Constantine the Iberian

ON ST. CONSTANTINE THE IBERIAN, MARTYR IN BABYLONIA,

IN THE YEAR 853

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY

Constantine the Iberian, martyr in Babylonia. (S.)

BY P. P.

[1] The Passion of Constantine the Iberian The Georgian Passion of St. Constantine, a prince, who is said to have been killed by the Arabs a little after the middle of the ninth century, leaves its readers with an ambiguous opinion of itself. What is related in this little book about the holy martyr's life and death would raise no doubt in anyone who had found the same things briefly recorded somewhere. But in that prolix and overflowing discourse many things are lacking which a writer not too far removed from the events themselves or from proven documents could not have omitted. nor by the style of its discourse Indeed, not a few things are mixed in which plainly conflict with history. And so from the very entrance of the inquiry an obvious conjecture thrusts itself forward: that there once existed some definite document about the martyrdom of St. Constantine, which in a later age some more talkative hagiographer

has diluted, more mendacious than it was with empty eloquence, so as to cook up a longish narrative from a meagre elogium. But it is not so clear what the substance of that subject-matter was. So that this investigation may succeed for us in some fashion, it must before all else be discerned how much the statements of the Passion are worth in themselves; lest by its deceptive authority the other testimonies be obscured, which most certainly surpass it. That set aside, we shall then see what can probably be gathered about St. Constantine from the historical records. Finally, a few remaining small questions about his cult and memory will be briefly dispatched.

§ I. On the Passion of St. Constantine.

[2] nor by the credit of its codices The Passion of St. Constantine was printed by Michael Sabinin in a work most useful indeed but wonderfully inaccurate, which he entitled the Paradise of Georgia [ [ ] (St. Petersburg, 1882), pp. 363–70.] . About the codex he used he judged that pious readers were not at all concerned. But unless the editor himself exceeded every measure of negligence, this copy must have been recent and mediocre. Besides this exemplar, with which, since all others were lacking, we have had to be content, other codices are cited here and there by the learned, such as:

A) Two codices of the Asiatic Museum of St. Petersburg, from which M. F. Brosset drew the mention of St. Constantine which he annotated to his History of Georgia Histoire de la Georgie, vol. I (Saint-Petersbourg, 1849), p. 268, note 2. ; the same, as it seems, as those he described summarily in a certain brief index of Georgian manuscripts and books [Recueil des Actes de l'Academie Imperiale des sciences de Saint-Petersbourg (1838), pp. 142–44.] . One of these contains fourteen, and the other, magnificently written in hieratic letters, eleven Lives of saints of the Georgian nation;

B) The Patericon, or Lives of the Fathers of the monastery of St. Šio Mḡvimeli, of which Demetrius Bakradze put forward a certain brief specimen [= History of Georgia, Tiflis, 1889, p. 218.] ;

C) The codex of the Museum of Ecclesiastical Archaeology of Tiflis, No. 130, of paper, written in the year 1713, consisting of 3 + 313 folios, which are entirely filled by Lives of saints of the Georgian Church Th. Žordania, [ , vol. I (Tiflis, 1903), p. 139.] ;

D) Codex 170 of the same museum, of paper, consisting of 251 folios, 0.29 m × 0.21, written out in the year 1733, with pages in two columns and in hieratic script. It offers nothing else to be read but 24 Lives of Saints of the Georgian Church, and among these, in fifth place, fols. 44–51v, the Passion of St. Constantine the martyr Ibid., pp. 178–80. ;

E) Codex 176 of the same museum, of paper, comprising 231 folios, 0.532 m × 0.21, written by various hands between the year 1734 and 1743. This too is entirely filled with Lives of saints of the Georgian Church, but in another series and another order than in the two above [Ibid., pp. 185–86. To one or other of these codices must be referred the mention which the same Žordania inserted into his historical florilegium, [ ] = Chronicles and other materials of Georgian history, vol. I (Tiflis, 1892), p. 82.] ;

F) The codex formerly of David Tchoubinof (Čubinov), written in the year 1838 in "knightly" letters, as it seems by the royal prince Theimouraz. It comprises 20 Lives of Georgian saints, which agree neither in selection nor in order with any of the codices mentioned above A. A. Tsagareli, [ , vol. I, 3 (St. Petersburg, 1894), p. 104.] .

is sufficiently commended. Besides this last exemplar, which today belongs to the library of the Society for the propagation of letters among the Georgians Tsagareli, same vol., p. XIV. , it is quite probable that not a few others are kept in that very large museum. I pass over unknown codices, whose scattered multitude lies hidden in the monasteries and libraries of Transcaucasia; to us they are as if they had never existed. But among all these, no copy of the Passion seems able to be found which is much older than those mentioned above; or if one is kept anywhere, it has escaped the diligence of the learned, who have the antiquities of their homeland thoroughly examined. In the libraries, certainly, which are less unknown to us, in the monastery of Mount Sinai, in the monastery of the Holy Cross at Jerusalem, in the laura of the Georgians on Athos, those most noble cradles of Georgian letters, it is almost evidently established that the Passion of Constantine was never copied or read. Whatever, then, may still be hoped for from hiding-places not yet explored, up to now it has nowhere been found outside codices of a plainly recent kind, in which the Lives of the native saints of the Georgian nation have been collected separately: which is certainly not without grave suspicion. The learned Cornelius Kekelidze, however, was not concerned to ward off this prejudice, when he mentioned the Passion of Constantine in passing among the ancient monuments of Georgian hagiography [ [ ] = History of Georgian literature, vol. I: the older literature (Tiflis, 1923), p. 567.] . Ivane Ǧavachišvili (Ǧavachov) himself, when he purposely put it to the test [ [ ] (V–XVIII) [= The aim, sources and methods of history, earlier and more recent. Book I: The older monuments of Georgian history (fifth to eighteenth centuries), 2nd ed., Tiflis, 1921], pp. 52–58.] , seems to have been content with the printed edition. Let pardon be granted to us too, who have yielded unwillingly to the same want. For however slight a hope shone, we left nothing untried to obtain the aids most necessary for reprinting this Passion. The inexorable law of the iron age in which we live prevailed. And so we commit to the indulgence of readers an edition which we regret having been compelled to undertake now We have for the most part silently corrected the compositors' errors. .

[3] The sum of the narrative The hagiographer wove for the holy martyr a history of this kind. Constantine was a most powerful prince of the "Upper", that is, "northern", region, which is called [ ], or [ ], most illustrious for the nobility of his family, his wealth and every praise of virtue. In their native tongue they called him [ ]. This surname, although it is not read in the Passion as it now stands, must nevertheless so evidently be restored in it that it cannot be passed over in this place See below, no. 20, p. 552. . The fame of the renowned man spread very widely. St. Theodora herself, empress of the Greeks, pursued him with singular goodwill (§3; cf. §§13–16). At an uncertain time, but certainly some years before his death, Constantine went to Jerusalem to pray, and there, with the most lavish liberality, heaped gifts upon the churches and the poor of the Holy City and the monasteries of the Jordan. And after he had returned home, he never neglected to send a great sum of money every year to Jerusalem (§4). He was in his eighty-fifth year when in Georgia the fury of the Muslims blazed out against the Christians. The saint, being chief counsellor and standard-bearer of his nation, was seized before the others, and dragged to Tiflis, to the Arab general Bugha; who, after trying the most valiant old man in vain with threats and insults, cast him into chains (§§5–6). From his prison the martyr sent a letter to the monks of the city and asked them to help him with their prayers on the journey on which he was about to set out (§7). A few days later, Bugha sent him, laden with chains, to the caliph of the Arabs, Ǧa'far son of Abraham [This name is false, as will be noted in its place, Passion §8, p. 558, note 4.] , who was then at Samarra, a city of Babylonia. When he could in no way shake the captive's constancy, he thrust him back into close custody (§8). While the saint is held in prison, two Armenian phylarchs, who, having abjured the Christian religion, had gone over to the superstition of the Muslims, were sent to him by the caliph, to tempt him again with blandishments and promises (§§9–10). Repulsed insultingly by the saint, they returned to the caliph with the matter unaccomplished. He, holding their faith suspect, at once ordered them to strike the martyr with the sword themselves. But although they strove in vain with all their strength, they could do him no harm. And so the saint's head was cut off by a barbarian executioner and brought to the caliph. Constantine's headless body was raised up on a high stake, and, while the whole people looked on (whether of the faithful or of the Muslims the hagiographer did not care to note), a miracle happened, which is no longer read in the Passion as it has now been presented to us, through the fault either of the copyists or of the editor (§11). At his funeral, the holy empress Theodora with her son Michael sent a letter of consolation to the martyr's sons and kinsmen, a complete copy of which has been added to the Passion by way of a conclusion (§§13–16).

[4] with the reckoning of the times The time at which these things were done is noted twice in the Passion. First (§11): the executioner cut off the saint's head on the Parasceve, on the tenth day of November, in the reign of Pancratius the curopalates [He was the son of Asotius (Ašoṭ) the curopalates, prince of Adranutzium (Arṭanuǧ), whom he succeeded when he was killed in the year 826. He died in the year 876. See J. Marquart, Osteuropäische und ostasiatische Streifzüge (Leipzig, 1903), pp. 408, 435.] . And again (§12): "He (the saint) died in a good confession on the tenth day of November, on the solemnity of St. George See below, no. 26. , with whom he was associated, on the day of the Parasceve, in the year from the creation of the world six thousand four [Ed.: three; but cf. Brosset, Hist. de la Georgie, same vol., p. 268, note 2; Bakradze, History of Georgia, p. 218; Žordania, Chronicles, p. 82.] hundred and fifty-seven, which by the reckoning of the Ishmaelites is the two hundred and twenty-seventh year." The numbers of the years demand an interpretation, which learned men have attempted in different ways. But there is no leisure to linger over that controversy, since the matter is clear from elsewhere. Bugha, by whom the saint is said to have been cast into chains, it agrees well enough; burst into Georgia in the year 853, and a few months later went on into Albania, as will be shown in its place Below, nos. 19, 21, pp. 551–52. . In this year, moreover, the 10th of November did in fact fall on a Parasceve, which does not occur again before the year 859. But the later year is excluded by the whole tenor of the narrative, in which we see that St. Constantine, quite a short time after he was seized, was carried off to Samarra and there condemned to death. Moreover, from about three years before the year 859, the empress Theodora had already withdrawn from the court and had surrendered the reins of the kingdom to the licence of her son Michael [H. Gelzer, Abriss der byzantinischen Kaisergeschichte, in K. Krumbacher, Geschichte der byzantinischen Literatur, 2nd ed. (Munich 1897), p. 971.] . And so no year could have been signified by the hagiographer but 853. And in very truth, if the year from the creation of the world 6457, which is inscribed in the Passion, is moved back by the 96 years which are usually added in the Georgian computation, the remaining number 6361 does in fact agree with the year 853 Brosset, Histoire de la Géorgie, loc. cit. . And so the year which has been added from the Arab reckoning can undoubtedly be corrected, and instead of the number 227, 239 is to be read. All of which would be established clearly enough,

if the substance of the narrative itself rested on the truth of the facts. But is credence owed to it at all, and how much? To see this, the history of these times must be gone over somewhat more fully.

[5] but by Armenian affairs Come then: the tangled sequence of events, which the Armenian authors [Thomas Artsruni, Histoire des Ardzrouni, book II, ch. 7 – book III, ch. 15, translated by M. Brosset, Collection d'historiens armeniens, vol. I (Saint-Petersbourg, 1874), pp. 104–168; Šapuh Bagratuni, [ ] ed. G. Termkrtčian and Bishop Mesrop (Ečmiadsin, 121); see below at no. 16, p. 548, note 18; John the Catholicos, [ ] = History of Armenia, ed. I. B. Emin (Moscow, 1853), pp. 66–75; in French, J. Saint-Martin, Histoire d'Armenie par le patriarche Jean VI (Paris, 1841), chs. XIII–XVII, pp. 103–122; Stephen of Taron, also called Asolik, [ ] = Universal History, book II, ch. 2, ed. C. Šahnazariantz (Paris, 1859), pp. 106–113; cf. H. Gelzer and Aug. Burckhardt, Des Stephanos von Taron armenische Geschichte (Leipzig, 1907), pp. 77–79; Moses of Kalankatuk, [ ] = History of the land of the Albanians, book III, chs. 21–22; ed. I. B. Emin (Moscow, 1860), pp. 265–71; in the Russian language Const. Patkanian, [ ] (St. Petersburg, 1861), pp. 272–79; Samuel, bishop of Siunik, [ ] = Histories of the house of Siunik, ch. 37, ed. I. B. Emin (Moscow, 1861), pp. 134–46; in French M. Brosset, Histoire de la Siounie par Stephannos Orbelian (St.-Petersbourg, 1863), pp. 102–105. Their testimonies were copied by Samuel of Ani, Mekhithar of Airivank, Cyriacus of Gandzak, Vardan the Great and other more recent writers.] , Georgian [ [ ] = History of Georgia, ed. Z. Dšidšinadze, vol. I (Tiflis, 1897), pp. 273–77; ed. E. Taqaïšvili, from the codex of Queen Mary (ibid., 1906), pp. 220–22; in French, Brosset, Histoire de la Géorgie, vol. I, pp. 265–68. [ ] = Brief history of Georgia ascribed to the historian Juansher, ch. 18 (Venice, 1884), pp. 104–105; in French in Brosset, op. cit., vol. IV. Additions et éclaircissements (St.-Pétersbourg, 1851), pp. 51–52.] , Arab [Ibn Wâdhih, who is called al-Ja'qûbî, Histories, ed. M. Th. Houtsma, vol. II (Leiden, 1883), pp. 597–99; in German in excerpts in Marquart, Streifzüge, pp. 461–62; likewise in Armenian, in B. Chalathiantz, [ ] = (The testimonies) of Arabic writers on Armenia, in Handes Amsorya, vol. XXI (1907), pp. 276–77; Ahmad al-Baḡdādi, known as al-Balādhori, [ ] = Book of the conquered lands, Cairo in Egypt, 1900, pp. 218–19; in Armenian, Chalathiantz, op. cit., Handes, vol. XVIII (1904), pp. 55–56; Tabari, Annals, ser. 3, vol. III, ed. V. Rosen and M. J. de Goeje (Leiden, 1883–1884), pp. 1408–1409, 1414–19; in Armenian, Chalathiantz, Handes, vol. XX (1906), pp. 276–77. In this place one may neglect ibn al-Athīr, who copied Tabari's Annals, ibn Khaldūn, ibn Miskawayh, and others, who scribbled down foreign and far-fetched recollections.] and Syriac The Syriac Chronicle of Gregory Barhebraeus [ed. Bedjan, Paris, 1890, pp. 155–56.] relate with much greater agreement than they usually do elsewhere, can be sketched thus in a few words [The sources have already been very well sifted by Dulaurier, Chronologie arménienne (Paris, 1859), pp. 255–59; Marquart, Streifzüge, pp. 410–14, 461–63, 508; M. Ghazarian, Armenien unter der arabischen Herrschaft bis zur Entstehung des Bagratidenreichs, in the Zeitschrift für armenische Philologie, vol. II (1903), pp. 189–193. The documents set out in European languages were put together with very diligent skill by J. Laurent, L'Armenie entre Byzance et l'Islam depuis la conquete arabe (Paris, 1919), pp. 108–110, 117–27, 320–21; Un feodal armenien au IXe siecle: Gourguen Ardzrouni fils d'Abou Beldj, in the Revue des études armeniennes, vol. III (1922), pp. 162–78. He, however, in ambiguous questions depends too much on others' interpretation, and sometimes buries the chief testimonies under obsolete trifles.] . In the Muslim year 237, in the month of Ramaḍān, that is, between the 27th of February and the 28th of March of the year 852, a grave revolt arose in Armenia against the Arab garrisons, because the caliph's governor Joseph son of Muhammad had treacherously thrown into chains the Armenian prince Pancratius (Bagarat), son of Asotius (Ašot), and banished him to Babylon, and had embittered the minds of the inhabitants with sacrilegious brigandage. In that tumult Joseph himself was captured and killed. And so, to check the rebellion, the caliph Abū Ǧa'far al-Mutavakkil sent another governor, a Turk by race, who was called Bugha (Buḡa, "Bull"), surnamed the Great or the Elder See below, no. 12, p. 546. . He spread terror far and wide in Armenia with savage cruelty, laid waste the region with sword, fire and slaughter, and of not a few noblemen he partly butchered some and partly sent others as captives into Babylonia. and Georgian ones In the following year, affairs in the province having been settled, he went on into the Caucasus to make war on the toparch of Tiflis, Isaac son of Ismael. This man's father, set over the region of Hyrcania by Harun ar-Rashid, had vainly tried to make his dominion his own by right. Isaac, heir of his father's governorship and of his ambition, carried his designs through; he increased his power by guile and arms On the origin of this Isaac, see Mas'udi, [ = The meadows of gold and mines of gems, vol. I (Cairo in Egypt, 1885–1886), pp. 88–89. The chief testimonies concerning him were clearly collected by Laurent, L'Arménie depuis la conquête arabe, pp. 320–21. Cf. moreover the Life of St. Gregory of Khandzta, §68, Anal. Boll., vols. XXXVI–XXXVII, pp. 290–91.] , until he openly revolted from the caliph's authority and seized the tyranny at Tiflis. With Bugha had joined his forces Pancratius the curopalates, son of Asotius, petty king of Adranutzium, who had experienced the greed of the emir Isaac to the detriment of his kingdom, and had wished to seek protection against the nearer enemy in the more remote one History of Georgia, loc. cit. . In the Arab army there was present also Symbatius the Bagratid, surnamed Abū 'l-'Abbās, supreme commander of Armenia, father-in-law of Pancratius the curopalates Marquart, Streifzüge, pp. 464, 435. , who, however, rendered service to the oppressors of his country more in appearance than at heart [He is said, together with Vararanes (Guaram) the mamphal, brother of Pancratius the curopalates, to have warned the Mountaineers (Mthiultha) by a secret message not to admit Zirak into their region. Annals of Georgia, ed. Dšidšinadze, p. 275; Brosset, Hist. de la Géorgie, pp. 266–67.] , and a little later was carried off by Bugha to Samarra, where he died in prison, worn out by hardships, and is held by the Armenians in the number of the martyrs See below, no. 22, p. 552. . On the other hand, the side of the emir of Tiflis had been embraced by the Abasgians, whose king Theodosius had married the sister of Pancratius himself Marquart, Streifzüge, p. 435. , and two other Christian peoples, the Gardabani and the Sanari. The first of these inhabited the province of the Utii, where Gardman was situated, their chief fortress Hübschmann, Die altarmenischen Ortsnamen (Strassburg, 1904), p. 352. , and the latter in Kakheti, between the roots of the Caucasus and the river Cyrus [See Marquart, pp. 37–40, 409 ff., who thinks the Sevortii are not to be distinguished from the Cachi, or inhabitants of Kakheti. Otherwise and better Laurent, Arménie, p. 14, note 6.] . Whether the Gardabani and the Sanari of their own accord, for the sake of defending their own liberty, wished to bar the way to Bugha's forces, as the Armenian writer Thomas Artsruni hints, or whether on the contrary, as the Annals of Georgia report, they joined in alliance with Isaac, with whom they had already shared the same fortune in the earlier war Marquart, Streifzüge, p. 411. , is scarcely clear from the documents, nor is it necessary for us to know in this place. For elucidating the history of St. Constantine one thing had to be noted: that the war during whose blaze he fell into the hands of the Saracens was in no way undertaken for the cause of religion, since two Muslim armies were fighting each other and each had Christian peoples and princes as auxiliaries. Indeed, among the allies of the Muhammadan plunderer by whom the saint was seized, there bore arms that very Pancratius the curopalates, who was then the sole prince of the Georgian nation.

[6] the history Nor is this the place to examine one by one what has been narrated clearly enough about this war, especially in the books of the Arabs and the Armenians. These moments of the events pertain in some way to the present question. Bugha took Tiflis by a sudden assault, captured and killed the emir Isaac, and destroyed the city utterly by fire after sprinkling it with naphtha [Thomas Artsruni, Tabari and other Arab authors report that the whole city was built of fir timber; see below, no. 19.] , together with a huge multitude of citizens [On this disaster one should read above all Thomas Artsruni, book III, ch. 9, Brosset, Historiens arméniens, pp. 140–42. The Arab historians likewise narrate that the city was destroyed by the flames with a great number of its inhabitants. Tabari indeed asserts that no fewer than 50,000 people perished in the burning of the city. Annals, same vol., p. 1415.] . Then, when he learned that Theodosius, king of the Abasgians, was bearing down with an army to avenge the disaster of his ally, Bugha sent against him the Arab Zirak [That is, in Pahlavi: the Wise. Barhebraeus confused this Zirak with the emir Isaac. Chronicle, same vol., p. 156.] , his lieutenant, with Pancratius the curopalates. They put the Abasgians to flight, but while the victors were returning, they suffered no light defeat at the hands of the Gardabani in a narrow pass of the route [Thomas Artsruni, book III, ch. 10, Brosset, same vol., pp. 143–44; whose narrative Marquart has set out lucidly, Streifzüge, pp. 412–14; cf. Ghazarian, Armenien unter der arabischen Herrschaft, loc. cit., p. 192.] . Bugha himself marched against the Sanari, through whose mountains he could not break a way for himself, and, desisting from the vain attempt, he turned aside into Albania, where he kept his winter quarters for the winter of this year. Then for some time he conducted the war with varying fortune, until in the year 855, either because his commission was completed, or, as some have thought, because he had been brought under suspicion with the caliph by unfavourable rumours, he handed over the army to another and was recalled to Samarra. This, according to the common opinion of the historians, is roughly the sequence of events into which the martyrdom of St. Constantine falls. The order of times, however, could be determined more distinctly from an inscription which is to be produced a little further below Below, no. 19, p. 551. . But from what has just been said it is already plain how little credence is owed to the Passion.

[7] is utterly overturned by the hagiographer. For it is clearly established that St. Constantine's

trial did not take place in the manner which the hagiographer devised for himself from widespread models. For in the brief and, as it were, lightning-swift heat of the war he was not the only one accused of the charge of religion, nor was he brought to Tiflis, where Bugha never had the seat of his power Cf. Marquart, Streifzüge, p. 508. and from which he would have been put to flight by pestilence alone, had he wished to remain, after the recent fire, in that heap of embers and corpses, with the dog-days burning See below, no. 19, p. 551. . Nor was the cause of one man eloquently pleaded in a city whose prince and the greatest part of whose inhabitants had just been destroyed in a tumultuous massacre; nor could the holy martyr send letters from his custody to monasteries, which certainly no longer existed after the destruction of the city. I pass over other things no less absurd. He who invented such things against all likelihood himself overturns the credit of the rest of his narrative as well. And so from the testimony of the Passion alone it cannot be gathered whether St. Constantine was really sent by Bugha to Samarra and there condemned to death by the caliph himself.

[8] Constantine an enemy to the Greeks rather than a friend Nor is it seen more clearly from the same Passion by what merits St. Constantine could have won the friendship and favour of the Greek emperors. Would they have judged that a man had fallen in their cause who had been captured among the enemies of Pancratius the curopalates, their client? Indeed, one who belonged to the dominion of a prince who had for a long time waged war with the Greek empire? And in very truth, more than once in earlier years the emperor Theophilus, either to bring help to the Abasgians [So Laurent, L'Arménie entre Byzance et l'Islam, p. 19, note 5 and pp. 320–21; with little probability, since at this same period we see the Abasgians and the emir of Tiflis joined by treaty. Cf. above, no. 6, p. 544.] , or rather to restore his affairs in Colchis which had been shaken by the tyrant of Tiflis, had sent armies against Isaac son of Ismael Marquart, Streifzüge, pp. 421–22; A. Vasiliev, [ , vol. I (St. Petersburg, 1900), p. 154.] . The empress Theodora herself in the year 842 made war in Upper Georgia against the emir, who, relying on the same allies, the Cachi, the Sanari and others, put the Greek forces to flight [Theophanes continuatus, book III, ch. 39; ed. I. Bekker (Bonn, 1838), p. 137; Stephen of Taron, History of Armenia, Gelzer-Burckhardt, same vol., p. 107; cf. Laurent, L'Arménie entre Byzance et l'Islam, p. 212.] . Certainly, in that long struggle, Constantine, if he is rightly said to have been the one most valiant prince of his nation, could have done nothing by which to win for himself praise and favour at Byzantium.

[9] The letter of the empress Theodora And so it is plainly certain and evident that the letter of St. Theodora which we mentioned above was not given to his relatives. Yet the hagiographer did not invent it himself. For although this letter consists for the most part of traditional and common formulas, and moreover was badly handled first by the translator and then by the copyists, no one reading it attentively will fail to recognise in it imperial majesty and the grandiloquent eloquence of the Byzantine court. The praises of the deceased, of the survivors and of the emperors themselves are celebrated with a clatter of words, useless indeed, but clever and truly Greek. Indeed, even a certain awkwardness of the discourse, by which now one, now several seem to be writing, has a fitting cause if the letter is understood to have been given by St. Theodora in her own name and that of her son. In short: not to the relatives of Constantine the Iberian the hagiographer pillaged a golden bull, which was really sent by a Byzantine emperor, and indeed to people joined and dear to him, who had deserved splendidly of the kingdom of the Greeks, and who were mourning a kinsman or relative by marriage recently taken from them by an illustrious death. To whom, then? There is no need here of conjectures either many or far-fetched. For in the year 848, but of another Constantine not long before the death of St. Constantine, in the same city of Samarra in which he is said to have suffered, by the same caliph Gafar al-Mutavakkil, forty-two Greek martyrs were slain with the sword, who had been captured by the Arabs in the year 838, when the town of Amorium in Phrygia was stormed On whom BHG 1209–1214. . Among these there excelled in virtue and constancy one of the highest commanders of the garrison of Amorium, who in all the Passions of the forty-two martyrs and in their liturgical office is called Constantine the patrician V. Vasilievskij and P. Nikitin, [ , in the Mémoires de l'Académie Impériale des sciences de St.-Pétersbourg, 7th ser., vol. VII, 2 (1905), pp. 212–14.] . The same man, certainly, Symeon the Logothete, Theodosius of Melitene, George the Monk, Leo the Grammarian and pseudo-Symeon Magister call Constantine the drungarius; while the continuator of the work of Theophanes, the chief witness of all, calls him now Βαβούτζικον, now πατρίκιον Κωνσταντῖνον [The passages were very well collected and arranged by Nikitin, op. cit., pp. 213–14.] . Now from the same continuator of Theophanes we learn that Sophia, sister of the holy empress Theodora, was given in marriage Κωνσταντίνῳ τῷ κατὰ τὸν Βαβούτζικον. Somewhat more distinctly Skylitzes: ἡ μὲν Σοφία Κωνσταντίνῳ συνήφθῃ τῷ Βαβουτζίκῳ εἰς μαγίστρους τελοῦντι In George Cedrenus, ed. I. Bekker, vol. II (Bonn, 1839), p. 161. . Having compared all these testimonies most diligently, Peter Nikitin rightly concludes that this Constantine, τὸν κατὰ τὸν Βαβούτζικον, is the very St. Constantine, martyr of Amorium Loc. cit., p. 214. . was really given. Behold, then, to whose relatives St. Theodora gave that letter of consolation. And in very truth all the indications which show that a funeral eulogy of this kind is foreign to St. Constantine the Iberian make it most suited to that other Constantine. For he was a most vigorous champion of the kingdom of the Greeks, an ornament of the empire, a relative by marriage of the emperors themselves, and dying for their defence and honour he won their favour and mindful goodwill for his own. His kinsmen St. Theodora could address, indeed was bound to address, in those words which our writer pretends were written to the relatives of St. Constantine the Iberian [On this subject we sent a paper to the students of Byzantine affairs assembled at Bucharest in the month of April of the year 1924.] .

[10] With this deceit or error, With what good faith he asserts this is not established, since we do not know where he found this letter and in what copy he read it, Greek or Georgian. Nevertheless, either he himself or the translator did not refrain from adding something of his own. For that Theodora and Michael did not deliver to the whole Georgian nation the address with which their letter now concludes See the Passion, §16. has already been shown more than sufficiently. But it will be helpful to note one thing besides. The name Βαβούτζικον is a hypocoristic formed in the Armenian manner from an Armenian name This name occurs in Lazarus of Pharp, [ = History of Armenia, Venice, 1891, p. 447.] . And so one may ask whether perhaps that Constantine, like so many other Byzantine soldiers and magistrates, was Armenian by birth [Another sister of Theodora, Maria, was joined in marriage Ἀρσαβὴρ μαγίστρῳ, ἀνδρὶ γενναίῳ καὶ ἐν τοῖς τότε καιροῖς διαπρέποντι. Skylitzes, loc. cit. This Arsaber, indeed, brother of the patriarch John, was a Byzantine by country, of the family of the Μωροχαρζανίων. Skylitzes, loc. cit., pp. 146, 144. Nonetheless his name Aršavir is plainly Armenian. St. Theodora herself was by family a Paphlagonian. Skylitzes, same vol., p. 103.] , whose fellow tribesmen and fellow citizens St. Theodora, after his death, wished to confirm in loyalty and friendship to the Greek empire. And so in the letter as it is now read, Georgians seem to have crept into the place of Armenians. But to have thrown in this little question, which does not pertain to our purpose, in passing is already enough.

[11] other fictions have been joined, But if the panegyrist of St. Constantine read the letter of the empress Theodora in some lost Passion of the holy Martyrs of Amorium, which is certainly not unlikely, he could have found in the same source other things to adapt to his own uses. For Sophronius, archbishop of Cyprus For Nikitin ascribes to him the Passion BHG 1209–1210. Op. cit., p. 187. , and after him Symeon Magister [On Theophilus, ch. XVIII, ed. I. Bekker, Theophanes continuatus, pp. 638–640; cf. Nikitin op. cit., p. 222.] , narrate that on the day before the martyrs of Amorium were killed, a certain Greek apostate named Βοἳδίτζην or Βουδίτζην, the betrayer of the town of Amorium, came to the door of the prison, and, having called out a certain Constantine, the notary of Constantine the patrician, urged that he and the patrician should pretend to assent to the religion of the Saracens. Constantine, without any hesitation, repulsed him insultingly. But on the next day, after the holy martyrs had been slain with the sword, Βοἳδίτζης himself, by order of the prince of the Arabs, was beheaded and thrown into the river. Perhaps our hagiographer used this model when he embellished the little story of the two Armenian apostates who were sent in to entice St. Constantine Passion, §9. . In any case, corrupters of this kind could have been introduced not without a certain appearance of truth. Nor was it from envy alone against a nation hateful to him that our Georgian called them Armenians. For the Armenian authors themselves confess unambiguously that not a few of the princes of their nation who were banished by Bugha to Samarra abjured the Christian faith, whether with their lips or even with their will [John the Catholicos, Emin, same vol., p. 73, in Saint-Martin, ch. XIII, p. 115; Thomas Artsruni, book III, chs. 5, 6; Brosset, pp. 126, 130; Stephen Orbelian, ch. XXXVI; Emin, pp. 124–25; Brosset, ch. XXXVII, p. 103. See also below, no. 22, p. 552.] . It is not at all incredible that among their number were found some who urged a Christian captive to imitate their cowardice. Moreover, what is added does not disagree with the customs of the Persian tyrants, whom the Arabs had succeeded in the same region: that those two deserters of the faith were ordered by the caliph to cut off the holy martyr's head with their own hand [See above the Prel. Comm. on the Passion of SS. Narses and Joseph, no. 30, p. 421.] . But in the narrative certain other things give offence which most certainly belong to the well-worn stock-in-trade of hagiographers. And finally the arguments will have to be considered which rather suggest that St. Constantine was killed not at Samarra but in Albania. Let us therefore leave the matter undecided for a little.

[12] which being excluded, Now if what has so far been found doubtful or manifestly false is separated from the narrative, the remaining part is contained in roughly this: St. Constantine was a nobleman of Upper Georgia, who in the year 853, in the eighty-fifth year of his age, was seized by Bugha and on the 10th of November, either in the region itself or in exile, was condemned to death. How far it is true that the very aged man was killed because of the fear he inspired in the enemy cannot be decided from an estimate of probability alone:

this would be no wonder and not absurd, since they report that Bugha himself, when he was raging through Georgia and Albania, was already eighty years old Mas'udi, The meadows of gold, vol. II, p. 297. . Nevertheless, about the deeds of Constantine nothing has been handed down to memory in the Georgian annals, nothing in the Armenian, nothing in the Arabic. All the rest which the hagiographer heaped up in his praise has either been repeated at greater length from the letter of the holy empress Theodora [The hagiographer seems also to have borrowed arguments from Michael Modrekili, on whom see below, nos. 14–15. The declaimer from the poet.] , or shamelessly drawn from commonplaces. About the saint's birth, parentage, education, and the course of his life and honours nothing at all is related, and about his virtues scarcely anything, apart from the feeble praises which are usually sung by any encomiast about any saint. Nor is Constantine's journey to Jerusalem free from the suspicion of falsehood, which in Georgian hagiography is almost a traditional ornament, whenever no sufficiently certain mention of times and places is added Cf. Anal. Boll., vol. XXXII, p. 239. . Finally, the very prologue with which the narrative opens was condensed from the Life of St. John Chrysostom written by George of Alexandria BHG 873. George died in the year 630. , which, translated into Georgian, already exists in a codex of the year 868 [Formerly in the library of the Military (Academy?) of St. Petersburg, new ser. 13, now carried away to Georgia; Kekelidze, History of Georgian literature, same vol., p. 567, note 4. Another codex, written in the years 977–980, is held in the laura of the Georgians on Athos, No. 52. O. Wardrop (from A. A. Tsagareli), Georgian Manuscripts at the Iberian Monastery on Mount Athos, in the Journal of Theological Studies, vol. XII (1910–1911), p. 602. With both these exemplars is to be compared the Georgian Life of St. John Chrysostom which was likewise copied in the year 968 by John Saphareli in the laura of St. Chariton by the Jordan. Tsagareli, [ ], vol. IV, 1 (1888), pp. 227–28.] . The learned Cornelius Kekelidze, who had a copy of this version at hand, testifies that our hagiographer borrowed the very words of the translator. We have been able to compare only the Greek H. Savile, Opera S. Iohannis Chrysostomi, vol. VIII (Eton, 1612), pp. 157–58. .

[13] all credit is taken away. This being so, we cannot sufficiently wonder at the indulgence of the same learned man C. Kekelidze History of Georgian literature, p. 567. and of Ivane Ǧavachišvili Monuments of Georgian history, same vol., p. 53. , who think that the Passion of Constantine was committed to writing shortly after the year 853, because the writer professes himself nearly contemporary with the holy martyr or even his contemporary. At any rate the man's hand did not stiffen when he wrote these words: "I have written out the life and martyrdom of the holy and blessed martyr Constantine, who lived in our days Passion, §2. ." But I would ask, with the leave of these excellent judges: can so many indications which show that the Passion was fabricated at a much more recent age be covered up by so easy a trick? About the grammatical form and the composition of the words, since nothing is established from the wretched edition, let us say nothing. Everything else, the style, the thread of the discourse, the rotten emptiness of the sentences, betrays the rhetoric of a worse age. And certain knowledge of a historian who reports what is well known to him is nowhere perceived in the whole narrative. Enough of this: the Passion of St. Constantine was composed long after the times of David the Restorer and Queen Thamar, by a teller of tales who did not even remember that Tiflis was not always the seat of the Georgian kingdom. The genuine memory of the blessed martyr must be sought elsewhere.

§ II. On the historical mentions of St. Constantine.

[14] By Michael Modrekili, The most ancient testimony in which St. Constantine is designated by name has been preserved for us by a hymnary or hirmologion, which at the end of the tenth century Michael Modrekili partly collected and partly composed See Kekelidze, History of Georgian literature, vol. I, pp. 172–74. . A copy of it written by the hand of Michael himself exists in codex 425 of the Society for the propagation of the study of letters among the Georgians, which has already exercised the ingenuity of the learned not a little [It is of no help to report here their commentaries, mostly antiquated. See however what M. G. Ǧanašvili set out about the codex, [ ] = A treasury from the tenth century, Tiflis, 1891, pp. 8–25. A specimen of this manuscript with its musical notation was reproduced phototypically by J. Thibaut, [ ], vol. III (1914), plate XIV at p. 208.] . In this hymnary, then, among the festal songs which seem to have been composed by Michael, there is read, at the 22nd of November, the acoluthia [ ], of the holy martyr Constantius Cachaï the Georgian, martyr See below, no. 15. . How significantly the surname Cachaï shows the origin of this mention cannot now be explained in a few words, but it will be manifestly plain from what follows. in the tenth century About the age of the codex there is no doubt. It was written between the year 978 and 988, as the commemorative entries which Moses Ǧanašvili reported evidently show A treasury from the tenth century, pp. 8–25. . These again must be compared with the notes, and especially with the "codicil", which were added in the year 977 to the manuscript 69 of the laura of the Georgians on Athos [Select orations of SS. John Chrysostom and Ephrem the Syrian translated into Georgian. Tsagareli-Wardrop, Catalogue of the codices of the monastery of the Georgians, same vol., p. 605.] , and were excerpted by Demetrius Bakradze in his historical selections Chronicles, vol. I, pp. 107–122. : who, however, mixed them with other documents in such a way that you cannot easily see what was drawn from the Athos codex and what from elsewhere. From these testimonies the learned man persuaded himself that our Michael was the brother of Mary, mother of St. John the Hagiorite and of Thornicius, by whom the laura of the Georgians was founded [Life of SS. John and Euthymius, §6, Anal. Boll., vols. XXXVI–XXXVII, p. 16.] . But that this was wrongly concluded was shown by the distinguished Corn. Kekelidze Tsagareli-Wardrop, loc. cit. . Whether, moreover, Michael more probably called himself the son of St. John, and so the brother of St. Euthymius the translator, is a matter for a longer discussion and not very opportune to know for the present question. Certainly our Modrekili was joined by some bond of relationship and kinship with the holy men who in various ways laboured at founding the monastery of the Georgians. But even if the pedigree of this family were explained, the testimony now in question would become no better explored. in Calarzene, Of these things, God willing, elsewhere. As for the monastery of Uški, [ ], in which Michael Modrekili worked, or to which he offered his hymnary when copied [In one of his notes Michael complains that he is sunk in the waves of this world. Ǧanašvili, same vol., p. 13. In another he mentions the expenses he laid out on his work; ibid., p. 16; Kekelidze, Hist. litter. Hiber., p. 172.] , Žordania quite inconsiderately supposed that it was the same Chronicles, same vol., p. 108. as the dwelling of St. John the Baptist on Mount Athos, formerly a metochion of the Great Laura and then of the Georgians, where in the year 977 the above-mentioned codex of Chrysostom and Ephrem the Syrian was written, and in the following year the very well-known Athos exemplar of the Georgian Bible Tsagareli-Wardrop, same vol., pp. 594–95. : which cell, Tsagareli testifies, is still called Ušk by the Greeks [Ibid., p. 595. We confess that we do not know this. Of the more recent writers, indeed, Gerasimos Smyrnakes, a hagiorite, says only that the Σκήτην τοῦ τιμίου Προδρόμου is situated κάτωθεν τῶν ὁροσειρῶν τῆς Τζούκας. See Τὸ Ἅγιον Ὄρος (Athens, 1903), p. 481.] . But both from other indications and also from the frequent notes in which John Mṭbevari, that is, the bishop of Tbethi, is mentioned [Ǧanašvili, Treasury, pp. 17–20. On that John, Kekelidze, Hist. litter. Hiber., pp. 170–72. Where his church was situated and when it was founded, see Anal. Boll., vols. XXXVI–XXXVII, p. 210.] , it is established that Michael's hymnary was composed in Georgia. Now in Calarzene, to the west of Lake Torthum, and not very far from the most famous monasteries of the Georgians, Chachuli and Išchan Anal. Boll., same vol., pp. 84, 221. , in the place which is now called Eošq N. Sargisian, [ = Descriptions of Lesser and Greater Armenia, Venice, 1864, pp. 85–86.] or also Ošk So Richard Kiepert, Karte von Kleinasien (Berlin, 1908), plate VI A. , there exist to this day a monastery and a church of magnificent workmanship, which were built a little before the year 937 by Adarnarses the curopalates, Pancratius the archon of archons and David the Magister, sons of Adarnarses the curopalates [On these, the Life of St. Gregory of Khandzta, §§12, 24, in Anal. Boll., same vol., pp. 235, 247.] . In that church are read inscriptions set up in the tenth and eleventh centuries, which were edited and illustrated by Narses Sargisian Descriptions of Armenia, pp. 88–89. and after him by F.-M. Brosset [Inscriptions géorgiennes et autres recueillies par le Père Nersès Sargisian, in the Mémoires de l'Académie impériale des Sciences de St.-Pétersbourg, 7th ser., vol. VIII, 10 (1864), pp. 5–11, with plates I and II.] . It can scarcely be prudently doubted that this is that monastery of Uški for which the hirmologion of Michael Modrekili was destined [One may also ask whether this is also the monastery in which St. John the Hagiorite and Thornicius took refuge before they moved to Greece. See Anal. Boll., same vol., pp. 16–17. Perhaps they transferred its name to their seat on Athos.] .

[15] the acoluthia of St. Constantine Cachaï The acoluthia of St. Constantine Cachaï, together with other songs of Michael Modrekili, was recently edited by A. P. Ingoroqva [ [ ] = The spiritual poetry of the ancient Georgians, vol. I (Tiflis, 1913), pp. 289–94.] : having read it through, you will no longer wonder that this source was so long neglected by the learned men who have discussed the history of St. Constantine. The proper part of the office consists almost entirely of traditional formulas, from which, apart from the praises which are commonly given to all martyrs, this one thing can be gathered: that St. Constantius was a nobleman who was renowned for mercy towards the poor Op. cit., p. 289. . Nevertheless, near the end Ibid., p. 293. , these words are read which sound somewhat more distinctly: "Blessed Constantius, when he was carried off from his own land into the land of the unbelievers, strengthened by the Holy Spirit, resisted the edict of the unbelievers, and, made a martyr by suffering the sword, ascended on high to God for ever … He despised the sword with a brave heart, bent his neck Cf. ibid., p. 290. and cried out with joy: 'Bless…'" So Michael knew that the saint whose praises he had undertaken to write out had been carried off by the unbelievers and struck with the axe in exile for the faith of Christ.

This is roughly what report had handed down to him about the holy martyr. composed of empty formulas For certainly, if he had read his life and death narrated anywhere, he would not have stuffed his little verses with so many empty words, as with flock. He certainly did not use the Passion of St. Constantine. Rather, the hagiographer seems to have sought the nourishment of his eloquence, slender though it was, from Michael Modrekili [Emin, same vol., pp. 5, 63, 73, 79; in Saint-Martin, ch. II, p. 2; ch. XIII, p. 99; ch. XIV, p. 118; ch. XVIII, p. 127.] . Come now, let us see whether the memory of the Georgian martyr, whom neither of them knew, has been better preserved anywhere.

[16] From the testimony of Thomas Artsruni In the first place we must hear the man who in the affairs of this period will be our chief witness of all, until that Sapor the Bagratid (Šapuh Bagraṭuni) can be questioned, whose book, praised more than once by John the Catholicos See at §3 of the Passion. , has recently emerged into the light from the oblivion in which it was believed to have been blotted out [Almost at the very hour at which this little commentary had to be committed to the press under untimely necessity, we hoped the book would be brought to us. The plan of our work did not allow us to draw out a longer delay. A most troublesome scruple, however, was removed from us when the learned lady S. Der Nersessian, who was able to read the history of Sapor Bagratuni, kindly informed us that she had found in it no mention of this man, about whom we are now about to take the testimony of Thomas Artsruni.] . For Thomas Artsruni, in that work, not so much a history as an encomium of his nation and house, which he wrote at the beginning of the tenth century Brosset, Collection d'historiens Armeniens, p. 140 ff. , after relating in book III, ch. 9, the destruction of Tiflis and in ch. 10 Bugha's fruitless expedition against the Sanari, at once turns his discourse to the calamities with which Bugha then afflicted Albania. In this narrative, first, in ch. 11, he mentions some men who were slain by the unbelievers in that region. Their column is led by a certain Armenian nobleman named [ ], Mucatl, that is, in Arabic: [ ], "warrior", from the district of Vanand Stephen of Taron, book II, ch. 2: [ , Mocatl of Vanand; ed. Šahnazariantz, same vol., p. 117. In the synaxarion of "Ter Israel" there seems to have succeeded in the place of Mucathl [ ], Mleh, otherwise unknown (vol. I, p. 105, on the 3rd of March).] , in the canton of Aïrarat; who, having come to sound out the minds of the Albanians, fell into the hands of the enemy and was cruelly killed in the camp of the Arabs, at the place which is called Goroz, near Mount Kšith. Thomas, then, first narrates his execution. Then he goes on in these words [[ ] Constantinopli = Constantinople, 1821, pp. 210–11.] :

"Not otherwise, indeed with still more illustrious praise, the thrice-blessed Salomon, who is surnamed the Sevordian [[ ], sevordiq, that is, sons of the Black, in Greek Σεβόρτιοι (ed.: Σερβότιοι, Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De caerimoniis, II, 48; Bonn, p. 687), or Σαβάρτοι (the same, De administrando imperio, ch. 38; ibid., p. 168), were an Asiatic tribe of Turkish stock, which had settled in Armenia about the middle of the eighth century. The origins of the Sevordians are set out most learnedly by Jos. Marquart, who contends that the Hungarians derive their origin from them. Streifzüge, pp. 36–42. The prince of the Sevordians, Stephen, surnamed [ ], Conus, sent away by Bugha to Samarra with Symbatius Abū 'l-'Abbās, was condemned to death in the year 855. See below, no. 22, p. 552.] , and Cachaī from the Upper Land, were not at all swayed by the king's words, testimony nor did they lend their ears to the sharp and fetid words, like bile, of him who breathed the smell of putrefaction as from a cracked tomb: by which he had shaken not a few in the divine laws and in the adoration of the Son of God. They on the contrary went bravely to meet the contest, and gave the king an answer of the utmost boldness, trusting in the one King of kings and Lord of lords, Christ the Son of God, and they said to the king: Deut. 10:17. 'It is better for us to die for the name of Christ than to rejoice with you. By whatever death you wish (to afflict us), we are ready to meet all the devices of torture which Satan, the master of evils, your father, has taught you. We for our part will not depart from the love of Christ; nor shall we be separated from eternal life, or be destined to everlasting punishments.' At this the tyrant, blazing with fury, like a savage beast that rushes upon lambs to devour them, ordered them to be bound with chains hand and foot to stakes; he ordered knotted clubs to be brought, and them to be beaten with these clubs until they were believed to be about to die from it. But they stood with the greatest fortitude, and proclaimed the infinity and munificence of the gifts of Christ, by whom they had been made worthy to die for the name of Christ and receive the crown of martyrdom. Since, then, they were still surviving and proclaiming the invincible power of Christ, who had strengthened the saints in the great arena of the spiritual war, the king, blazing with more vehement fury, like a furnace seething with flames, ordered stakes to be brought; and when blessed Salomon had been raised up on a stake, they placed St. Cachaï near this stake, in case perhaps one, terrified by the torments of the other, might be bent to the king's command. But they offered themselves to the tortures even more readily than before, so as to become partakers of the cross of Christ; they denied themselves, took up the cross of Christ, and followed him who called them; they lost their souls, that is, their earthly life, so as to find eternal life; they died with Christ so as to reign with Christ. Meanwhile it was ordered by royal edict that, to finish off St. Salomon on the stake itself, arrows should be shot at him. And so, while the lictors at the tyrant's command shoot arrows at him all round [Cf. the Passion of St. Isbozetas, §8, above, p. 212, and what has been annotated at the place.] , the blessed hero of Christ gave up his spirit, to the glory of God. St. Cachaï, however, was struck, the blessed man, with the sword, and his head was cut off: and he at once gave up his spirit into the hands of God. Thus, then, those blessed men became martyrs to the glory of the holy Trinity, for ages of ages."

[17] it is established So Thomas Artsruni, who, although he not infrequently mixes fables into the history of earlier times, had nevertheless learned the rebellion of the Armenians against the emir Joseph and the calamities which followed from memories not yet obscured, and himself knew surviving witnesses and actors of this tragedy [See book II, ch. 7; Brosset, op. cit., p. 105. On the authority of Thomas Artsruni, Brosset, ibid., pp. I–XX, especially pp. X–XV. Cf. Thopdschian, Die inneren Zustände von Armenien unter Ašot I, in the Mitteilungen des Seminars für Orientalischen Sprachen, zu Berlin, vol. VII (1904), p. 122.] . He would certainly be an imprudent judge who opposed an exception to his authority from the Passion of Constantine. that the Georgian named Cachaï Now in the narrative of Thomas these points especially are to be noted: Cachaï (Caḫaï, Cahaï) was a nobleman of the Upper Region, that is, of northern Georgia, which our hagiographer too says was the homeland of Constantine. Yet all the martyrs among whom he is counted were Armenians either by race or by religion. Salomon himself, whose partner he was in the execution, was a Sevordian: therefore he belonged to the jurisdiction of the Armenian Church. Nor is there any reason for doubting that Thomas, in whom party zeal counted for so much, also held St. Cachaï as one of his own and joined to him in the communion of faith. Whether already before the final contest both martyrs were partners in the same undertaking or design, or whether on the contrary a chance event associated them in death, in Albania, cannot be gathered from the narrative. Salomon indeed seems to have been a native of the region in which he was seized. But where Cachaï fell into the hands of the enemy and from where he was brought to Bugha, Thomas either did not know or did not care to report. The place in which both were slaughtered is unknown to us. The city or village of Gorhoz, otherwise Goroz ([ ]), a name understood both in Armenian and in Georgian as proud or fierce, we do not see mentioned by the geographers Luke Indjidjian, [ = Description of ancient Armenia, Venice 1822, p. 515.] . Nor is the mountain better known which rises near this place, and on which the camp of the Arabs seems to have been situated. Moreover the name [ ], otherwise [ ] [Thomas Artsruni, book III, ch. 10; Brosset, Historiens arméniens, same vol., p. 145; cf. p. 151, note.] or [ ] Indjidjian, op. cit., p. 515. , in the autumn of the year 853 is a hopeless corruption. On the other hand, all the indications of time plainly agree. Salomon the Sevordian and Cachaï the Georgian were condemned to death by Bogha after he had burst into Albania, as is gathered from what has just been said, and not long before he led his army into winter quarters at the city of Partav, which is Barda'a, on the river Terter, in the province and canton of the Utii H. Hübschmann, Die altarmenischen Ortsnamen, pp. 273–274, 353. Thomas Artsruni, book III, ch. 11; Brosset, same vol., p. 153. . was killed by Bugha. If Thomas's words are to be taken strictly, sentence was pronounced on both captives by the king of the Arabs himself, that is, the caliph, who was then at Samarra, or at any rate in Babylonia. That, however, is excluded by the whole sequence of the events narrated. But unless the not very elegant writer said king for supreme commander, it is probably to be understood that the martyrs' cause was judged by Bugha in the king's stead and in accordance with the law which the caliph had decreed. Finally, it is worth noting that in the kind of execution by which Cachaï was killed, Thomas Artsruni agrees to some extent with the Passion of Constantine.

[18] The inscription of the church of Ateni; With Artsruni's narrative is to be compared an inscription painted in plasterwork in the apse of the church of Holy Sion [That is, of the basilica, if the etymology of the name is to be kept. I. Ǧavachov (Ǧavachišvili), [ ], in [ ], vol. I, 3 (1912), p. 293.] , in the village of Ateni near the city of Gori, to the west of Tiflis. Its letters are so little conspicuous that they escaped the sight of the most painstaking Brosset, who collected other inscriptions in the same church [Voyage archéologique dans la Géorgie et dans l'Arménie, 6th report (1851), pp. 20–26.] . The first to notice the inscription was Davithišvili, who supplied a copy of it to Demetrius Bakradze. He, after once and again recognising each letter on the wall itself with great care, inserted the inscription into his History of Georgia, which was published for the first time after his death [[ ], same vol., p. 219.] . Then, through some new decay, the inscription again lay hidden, so that Thomas Žordania, having it from Bakradze's testimony

complained that it had been destroyed Chronicles, same vol., p. 82. From the same source M. G. Ǧanašvili copied it, [ = History of Georgia, vol. I (Tiflis, 1906), p. 314. Cf. also M. Tamarati, L'Église géorgienne, des origines jusqu'a nos jours (Rome, 1910), pp. 272–85.] . Nor did better fortune assist the most skilled antiquaries who in the year 1886, with combined efforts, explored the church of Ateni Countess Uvarova, [ , vol. IV (Moscow, 1894), pp. 147–53.] . At length, in the month of July of the year 1911, Ivane Džavakhov (Ǧavachišvili), after he had inspected all the parts of the interior of the building again and again, found the inscription by an unexpected chance, and at once reproduced it photographically [Christianskij Vostok, same vol., pp. 277–85. There is added to the edition, plate XVIII, 2, a phototypic image legible to a Lynceus alone.] . It is now available, brought to clarity and corrected. It is of this kind:

"In the month of August, on the 5th, a Saturday, in the great Cycle number 73 (and) in the year 239, Buḡa burned the city of Tiflis, and seized the emir Isaac and killed him. And on the 26th day of the same month of August, likewise on a Saturday, Zirak seized Caḫaï and his son Tarḥuǧi [Ǧavachišvili connected this name with the name of that Tharcho (Tarḫon) whose son Mirian, commander of the fortress of Ateni, is mentioned in another inscription which was set up in the same church about the year 1060. Loc. cit., pp. 289–91, 296–97.]"

In the second line, difficulty is caused by the faded trace of a small letter [ ], after which another seems to have been written, and perhaps a third. Bakradze had thought [ ] was to be read, that is, [ ], above, against grammar. Ǧavachišvili prefers [ ], which would be an abbreviation of the name [ ], of the Ishmaelites Loc. cit., p. 279. . A rather harsh contraction, certainly. The sense is equally clear if [ ] is restored, and, as well as. For the Muhammadan notation of the years, which it is quite manifest was used in this place, came readily to the mind of the readers, who, being then subject to the dominion of the Arabs, commonly used it in all public business. This was least of all ambiguous in an inscription in which the slaughter of the Muslim prince of the very region was commemorated [Ǧavachišvili wondered that in a Christian monument the time was noted in the Arab manner, and thought he had to prove by adducing examples that this could have happened (loc. cit., pp. 279–80). The thing, however, is neither so unusual nor so difficult to believe. In the very Passion of our St. Constantine (§12) the years of the Arabs are indicated.] . Finally, the name Cachaï in the last line involves some question; but we trust that this too will presently be settled See below, no. 20. .

[19] how certain its credit is That the inscription of Ateni is genuine was established even before it was found anew. The very errors into which Bakradze had manifestly fallen, as when, for example, he changed the name Zirak into vezir, evidently showed that the inscription had been copied not with sufficient sharpness of eye indeed, but with honest probity. Nor will anyone but the obstinate be moved by what the learned J. Strzygowski asserts, that the church of Ateni was built in the tenth century [Die Baukunst der Armenier und Europa (Vienna, 1918), pp. 88–89; where, p. 88, note, the experts who have discussed this building are mentioned.] ; for that cannot be discerned from the form of the building alone, which Ǧavachišvili shows was changed after its first construction Christianskij Vostok, same vol., pp. 292–295. . The inscription itself, in all its syllables, so to speak, makes itself credible, and confirms and illustrates history with new testimony. First of all, from it is precisely defined at what time Tiflis was overthrown by Bugha. The year 853 was already established, which is probably gathered from Thomas Artsruni This was already lucidly set out by Dulaurier, Chronologie, pp. 255–59. and is clearly indicated by Ia'qūbi Houtsma, same vol., p. 517. , Balādhori Same vol., p. 219. and other Arabs who were nearly present at the events themselves See Thopdschian, Die inneren Zustände von Armenien, loc. cit., pp. 111–12. . But now we are taught that the town was stormed on the 5th of August, which in this year did in fact fall on a Saturday, as the inscription of Ateni states. Deceptive, therefore, in this matter is the diligence of Tabari, who in his annals Annals, Rosen-de Goeje, same vol., p. 1414: [ and when the day of the sabbath came, ten (nights) of the first month of rabī' of the year 237 having passed, that is, on the 31st of August of the year 852: so that this may not be openly false, instead of [ ], [ ] is to be read, ten (nights) remaining, that is, on the tenth of September, which in the year 852 was a Saturday. Laurent, L'Arménie entre Byzance et l'Islam, p. 375, defers the destruction of Tiflis to the month of October of the year 853.] asserts that Zirak "the Turk", sent ahead by Bugha, crossed the river Cyrus opposite Tiflis on a Saturday, the 31st of August of the year 852; that at once the gates of the town were besieged and fire was applied to the walls by fire-throwers, which was extinguished on the next day, the city having been burned up. The burning of Tiflis and the punishment inflicted on the emir Isaac, if they still needed any attestation, have now been confirmed by the authority of those who were, as it were, spectators. The remaining part of the inscription agrees no less aptly with history. The fortress [By this name the place is called in the other inscription spoken of above, no. 18, p. 550, note 13.] or castle of Ateni is situated below the region through which Zirak, setting out from Tiflis, had to meet the invading forces of the Abasgians See above, no. 6, p. 544. . It is quite probable that Cachaï and his son were intercepted, not indeed in the fortress itself, which does not seem to have suffered damage from the enemy, but yet not far from it: for certainly an inscription in which, together with the slaughter of the prince and the huge disaster of the whole region, the seizure of two men is commemorated by name must be judged to have been set up in the place where their fate had especially moved people's minds. These things having been briefly noted, we must now approach the question proposed more closely.

[20] The sum of the testimonies: The answers of the witnesses who have been questioned so far can be compared with one another in a single view, as it were, thus. In the Passion we read that Constantine the Georgian, prince of the Upper region, was cast into chains by Bugha, taken from Tiflis to Samarra, and there, by the sentence of the caliph himself, slain with the sword on the 10th of November of the year 853. From Michael Modrekili we have learned that Constantius, surnamed Cachaï, a pious and noble Georgian prince, was beheaded in the land of the unbelievers. From Thomas Artsruni, that a man of the Upper region, of the sect of the Armenians, named Cachaï, was ordered by Bugha to be struck with the sword in Albania before the winter of the year 853. Finally, from the inscription of the church of Ateni, that a certain conspicuous man named Cachaï or Cacha, with his son Tarchuǧi, was intercepted on the 26th of August of the year 853 by Zirak, Bugha's lieutenant, as it seems in the vicinity of the fortress of Ateni. Who in so obscure an antiquity would require indications more consistent, in order to recognise the varied images of one and the same little memory? It matters little that in the inscription of Ateni some doubt can be raised about the last letter of the name Cachaï. Ǧavachišvili indeed, after he found that neither [ ] nor [ ] was written with the usual stroke, at length decided that the former name was to be chosen Christianskij Vostok, same vol., p. 281; cf. p. 296. , because he understood that the inscription most certainly designated [ ] that man whose execution Thomas Artsruni narrated Loc. cit., p. 283. ; but he flatly denied that this same man was St. Constantine the Georgian [Ibid., note, where the learned Jos. Marquart is rebuked, who, more by divining than by arguing, very acutely, as is his way, had opined that the Cachaï of Thomas Artsruni and Constantine the Georgian, whose history he had read summarily set out in Brosset, were one and the same man. Streifzüge, p. 413, note 1.] . On the other hand, the learned Robert P. Blake, who himself inspected the stone in person, advised us without hesitation that [ ] seems to be drawn distinctly enough. If that is so, his hand deceived the painter, who, after once laying on the superfluous stroke in the wet plaster, could no longer erase it. But without doubt he ought to have written, and wished to write, [ ]. Nor, in preference to a customary word [Besides the examples which Ǧavachišvili adduced, loc. cit., p. 296, there is mentioned in a codex of the tenth century (laura of the Georgians 11) John Cachaï, a monk in the monastery of Cosmas and Damian on Mount Olympus in Bithynia. Tsagareli Wardrop, same vol., p. 598.] which is confirmed by parallel documents, is an unusual and new name to be retained, of which no example occurs elsewhere. Much more evidently still must be corrected the absurd sentence which is read at the beginning of the Passion: [ ], "Constantine, who was called a man of this land of his fathers." For when all the testimonies are compared, it is clearly established that the name [ ] was repeated from either the preceding or the following line in place of [ ], from which, in hieratic script, it is distinguished by scarcely the slightest stroke. In this, then, Ǧavachišvili is unambiguously to be approved, who, after he inspected the hymnary of Michael Modrekili, unhesitatingly changed his earlier opinion and pronounced that St. Constantine the Georgian was the very Cachaï killed by Bugha, and that in the archetype of the Passion he was called by this surname also [Monuments of Georgian history, same vol., p. 54. The same opinion once burst into our mind also, when we first read the name of St. Constantine "Cachi" ([ ]) in Corn. Kekelidze, [ ] = Georgian liturgical monuments from the libraries of the homeland, Tiflis, 1908, p. 381. May it be permitted to note this now, belatedly, to show that it is a probable conjecture indeed which offers itself spontaneously to all.] . No wonder. Would that a little doubt had rather remained with the learned man, so that he might have sought the authority of the codices! The conjecture by which he emended the text, [ ], "who was called Cachaï in his paternal land", is probable, yet not certain on every side. It could also be read: [ ], "(who was called Cachus) on account of his native land". That is, the name Cachaï can in some way or other be connected with [ ], Cachus, or "inhabitant of the region of Kakheti" On the name of the Cachi, N. Marr, [ vol. XVI (1905), p. 167.] . And in very truth, in the heading of one of the two St. Petersburg codices which Brosset collated, St. Constantine is called: prince of Kakheti Recueil des Actes de l'Académie des sciences de Saint-Pétersbourg, 1838, p. 143. .

[21] Constantine Cachaï This being so, it seems almost certain that that Cachaï who is mentioned in the inscription of Ateni is the same man whose noble end Thomas Artsruni related, whom Michael Modrekili praised in song, and for whom some unknown hagiographer devised a history. intercepted by Zirak, It remains for us to fit these testimonies together. Cachaï fell into the hands of the enemy on the 26th of August of the year 853, who, after the destruction of Tiflis, were pressing on towards Abasgia.

By them he was taken to Bugha, whom Zirak, condemned by Bugha in Albania in the month of November when the autumn was already well advanced, seems to have overtaken in Albania. The saint's execution took place there, on either the tenth or the twenty-second day of November. For both are handed down, the latter, however, on better testimony than the former. Not far from either of them is the day on which there was first appointed in Armenia the commemoration of the martyrs who met death in this war. For the patriarch John VI instituted a common solemnity for all of them, to be celebrated on the 25th day of the month Mehekan John the Catholicos, ed. Emin, p. 70; in Saint-Martin, ch. XIII, p. 112. , which in the year 853, in the wandering calendar, fell on the 17th of November [Dulaurier, Chronologie, p. 250. In the fixed calendar 25 Mehekan became the 3rd of March.] . And since the greatest part of those martyrs seems to have fallen in Albania within the interval of time now being discussed, it may be conjectured with fair probability that about the 17th of November took place that great slaughter of captives and hostages by which Bugha, about to depart into winter quarters, put the finishing touch to his work. From this, however, the choice between the 10th and the 22nd is no easier. Nor is much to be made of the fact that Constantine's day of death is designated in the Passion by quite consistent marks of time. For anyone who had learned from some document, for instance from the inscription of Ateni, that in the year 853 the 5th and the 26th of August were Saturdays, could certainly gather from it without any trouble that in the same year the 10th of November fell on the sixth day of the week.

[22] nor was he taken to Samarra. And so St. Constantine was never sent to the caliph Mutavakkil. Nor are the words of Michael Modrekili to be pressed to the letter, who says that St. Constantine was killed in the land of the unbelievers. Certainly the poet could say, with no too unusual licence, that a captive who had been carried off by the Arabs from the region of Tiflis into Albania to be killed had fallen in the land of the enemy. What Michael had thrown in in passing, and perhaps for the sake of metre, the hagiographer wished to narrate more fully. Moreover, what he set out about the holy martyr's confession before the tyrant smacks most unpleasantly of fable. the very slight credit of the Passion, For who would believe that the thing was done thus? To be sure, John the Catholicos Emin, same vol., p. 73; in Saint-Martin, ch. XIV, p. 117. , Thomas Artsruni Book III, ch. 11; Brosset, p. 153. and other Armenian authors report here and there that not a few princes of their nation were by Bugha partly sent ahead from Albania into Babylonia, partly carried off with him to Samarra. But besides the fact that in their number there appears neither Constantine nor Cachaï (whom, of course, the same Thomas had narrated a little earlier to have been killed), none of these captives suffered capital punishment except Stephen "Conus", prince of the Sevordians See above, p. 549, note 1 : for John the Catholicos testifies this in express words Emin, p. 70; in Saint-Martin, ch. XIII, p. 112. . Nor were these exiles carried off from their country for the cause of religion alone, as is established even from the fact that those who had gone over to the Muhammadan religion were not released from custody [Pancratius the Bagratid himself, prince of Taron and archon of archons, whose defection from his ancestral religion, whether real or feigned, had been notably shameful, was nevertheless detained at Samarra. On his lapse see the preface to the narrative of Nana the Syrian on John, ed. Ch. Čraqean, [ ] (Venice, 1920), pp. 6–7; cf. N. Marr, Βυσαντινὰ Χρονικά, vol. XII (1906), pp. 12–13.] . Some of the captives, in whose number was Symbatius Abu 'l-'Abbās, died in prison [John the Catholicos, ed. Emin, p. 73; in Saint-Martin, ch. XIV, pp. 116–17; the Armenian Synaxarion at the 3rd of March.] . All the rest were brought home again in the year 859 Dulaurier, Chronologie, pp. 262–65. . Nothing therefore remains in which the Passion deserves credence apart from the other witnesses. Finally, so that we may omit nothing that could contribute to assessing the authority of the sources, it is to be noted that those who set up the inscription of Ateni had not yet heard of the death of Cachaï.

[23] Vakhushti's is none. Apart from the testimonies just recited, no mention of St. Constantine has been found either in histories or in hagiographical literature. In the codex of the Annals of Georgia which Vakhusht revised, however, this little note was added in the margin, apparently in his own hand [[ ] = Vakhushti's History of Georgia, ed. D. Z. Bakradze (Tiflis, 1885), p. 123, note 1.] ; which Bakradze History of Georgia, same vol., p. 219. and Žordania judged worthy of mention Chronicles, p. 82. : "In this year of Christ 855, that Bugha seized Constantine the Georgian and sent him to Gafar, emir of the Muslims, who made him a martyr in the year 855, as his Life (μετάφρασις) teaches us." It could not be indicated more openly that this mention was excerpted from the Passion of Constantine, and that it cannot be held as a testimony of any authority whatever.

§ III. On the cult of St. Constantine.

[24] The cult of St. Constantine If anything can legitimately be concluded from certain and verified history, St. Constantine did not begin to be venerated immediately after his death in the dominion of the petty kings of Adranutzium, which was then the ancestral kingdom of the Georgian nation. Unless perhaps this astonishing thing happened, that in the reign of Pancratius the curopalates a man killed in war by a commander whose standards the same Pancratius had followed in this very war was held by his people as a martyr of the Christian faith See above, no. 5, p. 544. . Certainly the cult of St. Constantine had its first beginnings in that part of northern Georgia into the kingdom of Georgia which had formerly obeyed the tyranny of the emir Isaac. But it cannot so easily be discerned where and when it was established. What Sabinin says Paradise of Georgia, p. 368, note 3. , and Carbelasvili echoes from him [[ ] = The hierarchy of the Georgian Church: catholicoi and archbishops, vol. I (Tiflis, 1900), pp. 55–56.] , rests on no authority: that a solemn commemoration of St. Constantine was appointed by John, catholicos of Mtskheta, the second of this name, who seems to have sat for about the years 870–882 Zordania, Chronicles, same vol., p. 74. . And so, from where it was brought in since all indications are otherwise lacking, it can be conjectured with a certain presumptive probability that the holy martyr began to be venerated where his memory was preserved as in its own seat. This place, moreover, is not to be sought far from the church on whose wall his captivity was inscribed to be read by posterity. Now it is established that the basilica of Ateni was built by an Armenian architect, who set up an inscription in it in Armenian letters [Ǧavachišvili, Christianskij Vostok, same vol., p. 295; cf. N. Marr, Zapiski vostoon, otd., vol. XIX (1909), p. 56.] . This would indeed be a slender reason for concluding that it was also dedicated in the Armenian rite. Yet it is gathered from this that in the castle of Ateni the faith of the Armenians was not very hateful to the Georgians. Besides, it must be kept before one's eyes that at that time the northern Georgians and the Armenians were joined in a fellowship of hardships, and that our Constantine himself is reckoned among the Armenian heroes by Thomas Artsruni, who nevertheless without concealment calls him a Georgian [Yet Stephen of Taron, who mentions Muqātel of Vanand (see above, no. 16, p. 549, note 1), passes over Salomon the Sevordian and Cachaï in silence. Was it for that reason, because he had recognised the latter as a Georgian?] . And so his glory seems to have been able to be claimed with a certain ambiguous right by both Churches, the Georgian and the Armenian. Nor does it stand in the way that his name is not read in the Armenian calendars of the saints. Most of the illustrious men who are hailed by the writers of that age with the name of martyrs also lacked this honour, but in the liturgical books were either passed over or confusedly listed with the nameless crowd of the heavenly ones.

[25] and how. Then, after the divided parts of the Georgian land grew together into one kingdom, together with the soil and the people of each region its antiquities and memories too were taken over. The history of earlier times, both sacred and profane, was gradually accommodated to the new state of things. Posterity gave their own enemies and friends to their ancestors. This must already have been largely accomplished when, at the end of the tenth century, Michael Modrekili, in Calarzene, was composing a hymn in honour of St. Constantine Cachaï. Of that most confused and not yet sufficiently explored history only the outcome concerns us: a captive, killed long before by Bugha in a band of Armenians, began to be held as a native martyr and a proper glory of the kingdom in which, while he lived, he had been counted among the enemies. But the very unusual precaution by which the Georgian was commonly called by the Georgians "the Georgian", as if by a family surname, sufficiently betrays that some suspicion of foreignness first had to be driven away from him.

[26] His records very rare. The early liturgical monuments of the Georgian Church mention St. Constantine not at all. That his name is not announced in the Palestinian typicon, the most ancient of all, which the learned Cornelius Kekelidze edited [[ ], Tiflis, 1912.] , no one will wonder, since that was copied in the ninth century Anal. Boll., vol. XLII, p. 138. . But silent too is a much fuller recension of the same work, which seems to have been put together in the twelfth century [H. Goussen, Ueber georgische Drucke und Handschriften, die Festordnung und den Heiligenkalender des altchristlichen Jerusalems betreffend (München-Gladbach, 1923). Cf. Anal. Boll., same vol., pp. 137–40.] . Nor is St. Constantine found in the proper calendar of Georgian saints which is inserted in the same work Goussen, loc. cit., p. 40. . Into the synaxarion of St. George the Hagiorite he was brought in only later, as were the other native martyrs and saints Kekelidze, Liturgical monuments, pp. 228–72. . Nevertheless, we know from Michael Modrekili that his feast was already being celebrated at the end of the tenth century Above, nos. 14, 21, pp. 547, 552. . The feast. For it the day first appointed was the 22nd of November; then it was transferred to the tenth of the same month, although on that day the Georgians were already accustomed to commemorate the suspension of St. George on the wheel of torture See above, p. 313. . This is the mark of time which is indicated in the Passion §11. . But truly, if the day is commended by no better authority, let us say that it was chosen rashly and by chance.

[27] By one Justus, a monk, whom we freely confess to be utterly unknown to us, Sabinin found it narrated in a certain history of Georgia that the body of St. Constantine a little after his death from Babylon into Georgia

had been brought [Paradise of Georgia, p. 368, note 3. The same, citing no author, G. Ioseliani, [ ] = Georgian Saints, Tiflis, 1901, p. 53.] . Neither any relics of him But unless he dreamed that he had read this, the author himself whom he believed was trifling. That author, however, as Sabinin regrets was omitted, did not indicate where the sacred remains were laid to rest. What if he had added this too? For the rest, this fable does not seem to have been received by eager ears. At Mtskheta, in the most sacred church of the Living Pillar, once the metropolis of all Georgia, among the very many and most varied relics which are believed to be kept there, there exists no memorial of St. Constantine A. Natroev, [ (Tiflis, 1901), pp. 254–57.] . Whether elsewhere some church boasts that it has been enriched with this treasure, nor churches. it is not for us to explore. Today the cult of this Georgian martyr does not seem to have settled in any definite place. Nor among the monasteries and parishes whose patrons Vakhusht listed in the eighteenth century in his Geography [Ed. M. Brosset, Description géographique de la Géorgie par le tsarévitch Wakhoucht, St.-Pétersbourg, 1842; ed. M. G. Ǧanašvili, Tiflis, 1904; in the Russian language, translated by the same: [ ], ibid., 1904.] could we anywhere find a church or chapel dedicated to St. Constantine. Here we have stopped, where everything failed us. Let those complete and correct our labour who are nearer to the sources, and are not compelled laboriously, without guides, from begged indications, to find their way in a land unknown to them.

THE PASSION OF ST. CONSTANTINE THE IBERIAN

Constantine the Iberian, martyr in Babylonia. (S.)

According to the edition of Michael Sabinin. Cf. Prel. Comm. no. 2.

In the month of November, on the 10th day. The Life and Passion of St. Constantine, the Georgian martyr, who suffered martyrdom at the hands of Giafar, king of the Babylonians.

[1] Prologue. Dearly beloved [On this preface, see the Prel. Comm. no. 12, above, p. 546. From the prologue of George of Alexandria it will be enough to compare these few specimens: Πάντες οἱ παλαιοὶ ἱστοριογράφοι τὰ μὲν ἐκ προγενεστέρων αὐτῶν συγγραφέων ἐκδεδώκασι, τὰ δὲ ἀπὸ ἀκοῆς, τὰ δὲ καὶ αὐτόπται τῶν πραγμάτων γεγονότες. Μωϋσῆς γὰρ ὁ μέγας ἐν προφήταις, τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς κόσμου γένεσιν παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ δημιουργηθεῖσαν ἐξηγήσατο, μυσταγωγηθεὶς παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, μηδὲν ἐξ αὐτῶν ἑωρακὼς τοῖς αἰσθητοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς, ἡνίκα πεπλαστούργηνται. Εἶτα μετὰ ταύτην τὴν συγγραφήν, καὶ ἑτέραν βίβλον συνεγράψατο, τὴν τοῦ ἰδίου ἔθνους ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἔξοδον… Εἶτα καθεξῆς τὰ ὑπόλοιπα τρία βιβλία τοῦ Ἰουδαἳκοῦ νόμου μέκρι τῆς αὐτοῦ τελευτῆς· μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον δὲ πάλιν τὰ κατὰ γενεὰν συμβάντα, οἷον τὰ ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ τοῦ Ναυῆ… Πάλιν δὲ μετ᾽ ἐκείνην τὴν παλαιὰν γραφήν, ἐπήνθησεν ἡ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν καὶ Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ἔνδοξος παρουσία … φωτίζουσα τὰς διανοίας τῶν πιστευόντων εἰς αὐτὴν διὰ τῆς ἐκδόσεως τῶν θείων εὐαγγελιστῶν καὶ ἀποστόλων αὐτοῦ. Προέλαμψαν δὲ καὶ ἁγίων μαρτύρων τῆς ἀληθείας καὶ ἀσκητῶν καὶ θεοφόρων ἀνδρῶν πλήθη ἄπειρα, ὧν τινων τὰς ἀρετὰς καὶ βίους καὶ ἄθλους συνεγράψαντο οἱ κατ᾽ ἐκεῖνον καιρὸν εὑρεθέντες φιλοπονέστεροι τῶν ἄλλων ἀνδρῶν, πρὸς δόξαν μὲν Θεοῦ, ὑπόμνησιν δὲ καὶ ζῆλον τῆς ἐκείνων πολιτείας. [All the ancient historians have published some things from writers earlier than themselves, some from hearsay, and some having themselves become eyewitnesses of the events. For Moses, the great among the prophets, expounded the origin of the world from the beginning, fashioned by God, having been initiated into the mystery by him, though he had seen none of these things with bodily eyes when they were being formed. Then after this writing he composed another book as well, the exodus of his own nation from Egypt… Then in order the remaining three books of the Jewish law, up to his own death; and after him again the things that befell generation by generation, such as those under Jesus son of Nave… And again, after that old Scripture, there blossomed forth the glorious coming of our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus Christ … enlightening the minds of those who believe in it through the publication of his divine evangelists and apostles. And there shone forth also countless multitudes of holy martyrs of the truth and of ascetics and God-bearing men, the virtues and lives and contests of some of whom were written down by those who at that time were found more industrious than other men, to the glory of God, and for the remembrance and emulation of their way of life.]] , Prologue. it is plain to all that the (sacred) books could in no way have been written except by the grace of the Holy Spirit. For that great Moses first began to write the creation of heaven and earth, which he had by no means seen, but, the Holy Spirit teaching him, he wrote it down as if it had been set before (his) eyes. Afterwards he wrote the other books as well, in which he narrated the exodus of the children of Israel and what followed thereafter, up to his death. Then the discourses of the prophets were written, in which the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ was proclaimed. The four Gospels were written, by which the happy tidings were carried to future generations of the coming of the Lord, and of the things done by him in that flesh which out of (his) mercy towards us he had taken from the Virgin Mary. Afterwards (were written) the Acts of the Apostles, how they had travelled through the whole earth and preached the word of life; and (how) many, putting faith in them, had received baptism in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Matt. 28:19. But that perpetual enemy and rival never rested from assailing the truth. Roused by him, the kings of this time wished to compel the faithful to serve their idols; and those of them who did not obey them they slaughtered with the edge of the sword or burned with fire. Then from the number of the faithful certain men arose who began to commit to writing the histories of the holy martyrs, and what the outcome of each one's contest had been, to the praise of the holy martyrs and as an example to those who had zeal for God.

[2] In the reign of the empress Theodora, With no different purpose I myself, unworthy as I am, wished to imitate those predecessors, and so I have written out the life and martyrdom of the holy and blessed martyr Constantine, who [At this place in the codex of Demetrius Bakradze are inserted the words which are read here a little further below: who, in the parts of the Upper region in the land of Georgia, was most illustrious.] lived in our days, in the reign of the most pious empress Theodora; who reigned in the empire of the Greeks On whom BHG 1731–1735; cf. Prel. Comm. nos. 4, 9, above, pp. 543, 545. until her son Michael came out of boyhood. This blessed (woman) purged all Greece of the error of the iconoclasts, which had prevailed in the age of her husband Theophilus (829–842). ; she strengthened Greece in its labours More literally: she stabilised the labour of the Greeks. , and restored many islands which had been laid waste by the Agarenes.

[3] Constantine, a Georgian prince, At this time, then, there was in the land of Georgia, in the borders of the Upper region, a man whose name was Constantine, who in his native land was called Cachaï [Ed.: who was called a man of this land of his fathers. Ǧavachišvili: who in his paternal land was called Cachaï. Perhaps it could also be read: who from his native land (or: from his birthplace) was called Cachaï. See the Prel. Comm. no. 20, above, p. 552.] . That man, moreover, was distinguished with the highest praise in the whole land of Georgia; he possessed immense resources and abounded in the delights of this world. He was renowned for every kind of praise. His name was celebrated in distant lands, so much so that his fame reached the emperor himself. And so the blessed man was adorned (by the merit) of those works in both (lives), like a tree with leaves and fruits. He had a faith by no means wavering, and firmer than the mountains, in our God Jesus Christ; the blessed man also honoured with faith the hierarchs and all the ecclesiastical orders, as is fitting and just. He loved the monks, revered them with faith, and served them with the readiest zeal; and if any of the monks or of any order of regulars had turned aside to his house, he received him with joy, saluted him bowing to the ground, refreshed him liberally and sent him away with generous gifts [Cf. the letter of the empress Theodora, below, §15, and the hymn of Michael Modrekili (Ingoroqva, loc. cit., p. 189): … Before this he pleased you, (O God), and showed himself to the churches a worker of benefactions; he put on mercy by feeding the poor…] . About his hospitality, however, and his mercy towards the poor, no one could speak worthily enough. Yet let us say a little about these too. Who ever came to him hungry or thirsty who was not satisfied? Who naked, and was not gladly clothed by him? Many from remote lands, fleeing debt, took refuge with him; and to him it was most delightful to pay their debts. What orphan did he ever see, or what widow, to whom he did not most readily give his help? Besides all this he most carefully attended to the needs of his own house, as one who had heard the apostle Paul speaking thus: "If any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." 1 Tim. 5:8. In humility and lowliness, moreover, the blessed man surpassed all men; for he had heard our liberator and Saviour saying thus: "Learn of me, because I am meek and humble." Matt. 11:29. And so he reckoned himself the most wicked of all men and wept for his sins, being accustomed very often to say thus: "By no means do I hope that my sins will be forgiven me, unless I shed my blood for his sake who for our sake shed (his) blood The same less ornately Michael Modrekili (Ingoroqva, op. cit., p. 189): [ . But he, as one who had been as it were conquered by God read: as was divinely said in the Gospel; cf. Matt. 26:41, prepared himself by penance and tears; for he had long desired to attain bravely by patience to victory in this arena (cf. Heb. 12:1).] ."

[4] He goes to Jerusalem. Moreover, he had resolved to go to Jerusalem, to that temple, and to adore holy Golgotha, where by the right hand of the Most High our renewal was accomplished, and the light-bearing and life-giving sepulchre, and holy Sion, the mother of the churches, and all the sacred places in which the feet of the Lord stood. Ps. 76:11. When, then, he reached Jerusalem, he went round the sacred places in prayer, and presented the churches, the poor and the inhabitants of Jerusalem with gifts of great price. Then, going out from Jerusalem, he visited all the monasteries of the wilderness and the dwellers by the Jordan, and contributed very much help to their relief and comfort. And they sent him away with very many prayers and blessings. And after he had returned to his homeland, shining in every way in the service of God, he began to provide for his salvation See the Prel. Comm. no. 12, above, p. 546. . Thenceforth he never ceased most zealously to send greetings to Jerusalem and to succour the poor who were there. And every year he handed over to one of his servants thirty thousand pieces of silver (to be sent) partly to the holy Places, partly to the wildernesses, partly to the poor living in Jerusalem. For he had heard the precept of the apostle Paul which he wrote to the Corinthians in these words: "Let your abundance supply their want who are in Jerusalem, that their abundance also may supply your want." 2 Cor. 8:14.

[5] His homeland being oppressed by the unbelievers, But when the blessed man had grown old and was in the eighty-fifth year of his age, a grave persecution of the Christians arose in the whole land of Georgia. Great battles were fought in which very many of the number of the Christians 〈were slain The text is mutilated at this place. See the Georgian. 〉, who had fought for the law of Christ. The blessed man, as the standard-bearer of the whole land of Georgia, a most eminent man and the oracle of his nation, he is the first to be seized. was seized by force: and when they had bound him with chains, they led him to the city of Tiflis Prel. Comm. no. 7, above p. 545. and threw him into prison. He was not at all frightened or terrified; but on the contrary he received with joy what had befallen him, and gave thanks to the Lord. For that this blessed man was seized was not without God's

providence that it happened. Rather, he who rules all things and with a certain hidden providence supplies to the human race the aids of salvation willed that in him too there should be this joyful tranquillity, so that that glorious leaven Cf. 1 Cor. 5:7; but perhaps fundamentum should be restored. of his constancy might become a spectacle to angels and to men. 1 Cor. 4:9. For he had known beforehand that he would be seized, and had not prevented it, because he trusted in his Ed.: suae. fortitude. Nor had it been done otherwise with Job and with all the other saints in turn.

[6] Before the tyrant When, then, they had set the blessed man at Tiflis before the tyrant whose name was Bugha [How far these things depart from history has been said in the Prel. Comm. nos. 5–6, above, pp. 543–44.] , he resists fearlessly. he began to revile him in these words: "Had you not understood that you should seek safety in flight? For of those who stirred up sedition against me there was none whom I did not overcome; nor does anyone gird himself to engage with me whom we do not rout. For behold, today God has delivered you, who are to be exterminated, into our hands." The blessed Constantine answered him and said: "I too know that we have been delivered into your hands by God; not indeed because of his love for you, nor because of your glorious deeds; but because we ourselves did not observe his precepts, therefore he has cut us down through this stubborn nation. And in very truth the Lord more than once delivered Jerusalem itself into the hands of foreign nations, since they did not walk in his ways. Ps. 118:71. But it is good for me Ed.: nobis. See the Georgian. that the Lord has humbled me, that I might keep his commandments." And he bravely endured the tyranny of that wicked man: for he remembered the word of the Lord which he spoke: "Blessed are you when they shall persecute you and revile you and speak all that is evil against you falsely, for my sake." Matt. 5:11."

[7] He commends himself to the prayers of the servants of God. The martyr of Christ, while he is a captive at Tiflis, wrote a letter to all the solitaries of the city and to the fathers of the households of the monasteries, which was written in this form: "I am not unaware that it has been announced to you what the Lord has sent upon me because of my sins. Nevertheless I beseech you, holy fathers who truly live in the manner of Christ, that, mindful of my zeal and faith towards you, you would be pleased to supplicate the Lord for me, not indeed that he should in any way snatch me from the hands of the ungodly, but that Christ the true God may arm me with strength against the snares prepared (for me), which my enemy will lay, with the design of hindering me from that journey to which my soul aspires."

[8] Carried off into Babylonia, A few days later they bound him tightly with iron chains and sent him into the land of Babylon, to the city which is called Samaria That is, Samarra, on the Tigris, in Arabic: [ , Surr man ra', "he who saw it rejoiced".] . They presented him to the king of the Ishmaelites, whose name was Giafar son of Abraham [Read: of Muhammad. He is Ǧa'far ben Mohammad al-Mo'tasim ben Hārūn ar-Rašīd. He reigned from the year 847 to 861.] . When they had set the martyr of Christ before him, he said to him: "Behold, you have been delivered into my hands. I indeed have the power to deal with you well or ill. But listen to me and obey me. Embrace our religion Ed.: electum, admonitum. and abjure the error in which you are concerning Christ God. He spurns the caliph's blandishments and threats. For you seem to me a wise man: how then can you profess that a simple man born of a woman is God? Therefore desist from this, since it cannot be said that God has a son. And so withdraw now from your error; you will receive from me benefits and the most ample honours; I will make you a sharer of my counsels and more eminent than all your companions. But if you will not obey my word, you shall die by the edge of the sword, and I will give your flesh as food to the birds of the air, and who will there be that can deliver you out of my hand?" 1 Kings 2:6; Ps. 78:2. The holy martyr of Christ answered and said: "I too know that you have power over my body but not over my soul, as our Lord and God said; and therefore I do not fear your sword, but I fear him who can destroy both soul and body; and in whose power are life and death alike. Matt. 10:28; 1 Kings 2:6. Therefore for his name's sake I will willingly suffer punishment, because he is truly the mighty ruler, the prince of peace, the father of the ages to come, as it is written. Is. 9:6. Come now, how should I despise him, so as to obey your command and your law? For the prophet inveighs against you in these words: 'It hath not been heard of in Chanaan, neither hath it been seen in Theman, nor by the children of Agar, kings and tellers of tales, who seek after wisdom on the earth; but the way of truth they have not understood, neither have they remembered her paths. Bar. 3:22–23, 27. And so these perished as well as he.' How, then, shall I obey those into whose ears the prophet thrusts (these things), and to whom he foretells destruction? Rather, accomplish upon me what you have in mind."

[9] When the king heard this speech, he was filled with immense anger and broke out still more vehemently in the fury of his indignation against him. He ordered him to be thrust back into close custody, His emissaries and sent to him two archons who, having likewise been carried off from Armenia into exile, had denied Christ and won favour with him See the Prel. Comm. no. 11, above, p. 546. . They went in to the blessed man and said: "Thus says our lord the king: 'Once more (I wish) to rebuke your folly; for it is laid down for me in the law that unbelievers are to be reproved three times. Now therefore listen to me, that you may be saved; and do not trust in a hope which is no hope, for by God himself you have been delivered into my hands.' We too urge the same on you; do not remain in these straits, as if dull of mind: for we know you to be wise. We too were Christians, but we could not resist the king's command. Therefore we have received honour from him; but in the eternal life, he bravely repels them. who knows what will be better?" Then St. Constantine answered the Armenian emissaries and said: "Say this to your king: 'What sort of opinion, pray, do you have of me? And although the law of the kings of Babylon has dominion over you (for they too were stubborn against the truth), nevertheless command 〈whatever you will The text must be completed with one of the customary formulas of this kind. to be done, and〉 do what you have it in mind to do.' But you, to what end are you striving, and why do you wish me to become like you? Therefore depart from me, that I may search out the precepts of my God." Ps. 118:115.

[10] His last prayer. And lifting up his hands to heaven he raised his face before them, and said: "I will sing to you, O Lord God of hosts, God of the ages, who have given me strength to resist the wicked judge, as you had foretold in these words: 'Give me your heart, and I will give Ed.: dedi. you my strength.' Prov. 23:26. Make me worthy of the light of your countenance, Ps. 4:7. for I flee to you, O Christ, Son of God. Ps. 142:9. Behold, now for the sake of your holy name I have been weakened by all the unbelievers, and above all by this unjust king. Come then, O Lord my God, accept my sacrifice; receive my soul from the hands of the ungodly, and bestow on me what you promised, which you pledged in these words: 'Those who confess me before men, my Father will honour.' Luke 12:8; John 12:26. And just as in this very place you made illustrious those holy children who confessed you, make me too worthy of their fellowship, who have myself come to them as the fourth. As I shall confess you before the unjust king, so do you in turn, kind Lord, confess me before your angels. And as on this day you crowned with glory your venerable martyr St. George, and accepted his labour and the shedding of his most pure blood, accept also my worthless blood and make me a partaker of that lot, that I may come into the company of your elect; for your inheritance is sure to me." Ps. 15:6.

[11] At the caliph's command As the holy martyr said these things, torrents of tears, as was his custom, poured from his eyes. But those who stood around him began to strike him with blows and tormented him with very many tortures, yet they could not restrain his tongue from the praise (of God). And so those archons, going back, told the king all that they had heard and seen. Then the king blazed with still heavier anger; and he sent the same men, ordered to cut off his head. For he wished to test them too in this way; for he held them suspect. And so, going to (the saint), before the throne [Absurdly written, for even from the sequence of the narrative alone it is manifest that the punishment of St. Constantine was not carried out in the king's presence. But see whether perhaps [ ] was written for [ ]: [ ], that is, lictor.] they struck his neck with the sword; but they could by no means harm him [Cf. Prel. Comm. no. 11, above, p. 546. That apostates who were ordered to slaughter martyrs were sometimes stupefied by horror at the crime is soberly narrated by certain historical Acts. Read, for example, the Passion of St. Barhadbesaba the deacon, Bedjan, Acta martyrum et sanctorum, vol. II, p. 315.] . When this was announced to the impious king, he sent one of his guards, a foreigner, who on the Parasceve, He is struck with the sword. (the) tenth (day) of November, in the reign of Pancratius the curopalates, cut off his head with the sword Cf. Michael Modrekili (Ingoroqva, same vol., p. 190): [ , joyfully he put his neck beneath the sword. For another passage see the Prel. Comm. no. 15, above, p. 548.] and brought it to his king, as the head of John the Baptist (was brought) to Herod. His body they raised on a very high stake; and all the people beheld a remarkable prodigy which took place in that body … [It would be strange if this portent had not been narrated in the archetype of the Passion.] . But the holy martyr passes to the place of rest from which all infirmities, hardships and pains are shut out, where he sees the light of your countenance, O Lord, and which slanderous tongues do not reach, but where there is everlasting happiness and the fellowship of the holy angels.

[12] Chronology. He died in a good confession, on the tenth day of the month of November, on the solemnity of St. George, with whom he was associated

on the day of the Parasceve, in the year from the creation of the world six thousand three Read: four; cf. Prel. Comm. no. 4, above, p. 543. hundred and fifty-seven, which by the reckoning of the Ishmaelites is the two hundred and twenty-seventh year [The codex of Demetrius Bakradze: He died in the month of November, on (the) tenth (day), on the solemnity of St. George, (which) day was the Parasceve; the year from the creation of the world was 6457, but by the reckoning of the Ishmaelites 232.] .

These few things, then, out of many, have been written down about the valiant deeds of St. Constantine, so that this discourse might be concise and complete, and might neither vex minds by excessive brevity nor exceed measure by prolixity. (May it be) to the glory of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, now and always, and for ages of ages.

[13] Of the emperors When the holy emperors mentioned above had heard of the martyrdom of St. Constantine, exulting with joy they wrote a letter to his sons and to the kindred of his house See the Prel. Comm. nos. 9–10, above, pp. 545–46. : for this was very great in number. (The letter) was written in this manner: "At first, indeed, the reports which came to our ears Ed.: adornabantur; see the Georgian. proclaimed Ed.: praedicabatur. what had been done by us for justice' sake. But now your works bear witness about you, what manner of men you have become. And so both that report has been most certainly proved, and confirmed has been both your illustrious religion and the remarkable deed of your constancy. For with slender resources you showed among those impious men how firmly faith was implanted in your breasts. You who, as perfect Christians, were of one mind, just as you were Ed.: eramus. also of one religion, have always looked upon your Lord with fixed gaze; joined one with another in unshaken firmness, with your hope placed in Christ, you have prevailed against the enemies of the Cross; with Christ's help, you have acted manfully, you have covered their faces with shame, and by your triumphal union Ed.: triumphantium coniunctorum. See the Georgian. you have together made their flight notable. Which was a work perfected by divine power and glorious to your parents.

[14] a congratulatory exhortation "And so that we may make our discourse the more pleasing to me and to you, of this blessed martyr Constantine 〈 … [Something must be supplied at this place, unless it is better to delete the following conjunction.] 〉 and the fortitude with which he rose up against invisible enemies, I must set forth to you our most dear ones, who are his genuine sons and images of his bodily form, how, when he fought against the demons, he had first subdued his body by the fear of God. And so he was not accustomed to regard the gross matter of corporeal things, nor did the very light of this perishing sun seem splendid to him, nor did he reckon sweet the fleeting brightness spread by the orb of this sun, but, burning with desire Properly: fury. for the light to come, he held it as a little cloud (drawn over) that rising sun, and for the love of Christ he spat out all earthly sweetnesses no otherwise than blood from the teeth, by reason of the vehemence with which he panted for his desire and of the wisdom with which he guarded against deceivers. Therefore he reckoned all the glory of this world as refuse, that he might gain Christ alone; and for that reason now the heavens are his, the earth, and whatever is in them Ed.: ea. , because he left all things and gloried in God alone. He (now) has received glory from God and from his angels and will be praised for ever by his works.

[15] "Nor is it our part to bring you consolations at his (death), to the saint's relatives since that man himself is our consoler and patron and yours with Christ. Rather, let us now leave him who has not been left [The active voice agrees better with the preceding sentence: let us leave him who has not left (us); τὸν οὐ μέντοι ἀφειμένον: which could be understood either way.] , and turn our discourse to you, most acceptable to God and to us. (Namely,) I will show you by word and deed that your house is held in honour by us, for the honour of him who has departed, so that you may be confident in me, and may seek protection under the wings of my shelter, since, attending to the precept of religion, you overturn Ed.: evertit. whatever is contrary to it; you have constantly lent your ear to Christ speaking in you; you have bowed your heads anointed by him; you have submitted your necks to our yoke, which is from Christ, and you have not cast off Ed.: procul novistis. our light burden placed on your shoulders. Truly you are trusting in God, and like Mount Sion Ed.: Sinai; but cf. Is. 26:1. , you have shown yourselves a tower of strength against the enemy. Ps. 60:4. By your works you have shown that, (following in) the footsteps of your father, admirable before God and men, you have diligently pursued virtue, by cherishing guests, by providing safety on the roads, by kindly receiving monks and pilgrims. Go on further in these things, and complete the pattern of this blessed man's life; for that defender of our kingdom will fight for you, and that mountain of our fortification Ed.: opulentiae. in Christ will raise up your fall. Persist, then, in this, and through him be of a confident mind.

[16] and all the Georgians. "This we proclaim not to you only, but to all the Georgians See the Prel. Comm. no. 10, above, p. 546. , as many as belong to us and are under our dominion: for all alike I hold (as) friends in Christ of Christ and of our empire, and as your own brothers' sons. But truly, rise up again and be strengthened by God: (relying) on whose most mighty power, brandish your spears against the enemies; and let no place be given to any of them among you, so that you may enjoy our benefits and receive from the Lord the honour promised to those who do well."