prove, that there is a copyist's error in the number,

and XCVIII days ought to be read, which if you begin to count after May XVIII,

you reach to August XXVI,

on which day precisely Theodoric divinely struck, although

not immediately dead, thus the Anonymus indicates. Symmachus

the Jew, exhausted by a three-day belly flux on Aug. 30. by the order not of the King, but of a tyrant, dictated

precepts on the day of the fourth feria, the seventh Kalends of September,

Indiction IV, with Olybrius Consul, that on the Lord's day

coming the Arians might invade the Catholic Basilicas.

But he who does not allow his faithful worshippers to be oppressed by foreigners,

soon brought upon him the sentence

of Arius, the author of his religion. He incurred a flux of the belly:

and when within three days he had been emptied,

on the same day (namely Sunday and then August XXX)

on which he rejoiced to invade the churches, he lost at once kingdom

and soul. Therefore before he expired,

his nephew Athalaric in the kingdom he established; while

he himself yet lived, he made for himself a monument of squared stone,

a work of wonderful magnitude, and a huge stone

which he might place above sought. Not dissonant from this

relation is the Tours one, in book On the Miracles and glory of the Martyrs

chapter 40, about John and Theodoric, otherwise to be corrected

in many things when he says; "that the Lord's mercy

immediately (rather, three months after the Pontiff's death) brought vengeance

upon the wicked King: for suddenly

struck by God, exhausted with great strokes he perished,

and immediately took the burning of flaming Gehenna."

[34] S. Gregory the Great in book 4 of the Dialogues chapter 30;

when to his Peter he had proved, that the fire of Gehenna is corporeal;

"It is worth the trouble," he says, "I believe if those things which by faithful

men have been related to me I shall narrate, of the seen torments

of Theodoric recently condemned. For Julian,

the second Defender of this Roman Church, Afterwards seen cast into the fires of Vulcania island by John and Symmachus. which by God's authority

I serve, who about seven

years ago died, while I was still placed in a monastery used to come to me

frequently, and was wont to talk with me about the soul's

utility. He therefore on a certain

day told me, saying: 'In the times of King Theodoric

the father of my father-in-law had performed the exaction of canon in Sicily,

and was now returning to Italy. Whose ship

was driven to the island called Lipari. And

because there a certain solitary man of great virtue dwelt,

while the sailors were repairing the ship's tackle,

it seemed good to the said father of my father-in-law to go to the same man

of God, and to commend himself to his prayer.

Whom the man of the Lord when he had seen, speaking among other things

said to them: Do you know that King Theodoric is dead?

To whom they immediately replied: God forbid, we left him

alive, and nothing such has been brought to us about him until

now. To whom God's servant added,

saying: Indeed he is dead: for yesterday at the ninth hour,

between Pope John and Symmachus the Patrician,

ungirt and unshod, and with bound hands

led, into this neighbouring pot of Vulcan was thrown.

Which they hearing, carefully wrote down

the day, and returning to Italy, on that day they found

King Theodoric to have died, on which his end and torment

had been shown to the man of God.'"

"And because he killed Pope John afflicting him in custody,

he also slew Symmachus the Patrician with iron,

he appeared sent justly into fire by them, whom

in this life he unjustly judged." Thus S. Gregory. There is

further among the Aeolian islands, opposed to the northern side of Sicily,

the chief Lipara, honored with an Episcopal See, to which neighbouring

is Vulcania, vomiting fires, now also called

Vulcano.

[35] When we were once at Ravenna, we saw on November XIX

in the year MDCLX, before the church of S. Apollinaris the new, His monument at Ravenna.

of which we have spoken above, an extended enclosure, with that ancient

tower, in which S. John is thought to have died. It is above

the gate, by which from the square one passes to the church: and on

the right side of that gate, is seen a porphyry tomb,

inserted in the wall, indeed quite magnificent, than which I do not know if

any larger is in all Italy, with such a title underneath: "This

porphyric vase, formerly hiding in the apex of the Rotunda the ashes of Theodoric

Emperor of the Goths,

with Petrus Donatus Caesius Bishop of Narni favoring,

translated here, for perennial memory the Wise of the Republic

of Ravenna placed it. MDLXIIII." Of Queen Amalasuntha, who

was Theodoric's daughter, the work is believed to be the church of S. Mary

named the Rotunda, having its name from its form: under whose

admirable cupola, that the ashes of the Arian King were tolerated so long,

is wonderful indeed; and prudently it was done by Archbishop Caesius,

that he took care to remove them from the sacred place;

yet so that the memory of the Prince, otherwise greatly meriting from the Ravennates,

would not be obliterated; not for the consolation of the dead one's soul, but

either for the curiosity of the living for spectacle, or for emendation

for example, with the unhappy end remembered by which his crimes are read

to have been punished.