Sergius and Bacchus

ON SS. SERGIUS AND BACCHUS, MARTYRS, IN SYRIA,

In the third century or the beginning of the following.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTARY.

Sergius, martyr, in Syria. (St.) Bacchus, martyr, in Syria. (St.)

BY C. B.

§ I. The memory of the Saints in the sacred Fasti, and their public ecclesiastical cult.

Of the Martyrology which commonly passes under the name of St. Jerome, and which preceded in age all the other Martyrologies or hagiologies, the three copies presented by Fiorentini, [The Saints, who are found inscribed today in many hagiologies of the Greeks and Latins,] namely the Lucca, the Corbie, and, older than these, the Antwerp or Echternach, commemorate SS. Sergius and Bacchus today, though in the Antwerp one corruptly, the names of both having been fused into one by the copyists. The same is done also in the abridged Hieronymian copy of Reichenau, which exists inserted in volume VII of June of our Work, as also in two very ancient Calendars, one of Stavelot, the other of Verden, and in the Martyrology of the church of Auxerre, published by Martène in volume 6 of the most ample Collection of Ancient Writers. To these are added also, besides the Fragment of a very old Martyrology of the church of Tours in Martène, volume 3 of the Thesaurus of Anecdota, column 1590, which celebrates the Saints not today but on the following day, or the 8th of October: the ancient one which Génébrard made public in the year 1592; the Calendar of the Greeks, the Basilian, which seems to have been drawn up for the public use of the churches of Constantinople before the year 984; the now very well known Menologion; the Little or old Roman Martyrology; and, of the older ones which are usually called Classical, four Martyrologies of the Latins, namely those of Ado, Rabanus, Usuard, and Notker. Meanwhile, however, the one which is prefixed to volume 2 of March of our Work and has Bede as its author, and another which Wandalbert composed in metre, make no mention at all of SS. Sergius and Bacchus; as neither do some more abridged Hieronymian copies published in print by our predecessors in volume VII of June and in various other labours.

[2] But although this is so, are found inscribed in the hagiologies, some of the Hieronymian copies praised above, and other sacred records, which are nearly all known with certainty to be older than the eleventh century, and which with unanimous consent commemorate those two illustrious Champions today, are an argument by no means doubtful that they enjoyed great veneration in the Church, both Greek and Latin, before that same century; and that this did not cease, nay did not even decrease, with the lapse of time, is shown more than sufficiently by not a few sacred Fasti of later times, both Greek and Latin, in which the name of the Saints is likewise found inscribed. And among the later ones the principal (for I do not think it worth while to review them all) are the present-day Roman Martyrology and others which are most certainly more recent than the eleventh century, composed by Belinus, Greven, Maurolico, Galesini and Molanus; while among the earlier ones there chiefly deserve mention the Sirletian Menologion, the great printed Menaea of the Greeks, and other sacred Fasti or ecclesiastical books usually employed by the Greeks, which themselves too are all, if not certainly, yet most probably, more recent than the eleventh century. Further, the Greeks and Latins today celebrate Sergius and Bacchus not only in the sacred Fasti, their names having been entered in them, but also in the ecclesiastical Office.

[3] and have part in the ecclesiastical Office of the same, And first indeed, to begin with proving the matter as regards the Latins, in the Roman Breviary, in which the Office of St. Mark the Pope is set out to be recited today, a commemoration of our Saints is prescribed to be made, a prayer proper to them together with SS. Marcellus and Apuleius being assigned; and in the Mass usually recited on this day the Roman Missal sets forth not only a Collect but also a Secret and Postcommunion proper to those four Saints. As for what pertains to the Greeks, these today make not merely a commemoration of SS. Sergius and Bacchus but their very own Office, with scarcely anything but the elogia of Julian, Caesarius and Polychronius, who are celebrated later in the present-day Roman Martyrology, inserted, as anyone will find who has looked into the great printed Menaea of the Greeks, the Typicon which is marked with the name of St. Sabas, and the most recent Anthologion, printed in the year 1738. And these are the things which I have thought should be brought forward here in general concerning the cult of the Saints among the Greeks and Latins, intending to teach the reader more conveniently elsewhere the things which concern their special veneration among these and others in certain sacred places: before I do which, it must above all be noted further that not only among the Greeks and Latins, but also among the Slavo-Russians or Greco-Muscovites, the Copts, and above all among the Syrians or Chaldaeans, among whom they were crowned with martyrdom, both our holy Athletes are held in great honour and esteem.

[4] [they are likewise celebrated in the sacred Fasti of the Greco-Muscovites and others.] For in the Greco-Muscovite Ephemerides prefixed to volume 1 of May of our Work, in the Slavo-Russian Menologion of Sparwenfeld, which we keep in manuscript, and likewise in the Ruthenian Synaxary which Georg David, a priest of our Society, sent to us from Moscow in the year 1688, Bacchus and Sergius are marked together today. As for what concerns the Copts and Syrians, Sergius indeed, who, as I shall teach below, alone on this day ended his glorious contest for the faith by a happy death, is alone commemorated today, no otherwise than is done in the Ruthenian Calendar of Possevino, in the Gellone Martyrology in d'Achery, volume 13 of the Spicilegium, and in the abridged Hieronymian copy among us in volume VII of June, which is entitled the Labbe copy, in the Coptic Calendar which it is suspected was translated into the Latin language by Kircher, a priest of our Society, and likewise in another Coptic Calendar which we have translated roughly into the Latin language; but in a Coptic Calendar likewise, in Selden, On the Sanhedrins of the Ancient Hebrews, page 379, he is noted today too with Bacchus joined to him, who is there called by a name derived from the Coptic language Achasius, and in Hiob Ludolf in the sacred Fasti of the church of Alexandria Wachisus; and the same is done also in the Syriac or Chaldaic Calendar printed at Rome in the year 1624, and afterwards rendered into Latin and existing among us in manuscript, and that not only on this day but also, which is surely an argument that both our Saints are held in great veneration, as I have already said, especially among the Syrians or Chaldaeans, on the 9th of December, and again on the 21st of August, only a commemoration of them, however, being assigned to the latter day.

[5] And so I have now reviewed the principal sacred Fasti in which our Saints are celebrated, [The elogia with which this is done in the Usuardine and present-day Roman Martyrologies are recited,] with some variation, which I have not yet noted, occurring from time to time in their names. Here now are the two elogia with which this is done in the Usuardine and present-day Roman Martyrologies. The first runs thus: "In the province which is called Augusta Euphratensis, of the holy martyrs Sergius and Bacchus under the emperor Maximian; of whom Bacchus was beaten so long with raw thongs until, torn apart in his whole body, he sent forth his spirit in the confession of Christ: but Sergius, shod on his feet with nailed boots, when he remained fixed in the faith, sentence having been given, was ordered to be beheaded." And the second, which, as will appear from a comparison of both, is for the greater part composed from this one, is conceived in these following words: "In the province which is called Augusta Euphratensis, of the holy martyrs Sergius and Bacchus, noble Romans, under the emperor Maximian: of whom Bacchus was beaten so long with raw thongs until, torn apart in his whole body, he sent forth his spirit in the confession of Christ; but Sergius, shod on his feet with nailed boots, when he remained fixed in the faith, sentence having been given, was ordered to be beheaded; from whose name the place where he rests was called Sergiopolis, and is honoured by a frequent concourse of Christians on account of its splendid miracles." All and each of the remaining things with which Sergius and Bacchus are adorned in the other sacred Fasti enumerated above, whether elogia or announcements (for it will suffice to have noted them in their places in the course, if they offer anything worth noting), I do not think it worth while to set here before the reader's eyes; yet, in order to present to him in summary, at the very threshold of this Commentary, the things that are chiefly narrated of the Saints, I cannot but add besides the more prolix elogium of them furnished by Ado to the two others already given, the first of which Usuard abridged from it.

[6] It runs thus, then: "On the same day" (namely the 7th of October) "the birthday of the holy martyrs Julia, as also the more prolix one with which Ado adorned the Saints. Sergius and Bacchus, under the emperor Maximian; exalted by whose honours they were held illustrious in his palace. For Sergius was primicerius, and Bacchus secundicerius, of the school of the gentiles. Accused, therefore, by certain persons before the emperor of being Christians, they were summoned by the emperor to taste with him, as he sacrificed to Jupiter, of the sacrifices offered. The emperor, having entered the temple, tasted of the sacrifices, and, looking round, did not see Sergius and Bacchus: for they had not entered the temple. The emperor, therefore, sending soldiers from among those standing by him, ordered them to be brought in; and to them he said: As I see, you have become enemies of the gods. Approach the altar of great Jupiter and sacrifice, and eat of his sacrifices, as the others also do. Blessed Sergius and Bacchus answered: We have a true eternal king in heaven, Jesus Christ the Son of God. To Him we offer every day a holy and living sacrifice and a reasonable service; but stones and wood we do not adore. The emperor then, indignant, ordered them to be stripped of their cloaks and clothed in a woman's tunic, and dragged through the middle of the city to the palace, with chains placed on their necks. And when they had come to the palace, the emperor said to them: Most wicked men, do you know that the Christ whom you worship was the son of a carpenter, and that, before a lawful marriage was made, his mother procreated him of adultery done? To whom the Soldiers of Christ answered: You err, emperor; for He whom we worship is true God and eternal life, who made heaven and earth and the things that are in them.

[7] Ado adorned. "Maximian, therefore, angered the more by their truthful pleadings, ordered them to Antiochus the general

to be handed over, that he might bind them fast in the stocks. And when morning came, he sat in the praetorium, and Sergius and Bacchus were brought before him; and when he could bend them from their purpose neither by flatteries nor by threats, he ordered blessed Sergius to be received again into custody; but Bacchus to be stretched out and beaten with raw thongs so long that the beaters, wearied, gave out. And the beaters succeeding one another in turn, the glorious Martyr, in the confession of Christ, torn apart in his whole body, sent forth his spirit; and, the body being left to birds and beasts, Antiochus went away. But the Christians, coming secretly, took the Martyr's body and buried it in a certain cave. And on the following day blessed Sergius, brought out of custody, is presented to Antiochus; who, when he could not bend him with words, first had him shod with boots pierced with nails, and made him run nine miles before him. Afterwards, seeing that he remained fixed in his resolve, he ordered him to be beheaded; and the Christians then buried him in the same place. And a short time having intervened, they raised blessed Bacchus too from the place where he had been entombed and laid him in a place honourable for Martyrs beside St. Sergius; where also the virgin Julia, who consummated her martyrdom under the governor Marcian, associated with the Martyrs, rests buried." Such is the more prolix elogium with which Ado adorned SS. Sergius and Bacchus. And this indeed, as regards some of the heads of which it consists, the martyrologist made as a compendium from their more diffuse Acts; but from which? The following § will disclose it.

§ II. The Latin Acts, from which Ado adorned the more prolix elogium of the Saints, and of what kind are the other, Greek, Acts, and why both are to be published.

The Adonian elogium of the Saints from the Latin Acts, Twofold Acts of the Saints are now found: namely, some which are presented written only in the Latin language, and others Greek, which, first translated into the Latin language by Lippomano, were afterwards brought in at this day by Surius into the collection of Lives which he compiled, with no change at all introduced into Lippomano's translation. Of the Greek Acts there exist among us, in the codex marked ✠ MS. 193, two copies, agreeing exactly with each other, of which I do not know whence one was received, while the other is noted as taken from the Medici manuscript of the royal library at Paris; and of the Latin Acts Mombritius presents one copy or transcript in volume 2 of the Lives published by him, and we have three others in manuscript in as many manuscript codices, of which the first is marked Q. MS. 6, the second Q. MS. 7, and the third, finally, P. MS. 20. The two former of these three manuscript copies or transcripts agree excellently with each other, as also, if you except one place to be pointed out below, with the printed Mombritian copy, not only in substance and all circumstances, but almost in the very individual words in which these things are expressed, if you except a few variant readings which make little to the matter; but as regards the last of the same three manuscript copies of the Latin Acts, although this too agrees quite exactly with the two others and with the printed Mombritian copy in substance and circumstances, yet in the words in which these things are set out it differs very much from them. These things premised, I now answer what is here asked. It appears most probable, not to say undoubted, that Latin Acts, conceived in entirely the same, or certainly almost the same, words as those of which the three copies or transcripts already mentioned consist, one of which is presented by Mombritius and the other two in our codices Q. MS. 6 and Q. MS. 7, lit the way for Ado, and that from them the elogium of the Saints which I recited at numbers 6 and 7 was composed by him as regards some of the heads of which it consists.

[9] This opinion is settled by the fact that the expressions and phrases, and most of the words too, of which here a certain in which Ado comprised it are found also in those Latin copies of the Acts. That the matter may become manifest, I set forth a certain compendium of the same Acts, abridged from them, such as is presented in the Adonian elogium of the Saints, with points for the most part merely interposed where the things omitted in it occur, even greater licence in abridging being used than is fitting, of the kind that, from what will be said, occurs also in the Adonian elogium. "Then, therefore …" (I follow the readings of our codex marked Q. MS. 7) "Sergius and Bacchus were powerful in the palace, and were honourable with the emperor Maximian. Blessed Sergius indeed was primicerius … of the school of the gentiles… And blessed Bacchus was himself secundicerius of the same school of the gentiles… Through the envy, therefore, of the malignant demon … certain men … accused them … before the emperor of being Christians… Forthwith, therefore, the emperor called them together (namely, to sacrifice)… And he entered the temple … and sacrificed … and tasting of the sacrifices he looked round and did not see Sergius and Bacchus; for they had not entered the temple… The emperor, sending some of the attendants standing by him, ordered them … to be brought in. To them as they entered he said: As I see, … you wish to despise the imperial edict, having become transgressors and enemies of the gods… Approach … the altar of great Jupiter and sacrifice, and taste of the mystic sacrifices, as the others also do. And answering … Sergius and Bacchus said: … We have … a true eternal King in heaven, Jesus Christ the Son of God… To Him we offer every day a holy and living sacrifice and a reasonable service; but to stones and wood we do not sacrifice, nor do we adore them…

[10] compendium "The emperor, therefore, indignant, ordered … their belts to be cut, and, stripped of their cloaks, … clothed them in women's colobia ; and … ordered them to be dragged through the middle of the city to the palace, carrying very heavy chains on their necks… And when they came to the palace, the emperor called the Saints and said: Most wicked men …, do you know that the Christ whom you worship was the son of a carpenter, and that, before a lawful marriage was made, His Mother procreated Him of adultery done?… Answering … the most valiant Soldiers of Christ said: You err, emperor… He whom … you say was the son of a carpenter of adultery done, He is the Son of the true God, who with Him and through Him made all things, stretched out the heavens, founded the earth… Hearing these things, the emperor became full of fury, and … sent them to Antiochus the general… In the morning … the general sat in the praetorium, and … said: Let the envoys come in… And when the Saints were standing by … he said: … At least now sacrifice to the gods… The Saints, answering, said: … Your speech does not touch our souls… Then the general Antiochus, very angry, ordered blessed Sergius to be received again into custody; but blessed Bacchus to be stretched out and beaten with raw sinews until those who were beating him fell to the ground wearied. And when they were wearied with the labour, he ordered others to turn the holy martyr Bacchus over, and by these again to beat his belly… And while the Saint was being beaten, he gave up his soul into the hands * of the angels. And Antiochus, angered, ordered that his body should not be buried but thrown to the dogs, beasts and birds; and rising he withdrew… And when evening came, certain of the Brethren dwelling there in caves, coming down, took his holy body, … and buried him in one of their caves.

[11] is given, "On the following … day, the general being about to go out from the fortress of Barbalissus to the fortress of Sura, he ordered blessed Sergius also to follow, and besought him to sacrifice… When, therefore, they came to the fortress of Sura, … Antiochus called blessed Sergius to him into the praetorium, saying to him: … If … you will not sacrifice … I will subject you to the sharpest punishments. Blessed … Sergius said: Do what you will… The general … therefore called the assistant of his office and said: Put on him quickly boots pierced with long nails, leaving their nails upright; and when they were being put on him, Antiochus, sitting in a carriage, ordered him to run before him, commanding that the beasts should be driven quickly as far as the fortress of Tetrapyrgium; and this fort is nine miles distant from Sura… And when they had come to the fortress of Tetrapyrgia, Antiochus the general said: I wonder at you, Sergius, how, tried in so great an office, you have now been able to bear such heavy punishments. And the holy Martyr of Christ answering said: Your punishments are not bitter to me, but sweet above honey and the honeycomb… Antiochus, therefore, … seeing that he persisted fixed and immovable in the faith and confession of Christ, gave such sentence against him:… This man the laws command to be punished with the sword… The apparitors, therefore, coming, put a rope between his lips, and taking him from the midst of the council-chamber led him away to be put to death by the sword… When they had come to the place in which Sergius, martyr of Christ, was to be consummated, … signing himself, and bending his knees, he was beheaded… Certain persons gathered up his body, and, burying it excellently, laid him in the same place in which he had also suffered."

[12] Such is the compendium of the same Acts, abridged from the mentioned Latin Acts of the Saints, as regards some things, not however which it pleased me to present here. Compare it now with the Adonian elogium recited above, and you will see that not a few expressions or phrases which are in the latter are found also in the former, and that the latter was therefore woven by Ado from the former as regards some of the heads of which it consists. And I say, as regards some of the heads of which it consists: for not all the things which are related in the Adonian elogium are found related in the praised Acts also. The elogium ends with these following words: "And a short time having intervened" (namely from the martyrdom of St. Sergius) "they raised blessed Bacchus too from the place where he had been entombed and laid him in a place honourable for martyrs beside St. Sergius; where also the virgin Julia, who consummated her martyrdom under the governor Marcian, associated with the Martyrs, rests buried": but in the Acts there occurs no mention either of Julia or of the body of St. Bacchus having been translated a short time after the martyrdom of St. Sergius from the place where it had been committed to the earth to the place where St. Sergius had obtained a tomb. Nor does the Elogium seem to agree sufficiently everywhere with the Acts. For it (go to number 7) has thus: "Maximian, therefore, angered the more by their" (namely of St. Sergius and Bacchus) "truthful pleadings, ordered them to be handed over to Antiochus the general, that he might bind them fast in the stocks. And when morning came, he sat in the praetorium, and Sergius and Bacchus were brought before him."

[13] And in this way it is not obscurely indicated that on the day next following the command as regards all things, was woven. by which Maximian ordered our Saints to be handed over to Antiochus the general, they were brought to him; which certainly by no means agrees with the Latin Acts mentioned above, which lit the way for Ado. For according to what is narrated in these, as also in the Greek, Maximian was then distant from Antiochus by a journey of several days, nor were the Saints brought to Antiochus before they had travelled a very long way. It must be, therefore, that Ado here, either ancient records,

distinct from the aforesaid Acts, followed, which, however, I do not think; or else, which I deem far more probable, abridged these not aptly enough, omitting more freely than was fitting absolutely everything which they maintain intervened between Maximian's command and the Saints' coming to Antiochus. Less contrary to the said Acts is the licence which the holy martyrologist of Vienne used besides in setting out the punishments which St. Sergius is related in the same at length to have undergone. For although he makes mention of only one occasion on which Sergius, shod with nailed boots, was compelled to run, yet he suggests nothing from which it necessarily follows that this was not done twice, as is related in the Acts. However these things may stand, it is sufficiently plain from what has already been adduced that Ado wove the elogium transcribed above, with which he adorned the Saints, from the Latin Acts so often praised, as regards some of the heads of which it consists.

[14] Hence, further, it now follows that those Latin Acts surpass in antiquity the Greek Acts existing in our codex marked ✠ MS. 193, [Those Latin Acts, as also the Greek ones of Metaphrastes, were received from Greek] and mentioned above. For these, as Leo Allatius rightly teaches on the writings of the Simeons, page 127, have as their author Simeon Metaphrastes, who is known with certainty not to have flourished before the tenth century; whereas Ado, for whom, from what has been said, the former lit the way, born about the year eight hundred, departed from among the living in the year 875, as our Du Sollier teaches from Mabillon in his Preface to Usuard, number 150. But you will inquire: were, then, the Acts of our Saints written in Latin before they were in Greek? That indeed does not appear so to me. For since, as I taught above, the Latin Acts which exist in Mombritius and in our two codices marked Q. MS. 6 and Q. MS. 7 agree with the Latin Acts likewise existing in another codex of ours, which is marked P. MS. 20, in substance and circumstances together, but not in the words in which these are expressed, it appears most probable that this happened from this, that Greek Acts existed before those Latin ones, and that two different writers each translated them into the Latin language in his own style. And I judge it most probable that not only the Latin Acts just mentioned flowed from such older Greek Acts, which have now perished, but also the Greek Acts still existing among us, which, as I have already pointed out, Metaphrastes composed. For these agree excellently in substance with the Latin Acts which, as I have already said, seem to have been received from older Greek Acts no longer existing. Nor is it an obstacle that they set out this substance, as also the circumstances, some of which, less probable, they even omit, more briefly. Far be it, too, that you should think otherwise because they at times wholly pass over the more prolix discourses which are fastened in the Latin Acts upon Sergius and Bacchus, or upon Maximian or even Antiochus the general, or merely indicate that they were held, or certainly present them far more abridged.

[15] older ones, which have now perished; For those Acts, as has already been said, were woven by Metaphrastes; and this writer's only aim, as our Papebroch declares on the 18th of April in the Annotations on the Life of St. Eleutherius, in composing and collecting the Acts of any Saints whatever, was that the things which were read in certain Greek churches not without the disgust of the prudent, on account of rusticity or prolixity of style, might, being drawn out more briefly and neatly in his own style, displease less. But, someone will object, one circumstance also, to be mentioned below and improbable, which is absent from the aforesaid Latin Acts, is found in the Acts worked up by Metaphrastes. I confess, it is so: but what then? It may be either that, although Metaphrastes composed his Greek Acts from the same older Greek Acts from which the Latin Acts were woven, yet the copy of them which this writer, who was not wont to augment the Acts of the Saints that he polished with fabulous or improbable circumstances, had at hand was interpolated in that part; or that the Latin Acts themselves, or rather the copies of the older Greek Acts from which these were drawn, laboured under this fault. The Latin Acts of our Saints, as they exist in Mombritius, have thus at the beginning: "Then, therefore" (namely, Maximian reigning), "like certain earthly stars in respect of the confession of the faith of our Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ, Marcellus, Apuleius, Sergius and Bacchus were powerful in the palace, and were honourable with the emperor Maximian"; and although it is not altogether certain that SS. Marcellus and Apuleius, already given on this day, who in these words are related to have flourished together with Sergius and Bacchus under Maximian, were crowned with martyrdom in the first century, before this emperor's age, this nevertheless appears sufficiently probable, and those two Saints are joined with SS. Sergius and Bacchus neither in the Greek Acts adorned by Metaphrastes nor in the Latin Acts as these are presented in our three codices marked Q. Ms. 6, Q. Ms. 7 and P. Ms. 20.

[16] Wherefore I judge that the Latin Acts which Mombritius furnishes, and these not by a contemporary writer, in the place produced, are not only foreign to the truth but also interpolated by a writer of a later age; and if it were established that the Latin Acts of the three codices of ours just mentioned were somewhere infected with a like blemish, I would rather persuade myself that the hardly probable circumstance which Metaphrastes furnishes, from what has been said, was intruded by a like interpolator into the copy of the same Greek Acts which lit the way for this writer, than that it was omitted by an interpolator of a more recent age in the copies of the Older Greek Acts from which these were received. But since the matter stands otherwise, I judge it more probable that that circumstance was not omitted, through the fault of a more recent interpolator, in the copies of the older Greek Acts from which the Latin copies of our said three codices were received; and I now inquire into the time at which these Greek Acts were originally written. In the Latin Acts of our three codices just mentioned again, which were drawn from these, as has been said, it is narrated near the end that a chasm was prodigiously made, after the martyrdom of this Saint, in the place where St. Sergius was crowned with martyrdom; and then, a few things intervening, it is subjoined: "And so" (the words of the Acts are those in our codex Q. MS. 7) "that place has remained until the present day, containing by the divine will the signs of antiquity." Moreover, a little after, in the same Latin Acts, with which the Greek also, written by Metaphrastes, agree as regards substance, these words follow: "After a long time, then, religious men, stirred by zeal for Christ, began to despoil the body from its place, coming from the fortress of Sura, as some most precious treasure; but St. Sergius did not permit his body to be secretly translated, which had been publicly punished with triumphal punishments for the confession of Christ"; and these two texts in no way argue that the author of the older Greek Acts, at all events, from which they were drawn, flourished at the time in which the Saints, their blood shed for Christ, obtained the palm of martyrdom.

[17] But how much time indeed had elapsed after the happy passage of the Saints to heaven when he set his hand to the work but either in the fifth century, than which they are certainly not earlier, in which he comprised their martyrdom? In the same Latin Acts, with which again those composed by Metaphrastes agree at least as regards substance, after the words just recited, some others still which have no bearing here being adduced, these following are subjoined: "As the Religion of our Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ gradually advanced, therefore, most holy bishops, fifteen in number, coming together into one, built near the fortress of Rhuzafata a cemetery worthy of his confession, and translated there the body of the holy Martyr" (namely Sergius), "and laid it in the same martyrium on the same day on which he suffered, the seventh day of the month of October. Many salvations, finally, and miracles are wrought wherever his holy relics may be, especially at the tomb where he had previously lain." Alexander, bishop and metropolitan of Hierapolis in Syria Euphratensis in the fifth century, as I shall teach below, built a church in the place where St. Sergius had been crowned with martyrdom, three hundred pounds of gold being spent on that building. That the discourse in the words just transcribed here is about this sacred building, which the said Alexander, metropolitan of Hierapolis, also consecrated with solemn rite, when it had been built by him, many bishops of his province assisting, and adorned by laying in it the sacred remains of St. Sergius, appears most probable; and that the older Greek Acts of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, in which these things were originally noted, were therefore not written before the fifth century.

[18] [were written either as the fifth century was growing old, or as the sixth was already passing,] But was this done in this very century, or later? The place or village where, as I have just said, Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, erected a church to St. Sergius in the fifth century was afterwards, from what will be said below, called Sergiopolis in honour of this holy Martyr, whereas previously it was called Resapha or Rosapha; and since Procopius, a writer of the sixth century, teaches this in book 2 of the Buildings, chapter 9, this must certainly have been done before the seventh century. Moreover, the church built to St. Sergius by Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, was decorated in the sixth century with precious gifts by the emperor Justinian I, and even by Chosroes himself, the heathen king of the Persians, son of Hormisdas, from singular veneration toward the holy Martyr, when he had experienced him beneficent toward himself more than once, as I shall teach below. Wherefore, since the Acts of the Saints nowhere mention this matter, and nowhere call the place where St. Sergius both consummated his martyrdom and obtained a tomb Sergiopolis, but everywhere the Greek indeed, adorned by Metaphrastes, call it Resapha, and the Latin, the name a little corrupted, Rutzaphata, I conjecture that the older Greek Acts, from which these seem to have been drawn, as I have taught, were most probably composed before the seventh century; and all that has already been said makes me think that he would perhaps not stray far from the truth who should determine that they were adorned either as the fifth century was growing old or as the sixth was already passing. However that may be, since they speak indeed of the church mentioned above, built in the fifth century, as of a thing accomplished some while before, and the Saints, from what will be said, were crowned with martyrdom either at the end of the third century or at the beginning of the following, it appears sufficiently certain that they were worked up at least a century and a half after the happy passage of our Saints to heaven.

[19] [and hence the others which were woven from these do not merit undoubted credence:] Hence, further, it now flows that those which were woven from them, both the Latin and the Greek Metaphrastic ones, are certainly not such as to win for themselves certain and undoubted credence. Nor are they only destitute of sufficient antiquity in respect of the source from which they arose, but they are also commonly held in no great esteem by the learned. Baronius, who both the Mombritian Latin Acts and the Greek

Metaphrastic Acts had at hand, writes thus in the Annals at the year 309, the last number: "In Upper Syria, which was called Augusta Euphratensis, Sergius and Bacchus, most illustrious martyrs, fell; whose memory, by the power of miracles, was spread not only among Christians but also among unbelievers, as we shall say in its place. Their Acts are extant, but in some things to be corrected." So he, plainly acknowledging that the Acts of our Saints which he saw were not entirely free from every blemish. Nor do Tillemont and Baillet honour the Metaphrastic Acts, which alone they saw, with a more favourable judgment. Meanwhile our Papebroch perhaps judged the Latin Acts to be less faulty than the Greek adorned by Metaphrastes. Hear him speaking of SS. Sergius and Bacchus in his Annotations at this day on the Greco-Muscovite Ephemerides prefixed to volume 1 of May: "These Martyrs," he says, "of Augusta Euphratensis, most celebrated throughout the whole world, were also inscribed in the ancient Fasti of the Latins. We have Greek Acts, but polished by Metaphrastes, so that perhaps the old Latin ones are more genuine." And indeed, although the Acts of the Saints, as our Stilting rightly teaches in volume 8 of September, in the Commentary prefixed to the Acts of St. Gregory the Armenian and his companions, number 52, are not straightway rightly rejected as spurious and fabulous because they have been polished by Metaphrastes, yet the Latin Acts of SS. Sergius and Bacchus may in some measure seem more genuine than the Greek Acts of the same polished by Metaphrastes, for this reason, that they everywhere express far more accurately than the Metaphrastic Acts do the older Greek Acts from which, as I taught above, they were drawn no less than those which Metaphrastes adorned, as it is easy to gather from what has already been said above. But do they therefore merit even greater credence than the Acts polished by Metaphrastes?

[20] In the Greek Acts which have Metaphrastes as their author, the Metaphrastic meanwhile on some head than the Latin Acts. it is narrated at number 13 that SS. Sergius and Bacchus were sent by the emperor Maximian to Antiochus the general in Syria, to be drawn away from the faith, or otherwise to be afflicted with the heaviest torments and even with death itself; and, the letter which Maximian gave to him on that occasion having been recited, it is subjoined: "When the soldiers had received this letter and the holy Men, they set out on the way. And certain of the servants, overcome by a like zeal for piety and by goodwill toward their Masters, followed them also, as wishing to serve God not with their bodies only but also with their souls. And they also heard the saints conversing among themselves and saying that on the night on which they went out of the city of the Romans a certain divine vision appearing bade them be confident and of good courage for the contest"; and from these words it appears it must be gathered that the Saints were sent by the emperor Maximian from Rome, or at least from Constantinople, which among the Greeks was commonly called New Rome from the time of Constantine the Great, to Antiochus the general in Syria; which certainly, since no emperor named Maximian reigned at the same time both at Rome or Constantinople and in Syria, can with great difficulty be understood as consonant with the truth, and therefore constitutes the circumstance which I mentioned at number 15 as hardly probable. Wherefore, since the Latin Acts of the Saints do not labour under this difficulty, to which others too might be added, they may in some measure seem, on this head at least, to merit greater credence than the Greek Metaphrastic ones. But they contain other things, also hardly probable, on account of which they may deservedly seem inferior in credit to the Metaphrastic Acts, from which these things are absent.

[21] For, having narrated the martyrdom of St. Bacchus, they presently subjoin: [and these on the other hand on another head may seem worse than the Metaphrastic.] "But Antiochus, angered, ordered that his body" (namely St. Bacchus's) "should not be buried, but thrown out from the camp to the dogs and birds; and rising he withdrew. And when his body had been thrown out far, a multitude of beasts gathered and surrounded him, but the birds flying above did not permit the cruel beasts to touch him, and they held on guarding him until the time of night. And when evening came, certain of the brethren dwelling there, coming down from their caves, took his holy body, being permitted by the beasts as by certain rational men, and buried him in one of their caves." That even fierce beasts abstained from touching the bodies of holy Martyrs is read in genuine Acts of Martyrs too; but that beasts were prevented by birds from touching them I have not yet found in Acts approved on every side, nor do I think that this prodigy will easily find credence with anyone. But here is yet another thing which the same Latin Acts furnish, and which appears not much more credible. After the martyrdom of St. Sergius these following words are subjoined in them, some other things being interposed which I do not think should be recited here: "And the place in which the blood of the holy Martyr was received, being split, made a great chasm, God so disposing, in order that those who wallowed like swine in the mire, through terror of the chasm they had seen, should not dare to approach and trample upon the blood of the holy Martyr in it." Other things, on account of which besides the Latin Acts of the Saints may seem to be of worse credit than those which were written by Metaphrastes, I pass over, and I now bring forward the principal ones, which may teach what is to be determined in general both of these and of those.

[22] What things are to be disapproved both in these and in those, Both the Greek and the Latin Acts necessarily require, as I shall teach below, that SS. Sergius and Bacchus were slain for the faith in Syria by order of the emperor Maximian, a general persecution against the Christians having been set in motion; wherefore, since at that time certainly no Maximian who was either emperor or even only Caesar reigned in Syria, it must be either that the martyrdom of our Saints did not happen in the said general persecution, or that what was to be ascribed to Maximin, who from the year 305 up to the year 313 ruled in Syria partly as Caesar, partly as Augustus, is wrongly attributed in the praised Acts to Maximian, who, as Tillemont teaches in volume V of the Ecclesiastical Memoirs, page 492, is not rarely confused with the said Maximin. Moreover, more prolix reasonings, bearing some appearance of a disputation, which are fastened either upon our Saints or upon the emperor Maximian or finally upon Antiochus the general, occur frequently both in the Greek and in the Latin Acts (less, however, in the former, because it was Metaphrastes's care to abridge the older Greek Acts which he had at hand): which you would find with the greatest difficulty in Acts of more approved credit. Nor do the frequent prodigies which occur in them commend the credit of the Acts, either Latin or Greek, and particularly the apparitions by which the Saints were divinely strengthened to endure every most grievous torment; for although similar things may be read in the Acts of other Martyrs also, which are by no means suspect, yet frequent prodigies related in any Acts whatever detract not a little from their worth and credit if, as happens here from what has been said above, they are known to have been committed to writing not by a writer of the same age in which the martyrs whose Acts they are flourished, but only by one of a later age, whence he drew his material being unknown.

[23] and why both are nevertheless to be published. But whatever, in the end, the Acts of our Saints may be, since they nevertheless comprise some things also, especially as regards the place and manner of the martyrdom with which they were crowned, which, as will become plain from what is to be said in the course of this Commentary, appear exceedingly consonant with the truth, it has seemed good to present them in print, divided into chapters and numbers according to our custom, at the end of the Commentary, to the reader, who will thus be able more easily to judge from the inspection of them whether what we have here discoursed concerning the Acts of the Saints is true or false; and indeed not only the Latin but also the Greek, which, since they have not hitherto, so far as I know, been published in Greek, are perhaps more desired by some than the Latin. I am moved to this besides by the fact that, since the older Greek Acts, from which Metaphrastes adorned other Greek ones, are accurately expressed in the Latin Acts of the Saints, as it is easy to draw out from what has been said above, it will thus come about that anyone may perceive from a comparison of these with the Acts adorned by Metaphrastes that this writer, when he undertook to set out the older Lives of the Saints in his own style, did not always do so in such bad faith as some would have believed. I shall further carry the matter into execution in this way. The Latin Acts indeed, because from what has been said they surpass the Greek in antiquity, I shall publish in the first place, from our codex Q. MS. 7, a collation having been made of them with the printed Mombritian Acts and with the others which exist in our two codices Q. MS. 6 and P. MS. 20; and in the second place I shall print the Greek Acts which exist in our codex ✠ Ms. 193, and which are noted as received from the Medici codex of the royal Library at Paris, with the Latin translation which, as I have already taught, Lippomano adorned, added opposite. Further, to the Acts both Greek and Latin I shall join Annotations according to our custom, so that the variant readings also that are more worth noting, if they have not already been noted in the margin, may be assigned, and the things that are obscure may be elucidated, if this has not been sufficiently done in the Preliminary Commentary.

* Mombritius: colobia

* ligati bound men

* otherwise: in manus into the hands

§ III. The military condition of the Saints, the place, manner, and time of their martyrdom, and other circumstances.

That the Saints were in fact, as is related in the Acts, That SS. Sergius and Bacchus were soldiers by condition, and indeed not of inferior rank, their Acts both Greek and Latin indicate in more than one place. And first indeed the Latin have thus at the beginning: "Sergius and Bacchus were powerful in the palace, and were honourable with the emperor Maximian. Blessed Sergius indeed was primicerius and chief of the school of the gentiles… And blessed Bacchus was himself secundicerius of the same school of the gentiles." With the Latin Acts agree not only the Adonian elogium of the Saints, which was drawn from these, as I taught above, but also the Sirletian Menologion, and the encomium occurring at this day in the great printed Menaea of the Greeks, conceived at the beginning in these words: Ὁ μὲν Σἑργιος πριμμικήριος ἦν σχολῆς τῶν γεντιλίων, ὁ δὲ Βάκχος σεκουνδικήριος τῆς ἀυτῆς σχολῆς· "Sergius indeed was primicerius of the school of the gentiles, and Bacchus secundicerius of the same school." In the Greek Acts of the Saints, woven by Metaphrastes and, as I have said, to be published here, κεντιλίων is read for γεντιλίων, and Lippomano rendered this word in Latin by the genitive word Centiliorum.

[25] But that in the said Greek Acts, or rather in both copies of them which, as I have already taught, exist among us, and likewise in the other which Lippomano used, soldiers by condition, and indeed κεντιλίων was certainly wrongly written for γεντιλίων by error from the carelessness of the copyists, becomes manifest, first indeed from this, that in absolutely all the other records in which the military condition and dignity of the Saints is openly expressed, not κεντιλίων but

γεντιλίων is written; and then also from this, that the first of these two words is found to have no signification whatever attached to it, whereas the second really has one attached, as will become plain from what is now to be said. Gentiles, as Hofmann teaches in his continued Lexicon of Antiquities at the word Gentilis, from the ancient Notitiae of the Roman empire and from Ammianus Marcellinus, was the name given by the Romans to those who, called barbarians by the same people elsewhere, served in their armies as their federates, or who passed under Roman laws either voluntarily or by surrender. And this is the signification which the word Gentilis has in the Acts of our Saints. Further, Valois adds in his Annotations on Ammianus Marcellinus, book 7, chapter 7, that those gentiles held a place among the palatine schools, that is, among the military troops destined chiefly for the guard of the imperial palace; and that there also existed such a school or military troop of gentiles, of which St. Sergius is maintained to have been primicerius and Bacchus secundicerius, is indicated clearly enough in their Latin Acts.

[26] not of the lowest rank, perhaps, were And hence it now follows that, since the primicerius of any order whatever, as Du Cange teaches at this word in the Glossary of middle and low Latinity, is he who holds the first place in it, and the secundicerius he who holds the second, it appears altogether undoubted that our Saints, whom the present-day Roman Martyrology calls noble Romans, were indeed soldiers by condition, and of not the lowest rank, if their Acts and the other records praised above are regarded, to which nothing proves that credence must here either certainly be denied or certainly be given. Nor is there reason why anyone, to prove the contrary, should reply that the school of the gentiles consisted of barbarians, or of those who had been born in provinces not subject to Roman rule, and that it therefore does not seem probable that Sergius was its primicerius and Bacchus its secundicerius, both being, as is related in the Acts, Romans by birth. For granted that all the common soldiers of the said school of the gentiles, and the officers themselves of inferior rank, were enrolled from among barbarians, it nevertheless seems by no means foreign to the appearance of truth that Romans were always, or at least from time to time, appointed to discharge the superior offices in a school or military troop of this kind, so that the emperor might be more secure of its loyalty. The Latin Acts further add that our Saints had such influence with the emperor Maximian that at their request he created a certain Antiochus general of Augusta Euphratensis. The Greek Metaphrastic Acts agree, yet in such a way as to note that Antiochus was created general not of Augusta Euphratensis but of the East. But since he who was general of the East, as I understand from the ancient Notitiae of the Roman empire, also had command of Augusta Euphratensis, it is doubtful whether the Greek here surpass the Latin Acts, or the latter on the contrary the Greek. Nor would I dare to assert as true what is asserted, as has been said, both in these and in those, of the power of the Saints with Maximian. Now, that what is to be said afterwards may be more clearly understood, let us turn our discourse to the arena in which the Saints entered upon their glorious contest for the faith.

[27] Augusta Euphratensis, which by Pliny, Strabo, Ptolemy, and other writers earlier than the fourth century of Christ is called Commagene or Comagene or even Comagena, Notice of Augusta Euphratensis, and of two places situated in it, is a province of Syria, called Euphratensis indeed because it is situated by the Euphrates; and Augusta because it happened, perhaps by the order of one of the emperors, who are also called Augusti, that its name was changed. Le Quien, in his Christian East, volume 2, column 926, ascribes that change to Caesar Augustus, by whom Comagena was reduced into a Roman province. But although, if Panciroli rightly notes in his Commentary on the Notitia of the Eastern empire, chapter 113, Commagene received the name Augusta from Augustus, yet it long retained its ancient name of Comagene after the age of Augustus, and is first found called Augusta Euphratensis or by a related name by Sextus Aurelius Victor and Ammianus Marcellinus, writers of the fourth century. Wherefore this opinion of Le Quien appears to me hardly probable, especially since Tacitus, a contemporary writer, records in book 2 of the Annals, chapter 56, that Comagene was first reduced into a Roman province by Tiberius. However that may be, our Saints, from what will be said, were crowned with martyrdom in that province, and therefore in Syria. But in which determined place or places of it? Augusta Euphratensis, while it was still called Commagene, or in the age of Ptolemy, Strabo, and Pliny, was not a very large region, as may be seen in the ancient Geography in Cellarius, volume 2, book 3, chapter 12; but afterwards, its name changed, it changed its limits too, attaining far more extended ones than before. Charles de Saint-Paul, in the Sacred Geography, or ancient Notice of the bishoprics of the universal Church, which he excerpted from the councils, fathers, ecclesiastical history, and ancient geographers, enumerating the cities of the province Euphratensis, or Augusta Euphratensis, adorned with episcopal sees, places under the metropolis Hierapolis Cyrrhus, Samosata, Doliche, Germanicia, Zeugma, Perre, Europus, Urima, Caesarea, Sergiopolis, Sura and Marianopolis; and that to these cities or episcopal sees Barbalissus, which seems to have been a fortress rather than a city, must besides be added, Le Quien rightly teaches in the Sacred East, volume 2, as the things he brings forward there at columns 949 and 950 give proof. And at Barbalissus indeed St. Bacchus, and at Sergiopolis, which was then called Resapha or Rosapha, St. Sergius, as I shall teach below, consummated his martyrdom. Wherefore some things must still be said here about both these places, so that the studious reader may have it well perceived beforehand where they are situated.

[28] Among the episcopal cities of Augusta Euphratensis just reviewed from Charles de Saint-Paul, of the places, namely of Barbalissus six are situated on the Euphrates, namely Perre, Samosata, Urima, Zeugma, Europus and Sura; and midway between the two last of these lies Barbalissus, or, as it is written by others, Barbarissus. So all geographers, both ancient and more recent, who indeed have been seen by me treating of the situation of this city or fortress, determine with unanimous consent. Wherefore, since the matter is not to be doubted, we have ascertained the situation of the place which St. Bacchus obtained as the arena of his martyrdom. But concerning the place afterwards distinguished by the name of Sergiopolis, where, as I have already said, St. Sergius consummated his martyrdom, a somewhat greater difficulty occurs. For the praised Charles de Saint-Paul, in the Geographical Map of the patriarchate of Antioch, which together with some other geographical maps likewise he brought into his praised Work, places Sergiopolis between Samosata and Doliche, situated to the East of the city of the Syri, or of Sura, and has some other more recent writers agreeing with him in this matter. Moreover Cellarius, in the Ancient Geography at the place just cited, puts Resapha or Rosapha, by which name, as I have already indicated, Sergiopolis was formerly called, midway between the city of Sura, or of the Syri, and Barbalissus, yet somewhat removed from the Euphrates. But both Cellarius and Charles de Saint-Paul and all others who agree with them are convicted of error from Procopius.

[29] and of Sergiopolis, is assigned, and this is shown to be the same as Resapha. For this writer, by whom indeed we must stand, as one more versed in those matters than the more recent authors already praised, records thus of Chosroes, king of the Persians, in book 2 of the Persian War, page 99: "He sends, therefore, to Sergiopolis, a city of the Roman dominion which received its name from Sergius, an illustrious Saint, and is 126 stades distant from the captured city" (namely Sura), "situated toward the South in what they call the Barbarian plain: he sends, I say, men to demand of Candidus, the bishop of the city, two hundred pounds of gold as the price of the ransom of twelve thousand captives." Sergiopolis, therefore, formerly Resapha or Rosapha, is situated, as Procopius here teaches, toward the South or Meridian of the city of the Syri; and since all geographers place toward its Northern quarter both Barbalissus, or, as it is also called by others, Barbarissus, and Samosata and Doliche, Sergiopolis, formerly called Resapha, is certainly wrongly placed both between these two cities by Charles de Saint-Paul and others, and between Barbalissus and the city of the Syri by Cellarius. But there will perhaps be someone who, to defend Cellarius at least, will deny that Sergiopolis is the same as the city which was formerly called Resapha or Rosapha. And someone might perhaps be moved to this by the fact that no ancient writer at all, not even Procopius himself, who nevertheless treats of Sergiopolis, so named from St. Sergius the martyr, in book 2 of the Buildings, chapter 9, expressly affirms that this city, by its original name, before it was called Sergiopolis, was called Resapha. But although this is so, the identical situation of both makes it all but undoubted that Sergiopolis is the same as the city which was formerly called Resapha or Rosapha or by another related name. As the words recited above from Procopius show that Sergiopolis was situated to the South or Meridian of the city of the Syri, so the Peutinger Tables prove that Resapha also was situated likewise to the South or Meridian of this city. The matter will become plain from what is now to be said.

[30] is shown to be the same. In the seventh Fragment of these, in Ortelius and the other editors of them, Resapha, or, as it is there called, Risapa, is placed between the city of the Syri and Palmyra, an almost straight series being kept, in this order: Sure, Risapa, Cholle, Oruba, Harae, Palmyra; wherefore, since Palmyra is situated, as absolutely all geographers confess, toward the Southern quarter of the Syri or of the city of Sura, it is not to be doubted that Risapa or Resapha too was situated toward the same quarter of that city. Moreover, what makes it still more certain that one and the same city is signified by Resapha and Sergiopolis is that it is acknowledged by all that the sacred body of St. Sergius lies laid up at Sergiopolis, or certainly lay there long ago if the matter now stands otherwise; and that this is also consonant with the truth is argued by what Evagrius records in the Ecclesiastical History, book 4, chapter 28, concerning the relics of this holy Martyr kept among the people of Sergiopolis in an oblong chest covered with silver; while what is to be said below will show that at Resapha, the place where, as has already been said, the same Saint consummated his martyrdom, his sacred body also was committed to the earth; so that even from this it is, if not wholly certain, at least most probable that Resapha, which St. Sergius obtained as the arena of his martyrdom, is the same as Sergiopolis. And since this is so, and we have the situation of this city exceedingly well ascertained from what has already been adduced, the situation also of Resapha, or of the place where Sergius consummated his martyrdom, is held sufficiently explored; which was also to be determined here.

[31] It must further still be noted that Resapha, although already from the sixth century, The Saints are sent into Augusta Euphratensis to Antiochus the general. as from the council of Constantinople

then celebrated, in which Abraham, bishop of Sergiopolis, occurs in Labbe, volume 5 of the Councils, column 417, it is plain that, the original name being laid aside, it was called Sergiopolis in honour of St. Sergius, yet was not so perpetually and constantly called by this new name but that it was also called by its original name by writers of a later age, in the ancient manner, as is plain from the seventh ecumenical synod, celebrated in the year 787, in whose Fifth Session, in Labbe, volume 7 of the Councils, column 382 and following, mention is made of an aged anchorite who was wont from time to time to go on pilgrimage to St. Sergius at Arapha (Arapha, namely, written for Rasapha, unless I am mistaken, through the carelessness of the copyists). These things noted, let us now take up the series of the martyrdom which the Saints underwent. When SS. Sergius and Bacchus had been denounced as Christians to the emperor Maximian, and had been found by him to be such in very deed and constant in the faith, by his order they were stripped of their military garments, clothed in women's colobia, and led through the middle of the city with the greatest mockery to the imperial palace; and, when they nonetheless persevered constant in the faith, they were sent to Antiochus, general either of the East or of Augusta Euphratensis, a letter also being added by which he was commanded either to bring the Saints to deny the faith or, if he could not do this, to punish them even with the supreme penalty.

[32] So the Acts of our Saints which are to be published; Bacchus by him with scourges, but Sergius and who would dare to define whether they merit undoubted credence here, regard being had to the age in which they were written? Meanwhile I think less is to be attributed here to the Greek Acts than to the Latin; for they seem to assert that the Saints were sent by Maximian from Rome, or at least from Constantinople, to Antiochus the general in Syria; which I have already taught above to be very little probable. But let us proceed to the other things which the Saints are related besides to have suffered. When they had been led to Antiochus the general, and he had been able to bring them to deny the faith neither by threats nor by flatteries, he set about raging against the Saints with most atrocious torments. And first, indeed, Sergius having been thrust back into prison, he ordered Bacchus to be beaten with raw thongs at Barbalissus, where he was then staying, until he should send forth his spirit amid the repeated blows. And when this had been carried into execution, he set out on the next day from Barbalissus to Sura, or, if it please others, who make this name neuter and plural, to adhere to that, to Sura, or even (for that name is written very variously) Syrum or Sirum, a city, as has already been said, of Augusta Euphratensis, or, as it is called in the Latin Acts to be published, a fortress, defended by a Roman garrison, taking St. Sergius with him; how cruelly he then treated him, in order to break his constancy in the faith, receive now.

[33] [with the sword, having been otherwise tortured besides, is related in the Acts to have been slain.] Having summoned St. Sergius to him again at Sura, he first tries partly by flatteries, partly by threats, to turn him from the faith; and when he perceived that he was making no progress even so, and was about to depart from Sura to Resapha, another town or fortress of Euphratensis, likewise defended by a Roman garrison, concerning which the things I taught above should be seen, he compelled the holy Athlete, shod with boots which were furnished with iron nails, their points turned inward and not bent back, to run before the carriage in which he was being driven, as far as Tetrapyrgium, or, as it is also written elsewhere, Tetrapyrgia, a fortress nine miles, or, which comes to almost the same (for eight stades make up a mile), seventy stades, distant from Sura, as is hinted in the Greek Acts adorned by Metaphrastes. Nor did Antiochus's savagery against the Saint stop here. For on the following day, when he had seen the brave Champion of Christ walking with straight step (for the wounds he had received in his feet had been healed by a prodigy), and found him no less immovable in his purpose than before, he compelled him again to run before the carriage in which he was being driven as far as the town or fortress named Resapha, nine miles distant from Tetrapyrgia, as is noted in the Latin Acts, and, when he nonetheless adhered constantly to the faith just as before, at length ordered him to be put to death there by the sword. So the Latin Acts of our Saints, with which the Greek, woven by Metaphrastes, agree as regards substance, here already presented after a fashion in summary. Now let us examine what appears to be determined concerning some things which are related in this.

[34] With these, in the matter itself, And first, indeed, there is no reason why the whole eighteen miles which St. Sergius, shod with sandals or boots nailed in the manner I have described, is asserted to have accomplished from Sura to Resapha or Rosapha, should be thought unable to be reconciled rightly enough with the distance by which the former of these two places is separated from the latter, on the ground that Sergiopolis, which, as I taught above, is not different from Rosapha or Resapha, is distant from Sura only one hundred and twenty-six stades, as the words of Procopius which I recited at number 29 make credible. For although the matter stands so, and accordingly Sura is distant from Resapha, in Procopius's mind, not eighteen but only about sixteen miles, yet this writer must most probably, not to say undoubtedly, be understood of the straight road by which one proceeds from Sura to Resapha. Wherefore, since absolutely nothing prevents it from being believed that the fortress of Tetrapyrgium, which is noted nowhere either in the Peutinger Tables or elsewhere, as commonly happens with more obscure places, and to which nevertheless St. Sergius, shod with nailed boots, was compelled first to go running, and thence afterwards to proceed in the same manner to Resapha, lay somewhat off that road, there is surely no reason why the Latin Acts of the Saints should be thought to conflict with the distance placed by Procopius between those two places because, by their reckoning, St. Sergius, shod with boots or sandals nailed in the manner I set out above, covered from Sura to Resapha not merely sixteen but eighteen miles. As regards what pertains either to the long journey itself which the unconquered Athlete accomplished in the manner described, or to the other torments by which both he and St. Bacchus consummated their martyrdom, that death was inflicted on the latter by scourges driven very often into his belly and the other parts of his body, as all the Acts maintain, by no means exceeds credence, and I hold myself persuaded that Bacchus did in very deed so consummate his martyrdom.

[35] For although the anonymous author by whom they were written as appears from what is adduced here, flourished at least a century and a half after the martyrdom of the Saints, as I taught above, and it is not known whether he drew his material from older records; and although it may hence with reason be doubted whether he attained the truth in each and all of the things he records; yet I judge that he did not stray from it in narrating the manner of martyrdom which St. Bacchus underwent, for this reason, that it appears most probable that he could have learned it, if not from ancient documents or records, at least from a genuine tradition handed down from the forefathers to posterity, and did in very deed learn it. For since the more grievous punishments with which it sometimes happens that even notable malefactors are punished by the magistrates cling very long in men's memory, and, told by fathers to their sons, have at times passed even to late posterity by tradition alone, shall we believe that among the first Christians, who held the Martyrs in the highest veneration and most diligently guarded their sacred relics, the memory of the most atrocious torments by which those most valiant Athletes had at length triumphed over the tyrants and even over the demon himself, their blood shed for Christ, perished so easily that it was wholly unknown, only about a century and a half having elapsed from the event, by what manner of martyrdom St. Bacchus ended his contest? That indeed seems to me foreign to almost every appearance of truth. Nor is there reason for you to reply that in this way the remaining circumstances of the martyrdom of our Saints also, and particularly the apparitions and other miracles which are narrated in the Acts as accompanying it, can be defended as true; for although it may easily happen that things known only by popular tradition, from which alone perhaps he who first committed the Acts of our Saints to writing had learned them, comprise something of truth both as regards one or another circumstance more worth noting and more closely connected with the substance, such as may be held the atrocious manner of martyrdom which our Saints underwent, and as regards the substance itself, yet as regards the individual circumstances, less worth noting and less closely connected with the substance, this either never happens at all or certainly very rarely, as it is easy to gather from what I discoursed on the preceding day in the Commentary prefixed to the Acts of St. Bruno, §23.

[36] Further, as regards the apparitions and miracles, it appears one must assent, nor do the Greek, the writers who committed to writing the Acts of holy Martyrs earlier than their own age by not less than a century are known not rarely to have brought into these labours of theirs apparitions and miracles which they had either themselves invented or, through lack of prudent criticism, adopted when already invented by others; and hence such things, unless they rest on contemporary writers or records, that is, of the same age, of credit approved and known on every side, commonly do not now find undoubted credence among the more learned critics. Wherefore, since the matter stands so, and it may accordingly happen that the original biographer of our Saints, later than their age by at least a century and a half, either himself invented the prodigies he relates in order to render their history more illustrious, or imprudently adopted them when already invented by another, there is surely reason why undoubted credence should not be given to them. All these things, therefore, being weighed, although I by no means hold as certain the prodigies which are maintained in the Acts to have accompanied the martyrdom of the Saints, yet concerning the kind of torment by which they are narrated in the same Acts to have consummated it, I think otherwise. And that Bacchus indeed fell amid scourges I persuade myself, as I have already said; and although it appears hard to believe that Sergius, shod with boots or sandals nailed in the manner explained above, was compelled to run so long a way as, from what has been said, is that which leads from Sura to Resapha, yet I do not at all doubt that he ended his martyrdom by the sword, as is maintained in the Acts. But there will perhaps be someone who will now object here the Greek inscription placed in the Constantinopolitan temple of St. Sergius in the reign of Justinian I, that is, in the sixth century, and recited by Niccolò Alemanni from Vatican manuscript codices at page 124 in his historical Annotations on the Secret History of Procopius; in which, since it seems to be hinted that St. Sergius endured for the faith the punishment of fire also, and yet no mention of this matter is made in the Acts, these may for that reason seem not sufficiently accurate in recounting the torments by which the Saints consummated their martyrdom, and therefore of less firm credit. That inscription, still to be mentioned below, in which the emperor Justinian and his wife Theodora are praised for the sacred building erected to St. Sergius, it pleases me to transcribe here whole, adding also the Latin translation which I have made.

[37] the inscription which is given here, It runs thus:

Αλλοι μὲν βασιλῆες ἐτιμήσαντο θανόντας Ανέρας, ὦν ἀνόητος

ἔην πόνος. ἡμέτερος δὲ Ἐυσεβίην σκηπτοῦχος Ιουστινιανὸς ἀέξων Σέργιον ἀιγλήεντι δόμῳ θεράποντα γεραίρει Χριστοῦ παμμεδέοντος· τὸν οὐ πυρὸς ἀτμὸς ἀνάπτων, Οὐ ξίφος, ὀυχ ἑτέρη βασάνων ἐτάραξεν ἀνάγκη, Αλλὰ Θεοῦ τέτληκεν ὑπὲρ Χριστοῖο δαμῆναι Αἵματι κερδαίνων δόμον οὐρανοῦ· ἀλλ᾽ ἐνὶ πᾶσι Κοιρανίην βασιλῆος ἀκομήτοιο φυλάξοι, Καὶ κράτος ἀυξήσειε θεοστεφέος Θεοδώρας, Ης νόος ἐυσεβίῃ φαιδρύνεται, ἧς πόνος ἀνεὶ Κᾀκ κτεάνων θρεπτῆρες ἀφειδέες εἰσὶν ἀγῶνες.

Other emperors indeed have honoured, when taken from among the living, Men whose manner of life had not been sound; but ours, The emperor Justinian, who promotes piety, Honours with a splendid house Sergius, the servant Of Christ, ruler of all; whom, unmoved by the reek of fire, Neither the sword nor any other force of torments disturbed, But he endured to die for Christ God, Gaining by his blood the house of heaven. May he therefore in all things Guard the rule of the most watchful emperor, And increase the power of Theodora, crowned by God, Whose mind is adorned with piety, whose care, as it were, Is an assiduous striving out of zeal for preserving possessions.

[38] proves that Sergius was besides tried by fire, which is not related in the Acts. Such is the Greek inscription which might be objected here against the manner of martyrdom of our Saints asserted in the Acts. But besides that this, inasmuch as it was first set up in the age of Justinian I, who reigned in the sixth century, is not older than the Greek source from which, as I taught above, the Acts of the Saints flowed, and therefore does not seem of greater credit than they, it may be that it hints that Sergius was not moved or terrified by fire, not because this holy Athlete was in very deed tried by fire, which he overcame, but either because he remained unmoved and constant in the faith at threats of fire to be applied to his body, or because he showed himself ready to suffer for the faith every most atrocious torment, and therefore even the burning of fire itself, although meanwhile he did not in very deed suffer either this or very many other things. Further, that this interpretation may displease the less, the very Greek words of the inscription which bear on this favour it: for in these St. Sergius is not properly said to have been unmoved at the fire itself or its burning, but only at the ἀτμὸν of fire, that is, its vapour or reek. Moreover, even if we granted that St. Sergius was in very deed tried by fire as well, not even so would the Acts, as containing nothing which conflicts with this fact, become of less credit here, or need to be said to be destitute of sufficient accuracy in recounting the torments by which Sergius and Bacchus consummated their martyrdom. For this accuracy it is not so much required that all the torments which the Saints underwent be recounted, as that those which they are related to have undergone were also undergone in truth.

[39] Further, as with regard to the manner of death With them also as regards the different place, which they assign to the Saints; by which the Saints consummated their martyrdom one must, as I have already taught, assent to their Acts which are to be published, so also I think we must stand by them both as regards the day on which they determine that Sergius suffered, and as regards the place or arena of martyrdom, which, as we have already seen, they assign as different to each Saint. And first, that St. Sergius consummated his martyrdom at Resapha appears most probable even from this, that his sacred body, as will become plain from what is to be said below, lay laid up in that city in the fifth and sixth centuries, and is not known to have been brought there from elsewhere; and as regards St. Bacchus, that he fell by martyrdom at Barbalissus was probably ascertained excellently by genuine tradition, handed down from the forefathers to posterity, even in the age in which the original biographer of our Saints flourished. So I suppose, for the reasons adduced just now when I treated of the manner of martyrdom, that he also learned that martyrdom was consummated by St. Bacchus in the aforesaid place from that tradition, from which he could likewise learn St. Sergius's arena, unless perhaps he received it from older documents, which too does not appear altogether improbable. Pope Gregory the Great, who died at the beginning of the seventh century, writes thus to Eulogius of Alexandria, book 7, letter 29: "But we have the names of almost all the Martyrs collected in one codex, with their passions distinguished by the several days; and on each day we celebrate the solemnities of Masses in their veneration. Yet in the same volume it is not indicated who suffered and how, but only the name, the place, and the day of the passion are set down." What then if such a codex as Gregory here testifies existed at Rome in his age, that is, in the sixth century, existed also among the Greeks in the age of our biographer, that is, from what has been said, as the fifth century was growing old or the sixth already passing, and he learned from it the different arena which our Saints, and particularly St. Bacchus, obtained?

[40] The thing certainly seems to me by no means to shrink from the appearance of truth. [one must stand as regards the arena, as also as regards the day on which they determine that Sergius] However that may be meanwhile, I think it most probable that the biographer drew either from a similar record or from a tradition worthy of the name the place in which our Saints consummated their martyrdom, and therefore I think one must assent to the Acts no less when they assign Barbalissus to St. Bacchus as his arena than when they assign Resapha to St. Sergius. Further, it is remarkable how variously and confusedly three sacred Fasti of the Greeks, therefore now to be mentioned here, speak of the arena of the Saints. And first, in the Basilian Menologion the Saints are narrated to have been led to the prefect of Augustopolis and afflicted by him with martyrdom; but since I find it noted nowhere else that our Saints were crowned with martyrdom in a city of this name, it appears certain that Augustopolis is here wrongly put for Augusta Euphratensis, in which province both our Saints underwent martyrdom, as is plain from what has been said above. In the Menaea, which it pleases me to mention here in the second place, the most valiant Champions are related to have been crowned with martyrdom ἐν πόλει Ἐυφρατησίων, that is, in the city of the Euphratensians; but since the Saints did not suffer in one and the same city of Euphratensis, as is thus hinted, an error certainly lies here in the Menaea, as is sufficiently plain from what has already been said above. Nor does the Sirletian Menologion, which still remains to be mentioned here, err less. For it relates that the Saints were crowned with martyrdom in the city of Augusta Euphratensis; but I find no city of this name either among the ancient or among the more recent geographers. Baudrand indeed, in his Geographical Lexicon, from Niger, reviews a city which was formerly called Augusta Euphratensis and is now called Azar. But he brings forward absolutely nothing to confirm what he found on this matter in this writer, nor do I sufficiently perceive what solid thing he could have adduced. Perhaps the councils of Chalcedon and Seleucia, in the latter of which, celebrated in the year 359, in Hardouin, volume 1 of the Councils, column 726, Augustus, bishop of Euphratensis, and in the former, celebrated in the year 451, in Labbe, volume 4 of the Councils, column 788, Augustus of Eufrasiensis appears? But in neither place is a city designated, but only a province, as I shall show when I treat below of St. Julia, also inscribed today in the Roman Martyrology. For the rest, that one must also assent to the Acts of our Saints as regards the day to which they bind the martyrdom of St. Sergius, which still remains to be proved here, will become plain from what is now to be said.

[41] [was crowned, who nevertheless did not suffer together with Bacchus on one and the same day, as is related in the Menaea.] In the great printed Menaea of the Greeks two little verses are prefixed to the elogium of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, in which allusion is made to the manner of martyrdom endured by them, together with a third little verse in which are openly expressed both the kind of death by which both Saints consummated their martyrdom and also the day on which it happened. The former two, to which I also add a Latin version, run thus:

Χαλκᾶ σὰ νεῦρα, Βάκχε, πρὸς νεύρων Βίαν, Καὶ πρὸς ξίφος, Σέργιε, πῦρ σὴ καρδία.

Of bronze are your sinews, Bacchus, against the force of the thongs, And against the sword, Sergius, your heart is fire;

And the latter is conceived in these words:

Σέργιον εβδομάτῃ ξίφος ἔκτανε, νεῦρα δὲ Βακχον.

This hexameter verse our Papebroch, in the Greco-Muscovite Ephemerides at this day, renders in Latin by this following elegant verse, likewise hexameter, which corresponds to it almost word for word:

Sergius by the sword, Bacchus by scourges, the seventh day slays.

If, therefore, one is to stand by the Menaea, Bacchus as well as Sergius consummated his martyrdom on one and the same seventh day of October. But since St. Sergius, on the day next after the martyrdom of St. Bacchus, consummated at Barbalissus, was led by Antiochus's order to Sura, as we taught above, and did not obtain the end of the most atrocious torments which he underwent for Christ, and at the same time of his life, by the sword before he had been compelled to walk or run, shod with boots or sandals nailed in the manner set out above, before the vehicle of Antiochus as he proceeded to these places, from Sura to Tetrapyrgium and thence afterwards to Resapha, it must certainly be said that the Saints were not slain on one and the same seventh day of October, but on the contrary that several days intervened between the martyrdom of the one and of the other.

[42] What different days, then, are to be assigned to the martyrdom of the Saints, or rather to its consummation? did not suffer, was crowned. That Sergius ended his martyrdom by the sword on the seventh day of October the Acts of the Saints, as I have already indicated more than once, expressly relate, and with unanimous consent almost all the sacred Fasti praised above support them, not only those of the Latins, Greeks, Ethiopians and Russians, but also those of the Syrians themselves, among whom the Saints were crowned with martyrdom. Wherefore it does not appear to be doubted that St. Sergius did in very deed consummate his martyrdom on the said seventh day of October; and as regards the day on which this befell Bacchus, since at least one day, as you will easily draw out from what has been said before, was spent on the journey which Sergius was compelled to make on the day next after the death of Bacchus from Barbalissus to Sura, and thence to Tetrapyrgium, and no less than another day could have been spent on the journey then to be made from Tetrapyrgium to Resapha and on inflicting death on St. Sergius there, it follows altogether that Bacchus was crowned with martyrdom at least two days before Sergius. Moreover, since the Acts in no way express whether Sergius underwent martyrdom on the very day on which he had arrived from Tetrapyrgium at Resapha, and likewise whether he was compelled to proceed to Tetrapyrgium on the very day on which he had been brought to Sura, I would not dare to assert that four or even five days did not intervene between the martyrdom of our Saints. Wherefore perhaps the true day on which Bacchus, beaten to death with raw thongs, passed to the Blessed above is marked by the Ethiopian Fasti in Hiob Ludolf, and the Coptic Calendar still mentioned at number 4 and roughly rendered into the Latin language, in which I find the memory of St. Bacchus noted at the 1st day of October. However that may be, it appears undoubted that Bacchus and Sergius did not fall for the faith on one and the same day, as also that this happened in the case of St. Sergius on the 7th day of October.

[43] It is next now to examine in what century it befell the Saints to fall for the faith. That this was done in a general persecution, the Acts require; The Eastern Chronicle published in print by Ecchellensis determines that it was done under St. Heraclas, patriarch of Alexandria; but since Heraclas, as is shown in the chronological History of the patriarchs of Alexandria prefixed to volume V of June of our Work, sat from the year 232 up to the year 246, and so the martyrdom of the Saints, which happened in Syria, would have to be attributed to Maximin I, to whom it can with the greatest difficulty be suited, the learned commonly all depart here from the praised Eastern Chronicle, very often false in other things too. But how, then, shall we at last determine at least the century in which the Saints suffered? The Latin Acts of the Saints have thus at the beginning: "In the reign of the tyrant Maximian, much error had possessed the race of men. For they adored stones and wood, the inventions of men, and tasted of obscene sacrifices. And those who would not sacrifice, afflicted more vehemently with penalties and punishments, were compelled to serve demons. There was, then, an edict set up in the forum in every city with the most severe threat." Thus far the Latin Acts of our Saints, with which the Metaphrastic Greek also agree as regards substance; and what they subjoin thereafter in continuous series most clearly requires that our Saints were crowned with martyrdom in that state of affairs in which a general persecution against the Christians was raging. But since, as I already pointed out above, no emperor named Maximian, by whose order the Saints were sent into Syria to Antiochus the general, to be drawn away from the faith by him or afflicted with most atrocious torments and even with death itself, reigned in Syria when a general persecution against the Christians had been set in motion, how can this be true? In no way certainly, as indeed it appears to me.

[44] it happened about the year 296 or at the beginning of the following century, Wherefore it must be either that the Saints are wrongly determined in the Acts to have fallen for the faith in the time of the general persecution, or that what happened under Maximin, who governed Syria from the year 305 up to the year 313, and who is very often wont to be confused with Maximian Galerius, is noted by error as done under Maximian. But which is preferable? To place the martyrdom of the Saints under Maximin, when the general persecution had been set in motion, or under Maximian Galerius, when it was not yet raging? The latter, in the years 296 and 297, on the occasion of the Persian war, as is agreed among all writers, stayed in Syria; and then perhaps, as we taught at the 29th day of August, he ordered St. Andrew the tribune, and many soldiers with him, to be slain by Antiochus, general of the forces in Syria, because they were Christians. If, therefore, an error in the Acts is rather to be admitted as regards the general persecution, during whose rage our Saints were slain for the faith, than as regards the name of the emperor under whom it happened, you would not unfittingly assign the martyrdom of our Saints to about the year 296 or the following. But since it may very easily happen that there has been an error only as regards the name of the emperor under whom the Saints were crowned, there is indeed reason why you should doubt whether it was not rather done when the general persecution had already been stirred up by order of Maximian and Diocletian, and therefore when the fourth century was already passing. As far as I am concerned, since the Saints are narrated in the Acts to have suffered martyrdom under a Maximian ruling in Syria who was emperor, and Maximian Galerius did not obtain the name of emperor before the year 305, I incline more to that opinion which places the martyrdom of the Saints under Maximin, who is wont to be confused with Maximian Galerius chiefly from the likeness of the name, the general persecution having already arisen at the beginning of the fourth century; nor would I dare to assert that Baronius goes far from the truth, who binds it in the Ecclesiastical Annals to the year 309. The matter meanwhile, as is sufficiently plain from what has been said, is by no means certain, and hence I wrote above in the margin, In the third century or the beginning of the following.

* σν

* ἀκοιμἡτοιο

§ IV. What veneration was paid to the Saints before the sixth century, and particularly to St. Sergius.

St. Sergius, as the words of Theodoret here recited That the veneration which is shown to SS. Sergius and Bacchus by the Greeks, Latins and others is very ancient indeed, the things we discoursed in § I of this preliminary Commentary show in general; now what is to be said in this § will disclose more specially how ancient indeed it is. And first, as regards particularly the veneration paid to St. Sergius, we have a most abundant witness of the antiquity to be attributed to it in Theodoret, bishop of Cyrrhus in Augusta Euphratensis in the fifth century. For he, who became illustrious by more than one Work published, writes thus in the book On the Cure of the affections of the heathen, chapter XI, in which he treats chiefly of the holy Martyrs of the Church: "From these, therefore" (the faithful of Christ), "men and women, the choirs of the Martyrs have been constituted. And the philosophers indeed and the illustrious orators have now been given over to oblivion; and of the emperors and great generals many today do not know even the names, while yet all mortals know the names of the Martyrs better than those of their own household. Nay, they even take care to impose them on their sons at birth, thus procuring for them most certain guardianship and protection. But why do I mention philosophers, emperors and generals, when the Martyrs have abolished from the mind of men the memory even of those who were everywhere reputed Gods?

[46] "For their temples, together with their groves, annual festival, already from the fifth century, have now been so destroyed that not even any traces remain, much less can men know in what form their altars stood. But the material of those things has been expiated by temples and altars raised to the Martyrs. For the Lord our God has brought His own Dead into the temples in place of your gods. And those He has rendered empty of glory and vain; but to His Martyrs He has given their honour. For instead of the Pandia, the Diasia and the Dionysia" (that is, the solemnities of Jupiter and Father Liber), "solemnities are performed with a popular banquet to Peter, Paul, Thomas, Sergius, Marcellus, Leontius, Antoninus, Maurice and other holy Martyrs; and instead of that old pomp, instead of base obscenity and shamelessness, there are held modest, chaste festivals full of temperance, not indeed steeped in wine, not frivolous with revelries, not loosed in guffaws, but resounding with divine canticles and intent upon hearing sacred discourses, in which prayers are sent up to God not without holy tears and sighs."

[47] With such a solemnity as is here described by Theodoret, [was honoured, and even earlier the deed of the people of Sura, here related, proves him so honoured,] the annual festival of St. Sergius, no otherwise than that of SS. Peter, Paul and other most celebrated martyrs, was celebrated in the age of Theodoret, and therefore already from the fifth century, in which he flourished, nay perhaps even already from the fourth; for Theodoret nowhere says that this first began to be done in his own age. Moreover, a plainly notable argument of the veneration toward St. Sergius which, as appears, flourished already from the fourth century is furnished in the Acts both Greek and Latin. Here are the words in which it is related in the Latin near the end: "After a long time, then" (namely from the martyrdom of St. Sergius), "religious men, stirred by zeal for Christ, began to despoil the body" (namely of St. Sergius) "from its place, coming from the fortress of Sura, as some most precious treasure; but St. Sergius did not permit his body to be secretly translated, which had been publicly punished with triumphal punishments for the confession of Christ, but besought God that a fire be kindled in the same place, not that he might avenge or even burn those who were trying to steal it, but that he might also illumine the darkness of the night to the fortress of Ruzaphata over such a theft; which also was done. The fire, then, having been kindled in the place where the body lay, certain of the inhabitants of the fortress, seeing it and the flame raised high up even to the heavens, thought that that very great fire had been made by some enemies; and they went out armed and pursued those who had attempted to steal the body of the holy Martyr; and they, entreating them, were permitted to remain there a few days; and, making a building of stones and mud in the place where it lay, and covering it over in honour of the Martyr, they thus withdrew."

[48] [which, before the sacred building of St. Sergius by Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis,] The inhabitants of the Fortress of Sura, by their deed related in these words, however little it is to be approved, made manifest that they had been carried away by great veneration toward St. Sergius and his sacred remains; and although it is understood from the very beginning of the same words that this did not happen before much time had elapsed from the martyrdom of St. Sergius, yet I judge that it was perhaps earlier than the fifth century, as I have already indicated, because in the Acts of our Saints, immediately after the deed just related, another is subjoined which is hinted to have happened later than this, and which nevertheless occurred when the fifth century was not much advanced, as will become plain from what is now to be said. The Acts set this out in these following words, which are immediately subjoined to those just given: "As the religion of our Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ gradually advanced, therefore, most holy bishops, fifteen in number, coming together into one, built near the fortress of Ruzafata a martyrium worthy of his confession, and translated there the body of the holy Martyr and laid it in the same martyrium on the same day on which he suffered, the seventh day of the month of October." That the things narrated here happened later than the theft of St. Sergius's body attempted by the inhabitants of the fortress of Sura seems clearly evident from this, that, after this has been narrated, those things at length are related to have happened "as Religion gradually advanced"; but whence can it be proved that they were done when the fifth century was not much advanced? Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis in Syria Euphratensis in the fifth century, at the council of Ephesus, celebrated in the year 431 against Nestorius, stood with John, patriarch of Antioch, and some other bishops of the East for Nestorius against St. Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria.

[49] as from the letter written by him on the occasion which is here set out, And although John afterwards consented to the condemnation of Nestorius, and so returned into concord with St. Cyril, Alexander not only constantly refused to follow his example, but also separated himself from the communion of John, because he both embraced the decrees of the council of Ephesus against Nestorius and was united with St. Cyril; nor could he ever be brought either to concord or to condemning Nestorius. Hence John, in order either to break or to punish the obstinacy of the man, who occupied a metropolitan see belonging to the patriarchate of Antioch, and of the other bishops adhering to him, ordained other bishops in the place of two of these, with the consent, as appears, or at least without the opposition, of the emperor Theodosius the Younger. Moreover, John consecrated a bishop in the church of the diocese of Hierapolis sacred to St. Sergius, which had not previously had a bishop, and tore it away from the diocese of Hierapolis. Alexander and six other bishops of the province of Hierapolis, or Augusta Euphratensis, adhering to him, chiefly moved by this, gave a letter to Eudocia, the emperor's wife, and Pulcheria his sister, both Augustae, most earnestly

demanding that, the matter being carried to the emperor, they would take care both that the church sacred to St. Sergius be restored to the metropolis of Hierapolis, to which it had formerly belonged, and that John's further undertakings against the province of Hierapolis, or Augusta Euphratensis, be checked.

[50] That letter, among various letters written about the year 432, the letter, which Christian Lupus published at Louvain in the year 1682, and which Étienne Baluze reprinted in the year 1707 in the new Collection of the councils, holds the hundred and thirty-fifth place. I transcribe the words it contains which bear chiefly on this matter. In it, then, the aforesaid bishops, complaining most bitterly and, as appears, not justly and moderately enough of John, patriarch of Antioch, speak in this following manner: "He has barked against our province, and against the rules of the holy Fathers has ordained two bishops, abominable and perverse men and workers of every wantonness. He has also invaded the martyrium of the holy and good victor Sergius the martyr, which was under the church of Hierapolis, and has newly ordained a bishop there contrary to custom, whose iniquity is not hidden but known to all. For this reason we have been compelled to send clerics and monks most dear to God with the present letter, through which we beseech your piety not to despise the churches of God, but to inform our most pious prince, the friend of Christ, of these iniquities which are done against us; and to persuade him to order by his authority that the unjust ordinations be void, and that the bishops of our province celebrate ordinations according to the rules of the holy and blessed Fathers; and that the Basilica of the holy and good victor Sergius the martyr be, according to the ancient custom, under the church of this metropolis, as it was before both that great temple itself was built, and those very high walls, and the other buildings within the same fortification. For it befits your holiness both to remove this iniquity and to strengthen the rules of the holy and most blessed Fathers, by whose prayers your empire is fortified."

[51] Among the letters mentioned above, which Lupus first published and Baluze afterwards printed again, [and from two others it is gathered, built at Resapha in the fifth century, seems to have happened.] two more occur, namely 147 and 165, in which the praised Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, utters besides some things which bear on this matter; in the former indeed these: "Not even if John" (the patriarch of Antioch) "should give me the whole kingdom of heaven, of which he is not lord, not to speak of Rasapha and the other cities of this desert" (in which, namely, Resapha was situated toward Palmyra), "shall I endure to communicate with him"; and in the latter these: "For what form of opposition has the Antiochene not exercised against me? Has he not armed the masters of the soldiers and the judges against my lowliness? Has he not taken from me the church of the Martyr" (namely St. Sergius), "on which we spent nearly three hundred pounds of gold, and made the church subject to debt?" Further, from these texts of the three letters I have mentioned, taken together, the learned, and not, as appears, without reason, conclude that in the fifth century, before the quarrels that arose between himself and John, patriarch of Antioch, on the occasion of the Nestorian heresy, a notable church was built and dedicated to St. Sergius the martyr at Resapha by Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, three hundred pounds of gold being spent on that sacred building, and his own church being hence bound under debt; and that the whole place besides, which he also adorned with many other buildings, was surrounded with very high walls and fortified against the incursions of the Saracens.

[52] shows him to have been in great veneration. And I indeed think that this church is the same as the church which the Latin Acts of our Saints, in the words recited at number 48, maintain was built by bishops fifteen in number who entered Resapha, and adorned with the sacred relics of St. Sergius the martyr when it had been consecrated by the same bishops; and that chiefly for this reason, that neither before nor after the founding of the church to St. Sergius at Resapha by Alexander of Hierapolis is any other notable church known to have been built there to the same. The Acts, meanwhile, do not speak accurately enough, and seem as though they should have noted that the church of St. Sergius was not indeed built by the bishops fifteen in number who entered Resapha, but only, when it had already been built at the expense supplied by Alexander of Hierapolis, dedicated by them, or rather by the said Alexander alone, fourteen other bishops assisting, and then enriched by the sacred remains of St. Sergius brought into it. Now, since this sacred building of St. Sergius, dedicated, as the Latin Acts maintain, by bishops fifteen in number, is not in fact different, as appears from what has been said, from the church which, from what has been said, Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, built to the same holy Martyr at Resapha about the time of the council of Ephesus, celebrated in the year 431 against Nestorius, and therefore when the fifth century was not much advanced; and since the attempt mentioned above, by which the people of Sura, offering even thus an argument of notable veneration toward the Saint, tried to carry off the body of St. Sergius from Resapha, happened, from what has been said, before its building; it follows altogether that this attempt was perhaps earlier than the fifth century, as I asserted above, and therefore that St. Sergius was perhaps in great veneration already from the fourth century. These things premised, some other things are now still to be observed concerning what Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, is gathered besides from the three letters praised above, which he himself wrote, to have done at Resapha.

[53] That sacred building on the day related in the Acts, the seventh of October, And first, since the church which he erected there to St. Sergius is not different, from what has been said, from the church which is maintained in the Acts to have been built at Resapha after the theft of St. Sergius's body attempted by the people of Sura, and since this, as is related in them, was consecrated on the same seventh day of October on which this holy Martyr, his blood shed for Christ, passed to the Blessed above, the day on which it befell that it was dedicated with solemn rite by Alexander of Hierapolis is certainly held ascertained, if one is only to stand by the Acts of the Saints. But there will perhaps be someone who, to weaken their credit in this matter, will object here the Coptic Calendar, rendered into Latin, as we suspect, by Kircher, and still praised above, in which there is found noted at the 15th of November: "The Foundation of the church of St. Sergius the martyr at Rosepha." And certainly, since in another Coptic Calendar besides, roughly converted into the Latin language and likewise still praised above, there is recorded at the same fifteenth day of November "The Dedication of the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus in the city of Rassaphe," it seems that it can not altogether undeservedly be called into doubt whether that church was consecrated on the 15th of November, on which its foundation or dedication is marked in these two Calendars, or rather on the 7th day of October, as is asserted in the Acts. Nevertheless, since in Calendars and other sacred Fasti the festivals of the Saints, the dedications of churches, and other similar things are not rarely commemorated on other days than those on which they occurred, I think one must adhere to the Acts of our Saints, which expressly mark on the seventh day of October the solemnity in which Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, consecrated the church of St. Sergius built by him at Resapha.

[54] But do the same Acts also rightly, when they record that that church was dedicated to St. Sergius, not to St. Sergius alone, but to Bacchus besides and that the sacred relics of the same holy Martyr were translated into it, make absolutely no mention of St. Bacchus, just as if that sacred building had not then been dedicated to his name also, and adorned with his relics by their translation into it? The Greek Acts of our Saints, adorned by Metaphrastes, differ here from the Latin Acts, and have thus at the last number: "Piety toward our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ gradually increasing, bishops fifteen in number, having entered the city of Rosaphota, build a notable temple to the Saints" (namely to Sergius together with Bacchus), "and, when they had consecrated it, laid in it the divine relics of the Martyrs." Here, then, on the testimony of the Greek Metaphrastic Acts of the Saints, the temple which Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, founded at Resapha was built not only to St. Sergius but also to St. Bacchus, and the sacred remains of the latter as well as of the former were brought into it. But whence did Metaphrastes learn these things? Since he drew the Greek Acts which he wove from the same older Greek Acts, as I taught above, from which the Latin Acts of the Saints, which from what has been said express these accurately, were received; and since in these it is not recorded either that the temple of Resapha was consecrated to the name of Bacchus also, or that the sacred remains of the same holy Martyr were brought into it; it must be either that Metaphrastes had other documents lighting his way in which both this and that were noted, or certainly that the older Greek Acts which he used for adorning his own were interpolated in this part, as they seem also to have been elsewhere (go to number 15 and following). However that may be, the temple of Resapha seems indeed to have been dedicated not only to St. Sergius but also to St. Bacchus, and enriched by the sacred relics of the latter as well as of the former brought into it. For, to confirm both these assertions in the order in which they are here brought forward, in the Coptic Calendar already more than once praised above, in which, roughly converted, as I have said, into the Latin language, the dedication of the temple or church of Resapha of which we speak here is marked at the fifteenth day of November, this sacred building is distinguished not only by the name of St. Sergius but also by that of St. Bacchus. I repeat the words of the Calendar: "The Dedication of the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus in the city of Rassaphe."

[55] It may indeed be objected here that the church of Resapha of which we speak seems to have been consecrated, is honoured with the name of St. Sergius alone in the Coptic Calendar likewise praised above and rendered into Latin, as we suspect, by Kircher, and that this is done also by Alexander himself, the metropolitan of Hierapolis, who erected and dedicated that church, in the three letters praised above; but it not rarely happens that churches which were dedicated to two or three or even more Saints are wont to be called both by the common people and, following their example, by writers by the name of the principal Saint alone, or of him who is judged to surpass the rest in the celebrity of his name or in holiness, just as men on whom several names of Saints were imposed in Baptism are commonly accustomed to be called by the first only, the rest being omitted. And since this is so, it certainly by no means follows from the fact that the church of Resapha is distinguished by the name of St. Sergius alone both in the Coptic Calendar just praised again and by Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, that it was not consecrated to St. Sergius and to St. Bacchus together. Nay rather, since the same church is found honoured with the name of SS. Sergius and Bacchus together not only in the other Coptic Calendar praised in the preceding number and elsewhere, but also in other records, in order that these may be brought into concord with the Coptic Calendar rendered into Latin by Kircher, and also with the aforesaid letters of Alexander of Hierapolis, in which it is distinguished by the name of St. Sergius alone, it must be said that in those it was done according to the commonly received custom by which, as I have already pointed out, sacred buildings, to several Saints

consecrated, are wont to go only by the name of the principal one; and that one must therefore stand by the other Coptic Calendar, which I praised in the preceding number and elsewhere, and by the other records which, since they honour the church of Resapha with the name of SS. Bacchus and Sergius together, support the Greek Metaphrastic Acts of our Saints, in which it is recorded that the church of Resapha was built and dedicated not only to St. Sergius but also to St. Bacchus, as the words which I have just recited from them make credible.

[56] [and then also, as appears, the sacred remains of the latter as well as of the former] As regards now the sacred relics of St. Bacchus, which Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, also laid in the church of Resapha built by him, it seems that in this matter too one must assent to the Greek Metaphrastic Acts. For St. Julia the martyr is joined today with SS. Sergius and Bacchus under one and the same announcement in the Hieronymian codices, the Little or Old Roman Martyrology, Ado and Notker; and since Julia was not crowned with martyrdom at the same time as Sergius and Bacchus, this does not seem to be done for any other reason than that, as Fiorentini observes today in his Annotations on the Hieronymian Martyrology, she rests laid in the same place as they. Wherefore, since as regards St. Julia, whom the Adonian elogium of our Saints, transcribed here above at numbers 6 and 7, relates at its end as actually resting buried in the same place as SS. Sergius and Bacchus, the matter seems truly to stand as Fiorentini notes; and since Bacchus, who is joined today with Sergius under one and the same announcement in the sacred Fasti just mentioned, did not, as I taught above, consummate his martyrdom on the same day as Sergius; this joining of the two in the sacred Fasti may with good reason seem likewise to have been made because the sacred relics of the latter lie laid up in the same place as those of the former. Nevertheless, since it may be replied here that Bacchus can also be joined with Sergius in the aforesaid sacred Fasti because, although he did not consummate his martyrdom with him, he yet began it with him; or even that, if they are coupled today under one announcement on account of the sacred relics of both being laid up in one and the same place, this may be because, although the sacred relics of St. Bacchus were not joined to those of St. Sergius at the time when Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, laid St. Sergius's relics in the church of Resapha founded by him, this was nevertheless done some while after; since, I say, these things may be replied here, I bring forward besides something else by which I shall show that the sacred relics of St. Bacchus also were laid in the church of Resapha by Alexander of Hierapolis, already so very often praised.

[57] Ado, in the elogium of our Saints transcribed above, were brought into it; immediately after narrating that St. Sergius, beheaded, consummated his martyrdom, subjoins: "And a short time having intervened, they raised blessed Bacchus too from the place where he had been entombed and laid him in a place honourable for Martyrs beside St. Sergius." Not much time, therefore, having elapsed after the martyrdom of St. Sergius, the sacred bones of St. Bacchus, on the testimony of the holy Martyrologist of Vienne, were translated to the place where the latter lay entombed, that is, to Resapha. Nor is there reason why we should deny credence to this writer here. For since it is acknowledged by all that the body of St. Bacchus also formerly lay laid up at Resapha for no small space of time, and perhaps still lies there in part today, why should we believe that it was brought there at another time rather than at the one assigned by Ado? Add that there is no reason why we should think that Ado lacked a reason impelling him to write that St. Bacchus was translated from the place where he underwent martyrdom, that is, Barbalissus, to Resapha not long after the martyrdom of St. Sergius, although meanwhile, following the custom of abridgers, he nowhere discloses it. Now, since the sacred relics of St. Bacchus also, as from what has been said it does not appear to be doubted, translated thither from the fortress named Barbalissus not long after the martyrdom of St. Sergius, and therefore already from the fourth century, rested at Resapha near the body of St. Sergius, it does not appear to be doubted that when Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, translated the latter into the church built by him at Resapha in the fifth century, not much advanced from what has been said, he then translated the sacred relics of St. Bacchus too into it, as Metaphrastes records in the Greek Acts of the Saints adorned by him; who, therefore, I judge, no more lacked ancient records worthy of credence for asserting this than Ado did for setting down the translation of the same sacred relics of St. Bacchus from Barbalissus to Resapha not long after the martyrdom of St. Sergius.

[58] And so we now have both that the church of Resapha was dedicated to St. Sergius together with St. Bacchus by Alexander, and thereafter, the fifth century still passing, the Saints bishop of Hierapolis, and that the sacred relics of the latter as well as of the former were translated into it by the same. Nor was Alexander content with having enriched the church built by him with this sacred treasure; he also surrounded the place itself in which it was situated, namely Resapha, with very high walls, as I have already said above. For since, as appears, the Lord made the tomb of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Resapha illustrious by signs and prodigies, a huge multitude of pilgrims, as it seems, flowed together hither, visiting it and decorating it with precious gifts in order to render the Saints propitious to themselves. Alexander, therefore, in order, as appears, both to check the insatiable rapacity of the neighbouring Saracens, from whom he feared both for the church built by him and above all for the treasures kept in it, and to render Resapha safe for the pilgrims against their assaults, thought fit to add to the church founded by him there very high walls with which to fortify it. Nor did his doing so, as appears, lack fruit; for it seems partly to have come about from this that the tomb of the Saints thereafter began to be visited by more numerous Christians, or at least that their accustomed concourse to it did not cease. However that may be, it appears most probable from what is now to be said that the Saints indeed, in the fifth century, when Resapha had already been surrounded with walls by Alexander, which from what has been said above happened about the year 430, were honoured with frequent pilgrimages to their tomb at Resapha.

[59] a miracle which happened then by their help is here related, Nicephorus Callistus, in the Ecclesiastical History, book 15, chapter 23, narrates in these following words a notable miracle which happened under Acacius, patriarch of Constantinople, promoted to that see in the year 471, as may be seen in the chronological History of the patriarchs of Constantinople prefixed to volume 1 of August of our Work: "A certain ruler of the synagogue among the Jews, seized with two boys in a tumult that had been stirred up, as though he had been its author, was cruelly tortured by a man of consular rank, many people being present. And he, amid various torments, cried out only this: O God of St. Sergius, help me. St. Sergius, thou knowest. The judges, further, thinking that the Hebrew was feigning and dissembling these things, condemned him who had uttered those words to the fire, to be burned alive. And behold, in the midst of the flame two horsemen, clad in white robes, appearing, kept him for many hours untouched by the fire; and the multitude, leaping into the flame, snatched the man out of it. And he, afterwards baptized, was named Sergius: and he, enlightened no less in mind too, having sold his substance, which he had in abundance, built in the place of the pyre a most ample temple to Sergius the martyr: where, his head shaven, he spent the rest of his life according to the good pleasure of God. The same did his two boys, their names being changed into the names of Sergius and Bacchus."

[60] were honoured with frequent pilgrimages to their tomb, Baronius too, citing Nicephorus, reviews this same miracle in the Ecclesiastical Annals at the year 471; and into the words in which he does so he inserts this observation: "Pilgrimage to the holy martyr Sergius was frequent in these times, from whom people were wont to receive what each asked: and this being widely known, it came about that vehement pain wrung from the Jew, suffering dreadful things, that he should invoke the God of St. Sergius." So he: and although the prodigy which he relates, as first recorded by Nicephorus, a writer of the fourteenth century and so removed by about nine centuries from the event, does not merit undoubted credence, yet the observation he suggests, which I have transcribed, appears consonant with the truth as regards the frequent pilgrimage which it asserts was wont to be made in those times, that is, as the fifth century was growing old, and therefore when the church at Resapha had already been founded to the Saints by Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, and this city fortified with walls, to St. Sergius, or to the temple at Resapha sacred to him and St. Bacchus. For since this veneration toward the Saints probably had place already from the beginning of the fifth century, from what has been said, that is, before the church of Resapha was founded to the Saints, and certainly, as I shall show below, in the sixth century, it seems most probable that it had place also in the same fifth century when the said church had already been founded.

[61] For the rest, Resapha, from about the time And Resapha, its name changed, was called Sergiopolis. when Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, adorned it with the new church built in honour of SS. Sergius and Bacchus and strengthened it with fortifications, seems to have been called Sergiopolis, its ancient name being laid aside, from the singular veneration of the inhabitants and of others toward St. Sergius. For in Procopius, On the Persian War, at the years 540 and 542, Candidus, bishop of Sergiopolis, occurs; and in the council of Constantinople, celebrated in the year 554, Abraham, likewise bishop of Sergiopolis; and the praised Procopius, who flourished in the sixth century, writes in book 2 of the Buildings, chapter 9, that the church sacred to St. Sergius, or rather the place in which it was built, was called Sergiopolis by the ancients: so that accordingly Resapha in the age of Procopius, that is, in the sixth century, had already long, and therefore most probably not long after about the year 431, or after the building of the church to St. Sergius by Alexander of Hierapolis, been distinguished by that new name, the old being laid aside. I could say more here still about the church built to SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Resapha, about this place itself, afterwards called Sergiopolis, and about the veneration paid there to the Saints and particularly to St. Sergius; but the chronological order which I have resolved to follow requires that, before I bring these things forward, I should teach the reader some other things, earlier in the time at which they were done.

§ V. Various churches built to the Saints in the sixth century, and other offices of veneration paid chiefly in the East.

[The emperor Anastasius was deterred by a vision from putting Justin and Justinian to death.] That the Saints, and particularly St. Sergius, were held in the greatest veneration in the fifth century, and perhaps even earlier, in Syria, or, if you prefer, in the province of this most ample region named Augusta Euphratensis, the things we discoursed in the preceding § most clearly prove; and that it increased very greatly in the sixth century, and did not remain confined to the borders of Syria alone, the things we are about to bring in the present § will likewise most clearly show. From the source from which, as then to the Saints'

cult or veneration much increase accrued, it seems to have arisen, I take my beginning. Already from the beginning of the sixth century, and perhaps even from an earlier time, our Saints, as you will gather from what is to be said, seem to have enjoyed the highest veneration in Illyria and Dardania too; and both of them, on the other hand, are maintained to have shown themselves in a plainly singular manner benevolent toward Justin and his nephew Justinian, afterwards emperors, who were sprung from that tract of country, and who perhaps revered both Saints exceedingly from an affection toward them drawn in their native land. Justin and his nephew Justinian had been accused of high treason before the emperor Anastasius, in whose service they were bound, a little before his death, which occurred in the year 518, and were, as appears, undoubtedly to be condemned to death by him; but the emperor having been deterred from inflicting death on them by a terrifying vision presented to him in sleep, they came off free.

[63] Zonaras and Cedrenus, who write of the event, I first set forth in the very words of these writers, That not one only, as Zonaras and Cedrenus write, intending afterwards to declare what appears to be determined concerning their narrative. The former uses these following words in the Annals, book 14, chapter 4: "Anastasius, a little before his death, plots having been reported to him, had seized many, and among others Justin and Justinian, who afterwards gained the supreme power, and he had it in mind to kill them. But he was deterred by a dream, when a terrible man seemed to stand by him and say: Do no harm to Justin and Justinian; for each in his own time will serve God"; and the latter, in the Compendium of histories woven by him, these: "Anastasius … a little before he died, information of plots made against him having been brought to him, ordered many to be seized and put to death. Among those taken were Justin and Justinian too; and when he had resolved to kill them, a certain terrible man stood by him in sleep, saying thus: To you indeed, O emperor, it is permitted to remove the other plotters; but from Justin and Justinian abstain from every evil deed; for it will not be lawful for you to do them harm, however much you may wish. And when Anastasius said that they were guilty of injury to the imperial majesty, he answered that they were vessels fit for carrying out the counsel of Providence, and that each in his own time would render service to God. And these two indeed Anastasius absolved of the crime; and the outcome in its time proved the dream. For each of them, after the death of Anastasius, held the empire." Thus, then, at the end of his Life the emperor Anastasius was impelled to absolve Justin and Justinian, afterwards emperors, of the crime of injured majesty of which they had been made defendants, by the terrifying appearance of a man appearing to him in sleep and forbidding them to be put to death, if only Zonaras and Cedrenus write rightly in the words recited; but it has also been recorded that Anastasius was moved to spare Justin and Justinian by the terrifying appearance not of one man only but of two, of whom one was St. Sergius and the other St. Bacchus; and that by a writer older than Zonaras and Cedrenus, if credence is to be given to Alemanni in his Annotations on the Secret History of Procopius.

[64] but two appeared, of whom one was St. Sergius, the other St. Bacchus, For on the sixth chapter of this History, in which Procopius relates that Justin, when he had been accused of a crime and cast into prison under John the Hunchback, under whom he was serving while the latter led the imperial army against the rebel Isaurians at the beginning of the reign entered upon by Anastasius in the year 491, was snatched from the most present danger of death by a terrifying vision of a man presented to that general in sleep once, again, and a third time, he observes thus: "The wonderful deliverance of Justin others too have written, John Zonaras, Cedrenus" (I have already given the words of these two) "and Ephraemius in the Chronicle; but it is plainly another than that which Procopius" (namely, at the place just cited) "affirms happened while John the Hunchback was leading forces against the Isaurians, under whose authority Justin was then serving, namely at the beginning of the principate of Anastasius; for at the end of the same man's reign Justin was patrician, senator and count of the Praetorians; and what confirms this more and more is that Justinian, the nephew of Justin, when the Hunchback was leading the army, was plainly a boy, and was not living in the camp, so as to be able to be a partner in the crime or prison of his uncle which they narrate: for he served in the candidati, as Victor of Tunnuna says, about the beginning of the reign of Justin. Therefore Justin is cast into prison a second time by Anastasius with his nephew Justinian, then over thirty years of age, accused of high treason. But he is rescued not by that appearance of a man, as Zonaras" (go to his words just recited) "and others write, which Procopius relates appeared here to the Hunchback, master of the soldiery; but by the martyrs Sergius and Bacchus being seen in sleep by the emperor Anastasius, whose veneration was the highest among the Dardanians and Illyrians, and among these very Justin and Justinian, their fellow tribesmen and kinsmen, by whom a little after a most magnificent temple was raised to the same martyrs Sergius and Bacchus at the city of Scodra and the river Barbana, as Theophilus, Justinian's preceptor, narrated more fully.

[65] [Alemanni, a writer not unskilled, relates from Theophilus, Justinian's preceptor,] "That first vision of John the Hunchback and the second of the emperor Anastasius plainly agree in this, that Justin and his kin were to be, to use the words of Cedrenus, σκεύη χωρητικὰ τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ βουλῆστε καὶ προνοίας, καὶ μέλλουσιν ὑπουργῆσαι τῷ Θεῷ ἕκαστος ἐν τοῖς καιροῖς ἀυτοῦ, vessels fit for carrying out the counsel of divine Providence, and that each in his own time would render service to God." Thus far Niccolò Alemanni, whom I have praised for these words. And first, he contends not without reason that the vision by which Justin, when he had been accused before John the Hunchback, leader of the forces of Anastasius at the beginning of the reign entered upon by him, was delivered from the most present danger to his life, is different from the vision by which Justin and Justinian together, when they had been charged with a graver crime before the emperor Anastasius a little before his death, were snatched from the most closely impending danger of death. But does he likewise with good reason, or rightly, affirm that this was done by a terrifying vision presented to the emperor Anastasius not of one man only but of two, of whom one was St. Sergius and the other St. Bacchus? For this assertion of his and for another which he presently joins to it he cites Theophilus, Justinian's preceptor; but who or of what kind he was he does not declare, nor have I, even after most diligent search, been able to discover it. Tillemont, in volume 5 of the Memoirs, notes in the lower margin of page 495 that he too does not know what author the Theophilus praised by Alemanni is. However that may be, there does not indeed seem to be reason why we should think that an author is cited by Alemanni, whom I find traduced by no one as an inept or deceitful writer, who either never existed or did not commit to writing the things which he ascribes to him. And since this is so, and the Theophilus praised by Alemanni flourished in the age of the emperor Justinian, inasmuch as he was his preceptor, it indeed appears that credence is to be given rather to him who writes that Justin and Justinian were delivered from the danger of imminent death to be inflicted on them by the emperor Anastasius, SS. Sergius and Bacchus appearing to him in sleep, than to Zonaras and Cedrenus, writers later than the tenth century, who attribute plainly no part in that vision presented to Anastasius to SS. Sergius and Bacchus.

[66] Du Cange, in Christian Constantinople, book 4, page 135, number 88, [and Du Cange too assents to him, nor altogether without reason is this done by him; the sacred buildings,] citing also for himself the praised Alemanni, writes thus: "The veneration of the martyrs SS. Sergius and Bacchus was the highest among the Dardanians and Illyrians, by whose help Justin, accused of high treason and cast into prison by the emperor Anastasius together with his nephew Justinian, was freed, the same being seen in sleep by Anastasius." Thus Du Cange, assenting without doubt to Alemanni, who, as I have already taught, attributes the vision presented to the emperor Anastasius, by which Justin and Justinian, afterwards emperors, were delivered from the most present danger to their lives, not to one man only who gave himself to be seen by Anastasius in sleep in terrifying form, but to two, of whom one was St. Sergius and the other St. Bacchus; nor, as appears, altogether without reason: for he could have been impelled to this by almost the same reasons which I have already alleged; and these are such that, when they are regarded, the matter seems to be held, if not as certain, at least as very probable; especially since the sacred buildings which, partly Justinian alone, partly Justin and Justinian together, are maintained afterwards to have raised to these two Saints in various places, are an argument of some sort that Justin and Justinian were favoured with that benefit by SS. Sergius and Bacchus. It may indeed be replied that the sacred building afterwards erected to SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Scodra and the river Barbana, the construction of which alone is attributed to Justin and Justinian together, is mentioned by Alemanni in the words recited above solely on the credit of the Theophilus praised above, an unknown writer, all the other ancient writers being silent, and even Procopius himself, who nevertheless reviews all the buildings erected by Justinian.

[67] which both by Justin together with Justinian at Scodra, But although this is so, there does not seem to be reason why Alemanni should have refused credence to Theophilus asserting that that sacred building at Scodra was raised to SS. Sergius and Bacchus by Justin together with Justinian in memory of the benefit received by their help. For although not even Procopius himself, who nevertheless reviews in a work purposely elaborated on this matter all the buildings, both sacred and profane, either erected or restored or even only enlarged by Justinian, anywhere makes mention of that sacred building, there is yet no reason why this should seem strange to anyone, since the sacred building of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Scodra of which we speak here, although it is also, as appears, to be attributed in part to Justinian, was nevertheless erected in the reign of Justin, and it was Procopius's aim in the mentioned Work to enumerate only those buildings which were either raised from the foundations, or restored, or even only enlarged by Justinian when he was already guiding the reins of empire. And as regards the silence of the other writers about the same sacred building, there is no reason either why this should seem strange to anyone. For of all of them there is plainly none who undertook purposely to commemorate the buildings, either sacred or profane, which were erected either through the care of Justin and Justinian together or at least while the former of these two emperors guided the reins of empire; and the writers who committed to writing in general the things done in the reign of Justin are not to be thought to have done it so accurately as to have omitted none at all.

[68] and by Justinian alone at Constantinople, All things therefore having been maturely weighed, I do not think that credence is to be denied without doubt to Alemanni relating from Theophilus that the sacred building at Scodra and the river Barbana was raised to SS. Sergius and Bacchus by Justin and Justinian together, although

meanwhile the matter, because it is obscure who this writer was, does not seem certain in every respect. But let these things now suffice concerning the buildings of the Saints erected by Justin and Justinian together, or rather concerning the single sacred building raised at Scodra; as regards those which Justinian erected alone, it is certain from Procopius that he, when already raised to the empire, erected at Constantinople near the palace of Hormisdas, where he had lived before he obtained the empire, a plainly notable building to SS. Sergius and Bacchus. Hear this writer himself testifying it in his own words, book 1 on the buildings erected by Justinian, chapter 4. "To Sergius also," he says, "and Bacchus, renowned dwellers in heaven, he established a temple there" (namely at Constantinople near the palace of Hormisdas); "then he set another" (namely sacred to SS. Peter and Paul) "at an angle to it. For both do not face each other; but they cohere at the side, comparable with one another; they have common entrances, are altogether equal to each other, and are girt with platforms. Neither surpasses or yields to the other in beauty, size, or any other thing. Both equally surpass the sun in the brilliance of their marbles, and are smeared everywhere with abundant gold alike and filled with gifts. In this one thing they differ, that the length of the latter is straight, whereas the columns of the former are almost all disposed in a semicircle. They have one portico in the vestibule, which obtained its name from the Narthex or fennel-stalk for this reason, that it stretches out very far. All the propylaea are common, the atrium, the middle doors, and the junction with the palace. Such, finally, is the magnificence of each temple that manifest adornment accrues hence to the whole city and to the palace itself."

[69] Thus far Procopius, wonderfully proclaiming the elegance and beauty of the two sacred buildings mentioned by him here, a great sum of money having been spent on it, of which the emperor Justinian founded one to SS. Peter and Paul and the other to SS. Sergius and Bacchus: Cedrenus further relates, at pages 348 and 366, that those two sacred buildings were situated by the sea, and that Justinian not only devoted to raising them his former wealth, which he had possessed as a private man, but also established in them a monastery of men. This last, as also that the said building sacred to SS. Sergius and Bacchus was situated by the sea, is also taught by the anonymous author whom Banduri published in print at Paris in the year 1711, in the Antiquities of Constantinople, part 3, near the beginning, a title conceived in these words being prefixed, On the monastery of St. Sergius and Bacchus, surnamed of Hormisdas, and writing thus: "The place called of Hormisdas was a small harbour, in which Justinian the Great built a monastery in the name of Sergius and Bacchus." Whoever desires to know more either about this monastery or about the sacred building pertaining to it, erected by Justinian at Constantinople to SS. Sergius and Bacchus and now converted by the Turks into a Mosque, as Thevet teaches in book 19 of the Cosmography, chapter 3, may go to Du Cange in Christian Constantinople, book 4, page 135 and following, where he will also find the inscription already recited at number 37, which, since it was formerly set up in the Constantinopolitan sacred building of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, also makes it credible that this was built by Justinian, as will become plain to anyone reading it. Let us now review two other buildings sacred to SS. Sergius and Bacchus, or at least to the former of our two Saints alone, unless perhaps, which however I do not think, they are to be attributed to St. Sergius, martyr of Caesarea in Cappadocia, already given among us at the 24th day of February; one of which Justinian founded, and the other he favoured with a benefaction or enlarged.

[70] Procopius, in the Work which is entitled On the buildings of Justinian, records thus of this emperor in book 5, chapter 9: and are maintained to have been built elsewhere, are an argument of some sort. "He built these wells or cisterns. In the monastery of St. Samuel a well and a wall, in the monastery of abbot Zacharias a well … in the monastery of St. Sergius on the mountain whose name is Cisseron, a well; the wall of Tiberias; among the people of Bostra the poorhouse of Phoenice; at Porphyreon a shrine of the Mother of God, the monastery of St. Phocas on the mountain; a shrine of St. Sergius at Ptolemais." The former of the two churches of St. Sergius here mentioned is placed in Palestine, the latter in Phoenicia, by Tillemont, volume 5 of the Memoirs, page 495, nor does it appear that he is to be opposed in this matter. But although both these sacred places are distinguished by Procopius by the name of St. Sergius alone, yet I think it is for this reason to be doubted whether they were not dedicated to St. Bacchus as well as to St. Sergius, that of these two Saints of ours Sergius, as surpassing Bacchus both in the office which he discharged while alive and in the celebrity of his name, may in some way seem the principal; and sacred buildings which are dedicated to several Saints are not rarely (go to what I have already brought forward bearing on this at number 55) designated by writers only by the name of the principal one. Now, since the matter stands so, and it appears from all that has been said that it is not to be doubted that sacred buildings, at least some in number, built to both our Saints partly by Justin and Justinian together, partly by Justinian alone, existed, this is certainly an argument of some sort, as I have said, that the vision related above, by which the emperor Anastasius was deterred from putting Justin and Justinian to death, was presented to him by SS. Sergius and Bacchus, although meanwhile the matter cannot be certain even from this, because it may be that Justin and Justinian built the buildings sacred to the Saints not out of memory of a benefit received but out of the veneration toward the Saints conceived in their native land.

[71] [That in the sixth century the Saints were singularly venerated in various places appears also from this;] From the sacred places just reviewed here, which in the age of Justin and Justinian, that is, in the sixth century, as we have already seen, stood dedicated to both our Saints or at least to Sergius alone of them, it seems besides to be gathered that it then came about that they were honoured more and more not only among the Illyrians, among whom, even when those places had not yet been built, they seem to have been in great veneration, from the recited words of the Alemanni praised above, who cites for himself Theophilus, preceptor of the emperor Justinian; but also that in Palestine and Phoenicia one of them, namely Sergius, and perhaps Bacchus too, and at Constantinople both the latter and the former, were favoured with a plainly notable ecclesiastical cult not only by the emperor Justinian but also by those who were subject to his rule in those parts. This observation now added to the others which I have already adduced, I come again to the church of our Saints at Resapha. Procopius writes thus in book 2 of the Buildings, chapter 9: "There is in Euphratensis a temple sacred to Sergius, a Saint of great name; whom the ancients so venerated and looked up to that they called the place Sergiopolis. They had enclosed it with a very low wall, which would namely suffice to prevent the Saracens of those parts from bursting in at the first approach. For the Saracens are not born to assault walls. Certainly any wall in their way, even the weakest and compacted only of mud, checks their onset. Afterwards this temple became exceedingly renowned for its gifts and sacred furniture. Which the emperor Justinian, considering, forthwith turned his care thither, surrounded the place with most splendid walls, and provided an abundance of water, an immense quantity of it being collected into reservoirs. Besides, he built houses, porticoes, and other buildings with which cities are wont to be adorned. He also established a military garrison there, to defend the walls when the matter should require. Indeed Chosroes, king of the Persians, when, most eager to take the city, he had besieged it with great forces, prevented by the strength of the fortification, raised the siege with the matter unaccomplished."

[72] These things argue that the renown of St. Sergius's name and the veneration of him among the people were great indeed even before the age of Procopius. But in the individual things which he asserts in them, and particularly that St. Sergius was honoured with pilgrimages at Resapha, this writer does not sufficiently agree with Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, praised above more than once. For Justinian, as he relates, surrounded with most splendid walls Sergiopolis, which had previously been enclosed only by a very low wall; and yet this same city had already been surrounded with very high walls from the age of Alexander of Hierapolis, a whole century older than Justinian, as that bishop himself teaches in the letter he wrote, which I praised above, to the Augustae Eudocia and Pulcheria. It must be, therefore, that the walls of Sergiopolis built before had partly through age, partly through the injury of the times, collapsed or even been partly destroyed in the age of Justinian and Procopius; and since they had hence become low, having lost their former height, Procopius thought them to have been such from the beginning, although meanwhile, on the testimony of Alexander of Hierapolis, whom no one would dare to accuse of falsehood in this matter, they had been very high. But however this matter may stand, it contributes little to our purpose; more nearly does it touch it that the reason for which Procopius writes, in the words just recited, that Resapha was fortified by Justinian is drawn from the sacred furniture and precious gifts for which the church of St. Sergius at Resapha was renowned in the age of Justinian, that is, in the sixth century.

[73] For even from this it does not appear to be doubted that the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Resapha was then renowned for the frequent concourse to it of pilgrims, is gathered from Procopius. by whom those gifts were offered to this sacred building and particularly to St. Sergius, especially since the words of Gregory of Tours, who flourished in the same sixth century, to be recited at number 86, also support this opinion, as appears. Moreover, since Justinian, as Procopius indicates in the words just recited, surrounded Sergiopolis or Resapha with most splendid walls, adding also a military garrison to defend them, in order that the gifts and sacred furniture of the temple consecrated to St. Sergius, which was situated in this city, might be safely guarded, it does not likewise appear to be doubted that he did this from a singular veneration toward St. Sergius, which also bears closely on this. Nor did Justinian only, out of this veneration, study to guard the sacred furniture and gifts of the Sergian temple in the manner already stated, but he also increased them, adding to them a new donation of a golden cross. Evagrius teaches us this, furnishing at the same time besides another argument of extraordinary veneration toward St. Sergius, and also a notable miracle wrought by his power. Here are the very words in which that writer does all this, in the Ecclesiastical History, book 4, chapter 28. "I shall now relate," he says, "what was done by the same Chosroes elsewhere, around the city of Sergiopolis. For it is extraordinary, and altogether worthy to be commended to the everlasting memory of men.

[74] "For Chosroes came to this city too, That his sacred bones were also then kept there in a chest covered with silver, desiring to storm it. When, therefore, having brought up the ram, he had already begun to shake the walls, the townsfolk entered into a parley with him for the sake of saving the city. And at length it was agreed between them that the sacred vessels of the church should be given for the ransom of the city: among which was a cross which Justinian and Theodora had sent there. These having been carried to Chosroes,

Chosroes inquires of the priest and of the Persians who had been sent with him for that purpose whether nothing more remained. Then one of those who were accustomed to lie answered that there were other treasures besides, hidden by the townsfolk, who were very few. Further, of the sacred treasures which were brought together, no vessel of gold or silver indeed had been left, but one of another more excellent material, and wholly dedicated to God, namely the most holy relics of the invincible martyr Sergius, laid up in a certain oblong chest covered with silver. Induced by these things, when Chosroes had moved his whole army up to the city, suddenly along the whole circuit of the walls there was seen an innumerable multitude of soldiers defending the city with shields. Which being seen, those who had been sent by Chosroes returned, reporting both the number and the kind of armour not without wonder. But Chosroes, after he had inquired again and learned that very few had remained in the city, and those either old men or little children, all the strong having namely been removed, understood that the Martyr was the author of this miracle. And on this account, struck with fear and wondering at the faith of the Christians, he returned into his own kingdom. They say also that near the end of his life he was initiated in the sacred laver of regeneration."

[75] [Evagrius relates, and this, although meanwhile concerning the miracle which he likewise relates, and which] Thus Evagrius; and that the sacred bones of St. Sergius, as he writes, were kept at Resapha in an oblong chest covered with silver when Chosroes was besieging this city, I believe this writer when he asserts it; but whether it came about by the prodigy which he narrates besides here, and which, as appears, would be attributed to St. Sergius, that Sergiopolis was freed from the siege by which it was pressed by Chosroes, king of the Persians, may not without reason be called into doubt. For Procopius, who lived contemporary with that warlike expedition undertaken by Chosroes in the year 542, as Pagi rightly teaches at this year in the Critica, makes absolutely no mention anywhere of that prodigy, and records in book 2 of the Buildings, chapter 9, and book 2 of the Persian War, chapter 20, that it happened by a far different cause that the Persians were compelled to raise the siege of which we speak; in the former Work indeed using these few words, already given above: "Chosroes, king of the Persians, when, most eager to take the city" (namely of Sergiopolis), "he had besieged it with great forces, prevented by the strength of the fortification, raised the siege with the matter unaccomplished"; and in the latter treating the matter more fully in this way: "At the beginning of spring Chosroes, son of Cabades, burst a third time into the Roman territory with a huge army, making his way along the Euphrates, which flowed on the right. When Candidus, bishop of Sergiopolis, heard that the forces of the Medes were very near, fearing for himself and his city because he had not performed his promises to Chosroes on the appointed day, he entered the enemy's camp and besought him not to be angry with him for this reason: that he had never had money: that for this reason he had refused at the very beginning to ransom the people of Sura: and that by his prayers, though earnestly repeated, he had not prevailed in the least with Justinian Augustus.

[76] does not sufficiently agree with what Procopius writes, "Nevertheless Chosroes held him in custody, and, raging against his body with most bitter torture, wished to exact a sum double that which had been agreed by the compact. But he asked as a suppliant that men be sent to Sergiopolis to receive whatever precious furniture there was in the temple of the city. When Chosroes had ordered this to be done, Candidus sent some of his own retinue along with them. Those whom the king had appointed having been received into the city, the people of Sergiopolis gave many things from the sacred treasury, asserting that nothing else was left to them. But Chosroes, contending that far more was owed him, said he was not content with these. Wherefore he sent a band of his own men, ostensibly to search out the wealth of the city, but in reality with this design, that they might seize it. But since Sergiopolis was by no means to come into the power of the Persians, a certain Saracen, a Christian and subject to the rule of Alamundarus, whose name was Ambrus, came by night to the walls of the city, and, having disclosed the fraud, urged the citizens by no means to receive the Persians. And so those whom he himself had sent returned empty to Chosroes. Gravely offended by this repulse, he formed the design of storming the city: he presently ordered an army consisting of six thousand to set out thither, to lay siege, and to make an assault on the walls. When they had come there, they set hand to the work. And at first indeed the people of Sergiopolis resisted bravely; but afterwards, their spirits collapsing and dreading the hazard of Mars, they were contemplating surrender: for they had not more than two hundred soldiers. But Ambrus, again coming forward by night to the walls, signified that the Persians, compelled by want of water, would raise the siege within two days. Wherefore the townsfolk did not come to a parley with the enemy. And the barbarians moved camp, parched with thirst, and returned to Chosroes: who thereafter never let Candidus go."

[77] In the mind of Procopius, therefore, it came about not by a prodigy but partly by the strength of the walls, may not without reason be doubted, appears undoubted, as also that by Chosroes partly by want of water, that Chosroes, king of the Persians, was compelled to withdraw from the siege of Sergiopolis. Wherefore, since Procopius, as has already been said, was contemporary with this matter, done, as has likewise been said, in the year of Christ 542, while Evagrius, inasmuch as he did not flourish before the sixth century was growing old, lived removed from it by a space of at least forty years, there is certainly reason why it may not without reason be doubted whether one must assent to this writer when he asserts that the Persians were compelled to raise the siege of Sergiopolis by the prodigy which he alleges. But however this matter may stand, what the same Evagrius records in the words recited about the relics of St. Sergius kept at Sergiopolis in an oblong chest covered with silver when this city was being besieged by the Persians, and about the singular care of the people of Sergiopolis in guarding them, appears sufficiently certain; nor does Procopius by his manner of writing, which is expressed in his words just recited, render this matter in any way suspect of falsehood, as will be plain to anyone considering it. And since this is so, we have indeed from the praised Evagrius another clear argument of the veneration paid to St. Sergius in the sixth century. But this same writer furnishes far more certain arguments too, since he was himself contemporary with them, of a plainly extraordinary veneration paid to St. Sergius, as the sixth century was already verging to its end, by another Chosroes, king of the Persians. This man, as the praised Evagrius teaches in book 4, chapter 17, was the son of Hormisdas, king of the Persians; and when he had come into the lands subject to the Roman empire to ask aid from the emperor Maurice against the Persians in rebellion against him, and had understood that St. Sergius grants the requests of those who take refuge with him, he promised the holy Martyr a golden cross if the army which he was sending against his enemy, by name Zadespram, should bring him before him alive or dead. Chosroes was a Heathen; but since God, as Tillemont rightly says in volume 5 of the Memoirs, page 494, hears even the most perverse, and even the demons themselves when it pleases Him, when it is a question only of the temporal things of this world, Chosroes in the first year of his reign, which, as Pagi teaches in the Critica, runs from the end of the year 590 to the end likewise of the year 591, had made the vow on the seventh day of January, and on the ninth day of the following February received with the greatest joy of mind the head of Zadespram brought to him, and not long after recovered his kingdom.

[78] various gifts to Sergius, when he had experienced him benevolent toward himself, Go for almost all these things to Evagrius, Ecclesiastical History, book 4, chapters 17 and 21; from which latter place you will besides understand, first, that Chosroes, his kingdom recovered, not only gave a golden cross to the church of St. Sergius at Resapha, to which he was bound by the obligation of his vow, but also restored to it a golden cross likewise, found in the treasuries of his kingdom, which, as we saw above, the people of Sergiopolis had formerly been compelled to hand over to the elder Chosroes, the son of Cabades; and then that the same king, when on other occasions also he had experienced St. Sergius beneficent toward himself, a vow having been made to him, showed himself excellently grateful and reverent toward him, sending to the temple of the holy Martyr at Resapha gifts, not only those to which he was held by the obligation of his vow, but also other most precious ones. Since the praised twenty-first chapter of the Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius furnishes most clear arguments of the plainly notable veneration paid to St. Sergius in the sixth century, and conduces very much to the glory of the same Saint of ours, I cannot but transcribe it here whole. And I am moved to this chiefly also because it comprises the documents by which Chosroes himself makes credible the things just asserted, and brings forward not a few things tending to the honour of the Saint. It is conceived, then, in these Latin words, from the version of Valois: "But Chosroes, when he had recovered his kingdom, sent to Gregory a cross adorned with much gold and precious stones in honour of the most invincible martyr Sergius: which Theodora, the wife of Justinian, had dedicated to the same Martyr; but Chosroes had plundered it along with other treasures, as has been mentioned by me above.

[79] as by the inscription which was added by him "The same Chosroes sent besides another golden cross, on which he inscribed this in Greek letters: 'I, Chosroes, king of kings, son of Hormisdas, at the time when, through the devilish working and malice of the most unhappy Varamus and of the horsemen who were with him, I betook myself to the dominion of the Romans: and since the most unhappy Zadespram had come with an army to Nisibis, to solicit the horsemen of Nisibis to revolt from us and attack us; we too sent horsemen to the town of Charchas together with a general. And since we had heard that the venerable and most celebrated St. Sergius grants all things that are asked of him; in the first year of our reign, on the seventh day of the month of January, we asked through the genius of the same Saint, promising that, if our horsemen should slay Zadespram or at least take him alive, we would send a golden cross set with little stones to his shrine, on account of his venerable name. And on the ninth day of the month of February our horsemen brought to us the head of the same Zadespram. Having therefore obtained our vow, that the matter may be made manifest to all, and no room for doubt be left, we have sent to the shrine of the most venerable St. Sergius this cross made by us in his most venerable name, together with that which was formerly sent by the Emperor of the Romans Justinian to the shrine of the same Sergius, but afterwards, war having arisen between the two commonwealths, was brought here by Chosroes, son of Cabades, our father, and was found in our treasuries.' These crosses Gregory" (namely the patriarch of Antioch, who, as may be seen in the chronological History of the patriarchs of Antioch prefixed to volume IV of July of our Work, page 98, sat from the year 570 to the year 593), "having received them not without the consent of the emperor Maurice, dedicated with great pomp in the Church of the holy Martyr. And not long after the same Chosroes sent other gifts also to the same

church, and ordered these words to be inscribed in Greek speech on a golden paten.

[80] "'I, Chosroes, king of kings, son of Hormisdas, have caused these things to be inscribed on this paten, were offered, and are here recited, not that they might be seen by men, nor that the greatness of thy venerable name might become known by my words, but both on account of the truth of the things which are inscribed, and on account of the many and very great benefits with which thou hast favoured me. For it is to me in place of happiness that my name should be found engraved on thy sacred vessels. When I was in the place which is called Beramais, I asked of thee, holy Man, that thou wouldst bring me help, and that Sira might conceive in the womb. And since Sira was a Christian, and I a heathen, our law indeed did by no means permit us to have a Christian wife. I, however, on account of my goodwill toward thee, neglected the law for the sake of this woman; and I loved her with a special love above my other wives, and love her more and more day by day. And so I resolved now to implore thy kindness, holy Man, that she might become pregnant. I asked, therefore, and pronounced a vow that, if Sira should become pregnant, I would send as a gift to thy venerable shrine the cross which she wears. For this reason I and Sira have determined to retain this cross in memory of thy name, holy Man. And in place of it we have resolved to send its valuation, which by no means exceeds four thousand four hundred miliarensian staters, five thousand staters. And from the time when I conceived this vow and turned these things over within myself, until I came to Rosumchosdrum, not more than ten days elapsed, when thou, holy man, not because I had deserved it, but out of thy kindness, appeared to me by night in sleep, and thrice affirmed to me that Sira would be pregnant.

[81] "'And I in the same vision thrice answered thee, make credible, It is well. And since thou grantest the things that are asked of thee, from that day Sira did not experience the courses of women. I, indeed, would perhaps have doubted of this matter, had I not believed thy words, because thou art a holy man and givest what is asked, that Sira would thereafter not experience the courses of women. From this, therefore, I perceived the power of the vision and the truth of the things foretold by thee. Wherefore forthwith I sent the cross itself and its price to thy venerable shrine, ordering that from its price one paten and one cup be made for the use of the sacred mysteries: likewise a cross, to be fixed on the sacred altar, and a censer: all of gold. Besides, a Hunnic veil adorned with gold. And whatever miliarenses shall be left over from the aforesaid price, we wish them to belong to thy sacred shrine, so that through thy genius, holy Man, thou mayest bring help to me and Sira in all things, but especially in this petition; and that what has befallen us through thy intercession may come to perfection by the mercy of thy kindness, according to the mind of us both. So that, namely, I and Sira and all mortals may place hope and confidence in thy power and believe in thee.'"

[82] were offered twice. And this, first indeed, as from Simocatta Of the gifts reviewed in this chapter of the Evagrian History now given, whether Chosroes, son of Hormisdas, king of the Persians, truly offered them to St. Sergius the things furnished in that same chapter certainly do not allow us to doubt, there treats also, in book 5 of the Histories, chapters 13 and 14, Theophylact Simocatta, who flourished at the beginning of the seventh century, and therefore not very long after Evagrius, reciting also the two inscriptions which the same chapter of the Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius, which I have just recited, likewise comprises; and although he wrongly distinguishes these, which Evagrius relates were written in Greek and engraved on the gifts sent by Chosroes to the church of St. Sergius at Resapha, merely by the name of letters added to them, yet he presents the latter of them more correct, as appears, as regards the words in which Chosroes speaks of the apparition of St. Sergius presented to him and of the pregnancy of his wife Sira. For these, but not likewise those in which Chosroes does this in Evagrius, produce a lucid and by no means involved sense, corresponding, according to the translation which I myself have made, to these following Latin words: "Holy one, not because I had deserved it, but out of kindness thou gavest thyself to be seen by me in a nocturnal vision, and didst say a third time that Sira was pregnant; and I in the same vision answered thee a third time, saying: It is well, it is well, it is well. And by thy power and mercy, and on account of thy most venerable name, and because thou art the giver of the things that are asked of thee, Sira from that day did not see what is wont to befall women. And I did not doubt of this matter (namely of Sira's pregnancy), but gave credence to thy words; and when afterwards she had not suffered her monthly courses, because thou art good and a true giver of the things that are asked of thee, I perceived from this the force of the vision and the truth of the things which had been said by thee."

[83] is gathered, happened in the year 591, and the second time in 593, Nor does Simocatta furnish only what has already been said as regards the latter of the two inscriptions which were engraved on the gifts sent by Chosroes to the church of St. Sergius at Resapha; but he also teaches in express words that the golden cross which Chosroes first offered to St. Sergius, together with the golden cross formerly taken away by Chosroes the son of Cabades, was fixed to the top of this latter cross; and he furnishes besides, to pass over other things less worth noting in which he differs from Evagrius, things from which it is possible to draw out both the year in which these gifts, and likewise the year in which the other gifts expressed in the latter of the two said inscriptions, were sent by Chosroes to the church of St. Sergius at Resapha. For having brought forward the former of those two inscriptions, in which Chosroes records that, after receiving in the first year of his reign, on the ninth day of February, the head of the slain Zedespram, he gave a golden cross to the church of St. Sergius at Resapha, he presently subjoins that the same Chosroes in the next year publicly called Sira, whom he had joined to himself in marriage, queen, and then in the third year made supplication to St. Sergius the martyr for offspring to be had from her, and not so long after, when he had again experienced him benevolent toward himself in that matter, sent gifts a second time to his church at Resapha: and since these things are so, and the first year of the reign of Chosroes ran, as I taught above, from the end of the year 590 to the end likewise of the year 591, it follows from Simocatta that it came about that the gifts recounted in the former of the two aforesaid inscriptions were sent by Chosroes to the church of St. Sergius at Resapha in the year 591, and those in the latter in the year 593, or certainly not much after.

[84] Further, whatever the chapter of the Ecclesiastical History of Evagrius just recited furnishes, nor, that Chosroes, who nevertheless did not embrace the Christian faith, Nicephorus Callistus likewise brought into book 18, chapter 21 and following, of the Ecclesiastical History composed by him, as also Baronius into the Ecclesiastical Annals which he composed, at the year just mentioned, 593; and the latter writer, after these following words, transcribed from Christopherson's version, with which Evagrius closes the chapter last transcribed in which he comprises them, "These gifts offered by Chosroes seem to speak things which agree with the prophecy of Balaam: which was plainly done by the Providence of God, that the tongues of the heathen should bring forth saving words," presently subjoins: "Worthy indeed to be formed in letters a cubit high, as they say, so that the innovators may be the more suffused with shame and keep silent, since they are refuted even by unbelievers and idolaters in the veneration of the most holy Cross and the cult of the holy Martyrs, when a heathen speaks such things, yet a Christian in his own conscience, fearing to profess publicly what he thought, lest he should find his people rebellious, whom at this beginning of his reign he was busy soothing by every office." Thus Baronius, and rightly indeed. Would only that Chosroes had at length professed the truth of the faith which he knew, and had not perished wretchedly in unbelief in an unhappy manner! There are indeed those who have committed to writing that Chosroes embraced the Christian rites; but that these strayed far from the truth is clearly proved by the things which Chosroes is known afterwards to have done against the Christians, having undertaken a most cruel war against the Eastern empire in order to avenge the death of the emperor Maurice, by whose help he had recovered his kingdom.

[85] This prince meanwhile showed himself grateful toward St. Sergius for benefits received not only by the gifts reviewed above, also built a temple to the Saint, appears doubtful, but also by a temple built in his honour. So Barhebraeus teaches in Assemani, in the Oriental Library, volume 3, part 1, page 412. Here are his words. "And Chosroes built," he says, "three most ample temples, one to the Mother of God, another of the Apostles, the third of St. Sergius the martyr, which the patriarch of Antioch also consecrated." Barhebraeus indeed not rarely strays from the truth, as Assemani shows in the aforesaid Work; but I think that he declares true things here, because Abulpharagius too supports him, in the History of the Dynasties, published in print at Oxford in the year 1663, page 98, expressly relating that a temple was built by Chosroes to St. Sergius the martyr at Miyapharekin. "To the Romans," he says, speaking of Chosroes, "he also restored Dara and Miyapharekin, and built two temples for the Christians at Miyapharekin, one dedicated to the name of the blessed Virgin, the other to the name of Mar Sergius the martyr." That Chosroes gave two cities to the Romans Evagrius also records, Ecclesiastical History, book 6, chapter 19; and since he calls one of these too Dara and the other Martyropolis, it is not to be doubted that Abulpharagius designates by Miyapharekin this very city, which, as Procopius teaches in book 3 of the Buildings, chapter 2, is situated in Armenia on the river Nymphius; namely the said city which Baudrand affirms in the Geographical Lexicon is named Miepherkin by the Saracens, so calling it by a name derived from the Saracen or Arabic tongue. And so we now have from Abulpharagius not only that Chosroes built a temple to St. Sergius, but also in what place he did so.

[86] and in the sixth century he had two other places in the East sacred to himself. Further, in the Acts of St. Anastasius the Persian, crowned with martyrdom in Assyria in the year 628, given among us on the 22nd day of January, at number 35 mention is made of a monastery of St. Sergius which was distant only one mile, as we taught in the Commentary prefixed to those Acts, number 12, from Bethsaloe, a town of Assyria six miles distant from Discartas or Dastager, the palace of Chosroes; and in the Elogium of St. Cholinduch, also given among us at the 13th day of July, an oratory of St. Sergius, which, when the Saint

departed to the Lord at the beginning of the seventh century, existed between Dara and Nisibis, cities of Mesopotamia, is commemorated. Wherefore, since it is plain that this oratory is distinguished, by the different situation already assigned which it has, both from the monastery of St. Sergius commemorated in the Acts of St. Anastasius and from both these sacred places of the temple which Barhebraeus and Abulpharagius write was built to St. Sergius by Chosroes, besides the church of Resapha three other sacred places further become known which St. Sergius had consecrated to his name in the East already from the seventh century, and probably even already from the sixth. But let what has already been said suffice concerning the notable veneration which the text of Gregory of Tours, to be recited presently in the following §, also proves to have been then paid there to St. Sergius in particular; let us now step toward the West.

§ VI. Veneration paid to the Saints, and particularly to St. Sergius, in the sixth century and a little later, in the West also.

From Gregory of Tours, whose words are given here, The plainly notable celebrity of name which, as the things adduced so far show, St. Sergius had in the East in the sixth century extended also to the West in the same century. The matter will become plain from what is to be said in the present §. Gregory of Tours, who flourished in the sixth century, writes thus in the Work which is entitled On the Glory of the Martyrs, book 1, chapter 97, of our St. Sergius (for it has not so far seemed to anyone that he treats either here or in the places to be cited below of another Saint of the same name): "Sergius too, the martyr, works many signs among the peoples, curing the infirmities and healing the sicknesses of those who pray faithfully. Whence it comes about that to this huge basilica" (it does not appear to be doubted that the church of St. Sergius at Resapha is commemorated here by Gregory) "either vows are promised or gifts are brought, of which it is altogether unlawful to withdraw or take away anything. And if anyone does so, he presently incurs judgment either of harm or of death. On account of this devotion many devote their goods to the Saint, namely so that, fortified by his power, they may not be plundered by evil men. Lastly, there was a slight old woman, and I believe like that poor widow of the Gospel who once devoutly cast two mites into the treasury when she had nothing else. This woman, then, had a very few chickens, which she had by vow subjected to the dominion of the basilica, intending to give them from her own house when necessity should require. When, therefore, many people had come to the festival of the Saint, two men, having made an agreement, who had formerly seen these chickens, withdrew one by theft, and, having cut off its head, stripped off its feathers, and cut off its feet, they placed it in a vessel with water, lifted it upon the fire, and urgently kindled it. And the water boiled most vigorously, but the stolen flesh did not cook. The water is even consumed in boiling, and that chicken is not softened at all. They try it often with their hands, and endeavour to drive in a nail, but they find it harder than when they had put it in. Meanwhile there arrive the guests summoned to the banquet, by no means to partake of the preparation. A table stands covered with snowy cloths, adorned with embroidered work. The food having been turned into a new hardness, the dish is often rinsed with water, but nothing cooked is found in it to set before them; and so, by a new miracle, the dishes having been reduced to stone, the hosts confounded, the invited ashamed, they departed from the supper with shame."

[88] Thus far Gregory; and Tillemont says, volume 5 of the Ecclesiastical Memoirs, page 496, [it is understood that the name of St. Sergius was very illustrious in the Gauls in the sixth century;] that the miracle which that holy prelate of Tours relates in the words recited agrees more with the simplicity of the century in which Gregory lived than with the subtlety of the seventeenth century, in which he himself composed the praised Ecclesiastical Memoirs. And indeed, since Gregory is known at times to have given credence to uncertain narratives, it may not without reason be doubted whether he did not learn the aforesaid miracle from a rumour of only doubtful credit, especially since, if it truly happened, it happened not in Gaul but in Syria, very far distant from the place where Gregory was staying, as appears from the very context of the words in which it is narrated by Gregory. But although the matter stands so, and the things which Gregory records here do not pertain to Gaul, yet from the fact that they are mentioned by Gregory, a writer of the sixth century, and were therefore known and believed in Gaul at that time, it appears that it must be gathered that the name of St. Sergius was very illustrious in that kingdom in this very century. Moreover, the same Gregory, in book 7 of the History of the Franks, chapter 31, also relates something from which you may gather this very thing for a like reason, that there was a king in the East who, fortified with the thumb of St. Sergius, carried off an illustrious victory over his enemies. He does not indeed declare who that king was, and certainly the reckoning of time, as it will be easy to draw out partly from what has been said, partly from what is to be said, altogether prevents him from being able to be Chosroes, the king of the Persians just mentioned. But although this is so, yet from the report of this matter, as he adds, it came about that Gundobaud, who gave himself out as the son of Chlothar the first, king of the Franks, who died in the year 561, and contended accordingly that a part in his inheritance was owed to him, desired a part of the relics of St. Sergius for himself. And since at Bordeaux, where Gundobaud was then staying, a notable portion of the relics of St. Sergius was kept with great veneration in the house of a Syrian merchant, Gundobaud obtained a part of it for himself; how this was done Gregory sets out at the place cited, whose words I transcribe here, because from what is to be said they contribute much to the glory of St. Sergius, and record other things which I have just said.

[89] Thus, then, Gregory has it there: "There was at that time Gundovald in the city of Bordeaux, greatly loved by bishop Bertram. and from the deed of Mummolus, which is also narrated here by the same Gregory, And as he inquired what things might afford him comfort for his cause, someone narrated that a certain king in the parts of the East, having obtained the thumb of St. Sergius the martyr, had inserted it in his right arm. And when need had come upon him to drive off his enemies, trusting in this help, when he had raised the forearm of his right arm, forthwith the multitude of the enemy, as though overwhelmed by the Martyr's power, slipped into flight. Hearing these things, Gundovald began to inquire more diligently who there was in that place who had merited to receive relics of St. Sergius the martyr. Meanwhile Eufronius the merchant was betrayed by bishop Bertram out of enmity, because he had once tonsured him against his will, gaping after his wealth. Which he, scorning, passing to another city, returned when his hair had grown. The bishop says, therefore: There is here a certain Syrian, Eufronius by name, who, making a church of his house, has placed relics of this Saint, and has beheld very many signs from them, the power of the Martyr helping. For when on a certain occasion the city of Bordeaux was blazing with a very great fire, this house, surrounded by the flames, was in no way burned. When he said these things, immediately Mummolus with bishop Bertram goes at a rapid pace to the house of the Syrian, and, the man being hemmed in, ordered the holy pledges to be shown to him. He refuses. Yet, thinking that these snares were being laid for him through some malice, he says: Do not weary an old man, nor do injury to the Saint: but take a hundred gold pieces from me and go away. And when he still insisted on seeing the holy relics, he offered two hundred gold pieces, and not even so did he obtain that he should withdraw unless the pledges themselves were seen.

[90] that his patronage was then also greatly prized there, "Then Mummolus orders a ladder to be raised against the wall (for they were laid up high on the wall opposite the altar in a little chest) and commanded his deacon to climb. He, climbing by the steps of the ladder, as he took hold of the chest, was so shaken with trembling that he was not thought likely to return to the ground alive. Yet, having taken, as we have said, the little chest which hung from the wall, he brought it down. And when it was searched, Mummolus found a bone of the Saint's finger, which he did not fear to strike with a knife. For having placed a knife upon it, he struck thus with another. And when after many blows it could scarcely be broken, the little bone, divided into three parts, slipped away in different directions. I believe it was not acceptable to the Martyr that he should touch these things. Then, Euphronius weeping most vehemently, all prostrate themselves in prayer, beseeching that God would deign to show what had been taken away from human eyes. And after the prayer the particles were found, of which Mummolus took one and went away: but not, as I believe, with the favour of the Martyr, as was declared in what followed." The outcome indeed, as Gregory hints here at the end, most clearly proved that the bold and rash deed of the general Mummolus, which is related in the words recited, by no means pleased St. Sergius. For neither Mummolus nor Gundobald, chiefly in whose favour he had committed it, derived any advantage from the relics of the holy Martyr taken away, or triumphed over his enemies by their power, as they had expected; but both perished at Convenae, the army of Guntram, king of the Franks, having been brought up against this city, in the year 585, as Le Cointe teaches from the praised Gregory in the Ecclesiastical Annals of the Franks at the said year, number 7.

[91] is plain. But although the affair turned out thus unhappily both for Gundobald and for Mummolus, yet it is plain even from the deed itself of the latter, however little to be approved, which I have related from Gregory, how powerful with God the patronage of St. Sergius was then esteemed in Gaul, so that it is surely not to be doubted that then too the holy Martyr was in great veneration there. But about what year was the rash deed of Mummolus, which I have related, perpetrated? Gregory of Tours writes thus of Gundobad in book 6 of the History of the Franks, chapter 24: "This man, since he had been born in the Gauls and brought up with diligent care, as is the custom of these kings, with the tresses of his hair let down over his back, educated in letters, was presented by his mother to king Childebert, she saying: Behold, she said, your nephew, the son of king Chlothar; and because he is held hateful to his father, receive him, for he is your flesh. And he, because he had no sons, receiving him kept him with him. These things are announced to king Chlothar, and he sent messengers to his brother, saying: Let the boy go, that he may come to me. Nor did he delay; he directed the young man to his brother. Seeing him, Chlothar ordered the hair of his head to be shorn, saying: This one I did not beget. After the death of king Chlothar, therefore, he was received by king Charibert. Sigebert, having summoned him, again cut off the hair of his head, and sent him to the city of Agrippina, which is now called Cologne. He too, having slipped away from that place and let his hair grow again, went off to Narses, who then governed Italy, and there, having taken a wife, begot sons, and went to Constantinople."

[92] These things Le Cointe, praised above, relates at the year 562 in the aforesaid Annals of the Franks, that deed happened either in the year 582 or in one of the three following, and then, having narrated at the year 582, number 10, the coming of Gundobaud, or Gundobald, or even (for this name is written variously by various people) Gundobad, from

the city of Constantinople into Gaul, he sets out at the year 585, number 2 and following, from Gregory of Tours, that the same Gundobad in this year, in order to obtain the part of the kingdom which he contended was owed to him from the inheritance of his father Chlothar, as he alleged, stirred up a civil war in Gaul, having joined to himself the Mummolus mentioned above, who had previously become illustrious for warlike valour against the Saxons and Lombards, having vanquished these, and some other generals; and that in this he perished miserably in that very year 585, together with Mummolus and others who had embraced his party. Now, since these things stood so, and indeed at the years noted by Le Cointe (for nothing renders the calculation of this writer suspect here), and since Mummolus, as is plain from the words of Gregory of Tours recited above, did not seize and partly carry off the sacred remains of St. Sergius kept at Bordeaux with Euphronius, the Syrian merchant, before he had joined himself to Gundobad, which certainly did not happen before the year 582, it follows that this happened either in the year 582, in which Gundobad returned from Constantinople into Gaul, or in one of the three following. And hence we now have that St. Sergius in the Gauls, if not earlier, at least already from about the year 582, was illustrious with the fame of miracles and holiness, and was held in great veneration and esteem.

[93] Gregory of Tours, who teaches us the rash deed of Mummolus which we have already mentioned, and the deposition of relics of St. Sergius, which Gregory writes that he made, also laid sacred relics of St. Sergius in the baptistery of the church at Tours dedicated to St. Perpetuus, one of his predecessors, as he himself affirms in book 10 of the History of the Franks. Here are the words in which he does so there. "The basilicas of St. Perpetuus," he says, "I found burned by fire, which I commanded to be painted or adorned in that splendour, as they had been before, by the work of our craftsmen. I ordered a baptistery to be built at the basilica itself, in which I placed relics of St. John with those of Sergius the martyr." So Gregory; but whence he received the relics which he says he laid in the baptistery of the church of St. Perpetuus he does not declare. Were these perhaps a portion of the tiny parts into which the sacred little bone of the finger of St. Sergius, kept with Euphronius, the Syrian merchant, slipped away when it was struck with many blows by Mummolus, who desired a part of it for himself (go to the words of Gregory which I recited at number 90)? That indeed appears to me quite probable, whether meanwhile Gregory received them as a gift from Euphronius himself or acquired them from elsewhere. And I am so minded even for this reason, that it did not happen that relics of St. Sergius were laid in the baptistery of the said church before the aforesaid little bone of the finger of St. Sergius had been divided into various parts by the rash deed of Mummolus, as will become plain from what is now to be said. Gregory, as he himself teaches in book 10 of the History of the Franks, just cited again, restored the cathedral church of St. Martin at Tours, and another there sacred to St. Perpetuus, both of which he had found burned by fire when he came to the see of Tours; and it appears probable that it was Gregory's care that his cathedral church should be restored sooner than the other, and therefore, since from what Gregory himself writes at the place cited the last hand seems to have been put to its restoration only in the seventeenth year of Gregory's episcopate, which coincides with the year of Christ 590, the restoration of the church of St. Perpetuus is not to be assigned before the same year 590.

[94] [preceded the deposition. This meanwhile was made while the sixth century was still passing,] Now, since this is so, and Gregory, as appears from his very words just recited, did not lay the relics of St. Sergius in the baptistery of the church of St. Perpetuus before he had restored it, it follows that this did not happen before the rash deed of Mummolus by which the little bone of the finger of St. Sergius was divided into various parts, since that was done not later than the year 585, as is plain from what has been said above. But however this may be, it is undoubted that sacred relics of St. Sergius were laid by Gregory of Tours, while the sixth century was still passing, inasmuch as he did not prolong his life beyond it, in the baptistery of the church sacred to St. Perpetuus at Tours; which again shows in some measure that this holy Martyr enjoyed great veneration in the Gauls already from that century. And that it did not cease in the same kingdom in the next following century even the monastery alone can be an argument, built in the suburb of Angers in honour of SS. Bacchus and Sergius together in the reign of Clovis II, king of the Franks, who died in the year 656, as the Writers of the old Gallia Christiana teach, volume 4, column 820. There are indeed those who assert that that monastery, which, still today adorned with the name of St. Sergius, is inhabited by Benedictine monks, was founded only by Nominoë, prince of Brittany, two hundred years later; but these allege absolutely no ancient guarantor for themselves, and are convicted of falsehood by the diploma of Childebert III, king of the Franks, who died in the year 711, which the Writers praised in that place recite. For the rest, not only in the Gauls but also in the very city of Rome SS. Sergius and Bacchus seem to have enjoyed the highest veneration already from the sixth century, and perhaps even earlier.

[95] [in which, as appears, there already existed at Rome a diaconia of SS. Sergius and Bacchus.] For Anastasius the Librarian, in the book on the Lives of the Roman Pontiffs, writes thus in Gregory the third: "Likewise the diaconia of Saints Sergius and Bacchus situated at blessed Peter the Apostle, in which formerly there was a small oratory, he" (namely Pope Gregory the third) "enlarged from the foundations with an ampler building, and, granting all things that exist for the use of the diaconia, decreed that they should serve for ever for the support of the poor in the ministry of the diaconia." Since Pope Gregory the third died in the year 741, as is agreed among the learned, and only enlarged the sacred building at Rome of SS. Sergius and Bacchus which Anastasius here mentions, or built an ampler one in place of the old, which was small, it appears most probable that it existed already from the sixth century, or perhaps even earlier, and therefore that SS. Sergius and Bacchus were already then honoured at Rome too with a sacred place built in their honour. But let it suffice now to have discoursed on the veneration paid to the Saints in the West also already from the sixth century; let us now see with what honour and cult the same were favoured both at Rome and elsewhere, whether in the East or in the West, in later or even unknown times.

§ VII. Churches or sacred places both of the West and of the East in which either the Saints were favoured with ecclesiastical cult after the sixth century, or certainly from an unknown time, or their sacred relics too either are or were kept.

The Saints, by pilgrimages undertaken to their church at Resapha, That I may proceed more orderly in treating this argument and avoid confusion as far as possible, I shall review the churches or sacred buildings in which I find it recorded that our Saints are particularly venerated or that their sacred remains too are possessed, the order of the antiquity with which each enjoys that cult or possession being kept; and for this reason also, when it can conveniently be done, intending to mention only in the last place, lest I disturb this order, those of which I cannot determine at what time they first began to venerate the Saints or to possess their sacred relics. These things premised, I approach the matter itself. That pilgrimages to the church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Resapha were frequent in the fifth or sixth century we have taught above; and that these did not cease in the seventh and eighth centuries either, what is now to be said will disclose. In Labbe, volume 7 of the Councils, column 382, Stephen, monk and keeper of books, said in the second council of Nicaea, in the fifth session, that it had been narrated to him by Dionysius, priest of the church of Ascalon, that abbot John the anchorite was at one time wont to go on pilgrimage to St. Sergius at Arapha (for so Resapha is corruptly called there).

[97] Now, since the said council of Nicaea was celebrated in the year 787, were still honoured in the seventh century and later, and Dionysius the priest, by whom Stephen the monk then said this had been narrated to him, seems to have been contemporary with John the anchorite, who was wont from time to time to go on pilgrimage to St. Sergius at Resapha, it follows that, since this anchorite, by name John, was alive, as appears, either while the eighth century was already passing or while the seventh was growing old, the church of our Saints at Resapha was probably still wont to be frequented in both these centuries too by pilgrims taking refuge in their help, no otherwise than had been done in the two centuries immediately preceding; whether this is still done today, as seems to be indicated in the modern Roman Martyrology, I would not dare to assert for certain. That this veneration toward the Saints had not yet ceased in the seventh century, nay not even in the ninth and tenth, appears credible also even from this, that a plainly notable cult of them still existed in the East then, as is argued by three different temples or monasteries which then stood dedicated there to the name either of both Saints or at least of Sergius alone, namely that of Tagrit in Mesopotamia, that of Tura-Saia, situated opposite the city of Balat placed in Mesopotamia on the Tigris, and that of Guba, or which was placed in the lower part of the region of Guba. And the first of these was built about the year 675, the second in the ninth century or even earlier, and the third, finally, in the tenth century, as may be seen in Assemani, in the Oriental Library, volume 2, pages 422, 127 and 350; in which last place you will also find that relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus were laid in the monastery of Guba at the same time at which it was founded.

[98] and the Venetian patriarchal church their sacred relics, And these are the things that occur to be said concerning the veneration paid to the Saints in their church at Resapha after the sixth century; I now turn my discourse to other churches which either honoured them with ecclesiastical cult after this time or also obtained their sacred relics; and, that I may follow the chronological order which I have set myself, I take my beginning from the patriarchal church of Venice, situated, as the more probable opinion has it, in that part of the Venetian city which was formerly called Olivolo, and which comprises the episcopate and the Cathedral basilica. Ughelli, volume 5 of Sacred Italy, edition of the year 1653, among the Venetian Patriarchs, column 1267, writes thus: "Orso of Rivoalto, surnamed Badoer, son of Angelo and brother of Giovanni Partecipazio, prince of Venice, held the Venetian Pontificate in the year 821 and sat 32 years. His parents, devout men, says Dandolo, built the churches of St. Severus the bishop and St. Lawrence the martyr, adjoining each other, as twins; of which this man, succeeding as bishop, arranged that St. Lawrence's should be changed at his death into a monastery of virgins, and set over it as abbess his sister, a most choice virgin. He began the Cathedral church of Olivolo under the name of St. Peter the Apostle, which after

five years, when completed, he consecrated on the 3rd day before the Kalends of June, and laid in it relics of Saints Sergius and Bacchus." Since this fourth bishop of Venice, or, if you prefer the ancient name by which he was formerly called from the part of the city of Venice in which he resided, of Olivolo, began to occupy this see, as Ughelli teaches in the words recited, in the year 821, and held it thirty-two years, it follows that what the same bishop is related in the words recited to have done, translating relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus into the cathedral church which he had built at Venice, he did in the space of time which intervened between the year 820 and the year 854, as will be plain to one who reckons it.

[99] brought from Heraclea to Venice, from the ninth century, But whence, and at about what time, had those relics of our Saints been brought to Venice? Flaminio Cornaro, a Venetian senator, in the Venetian Churches illustrated by him, volume 13, page 10, writes thus: "While he (Christopher II) was administering the church of Olivolo, the Venetians, gathered in public assembly, decreed in the year 809 that the ducal seat, removed from the city of Malamocco, should remain at Rivoalto; and these things done, they appointed Angelo Partecipazio duke. And the Catholic duke translated from Heraclea, whence he had drawn his origin, the bodies of Saints Sergius and Bacchus, as some of the chroniclers of Venetian affairs relate, to Venice, and laid them in a marble sepulchre in the cathedral church dedicated to them, in the castle of Olivolo; which relics of the holy Martyrs were afterwards, the temple of St. Peter the apostle having been built, or rather rebuilt, as we shall presently say, translated into it by Orso Badoer, the 4th bishop of Olivolo." The sacred relics of our Saints, therefore, which the fourth bishop of Venice brought into the cathedral church recently built by him at Venice, had been brought to Venice from Heraclea, a city of the Venetian region long since destroyed (whence it had received them I do not find), and that at the beginning of the ninth century. Nor do we have only this from the given words of Flaminio Cornaro, but also that there already existed at that time at Venice a church sacred to SS. Sergius and Bacchus, and that this, when the cathedral church of St. Peter had not yet been founded, served as cathedral there; which things meanwhile, as also what the same writer affirms in the volume cited, page 3, of the said church, that it was built there to SS. Sergius and Bacchus already from the first beginnings of the nascent Venetian city, I would wish to be confirmed by some ancient document worthy of credence in every respect. But although this is found done nowhere, it does not in any way appear to be doubted (for there does not seem to be reason why Cornaro and Ughelli, asserting it in the words recited, should be held suspect of falsehood here) that the cathedral, or, as it is now called, patriarchal church of Venice possessed sacred relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus already from the ninth century.

[100] Nor did it only possess these already then and keep them honourably, and, celebrating the Saints for that reason with an annual feast, possessed; but it also venerated the Saints themselves with a special rite, or certainly did so in the century just past, and does so also today. So, as regards the veneration which it paid to them in the century just past, I learn from the Order for reciting the divine Office of the patriarchal church of Venice, printed at Venice in the year 1683, which exists among us; in which, although the feast of our Saints is deferred to another day from the seventh day of October, being impeded by the sacred day of St. Justina, yet in the patriarchal church itself it is prescribed to be celebrated on the seventh day of October on account of their sacred bodies which are kept there. The words of the praised Directory, or Order for reciting the divine Office, are: "In the Patriarchal Church, the feast of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, on account of their bodies." As regards the veneration which is still paid to the Saints at Venice today, the praised Cornaro, in the volume cited, published in print in the year 1749, page XI, writes thus: "The birthdays of the holy Martyrs" (namely Sergius and Bacchus) "are kept by the clergy of the Venetian city under the semidouble rite, but under the double in the ducal and patriarchal basilicas, of which the latter keeps the greater part of the bodies, under the name of the body, in a marble monument, while the former has obtained notable relics taken from the bodies themselves." So he, furnishing at the same time, in these words, by which he teaches besides that in the ducal church at Venice too our Saints are specially venerated and their sacred remains kept, the things from which you may understand that the aforesaid Directory, when it hints that the bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus are found at Venice in the patriarchal church, speaks only figuratively, and takes the part of the bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus which the Venetian patriarchal church possesses for their entire bodies, as is very frequently wont to be done when there is talk of the relics of other Saints too; which must likewise be said of all writers and records if they attribute the entire bodies of our Saints to one place alone. And I come to that opinion besides for this reason, that parts of those sacred pledges are found elsewhere too, as will become plain from what is now to be said in the order which I have set myself.

[101] and the church of St. Felix at Pavia too enjoys the same prerogative, Giacomo Gualla, reviewing in the Sanctuary of Pavia, book 5, chapter XI, the sacred relics of various Saints kept in the monastery of St. Felix at Pavia, writes in this manner: "Otto the German, the second emperor, founded for our Saviour a very beautiful oratory" (namely at Pavia), "in our time called St. Felix; which shrine the most holy virgins of the Order of St. Benedict serve with wonderful devotion. And in it lie these venerable bodies of the Saints, whose names are written below: Felix, Castulus, George, Felicity, Protus, Hyacinth, Sergius and Bacchus, two Innocents, Marina, Felicula, the head of St. Stephen the protomartyr, the head of St. Valentine the priest, one gilded Cross from the most holy wood of the Cross, one chest in the middle of the high altar full of relics. All which venerable relics indeed are fittingly entombed in the underground oratory * in three chests of wonderful beauty of ivory marble, distinguished by excellent workmanship, which, preserved with faithful devotion, still exist there and are venerated." Since the praised Giacomo Gualla here, immediately after asserting that the bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus lie at Pavia, subjoins that the heads of SS. Stephen and Valentine are also kept there, there seems to be reason why he should be understood of the entire bodies of our Saints and of the others whom he mentions lying at Pavia, and not merely of parts of them.

[102] to which also their entire bodies seem to be attributed. Moreover, Romualdo of Santa Maria, in Sacred Ticinum or Pavia, part 2, page 151, writes thus: "Sergius … on the Nones of October he too flew up to heaven, to the longed-for palm of martyrdom, to be associated with his fellow soldier Bacchus; and on account of the memory of Sergius himself the place where his body was first laid in a tomb was called Sergiopolis from his name, and is honoured by a frequent concourse of Christians on account of the splendid miracles which he wrought there; whose same remains, carried afterwards together with the body of St. Bacchus to Ticinum, rest with much veneration in the shrine of St. Felix, of the nuns of St. Benedict." In these words this writer too seems to wish it signified that the entire bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, and not merely parts of them, are kept at Ticinum or Pavia. But if those two writers, as they seem to contend from what has been said, contend this in very deed, it is not to be doubted, for the reason adduced at number 100, that they stray from the truth. Nor is there reason why it should seem strange to anyone that those writers are accused by us of error here. For what Giacomo Gualla records of the bodies of Our and of other Saints kept at Pavia he most probably learned neither from the inspection of them nor from records of approved credit, but only, as I gather from the Martyrology of Como of Luigi de Tatti at the 11th day of September, from the tradition of the people, very frequently liable to error; nor does Romualdo of Santa Maria seem to have drawn his material from elsewhere.

[103] from the tenth century, And since this is so, who, I ask, would wish us to be prevented from pronouncing this foreign to the truth, for the reason which was given at number 100, as I have already said, and which appears exceedingly solid? It is next that I should now set out a few things about the time at which the monastery of the Nuns of St. Felix at Pavia began to possess relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus. Plainly nothing occurs by which I might determine this with certainty; but although the matter stands so, it by no means appears improbable that that house of virgins sacred to God was in possession of that sacred treasure already from the time when it was built by Otto II, that is, since he guided the reins of empire from the year 966 up to the year 983, already from the tenth century; and therefore I thought that it should be treated here, especially since no more opportune place for doing so occurred. For the rest, whether and what ecclesiastical cult is paid to our Saints in the monastery of St. Felix at Pavia I do not find; yet in the Index which is added to the Work of Romualdo of Santa Maria praised above, it seems to be indicated that a commemoration of them is made in the ecclesiastical Office which is wont to be recited there on the 7th day of October. I now proceed to another sacred building which also possesses part of the sacred remains of our Saints.

[104] Jean Maan, in the Holy and Metropolitan Church of Tours, that of Angers, dedicated to the name of the Saints themselves, illustrated by him and printed in the year 1667, page 118, records these things under Engebald, archbishop of Tours: "Having set out for Angers in the year 1152 at the request of count Geoffrey, he received with solemn rite on the 15th day before the Kalends of February the sacred relics of the blessed Sergius and Bacchus, which he had ordered to be brought from Jerusalem, and brought them into the temple dedicated to their name, to be celebrated with perpetual cult; and lest it should ever fall from the memory of the pious, he willed that the feast day of the reception be kept every year with the benefit of indulgences. And there were present for carrying out the matter, opportunely, the prelates of the Andes, the Redones and the Namnetes." So the praised author; and whatever he relates here he learned from the very letters of Engebald, archbishop of Tours, who performed the solemnity set out in the words recited, which, as he adds, "we obtained through the kindness of the most learned Artaud, canon of Angers and archdeacon beyond the Loire, from the archive of Saint-Serge of Angers." These had namely, as it does not appear to be doubted, been granted by Engebald to the monastery of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at Angers, both to testify that relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus had been brought into it by him with solemn rite, at the request of Geoffrey, count of Angers, who had ordered them to be brought from Jerusalem, and to establish that the day on which this happened, the 15th before the Kalends of February, or the 18th of January, should be kept as a feast every year, indulgences also being imparted to stir up piety.

[105] But did Engebald will that feast day to be kept every year by the whole city of Angers, or and celebrating them still today with singular cult, by the monastery of our Saints alone, which is situated near it and was built, as I taught above, in the seventh century? This, the words of Jean Maan which I have transcribed being regarded,

appears doubtful to me, nor is anything available from elsewhere by which I might remove this doubt from my mind; although meanwhile, if that feast was perhaps once celebrated in the whole city of Angers, the Breviary of Angers, printed in the year 1624 and existing among us, renders it most probable, not to say undoubted, that it is certainly no longer celebrated there today; in which, as also in the Calendar prefixed to it, at the 18th day of January the Office is set forth to be recited, not of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, or of their translation of which we speak here, but of the Chair of St. Peter in which he first sat at Rome, with only the commemoration added which is to be made of St. Prisca the virgin. Nor have I ascertained whether even the monastery of our Saints at Angers itself continues to keep as a feast today the 18th day of January, which it is not to be doubted that it formerly kept as a feast by the statute of bishop Engebald praised above. Meanwhile I understand from the Breviary of Angers praised above, as also from the Calendar, likewise praised, which it has prefixed to it, that SS. Sergius and Bacchus are venerated in the city of Angers and its diocese on the 7th day of October, that is, today, with an Office of semidouble rite, with only a commemoration of the martyrs SS. Marcellus and Apuleius added; and hence I think it is scarcely, nay not even scarcely, to be doubted that the same Saints of ours are venerated on this day also in the monastery of Angers, which is dedicated to their name and besides enriched with sacred relics, unless perhaps these have now perished through the injury of the times, with an Office of a still higher order, or are favoured with ecclesiastical cult.

[106] from the very day appointed for the solemnity here mentioned But can it likewise be held as equally undoubted, whence it appears that the sacred relics of our Saints came into the possession of the said monastery of Angers from about the year 1152, that the solemnity in which the relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus were brought by Engebald, archbishop of Tours, three other bishops assisting, namely those of the Andes, the Redones and the Namnetes, into the monastery near Angers sacred to them, was performed in the year 1152 already mentioned, which Jean Maan, historiographer of the church of Tours praised above, assigns? Engebald, archbishop of Tours, at the request of count Geoffrey, both went to Angers and translated there the sacred relics of our Saints which had been brought from Jerusalem by his order, as that writer records, in the said year 1152; so that certainly at that time some count of Angers whose name was Geoffrey (for it does not appear probable that Maan is speaking of a count of the same name of some other dominion) governed the territory of Angers; but in the catalogue of the counts of Angers furnished by Jean Gaultier in the Chronicle of Chronicles there occurs no count named Geoffrey who governed the Angevins at the year 1152. And since this is so, it may easily be that someone will call into doubt whether the solemnity mentioned above, in which the relics of our Saints were brought by Engebald into the temple consecrated to them at Angers, was performed in the year 1152, because, if that epoch stands, it is necessary that the said solemnity was performed at the request of a count of Angers whose name was Geoffrey.

[107] about the year 1152, As far as I am concerned, since the aforesaid Catalogue of the counts of Angers which Gaultier furnishes is woven, as that writer himself indicates at the head of this Little Work, from the Genealogy of the kings and princes of Gaul published in print at Lyons in the year 1561 by Guillaume Paradin, and this author, as I understand from Niceron, volume 33 of the Memoirs, page 170, confirms the things he asserts in this Work by absolutely no arguments and proofs, I think one must stand by Jean Maan, who drew what he writes in the words recited above from a record, as appears, in the highest degree authentic, even as regards the very year 1152 to which he binds the solemnity of which we speak here, although it is thus necessary that some count of Angers whose name was Geoffrey was still surviving among the living at that time. And that opinion is settled chiefly even for this reason, that in the mentioned catalogue of the counts of Angers which Gaultier furnishes there is indeed reviewed a count Geoffrey, the fifth of this name, who died in the year 1150, and it may easily happen that in assigning the year of this count's death Gaultier, or rather Paradin, from whom he drew his material according to what has been said, erred. Now, since this is so, and the relics of the Saints seem not to have been brought to Angers long before the aforesaid solemnity, it follows that they most probably came into the possession of the said monastery of Angers from about the year 1152.

[108] But enough now of this matter; let us pursue our purpose. A part also of the sacred relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus [and the collegiate church of Heiligenstadt, having the Saints as almost its principal patrons,] is still today kept, or certainly was formerly kept, in the collegiate church of Heiligenstadt in the diocese of Mainz, which is sacred to St. Martin, archbishop of Tours. This is plain from the Pontifical Bull granted by Pope Paul II in the year 1469, in which that Pontiff expressly affirms that the bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus are kept in the said church of Heiligenstadt, as anyone will find who consults it, recited in part in volume III of June of our Work, page 86, and therefore not to be recited here. And Sergius and Bacchus, as soon as their sacred remains were brought to Heiligenstadt, which from what is to be said was done in the thirteenth or fourteenth century, obtained there a cult so celebrated, as Papebroch teaches at the place of our Work just cited, that they were esteemed almost the principal patrons of the collegiate church which in that city, as I have already said, is sacred to St. Martin, archbishop of Tours. And this indeed seems exceedingly consonant with the truth for this reason, that in the Pontifical Bull of the year 1469 which I have just praised, absolutely no mention being made of SS. Aureus and Justinus, who nevertheless are held as patrons by the people of Heiligenstadt, our Saints alone are commemorated by Pope Paul II, as anyone will discover who consults it at the place cited. Moreover, in the letters recited in the same said third volume of June of our Work, page 83 and following, which the bishops of Sulatana, Trieste, Sagona, Serbia, Gallipoli, Amelia, Acerno, Syriquensis, Demitensis and Senangensis gave at Avignon in the year 1328, Sergius and Bacchus are counted among those Saints on whose feasts the said bishops stir up the faithful to frequent the church of St. Martin of Heiligenstadt, by the indulgences proposed which they express in the aforesaid Letters.

[109] There are added besides two diplomas of two archbishops of Mainz, enjoyed it from the thirteenth or fourteenth century. in the former of which, which was granted by Diether in the year 1461, Sergius and Bacchus are numbered among the Saints who are patrons of the church of Heiligenstadt, and their feasts among those which can be celebrated publicly, with the doors open and the signal given with the bronze bell, with recitation of the divine Offices, and with cessation of an interdict laid by the bishop or the provincial council of Mainz; and in the latter, which Berthold, likewise archbishop of Mainz, imparted in the year 1499, Sergius and Bacchus appear again, and it is granted that the feasts of them and of the other Saints whom it names can be celebrated in the same manner as in the diploma just mentioned, the privilege only being extended to more feasts. But whence and when did the church of Heiligenstadt acquire the sacred relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus? It has seemed to our Papebroch, as he himself makes manifest at the place of our Work cited above, that they were translated from Syria into Europe on the occasion of the holy war, or of the expeditions undertaken by the Christians into the Holy Land, and so at length came to the aforesaid church of St. Martin of Heiligenstadt in the thirteenth or fourteenth century. And certainly, since very many other relics of other Saints were brought into Europe on the same occasion, I hold myself persuaded that it seemed so to him not without reason. Further, perhaps about one century after the time at which the church of St. Martin of Heiligenstadt had first obtained a part of that sacred treasure, it was granted to the metropolitan church of Prague in Bohemia to enjoy the same prerogative.

[110] Further, in the year 1354 it obtained notable relics of Sergius and Bacchus too, The emperor Charles IV, king of Bohemia, gave sacred relics of various Saints in great number, which he had sought out on every side with the greatest zeal, to the said metropolitan church of Prague, sacred to St. Vitus, in various years of his reign, as Pessina teaches in the Prague Phosphorus from page 399, various documents of altogether approved credit being brought forward. And in the year 1354, indeed, in which a beginning was given to this pious liberality, he bestowed very many; and among these the sacred relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus obtained a place. This is plain from the very letters which Pessina recites in the Work cited, page 433 and the five following, given by Charles to all the estates of the kingdom of Bohemia from Mainz in the said year 1354, on the fourth day of January. For in these the praised emperor counts the sacred relics of our Saints, in this manner, among the sacred relics which, acquired from various sacred places visited by him, he gives to the church of Prague: "Coming thence" (namely from the monastery of Ersheim in the diocese of Strasbourg) "to the monastery of Weissenburg in the diocese of Speyer, of the foundation of the emperor Dagobert, we obtained the half of the bodies of the blessed Sergius and Bacchus, martyrs." And so we have now ascertained not only that the church of Prague at length also obtained relics of our Saints, but also whence and when they were received. But whence had those sacred pledges come to the monastery of Weissenburg, from which they were acquired by the emperor Charles? As those which the church of Heiligenstadt, spoken of above, possesses seem to have been brought to it from Syria, as I have taught, on the occasion of the sacred expeditions, so I judge that those also which the emperor Charles obtained from the monastery of Weissenburg were brought to it on the same occasion and from the same region.

[111] and these, to which the emperor Charles IV also added silver ornaments, Further, the emperor Charles IV, who, as we have already seen, imparted very many sacred pledges, acquired from every side, to the metropolitan church of Prague, also took care that a feast day should be instituted on which the memory of the celebration with which they were brought to Prague should be recalled every year; and the second day of January was appointed for this solemnity. So, in Pessina again, in the praised Work, page 449, teach the Breviary and Martyrology of the metropolitan church of Prague together, as also the Prague Calendar which is kept in our museum, sent in to our Bolland in the year 1647 by Father Theodore Moretus. Nor do I learn only this from these, but also that the relics which the emperor Charles gave to the church of Prague were most preciously adorned by this most religious prince with gold and silver and gems. And how in particular the sacred relics of our Saints were adorned by him it is possible to gather from two lists of the relics which are kept in the cathedral or metropolitan church of Prague, existing in Pessina in the Work already cited more than once. For in the one, which is noted as made in the year 1368, at page 472 these following words are read: "Of Sergius and Bacchus, martyrs, silver-gilt, with images"; and in the other, which, since in the year 1420, on the Wednesday after the feast

of St. James, the sacred relics of Prague were carried, through fear of the Wycliffite heretics, from the church of St. Vitus at Prague partly to Zittau, partly to Karlstein, is marked as drawn up then, and comprises the relics which were then carried to the latter place, these words occur at page 479: "The sepulchre of SS. Sergius and Bacchus surrounded with silver and gilded images."

[112] But the ornaments which the emperor Charles added to the chest containing the sacred relics of our Saints, the church of Prague still keeps today, made of silver-gilt, as appears it must be gathered from the words of the two Lists I have mentioned, already recited, were afterwards stripped from the same chest by the injury of the times. Pessina, in the Work already often cited, page 478, writes thus: "From which" (treasure of the relics translated to the castle of Karlstein, as I have already said, through fear of the heretics, in the year 1420 on the Wednesday after the feast of St. James) "… whatever there was in gold, silver, gems and precious stones, the emperor Sigismund carried off in the year 1420 on the 29th day of July, and converted it to military pay and the present necessity of war"; and in the Catalogue of the relics and jewels (go to Pessina, already often praised, page 498) of the cathedral church of Prague, drawn up in the year 1537, it is indicated that the sacred relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus were kept only in a small leaden box. Wherefore it does not appear to be doubted that the emperor Sigismund, in the year 1420, on the twenty-ninth day of July, the necessity of war pressing, stripped from the sacred remains of our Saints, no otherwise than from those of others kept in the castle of Karlstein, the silver ornaments with which the emperor Charles had decorated them, and converted them to the pay of soldiers. But although this is so, the Metropolitan church of Prague does not for that reason seem to have relaxed anything of its care in keeping those sacred pledges; and hence most probably it has come about that it possesses them still today, or certainly still possessed them in the year 1673, as is made credible by the catalogue of the relics kept in the cathedral church of Prague, drawn up then by Pessina, very often praised, from an ocular inspection of them, and brought by him into the Work now cited several times, in which at page 519 is read: "Of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, half of the bodies, obtained by Charles in the monastery of Weissenburg in the diocese of Speyer, 1354."

[113] But does this church also, as is declared in these words, possess the half, or middle part, of the body [nor does what is narrated of the bones of the Saints found near Soria hinder this from being believed.] of Bacchus as well as of Sergius, or did the emperor Charles IV obtain it from the monastery of Weissenburg? Since the Catalogue just mentioned, in which so notable a part of the sacred bodies of both Bacchus and Sergius is said to be kept in the church of Prague, was drawn up by Pessina, an ocular inspection having first been made, according to what has been said, I would not dare to deny credence without doubt to this writer when he relates it, much less to the emperor Charles asserting in the letters praised above that he acquired the middle part of the same bodies from the monastery of Weissenburg. Meanwhile a scruple is raised by the other churches already reviewed which are likewise enriched with relics of our Saints, and above all the Venetian patriarchal church, which expressly (go to number 100) ascribes to itself the greater part of the bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus. But although this is so, there is yet no reason why anyone should object here Lope de Morales, knight of Santiago, who records, in a little book published on this matter in the Spanish tongue, that in the year 1470 near Soria, a city of the diocese of Osma in Spain, the bones of four men were found in a stone chest, with an inscription added by which it was indicated that they were those of SS. Sergius, Bacchus, Marcellus and Apuleius. For besides that the Spanish words of Lope, rendered in Latin at this day by Tamayo (go to the Sylloge on SS. Marcellus and Apuleius already given today, number 21 and following) in the Spanish Martyrology, seem in no way to require that the bodies of SS. Sergius and Bacchus and of two others, namely Marcellus and Apuleius, were found near Soria entire or even for the greater part, the Work of the praised Lope de Morales does not exist among us, and hence we cannot define whether the things which Tamayo brings forward in its commendation at the place cited are consonant with the truth in every respect. Moreover, if Lope asserted in very deed that the entire bodies of our Saints were found near Soria, his credit would necessarily be most shaken even by this, since it is sufficiently established from what has been said above that the entire sacred bodies of our Saints are held nowhere.

[114] These meanwhile in that place, and in others which are here Further, Lope de Morales, by the words which have already been recited at the cited place of the Sylloge just praised, teaches not only that the bones of our Saints were found near Soria, but also that from the fifteenth century, in which this happened, they obtained a special cult there, which the miracles wrought at their invocation also increased; which, not judging it to be called into doubt, I now come to the sacred places of which I cannot define at about what time they began to venerate the Saints or to possess their sacred remains. Gelenius, On the Greatness of Cologne, syntagma 19, §2, counts among the sacred relics which the parish church called St. Martin the Lesser possesses at Cologne two ribs of the Saints, one of Sergius, the other of Bacchus; and although he does not declare at about what time these sacred pledges were brought to Cologne, yet he teaches not obscurely that the Saints there both became illustrious by frequent miracles and were in the highest veneration among the people in his own age. The words in which he does so, and in which he relates besides that there formerly existed at Cologne a chapel sacred to St. Sergius, I transcribe here. They run thus: "That through these sacred ribs" (namely of SS. Sergius and Bacchus) "miracles were frequent at Cologne, especially for those failing in a long consumption, who very often recovered their strength by the invocation of these Saints, we have very often heard discoursed in sermons publicly held by the illustrious theologian, pastor of this church, Adolf Schulcken, vicar general in spirituals of Cologne, provost of Blessed Mary the Virgin ad Gradus and priest-canon of the metropolitan church; with whose assertions agrees a very ancient manuscript of my library in the description of the Sergian chapel, formerly situated at the old Rhine gate, which was destroyed in the year 1563 by the authority of the superiors, the sacred things and all the furniture being transferred into this more capacious parish basilica."

[115] reviewed, either enjoy special cult in sacred places or formerly enjoyed it. Nor is Rome, which possesses very many, nay almost innumerable, sacred relics, wholly destitute of the relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus. Besides the sacred building or oratory which, as I taught at number 95, was most probably built to our Saints at Rome already from the sixth century, four further sacred places which they have, or certainly formerly had, dedicated to their name there are reviewed by Fioravante Martinelli in Rome Made Sacred from the Heathen, namely a church at the arch of Septimius Severus; a monastery situated behind the course of the aqueduct of the Lateran patriarchate and mentioned by Anastasius the Librarian in the Life of Pope St. Paschal the first, among us at the 14th day of May, number XI; an oratory in Callinicum; and finally the Ruthenian college of SS. Sergius and Bacchus at the Monti. And this, whence chiefly it comes to be mentioned here, possesses also a part of the sacred relics of SS. Sergius and Bacchus. So I understand from the Sacred Hemerologion of Piazza at this day, who, however, does not declare whence and when it received it; as also that their feast is celebrated today not only in the church of the said college, but also in the church of St. Mary in Aracoeli, and likewise in another, sacred to St. Adrian, in which they besides have an altar dedicated to their name. For the rest, some other sacred places too possess precious pledges of our Saints, concerning whom I learn from Domenico Giorgi in his Annotations of today on the Martyrology of Ado that the Gospel to be recited today is designated in the very ancient Vatican capitulary of the Gospels, 43, and venerate the same Saints.

[116] But these, because they are less celebrated than those already reviewed, together with some others, which are said indeed to have possessed sacred relics of our Saints and yet it may be called into doubt whether they ever truly possessed them, I pass over for the sake of brevity, and only add still to those enumerated above the church of the Benedictines in the rue Saint-Jacques at Paris, formerly dedicated to SS. Sergius and Bacchus, as Baillet teaches at this day in the Lives of the Saints composed by him; and the suburb of Constantinople, or, if you prefer on account of what will presently be said, of Chalcedon, which is called Ρουφινιαναὶ by the Greeks. In the former of these two places our Saints, as the same Baillet also teaches at the place cited, are still today venerated as ancient patrons, and their sacred remains besides, as I learn from various spiritual Diaries of the Parisian church of various years, are kept beneath the principal altar; and as regards the latter of the two said places, which, as may be seen in Du Cange in Christian Constantinople, book 4, §13, is situated across the sea in Asia near Chalcedon, it is noted thus in a Greek manuscript Synaxary and in the manuscript Menaea of Milan and Turin at the 27th day of May: Μνημὴ τῶν ἁγ· Σεργίου καὶ Βάκχου πέραν ἐν Ρουφινιαταῖς, "The commemoration of Saints Sergius and Bacchus across the sea at Rufinianae"; so that certainly it is not to be doubted that our Saints either enjoy, or at least formerly enjoyed, ecclesiastical cult in the aforesaid suburb, whether of Chalcedon or of Constantinople. But I find it noted nowhere that their sacred relics are also kept there. Moreover, since Du Cange, at the place cited, reviews two sacred buildings which existed at Rufinianae, one dedicated to SS. Peter and Paul, the other to St. Hypatius, and that suburb perhaps comprised several others, I can in no way define, the documents necessary for this being lacking, whether in all of them, or, if the matter stands otherwise, in which one or ones of them the honour proper to the Saints was paid to Sergius and Bacchus.

* oratorio oratory

ACTS,

By an Anonymous Author,

From our parchment manuscript codex marked Q. Ms. 7, collated with two other parchment manuscript codices of ours likewise and with the edition of Mombritius.

Sergius, martyr, in Syria. (St.) Bacchus, martyr, in Syria. (St.) BHL Number: 7599

By an anonymous writer.

CHAPTER I.

Sergius and Bacchus are denounced as Christians to the emperor Maximian; found to be such, they are held up to mockery by him, are sent to Antiochus the general to be put even to death unless they sacrifice to the gods, and are shut up in custody by him.

Sergius and Bacchus, eminent in favour and authority in the palace, In the reign of Maximian ^a, the tyrant, much error had possessed the race of men; for they adored stones and wood, the inventions of men, and tasted of obscene sacrifices. And those who would not sacrifice, afflicted vehemently with penalties and punishments, were compelled to serve demons. There was, then, an edict set up in the forum in every city with the most severe threat ^b. And so the purity of the upper air was polluted

by the devilish shining of the altars *, and the darkness of devilish error was thought a fitting way of life for men. Then, therefore, like certain earthly stars in respect of the confession of the faith of our Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ, Sergius and Bacchus were powerful in the palace ^c and were honourable with the emperor Maximian. Blessed Sergius indeed was primicerius and chief of the school of the gentiles, a friend of the emperor and having much confidence with him, so that he even granted his requests swiftly ^d.

[2] having very great influence, by envious men For which reason Antiochus, having Sergius as a familiar friend , asked of the emperor that he had become ^e general of the province of Augusta Euphratensis ^f; and blessed Bacchus was himself secundicerius of the same school of the gentiles. For they who were of one mind in the charity of Christ were fittingly not separated from one another in secular military service either, connected not indeed by the affection of nature but by the bond of faith, singing always and saying: "Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity ^g." They were, then, talented and happy Soldiers of God, and instructed to perfection in the Scriptures inspired by God * for the destruction of devilish error, and fully exercised in battles for the slaying of the barbarians. Through the envy, therefore, of the malignant and wicked demon, certain men of the same school, which is called that of the Gentiles, goaded on, seeing them living elegantly in the royal courts and advancing in the service, and having much confidence with the emperor, being unable otherwise to weave the snares of their contriving against them, accused them before the emperor of being Christians.

[3] For, watching for a time when the same blessed Sergius and Bacchus were not standing by the emperor, are accused before the emperor Maximian as Christians, finding him alone, they said: "Your immortal highness has much zeal for the religion of our venerable and great gods; for which reason your writings have come everywhere and to all places, in which you have commanded that those who will not venerate and adore them, being liable under your spotless edict, shall be consumed by innumerable punishments. Why, then, do Sergius and Bacchus, primicerii of our school, having such confidence with the power of your eternity, venerate and adore Christ, whom those who are called Jews crucified and slew as a malefactor, and, persuading many others, withdraw them from the worship of the gods and bring them over to their own religion?" The emperor, hearing these things and not believing them, said: "I do not think that you speak the truth, because Sergius and Bacchus are not undevoted to the honour and religion of God.

[4] "Since, then, I have a spotless charity toward them, and by him, the truth of the accusation, from this, which they would not have merited to obtain unless they were devout and sincere ; but if, as you maintain, they are of that care , they will be found out. For, calling them together, unaware of what has been said, I will go together with them to the sanctuary of great Jupiter; and if indeed they sacrifice, you assign to yourselves the cause of undergoing danger for such a calumny; but if they will not sacrifice, they will undergo a punishment worthy of their impiety. For the gods, the attendants of my empire, do not want the impious and ungrateful." The accusers answering said to the emperor: "We, moved by love and affection for the gods, have suggested to your immortal highness what we heard concerning them; and it will be for your undefiled wisdom to find out their impiety." Forthwith, therefore, the emperor called them together; and they had entered with the customary services of the attendants; and taking them with him he entered and sacrificed with the officials, and tasting of the sacrifices he looked round, and did not see blessed Sergius and Bacchus.

[5] For they had not entered the temple, judging it impious and unlawful to see men sacrificing and tasting of unclean sacrifices: because, and to enter the temple of Jupiter but they were standing outside *, and praying as with one mouth, saying: "King of kings and Lord of lords, who dwellest in light inaccessible, enlighten the eyes of the heart of those who walk in the darkness of ignorance, who have changed Thy glory, of the incorruptible God, into the likeness of corruptible men, and of birds and four-footed beasts and serpents, and serve the creature rather than Thee the Creator; convert them, that they may know Thee the only true God, and Thine only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who for us and for our salvation suffered and rose again, that He might snatch us from the curse of the law and free us from the error of vain idols: but keep us, O God, undefiled and spotless in the way of Thy testimonies, that we may walk according to Thy commandments." And while the prayer was still in their mouth, the emperor, sending some of the attendants standing by him, ordered them to be brought into the temple.

[6] and to sacrifice to the gods, being found to refuse, To them as they entered he said: "As I see, trusting in my great mildness and humanity, under whose protection the gods have provided for you, you wish besides even to despise the imperial edict, having become transgressors and enemies of the gods. ^h But I shall not bear it if the things which have been said of you are proved. Approach, therefore, the altar of great Jupiter and sacrifice, and taste of the mystic sacrifices, as the others also do." And answering, the most valiant soldiers of Christ and martyrs Sergius and Bacchus said: "We, emperor, owe you indeed the discharge of the earthly service of bodily soldiering; but we have a true King, eternal in heaven, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, to whom we have devoted our souls, who is our hope and the refuge of our salvation. To Him we offer every day a holy and living sacrifice and a reasonable service; but to stones and wood we do not sacrifice, nor do we adore them. For your gods have ears indeed, but do not hear the prayer of men. Likewise they have nostrils, but do not smell the sacrifice which is offered to them; and having mouths * they do not speak, having hands they do not handle, having feet they do not walk. Let them that make them become like unto them, and all who trust in them."

[7] clothed in women's colobia, they are ordered to be led round through the city, The emperor, therefore, indignant, changed his countenance, and ordered their belts to be cut at once, and, stripped of their cloaks and whatever were the garments of their military service, and at the same time the gold torques to be taken from their necks; and he clothed them in women's colobia *, and so ordered them to be dragged through the middle of the city to the palace, carrying very heavy chains on their necks. And when the Saints of God were being dragged through the middle of the forum, they said, singing together: "If we walk in the midst of the shadow of death, we will fear no evils, for Thou art with us"; and that Apostolic word: "So that, denying all impiety and worldly desire, and having put off the garment of the old man, naked in faith we may exult in Thee, O Lord, for Thou hast clothed us with the garment of salvation, and with the tunic of gladness hast Thou surrounded us ⁱ. As a bride Thou hast adorned us with women's robes; join us to Thyself through confession. Thou, O Lord, didst command us, saying: Before kings and governors you shall be led for my sake; and when they deliver you up, be not anxious how or what you shall speak; for it shall be given you in that hour what to speak: for it is not you that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you ^k.

[8] and remaining nonetheless, this being done, "Arise, O Christ, help us, and fight against them that fight against us; strengthen our souls, that we be not moved, and the impious say: Where is their God?" And when they came to the palace, the emperor called the Saints and said: "Most wicked of all men, do you think that, trusting in my friendship which I had toward you, thinking you servants of the gods, you may answer the emperor things which are not lawful? Why do you also blaspheme the gods, through whom the race of men enjoys great peace? Do you not know that the Christ whom you worship was the son of a carpenter, and that, before a lawful marriage was made, his mother procreated him of adultery done? Whom also the Jews crucified, because he sent discords and seditions among them, deceiving them by magic arts, and saying that he was God; but the greatest race of our gods was procreated from the lawful nuptials of Jupiter. The great gods Jupiter and Saturn are venerably named from the union with blessed Juno ^l. And I think that you have also heard of the theoric and greatest twelve Labours ^m."

[9] And the most valiant Soldiers of Christ answering said: constant in the confession of the faith "You err, emperor; for these are fables deceiving the ears of simpler men and urging them to perdition. But He whom you say was the son of a carpenter of adultery done is the Son of the true God, who with Him and through Him made all things, stretched out the heavens, founded the earth, bridled the abyss and the great sea loosed upon the sand, adorned the heaven with the multitude of the stars, created the sun to give light to the day and founded the moon for the solace of the night, and divided between the darkness and the light, set the measure of the day and the end of the night. All things He brought out from that which is not, that they might be. For He made all things in wisdom, as God. And in the last days, for the salvation of men, He was born on earth, not of the will of man, nor of the pleasure of the flesh, but of the Holy Spirit and of the Maiden ever Virgin. And He conversed with men, teaching us to turn back from these vain idols and to know Him and His Father, the true God.

[10] "And if according to the flesh the Jews slew Christ, to Antiochus the general, yet He also despoiled hell, and rose on the third day by the deity of His power, and established the law of incorruptibility and the resurrection of the dead." Hearing these things, the emperor became full of fury, and ordered their accusers to be ranked in the service in their place, and said to them: "I send you, accursed ones, to Antiochus the general, because through the friendship and confidence which you have, given to you by me, you have even brought him to this dignity; that you may know from what honour you have fallen, and by what least judgment you have to suffer the uttermost punishment on account of the blasphemy which you have dared to commit against the gods ⁿ." He said these things and sent them to Antiochus the general, and ordered them, bound with heavy chains over the whole body, to be led to the parts of the East through the officials of the several cities ^o.

[11] And he wrote also a letter of this kind: "The emperor Maximian, pious and triumphant, to Antiochus the general, greeting. a letter also being given to him, they are sent. The very great providence of the gods does not wish any men indeed, but especially the guardians of my empire, to be impious and strangers to their familiarity; and therefore Sergius and Bacchus, convicted by their own conscience of being of the impious religion of the Christians, I have judged liable to the uttermost punishments; whom, judging them not worthy of the inquiries of the imperial courts, we have directed to your strenuousness, so that, if indeed they repent and sacrifice to the gods beforehand, pardon having been granted them, you may send them back to us without torments. For they shall soon receive the dignity of the service, and better than they had before. But if they will by no means do these things, but remain in their impiety, do not defer to subject them to the severity of the laws, and long

hopes of life cut off for them. Farewell [p]." And those who received them, the evening of that same day having come, stayed at the twelfth milestone from the city in a stable, with great protection and guard.

[12] About midnight an angel of the Lord came and said to them: On the journey they are encouraged to the fight by an angel appearing to them, "Be confident and fight against the spirit of the devil, as most valiant soldiers and athletes, so that when, wrestling him through, you put him beneath your feet, and when you come to see the King of glory, Christ, we may meet you with a multitude of the army of angels, singing the praise of victory, bearing to you the palms of perfect faith and the crowns of confession." And when dawn came, rejoicing with all gladness they walked on the way. And there were with them some of their servants, who, for love of the piety of Christ and of their bodily masters, would not leave them even in such necessities; who heard them telling one another of the coming of the angel whom they had seen in the night. And as they walked they sang psalms together and prayed as from one mouth, both thus saying: "In the way of Thy testimonies we have delighted, as in all riches, and in Thy commandments we will exercise ourselves, and we have considered Thy ways. In Thy justifications we will meditate, O Christ; reward Thy servants, that we may live and keep Thy words."

[13] and, brought to Antiochus, they are thrown by him into custody, And thus, according to the emperor's command, the Soldiers of Christ were passed on with every guard through the several officials of the cities [q] along the way of martyrdom set before them, until they were brought to the province of Augusta Euphratensis, to the soldiers who are beside the nation of the Saracens in the fortress named Barbalissus [r], in which Antiochus had his seat; to whom they handed them over about the ninth hour with the emperor's letter. And Antiochus rose from his seat and received the emperor's letter in the purple of his cloak, and read it silently to himself; and he called the commentariensis [s] of his office and said to him: "Receive the envoy men, and put them in military custody without any of the customary molestation. For put their feet in the several pierced holes of the stocks [t]; and on the next day bring them to judgment, that I may hear them according to the laws." And the commentariensis, as he was commanded, received them and put them in the stocks.

[14] in which, while they implore the divine help, And when evening came, they sang psalms together and prayed as from one mouth, both saying: "Thou, O Lord, hast broken the heads of the great dragon, Thou hast dried up the rivers, Thou hast broken open fountains and torrents, Thou hast made the borders of the world; look upon us, O Lord our God, for the enemy has reproached us for Thy name. Deliver not up the souls of men who confess Thee to those who are more savage than wild beasts. Forget not to the end the souls of the poor. Look upon Thy covenant, for they that are darkened of the earth are filled with dwellings of iniquities [u]. Let us not turn back in shame, made wretched, that we the poor may praise Thy name.

[15] they are refreshed again by an angelic apparition offered to them. "Thou wilt not forget * the voices of those who supplicate Thee, for the pride of them that hate Thee ascends always to Thee; and men have hated us without cause, but do Thou, O Lord, help us and free us for Thy name's sake." And when the Saints, saying these things, had fallen silent, an angel of the Lord came upon them and said to them: "Be confident and stand bravely in faith and confession, for our Lord Jesus Christ is with you." And they rose from sleep and narrated to their servants the revelation of the angel, and received confidence. And they sang these psalms, saying: "To the Lord, when we were troubled, we cried, and He heard us from His holy mountain. We slept and took our rest, and we rose up, for the Lord upheld us. We will not fear thousands of the people surrounding us. Arise, O Lord, save us, our God, for Thou art salvation, and Thy blessing is upon those who hope in Thee."

ANNOTATIONS.

g. Psalm 132, verse I.

p. This letter too seems to have been invented at pleasure by the author of the Acts.

q. Go to the Annotations just above at letter o.

r. For the situation of this fort see the Preliminary Commentary, number 31; and there, that you may understand that what is said here in the Acts is true, add to what is said that that Fort was situated not far from Arabia, in which the Saracens had their seat.

s. The commentarienses were those to whom the care of the accused was committed, so called because they inscribed the names of the accused in records. Go to Baronius in his Annotations on the Roman Martyrology at the 27th of March.

t. That which by the Greeks was called ξύλον, by the Latins, as Suidas testifies, was called Cippus, and was a certain kind of fetter, concerning which Valois, in his notes on book 5 of the Ecclesiastical History of Eusebius, chapter I, observes thus: "It was a wooden trunk, hollowed out with five holes on either side, divided from one another by a fixed space. Into these holes, as into certain greaves, the feet of the guilty were inserted, and bound fast with chains or thongs, as is gathered from the verses of Arator which we reported above on book IV." Further, from this description or notice of the cippus which Valois adduces here at the same time, it does not appear to be doubted that here in the Acts by percussa, or rather, as it is written in two other copies of these, namely of the Mombritian edition and of our codex Q. Ms. 6, pertusa, the same thing is designated as by the holes in the description of the cippus given. And from all these things, especially since those whose feet were stretched to several holes were tortured far more harshly and heavily, as suffering their legs to be spread apart in an almost intolerable manner, it now follows that to the reading which is read both here and, with the difference of only one or another word, in the Mombritian edition and our codex Q. Ms. 6, "Receive the envoy ligatos: bound men and put them in military custody without any of the customary molestation. For put their feet in the several pierced holes of the stocks," this other reading of our codex P. Ms. 20 is surely preferable, which has thus: "Receive the bound men; have them kept under military custody … Let them suffer nothing beyond the usual precaution, and let not their feet be bound fast in several holes of the wood."

u. Our codex which is marked P. Ms. 20 has: "Look, O Lord, upon Thy covenant, for the dark ones of the earth are filled with dwellings of iniquities"; and in Psalm 73, verse 20, is read: "Look upon Thy covenant; for they that are darkened of the earth are filled with dwellings of iniquities."

* nidore reek

* otherwise: Sergius

* ab alterutro from one another

* otherwise: Scripturis, a Deo inspiratis in the Scriptures inspired by God

* sinceri sincere

* otherwise: culturæ of that worship

* otherwise: ignorantes unaware

* otherwise: degustans tasting

* otherwise: foris outside

* Otherwise: os a mouth

* otherwise: colobia.

* otherwise: obliviscere forget not

CHAPTER II.

The constancy of the Saints in the faith before Antiochus, the death thereupon inflicted on them, the miracles that followed it, their burial, and the honour paid to them by the Christians.

Antiochus exhorts the Saints, brought to him, to sacrifice to the gods; And when morning came, the general sat in the praetorium and called the commentariensis ^a and said to him: "Let the envoys * come in." The commentariensis said: "They are present at the judgment of your power, lord." And when the Saints were standing by, he read the emperor's letter. This done, the general Antiochus, his counsellor having been sent away, said: "You ought indeed always to fulfil the commands of the emperor and to sacrifice to the gods, that you might have favour from them; but since, I know not how, you have by no means been willing to do this, and have fallen from such glory, at least now sacrifice to the gods, knowing that, if you do this, you will have honour and glory among men more than before, receiving back your ranks in the service, and the things which have been taken from you will be multiplied. For this we have learned from the commands of the imperial letter, as you too have heard. For your emperor, being humane, has promised you that, if you repent of what went before and sacrifice to the gods, all these things shall be restored to you; which I urge you to do, mindful of your friendship and of the benefits which I had above all from you, my lord Sergius. But if you will by no means do this, it is necessary for me to fulfil severely the emperor's commands."

[17] Answering him, the Saints said: "We for this reason left all things and followed Christ, but these persist constant in the confession of Christ, that, despising earthly service, we might serve with the angels in heaven, and, casting away those monies which are on earth, might have heavenly riches. For what would it profit us if we should gain the whole world, but lose our souls? Therefore do not urge such things upon us, Antiochus; for your tongue speaks deceitfully, and the venom of asps is under your lips. But your speech, which provokes us to perdition, does not touch our souls. Do what you will; for we do not adore wood and stones, but Christ the Son of God, the eternal King, to whom every knee bows of things in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confesses Him. For your gods are not gods, but idols made with hands. For if they were gods, let them themselves make men sacrifice to them, and they would not be avenged * by the providence of men on those who will not sacrifice to them and adore them ^b."

[18] And answering, the general Antiochus said: "We do not avenge the gods; Hence Antiochus orders Bacchus to be beaten to death with thongs, for by their providence all the strength of the enemy is subjected to us; but we blame you because you worship an impure and abominable religion." And the holy Martyrs answered and said: "Impure and abominable are you, and those who follow you, and sacrifice to demons and adore pieces of wood which after a little while are thrown into the fire." Then the general Antiochus, very angry, ordered blessed Sergius to be received again into custody, but blessed Bacchus to be stretched out and beaten with raw thongs until those who were beating him fell to the ground wearied. And when they were wearied with the labour, he ordered others to turn the holy martyr Bacchus over, and by these again to beat his belly; and he himself said: "Let be, let us see whether Christ, whom you say is God, can help." And when the Saint's body had been beaten a long time and the blood was flowing round, the martyr Bacchus said to Antiochus: "The ministers of Satan who are beating are wearied, your audacity has fallen. The tyrant Maximian is conquered, and your father the devil ^c. For as much as the body which is outside me is corrupted, so much is the man who is within renewed for the life to come ^d."

[19] [and orders the body of the slain man to be thrown out to be devoured by wild beasts.] As he said these things, a voice came from heaven, saying: "Come now to the kingdom prepared for you, Athlete Bacchus"; and those standing round, hearing the voice, were astounded, and became as if empty; and while the Saint was being beaten he gave up his soul into the hands * of the angels ^e. And Antiochus, angered, ordered that his body should not even be buried, but thrown to the dogs, beasts, and birds; and when his body had been thrown far from the fortress, a multitude of beasts gathered and surrounded him; but the birds flying above did not permit the cruel beasts to touch him ^f. And they held on guarding him until the time of night; and when evening came, certain of the brethren dwelling there in caves, coming down, took his holy body, permitted by the beasts as by certain rational men, and buried him in one of their caves ^g. But blessed Sergius, exceedingly anxious and saddened, was left alone, and weeping said: "Woe is me, Bacchus my brother and comrade, never shall we sing, saying: Behold how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity. For ascending into heaven you have been separated from me, leaving me solitary upon the earth."

[20] Sergius is encouraged to the contest by Bacchus appearing to him by night, As he said these things, in the same night blessed Bacchus stood by him, having a face shining white like an angel's, clothed in military dress, and said to him: "Why are you saddened, or why are you anxious, brother? Although I have departed from you in the body, yet by the bond of confession I am with you, singing and saying: I have run the way of Thy commandments, when Thou didst enlarge * my heart. And you too, therefore, Brother, make haste, that by a good and entire confession you may come to me, finishing the course and keeping the faith. For with you there is laid up for me justice and a crown ^h." Rising, then, at daybreak, he narrated to those who were with him in what dress he had seen blessed Bacchus by night. On the following day, then, the general, being about to go out from the fortress of Barbarissus to the fortress of Sura ⁱ, ordered blessed Sergius also to follow, and besought him to sacrifice. But he, spurning his flatteries, made his journey in peace.

[21] [on the following day he is tempted by Antiochus with flatteries, and while both to these] When, therefore, they came to the fortress of Sura, Antiochus, sitting on the tribunal in the praetorium, called blessed Sergius to him, saying to him: "Bacchus indeed, most impious, unwilling to submit to sacrificing to the gods, chose to be deprived of life, and has obtained a death worthy of him. But you, my lord Sergius, why, following that seductive and impious religion, have you delivered yourself to such great misery? For I revere you, mindful of your benefits, and I am confounded before you , because you procured this command for me. And you indeed stand as a defendant in the rank of the examined , while I sit in the seat of the presiding judge." And answering, the martyr of Christ Sergius said: "This affliction and temporal confusion will bring forth great confidence and eternal glory with the King of heaven and earth and of every spirit, Christ Jesus, the Son of God. Would that even now you would hear me, and know God and my King Christ, and make provision for yourself, as with the earthly and mortal emperor, so also with Christ, the heavenly and eternal king, that there might be granted to you a principality without successor and immortal glory.

[22] "For earthly princes fall swiftly, as the Psalm said: and to threats remains unmoved, But you shall die like men, and shall fall like one of the princes ^k. And again: I saw the impious exalted and lifted up like the cedars of Lebanon. I sought him and his place was not found ^l." The general Antiochus said: "Leave these foolish and undisciplined superfluities and sacrifice to the gods, and be obedient to the venerable commands of our emperor Maximian. But if you will not sacrifice, know that you will compel me to forget all that you have done for me, and I will subject you to the sharpest punishments of the laws." Blessed Sergius therefore said: "Do what you will; for I have Christ helping me, who said: Fear not them that kill the body; but the soul they cannot kill. But rather fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell ^m. My body, therefore, lies subject to you; punish and afflict it as much as you will, knowing this, that, even if you destroy my body, you will not be able to have power over my soul, neither you nor your father Satan."

[23] The general, therefore, indignant, said: "As it seems, my humanity has made you bolder and more insolent." shod with nailed boots, he is compelled to run the space of nine miles. He called, therefore, the assistant of his office and said: "Put on him quickly boots ⁿ pierced with long nails, leaving their nails upright"; and when they were being put on him, Antiochus, sitting in a carriage, ordered him to run before him, commanding that the beasts should be driven quickly as far as the fortress of Tetrapyrgium. And this fort is nine miles distant from Sura ^o. And as he ran he sang psalms, saying: "Waiting I waited for the Lord, and He looked upon me, and brought me out of the pit of the misery of the pagans and out of the mire of the dregs of idolatry, and set my feet upon the rock of confession." And when they had come to the fortress of Tetrapyrgia, the general Antiochus said: "I wonder at you, Sergius, how, tried in so great an office, you have now been able to bear such heavy punishments." And the holy Martyr of Christ answering said: "Your punishments are not bitter to me, but sweet above honey and the honeycomb." The general, getting down from the carriage, went into the praetorium, commanding the Martyr of Christ to be guarded in military custody.

[24] And when evening came blessed Sergius sang, saying: [But Sergius, the wounds which he had received in his feet having been healed by an angel,] "They who once ate my bread have lifted up their heel against me, and with the cords of most grievous punishments have stretched a snare for my feet, wishing to trip me up. But arise, O Lord, prevent them and overthrow them, and deliver my soul from the impious." And about midnight an angel of the Lord, standing by, restored his feet to him sound [p]. At daybreak, then, the general, sitting on the tribunal, ordered him to be brought, thinking that from the pain he could not even walk, unless perhaps he were carried. When he was being brought, the general, seeing him from afar walking and by no means limping, terrified, said: "This Man is a magician; therefore he was able to have such great confidence with the emperor, obtaining it by magic arts; and the things that are seen are the proofs of the things that are said. For I thought that he could by no means walk on his feet, inasmuch as they had been rendered useless for anything by yesterday's punishment. But how he now walks, as if he had suffered nothing, by the gods, I wonder."

[25] still refuting the idolaters, he is subjected again to the same torment, Blessed Sergius, therefore, standing before the tribunal, Antiochus said: "Wretch, look about you at last and sacrifice to the gods and strip yourself of the punishments to come. For I spare you, mindful of your benefits. But if you do not sacrifice, know that your magic arts, by which you thought yourself made safe, will avail you nothing." And answering,

blessed Sergius said: "Would that you would come to your senses from the drunkenness of devilish error! For I am sober in the Lord, who has crushed the arms of your father the devil beneath the feet of His humble servant; who has granted me victory against you; who has sent me His angel and will save * me. For you are assuredly the magician, and those who adore demons. For the worship of demons, not even to be named, is the inventress of all impiety. For it is both the beginning and the cause and the end of all malice [q]." Antiochus, exasperated the more, sat again in the carriage, and ordered him, shod in the same boots, to run before him as far as the fortress named Ruzafata [r], which is nine miles distant from Tetrapyrgia.

[26] [and not willing even so to sacrifice to the gods, at length by the order of Antiochus,] And when they had come to the fortress of Ruzaphata, the general Antiochus said to blessed Sergius: "Most wretched man, have the punishments of the nails put to flight the persistence of your folly, so that you at last consent to sacrifice to the gods, or do you persist in the persistence which has taken possession of you?" And answering, the most valiant Martyr of Christ said: "Let it be known to you, Antiochus, that through this folly I shall persist to the undoing of your power and that of your father the devil. Do, therefore, what you will; for I do not adore demons, nor do I sacrifice to idols, but I make haste to offer myself as a spotless sacrifice to the Lord my God." Antiochus, therefore, seeing that he persisted fixed and immovable in the faith and confession of Christ, gave such sentence against him: "Sergius, who has shown himself unworthy of the piety of the gods, and has inserted himself into the most impious heresy of those who are called Christians, and has offended against the great fortune of the emperor Maximian, in that he would not be obedient to his venerable * edicts by sacrificing to the gods, this man the laws command to be punished with the sword." Certain of those standing by, therefore, acclaimed that the sentence which had been pronounced against him was just. The apparitors, therefore, coming, put a rope between his lips, and taking him from the midst of the council-chamber led him away to be put to death by the sword.

[27] the prayer poured out to God which is here recited, A very great multitude, therefore, of men and women followed him, to behold the end of the Blessed one. Seeing, then, the flower of his countenance and the youthful greatness of his age, they wept most bitterly, sighing over him. And the beasts of the same place, leaving their lairs, came together all mingled, laying snares for none of men, and, touched by the cries, gazed upon the death of the holy Martyr [s]. As they approached the place in which Sergius, martyr of Christ, was to be consummated, he asked the executioners to grant him a little respite that he might pray. And stretching out his hands to heaven he said: "The beasts of the field and the birds of the air, knowing Thy dominion and empire, O Lord, have gathered together to the glory of Thy holy name, that by their confession they may turn * the knowledge of rational men to Thee, who by the nod of Thy goodness and the force of Thy will willest all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Holding back death indeed, awaiting repentance, remember not, O Lord, the sin of their ignorance, which they have drawn out against us for Thy name.

[28] "Enlighten the eyes of their heart and lead them to the knowledge of Thee. having made the prayer, he is beheaded, Receive finally my soul also, and make it rest in Thy heavenly tabernacles with those who have pleased Thee from the beginning of the world. For to Thee I commend my soul, for Thou hast rescued me from the snare of the devil." Saying these things, then, and signing himself and bending his knees, he was beheaded and gave up his soul to the angels [t]. And a voice came from heaven, saying: "Sergius, my soldier and athlete, enter into the kingdom which is prepared for you. For the armies of the angels await you, the numbers of the patriarchs, the companies of the Apostles and prophets, the spirits of the just, that with them you may receive the good things which are prepared for you [u]." And the place in which the blood of the holy Martyr was received, being split, made a great chasm, God so disposing, in order that those who wallowed like swine in the mire, through terror of the chasm they had seen, should not dare to approach and trample upon the blood of the holy Martyr in that very place. And for this reason that great chasm was made, and so that place has remained until the present day, containing by the divine will the signs of antiquity [x], that, a miracle existing in a special manner, it may build a firm foundation of faith in those who do not believe.

[29] Accordingly some of those who had gathered to see the end of the holy Martyr, and, the people of Sura long after vainly trying to carry off his body, heeding the regard of common nature, gathered up his body, and, burying it excellently, laid him in the same place in which he had also suffered. After a long time, then, religious men, stirred by zeal for Christ, began to despoil the body from its place, coming from the fortress of Sura, as some most precious treasure; but St. Sergius did not permit his body to be secretly translated, which had been publicly punished with triumphal punishments for the confession of Christ, but besought God that a fire be kindled in the same place, not that he might avenge or even burn those who were trying to steal it, but that he might also illumine the darkness of the night to the fortress of Ruzaphata over such a theft; which also was done. The fire, then, having been kindled in the place where the body lay, certain of the inhabitants of the fortress, seeing it and the flame raised high up even to the heavens, thought that that very great fire had been made by some enemies; and they went out armed and pursued those who had attempted to steal the body of the holy Martyr; and they, entreating them, were permitted to remain there a few days; and, making a building of stones and mud in the place where it lay, and covering it over in honour of the Martyr, they thus withdrew [y].

[30] As the religion of our Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ gradually advanced, therefore, he is honoured by the Christians with a notable church built in his honour. most holy bishops, fifteen in number, coming together into one, built near the fortress of Ruzafata a Cemetery worthy of his confession, and translated there the body of the holy Martyr and laid it in the same martyrium on the same day on which he suffered, the seventh day of the month of October [z]. Many salvations, finally, and miracles are wrought wherever his holy relics may be, especially at the tomb where he had previously lain. For out of affection for the place in which he suffered, the same holy Martyr beseeches the Lord that all who flock thither may be cured of divers sicknesses. And he cures those possessed by unclean spirits; and also the wild beasts are turned to gentleness. For the beasts keep the day on which he suffered every year as a lawful one, flocking from the desert which is round about, and, mingled with men, lie in wait for none at all, nor use a savage onset to the hurt of those who flock thither [aa]. But rather, honouring the Martyr of Christ in gentleness, they remain in the same place according to the command of the Lord, to whom is honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.

fort, or town, and Sura Procopius establishes. Go to the Preliminary Commentary, number 34, and there add to what is said that the word Tetrapyrgium is undoubtedly composed of two Greek words, τεσσαρὰ or τετταρὰ and πυργὸς, of which the former signifies four, the latter Tower; so that that fort, the name given it being derived from the thing itself, most probably consisted of four towers.

p. Nor can the apparition narrated here, joined besides with another miracle, seem more credible than the others related above. Go to the Preliminary Commentary, numbers 22 and 36.

q. These reasonings too again, and others still occurring below, which are ascribed to St. Sergius and Antiochus, seem to have been invented at pleasure by the biographer.

r. Concerning this Fort, which is more commonly called Resapha or Rosapha by the ancient writers, and which St. Sergius obtained as the arena in which he consummated his martyrdom, see what has been said both in the Annotations just above at letter o and in the Preliminary Commentary, number 27 and some following.

s. Nor would I wish to put myself forward as surety for the truth of this miracle. Go again to the Preliminary Commentary, numbers 22 and 36.

t. That St. Sergius consummated his martyrdom by the sword in very deed too, as is related here, scarcely any room for doubt remains from what I discoursed on this matter in the Preliminary Commentary, number 35 and following.

u. What I declared just now, in the Annotations subjoined to the preceding chapter at letter e, of the voice which came down from heaven when Bacchus was being crowned with martyrdom, consider the same said here of the voice which is asserted to have come down from heaven when Sergius had been struck with the sword.

x. Whether certain credence is to be given to this miracle, determine from what was said in the Preliminary Commentary, numbers 22 and 36. Meanwhile it is understood from this place of the Acts that the Acts of the Saints were not written by a contemporary author, as I have already pointed out in the Preliminary Commentary, number 16.

y. Whatever may be the case with the prodigy related here, since it is related by the biographer to have been wrought a long time after the martyrdom of St. Sergius, it is plain both from this place of the Acts, as also from the other which immediately follows, that they were not written by an author who lived contemporary with the Saints, as I have already taught in the Preliminary Commentary, number 16 and following.

z. Since martyrium signified among the ancients the same as any sacred building, whether small or large, built in honour of a martyr, I think that by that word is understood here the notable church built by Alexander, bishop of Hierapolis, at Resapha to St. Sergius, or rather to him together with St. Bacchus, about the year 430, as I taught in the Preliminary Commentary, § IV. And indeed this sacred building is called in our codex P. Ms. 20 not martyrium but basilica.

aa. Resapha or Sergiopolis, in which city St. Sergius was crowned with martyrdom and obtained a tomb, was situated in a desert abounding in very many wild beasts; so that hence perhaps (for wild beasts are not wont to harm men when many are gathered in one and the same place) what is narrated here, and what happened with no miracle intervening, was nevertheless believed by the credulous and prodigy-loving common people to happen by a miracle, and the matter besides came to the knowledge of the biographer not as it was, but augmented with false circumstances.

* ligati bound men

* otherwise: vindicentur would be avenged

* otherwise: manus hands

* otherwise: dilatasti Thou didst enlarge

* otherwise: in te before you

* otherwise: examinatus examined

* otherwise: salvavit has saved

* Mombritius: venerabilibus venerable

* otherwise: convertant may turn

OTHER ACTS,

By Symeon Metaphrastes,

From the Medici manuscript of the royal library at Paris, translated into Latin by Lippomano, volume VI, from page 317.

Sergius, martyr, in Syria. (St.) Bacchus, martyr, in Syria. (St.)

By Symeon Metaphrastes.

CHAPTER I.

The Saints are accused as Christians before Maximian, are found by him to be such, and are held up to mockery.

ΜΑξιμιανοῦ βασιλεύοντος τοῦ τυράννου, καὶ τῆς οἰκουμένης σχεδὸν ἀπάσης ὺπὸ βαθεῖ σκότῳ τῆς ἀσεβείας κειμένης, λίθουστε καὶ ξύλα τῶν ἀνθρώπων τιμᾷν οἷα θεοὺς ἀναγκαζομένων, καὶ μιαρωτάτων ἀπογεύεσθαι θυσιῶν, Σέργιος καὶ Βάκχος, ῥωμαῖοι τὸ γένος ἄμφω, τῇ περὶ τὸν Χριστὸν ὁμολογίᾳ καὶ πίστει, κατὰ τοῦς διαφανεῖς ἀστέρας ἐν τοῖς βασιλείοις τῶν τηννικαῦτα διέλαμπον, οὐ τῶν πολλῶν ὄντες καὶ ἀσήμων, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μέν πριμικήριος τῆς τῶν κεντιλίων σχολῆς ὁ Σέργιος, σεκουνδουκήριος δὲ ταύτης ὁ Βάκχος ἦν, μεγάλα μὲν παρὰ βασιλεῖ Μαξιμιανῷ δυνάμενοι, μείζονα δὲ τὴν παρὰ τῷ ἀθανάτῳ βασιλεῖ καὶ θεῷ παῤῥησίαν κτησάμενοι, ἅτε σκηνὴν μὲν τόν δὲ βίον καὶ παροικίαν καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο τῶν οὐχ ἑστώτων ἡγούμενοι, ἔμποροι δὲ ἀγαθοὶ τῆς ἑαυτῶν γινόμενοι σωτηρίας, καὶ τὴν ἐν τῷ μέλλοντι ζωὴν διὰ τῶν παρόντων πραγματευόμενοι, καὶ ὡσπέρ τινα πρὸς τὴν ἐκείνης κτῆσιν διδασκαλίαν καὶ τέχνην, τὰς θείας μετιόντες Γραφὰς καὶ ταύτας ἀεὶ διὰ χειρὸς ἔχοντες.

[2] Ὅθεν οὐδὲ ἀνεκτὰ ταῦτα τῷ φθόνῳ κατέστη, ἄλλά τινες τοῖς γενναίοις τῆστε ἄλλης ἀρετῆς, καὶ δὴ καὶ τῆς εἰς αὐτὸν βασιλέα παῤῥησίας βασκήναντες πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐκεῖνον τὸν τῆς παῤῥησίας αἴτιον βασιλέα τοὺς ἄνδρας ἐνδιαβάλλουσιν, ὡς ὡλιγωρήκασι μὲν τῆς ἐκείνου φιλίας, ἠλόγησαν δὲ καὶ τῆς πρὸς θεούς θεραπείας, καὶ πρὸς ἑτέραν ἤδη θρησκείαν ἀπέκλιναν, Χριστιανοὺς ἑαυτοὺς καὶ Χριστοῦ δούλους ἐπιφημἰζοντες· Μαξιμιανὸς μὲντοι καὶ αὐτὸς εἰδὼς ὅτι πολλοῖς πολλάκις αἱ διαβολαὶ φθόνων αἰτίαν ἔχουσιν, οὐκ ἀλήθειαν, ἄλλωστε δὲ καὶ τὴν τῶν ἀνδρῶν εὔνοιαν ὁπόση μὴ ἀγνοῶν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὴν οἰκείαν ἀπήνειάντε καὶ αὔστήρίαν ἐπὶ νοῦν ἔχων, ταὐτῃ γὰρ καὶ μάλιστα διαφέρειν τῶν ἄλλων αὐτὸς ἐφιλοτιμεῖτο· καὶ ὡς εἰ τάχα καὶ τῆς εὐνοίας ἐκεῖνοι ταύτης καὶ τῆς φιλίας ὑπεριδεῖν ἔκριναν, ἀλλὰ τὸν κίνδυνον ἂν ἐφοβήθησαν, ἀπίθανάτε ἡγεῖτο καὶ ψευδῆ τὰ λεγόμενα, καὶ ὅτι μὴ ἀβασανίστως ταῦτα προσδέχεσθαι δεῖ. Τί οὖν ἐποίει; θυσίαν φιλότιμον καὶ πολυτελῆ παρασκευασάμενος, καὶ συνελθεῖν εἴς τὸ ἱερὸν ὅσον περὶ αὐτὸν ἐπιφανὲς ἦν, κοινωνῆσαίτε αὐτῷ τῆς θυσίας πρότερον παραγγείλας, ἐντεῦθεν δοκιμάσαι τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ τὴν διαβολὴν διεσκέψατο.

[3] Ἔσεισι μὲν οὐν αὐτος πρῶτος· συνεισῄει δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ πολύ τι πλῆθος, καὶ ὅσον κατὰ τὸ ἱερὸν ἤθροιστο· καὶ οἱ μὲν τὴν θυσίαν ἐπιμελῶς διετέλουν, καὶ παρόντα τὸν Μαξιμιανὸν ἐθεράπευον, Σέργιος δὲ καὶ βάκχος οἱ γενναιότατοι μηδὲ τῇ θύρᾳ τοῦ ἱεροῦ προσβαλόντες, ἔξω που παρειστήκεσαν, αὐτοὶ μᾶλλον Θεῷ τὴν καθαράντε καὶ άληθῆ τελοῦντες θυσίαν, καὶ ὑπερ ἐκείνων δεόμενοι, κύριε, κυριε λέγοντες, ὁ Θεὸς, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν αἰώνων ἐνώτισαι τὴν φωνὴν τῆς δεήσεως ἡμῶν, ἱλάσθητι τῇ κληρονομίᾳ σου, φεῖσαι, κύριε, καὶ μὴ δῶς αὐτοὺς εἰς καύχημα τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ, ἀλλὰ φώτισον, κύριε, φώτισον τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς τῶν καρδιῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ εἰς τὴν σὴν ἐπιγνώσιν αὐτοὺς καθοδήγησον, οἱ ἐν σκότει νῦν τῆς ἀγνοίας πορεύονται, καὶ ἠλλάξαντο τὴν δόξαν σου τοῦ μόνου ἀφθάρτου Θεοῦ, ἐν ὁμοιώματι θηρίων καὶ τετραπόδων καὶ ἑρπετῶν, ἀπέστησάντε ἀπὸ σοῦ, καὶ ἔθυσαν τοῖς γλυπτοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ τὸ ὄνομα τὸ ἅγίον σου ἠθέτησαν· ἐπίστρεψον αὐτοὺς, κύριε, καὶ γνώτωσαν τὰ θαυμάσιά σου, καὶ τὸν μονογενῆ σου υἱὸν καὶ σωτῆρα ἡμέτερον, ὸς ἑκουσίῲ σταυρῷ καὶ θανάτῳ τὴν ἡμῶν ἐπραγματεύσατο σωτηρίαν, καὶ ἡμᾶς δὲ ἀμώμους ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ τῶν μαρτυρίων σου, καὶ τῇ τῶν ἐντολῶν σου φυλακῇ διατήρησον. Οἱ μὲν οὖν ἔξω πρὸ τῶν πυλῶν τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἑστῶτες τοιαῦτα προσηύχοντο, καὶ οὕτω τὸν Θεὸν ἐξιλάσκοντο.

[4] Μαξιμιανὸς δὲ εἰσελθὼν, καὶ τῇ δὲ κᾀκεῖσε περιβλεψάμενος, ὡς μόνους ἐκείνους Σέργιον οὐκ ἴδοι καὶ Βάκχον εἴσω τοῦ ἱεροῦ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων παρόντας, τότε δὴ πίστιν ἀκριβῆ τὸ γενόμενον τῆς κατ᾽ αὐτὸν διαβολῆς ἐποιεῖτο· καὶ εὐθὺς ἡ συνήθης ἀπήνειάτε καὶ ἀγριότης καὶ ἡ ὀργὴ· καὶ τί μέλλετε πρὸς τοὺς παρεστῶτας, καὶ πολὺ τὸ, ἀχθήτωσαν οἱ κατάρατοι, μετὰ φοβεροῦ τοῦ κελεύσματος. Ἄγονται τοίνυν οἱ Μακάριοι στολαῖς αὐταῖς, καὶ χλαμύσι καὶ ζώναις, ὑπὸ μιᾷ γλώττῃ τὴν γλυκεῖαν ἐκείνην εὐχὴν ἔτι στρέφοντες. Εῖτα τὴν ἀρχικὴν ἄρας ὀφρῦν ὁ βασιλεὺς, καὶ σοβαρὸν αὐτοῖς καὶ ἄγριον ἐνιδων, ἔοίκατε, ἔφη, παῤῥησίας οὐ κατὰ καιρὸν ἀπολαύσαντες τῆς ἐμῆς, ἄλλωστε δὲ καὶ τῇ πολλῇ ταύτῃ ᾗ περὶ ὑμᾶς ἐκεχρήμεθα εὐμενείᾳ, πολλὴν εὐήθειαν καταγνόντες ὑμῶν, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο κατεπαρθῆναί τε τοῦ ἡμετέρου κράτους, καὶ ἀνόσιοι μὲν τὰ περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς αὐτοὺς, ἀχάριστοι δὲ τὰ περὶ ἡμᾶς ὀφθῆναι καὶ ἄδικοι· ἀλλ᾽ εἰ μὴ θύσετε, καὶ θεοὺς ἅμα καὶ ἡμᾶς ἐξιλάσεσθε, ἐγὼ τὴν ἐμὴν ἱκανῶς ἰάσομαι μέμψιν, καὶ ὑμεῖς αὐτίκα φανερῶς εἴσεσθε, οἵας ἡμερότητος καὶ προσηνείας οὐκ ἐθέλοντες ἀπολαύειν, οἷόν μου τὸν θυμὸν ἄρτι καθ᾽ ὑμῶν κεκινήκατε.

[5] Τούτων ἀκούσαντες οἱ γενναῖοι, καὶ γνόντες, ὅτι δῆλοι πάντως ἤδη τῷ βασιλεῖ γεγόνασι, καὶ ὅτι κρύπτειν ἔτι τὴν εὐσέβειαν ἥκιστα χρὴ, καὶ τὸν καιρὸν παριέναι, ἀλλὰ δημοσίευειν μᾶλλον ὡς οἷόντε, καὶ πολλὴν ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς εἰσφέρειν τὴν παῤῥησίαν, ἐλευθέρᾳ καὶ ψυχῇ, καὶ γλώττῃ Θεὸν μέν ἀληθῆ τὸν Χριστὸν ὡμολόγησαν· εἴδωλα δὲ τοὺς αὐτῶν θεοὺς καὶ χειρῶν ἀνθρωπίνων ἔργα πνοῆς ἔρημα καὶ κωφά καὶ καθαρῶς ἀνεῖπον, οἱ θεοὶ ὑμῶν, λέγοντες, ἀργύριον καὶ χρυσίον, ἔργα χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων, καὶ ὅσα ἐξῆς ἔπιλέγοντες καὶ ὅτι περ᾽ ἡμεῖς, ὡ βασιλεῦ, τοῦτό σοι μόνον ὀφείλομεν, τόγε εἰς τὴν ἐπίγειον ταύτην στρατείαν εὐγνωμόνως ὑπηρετεῖν, καὶ τὴν ἀνήκουσαν ἑκατέρῳ τάξιν ἀποπληροῦν· καὶ οὔτε δὲ τοῖς κωφοῖς τούτοις ἀψύχοις θεοῖς θύσομεν, οὔτε τοῦ ἡμετέρου καὶ ἀληθῶς θεοῦ μόνου ἀποστησόμεθα, κᾂν εἰ καὶ χαλεπώτερον ἀγριάνῃς, κᾂν εἰ μηδὲν εἰς ἡμᾶς φιλάνθρωπον ἐπιδείξῃ, ἀλλὰ καὶ σιδήρῷ καὶ πυρὶ καὶ ταῖς ἅλλαις παραδώῃς κολάσεσι. Τί γὰρ ἰσχυρότερον εὐσεβεἰας, ἢ τοῦ ὑπὲρ αὐτῆς πάσχειν μακαριώτερον;

[6] Πρὸς ταῦτα ὀξύτερον καὶ Μαξιμιανὸς κινηθεὶς ἀφαιρεθῆναι μὲν αὐτοὺς τὰ παράσημα τῆς ἀρχῆς αὐτίκα κελεύει, ἐσθήματα δὲ γυναικεῖα μεταμφιασάμενους καὶ σιδηροῖς κλοιοῖς ἅμα περιαυχενισθέντας διὰ μέσης τῆς ἀγορᾶς μέχρι τῶν βασιλείων αὐτῶν ἄγεσθαι. Ἤγοντο μὲν οὖν εὐθὺς οἱ Μακάριοι τὴν μακαρίαν ὄντως ἐκείνην ὁδὸν καὶ εἰς Χριστὸν αὐτὸν φέρουσαν, οὐκ αἰσχύνην εἶναι τὸ πρᾶγμα νομίζοντες, ἀλλ᾽, ὡς τὴν ἀσέβειαν μᾶλλον ἐν ἑαυτοῖς καταισχύνοντες, περιφανῶς ἀβρυνόμενοι· καὶ τοὺς μὲν πόδας ἡ πορεία, τὰ χείλη δὲ ἡ εὐχαριστία εἶχε, καὶ ἡ πρὸς Θεὸν ὁμιλία καὶ δέησις· ἔλεγον γάρ, Ἐὰν καὶ πορευθῶμεν ἐν μέσῳ σκιᾶς θανάτου, οὐ φοβηθησόμεθα κακὰ, ὅτι σὺ μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν εἶ, Κύριε· διὰ τοῦτο ἀγαλλιάσεται ἡ ψυχὴ ἡμῶν ἐπὶ σοὶ,

ὅτι ἐνέδυσας ἡμᾶς ἱμάτιον σωτηρίου, καὶ χιτῶνα εὐφροσύνης περιέβαλες ἡμᾶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνάστηθι, Κύριε, εἰς τὴν βοήθειαν ἡμῶν, καὶ λύτρωσαι ἡμᾶς ἕνεκεν τοῦ ὀνόματός σου· οὔπω πέρας εἶχεν αὐτοῖς ἡ εὐχὴ, καὶ τῷ βασιλεῖ παρέστησαν, αὖθις ἀπὸ τοῦ ἱεροῦ ἀνασωθέντι πρὸς τὰ βασίλεια.

[7] Θωπείαν οὖν ἐκεῖνος τῇ συνήθει ἀπηνειᾴ συγκερασάμενος, καὶ οἷα καὶ φοβεῖν ἅμα καὶ λεαίνειν τὴν ἐπενεχθεῖσαν αὐτοῖς τῷ δοκεῖν αἰσχύνην ἐκ τῆς ἀτιμίας ταυτῆς βουλόμενος· Δεινὸν, ἔλεγον, ὦ παρόντες, καὶ σφόδρα δεινὸν τὸ τὰς μεγίστας τιμὰς ἁπλῶς οὕτω καὶ ἀλογίστως προΐεσθαι· εἰώθασι γὰρ αἱ παρ᾽ ἀξίαν εὐπραγίαι τοὺς ἀνοήτους οὐ πρὸς εὔνοιαν ἐρεθίζειν μᾶλλον, ἀλλ᾽ εἰς θράσος κατὰ τῶν εὐεργετούντων ἐπαίρειν. Οὗτοι γαρ, ὡς ὁρᾶτε, μεγάλης παρ᾽ ἡμῖν δόξης ἐπιτυχόντες, φιλίας τε ἡμετέρας καὶ παῤῥησίας οὐδ᾽ ὅσης εἰπεῖν ἀπολσαντες, ὡς μὴ μόνον αὐτοι τὰ πρῶτα φέρειν εἰς οἰκειότητα, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἑτερους ἐξοικειοῦν ἡμῖν δύνασθαι, καὶ ζηλωτοῦς ἐν βραχεῖ καὶ περιβλέπτους ἐργάζεσθαι, τούτοις ἅπασι μακρὰν ἐπιθέντες λήθην, τέλος δὲ καὶ τῶν μεγίστων θεῶν καὶ αὐτοῦ Διὸς κατολιγωρήσαντες, ὃς πάντων μὲν δημιουργὸς, πάντων δὲ θεῶντε καὶ ἀνθρώπων πατὴρ εἶναι πιστεύεται, τὸν λεγόμενον προτετιμήκασιν Ἰησοῦν, γυναικὸς υἱὸν ὄντα καὶ τέκτονος, καὶ σταυρὸν σὸν ἅμα δυσὶ κακούργοις ὑπὸ Ἰουδαίων κατακριθέντα, καὶ πικρότατον ὄντως ὑπομεμενηκότα θάνατον· ἀλλ᾽ ἐγὼ πάντως τούτων αἴτιος, ὅς γε καὶ περὰ τοῦ μετρίου φιλάνθρωπος εἶναι βουλόμενος, φίλους αὐτοὺς καὶ κοινωνοὺς τῆς εὐδαιμονίας ἐποιησάμην.

[8] Οὕτω σφοδρὸν κατατείνας τὸν λόγον, ἔπειτα πάλιν ὑποκλέπτειν αὐτοὺς τῷ μειλιχίῳ πειρώμενος, ἥμερόν τι βλέψας καὶ φιλικὸν, ἀλλ᾽ εἴπερ οἱ αὐτοὶ καὶ νῦν ἐστὲ, ἔφη, Σέργιόστε καὶ Βάκχος, καὶ μή τις ὑμῶν τὴν διάνοιαν φθονερὸς ἐπήρωσε δαίμων, αἰδέσθητε μὲν τὸ μέγα τοῦ ἀξιώματος, αἰδέσθητε δὲ τὸ καθαρὸν καὶ ἄψευστον τῆς φιλίας, καὶ μὴ τὰ εἰς τοὺς θεοὺς οὕτως ἀσεβοῦντες ὀφθείητε, ἀσονήθη καὶ ξένην θρησκείαν εἰσάγοντες, καὶ ἡμῖν περὶ τὸ σέβας διαφερόμενοι· οὓς ἐχρῆν ἄχρι καὶ αὐτοῦ θανάτου τὸν τῆς φιλίας ἡμῖν συμπνεῖν ἔρωτα, ὡς ἔγωγε καὶ βαρυτάταις κολάσεσι χρῆσθαι δυνάμενος, καὶ τυραννικῶς ὑμᾶς, ὧ φίλοι, βιάζεσθαι, χρήσομαι γὰρ ἔτι τῷ συνήθει προσρήματι· ἀλλὰ τὴν φιλίαν, ὦ θεοὶ, δυσωποῦμαι, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὰς τιμωρίας ὀκνῶ καὶ τὴν βίαν ἑκὼν ἐναβάλλομαι. Τούτων ἀκούσαντες οἱ Γενναῖοι, χαριέντως, ἠρέμα καὶ ὁμαλῶς, ὅτι μὲν οὐκ ἐπελαθόμεθά σου τῆς φιλίας, εἶπον, οὐδὲ ἀχάριστοι περὶ τὰς εὐεργεσίας καὶ τὰς τιμὰς γεγενήμεθα, ἀλλὰ καὶ φιλοῦμεν εἰ καί τινα ἕτερον, καὶ δεσπότην ἡγούμεθα, καὶ πάντα ἡμῖν εἶ σὺ, τεκμήριον ὑπάρχει σαφὲς, τὸ καὶ πιστῶς εἰς δεῦρο ὑπηρετεῖσθαι, καὶ συνδιαφέρειν σοι τὰ κοινὰ σπουδαίως, καὶ μηδὲν μήτε μικρὸν μήτε μεῖζον ἀγνωμονοῦντας φανῆναι, μηδέ τι προδιδόντας ἢ ἀμελοῦντας τῶν καθηκόντων.

[9] Οὔκουν ἡμεῖς οὐδεμίαν ἀγνωμοσύνην ἢ φιλίας ὀλιγωρίαν ἔγκαλεῖσθαι ἄξιοι, οὐδ᾽ ὅτι σοι κατὰ μῖσος διαφερόμεθα, φιλανθρωπότατε βασιλεῦ, ἀλλὰ διέστησεν ἡμᾶς ἡ κενὴ αὕτη περὶ τὰ εἴδωλα πλάνη, καὶ τὸ εἰς σαφῆ καὶ ὡμολογημένην σέτε καταπίπτειν ἀπώλειαν, καὶ πρὸς τὸν ἶσον κατενεχθῆναι καὶ ἡμᾶς κίνδυνον ἀναγκάζειν. Ἕως μεν γὰρ περὶ μόνην τῆν κοσμικὴν στρατείαν ἐξηταζόμεθα, οὐδὲν τῶν δεόντων ἡμεῖς ἐνελίπομεν· μαρτυρήσεις ἡμῖν καὶ αὐτὸς ὅτιπερ οὐδὲ ῥᾳθυμίαν τινα οὐδὲ ἀμέλειαν τῶν ἐν χερσὶ κατεγνώσθημεν, ἀλλὰ θερμὸν περὶ ταῦτα τὸν ζῆλον εἴχομεν, καὶ ὅσα πάλιν ἐν νόμῳ Χριστιανοῖς ἐτελοῦμεν ἑκάστοτε, καὶ τὸν Θεὸν τὰ δυνατὰ καὶ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν ἱλεούμεθα. Ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ αὐτὸ τῶν καλῶν τὸ κεφάλαιον ἀφελέσθαι φιλονεικεῖς ἡμᾶς τὴν εὐσέβειαν, καὶ Θεὸν ζημιῶσαι τὴν ἐσχάτην ταύτην ζημίαν, καὶ ἣν οὐδὲ ὑπενεγκεῖν ἂν ἡ εὐσεβὴς ψυχὴ δύναιτο, τιμῶντε διὰ τούτου καὶ φιλοτιμίας ἀναμιμνήσκεις, πῶς οὐκ ἀμαθῶς ἔχειν σε τοῦ καλοῦ δικαίως ἂν εἴποιμεν, ὅτι καὶ παραβάλλεις ὅλως αὐτὰ πρὸς ἄλληλα, καὶ οἱονεὶ τοῦ κρείττονος ἡμῖν τὴν αἵρεσιν ἐπιτρέπεις, εὐσεβείας φαμὲν τῆς πρὸς τὸν Θεὸν καὶ φιλίας ἀντρωπίνης καὶ δόξης τῆς ἶσα παρυῤῥεούσης καὶ ὕδατι;

[10] Πῶς δέ σοι καὶ κοινωνήσομεν ἐπὶ τούτῳ, καὶ οὐχὶ τοὐναντίον, καὶ τὴν φιλίαν, καὶ τὴν τιμὴν, καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο μεῖζον ἦν, ἀρνησόμεθα; Πῶς δὲ οὐ σὺ μᾶλλον ἀγνωμονῶν τάγε πρὸς Θεὸν ἁλίσκῃ, τὸν καὶ αὐτό σοι τὸ εἶναι καὶ τὸ ἀναπνεῖν παρασχόμενον; Ὃς ἄναρχος ὢν καὶ συναΐδιος τῷ γεγεννηκότι, καὶ τοὺς οὐρανοὺς τῷ λόγῳ καὶ τὴν γῆν ὑποστήσας, τὸν ἄνθρωπόντε χερσὶν οἰκείαις ἐδημιούργησε, καὶ ἀθανασιᾴ τοῦτον ἐτίμησε, καὶ βασιλέα τῶν ἐπὶ γῆς χατεστήσατο, καθάπερ τινα βασίλεια τὸ κάλλιστον ἁπάντων ἀποτάξας αὐτῷ τὸν παράδεισον; Πλὴν ἀλλὰ μηδὲν ἡμῖν ἀχθεσθῇς, ὦ βασιλεῦ, εἰ καὶ μακροτέραν ὁ λόγος ποιήσεται τὴν διήγησιν. Καὶ ὁ Θεὸς μὲν οὕτω φιλότιμος τὰς εὐεργεσίας, φημὶ, πρὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον. Ὁ δὲ φθόνῳ κλαπεὶς, καὶ ἡδονῇ φεῦ μοι δελεασθεὶς, ἀθλίως τούτων ἐξέπεσε πάντων, καὶ ὁ πρὶν ζηλωτὸς ἐλεεινὸς ὠρᾶτο, καὶ δακρύων διὰ τὴν συμφορὰν ἄξιος.

[11] Ὁ πλάσας τοίνυν ἡμᾶς καὶ δημιουργήσας Θεὸς, φιλανθρώποις πὰλιν ἰδὼν ὀφθαλμοῖς τὸ τῶν οικείων χειρῶν ἔργον, τὸ θεὸς εἶναι μὴ μεταβαλὼν, ὅπερ ὴν, ἐγένετο δι᾽ ἡμᾶς ἀναμαρτήτως, ὅπερ ἡμεῖς, καὶ σταυρὸν ἑκουσίως καὶ θάνατον ὑπελθὼν, τὸν ἄνωθέντε τῷ ἡμετέρῳ γένει καταβεβλήκει πολέμιον, καὶ ἡμᾶς τῆς πικρᾶς ἐκείνης αἰχμαλωσίας ἀνασωσάμενος, τὴν προτέραν ἀπέδωκε φιλαγάθως ἐλευθερίαν· καὶ ὅθεν διὰ τὴν παρακοὴν ἐκπεπτώκαμεν, ἐκεῖ πάλιν διὰ φιλανθρωπίαν ἡμᾶς ἐπανήγαγε· τὸν δὴ τοιαῦτα διὰ σὲ παθόντα, καὶ ταῦτα Θεὸν ὄντα, καὶ τοιούτων σὲ πάλιν καταξίωσαντα, κοινὴ γὰρ ἀνθρώποις ὥσπερ ἡ ἀπώλεια πρότερον, οὕτω καὶ ἡ ἔλευθερία, τοῦτον αὐτὸς ἀθετῶν, καὶ εἰς τὸν ἐκείνου σταυρὸν ἀποσκώπτων, ποίαν ἀγνωμοσύνης ὑπερβολὴν καταλείπεις; ἴσθι τοίνυν, ὡς οὐ κοινωνήσομἐν σοι τῆς τοιαύτης ἀχαριστίας, οὐδὲ τὸν ἡμέτερον εὐεργέτην καὶ ἀληθῆ Θεὸν ἀρνησόμεθα. Τὰ δὲ παρὰ σοῦ προτεινόμενα, βασιλεῦ, εἶτε ἀγαθὰ εἶεν, εἶτε καὶ δυσχερῆ, καὶ αὐτὸν ἐπάγοντα θάνατον, ἐπίσης ἡμῖν ἅπαντα παροπτέα διὰ Χριστὸν, καὶ φροντίδος οὐδεμίας ἄξια.

Saints of very great authority and favour, When Maximian the tyrant was reigning, and almost the whole world lay in the deep darkness of ignorance, and men were compelled to adore stones and wood as gods, and to taste (alas!) most execrable sacrifices ^a, Sergius and Bacchus, both Romans by birth, then shone in the palace by their confession of and faith in Christ, no otherwise than bright stars. And they were not common men, nor obscure: but Sergius indeed was primicerius of the school of the Centilii ^b, and Bacchus its secundicerius: who were indeed very powerful with the Emperor Maximian ^c, but had procured for themselves a greater confidence with the immortal King and God, as men who reckoned this life a tabernacle and a sojourning and an exile, and whatever else is viler than these. And since they were good merchants of their own salvation, and were purchasing through present things the life which is in the future, they exercised themselves in the divine scriptures as a certain art for acquiring it, and always had them in their hands.

[2] [they incur the envy of others, and are charged by them with faith in Christ; and whether this is true,] Wherefore envy could not bear these things: and since certain others envied the illustrious men both their other virtues and their confidence with the Emperor himself, they accuse them before that very author of their confidence, namely the emperor: that they had despised his friendship and had also neglected the worship of the gods: and had now turned aside to another religion, calling themselves Christians and servants of God. But Maximian, although he knew that often calumnies have envy for their cause with many, not truth, especially since he was not ignorant how great was their goodwill toward him; nay, since he also turned over in his mind his own savagery and harshness (for in this above all he strove to surpass others), and that if perhaps they had resolved to despise the goodwill of the gods and his friendship, they would certainly have feared the danger; and since he thought that what was said was not probable but false; yet he considered that it was not to be admitted without examination, as was fitting. What, then, does he do? Having prepared a splendid and magnificent sacrifice, and having first ordered all who were distinguished and illustrious to assemble in the temple and to be partakers of the sacrifice with him, he resolved thereupon to examine the matter.

[3] And he himself indeed enters first: and together with him there enters also a great multitude, and the whole was assembled in the temple. And the others diligently performed the sacrifice and paid court to Maximian who was present; but Sergius and Bacchus, the emperor Maximian, to explore the matter, goes to the temple, most noble men, not even having entered the door of the temple, stood somewhere outside, themselves rather performing to God a pure and true sacrifice, and praying for the others: "Lord, Lord," they said, "God, King of each one *, hear the voice of our prayer, and be propitious to Thine inheritance. Spare, O Lord, and give them not to the adversary for boasting. But enlighten, O Lord, enlighten the eyes of their hearts, and lead them to the knowledge of Thee, who now walk in the darkness of ignorance, and have changed Thy glory, who alone art God and free from destruction, into the likeness of beasts, of four-footed creatures and of serpents, and have revolted from Thee, and have sacrificed to their graven images, and have held Thy holy name in contempt. Convert them, O Lord, and let them know Thy wonders, and Thine only-begotten Son, and our Saviour, who by a voluntary Cross and death procured our salvation. And further, keep us too free from reproach in the way of Thy testimonies and in the keeping of Thy commandments." And standing outside beyond the doors of the temple, they prayed these things, and so appeased God.

[4] Maximian meanwhile, having entered the temple, when he had looked round hither and thither, having summoned Sergius and Bacchus to him to sacrifice to the gods, and had not seen those alone, Sergius and Bacchus, present in the temple with the others, then determined that what was happening openly proved the accusation that was directed against them; and forthwith his accustomed savagery, fierceness, and anger blazed up: and "Why do you delay?" he said to those who stood by: and he repeated often that word, "Let the execrable men be brought," with a terrible command. The Martyrs, therefore, are brought in the same garments, tunics, and belts, turning over with one tongue that sweet prayer. Then the emperor, raising a prince's brow, and looking on them proudly and grimly: "You seem," he said, "to have abused my confidence out of season, and on account of this goodwill which we have shown toward you to have condemned us of great foolishness, and to have risen up against our power, and impious indeed

toward the gods themselves, and ungrateful and unjust toward us. But unless you sacrifice, and appease both the gods and us together, I shall sufficiently remedy my complaint: and you will at once plainly know, since you are unwilling to enjoy the highest kindness and mildness, what kind of anger of mine you have lately stirred against you."

[5] When those illustrious Men had heard these things, and and refusing to do this and confessing Christ, had perceived that they had now become altogether manifest to the emperor, and that it was no longer fitting to conceal their piety and let the occasion pass, but rather to publish it as much as they could, and to bring great confidence and freedom of speech on its behalf, with free soul and tongue they confessed Christ to be the true God: and they plainly showed that their gods were images and the works of human hands, lacking breath and deaf, saying: "Your gods are silver and gold, the works of the hands of men," and subjoining the things which follow thereafter: and, "We, O Emperor, owe you this alone, that in this earthly service we should serve you with a grateful mind, and fulfil the office which has been enjoined on each of us. But neither will we sacrifice to these deaf and lifeless gods, nor will we revolt from our own and the only true God, even if you are carried away beyond measure, even if you show us no humanity, but hand us over to iron and fire and other punishments. For what is stronger than piety, or what more blessed than to suffer for it?"

[6] he orders them to be led round ignominiously through the middle of the city; Moved more vehemently by these words, Maximian orders the insignia of their office to be taken from them at once: and, clothed in women's garments and with iron collars put round their necks at the same time, to be led through the middle of the city to the palace itself. And at once the Saints were led along that blessed way which truly is so, and which leads to Christ Himself, not thinking the thing a disgrace: but, as though they rather put impiety to shame, openly glorying and well pleased with themselves. And their feet indeed walked on, but their lips were busy in thanksgiving, and in converse and prayer with God. For they said: "Even if we walk in the midst of the shadow of death, we will fear no evils: for Thou art with us, O Lord. Therefore our soul shall exult in Thee: for Thou hast clothed us with the garment of salvation, and with the tunic of gladness hast Thou surrounded us. But arise, O Lord, to our help: and redeem us for Thy name's sake." The prayers were not yet finished, and they were brought before the emperor, who had returned from the temple to the palace.

[7] and while he afterwards with flattering words the Saints, He, therefore, having tempered flattery with his accustomed savagery, and wishing at the same time to soothe the shame with which they had been affected, as it seemed, by this ignominy inflicted on them: "It is grievous, and very grievous, O you who are present," he said, "to betray the greatest honours so lightly and inconsiderately. For things which turn out happily for the undeserving are wont not so much to incite fools to goodwill as to raise them up to rashness against their benefactors. For these men, as you see, having attained great glory with us, and having obtained our friendship and the greatest confidence and liberty of speaking with us, so that not only did they themselves bear the first parts in familiarity, but could also make others familiar to us, and in a short time render them happy and looked up to; forgetting all these things, at last, the greatest gods also and Jupiter himself being despised, who is said to be the maker of all things and the father of all gods and men, have preferred Jesus, who is said to have been the son of a woman and a carpenter, and was condemned to the cross with two malefactors by the Jews, and underwent a death truly most bitter. But I am altogether the cause of all these things, who, wishing to be kind beyond measure, made them friends and partners of my felicity."

[8] to give themselves to the worship of the gods, sets about it, When he had stretched out so vehement a speech, trying again to entice them with flattering words, and looking on them kindly and in friendly fashion: "But if," he said, "you are now too the same Sergius and Bacchus, and an envious demon has not blinded your mind, revere great authority, revere pure and not false friendship, and be not seen to behave so impiously toward the gods, introducing a new and unwonted religion, and dissenting from us in their worship, you who ought to conspire with us in friendship even to death itself. For I indeed, though I could use heavier punishments and do violence to you tyrannically, O friends (for I shall still use the accustomed appellation), yet, O gods, I revere friendship, and therefore I delay the tortures, and gladly put off violence." When the excellent Men had heard these things, they said skilfully, agreeably, and plainly: "That we indeed have not forgotten your friendship, nor been ungrateful for your benefits and honours, but both love you, if any other, and esteem you lord, and that you are all things to us, is a manifest sign that we have both served faithfully up to now and diligently supported the commonwealth with you, nor have we been seen ungrateful in anything, small or great, nor have we betrayed or neglected anything of what is fitting.

[9] "We, therefore, cannot justly be accused either of the crime of an ungrateful mind or of contempt of friendship: having been refuted by them in a long speech nor of dissenting from you out of hatred, O most kind emperor. But what has separated us is the vain error itself of the worship of images, and that you are falling into certain and manifest destruction and compel us too to be cast down into the same danger. For as long as it was a matter of worldly service alone, we omitted nothing of what is fitting. You yourself will bear us witness that we were never condemned for any sloth or negligence in any matter that was to be dispatched, but that we had a keen zeal in those matters. And again, by whatever we performed according to the custom of the Christians, we rendered God too propitious to you according to our strength. But since you strive to take from us that very head of good things, namely piety, and to deprive us of God, which is the uttermost loss and what a pious soul cannot bear, and for that reason recall to our memory honours and praises, how should we not justly call you ignorant of the good and honourable, since you altogether compare these things with one another, as though in some way to give us the choice of the more excellent, piety, I say, toward God, and human friendship and glory, which flows away just like water?

[10] "And how shall we agree with you in this matter, and not, on the contrary, [for an ungrateful mind toward the true God, who has conferred very many benefits on the human race,] deny friendship and honour, and whatever else there may be greater? And how are not you rather convicted of the crime of an ungrateful mind toward God, who has granted you both to be and to breathe? Who, being without beginning, by a word caused heaven and earth to stand: and fashioned man with His own hands, and honoured him with immortality, and set him up as a kind of king of the things that are on earth, assigning to him what is the most beautiful of all, namely Paradise. But be not angry with us, O emperor, if our speech is going to make a longer narration. And God indeed was, as I have said, so munificent in conferring benefits on man. But he, seduced by envy, and (woe is me!) baited by pleasure, fell wretchedly away from them altogether: and he who was before reckoned blessed was seen pitiable, and worthy of tears for his calamity.

[11] "God, therefore, who formed and fashioned us, the vice of his mind is refuted. when He had again looked with kindly eyes upon the work of His hands, not changing from being God, which indeed He was, became for our sakes, without sin, that which we are. And when He had of His own will undergone the cross and death, He both laid low the enemy who had been superior to our race, and, we having been saved from that bitter calamity, He kindly restored our former liberty: and whence we fell through disobedience, thither He brought us back through His clemency. And Him who had suffered such things for your sake, and that when He was God, and had judged you worthy of such great things for common to men is, as formerly destruction, so now liberty, you despising Him and mocking His cross, how are you not by far most ungrateful? Know, therefore, that we shall not be your partners in the crime of an ungrateful mind, nor deny our Benefactor and the true God. And the things which are put forward by you, O emperor, whether they be good or hard, and bringing even death itself, are equally to be despised by us for Christ's sake, and not to be cared for by us ^d."

ANNOTATIONS.

* seculorum of the ages

CHAPTER II.

The Saints are sent to Antiochus the general; they are variously admonished by him to fall away from the faith, and Bacchus is beaten with scourges even to death.

ΤΟύτων εὐκαίρως οὕτω καὶ ἡδέως τοῖς μάρτυσιν ὑπαγορευθέντων, ὁ Μαξιμιανὸς ἐκινεῖτο μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ θυμοῦ, καὶ πικρῶς αἰκίζειν τοὺς Ἁγίους ἠβούλετο· ὤκνει δὲ πάλιν καὶ ἀνεβάλλετο τὴν ἐγχείρησιν, τὸ περιφανὲς αὐτῶν εὐλαβούμενος, καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλων Ἀνδρῶν τοιούτων ὑποστῆνναι ζημίαν· ἐδεδίει γὰρ, μὴ καὶ τιμωρηθέντες τὴν ἀρχὴν, καὶ παῤῥησιασάμενοι τὴν εὐσέβειαν ἐν μέσῳ πολλῶν, εἶτα τοπαράπαν ἀμετάθετοι διαμείνωσιν. Ἀμέλει καὶ Ἀντίοχῳ τῷν τῆς ἀνατολῆς δουκὶ παραπέμπειν αὐτοὺς ἔγνω, ὡς ἂν ὠμοτάτῳ πάντων τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτὸν ὄντι, καὶ ἀπὸ ψιλοῦ τάχα καὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος καταπλήξειν αὐτοὺς δυναμένῳ, καὶ ὅτι διὰ μείζονος τιμῆς ἔφεσιν τὴν Μαξιμιανοῦ θεραπείαν

ἐκεῖνος σπουδάζων οὐδεμιᾶς ἀφέξεται μηχανῆς, ὅπως αὐτοὺς ἕλῃ καὶ μεταπείσειε· πρὸς τούτοις ἵνα καὶ ἡ μακρὰ ὁδοιπορία καὶ ἄτιμος τῆς ἐνστάσεώστε αὐτοῖς ὑποχαλάσῃ τὴν εὐτονίαν, καὶ ἠρέμα μεταστήσῃ τῆς εὐσεβείας, καὶ μάλιστα ὅτι καὶ ὑπὸ χεῖρα πρότερον αὐτοῖς ἦν ὁ Ἀντίοχος, ᾧ παραστῆναίτε καὶ ὑφ᾽ οὗ κριθήσεσθαι ἔμελλον· ὂ δὴ καὶ πλέον τῆς τῶν εὐγεγονότων ψυχῆς ἅπτεται, τὸ τοὺς πρότερον ἀρχομένους, ἄρχειντε αὐτῶν ὕστερον καὶ ὑπηκόοις χρῆσθαι τοῖς οὐ πρὸ πολλοῦ δεσπόταις αὐτῶν καὶ εὐεργέταις γεγενημένοις· ἐτύγχανε γὰρ τὴν τοιτην τοῦ δουκὸς ἀρχὴν ὁ Ἀντίοχος μεσιτείᾳ πρότερον τοῦ θαυμαστοῦ Σεργίου παρειληφώς· ἀλλ᾽ ἔοικεν ἀληθῶς οὐδὲν οὕτως εὐμάραντον εἶναι, ὡς ἀνθρωπίνη χάρις ἐν ἀχαρίστῳ ψυχῇ φυτευθεῖσα.

[13] Οὗτος γὰρ οὐ μόνον οὐδὲν ἀπομνημονεεύσας αὐτοῖς τῆς εὐεργεσίας ἐφάνη, ὡς τὰ τοῦ λόγου προἳόντα δηλώσει, ἀλλὰ καὶ καθάπερ τὰ ἔσχατα ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνων ἀδικηθεὶς, οὕτως αὐτοῖς ἐχρήσατο, καὶ οὕτω χαλεπὰς ἔπήγαγε τιμωρίας. Ἐπέμποντο μὲν οὖν οἱ Ἅγιοι πρὸς αὐτὸν ἁλύσει βαρείᾳ δεδεσμένοι, ἐγέγραπτο δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ ἐπιστολὴ παρὰ βασιλέως ἔχουσα οὕτως. Ἡ τῶν θεῶν μεγίστη πρόνοια καὶ πάντας μὲν ἀνθρώπους, μάλιστα δὲ τοὺς τῆς ἐμῆς βασιλείας ὑπασπιστάστε καὶ δορυφόρους, εὐσεβεῖς τε τὰ εἰς ἐκείνους, καὶ τοὺς ὑπ᾽ ἐκείνων πάλιν ἄρχειν ἠξιωμένους πειθηνίους εἶναι βούλεται καὶ εὐγνώμονας· διὰ ταῦτα τοι καὶ Σέργιον τοῦτον καὶ τὸν σὺν αὐτῷ Βἀκχον, ἀσεβεῖς μὲν τὰ περὶ τοὺς θεοὺς ἀναφανέντας, καὶ τῇ τῶν Χριστιανῶν προσθεμένους θρησκείᾳ, περὶ ἡμᾶς δὲ ἀγνώμονάστε καὶ ἀχαρίστους ἐληλεγμένους, καὶ παρὰ τοῦτο πολλαῖς τιμωρίαις ὑποβληθέντας, ἀναξίους ἤδη τοῦ ἡμετέρου βήματος, καὶ τῆς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἐξετάσεως νομισθέντας, ὑπὸ ἀσφαλεστάτῃ φρουρᾷ καὶ δεσμοῖς τῇ σῇ στἐρρότητι παρεπέμψαμεν. Εἰ μὲν οὖν μεταμεληθέντες θύσειαν τοῖς θεοῖς, τῶν δεσμῶντε, τῶν ἐπικειμένων αὐτοῖς, λυθήτωσαν, καὶ τιμῆς ἀξιωθήτωσαν μᾶλλον καὶ εὐμενείας· ἀνακληθήσονται γὰρ αὖθις καὶ παρὰ τοῦ ἡμετέρου κράτους, καὶ τάστε προτέρας ἀπολήψονται τιμὰς, ἢ καὶ μείζους, καὶ ἐν τάξει τῇ προσηκούσῃ τὸ λοιπὸν ἔσονται. Εἰ δὲ τῆς προλαβούσης ἀμεταθέτως ἔχονται γνώμης, τῇ αὐστηρότητι τῶν νόμων ὑποβληθέντες, καὶ αὐτὸ μετὰ τῶν ἄλλων τὸ εἶναι καὶ τὸ ζῆν διὰ ξίφους ἀφαιρεθήτωσαν. Ἔῤῥωσο.

[14] Τὰ τοιαῦτα γράμματα λαβόντες οἱ στρατιῶται, εἶτα καὶ τοὺς Ἁγίους παραλαβόντες, ὁδοῦ εἴχοντο· τῶν οἰκετῶν δέ τινες τῷ τε ὁμοίῳ περὶ τὴν εὐσέβειαν ζήλῳ, καὶ δὴ καὶ τῇ πρὸς τοὺς δεσπότας εὐνοίᾳ νενικημένοι, συνείποντο καὶ αὐτοί, καθάπερ οὐ νόμῳ τὰ σώματα δεδουλῶσθαι μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ πόθῳ τὰς ψυχὰς βουλόμενοι. Οἳ καὶ τῶν Ἁγίων ἤκουον πρὸς ἀλλήλους μεταξὺ κοινολογουμένων, ὡς ἄρα τῆς νυκτὸς, καθ᾽ ἣν τῆς πόλεως Ῥωμαίων ἐξῄεσαν, θειοτέρα τις ὄψις ἐπιφανεῖσα θαῤῥεῖν αὐτοῖς ἐκέλευε τὸν ἀγῶνα, καὶ προθυμότερον τῆς καλῆς ἐκείνης διὰ Χριστὸν ἔχεσθαι πορείας· διὸ καὶ ὑπὸ τῇ ἁλύσει τῇ σιδηρᾷ βαίνοντες ἐκεῖνοι, καὶ τοῖς δεσμοῖς, ἀλύπως καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἔψαλλον· Εν τῇ ὁδῷ τῶν μαρτυρίων σου ἐτέρφθημεν, Κύριε, ὡς ἐπὶ παντὶ πλούτῳ· ἐν τοῖς δικαιώμασί σου μελετήσομεν, καὶ τοῦ νόμου σου οὐκ ἐπιλησόμεθα· ἐν ταῖς ἐντολαῖς σου ἀδολεσχήσομεν, καὶ ἐκζητήσομεν τὰς ὁδούς σου, ζησόμεθα καὶ φυλάξομεν τοὺς λόγους σου. Πᾶσαν οὖν τὴν ὁδὸν ἐκείνην ἀπόνως ἀνύσαντες, ἔν τινι βαρβαρλισῷ πόλει τῆς λιμιτανέων ἐγγὺς κατάγονται· ἔνθα διατρίβοντι τῷ δουκὶ παρέστησαν Άντιόχῳ, χαρίεντες μὲν καὶ φαιδροὶ τὴν ὄψιν, τὴν δὲ τῆς ψυχῆς εὐγένειαν τῷ τοῦ ἤθους εὖ μάλα δεικνύοντες ἐλευθερίῳ.

[15] Ἀμέλει καὶ οἱ τῶν περιεστώτων ὀφθαλμοὶ τῆς ἐκείνων θέας ὅλως ἐξήρτηντο, καὶ οὐδὲ ῥᾳδίως ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν ἀφίστασθαι ἤθελον, ἀλλ᾽ ἀτενὲς εἰς αὐτοὺς ἐνεώρων, καὶ γλυλεῖά τις ἦσαν τῷ θεάτρῳ πανήγυρις. Θεασάμενος τοίνυν αὐτοὺς ὅπως εἶχον ὁ δοὺξ, εἶτα καὶ τὰ βασιλέως ἀναγνοὺς γράμματα, σιγῇ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἀπεθμαζε, καὶ πάλιν αὐτοὺς ἐπαινῶν ἐθεάτο, μέγά τι καὶ καινὸν εἶναι οἰόμενος, ὄπως εἰς τοῦτο γενναιότητόστε καὶ τόλμης ἦλθον, ὡς καὶ κολάσεων καὶ ἀπειλῶν, καὶ δόξης, καὶ αὐτοῦ δὴ καταφρονῆσαι τοῦ βασιλέως καὶ περὶ ἐλαχίστου θέσθαι τὸν θάνατον, τὸν τῆς τάξεως δὲ ὅμως κομενταρήσιον καλέσας, τοὺς δεσμίοὺς τούτους, ἔφη, παραλαβὼν, ὑπὸ φρουρᾷ μὲν τήρει μοι τῇ ἀσφαλεστάτῃ, πλὴν μηδ᾽ ὁτιοῦν λυπηρὸν, ἢ ἀβούλητον ὑπομένοντας· ὄψομαι γὰρ καὶ εἰς δευτέραν αὐτοὺς ἐξέτασιν. Οὗτοι μὲν οὖν κατὰ τὸ τοῦ δουκὸς πρόσταγμα ἐν τῷ ἀσφαλεῖ κλεισθέντες τῆς φυλακῆς, ἑσπέρας καταλαβούσης, εἰς προσευχὴν ἑαυτοὺς ἀνῆκαν, Ἐπίβλεψον ἐφ᾽ ἡμᾶς, λέγοντες, ἐξ ἁγίου σοῦ, Δέσποτα, κατοικητηρίου, ὅτι ἐχθρὸς ὠνείδισεν ἡμᾶς διὰ τὸ σὸν ὄνομα, καὶ λαὸς ἄφρων παρώξυνε τὸ ὄνομά σου τὸ ἅγιον, καὶ μὴ παραδῶς ἀνθρώποις θηρίων ἀγριωτέροις ψυχὰς ἐξομολογουμένας σοι, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπίβλεψον εἰς τὴν διαθήκην σου, καὶ ἀντιλαβοῦ ἡμῶν, Κύριε, καὶ λύτρωσαι ἡμᾶς ἔνεκεν τοῦ ὀνόματός σου, ὅτι ἡ ὑπερηφανία τῶν μισούντων σὲ γέγονεν ἐφ᾽ ἠμᾶς ἰσχυρὰ.

[16] Καὶ τῆς εὐχῆς ἤδη τελεσθείσης, βραχὺ πρὸς ὕπνον διατραπεῖσιν ἄγγελος αὐτοῖς ἐπίστας, ἡλίῳ μὲν τὴν μορφὴν ἐοικὼς, φαιδρὸν δὲ καὶ τῆς ἑσθῆτος αὐτῆς ἀπολάμπων, θαρσεῖτέ, φησὶ, πρὸς αὐτοὺς, οἱ τοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλοι, καὶ μὴ φοβεῖσθε, ἑδραῖοι δὲ μᾶλλον ἐν τῇ πρὸς τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰεσοῦν Χρίστὸν ὁμολογίᾳ στῆτε. Αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐστὶ μεθ᾽ ὑμῶν, ἀντιλήπτωρ ὑμῶν· ὁ μὲν δὴ ταῦτα εἶπε· τοῦ ὕπνου δὲ διαναστάντες ἔκεῖνοι, ἀλλήλοιστε καὶ τοῖς συνοῦσιν οἰκέταις τὴν ἀγγελικὴν ἐκείνην διηγήσαντο ὀπτασίαν, καὶ τὰς ψυχὰς θάρσους ὑποπλησθέντες μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς πάλιν ἔκαστος ἔψαλλον· Πρὸς Κύριον ἐν τῷ θλίβεσθαί με ἐκέκραξα, καὶ ἐπήκουσέ μου ἐξ ὄρους ἀγίου αὐτοῦ. Ἐγὼ ἐκοιμήθην καὶ ὕπνωσα, ἐξηγέρθην ὅτι Κύριος ἀντιλήψεταί μου· οὐ φοβηθήσομαι ἀπὸ μυριάδων τῶν κύκλῳ συνεπιτιθεμένων μοι, ἀνάστα, Κύριε, σῶσόν με, ὅτι σοῦ ἐστὶν ἡ σωτηρία, καὶ ἐπὶ τὸν λαόν σου ἡ εὐλογία σου· εὐθὺς δὲ ἄμα πρωῒ ὁ δοὺξ μὲν ἐπὶ μετεώρου κθῆστο τοῦ βήματος· παρειστήκει δὲ αὐτῷ καὶ ἅπαν τὸ στρατιωτικὸν σύνταγμα. Μεταπεμψάμενος οὖν ἀπὸ τῆς φυλακῆς τοὺς Ἁγίους, εἰς ἐπήκοον αὐτῶν ἀναγνωσθῆνναι κελεύει τὰ γραμματα.

[17] Οὗ γενομένου, ὑπολαβὼν αὐτὸς, Ἔδει μὲν ἀπ᾽ ἀρχῆς, ἔφη, τῷ τοῦ καλλινίκου βασιλέως προστάγματι πεισθέντας ὑμᾶς θῦσαίτε τοῖς θεοῖς, καὶ τὴν ἐκείνου μή παροργίσαι φιλανθρωπίαν· ἐπεὶ δὲ τί παθόντες οὐκ οἶδα ἐκεῖνόντε παρωξύνατε, καὶ τοσαύτης ἐκπεπτώκατε δόξης, καὶ τὸν βαθὺν ἐκεῖνον πλοῦτον ἀποβεβλήκατε· ἀλλὰ νῦν γοῦν ὑπακοῦσαίτε ἡμῖν προθυμήθητε τὰ λυσιτελῆ συμβουλεύουσι, καὶ τοῖς θεοῖς θῦσαι θελήσατε· οὕτὼ γὰρ ἂν δόξηστε μείζονος παρὰ πολὺ τῆς προτέρας, καὶ πλούτου, καὶ τῶν ἄλλων τῶν παρὰ βασιλεῖ καλῶν ἀπολσητε. Καὶ τί γὰρ τοῦτο δεινὸν τὸ μὴ δυνηθέντας τὸ δέον συνιδεῖν πρότερον, εἴθ᾽ ὑπὸ τύχης, εἴτε καί τινος ἄλλης περιπετείας, νῦν γοῦν ἐμμελέστερον σκεψσαμένους τὸ προσῆκον ἑλέσθαι σὺν ὰκριβείᾳ· πολλῶ γὰρ κουφότερον δι᾽ ἄγνοιαν τοῦ καλοῦ καὶ συμφέροντος ἁμαρτεῖν, ἢ ἐπιγνόντα τοῖς χείροσιν ἐπιμεῖναι, καὶ μὴ μεταπεσεῖν πρὸς τὸ βέλτιον· τὸ μὲν γὰρ ἀγνοίας ἐστὶν ἀμάρτημα, τὸ δὲ γνωμης ἐθελοκάκου, καὶ μοχθηρᾶς προαιρέσεως. Ὥς ἔγωγε πάνυ σφόδρα ὑμῶν περικαίομαι, τὴν τε ἄλλὴν ἀναλογιζόμενος φιλίαν, καὶ δὴ καὶ διαμνημονεύων ὑμῖν τοῦ καλοῦ καὶ τῆς εὐεργεσίας· καὶ μάλιστά σοι τῷ κυρίῳ μου Σεργίῳ, δι᾽ οὗ καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν ταύτην ἐκτησάμην.

[18] Ἀλλ᾽ οὐκ οἶδα, ὅτι καὶ δράσω, τῆς τύχης οὕτω τὰ πράγματα διαθείσης, ὧστε κριτὴν μὲν ἐμὲ καθῆσθαι τήμερον, ὑμᾶς δὲ ἶσα καὶ καταδίκοις τῷ ἐμῷ παρίστασται βήματι, λόγον ὑφέξοντας ὧν εἴστε τοὺς ἀηττήτους θεοὺς αὐτοὺς καὶ τὸν εὐσεβῆ βασιλέα παρηνομήσατε. Οὕτω μὲν οὖν καὶ τοιούτοις ἐπαγωγοῖς ῥήμασιν ὁ Ἀντιόχος τοῖς Ἁγιοις ὡμίλει, καὶ ὡσανεὶ φιλίως αὐτοῖς διελέγετο, οὐ συμβουλεύων, οὐδὲ τὰ χρηστὰ ἐκείνοις ὑποτιθεὶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἑαυτῷ μᾶλλον τὴν βασιλικὴν μνηστευόμενος θεραπείαν· ᾔδει γὰρ οἷος ἔρως ἐκεῖνοι τῷ βασιλεῖ, καὶ ὅπως αὐτῷ περὶ πλείστου, τὸ μὴ τοιούτους ἀνδρας ἀποβαλεῖν· ἐκ πολλῶν καὶ ἄλλων τοῦτο δὴ τεκμαιρόμενος, καὶ τῷ μηδεμιᾷ τούτους ἐθελῆσαι βασάνῳ περιβαλεῖν, ἀλλὰ διὰ μόνης τῆς ἀτίμου ταύτης πρὸς ἐκεῖνον ἀποστολῆς μεταπείσειν αὐτοὺς βουληθῆναι· ὁποῖος δὴ Μαξιμιανὸς τεχνᾶσθαι ταῦτα βαθύτατόστε καὶ ποικιλώτατος. Ἀλλὰ τοιούτοις μὲν ὁ Ἀντίοχος, ὤσπερ ἔφημεν, θελκτηρίοις ὑποκλέπτειν τὰ πρῶτα λόγοις αὐτοὺς ἐπειρᾶτο· εἶτα προσετίθει, τὸ καὶ τοῖς φοβερωτέροις τοῦ σκοποῦ μετακινῆσαι, καὶ τῆς ἐνστάσεως· εἰ γὰρ μὴ πισθείητέ μου, λέγων, ταῖς παραινέσεσιν ἀνάγκη μοι πάντως ἔσται κατὰ τὰ προτεταγμένα ποιεῖν, καὶ ὡς ἐχθρὸν μᾶλλον τῇ ὑμετέρᾳ προσφέρεσθαι μεγαλοπρεπείᾳ καὶ πολὺς ἦν ἐφεξῆς τοῖς τῶν κολαστηρίων ὀνόμασι, καὶ ταῖς ἀπειλαῖς.

[19] Ἀλλ᾽ αἱ ἅγιοι Μάρτυρες οὕτε θωπείαις μαλαττόμενοι, οὔτε ἀπειλαῖς ταπεινούμενοι, τοῖς τὸν Χριστὸν μόνον εἶπον, ὦ δικαστὰ, καὶ τὴν παρ᾽ αὐτῷ κρυπτομένην ζωὴν κερδάναι προελομένοις, οὐδενὸς μἐλει τῶν ῥεόντων τούτων καὶ φθειρομένων, οὐ τιμῆς, οὐ δόξης, οὐ δυναστείας, οὐκ ἄλλου τινὸς τῶν ἢ θέλγειν, ἢ λυπεῖν δυναμένων. Οἷον δὲ γὰρ ἡμεῖς καὶ ἀπειλῶν τῶν παρὰ σοῦ καὶ κολακειῶν ἐπίσης καταφρονοῦμεν, καὶ οὐδενὸς ὅλως τῶν ὑμετέρων φροντίζομεν· πσαι τοιγαροῦν πονηρὰ κατὰ τὸν ὄφιν ἡμῖν καὶ αὐτὸς συμβουλεύων· ὁρῶμεν γὰρ ὑπὸ τὰ χείλη σου τὸν ῒὸν, και διὰ τοῦτο καὶ τὴν συμβουλὴν ὡς χαλεπὴν οὖσαν ἐπιβουλὴν ἐκτρεπόμεθα. Μὴ τοίνυν ἐξαπατῶ, τὸν καιρὸν εἰς μάτην ἀναλίσκων, καὶ κενῶν ἐλπίδων ἐχόμενος· οὔτε γὰρ κολάζων αἱρήσεις, οὔτε ἀπειλῶν πείσεις καταλιπεῖν μὲν τὸν ζῶντα Θεὸν, δαίμοσι δὲ κωφοῖς καὶ ἀναισθήτοις θυσίαν προσενεγκεῖν· ἡμῖν γὰρ καὶ τὸ διὰ Χριστὸν ζῆν ἀγαθον, καὶ δι᾽ αὐτὸν πάλιν ἀποθανεῖν, κέρδος. Σὺ δὲ ἄλλ᾽ οὐκ ἂν ἔχοις τί καὶ αὐτὸς τοιοῦτον περὶ τῶν οἰκείων εἰδώλων εἰπεῖν· ἀληθῶς γὰρ ἀργύριόν εἰσι καὶ χρυσίον, ἔργα χειρῶν ἀνθρώπων, οὐδὲν τοὺς εἰς αὐτὰ πεποιθότας ὀνῆσαι δυνάμενα. Ὅμοιοι αὐτοῖς γένοιντο οἱ τιμῶντες αὐτὰ, καὶ πάντες οἱ πεποιθότες ἐπ᾽ αὐτοῖς.

[20] Ὁ δούξ τοίνυν τοιαῦτα φανερῶς φθεγξαμένους, καὶ οὕτως ἐλευθερίως ἔχοντας τοὺς Γενναίους ἰδὼν, καὶ γνοὺς ὡς οὐκ ἄν ποτε λόγοις αὐτοὺς μεταπεῖσαι δυνηθείη, πρὸς τὴν διὰ βασάνων πεῖραν ἐχώρει, καὶ τὸν μὲν μακάριον Σέργιον ἀσφαλεστάτῃ φρουρᾷ παρεδίδου, τούτῳ δῆθεν ἀμειβόμενος αὐτὸν τῆς εὐεργεσίας· τὸν Βάκχον δὲ διὰ τεσσάρων ἰσχυρῶς ἐκταθέντα βουνεύροις ὡμῶς ἐκέλευε καταξαίνεσθαι· ἀλλ᾽ ἦν ἰδεῖν γνώμην πολλῷ φύσεως ἰσχυροτέραν καὶ προαίρεσιν σωματικῆς πάσης βίας ὑψηλοτέραν. Μέρη μὲν γὰρ τοῦ παναγίου σώματος ἐκείνου ταῖς μάστιξιν ἀποσπώμενα, πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀέρα διεῤῥιπτοῦτο, αἱμάτων δὲ κατὰ γῆς ἐφέροντο ῥύακες,

καὶ σπλάγχνα μὲν τῶν σαρκῶν ἐγυμνοῦντο, τὴν τῆς φύσεως αὐτῆς διάπλασιν τοῖς παροῦσιν ἀνακαλύπτοντα. Ψυχὴ δὲ καὶ αὐτὴ ἀπολιπεῖν ἐπειγομένη τὸν Ἀθλητὴν, ὅμως ἐπέμενε καὶ πλείους ἐπιζητοῦσα κολάσεις, ἵνα φιλοτιμωτέρων πάντως ἐπιτύχῃ καὶ τῶν βραβείων.

[21] Ἔχαιρον ἄγγελοι τὴν ὑπερφυᾶ τοῦ Μάρτυρος καρτερίαν ὁρῶντες, ἠνιῶντο δαίμονες, τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἦτταν ὑπὸ ταῖς πάντων ὄψεσι θριαμβεύοντες, ἀπαγορεύοντες οἱ δήμιοι τῆ γῇ κατεκλίνοντο. Καὶ ὁ Μάρτυς, εἶπερ ἂν αὐτὸν οὕτως ἰδὼν διακείμενον, οὐ μάστιξι μαλλὸν, ἢ μάστιξιν εἰαρινοῖς καταχέεσθαι, ἕως ἐπὶ τὸν μακαριστὸν τῆς ἀναπσεως δι᾽ ἐπουρανίου φωνῆς ἐκλήθη τόπον, ταῖς τοῦ δημιουργοῦ χερσὶ τὴν ψυχὴν παραθέμενος. Τὸ μέν τοι μαρτυρικὸν ἐκείνου σῶμα βρῶμα μὲν θηρσὶν ὁ παράνομος δικαστὴς προετίθει· ἠγνόει δὲ πάντως ὁποῖος ἦν κήδεσθαι τῶν φιλούντων ὁ ἐκείνου Θεὸς, ὃς καὶ θηρίων οἶδε φύσιν μεταβάλλειν εἰς ἡμερότητα, καὶ μείζονα ἔτι δι᾽ ἐκείνων θαυματουργεἵν. Τοὺς γὰρ ὑπὲρ τῆς εὐσεβείας αἰδούμενοι τοῦ ἀνδρὸς ἄθλους οἱ θῆρες, οὐ μόνον οὐδὲ ψαῦσαί τινος τῶν αὐτοῦ μελῶν ὅλως ἠνέσχοντο, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς ταφὴν ὑπὸ Χριστιανῶν φερομένῳ παρείποντο, δορύφορων τάξιν ἀποπληροῦντες, καὶ τὴν τῶν θεομάχων ἄνοιαν φανερῶς διελέγχοντες· οὕτω μὲν οὗν ὁ ἀοίδιμος Βάκχος ὧν ἐπεθύμει τυχὼν, πρὸς τὰς ἐν οὐρανοῖς σκηνὰς διαβαίνει.

The Saints, to be turned from the faith, to Antiochus the general, These things having been said so opportunely and pleasantly by the Martyrs, Maximian was indeed moved with anger and wished to punish the Saints bitterly. But again he hesitated, and put off setting about it, having regard to their distinction, and not wishing to suffer the loss of such Men. For he feared lest, being tortured, when they had spoken out the truth freely in the midst of many, they should thereafter remain altogether immovable. He resolved, therefore, to send them on to Antiochus, general of the East ^a, as being the most cruel of all who were under his power, and able to terrify them even by his name alone: and because, out of desire for greater honour, taking care to court Maximian, he would abstain from no devices by which to assail them and bring them over to his opinion. Besides, in order that both the long and ignominious journey might relax so intense a constancy and gradually move them from piety, and above all because Antiochus himself, before whom they were to be set and by whom they were to be judged, had formerly been subject to them. For this touches most of all the mind of those who are born in an honourable station, that those who formerly obeyed should afterwards command them, and treat as subjects those who not long before had been their masters and benefactors. For Antiochus had obtained this magistracy of the generalship through the intercession of the admirable Sergius himself ^b. But in truth nothing seems to wither so easily as a benefit planted in an ungrateful mind.

[13] a letter also being given to him, they are sent by Maximian, For he not only appeared to have by no means remembered the benefit, as the discourse will show as it proceeds: but, just as though he had been affected by them with the greatest injury, he treated them so, and inflicted grievous punishments on them. And the Saints were sent to him, bound with a heavy chain. And a letter also had been written to him by the emperor, which ran thus: "The very great providence of the gods wills all men indeed, but especially the guards and attendants of my empire, to be pious toward them, and again to obey those whom they have judged worthy of empire, and to be of a grateful mind toward them. Therefore this Sergius and Bacchus, who have appeared impious toward the gods and have joined themselves to the religion of the Christians, and have been convicted of the crime of an ungrateful mind toward me, and have already been judged unworthy of our tribunal and of our examination, we have sent on to your constancy under the safest custody and in chains. If, therefore, led by repentance, they sacrifice to the gods, let them be loosed from the chains laid upon them, and let them be judged worthy of honour and goodwill. For they will be recalled again by our power, and will receive their former honours, or even greater, and will be thereafter in the place and rank befitting them. But if they cling immovably to their former opinion, let them be subjected to the severity of the laws, and be deprived of their very being and life by the sword together with others. Farewell ^c."

[14] When the soldiers had received this letter and the holy Men, and, brought to him at Barbalissus, they set out on the way. And certain of the servants, overcome by a like zeal for piety and by goodwill toward their masters, followed them also, as wishing to serve God not with their bodies only but also with their souls. And they also heard the Saints conversing among themselves and saying that on the night on which they went out of the city of the Romans ^d a certain divine vision appearing bade them be confident and of good courage for the contest, and enter eagerly upon the good journey for Christ. Wherefore, although they were bound with that iron chain, they sang psalms without distress and with pleasure: "In the way of Thy testimonies we have delighted, O Lord, as in all riches. In Thy justifications we have meditated, and we have not forgotten Thy law. In Thy commandments we will meditate, and we will search out Thy ways. We shall live and keep Thy words." When, therefore, they had accomplished that whole journey without toil, they lodge in a certain city by name Barbalesus ^e, near the region of the limitanei ^f. And since the general Antiochus was staying in that place, they were brought before him, joyful indeed and with cheerful countenance, and showing the nobility of their spirit by their liberal manners.

[15] The eyes, therefore, of all who stood around them were all cast upon them; they are presently thrown into prison; and they did not easily desist, but looked on them with a firm and intent gaze, and they were a pleasant kind of spectacle to the theatre. When, therefore, the general had seen how they bore themselves, and had then also read the emperor's letter, he wondered silently within himself, and contemplated them again, thinking it something great and new that they had advanced to such greatness of spirit as to despise both punishments and threats and glory and even the emperor himself, nay to make very little even of death. And having summoned the commentariensis ^g: "Receive," he said, "these bound men, and keep them indeed in the safest custody, but suffering nothing grievous or troublesome: for I reserve them for examination." And they indeed, shut up by order of the general in safe custody, when evening had come, gave themselves to prayer, saying: "Look upon us, O Lord, from Thy holy dwelling-place, for the enemy has affected us with reproaches, and a foolish people has provoked Thy holy name; and deliver not to men more savage than wild beasts souls that confess Thee; but look upon Thy covenant, and receive us, O Lord, and redeem us for Thy name's sake. For the pride of those who hate Thee has risen up against us, vehement and powerful."

[16] and being strengthened in it for the contest by an angelic apparition, And their prayers being finished, when they had turned to sleep, an Angel appeared to them, like the sun indeed in form, and from his very garment also sending forth a joyful splendour, and said to them: "Be confident, Servants of Christ, and fear not, but stand firm and steadfast in the confession of our Lord Jesus Christ. For He Himself is with you, your defender ^h." He indeed said these things. And they, when they had been roused from sleep, narrated that angelic vision both among themselves and to the servants who were with them. And when their spirits were filled again with confidence, they sang psalms joyfully, each one: "To the Lord, when I was troubled, I cried, and He heard me from His holy mountain. I slept and was given to slumber. I rose up, for the Lord will uphold me: I will not fear the thousands of the people who beset me round about. Arise, O Lord, save me. For Thine is salvation, and upon Thy people Thy blessing." At once, therefore, very early in the morning, the general sat on a lofty tribunal: and there stood by him also the whole military band. When, therefore, he had summoned the Saints from custody, he orders the letter to be read in their hearing.

[17] and while, brought out thence on the following day, neither by flatteries, When this had been done: "You ought indeed," he said, "obeying the command of the glorious emperor, to have sacrificed to the gods, and not to have provoked his humanity to anger. But since, I know not how it has come about that you have both provoked him to anger and fallen from such great glory, and lost those deep riches; yet now at least be willing to obey us, who counsel you what is profitable. For so you will obtain glory far greater than before, and greater wealth, and other good things with the emperor. For what is grievous if what you could not understand before, whether by chance or by some other occurrence, you now, when you have considered it more diligently, accurately choose that which is fitting? For it is much lighter to sin through ignorance of what is good and profitable than, when you have recognized it, to persevere in the worse and not pass over to what is better. For the former indeed is a sin of ignorance, but the latter of an evil mind, and of one choosing of his own will the things that are evil. For I indeed am much inflamed, both reckoning your friendship in other respects and remembering the benefit which I received from you, and above all from you, my lord Sergius, through whom I procured this magistracy for myself.

[18] nor by the threats of Antiochus, "But I know not what to do, since fortune has so ordered things that I indeed sit today as judge: while you stand, as defendants, before my tribunal, to render an account of your impiety toward the unconquered gods themselves and of your disobedience toward the pious emperor." Thus, then, with these alluring words too Antiochus approached the Saints, and in some fashion addressed them in a friendly way, counselling them and suggesting to them, as it seemed, good things, so that he might procure for himself the goodwill of the emperor. For he knew how great was his love for them, and that he set great store by not losing such Men: conjecturing this both from many other things and from this, that he had not wished to subject them to any torment, but strove, by this ignominious sending of them to him alone, to bring them over to the contrary opinion, inasmuch as Maximian was most crafty and most ingenious at devising such things. But with these flattering and enticing words indeed Antiochus first tried to entice them. Then he tried also by terror to draw them from their aim and constancy, saying: "For if you do not obey my exhortations, it will be altogether necessary for me to do what has been commanded, and to behave as an enemy toward your magnificence." And after this he was copious in enumerating the names of torments and in holding out threats.

[19] But the holy Martyrs, neither softened by flatteries nor cast down by threats, are bent to sacrifice to the gods, said to them: "To those who have resolved to gain Christ alone, O judge, and the life which is hidden with Him, there is no care for any of the things which flow away and perish, not honour,

neither glory, nor power, nor anything else of those things which can either soothe or cause distress. For we despise alike both your threats and your blandishments. Cease, then, you too, like the serpent, to counsel evil to us. For we see the venom beneath your lips, and therefore we turn away from your counsel as from a grievous ambush. Do not deceive yourself, then, wasting your time in vain and hanging upon an empty hope: for neither by punishing will you overcome us, nor by threatening will you persuade us to forsake the living God and offer sacrifice to deaf demons endowed with no sense. For to us it is good both to live for Christ's sake, and in turn to die for His sake is gain. But you can say nothing of the kind of your images. For truly they are silver and gold, the works of men's hands, which can be of no profit to those who have placed their trust in them. Let them, then, who worship them become like them, and all who trust in them ⁱ.

[20] When, therefore, the duke saw that they had spoken so openly, and were endowed with such freedom and greatness of soul, at his command Sergius is thrust back into prison, but Bacchus and understood that it could not be that he should persuade them by words, he proceeded to make trial of them by torments: and the blessed Sergius he handed over into the strictest custody, repaying him in this way for the benefit he had received; but Bacchus he ordered to be stretched out stoutly by four men and cruelly beaten with thongs of ox-sinew. But one could see a mind far stronger than nature, and a resolve of soul loftier than any force of the body. For the parts of that most holy body, torn off by the scourges, were flung into the very air, and over the ground streams of blood were spreading; and the inward parts were laid bare of flesh, opening to those present the very formation of nature: yet the soul, which itself also was hastening to leave the Athlete, nevertheless held out, demanding still more torments, that it might attain altogether more bountiful prizes.

[21] The angels rejoiced, seeing the admirable constancy of the Martyr. He is beaten even unto death. The demons were tormented, because, the victory having been won over them, they were in a manner being led in triumph in the sight of all. The lictors, wearied, lay down upon the ground. But seeing the Martyr, you would have said that he was so affected that he seemed not so much beaten with scourges as strewn with spring flowers. At length he was called by heavenly voices to the blessed place of rest, having laid down his soul into the hands of the Maker ^k. His martyred body, however, that unjust judge exposed to be devoured by beasts. But he did not know what care the God of that man takes of those who love Him, who knows how to bring even the nature of wild beasts over to gentleness, and through them to work still greater miracles. For the wild beasts, reverencing the contests which he had undertaken for piety, not only could not bear to touch any one of his members at all, but even, while he was being carried to the sepulchre by the Christians, followed him, discharging the office of attendants, and openly convicting the enemies of God of madness ^l. Thus, then, the renowned Bacchus, having obtained the things he desired, passed over to the heavenly dwellings.

ANNOTATIONS.

CHAPTER III.

Sergius is cruelly tortured, consummates his martyrdom by the sword, and is honoured with a church over his sepulchre.

Ὁ σύναθλὸς δὲ Σέργιος ἀπολειφθεὶς, λύπῃτε διὰ τὸν χωρισμὸν, καὶ ἡδονῇ πάλιν διὰ τὰ προσδοκώμενα ἐμερίζετο, ἀλλ᾽ οὐ περιεῖδεν αὐτὸν τῷ χωρισμῷ κάμνοντα ὁ γλυκὺς ἐταῖρος καὶ ἐραστής· ἀλλὰ φαιδρᾷ τῇ ὄψει ὁ θεῖος Βάκχος, καὶ συνήθει τῷ τῆς στρατείας σχήματι νυκτὸς ἐπιφανεὶς, καὶ διαλεχθεὶς τῷ φίλῳ, καὶ θάρσους ἐμπλήσας τὸ σκυθρωπόντε τῆς ἀθυμίας διέλυσε, καὶ ἀσφαλέστερον ἅμα καὶ γενναιότερον πρὸς τὰς μελλούσας τιμωρίας διέθηκεν. Εἰς δὲ τὴν ἐξῆς καθίσας πάλιν ὁ δοὺξ ἐπὶ βήματος, καὶ τὸν μακάριον παραγαγὼν Σέργιον, τὴν λεοντὴν ἀποβαλὼν ὁ ποικίλος τὴν ἀλωπεκὴν ἐνδύεται καὶ τινα πλασάμενος εἰς αὐτὸν εὔνοιαν, καὶ πιστόν τι δῆθεν ἐπιδεικνὺς ὅτι τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐκείνην ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ κτήσαιτο, κολακείαις αὐτὸν εἰς τὸ θύειν ἐξεκαλεῖτο, τὴν παντελῆ Χριστοῦ ἀλλοτρίωσιν ἐν τάξει χαρίτων ἀποδοῦναι βουλόμενος ὁ θεομισὴς καὶ ἀνόητος· ἠρέμα δὲ καὶ ταῦτα ὑποφωνῶν, Αἰσχύνομαι τὴν παλαιὰν ἐκείνην εὐδαιμονίαν καὶ τὰς εἰς ἐμὲ χάριτας, φίλτατε Σέργιε, αἰσχύνομαι νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς, καὶ οὐδὲ ὁρᾷν ἔτι σὲ φέρω κατάδικον οὕτω τῷ ἡμετέρῳ βήματι παριστάμενον, ὁ πολλοστὸς ἐγὼ πρὸς τὴν σὴν ἐπιφάνειαν, καὶ τῆς σῆς φιλίας καὶ δυναστείας ἔργον τὴν παροῦσαν ἀρχὴν περικείμενος.

[23] Ὁ μὲν οὖν πανούργως ἔλεγε τὰ τοιαῦτα, τοῦτο μόνον τεχνώμενος, ὅπως αὐτὸν ἐξ ἅπαντος ὑποκλέψῃ, καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἴσην αὐτῷ θρησκείαν δολερῶς ὑπαγάγηται. Ὁ δὲ, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ βούλει, φησὶ, καὶ νῦν ἐν τοῖς μεγίστοις τῶν ἀγαθῶν εὐεργέτην λαβεῖν με, πρόθυμος ἔσομαι σοι· ἐλευθερώσας γάρ σε τῆς βατείας ταύτης ἀπάθης, τῷ τῆς ἀληθείας προσάξω φωτὶ, καὶ Βασιλεῖ τῷ ἀθανάτῳ προσοικειώσομαι. Οὐκ ἤκουσεν ἡδέως τῶν λεγομένων ὁ τῇ ἀπωλείᾳ συνεθισθεὶς ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ᾽ ἐμβριθέστερον αὐτίκα Σεργίῳ τὸ βλέμμα ἐπιβαλὼν, Μὴ βλασφήμει τοὺς ἀθανάτους, ἔφη, θεούς. Καὶ ὁ Μάρτυς δὲ θερμότερον πάλιν τῇ παῤῥησίᾳ χρησάμενος, τούναντίον ἅπαν ἐποίει, καὶ εἰς τοὺς ἐκείνου θεοὺς ἐξύβριζέτε, καὶ ὀνόματα μόνον αὐτοὺς ἐκάλει πραγμάτων ἔρημα, καὶ τοὺς προσκυνοῦντας δὲ, καὶ σεβομένους αὐτοὺς ἀναισθητοτέρους πολλῷ τῶν κωφῶν ἐκείνων ἀπεδείκνυ θεῶν. Ὁ δοὺξ τοίνυν ὡς ἑῶρα κολακειῶντε κρείττω καὶ ἀπειλῶν τὸν Σέργιον, καὶ οὐδ᾽ ὁπωσοῦν ὑποδιδόντα τῆς παῤῥησίας, αὐτίκα τὴν κατεψευσμένην ἐκείνην φιλίαν καὶ τὸ προσωπεῖον ἀποδυσάμενος, ὅπερ ἦν ἐναργῶς ἐδείκνυτο. Καὶ ὡς ἔοικεν ἡ πολλή μού, φησιν, ἡμερότης, καὶ τὸ ἀκαίρως τοῦτο πρὸς σε φιλάνθρωπον, ταῦτά σε πρὸς ἀλαζονείαν ἐπῆρε, καὶ οὕτω καθ᾽ ἡμῶντε αὐτῶν καὶ θεῶν ἠρέθισε τῶν μεγάλων.

[24] Ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν τύφον ἀπομαθήσῃ, εὖ οἶδα, καὶ ἐπιλήσῃ τῆς αὐθαδείας, καὶ γνώσῃ σεαυτὸν οὐ μεσίτην ἄρτι τῶν κοινῶν ὄντα, οὐδὲ παρὰ βασιλεῖ τα μεγάλα δυνάμενον, ἀλλὰ κατάκριτον καὶ δεσμώτην, καὶ εἰ τι ἄλλο τοῖς οὕτω φρονοῦσιν ἕπεται κακόν. Καὶ αὐτίκα τὴν ἀπὸ τοῦ φρουρίου Σουρῶν ἐπὶ τὴν πόλιν Ῥωσαφῶν στελλόμενος πορείαν ὁ δοὺξ, σιδηραῖς κρηπῖσιν ἡλους ὀξεῖς ἐμπεπαρμέναις τὸν Ἀθλητὴν ὑποδεθῆναι παρασκευάζει. Καὶ ὀχήματος αὐτὸς ἐπιβὰς, ἔμπροσθεν ὡς εἶχε ποδῶν, τρέχειν τὸν Ἅγιον ἐπὶ ἑβδομήκοντά πού σταδίους ἄχρι Τετραπυργίας ἠνάγκαζεν. Ὅσοι μὲν οὖν ἀποῤῥέον τὸ ἐκ ποδῶν αἷμα ἑώρων, θαυμάζειντε αὐτοῖς ἀτεχνῶς ἐπήει, καὶ τὸν Ἀθλητὴν τῆς καρτερίας ἐκπλήττεσθαι. Ἐκείνῳ δὲ ἅρα αἱ τῶν προσδοκωμένων ἐλπίδες ῥανίδες παρακλήσεως ἦσαν ἐξ οὐρανοῦ στάζουσαι, καὶ τὸ βαρὺ τῶν ὀδυνῶν ὑπεκούφιζον· ἀλύπωστε εἴχετο τῆς ὁδοῦ, καὶ σὺν ἡδονῇ ταῦτα ὑπέψαλλεν. Ὑπομένων ὑπέμεινα τὸν Κύριον, καὶ προσέσχε μοι. Καὶ εἰσήκουσε τῆς δεήσεώς μου, καὶ ἀνήγαγέ με ἐκ λάκκου ταλαιπωρίας, καὶ ἀπὸ πηλοῦ ἰλύος. Καὶ ἔστησεν ἐν εὐρυχώρῳ τοὺς πόδας μου, καὶ κατεύθυνε τὰ διαβήματά μου.

[25] Ὡς δὲ καὶ τὴν Τετραπυργίαν ἤδη κατέλαβον, αὐτὸν μὲν ἡ φυλακὴ δεσμώτην ἐλάμβανεν, οὕτω προσταχθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ δουκός· ἐκεῖνον δὲ φροντίδες ἐν χερσὶ δημοσίων πραγμάτων εἶχον. Ἑσπέρας δὲ ἤδη γενομένης, μόνος παρὰ τῇ φυλακῇ ὁ Μάρτυς ἀπολειφθεὶς, Οἱ ἐσθίοντες, ἔψαλλεν, ἄρτους μου, ἐμαγάλυναν ἐπ᾽ ἐμὲ πτερνισμόν, καὶ σχοινίοις διέτειναν παγίδα τοῖς ποσί μου, καὶ διελογίσαντο τοῦ ὑποσκελίσαι τὰ διαβήματά μου· ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς, Κύριε, πρόφθασον αὐτοὺς, καὶ ὑποσκέλισον αὐτοὺς, καὶ ῥῦσαι ἀπὸ ἀσεβῶν τὴν ψυχήν μου, καὶ ἐν χειρὸς κυνὸς τὴν μονογενῆ μου. Ὅθεν οὐδὲ ἀπαράκλητον αὐτοῦ τὴν ψυχὴν πάλιν ὁ τοὺς στεφάνους αὐτῷ πλέκων ἄνωθεν περιεῖδεν, ἀλλὰ κηδεμονίαντε περὶ τοῦτον πολλὴν ἐπιδείκυται, καὶ ἄγγελον αὐτῷ κατὰ μέσην ἐκπέμπει τὴν νύκτα, ὃς πρότερον τὴν ἐκείνου ψυχὴν ἡδέως ἀνακτησάμενος, εἶτα καὶ τοῦ σώματος ἐπιμεληθεὶς, καὶ τοὺς πόδας αὐτῷ πονήρως ὑπὸ τῶν πληγῶν ἔχοντας ὑγιάσας, καὶ καθάπερ ἑταίρῳ τινὶ καὶ συμπολίτῃ φιλικώτατα διαλεχθεὶς καὶ κατασπασάμενος, προθυμότερον πολλῶ πρὸς τὸν ἀγῶνα διέθηκεν. Ἔωθεν τοίνυν καθίσας ἐπὶ τοῦ βήματος πάλιν ὁ δοὺξ, κελεύει τισὶ τῶν περιεστώτων, ἀνελομένους τὸν Μακάριον ἀπὸ τῆς φυλακῆς, ποῦ γὰρ αὐτὸν δυνατὸν εἶναι χρήσασθαι τοῖς ποσὶν ὑπὸ τῶν πληγῶν ᾤετο, πρὸς ἑαυτὸν καὶ τὸ βῆμα κομίσαι.

[26] Τῶν δὲ πρὸς τὴν φυλακὴν παραγενομένων, εὐθὺς ἀετὸς ἦν ἐκ καινῆς ὁ Μάρτυς, οὐ τὸ γῆρας, ἀλλὰ τὰς πληγὰς πάσας ἀποξυσάμενος οὐδὲ γὰρ ἐδεήθη χειρὸς ἀνεχούσης, ἢ τοπαράπαν αὐτῷ συλλαμβανούσης

πρὸς τὴν πορείαν, ἀλλὰ κούφως τε ἔβαινε, καὶ σοβαρὸν ἐκινεῖτο, καὶ Μάρτυς ἦν ἀληθῶς ἀξιόπιστος τῆς ἀμάχου καὶ πανσθενοῦς τοῦ Χριστοῦ δυνάμεως. Οὕτω δὲ αὐτὸν ὁ δοὺξ ἔχοντα πόῤῥωθεν κατιδὼν, ἡσυχῆ καὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν ἀπεθαύμαζεν. Ὡς δὲ καὶ πλησίον γένοιτο ἤδη, μαγείαντε τὸ πρᾶγμα ἐκάλει, καὶ θεοὺς ἐπώμνυ, καὶ μάρτυρας αὐτοὺς ἐποίει τῶν λεγομένων. Τί γάρ ἐστιν ἕτερον, ἔλεγεν, ὄ καὶ παρὰ βασιλεῖ πρότερον αὐτῷ τοσαύτην, παρεῖχε τῆν παῤῥησίαν, καὶ νῦν πάλιν τὰς ὀξεῖας τῶν πληγῶν ὀδύνας ἐκοίμισέτε καὶ ἤμβλυνεν, ὅτι μὴ μαγεία σαφὴς, καὶ λόγοι περίεργως ὡς τὰ πολλὰ καὶ σοφιστικῶς ἐπαδόμενοι. Ἐντεῦθεν καὶ ἀπεγίνωσκεν ἢδη Σεργίου, καὶ τὸν ἄνδρα ὅτι ἐγγυτάτω παραστησάμενος, εἴ πως κᾂν οὕτως ὑποκλέψῃ ταῖς οἰκειώσεσιν, ἡμέρωστε διατεθεὶς ὡς μάλιστα, καὶ τῆς προτέρας πάλιν πρὸς αὐτὸν θωπείας γενόμενος, θεῖον τι, ἔλεγεν, ἡγοῦμαι, καὶ ἄπιστον, πῶς ἐν πολλῇ θεραπείᾳ καὶ πλούτῳ καὶ ἤθεσιν ἄλλοις τραφεὶς, τὴν βαρυτάτην βάσανον ταύτην οὕτω γενναίως ὑπήνεγκας· ἀλλὰ τὴν ὁμιλίαν εὐθὺς ὁ Μάρτυς αὐτῷ ἐπικόψας, οὐ βάσανός μοι τὰ παρόντα, εἶπεν, ὦ δικαστὰ, ἀλλ᾽ ἱερὰ διὰ Χριστὸν πομπὴ καὶ πανήγυρις, πρὸς αὐτόν με τὸν οὐρανὸν ἥδιστα παραπέμπουσα.

[27] Ὁ δοὺξ τοίνυν ἐπιπλέον καὶ αὖθις ἀπαγορεύσας, τῇ φυλακῇ παραπέμπει τὸν Ἅγιον· αὐτὸς δὲ περὶ τραπέζας εἶχε, καὶ τὸν μεταξὺ πάντα καθηδυπάθει καιρὸν, ὥσπερ οὐ θυμοῦ μόνον καὶ ὡμότητος, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἡδονῆς δοῦλος εἶναι βουλόμενος· ἐπεὶ δὲ ἅπτεσθαι καὶ πάλιν ὁδοῦ ἔμελλε, καὶ πρὸς τὸ Ῥωσαφῶν ἠπείγετο φρούριον, ἐφ᾽ ὃ καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἀπὸ Σουρῶν ὤρμητο, ταῖς προτέραις αὖθις τὸν Ἀθλητὴν ὑποδήσας κρηπῖσι, τὴν ἀπὸ Τετραπυργίας μέχρι Ῥωσαφῶν αὐτῶν ἤλαυνεν· ὡς δὲ τῇ αὐτῇ πάλιν ἀνάγκῃ παλαίοντα, τὴν αὐτὴν ἢ καὶ μείζω καρτερίαν ἐπιδεικνύμενον εἶδε τὸν Μάρτυρα, καὶ τὴν ἀπὸ Σουρῶν ἄχρι Ῥωσαφῶν ὁδὸν μετὰ τῶν σιδηρῶν κρηπίδων ἐκείνων ἀπονητὶ διανύσαντα, τὴν μεταβολὴν παντάπασιν ἀπογνοὺς, ξίφει τὴν μακαρίαν αὐτοῦ κεφαλὴν ἀποτμηθῆναι κελεύει. Ἄγεται μὲν οὖν ὑπὸ τῶν τῆς τάξεως λοιπὸν ἐπὶ τὸν τῆς τελειώσεως τόπον ὁ Μάρτυς· ἀνδρῶν δὲ πολύ τι πλῆθος, καὶ γυναικῶν, καὶ ἡλικίας ἁπάσης, ὥσπερ ἐν σκότῳ φωτὸς εἰς τὴν πόλιν προηγουμένου, πάντες ἐπηκολούθουν, ὧστε ἀγωνιζόμενον αὐτὸν ἰδεῖν, καὶ νικῶντα, καὶ στεφανούμενον.

[28] Ἀλλὰ καὶ θῆρες ἄγριοι καθάπερ τι ἐρωτικὸν καὶ οὗτοι πρὸς τὸν Ἀθλητὴν παθόντες, τῶν οἰκείων ἀπάραντες φωλεῶν, ἡμέρως αὐτὸν καὶ προσηνῶς παρέπεμπον, ἐκεῖνον μὲν τῆς μακαρίας ὥσπερ πορείας ἀποδεχόμενοι, τοὺς ἀσεβεῖς δὲ πράγματι διελέγχοντες, ὅτι ὅν καὶ θῆρες ᾐδέσθησαν, αὐτοὶ λίαν τυφλώττοντες ἀναιροῦσιν. Ὁ δὲ τοὺς ἄγοντας στρατιώτας βραχύν τινα καιρὸν εἰς προσευχὴν αἰτήσας, καὶ παρ᾽ ἐκείνων λαβὼν, ὅλην εὐθὺς πρὸς τὸν ἑαυτοῦ δεσπότην μετὰ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αἴρει καὶ τὴν ψυχὴν. Εἶτα τῆς οἰκείας συμπαθείας αὐτὸν ἀναμνήσας, ἤδη καὶ εἰς ἔλεον τῶν φονευτῶν ἐκεῖνον ἐξεκαλεῖτο. Ὁ μόνῃ, λέγων, ἀγαθότητι τὰ πάντα δημιουργήσας, ὁ κατ᾽ εἰκόνα σὴν τὸν ἄνθρωπον διαπλάσας, καὶ ἄρχειν τῶν ὁμοδούλων προχειρισάμενος, ὁ καὶ τὴν ἐντολὴν παραβάντας, καὶ ἠθετηκότας σε τὸν δεσπότην, καὶ ἀγνώμονας περὶ τὸν εὐεργέτην ἀναφανέντας μὴ ἀπωσάμενος, ἀλλὰ καὶ δι᾽ ἡμᾶς γενόμενος ἄνθρωπος, καὶ δούλου μορφὴν ἀναλαβὼν, καὶ πάντα ἑκὼν ὑπομείνας, καὶ μηδὲ θάνατον τὸ τελευταῖον παραιτησάμενος, αὐτὸς σύγγνωθι καὶ νῦν τοῖς εἰς ἡμᾶς πλημμελήσασι, καὶ τὸ παχὺ τοῦτο τῆς ἀσεβείας νέφος διατεμὼν, καὶ τῆς τοῦ ἐχθροῦ τυραννίδος τοὺς ἀθλίους ἐλευθερώσας, φῶστε θεῖον αὐτοῖς τῆς σῆς ἐπίλαμψον χάριτος, καὶ ἀνακάλεσαι πεπλανημένους αὐτοὺς τῷ μεγάλῳ καὶ θαυμαστῷ ὀνόματι καὶ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ σου, καὶ ἡμᾶς δὲ τοὺς ὑπὲρ σοῦ, δέσποτα, σφαγιαζομένους, καὶ τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτὰς τῇ προαιρέσει καὶ τὰ σώματα καταθύοντας, ὡς ἱερεῖα δεκτὰ, ὡς θυσίαν εὐάρεστον πρόσδεξαι, καὶ εἰς τὸ σὸν θυσιαστήριον τὸ ὑπεράνω τῶν οὐρανῶν εὐφραινομένους εἰσάγαγε.

[29] Ταῦτα προσηύξατο, καὶ φωνὴ τοῦτον ἐκεῖθεν αὐτίκα ἐκάλει· καὶ ταύτης ἑκεῖνος ἀσμένως καὶ μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἀκούσας, τὸν τράχηλον εὐθὺς ὡς ἥδιστα ὑποσχὼν, τὴν μαρτυρικὴν ἐκτέμνεται κεφαλὴν, ἑβδόμην τότε τοῦ Ὀκτωβρίου μηνὸς ἄγοντος, καὶ πρὸς τὸν καλοῦντα τρέχει Δεσπότην, καὶ πρὸς τοὺς στεφάνους ὁρᾷ, καὶ φιλοτίμους ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς αὐτοὺς καὶ πολυτελεῖς ὑποδέχεται. Τῶνγε μὴν κατὰ θέαν τινὲς τῆς τελειώσεως συνεληλυθότων, τὸ τίμιον ἐκεῖνο σῶμα εὐλαβέσιν ἅμα καὶ ποθούσαις ταῖς χερσὶν ἀνελόμενοι, καὶ ὅσα νόμος εἰς ταφὴν τελέσαντες, λαμπρῶς καὶ φιλοτίμως παρ᾽ αὐτῷ τῷ τῆς μαρτυρίας τόπῳ κατέθεσαν. Χρόνου δὲ συχνοῦ διαγενομένου, τῶν θερμοτέρων τινες περὶ τὴν εὐσέβειαν ἀπὸ τοῦ φρουρίου Σουρῶν ἀφικόμενοι, ὑφελέσθαι τὸ τοῦ Μάρτυρος λείψανον ἐπεχείρουν.

[30] Ὁ δὲ εἴτε μὴ θέλων ἑαυτὸν ζημιῶσαι τὴν πόλιν, εἴτε μὴ ἀνασχόμενος τὸν κοινὸν θησαυρὸν ἴδιον γενέσθαι τινος, φλόγα μεγάλην ποιεῖται τῆς κλοπῆς μηνυτήν, καὶ πὺρ ἀναφθὲν ἐκεῖθεν ἀθρόον δημοσιεύει τὸν δόλον, καὶ τὴν ζημίαν σαφῶς παραδείκνυσιν. Οἱ ἐν τῇ Ῥωσαφῶν τοίνυν πολεμίων ἐπιδημίαν τὸ πρᾶγμα εἶναι ὑπολαβόντες, ἔνοπλοι πάντες ἐκ τοῦ αἰφνιδίου τῷ τοῦ Μάρτυρος ἐφίστανται τάφῳ· καὶ μαθόντες ὁπερ ἦν, τὴν ὑφαίρεσίντε διεκώλυσαν, καὶ οὐκέτι οὐδε ἑπιμεῖναι τῷ τόπῳ τοὺς ἀπὸ Σουρῶν ἠνείχοντο. Εἶτα μέντοι πολλὰ δεηθέντας ὀψὲ καὶ μόλις παραμεῖναι βραχὺ συνεχώρησαν. Οἱ δὲ, τὴν προσεδρείαν μὴ ἀργὴν ἔχειν μηδὲ ἄπρακτον βουληθέντες, ναόν τινα μικρὸν ἐπὶ τῷ τάφῳ ἐδείμαντο, καὶ οὕτω μεθ᾽ ἡδονῆς ἐπανῆκον, τῷ δοῦναι μᾶλλον ἢ λαβεῖν τὸν πρὸς τὸν Ἀθλητὴν πόθον ἀφοσιώσαντες. Κατὰ μικρὸν δὲ τῆς περὶ τὸν Σωτῆρα καὶ Κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν εὐσεβείας ἐπιδιδούσης, ἐπίσκοποι τὸν ἀριθμὸν πέντε καὶ δέκα τῆς πόλεως Ῥωσαφῶν εἴσω γενόμενοι, ναόντε τοῖς Ἁγίοις περιφανῆ ἀνιστῶσι, καὶ τοῦτον καθιερώσαντες ἐν αὐτῷ τὰ θεῖα καὶ μαρτυρικὰ κατέθεντο λείψανα εἰς δόξαν Θεοῦ Πατρὸς, καὶ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ᾧ πρέπει τιμὴ, κράτος, μεγαλωσύνητε καὶ μεγαλοπρέπεια, νῦν καὶ εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας τῶν αἰώνων. Άμὴν.

Antiochus again with blandishments assails Sergius, But Sergius his companion, left behind, was torn both by distress on account of the separation and in turn by joy on account of what he awaited. But his sweet friend and intimate did not disregard him as he bore the separation hard; but the divine Bacchus, appearing to him by night with a joyful countenance and in his accustomed military dress, when he had met with his Friend and had filled him with boldness, dispelled his sadness and the sickness of his soul, and rendered him firmer and braver for the torments ^a. On the following day the duke, sitting again on the tribunal, when he had caused the blessed Sergius to be brought forward, putting off the lion's skin, the turncoat put on the skin of the fox. And having feigned a certain goodwill toward him, displaying something suited to gain credence, namely that he had obtained that magistracy through him, he tried with blandishments to call him forth to sacrifice, wishing, fool that he was, to render him a perfect and absolute separation from Christ in return for the benefit, addressing him gently in this way also: I am ashamed of that former happiness and of the benefits which you conferred upon me, most dear Sergius, nor can I bear any longer even to look upon you standing thus as a defendant before our tribunal, I who am the least, if I be compared with your splendour, and who by the help of your friendship and power have obtained the present magistracy ^b.

[23] He indeed said these things craftily, contriving this alone, that he might altogether entice him with flattering words, and deceitfully lead him to the same religion. But he said: But if you wish even now to receive me as a benefactor in the greatest goods, and assails him with threats when he does not yet comply with his will; I will serve you in this matter with a ready and eager mind. For when I have freed you from this deep deception, I will lead you to the light of truth and make you an intimate of the immortal King. The man who had grown accustomed to perdition did not willingly hear what was said: but at once looking upon Sergius more gravely and severely, he said: Do not blaspheme the immortal gods. But the Martyr, using his freedom of speech more sharply, did entirely the contrary, and assailed his gods with reproaches and insults, and called them mere names lacking reality: and he showed that those who adored and worshipped them were endowed with far less sense than those deaf gods. But the duke, after he saw that Sergius was superior both to blandishments and to threats, and was abating nothing of his freedom of speech, at once putting off that counterfeit friendship and mask, showed openly what he was; and he said: My great gentleness and this unseasonable kindness toward you have lifted you up to arrogance, and have thus provoked you against ourselves and the great gods.

[24] But you will unlearn your pride (I know it well), and will forget your arrogance, he orders him to be shod with nailed boots and so to run before his carriage; and you will know yourself not to be a man of public affairs with the emperor, but to be condemned and in chains, and whatever other evil follows those who think thus. And at once the Duke, setting out from the garrison of Sura to the city of the Rosaphi ^c, caused the Athlete to be shod with sandals pierced with iron nails: and mounting his carriage, he compelled the Saint, his feet so afflicted, to run before him some seventy stadia as far as Tetrapyrgia ^d. And whoever saw the blood flowing from his feet were plainly moved to wonder, and to be astonished at the endurance of the Athlete. But to the Martyr the hopes of the things awaited were drops of consolation falling from heaven, and they lightened the weight of his pains. And without distress he went on his way, and sang these things with joy: Waiting I waited for the Lord, and He attended to me. And He heard my prayer: and brought me out of the pit of affliction, out of the mire of dregs. And He set my feet in a wide place, and directed my steps.

[25] And after they had now arrived at Tetrapyrgia, the guard received him, and the wounds he had thence received in his feet are healed by an angel. the duke so ordering: but the cares of the Republic, pressing upon the duke, kept him occupied. And when it was now evening, the Martyr, left alone in custody, sang: They that ate my bread have magnified supplanting against me. And with cords they have stretched a snare for my feet, and have thought to supplant my steps. But Thou, O Lord, prevent them and supplant them, and deliver my soul from the impious, and my only one from the hand of the dog. Wherefore He who from on high was weaving crowns for him did not again disregard his soul as without consolation, but showed that He took great care of him, and sent him an angel at midnight, who, when he had first pleasantly refreshed his soul, and then also cared for his body, and healed his feet, which were in a bad state, and as with a certain friend and fellow-citizen of his own

had spoken most amicably and embraced him, rendered him far more eager for the contest ^e. In the morning, then, the duke, sitting on the tribunal, orders certain of those who stood by to take the Saint up from custody (for he did not think it could be that he should use his feet, because of the wounds) and carry him to his tribunal.

[26] But when they had come into the prison, at once the Martyr was, had been healed, being as steadfast in the faith as before, like the eagle, renewed, not with old age taken away, but with all his wounds. For he had no need of a hand to support him, or to give him any help at all in walking: but he both walked lightly and moved handsomely, and was in truth a witness worthy of credence to the invincible and almighty power of Christ. For when the duke had beheld him from afar in this condition, he marvelled silently within himself. But when he was now near, he called the thing magic, and swore by the gods, and called them to witness to what he said. For what else is it, he said, that both formerly gave him such confidence with the emperor, and now has at once lulled and dulled the sharp pains of his wounds, but open magic and words which for the most part are chanted with curious art and sophistry? From this point he now cast away hope concerning Sergius, and when he had caused him to be set as near as possible, in case he might thus allure him by familiarity, addressing him gently and returning to his former flattery, he said: I judge it a thing divine and incredible, that you, brought up amid many delights and riches and in honourable manners, have borne so bravely this so grievous torment. But the Martyr, at once interrupting his speech, said: The present things are not a torment to me, O judge, but a sacred procession for Christ's sake and a solemn feast, sending me over most delightfully to heaven itself.

[27] [He orders him, remaining constant, to be subjected again to the same torment and at length to be beheaded.] The duke therefore, despairing still more, sends the Saint back into custody. He himself meanwhile gave his attention to the sumptuousness of his tables and to merriment, as one who wished to be the slave not only of anger and cruelty but also of pleasure. But when he was about to set out on his way again, and was hastening to the garrison of the Rosaphi, toward which he had set out from Sura, he led the Athlete, again shod with the former sandals, from Tetrapyrgia as far as Rosapha ^f. And when he saw that the Martyr, struggling again with the same necessity, showed the same or even greater fortitude, and had accomplished without toil the way which runs from Sura to Rosapha with those iron sandals, altogether despairing that he would be changed, he orders the head of the blessed Martyr to be cut off with the sword. The Martyr is therefore led by the soldiers to the place of consummation. And a great multitude of men and women and of every age followed, that they might see him both contending, and conquering, and crowned.

[28] [The Martyr is led to the place of punishment, and having poured out prayer to God,] Nay, even the wild beasts themselves, as though seized by a certain love for the Athlete, leaving their own lairs, escorted him gently and tamely [g], in a manner approving and commending his blessed journey, but in very deed convicting the impious, in that him whom the wild beasts reverenced they, utterly blind, put to death. And he, when he had asked of the soldiers who were leading him some brief time for prayer, and had obtained it from them, at once lifted up his whole soul with his eyes to his Lord. Then, when He had recalled to his memory His compassion, he called down mercy upon those also who were slaying him, saying: Thou who didst fashion all things by goodness alone, who didst form the human race to Thine image and didst set it over all things: who also, when they had transgressed Thy commandment, and had despised Thee their Lord, and had shown themselves ungrateful toward their Benefactor, didst not repel them, nay, for our sake wast made man, and didst take the form of a servant, and didst endure all things willingly, and at last didst not refuse even death: do Thou also now forgive those who have sinned against us: and, this thick cloud of impiety being dispersed, and the wretched being freed from the tyranny of the enemy, shine upon them with the divine light of Thy grace, and recall them in their wandering by Thy great and wonderful name and truth. And further, us also, who are slain for Thee, O Lord, and willingly sacrifice our very souls and bodies, receive as acceptable victims and a pleasing sacrifice, and bring us rejoicing to Thine altar, which is above the heavens.

[29] This he prayed, and at once a voice from thence called him. And when he had heard it willingly and with pleasure, he ends his life by the sword, is committed to the earth in the same place, forthwith eagerly stretching out his neck, he is beheaded in his martyr's head ^h on the seventh of the month of October: and he runs to the Lord who called him, from whom he receives crowns, and those magnificent and glorious. And some of those who had come to watch the consummation, when they had taken up that precious body with pious and longing hands, and had performed the things customarily done at a burial, laid it down gloriously and magnificently at the very place of the martyrdom. And when much time had passed, certain of those who were more fervent in piety, coming from the garrison of Sura, attempted to steal away the relics of the Martyr ⁱ.

[30] But he, whether not wishing to inflict loss upon the city, and afterwards is honoured with a church built for him in the same place. or not enduring that the common treasure should become the property of any one person, caused a great flame to be the informer of the theft: and the fire kindled there, publishing the deceit openly, suddenly revealed the loss. Those therefore who were in the city of the Rosaphi, thinking that the coming of enemies was signified by it, all at once came armed to the sepulchre of the Martyr. And when they had learned what the matter was, they both prevented them from carrying him away, and would not suffer the men of Sura to remain any longer in that place. But they, since they did not wish to have come in vain and to no purpose, built a certain small church at the sepulchre: and so they returned with joy, satisfying their longing toward the Saint by giving rather than by receiving. And as piety toward our Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ gradually increased, bishops to the number of fifteen, entering the city of the Rosaphi, build a notable church for the Saints, and when they had consecrated it, they deposited in it the divine relics of the Martyrs ^k to the glory of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom are fitting honour, power, majesty and magnificence, both now and always, and unto ages of ages, Amen.

ANNOTATIONS.