ON ST. FROILAN, BISHOP, AT LEÓN IN SPAIN,
IN THE YEAR MVI.
PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.
Notice of the place: the Saint's memory in the more recent Martyrologies, the announcement in the Roman prescribed, his cult in Spain: the controversy concerning the age in which he lived discussed and defined: what Acts of his are to be edited.
Froilan, bishop, at León in Spain. (S.)
BY J. G.
The city which is called by Ptolemy, book 2, the Seventh Germanic Legion of the Brigaecini, in the Itinerary of Antoninus Augustus the Twin Seventh Legion, St. Froilan at León, of which notice is given, is a city of Tarraconensian Spain in the territories of the Cismontane Astures, called Leon by the natives and by most nations of Europe, but by the Italians Leone di Spagna. This city, as is also asserted in the Division of the dioceses and parishes of Spain commonly attributed to king Wamba, in Loaisa, Collectio Conciliorum Hispaniae, pages 136 and 137, in Aguirre, volume 2 of the Concilia Hispaniae, page 315, and in Hardouin, volume 3 of the Councils, column 376 and following, enjoys the illustrious title of royal seat, and also of priestly and royal city; and it is also affirmed there that it enjoys perpetual liberty through the Roman Pope and was never subject to any metropolitan. Besides not a few buildings consecrated to God, it has a notable cathedral church, one of the four most celebrated of all Spain, and most highly commended both by the wonderful and most beautiful artifice of its structure and by many relics of Saints, and namely of St. Froilan. Concerning the foundation of the city, its antiquity and the occasion of the name given it, writers both ancient and more recent have handed down many things, and among these chiefly Athanasius de Lobera, a monk of the Cistercian Order, in a Spanish Work, in the year 1596
published, whose title sounds thus in Latin: History of the greatness of the most ancient and notable city and church of León, and of its bishop and patron St. Froylan. Fully enough, too, in the Spanish idiom on the same argument wrote González Dávila in the Teatro eclesiástico of the Castiles, volume 1, page 343 and following, Rodríguez Méndez Silva in the Población de España, chapter 8, and most recently Henry Flórez of the Order of St. Augustine, a learned writer, in volume 4 of the España Sagrada, page 227 and following; in whom the studious reader, if he desires a fuller notice of that place, in which we must wander here for a little while, will find recorded the remaining things which bear on the situation and commendation of the same city.
[2] In this city, which is the capital of the kingdom of the same name, recorded on various days in the more recent Martyrologies, St. Froilan or Froylan, bishop of León, is venerated with exceptional piety; who in the Ecclesiastical Annals of the most learned Baronius under the year of Christ 1027, number 14, is less correctly named Florianus the priest. This holy Prelate Ferrarius, in the General Catalogue of the Saints who are not in the Roman Martyrology, announces at the 5th day of October thus: At León in Spain, of St. Froylan, bishop, patron of the same city. Chastelain, on the contrary, reports him on the 1st day of October, and the Benedictine martyrologists on the 3rd; and thus indeed Arnold Wion in the Lignum vitae, part 2, book 3, page 325, celebrates him: On the fifth of the Nones of October … in Spain, the deposition of saint Froilan, bishop of León and confessor, conspicuous for learning and holiness. Then at page 326 he has almost the same things which he had written of him in book 2, page 325, in this manner: St. Froilan or Froyllan, who is also called by a corrupted word Florianus, a Spaniard, monk and abbot of Moreruela near Zamora, was created bishop in the year of the Lord DCCCXX, as Villegas will have it, or, as Morales asserts, DCCCLXX. And he was in that power for five years, unceasingly feeding the sheep entrusted to him by word and example together. He passed from this light in the year DCCCXXV or DCCCLXXV, in the LXXIIIrd year of his age, on the fifth of the Nones of October. Bucelin agrees in the Benedictine Menology, page 684, and Hugh Ménard at the 3rd day of October, except that the latter in neither book of his Observations designated the very time in which the Saint flourished; either because he had deservedly persuaded himself that the chronological notes assigned by Wion and Bucelin were joined with error, or because no other instruments lighted his way from which he might elicit the age of the holy Prelate. With the Benedictine hagiologists, as regards the day of the announcement, Tamayo Salazar agrees in volume 5 of the Spanish Martyrology, page 383, where he adorns our Saint with this elogium: On the Vth of the Nones of October … At León in Spain, of St. Froilan, bishop of that city, who, when from the Congregation of the Benedictine Order, the odours of his virtues pressing, he was raised to the episcopal summit, so wove his life with most holy deeds in the office of the prelacy, that, admirable for miracles, the excellent confessor received an unfailing reward for his labour.
[3] [he began to be announced in the Roman Martyrology on the 5th day of October by virtue of a decree issued in the year 1716,] It may seem wonderful to the reader that St. Froilan — who, as will be proved below from page 236, had St. Attilanus, afterwards bishop of Zamora, as his pupil in monastic discipline and as his companion in the preaching of the word of God — nowhere appears with his holy disciple, either at the 3rd or at the 5th of October, in the Martyrology of Molanus of the year 1568, the German one of the year 1573, and that of Galesini of the year 1578, nay not even in the Roman Martyrology itself; although Baronius, in the Ecclesiastical Annals under the year 1027, asserts that each of them is found worthy of the honour of the Saints and by right inscribed in their Catalogue. But whatever at length was the reason for formerly omitting the name of Froilan, especially in the Roman Martyrology — into which it is not necessary to inquire more laboriously — that defect was removed in the year 1716, under Clement XI, Supreme Pontiff, by the issuing of a decree of the Congregation of Rites, which exists in volume 8 of the great Bullarium, or volume 2 of its Continuation, page 439, of the edition commonly called that of Luxemburg. Hence our Saint has his place in the Roman Martyrology, augmented and corrected by Pope Benedict XIV, on the 5th day of October; yet so that he who in that decree was called Fruilanus, perhaps by a typographical error, is called in that Martyrology by his truer name Froilanus. Further, his elogium, which was composed by the Most Eminent Cardinal Origo and approved by the sacred Congregation and by the supreme Pontiff himself, sounds thus: At León in Spain, of saint Froilan, bishop of the same city, renowned for zeal in propagating the monastic life, beneficence towards the poor, and other virtues and miracles. Concerning this elogium the most learned Pontiff praised above may be consulted, book 4 De Servorum Dei Beatificatione etc., part 2, chapter 18, number 16, where he writes that that decree was given on the 15th day of February in the year 1716, and not on the 30th of May of the same year, as the cited edition of the Bullarium has; so that in one or the other of the Works already cited the diligence and accuracy of the printers is wanting. But this defect is too slight for it to detain us as we proceed to treat thoroughly of the Saint's cult.
[4] For the rest, although he was inscribed in the Roman Martyrology not so long ago, yet he obtained a solemn cult long before in Spain. nevertheless the holy Prelate began long ago to be venerated in all the cathedral churches of Spain with a solemn rite of veneration, and indeed the double of the 2nd class, as the Directory of the metropolitan church of Valencia testifies; nay also in some dioceses of Spain an Ecclesiastical Office of him was celebrated at the 5th day of October under the rite of the double of the class, as is manifest from the Order of reciting the divine Office printed at Madrid in the year 1684, where is read thus: Of the diocese and church of León, the 5th of October: of Froilan, bishop and confessor, principal patron, double of the I class with an Octave in the whole diocese: and then this: Of the diocese and church of Palencia, the 5th of October: of Froilan, bishop and confessor, double of the I class with an Octave: which words are repeated for the diocese and church of Lugo. The antiquity of his solemn cult is shown by Ambrosio de Morales, chronographer of Philip II, king of the Spains, in his General Chronicle of Spain published in the year 1586, volume 3, page 151, where he testifies in Spanish words that in the cathedral church (of León) there exists a chapel dedicated to St. Froilan, and that his feast day, inasmuch as he is a native Saint, is celebrated with great solemnity. Nay more, on the testimony of Athanasius de Lobera, praised at number 1, the Ecclesiastical cult both of our holy Prelate and of St. Attilanus, formerly his disciple, took its beginning not so very long after the death of each. So he discourses in the Prologue to the reader of the History of the city and church of León, a little before the penultimate page, in Spanish words turned by me into Latin: As is established from writings and ancient monuments, a space of almost five hundred years has already (that is, in the year of Christ 1596, in which his book was printed) flowed by since the feast days of those Saints (Froilan and Attilanus) have been celebrated, on which without any doubt the proper Lessons, Antiphons and Responsories of the Saints which are now recited were also in use anciently; and, says the praised writer, both the form of the old characters and the very style of the discourse confirm their antiquity. So that therefore his testimony concerning the ancient cult of the Prelate and Patron of León, although perhaps less solemn than now, ought deservedly not to be doubted.
[5] His time of death, concerning which opinions vary, But it is far from the case that the very time too at which the Saint died is placed beyond controversy, since among Spanish authors of great name some set his death in the eleventh century, others in the tenth, others in the ninth; and that in such a way that those who agree on the same century disagree in designating the years of the same century, as may be seen from the words of Wion adduced at number 2, and from what is to be said below. But which of so discrepant opinions is to be embraced before the rest? I answer, that which ties the death of St. Froilan to the beginning of the eleventh century, that is, to the year of Christ 1006. This either Athanasius de Lobera, already praised above, found, or first, so far as I know, established; and Antonio de Heredita, Tamayo, Yepes, Mabillon and others adhered to him, convinced by the authority and weight of the testimonies which Lobera brought forward. Before I bring these forward, it will be to the purpose to have premised two things. The one, that the Spanish era, as Flórez in the Chronologia Historiae Hispanicae, part 1, chapter 1, §1, and others elsewhere here and there establish, runs ahead of our common era by thirty-eight years; the other, as the same Lobera at page 137, and Du Cange in the Lexicon under the word Testamentum, Cardinal Aguirre and many others teach, that under the name of Testament are also comprehended any charters of donation or largesse confirmed by the subscriptions of witnesses in the tenth century and afterwards in Spain. The first testimony, therefore, by which it may be plain that St. Froilan did not depart from the living in the year of Christ 875, much less in the year 825, as some contend, is supplied to us by a charter of Veremund II, king of León, given on the 27th day of November in the Spanish era 1028, that is, the year of Christ 990, which Lobera presents in summary at page 114 and following. This, moreover, on his testimony, is concluded thus: I, Beremund, most serene prince, my vow and holocaust, which I of my own accord offer to my God for the remitting of my sins and the absolving of my offences, this testament I offer, and in council with my own hand I have signed the sign in the accustomed manner and for the love of God; and then, after the bishops Armentarius of Dumium, Pelagius of Lugo, Peter of Iria and Ximenius of Astorga, who lived towards the end of the tenth century, there follows the confirmation of our Saint, made, as it appears, by the hand of the royal scribe, conceived in this manner: The illustrious and great Froilan, bishop of León, confirms. From which subscription, says Ángel Manrique in the Annales Cistercienses under the year of Christ 1131, chapter 8, you may see the reverence towards Froilan and the veneration of him among all, whom public instruments call, even while living and present, and alone among so many and so great prelates of Spain, Great and Illustrious — perhaps without example, or with a very rare one. But let these things be said in passing.
[6] and the time of the episcopate he held is elicited from various diplomas, But because the praised Lobera published, in place of the Latin and original words by which the time of the diploma given is marked, only words turned into Spanish, it will be useful to copy out in part a diploma of the same king Veremund, given in the year of Christ 999 on the Nones of January, so that hence, as from the very source, it may be clear that St. Froilan flourished under this king together with the bishops mentioned above, and that therefore those erred who remove him to the ninth century or the beginning of the tenth. The words of the diploma which bear on this, turned into Spanish in Yepes, in the Appendix to Century 6 of the Chronicle of the Order of St. Benedict, page 433, run thus:
The series of the testament or restoration of the titles (of the monastery of St. Lawrence of Carbonario, now called Carbuero) was made by me, the prince Beremund already named, on the very Nones of January, the era then running after the thousandth, the seventh beginning, after the thirtieth already completed (that is, the Spanish era 1037, or the year of Christ 999). King Beremund, in this testament made, which I chose to have made, have put the sign with my own hand to confirm it. And presently, before the other subscriptions of priests and leading men, these follow, which pertain to our matter: Under the name of Christ, Armentarius, bishop of the see of Dumium, confirms. Under the help of the Lord, Pelagius, bishop of the see of Lugo, confirms. Under the weight of the fear of the Lord, Peter, bishop of Iria and of the Apostolic see, confirms. Under of the Trinity indivisible (perhaps invocation is lacking), Froilan, bishop of the see of León, confirms. Finally, in another charter, by which St. Froilan assigned with no common liberality many possessions to the monastery of SS. Facundus, Primitivus and Tyrsus, called De Domnos sanctos, our opinion is also most clearly confirmed. Hear the words, although barbarously Latin: The text of the writing made known on the day which will be the eighteenth of the Kalends of October, era MXXXVIII, king Veremund reigning in the kingdom of his grandfathers. I, Froilan, bishop, by the grace of God bishop of the see of León, have confirmed with my hand this little charter of testament, which I willed to be made and knew to be read. I, king Veremund, confirm and corroborate, etc. This charter can be seen entire in Yepes in the cited Appendix, page 445 verso, and in Mabillon, Saeculum VI Benedictinum, part 1, page 60, where he edited it from Yepes, preserving its native phrasing, although bristling with solecisms; and, following him in everything to the letter, he also marked the era 1038, in place of which the era 1037 must be substituted, as is plain both from the epitaph of Veremund II reported by Ambrosio de Morales, book 17, chapter 23, where this king is asserted to have rested in peace in the era 1037, and from the fact that on the 3rd day of October in the year of Christ 999, that is, the Spanish era 1037, Alfonso V, Veremund's successor, was already then presiding over the kingdom of León, as is plainly concluded from his diploma, of which Lobera treats at page 131 verso.
[7] But in order that by the same labour by which I demonstrate the Saint's age I may likewise exhibit the years of the episcopate he held, [and it is established that the Saint held the see of León from the year of Christ 990 up to 1006;] I proceed to review the diplomas which prove that he held the see of León from the year of Christ 990 — in which he succeeded Sabaricus, who had died, as Lobera proves at page 114, towards the month of March — up to 1006, that is, the Spanish era 1044. Lobera, already often praised, says at page 133 that he turned word for word from Latin into the Spanish idiom the charter of St. Froilan exhibited by him in the place cited, by which he assigned many possessions to his cathedral church. To this diploma, moreover, on the testimony of the same writer, who inspected the autograph preserved in the archive of the church of León, is appended the Spanish era 1040, and the day the 21st of December; and so, as the year of Christ 1002 was drawing to its end, our Saint was still presiding over the church of León. And that the same Prelate of León was still among the living in the year of Christ 1006 is manifestly plain from two charters subscribed by him, of which one, as the same Lobera testifies at folio 148 verso, bears the Spanish era 1044 and the day the 15th of January, the other the same era and the day the 1st of March. Since therefore, as I noted above, the Spanish era runs ahead of our common era by 38 years, it is necessary that he who subscribed his name to two charters in the Spanish era 1044 was still among the living in the year of Christ 1006. And that St. Froilan did not reach the end of this year seems to be able probably to be concluded from this, that in a charter of sale preserved in the church of León, which is written as given in the month of April, era 1045, is read not the name of Froilan but that of Munius or Martin, his successor in the see of León. So again the same Athanasius de Lobera at page 149, against full credence being given to whom in these things I see nothing at all standing in the way. Hence, although it is not altogether certain that St. Froilan departed to the Heavenly ones when the year of Christ 1006 was already growing old, yet this, as I have said, appears sufficiently probable; nor is it at variance with the truth that the 5th day of October, which is sacred to the cult of the holy Prelate, was also the day of his death.
[8] nor, as some wrongly would have it, are two Froilans Here, however, a certain knot occurs, not to be untied at first sight with so easy a labour. For men skilled in antiquities, who searched the record office of the church of León no less diligently than Lobera, relying on the old instruments which exist deposited there, establish two Froilans as bishops of León at almost the same time: one, whom they will have to be our Saint, they affirm held that see for 4 years, namely from the Spanish era 1010 up to the era 1014, that is, from the year of Christ 972 up to 976; the other Froilan, different from our Saint, they maintain occupied the same chair from the Spanish era 1028 up to 1039, that is, from the year of Christ 990 up to 1001. And that they try to establish their opinion with no fragile prop is clear from this, that they bring forward for themselves that very charter of St. Froilan edited by Lobera, chapter 30, and cited by us at number 5; for, they say, since this bears in the autograph the era MX~, it is necessary that, 38 years being deducted from the Spanish era, St. Froilan was bishop of León at the year of Christ 972. And since Sabaricus, as is altogether manifest from four charters confirmed by him, and as Lobera himself admits at page 113 verso, occupied that see at the beginning of the year of Christ 990, and again from the era 1028 up to 1039, that is, from the year of Christ 992 up to 1001, a certain Froilan appears in old charters as prelate of León, hence, they say, two Froilans must beyond doubt be admitted: the former, who preceded Sabaricus, the latter, who immediately followed the same Sabaricus. So they contend, by an argument unconquerable, as it at first appears, that the beginning of our Saint is wrongly tied by us to the year of Christ 990, that is, the year 1028 of the Spanish era, and his death to the year of Christ 1006.
[9] bishops of León are to be admitted at about the same time; But this whole difficulty, great as it is, vanishes, and this knot is untied with an easy wedge, if we acknowledge with Lobera, page 150, that the arithmetical character of the old Castilians, which in the charter of king Veremund is formed in this manner (X~), denotes not the number ten but forty; on whose testimony that curling stroke of the pen which rises above the numeral X~ was once written for the numeral sign L, as may also be seen in Berganza, Antigüedades de España, part 2, page 579; and so the numeral X~ is to the old Spaniards exactly the same as XL is now to us. The praised writer does not indeed deny that in some old documents the number forty is also exhibited by a figure somewhat differing from the one assigned, namely by an oblique line drawn crosswise through the lower part of the letter X, as the curious reader can see that numeral sign in Esteban de Garibay, in his Compendio historial de las Chronicas de España, book 9, chapter 5, page 338. Yet, says Lobera at page 149 verso, that old codex of León, written by hand, which they commonly call el tumbo redondo, in the diplomas and public instruments which it exhibits always expresses the number forty in such a way that, in place of the characters XL, that curling stroke of the pen is written over the numeral letter X~. And since those searchers of antiquity who establish two Froilans either did not know this, or at least had not considered it attentively, it was easy for them to go more confidently into the opinion opposite to ours; and consequently they were compelled to ascribe no more than 4 years to the episcopate of our Saint. But if, wherever that arithmetical sign of the old Spaniards is found, forty is understood in place of the number ten — as Lobera deservedly contends it is to be so understood — all things will then flow of their own accord; nor will it follow — to spare other absurdities of the adverse opinion — that Alfonso V, who together with his mother subscribed to the diploma of the donation made by St. Froilan in the Spanish era MX~, with the same arithmetical form, administered the kingdom of León in the year of Christ 972, at which time he was certainly not yet born, since, according to the common opinion of old and more recent writers, he was a boy only five years old when in the year of Christ 999 he succeeded Veremund II in the kingdom of León. From which, since it is manifestly plain that that arithmetical character X~ denotes no other than the number forty, it follows that Froilan held the chair of León not in the Spanish era 1010, that is, the year of Christ 972, but in the era 1040, that is, the year of Christ 992, and therefore was not the predecessor but the successor of Sabaricus; so that it is by no means necessary to establish two Froilans as bishops of León, since, by attributing to one and the same man 16 years of episcopate from the year of Christ 990 up to 1006, all things are most fittingly brought into concord, nor need anything absurd be admitted by us, as in the opinion of others.
[10] I confess, however, that in setting the year of Christ 1006 as the year of St. Froilan's death, [nor did our Saint die before the end of the tenth century, as authors of great name maintain,] I suffer as adversaries in this, besides some more recent writers, also some ancient ones, namely Pelagius, bishop of Quetum Quetensem, Rodrigo Jiménez, archbishop of Toledo, and Lucas of Tuy, all renowned writers of Spanish History, who plainly intimate that Froilan died before the end of the tenth century. And thus indeed Pelagius, the most ancient of these, in the Brief Compendium edited by Sandoval, page 63, writes under Veremund II, king of León: Therefore on account of the sins of the aforesaid prince (Veremund II) and of the people, the Hagarene king, whose name was Almanzor, together with his son a Damielchet (with Rodrigo I think Abdemelich, or with Lucas of Tuy Abdameleh, is to be read), with exiled Christian counts, arranged to come and destroy and depopulate the kingdom of León. But when the citizens of León and Astorga had heard and learned that that plague was coming upon them, they began the bones of the kings which were buried in León and Astorga together with the body of St. Pelagius, which they placed upon the altar of blessed John the Baptist. And some of the citizens of León raised the body of saint Froilan the bishop below the Pyrenean mountains in Valle Caesar, and placed him upon the altar of saint John the Baptist. Things consonant with these in substance are handed down by the praised Rodrigo, book 5 De Rebus Hispaniae, chapter 14, and Lucas of Tuy in the Chronicle of the world, page 87. Accordingly, whether with Mariana and other writers in the year of Christ 985, or with Juan de Ferreras in the History
of Spain, part 4, in the year of Christ 996, the expedition of Almanzor, leader of the Moors, against the city of León be tied, since this certainly ought to be set before the end of the tenth century, namely under Veremund II, by whose command, as the praised writers hand down, the relics of St. Froilan and other Saints and the bodies of the kings were translated to Oviedo Ouetum, lest they should be a mockery to the enemy, it follows from these that our Saint ceased to be among the living before the year of Christ 1000, and so that his death is postponed by us up to the year of Christ 1006 with no appearance of truth.
[11] he must be said to have died, but neither about the year 1016. So indeed it can be argued against our opinion. But since the praised Pelagius wrote his Brief Compendium when a whole century had elapsed after the Saint's death, as is clearly established from page 77, penultimate line, of Sandoval's edition, in which mention is made of the Spanish era 1147, and since Rodrigo of Toledo and Lucas of Tuy are later than our Saint by two hundred years and more, although I greatly respect and venerate their authority when they write of things done in their own age, yet in this matter of ours it is not of so great weight for me that I would dare to go against the manifest testimony of several diplomas. For since these writers fell into a parachronism when they narrate that Adaulphus, bishop of Compostela, who had died much earlier — as is plain from the Compostellan History in Flórez, volume 3 of the España Sagrada, in the Appendix, number X, pages LIX and LIX, and from book 6, chapter 14, number 341 of the Bibliotheca Vetus Hispaniae — was cast before an untamed bull by Veremund II, why should we not say that a little later, when they write of the translated body of St. Froilan, they also lapsed into an anachronism? However that may be, certainly by the rules of sound criticism the constant testimony of the diplomas signed by St. Froilan ought altogether to outweigh the authority of these writers, who are not even nearly contemporary. Nor is there any reason why we should here either listen to, or refute more fully, the learned man Juan de Ferreras and his French translator d'Hermilly, when both write under the year of Christ 999 that our Saint died in the year of Christ 1016; since this opinion of theirs, if however it is not a compositor's error, is manifestly convicted of error from what has been said at number 7.
[12] [Since the Saint's Acts were either not written by contemporaries or have been lost,] And would that, just as the Saint's age has been shown from contemporary documents, so also the things illustriously done by him, and the singular miracles which are said to have been performed by him, could be placed here before the eyes from coeval or nearly contemporary writers! But — what is most to be grieved — his Life was committed to writing by no one who was an eyewitness of these things, or even a contemporary writer; or, if that Work ever existed and was happily withdrawn from the fury and the fires of enemies, it had not yet been drawn out of the darkness in Mabillon's time, nor hitherto, at least so far as I know. Hence the praised Mabillon, part 1, Saeculum VI Benedictinum, page 58, speaks thus: Most of the more recent Spanish writers have taken care to commit the deeds of Froilan to writing, although no ancient writer, at least who is known, is held to be the author of his Life. Nor ought this to seem so wonderful, since from about the beginning of the eighth century up to the fourteenth, in which Spain at length scarcely shook off the most harsh yoke of the Moors, nothing less than a frequent place was given to letters and writers in that part of the world. So almost Nicolás Antonio, a man especially learned, who also, in volume 1 of the Bibliotheca Vetus Hispaniae, page 319, writes this, apposite to our matter: Nor will you wonder, reader, that in the time of this great calamity there were lacking those men, once renowned among us and in the whole world for learning, whose names we might insert in this roll. It will now be the task, therefore, to gather the rare ears of writers which the malignant star coming from the South and East spared and the threshing of the Saracens did not beat out, and, as it were, to cherish in the bosom of this history, lest they perish, certain sparks of the almost extinguished fire of learning. The praised Antonio indeed, in volume 2 of his Bibliotheca Vetus, brings forward some authors nearly contemporary with St. Froilan, who, if not fully and learnedly, at least very briefly and artlessly, as it was then their custom to note deeds done, could have written the Life of our holy Prelate; but that most diligent writer of the Bibliotheca found not one who in fact performed it to be mentioned.
[13] Nor may much help be expected from elsewhere. [it has seemed good to edit those things which have been collected from various Breviaries, even ancient ones.] For the monastery of Moreruela, over which St. Froilan presided as abbot, and in which therefore it is credible that some monuments of him existed, suffered, on the testimony of Lobera in the Prologue, so disastrous a fire on three occasions that all the old writings were consumed by fire. And as for what pertains to the record office of the church of León, in it, as the same writer, an eyewitness, asserts, very many old instruments are indeed preserved; but what each contains cannot be learned without a long space of time and immense labour. There is added, he says, that many of them are written in Gothic letters, and so — which is the head of the matter — eaten away and corrupted by the injury of the times that they seem by no means able to be read. And the church of Zamora, as the same Lobera testifies, possesses in its record office no monuments which are of any moment to our matter, or which were given before Alfonso, king of León, the VIth of this name. Being placed therefore, in sum, in a penury of documents contemporary with the Saint's times, nothing remains for us but that, following the examples of Lobera, Tamayo, Yepes and Mabillon, we present to the curious reader, collected into one, the things concerning St. Froilan which exist committed to writing in the ancient Lessons mentioned at number 4 or in other Breviaries or writers. And since the Spanish Work of the same Lobera on this argument, besides containing many things contributing nothing to the deeds of St. Froilan, is far too prolix to be given Latinity entire and to find place here; and since the compositions of Yepes and Mabillon can be held not so much as the very Acts of the Saint as a Commentary on his deeds, it has seemed more fitting to reprint, and to illustrate with notes both critical and historical, those Acts which the praised Tamayo published at the 3rd day of October, brought together into one from the old, as he calls them, Breviaries of León, Compostela, Zamora, Burgos, Lugo and others, as also from various writers. Behold them, therefore, as they exist in the Spanish Martyrology, volume 5, page 389 and following, the very words of the Breviaries having been preserved, as I judge, as far as could be done; and how much credence they deserve the learned reader will then discern more manifestly when that volume of the España Sagrada comes to light, by the praised author Flórez, which is to comprise the bishops of León.
Annotations* hoc this
* propria [own]
ACTS
Collected from various Breviaries, even old ones, volume 5 of the Spanish Martyrology, from page 389.
Froilan, bishop, at León in Spain. (S.)
From the Breviaries.
The Saint's birth, instruction, withdrawal into the desert, Froilan, a Spaniard by origin, was born in the suburb of the city of Lugo a of the province of Galicia, of noble parents, whose mother was Froila b, but the name of his father is as yet unknown. Imbued from infancy with holy disciplines, fearing God, departing from evil, raising the inmost parts of his heart to the heavens, despising all earthly things, full of faith and good works, he passed that age. Having become a youth, the honours of human life foreseen and abandoned, when he was eighteen years old he flew away to the desert c, desiring to lead a solitary life. Hiding in which among the shade of the woods and the shaggy lurking places of the mountains, pleasing to God and glad in himself, he passed the course of many years. But because he was a vessel of election predestined for the illumination of many, he endeavoured to take up the office of preaching, not without a prodigious experiment upon himself. For when one day he was doubtful whether it was lawful for him to take upon himself the office of preaching, burning coals having been fetched and put into his mouth, he felt no heat of burning, nay the fire left no sign of its operation in his mouth d. Accordingly, relying on so great a prodigy, having given thanks to God, he forthwith girded himself for the work of preaching; and while, set in prayer, he besought help from the Lord with ardour of heart and fervour of mind so that he might perform that office with God's blessing, at dead of night he saw an exceeding brightness shining in the desert, and two doves entering into his mouth, of which the one, which was of a flame colour, caressed him e.
[2] His preaching of the word of God and a prodigy done by him are reviewed. Rising glad at these signs, leaving the desert very early in the morning, descending to the plains, he began to preach frequently to the peoples, from whose mouth came forth great and sweet utterances, illustrious and pleasant words. Which office of herald of the word of God he executed with such profit of the peoples that he was proclaimed by common voice to be filled with the Holy Spirit. To these was added a celebrated miracle, which happened in those times; for since the Man of God always had with him a little ass, which carried the pack of books, and it had been killed one night by a wolf, the blessed Man, relying on the mercy of God, with a commanding voice called the rapacious animal to be present before him and forthwith render account of the devoured ass. The baleful wolf presented itself at the summons of the Man of God, very many who followed the holy Man being present, and, its head lowered and its ferocity laid aside, casting itself at the feet of Froilan, it asked pardon for the crime committed by it. Then the Servant of God commanded it to carry on its shoulders the pack of books which the ass had been accustomed to carry; and it, receiving the burden, gentle and humble, clung to the Man of God for many years, offering to all the peoples an example of humility and demonstrating the holiness of Froilan f.
[3] After these things, shunning the breezes of men, he resolved to flee public places, Having embraced the monastic life, he took St. Attilanus to himself as disciple, and, as is believed, putting on the cowl of the Benedictine monks after he had professed the Rule of that Order g, seeking a fitting dwelling for the solitary life, ascending the mountain Cuturrinus h, he built for himself in a deep valley a very small cell, where he spent some time in contemplation, prayer, fasts and other mortifications. Attilanus i, a member of the convent of Sahagún, learning the fame of his holiness, resolved to seek him out in order to be imbued with more perfect teachings; and, ascending the same mountain to which Froilan had withdrawn, he found the holy Man, and, having cast himself at his knees, received his blessing from him and disclosed to him all the inmost things of his heart. Then Froilan showed him a place where he too might build a little cell, in which to apply himself to prayer and meditation. Attilanus forthwith obeyed, and, a little cell having been built, followed the footsteps of his holy Master with humble submission. Here the holy Hermits led an angelic life for some time: but since their celebrated fame flew through the whole province, a crowd of peoples flocked to hear them. Hence, however, Froilan, of many
prayers besought, descended to the town of Vesum k, where he might refresh the crowds of those confessing not only with spiritual but also with bodily nourishment.
[4] With divine help favouring, therefore, he built a convent there, and several convents having been built, three hundred monks having been gathered, whom teaching the fodder of heavenly doctrine and pouring out monastic discipline, in a short time that house and its monks, by the ministry of the holy Abbot and Prior, was called the dwelling of holiness and the treasury of perfection. Here Froilan, having obtained the highest acclaim by frequent miracles and followed by a celebrated fame through the assiduous heaps of his virtues, — when the Christian cause was seen in the last danger of life through frequent victories of the Saracens, so that everywhere a second destruction was feared, the sins of our people demanding it l — his virtues and prodigies came to the king of León m, who, hearing of his holiness, asked him to come to him. And having received him with the greatest honour, he disclosed to him the cause of his summons, as he laid bare the state of the kingdom, the insolence of the Hagarenes and the straits of the times. Then the holy Abbot made manifest in public sermons that the wrath of the Lord on account of the sins of the peoples and the nobles would shortly be seen and experienced, unless penance placated the fury of the Godhead, and foretold to the king what was to be done. And he, offering the holy Man copious money for the sustenance of the brethren, gave him power to found convents throughout his whole kingdom wherever it should seem to him more fitting and more convenient n. Hence, having returned to his own and been kindly received by Attilanus and his companions, inflamed with the love of God, and content with the offspring of so many monks, and relying on the royal diploma o, he resolved to erect new colonies of monks. Having built, therefore, the monastery of Tabora [p] and many others beside the river Estola, or Ezla [q], he built as a dwelling for himself a convent named Morerola [r], where he gathered almost two hundred monks, under himself as abbot and Attilanus as Prior.
[5] He is consecrated bishop and, renowned for virtues and miracles, dies. At that time, the churches of León and Zamora being bereft of shepherds, since the king [s] of León had beheld so great virtue and divine grace in the man of God Froilan, wishing to satisfy the clamour of the people earnestly demanding it and his own desire, he caused the holy Man, although unwilling and refusing, to be ordained bishop of León, not without the greatest applause of all, the chair of Zamora also being entrusted to St. Attilanus. Both of whom were consecrated together on the holy day of Pentecost [t]. Froilan, therefore, being established in the episcopal see, began to exercise the pastoral office not sluggishly. Whom the Lord not only illustrated with many miracles, but also adorned with the spirit of prophecy, by which he many times foretold things to come. Whence, knowing the term of his death, a throng of many clerics and monks having been gathered, all lamenting, that heavenly soul, the bodily garment laid aside, accompanied by angelic choirs, borne up to the heavens, entered triumphant into heaven on the IVth of the Nones of October [u]; and the holy little body was laid away in a precious sepulchre built by the king [x] in the church of León [y].
[6] [His body, through fear of the Saracens translated elsewhere, then carried back to León.] Which afterwards, through fear of the Hagarenes, having been shut up in the church of St. Peter [z], was translated thence to the Valley of Caesar [aa], afterwards to the convent of Moreruela [bb], and worthily to its own church of León, some sacred remains being left in that convent [cc], where today it rests honourably, and is venerated with the highest applause of the people and with the veneration of the whole diocese, who acknowledge him as Patron. As also by the Benedictine Order, which confesses the holy Prelate as its member, by the city of Lugo in Galicia, which claims him as its native citizen, and finally by the whole of Spain, which proclaims him its Inhabitant and native Saint.
ANNOTATIONS.
p. Mabillon calls it Tabarense. The praised Yepes, further, notes at page 201 that a monastery called Moreruela was founded by these Saints in the valley of Tavara, and therefore called Moreruela de Tavara, one league distant from the river Ezla or Estola, and different from the monastery of Morerola which exists today.
q. Estola, says Baudrand, a river of Spain, now el rio Esla, rises from the mountains of the Astures, then flowing South through the kingdom of León waters the city of León and Benevento (otherwise Benavente), and afterwards, increased by the Orbigo and other lesser rivers, empties itself into the Douro between Miranda to the West and Sentica (Zamora) to the East. For the rest, Mabillon judges with Yepes that those very many monasteries situated about the river Estola were rather restored by Froilan than raised anew.
r. The beginnings and progress of this convent, which received the name of St. Mary of Morerola from the monks of the Cistercian Order who now inhabit it, Ángel Manrique has fully described in the Annales Cistercienses under the year of Christ 1131, chapters 8 and 9; consult him therefore, if you please. And he sets forth the situation of the same monastery thus at page 231: Morerola is not far from the river Ezla, in a low, marshy plain, and, from the obstruction of a neighbouring mountain, less open to the winds, and therefore less suited to health; so that those Saints seemed to have sought virtue
not to be acquired by institute, but to be perfected in infirmity, to which the monastery is liable even up to present times. On either side it has Zamora and Benavente, at almost equal distance, four leagues from the latter, six from the former.
s. It was not Ramiro III, from whom the Saints had received the permission to build convents, but his successor Veremund II, who, as Mabillon rightly writes, Ramiro having died, had added the kingdom of León to his Galician one.
t. This was done on the 30th day of May, since in the year of Christ 990, in which St. Froilan succeeded Sabaricus, Easter fell on the 20th of April, as may also be seen in Labbe, in the Concordia chronologica, part 1, page 298.
u. That is, on the 4th day of October. But whence this day of death is here maintained as certain I altogether do not know.
x. Alfonso, Vth king of León of this name, is here designated; that he built a precious mausoleum for our Saint I cannot prove by the testimony of the ancients.
y. Since St. Froilan died eight or nine years after the cathedral church had been polluted and destroyed by the Saracens, it is undoubted, says Lobera at page 147, that he was not buried in it at that time; and the same author judges that he first obtained burial in the church sacred to St. Peter, which was near the cathedral. But since he does not praise an ancient witness for his last assertion, let the credit rest with Lobera.
z. Lobera judges improbable the cause here alleged for the translation of the body of St. Froilan, since at that time there was nothing to be feared from the Saracens; or, if there had been, the Saint's body ought not to have been translated from the city church into the suburban church of St. Peter, which seems to be designated here, inasmuch as it was more exposed than the cathedral church to the fury of the enemies.
aa. The marvels which Lobera narrates from page 153 as having happened in this translation, let him read in him who has a mind to it. I fear that these are as uncertain as the year and day in which that translation was made.
bb. The old Missals of the abbey of Morerola indicate the memory of this translation on the 16th day of January, as Lobera says at page 156 verso. But in what year it was made the praised writer does not dare to define, page 156 verso. For the rest, let him who delights in marvels read the prodigious history of this translation in him from page 154.
cc. The memory of this translation is kept in the church of León on the 11th day of the month of August, as Lobera testifies at page 158. For the rest, the circumstances of this translation, which you may read in the same Lobera from page 156, are not much more certain than the others. This one thing is certain from elsewhere, that the body of St. Froilan was honourably deposited partly in the church of León, partly in that of Morerola, as Athanasius de Lobera, already often praised, Yepes and many others testify. But how long before the year of Christ 1142 part of the body of St. Froilan was carried back to León, nothing occurs either by which I might define it. Certainly that that translation cannot be postponed beyond this year becomes manifest from the History of the translation of the body of St. Isidore, bishop of Seville, chapter V, in which, with us in volume 1 of April, page 361, express mention is made of the body of St. Froilan, or a great part of his body, which together with other relics of Saints was carried through the city of León in the solemn rite of those making supplication by John, bishop of the same city; who, since he ascended this see in the year of Christ 1133, and, as is handed down in the Catalogue of the Bishops of León, volume 6 of the Spanish Martyrology, page 99, seems not to have held it beyond the year of Christ 1142, it follows that those Relics of St. Froilan were brought from the monastery of Morerola into the church of León before that year 1142, and so that that translation is not rightly set by some under Manrique, John's successor, who lived up to the year of Christ 1161.
* edocente teaching
* propinante Froilano Froilan pouring out