Nicetas

ON ST. NICETAS, CONFESSOR, IN GREECE, ABOUT THE YEAR DCCCXXXVIII.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

The Saint's memory in the sacred Fasti, his ecclesiastical cult, his birth, his distinction from namesakes, the course of his life discussed, and the Acts, to be published from the Menaea, of what kind they are.

Nicetas, confessor, in Greece. (S.)

BY C. B.

Since the mere entry of Saints in the sacred Fasti of the Greeks (consult our Work, volume VI of September, page 535 and following) does not imply ecclesiastical cult, The Saint, who by cult, as here not a few Saints occur concerning whom, although they are inscribed either in the Menaea, or in the Basilian and Sirletian Menologies, or even in the Sirmondian Synaxarion, it can not undeservedly be doubted whether they enjoy, or ever enjoyed, ecclesiastical cult among the Greeks. And first indeed someone might perhaps contend that St. Nicetas, patrician and confessor, should be reckoned among them, because, although today he is recorded in the great printed Menaea of the Greeks and in other sacred Fasti also, nothing at all seems to be done concerning him in the present-day Office of the same Menaea, nor is anything prescribed to be done in any ritual books of the Greeks. But, even if this be so, the ecclesiastical cult of the Saint in the Greek church appears to me sufficiently certain from other grounds. For first, St. Nicetas is celebrated in the great printed Menaea not on one only but on two different days, namely on the present day, on which he has only two little verses, and on the 13th of October, on which he has besides a prolix eulogy attached; which honour I have not thus far found to be paid in those sacred Fasti of the Greeks to a Saint who lacks all ecclesiastical cult whatever. Secondly, our Saint is commemorated not only in the aforesaid Menaea and by Maximus Margunius, who generally followed them; but also in various abridged manuscript Menaea which exist with us, in the Sirmondian Synaxarion, likewise manuscript, and in both the Menologies published by benefit of print, namely the Basilian and the Sirletian; and that he is celebrated by the Greeks in so many sacred monuments appears no weak argument of the ecclesiastical cult which he either enjoys even today among them, or certainly once enjoyed.

[2] Thirdly, the Sirletian Menology, which today celebrates the birthday of Nicetas, is proved by more than one argument, that is, the first birth of this our Saint in heaven, also appoints his commemoration, as the printed Menaea likewise do, at the 13th of October; which seems to argue an ecclesiastical cult which then at least either ought to have been, or ought to be, paid to the Saint. Fourthly and finally, in the printed Menaea, both today and again on the 13th of October, Nicetas is adorned with the title of Saint and with two little verses, there being also added at the end, by which the divine mercy is implored through the prayers both of him and of the other Saints commemorated there with him on each day, this brief little prayer, not rarely accustomed to be used in the printed Menaea also elsewhere after some Saints have been reviewed: Ταῖς ἀυτῶν ἁγίαις πρεσβείαις, ὁ Θεὸς, ἐλέησον καὶ σῶσον ἡμᾶς· By their holy prayers (namely of Nicetas and the other Saints set down immediately before in the same place in the Menaea), O God, have mercy on us and save us; and it appears beyond doubt that all who are so celebrated in the printed Menaea are by this very fact venerated as Saints, unless perhaps in some particular case the contrary is established from elsewhere, as, for example, happens in the case of the Fathers or bishops of the VI ecumenical council, of all of whom the printed Menaea appoint a commemoration at the 14th day of September in the manner just set out, and yet not all of whom are venerated as Saints by the Greeks, as, so far as I think, is sufficiently clear of itself.

[3] he enjoys ecclesiastical, and that legitimate, cult among the Greeks. Nor is there reason for you to object that persons who are not Saints are also from time to time celebrated in the printed Menaea in the manner explained; for this is an argument only that sometimes even the unworthy are honoured as Saints by the Greeks; which indeed we confess, and how true it is is shown in the chronological History of the patriarchs of Constantinople prefixed to our Work, volume 1 of August, in more than one place, and especially on page 95 and the four following. But this blemish, with which the Menaea are infected, ought to be attributed to the schismatic Greeks who lived when the 11th century was about half-way advanced, or later, and inserted many favourers of the schism or other unworthy persons in the sacred Fasti of their church; wherefore, since the successors of Photius — who after the middle of the 9th century was the author of the deadly schism between the Greek and Latin church — in the see of Constantinople in the 10th century were not schismatics, as is agreed among the learned, and since the Saint, who, from what is to be said, ceased to live about the year 838, is also inscribed in the Basilian Menology, which was compiled in the same 10th century by order of the emperor Basil Porphyrogenitus, it appears most probable that the Greeks, then still Catholics, already then showed him ecclesiastical cult as a Saint; who certainly seem by no means likely to have done so if he had been unworthy of that honour. Hence further it now follows that the cult which Nicetas enjoys, or certainly once enjoyed, was legitimate, and that he himself is to be held a true Saint, especially since the eulogies setting forth the history of his life, with which he is celebrated in both Menologies, in the printed Menaea and in the manuscript Sirmondian Synaxarion, contain nothing at all which is either manifestly fabulous or unbecoming to a holy Man, as will be evident even from a mere inspection of the said eulogies. Of all these the more prolix is that which the printed Menaea furnish at the 13th of October.

[4] and by the eulogies, which are given here, in the Sirletian Menologies That one, therefore, lest the course of the matters to be treated be too much interrupted, I shall not insert in this Commentary, but shall subjoin at its end under the name of Acts, transcribing here in advance, meanwhile, the two little verses which it bears at its head, with a Latin version attached, and the other shorter eulogies of the Saint. Those little verses, with which the Saint is adorned also today in the same Menaea, run thus:

Θλίψεις ὑποστὰς εἰκόνων θείων χάριν Χαίρει χαρὰν Νικήτας, οἷαν οἱ νόες.

Having endured afflictions for the sake of the divine images, Nicetas rejoices with a joy such as the angels.

The eulogies which it pleases me now to transfer here are three in number, namely the Basilian, the Sirmondian and the Sirletian, so called here by me because the first is written today in the Basilian Menology, the second likewise today in the Synaxarion of Sirmond, and the third finally at the 13th of October in the Sirletian Menology, in which moreover our Saint, or rather his birthday in heaven, is also announced today briefly thus: On the same day (namely the 6th of October) the Birthday of our holy father Nicetas, patrician, of Paphlagonia, who in the confession of the holy images constantly bore many hardships and calamities. Behold now in what words each of the three said eulogies is composed. The Sirletian has thus: On the same day (the 13th of October) the commemoration of our holy father Nicetas, patrician, of the region of Paphlagonia, who, being studious of the divine letters and of piety, laboured very much for the cult of the holy images against their * assailants and the emperor Leo, and, many miracles having been performed, when he had foretold the day of his death, passed into heaven.

[5] The Basilian, from the translation which the edition of the Basilian Menology made at Urbino in the year 1727 exhibits, and in the Basilian, sounds in this manner: Our holy father and confessor of Christ Nicetas, a kinsman of Irene Augusta, was acceptable to her not so much on account of kinship as on account of his own virtue. For he so excelled in contests and exercises of the virtues that he was sent as the empress's legate to the holy second synod of Nicaea; in which office he conducted himself outstandingly and remarkably, as was pleasing to God. For he was most fit for accomplishing all things excellently. Wherefore, loaded with the honour of the patriciate, he is declared strategus of Sicily (that is, prefect, duke, or even praetor, as Du Cange explains at the words strategus, στρατηγὸς, in the Glossaries of middle and low Latinity and Greekness): and this province too being administered excellently, using much kindness especially towards widows and orphans, he returned home. But because Leo the Armenian, an iconoclast, had obtained the empire, having sent a notice of renunciation to dignity, riches, and all worldly glory, he is made a monk. When the emperor learned this, wishing to subject him to torments, he commanded that he should send the image of the Saviour, that he might burn it. But when he refused to do this, he banished him: and he, worn out in exile by many hardships, died.

[6] The Sirmondian is thus turned from the Greek tongue, in which it is written, as he is also celebrated in the Synaxarion of Sirmond, into Latin: He (St. Nicetas the patrician, as is premised) flourished under the most pious Irene, held in honour and love by her, as being her blood-relation, born of parents Gregory and Anna, sprung from Paphlagonia; and, being a eunuch, he surpassed many in prudence and experience of affairs. He was sent by the empress as legate to the second synod of Nicaea, and afterwards into Sicily on account of the difficulty of the affairs to be conducted there. Hence further he returned and undertook the monastic life. And when afterwards, many straits and persecutions having been endured for the holy images, first indeed under the most impious Leo the Armenian and afterwards under Michael and his son Theophilus, he had completed the seventy-fifth year of his age, he passed to the Lord, having performed many signs and miracles. Such are the three eulogies of the Saint mentioned above; which indeed, as will be evident to one inspecting them, contain nothing at all which either openly smells of the fables familiar to the Greeks, or casts an unfavourable suspicion on the sanctity of Nicetas.

[7] he is also recorded by Châtelain and other martyrologists of the Latin church, Wherefore, since nothing of this kind occurs either in the Saint's Acts or eulogy to be given below from the Menaea, or anywhere else, rightly indeed have those who composed these sacred Fasti given a place today to our Saint in the General Catalogue of the Saints who are not inscribed in the present-day Roman, in the Universal Martyrology and in the Sicilian Martyrology, namely Ferrarius, Châtelain and Ottavio Gaetani; the last of whom does not even distinguish the Saint's name with an asterisk, having declared just before the beginning of his Martyrology that in this manner the Saints are reviewed by him to whom public honours are paid; so that accordingly he too undoubtedly judged Nicetas honoured with ecclesiastical cult, from the Sirletian Menology and the Menaea, which he cites in the margin. But why did Baronius, who today brought St. Eroteis the martyr, already given above, and other Saints on other days from the Sirletian Menology into the Roman Martyrology, nevertheless abstain today from bringing into it our Saint, who, from what has been said, is recorded today in the Sirletian no less than Eroteis? The most learned man in all likelihood did this because he thought Nicetas, inscribed today in the Sirletian, the same as Nicetas, hegumen or abbot of Medicion in Bithynia, whom he had already inscribed in the Roman Martyrology at the 3rd day of April, at which accordingly we also treated of him in our Work. So I think, because the index added to the ninth volume of Baronius's Ecclesiastical Annals attributes to one and the same Nicetas whatever is narrated in the same volume either of our Nicetas or of Nicetas, hegumen of Medicion.

[8] nor ought he to have been omitted in the present-day Roman, But many things which are read in the eulogies mentioned above of our Nicetas are of such a kind that they by no means fit Nicetas of Medicion, and conflict with the Life of this holy abbot, most faithfully written by Theosterictus, his monk and disciple, and inserted among us in the first volume of April, from page 254 to page 266. To bring forward a few specimens of this matter out of many: our Nicetas, as his Sirmondian eulogy, transcribed here at number 6, reveals, had a father named Gregory; he put on the monk's habit at Constantinople, as the Acts to be given from the Menaea teach at number 2, in the monastery called Chrysonike; and, as the Acts to be given from the Menaea likewise teach, the Sirmondian eulogy also agreeing and the rest not opposing, he exchanged this mortal life for the immortal under Theophilus, son of Michael the Stammerer, who did not succeed his father in the empire before the year 829. But Nicetas, abbot or hegumen of Medicion, had a father named Philaretus, embraced the monastic life in the monastery of Medicion, situated in the maritime part of Bithynia on the Propontis, and at length under Michael the Stammerer, on the third day of the month Xanthicus, that is April, the Lord's day dawning, which chronological notes designate the year 824, died his last day, as Theosterictus, just cited, testifies to all these things among us in his Life, the first indeed at number 4, the second at number 8, and the third finally at number 48 and following. Moreover, our Nicetas is adorned with the title of Patrician in the Menaea, in the Sirletian and Basilian Menologies, as also in the Synaxarion of Sirmond; but that Nicetas of Medicion was not conspicuous for this dignity is abundantly clear from chapter 1 of his Life among us. Unless, therefore, we wish all credit to be wholly taken away from the Menaea and the other Fasti of the Greeks cited above, it is not to be doubted that our Nicetas is distinct from Nicetas, abbot of Medicion; so that Baronius ought not to have omitted the former today in the Roman Martyrology on the ground that he had already commemorated the latter at the 3rd day of April.

[9] Wherefore, the difference of our Saint from Nicetas of Medicion and his legitimate ecclesiastical cult being now sufficiently established, he was born about the year 763 in Paphlagonia. and the various eulogies with which Nicetas is adorned having been brought forward, I now set about discussing most of the things which occur about him both in these and elsewhere. That St. Nicetas was born in Paphlagonia, a province of Asia Minor, the Menaea, or the Acts to be given from them, hand down to memory at number 1. And this indeed appears sufficiently probable: for with the Menaea, besides Maximus Margunius, the Sirletian eulogy of the Saint transcribed here at number 4 also agrees, nor do the Sirmondian and the Basilian oppose, since the latter indeed is silent about the Saint's birthplace, while the former affirms that the Saint was begotten of parents sprung from Paphlagonia, adding also that they were called Gregory and Anna, which is omitted in the other monuments, as also the year of the Saint's birth, which likewise I do not find expressed in the Sirmondian either. But since the Saint, from what is to be said, departed from the living about the year 838, an old man of nearly seventy-five years, it follows that it befell him to be born about the year 763, as will be evident to one making the calculations. And so much of the place and year of St. Nicetas's birth; now we must discourse of his stock.

[10] That St. Nicetas drew his stock from Theodora Augusta, or the empress, Whether he draws his stock from the empress Theodora, the Menaea, or the Acts to be given from the Menaea, relate at number 1 from report alone, and add nothing further bearing on it. Φασὶ δὲ, ἀυτὸν (the words are the Menaea's) ἀπόγονον εἶναι Θεωδώρας τῆς

βασιλίσσης. And they say that he (St. Nicetas) was sprung from Theodora Augusta, that is, a grandson of Theodora Augusta. Wherefore, since Theodora, wife of the emperor Theophilus, was also born in the same region of the Paphlagonians in which, from what has been said, our Saint drew his first breath, as John Curopalates testifies in the Compendium of Histories, which, translated from the Greek tongue into Latin by Giovanni Battista Gabia, came out in print at Venice in the year 1570, page 15, there will perhaps be someone who suspects that St. Nicetas drew his stock from her. But since that empress did not marry the emperor Theophilus before the year 829 (consult Pagi in the Critica at this year, number 3), and was then still young, she must have been born at the very least thirty years after our Saint, as having been brought into the light, from what has been said, about the year 763; so that accordingly she certainly could not have Nicetas as grandson, or he draw his stock from her. But does there not anywhere occur one or another Theodora Augusta, different from the preceding, who flourished before St. Nicetas, and from whom accordingly he could have sprung? Unless someone should wish here, which however I do not think will happen, to have recourse to Theodora, wife of Constantius Chlorus after Helena was repudiated in the year 292, he will find no other Theodora Augusta who preceded our Saint in age than the consort of the emperor Justinian, taken from the living in the year 548. If therefore the Menaea rightly note that the Saint was sprung from Theodora Augusta, he must have drawn his stock from Theodora, wife of the emperor Justinian.

[11] But this, as far as I think, on the sole authority of the Menaea, [and whether he was sent as legate to the second council of Nicaea by Irene Augusta.] the other monuments being silent, will find credit with the utmost difficulty. It appears somewhat more probable that the Saint was joined by kinship to the empress Irene, who held the reins of the Eastern empire from the year 780 to the year 802: for this (consult numbers 5 and 6) is likewise handed down both in the Sirmondian Synaxarion and in the Basilian Menology, which is older than the Menaea, and it is also confirmed in some manner from this, that that empress pursued Nicetas with the highest favour when he had come to the court of Constantinople while still very young, as not only the Sirmondian and Basilian eulogies of the Saint, but most of all the very Acts to be given from the Menaea, at number 1, testify: and lest you perhaps deny all credit to these monuments here too, take this for some sort of confirmation of the matter: since our Saint is constantly adorned with the title of Patrician in absolutely all the sacred Fasti of the Greeks mentioned above, it appears most probable that he was, as is also asserted in the greatest part of them, raised to the dignity of the patriciate by Irene Augusta; which indeed is an argument of no small favour, and suffices here for the present purpose. But did the Saint enjoy so great favour with Irene, or did he at least so approve himself to this empress, that he was sent by her as legate to the second council of Nicaea, held in the year 787 for protecting and restoring the cult of the sacred images? So two of his eulogies, namely the Sirmondian and the Basilian, affirm at numbers 5 and 6; but the Menaea are deeply silent about this legation of the Saint, and rightly indeed, as far as appears. For in the Acts of the aforesaid council, extant in Labbe, volume 7 of the Councils, there are recorded as having been present at that council, as legates of the emperor Constantine and Irene his mother, only Petronas, ex-consul and patrician, and John, logothete of the military logothesion, that is, military treasurer, no mention at all being made anywhere of our Saint; wherefore, if not certainly false, it seems at least very doubtful that he was sent by the empress Irene as legate to the second council of Nicaea.

[12] He was most probably made prefect of Sicily by her. One must speak otherwise of the prefecture of Sicily, to which also both the Sirmondian and Basilian eulogies of our Saint Nicetas the patrician likewise teach that he was appointed by the empress Irene. For besides the fact that the printed Menaea also agree in that matter with both these eulogies, in the History of the body of St. Euphemia, virgin and martyr, often translated, written by Constantine, bishop of Tios in Paphlagonia, contemporary with our Saint, and published among us in volume V of September from page 274, it is reported at number 16 that Nicetas the patrician built in Sicily a temple to this holy martyr, in which also he caused her sacred hand to be placed; whence, since he does not seem to be distinct from our Nicetas, being contemporary with him, likewise a patrician, and praised for beneficence towards Sicily, it is not a little confirmed that the Saint held the prefecture of Sicily, and so the matter can be held as extremely probable. Nor does it stand in the way that the Nicetas who built the temple of St. Euphemia was surnamed Monomachus, as is handed down in the History just cited in the place cited; for that our Saint was not surnamed Monomachus cannot be argued from the sacred Fasti of the Greeks produced above, since these nowhere mention any surname that he had, and accordingly by no means prevent our Saint from being believed to have been surnamed Monomachus and to have been one and the same with the Nicetas who founded the temple of St. Euphemia in Sicily. Hence our Stilting, in the Annotations on the History of the Translation of St. Euphemia, already twice mentioned here, very rightly made our Saint the same as Nicetas the patrician who founded the temple of St. Euphemia, observing thus at his name: This Nicetas the patrician is inscribed in the Fasti of the Greeks on the 6th day of October, where in the Basilian Menology he is said to have been a blood-relation of Irene Augusta, and by her sent as legate to the II council of Nicaea, then prefect of Sicily, and to have administered affairs there excellently. At length he is said to have been sent into exile by Leo the Armenian, and to have died in it. These and other things about him can be examined at the said day, if his legitimate cult shall have been sufficiently established.

[13] So Stilting: and of the Saint indeed whose legitimate cult I have proved above, he did not help Nicephorus to invade the empire the things which he here declares are to be examined I have partly just examined, partly must still examine; which I now set about doing. Baronius in the Ecclesiastical Annals, volume 9, at the year 802, number 1, hands down thus to memory: Augusta (Irene) having been overthrown from the throne and reduced to the ranks, Nicephorus the tyrant invaded the empire. But how things went, hear first from the same Theophanes: But in the following year, which was the first year of Nicephorus, on the day before the Kalends of November, the eleventh Indiction, at the fourth hour of the night which dawns into the second weekday, the same Nicephorus, being patrician and general logothete, raised a tyranny against the most pious Irene, God indeed permitting it by ineffable judgements on account of the multitude of our sins, there co-operating with him Nicetas the patrician and domestic of the scholae, and Sisinnius the patrician, his brother, a man full of perjuries and frauds, and Nicetas Triphyllius. So Baronius; teaching the reader rather openly afterwards, in the very ample Index added to the aforesaid volume of his Work, unless perhaps he did not compose it himself, that our Saint helped Nicephorus, together with Nicetas Triphyllius, to invade the empire in the year 802 and to depose Irene Augusta; which indeed it might perhaps not undeservedly be contended that he did, from the text of Theophanes which the words of Baronius just transcribed include, if only it sounded thus in Greek in Theophanes as it does in Latin in the cited place of Baronius.

[14] But the matter stands far otherwise: for the Greek text of Theophanes, he did not help. the chronological notes being cut away, is expressed thus: Νικηφόρος πατρίκιος καὶ γενικὸς λογοθέτης ἐτυράννησεν κατὰ τῆς εὐσεβεστάτης Εἰρήνης, Θεοῦ μὲν συγχωρήσαντος ἀφάτοις κρίμασιν διὰ πλῆτος ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν, συνεργούντων δὲ ἀυτῶν Νικήτου πατρικίου καὶ δομεστίκου τῶν σχολῶν, καὶ Σισιννίου πατρικίου καὶ ἀδελφοῦ αυτοῦ, τῶν δολερῶν καὶ ἐπιόρκων Τριφυλλίων· But to these words not that interpretation which the words of Baronius recited above exhibit, but this one, as anyone not wholly unskilled in the Greek tongue will confess, fits: Nicephorus, patrician and general logothete, seized a tyranny against the most pious Irene, God indeed permitting it by His ineffable judgements on account of the multitude of our sins, but there co-operating with them Nicetas the patrician and domestic of the scholae, and Sisinnius likewise patrician, his brother, the deceitful and perjured Triphyllii. Now since here, as happens in Baronius, two Nicetases are not recorded, of whom the one was patrician and domestic of the scholae, the other surnamed Triphyllius, it certainly cannot be argued from the Greek text of Theophanes which I have now transcribed here, rendered into Latin as it ought to be, that our Saint was a helper to Nicephorus in deposing Irene, unless he can be proved to be one and the same with Nicetas Triphyllius. But this can be done on no ground at all: for Nicetas Triphyllius, as Theophanes teaches in the Chronographia, was killed in the year 803 by Nicephorus himself, who perished in the year 811 in the war against the Bulgars; but our St. Nicetas the patrician prolonged his life long after this year, as will be evident from what is now to be said.

[15] In the year, as seems more probable, 813 he put on the monk's habit, That the Saint, after he had administered the prefecture of Sicily excellently, gave himself to the monastic life (at Constantinople, in the monastery called Chrysonike, the Menaea alone add), the Acts to be given from the Menaea and all his eulogies transcribed here above, if you except the Sirletian, which is silent on the matter, hand down with unanimous consent. But as to the time of the thing done, which the Sirmondian eulogy does not express, the Basilian and the Menaea do not agree. And indeed the Menaea, or the Acts to be given from these sacred Fasti of the Greeks, hand down to memory at number 2 that the Saint put on the monk's habit under Michael Curopalates, surnamed Rhangabe, who presided over the Eastern empire from the year 811 to the year 813; but the Basilian eulogy of Nicetas relates that this was done at length under Leo the Armenian, who was first created emperor in the year 813. But since Leo the Armenian immediately succeeded Michael Curopalates in the empire in the year 813, it could easily have happened that the author of the Basilian believed by mistake that what had happened in this year under Michael was done under Leo the Armenian. Wherefore I should prefer here to stand by the Menaea, which, from what has been said, hand down that the Saint put on the monk's habit under Michael Rhangabe; yet so that I think it more probably happened not in the year 812 or the one immediately preceding, in which he first obtained the empire, but in the year 813, in which, Leo the Armenian succeeding, he lost it. And these are the things which occur to be said about the Saint's monastic life and the time at which he gave himself to it; next it is that I should now turn my discourse to the things which he suffered for the cult of the sacred images.

[16] afterwards he suffered many things for the cult of the sacred images, When the Saint, now made a monk, having learned the extreme impiety of Leo the Armenian towards the sacred images, had of his own accord left Constantinople, and had refused to hand over to the man whom he had sent the sacred image of the Saviour to be burned with fire, he was ordered not to move his foot from the suburban place to which he had withdrawn, being thus in a manner punished with exile for his piety, in

which, when afterwards, being compelled also to change his place from time to time, the persecution against the venerators of the sacred images raging most fiercely, he had been worn out by most grievous hardships, at length under the emperor Theophilus, being already more than seventy years old, he passed to the Lord, many miracles having been performed both in life and after death. So, nearly as to substance, the Acts to be given from the Menaea at number 2 and following; but that Nicetas was punished with exile by Leo the Armenian because he refused to hand over the sacred image of the Saviour to be burned with fire, and died in it worn out by many hardships, the Basilian eulogy alone hands down, no mention at all being made of the emperor Theophilus, under whom at length he departed from the living at a very great age. But indeed, since the Basilian does not expressly declare that the Saint exchanged life for death under Leo the Armenian, nor does the truth of the other things which it reveals in any way require it, I think that here again one must stand by the Menaea, which put together the death of our Saint with the reign of the emperor Theophilus, especially because the Sirmondian eulogy too agrees with the Menaea, affirming that the Saint, having endured many straits for the cult of the sacred images, first under Leo the Armenian, and then under Michael the Stammerer and his son Theophilus, at length passed to the Lord when he had already completed the seventy-fifth year of his age. But in what determinate year, and in what place, did this happen? That Nicetas closed his last day in a monastery which was situated by the sea, the Acts to be given from the Menaea hand down to memory at the last number.

[17] But since they determine neither the sea, nor the place of known situation beside which that monastery lay, and at length, about the year, as appears probable, 838, he died. I remain in doubt whether I can with sufficient safety determine that the Saint departed from the living near Constantinople, in whose suburban places the Menaea affirm that he lived for some while as an exile, the iconoclasts raging against the orthodox; and hence I ascribe him above in the title to Greece, ecclesiastical Greece namely, not by reason of his death, but of the cult which he enjoys, or once enjoyed, among the Greeks. But as regards the year in which he ended his life, I define it thus: the Saint, as I taught at number 15, more probably put on the monk's habit in the year 813; wherefore, since he had then, as the Acts to be given from the Menaea teach at number 2, already lived fifty years, and was, when he died, as the same Acts testify, the Sirmondian eulogy also supporting them, about seventy-five years old, it follows, as will be evident to one making the calculations, that about the year 838 he passed by a happy departure from the living to those above: and although this epoch of the Saint's death, as founded almost solely on the Menaea, of by no means undoubted credit, cannot be held as wholly certain but only as probable, it indeed does not appear to be doubted that Nicetas died his day under the emperor Theophilus, and accordingly after the year 828, about nine months after which he first began to preside over the Eastern empire; for this has its foundation not only in the Menaea but also in the Sirmondian eulogy, which moreover neither the Sirletian nor the Basilian opposes, as it is easy to gather from what has already been said above.

[18] Of what kind his Acts to be published are. For the rest, the things which I brought forward at number 16 about the hardships endured by the Saint for the cult of the sacred images are set forth more fully in the Acts which I am now about to subjoin to this Commentary, Annotations also being added as usual where it shall seem opportune; and that the studious reader may know beforehand of what kind they are, I think he must be forewarned about them thus: Although they are not, as I have already said above, openly fabulous or fictitious; nay indeed, although they hand down to memory nothing, or certainly almost nothing, which wholly shrinks from probability, yet they do not merit undoubted credit in those things which cannot be confirmed from elsewhere: for they are excerpted, as I have already noted, from the great printed Menaea of the Greeks, which, although they contain not a few things both probable and also excellently consonant with the truth, yet have very many things also mixed in, as is commonly known, which are either undoubtedly foreign to the truth, or suspect of falsity and drawn from wholly muddy sources; and who could determine for certain that the things which the Menaea reveal about the Saint, and which are read nowhere else, are not to be reckoned among these? Here now are the Greek Acts of the Saint themselves, with a Latin version added, which I myself prepared, because I found no other that pleased me sufficiently.

earum* their

ACTS FROM THE GREEK MENAEA,

Translated by Cornelius Bye.

Nicetas, confessor, in Greece. (S.)

From the Menaea.

Ὁ͂υτος γεννᾶται ἐν τῇ Παφλαγόνων χώρᾳ παρὰ ἐυσεβῶν καὶ φιλοθέων γονέων. Φασὶ δὲ ἀυτὸν ἀπόγονον εἶναι Θεοδώρας τῆς βασιλίσσης· ἐκδοθεὶς δὲ καὶ παιδευθεὶς ἐν τῇ βασιλευούσῃ εἰσῆλθη δεκαεπτὰ χρόνων ὑπάρχων. Εἰρήνης δὲ τότε τὰ σκῆπτρα τῆς βασιλείας κρατούσης καὶ τὸν Παῖδα ἀναμαθούσης ἐυνοῦχον εἶναι ὡς παρὰ τῶν γονέων ἐυνουχισθέντα, ἀνελάβετο, καὶ δι᾽ ὀλίγου πρῶτος ἐν τοῖς οἰκείοις πάντων γίνεται. Καὶ φθάσας τὸ τῶν πατρικίων ἀξίωμα στρατηγὸς Σικελίας προβάλλεται. Ἔκτοτε οὖν καλῶς καὶ θεαρέστως βιώσας καὶ βουλόμενος ἀποκαρῆναι, οὐ συνεχωρεῖτο παρὰ τῶν κρατούντων, τοῦτε Νικηφόρου καὶ τοῦ ὑιοῦ ἀυτοῦ Σταυρακίου.

[2] Ὕστερον δὲ κρατήσαντος τοῦ βασιλέως Μιχαὴλ, μόλις οὗτος παρακληθεὶς κατένευσε μοναχὸν μὲν γενέσθαι, τῆς πόλεως δὲ μὴ ἐξελθεῖν, ὰλλ᾽ είς την λεγομένην χρυσῆν πόρταν δοὺς ἁυτῷ μονὴν, την λεγομένην Χρυσονίκην, προσμένειν ἐκέλευσε. Πεντήκοντα δὲ χρόνων ἦν, καθ᾽ ὃν καιρὸν ἀποκαρεὶς, ἀνάδοχος ὁ βασιλεὺς τούτου γέγονεν. Ἐν τάυτῃ τῇ μονῇ διῆγεν ἄχρι τῆς βασιλείας Αέοντος τοῦ εἰκονομάχου. Ὡς δὲ ἑώρα τὰ κατὰ τῶν ἀγίων εἰκόνων γινομένα, ἐξελθὼν τῆς πόλεως εἰς προάστειον ἀπῆλθεν, ὅ ἀυτὸς τῇ μονῇ ἐδωρήσατο, καὶ συγκατέμιξεν ἐαυτὸν τοῖς ἐσχάτοις ἀδελφοῖς, συνεσθίων καὶ συγκοπιῶν ἀυτοῖς.

[3] Ἐπεὶ δέ τινες διαβολεῖς τῶ θεομάχῳ χαριζόμενοι προσήγγειλαν, εἰκόνα κεκτῆσθαι τοῦτον τοῦ Σωτῆρος, ἣν ἐκ πίστεως ἀπὸ Ῥώμης ἔλαβεν, ἀπεστάλη τῶν τῆς τάξεως ἀυτοῦ τίς, λόγοις οὐκ ἀνειμέροις *, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἀπειλαῖς ἐκφοβῶν καὶ ἀπαιτῶν δοθῆναι οἱ τὴν σεβασμίαν εἰκόνα. Ὡς δ᾽ οὐκ εἶχε τοῦτον καταπειθῆ, ὁψέποτε ἀποκρινόμενον, ὡς οὐκ ἐμὴ ἅυτη ἡ σεβασμία εἰκὼν, ἀλλὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ τοῖς ἱεροῖς τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀφορισθεῖσα κειμηλίοις, ἁρπάσας ἕτερον ἀδελφὸν ἐπὶ τὸ δειχθῆναι ἀυτῷ τὸ ζητούμενον, εἰσῆλθεν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, καὶ λαβὼν την σεβασμίαν εἰκόνα, ὡς μῖσος τὶ, ἔῤῥιψεν ἀτίμως ἐν τῷ βεριδαρίῳ ἀυτοῦ. Ὁ δὲ Ἅγιος, τοῦτο ἰδὼν, ἑκ βάθους ἐστέναξεν, ἀρχὴν πειρασμῶν τοῦτο λογισάμενος. Ἐπεὶ δὲ ἀποχωρεῖν ἔμελλεν ὁ ἀποσταλεὶς ἐξησφαλίσατο μηδόλως τὸν Ἅγιον ἐξέρχεσθαι τῶν ἐκεῖσε.

[4] Θεοφίλου δὲ ἑτέρου μετὰ ταῦτα τὴν βασιλείαν κατασχόντος θεομάχου, καὶ τούτου κατὰ τὰ τῶν ἁγίων εἰκόνων οὐκ ἀμελῶς μετερχομένου, ἀπεστάλη καὶ πρὸς τὸν Ὅσιον Θεοδόσιός τις ὅυτως εἰρηκὼς ἐνώπιον τῶν παρευρεθέντων· Ὁ βασιλεὺς κελεύει σοι δι᾽ ἐμοῦ ἢ τῷ πατριάρχῃ Ἀντωνίῳ κοινωνῆσαι καὶ τοῖς εἰκόσι μὴ προσκυνεῖν ἢ τῇ ἀυτῇ ὣρᾳ ἐξοριθῆναι * τῶν ὧδε· καὶ ὁ Ἃγιος· Τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ Θεοῦ μου ἐικόνα ού πάυσομαι ἀεὶ προσκυνεῖν, κἂν ὑμεῖς ἁπαρέσκησθε, τὸν δὲ Ἀντώνιον, εἴπερ ἐν τῷ καθεστηκότι εἰμὶ, οὐκ ὀνομάσω πατριάρχην, ἀλλὰ μοιχὸν. Λοιπὸν ἐξόριζε, σφάττε, ποίει, ὃ βούλει. Καὶ εὐθέως ἐξωσεν ἀυτὸν ἐκεῖθεν.

[5] Ὁ δὲ Ἅγιος τῷ Θεῷ εὐχαριστήσας, λαβὼν μεθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ τρεῖς ἀδελφοὺς εἰς ἕτερον προῆλθε προάστειον ἀγχοῦ που κείμενον, καὶ διαβιβάσας ἐκεῖσε τὴν ἁγίαν τεσσαρακοστὴν ἄχρι τῆς Πεντηκοστὴς, καταλαμβάνει τὸ παντείχιον. Ἐπεὶ δὲ δόγμα ἐξετέθη μὴ ὑποδέχεσθαι τοὺς φεύγοντας Χριστιανους, στενοχορηθεὶς ὁ Ἄγιος πρὸς ἐρίβολον ὑπέστρεψεν ὡς δὲ καὶ ἐκεῖσε διὰ τὴν τῶν Ἀγαρηνῶν ἔφοδον ἐδυσχέραινον , ἦλθε πρὸς ἀυτὸς τίς Νικόλαος προσγενὴς ὢν ἀυτῷ λέγων· ὀυ μικρὰν εὑρεῖν ἀνάπαυσιν, ἑίπερ ἀφικέσθαι βουληθῆ πρὸς τὸ παρ᾽ ἀυτῷ ὂν προάστειον Ζουλουπᾶς ὅυτως καλούμενον, ἐκεῖσε παρεγένετο.

[6] Ἀλλὰ μετὰ χρόνον τινὰ μήνυμα γέγονεν ἀυτῷ, ἢ κοινωνῆσαι, ἢ μετανάστην γενέσθαι. Μεταβὰς οὖν ἐκεῖθεν, ἀφίκετο πρὸς Κατισίαν, καὶ τοπίον μικρὸν εὐρὼν ἐξωνήσατο τοῦτο καὶ είς ὄνομα τῶν ἀσωμάτων δειμάμενος ναὸν, χρόνους ἱκανούς μετὰ τῶν συνόντων ἀυτῷ ἀδελφῶν καλῶς καῖ θεαρέστως διαβιβάσας ἐν ἀυτῷ, τελευταῖον είς τὸ παρὰ την θαλάσσαν ἀφίκετο μοναστήριον, ἐν ὧ καὶ τοὺς μοναχοὺς κατηχήσας καὶ ἐπευξάμενος, τὴν ἑαυτοῦ πρὸς Κυριὸν ἐκδημίαν προγνοὺς ἐξεδήμησε, πολλὰ καὶ ζῶν καὶ μετὰ θάνατον θάυματα πεποικὼς *, περὶ τὰ ἑβδομήκοντα πέντε ἔτη γεγονὼς.

The Saint, who had been born in Paphlagonia, held the prefecture of Sicily, He (St. Nicetas) was born in the region of the Paphlagonians of pious and God-loving parents. And they say that he was sprung from Theodora the empress ^b. Further, when he had been given to be instructed in letters, and had already been instructed in them, he came to Constantinople ^c being seventeen years old ^d. Further, since Irene then held the sceptre of the empire, and had understood that the Boy, as having been castrated by his parents ^e, was a eunuch, she received him into the palace, and in a short time he was made first among all the domestics, and, having been raised to the dignity of the patricians, was appointed prefect of Sicily ^f. Therefore, when from that time he had led an honest life pleasing to God, and wished to be shorn a monk, he did not obtain this from the rulers Nicephorus ^g and his son Stauracius.

[2] But when afterwards the emperor Michael ^h had obtained power, and at length, this office being laid down, he put on the monk's habit; being at length with difficulty entreated himself, he permitted him indeed to become a monk, but not to go out of the city, but ordered him to remain at the golden gate, giving him a monastery called Chrysonike ⁱ. And he was fifty years old when he was shorn a monk ^k, the emperor himself being his sponsor. He remained in that monastery until the reign of Leo the iconoclast ^l. But when he beheld the things that were being committed against the images, going out of the city, he withdrew to a suburban estate ^m which he himself had given to the monastery, and joined himself to the lowest of the brethren, eating and labouring with them.

[3] in which state when many things, first under Leo the Armenian, But when certain informers, obsequious to the enemy of God, reported that he had an image of the Saviour which he had taken away from the city ⁿ, a certain one of his rank was sent, to terrify him not with ungentle words but with threats, and to demand that the venerable image be given to him. But when he did not find him obedient to him, but at length answering that the image was not his but God's, and was kept laid up in the sacred treasury of the church, having seized another brother to show him what was sought, he entered the church, and, having seized the venerable image, threw it without reverence, as something execrable, onto his post-horse ^o. And when the Saint had seen this, he groaned from the bottom of his breast, conjecturing this to be the beginning of temptations. Further, when he who had been sent was about to go away,

he most severely ordered that the Saint should in no way move his foot out of that place.

[4] and afterwards under Theophilus But when after these things Theophilus, another enemy of God, had obtained the empire [p], and he himself was raging not sluggishly against the holy images, there was sent to the Saint also a certain Theodosius [q], who declared thus before those whom he found present: The Emperor commands you through me that either you communicate with the patriarch Antony [r] and do not venerate the images, or in this very hour you be driven hence into exile. And the Saint answered: I shall never cease to venerate the image of Christ and my God, even if you take it ill; and Antony, as long as I shall be among the living, I shall not name patriarch, but adulterer. For the rest, drive me into exile, kill me, do what you will. And at once he expelled him thence.

[5] for the cult of the sacred images But the Saint, thanks having been given to God, and three brethren having been taken with him, withdrew into another suburban estate situated not far from there, and when he had spent there holy Lent until Pentecost, he betook himself to a public hostel. But when an edict had been put forth that fleeing Christians should not be received in hostels, the Saint, reduced to straits, betook himself to a place called Eribolum [s]; and when there too he was ill at ease on account of the incursions of the Agarenes, a certain Nicholas, who was his kinsman, came to him, saying that he would find no moderate quiet if he would go over to his suburban estate called Zulupas; and he betook himself thither.

[6] [having suffered, he at length departed from the living, more than seventy years old.] But after some time it was signified to him that he should either communicate with the iconoclasts or withdraw from there. Going away from there, therefore, he came to Catisia, and, having found a small place, bought it; and when he had lived honourably and religiously for a good many years with the brethren who were with him in a temple built there by him under the name of the Incorporeal Ones [t], at length he came to a monastery lying by the sea; in which, when he had both instructed the monks and been assiduously free for prayers, having foreknown the end of his life, he departed [u], being about seventy-five years old, many miracles having been performed both in life and after death.

ANNOTATIONS.

p. This emperor did not obtain the Eastern empire immediately upon the death of Leo the Armenian, as these Acts of Nicetas might perhaps give someone a handle for supposing, but only after Michael the Stammerer, who governed it immediately after the murder of Leo the Armenian up to the year 829. More rightly therefore the Saint is handed down in the Sirmondian eulogy to have endured many things for the sacred images first under Leo the Armenian, then under Michael the Stammerer, and finally under Theophilus.

q. This Theodosius, as also Nicholas, who is mentioned below, is not known to me from elsewhere.

r. This heretic sat as patriarch of Constantinople from about the year 821 up to the year 832. Consult the chronological History of the patriarchs of Constantinople prefixed to volume 1 of August of our Work, number 616.

s. Of this place, as also of the suburban estate Zulupas, of Catisia and of the maritime Monastery, of which mention occurs below, I have been able to find notice nowhere else.

t. That is, of the angels.

u. This will probably have happened about the year 838. See the preliminary Commentary, number 17.

* ἀνειμένοις

* ἐξορισθῆναι

* ἐδυσχέραινεν

* αὐτὸν

* πεποιηκὼς